The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2014-04-14 Workshop Meeting Agenda and Reports.pdfDistrict of Maple Ridge 1.ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 2.MINUTES – N/A 3.PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL 3.1 Discussion with MP Randy Kamp •Medical Marihuana Decommissioning of Licenses •Post Secondary Funding •Fish Act •Housing •Impact of Downloading on Local Government 4.UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS 4.1 Waste Flow Management •Carol Mason, Chief Administrative Officer •Paul Henderson, General Manager, Solid Waste Services COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA April 14, 2014 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 April 14, 2014 Closed Council following Workshop Committee of the Whole Meeting 1:00 p.m. April 15, 2014 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. Council Workshop April 14, 2014 Page 2 of 4 4.2 Environmental Management Strategy •Catherine Berris, Berris and Associates/Urban Systems 4.3 Consolidated Financial Statements Presentation by the Manager of Accounting 4.4 Housing Action Plan Update – Consultation Summary Report Staff report dated April 14, 2014 providing an update on the status of the Housing Action Plan and recommending that the report be received for information. 4.5 Proposed Safe Premises Bylaw No. 7077-2014 Staff report dated April 14, 2014 providing information on a proposed Maple Ridge Safe Premises bylaw. 4.6 Use of District Land for Economic Development Opportunities Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that staff proceed with negotiations with Delta Force Paintball and Seyem’ Qwantlen Business Group pertaining to a family-friendly-outdoor-recreational-activity initiative for 2014-2015 and a full-service campground initiative for 2015-2016. 4.7 Downtown District Lands – Request for Proposal Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending that staff proceed with a Request for Proposal for the 3.04 acre District Lands located between Haney Place Mall and ValleyFair Mall. 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. Link to Draft Environmental Management Strategy Document Council Workshop April 14, 2014 Page 3 of 4 5.1 Notification from Metro Vancouver regarding the Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Letter from Metro Vancouver dated March 28, 2014 outlining a request from the Corporation of Delta for a type two amendment to the Regional Growth Strategy Land Use Designation Map. Recommendation: Staff report dated April 14, 2014 recommending receipt for information 6. BRIEFING ON OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST/QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL 7. MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT 8. ADJOURNMENT Checked by: ___________ Date: _________________ Council Workshop April 14, 2014 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. 1 District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 14, 2014 and Members of Council FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop SUBJECT: Housing Action Plan Update – Consultation Summary Report EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is to provide an update to Council on the status of the Housing Action Plan. A Consultation Summary Report has been received that provides a summary of the results of the Consultation Program activities for the Housing Action Plan (HAP). The Consultation Summary Report is the second of three key milestones in the process. This report documents the feedback from the consultation activities and summarizes the issues and suggestions together with the Situation Report, and research on other local and regional examples that will inform the development of the Housing Action Plan. Results from consultation identified the following groups having difficulty finding housing: Renters Seniors Low-income and Single-Parent Families At-Risk Women Results from the consultation program also identified the priority housing issues and opportunities in Maple Ridges as: Housing Mix and Homeownership A Mix of Housing Options Market Rental Housing Non-Market Housing Seniors Development Approvals Process Leadership Role RECOMMENDATION: That the report titled “Housing Action Plan Update - Consultation Summary Report”, dated April 14, 2014 be received for information. DISCUSSION: Background 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 articulates affordable housing with a range of housing options is an essential part of a complete 4.4 2 community and requires that each municipality prepare and implement a Housing Action Plan. The amended Regional Context Statement in the Official Community Plan identifies the District’s commitment to completing a Housing Action Plan to address policies in the RGS for achieving Complete Communities. Counicl endorsed a process and authorized staff to proceed with the development of a Housing Action Plan. Council passed the following resolution at the June 26, 2012 Council meeting: Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that staff be authorized to proceed with the preparation of a Housing Action Plan. Housing Action Plan Process: The Council-endorsed process articulates that SPAC will act as the Steering Committee for the Housing Action Plan, guiding the process and making recommendations on decision items to Council. The firm CitySpaces Consulting Ltd. was hired and began work in early September, 2013. The Situation Report and a Consultation Program document were submitted in Winter 2013/2014 and discussed in an information report that went to Council Workshop February 3, 2014. The Situation Report was the first of three key milestones of the Housing Action Plan. It provides important demographic information and analysis that together with the Consultation Summary Report will serve as a baseline for the development of the Housing Action Plan document in conjunction with feedback from the outcomes of the Consultation Program, which is presented in the Consultation Summary Report, attached as Appendix D. Housing Action Plan Activities: The Housing Action Plan began in September, 2013 and is scheduled for presentation of the final plan to Council in August, 2014. Scheduled activities for the Housing Action Plan process are: HAP WORKPLAN LEVEL OF COMPLETION Council Update July 21, 2013 Complete Council Update September 9, 2013 Complete Research and analysis of the current housing context (September-November 2013) Situation Report (December 2013) Complete Consultation program design and scheduled events (October 2013 – March 2014) Complete Council Update February 3, 2014 Complete Consultation Program report (March-April 2013) Complete Council Update April 14, 2014 Draft Housing Action Plan May 2014 SPAC Review May 2014 Presentation of Draft HAP to Council June , 2014 Open Review June-July, 2014 SPAC Review July 2, 2014 Presentation of Finalized HAP to Council August-September, 2014 3 Consultation Program Activities The Consultation Program consisted of activities which included: interactive posters, an online interactive mapping tool, targeted stakeholder workshops, and a questionnaire that was available online and in hard copy form from January 27 to February 28, 2014. To promote the Housing Action Plan over 200 handouts were distributed at key events and locations starting in the fall of 2013. A press release was sent to the two local newspapers, which generated several articles that can be viewed in Appendix B. The Communications Department also featured articles on the Housing Action Plan in two issues of the Maple Ridge This Month for February 2014 that are included in Appendix C. These pieces were supported by the Housing Action Plan webpage, which is found on the District of Maple Ridge website at http://www.mapleridge.ca/246/Housing- Action-Plan, along with Facebook™ and Twitter™ posts promoting the various activities when appropriate. From the third week of January until February 28, 2014 the interactive posters generated 494 responses at four different locations including the Maple Ridge Leisure Centre, the Maple Ridge Public Library, the Ridge Meadows Seniors Society (RMSS) and the District of Maple Ridge Municipal Hall respectively. The targeted stakeholder workshops hosted 32 people at three separate workshops on January 27, 29 and February 6, 2014 respectively. The questionnaire generated 240 responses and the online mapping tool received 29 housing idea submissions. CONSULTATION SUMMARY REPORT: The Consultation Report is organized into three sections: an Introduction, a Consultation Activities section showing results from each of the consultation activities, and a What We Heard section which summarizes the key themes. The body of the report is accompanied by appendices that contain the raw results from the consultation activities. For the purpose of this report, each section will be briefly described here.  Section One – Introduction The Introduction sets the context for the Housing Action Plan. It describes the work that has been completed to date and outlines what a Housing Action Plan is, namely a plan for action that assesses local market conditions, identifies gaps in the housing continuum, and introduces tools to address them. The Housing Action Plan will help guide decision-making on future market and non-market housing development in Maple Ridge.1  Section Two - Consultation Activities Section Two presents the results from the targeted stakeholder workshops, the questionnaire, the interactive Post-It posters, and the online mapping tool respectively. Housing Action Plan Workshops (January 27- February 6, 2014) Each of the three workshops were organized in the same way, but were targeted to a different audience. Each group of workshop participants were asked about their housing issues and concerns, and then were asked to make suggestions about how those issues could be addressed. 1 The HAP is not a regulatory document. Items in the HAP may result in amending existing policy in the Official Community Plan and implementing recommended strategies and actions. 4 Housing Planning Table Workshop January 27, 2014. This workshop targeted those that work in the non-profit sector, local, regional and provincial government agencies, particularly those working on social issues such as poverty alleviation, housing, seniors, and people with disabilities, etc. Key Discussion Topics:  Home Ownership  Seniors  Population Groups in Need  Non-Market and Special Needs Housing  Suggestions Seniors Workshop January 29, 2014 This workshop targeted seniors who are particularly interested and involved in seniors housing issues, as well as members of the Maple Ridge seniors’ community. Key Discussion Topics:  Limited Housing Options  Building Conditions and Tenure Stability  Accessibility and Location  Information and Outreach  Suggestions Builders/Developers Workshop February 6, 2014 The Builders and Developers group are those people who have been working in the development industry in Maple Ridge and are well known in the community. Key Discussion Topics:  Market Context  Housing Mix Ideas  Secondary Suites  Garden Suites  Approvals, Regulations and Requirements  Land Matters  Suggestions Questionnaire The questionnaire was available on the District’s website from January 27 to February 28, 2014. Hard copies were also available by request and were returned to the District office and input manually. Also, members of the consultant team went out into the community and completed a number of questionnaires with residents at local shopping areas and activity places such as the Maple Ridge Leisure Centre and the Ridge Meadows Seniors Society. The questionnaire was comprised of eight questions, combining both quantitative (close-ended) and qualitative (open-ended) questions. The questions ranged from general to specific, and were designed to find out characteristics of each respondent regarding their own housing situation, associated issues and concerns, and their opinions about housing priorities in Maple Ridge. Complete results from the questionnaire can be found in Appendix D. A short summary is provided here: 5 1. Housing Tenure: 80% of respondents are home owners, 20% of respondents are renters. 2. Affordability: 37% of respondents said their housing was affordable, 35% of respondents said their housing was somewhat affordable, and 28% said their housing was not very affordable2. 3. Cost, Quality and A menities were the top three criteria when respondents considered acquiring housing. 4. Of the top three criteria for acquiring housing, the greatest numbers of respondents were Satisfied with Cost (44%), Satisfied with Quality (55%) and Not Very Satisfied with Amenities (42%). 5. Respondents identified the top three groups facing the greatest challenge with finding affordable and suitable housing: Single Parents (16%) and Persons on Fixed Incomes (16%), and Seniors (13%) 6. Respondents were asked specific comments (open-ended qualitative) on the question above. Comments included but are not limited to: a lack of housing for people with disabilities, lack of housing for people with mental health issues, lack of transportation options for people on fixed incomes, limited housing options for seniors across the housing continuum, and a lack of housing for youth and the homeless. 7. Respondent were asked to rank eight housing issues. These were:  Accessibility to Transit, Services and Shopping - 62%  Housing for Seniors – 46%  Housing with Support Services - 41%  Housing character and Design Choice – 38%  Quality and Condition of Rental Stock - 37%  Diversity of Housing Forms - 35%  Shortage of Affordable Rental Units – 34%  Availability of Rental Housing – 31% The three highest priority issues identified by respondents were Accessibility to Transit, Services and Shopping (62%), Housing for Seniors (46%), and Quality and Condition of Rental Stock (37%). 8. The final question was open-ended (qualitative) and asked respondents how to encourage development of affordable housing in Maple Ridge. Response included but were not limited to:  More local shopping to bring down residential property taxes  Incentives  Develop policy that supports the development of affordable housing  Education and outreach  Limit sprawl and develop near existing services  Include rental units in new multi-family development  More good jobs close to home so people can afford more for housing Interactive Post-It Posters The intention of the posters was to generate interest in the development of a Housing Action Plan by asking people what their home and neighborhood need ed. The interactive posters or “Post-It Posters” were placed at the Leisure Centre, the Maple Ridge Public Library, the Ridge Meadows 2 The definition of affordability that was used for the questionnaire is th e CMHC definition, which defines housing that is more than 30% of their total pre-tax income is not affordable. For renters, shelter costs include rent and any payments for electricity, fuel, water and other municipal services. For owners, mortgage payments (principal and interest), property taxes, and any condominium fees, along with payments for electricity, fuel, water and other municipal services. 6 Seniors Centre (RMSS) and the District of Maple Ridge Municipal Hall. Four posters were completed at the Leisure Centre, three at the Library, and one each at the RMSS and the municipal hall respectively. The posters were designed to look like a display panel covered with Post-it notes that asked questions such as “Maple Ridge needs housing for……”, “I wish my neighbourhood had housing that…….”, “Maple Ridge needs……..” The design was intended to elicit a response that made people think about housing. Responses were varied, based on the age group of the respondents which included anyone who knew how to write. Please refer to Appendix D to view all of the Post-it comments. Online Mapping Tool – ‘coMap’ The intention of coMap was to generate housing ideas in a spatial onli ne format. Users were instructed to upload text and pictures of ideas they had for housing in Maple Ridge. This was intended to attract online proponents who might not be reached through other Housing Action Plan activities. A summary of the ideas from coMap include: infill ideas, mixed uses, transportation, ground-oriented single units, subsidized housing for people with disabilities and dwelling units for seniors with low incomes. Please refer to pages 20 and 21 in the body of the report to view all of the summarized comments.  Section Three – What We Heard Section Three summarizes the results from the consultation activities with emphasis on the stakeholder workshops and the questionnaire results. The section begins with identifying those groups in the Maple Ridge population that were most in need in terms of housing according to workshop participants and questionnaire respondents. The groups that were consistently identified as experiencing challenges finding housing are:  Renters  Seniors  Low-income and Single-Parent Families  At-Risk Women The results were then grouped into seven themes that articulate what workshop participants and questionnaire respondents identified as the housing issues and opportunities in Maple Ridge. They are:  Housing Mix and Homeownership  A Mix of Housing Options  Market Rental Housing  Non-Market Housing  Seniors  Development Approvals Process  Leadership Role 7 NEXT STEPS: A draft of the Housing Action Plan will be completed in early May, 2014. Staff will review the draft at a workshop in mid-May. This will be followed by a workshop with the Social Planning Advisory Committee and the consultant on May 22, 2014 to provide input. This will be followed by a presentation by the consultant to Council Workshop in June, 2014. After the Council presentation, the Draft HAP will be made available to the Maple Ridge community online for review and feedback. Hard copies of the plan and feedback form will also be available by request to District staff. A finalized version of the Housing Action Plan will be presented to Council in August, 2014. CONCLUSION: That the Housing Action Plan Update report be received for information. “Original signed by Siobhan Murphy” ____________________________________________ Prepared by: Siobhan Murphy, MA, MCIP, RPP Planner II “Original signed by Sue Wheeler” _______________________________________________ Approved by: Sue Wheeler Director Community Services “Original signed by Jim Charlebois” _______________________________________________ Concurrence: Jim Charlebois, MCIP, RPP Manager Community Planning “Original signed by Kelly Swift” _______________________________________________ Approved by: Kelly, Swift General Manager, Community Development, Parks and Recreation Services “Original signed by Jim Rule” _______________________________________________ Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A – Housing Action Plan webpage Appendix B – local newspaper articles on the Housing Action Plan Appendix C – Copies of February editions of Maple Ridge This Month Appendix D – Consultation Summary Report 8 Appendix – A Housing Action Plan webpage 9 Appendix B – Articles from local publications regarding the Housing Action Plan 3/31/2014 Maple Ridge studyassesses housing stock- News -Maple Ridge -Pitt Meadows Times Maple Ridge study assesses housing stock An online survey is being conducted to help formulate an action plan. Maria Rantanen /Maple Ridge -Pitt Meadows Times January 29, 2014 05:44 PM The District of Maple Ridge is trying to identify gaps in housing so that everyone has a place to live. Led by the Social Planning Advisory Committee (SPAC), a Housing Action Plan is being formulated with feedback from the community, and it will determine what the housing stock is, what is missing, and what is needed. Maple Ridge Councillor Cheryl Ashlie, who is the council liaison to SPAC, said affordable housing is a key piece in stopping the "brain drain" whereby young adults move away from Maple Ridge, taking their innovative ideas and intellectual capital to other communities. Ashlie said she hopes this housing plan will identify needs in the community so that council can be more aggressive in getting safe, affordable housing for all ages. "I want to be able to have it so our youth can stay here... and they can age out as an owner," Ashlie said. The District can facilitate the creation of affordable housing with its policies and bylaws, Ashlie said, allowing for in -fill that still respects the look of neighbourhoods, for example, allowing homes to be developed into duplexes or fourplexes. This allows neighbourhoods to look the same but accommodate more people, she added. Council will be receiving an update and report on the housing action plan at Mondays workshop given by Sue Wheeler, who is the community services director with parks and leisure services. An online questionnaire was launched this week by the District to get feedback from the public. This information will be used in formulating recommendations for the housing action plan for council to consider. The questionnaire takes less than five minutes to complete and can be found at www.mapleridge.ca —look for the housing action plan link. © Maple Ridge -Pitt Meadows Times http:/MnNro.mrtimes.com/news/maple-ridge-study-assesses-housing-stock 1.807060 1/1 Page 1 of 1 Ideas sought for affordable ey Maple Ridge News Publ(shed: January 30, 2014 11:00 PM Updated: January 30, 2014 03:533 PM contributed Servt'scq tLlapte Ridge &Pitt, /Yleadows since 197'8 housing in Maple Ridge �� Maple Ridge wants to know where and how people will live and how they'll be able to afford It. So the district has launched an online questionnaire to get your Ideas and mix them Into the housing action plan due for completion this year. By going to map/eridge.ca/246/Housing-Acton-Plan, people can click on a map and tell the district what type of housing should go where. They can also take an online questionnaire to give the district further Input. The survey takes five minutes to complete, and combined with other efforts, will help create the recommendations for housing that council will consider later this year. Some of the goals of the housing action plan are to assess the local housing market, Identify priorities and encourage more rental housing, as well as to work with other levels of government to provide affordable housing. The plan, setting out a housing policy, Is scheduled to go to council in July. Completing a housing action plan Is one of the requirements of Maple Ridge signing on to Metro Vancouver's long-term Regional Growth Strategy. Find this article at: http://www. mapleridgenews.com/news/242847291. html http://www.mapleridgenews. com/news/242847291.html?print=true 2/21/2014 3/31/2014 Maple Ridge housing more affordable- News -Maple Ridge -Pitt Meadows Times Maple Ridge housing more affordable Demographics and community input will help form a plan for housing. Maria Rantanen/TIMES /Maple Ridge -Pitt Meadows Times February 3; 2014 05:15 PM Singles, single -parent families, and seniors have the most difficulty finding housing in Maple Ridge. But housing still remains more affordable in Maple Ridge than in most areas of the Lower Mainland. These are some of the preliminary findings of a situational reporting that was scheduled to be presented to Maple Ridge council on Monday morning, and will be part of the information that will help to form a Housing Action Plan for the District. The public is also being asked to fill out a questionnaire about housing in Maple Ridge (it can be found at www.mapleridge.ca, look for the housing action plan link). In addition, there will be opportunities at various community events to give feedback on Maple Ridge's housing situation. The data doesn't tell the whole story, said Sue Wheeler, community services director with parks and leisure services, so she's hoping the community feedback will fill the gaps on the housing needs. Two pieces, the situation report presented to council on Monday and the community consultation process, will then "inform the creation of the Housing Action Plan," said Siobhan Murphy, a planner with the District of Maple Ridge. "We have existing policies in the [Official Community Plan] and outcomes from the Housing Action Plan may result in additional policies and regulations," Murphy said. The impetus for the Housing Action Plan came from Metro Vancouver. Maple Ridge signed on to the Regional Growth Strategy in July 2011, and this requires each municipality to develop a plan for their community. A community profile of the demographics of Maple Ridge was compiled as a starting point for the housing action plan. In the next 10 years, the population of Maple Ridge is expected to grow 17 per cent, but the number of children and youth is expected to go down, and a larger percentage of the population will be older than 65. The housing stock in Maple Ridge is largely ground -oriented, and 81 per cent of households are owner -occupied. The situational report also found that average rents are lower in Maple Ridge than in other parts of the Lower Mainland, and vacancy rates in condos tend to be low. And rental rates for seniors independent and supportive living units are about $650 less than across the region. Housing prices are almost $200,000 lower than in the rest of the region, with an average house in Maple Ridge selling at about $385,000, compared to the regional average of $588,000. © Maple Ridge -Pitt Meadows Times http://�nMw.mrtimes.com/news/maple-ridge-housing-more-affordable-1.812346 1/1 10 Appendix C – Copies of February editions of Maple Ridge This Month s rM INIUSUr _ r HousingOnline In 2011, the District of Maple Ridge adopted the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) along with other communities in Metro Vancouver. The RGS Identifies the Importance and need for affordable housing with a range of options, as being an important part of a complete community. The amended Regional Context Statement (RCS) in the Official Community Plan (OCP) identifies the District's commitment to completing a Housing Action Plan (HAP) to address policies for complete communities in the RGS. One of the key milestones of this work is to reach out to the community to get our citizens ideas, comments and suggestions. On Monday, January 27, 2014 an online questionnaire was launched that can be reached by going to the HAP home page on the Districtwebsite at www.mapleridge,ca/246/Housing- Action-Plan. The questionnaire takes less than five minutes to complete, and when combined with the other outreach programs that are underway, will help create recommendations that will come back before Council later in the year, In addition to the online questionnaire there are two other outreach programs. You will find interactive posters located in Fraser Health, Vancouver Coastal Health and UBC are currently conducting a study titled 'My Health My Community' that will help them to learn how our lifestyles, our neighbourhoods and our environment all come together to affect overall health and well-being, They'll study the results, and be able to improve future programs and services so that they are more relevant to your health and wellness needs. They'II also be able to share the most up-to-date health and lifestyle information with the District and community stakeholders and help them shape policies, programs and community services that lead to better health. You can find the survey online at wnnv.myheaithmycommunity. org. The site will explain who is eligible to fill out the survey, some background information on the program and details on how you can enter a draw for a number of prizes Including a draw for an iPadl Your opinion countsl Take a few minutes and participate in this important survey. It's that time of year) If you are Interested in being part of the 2014 Maple Ridge Canada Day Planning Committee, please contact Dave Speers, Neighbourhood Development Coordinator with Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows Parks & Leisure Services, Tel: 604-467-7433 Extension 1. It's a great way to meet new friends and to help make Maple Ridge a special place to live. the lobbies of the Maple Ridge Leisure Centre, Ridge Meadows Seniors Centre and Municipal Hall. The colourful posters allow you to make comments and share your views on this Important work. The third program is a tool called 'coMap' that allows you to share your ideas about housing types and tenure forspecific locations in the community, This tool can be reached on the Housing Action Plan homepage at mapleridge.ca. Contact us at enquiries@mapleridge.ca If you have a question about any of the content in this ad, or questions about any programs or services offered by the District of Maple Ridge, please send an email to enatunes@maple"dge.ca and one of our team members will respond to you, February 2014 Council Meeting Schedule Mayor and Council encourage everyone to attend these important public meetings. It's your chance to see how public policy is debated and enacted, Tuesday, February 11 7:00 pm, Council Meeting - Council Chambers Monday, February 17 9:00 am, Workshop - Blaney Room 1:00 pm, Committee of the Whole - Council Chambers Tuesday, February 18 7:00 pm, Public Hearing- Council Chambers Tuesday, February 25 7;00 pm, Council Meeting - Council Chambers Agendas & Minutes Agendas for these meetings are posted online the Friday before the meeting date, Go to mapleridge,ca, click the link under Your Council on the home page. Council This Week Subscribe to the 'Council This Week' eNewsletter that provides a summary of issues discussed at Council Workshop meetings, Go to mapleridge.ca, click the link to'Notify Me' and sign up today. Council Meeting Videos If you are unable to attend a Council Meeting, Public Hearing or Committee of the Whole meeting you can now watch these meetings on your computer 24/7. The entire unedited meetings are posted two to three days after the meeting. The video is indexed to the agenda package so that you can watch them in their entirety or click through by agenda Item. Go to mapleridge,ca and click on the video link at the centre of the home page, How Will You Spend Your Second HC Family ®ay Holiday? Monday, February 10 is Family Day in BC and if you're trying to think of a fun activity for the whole family, we invite you to pop down to the Maple Ridge Leisure Centre for a day full of fun and fitness. The Leisure Centre will be open from 8:30 am to 4:00 pm andiour4'e&eation team will be working hard to make your second Family Day special, Look for posters featuring the frany activities on this new holiday. Here's a list of the operating hours for all of our facilities for Monday, Februaryl0: ;, Municipal Hall: Closed Maple Ridge Leisure Centre: Open 8:30 am - 4:00 pm Greg Moore Youth Centre: Open 6:00 pm to 9:30 pm Fire all H1 Administrative offices: Closed Ridge Meadows RCMP Administrative offices: Open 1100 am to 3:00 pm <�< � r � r 1'.. � , � - Over the last couple of weeks the Greg Moore Youth Centre has been undergoing a bit of a facelift. When the facility reopened on Family Day, February 10, the young people vrho use the facility noted that it seemed much brighter. While part of that might be as a result of some of the freshly painted walls and new carpeting, a lot of that'brightness' comes from above. As part of the annual maintenance shutdown the lighting in the activity area was upgraded. The new six lamp fluorescentT5 fixtures create a brighter and snore even light en the activity space and, compared to the old 400 watt mercury vapour lights they replace, energy consumption for this space will be reduced by approximately 10,000 kilowatt hours per year. This technologywill also be used to replace the lighting in the Leisure Centre gym as phase two of this project rolls out. To put this In context, this is the equivalent of the energy used to power two homes far a whole year and represents an energy savings to the District of between $1500 and $2000 annually, As energy prices continue to rise, these annual savings will increase as well. r_ Left: OId Lights, Right: New Lights Whenever we have a maintenance or renovation project we Zook at how we can apply innovative technologies to improve our efficiency and sustainability. Inthis case the quality of light in both activity areas is much better than before, and it costs less to run the lights. These kinds of technologies are also available to homeowners to help you reduce your energy consumption. We encourage you to look at the Information on the BC Hydro website at bchydro.com to see how ycu can retrofit your home as you do regular maintenance and upgrades in your home. Bright ideas. Big savings. �_ � rE= i r r r In 2011, the District adopted the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) along with other communities in Metro Vancouver. The RGS identifies the importance and need for affordable housing with a range of options, as being an important part of a complete community. The amended Regional Context Statement (RCS) in the Official Community Plan (OCP) identifies the District's commitment to completing a Housing Action Plan (HAP) to address policies for complete communities (n the RGS. One of the key milestones of this work is to reach out to the community to get our citizens' ideas, comments and suggestions. On Monday, January 27, 2014 an online questionnaire was launched that can be reached by going to the HAP home page on the District website at tv<vw.mapieridge.ca/246/Housing-Action-Plan. The questionnaire takes less than five minutes to complete, and when combined with the other outreach programs that are underway, will help create recommendations that will come back before Council later in the year. 1 1--lousing Action Plan In addition to the online questionnaire there are rivo other outreach programs. You will find interactive posters located in the lobbies of the Maple Ridge Leisure Centre, Ridge Meadows Seniors Centre and Municipal Hall. The colourful posters allow you to make comments and share your views on this important work. The third program is a tool called 'coMap' that allows you to share your ideas about housing types and tenure for specific locations in the community. This tool can be reached on the Housing Action Plan homepage at mapleridge.ca. :. r . ..�, r r r Clean Drinking Water is a Number One Priority Later in February the District will be hosting an information session on water cross connections to expla(n the best practices to ensure that our public water system is safe and secure, Our team, along with some experts, will talk about hova backflow protection systems can be used to protect the quality of drinking water within your building and where your building connects to the District water system. Look for details of the seminar in this newspaper next week, online at the District website at mapleridge.ca and on Facebook and Twitter. Did you know that leaving a hose in your pool can contaminate yourvrater supply under certain conditions? Learn more atthis seminar. Contact us at enquiries@mapleridge.ca If you have a question about any of the content in this ad, or questions about any programs or services offered by the District s s February 2014 Council Meeting Schedule Mayor and Council encourage everyone to attend these important public meetings, It's your chance to see how public policy is debated and enacted. Monday, February 17 9:00 am, Workshop -Blaney Room 1:00 pm, Committee of the Whole -Council Chambers Tuesday, February 18 7:00 pm, Public Hearing -Council Chambers Tuesday, February 25 7:00 pm, Council Meeting -Council Chambers Agendas &Minutes Agendas forthese meetings are posted online the Friday before the meeting date. Go to mapleridge.ca, click the link underYour Council on the home page, Council This Week Subscribe to the'Council This Week' eNewsletter that provides a summary of issues discussed at Council Workshop meetings. Go to mapleridge.ca, click the link to'Notify Me' and sign up today. Council Meeting Videos If you are unable to attend a Council Meeting, Public Hearing or Committee of the Whole meeting you can now watch these meetings on your computer 24/7. The entire unedited meetings are posted two to three days after the meeting. The video is indexed to the agenda package so that you can watch them in their entirety or click through by agenda item. Go to mapieridge.ca and click on the video link at the centre of the home page. Fraser Health, Vancouver Coastal Health and UBC are currently conducting a study titled'My Health My Community that will help them to learn how our lifestyles, our neighbourhoods and our environment all came together to affect overall health and well-being. The purpose of the survey is to look at how we are doing as a community and a region when ii comes to our health and wellness, and provide all of the stakeholders in our community with important ihformatipr that will help them shape policies, programs and qulnmttnty services to allow us to achieve our health coals; You can find the`supteybplibe atwww.myheafthmycommunityorg. The site explains who is:eligible to fill outthe survey, provides ..background information on the program and details how you can enter a draw for a number of prizes including an iPad!Your bpinion countsl The survey takes less than SO minutes to fill - out and It allows you to spend a few moments to think about your health apd pur community. The two are related, so fire up your computer and be part of creating the health care system we all want, MAPLE=R1t.�� •. ,r..�. •�• • •• "�' �° „BfiitishColumbia; �� •' '= 11 Appendix D – Consultation Summary Report Consultation Summary Report MARCH 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................1 | INTRODUCTION 1 .....................................................................................................................OVERVIEW 1 .........................................................2 | CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES 4 .........................................................................THREE HOUSING WORKSHOPS 4 ...................................................................THE HOUSING QUESTIONNAIRE 14 ....................................................................................POST-IT® NOTE POSTERS 17 ...........................................................................................................................coMAP 18 ...........................................................................3 | WHAT WE HEARD 22 .....................................................................POPULATION GROUPS IN NEED 22 ..............................................................................................................KEY THEMES 23 ...............................................................................................APPENDIX A 26 .............................................................LIST OF WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS 26 ...............................................................................................APPENDIX B 27 .........................................................HOUSING QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS 27 ...............................................................................................APPENDIX C 49 ................................................................HOUSING POST-IT NOTE POSTERS 49 ..............................................................................................APPENDIX D 68 .............................................................................CONSULTATION MATERIALS 68 MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 1 MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 2 1 | INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW APPROACH & PURPOSE The District of Maple Ridge has engaged CitySpaces Consulting to prepare a Housing Action Plan. A Housing Action Plan (HAP) assesses the local housing market conditions; identifies housing challenges and ‘gaps’ along the housing continuum; and outlines tools to address these issues. When endorsed, the HAP will guide decision-making related to market and non-market housing in the District of Maple Ridge. Maple Ridge’s Housing Action Plan consists of three major phases: 1.THE SITUATION REPORT (Completed) – Assessing the housing context in Maple Ridge by identifying and analyzing key housing data and relevant information. 2.CONSULTATION REPORT (Current) – A series of workshops, a community questionnaire, and additional engagement approaches to identify gaps in the housing continuum and identify issues affecting specific population groups, such as seniors and young families. 3.HOUSING ACTION PLAN REPORT (Spring/Summer 2014) – In response to the issues and gaps identified in earlier stages, a toolbox of policies and approaches will be recommended and an implementation plan will be prepared that outlines short, medium, and long term actions. THE CONSULTATION Consultation with residents and community stakeholders is an integral part of the planning process for this project, helping identify the top housing issues in Maple Ridge and potential solutions to overcome housing challenges. The goals of the consultation program were to: ✦Provide information to stakeholders, special interest groups, and the public about the Maple Ridge Housing Action Plan; ✦Provide a range of opportunities for residents and groups to participate in the development of the Maple Ridge Housing Action Plan; and ✦Supplement quantitative data and background research with qualitative information and “real life” stories from residents and groups about the housing issues and challenges they face in Maple Ridge. This Consultation Summary Report is the second of three reports to be produced as part of Maple Ridge’s Housing Action Plan work in 2013/2014. It presents the results of community engagement activities undertaken between September 2013 and February 2014. Figure 1.1 outlines the different phases of work in the Housing Action Plan and what stage the project is currently at. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 1 FIGURE 1.1: Housing Action Plan Project Outline REVIEW OF STATISTICS & POLICY DOCUMENTS SITUATION REPORT ONLINE & POP-UP QUESTIONNAIRE STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOPS CONSULTATION REPORT (CURRENT STAGE) IDENTIFY GAPS IN HOUSING CONTINUUM PREPARING TOOLBOX OF POLICIES & STRATEGIES DRAFT HOUSING ACTION PLAN FINAL HOUSING ACTION PLAN CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES The following set of engagement activities were undertaken between September 2013 and February 2014: ✦Promotion and Publicity Activities — To generate interest and awareness of Maple Ridge’s Housing Action Plan. These included the distribution of 200+handouts at key events and locations; an online collective mapping tool (coMap) that generated 29 responses; and the placement of seven Post-it® note posters at key locations in the community (494 notes written). ✦Stakeholder Workshops — Three two-hour workshops were held with targeted stakeholder groups, including one session with the local housing table representing a range of housing interests in Maple Ridge; one workshop with individuals representing local seniors; and one workshop with builders, developers, and designers. ✦Community Questionnaire — A self-selected questionnaire was made available online and the link distributed broadly to local groups and agencies. It was promoted publicly with a news release and through social media sources, including Twitter and Facebook. District staff further boosted the questionnaire by distributing hardcopies at key meetings and subsequently entering the responses online. A total of 240 questionnaires were generated. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 2 A summary of the findings from each of the consultation activities has been included in Section 2 - Consultation Activities, while Section 3 provides a summary of what we heard across all the consultation activities. Detailed results, including verbatim comments and feedback, have been included in the Appendices. Across all the consultation activities, there were approximately 1,000 points of contact with participants. The level of participation by local residents is summarized in Figure 1.2. FIGURE 1.2: Summary of Consultation Activities 3 MEETINGS 32 PARTICIPANTS 240 RESPONSES 200+ DISTRIBUTED 4 LOCATIONS 7 POSTERS 494 NOTES 29 COMMENTS WORKSHOPS ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE HANDOUTS POST-IT NOTE POSTERS COMAP (ONLINE MAPPING TOOL) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 3 2 | CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES This section summarizes the findings from each of the main consultation activities — the stakeholder workshops, the questionnaire, the Post-it® note posters, and the comments from co-Map, the online mapping and engagement tool. THREE HOUSING WORKSHOPS The workshops were held with invited participants representing key stakeholder groups. The first was held with members of the local housing planning table; the second with individuals and community groups that represent seniors in Maple Ridge; and the final session was with builders, developers, and designers who have been active in Maple Ridge in recent years. The following section summarizes the findings from each of the sessions. NOTE: Please note that the summary of comments have not been filtered, fact-checked, or corrected. The comments are those of the participants that have been simply paraphrased for clarity. WORKSHOP #1: Housing Table The Maple-Ridge-Pitt Meadows-Katzie Housing Planning Table is one of several regional constituency tables in Metro Vancouver responsible for providing a regional voice on the work of the Regional Steering Committee on Homelessness. A facilitated workshop with this group was conducted on Monday, January 27th. There were eleven participants representing eight agencies. Below is a detailed summary of the discussion. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 4 Homeownership ✦With continuing increases in the cost of living in the region, the ability to afford housing and maintain a quality of life in Maple Ridge is increasingly difficult for households earning moderate incomes. Single parent households earning the median income ($42,000 a year) would find it difficult to save, as all their income is spent on basic necessities. This makes it difficult for many households to enter into homeownership. The number of children that a family has is also a factor. Seniors ✦There is limited seniors subsidized assisted living facilities in the Lower Mainland. Without subsidized assisted living facilities, the average senior would pay upwards of $1,400 per month for this form of housing, which is unaffordable for low-income seniors on fixed incomes. ✦There are ongoing challenges in mixed non-market housing buildings that house seniors and persons with disabilities who require specialized supports. Without 24-hour staffing, tensions arise when there are tenants with behavioral challenges living in their buildings. There is a need for low-income independent living units specifically for seniors. ✦Seniors are often not able to live in townhouses as they are typically three-storey structures. Townhouses are better suited to families with moderate incomes. ✦One seniors housing provider indicated that there were currently no vacancies. Subsidized units for single seniors often have little turnover. Population Groups In Need ✦The rental options in Maple Ridge are either too costly or inappropriate for single parent families. There are concerns around substandard rental housing conditions, perceptions around personal safety, appropriate setting for children, as well as fire safety. ✦Divorced parents often need two bedroom units in order to keep their children, but have a difficult time finding suitable rental or ownership housing that they can afford. ✦In general, people on income assistance or fixed incomes have limited options available. ✦Women often do not leave abusive situations because of a lack of housing. ✦More youth-friendly housing that has integrated mental health and addictions programs, and life skill programs is needed. Youth cannot be housed in the same environment as adult population. ✦There is a stigma among landlords towards at-risk groups, e.g. youth, formerly homeless, persons with mental health or addictions. It is difficult for these groups to access housing through the private market. There is a need to foster more compassion and inclusion in the community. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 5 Market Rental Housing ✦There are no restrictions on landlords to prevent them from increasing rents when tenants move out. ✦The Crime Free Multi-Housing Program has been introduced in Maple Ridge. Incentives for rental property owners and building managers could be introduced to further support this program. ✦Housing standards should be established for all rental buildings. What can the District do to address the quality/conditions of existing rentals? ✦There should be incentives for introducing and upgrading secondary suites. How can this be made easier in order to increase the supply of rental units in Maple Ridge? ✦Landlords need access to incentives and support workers in order to rent units to persons with mental health or addictions issues. Examples that have been effective in the past are: a non-profit organization rents a unit on behalf of a tenant, thereby reducing the risk for the landlord by guaranteeing that the costs of any damages/repairs would be covered and that support to the tenant would be provided. ✦The District could facilitate the development of market rental housing and ensure it is secured as rental housing, through housing agreements and restrictive covenants on title. Non-Market & Special Needs Housing ✦The federal government has prioritised “housing first” as the primary strategy for responding to homelessness, and will be allocating federal funding towards it. However, there are no new projects that are planned that could benefit from the availability of new capital funding for housing first projects. ✦There is a need for permanent affordable subsidized housing units for singles. ✦Through the redevelopment of existing non-market housing buildings, there is an opportunity to replace these older buildings with new projects that include a portion of new units as market rental to support the rent-geared to income units. ✦There is a need to provide housing for persons with mental health and addiction issues, with integrated health care support services and resources. There are low-income independent living units in Maple Ridge, but many do not have 24-hour staffing and do not have the ability to support tenants appropriately. Safety & Accessibility ✦The principles of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) are also important to consider and incorporate. ✦Accessible units should be offered in new buildings and existing buildings adapted or modified to be wheelchair accessible. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 6 Suggestions ✦The District could facilitate partnerships between market developers and non-profit housing societies. Partnerships between non-profits and developers with joint funding, reduced fees would make housing more affordable. ✦The District could encourage mixed-income buildings that allow for market units to cross-subsidize some non-market units. Incentives for developers would be needed to achieve such an income mix in a project. ✦To encourage developers to build affordable housing, the District should market and promote affordable housing in order to send a message that affordable housing makes a better community. ✦A community credit program could be investigated. This could be similar to a carbon offset program, but for building affordable housing units or cash-in-lieu for affordable housing units. ✦The District could advocate for higher minimum wage in BC (“a living wage”), and more rent subsidies and rent-geared to income units for at-risk groups (e.g. seniors, families, women). ✦Multi-agency coordinated discharge planning is needed to help get people housed immediately after leaving a hospital. ✦There is a need to improve communications between agencies and to demonstrate successful examples of partnership and redevelopment. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 7 WORKSHOP #2: Seniors Housing Table The Seniors Housing Table included representatives from a number of organizations that provide seniors housing and/or seniors support services in Maple Ridge. A facilitated workshop with this group was conducted on Wednesday, January 29th at the Ridge Meadows Seniors Centre. The format of the workshop was the same as the Housing Table, with each participant sharing priority housing issues and suggestions for the District as well as other groups. There were a total of eleven participants representing six organizations and five community members at large. The following is a summary of the discussion. Limited Housing Options ✦There is a need for housing for seniors across the housing continuum, especially for single seniors, seniors supportive housing, and rent-geared to income units. ✦There are not enough residential care beds in Maple Ridge. Seniors often have extended stays at hospitals, and have little support with finding suitable and affordable housing before they are discharged. Some seniors, who would prefer to stay in their community, are being relocated outside of Maple Ridge to find housing. ✦The options for subsidized assisted living are limited in Maple Ridge. Rent levels are too high for seniors living on fixed incomes. Some seniors are living in inadequate or unsuitable conditions, due to the lack of options in the community. ✦There is little turnover in low-income buildings. According to one low-income seniors housing provider, waitlists are typical for the 1-bedroom units in their complex and there is often little turnover of these units. However, there are no waitlists for the 2-bedroom units that rent for ~$715/month. ✦Many seniors are living with their adult children in a house, or sometimes in a secondary suite or in-law suite. There have been cases of elder abuse of seniors by family members. Some seniors feel “stuck” because of a lack of housing alternatives. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 8 Building Conditions & Tenure Stability ✦Some rental buildings are in poor condition and there are concerns around safety and maintenance standards, particularly non-functioning fire alarms and limited upkeep. ✦Landlords do not always provide adequate maintenance and upkeep of the units and/or buildings. Renters are concerned about potentially losing their affordable units if they complain or upgrades are undertaken. They often do not understand their rights as tenants. There is a need to have a community watchdog to keep track of housing issues. ✦There needs to be enforcement of building standards and fire safety for all rental housing. In particular, there is a need for inspections of buildings that house seniors, ensuring all buildings have fire escape plans and safety checklists. ✦Tenants living in buildings with expiring operating agreements could be at-risk if the housing providers have not planned for this transition. It was noted, however, that not all providers are at risk once their mortgage debts are paid off and the operating subsidies are eliminated. Accessibility & Location ✦There is a need to develop a classification or inventory of housing that is suitable for people using wheelchairs and persons with disabilities. ✦Transit does not reach many parts of Maple Ridge. New housing for seniors should be located in close proximity to services. ✦A survey should be undertaken to find out about issues that seniors with mobility limitations are facing. Residents could report about broken sidewalks, obstructions in walkability/scooters (i.e. telephone poles in sidewalks), lack of ramps, issues around traffic safety, etc. ✦Services should be distributed in neighbourhood centres throughout Maple Ridge. This way, retail and services are more accessible to seniors and persons with disabilities. ✦Maple Ridge is spread out. Seniors who are moving need assistance with finding a suitable and affordable place to live. A mapping tool that shows the places and services in proximity to transit routes would be useful. Information & Outreach ✦Seniors outreach support is key. The need for an outreach worker specifically for seniors was repeatedly noted by participants. ✦It was noted that many seniors are unaware of programs such as SAFER, the Shelter Aid for Elderly Renters, or the availability of subsidized assisted living units in the region. ✦The Seniors Network produces a booklet with services and information for seniors. Not all seniors are aware of this booklet. There is a need to better connect at-risk and low-income seniors to resources and programs. ✦Hospital discharge planning and a shuttle system are needed to assist individuals being released from hospitals and other institutions. ✦Home support services, such as a home-maker program, would allow those seniors who can live semi- independently to stay in their homes. ✦Seniors could also be supported with technology training to assist them to use the resources that are currently available. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 9 Suggestions ✦The District could assist with identifying opportunities for partnership-building, or other incentives, to allow private market housing providers to include a number of subsidized units as part of their projects. ✦The District should play a role, identifying and facilitating partnerships between non-profits and developers. ✦The District should actively enforce building and fire safety standards in rental housing. ✦The District should advocate for more subsidies for rent-geared to income units. ✦Municipal policies should be drafted to support low-cost seniors housing. ✦The District could provide incentives for low-cost seniors housing such as property tax exemptions, concessions on fees, or other incentives. ✦Can Maple Ridge use the properties that it owns for affordable housing purposes, such as a temporary seniors shelter or other non-market housing project? MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 10 WORKSHOP #3: Builders Forum The third workshop involved representatives from the development community (builders, housing designers, and industry representatives). Participants had been involved in a range of projects including large lot and small lot subdivisions, townhouse developments, four-storey condominium projects, as well as a proponent for a new modular housing development. Many of the participants had direct experience with secondary suites and garden suites in the District, as well as in other communities. In total, there were nine participants, representing nine different organizations/firms. The following highlights the workshop discussion. The Market Context ✦The market ultimately determines the unit types and product mixes that will be most successful in Maple Ridge. Small condominium units, namely studios and one-bedrooms that are 700 sq. ft. or smaller, have not been selling well. These units are too small for Maple Ridge, where there is not enough demand for studios and one-bedrooms. ✦There is not a lot of demand for R1 lots as they are too expensive; most new sites are being zoned to R3 (small lot). ✦The market demand for some forms of infill housing is limited. Buyers are less interested in a small lot infill development priced at $550,000, when an older home in a mature neighbourhood on a large lot costs $600-$650,000 (e.g. Silver Ridge). There would likely be greater demand for small lot infill development if the price difference was greater. ✦Replacing large lots with triplexes and four-plexes would be an effective form of intensification. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 11 Housing Mix Ideas ✦Modular housing may be a new housing product that could provide an alternative housing form and, possibly, a more affordable ownership option. ✦Three-storey townhomes work well for families with moderate incomes. The District has been asking for 30 percent of townhouse projects to have double-wide garages. It is, however, challenging to design townhouses to accommodate double-wide garages. Tandem parking helps to achieve the standard of two parking spaces per unit. Secondary Suites ✦In new builds, small lot houses are being designed with the intention of converting the basement/ ground level into a secondary suite after occupancy. Suites are only permitted in large lot zones. One of the challenges of introducing suites “legally” is the requirement for an extra parking space. ✦Suites were noted to be a positive solution for seniors who wish to “age in place” and remain in their homes through their elder years. Garden Suites ✦The regulatory requirements for garden suites are onerous, with strict setback requirements, housing agreement requirements, and other limitations. Garden suites cannot be built above a garage. ✦More flexibility in the zoning is needed. Examples were given from other communities: ✦In Coquitlam, Morning Star’s Somerton development in Coquitlam (Burke Mountain) had suites above garages that sold very well. Similarly, Chilliwack’s Garrison Crossing permitted suites above garages. ✦In Vancouver, the rules were changed for laneway houses to increase the square footage on the ground level in order to reduce overall massing and impact on yards and neighbours. ✦In Seattle, landowners have the option to subdivide the lot and sell two separate detached units. Approvals, Regulations & Requirements ✦There is a need to simplify the process for developers to build townhomes. Rowhomes or townhomes are considered multi-unit structures under the BC Building Code and, therefore, face additional requirements, design specifications, and building inspections. ✦A review of the building bylaws was suggested to see how to remove inefficiencies that add to the cost of housing. For example, the requirement for solar hot water heaters adds approximately $10,000 to the cost of the house, but they only contribute 30% of the hot water. ✦There is a perception that the approval time for development applications in Maple Ridge is lengthy. How can the application process be expedited? ✦In terms of community amenity requirements, new residents may pay for these costs. The District needs to be cautious about the addition of too many requirements that add to the costs of housing. ✦A collaborative approach between the District and developers is needed to achieve successful projects. Developers know what makes financial sense, therefore, a solution-seeking approach would benefit everyone. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 12 ✦A Development Advisory Committee would facilitate discussions between the development community and planning staff. This committee could suggest solutions to regulatory road blocks and act as a sounding board for new ideas. Such committees only work when there is an openness and a culture of partnership and innovation. To be effective, development advisory committees need to have senior planning staff at the table. Land Matters ✦There needs to be more employment opportunities in the District, so that locals can live and work in Maple Ridge. Many people have had to move outside of Maple Ridge because of a lack of employment opportunities. Dedicated employment land is needed. Suggestions ✦There is a need to find tools to discount home prices. ✦For certain projects, the District could increase density, while reducing fees. ✦Waiving development cost charges (DCCs) or waiving property taxes for a period of time (e.g. five years) would reduce the costs to the developer and help achieve affordable housing or rental housing projects. ✦The District could invest earnings from DCCs and generate interest that could be applied towards affordable housing. ✦The District could itself take on a pro-active leadership role and develop its own land for affordable housing. The District should always retain ownership of their land as these are assets that can be leveraged for affordable housing in the future. ✦The District could stipulate that certain areas be restricted for rental use or for seniors only. The District could also encourage rental housing development that has durable, lower-end finishes, which help reduce the cost of the unit. ✦A cultural shift is needed, one that appreciates the risks that the development community takes for community benefits that are provided through their development projects. ✦Opening up more Agricultural Land Reserve land was suggested, with a caution to limit urban sprawl and focus development in central areas where there are services, schools, and infrastructure. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 13 THE HOUSING QUESTIONNAIRE An 8-question housing questionnaire was launched in Maple Ridge as part of the consultation process. It was made available online, and advertised through the District website and social media feeds. The questionnaire was also taken into the community through a series of “pop-ups”, where members of the consulting team asked the questions directly to residents (who were willing), and recorded the answers on iPads. The pop-up approach made for an engaging exercise, and helped spread the word about the project. There were a total of 240 questionnaires submitted. Among these responses, 41 were partially completed and 199 were fully completed. Please note that the responses were self-selected (not randomly selected) and are not therefore representative of Maple Ridge residents as a whole. The results of the closed questions (quantifiable) are included in this section. The complete set of results, including all verbatim open-ended responses, can be found in Appendix B. The majority of respondents were home owners, which is representative of Maple Ridge households (81% owner-occupied according to the 2011 National Household Survey). Among the respondents, 28 percent reported their housing was “not very affordable” and another 35 percent felt that it was “somewhat affordable.” Just over one third of respondents (35%) reported that their current housing was “affordable”. 20% 80% Own Rent 28% 35% 37% Affordable Somewhat Affordable Not Very Affordable Cost Quality Size Amenities Transit Other 12%12% 18% 15% 21%22% MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 14 Housing cost, quality, and proximity to amenities were considered important factors when looking to purchase or rent a home. Among the respondents, however, 42% indicated they were not very satisfied with the location of housing in Maple Ridge in terms of its proximity to amenities, services, and transit. Cost of Housing Quality of Housing # of Bedrooms Proximity to Amenities + Services Proximity to Transit Very Satisﬁed 12%18%22%12%7% Satisﬁed 44%55%59%39%32% Not Very Satisﬁed 34%20%9%42%42% Don’t Know 1%0%2%0%3% According to the questionnaire respondents, single parents and persons on fixed incomes are facing the greatest challenge with finding suitable and affordable housing in Maple Ridge. The next group identified was seniors, followed by couples with children, youth, and persons with disabilities. Singles 7% Single Parents 16% Couples w/ Kids 11% Youth 11% Seniors 13% Persons w/ Disabilities 11% Persons w/ Health Support Needs 8% Persons on Fixed Incomes 16% Newcomers/Refugees 4% MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 15 High Priority Moderate Priority Low Priority Don’t Know Availability of Rental Housing 24%31%23%21% Shortage of Affordable Rental Units 34%23%22%21% Quality + Condition of Rental Stock 37%26%17%20% Diversity of Housing Forms 29%35%29%7% Housing Character + Design Choice 20%38%36%5% Accessibility to Transit, Services, and Shopping 62%28%6%3% Housing for Seniors 46%34%8%12% Housing with Support Services 32%41%13%14% The table above highlights those issues that were considered important among the questionnaire respondents. Housing that is accessible to transit, services, and shopping was considered to be a high priority by the majority of respondents (62%). Housing for seniors was also ranked as a high priority (46%), as was the quality and condition of the rental stock (37%), and the shortage of affordable rental units (34%). Other Comments The questionnaire respondents described a vast array of housing issues. Some of the areas of note included: ✦An emphasis on vulnerable or at-risk groups. ✦The future use of agricultural land for development. ✦The relationship between affordable homeownership and the availability of employments lands, i.e. living close to work. ✦Increasing industrial and employment lands as a way to increase the non-residential tax base. ✦Increasing transit and locating houses, services and amenities in areas close to transit. ✦Supporting mixed use development projects with residential units and rental housing above commercial development. ✦Mixed views towards higher density development. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 16 POST-IT® NOTE POSTERS A set of seven “Post-it® note” posters were distributed throughout Maple Ridge in high-traffic (pedestrian) areas, including the Library, Leisure Centre, the Seniors Centre and at the District Hall. Each Post-it® note had a starter sentence, such as “My home is...”. Residents passing by had the opportunity to write on the poster and fill-in the blanks. Overall, this activity provided some commentary about residents housing-related experiences, which can be found in Appendix C, and helped to generate interest and awareness of the Housing Action Plan. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 17 coMAP coMap is an online collective mapping tool that allows residents to draw routes, place markers, make comments, add photos, and share ideas with the help of a map. A specially-made coMap was prepared for the Maple Ridge Housing Action Plan, and was directly embedded on the District’s website. The coMap instructions asked participants to comment on the types of housing and characteristics they think there should be more of in Maple Ridge and why, allowing them to put a spatial layer to their content by adding a marker to the map. FIGURE 3.1: Spatial Distribution of coMap Comments There were 29 comments made altogether. The map in Figure 3.1 illustrates the spatial distribution of these comments. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 18 The verbatim comments were consolidated and summarized in Figure 3.2. Please see the following two pages for a larger image of the consolidated comments. FIGURE 3.2: Consolidated coMap Comments MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 19 MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 20 MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 21 3 | WHAT WE HEARD This section summarizes the key findings from the consultation activities. The discussion items highlighted in this section represent comments that were repeatedly mentioned by participants, or ones that were found to have particular merit or interest. Along with the detailed comments in the previous section, these findings provide a record of community comments and insight that will inform the Maple Ridge Housing Action Plan. The following issues and suggested strategies are a direct outcome of the community consultation. They do not necessarily reflect the values or intentions of all participants, or that of the District, and they have not been given any weighting or priority. POPULATION GROUPS IN NEED RENTERS There is limited availability of rental housing, and some of the housing that is available, is in poor condition or of low quality. Lower income households, or households with special circumstances, often have the least choice in the housing market. Renters were identified as being in particular need in Maple Ridge. SENIORS Lower income seniors often have few housing options available. Non- market housing buildings typically house persons with mental health and addictions issues, which may result in uncomfortable or inappropriate living environments. Participants reported there are limited options for independent living or assisted living in the community. More moderate income seniors, and those who own their own homes, face different limitations. Many senior households would like to have access to services that allow them to age in place or find houses that they can downsize into that are suitable (e.g. on one level and in a safe neighbourhood that is close to services). Yet, home support services are limited and single-level houses or larger condominiums are in short supply. The need for a seniors-specific outreach worker was repeatedly identified. An outreach worker could provide tailored support services or assist with providing information, links, and referrals. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 22 LOW INCOME & SINGLE PARENT FAMILIES For single parent families, the rental options that are available can be too costly or not well suited to their needs. A better range of housing options is needed to accommodate single parent households. Single parents, who are at risk of losing custody of their children, are required to have a 2-bedroom unit in order to maintain custody. Yet, two-bedroom rentals can be expensive for a single income household. Some families in Maple Ridge are one pay cheque away from losing their housing. Finding rental housing that is stable, affordable, and appropriate for children is a challenge. AT-RISK WOMEN There is a need for more support services that are specific to women who are homeless or at-risk of homelessness. KEY THEMES HOUSING MIX & HOMEOWNERSHIP Many participants described the difficulties facing low and moderate income families who wish to purchase a home in Maple Ridge, especially first-time homebuyers, single parent families, or others that do not have downpayment assistance. At the same time, local builders and developers commented on approval wait times in Maple Ridge, as well as the challenges associated with housing products such as townhouses or small lots that are typically more affordable. The market ultimately determines the unit types and product mixes that will be most successful in Maple Ridge. It was reported that small market condominium units, namely studios and one-bedrooms have had slow absorption rates. While smaller market condominium units have experienced slow absorption, there were other residents who noted the lack of larger condominium options in Maple Ridge. These types of units would be well suited to senior couples who are downsizing or young families. A MIX OF HOUSING OPTIONS There is an interest in the development community to diversify the housing mix, building multi-unit houses and apartment buildings other than single-detached homes. A number of challenges were noted by builders and developers to achieving this mix. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 23 An openness to new ideas would create a supportive environment for developers to try new forms of housing, and allow for innovation in the area of affordable housing development. Some of the suggested incentives for developers who are building affordable housing included increasing permitted density, reducing fees, reducing parking requirements, or expediting approvals. Suggestions were also made for reducing development costs, which would then translate into more affordable housing. MARKET RENTAL New purpose-built rental projects are difficult to achieve in Maple Ridge, given the high capital costs (land values and construction costs) relative to the rent levels in the District. As a result, developers will not likely undertake purpose-built rental projects without additional incentives or support. Some rental buildings were reported to be in poor condition with concerns around safety and maintenance standards noted by participants. In particular, the location, safety, and appropriateness of rental housing for children was noted. Enforcement of building standards and fire safety for all rental housing was noted to be a priority by several participants. Secondary suites are a source of rental income for homeowners, increasing affordability and housing choice for purchasers. They are also a major contributor to the rental supply. Suites often accommodate family and relatives, e.g. to house adult children or elderly parents/grandparents. Many participants commented on the need to support the development of legal secondary suites. According to participating builders and developers, there is continued demand for basement suites and most new single detached homes are built to be suite-ready. They also commented that garden suites have had limited take up due to developers finding the requirements to be onerous. While not currently permitted, adding a unit above a garage was repeatedly suggested as a cost effective way to diversify the housing stock. NON-MARKET HOUSING The need for a range of non-market housing was identified by residents and service provider groups. This includes rent supplement programs that allow individuals to live in scattered units throughout the community as well as congregate housing with on-site support services. Partnerships between multiple levels of government, as well as the non-profit and private sector, are needed to be able to develop new non-market housing in Maple Ridge. Non-market housing and rental housing should be located in areas that are accessible to services and transit. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 24 “High Density Housing — ... I do think that we should build more high density housing downtown. You need areas like this where people of all different incomes and backgrounds can live in close proximity if you want an interesting community.” -- coMap comment SENIORS There is a need for housing for seniors across the housing continuum, especially for single seniors, seniors supportive housing, and rent-geared to income units. Many participants felt that the range of seniors housing options were limited and that more support services for seniors were needed. There is a lack of outreach and support services for seniors in Maple Ridge. A need for seniors’ outreach support workers was repeatedly noted by participants. The distribution of information about available resources and programs was identified. THE DEVELOPMENT & APPROVAL PROCESS The builders and developers who participated in the consultation process indicated that they have experienced lengthy approval times, and that this was seen to potentially have an impact on future development in the community. It was also noted that policy and regulations are sometimes developed without an understanding of the financial and market constraints that developers are working within. Suggestions about how to improve the application and approval process were made. The participants were open to working collaboratively to find solutions. LEADERSHIP ROLE There were numerous suggestions for tools and incentives that the should be considered and implemented to help facilitate the development of affordable ownership housing, market rental housing, and non-market rental housing. In general, the tone and intent behind many of the suggestions was that the District had an important leadership role to play, creating incentives, identifying partnership opportunities, and fostering a supportive environment towards positive change for all Maple Ridge residents. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 25 “Seniors housing and low income — Housing needs to be near the centre of the business district so that Seniors can walk to shopping, doctors’ offices, and other services. It also needs to be near transport.” -- coMap comment APPENDIX A LIST OF WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS WORKSHOP AREA OF FOCUS ORGANIZATION WORKSHOP #1 (11 Participants) Non-Market Housing (Shelter, Transitional, Supportive) Cythera Transition House Society WORKSHOP #1 (11 Participants) Non-Market Housing (Shelter, Transitional, Supportive) Alouette Home Start Society (2 Participants) WORKSHOP #1 (11 Participants) Non-Market Housing (Shelter, Transitional, Supportive)Salvation Army Caring Place (2 Participants) WORKSHOP #1 (11 Participants) Non-Market Housing (Shelter, Transitional, Supportive) Affordable Housing Society WORKSHOP #1 (11 Participants) Social Services + Municipal Programs The CEED Centre WORKSHOP #1 (11 Participants) Social Services + Municipal Programs District of Maple Ridge (2 Participants) WORKSHOP #1 (11 Participants) Social Services + Municipal Programs RCMP WORKSHOP #1 (11 Participants) Social Services + Municipal Programs Fraser Health, Mental Health + Addictions WORKSHOP #1 (11 Participants) Social Services + Municipal Programs Community Living BC WORKSHOP #2 (11 Participants)Seniors Housing Community Members at Large (5) WORKSHOP #2 (11 Participants)Seniors Housing Seniors Helping Seniors WORKSHOP #2 (11 Participants)Seniors Housing Affordable Housing Society WORKSHOP #2 (11 Participants)Seniors Housing SunwoodWORKSHOP #2 (11 Participants)Seniors Housing RMSS WORKSHOP #2 (11 Participants)Seniors Housing Maple Ridge, Pitt Meadows, Katzie Seniors Network WORKSHOP #2 (11 Participants)Seniors Housing Seniors Network Space WORKSHOP #3 (9 Participants) Developer/Builder/ Design/Industry Greater Vancouver Homebuilder’s Association WORKSHOP #3 (9 Participants) Developer/Builder/ Design/Industry Portrait Homes WORKSHOP #3 (9 Participants) Developer/Builder/ Design/Industry Epic Homes WORKSHOP #3 (9 Participants) Developer/Builder/ Design/Industry Westack Developers WORKSHOP #3 (9 Participants) Developer/Builder/ Design/Industry Hawk Ridge Home DesignWORKSHOP #3 (9 Participants) Developer/Builder/ Design/Industry Biero Design WORKSHOP #3 (9 Participants) Developer/Builder/ Design/Industry Remax Lifestyles WORKSHOP #3 (9 Participants) Developer/Builder/ Design/Industry Portrait Homes WORKSHOP #3 (9 Participants) Developer/Builder/ Design/Industry Morningstar Homes MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 26 APPENDIX B HOUSING QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS The following graphs, tables and charts illustrate the complete results from the online Housing Questionnaire. In the open-ended responses, minor spelling errors have been corrected for the benefit of the reader. Otherwise, the responses have been unedited, recorded as submitted by participants. 1) Do you rent or own your home? 2) Do you find your current housing to be affordable? MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 27 20% 80% Own Rent Own Rent 193 47 80%20% 28% 35% 37% Affordable Somewhat Affordable Not Very Affordable Affordable Somewhat Affordable Not Very Affordable 37%35%28% 3) What are some of the important factors you consider when renting/buying a home? Cost Quality Size Amenities Transit Other 22%21%15%18%12%12% 4) For those factors that you think are important, how satisfied are you with them in Maple Ridge? Cost of Housing Quality of Housing # of Bedrooms Proximity to Amenities + Services Proximity to Transit Very Satisﬁed 12%18%22%12%7% Satisﬁed 44%55%59%39%32% Not Very Satisﬁed 34%20%9%42%42% Don’t Know 1%0%2%0%3% 0% 8% 15% 23% 30% Cost Quality Size Amenities Transit Other MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 28 5) Thinking about Maple Ridge, which of the following groups do you think are facing the greatest challenge with finding suitable and affordable housing in Maple Ridge today? Singles 7% Single Parents 16% Couples w/ Kids 11% Youth 11% Seniors 13% Persons w/ Disabilities 11% Persons w/ Health Support Needs 8% Persons on Fixed Incomes 16% Newcomers/Refugees 4% 6) Do you have any specific comments on the above? Or are there any groups that you think we may have missed? RESPONSES Transit is very poor. theres also some concentrated poor run down housing. People with mental health issues are important Families living paycheque to paycheque Rent increasing makes it challenging We need more facilities for handicapped people - eg. Telephone poles in middle of sidewalks, bike lanes for scooters and off ramps on sidewalks In particular, I think that there is not enough support for people with a mental illness to maintain sustainable rental relationships. Anyone can ﬁnd affordable housing a challenge at any time of their lives depending on their income and employment. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 29 RESPONSES Just not enough to supply the demand for housing. Not enough low rentals. Access to handi dart. Accommodations that suit people with mobility limits. Not enough options in maple ridge You don't see young people The seniors centre is very good. Affordable housing for all groups Difﬁcult for young people to ﬁnd rental housing. No pets or kids rules. We are looking at the bigger picture as it applies to all generations. We own our property and we can see there are issues that need to be addressed in Maple Ridge. Every single group mentioned above should have access to home ownership in some form. I reiterate that without the adequate access to employment above minimum wage jobs our "brain drain" will continue!! Our youth leave not because of housing but because of the lack of employment. The more "affordable" low income housing Maple Ridge has gone far enough with affordable housing. There is plenty here. We bought a condo 7 years ago and because of council ﬂooding the market our 1 bedroom condo is now worth $20,000 to $30,000 less than what we bought it for. Why would someone buy our condo when they can get a new one for $159,000? Certain groups are very limited when it comes to options. Those who don't drive or don't want to drive will have to live in or close to the Town Core. However, if you want to bike, the Town Core is not a great place to be, because there are no bike lanes. The bike routes don't lead to where the destinations are, so they're not that useful. By not driving, you create more space on the road for those that do drive, but in turn, they're not slowing down for you to make sure you're safe. Quality affordable housing out of reach for most. Young people, or folks on ﬁxed income especially. You missed the homeless. more than three!- single parents and single people too! Families with more than two cars with no transit Low income families homeless The Homeless and Mentally Ill. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 30 RESPONSES I am currently living in affordable supportive housing and it has a two year term. There was supposed to be another building like this built and there never was so thats 35 people given hope now or very soon with nowhere to go. There is no where affordable for low income singles or couples and bc housing is putting single parents or families before singles but the single parents that moved from my building after six months did not even have custody of the children. I have been on the list for three years and still no consideration for housing has come. so grouping individuals is not the answer it needs to be done on an individual need basis and the length of time people have been in these situations should be considered for it is about quality of life that also promotes growth and change Afﬂuent baby boomers and seniors. How about the people who have been living and paying taxes for the last 40 years that wish to sell and ﬁnd something affordable which meets their criteria and can not ﬁnd anything in Maple Ridge. These people will have to move further out in the Valley to ﬁnd something they can afford. I think the city of Maple Ridge needs to amend bylaw regarding secondary suites. how can a true assessment of housing and affordability be made without a true reﬂection of supply? legalize suites for affordability Single parents need a safe, affordable place to raise their children away from seedy areas. Social housing seems to end up in these areas (or it creates them). There must be some way to integrate social housing into existing single family neighbourhoods that would look attractive, and be affordable. Metro Vancouver has one of the highest costs of living, but we don't have the highest wages so a higher percentage of income goes towards housing. I worry about the working poor, and the metro Vancouver's child poverty rate. I would have added Persons with physical disabilities iﬁ there was room for a fourth choice. It's not necessarily a question of the group one lives in but of one's income. As rents rise, incomes do not, and there is little choice for people on ﬁxed incomes, GAIN, SAFER, homeless, Disability Pensions and those with chronic illnesses. How about all of the above ? As mentioned previously no 1500-1600 sf ranchers being built in a seniors gated community. Our current hillside rancher is 3600 sf on 1/3 acre. We no longer require the lower level but being seniors having the bedrooms, kitchen, laundry, family room dining and living room on the same level is important. With the townhouse and houses being built they are multi level and not great for seniors. With regard to caring for a senior who can no longer live alone, it would be helpful to have more capacity in local short term and long term care facilities. It is a challenge to maintain a job, e.g. in Vancouver, commute back to Maple Ridge, then travel to another community (daily or every other day) to spend time with the ailing senior parent or relative. Having had to travel back and forth to Langley for seven + months, I would not want to see another family have to go through the same experience. During the experience I met many people who had to go to Langley or New Westminster or Abbotsford to care for their parents. It puts a lot of stress on caregivers and seniors. Maple Ridge has a good cross section of housing options except for concrete high rise which could provide both seniors and other groups a good alternative if located near amenities Household host immigrants until they found a place Two young sons who have to live together because they can't afford housing. Can only afford to live in the slums. 19 and 26 years. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 31 RESPONSES The type of housing is the issue. Housing for seniors who are retiring and looking for quality housing near town or in town can only ﬁnd condos. And there is limited choice among condo market. Mobility issue when looking at town houses. Affordable downsizing options for seniors are needed. Likely the number one solution to deal with housing affordability and issues for many of the above groups is to focus on approving and encouraging housing development in the downtown core rather than on unnecessary developments such as Grant Hills Estates and sprawl and environmental degradation in east Maple Ridge Not enough 3+ bedroom condo's on the market. Unaffordable for young people for renting and owning Taxes are high here, makes buying house expensive Young families have to sell homes to rent, young people have to have roommates, in order to ﬁnd affordable home have to locate in less desirable neighbourhood. Young Families I am aware of single moms that are struggling and that seniors on ﬁxed incomes are struggling. If they can ﬁnd affordable housing it is often not appropriate and safe People on PWD beneﬁts I THINK YOU ARE MISSING THE HOMELESS IN THE HOUSING PART OF MAPLE RIDGE Most of these people are struggling to ﬁnd adequate affordable housing Homeless population rents are too high if you are poor Youth below the age of 18 who need emergency housing (Safe house etc). Not much of this type of housing is available in the lower mainland, and it is much needed.. working poor Particularly seniors on ﬁxed incomes (GIS and SAFER); and people with permanent disabilities. The single greatest resource for the health and well-being of our society is the family, in particular those with children. These children will be the ones who continue to provide the wealth necessary to sustain our province and our country. Single income families vs dual income families terms of seniors questionable? eg 55+ Need to able to pick more than 3. Would like to see single level accommodation/condo/townhouse (for people downsizing) in quiet less urban areas MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 32 RESPONSES Youth at risk Only choosing three wasn't enough as I personally think all of the above. people with kids need yards. there are TONS of whistler type new housing that are disgustingly small yard sizes. Great for seniors or a single person. Horrible for families. And no amenities for families at all. we keep talking about the same things, over and over. How is going change anything now? Homeless I am a senior and my friends are seniors. I am more fortunate than some of my friends, they live in very small apartments and it seems that some cannot ﬁnd housing within their income. Although some do get help, many just do not know where to turn. I feel it is wrong that a person has been a tax-paying citizen of Canada and in their "Golden Years" they feel abandoned. Hosing too expensive and not taken care of by landlord. types of housing available for seniors is limited to condos - very few (if any) bungalow town house type, single ﬂoor living facilities are available, especially when compared to Langley Maybe the distinction should be made between employed and unemployed rather than based on age/family status distinctions. I have just checked the realtor.ca we sire and found numerous listings for 2 bedroom condos under 200 thousand which is certainly affordable for employed people with modest incomes and today's low interest rates. I found one for under 100000, which with minimum down would have a payment of under $600. However, it was described as rented for 1000. So here is the disconnect: certainly affordable to buy for someone with a modest income but way to expensive to rent. But why would anyone take the chance on in eating in a rental unit given the risks involved ie bad tenants, grow ops , unit damage etc. The seniors population is growing rapidly. We need more subsidized assisted living and low income rental housing in Maple Ridge MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 33 7) How would you rank the following housing issues in Maple Ridge? High Priority Moderate Priority Low Priority Don’t Know Availability of Rental Housing 24%31%23%21% Shortage of Affordable Rental Units 34%23%22%21% Quality + Condition of Rental Stock 37%26%17%20% Diversity of Housing Forms 29%35%29%7% Housing Character + Design Choice 20%38%36%5% Accessibility to Transit, Services, and Shopping 62%28%6%3% Housing for Seniors 46%34%8%12% Housing with Support Services 32%41%13%14% 8) What do you think we could do to encourage the development of affordable housing in Maple Ridge? RESPONSES Less urban sprawl, more condensed inner city development. Improve transit. Offer incentives. Legislate. Mixed Commercial, retail and housing development should be encouraged. Actually allow Walmart and other big boxes in so people don't need to drive to Langley or PoCo. A single target doesn't does not meet the needs of a community this size. Build low cost housing Continue expansion. Daughter moved to Ontario because they couldn't afford to buy. Developing grants for new homebuyers. Need better access to District water for farmlands. Construction, people building less expensive, less luxury ﬁnishes, durable, materials affordable We could have more coop housing because it's based on your income. Make it better for people. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 34 RESPONSES Lower rental costs. A program to help people ﬁnd housing. Faster access to low income housing. Helping people with criminal records to get housing. Keep Council out of the real estate business. ALR is being abused. Build more housing/development Downtown. City hall has a hinder ﬁrst attitude. Which costs builders and developers more money. Which drives the house price up, which transfers to the buyer. Red tape is paramount to the cost to the buyer. Bring more shopping to maple ridge to decrease the tax burden on home owners. Give home owner tax breaks like other municipalities I.e carbon footprint. New windows, new toilets, new appliances, rooﬁng, etc Incentives or Zoning variances for rental projects More concerned about availability of quality, safe, affordable housing. Too much high density housing in run down neighbourhoods. New development appears to be very homogeneous - expensive, carbon-copies of houses over- sized for their lot and in the $500K to $700K price range. Developers should be required to construct a certain proportion of smaller detached entry level houses as part of a development. It might be worth considering attached houses - duplexes, triplexes. Recently rented in a newer complex (condo apartments & townhouses) - the quality of design and construction was incredibly poor - ie. shiny, but poor function, layouts, etc. Problems with neighbour's noise, smoke, domestic disputes, frequent drug busts across the street, lack of expected sidewalks, insufﬁcient green space, bad parking layout causes accidents, speeders doing 80km/h in an area with lots of pedestrians (including kids) and blind parking exits. More affordable housing should not feel crappy, overcrowded, stressful, unfair or unsafe. Generally sense that Maple Ridge is being overdeveloped in a non-optimal way. Another variable outside our direct control is the greater metro Vancouver area housing costs. Affordable housing needs to be worked on even more in Vancouver and adjacent communities. Maple Ridge housing will unfortunately be stuck expensive as long as the overall area is over priced - the affordable demand pool is from the 2 M+ people. Increasing property taxes slightly to pay for services and anticipated Canadian interest rate increases will do much to "solve" affordability challenges in Maple Ridge. Improved local job opportunities would also reduce commuting costs, improving housing affordability. Under no circumstances do I think that it would be appropriate to build lots of stupidly under-sized 400sqft condos/apartments when 2/3rds of the city land is completely undeveloped. I also don't think that Maple Ridge should be altering it's growth and development in an unbalanced way because Vancouver and other cities are stupidly expensive. Create policy that ensures that all levels of housing needs are supported by the development community. quick approvals and low dcc and cac fees for new developments Get out in the community and speak directly to the groups who ﬁnd housing affordability challenging and learn more from them about what could be done to alleviate some of this pressure; listen to their suggestions, consult with other government services and local developers to establish how affordable housing can become a reality. Putting in more shops making people want to buy in those areas and creating more jobs They should have more priority for seniors, young people /women with divorces, and people with disabilities. Not enough access for people with wheelchairs. Get the druggies out of the building, makes unsafe, terriﬁed seniors, have dedicated buildings for them. No option to have pets/cats. Need to go talk to people who are living I'm rental housing to ﬁnd out what the issues are. No idea, instead of building sprawl, do something else, too congested MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 35 RESPONSES Not sure Building housing costs money and politics get in the way. But it is important. We don't want people living in a dump. Helps that none of us work in Vancouver. So we really like where we live. Needs more communication with builders, municipality to push them to build of what's the priority here like affordability. Build what the community needs. Improve access to amenities like schools. Schools are overcrowded. Affordable housing should not be a priority. Transportation and services are more important. Stop building Albions and Silver Valleys - housing that many people, with children in such small areas only means more illegal or legal basement suites and no amenities, parking, etc., to go with them. In this day and age, people need to supplement income for mortgages, it's a fact of life. You build these places and they're supposed to be cheaper because there's no town halls, ﬁrehalls, enough schools, no shopping, etc., but they end up costing more because then people have to drive more and pollute more. It's ridiculous how LITTLE the builders have to contribute - $3.000.00 per house of a certain size on a new development that will ... what? put in outhouses because the funding is so negligible they might as well pay nothing. When you build communities with small shopping centres like they've done in some Langley neighbourhoods (off 195 & 64th Ave., for example) with walkable corner stores, coffee shops, hair dressers, etc., they not only promote local small business, they create neighbourhoods. What we have now is nothing but bedroom communities - everybody goes to work far away and comes home to sleep and leave on the weekends. We need people to stay in Maple Ridge and shop here too. We need to look to the future and driving everywhere isn't it. Pitt Meadows is doing lots of cycling and walking areas and we do very little. They do it without all the fuss (like the NON $1.6 million dollar path - that inﬂated ﬁgure was a crock and meant to inﬂame the masses too lazy to exercise. Time to think of the younger and/or more physically ﬁt or those who want to be, but can't because there's nothing close. The good old boys will all be dead in a few years - do we need to cater to that type forever? Work with all governments to implement a plan to provide affordable housing. Besides the lack of affordable housing for renter's, why can't there be a program that low income citizens can buy house's with there government money from Welfare. When we ﬁrst moved to Maple Ridge April last year we had 3 kids (1 boy 13 yrs old, 2 girls- 1- 10 yrs old & 1- 3 yrs old), now we have 5. Our nephew Male 17 yrs old moved in with us cause his mom moved to Alberta to be with a new boyfriend in which he wanted to stay here and ﬁnish his school and get a trade in a apprenticeship program which he's starting soon in Coquitlam. And my step son same sex and age as my nephew couldn't handle living with his real dad in Winnipeg, Mb. So now i'm in a bind of ﬁnding a place we can afford. Through Welfare or Disability Social Assistance we can afford $1000 and We might be getting some assistance through a program through Child Family Service in regards to my Nephew. But anyway's I love Maple Ridge & so does my family, but its hard to ﬁnd a 4-5 bedroom house with in our mean's. We barely get by now as it is and with the way the rental market is there are far less rentals to choose from. How about these rent to own house's, there should be a program that can help low income family's get into those. In Winnipeg habitat for humanity has or had a program that build houses for low income houses but the waiting list was huge. The housing market today even if i had a full time job i could never get a mortgage or a loan. Affordable Housing should be considered a basic human right Not a sham of the Corporate Greed. inﬁll, stop sprawl Attract business who want to improve the commerce of this city. We need to utilize the technological resources available in maple ridge to attract jobs jobs and more jobs...not more low paying low skill jobs!!!! We have more than enough. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 36 RESPONSES LOWER the residential property taxes. Provide some SERVICES for example: safer pedestrian crossings throughout with pedestrian controlled ﬂashing amber lights at all crossings. Other communities have them within the Lower Mainland. You cannot see pedestrians in the dark / in the rain, light it up. You also have J-walk pedestrian crossings.. light it up. Why do we not have city garbage pick up like other areas in greater Vancouver within our tax base? You have concerns about wildlife then issue a by-law indicating all residences must have tamper proof garbage containers. Congested populations lead to slums and crime. The more you force people into smaller areas, high density housing, no yards, the higher your crime rates are going to grow. It's a fact. We need another thoroughfare heading east and west out of Maple Ridge. Golden Ears bridge approach is a half effort. It needs to continue east. You need to move travel efﬁciently and safely which means more lanes, and minimal trafﬁc lights. We are at the far east end of Greater Vancouver. It takes a long time to get to down town Vancouver or North Vancouver. Narrow streets and excessive street lights only promotes road rage, speeding, etc. Aggressively market Maple Ridge for commercial and light industrial businesses to locate in Maple Ridge to offset the burden residential homeowners should not be carrying. Pitt Meadows and Mission are making "fools" out of Maple Ridge. Do NOT place light industry in residential areas as they often can produce health issues for the residents. These areas should be buffered by commercial businesses. Giving tax credits to developers for building out the centre of town was a good idea. What happened to the savings being passed onto the buyers? I do not agree that there should be collusion on the part of government and realtors to impact what a home is marketed for. Government should ONLY be assisting with fair priced RENTAL HOUSING. I ﬁnd it appalling at the amount of harassment I have received from City Hall regarding my basement suite. I am a responsible, harding working, single mother who has struggled to support my family. The income I receive from my suite helps me and also provides a safe home for another family with children. How can anyone in their right mind not wish that for a community? The development in Albion has to be the least expensive in M. R. If you get any cheaper you will have slums in years to come as the cost to build a house is not cheap to build it properly. There really isn't any industry or commercial shopping to support a tax base to support affordable housing in a good area close to downtown and an area for family living ie. play area, safe surroundings. My idea of affordable living is living and shopping in a down town area without driving anywhere else for my needs. We need jobs,shopping schools and a councils that tries to see a future for our "city " of HANEY, MAPLE RIDGE, BC. There is nothing you can do. We already have enough housing. The development process has been happening too fast driving up property taxes. High property taxes is making Maple ridge unaffordable. Developers should be paying more for Schools, hospitals, roads, ﬁre halls, bridges, not the taxpayer. All those items are affected every time a new development goes in. Maple Ridge is looking for new ways to tax us to pay for this, while the developer makes a killing. Densiﬁcation (high/mid rise residential with lower level commercial) in and around the downtown core. This type of development eliminates/reduces the need for the use of a $ar, reduced service costs, stimulates a higher commercial tax base (maintain/reduce taxes), local job opportunities, closer/walk to health services and improved transit all due to a higher concentration of people (consumers). Affordable housing is more than just about the "house". The existing rural sprawl (high cost to service, need for a car, distance from services = $$$ and environmental cost) of single family and townhouses is more than sufﬁcient to meet the current and future demand for this type of housing stock. Most existing urban lots are also of sufﬁcient size to subdivide and create multiple single family/ semi-detached houses per lot to meet any increase in demand for this type of housing and thereby being consistent with the core densiﬁcation approach and beneﬁts. Housing prices are demand driven and living in the GVRD has a premium. Smaller units and higher density is more affordable, but you'd have to get people to buy into the concept. Encourage home owners to build laneway housing for affordable rental by offering tax breaks etc. Consider building subsidized housing for seniors and disabled. Ask Katsi nation if they would build affordable housing on their land in exchange for whatever they want. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 37 RESPONSES The problem with Maple Ridge is that the only place where affordable housing makes sense is in the Town Core and along Lougheed and Dewdney where people have reasonable access to public transit (although cycling is not great, not having bike lanes, and often having to bike on the sidewalk). Often affordable housing brings social problems with it, which means all those kinds of problems (drugs, alcohol abuse, prostitution) are concentrated in the Town Core. The fact that people who need social housing also often get around by bike, and that they end up biking on the sidewalk, makes that they're even more despised by the general population than they already are. These people, as all cyclists, need to be treated with respect, and they should not be relegated to back streets (without destinations) or the sidewalks. It's sad that affordable housing will need to be built along the transportation corridors so that low-income people have access to transit, while many may not even drive themselves. They do have to live in close proximity to these noisy, high volume, high speed arterials, while walking and cycling is very unpleasant and quite dangerous along these routes. As long as proper transit options as well as and safe cycling facilities can be provided, more affordable housing can be built in other areas of Maple Ridge as well. I absolutely don't agree with the way Maple Ridge expands to the east and north. It's mostly single family homes, without any amenities close by. People are absolutely, totally dependent on their cars. How could you build affordable housing there? It was not a very smart plan. There's supposed to be 'higher density' along the transportation corridors, but there's an awful lot of single family homes along 240th for example, and also along many of the other arterials. Why couldn't 240th have commercial and ofﬁces with apartments above (more than what's going to be at 240th and 112th). Kanaka Way has mostly single family homes. It's a racetrack, and there's nothing but houses. An absolutely awful place to live. Try to cross the street as a senior, or as a mom with a stroller and a little kid by the hand... No wonder you see mostly renters there. And why on earth would you build these single use neighbourhoods up on the mountain in north Maple Ridge? You can't bike there, you can't walk there because there's no sidewalks to get there. No shopping, no schools, no pub, no restaurant... A community needs to be built from the inside out. And we need planners who have lived in walkable communities, who walk a lot themselves, to understand what's needed. If we don't change the way Maple Ridge expands, there's just not a whole lot of places where you can build affordable housing. If we do manage to change the way we expand, perhaps inclusionary zoning would work, whereby the developer has to build a certain percentage of affordable housing in a development project. Work in partnership with developers to keep proﬁt expectations in check,open up land and ensure that the developer is not allowed to "gouge" potential buyers. Too many redevelopment apps, and no thought to trafﬁc congestion. The quarry on Jackson Rd has too much density, this whole area is developing quickly and trafﬁc is busy on 102 ave and 104 ave and is getting very busy. Allowing basement suites is not the answer, look at 102 Ave all those homes packed into one small area, everyone parks on the street, you can barely drive down those streets. Reduce costs I gave my thoughts on the other webpage map feature.....council for years has ignored treating the Lougheed highway like a HIGHWAY, as opposed to Main Street.....get the entire length of Lougheed from 200th to the bypass away from single family housing....it should all be commercial WITH one or two stories of small rental apartments (not condos). The SW corner of 207th, that new mall should have had apartments above the commercial space, what a waste of space. Along the highway put in three story apartment complexes or ﬁrst ﬂoor commercial with rental apartments above, with car access only from back/side streets not the highway, and you'll have plenty of affordable places to sleep and work. If council had demanded this of developers along the highway for years, they either build this or don't build at all, then we wouldn't be in this mess, on either the housing or the trafﬁc fronts. Same with the highway frontage in Albion, all commercial along there should have apartments or condos overhead from now on in any future Albion lougheed corridor development. Have Better Transit service, Most of the secondary suites are out in the larger homes like Silver Valley, Rock Ridge etc. Parking is a big issue, and no Transit to get you to local Bus routes. Everyone needs a vehicle. Our street has big houses, suites and you can only park on one side of the street. And above that you may only be able to park one small car, or smart car size. Because the by law states . There must be 3 meters on ether side of each driveway. Average vehicle size is 18 feet. Add 20 feet to that. That's 38 feet. plus driveway width. Must buy a motor cycle and join the Hell's Angel's. Go ﬁgure. Thanks for Allowing me to voice my opinion. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 38 RESPONSES Lay out a clear, concise plan as to where and what type of affordable housing you plan on developing. Be mindful of where you place the affordable housing. Place it near services / amenities that low income / disabled tenants require. Have more low income housing made available through the planning process and having the developers build more instead of the high priced market. Tax discount for rental properties Have the developers include some affordable units with the market rental units. Have a mixture of tenants. This could be a start to affordable units for low income tenants. Ask builders to be a part of a needed change in Canada and commit to 10% of buildings to be affordable housing. Allow for suites, carriage homes, allow landowners to develop their land if they want. Put the infrastructure in ﬁrst-transit, schools, shopping. Otherwise this is putting the cart before the horse. But that said, ﬁnd non-corrupt developers and conservative district planners and work within the public scrutiny to grow the district at a slow and steady, manageable pace. More townhouses isn't going to help Maple Ridge but more affordable single family homes will. Enforce some bylaws too to make it pleasant. Parking is soon going to be a major issue here!! The development of affordable housing is already over encouraged in Maple Ridge. Are we not already one of the most affordable areas in the lower mainland? Maple Ridge should be encouraging higher property values so that there is proper investment in the community, not welcoming all those who can't afford to maintain or improve the housing situation. Allow properties that have been stuck in the ALR since it's inception to be able to opt out for affordable housing. Properties that haven't been farmed for years that just grow acres of blackberries on solid clay soil that is incapable of farming anything at all. Properties that border on Secondary and Elementary Schools, that have transit, water, sewer and are within 5 km. of the town centre. There are many of these properties on Dewdney Trunk Rd. that are sitting on prime locations that would make sense to develop rather than doing clear cuts on our Mountain sides and having to bring in all of the amenities. I thought the plan of this council was to keep development within areas that are practical. Not build new roads, but use the ones that are already existing. This town is continually taking a step backwards in where they are allowing developments to go. Take a good look at properties that are within walking distance of schools, transit, shopping etc. and not just growing blackberries. Those who want to keep land in the ALR are people who are living in apartments, townhouse and single family homes. If they want to farm how about buying one of the many existing ones and try farming and let them watch their money go down the drain. It is impossible to live on these acreages and do nothing but lose money. THINK LOCATION when planning housing for the future!!!!!!! Adopt a new secondary suite policy that aligns with the rest of the Lower Mainland. Having a suite is the only way our young will be able to afford the dream of owning. Owning encourages stability and sense of community. The city has no idea how many illegal suites are out there right now and it is recklessly punishing those that are ﬂushed out. We all want our kids to stay in the community and we have to give them the chance to be able to achieve a happy stable /secure home they can call their own. Build better infrastructure like roads, shopping malls,entertainment. Target business to move into the area. Less commuting . Better attractive businesses which leads to more taxes. Less taxes on home owners. Stop building houses if the infrastructure is not in place. MP council trying to build MP with homeowners taxes. Taxes needs to come from other sources. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 39 RESPONSES Increase drastically the shopping choices for residents so they don't need to drive to Coquitlam Centre Mall or big box stores in Coq/Mission to shop. This will also help keep residents taxes from constantly rising because there is not a big enough commercial/industrial tax base. Do not increase density with small lot crammed neighborhoods - we are not the city of Vancouver and don't need to follow their model which doesn't ﬁt for our more rural community. Stop building housing so close together and stop building in areas where our wildlife live. It is wonderful to see bear and deer in the outer laying areas of our city but it is so sad to see them eating garbage from our back yards to feed their young. When you kick any living being out of their homes their are going to wander somewhere else to survive. Cluster housing in areas close to schools etc. and not spread out too far with large lots and big houses. Create neighbourhoods, i.e. cluster around DTR and 248 Street and rezone surrounding areas to RS1 and RS3 Difﬁcult question to answer. It appears that most of the stock being built are condos, townhouses and single family homes for sale. Perhaps dialogue with non-proﬁt groups would be a place to start. How about co-ops? Keep them near bus lines, shopping and transit. A lot of these folks can't afford transportation. I don't know how you would encourage developers to build them, but I would keep a close eye on the workmanship of the development. Maybe they could be partially funded by Lion's Clubs, Rotary or whatever. Build more low cost housing for seniors, handicapped and people on assistance. Better management. I just moved out of a dreadful apartment with the 15th manager starting. This many after 3 years of living. Affordable housing allowing cats and small dogs. I was rejected in all subsidized housing, because I have 2 cats that increase my quality of life.More affordable/subsidized housing for disabled persons. I believe Maple Ridge is an affordable community to live in. I was born and raised in the Tri-Cities and moved out here because despite my wife and I each having good jobs we couldn't afford a detached home to raise our family in, in the Tri Cities. Most people still commute west to go to work, so they are paying more in fuel. I think waving a percentage of development fees and have that money redirected at providing more transit options, so residents save money in fuel. Or have developers install recharge stations in new developments to make the possibility of owning an electric car more of a reality. I feel that the working class has chased affordable housing east into the Fraser Valley, which means commuting farther to work and spending more money on gas. To ﬁnd a way for it to be less punitive on the working people who can no longer afford to own a home Port Moody, Coquitlam, Burnaby, New Westminster, Richmond, the North Shore and Vancouver. Having less expensive options to get back and forth to work, can make housing less expensive. Ensure that a few low cost rentals are included in every new multi-dwelling development so that those with low incomes do not get "ghetto-ized". Encourage development of some housing without all the frills. The units in Alouette Heights subsidized housing are quite wonderful in providing exactly what a low income tenant needs, with lots of storage space, a decent kitchen and bathroom, but no need for the dishwasher , the elegant and expensive ﬁnishing such as marble counter tops and crown moldings. That is, keep some developments simple so that they are also affordable and perhaps reserve them for people with low income. Partner with churches and charities to provide/create housing (i.e. the Baptist Towers, The Lions housing on 224th) and then ensure they are kept up to standard such as ensuring decent cleaning of common places; attention to mould issues; leaks, maintenance. Create live-work spaces with economy ﬁnishing or interior ﬁnishing to be provided by the tenant such as was done in Vancouver along Great Northern Way. Allow deteriorating malls (Haney Plaza) and single story stores (Dewdney Trunk near 224th) to be developed into two or three storey buildings, but ensure that the new building have a "village" quality to them and an upscale design such as has been created in Whistler Village. Whistler Village allows higher development, but I think Maple Ridge needs to keep its small town appeal and sense of community, so recommend not building too high in the shopping areas. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 40 RESPONSES Maple Ridge needs industrial and commercial centres to supply jobs for the families in this city to make it affordable . This will reduce travel costs property tax on single families. Affordable housing is a relative term. Embark on a program to encourage more better paying jobs and part of the problem will solve itself. Also, don't go off half cocked and start building anything until an actual speciﬁc need has been established. What must be avoided at all costs is turning Maple Ridge into a Mecca for low or no income individuals. Nothing. My taxes in Maple Ridge are high enough without my family paying more so that someone else can have affordable housing. No doubt tax breaks will be used to attract more affordable housing, and the taxes lost, will be recovered by increasing my taxes. There is nothing you can do. Developers are not interested in losing money. Land is purchased by them based on the probability of developing to the greatest density possible under current or future zoning. If this District is looking for an out regarding the apparent out of control illegal suites, then perhaps create one or more subdivisions that allows for renters. The design must include design to facilitate ALL matters that increase localized population such as additional measures to both move and park the extra vehicles that come with this approach. As it is now, the District is not in compliance with their own zoning Bylaw and regarding renters and illegal suites. The idea of potentially changing current zoning to make illegal suites 'disappear' to facilitate this housing questionnaire is not a preferred method to make past and current violation better or go away as there is a large populous that carefully purchased in areas not zoned for suites that are being swallowed up by illegal suites. Cut taxes for rental homes, remove dcc's from new rental stock developments, and lesson red tape for the construction industry to show a partnership, rather than an adversarial approach to building. Provide zoning and incentives for developers to build low income housing . Don't know, haven't given it much thought Check with at least 3 independent urban planning professionals to establish a starting point. where? how much? etc.? Seniors need housing they can buy that meets the needs for senior living. All rooms on ground level, 1500-1600 sf ranchers. When we sell our larger homes to downsize MR does not provide these types of homes. Perhaps look at developments which include smaller homes, e.g. more ranchers or bungalows (2 - 3 bedrooms with den/family room) that offer a good starter home for a young couple and/or an appropriate size for a coulple who are down sizing from the very large homes. Not all single people, who have owned a family home, want to move into a townhouse, condominium or apartment complex. I believe there are many people downsizing who would like the option to purchase a smaller single family home, with a medium to small yard, so they can maintain independence and continue to enjoy the privacy offered in their own yard, garden. Maple Ridge is already relatively affordable in the Metro Vancouver area. If the mission of this effort is only to develop or satisfy the market for lowest cost housing it could result in an imbalance of development that could affect the overall market and appeal of Maple Ridge. Creating large pockets of single purpose communities should be avoided. There is a need in the rental market which is clearly obvious through the abundance of currently illegal suites in areas that are designed for single families. Rather than try to re-purpose single family areas that are already underserved with schooling, shopping and parks, new developments of mixed use, including a good component of rental only, high rise and retail could help balance the market. Allow more house building options on the smaller lots (under 2 acres) located in the ALR. This would allow more area to build housing without effecting our agriculture base. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 41 RESPONSES Lower the prices. For people not looking/settled, hard to judge market, but would look for affordable. Important to clean up the buildings in core areas to make sure quality is maintained and tenant issues - screening and quality control. There should be a rent cap so people can afford homes. Landlords aren't ﬁxing the places but keep charging high rents. One of the main issues is the industrial base. Developers are building cheaply to achieve affordability. District is allowing because they don't have industrial tax base to fall back on. Could attract higher end housing if you had other ﬁnancial resources available. There are no high rises in Maple Ridge. But these bring a quality of construction that is needed, e.g in Pitt Meadows. Quality intermediate housing for empty nesters within the core of the city so you don't have to go to outskirts. We are allowing too many developments in outlying parts of the District. Add tax in incentives for developers to develop affordable housing, tax breaks for people who develop their own housing to multi family, making it easier and cheaper to get building permit for secondary suite Reduce the fees for permits and development of smaller properties. I would improve my property if the non building costs were affordable. Adding more commercial property outside the town core would save a lot of car trips Affordable rental housing should and could be located on the parcels of land, at the 23000 block of Lougheed, which the Provincial Govt. is in the process of marketing. This area could accommodate an extremely good development which could encompass rental housing for singles, persons with disabilities, seniors, subsidized housing, etc. The Province has ongoing subsidies for these kinds of programs...so it obviously recognizes the need for these programs. Why is our Municipality NOT going after these lands to accommodate this vast shortage of rental housing within our Municipality? These lands hold the unique location which offer easy access and waking distance to transit, parks, recreation facilities, shopping, a community Clinic, etc. I think we are losing an valuable opportunity in not recognizing these lands as being vital to the Municipality embracing and assisting our most valuable asset...our citizens. Time is of the essence in securing these lands and initiating talks with the Province and our local MLAs. Restrict or tax heavily foreign ownership and speculative type purchases. Approve more business on the bottom/ housing above developments to densify downtown. Make it more expensive and difﬁcult for developers to put in housing in parts of Maple Ridge that are far removed from services and in environmentally sensitive and naturally scenic areas and offer the developers incentives to build in the downtown core are of Maple Ridge. Some of the core housing could also be higher end condo/ townhouses/apartments that would help revitalize the downtown core. Attract more business to the area to diversify the tax base. Maple Ridge needs both more and better retail but also white collar and manufacturing business to be based here. Residents who work where they live spend more money and generate more encompassing tax revenue. Currently Maple Ridge puts the development community before their citizens. This town is falling a part with cheap housing and there seems to be no appetite to discuss the amount of unabsorbed housing in the community the determent it is causing the resale values in our community. Time to think big Maple Ridge, people are moving here and turning around and moving out. Rent Controls, Lower taxes, permits etc to keep costs lower for developers. Secondary suites, incentives for creating these Condo mix that keeps some suites as rentals and affordable. Incentives for developers to build rental development and not convert to condos. Increase the amount of high density housing. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 42 RESPONSES Im not sure if this ﬁts in this category but I have to say this, I live in silver valley and I think its possibly one of the worst places to live and never wish I bought up here. There is no schools, coffee shops, transit...there is absolutely nothing up here. In order to get somewhere you need to drive your car at least 15 mins. City Maple Ridge has done a really poor job and I can't wait to leave this city due to the fact of nothing to do. Worst city to live in...more people will be leaving maple ridge. More subsidize housing and bc housing for singles On District Land I believe that Maple Ridge needs to maintain it's roots and not become completely developed throughout. I understand that development is a part of a healthy city, and agree that the downtown core and immediate surroundings should be heavily developed. I also believe that more urban areas need to be maintained as such for Maple Ridge to uphold the high quality of life that we have now. Areas that are being removed from the ALR shouldn't be. If they are to be subdivided, I suggest that larger lots be proposed. Maple Ridge is one of a few cities left that is not completely developed and is unique and awesome for it. I hope it doesn't follow the path of Coquitlam (where there are very few larger acreage properties), as this is extremely hard for the wildlife that live in the nature and for the ﬁsh that return to Kanaka and Alouette rivers every year. My .02 Cents. There are a lot of new appartments available in Maple ridge. I would like to see more Garden suites for older family menbers or tru. Also suites over garages for the yonger menbers of university students / youth that want privacy and can't afford or don't want to live in an appartment. There are many areas this is possable RS 1,2,and 3. As well this could serve as a morgage helper with a little more privace. than a basement suite . Add more social housing. Keep the momentum. Tax base is reﬂective of the housing, shopping is limited, increasing the shopping/commercial would increase taxes from businesses rather than homeowners. Increase businesses/shopping. Co op, instead owning by yourself, co owning and shared services, shared in quality, that would more affordable. More subsidized housing for working families, for both rental and ownership. Some families are selling their homes because can't afford it and now have to rent, govt loans or grants for down payment help. Build transitional and affordable units for single people on assistance. the Caring Place should not become the only way to survive for individuals that cannot afford housing Better public transportation routes and connections. Connections to mission and rural maple ridge would be useful, as well as more buses on current routes. An express bus is needed at all times (even weekends) to Braid station and Coquitlam station. Additionally, full lot houses would be beneﬁcial rather than all townhouses. Stop greed Probably need to have incentive for developers to build affordable housing and need to partner with senior government, municipal government isn't responsible but there must be things that this level of government can do like partner with senior government. Stop building new houses. Support the current community with more shopping. Hospitals and schools Fix downtown Maple Ridge. Move the low income housing to another area and build up the downtown core with new buildings and a new mall. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 43 RESPONSES Who knows? Keep it small town. Avoid having huge companies build to drive up the number of people Property taxes are high, discounts for those renting to at risk populations (single parents, youth and seniors) Provide tax breaks or other incentives to Non Proﬁt agencies that are willing to provide affordable housing. Get the City to require that all condo developments allocate at least one unit as an affordable housing suite - that way we individuals blend in and aren't singled out and neighbourhoods don't get overpopulated with people with less advantages. Perhaps a not of proﬁt society could be set up to oversee all of the units, manage them, ensure that they stay in the system as affordable units. Perhaps the city could give the developer an incentive. Show a need and develop a plan I THINK THAT MAPLE RIDGE NEEDS TO MAKE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING 30% OF PEOPLES INCOME. HOUSING HAS TO WORK WITH WHAT THE GOVERNMENT GIVES THEM TO LIVE ON OR WE WILL KEEP HAVING PEOPLE ON THE STREET Housing options for singles and young couples who are ﬁrst time home buyers. Affordable housing such as Housing Co-op and subsidized housing. Amenities that support communities such as local shopping, local businesses and childcare. Improve transit to other communities. No matter what the price if people can't get to work without a car they wont live here or they will be on welfare. Offer incentives to developers so that 20% of units are reserved for affordable housing We need a plan for work. Work is scarce in Maple Ridge. Maple Ridge needs to develop business across a spectrum of industries in order to create the work people need. As well, Maple Ridge city council and the MLAs and MPs have to work together and with developers to insist that a certain percentage of new housing built has to be rental and accessible to low income individuals and families. There are empty condos everywhere and when they are ﬁnally bought if they are rented out the rents will be high. There are good and sustainable models for mixed market housing that works. It is about political will. Housing should not be tied to the political cycle. Finally CMHC needs to be revitalized and small cities like Maple Ridge can and should be part of that process. 1. Ensure that planning decisions made in relation to future development sites are not determined by councilors with a ﬁnancial interest in property development. 2. Only allow development of undeveloped land when the development scheme includes appropriate infra-structure and services. These are notably missing from areas such as Albion, Silver Valley etc. These newly created communities need schools, medical services, stores etc. I think that it would be helpful to encourage the community to see affordable housing as an amenity. Increasing rental stock and providing affordable homeownership options would be extremely beneﬁcial to low income earners in our community. Increasing transit routes and clustering housing in hubs where amenities exist would support a healthier community where people walk more and use transit whenever possible. Support the youth safe house and try to expand services available for youth and young adults with mental health and addiction issues. Caring Place supports a night where community member stay in the cold overnight to experience homelessness. Invite the community to live in the "affordable housing" for a night or more. Make it political priority, the research is available - now is the time for courage MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 44 RESPONSES More condos between 228-222 Trade-offs on density for developers - a requirement that they provide a signiﬁcant number low cost suites in all apartment complexes in trade for extra height or number of suites; or priority in planning reviews of their projects in trade for provision of additional low cost suites. When I mention low cost suites, I mean those provided for rent at 30% of the individual's income. Allow for and encourage greater density and diversity of housing forms in the downtown core of Maple Ridge. Reduce DCC's and taxes in this area. Place greater emphasis on the public spaces to encourage people to want to live in the downtown area and because there are safe, attractive and interesting places to be on the streets, people will be willing to live in smaller homes. The street should be an extension of their living space; think Europe, New York, etc. . More people outside mixing it up with one another in a pleasant environment is a healthier society than having everyone hiding away in their own large home. This survey sounds like Maple Ridge wants to take in all the poor people who can't afford to live anywhere else and have no choice but to accept the failure of the urban planners to provide acceptable levels of quality, amenities, etc. Way to aim low. Not being a knowledgeable person in this aspect the only thing that comes to mind would be taxation and permits for building high quality low cost housing with access to amenities, schools and transportation. Any ideas I have kind of scare me as I like Maple Ridge the way it was 20 years ago when I was growing up here. Increase the commercial/industrial tax base; improve public transit service and offerings. Tax incentives seem to help. A blind spot here is the cost of heating homes. Can Maple Ridge provide incentives for homeowners to make their homes more efﬁcient without knocking them down and building new. That would make housing more affordable by bringing down heating costs, but also reduce the District's carbon footprint etc. Can there be incentives for owners of rental units to make them more efﬁcient? At the moment, with the tenants paying utility bills, landlords have no reason to do this. I don't think we need more housing, I think we need more amenities and schools for the children that live in the area already Get rid of abandoned houses. Homeless people' s place of refuge. Start making space for recycled homes Eg. Homes made from shipping containers. Eg.cottage Make affordable land area for them. Better planning of subdivisions to include small shopping areas allowing residents to be within walking distance of groceries, fast food I wish I had an answer but do not know...perhaps offer tax break to those developers who participate in offering answers to the solutions. Offer incentives outside of developing in the Downtown area. Redevelop areas of Maple Ridge that need cleaning up. Building more small single houses The government should build the Sky Train. It is far away to Vancouver. If the transportation is good ,many people would come here to live. It is good for the development of the economy and it is good to the development of housing in Maple Ridge. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 45 RESPONSES Don't know Gas more cheaper. more chain stores(Costco,superstore,etc.) and more restaurants. skytrain The government should build the Sky Train. It is far away to Vancouver. If the transportation is good ,many people would come here to live. It is good for the development of the economy and it is good to the development of housing in Maple Ridge. Don't know Gas more cheaper. more chain stores(Costco,superstore,etc.) and more restaurants. skytrain Help developers with lower Development Cost Charges in areas with more affordable land (outside of towncore where land is more expensive ) Possibly means Municipality does upgrades to roadways etc. ahead of development at present day cost and recovers later when development actually takes place. Help developers with lower Development Cost Charges in areas with more affordable land (outside of towncore where land is more expensive ) Possibly means Municipality does upgrades to roadways etc. ahead of development at present day cost and recovers later when development actually takes place. Have to show the need, Encourage the development of secondary suites or cottages on existing properties whenever possible I'm really not sure how to solve that issue. Lower tax rate for affordable housing. However make sure it continues to be affordable housing and safe Get developers to look at Bonson in pitt meadows. Incredible community ideas. GREAT planning. Not great yards, but great style and walking areas and community space that make yards feel larger. Coffee shops and community center within walking distance keeps people in the community. Don't follow their stupid lack of parking idea though. hard to keep businesses going if people's families can't join them because they are driving in from other areas. STUPID planning!!!! We'd love to not need cars, but that is not realistic. Have more group free parking and you'll keep people coming in instead of going to downtown vancouver. I'd rather spend my money and go for a walk around the coffee shop in bonson, but with the lack of parking during festivals and other events, I'm back to downtown Vancouver or Coquitlam. And maple ridge has nothing like it. People need large green spaces with coffee shops, small boutique stores and yoga places, community centers and playgrounds to stay in town. create and build community and places full of art and beauty and people will stay. make it ugly, with no art, or stupid rules like no playing in the fountains downtown and it makes people stay away. Look to europe and montreal for how they keep communities around. even edmonton. Great central area has kids swimming in fountains, festivals all summer long. It's awesome!!! Tax breaks for new rentals that are affordable Lower taxes Subsidized land for developers with a mixed use development With affordable housing and normal housing First, pressure city and regional district to commit to quality housing for all that need it. My issue is extreme lack of housing for seniors, which should be close to shopping, bank and transit MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 46 RESPONSES Plan for the future, there is already affordable housing but amenities lag far behind. With more desirability will come better rental options. Not sure Single family homes are still the most desirable not row houses not town house but your own home and land over densifying and lose of personal space is not the way to go we need to identify areas that can support larger developments and areas where sfhomes are best suited. Larger dev. Closer to main roads and hwys and shopping and sfh in areas where lot sizes and road sizes currently support sfh. Hammond is perfect for both if laid out correctly. Smaller streets and lots for sfh and along Lorne or maple crescent or 207 for larger developments. Federal funded housing for immigrants and homeless Yes We need to encourage affordable rental housing for people of low income. Builders need to build more of these units for the growing number of poor people in our community. Give them a tax break to do this, in partnership with our city and other levels of government! House taxes are too high, need to keep people shopping in the area . Now most people live here but don't work here.- Affordability is not just the cost of the house but the tolls, cost to commute to work, gas. etc Expand transit to other areas. If you rely on transit you are restricted to downtown only. There is NO transit servicing north Maple Ridge/ Silver Valley to MR Equestrian We need to encourage affordable rental housing for people of low income. Builders need to build more of these units for the growing number of poor people in our community. Give them a tax break to do this, in partnership with our city and other levels of government! House taxes are too high, need to keep people shopping in the area . Now most people live here but don't work here.- Affordability is not just the cost of the house but the tolls, cost to commute to work, gas. etc Expand transit to other areas. if you rely on transit you are restricted to downtown only. There is NO transit servicing north Maple Ridge/ Silver Valley to MR Equestrian Have more destination spots such as coffee shop/pizzeria/corner store spread out in the neighborhoods. Not everyone drives so the developments that are not near the main drag isolate people. Where if you have little destinations for people to walk to in there neighborhood for a loaf of bread or litre of milk they will not feel so isolated and consider moving there. Living in Maple Ridge has become increasingly more unaffordable. The building of Golden Ears Bridge made life better, but the toll enters into the unaffordable category as an example. So I guess what I'm trying to say is, it is other issues combined with housing unaffordability that is hard to live with. So development of affordable housing needs to take environmental factors into consideration as well as the actual housing. We need more shopping downtown and it needs to be accessible with affordable parking. I think there is a desire to live in M.R. where housing may be more affordable than other cities in the Lower Mainland, however, there has to be a look at the whole package. Get developers involved in sharing affordable housing with market housing tenants. With each new project built so many affordable unit could be included. This could be a start for affordable units. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 47 RESPONSES Develop the public transit and get people access to the cheapest neighborhood. Also the city should try to control the rental cost inﬂation with by laws if that's possible. Financial help from provincial government 1) As I have read about, in that if establishing secondary / in-law suites, that any additional parking is provided ON the property with the secondary suite, and not on the roadways. 2) Continue to improve transit (west coast express, skytrain, buses) so people can live out this way, and travel to other parts of Greater Vancouver Provide more aid for families based on income Accept families whos incomes are not high, but do Have employment. Feel too many ppl working the system are recieving help and aid when it comes to housing but those families who are working and struggling get left behind. The possibility of developing a rental cap, to keep smaller rental properties, such as Studio and 1 bedroom at a ﬁxed rate, and maybe it would open the door for more people. Build partnerships with non-proﬁt housing providers. Provide tax breaks and density bonusing. Engage groups and individuals who support social housing and rental housing policy reforms to 1) create further support in the community and 2) advocate with senior governments. In my experience, most members of Council and municipal staff in Maple Ridge are indifferent to or resistant to engaging with the public, so I won't hold my breath. Offer builders, building owners, property owners tax breaks to provide affordabke housing to people who meet a certain criteria and are in, what I consider to be, the most need of affordable housing. Its hard to be unbiased for me as I have a disabled father on a very ﬁxed income who has to live off a hundred dollars a month because I have been unable to ﬁndhim affordable, ground klevel accomodations with rental incentives. Perhaps Maple Ridge could pioneer a program for seniors and those with disabilities where it puts together renters and property owners. The program could di the screening for the owners to ﬁnd good quality, suitable candidates and as I mentioned, provide naybe property tax deduction s in order to obtain cheaper housing for someonr like my father. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 48 APPENDIX C HOUSING POST-IT NOTE POSTERS The notes from the Post-It® note posters have been pulled out of the poster format in order for them to be included in this report. The notes have been grouped by location (where the poster was placed) and notes with inappropriate language were removed. MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 49 Leisure Centre Post-it® Notes (1 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 50 Leisure Centre Post-it® Notes (2 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 51 Leisure Centre Post-it® Notes (3 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 52 Leisure Centre Post-it® Notes (4 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 53 Leisure Centre Post-it® Notes (5 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 54 Leisure Centre Post-it® Notes (6 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 55 Leisure Centre Post-it® Notes (7 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 56 Leisure Centre Post-it® Notes (8 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 57 Library Post-it® Notes (1 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 58 Library Post-it® Notes (2 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 59 Library Post-it® Notes (3 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 60 Library Post-it® Notes (4 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 61 Library Post-it® Notes (5 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 62 Library Post-it® Notes (6 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 63 Library Post-it® Notes (7 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 64 Library Post-it® Notes (8 of 8) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 65 Municipal Hall Post-it® Notes Seniors Centre Post-it® Notes MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 66 Seniors Centre Post-it® Notes continued MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 67 APPENDIX D CONSULTATION MATERIALS Housing Action Plan Handout (front) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 68 Housing Action Plan Handout (back) MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 69 Housing Action Plan Handout II MAPLE RIDGE HOUSING ACTION PLAN - Consultation Summary Report | March 2014 70 Page 1 of 3 District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 14, 2014 and Members of Council FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Council Workshop SUBJECT: Proposed Safe Premises Bylaw No. 7077 - 2014 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Maple Ridge Grow Operation, Health, Nuisance and Safety Bylaw No. 6274-2004 is a Bylaw that deals with requirements the District can regulate, prohibit and impose on property owners who have used their property or allowed their property to be used for an unauthorized grow operation. The District’s Legal Counsel has stated that while this bylaw is still basically sound there are some areas that need to be updated, in particular Schedule “D” to allow for full cost recovery on grow operation removals. These are the costs the District can recover when staff are involved in the removal of an illegal controlled substance grow operation or manufacturing process located on private property. Staff and Legal Counsel have drafted a new Bylaw named the Safe Premises Bylaw No. 7077-2014 (Appendix I) which cleans up the formatting, and has amended the definition section for clarity. The formatting of the Bylaw has been revised for clarity purposes and Schedule D has been renamed to Schedule A and amended to update the fee structure to increase the cost of staff services to meet realistic cost recovery services. The existing medical marijuana grow-ops, under Federal legislation, were to be discontinued completely no later than April 30, 2014. However, there has been a recent Interim Injunction filed with the Supreme Court regarding the cancelling of these licences and until such time as the Courts decide the outcome of this Injunction application any legal action by the municipality on these grow- ops is on hold. However, if staff were to locate a grow operation that was never licensed by the Federal Government and is basically just an illegal grow operation there would be no need to wait for the outcome of the Injunction to enforce the Bylaw. Although the intent of the service fees is to recover as much of the District’s costs as possible there will be the need, to start the program, for one additional Bylaw Enforcement Officer and one additional Bylaw Clerk. Staff will attempt to recover as much of their costs as possible, somewhere between 50% - 75% of total costs however these are only estimates at this time. The Bylaw Officer will cost approximately $70,000 annually and a vehicle will also be required for this position which will be in the area of $10,000.00 annually. The Bylaw Clerk will cost approximately $49,000.00. Staff’s plan is to use a contract Electrical Inspector as their time required in this process will be limited and costs associated with work they may become involved in regarding this Bylaw will be limited. RECOMMENDATION(S): That proposed Maple Ridge Safe Premises Bylaw No. 7077-2044 be received for information and discussion. 4.5 Page 2 of 3 DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: In 2001, the Federal government started issuing personal licences to grow marijuana for medical use. As a result of this, grow operations began springing up on many properties in the District of Maple Ridge. Quite a few of these ended up in residential areas with a detrimental impact to the neighbourhood. Some of the issues are fire hazards, traffic at all hours of the night, pungent odors, not to mention the presence of a criminal element. These medical marijuana grow-ops, under a new Federal legislation, were to be discontinued completely no later than April 30, 2014. However, there has been a recent Interim Injunction filed with the Supreme Court regarding the cancelling of these licences and until such time as the Courts decide the outcome of this Injunction application any legal action by the municipality on these grow-ops is on hold. In the meantime , with Council authorization, staff will continue to develop and implement an action plan for the removal of marijuana grow operations from residential properties in particular, Bylaw staff can coordinate with Police and Fire departments to begin removal of these operations once the Injunction has been lifted. However if staff were to locate a g row operation that was never licensed by the Federal Government and is basically just an illegal grow operation there would be no need to wait for the outcome of the Injunction to enforce the Bylaw. Council can proceed in two ways: 1. Act on a neighbourhood complaint basis only. 2. Provide a pro-active approach based on information received from the various sources (RCMP, Fire, Fraser Health, the public etc.) What staff has done at this time is draft a proposed Safe Premises Bylaw to replace our existing outdated Maple Ridge Grow Operation, Health, Nuisance and Safety Bylaw No. 6274-2004. b) Citizen/Customer Implications: The removal of these illegal marijuana grow operations from residential areas will improve the quality of life for these neighbourhoods and remove nuisances which negatively impact the ability of residents to enjoy their properties. Some of the negative impacts are of having marijuana grow operations in residential areas public safety, electrical hazards which could lead to fires and mold from improper ventilation to name a few. Once a house has been used for marijuana grow operation, there is often a need for significant remediation. These houses can be left unoccupied and deteriorate over a period of time becoming an eyesore to the neighbourhood. Financial Implication(s): While there are over six hundred marijuana grow operations that were licenced by Health Canada and currently operating in the District of Maple Ridge, at this time staff do not have a count on the number that are in residential areas. The program will require additional resources to begin the timely consuming removal of these operations. Other municipalities have a dedicated removal team which includes Bylaw, Police and Fire. Page 3 of 3 Various municipal staff will be required for all steps of the action plan therefore, to start with, it will be necessary to dedicate one Bylaw Officer, one Electrical Inspector and one clerk to this project. As the Bylaws, Permits and Licences Department is already working with limited resources, this program will require new staff in order to be successful. The RCMP and Fire Departments will also play a role in the removal of some the more dangerous grow operations. However the plan for cost recovery in this program is set out in Schedule A where staff members and the use of municipal vehicles will be billed to the property owner when an illegal unlicenced grow operation is investigated ,as well as flat fees for Special Safety Inspections and Safety Inspections as defined in the Bylaw. When a complaint is received the District can enforce the Bylaw and the dedicated removal team will move into enforcement mode. The first part of the program will be is to identify the unauthorized grow operations which will mainly be handled by the Bylaw Enforcement Officer. The Officer and Clerk need to be in place to start the program. Every attempt will be made to recover as much of their costs as possible, somewhere between 50% - 75% of total costs however these are only estimates at this time. The Bylaw Officer will cost approximately $70,000 annually and a vehicle will also be required for this position which will be in the area of $10,000.00 annually. The Bylaw Clerk will cost approximately $49,000.00 annually. Staff’s plan to is to use a contract Electrical Inspector as their time required in this process will be limited. CONCLUSIONS: Health Canada has made the decision to cancel all existing licences but has not put in place any program to ensure that the new regulations are being enforced. And then they extended the deadline for the cancellation of the licences to the end of April 2014. Now with the Injunction place that is estimated to take between 6 – 9 months to be heard, all enforcement is on hold. Due to the lengthy delay in enforcement caused by the current Injunction in place, the hiring of the additional Bylaw staff and the purchase of the vehicle can be delayed to 2015. This leaves each municipality the responsibility for determining what course of action they will take regarding the new regulations. The District of Maple Ridge must decide how it will proceed with the abrogation of current licencing regulations by the Federal government. “Original signed by E.S. (Liz) Holitzki” _______________________________________________ Prepared by: E.S. (Liz) Holitzki Director: Licences, Permits and Bylaws “Original signed by David Pollock on behalf of Frank Quinn” _______________________________________________ Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng General Manager: Public Works and Development Services “Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule” __________________________________________ Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Office LH/jd Appendix I – Draft copy of Safe Premises Bylaw APPENDIX I District of Maple Ridge Safe Premises Bylaw No. 7077 - 2014 Effective Date: District of Maple Ridge Safe Premises Bylaw 7077 -2014 Table of Contents Part 1 Citation ............................................................................................................ 2 Part 2 Severability ...................................................................................................... 2 Part 3 Previous Bylaw Repeal .................................................................................... 2 Part 4 Definitions ....................................................................................................... 3 Part 5 Hazardous Conditions ..................................................................................... 5 Part 6 Health and Safety Regulations........................................................................ 5 Part 7 Powers of Officials ........................................................................................... 7 Part 8 Duties of Registered Owners ........................................................................... 8 Part 9 Discontinuation of Services ............................................................................ 8 Part 10 Offence and Penalty ........................................................................................ 9 Schedule A – Fees ....................................................................................................... 11 Schedule B – Hazardous Conditions Requirement List .............................................. 13 Schedule C – Certification Form ................................................................................. 15 Schedule D – Notice .................................................................................................... 16 Schedule E – Hazardous Substances ......................................................................... 17 Schedule F - Moulds………………………………………………………………………….………………..18 2 District of Maple Ridge Safe Premises Bylaw 7077 - 2014 A bylaw to to regulate, prohibit and impose requirements with respect health and safety on property WHEREAS A. The Council of The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge deems it expedient to provide enact a bylaw to regulate, prohibit and impose requirements respecting health and safety matters on property; B. The alteration of plumbing, heating, air conditioning, electrical wiring and equipment, gas piping and fittings, appliances and accessories in buildings results in risks to the health and safety of occupiers and neighbours; C. The growth of mould and use of toxic chemicals in buildings results in risks to the health and safety of occupiers and neighbours; D. Properties used for the cultivation or production of certain controlled substances, including marijuana plants and amphetamines, are particularly susceptible to the above risks to health and safety; E. Inspection and bylaw enforcement with respect to properties used for the cultivation or production of controlled substances create unique risks and costs to the District and its agents; NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the District of Maple Ridge enacts as follows: Part 1 Citation 1.1 This bylaw may be cited as Safe Premises Bylaw No. 7077-2014. Part 2 Severability 2.1 If a portion of this bylaw is held invalid by a Court of competent jurisdiction, then the invalid portion must be severed and the remainder of this bylaw is deemed to have been adopted without the severed section, subsequent, paragraph, subparagraph, clause or phrase. Part 3 Previous Bylaw Repeal 3.1 Maple Ridge Grow Operation, Health, Nuisance and Safety Bylaw No. 6274-2004 is hereby repealed. 3 Part 4 Definitions In this bylaw: "Amphetamines” includes dextroamphetamines and methamphetamines; "Building" in the case of a building with multiple units or occupancies, means any portion of a building held or used as a separate unit, but may also include additional units in the same building that are reasonably expected to be affected by a hazardous condition in a separate part of the building; "Building Bylaw'' means Maple Ridge Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012, as amended from time to time; "Building Code" means the British Columbia Building Code, 2012, as amended or re-enacted from time to time; "Building Inspector" means the chief building official for the District, and every inspector appointed by the District, or by the Province or British Columbia Safety Authority, as applicable, to inspect buildings in relation to building, plumbing, gas or electrical standards or components; “Council ” means the Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge; “Director of Licences, Permits and Bylaws ” means the Director of Licences, Permits and Bylaws for the District of Maple Ridge or their designate; "District" means the District of Maple Ridge; "Fire Chief' means the person who is appointed to be the head of the District’s fire and rescue services and every person designated by Council by name of office or otherwise to act in the place of the Fire Chief; "Grow Operation" means the cultivation of marijuana plants or production of amphetamines on a parcel; "Hazardous Condition" means a contravention of any regulation in Part 5 of this Bylaw; "Hazardous Condition Requirement List” means a list of hazardous conditions present on a parcel, and any work required to address or remove those hazardous conditions, as prepared or compiled by the Building Inspector following an inspection or special safety inspection, and which may be in the form of Schedule "B"; "Hazardous Substance" means a substance listed in Schedule "E"; 4 "Inspector” means: a) the Fire Chief, and every person appointed by the Fire Chief or by Council, as applicable, to be an officer or employee of the District’s fire and rescue service; b) the Building Inspector; c) a peace officer; d) the Director of Licences, Permits and Bylaws ; e) a bylaw enforcement officer; f) the deputy of any person, officer or employee referred to in paragraphs (a) to (e); g) other persons designated by Council by name of office or otherwise to act in the place of persons, officers or employees referred to in paragraphs (a) to (e); "Mould' includes any mould or fungi, including any genus listed in Schedule "F" to this Bylaw; "Mould Remediation Guidelines" means s.9.0 of the Canadian Construction Association's Standard Construction Document CCA 82-2004: Mould Guidelines for the Canadian Construction Industry; "Owner” includes, in addition to the definition in the Community Charter, the lessee, licensee, tenant, caretaker, user or occupier of a building or a part of a building, or the agent of the owner; "Qualified Environmental Professional ” means a person qualified with a post- secondary degree in a field related to health, biology, or environmental science, and registered as a professional in that field, and experienced and qualified in overseeing the removal of contaminants from buildings; "Registered Owner'' means a person who is registered in the Land Title Office as the title holder of a parcel; "Residential Premises" means a building on a parcel that is used or may be used as a residence, including any buildings that may be accessory to a residential use, including garages and sheds; "Special Safety Inspection" means an inspection coordinated by the Building Inspector for the purposes of determining the presence of any hazardous conditions, as may be conducted or coordinated with the RCMP and other authorities; "Unauthorized Alteration" means any change made to the structural, mechanical, electrical, or natural gas system of a building that requires a permit, but for which no permit has been issued pursuant to the Building Bylaw, and which results in an increased risk to health or safety on the parcel; 5 "Utility " means a lawful provider of an electrical, water or natural gas service from a distribution system to consumers. Part 5 Hazardous Conditions 5.1 No Owner may occupy or permit the occupancy of a Building where a meter installed for the purpose of ascertaining consumption of electricity, water or natural gas from a distribution system has been disconnected or bypassed, except where such disconnection or bypass has been specifically permitted or required by the District, the applicable Utility, or a government authority. 5.2 No Owner may occupy or permit the occupancy of a Building where exhaust vents for hot water tanks, furnaces, or fireplaces exhaust into or within a building. 5.3 No Owner may occupy or permit the occupancy of a Residential Premises where a hazardous substance is present inside a Building in an amount that exceeds the limits set out for that hazardous substance in Schedule "E" to this Bylaw. 5.4 No Owner may occupy or permit the occupancy of a Building where: a) an exit or access to an exit required under the Building Code is blocked or obstructed; b) fire stopping provided or required under the Building Code has been removed; or c) the number of electrical circuits or connections to an electrical service exceeds the amount permitted under the Electrical Code. 5.5 No Owner may occupy or permit the occupancy of a Residential Premises where there is a visible accumulation of Mould on the interior of any window, wall or other structural component of the Building, or where air samples indicate a concentration of airborne Mould levels in excess of 150 colony forming units per cubic metre of air (CFU/cubic metre). 5.6 No Owner may occupy or permit the occupancy of a Building where there is an Unauthorized Alteration. Part 6 Health and Safety Regulations 6.1 If an Unauthorized Alteration exists in, on or at a Building with a Grow Operation, no Owner may occupy or permit the occupancy of the Building until: a) the Owner has paid the special safety inspection fee set out in Schedule "A" to this Bylaw; 6 b) a Special Safety Inspection of the Building coordinated by the Building Inspector has been conducted; c) the Building Inspector has issued a Hazardous Conditions Requirement List; d) the Owner has obtained all necessary building permits, approvals or authorizations required to carry out any work identified in the Hazardous Conditions Requirement List; e) the Owner has carried out or caused to be carried out all the work stated in the Hazardous Conditions Requirement List; f) the Building Inspector has inspected the Building and determined that the work required in the hazardous conditions requirement list has been completed in accordance with all requirements of this Bylaw, the Building Bylaw, the Building Code, the Fire Code and all other applicable enactments and that no hazardous condition remains in, on or at the Building ; and g) the Building Inspector has removed any notices under Part 7 of this Bylaw and issued a new occupancy permit for the Building pursuant to the Building Bylaw. 6.2 Where a Building Inspector has reasonable grounds to believe that a Hazardous Condition exists on a parcel which affects the structural integrity of a Building on the parcel, the Building Inspector may include in the Hazardous Conditions Requirement List a requirement that the Owner must obtain a report from a qualified professional engineer certifying that the building is safe for occupancy and complies with the Building Code. 6.3 Where a Building Inspector has reasonable grounds to believe that a Hazardous Condition involving a Hazardous Substance or Mould is found in a Building, the Building Inspector may include in the Hazardous Conditions Requirement List any or all of the following requirements: a) all carpets and curtains in the Building must be removed and disposed of; b) if a Building contains a forced air heating or ventilation system, the furnace, ventilation equipment, all air ducts, main distribution ducts, venting and filtering must be cleaned by a Qualified Environmental Professional or by a duct cleaning company; c) all walls, floors and ceilings in the Building must be replaced or cleaned and disinfected by a Qualified Environmental Professional; d) all Mould must be removed in compliance with this Bylaw and with 7 the Mould Remediation Guidelines; e) a certificate must be provided in the form prescribed in Schedule "C" to this Bylaw from a Qualified Environmental Professional certifying that the Building has been remediated in accordance with the Mould Remediation Guidelines and that the levels of Moulds and Hazardous Substances are at safe levels for occupancy and meet the requirements of this Bylaw. Part 7 Powers of Officials 7.1 Subject to section 16 of the Community Charter, an Inspector may enter onto a parcel, including residential premises, to: a) inspect and determine whether there is compliance with this Bylaw; b) carry out a Special Safety Inspection; c) take action authorized under Part 9 of this Bylaw. 7.2 If the Building Inspector or Fire Chief has reasonable grounds to believe that all or part of a Building contains an Unauthorized Alteration, the Building Inspector or the Fire Chief may post a notice in the form specified in Schedule "D" to this Bylaw in a conspicuous place at the entrances of the parcel or a Building on the parcel and deliver to the Owner of the parcel a notice that the Building is unsafe and that no person may enter or occupy the Building. 7.3 A person must not: a) interfere with or obstruct the Building Inspector or the Fire Chief from posting a notice; b) remove, alter, cover or deface a notice posted; c) occupy a Building until the Building Inspector or Fire Chief, as applicable, has removed the posted notice, except with the express written permission of the Building Inspector or Fire Chief who issued the notice. 7.4 No action of the District, including without limitation: a) the removal of a notice posted under this Bylaw; b) the issuance of a permit under this Bylaw; c) the acceptance or review of plans, drawings or specifications or supporting documents submitted under this Bylaw; 8 d) any inspections made by or on behalf of the District, will in any way relieve the Owner from full and sole responsibility to perform work required or contemplated under this Bylaw and the Building Code and all other applicable enactments, nor does it constitute in any way a representation, warran ty, assurance or other statement that the Bylaw, the Building Code or any other applicable enactment has been complied with. 7.5 When a Qualified Environmental Professional, engineer or architect provides certification or other documentation to the District under this Bylaw that work required or contemplated under this Bylaw substantially conforms to the requirements of this Bylaw, the health and safety requirements of the Building Code, Fire Code, Electrical Code or any other health and safety requirements established by applicable enactments, the District may rely solely on that documentation as evidence of conformity with those requirements and not on receipt of plans, monitoring of work, acknowledgement of completion, or removal of a notice. Part 8 Duties of Registered Owners 8.1 Every registered owner of a parcel that contains a residential premises subject to a tenancy agreement who is aware of or has attended the residential premises at a time when there is a contravention of this Bylaw must: a) within twenty-four (24) hours of the discovery of the contravention, deliver written notice to the Building Inspector of the particulars of the contravention; and b) take such action as may be necessary to bring the registered premises into compliance with this Bylaw. 8.2 Where a Registered Owner inspects and reports to the District a contravention under sub section 8.1 of this Bylaw of which the District or its Inspectors were not previously aware, the Special Inspection Fee arising in respect of the contravention may be waived in respect of that Building. Part 9 Discontinuation of Services 9.1 A person must not use water from the District’s water distribution system in a Grow Operation. 9.2 The District may discontinue providing water service to a parcel if the water is being used for or in relation to a grow operation on the parcel subject to the requirement that the District must: a) give the Owner seven (7) days written notice of an opportunity to make written representations to Council with respect to the 9 proposed discontinuance of the water service; b) if the O wner makes representations to Council, the Council must consider those representations and, if Council decides to proceed with the discontinuance of the water service, it must give the Owner an additional seven (7) days written notice of the date of that discontinuance. 9.3 Despite sub section 9.2, where the Building Inspector reasonably considers that there is a risk of backflow or contamination to the District's water distribution system from a parcel used as a Grow Operation, and there is no apparent mechanism to prevent that backflow or contamination, then: a) the Building Inspector may discontinue the provision of water to the parcel within twenty-four (24) hours of posting a notice on the front door of any Building on the parcel that the District is disconnecting the water supply to the parcel until such time as a mechanism to prevent backflow and contamination is installed, inspected and approved by the District; b) the District must reconnect a water supply to a parcel that was disconnected under this section upon being satisfied that there is an adequate mechanism in place to prevent the backflow and contamination of water from the parcel into the District's water distribution system; and c) the O wner may seek a reconsideration of the Building Inspector's decision at the next regularly scheduled meeting of Council. Part 10 Offence and Penalty 10.1 Every person who violates a provision of this bylaw, or who consents, allows or permits an act or thing to be done in violation of a provision of this bylaw, or who neglects to or refrains from doing anything required to be done by a provision of this bylaw, is guilty of an offence and is liable to the penalties imposed under this bylaw, and is guilty of a separate offence each day that a violation continues to exist. 10.2 Every person who commits an offence is liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding the maximum allowed by the Offence Act. 10 READ A FIRST TIME on [Date] READ A SECOND TIME on [Date] READ A THIRD TIME on [Date] ADOPTED by the Council on [Date] Schedules Schedule A: Fees Schedule B: Hazardous Conditions Requirement List Schedule C: Certification Form Schedule D: Notice Schedule E: Hazardous Substances Schedule F: Moulds PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER 11 Schedule A – Fees Each time the District enters on a Parcel to inspect, in the exercise of the District's authority to regulate, prohibit or impose requirements under this Bylaw or another enactment or to attend at the Parcel under this bylaw, the Owner must pay the District a fee of: a) $500.00 flat fee; b) $500.00 for a Special Safety Inspection payable prior to the Special Safety Inspection; and c) an additional $1,000.00 for a subsequent inspection undertaken if the Owner or occupier has failed to undertake action ordered by the Fire Chief, the Council or a person authorized under the bylaw to order the action; Service Fees include: a) $78.79 per hour for a Deputy Fire Chief; b) $74.19 per hour for an Assistant Fire Chief; c) $60.50 per hour for a Fire Captain; d) $55.54 per hour for a Fire Lieutenant e) $48.14 per hour for a 1st class Firefighter; f) $300 per hour per responding fire vehicle; g) $80.50 per hour for the Director of Licences, Permits & Bylaws; h) $66.00 per hour for the Manager of Inspection Services; i) $62.00 per hour for the Manager of Bylaws & Licences; j) $41.50 per hour for a Senior Bylaw Enforcement Officer; k) $38.50 per hour for a Bylaw Enforcement Officer; l) $46.50 per hour for a Building Inspector; m) $46.50 per hour for an Electrical Inspector; n) $51.58 per hour for a Staff Sergeant; o) $46.96 per hour for a Sergeant; p) $43.08 per hour for a Corporal; 12 q) $39.34 per hour for a Constable; r) $20.00 per hour per responding marked & unmarked police vehicle; s) $50 per hour per responding police cube van; t) $60.00 per hour for administration staff per person; u) The actual cost for other service fees incurred. 13 Schedule B – Hazardous Conditions Requirement List Re: _____________________________________ [Property Address] (the "Property") Pursuant to the District of Maple Ridge Safe Premises Bylaw No. 7077-2014 (the "Bylaw'') a Special Safety Inspection has been carried out on the above Property, and the Property has been posted with a Notice that it may not be occupied due to Hazardous Conditions and Unauthorized Alterations on the Property. No person is permitted to occupy the Property until this Notice has been removed. If you wish to reoccupy the Property, you are required to perform the following works , and provide the following certifications, as indicated: 1) Provide evidence from the following utility providers that the Property has been properly connected to the following utilities: a) Gas b) Water c) Electricity 2) Vent all furnace/hot water tank/gas appliances in accordance with the Gas Code. 3) Provide/Restore all egress points as required under the Building Code. 4) Provide/Restore all fire stopping materials as required under the Building Code. 5) Bring all electrical panels and circuits up to standards in Electrical Code. 6) Provide a report from a Qualified Professional Engineer certifying that the Building is safe for occupancy and complies with the Building Code. 7) Remove and dispose of all carpets and curtains. 8) Have the furnace, all air ducts, main distribution ducts, venting, and filtering cleaned by a Qualified Environmental Professional (as defined in the District’s Safe Premises Bylaw) or by a duct cleaning company. 9) Have all walls, floors and ceilings in the Building replaced or cleaned and disinfected by a Qualified Environmental Professional (as defined in the District’s Safe Premises Bylaw). 10) Have Mould removed in compliance with District’s Safe Premises Bylaw, and in accordance with the Mould Remediation Guidelines . 11) Provide a certificate report in the form prescribed in Schedule C of the Bylaw, from a Qualified Environmental Professional (as defined in the District’s Safe Premises Bylaw) certifying that the property has been remediated in accordance with the Mould Remediation Guidelines and meets the standards of this Bylaw for the removal of substantially all Moulds and/or hazardous substances. 14 You are required to obtain building permits from the District prior to performing any of the above works that may require a permit under the District's Building Bylaw. Until the above requirements above have been completed, and the Building Inspector has re- inspected the Property and removed the Notice, the Bylaw prohibits occupancy of the Property by any person. We enclose a copy of the Bylaw for your reference. If you have any questions concerning the regulations in the Bylaw, please call the District's Building Inspector at 604-467-7311. 15 Schedule C – Certification Form TO: District of Maple Ridge FROM: [insert name and address of Qualified Environmental Professional ] RE: Residential premises located at: ______________________________________________ ______________________________________________ __ This is to certify that in accordance with the Districts Safe Premises Bylaw No. 7077-2014 the professional identified in this certification: (1) Is a Qualified Environmental Professional as defined by the Safe Premises Bylaw, with the following degrees, qualifications, and professional affiliations: (2) Has completed an inspection of the residential premises on _ [Date] (3) The residential premises have been remediated in accordance with the Mould Remediation Guidelines and all Hazardous Substances, Moulds or fungi, are now within safe levels for occupancy, and are in accordance with the District’s Safe Premises Bylaw. The undersigned professional may be contacted at:__________________________ business telephone number Certified as of [Date] Signature of Qualified Environmental Professional 16 Schedule D – Notice TAKE NOTICE THAT these premises located at: have been found to contain unauthorized alterations and are in a hazardous condition. Pursuant to the District of Maple Ridge Safe Premises Bylaw 7077-2014, no person may occupy these premises until cleaning, remediation and/or repairs have been completed in compliance with that Bylaw and the Building Inspector has confirmed that a satisfactory occupancy inspection has been completed. It is an offence to remove or deface this notice. Any inquiries should be directed to the District of Maple Ridge Building Department at 604-467-7311. Date District of Maple Ridge Building Inspector 17 Schedule E – Hazardous Substances Hazardous Substance Maximum Stored in Container designed for storage of that substance Maximum ppm in air Acetic Acid 0.5 Litres 10_Qpm Acetone 1.0 Litres 250ppm Ammonia Solution (>50% ammonia) 0.0 Litres 25 ppm Ammonia Solution (35%-50%) 0.125 Litres 25 ppm Ammonia Solution (10%-35%) 5.0 Litres 25J>pm Ammonia, Anhydrous 0.0 Litres 25 ppm Carbon Monoxide 0.0 Litres 25 ppm Chloroform 5.0 Litres 2ppm Ethanol 1.0 Litres 1000 ppm Ethyl Ether 0.0 Litres 400 ppm Hexane 1.0 Litres 20 ppm Hydrochloric Acid 1.0 Litres 2ppm Iodine Azid (Dry) 0.0 Litres/Kilograms 0 ppm Iodine Monochloride 1.0 Kilograms 0.1 ppm Iodine Pentaflouride 0.0 Kilograms 0.1 ppm Isopropyl Alcohol 1.0 Litres 220 ppm Methanol 1.0 Litres 200 ppm Methylamine, Anhydrous 0.125 Litres 5ppm Methylamine, Aqueous Solution 1.0 Litres 5 ppm Methylamine Dinitramine 0.0 Litres Oppm Methylamine Perchlorate (dry) 0.0 Litres/Kilograms 0 ppm Methyl Ethyl Ketone 1.0 Litres 50 ppm Nitroethane 5.0 Litres 100 ppm Phosphine 0.0 Litres 0.3 ppm Propane 1.0 Litres 1000 ppm Thionyl Chloride 0.0 Litres 1 ppm Toluene 1.0 Litres 20 ppm Xylene 1.0 Litres 100_ppm 18 Schedule F – Moulds Absidia sp. Acremonioum sr. (Cephalosporium sp.) Acrodontium salmoneum Alternaria sp. Ascomycete AspergH!us sp. Aspergillus candidus Aspergillus flavipes Asperfillus flavus Asperfillus fumigatus Aspergillus glaucus Aspergillus niger Aspergillus ochraceus Aspergillus oryzae Aspergillus penicilloides Aspergillus restrictus Aspergillus sydowi Aspergillus versicolor Aureobasidium pullulans Basidiomycetes Bipolaris sr. Bipolaris australiensis Bipolaris hawaiiensis Bipolaris spicifera Blastomyces sp. Botrytis sp. Chaetomium sp. Chaeotmium atrobrunneum Chaeotmium globosum Chaeotmium strumarium Chrysosporium spp. Cladophialophora spp. Indoor Cladosporium sp. Cladosporium cladosporioides Cladosporium herbarum Cladosporium macrocarpum Cladosporium sphaerospermum Conidobolus sp. Cunninghamella sp. Curvularia sp. Emericella nidulans Emericella quadrillineata Emericella rugulosa Epidermophyton sp. Fusarium so/ani Fusarium sp. Geotrichum sp. Glioc/adium sr Helminthosporium sp. Humicula sp. Hyaline Mycelia Myxomycetes Nigrospora sr Paecilomyces sp. Papulospora sr. Penicillium sp. Phoma sr. Rhizomucor sr Rhizopus sp. Rhodotorula sp. Saccaromyces sp. Scopulariopsis sp. Serpula lacrymans Sporobolomyces sr. Sporothrix sp. Sporotrichum sr. Stachybotrys sr. Stemphylium sp. Syncephalastrum sp. Trichoderma sp. Trichothecium sp. Tritirachium sr. Ulocladium sr. District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 14, 2014 and Members of Council FILE NO: FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Council Workshop SUBJECT: Use of District Land for Economic Development Opportunities EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: In September 2013, the District released two Requests-For-Expressions-of-Interest (RFEI’s) in order to gauge market interest in the development of two distinct activities on District-owned land – a full service campground and a complementary-to-WildPlay, family-friendly-outdoor-recreational-activity. These Requests-For-Expressions-of-Interest were prepared and released subsequent to a Report to Council and Council Resolution passed on May 27, 2013. While the District received strong interest and inquires related to both Requests-For-Expressions-of- Interest, in the end, it received one formal submission for each of the opportunities; one from Delta Force Paint Ball, for the family-friendly-outdoor-recreational-activity opportunity and one from the Seyem’ Qwantlen Business Group (Kwantlen First Nations) for the full service campground. The full service campground opportunity will require significant on-site investments in water, septic and electrical infrastructure, and will also require considerably more time to fully develop both the concept and plan logistics and work through the public process. It would be a decidedly more permanent community ‘amenity’ given the requisite investment of capital. The family-friendly- outdoor-recreational-activity proposal however, would require very little investment in permanent infrastructure, suggesting that it could be potentially brought to completion in 2014. Thus, with Council’s approval, staff’s desire is to meet with and conduct preliminary negotiations with each of the proponents in order to better evaluate the ‘readiness’ of each proponent and initiative and from there, report back to Council on these negotiations. Given the District’s existing base of land-holdings, coupled with Council’s goal of attracting investment and increasing the economic base of the community, exploring leverage options for these land assets would appear the prudent course of action for the District as a whole. In the end, the objective remains to greater leverage the taxpayer-owned resource to deliver both financial and ancillary economic development benefits to the community at large. RECOMMENDATION(S): That staff proceed with negotiations with Delta Force Paintball and Seyem’ Qwantlen Business Group to determine the terms and conditions of any potential contractual arrangements and the respective readiness of the family-friendly-outdoor-recreational-activity initiative for 2014/15 and the full- service campground initiative for 2015/16 and report back to Council as to the outcome of the negotiations. 4.6 DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: In September 2013, the District released two Requests-For-Expressions-of-Interest in order to gauge market interest in the development of two distinct activities on District-owned land – a full service campground and a complementary-to-WildPlay, family-friendly-outdoor-recreational-activity. These Requests-For-Expressions-of-Interest were prepared and released subsequent to a Report to Council and Council resolution passed on May 27, 2013. The May 27 report noted that the District held considerable underutilized land holdings in the central north and eastern regions of the community, coupled with economic development goals focused on attraction of tourism-related product and non-hotel accommodations options. By coupling market demand for temporary use of these lands with quality facilities, the District could create the potential for generation of revenue from these lands over the medium to long term, while not compromising their intended future use or sale-ability, nor creating negative impacts within the existing neighbourhood context. District staff identified two vacant parcels of land that may be suitable and appropriate for use as a full-service campground and as a base for a family-friendly outdoor adventure activity. One is a 51 acre parcel located adjacent to, but not fronting, Whonnock Lake (currently zoned RS-3) and the other, an assembled collection (10 – 20 acres) of RS-3 zoned properties fronting Fern Crescent near the entrance to Golden Ears Provincial Park. These two properties were profiled in the Requests-For- Expressions-of-Interest and are as identified in Appendix A and Appendix B. While the District received strong interest and inquires related to both Requests-For-Expressions-of- Interest, in the end, it received one formal submission for each of the opportunities, one from Delta Force Paintball and one from the Seyem’ Qwantlen (Kwantlen First Nations) Business Group. The family-friendly-outdoor-recreation-activity will require a capital investment of upwards of $1 million dollars, while the full service campground will require an investment in excess of $6 million dollars. While the campground option will require significant on-site investments in water, septic and electrical infrastructure, the family-friendly-outdoor-recreation-activity proposal would require very little, suggesting that it could be potentially brought to completion in 2014. Given the scale of these investments, it is expected that the full service campground proposal will require a longer lease period in order for it to make it financially viable for the proponent. The family-friendly-outdoor- recreation-activity proposal could likely be made financially viable over a shorter time period. Given the diversity of the projects and volume of work and time required to move even one of the options through to completion, the prudent direction will be to enter into discussions and negotiations with both proponents with the goal of completing the family-friendly-outdoor-recreation- activity proposal in 2014/2015 and the full-service campground in 2015/2016. Thus, with respect to next steps, staff’s goal is to meet with and conduct preliminary negotiations with each of the proponents over the next number of months in order to better evaluate the ‘readiness’ of each proponent and initiative. In summary, given the District’s existing base of land-holdings, coupled with Council’s goals of attracting investment and increasing the economic base of the community, exploring leverage options for these land assets would appear the prudent course of action for the District. In the end, the objective remains to greater leverage the taxpayer-owned resource to deliver both financial and ancillary economic development benefits to the community at large. b) Strategic Alignment The 2012 Citizen’s report identified the desire of the community at large for a greater focus on creation of high value jobs and identification of incremental investment and commercial development opportunities. Expanding the tax base was also identified as a critical objective. These goals are further echoed in the Economic Advisory Commission’s strategic plan and by the Province’s BC Jobs Plan which includes a direct focus on industry sectors such as tourism, advanced manufacturing and post-secondary education. In addition, the use of partnerships with private enterprise for provision of incremental community services remains a concept that has demonstrated many positive attributes within Maple Ridge. In general, there is a direct strategic alignment with the community at large, with both local and regional levels of government, and the short, medium and long-term business plans of District departments provided that the business case is sound and the municipality’s interests are well protected. c) Citizen/Customer Implications: District-owned land is an asset of the taxpayers of Maple Ridge. More proactive utilization of this asset can only serve to positively enhance the community as a whole, generating new jobs, greater revenues, supporting complementary businesses, and producing greater overall awareness of the community and its amenities. In order to better understand the issues related to both initiatives, a public consultation will be undertaken. d) Interdepartmental Implications: This initiative will require cooperation and direct interaction between Parks & Leisure Services, Planning, Bylaws & Licensing, Engineering, Financing and Economic Development as well the Corporate Management Team. e) Business Plan/Financial Implications: There will be direct business plan implications for the 2014/2015/2016 planning cycles for the various departments involved. This initiative is not expected to generate any negative financial implications (i.e direct costs) unless specific feasibility studies (or the like) are deemed warranted. The overall objective is to both generate incremental cash flow to the District and create positive, community-wide economic spin-offs, including jobs for local residents. f) Policy Implications: Through this initiative, it should be expected that new policy initiatives and bylaw amendments will be required in order facilitate the land-use leases and/or occupancy permits and to develop the various operating protocols and procedures. These initiatives and amendments would come as a result of collaborative efforts between the various internal departments and would be presented to Council for its consideration and approval. Alternatives: Council may wish to defer exploration of the either concept until a later date or decide to terminate the process altogether. CONCLUSIONS: Given the District’s current land holdings, coupled with Council’s desire to expedite economic development activities that generate both jobs and an increase in general revenues, the District has identified the potential commercial opportunities, the potential property sites and undertaken a public process to solicit prospective proponents. It is staff’s recommendation that the District proceed with negotiations with Delta Force Paint Ball and Seyem’ Qwantlen Business Group to determine the terms and conditions of any potential contractual arrangements and the respective readiness of the family-friendly-outdoor-recreational-activity initiative for 2014/15 and the full- service campground initiative for 2015/16 and report back to Council as to the outcome of the negotiations. “Original signed by David Boag”____________________ Prepared by: David Boag Director, Parks & Facilities “Original signed by Darrell Denton”___________________ Prepared by: Darrell Denton Assistant Property & Risk Manager “Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule”____________________ Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer Appendixes a) Appendix A: Map of location of proposed family friendly outdoor recreation activity b) Appendix B: Map of location of proposed full service campground A. Map of Location of Proposed Family-Friendly-Outdoor-Recreation-Activity District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 14. 2014 and Members of Council FILE NO: FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Council Workshop SUBJECT: Downtown District Lands - Request For Proposal EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On December 15, 2010, the District of Maple Ridge completed the purchase of 14 properties located between Haney Place Mall and ValleyFair Mall - a total development site of 3.04 acres. The District’s primary objectives for the properties at the time of purchase included the following: •Serve as a catalyst for further like development in the Town Centre - to support the introduction of the Town Centre Investment Incentives program. •Clean up the area – remove the existing homes that were contributing to social issues in the Town Centre. •Create an iconic, mixed use development that would showcase the potential for development of the Town Centre. •Showcase and demonstrate the economic viability of green building technologies. •Deliver a wide range of public amenities. The District released a Request-For-Expressions-of-Interest in July 2012 and the District received strong interest from about a half dozen developers. With this interest, and after the Request-For- Expressions-of-Interest’s closing in mid September, two high quality proponents were shortlisted to move forward to a more formal Request-for-Proposal process. The Request-for-Proposal was released on October 2012 and closed in mid-December 2012. The objective at the time was to secure one, quality developer that would work with staff in planning and developing the site, all the while delivering to the objectives that were established early on. With a softening of the real estate market in late 2012/early 2013, the proposals did not proceed any further. Over the past 12 months, staff have received a number of inquiries as to the status of the District- owned lands and in following up on this renewed interest, staff re-connected with Brook Pooni (the original consultant to the project) to get feedback on current market conditions and the market potential for release of a Request-for-Proposal. Mr Pooni has suggested that the current market conditions are such that the District should consider initiation of a Request-For-Proposals process for its Downtown Lands to determine the level of developer interest and what the District might be able to realize from the property, both in terms of remuneration and form of development. RECOMMENDATION(S): That staff proceed with a Request for Proposal for the 3.04 acre Downtown District Lands located between Haney Place Mall and ValleyFair Mall and that staff report back to Council on the outcome of that process. 4.7 DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: On December 15, 2010, the District of Maple Ridge completed the purchase of 14 properties located between Haney Place Mall and ValleyFair Mall - a total development site of 3.04 acres. Existing land uses within the surrounding area include a wide variety of commercial (retail, restaurant and professional services), light industrial (automotive repair and machine shop) and mixed-use commercial/residential developments. Currently under construction and contained within the same block ‘footprint’ is a two-building, four-storey, 96 unit residential-over-commercial development, located on the north west corner of the block. The District’s property will directly abut this development. The District’s lands are effectively ‘sandwiched’ between the Haney Place and ValleyFair malls and the new Community Gaming Centre is located one-half block south of the District property – a five minute walk. The District’s primary objectives for the properties at the time of purchase included the following: • Serve as a catalyst for further like development in the Town Centre - to support the introduction of the Town Centre Investment Incentives program. • Clean up the area – remove the existing homes that were contributing to social issues in the Town Centre. • Create an iconic, mixed use development that would showcase the potential for development of the Town Centre. • Showcase and demonstrate the economic viability of green building technologies. • Deliver a wide range of public amenities. Given the complexity and critical nature of the project, staff determined the need for strategic support and consultation to guide them through the Request-for-Expression-of-Interest and Request- for-Proposals processes and potential contract negotiations. This was accomplished through a separate Request-for-Proposal process that concluded in May 2012 with the selection of Gary Pooni of Brook, Pooni & Associates. In June 2012, the District hosted the Urban Land Institute’s Technical Assistance Panel, which delivered key insights into what was potentially achievable on the site with respect to development’s form and character and market absorption for commercial, mixed-use and multi-family residential developments. These insights were woven into both the Request-for-Expression-of-Interest and Request-for-Proposal documents and processes. The Request-for-Expression-of-Interest was released in July 2012 and the District received strong interest from about a half dozen developers. With this interest, and after the Request-for-Expression- of-Interest’s closing in mid September, two, high-quality proponents were shortlisted to move forward to a more formal Request-for-Proposal process. The Request-for-Proposal was released on October 2012 and closed in mid-December 2012. The objective at the time was to secure one, quality developer that would work with staff in planning and developing the site, all the while delivering to the objectives that were established early on. Through the summer and fall of 2012, staff continued to monitor the local real estate market trends noting that real estate market conditions (sales) had cooled off considerably over the past 4-6 months and that developers, consumers and agents alike were proceeding cautiously, the specter of the 2008/2009 market crash still looming. In January, 2013, the market had slowed significantly more and after discussions with Brook Pooni and the two short-listed proponents, the proposals did not proceed. To refresh as to the original objectives, the District purchased the site, partly to support the launch of the Town Centre Investments Incentive Program. Since that time, the derelict homes have been removed and the site remediated – a simple act which in itself has been met with great support from the general public. Council has also seen a tremendous amount of development in the Town Centre – in excess of 40 development projects and close to $140 million dollars worth of commercial and residential development. Property that has sat vacant for the better part of 75 years has been now developed and sold and staff continue to bring forward to Council, applications for a number of exciting projects that will drive further development of the Town Centre. In recognizing the long-term legacy potential of this development site, the District remains committed to doing the Downtown District-lands development ‘right’. So while development continues at a strong pace, the need for this project to serve as a ‘catalyst’ for development in the Town Centre has certainly diminished. Thus, as the District-owned lands are located directly in the centre of some significant development activity, the strategy of holding out for an iconic development that delivers on the District’s original objectives and yet still meets the Town Centre Area Plan criteria remains solid. Over the past 12 months, staff have received a number of inquiries as to the status of the District- owned lands. Following up on this renewed interest in the properties, staff re-connected with Brook Pooni to get feedback on current market conditions and the market potential for release of a Request-For-Proposals. The feedback provided by Brook Pooni suggested that the current market conditions are such that the District should consider initiation of a Request-for–Proposals for the Downtown Lands to determine the level of developer interest and what the District might be able to realize from the site, both in terms of remuneration and form of development. b) Desired Outcome Direction from Council as to the release of the Request-For-Proposal as related to the potential sale, disposition and development of the 3.04 acres of District-owned Downtown Lands. c) Strategic Alignment The District’s vision statement states a desire to be “among the most sustainable communities in the world” and notes “an ongoing commitment to environmental stewardship and creation of stable and special neighbourhoods”. It is incumbent on the District to strategically manage its land holdings, especially those in the Town Centre to ensure that they deliver fair return to the taxpayers and that they also serve as models of development excellence that future developers may emulate. The District’s Downtown Lands have the potential to become an iconic ‘special neighbourhood’ that its vision statement refers to. d) Citizen/Customer Implications: District-owned land is an asset of the taxpayers of Maple Ridge. Proactive utilization of this asset will positively enhance the community as a whole, influencing the creation of a special neighbourhood, generating new jobs, greater tax revenues, supporting complementary businesses, and producing greater overall awareness of the community as a whole. As the District-owned Downtown Lands represent a unique opportunity to create an iconic residential and commercial address in the Town Centre, careful consideration must be exercised to ensure that the final development is befitting its true potential. e) Interdepartmental Implications: This initiative will require cooperation and direct collaboration among Planning, Engineering, Parks and Leisure Services, Financing, Property & Risk Management and Economic Development as well the District’s Corporate Management Team. f) Business Plan/Financial Implications: There will be direct business plan implications for the 2014/2015 planning cycles for the departments involved and it should be expected that if the decision is made to move forward with the Request-for-Proposal that it will consume significant staff resources from within each department. In addition, this initiative may generate some direct costs as related to an appraisal of the properties, outside consultant costs and specific feasibility Request-for-Proposal studies (or the like) if deemed warranted. g) Policy Implications: While this particular development site falls within the well-defined and articulated Town Centre Area Plan, it is possible that certain parcels contained within the site may be subject to either re-zoning or Official Community Plan amendments. Alternatives: Council may wish to defer exploration of the disposition of the District-owned Downtown Lands to a later date. CONCLUSIONS: Given the renewed and current interest in the District’s Downtown Lands, coupled with Council’s desire to continue the development of the Town Centre, it is the recommendation of staff that the District proceed with a Request-for-Proposal process as related to the 3.04 acres of District-owned land in the Town Centre. “Original signed by Darrell Denton”____________________ Prepared by: Darrell Denton Assistant Risk and Property Manager “Original signed by Ron Riach”________________________ Prepared by: Ron Riach Property & Rick Manager “Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule”_____________________ Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer Appendix A: Map of District-owned Downtown Lands Appendix A: Map of District-owned Downtown Lands B. Map of Location of Proposed Full Service Campground District of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: April 14, 2014 and Members of Council FILE NO: FROM: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: Council Workshop SUBJECT: Notification from Metro Vancouver regarding the Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On April 1, 2014, the District of Maple Ridge received notification that Metro Vancouver has received a request from the Corporation of Delta requesting a type two amendment to the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) Land Use Designation Map (Appendix A attached). The proposed amendment is to: redesignate Agricultural areas to General Urban and Conservation and Recreation, and extend the Urban Containment Boundary to include new General Urban areas. The District of Maple Ridge has been invited to provide written comments on the requested amendment, noting that comments are due by Thursday April 29, 2014. Following the comment period, there will be a Public Hearing following which the GVRD Board will review comments from the Regional Planning Advisory Committee, affected local governments and Public Hearing materials, and will consider third reading and final adoption of the amendment bylaw. The amendment is considered to be a Type 2 Minor Amendment in the Regional Growth Strategy, which necessitates the preparation of a RGS amendment bylaw, a regional Public Hearing, and adoption of the Bylaw by a two-thirds weighted vote at the Board. RECOMMENDATION That the report “Notification from Metro Vancouver regarding the Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands”, dated April 14, 2014 be received as information. DISCUSSION a)Background Context The Corporation of Delta has requested an amendment to the Regional Growth Strategy to facilitate the Southlands development proposal. The Metro Vancouver staff report attached to the referral includes the specific details of the application, but the following are some key highlights about the subject site: 5.1 2  The Southlands site is a 217.5 hectare site, comprised of 7 properties.  The site is designated Agricultural in the Delta Official Community Plan and Agricultural in the Regional Growth Strategy.  The lands were removed from the Agricultural Land Reserve in 1981.  The lands are within the Fraser Sewerage Area. The proposal includes:  a mixed use development with 950 residential units, and approximately 80,000 square feet of commercial space.  community-based and conventional agriculture, natural habitat, public open spaces and greenways on approximately 80% of the site.  the owner transferring 172 hectares of land to the Corporation of Delta to be held in public ownership (which represents 80% of the site area).  consideration of inclusion of the lands in the Agricultural Land Reserve (pending discussion with the Agricultural Land Commission).  the owner providing $9 million to Corporation of Delta to improve drainage and irrigation for agricultural land on the site.  redesignation of 101.9 hectares of land from Agricultural to General Urban (59.7 ha) and Conservation and Recreation (42.2 ha). The balance will remain Agricultural (115.6 ha) Pursuant with the Legislation, all member municipalities have 30 days to provide commentary to the Region, which translates into an April 29, 2014 deadline. In the absence of a written submission to the Region, the municipality will be deemed to have no concerns or objections to the amendment. b) Metro Vancouver Staff Report The Metro Vancouver staff report provides an analysis of the Southlands Proposal in light of the goals and strategies contained with the Regional Growth Strategy. The report concludes that:  there are many inherent and complex trade-offs with the proposal.  there would be a major gain of 80% of the site going to public ownership with an aim of securing it for agricultural or park use in perpetuity.  the application would result in an expansion to the Urban Containment Boundary to accommodate up to 950 residential units. Delta’s Regional Context Statement indicates the Delta has the capacity to accommodate projected growth within its curre nt Urban Containment Boundary. The expansion would result in a more dispersed, rather than a compact growth model.  the application is at odds with many of the RGS Goals.  the application would resolve a long-standing and divisive issue with the community. c) District of Maple Ridge: Like Delta, the District of Maple Ridge has a number of properties that were historically removed from the Agricultural Land Reserve, yet remain designated Agricultural, and are located outside of the Urban Area Boundary in the Official Community Plan. During the Regional Growth Strategy Review, it was identified that these properties were designated Agricultural in the draft Regional Plan. Maple Ridge requested that given the removal of these lands from the ALR and proximity to the Districts Urban Area Boundary, that the lands be included within the Regions Urban Containment Boundary and be designated General Urban in the Regional Plan. This request was accommodated in the approved Regional Plan. 3 Given that the Corporation of Delta is not a neighbouring municipality, the proposed amendment does not have direct impacts on the District of Maple Ridge. However, it is acknowledged that the removal of 101 hectares of land from the Agricultural land use designation for inclusion in the Regions Urban Containment Boundary is at odds with Regional Growth Strategy goals of Creating a Compact Urban Area. d)Citizen/Customer Implications The proposed Type 2 Amendment to the Regional Growth Strategy does not appear to impact residents of this community. Should Maple Ridge residents have any objections or concerns, they may attend the regional Public Hearing on the matter. e)Alternatives Should Council have concerns with the proposed amendment to the Regional Growth Strategy, it is recommended that a letter be sent to Metro Vancouver noting those concerns. CONCLUSION: The Type 2 Amendment to the Regional Growth Strategy has been forwarded for comment to member municipalities by the Metro Vancouver Board at its March 28, 2014 meeting. Member municipalities have 30 days (April 29, 2014) to respond. This report provides a brief overview of the proposed amendment and concludes that the amendment has no direct impact on properties within this community. Given that in the absence of a written submission to the Region, the municipality will be deemed to have no concerns or objections to the amendments, no response to the Region is required. “Original signed by Christine Carter”_________________ Prepared by: Christine Carter, M.Pl., MCIP, RPP Director of Planning “Original signed by David Pollock”___________ for_____ Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services “Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule”_____________________ Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule Chief Administrative Officer Appendix A – Notification letter dated March 28, 2014 from Metro Vancouver and attachments 5.1 Mayor Daykin and Members of Council, District of Maple Ridge Notification of a Proposed Amendment to the Metro Vancouver 20409 Shaping our Future = Type 2 Amendment Paee 2 of 2 More information and a copy of Metro 2040 can be found on the Metro Vancouver website at: http://wwwometrovancouver.org/planning/development/strategy/Pages/default.aspx In addition, more information and the Corporation of Delta staff reports on the proposed amendment can be found at: httpmHwww.delta.ca/EN/main/municipal/323/27003/southiands.html Sincerely, Paulette A. Vetleson Director, Board and Information Services/Corporate Officer PV/EC/HM/ms Encl: Report dated February 21, 2014 titled "Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands" 8731194 metrovancouver _ SERVICES AND SOLUTIONS FOR A LIVABLE REGION To: Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee From: Heather McNell, Regional Planning Division Manager Jason Smith, Senior Regional Planner Planning, Policy and Environment Department 5.1 Date: February 21, 2014 Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Subject: Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands RECOMMENDATION That the GVRD Board: a) Initiate the regional growth strategy amendment process for the Corporation of Delta's proposed regional growth strategy amendment for the Southlands site and direct staff to notify all affected local governments as per Metro Vancouver 2040: Shaping our Future section 6.4.2; b) Give 1st and 2nd readings to Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Amendment Bylaw No. 1203, 2014; c) Refer Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Amendment Bylaw No. 1203, 2014 to public hearing; d) Delegate the holding of the public hearing to the following board directors who are appointed to the Metro Vancouver Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee. i. Derek Corrigan ii. Harold Steves iii. Mike Clay iv. Ernie Daykin Vs Jack Froese vi. Linda Hepner vii. Darrell Mussatto viii. Andrea Reimer ix. Michael Smith x. Richard Stewart A. Wayne Wright e) Appoint Derek Corrigan as chair of the public hearing and Harold Steves as vice -chair of the public hearing and set quorum for the public hearing as 3 directors; and f) Direct staff to set the date for the public hearing. PURPOSE To provide, for Board consideration, Metro Vancouver staff analysis of, and recommendations for the proposed Type 2 Land Use Designation amendment to Metro Vancouver 2040: Shaping our Future (Metro 2040) requested by the Corporation of Delta. Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 26 - Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Page 2 of 15 BACKGROUND On January 14, 2014 the Corporation of Delta submitted a request to amend the regional growth strategy in order to accommodate a development proposal commonly known as Southlands (Attachment 1). The request was made after Delta Council held a local public hearing and gave third reading to Official Community Plan and Zoning Bylaw amendments to accommodate the Southlands development. An amendment to Metro Vancouver 2040: Shaping our Future is required in order for the development to proceed. The amendment requested by the Corporation of Delta is to re- designate existing regional growth strategy (RGS) Agricultural areas to General Urban and Conservation and Recreation, and to extend the Urban Containment Boundary (UCB) to include the new General Urban areas (Attachment 2 and Figure 1). Corporation of Delta staff have provided a rationale for why they beeve te proposed regional growth strategy amendment is supportable from a regional growth management perspective (Attachment 1). This rationale was written in response to comments made by Metro Vancouver staff in a letter dated January 5, 2012 (Attachment 3). lih Southlands Site Context Parcel Size 217.5 ha (537.4 ac) RGS Designation Agricultural OCP Designation Agricultural Municipal Zoning Al- Agricultural Agricultural Land Not in the Agricultural Land Reserve Reserve (removed in 1981 by provincial Order -in -Council) Proposed RGS General Urban — 59.7 ha (147.5 ac) Designations Conservation and Recreation — 42.2 ha (104.2 ac) Remains Agricultural — 115.6 ha (285.7 ac) (see Attachment 2 for layout) Proposed Residential 950 units in the form of single family Development dwellings, townhouses, apartment building (max. 3 storeys) and mixed use buildings (commercial at grade, max. 3 storeys) Proposed Commercial 7432 mz (80,000 ftz) all ground Development oriented Sewerage Area The Southlands site is within the Fraser Sewerage Area DISCUSSION Development Context The Southlands site is a 217.5 hectare site made up of seven properties located in the Corporation of Delta in the southwest corner of the region. The site is bounded on the south by the US'border, the north by the community of Beach Grove, the northeast by Boundary Bay Regional Park, and the west by the community of Tsawwassen. The site is designated Agricultural in the Corporation of Delta's Official Community Plan (OCP), Agricultural in Metro 2040, is not in the Agricultural Land Reserve, and is within the Fraser Sewerage Area. There is a considerable amount of development taking place in or near the Tsawwassen area. The nearby Tsawwassen Springs development will see 490 residential units added to the area. The Tsawwassen First Nation is in the midst of planning and implementing several large residential and commercial developments on lands just to the west of the community of Tsawwassen. Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 27 - Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Paee 3 of 15 Current plans for the Tsawwassen First Nation's lands see the addition of 1,864 residential units and 1.8 million square feet of commercial space. Figure 1: Proposed RGS Land Use Designation Amendments Regional Growth Strategy Designations ^� ____ Sub)ect Area �^ ' �� Conservation : Mixed General ❑Urban Containment Agricultural ON g_Recreation ;-lndustnal Employment Rural Urban Boundary (UCa) -. Southlands Properties — -Expand the Urban Containment Boundary (59.7 hecares) -Agricultural to General Urban (59.7 hectares) Agricultural to Conservation & Recreation (42A hectares) The Southlands Proposal The owner has proposed a comprehensive, mixed -use development that includes 950 residential units in various forms and densities, including single family homes, townhomes, apartments and live -work units, and approximately 80,000 square feet of ground -oriented commercial space. The proposal includes community -based and conventional agriculture, natural habitat, public open spaces and greenways on approximately 80 percent of the site (Attachment 4 and Figure 2). The portions of the site proposed to be redesignated to RGS General Urban are situated in two locations: one on the Boundary Bay side of the site, called "Southlands Village", and one on a smaller area on the western side of the site off of 56th Street called "Southlands Gateway". The owner proposes to construct a new connector road through the site extending from 56th Street and 4th Avenue to Boundary Bay Road and 3rd Avenue (see Figure 2 below). The owner proposes to transfer 172 hectares of land to the Corporation of Delta to be held in public ownership; this represents nearly 80 percent of the total site area. This land is to be used for agriculture, natural habitat, public open space and greenways. The owner also proposes to provide $9 million to the Corporation of Delta to improve agricultural drainage and irrigation for the agricultural land on site — infrastructure that Delta has identified as essential to improving the existing Southlands soil quality and increasing the agricultural capacity of the land. Delta Council has indicated their intent, if this proposed amendment is approved, to discuss with the Agricultural Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 28 - Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Page 4 of 15 Land Commission which portions of the land acquired by the Corporation of Delta would be appropriate for inclusion into the Agricultural Land Reserve, Figure 2: Proposed Land Uses for the Southlands Site 1 \ j I 11 I JtY(/ � ___I' xli iE:� outhla 1 LGatew LW - -� e'—, �PROPOSED LAND USE i i sv,uecv.. to„WLrt.U;. _ I E.NV (IF;N N'K G+F -nays _� wua v;cl��soui�E.anw•sE bcCua.mr. € � � 4 F Kf.L3K{ L 4tMGp,TFR�di i EM MR", UAFhPb. .nT.4 i /•i¢hST'PEwENNt I The owner has completed geotechnical studies to address concerns about the placement of fill on the site to accommodate the development. The studies address concerns pertaining to liquefaction and the effects on the water table, and conclude that the risks to.neighbouring properties are negligible. To address flooding concerns, the development plan proposes to raise the developed portions of the site to a 4.2 m flood construction level. Proposed Amendment to Metro Vancouver 2f)40: Shaping our Future The proposed regional growth strategy (RGS) amendment for the Southlands development includes redesignating 59.7 hectares from RGS Agricultural to RGS General Urban (27% of the site) and amending the Urban Containment Boundary to include these lands; and redesignating 42.2 hectares from RGS Agricultural to RGS Conservation and Recreation (19% of the site). Both of these amendments are Type 2 RGS amendments, necessitating a RGS amendment bylaw adopted by a two thirds weighted vote at the Board and a regional public hearing. The remainder of the site (115.6 hectares or 54%) will maintain a RGS Agricultural designation. Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 29 - Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Paee 5 of 15 Metro Vancouver Regional Planning Analysis Metro 2040, the region's regional growth strategy, provides the framework for assessing the proposed amendments. Consideration has been given to each of the five RGS goals and the associated strategies. Goal 1— Create a Compact Urban Area Proposed Development The Southlands development proposal requires an amendment to Metro 2040 to expand the Urban Containment Boundary and to re -designate 59.7 ha of RGS Agricultural land to General Urban to accommodate up to 950 residential units in the form of single family dwellings, townhouses, apartment building (max. 3 storeys) and mixed use buildings (commercial at grade, max. 3 storeys), along with 7,432 square metres (80,000 sq ft) of ground -oriented commercial space. Consideration 1: Urban Containment A core concept of Metro 2040 is urban containment. The Urban Containment Boundary was established to create a stable, long-term, regionally defined area for urban development that would result in compact development patterns that support efficient use of land and transportation networks, and that reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The lands inside the Urban Containment Boundary were assessed to have the capacity to accommodate all of the population and employment growth projected in the regional growth strategy. Metro 2040 Action 1.1.2 states that Metro Vancouver's role is to "accept Regional Context Statements that accommodate all urban development within the areas defined by the Urban Containment Boundary, and that meet or work towards Action 1.1.3." Action 1.1.3 directs municipalities to incorporate the Urban Containment Boundary in their Regional Context Statements, along with their population and employment growth projections as well as indication of how their plans work towards accommodating the projected growth within the Urban Containment Boundary. The Corporation of Delta submitted a Regional Context Statement in August 2013 that was accepted by the Metro Vancouver Board on September 27, 2013. The accepted Regional Context Statement is consistent with Metro 2040 Action 1.1.3 and indicates that Delta has the capacity to accommodate all projected growth within the existing Urban Containment Boundary. Current OCP projections for Tsawwassen, identified as a Local Centre in the regional growth strategy, show that it has capacity for an additional 1,200 dwelling units by 2021. These projections are somewhat dated and, as noted in the recently accepted Regional Context Statement, will be updated as area plans for Tsawwassen and other areas in Delta are revised. Nonetheless, the projections show that there is capacity within the existing developed area of Tsawwassen to accommodate anticipated growth; further, this capacity is in addition to the 490 dwelling units already approved for Tsawwassen Springs and 1864 dwelling units planned on Tsawwassen First Nations land. Expanding the Urban Containment Boundary and the existing RGS General Urban area to accommodate the Southlands development would potentially absorb some of the future growth that is projected to go into the existing Tsawwassen area, resulting in a more dispersed rather than compact growth model. Consideration 2: Focusing Growth in Urban Centres Strategy 1.2 directs growth to Urban Centres and Frequent Transit Development Areas which further supports the concept of a compact urban area effectively and efficiently served by transit. Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 30 - Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Page 6 of 15 Metro 20405 Urban Centres network is focused on the Metro Core, Regional City Centres, Municipal Town Centres, and Frequent Transit Development Areas (FTDAs), but it also acknowledges local centres as additional focal points for growth. Metro 2040 endeavours to direct 40% of housing growth and 50% of employment growth to Urban Centres and an additional 28% of growth to FTDAs. While Delta's only Urban Centre in Metro 2040 is the Municipal Town Centre in Ladner, the Delta Regional Context Statement also identifies Tsawwassen Town Centre as a Local Centre and includes policies that support the Town Centre as the location for increased growth, mixed uses and higher density residential development. The Tsawwassen Area Plan contains further policy objectives to support growth in centres. It states one objective is "to create an attractive, viable and cohesive town centre, with a "small town" atmosphere, that reflects the unique characteristics and varying lifestyles of the community, and which has a pedestrian environment and includes commercial, institutional and multiple family residential uses." Another policy objective for the Tsawwassen Town Centre, as stated in the Tsawwassen Area Plan, is "to concentrate medium density housing in and around the town centre to eliminate the necessity of consuming farmland for residential use." These policy objectives are aligned with the Metro 2040 goal of creating a compact urban area. Expanding the Urban Containment Boundary and expanding the urban area may not align with the policy objectives for strengthening the Tsawwassen Town Centre. The medium -density, mixed -use residential development proposed for the Southlands properties would be located 1.3 kilometres away from the Tsawwassen Town Centre, Consideration 3: Risk of a Proliferation of Associated Proposed Amendments to Metro 2040 Another consideration is whether approving this amendment to the Urban Containment Boundary would have the propensity to lead to additional proposed regional growth strategy amendments in the area, further destabilizing the Urban Containment Boundary. The Southlands site is contained, and bounded by. RGS General Urban lands and a regional park. There are three Agricultural designated properties adjacent to the site. Two of the parcels are publicly owned park and the other is adjacent to the part of the development that will remain in RGS Agricultural. Therefore, it is not anticipated that approving this proposal will lead to a proliferation of other proposed RGS amendments in the immediate area. Goal 2 — Support a Sustainable Economy Proposed Development The proposed amendment to accommodate the Southlands development would see 115.6 ha (285.7 ac), approximately 54%, of the site maintain a RGS Agricultural designation. All of these lands would be transferred to the Corporation of Delta. In addition, $9 million would be given to the Corporation of Delta for investment in agricultural infrastructure to improve drainage and the viability of soil -based agriculture on the site. A total of 101.9 hectares or approximately 46% of the site would be removed from the RGS Agricultural designation. The development proposal includes a set of agricultural principles for the site that dictate the types of agricultural practices and uses permitted. These principles emphasize soil -based agriculture and do not permit greenhouses or noise cannons. The agricultural principles are part of a proposed phased development agreement and would be binding on the Corporation of Delta for the term of the agreement (20 years). Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 31- Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Page 7 of 15 The owner has committed to constructing a "Market Square" that provides commercial space to market agricultural products, in addition to providing community space. An innovative community - based farming concept and the creation of a small-scale farming program that is well integrated into the fabric of the community is proposed as part of the development. This has not yet, however, been formally negotiated or guaranteed as part of the development approval process. Consideration 1: Protecting the supply of agricultural land and promoting agricultural viability The two main objectives of Strategy 2.3 are to protect the supply of agricultural land and to promote agricultural viability. RGS Agricultural lands are intended primarily for agricultural uses, facilities and supporting services. These areas reinforce provincial and local objectives to protect the agricultural land base of the region: Over 90% of the RGS Agricultural designation overlaps with the provincially designated .Agricultural Land Reserve. The two function together as mutually supportive designations, with different, but complementary roles and mandates for protecting agricultural land. Metro Vancouver's non -urban designations primarily support the urban containment and efficient provision of utility services and transportation objectives, but also support the protection of those lands for their ascribed values. The Southlands development proposes to integrate community -based farming into the community, facilitate public ownership of the remaining agricultural lands, and provide $9 million for improvements to agricultural infrastructure and drainage on the site. Two types of agriculture are being proposed on site — community -based and conventional agriculture. The community -based agriculture portion of the development will surround, and is integrated into, the developed portion of the site through the "Market Square" concept. The community -based agricultural component will see smaller plot sizes that could serve as incubator farms for new farmers. The landowner and the Corporation of Delta both feel that this will help activate currently underutilized agricultural land, connect people to food production, and offer social and community benefits. There has been considerable effort made by the landowner to develop the innovative, community -based agricultural component of the proposal. Little detail on how the conventional agricultural portion will be utilized has been provided as it is contingent on the Corporation of Delta's efforts once the land is turned over to them. It should be noted that the Corporation of Delta owns other farmland and has considerable experience in leasing farmland to ensure that it is actively and responsibly farmed. The challenge in assessing the agricultural component of this development proposal from a regional growth strategy perspective is that it promotes agricultural viability, but results in the loss of agricultural land. Moreover, it is difficult for Metro Vancouver to comment on some aspects of agricultural viability for the Southlands development. While Metro 2040 supports the importance of regulating land use as a means of protecting agricultural land in the region, it relies on organizations such as the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) to assess 'the more technical elements of determining agricultural viability. Given that this site is not in the ALR, Metro Vancouver does not have the benefit of the ALC's analysis to determine in depth what this proposal means for agricultural viability. It would appear, however, that the proposed $9 million infrastructure investment supports Metro 2040 policy to improve agricultural infrastructure and drainage and will help improve agricultural viability and production. Public ownership of agricultural land allows for a greater degree of control over agricultural programming and this is being presented as a significant Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 32 - Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Paee 8 of 15 community benefit. Public ownership of the remaining agricultural land would provide greater certainty over the future programming and use of the land. Consideration 2: Managing the agricultural -urban interface Strategy 2.3 requires that municipal Regional Context Statements address the issue of managing the agricultural -urban interface, or edge planning. The interface between urban and agricultural uses is an area often vulnerable to conflict. Significant effort on the part of the landowner has gone into integrating agriculture into the community. However, there is no consideration given to promoting compatibility between the areas that will remain in more conventional agriculture use and the new residents of the development. The proposed road bisecting the area slated for more conventional agriculture exacerbates the length of interface and may present some significant challenges for promoting compatibility along the agricultural- urban edge. The Ministry of Agriculture has expressed concern about edge planning for this proposal (Attachment 6). The perspective of Ministry staff is that this development will negatively impact the nearby conventional farming. In similar situations, nearby residents often complain about the noise and smell of conventional farming, and farmers complain about vandalism and trespassing. The proposal deals with integrating small scale, community based farming into the development, but not the common interface issues between the remaining conventional farming lands and the proposed residential areas. Consideration 3: Economic development opportunities for agriculture Strategy 2.3 also requires that municipal Regional Context Statements include policies that demonstrate support for the economic development opportunities for agricultural operations. The Southlands development proposal incorporates a "Market Square" concept as described above that supports agricultural economic development, and is consistent with Metro 2040 policies. The Ministry of Agriculture has raised concerns about the economic viability of small-scale farming being proposed as part of the development. Consideration 4: Fragmentation and non farm use of agricultural land Strategy 2.3 requires that municipal Regional Context Statements include policies that discourage the subdivision of agricultural land in a way that leads to fragmentation. Fragmentation and parcel isolation affect the agricultural capacity of the land. The Southlands proposal leads to the loss of just under 60 hectares of agricultural land to urban development, and an additional 42 hectares to conservation and recreation land uses. A new road extending the existing 4`" Avenue through the site will bisect several of the existing large parcels of agricultural land, leading to further agricultural land fragmentation. There are two parcels immediately adjacent to the site that are designated RGS Agricultural that will be isolated from other agricultural lands. However, both parcels are existing parkland, and therefore the development would not lead to further agricultural land fragmentation in this regard. Consideration 5: Intention to put land back into the Agricultural Land Reserve Delta Council has directed staff to discuss which lands the Corporation would receive as a result of the Southlands development would be appropriate for inclusion in the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) with the Agricultural Land Commission. The entire site was removed from the ALR in 1981 by Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 33 - Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Paee 9 of 15 an Order in Council, not through an application for exclusion. Delta has kept this land designated and zoned Agriculture consistently since that time. However, there is no guarantee that the ALC would accept an application to reincorporate the lands into the ALR. The "Southlands Farming — Guiding Principles and Goals", a set of requirements for agriculture that are part of the phased development agreement, strongly support farming, but also constrain the type of farming that would be permitted. If a Metro 2040 amendment process is initiated, the ALC is one of the agencies that will be notified, and staff will include a request for clarification of the process for adding these lands back into the ALR along with what factors would be considered in the decision -making process. Goal 3 —Protect the Environment and Respond to Climate Change Impacts Proposed Development The proposed amendment would see 42 hectares (104 acres) of RGS Agricultural land redesignated as RGS Conservation and Recreation, all of which would be turned over by the owner to the Corporation of Delta.. The Conservation and Recreation lands are intended to remain in their current natural state, though part of a proposed trail system will run through some areas. The Southlands site is located near Boundary Bay and its elevation is close to sea level, leaving it susceptible to flooding due to storm surges and sea level rise. The current development proposal identifies that the areas slated for development would be built on fill and would raise the flood construction level for buildings to 4.2 metres. This proposal is based on a 50-year time horizon and accounts for the annual 2mm subsidence in the area. Raising the flood construction level to 4.2 metres requires an estimated 60,000 truckloads of fill and will take approximately two years to complete. . Geotechnical analysis of the proposed development conducted by the owner received independent review in support of its conclusions. The studies determine that the Southlands proposal adequately addresses geotechnical considerations, and in particular concerns regarding liquefaction. There is no discussion of greenhouse gas emissions in the materials provided by the Corporation of Delta. Consideration 1: Protecting Conservation and Recreation Lands A key Metro 2040 strategy is to protect Conservation and Recreation lands in order to preserve ecosystem services and function, and to provide opportunities for recreation in a natural environment. The addition of publicly owned Conservation and Recreation land is a regional benefit, as it provides greater certainty of future use. The proposed Conservation and Recreation lands in the southwest of the property would preserve the existing forest cover and maintain important wildlife habitat. The additional trails system proposed for the development will improve pedestrian and cycling access to Boundary Bay Regional Park from Tsawwassen. Consideration 2: Greenhouse gas emissions Strategy 3.3 encourages land use and transportation infrastructure policies that reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Given the location of the development in relation to employment centres, major commercial centres and the lack of regular transit service, it is likely Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 34 - Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Page 10 of 15 that most residents will need to use private vehicles for most trips off -site leading to greenhouse ,as emissions implications. This is also documented in the traffic study supplied by the landowner. According to the traffic study, the number of trips per dwelling unit would be 16% and 12% higher during the morning and afternoon peaks respectively compared to a development located in Tsawwassen Town Centre. There is no discussion or commitment made as part of the development to improve energy efficiency in the buildings, which is not consistent with policies under this strategy that promote best practices and require municipalities to identify policies that reduce energy consumption. Consideration 3: Climate change impacts and natural hazards Strategy 3.4 encourages land use and transportation infrastructure that improves the ability to withstand climate change impacts and natural hazard risks. The latest reports from the Ministry of Environment recommend a flood construction level of 6.2 metres for this area based on projected sea level rise by 2100. The current proposal would see a flood construction level of 4.2 metres. While this exceeds the current Corporation of Delta standard of 2.9 metres, it falls short of the best practices recommended by the Ministry of Environment. As part of the rezoning proposal, flood covenants will be required on all the developed properties absolving the Corporation of Delta of liability from future flooding impacts. Implicit in this requirement for covenants is that there potentially will be future flooding impacts. Goal 4 —Develop Complete Communities Proposed Development The proposed amendment would see the development of 950 units of housing, which would include a mix of single family homes, townhouses and 3-storey apartments. There is no provision for rental housing and secondary suites will not be permitted. The Southlands proposal envisions some commercial uses in the centre of the development as well as an extensive trail network. Consideration 1: Diverse and affordable housing Strategy 4.1 advocates for the provision of diverse and affordable housing choices. It requests that municipalities encourage the supply of new rental housing and secure additional affordable housing units, for households with low or low to moderate incomes through policies, particularly in areas that are well served by transit. The proposed development would increase the housing diversity in the area which is consistent with part of the intent of Metro 2040 Strategy 4.1. The proposed development does not include requirements for rental housing and restricts secondary suites. As a result, it would be helpful for Delta to confirm how the proposal will assist in meeting projected demand for rental housing, which, in the regional growth strategy, is estimated for Delta to be 1,100 units. Consideration 2: Healthy and complete communities Strategy 4.2 promotes the development of healthy and complete communities with access to a range of services and amenities. The intention of this policy direction is to support compact, mixed use, transit, cycling and walking oriented communities. Specifically, municipalities are requested to include policies that "where appropriate, identify small scale Local Centres in General Urban areas that provide a mix of housing types, local -serving commercial activities, and good access to transit". Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 35 - Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Page 11 of 15 The proposed development's provision of trail networks, community space, connections to nearby recreational opportunities, and access to some small scale commercial services are integral parts of a complete community. This development would add up to 2,500 people to the Tsawwassen area which would enhance the economic viability of commercial businesses in the area. In turn, this would enhance and maintain important services that are part of a complete community. It is clear that a tremendous amount of effort has gone into creating a design for Southlands that considers community amenities and providing as many elements of a complete community as possible. The real challenge for this development in terms of complete community objectives is location. The distance from the edge of the Tsawwassen Town Centre (1.3 kilometres) and hence most commercial services and employment, and the lack of institutional services, mean that Southlands residents would have to drive for most daily services. Best practices indicate that people are often willing to walk between 400-800 metres for such services. Goal 5 —Support Sustainable Transportation Choices Proposed Development The Southlands area is currently served by public transit in the form of a community shuttle that offers hourly service to the South Delta Exchange and limited peak hour commuter bus service to Bridgeport. The Southlands site is not on the Major Road Network. The landowner will be required to pay for off -site upgrades to road infrastructure created by the increased demand generated by the development. The Southlands proposal includes a trail network that would connect the development with the existing trail network and the neighbouring communities. Consideration 1: Coordination of land use and transportation Metro 2040 recognizes the interplay between an use and transportation and that an use influences travel patterns and choices. Strategy 5.1 seeks to coordinate land use and transportation to encourage transit, multiple -occupancy vehicles, cycling and walking. It is strongly linked to TransLink's recently adopted Regional Transportation Strategy Framework and the Frequent Transit Network. The proposed trail network is consistent with Metro 2040 policies to promote walking and cycling and would result in more sustainable transportation choices and the opportunity for residents to access recreational opportunities. The distance from major commercial and employment locations, along with infrequent public transit service would likely result in the majority of trips being made by private vehicle. It is not clear in the materials provided by Delta how the proposal will contribute to achieving Strategy 5.1 to promote more sustainable transportation choices. The traffic study provided by the landowner reinforces this point. Consideration 2; Safe and efficient movement of goods and passengers Strategy 5.2.contains policies to promote the efficient movement of goods, passengers and services. Policies call for active management of existing and planned capacity of the road network. The traffic study provided by the landowner offers a brief, broader scale assessment of traffic impacts in the area. This is an important issue as there is significant development taking place elsewhere in Tsawwassen and is on Tsawwassen First Nation land. The study shows that there will potentially be significant impacts at two key intersections along 56th Street, namely at 12th Avenue and Highway Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 36 - Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Page 12 of 15 17. This would occur at build out of all planned development in the area in 2031. The congestion at these intersections will be caused by other developments in the area and is not projected to occur solely because of the Southlands proposal. Comments from related Metro Vancouver departments As part of the review process for amendments to Metro 2040, Regional Planning staff circulates the proposal associated with the proposed amendment to other Metro Vancouver departments for comment. The proposal was reviewed by Regional Parks as well as the Water and Liquid Waste Utilities, Regional Utilities The review concluded that it is not possible to precisely identify the appropriate water infrastructure servicing strategy for the proposal at this time, as detailed water demand projections for Southlands and neighbouring areas are not currently available to Metro Vancouver. Based on information provided in the document titled "Preliminary Engineering Requirements" dated September 25, 2013, it appears that detailed water demand projections for Southlands will be provided to Metro Vancouver at a future date. Subject to further detailed investigation, it appears reasonable that it will be in the regional interest to designate the Pebble Hill Reservoir as the official supply point for Southlands. If the Southlands amendment to the RGS is approved, technical staff from Metro Vancouver and the Corporation of Delta should work collaboratively to agree upon a water servicing strategy for the entire south Delta area, including Southlands, that optimizes use of the existing Pebble Hill Reservoir. In terms of liquid waste, initial flows analysis shows minor impacts on regional infrastructure based on the preliminary information provided. Most of the impacts of this development in terms of managing liquid waste will be on the municipal system and those impacts have been addressed. It should be noted that although the entire Southlands site is within the Fraser Sewerage Area, Metro 2040 stipulates that the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage District not extend regional sewer services into RGS Agricultural areas except for building footprints in cases where the infrastructure is needed to address public health issue, protect the region's natural assets, or to service agriculture or agri-industry. Regional Parks Regional Parks' staff reviewed the Southlands proposal from the perspective of Boundary Bay Regional Park. The Southlands proposal is adjacent to the core part of the park which contains a popular beachfront recreation area as well as important ecosystems classified as Wildlife Reserve Areas (WRA). The management of stormwater generated by the proposed Southlands development is the most significant concern due to its potential to negatively alter the park's hydrology and degrade the ecological health of its sensitive and valuable ecosystems. Available documents indicate that stormwater from the Southlands Village site is to be directed by pipe along Boundary Bay Road, then via a ditch that transects the park into to the reservoir at the 12th Avenue pumping station. Boundary Bay Regional Park presently experiences high groundwater in areas of the WRA which tends to degrade ecosystem quality. The movement of stormwater will require expansion of the Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 37 - Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Paee 13 of 15 reservoir located adjacent to the 12th Avenue pumpstation. It is unclear if the municipality presently has sufficient land within its utility easements to accommodate this expansion or if additional lands, potentially park, are required. With appropriate detailed planning, design and implementation, proposed drainage works could support natural resource management goals for the park. The proposal identes a number of ecosystems/land parcels for protection as Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA). One of particular note to Boundary Bay Regional Park is the 12.9 ha parcel adjacent to its south boundary. Acquisition of this land is a regional benefit as an ESA will maintain its current ecological relationship with the Regional Park. Metro Vancouver RGS Amendment Process The proposed amendment is a Type 2 Minor.Amendment to the regional growth strategy which requires an amendment bylaw that receives an affirmative two-thirds weighted vote by the Metro Vancouver Board at each reading including adoption, and a regional public hearing. Metro Vancouver 2040 lays out the process for such an amendment. A draft staff report on the proposed amendment was reviewed by the Regional Planning Advisory Committee on February 21, 2014 as required by Regional Growth Strategy Procedures Bylaw No. 1148. The Regional Planning Advisory Committee received the then draft staff report for information. The application is now coming before the Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee and Board for consideration of initiation, notification, 1st and 2"d reading of the amendment bylaw, delegation of the public hearing, and direction to staff to set the public hearing date. If the Board approves these resolutions, staff anticipates a 30-day notification period, holding the public hearing the final week of April 2014 or the first week of May. The Committee and Board would then consider the public hearing materials and any comments received from affected local governments and agencies and the public, and 3rd and final reading of the amendment bylaw in May 2014, ALTERNATIVES 1. That the GVRD Board: a) Initiate the regional growth strategy amendment process for the Corporation of Delta's proposed regional growth strategy amendment for the Southlands site and direct staff to notify all affected local governments as per Metro Vancouver 2040: Shaping our Future section 6.4.2; b) Give 1st and 2nd readings to Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Amendment Bylaw No. 1203, 2014; c) Refer Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Amendment Bylaw No. 1203, 2014 to public hearing; d) Delegate the holding of the public hearing to the following board directors who are appointed to the Metro Vancouver Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee: i. Derek Corrigan lei. Harold Steves [leis Mike Clay iv. Ernie Daykin v. Jack Froese vie Linda Hepner vile. Darrell Mussatto viii. Andrea Reimer Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 38 Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Page 14 of 15 iMe Michael Smith x. Richard Stewart xi. Wayne Wright e) Appoint Derek Corrigan as chair of the public hearing and Harold Steves as vice -chair of the public hearing and set quorum for the public hearing as 3 directors; and f) Direct staff to set the date for the public hearing. 2. That the GVRD Board decline the Corporation of Delta's request for a Regional Growth Strategy amendment for the Southlands development. FINANCIAL 1MPLICi4TIONS If the Board proceeds with Alternative 1, there will be financial implication for the cost of holding a public hearing. These costs include advertising, additional staff time and remuneration of Board directors depending on the timing of the public hearing. There are no financial implications associated with Alternative 2. REGIONAL GROWTH IMPLICATIONS If the Board chooses Alternative 1, it: • Indicates a. desire to initiate the Metro 2040 amendment process which allows an opportunity for member municipalities and other affected agencies to comment on the proposal. It provides an opportunity for the public to address public officials and present their opinions on the proposal. If the Board chooses Alternative 2, it: • Determines that the regional benefits of the proposal do not outweigh the infringement on the urban containment and growth management objectives of the RGS; • Maintains the current amount of RGS Agricultural land on the site; • Loses an opportunity to invest in improving agricultural viability for some of the land; and • Metro 2040 could be perceived as overly rigid and not accommodating of local aspirations and needs. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION The analysis completed by Metro Vancouver staff demonstrates the inherent and complex trade- offs of the proposed Metro 2040 amendment that would facilitate the Southlands development proposal. From a regional perspective, a fundamental question is if there is a compelling rationale or benefit for allowing significant residential development outside of the urban containment boundary. The major gain from a regional perspective for allowing residential and commercial development outside the urban containment boundary in this particular instance is the donation of 80% of the site to public ownership with an aim to securing it for agricultural and park use in perpetuity. There is no doubt that this transfer allows greater control over future land uses in the area on the part of the municipality and would provide closure for a long-standing source of tension in the local community. Given the municipality's stated intention of applying to have some of these lands reinstated in the Agricultural Land Reserve, and that these lands are currently in private ownership and therefore 'at greater risk of development', this is a significant regional and local gain. Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 39 - Corporation of Delta Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendment for Southlands Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee Meeting Date: March 7, 2014 Pase 15 of 15 However, it is a significant challenge to determine what level or amount of regional and local benefit is sufficient to allow development outside of the urban containment boundary when it is clear that there is sufficient space to accommodate projected population and employment growth within the existing community. A key issue with the potential to set precedent is the notion that public ownership of land enhances protection above and beyond regulation alone, and is a substantial community benefit. Given that the vast majority of agricultural lands in the region are privately owned, accepting this amendment could be seen to signal to those land owners, that subdividing their property, proposing to develop a small percentage of the land, and dedicating the rest to public ownership is an acceptable, even desirable proposal. This could, on a broader regional level, lead to greater speculation of agricultural land and proposals of this nature, thereby undermining fundamental values inherent in the regional growth strategy. Staff recognizes Delta's aspirations and support for the proposal. There are numerous community benefits, not the least of which is the resolution of a long-standing, divisive issue with a solution that sees the innovative development of only 20% of the site, and the remaining 80% turned over to the municipality for conservation, recreation and agricultural uses. The landowner's thoughtfulness, consideration of community values, and commitment to providing an innovative, sustainable proposal should be commended. Metro Vancouver's role in this issue is to comment on the consistency of the proposed amendment with Metro Vancouver 2040: Shaping our Future — to assess whether the benefits are sufficient to offset impacts on regional growth strategy objectives. Based on the analysis provided, staff recommends, Alternative 1. This will allow for additional information to outstanding questions to be received, will facilitate a broader, more fulsome dialogue on the proposed amendment, and will provide an opportunity for municipalities, other agencies and the public to provide comment to the Board for their consideration and to inform staff's recommendation regarding the proposed amendment. Attachments 48671368): 1. 'Referral to Metro Vancouver for Southlands Application (Century Industries Ltd.), Delta, BC' — Letter dated January 14, 2014 from The Corporation of Delta. 2. 'Proposed RGS Land Use Designation and Overlay Amendments' - Map. 3. 'Proposed Official Community Plan Amendment for the Southlands Properties' - Initial Metro Vancouver Comments from January 5, 2012. 4. 'Southlands Proposed Land Uses/Site Plan'. 5. 'Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Amendment Bylaw No. 1203, 2014'. 6. 'Delta Community Based Farm District - Planning Southlands as a Regionally Significant Model for Metro Vancouver' - Letter dated May 15, 2013 from the Ministry of Agriculture addressed to the Corporation of Delta. 8595545 Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 40 - 5.1 Attachment 1 Mayor Greg Moore, Chair Metro Vancouver Board of Directors 4330 Kingsway E3urnaby, BC V5H 4G8 Dear Chair Moore, Re; Referral to Metro Vancouver for Southlands Application (Century Industries Ltd.), Delta, SC The purpose of This letter is to refer the development application far the Southlands properties to Metro Vancouver, and to seek approval of several amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy and Delta's Regional Context Statement. The letter includes the following sections. Prapasal , • Process • Local and Regional Context • Commentary from Council • Supporting Information • Delegation Request • Conclusion 1. Proposal The Southlands application involves seven properties totaling 217 ha (537 ac} in area. All of the properties are designated A�Agrcultural in the Future Land tJse Plan in Schedule A of Delta's Official Community Plan, designated AGR-Agricultural in the Tsawwassen Future Land Use Plan in Schedule DA of Delta's Official Community Plan, and zoned Al Agriculture, The owner, Century Industries Ltd., .has made application fora proposed comprehensive development that would include agricultural uses, natural habitat, public open spaces and greenways as well as a Market Square on approximately 80 percent of the subject site, and residential, commercial and institutional uses on approximately 20 percent of the subject site: Regional Planning and Agri ulture Committee - 41- January 14, 2014 Page 2 The owner proposes to develop a mixed -use residential community with 950 residential units in various forms and densities, including single family homes, townhomes, apartments and live -work AI units and approximately 7,432 ml (80,000 ft2) of ground oriented commercial space, The development would occur in two areas: one on the Boundary Bay side called "Southlands Village", and a smaller area off 56 Street called "Southlands Gateway", The owner proposes to construct a new connector road which would extend from 3 Avenue I4np4urjIL,.o$)r:r(. J(r.,"V,.,,,;,Aittl,,,�,, and Boundary Say Road to 4 Avenue and 56 Street, The owner proposes to transfer 172 ha (425 ac) of land to Delta, to be heid in public ownership as amenity land, This amounts to approximately 80 percent of the total site, less the proposed 2,4 ha (6 ac) Southlands Homestead, The land to be transferred' to Delta would be used for agriculture, natural habitat, public open space (including a Market Square) and greenways, Included with the amenity land are the Alexander/ Gunn House. and the Red Barn, Both of these buildings are in the proposed Market Square area, The owner would also construct a new multi -use community building in the Market Square area, complete extensive renovations to the Red Barn, and also provide landscaping and open space improvements throughout the Market Square area, The Earthwise Gardens and community gardens would also be located within this area. The owner proposes to provide a $9 million amenity contribution to Delta that would be put in a special reserve by Delta and administered by it at its discretion for the sole purpose of improvingagricultural drainage and irrigation for the agricultural land that is proposed to be transferred to Delta, The owner proposes to lease back a portion of the land that is proposed to be transferred to Delta, including approximately 1,83 ha (46 ac) of the agricultural land for use for small-scale farming (the "Community Farming Area"), in addition to the owner leasing and operating the Market Square area, each for a minimum period of 10 years with options to extend for a further 10 years. Additional areas comprising public parking, open spaces and pathways are also proposed to be leased back and thus maintained by Century Industries_ Ltd. The remainder of the agricultural land that would be transferred to Delta would be available to be leased by Delta to one or more third party tenants for larger scale soil -based farming, to be actively used in a'manner with consideration to surrounding residential neighbourhoods, Leases are to be negotiated/considered at a later date, Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 42 - January 14, 2014 Page 3 2. Process The proposal requires an amendment to Delta"s Official Community Plan for a portion of the lands, rezoning of a portion of the lands, and other bylaws, permits and considerations. Amendments to'the .Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy would also be required in order for the development to proceed. Additionally, Century Industries Ltd. has requested a Phased Development Agreement of 20 year duration, which requires approval of the Inspector of Municipalities. This application has been under consideration since October 2011. Delta has; throughout that period, undertaken extensive analysis of the project and also had consultation with the community. The consultation process has included: • Public.. Information Meetings Hosted by Century Industries Ltd,. on May 12 and 15, 2012; • Public Information Meeting Hosted by the Corporation of Delta on October 25, 2012; • Public Information Meeting Hosted by the Corporation of Delta on May 30, 2013; and • Public Hearing on October 28, 29 and 30, 2013 and November 1, 2 and 8, 2013, Throughout the application process a number of technical studies have been completed and the development plans have undergone refinements, The application review process has been thorough and there is extensive information on the proposal in the staff report dated July 18, 2013 which was considered by Council at their July29, 2013 Regular Meeting and the staff report dated October 4, 2013 which was considered by Council at their October 7, 2013 Regular Meeting. There is further information contained in the staff report dated November 7, 2013 that was considered by Council at the Special Meeting on November 8, 2013, Various technical studies, staff reports and other documents are available through Delta"s website at +mv,rwAelta.ra/southlands, At the Special Meeting on November 8, 2013, Council gave third reading. to Official Community Plan Amendment (Regional Context Statement) Bylaw No. 7167, Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. '7168, Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 7169, Development Application Procedures Amendment Bylaw No. 7170 and Phased Development Agreement Bylaw No. 7271 and endorsed a motion requesting the Metro Vancouver Board to amend "Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Bylaw Number 1136, 2010". The amendments requested involve: 1. Changing the regional land use designation of approximately 27 percent of the site from Agricultural to -General Urban, and adding these lands to the Urban Containment Boundary; 2, Changing the regional land use designation of approximately 19 percent of the site from Agricultural to Conservation and Recreation; and Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 43 - January 14, 2014 Page 4 3. Amending the Regional Growth Strategy Maps as necessary to reflect the required amendments listed above. Council also endorsed a motion that, subject to approval of the Regional Growth Strategy amendments, the Metro Vancouver Board be requested to approve the amendments to Delta's Regional Context Statement, as reflected in "The Corporation of Delta Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 3960, 1985 Amendment (Regional Context Statement Amendment for Southlands Properties — LU006390) Bylaw No. 7167, 201311. Please find enclosed a copy of Bylaw No. 7167, certified correct at third reading (Attachment A). 3: Local and Regional Context Attachment B to this letter illustrates the proposed Regional Growth Strategy land use designations in relation to the subject site and the portions of the subject site that are proposed to be included in the Urban Containment Boundary, Metro Vancouver staff provided comments an the Southlands application on January 5, 2012. The comments outlined regional factors which should be considered should Council submit a request fora Regional Growth Strategy amendment to the Metro Vancouver Board. Further discussion on the regional factors identified by Metro Vancouver and Delta staffs response is provided in Attachment C to this letter, and this information was presented to Council in the July 2013 report. In Delta's view, some of the significant regional benefits that would be generated by the proposal include the following, • -While this proposal would result in increased urban area. within the Urban, Containment Boundary, Tsawwassen would remain a compact urban area. The proposed development would provide an opportunity to make Tsawwassen a more complete community by providing more housing options for diverse needs and more population to support commercial uses and employment in this local centre. • The owner is proposing. to transfer approximately 80 percent of the site to Delta, including 110 ha (272 ac) of land that would be zoned Al Agriculture. if the application is approved and the lands become publicly owned, the Municipality has identified objectives to ensure the lands are in active agricultural use and farmed in a sustainable manner. The lands have not consistently been farmed in the past. • Promoting agricultural viability by enhancing the agricultural capability of the land. Specifically, the owner is proposing to provide a $9 million amenity contribution #o Delta, to be put in a special reserve for the sole purpose of improving drainage and providing irrigation to improve and sustain the agricultural capability of the agricultural land that is proposed to be dedicated to Delta: Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 44 - January 14, 2014 Page 5 Part of the land that is proposed to be transferred to Delta is the 12.9 ha (31.9 ac) parcel located on the east side of. Boundary Bay Road, which borders the southern portion of the Boundary Bay Regional Park. If the proposal Is approved and the land transferred to Delta, then Delta would consider giving this parcel to Metro Vancouver to help increase the overall size of the Boundary Bay Regional Park and provide additional land to be used for conservation and/or recreation, • The entire Sauthlands site is currently designated' Agricultural in the Regional Growth Strategy and Delta's Official Community Plan, is zoned Al Agriculture and could therefore be cleared at any time to use for farming purposes. If the portion of the Southlands site on the east.side of Boundary Bay Road was given to Delta, the Official Community Plan designation of the property is proposed to be changed to Environmentally Sensitive Area 3. Permitted uses in this designation include passive recreation and education activities oriented town appreciation of the natural environment, and preserving or managing wildlife habitat, 4. commentary from Council The minutes of the Special Meeting of Ccwncil on November 8, 2013 are provided in the referral package, and include detailed comments from all Council members. Please note that the full statements of all members of Council can be viewed by watching the enclosed video recording of the Special Meeting proceedings. The following provides a brief summary of some of the comments that were made. by Membersof Council during the Special Meeting in consideration of this application: The application presents an unbelievable deal for agriculture in Delta< The subject property has become fallow and overgrown with blackberries, thistles and trees, At the Public Hearing, a local farmer showed pictures of crops that he lost to flooding in 2013 on farmland that is part of the subject property. The $9 million contribution from the developer would improve the ditching, drainage and the farmland. • Approval of the application means certainty for the site. As 80 percent of the land would be donated to Delta, the usage of the land is ensured through public control, The proposal adheres to Delta's values', which include preservation of environment, food security, connectivity and wellness, harmony, and excellence, with 950 proposed homes and the remaining 80 percent of the land to be given to Delta in perpetuity. An opportunity like this will not come again in our lifetime. + With reference to official Community Plan Amendment (Regional Context Statement) Bylaw. No. 7167, it was suggested that .alterations to regional land use designations would be offset by environmental and agricultural benefits for the region.. Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 45 - January 14, 2014 Page 6 • There is a long history of development proposals on the subject property, Each time an application was denied, the subsequent proposal presented to Council and the community was improved, The current application is the best compromise and the best thing for the community. • There are many residents who feel that there should be no compromise; however, the only way to have certainty on this land is for it to come into public ownership. • There is a desire to have a balance and compromise for the property and find an option with the greatest benefit to Delta. • Developer proposal to donate 80 percent of the property to the public domain in order to have development on the remaining piece is unprecedented. • It is important to not just save the land but also the farmer. The opportunity to save this much agricultural land is rare. The proposed donation of 80 percent of the parcel to the Municipality for agricultural use is one of the most astounding proposals ever seen. • Should the application be approved by both Delta Council and the Metro Vancouver Board, Council will be requested to take the necessary action to have the donated agricultural land under Delta's purview put back in the Agricultural Land Reserve. One Councillor d}d not support the proposal and voted.}n opposition. She referenced information from Metro Vancouver indicating that there is sufficient residential capacity to meet the region's needs within the defined Urban Containment Boundary. She also cited concerns regarding development on agricultural land, development on a floodplain, and the Phased Development Agreement among other items. 5. Supporting Information In fonit ard}ng th}s application to Metro Vancouver, we have prepared a comprehensive package that conta}ns all of the information noted in Attachment D, including staff reports to Council, minutes of Council meetings and the Public Hearing, a video recording of the Special Meeting on November 8, 2013, technical reports, comment sheets from Public Information Meetings held by Century Industries Ltd. and The Corporation of Delta, correspondence submitted to staff and correspondence to Mayor and Council regarding the Southlands application received from October 3, 2011 (date of Official Community Plan Amendment application) until 12:00 p.m. (noon) on November 7, 2013 (deadline for written submissions. for the Public Hearing) including individual pieces of correspondence (letters and ema}ls), form letters and petitions. It was Council's direction that this correspondence going back to the initial date of the application to Delta be provided to Metro Vancouver. Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 46 - January 14, 2014 Page 7 6, Delegation Request There is a significant amount of information included in the referral package, and there are many details and components to this request to amend the Regional Growth Strategy. Delta staff will therefore be making a request, through Metro Vancouver's Board Secretariat and Corporate Information Department, to appear as a delegation and speak to the following Metro Vancouver Committees: • Greater Vancauver Regional Di.,trict (Metro Vancouver} Board; • Mayors Committee; • Environment and Parks Committee; and • Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee, as well as staff Technical Committees. We feel that these presentations. would be very valuable as they would allow for an overview of the application to be provided to the Board and the Committees, and Delta staff would also be available to answer questions, Delegations to Metro Vancouver .Boards and Committees are normally given a maximum of five minutes to present. We respectively request that Delta staff be provided with 15 minutes for each of these presentations in order to provide a more comprehensive overview of various components of this proposal. 7. Conclusion As part of the Metro Vancouver process, my staff would welcome the opportunity to meet wlth Metro Vancouver staff and make presentations to the Metro Vancouver Board and Committees at the appropriate times, Please do not hesitate to contact Delta's Chief Administrative Officer, Mr. George V. Harvie, at 604-946-3212, or Delta's Director of Community Planning and. Development, Mr. Jeff Day at 604-946-3381, should you require any additional information. Yours traly his E: Jackson Mayor Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 47 - January 14, 2014 Pa9e 8 Attachments A. Copy of Official Community Plan Amendment (Regional Context Statement) Bylaw No. 7167 certified correct at third reading B, Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Land Use Designations as well as Portions of Subject Site to be Added to the Urban Containment Boundary C, Regional Factors to Consider for the Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendments D, List of Information Included in Referral Package to Metro Vancouver cc; Metro Vancouver Board of Directors Delta Council George V. Narvie, Chief Administrative Officer Jeff Day, Director of Community Planning and Development Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 48 - Attachment A Page 1 of 2 THE CORPORATION OF DELTA BYLIAVY NO. 7167 A Bylaw to arneno' ' Me Cotpotatron or Delta Off vial Comintrolty Plao Bylaw No. 3950, 1985"' WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of Delta has adopted an Official Community Plan pursuant to Section 876 of the Local Gove�prnent Act: NOW THEREFQRE, the MuniaipaLCouncil of The Corporation ofDelta in open i�neeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: '1. This Bylaw ►liay be cited for all purposes as "The Corporation of Delta Official Community Plan Bylaw No, 3950, 1986 Amendment (Regional Context Statement Amendment for Southlands Properties - LU006390) Bylaw No. 7167, 201311 . 2. Schedule A of ""The Corporation of Delta Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 3950, 1985", as amended, is hereby further amended by deleting, from Section 1.8 Regional Context Statement, the Regional Context Statement Map, and inserting in its place the Regional Context Statement Map in Schedule 7167.1. READ A FIRST time the 29r" day of July, 2013. READ A SECOND time the 29'" day of July, 2013. PUBLIC NEARING held the 28rn, 29t" and 30`r' day of October and the I t 2nd and 8 da.y of November, 2013, READ A THIRD time the 801 day. of November, 2013 FINALi�Y CONSIDERED AND AC)OPTED the day of ; 201 . i ot�glt►�M rq Arta � UM py{bia ' q�6ng , ��tttsn, Lois E Mayor Jackson Sandra MacFarlane Acting Municipal Clerk Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 49 - uylaw No. 7167 -2- Attachment A Page 2 of 2 LY o U 4 c a p Y ..Lr' 7: v-Et P tM zi{ pw €t 13 This is Schedule 7167-1 to "The Corporation of Delta Official Community Plan Bylaw N'o: 3950, 1985 Amendment (Regional Context Statement Amendment for Southlands Properties t-U006390) Bylaw No, 7167, 2013 Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 50 - Attachment W Page 1 of 3 EGIONAL GROWTH STRATEGY LAND USE DESIGNATIONS Existing egionai Growth Strategy Land Use Designations for Southlands Properties Tito existing Regional Growth Strategy Land Use Designations for the Southlands site and surrounding properties are shown on Map I at right. The entire'217.5 ha (537,5 ac) southland5 site has an existing Regional Growth Strategy Land Use Designationof "Agriculcural Descriptions of the Regional Land Use Designations are provided below i It;yr f+tiL'F:n"19 U:3 a rla t I, Cxliting Reglorsat f row th Strategy Land Use' i Proposed I�egiana) Growth Strategy Land ,Use Designations for Southlands Properties Thr Regional Land Use Designations proposed for the Sout hlands sites Include "Agriculcural"," General Urban" and "Conservation E Recreation", as shown on Map 2 at right. Descriptions of the Regional Growth St-ategy Land Use Designations are provided below. 5orne of the lands within the proposed "General Urban'" area are prcposed to be used for parks and recreational uses, however, they are not cortsidered to be regionally significant green space_ The Market Square area Is proposed to be designated "General Urban'', Table I •below provides a breakdown of the different Regional Growth Su+ategy Land Use Designations proposed by area and percentage of the"Southlands site, Propanlao akojuA arry Pu a.. �t i4 l� I iUalrtli, ]sC 'it,3 Y�. '��J 1'♦1+r IF'71wi \,.I. ~t Ill Map 2, i Changes ko Regional ! Land Uses ogslgnatlans ieblc 1, 8rrakdown o(Prvposed ReYlmre(Gr„wth Strotcjy tend Ute Uerlpnotinns for 511bjtct Plop eel) by.0rto hrsd in as gha on a �—"��'��—percent�ga o ou an x 5�� Agrlcuttural � 113 6 ha l 1Bi 7 ac 5)1',s, General Urban 59.7 ha I 1473 at 27 Iles Conservation R Recreation 42 1 ha 104,1 ae 19,1E Tahl. 1175 1000 i Piease note that die 11,9 ha (11.91c) portion of thu Southlands t1to on the easr side of Boundary By Ro0 capef be ended trs iha Boundary Bay Regional Park, subject to further discussion with FlerroYancouver. Descrfptfans of Regional Land Use Resignations Urban land Use Designation Gener4l Urbon 6anar-41 Urban areas aet:r,d e ,ad fat readvxai ntlghbatx-tsuads ON ten[+es, and am supported by shopping, strvke5, insotuuons, recreational fiidfcas sod parks. hfin General Urban areas, hiYfter dersry generatiq dera!opment is to ba Directed to urban Centres and FrequentTra k DeveiopmentA.'ea: Geneni IkbanAn as i2!nterded to emphutac plate• mak4 an tarkhed pubic r%alrt, incl promake transh. oriented contranides where rranslc.mult,1ple'occupan. vc des, cycli q and vra!k'r q are the preferred modes of trinsaorsar_bn NonoUrban Land Use Designations Agricululrof pgrku!ural eras- arts htsarWad preen uiy for agrkw u'ral uses, fatilidos arsi sup on{n/, rerrYces wMs an artsphasia on load produttton w!sera appropr/sees ilstse arxaz �a��for�a prav[ncial and local oblaaYves ro pracers die ag1Y<IAttaal binI base of dip, rogtnn. COflSts/YaGOn qnd RecreationCor1scrradon m?d Racrcadon arils era Intended to protect signncEatu ecalogicat and recreation assctti, tnc'us:mg drinkirg watersheds, canservadon area;, wpollte managJtsen4 areas and +cologlcal raarvOs,fansn, vrtitlxnds. riparian corridors, major parks and recreadon areas, ski tags and other tourist recreadon ucas ihis 14 I copy of art rntt,achr7tent to tttc� staIf report dated July 18, 2013 which show , (lip exlsttnG and proposed Rrii;iGna) Growth Street€V Land Use Dt�sil;nations for,tltt� Scruthlantis Prol�t�fti�>: Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 51- �ttachnif nt B Pale 2 of 3 Land Proposed to be included in the Urban Containment Boundary Subject �aGR Properties' mnr W,l c % e :.tea . M 1 tj5� Land Proposed to be Included ii1 the Urban Containment Boundary 5947 ha (147,5 ac) Existing Urban Containment Boundary Currently, ti7e Regional Grawih Strategy includes a regionally defined Urban Containment Boundary, which is intended to establish a stable, fang -term regionally defined area for urban development The Regional Growth ' Strategy notes that the establishment of the Urban Containment Boundary will reinforce the protection of agricultural; conservation and rural areas, and provide predictability for locating urban uses, major transportation and infrastructure investment The entire Southlands site currently has a Regional Laird Use Designation of"Agrlcukural" and is located outside of the teglonaUy defined Urban Containment Boundary. As part of the Southlands application, it is proposed that 593 ha (147.5 ac) of the 217.5 ha (537A ac) Southlands site be Included in the Urban Containment Boundary. The areas that are proposed to be included in the Urban Containment Boundary include an 83 ha (21.4 ac) area on the west side of the Southlands site, and a 51 ha (126 ac) area on the eastslde of the site, Including the Markat Square area � Subf eat ProperUea �r_.,.� * ®Ettrtlr:p t)rba❑ Contatnmartt 8oundtry 41hi; i; ,, co1q of an attar.I`uiiont to the stEafi repot t ti,;tori Iuly 13, s�013 which Shows the nxMin€; e)ftari Car7tainntcnt Bcrunriary and thu proposed antorreimerrks tG� tl�r� lJrta,ur C:ar�tiinn'+�'�nt fit�unditry, Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 52 - tt�c11114lont B Page 3 of 3 Attachment C Page 1 of 3 Regional raCtors to Consider for the Proposed Regional Growth Strategy Amendments for the Southlands Application, The subject properties are currently designated Agriculture in the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy, and are located outside of the regional Urban Containment Boundary, At the time that the Regional Growth Strategy was being drafted, municipalities were requested to identify regional designations for lands within their boundaries, As Delta's Official Community identified the lands as agricultural, a regional agricultural designation was selected. The following section responds to comments received by Metro Vancouver when the application was referred to them in 2011 and 2012, Should the application proceed, Council would at a later date need to consider a resolution to request amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy, At that time staff would prepare a more comprehensive overview of the application with reference to the Regional Growth Strategy goals, objectives and strategies, i) .Impact on Compact Region Objectives. Metro Vancouver noted that the subject site is located outside of the Regional Growth Strategy Urban Containment Boundary, They noted that sufficient residential capacity to meet the region's needs is available within the Urban Containment Boundary, and asked Delta to explain why an expansion of the Urban Containment Boundary is necessary and how the expansion will help achieve Goal 1 of Creating a Compact Urban Area. While the subject site is outside of the Urban Containment Boundary, it is located within one of Delta's three urban communities and separated from the majority of Delta's agricultural lands, The area that is proposed to be developed on the west portion of the site has existing residential development to the north, south and west of it, The area that is proposed to be developed on the east portion of the site is in close proximity to residential development in Boundary Bay, which is located to the east of the subject site. The road and transit network traverse through this site because of its central location within the community, While this proposal would result in increased urban area within the Urban Containment Boundary, Tsawwassen would remain a compact urban area. The proposed development would provide an opportunity to make Tsawwassen a more complete community by providing more housing options for diverse needs and more population to support commercial uses and employment In this local centre. The proposed development would also create the opportunity to strengthen the connection between the urban and agricultural communities and emphasize the importanceof agriculture, given the significant agricultural component of this proposal. Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 54 - Attachment C Page 2 of 3 impact on agricultural land base and agriculture economy of the region Metro Vancouver noted that Strategy 2.3 of the Regional Growth Strategy focuses on protecting the existing supply of agricultural land and promoting agricultural viability, and asked Delta to explain how these objectives will be met. The entire Southlands site is designated Agrlcultuic, in the Regional Growth Stratecy and Delta 's Official Community Plan and zoned Al Agriculture, As part of the applicakionI the owner is proposing to give Deity approximately 80 percent of the site, including 110 ha (274 ac) of land that would be zoned. Al Agriculture. If the application is approved and the lands become publicly owned, the Municipality has identified objectives to ensure the lands are In active agricultural use and farmed in a sustainable manner. The lands have not consistently been actively farmed in the past: The proposal includes promoting agricultural viability by enhancing the agricultural capability of the land, Specifically, the owner is proposing to provide a $9 million amenity contribution to Delta, to be put in a special reserve for the sole purpose of improving drainage and providing irrigation to improve and sustain the agricultural capability of the agricultural land that is proposed to be dedicated to Delta. The owner is proposing to lease 1 t3.7 ha (4G ac) of the agricultural land .from Delta, and to enter into an agreement to establish a Delta Community Farm District on these lends. The owner would maintain and provide agricultural programs and subleases to activate agriculture and demonstrate the viability of the Delta Community Farm District within the lease area. The agricultural land that the owner proposes to lease from Delta is located immediately west of the main development area for the Southlands site and will be closely linked to the development and proposed Market Square, community garden and new farm support building, The remaining 91.111 (228 ac) of agricultural land to be given to Delta is proposed to be leased to farmers. The majority of the land is proposed to be leased for larger scale sol•based farming, Farm lease holders would be required to implement and Environmental Farm Plan and adopt Beneficial Management Practices that enhance agricultural sustainability and contribute to a cleaner, healthier environment. Delta would also work with farm lease holdeirs and the Delta Farmland & Wildlife Trust to identify and implement stewardship programs for the longterm benefit of the land and wildlife. Impact on Regional Parks Metro Vancouver staff noted that the subject site is adjacent to Boundary Bay Regional Park, and asked Delta to assess impacts on recreation and conservation values of the park. The owner is proposing, to transfer approximately 80 percent of the subject site to Delta, Including the 12,9 he (31,9 ac} parcel located on the east side of boundary Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 55 - Attachment C Page 3 of 3 Bay Road, which borders the southern portion of the Boundary Bay Regional Park. if the proposal Is approved and the land transferred to Delta, then Delta would consider giving this 12.9 ha (31.9 ac) parcel to Metro Vancouver to help increase the overall size of the Boundary Bay Regional Park and provide additional land to be used for conservation and/or recreation. Further discussion between Delta and Metro Vancouver would be required on this matter. The portion ofi the Southlands site that is proposed to be developed for housing and commerclal uses is all located on the west side of Boundary Bay Road, away from the Boundary Bay Regional Park. This would help to minimize the impacts of the proposed development on the recreation and conservation values of the park. The entire: Southlands site is currently designated Agricultural in the Regional Growth Strategy and Delta's Official Community Plan, is zoned Al Agriculture and could therefore be cleared at any time to use for farming purposes. If the portion of the Southlands site on the east side of Boundary Bay Road was given to Delta, the Official Community Plan designation of the property is proposed to be changed to Environmentally Sensitive Area 3. Permitted uses in this designation Include passive recreation and education activities oriented to an appreciation of the natural environment, and preserving or managing wildlife habitat. iv) Impact on demand for regional services (utilities, transit and roads) The January 5, 2012 letter from Metro Vancouver noted that the subject site is within the Fraser Sewerage Area, Metro Vancouver requested further details on volumes and loadings to determine if there will be an impact on existing and future Sanitary Sewer Overflows within the regional collection system. Delta has no defined Sanitary Sewer Overflow {SSO) points. In general, Delta's sanitary sewer system is well -contained. According to the Engineering Servicing. Executive Summary by Aplin &Martin for the Southlands dated September 21, 2013, the total sanitary flow would be 43.1 I/s, which is included in the Official Community Plan build -out flows for Tsawwassen, G',1QURAENT DEVELOPMENTLu FIlE61LUCO6�1.U0C639GiCOUNGILUULY 29 2013 ftEPORT11STd2NQREADING5REPoftT A77ACHtdENT REGIQNALF'ACTORSTQCQNSIDER,DQCX Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 56 - List of Information Included in Referral Package to Metro Vancouver Attachment D Page 1 of 1 Item Binder Number 1, Cover Letter to Chair Moore from Mayor Lois E Jackson Fdated _. 1 _.._ Januar 14 y 4, 2014 with 4 A ttachme_n_ts_ 2, _ Comment Sheets from Century Group's Public Information Meetings an 2 May 12 and 15, 2012 3, Comment Sheets from The Corporation of Delta's Public Information 3' Meeting, on October 25, 2012 rv� 4, Southlands Correspondence (to Mayor and Council) from October 3, 4 (A) (B) (C) 2011 up toand Including November 16, 2012 5% Southlands Correspondence (to Staff) from October 3, 2011 up to and 5 Including, Noyemberl6, 2012 _._6, Southlands Petitions Received up to and including _ 6 November 16, 2012 7. _ T __-7 Southlands the Facts Form Letters 8. _ Comment Sheets from The Corporation ofD_, ta.__.__�_ -- slte"s Public Information 8 . Meeting on May 30, 2013 9, Southlands Correspondence (to Mayor and Council) from November 17, 9 2012 up to and Including June 14, 2013 10. Southlands Correspondence (to Staff) from November 17 2012 up to and 10 Including June 14, 2013 and Comment Sheets from The Corporation of Deltas Public Information Meeting on October 25, 2012 Submitted After November 16, 2012_ 11. Southlands £orrespondence from June 15 2013 to July 29, 2013 12, Public Hearing; Southlands Correspondence (Received after _11 12 (A) (B) (C) (D) July 29, 2013 up to 12:00_pm noon_ on November 7, 2013 13, Council Reports and Minutes 13 (A) (B) a} Report considered by Council on July 29, 2013 (Item F.01) b) Report considered by Council on October 7, 2013 (Item E,00) c) Memo to Council for Public Hearing on November 8, 2013 d) Report considered by Council on November 8, 2013 (Item A,01) e) Minutes of Public Hearing on October 28, 29, 30 and November 1, 2 and 8, 2013 f) Minutes of Special Meeting on November 8, 2013 g} Video Recording of Special Meeting on November 8, 2013 14, Consultant Reports and Studies (not attached to Council reports) 14 a) Southlands Master Plan Transportation Review by Bunt and Associates - May 14, 2013 b) Environmental Baseline and Impact Assessment by Robertson Environmental Services Ltd. - September 2012 c) Delta Community -Based Farm District: Planning Southlands as a Regionally Significant Model for Metro Vancouver, by Tara Moreau and Kimberley Hodgson - October 2012 d) Southlands Public Design Charrette Assessment of Archaeological Concerns by Arcas Consulting Archaeologists Ltd. - April 30, 2008 Note: Additional information and documents relating to the Southlands application, including copies of presentations, can be found on Delta's webste at www;delta, calsouthlands. g,lcurrent developmeniUu.filesUuQO8Nu006354icaunallMjan 13 2014 reportlatlechment d metro vapcouver binder list of information Included in referral package to metro vancauver,dsacx Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 57 - 5.1 Attachment 2 'roposed RGS Land Use Designation and Overlay Amendments tegional Growth Strategy Amendments for Delta Southlands Properties Expand the Urban Containment Boundary (59.7 hecares) Agricultural to General Urban (59.7 hectares) Agricultural to Conservation & Recreation (42.4 hectares) roduced by Metro Vancouver metrovanmuver anuary28,2014 seitwcranur,sownu+srrn A LIVABLE REGION Rpai.- _, r'lanning and Agriculture Committee - 58 - netrovancouver 5.1 Attachment 3 ............................................................................................-......-.-...._.........................................................._................ _.. 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5H 4G8 604-432-6200 www.metrovancouver.org January 5, 2012 Mr. Mike Ruskowski, Senior Planner The Corporation of Delta 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Delta, BC V4K 3E2 Dear Mr. Ruskowski: Metropolitan Planning, Environment and Parks Tel: 604432-6375 Far:604436-6970 File: CR-07-01-DEL Re: Proposed Official Community Plan Amendment for the Southlands Properties Thank you for your request for comments on the Proposed Official Community Plan Amendment for the Southlands Properties. These are preliminary staff comments only at this stage. Your report notes that the subject lands are designated Agriculture in Delta's Official Community Plan. Your report also notes that an amendment to the Regional Growth Strategy (GVRD Bylaw No.1136, 2010) is required as the subject lands are located within the regional land use designation of Agricultural. An amendment to Delta's Regional Context Statement is also required. We note that the proposal is to amend a portion of the site from the regional land use designation of Agricultural to the regional land use designation of General Urban to accommodate approximately 950 housing units on 43.4 hectares. Additional amendments to the regional Agricultural designation may be required to accommodate Conservation and Recreation uses. If Council wishes to proceed with this application, when submitting Regional Context Statement and Regional Growth Strategy amendments to the Metro Vancouver Board please consider the following regional factors, 1) Impact on compact region objectives: The subject site is located outside of the Regional Growth Strategy Urban Containment Boundary. Noting that sufficient residential capacity to meet the region's needs is available within the Urban Containment Boundary, please explain why an expansion of the Urban Containment Boundary is necessary and how the expansion will help achieve Goal 1 of Creating a Compact Urban Area. 2) Impact on agricultural land base and agriculture economy of the region: Strategy 2.3 of the Regional Growth Strategy focuses on protecting the existing supply of agricultural land and promoting agricultural viability. Please explain how these objectives will be met. 3) Impact on regional parks: The subject site is adjacent to Boundary Bay Regional Park. Please assess impacts on recreation and conservation values of the Park. Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 59 - Mr. Mike RUSkOWSkI, Senior Planner, Delta Proposed Official Community Plan Amendment for the Southlands Properties Paqe 2 of 2 4) Impact on demand for regional services (utilities, transit and roads): The subject site is within the Fraser Sewerage Area. As the council report provides only preliminary information, we will need further details on volumes and loadings to determine if there will be an impact on existing and future SSO's within the regional collection system. We assume TransLink will be commenting on impact on roads and transit services. Please contact me at 604-436-6850 (Christina.DeMarcoC�metrovancouver.org) if you have any questions. Yours truly, Christina DeMarco Regional Development Division Manager CDIms 5605735 Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 60 - 5.1 Attachment 4 Southlands Proposed Land uses / Site Plan { All I A / d i �4 4 r< g r n m I `td AA I It Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 61- 5.1 Attachment 5 GREATER VANCOUVER REGIONAL DISTRICT REGIONAL GROWTH STRATEGY AMENDMENT BYLAW NO. 1203, 2014 A Bylaw to Amend Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Bylaw No. 1136, 2010. WHEREAS the Board of the Greater Vancouver Regional District adopted the Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Bylaw No. 1136, 2010 on the 29th day of July, 2011; NOW THEREFORE, the Board of the Greater Vancouver Regional District in open meeting assembled ENACTS as follows; 1. The "Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Bylaw Number 1136, 2010" is hereby amended by re -designating parts of the subject site from Agricultural to General Urban, extending the Urban Containment Boundary to encompass the General Urban area and re -designating other parts from Agricultural to Conservation and Recreation, as shown in Schedule A of this Bylaw. 2. The official Citation for This bylaw is "Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Amendment Bylaw No. 1203, 2014" This bylaw may be cited as "Regional Growth Strategy Amendment Bylaw No. 1203, 2014." Read a First time this day of , 2014. Read a Second time this day of , 2014. Public Hearing held day of , 2014 Read a Third time this day of , 2014. Reconsidered, Passed and Finally Adopted this day of Paulette A. Vetleson Corporate Officer Greg Moore Chair Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Amendment Bylaw No. 1203, 2014 Page 1 of 2 Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 62 - Schedule A - Map of Subject Site RGS Land Use Designation and Urban' Containment Boundary Amendments Point Roberts Southlands Q Extend the Urban Containment Boundary N PropertiesRedesignate from Agricultural to General Urban City of Delta Redesignate from Agricultural to Conservation & Recreation Greater Vancouver Regional District Regional Growth Strategy Amendment Bylaw No. 1203, 2014 Page 2 of 2 Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 63 - 5.1 Attachment 6 May 15, 20I3 Mayor and Couuacil The Corporation of Delta 4500 Clarence Taylor Crescent Delta, RC WK 3E2 File: LU006390 17T, Iielta C'cammunity Based Farm. Dictrici — Plsnating$outlita�ds a,� a Regionally Significant Model for Metro Vancouver Daar Tvlityoc .lack�n snd Council; It has come to our attention that the report titled, Delta ,Community -used Farm Ptanning Southlands as a Regionally Significant Model ibr Metro Vancouver (CBFDJ has been submitted as part of the South)ands OCP amendment and re -zoning application currently under consideration by the Corporation of Delta. White the Sottthlands i$ not i n Che Agricultural Land Reserve, and thexefdre Uclta is riot required to seek Minister of Agriculture approval for bytaws affecting this area, we wound lIke to inform Delta of our concerns about the report, since it is largely based on calculations From Ministry documents. In Che caverdng letter troTn Centtary Croup that accompanied the report, the applicant stated that the report's purpose was tt� articulate the specifics of haw ;outhlands "can be activated towards the Community-Based Farming Model." However, we feel that toe report does not Include sufficient, reliable information on which to base this significant planning decision. We have discussed these concerns with the report's authors. fJur primary. concerns about the report are listed below, Amore detailed list of concerns is contained ill Schedule Il. First, the report does not include enough details regarding soils, suitable craps, and drainage and 3rrigaClon improvements needed at the site. The CBFD report authors have indicated that: their client requested that they assume that drainage and irrigation needs Tefe*wrse: (604) M30At3 tNek� Adgtess: hlrnlHnvw.af:pov,bc.ca FoaW}a: (644)556-3030 Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 64 - Pabe 2 would be taken care of, Consequently, the report does not capture the costs associated with these items, As the'Southlands Drainage and Irrigation Assessiriene' report commissioned by the Corporation of Delta shows, drainage enhancements (ata cost of $6 rtilllion) and irrigation Improvements (at a cost of $7 million) would be critical to crap production. In his covering letter, Mr. Hodgins offered to pay for the installation of drip irrigation lines using municipal water for Phase 1, but there Is no mention of paying for: drainage improvement costs in Phase 1; the costs of both drainage and irrigation improvements in Pleases 2 and 3; or the actual costs of the metered municipal water used for irrigation in any of the phases. Second, the report utilized the Ministiy of Agriculture'sPianning for Profit $nterprise Budgets to calculate the potential revenue for most of the proposed crop/livestock types. These budgets are in 2002 or 2008 dollars and were intended for individual farm planning at farms of certain scale, using conventional production methods and a mix of wholesale and direct farm marketing, The report did not adjust the dollar amounts for Inflation, or adjust for organic production costs (including higher tabour costs) or lower organic yields, or for product slippage at 1040/o direct farm marketing: If these adjustments had occurred, the report's conclusions about the economic viability of these crop/livestock types would have been significantly different. Third, the costs for hedgerow planting and maintenance (which would be Incurred by the Corporation of Delta in Phase 2 and 3 of the plan) have been significantly underestimated. The report utilized a 2003 California publication and came up with planting costs (for a 4 to S meter wide hedgerow) at $2.36/linear foot, and operating costs of$0.52/linear foot Costs incurred by the Delta Farmland and Wildlife Trust in' planting a 4 metre wide hedgerow in 2012 were $43.1 4/linear foot The Trust's hedgerow maintenance costs are also significantly higher than the reported $0.52/tinear foot. Fourth, we do not suppot't the premise that the puhtc will appreciate agriculture and' become ntore involved withit by living adjacent tv it; particularly sniall-scale, organic plots. Farm operations of all types and sizes will almost certainly utilize machinery and manure, generating a variety of annoyances for Dion-farni nelghbours Including odours and noise. In addition, many farms do not welcome the public, for theft, vandalism, and/or biosecurity reasons. Ministry of Agriculture staff have years of expeHence with the agricultural/urban edge and our research has found that most people like seeing agriculture from a distance. Both farmers and their nonfarm neighbors favour a consistent and clear delineation of activities. The Ministry's "Guide to Edge Planning" recommends establishing vegetated buffers and residential building setbacks to ensure compatibility over time, particularly as individual homeowners and farm businesses change, Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 65 - Page 3 l hail you For taking these concerns intro accouak, Please d6 not hesitate to contacC us if you have further questions about these comments.. Sincerely, f{athleen Zimmerman, M.Sc., P.Ag. Regional Agrologist . Hannah Cavendish -Palmer, M.A. Land Use Planner Cc: Bej-t van Dalfsen, Manager, Strengtliening farming Prs�gram, i3C Ministry of Agriculture Orlando Sclimidt, South Coast Manager, BC Ministry of Agriculture Tara Moreau, Crow Moreau Consulting Kimberley Hodgson, Cultivating Healthy Places Attachment The �outhlan�is site is not ira tla� A,�ricultur��l Land Re 5�-�rve, �ri�� [vela is t��erei'c�r� nc�i: reriuired to seek 1411inlstei of AgriCulture approval four 1:7ylas affecting these lands, The con7ments from the Ministry of Agriculture can the report titled, Delta COrtrOIU17ity- osed Farm District - Planning Southlonds as a Regionally Significant Allodel for tVletry 1lancotwer ha%.1e been i-eceive.d for infonTiation, It is also noted that the info(rrnation sOn-iitted to Deltca by the Ministry of Agriculture has also been sent to the authors of the report that was prepared fc)io Century Group. 8671368 Regional Planning and Agriculture Committee - 66 -