HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-10-22 Workshop Agenda and Reports.pdfCity of Maple Ridge COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA October 22, 2019 3:00 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. 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. The meeting is live streamed and recorded by the City of Maple Ridge. REMINDERS October 22, 2019 Public Hearing 7:00 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 2. ADOPTION OF MINUTES • October 8, 2019 Council Workshop Meeting • October 15, 2019 Council Workshop Meeting 3. PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL 4. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUS/NESS 4.1 Supportive Recovery Housing Proposed Regulator Approach Staff report dated October 22, 2019 recommending that a Zone Amending Bylaw to regulate supportive recovery housing and facilities be prepared. 4.2 St. Anne Camp Remediation Presentation by the Acting Director, Parks and Facilities
Council Workshop Agenda October 22, 2019 Page 2 of 3 4.3 Proposed Revisions to the Development Permit Process Staff report dated October 22, 2019 recommending that amendments be made to bylaws to improve specific development permit processes. 5. CORRESPONDENCE By Invitation to Mayor and Council Tuesday, October 24 5:30 pm -8:30 pm Saturday, October 26 9:00 am to 12:00 pm Saturday, October 26 10:00 am -2:00 pm Saturday, October 26 6:00 pm -10:00 pm Sunday, October 27 5:00 pm -8:00 pm Love is Fundraising Dinner & Silent Auction for the Prevention of Suicide in Youth. Meadows Gardens Golf Club, 19675 Meadow Gardens Way, Pitt Meadows, BC Host: Community Services, Youth Wellness Centre, Lotus & Lemongrass Metro Vancouver Council of Councils Meeting, Civic Hotel, 13475 Central Ave. Surrey, BC Host: Metro Vancouver Pitt Meadows Plumbing Open House, 20142 1138 Avenue, Maple Ridge, BC Host: Pitt Meadows Plumbing Ridge Meadows Senior's Society 20th Anniversary Celebration, 12150 224 Street, Maple Ridge, BC Host: Ridge Meadows Senior's Society Celebrate the Night, Memorial Peace Park, Maple Ridge, BC Host: City of Maple Ridge General Community Events Saturday, October 26 9:00 am -2:00 pm Saturday, October 26 11:00 am -2:00 pm Sunday, October 27 10:00 am -2:00 pm Sunday, October 27 11:00 am -3:00 pm Haney Farmers Market, Memorial Peace Park, Maple Ridge, BC Host: Haney Farmers Market Trick or Treat, Memorial Peace Park, Maple Ridge, BC Host: Downtown Maple Ridge Business Improvement Association Pumpkin Cross Cycling Event, North Alouette Greenway Park, Maple Ridge Equi-sport Centre, 21973 132 Avenue, Maple Ridge, BC Host: Local Ridge Bike Racing Eat, Drink and Be Spooky, Haney House Museum, 11612 224 Street, Maple Ridge, BC Host: Haney House Museum 6. BRIEFING ON OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST/QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL
Council Workshop Agenda October 22, 2019 Page 3 of 3 7. MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT 8. ADJOURNMENT Approv~~ Date:~~\?\ I Checked by: ~ Date: Checked Date: lo 1, 1'7
2.0 Adoption of Minutes 2.0
----~-City of Maple Ridge COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES October 8, 2019 The Minutes of the City Council Workshop held on October 8, 2019 at 2:20 p.m. in the Blaney Room at City Hall, 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, British Columbia for the purpose of transacting regular City business. PRESENT Elected Officials Mayor M. Morden Councillor J. Dueck Councillor K. Duncan Councillor C. Meadus Councillor G. Robson Councillor R. Svendsen Councillor A. Yousef Appointed Staff K. Swift, Acting Chief Administrative Officer D. Boag, Acting General Manager Parks, Recreation & Culture C. Carter, General Manager Planning & Development Services J. Storey, Acting General Manager Engineering Services L. Benson, Director of Corporate Administration T. Thompson, Chief Financial Officer S. Nichols, Deputy Corporate Officer Other Staff as Required M. Orsetti, Manager of Bylaw & Licensing Services R. Stott, Environmental Planner 2 P. Irani, Manager of Transportation Note: These Minutes are posted on the City Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca Video of the meeting is posted at media.mapleridge.ca/Mediasite/Showcase 1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA R/2019-573 It was moved and seconded That the agenda of the October 8, 2019 Council Workshop Meeting be amended to add Item 7.12019 Federal Candidate Questions and to renumber agenda items to accommodate the arrival of Translink representatives; and further That the agenda as amended be approved. CARRIED 2. MINUTES -Nil 3. PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL -Nil ! I f ~l I'~ i l I
Council Workshop Minutes October 8, 2019 Page 2 of 4 4. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS Note: Items 4.2 and 4.3 have been renumbered to 4.1 and 4.2. Item 4.1 has been renumbered to 4.3. 4.1 Update on Maple Ridge Tree Bylaw Survey and Process Staff report dated October 8, 2019 recommending that the Tree Bylaw Survey and Process be endorsed. The General Manager of Planning and Development Services introduced the topic and provided background information on the item. The Environmental Planner reviewed tree bylaw feedback received from stakeholders and sections of the proposed survey. R/2019-575 It was moved and seconded That the Tree Bylaw Survey as attached to the staff report titled "Update on Maple Ridge Tree Bylaw Survey and Process" dated October 8, 2019 be amended to include only questions 1, 2, 4, and the first sentence of question 10 up to the word "process"; and, That a question be added that is directed to professional contractors relative to their experience with other municipality's permit process. CARRIED Councillor Duncan -OPPOSED 4.2 Department Update -Bylaw and Licencing The Manager of Bylaw and Licencing Services introduced Chad Cowles, Bylaw Compliance Officer Community Safety Patrol to Council. Mr. Cowles provided a brief background on himself and his experience in the role. Ms. Orsetti provided a presentation on Bylaw and Licencing Services and responded to questions from Council. 4.3 Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows Area Transport Plan Staff report dated October 8, 2019 recommending that the Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows Area Transport Plan be endorsed. The Manager of Transportation introduced Sarah Ross, Director, System Planning, Translink and Matt Craig, Senior Planning Manager, Translink.
Council Workshop Minutes October 8, 2019 Page 3 of 4 Ms. Ross introduced Adam Lougheed, Planner and Brian Soland, Senior Transportation Manager and gave a presentation on the Translink Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows Area Transport Plan. She noted that the City of Pitt Meadows has endorsed the plan and outlined the timeline for moving forward. She advised that the rapid bus launch is scheduled for January 6, 2020, Note: Councillor Svendsen left the meeting at 4:20 p.m. and did not return. Staff was given direction to work further with Translink to address questions and concerns raised by Council and to invite Translink to a future meeting. 4.4 Business, Industrial and Farm Property Tax Property Tax Comparisons Staff presentation and report dated October 8, 2019 providing information and comparisons on Business, Industrial and Farm property tax rates. The Chief Financial Officer gave a presentation and responded to questions of Council. Staff was requested to set up a meeting with BC Assessment relative to the mill property prior to business planning. 5. CORRESPONDENCE -Nil 6. BRIEFING ON OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST/QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL -Nil 7. MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT 7 .1 2019 Federal Candidate Questions The Mayor presented the topic areas covered by the draft list of questions for the federal candidates to get commitments on the goals and priorities of Council and the strategic plan. R/2019-576 It was moved and seconded That the Mayor be authorized to work with staff to finalize the questions from Council to the candidates of the federal election; and, That the final list of questions be circulated to Council for review prior to being sent. CARRIED
Council Workshop Minutes October 8, 2019 Page 4 of 4 8. ADJOURNMENT -5:26 p.m. Certified Correct L. Benson, Corporate Officer M. Morden, Mayor
City of Maple Ridge COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES October 15, 2019 The Minutes of the City Council Workshop held on October 15, 2019 at 1:33 p.m. in the Blaney Room at City Hall, 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, British Columbia for the purpose of transacting regular City business. PRESENT Appointed Staff Elected Officials K. Swift, Acting Chief Administrative Officer Mayor M. Morden Councillor J. Dueck Councillor K. Duncan Councillor C. Meadus Councillor G. Robson Councillor R. Svendsen Councillor A. Yousef D. Boag, Acting General Manager Parks, Recreation & Culture C. Carter, General Manager Planning & Development Services D. Pollock, General Manager Engineering Services L. Benson, Director of Corporate Administration T. Thompson, Chief Financial Officer S. Nichols, Deputy Corporate Officer Other Staff as Required C. Goddard, Director of Planning M. Orsetti, Manager Bylaw & Licensing Services Note: These Minutes are posted on the City Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca Video of the meeting is posted at media.mapleridge.ca/Mediasite/Showcase 1. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA R/2019-576 It was moved and seconded That the agenda of the October 15, 2019 Council Workshop Meeting be approved as circulated. CARRIED 2. MINUTES 2.1 Minutes of the October 1, 2019 Council Workshop Meeting R/2019-577 It was moved and seconded That the minutes of the Council Workshop Meeting of October 1, 2019 be adopted as circulated. CARRIED ,-,-' ,_ ,--~l r
Council Workshop Minutes October 15, 2019 Page 2 of 3 3. PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL -Nil 4. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUS/NESS 4.1 Maple Ridge Safer Streets Bylaw No. 7581-2019 Staff report dated October 15, 2019 recommending that the attached report titled "Maple Ridge Safer Streets Bylaw No. 7581-2019" be forwarded to the October 29, 2019 Council meeting. R/2019-578 It was moved and seconded That the attachment to the October 15, 2019 report titled "Maple Ridge Safer Streets Bylaw No. 7581-2019" be forwarded to the October 29, 2019 Council Meeting. CARRIED R/2019-579 It was moved and seconded That staff seek legal advice on extending the 10 metre restriction to all Maple Ridge businesses. CARRIED 4.2 Mayor & Council Communications Policy Staff report dated October 15, 2019 recommending that the Mayor & Council Correspondence Policy No. 3.08 be repealed and that the Mayor & Council Communications Policy be adopted. The Acting Chief Administrative Officer introduced the item. The Director of Corporate Administration gave a presentation on the proposed workflow and answered questions from Council. Staff were directed to review the item with the new Chief Administrative Officer. 5. CORRESPONDENCE 5.1 Upcoming Events Upcoming events were discussed.
-------~...,.~ ---,.,,.___ -~------.-Council Workshop Minutes October 15, 2019 Page 3 of 3 6. BRIEFING ON OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST/QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL 7. MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT 7 .1 2020 Conferences The Mayor announced that the hotel blocks have opened up for the Union of BC Municipalities Conference in Victoria and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities conference in Toronto. 8. ADJOURNMENT -3:54 pm M. Morden, Mayor Certified Correct L. Benson, Corporate Officer
'-------'-TO: FROM: map I er id g e. ca City of Maple Ridge His Worship Mayor Michael Morden and Members of Council Chief Administrative Officer MEETING DATE: October 22, 2019 FILE NO: 2017-231-RZ MEETING: Workshop SUBJECT: Supportive Recovery Housing: Proposed Regulatory Approach EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At the May 14, 2019 Council Workshop, staff were directed to bring back a report on a proposed regulatory approach for supportive recovery housing facilities in Maple Ridge. For the purposes of this report, supportive recovery housing includes transitional housing. This report provides an overview of the proposed three-pronged approach to regulating supportive recovery homes and transitional facilities in Maple Ridge. The report outlines possible zoning amendments as well as potential operating terms for Council consideration. Based on Council comment, staff seek direction to prepare a Zone Amending Bylaw consistent with the regulatory approach outlined in this report to regulate supportive recovery housing and facilities for Council consideration at an upcoming Council Workshop meeting. RECOMMENDATION: That staff be directed to prepare a Zone Amending Bylaw consistent with the regulatory approach outlined in the report titled "Supportive Recovery Housing: Proposed Regulatory Approach" to regulate supportive recovery housing and facilities for Council consideration. BACKGROUND: a) History In April 2016, Council passed a resolution directing staff to present options to regulate care facilities in Maple Ridge. On April 24, 2017, staff provided an overview of this issue in a report to Council. The report included a review of best practices and a scan of local municipal approaches to this issue. Two options were presented; Council chose Option 1 and passed the following resolution: 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. On June 6, 2017, staff presented a report, including a draft Zoning Bylaw Amendment No. 7339-2017, to regulate unregulated private supportive recovery homes and other similar care facilities and a draft Housing Agreement template. Council gave the Zoning Bylaw Amendment No. 7339-2017 First and Second Reading and forwarded it to Public Hearing. The Public Hearing on June 20, 2017 was well attended by community residents and care facility operators. There were 22 speakers, with a number of respondents speaking twice. Approximately 2017-231-RZ Page 1of 11 4.1
half of the comments were supportive of the proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendment and half were opposed. Comments included that the maximum number of permitted residents is too restrictive and that the minimum separation distance is not reflective of existing conditions. It is noted the Zoning Bylaw Amendment was the focus of the Public Hearing and did not include the draft Housing Agreement template. On June 27, 2017, Council considered the Zoning Bylaw Amendment for Third Reading, however, opted to defer Third Reading of Zoning Bylaw Amendment No. 7339-2017. On May 14, 2019, staff presented a summary of the work completed to-date, including an outline of the City's regulatory and policy base for supportive recovery housing in the City, with a focus on Unregulated Private Facilities. At that meeting, Council passed the following resolution: That staff prepare an options report based on Council's identified preferred regulatory directions, as outlined in the report titled "Supportive Recovery Housing: Update and Next Steps", dated May 14 2019, to be brought back to a future Council Workshop. At that meeting, Council indicated a willingness to allow the use in single family neighbourhoods subject to the application of accountability mechanisms. b) Types of Provincially Regulated Facilities The provincial Community Care and Assisted Living Act provides licensing for Community Care facilities and a registration process for Assisted Living Residences. In short, these facilities can be characterized as follows: i. A Community Care Facility is a premises or part of premises in which an operator provides care and housing to 3 or more persons who are not related. A Community Care facility must be licensed under the Community Care and Assisted Living Act. Licensing programs for community care facilities are operated by regional health authorities such as Fraser Health. Those Community Care facilities that contain more than 10 people in care are subject to municipal zoning. ii. A Registered Assisted Living Residence is a premises or part of a premise, other than a Community Care Facility, in which housing, and hospitality services are provided by or through the operator to 3 or more adults who are not related. An Assisted Living Residence must be registered with the Assisted Living Registrar and must comply with municipal zoning. c) Unregulated Private Facilities Missing from the above two types of facilities are the unregulated private supportive recovery homes. Such private facilities may resemble a Community Care Facility or an Assisted Living Residence, in that they offer housing as well as a measure of hospitality services, but may not offer any prescribed services. Such private supportive recovery homes are not regulated under the Community Care and Assisted Living Act and therefore do not require registration under the Assisted Living Registrar or licensing under the Community Care and Assisted Living Act. Such unregulated private facilities are subject to municipal zoning however are permitted under the definition of family (see Section e). Specifically, as private supportive recovery homes can host any number of unrelated people in a shared living arrangement, any regulatory effort intended to focus on such facilities may also unintentionally include other forms of residential living that are premised on sharing a dwelling unit (such as boarding uses, or a group of friends living together). 2017-231-RZ Page 2 of 11
--------~-~--~ ,.~ ... -~y d) Prescribed Services Under the Community Care and Assisted Living Act, facilities are categorized based on the number of prescribed services that are provided over and above the typical housing and hospitality services these facilities inherently represent. Prescribed services are defined as the following by the Community Care and Assisted Living Regulation: i. regular assistance with activities of daily living, including eating, mobility, dressing, grooming, bathing or personal hygiene; ii. central storage of medication, distribution of medication, administering medication or monitoring the taking of medication; iii. maintenance or management of the cash resources or other property of a resident or person in care; iv. monitoring of food intake or of adherence to therapeutic diets; v. structured behaviour management and intervention; and vi. psychosocial rehabilitative therapy or intensive physical rehabilitative therapy. A Community Care Facility provides hospitality services plus 3 or more prescribed services. An Assisted Living Residence provides hospitality services plus 1 but not more than 2 prescribed services. Unregulated/ unregistered homes can provide hospitality but not prescribed services. It is noted that housekeeping services such as provision of meals, laundry and housecleaning are not considered prescribed services. Figure 1 below shows how Community Care Facilities and Assisted Living Residences are categorized according to the number of prescribed services and the licensing or registration requirements, where applicable. Categorization is also impacted by the number of people in a facility. Also outlined in the table is a comparison of Community Care Facilities and Assisted Living Residences to unregulated private supportive recovery housing facilities. Figure 1: Provincially and Non-Provincially Regulated Facilities in Maple Ridge 2017-231-RZ r Licensed Community Care Facilities Assisted Living Residences • licensed under the Community • Regulated under the Care and Assisted Living Act Community Care and Assisted • Provides Hospitality Services Uving Act and 3 or more Prescribed • Must be registered with the Services Assisted living Registrar • Facilities with greater than 6 • Provides Hospitality Services people in care are within and 1 but not more than 2 municipal jurisdiction and Prescribed Services require zoning • Not exempt from zoning • Facilities with no more than 6 • Sha,ed Living arrangements persons in care are exempt allow up to fo•e unrelated from zoning people under the zoning bylaw • Where Shared living arr•nge~nts have more than 5 unrelated people. it requires zoning Unregulated Private Supportive Recovery • Shared living arrangements allow up to five unrelated people under the zoning bylaw • Where Shared Living arrangements have more than S unrelated people, it requires zoning • Can include Hospitality Services • Does not include Prescribed Services • Currently not defined by municipal zoning Page 3 of 11
For further information, it is noted that the City may not regulate or prohibit by zoning, or regulate by business regulation, a provincially operated facility on provincially owned land or on privately owned land (i.e. leased to the Province for a Provincial purpose and undertaking). A privately operated use on Provincial land (i.e. a private commercial company leasing Crown land) may be regulated by the City through zoning and business regulations, depending on the type of care facility and the number of person in residence or care. As mentioned earlier, unregulated private supportive recovery homes and facilities are not subject to Provincial regulations, but are subject to City zoning and regulatory requirements. e) Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw The Zoning Bylaw contains the following definitions for Dwelling Unit, Family, Boarding Use and Private Hospital. • Dwelling unit: means one or more rooms used for the residential accommodation of only one "family" when such room or rooms contain or provide for the installation of only one set of cooking facilities. • Family: Mean the persons sharing a household, consisting of: (a) two or more persons related by blood, marriage, adoption, or foster parenthood; or (b) three or fewer unrelated persons. • Boarding use: means a use accessory to a residential use for the accommodation of persons, other than members of the family that is contained entirely within the dwelling unit, limited to not more than 2 sleeping units and limited to not more than 2 boarders. • Private Hospital use means a use providing for the care of the sick, injured, or aged other than in a public hospital; includes private hospitals, convalescent homes, nursing homes, hospices, palliative care units, community care facilities, multi-level care facilities, congregate care facilities and adult daycare centres. Relevant to this discussion, it is noted that our Zoning Bylaw does not currently define Supportive Recovery Home, Assisted Living Residences, or Community Care Facilities. This means that using the definitions that are currently in place, such as the definitions of family and boarding use, a dwelling unit in Maple Ridge may contain five or fewer unrelated people in a shared residential living arrangement long as it does not include the provision of prescribed services. Currently, Licenced Community Care Facilities with less than 6 residents in care are exempt from municipal zoning. Assisted Living Residences with more than 5 residents must comply with municipal zoning. f) Maple Ridge Business Licensing and Regulation Bylaw The City of Maple Ridge requires a business licence for all operators renting more than one unit that charge rents to people. The Rental Units -Room Rental/Care Home category of the Business Licensing and Regulation Bylaw captures uses such as Community Care, Assisted Living, Supportive Recovery Homes, and Transitional Housing. The Bylaw states that approval by either the Fraser Health Authority or the Assisted Living Registrar, depending on whether the facility is either providing Community Care or Assisted Living, should be in place prior to making application. Once the Municipality is satisfied that the facility has met the approvals of the Planning, Permit, Bylaws & Fire Departments, a municipal approval letter is sent by Licensing to Fraser Health or the Assisted Living Registrar. 2017-231-RZ Page 4 of 11
The Business Licence is not issued until notification is received from Fraser Health or the Assisted Living Registrar. Non-profit organizations are also required to hold a valid business licence, although they are exempt from paying a fee. g) Key Messages From 2017 Stakeholder Consultation From the consultation undertaken, the following key messages were heard, many of which are reflective of the comments raised at the Public Hearing. i. Zoning Bylaw Amendment No. 7339-2017 a. A Maximum Number of Permitted Residents Is Too Restrictive: An all-inclusive limit (10 persons was the proposed limit) was identified as too restrictive by a number of organizations. Depending on the facility, the ratio of residents to staff may vary. Combining both residents and staff under the ten person limit was seen as therefore potentially challenging to some operations that require more staff. Specifically, it was noted that funding for such care facilities is tied to the number of residents in care. If the number of people in the building is limited to ten inclusive of any staff, it was suggested that there may not be enough funding to support the running of the facility. b. Minimum Separation Distance Requirement Not Reflective of Existing Conditions: Many of the organizations that were interviewed identified that there exist related facilities within the same neighbourhood. The intent behind this approach stems from the opportunity to share resources and communicate with other staff and residents that are close by. As well, often the nearby facilities provide different types of services in order to offer a fuller continuum of care and facilitate the transition of residents from one facility to another. In terms of proximity to schools and daycares, it was stated in meetings and at the June 20, 2017 Public Hearing that in some cases, residents at supportive recovery homes volunteer in the community as well as work around their respective houses and yards, thus providing a presence and "eyes on the street" in their respective neighbourhoods. ii. Draft Housing Agreement Template As a component of the earlier draft zone amending bylaw, staff attached a housing agreement that contained a number of requirements. a. Redundant for Licensed and Registered Facilities Operators of licensed Community Care Facilities and registered Assisted Living Residences identified that the requirement for a Housing Agreement was a redundant and therefore onerous imposition by the City. This sentiment reflected the many requirements and levels of approval already undertaken by these facilities to gain either their registration or licensing. b. Duplicating Exit Plan Requirements: Under the proposed Housing Agreement, there was a requirement that any unspent portion of a resident's fees be held for a resident upon exiting a facility. It was identified that all registered Assisted Living Residences and licensed Community Care Facilities must already require an exit plan for their residents as part of their registration or licensing. c. 24 Hour Staffing Unachievable: With respect to Supportive Recovery Homes and Transitional Housing, 24 hour a day staffing was identified as cost-prohibitive. In some Supportive Recovery Homes, there is daytime staff, and at night there are peer-to-peer supervision programs that are supported 2017-231-RZ Page 5 of 11
by off-duty staff that are available by phone. In some Transitional Houses, residents do not require additional supervision and are supported by off-duty staff that are available by phone. d. Privacy Issues with Sharing Resident Roster with RCMP: All facilities that were interviewed have a current roster of residents. However, some organizations expressed concern regarding privacy and safety issues for residents in sharing that information with the RCMP. It was often stated that many of the registered and licensed facilities strive to maintain a good relationship with the RCMP, and would prefer to rely on those connections rather than a mandated requirement. e. No drugs or alcohol permitted on the premises: There are facilities that are not abstinence-based and espouse a harm reduction approach. In a case of renewed substance use by a client in a facility that has a harm reduction approach, counselling and other supports are used to assist the client, but they are not asked to exit the care facility. In such facilities, operators identified the challenge of operating a harm-reduced approach with the proposed restriction. DISCUSSION: a} Regulatory Approach The draft zoning bylaw regulations would provide a regulatory framework that limits the size of some facilities, including unregulated private supportive recovery homes. This approach is intended to provide a regulatory means to meet the need for care facilities in the City of Maple Ridge while also establishing accountability measures for their ongoing operation. A three-pronged approach is proposed: 1) Permit subject to compliance with zoning regulations, Licenced Community Care Facilities with more than 6 residents in care but not more than 10 residents in care and Registered Assisted Living Residences with not more than 10 residents in care in the City's RS Zones. Noting that Licenced Community Care Facilities with less than 6 residents are exempt from municipal zoning under provincial statute. 2) Require rezoning for Unlicensed, unregistered, unregulated supportive recovery homes with 10 (inclusive of clients and employees) or less residents. The rezoning process facilitates the use of a Housing Agreement. 3) Require rezoning to an Institutional Zone for Licensed Community Care Facilities, Registered Assisted Living Residences, and Unlicensed, unregistered, unregulated supportive transitional facilities with 11 (inclusive of clients and employees) or more residents. To accommodate this approach, a number of new definitions including an amended definition of Family as well as new language to define Assisted Living Residences, Community Care Facilities, and Supportive Recovery Homes is proposed. Details regarding the regulatory approach are noted in the following section of this report. 2017-231-RZ Page 6 of 11
b) Draft Zoning Regulations -Licenced Community Care Facilities (6 -10 residents) and Registered Assisted Living Residences (up to 10 residents) Licenced Community Care Facilities with more than 6 residents in care but not more than 10 residents in care and Registered Assisted Living Residences with not more than 10 residents in care would be permitted outright in the City's RS Zones or, said differently, on lots larger than 557 sq m or 6,000 sq ft. The Zoning Bylaw would be amended to establish the criteria they must satisfy including: i. ii. iii. iv. V. vi. Shall have a maximum of 10 residents; Shall be contained within the same building as the residential use; Shall not be permitted where there is a Secondary Suite, Detached Garden Suite, Boarding Use or Temporary Residential Use on the lot; Shall not be permitted to contain habitable space below the recommended Flood Construction Level of any designated floodplain; Be not less than 250m from other Supportive Recovery Homes, Transitional Housing, Assisted Living Residences, or Community Care Facility, a school both public or private, child care centres and a family daycare; Will require proof of notification or approval from the applicable Health Authority or to the appropriate authority if located on a lot which is not serviced by municipal sewer and water; vii. Shall not be strata-titled; It is proposed that Licenced Community Care Facilities and Registered Assisted Living Residences not be required to enter into a Housing Agreement with the City. This is in reflection of the process and requirements already undertaken by these facilities to gain either their provincial licencing or registration. c) Draft Zoning Regulations -Unlicensed, Unregistered, Unregulated Supportive Recovery Homes (up to 10 residents) Unlicensed, Unregistered, Unregulated Supportive Recovery Homes would be subject to the rezoning process, including Public Hearing. A Housing Agreement, negotiated by Council, would be a requirement of any such rezoning to ensure that neighbourhood interests are considered. For Supportive Recovery Homes with 10 or less residents, it is proposed that a home: i. Would be required to go through a rezoning process; ii. Shall have a maximum of 10 residents; iii. Shall be contained within the same building as the residential use; iv. Shall not be permitted where there is a Secondary Suite, Detached Garden Suite, Boarding Use or Temporary Residential Use on the lot; v. Shall not be permitted to contain habitable space below the recommended Flood Construction Level of any designated floodplain; 2017-231-RZ Page 7 of 11
vi. Be not less than 250m from other Supportive Recovery Homes, Transitional Housing, Assisted Living Residences, or Community Care Facility, a school both public or private, child care centres and a family daycare; vii. Will require proof of notification or approval from the applicable Health Authority or to the appropriate authority if located on a lot which is not serviced by municipal sewer and water; viii. Shall not be strata-titled; ix. Shall be permitted on the condition that the operator enters into a Housing Agreement with the Corporation of the City of Maple Ridge under Section 483 of the Local Government Act, which must be executed and delivered to the Municipality including all appendices prior to the issuance of any building permit or business licence for the land in relation to which the use is permitted. d) Draft Zoning Regulations -Licensed Community Care Facilities, Registered Assisted Living Residences, and Unlicensed, Unregistered, Unregulated Supportive Transitional Facilities with more than 10 residents. Licenced Community Care Facilities and Registered Assisted Living Residences would be subject to the rezoning process, including Public Hearing, to an Institutional Zone (P-2). A Housing Agreement would not be required. For Licenced Community Care Facilities and Registered Assisted Living Residences with more than 10 residents, it is proposed: i. Would be required to go through a rezoning process to an Institutional zone; ii. Shall have more than 10 residents; iii. Will require proof of notification or approval from the applicable Health Authority or to the appropriate authority if located on a lot which is not serviced by municipal sewer and water; iv. Shall not be strata-titled; v. Shall not be permitted to contain habitable space below the recommended Flood Construction Level of any designated floodplain. Unlicensed, Unregistered, Unregulated Supportive Transitional Facilities would be subject to the rezoning process, including Public Hearing. A Housing Agreement, negotiated by Council, would be a requirement of any such rezoning to ensure that neighbourhood interests are considered. For Supportive Transitional Facilities with 11 (inclusive of clients and employees) or more residents, it is proposed that a facility: i. Would be required to go through a rezoning process to an Institutional zone; ii. Shall have more than 10 residents including staff; iii. Will require proof of notification or approval from the applicable Health Authority or to the appropriate authority if located on a lot which is not serviced by municipal sewer; iv. Shall not be strata-titled; v. Shall not be permitted to contain habitable space below the recommended Flood Construction Level of any designated floodplain. 2017-231-RZ Page 8 of 11 , __ CC r_-_
vi. Shall be permitted on the condition that the operator enters into a Housing Agreement with the Corporation of the City of Maple Ridge under Section 483 of the Local Government Act, which must be executed and delivered to the Municipality including all appendices prior to the issuance of any building permit for the land in relation to which the use is permitted. e) Proposed Accountability Mechanisms Hearing Council's comments about the importance of neighbourhood context, and sensitively incorporating such support services within neighbourhoods, it is important to include accountability mechanisms for these types of services within the Housing Agreement. Nesting these clauses under a Housing Agreement provides the City with an enforceable mechanism, should certain issues arise with the owners or occupants of these facilities, noting that other City bylaws, such as the Noise and Unsightly Premises Bylaws, and Business Licencing process will also be applied. By embarking on the rezoning process, the City is permitted the use of a Housing Agreement which sets out operational terms and conditions. It is important to note that the conditions of a Housing Agreement can be negotiated by Council on a case-by-case basis at the time of rezoning. These mechanisms are for information purposes, and would not form part of the zone amending bylaw. A Housing Agreement may include, but not be limited to the following: i. An exit plan for residents who are evicted or who complete the program must be filed with the City. The exit plan shall include a provision for those clients that are evicted, that any funding provided to the Supportive Recovery Home will be held in trust, and the organization will provide a prorated amount at the time of departure to the person evicted or money returned to the individual or organization; ii. Adherence to municipal noise bylaw standards; iii. Have staff available 24 hours per day; iv. A current roster of all operators, residents and staff must be maintained on site and available to the City and/or the City of Maple Ridge RCMP detachment; v. No alcohol or illicit drugs are permitted on the premises in those facilities that are providing drug and alcohol treatment and counselling; vi. Property owner approval of the facility; vii. Neighbourhood consultation meetings are required for each new facility; viii. Notification of surrounding neighbours required (100m radius mail out within the Urban Area Boundary (UAB), 500m radius mail out outside of the UAB, at the operator's expense) with all information gathered to be provided to the City of Maple Ridge; ix. Property maintenance and parking standards must be met; x. Annual fire inspections shall be performed; xi. Annual building inspections shall be performed; and xii. Shall have no exterior signage. The table on the following page is a summary of the resulting framework for supportive recovery homes / transitional facilities. It includes information on zoning and accountability mechanisms. 2017-231-RZ Page 9 of 11
Figure 2 -Accountability Mechanisms by Facility Type Type Proposed Zoning Accountability Mechanism Approach Licenced Community Status Quo, currently exempt; Provincial Licence* Care Facility under 6 Subject to CCAL Act Licenced Community Care Facility with 6 -10 residents & Allowed outright; Provincial Licence* Registered Assisted Living Residence under Subject to zoning; Provincial Registrar* 10 City of Maple Ridge Housing Agreement; Unregulated Private Terms of the Housing Agreement to be Recovery Homes under Require rezoning; determined at time of rezoning; 10 Require Business Licence Licenced Community Care Facility, City of Maple Ridge Housing Agreement*; Registered Assisted Housing Agreement to be determined at Living Residences, and Require rezoning; time of rezoning; Unregulated Private Transitional Facilities Require Business Licence over 10 * Earlier feedback suggested Housing Agreements are not needed for L1cenced Community Care Facilities and Registered Assisted Living Residences as it duplicates the provincial requirements. f) Next Steps Based on Council's direction, staff would prepare appropriate bylaw amendments, based on the regulatory approach outlined in this report, to be presented at an upcoming Council Workshop. g) Strategic Alignment As part of the City of Maple Ridge Strategic Plan 2019 -2022, under its Community Safety theme, the regulation of supportive recovery housing in Maple Ridge is a key priority of Council. h) Alternative Recommendation Should Council not wish to proceed with the identified recommendation, the following alternative recommendation has been provided for Council consideration. That further work take place on supportive recovery housing and that an update be brought back to a future Council Workshop. 2017-231-RZ Page 10 of 11
CONCLUSION: This report outlines a three-pronged approach for regulating supportive recovery housing and transitional facilities in Maple Ridge: 1) Permit subject to compliance with zoning regulations, Licenced Community Care Facilities with more than 6 residents in care but not more than 10 residents in care and Registered Assisted Living Residences with not more than 10 residents in care in the City's RS Zones. Noting that Licenced Community Care Facilities with less than 6 residents are exempt from municipal zoning under provincial statute. 2) Require rezoning for Unlicensed, unregistered, unregulated supportive recovery homes with 10 (inclusive of clients and employees) or less residents. The rezoning process facilitates the use of a Housing Agreement. 3) Require rezoning to an Institutional Zone for Licensed Community Care Facilities, Registered Assisted Living Residences, and Unlicensed, unregistered, unregulated supportive transitional facilities with 11 (inclusive of clients and employees) or more residents. This approach is intended to provide a regulatory means to meet the need for care facilities in the City of Maple Ridge while also establishing accountability measures for their ongoing operation. Based on Council comment, staff seek direction to prepare a Zone Amending Bylaw consistent with the regulatory approach outlined in this report to regulate supportive recovery housing and facilities for Council consideration at an upcoming Council Workshop meeting. a Prepared by: Amanda Grochowich, MCIP, RPP Planner 1 Reviewed by: Charles . Goddard, BA, MA Director of Planning Cih::u Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP GM Planning & Development Services Concurrence: 2017-231-RZ Page 11of 11 l
1~-~-··· mapleridge.ca City of Maple Ridge TO: FROM: His Worship Mayor Michael Morden and Members of Council Chief Administrative Officer MEETING DATE: FILE NO: ATTN: SUBJECT: Proposed Revisions to the Development Permit Process EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: October 22, 2019 2019-334-RZ Workshop The City of Maple Ridge has always been receptive to recommendations that improve efficiencies in their service delivery. For the Planning Department, a pertinent focus continues to be improvements in the development application process. Following on this broader objective, this report makes recommendations for specific development permit processes, that could be either exempted or delegated to the Director of Planning. This resulting process is expected to benefit applicants by improving processing times and reducing the number of reports being placed on Council agendas. For Council's consideration, this report recommends revisions and conditions for specific types of development permits. These permits and conditions include: • Wildfire Development Permits. Delegate authority for the issuance of these technical permits. • Form and Character Exemption threshold. For exterior far;;ade and landscape renovations to existing structures, raise the current development permit exemption from $25,000.00 to $250,000.00. • Form and Character Development Permits. Delegate authority for the issuance of these permits if the estimated cost of construction is less than $500,000.00 for new buildings, or between $250,000.00 and $500,000.00 for exterior far;;ade and landscape renovations. These initiatives are proposed as part of a larger municipal effort to improve service delivery, especially for smaller scale business owners and investors. RECOMMENDATION: That staff prepare bylaw amendments as outlined in the report "Proposed Revisions to the Development Permit Process" dated October 15, 2019. DISCUSSION: a) Background: This proposal to revise processes and considerations for the issuance of development permits is consistent with earlier initiatives made in 2007. At that time, Council amended the Maple Ridge Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999 with the purpose of stream lining the approval and review process of various Planning Department applications. With this in mind, a second bylaw was adopted at the same time delegating to the Director of Planning the issuance of Environmental related Development Permits and the approval of minor changes to existing form and character Development Permits as Maple Ridge Development Permit Delegation Bylaw No. 6478-2007. These 4.3 2019-334-RZ Page 1 of 4
implemented changes were the results of a lengthy and in-depth analysis of a review by a consultant team, UMA Engineering Ltd. in 2004 whose strategy was endorsed by Council. Overall, the results of the earlier bylaw changes have been positive. For example, the delegation of the issuance of technical environmental permits and minor DP amendments have reduced processing time significantly. Other initiatives developed at that time were intended to improve the accessibility of information for prospective applicants. These initiatives included the encouragement of pre-application meetings and the preparation of comprehensive check lists for development applications. b) Proposed Amendments and Regulatory Framework: Building on the successes of these earlier initiatives, further revisions are proposed for Council's consideration. Descriptions of the affected applications, justification for these amendments, and the required bylaw amendments to make these changes are described below: • Wildfire Development Permits Description: The Wildfire Development Permit Area Guidelines are intended for the protection of life and property in designated areas that could be at risk of wildfire and where this risk may be reasonably abated through implementation of appropriate precautionary measures. A Development Permit is required for all development and subdivision activity or building permits for areas identified as a Wildfire Development Permit Area in the Official Community Plan. Recommendation: Delegate the authority for issuance of these permits to the Director of Planning. As before, the Fire Chief will review and sign the report. Justification: The Wildfire Development Permit Area was established in 2014. At present, these Development Permits are issued by Council, but are highly technical, based on scientific findings, that do not require a political decision to be justified. The site specific details of these permits are generally integrated with other environmental development permits as part of an overall development application for rezoning or subdivision. The issuance of environmental development permits (Watercourse Protection and Natural Features) was delegated to the Director of Planning in 2007, with positive results. For this reason, it is consistent and justified to also delegate authority for the issuance of Wildfire Development Permits to the Director of Planning. Required Bylaw Amendment: This additional delegation of authority to the Director of Planning will require an amendment to the Maple Ridge Delegation Bylaw 6478-2007. • Form and Character Development Permits Description: Form and character development permits are a practical approach for directing the appearance of buildings and landscaping within the Community. To meet this objective, Development Permits are required for all rezoning, subdivision of land, or construction, addition to or alteration of buildings or other structures that involve multifamily residential, intensive residential, commercial, and industrial development. Exemptions are specified for form and character development permit requirements, including single family development, internal renovations, or site improvements with an estimated value of $25,000.00. 2019-334-RZ Page 2 of 4
• Form and Character Exemption threshold Recommendation: Increase the exemption threshold for requiring a form and character development permit from $25,000.00 to $250,000.00 for exterior fagade and landscape renovations to existing structures. Justification: Rising construction costs are the main reason for this exemption. A staff review of construction costs and development permits reveal that there has been about 1 application per year with construction costs of less than $100,000.00. A threshold of $250,000.00 would exempt about 20 applicants each year from the requirement to apply for a development permt. This change will benefit smaller scale developers and business interest with reduced costs and fewer time delays in application processing. Consideration will be required to maintain quality in the built form. For this reason, this exemption threshold increase is only recommended for renovations to existing structures that would have previously been subject to the development permit process. In addition, a recommendation will be to require a standard landscape security as part of the building permit process to direct both the installation and maintenance of landscape materials. Building permit information pertains to the entire cost of construction, but with an existing building, changes to landscaping and external facades are usually minimal. Internal renovations do not require a development permit. Required Bylaw Amendment: The current development permit exemption is prescribed in the Official Community Plan. For this reason, an amendment to the Official Community Plan is required to increase this threshold. • Delegation of Issuance of Form and Character Development Permits Recommendation: the delegation of authority to the Director of Planning for the issuance of form and character development permits for new buildings where the estimated cost of construction is less than $500,000.00, or between $250,000.00 and $500,000.00 for exterior fagade and landscape renovations. Justification: A revised process is recommended in order to streamline application processing while maintaining municipal standards for urban design. In these cases, the applicant will still be required to follow processes including attendance at an Advisory Design Panel meeting, and interdepartmental referrals, but Council approval will not be required for the issuance of these smaller scale permits. Required bylaw amendments: This additional delegation of authority to the Director of Planning will require an amendment to the Maple Ridge Delegation Bylaw 6478-2007. Next Steps: The recommendations presented above are intended to improve the development application process and promote Council dialogue and direction on the required bylaw amendments to achieve these outcomes. Two bylaws (Official Community Plan and Delegation Bylaw) will need to be amended to realize these outcomes. The amending process for the Official Community Plan includes a required Public Hearing. The Delegation Bylaw does not require a public hearing. If the recommendations above are agreed to, staff can commence a simple process of bylaw introduction that would be brought to a regular Committee of the Whole meeting. It is recommended that these improvements be implemented immediately because these amendments will benefit both Council, applicants, and the public. The Official Community Plan amendment will provide consultation opportunities with the required public hearing. 2019-334-RZ Page 3 of 4
------. -----c.: -~ c) Intergovernmental Implications: The Local Government Act provides enabling legislation for amending both the Delegation Bylaw and the Official Community Plan. Any amending bylaws will be required to adhere to the process as outlined in the Local Government Act. d) Citizen/Customer Implications: Staff participate on the UDI/HAVAN (Urban Development Institute/ Home Builder's Association Vancouver) Liaison Committee, and will seek feedback on these amendments prior to the Public Hearing. The delegation bylaw does not require a Public Hearing to be adopted by Council, although a Public Hearing is required to amend the Official Community Plan. e) Interdepartmental Implications: The recommendations outlined in this report are intended to improve service delivery in the development process. This objective is integrated throughout municipal departments, but most directly involves Planning, Building, Engineering, Bylaws, and Economic Development. These proposed amendments have been discussed with these departments, and all are supportive of the recommendations. CONCLUSION: This report provides recommendations to help streamline the approval process for specific development permits, and recommends that Council direct staff to commence bylaw introduction for this purpose. "Original signed by Diana Hall" Prepared by: Diana Hall, M.A (Planning), MCIP, RPP Planner 2 "Original signed by Chuck Goddard" Reviewed by: Charles R. Goddard, BA, MA Director of Planning "Original signed by Christine Carter" Approved by: Christine Carter M.PL., MCIP, RPP GM Planning & Development Services "Original signed by Kelly Swift" Concurrence: Kelly Swift, MBA Acting Chief Administrative Officer 2019-334-RZ Page 4 of 4