HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-11-15 Workshop Agenda and ReportsCorporation of the District of Maple Ridge
COUNCIL WORKSHOP A GENDA
November 15, 2004
9:00a.m.
Blaney Room, F' Floor, Mu:: icipal Hall
The purpose of the Council Workshop is to review and discuss policies and
other items of interest to Council. Although resolutions may be passed at this
meeting, the intent is to make a consensus decision to send an item to Council
for debate and vote or refer the item back to stafffor more information or
c1arfIcation.
REMINDERS
November 15
Closed Council Following Workshop
Committee of the Whole 1:00 P.M.
November 16
Public Hearing 7:00 p.m.
ADOPTION OF THEAGENDA
MINUTES - November 1, 2004
PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL
UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
4.1 OCP Review - Housing and Residential Lands
4.2 2005-2009 Consolidated Financial Plan Bylaw
Discussion of staff report dated November 12. 2004 recommending that the bylaw be
given three readings.
4.3 'Grow Operation, Health, Nuisance and Safety Bylaw No. 6274-2004
Staff report dated November '9, 2004 recommending that the subject bylaw be given
three readings. -
,:
Council Workshop
November 15. 2004
Page 2 of 3
4.4 B.C. Hydro Substation - Discussion of Municipal Role
4.5 Proposal Review of KroIl Report
Staff report dated November 10, 2004 recommending that Carousel Enterprises
Limited be awarded the contract for the review of the Kroll Report.
5 CORRESPONDENCE
The following correspondence has been received and requires a response. Staff is seeking
direction from Council on each item. Options that Council may consider include:
Acknowledge receipt of correspondence and advise that no further action will be taken
Direct staff to prepare a report and recommendation regarding the subject natter.
Forward the correspondence to a regular Council meeting for further discussion.
Once direction is given the appropriate response will be sent.
5.1 Lower Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee
Letter dated November 5. 2004 from Mayor Ralph Drew, Chair, requesting that
Council consider a resolution in support of LMTAC's concerns regarding Treaty
Negotiations.
6 BRIEFING ON OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST/QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL
7. MA TTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT
8. ADJOURNMENT
Checked by
Council Workshop
November 15, 2004
Page 3 of 3
Rules for Holding a Closed Meeting
A part of a council meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to
one or more of the following:
personal information about an identifiable individual whoholds or is being considered for a position
as an officer, employee or agent of the municipality or another position appointed by the municipality;
personal information about an identifiable individual who is being considered for a municipal award
or honour, or who has offered to provide a gift to the municipality on condition of anonymity;
labour relations or employee negotiations; -
the security of property of the municipality;
the acquisition. disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if the council considers that
disclosure might reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the municipality;
law enforcement, if the council considers that disclosure might reasonably be expected to harm the
conduct of an investigation under or enforcement of an enactment;
litigation or potential litigation affecting the municipality;
an administrative tribunal hearing or potential administrative tribunal hearing affecting the
municipality, other than a hearing to be conducted by the council or a delegate of council
the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary
for that purpose;
information that is prohibited or information that if it were presented in a document would be
prohibited from disclosure under section 21 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of
Privacy Act;
negotiations and related discussions respecting the proposed provision of a municipal service that
are at their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the council, could reasonably be expected to
harm the interests of the municipality if they were held in public;
(1) discussions with municipal officers and employees respecting municipal objectives, measures and
progress reports for the purposes of preparing an annual report under section 98 annual municipal
report]
(rn) a matter that, under another enactment, is such that the public may be excluded from the meeting;
the consideratiOn of whether a council meeting should be closed under a provision of this subsection
of subsection (2)
the consideration of whether the authority under section 91 (other persons attending closed
meetings) should be exercised in relation to a council meeting.
information relating to local government participation in provincial negotiations with First
Nations. where an agreement provides that the information is to be kept confidential.
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
TO: Her Worship Mayor Kathy Morse DATE: November 12, 2004
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: Council
SUBJECT: 2005-2009 Consolidated Financial Plan Bylaw
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Through a public participation process, Council has deliberated the 2005 - 2009 Consolidated Financial
Plan. Council has received a presentation of the 2005 - 2009 Business Plans from each of the corporate
divisions that represent the capital and operating expenditures for the municipality. Council has also
carefully reviewed the revenue sources and funding levels necessary support the proposed expenditures
and the impact to the tax payer. This plan also reflects a start to the implementation of Council's
Strategic Financial Planning Policies that relate to financial governance and sustainability.
This by-law will provide the authorization required to carry out the Business Plans presented to the Mayor
and Council and the public on November 8 th and 9th, 2004.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Maple Ridge Consolidated Financial Plan Bylaw No. 6278 - 2004 be read a first, second
and third time.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The Municipality is currently authorized to make expenditures under the Amended 2004 - 2008
Financial Plan Bylaw No. 6267 that was adopted on September 28, 2004. However, this plan will
be outdated at year end. It does not represent Council's recommendation to move forward with
the Business Plans as presented in a public participation process on November 8 th & 9th•
The 2005 - 2009 Consolidated Financial Plan provides for the following:
• Real Growth (additions to the Tax Roil) 2.75% -
• Property Tax revenue increase of 4%
• Building Permit Revenue of $1.2M
• Increase in the Water Utility rate of $14.30 to $253.50 to provide for the increased rate for
purchased water from the GVWD and capital improvements
• Increase in the Sewer Utility rate of $10.30 to $184.50 to provide for increased disposal and
treatment costs at the GVS &DD and capital improvements
• Increase of the Recycling Depot Charge of $1.03 to $25.75
• Increase of the Recycling Blue Box Collection Charge of $.48 to $26.00
• Increase of the Recycling Collection Charge for Apartments of $.77 to $26.00
• Adjustments to various revenue projections based on current experience and information.
• Increase izfthe Provincial Government Grant related to traffic fines
• Increased fuel, energy, electrical, comm nications and insurance costs
Z/. '0.,
• Comiñunity Grants maintained at prior level of $33,000
Desired Outcome
Adoption of the 2005 - 2009 Consolidated Financial Plan will enable the operating and capital
programs to proceed.
Strategic Alignment:
All departments prepared and presented a Business Plan, which then became the driver of their
individual Financial Plans. These were achieved within the guidelines set in Business Planning
Guidelines 8 h Edition. This document is reviewed and amended annually in consultation with
Council.
The Financial Plan reflects Council's Strategic Financial Planning Policies.
Financial Plan/Business Plan Implications:
The financial implications are represented in the schedule accompanying the bylaw. In summary,
this bylaw will provide authorization for consolidated expenditures of $82.3M. However, $8M is
for internal transfers to reserves. The following is an expenditure outline:
• $17.5M - Capital Program
• $52.1M- Operating Expenditures
• $4.7M - Debt Service
• $8.OM- Internal Reserve Transfers
The revenue sources to fund the expenditures are as follows:
• $39. 1M- Property Taxation, Grants in Lieu, Parcel Charges
• $20.6M- Fees & Charges; this includes $1.2M in Building Permit Revenue
• $5.2M - Grants, Interest Income & Other
• $4.3- Development Cost Charges & Development Fees
• $13.1M- Internal Reserves & Surplus
Financial obligations with respect to the acquisition of the Downtown Core Development are in
the plan based on agreements for purchase and the fact MRMH Ltd. is a wholly owned
subsidiary. The net impact of these transactions is neutral with regard to the plan as these items
mirror the previous plan. The borrowing proceeds in 2006 and payment of debt represents the
debt buyoutlswap and future obligations.
Citizen/Customer Implications & Communications:
The implication to homeowners, businesses and industry is that they will experience a municipal
tax increase and increase for utility services. The amount will vary depending on the class and
assessed value but will approximate 4%. In addition, there are increases for water consumption
and sewage disposal and treatment.
This Financial Plan provides funding to implement the Fire Master Plan including the
• development of Fire Hall #4. Three additional police officers and an additional Bylaw
Enforcement Officer have been provided for in the plan. There are a number of capital
improvements in transportation services such as a traffic signal on 240th St. @ 104th Ave. and the
part of the Translink cost share program. The 2005 portion of the plan contemplates funds for a
Youth Safe House.
An open invitation was extended to the public to attend any or all of the Business Plan
presentations held during November 2004. Feedback was requested in person at the
presentations, on the District's web site, and by mail and telephone. Under the current "Open
Government" structure the public has continuous access to present commentary and ask questions
with regard to the proposed 2005 - 2009 Consolidated Financial Plan.
t) Policy Iniplications:
None;, all amendments are as per statutory requirement and necessary to generate the revenues to
provide municipal services within Maple Ridge. The increases in rates are per Council direction
and other financial undertakings in accordance per Council adopted policy.
g) Alternatives:
In the event this bylaw is not passed,, the District is not authorized to make any expenditure other
than those identified in the Amended 2004 —2008 Consolidated Financial Bylaw No.6267 - 2004.
This will require some operating changes to ensure that departments curtail or delay certain
expenditures or programs to provide for the increased costs for energy, fuel and safety.
CONCLUSIONS:
The Five Year Financial Plan represents Council's vision and coirimitment to provide quality services to
the residents of Maple Ridge. The Plan provides a forecast of the financial resources that are required to
fund operations, programs and infrastructure for the five years. As the Consolidated Financial Plan is a
multi-year planning, review and reporting process, the number of changes that are now being considered
are minor.
As the Plan provides for a tax increase Council must adopt this plan by by-law prior to adopting the Tax
Rates By-law for 2005. Any Financial Plan changes that occur prior to the adoption of the Tax Rates will
be reflected in an Amended Financial Plan.
Prepared by: ' cob G. Sorba, CGA
Director of Finance
L -
Approved by: Paul Gill, BBA, CGA
GM - Corp. & Financial Services
Concurrence:/ J. L. (Jim) Rule
/ Chief Administrative Officer
JGS/jgs
Summary of Chanqes for 2005-9 Financial Plan
Surplus from 2004-8 Adopted Financial Plan $3,392 $421,463 $271,318 $1,425,911 $2,473,799
Base Budget Adjustments
Police Services
RCMPContract $0 ($106,413) ($178,119) ($393168) ($411,977)
Dispatch Contract (net PM Recovery) ($41,087) ($124,717) ($126,960) ($129,599) ($129,599)
Fund IHIT (currently in RCMP cap) ($50,000) ($100,000) ($150,000) ($200,000)
Fire Department (SuppliesNehicle Mtce.) ($35,500) (S35,500) ($35,500) ($35,500) (S35,500)
• Old Courthouse
Lease Revenue
Operating Costs
Development Services -Wages/Rev Adj.
Information Services -
CDPR
Parks & Facilities
Remove PM POOL Operating Costs (Net)
Transfers/Contingency/Debt adjustments/Training and other
Remove Inflation for 2005
$45,000
($110,000)
($36,900)
$10,500
($22,300)
($55,000)
$2,426
$163,169
$45,000
($1 10,000)
($56,700)
$10,500
($22,300)
($55,000)
$50,834
$163,169
($110,000)
($79,500)
$10,500
($22,300)
($55,000)
$400,000
$59,349
$163,169
($ 110,000)
($103,100)
$10,500
($22,300)
($55,000)
$400,000
($117,881)
$163,169
($110,000)
($127,400)
$10,500
($22,300)
($55,000)
$400,000
($256,952)
$163,169
GST Savings Estimate- Operating Budget $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000
Fine Rev adjustment $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 $400,000
RCMP Members ($175,000) ($300,000) ($300,000) ($300,000) ($300,000)
Police Support Staff (net PM) ($82,000) ($82,000) ($82,000) ($82,000) ($82,000)
Baws Enforcement Support ($65,000) ($65,000) ($65,000) ($65,000) ($65,000)
Community Safety ($30,000) ($30.000) ($30,000) ($30,000) ($30,000)
$48,000 ($77,000) ($77,000) ($77,000) ($77,000)
Fiscal Services $0 ($79,000) ($114,000) ($284,000) ($284,000)
Fire Department
Fire Service Improvement Levy ($600.000) (S1.200,000) ($1,800,000) ($2,400,000) ($3,000,000)
Fire Master Plan Implementation $600,000 $1,200,000 $1,800,000 $2,400,000 $3,000,000
$0 $0 $0 SO $0
$71 4700 ,$744336'' J$105,957 $62Z0320'-'$1.437;740'
Recommended 2005 Incremental Costs
Planning - Upgrade Planning Assistant to Planner 2 ($26,600) ($26,600) ($26,600) (S26,600) ($26,600)
Planning - Environment Tech. to Environment Planner ($16,600) ($16,600) ($16,600) ($16,600) ($16,600)
Recreation - Festival Funding ($8,000) ($8,000) ($8,000) ($8,000) ($8,000)
Social Planning - Support for Safe House Project ($15,900) ($15,900) (S15,900) ($15,900) ($15,900)
Train Whistle Blowing Study ($32,000)
CDPR Admin -Survey (net) ($12,000)
Funding Source - 2004 surplus ' $44,000
Total 2004 Incremental Costs ($67,100) ($67,100) ($67,100) ($67,100) ($67,100)
44,600
Future Years Incrementals Pkgs
Safer Cities ($40,000) ($40,000)
Emergency -Program Assistant (Si 7,300) ($17,300) ($17,300)
Parks -Infrastructure Funding ($50,000) ($50,000)
PM & MR Museum Funding (S13,000) ($13,000) ($13,000)
Parks Mtce. ($45,000) ($100,000)
Operations Mtce ($75,000)
RCMP Members ($200,000) ($600,000)
Development Services ($45,000) (Si 25,000)
Recreation Services - ($45,000) (Si 25,000)
Support Services - - ($45,000) ($125,000)
Fire Services ($45,000) ($100,000)
Water & Sewer Mtce ($50,000) ($100,000) ($150,000) ($200,000)
Utility Funded $50,000 $100,000 $150,000 $200,000
$4,600 $7,236 .-: $9,632 $340
Property Tax Comparison
2004 Average Home
2004 2005
$ 1,091.97 $ 1,135.65
$ 61.15 $ 63.60
$ 1,153.12 $ 1,199.25 4.0%
Average Home Municipal Levies:
General Purpose & Debt Levy
Library
Total General, Debt & Library
Average Home Other Municipal Charges:
Recycling Increase
Water Increase
Sewer Increase
Fire Service Improvement Levy New Charge
$ 1.50
$ 14.30
$ 10.30
$ 22.00
$ 48.10
Average Home Other Agency 2004 Levies:
BCAA, MFA, GVRD
GVTA
School Tax
Less: Home Owner Grant
$ 53.37 ?
$ 69.92
$ 856.99 ?
$ (470.00)
$ 386.99 ?
MAPLE RIDGE
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BY-LAW NO. 6278-2004
A By-law respecting the 5 year Consolidated Financial Plan for the years 2005 through 2009 -
The Council for the District of Maple Ridge in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:
This By-law may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Consolidated Financial Plan By-law No.
6278-2004. -
Statement 1 attached hereto and made part of this by-law is hereby declared to be the Consolidated
Financial Plan of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge for the years 2005 through 2009.
READ a first time the day of 2004.
READ a second time the day of 2004.
READ a third time the day of 2004.
RECONSIDERED and adopted the day of 2004.
MAYOR
CLERK
Attachment: Statement I
Attachement to Financial Plan Bylaw 6278 - 2004
Statement 1
Consolidated Financial Plan 2005-2009
2005 2006 - 2007 2008 2009
REVENUES
External Revenues
Property Taxes $37,252,914 $40,180,952 $42,866,321 $45,416,922 $48,010,838
Parcel Charges $1,868,427 $1,910,516 $1,953,481 $1,989,723 $2,026,549
Fees & Charges $20,571,015 $21,252,631 $21,831,997 $21,920,469 $22,005,966
Interest $1,725,000 $1,725,000 $1,725,000 $1,725,000 $1,725,000
Grants (Other Govts) $3,460,599 $3,320,813 $3,097,988 $4,627,508 $3,362,154
Property Sales $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Development Fees
Developer Cost Charges $4,113,029 $3,605,068 $4,255,391 $4,076,151 $4,128,082
Developer Specified Projects $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Parkiand Acquisition $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 $200,000
Development Fees Total $4,313,029 $3,805,068 $4,455,391 $4,276,151 $4,328,082
Total External Revenues $69,190,984 $72,194,980 $75,930,178 $79,955,773 $81,458,589
Internal Revenues
Borrowing Proceeds $0 $15,941,127 $0 $700,000 $0
Transfer from Reserve Funds
Land Reserve $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Local Improvement Reserve $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Equipment Replacement Reserve $3,540,047 $1,756,080 $739,102 $2,341,516 $1,326,832
Sanitary Sewer Reserve $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Capital Works Reserve $1,595,500 $983,000 $2,138,000 $810,000 $731,000
Fire Department Capital Reserve $1,146,165 $1,178,960 $2,550,000 $1,750,000 $1,500,000
Transfer from Reserve Fund Total $6,281,712 $3,918,040 $5,427,102 $4,901,516 $3,557,832
Transfer from Own Reserves $5,145,500 $5,524,125 $5,582,023 $5,641,499 $5,672,032
Transfer from Surplus $1,695,117 $909,372 $914,628 $860,462 $559,332
Total Internal Revenues $13,122,329 $26,292,664 $11,923,753 $12,103,477 $9,789,196
Expenditures
External Expenditures
Capital Expenditures $17,481,875 $13,300,519 $15,590,276 $16,949,977 $13,119,374
Principal Payments on Eiebt $1,673,762 $17,853,395 $1,745,980 $1,715,511 $1,654,523
Interest Payments on Debt $3,065,021 $2,876,628 $2,712,199 $2,638,145 $2,545,100
Other Expenditures $52,090,980 $55,424,811 $57,868,955 $60,897,906 $63,775,965
Total External Expenditures $74,311,638 $89,455,353 $77,917,410 $82,201,539 $81,104,962
Internal Expenditures
Transfer to Reserve Funds
Capital Works Reserve $683;767 $668,670 $903,431 $689,562 $857,574
Equipment Replacement Reserve $1,741,979 $1,830,398 $1,866,460 $1,905,692 $1,946,163
Fire Dept. Capital Aquisition $769,521 $813,392 $853,200 $893,482 $932,114
Land Reserve $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
Local Improvement Reserve $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Sanitary Sewer Reserve $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000 $80,000
Total Transfer to Reserve Funds $3,295,267 $3,412,460 $3,723,091 $3,588,736 $3,835,851
Contribution to Surplus $O $0 $0 $0 $0
Contribution to Own Reserves $4,706,408 $5,619,831 $6,213,430 $6,268.975 $6.306.972
Total Infernal Expenditures $8,001,675 $9,032,291 $9,936,521 $9,857,711 $10,142,823
TOTAL EXPENDITURES $82,313,313 $98,487,644 $87,853,931 $92,059,250 $91,247,785
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
TO: Her Worship Mayor Kathy Morse DATE: Nov.9, 2004
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: Council Workshop
SUBJECT: Grow Operation, Health, Nuisance and Safety Bylaw No. 6274 - 2004
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Over the past number of years there has been a steady increase in the number of residential, commercial and
industrial premises being used for the manufacturing of controlled substances.
To date, the majority of the costs associated with the clean up and dismantling of these operations have been borne
by the general taxpayers of the municipality. Resources from the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Maple Ridge Fire
Department and Maple Ridge Business Licensing, Permits and Bylaws Department are all involved in the process.
Costs associated with executing a search warrant and dismantling a marihuana grow operation are estimated at
between $3000 and $5000 for police alone. Currently, none of these costs are being recovered from the property
owner. Once an operation has been dismantled, the costs associated with the inspection and re-occupancy of the
premise is being charged to the owner through inspection and permit fees.
These types of operations are not onlyan illicit substance issue, but dangerous and costly to the taxpayer. They pose
a significant hazard to individual safety and have a detrimental impact on neighbourhoods. The nature of these
operations creates risks from carbon monoxide, poisonous chemicals, electrical circuit diversion/overload and a
serious threat of fire.
The Ridge Meadows R.C.M.P. averages between 125 to 150 reports of residential drug operations per year. The
R.C.M.P. report that many of the marihuana grow operations involve organized crime groups and have resulted in a
marked increase in violence associated to this activity. Home invasions, drug rip offs, firearm offences and domestic
violence are increasing in homes used for drug production.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
That Maple Ridge Grow Operation, Health, Nuisance and Safety Bylaw No. 6274 - 2004 be given first, second
and third reading.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The manufacturing of controlled substances has resulted in increased policing costs and serious safety
concerns in both the homes used for the production of the drugs and neighbouring properties. Safety
concerns associated to-both the-generai publicand officials involved in the enforcenettt aaifst homes used
for the production of the drugs and other consequences of this activity include the following:
Fire: Diversion of electricity and tampering with electrical wiring can lead to house fires. The use
of extra exhaust fans in marihuana grow operations can accelerate the fire. This hazard extends
not only to the house used for the manufacture of the drug but to surrounding homes in the
neighbourhood. Often the power loads required for the production of the drug can not be
supported by the electrical system resulting in over heated wiring and fire. In addition, there is the
potential of transformers exploding. Not only does this pose a threat to the occupants of the home
and neighbouring properties but also to firefighters, police and hydro officials who attend the
sites.
Poisonous Gases: The re-venting of the furnace to circulate air to feed marihuana plants can
circulate exhaust fumes from the furnace back into the home. There can also be a build up of
poisonous gases from chemical nutrients used in the production of the crop which circulate in the
home and may also be vented outside resulting in these gases being circulated in the immediate
neighbourhood.
• Human Injury: Occupants of the home including children can ingest the noxious fumes
associated with the manufacturing of the drugs. Children can also fall into and get trapped in the
large vents used in marihuana grow operations as recently reported in the Hamilton, Ontario area.
Occupants are also exposed to mould, chemicals including fertilizers, insecticides, herbicides and
others resulting in health problems and potential learning disabilities in children.
• Environmental: Chemicals used in the manufacturing of drugs are very potent, corrosive and in
some cases poisonous. Growers will often dump these chemicals into local sewer/septic systems
resulting in pOssible contamination to local water supplies.
• Increased Utility Costs: Indoor marihuana grow operations require massive amounts of water
and electricity. In order to prevent detection, the growers often steal the hydro. They tap into and
redirect the systems that bring these services into the home and tamper with the meters that
measure consumption. The costs to cover the increased consumption of electricity and water are
passed along to all consumers. It is estimated that an average indoor marihuana grow operation
consumes between $700 to $1000 per month in hydro which is not paid for by the user.
• Structural Damage to Homes: Marihuana growers will often move load bearing wall supports
and cut large venting holes into the floor, ceiling and roof. Often homes are structurally altered to
enable the growing of more marihuana. Foundation walls are drilled through to facilitate illegal
wiring. Mould and fungus caused by condensation from the grow operation is evident and can eat
through the roof of a home in only a few years.
• Booby Traps and Weapons: Often homes used for the production of illegal drugs will contain
weapons and may be booby trapped to target unauthorized entry. This practice can cause injury or
even death to emergency responders or innocent children who happen to wander on to the
property.
• Higher Insurance Premiums: As noted above extensive structural and cosmetic damage can
result to a home used for the production of drugs. Once discovered, the costs to repair the damage
is often claimed through insurance resulting in increased premiums for all home owners in the
province.
• Increased Policing and Fire Department Costs: The proliferation of the illegal production of
drugs has resulted in increased policing and fire fighting costs with very little cost recovery.
Desired Outcome(s):
That all costs associated to the dismantling and cleanup of properties used for the manufacturing of
controlled substances be the responsibility of the property owner and that prior to re occupancy of the
residence the property is certified to be safe by a recognized authority. Further, through an aggressive
educational program, property owners who are renting their homes will become more familiar with the
signs associated with illegal controlled substance manufacturing and take the necessary measures to curtail
such operations in cooperation with local authorities.
Citizen/Customer Implications & Communications:
Cost recovery of police and fire department investigations and dismantling operations will reduce the
impact on tax payers and the municipal budget. Revenues derived from the program may be re allocated to
this type of enforcement ensuring sustainability of the initiative. A communication strategy should be
developed to inform the public how they may report this type of activity in their neighbourhood as well as a
program aimed at educating landlords.
Interdepartmental Implications:
The administration of the bylaw will involve a cooperative approach between the R.C.M.P., Fire
Department and the Business Licensing, Permits and Bylaws Department.
-2-
Business Plan/Financial Implications:
The bylaw will be administered by the Business Licensing, Permits and Bylaws Department in cooperation
with the R.C.M.P. and Fire Department. They will work together on each file to ensure all costs are
captured and that the premises are safe for re-occupancy. A portion of the revenues received from, the
service cost charges will be allocated to the R.C.M.P. in order to sustain a heightened level of enforcement.
It is anticipated that no additional resources will be required to implement the program.
Alternatives:
Not pass the bylaw and continue to fund the investigation and dismantling of controlled substance
manufacturing through the general police budget.
CONCLUSIONS:
The manufacturing of controlled substances in the District of Maple Ridge continues to grow and the costs
associated with the investigations and dismantling of these operations is very expensive and currently is funded by
the general taxpayers. The adoption of the bylaw will recover some of those costs as well as take steps towards
improving the safety of homes which have been used for the purposes of manufacturing these drugs prior to the re-
occupancy of the premises. In the long run the bylaw may deter some from setting up these types of operations in
the community.
Prepared by: Brock McDonald
Director, Business Licenses, Permits and Bylaws
ale
Prepared by: / Janice Armstrong 7 Officer in Charge, R.C.M.P.
App roved Frank Quinn, P.Eng., PMP
GM: Public Voi9 Development Services
J.L. Jim) Rülë
Chief Administrative Officer
bm
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
Bylaw No. 6274 - 2004
A bylaw to Regulate, Prohibit, or Impose Requirements Respecting
Nuisances, Noxious or Offensive Trades, and Health
and Safety Risks
The Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open meeting
assembled, enacts as follows:
This bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Grow Operation, Health, Nuisance and Safety
Bylaw No. 6274 - 2004".
INTERPRETATION
Inthisbylaw:
"Alteration" means any change made to the structural, gas, plumbing, ventilation
mechanical or electrical components of a Building;
"Amphetamines" include dextroamphetamines and methamphetamines;
"Building" means any Structure or construction used or intended for supporting or sheltering
any use or occupancy;
"Building Official" means the Chief Building Official for the District, and every Building
Official appointed by the District to inspect Buildings or Structures in respect of building,
plumbing, gas or electrical safety standards;
"Controlled Substance" means a "controlled substance" as defined and described in
Schedules I, II, or III of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (R.S.0 1996, c. 19) as may
be amended from time to time, but does not include a controlled substance that is permitted
under that Act or. otherwise lawfully permitted under the District's Business License Bylaw;
"Controlled Substance Property" means
a Parcel contaminated by chemical or biological materials used in or produced by the
trade or manufacture of a Controlled Substance; or
a Building or other Structure Altered to trade or manufacture a Controlled Substance; or
a Parcel which has been used for the manufacture, growing, sale, trade or barter of a
Controlled. Substance therein or thereon; and
which does not meet applicable safety standards under the British Columbia Building
Code, Gas and Electrical Codes, per B.C. Safety Standards Act, British Columbia Fire
Code, Health Act, or other applicable safety regulations including any bylaw requirements
of the District, all as amended from time to time;
"Council" means Council of the District;
"District" means the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge;
"Director" means the Director of Business Licensing, Permits and Bylaws Department of
the District;
"Fire Chieff" means the person who is appointed to be head of the Maple Ridge Fire
Department and every person designated by Council under the Community Charter by name
of office or otherwise to act in the place of the Fire Chief;
"Grow Operation" means the cultivation of marijuana plants or the production of
Amphetamines, or the production of other Controlled Substances;
"Hazardous Conditions" means:
any real or potential risk of fire;
any real or potential risk to the health or safety of persons or property;
any unapproved or unauthorized Building Alteration; or
repairs needed to a Building or Structure
arising or resulting from the use or contamination of a Parcel as a Controlled Substance
Property;
"Inspector" means:
the Fire Chief, and every person appointed by Council or the Fire Chief, as applicable, to
be an officer or employee of Maple Ridge Fire Department;
the Chief Building Official for the District, and every Building Official appointed by the
District to inspect Buildings or Structures in respect of building, plumbing, gas or
electrical standards:
a Peace Officer, including a member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police;
the Director of Business Licensing, Permits and Bylaws;
a Health Inspector appointed by the Fraser Health Authority;
.abvaw-enforcement_offjcer
the deputy of a person, officer, or employee referred to in paragraphs (a) through (f);
other persons designated by Council by name of office or otherwise to act in the place of
persons, officers, or employees referred to in paragraphs (a) through (g);
"Occupier" means a person occupying a property within the District and includes the
registered owner of the property where the owner is the person occupying or if the property is
unoccupied;
"Owner" includes the registered owner in fee simple of real property located in the District
and those persons defined as "owner" in the Community Charter;
"Parcel" means includes land and any improvement comprised in a parcel;
"Pesticides" means a substance or mixture, including a chemical, used to destroy, prevent,
repel or mitigate fungi or animal pests or microorganisms such as bacteria or viruses, and
includes herbicides, fungicides, or other substances used to control pests, plant regulators,
defoliants or dessicants;
"Professional Cleaner" means an individual or corporation that is experienced and qualified
in removing contaminants from Buildings and is licensed to carry on business in the District;
"Re-occupancy Permit" means pet-mission or authorization in the form attached as Schedule
"F" by the Director to re-occupy any Building or part thereof in respect of which the Director
has issued an order to cease occupancy because of a Hazardous Condition;
"Residential Premises" means any Building or part of a Building that may lawfully be
occupied as a dwelling unit by one or more persons;
"Service Costs" means fees in respect of all direct and indirect costs incurred by:
the Maple Ridge Fire Department;
the Maple Ridge detachment of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police;
the District's Business Licensing Permits and Bylaws Department; and
the Fraser Health Authority;
associated with the inspection and removal of a Grow Operation, or illegal activities,
materials associated with illegal activities, and by-products resulting from illegal
activities at a Controlled Substance Property, and includes:
administration and overhead associated with the inspection and removal;
costs incurred for the lawful dismantling, disassembly, removal, clean up, transportation,
stOrage, and disposal of equipment, substances, materials and other paraphernalia
associated with the Grow Operation, or with the use, trade, business, or manufacture of
Controlled Substances; -
costs incurred from the replacement of consumables used, or the replacement of
equipment following exposure to contaminants; and
costs incurred as a result of the analysis of the materials found at the property and the
health and safety conditions at the property
(which shall be determined according to the Schedule of Costs attached to this Bylaw as
Schedule "D");
"Structure" means an erection, construction, repair, Alteration, addition, demolition,
excavation, or other construction which supports or shelters a use or occupancy;
"Tenancy Agreement" means an agreement, whether written or oral, express or implied,
having a predetermined expiry date or not, between a landlord and tenant respecting
possession of Residential Premises; and
"Unsightly" has the meaning given by the District's Unsightly and Untidy Premises Bylaw
6239-2004, as amended or replaced.
BUILDING AND SAFETY STANDARDS
No person other than a person authorized by the owner or operator of an electrical or water
distribution system, shall disconnect from an electrical or water distribution system a meter
installed for the purpose of ascertaining consumption of electricity or water.
No person will divert or install exhaust vents of hot water tanks or furnaces to exhaust into or
within the Building instead of by way of an exhaust vent constructed or installed in
compliance with applicable safety enactments.
No person may construct or install any obstruction of an exit or an access to an exit required
under the Building Code or other safety enactment, as amended from time to time, or remove
fire stopping that is provided or required under a safety enactment to contain the spread of
fire within a Building.
No person may Alter a Structure or Building for the purpose of establishing or operating a
Grow Operation.
If, as a result of the use of a Parcel as a Controlled Substance Property,
the supply of electricity, water, or natural gas to the Parcel has been disconnected by the
District or any other lawful authority;
unauthorized Alterations have been made to structural, electrical, water or gas systems,
equipment, appliances, or other accessories of any kind on the Parcel; or
a Hazardous Condition exists on the Parcel
no person may permanently reconnect the supply of electricity, water, or natural gas and,
subject to the Residential Tenancy. Act, no person may use or occupy the Parcel until:
(d) the Parcel has been inspected by the Building Official and all other lawful authorities
having jurisdiction over the supply of electricity, water, or natural gas, for compliance
with all health and safety requirements of the District's bylaws and any provincial statute
or regulation relating to building, electrical, water, health, gas, or fire safety as amended
from time to time;
(c) the Owner has obtained all permits, approvals or authorizations required to carry out the
work necessary to bring the Parcel into compliance with the District's bylaws and all
provincial statutes and regulations as amended from time to time;
all of the work refeffed to in this section has been completed and inspected by the
Building Official and all other lawful authorities having jurisdiction and the Parcel is in
compliance with the District's bylaws and all applicable provincial statutes and
regulations, as amended from time to time; and
the Owner has paid all Service Fees and other fees imposed by Schedule "A" of this
bylaw and other relevant District bylaws in relation to the inspection of the Parcel and the
issuance of permits, and the Director has issued a Re-occupancy Permit for the Parcel in
the form attached to this Bylaw as Schedule "F".
8. The Building Official. or Fire Chief may post a notice containing the words "Unsafe - Do Not
Enter or Occupy" in a conspicuous place at the entrances of a Controlled Substance Property
in respect of which the:
Fire Chief has made an order to vacate, or
Director has made an order to vacate, or
Council has made an order to vacate under the Community Charter.
9. No person may:
(a).interfere or obstruct the Building Official or the Fire Chief from posting a notice referred
to in Section 8; or
(b) remove, alter, cover, or mutilate a notice posted under Section 8
except with the permission of the Building Official or Fire Chief, as applicable.
NUISANCE
10. No person may cause or permit:
(a) a nuisance as a result of his or her use or occupancy of a parcel; or
(b) water, rubbish or Unsightly matter to collect or accumulate in, on, under or around real
property owned, used or occupied by him or her.
HEALTH
11. No person may cause or allow a Building to become subject to the growth on any portion of
the Building of mould or fungus arising from or in relation to the cultivation of marijuana
plants or production of Amphetamines or other Controlled Substances in the Building.
FIRE PROTECTION
12. Every Owner or Occupier of real property will undertake any action directed by the Fire
Chief or other person authorized by Council to act in the place of the Fire Chief for the
purpose of removing or reducing any thing or condition that the Fire Chief considers is a fire
hazard or increases the danger of fire.
DUTY OF OWNER
13. The Owner or Occupier of real property will not refuse entry to an Inspector who attends the
real property at any reasonable time to determine whether there is compliance with this
bylaw.
TENANCIES
14. Every Owner of Residential Premises or other Building that is subject to a Tenancy
Agreement must inspect the premises at least once every three months to ascertain whether
this bylaw has been contravened.
15. Every Owner of a Residential Premises or other Building that is subject to a Tenancy
Agreement who has: knowledge of a contravention of this bylaw, in relation to the Residential
Premises or other Building, must:
within 48 hours of the discovery of the contravention, deliver written notice to the District
of the particulars of the contravention, and
subject to the Residential Tenancy Act, within two months of the delivery of the notice,
take such action as may be necessary to bring the Residential Premises into compliance
with this bylaw.
REMIEDIATION REQUIREMENTS
16. If a Building has been used for a Grow Operation, the Owner of the Building must, within 14
days after the Grow Operation has been removed, subject to the Residential Tenancy Act:
(a) either remove and dispose of all carpets and curtains in the Building, or have all carpets
and curtains in the Building cleaned by a Professional Cleaner; - --
if the Building is heated by forced air heating, have all air ducts cleaned by a Professional
Cleaner or by a duct cleaning company; and
either remove all mould or water-damaged materials such as, but not limited to, drywall
or gyproc, or have all walls and ceilings in the Building cleaned and disinfected by a
Professional Cleaner,
and the District may deliver to the Owner and Occupier of the Building a letter in the form of
Schedule B.
INSPECTION AND CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT
After a Professional Cleaner has been engaged by the Owner and has completed the
requirements of Section 16, an individual or corporation certified by the Canadian
Registration Board of Occupational Hygienists or the American Board of Industrial Hygiene
must inspect the Building and provide written certification, in the form of Schedule E, to the
Director, confirming that the requirements of Section 16 have been satisfied and that the
Building is substantially free of any Pesticides, fertilizers, toxic substances, moulds, or fungi,
prior to the occupancy or re-occupancy of the Building.
OCCUPANCY
After a Grow Operation has been removed from a Building and until the remedial measures
prescribed by. Section 16 of this bylaw have been completed and written certification has been
provided to the Director under Section 17, the Building must not be occupied by any person.
Before a Building is re-occupied after removal of a Grow Operation,the Owner must notify
the prospective occupants in writing that a Grow Operation has been removed and that the
requirements of this bylaw have been met.
ALTERATIONS
A Building must not be re-occupied after the removal of a Grow Operation until:
a Building permit has been obtained for any proposed or remediation work, including an
Alteration, which requires a permit under the Districts building regulation bylaw;
the Building complies with the health and safety requirements of the British Columbia
Building Code, the B.C. Electrical Code, the B.C. Gas Code this bylaw, and all other
health and safety requirements established by law;
the Owner has paid to the District all Service Fees and other fees due and owing under
this or any other District bylaw,
the Director, or the Chief Building Official has confirmed that a satisfactory occupancy
inspection of the Residential Premises by the District's Business Licensing, Permits and
Bylaws Department has been completed; and
(e) a Re-occupancy permit per Schedule "F" has been issued.
FEES
21. The following fees apply under this Bylaw:
each time an Inspector enters on a Parcel to carry out an inspection in the exercise of
authority by the District to regulate, prohibit or impose requirements under this Bylaw, or
another safety enactment, the Owner must pay the District the administration and
inspection fee stipulated in Schedule A;
an administration and inspection fee stipulated in Schedule A must be paid to the District
before confirmation is provided under Section 20(d);
for each inspection prior to issuance of a Re-occupancy Permit, the Owner or Occupier
must pay the District the Re-occupancy Permit fee stipulated in Schedule A;
to obtain a Re-occupancy Permit, the Owner must pay the District the fee stipulated in
Schedule A; and
every Owner whose Residential Premises or other Building is used as a Grow Operation
or Controlled Substances Property must pay the District all Service Costs incurred by or
on behalf of the District, unless that Owner has given the District notice pursuant to
section 15.
NOTICES AND INSPECTIONS
22. Subject to the Community Charter, an Inspector may attend or request the attendance of one
or more other Inspectors to enter onto and inspect a Parcel, if
the Inspector believes the real property is not in compliance with this Bylaw;
the Inspector is concerned for the health, safety, or possible injury to a tenant, an occupant
or the public; or
• (c) there is property damage to a Building which may affect the health or safety of a tenant,
an occupancy or the public.
23. Subject to the Community Charter, an Inspector may enter on a Parcel at reasonable times
and in a reasonable manner, for the following purposes:
(a) to inspect and determine whether all regulations, prohibitions and requirements under this
Bylaw or other safety enactments are being met in relation to any manner for which the
Council,.a municipal officer or employee or a person authorized by the Council has
exercised authority under this or another act to regulate, prohibit or impose requirements;
Ufldr Sections 2 andZ96yiaw; and --
(c) to inspect or to disconnect or remove a water service under Sections 3 or 26 of this bylaw.
24. The Director or a person acting under the direction of the Director may post a notice in the
form of Schedule C on any Building which has been used for a Grow Operation, advising of
the regulations in this bylaw.
25. No person may interfere with an inspection or proposed inspection of Section 23 of this
bylaw and no person shall remove or deface any notice posted under Section 24 of this bylaw.
DISCONTINUANCE OF SERVICE
26. The District may discontinue providing water service to a Parcel if the water is being used for
or in relation to a Grow Operation on the Parcel, subject to the requirements that the District
must:
give the Owner and Occupier of the parcel seven (7) days written notice of an opportunity
to make representations to Council with respect to the proposed discontinuance of the
water service; and
after the persons affected have had an opportunity to make representations to Council, the
District must give the Owner and Occupier seven (7) days written notice of any proposed
discontinuance of the water service.
OFFENCE AND PENALTY
27. Every person who offends against any of the provisions of this Bylaw, or who suffers or
permits any act or thing to be done in contravention or refrains from doing anything required
to be done by any of the provisions of this Bylaw, or who does any act or thing which violates
any of the provisions of this Bylaw shall be liable on summary conviction to a penalty not
exceeding the maximum penalty specified in the Offence Act from time to time. Each day that
a violation continues to exist is a separate offence against this Bylaw.
DEFAULT
28. If an Owner or Occupier of a Parcel fails to comply with a requirement of the District under
this Bylaw or another safety enactment, the District, within the time specified in the order or
notice may enter on the Parcel and take such action as may be required to correct the default,
including to remediate the Parcel or bring it up to a standard specified in an safety enactment,
at the expense of the Owner or Occupier who has failed to comply, and may recover the costs
incurred as debt.
29. If the Owner has failed to pay the District's costs of acting in default under Section 28 before
the 3 1 st day of December in the year that the correction of the default was effected, the costs
must be added to and form part of the taxes payable on the property as taxes in arrears.
SEVERABILITY
30. If any provision of this Bylaw is held to be invalid, it shall be severed and the remainder of
the Bylaw shall remain in effect.
a
READ A FIRST TIME this
READ A second time this
READ A third time this
day of 2004.
day of 2004.
day of 2004.
COUNCIL CONSULTED with the Regional Health Board/Medical Health Officer
this day of 2004.
DEPOSITED with the MINISTER OF HEALTH SERVICES this day of
2004
RECONSIDERED and ADOPTED this day of_____ 2004.
Mayor
Clerk
10
SCHEDULE AU - FEES
1. The following fees apply under this Bylaw:
(a) each time the District enters on a Parcel to inspect in the exercise of the District's
authority to regulate, prohibit or impose requirements under this bylaw or another safety
enactment, the Owner must pay the District an administration and inspection fee of:
$300.00;
an additional $300.00 for a subsequent inspection undertaken if the Owner or
Occupier has failed to undertake action ordered by the Fire Chief, the District or a
person authorized under the Bylaw to order the action;
(b) before confirmation is provided under Section 20(d), the Owner must pay to the District
all applicable fees under the District's Building Bylaw No. 6180, 2003, as amended from
time to time; and
(c) to obtain a Re-occupancy permit - $250.00
43
11
SCHEDULE "B"
LETTER TO PROPERTY OWNER
Re: Grow Operation Health, Nuisance and Safety Bylaw 2004, No 6274
This letter is to notify you that the District of Maple Ridge's "Grow Operation Health, Nuisance
and Safety Bylaw No. 2004 6274" establishes regulations concerning the cleaning and
remediation of Residential Premises that have been used for marijuana grow operations or
amphetamine production.
The District has been advised by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police that the Residential
Premises at (insert address) were in use as a marijuana grow operation (or amphetamine
production operation) which has been removed by the police.
The bylaw requires that within 14 days, all carpets and curtains in the premises must be removed
or cleaned, any forced air heating ducts in the premises must be cleaned, and all walls and
ceilings must be cleaned and disinfected. That work must be carried out by a Professional
Cleaner with experience in removing contaminants from Residential Premises. The Professional
Cleaner must hold a license to carry on business in Maple Ridge.
After the cleaning is completed, an individual or corporation certified by the Canadian
Registration Board of Occupational Hygienists or the American Board of Industrial Hygiene
must certify that the premises are safe for human occupancy.
Until the cleaning and certification have been completed, Section 18 of the bylaw prohibits
occupancy by any person. Before occupancy, you are required to notify prospective occupants
that the requirements of the bylaw have been satisfied.
- We enclose a copy of the bylaw for your reference. If you have any questions concerning the
regulations in the bylaw, please call the District's Business Licensing, Permits and Bylaws
Department at (insert telephone number).
12
SCHEDULE "C"
NOTICE -
TAKE NOTICE THAT these Premises have been used as a marijuana grow operation (or an
amphetamine production operation).
Pursuant to District of Maple Ridge "Grow Operation Health, Nuisance and Safety Bylaw No.
2004 - 6274", no person may occupy these premises until cleaning and remediation have been
completed in accordance with that bylaw and the Director of Business Licensing, Permits and
Bylaws or his designate has confirmed that a satisfactory occupancy inspection has been
completed.
It is an offence to remove or deface this notice.
Any inquiries should be directed to (insert name and telephone number of appropriate District
official).
13
SCHEDULE "D"
SCHEDULE OF COSTS FOR SERVICE FEES
A. Staff Costs (2 hour minimum charge).
• Corporal R.C.M.P. $64.59 Ihr
Constable R.C.M.P. $61.36 fhr
Bylaw Enforcement Officer $64.59 /hr
Bylaw Enforcement Supervisor $82.87 /hr
Senior Building Official $82.87 /hr
Building Official $79.47 /hr
Health Officer (Fraser Health Authority) $100.00 /hr
Fire Fighter $30.00 /hr
Equipment Costs
• Fire Truck $300.00 /hr
Replacement of Equipment by Cost to District
Exposure to contaminants
Replacement of Consumable Equipment Cost to District
Analysis and Tests of materials or • Cost to District
Conditions found at the property
Administration
Administration and Overhead costs 15%
14
SCHEDULE E
CERTIFICATION FORM
TO: The District of Maple Ridge
FROM: (insert name of professional cleaner)
RE: Premises at (insert address)
This is to certify that in accordance with sections 16 and 17 of the "Grow Operation, Health,
Nuisance and Safety Bylaw, No. 2004 - 6274", the professional identified in this certification:
meets the requirements for a professional inspector under Section 17 of the bylaw;
has completed an inspection of the Premises on (date); and
the Premises are remediated in accordance with Section.16 and as such, are
substantially free from any pesticides, toxic chemicals, moulds, or fungi normally
associated with and found in a "Grow Operation" premises, and that the Premises are
fit for, human use and occupancy.
The undersigned professional may be contacted at: (insert business telephone number).
CERTIFIED AS OF (insert date)
(insert name of professional inspector)
Authorized Representative
15
SCHEDULE F
RE-OCCUPANCY PERMIT
Address of Building:
Legal Description:
Approved Occupancy (use):
The Building remediated under the authority of Building Permit Number:
is approved for Re-occupancy.
This Permit confirms that inspections pursuant to the District of Maple Ridge "Grow Operation, Health,
Nuisance and Safety Bylaw No. 6274-2004" have been completed and remediation requirements have
been satisfied. This Permit is not a warranty that the subject Building complies with all Municipal and
Provincial Regulations governing Building Construction nor that it is without defect. It is only a formal
comment on the remediated condition of the Building at the date of issue only.
This certificate shall be affixed to a conspicuous and permanent place in the said Building and
shall not be removed.
Chief Building Official
Date:
0
ZVI, CORPORATION OF THE
MAPLE RIDGE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
TO: Her Worship Mayor Kathy Morse DATE: November 10, 2004
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN:
SUBJECT: Proposal Review of Kroll Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A call for proposals was advertised for firms to submit proposals for a review of the Kroll Report. Four
submissions were received from interested individuals.
The submissions were reviewed and ranked by the Chief Administrative Officer, the Manager of
Procurement, and the Chair of the Audit Committee (Councillor Harris).
The proposal selected by the group is Carousel Enterprises Limited of Maple Ridge and the individual
undertaking the work is Mr. C.M. (Chuck) Gale.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
THAT Council award this proposal call to Carousel Enterprises Limited of Maple Ridge.
Prepared by:/ J.L. (Jim) Rule
/ Chief Administrative Officer
Z/ - 5, A
DcO/1 7 L(
November 5, 2004
Mayor Kathy Morse & Council
District of Maple Ridge
11995 Haney Place
Maple Ridge, BC V2X 6A9
Dear Mayor Morse & Council:
NOV 0 9 2004
MAYOR
M&CCAO_GM¼
Other
Action:
/
RE: LMTAC Concerns & Pace of Negotiations - Tsawwassen Treaty Table
The purpose of this letter is twofold. First, I want to provide you with a copy of
LMTAC's November 4th letter distributed to the Honourable Geoff Plant, Minister
Responsible for Treaty Negotiations, outlining, the serious concerns of the Lower
Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee member jurisdictions' regarding the significant
outstanding issues still requiring consultation and the pace of negotiations at the
Tsawwassen Treaty Table.
Second, and most importantly, I ask that you place the attached November 4 h letter
on your next agenda for discussion, and that your Council or Board pass a resolution
in support of LMTAC's concerns regarding both Additions to Treaty Settlement
Lands (TSL) and Fiscal Compensation for lands that will be transferred from local
government jurisdiction to First Nations as a consequence of treaty negotiations. I
also ask that you communicate your support of LMTAC's concerns to Minister Plant
with copies to your local MLA.
In the case of the Tsawwassen Treaty Table, municipal consent for the post-treaty
conversion of fee-simple land to TSL is not a prerequisite, unlike all other AlPs in
British Columbia. Specifically, the Tsawwassen Treaty Table AlP has stipulated in
theLands..chapte.r-.under-.clause-•23-that 'Be fore -the =FinaiA greement,- the -Parties -will
attempt to obtain the consent of any municipality within whose boundaries the
Specified Lands fall'; however, clause 25 notes that "The Parties agree that the
consent of municipalities and First Nations to a proposed inclusion of lands as
Tsawwassen Lands should not be unreasonably withheld." Without a clear definition
of what constitutes a "reasonable" basis for withholding approval, such language in the
TFN Final Agreement effectively pre-empts the "appearance" of local government
approval.
Although we have not yet resolved the question of Fiscal Compensation for local
governments that lose a portion of their taxable assessment base as a result of
51
2
treaty settlement land transfers, it is essential that lands transferred post-treaty be
compensated on the same basis as lands transferred at the time of FinalAgreement.
In addition, the Province intends to explicitly identify (designate) fee-simple lands
that, if purchased post-treaty by the First Nation, can be converted to Treaty
Settlement Lands. The act of designating "Specified Lands" for post-treaty
acquisition and transfer to a First Nation is problematic and detrimental to the
owners of privately held lands that get "specified". The very act of designating
properties both encumbers the properties and creates uncertainty for the property
owners. Property sales under such circumstances are not transacted on a "willing
seller/willing buyer" basis because the market is skewed by the act of designation.
This approach is not in the interest of property-owners in British Columbia's
communities.
We ask that the Province's Specified Lands approach for Additions to Treaty
Settlement Lands presently being pursued at the Tsawwassen Treaty Table be
reconsidered and made consistent the many other AlPs in British Columbia.
Your urgent attention to the foregoing would be very much appreciated.
Sincerely,
Mayor Ralph Drew,
Chair, Lower Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee
Attachment
PC: LMTAC Members
/
November 4, 2004
Honourable Geoff Plant
Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Treaty Negotiations
P0 Box 9100 STN PROV GOVT
Victoria, BC V8W 9B 1
Dear Minister Plant,
Re: Pace of Tsawwassen Treaty Negotiations
In recent months I have corresponded with you, on behalf of the Lower Mainland Treaty
Advisory Committee (LMTAC), outlining specific Lower Mainland area local government
interests and concerns at the Tsawwassen Treaty Table and, in particular, concerns related
to Final Agreement negotiations.
During this time, the Parties at the Tsawwassen Treaty Table have publicly stated that the
tripartite goal is to reach an agreement on substantive treaty issues by mid-December.
With less than six weeks until this target date, LMTAC members are deeply concerned that
details of several substantive treaty issues have yet to be decided at the Tsawwassen Treaty
Table and, furthermore, that many of the discussions on the details will not be held until
late November or early December.
Accordingly, it is now apparent that this current timeline will not provide local government
with adequate time to review and provide feedback on issues of critical importance to
LMTAC member jurisdictions, such as, but not limited to:
• Governance and First Nation participation within regional structures and processes;
o Additions to Treaty Settlement Lands;
• Fiscal compensation to local government;
• Representation and treatment of non-member residents on Treaty Settlement Land;
• Taxation and other fiscal matters; and
• Economic fisheries.
We appreciate that the Parties' wish to conclude negotiations in a timely manner to allow
the negotiating table to progress toward Final Agreement; however, more detail on the
above noted key issues and adequate time for consultation with local government must be
provided before the Parties agree to such substantive issues.
... PageTwó --
4th floor, 4330 Kingsway, Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5H 4G8 Tel (604) 451-6179 Fax (604) 436-6860
Minister Geoff Plant November 4, 2004
Page Two, Continued
We trust that you share these concerns, and will ensure that due diligence will not be
displaced by hasty agreements.
Sincerely,
Mayor Ralph Drew, Chair
Lower Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee
cc: Lorne Brownsey, Deputy Minister, Treaty Negotiation Office
Mike Furey, Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaty Negotiation Office
Bronwen Beedle, Chief Negotiator, Treaty Negotiation Office
Cory Herrera, Negotiator, Treaty Negotiation Office
Martha Anslow, Manager, Local Government - First Nations Relations, Ministry of
Community, Aboriginal and Women Services
Director Ted Armstrong, Chair, UBCM Aboriginal Affairs Committee
Alison McNeil. Senior Policy Analyst, UBCM
Joanne Gauci, Policy Arialyst, UIBCM
LMTAC members
copy
November 4, 2004
Honourable Geoff Plant
Attorney General and Minister Responsible for Treaty Negotiations
P0 Box 9100 STN PROV GOVT
Victoria, BC V8W 9B1
Dear Minister Plant,
Re: Pace of Tsawwassen Treaty Ne2otiations
In recent months I have corresponded with you, on behalf of the Lower Mainland Treaty
Advisory Committee (LMTAC), outlining specific Lower Mainland area local government
interests and concerns at the Tsawwassen Treaty Table and, in particular, concerns related
to Final Agreement negotiations.
During this time, the Parties at the Tsawwassen Treaty Table have publicly stated that the
tripartite goal is to reach an agreement on substantive treaty issues by mid-December.
With less than six weeks until this target date, LMTAC members are deeply concerned that
details of several substantive treaty issues have yet to be decided at the Tsawwassen Treaty
Table and, furthermore, that many of the discussions on the details will not be held until
late November or early December.
Accordingly, it is now apparent that this current timeline will not provide local government
with adequate time to review and provide feedback on issues of critical importance to
LMTAC member jurisdictions, such as, but not limited to:
• Governance and First Nation participation within regional structures and processes;
• Additions to Treaty Settlement Lands;
• Fiscal compensation to local government;
• Representation and treatment of non-member residents on Treaty Settlement Land;
• Taxation and other fiscal matters; and
• Economic fisheries.
We appreciate that the Parties' wish to conclude negotiations in a timely manner to allow
the negotiating table to progress toward Final Agreement; however, more detail on the
above noted key issues and adequate time for consultation with local government must be
provided before the Parties agree to such substantive issues.
.Page Two
Minister Geoff Plant November 4, 2004
Page Two, Continued
We trust that you share these concerns, and will ensure that due diligence will not be
displaced by hasty agreements.
Sincerely,
COPY - Original Signed
Mayor Ralph Drew, Chair
Lower Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee
cc: Lorne Brownsey, Deputy Minister, Treaty Negotiation Office
Mike Furey, Assistant Deputy Minister, Treaty Negotiation Office
Bronwen Beedle, Chief Negotiator, Treaty Negotiation Office
Cory Herrera, Negotiator, Treaty Negotiation Office
Martha Anslow, Manager, Local Government - First Nations Relations, Ministry of
Community, Aboriginal and Women Services
Director Ted Armstrong, Chair, UBCM Aboriginal Affairs Committee
Alison McNeil, Senior Policy Analyst, UBCM
Joanne Gauci, Policy Analyst, UBCM
LMTAC members
September 2004
ADDITIONS TO TREATY SETTLEMENT LANDS AND
TREATY NEGOTIATIONS
BACKGROUND BRIEFING NOTE TO LMTAC FIRST PRINCIPLE #12:
Continuation of Local Government Authority over Lands Pre and Post
Treaty*
This Briefing Note includes information on:
LMTAC's current related policy;
Background: Two Approaches to Additions to Treaty Settlement Land (TSL) in Existing AlPs; and
Other related LMTAC interests and concerns.
First Principle #12 - Continuation of Local Government Authority over Lands Pre and Post Treaty
The continuation of Local Government regulatoi'y and taxation authority over lands within a municipality or
regional district that may be transferred as part of a treaty settlement is paramount.
Lands received by a First Nation as part of a Treaty settlement should be held in fee-simple and have no new or
special status. Lands to be added after the treaty is signed must remain subject to Local Government jurisdiction
and taxation unless otheiwise agreed to by Local Governments through a community consultation process.
Definition
Treaty Settlement Lands (TSL): the area of land that will be owned and managed by a First Nation pursuant to
a treaty. The precise legal status of TSL, and the extent of First Nation jurisdiction on it remains to be determined.
The Tsawwassen AlP uses the terms "Tsawwassen Lands" and "Other Tsawwassen Lands" to distinguish lands
that have Tsawwassen jurisdiction (Tsawwassen Lands) from those "Other Tsawwassen Lands" that will form part
of the treaty settlement package that Tsawwassen will own in fee simple, without governance jurisdiction.
* This background briefing note was endorsed by the LMTAC Board, September 29, 2004.
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #12 September 2004
I) Traditional Approach (Default) contained within Existing AlPs
Using this approach...
• The Parties will negotiate provisions in the Final Agreement for a process to include lands as TSL after the
Effective Date. Post-FinalAgreement and at the request of a First Nation, when that First Nation acquires
ownership of lands off-TSL, Parties agree to engage in a process to consider additions to TSL.
• The process would be outlined within the Final Agreement, and would allow for each Party to make a
decision independent of other Parties and according to its own conditions.
• A final decision to provide a First Nation with jurisdictional authority over additional lands would require
tripartite consent, meaning each Party would hold a veto.
• To provide for greater predictability within a Final Agreement, Parties may list considerations to take into
account when deliberating on a First Nation's request. For example, the Province has stated that under
this approach, it would require the consent of the municipality where lands are located within its
boundaries.
ii) "Specified Lands" Approach Proposed in Tsawwassen AlP (Chapter 3- Lands, clauses 21- 25)
The Tsawwassen Agreement in Principle (AlP) contains the following clauses:
Clause 21: Before the FinalAgreement, the Parties will attempt to agree on parcels of land (the "Specified
Lands") which, if acquired by Tsawwassen First Nation in fee-simple, will become Tsawwassen
Lands.
Clause 22: Before the Final Agreement, the Parties will agree on the process required to include Specified
Lands as Tsawwassen Lands after the Effective Date.
Clause 23: Before the Final Agreement, the Parties will attempt to obtain the consent of:
any municipality within whose boundaries the Specified Lands fall; and
any First Nation which claims aboriginal rights or title to the Specified Lands to any proposed
inclusion of Specified Lands as Tsawwassen Lands.
Clause 24: If the Parties are unable to reach agreement on the Specified Lands before the Final Agreement, the
Parties will negotiate provisions in the Final Agreement for a process to include lands as
Tsawwassen Lands after the Effective Date.
Clause 25 The Pãhies agréé that the consent of municipalities and First Nationsto a proposed inclusion
of lands as Tsawwassen Lands should not be unreasonably withheld.
The goal in the Tsawwassen AlP is to identify - before the Final Agreement - specific parcels that if acquired by
the First Nation in fee simple will become TSL post-treaty. If successful, this approach would appear to provide
more certainty with respect to the amount of land that will be added and its location. However, unlike all other
AlPs, municipal consent is not a requirement where the lands to be added are within municipal boundaries. The
Tsawwassen AlP is the only such agreement whereby the Parties agree to attempt to obtain the consent of the
municipality as a consideration, and which states that the consent must not be unreasonably withheld. Therefore,
a municipality loses its veto power.
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #12 September 2004
Additions to Treaty Settlement Lands - Local Government Interests
The following list of local government interests have been compiled based upon the expressed views of LMTAC
members during Executive and Board discussions and in consultation with LMTAC Table Representatives.
• Local governments prefer no conversion of fee-simple lands to TSL post-treaty. Any fee simple lands
acquired by First Nations' governments should remain in fee simple with no change in jurisdiction.
• As an exception, where there is a scarcity of Crown land and adding to TSL post-treaty is the only way to
ensure an equitable land package, local governments prefer that certain limiting conditions be placed on
additions such as: location (where applicable, land should be contiguous to existing TSL to avoid
jurisdictional complexity), time and quantity.
In addition, prior to any lands being added to TSL, clarification must be provided in the follOwing areas:
jurisdictional arrangements, including long term land use planning and compliance with regional
context statements;
> service arrangements and continued access to utility rights-of-way;
continued public access for recreational uses;
> preservation of public transportation corridors;
a process for dispute resolution; and
public notice requirements.
• Additions to TSL must receive local government approval. Given the unique circumstances for each treaty
table, all impacted municipalities must be notified and consulted early in the land selection process and
provided with both sufficient information and time to proceed with required public processes. Regional district
(including electoral areas) interests must be sought and considered when the land is outside municipal
boundaries.
Additions to TSL must be dealt with on a case by case basis.
First Nation communities involved in treaty negotiations within the Lower Mainland region vary in both the
number of reserves and their location within municipalities. For example, the Tsawwassen First Nation is
unique because it includes one existing reserve located within one municipality (Corporation of Delta),
whereas the other Lower Mainland First Nations have multiple reserves located within more than one local
government jurisdiction:
- - —Katz-ie: -5-existing-reserveslocatedwithin -4-different-localgovernmntjurisdictions - -
(District of Pitt Meadows, District of Maple Ridge, Township of Langley, and GVRD Electoral Area A
(Barnston Island and Pitt Lake)
Tsleil Waututh: 3 existing reserves located with 2 different local government jurisdictions
(District of North Vancouver and the GVRD Electoral Area A)
Musqueam: 3 existing reserves located with 3 different municipalities
(City of Vancouver, Corporation of Delta and the City of Richmond)
Squamish: This community further highlights the complexity of the region - it has 23 existing reserves
that span 3 different Regional Districts.
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #12
September 2004
> In the case of the Greater Vancouver region, Squamish Nation has 3 reserves located within 3
different municipalities (District West Vancouver, City of North Vancouver, and District of
Vancouver).
> Further, the Squamish Nation has 5 separate reserves located within the District of Squamish alone.
Criteria for assessing additions to TSL must be considered within the unique context of each treaty table. That
First Nation communities may include multiple reserves located within different local government jurisdictions,
criteria such as contiguity with existing reserves may not be within the interest of all impacted local
governments. In the case of the Tsawwassen treaty, local governments prefer contiguous parcels.
Additions to TSL must also meet the following criteria:
> Land is within the First Nation's Statement of Intent area.
> Land is free from overlaps, unless First Nation consent is obtained.
> Land is owned in fee simple by the First Nation.
> That there is tripartite agreement, whereby the Province must acquire the consent of the municipality in
which the proposed lands are located.
• Local governments are primarily interested in budgetary stability and must be fully compensated for any loss
of tax base or infrastructure investments (LMTAC First Principle #36). It is essential that lands transferred
post-treaty be compensated on the same basis as lands transferred at the time of Final Agreement.
Additions to Treaty Settlement Lands (TSL) - Local Government Concerns
In General:
• Budgetary stability - Loss of tax base from private property converted into TSL as well as net incremental
costs to a region in the longer term as a result of an addition is not adequately addressed. Loss of a portion of
the overall tax base results in an increased tax burden for the remaining areas in order to meet the financial
costs of regional services. In addition to the loss of tax base for local governments to provide services,
consideration must also be given to the loss of school board, hospital and regional district taxes.
• Influence on Property Values - The act of designating "Specified Lands" for post-treaty acquisition and
transfer toa First Nation is problematic and detrimental to the owners of privately held lands that get
"specified". The very act of designating properties both encumbers the properties and creates uncertainty for
the property.owners. Property sales under such circumstances are not transacted on a "willing seller/willing
buyer" basis because the market is skewed by the act of designation.
: Local Government Approval - The issue of local government approval as a pre-requisite for post-treaty
- - - additions tôTeat[SëttléThèñt Laridi ndd tob larifiéd and re-enforced. Although previous AlPs have
included a requirement for local government approval, the Tsawwassen Treaty Table has stipulated that such
approval must not be unreasonably withheld. Without a clear definition of what constitutes a "reasonable"
basis for withholding approval, such language in the TFN Final Agreement effectively pre-empts the
"appearance" of local government approval.
• Land use planning - Local government land-use bylaws, zoning and related enforcement would no longer be
applicable once the land becomes TSL. As a result, there would be the potential for incompatible land uses
and land use conflict.
• Jurisdictional arrangements and public notification- Business owners or individuals that lease/rent
homes or businesses on occupied fee simple lands which are converted to TSL would be faced with a new
jurisdiction and may not have the same representation as they had with local government.
4
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #12 September 2004
• Sufficient time for public processes- Municipalities require sufficient time to consider a proposal for
additions to TSL that takes into consideration the various processes required for council reports and public
consultation. For example, the time required for municipal Councils to revise an Official Community Plan or
approve a boundary extension may range from 6 months to one year. The more contentious the issue, the
more is required for public consultation.
• Jurisdictional uncertainty- Shared/overlapping claim areas as well as lands held jointly by more than one
band and the inconsistent/decentralized manner in which additions may be carried out could lead to overall
jurisdictional uncertainties for neighbouring local governments. Consideration must be given to preserving
transportation, utility and communications corridors.
• Servicing- Infrastructure coordination and supply issues.
• Timely resolution of third party interests (e.g. water rights, rights-of-way, access for private
landowners, infrastructure/utilities, etc.)- How a third party right is to be specifically dealt with is not clear.
Problems of access may arise if lands are already held by third party interests.
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #12
September 2004
Scan of References to Additions to Treaty Settlement Lands and Local Government Tax L oss*
Appendix to:
Additions to Treaty Settlement Land & Treaty Negotiations - LMTAC Background Briefing Note to
First Principle #12
Document Issue Prepared Date Page! Text Quotation
for/by Section
Considerations: Additions to Lower July Page 10; The continuation of Local Government regulatory and
A Guide to Treaty Mainland 2000 First taxation authority over lands within a municipality or regional
Lower Mainland Settlement Treaty Principle district that may be transferred as part of a treaty settlement is
Area Local Lands Advisory #12 paramount.
Government Committee
Interests in (LMTAC) Lands received by a First Nation as part of a treaty settlement
Treaty should be held in fee-simple and have no new or special
Negotiations status. Lands to be added after the treaty is signed must
remain subject to Local Government jurisdiction and taxation
unless otherwise agreed to by Local Governments through a
community consultation process.
Considerations: Local Lower July Page 14; No demand must be placed on Local Government tax -
A Guide to Government Mainland 2000 First revenues or revenue sources resulting from treaty settlements,
Lower Mainland Tax Loss Treaty Principle particularly on the ability of Local Government to derive tax
Area Local Advisory #36 revenue from sources such as property taxes; service fees,
Government Committee utility charges and grants-in-lieu from Crown lands. Any
Interests in (LMTAC) revenue loss to Local Governments arising from treaty
Treaty settlements must be fully compensated.
Negotiations
GVRD Principles Additions to GVRD Oct. Page 2; Lands and assets held and designated by the GVRD
for Treaty Treaty 1999 Principle including, but not limited to, leased lands, rights-of-way, and
Negotiations Settlement (updated #9 Crown reserves must be excluded from any treaty settlement.
Lands July
2002)
GVRD Principles Additions to GVRD Oct. Page 2; The interests in non-Crown land owned in fee simple,
for Treaty Treaty 1999 Principle including lands owned by the GVRD, other governments, or
Negotiations Settlement (updated #10 private individuals and corporations, be protected in future
Lands July treaties.
2002)
GVRD Principles Local GVRD Oct. Page 2; All costs associated with treaty settlements must be the
for Treaty Government 1999 Principle responsibility of the Provincial and Federal governments in
Negotiations Tax Loss (updated #14 terms of lands and assets that are being negotiated.
-. July. -.---- -- --- -------- - --
2002)
Snuneymuxw Additions to BC Treaty Revised Page 19; Regional District of Nanaimo-
First Nation Treaty Negotiations Sept. 13,
Treaty Settlement Office 2002 Regional Any Crown Lands that become treaty settlement lands shall
Negotiations: Lands
- ----
District of remain under current land use designations unless a change is
Discussion Paper Nanaimo agreed to under the Growth Management Planning process.
- Positions and
Interests Crown
Expressed by Lands
Local and
Regional Principle
Government #3
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #12
September 2004
Document Issue Prepared Date Page! Text Quotation
for!by Section
Snuneymuxw Additions to BC Treaty Revised Page 28; City of Nanaimo
First Nation Treaty Negotiation Sept. 13, -
Treaty Settlement Office 2002 City of The City expects that all fee simple lands designated as treaty
Negotiations: Lands Nanaimo settlement lands to remain under the jurisdiction of the
Discussion Paper municipality.
-Positions and Jurisdiction
Interests over Fee
Expressed by Simple
Local and Lands
Regional
Government Principle
#1
Prince George Local Prince March 4, Revenue If non-reserve settlement lands are removed from the
Treaty Advisory Government George 1998 and municipal assessment rolls and then taxed by the First Nation,
Committee Tax Loss Treaty Taxation the loss of existing tax revenues may be significant in some
Statement of Advisory section cases The Prince George TAC has an interest in the creation
Interest in Treaty Committee of a process in place for compensating municipalities for loss
Negotiations (PGTAC) of tax revenues.
FVTAC Guiding Local Fraser 1999 Page 2 At the end of treaty making, there must be zero net costs to
Principles in Government Valley local government. Specifically, this means there should be
Treaty Making in Tax Loss Treaty adequate compensation for municipal and regional services
the BC Treaty Advisory rendered by a local government on TSL. The FVTAC
Commission Committee recognizes the importance of designating a land base over
Process (FVTAC) which First Nations have jurisdiction as Treaty Settlement
Lands. Municipalities are bound by the financial stability
provisions of the Municipal Act. Maintenance of a stable and
adequate tax base that can support the services local
governments provide to their constituencies is also a priority.
Once treaties are completed, there must be certainty that the
changes in jurisdictions that impact local government are also
complete.
FVTAC Guiding Additions to Fraser 1999 Page 3 Any crown land which has a local government interest should
Principles in Treaty Valley be preserved and respected by the Crown.
Treaty Making in Settlement Treaty
the BC Treaty Lands Advisory
Commission Committee
Process (FVTAC)
A Guide to • Additions to islands Trust Feb. -. - _Pa.ge5 . Anyiands.acq.uired.by.a First Nation after-completion of- -
Islands Trust Treaty 2004 its treaty agreement remain within the land use planning
Interests in Settlement jurisdiction of a local trust committee or island
Treaty Lands municipality.
Negotiations in • The local trust committee or island municipality is granted
the Islands Trust - a veto on additions to Treaty Settlement Lands after Treaty
Area Agreement. -
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #12
September 2004
Document Issue Prepared Date Page! Text Quotation
for/by Section
Fraser Valley Local Fraser Sept. 16, Page 2 Discussion related to the importance of ensuring that in the
Treaty Advisory Government Valley 2003 event any fee simple lands become part of the treaty
Committee Tax Loss Treaty settlement lands, adequate compensation is made to the
Minutes Advisory Regional District for any lost tax revenue. Taxes are
Committee intrinsically linked to land, and this is particularly important
given the Regional District apportionment to health care
infrastructure...
Resolution Additions to Union of BC Sept. --- Regional District Interests in Additions to Treaty Settlement
endorsed by the Treaty Municipali- 2004 Lands
Union of BC Settlement ties
Municipalities Lands (UBCM) WFIIEREAS four Agreements in Principle (AlP) negotiated
membership at with First Nations in 2003 by the provincial and federal
the 2004 annual governments have been ratified by all three parties;
convention
AND WHEREAS only one of these AlPs required the parties
to take into account the interests of the regional district in
cases where a proposal is made to add land that is within the
Regional District but outside a municipality to First Nations
treaty settlement lands post-treaty.
/ THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that all treaties and
Agreements in Principle negotiated with First Nations by the
provincial and federal governments require that regional
districts be consulted and accommodated before lands are
added to First Nations treaty settlement land post-treaty.
Lheidli T'enneh Additions to Canada, BC, July 26, Pages 46- At any time after Effective Date, with the agreement of
Agreement in Treaty Lheidli 2003 47 Canada and British Columbia, Lheidli T'enneh may add
Principle Settlement T'enneh to Lheidli T'enneh Lands, land that is:
Lands First Nation C. outside of municipal boundaries or within
municipal boundaries if the municipality consents;
Nothing in paragraph 17 obligates Canada or British
Columbia to pay any costs associated with the purchase,
transfer or related costs concerning the addition of lands
to Lheidli T'enneh Lands.
When making a decision pursuant to paragraph 17, the
Parties will take into account, among.other factors:
b. interests of the Regional District of Fraser Fort
George in cases where the land is within the Regional
- District of Frase.Fort.George.but not.withina. - - -- - - - . - - - - municipality.
Sliammon Additions to Canada, BC, 2003 Page 24 25. With the agreement of, and at no cost to, Canada and
Agreement in Treaty Sliammon British Columbia, Sliammon may add parcels of land to
Principle Settlement First Nation Sliammon Lands which are:
Lands outside of municipal boundaries unless the
municipality_consents
Snuneymuxw Additions to Canada, BC, Feb. 19, ? 14. At any time after the Effective Date, with the agreement
Treaty Treaty Snuney- 2003 of, and at no cost to, Canada and British Columbia,
Negotiations Settlement muxw First Snuneymuxw may add to Snuneymuxw Treaty Land,
Consultation Lands Nation land which is: -
Draft outside of municipal boundaries unless the
Municipality consents
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #12
September 2004
Document Issue Prepared Date Page! Text Quotation
for/by Section
Tsawwassen Additions to Canada, BC, 2003 Page 24 21. Before the Final Agreement, the Parties will attemptto
Agreement in Treaty Tsawwassen agree on parcels of land (the "Specified Lands") which,
Principle Settlement First Nation if acquired by Tsawwassen First Nation in fee simple,
Lands will become Tsawwassen Lands.
22. Before the Final Agreement, the Parties will agree on
the process required to include Specified Lands as
Tsawwassen Lands after the Effective Date.
23. Before the Final Agreement, the Parties will attempt to
obtain the consent of:
any municipality within whose boundaries the
Specified Lands fall; and
any First Nation which claims aboriginal rights
or title to the Specified Lands, to any proposed
inclusion of Specified Lands as Tsawwassen
Lands.
24. If the Parties are unable to reach agreement on the
Specified Lands before the Final Agreement, the Parties
will negotiate provisions in the Final Agreement for a
process to include lands as Tsawwassen Lands after the
Effective Date.
25. The Parties agree that the consent of municipalities and
First Nations to a proposed inclusion of lands as
Tsawwassen Lands should not be unreasonably
withheld.
Maa-Nulth First Additions to Canada, BC, 2003 Page 4 Each Maa-Nulth First Nation will be able to add fee simple
Nations Treaty Treaty Maa-Nulth land to settlement land in the future, subject to the agreement
Negotiations Settlement First of Canada and British Columbia, and to the consent of the
Summary of Lands Nations, BC municipality if the lands are within municipal boundaries.
Agreement in Treaty Any such additions will be at no cost to Canada and British
Principle Commission Columbia.
Sechelt Additions to Canada, BC, 1999 Page 1 • For 24 years after the effective date, the Sechelt Indian
Agreement in Treaty Sechelt Band may propose to Canada and BC to add to Sechelt
Principle Settlement Indian Band Treaty Land, land that the band had acquired or optioned.
Summary Lands • The total area of the Sechelt Treaty Land will not be more
than 3,055 hectares. The Sechelt Indian Band will not
own subsurface resources on lands acquired after the
effective date unless agreed to by BC.
• Any lands to be added must meet certain defined criteria
lands must be within a defined area and must not result in
any cost to Canada or BC.
• To ensure that municipal interests are considered, lands
within municipal boundaries may not be added unless the
municipality agrees. Similarly, lands acquired within an
andbe.approved.byCanada-and.BC. .Forexampie,-added---
area of overlap with another First Nation may not be added
to treaty lands unless the First Nation agrees.
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #12
September 2004
Document Issue Prepared Date Page! Text Quotation
for!by Section
Additions to Local Indian and May 13, Appendix • Federal lands are not part of the tax base from which
Reserves - Government Northern 2004 4, Page 35 provinces or municipalities may draw property taxes.
Communications Tax Loss Affairs • Municipalities may face a net loss of property tax revenue
ToolKit Canada when a reserve is created or expanded.
(Strategy) Additions to (INAC) • Additions to Reserves (ATR) policy requires that a First
Reserves Nation negOtiate directly with the municipality on
reasonable compensation.
ATR policy does not require a First Nation to compensate
the municipality for an unlimited time for the net loss of
property taxes.
Evaluation of the Additions to Audit and June 6, Page iv Recommendations:
Additions to Reserve Evaluation 1996 • That the Director of Lands coordinate with the regions to
Reserve (ATR) Branch, take steps, including the preparation of appropriate
Policy Indian and documentation, to inform....
Northern Municipalities on the Additions to Reserve policy to
Affairs ensure they are aware of the policy's implications for
Canada them; and
(INAC) Other affected parties...
7. The policy requires that written consultation occur
with urban and rural municipalities within whose
boundaries the proposed land addition is located.
10
September 2004 DRAFT
FISCAL INTERESTS AND TREATY NEGOTIATIONS
BACKGROUND BRIEFING NOTE TO LMTAC FIRST PRINCIPLE #36:
Cost Neutral Agreements for Local G overnmen ts *
This Briefing Note includes information on:
1. LMTAC's current related policy;
2. Background: Local Government Powers Related to Property Taxation
First Nation Powers Related to Property Taxation (Pre and Post-Treaty)
Pre-Treaty Context: Indian Act & Indian Self Government Enabling Act
Post-Treaty Context: Tsawwassen Agreement in Principle
3. Other related LMTAC interests and concerns
First Principle #36 - Cost Neutral Agreements for Local Governments
No demand must be placed on Local Government tax revenues or revenue sources resulting from treaty
settlements, particularly on the ability of Local Government to derive tax revenue from sources such as property
taxes, seniice fees, utility charges and grants-in-lieu from Crown lands. Any revenue loss to Local Governments
arising from treaty settlements must be fully compensated.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT POWERS RELATED TO PROPERTY TAXATION
Taxation is the predominant tool for financing the provision of municipal services. Among the various tax tools
available to local governments, the ad valorem tax (a tax determined by applying a tax rate to the taxable
assessed property value) is the largest source of revenues for all municipalities.
The tax derived from a property depends upon its assessed property value (from the BC Assessment Authority)
and the municipal tax rate (stated as a tax per $1000 of assessed value). Each municipality sets its own tax rates
annually andin- general, most - choosetoIevy- a higher r-ate•on-industry-and -businessthan on homes.
Community Charter— Municioal Revenue Provisions:
Local Government powers related to taxation were previously provided for under the Local Government Act and
are now provided for in the Community Charter(Pad 7- Municipal Revenue).
Under the Community Charter, Property Value Taxation is one source of municipal revenue. Each year, after
adoption of the financial plan but before May 15, a council must, by bylaw, establish tax rates for:
the municipal revenue proposed to be raised for the year from property taxes, as provided in the financial
plan, and
the amounts to be collected for the year by means of rates established by the municipality to meet its
taxing obligations in relations to another local government or other public bodies.
*ThiS background briefing note was endorsed in principle by the LMTAC Board, September 29, 2004.
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #36 September 2004 DRAFT
Unless otherwise permitted, property taxes are imposed on all taxable land and improvements in the municipality.
For the purposes of generating municipal revenue, the bylaw may establish for each property class a rate for all
revenue to be raised, or separate rates for revenue to be raised for different purposes, however the relationship
between the different property class rates must be the same for all purposes.
FIRST NATION POWERS RELATED TO PROPERTY TAXATION
Pre-Treaty Context: Federal Indian Act & Provincial Indian Self-Government Enabling Act
In 1988, the federal Indian Act (section 83) was amended to enable First Nations to collect taxes on reserve land
leased to non-aboriginal residents or businesses. An Indian Band interested to take advantage of this
amendment is required to pass a property taxation bylaw which must be reviewed by the Indian Taxation Advisory
Board and then approved by the federal minister.
To prevent double taxation, the B.C. government passed the Indian Self-Government Enabling Act in 1990, which
provided for provincial and municipal authorities to withdraw from taxing reserve lands when band taxation bylaws
take effect.
Post-Treaty Context: Tsawwassen Agreement in Principle (July 9, 2003)
• Taxation Chapter
Other Taxation and Tax Administration Agreements
Clause 4: Before the Final Agreement, Tsawwassen First Nation and British Columbia will negotiate and attempt
to reach agreement on terms and conditions;
upon which Tsawwassen First Nation will have the authority to impose real property tax on all person
in re.spect of those person's interests in Tsawwassen Lands; and
to relieve all persons from real property taxation imposed under authority of British Columbia in respect
of their interests in Tsawwassen Lands.
Tsawwassen Lands
Clause 6: Tsawwassen First Nation will not be subject to taxation of lands, or interests in lands, on Tsawwassen
Lands, on which there are no improvements or on which there is an improvement all or substantially all
of which is used for a public purposed and not for a profitable purpose.
• Fiscal Relations Chapter
Own Source Revenue
Clause 17: Before initialling the FinaLAgreement, the Parties=will.negotiate and=reach agree•rnenton;
a., a definition of own source revenue capacity, including own source revenue capacity associated
with real property taxation.
2
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #36 September 2004 DRAFT
Potential Impacts to Local Government Revenue Sources Resulting from Treaty Settlements
Treaty settlement land packages have the potential to impact local government revenue sources in the following
ways:
• current revenue sources (property taxes and grants-in-lieu)
• future prospects and lost opportunity costs
Local Government Fiscal Interests
The following list of local government interests have been compiled based upon the expressed views of LMTAC
members during Executive and Board discussions and in consultation with LMTAC Table Representatives.
• Compensation For Loss of Revenue- Local governments must be provided with fair compensation in order
to adjust to changes to revenue sources (i.e. property taxes, grants-in-lieu of taxes, and future opportunities)
resulting from treaty land selection.
The Province is committed to concluding treaties that are of no net loss to local governments. In order to
ensure this outcome, mitigating factors must be considered and a process must be established to address
any losses incurred by local governments. The treatment of compensation/adjustment funding for local
governments should be guided by the following principals:
Mitigating Factors (Pre-treaty land selection)
> Pre-treaty, the Province should undertake cumulative impact studies to determine what the anticipated
impact land selection will have on affected local governments. This information should be made
available to local governments as part of the Province's commitment to transparency.
) Land settlements must take into account what percentage of a municipality's land base is being
considered for TSL and the resulting impact to its population/assessment base. (Acknowledge that the
magnitude of such impacts on the tax base of smaller municipalities will be greater).
Provide local governments with sufficient notification of any changes to their existing assessment base
in order to plan for necessary adjustments.
Process to Compensate Local Governments (Post-treaty by Effective Date)
> Provide local governments an opportunity to evaluate the impact of treaties on their revenues and
expenditures. (For example, comparing the total property taxes collected with the costs to service a
particular parcel of land). In the event local governments demonstrate that a loss has resulted, this
information would in turn be used to apply for "community adjustment fUnditi".
> Relief provided to local governments should be provided in accordance with a proposed transition or
phase-in period to avoid any undue economic strain on local governments.
• Cost-recovery for Services- Local governments rely on service agreements with First Nations to recover
user fees and service charges. Although service agreements are a matter to be addressed outside treaty,
treaty provisions should enable such intergovernmental arrangements.
Budgetary Stability- Capital financing and service provision commitments are based upon expectations of a
relatively predictable population/assessment base. Five-year financial plans are now a statutory requirement
and mean that local governments value stability and sufficient time to consider the impacts of revenue
change. Given the strict budgetary process designated by the Community Charter, which requires local
governments to balance their budgets, maintaining financial stability is a primary interest of local governments
in order that they continue to be able to provide the services expected by their residents, at a reasonable cost.
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #36 September 2004 DRAFT
Significant or unanticipated changes to any of local government revenue sources may result in revenue
shortfalls and tax increases, unless there is a corresponding decrease in expenditures.
• Future Prospects- Treaty land selection must not unfairly constrain the ability of Local governments to
provide for future growth of their communities (in-keeping with the Regional Growth Strategy) and benefit from
the development potential within those lands.
• Fairness and Equity in First Nation and local, government taxation authority as it relates to:
> Establishing tax rates between property classes
> Exemptions (land and improvements) in relation to the property tax.
• Economic Development- Local governments are interested that there be equity in taxation so that a 'level
playing field' is established. This issue must be settled in the negotiations. Mechanisms and opportunities for
joint and co-ventures and partnerships between the communities should be supported and encouraged both
in the negotiation process and in the post- treaty settlement period.
• Consistent Legislative and Regulatory Regimes- First Nation government authorities related to such areas
as: property taxation, environmental regulation, income tax, sales tax and labour legislation, should be derived
from policy frameworks comparable to principal local government documents (Community Charter).
Local Government Fiscal Concerns
• Reduced Competitive Equity- If First Nation governments are provided with competitive tax advantages over
neighbouring local governments, this would negatively impact local economies and the ability for non-First
Nation governments to attract business investments.
• Inability to Recover Costs for Services- All existing and future service agreements must be respected to
ensure local governments receive financial contributions from all users of local government programs,
services and infrastructure (LMTAC First Principle #35).
Increased Infrastructure Maintenance Costs- Unanticipated development of lands that are transferred for
treaty settlements will place a strain upon the transportation corridors and service infrastructure of adjacent
municipalities, resulting in increased maintenance costs.
4
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #36 September 2004 DRAFT
PROPOSED FISCAL COMPENSATION MODEL TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT*
APPENDIX TO
FISCAL INTERESTS AND TREATY NEGOTIATIONS
BACKGROUND BRIEFING NOTE TO LMTAC FIRST PRINCIPLE #36:
Cost Neutral Agreements for Local Governments
First Principle #36 - Cost Neutral Agreements for Local Governments
No demand must be placed on Local Government tax revenues or revenue sources resulting from treaty
settlements, particularly on the ability of Local Government to derive tax revenue from sources such as
property taxes, service fees, utility charges and grants-in-lieu from Crown lands. Any revenue loss to Local
Governments arising from treaty settlements must be fully compensated.
Draft Compensation Formula to Calculate Local Government Lost Revenue
Annual Local Government Lost Revenue =
Land Quantum Transferred From Local Government X
Current Land, B.C. Assessment, Assessed Value (at Current Property Classification) X
Current Local Government Tax Rate
What the Formula addresses:
• The municipal tax component for municipal lands, unoccupied Crown Lands, and Crown Corporation
Lands.
• Treaty related scenarios - although this does not preclude non-treaty scenarios or examples.
What the Formula does not address:
o Municipal service delivery costs, as these are anticipated to be addressed through the negotiation of
service agreements directly between the First Nation and municipality.
• Regional district service delivery costs, as these are anticipated to be addressed through post-treaty
regional governance discussions whereby First Nations may become members of the regional district.
Formula Assumptions
• Compensation is to be paid in the form of an on-going payment-in-lieu, calculated annually based on the
land quantum transferred from the local government, current land assessment for the current property
classification for the transferred lands, and the current local government tax rate for that land use.
• Compensation is to be paid as of the Effective Date of a treaty, when lands are transferred from municipal
to First Nation jurisdiction; and at the time that post-treaty additions to Treaty Settlement Lands occur.
*Endorsed in-principle by LMTAC Board, October 27, 2004.
Background Briefing Note to LMTAC First Principle #36 September 2004 DRAFT
• Parity between First Nation and local governments in their ability to development lands for economic
opportunities.
• Prior to lands being transferred, service arrangements will be negotiated between First Nations and local
governments for payment of services provided. Fees for service will not be unbundled, and will include
both hard and soft services.
> Hard Services (i.e. water, sewer, refuse collection, recycling, etc.) - These types of agreements
refer to additional services outside the general tax levy that are directly related to the cost for the
various services. Local governments may enter into agreements to provide for full cost-recovery.
> Soft Services (i.e. police, fire, library, parks, etc.) - Although revenue generated by service
arrangements for soft services (included within the general tax levy) may be deducted from a
payment-in-lieu, if funds for soft services are not also collected with respect to the Treaty
Settlement Lands (TSL), then First Nation governments would be at a competitive advantage to the
local government.
• If local governments do not receive fair payment for services, then cost-recovery will need to be further
explored as appropriate on a case-by-case basis and added to the annual payment-in-lieu.
• The fiscal compensation model should be adapted to each local government scenario.
C. Rationale
• A payment-in-lieu is a "proxy" tax calculation and only includes the municipal tax component.
• Payments-in-lieu already exist; therefore, this proposal is not suggesting something new or precedent-
setting.
• The municipal tax assessment is based on the existing BC Assessment Authority (and its annual cycle)
and is in-line with Community Charter provisions related to local government taxation authority.
• As is the case for local government tax revenue calculations, the payment-in-lieu compensation
calculations would also be done annually in order to accommodate changes in property classifications
over time.
A reliable/predictable property base is integral to each municipality's planning process. Municipalities
• work according to a 35-40 year redevelopment period for lands in transition from current property
classifications.
• The model is based on a local government development-planning horizon, starting on the basis that
compensation will be paid to municipalities by the Province into perpetuity, given that the loss incurred by
• local government for loss of tax assessable lands is in perpetuity:
• Services are provided for the benefit of the greater community, therefore service delivery cannot be
unbundled.
6
HousiNG AND RESIDENTIAL
LANDS POLICY REVIEW FOR MAPLE RIDGE
TECHNICAL REPORT No. 3:
EVALUATION OF RESIDENTIAL GROWTH OPTIONS
REVISED DRAFT
October 2004
Prepared for:
District of Maple Ridge
-- By:-- - -- - -- -
The Sholtair Group
E-~]F
g I 0 b a I
RAMEWORKS
QD
I N L' R A C Y C L 5
Eric Vance
& Associates
Planning and Management
Consultants
a]
HarrisConsulting
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report documents the results of a technical evaluation of three options for accommodating
residential growth in the District of Maple Ridge. It is the final in a series of three technical reports
that provide the background data and analysis for the District's Housing and Residential Lands Policy
Review for the update of the 1996 Official Community Plan (OCP). The other two reports in the series
are a Context Report (Technical Report No. 1) and a Residential Capacity Assessment (Technical
Report No. 2).
A structured evaluation and decision analysis framework was used to evaluate three options for
accommodating residential growth. The framework is organized according to seven overarching policy
objectives identified by the consultant team in consultation with District staff and the community
Study Circle representatives. These objectives take into account the District's municipal objectives,
the fundamental strategies of the Greater Vancouver Regional District's Livable Region Strategic Plan,
and the provincial goats for regional growth strategies. The policy objectives, which are eLaborated on
in the Context Report, include to:
Improve housing choice;
Foster housing affordability;
Build complete communities;
Develop a compact community;
Increase transportation choice;
Minimize municipal costs; and,
Preserve community character.
The evaluation includes both quantitative indicators and a qualitative assessment related to social,
economic, fiscal, and environmental aspects for each of the overarching policy objectives. As a
whole, the evaluation includes a balanced set of social, economic, and environmental aspects of
housing and residential Lands.
A Base Case and three other residential growth options were identified as outLined in the Terms of
Reference for this project and detailed at a workshop with District staff held in June 2004.
Base Case
The business-as-usual option for accommodating population growth is called the Base Case, which is
based on the existing Land use designations in the District's current OCP.
Option 1: Moderate Intensification and Urban Containment
In Option 1, residential growth is limited to the existing Urban Area Boundary. Urban residential
growth is projected to occur solely through infill and intensified development within the older
neighbourhoods in the Urban Core Area 1 and through new developments in areas within the existing
urban boundaries, such as Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver Valley.
Option 2: Modest Intensification and Northward Urban Expansifl
Option 2 accommodates growth by expanding or adjusting the existing Urban Area Boundary to the
north and potentially east of the Urban Core Area in addition to allowing modest levels of growth
within the existing Urban Area Boundary through infill development and densification. The expansion
areas would be Located adjacent to the existing urban area and thus maintain the contiguity of the
urban area. As with Option 1, growth would also occur through new developments in areas within the
existing urban boundaries, such as Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver Valley. An expansion area of
1 The Urban Core Area consists of the urban portions of Maple Ridge west of the Cottonwood Urban Area
(approximateLy west of 232nd Street south of Dewdney Trunk Road and west of 234th Street north of Dewdney
Trunk Road). It excludes Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver Valley and rural areas in the community.
IT
approximately 300 hectares (740 acres) would be required to accommodate the projected population
of 108,900 in 2031.
Option 3: Modest Intensification and Eastward Expansion into Urban Reserve
Option 3 includes expansion of the Urban Area Boundary by opening up the Thornhill Urban Reserve,
located to the east of Albion. It incorporates the Thornhill Urban Reserve as a new urban area in
addition to accommodating modest Levels of growth within the Urban Core Area through infill
development and densification and through new developments in Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver
Valley.
Each of the growth options was considered in terms of their ability to address the District's priority
objectives for housing and residential lands policy. A detailed set of over twenty fiscal, economic,
environmental, and social indicators was examined for each option and a variety of qualitative
assessments were conducted for the options. Table 1 below presents the overall summary rankings of
the options according to the policy objectives as assessed by the consultant team.
Table 1: Overall Rankings of the Options by Overarching Policy Objectives 2
Base Case Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and Northward and Eastward
Containment Urban Expansion Expansion into
Urban Reserve
I - Improve Housing Choice 4 3 1 (tie) 1 (tie)
2 - Foster Housing 4 2 (tie) 2 (tie) I
Affordability
3 - Build Complete 3 1 2 4
Communities
4. DeveLop a Compact 1 (tie) 1 (tie) 3 4
Community
5- Increase Transportation 2 1 3 4
Choice
6 - Minimize Municipal I (tie) 1 (tie) 3 4
Infrastructure Costs U:
Ensure Sustainable
Revenue Sources
7- Preserve Community 1 2 (tie) 2 (tie) 2 (tie)
Character
Option 1 was found to outperform the Base Case across six of the seven policy objectives. Similarly,
Option 2 outperforms Option 3 for six of the seven.policyobjectives. Therefore, theBase Case.a.nd-
Option 3 can both be considered inferior options. In particular, the Base Case only has the designated
residential capacity to accommodate a population of 93,900, well short of the projected population of
108,900 for the District for 2031. Option 1 performs equally well as or outperforms Option 2 on all of
the policy objectives, with the exception of improving housing choice.
A critical failing of Option 1 is that it does not achieve Objective 1 (improve housing choice) as it is
currently structured and does not accommodate the projected population of 108,900 in 2031. Option
2 The rankings are reLative. The highest ranking is a 1. The Lowest ranking is a 4.
Updated from the report Demographic Analysis and Population and Housing Projection for Maple Ridge, 200 1-
2031. March 2004. Prepared by The Sheltair Group and Kelly ft Associates for the District of Maple Ridge.
Housing U: Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
1 can only accommodate a population of 102,900 at capacity and falls short of meeting the anticipated
single-detached housing demand by over 6,000 units.
One of the challenges with Option 1 is the newness of the housing stock in the existing urban area.
The newer the housing stock, the Less likely it will be avaiLabLe for residential intensification over the
projection period for the existing urban area. While the Town Centre can accommodate a significant
amount of residential growth, areas in the rest of the Urban Core Area (outside the Town Centre) will
not be ready for high levels of residentiaL intensification until the housing stock is older, which will not
LikeLy occur until later in the projection period. In addition, even if significantly more ground-oriented
units could be accommodated, it would be at the expense of predominantly singLe-detached homes
through conversions of the older housing stock, which would result in an even greater gap between the
supply and demand for single-detached housing. Option 1 therefore is not a viable option over the
projection period for both meeting the projected population growth and the mix of dwelling units
projected to be in demand in Maple Ridge.
Options 2 and 3 achieve Objective 1 (improve housing choice) as they both include additional land
primarily to accommodate single-detached and other ground-oriented housing units. While both can
accommodate the projected population of 108,900, Option 2 is preferred to Option 3 because of
several important considerations:
• it creates a more spatially compact and compLete community;
• it is more contiguous with the District's current Urban Area Boundary;
• it makes better use of existing community infrastructure and services, thereby reducing the
costs to the District;
• growth is better located relative to the Town Centre, existing commercial services, and
employment opportunities; and,
• it facilitates more transportation choices, with more opportunities for walking, cycLing, and
access to public transit.
While Option 2 outperforms Option 3, it does not fully achieve all of the District's desired objectives,
some of which are better met by Option I (e.g. achieving a compact and complete community). The
main tradeoff associated with Option 2 is that it would require expansion primarily on to lands that are
currently in the Agricultural Land Reserve and designated as part of the Green Zone in the GVRD's
Livable Region Strategic Plan.
Since Option 1 's major shortcoming is its inability to meet the projected number and mix of housing
units required by 2031 and Option 2's major shortcoming is that it requires expansion on to Lands
currently in the Agricultural Land Reserve, the recommended solution is to blend certain attributes of
Option 1 and Option 2 together. This hybrid option reduces the amount of expansion lands required,
reLative to Option 2, because of the higher number of units accommodated within the Urban Core
Area. The recommended option, or Option 4, can be characterized as having growth accommodated
through moderate intensification of the Urban Core Area and northward urban expansion, in addition
to development occurring in the remaining designated areas of Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver Valley.
This recommended option would provide some expansion to the existing Urban Area Boundary, and
would also maintain many of the benefits of Option 1. Option 4 would have a level of residential
intensification for the Urban Core Area sbmewhére betweeii the modest levels of intensification
associated with Option 2 and the higher Levels of Option 1.
The recommended Option 4 successfulLy meets the prerequisite of accommodating expected
population growth and addressing the demand for an appropriate mix of housing. Across each of the
other objectives, the recommended option offers a suitable alternative and in some cases distinct
advantages to the other growth options. These include: relative affordability in terms of proximity to
the urban centre and improved allowance for secondary suites; a more compact community through
increased contiguity; improved transportation choice; the existence of hard infrastructure and select
community services; and controlled expansion into agricultural areas.
Housing ü Residential Lands PoLicy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
A key question for the fourth option is where to expand the urban area as the northward or eastward
expansion of the urban area requires conversion of agricultural lands into urban uses for a large
portion of any expansion area. Figure 1 is a map of Option 4 and shows severaL potential urban
expansion areas for accommodating growth. ALL of these areas are outside the flood plain of the
Fraser and Alouette Rivers. Depending on the levels of residential intensification achieved in the
Urban Core Area and the gross residential densities in the expansion areas, it is estimated that an
expansion area of approximately 150 to 300 ha (370 to 740 acres) in size would be needed to satisfy
the projected population of 108,900. This area is much smaller than the size of the total potential
expansion areas shown on the map.
Figure 1: The Recommended Option - Moderate Intensification and Northward Urban Expansion
/sorL-i J
P Valley '
Ablon
Legend I
Flood paIn
Majoc Parks NOTE: THE POTEN11AL EXPANSION AREAS ARE
CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND ARE GENERALIZED
A preliminary assessment of the potential urban expansion areas is included in the technical report. It
is recommended that the District conduct a detailed assessment of each of the potential expansion
areas to identify a preferred expansion area, particularly from an agricultural capability and suitability
perspective and from the point of view of desirability for urban development. A set of criteria is
included in this report to assist the District with conducting a detailed assessment of the potential
expansion areas.
To expand beyond the existing Urban Area Boundary would require removing large blocks of land from
the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) and hence would require approval for exclusions from the
Agricultural Land Commission. One way of reducing the negative impacts of the recommended option
is through the District considering a poLicy of no net loss of ALR by offsetting any ALR exclusions with
ALRincLusionsetsewherein the'Districtas over 25% of the agrcultUrál production in the District is
from Lands outside the ALR. Regardless, the District's Regional Context Statement in its OCP would
need to be amended and supported by the GVRD to have any block scale removal of lands from the
Green Zone. To expand the servicing area to include any of these potential expansion lands would
also require approval from the Greater Vancouver Sewerage Et Drainage District.
There are ways that the fourth option can be refined and optimized to improve its performance. The
key way to refine the option is to minimize the amount of land required for the urban expansion area,
particularly avoiding or minimizing loss of lands that have high agricultural suitability. Specific ways
to minimize the land area required for the urban expansion area and to minimize the loss of
productive agricultural land include to:
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: v
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
• achieve a moderate Level of residential intensification in the Urban Core Area, including high
levels in the Town Centre;
• obtain a higher share of population Living in secondary suites (assumed to be 20% of single-
detached units - a higher level could be achieved);
• increase residential densities on the remaining greenfield sites in the Urban Core Area, Albion,
Cottonwood, and Silver Valley urban areas;
• set and achieve minimum urban residential density targets for the potential expansion area;
• seLect an expansion area that minimizes the loss of agricultural lands with high agricultural
capability and suitability; and,
• adopt a policy that minimizes the loss of agricultural Land that results in no net loss of agricultural
capacity
In order to achieve a relatively high urban residential density in the potential expansion area, it is
recommended that a neighbourhood plan be developed for the area in advance of alLowing any urban
development to ensure the area is developed in an efficient manner. There is sufficient single-
detached capacity in other areas of the District until the period 2011 to 2016 so this expansion area is
not needed until next decade. It is also recommended that a neighbourhood plan be developed for
the Maple Ridge Town Centre, which has the capacity to accommodate a significant amount of
residential growth. Through a neighbourhood planning process, the types of residential development,
land use patterns, and appropriate design can be identified to best meet the needs of the community.
Policy recommendations regarding the findings of this research on the evaluation of the residential
growth options as well as the other components of the study are contained in the Housing and
Residential Lands Policy Review summary report.
Housing Et Residential Lands PoLicy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List Of Tables And Figures . viii
1.0 Introduction ...........................................................................I
1.1 Background ............................................................................................. 1
1.2 Approach and Evaluation Framework.............................................................. 1
Step 1: Defining the problem ................................................................................ I
Step 2: Clarifying the objectives and developing a set of indicators .................................. I
Step 3: Identifying the options............................................................................... 2
2.0 Analysis of the Residential Growth Options .....................................6
2.1 Improving Housing Choice ........................................................................... 6
2.2 Fostering Housing Affordability..................................................................... 9
Low Income and Rental Housing ............................................................................. 9
Multi-Family Dwellings ........................................................................................ .9
AverageLot Size .............................................................................................. 10
2.3 Building Complete Communities................................................................... 13
Proximity of Housing to Services ........................................................................... 13
Higher Population Density................................................................................... 15
OtherConsiderations......................................................................................... 16
2.4 Developing a Compact Community................................................................ 18
2.5 Increasing Transportation Choice ................................................................. 22
Urban Population Density.................................................................................... 22
UrbanLand Area .............................................................................................. 23
2.6 Minimising Municipal Infrastructure Costs and Ensuring Sustainable Revenue Sources ..25
2.7 Preserving Community Character ................................................................. 28
NeighbourhoodChange....................................................................................... 28
Conversion of Agricultural, Rural and Suburban Residential Lands to Urban Uses.................. 29
3.0 Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................32
3.1 ConcLusions to the Evaluation of the Growth Options .........................................32
3.2 Recommended Option ...............................................................................33
Description of Recommended Option ......................................................................33
Advantages of Recommended Option ......................................................................35
Considerations.................................................................................................36
Refining and Optimizing the Recommended Option .....................................................37
Summary .......................................................................................................38
Glossary .....................................................................................39
ReferenceDocumeflts .................................. ..
.................................... 41
Appendix A: Preliminary Analysis of Potential Expansion Areas ................Al
Appendix B: Municipal Infrastructure Costing Methodology .....................BI
The Costing Methodology ............................................................................ ....... B I
Profile of the Options for the Costing Analysis..........................................................B2
Appendix C: Summary of Municipal Infrastructure Costing Results ............Cl
Appendix D: Summary of Quantitative Analysis of Growth Options ............Dl
Appendix E: Ranking of Residential Growth Options ..............................El
Housing 8 Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Lisi OF TABLES
Table 1: Objectives by Sustainability Principles Matrix ..........................................................2
Table 2: Projected Housing Demand by Type, 2001-2031 ........................................................ 6
Table 3: Comparison of Housing Supply of the Options with Projected Demand and Population
Accommodated ...................................................................................................... 7
Table 4: Assumed Number of Secondary Suites for the Options ................................................ 9
Table 5: Number and Percentage of Multi-family Units for the Options ..................................... 10
Table 6: Calculated Average Single-detached Lot Sizes for the Options ..................................... 10
Table 7: Percentage of DweLlings Units within Proximity to the Maple Ridge Town Centre .............. 14
Table 8: Gross Dwelling Unit Density of the Options, units/ha (units/acre)................................. 15
Table 9: Gross Population Density of the Units, persons/ha (persons/acre) ................................ 16
Table 10: Amount of Urban Land Area Used for Expansion and Amount of Agricultural Land Converted
toUrban Uses....................................................................................................... 19
Table 11: Change in Perimeter of Urban Area Boundary ........................................................ 19
Table 12: Gross Dwelling Unit Density of the Options ........................................................... 20
Table 13: Gross Population Density of the Options in Urban Areas, person/ha (persons/acre) .......... 23
Table 14: TotaL Urban Land Area of the Options, ha (acres) ................................................... 23
Table 15: Comparison of Total Municipal Infrastructure Costs of the Options .............................. 25
Table 16: Percentage Change in DwelLings Units for the Options by Neighbourhood and for the Town
Centre............................................................................................................... 29
Table 17: Amount of Agricultural and Rural/Suburban Residential Lands Converted to Urban Uses for
theOptions ......................................................................................................... 30
Table 18: OveraLL Rankings of the Options by Overarching Policy Objectives ............................... 32
Table 19: Summary of Advantages of the Recommended Option.............................................. 36
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Map of Option 1 - Moderate Intensification and Urban Containment ..............................3
Figure 2: Map of Option 2 - Modest Intensification and Northward Urban Expansion .......................4
Figure 3: Map of Option 3 - Modest Intensification and Eastward Expansion into Urban Reserve ........5
Figure 4: Map showing Circles of Various Radii from the Middle of the Maple Ridge Town Centre......14
Figure 5: Neighbourhood Boundaries (based on Census Dissemination Area Boundaries) .................29
Figure 6: Map of Recommended Option - Moderate Intensification and Northward Urban Expansion ..34
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
This report documents a technicaL evaluation of three options for accommodating residential growth in
the District of Maple Ridge. The report is the final in a series of three technical documents that
provide the background data and analysis for the District's Housing and Residential Lands Policy
Review. The first two reports in the series were (1) a context review and (2) a residential capacity
assessment.
1.2 Approach and Evaluation Framework
A structured evaluation and decision analysis framework was used to evaluate three options for
accommodating population growth in Maple Ridge. The approach taken is known as a multi-attribute
evaluation as it includes a variety of social, economic, and environmental attributes. Using this
systematic approach helps to define the problem, provide insight and clarity into anticipated
consequences, and highlight differences and trade-offs among the options.
The process for conducting the structured evaluation includes the following major steps:
Defining the problem
Clarifying the objectives and developing a set of indicators
Identifying the options
Describing the consequences of the options for each objective and identifying major tradeoffs
Recommending an option
Steps 1 to 3 are briefly described in the remainder of this section. Step 4 (consequences of the
options) is documented in detail in Section 2, while step 5 (recommending an option) is summarized in
Section 3.
Step 1: Defining the problem
The problem context underlying this technical evaluation is how the District of Maple Ridge can
accommodate population growth to 2031 in a manner that best meets its social, economic, and
environmentaL objectives.
Step 2: Clarifying the objectives and developing a set of indicators
The evaluation framework is structured and organized according to seven overarching policy
objectives identified by the consultant team in consultation with District staff and the community
Study Circle representatives. These objectives take into account the District's municipal objectives,
the fundamental strategies of the Greater Vancouver Regional District's Livable Region Strategic Plan,
and the provincial goalsior .re.gionaLgrowthstrategies. The •pol•icy=object-ivesareeLaboratedon in the
Context Report (Technical Report No. 1).
The seven overarching policy objectives are:
Improve housing choice
Foster housing affordability
Build complete communities
Develop a compact community
Increase transportation choice
Minimize municipal costs
Preserve community character
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Each of the objectives has direct and indirect implications on each of the sustainabitity principles
guiding the District (social, economic, fiscal, and environmental). For the purposes of this technical
evaluation, only select principles are quantitatively examined for each of the objectives (Table 1). As
a whole, the evaluation includes a balanced set of social, economic, and environmental aspects of
housing and residential lands.
Table 1: Objectives by Sustainability Principles Matrix
OBJECTIVE PRINCIPLES
Social Economic/Fiscal Environmental
Housing Choice I I
AffordabiLity I I
Complete Communities I
Compact Community I
Transportation I
Infrastructure Costing I
Community Character I
To assist in the assessment of the options from a fiscal, market, environmental, and social
perspective, a set of quantitative indicators and qualitative questions was developed. Two to three
quantitative indicators were selected for each of the objectives. The indicators and questions were
tested for reliability, relevance, and effectiveness. District staff also reviewed these indicators and
questions.
The selection of quantitative indicators was based on their relevance, comparability, availability of
data, and how well they addressed the objective at hand. They include spatial measures as well as
population density, housing mix, housing capacity, and municipal infrastructure cost indicators.
Additional issues or measures were included as part of the qualitative discussion and assessment to
supplement the quantitative data. The indicator data were then tabulated for purposes of summary
and review.
A set of questions served to guide the qualitative part of the analysis and also to put the quantitative
indicators into a broader context. This was considered important because certain aspects of assessing
the options are quaLitative in nature and cannot be translated into a measurable value, but are
necessary for distinguishing the consequences of the options.
Step 3: Identifying the options
The default option for accommodating population growth is called the Base Case, which is based on
the existing Land use designations in the District's current Official Community Plan. The Base Case is
included for reference purposes at various points in this analysis.
Three other residential growth options were identified by the District and detailed at a workshop with
District staff held in June, 2004. District staff helped to identify the areas where capacity can be
increased above and beyond the existing OCP land use designations, to specify general criteria for
expanding the Urban Area Boundary to heLp define one of the options, and to confirm the land use
configuration for the ThornhiLl Urban Reserve.
Housing & Residential Lands PoLicy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of ResidentiaL Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Option 1: Moderate Intensification and Urban Containment
In Option 1, residential growth is limited to the existing Urban Area Boundary (Figure 1). Urban
residential growth is projected to occur soLely through infill and intensified development within the
older neighbourhoods in the Urban Core Area and through new developments in areas within the
existing urban boundaries, such as Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver Valley.
Figure 1: Map of Option 1 - Moderate Intensification and Urban Containment
Option 2: Modest Intensification and Northward Urban Expansion
Option 2 incLudes expansion and adjustment to the Urban Area Boundary (Figure 2). This option would
accommodate growth by expanding or adjusting the existing urban boundary to the north and
potentially east of the Urban Core Area 4 in addition to allowing modest levels of growth within the
existing urban boundary through infill development and densification. The expansion areas wouLd be
Located adjacent to the existing urban area and thus maintain the contiguity of the urban area. As
with Option 1, growth would also occur through new developments in designated areas within the
existing urban boundaries, such as Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver ValLey.
The following are the minimum criteria that were used to identify potential urban expansion areas:
• includes areas that are contiguous with the existing urban area
• excludes land in the floodplain (e.g. floodplains of the Fraser and Alouette Rivers)
• -exctudeslandswithsteep sLopes(e.g.•greater•than2-5%)-- - -
• excludes lands that contain heritage properties and farms identified by the District in the Heritage
Inventory
Not all of the expansion areas shown in Figure 2 wouLd need to be developed to accommodate the
expected population growth. It is estimated that an expansion area of approximately 300 hectares
(740 acres) in size would be required to accommodate the population to 2031 that cannot otherwise
be accommodated through the modest intensification of the Urban Core Area or through new
developments in other designated urban areas of the District. Appendix A includes a preliminary
The Urban Core Area consists of the urban portions of Maple Ridge west of the Cottonwood Urban Area
(approximateLy west of 232d Street, south of Dewdney Trunk Road and west of 234th Street, north of Dewdney
Trunk Road). It excludes Albion, Cottonwood, and SiLver ValLey and the rural areas in the community.
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
analysis of the potential expansion areas in terms of their suitability for residential growth from the
perspective of meeting the District's policy objectives.
Figure 2: Map of Option 2 - Modest Intensification and Northward Urban Expansion
+
' y4' !L iver
lIoy L
,o
TownCentre \
, -5-
•Abwn
Legend
UrbanCoreArea
Flood Plain
NOTE THE POTENTIAL EXPANSION AREASARE Major Parks CONCEPTUAL IN NAIURE AND ARE GENERAUZED
Option 3: Modest Intensification and Eastward Expansion into Urban Reserve
Option 3 includes expansion of the Urban Area Boundary by opening up the Thornhill Urban Reserve,
Located to the east of Albion (Figure 3). It incorporates ThornhiLl as a new urban area in addition to
accommodating modest levels of growth within the Urban Core Area through infilt development and
densification and in Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver ValLey through development on greenfield sites 5.
The Land area of the Thornhi(l Urban Reserve is 560 ha (1,384 acres), excluding the park designation in
the northern portion of the area.
For this report, the land use proposed in the District of Maple Ridge Urban Growth Study and
Conceptual Plans Report (UMA 1988) is used to assess the ThornhilL Urban Reserve.
The housing capacities and amount of population growth that would be accommodated in Atbion, Cottonwood,
Silver Valley and the rural areas is assumed to be the same for all the options.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Figure 3: Map of Option 3 - Modest Intensification and Eastward Expansion into Urban Reserve
The remainder of this report is focused on the final two steps of the evaluation of these housing
options. Section 2 describes the consequences of each option with respect to each objective and
identifies the tradeoffs associated with each option (Step 4), and Section 3 summarizes the
recommended option (Step 5).
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
2.0 ANALYSIS OF THE RESIDENTIAL GROWTH OPTIONS
Each of the growth options has been considered in terms of their ability to address the District's
priority objectives for housing and residential Lands policy. The detailed analysis of both quantitative
and qualitative data discusses the strengths, weaknesses, consequences, and tradeoffs of each option
in order to objectively determine the effectiveness and appropriateness of each of the options.
The upcoming seven sections discuss the analysis of the three options with respect to the individual
objectives. An overall description of the performance of the three options in relation to all the
objectives is included in Section 3.
2.1 Improving Housing Choice
Objective I - To create housing choice by providing an appropriate mix of housing by type,
tenure, price, and location that addresses the housing needs of all residents.
Issues / Indicators Quantitative Measures Qualitative Questions
Adequate Supply • Population • How well would the market
accommodated respond?
Housing Mix • Composition of units as. How well are the needs of the
compared to a specified population being met?
balance of dwelling types • How diverse is the housing mix?
Maple Ridge is projected to have a population of about 108,900 by 2031 (The Sheltair Group and Kelly
& Associates, March 2004). The characteristics of this population need to be considered in
determining where and how residents should be accommodated. The projected aging of the
population is a particularly important consideration. By 2031, it is estimated that there will be fewer
young people choosing to maintain a single-detached dwelling and a greater share of seniors
maintaining an apartment.
Projections of the number and mix of housing units were deveLoped based on an analysis of the
household occupancy demand in Maple Ridge from 2001 to 2031 (Table 2). Additional detail on the
household occupancy demand can be found in the Residential Capacity Assessment report (Technical
Report No. 2). Assumptions regarding land use, housing mix and densities are also included in
Technical Report No. 2.
Table 2: Projected Housing Demand by Type, 2001-2031
Housing Type 2001 2011 2021 2031
single-detached 15;400' - -65% 1-9;00 - 22;600 57% 25,200
OtherGround 4,600 19%
Oriented
6,500 20% 8,700 22% 11,300 23%
Apartment 3,700 16% 5,600 18% 8,300 21% 12,100 25%
Total 23,700 100% 31,600 100% 39,600 100% 48,700 100%
The number and type of housing units in demand will evolve over time. Over the next 25 to 30 years,
an increasingly smaller share of single-detached units is anticipated, while demand for apartments and
other ground-oriented units6 will gradually increase. It is therefore important that the OCP take into
consideration the phased nature of demand and not simply focus on what is needed in 30 years' time.
6 See Glossary for definition of ground-oriented units
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
However, for the purposes of comparing the three options, this evaluation will only focus on the
endpoint figures for 2031.
The three options for accommodating population growth in Maple Ridge yield different numbers and
mixes of housing units and population capacities (Table 3). AdditionaL details on the housing
capability of the options is included in the Residential Capacity Assessment report (Technical Report
No. 2)
Table 3: Comparison of Housing Supply of the Options with Projected Demand and Population
Accommodated
Housing Type Total Demand Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and Northward and Eastward
Containment Urban Expansion Expansion into
Urban Reserve
Single-detached 25,200 52% 19,200 41% 23,600 48% 26,100 50%
Other Ground 11,300 23% 15,500 33% 13,200 27% 14,200 27%
Oriented
Apartment 12,100 25% 12,100 26% 12,100 25% 12,100 23%
Total 48,700 100% 46,700 100% 48,900 100% 52,400 100%
Population 108,900 102,900 108,900 117,100
Accommodated ________
Option I
Option I has two major shortcomings. First, the option accommodates a population of only 102,900
persons, which is 6,000 less than the target population of 108,900 for 2031. This shortfall is due to the
limitation of the residential capacity in the existing urban area. In addition, much of the future
housing under this option can only be provided through the conversion of existing single-detached
home areas to other forms of ground oriented housing, which have a lower average number of persons
per household.
Second, the mix of housing units provided is not what Maple Ridge will need to accommodate its 2031
population. The required number of apartment units can be supplied, but there is a major imbalance
between single-detached and other forms of ground oriented housing, with a shortfall of 6,000 single-
detached units and a surplus of 4,200 units of other ground oriented housing.
It is possible that some people seeking single-detached housing may be willing to accept other forms
of ground oriented housing if the units offer many of the same features as single-detached housing
(e.g. ,.large.fioor plans., suffic.ient.private yard..space, adequateparking). However, thernajority of
people seeking single-detached housing are unlikeLy to accept another ground oriented form and will
look to other communities (e.g., Mission, Surrey, Langley, Abbotsford) for their housing if it cannot be
supplied in Maple Ridge.
Another factor to consider is the age of Maple Ridge's housing stock. Overall the dwelling stock in the
district is relatively new, with only 1% of the single-detached units built before 1921 and only 4% of
the units built before 1941 (in the Urban Core Area). From an economic perspective, it may not be
feasible to demolish much of the dwelling stock to convert to higher density housing.
The relative newness of much of Maple Ridge's housing stock means that white in theory there can be
a significant number of housing units other than single-detached accommodated in the urban
containment area, the reality is that some of the neighbourhoods where conversion is desired will not
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
be ready for redevelopment by 2031. Furthermore, a shortage of single-detached housing in the
community wilt likely drive up the prices of single-detached homes, making it less economically viabLe
for developers to acquire and assemble single-family properties for conversion to other housing forms.
While it could be argued that this can be addressed by allowing redevelopment to occur at densities
sufficient to offset the higher land costs, this often results in smaller unit sizes, which is not what
most people seeking ground oriented housing desire.
Option 2
Option 2 can accommodate the 2031 target population of 108,900 and exceeds the target of 48,700
housing units by 200 units. Although the requirement for total dwelling units is met, the option results
in a shortage of 1,600 single-detached housing units. The option meets the target for apartment units
in demand but generates 1,900 more other ground oriented housing units than are required.
It is possible that the imbalance between apartments and other ground-oriented housing could be
addressed by allowing for higher densities in and close to the core area to accommodate apartment
units.
Option 3
The population capacity of Option 3 exceeds the 2031 target population of 108,900 by 8,200 persons.
The option's housing capacity also exceeds the 2031 target of 48,700 housing units by 3,700 units.
As in Option 2, this option exhibits an imbalance between the supply of apartment units and other
ground oriented housing forms. Again, this disparity could be addressed by allowing for higher
densities in and close to the core area.
Summary of Housing Choice
From a housing choice perspective, Option 1 is the least desirable option because, with the exception
of apartment units, it does not produce the required housing mix. Option I also falls short of meeting
both the population and housing unit targets for 2031. This option also has an undersupply of single-
detached units.
Options 2 and 3 both meet or exceed the 2031 housing and population targets. Their common
weakness is that they produce an oversupply of other ground-oriented units. However, unlike Option I
where there is not the physical land base available within the urban containment area to meet the
target housing mix, both Options 2 and 3 could be adjusted to correct for a housing imbalance.
Option 1 is therefore not a viable option in terms of meeting the District's objective of providing an
adequate supply and mix of housing for all residents. Options 2 and 3, while not fully meeting the
objective as they are currently configured, both come much closer to meeting the objective.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: 8
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
2.2 Fostering Housing Affordability
Objective 2 - To ensure the provision of housing that is affordable to all income groups within the
population.
Issues / Indicators Quantitative Measures Qualitative Questions
Low Income or Rental • % of rental / • How well would the market respond
Housing % secondary suites to the provision of non-market or
special needs housing?
Affordable Home • %of multi-family • To what extent will the options
Ownership dwelling units allow for the provision of entry-level
• Average Lot size, single- housing?
detached
Low Income and Rental Housing
Municipalities throughout the region have cited stresses to the rental housing market, including the
absence of new purpose-built rental housing, the relative unaffordability of the newer forms of rental
housing such as "buy to rent" condos, low vacancy rates, and the increasing gap in household income
between owners and renters.7 As such, much of the affordable rental units in the District come from
secondary suites or rented condominiums. In particular, secondary suites represent an important
component of the low-income rental stock. Secondary suites also address the affordability of housing
for owners of single-family dwellings by providing a source of income to help finance mortgage
payments.
Currently, between 800 and 1,500 secondary suites exist in Maple Ridge, forming 4% to 6% of the
dwelling stock. It is anticipated that the growth options will produce between 3,800 and 5,100
secondary suites (Table 4).
Table 4: Assumed Number of Secondary Suites for the Options
Housing Type Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and Northward and Eastward
Containment Urban Expansion into
Expansion Urban Reserve
# of Secondary Suites 3,800 4,600 1 5,100
Secondary Suites as a % of 8% 9% 10%
Total Dwelling Units
It is estimated that 24% of the .households.in.203twilLmainta.in.a .rentaL.dwel.Ling, which-is a-slight
increase from 22% in 2001 from the census.
Multi-Family Dwellings
Multi-family dweLlings include apartments, duplexes, row houses, and additional forms of other
ground-oriented units. These housing forms often provide more affordable ownership alternatives
compared to single-family dwellings.
Greater Vancouver Regional District. March 2002. Review of Municipal Secondary Suite Policies in the Greater
Vancouver Regional District. PoLicy and Planning Department.
8 See GLossary under Tenure (housing) for definition of a rental unit
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
In Maple Ridge, 34% of the dwelling stock in 2001 consisted of multi-family units (19% other ground-
oriented and 15% apartment). It is anticipated that the growth options will produce between 13,200
and 15,500 muLti-family dwelling units, representing between 50% and 59% of the housing stock in 2031
(Table 5).
Table 5: Number and Percentage of Multi-family Units for the Options
Housing Type Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Intensification Modest Intensification
Intensification and and Northward Urban and Eastward
Urban Containment Expansion Expansion into Urban
Reserve
Number of % of Number of % of Number of % of
Multi-family Total Multi-family TotaL Multi-family Total
Units Units Units Units Units Units
Other Ground 15,500 33% 13,200 27% 14,200 27%
Oriented
Apartment 12,100 26% 12,100 25% 12,100 23%
Total Multi- 27,600 59% 25,300 52% 26,300 50%
family
Average Lot Size
Average lot size of single-detached homes is used here as a proxy for more affordable home
ownership. The average lot size for the Base Case at build-out in the urban areas of the Urban Core
Area, ALbion, and Cottonwood is estimated to be approximately 6,000 sq. ft. Due to the assumptions
made in defining the different growth options, little distinction in average Lot size exists between the
options (Table 6).
Table 6: Calculated Average Single-detached Lot Sizes for the Options
Average Lot Size (ft) Current Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and Northward and Eastward
Containment Urban Expansion
Expansion into Urban
Reserve
Urban CoreArea 5,930 5,480 5,750 5,750
Albion 6,140 6,140 6,140 6,140
Cottonwood 5,670 5,670 - _5,670 5,670
Silver VäLEéy 12,550
-
12,550 12,550 12,550
Expansion Areas 0 0 6,610 0
Urban Reserve 0 0 0 6,610
Average for Urban Areas 7,020 6,860 6,850 6,830
The Base Case has the highest average lot size at approximately 7,020 sq. ft. Options 1, 2 and 3 all
include Lot splitting to allow for two single-detached houses on Large Lots and for smaller single-
detached Lots in undeveloped areas of the Urban Core Area (e.g. Transportation Lands east of
Downtown). This reduces the single-detached Lot sizes in the Urban Core Area (Haney, Port Haney,
Hammond, and West Maple Ridge).
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Non-Market Housing
Housing advocates believe there is a significant deficiency in the provision of non-market housing in
Maple Ridge for special needs, mental health, supportive housing, at-risk youth, and the homeless.
The possibility of introducing non-market housing or a continuum of housing to meet this demand is
dependent on provinciaL funding, land acquisition, and neighbourhood compliance issues. As these
factors would equally apply across each of the three growth options, the potentiaL for non-market
housing cannot be compared. However, policy recommendations can address this issue by encouraging
support and funding for emergency shelters, transitional housing, and other forms of supportive
housing.
Option I
Option I has the least potential for providing affordable rental units through secondary suite
development. Only 3,800 suites are projected, which is 8% of the dwelling stock. This is due to the
conversion of some of the single-detached housing stock to multi-family units in the Urban Core Area.
Alternatively, this option provides the greatest number (27,600 units) and share (59%) of multi-family
dwelling units.
The average lot size in Option I is slightly larger than in Options 2 and 3, mainly because the larger lot
sizes in Silver Valley skew the results. However, the average lot size for the Urban Core Area is
smalLest in Option I because of the demolition of some Larger lots to accommodate apartment and
other-ground oriented units.
Option 2
Option 2 provides 800 more units of secondary suites than Option 1, but 500 less units than Option 3.
Additionally, Option 2 provides fewer multi-family dwelling units than the other options.
The average Lot size is slightly smaller for Options 2 and 3 than Option 1, mainly because the large lot
sizes in Silver Valley skew the results. However, the expansion area in Option 2 would have an
average lot size of 6,610 sq. ft., which is larger than the Urban Core Area, Cottonwood or Albion.
Option 3
Option 3 provides more secondary suites than the other options. Additionally, Option 3 produces
1,000 more multi-family housing units than Option 2, but 1,300 fewer units than Option 1.
Option 3 has a slightly smaller average lot size than Option 2 only because of the Larger housing
capacity in Option 3. In actuality, the Thornhill Urban Reserve has the same assumed average tot size
as the expansion area as outlined in Option 2, exceeding that of the Urban Core Area or other existing
neighbourhoods in Albion or Cottonwood.
An important affordability consideration is transportation costs associated with housing choice. As
shown•in•t•he anatysisof the Increasing Transportation Choice objec-tive(Section 2.5, people living in
the Thornhill Urban Reserve would have a higher Level of automobile dependence than those living in
the expansion area or the Urban Core Area. These people would therefore have increased household
expenditures for transportation.
Finally, the municipal infrastructure cost per dwelling unit is estimated to be highest for Option 3 as
described in the Minimizing Infrastructure Cost objective. (Section 2.6). The developer portion of
infrastructure costs are typically passed on to the homebuyers resulting in decreased housing
affordability.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: 11
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Summary of Fostering Housing Affordabilit
Option 3 has the greatest allowance for secondary suites, foLLowed by Option 2. However, Option 2
wouLd have the same number of secondary suites as Option 3 if the expansion area in Option 2 were
equivalent in size to the area of the ThornhiLt Reserve. Conversely, Option 1 provides the greatest
number and share of muLti-family dwelLings, followed by Option 3.
The average Lot size in Options 2 and 3 is smaLler than the Base Case. The average Lot size wouLd be
even smaller if the single-detached residential densities were higher in the expansion areas and the
ThornhiLl Urban Reserve.
Option 3 results in the highest Level of automobile dependence, which impacts affordability for
transportation expenditures. Additionally, Option 3 has the highest municipal infrastructure costs per
dwelling unit, which would resuLt in decreased housing affordabiLity.
Non-market housing units couLd be developed in each option; however, historically it is Less Likely that
non-market housing is built in new neighbourhoods. This is due to several factors incLuding the Low
density of new neighbourhoods, concerns for property values, and Limited accessibility to services and
amenities. Thus, it can be presumed that non-market housing units are Less likely to be deveLoped in
the expansion area as outlined in Option 2 and the ThornhiLl Urban Reserve. However, in any of the
options, this type of development couLd be accommodated within the Urban Core Area.
Housing & ResidentiaL Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
2.3 Building Complete Communities
Objective 3 - To ensure that the majority of housing is developed within close proximity to places
of work, shopping, services, recreational facilities and park space.
Issues I Indicators Quantitative Measures Qualitative Questions
Proximity of Houses to • % of dwelling units within • How accessible are services and
Services 2.5 km, 5 km, 7.5 km facilities in relation to where
and 10km of Town people live?
Centre • How well do the options meet the
needs of different population
groups?
PopuLation Density I • Population / ha • How well do the options increase a
sense of community?
Proximity of Housing to Services
A complete community is one that enhances a sense of community, creates a vibrant and active street
life, and fosters public safety. Neighbourhoods that offer shopping and services, opportunities for
work, and cultural or recreational facilities that are in close proximity are said to foster a complete
community. The proximity of houses to services thus provides a quantitative measure for accessibiLity
of services and facilities.
MapLe Ridge's Town Centre has a concentration of services and amenities that cannot be provided in
smaller neighbourhoods. As such, the percentage of dwelling units within proximity of the Town
Centre is a meaningful measure, which indicates the proportion of housing that is located close to a
wide diversity of shopping, services, and public facilities.
An indicator was developed for the percentage of dwelling units that would be located within a
certain radius of the Town Centre. Figure 4 shows a map of Maple Ridge with circles of various radii
extending out from the middle of the Maple Ridge Town Centre 9. The number of units falling inside a
certain proximity to the Town Centre at build-out was estimated for each of the options.
For the purpose of the indicator calculation for the percentage of dweLling units within proximity to the Town
Centre, the geographic centre of the Maple Ridge Town Centre was defined as the Maple Ridge Arts Centre and
Theatre.
Housing ü Residential Lands PoLicy Review TechnicaL Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Figure 4: Map showing Circles of Various Radii from the Middle of the Maple Ridge Town Centre
Table 7: Percentage of Dwellings Units within Proximity to the Maple Ridge Town Centre
Distance to Town Centre Base Case Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and and Eastward
Containment Northward Expansion
Urban into Urban
Expansion Reserve
0 to 2.5 km 52.9% 55.5% 55.7% 48.9%
2.5 to 5.0 km 35.7% 34.2% 34.3% 30.0%
5.0 to 7.5 km 5.6% 5.0% 4.9% 9.9%
7.5 to 10.0 km 2.9% 2.6% 2.6% 8.7%
>10 km 2.9% 2.6% 2.5% 2.5%
100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
In the Base Case, 53% of the dweLLing units are within 2.5 km of the Town Centre and 36% are between
2.5 km and 5 km of the centre. Only 11% of the District's dwelLing units are situated in the outlying
areas that are more than 5 km away from the Centre.
I-lousing & ResidentiaL Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
EvaLuation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Higher Population Density
In theory, higher population density development supports the development of commerciaL nodes or
the construction of facilities and service centres. Higher density development should also encourage
local residents to walk and cycle to shopping and services as well as provide easier access to transit
services (see Section 2.5).
There is an average of 10.3 dwelling units per hectare (4.2 units/acre) in the urban areas of Maple
Ridge under the Base Case (Table 8). The highest Levels of density occur in the Urban Core Area (13.8
units/hectare; 5.6 units/ acre) and the lowest in Silver Valley (5.5 units/hectare; 2.2 units/acre).
Table 8: Gross Dwelling Unit Density of the Options, units/ha (units/acre)
Dwelling Unit Density Base Case Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and and Eastward
Containment Northward Expansion
Urban into Urban
Expansion Reserve
13.8 16.6 15.2 15.2
Urban CoreArea (5.6) (6.7) (6.2) (6.2)
5.9 5.9 5.9 5.9
Albion (2.4) (2.4) (2.4) (2.4)
10.1 10.1 10.1 10.1
Cottonwood (4.1) (4.1) (4.1) (4.1)
5.5 5.5 5.5 5.5
Silver Valley (2.2) (2.2) (2.2) (2.2)
12.0
Expansion Areas (4.9)
12.0
Urban Reserve (4.9)
Average Dwelling Units/ha in 10.3 11.7 11.1 11.1
Urban Areas (4.2) (4.7) (4.5) (4.5)
The average gross population density in Maple Ridge is estimated to be 25.6 persons/hectare (10.4
persons/acre) at build out in the Base Case (Table 9). The most densely populated area is the Urban
Core Area (33 persons/ha; 13.4 persons/acre) followed by Cottonwood (26.5 persons/ha; 10.7
persons/acre). Albion and Silver Valley are the least densely populated areas in Maple Ridge, with
population densities of 15.9 persons/ha (6.4 persons/acre) and 15.3 persons/ha (6.2 persons/acre)
respectively.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: 15
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Table 9: Gross Population Density of the Units, persons/ha (persons/acre)
Geographic Area Base Case Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and and Eastward
Containment Northward Expansion
Urban into Urban
Expansion Reserve
33.0 38.0 35.6 35.6
Urban Core Area (13.4) (15.7) (14.4) (14.4)
15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9
ALbion (6.4) (6.4) (6.4) (6.4)
26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5
Cottonwood (10.7) (10.7) (10.7) (10.7)
15.3 15.3 15.3 15.3
Silver Valley (6.2) (6.2) (6.2) (6.2)
32.7
Expansion Areas (13.2)
32.7
Urban Reserve (13.2)
Average Population Density 25.6 28.1 27.4 27.7
in urban areas (10.4) (11.4) (11.1) (11.2)
As a reference point, the population densities in the Urban Core Area under the Base Case approach
those of Mallairdville in Coquitlam and Steveston in Richmond. The Thornhill Urban Reserve and the
expansion area were assumed to each have a popuLation density of 32.7 persons/hectare (13.2
persons/acre)10. This is comparable to the densities of Walnut Grove in the Township of Langley and
Coquitlam's Westwood Plateau.
A population density of 30 persons/hectare (12.1 persons/acre) has been identified as a threshold
above which automobile dependence is reduced'1 . According to this threshold, the population density
in the Urban Core Area under all three options would support reduced Levels of automobile
dependence.
In some existing urban areas outside the Urban Core Area, however, the densities are well below this
threshold of 30 persons/ha (12.1 persons/acre), which suggests continued automobile dependence.
The expansion area and the Thornhill Urban Reserve each have a population density of 32.7
persons/ha (13.2 persons/acre). This density level promotes the use of walking, cycling, and transit
use; however, otherfactors affect the use of these modes other than density (see Section 2.5).
Other Considerations
Another consideration is the extent to which each option develops a neighbourhood -hub-Or community
core area. The landscape and character of the buildings within these nodes help define a sense of
place in each neighbourhood.
10 Assumption of population densities based in part on average household sizes for 2031 from the report
Demographic Analysis and Population and Housing Projection for Maple Ridge, 2001-2031. March 2004. Prepared
by The Sheltair Group and KeLly E Associates for the District of Maple Ridge. Assumptions on dwelling mix for the
Thornhill Urban Reserve based on the report District of Maple Ridge Urban Growth Study and Conceptual Plans
Report. 1988. Prepared by UMA Engineering Ltd. for District of Maple Ridge. Assumed mix of 80% single-
detached dwellings and 20% townhouse made by the consultant team for the expansion areas for Option 2.
11 Newman, Peter and Jeffrey Kenworthy. 1999. Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence.
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Further, a balanced mix of uses and housing types contributes to building a complete community.
Providing housing choice and diversity of dwellings addresses the needs of different population groups,
including seniors, people with disabilities, youth, and young families.
Finally, impro'ing the balance of housing to jobs is an important goal throughout the region. A robust
Town Centre would facilitate this goal as well as support economic development. The support of
home-based businesses and Live/work type development and related amenities also acts to promote a
complete community.
Option I
In Option 1, 56% of the dwellings would be located within 2.5 km of the Town Centre. This is higher
than in Option 3, although marginally lower than in Option 2. A higher percentage is beneficial from
the perspective of supporting economic activity and businesses in the Town Centre, as people would
be within walking distance of shopping, services, employment and other amenities in the Town Core.
Option I supports the highest level of density in the Urban Core Area, which also fosters increased
vitality in the Town Centre.
Option 2
Option 2 has the same proportion of dwellings (56%) in proximity to the Town Centre as Option 1. This
reflects the additionaL capacity planned for the expansion area, which is both contiguous with the
existing Urban Area Boundary and situated in close proximity to the Urban Core Area. Option 2 also
has the smallest proportion of dwelling units (10%) located more than 5 km from the Town Centre.
Both Option 2 and Option 3 have the same levels of dwelling unit density (11.1 units/ha; 4.5
units/acre) and similar population densities (32.7 persons/ha; 13.2 persons/acre) for the potential
expansion area as outlined in Option 2 and in the Thornhill Urban Reserve.
Option 3
Option 3 has the smallest percentage of dwelling units within 2.5 km of the Town Centre. Due to the
location of the ThornhiLl Urban Reserve, this option also has the largest proportion of units Located
between 5 and 10 km of the Town Centre.
Given the distance of the ThornhiLl Urban Reserve from the Town Centre, there is the potential to
build a mid-size commercial and neighbourhood centre within ThornhiLl. If commerciaLly viable, a
neighbourhood centre could help promote a sense of community and unique community character.
However, this type of neighbourhood centre would not necessarily reduce travel to services and
facilities that could only be feasibly located in or close to the Town Centre.
Summary of Building Complete Communities
Option I scores the highest in terms of its overall ability to build a complete community that is within
close proximity to services, transit, and amenities, and one that has high levels of population density.
Option 2 provides the largest share of dwelling units that are close to the urban core, yet it does not
have the same levels of density as in Option 1.
Option 3 scores the lowest in terms of its ability to build a complete community within proximity to
centralized services and one that has the density to support comprehensive development of services
and access to frequent transit service.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: 17
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
2.4 Developing a Compact Community
Objective 4 - To facilitate the development of compact communities whereby low density
dispersed suburban development is minimised, land is used efficiently, and green space and
agricultural lands are protected.
Issues I Indicators Quantitative Measures Qualitative Questions
Sprawl/Density • Dwelling units/ha • How well do the options minimise
• PopuLation/ha low density dispersed suburban
• Total amount of land development
development • Do the options use land efficiently?
Greenspace • Perimeter of urban area • To what extent are forest lands,
boundary natural parks, and greenspace being
protected?
• To what extent are green space
lands fragmented by each of the
Agricultural Land • Loss of agricultural land • How much agricultural land would
be converted to urban uses?
Many of the notions of compact community development address the goals of reducing Low density
dispersed suburban growth (sometimes known as urban sprawl), protecting greenspace and agricultural
lands, and promoting principles that encourage efficient Land use. Characteristics of 'sprawl" include
low density dispersed suburban development, outward expansion, and non-contiguous development.
One useful measures of compactness is the amount of additional urban land required for the options
and the amount of agricultural land lost because of expansion (Table 10). The table shows the amount
of land in the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) that would be converted to urban uses. Land in the ALR
is part of the GVRD's Green Zone 12. Option 2 would result in the greatest loss of land in the
Agricultural Land Reserve. The land in the Thornhill Urban Reserve is entirely outside the Green Zone,
although aLmost 400 ha is zoned for agricultural purposes. However, there is significant greenspace in
the Thornhitl Urban Reserve as much of the area is forested. Therefore, conversion of land to urban
uses in the Thornhill Urban Reserve would also result in toss of greenspace values even though it is not
classified as Green Zone.
12 For more information on agricultural Lands, see the report Maple Ridge AgriculturaL Policy Review - Background
Report: Situation AnaLysis. October 2004. Prepared by Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmentat Consulting and Quadra
Planning ConsuLtants Ltd for the District of Maple Ridge.
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: 18
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Table 10: Amount of Urban Land Area Used for Expansion and Amount of Agricultural Land
Converted to Urban Uses
Indicator Base Case Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and Northward and Eastward
Containment Urban Expansion into
Expansion Urban Reserve
Additional Urban Land Area through 0 0 310 560
Expansion, ha (acres) assumed (766) (1,384)
Amount of ALR converted to urban 0 0 215* 0
uses, ha (acres) (531)
Minimum amount
Amount of agricuLturally designated 0 0 230* 0*
land converted to urban uses, ha (568) 390 ha (964 acres)
(acres) Minimum amount Urban Reserve zoned
for agricu'turaL use
101 ha (250 acres)
with farm exempt
status
Table 11 shows the change in perimeter of the Urban Area Boundary. A smaller increase in the
perimeter of the urban area boundary for a given increase in land area is desirable from a compact
community perspective as it represents a more compact urban form and also may decrease potential
urban-rural conflicts through minimizing the interface between these very different land uses. A smaLl
increase in perimeter is possible through having contiguous development to the existing Urban Area
Boundary and through smoothing the Urban Area Boundary Line, as is the case with Option 2.
Table 11: Change in Perimeter of Urban Area Boundary
Indicator Base Case Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and Northward and Eastward
Containment Urban Expansion into
Expansion Urban Reserve
Increase in Perimeter of Urban Area 0 0 <0.5 km 14 km
Boundary (<0.3 miles) (8.7 miLes)
Another indicator of compactness Is gross dwelling Unit density which -it a rasure of how efficiently
the land is being used for housing the population. Table 12 shows the gross dwelling unit densities of
the options for the Urban Core Area and the assumed densities for the expansion areas.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Table 12: Gross Dwelling Unit Density of the Options
Indicator Base Case Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and Northward and Eastward
Containment Urban Expansion into
Expansion Urban Reserve
Gross Dwelling Unit Density of Urban 13.8 16.6 15.2 15.2
Core Area, units/ha (units/acre) (5.6) (6.7) (6.2) (6.2)
Gross DweLLing Unit Density of N/A N/A 12 12
Expansion Areas, units/ha (units/acre) (4.9) (4.9)
Option I
Option 1 best meets the objective of creating a compact community, particularly through using Land
efficiency and avoiding outward expansion of the Urban Area Boundary. In this option, the urban Land
area remains the same as in the current OCP, no ALR or agriculturalLy designated land is converted to
urban use, and the size of the urban perimeter remains unchanged. Overall, this objective will do the
most to limit low density dispersed suburban deveLopment and promote land efficiencies within the
District of Maple Ridge.
Regionally, Option 1 has the most potential to fulfill the Livable Region Strategic Plan (LRSP) strategy
of creating a compact metropolitan area, assuming that urban density in Maple Ridge increases
sufficiently to accommodate the new growth. An important consideration, however, is the option's
inability to address the housing demand for different dwelling types. If residentiaL development in the
District is unable to address the demand for single-detached dwellings within this option, the growth
may be redirected to other, lower-density developments within the GVRD (e.g. Mission or Langley). If
this is the case, Option 1 's contribution to the creation of a compact metropolitan region will be
negligible.
This option requires an increase in urban density within the Urban Core Area of 3 units/hectare (1.2
units/acre) over the Base Case in order to accommodate new residents. However, as was discussed in
the evaluation of Objective 1, the housing market may not support the implementation of this option.
Option 2
Option 2 increases the size of the urban area by approximately 310 ha (766 acres). However, it has
the potential to promote the creation of a compact community by helping connect the currentLy
disconnected Silver Valley development to the Urban Core Area and creating a more contiguous urban
area.
This option resuLts in a modest increase in density in the Urban Core Area. The gross density only
increases from 14 units/ha (5.7 units/acre) in the Base Case to 15 units/ha (6.1 units/acre) in Option
2. Average gross densities in the new growth areas would reach 12 units/hectare (4.9 units/acre).
This option adequately increases the urban area to meet housing and population demand projections
to 2031. The option strikes a balance between accommodating expected future growth and providing
some market incentive (by limiting supply) for residential intensification.
Option 2 removes at least 215 ha (530 acres) of land from the ALR, and redesignates a total of 230 ha
(570 acres) of Land from agricultural to urban uses. This is counter to the LRSP goal of protecting the
Housing Et ResidentiaL Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Green Zone, although the contiguous nature of the new development helps to create a more compact
community form.
Option 3
Option 3 wouLd increase the urban area by approximately 560 ha (1,380 acres) and create virtually
non-contiguous areas of development within Maple Ridge. As a result, servicing costs would be highest
with this option (see Section 2.6).
Option 3 is the least favourable option in terms of creating a compact community and does not fit into
the LRSP's strategy of creating a compact region. In the Regional Context Statement of the 1996 OCP,
the District recognized the need to work towards consistency between the OCP and the LRSP over
time, including a review of the Thornhilt Urban Reserve13.
Under Option 3, there is no redesignation of any ALR lands into urban uses or conversion of Green Zone
lands into urban uses. Therefore this option promotes the LRSP strategy to protect the Green Zone.
However, there is significant greenspace in the Thornhill Urban Reserve as much of the area is
forested or is used for agriculture. Therefore, conversion of Land to urban uses in the Thornhill Urban
Reserve would also result in loss of greenspace values even though it is not classified as Green Zone.
Land available for housing under this option would exceed projected demand to 2031. This over-
supply of land provides little incentive for higher densities in new or existing residential
neighbourhoods. Therefore, it is unlikely that density in the Urban Core Area would increase as
quickly under this option.
Summary of DevelODine a ComDact Communit
Option 1 most clearly meets the policy objective of creating a compact community and compact
metropolitan region. If successfuL, this option would promote higher residential densities in Maple
Ridge and minimize low density dispersed suburban development. Market realities may, however,
hinder the successful implementation of this option.
Option 2 also creates a more compact community by creating a more discreet and contiguous urban
area for Maple Ridge. The option achieves increases in density while still accommodating expected
growth.
Option 3 does not meet the objective of achieving a compact community. In fact, the option's surplus
land designation is Likely to contribute to low density dispersed suburban development.
Option I and 3 are the most Likely to protect the Green Zone as these options do not redesignate
additional agricultural or ALR land to urban uses. In contrast, Option 2 does redesignate some land
from the ALR to urban uses.
13 The Regional Context Statement in the 1996 OCP includes the following: "The Municipality will work towards
consistency between the OCP and the LRSP over time and will ... undertake a review of the ThornhilL Urban
Reserve to determine appropriate development timing depending upon achieving success in meeting the regional
compact metropolitan and transportation objectives in the Maple Ridge context."
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
2.5 Increasing Transportation Choice
Objective 5 - To foster an urban form and land use pattern that reduces the dependency on
automobiles and increases walking, cycling, and the use of public transit.
Issues I Indicators
Automobile Dependence/
Accessibility
Quantitative Measures
• Gross Population Density
(target for reduced
automobile dependency
is a minimum of 30
persons/ha)
• Indicators from Sections
2.3 (Building Complete
Communities) and 2.4
(Developing a Compact
Qualitative Questions
• How well do the options increase the
accessibility to transit services,
including the West Coast express?
• How well do the options increase the
accessibility of jobs, services, and
amenities?
Increasing Opportunities • Total Urban Land Area • How do each of the options foster
for Walking and Cycling opportunities for walking and cycling?
The objective of increasing transportation choice is closely linked to the objectives of building
complete and compact communities because transportation choice is influenced by urban form, land
use mix, and urban density. This evaluation uses the indicators of density and total urban land area to
reflect how housing development patterns impact automobile usage versus alternatives such as
walking, bicycling and taking public transit.
Urban Population Density
Maple Ridge currently has one of the lower population densities in the region. Lower levels of
population density are linked to high levels of automobile dependence. A gross population density of
30 persons/hectare (12.1 persons/acre) has been identified as the typical threshold above which
automobile dependence is reduced.14 At this density level the provision of frequent transit service
becomes more feasible as do opportunities for walking and cycling.
In each growth option, the population density in the Urban Core Area is above the threshold of 30
persons/ha (12.1 persons/acre), which suggests reduced levels of automobile dependence would be
achieved (see Table 13). In contrast, the outlying existing urban areas outside the Urban Core Area
have population densities well below this threshold. The lower levels of population density in these
neighbourhoods in combination with their distance from the Town Centre indicate the likelihood of
continued automobile dependence for the outlying urban parts of the community. Both the expansion
area as outlined in Option 2 and the Thornhill Urban Reserve have the same population density of 32.7
persons/ha (13.2 persons/acre), which is high enough to support increased walking, cycling, and
transit use. However, other factors besides density, will influence automobile usage in.these areas.
For example, in Thornhill, its topography, distance from existing services and shopping, and
discontiguity from the existing urban area would make it much more automobile dependent than the
potential northward expansion areas that are outlined in Option 2.
14 Newman, Peter and Jeffrey Kenworthy. 1999. Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence.
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Table 13: Gross Population Density of the Options in Urban Areas, person/ha (persons/acre)
Geographic Area Base Case Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and Northward and Eastward
Containment Urban Expansion into
Expansion Urban Reserve
33.0 38.0 35.6 35.6
Urban Core Area (13.4) (15.7) (14.4) (14.4)
15.9 15.9 15.9 15.9
Albion (6.4) (6.4) (6.4) (6.4)
26.5 26.5 26.5 26.5
Cottonwood (10.7) (10.7) (10.7) (10.7)
15.3 15.3 15.3 15.3
Silver VaUey (6.2) (6.2) (6.2) (6.2)
32.7
Expansion Areas (13.2)
32.7
Urban Reserve (13.2)
Average Population Density in 25.6 28.1 27.4 27.7
Urban Areas (10.4) (11.4) (11.1) (11.2)
Urban Land Area
Housing tends to become more dispersed as total urban land area increases, which makes it more
difficult to service neighbourhoods with frequent public transit. Walking and cycling trip distances
also tend to increase as urban land area becomes larger, which discourages the use of these modes.
AdditionaLLy, large distances between new development areas Lead to limited accessibility and
increased reliance on private automobiles (see section 2.4 - Develop a Compact Community). For
example, development in Silver Valley or ALbion resuLts in greater travel distances between these
areas and the existing Urban Core Area. Table 14 shows the total urban land area associated with
each of the options.
TabLe 14: TotaL Urban Land Area of the Options, ha (acres)
Urban Land Area Base Case Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and and Eastward
Containment Northward Expansion
Urban into Urban
Expansion Reserve
3,310 3,310 3,620 3,870
Total Area, ha (acres) (8,179) (8,179) (8,945) (9,563)
Option 1
Option 1 outperforms the other options with respect to transportation choice because this option is
the most compact, has the highest densities and produces the greatest mix of uses. The option best
supports reduced automobile dependence and improved frequency of service for public transit. The
option also promotes increased opportunities for walking and cycling.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Option 2
Option 2 is more compact than Option 3, and thus offers more transportation choice. Additionally, the
new neighborhoods in the expansion area may act to enhance transit service due to increased
population levels along corridors such as 232nd Street.
Option 2 has the same gross dwelling unit density in the urban areas (11.1 dwellings/ha; 4.5
dwellings/acre) as in Option 3 and approximately the same gross dwelling unit density in the expansion
areas (12 dwelLings/ha; 4.9 dwellings/acre) as in the Thornhill Urban Reserve. The key difference
between Options 2 and 3 is that the northern expansion areas in Option 2 are more complete and
cLoser to existing services and amenities than the Thornhill Urban Reserve in Option 3.
Therefore, Option 2 outperforms Option 3 because of its compactness and proximity to the Town
Centre, shopping, services, employment, and public facilities. These factors will likely have a positive
influence on the propensity of people to walk, cycle, and take public transit.
Option 3
While the expansion areas of Options 2 and 3 have the same per capita densities, the expansion areas
in Option 2 are more compact and complete than the Thornhill Urban Reserve in Option 3. Therefore,
Option 3 will likely be more dependent on private automobile usage than Option 2.
One advantage of the Thornhill Urban Reserve is its linear form of development, which makes it better
suited to public transit compared to more dispersed development forms 15.
A drawback of the Thornhill Urban Reserve is that it is located on a large hill, which will increase the
level of effort for cyclists to cycle to destinations outside Thornhill. This factor, in combination with
the distance to the Town Centre, decreases the propensity for cycling by residents of the Thornhill
Urban Reserve. Similarly, it is unlikely that residents will walk to destinations outside of Thornhill.
Finally, Option 3 is more vulnerable to any increases in energy prices due to its expected automobile
dependency, which would result in increasing transportation costs for the portion of the population
that would live in the Thornhill Urban Reserve.
Summary of Increasing Transportation Choice
Residents of the Urban Core Area have the best transportation choices due to its compact form,
increased population density, and proximity to the Town Centre, shopping, services, employment, and
public facilities. Option I has the highest number of people located in the Urban Core Area and
therefore scores the highest amongst the three growth options. However, Option 1 is unable to
accommodate the expected population growth to 2031.
Options 2 and 3 both have lower popttation densities than Option 1 for the Urban Core Area. Options
2 and 3 have similar population and dwelling unit densities for the potential expansion area as
outlined in Option 2 and the Thornhill Urban Reserve. These densities are lower than the Urban Core
Area but higher than Albion and Silver Valley. The northward expansion area of Option 2 outperforms
the Thornhitl Urban Reserve of Option 3 because it is more compact and complete, and is in closer
proximity to the Town Centre, shopping, services, employment, and public facilities. Additionally,
Option 2 better supports the use of existing train and transit service due to its proximity to the Town
Centre, public transit along Dewdney Trunk Road, and the West Coast Express. Thus, Option 2
outperforms Option 3 with respect to transportation choice.
15 In addition, a Westcoast Express Station is proposed for Albion that would be accessible from Thornhill by car.
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: 24
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
2.6 Minimising Municipal Infrastructure Costs and Ensuring Sustainable Revenue
Sources
Objective 6 - To minimise municipal capital, replacement, operation and maintenance costs of
servicing residential development and to generate sufficient revenues from all sources to pay for
the lifecycle costs of municipal infrastructure and community services and maintain adequate
reserve funds.
Issues I Indicators Quantitative Measures Qualitative Questions
Hard Infrastructure Costs • hard infrastructure costs • How well do the options minimise
(S/unit; S/capita) hard infrastructure costs including
capital, operating, replacement, and
maintenance costs?
Community/ • community service costs • How well do the options minimise the
Administrative Services (S/unit; S/capita) costs for community and
Costs • municipal administration administrative services?
costs (S/unit; 5/capita)
Schools • Which options make best use of
existing school facilities?
This evaluation used a lifecycle costing methodology to calculate the long-term cost of three main
areas of expenditures: hard infrastructure, administration, and community services. The lifecycle
costs included capital costs, replacement costs, and annual operating and maintenance costs. The
costs were calculated for a 20-year period. Appendix B describes the costing methodology and its
assumptions in detail.
Table 15 shows the total, per dwelling unit, and per capita municipal infrastructure lifecycle costs for
the three options. Cost savings related to hard infrastructure are only a smaLl part of the fiscal
picture related to land use. Administrative costs and costs for the provision and delivery of facilities
and programs are substantial, comprising over 90% of the lifecycle municipal infrastructure costs for
all the options. A more detailed summary of the information is included in Appendix C.
Table 15: Comparison of Total Municipal Infrastructure Costs of the Options
Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest Intensification
Intensification and Intensification and and Eastward
Urban Northward Urban Expansion into Urban
Containment Expansion Reserve
Total LifecycLe cost for $209 million $276 million $363 million
20years.fornew - -.
residentiaL units'6
Per new residentiaL unit $14,000 $16,000 $18,000
Per capita for $7,000 $8,000 $8,500
population in new
residentiaL units
16 Municipal infrastructure costs included in the analysis were hard infrastructure costs, community services, and
administration costs for new residential units in the Urban Core Area, the expansion area, and the Urban Reserve.
Existing and new units in Albion, Cottonwood, Silver Valley, and rural areas were not included in the analysis.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Option I
Option I is the Least expensive of the options at $14,000 per new residential unit. The main reasons
for the Lower cost of Option 1 are:
• No new hard infrastructure is required in existing serviced areas of the Urban Core Area (but
there may be local improvements required to upgrade services).
• No new parks or community facilities were added to the Urban Core Area to support this
option. However, the option will have increased population-driven costs for municipal
services such as recreational programs.
Option 2
Option 2 is in the mid-cost range for municipal infrastructure services at $16,000 per new residential
unit. The main reasons for this cost Level are:
• The majority of the units are within the Urban Core Area, which is already serviced by hard
infrastructure.
• There is a modest increase in costs to provide some new community facilities (e.g., three new
neighbourhood parks).
• No new off-site services are included in the analysis.
• Some school facilities already exist in the vicinity of the northern expansion areas (a factor,
but not included in the cost total above).
Option 3
Option 3 is the most expensive of the options at $18,000 per new residential unit. The main reasons
for the higher cost of Option 3 are:
• More housing units are located in the Thornhill Urban Reserve, which are more expensive to
service than in the Urban Core Area.
• Off-site costs for sanitary sewer and water distribution are required.
• A new fire halL (#5) would be required.
• There is a significant increase to some community facilities (e.g., five new neighbourhood
parks, library).
• New elementary and secondary schools are required, which increases costs to the school
district (a factor, but not included in the cost total above)
Even though the Thornhill Urban Reserve requires over $20 million in off-site services, there are a
significant number of units that can be accommodated in this area, which spreads the cost over a
large number of units. Therefore, the per unit municipal infrastructure costs for Option 3 are higher
than Option 2, but not significantly higher.
The form of a community also has broad implications to costs. The fiscal performance (costs and
revenues) of a development is greatly affected by the design and standards that are applied to a site.
For example, a development using the design principles of the New Urbanis-m versus conventional
suburban design can yield significantly different outcomes regarding per unit infrastructure costs. This
could be the case with the potential expansion area as outlined in Option 2 and the Thornhill Urban
Reserve.
Summary of Municipal Infrastructure Costs
Option 1 is the least expensive of the options in terms of lifecycle municipal infrastructure costs for
hard infrastructure, community services and administration. Another advantage of Option 1 is that
accommodating more population in the Urban Core Area would result in better utilization of existing
schooLs, as an aging population means there will be a proportionately smaller share of school-age
children and students. This same argument applies to the Base Case.
Option 3 is the most expensive of the options, primariLy due to the additional off-site services required
as well as the need for new facilities, such as a Fire Hall and Library in the Thornhill Urban Reserve.
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: 26
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Option 3 also requires additional school facilities to be developed to service the population in the
Thornhill Urban Reserve.
Option 2 results in Lifecycle municipal infrastructure costs greater than Option 1 but less than Option
3. One of the main reasons Option 2 outperforms Option 3 is that some schooL facilities already exist
in the northern expansion area. In contrast, Option 3 does not have any existing school facilities in
the ThornhitL Urban Reserve.
Housing U Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
2.7 Preserving Community Character
Objective 7 - To preserve community heritage and character, including protecting rural areas,
open space, historic buildings, and the overall small-town character of the District.
Issues / Indicators Quantitative Measures Qualitative Questions
AgriculturaL Lands • Hectares and % of • To what extent are agricultural
agriculture land lost lands being protected by each
option?
Rural Character • Hectares and % of rural • How well do the options preserve
residential and suburban the rural character and community
residential identity?
Neighbourhood Change • % of redevelopment • How does redevelopment impact
the character and feel of
neighbourhoods?
Preserving community character is difficult to define and differs from community to community.
Preserving community character is interpreted here to mean preserving the rural character of the
District and minimizing physical change to the character of urban neighbourhoods.
Neighbourhood Change
One way to preserve the character of the community is to minimize change to the existing
neighbourhoods and to ensure that new areas do not obstruct natural features, amenities, and views,
white maintaining the same character and feel of the original neighbourhoods. This evaluation uses
the increase in dwelling units as an indicator of neighbourhood change.
Heritage is an important aspect of community character to be preserved, including the preservation of
historic buildings. The District has conducted a heritage review as part of the current OCP review
process including policies to preserve heritage buildings. It is assumed that the heritage buildings and
other facilities are protected equally in all the options.
Table 16 shows the percentage change in dwelling units for the Options by neighbourhood and for the
Town Centre. The greatest change in the character of existing neighbourhoods will occur in the Town
Centre. Under the Base Case, the number of dwelling units in the Town Centre will almost double (a
140% increase over 2003 levels) mainly because of construction of new apartment units. Density
increases in the Town Centre are even more dramatic under Options 1, 2 and 3. In these options, the
number of dwelling units in the Town Centre will almost triple (a 170% increase over 2003 levels).
Much less growth is projected for the rest of the Core Urban Area (e.g., Hammond and West Maple
Ridge). In addition, the actual increase in population in these areas will be much lower than the
increase indwelling units -because the averageThousehotd -size-is anticipated todectine -over the next
few decades. In some areas, such as Hammond East, the population may actually fall below 2003
levels despite the increase in dwelling units.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Table 16: Percentage Change in Dwellings Units for the Options by Neighbourhood and for the
Town Centre
Change in Total Dwelling Units Base Case Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Between 2003 and at Capacity Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and and Eastward
Containment Northward Expansion
Urban into Urban
Expansion Reserve
Hammond 10% 31% 12% 12%
West Maple Ridge 14% 36% 16% 16%
Haney
Port Haney 91% 148% 136% 136%
Urban Core Area Subtotal 53% 84% 68% 68%
Maple Ridge Town Centre 138% 172% 172% 172%
Figure 5: Neighbourhood Boundaries (based on Census Dissemination Area Boundaries)
Conversion of Agricultural, Rural and Suburban Residential Lands to Urban Uses
Protecting the ruraL character of Maple Ridge has been identified as a community priority according to
the 2003 Strategic Plan Community Survey (MusteL Group, March 2003). For most of the District's non-
urban Lands, it is projected that there wilL be Limited population growth that occurs in the rural areas.
According to the Residential Capacity Assessment report (Technical Report No. 2), just over 500
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
additional units of capacity are available in the rural areas. In addition, there is an Urban Area
Boundary, which clearly delineates areas that are urban from areas that are non-urban, which is
implemented primarily through maximum allowable densities and through the provision of sewers. An
Urban Area Boundary is included for all the options, although the extent of the boundary is different
for the options. For all the options, much of the District would retain its rural character outside the
Urban Area Boundary and those areas would undergo modest changes in terms of housing
development.
The areas where there would be the greatest difference in terms of potential changes from urban
development are for the potential expansion areas as outlined in Option 2 and in the Urban Reserve.
The three types of land that would be converted to urban uses in these areas are: agricultural land
(Land in the ALR, designated Agricultural, or zoned for agriculture), land designated Suburban
Residential (defined by the District as housing that is typically serviced with water but not sewer and
with net densities typically less than 2.5 units/ha), and land designated Rural Residential or zoned as
rural.
For Option 1, there is no conversion of agricultural, rural, or land designated suburban residential to
urban uses. However, in the expansion lands of both Options 2 and 3, there are significant areas of
lands that are agricultural, rural or suburban residential that would be converted to urban
development (Table 17). The implications of the options with respect to agricultural lands are
discussed in greater detail in the section on developing a compact community (section 2.4).
Table 17: Amount of Agricultural and Rural/Suburban Residential Lands Converted to Urban Uses
for the Options
Expansion Land Area, ha (acres) Base Case Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and and Eastward
Containment Northward Expansion
Urban into Urban
Expansion Reserve
220 ha of land 0 ha of land in in Agricultural ALR; 391 ha of
Agricultural Land Converted to Urban Land Reserve land zoned for
Uses 0 0 (544 acres) agriculturaL uses
Suburban Residential Designated Land 70 ha
Converted to Urban Uses 0 0 (173 acres) N/A
One Family Rural Residential Zoned 170 ha
Land (RS-3) Converted to Urban Uses 0 0 N/A (420 acres)
Option I
Aspects of community character are Lost in all three of the options. Option 1 will produce a dramatic
shift in the number and type of dwelling units in the Urban Core Area, particularly in the Town Centre,
which is projected to experience a 140% increase in dwelling units. The outlying neighbourhoods will
likely experience a much smaller increase in dwelling units, such as in the order of 30% to 40% for
neighbourhoods outside the Town Centre.
Under this option, the increase in dwelling units will likely occur through infill, some lot-splitting of
single-detached lots and granny suites, and primarily through the conversion of single-detached units
into other-ground oriented units. Hence, it is expected that the character of several existing
neighbourhoods will change significantly in the Town Centre and to a lesser degree in the other parts
of the Urban Core Area.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
There is no loss of agricultural land or Land designated Rural or Suburban Residential under Option 1.
Option 2
In this option, a 170% increase in total dwelling units is expected within the Town Centre. Under
Options 2 and 3, there will likely be a 10% to 20% increase in dweLling units in the older
neighbourhoods in the outlying areas around the Town Centre. Therefore, Options 2 and 3 will
produce the least change in the older residential neighbourhoods and slightly less change in the Town
Centre. In addition, the growth will occur entirely through infill, lot splitting of single-detached lots,
and allowing a small number of granny flats.
The highest loss in agricultural Land occurs under Option 2 (a loss of almost 220 ha or 544 acres of land
in the ALR). Approximately 75% of the potentiaL expansion areas are agriculturally designated and 70%
is within the ALR.
Option 3
Option 3 scores better than Option 1 and performs the same as Option 2 in terms of neighbourhood
change in the Town Centre and rest of the Urban Core Area.
While there is no land in the ALR in Thornhill Urban Reserve, there are almost 400 hectares of land
zoned Small-holding Agricultural Land (A-I) and Upland Agricultural Land (A-2). Also, 30% of the land
area slated for urban development under Option 3 would include land zoned for rural and suburban
residential uses.
Furthermore, much more of the Thornhill Urban Reserve is forested compared to the potential
expansion area as outlined in Option 2. As a consequence, Option 3 may not perform as well as Option
2 in terms of protecting the natural environment, greenspace, and views. Conversion of this land to
urban deveLopment would negate significant aspects of the current naturaL character of the area.
Summary of Preserving Community Character
Across all the options, there will be a change in the number of dwelling units as well as the type of
dwelLings. This shift is more pronounced in Option 1 mainly because many single-detached units will
be converted into other ground-oriented units. Thus, Option 1 produces the most neighbourhood
change. At the same time, Option 1 performs the best in terms of limiting the loss of agricultural land
and preserving green space since no additional agricultural, rural residential, or suburban residential
land is lost.
Option 2 does not perform well in terms of preserving agricultural lands, while Option 3 does not score
well in terms of preserving rural residential and suburban residential lands. However, Option 3 ranks
higher than Option 2 because of the extent of land in the Agricultural Land Reserve lost under Option
2.
Option 3 performs well with respect to preserving community character because it produces the least
impact to agricultural lands and change to existing neighbourhoods. However, Option 3 may
jeopardize community value regarding protection of the environment, views, and natural corridors. It
also results in conversion of rural and suburban residential areas into urban uses.
In summary, there are major tradeoffs associated with preserving community character for all the
options. The Base Case, which is closest to preserving the status quo, was thought to best preserve
community character since it wouLd involve the least amount of change.
Housing It Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: 31
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
3.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 Conclusions to the Evaluation of the Growth Options
Table 18 presents the overall rankings of the Options according to the policy objectives as assessed by
the consultant team. A more detailed summary of the quantitative analysis of the options, as well as
rankings of individual indicators, is included in Appendices D and E respectively.
Option I outperforms the Base Case across six of the seven policy objectives. Similarly, Option 2
outperforms Option 3 for six of the seven policy objectives. Therefore, the Base Case and Option 3
can both be considered inferior options. In particular, the Base Case only has the designated
residential capacity to accommodate a population of 93,900, well short of the projected population of
108,900 for the District for 2031 1 . Option 1 performs equally well as or outperforms Option 2 on all of
the policy objectives, with the exception of improving housing choice.
Table 18: Overall Rankings of the Options by Overarching Policy Objectives
Base Case Option 1: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification and Intensification and Intensification
Urban Northward Urban and Eastward
Containment Expansion Expansion into
Urban Reserve
1 - Improve Housing Choice 4 3 1 (tie) 1 (tie)
2 - Foster Housing 4 2 (tie) 2 (tie) 1
Affordability
3 - Build Complete 3 1 2 4
Communities
4 - Develop a Compact 1 (tie) 1 (tie) 3 4
Community
5 - Increase Transportation 2 1 3 4
Choice
6 - Minimize MunicipaL 1 (tie) 1 (tie) 3 4
Infrastructure Costs Ft Ensure
Sustainable Revenue Sources
7 - Preserve Community 1 2 (tie) 2 (tie) 2 (tie)
Character
Tradeoffs can be presented across the three options depending upon the importance that one wishes
to attach to each of the objectives. However, there is no trade off possible when it comes to
Objective 1, which is to ensure that an adequate supply and appropriate mix of housing units are
- - - _provide.d..to..meet the .needs of-ex-istingand4utureresidents. Ifth.is objectiveisnotachleved;-then
Maple Ridge cannot grow as projected and those who might have chosen to make the District their
home may choose to live elsewhere and some existing residents may be forced to move outside the
community as their housing needs change.
A critical failing of Option 1 is that it does not achieve Objective 1 (improve housing choice) as it is
currently structured and does not accommodate the projected population of 108,900 in 2031. Option
I can only accommodate a population of 102,900 at capacity and falls short of meeting the anticipated
single-detached housing demand by over 6,000 units.
17 Updated from the report Demographic Analysis and Population and Housing Projection for Maple Ridge, 2001-
203 March 2004. Prepared by The Sheltair Group and Kelly & Associates for the District of Maple Ridge.
Housing a Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
One of the challenges with Option I is the newness of the housing stock in the existing urban area.
The newer the housing stock, the less likely it will be available for residential intensification over the
projection period for the existing urban area. While the Town Centre can accommodate a significant
amount of residential growth, areas in the rest of the Urban Core Area (outside the Town Centre) will
not be ready for high levels of residential intensification until the housing stock is older, which will not
occur until towards the end of the projection period. In addition, even if significantly more other
ground-oriented units could be accommodated, it would be at the expense of predominantly single-
detached homes through conversions of the older housing stock, which would result in an even greater
gap between the supply and demand for single-detached housing. Option 1 therefore is not a viable
option over the projection period for both meeting the projected population growth and the mix of
dwelLing units estimated to be in demand in Maple Ridge.
Options 2 and 3 achieve Objective I (improve housing choice) as they both include additional Land
primarily to accommodate single-detached and other ground-oriented housing units. While both can
accommodate the projected population of 108,900, Option 2 is preferred to Option 3 because of
several important considerations:
• it creates a more spatially compact and complete community;
• it is more contiguous with the District's current urban boundary;
• it makes better use of existing community infrastructure and services, thereby reducing the
costs to the District;
• growth is better located relative to the Town Centre, existing commercial services, and
employment opportunities; and,
• it facilitates more transportation choices, with more opportunities for walking, cycling, and
access to pubLic transit.
While Option 2 outperforms Option 3, it does not fulLy achieve all of the District's desired objectives,
some of which are better met by Option 1 (eg, achieving a compact and complete community).
3.2 Recommended Option
Description of Recommended Option
Since Option 1 's major shortcoming is its inability to meet the projected number and mix of housing
units required to 2031 and Option 2's major shortcoming is that it requires expansion on to lands
currently in the Agricultural Land Reserve, the recommended solution is to blend certain attributes of
Option 1 and Option 2 together. The recommended option, or Option 4, can be characterized as
having growth accommodated through moderate intensification of the Urban Core Area and northward
urban expansion, in addition to deveLopment occurring in the remaining designated areas of Albion,
Cottonwood, and Silver Valley (see Figure 6). This recommended option would provide some
expansion to the existing urban area, and would also maintain many of the benefits of Option 1. The
fourth option would have a Level of residential intensification for the Urban Core Area somewhere in
between the modest levels of intensification associated with Option 2 and the higher Levels of Option
1.
Housing a Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Figure 6: Map of Recommended Option - Moderate Intensification and Northward Urban Expansion
V Silver
' Valley
As
V -
/
Legend I
C? ExistingurbanAroaBoundary
Urban Core Area
Potential Expansion Areas , 1 2 3 4 5
Rood Plak, -
d NOTE: THE POTENTIAL EXPANSION AREAS ARE Major Parks CONCEPTUAL IN NATURE AND ARE GENERALIZED
A key question for the fourth option is where to expand the urban area as the northward or eastward
expansion of the urban area requires conversion of agricultural Lands into urban uses. It is
recommended that the District conduct a detailed assessment of each of the potential expansion
areas, particularLy from an agricultural suitability perspective and from the point of view of urban
development. A preliminary assessment of the potential expansion areas from an urban development
perspective has been included in Appendix A.
This preliminary assessment does not include an assessment of agricultural capability and suitability
which are key factors for determining which lands would be more suitable for conversion to urban uses
than others. It is recommended that the District conduct such an assessment. This assessment should
include using multiple sources of information and consulting with various professionals, incLuding
agrologists from the AgricuLtural Land Commission and the BC Ministry of AgricuLture, Food, and
Fisheries with regard to agricultural suitability as well as staff from the GVRD regarding the Green
Zone. In addition, the District should consider the findings from the agricultural lands review for the
OCP, and seek the opinion of its agricultural consultant regarding the potential expansion areas.
FinaLly, a GIS tooL is under development for assessing agricultural suitability in Maple Ridge. However,
since the tool is new and is designed to provide a coarse Level of analysis, it is recommended that the
District use this as a supplemental source of information.
Currently, about 26% of actively farmed land in Maple Ridge occurs outside the Agricultural Land
Reserve. For this reason, there could be some scope and fLexibiLity for the District to enhance and
protect existing farm operations while accommodating a growing population. The Agricultural
Background Paper for the OCP Review recommended that the District adopt an OCP policy of "No-Net-
Loss.to-Agriculture". One option could be to add Land to the ALR to replace lost agricultural capacity
from the potential expansion areas.
If this strategy was pursued, it would minimize one of the major tradeoffs with this option which is
reducing the loss of agricultural Land and removal of lands from the Agricultural Land Reserve. This
strategy, combined with a more thorough assessment of agricultural suitability, could greatly assist in
managing population growth while protecting the agricultural sector.
Housing a Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
A set of criteria for assessing the potential expansion areas is included in Appendix A. Based on the
preliminary analysis of the expansion areas, the most promising area is the potential expansion area
located in Yennandon, approximately between 224th St. and 2401h St. and between the northern urban
area boundary (Dewdney Trunk Rd. and northward) to the floodplain of the South Alouette River. This
area comprises relatively small parcel sizes compared to some other areas (e.g. west of Laity Street)
would provide a permanent northern spatial boundary coinciding with the south floodplain of the
South Alouette River, is located within close proximity to the Town Centre, has water mains and trunk
sewers running through or adjacent to the site, has several existing schools in the vicinity, and
minimises the loss of productive agricultural land (part of this area is already designated Rural
Residential and Suburban ResidentiaL). It is possible that additional urban lands may be required to
satisfy the projected population growth to 2031 in addition to the above area, but this depends on
how much residential intensification can be achieved in the Urban Core Area and the densities in the
expansion area. If additional land is required, this could occur in the area east of 240 I Street.
An important recommendation with respect to the potential expansion area is that future
development be phased in such a way that land becomes available only when the projected market
demand warrants it. There is sufficient single-detached capacity in other areas of the District until
the period 2011 to 2016 so this expansion area is not needed until next decade. If at all possible,
residential development should continue in the existing urban area before Land is developed in the
expansion area.
Advantages of Recommended Option
The recommended option has several advantages related to the seven policy objectives for housing
and residential lands. The option successfully meets the prerequisite of accommodating expected
population growth and addressing the demand for an appropriate mix of housing. Across each of the
other objectives, the recommended option offers a suitable alternative and in some cases distinct
advantages to the other growth options. Advantages include: relative affordabiLity in terms of
proximity to the urban centre and improved allowance for secondary suites; a more compact
community through increased contiguity; improved transportation choice; the existence of hard
infrastructure and select community services; and controlled expansion into the agricultural areas.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: 35
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Table 19: Summary of Advantages of the Recommended Option
Objective Advantages of Recommended Option
Housing Choice • Addresses the anticipated population growth and housing demand
to 2031. Specifically, the expansion area can accommodate the
demand for single-detached and some other ground-units, while
the intensification accommodates the demand for apartments as
well as other ground-oriented units.
Affordability • Relative proximity to Town Centre reduces reliance on
automobiles and increases access to transit and services.
Complete Communities • The area's Location adjacent to the urban area provides better
access to the commercial centre, transportation, and other
services than other expansion areas would.
Compact Community • Increases contiguity of existing urban area by linking the Town
Centre to Silver Valley.
Transportation • The area has easy access to the major transportation corridor
through the Abernethy Connector, which minimises additional
traffic traveling through the Town Centre.
• Transportation choices are improved with relatively easy access to
transit, walking, and cycling opportunities.
Infrastructure Costing • Hard infrastructure is aLready in place including water mains and
sanitary sewer trunk lines.
• A number of community facilities already exist in the area,
including schools and municipal services.
Community Character • Over 30% of the proposed expansion area is designated non-
agricultural and 40% is located outside the Agricultural Land
Reserve (for the Yennandon potential expansion area).
• The area has a lower density of streams in the area (compared to
Albion for example) which means less land is taken out for stream
setbacks and there will be fewer concerns with regards to
protection of riparian areas.
Considerations
How realistic is it that this fourth option could be implemented? The major issue and challenge with
respect to implementation concerns the potential expansion areas. To expand outward would require
removing bLock lands from the Agricultural Land Reserve and would require support from the
Agricultural Land Commission. In addition, the GVRD's Livable Region Strategic Plan identifies land in
the Agricultural Land Reserve as being part of the Green Zone. The District's Regional Context
Statement in.its OCP would need to be amended and .supported by theGVRD tohave -anybI.ock scale
removal of ALR lands and lands from the Green Zone. The Green Zone serves multiple objectives,
including protection of green space and agricultural land as well as urban containment. The GVRD
Board would need to support removal of this amount of land from the Green Zone.
In addition, a key tool that the GVRD possesses is funding of regional water and sewer infrastructure
extensions and improvements. The GVRD wants to achieve a compact metropolitan region and may
not want to extend services beyond the urban containment boundary of the municipality as identified
in the District's Regional Context Statement. To expand the servicing area to any of these expansion
Lands would first require obtaining approval to amend the Livable Region Strategic Plan and the
municipality's Regional Context Statement and approval from the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and
Drainage District.
Housing ü Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Refining and Optimizing the Recommended Option
There are ways that the fourth option can be refined and optimized to improve its performance. In
particular, the key negative aspect of this option is that lands in the ALR would need to be converted
to urban uses. Therefore, a way to improve the performance of this option is to minimize the amount
of high quality agricultural land and Land in the ALR that wouLd be converted to urban uses.
The amount of urban land that is required outside the existing Urban Area Boundary is a residuaL of
the dwelling capacity in the existing urban area. By increasing the capacity for dwelling units in the
existing urban area, the amount of additional urban Land required outside the current Urban Area
Boundary would be minimized.
The key way to refine the option is to minimize the amount of land required for the urban expansion
area, particularly avoiding or minimizing loss of Lands that have high agricultural suitability. Specific
ways of accomplishing this include to:
• achieve a moderate level of residential intensification in the Urban Core Area, and higher levels
in the Town Centre;
• obtain a higher share of population living in secondary suites (assumed to be 20% of single-
detached units - a higher level could be achieved);
• increase residential densities on the remaining greenfieLd sites in the Urban Core Area, Albion,
Cottonwood, and Silver Valley;
• set and achieve minimum urban residential density targets for the potential expansion area; and,
• select an expansion area that minimizes the loss of agricultural lands with high agricultural
capability and suitability.
The above strategies would delay the requirements for additional urban land and minimize the amount
of additional urban land required for the expansion area.
The amount of urban Land required in the expansion area is primarily a function of residential density.
To promote development in the most efficient and rational manner, piecemeal expansion into this
area shouLd be avoided as it would result in lower densities as well as a potentially incomplete
community. To maximize densities in this area, it is recommended that a neighbourhood plan be
developed for the identified expansion area. In addition, criteria could be established to ensure
development is consistent with municipal objectives and with the Livable Region Strategic Plan from a
land use perspective.
Encouraging higher densities in the potential expansion area may also require accepting a lower share
of single-detached units than the housing demand projection has indicated. Allowing a higher share of
ground-oriented units in the expansion area (the original assumption was 20%), would increase
residential densities and reduce the amount of land required to accommodate the population.
Through a neighbourhood planning process, the types of residential development, land use patterns,
and appropriate design can be identified to best meet the needs of major stakeholders, including
property owners, residents, developers, District staff, GVRD, Agricultural Land Commission, BC
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries, and other affected parties.
The location of the potential urban expansion area should be selected to minimize the Loss of the
highest quality agricultural Lands. A set of criteria and preliminary analysis of the five potential urban
expansion areas is included in Appendix A, but does not include an agricultural suitability assessment.
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Summary
This technicaL evaLuation of residentiaL growth options for the District of Maple Ridge found that two
of the options are cLearly inferior from the perspective of meeting the District's poLicy objectives.
The Base Case is clearly inferior to Option I (Moderate Intensification and Urban Containment).
SimiLarly, Option 3 (Modest Intensification and Eastward Expansion into ThornhiLl Urban Reserve) is
outperformed by Option 2 (Modest Intensification and Northward Urban Expansion) on six of the seven
policy objectives. A recommended option combining elements of Option I and Option 2 has been
identified. The fourth option can be characterized as having moderate intensification of the Urban
Core Area and northward urban expansion.
The main disadvantage of the recommended option is that it involves the conversion of agricultural
land, primariLy Land in the ALR, to urban uses. This disadvantage can be minimized through achieving
a moderate level of residential intensification in the Urban Core Area, increasing densities in
remaining Greenfield sites, and selecting a preferred expansion area that minimizes the Loss of ALR
land. A set of criteria for assessing the potentiaL expansion areas has been included.
Finally, the District may want to incorporate a policy of no net loss of ALR by offsetting any ALR
exclusions with ALR incLusions elsewhere in the District as 25% of the agricuLtural production in the
District is from lands outside the ALR.
Additional analysis of the preferred expansion areas is required as well as discussions and consultations
with the public, GVRD, AgricuLturaL Land Commission, BC Ministry of AgricuLture, Food and Fisheries,
and other stakehoLders to address concerns regarding potentiaL expansion of the Urban Area boundary.
Policy recommendations regarding the findings of this research on the evaLuation of the residential
growth options as well as the other components of the study are contained in the Housing and
Residential Lands PoLicy Review summary report.
Housing Et ResidentiaL Lands PoLicy Review TechnicaL Report No. 3:
Evaluation of ResidentiaL Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
GLOSSARY
Items denoted by an asterisk (*) are from the 2001 Census Dictionary, Statistics Canada. Items
denoted with a diamond (.) are from the District's 1996 Official Community Plan.
APARTMENTS - for the purpose of this report, apartments include the two census categories of
apartments: apartments five or more stories, or apartments less than five stories
APARTMENT, DETACHED DUPLEX* - One of two dwellings, located one above the other, but not
attached to any other dwelling or structure (except its own garage or shed). The two units
together have no other dwellings attached to the back, front, or sides, and have open space on all
sides.
APARTMENT, FIVE OR MORE STOREYS* - A dwelling unit in a high-rise apartment building which has five
or more storeys
APARTMENT LESS THAN FIVE STOREYS* - A dwelling unit attached to other dwellings, commercial units
or other non-residential space in a building that has fewer than five storeys.
COMPLETE COMMUNITY.: A complete community has a balance in the distribution of jobs and housing,
a wide choice of affordable housing, better distribution of public services, and effective
transportation service.
MOVABLE DWELLING* - A single dwelling used as a place of residence, but capable of being moved on
short notice, such as a mobile home, tent, recreational vehicle, travel trailer or houseboat.
MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING - includes apartments, duplexes, row houses, and other forms of other
ground-oriented units.
OCCUPIED PRIVATE DWELLING* - A separate set of living quarters which has a private entrance either
directly from outside or from a common hall, lobby, vestibule or stairway leading to the outside,
and in which a person or a group of persons live permanently.
OTHER GROUND-ORIENT UNITS - for the purpose of this report, includes row houses, semi-detached
houses, other single-attached houses, movable dwellings / mobile homes, apartments in a
detached duplex, and secondary suites
OTHER SINGLE-ATTACHED HOUSE* - A single dwelling that is attached to another building and that
does not fall into any of the other categories, such as a single dwelLing attached to a non-
residential structure (e.g. a store or a church) or occasionally to another residential structure
(e.g. an apartment building).
ROW HOUSE - One of three or more dwellings joined side by side (or occasionally side to back), such
as a town house or garden home, but not have any other dwellings either above or below
SECONDARY SUITE - Separate self-contained dwelling unit with a cooking facility, located in a single-
family home.
SEMI-DETACHED HOUSE* - One of two dwellings attached side by side (or back to front) to each other,
but not to any other dwelling or structure (except its own garage or shed). A semi-detached
dwelling has no dwellings either above it or below it, and the two units together have open space
on all sides.
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: 39
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
SINGLE-DETACHED HOUSEA - A single dwelling not attached to any other dwelling or structure (except
its own garage or shed). A single-detached house has open space on all sides, and has no dwellings
either above it or below it.
SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.: Suburban residential development refers to housing that is
typically serviced with water but not sewer.
TENURE (HOUSING)* - Refers to whether some member of the household owns or rents the dwelling, or
whether the dwelling is Band housing (on an Indian reserve or settlement). A dwelling is classified
as owned' even if it is not fully paid for, such as one which has a mortgage or some other claim on
it. A dwelling is classified as "rented even if it is provided without cash rent or at a reduced rent,
or if the dwelling is part of a cooperative.
TOWN CENTRE - The area of the Maple Ridge Town Centre reflects the area as identified in the
Greater Vancouver Regional District's Livable Region Strategic Plan. It extends from
approximately 124th Avenue, south to the Fraser River and 221st Street to Burnett Street. The
Town Centre includes the downtown core and the central business district. Note that the
definition of the Town Centre in this report differs from the definition in the 1999 Official
Community Plan.
URBAN AREA - Areas within the Urban Area Boundary.
URBAN AREA BOUNDARY - A line that clearly designates areas that are identified for urban uses from
areas that are identified for non-urban uses.
URBAN CORE AREA - The Urban Core Area consists of the urban portions of Maple Ridge west of the
Cottonwood Urban Area (approximately west of 232" Street south of Dewdney Trunk Road and
west of 234th Street north of Dewdney Trunk Road). It excludes Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver
Valley and the rural areas in the community. The Urban Core Area is a geographic area developed
for the purpose of the Housing and Residential Lands PoLicy Review by the consultant team.
URBAN RESERVE. - Urban reserve refers to lands identified for future urban level services and urban
housing.
URBAN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. - Urban residential development refers to housing that is typically
fully serviced (i.e. - sewer, water, roads, curb, gutter, sidewalk, streetlights) and on smaller lots
in a more compact area (i.e. . higher density).
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
District of MapLe Ridge. 1996. Official Community Plan. Bylaw No. 5434 - 1996. Consolidated up to
and including Bylaw 6159 - 2003 adopted Feb, 24, 2004. District of Maple Ridge. Adopted
September, 1996.
District of Maple Ridge and Maple Ridge Community Heritage Commission. March 2004. Maple Ridge:
A Community of Communities. 2003 Official Community Plan Review.
Greater Vancouver Regional District. 1996. Livable Region Strategic Plan. Prepared by the GVRD
Policy and Planning Department.
Greater Vancouver Regional District. March 2002. Review of Municipal Secondary Suite Policies in the
Greater Vancouver Regional District. Policy and Planning Department.
Hammond, Keeney, and Raiffa. 1998. Smart Choices: A Practical Guide to Making Better Decisions.
Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Mustel Group. March 2003. District of Maple Ridge: Strategic Plan Community Survey. Prepared for
District of Maple Ridge.
Newman, Peter and Jeffrey Kenworthy. 1999. Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile
Dependence. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
Patton, Carl and Sawicki, D. 1993. Basic Methods of Policy Analysis and Planning. 2 nd Ed. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Rollo, G.P. U Associates. February 2004. Planning for Commercial Development: Commercial Land Use
Study. Draft. Prepared for the District of Maple Ridge.
Rollo, G.P. & Associates. February 2003. Planning for Industrial Development: Industrial Land Use
Study. Draft. Prepared for the District of Maple Ridge.
Sheltair Group and Kelly It Associates. March 2004. Demographic Analysis and Population and Housing
Projection for Maple Ridge, 2001-2031. Prepared for the District of Maple Ridge.
UMA Engineering Ltd. July 1988. District of Maple Ridge Urban Growth Study and Conceptual Plans
Report.
Zbeetnoff Agro-Environmental Consulting and Quadra Planning Consultants Ltd. Oct 21, 2004. Maple
Ridge AgricuLtural Policy Review - Background Report: Situation AnaLysis. As presented to
Council, October 25, 2004.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
APPENDIX A: PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL EXPANSION AREAS
The following provides a preliminary analysis of the five main subareas of the potential expansion area
of Option 2 for suitability for potential urban deveLopment. There may be some additional smaller
parcels adjacent to the Urban Area Boundary that could also be considered for urban uses. The map
of the potential expansion areas is conceptual and only larger areas are shown on the map and
included in this preliminary assessment.
As the recommended option is based in part on Option 2, the discussion in this section also applies to
the recommended option. This analysis does not include an agricultural capability or suitability
analysis, which is outside the consultant's expertise. The analysis is of the general areas and not site
specific.
The District would need to assess the agricultural suitability of each of the subareas, and also consider
additional factors, to determine the most desirable expansion area. As part of the recommendations
of the Rural Plan Advisory Committee in the 1997 unadopted Rural Plan, options and recommendations
were made for the subareas that also correspond to the potential expansion areas. However, as this
report was not adopted and that the recommendations for many of the subareas adjacent to the
existing urban area are not definitive, there is additional analysis that is required. in particular, the
agricultural suitability and continued agricultural viabiLity of the areas needs to be assessed for these
areas.
In 2003, the Agricultural Land Commission commissioned a study to analyze the ALR lands in Maple
Ridge with respect to agricultural suitability, incLuding the development of a GIS-based tool. When
the report is released, the findings may be able to be used to identify areas that are more suitable to
retain as agriculturaL and which areas could be made available for other community land uses.
However, as this is a new tool and also is designed to provide a coarse scale of analysis, it is
recommend that the District not rely on the findings of this tool exclusively. It is recommended that
the District use multiple sources of information and consult with other professionals, including
agrologists from the Agricultural Land Commission and BC Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Fisheries
with regard to agricultural suitability as well as staff from the GVRD regarding the Green Zone. In
addition, the District should consider the findings from the agricultural lands review for the OCP, and
seek the opinion of its agricultural consultant regarding the potential expansion areas.
An urban expansion area of approximately 310 ha for Option 2 is required to satisfy the projected
population to 2031. For the recommended option, or Option 4, approximately 150 to 300 ha of land
would be required in the expansion areas. The exact size of the expansion area would depend on the
gross residentiaL densities achieved in the expansion areas.
The following are the minimum criteria that were used to identify potential urban expansion areas:
• includes areas that are contiguous with the existing urban area
• excludes land in the floodplain (e.g. Fraser and Alouette River Floodplains)
excludestands with steep slopes (e.g. greaterthan 25%)
• excludes lands that contain heritage properties and farms identified by the District in the Heritage
Inventory
Based on this criteria, five subareas were defined as shown in Figure A-i. There may be other smaller
areas that satisfy the criteria but they were not included in this analysis as it would be too site
specific for the scale of analysis appropriate to this project. For Option 2, the total urban area
required is larger than any of the individual sub areas, therefore parts of more than one sub area
would be required to provide amount of land, but not all areas would be needed.
Not all of these five potential expansion areas as shown in Figure A-i are needed to accommodate the
projected population to 2031. Therefore, a preferred potential expansion are would need to be
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: Al
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
selected by the District if they were to pursue Option 2 or Option 4 (the recommended option). ALL of
the areas also comprise significant amounts of land that is designated Agricultural or is in the
Agricultural Land Reserve. Therefore, there is a major tradeoff for accommodating urban growth at
the expense of converting agricultural lands to urban uses.
Figure A-I: Potential Expansion Areas for Option 2
N
/ I :
-
II
\
Maple Ridge Town Centre \ Is
Albion
Legend
Boundary
Potential ExpansIon AreaS 1 05 0 1 23
Flood Plain
NOTE THE POTENTIAL EXPANSION AREASARE Major P811(0 CONCEPTUAL IN NAIUREANOARE GENERALIZED
The following are proposed as criteria or considerations that can be used to help identify a preferred
expansion area:
• minimize the conversion of lands in the Agricultural Land Reserve to urban uses;
• minimize the conversion of lands that have the highest agricultural capability (e.g. soils capability,
drainage, etc.);
• minimize the conversion of lands that have the highest agricultural suitability
• minimize or avoid areas where there are heritage properties or farms;
• maintain contiguity of agriculturaL areas;
• maintain contiguity of urban areas;
• minimize the increase in the perimeter of the Urban Area Boundary to reduce land use conflicts;
• consider the parcel size of agriculturally designated lands (in general, larger parcel sizes are
relatively better for agriculture than smaller sized parcels);
• avoid environmentally sensitive areas and minimize environmental impact;
• consider stream density as tower stream densities in areas will both minimize impact to streams
.andincrease.the-deveLopabieareaof -the expansion -area; -
• consider proximity to the Town Centre and other shops and amenities as areas closer to the Town
Centre are preferred to provide access to these services;
• consider proximity to existing or potential bus routes which would have a reasonable frequency of
service as this would increase transportation choice;
• minimize municipal costs by selecting areas along or in the vicinity of existing collector or arterial
roads, water mains, and trunk sewers; and,
• makes use of existing schools and public recreational facilities and services.
As a key feature of the potential expansion areas is the land within the Agricultural Land Reserve,
Figure A-2 shows the extent of the ALR in Maple Ridge. All the potential expansion areas contain at
least some land within the ALR.
Housing U Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of ResidentiaL Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
FiQure A-2: Extent of the A2ricultural Land Reserve in Maøle Ridge. 2003
R-711
Silver - - 'fley
al
Iry
$1TL
Legend
Existing Urban Area Boundary _. • Major Perks
Land in Agricultural Land Reserve
Table A-i summarizes some key attributes for the potential expansion areas, particularly some of the
physical characteristics such as maximum and average parcel size as well as the percentage of land in
the Agricultural Land Reserve. In addition, the District's current agricultural area policy (cited in the
unadopted 1997 Rural Plan) is included for information regarding the Agricultural Land Reserve.
Table A-I: Attributes of the Potential Exoansion Areas
Potential Land % in Max. Average % area % treed Relative Current Maple Ridge
Expansion Area ALR Parcel Parcel where vegetative Proximity Agricultural Area
Area (ha) (%) Size Size slope cover (rough to Town Policy for Portion in
(ha) (ha) greater visual Centre ALR (cited in 1997
than estimate from Rural Plan)
101Y0 orthophoto)
1 130 100% 27 2.5 -0% <2% Closest Retention in the ALR
(tied)
2 240 61% 7.7 2.5 4.6% 10%-20% Closest Retention in the ALR
(tied)
3 250 63% 6.1 1.8 4.8% 15%-25% Further Retention in the ALR
away than and Council consider
1, 2, and applications for
3 subdivision of land
within the ALR on
their_merit
4 240 77% 8.1 1.6 10.4% 30%-40% Further Retention in the ALR
away than and Council consider
I and 2 applications for
subdivision of land
within the ALR on
their merit
5 131 27% 10.2 1.9 38.2% 60%-70% Furthest Support excluding
away the land from the
ALR with
recommended uses
as suburban
residential and park
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Potential Expansion Area 1
Area 1 is entirely within the Agricultural Land Reserve, appears to be actively farmed, has the largest
parcel sizes, and has the flattest land. In addition, the District's current policy for the area (Area I is
a subarea of the ALR policy area) be retained in the ALR as cited in the 1997 unadopted Rural Plan.
The Maple Ridge Rural Plan Advisory Committee did not make a definitive recommendation on the
areas south of 128th Avenue to the urban boundary in its unadopted 1997 Rural Plan due to its
controversial nature. However, the two options that the committee appeared to prefer both involve
retention of these lands in the Agricultural Land Reserve.
It would appear that this area would be relatively more desirable to retain as farmland than the other
potential expansion areas. In particular, the western portion of area 1 (west of Laity St.) is the least
desirable to convert to urban uses from the perspective of parcel size. This area has one of the
largest parcels (27 ha; 67 acres), of the five potential expansion areas, and it also has the highest
mean parcel size at over 5 ha (12 acres) in size. The actual suitability of this area for agricultural
would need to be assessed by the District. On the other hand, this area has many characteristics
which make it desirable for urban development including having schools in the area, sanitary sewer
interceptor (along Abernethy Way), access to the Abernethy connector and is located close to the
existing shopping and services, including the Town Centre for the eastern half of this area. Overall,
however, it is thought that these lands may be more difficult to remove from the ALR for the reasons
described above. However, if these lands were ever to be converted to urban uses, it is recommended
that the northern boundary of the urban area not extend north of the Abernethy Connector (which is
primarily in the flood plain).
Potential Exoansion Area 2
Potential expansion area 2 in the Yennandon area minimizes the conversion of ALR lands to urban uses
as only 61% of this area is in the ALR. The non-ALR land primarily consists of Rural and unserviced
Suburban Residential designated land. In addition, several parcels of approximately 20 to 25 ha (49 to
62 acres) in combined area have been removed from the ALR recently in this area. This area has a
higher percentage of tree cover than area 1, which suggests that some of this area may not be actively
used for farming (although silviculture could be an agricultural use in the area). The agricultural area
is virtually covered on three sides by urban, suburban or rural residential development which may
cause urban-rural Land use conflicts. The District's current agricultural area policy for this area is for
it to be retained in the ALR as cited in the 1997 Rural Plan report.
In 1997, the Maple Ridge Rural Plan Advisory Committee in its unadopted Rural Plan recommended
that the parcels west of 232nd Street and south of 128th Street be excluded from the ALR and
incorporated in the urban area as determined by Council. The committee indicated that these lands
would not have a viable future as agricultural due to isolation from other agricultural areas,
encirclement by urban areas, and by being cut-off by major arterial roads. For the remaining area of
this subarea in Yennandon, the committee was undecided about recommendations for retention of
these lands in the ALR or for other uses.
This area is located within very close proximity of the Town Centre and a large parcel is adjacent to
Dewdney Trunk Road which would provide access to services and to public transit. Parts of this area
are also within walking and cycling distance of the Town Centre which would reduce automobile
dependence if redesignated as urban.
The area has several elementary schools in the vicinity as well as a private school, and an outdoor
pool. In terms of infrastructure, a water main runs through the subarea and a trunk sewer runs
adjacent to and through a corner of the subarea. In addition, a fire hall and police hall are located
near the area. This area would also have access to the Abernethy Connector, avoiding through-traffic
through the downtown area for trips made to Pitt Meadows or via the Pitt River or the Golden Ears
Bridges.
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: A4
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
This area also would serve to fill in the area between Silver Valley and the Urban Core Area.
Expanding the urban area north to the southern side of the South Alouette River floodplain would
provide a buffer between Land uses to the north. The Atouette River would also provide a recreational
amenity and potential linear park (but may require parkLand acquisition), which is an advantage of
potential expansion area 2 over potential expansion area 1. The Alouette River in the vicinity of
expansion area 2 forms a concave curve which is positive from the perspective of minimizing the
perimeter of the urban area, and also for increasing property value for residents Living near the
Alouette River. Overall, expansion area 2 is thought to be the most desirable of the five areas for
urban development from the perspective of meeting the District's objectives, with the caveat that an
analysis of comparative agricultural suitability and further analysis of the areas is required.
Potential Expansion Areas 3 and 4
Subarea 3, located north of Dewdney Trunk Road and east of 240th, does not have as many desirable
locational factors as potential expansion area 2 but has much of the infrastructure and facilities in
place to minimize municipal infrastructure costs for servicing this area. For example, a water main
and trunk sewer already run along Dewdney Trunk Road to the Smith Subdivision. There is also a high
school in the area.
From an agricultural perspective, this area has a smaLler parcel size than areas 1 and 2 and 63% of this
area is in the ALR. In the unadopted 1997 Rural Plan, it is cited that the District's current agricultural
area policy for this area (a subarea of the actual agricultural policy area) be retained in the ALR and
Council consider applications for subdivision of land within the ALR on their merit. The committee
identified this area as including a mix of parcel sizes ranging from larger farms to very small ruraL
parcels. The committee identified that the Transition Area (west of the Smith Subdivision to 240th St.
and between 124th Ave. and 113th Ave.) was controversial and the committee did not provide a
definitive recommendation for the area regarding land use and retention in the ALR.
A disadvantages of this area is that it is more removed from the Town Centre and shops and services
compared to expansion area 2. Development in this area would also channel relatively more traffic
along Dewdney Trunk Road as compared to expansion areas 1 and 2 and may increase traffic
congestion in the existing urban area. Similarly, walking and cycling for journey.to.work trips,
shopping, and services is thought to be less viable in this area due to longer trip distances. This area
would also result in increasing the perimeter of the urban area more than would expansion area 2. It
is also difficult to retain a permanent urban containment boundary through eastward expansion, which
is a consideration. In contrast, the South Alouette River for expansion area 2 would form a permanent
urban containment boundary for the urban area.
Potential expansion area 4 possesses many of the same characteristics as expansion area 3. One of
the main differences is that there is a much higher share of treed vegetative cover, with about 30% to
40% of the site being covered with treed vegetation. This area also has a higher percentage of slopes
that are greater than 10% than expansion area 3. PotentiaL expansion area 4 has a higher share of its
land area in the ALR (77%) than expansion area 3 (63%).
Potential Exoansion Area 5
Prior to 1996, this area was designated Urban Reserve in the Official Community Plan. In 1992, an
application to provide for a suburban residential development on a significant portion of this potential
expansion area was considered by District Council. The Planning Advisory Committee at the time
noted concern with the proposed urban level of density. However, the accompanying bylaws received
three readings by District Council. The bylaws were later rescinded in 2001.
One of the advantages of providing for urban expansion in this area is that over three.quarters of the
area is located outside the ALR. With respect to the portion of this area's land that is in the ALR, the
District's current policy is to support the exclusion of land from the ALR with recommended uses as
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
suburban residential and park. The Rural Plan Advisory Committee in 1997 also recommended that the
land in the ALR in the northern portion of this area be excluded from the ALR.
Relative to the other potential expansion areas, potential expansion area 5 is furthest removed from
the Urban Core Area and Town Centre, is not located adjacent to areas that could be considered
complete communities, is not serviced by trunk sewer or water mains, and approximately 6% of this
area has slopes greater than 20%. In many respects, this area has similar characteristics to the
Thornhill Urban Reserve - it is located adjacent to the Albion Urban Area, is highly forested, and they
share many of the same locational characteristics. For many of the same reasons that the Thornhill
Urban Reserve is not recommended for urban development at this time, Potential Expansion Area 5 is
also not recommended for urban levels of development at this time according to this preliminary
analysis. This area could be reconsidered for urban development at the same time as the Thornhill
Urban Reserve is reviewed for a future OCP review process. The only exception would be if it proves
difficult to remove lands from the Agricultural Land Reserve for the other potential expansion areas,
which would mean that non-ALR lands would become more important for urban development, such as
this area.
Summary of the Potential Exoansion Areas
This limited analysis has suggested that expansion area 2 (Yennandon) is the most promising of the five
potential expansion areas for meeting the District's objectives. This provides an area of land that may
be sufficient to accommodate the District's residual population growth to 2031, but additional land
area may also be required. The next best choices, from this limited analysis, would be expansion
areas 3 or 4, therefore suggesting there could be some urban expansion east of 240th. It is believed
that expansion area 1 should be retained in the ALR unless those areas are identified as marginal
farmland or not viable in the long-term for agriculture. It should be emphasized that this is a very
preliminary anaLysis and that the District will need to conduct a more thorough and detailed
assessment of the five subareas, particularly from an agricultural suitability perspective as well as an
environmental impact perspective. In addition, public consultation and discussions with the GVRD,
Agricultural Land Commission, BC Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Fisheries would be required.
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
APPENDIX B: MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE COSTING METHODOLOGY
The Costing Methodology
Changes to Land use trigger all municipal expenditures and revenues. The analysis excluded revenues
and focused primarily on costs borne by the municipality that would affect future residents.
A lifecycte costing methodology was used to calculate the long-term cost of three main areas of
expenditures:
• Cost of administration
• Cost of hard infrastructure, and
• Cost of community services.
Included in the analysis is the capital cost, replacement, annual operating and maintenance costs for
the above areas of expenditure. These were calculated for a 20 year period and take into account the
lifecycle or replacement cycle for the main areas of expenditure.
For example, the cost of administration included the cost of City Hall, administration buildings, all
executive and administration functions, staff training, office equipment and utilities.
For hard infrastructure, costs included in the analysis are off-site services, roads, street lighting,
sidewalks, sanitary sewers, stormwater sewers, and water supply. For hard infrastructure costs, the
capital costs for roads and sidewaLks, streetlights and traffic lights, water, sewer and other
infrastructure was not included in the costing. These services are typically paid for by the developer
and passed on to the home buyer. The replacement, operating and maintenance costs which is borne
by the municipality for this hard infrastructure is included in this analysis.
Items considered in the costing of community services include:
• the direct and indirect costs of municipal staff to deliver the service;
• the building replacement, operating and maintenance;
• recreation programs;
• fleet vehicles, equipment, capital and replacement; and,
• parkland maintenance.
The major categories for the community service analysis includes:
• library buildings;
• police protection;
• fire protection; and,
• all community and recreation buildings.
School facilities were not included in the analysis as they are not the responsibility of the
municipality.
The costing analysis was conducted for the Urban Core Area, for the potential northern expansion
area, and for the Thornhill Urban Reserve. Albion, Cottonwood, Silver Valley and the rural areas were
therefore not included in the calculations.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: Bi
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Profile of the Options for the Costing Analysis
Table B-i summarizes the additional dwellings, population accommodated in the new dwelhngs, and
the new net residential Land area assumed for the three Options.
Table B-I: Additional Residential Units, Population Accommodated, and New Residential Urban
Land for the Options
Option I: Option 2: Option 3:
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and Northward and Eastward
Containment Urban Expansion into
Expansion Urban Reserve
Number of additional 14,770 16,970 20,430
residentiaL units
Population accommodated in 28,630 34,800 42,960
additional residential units
Net New Urban Residential 20 210 330
Land (ha)
* Note: The above figures are only for the Urban Core Area (excluding Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver Valley)
and for the northern Expansion area for Option 2 and the ThornhilL Urban Reserve for Option 3
Option I
Option 1 assumes 14,770 additional residential units in the Urban Core Area. VirtuaLly all of the
development would occur in areas where there is existing infrastructure. The major sanitary and
water trunks have capacity to accommodate the number of units. Some areas in older communities
may require upgrades to sections of local sewers. This data was not available and is therefore not
included in the analysis. The maintenance costs of linear infrastructure was not included in the
analysis. Since the area is already established and maintained, there would be an incremental
increase in cost due to the additional population, which is not known. It is assumed that existing and
planned improvements to community facilities would support the future population.
Option 2
Option 2 assumes that of the additional 16,970 units, 12,650 would be located in the core area and
4,320 would be located in the north expansion area. The deveLopment potential of the north
expansion area was modeled to estimate land use and infrastructure. Based on the assumed land use
for the expansion area, community service and administration costs were calculated. No off-site
services were included in the analysis.
Option 3
Option 3 assumes that of the additional 20,430 residential units, 12,650 would be Located in the core
area and 7,780 units would be located in the Thornhill Urban Reserve. The development potential for
the vacant land was modeled based on a concept plan of the area developed by UMA Engineering
(1988). The cost of off-site service improvements for sanitary and water suppLy were included in the
analysis. Also included in the analysis was the addition of Fire Hall # 5.
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3:
Evaluation of ResidentiaL Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
APPENDIX C: SUMMARY OF MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE COSTING RESULTS
Housing Et Residential. Lands PoLicy Review Technical. Report No. 3:
EvaLuation of ResidentiaL Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
Appendix C: Infrastructure Costing
I 01fflfflIllhIllIUIJ1JIInfrastructure Costing > > > >> >>-> >U)iiiIiHIlllliiiIillUffltJ
1 IF Residential II Non-Residential II
Service Component Study Area
Capital Costs
V Replacement
Costs
1 Operating &
Maintenance
Ii ii
Total Life Cycle
I
ITotal Uniti Total peril Total Life IlTotal Net Landli
1 Total Net 'I Costs Costs Capita Cycle Cost Area (Acres) Land Prod.
Inc.
Appendix C: Infrastructure Costing
31flhIIIIIIIIiII1UJInfrastructure Costing > IIIIIIIIllhIIII
lOption 2: Moderate Intensification and Northward Urban Expansion IIFisca1 Year 112004 IPeriod 20 yrs
I II Summary of Life Cycle Costs n I
Recidential Non-Residential
Operating & Total Net
Maintenance Total Life Cycle Total Unit Total per Total Life Total Net Land Land Prod Costs Costs Capita Cycle Cost Area (Acres) Inc
Service Component Study Area
Capital Costs
Replacement
Costs
ICity Hall & Administration 0 336,000 36,760,000 37,096,000 2,187 1,065 0 0 F 0
lEquipement 3,539,000 1 4,528,000 0 8,067,000 476 232 0 0 0
Fire Protection 5,269,000 3,067,000 1 36,404,000 44,740,000 2,637 1,285 0 0 0
Library IF 800,000 228,000 493,000 1,521,000 [ 90 44 0 0 0
Police Protection 1 425,000 1,245,000 52,478,000 54,149,000 3,192 1,555 0 0 0
IRecreation 1 4,874,000 31,066,000 73,899,000 109,839,000 6,475 3,156 0 0 0
IRoads 1 0 4,384,000 2,104,000 6,488,000 383 186 0 0 0
Isanitary Sewer 0 2,341,000 1,043,000 3,384,000 200 97 0 1 0 0
ISidewaiks 0 1,161,000 0 1,161,000 ] 68 33 0 0 0
IStormwater sewers [ 0 2,833,000 715,000 3,548,000 209 102 0 01 0
IStreet Lighting 0 775,000 1 3,265,000 IF 4,041,000 238 116 0 oI 0 1
Traffic Signals 120,000 18,700 22,900 162,000 10 5 0 O 0
Water Distribution 0 1,473,000 318,000 1,791,000 106 51 0 ] 0 0
ITotal 15,027,000 53,456,000 207,502,000 275,986,000 16,270 7,930 0 0 0
Total Life Cycle Costs
(Residential+NonResidential) 275 986 000
Appendix C: Infrastructure Costing
[JiiUlluiIllhIiIOiWdnfrastructure Costing > > > > > > >*IoIllfflillllffliHfl
TIfl j IlOption 3: '1odest Intensification and Eastward Expansion into Urban Reserve lIFiscal Year 112004 lPeriod 1120 yrs
ieiir4wi I II Summary of Life Cycle Costs ________lEI I
Residential Non-Residential
Operating & Total Net
Maintenance Total Life Cycle Total Unit Total per Total ]fet Total Net Land Land Prod Costs Costs Capita Cycle Area (Acres) Inc.
Service Component Study Area
Capital Costs
Replacement
Costs
City Hall & Administration 0 336,000 46,137,000 [ 46,474,000 2,274 1,081 0 0 0
lEquipement 4,369,000 5,590,000 0 9,959,000 487 232 0 0 0
IFire Protection 6,927,000 3,787,000 44,941,000 55,654,000 2,723 1,295 0 0 0
Library 2,250,000 349,000 758,000 3,357,000 164 78 0 0 0
IPolice Protection 543,000 1,576,000 64,783,000 66,903,000 3,274 1,557 0 0 0
IRecreation 6,016,000 38,346,000 90,860,000 135,221,000 6,617 3,147 0 0 0
IRoads 0 5,219,000 2,242,000 7,460,000 365 174 0 0 0
ISanitary Sewer 12,500,000 2,929,000 1 1,383,000 16,812,000 823 391 0 0 0
ISidewalks I 0 1,294,000 1 0 I F 1,294,000 63 30 0 0 0
IStormwater sewers 1 0 3,012,000 760,000 [ 3,772,000 185 88 0 0 o
IStreet Lighting 1 0 973,000 4,100,000 5,073,000 248 118 0 0 0
ITraffic Signals 240,000 37,000 1 46,000 IF 323,000 16 8 0 0 0
Iwater Distribution 8,139,000 2,209,000 338,000 10,686,000 F 523 249 0 0 0
ITotal 40,983,000 65,657,000 256,348,000 362,988,000 17,763 8,449 0 0 0
Total Life Cycle Costs
(Residential+NonResidential) 362 988 000 '
APPENDIX D: SUMMARY OF QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF RESIDENTIAL GROWTH OPTIONS
Base Case Option I Option 2 Option 3
Moderate Modest Modest
Intensification Intensification Intensification
and Urban and Northward and Eastward
Containment Urban Expansion Expansion into
Urban Reserve
Objective 1: Improve Housing Choice
Total population that can be 93,900 102,900 108,900 117,100
accommodated at capacity (persons)
Total dwellings at capacity (units) 42,300 46,700 48,900 52,400
Single-detached 20,400 (48%) 19,200 (41%) 23,600 (48%) 26,100 (50%)
Apartment units 10,200 (24%) 12,100 (26%) 12,100 (25%) 12,100 (23%)
Other ground-oriented 11,700 (28%) 15,500 (33%) 13,200 (27%) 14,200 (27%)
Adequate housing capacity to No, shortage of No, shortage of Yes Yes
accommodate projected growth to 14,500 persons 6,000 persons
2031
Adequate single-detached housing No, shortage of No, shortage of -Yes -Yes
supply 4,800 units 6,100 units
Adequate apartment supply No, shortage of Yes Yes Yes
1,900 units
Adequate other ground-oriented Yes Yes Yes Yes
supply
Objective 2: Foster Housing Affordability
#of multi-family units 21,900 (52%) 27,600 (59%) 25,300 (52%) 26,300 (50%)
# of secondary suites 4,100 (10%) 3,800 (8%) 4,600 (9%) 5,100 (10%)
Infrastructure Costs for New Dwellings N/A $14,300 $16,300 $17,800
($/unit)
Average lot size of single-detached 7,020 ft2 6,860 ft2 6,850 ft2 6,830 ft2
units in urban area (ft2)
Objective 3: Build Complete Communities
% of units within 2.5 km of Maple 53% 56% 56% 49%
Ridge Town Centre
% of units within 5 km of Maple Ridge 89% 90% 90% 79%
Town Centre
% of units within 7.5 km of Maple 94% 95% 95% 88%
Ridge Town Centre
Population Density of Urban Core Area 33 38 36 36
(persons/ha)
Objective 4: Develop a Compact Community
Additional Urban Land Area through 0 ha 0 ha 310 ha 560 ha
Expansion (ha)
Housing a Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 3: Dl
Evaluation of Residential Growth Options (REVISED DRAFT OCTOBER 2004)
District of Mcipe Ridge:
Housing and Residential Lands Policy Review
Presentation to Council
November 15, 2004
Presentation by:
Eric Vance, Eric Vance & Associates
Lyle Walker, The Sheltair Group
Gordon Harris, Harris Cansulting
Noha Sedky, Global Frameworks
Housing and Residential Lands Policy
Review
• Purpose:
- Analysis of housing and residential land trends and
issues in Maple Ridge
- Development of OCP housing and residential land
policies
Process: ....
- Research and technical analysis
- Consultation with staff
- Study Circle-workshops
- Interviews with sta keholders
Housing and Residential Lands Policy
Review Process
• -
-
Part Context Review Apl 2004 — —
rh •1J ___________________
art 2. Residential Capacity 1 —
I - .ssment j JUfl 2004
LV[PJ Part 3: Evaluation
- FurAccommodatinyGrowthJ
P,Ixy
Aug2004
SeptlOct200 Part 4 Development of po ft 1 :1 commendations ii. h p f - Winter 2004
1lntegtion with OCP Review Process
(mci. public consultation) -
p.
1
Objectives for Housing and Residential
Lands
Improve housing choice
Foster housing affordability
Build complete communities
Increase transportation choice
Develop compact communities
Minimize municipal costs
Preserve community character
Context Review Summary
Housing choice:
• Residential deeelopment primarily single family in past 5-10 years
• Need sufficient housingto accommodatefuture population growth
(108,900 by2031)
• Need a mix of housing types to accommodate housing demand
Housing Affordability:
• Historically mom affordable housing relative to the GVRD
• Challenge to ensure affordability given high regional prices
• Need a mix of housing to meet diverse needs of population
including entry-level ownership, rental, seniors, special needs, and
non-market housing
Context Review (Cont.)
complete communities:
• The Town Centre and neighbourhood core concept to provide
opportunities to live and wob in the community
- This policy not always reflected in new residential developments
Compact communities:
- Urban Area Boundary is an important tool for containing development
• Challenge to castain development given development pressures
- Impacts most directly on agricultural land and the Green Zone
Transportation choice:
- Maple Ridge has a relatively high degree of automobile dependency
• Encourage land use patterns that minimise trip distances and support
transit service
Context Review (Cont.)
Municipal Casts:
• Recurring costs (replacement, operating, and maintenance costs)
make up 75% of lifecycle costs of infrastructure and services -
primarily berm by municipality
• Ability to pay for andfinance growth is critical to successful
implementation of OCP policies
Community Character:
• Community character will changr as population grows
• Challenge to maintain small town ondrural feel of Maple Ridge and
protect environmantal features
• Need to balance accommodotinggrowth with protecting greenspoce
and rural aloes
Residential Capacity Assessment
Su mmarv
• Capacity based on existing land use
designations is 38,200 units
• Represents accommodating a population of
93,900
Housing capacity is insufficient to accommodate
108,900 people projected for 2031
Supply falls short of projected demand by 4,800
single detached units and 1,900 apartment units
Options for Accommodating Growth
Moderate Intensification & Urban Containment
Modest Intensification & Northward Urban
Expansion
Modest Intensification & Eastward Expansion into
Urban Reserve
3
The Options in Concept
Option 1: - - - Moderate
Intensification & Containment
Option 2: - - -
Expand / Adjust ---
Urban Aiea &
- -
Modest Innsification
- - - Option 3:
Urban Reserve & - - - -
Modest Intensification
Existing Urban Area Urban Reserve & Designated Centres
Option 1: Moderate Intensification and
Urban Containment
Limit most
residential
growth and
density areas
within the
Urban Core
Area through
infill and
intensification
Option 2: Modest Intensification and
Northward Urban Expansion
Expansion of
approx. 300 ha
required to
accommodate
projected
pop growth
Areas shown on
map are
potential
expansion areas
- not all would
be needed
+
Option 3: Modest Intensification and
Expansion into Urban Reserve
Incorporate ± Thornhill Urban F -
Reserve as new
urban area in
addition to 1
modest levels I of growth
within the I (,
Urban Core
Area
Evaluation of the Options
• Options reviewed from fiscal, economic,
environmental, and social perspectives
- • Process structured according to 7 overarching
policy objectives
• For each objective, implications of each option
were assessed:
- Over 20 quantitative indicators
—Qualitative evaluation
Overall Rankings of Options
.Base. .
Case
. Option.
1
Option
2
Option
3
1) Improse housing choice 4 3 1 (tie) 1 (tie)
2) Foster housing affordability 4 2 (tie) 2 (tie) 1
3) Build complete communities 3 1 2 4
4) Develop a compact community 1 (tie) 1 (tie) 3 4
5) Increase transportation choim 2 1 3 4
6) Mininmice municipal costs 1 (tie) 1 (tie) 3 4
7) Preserve community chreacte, 1 2 (tie) 2 (tie) 2
Major Findings of Evaluation
• Base Case & Option 1
- Cannot accommodate theprojected pep. (max. 93900 and 102900
people respectively)
• Option 1
- Outperforms Base Case
- Does not meet projected housing demand mix (stort 6000 single
detached units)
- Limited by relative newness of housing stock
• Option 2
- Performs well on all objectives
- Major trodedf is expansion Onto ALR land
• Option 3
- Has enough capacity fore population sf117,000
- Outperformed by Option 2 on all but one objective
Fourth Option
• Combines elements of Option 1 and 2
• Level of residential intensification for Urban Core
Area between Option 2 (modest) and Option 1
(moderate)
• Additional analysis of preferred expansion area
required
Why this Option?
• Accommodates population growth and housing demand
to 2031 (including demand for single-detached units)
• Provides better access to commercial centre,
transportation, and other services
• Increases contiguity of existing urban area, i.e. linking
Town Centre and Silver Valley
• Easy access to Abernethy Connector, minimising
additional traffic through Town Centre
• Relatively easy access to transit, walking, and cycling
opportunities
n.
Why this Option? (Cont.)
• Hard infrastructure in place including water mains and
trunk sanitary sewers
• Some community facilities already exist In the area,
including some schools and municipal services
• Over 30% of proposed expansion area is non-
agricultural and 40% located outside the ALR
• Has a lower density of streams in the area, i.e. fewer
concerns with regards to riparian areas and allows
higher developable area
Recommended Option: Moderate Intensification of
Urban Core Area and Northward Expansion
An expansion area of apprax.
150-300 ha
wouldbe
required to
accommodate
the projected
population
growth
Lands in the AIR
Themain issue
with the
Recommended
Option is the
urban
encroachment
onto lands in
the AI.R
7
Refinement of Recommended Option
• Minimize land required for expansion area
- Achieve moderate densities in Urban Core Area and high densities in
Town Centre
- Snob a higher number of secondary suites
- Increase densities on greenlisld sites
- Set and achieve mm. densities for anpansien area
• Set of criteria provided for assessing the potential
expansion lands
• Other Issues
- Removal of block lands from ALR in eopansioit area
- Removal of lands from Green Znne and Regional Context Statement
- Appravol from GVS&DD
Policy Areas Reviewed
• Housing and Land Requirements
- Quantity and delling type
• Settlement Patterns
- Urban containment, residential densities, redevelopment, and
Complete and compact communites
• Affordable, Rental and Special Needs
Housing
- Affordable rental and home ownership, non-market housing -
Major Policy Directions
• Conduct detailed assessment of potential expansion
areas
• Develop neighbourhood plans
• Town Centre (high capacity for population growfr)
• Other areas for residential intensification
• Potential ecrpansion area
• Policies for fostering mixed use, increased density,
and residential intensification of existing urban area
- Establish non-OCP policies to support recommended
option (e.g. incentives & disincentives)
Summary
- To continue to grow and accommodate the projected
population, Maple Ridge will need to:
intensify development within the Urban Core Area
(particularly the Town Centre), and
ultimately expand the urban area
- To reflect the social, economic, fiscal, and environmental
objectives for housing, it is recommended that the
projected growth be accommodated through moderate
intensification and expansion to the north and east
HOUSING AND RESIDENTIAL
LANDS POLICY REVIEW FOR MAPLE RIDGE
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
REViSED DRAFT
October 2004
Prepared for:
District of Maple Ridge
By:
C~The Sheltair Group
L _J F R A M EWORKS
Eric Vance
& Associates In
Planning and Management HarrisConsulting r P Consultants
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION . 1
2.0 OCP POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................ 2
2.1 Issue: Housing and Land Requirements ............................................................ 2
2.1.1 Housing and Land Use Designations ............................................................... 2
2.1.2 Urban Expansion ..................................................................................... 4
2.1.3 Monitoring and In formation Needs ................................................................ 5
2.2 Issue: Settlement Patterns ........................................................................... 7
2.2.1 Complete and Compact Community ................................................................. 7
2.3 Issue: Affordable, Rental And Special Needs Housing ........................................... 11
2.3.1 Affordable Housing Options ....................................................................... 11
3.0 N0N-OCP RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 15
3.1 Schedule 'B" Recommendations .................................................................... 15
3.2 Zoning Bylaw Recommendations................................................................... 15
3.3 Monitoring LongTerm Housing Market Trends and Depletionof Remaining Residential
Capacity. ............................................................................................... 16
3.4 Conducting Additional Research on Residential Intensification .............................. 16
3.5 Municipal Infrastructure Costs and Revenues to Support Land Use Vision .................. 17
3.5. 1 Minimizing Municipal Infrastructure Costs through Urban Form ............................. 17
3.5.2 Consider all Major Municipal Infrastructure Lifecycle Costs .................................. 17
3.5.3 Neighbourhood and Subdivision Layout and infrastructure Standards....................... 17
3.5.4 Maintenance and Replacement of infrastructure .............................................. 18
3.5.5 Achieving Financial Sustainability ................................................................ 18
3.6 Restructuring of Development Cost Charges and Recurring Revenues ...................... 19
GLOSSARY .....................................................................................Z1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This report is the fourth and final in a series of documents prepared for the District of MapLe Ridge as
part of the review of the Official Community Plan's housing and residential lands policies. The
culminatiofl of the preceding work, this report includes strategic recommendations for Official
Community Plan (OCP) policies that address housing and land requirements, settlement patterns, and
affordable, rental and special needs housing. It also includes non-OCP recommendations that consider
aspects of the costs and revenues associated with urban growth and development.
The first three reports were technical documents that examined the policy context, assessed the
residential capacity within the District, and evaluated different growth options. These documents
provided an improved understanding of the issues, chaLlenges, and requirements for accommodating
the projected population as well as the tradeoffs of different growth options. They served to set the
stage for the policy recommendations presented here.
Seven community objectives served to set the policy context and frame the evaluation of the
residential growth options. These objectives take into account the District's municipaL objectives, the
fundamental strategies of the Greater Vancouver Regional District's Livable Region Strategic PLan,.and
the provinciaL goaLs for regional growth strategies. These policy objectives are elaborated on in the
Context Report (TechnicaL Report No. 1).
The seven objectives addressed issues that broadly reflected aspects of housing and residential lands.
For the purposes of reviewing and drafting policies for the District's OfficiaL Community Plan (OCP),
only those poLicies that most directly address aspects of housing and residential lands issues are
incLuded'PrimariLy, the recommended policies reflect the objectives of: a) improving housing choice,
and b) fostering housing affordability. More tangentiaLly, they address the other five objectives of: c)
building complete communities, d) deveLoping a compact community, e) increasing transportation
choice, f) minimising municipal costs, and g) preserving community character.
A workshop was held with the community Study CircLe representatives in October 2004 on the proposed
policy recommendations for housing and residential Lands. The main discussion points from this
workshop are summarized at the end of each subsection.
Section 2 examines current OCP poLicies as they had been categorised in the 1996 OCP, offers some
discussion regarding the policies, and, in some cases, suggests alternative or additionaL policies.
Section 3 of the report includes an overview of non-OCP recommendations.
Housing b ResidenttJ. Lands Policy Review:
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
2.0 OCP POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
2.1 ISSUE: HOUSING AND LAND REQUIREMENTS
The issue of housing and Land requirements concerns the amount and type of housing Maple Ridge will
need in the future. The District must ensure that there is adequate Land to satisfy the housing demand
created by its current and future residents, while at the same time balancing community livability and
sustainability objectives.
According to the District's population projection to 2031 and its residential capacity assessment, the
currently designated supply of urban Land is insufficient to meet the needs of the community to 2031.
Therefore, some expansion of the current urban boundary will be required to accommodate future
population growth, occurring in conjunction with residential intensification of a number of
neighbourhoods within the urban area to accommodate future housing demand in Maple Ridge.
As a consequence, and also in response to changing demographics in the community, Maple Ridge will
require an increasing proportion of medium to high-density dwelling units to meet the needs of the
growing and changing population.
The preparation of neighbourhood/area plans has been recommended as the means of specifying the
appropriate number, mix and density of new housing units in each neighbourhood or area that is
expected to undergo significant change within the timeframe of the OCP.
2.1 .1 Housing and Land Use Designations
The current OCP Land Use Designation plan (Schedule B) identifies four main categories of designation
for urban residential development - single family, compact housing, garden apartments and
apartments - and specifies which of the four categories applies to each property in the urban area
intended for residential use. The plan further specifies the maximum density or the density range for
each residentiaL category in each area where it is applied (expressed in units per ha).
Schedule B should not be significantly altered from existing residential land use designations and
densities until neighbourhood / area plans are completed for those areas where significant
redevelopment is anticipated. It is therefore recommended that the existing designations shown in
Schedule B largely carry over into the new OCP but that the neighbourhoods or areas for which plans
will be prepared be identified on the schedule. As each plan is prepared, it can be adopted as OCP
policy and Schedule B can be amended accordingly.
It is recommended that consideration also be given to allowing greater flexibility in the OCP in terms of
the type and density of housing designated for each neighbourhood or area in the Schedule. This would
allow the District to better accommodate and encourage innovative residential development proposals
and it would give developers the ability to better respond to changing market conditions. For example,
rather than specifying four categories of residential development, the categories could be reduced to
three, as follows:
• Low density residential, including single and two family, and small lot single family (compact
housing).
• Medium density residential, including three-plexes, four-plexes, townhouses, stacked
townhouses, cluster housing and combined townhouse / low-rise apartments.
• High density residential, including low and high-rise apartments.
Housing Et Residenti-Lands Policy Review: -
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
OBJECTIVE: ENSURE AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY AND DIVERSITY OF HOUSING IS MADE AVAILABLE TO
RESIDENTS
To provide an adequate supply and appropriate mix of housing forms to address the needs and
lifestyles of current and future residents while recognizing long-term housing market trends.
OCP POLICIES (1996)
The Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan will permit
different types of housing by
designating land for Rural
Residential, Suburban Residential,
Single Family Residential, Two
Family Residential, Compact
Housing, Garden Apartment and
Apartment uses. Designations such
as Town Centre Commercial,
Commerciat/ Apartment,
Community Commercial, Historic
Commercial and Agriculture will
also accommodate some residential
development. These designations
are noted on Schedule "B."
Maple Ridge will encourage the
development of greater density
housing near commercial centres,
and where appropriate near transit
routes.
Maple Ridgewill encourage
small-scale, housing development
which increases the housing density
in existing residential
neighbourhoods where the
proposed development is suitably
integrated and respects the
character of the neighbourhood.
Such development may be
considered consistent with existing
density designations of the Official
Community Plan where:
the development application
proposes single family housing;
the existing development
DISCUSSION
More flexibility and innovation
should be encouraged in
residential development to
facilitate the development of a
mix of housing forms and
densities to address the diverse
needs of the resident
population.
It is recommended that
neighbourhood plans determine
the criteria for densification and
level of change within each
neighbourhood where significant
redevelopment is anticipated. In
the absence of neighbourhood
plans, infill housing should be
sensitive to the neighbourhood
context. The District may opt
to draft a policy to address this.
The policies should describe a
broade,r set of circumstances
where greater density is
considered or encouraged.
Such policy is not appropriate
for the level of broad
directions and high-level
framework being set by the
OCP. This detail is better
suited to regulations developed
at the neighbourhood planning
stage.
PROPOSED NEW AND AMENDED
POLICIES
Policy: Maple Ridge will:
designate an adequate
supply of residential land to
accommodate current and
future residents, and;
permit an appropriate mix of
housing forms to address
diverse needs and lifestyles.
Policy: Maple Ridge will
encourage land use designations
that are responsive to long-
term market trends.
Policy: Maple Ridge will
encourage the development of
greater density housing within
the Town Centre, near
commercial centres, along
major arterial roadways, and
where appropriate near transit
stations.
Policy: Maple Ridge will
consider development which
increases the housing density
in designated-areas through
incentive mechanisms such as
differential fee structures (eg.
Development Cost Charges).
Policy: Maple Ridge will
support housing developments
in existing neighbourhoods
where neighbourhood plans are
in place to guide the form and
character of development.
Housing & ResidentiaJ. Lands Policy Review:
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
parcel(s) is larger than the
minimum parcel size implied by the Policy: Maple Ridge will
density designation and Larger than develop other strategies as
the parcel size typical of the appropriate for meeting the
surrounding neighbourhood; S future housing needs of
the resultant neighbourhood residents.
density is generally consistent with
the existing housing stock in the
immediate neighbourhood;
the siting,scale and general
character of any new housing
reflects existing housing stock in
the immediate neighbourhood;
existing infrastructure is capable
of supporting the new
development;
existing street standards should
be considered in determining
neighbourhood character.
2.1.2 Urban Expansion
The current OCP identifies the Thornhill Urban Reserve as an area for possible urban expansion.
However, analysis conducted for this review has determined that the area most suitable for urban
expansion would be to the north and northeast of the current urban area. However, further study is
required prior to any further expansion to the urban area occurring in the District.
OBJECTIVE: MEET FUTURE RESIDENTIAL LAND REQUIREMENTS
To accommodate future population growth and change through the expansion of the existing urban
area for the population that cannot be accommodated through residential intensification of the
existing urban area or through development of the urban growth areas. The population will be
accommodated in the expansion area in a manner that is consistent with community and regional goals
and objectives.
OCP POLICIES (1996) DISCUSSION PROPOSED NEW AND AMENDED
POLICIES
27. Policy: The Thornhilt In the interest of meeting the Policy: Maple Ridge will explore
area is designated Urban overall objective of creating a options for the orderly expansion of
Reserve, as noted on contiguous and compact the Urban Area Boundary that include
Schedule "B", to community while still providing areas to the north and northeast of
accommodate future urban residential land to meet the the current Urban Area Boundary and
expansion. The minimum housing needs of the District, a south of the South Alouette River
parcel size for subdivision first priority for urban floodplain. Maple Ridge will conduct
of land designated Urban expansion should occur in lands a detailed assessment of these
Reserve is 2.0 hectares. to the north and west of the potential expansion areas to
current urban area connecting determine the capacity of the
Silver Valley with the Core available and potential housing stock,
Urban Area. housing demand projections,
agricultural capability and suitability,
Housing & ResidentiLands Policy Review:
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
The expansion area in the
proposed policies refers to the
expansion area identified in
Option 4of the Technical
Evaluation of the Options, i.e.
the area to the north and east
of the existing Urban Area
Boundary. It does not refer to
other possible expansion areas
in Thornhilt or elsewhere.
suitability for residential
development, environmental impact,
use of existing schools and hard
infrastructure, and other community
factors.
Policy: Maple Ridge will prepare a
neighbourhood plan for the selected
expansion area to identify the types
of residential development, land use
patterns, minimum density
requirements, and phasing most
appropriate to the expansion area.
Policy: For lands designated
AgricuLtural in the identified
expansion area that are not in the
Agricultural Land Reserve, Maple
Ridge will retain an agricultural
designation on these lands until the
neighbourhood pLan is completed to
ensure efficient and orderly
development of the area.
2.1.3 'Monitoring and Information Needs
No OCP policies address aspects of analysis and monitoring of housing needs and capacity. Such a policy
ensures that the municipality bases future policy change and planning on up-to-date data and trends.
In this vein, two new policies are suggested.
OBJECTIVE: MONITOR LONG-TERM HOUSING MARKET TRENDS AND REMAINING RESIDENTIAL CAPACITY
To monitor long-term housing trends, including monitoring the remaining residential capacity of the
existing designated urban areas, in order to track when the capacity is anticipated to be reached.
PROPOSED NEW AND AMENDED POLICIES I
Policy: Maple Ridge will monitor urban residential capacity to determine how and when capacity is
being approached for different neighboiirhoodsand dwelling types
Policy: Maple Ridge will monitor long-term housing market trends and conduct relevant housing needs
studies as necessary, including age-specific housing forecasts and housing occupancy demand analysis.
Housing & ResidentiaLLands Policy Review:
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
Consultation with Study Circle Representatives
There was significant concern raised with respect to the use of Lands in the Agricultural Land Reserve
(ALR) for residential development and how that would threaten to destroy the rural character and
spirit of the community. It was suggested that any further decisions in this regard be made once an
agricultural plan is developed and that particular emphasis be Laid on protection of the District's
agricultural base.
Further, it was discussed that population growth should be limited to that which can be
accommodated within the existing Urban Area Boundary. If there is a need to expand the urban area,
this should be pursued with extreme caution. The community wanted to emphasize that past actions
and approaches to growth and development are not where residents wish to go in the future and that
future growth should be managed according to the objectives of the entire community. In order to
accommodate the population, expanding the Town Centre area and the area where multifa'mily
dwellings or apartments are permitted could be considered.
Monitoring was supported and community representatives asserted that residents should have more
involvement and influence on decision making and that there should be improved mechanisms for
both resident participation and access to information. The involvement of the community in planning
processes was highlighted as a critical issue. Specific components of the OCP should be more
frequently reviewed than is the norm for an entire OCP review and residents should be incLuded in
the monitoring and review of OCP amendments.
Housing & ResidentiL Lands Policy Review: 6
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
2.2 IssuE: SETTLEMENT PATTERNS
To avoid low-density dispersed development that would erode the rural character of the community
and require substantial additional investments in infrastructure, Maple Ridge will continue to
concentçate future growth within designated growth areas. This will be accomplished with well-
integrated development in existing neighbourhoods, comprehensive redevelopment in strategic
locations, and designation of appropriate residential densities within the northern urban expansion
area.
In order. to ensure efficient use of land and infrastructure and to promote sustainable principles that
minimize urban sprawl and protect sensitive and productive areas, municipalities put into place urban
containment boundaries as a growth management tool. An urban containment boundary defines those
areas of the community where urban growth is anticipated and where urban services will be made
available. Its purpose is to limit residential and commercial development into rural land areas, support
urban development and increased densities within the defined urban areas. Growth that occurs within
the urban containment boundary is financially feasible in that it limits development to serviceable
areas, reduces servicing costs, and creates more complete and sustainable communities. Maple Ridge
has a well established urban containment boundary delineating the urban areas and it shouLd be
identified as such in the OCP.
2.2.1 Complete and Compact Community
OBJECTIVE: DEVELOP COMPLETE COMMUNITIES AND INCREASE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN EXISTING URBAN
AREAS
To ensure that the majority of housing is developed in close proximity to places of work, shopping,
services, recreational facilities and park space to allow residents to conduct many of their daily
activities close to where they live.
OBJECTIVE: DEVELOP A COMPACT COMMUNITY
To facilitate the development of compact communities whereby urban sprawl is minimized, land is
used efficiently, and green space and agricultural, lands are protected.
OCP POLICIES (1996) DISCUSSION PROPOSED NEW AND AMENDED
POLICIES
26. Urban development is tobe A map of the urban Policy: Maple Ridge will limit
limited to urban areas where: containment boundary urban development to urban areas
the best use of existing physical should be revised to include where:
and social infrastructure can be the current proposed a4_the best use of existing
made, or expansion area. physical, community and social
where the infrastructure can be infrastructure can be made;
provided in an efficient manner. Policy 26 provides part of b) where the infrastructure can be
the rationale for the UCB. provided in a manner that is
efficient and cost effective for the
municipality; and
where the development does
not encroach on the Green Zone.
Housing Et Residential. Lands Policy Review: 7
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
The Thornhilt area is
designated Urban Reserve, as
noted on Schedule "B", to
accommodate future urban
expansion. The minimum parcel
size for subdivision of Land
designated Urban Reserve is 2.0
hectares.
Bare Land Strata titLe
deveLopment wiLl be considered for
all residential densities where:
Alternative development forms
will provide the flexibility required
to protect significant natural
amenities. This will typicaLly occur
with residential densities at or
Lower than 15 units per net
hectare, accommodated by the RG,
RG-2 and RG-3 Zones.
The form of development is
detached housing within the RM.1
(Townhouse Residential) zone, as a
means of providing choice in
tenure.
it is proposed that revisions
to the UCB only be
considered as the District
approaches its housing
capacity. For example, this
would be a suitable point to
reconsider the need for
residentiaL development in
the ThornhilL Urban Reserve.
Policy 28 is too specific for
an OCP and would be more
appropriate for
neighbourhood planning
level.
Broad policies that support
the development of
innovative housing forms
(i.e. mixed use, small Lot
infill, row housing) and
increased densities can be
introduced. Within this
policy, bare Land strata title
development can be
considered.
Policy: Maple Ridge will consider
whether to retain the Thornhilt
area to the east of the urban area
as Urban Reserve in order to
accommodate future urban
expansion. Expansion into the
urban reserve will be considered
only when the District approaches
the residential capacity of the
existing urban area.
Policy: Maple Ridge will explore
and introduce incentives that
encourage the development of
innovative housing forms and
tenure styles, such as small lot
infiLl, mixed use housing, heritage
preservation, flex housing, strata
development, and green design.
Policy: Maple Ridge will introduce
minimum gross residential density
requirements for the urban
expansion area appropriate to
regional and community planning
objectives and site-specific
conditions.
Policy: Maple Ridge will
encourage densification in the
Town Centre, close to major
transportation routes, community
services, adjacent to parks and
green space, along major streets,
and where it is compatible with
surrounding areas.
29. Subdivision of Lands in areas
designated Suburban Residential
will be limited to a minimum lot
size of 0.4 hectares with a
minimum lot frontage of 36 metres
provided:
• that a community water system
is available, and
• that the Local Medical Health
Officer has certified that each
lot created can accommodate
an adequate waste management
system.
Policy 29 reflects a level of
specificity that is not
common in an OCP.
The District may want to
include a minimum Lot size
or a maximum density for
Rural and Suburban
Residential areas if it wants
to have a degree of
specificity for this.
Policy: Areas designated Rural
Residential and Suburban
Residential are to be located
outside the Urban Area Boundary
and servicing for these areas is to
remain private.
Urban-level residential densities
will not be supported in areas
designated Suburban Residential
and Rural Residential.
Housing & Residential Lands PoLicy Review: -. 8
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
I 30. Subdivision of lands in areas I POLiCY 30 refLects a Level of I I designated Rural Residential will specificity that is not
I be limited to a minimum Lot size of j common in an ocp. I
2.0 hectares with a minimum lot I
frontage of 60 metres provided I I there is proven suitability for a I I
waste management system. I I
OBJECTIVE: iNTENSIFY EXISTING URBAN AREAS
To develop a prudent and comprehensive process for residential intensification through development
that is sensitive to and is well suited to the environmental and social values, lifestyle, and
characteristics of the community.
PROPOSED NEW AND AMENDED POLICIES
Policy: Maple Ridge will develop a neighbourhood plan for the Town Centre, including urban design
guidelines, for revitalizing this area and accommodating a significantly increased residential population
in the area.
Policy: Maple Ridge will encourage the development of multi-family housing that typically appeals to
residents seeking features traditionally associated with single-family housing.
Policy: Maple Ridge will permit small lot, single family residential uses in areas where neighbourhood
planning criteria and conditions are met.
Policy: Maple Ridge will encourage additional development in residential designated areas, such as
coach houses, duplexes, triplexes, secondary suites, and garden suites.
Policy: Maple Ridge will support residential intensification of the Urban Core Area through land use
designations, incentives, disincentives, municipal investments, and other policy instruments.
Policy: Maple Ridge will maintain a contiguous Urban Area Boundary to minimize the extension of hard
infrastructure.
OBJECTIVE: DEVELOP NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANS
To develop neighbourhood-level plans in order to provide direction for new development in urban
expansion areas as well as to guide redevelopment of existing neighbourhoods.
To incorporate sufficient flexibility into the-se plans, so that they may-be able to respond to'changin
market demands, including demands for diverse forms of housing.
NEW AND AMENDED POLICIES
Policy: Maple Ridge will initiate the creation of neighbourhood plans as a means to guide development.
Policy: Maple Ridge will develop a neighbourhood plan for the Town Centre as one of its first
neighbourhood plans due to its significance and high capacity to accommodate residential growth.
Policy: Maple Ridge will develop subsequent neighbourhood plans based on a consideration of each
area's suitability for accommodating residential intensification, and will begin with a consideration of
Housing a Residenti3l Lands Policy Review:
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
those neighbourhoods that present the greatest opportunities for redevelopment or a neighbourhood in
transition.
Consultation with Study Circle Representatives
Limits to urban development were supported and it was felt that the development of innovative
housing and mixed use development should be encouraged. Along with the anticipated higher density
development, it was suggested that new forms of single family housing, including compact housing
forms, be supported.
It was proposed that Thornhill be retained as a rural area and that its Urban Reserve designation be
removed. Only.expariding into the Urban Reserve once capacity is reached was seen to be a sound
approach that controls urban expansion. It was also felt that "land capacity" should be defined and
that efficiencies in infrastructure be pursued at all times.
The introduction of minimum residential density requirements was seen as a positive from the
perspective of making transit more feasibLe and encouraging more compact housing. However, it was
noted that high density development is risky and should be implemented with care so as to maintain
an appropriate mix of housing types.
Heritage preservation was heralded as a key part of retaining community character and an effective
way to retain existing houses with infill. Also, granny flats, flex housing, and other infill concepts
should be encouraged. In pursuing this and other intensification strategies, incentives and amenities
should be considered. The groups noted that this will require both political Leadership and financial
commitment.
The expansion of the urban area to the north would lead to a more contiguous urban area by (inking
Silver Valley. This was seen to have many implications that could undermine the uniqueness of Silver
Valley. The suggestion was to include Thomas Haney as an intensification area due to its proximity to
shopping centres and recreation facilities.
In addition, neighbourhood centres (or villages) should be considered a focal point in community
planning, placing commercial areas and green space within easy walking distance of most residents.
Housing & Residenti-Lands Policy Review: - 10
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
2.3 IssuE: AFFORDABLE, RENTAL AND SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING
A widely accepted measure for affordabLe housing is where annual shelter costs do not exceed 30% of a
household's gross income. Affordability is important to owners and renters whether it is market or
non-market housing (e.g. co-operatives, public housing, or non-profit housing provided by a community
organization). Maple Ridge has a limited number of non-market or social housing units, but they form
an important part of the housing stock.
The availability of rental housing (one form of market-based affordable housing) is also subject to
market fluctuations which can impose hardship for people in need of lower-cost housing. Further, a
significant portion of the rental housing stock in Maple Ridge is composed of insecure forms of rental
housing such as rented condominiums that are not approved by strata council for rental.
Throughout the region, the provision of affordable ownership housing is also found to be a challenge.
Given that Maple Ridge is primarily a community of homeowners and that many people would prefer to
live in single family dwellings, it is important to consider innovative approaches to facilitating
affordable housing ownership.
The withdrawal of senior governments from the social housing field means people are increasingly
looking to municipalities for innovative approaches to the provision of special needs housing. Special
needs housing is for people with physical and/or mental disabilities, people experiencing substance
misuse, women and children needing temporary or Long-term shelter, adult and young offenders,
children in'care, and homeless or at-risk people.
2.3.1 Affordable Housing Options
OBJECTIVE: SUPPORT THE PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
To ensure there is a diverse range of lower cost market and non-market housing in Maple Ridge and to
ensure the provision of housing that is affordable to all income groups within the population.
OBJECTIVE: ALLOW AND REGULATE SECONDARY SUITES IN SINGLE-DETACHED RESIDENTIAL AREAS
To continue to allow and administer the secondary suite program within the District in order to
encourage the development and regulation of secondary suites.
OCP POLICIES (1996) DISCUSSION PROPOSED NEW AND AMENDED
POLICIES
31. Maple Ridge will consider Density bonusing can be used to Policy: Maple Ridge will update its
a density bonusing policy as leverage affordable housing affordable housing strategy to include
ameans ofencouraging- the units, greendesign, orother specific targetsandobjectivesior
provision of amenities and community amenities from affordable housing units that include
affordable and special needs development projects. It has non-market housing, affordable
housing. not been as prevalent in market housing, seniors housing, and
suburban areas such as Maple special needs housing such as mental
Ridge as it has in metropolitan health housing.
centres.
Policy: Maple Ridge will work with
A more general policy on agencies and stakehoLders to develop
affordable housing should be appropriate strategies for providing
introduced prior to specific low and lower cost housing options.
Housing & Residential. Lands Policy Review: S 11
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
Policy: Maple Ridge will explore
opportunities to include affordable or
rental housing as part of residential
development projects.
Policy: Maple Ridge will encourage
private developers to provide
amenities and affordable and special
needs housing units through the use of
streamLining development
applications, differential fee
structures, strategic rezoning, and
public/private! non-profit
partnerships.
poLicies on implementation
tools.
Specific policies that promote
additional implementation tools
and strategies would further
facilitate the development of
affordable housing.
Policy: Maple Ridge will consider
leasing municipal land to non-profit
housing societies to manage non-
market housing units.
Policy: MapLe Ridge will support the
development of projects with
innovative tenure forms such as life
Leases and equity co-ops.
Maple Ridge will
undertake a detailed review
of Secondary Suites.
Maple Ridge will review
innovative approaches to
housing including housing
form, lot size, road and
other engineering standards.
The District has completed a
review of secondary suites and
has developed relevant bylaws
and regulations. An amended
policy should permit the
development of secondary suites
in all single family residences
and maintain the established
standards.
Innovative approaches could
specifically include reduced
parking standards and increased
densities.
It is recommended that this
policy be included as part of a
larger intensification strategy
and set of policies.
Policy: Maple Ridge wilt permit
secondary suites in all single-detached
residential areas within the Urban
Area Boundary.
Policy: Maple Ridge will maintain
standards for secondary suites that
regulate existing suites and encourage
the development of new units.
OBJECTIVE: SUPPORT THE PROVISION OF SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING
To facilitate the provision of special needs housing within the District, including community care
facilities, assisted living residences, emergency/transitional housing for homeless residents, as well as
adaptable housing units for people with physical, mental, and/or lifestyle challenges.
Housing a Residentia' Lands Policy Review: 12
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
OCP POLICIES (1996) DISCUSSION PROPOSED NEW AND AMENDED POLICIES
Maple Ridge recognizes Policy 34 is limited and can be Policy: Maple Ridge will encourage the
the need for integration of developed as a more directed integration of special needs housing in
special needs housing or action-focused policy. appropriatelocations and as an
throughout the community. appropriate share of the housing stock.
Policy: Maple Ridge will encourage
partnerships among government and non-
profit societies to support the creation of
new assisted living units (i.e. seniors
housing that includes access to regular
care services) in appropriate locations
throughout the District.
Policy: Maple Ridge will encourage
partnerships among government and non-
profit societies to support the creation of
emergency shelter and transitional
housing units for homeless residents.
Policy: Maple Ridge will consider the
needs of seniors or persons with
disabilities and persons with limitations
to mobility in the design guidelines of
new residential developments.
Maple Ridge will Policy 35 should be included in
encourage consideration of a section of the OCP that
energy efficient site design speaks more broadly of energy
in the development of all and water efficient design
new areas. with respect to all
development. It should not be
limited to residential
development.
NEW AND AMENDED POLICIES
Polic-y: Maple Ridge will partic-ipate in- local -and regional planning-initiatives dealing with issus of
homelessness in the community.
Housing Et Residential Lands Policy Review: * 13
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
'I
Consultation with Study Circle Representatives
The recommended "affordable, rental, and special needs housing" policies were reviewed and
supported. The group further stated that each neighbourhood should have affordable housing and that
housing is a basic right for which people should not have to pay more than 30% of their gross income.
With regards to secondary suites, it was recommended that the District capitalize on opportunities to
support secondary suites by a) regulating, b) adopting Vancouver secondary suite bylaws that allow
secondary suites in any neighbourhood in the City, and C) building houses with secondary suites.
Additional affordable housing strategies noted were:
• Incorporate higher density housing in single family neighbourhoods
• Lease municipal land for affordable housing
• Target a percentage of Development Cost Charges to a land trust for social housing
• Establish policies that mandate housing diversity
• Exchange density in new development for affordable or special needs housing
• Support residential units above commercial
• Streamline the paperwork and prioritising development applications for non-market housing
• Consider Vancouver regulations on Special Needs Residential Facilities as an approach to having
• special needs facilities throughout the District
• Encourage partnerships between businesses, ministries, agencies, and other stakeholders
•
Differentiate taxes for single vs. multifamily development and for infill vs. new development in
order to reduce the costs associated with appropriate multifamily housing and infill development.
Housing a Residenti Lands Policy Review: 14
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
3.0 NON-OCP RECOMMENDATIONS
The following provides recommendations for the non-OCP (and non-text portion of the OCP) of the
Housing and Residential Lands Policy Review. These recommendations are important to help support
and reinforce the policies recommended for the OCP.
The following recommendations are in the areas of:
• Schedule "B" (land use designations map of the OCP);
• The Zoning Bylaw;
• Monitoring of Long-term Housing Trends and Depletion of Remaining Residential Capacity;
• Additional Research for Residential Intensification;
• Municipal Infrastructure Costs and Revenue to Support Land Use Vision; and,
• Development Cost Charges and Recurring Revenues.
3.1 SCHEDULE"B" RECOMMENDATIONS
Various additional sources of residential capacity were identified in the Residential Capacity
Assessment report (Housing and Residential Lands Policy Review Technical Report No. 2). Two areas of
additional potential capacity were the Transportation Lands to the east of downtown and the release
of lands in the Industrial Reserve.
Recommendations:
That the District initiate discussions with the BC Ministry of Transportation regarding the release
and redesignation of lands designated as "Transportation" lands located at the eastern edge of
downtown in the vicinity of where the Lougheed Highway and Haney By-Pass meet. As the New
Fraser River Crossing is along the 200th St. Corridor, it is believed that these lands are no longer
needed for Transportation. It is recommended that these lands be redesignated urban residential,
with Single-Family (at least at 15 to 18 units per net ha) and Compact Housing.
That should the industrial lands in the Industrial Reserve be redesignated as identified in the
Industrial Lands Policy Review, they not be redesignated to residential uses at this time.
3.2 ZONING BYLAW RECOMMENDATIONS
A detailed review of the District's Zoning Bylaw is outside the scope of the consultant's work. However,
there were two areas identified where it is recommended that the zoning bylaw be amended when the
District conducts a more detailed review of the zoning bylaw.
In the Commercial Land Use Study prepared by G.P. Rollo & Associates Ltd. (February 2004), it was
identified that there is a shortage of commercially designated land to accommodate the potential long
term commercial development needs of the community. However, the consultant did identify lands
currently designated for commercial use that could be redesignated for residential or
commercial/residential mixed uses. These areas were primarily in the downtown area and were the
least likely to attract commercial development.
One key issue is that the CRM zone (mixed commercial/residential) for the Town Centre Commercial
Area requires commercial on the ground floor. Zoning that allows 100% residential development in
certain downtown areas would encourage more overall residential development downtown. This would
increase the residential capacity, speed the rate of development for residential development in
Downtown, and support commercial development in the Downtown. The report also indicated that the
100% residential development would remain compatible with the commercial development goals by
Housing & ResidentiaL Lands Policy Review: 15
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
limiting the areas in which pure'residentiat uses could be pursued and thereby avoiding any adverse
impact on commercial development.
Recommendations:
That the District change the zoning of selected areas to zones that allow apartment units (or a mix
of townhouses and apartments)
That the District use the recommendations from the Commercial Lands Study regarding lands that
are not well suited to Commercial for redesignation to residential as a guide for increasing
residential capacity in the Downtown area
One of the issues identified by developers is zoning for seniors housing. Currently, certain types of
seniors housing are only allowed in institutional rather than residential zones. While not a significant
issue at present since the market for seniors housing currently appears to be satisfied. However, this
will become more significant as the popuLation ages. Also, since seniors have reduced mobility, the
location of seniors' housing in proximity to services and good public transportation is important.
Recommendation:
That the District review its zoning bylaw to allow seniors' housing in zones in non-institutional
zones in parts of the Town Centre and in other areas of the Urban Core Area that have a diversity
of services in close proximity
3.3 MONITORING LONG-TERM HOUSING MARKET TRENDS AND DEPLETION OF
REMAINING RESIDENTIAL CAPACITY
It is important for the District to monitor long-term housing trends, including monitoring the remaining
residential capacity of the existing designated urban areas in order to track when the capacity is
anticipated to be reached.
Recommendations:
For the District to maintain an urban residential capacity inventory (and consider expanding this to
include the rural capacity as well) and monitor when capacity is being approached for different
neighbourhoods and dwelling types.
For the District to monitor long-term housing market trends and conduct relevant housing needs
studies as necessary, including age-specific housing forecasts and housing occupancy demand
analysis.
3.4 CONDUCTING ADDITIONAL RESEARCH ON RESIDENTIAL INTENSIFICATION
The Housing and Residential Lands Policy Review looked at high-Level aspects of residential
intensification. it is recommended that additional research be conducted to focus the residential
intensification strategy for the District. Maple Ridge has a relatively new housing stock and only some
of it will be ready for redevelopment within the next 30 years in areas designated for intensification. it
is important for the District to understand how to encourage residential intensification and how to
phase residential intensification over time.
Recommendations:
That the District conduct additional research and develop a detailed strategy on intensification of
the Urban Core Area, including the development standards and other incentives needed to
encourage intensification in selected areas of the community.
That the District work with research agencies and governmental agencies, such as the GVRD, to
better understand successful residential intensification initiatives and strategies in areas that are
Housing Et Residentia.l Lands Policy Review: 16
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
in relatively newer urban areas (e.g. with single-detached developments built in the 1940s-1970s)
(e.g. Burnaby and Richmond).
3.5 MUNICIPAL INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS AND REVENUES TO SUPPORT LAND USE
VisIoN
The following provides recommendations to the District on both the cost and revenue side for the
provision of municipal infrastructure services. The overall objectives for the District are two-fold: 1)
to minimizemunicipal capital, replacement, operation and maintenance costs of servicing residential
development and to generate sufficient revenues from all sources to pay for the lifecycle costs of
municipal infrastructure and community services and maintain adequate reserve funds; and, 2) to
support and reinforce the preferred residential land use pattern for the District.
3.5.1 Minimizing Municipal Infrastructure Costs through Urban Form
Changes to land use affect a variety of municipaL expenditures and revenues. A key policy of the
District should be the residential intensification of the existing Urban Core Area, so long as the levels
of intensification do not trigger significant local infrastructure improvements. Maximizing use of the
existing infrastructure capacity of the Urban Core Area is the most cost effective way of
accommodating future population growth as it minimizes the increase in the provision of hard
infrastructure, such as roads. It will also help make use of existing facilities such as schools in the
Urban Core Area, which have already, or may, become underutilized due to the anticipated continued
trend of declining average household sizes and changing demographics in the municipality.
For any expansion of the Urban Area Boundary, the least costly servicing will be for areas that are
contiguous to the Urban Area Boundary or that already have some hard infrastructure in place, all
other factors being equal. Therefore, the District should avoid non-contiguous expansion of the Urban
Area.
3.5.2 Consider all Major Municipal Infrastructure Lifecycle Costs
The District of Maple Ridge should view infrastructure in the broad context that includes alt costs that
support the community or site specific development. In the analysis of the three residential growth
options, over 80% of the lifecycle costs for municipal infrastructure were for the community services
and administration for the residential growth options analyzed. Focusing only on cost savings related to
hard infrastructure is only a small part of the fiscal issue related to land use. The vast majority of the
municipal expenses are in the categories of administration and delivery of community services,
facilities and programs.
Within these expenditure categories, the capital cost, replacement, annual operating and maintenance
cost make up the lifecycle cost (e.g. over a 20 year period) for the above areas of expenditure. Using a
lifecycle cost approach will take into account the lifecycle or replacement cycle for the main areas of
expenditure. It is typically the replacement, operating and maintenance costs that are fully borne by
the municipality as well as some capital costs.
3.5.3 Neighbourhood and Subdivision Layout and Infrastructure Standards
The form or design of a community also has broad implications to municipal costs. The fiscal
performance (costs and revenues) of a development is greatly affected by the design and standards
Housing & Residenttai.. Lands Policy Review: -- 17
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
that are applied to a site. Two designs on the same site can yield significantly different outcomes.
Generalizations and assumptions about a particular form of development may be costly for the District.
The District may wish to adopt fiscal impact assessment as a mechanism for judging the impact of a
particular proposed development before adopting the Land use plan for an area. This would provide the
District with the opportunity to test the fiscal performance of the plan and to recommend adjustments
to the plan before it is adopted. A broad policy statement can be incorporated in the OCP to
acknowledge the benefits of this form of fiscal planning. This would reflect all types of development
and not merely residential development.
Recommendations:
Use lifecycte fiscal impact (capital cost, replacement, and annual operating and maintenance costs
of municipal infrastructure, community service, and administration) as a tool for assessing the
fiscal performance of major development proposals and greenfield site developments, including
the concept pLan for the proposed northern expansion area.
Proposed Policy: Maple Ridge will consider the use of lifecycte fiscal impact analysis of major
development and redevelopment proposals in and for the community.
3.5.4 Maintenance and Replacement of Infrastructure
At the time a land use decision is made and a land use plan is implemented through the development
process, the municipality assumes the cost of supporting that plan in perpetuity. A fiscal strategy
should include adequate reserve funds to support the on-going and significant cost of replacement of
aging infrastructure and community facilities. A rough estimate of the replacement costs of hard
infrastructure and civic buildings over a 20 year period for the Urban Core Area and the northern
expansion areas is $75 to $100 milLion (excludes Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver Valley). Many
municipalities have not been adequately maintaining and replacing their infrastructure and the
avoidance of this may be costLy over the long run to the District.
One way of ensuring that sufficient funds are available for replacement is to establish an Infrastructure
Replacement Reserve Fund. The District already has a general reserve fund. However, it is beneficial to
set aside a separate account that deals solely with infrastructure replacement.
Recommendation:
Establish a separate Municipal Infrastructure Replacement Reserve Fund to pay for the replacement
of aging municipal infrastructure.
3.5.5 Achieving Financial Sustainability
The District should also consider revenue generation when considering costs, since proposed changes in
Land use is the genesis of all municipal expenses and revenues. The District needs to generate
sufficient revenues from all sources to pay for the Lifecycle costs of municipal infrastructure and
community services and maintain adequate reserve funds. Lifecycle costs include the municipality's
share of capital, replacement, operating and maintenance. This applies to all areas of expenditure
such as: the cost of administration, facilities and programs, deep infrastructure and surface
infrastructure.
The estimated cost to replace aging infrastructure in Canadian municipalities is $57 billion. In the
analysis completed for this study it was calculated that the total expenditure for hard infrastructure
was 17% of the total expenditure over 20 years.
Housing Et Residential. Lands Policy Review: 18
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
The fundamental question for the District is: Will there be sufficient revenues generated from the
additional residential units and other Land development in the Urban Core Area and the expansion area
to cover the Long-term infrastructure costs, community facilities and programs?
By completing a fiscal anaLysis before making a decision about a Land use proposal or Land use policy,
the District will increase fiscal performance from Land uses and be more successful at generating
revenuesto support infrastructure and community services. It is also important to know if there will be
a 'net gain' or 'net Loss' resulting from the proposed land uses in the OCP for all residential,
commercial, industrial, and institutional uses.
The revenues will be an important determining factor on the ability of the District to maintain or
increase the level of service for infrastructure in the District. The level of service may decrease if
there are insufficient revenues generated from the proposed land uses in the OCP.
Recommendation:
That the District conduct the following Lifecycle fiscal analysis for costs and revenues for the
District for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, and other land uses for: a) baseline
analysis of the current costs and revenues of the District; and b) analysis of at build-out costs and
revenues based on the adopted/updated Official Community Plan.
3.6 RESTRUCTURING OF DEVELOPMENT COST CHARGES AND RECURRING REVENUES
Development cost charges can be used to reinforce the District's desired Land use vision and settlement
pattern. The District of Maple Ridge currently has an adopted bylaw that allows it to impose
development cost charges on development for off-site capital costs. -
The current bylaw includes costs for sewage facilities, storm sewer facilities, water facilities, highway
facilities and public open space. Differential fees are assessed in the Urban Area, Downtown Core Area,
and Rural Area.
The current Urban Area definition in the bylaw is too generalized and includes both older
neighbourhoods, such as Port Haney and West and East Hammond, along with newer neighbourhoods or
greenfield sites such as Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver Valley. By distinguishing the older areas from
the newer and greenfield areas will allow differential fees to be applied to encourage intensification of
the Urban Core Area.
Recommendation:
That the District designate the Urban Core Area as a separate geographic area from Albion,
Cottonwood, and SiLver Valley in the Development Cost Charge bylaw.
That rates for Development Cost Charges be recalculated for the Urban Core Area and for the
combined areas of Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver Valley and included in the updated Development
Cost Charge bylaw.
Development cost charges help finance up front capital expenses borne by the municipality. The
development cost charges also only form a small portion of the District's revenue stream. It is
recommended that the District also focus on recurring revenues from land use including:
• rates for property tax assessments,
• sewer and water charges,
• recreational user fees,
• grants in lieu of taxes,
• investment income,
• and other recurring revenues.
Housing a ResidentiL Lands Policy Review: 19
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
The structuring of these recurring revenue streams as well as Land use choices can be empLoyed to
reinforce the District's desired Land use vision and settlement pattern and encourage intensification of
the existing Urban Core Area.
Recommendation:
15. That the District conduct a baseline analysis of all revenues in relation to Lifec,'cLe costs and then
pursue an adjustment to the Land use mix and land use rates as ways of reinforcing the desired Land
use objectives.
Housing & Residentiai Lands Policy Review: 20
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
p
GLOSSARY
Items denoted with a diamond (.) are from the District's 1996 Official Community Plan.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING: The generally accepted definition of affordability is for a household to pay no
more than 30 percent of its annual income on housing. Families who pay more than 30 percent of their
income for housing are considered cost burdened and may have difficulty affording food, clothing,
transportation and other necessities.
ASSISTED LIVING: Housing for seniors living in their own private units. Tenants access common
facilities and services available in supportive housing units, but can also access a wide range of services
as needed, including bathing and dressing, transportation, and nursing care.
CLUSTERED HOUSING: Consolidated residential development, generally sited on smaller lots, with
reduced rights of way and building setbacks. The reduced area of private ownership is replaced by
increased common green spaces or open spaces for community uses.
CO-HOUSING: This form of housing combines the autonomy of private dwellings with the advantages of
shared resources and community living. Residents commonly participate in the planning, design, and
ongoing management and maintenance of their community.
COMPACT HOUSING: Small lot single family housing.
COMPLETE COMMUNITY.: A complete community has a balance in the distribution of jobs and
housing, a wide choice of affordable housing, better distribution of public services, and effective
transportation service.
COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT ZONING: enables local government to negotiate with developers
about large, complex, multi-use sites and develop customized zoning regulations. The local
government will be able to increase density and relax building envelopes in return for affordable
housing or amenities such as day care centres.
DENSITY BONUSING: A toot used by local governments to increase the allowable density on a site (i.e.
floor area ratio or units per hectare) in return for the provision of affordable housing, special needs
housing, environmental design practices, or other amenities that benefit the community.
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AREAS: DPAs are authorised under the Municipal Act, and used during the
permitting process. In terms of buildings, DPAs can control the form and character of commercial,
industrial, or multi.family development.
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: The rules governing the development of land, buildings, such as zoning
and subdivision by-laws, engineering standards, building codes, and development cost charge
regulations.
FLEX HOUSING: Flex housing, as defined by CMHC, is an approach to housing intended to provide a
maximum basic degree of accessibility, ease of use, functional and emergency safety, and adaptability
for a wide range of consumers and their needs.
GREEN ZONE: One of the four main objectives of the GVRD's Regional Growth Strategy is to "Protect
the Green Zone." The Green Zone encompasses the region's natural assets, including parks,
watersheds, ecologicially important areas and resource lands such as farmland. It also establishes a
long-term growth boundary.
Housing & Residential Lands Policy Review: 21
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
HOUSING AGREEMENTS: A legaLly enforceabLe means to ensure that the housing negotiated as part of a
density bonusing agreement or comprehensive development zoning agreement actually gets built and
maintained. Municipalities are empowered to Lease Land at below market rates in order to facilitate
the provision of affordable housing OR establish housing reserve funds for housing purposes, borrowing
for purposes of housing following a referendum, and enforcing standards of maintenance for rental
housing.
INC LUSIONARY ZONING: As a condition of a rezoning process, inclusiOnary zoning requires that
developers include specific amenities such as affordable, rental, or special needs housing.
INFILL HOUSING: An intensification strategy where existing housing units are Left and new housing units
are filled in around them.
SECONDARY SUITE: Separate self-contained dwelling unit with a cooking facility, Located in a single
family home.
SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING: Refers to a broad spectrum of peopLe and their particular housing needs,
including people with physical and mental disabilities, the hard to house, women in crisis, and the
elderly.
SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT•: Suburban residential development refers to housing that is
typically serviced with water but not sewer.
SUPPORTIVE HOUSING: Seniors live in their own private units within a complex/building that provides
shared social, recreationaL, and meal services as well as housekeeping and Laundry.
TOWN CENTRE - The area of the Maple Ridge Town Centre reflects the area as identified in the
Greater Vancouver Regional District's Livable Region Strategic Plan. It extends from approximately
124th Avenue, south to the Fraser River and 221st Street to Burnett Street. The Town Centre includes
the downtown core and the central business district. Note that the definition of the Town Centre in
this report differs from the definition in the 1999 Official Community Plan.
URBAN AREA - Areas within the Urban Area Boundary.
URBAN AREA BOUNDARY - A Line that clearly designates areas that are identified for urban uses from
areas that are identified for non-urban uses.
URBAN CONTAINMENT BOUNDARY: A legally defined Line separating areas of development from areas
designated for protection. This is a mechanism for growth management to guide planning in an area
and to prevent urban sprawl.
URBAN CORE AREA - The Urban Core Area consists of the urban portions of Maple Ridge west of the
Cottonwood Urban Area (approximately west of 232nd Street south of Dewdney Trunk Road and west of
234th Street north of Dewdney Trunk Road). It excludes Albion, Cottonwood, and Silver Valley and the
rural areas in the community. The Urban Core Area is a geographic area developed for the purpose of
the Housing and Residential Lands Policy Review by the consultant team.
URBAN RESERVE. - Urban reserve refers to Lands identified for future urban Level services and urban
housing.
URBAN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. - Urban residential development refers to housing that is
typically fully serviced (i.e. - sewer, water, roads, curb, gutter, sidewalk, streetlights) and on smaller
Lots in a more compact area (i.e. - higher density).
Housing a ResidentiaLands Policy Review: 22
Policy Recommendations (REVISED DRAFT NOVEMBER 2004)
p
• SENT BY FAX TO: (230) 387-611
November 8, 2004
70 1 The Honourable Geoff Plant
MUftC1MLTflI$ Attorney General and Minister
Responsible for Treaty Negotiations
P0 Box 9044, STN PROV GOVT
Victoria, BC, V8W 9N7
W5Sh.l1bri4cWiy
Rkhmand
Dear Minister Plant:
D,5ACotuni),a
Cda2W9
GDUMM RE: ADDITION TO TREATY SETrLEMNT LANDS
Pi29i.6 I am writing to express IJBCM's concern regarding the "Specified Lands"
approach proposed for additions to Treaty Settlement Land (TSL) at the
Tsawwassen treaty table and to clearly express our views in this regard.
DtNW00DIF This matter was reviewed by UBCM'S First Nations Relations Committee
at their November meeting.
t'ICUTIVI D1ICTO
UBCM has consistently lobbied for a consistent approach to the process
for adding land to Treaty Settlements Lands post-treaty. This approach
was reiteratedin our comparative analysis of the five 2003 Agreements
in Principle:
Municipal consgiit for land added to TSL that is within municipal
boundaries should be a consistent rejuiremetit in all (not Just
some) AlPs and final treaties, as should a provision stating that
regknal districts interests must be sought and considered when the land
is outside municipal boundaries."
We support the requirement for municipal consent as found in the AlPs
(other than Tsawwassen) where the consent required is without
qalification.
It is of concern to us that the province has not provided a policy based
explanation as to why a different approach involving "specified lands" is
being taken-at-the Tsawwassen treaty table. It appears that this approach
succeeds only in singling out one municipality and setting a precedent
with no apparent justification. We ask that the province's "specified
lands" approach for additions to TSLs presently being pursued at the
Tsawwassen treaty table be reconsidered and made consistent with the
other AlPs in British Columbia.
NOU 09 2004 16:51 •. 6e466e2271 PAGE. ei.
/2
With respect to regional district invo]vement in additions to Treaty Settlement Lands
post-treaty, I have attached, for your information, a resolution passed by the UBCM
membership at the 2004 Convention
Sincerely,
Ted Armstrong, Chair
First Nations Relations Committee
CC: Mayor Ralph Drew, Chair of the Lower Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee
Attachment
NOV 08 2004 16,: 51
646602271 PAGE. e2
t
I F
/
B88 REGIONAL DISTRICT INTERESTS IN ADDITIONS TO UBCM Executive
TREATY SETTLEMENT LANDS
WHEREAS four Agreements in Principle (AlP) negotiated with First Nations in 2003 by
the provincial and federal governments have been ratified by all three parties;
AND WHEREAS only one of these AlPs required the parties to take into account the
interests of the regional district in cases where a proposal is made to add land that is
within the regional district but outside a municipality to First Nations treaty settlement
lands post-treaty:
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that all treaties and Agreements in Principle negotiated
with First Nations by the provincial and federal governments require that, in addition
to the current requirements with respect to municipalities, regional districts and local
trust committees also be consulted and accommodated before lands are added to First
Nations treaty settlement land post-treaty.
ON MOTION, as amended, was ENDORSED
NOU 09 204 16:51 60466e2271 PGE.03
c
For Immediate Release November 15, 2004
Property Owners Not Protected By the Province -
Private Property to Become Treaty Settlement Lands
Burnaby, B.C. . . .The Lower Mainland Treat Advisory Committee (LMTAC) is warning Lower
Mainland municipalities that the Province's approach at the Tsawwassen Treaty Table regarding
additions to Treaty Settlement Lands (TSL) does not protect BC property owners. This comes
after years of the Province re-assuring British Colurnbians that privately owned fee-simple
property would not be part of treaty settlements.
Mayor Ralph Drew, LMTAC Chair, emphasized: "Additions to TSL must require the consent of
the Local Government before the land can be converted to Treaty Settlement Lands. In the case
of the Tsawwassen Treaty Table, unlike all other Agreements-in-PrinciIe in British Columbia,
municipal consent is not a prerequisite for the post-treaty conversion of fee-simple land to Treaty
Settlement Land.
Drew further stated: "In addition, the explicit designation of fee-simple lands that can be
converted to Treaty Settlement Lands is problematic. The very act of explicitly designating lands
is a form of pseudo land-use zoning that will distort the market and have a negative impact on all
properties within the designated area."
"This is not a 'willing buyer, willing seller' scenario, and is definitely not in the interest
of property-owners in British Columbia's communities," said Mayor Drew.
The Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) has lobbied for a consistent approach
throughout British Columbia regarding additions to Treaty Settlement Lands, including the
Tsawwassen Treaty Table.
LMTAC has also expressed serious concerns to Minister Plant regarding the compressed
timeline being pursued at the Tsawwassen Treaty Table that will preclude proper and adequate
consultation on many significant issues that are critically important for local government. With
4h.e--P1-ovi-nce targeting for a "hand-shake agreement" by mid-December, LMTAC has written
Minister Plant requesting that the timeline for finalizing the Final Agreement be extended to
ensure that local government is properly consulted.
"The negative impact of a hasty agreement at theTsawwassen Treaty Table will be long-lasting
and far-reaching, and the Provincial government must give serious consideration to the concerns
of local government and ensure that all due diligence is undertaken before concluding a Final
Agreement," said Drew.
- 30-
For further infoLmation: Contact Mayor Ralpb Drew, LMTAC Chair, at (604) 451-6160
or visit www.lmtac.bc.ca .
BACKGROUNDER
LOwer Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee (LMTAC)
The Lower Mainland Treaty Advisory Committee (LMTAC) participates in area treaty
negotiations as a member and advisor to the provincial treaty negotiation team throughout all six
stages of the BC Treaty Process. The purpose of the BC Treaty Process is to clarify issues of
uncertainty regarding land, resources and governance in BC by establishing "a new relationship
among the First Nations, Canada and British Columbia, based on mutual trust, respect and
understanding, through political negotiations." (The Report of the British Columbia Claims Task
Force, released in 1991).
Although local governments are not one of the three principle parties in the tripartite BC Treaty
Process, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Union of BC Municipalities
(UBCM) and the Province of BC, signed in 1993, recognized that local government constituted
"a unique and special government interest in negotiations". Subsequently, in 1994. Treat);
Advisory Committees (TACs) were formed.
In January 2003, a new MOU was signed to reconfirm the role of local governments as full
members of the provincial negotiating team in the negotiation of treaties and other agreements.
As part of the provincial negotiating team, LMTAC continues to provide advice and guidance
from a local perspective to five Lower Mainland area treaty tables: Tsawwassen, Tsleil-Waututh,
Katzie, Squarnish, and Musqueam.
There are 25 individual local government jurisdictions represented as members on LMTAC: 22
individual municipal and 3 regional district jurisdictions (Greater Vancouver, Squarnish Lillooet
and Sunshine Coast).
From the total membership, LMTAC elects table representatives to sit as part of the provincial
team at each of the 5 sets of negotiations, including the Tsawwassen treaty table. LMTAC table
representatives table activity to the wider LMTAC membership, and along with LMTAC staff,
work to address issues arising from the negotiations.
LMTAC acts a central information base for local governments and other interested organizations
and individuals requesting treaty and related Aboriginal information from a local and community
perspective.
As several LMTAC member jurisdictions may be located within a particular First Nation's
Statement of Intent Area (SOl), the outcome of treaty negotiations at one table will likely affect
many local governments. Accordingly, LMTAC's responsibility is to ensure that the broader
interests of all local governments located in the Lower Mainland area are represented in treaty
negotiations.
Given this regional responsibility, no individual municipality or regional district has direct
representation in its own right at any specific negotiating table.
LMTAC is the largest of the 17 local government Treaty Advisory Comininees (TACs) in the
Province, and represents a mainly urban population of over 2 million people.
For further information on LMTAC and its attivities, please visit: www.lmtac.bc.ca
&
p)
LMTA C coordinates and represents the interests of Local Governments, and through theni their
constituents, in defining and building relationships between First. Nations and other orders of government.