HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-05-02 Workshop Agenda and Reports.pdf
City of Maple Ridge
1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
2. MINUTES
2.1 Minutes of the April 24, 2017 Council Workshop Meeting
3. PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL
4. MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS’ REPORTS
5. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
5.1 Golden Ears SSO Storage Project
• Paul Wilting, P.Eng. Project Manager, East Fraser Servicing & Treatment,
Project Delivery, Liquid Waste Services, Metro Vancouver
COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA
May 2, 2017
6:00 p.m.
Blaney Room, 1st Floor, City Hall
The purpose of the Council Workshop is to review and discuss policies and
other items of interest to Council. Resolutions may be passed at this
meeting, The meeting is live streamed and recorded by the City of Maple
Ridge.
REMINDERS
May 9, 2017
Closed Council Meeting 6:00 p.m.
Regular Council Meeting 7:00 p.m.
Council Workshop
May 2, 2017
Page 2 of 3
5.2 Employment Lands Consultation Outcomes and Next Step Options
Staff report dated May 2, 2017 recommending the amendment of Official
Community Plan Bylaw No. 7299-2016 to designate lands in Area 1: 256 Street
Lands as Industrial Reserve and that an Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw
be prepared to designate lands in Area 2: Lougheed Highway as Industrial and
Rural Residential.
6.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.
6.1 Upcoming Events
See attachment
7.BRIEFING ON OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST/QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL
Links to member associations:
•Union of British Columbia Municipalities (“UBCM”) Newsletter The Compass
o http://www.ubcm.ca/EN/main/resources/past-issues-compass/2016-
archive.html
•Lower Mainland Local Government Association (“LMLGA”)
o http://www.lmlga.ca/
•Federation of Canadian Municipalities (“FCM”)
o https://www.fcm.ca/
Council Workshop
May 2, 2017
Page 3 of 3
8. MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT
9. ADJOURNMENT
Checked by: ___________
Date: _________________
City of Maple Ridge
COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES
April 24, 2017
The Minutes of the City Council Workshop held on April24, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. in the
Blaney Room of City Hall, 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, British Columbia for the
purpose of transacting regular City business.
0BPRESENT
Elected Officials Appointed Staff
Councillor T. Shymkiw E.C. Swabey, Chief Administrative Officer
Councillor K. Duncan K. Swift, General Manager of Parks, Recreation & Culture
Councillor B. Masse P. Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services
Councillor G Robson F. Quinn, General Manager Public Works and Development
Councillor C. Speirs Services
L. Darcus, Manager of Legislative Services
ABSENT A. Gaunt, Confidential Secretary
Mayor N. Read 1BOther Staff as Required
Councillor C. Bell 2BC. Carter, Director of Planning
3BR. MacNair, Manager of Bylaw and Licensing Services
4BC. Balatti, Recreation Manager Health and Wellness
B. Elliott, Manager of Community Planning
S. Murphy, Planner 2
Note: These Minutes are posted on the City Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca
Note: Councillor Shymkiw chaired the meeting as Acting Mayor due to Mayor Read’s
absence
1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
R/2017-131
It was moved and seconded
That the agenda for the April 24, 2017 Council Workshop Meeting be adopted
as circulated.
CARRIED
Council Workshop Minutes
April 24, 2017
Page 2 of 6
2. MINUTES
2.1 Minutes of the March 27, 2017 Council Workshop Meeting
R/2017-132
It was moved and seconded
That the minutes of the Council Workshop Meeting of March 27, 2017 be
adopted as circulated.
CARRIED
3. PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL
4 MAYOR’S AND COUNCILLORS’ REPORTS
Councillor Duncan
Councillor Duncan attended the Connected Cities Dialogues at the SFU Centre
for Dialogue, spoke at the BC Library Conference and attended the annual
Thornhill plant swap.
Councillor Speirs
Councillor Speirs attended the Ridge Meadows Recycling Society Annual
General Meeting, presentations of community grants by the Maple Ridge
Community Foundation and a meeting of the Municipal Advisory Committee
on Accessibility Issues. He participated in a business walk to RST Instruments
and attended the Earth Day event.
Councillor Masse
Councillor Masse attended the Alouette River Management Society Annual
General Meeting, a meeting of the Maple Ridge Arts Council, a ‘Life After
School’ workshop at Thomas Haney Secondary School and an Active
Transportation Committee meeting. He spoke at a Rotary Meeting, attended
the presentation of funds to the Youth Wellness Centre by Chances Casino
and the Pork on the Fork event which also raised money for the Youth
Wellness Centre. Councillor Masse participated in a conference call with the
Justice Department related to community courts and also attended Earth Day
and Science Day.
Councillor Robson
Councillor Robson attended a meeting of the Maple Ridge Arts Council, a
meeting of the Ridge Meadows Recycling Society, the Annual General Meeting
of the Alouette River Management Society and a meeting at the Rotary Club.
He also attended the Maple Ridge Community Foundation presentation of
community grants and numerous meetings with Alouette Addictions.
Councillor Robson participated in the conference call with the Justice
Council Workshop Minutes
April 24, 2017
Page 3 of 6
Department, and attended meetings with the Chair of the Maple Ridge School
Board pertaining to field locations.
Councillor Shymkiw
Councillor Shymkiw attended the Maple Ridge Secondary School Graduate
transition plan sessions and opened the Lawn Bowling Club season.
5. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
5.1 Remedial Action for the Removal of Nuisance Vehicles Located at PID 012-
877-336
Staff report dated April 24, 2017 recommending that wrecked and unlicenced
vehicles at PID 012-877-336 be declared a nuisance and that the Owner
must remove the nuisance vehicles.
R/2017-133
It was moved and seconded
1. That the wrecked and unlicenced vehicles at the property legally
described as PID 012-877-336, Parcel “O” (reference plan 13847) of
Parcel “K” (reference plan 2535) District Lot 433 Group 1 , New
Westminster District be declared a nuisance within the meaning of
paragraph 74 (1) and 74 (2) of the Community Charter;
2. That the Owner must, no later than thirty (30) days after receiving a copy
of this resolution, remove the nuisance vehicles.
CARRIED
5.2 Community Safety Plan
Staff report dated April 24, 2017 recommending endorsement of a process
for the development of a Community Safety Plan.
R/2017-134
It was moved and seconded
That the process for the development of the Community Safety Plan outlined
in the staff report dated April 24, 2017 be endorsed.
CARRIED
Council Workshop Minutes
April 24, 2017
Page 4 of 6
5.3 Leisure Centre Accommodation Plan
Staff report dated April 24, 2017 providing information on mitigating the
impact of the closure of the Maple Ridge Leisure Centre on aquatics users
and staff groups supporting the aquatics operations.
The General Manager Parks, Recreation and Culture and the Recreation
Manager Health and Wellness reviewed the report and outlined discussions
held by staff on providing alternate accommodations to help mitigate the
closure of the pool.
5.4 Options for Regulating Supportive Recovery Homes, Transitional Housing,
Assisted Living Residences and Community Care Facilities
Staff report dated April 24, 2017 providing options for possible regulatory
changes to the City of Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw to address issues stemming
from existing care facilities in the City.
The Director of Planning introduced the topic. She advised on areas where the
City can and cannot regulate care facilities. The Manager of Community
Planning and the Planning Technician gave a PowerPoint presentation
outlining what future regulations may look like once Council direction is
provided. The presentation focused on providing information on unregulated,
unlicensed or unregistered supportive recovery homes, provided examples of
regulations in other municipalities and provided options for the creation of
regulations.
R/2017-135
It was moved and seconded
That staff be directed to prepare bylaw amendments and a Housing
Agreement template to regulate Supportive Recovery Homes and other similar
facilities as identified in Option 1: Creation of Regulations for uses with a
maximum of 10 residents in the Policy and Regulations section of the report
entitled “Options for Regulating Supportive Recovery Homes, Transitional
Housing, Assisted Living Residences and Community Care Facilities”, dated
April 24, 2017.
CARRIED
Councillor Shymkiw - OPPOSED
Council Workshop Minutes
April 24, 2017
Page 5 of 6
6. CORRESPONDENCE
6.1 Upcoming Events
April 29, 2017
8:00 a.m.
Council of Councils – Coast Hotel and Convention Centre,
20393 Fraser Highway, Langley, BC
Organizer: Metro Vancouver Board of Directors
April 29, 2017
11:00 a.m.
Pick Your Passion in Celebration of National Volunteer Week –
Valley Fair Mall, Maple Ridge, BC
Organizer: City of Maple Ridge, Community Services & Valley
Fair Mall
April 29, 2017
6:30 p.m.
Inaugural Gala – St. Luke’s Parish Family Centre Hall, 20285
Dewdney Trunk Road, Maple Ridge, BC
Organizer: Ridge Meadows Multicultural Society
May 1, 2017
6:00 p.m.
13th Anniversary Celebration – Maple Ridge Baptist Church,
22155 Loughheed Highway, Maple Ridge, BC
May 7, 2017
12:00 p.m.
Annual Walk for Alzheimer’s – 100 Newport Drive, Port Moody,
BC
Organizer: Investors Group and Alzheimer Society of BC
May 13, 2017
11:00 a.m.
Haney Farmers Market Opening Day – Memorial Peace Park,
Maple Ridge, BC
Organizer: Haney Farmers Market Society
May 13, 2017
6:00 p.m.
Annual Fundraiser and Citizen of the Year Presentation,
Meadow Gardens Golf Club, 19675 Meadow Gardens Way
Pitt Meadows, BC
Organizer: Maple Ridge Community Foundation
7. BRIEFING ON OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST/QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL
8. MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT
Council Workshop Minutes
April 24, 2017
Page 6 of 6
9. NOTICE OF CLOSED COUNCIL MEETING
R/2017-136
It was moved and seconded
That the Council meeting immediately following this meeting be closed to the
public pursuant to Section 90(1) and 90 (2) of the Community Charter as the
subject matter being considered relates to the following:
Section 90(1)(a) Personal information about an identifiable individual who
holds or is being considered for a position as an employee
appointed by the municipality.
Section 90(1)(e) The acquisition of land or improvements of which council
considers that disclosure might reasonably be expected to
harm the interests of the municipality.
Section 90(1)(g) Litigation or potential litigation affecting the municipality.
Section 90(1)(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.
Any other matter that may be brought before the Council that meets the
requirements for a meeting closed to the public pursuant to Sections 90 (1)
and 90 (2) of the Community Charter or Freedom of Information and
Protection of Privacy Act.
CARRIED
10. ADJOURNMENT - 11:48 a.m.
_______________________________
T. Shymkiw, Acting Mayor
Certified Correct
___________________________________
L. Darcus, Corporate Officer
1
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: May 2, 2017
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2016-448-CP
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: Council - Workshop
SUBJECT: Employment Lands Consultation Outcomes and Next Step Options
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In October and December 2016, two high-level land use assessments were presented to Council
intended to investigate the suitability of the lands located generally to the east and west of 256
Street and north of 128 Avenue (Area 1: 256th Street Lands); and along Lougheed Highway east of
240 Street to the east and west of the Kwantlen First Nation land (Area 2: Lougheed Lands) for an
employment designation.
The outcome of those reports indicated that there was a combined net estimate of 134 ha (330 ac)
of potential industrial land available for redesignation, subject to additional professional studies.
First reading was granted to OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7299-2016 on December 6, 2016 to
redesignate land in Area 1 as a first step in the process. Council directed staff to prepare an OCP
Amending Bylaw to redesignate land in Area 2: Lougheed Lands on October 25, 2016.
For both areas, Council sought early engagement with the community and other agencies. This report
summarizes the outcomes of the public consultation process, as well as the interdepartmental and
intergovernmental referral comments and seeks direction relating to the next steps in the
Employment Lands redesignation process.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1.That staff be directed to amend the OCP Bylaw No. 7299-2016 to designate lands in Area
1: 256th Street Lands as outlined in the report “Employment Lands Consultation
Outcomes and Next Step Options” dated May 2, 2017 as Industrial Reserve and that the
policies include criteria to establish requirements for future development.
2.That Staff be directed to prepare an OCP Amending Bylaw to designate as Industrial and
Rural Residential those lands in Area 2: Lougheed Lands, as outlined in the report
“Employment Lands Consultation Outcomes and Next Step Options” dated May 2, 2017.
BACKGROUND:
The 2012-2014 Commercial and Industrial Strategy (G.P. Rollo and Associates) presented an
industrial land demand forecast based on employment growth, which indicates that Maple Ridge will
require additional industrial lands by 2040. The Strategy identified that, in an effort to foster ongoing
growth amongst the City’s approximately 7,700 industrial-based jobs, there will be demand for
approximately 80 ha (200 ac) of industrial land in Maple Ridge before 2041. The Strategy
5.2
2
emphasized that the City should, in the interim, begin planning for this anticipated long-term growth
by finding additional industrial lands for when the demand for industrial land arrives, noting that
there is time to properly plan.
In pursuit of this direction, Council instructed staff to investigate a number of sites to assess their
suitably as employment-generating land uses. Specific options were identified for further
assessment as future industrial land supply.
On April 18, 2016, Council received an update on the status of these potential future employment
sites (see Inset map). Through an iterative and analytical process, including on-going dialogue and
conversations with Council, two areas were identified and pursued as potential future employment
sites. These sites are now called Area 1: 256th Street Lands and Area 2: Lougheed Lands.
Area 1: 256th Street Lands
The Commercial and Industrial Strategy (endorsed
August 15, 2014) analyzed lands in the 256th
Street area. At the time the Strategy was
developed it was thought that the distance to
major arterials from 256th Street was a hindrance,
and the area was viewed as being a long term
employment location (e.g. to be developed once
other areas were at capacity). However, market
conditions appear to have changed, as both
Business Parks in the vicinity of these lands are
now sold out.
3
Based on the previously reported high level analysis and given the improved interest in this area, a
redesignation could increase employment potential in the community by adding an additional 153
ha (378 ac) of currently designated Suburban Residential and Institutional lands. Of which, after
accounting for topography and known watercourses, approximately 75% appear to be viable for
development, regardless of designation.
In September 2016, Council authorized staff to begin preparing an amending bylaw to redesignate
the 256th Street Lands to Industrial from Suburban Residential and Institutional in the Official
Community Plan. First reading was granted to OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7299-2016 on December 6,
2016 to redesignate land in Area 1: 256th Street Lands as a first step in the process.
Area 2: Lougheed Lands
At the April 2016 workshop, Council requested that staff prepare a report on the suitability of the
lands west and east of the Kwantlen First Nation, towards outlining possible implications stemming
from any future land use redesignation.
The Lougheed Lands, when combined, represent
over 73 ha (180 ac) of currently designated
Suburban Residential land. Both sites located
east and west of the Kwantlen First Nation lands
are comprised of multiple individual properties
and encompass rail and highway rights of way.
Both sites are located outside of the Urban Area
Boundary and are neither within the Metro
Vancouver Urban Containment Boundary nor
within the Fraser Sewerage Area.
Based on the high-level land use assessment
undertaken for the October 17, 2016 report, it
appears that any development of the Lougheed
Lands will face certain challenges and
requirements regardless of designation. Specifically, a number of known environmental and site
considerations were identified that could limit the resulting redevelopment areas (for both the west
and east lands) to approximately 21% to 27% of their current gross land area.
Acknowledging these issues, the resulting 19 ha (46 ac) of developable land identified through the
analysis highlights an opportunity to achieve, in part, the City’s identified need for approximately 80
ha (200 ac) of employment-generating lands. Specifically, the potential for synergies with
surrounding commercial and industrial land uses along with the proximity of the lands to road and
rail transportation and the Fraser River, suggest that the sites in question are suitable for
employment-generating land use activities. As a result, Council directed staff to prepare an OCP
Amending Bylaw to redesignate land in Area 2: Lougheed Lands on October 25, 2016.
In light of both the challenges and the employment potential within the Area 1: 256th Street Lands
and Area 2: Lougheed Lands, Council also sought timely engagement and dialogue with the land
owners and local community. This consultation took place in early 2017 and is detailed further in the
following sections of this report.
4
CONSULTATION SUMMARY:
Public outreach activities undertaken in January and February 2017 included a series of focus group
meetings that targeted land owners as well as a public open house for Maple Ridge residents at
large. A questionnaire was also developed and made available in person at the outreach events and
online. Interdepartmental and intergovernmental referrals also took place.
i) Focus Groups:
A total of four focus groups were held over January and February 2017, two for each area under
consideration.
The focus groups for the Area 1: 256th Street Lands were held at Webster’s Corner
Elementary on January 23, 2017 and January 26, 2017 for a two hour period (5:00 pm –
7:00 pm and 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm, respectively). Invitations to participate were mailed to
approximately 33 land owners, and a total of 17 participants attended over the two focus
group sessions.
The focus groups for the Area 2: Lougheed Lands were held at Samuel Robertson
Technical School on January 31, 2017 and February 2, 2017 for a two hour period (5:00
pm – 7:00 pm and 6:00 pm – 8:00 pm, respectively). Invitations to participate were
mailed to approximately 43 land owners, and a total of 27 participants attended over the
two focus group sessions.
Copies of the focus group presentations were posted on the City’s website and are available in
Appendix A.
ii) Public Open House:
A public open house was hosted at City Hall on February 6, 2017 from 4:00 pm to 8:00 pm. The
meeting was well attended, with a total of 85 people opting to sign in and a visual estimate that
approximately 100 residents attended. Notification and advertising for the event was conducted
through the use of approximately 374 mailed letters, three newspaper advertisements, as well
as a listing on the City’s website and social media outlets. Following the event, the open house
presentation boards were made available on the City’s website and are available in Appendix B.
As this event was held on an evening during a winter weather event, staff posted an invitation on
the City’s website to contact staff to make other arrangements for those unable to attend the
open house. A few phone calls were received by interested residents looking for information.
iii) Community Questionnaire:
The Community Questionnaire was developed as a tool to determine the level of community
support for the lands under consideration for Industrial redesignation. The questionnaire also
sought to capture the community benefits and challenges inherent to creating new employment
lands as perceived by impacted land owners and Maple Ridge residents.
Paper copies were provided to participants at all of the focus group events and at the public
open house. The questionnaire was also available on the City’s website and promoted via social
media. Responses were received until February 20, 2017. In total, 100 questionnaires were
received. A detailed summary of the questionnaire responses is provided in Appendix C.
5
The questionnaire consisted of 19 questions, primarily in multiple choice format with two
opportunities for open ended written comments. There were five sections to the questionnaire:
Getting to Know You (4 questions), Supporting Jobs Close to Home (6 questions), Level of
Support (3 questions), Advantages and Disadvantages (4 questions) and Other Initiatives (2
questions).
iv) Interdepartmental Referrals:
The interdepartmental referrals process involved several City departments to assess the
potential impacts of guiding documents including the Five Year Financial Plan, the Parks Master
Plan, and the Economic Development Plan.
v) Intergovernmental Referrals:
Intergovernmental referrals were sent to Metro Vancouver and the Greater Vancouver Sewerage
& Drainage District for comment on the consistency with the Regional Growth Strategy. The
Katzie and Kwantlen First Nations as well as the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure,
Justice Institute of B.C., and the Canadian Pacific Railway also received formal referrals.
COMMUNITY CONSULTATION OUTCOMES:
The following consultation outcomes incorporate discussion, dialogue and feedback received
through the focus groups, Open House, Community Questionnaire and Interdepartmental &
Intergovernmental referrals.
i) General Feedback
In general, from the various in-person conversations held at the many focus group sessions and
at the public open house, and from the completed questionnaires submitted, there appears to
be a strong level of agreement with the intents and objectives of the current employment lands
redesignation process. More specifically, the focus group participants recognized the benefits of
having more local jobs within the community and how additional employment lands can address
that need. As well, there was recognition that low impact light industrial uses (over heavy
industrial uses) in the proposed redesignation areas might better suit the close proximity of such
areas to existing residential neighbourhoods.
At the Open House, the public indicated support for local initiatives that could support ongoing
job creation in the City, in particular for those efforts that would allow people to live and work
within the community. Other general comments raised included interest in industries that could
support a fair quality of life for employees and that would provide as many jobs as possible, given
the land area under consideration. The public also indicated support for the creation of future
employment lands where they can be easily accessed from major transportation routes.
While more discussion about each designation area is provided below, the submitted responses
from the questionnaire revealed support for the principle of creating new employment lands. As
evidence, the questionnaire results show that the statements below rated highly amongst
participants:
Maple Ridge should proactively create new employment lands to foster local job
opportunities;
Growth in employment generating lands should keep pace with regional demand;
6
Creating local jobs contribute to a healthier community;
The ability for residents to live and work in their community is desirable; and
Employment generating lands help diversify the tax base.
To get a feel for what the City could do to further help support the creation of job creation
opportunities, either as part of the current redesignation process or through future efforts, the
three most commonly indicated initiatives drawn from the questionnaire were:
Invest in capital projects that improve infrastructure;
Work with existing industrial land owners to better utilize current employment lands; and
Re-zone land to be construction ready for industrial purposes.
While general support for the employment lands redesignation process were revealed through
the community conversations and written and online submissions, the degree to which such
sentiments translate into support for the individually proposed areas varied considerably. As a
result, staff have broken down the feedback received for each area to better describe the
community’s perspectives and interests.
ii) Area 1: 256th Street Lands
a) Focus Group Feedback
In terms of the Area 1 lands, a range of possible challenges and constraints about their
proposed redesignation were discussed. The issues most commonly cited were related to
traffic safety and noise. Other concerns included perceived impacts on nearby residential
land values and property taxes as well as a desire to maintain the rural character of the
area. It was observed that such concerns stem from the industrial operations presently
active in the area, and while not specific to the introduction of new employment
opportunities, it was felt that such existing conditions would be exacerbated by the
expansion of industrial activities. Noting that, focus group participants proposed that the
redesignation process include triggers to clarify the anticipated timeline for
redevelopment and outline any appropriate conditions under which future employment
land development may take place in the 256th Street area.
b) Open House Feedback
Through a series of opportunities to provide written comments and in conversations with
attending staff, participants at the open house identified a range of possible challenges
and constraints about the proposed redesignation of employment lands in Area 1, which
included:
Negative noise impacts from excessive truck traffic and gravel extraction on the
existing residential neighbourhoods, including Whispering Falls;
The amount of truck traffic on local roads at the current level of industrial
development;
With additional industrial development, the possible exacerbation of the negative
impacts of truck traffic on the local roads and neighbourhoods;
7
Upgrading street infrastructure to effectively protect non-vehicular users from
road safety issues including poor visibility and excessive speeds;
Being able to safely share the road between pedestrians, equestrians, regular
vehicles and truck traffic;
Improved intersection design at the intersection of 256th Street and Dewdney
Trunk Road for those wishing to safely access Webster’s Corner Elementary;
The proximity of residential development and any potential negative impacts on
future property values that the proposed employment lands may have;
Improved servicing connectivity; and
Negative environmental impacts, including contamination and drainage
concerns.
c) Questionnaire
For Area 1, 40% of respondents support or strongly support the proposed land use
changes for the area. A similar number, 43%, do not support or strongly do not support
the proposed land use changes. The remaining 17% indicated neutrality about the
proposed changes for the 256th Street Lands.
Through the questionnaire, respondents took the opportunity to articulate their
comments or concerns for Area 1: 256th Street Lands. Key messages included:
Concern with existing traffic issues (e.g. excess speeds, truck traffic, safe
streets);
Frustration with the existing infrastructure deficits (e.g. sidewalks, road design,
servicing constraints);
Concern over the proposed expansion of gravel extraction activities, given
existing neighbourhood concerns;
That identified issues will increase with further industrial land designation;
Concern with protecting the environment given the potential impacts future
development may have on local watercourses and wildlife;
Environmental protection;
Proposed employment land designation may alter the rural lifestyle currently
enjoyed and sought after in the area; and
Desire to understand how the Abernethy Connector may impact truck traffic in
the Area 1: 256th Street Lands.
Of a range of possible advantages and disadvantages related to the proposed
employment lands redesignation, the most commonly identified advantages for the Area
1: 256th Street Lands were:
Planning ahead provides time to invest in future infrastructure improvements;
Provides the opportunity for existing businesses to expand in the same area; and
8
Large parcels address regional shortage of large-scale industrial opportunities.
A number of respondents (25) did indicate that they did not see any advantages to the
proposed changes in land use designation for Area 1: 256th Street Lands. While others
(16) provided qualified responses citing their overall support or concerns.
The most commonly identified disadvantages for the Area 1: 256th Street Lands were:
Increases in traffic; and
Impacts to environmentally sensitive areas.
A small number (7) of respondents did not see any disadvantage to the proposed change
in land use designation for Area 1; however, nearly two dozen additional comments were
provided with this question. The comments are available in Appendix C.
d) Additional Written Feedback
Three additional letters and one email have been received by Staff regarding the
proposed redesignation of Area 1: 256th Street Lands. Two letters received from resident
land owners have articulated their reservations and concerns for the redesignation of
Area 1: 256th Street Lands citing access, servicing and infrastructure deficiencies; one
resident wrote that the proposed Industrial redesignation is a downgrade from the
current land use designation. One letter and one email received from resident land
owners support the redesignation of the Area 1: 256th Street Lands and call for action by
the City. Copies of these letters are available in Appendix D.
iii) Area 2: Lougheed Lands
a) Focus Group Feedback
Focus Group participants explored the suitability of Area 2: Lougheed Lands for
employment purposes by discussing the interface of industrial and residential
development as the groups were interested in exploring a full range of possible
employment uses for the area. Options discussed included commercial uses, educational
facilities and institutional operations. Concerns over the impact of the steep slopes and
the necessary servicing standards for industrial development were also covered.
Focus Group participants also discussed how the proposed employment land
redesignation would impact the existing residential properties located along the Fraser
River on River Road, south of the Lougheed Highway - including changes in land values
and property taxes. As well, insights were offered by the owners of these residential
properties about the soil conditions and especially the slopes in the area, suggesting on-
site soil stability be further assessed. It was also noted that the residential lands south of
Lougheed Highway have relatively high property values compared to the rest of Area 2,
raising questions about whether future industrial development of these residential
properties would be financially feasible now or in the future.
9
b) Open House Feedback:
As noted for Area 1, the public expressed a similar overall level of support for Area 2 as it
was viewed as a local initiative that could lead to local investment, job creation, and less
commuting time. Building from that perspective, a range of possible challenges and
constraints about the proposed redesignation of Area 2 were also identified by the
attendees, which included:
Improved road design related to access challenges should future MoTI
infrastructure improvements be implemented;
The proximity of residential development and any potential negative impacts on
future property values that the proposed employment lands may have;
Improved servicing connectivity; and
Negative environmental impacts, including contamination and drainage
concerns.
c) Questionnaire Feedback
The questionnaire solicited feedback specific to the proposed employment land re-
designation of Area 2: Lougheed Lands. For Area 2, 61% of respondents support or
strongly support the proposed land uses changes for the area. A smaller number, 27%,
either do not support or strongly do not support the proposed land use changes. The
remaining 11% indicated neutrality about the proposed changes for the Lougheed Lands.
Participants were also offered the opportunity to provide additional comments about
Area 2: Lougheed Lands, with most responses to this question outlining participant
visions or concerns for Area 2. Again, a detailed summary of the responses is provided in
Appendix C; however common themes include the following:
Area 2: Lougheed Lands was often noted as being on a major transportation corridor
and more ideally suited when compared to Area 1: 256th Street Lands;
The area where the land meets the Fraser River, especially at the foot of 240th Street,
was noted as being a good location for an additional waterfront/park community
amenity and/or community beautification efforts;
The perceived loss of the rural lifestyle currently enjoyed in this area; and
There was broad concern about environmental protection and the development
impact on watercourses and wildlife in each area.
The most commonly identified potential advantages for the redesignation of the Area 2:
Lougheed Lands were:
Takes of advantage of proximity to already established employment lands;
Preserves land for future employment investment;
Provides the opportunity for existing businesses to expand in the same area; and
Planning ahead provides time to invest in future infrastructure improvements.
10
A number of respondents (11) did not see any advantages to the proposed employment
land redesignation of Area 2: Lougheed Lands.
The most commonly identified disadvantages for the Area 2: Lougheed Lands reflected
some of the comments heard from the Focus Groups and at the Open House, including:
Impacts to environmentally sensitive areas; and
Existing infrastructure needs improvement.
A larger number (15) of respondents did not see any disadvantage to the proposed
change in land use designation for Area 2.
e) Additional Written Feedback
One email was received by Staff regarding the proposed redesignation of Area 2:
Lougheed Lands. The letter articulated similar reservations to those mentioned above,
identifying concerns and overall lack of support for the redesignation of Area 2:
Lougheed Lands. The letter is available in Appendix D.
INTERDEPARTMENTAL AND INTERGOVERNMENTAL OUTCOMES:
i) Engineering Department:
The Engineering Department reviewed the servicing requirements for both areas. As Area 1:
256th Street Lands is partially in the Fraser Sewerage Area, a sanitary sensitivity analysis is
required to determine the capacity limit for industrial development. A sanitary sewer sensitivity
analysis to assess system capacity would be reserved as a future work item for either the
Engineering Department or a qualified consultant. An assessment of the Strategy Transportation
Plan and the possible access routes for Area 1 are anticipated as part of the 2017 Business
Plan.
For Area 2: Lougheed Lands, with the water distribution system boundary currently at 240th
Street, expansion of the water system to service any future land uses located on the westerly -
oriented lands may be accomplished through new development, at a cost to the developer.
Extending water services to the east of the Kwantlen First Nation lands is attainable, providing
the extension occurs in a logical and phased manner. Provision of sanitary services to Area 2 is
not possible without amendments by Metro Vancouver and the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and
Drainage District to the Regional Containment Boundary and Fraser Sewerage Area boundary
respectively.
ii) Finance Department:
The Finance Department reviewed the proposed land use changes for both areas in terms of
impact on the Financial Plan. The outcome of that review is that there is likely no impact on the
Financial Plan’s five year budget as a result of the land use changes. In the long term, there is
potential for a favorable impact as a result of more intensive development and property tax
revenues. Impacts to the Financial Plan would be triggered by necessary capital servicing and
infrastructure requirement, which have not been identified at this time.
11
iii) Parks, Recreation and Culture:
The Parks, Recreation and Culture Department evaluated the proposed redesignation of both
areas to determine potential impacts on the Parks Master Plan. The Parks Master Plan identifies
desired trail networks in these areas, and the development of these routes would be required
regardless of the land use designation.
iv) Economic Development Department:
The Economic Development Department has reviewed the proposed re-designation of both areas
and has noted that land in the Area 1: 256th Street Lands is likely more suitable and desirable
for industrial development; however, this is anticipated to be in the long term and lower job
density industries such as warehousing and storage will likely seek out this location. Industrial
development in this area will be closely tied to improvements in the transportation network and
sanitary sewer availability.
The Economic Development Department noted that the industrial land development potential in
Area 2: Lougheed Lands will be challenged by higher development costs due to the significant
topographic challenges. The possible integration of some highway commercial uses may be more
favourable for Area 2 given the location along the Lougheed Highway.
v) Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure:
Lougheed Highway east of 240th Street falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of
Transportation and Infrastructure; therefore, comments from the Ministry were requested in
regards to Area 2 only. The Ministry has indicated that a concrete barrier will divide Lougheed
Highway east of 240th Street in the future, which will restrict the traffic movements on both sides
of the highway to right-in and right-out movements.
vi) Metro Vancouver:
The Growth Management Division of Regional Planning at Metro Vancouver has reviewed the
proposed amendments and is in support of the proposed redesignation given the identified
pressure for industrial land conversion. Following a meeting with Staff in early March, Metro
Vancouver has expressed an interest in supporting Maple Ridge’s long term vision for both
areas.
For Area 1: 256th Street Lands, Metro Vancouver has noted that while small-scale industrial land
uses are aligned with the current regional designations of Industrial and Rural land uses, there is
interest to see more of the area redesignated entirely as Industrial under Metro 2040. Metro
Vancouver also appreciates that future study may be required to determine what, if any,
upgrades to the sewage collection system would be required to accommodate new industrial
development.
Similarly, for Area 2: Lougheed Lands, Metro Vancouver has expressed an interest in
redesignating the lands from Rural to Industrial and amending the Metro 2040 Regional Growth
Strategy.
In both instances, any such amendments to the Regional Growth Strategy would require an
amendment to the Region’s Urban Containment Boundary in addition to the land use designation
amendment.
12
vii) First Nations:
Representatives from the Kwantlen and Katzie First Nation have been contacted to provide
comments on the proposed redesignation. Staff met with representatives of the Kwantlen First
Nation in mid-April to discuss the proposed redesignation of Area 1: 256th Street Lands and Area
2: Lougheed Lands.
Regarding Area 1: 256th Street Lands, Kwantlen First Nation representatives expressed concern
over the health impacts to the watershed given the proposed redesignation and potential
development opportunities. Given the proposed gravel extraction, representatives would be
interested in furthering environmental protection and remediation opportunities.
For Area 2: Lougheed Lands, Kwantlen First Nation representatives appreciate the potential
synergies between the Kwantlen First Nation interests’ in the development of IR #5 and the
City’s proposed redesignation. Representatives are interested in being kept apprised of the
City’s initiatives within both areas.
While comments were sought from the Katzie First Nation, no formal comments have been
received at this time.
viii) Justice Institute of BC:
The Justice Institute of BC currently operates a campus in Area 1: 256th Street Lands. An
invitation to participate in the consultation process was provided to this stakeholder by way of a
mailed letter and follow up phone call. While comments were sought from the Justice Institute,
no formal comments have been received to date.
ix) Canadian Pacific Railway:
The Canadian Pacific Railway has commented that industrial land uses are more appropriate and
desirable than residential uses in Area 2: Lougheed Lands given the proximity of the train tracks;
therefore there is support from Canadian Pacific Railway for the proposed land use
redesignation.
DISCUSSION
Community outreach initiatives have clearly revealed the importance of designating future
employment lands and the desire to explore a full range of possible employment uses. Community
members and stakeholders recognize the benefits of supporting local job growth within the City.
Interest in developing employment generating lands was also demonstrated to be strong.
The level of support received specifically for Areas 1 and 2 is less clear. For ease, the following
discussion has been structured by area under consideration.
i) Area 1: 256th Street Lands
Area 1: 256th Street Lands offers potential for future employment uses and job creation within
the City, augmenting an existing employment node. However, initial dialogue and outreach has
highlighted many public concerns about the existing industrial context and raises more questions
that require further analysis.
13
Specifically, community outreach with residents, land owners and stakeholders captured a
recognition of the need for employment generating land within the City and highlighted the
community’s interest in future opportunities for local job creation. Area 1: 256th Street Lands
could represent approximately 115 ha (284 ac) and could contribute to building and supporting
the identified future industrial land base requirements, as noted in the Commercial and
Industrial Strategy.
At the same time, community dialogue raised some concerns that would benefit from further
assessment before possible industrial redevelopment occurs within the Area 1: 256th Street
Lands. Notable amongst the issues raised by the public is the matter of access, with many of the
identified issues related to traffic, noise and road design stemming from the overarching
concern. Staff acknowledges that as part of the 2017 Business Plan that an assessment of the
Strategic Transportation Plan and the possible access routes for Area 1 are anticipated this year.
It is also recognized that additional studies, such as those related to potential servicing
requirements and implications related to any possible adjustment to the Fraser Sewerage
Boundary, could further inform the future needs of Area 1.
Acknowledging that such further assessments have been identified, and picking up on
comments stemming from the focus groups related to Area 1, staff believe there is merit in still
pursuing a redesignation of these lands, but one towards an Industrial Reserve designation for
Area 1. Such a designation could identify the lands for a long-range industrial future in the OCP
while also providing policy directions and possibly identify thresholds to determine the timeline
for release of such lands for development uptake. In doing so, this approach could address many
of the raised community concerns and provide a greater level of certainty regarding the
conditions under which redevelopment might occur. As well, the introduction of an Industrial
Reserve designation could slow or prevent the expansion of Suburban-Residential interests in
this existing employment node. Staff notes that the creation of an Industrial Reserve designation
could be similar in nature to the already established Urban Reserve for the Thornhill area.
Staff therefore recommends amending the OCP Bylaw No. 7299-2016 to redesignate Area 1:
256th Street Lands as Industrial Reserve for future employment use at this time. Staff will
develop the policy base and criteria that would inform the possible triggers for a new Industrial
Reserve designation. Criteria could include necessary servicing studies, buffering and noise
attenuation, transportation and access assessments, gravel reserve review on the subject lands
and the identification of environmentally sensitive areas. Such further assessments and policy
development work would be reported back to Council as a separate report with the amending
bylaw.
With an Industrial Reserve, an OCP Amendment, including a Public Hearing, would be required in
the future to move land within the Industrial Reserve to an Industrial designation for employment
purposes. In addition to providing opportunity for public comment, future employment uses will
only be considered once all the identified policy triggers have been met.
ii) Area 2: Lougheed Lands
The Area 2: Lougheed Lands, if redesignated, do present the potential for future job creation in
an already established employment area. Based on the feedback from the community, land
owners, and stakeholders, there appears to be clearer support for the redesignation of Area 2 for
employment lands. A key area of uncertainty raised by the public however, related to whether the
14
residential properties present along River Road, south of the Lougheed Highway, warrant
inclusion within any redesignation Bylaw going forward.
Staff see the benefit that these residential properties present to an employment future, namely,
their proximity to the Fraser River and Lougheed Highway. However, based on the community
feedback received, greater issues related to the environmental condition of these sites were
revealed. Noting this area, in general, is already impacted considerably by environmental
conditions, such new insights related to the existing site conditions of the residential properties
would likely further reduce the overall potential of 19 ha (46 ac) that could be created across the
entire Area 2. Staff also acknowledge the existing level of property improvement inherent to
these properties as identified by BC Assessment, as a further challenge to their redevelopment
towards an employment future.
Based on the feedback received, both in terms of the support for Area 2: Lougheed Lands and
the further questions raised, Staff therefore recommend that an OCP amending bylaw be
prepared for the lands located to the west and east of the Kwantlen First Nation, but that the 7.7
ha (19 ac) of residential property located along River Road be redesignated as Rural Residential.
This approach would provide all current land owners with certainty regarding their properties;
namely that the established residential properties would remain residential and rural in nature,
while the remaining majority of Area 2 would be redesignated towards achieving a long term
future employment node in the City. Staff will prepare and bring forward an OCP amending bylaw
for Area 2 for Council consideration at an upcoming Council meeting.
15
SUMMARY OF NEXT STEPS:
Given the feedback from the outreach activities covered in this report, the recommended next steps
have been broken down by area, and include.
i) Area 1: 256th Street Lands Next Steps
1. Revise and proceed with OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7299-2016 to designate Area 1:
256th Street Lands as Industrial Reserve and include criteria on servicing, buffering and
noise attenuation, transportation and access, gravel reserves and environmental
protection.
ii) Area 2: Lougheed Lands Next Steps
1. Proceed with preparation of OCP amending bylaw for Area 2: Lougheed Lands,
incorporating the Industrial and Rural Residential designation.
ALTERNATIVES:
Should Council wish to proceed in a different manner than the next steps outlined above, alternative
recommendations have been identified:
Area 1: 256th Street Lands
1. That OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7299-2016 be deferred for Area 1: 256th Street Lands,
pending further assessment of capacity and transportation access or adjustments; or
2. That staff not pursue the redesignation of the Area 1: 256th Street Lands towards an
employment future.
Area 2: Lougheed Lands
1. That staff be directed to prepare an OCP Amending Bylaw for Area 2: Lougheed Lands,
encompassing all of the lands located to the west and east of the Kwantlen First Na tion
towards an Industrial designation; or
2. That staff not pursue the redesignation of Area 2: the Lougheed Lands towards an
employment future.
CONCLUSION:
The purpose of this report was to summarize the outcomes of the outreach processes, the
interdepartmental and intergovernmental referral comments and recommend Council direction on
the redesignation of possible employment lands within the City. The redesignation of Area 1: 256 th
Street Lands and Area 2: Lougheed Lands would help contribute up to 126 ha (311 ac) of net land
area for future employment uses and would be a significant step towards meeting the industrial land
requirement identified in the Commercial and Industrial Strategy.
Through consultation with residents and land owners at four focus groups and one public open
house, there appears to be a high level of general agreement amongst residents that setting aside
land now to accommodate local jobs in the future is important to create a vibrant and sustainable
16
community. However, support for the two specific areas proposed for future employment lands is
less clear.
For Area 1: 256th Street Lands, there was limited levels of support for redesignation, based largely
upon existing community concerns related to ongoing industrial activities. For Area 2: Lougheed
Lands the support was stronger, yet equally questions were raised around the acknowledged
environmental and site limiting conditions. The Staff recommendations before Council would permit
the overall employment potential of these two areas to be achieved in part while also preserving
further capacity for future use, subject to certain conditions. Such recommendations would also
address some of the residential issues raised through the Employment Lands consultation process.
“Original signed by Amanda Grochowich”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Amanda Grochowich
Planner 1
“Original signed by Brent Elliott”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Brent Elliott, MCIP, RPP
Manager of Community Planning
“Original signed by Brent Elliott” for
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
“Original signed by Frank Quinn”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E. C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
Appendix A – Focus Group Presentation
Appendix B – Open House Boards
Appendix C – Questionnaire Comments
Appendix D – Additional Letters and Emails
4/24/2017
1
Employment Lands Focus Group
January 2017
October 17, 2016
Outline
1. Overview
2. Background and Context
3. Analysis and Implications
4. Discussion
5. Feedback
Why are we here?
•The City is exploring possible change in land
use designation for a number of properties
around existing employment areas.
•The change will increase opportunities for
local job growth in Maple Ridge and help the
City meet the long demand for more
employment lands.
What is a land use designation?
•A land use designation determines the activities
that can occur on a property.
•Employment generating land uses can include
manufacturing, office, warehousing, education,
transportation, construction, communications,
and more.
•Redesignation will guide long-term future
development options and will not change
currently permitted uses or zoning.
Regional Context
•Metro Vancouver monitors the regional
inventory of industrial lands.
•About 23% (275,000) of the region’s jobs are
found on industrial lands.
•Regionally, there were 28,000 acres of
industrial land in 2015, only 5,586 acres or
20% were vacant.
Regional Context
•Over the 2010-2015 period the net land
absorption was about 188 acres per year.
•The regional supply of industrial land is under
pressure for conversion to uses which have
higher land values.
•As demand for industrial land increases without
new lands we could face a shortage by 2030.
APPENDIX A
4/24/2017
2
Maple Ridge Context
•Maple Ridge’s Official Community Plan establishes
policies that:
•Support the facilitation of opportunities for local
job growth.
•Promote local strengths to a global market.
•Encourage local job creation in order to foster a
balanced community.
•Identify the need for new industrial lands to
provide for future employment.
Maple Ridge Context
•To help guide our employment future, a
Commercial & Industrial Strategy was developed.
•A long-term goal is to accommodate about 42,500
jobs across all employment sectors by 2041.
•This means the City will need between 170 and 230
acres of industrial land for development.
•The City completed a search for lands that could
create long-term employment opportunities.
Albion Industrial Maple Meadows Kanaka/256 St Ruskin/Fraser
160 acres 155 acres 300 acres 113 acres
construction, wood
processing/
manufacturing,
transportation,
warehousing
light industrial,
manufacturing,
warehousing,
automotive
servicing, wood
processing, indoor
commercial
recreation
manufacturing,
warehousing,
forestry
lumber mills,
shingle
manufacturing
1,000 5,600 100 500
Maple Ridge Existing Industrial Areas Maple Ridge Businesses by Sector
•Changes in the
manufacturing,
construction,
wholesale and
education sectors
are increasing
demand for new
employment lands
north of the
Fraser.
Possible Employment Lands Proposed Employment Area #1
4/24/2017
3
Proposed Employment Area #2
Kwantlen First Nation
100 Avenue240 StreetLougheed Highway 256 StreetAnalysis and Implications
1.Topography
2.Watercourses
3. Geotechnical
4. Tree Management
5. Groundwater
6. Stormwater
Management
7. Access
8. Municipal Services
9. Development Potential
Area #1: Analysis and Implications
•The properties are generally level, although
topography changes near watercourses.
•Watercourse setbacks will range from
10m to 30 m.
•Together these environmental considerations
limit the development potential of the lands.
Area #1: Analysis and Implications
•153 ha (378 acres)
of gross land area
•115 ha (284 acres)
appear available
for development
Area #1: Analysis and Implications
•Several gravel extraction operations are
currently active in the area.
•Gravel resources must be removed before
other industrial operations could be permitted.
•Future redevelopment will be required to
assess gravel extraction potential.
Area #1: Surrounding Uses
•Existing Industrial uses north of 128th Ave.
•Kanaka Business Park immediately adjacent.
•Established residential uses along 130th Ave.
•Whispering Falls found in close proximity
further east.
•Justice Institute and Correction Facilities
located to the north.
4/24/2017
4
Area #1: Redesignation Implications
•After environmental factors, 115 ha (284 acres) or
75% of the area remain with development potential.
•Convenient vehicle access may slow redevelopment.
•Further study required at time of development,
including ongoing monitoring of gravel deposits.
•Surrounding Industrial and Resource uses present
synergetic employment opportunities.
Area #2: Analysis and Implications
•Both west and east areas are impacted by
slopes greater than 25%.
•Watercourse setbacks will range from
10m to 30 m.
•Together these environmental considerations
limit the development potential of the lands.
•60 ha (148 acres) of
gross land area.
•16 ha (39 acres)
appears available
for development.
Area #2:
Western Lands
•13 ha (32 acres) of
gross land area
•3 ha (7 acres)
appears available
for development
Area #2:
Eastern Lands
Area #2: Surrounding Uses
•Commercial and Industrial near the western
lands.
•Industrial to the south of the eastern lands.
•Albion Growth Area and ALR to the north.
•Kwantlen First Nation immediately adjacent.
Area #2: Redesignation Implications
•19 ha (46 acres) available for future
redevelopment.
•Resolution of environmental factors key to
development potential.
•Future residential limited to Suburban Residential.
•Opportunities to take advantage of nearby
established commercial, industrial and
recreational areas.
4/24/2017
5
Future Considerations
•Natural Features DP for slopes of 15%.
•Watercourse Development Permit.
•Tree Management Plan/Tree cutting Permit.
•Groundwater Impact Assessment.
•Stormwater Management Plan.
•Agricultural Impacts Assessment.
•Resolve issues related to access and servicing.
Economic Development
•It is estimated that up to 1,250 new direct jobs and
125 indirect jobs could be generated through
200 acres of new industrial lands.
•This could take the form of:
•expansion or relocation of existing operations.
•greater utilisation of current employment areas.
•creation of new businesses.
Economic Development
In terms of land values, based on 2016 BC Assessment,
average assessed land values were:
•Maple Meadows Business Park: $1.3 million per acre, a
16% increase from 2015.
•Kanaka Business Park: $250,000 per acre, close to a
36% increase from 2015.
•Webster’s Corner Business Park, $160,000 per acre, a
24% increase from 2015.
Discussion
•In light of regional and local needs, what is your
level of support for the proposed redesignations?
•What do you see as the benefits and
opportunities from the proposed changes?
•What do you see as possible challenges and
constraints from the proposed changes
We Want to Hear From You
•Questionnaires available:
•Online at www.mapleridge.ca/400
•In print at our event today
•Deadline for Feedback is February 20, 2016
•Provide feedback at anytime:
•By email: employmentlands@mapleridge.ca
•Or phone: 604-467-7493
Next Steps
1.Ongoing Land Owner Focus Groups
2.Public Open House February 6
3. Report back to Council with results
4/24/2017
1
Tonight is about sharing your thoughts on creating Tonight is about sharing your thoughts on creating Tonight is about sharing your thoughts on creating Tonight is about sharing your thoughts on creating
more employment lands in Maple Ridge.more employment lands in Maple Ridge.more employment lands in Maple Ridge.more employment lands in Maple Ridge.
Why are we here?Why are we here?Why are we here?Why are we here?
What is a land use designation?What is a land use designation?What is a land use designation?What is a land use designation?
A Land Use Designation determines the future activities that can
occur on a property. Employment generating land uses can include
manufacturing, office, warehousing, education, transportation,
construction, communications,and more.
Your City Council wants to hear from you about a possible change in
land use designation for a number of properties around existing
employment areas. The change will increase opportunities for local
job growth in Maple Ridge and help the City meet the long demand
for more employmentlands.
W E L C O M EW E L C O M EW E L C O M EW E L C O M E
Employment Lands Open House
What does this mean to my property?What does this mean to my property?What does this mean to my property?What does this mean to my property?
Redesignation is intended to guide long-term future development
options and will not change currently permitted uses or zoning.
Employment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment Lands
Regional ContextRegional ContextRegional ContextRegional Context
•Metro Vancouver has monitored the regional inventory of
industrial lands since 2005.
•About 23% (275,000) of the region’s jobs are accommodated
on industrial lands.
•In 2015, the region had 28,000 acres of industrial land, but
only 5,586 acres or 20% were vacant.
•Demand for industrial land is increasing and without new lands
we could face a shortage in the next 10 to 15 years.
Regional ChallengesRegional ChallengesRegional ChallengesRegional Challenges
•The regional supply of industrial land is under pressure for
conversion to residential and commercial uses, which have
higher land values.
•Conversion of industrial lands can occur through re-designation
or development of non-industrial uses.
•Over the 2010-2015 period the net land absorption was about
188 acres per year.
•At this rate, the vacant land supply will be substantially absorbed
by the 2030s.
Employment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment Lands
Maple Ridge ContextMaple Ridge ContextMaple Ridge ContextMaple Ridge Context
•Maple Ridge’s Official Community Plan establishes policies that:
•Support the facilitation of opportunities for local job growth
•Promote local strengths to a global market
•Encourage local job creation in order to foster a balanced
community
•Identify the need for new industrial lands to provide for future employment
•To help guide our employment future, a Commercial & Industrial
Strategy was developed between 2012 and 2014.
Employment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment Lands
APPENDIX B
4/24/2017
2
Maple Ridge ContextMaple Ridge ContextMaple Ridge ContextMaple Ridge Context
•Based on our Commercial & Industrial Strategy, total employment
on our existing industrial lands as of 2012 is estimated at 7,700
or 29% of all of our local jobs.
•The City’s long-term goal is to accommodate about 42,500 jobs
across all employment sectors by 2041 to support regional
and local growth.
•This means the City will need between 170 and 230 acres of
industrial land for development.
•The City completed a comprehensive search for lands that could
create long-term opportunities and identified a number of
possible parcels to help meet our long-term employment goals.
Employment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment Lands
Albion Industrial Maple Meadows Kanaka/256 St Ruskin/Fraser
160 acres 155 acres 300 acres 113acres
construction, wood
processing/
manufacturing,
transportation,
warehousing
light industrial,
manufacturing,
warehousing,
automotive servicing,
wood processing,
indoor commercial
recreation
manufacturing,
warehousing,
forestry
lumber mills,
shingle
manufacturing
1,000 5,600 100 500
Kanaka/256 StKanaka/256 StKanaka/256 StKanaka/256 St
Ruskin/FraserRuskin/FraserRuskin/FraserRuskin/Fraser
Albion Industrial Albion Industrial Albion Industrial Albion Industrial
Maple MeadowsMaple MeadowsMaple MeadowsMaple Meadows
Employment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment Lands
Existing Maple Ridge Industrial AreasExisting Maple Ridge Industrial AreasExisting Maple Ridge Industrial AreasExisting Maple Ridge Industrial Areas
Area
Employment
Sector
Number
of Jobs
Number of Maple Ridge BusinessNumber of Maple Ridge BusinessNumber of Maple Ridge BusinessNumber of Maple Ridge Business
Employment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment Lands
•Demand for industrial land north of the Fraser River is growing.
•Changes in the manufacturing sector are also increasing demand
for new employment lands:
•smaller production areas are needed
•greater mixing of operations with office space required
•increased importance place on easy vehicle access
•Given rising land prices in the region, wholesalers are looking for
cheaper land in locations servicing eastern Metro Vancouver.
•The construction industry is expected to put more pressure on
existing industrial land.
•Throughout B.C there has been increased development of new
post-secondary facilities in recent years.
Current TrendsCurrent TrendsCurrent TrendsCurrent Trends
Employment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment Lands
4/24/2017
3
AREA 1: 256 Street North of 128 AvenueAREA 1: 256 Street North of 128 AvenueAREA 1: 256 Street North of 128 AvenueAREA 1: 256 Street North of 128 Avenue
LAND AREA:LAND AREA:LAND AREA:LAND AREA: 378 acres
SERVICING: SERVICING: SERVICING: SERVICING: City Water; Combination of Sanitary Sewer and Septic
TOPOGRAPHY:TOPOGRAPHY:TOPOGRAPHY:TOPOGRAPHY: Properties are relatively level, with steep slopes adjacent to
identified watercourses.
ACCESS:ACCESS:ACCESS:ACCESS: Primary vehicle access is currently from 256 Street.
EXISTING LAND USES:EXISTING LAND USES:EXISTING LAND USES:EXISTING LAND USES: Vacant, Residential, Institutional
PROPOSED LAND PROPOSED LAND PROPOSED LAND PROPOSED LAND USES:USES:USES:USES: Rural Resource. This means that all gravel deposits must be
removed prior to any other future industrial uses occurring.
A greenway corridor north of 130 Avenue is proposed to buffer
residential land uses to the south.
The two properties immediately next to existing residential
homes along 130 Avenue are proposed as Suburban and
Estate Residential.
Proposed Employment LandsProposed Employment LandsProposed Employment LandsProposed Employment Lands
AREA 2: Lougheed Highway East of 240 StreetAREA 2: Lougheed Highway East of 240 StreetAREA 2: Lougheed Highway East of 240 StreetAREA 2: Lougheed Highway East of 240 Street
LAND AREA: LAND AREA: LAND AREA: LAND AREA: 180 acres
SERVICING: SERVICING: SERVICING: SERVICING: City Water and Septic System
TOPOGRAPHY: TOPOGRAPHY: TOPOGRAPHY: TOPOGRAPHY: Significant slopes impact the amount of
developable land.
EXISTING LAND USES:EXISTING LAND USES:EXISTING LAND USES:EXISTING LAND USES: Vacant, Residential
SURROUNDING LAND USES:SURROUNDING LAND USES:SURROUNDING LAND USES:SURROUNDING LAND USES: Kwantlen First Nation lands, Albion neighbourhood,
Albion Industrial Business Park and the Albion Flats
study area.
ACCESS:ACCESS:ACCESS:ACCESS: Accessible by a major transportation corridor
PROPOSED LAND USE:PROPOSED LAND USE:PROPOSED LAND USE:PROPOSED LAND USE: Industrial
Proposed EmploymentProposed EmploymentProposed EmploymentProposed Employment LandsLandsLandsLands
Economic DevelopmentEconomic DevelopmentEconomic DevelopmentEconomic Development
•What would an additional 170 – 230 acres of employment lands
mean to the City?
•Based on the number of jobs found in our existing industrial
lands:
•It is estimated that up to 1,250 new direct jobs and
125 indirect jobs could be generated through 200 acres of
new industrial lands.
•This could take the form of expansion or relocation of
existing operations, greater utilisation of current employment
areas, and creation of new businesses.
•Based on 2016 BC Assessment figures, local industrial land
values indicate that:
•In Maple Meadows Business Park the average assessed
land value was just over $1.3 million per acres, a
16% increase from 2015.
•In the Kanaka Business Park the average assessed land
value was just over $250,000 per acre, close to a
36% increase from 2015.
•In the Webster’s Corner Business Park, the average
assessed land value was about $160,000 per acre, a
24% increase from 2015.
Employment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment LandsEmployment Lands
We want to hear from youWe want to hear from youWe want to hear from youWe want to hear from you
Employment Lands
Q:Q:Q:Q:What do you see as the benefits and opportunities What do you see as the benefits and opportunities What do you see as the benefits and opportunities What do you see as the benefits and opportunities
from the proposed changes?from the proposed changes?from the proposed changes?from the proposed changes?
QQQQ::::What do you see as What do you see as What do you see as What do you see as possible possible possible possible challenges challenges challenges challenges and and and and
constraints from the constraints from the constraints from the constraints from the proposed proposed proposed proposed changes?changes?changes?changes?
4/24/2017
4
Questionnaires available:
Online at www.mapleridge.ca/400
In print at our event today
Deadline for FeedbackDeadline for FeedbackDeadline for FeedbackDeadline for Feedback
February 20, February 20, February 20, February 20, 2017201720172017
To provide feedback at anytime please email:
employmentlands@mapleridge.ca
Or phone: 604-467-7493
WeWeWeWe want to hear your thoughtswant to hear your thoughtswant to hear your thoughtswant to hear your thoughts
T H A N K Y O UT H A N K Y O UT H A N K Y O UT H A N K Y O U
Employment Lands Open House
1 of 21
Page 1
Welcome to the Employment Lands Proposed Re-designation questionnaire! Please fill
out the questions below.
Getting to Know You
Are you:
If you are a land owner, do you own land:
Which employment category applies to your current work situation:
Employment Lands
A resident?
A landowner?
Businesss owner in Maple Ridge?
Do not wish to answer
Other Type here
In either of the areas proposed for redesignation?
In the neighbourhood proposed for resdesignation?
Elsewhere in Maple Ridge?
Employed in Area 1 or Area 2
Employed in Maple Ridge, outside of the home and not within Area 1 or 2
APPENDIX C1
2 of 21
If you are currently empoyed, which sector do you work in:
Jobs Close to Home
Please select the level that you agree with the following statements.
Employed in Maple Ridge, home-based business
Employed outside of Maple Ridge
Unemployed
Retired
Do not wish to answer
Other Type here
Construction and Certified Trades
Business and Professional Services
Food and Beverage Services
Manufacturing
Wholesale
Technology
Retail
Transportation
Direct Sales
Do not wish to answer
Other Type here
3 of 21
Question 1
Maple Ridge should proactively create new employment lands to foster local job opportunities.
Question 2
Growth in employment generating lands should keep pace with regional demand.
Question 3
Creating local jobs contribute to a healthier community.
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disgree
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disgree
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disgree
4 of 21
Question 4
The ability for residents to live and work in their community is desirable.
Question 5
Employment generating lands help diversify the tax base.
Question 6
The City should leave the re-designation of new employment lands to private development
applications.
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disgree
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disgree
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
Agree
5 of 21
Neutral
Disgree
Strongly Disagree
6 of 21
Page 2
Proposed Land Re-designation
The following maps show the proposed land use changes for Area 1 and Area 2.
Area 1
Area 2
7 of 21
Question 7
Please select your level of support for the proposed land use changes in Area 1.
Strongly support
Support
Do not support
Strongly do not support
Neutral
8 of 21
Question 8
Please select your level of support for the proposed land uses change in Area 2.
Question 9
Please provide any other comments you have about Area 1 and/or Area 2.
Type here
Question 10
Below are some of the possible advantages of the proposed Area 1 changes. Please rank those
you agree with from most significant (1) to least significant (6). You do not have to rank all of the
options.
Strongly support
Support
Do not support
Strongly do not support
Neutral
9 of 21
Provides the opportunity for existing businesses to expand in the same area
Preserves lands for future employment investment
Takes advantage of proximity to already established employment
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
10 of 21
Planning ahead provides time to invest in future infrastructure improvements
Leads to a more diverse tax-base in the City
Large parcels address regional shortage of large-scale industrial opportunities
OR
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
11 of 21
Question 11
Below are some of the possible disadvantages of the proposed Area 1 changes. Please rank those
you agree with from most significant (1) to least significant (6). You do not have to rank all of the
options.
Existing infrastructure needs improvement
Possible nuisance to nearby residents
Other, please explain Type here
I do not see any advantages to the proposed change in land use designation for Area 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
12 of 21
Increases in amount of traffic
Impacts to environmentally sensitive areas
Long term timeline to provide local jobs
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
13 of 21
Impacts to adjacent agricultural lands
OR
Question 12
Below are some of the possible advantages of the proposed Area 2 changes. Please rank those
you agree with from most significant (1) to least significant (6). You do not have to rank all of the
options.
Provides the opportunity for existing businesses to expand in the same area
1
2
3
4
5
6
Other, please explain Type here
I do not see any disadvantages to the proposed change in land use designation for Area 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
14 of 21
Preserves lands for furure employment investment
Takes advantage of proximity to already established employment lands
Planning ahead provides time to invest in future infrastructure improvments
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
15 of 21
Leads to a more diverse tax-base in the City
Large parcels address regional shortage of large-scale industrial opportunities
OR
Question 13
Below are some of the possible disadvantages of the proposed Area 2 changes. Please rank those
you agree with from most significant (1) to least significant (6). You do not have to rank all of the
options.
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
Other, please explain Type here
I do not see any advantages to the proposed change in land use designation for Area 2
16 of 21
Existing infrastructure needs improvement
Possible nuisance to nearby residents
Increases in amount of traffic
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
17 of 21
Impacts to environmentally sensitive areas
Long term timeline to provide local jobs
Impacts to adjacent agricultural lands
OR
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
18 of 21
Other Initiatives to Create Jobs
Question 14
In your opinion, what other initiatives should the City of Maple Ridge consider in the future to help
support job creation? Rate any of the following that you support from greatest (1) to least (5)
important:
Provide financial incentives for industrial construction
Re-zone land to be construction ready for industrial purposes
Other, please explain Type here
I do not see any disadvantages to the proposed change in land use designation for Area 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
19 of 21
Use marketing and promotional techniques to attract business investment
Work with existing industrial land owners to better utilise current employment lands
Invest in capital projects that improve infrastructure
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
20 of 21
The City should not do anything to support job creation
OR
Question 15
Please use the space below to provide any other comments and feedback not captured in this
questionnaire.
Type here
Thank you for taking the time to provide your feedback, your interest is appreciated.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Other, please explain Type here
21 of 21
Online Survey Software powered by FluidSurveys
A SurveyMonkey Company.
APPENDIX C2
APPENDIX D
From: Harald Mischke [mailto:harald@cedarland.ca]
Sent: January-26-17 5:14 PM
To: 'abowden@mapleridge.ca' <abowden@mapleridge.ca>
Cc: 'belliott@mapleridge.ca' <belliott@mapleridge.ca>
Subject: Commercial and Industrial Strategy
Hi Amelia and Brent.
Thanks for taking the time to talk about our commercial & industrial potential for creating jobs and
income to the City.
Without doubt, there is a wonderful long term opportunity for the City of Maple Ridge to create 1,000
to 2,000 family supporting incomes in the Northern sector of gravel based land. However, without
proper road access this will remain a dream. The Abernethy-Lougheed connector is a must. This is easy
construction. You can utilize the gravel deposits you own to ensure a firm road substructure. Yes, some
home owners will be upset, but I think the 80,000 plus trump the few negative individuals. A possible
route is following the existing AL connector to 240th Str., then heading further east to 128th Ave.( there is
potential that not a single home is levelled) until you are directly south of the land that connects to the
proposed industrial/commercial land (east of 253 A Str.). Pls. keep this land for possible road
access. Brent, this portion of land was designated “residential” on your plan, PLEASE keep it as a
valuable access option. A visit will clarify my suggestion.
The 240th Str. north of Dewdney Trunk should be connected to the AL connector. This would facilitate
truck traffic to the proposed commercial/industrial area coming off Lougheed Hwy. without going east
past two schools and other hazards on Dewdney Trunk. The residence on 256th Str. would love to see no
more heavy truck traffic. Horses will rule the road again.
The area between 249th Str. and 256th Str. should make a first class site for a University
Campus/educational land. Now, the very last parcel of land NOT developed in the present 256th
industrial park is called “the big lake” area. This is NOT industrial land. It’s much too valuable for us
rough necks! I see an institution here that will heal our many members of the “lost community”. This
area has a beautiful lake with a stunning view. Nature may do most of the healing process.
Now, once we have good road access we can go to town. The area north of the existing industrial park
on 256 str. is potentially just as large and suitable for development. This is crown land and should be
included in the long term strategy. As well, the area east of 256 Str. has very good potential. Some of
this land the City owns now and is growing trees instead of making money for the City.
The “Van Maaren” industrial park should be connected to lands between 256th Str. to ease the traffic
pattern and lighten the 128 th Ave. traffic load.
Key to all this is a good road network for heavy truck traffic. Without such a commitment we are not
making Maple Ridge a well- funded prosperous community. With money in your coffers you can do all
the things that, at the present time, will only be covered by increased taxes.
This, to me, is a no-brainer.
Have a nice day.
Harald Mischke
President
14189 256th St.
Maple Ridge B.C. Canada, V4R 1C9
Office: 1.604.462.1210
Fax: 1.604.462.1214
6.1 Upcoming Events
Date: May 1, 2017
Time: 7:00 p.m.
Youth Week 2017: Youth Talent Show, The ACT, Maple Ridge
Organizer: City of Maple Ridge
Date: May 2, 2017
Time: 7:00 p.m.
Youth Week 2017: Summer Plan Slam, Greg Moore Youth
Centre, Maple Ridge
Organizer: City of Maple Ridge
Date: May 3, 2017
Time: 6:00 p.m.
Youth Week 2017: Tournament Night – Greg Moore Youth
Centre, Maple Ridge
Organizer: City of Maple Ridge
Date: May 4, 2017
Time: 6:00 p.m.
Youth Week 2017: 3 on 3 Hockey – Greg Moore Youth Centre,
Maple Ridge
Organizer: City of Maple Ridge
Date: May 5, 2017
Time: 6:00 p.m.
Youth Week 2017: Mentorship BBQ, Thomas Haney Secondary
School, Maple Ridge
Organizer: City of Maple Ridge
Date: May 7, 2017
Time: 6:00 p.m.
Youth Week 2017: Movie/Ice Cream Sundae, Greg Moore
Youth Centre, Maple Ridge
Organizer: City of Maple Ridge
Date: May 7, 2017
Time: 6:30 p.m.
Flamenco Performance, The ACT, Maple Ridge
Organizer: The ACT Arts Centre
Date: May 28, 2017
Time: 9:00 .m.
Walk 4 the Salish Sea, Grandview Park, 1647 Charles St.,
Vancouver
Organizer: Burnaby Residents Opposing Kinder Morgan
Expansion / Walk 4 the Salish Sea
6.1