The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2021-02-16 Public Hearing Agenda and Reports.pdfCity of Maple Ridge PUBLIC HEARING February 16, 2021 CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA 1)2018-448-RZ 12061 Laity Street Lot 130 District Lot 242 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 47517 Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Bylaw No. 7532-2019 To provide heritage protection for the historic Gillespie Residence and allow for the construction of three courtyard housing units. The current application is to provide heritage protection for the historic Gillespie Residence and the construction of three courtyard housing units on the lot as permitted under the RT-2 (Ground-Oriented Residential Infill) zone. PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA February 16, 2021 7:00 pm Virtual Online Meeting including Council Chambers The purpose of the Public Hearing is to allow all persons who deem themselves affected by any of these bylaws a reasonable opportunity to be heard before Council on the matters contained in the bylaws. Persons wishing to speak for or against a bylaw will be given opportunities. You will be asked to give your name and address. Please note that all written submissions provided in response to this consultation including names and addresses will become part of the public record which includes the submissions being made available for public inspection. Further consideration of bylaws on this agenda will be at the next regular Council meeting. The meeting is recorded by the City of Maple Ridge. For virtual public participation register by going to www.mapleridge.ca/640/Council-Meetings and clicking on the meeting date. Note: This Agenda is also posted on the City’s Website at www.mapleridge.ca/AgendaCenter (see: Public Hearing) CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE NOTICE OF VIRTUAL ONLINE PUBLIC HEARING TAKE NOTICE THAT A PUBLIC HEARING is scheduled for Tuesday, February 16, 2021 at 7:00 p.m. This meeting is an online virtual meeting only, to be hosted in Council Chambers at City Hall, 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge. For virtual online participation, access the link at: www.mapleridge.ca/640/Council-Meetings and click on the meeting date to register. For viewing only, access the link at http://media.mapleridge.ca/Mediasite/Showcase and click on the February 16, 2021 Public Hearing presentation video; The Public Hearing Agenda and full reports are posted on the City’s Website at www.mapleridge.ca/AgendaCenter (see: Public Hearing). This Public Hearing is held in order to consider the following bylaw: 1)2018-448-RZ 12061 Laity Street Lot 130 District Lot 242 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 47517 Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Bylaw No. 7532-2019 To provide heritage protection for the historic Gillespie Residence and allow for the construction of three courtyard housing units. The current application is to provide heritage protection for the historic Gillespie Residence and the construction of three courtyard housing units on the lot as permitted under the RT-2 (Ground-Oriented Residential Infill) zone. AND FURTHER TAKE NOTICE that a copy of the aforesaid bylaw and copies of staff reports and other information considered by Council to be relevant to the matters contained in the bylaw are available for viewing on the City’s Land Development Viewer site at: https://gis.mapleridge.ca/LandDevelopmentViewer/LandDevelopmentViewer.html During the COVID-19 health emergency it is important to ensure that our democratic processes continue to function and that the work of the City remains transparent for all citizens. As authorized by the current health order, the Public Hearing pertaining to the aforesaid bylaw will be conducted virtually using the links set out below. ALL PERSONS who believe themselves affected by the above-mentioned bylaw shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard at the Public Hearing before Council on the matters contained in the bylaw. Please note that all written submissions provided in response to this notice will become part of the public record which includes the submissions being made available for public inspection. •For virtual online participation, access the link at: www.mapleridge.ca/640/Council-Meetings and click on the meeting date to register. When registering you will be asked to give your name and address, to give Council your proximity to the land that is the subject of the application. We ask that you have your camera on during the Public Hearing; •For viewing only, access the link at http://media.mapleridge.ca/Mediasite/Showcase and click on the February 16, 2021 Public Hearing presentation video; •To submit correspondence prior to the Public Hearing, provide written submissions to the Corporate Officer by 12:00 Noon, Tuesday, February 16, 2021 (quoting file number) via drop-box at City Hall or by mail to 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, V2X 6A9; or, •To email correspondence, forward written submissions to clerks@mapleridge.ca to the attention of the Corporate Officer, by 12:00 Noon, Tuesday, February 16, 2021 (quoting file number). Dated this 2nd day of February, 2021. Stephanie Nichols Corporate Officer 2018-448-RZ Page 1 of 9 City of Maple Ridge TO: His Worship Mayor Michael Morden MEETING DATE: January 19, 2021 and Members of Council FILE NO: 2018-448-RZ FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C o W SUBJECT: Second Reading Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 7532-2019; 12061 Laity Street EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: An application for the property located at 12061 Laity Street (Appendix A and B) has been received for Heritage Designation and Revitalization for heritage protection of the historic Gillespie Residence and integrating this heritage building into a courtyard housing development consisting of three new dwelling units (Appendix C). The Gillespie Residence is listed in the Maple Ridge Heritage Inventory. The proposal is to shift the location of the Gillespie House closer to Laity Street, undertake its conservation, and in exchange for its conservation, to allow three (3) additional dwellings in the form of Courtyard housing based on the RT-2 (Ground-Oriented Residential Infill) zone. This is being undertaken under Section 610 of the Local Government Act, whereby Council may, by authorizing bylaw, enter into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement (HRA). The main parts of the HRA will include: The agreement outlining the particulars for the conservation and protection of the Gillespie Residence, including the timing for the completion of the conservation works; A Heritage Conservation Plan (HCP) detailing the character elements, their condition and the process of conservation to be employed; and Applying the RT-2 (Ground-Oriented Residential Infill) zone to the development, with variances to best accommodate the envisioned conservation. The approval process is the same as for zone amending bylaws, requiring four (4) bylaw readings, a Public Hearing between second and third reading, and addressing terms and conditions before adoption. Issuance of a Development Permit for the three (3) Courtyard dwelling units and a Heritage Alteration Permit for the Gillespie Residence will occur concurrently with final adoption of the bylaw. Pursuant to Council policy, this application is subject to the Community Amenity Contribution (CAC) Program at a rate of $4,100 per dwelling unit. The policy exempts payment on the first Courtyard dwelling unit and Council may wave payment on heritage buildings being conserved. Therefore, the CAC payment would be for two dwelling units, for an estimated amount of $8,200. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1)That Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 7532- 2019 be given second reading, as amended, and be forwarded to Public Hearing; 1. 2018-448-RZ Page 2 of 9 2)That the following terms and conditions be met prior to final reading: i)Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt of the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement; ii)Registration of a Restrictive Covenant for the Geotechnical Report, which addresses the suitability of the subject property for the proposed development; iii)Registration of a Restrictive Covenant for the stormwater management strategy on the subject property; iv)In addition to the site profile, a disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage ta nks on the subject property. If so, a Stage 1 Site Investigation Report is required to ensure that the subject property is not a contaminated site. v)Submission of a forfeitable security of $25,000 for the relocation and conservation of the Gillespie Residence; vi)That a voluntary contribution, in the amount of $8,200 ($4,100 per unit), exempting the first courtyard housing unit and the Gillespie Residence, be provided in keeping with the Council Policy with regard to Community Amenity Contributions. DISCUSSION: 1)Background Context: Applicant: Casa Realty Investments Legal Description: Lot 130 District Lot 242 Group 1NWD Plan 47517 OCP: Existing: Urban Residential Proposed: Urban Residential Zoning: Existing: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) Proposed: Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 7532-2019 , which is based on RT-2 (Ground-Oriented Residential Infill) Surrounding Uses: North: Use: Residential Zone: RS-1 (Single Detached Residential) Designation: Urban Residential South: Use: Residential Zone: RS-1 (Single Detached Residential) Designation: Residential East: Use: Residential Zone RS-1 (Single Detached Residential) Designation: Urban Residential 2018-448-RZ Page 3 of 9 West: Use: Residential Zone: RS-1 (Single Detached Residential) Designation: Urban Residential Existing Use of Property: Residential Proposed Use of Property: Courtyard Residential Site Area: 0.128 HA. (0.32 acres) Access: 12061 Laity Street Servicing requirement: Urban Standard 2) Project Description: The proposal is for a four-unit (4) Courtyard residential project (Appendix D), where one (1) of the units will be the existing Gillespie House (floor area of 197.8 m2 or 2,129 ft2). The proposal is to move the residence from its current location towards the front of the property, onto a new foundation that is closer and more viable to the general public from Laity Street. The remaining three (3) new dwelling units will be located elsewhere on the site. One new dwelling will be facing Laity Street with a driveway into the site separating it from the Gillespie House. The driveway leads to a courtyard area, with a building with two (2) new dwellings to the rear. The buildings are of a modest design, ranging between 263.3 and 267.9 m2 (2,834 ft2 and 2,884 ft2), borrowing design elements from the Gillespie House to be compatible, yet different enough to be distinct from the Gillespie House. There will be two (2) parking spaces provided for each of the dwelling units, for a total of eight (8) parking spaces. Four (4) will be unconcealed parking, one garage will have two (2) side-by-side spaces and two (2) garages will have single car parking. Visitor parking is not required for Courtyard housing projects. The applicant proposes that the project be done in two phases:  Phase 1: Within 18 months of Council adopting the HRA Bylaw, the Gillespie House will be moved under the supervision of the Heritage Professional and placed on a new foundation closer to Laity Street; and  Phase 2: Once the conservation works on the Gillespie House are completed, as certified by the Heritage Professional, the applicant will proceed with the development of the three (3) remaining units for the courtyard residential project. An HRA Bylaw will govern the conservation works, allowing the Courtyard development, thus no rezoning will be required. Because the use and density is being changed like for a rezoning proposal, this HRA Bylaw will require a Public Hearing. The HRA Bylaw that was granted first reading was based on the RT -2 (Ground-Oriented Residential Infill) Zone under the former Zoning Bylaw. The HRA Bylaw attached in Appendix C has been amended to apply the RT-2 (Ground-Oriented Residential Infill) Zone under the new Zoning Bylaw No. 7600-2019 to the development of the site. Therefore, a series of minor amendments are necessary to the HRA bylaw since first reading was granted by Council and therefore is being brought back for second reading, as amended. 2018-448-RZ Page 4 of 9 These minor changes include: Citing the new Zoning bylaw, Maple Ridge Zoning By-law No. 7600-2019, in Section 16 of the Agreement and in Schedule “F”; Finalization of the site plan allowed a full complement of eight (8) parking spaces to be provided. Therefore, the variance reducing the parking requirement from eight (8) spaces to six (6) spaces has been removed in Schedule “F”; The Zoning Bylaw section numbers in Schedule “F” were changed to reference the appropriate section numbers contained in the new Zoning bylaw. The interior setbacks were also modified to accommodate the detailed site plans submitted for this second reading report; Comments from the Engineering Department resulted in the variance to Maple Ridge Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No. 4800 – 1993 to be adjusted to only include the reduction in right-of-way width along the frontage of Laity Street; and Incidental housekeeping changes and formatting. 3)Planning Analysis: i)Official Community Plan: The project fully complies with the policies in the OCP to conserve and protect heritage assets in the City as follows: Policy 4 – 40: Maple Ridge will encourage the conservation and designation of significant heritage structures, and natural and cultural landscape features in each neighbourhood. Policy 4 – 44: Maple Ridge will endeavour to use tools available under Provincial legislation more effectively to strengthen heritage conservation in the District. Other planning tools will also be utilized where appropriate to establish a comprehensive approach to heritage management in the District. Staff comment: The Heritage Professional has concluded that the Gillespie House is significant for its association with interwar development and the Late Craftsman styling detailing popular in the greater Haney neighbourhood. The Heritage Revitalization Agreement is the most effective tool to achieve the conservation of the Gillespie House and to accommodate the proposed Courtyard residential development. Secondary to the above heritage policies, the proposed development is also consistent with other policies such as OCP Policy 3 – 18 to increase densities on Major Road Corridors (Laity Street) in the urban area; OCP Policy 3 – 20 to encourage infill development with projects like the one proposed; and OCP Policy 3 – 21 to give particular attention to conservation of heritage buildings that contribute to the unique character of a neighbourhood. Therefore, the project is fully in compliance with the OCP. ii)Heritage Strategic Plan: The Heritage Strategic Plan contains a series of strategies and accompa nying Actions respecting the management of heritage assets in Maple Ridge. The following Actions under Strategy 2: Heritage Management and Strategy 4: Historic Communities apply: Develop an enhanced heritage incentives program, using tools enabled under provincial legislation; 2018-448-RZ Page 5 of 9 Conserve heritage resources in each historic community; and Plan for the development of sustainable and vibrant neighbourhoods by building on the character, amenities and historic infrastructure of existing neighbourhoods. Staff Comment: The Gillespie House represents the style of housing prevalent in the greater Haney area neighbourhood in the interwar period, while retaining details that were not ordinary reflected due to the economic austerity in that period. The proposed developme nt not only facilitates retention, but will result in a project that takes on some of the elements of the Gillespie House to build character and enhance the vibrancy of the surrounding neighbourhood. The proposal is fully in compliance with the Heritage Strategic Plan. iii)HRA Bylaw: The Gillespie House situated at 12061 Laity Street has been identified in the Maple Rige Heritage Inventory for conservation due to its heritage value and heritage character. Therefore, the property is proposed to be subject to Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 7532-2019 (HRA Bylaw). This bylaw has the following components: 1.Conservation Component: The HRA Bylaw (Appendix C) contains the Heritage Conservation Plan (HCP) (Appendix C Schedule C) prepared by a consultant recognized by the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals (CAHP). It will be under this HCP that the Gillespie Residence will be conserved. This plan is based on the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (the Standards), which were adopted by Council on March 24, 2009 and have been applied consistently to guide the conservation of all protected heritage properties in Maple Ridge. 2.Rezoning Component: The HRA Bylaw will over-ride the existing RS-1 (Single Detached Residential) Zone to apply RT-2 (Ground-Oriented Residential Infill) Zoning regulations as varied by the HRA. In exchange, for conserving the heritage residence, the HRA bylaw provides for the RT-2 (Ground-Oriented Residential Infill) Zone to be applied to the lands (Appendix C Schedule F) as follows: The RT-2 zone in accordance with the City’s new Zoning Bylaw No. 7600-2019 will apply to the development of the lands and allow four (4) dwelling units on the subject site, one of which is the Gillespie House, as a Courtyard Residential development; and HRA proposes these variances: 1 (a) Allowing unconcealed parking: The four (4) unconcealed residential parking spaces will be allowed, provided they are landscaped and are incorporate using an attractive surface treatment, as specified in the development permit to be approved at a later date by Council; 2 (a) Lot Width: The minimum lot width be reduced to accommodate the existing lot (24.42 metres instead of 25 metres); (b)FSR Calculation: This proposal followed an early version of the of the RT -2 zone, allowing the practice in the RM-1 Zone to exclude up to 50 sq. m. of basement area per dwelling from the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) calculation. This exclusion language is included in Schedule F of the HRA Agreement thus avoiding the need for the developer to redesigning the project and allowing for best practices to conserve the Gillespie House; 2018-448-RZ Page 6 of 9 (c) Setbacks: The minimum interior side lot line setback be reduced for the three new dwellings from 2.25 metres to 1.82 metres and to 1.22 metres for the Gillespie Residence from the south lot line; (d) The maximum height be increased from 8.0 metres to 8.8 metres; and 3 (a) Road Design: Reducing the bike lane and travel lane widths for the Collector Road Standard under the Maple Ridge Subdivision and Servicing Bylaw. In the HRA bylaw granted first reading, Schedule “F” included a variance to the Accessory Off Street Parking and Loading Bylaw. That variance was to reduce the requirement from 2.0 parking spaces per dwelling unit (eight (8) spaces) to 1.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit (six (6) spaces) has been deleted. The developer reconsidered this, and the site plan was adjusted, without impacting private open space, to provide the full parking requirement of eight (8) parking spaces for the project. Therefore, this variance was removed. Staff supports these variances for the following reasons:  The concealed parking spaces will be suitably landscaped and finished;  The width variance accommodates an existing legal parcel and the applicant has demonstrated that the Gillespie Residence can be successfully conserved and a Courtyard complex developed generally in accordance with the interim multi-plex guidelines (see ADP review section) on the slightly narrower lot;  The 50 sq. m. basement area exclusion, setback and height variances can be supported because the applicant has demonstrated these variances assist in achieving the intent of the Heritage Conservation Plan;  The Advisory Design Panel supported the design of the project, including the manner in which the heritage residence, is integrated into the overall project. 3. Heritage Designation Component: The Gillespie House and the portion of the subject site upon which it is located (the Real Property as defined under the Local Government Act), will become a Designated Heritage Site (Appendix C Schedule G) under the provisions of the Local Government Act Section 611. This provides certain protection such as preventing demolitions and benefits such as financial incentives. 4. Heritage Tax Exemption Component: Through designation, the Gillespie House may be granted a municipal tax exemption for a fixed time period (5 years being proposed) under the Community Charter Act, Section 225. As part of this approval process, under Section 226 of the same Act, there will be the necessary notice will be published prior to final approval of the HRA Bylaw. 5. Notification to the Minister: The City will provide notification of the HRA Agreement, Designation and Heritage Tax Exemption in accordance with Section 595 (1) of the Local Government Act, once the HRA bylaw is adopted. Permit Requirements: There will be two (2) permits forwarded to Council at a later date to approve and issue in conjunction with adoption of the HRA Bylaw. These permits are as follows: Form and Character Development Permit: Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the OCP, a Multi-Family Development Permit application is required for the three (3) courtyard units to ensure the current proposal enhances existing neighbourhoods with 2018-448-RZ Page 7 of 9 compatible housing styles that meet diverse needs, and minimize potential conflicts with neighbouring land uses. This permit will apply to the design of the three courtyard units, parking and site landscaping, including any stormwater management incorporated into the landscaping (Appendix D). Heritage Alteration Permit: Pursuant to Section 15 of the Maple Ridge Heritage Procedures Bylaw 6951-2012, a Heritage Alteration Permit application is required for all heritage conservation projects. This permit is an equivalent instrument to a development permit; however, it strictly applies to a heritage building and is governed by the criteria and guidelines within the Heritage Conservation Plan forming part of a HRA bylaw. OCP development permit area guidelines do not apply. iv)Advisory Design Panel: The application was reviewed by the ADP at a meeting held on November 17, 2020 and their comments and the applicants responses are outlined in Appendix F. v)Development Information Meeting: A virtual Development Information Meeting was held between November 22nd, 2020 to December 2nd, 2020. Four (4) people responded by email or by phone call. A summary of the main comments and discussions was provided by the applicant and include the following main points: Issues raised by the Public Applicant’s response to issues raised What does the proposed rezoning from RS-1 to Heritage Revitalization Agreement mean? How will three new units be added on the lot? The purpose and workings of the HRA, the conservation guidelines, the strategy of moving the Gillespie Residence and siting of three new dwellings was explained. Colour elevation plans were emailed to the resident. Is removal of the trees proposed along the west/back fence line for either development? No tree removal is proposed along the back fence area. Exiting onto Laity is a struggle during rush hours. The design for the driveway allows car to wait for access while the second car can simultaneously drive into the property, thus minimizing the impact of traffic issues on the residents. Request to see the plans and more details? Colour elevation plans were emailed to the resident. What will be the fate of the heritage house? How many new dwellings? Will the units have yards? The Gillespie house will be conserved. There will be three (3) new dwelling. All four (4) dwellings will have their own private yards. 2018-448-RZ Page 8 of 9 4)Interdepartmental Implications: i)Engineering Department: The project will require a Rezoning Servicing Agreement for the necessary utility, road, sidewalks and street lighting. Upgrades usually associated with development applications will also be described and securities collected under this agreement. The preliminary plan showing a proposed fill and retaining walls at the rear of the lot has been modified to comply with the requirements of the Engineering Department. Road widening is not required; however, varying some of the Collector Road standards are supported as described earlier and provided for in the HRA Agreement. ii)License, Permits and Bylaws Department: The Building Department commented on matters that will be subject to more detailed review at the building permit stage, like sprinklering and usual Code-related and safety matters. The stormwater management plan is to take into consideration The Fraser River Escarpment area requirements as plans are finalized after third reading of the HRA bylaw. The existing site grades are to be retained and servicing is to be by way of gravity flow. CONCLUSION: This Heritage Revitalization Agreement application proposes to conserve the Gillespie House by moving the residence, under the supervision of the Heritage Professional, to a more prominent location on its historic parcel. This would allow for this significant heritage asset to be more viable from the public realm by passersby. In exchange for its conservation, the developer with gain three (3) new dwelling units, incorporated with the relocated Gillespie House, to result in a Courtyard Residential Development. This increase in density is consistent with the infill policies of the OCP. This development has a design that is sensitive both to the heritage character of the Gillespie House and is compatible with the surrounding residential neighbourhood. The Adv isory Design Panel supported this design having achieved this intent. Sensitive infill will be achieved through the careful application of development permit are landscaping guidelines and the measures in the HRA Bylaw’s Heritage Conservation Plan to be reflected in heritage alteration permit. The conservation of the Gillespie Residence will achieve the applicable strategies in the Maple Ridge Heritage Strategic Plan. 2018-448-RZ Page 9 of 9 This proposal is in compliance with the OCP; therefore, it is recommended that Council grant Second Reading, as amended, to Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 7532-2019 and forward application 2017-448-RZ (HRA) to Public Hearing. “Original signed by Adrian Kopystynski” _______________________________________________ Prepared by: Adrian Kopystynski, MSc, MCIP, RPP, MCAHP Planner “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 Al Horsman” _______________________________________________ Concurrence: Al Horsman Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A – Subject Map Appendix B – Ortho Map Appendix C – Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 7532-2019 Appendix D – Architectural and Landscaping Plans Appendix E – ADP design comments DATE: Nov 14, 2018FILE: 2018-448-RZ 12061 Laity St PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT PROPERTY ´ Scale: 1:2,500 BY: LP Legend Ditch Centreline DEWDNEY TRUNK RD DATE: Nov 14, 2018FILE: 2018-448-RZ 12061 Laity StCity of PittMeadows District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R. ^PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT PROPERTY Aerial Imagery from the Spring of 2016´ Scale: 1:2,500 BY: LP CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW NO. 7532-2019 A Bylaw to designate a property as a heritage property under Section 967 of the Local Government Act and to enter into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement under Section 966 of the Local Government Act and to grant a Tax Exemption under Section 225 of the Community Charter ___________________________________________________________ WHEREAS the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge considers that the property located at 12061 Laity Street, Maple Ridge, B.C. has heritage value and heritage character and that certain portions of the land and the building on the Property known as “the Gillespie House” should be designated as protected under section 967 of the Local Government Act; AND WHEREAS the City of Maple Ridge and 1103625 BC Ltd. Inc. No. BC 1103625 (“the Owners”) wish to enter into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement for the property; AND WHEREAS the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge wishes to exercise its discretion under section 225 of the Community Charter to exempt the designated portion of the property from municipal property taxation subject to the terms of an exemption agreement; AND WHEREAS the City of Maple Ridge has provided notice of a proposed tax exemption bylaw in accordance with section 227 of the Community Charter; AND WHEREAS the Owners of the Property intend to have a strata titled development of the Property and has agreed that in order to ensure the protection of the heritage value and heritage character of the of the Property, certain provisions must be in place, including the requirement for notice to be placed on title to any strata lots created by the filing of a strata plan in respect of all or part of the Property; NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows: Citation 1.1 This Bylaw may be cited as “Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 7532-2019”. Interpretation 2.1 In this Bylaw, the terms “heritage value”, “heritage character” and “alter” have the corresponding meanings given to them in the Local Government Act. Heritage Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement 3.1 The City of Maple Ridge enters into a Heritage Revitalization and a Tax Exemption Agreement (the “Agreement”) with the registered owners of the properties located at 12061 Laity Street, Maple Ridge and legally described as: PID: 006-199-704 Lot 130 District Lot 242 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 47517 (the “Property”). 3.2 The Mayor and Corporate Officer are authorized on behalf of the City of Maple Ridge Council to sign and seal the Agreement in the form attached as Appendix “1” to this Bylaw. 3.3 Subject to all of the terms and conditions set out in the Agreement, the Designated portion of the Property on which is located the “Existing Heritage Building”, as described in the Agreement, shall be exempt from City property taxation for a term of five (5) years effective from the date on which the Agreement comes into force. Heritage Designation 4.1 Council hereby designates the “Existing Heritage Building”, as described in the Agreement and that portion of the Property containing the “Existing Heritage Building”, as protected heritage property for the purposes of section 967 of the Local Government Act of British Columbia. Exemptions 5.1 The following actions may be undertaken in relation to the Existing Heritage Building without first obtaining a heritage alteration permit from the City: (a)non-structural renovations or alterations to the interior of the building or structure that do not affect any protected interior feature or fixture and do not alter the exterior appearance of the building or structure; and (b)non-structural normal repairs and maintenance that do not alter the exterior appearance of a building or structure. 5.2 For the purpose of section 5.1, “normal repairs” means the repair or replacement of elements, components or finishing materials of a building, structure or protected feature or fixture, with elements, components or finishing materials that are equivalent to those being replaced in terms of heritage character, material composition, colour, dimensions and quality. READ a first time the 26th day of February, 2019. READ a second time, as amended, the 26th day of January, 2021 PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , 20 READ a third time the day of , 20 APPROVED by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure this day of , 20 ADOPTED, the day of , 20 _____________________________ ____________________________ PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER APPENDIX “1” – HERITAGE REVITALIZATION AND TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT dated for reference the day of ,………………… is BETWEEN: 1103635 BC Ltd. Inc. No. 1103635 15582 80 Avenue Surrey, B.C. V3S 2J3 (the “Owner”) AND: THE CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE 11995 Haney Place Maple Ridge, British Columbia V2X 6A9 (the “City”) WHEREAS: A.Insert is the registered owner in fee simple of the land and all improvements located at 12061 Laity Street, Maple Ridge, BC and legally described as: PID: 006-199-704 Lot 30 District Lot 242 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 47517 (the “Lands”); B.There is one principal building currently situated on the Lands, as shown labeled on the sketch map attached as Schedule “A” to this Agreement (the “Existing Heritage Building”), and the City and the Owners agree that the Existing Heritage Building also known as the Gillespie Residence has heritage value and heritage character and should be conserved; C.The Owners intend to apply to the City for approval to construct a Courtyard Residential complex, with the Existing Heritage Building being relocated in-situ and being one of the four buildings forming the Courtyard Residential layout, generally in accordance with the proposed development site plan attached as Schedule “B” (the “Proposed Site Plan”); D.The remaining units will be subject to a development permit governing their form and character such that the design will be physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and distinguishable from the Existing Heritage Building. E.Section 966 of the Local Government Act authorizes a local government to enter into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement with the owner of heritage property, and to allow variations of, and supplements to, the provisions of a bylaw or a permit issued under Part 26 or Part 27 of the Local Government Act; F.Section 225 of the Community Charter authorizes a local government to enter into an agreement with the owner of eligible heritage property that is to be exempt from municipal taxation, respecting the extent of the exemption and the conditions on which it is made; G.The Owners and the City have agreed to enter into this Heritage Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement setting out the terms and conditions by which the heritage value of the Existing Heritage Building is to be preserved and protected, in return for specified supplements and variances to City bylaws and the exemption of the Existing Heritage Building from City property taxation for a specified term; THIS AGREEMENT is evidence that in consideration of the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) now paid by each party to the other and for other good and valuable consideration (the receipt of which each party hereby acknowledges) the Owners and the City each covenant with the other as follows: Effective Date 1.The date of final adoption of the bylaw to which this Agreement is attached is the "Effective Date". Conservation of the Existing Heritage Buildings 2.The Owners shall, promptly following the Effective Date, commence and complete the restoration, renovation and conservation of the Existing Heritage Building (the “Work”) in accordance with recommendations set out in the Conservation Plan attached as Schedule “C” to this Agreement (the “Conservation Plan”). 3.Prior to commencement of the Work, the Owners shall obtain from the City all necessary permits and licences, including a heritage alteration permit. 4.The Work shall be done at the Owners’ sole expense in accordance with generally accepted engineering, architectural and heritage conservation practices. If any conflict or ambiguity arises in the interpretation of the Conservation Plan, the parties agree that the conflict or ambiguity shall be resolved in accordance with the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, Second Edition, published by Parks Canada in 2010, or any future update to this edition. 5.The Owners shall, at their sole expense, engage a member of the British Columbia Association of Heritage Professionals (the “Registered Professional”) to oversee the Work and to perform the duties set out in section 7 of this Agreement. 6.If the intent is to have a strata titled development, the Owner as the owner developer will insure that the maintenance requirements discussed in this Agreement will be set out within the by-laws governing the strata titled development before the first meeting of the owners of the strata development. The by-laws that reflect these maintenance requirements, and the maintenance requirements themselves, shall not be changed without the prior written consent of the City. 7.The Owners shall cause the Registered Professional to: (a)prior to commencement of the Work, provide to the City an executed and sealed Confirmation of Commitment in the form attached as Schedule “D” to this Agreement; (b)while the Existing Heritage Building is being stored on the Lands, insure it is secured at all times and suitable measures are in place to protect it from any damage during excavation activities and construction on the Property. All contractors and tradespersons shall be made aware that the Existing Heritage Building is a protected heritage building; (c)throughout the course of the Work, effectively oversee the work of all contractors and tradespersons and inspect all materials leaving and arriving at the site to ensure that the Work is carried out in accordance with the Conservation Plans; (d)obtain the City’s approval for any changes to the Work, including any amended permits that may be required; (e)upon substantial completion of the Work, provide to the City an executed and sealed Certification of Compliance in the form attached as Schedule “E” to this Agreement; and (f)notify the City within one (1) business day if the Registered Professional’s engagement by the Owners is terminated for any reason. Heritage Revitalization Information Sign 8.The Owners shall erect on the Lands and keep erected throughout the course of the Work, a sign of sufficient size and visibility to effectively notify contractors and tradespersons entering onto the Lands as well as the general public that the Work involves protected heritage property and is being carried out for heritage conservation purposes stating as follows: PROTECTED HERITAGE SITE Gillespie Residence No Vandalism or Removal of Materials Maximum Individual Penalty: $50,000 and 2 years imprisonment: Future Development 9.The Owners agrees to relocate the Existing Heritage Building onto a new foundation and complete the Works prior to any further development of the Lands. Timing of Restoration 10.The Owners shall commence and complete all actions required for the completion of the Work in accordance with this Agreement within 18 months following the Effective Date. Ongoing Maintenance 11. Following completion of the Work, the Owners shall, in perpetuity, maintain the Existing Heritage Building and the Lands in good repair in accordance with the provisions and the checklist in Section 6.0 Maintenance Plan contain in the Conservation Plan and the maintenance standards set out in Maple Ridge Heritage Site Maintenance Standards Bylaw No. 6710-2009. Security: 12. As security for the due and proper storage on the Lands, relocation onto a permanent foundation on the Lands and the completion of all Works for the Existing Heritage Building on the Lands, the Owners shall deposit a security with the City in the amount of $25,000.00 in the form of a letter of credit (the “Security”). The Owners will, without notice from the City, renew the Security prior to the expiration of its term. If the Owners fail or neglect to renew the Security not less than one month prior to the expiration of its term, the City may make demand upon such Security and hold the proceeds so obtained in place of the Security. In the event that the Existing Heritage Building is completely destroyed prior to the Works being completed and final occupancy granted by the City, then, without limiting the City’s other rights and remedies under this Agreement and the relevant statutory provisions, the Security with any interest thereon shall be forfeited to the City as liquidated damages, the parties agreeing that the Security shall constitute a genuine pre-estimate of damages arising from the loss of the Existing Heritage Building in its original state. Damage to or Destruction of Existing Heritage Building 13. If the Existing Heritage Building is damaged, the Owners shall obtain a heritage alteration permit and any other necessary permits and licences and, in a timely manner, shall restore and repair the Existing Heritage Building to the same condition and appearance that existed before the damage occurred. 14. If, in the opinion of the City, the Existing Heritage Building is completely destroyed, the Owners shall construct a replica, using contemporary materials if necessary, of the Existing Heritage Building that complies in all respects with the Conservation Plan and with the City’s Zoning Bylaw as varied by this Agreement, after having obtained a heritage alteration permit and all other necessary permits and licences. 15. The Owners shall use their best efforts to commence and complete any repairs to the Existing Heritage Building, or the construction of any replica or replacement building, with reasonable dispatch. Variations to City’s Zoning and Parking Bylaws 16. Maple Ridge Zoning By-law No. 7600-2019 (the “Zoning Bylaw”) is varied and supplemented in its application to the Lands and the Existing Heritage Building in the manner and to the extent provided in the table attached as Schedule “F” to this Agreement. Heritage Designation 17. The Owners hereby irrevocably agree to the designation of the Existing Heritage Building and that portion of the Lands containing the Existing Heritage Building as identified on the plan attached herein as Schedule “G”, as a municipal heritage site in accordance with section 967 of the Local Government Act, and release the City from any obligation to compensate the Owners in any form for any reduction in the market value of the Lands or that portion of the Lands that may result from the designation. Tax Exemption Conditions 18. The City hereby exempts from City property taxation, for five (5) years following the Effective Date, that portion of the Lands on which the Existing Heritage Building is located, as shown on the sketch map attached as Schedule “A”, on the following conditions: (a) all items agreed to within this Agreement must be met; (b) any other fees and charges related to the Lands and the Existing Heritage Building due to the City of Maple Ridge are paid in full; (c) the Owners are not in contravention of any other City of Maple Ridge bylaw. 19. If any condition set out in section 18 above is not met to the satisfaction of the City, acting reasonably, then the Owners must pay to the City the full amount of tax exemptions received, plus interest, immediately upon written demand. 20. Without limiting the foregoing, if the Existing Heritage Building is completely destroyed and the Owners are required to construct a replica building in accordance with section 13, the tax exemption granted by section 18 shall be at an end and the Owners shall pay to the City the full amount of tax exemptions received, plus interest, immediately upon written demand. Interpretation 21. In this Agreement, “Owners” shall mean the registered owners of the Lands or a subsequent registered owner of the Lands, as the context requires or permits. Conformity with City Bylaws 22. The Owners acknowledge and agree that, except as expressly varied by this Agreement, any development or use of the Lands, including any construction, restoration and repair of the Existing Heritage Building, must comply with all applicable bylaws of the City. Heritage Alteration Permits 23. Following completion of the Work in accordance with this Agreement, the Owners shall not alter the heritage character or the exterior appearance of the Existing Heritage Building, except as permitted by a heritage alteration permit issued by the City. Statutory Authority Retained 24.Nothing in this Agreement shall limit, impair, fetter or derogate from the statutory powers of the City, all of which powers may be exercised by the City from time to time and at any time to the fullest extent that the City is enabled. Indemnity 25.The Owners hereby release, indemnify and save the City, its officers, employees, elected officials, agents and assigns harmless from and against any and all actions, causes of action, losses, damages, costs, claims, debts and demands whatsoever by any person, arising out of or in any way due to the existence or effect of any of the restrictions or requirements in this Agreement, or the breach or non-performance by the Owners of any term or provision of this Agreement, or by reason of any work or action of the Owners in performance of their obligations under this Agreement or by reason of any wrongful act or omission, default, or negligence of the Owners. 26.In no case shall the City be liable or responsible in any way for: (a)any personal injury, death or consequential damage of any nature whatsoever, howsoever caused, that be suffered or sustained by the Owners or by any other person who may be on the Lands; or (b)any loss or damage of any nature whatsoever, howsoever caused to the Lands, or any improvements or personal property thereon belonging to the Owners or to any other person, arising directly or indirectly from compliance with the restrictions and requirements in this Agreement, wrongful or negligent failure or omission to comply with the restrictions and requirements in this Agreement or refusal, omission or failure of the City to enforce or require compliance by the Owners with the restrictions or requirements in this Agreement or with any other term, condition or provision of this Agreement. No Waiver 27.No restrictions, requirements or other provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to have been waived by the City unless a written waiver signed by an officer of the City has first been obtained, and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, no condoning, excusing or overlooking by the City on previous occasions of any default, nor any previous written waiver, shall be taken to operate as a waiver by the City of any subsequent default or in any way defeat or affect the rights and remedies of the City. Inspection 28.Upon request, the Owners shall advise or cause the Registered Professional to advise the City’s Planning Department of the status of the Work, and, without limiting the City’s power of inspection conferred by statute and in addition to such powers, the City shall be entitled at all reasonable times and from time to time to enter onto the Lands for the purpose of ensuring that the Owners are fully observing and performing all of the restrictions and requirements in this Agreement to be observed and performed by the Owners. Enforcement of Agreement 29. The Owners acknowledge that it is an offence under section 981(1)(c) of the Local Government Act to alter the Lands or the Existing Heritage Building in contravention of this Agreement, punishable by a fine of up to $50,000.00 or imprisonment for a term of up to 2 years, or both. 30. The Owners acknowledge that it is an offence under section 981(1)(b) of the Local Government Act to fail to comply with the requirements and conditions of any heritage alteration permit issued to the Owners pursuant to this Agreement and section 972 of the Local Government Act, punishable in the manner prescribed in the preceding section. 31. The Owners acknowledge that, if the Owners alter the Lands or the Existing Heritage Building in contravention of this Agreement, the City may apply to the B.C. Supreme Court for: (a) an order that the Owners restore the Lands or the Existing Heritage Building to its condition before the contravention; (b) an order that the Owners undertake compensatory conservation work on the Lands or the Existing Heritage Building; (c) an order requiring the Owners to take other measures specified by the Court to ameliorate the effects of the contravention; and (d) an order authorizing the City to perform any and all such work at the expense of the Owners. 32. The Owners acknowledge that, if the City undertakes work to satisfy the terms, requirements or conditions of any heritage alteration permit issued to the Owners pursuant to this Agreement upon the Owners’ failure to do so, the City may add the cost of the work and any incidental expenses to the taxes payable with respect to the Lands, or may recover the cost from any security that the Owners have provided to the City to guarantee the performance of the terms, requirements or conditions of the permit, or both. 33. The Owners acknowledge that the City may file a notice on title to the Lands in the land title office if the terms and conditions of the Agreement have been contravened. 34. The City may notify the Owners in writing of any alleged breach of this Agreement to the Owners shall have the time specified in the notice to remedy the breach. In the event that the Owners fail to remedy the breach within the time specified, the City may enforce this Agreement by: (a) seeking an order for specific performance of this Agreement; (b) any other means specified in this Agreement; or (c) any means specified in the Community Charter or the Local Government Act, and the City’s resort to any remedy for a breach of this Agreement does not limit its right to resort to any other remedy available at law or in equity. Headings 35. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation of this Agreement or any of its provisions. Appendices 36. All schedules to this Agreement are incorporated into and form part of this Agreement. Number and Gender 37. Whenever the singular or masculine or neuter is used in this Agreement, the same shall be construed to mean the plural or feminine or body corporate where the context so requires. Successors Bound 38. All restrictions, rights and liabilities herein imposed upon or given to the respective parties shall extend to and be binding upon their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns. Severability 39. If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the invalid portion shall be severed and the decision that it is invalid shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Owners and the City have executed this Agreement on the dates set out below. Signed, Sealed and Delivered by INSERT in the presence of: Name Address Occupation ______________________________ Date ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) INSERT The Corporate Seal of CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE was hereunto affixed in the presence of: Mayor: Corporate Officer: ______________________________ Date C/S SCHEDULE “A” EXISTING HERITAGE BUILDING SCHEDULE “B” PROPOSED SITE PLAN SCHEDULE “C” CONSERVATION PLAN GILLESPIE HOUSE 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BC CONSERVATION PLAN AUGUST 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC 1030 - 470 GRANVILLE STREET VANCOUVER BC V6C 1V5 info@donaldluxton.com 604 688 1216 www.donaldluxton.com DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC 1030 - 470 GRANVILLE STREET VANCOUVER BC V6C 1V5 info@donaldluxton.com 604 688 1216 www.donaldluxton.com 1. INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................1 2. HISTORIC CONTEXT ................................................................................................2-3 3. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE ..................................................................................4 4. CONSERVATION GUIDELINES 4.1 Standards & Guidelines .........................................................................................5 4.2 Conservation References .......................................................................................6 4.3 General Conservation Strategy ..............................................................................7 4.4 Sustainability Strategy ...........................................................................................8 4.5 Alternate Compliance ...........................................................................................9 4.5 Site Protection & Stabilization .............................................................................10 5. CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Site ....................................................................................................................11 5.2 Overall Form, Scale, & Massing...........................................................................12 5.3 Foundation .........................................................................................................12 5.4 Exterior Wood-Frame Walls .................................................................................13 5.5 Roof ..................................................................................................................14 5.5.1 Chimney ..................................................................................................15 5.6 Front Porch .........................................................................................................16 5.7 Fenestration ........................................................................................................17 5.7.1 Windows & Trims ......................................................................................17 5.7.2 Doors & Trims ......................................................................................18-19 5.8 Exterior Colour Schedule ....................................................................................20 6. MAINTENANCE PLAN 6.1 Maintenance Guidelines .....................................................................................21 6.2 Permitting ...........................................................................................................21 6.3 Routine, Cyclical & Non-Destructive Cleaning ....................................................21 6.4 Repairs & Replacement of Deteriorated Materials ................................................22 6.5 Inspections .........................................................................................................22 6.6 Information File ..................................................................................................22 6.7 Exterior Maintenance .....................................................................................23-25 APPENDIX A: RESEARCH SUMMARY ......................................................................26-27 GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION HISTORIC NAME: Gillespie Residence CIVIC ADDRESS: 12061 Laity Street, Maple Ridge, BC ORIGINAL OWNERS: William Francis Gillespie DATE OF CONSTRUCTION: 1929 The one and one-half storey Craftsman-style house is typical of the simple bungalows built in the late 1920s and 1930s, which demonstrate the austerity of the local economy at the time. The house features a side-gabled roofline with a flat-roofed porch with square columns, double-hung windows and glazed front entry door. It was built for the Gillespie family in 1929, at the time that William Gillespie was hired as the local agent for the B.C. Electric Railway Company. It is typical of the growth seen to the west of the Haney area due to the expansion of the local road network. An overall rehabilitation scheme has been prepared as part of a larger infill developement scheme on the site. This Conservation Plan is based on Parks Canada’s Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. It outlines the preservation, restoration, and rehabilitation that will occur as part of the proposed development. GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 20172 2.0 HISTORIC CONTEXT Downtown Haney, looking west during the flood of 1948. [Maple Ridge Museum & Archives P07068] GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 3 HISTORIC CONTEXT By 1874, several small communities had sprung up, consisting of a few families each, on the north side of the Fraser River in the areas that would become The Ridge, Port Haney, Port Hammond, Pitt Meadows, Whonnock, Ruskin and Albion. One of the problems of smaller communities is that they remain isolated unless some means is found to connect them. These early settlements, sometimes less than a handful of homes, were at the river’s shore, when water was the only practical method of transportation. The arrival of the Canadian Pacific Railway, with stations at Port Hammond and Port Haney, provided much more convenient access between Port Hammond and Port Haney. In 1930, after the completion of the Lougheed Highway, ‘Haney’ became the dominant name for the residential and business area along the new highway between Pitt Meadows and Kanaka Creek. The area between the two communities was known as The Ridge. This modest residence was built for Mrs. and Mrs. William F. Gillespie, after William Gillespie was hired as the local agent and representative for the B.C. Electric Railway. The Gillespies acquired the lot from Eliza Moore Burnett, a local school teacher. Burnett was known to have contracted other houses in the area; it is unknown if the listed contractor “Mr. Burnett” was related to Eliza Burnett. The Gillespie family owned the house until 1940, when it was purchased by the Orro family who owned it for four decades. GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 20174 3.0 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE GUILLESPIE HOUSE 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BC Description of the Historic Place The Gillespie Residence is a one and one-half storey, wood-frame house with full basement located at 12061 Laity Street in The Ridge neighbourhood of Maple Ridge. This Late Craftsman-style house was constructed during the interwar period, and features a side-gabled roof, a flat-roofed porch with square columns, double-hung windows and a glazed front entry door. Heritage Value of the Historic Place Constructed in 1929, the Gillespie Residence is significant for its association with the interwar development of the greater Haney neighbourhood. It is typical of the modest family houses constructed west of Haney to support the growing population that was facilitated by the expansion of the local road network. The Gillespie Residence is a small bungalow that displays vernacular Late Craftsman style detailing, popular during the 1920s but typically more restrained than pre-war examples, reflecting the economic austerity of the times. Character-Defining Elements The elements that define the heritage character of the Gillespie Residence include its: •location on Laity Street in The Ridge neighbourhood; •continuous residential use; •residential form, scale and massing as expressed by its one and one-half storey height, side-gabled roof, front shed dormer, flat-roofed entry porch with square columns, and full basement; •wood-frame construction including: lapped wooden siding with cornerboards; intermediate fascia between main floor and gable cladding; and dimensional wood window and door trim; •Late Craftsman influenced design including side-gabled roof with open soffits and exposed purlins, and symmetrical design; •variety of original wooden sash windows, including double-hung windows in single and double assembly; •glazed front entry door; and •one internal red brick chimney. GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 5 4.0 CONSERVATION GUIDELINES 4.1 STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES The Gillespie Residence is a significant historical resource in the City of Maple Ridge. The Parks Canada’s Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada is the source used to assess the appropriate level of conservation and intervention. Under the Standards & Guidelines, the work proposed for the Gillespie Residence includes aspects of preservation, restoration, and rehabilitation. Preservation: the action or process of protecting, maintaining, and/or stabilizing the existing materials, form, and integrity of a historic place or of an individual component, while protecting its heritage value. Restoration: the action or process of accurately revealing, recovering or representing the state of a historic place or of an individual component, as it appeared at a particular period in its history, while protecting its heritage value. Rehabilitation: the action or process of making possible a continuing or compatible contemporary use of a historic place or an individual component, through repair, alterations, and/or additions, while protecting its heritage value. Interventions to the Gillespie Residence should be based upon the Standards outlined in the Standards & Guidelines, which are conservation principles of best practice. The following General Standards should be followed when carrying out any work to an historic property. STANDARDS Standards relating to all Conservation Projects 1. Conserve the heritage value of a historic place. Do not remove, replace, or substantially alter its intact or repairable character-defining elements. Do not move a part of a historic place if its current location is a character- defining element. 2. Conserve changes to a historic place, which over time, have become character-defining elements in their own right. 3. Conserve heritage value by adopting an approach calling for minimal intervention. 4. Recognize each historic place as a physical record of its time, place and use. Do not create a false sense of historical development by adding elements from other historic places or other properties or by combining features of the same property that never coexisted. 5. Find a use for a historic place that requires minimal or no change to its character defining elements. 6. Protect and, if necessary, stabilize a historic place until any subsequent intervention is undertaken. Protect and preserve archaeological resources in place. Where there is potential for disturbance of archaeological resources, take mitigation measures to limit damage and loss of information. 7. Evaluate the existing condition of character- defining element to determine the appropriate intervention needed. Use the gentlest means possible for any intervention. Respect heritage value when undertaking an intervention. 8. Maintain character-defining elements on an ongoing basis. Repair character-defining element by reinforcing the materials using recognized conservation methods. Replace in kind any extensively deteriorated or missing parts of character-defining elements, where there are surviving prototypes. GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 20176 CONSERVATION GUIDELINES 9. Make any intervention needed to preserve character-defining elements physically and visually compatible with the historic place and identifiable upon close inspection. Document any intervention for future reference. Additional Standards relating to Rehabilitation 10. Repair rather than replace character-defining elements. Where character-defining elements are too severely deteriorated to repair, and where sufficient physical evidence exists, replace them with new elements that match the forms, materials and detailing of sound versions of the same elements. Where there is insufficient physical evidence, make the form, material and detailing of the new elements compatible with the character of the historic place. 11. Conserve the heritage value and character- defining elements when creating any new additions to a historic place and any related new construction. Make the new work physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and distinguishable from the historic place. 12. Create any new additions or related new construction so that the essential form and integrity of a historic place will not be impaired if the new work is removed in the future. Additional Standards relating to Restoration 13. Repair rather than replace character-defining elements from the restoration period. Where character-defining elements are too severely deteriorated to repair and where sufficient physical evidence exists, replace them with new elements that match the forms, materials and detailing of sound versions of the same elements. 14. Replace missing features from the restoration period with new features whose forms, materials and detailing are based on sufficient physical, documentary and/or oral evidence. 4.2 CONSERVATION REFERENCES The proposed work entails the Preservation, Restoration, and Rehabilitation of the exterior of the Gillespie Residence. The following conservation resources should be referred to: Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, Parks Canada, 2010. http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/pages/standards- normes/document.aspx National Park Service, Technical Preservation Services. Preservation Briefs: Preservation Brief 9: The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows. http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/9- wooden-windows.htm Preservation Brief 10: Exterior Paint Problems on Historic Woodwork. http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ briefs/10-paint-problems.htm Preservation Brief 14: New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings: Preservation Concerns. http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ briefs/14-exterior-additions.htm Preservation Brief 19: The Repair and Replacement of Historic Wood Shingle Roofs. http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ briefs/19-wooden-shingle-roofs.htm Preservation Brief 37: Appropriate Methods of Reducing Lead-Paint Hazards in Historic Housing. http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ briefs/37-lead-paint-hazards.htm Preservation Brief 39: Holding the Line: Controlling Unwanted Moisture in Historic Buildings. http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ briefs/39-control-unwanted-moisture.htm GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 7 CONSERVATION GUIDELINES Preservation Brief 41: The Seismic Retrofit of Historic Buildings: Keeping Preservation in the Forefront. http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ briefs/41-seismic-retrofit.htm Preservation Brief 45: Preserving Historic Wooden Porches. http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ briefs/45-wooden-porches.htm Preservation Brief 47: Maintaining the Exterior of Small and Medium Size Historic Buildings. http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ briefs/47-maintaining-exteriors.htm 4.3 GENERAL CONSERVATION STRATEGY The primary intent is to preserve the existing historic structure, while undertaking a rehabilitation that will upgrade its structure and services to increase its functionality for residential uses. As part of the scope of work, character-defining elements will be preserved, while missing or deteriorated elements will be restored. Proposed Redevelopment Scheme A redevelopment scheme for this property is currently being prepared, which includes the relocation of the Gillespie Residence within the property site, and the construction of ####, infill dwellings with a garden suite below. All new visible construction and proposed addition to the historic asset should be considered a modern addition to the historic structure. The Standards & Guidelines list recommendations for new additions to historic places. The proposed design scheme should follow these principles: • Designing a new addition in a manner that draws a clear distinction between what is historic and what is new. • Design for the new work may be contemporary or may reference design motifs from the historic place. In either case, it should be compatible in terms of mass, materials, relationship of solids to voids, and colour, yet be distinguishable from the historic place. • The new additions should be physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and distinguishable from the preserved historic façade. An addition should be subordinate to the historic place. This is best understood to mean that the addition must not detract from the historic place or impair its heritage value. Subordination is not a question of size; a small, ill-conceived addition could adversely affect an historic place more than a large, well-designed addition. Additions or new construction should be visually compatible with, yet distinguishable from, the historic place. To accomplish this, an appropriate balance must be struck between mere imitation of the existing form and pointed contrast, thus complementing the historic place in a manner that respects its heritage value. Relocation of Historic Building The relocation of an historic building on an existing lot is the least intrusive relocation approach with regards to loss of historic context and invasive work to the structure. The following Relocation Guidelines should be implemented for the relocation of the Gillespie Residence: • A relocation plan should be prepared prior to relocation that ensures that the least destructive method of relocation will be used. • Alterations to the historic structure proposed to further the relocation process should be GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 20178 CONSERVATION GUIDELINES In 2016, the Federal Provincial Territorial Ministers of Culture & Heritage in Canada (FPTMCHC) published a document entitled, Building Resilience: Practical Guidelines for the Retrofit and Rehabilitation of Buildings in Canada that is “intended to establish a common pan-Canadian ‘how-to’ approach for practitioners, professionals, building owners, and operators alike.” The following is an excerpt from the introduction of the document: [Building Resilience] is intended to serve as a “sustainable building toolkit” that will enhance understanding of the environmental benefits of heritage conservation and of the strong interrelationship between natural and built heritage conservation. Intended as a useful set of best practices, the guidelines in Building Resilience can be applied to existing and traditionally constructed buildings as well as formally recognized heritage places. These guidelines are primarily aimed at assisting designers, owners, and builders in providing existing buildings with increased levels of sustainability while protecting character-defining elements and, thus, their heritage value. The guidelines are also intended for a broader audience of architects, building developers, owners, custodians and managers, contractors, crafts and trades people, energy advisers and sustainability specialists, engineers, heritage professionals, and officials responsible for built heritage and the existing built environment at all jurisdictional levels. evaluated in accordance with the Conservation Plan and reviewed by the Heritage Consultant. This can involve removal of later additions that are not enhancing the heritage value and historic appearance of the heritage house; for example, the concrete corner addition. •Only an experienced and qualified contractor shall undertake the physical relocation of the historic structure. •Preserve historic fabric of the exterior elevations including the wood-frame structure with stucco siding, wood sash windows and roof structure as much as possible. Preserve brick chimney in situ, and relocate with the main structure if possible. Alternatively reconstruct chimney with salvaged bricks to match historic appearance, if unable to relocate with the historic building due to structural reasons. •Appropriate foundation materials shall be used at the new site, which can include reinforced concrete foundations and floor slab. The final relative location to grade should match the original as closely as possible, taking into account applicable codes. •Provide utility installations for electricity, communication and other service connections underground if possible. All installations located above ground should be incorporated harmoniously into the design concept for the relocated structure. 4.4 SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGY Heritage conservation and sustainable development can go hand in hand with the mutual effort of all stakeholders. In a practical context, the conservation and re-use of historic and existing structures contributes to environmental sustainability by reducing solid waste disposal, saving embodied energy, and conserving historic materials that are often less consumptive of energy than many new replacement materials. GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 9 Building Resilience is not meant to provide case-specific advice. It is intended to provide guidance with some measure of flexibility, acknowledging the difficulty of evaluating the impact of every scenario and the realities of projects where buildings may contain inherently sustainable elements but limited or no heritage value. All interventions must be evaluated based on their unique context, on a case-by-case basis, by experts equipped with the necessary knowledge and experience to ensure a balanced consideration of heritage value and sustainable rehabilitation measures. Building Resilience can be read as a stand- alone document, but it may also further illustrate and build on the sustainability considerations in the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. 4.5 ALTERNATE COMPLIANCE As a listed heritage building, the Gillespie Residence may eligible for heritage variances that will enable a higher degree of heritage conservation and retention of original material, including considerations available under the following municipal legislation. 4.5.1 BRITISH COLUMBIA BUILDING CODE Building Code upgrading ensures life safety and long-term protection for historic resources. It is important to consider heritage buildings on a case- by-case basis, as the blanket application of Code requirements do not recognize the individual requirements and inherent strengths of each building. Over the past few years, a number of equivalencies have been developed and adopted in the British Columbia Building Code that enable more sensitive and appropriate heritage building upgrades. For example, the use of sprinklers in a heritage structure helps to satisfy fire separation and exiting requirements. Table A-1.1.1.1., found in Appendix A of the Code, outlines the “Alternative Compliance Methods for Heritage Buildings.” Given that Code compliance is such a significant factor in the conservation of heritage buildings, the most important consideration is to provide viable economic methods of achieving building upgrades. In addition to the equivalencies offered under the current Code, the City can also accept the report of a Building Code Engineer as to acceptable levels of code performance. 4.5.2 HOMEOWNER PROTECTION ACT The Homeowner Protection Act was implemented in 1998 as a means to strengthen consumer protection for the purchase of new homes. The act was passed following a commission of enquiry into the leaky condo crisis, and was intended on protecting homeowners by ensuring home warranty insurance was provided on new construction, covering two years on labour and materials, five years on the building envelope and 10 years on the structure of the home. As the Act was intended to regulate new construction, considerations were not taken of buildings that have remained in sound condition for a many number of years that already far exceeded what the HPA requires for a warranty on a new home. The act did not take into consideration the protection of heritage projects, and consequently resulted in the loss of significant heritage fabric through the requirement of new windows and rainscreen wall assemblies on residential heritage rehabilitation projects. Amendments to the Homeowner Protection Act Regulation made in 2010 allow for exemptions for heritage sites from the need to fully conform to the BC Building Code under certain conditions, thus removing some of the barriers to compliance that previously conflicted with heritage conservation standards and guidelines. The changes comprised: CONSERVATION GUIDELINES GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 201710 1. an amendment to the Homeowner Protection Act Regulation, BC Reg. 29/99 that allows a warranty provider, in the case of a commercial to residential conversion, to exclude components of the building that have heritage value from the requirement for a warranty, and 2. clarification of the definition of ‘substantial reconstruction.’ The latter clarification explains that 75% of a home must be reconstructed for it to be considered a ‘new home’ under the Homeowner Protection Act, thus enabling single-family dwelling to multi-family and strata conversions with a maximum of 75% reconstruction to be exempt from home warranty insurance. The definition of a heritage building is consistent with that under the Energy Efficiency Act. The Gillespie Residence falls into the second category, as the proposed project involves retaining a high degree of the original structure and less than 75% of the house will be reconstructed. Consequently, this project is not considered a substantial reconstruction as per the amended definition in the Homeowners Protection Act, and will be exempt from the requirement of a warranty. This amendment will enable a higher degree of retention and preservation of original fenestration, siding and woodwork. 4.5.3 ENERGY EFFICIENCY ACT The provincial Energy Efficiency Act (Energy Efficiency Standards Regulation) was amended in 2009 to exempt buildings protected through heritage designation or listed on a community heritage register from compliance with the regulations. Energy Efficiency standards therefore do not apply to windows, glazing products, door slabs or products installed in heritage buildings. This means that exemptions can be allowed to energy upgrading measures that would destroy heritage character- defining elements such as original windows and doors. These provisions do not preclude that heritage buildings must be made more energy efficient, but they do allow a more sensitive approach of alternate compliance to individual situations and a higher degree of retained integrity. Increased energy performance can be provided through non-intrusive methods of alternate compliance, such as improved insulation and mechanical systems. Please refer to the Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada for further detail about “Energy Efficiency Considerations.” 4.6 SITE PROTECTION & STABILIZATION It is the responsibility of the owner to ensure the heritage resource is protected from damage at all times. At any time that the building is left vacant, it should be secured against unauthorized access or damage through the use of appropriate fencing and security measures. Additional measures to be taken include: • Are smoke and fire detectors in working order? • Are wall openings boarded up and exterior doors securely fastened once the building is vacant? • Have the following been removed from the interior: trash, hazardous materials such as inflammable liquids, poisons, and paints and canned goods that could freeze and burst? The historic house should be protected from movement and other damage at all times during demolition, excavation and construction work. CONSERVATION GUIDELINES GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 11 A condition review of the Guillespie Residence was carried out during site visits in May and June 2017. In addition to the visual review of the exterior of the building, samples were taken from exterior building materials and examined. The recommendations for the preservation and rehabilitation of the historic façades are based on the site review, material samples and archival documents that provide valuable information about the original appearance of the historic building. The following chapter describes the materials, physical condition and recommended conservation strategy for the Rush House based on Parks Canada Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. 5.0 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 SITE The Guillespie Residence is located at 12061 Laity Street, in the Dewdney Trunk neighborhood of Maple Ridge. The property is in a mid-block location, with the house set back from the main frontage along Laity Street. The site is characterized by a large open lawn area, with limited mature landscaping composed of several fruit trees, and a small collection of shrubs at the front entrance. The un-crowded relationship of the house of a spacious lot was typical of the post war and early settlement period. This provided allowances for gardens and self sustaining activities that were still needed in a semi rural setting. As part of the rehabilitation scheme the house will be moved towards a front corner of the lot to accommodate the construction of detached infill dwellings at the side and rear of the house. The site should be protected from damage or destruction Aerial view showing location of Rural House at 12061 Laity Street. DEWDNEY TRUNK RDLAITY STREETGLENWOOD AVE MCINTYRE CTMCINTYRE CT212 STREET GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 201712 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS at all times. Pease reference Section 4.6: Site Protection for further information. Conservation Strategy: Rehabilitation •Relocate the historic house within the property lines. •Retain the main frontage relationship of the front of the house to Laity Street. •Any drainage issues should be addressed through the provision of adequate site drainage measures. •Design new infill structures that are “physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to, and distinguishable from the historic place” as recommended in Standard 11. 5.2 OVERALL FORM, SCALE & MASSING The Gillespie Residence demonstrates a typical Craftman style, form, scale and massing of the late 1920s and early 1930s characterized by its one and half story height, and front dormer. The overall detailing and proportions of finishes are typical of buildings where the majority of materials were found and locally milled or produced. As part of the rehabilitation scheme, the overall form, scale massing and inherent relationships to the exterior spaces of the historic house will be preserved. Conservation Strategy: Preservation •Preserve the overall form, scale and massing of the building. •The historic street façade along Laity Street should be retained. If the building is moved on the lot the orientation should remaind the same. 5.3 FOUNDATIONS The existing foundations of Gillespie Residence are typical of the period in which it was built and are an eight-inch cast in place concrete with some small areas of rubble infill; however, the stability and construction methods are unknown. As part of the proposed rehabilitation scheme, Gillespie Residence will include new foundation walls and an upgraded basement area upon its relocation. This will occur within the current property lines. Careful attention should be given to insure that the wood- frame walls above are are not stressed or damaged during the move, or while the rehabilitation work is being completed. In its final appearance the house should maintain its same relationship to the grade. Conservation Strategy: Rehabilitation •As new foundations are proposed, concrete is a suitable material. New materials, such as cladding, should match original in appearance, and height, as viewed from the exterior. •Foundations should be reviewed by a Structural Engineer. Once the condition is assessed, conservation recommendations can be finalized. All requirements for code compliance will reviewed and comply with the current BCBC. •To ensure the prolonged preservation of the new foundations, all landscaping should be separated from the foundations at grade by a course of gravel or decorative stones, which help prevent splash back and assist drainage. New vegetation may assist in concealing the newly exposed foundations, if desired. GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 13 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 5.4 EXTERIOR WOOD-FRAME WALLS The Gillespie Residence features wood frame construction typical of the Craftsman style of the late 1920s and early 1930s. This includes painted cedar siding on all elevations that extends past the full height concrete footing complete with a watertable and trim board at the base as well as surviving original wood features such as wood framed windows, and full trims and sills. Overall the condition of the exterior walls is good, demonstrating signs of minor age deterioration such as discoloration, paint peeling, and small holes from redundant fasteners. The exception is the front entrance, which is significantly damaged due to long term water ingress from the interface between the roof and the stoop. Although the front door is intact, separated and repairable, the surrounding framing, sheathing and cladding has been significantly damaged by rot and carpenter ant activity. This will require further investigation to clarify the integrity of the assembly, and what level of restoration and repair is required prior to the door being reseated in the original location. Conservation Strategy: Preservation • Due to the integrity of wood frame structure, the exterior walls should be preserved through retention and in-situ repair work. • Preserve the original wood-frame structure of the historic building. • Preserve original siding on all elevations, if possible, and clean surface for repainting. • Replace damaged siding to match existing in material, size, profile and thickness. • Any existing trim should be preserved, and new material that is visually physically compatible with the original should be reinstated when original fabric is missing. Combed and/or textured lumber is not acceptable. Hardi-plank or other cementitious boards are not acceptable. • Design structural or seismic upgrades so as to minimize the impact to the character-defining elements. • Utilize Alternate Compliance Methods outlined in the BCBC for fire and spatial Guillespie Residence Front Entrance Rot Condition Guillespie Residence North Elevation Cladding GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 201714 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS separations including installation of sprinklers where possible. • Cleaning procedures should be undertaken with non-destructive methods. Areas with biological growth should be cleaned using a soft, natural bristle brush, without water, to remove dirt and other material. If a more intense cleaning is required, this can be accomplished with warm water, mild detergent (such as D/2 Biological Solution®) and a soft bristle brush. High-pressure power washing, abrasive cleaning or sandblasting should not be allowed under any circumstances. 5.5 ROOF Gillespie Residence features an original simple gable roof structure with a front dormer, and one interior brick chimney which projects through the roof near the roof ridge at the rear of the building. The roof structure features exposed framing and trims at the soffit edges. The roof was re-shingled at a later date with interlock asphalt shingles that do not contribute to the historic character of the house. The roof was not directly accessed during the review, however, from grade appears to be in very poor condition. The roof is demonstrating significant biological growth at the leading edge of the shingles, exposed scrim, degranulation, and deterioration in localized areas. In addition several interior leakage locations were noted upon the initial site visit, and the failure has significantly contributed to the rot conditions found adjacent to the front door. The roof should be replaced as soon as possible to protect against any further damage to other exterior cladding and interior structure. The new roofing should match the original appearance of when the house was constructed. Cedar shingles would be the best choice, alternately a three tab asphalt shingle could be used. Roofing materials should be reviewed by the Heritage consultant prior to installation. Guillespie Residence Rear Elevation Cladding GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 15 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS Conservation Recommendation: Rehabilitation • Preserve the roof structure in its current configuration. • If required, roofing membrane and cladding system may be rehabilitated. Cedar shingles are the preferred material, but asphalt shingles or Aged Cedar Enviroshingles™ are also acceptable. • Retain the original bargeboards and fascia boards, as well as the soffit any exposed roof elements. • Design and install adequate rainwater disposal system and ensure proper drainage from the site is maintained. Wood gutters with galvanized steel downspouts are recommended. Aluminum in appropriate colours is also acceptable. Paint or provide specification of drainage system elements according to colour schedule devised by Heritage Consultant. 5.5.1 CHIMNEY Gillespie Residence features one original, interior brick chimney that appears to be in fair condition based on visual review from grade. The bricks of the chimney above the roofline demonstrate some deterioration such as discolouration, bird deposit staining, biological growth, and deteriorated or missing mortar joints. The surviving, original brick masonry chimney is a character-defining element of the heritage asset, and should be preserved, and repaired. Conservation Recommendation: Preservation • Preserve the chimney in its original configuration, if possible. • Chimneys may require structural stabilization. • Investigate condition of brickwork. If required, brickwork may be repointed and cleaned using a natural bristle brush and mild rinse detergent. • If the house is relocated, the chimney should Guillespie Residence Front Entrance Rot Condition At Soffit and Trim Board Interface. GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 201716 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS be moved with the house, ordismantled and rebuilt as required. 5.6 FRONT PORCH Gillespie Residence has a covered porch that extends out directly in front of the front entry, and terminates before it intersects with the windows surrounds on either side of the front façade. The porch was characterized by: flat deck roof, open wood balustrades, tongue and groove and exposed rafter framing, and a wood plank decking that was removed and replaced with a later unsympathetic and incomplete assembly.The connection of the porch and stairs is tenuous at both the roof and decking levels Heritage homes were typified by a low balustrade of approximately 24” in height. To ensure the heritage character of the house is preserved, the restored balustrade design should reflect the original configuration. In order to restore the original balustrade height, alternate compliance measures Guillespie Residence Front Building Elevation GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 17 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS should be explored, such as the use of metal pipe rail and glass panels to make up the remaining height to meet code requirements. Conservation Strategy: Rehabilitation •Original lower height of the balustrade should be restored, with alternate compliance methods utilized to achieve the required 42” height. •Top of restored wood balustrade should be 24”. •New possible alternative materials may be glass panels, metal pipe rails or a combination of both. 5.7 FENESTRATION Windows, doors and storefronts are among the most conspicuous feature of any building. In addition to their function — providing light, views, fresh air and access to the building — their arrangement and design is fundamental to the building’s appearance and heritage value. Each element of fenestration is, in itself, a complex assembly whose function and operation must be considered as part of its conservation. – Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. 5.7.1 WINDOWS & TRIMS Guillespie Residence features surviving, original wood windows, including a number of multi-pane casement and multi-pane double-hung assemblies with true-divided lites. Based on initial visual review of the original wood window assemblies, the window sashes appear to be operable and in good, reparable condition. The glazing in several windows unfortunately was recently broken, and will need replacement. In cases where the glazing is still intact measures should be applied to protect the assemblies as much as possible via removing and storing, or sending out the sashes for refurbishment until the building is resituated may be the best practice to avoid further damage. All surviving original wood window assemblies should be preserved, and repaired as possible. Conservation Strategy: Preservation •Inspect for condition and complete detailed inventory to determine extent of recommended repair or replacement. •Retain existing window sashes; repair as required; install replacement matching sashes where missing or beyond repair. Guillespie Residence Front Entrance Rot Condition At North Side of Front Door GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 201718 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS •Preserve and repair as required, using in kind repair techniques where feasible. •Overhaul, tighten/reinforce joints. Repair frame, trim and counterbalances. •Each window should be made weather tight by re-puttying and weather-stripping as necessary. •Retain historic glass, where possible. Where broken glass exists in historic wood-sash windows, the broken glass should be replaced. When removing broken glass, the exterior putty should be carefully chipped off with a chisel and the glazier’s points should be removed. The wood where the new glass will be rested on should be scraped and cleaned well, and given a coat of linseed oil to prevent the wood from absorbing the oil from the new putty. The new glass should be cut 1/16- 1/8th smaller than the opening to allow for expansion and irregularities in the opening, to ensure the glazing does not crack due to natural forces. Window repairs should be undertaken by a contractor skilled in heritage restoration. •Replacement glass to be single glazing, and visually and physically compatible with existing. •Prime and repaint as required in appropriate colour, based on colour schedule devised by Heritage Consultant. 5.7.2 DOORS & TRIMS Gillespie Residence features original door openings, and one surviving, original wood front door assembly. It has been removed, to secure the building with plywood due to the rot on the surrounding framing. The original doors and trims are important character-defining elements of the heritage asset. All surviving original doors should be preserved and repaired, as required, while unsympathetic replacement doors should be removed and restored with historically accurate wood doors. Guillespie Residence Side Elevation Windows Partially Intact. Overall Sashes and Jambs. GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 19 Conservation Strategy: Preservation or Rehabilitation • Retain the door openings in their original locations, and preserve and repair original doors. • The front door assembly should be rehabilitated and restored. CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS • New doors should be visually compatible with the historic character of the building. • The Heritage Consultant will review shop drawings for new door assemblies prior to manufacture and installation. Guillespie Residence South Elevation Windows Guillespie Residence - Typical Sill Condition Guillespie Residence - Front Door Lites and Frame Intact GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 201720 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 5.8 EXTERIOR COLOUR SCHEDULE Part of the Restoration process is to finish the building in historically appropriate paint colours. A final restoration colour scheme will be developed in conjunction with the project architect. The final colour scheme will be based on a colour palette that will be determined by sampling. Onsite testing will be carried out once access is available, and paint samples assessed by microscopic analysis in order to reveal the original colour scheme of the structure. Conservation Strategy: Restoration •Determine an appropriate historic colour scheme for exterior painted finishes. GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 21 A Maintenance Plan should be adopted by the property owner, who is responsible for the long-term protection of the heritage features of the Gillespie Residence. The Maintenance Plan should include provisions for: •Copies of the Maintenance Plan and this Conservation Report to be incorporated into the terms of reference for the management and maintenance contract for the building; •Cyclical maintenance procedures to be adopted as outlined below; •Record drawings and photos of the building to be kept by the management / maintenance contractor; and •Records of all maintenance procedures to be kept by the owner. A thorough maintenance plan will ensure the integrity of the Gillespie Residence is preserved. If existing materials are regularly maintained and deterioration is significantly reduced or prevented, the integrity of materials and workmanship of the building will be protected. Proper maintenance is the most cost effective method of extending the life of a building, and preserving its character-defining elements. The survival of historic buildings in good condition is primarily due to regular upkeep and the preservation of historic materials. 6.1 MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES A maintenance schedule should be formulated that adheres to the Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. As defined by the Standards & Guidelines, maintenance is defined as: Routine, cyclical, non-destructive actions necessary to slow the deterioration of a historic place. It entails periodic inspection; routine, cyclical, non- destructive cleaning; minor repair and refinishing operations; replacement of damaged or deteriorated materials that are impractical to save. The assumption that newly renovated buildings become immune to deterioration and require less maintenance is a falsehood. Rather, newly renovated buildings require heightened vigilance to spot errors in construction where previous problems had not occurred, and where deterioration may gain a foothold. Routine maintenance keeps water out of the building, which is the single most damaging element to a heritage building. Maintenance also prevents damage by sun, wind, snow, frost and all weather; prevents damage by insects and vermin; and aids in protecting all parts of the building against deterioration. The effort and expense expended on an aggressive maintenance will not only lead to a higher degree of preservation, but also over time potentially save large amount of money otherwise required for later repairs. 6.2 PERMITTING Repair activities, such as simple in-kind repair of materials, or repainting in the same colour, should be exempt from requiring city permits. Other more intensive activities will require the issuance of a Heritage Alteration Permit. 6.3 ROUTINE, CYCLICAL AND NON- DESTRUCTIVE CLEANING Following the Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, be mindful of the principle that recommends “using the gentlest means possible”. Any cleaning procedures should be undertaken on a routine basis and should be undertaken with non-destructive methods. Cleaning should be limited to the exterior material such as concrete and stucco wall surfaces and wood elements such as storefront frames. All of these elements are usually easily cleaned, simply with a soft, natural bristle brush, without water, to remove dirt and other material. If a more intensive 6.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 201722 MAINTENANCE PLAN cleaning is required, this can be accomplished with warm water, mild detergent and a soft bristle brush. High-pressure washing, sandblasting or other abrasive cleaning should not be undertaken under any circumstances. 6.4 REPAIRS AND REPLACEMENT OF DETERIORATED MATERIALS Interventions such as repairs and replacements must conform to the Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. The building’s character-defining elements – characteristics of the building that contribute to its heritage value (and identified in the Statement of Significance) such as materials, form, configuration, etc. - must be conserved, referencing the following principles to guide interventions: • An approach of minimal intervention must be adopted - where intervention is carried out it will be by the least intrusive and most gentle means possible. • Repair rather than replace character-defining elements. • Repair character-defining elements using recognized conservation methods. • Replace ‘in kind’ extensively deteriorated or missing parts of character-defining elements. • Make interventions physically and visually compatible with the historic place. 6.5 INSPECTIONS Inspections are a key element in the maintenance plan, and should be carried out by a qualified person or firm, preferably with experience in the assessment of heritage buildings. These inspections should be conducted on a regular and timely schedule. The inspection should address all aspects of the building including exterior, interior and site conditions. It makes good sense to inspect a building in wet weather, as well as in dry, in order to see how water runs off – or through – a building. From this inspection, an inspection report should be compiled that will include notes, sketches and observations. It is helpful for the inspector to have copies of the building’s elevation drawings on which to mark areas of concern such as cracks, staining and rot. These observations can then be included in the report. The report need not be overly complicated or formal, but must be thorough, clear and concise. Issues of concern, taken from the report should then be entered in a log book so that corrective action can be documented and tracked. Major issues of concern should be extracted from the report by the property manager. An appropriate schedule for regular, periodic inspections would be twice a year, preferably during spring and fall. The spring inspection should be more rigorous since in spring moisture-related deterioration is most visible, and because needed work, such as painting, can be completed during the good weather in summer. The fall inspection should focus on seasonal issues such as weather- sealants, mechanical (heating) systems and drainage issues. Comprehensive inspections should occur at five-year periods, comparing records from previous inspections and the original work, particularly in monitoring structural movement and durability of utilities. Inspections should also occur after major storms. 6.6 INFORMATION FILE The building should have its own information file where an inspection report can be filed. This file should also contain the log book that itemizes problems and corrective action. Additionally, this file should contain building plans, building permits, heritage reports, photographs and other relevant documentation so that a complete understanding of the building and its evolution is readily available, which will aid in determining appropriate interventions when needed. GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 23 The file should also contain a list outlining the finishes and materials used, and information detailing where they are available (store, supplier). The building owner should keep on hand a stock of spare materials for minor repairs. 6.6.1 LOG BOOK The maintenance log book is an important maintenance tool that should be kept to record all maintenance activities, recurring problems and building observations and will assist in the overall maintenance planning of the building. Routine maintenance work should be noted in the maintenance log to keep track of past and plan future activities. All items noted on the maintenance log should indicate the date, problem, type of repair, location and all other observations and information pertaining to each specific maintenance activity. Each log should include the full list of recommended maintenance and inspection areas noted in this Maintenance Plan, to ensure a record of all activities is maintained. A full record of these activities will help in planning future repairs and provide valuable building information for all parties involved in the overall maintenance and operation of the building, and will provide essential information for long term programming and determining of future budgets. It will also serve as a reminded to amend the maintenance and inspection activities should new issues be discovered or previous recommendations prove inaccurate. The log book will also indicate unexpectedly repeated repairs, which may help in solving more serious problems that may arise in the historic building. The log book is a living document that will require constant adding to, and should be kept in the information file along with other documentation noted in section 6.6 Information File. 6.7 EXTERIOR MAINTENANCE Water, in all its forms and sources (rain, snow, frost, rising ground water, leaking pipes, back-splash, etc.) is the single most damaging element to historic buildings. The most common place for water to enter a building is through the roof. Keeping roofs repaired or renewed is the most cost-effective maintenance option. Evidence of a small interior leak should be viewed as a warning for a much larger and worrisome water damage problem elsewhere and should be fixed immediately. 6.7.1 INSPECTION CHECKLIST The following checklist considers a wide range of potential problems specific to the Rush House, such as water/moisture penetration, material deterioration and structural deterioration. This does not include interior inspections. EXTERIOR INSPECTION Site Inspection: ☐Is the lot well drained? Is there pooling of water? ☐Does water drain away from foundation? Foundation ☐Paint peeling? Cracking? ☐Moisture: Is rising damp present? ☐Is there back splashing from ground to structure? ☐Is any moisture problem general or local? ☐Is damp proof course present? ☐Are there shrinkage or movement cracks in the foundation? ☐Are there settlement cracks in the foundation? ☐Is crack monitoring required? ☐Is uneven foundation settlement evident? ☐Are foundation vents clear and working? MAINTENANCE PLAN GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 201724 ☐Do foundation openings (doors and windows) show: rust; rot; insect attack; paint failure; soil build-up; ☐Deflection of lintels? Wood Elements ☐Are there moisture problems present? (Rising damp, rain penetration, condensation moisture from plants, water run-off from roof, sills, or ledges?) ☐Is wood in direct contact with the ground? ☐Is there insect attack present? Where and probable source? ☐Is there fungal attack present? Where and probable source? ☐Are there any other forms of biological attack? (Moss, birds, etc.) Where and probable source? ☐Is any wood surface damaged from UV radiation? (bleached surface, loose surface fibres) ☐Is any wood warped, cupped or twisted? ☐Is any wood split? Are there loose knots? ☐Are nails pulling loose or rusted? ☐Is there any staining of wood elements? Source? Condition of Exterior Painted Materials ☐Paint shows: blistering, sagging or wrinkling, alligatoring, peeling. Cause? ☐Paint has the following stains: rust, bleeding knots, mildew, etc. Cause? ☐Paint cleanliness, especially at air vents? Verandahs/Porches: ☐Are steps safe? Handrails secure? ☐Do any support columns show rot at their bases? ☐Attachment – are porches, steps, etc. securely connected to the building? Windows ☐Is there glass cracked or missing? ☐If the glazing is puttied has it gone brittle and cracked? Fallen out? Painted to shed water? ☐Is there condensation or water damage to the paint? ☐Are the sashes easy to operate? If hinged, do they swing freely? ☐Is the frame free from distortion? ☐Do sills show weathering or deterioration? ☐Are drip mouldings/flashing above the windows properly shedding water? ☐Is the caulking between the frame and the cladding in good condition? Doors ☐Do the doors create a good seal when closed? ☐Are the hinges sprung? In need of lubrication? ☐Do locks and latches work freely? ☐If glazed, is the glass in good condition? Does the putty need repair? ☐Are door frames wicking up water? Where? Why? ☐Are door frames caulked at the cladding? Is the caulking in good condition? ☐What is the condition of the sill? Gutters and Downspouts ☐Are downspouts leaking? Clogged? Are there holes or corrosion? (Water against structure) ☐Are downspouts complete without any missing sections? Are they properly connected? ☐Is the water being effectively carried away from the downspouts by a drainage system? ☐Do downspouts drain completely away? Roof ☐Are there water blockage points? ☐Is the leading edge of the roof wet? ☐Is there evidence of biological attack? (Fungus, moss, birds, insects) ☐Are shingles wind damaged or severely weathered? Are they cupped or split or lifting? ☐Are the nails sound? Are there loose or missing MAINTENANCE PLAN GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 25 shingles? ☐Are flashings well seated? ☐If there is a lightening protection system are the cables properly connected and grounded? ☐Does the soffit show any signs of water damage? Insect or bird infestation? ☐Is there rubbish buildup on the roof? INTERIOR INSPECTION Basement ☐Are there signs of moisture damage to the walls? Is masonry cracked, discoloured, spalling? ☐Is wood cracked, peeling rotting? Does it appear wet when surroundings are dry? ☐Are there signs of past flooding, or leaks from the floor above? Is the floor damp? ☐Are walls even or buckling or cracked? Is the floor cracked or heaved? ☐Are there signs of insect or rodent infestation? Concealed spaces ☐Is light visible through walls, to the outsider or to another space? ☐Are the ventilators for windowless spaces clear and functional? ☐Do pipes or exhausts that pass through concealed spaces leak? ☐Are wooden elements soft, damp, cracked? Is metal material rusted, paint peeling or off altogether? ☐Infestations - are there signs of birds, bats, insects, rodents, past or present? 6.7.2 MAINTENANCE PROGRAMME INSPECTION CYCLE: Daily •Observations noted during cleaning (cracks; damp, dripping pipes; malfunctioning hardware; etc.) to be noted in log book or building file. Semi-annually •Semi-annual inspection and report with special focus on seasonal issues. •Thorough cleaning of drainage system to cope with winter rains and summer storms •Check condition of weather sealants (Fall). •Clean the exterior using a soft bristle broom/ brush. Annually (Spring) •Inspect concrete for cracks, deterioration. •Inspect metal elements, especially in areas that may trap water. •Inspect windows for paint and glazing compound failure, corrosion and wood decay and proper operation. •Complete annual inspection and report. •Clean out of all perimeter drains and rainwater systems. •Touch up worn paint on the building’s exterior. •Check for plant, insect or animal infestation. •Routine cleaning, as required. Five-Year Cycle •A full inspection report should be undertaken every five years comparing records from previous inspections and the original work, particularly monitoring structural movement and durability of utilities. •Repaint windows every five to fifteen years. Ten-Year Cycle •Check condition of roof every ten years after last replacement. Twenty-Year Cycle •Confirm condition of roof and estimate effective lifespan. Replace when required. Major Maintenance Work (as required) •Thorough repainting, downspout and drain replacement; replacement of deteriorated building materials; etc. MAINTENANCE PLAN GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 201726 APPENDIX A: RESEARCH SUMMARY HISTORIC NAME: GILLESPIE RESIDENCE ORIGINAL OWNERS: Mr. & Mrs. William Francis Gillespie ADDRESS: 12061 Laity Street DATE OF CONSTRUCTION: 1929 ORIGINAL CONTRACTOR: Mr. Burnett LAND TITLE SEARCH •September 18, 1923 – January 7, 1920: Andrew Phillips. •January 7, 1920 – March 23, 1923: Claire Annie Phillips (Widow) Trustees, Executors and Agency Limited and Frank Hardy Phillips (In Trust). •March 23, 1923 – October 23, 1930: Eliza Moore Burnett. •October 23, 1930 – February 7, 1940: William Francis Gillespie. •February 7, 1940 – October 24, 1980: Oscar Orro and Laura Noel Orro. •October 24, 1980 – February 8, 2017: Patrick Waddell and Susan Crape. DIRECTORIES •1929 [Wrigley’s BC Directory,] page 922: Gillespie W F electn h 10, 1305 W 15 No listing for Gillespie in Port Hammond or Port Haney •1929 [Wrigley’s BC Directory,] page 515: BCER W G McKay agt BC Rapid Transit Co (Freight Line) E B Carr agt •1930 [Wrigley’s British Columbia Directory,] page 505: Port Haney – Gillespie Wm F agt BCER Port Haney – BCER W F Gillespie agt •1935 [BC & Yukon Directory,] page 472: Port Hammond – Gillespie W F dist rep BCER •1936 [BC & Yukon Directory,] page 185: Haney – Gillespie W F dist rep BCER •1937 [BC & Yukon Directory:] Haney/Port Hammond – BCER and Gillespie not listed •1938 [BC & Yukon Directory:] Haney/Port Hammond – BCER and Gillespie not listed •1939 [BC & Yukon Directory,] page 107: Haney/Port Hammond – Gillespie not listed Haney – BC Electric Co F W Jones agt GAZETTE REFERENCES •Gazette, April 11, 1929, page 1: “Mr. and Mrs. Gillespie, of Vancouver, have taken up residence on the Laity Road in a house recently built by Mr. Burnett. Mr. Gillespie has been appointed by the B.C. Electric Railway to fill the vacancy caused by Mr. McIsaac’s transfer to Chilliwack.” •Gazette, December 24, 1931, page 1: “Local – Personal: Mr. Gillespie, the B.C. Electric Railway Co.’s representative resides on the Laity road near the Dewdney Trunk.” GILLESPIE RESIDENCE: 12061 LAITY STREET, MAPLE RIDGE, BCCONSERVATION PLAN | AUG 2017 27 B.C. VITAL EVENTS •Person: Eliza Moore Burnett; Event Type: Death; Registration Number: 1967-09-008391; Event Date: 1967-06-15; Event Place: Delta; Age at Death: 97. RESEARCH SUMMARY SCHEDULE “D” CONFIRMATION OF COMMITMENT BY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL This letter must be submitted before issuance of a Heritage Alteration Permit or a building permit. To: THE CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE (the authority having jurisdiction) Re: THE GILLESPIE RESIDENCE ___________________________________________________ Address ___________________________________________________ Legal Description The undersigned has retained _____________________________________________ as a coordinating registered professional and member of good standing with the BC Association of Heritage Professionals with experience in heritage conservation to coordinate the design work and field reviews of the registered professional required1 for this heritage project. The coordinating registered professional shall coordinate the design work and field reviews of the registered professional required for the project in order to ascertain that the design will substantially comply with the Gillespie Residence Conservation Plan and Preservation Plan and the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, the B.C. Building Code, and other applicable enactments respecting safety, not including the construction safety aspects. For this project, field reviews are defined as those reviews of the work: a) at a project site of a development to which a Heritage Alteration Permit relates, and b) at fabrication location where building components are made that will replace deteriorated materials identified as character-defining elements for this project. That a registered professional in his or her professional discretion considers necessary to ascertain whether the work substantially complies in all material respects with the plans and supporting documents prepared by the registered professional and with the Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 6913-2012, for which the Heritage Alteration Permit is issued. The owners and the coordinating registered professional have read the Gillespie Residence Conservation Plan and the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. The owners and the coordinating registered professional each acknowledge their responsibility to notify the addressee of this letter of the date the coordinating registered professional ceases to be retained by the owners before the date that the coordinating registered professional ceases to be retained or, if that is not possible, then as soon as possible. The coordinating registered professional acknowledges the responsibility to notify the addressee of this letter of the date a registered professional ceases to be retained before the date the registered professional ceases to be retained or, if that is not possible, then as soon as possible. __________________________________________________________________________________ 1 It is the responsibility of the coordinating registered professional to ascertain which registered professionals are required. The owners and the coordinating registered professional understand that where the coordinating registered professional or a registered professional ceases to be retained at any time during construction, work on the above project will cease until such time as: a) a new coordinating registered professional or registered professional, as the case may be, is retained, and b) a new letter in the form set out in Schedule C in the Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. __________, is completed by the authority having jurisdiction. The undersigned coordinating registered professional certifies that he or she is a registered professional of the BC Association of Heritage Professionals as well as being or working with another registered professional as defined in the British Columbia Building Code, who also has experience with heritage conservation projects and agrees to coordinate the design work and field reviews of the registered professionals required for the project as outlined in the attached plans and specifications. Coordinating Registered Professional Owner _____________________________________ _________________________________________ Name (Please Print) Name (Please Print) _____________________________________ _________________________________________ Address Address _____________________________________ _________________________________________ _____________________________________ _________________________________________ Phone Name of Agent or Signing Office (if applicable) _________________________________________ Date _________________________________________ Owner’s or Owners appointed agent’s signature (if owner is a corporation the signature of a signing officer must be given here. If the signature is that of the agent, a copy of the document that appoints the agent must be attached.) (Professional’s Seal and Signature) _________________________________ Date (if the coordinating registered professional is a member of a firm, please complete the following) I am a member of the firm _________________________________________ and I sign this letter on behalf of the firm. SCHEDULE “E” CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE This letter must be submitted after substantial completion of the project but prior to final inspection by the authority having jurisdiction. TO: THE CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE (the authority having jurisdiction) RE: _____________________________________________ Discipline (e.g. Architectural, Engineering etc.) (Print) _____________________________________________ Name of Project (Print) _____________________________________________ Address of Project (Print) _____________________________________________ Legal Description of Project (Print) (Each registered professional shall complete the following: ____________________________________________ Name (Print) ____________________________________________ Date ___________________ Address (Print) _____________________________________________ City Prov Postal Code _____________________________________________ Phone I hereby give assurance that: a) I have fulfilled my obligations for field review as outlined in Section 6 of the Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 6913-2012 and the attached Schedule D, Confirmation of Commitment by Owners. b) I am a registered professional of the BC Association of Heritage Professionals as well as being or working with another registered professional as defined in the British Columbia Building Code. (if the registered professional is a member of a firm, complete the following:) I am a member of the firm _______________________________________ and I sign this letter on behalf of the firm. __________________________________________ Signature Professional’s Seal and Signature SCHEDULE “F” ZONING BYLAW NO. 7600-2019 VARIANCES AND SUPPLEMENTS PERMITTED THROUGH MAPLE RIDGE HERITAGE DESIGNATION AND REVITALIZATION AND TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT BYLAW NO. 7532-2019 The variances identified in this Schedule “F” to the Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 7532-2019 apply to an only to those Lands within the City of Maple Ridge described below and any and all buildings, structure, and other development thereon: For Maple Ridge Zoning By-law No. 7600-2019: The General Regulations for Permitted Uses of Land, Buildings and Structures are varied as follows:  Section 402.1 1. a. is varied to allow unconcealed accessory off-street parking, provided such spaces are integrated into the landscaping, design and surface treatment of the courtyard area. The RT-2 (Ground –Oriented Residential Infill) zone regulations shall apply to the Lands identified in the Agreement to which this Schedule is attached, with the following permitted exceptions:  Section 616.4 LOT AREA and DIMENSIONS 5. b. is varied to reduce the lot width dimension from 25.0 metres to 24.42 metres;  Section 616.5 DENSITY is varied to allow excluding a maximum of 50 sq. m. of habitable basement area;  Section 616.7 SETBACK 1 (d) is varied to reduce the interior side setback from 2.25 metres to 1.82 metres and further reduced to 1.22 metres from the south interior side lot line for the Gillespie Residence and deleting the exception; and  Section 616.8 HEIGHT 1. is varied to increase the permitted height from 8.0 metres to 8.8 metres. For Maple Ridge Subdivision and Development Servicing By-law No. 4800 - 1993: The standards for Collector Roads contained in this Bylaw are varied along Laity Street as follows:  the minimum road right-of-way width for a Collector Road standard with bike lanes is reduced from the required 24 metres to 18 metres. Applicant initials below confirming the variance(s) requested is (are) accurate: SCHEDULE “G” Portion of Site being Designated ADP Comments with Architect’s Responses Architectural Comments: Consider reviewing the window proportion and placement on courtyard side on north and south elevations; Response: the windows on Building B north elevations have been updated to proportions that are more consistent. Consider keeping materials consistent on the higher gables; Response: all the gables will consistently be clad with board and batten siding. Revisit height of the garage doors; Response: the garage doors have been lowered to 8’6” with a transom window above. Please check turning radii and clearances to ensure vehicle accessibility into garage of unit B and surface stall between C and D; Consider reviewing the materiality of the elevations facing the courtyard to reduce the overall height; Response: Board and batten siding is added to break up the facades further. Landscape Comments: Incorporate fruit trees to preserve character; Response: Two (2) fruit trees will be substituted for two (2) small trees in rear yards of the two rear units. Review and comply with recommendations from heritage report for landscape items; Response: Landscape items in the heritage report will be reviewed and addressed where possible. Consider connecting the entrance walkways from Unit A and B to the public sidewalk instead of the driveway. Provide separate vehicle and pedestrian surfacing to limit conflict and improve wayfinding; Response: Entry walkways to front units will be redirected to exit on public sidewalk. There will also be a review of the separation of vehicles and pedestrians on the driveway with possible contrasting paved material to define the walkway and improve wayfinding. The unit paver soldier course edging in asphalt may loosen overtime. Consider containing the pavers in concrete or utilizing an alternate decorative paving material such as stamped asphalt in the central turnaround; Response: Where necessary concrete banding will be used to contain pavers. Evaluate the bench located beside Unit B. Place bench in a location that enhances views of the courtyard and provides better separation from traffic. Response: Relocation of the bench will be investigated bearing in mind privacy issues for units and the need for courtyard overlook and separation from traffic