HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-06-26 Council Meeting Agenda and Reports.pdf
Page 1
District of Maple Ridge
COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
June 26, 2012
7:00 p.m.
Council Chamber
Note: This Agenda is also posted on the Municipal Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca
The purpose of a Council meeting is to enact powers given to Council by using bylaws
or resolutions. This is the final venue for debate of issues before voting on a bylaw or
resolution.
100 CALL TO ORDER
200 MOMENT OF REFLECTION
300 INTRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS
400 APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
500 ADOPTION AND RECEIPT OF MINUTES
501 Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of June 12, 2012
502 Minutes of the Public Hearing of June 19, 2012
503 Minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meetings of June 6(2),
7, 12 and 20, 2012
MEETING DECORUM
Council would like to remind all people present tonight that serious issues are
decided at Council meetings which affect many people’s lives. Therefore, we ask that
you act with the appropriate decorum that a Council Meeting deserves. Commentary
and conversations by the public are distracting. Should anyone disrupt the Council
Meeting in any way, the meeting will be stopped and that person’s beh avior will be
reprimanded.
Council Meeting Agenda
June 26, 2012
Council Chamber
Page 2 of 8
600 PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL
700 DELEGATIONS
800 UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Forwarded from the June 18, 2012 Council Workshop Meeting
801 North Albion Area Plan – Open House Summary
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending preparation of an Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw and a first reading report to advance the
proposed Albion Area Plan amendments.
802 Resident-Exemption and Resident-Only Parking Policy
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending the “Residential-
Exemption and Resident-Only Parking Policy” be endorsed.
803 Housing Action Plan Process
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that staff be authorized to
proceed with the preparation of a Housing Action Plan.
804 UBCM Resolutions
Consideration of resolutions proposed by Councillors Ashlie and Morden
900 CORRESPONDENCE
1000 BYLAWS
Note: Items 1001 to 1003 are from the Public Hearing of June 19, 2012
Bylaws for Third Reading
1001 Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6838-2011
A text amendment to allow hobby beekeeping
Third reading
Council Meeting Agenda
June 26, 2012
Council Chamber
Page 3 of 8
1002 RZ/066/07, 12355 McNutt Road
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6881-2011
To rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-2 (One Family
Suburban Residential) to permit future subdivision into two lots
Third reading
1003 2011-065-RZ, 24426 102 Avenue
1003.1 Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6843-2011
To amend Schedule “B” of the Official Community Plan to include the
property within Urban Area Boundary, to add to the Albion Area Plan, to
remove the “Starred Property” designation and to revise the conservation
area
Third reading
1003.2 Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6844-2011
To rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to R-3 (Special Amenity
Residential District) to permit the future subdivision of 30 residential lots
Third reading
Bylaws for Final Reading
1004 Maple Ridge Building Bylaw No. 6925-2012
To provide consistency with newly adopted provincial regulations)
Final reading
1005 Maple Ridge Recreation Facility Fees Amending Bylaw No. 6932-2012
To amend fees and charges for use of Parks & Leisure Services recreation
facilities
Final reading
COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1100 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
1100 Minutes – June 18, 2012
The following issues were presented at an earlier Committee of the Whole meeting with
the recommendations being brought to this meeting for Municipal Council consideration
and final approval. The Committee of the Whole meeting is open to the public and is held
in the Council Chamber at 1:00 p.m. on the Monday the week prior to this meeting.
Council Meeting Agenda
June 26, 2012
Council Chamber
Page 4 of 8
Public Works and Development Services
1101 2012-054-RZ, 23274 Silver Valley Road, RS-3 to RS-1b and RS-1
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6936-2012 to permit a subdivision of 8 lots be given
first reading and that the applicant provide further information as described
on Schedules A, C, F and G of the Development Procedures Bylaw No.
5879-1999, along with the information required for a Subdivision
application.
1102 2011-055-RZ, 11461 and 11475 236 Street, RS-3 to RM-1
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6832-2011 to adjust designated
conservation areas be given first and second reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing and that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6833-2011
to permit a 53 unit townhouse development be given second reading and
be forwarded to Public Hearing.
1103 2011-066-RZ, 26777 Dewdney Trunk Road, RS-3 to RS-2
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6934-2012 to amend a conservation
designation be given first and second reading and be forwarded to Public
Hearing and that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6841-2011 to
permit subdivision into two lots be given second reading and be forwarded
to Public Hearing.
1104 2011-050-RZ, 21165 River Road, RS-1 to RS-1b
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6846-2011 to permit a subdivision into seven lots be
given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
1105 2011-054-RZ, 22327 River Road and Roll #31399-0000-4, RS-1 to CRM
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6827-2011 to permit future construction of a four-
storey apartment building with 43 units be given second reading and be
forwarded to Public Hearing.
Council Meeting Agenda
June 26, 2012
Council Chamber
Page 5 of 8
1106 2012-005-RZ, 20528 Lougheed Highway, CS-1 to C-2
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6926-2012 to permit an existing commercial building
to be expanded and allow a broader range of commercial uses be given
second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
1107 2012-027-DVP, 24207 102 Avenue
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal 2012-027-DVP to vary road widths and
construction standards, minimum lot depth on lots fronting 102 Avenue
and reduction of side yard setbacks.
1108 2012-027-DP, 24207 102 Avenue
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal 2012-027-DP to permit development of 27
lots under the R-3 zone.
1109 Local Area Service – 11160 234A Street Paving
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that staff be authorized to
prepare a bylaw to establish a Local Area Service for 11160 234A Street.
1110 Excess Capacity/Extended Services Agreement LC 151/12, 124 Avenue
and 203 Street
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal Excess Capacity Latecomer Agreement LC
151/12.
1111 Award of Contract No. ITT-EN12-55, 122 Avenue Road and Walkability
Improvements (216 Street to 222 Street)
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Contract No. ITT-
EN12-55, 122 Avenue Road Improvements (216 Street to 222 Street) be
awarded to Imperial Paving Limited and that the Corporate Officer be
authorized to execute the contract.
Council Meeting Agenda
June 26, 2012
Council Chamber
Page 6 of 8
1112 Lava Room Dining and Lounge – Liquor License Application –
Entertainment Endorsement
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Council decline
comment on the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch Application for a
minor amendment to include Patron Participation Entertainment at the
Lava Room Dining and Lounge.
Financial and Corporate Services (including Fire and Police)
1131 2011 Annual Report and 2011 Statement of Financial Information*
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the 2011 Annual
Report be received and that the 2011 Statement of Financial Information
be approved.
*The Financial Information Act only requires certain pages of our financial
statements to be submitted. The full version of the 2011 Annual Report
can be found on the District’s website.
Community Development and Recreation Service
1151 Cedar Park Construction – Award of Tender
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the contract for the
construction of Cedar Park be awarded to Wilco Civil Inc. and that the
Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the agreement.
1152 Deer Fern Park Construction – Award of Tender
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the contract for the
construction of Deer Fern Park be awarded to Wilco Civil Inc. and that the
Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the agreement.
Correspondence
1171
Council Meeting Agenda
June 26, 2012
Council Chamber
Page 7 of 8
Other Issues
1181 Town Centre Incentive Program Partnering Agreements
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to execute Partnering Agreements for Building Permit
Numbers 11-120295, 12-109255 and 11-124858, 11-110037 and 12-
112565 to provide an upfront financial incentive as part of the Town
Centre Investment Incentive Program.
1200 STAFF REPORTS
1300 RELEASE OF ITEMS FROM CLOSED COUNCIL
1400 MAYOR’S REPORT
1500 COUNCILLORS’ REPORTS
1600 OTHER MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT
1700 NOTICES OF MOTION AND MATTERS FOR FUTURE MEETING
1800 QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
Council Meeting Agenda
June 26, 2012
Council Chamber
Page 8 of 8
1900 ADJOURNMENT
CChheecckkeedd bbyy::””oorriiggiinnaall ssiiggnneedd bbyy CC.. MMaarrlloo””
DDaattee:: 22001122//0066//2211________
QUESTION PERIOD
The purpose of the Question Period is to provide the public with an opportunity to
ask questions of Council on items that are of concern to them, with the exception of
Public Hearing by-laws which have not yet reached conclusion.
Council will not tolerate any derogatory remarks directed at Council or staff
members.
Each person will be permitted 2 minutes to ask their question (a second
opportunity is permitted if no one else is sitting in the chairs in front of the podium).
Questions must be directed to the Chair of the meeting and not to individual
members of Council. The total Question Period is limited to 15 minutes.
Council reserves the right to defer responding to a question in order to obtain the
information required to provide a complete and accurate response.
Other opportunities are available to address Council including public hearings,
delegations and community forum. The public may also make their views known to
Council by writing or via email and by attending open houses, workshops and
information meetings. Serving on an Advisory Committee is an excellent way to
have a voice in the future of this community.
For more information on these opportunities contact:
Clerk’s Department at 604-463-5221 or clerks@mapleridge.ca.
Mayor and Council at mayorandcouncil@mapleridge.ca.
District of Maple Ridge
COUNCIL MEETING
June 12, 2012
The Minutes of the Municipal Council Meeting held on June 12, 2012 at 7:00 p.m. in
the Council Chamber of the Municipal Hall, 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, British
Columbia for the purpose of transacting regular Municipal business.
PRESENT
Elected Officials Appointed Staff
Mayor E. Daykin J. Rule, Chief Administrative Officer
Councillor C. Ashlie K. Swift, General Manager of Community Development,
Councillor C. Bell Parks and Recreation Services
Councillor J. Dueck F. Quinn, General Manager Public Works and Development
Councillor A. Hogarth Services
Councillor B. Masse C. Carter, Director of Planning
Councillor M. Morden C. Marlo, Manager of Legislative Services
A. Gaunt, Confidential Secretary
Other Staff as Required
S. Cote-Rolvink, Manager of Inspection Services
Note: These Minutes are also posted on the Municipal Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca
The meeting was filmed by Shaw Communications Inc.
100 CALL TO ORDER
200 MOMENT OF REFLECTION
300 INTRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS
400 APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was approved with the following revision:
Item 602 will be dealt with following item 703 501
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 2 of 15
500 ADOPTION AND RECEIPT OF MINUTES
501 Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of May 22, 2012
R/2012-253 501
Minutes
Regular Council It was moved and seconded
May 22, 2012
That the minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of May 22,
2012 be adopted as circulated
CARRIED
502 Minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meetings of May 28,
2012
R/2012-254 503
Minutes
Development Agmt It was moved and seconded
Committee
That the minutes of the Development Agreements Committee
Meetings of May 28, 2012 be received.
CARRIED
600 PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL
Note: Item 601 was dealt with following Item 703
601 Maple Ridge-Pit Meadows Bicycle Advisory Committee Update
Alex Pope, Chair
Mr. Pope gave a PowerPoint presentation which outlined the mandate of
the Bicycle Advisory Committee, highlighted accomplishments of the
committee in 2011 and detailed activities worked on and planned for in
2012. He provided a map illustrating current cycling infrastructure in
Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows and showed proposed infrastructure to be
used in a transportation plan currently being worked on.
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 3 of 15
602 Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows Municipal Advisory Committee for Accessibility
Issues Update
Kevin Priebe, Co-Vice Chair
Joylene MacBurnie, Co-Vice Chair
Ms. MacBurnie and Mr. Priebe gave a PowerPoint presentation which
provided a background and information on the structure of the committee,
spoke to its mandate, the purpose of the overview and the history and
successes of the committee over the years. The presentation highlighted
ongoing and 2012 initiatives.
700 DELEGATIONS
701 SAM (Sales and Marketing) Award
Award for Portrait Homes Subdivision Developments in Silver Ridge
Rob Grimm, Portrait Homes
Mr. Grimm spoke to the homes built in Silver Ridge by Portrait Homes and
provided information on the SAM Award received by the company for the
Silver Ridge development as the best residential development in Canada in
2008 and 2011. He presented the award to Council.
702 Our Neighbourhoods Group
To address development and the impact that it is having on the two main
growth centres of Albion and Silver Valley
Craig Ruthven
Mr. Ruthven provided a PowerPoint presentation speaking to the initiative
of the “Our Neighbourhoods Group” pertaining to West Coast Urban Forests
and methods of integrating neighbourhoods into natural surroundings.
703 Metro Vancouver Feast of Fields
A gourmet wandering harvest festival - FarmFolkCityFolk’s annual
fundraising event to be held at the 2012 Host Farm of Golden Ears
Cheesecrafters
Dana Reinhardt, Metro Vancouver Feast of Fields Coordinator
Ms. Reinhardt gave a PowerPoint presentation providing information on the
Feast of Fields event. She introduced FarmFolkCityFolk and outlined the
work done by the group. She provided information on distribution of funds
raised by the Feast of Fields fundraiser, highlighted programs hosted by the
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 4 of 15
group and spoke to what an event such as the Feast of Fields can bring to
the community it is held in.
800 UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Forwarded from the June 4, 2012 Committee of the Whole Meeting
801 SmartCentres – Albion Flats Proposal
Discussion of proposal presented by SmartCentres and consideration of a
resolution to direct staff to enter into discussions with SmartCentres
Mayor Daykin addressed the resolution pertaining to the proposal by
SmartCentres.
R/2012-255
SmartCentres
Albion Flats It was moved and seconded
Proposal
That staff be directed to enter into discussions with
SmartCentres pertaining to the proposal for Albion Flats as
presented at the June 4, 2012 Committee of the Whole
Meeting.
CARRIED
900 CORRESPONDENCE – Nil
1000 BYLAWS
Bylaws for Final Reading
1001 RZ/075/10, 10455, 10469 and 10481 245B Street
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6762-2010
To rezone from RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to RS-1b (One
Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) to allow for subdivision into 11
single family lots
Final reading
R/2012-256
RZ/075/10
BL No. 6762-2010 It was moved and seconded
Final reading
That Bylaw No. 6762-2010 be adopted.
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 5 of 15
CARRIED
COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1100 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Minutes – June 4, 2012
R/2012-257
Minutes
COW It was moved and seconded
June 4, 2012
That the minutes of the Committee of the Whole Meeting of
June 4, 2012 be received.
CARRIED
Public Works and Development Services
1101 2012-049-RZ, 12420 269 Street, A-2 to RS-2
Staff report dated June 4, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6930-2012 to permit the subdivision of single family
residential lots be given first reading and that the applicant provide further
information as described on Schedules B, F and G of the Development
Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, along with information required for a
Subdivision application.
R/2012-258
2012-049-RZ
BL No. 6930-2012 It was moved and seconded
First reading
That Bylaw No. 6930-2012 be given first reading; and
That the applicant provide further information as described on
Schedules B, F and G of the Development Procedures Bylaw
No. 5879-1999, along with the information required for a
Subdivision application.
CARRIED
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 6 of 15
1102 2012-052-RZ, Text Amendment to CS-1 Zone
Staff report dated June 4, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6931-2012 to permit the operation of a music store in
the town centre be given first reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
The Manager of Inspection Services advised on proposed changes to the
building in relation to the Building Code.
R/2012-259
2012-052-RZ
BL No. 6931-2012 It was moved and seconded
Text Amendment
That Bylaw No. 6931-2012 be given first reading and be
forwarded to Public Hearing.
CARRIED
1103 2011-015-RZ, 11959 203 Street, CS-1 to C-2
Staff report dated June 4, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6933-2012 to permit apartment use be given first and
second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing and that Maple Ridge
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6801-2011 to permit construction of a two-
storey commercial and residential building be given second reading and be
forwarded to Public Hearing.
R/2012-260
2011-015-RZ
BL No. 6933-2011 It was moved and seconded
First, second, PH
BL No. 6801-2011
Second reading, PH
1. That Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6933 - 2012
be given First and Second Reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing; and
2. That Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6801 - 2011
be given Second Reading and be forwarded to Public
Hearing; and
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 7 of 15
3. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to
Final Reading.
i. Approval from the Ministry of Transportation and
Infrastructure;
ii. A Statutory Right-of-Way plan and agreement must
be registered at the Land Title Office for storm sewer;
iii. A Reciprocal Cross Access plan and agreement must
be registered at the Land Title Office;
iv. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a
Professional Engineer advising whether there is any
evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there
is evidence, a site profile pursuant to the Waste
Management Act must be provided in accordance
with the regulations;
v. Registration of a Restrictive Covenant protecting the
Visitor Parking;
vi. Registration of a Restrictive Covenant protecting the
Resident Parking;
vii. Registration of a Restrictive Covenant securing four
(4) parking spots on the adjacent property; and
viii. Registration of a Housing Agreement as a Restrictive
Covenant to ensure residential units remain as rental
units.
CARRIED
1104 2011-082-RZ, 10150 and 10190 Jackson Road, RS-3 and M-2 to R-1 and
RS-1b
Staff report dated June 4, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6928-2012 to designate land use
from Low/Medium Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and
Conservation in the Albion Area plan be given first and second reading and
be forwarded to Public Hearing and that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw
No. 6861-2011 to permit future subdivision into approximately 45 single
family lots be given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
R/2012-261
2011-082-RZ
BL No. 6928-2012 It was moved and seconded
First, second, PH
BL No. 6861-2011
Second
1. That in accordance with Section 879 of the Local
Government Act opportunity for early and on-going
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 8 of 15
consultation has been provided by way of posting Maple
Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6928-
2012 on the municipal website and requiring that the
applicant host a Development Information Meeting, and
Council considers it unnecessary to provide any further
consultation opportunities, except by way of holding a
Public Hearing on the bylaw;
2. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6928-2012 be considered in conjunction with
the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management
Plan;
3. That it be confirmed that Maple Ridge Official Community
Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6928-2012 is consistent with
the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management
Plan;
4. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6928-2012 be given First and Second Readings
and be forwarded to Public Hearing;
5. That Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6861 -2011
be given Second Reading and be forwarded to Public
Hearing; and,
6. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to
Final Reading:
i. Approval from the Ministry of Transportation and
Infrastructure;
ii. Amendment to Schedule "A" & “C” of the Official
Community Plan;
iii. Registration of a geotechnical report as a Restrictive
Covenant which addresses the suitability of the site
for the proposed development;
iv. Road and park dedication as required;
v. Consolidation of the development site;
vi. Purchase of the eastern portion of Lot B of BCP
46878 (10190 Jackson Road) and consolidation of
western portion with Jackson Farm Park; and,
vii. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a
Professional Engineer advising whether there is any
evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there
is evidence, a site profile pursuant to the Waste
Management Act must be provided in accordance
with the regulations.
CARRIED
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 9 of 15
1105 RZ/024/09, 25467 Bosonworth Avenue, RS-3 to RS-2
Staff report dated June 4, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6867-2011 to permit a future subdivision of 4 lots be
given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
The Director of Planning advised on road access and grades on the site.
R/2012-262
RZ/024/09
BL No. 6867-2011 It was moved and seconded
Second reading, PH
1. That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6867-2011 be given
Second Reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing; and
2. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to
Final Reading.
i. Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a
Restrictive Covenant and receipt of the deposit of
security as outlined in the Agreement;
ii. Amendment to Schedule "B" of the Official
Community Plan;
iii. Road dedication as required;
iv. Registration of a geotechnical report as a Restrictive
Covenant at the Land Title Office which addresses
the suitability of the site for the proposed
development;
v. Removal of the existing buildings that will not comply
with future lot lines;
vi. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a
Professional Engineer advising whether there is any
evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there
is evidence, a site profile pursuant to the Waste
Management Act must be provided in accordance
with the regulations.
CARRIED
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 10 of 15
1106 2012-059-DP, Heritage Alteration Permit, Billy Miner Pub Heritage Site,
22355 River Road
Staff report dated June 4, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal the Heritage Alteration Permit to allow for a
coffee shop/restaurant in the Port Haney Post Office building at property
located at 22355 River Road.
R/2012-263
2012-059-DP
Heritage Alteration It was moved and seconded
Permit
Sign and seal
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal the
Heritage Alteration Permit respecting property located at
22355 River Road.
CARRIED
1107 DVP/075/10, 10455 and 10481 245B Street
Staff report dated June 4, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal DVP/075/10 to vary the minimum lot width
for the lots fronting 245 Street.
R/2012-264
DVP/075/10
Sign and seal It was moved and seconded
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal
DVP/075/10 respecting properties located at 10455 and
10481 245B Street.
CARRIED
1108 2012-019-DP/DVP, 11378 Kingston Street
Staff report dated June 4, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal 2012-019-DVP to vary setbacks facing 113B
Avenue and Kingston Street and that the Corporate Officer be authorized to
sign and seal 2012-019-DP to permit a proposed multi-tenant industrial
building in the M-3 (Business Park) zone.
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 11 of 15
R/2012-265
2012-019-DP/DVP
Sign and seal It was moved and seconded
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal
2012/DVP/019 respecting property located at 11378
Kingston Street; and further
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal
2012/DP/019 respecting property located at 11378 Kingston
Street.
CARRIED
1109 Maple Ridge Building Bylaw
Staff report dated June 4, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Building
Bylaw No. 6925-2012 be given first, second and third readings.
The Manager of Inspection Services advised on a fee structure review and
on provisional occupancy permits.
R/2012-266
BL No. 6925-2012
Three readings It was moved and seconded
That Bylaw No. 6925-2012 be given first, second and third
readings.
CARRIED
1110 Greater Vancouver Water District (GVWD) Drinking Water Management Plan
Staff report dated June 4, 2012 recommending that the Greater Vancouver
Water District’s Drinking Water Management Plan be endorsed and that
implementations of the plan be reviewed through the District’s annual
Business Planning process.
R/2012-267
Drinking Water
Management Plan It was moved and seconded
Endorse
That the Greater Vancouver Water District’s Drinking Water
Management Plan be endorsed; and
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 12 of 15
That the implementation of appropriate municipal actions in
support of the Drinking Water Management Plan be subject to
review through the District’s annual Business Planning
process.
CARRIED
1111 Drinking Water Quality Report 2011
Staff report dated June 4, 2012 providing information on the regulatory
framework and water quality monitoring data for 2011.
For information only
No resolution required
Financial and Corporate Services (including Fire and Police) – Nil
Community Development and Recreation Service
1151 Fees and Charges Bylaw Amendment
Staff report dated June 4, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge
Recreation Facility Fees Amending Bylaw No. 6932-2012 be given first,
second and third reading.
R/2012-268
BL No. 6932-2012
Three readings It was moved and seconded
That Bylaw No. 6932-2012 be given first, second and third
reading.
CARRIED
Correspondence – Nil
Other Committee Issues – Nil
1200 STAFF REPORTS – Nil
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 13 of 15
1300 RELEASE OF ITEMS FROM CLOSED COUNCIL
From the June 4, 2012 Closed Council Meeting
Medical Marijuana Grow-ops and Dispensaries
• Direction to staff to work with legal counsel to draft the appropriate
bylaw amendments with respect to growing medicinal marijuana in the
District.
1400 MAYOR’S REPORT
Mayor Daykin attended a number of events celebrating youth involvement
in the community. He attended the graduation ceremony for Maple Ridge
Secondary School, the kickoff for the Haney Neptunes’ swim meet and the
Ridge Meadows RCMP 2nd Annual Police Fair.
1500 COUNCILLORS’ REPORTS
Councillor Morden
Councillor Morden attended the Rotary Club’s Annual Fundraiser Golf
Tournament, the opening of the Maple Ridge Hospital Information Centre,
Pitt Meadows Day and the Pitt Meadows Airport Annual General Meeting.
He participated in a fundraising event for the Food Bank held at Save On
Foods. Councillor Morden also attended meetings of the Salvation Army
Board, the Maple Ridge Community Heritage Commission and the
Downtown Maple Ridge Business Improvement Association. He advocated
for a new initiative being launched via the Business Improvement
Association, Community Policing and the RCMP encouraging the public and
businesses to report all crime.
Councillor Hogarth
Councillor Hogarth attended a number of events including the Sea Cadets
event and the graduation ceremony for Maple Ridge Secondary School. He
reminded residents of the Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows Municipal Advisory
Committee on Accessibility Issues Annual Accessibility Awards.
Councillor Bell
Councillor Bell attended a Show and Shine Fundraiser for Maple Ridge
Secondary Schools grads, an ICBC feedback forum on policies for low risk
and high risk drivers and a meeting of the Fraser Valley Regional Library.
She advised on an upcoming Ridge Meadows Recycling Society’s campaign
to find the next generation of recyclers.
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 14 of 15
Councillor Ashlie
Councillor Ashlie attended the Maple Ridge Secondary School graduation
ceremony, the first annual race held for the Caring Place to raise money for
Sonya’s Cradle and a meeting of the Maple Ridge Agricultural Advisory
Committee. She also attended an update on the Alouette Heights
supportive housing project hosted by the Alouette Home Start Society. She
advised that residents can nominate a deserving senior for the Queen’s
Jubilee Medal through the office of Randy Kamp.
Councillor Dueck
Councillor Dueck recognized Parks staff for work done for the Volunteer
Appreciation event. She also thanked District Finance Department staff for
their work during tax season.
Councillor Masse
Councillor Masse attended the Ridge Canoe and Kayak Open House, the
Ridge Meadows Hospital opening of the Health Information Centre and
meetings of the Maple Ridge Agricultural Advisory Committee and the
Maple Ridge Social Planning Advisory Committee. He also attended an
update from the Alouette Home Start Society on the supported housing
facility.
Mayor Daykin spoke to the passing of Mr. David Alexander, whom he
recognized as an interesting gentleman with a unique place in the history of
Maple Ridge.
1600 OTHER MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT – Nil
1700 NOTICES OF MOTION AND MATTERS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS – Nil
1800 QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
Andy Cleven – 12664 235 Street
Mr. Cleven expressed concern with a proposal for an open pit gravel mine
in the Yennadon area behind his property. He asked how the process for
such a mine could have moved forward to the point where it may go to the
Agricultural Land Commission and/or to Council. He asked if the process
has moved to the point of possibility of a gravel pit.
Mayor Daykin advised that the District has only received a Notice of Intent
filed with the Agricultural Land Commission and that no conversations have
been held with the applicant.
Council Minutes
June 12, 2012
Page 15 of 15
The General Manager Public Works and Development Services confirmed
that staff have only received copies of correspondence between the
property owner and Agricultural Land Commission and have not spoken
with applicant.
Mayor Daykin reiterated that there have been no decisions made on this
application and asked General Manager of Public Works and Development
Services to meet with Mr. Cleven to explain the process.
1900 ADJOURNMENT – 9:08 p.m.
_______________________________
E. Daykin, Mayor
Certified Correct
___________________________________
C. Marlo, Corporate Officer
District of Maple Ridge
PUBLIC HEARING
June 19, 2012
The Minutes of the Public Hearing held in the Council Chamber of the Municipal Hall, 11995
Haney Place, Maple Ridge, British Columbia on June 19, 2012 at 7:00 p.m.
____________________________________________________________________________
PRESENT
Elected Officials Appointed Staff
Mayor E. Daykin F. Quinn, Acting Chief Administrative Officer
Councillor C. Ashlie C. Marlo, Manager of Legislative Services
Councillor C. Bell C. Carter, Director of Planning
Councillor J. Dueck C. Goddard, Manager of Development and Environmental
Councillor A. Hogarth Services
Councillor B. Masse A. Gaunt, Confidential Secretary
Councillor M. Morden D. Hall, Planner
______________________________________________________________________________
Mayor Daykin called the meeting to order. The Manager of Legislative Services explained the
procedure and rules of order of the Public Hearing and advised that the bylaws will be
considered further at the next Council Meeting on June 26, 2012.
The Mayor then called upon the Manager of Development and Environmental Services to
present the following items on the agenda:
1)
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING BYLAW NO. 6838-2011
PURPOSE: To Amend the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985 as follows:
a)PART 2 INTERPRETATION, is amended by the addition of the following
definition in correct alphabetical order:
“Hobby Beekeeping use means the keeping, owning, or maintaining of
up to two (2) bee hives on a residential property occupied by the
beekeeper or as an educational use in an institutional setting”.
b)PART 4, GENERAL REGULATIONS, SECTION 402 REGULATIONS FOR
PERMITTED USES OF LAND, BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES is amended by
the addition of the following subsection in correct numerical order:
(12) Hobby Beekeeping Use 502
Public Hearing Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 2 of 9
Where permitted a Hobby Beekeeping use is subject to the following
provisions:
a) A maximum of two (2) hives per property shall be permitted;
b) Bee Hives for a Hobby Beekeeper use shall be located to the rear of
the principal building on the lot:
c) Hives must:
(i) be raised a minimum of 2.5 metres above grade; or
(ii) be behind a solid fence or hedge a minimum of 2.0 metres in
height located parallel to an adjacent property line and
extending a minimum of 6.0 metres horizontally beyond the
hive in either direction,
(iii) be oriented with the hive entrance facing towards the centre of
the property.
c) PART 6, RESIDENTIAL ZONES, Section 601, Subsection A. PERMITTED
USES OF LAND, BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES is amended by the addition
of the following after Detached Garden Suite Use
“Hobby Beekeeping Use RS-1 RS-1a RS-1b RS-1c RS-1d RS-2 RS-3 SRS”
(subject to Section 402)
The Manager of Legislative Services advised that correspondence expressing support for the
application was received from Patrice Batch.
The Planner gave a power point presentation providing the following information:
Application Information
Neighbourhood Context
OCP Context
Submitted Information
Project Details
Mathew Laity
Mr. Laity spoke in favour of the application.
There being no further comment, the Mayor declared this item dealt with.
Public Hearing Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 3 of 9
2) RZ/066/07
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6881-2011
Legal: Lot 6, Section 20, Township 15, New Westminster District, Plan 12094
Location: 12355 McNutt Road
From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
To: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Purpose: To permit future subdivision into two lots.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a power point presentation
providing the following information:
Application Information
Neighbourhood Context
OCP Context
Submitted Information
Project Details
There being no comment, the Mayor declared this item dealt with.
3a) 2011-065-RZ
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6843-2011
Legal: Lot A, Section 3, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan 8296
Location: 24426 102 Avenue
Purpose: To amend Schedule “B” of the Official Community Plan to include the
property within Urban Area Boundary, to add to the Albion Area Plan,
and to remove the “Starred Property” designation
Purpose: To amend Schedule “B” of the Official Community Plan
From: Medium Density Residential
To: Conservation
Purpose: To amend Schedule “C” of the Official Community Plan to add to
Conservation
Public Hearing Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 4 of 9
3b) 2011-065-RZ
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6844-2011
Legal: Lot A, Section 3, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan 8296
Location: 24426 102 Avenue
From: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
To: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Purpose: To permit the future subdivision of 30 residential lots.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a power point presentation
providing the following information:
Application Information
Neighbourhood Context
OCP Context
Site Characteristics
Proposed Subdivision Plan
Terms and Conditions
Craig Speirs
Mr. Speirs spoke in opposition to the application. He advocated for more small lot
agricultural properties and asked that the property be left with its present designation. He
expressed concern that the proposal has been brought forward too soon and does too little
for the area.
Dave Callen
Mr. Callen is not in favour of the application. He expressed concern over the number of non-
legal secondary suites in the existing neighbourhood and the lack of bylaw enforcement. He
felt that an additional 30 houses will add to the illegal secondary suite issue as well as
increase the congestion in the area. He requested that members of Council visit the area in
order to understand the amount of congestion.
Mr. Callen stated that the R-3 zone does not work and that the Albion area was an
experiment which does not work. He requested that the property be left an open area as
part of Jackson Farm or that the size of lots be increased to allow for legal secondary suites.
Public Hearing Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 5 of 9
Stuart Pledge
Mr. Pledge is opposed to the application. He encouraged Council to walk around the
Jackson Farm property. He provided a slide with an overhead view of Jackson Farm and the
proposed development site. He expressed concern with the proposal to redevelop a part of
the Jackson Farm park area which borders the proposed application as a bioswale and the
impact on the existing area of the park. He did not feel that public land should be used to
mitigate stormwater issues for the proposed development and cited possible negative
effects on the park area resulting from a bioswale.
Beryl Eales
Ms. Eales spoke in opposition to the application. She presented a petition from the Kanaka
Coffee Shop Community against the development. She read from a cover letter attached to
the petition which expressed the need for amenities, services and a school prior to further
development. Concern was also put forward pertaining to the proposed bioswale to be built
on the Jackson Farm property. Ms. Eales read comments from the pet ition many of which
spoke against further housing developments in the area and requested more services for
the existing ones.
Craig Ruthven
Mr. Ruthven questioned the use of District land for drainage purposes. He expressed
concern with the change in zoning of the existing property which he felt will create drainage
issues where there currently are none. Mr. Ruthven stated that community perception was
that Mayor and Council favoured developers over the general public and asked that the use
of District owned land for drainage be justified.
He requested that Council visit the site and expressed concern over the negative impact of
the bioswale as well as the planting of larger conifers on the existing view to the west of the
Jackson Farm park property.
Elizabeth Taylor
Ms. Taylor is not in favour of the application. She stated that the District owned land was
hard fought for by the community and should remain parkland. She expressed that the
Albion area is not a great area to live in due to numerous unaddressed issues. She
expressed concern that more development is being carried out and that existing issues are
not being solved. She is particularly concerned with the lack of services such as schools
and a community hall and the continued development despite this. She also expressed
concern relating to a District owned property which is attracting bears. She asked that
Council take another look at the proposal and that the Jackson Farm property not be used
for the purpose of drainage and that the other portion of the land not be used for houses.
Bernice Rolls
Ms. Rolls read a poem. She expressed concern that Jackson Farm and the adjoining
property are viewed only for residential development and that the historical values
representing the farms and homesteads and the unique viewscapes of the Jackson Farm
property are not being considered. She also expressed concern with continued development
in the area without the necessary infrastructure and provision of services. She stated that
Public Hearing Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 6 of 9
Council appeared to be blind to the benefits of connecting with nature. Ms. Rolls was
particularly concerned with the encroachment onto Jackson Farm land of the bioswale and
requested that this not be done for the benefit of the developer. She provided her
comments to the Manager of Legislative Services.
Bob Goos
Mr. Goos is opposed to the application as he is concerned that the proposed development
will reduce the integrity of the farm property and the overall impact of the land in terms of
the view of the area. He expressed concern with the encroachment of the bioswale onto the
farm property and the use of a public area for this. Mr. Goos felt that the proposed
application is not necessary at this point. He spoke to future plans to develop smaller lot
homes in the Albion area and felt that development did not have to encroach onto the
Jackson Farm property at this point due to its historical and emotional value to the
community.
Craig Speirs
Mr. Speirs spoke to the history represented by the property. He suggested that the area is in
need of a community centre and that the application property could serve as a central site
for this. He encouraged Council to look for public feedback and to include the current
application property in this process. He also put forward that the area is in need of more
amenities. Mr. Speirs expressed concern that the application was not done carefully, is an
attempt to put housing somewhere and that the surrounding community is not ready for this
type of development. He provided a copy of his comments to the Manager of Legislative
Services.
Sean Orcutt
Mr. Orcutt requested that the Lower Jackson Farm remain in its current state. He is
opposed to the densification of the Albion Area to the extent of the 30 lot subdivision
proposed in the application. He felt that the developer should not be provided extra land
and that fewer houses should be built to allow for accommodation of drainage on the
development site. He advocated for a few larger lots rather than the density proposed and
again asked that the Jackson Farm property be allowed to remain as is.
Stuart Pledge
Mr. Pledge provided a slide show of the Jackson Farm area and the views from the property,
along with a descriptive narrative of the slides. He expressed concern that trees being
planted as part of the proposed development will block the existing viewscape provided by
the Jackson Farm property. He also expressed concern that the proposed bioswale will
negatively impact the view from the Jackson Farm. Mr. Pledge is opposed to the number of
houses being proposed in the application. He felt that stormwater can be dealt with in other
ways rather than a bioswale and spoke to the possible growth of invasive plants due to
bioswale construction. Mr. Pledge also spoke to future developments proposed for the area,
indicating these will also add to the population in the area, thus increasing traffic and the
need for more schools.
Public Hearing Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 7 of 9
Beryl Eales
Ms. Eales outlined the size of the usable area of Jackson Farm and expressed concern with
the removal of 1.5 acres. She asked whether a process involving parkland requires a public
process and termed the proposed construction of a bioswale as an imposition on the people
of the neighbourhood. She expressed concern that many residents are not yet aware that
the Jackson Farm is a park. She requested that members of Council educate themselves as
to the opinions of residents of the area who could not attend the Public Hearing due to other
commitments. Ms. Eales spoke to the Jackson Farm as being part of a wildlife corridor and
felt that the District’s Environmental Planner may not be aware of the heritage landscape of
the Jackson Farm property.
Bernice Rolls
Ms. Rolls read excerpts from a staff report presented on May12, 2012. She expressed
concern that members of the public are not receiving all information pertinent to the
application due to varying advertising methods. Ms. Rolls spoke to rumours which
concerned her indicating that the proposed development is a “done deal” and wondered if
the current Public Hearing is being held to adhere to a portion of the Government Act. She
felt that stormwater runoff is not currently a problem but will result from the proposed
development. Ms. Rolls also indicated that it is her belief that the purpose of the proposed
bioswale along the southern end of Jackson Farm is to allow the developer to build more
houses. She presented a spintop to members of Council to acknowledge what she feels is
considerable spin coming from Council pertaining to this application.
Mayor Daykin requested clarification from the Manager of Development and Environmental
Services on the construction of the bioswale.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services explained the rationale behind
the construction of a bioswale. He indicated that a significant amount of water flows the
from Jackson Farm property south and west across the applicant’s property. He advised
that the developer had proposed a traditional pipe solution for water management however
District staff looked at including a bioswale to enhance Jackson Creek and to carry cleaner
water to the creek in an environmentally sensitive manner. He also explained that the
proposed bioswale is not for use by the developer for drainage or stormwater management
on his site but for District use to control flows coming from District owned land.
The General Manager Public Works and Development Services advised that the process to
provide the public with information on development applications is consistent with every
application received. He also provided clarification on the staff recommendation in the
report.
Mayor Daykin assured the public that all information and presentations made are taken into
consideration by Council when looking at development applications.
Public Hearing Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 8 of 9
Craig Ruthven
Mr. Ruthven asked whether there is currently an issue with drainage and excess water on
the site.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services advised that through the
development process, it was ascertained that a large amount of flow from the Jackson Farm
site runs south and advised that there is historic water flow across the properties.
Beryl Eales
Ms. Eales suggested that a subdivision of any form on the property in the application will
cause problems with the Jackson Farm site which do not currently exist. She asked that
Council reflect on the heritage landscape and leave the existing site as is. She also asked
whether a Statement of Significance for the site could be added to the Official Community
Plan.
Stuart Pledge
Mr. Pledge spoke to the stormwater issue. He stated that private landowners are not
expected to alter landscape to deal with stormwater issues on an adjacent property.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services advised that property owners
should maintain drainage on their site to not impact neighbours.
Mr. Pledge expressed concern that a precedent is being set by the Distric t with the proposed
construction of the bioswale on public land. He requested that the Jackson Farm site
remain as is.
Carol Addy
Ms. Addy asked how many homes could be placed on this property whereby a bioswale is
not needed.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services explained that the bioswale is
proposed to be on the park boundary as it will serve the District’s drainage issues. He
advised that the proposed development site is expected to deal with its own drainage
through an onsite system. He also advised that the bioswale and the water management
system for the proposed development are independent of each other.
Ms. Addy asked whether any complaints regarding runoff have been received with only one
house on the property.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services advised that no complaints have
been received from the current home owner. He added that indications are that there are
significant flows crossing the Jackson Farm property which the District will have to deal with.
Ms. Addy requested that Council continue the process to keep Jackson Farm as is.
Public Hearing Minutes
June 19, 2012
Page 9 of 9
Sean Orcutt
Mr. Orcutt echoed the concern that the proposed construction of a bioswale on Jackson
Farm will be precedent setting. He expressed concern with the increasing density in the
Albion area and with the inability of existing services to keep up. He stated that he is
opposed to densification in the area and put forward that the Lower Jackson Farm would be
a great site for a community centre.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services advised on the financing and the
maintenance of the proposed bioswale.
There being no further comment, the Mayor declared this item dealt with.
Having given all those persons whose interests were deemed affected by the matters
contained herein a chance to be heard, the Mayor terminated the Public Hearing at
8:32 p.m.
____________________________
E. Daykin, Mayor
Certified Correct
______________________________
C. Marlo, Corporate Officer
1
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: North Albion Area Plan – Open House Summary
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At the March 27 2012 Council Meeting, a resolution was passed that outlined the process for
consideration and public consultation related to proposed bylaw amendments to the Albion Area
Plan Zoning Matrix. The proposed amendment is to include two new single-family residential zones
within the existing Low and Low-Medium Residential land use designations that would provide
opportunities for higher single-family residential densities.
In addition, Council also endorsed a process for considering in-stream development applications that
would see all applications that had not proceeded to Public Hearing to be on hold, pending Third
Reading of Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6910-2012.
Pursuant to the approved public consultation process, an open house was held on Wednesday May
30, 2012 at Samuel Robertson Technical School and was attended by approximately 160 people,
78% of which stated that they are residents of the Albion neighbourhood.
Generally, there appears to be support for the proposed Official Community Plan amendments. In
addition a range of other land use and servicing issues were identified during the course of the open
house and through a short questionnaire.
On May 14, 2012, the Planning Department presented a report to Council on the scope and process
for the Amenity Zoning Study which is assessing its potential use across Maple Ridge which will
include a market assessment of the potential to achieve Community Amenity Contribution s in the
North Albion Plan area, beyond the standard development cost charges. That work is currently being
prepared by the consulting firm CitySpaces, and is anticipated to be completed in mid July. Based
on the feedback received at the Open House the consultant has been advised to continue and
complete the assessment on North Albion.
Base on the feedback from the public information open house it is recommended that the proposed
density amendments be advanced to the next stage of the process which is the preparation of an
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw and First Reading report to Council. That report will also
include a discussion on the opportunities for Community Amenity Contributions within the North
Albion Area and will enable further discussion with Council prior to First Reading of the North Albion
OCP amending bylaw.
801
2
RECOMMENDATION:
That staff be directed to prepare an Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw and First
Reading report to advance the proposed Albion Area Plan amendments to the next stage of
the process and for the First Reading report to include a discussion of the potential to
achieve Community Amenity Contributions in the northern portion of the Albion Area Plan.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
At the March 27, 2012 Council Meeting, Council passed the following resolution:
“That Option #3 Albion Matrix Amendment Process, as outlined in the report titled
“Density Review Process for North Albion” dated March 19th, 2012 be endorsed;
That the process for the processing of in stream rezoning applications in the study area,
as outlined in the report titled “Density Review Process for North Albion” dated March
19th, 2012 be endorsed;
In respect of Section 879 of the Local Government Act, requirement for consultation
during the development or amendment of an Official Community Plan, Council must
consider whether consultation is required with specifically;
i. The Board of the Regional District in which the area covered by the plan is
location, in the case of a Municipal Official Community Plan;
ii. The Board of any Regional District that is adjacent to the area covered by the
plan;
iii. The Council of any municipality that is adjacent to the area covered by the plan;
iv. First Nations;
v. School District Boards, greater boards and improvements district boards; and
vi. The Provincial and Federal Governments and their agencies
and in that regard it is recommended that the only additional consultation to be required in
respect of this matter beyond posting of the proposed Maple Ridge Official Community Plan
Amending Bylaw No. 6910-2012 on the District’s website, together with an invitation to the
public to comment, is the following:
i. Referral to the School Board; and
ii. An open house.”
The following excerpt identifies the proposed changes for the Albion Zoning Matrix, with the
proposed additions shown in bold text:
3
Included in the March 27, 2012 report was the public consultation process that identified an
open house would be held in April or May 2012.
b) Open House Update:
Pursuant to the approved process, an open house was held on Wednesday May 30, 2012 at
Samuel Robertson Technical School and was attended by approximately 160 people, 78% of
whom are residents of Maple Ridge.
Advertisement for the open house was run in both the Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Times and
The News in the May 11, 18, 25 and 29, 2012 editions; details of the open house and
accompanying information was posted on the District’s website as of May 10 and a
questionnaire available on the District’s website from May 30 to June 11, 2012.
The information panels presented at the open house provided an overview of the proposed
new residential zones to be added to the Albion Zoning Matrix and are included in the report
as Appendix A. This information has been available on the District’s website since May 30,
2012 and can still be found under the Area Planning section.
A questionnaire was also provided at the open house and was available online from May 30
to June 11, 2012. It included questions related to the types and densities of residential
development that participants felt would be appropriate within the north Albion Area,
examples elsewhere within the Albion Area Plan area that were felt to be good h ousing
models and suggestions on ways to improve the walkability within the area. The full
summary of the responses received from the Questionnaire are attached as Appendix B.
Questionnaire Summary
As indicated, approximately 160 people attended the open house with 59 questionnaires
being completed for a response rate of 37%. The following is a summary of the feedback
received for each of the four questions.
4
Question 1: Do you support the proposed zones in the Albion Zoning Matrix, which
allow for a slight increase in density in the Albion Area Plan?
Yes 23 responses 39%
No 36 responses 61 %
If yes, can you please tell us why you support the density increase? If no, can you
please explain why you don’t support the additional density?
51 responses were received for the second part of Question 1.
Question 2: What kind of housing forms would you support in the North Albion Area?
Townhouse 1 response 2%
Small lot Single-Family 9 responses 17%
Medium to large lot Single-Family 23 responses 43%
Other 20 responses 38%
Comments received in the “Other” category included:
12 responses in support of all the suggested housing types, including
townhouses
5 responses for a mix of large and medium lot residential and village
commercial
1 response for agricultural use
1 response not supporting any of the housing options
Are there any housing types that currently exist within the Albion area that you think
are more appropriate than others?
38 responses were provided for the second part of Question 2
Question 3: Are you a resident of the Albion Area?
Yes 46 responses 78%
No 13 responses 22%
If you are a resident of Albion, do you walk in your neighbourh ood? If so, to what
destinations? Please explain any changes that would improve the walkability in your
area.
40 responses were provided for the second part of Question 3.
Question 4: Please provide any other comments or suggestions you may have.
37 responses were provided for Question with the full record included in
Appendix B.
5
The open house was well attended by area residents with the feedback received suggesting
there is some support for the proposed higher single-family residential densities. Additional
comments also identified concerns related to the future extension of infrastructure through
the north portion of the Albion neighbourhood, additional parkland and neighbourhood
commercial needs, and concerns related to safe pedestrian routes.
c) Policy Implications:
The participation at the open house suggests that area residents and landowners are very
interested in the future of the north Albion Area. The majority of the feedback received at the
open house suggests there is general support for the increase in single-family density.
In addition, many participants were not clear on how new development generates
development cost charges that fund infrastructure improvements.
As outlined above, feedback was also received related to the need for additional parkland,
concerns related to conservation areas and regulations, future road network and pedestrian
connectivity and the potential for additional neighbourhood-scale commercial uses.
Amenity Zoning Study
As part of the Planning Department’s 2012 Work Program, Council directed a review of
Amenity Zoning and its potential use in Maple Ridge. This review began in May 2012 and is
anticipated to be completed by the fall 2012 and incorporated into the Zoning Bylaw Review.
As part of the Study, CitySpaces Consulting has been hired to review the tools that are
available under the Local Government Act, summarize the pros and cons of the various
approaches, identify key priorities for the District and provide Council with a detailed
information package on the options and economic impacts of an amenity zoning framework.
The CitySpaces team will also be undertaking a market review of development impacts of
Amenity Zoning and will be using examples from the North Albion neighbourhood to aid in
that assessment. Staff provided an update to Council on the Amenity Zoning Study on May
14, 2012 at which time it was anticipated that the market review would be completed in time
to include in the North Albion Area Plan update. However, that work is still in process and
not expected to be completed until mid-July. The market review will provide important
information on the question of the financial viability of single-family residential developments
and whether or not the District can anticipate amenity zoning contributions (also known as
Community Amenity Contributions) in addition to the standard development cost charges.
This information will be very useful in assessing the mechanisms that the District may utilize
to provide the level of hard and soft services identified during the May 30 open house.
6
In-stream Development Applications
Council will recall that as part of the work discussed at the March 27, 2012 Council meeting,
a process for considering in-stream applications while the North Albion Area Plan
amendments were being considered was presented. The following process was approved by
Council:
“2. Applications that are in-stream or new, but have not proceeded on the Public
Hearing, are proposed to be deferred until such time as the Albion Area Plan
Amendments proposed are presented at Public Hearing and given Third Reading by
Council.”
It is recommended that the process for considering in-stream development applications in
the North Albion Area Plan Study Area be maintained.
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
The Engineering Department provided information on the proposed road network, final
design cross-sections and several pedestrian network interim solutions as well as the
proposed sewer and water system. The extension of sewer and water infrastructure was a
key theme that arose at the open house and as part of the comments received on the
completed questionnaires. Many residents asked when these services would be extended
but did not necessarily understand that development enables the District to collect
development cost charges that fund additional infrastructure improvements.
An evaluation of the potential densities and associated development cost charges would be
beneficial to determine the extent to which the provision of new infrastructure (roads, sewer
and water) can be achieved within the north Albion area. While the District will require
infrastructure upgrades and extensions to service approved development appli cations, what
is not yet known is whether or not it is financially viable for developers to develop within a
predominantly single-family housing form. A separate report on the options for servicing of
the north Albion area is currently being prepared and will be submitted for Council’s review in
conjunction with the next stage of the process.
e) Alternative:
That the proposed amendments to the Albion Area Plan, outlined in the March 27, 2012
report to Council, not proceed to First Reading.
7
CONCLUSIONS:
The feedback received at the open house event and through the questionnaire suggests that there is
general support for the proposed amendments to the Albion Area Zoning Matrix to add two new
single-family residential zones. In addition, a wide range of opinions and suggestions for residential
densities, infrastructure improvements and additional parkland provisions within the Plan area were
also received. As such, it is recommended that the North Albion Area Plan process be advanced to
the next stage for staff to prepare an Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw and First Reading
report.
“Original signed by Jim Charlebois”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Jim Charlebois, MURP, MCIP
Manager of Community Planning
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn,MBA, P.Eng
GM , Public Works & Development Services
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A: North Albion Open House Panels
Appendix B: North Albion Open House Questionnaire Results
Albion Area Plan
Albion Area Plan
Study Areas -Area 1 & Area 2
LAND USE DESIGNATION ZONE
Residential Low Density RS-1d One Family Urban (Half Acre) Residential
Residential Low –Medium
Density
SRS Special Urban Residential
RS-1b One Family Urban (Medium Density)
Residential
RT-1 Two Family Residential
Medium Density Residential R-1 Residential District
CD-1-93 Amenity Residential District
RM-1 Townhouse Residential
RM-4 Multiple Family Residential
RMH Mobile Home District
Current Residential Land Use Designations
Proposed Residential Land Use Designations
Other zones may correspond with the Residential Land Use designations where a Density transfer has been
applied, subject to Section 10.2.2 Residential Development and Density Transfers.
Albion Area Plan
Albion Zoning Matrix
LAND USE DESIGNATION ZONE
Residential Low Density RS-1d One Family Urban (Half Acre) Residential
RS-1 One Family Urban Residential
Residential Low –Medium
Density
SRS Special Urban Residential
RS-1b One Family Urban (Medium Density)
Residential
RT-1 Two Family Residential
R-1 Residential District
Medium Density Residential R-1 Residential District
CD-1-93 Amenity Residential District
RM-1 Townhouse Residential
RM-4 Multiple Family Residential
RMH Mobile Home District
Proposed Residential Land Use Designations
A Residential Low Density designation allows for RS -1d and new RS-1 Lots.
Principle Use Min
Setback
Zone
Min
Width
Min
Depth
Min
Area Height Front Rear
Exterior/
Interior
RS-1d 30m 40m 2000m2 11m 9m 9m 9m/2.5m
30m x
66.7m
2000m2
18m x
37.11m RS-1d (One Family Urban
(Half Acre) Residential)
In a 2.76 Hectare Lot You Can subdivide into
12 RS-1d Lots
Albion Area Plan
Potential Subdivision LayoutRS-1b and R-1
668m2
18m x
37.11m
Principle Use Min Setback
Zone
Min
Width
Min
Depth
Min
Area Height Front Rear
Exterior/
Interior
RS-1 18m 27m 668m2 11m 7.5m 7.5m 4.5m/*1.5m
RS-1d (One Family Urban
(Half Acre) Residential)
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Or up to 30 RS-1 Lots
* See the Bylaw for special conditions
Buildable
Area
Buildable
Area
A Residential Low -Medium Density designation allows for RS -1b and new R-1 Lots.
Principle Use Min Setback
Zone
Min
Width
Min
Depth
Min
Area Height Front Rear
Exterior/
Interior
RS-1b 15m 27m 557m2 9.5m 6m 6m 3m/1.5m
15m x
37.14m
557m2
15m x
36.33m RS-1b (One Family Urban
(Medium Density) Residential
In a 2.76 Hectare Lot You Can subdivide into
36 RS-1b Lots
Albion Area Plan
Potential Subdivision LayoutRS-1b and R-1
395m2
15m x
36.33m
Principle Use Min Setback
Zone
Min
Width
Min
Depth
Min
Area Height Front Rear
Exterior/
Interior
RS-1b 12m 24m 371m2 9m 5.5m 8m 3m/1.2m
RS-1b (One Family Urban
(Medium Density) Residential
R-1 (Residential District)
Or up to 48 R-1 Lots
Buildable
Area
Proposed Process
Pre-Application
Meeting
Environmental and other
Technical Studies to determine
the conservation and development
potential of the Site
Albion Area Plan Land Use
Designation to identify the
available zones (from the
Zoning Matrix)
Development
Information Meeting
Application changes to reflect
comments from DIM (if necessary)
1st & 2nd Reading report
to Council (includes
development conditions)
Public Hearing
Applicant to meet in DMR to
discuss development &
conservation areas and
potential density transfer provisions
Applicant to amend application
to reflect final conservation
and development areas
Current Process
Pre-Application
Meeting
Environmental and other
Technical Studies to determine
the conservation and development
potential of the Site
Albion Area Plan Land Use
Designation to identify the
available zones (from the
Zoning Matrix)
Development
Information Meeting Additional Steps in Current ProcessAlbion Area Plan
Development Application Process
3rd Reading
Public Hearing
Final Reading
Development Conditions
satisfied
Application changes to reflect
comments from DIM (if necessary)
1st Reading report to
Council for consideration
Development Conditions
established for Final Approval
2nd Reading
Public Hearing
Final Reading
3rd Reading
Development Conditions
satisfied
INTERIM
PEDESTRIAN
FACILITIES
FINAL ROAD DESIGN
ROAD NETWORK AND CLASSIFICATION
Albion Area Plan
Transportation
Concrete Barrier
Painted Line
Paved Shoulder
INTERIM
PEDESTRIAN
FACILITIES
URBAN ARTERIAL
4 LANE UNDIVIDED WITH BIKE LANES
26.0m RIGHT-OF-WAY
THROUGH URBAN LOCAL
SIDEWALK BOTH SIDES
18.0m RIGHT-OF-WAY
FUTURE SEWER NETWORK
Kan a k a C r e e k113 AV
E239A S T
114A AV E
BAK ER PL
KAN AK A C R K R D
109 AV E LOC KW OO D ST
106
B
A
V
E
112 AV E 243B STMOR R IS ETTE PL240 S T241A S T
246/112 R OA D
106B AVE 252 S T
24
4
S
T
FE R GU SON AV E
106
A
V
E239 S T
110 AV E
109A AV E240 S T
112 AV E
249 S TLAN E
MC
C
L
U
R
E
D
R
245 S T
MC
C
L
U
R
E
D
RLAN ELAN ELAN ELAN ELAN E
113 AV E
243 S T
106 AV E
2
4
3
S
T239 S T239 S T
110 AV E
241 S T
110 AV E
2
4
6
S
T 248 S T248 S T
108 AV E
LAN ELAN E
LAN ELAN EZE R ON AVE
105 AV
E105A AV
E240A S T
MC C LU R E AVE
244 S T245B STCA ME R ON C RT
107AVE 240A S T
113A AV E
240 S T
112 AV E
115 AV E
115A AV E
247A S TMC C LU R E DRLAN E
KIM
O
L
A
W
A
Y
KIM OLA D R B
EE
CH
A
M
P
L ER SKIN E S T
108B ST
108A S T249A S T249 S T
10
6
B
A
V
E
248A AV ELAN E
105
A
A
V
E
106 AV E
RO BER TSON AVE248 S T
108 AV E
KI
M
O
L
A
D
R
MC C LU R E DR
248 S T240 S T
108 AV E 248 S T
MC
C
L
U
R
E
D
R
112 AV E
240 S T
110 AV E
JAC KS ON R D
¬«PS
¬«PS
¬«PS
¬«PS
¬«PS
¬«PS
S
I
P
H
O
N
0 280 560140M eters
4
FUTURE WATER NETWORK
Kan a k a C r e e k113 AV
E239A S T
114A AV E
BAK ER PL
KAN AK A C R K R D
109 AV E LO C KW O O D ST
106B
A
V
E
112 AV E 243B STMO R R IS ETTE PL240 S T241A S T
246/112 R O AD
106B AVE 252 S T
24
4
S
T
FE R G U SO N AV E
106
A
V
E239 S T
110 AV E
109A AV E240 S T
112 AV E
249 S TLA N E
MC
C
L
U
R
E
D
R
245 S T
MC
C
L
U
R
E
D
RLA N ELA N ELA N ELA N ELA N E
113 AV E
243 S T
106 AV E
2
4
3
S
T239 S T239 S T
110 AV E
241 S T
110 AV E
2
4
6
S
T 248 S T248 S T
108 AV E
LA N ELA N E
LA N ELA N EZE R O N AVE
105 AV
E105A AV
E240A S T
MC C LU R E AVE
244 S T245B STCA ME R O N C RT
107
AVE 240A S T
113A AV E
240 S T
112 AV E
115 AV E
115A AV E
247A S TMC C LU R E DRLA N E
KIM
O
L
A
W
A
Y
KIM O LA D R B
E
E
C
H
A
M
P
L ER SKIN E S T
108B ST
108A S T249A S T249 S T
10
6
B
A
V
E
248A AV ELA N E
105
A
A
V
E
106 AV E
RO BER TSO N AVE248 S T
108 AV E
KI
M
O
L
A
D
R
MC C LU R E DR
248 S T240 S T
108 AV E 248 S T
MC
C
L
U
R
E
D
R
112 AV E
240 S T
110 AV E
JAC KSO N R D
¬«PRV
0 280 560140M eters
4
Albion Area Plan
Water and Sewer Kan a k a C r e e k113 AV
E239A S T
114A AV E
BAK ER PL
KAN AK A C R K R D
109 AV E LO C KW O O D ST
106B
A
V
E
112 AV E 243B STMO R R IS ETTE PL240 S T241A S T
246/112 R O AD
106B AVE 252 S T
24
4
S
T
FE R G U SO N AV E
106
A
V
E239 S T
110 AV E
109A AV E240 S T
112 AV E
249 S TLA N E
MC
C
L
U
R
E
D
R
245 S T
MC
C
L
U
R
E
D
RLA N ELA N ELA N ELA N ELA N E
113 AV E
243 S T
106 AV E
2
4
3
S
T239 S T239 S T
110 AV E
241 S T
110 AV E
2
4
6
S
T 248 S T248 S T
108 AV E
LA N ELA N E
LA N ELA N EZE R O N AVE
105 AV
E105A AV
E240A S T
MC C LU R E AVE
244 S T245B STCA ME R O N C RT
107
AVE 240A S T
113A AV E
240 S T
112 AV E
115 AV E
115A AV E
247A S TMC C LU R E DRLA N E
KIM
O
L
A
W
A
Y
KIM O LA D R B
E
E
C
H
A
M
P
L ER SKIN E S T
108B ST
108A S T249A S T249 S T
10
6
B
A
V
E
248A AV ELA N E
105
A
A
V
E
106 AV E
RO BER TSO N AVE248 S T
108 AV E
KI
M
O
L
A
D
R
MC C LU R E DR
248 S T240 S T
108 AV E 248 S T
MC
C
L
U
R
E
D
R
112 AV E
240 S T
110 AV E
JAC KSO N R D
¬«PRV
0 280 560140M eters
4
The majority of service extensions are constructed through development. Latecomer
agreements and DCC contributions are used to distribute the up-front capital costs for
community services which benefit multiple properties.
Albion Area Plan
Comments & Suggestions
Summary Report
(Completion rate: 98.33%)
QUESTION 1 Do you support the proposed zones in the Albion Zoning Matrix, which allow
for a slight increase in density in the Albion Area Plan?
Response Chart Percentage Count
Yes 39%23
No 61%36
Total Responses 59
If yes, can you please tell us why you support the density increase? If no, can you please
explain why you don’t support the additional density?
The 51 response(s) to this question can be found in the appendix.
QUESTION 2 What kind of housing forms would you support in the North Albion Area? For
example:
Response Chart Percentage Count
Townhouse 2%1
Small lot Single-Family Residential 17%9
Medium to Large lot Single-Family
Residential
43%23
Other 38%20
Total Responses 53
QUESTION 2 What kind of housing forms would you support in the North Albion Area? For example: (Other)
#Response
1.Acreages/Agriculture
2.see additional comments
3.none
4.homes on 2 acres
5.mix of small and medium
6.All of the above
7.All of the above
8.All of the above
9.All of the above
10.All of the above
11.All of the above
12.All of the above
13.All of the above
14.Townhouse/Small lot Single-Family Residential
15.Medium to large lot single-family residential & village commercial
16.Townhouse/Small lot Single-Family Residential
17.Townhouse/Small lot Single-Family Residential
18.lots such as mine are suitable for a small apartment suitable for seniors who have always lived in this area.
19.Mostly larger lot or "master planned"
Additional Comments - Are there any housing types that currently exist within the Albion area
that you think are more appropriate than others?
The 38 response(s) to this question can be found in the appendix.
QUESTION 3 Are you a resident of the Albion Area?
Response Chart Percentage Count
Yes 78%46
No 22%13
Total Responses 59
If you are a resident of Albion, do you walk in your neighbourhood? If so, to what
destinations? Please explain any changes that would improve the walkability in your area.
The 40 response(s) to this question can be found in the appendix.
QUESTION 4 Please provide any other comments or suggestions you may have.
The 37 response(s) to this question can be found in the appendix.
Responders Name (optional)
The 36 response(s) to this question can be found in the appendix.
Appendix
If yes, can you please tell us why you support the density increase? If no, can you please explain why you don’t
support the additional density? |
#Response
1.The density is already high, with little to no support services in the area. You have to get in your car every time
you need something!
2.Higher density makes more sense for supplying services, such as transportation services, streetlights, sidewalks,
(food) shopping and restaurants, etc..
3.Adhoc increase in density does not tie in to the surrounding area. Increase density will require an increase in
infrastructure and services.
4.I understand the need to upgrade existing infrastructure and to build additional roads and services to support the
already quickly developing area. With greater development comes $$$ Water and sewer lines are needed.
5.The lots sizes make sense. You should allow R-1 in Low?Medium in the south Albion area as well.
6.Due to the enviro, topo constrainsts and to further maximize on the new services, increasing in density makes
good sense. Lot sizes under R1 encourage and continue to make it viable for builders to construct detached
housing which is why families choose to continue to enjoy Maple Ridge for.
7.The Albion Area shouldn't be developed at all. It's only contributing to the sprawl. Instead, improve access to
existing sprawl-centers like Rock Ridge and Silver Valley, and continue up there.
8.Not enough support for roads and other infrastructure
9.-Not enough schools in the area
-240th street from 104th ave southward is not capable of handling the surplus traffic without turning lanes,
widening of roads, and proper sidewalks.
10.There is too much 'bulldoze and build' going on in maple ridge. It is becoming a suburban sprawl with inadequate
resources and planning to make them sustainable places to live/work rather than the current dormitories.
11.It depends. (I had to pick 'yes' or 'no', so please ignore my 'no').
In principle, I believe in increasing density in areas where it eventually leads to a relative certainty of getting
adequate transit , as well as when it is planned as a “complete neighbourhood”, i.e. with amenities such as a
school, (useful) shops – a decent grocery store, not just a convenience store, is a must - at walking or biking
distance, and useable parks (not just parks as in trees to look at from the confines of your backyard or driving by
in your car, but parks with trails and benches for people to sit, and trees for shade, a playing field for the kids to
kick the ball around, picnic benches to go for a picnic on a sunny Saturday, play structures for the kids to play.
The area in question appears to be challenging due to the topography, and creeks running through the area,
possibly limiting the possibilities to provide connections for walking and cycling other than along the main roads.
One possible solution might be to provide pedestrian/cyclist bridges at various locations, to be paid for by the
developers in return for the increased density. It may add some cost to developing this area, but that’s part of the
cost of developing areas with a less favourable topography. The more difficult topography is the reason why
developers are able to acquire the land at a good price.
I understand that part of the reason for the densification is to make the houses more affordable (or just more
affordable for the developers to build?). Is this considered the right area for “affordable” housing? Would one of
the basic requirements for people living in more affordable housing not be to have adequate transit and amenities
close by?
The District should aim for densification along transportation corridors if we can provide adequate access to these
transportation corridors from surrounding areas. That’s something that’s going to be very problematic here.
12.increased density without supporting amenities in Maple Ridge (shopping etc) increases the imbalance we have
today between population and those supporting amenities. increased density also stresses the environment
13.Until something is done to alleviate traffic congestion in west maple ridge and Pitt meadows I do not agree with
continuing to build more and more houses and townhouses when the roads are beyond capacity. Plan for the roads
ahead of the housing development. While I realize that people do need somewhere to live and that Maple Ridge is
one of the last affordable places in the lower mainland more planning of roads and transit services should be done
prior to allowing further development. As well schools are so crowded in the Albion area that children who live
there cannot even attend the schools that are nearby. Planning for this should be done first.
14.Poorly planned, not enough schools in area, no plans for traffic congestion, riparian area for the animals becoming
smaller and smaller around the river
15.maximum use of land for housing in an area that will have a lot of green space makes sense
16.There's not enough support ie schools in this area are mostly overcrowded.
17.The land in the urban development area needs to reach the best potential to afford the cost of services such as
water etc., to everyone. The increase is reasonable and in some cases because so much land is used for
conservation and terrain breaks it up could stand more density in pockets.
Good to support schools as well.
18.This will be the same old, same old. In he best interests of developers and investors NOT for the people. Public
input would more properly be the first step. Remember the visioning process of about six years ago? How about
the Silver Valley Plan? what about the consultants report on housing prior to the last OCP? If we keep doing what
we are doing we will keep gettng what are getting - development at the behest of investors that make specualators
the biggest buck. Never mind how it will affect the environment, water and climate and future generations.
19.Most of the land in this area is not being utilised efficiently and is open pasture land. The houses are ostly older
and single family. Our taxes are high. The sewer line etc. will rid the area of septic fields and clean up the creeks.
20.Since living in this area is no longer "rural", might as well expand the subdivision(s) and give long term residents
a chance to move on.
21.I support the density increase because the area has significant conservation areas, and sufficient school and transit
potential.The servicing of the area is challenging due to the sanitary sewer lift stations, and other higher that usual
costs.The density may assist in the feasability to service this area.
22.There is a shortage of space at Albion Elementary, and no immediate plans to expand or build a new elementary
school.
23.higher population will give us a bigger tax base for government spending such as transportation.
24.I believe the current road structure is not sufficient to handle the additional housing structure.
25.The area needs to change to keep up with all the growth around. The rezoning for RS-1d should also be zoned R-1
to keep in line with the other development in the area. Why would you have a school across from large lots?
26.I support the zoning. I would like to see some zoning allocated to commercial toward the top of the hill. Take
Westwood Plateau for example, just a small zone for a small convenience store like 7-11. This would reduce
traffic just by not having the whole hill having to drive down the road a jug of milk.
27.Needs more schools first.
28.Families with children will be moving into those homes. There are not enough schools to support the families
presently in this area. Many young children are walking along busy roads with no sidewalks to get to school. Stop
the housing development agenda and start community planning.
29.The current environmental setbacks have significantly reduced the yields within Albion. The increase density will
allow original objectives to be met. Also these setbacks have limited some lands ability to develop and higher
density will the help the land develop.
30.Higher density and these setbacks will help useful land develop, times superior to the senses.
31.I support current residential land use designations very much. Because of you are working and making an effort to
improve unreasonable policys of environmental setbacks and very old zones plan for all the people.
32.All the people of study area who we met support higher density and these setbacks plan. It is a very good idea.
33.1. Too many streans and ravines
2. Too many clay banks and steep slopes
3. Flood planes
4. Adverse effect on the quality of life
5. Adverse effect on some property values
34.1. The area of North Albion has been designated already under the present OCP as being unsuitable for
development over Low-Density (1/2 acre lots) because of the preponderance of ravines, watercourses, clay soil
banks and enviornmentally sensitive areas.
2. More development will result in sever traffic problems. Already with present population a major problem for
residential.
3. More development through deinsificatio cannot be serviced by existing schools or even the proposed school
(elementary) construction.
35.With population increasing, people have to live somewhre. Incrasing density is a must do. The Albion area is the
next logical place.
36.With the 12 lots becoming 30 and the 36 lots becoming 48 I see this as not being a slight increase but a high
density increase in a rural area which has not got the infrastructure to support such planning for the future.
37.I do not consider the proposal is a slight increase. Already there is not enough open area and natural green space,
nor parks created in the existing high density areas in Albion. the few roads re congested speedways and need to
be settled down before more vehicles are added. When natural area is gone, it's gone forever. (We will need larger
lots to help house the dispaced wildlife in our midst!)
38.As a homeowner in the affected area, I don't see any advantage to the proposed density increase. We moved to this
area beacuse it was designated as 'Low Density' on the OCP. Under the proposed zoning changes our area would
be effectively changing to 'Low-Medium Density'. Factor in the secondary suites that could also be potentially
built in these smaller lot houses and we are now living in 'Medium Density' - contrary to the OCP designation
(why even have 'Low Density' in the OCP?). In my immediate area, there are already four Development
Applications that include the proposed new zones (RS-1 & R-1), so obviously it's developers/builders who want
these new denser zones. I have not spoken to one neighbour who supports this, except for some of the ones that
have acreage and want to make the most money off their property and then move away! I also wonder how the
infrastructure in our area would support the traffic from this increased density. Every development application
currently posted in our area includes the denser zones, so this isn't going to be just a few 'here and there'.
39.It's needed. Large lots too expensive.
40.I'm very concerned about young families wo move in to discover there is no school in the area for their children to
attend, especially because the nearest schools are all grossly overcrowded.
41.After viewing the proposed zones, it seems you would like to cram more houses into the same zone. The reasons
given to me, were filled with excuses that did not care about human comfort. I feel you are turning the community
into a laboratory filled with rats and you like to add more rats with a reassuring smile on your face.
42.I am particularly interested in study area 2 specifically the area west of 248th and north of 108th. I have lived in
this area for over 35 years and participated in the community planning process before. The subject area has been
studied before with the resulting present density recommendations. What is being proposed is an almost 3 to 4
fold increase in densities which makes a farce of previous recommendations. This is not a slight increase. Over the
years I have seen a lot of damage to year round and seasonal water courses which will have to be restored with
any new development, particularly north and east of my property (24705 108 Ave). The property north of my lot
has been left “tranquil” for a number of years now so some streams are reappearing but are not gazetted yet. I am
concerned that with the proposed new federal guidelines on water streams they will all disappear.
The subject area should be left as half acre lots for several reasons:
• Most of the area is already subdivided into ½ acre lots and developing the entire area will be very difficult as
there are many very reluctant property sellers
• The area has so many water courses that it will be difficult to develop higher density areas under the new
guidelines without potentially resorting to much higher densities, perhaps even townhouses in the remaining
pockets
• There should be some pockets left in maple Ridge where larger properties (and not necessarily with huge
houses)are available and people can have some smaller farming and gardening opportunities. Considering all the
streams and slopes this would be an ideal area.
• The wild life in this area is significant due to its proximity to Kanaka Creek. I think there are more frogs in this
area alone than in the rest of Maple Ridge combined.
• I view the present push for higher densities mostly as a result from developers wanting to increase their profits
with no regard to what they leave behind.
43.I support the density increase because there is a lot of unuseable land in the study area.
44.It appears that this is developer-driven rather than based upon any real practical need for densification. A number
of developments are far from built out in Albion and there appears to be a considerable number of re-sale homes
on the market. Maple Ridge has no (and won't for quite some time, if ever) significant job-base to justify the
densification (Kanaka Business park is empty for example) and the proposed area is not that close to the roads to
get people on their way out of town to other jobs.
More importantly than the above, we need to be more proactive in preserving one of the best assets of Maple
Ridge: its natural beauty. Study after study has shown that no matter how you develop, increased development has
adverse impacts on streams (epecially in sensitive watersheds). In the future it would be nice to look back and say
"look how we maintained the character of Maple Ridge and preserved its natural assests" rather than "look how
we exploited all our sensitive areas with development". I have slowly seen the character of eastern Maple Ridge
erode (and beautiful rolling farmland/open space on 240 is now being paved over as well as Upper Jackson Farm
and other spaces). The monstrosity of a development that is Grant Hill - the massive clearing and muddly runoff
coming from there - seems like just a bit too much to me.
It seems to me that re-development of the core of Maple Ridge should be the focus. Densification should go there
with cheaper housing and proximity to schools (unlike the joke that is an overcrowded Albion Elementary with a
huge development going up right next to it, shopping and other amenities which are lacking in Albion.
45.Rezoning the area would lower the tax burden, and put more money in the Municipality.
46.This land is going to be built on now or the years to come, so why not rezone it this year.
47.The density of Maple Ridge should be restricted to areas closer to the downtown core. Further expansion of
homes in Albion will only exacerbate the problem of parking, vandalism, over-abundance of animals and lack of
services such as schools.
48.The density increase is of little value to me as a long time homeowner of Albion (40 years). Our property is not
included in the density increase. Our property has been referred to as an illegal lot. It is 16,353 sq ft. or 15,198 sq.
meters. It is 5625 sq. ft. less than 1/2 acre. I feel the rezoning unfair as developers in Highland Visa were allowed
to go back to council and have lot sizes changed to R! with as little as 471 sq. meters. Their reasoning was that the
market had dropped. In fact, during this time between May 2011 to May 2012 as reported by the Real Estate board
in the Province Maple Ridge showed an increase in sales unlike other lower mainland areas. Developers own the
property of 5 acres next to me. Once they begin to build my way of life with privacy and quiet is gone. We have
been informed once sewer and water comes we have to hook up to sewer immediately and water within 1 year.
We are pensioners how will we be able to pay for this? We deserve a increase in density just as well as the people
with 1/2 acre. Some of the lots my size wish to be left as is but they will not be affected as I will next door and
directly behind me
49.I am very concerned about traffic increases in Maple Ridge overall and this area has few good arterial roots.
Already the intersection of Lougheed Hwy., Haney Bypass, and Kanaka Way are getting overcrowded. Same with
240th and Lougheed Hwy. At both intersections I am lining up for a left hand turn lane in the Hwy fast lane. A
scary situation.
50.There currently aren't enough schools for the projected populations of the existing development sites as it stands.
51.60% not in favour, 40% in favour. While I must admit that I was relieved to see a proposal retaining some larger,
more substantial sized lots (RS-1's), I am still not quite there favouring this proposal. Firstly, I would not
characterize a minimum 30% increase in density (if these estimates are correct) a "slight increase". Secondly, no
one has explained to the public how the increased density--roughly 300 homes--will impact the local community
in terms of traffic, congestion, and further strain on our ridiculously overcrowded schools. (Please do not argue
that it will help, as norther Alb. will be requiring 2 additional schools.) Will council hold the line with the terms of
this proposal, if selected? Please, no further density beyond staff recommendations!
Additional Comments - Are there any housing types that currently exist within the Albion area that you think are
more appropriate than others? |
#Response
1.Too many houses squashed next to each other with little to no yard, trees taken down and the hill is becoming
ugly.
2.Kanaka Creek has higher density with nice looking homes.
3.A mixture of medium to large lot single family residential with some small lot single-family residential.
4.The Epic Home style development's entry level product, most having 3,500 - 4,000 sqft lots are in good demand
and most affordable.
5.Farms and homes with yards. Cramming more people into an over crowde area with a lack of schools, roads and
commercial resources is not smart.
6.I think there is something missing in this question, which is unfortunate. Why don’t we have the choice of having
mixed housing and possibly some commercial? We usually just see endless subdivisions sprouting up with similar
sizes of single family housing, and here and there some townhouses. Why can’t there be a variety of houses on the
same street? Why can’t our neighbourhoods be made to look more interesting and unique? That’s the option that I
would pick.
7.all communities need a mix of housing. there is a significant amount of high density in south albion and kanaka
creek
8.The housing I would like to see is one that provides amenities for small business owners and one that houses more
children in learning environment (meaning schools)
9.Smaller parcels should be sensified but not to 3,000 square foot lots. Better to have townhouse use than that.
10.We cannot see any reason that the housing density can't fit the requirement for housing.
11."Mixed neighbourhoods" offer a cultural diversity and appeal to all ages and stages of life. What boring
neighbourhoods if they are all the same.
12.I highly support small lot Single-Family Residential, and townhousing in areas of medium density where
conservation constraints make development difficult for access.
13.Single family homes on large lots are much more appropriate (townhouses are much too dense considering the
lack of school spaces available).
14.I don't think the roads are sufficient size to support smaller lots/townhouses.
15.Variety within reason; same grade within construction region. Plenty of greenland remaining around new homes.
Parks for children to play is necessary.
16.Mostly single family.
17.Townhouse development should be allowed in areas where environmental restrictions make single family
residential lots difficult to produce due to access and setbacks.
18.Our land is 2 creeks in both side. So after we make the road of access and setbacks we cannot build 2/3 (70%
more)of middle land. Therefore townhouse development should be really allowed about this land such as attached
concept site plan.
19.After you estimate envronmental setback about such as our land of both side creeks. In special case (one side is
about 30m deep the other side of ditch is very small). If you can throw it out totally whether you make single
family lots or if you throw it out impossible. We think that townhouse development should be really allowed for
useful development of land.
20.Just the next door (111 Ave) of attached our land is townhouse development zone. So after developers buy our
land they had tried to build townhouses of our land (110 Ave) and 111 Ave; land together from 17 years ago. But
you had refused in continuously. this time we thin you have to allow townhouse development.
21.Acreage as now. The existing low density zoning.
22.Considering the natural terrain of this area, only rural residential family housing is suitable for the majority of
land available. There are only a few areas suitable for anything else. The current low density zoning (1/2 acre)
would then be appropriate for these few. NOT medium density.
23.I think the planning dept. should include a wide range of housing options. Some townhouses or smaller lots may
be more affordabble for young familys.
24.Medium size lots would not overload our schools, parks, roads that would gridlock our transportation system like
what has happen in other municipalities ei. Langley 200 St. This may look good on paper and tax monies but it is
not a good long term planning.
25.Albion is a rural area dn could retain this character with a combination of single family lot sizes and reserving
larger natural areas.
26.A drive down 240th highlights the different housing types clearly. The 102ave area is horrible. I would think a
mix of townhouses and larger lot single family houses would have been better than the row upon row of little box
houses on tiny little lots. Head up to 104ave and it's starting to look just as bad. I cant imagine what that area will
look like in another 10 years if it continues.
The MapleCrest Subdivision I think is more appropriate for the area (larger lot single family houses and larger
duplex style townhomes - Trail's Edge).
27.Affordability is key.
28.Houses on medium lots with protected green space.
29.Houses backing onto greenspace with trails.
30.As long as there is sufficient green space. The proposed zones are not designed for human comfort. They are
designed for profits!
My housing types = designed for human comfort!
Your proposed housing types = designed for profit!
In this society profits always come first. Therefore my designs will never come to fruition.
31.see my answers above
32.Townhouses should be built besdie riparian areas as more families with extremely small backyards can enjoy the
natural surroundings.
33.One level houses would be nice.
34.There should be more one level homes for the seniors in the area.
35.NO! The residential expansion of Maple Ridge has happened too quickly. Taxes continue to rise with the urban
sprawl. Your direction should not be at the ruination of Maple Ridge's character - a jewel within the Greater
Vancouver Regional District.
36.The idea of larger lots on larger pieces or property mixed with smaller lots as at Beecham Place looks better than
many many small lots in the same area as on 102 Ave.
37.An opposite view. The very dense housing east of 240th and north of 102nd avenue is scarily dense. I would hate
to see a house on fire in that neighbourhood. I don't think the fire trucks would get in and the fire would spread
very fast.
38.Since the future development will not be occurring in a vacuum, I have to qualify my answer. What many of us
would like to see is mixed density deelopment as well as elements of master planned communities so this would
suggest that I would favour some townhomes in norther Albion. The reality is that there are very few, if any,
developers in this town that are committed to such products. Furthermore, we are already flooded w/townhomes
along 240th and its feeders. There hasn't been enough regulation. Therefore I favour generous sized (6000 ft2) lots
to prevent further erosion to the quality of life in northern Albion & Maple Crest.
If you are a resident of Albion, do you walk in your neighbourhood? If so, to what destinations? Please explain
any changes that would improve the walkability in your area. |
#Response
1.I walk in my neighbourhood but no where specific as there are no stores, fields, leisure services, gas stations etc.
2.Only to mailbox. Improvements would be sidewalks, stores, restaurants, better transportation services
3.Need more interconnected paths.
4.I walk to Cliff Park, the Louise Poole trail, the Erskine and Bear Ridge Trail. Sidewalks on 112th Avenue and
Lockwood
5.I barely walk in my neighborhood due to the high amount of bear traffic seen on a daily basis. I leave my
neighborhood to walk.
6.No, but I live very close to Albion and walk in Albion every day.
I am a resident of Cottonwood.
I do walk in my neighbourhood, but preferably not along Kanaka Way, because cars drive too fast and I find it
unpleasant. It’s a road that’s not particularly welcoming to people and all it will ever be is a traffic sewer, not a
neighbourhood. Other roads don’t really lead anywhere. You just keep walking through similar residential areas,
mostly along roads with cars. There are various stratas/gated communities in my area, which don’t welcome
strangers, so instead you just keep walking on the busier roads with cars. When I walk the dog, I always walk the
same route, every day. I walk the trail at Kanaka Creek and cross at the Rainbow Bridge, then walk along the trail
behind Tamarack, and do a loop around Planet Ice and the sports fields. It’s a nice and quiet route. The only
destination in my area I can think of is Planet Ice/Fairgrounds/sports fields (distance about 1 ½ km), and for
younger families of course Kanaka Elementary School. A destination for my kids is 7-11 on Lougheed. And
Thomas Haney SS used to be a destination. They had to walk along busy Lougheed to get there, or 232nd, without
adequate sidewalks part of the way.
Walkability improves
• if you have destinations to walk to (a store, a park, restaurant, pub etc.)
• if you don’t always have to walk along busy and noisy roads with speeding cars
• if there is traffic calming
• if roads are narrower (which slows cars down)
• if there are sidewalks
• if there are fewer stratas and gated communities
• if connectivity is good (e.g. pedestrian/cyclist bridges to cross a creek, paths/shortcuts between neighbourhoods)
7.current trails and "walkability" in south albion is very good. maintenance of conservation areas is good. i hope
north albion has similar walkability
8.Yes, I walk anywhere from Jackson Road down to Planet Ice depending. And Lougheed Hwy to bridge on 240th.
9.yes.yes.a path from 256th to the Fraser River along Kanaka Creek
10.Not enough sidewalks, part of 240th close to Albion elem needs better paving, it's a really busy road that needs
attention.
11.Rarely....if I do it is for recreation and exercise.
There are no services
12.Councils for many years have supported this type of planning. When will council say this is what we want now
who will build it as opposed to the present system where developers say this is what we want, let us do it now!
13.We walk both ways from 243B on 112th - sidewalks.
14.Yes I do walk almost daily but to NO DESTINATION. I suppose that I could get to Bruce's Mkt but to return
uphill with groceries would not be viable. So my walking at present is only recreational.
15.To and from Bruce's Market, Albion Park, Jackson Farm, SPCA/Kaitie's Place, Samuel Robertson Technical,
Albion Elementary, Albion Pizzeria/Albion Video/Kanaka Creek Coffee shop. The sidewalks in some areas are
too narrow (Country Lane development). The sidewalk, on 104 Ave is not continuous from 244 to 248 Street (at
S.R.T.).
16.coffee shop
17.It would be nice to have more stores in the area. I walk for my health.
18.Currently the area I live in is not very walkable. I live on Beecham Place. To get to the nearest childrens park ther
are no sidewalks and traffic is very fast along Jackson Road (where SPCA dog walkers walk). Sidewalks and
childrens parks are really needed in the 108th & Jackson area.
19.Trnas Canada Trail
Kanaka Creek Regional Park
Thornhill, Grant Hill
Kanaka Creek
No improvements necessary for "walkability".
20.We often walk the Trans Canada Trail.
Kanaka Creek area.
Thornhill, Grant Hill
21.We walk to the end of 110 Ave and beyond along Kanaka Creek to Turkey Trot and beyond. We also walk to and
along Kanaka Creek Raod and on to the fairgrounds. As for changes: 1) Completion of linear park along Kanaka
Creek.
22.Yes, I walk as much as possible but I am limited to the few streets and pathways safe enough to do so. For
example Kanaka Creek Rd, pathways to Planet Ice which are part of Metro Vancouver Kanaka Creek Park. Any
other street expecially 240th, is unpleasant and dangerous due to the heavy traffic even where there are sidewalks.
23.N/A. I have foot problems, so walking is not an option.
24.We walk on concrete sidewalks up and down 240 St and occationally drive and walk by Kanaka Creek. Parking is
not always desirable this area as the gate for the parking is closed. the local area animal population is also being
crowded which cause unexptected meeting with our animal (local) population.
25.Yes, I walk along a cement sidewalk on 240 St. thre is no walking path nor open space in our neighbourhood. An
improvement would be to have some access away from 240 St on a natural path into some natural areas/creek. My
opinion is to save some of the existing land close to over-buld areas for enjoyment liveability. (Of course,
blackberry bushes are a treasure to my thinking.)
26.We have a dog and regularly walk in Kanaka Creek Park around the Rainbow Bridge / 108 Loop area. We have to
drive there (we live off 112th and 243rd) as the walk down 112th to 240th is too dangerous (no lighting, no
sidewalks/shoulders). Hopefully green space/dog walk/park areas will be included in any redevelopement of the
North Albion area.
27.There is no where to walk to - ie - shopping.
28.Erskine Trail
Trail's Edge Trail Network
Epic Homes Trails
29.Constantly. Using trail network from Trail's Edge to Erskine to lookout above old gravel pit, to microwave towers
to Turkey Trot trail etc. Dog owners.
30.Yes.
31.All areas from Dewdney to 104th Avenue. Some of the proposed zones suggest next to no barrier between house
and street. I would be walking alongside "houses" not neighbourhoods.
32.I regularly walk through the entire area and appreciate the many new trails that have been added over the years. I
am looking forward to when the trail from the bottom of 108th Ave gets connected to 240th and eventually Haney
33.We do not walk in our neighbourhod. There are no desitnations close by.
A small strip mall with grocery store, coffe shop, neighbourhood pub/restaurant at 112 & 240th complete with a
wider 112 ave, with street lights and sidewalks are needed.
34.I walk/run in the area for exercise. Other than a few minor trails, this area has really no destinations within
reasonable walking distances. Enhancing the parkland/conserved areas would give be nice.
35.More sidewalks along 240 Street and road off that road.
36.More walking trails.
37.In fact I do walk in my neighbourhood on a regular basis - to where is actually irrevelant. Suffice to say, that I
often walk to the downtown area of Maple Ridge (6 kilometres) - bike lanes (few people use) and a substantial
lack of sidewalks. As I walk along the side of the Lougheed Highway, I am appalled at the garbage strewn in the
ditches and you and council wish to attract more cars and people. Wake up!
38.At present sidewalks only are built directly in front of new homes, there are undeveloped parts that are adjacent
which have the sidewalk end abruptly. One minute you are safe, the next you are almost walking in the ditch.
More sidewalks would improve the area - especially along Jackson (Industrial). Also along 104th, both sides
should be sidewalk very dangerous for kids. People seem to think they are in the "country" and walk 3 and 4
abreast on areas where there are no sidewalks.
39.Bruce's Market, Albion Park, local parks. Wider side walks make it easier when walking with a stroller and
another adult.
40.Yes, I am a resident, and I do walk through Maple Crest and its trail networks. I would like to see the streetscapes
along 240th to get plenty of attention so that they are pleasant to walk along. I would like to see more native plant
species and evergreens worked in and around new housing so that these areas have a similar feel to our trails. If
the city ensures attractive streetscapes, more people will walk the sidewalks. We would like to see trail systems
connected along Kanaka Creek. I would walk to various proposed malls.
QUESTION 4 Please provide any other comments or suggestions you may have. |
#Response
1.We have so many underdeveloped area's within the urban area of Maple Ridge - why not fill those up first and
then look to Albion, rather than constantly shuttling people further and further east with no services.
2.It makes sense to reduce sprawl. Smaller lots also means more affordable homes.
3.Before this goes ahead you need to have additional services such as schools, park and small retail as part of the
master plan to provide a community feel, rather than just a housing development. People in this area are drawn to
the nice family homes in the MapleCrest development.
4.Any assistance the District can by placing in the main services will encourage a consistent and sensible growth
pattern.
5.The intersection at Haney Bypass/Lougheed Hwy/232 st needs drastic improvement in the area of accessing 232
street.
Also the Bridge over the Alouette at 240th street needs building much sooner than currently scheduled. And while
at that, extend the Abernethy Way to 240th.
6.I believe that so much can be done in the existing parts of Maple Ridge when it comes to densification that would
really benefit the community. Certain older parts in Maple Ridge, west of the town core, in my view, are ripe for
redevelopment, and would seem much more appropriate for densification, since they are close to transportation
corridors and have much more potential for successful mixed zoning. Also densification along Dewdney would
seem more appropriate, because it’s more likely to get better transit, and connectivity + topography would seem to
be less of an issue.
I would like Council and staff to take a hard look at how much these types of developments are costing the
existing taxpayers in the long run, since it’s well-known that spread out developments generally don’t generate
enough tax-revenue to pay for the cost of maintaining and servicing them. The developer may pay for the initial
cost of building the infrastructure, but the cost of maintaining and servicing these areas will be a huge burden in
the future. A cost-benefit analysis would seem a wise thing to do.
7.I believe the keys to success in Maple Ridge are downtown development & population increase (I support the
current strategic plan), and development of shopping areas, which is an essential service for an area with 75,000
residents. Further urban sprawl before supporting amenities are at least approved will add to today's situation in
Maple Ridge (urban sprawl creating more service demands on the municipality, and more traffic leaving Maple
Ridge to shop and work).
8.Community planning for roads, schools and transit should be done ahead of building more houses. Our school at
Hammond is near capacity as well as many schools in Albion. Address this first as well as the roads and transit
then address building more houses/townhouses. I feel that Maple Ridge is putting the cart before the horse in this
case.
9.Please do not build anymore around here. There are many homes for sale in my neighborhood and creating a glut
will not be helpful to our local economy. Our schools are at capacity in the area and there is a sense of frustration
in the community that developers and Maple Ridge municipality are looking to make a quick buck instead of
really giving some to a more planned community.
10.I think schools should be built first before more housing, new families buy houses here only to find out that their
kids cannot even go to their catchment area.
11.Option 2 on sewer extension is more difficult to obtain right of way but makes a better route from an engineering
and economic point of view.
12.A healthy community must provide for the needs of all ages - walking distance to school, convenience store, green
space, meeting/entertainment place. Those small houses don't have space for even a birthday party. A variety of
housing - co-op, boarding homes, secondary suites, lane houses, mobile home park (ie Wildwood in Pitt
Meadows), smaller senior care centres closer to families. Involve the public in preparing the N. Albion Plan such
as in the Silver Valley Plan. Stick to the OCP.
13.A traffic light would be required at 112/240 intersection - needed now! And ravines like the one on our property
which are damp and muddy run-offs should be filled in.
14.Eventually there will be a great deal more traffic up 112th & 108th to Paul Hayes new development. I hope
someone has figured ot the road usage ahead of time??
*I appreciated the opportunity to speak with Frank Quinn who was able (and willing) to answer some of my
questions as to "Institutional" designation and the current progress.
15.This is a short sighted plan. save time. Save money. Think of future generations. Stick with the OCP.
16.I compliment planning staff on their good work.With the current geotechnical and DFO setbacks the yeilds have
decreased dramically from the original Albion Plan.The concern regarding the number of legal suites will decline
with the new higher density zoning prohibiting legal suites in those Zones.I support the new plan.
17.I believe we need to secure the elementary school spaces needed for sustainability, before we further densify,
however I support densification in the north Albion area if it is single family homes on large lots (the least dense
option), in the interim.
18.Please look at completed development in other cities, look at what worked and what didn't. Do not make roads too
small and consider inceasing park zones and the amount of sidewalks.
19.Please continue to increase the number of bicycle lanes with road improvements. This is a great assistance to
improve safety.
20.Continued from question #1; We do not have enough services to support this area at present. Before we build
more houses we need to address the entire community and the requirements - food, safety, schools, traffic,
shopping.
21.There seems to be plenty of open space closer to town. Why not develop there first?
22.I suggest this proposal of increasing the density in N. Albion should be re-visited and I hope the current OCP
designation of Low Density be maintained. Why not encourage more residential development in town, there are
still many ares in Haney needing re-development!
23.The Albion area should be the next spot for developed due to its prosimity to downtown.
24.There are not enough main arteries between Dewney Trunk and Lougheed Hwy. 240 is already getting crowded
with the expansions of higher density lots we will create the same problems with our roads like experienced south
of the the Fraser. Until the road planning and connectors are complete there shoul be no high density lots. Making
240 St a four lane will only create access problems for the local residents already there. Maple Ridge is not ready
for high density living. We do not need an anthill to live on.
25.At the open house I didn't see plans for additional roads to cope with all the vehicles that will heading from all the
new residents. It appears all will drive onto 240 St already a problem area. (I don't appreciate having to
contemplate moving from here because of speeding traffic.)
26.I am curious about the removal of the Density Transfer on properties with unbuildable areas - is this contingent on
the new denser RS-1/R-1 zones being approved?
27.More trails please! Use to live in Oakville, Ont. Fabulous connection of trails to subdivision. Huge population
biking walking running. this same Albion area is a gem for trails. Suggest trail on north side of Trail's Edge
between Kanaka River & Kimola. gorgeous area.
28.the District needs to provide more retail shops in the Albion Area before it creates its density. The District should
definitly purchase the property designated "school" 148th & 108th. No more density in that area it has a nice rural
flavour. Don't change everything all at once, go a little slower.
29.After taking part in the open house and speaking with represtatives I have concluded the following. The true
objective here is to "maximize profits regardless of social and environmental costs." I highly doubt that the person
suggesting these proposed zones lives in these zones, also know to me as rat cages.
30.I appreciate the ability to provide feedback. I hope it can make a difference
31.More bikelane/trails in the Albion area for family recreation and commuting.
32.Change is in some ways inevitable, in other ways not inevitable. The focus should be on the right mix of
appropriate preservation first, development second. Let's make this an area with good proximity to an enhanced
trail and park network that are the signatures of the beauty of this place. I am happy to put up with few amenities
(i.e. one pizza shop, one coffee shop and one market) in return for an area in which I can breathe.
33.Take a deep breath and ponder the fact that 71% of Maple Ridge's electorate did not necessarily support you in the
last municipal election!
34.Some areas such as 112th are to be developed and some areas such as 108th are being skipped. We live in old
homes, the people on 108th are for the greatest part not absentee land owners. If our way of life is now
compromised then our street should be rezoned to R1. Please reconsider the zoning for our "illegal lots". Building
permits were issued for them once, they can be changed again!
35.I have to question the reason for this whole exercise. I pessimistically have to assume council owes a
developer/campaign contributor a favour. Sorry.
36.It would be nice if there were some gargage bins in public areas.
37.1. Please explain to the public how the proposed density will impact the local ingrastructure. (I am concerned
about 240th & Kanaka Way and getting in and out Maple Crest.) I would like to stress that I am not entirely
opposed to the increased density proposed for norther Albion, with the exception of the 4000ft2 lots, which
scream uninspired "cookie cutter" housing. What I am most concerned with is further density beyone the amended
OCP. Council tends to interpret the OCP as being loose recommendations. Are we at the abosolute ceiling of
density increases?
Responders Name (optional) |
#Response
1.Lisa Prophet
2.Ryan
3.Luke
4.Mark Sherling
5.Danny Gerbrandt
6.Darren Munnich
7.Susan Boan
8.E. Fox
9.Bob Quinnell
10.Bernice Rolls
11.Keith Every
12.Sandra McKeever
13.Bernice Rolls
14.Ron Antalek
15.Sean Orcutt
16.D. Cougar
17.Ian Lndquist
18.Bill Durno
19.Barbara Durno
20.Grace
21.Curtis Yang
22.Jeff
23.Hana Park
24.Paul Schmitt
25.Christine Schmitt
26.Hasse Marthinsen
27.Colleen Marthinsen
28.Bruce Rae
29.Bob P.
30.Working class peasant
31.Andres Schneiter 604 467 1651
32.Dave Johnston
33.Barbara Moniuk
34.52 year old male
35.DM Cork
36.James Craig Ruthven
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: E02-008-001
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: Resident-Exemption and Resident-Only Parking Policy
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Ongoing growth in the District can, in single family residential areas adjacent to high parking demand
such as hospitals, transportation hubs or commercial hubs, heighten the level of concern of
residents around excessive non-local vehicles taking up on-street parking. It is prudent to establish a
consistent policy framework for dealing with such parking-related issues as they manifest
themselves in these high demand areas.
In April 2012 a report on the consideration of resident-exempt and resident-only parking was brought
to Workshop and Council passed Motion R/2012-187 that states:
That staff be directed to develop a policy to address resident parking issues in residential
neighbourhoods adjacent to areas of high demand such as hospitals, transportation or
commercial hubs.
This report outlines the parking policy for Council’s consideration and endorsement. Doing so will
ensure that a consistent approach is applied in all circumstances.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the “Resident-Exemption and Resident-Only Parking Policy” to address parking issues in single
family residential neighbourhoods adjacent to areas of high demand, be endorsed.
DISCUSSION:
Residential areas adjacent to areas of high parking demand such as hospitals, transportation hubs
or commercial hubs often have to deal with non-resident vehicles taking up the limited on-street
parking. The implementation of resident-exempt or resident-only parking strategies under defined
policy procedures is intended to address and resolve situations where a chronic and heavy demand
for on-street parking by non-residents is a concern.
Permit parking for residents in a neighbourhood allows residents to have parking priority in a signed
area within a reasonable distance of their home but does not guarantee residents the right or ability
to parking front of their own property.
802
a) Background Context:
In single family residential areas adjacent to high demand hubs where there is competition for
limited parking stalls there are two basic situations that may exist:
a lack of available on-street parking, or
a preponderance of non-resident vehicles that park within a neighbourhood and while
residents may have adequate off-street parking on their properties it is seen as an imposition
or detriment to the neighbourhood.
Resident only parking permit zones are generally established where there is a chronic and heavy
demand for on-street parking by non-residents and not to address short term intermittent parking
problems generated by schools, churches, pubs etc. Likewise, permit parking regulations are
generally implemented in single family neighbourhoods and not intended to deal with the demands
of higher-density residential uses such as townhouses or apartments as these zones are required to
provide adequate off-street parking.
One caveat of a parking permit system is that it can significantly reduce the availability of on-street
parking that may be considered as contrary to the intended use which is to provide an amenity to all
members of the public unless the permit system is combined with unregulated or time limited
parking areas.
Within the District of Maple Ridge there are currently no areas where parking is limited to local
residents to the exclusion of others; there is a network of time limited parking areas, mostly around
the Town Centre but also, for example on River Bend adjacent to the Haney Stati on or Patterson
Avenue off 203 Street. The time limits range from 15 minutes for a loading zone up to 3 hours.
There are two basic types of permit parking regulations:
Option 1 – Time Limited Parking with Resident Exemptions (RE)
Time limited parking is generally set for one to two hours in order to allow parking for the general
public while allowing residents to park for a longer period under a permit. Depending upon the
adjacent land use, the time limited parking may be in place for a defined period each day, may
be in place Monday to Friday, or may be in place 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Option 2 – Resident Only Parking (RO)
This method is generally implemented where there is a demonstrated lack of available on-street
parking, even for local residents, and there is considerable demand from external vehicles.
Council considered the development of a policy to govern RE and RO permit parking at a Workshop
in April 2012 with the following stated objectives:
Enhance residential amenity by eliminating or restricting opportunities for non-residents and
commuters to park all day on residential streets in high-demand areas such as those
adjacent to such as hospitals or institutions, transportation hubs or commercial hubs
Provide equitable on-street parking opportunities for road users
Support green transportation objectives and strategies
Encourage public transportation usage by limiting unrestricted parking in high demand areas.
Subsequent to Council’s direction to develop a policy to address resident parking issues in
residential neighbourhoods adjacent to areas of high demand such as hospitals, transportation or
commercial hubs staff have created a “Resident-Exemption and Resident-Only Parking Policy” for
Council’s consideration and endorsement, a copy of which is attached in Appendix A of this report.
b) Desired Outcome:
The implementation of a resident-only parking policy will provide some certainty for residents
concerned about the livability of their neighbourhood by controlling the number of non-resident
vehicles parking for extended periods of time.
c) Citizen/Customer Implications:
A consequence of limiting on-street parking for resident in a high-demand neighbourhood is the
inconvenience in having visitors seek to park on the street and possibly be ticketed. There is the
cost of the decals or permits to residents as well as having to renew permits annually at Municipal
Hall although this situation exists for many residents through the issuance of animal licences as an
example. The policy does not allow for the issuance of visitor permits as they are often misused and
it is difficult to track appropriate usage. It is expected that residents would allow visitors to use their
driveway while they park on the road while in the case of larger private gatherings the residents
should contact the Bylaws Department to make them aware of the guest vehicles.
It is noted however that the installation of a resident-only parking zone does not guarantee that
residents will be able to park in front of their residence – the parking is available to any eligible user.
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
The Licences, Permits and Bylaws Department will enforce the regulations within the designated RE
or RO zones. The issuance of permits or decals will be handled through the Bylaws Customer Service
Counter in Municipal Hall.
e) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
There will be a cost to administer the issuance and record-keeping of the RE or RO decals. The
annual costs associated with this program will depend largely upon the number of streets where RE
or RO is implemented.
It is recommended that the annual fee for RE or RO decals be included in the District’s Fee and
Charges Bylaw, and reviewed annually in future years. For 2012 it is recommended that the annual
fee for a single RE or RO decal be set at $10. Costs for parking permits vary in other jurisdictions
from $10 up to $74 per annum.
Municipality Parking Permit Costs
New Westminster $10.00
West Vancouver $10.00
City of Coquitlam $18.00
City of North Vancouver $25.00
White Rock $33.60
Vancouver (various locations) $37.00/$55.00/$74.00
The enforcement of the regulations will be undertaken by Licences, Permits and Bylaws Department
staff in the course of their regular shifts.
f) Policy Implications:
The new policy will govern the consideration and implementation of RE or RO zones.
g) Alternatives:
Should the proposed policy to govern RE and RO zones not be supported then staff will continue to
address issues of residential parking conflicts on a case-by-case basis but without the benefit of a
guiding framework.
CONCLUSIONS:
The endorsement of a Council Policy to address concerns of residents around excessive non-local
vehicles parking should alleviate potential conflicts and dissatisfaction of affected residents in
neighbourhoods adjacent to areas of high parking demand such as hospitals, transportation hubs or
commercial hubs.
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: David Pollock PEng, Municipal Engineer
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Liz Holitzki, Director of Licences, Permits and Bylaws
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn PEng., MBA, General Manager,. PW & DS
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
DP/dp
Attachment: Appendix A – “Resident-Exemption and Resident-Only Parking Policy”
"Original signed by David Pollock"
"Original signed by E.S. (Liz) Holitzki"
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
Appendix A
Page 1 of 2 Policy
POLICY MANUAL
Title: Resident-Exemption and Resident-Only Parking
Policy No :
Supersedes:
Authority: Legislative Operational
Approval: Council CMT
General Manager
Effective Date:
June 26, 2012
Review Date:
June 26, 2013
Policy Statement:
Requests for Resident-Exemption and Resident-Only Parking will be addressed in accordance with
the strategies, practice and measures as contained in the document titled “Resident-Exemption
and Resident-Only Parking Procedures”, as attached.
Purpose:
Residential parking issues are a concern of both the District and its residents. The application of
consistent processes and practices will ensure that neighborhood parking issues will be addressed
in a balanced, efficient and cost effective manner that respects the needs of residents and road
users.
Definitions:
See attached “Resident-Exemption and Resident-Only Parking Procedures.”
Page 2 of 2 Policy
Key Areas of Responsibility
Action to Take
Neighborhood request for Parking Restrictions
Evaluate request based on procedures (see attached) and forward
recommendation to Municipal Engineer
Approval or denial
Install signs
Issuance of annual permit
Parking enforcement
Responsibility
Residents
Bylaws and Engineering
Municipal Engineer
Operations
Bylaws
Bylaws
Date: June 26, 2012
RESIDENT-EXEMPTION AND RESIDENT-ONLY PARKING PROCEDURES
(An attachment to Policy No: )
INTRODUCTION
Residential areas adjacent to areas of high parking demand such as hospitals, transportation hubs
or commercial hubs often have to deal with non-resident vehicles taking up the limited on-street
parking. To resolve such issues jurisdictions may choose to implement parking strategies in
situations where a chronic and heavy demand for on-street parking by non-residents is a concern.
Permit parking schemes for residents in a neighbourhood allows residents to have parking priority in
a signed area within a reasonable distance of their home but at the same time it is noted that
residents are not guaranteed the right or ability to park in front of their own property.
Restricted parking schemes are generally implemented where there is a chronic and heavy demand
from on-street parking by non-residents and is not to address short term intermittent parking
problems generated by school, churches, pubs, etc.
The form of parking scheme will vary with the intensity of the parking problem. In general terms
access to on-street parking becomes more difficult once a level of 70 percent parking occupancy is
reached. This threshold is applied as a guide for determining when parking control schemes should
be introduced. Residential streets that consistently have parking levels less than this threshold will
largely remain uncontrolled, apart from controls to maintain traffic efficiency and safety standards.
Once the 70 percent parking occupancy threshold is consistently exceeded, the implementation of
restricted parking zones will be considered if a majority of 65 percent of residents support the
implementation on the affected length of street.
OBJECTIVES
The main objectives of a policy to guide requests for Resident-Exempt (RE) or Resident-Only (RO)
parking schemes are:
Enhance residential amenity by eliminating or restricting opportunities for non-residents and
commuters to park all day on residential streets in high-demand areas such as those
adjacent to such as hospitals or institutions, transportation hubs or commercial hubs
Provide equitable on-street parking opportunities for road users
Support green transportation objectives and strategies
Encourage public transportation usage by limiting unrestricted parking in high demand areas.
Permit parking regulations, whether they be RE or RO are generally implemented in single family
neighbourhoods and not intended to deal with the demands of higher-density residential uses such
as townhouses or apartments as these zones are required to provide adequate off-street parking.
DEFINITIONS
There are two basic types of permit parking schemes:
RESIDENT-EXEMPTION (RE) PARKING:
In this case an area is posted as a time-limited zone where the parking limit is generally set for
one to two hours in order to allow parking for the general public. Residents are able to park for a
longer period under a Resident-Exemption permit. Depending upon the adjacent land use, the
time limited parking may be in place for a defined period each day, may be in place Monday to
Friday, or may be in place 24 hours a day, seven days a week . Residents are not guaranteed an
on-street parking space and availability is on a first-come, first-serve basis.
Date: June 26, 2012
RESIDENT-ONLY (RO) PARKING:
This strategy is generally implemented where there is a demonstrated lack of available on-street
parking even for local residents and there is considerable demand from external vehicles.
CONSIDERATION OF RE AND RO ZONES
RE and RO parking areas should be considered for neighbourhood streets that are in close proximity
to public facilities such as institution facilities, transit hubs, commercial districts and tourist
attractions.
If there is a desire for RE or RO parking on an applicable street the District’s Engineering Department
(Traffic) will undertake a parking evaluation with assistance from Bylaws to determine the validity of
the concern and appropriate measures. The evaluation may include the following:
Inventory of the existing number of on-street parking spaces
Survey of on-street parking demand
Review and evaluation by the Traffic Management Group comprised of staff from RCMP,
Engineering, Bylaws, Speedwatch, Planning, Parks and ICBC.
RE and RO parking areas will be considered on an area-specific basis with the minimum area being a
complete street block, both sides.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Eligibility for a RE or RO permit will be determined as follows:
Single Family dwellings and Semi-detached dwellings (duplex, 3-plex and 4-plex) are eligible
to receive a maximum of two permits, provided that there are two or more cars registered at
the address.
Multi-family dwellings (apartments, townhouses, low and high rise buildings are not eligible
for permits as these zones are required to provide sufficient off-street parking.
In addition to the above;
The permitted vehicle must be registered to the residential address and cannot be a
commercial truck, bus, caravan, recreational vehicle, boat trailer, nor can the vehicle exceed
5000 kgs L.G.V.W.
No visitor or temporary permits will be issued to eliminate mis-use.
Permit holders are permitted to park in designated areas and does not guarantee an on -
street parking space. Parking availably will be on a first come first serve basis.
CONSULTATION PROCESS
All affected residents, business and/or property owners of the street proposed for permit parking will
be notified in writing. A questionnaire survey on the proposal and/or some other form of
communication such as neighborhood street meetings may be used to assess the area residents’
support and willingness to participate in the program. The District is looking for a minimum 65
percent participation rate in any identified area to initiate either a RE or RO scheme.
APPROVAL PROCESS
The Municipal Engineer will have final authority on designating a subject neighbourhood as a RE or
RO area.
Date: June 26, 2012
APPLICATION FOR INDIVIDUAL PERMITS
Residents seeking either RE or RO permits are required to make an annual application at the Bylaws
counter at Municipal Hall. In applying for exemption, residents are responsible to provide the
necessary documents to the District’s Bylaws Department as specified in the application forms.
FEES
Fees for permits shall be as listed in the District’s Fee and Charges Bylaw. These fees will be subject
to annual review.
Any replacement permits required due to damage to original permit, sale of vehicle etc. will be
provided upon receiving new documentation and payment of fee.
USE OF PERMIT
Any issued permit is not transferable.
Permits must reflect the vehicle plate number of the vehicle in which it is displayed and designated
area in which it is parked.
If circumstances change and the permit holder does not meet the eligibility criteria, the permit is no
longer valid and must be returned.
RENEWAL OF RESIDENT PARKING PERMIT
Resident Parking Permits must be renewed at the beginning of each calendar year, subject to
satisfying eligibility criteria. It is the permit holder’s responsibility to make sure that the permit is
valid at all times. Residents must be aware that it is not an automatic renewal.
RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY
The Traffic Management Group will provide input to the Municipal Engineer for all new requests to
establish permit parking areas.
The Municipal Engineer will have final authority on designating RE and RO areas.
The Engineering Department (Traffic) will be responsible for the installation of all traffic controls in
designated RE and RO areas.
The Bylaws Department is responsible for the processing of applications and issuance of all resident
parking permits.
The Bylaws Department is responsible for the enforcement of all permit parking areas.
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: CDPR-0640-30
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: Housing Action Plan Process
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The purpose of this report to is obtain Council’s authorization to proceed with the proposed process
for the preparation of a Housing Action Plan (HAP) for the District of Maple Ridge. The HAP will
articulate a vision, guiding principles, goals and objectives, and a plan for municipal actions and
strategies with the goal of achieving an adequate supply of housing to meet the full range of incomes
and needs in our community.
RECOMMENDATION:
That staff be authorized to proceed with the preparation of a Housing Action Plan, in accordance with
the process outlined in this staff report dated 2012-06-18.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The proposed HAP was approved as a part of the 2012 Business Plan under the title Affordable
Housing Strategy. This title has been modified to be called the “Housing Action Plan” to align
with the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS).
In July, 2011, Metro Vancouver adopted the RGS with the support of member municipalities.
Maple Ridge Council accepted the RGS on March 22, 2011. The RGS demonstrates that
affordable housing with a range of housing options is an essential part of a complete community.
It outlines a series of municipal actions including the development of Official Community Plans,
Regional Context Statements, and Housing Action Plans as actions to assist municipalities in
increasing the supply and diversity of affordable housing at key points along the housing
continuum.
The RGS provides ten year estimates of future housing demands across the region. The 10-year
estimate for Maple Ridge is for 6,600 new housing units; with 4,300 being ownership units and
2,300 being rental units. Of the rental units, it is estimated that 1,700 will need to be affordable
in order to accommodate low and moderate-income households. Of the 1,700, it is estimated
that there is a need for 800 non-market social housing units and 900 affordable market rental
units.
Scope
The District of Maple Ridge’s HAP will identify actions currently underway and will recommend
strategies to address current and future housing needs, with a particular focus on the needs of
low and moderate income households for whom home ownership is not an option. The HAP will:
assess local housing market conditions, by tenure, including assessing housing supply,
demand and affordability;
identify housing priorities, based on the assessment of local housing market conditions, and
consideration of changing household demographics, characteristics and needs;
803
identify implementation measures within the jurisdiction and financial capabilities of
municipalities;
identify strategies to encourage the supply of new rental housing and limit the loss of existing
rental housing stock;
identify opportunities to participate in programs with other levels of government to secure
additional affordable housing units to meet housing needs across the continuum of housing.
Through a community and stakeholder engagement process, the HAP will focus on the housing
continuum from home ownership through to non-market housing to identify key
recommendations to address the supply of:
Non-market housing for low income households and for groups that require supportive or
special needs housing;
Market rental housing for low and moderate income households, and
Affordable home ownership.
Non-Market Housing:
Through the Social Planning function, the District of Maple Ridge has been working with
community partners to facilitate solutions to the issues related to inadequate housing options.
Work has included:
Being informed and understanding the issues;
Acting as an advocate to other levels of government, funders, and community stakeholders;
Supporting the implementation of solutions through actions that are within the municipality’s
mandate.
Over the last several years, the District has been proactive in serving as a catalyst for action to
address homelessness. Examples include:
Participation on the Regional Steering Committee on Homelessness;
Support for the development 2004 Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows Ending Homelessness Action
Plan, as well as the update to this Action Plan that is currently underway;
Support, and in some instances in-kind contribution, for numerous community initiatives
including: the Iron Horse Youth Safe House, the Alouette Home Start Community Outreach
team; the Family Inn; Alouette Heights Supportive Housing; and the Route 29 Youth Housing
support program.
The HAP will explore strategies to build on the Municipality’s current activities and identify
options and opportunities to help increase the supply of non-market housing for low-income
households and supportive housing for seniors, youth and people with disabilities.
Market Rental Housing:
The development of a HAP will provide an opportunity for Maple Ridge to undertake an analysis
of its current market rental housing stock, examine the municipal policies and regulations that
impact the supply of rental housing, and identify priority issues and recommended actions for
tracking and increasing the supply of rental housing.
Home Ownership:
The preparation of the HAP will include an analysis of the municipality’s land use policies and
regulations and investigate how to support and encourage the continued supply of ownership
housing in a variety of forms, and explore opportunities for affordable home ownership.
Proposed Process
The attached HAP flow chart outlines the proposed process for this project. The proposal is that
the Social Planning Advisory Committee will act as the Steering Committee for the HAP, guiding
the process and making recommendation on decision items to Council. The Parks & Leisure
Services department staff that support SPAC will be the key staff liaisons to the project and the
Planning Department will provide technical support.
The flow chart indicates that background work to prepare for the HAP is already underway. The
chart indicates that the work to prepare for the HAP began with the participation in the RGS. It
is anticipated that this work will coincide with the hiring of a consulting firm which will then begin
the process of conducting research related to the HAP. The background studies and policy
papers being prepared by staff include:
Housing and Market Conditions Update - the Official Community Plan includes a section on
population and housing trends, including the population profile of the community at the time
(2005) and housing distribution (2001) and projections. The 2011 Federal Census provides
an opportunity to update this information to ensure it provides relevant information for the
other studies being completed as part of the Housing Action Plan.
Secondary Suites Review - this work includes a review of the Zoning Bylaw regulations and
general issues related to Secondary Suites and Temporary Residential Uses (TRU’s), to
investigate options and ideas to solve the issues and to recommend a set of policy and/or
bylaw amendments for Council’s consideration.
Ending Homelessness Action Plan – work to update the 2004 Action Plan is in the SPAC
2012 Business Plan. The work will be conducted with the Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Katzie
Community Network Housing Planning Table. The Action Plan will provide an analysis of
current resources and services and will identify current priorities within the format of an
action plan. This plan will guide the work of the Housing Planning Table and partners over
the next five years. The issues and priorities that are identified in this plan will provide
background information to inform the HAP.
Seniors & Special Needs Housing Assessment - the Official Community Plan also includes
planning principles, objectives and policies respecting seniors and special needs housing.
The HAP process provides an opportunity to ensure that the current policies continue to
provide direction for seniors and special needs housing in the District.
These background studies and policy papers, together with additional research, will provide
valuable information and context for the HAP public consultation process. The proposed timeline
is for the consultation process to begin mid January, 2013. The public consultation process will
be designed to engage a diverse mix of stakeholders and community members in dialogue
designed to identify the key housing issues and explore options and opportunities to address the
issues.
The HAP will include a vision, goals and objectives, and actions and strategies. The proposed
final HAP will be assessed to ensure alignment with the RGS and to determine implications for
municipal policy or bylaw amendments. The final proposed HAP, along with an outline of
municipal policy implications, will be presented to SPAC for endorsement and a recommendation
to Council. This process is expected to be completed by the summer of 2013. Once endorsed,
the HAP will contribute to the development of the Regional Context Statement.
b) Desired Outcomes:
Housing is essential in creating healthy, sustainable communities and affordability plays an
important role in supporting a competitive local economy and in promoting the economic and
social well-being of families and individuals.
The proposed HAP will focus on developing recommendations designed to address the
critical needs in the community: the shortfall in the supply of affordable rental housing, the
shortfall in the supply of social housing, the homelessness and the increasing numbers of at-
risk of homelessness, and the shortfall in modest-cost housing appropriate for first-time
home-buyers.
c) Strategic Alignment:
This initiative aligns with Council’s strategic direction of creating a safe and livable community.
This initiative recognizes that the provision of adequate housing is essential to the overall health
of the community. There are three core arguments that suggest that the health and
sustainability of the municipality depends on the provision of adequate housing:
1. Housing, Health and Quality of Life: there is a correlation between housing, health and
quality of life:
2. Links to Economic Well-being: housing affordability is important in terms of supporting a
competitive local economy:
3. Public costs: Homelessness has a social and health cost to both the individual and to the
community:
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
It is estimated that for one-third of the region’s households, finding and remaining in affordable
housing to rent or own is a problem. Individuals unable to find housing that is suitable in size
and good repair without spending 30% or more of their household income on shelter are
considered to be in “core housing need”. The 2006 census estimated that 17% of households in
Metro Vancouver were in core housing need. It is critical to the well being of individuals and
family, and to the health of the overall community, that there is an adequate supply of affordable
housing options to meet the full range of incomes and needs in our community.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
Parks and Leisure Services, under the guidance of the Social Planning Advisory Committee will
provide staff support to the development of the HAP with the technical support of the Planning
Department.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
It is anticipated that the recommendations developed for the HAP will have implications for
future business plans for both the Parks and Leisure Services and the Planning Department
business plans.
The endorsement of the HAP itself would not have any financial implications; however there is
the potential that specific recommendations may include a financial commitment. Such
recommendations would be considered by Council individually through the annual business
planning approval process.
g) Policy Implications:
The RGS requirement for municipalities to develop a HAP and to ensure the alignment of the
Official Community Plan with the RGS are implications for Municipal policies.
The RGS requires that within two years of its adoption, each municipality prepare an updated
Official Community Plan and Regional Context Statement. The Regional Context Statement sets
out the relationship between the RGS and the municipality’s OCP, and identifies how local
actions will contribute to achieving Regional Growth Strategy goals. Municipalities are required
to submit their Regional Context Statements to the Metro Vancouver Board for acceptance.
Should a municipality not complete components such as the HAP within the two year time
frame, it is acceptable to indicate in the Regional Context Statement that this work is underway.
CONCLUSIONS:
The development of a Housing Action Plan is an important step in advancing the municipality’s
sustainability objectives. The HAP will focus on meeting critical housing needs in the community
recognizing that housing is essential in creating healthy, sustainable communities and affordability
plays an important role in supporting a competitive local economy and in promoting the economic
and social well-being of families and individuals.
The Housing Action Plan will inform the development of the Regional Context Statement to be
submitted to Metro Vancouver outlining the relationship between the Regional Growth Strategy and
the municipality’s OCP, and identifying how local actions will contribute to achieving Regional Growth
Strategy goals.
The District of Maple Ridge Social Planning Advisory Committee has endorsed the proposed Housing
Action Plan process and is recommending that Council endorse the process and authorize staff to
proceed.
“Original signed by Sue Wheeler”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Sue Wheeler
Community Services Director
“Original signed by Kelly Swift”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Kelly Swift
General Manager: Community Development, Parks and Recreation Services
“Original signed by Christine Carter”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence by: Christine Carter, Director of Planning
“Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
:sw
Attachment: Housing Action Plan Process
Regional Growth Strategy:
Municipalities to prepare
and implement a Housing
Action Plan
District of Maple Ridge
Council direction to
undertake the work
in 2012
Background Studies and Policy Papers
Summary of Background Studies
and Policy Papers and additional
Research Papers as
required
Key Housing Issues
Housing Action Plan Content
Vision
Goals & Objectives
Actions & Strategies
Alignment with the Regional
Growth Strategy
Recommendations to Council on policy
or bylaw amendments
Housing Action
Plan
Secondary
Suites Review
Ending
Homelessness
Action Plan
Seniors & Special
Needs Housing
Assessment
Housing Market
Conditions
Update
July
2011
December
2011
May
2011
Fall
2012
Winter
2012 / 2013
Spring
2013
Summer
2013 Ongoing Consultation with Residents, Service Providers, User Groups and other levels of Government SPAC
District of Maple Ridge
LONG TERM TRANSLINK FUNDING MODEL
WHEREAS TransLink is responsible for regional transit, cycling and commuting options, and
the Major Road Network for the Metro Vancouver area which is home to approximately 50%
of British Columbia’s population;
AND WHEREAS TransLink is unable to generate sufficient funding to meet the needs of this
growing area through its current funding model;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Union of British Columbia Municipalities urge the
provincial government to provide a permanent and appropriate long tem funding model for
TransLink.
804
District of Maple Ridge
MUNICIPAL PRICE INDEX
WHEREAS municipal spending is often compared to or linked to the Consumer Price Index
which measures changes in the price level of consumer goods and services purchased by
households;
AND WHEREAS municipalities experience with inflation can differ greatly from the Consumer
Price Index as the largest municipal expenditures are typically labour, materials and
contractual services which are different factors than those found in the Consumer Price
Index;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Union of British Columbia Municipalities request that
the provincial government include in the Terms of Reference of the Municipal Auditor
General the creation of a Municipal Price Index that will improve the accuracy by which
municipal costs can be projected.
District of Maple Ridge
Remuneration Levels for Municipal Councils
WHEREAS there are a variety of methodologies used throughout the Province to set
remuneration levels for elected officials at the municipal level;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Union of British Columbia Municipalities urge the
provincial government to include in the Terms of Reference of the Municipal Auditor General
responsibility for determining the most appropriate methodology for establishing
remuneration levels for Municipal Councils.
1
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6838 - 2011
A Bylaw to amend the text of Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw
No. 3510 - 1985 as amended.
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as
amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open
meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6838 – 2011”
2. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 – 1985 is hereby amended as follows:
a) PART 2 INTERPRETATION, is amended by the addition of the following definition in correct
alphabetical order:
“Hobby Beekeeping use means the keeping, owning, or maintaining of up to two (2) bee
hives on a residential property occupied by the beekeeper or as an educational use in an
institutional setting”.
b) PART 4, GENERAL REGULATIONS, SECTION 402 REGULATIONS FOR PERMITTED
USES OF LAND, BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES is amended by the addition of the following
subsection in correct numerical order:
“(12) Hobby Beekeeping Use
Where permitted a Hobby Beekeeping use is subject to the following provisions:
a) A maximum of two (2) hives per property shall be permitted;
b) Bee Hives for a Hobby Beekeeper use shall be located to the rear of the principal
building on the lot;
c) Hives must:
(i) be raised a minimum of 2.5 metres above grade; or
(ii) be behind a solid fence or hedge a minimum of 2.0 metres in height located
parallel to an adjacent property line and extending a minimum of 6.0 metres
horizontally beyond the hive in either direction.
(iii) be oriented with the hive entrance facing towards the centre of the property.
1001
2
c) PART 6, RESIDENTIAL ZONES, Section 601, Subsection A. PERMITTED USES OF LAND,
BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES is amended by the addition of the following after Detached
Garden Suite Use
“Hobby Beekeeping Use RS-1 RS-1a RS-1b RS-1c RS-1d RS-2 RS-3 SRS”
(subject to Section 402)
READ a first time the 8th day of May, 2012
READ a second time the 8th day of May, 2012
PUBLIC HEARING held the 19th day of June, 2012
READ a third time the day of 2012
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of 2012
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6881-2011
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended.
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6881-2011."
2. That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 6 Section 20 Township 15 New Westminster District Plan 12094
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1551 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RS-2 (One Family Suburban
Residential).
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 13th day of December, A.D. 2011.
READ a second time the 8th day of May, A.D. 2012.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 19th day of June , A.D. 2012.
READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 .
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
1002
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE : Apr 25, 2012 FILE: RZ/066/07 BY: PC
12355 MCNUTT ROAD
CORPOR ATION OFTHE DIST RIC T OFMAPLE R IDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1
2
4
1
0
12310
12366
12414
12293
12313
12485
12470
12240
12231
12251 12250
12375
12462
12295
12383
12278 12273
12355
12357
12294 1240612433 McNUTT RD.272 ST.LMP 6073
LMP 20047
1
BCP 38378
28
31
Rem 32
7
P 12094
BCP 38378
29
LMP 15210
Rem A
6
11
LMP 109238
6
9
PARK
PARK
P 34391
LMP 20047
EP 32859
7
BCP 253 18
LMP 6073
PARK
10
BCP 253 18
30
3
LMP 20049
2 3
!(
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
SCALE 1:2,000
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6843-2011
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan
_______________________________________
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the Official
Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed desirable to amend Schedules “A” "B" & "C" to the Official Community
Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open
meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6843-2011
2. Schedule "A", Section 10.2.1 Land Use Designations, Albion Area Plan map is hereby
amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot “A” Section 3 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 8296
as shown on Map 831, a copy of which is attached hereto and forming part of this Bylaw, by
redesignating the area shown hatched to “Medium Density Residential”, and the area
outlined in heavy black line to “Conservation” and adjusting the Albion Boundary.
3. Schedule “B” is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Lot “A” Section 3 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 8296
as shown on Map No. 811, a copy of which is attached hereto and forming part of this Bylaw,
to include the property within the Urban Area Boundary, to add the property to the Albion
Area Plan, and to remove the “starred property” designation from the property.
4. Schedule “C” is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Lot “A” Section 3 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 8296
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 832, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by adding “Conservation” and adjusting the
Urban Area Boundary.
1003.1
5. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No.6425-2006 is hereby amended accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the 22nd day of May, A.D. 2012.
READ A SECOND TIME the 22nd day of May, A.D. 2012.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the 19th day of June, A.D. 2012.
READ A THIRD TIME the day of , A.D. 20 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20.
___________________________________ _____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
24315243182431610077
10081
10093
10097243102432524325 2433124326243382434824349243502436024357243622436324374243732437724375243812438624390243962439510241
10245
10251
24426243112431224314243182431810085
1008924327 2434210116
10120 24350243472435524355243602436224355243652436624372243982431024319243162432610080
1011224330243362433724343 24352243462435324357243612436824371243692437424384243912439424399243242433010062 243462433624345243512436124366243642436524366243712437224379243802437824382243812438524386243912439210211
10231
10249
245392431324314243221011324315 2432024326100682433324340 2434424341243462435124345243572435924364243672437024375243702437324384243832438724388243942439524314243201010524323 2433224341243402436024350243562435424357243592435624361243682437624377243802438610253
2430924317243262433024330243292433424342243482435424353243582437024363243692436724367243792437824382243832439010243
10247
24554/722430510073
10109243212432224328
1007224335243391007624340 243582437424371243762437824382243872439910221
244 ST.102 AVE
101 A AVE.244 ST.102 A AVE.
101 AVE.243 A ST.243 A ST.101 A AVE.
JACKSON RD.
102 B AVE.5859146
124
20
111
4
142
128
572LMP 36346P 214291
46 45
32
20
LMP 36343
BCP 6181
41
12
7
16
25
17335
1
A
135 85BCP 13188
2
148
137
125
LMP 36295
BCP 174904
151
140
114
418
143 5
107
LMP 36343
3
BCP 7533
3
25
42
BCP 6181
13 14
5
41 39
8
9 36PARK
3
147
5 6
141
71
16
132
47
34
19
10
3
20 19
27
BCP 8931
42
5 6
30
39
28
2635 18
P 8296
BCP 46878
LMP 3634669661
3
139
127LMP 36295
PARK
19
150
673131
36 35LMP 36343
1514 13
4
7
2 24
120 44
LMP 3634322
6
18
28
LMP 3572811BCP 893131 3738 37
27
12
LMP 36346109
64152
BCP 3283
116
BCP 17490
24
2
117
48
LMP 34684
26
17
40
10
5557BCP 17490
BCP 32285
145
136
LMP 36295
70676562LMP 34684
138
126
112113 115
8
17 P 21429118
25 BCP 328323
45
44
33
11LMP 36343
2
BCP 6181
29
8
15
14
545660123
110
61149
129130
3
6119
11 12
22
1
4
43
43
29
40 38
16
13
15 3234A
LMP 36295
68632
1 972 717 9
1
49
10
1
121
2
21
31 30
PARK
21 23
4
24
7 9
BCP 17491
LMP 36344
LMP 36348BCP 17488 BCP 17487
BCP 17489
P 38409
´
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No.Map No.
6843-2011832To Add To Conservation
24315243182431610077
10081
10093
10097243102432524325 2433124326243382434824349243502436024357243622436324374243732437724375243812438624390243962439510241
10245
10251
24426243112431224314243182431810085
1008924327 2434210116
10120 24350243472435524355243602436224355243652436624372243982431024319243162432610080
1011224330243362433724343 24352243462435324357243612436824371243692437424384243912439424399243242433010062 243462433624345243512436124366243642436524366243712437224379243802437824382243812438524386243912439210211
10231
10249
245392431324314243221011324315 2432024326100682433324340 2434424341243462435124345243572435924364243672437024375243702437324384243832438724388243942439524314243201010524323 2433224341243402436024350243562435424357243592435624361243682437624377243802438610253
2430924317243262433024330243292433424342243482435424353243582437024363243692436724367243792437824382243832439010243
10247
24554/722430510073
10109243212432224328
1007224335243391007624340 243582437424371243762437824382243872439910221
244 ST.102 AVE
101 A AVE.244 ST.102 A AVE.
101 AVE.243 A ST.243 A ST.101 A AVE.
JACKSON RD.
102 B AVE.5859146
124
20
111
4
142
128
572LMP 36346P 214291
46 45
32
20
LMP 36343
BCP 6181
41
12
7
16
25
17335
1
A
135 85BCP 13188
2
148
137
125
LMP 36295
BCP 174904
151
140
114
418
143 5
107
LMP 36343
3
BCP 7533
3
25
42
BCP 6181
13 14
5
41 39
8
9 36PARK
3
147
5 6
141
71
16
132
47
34
19
10
3
20 19
27
BCP 8931
42
5 6
30
39
28
2635 18
P 8296
BCP 46878
LMP 3634669661
3
139
127LMP 36295
PARK
19
150
673131
36 35LMP 36343
1514 13
4
7
2 24
120 44
LMP 3634322
6
18
28
LMP 3572811BCP 893131 3738 37
27
12
LMP 36346109
64152
BCP 3283
116
BCP 17490
24
2
117
48
LMP 34684
26
17
40
10
5557BCP 17490
BCP 32285
145
136
LMP 36295
70676562LMP 34684
138
126
112113 115
8
17 P 21429118
25 BCP 328323
45
44
33
11LMP 36343
2
BCP 6181
29
8
15
14
545660123
110
61149
129130
3
6119
11 12
22
1
4
43
43
29
40 38
16
13
15 3234A
LMP 36295
68632
1 972 717 9
1
49
10
1
121
2
21
31 30
PARK
21 23
4
24
7 9
BCP 17491
LMP 36344
LMP 36348BCP 17488 BCP 17487
BCP 17489
P 38409
´
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No.Map No. From:
To:
6843-2011831Agricultural
Medium Density ResidentialConservation
24315243182431610077
10081
10093
10097243102432524325 2433124326243382434824349243502436024357243622436324374243732437724375243812438624390243962439510241
10245
10251
24426243112431224314243182431810085
1008924327 2434210116
10120 24350243472435524355243602436224355243652436624372243982431024319243162432610080
1011224330243362433724343 24352243462435324357243612436824371243692437424384243912439424399243242433010062 243462433624345243512436124366243642436524366243712437224379243802437824382243812438524386243912439210211
10231
10249
245392431324314243221011324315 2432024326100682433324340 2434424341243462435124345243572435924364243672437024375243702437324384243832438724388243942439524314243201010524323 2433224341243402436024350243562435424357243592435624361243682437624377243802438610253
2430924317243262433024330243292433424342243482435424353243582437024363243692436724367243792437824382243832439010243
10247
24554/722430510073
10109243212432224328
1007224335243391007624340 243582437424371243762437824382243872439910221
244 ST.102 AVE
101 A AVE.244 ST.102 A AVE.
101 AVE.243 A ST.243 A ST.101 A AVE.
JACKSON RD.
102 B AVE.5859146
124
20
111
4
142
128
572LMP 36346P 214291
46 45
32
20
LMP 36343
BCP 6181
41
12
7
16
25
17335
1
A
135 85BCP 13188
2
148
137
125
LMP 36295
BCP 174904
151
140
114
418
143 5
107
LMP 36343
3
BCP 7533
3
25
42
BCP 6181
13 14
5
41 39
8
9 36PARK
3
147
5 6
141
71
16
132
47
34
19
10
3
20 19
27
BCP 8931
42
5 6
30
39
28
2635 18
P 8296
BCP 46878
LMP 3634669661
3
139
127LMP 36295
PARK
19
150
673131
36 35LMP 36343
1514 13
4
7
2 24
120 44
LMP 3634322
6
18
28
LMP 3572811BCP 893131 3738 37
27
12
LMP 36346109
64152
BCP 3283
116
BCP 17490
24
2
117
48
LMP 34684
26
17
40
10
5557BCP 17490
BCP 32285
145
136
LMP 36295
70676562LMP 34684
138
126
112113 115
8
17 P 21429118
25 BCP 328323
45
44
33
11LMP 36343
2
BCP 6181
29
8
15
14
545660123
110
61149
129130
3
6119
11 12
22
1
4
43
43
29
40 38
16
13
15 3234A
LMP 36295
68632
1 972 717 9
1
49
10
1
121
2
21
31 30
PARK
21 23
4
24
7 9
BCP 17491
LMP 36344
LMP 36348BCP 17488 BCP 17487
BCP 17489
P 38409
´
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No.Map No.
PURPOSE:
6843-2011811
TO AMEND URBAN AREA BOUNDARY AS SHOWNTO ADD TO ALBION AREA PLAN ANDTO REMOVE AS "STARRED PROPERTY"
EXISTING URBANAREA BOUNDARY
PROPOSED URBANAREA BOUNDARY
URBAN AREA BOUNDARYTO BE REMOVED
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6844-2011
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended.
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6844-2011."
2. That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot A, Section 3, Township 12, New Westminster District Plan 8296
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1531 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential
District).
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 26th day of July, A.D. 2011.
READ a second time the 22nd day of May, A.D. 2012.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 19th day of June, A.D. 2012.
READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20 .
APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation this day of , A.D. 20 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 .
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
1003.2
24315243182431610077
10081
10093
10097243102432524325 2433124326243382434824349243502436024357243622436324374243732437724375243812438624390243962439510241
10245
10251
24426243112431224314243182431810085
1008924327 2434210116
10120 24350243472435524355243602436224355243652436624372243982431024319243162432610080
1011224330243362433724343 24352243462435324357243612436824371243692437424384243912439424399243242433010062 243462433624345243512436124366243642436524366243712437224379243802437824382243812438524386243912439210211
10231
10249
245392431324314243221011324315 2432024326100682433324340 2434424341243462435124345243572435924364243672437024375243702437324384243832438724388243942439524314243201010524323 2433224341243402436024350243562435424357243592435624361243682437624377243802438610253
2430924317243262433024330243292433424342243482435424353243582437024363243692436724367243792437824382243832439010243
10247
24554/722430510073
10109243212432224328
1007224335243391007624340 243582437424371243762437824382243872439910221
244 ST.102 AVE
101 A AVE.244 ST.102 A AVE.
101 AVE.243 A ST.243 A ST.101 A AVE.
JACKSON RD.
102 B AVE.5859146
124
20
111
4
142
128
572LMP 36346P 214291
46 45
32
20
LMP 36343
BCP 6181
41
12
7
16
25
17335
1
A
135 85BCP 13188
2
148
137
125
LMP 36295
BCP 174904
151
140
114
418
143 5
107
LMP 36343
3
BCP 7533
3
25
42
BCP 6181
13 14
5
41 39
8
9 36PARK
3
147
5 6
141
71
16
132
47
34
19
10
3
20 19
27
BCP 8931
42
5 6
30
39
28
2635 18
P 8296
BCP 46878
LMP 3634669661
3
139
127LMP 36295
PARK
19
150
673131
36 35LMP 36343
1514 13
4
7
2 24
120 44
LMP 3634322
6
18
28
LMP 3572811BCP 893131 3738 37
27
12
LMP 36346109
64152
BCP 3283
116
BCP 17490
24
2
117
48
LMP 34684
26
17
40
10
5557BCP 17490
BCP 32285
145
136
LMP 36295
70676562LMP 34684
138
126
112113 115
8
17 P 21429118
25 BCP 328323
45
44
33
11LMP 36343
2
BCP 6181
29
8
15
14
545660123
110
61149
129130
3
6119
11 12
22
1
4
43
43
29
40 38
16
13
15 3234A
LMP 36295
68632
1 972 717 9
1
49
10
1
121
2
21
31 30
PARK
21 23
4
24
7 9
BCP 17491
LMP 36344
LMP 36348BCP 17488 BCP 17487
BCP 17489
P 38409
101 AVE.243 A ST.´
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No.Map No. From:
To:
6844-20111531RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 1 of 45
DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012
A Bylaw to regulate the Construction, alteration, repair, demolition or moving of
buildings and Structures and the installation, alteration or repair of plumbing,
electrical working and equipment and gas piping, fittings and appliances in the
Municipality of Maple Ridge
WHEREAS section 692 (1) and (2) of the Local Government Act authorizes the Corporation of the
District of Maple Ridge, for the health, safety and protection of persons and property to regulate the
Construction, alteration, repair, or demolition of buildings and Structures by bylaw;
AND WHEREAS the Province of British Columbia has adopted a building code to govern standards in
respect of the Construction, alteration, repair and demolition of buildings in municipalities and
regional districts in the Province;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed necessary to provide for the administration of the building code;
NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the District of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
1. Citation
This bylaw be cited as the “Maple Ridge Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012” and;
That “Maple Ridge Building Bylaw No. 6180 – 2003” as amended be repealed in its entirety.
2. Definitions
In this bylaw:
The following words and terms have the meanings set out in the current edition of the British
Columbia Building Code: assembly occupancy, Building, Building area, Building height, business and
personal services occupancy, care or detention occupancy, Constructor, coordinating registered
professional, designer, field review, high hazard industrial occupancy, industrial occupancy, low
hazard industrial occupancy, major occupancy, mercantile occupancy, medium hazard industrial
occupancy, occupancy, owner, plumbing system, registered professional, registered professional of
record, and residential occupancy. The following term has the same meaning as set out under
Section 55 of the Community Charter: Qualified Professional
The words and terms in Bold below have the following meanings:
“Accessory Building” means a Building which is customarily incidental, subordinate and
exclusively devoted to the uses contained within the principal Building.
“Agent” means a person appointed as an agent in writing by the owner of the Premises
authorizing such person to make application for a Building Permit or Occupancy Permit
pursuant to this Bylaw and to act for the Owner pursuant to this Bylaw.
1004
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 2 of 45
“B.C. Gas Safety Code” means the standards of the Canadian Gas Association and
amendments thereto as adopted by the B.C. Safety Standards Act and Gas Safety
Regulation pursuant thereto.
“Building Code” means the British Columbia Building Code current edition as adopted by the
Minister pursuant to section 692 (1) of the Local Government Act, as amended or re-
enacted from time to time.
“Building Official” includes The Chief Building Official, Building Inspectors, Gas/Plumbing
Inspectors, Electrical Inspectors, Trades Inspectors, Safety Officers and Plan Checkers
designated by the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge.
"CC" - means the Community Charter [SBC 2003] Chapter 26 as amended or re-enacted from
time to time.
“Chief Building Official” is the Manager of Inspection Services / Local Safety Manager and
includes those Building Officials as designated by the Manager of Inspection Services
and the Director of Licensing, Permits and Bylaws.
“Complex Building” means:
2.1 all Buildings used for major occupancies classified as
2.1.1 assembly occupancies,
2.1.2 care or detention occupancies,
2.1.3 high hazard industrial occupancies, and
2.2 all Buildings exceeding 600 square metres in Building area or exceeding three
storeys in Building height used for major occupancies classified as
2.2.1 residential occupancies,
2.2.2 business and personal services occupancies,
2.2.3 mercantile occupancies,
2.2.4 medium and low hazard industrial occupancies;
“Construct” includes erect, install, replace, alter, enlarge, demolish, repair or move and any
excavation (excavation as defined in the B.C. Building Code).
“Construction” means the erection alteration, replacement, addition, removal, moving and
demolition of Buildings, Structures and of all appurtenances thereto including without
limitation, Plumbing, sewer, drainage, septic, heating, air conditioning, electrical, gas, oil
and other systems, fittings, appliances and accessories of every nature and kind, and
includes all site preparation, excavation, filling and grading.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 3 of 45
“Corporation” means the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge.
“Council” means the Municipal Council of the Corporation.
“Electrical Code” means all those parts of the current Canadian Electrical Code CSA Standard
C22.1-02 including errata forming the B.C. Electrical Code and Electrical Safety
Regulation enacted by the B.C. Safety Standards Act.
“Electrical Equipment” means Electrical Equipment as defined in the Electrical Code.
“Gas Equipment” shall have the same meaning as that term defined in the Gas Safety
Regulation forming part of the BC Safety Standards Act.
“Health and Safety Aspects of The Work” means design and Construction regulated by Part 3,
Part 4, and sections 9.1, 9.4, 9.5, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.12, 9.14, 9.15, 9.17, 9.18, 9.20,
9.21, 9.22, 9.23, 9.24, 9.31, 9.32, and 9.35 of Part 9 of the Building Code.
“Non Inhabitable” means an accessory residential Building which has no cooking, or kitchen
counter/cupboard facilities, bathing, or sleeping facilities and which is used solely as an
Accessory Building for storage or work shop purposes;
“Permit” includes a Building Permit, Occupancy Permit, Gas Permit, Plumbing Permit, Electrical
Permit and all other Permits required by this Bylaw.
“Plumbing” means any system or arrangement of one or more pipes, including fittings and
appliances attached thereto, in or upon any Premises, installed for the purpose of
supplying such Premises with potable water or for the conducting or carrying away of
waste water or of rain or surface water, including any required vent pipes and including
sprinkler systems and irrigation systems.
“Pond”- means any manufactured or constructed body of water of any size, which is installed
as a landscaping feature and is not intended for the purposes of swimming bathing or
human occupation.
“Pool” means any manufactured or constructed swimming Pool having the capacity to contain
water at a depth exceeding 450mm or with a water surface area exceeding 14 square
metres. A Pool includes any fence or other enclosing Structure, all Plumbing and
appurtenances necessary or convenient to the use of the Pool, but does not include self-
contained hot tubs with a locking cover.
“Premises” includes any parcel of land together with all Buildings or Structures located
thereon.
“Simple Building” means Buildings of three storeys or less in Building height, having a Building
area not exceeding 600 square metres and used for major occupancies classified as:
2.3 residential occupancies,
2.4 business and personal services occupancies,
2.5 mercantile occupancies, or
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 4 of 45
2.6 medium and low hazard industrial occupancies.
“Structure” means a Construction or portion thereof of any kind, whether fixed to, supported by
or sunk into land or water, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, includes any
pad or base of concrete, asphalt or other material designed to support or actually
supporting a mobile home; but specifically excludes landscaping, paving, decks less than
0.6 metres in height with no roofs and retaining Structures less than 0.6 metres in
height.
“Temporary” means a period of time not exceeding 12 months.
“Temporary Building” means a Building that has been granted approval for a fixed and limited
time not exceeding the expiration date of the authorizing Building Permit.
“Temporary Residential Use” means a temporary dwelling unit for the accommodation of a
relative of the property Owner.
3. Purpose of Bylaw
3.1 This bylaw, shall, notwithstanding any other provision herein, be interpreted in
accordance with this section.
3.2 This bylaw is enacted and retained for the purpose of regulating Construction within
the Corporation in the general public interest. The activities undertaken by or on
behalf of the Corporation pursuant to this bylaw are for the sole purpose of providing
a limited spot check for health, safety and the protection of persons and property. It
is not contemplated nor intended, nor does the purpose of this bylaw extend:
3.2.1 to the protection of owners, owner/builders or Constructors from economic
loss;
3.2.2 to the assumption by the Corporation of any responsibility for ensuring the
compliance by any owners, his or her representatives or any employees,
Constructors or designers retained by him or her, with the Building Code, the
requirements of this bylaw or any other applicable codes or standards;
3.2.3 to providing any person a warranty of design or workmanship with respect to
any Building or Structure for which a permit or occupancy permit is issued
under this bylaw;
3.2.4 to providing a warranty or assurance that Construction undertaken pursuant
to permits issued by the Corporation is free from latent, or any defects.
4. Permit Conditions
4.1 A permit is required whenever work regulated under this bylaw is to be undertaken.
4.2 Neither the issuance of a permit under this bylaw nor the acceptance or review of
plans, drawings or specifications or supporting documents, nor any inspections made
by or on behalf of the Corporation shall in any way relieve the owner or his or her
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 5 of 45
representatives from full and sole responsibility to perform the work in strict
accordance with the Building Code, this bylaw and all other codes, standards and
applicable enactments.
4.3 It shall be the full and sole responsibility of the owner (and where the owner is acting
through a representative, the representative) to carry out the work in respect of which
the permit was issued in compliance with the Building Code, this bylaw and all other
applicable codes, standards and enactments.
4.4 Neither the issuance of a permit under this bylaw, the review and acceptance of the
design, drawings, plans or specifications, nor inspections made by a Building Official,
shall constitute a representation or warranty that the Building Code or the bylaw have
been complied with or the Building or Structure meets any standard of materials or
workmanship, and no person shall rely on any of those acts as establishing
compliance with the Building Code or this bylaw or any standard of Construction.
5. Scope and Exemptions
5.1 This bylaw applies to the design, Construction and occupancy of new Buildings and
Structures, and the alteration, re-Construction, demolition, removal, relocation and
occupancy of existing Buildings and Structures.
5.2 This bylaw does not apply to Buildings or Structures exempted by Division A - Part 1
of the Building Code except as expressly provided herein.
6. Prohibitions
6.1 No person shall commence or continue or suffer or permit the commencement or
continuance of any Construction, alteration, reconstruction, demolition, removal or
relocation of any Building or Structure, including excavation or other work related to
Construction unless a Building Official has issued a valid and subsisting permit for
the work.
6.2 No person shall demolish of suffer or permit the demolition of a Building or Structure
unless a Building Official has issued a valid and subsisting demolition permit for the
demolition.
6.3 No person shall move or suffer or permit the movement of a Building or Structure
unless a valid and subsisting moving permit has been issued by a Building Official for
the moving of the Building or Structure.
6.4 No person shall occupy or use or suffer or permit the occupancy or use of any
Building or Structure unless a valid and subsisting occupancy permit has been issued
by the Chief Building Official in accordance with sections 23.1 to 23.8 of this bylaw
for the Building or Structure, or contrary to the terms of any permit issued or any
notice given by the Chief Building Official.
6.5 No person shall or suffer or permit, unless authorized in writing by the Chief Building
Official, reverse, alter, deface, cover, remove or in any way tamper with any notice,
permit or certificate posted upon or affixed to a Building or Structure pursuant to this
bylaw.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 6 of 45
6.6 No person shall or suffer or permit any work that is substantially at variance with the
approved design, plans or specifications of a Building, Structure or other works for
which a permit has been issued, unless that variance has been accepted in writing by
a Building Official.
6.7 No person shall or suffer or permit the obstruction of the entry of a Building Official
or other authorized official of the Corporation on property in the administration of this
bylaw.
7. Building Officials
7.1 The Chief Building Official:
7.1.1 shall administer this bylaw;
7.1.2 shall keep records of permit applications, permits, notices and orders issued,
issues Permits for the purposes mentioned in this Bylaw, inspections and
tests made, and shall retain copies of all documents related to the
administration of this bylaw or microfilm copies of such documents, or retain
by any other acceptable means, copies of such documents;
7.1.3 may establish, if requested to do so, whether the methods or types of
Construction and types of materials used in the Construction of a Building or
Structure substantially conform to the requirements of the Building Code;
7.1.4 is designated Local Safety Manager for Electrical and Gas Safety Regulations
in accordance with the Safety Standards Act of BC, as amended;
7.1.5 may appoint Building Officials who shall be responsible to the Chief Building
Official and shall assist in the administration of this bylaw.
7.2 A Building Official:
7.2.1 may enter any land, Building or Premises at any reasonable time for the
purpose of ascertaining the terms of this bylaw are being observed;
7.2.2 shall, where any residence is occupied, obtain the consent of the occupant or
provide written notice to the occupant twenty four (24) hours in advance of
entry; and
7.2.3 shall carry proper credentials confirming his or her status as a Building
Official.
7.3 A Building Official may order the correction of any work that is being or has been
done in contravention of this bylaw.
8. Applications
8.1 Every person shall apply for and obtain:
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 7 of 45
8.1.1 a permit before constructing, repairing or altering a Building, a Structure,
Plumbing works per Section 29, Gas works per Section 30, and/or Electrical
works per Section 31. A permit shall be in the form provided by the Chief
Building Official and, if applicable, to be in accordance with section 11.1 of
this bylaw. Each Building or Structure to be constructed on a site requires a
separate building permit and shall be assessed a separate building permit
fee based on the value of that Building or Structure as determined in
accordance with Schedule “A” to this bylaw;
8.1.2 a moving permit before moving a Building or Structure; A moving permit shall
be in the form provided by the Chief Building Official;
8.1.3 a demolition permit before demolishing a Building or Structure; A demolition
permit shall be in the form provided by the Chief Building Official;
8.1.4 a fireplace and chimney permit prior to the Construction of a masonry
fireplace or the installation of a wood burning appliance or chimney unless
the works are encompassed by a valid building permit. A fireplace and
chimney permit shall be in the form provided by the Chief Building Official.
8.2 Application Exceptions
Except as herein specifically provided, where a Building or Structure or any part
thereof has been constructed prior to the adoption of this Bylaw, such Building or
Structure or part thereof shall not be required to be altered to comply herewith:
8.2.1 Where a Building or Structure or any part thereof is demolished or removed,
this bylaw applies to any part of the Building or Structure which remains on
the Premises and to all Construction done in connection with the demolition
or removal thereof;
8.2.2 Where a Building or Structure or any part thereof is moved to a site within the
Municipality, this Bylaw applies to any part of the Building or Structure which
is moved and to all Construction done in connection with the relocation
thereof;
8.2.3 Where the class of occupancy or use, as defined in the Building Code, of a
Building or any part thereof is changed, this Bylaw applies to any part of the
Building affected by the change;
8.2.4 Where a Building is damaged by any cause to the extent of more than fifty
percent (50%) of its assessed value as shown on the last assessment roll
upon which such Building was assessed, this Bylaw applies to the whole of
the Building and to all Construction done in connection with the repairs
thereto, and where the Building damage by any cause is fifty percent (50%) or
less of the assessed value as shown on the last assessment roll upon which
such Building was assessed, the Bylaw is only applicable to the damaged
part;
8.2.5 Storage and garden sheds and other accessory Buildings not exceeding 10
m2 in floor area may be erected without a Building Permit, but such Buildings
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 8 of 45
shall comply with the applicable portions of the Building Code, this bylaw, all
other bylaws of the Corporation, and any other applicable enactment
concerning safety;
8.2.6 Farm Buildings which are not used as dwellings shall comply with Part 1 of
the Canadian Farm Building Code current edition issued by the Associate
Committee on the National Building Code which is hereby adopted and made
a part of this Bylaw, and with all other applicable provisions of this Bylaw, all
other Bylaws of the Corporation and any other applicable enactment
concerning safety.
8.3 Certified Geotechnical Report for Applications
8.3.1 If the Chief Building Official considers that Construction would be on land that
is subject to or is likely to be subject to flooding, mud flows, debris flows,
debris torrents, erosion, land slip, rockfalls, subsidence or avalanche, the
Building Official may require the owner of land to provide the Chief Building
Official with a report certified by a professional engineer with experience in
geotechnical engineering that the land may be used safely for the use
intended.
8.3.2 Should the lands be of sufficient complexity the Chief Building Official may
require a third party review of the aforementioned report. The costs incurred
for this report will be born solely by applicant.
8.3.3 If a professional engineer with experience in geotechnical engineering
determines that land may not be used safely for the use intended, the Chief
Building Official must refuse to issue a building permit.
8.3.3.1 the Chief Building Official may issue a building permit in accordance
with 8.3.3 if a professional engineer with experience in geotechnical
engineering determines and certifies that the land may be used safely
for the use intended if the land is used in accordance with the
conditions specified in the professional’s report.
8.3.4 A building permit under 8.3.2 may only be issued on the following conditions:
8.3.4.1 the owner of the land covenants with the municipality to use the land
only in the manner determined and certified by the engineer as
enabling the safe use of the land for the use intended;
8.3.4.2 the covenant contains conditions respecting reimbursement by the
covenanter for any expenses that may be incurred by the covenantee
as a result of a breach of a covenant under paragraph (a); and
8.3.4.3 the covenant be registered under section 219 of the Land Title Act.
8.4 Private Wells and Septic Systems
8.4.1 Except as hereinafter specifically provided, no Building Permit shall be issued
for the Construction of any Building where the property on which the
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 9 of 45
proposed Building is to be located has not been occupied during the previous
12 month period and is not served by a community water system until, a
certificate of well water quantity and potability in the form provided by the
Chief Building Official, certifying that the well or wells on the Premises will be
capable of supplying at least 2,250 litres of potable water per day per
dwelling unit on a year round basis, has been submitted to the Chief Building
Official.
8.4.2 Where a certificate of well water quantity has been executed by a
Professional Engineer certifying that the well or wells on the Premises will be
capable of supplying at least 2,250 litres of water per day per dwelling unit
on a year round basis, the Chief Building Official may issue a Building Permit
prior to receiving a certificate of well water potability provided that the
applicant enters into an agreement with the Corporation to install any water
treatment system necessary to render the well water potable to the
satisfaction of the Authorizing Officer as designated by the Health Authority
prior to the occupancy of the Building and, as security for the carrying out of
the said agreement, deposits with the Corporation, in the form of cash, term
deposit or an irrevocable letter of credit issued by a financial institute
acceptable to the Corporation, a sum equal to the estimated cost of installing
the water treatment system but in no case shall be less than Five Thousand
Dollars per well ($5,000).
8.4.3 This Section does not apply where a proposed new Building is to replace an
existing Building on the same Premises and where there is an existing proven
source of potable ground water yielding 2,250 litres per day on a year round
basis.
8.4.4 Except as hereinafter specifically provided, no Building Permit shall be issued
for the Construction of any Building where the Premises on which the
proposed Building is to be located is not served by a public sanitary sewer
system until a filing has been received by the Health Authority for the
installation of a septic sewage disposal system. Confirmation is required to
be submitted to the Chief Building Official by an “Authorized Person”, as
defined in the Sewerage System Regulation of BC - relating to small building
additions and accessory buildings - has provided written assurances that the
Construction is not impacting on the existing septic sewage disposal system.
8.4.5 Where an alternate method of sewage disposal is required due to soil
conditions and where a filing has been registered at the Health Authority to
allow Construction to proceed prior to the installation of the alternate sewage
disposal system, the Chief Building Official may issue a Building Permit prior
to the installation of the alternate sewage disposal system provided that the
applicant enters into an agreement with the Corporation assuring that the
alternate sewage system shall be installed in accordance with the filing made
at the Health Authority, prior to the occupancy of the Building and, as security
for the carrying out of the said agreement, deposits with the Corporation, in
the form of cash, term deposit or an irrevocable letter of credit issued by a
financial institute acceptable to the Corporation, a sum equal to the
estimated cost of installing the alternate sewage disposal system but in no
case shall be less than Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) minimum.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 10 of 45
9. Applications for Complex Buildings
9.1 An application for a building permit with respect to a Complex Building shall:
9.1.1 be made in the form provided by the Chief Building Official, signed by the
owner, or a signing officer if the owner is a corporation, and the coordinating
registered professional;
9.1.2 be accompanied by the owner’s acknowledgment of responsibility and
undertakings made in the form provided by the Chief Building Official, signed
by the owner, or a signing officer if the owner is a corporation;
9.1.3 include a site plan showing:
9.1.3.1 the bearing and dimensions of the parcel taken from the registered
subdivision plan;
9.1.3.2 the legal description and civic address of the parcel;
9.1.3.3 the location and dimensions of all statutory rights of way, easements
and setback requirements;
9.1.3.4 the location and dimensions of all existing and proposed Buildings or
Structures on the parcel;
9.1.3.5 setbacks to the natural boundary of any lake, swamp, pond or
watercourse where the Corporation‘s land use regulations establish
siting requirements related to flooding;
9.1.3.6 the existing and finished ground levels to an established datum at or
adjacent to the site and the geodetic elevation of the underside of the
floor system of a Building or Structure where the Corporation of the
District of Maple Ridge’s land use regulations establish siting
requirements related to minimum floor elevation; and
9.1.3.7 the location, dimension and gradient of parking and driveway access.
9.1.4 include floor plans showing the dimensions, heights and uses of all areas:
the dimensions and height of crawl and roof spaces; the location, size and
swing of doors; the location, size and opening of windows; floor, wall, and
ceiling finishes; Plumbing fixtures; structural elements; and stair dimensions.
9.1.5 include a cross section through the Building or Structure illustrating
foundations, drainage, ceiling heights and Construction systems.
9.1.6 include elevations of all sides of the Building or Structure showing finish
details, roof slopes, windows, doors, proposed and finished grades at and
beyond the building face to provide an accurate representation of finished
grade levels and their impact on building elements and access points.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 11 of 45
9.1.7 include cross-sectional details drawn at an appropriate scale and at sufficient
locations to illustrate that the Building or Structure substantially conforms to
the Building Code.
9.1.8 include copies of approvals required under any enactment relating to health
or safety, including, without limitation, sewage disposal permits, highway
access permits and Health Authority approval.
9.1.9 include a letter of assurance in the form as provided in Division C - Part 2 of
the Building Code, signed by the owner, or a signing officer of the owner if the
owner is a corporation, and the coordinating registered professional.
9.1.10 include letters of assurance in the form provided in Division C - Part 2 of the
current edition of the Building Code, each signed by such registered
professionals of record as the Building Official or Building Code may require
to prepare the design for and conduct field reviews of the Construction of the
Building or Structure.
9.1.11 include two copies of specifications and three sets of drawings at a scale of
¼”:1’-0”, 1:50, or another suitable scale of the design prepared by each
registered professional of record and including the information set out in
sections 9.1.4 – 9.1.7 of this bylaw.
9.1.12 may require structural drawings sealed by a Qualified Professional as
provided for under Section 55 (1)(d) of the CC for all new construction or
additions to existing buildings.
9.2 In addition to the requirements of section 9.1, the following may be required by a
Building Official to be submitted with a building permit application for the
Construction of a Complex Building where the complexity of the proposed Building or
Structure or siting circumstances warrant:
9.2.1 site servicing drawings, including sufficient detail of off-site services to
indicate locations at the property line, prepared and sealed by a registered
professional, in accordance with the Corporation’s subdivision servicing
bylaw;
9.2.2 a section through the site showing grades, Buildings, Structures, parking
areas and driveways;
9.2.3 any other information required by the Building Official or the Building Code to
establish substantial compliance with this bylaw, the Building Code and other
bylaws and enactments relating to the Building or Structure.
10. Applications for Simple Buildings
10.1 An application for a building permit with respect to a Simple Building shall:
10.1.1 be in the form provided by the Chief Building Official, signed by the owner, or
a signing officer if the owner is a corporation;
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 12 of 45
10.1.2 be accompanied by the owner’s acknowledgment of responsibility and
undertakings made in the form provided by the Chief Building Official, signed
by the owner, or a signing officer if the owner is a corporation;
10.1.3 include a site plan showing:
10.1.3.1 the bearing and dimensions of the parcel taken from the registered
subdivision plan;
10.1.3.2 the legal description and civic address of the parcel;
10.1.3.3 the location and dimensions of all statutory rights of way,
easements and setback requirements;
10.1.3.4 the location and dimensions of all existing and proposed Buildings
or Structures on the parcel;
10.1.3.5 setbacks to the natural boundary of any lake, swamp, pond or
watercourse where the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge’s
land use regulations establish siting requirements related to
flooding;
10.1.3.6 the existing and finished ground levels to an established datum at
or adjacent to the site and the geodetic elevation of the underside
of the floor system of a Building or Structure where the Corporation
of the District of Maple Ridge’s land use regulations establish siting
requirements related to minimum floor elevation;
10.1.3.7 the location, dimension and gradient of parking and driveway
access; and
10.1.3.8 the comprehensive lot grading required to establish Building or
Structure height compliance with the District of Maple Ridge’s
Zoning Bylaw;
10.1.4 include floor plans showing the dimensions, heights and uses of all areas: the
dimensions and height of crawl and roof spaces; the location, size and swing
of doors; the location, size and opening of windows; floor, wall, and ceiling
finishes; Plumbing fixtures; structural elements; and stair dimensions.
10.1.5 include a cross section through the Building or Structure illustrating
foundations, drainage, ceiling heights and Construction systems.
10.1.6 include elevations of all sides of the Building or Structure showing finish
details, roof slopes, windows, doors, proposed and finished grades at and
beyond the building face to provide an accurate representation of finished
grade levels and their impact on building elements and access points.
10.1.7 include cross-sectional details drawn at an appropriate scale and at sufficient
locations to illustrate that the Building or Structure substantially conforms to
the Building Code.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 13 of 45
10.1.8 include copies of approvals required under any enactment relating to health
or safety, including, without limitation, sewage disposal permits, highway
access permits and Health Authority approval.
10.1.9 include a foundation design prepared by a registered professional in
accordance with Part 4 of the Building Code, accompanied by letters of
assurance in the form provided in Division C - Part 2 of the current edition of
the Building Code, signed by the registered professional of record, unless.
10.1.9.1 the requirements of section 10.1.9 are waived by a Building Official
because the Building Official required a professional engineer’s
report pursuant to section 56 of the CC and the building permit is
issued in accordance with section 56 of the CC, (see section 8.3);
or
10.1.9.2 documentation, prepared and sealed by a registered professional,
is provided certifying that the foundation design substantially
complies with section 9.4.4 of Part 9 the Building Code and the
foundation excavation substantially complies with section 9.12 of
Part 9 of the Building Code.
10.1.10 include two copies of specifications and two sets of drawings at a scale of
¼”: 1’-0”, 1:50, or another suitable scale of the design including the
information set out in sections 10.1.4 to 10.1.9 of this bylaw.
10.2 In addition to the requirements of section 10.1, every new dwelling of residential
occupancy must be constructed with the ability to install a solar domestic hot water
heating system. The current “Solar Hot Water Ready Regulation” as amended, is
hereby adopted and form part of this Bylaw. Construction pursuant to this regulation
shall follow the form as prescribed in Schedule B of this bylaw.
10.3 In addition to the requirements of section 10.1, the following may be required by a
Building Official to be submitted with a building permit application for the
Construction of a Simple Building where the project involves two or more buildings,
which in the aggregate total more than 1000 square metres of building area, or two
or more buildings that will contain four or more dwelling units, or otherwise where the
complexity of the proposed Building or Structure or siting circumstances warrant:
10.3.1 site servicing drawings, including sufficient detail of off-site services to
indicate locations at the property line, prepared and sealed by a registered
professional, in accordance with the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge’s subdivision servicing bylaw;
10.3.2 a section through the site showing grades, Buildings, Structures, parking
areas and driveways;
10.3.3 a roof plan and roof height calculations;
10.3.4 structural, electrical, mechanical or fire suppression drawings prepared and
sealed by a registered professional;
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 14 of 45
10.3.5 letters of assurance in the form provided in Division C - Part 2 of the current
edition of the Building Code, signed by the registered professional of record;
10.3.6 any other information required by the Building Official, Building Code, B.C.
Safety Standards Act including the B.C. Gas Safety Regulation and Code or
the Electrical Safety Regulation and Code to establish substantial compliance
with this bylaw, the Building Code and other bylaws and enactments relating
to the Building or Structure.
10.4 In addition to the requirements of section 10.1, the following shall be required by a
Building Official to be submitted with a building permit application for the
Construction of a Simple Building where the project involves an infill lot in an already
established subdivision:
10.4.1 include a current posting and topographic survey of the land prepared by a
land surveyor registered in the Province of B.C.;
10.4.2 include invert elevations of the municipal connections at the property line
and establish the minimum building elevation to ensure gravity feed of the
storm and sanitary sewers to the municipal connections. Should storm
outfall be to a ditch then invert elevation is to be 250mm from crest of ditch
or as determined by the Municipal Engineer.
11. Professional Plan Certification
11.1 The letters of assurance in the form provided in Division C - Part 2 of the current
edition of the Building Code. and provided pursuant to sections 9.1.10, 10.1.9,
10.3.5, and 19.1 of this bylaw are relied upon by the Corporation and its Building
Officials as certification that the design and plans to which the letters of assurance
relate comply with the Building Code and other applicable enactments relating to
safety.
11.2 A building permit issued for the Construction of a Complex Building, or for a Simple
Building for which a Building Official required professional design pursuant to section
10.3.4 and letters of assurance pursuant to section 10.3.5 of this bylaw, shall be in
the form provided by the Chief Building Official.
11.3 A building Permit issued pursuant to section 11.1 of this bylaw shall include a notice
to the owner that the building Permit is issued in reliance upon the certification of the
registered professionals of record that the design and plans submitted in support of
the application for the building Permit comply with the Building Code and other
applicable enactments relating to safety.
11.4 When a building permit is issued in accordance with section 11.1 of this bylaw the
permit fee shall be reduced by 5% of the fees payable pursuant to Schedule “A” to
this bylaw, up to a maximum reduction of $500.00 (five hundred dollars).
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 15 of 45
12. Fees and Charges
12.1 In addition to applicable fees and charges required under other bylaws, a permit fee,
calculated in accordance with Schedule “A”, “D”, “E” and “F” to this bylaw, shall be
paid in full upon issuance of any permit under this bylaw.
12.2 The appropriate plan-processing fee as set out in Schedule “A”, “D”, “E” and “F” shall
accompany an application made for a permit to this bylaw.
12.3 Where, due to non-compliance with this bylaw, more than two inspections are
necessary when one inspection is normally required, for each inspection after the
second inspection, a re-inspection fee as set out in Schedule “A”, “D”, “E” and “F” to
this bylaw shall be paid prior to additional inspections being performed.
12.4 Where a required permit inspection is requested to be done after the hours during
which the offices of the Corporation are normally open, an inspection charge shall be
payable based on the time actually spent in making such inspection, including travel
time, as set out in Schedule “A”, “D”, “E” and “F” to this bylaw.
12.5 The fees as set out in Schedule "A", "D", "E" and "F" to this bylaw shall be adjusted
annually and implemented on the 15th day of January in the following year. This
annual adjustment shall be based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) - as established
by Statistics Canada - based on the previous 12 month period ending December.
13. Building Permits
13.1 When:
13.1.1 a completed application in compliance with section 9 or 10 of this bylaw,
including all required supporting documentation has been submitted:
13.1.2 the owner or his or her representative has paid all applicable fees set out in
12.1 of this bylaw;
13.1.3 the owner or his or her representative has paid all charges and met all
requirements imposed by any other statute or bylaw;
13.1.4 no covenant, agreement, or regulation of the Corporation authorizes the
permit to be withheld;
a Building Official shall issue the permit for which the application is made.
13.2 When the application is in respect of a Building that includes, or will include, a
residential occupancy, the building permit must not be issued unless the owner
provides evidence pursuant to section 30 (1) of the Home Owner Protection Act, SBC
1998 Chapter 31, and amendments thereto, that the proposed Building:
13.2.1 is covered by home warranty insurance; and
13.2.2 the Constructor is a licensed residential builder.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 16 of 45
13.3 Section 13.2 of this bylaw does not apply if the Owner is not required to be licensed
and to obtain home warranty insurance in accordance with sections 20 (1) or 30 (1)
of the Home Owner Protection Act, SBC 1998 Chapter 31, and amendments thereto.
14. Change of Plans:
14.1 The plans and specifications for any Building, Structure, Plumbing, Electrical
Equipment or gas Construction for which a Building Permit, Plumbing Permit,
Electrical Permit and or Gas Permit has been issued shall not be altered unless such
alteration is approved in writing by the Chief Building Official.
14.2 No person shall do any Construction that is at variance with the description, plans
and specifications submitted with the application for a Building Permit, Plumbing
Permit, Electrical Permit and or Gas Permit which has been issued pursuant to this
Bylaw, unless such change has been approved in writing by the Chief Building
Official.
15. Revocation of Permit:
15.1 Where an applicant fails to obtain or provide the necessary documentation to
complete a Building Permit, Plumbing Permit, Electrical Permit and or Gas Permit
within 60 calendar days of being notified that the same is ready for issuance or in
need of additional information, unless an extension has been granted by the Chief
Building Official, the application shall be deemed null and void and any fees paid in
respect of such application shall be forfeited and any documentation submitted may
be destroyed.
15.2 Every Building Permit, Plumbing Permit, Electrical Permit and or Gas Permit is issued
subject to the following conditions:
15.2.1 the Construction shall commence within 6 months from the date the
Building Permit, Plumbing Permit, Electrical Permit and or Gas Permit is
issued;
15.2.2 the Construction shall not be discontinued or suspended for a period in
excess of 12 months;
15.2.3 the Construction shall be completed within twenty four (24) months from the
date the Building Permit, Plumbing Permit, Electrical Permit and or Gas
Permit is issued; and
15.2.4 In the event that any conditions in clauses 15.2.1, 15.2.2 or 15.2.3 of this
subsection are breached, the Building Permit, Plumbing Permit, Electrical
Permit and or Gas Permit authorizing the Construction shall forthwith expire
and shall be without force and effect.
15.3 The Chief Building Official may revoke a Building Permit, Plumbing Permit, Electrical
Permit and or Gas Permit if:
15.3.1 there is a contravention of any condition under which that Building Permit,
Plumbing Permit, Electrical Permit and or Gas Permit was issued;
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 17 of 45
15.3.2 the Building Permit, Plumbing Permit, Electrical Permit and or Gas Permit
was issued on the basis of incorrect information provided by the owner, his
agent, his contractor or a Registered Professional; or
15.3.3 there is a violation of this Bylaw or other relevant Bylaws and any other
applicable enactment concerning safety.
16. Permit Fee Refund
16.1 Where an Owner or his agent applies in writing for the cancellation of a Building
Permit, Plumbing Permit, Electrical Permit and or Gas Permit issued under this
Bylaw, 75% of any Permit fee paid in excess of $150.00 may be refunded to the
holder of the Permit, provided:
16.1.1 the Building Permit, Plumbing Permit, Electrical Permit and or Gas Permit
had not expired at the time the application for cancellation was received;
and
16.1.2 no Construction had commenced under that Building Permit, Plumbing
Permit, Electrical Permit and or Gas Permit.
17. Permit Transfer and Limitations
17.1 No Building Permit, Plumbing Permit, Electrical Permit and or Gas Permit issued
pursuant to this Bylaw shall be transferred or assigned until the holder of the
Building Permit, Plumbing Permit, Electrical Permit and or Gas Permit has received
in writing:
17.1.1 approval from the Chief Building Official for the transfer or assignment; and
17.1.2 has paid the prescribed transfer fee as set out in Schedules “A, D, E, & F”
hereto.
17.2 A Building Official may extend the period of time set out under sections 15.2.1 and
15.2.2 where Construction has not been commenced or has been discontinued due
to adverse weather, strikes, material or labour shortages, or similar hardship beyond
the owner’s control.
17.3 A Building Official may issue a foundation permit in the form provided by the Chief
Building Official, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
17.4 A Building Official may issue a building permit for a portion of a Building or Structure
before the design, plans and specifications for the entire Building or Structure have
been accepted, provided sufficient information has been provided to the Corporation
to demonstrate to the Building Official that the portion authorized to be constructed
substantially complies with this and other applicable bylaws and the permit fee
applicable to that portion of the Building or Structure has been paid. The issuance of
the permit notwithstanding, the requirements of this bylaw apply to the remainder of
the Building or Structure as if the permit for the portion of the Building or Structure
had not been issued.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 18 of 45
17.5 When a site has been excavated under a foundation permit issued pursuant to
section 17.3 of this bylaw and a building permit is not subsequently issued or a
subsisting building permit has expired in accordance with the requirements of
section 15.2, but without the Construction of the Building or Structure for which the
building permit was issued having commenced, the owner shall fill in the excavation
to restore the original gradients of the site within 60 days of being served notice by
the Corporation to do so.
18. Disclaimer of Warranty or Representation
18.1 Neither the issuance of a permit under this bylaw, the review and acceptance of the
design, drawings, plans or specifications, nor inspections made by a Building Official,
shall constitute a representation or warranty that the Building Code or the bylaw have
been complied with or the Building or Structure meets any standard of materials or
workmanship, and no person shall rely on any of those acts as establishing
compliance with the Building Code or this bylaw or any standard of Construction.
19. Professional Design and Field Review
19.2 When a Building Official considers that the site conditions, size or complexity of a
development or an aspect of a development warrant, he or she may require a
registered professional to provide design and plan certification and field review
supported by letters of assurance in the form provided in Division C - Part 2 of the
current edition of the Building Code.
19.3 Prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit for a Complex Building, or Simple
Building in circumstances where letters of assurance have been required in
accordance with sections 10.1.9, 10.3.5, or 19.1 of this bylaw, the owner shall
provide the Corporation with letters of assurance in the form provided in Division C -
Part 2 of the current edition of the Building Code.
19.4 When a registered professional provides letters of assurance in accordance with
sections 9.1.10, 10.1.9, 10.3.5, or 19.2 of this bylaw, he or she shall also provide
proof of professional liability insurance to the Building Official in the form provided by
the Chief Building Official, except that proof of professional liability insurance in
respect of building envelope matters need not be provided if the owner grant to the
Corporation a covenant registerable under Section 219 of the Land Title Act requiring
that the building envelope, in respect of which the registered professional of record
has provided design or field review services, be monitored, maintained and repaired
in accordance with the recommendations of the registered professional of record as
set out in the covenant, and containing a full release and indemnity of this
Corporation in respect of claims of any nature arising from any defect in design,
installation or performance of the building envelope.
20. Responsibilities of the Owner
20.1 Every owner shall ensure that all Construction complies with the Building Code, B.C.
Safety Standards Act referencing the Gas Safety Regulation and Code and the
Electrical Safety Regulation and Code, this bylaw, other Municipal Bylaws and other
applicable enactments respecting safety.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 19 of 45
20.2 Every owner to whom a permit is issued shall be responsible for the cost of repair of
any damage to municipal works and property that occurs in the course of the work
authorized by the permit. (see Section 22).
20.3 Every owner to whom a permit is issued shall, during Construction:
20.3.1 keep a copy of the accepted designs, plans and specifications on the
property and keep inspection records in a conspicuous place; and
20.3.2 post the civic address on the property in a location visible from any adjoining
streets.
21. Surveyor's Certificate
21.1 Where the market value of a proposed Building will exceed $1,000.00 and such
Building is being constructed or will be constructed upon a concrete foundation or
pad, the Chief Building Official may require that the applicant submit a Surveyor's
Certificate showing the geodetic elevations of the forms and the location of the forms
in relation to the boundaries of the parcel upon which the Building is being or will be
constructed. An original copy of this certificate is required to be presented to the
Building Official on site at the time of the inspection.
21.2 No Building or Structure shall be constructed on any parcel in such a manner that it
encroaches upon any adjoining parcels or crosses any parcel boundary.
22. Inspections
22.2 When a registered professional provides letters of assurance in accordance with
sections 9.1.9, 10.1.9, 10.3.5, or 19.2 of this bylaw, the Corporation will rely solely
on field reviews undertaken by the registered professional of record and the letters of
assurance submitted pursuant to section 19.2 of this bylaw as certification that the
Construction substantially conforms to the design, plans and specifications and that
the Construction complies with the Building Code, this bylaw and other applicable
enactments respecting safety.
22.3 Notwithstanding section 22.1 of this bylaw, a Building Official may attend the site
from time to time during the course of Construction to ascertain that the field reviews
are taking place and to monitor the field reviews undertaken by the registered
professionals of record.
22.4 A Building Official may attend periodically at the site of the Construction of simple
Buildings or Structures to ascertain whether the health and safety aspects of the
work are being carried out in substantial conformance with the applicable portions of
the Building Code, this bylaw and any other applicable enactment concerning safety.
Building
22.5 The owner, or there representative, shall give at least twenty four (24) hours notice to
the Corporation when requesting an inspection and shall obtain an inspection and
receive a Building Official’s acceptance of the following aspects of the work prior to
concealing them:
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 20 of 45
22.5.1 the foundation and footing forms, before concrete is poured;
22.5.2 installation of perimeter drain tiles and damp-proofing, prior to backfilling;
22.5.3 the preparation of ground, including ground cover, when required, prior to the
placing of a concrete slab;
22.5.4 rough-in of factory built chimneys and fireplaces and solid fuel burning
appliances;
22.5.5 the framing and sheathing;
22.5.6 installation of rain screen;
22.5.7 installation of backing board prior to the installation of cultured stone or
stucco;
22.5.8 installation of insulation and vapour barrier;
22.5.9 the health and safety aspects of the work when the Building or Structure is
substantially complete and ready for but prior to occupancy.
22.6 No aspect of the work referred in section 22.4.1 - 8 of this bylaw shall be concealed
until a Building Official has accepted it in writing.
22.7 The requirements of section 22.4.2 - 9 of this bylaw do not apply to any aspect of the
work that is the subject of a registered professional of records letter of assurance
provided in accordance with sections 9.1.10, 10.1.9, 10.3.5, paragraph 19.1 and
19.2 of this bylaw.
Electrical
22.8 The holder of an electrical permit shall give at least twenty four (24) hours notice
(contractors via
declaration only) to the Corporation when requesting an inspection and shall obtain
an inspection and receive an Electrical Safety Officer’s acceptance of the following
aspects of the electrical work prior to concealing them.
22.8.1 after all underground electrical Construction is complete, but prior to the
placing of any concrete or backfill;
22.8.2 after electrical rough-in wiring but prior to framing;
22.8.3 electrical final inspection must be performed prior to the final Building
inspection.
Plumbing
22.9 The holder of a plumbing permit shall give at least twenty four (24) hours notice to
the Corporation when requesting an inspection and shall obtain an inspection and
receive a building official’s acceptance of the following aspects of the plumbing work
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 21 of 45
prior to concealing them.
22.9.1 after the installation of foundation drains, dampproofing and drain rock,
sanitary sewer lines, storm sewer lines, water lines, sumps and storm water
infiltration systems is complete, but prior to the backfilling of foundations;
22.9.2 after all underground Plumbing Construction is complete, but prior to the
placing of any concrete or backfill;
22.9.3 after the installation of in slab radiant heat piping where required, but prior to
the pouring of concrete slabs;
22.9.4 after Plumbing rough-in, but prior to framing;
22.9.5 Plumbing final inspection must be performed prior to the final Building
inspection.
Gas
22.10 The holder of a gas permit shall give at least twenty four (24) hours notice to the
Corporation when requesting an inspection and shall obtain an inspection and receive a
Gas Safety Officer’s acceptance of the following aspects of the gas work prior to
concealing them.
22.10.1 after all underground gas Construction is complete, but prior to the placing
of any concrete or backfill;
22.10.2 after heating duct installations, gas venting installations, gas piping
installations, but prior to framing;
22.10.3 gas final inspection must be performed prior to the final Building inspection.
23. Occupancy Permits
23.1 No person shall occupy a Building or Structure or part of a Building or Structure until
an occupancy permit has been issued, in the form set out in Schedule “C” to this
bylaw, by the Chief Building Official.
23.2 An occupancy permit shall not been issued unless:
23.2.1 all letters of assurance have been submitted when required in accordance
with sections 9.1.10, 10.1.9, and 10.3.5, of this bylaw; or
23.2.2 all aspects of the work requiring inspection and an acceptance pursuant to
section 22.4 of this bylaw have been inspected and accepted; and
23.2.3 All the requirements of this Bylaw, other relevant Bylaws of the District and
any other applicable enactment concerning safety as evidenced by inspection
approvals pursuant to sections 22.7, 22.8 and 22.9.
23.3 The type of occupancy or use of a Building for which an Occupancy Permit has been
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 22 of 45
issued shall not be changed to any other type of occupancy or use which is not
specifically approved in the occupancy Permit until a new occupancy Permit therefore
has been issued by the Chief Building Official.
23.4 The site must be identified in accordance with the Corporation’s House Numbering
Bylaw for emergency vehicle and inspection purposes during Construction.
Permanent address must be in place prior to occupancy.
23.5 Before an occupancy Permit is granted, all Provisional Occupancy Permit fees and
any other Municipal fees shall be paid.
Provisional Occupancy Permit
23.6 The Chief Building Official may issue an occupancy permit for part of a Building or
Structure when that part of the Building or Structure is self-contained, provided with
essential services and meets requirements set out in section 23.2 of this bylaw.
Upon the written request of the holder of a Building Permit or the owner of a Building
for which a Building Permit has been issued, and on payment of fees required as per
Schedules A, D, E and F the Chief Building Official may issue a provisional occupancy
Permit where such provisional occupancy will not jeopardize the health or safety of
the occupants of the Building. Planning and Engineering department approvals are
necessary prior to the granting of the provisional occupancy Permit.
No Provisional Occupancy Permit may be issued unless:
23.6.1 The exterior finishes of the Building are substantially complete;
23.6.2 A permanent address pursuant to Maple Ridge House Numbering Bylaw has
been assigned and posted on the Building;
23.6.3 It sets out the date of expiry of the Provisional Occupancy Permit; and
23.6.4 Where Registered Professionals are engaged in the inspection process a
certified statement from them that the provisional occupancy applied for will
not jeopardize the health or safety of occupants of the Building.
23.7 The Chief Building Official may require as a condition of issuance of a Provisional
Occupancy Permit that the owner provide security equal to the value of part or all of
outstanding Construction required to complete the Building.
23.8 The site identified as per the Corporation’s House Numbering Bylaw for emergency
vehicles and inspection purposes during Construction. Permanent address must be
in place prior to provisional occupancy.
Where other items, not of health or safety concerns, relating to Building or site issues not
covered by security already deposited with the Corporation, the Director may require an
amount of security equal to the value of outstanding Construction.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 23 of 45
24. Site Grades:
24.1 Where the natural grade of any land is altered for any reason, all slopes shall be
suitably landscaped or retained to prevent soil erosion and escape of water to or
from adjacent Premises. Existing slopes, which are adequately retained by trees,
shrubs, turf, rock or any combination thereof, shall not require further treatment.
24.2 All walls, grade transitions and methods of soil retention shall be shown on the site
plan including all details of Construction. Any wall (method of soil retention) over 1
metre high shall be structurally engineered except that in geotechnically sensitive
areas, the Chief Building Official may require a Geotechnical Engineer to design and
inspect the method of retention. A registered professional shall supervise the design
and Construction of a retaining Structure greater than 1.0 metre in height. Sealed
copies of the design plan and field review reports prepared by the registered
professional of record for all retaining Structures greater than 1.0 metre in height
shall be submitted to a Building Official prior to acceptance of the works.
24.3 Any retaining wall (method of soil retention) or grade alteration over 0.6 metres will
require a Permit for grade alteration or retaining wall(s) except that where the
retaining wall(s) have been identified on the initial Building Permit application, no
separate retaining wall Permit will be required.
25. Design Data
25.1 The following climatic design data shall be utilized for the design of Buildings in the
Municipality:
25.1.1 January 2 1/2 percent Design Temperature: - 9oC
25.1.2 January l percent Design Temperature: -11oC
25.1.3 July 2 1/2 percent Design Drybulb Temperature: 30oC
25.1.4 July 2 1/2 percent Design Wetbulb Temperature: 20oC
25.1.5 Annual Total Degree-days below 18oC: 3050
25.1.6 Maximum Fifteen-minute rainfall: 10mm
25.1.7 Maximum One-day rainfall: 134mm 1/50
25.1.8 Annual Rain: 1800mm
25.1.9 Annual Total Precipitation: 1950mm
25.1.10 Moisture Index: 1.86
25.1.11 Driving Rain Wind Pressure Pa, 1/5: 160
25.1.12 Ground snow load (kPa):
25.1.13
0-45 metres elevation: 1/50 SS = 2.4 kPa (design weight based on snow depth)
SR = 0.2 kPa (design weight added for rain)
SS + SR = 2.6 kPa calculated ground snow load
Cb = 0.45 for entire roofs not exceeding 4.3 m / 0.55 m for
all other roofs
Above 45 Metres: 0.008 x (Site elev. in Metres) + 2.04 kPa = SS
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 24 of 45
0.001 x (Site elev. in Metres) + 0.2 kPa = SR
CbSS + SR = specified snow load
25.1.13 Hourly Wind Pressures: Probability 1/10 = 0.36kN/m2
Probability 1/50 = 0.47kN/m2
25.1.14 Seismic Data: Sa (0.2) = 0.97
Sa (0.5) = 0.65
Sa (1.0) = 0.32
Sa (2.0) = 0.17
PGA = 0.48
26. Temporary Buildings
26.1 Application for a Building Permit for a Temporary Building shall be in writing, signed
by the applicant and shall be accompanied by:
26.1.1 plans showing the location of the proposed Temporary Building or Structure
and Construction details thereof;
26.1.2 an explanation of the intended use for the proposed Temporary Building or
Structure;
26.1.3 an agreement with the Corporation executed by the applicant, that the
applicant will remove the Temporary Building or Structure from the Premises
and leave the site in a safe, tidy and sanitary condition upon the expiration of
the Temporary Building Permit; and
26.1.4 cash, term deposit or an irrevocable letter of credit issued by a financial
institute acceptable to the Corporation in the amount $10,000.00 minimum
up to a maximum of $20,000.00, based on a value of 25% of the Building as
security for the carrying out of the agreement to remove the Temporary
Building or Structure.
26.2 If, upon the expiration of the Temporary Building Permit, the Permit holder does not
remove the Temporary Building or Structure from the Premises and leave the site in a
satisfactory condition, the Corporation may do so at the Permit holder's expense and
may deduct the cost of so doing from the security deposit. If the security deposit is
not adequate to cover the said cost the Permit holder shall pay to the Corporation
any cost in excess of the security deposit.
26.3 Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Temporary Building or Structure which is rendered
Non Inhabitable and which conforms with all Bylaws of the Corporation and the
Provincial regulations may be allowed to remain on the Premises after the expiration
of the Temporary Building Permit upon the Permit holder applying for and receiving
an occupancy Permit for the said Building or Structure.
26.4 In addition to the requirements of Sections 26.6 to 26.13 of this Bylaw all Temporary
mobile homes except those to be occupied for Temporary Residential Use pursuant
to the provisions of Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw, as amended shall comply with
Canadian Standards Association Z240 MH Series “mobile homes”, as referenced in
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 25 of 45
Division B - Part 1 of the current Building Code.
26.5 All Temporary mobile homes to be occupied for Temporary Residential Use pursuant
to the provisions of Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw, as amended, and all other Temporary
Buildings or Structures shall comply with all provisions of the Provincial regulations
and all Bylaws of the Corporation. Prior to occupancy the owner shall obtain an
inspection by the Chief Building Official or a Building Official to determine compliance
with all applicable Codes and Bylaws and shall pay an inspection fee of $l50.00 to
the Corporation.
All Temporary Mobile Homes Shall:
26.6 be directly serviced by a water supply capable of supplying at least 2,250 litres of
potable water per day per dwelling on a year round basis;
26.7 be serviced by a separate sewage disposal system as filed by an “Authorized
Person”, per the Provincial Sewerage Regulation, with the Health Authority;
26.8 be serviced by an electrical subfeed from the main dwelling or, with the approval of
the Chief Building Official, a separate electrical service, when it can be shown that it
would be an extreme hardship due to location; a security deposit must be posted as
per section 26.1.4 to cover the removal;
26.9 have any fuel oil tank or propane gas tank placed in accordance with the British
Columbia Fire Code as amended and totally screened from view from any highway;
26.10 be equipped with stairs, landings and handrails;
26.11 have a skirting around the mobile home between the underside of the frame and the
ground at its exterior perimeter;
26.12 be set true, square and level on the lot; and
26.13 have any support pad or base or any material which is in contact with the ground,
consist of concrete Construction designed and constructed in accordance with the
provisions of the Building Code.
26.14 Where an application for a Building Permit is made for the Construction of a
residential dwelling on Premises where an existing residential dwelling is situated,
and only one residential dwelling is Permitted by the Bylaws of the Corporation, the
Chief Building Official may issue the Building Permit provided that the owner of the
Permit grants to the Corporation in registerable form a restrictive covenant pursuant
to Section 219 of the Land Title Act providing that:
26.14.1 Use and occupancy of the existing residential dwelling shall be prohibited
upon occupancy of the new residential dwelling;
26.14.2 The existing residential dwelling shall be wholly removed from the Premises
within 60 days of commencement of occupancy of the new residential
dwelling; and
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 26 of 45
26.14.3 Security be deposited with the Corporation to secure all the obligations of
the Covenantor.
26.15 Where a Temporary Building Permit has been issued for the Construction of a
Building for a Temporary Residential Use pursuant to the provisions of Maple Ridge
Zoning Bylaw, as amended and where the Temporary Building complies with the
provisions of the Provincial regulations and all Bylaws of the Corporation, the Chief
Building Official may issue a Temporary Residential Use agreement Permit to allow
occupancy of the Temporary Building for a Temporary Residential Use provided that
the owner of the Permit grants to the Corporation in registerable form a restrictive
covenant pursuant to Section 219 of the Land Title Act.
26.16 Applications for Temporary second dwelling or Temporary Residential Use agreement
Permits shall be in writing, signed by the applicant and shall be accompanied by:
26.16.1 for Buildings to be occupied during the Construction of a new dwelling,
plans showing the location of the existing dwelling and the proposed
location of the new dwelling on the Premises; Such drawings shall conform
to the requirements of Section 10;
26.16.2 a restrictive covenant pursuant to Section 219 of the Land Title Act
executed by the owner in registerable form an agreement with the
Corporation, that the applicant will remove the Temporary second dwelling
from the Premises and leave the site in a safe, tidy and sanitary condition
upon the expiration of the Temporary second dwelling Permit; Such a
restrictive covenant shall be registered with the Land Titles Office; and
26.16.3 cash, term deposit or an irrevocable letter of credit issued by a financial
institute acceptable to the Corporation in the amount of $10,000.00, as
security to secure all the obligations of the Covenantee under the restrictive
covenant.
26.17 If, upon the expiration of the Temporary second dwelling Permit, the Permit holder
does not remove the Temporary second dwelling from the Premises and does not
leave the site in a satisfactory condition, the Corporation may do so at the Permit
holder’s expense and may deduct the cost of so doing from the security deposit. If
the security deposit is not adequate to cover the said cost the Permit holder shall pay
to the Corporation any cost in excess of the security deposit, prior to the issuance of
an occupancy Permit for the new dwelling.
26.18 Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Temporary second dwelling which is rendered Non
Inhabitable and which conforms with all Bylaws of the Corporation and the Provincial
regulations may be allowed to remain on the Premises as an accessory Building after
the expiration of the Temporary second dwelling Permit provided that the Permit
holder applies for and is issued an occupancy Permit for use of the Building as an
accessory Building.
27. Moving of Buildings
27.1 No person shall move any Building from one parcel of land to another parcel of land
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 27 of 45
without first obtaining a Building Permit therefore.
27.2 Every application for a Building Permit to move a Building shall show the existing site
of the Building and the proposed site to which it is to be moved.
27.3 No Building Permit to move a Building shall be issued until the time and the route of
the moving have been approved by the Officer in Charge of the local Detachment of
the R.C.M.P., all utility companies having overhead wires along the proposed route,
the Municipal Engineering Department and the Chief Building Official.
27.4 No Building Permit required under Section 26 shall be issued unless the application
for the Building Permit includes all Construction necessary to complete the Building
or Structure in compliance with all Bylaws of the Corporation and of the Building
Code.
27.5 No Building Permit shall be issued without the proposed building being in substantial
compliance with the form and character of other buildings within 200m of the
location to which the building is to be moved.
28. Pools
28.1 No person shall construct a Pool on any Premises without first obtaining a Building
Permit to do so.
28.2 Every application for Construction of a Pool shall be accompanied by a plan showing:
28.2.1 the location of the proposed Pool in relation to all existing Buildings on the
Premises and the parcel boundaries;
28.2.2 the type of Construction;
28.2.3 the water supply and proposed method of drainage;
28.2.4 septic approval from the Health Authority if not serviced by Municipal
Sanitary Sewer; and
28.2.5 the proposed method and location of fencing and gates.
28.3 Every Pool, whether filled with water or empty, shall be completely enclosed with a
fence or other Structure which is not less than 1.2 metres in height, which has no
opening or gap with its largest dimension being more than 100 mm for vertical
pickets or 25.4 mm for chain link fencing. Further, this enclosing structure must
comply with the Building Code requirements for climbability of guards to restrict
access to the Pool. The fence or other Structure shall be continuous except for
points of access which shall, except for access from doors of the residence, be
equipped with self-closing gates which are designed so that they will return to a
latched or locked position when not in use, and which are secured by a latch or lock
located not less than 150 mm from the top of the gate and not less than l metre
above grade, on the Pool side of the fence or other Structure. Also, the area within
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 28 of 45
300 mm of the latch mechanism must be solid with the only gap – maximum 12.5
mm - occurring between the gate and the adjacent post to which the gate latches.
28.4 Every fence or other Structure enclosing a Pool, whether filled with water or empty,
shall be maintained by the owner or occupier of the Premises upon which the pool is
located, in good order and repair so that it is adequate to perform its intended
function. All sagging gates, loose parts, worn latches or locks and all broken or
binding members shall be promptly and adequately replaced or repaired.
28.5 Every gate in a fence or other Structure which provides access to a Pool shall be kept
in a latched or locked closed position and shall only be open for the purpose of entry
to or exit from the Pool area during such period.
28.6 Every Pool and hot tub shall be drained into a sanitary sewer system or, where a
sanitary sewer system of adequate capacity is not available, into a dedicated septic
dry well or rock pit approved by the Health Authority.
29. Plumbing
29.1 No Plumbing System, as defined in the current Building Code shall be installed,
altered or repaired except in accordance with the provisions of this Bylaw and the
Building Code and Regulations.
29.2 No Plumbing, including drainage systems, septic tanks, sewers and sewer
connections, or any part thereof, shall be located outside of the lot being served by
such Plumbing, except where an easement has been registered in the Land Title
Office charging the lands burdened by the easement and benefiting the lands served
by such Plumbing System.
29.3 No Plumbing storm drainage system shall be installed without gravity drainage to a
Municipal or other approved drainage system unless a written request is made, a
restrictive covenant pursuant to Section 219 of the Land Title Act executed by the
owner in registerable form including engineering details and auxiliary electrical
backup power specifications or other equivalent emergency systems. Such details
must be provided and approved by the Chief Building Official prior to the
commencement of any Building or drainage Construction.
Permit Required
29.4 Except as hereinafter specifically provided, no Plumbing shall be installed, altered or
repaired until a Permit to do so has first been obtained pursuant to this Bylaw.
29.5 No Building Permit shall be required for the repair of leaks in water pipes or the
replacing of Plumbing fixtures, provided that such fixtures and the installation thereof
conform with all other requirements of this Bylaw and the provincial regulations, or
for the removal of blockages in sewer or drain pipes provided that clean-outs are
utilized for such purpose and it is not necessary to cut any sewer or drain pipe.
29.6 Where Construction has commenced prior to issuance of the Plumbing Permit, the
Permit fee shall be doubled up to a maximum of $2,000.00 per Building.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 29 of 45
29.7 A Plumbing Permit shall only be issued to a plumber holding a valid British Columbia
Journeyman Plumber qualification and a valid Maple Ridge Business License or,
where the installation, alteration or repair of Plumbing is to be carried out within a
single family dwelling and entirely by the owner and occupier or intended occupier of
the Premises for which the Permit is sought.
29.8 where the Construction is done under a home owner Permit and that person is found
to be incompetent or to have violated a condition under which the Permit was issued,
that Permit will be revoked by the Chief Building Official and a qualified plumber will
be required to review the project and complete it under a new Permit prior to
occupancy being issued relevant to this Permit.
29.9 Every application for a Plumbing Permit shall:
29.9.1 be made in the form provided for such purposes;
29.9.2 be signed by the applicant; and
29.9.3 be accompanied by plans and specifications sufficient to describe the
proposed Construction and establish compliance with the Building Code,
this Bylaw and all other Bylaws of the Corporation.
29.10 Where an application has been made for a Plumbing Permit pursuant to this Bylaw
and:
29.10.1 the proposed Construction as shown in the application conforms with the
Building Code and Regulations, this Bylaw and all other Bylaws of the
Corporation;
29.10.2 the applicant has shown proof that he is the holder of a valid British
Columbia tradesman’s qualification certification as a plumber or, where the
applicant is the owner and occupier or intended occupier of a single family
dwelling for which the Permit is sought, he has delivered a signed
declaration that he will be carrying out the Construction himself; and
29.10.3 the applicant has paid the prescribed fee as set out in Schedule “D” hereto;
the Chief Building Official shall issue the Plumbing Permit for which the
application was made.
29.11 The holder of a Plumbing Permit shall obtain an inspection by a Building Official to
determine compliance with the provisions of this Bylaw and the current Building Code
and Regulations:
29.11.1 after the rough Plumbing is complete, but prior to the installation of any
fixtures or the covering thereof by dirt, concrete, insulation, lath or other
interior or exterior finish which would conceal such Construction; and
29.11.2 when the Plumbing is complete and ready for use, but before the Plumbing
is put into use by the owner or occupier of the Premises.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 30 of 45
29.12 Provided however, that where a registered professional registered to practice
Mechanical Engineering in the Province of British Columbia has been engaged by the
owner for the inspection of the Plumbing and where the prior written approval of the
Chief Building Official has been obtained, sealed certificates of compliance with the
approved plans and the provincial regulations, submitted by the registered
professional of record, may be accepted in lieu of inspections made by the Chief
Building Official or a Building Official.
29.13 The holder of a Plumbing Permit shall, during the installation, alteration or repair of
the Plumbing Constructions, keep a copy of the Permit documentation approved
drawings and specifications, which accompanied the Permit application on the
Premises. These drawings and specifications shall be kept on site and available to
the Building Official so that they are able to complete the inspections. Failure to have
the drawings on site will be deemed an offence under this bylaw and will require
a re-inspection fee and re-inspection to verify that the Construction complies with the
Permit.
30. Gas
30.1 Parts 1 to 9 of the current CSA B149.1-00 Standard, as amended, Natural Gas and
Propane Installation Code are hereby adopted and forms part of this Bylaw.
30.2 Every person who obtains a Permit for the installation or alteration of gas
Construction pursuant to the B.C. Safety Standards Act and related Gas Safety
Regulation shall pay to the Corporation the fees prescribed in Schedule “E” hereto
prior to obtaining the Permit.
30.3 Every person who obtains a Permit pursuant to this Section 30 shall maintain and
keep a copy of the Permit and all documentation and plans pertaining thereto on the
Premises on which the Construction authorized by the said Permit is being done.
Failure to have the Permit documentation on site will be deemed an offence under
this Bylaw and will require a re-inspection fee and re-inspection to verify that the
Construction complies with the Permit.
31. Electrical
31.2 Parts 1 and 2 of the current Canadian Electrical Code, as amended, are hereby
adopted and form part of this Bylaw.
31.1 Every person who obtains a Permit for the installation or alteration of Electrical
Equipment pursuant to the B.C. Safety Standards Act, Electrical Safety Regulation
and Electrical Code, shall pay to the Corporation the fees prescribed in Schedule “F”
hereto prior to obtaining the Permit.
31.2 Every person who obtains a Permit pursuant to this Section 31 shall maintain and
keep a copy of the Permit and all documentation and plans pertaining thereto on the
Premises on which the Construction authorized by the said Permit is being done.
Failure to have the Permit documentation on site will be deemed an offense under
this Bylaw and will require a re-inspection fee and inspection to verify that the
Construction complies with the Permit.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 31 of 45
32. Penalties and Enforcement
32.1 Every person who contravenes any provision of this bylaw commits an offence
punishable on summary conviction and shall be liable to a fine of not more than
$10,000.00 (Ten Thousand Dollars) or to imprisonment for not more than six months
and or impose a “Monetary Penalty” in accordance with the enabling Monetary
Penalty Regulation for Gas and Electrical works or workmanship, forming part of the
B.C. Safety Standards Act.
32.2 The Chief Building Official may order the cessation of any work that is proceeding in
contravention of the Building Code, B.C. Gas Safety Code and Electrical Code or
related Safety Regulations, this bylaw, any other bylaw of the Corporation or any
other applicable enactment concerning safety, by posting a Stop Work notice in the
form provided by the Chief Building Official.
32.3 The owner of property on which a Stop Work notice has been posted, and every other
person, shall cease all Construction work immediately and shall not do any work until
all applicable provisions of this bylaw have been substantially complied with and the
Stop Work notice has been rescinded in writing by a Building Official.
32.4 Where a person occupies a Building or Structure or part of a Building or Structure in
contravention of section 6.4 of this bylaw the Chief Building Official may post a Do
Not Occupy notice in the form provided by the Chief Building Official on the affected
part of the Building or Structure.
32.5 The owner of property on which a Do Not Occupy notice has been posted, and every
person, shall cease occupancy of the Building or Structure immediately and shall
refrain from further occupancy until all applicable provisions of the Building Code and
this bylaw have been substantially complied with and the Do Not Occupy notice has
been rescinded in writing by the Chief Building Official.
33. Severability
33.1 If any part, section, sub-section, clause, or sub-clause of this bylaw is, for any reason,
held to be invalid by the decision of a Court of competent jurisdiction, such decision
does not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this bylaw.
34. Forms and Schedules
34.1 Schedules A, B, C, D, E & F attached to this Bylaw form a part of this bylaw.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 32 of 45
READ a FIRST TIME on this 12th day of June, 2012.
READ a second time on this 12th day of June, 2012.
READ a third time on this 12th day of June, 2012.
ADOPTED this day of
PRESIDING MEMBER
CORPORATE OFFICER
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 33 of 45
SCHEDULE “A” – Building Permit Fees
Effective January 1, 1999
The following fees shall be paid by the applicant for a Permit to construct a Building or a Pool:
BASE FEES
For market value of Building or Pool or Construction to be done thereon of up to
$l000.00 - $35.00
For market value of Building or Pool or Construction to be done thereon of
$l001.00 - $2000.00 - $43.00 plus:
$8.95 for each additional $l000.00 or part thereof up to
$25,000.00, plus
$8.65 for each additional $1000.00 or part thereof up to
$50,000.00, plus
$8.10 for each additional $1000.00 or part thereof up to
$75,000.00, plus
$7.60 for each additional $1000.00 or part thereof over
$100,000.00, plus
$6.30 for each additional $1000.00 or part thereof up to
infinite.
NOTE: Building Values shall be based upon current estimated Construction costs. The current
edition of the Marshall Valuation Service, the Marshall and Swift Residential Cost Handbook or
other valuation tables may be used by the Chief Building Official to determine the market value
for the purpose of assessing Permit fees.
OTHER FEES
Where an application is made for a Building Permit for other than Single Family Detached
Dwellings, there will be an additional fee of $79.00 per dwelling unit.
In addition to the above, the following fees shall be paid by the applicant for a Permit pursuant to
this Bylaw:
1. Permit to erect a retaining wall - first 20m or portion thereof $53.00
for each additional 10m or portion thereof - $27.00
2. Permit to install a fireplace, stove or chimney - $30.25 for each fireplace, stove or flue.
3. Permit to install a Dry Chemical Fire Extinguishing System - $30.25
4. Building Demolition Permit - $30.25
5. Temporary Building Permit $30.25
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 34 of 45
SCHEDULE “A” – Building Permit Fees
Effective January 1, 1999
6. Temporary Second Dwelling Permit - $30.25
7. Provisional Occupancy Permit -
(a) SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING
(i) $79.00 (90 day maximum period)
(ii) $27.00 renewal (90 day maximum period)
(b) MULTI FAMILY DWELLING
(i) $79.00 per unit (120 day maximum period)
(ii) $27.00 renewal per unit (60 day maximum)
(c) OTHER THAN RESIDENTIAL
(i) $79.00 per unit (60 day maximum period)
(ii) $27.00 renewal per unit (60 day maximum)
8. For Change of Occupancy or use where a Building Permit is not required - $30.25
9. Permit Assignment or Transfer Fee - $30.25
10. Permit Renewal Fee - $30.25
11. Re-inspection Fee where more than 1 re-inspection is required due to the fault of the holder
of a Building Permit - $35.50 for each extra re-inspection required.
12. Address Change:
(i) If Permit has been issued but no occupancy Permit issued - $105.00 per unit;
(ii) Permit application in process but Permit not issued - $42.00 per unit
(iii) Occupancy Permit issued, follow fee schedule in accordance with Maple Ridge
House Numbering Bylaw
13. Additional fee for any inspection performed outside the boundaries of the Municipality $.40
per km traveled, measured from the Municipal Hall to the site of the inspection along the
shortest available highway route.
14. Miscellaneous and Special Inspections:
(a) during normal working hours - $38.50 per hour;
(b) outside normal working hours - $55.50 per hour;
(c) minimum charge - 1 hour
15. A fee of $2.00 per page, for plans for micro film charge over and above Building Permit.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 35 of 45
SCHEDULE “A” – Building Permit Fees
Effective January 1, 1999
16. Charges as shown below will be applicable for examination of plans and specifications on
application of Building Permit:
(a) Plan Check Fee - $42.00 per hour
(b) Single or Two Family - minimum $30.25 per unit
(c) Other than Single or Two Family - minimum $105.00 per Building
17. For each written Building record search, for legal purposes a fee of $79.00 per parcel or file
is applicable.
18. Business Licence Inspection Fee - minimum $30.25 per inspection,
maximum $121.00 per inspection.
19. Where Construction is started prior to obtaining a Permit, the applicable Permit fee shall be
doubled but in no case shall the penalty amount doubled, exceed $1,600.00 per Building.
20. If the applicant makes an erroneous declaration on the Permit application to obtain a
lesser Permit fee, the Permit shall be revoked and a new Permit issued using the
corrected value. The new Permit shall be calculated according to the corrected Permit
value and a 50% administrative fee shall be added to the calculated fee.
21. A fee of $28.25 for environmental inspection shall be paid for each residential unit with a
value in excess of $10,000.00. For each non residential unit a fee of $28.25 per unit
shall be paid where the value exceeds $20,000.00.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 36 of 45
SCHEDULE “B” - Solar Hot Water Regulation
Effective upon adoption of the Bylaw
Contents
1. Definitions
2. Applications
3. Solar collectors for a domestic hot water system
4. Solar hot water ready components
5. Conduits runs
Definitions
1. In this regulation, the terms in italics have the same as in the 2006 British Columbia
Building Code.
Application
2. This regulation is applicable in the following local government jurisdictions:
(a) Cariboo Regional District;
(b) City of Campbell River;
(c) City of Chilliwack;
(d) City of Colwood;
(e) City of Cranbrook;
(f) City of Dawson Creek;
(g) City of Duncan;
(h) City of Fernie;
(i) City of Fort St. John;
(j) City of Kelowna;
(k) City of New Westminster;
(l) City of North Vancouver;
(m) City of Richmond;
(n) City of Pitt Meadows;
(o) City of Port Coquitlam;
(p) City of Port Moody;
(q) City of West Vancouver;
(r) Corporation of Delta;
(s) Cowichan Valley Regional District;
(t) District of Invermere;
(u) District of Maple Ridge;
(v) District of Metchosin;
(w) District of North Vancouver;
(x) District of Peachland;
(y) District of Sparwood;
(z) District of Tofino;
(aa) Greater Vancouver Regional District;
(bb) Municipality of North Cowichan;
(cc) Resort Municipality of Whistler;
(dd) Squamish Lillooet Regional District;
(ee) Town of View Royal;
(ff) Township of Esquimalt;
(gg) Township of Langley;
(hh) Village of Ashcroft;
(ii) Village of Kaslo;
(jj) Village of Midway.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 37 of 45
SCHEDULE “B” - Solar Hot Water Regulation
Effective upon adoption of the Bylaw
Solar collectors for a domestic hot water system
3. (1) Subject to subsection (2), 2 conduit runs and an area that
(a) is not less than 9.3 square meters,
(b) has no dimension less than 2.7 meters, and
(c) is designated for future installation of solar collectors for a solar domestic hot
water system in compliance with CAN/CSA-F383-87
Must be incorporated in construction of new buildings of residential occupancy that
contain
(a) One dwelling unit, or
(b) One dwelling unit and one secondary suite.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply with respect to new construction referred to in that
subsection if the local government of the jurisdiction to which this regulation applies
and within which the new construction is to occur is satisfied that building site
conditions do not permit effective use of solar hot water heating
Structural requirements
4. Structural members of areas referred to in section 3 (1) must be designed to
accommodate the greater of the following;
(a) the anticipated load;
(b) A load of 0.2 kpa in addition to design loads required by the British Columbia
Building Code.
Conduit runs
5. (1) Two straight, continuous, conduit runs must be provided that extend from the area
directly adjacent to the building’s primary service water heater to
(a) an accessible attic space adjacent to the roof area designated for installation of
solar collectors for a domestic hot water system,
(b) the roof area designated for installation of solar collectors for a solar domestic
hot water system, or
(c) the exterior wall surface directly adjacent to the area designated for the
installation of solar collectors for a solar domestic hot water system.
(2) Conduit runs described in subsection (1) must
(a) be accessible at both ends,
(b) be capped or sealed at both ends to prevent water ingress and air leakage,
(c) be identified by markings that are permanent, distinct and easily recognized,
(d) have a minimum inside diameter of 55 mm, and
(e) be able to accommodate the installation of insulated plumbing services for a
solar domestic hot water system in compliance with CAN/CSA-F383, Installation
Code for Solar Domestic Hot Water Systems, as referred to in the British
Columbia Building Code.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 38 of 45
SCHEDULE “C”
OCCUPANCY PERMIT
Address of Building:
Legal Description:
Approved Occupancy (use):
Name of Business, if applicable:
The Building constructed under the authority of Building Permit Number:
is approved for Occupancy.
The septic system for this Building has been approved for bedrooms.
This Permit pertains to sq ft of the basement being finished.
This Permit number does include or does not include a secondary suite.
This Permit confirms that inspections pursuant to the District of Maple Ridge Building Bylaw have
been complete and no substantive violation of health or safety requirements have been observed.
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 comment on
the conditions 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.
NOTE: A new Permit shall be obtained prior to any change in the use of the Building.
Chief Building Official
Per:
Date:
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 39 of 45
SCHEDULE “D” – Plumbing Permit Fees
Effective January 1, 1999
The following fees shall be paid by the applicant for a Permit to install, alter or repair Plumbing:
1. Minimum fee for any Plumbing Permit or inspections - $30.25
2. For Plumbing Construction which involves the installation of fixtures:
$16.90 for the first fixture plus
$15.25 for each additional fixture
For the purpose of this Bylaw, “fixtures” shall include Pools, interceptors, hot water storage tanks,
automatic washers, roof drains, floor drains and built-in dishwashers.
Where an application is made for a Plumbing Permit for other than single family detached
dwellings, there will be an additional fee of $27.00 per dwelling unit.
Permit fees for finishing Plumbing only (installation of fixtures where rough-in Plumbing exists)
shall be 50% of the above fees.
3. For Plumbing Construction which involves the connection of hydraulic equipment or the
installation of vacuum breakers, backflow prevention devices or similar equipment - $22.40
per item connected or installed.
4. For Plumbing Construction which involves the installation of lawn irrigation systems -
$36.50
5. For Plumbing Construction which involves the installation of fire sprinkler systems:
(a) for up to six (6) sprinkler heads - $38.50
(b) for each additional sprinkler head - $ 0.45
6. For Plumbing Construction which involves the installation of standpipes, Siamese
connections, fire hose connections and fire hydrants - $22.40 for each hydrant or hose
connection.
7. For Plumbing Construction which involves the installation of storm sewers, perimeter
foundation drains, sanitary sewers or water service lines:
(a) for single or two-family dwellings - $36.50 each
(b) for other than single or two-family dwellings:
(i) first 30 metres or part thereof - $43.00 each
(ii) each additional 30 metres or part thereof - $22.40 each
(iii) each sump, catchbasin, rock pit, dry well or manhole - $22.40
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 40 of 45
SCHEDULE “D” – Plumbing Permit Fees
Effective January 1, 1999
8. Re-inspection fee where more than 1 re-inspection is required due to the fault of the Permit
holder - $35.50 for each extra re-inspection required.
9. Permit assignment or transfer fee - $30.25
10. Permit renewal - $30.25
11. Miscellaneous and special inspections:
(a) During normal working hours - $38.50 per hour;
(b) Outside normal working hours - $55.50 per hour;
(c) Minimum Charge - 1 Hour.
12. Charges as shown below will be applicable for examination of plans and specifications on
application.
(a) Plan Check Fee - $42.00 per hour
(b) Single or Two Family Dwellings - minimum $30.25 per unit.
(c) Other than Single or Two Family Dwellings - minimum $105.00 per Building.
13. Business Licence Inspection Fee - minimum $30.25 per inspection, maximum $30.25per
inspection.
14. Where Construction is started prior to obtaining a Permit, the applicable Permit fee shall be
doubled, but in no case shall the penalty amount doubled, exceed $1,600.00 per Building.
15. If the applicant makes an erroneous declaration on the Permit application to obtain a lesser
Permit fee, the Permit shall be revoked and a new Permit issued using the corrected
information. The new Permit shall be calculated according to the corrected Permit value and
a 50% administrative fee shall be added to the calculated fee.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 41 of 45
SCHEDULE “E” – Gas Permit Fees
Effective January 1, 1999
The following fees shall be paid by the applicant for a Permit to install or alter gas Construction:
1. For gas Construction which involves the replacement of an appliance or the installation of a
new gas appliance.
(a) for Single or Multi-Family Dwellings:
(i) $24.50 per appliance, $31.50 minimum
(b) for other than Single or Multi-Family Dwellings:
(i) up to 102,000 BTU/hr $44.00 per appliance
(ii) 102,001 - 409,000 BTU/hr $60.50 per appliance
NOTE: Fee for additional appliances are calculated on BTU rating.
2. Where an application is made for a Permit for other than single family detached dwellings,
there will be an additional fee of $27.00 per dwelling unit.
3. Gas Heated Buildings - Building heat loss calculation review
(i) $53.00 per Single Family Dwelling.
(ii) $11.00 per unit for Multi Family Use - not less than $53.00 per Building
(iii) $105.00 per Building for other than Residential.
4. For gas Construction which involves the installation of vents or furnace plenums only -
$24.50 each
5. For gas Construction which involves the installation of house piping:
(a) for single or two family dwellings - $35.50 per unit;
(b) for other than single or two family dwellings:
(i) first 30 metres or part thereof - $43.00 per unit plus
(ii) each additional 30 metres or part thereof - $21.50 per unit
6. Re-inspection fee where more than one (1) inspection is required due to faulty workmanship
or materials - $35.50 for each extra re-inspection required.
7. Permit Renewal - $30.25
8. Permit Transfer - $30.25
9. Miscellaneous and special inspections:
(a) During normal working hours - $38.50 per hour;
(b) Outside normal working hours - $55.50 per hour;
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 42 of 45
SCHEDULE “E” – Gas Permit Fees
Effective January 1, 1999
(c) Minimum charge - l hour
10. Charges as shown below will be applicable for examination of plans and specifications on
application of Gas Permit.
(a) Plan Check Fee - $42.00 per hour
(b) Single or Two Family Dwellings - minimum $30.25 per unit
(c) Other than Single or Two Family Dwellings - minimum $121.00 per Building.
11. Oil and Propane Fee Schedule would follow the Gas Fee Schedule “E” in it's entirety.
12. Business Licence Inspection Fee - minimum $30.25 per inspection, maximum $121.00 per
inspection.
13. Where Construction is started prior to obtaining a Permit, the applicable Permit fee shall be
doubled, but in no case shall the penalty amount doubled, exceed $1,600.00 per Building.
14. If the applicant makes an erroneous declaration on the Permit application to obtain a lesser
Permit fee, the Permit shall be revoked and a new Permit issued using the corrected
information. The new Permit shall be calculated according to the corrected Permit value and
a 50% administrative fee shall be added to the calculated fee.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 43 of 45
SCHEDULE “F” – Electrical Permit Fees
Effective January 1, 1999
The following fees shall be paid by the applicant for a Permit to install Electrical Equipment:
For one and two Family Dwellings including additions, the Permit fee shall be 15% of the building
Permit fee or the minimum electrical Permit fee, whichever is greater.
The following additional charges are applicable to one and two family dwelling when the electrical
Permit is taken out in conjunction with a building permit:
1. a) Each hot tub or spa $12.80
b) Each hydro massage tub bath $10.30
c) Electrical Heating or based on the value $26.00 minimum
of electrical heating contract, whichever is greater
d) Air Conditioning $10.30 per unit
e) Each sub panel $10.30
Fees for all other work not included above
For market value of Electrical Equipment, including costs of installation, of up to $200.00 -
$31.25
For market value of Electrical Equipment, including costs of installation of $201.00 - $500.00 -
$41.00
For market value of Electrical Equipment, including costs of installation of $501.00 -
$1000.00 - $57.50 plus:
$21.00 for each additional $l000.00 or part thereof up to $10,000.00 plus
$ 8.10 for each additional $l000.00 or part thereof up to $100,000.00 plus
$ 6.00 for each additional $l000.00 or part thereof up to $250,000.00 plus
$ 4.40 for each additional $l000.00 or part thereof up to $300,000.00 plus
$ 3.40 for each additional $1000.00 or part thereof over $300,000.00 to infinite.
NOTE: Market values shall be based upon current estimated electrical installation costs.
Where an application is made for an Electrical Permit for other than Single Family Detached
Dwellings, there will be an additional fee of $27.00 per dwelling unit.
In addition to the above, the following fees shall be paid by the applicant for a Permit to install
Electrical Equipment.
2. Underground Service Duct - $25.70
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 44 of 45
SCHEDULE “F” – Electrical Permit Fees
Effective January 1, 1999
3. Temporary:
(a) Temporary to permanent connection conversion $23.40
(b) Temporary Service connection $23.40
4. Temporary current Permit for uses other than carnivals:
(a) Initial six (6) month period - $31.50
(b) Each additional six (6) month renewal period - $28.25
5. Special Event Permit Including Carnivals:
Each Location: $57.00
6. Movie Shoot Permit:
(a) up to 14 days $79.00
(b) Annual permits, per location $155.00
(c) Inspections outside normal working hours
additional fee $206.00
7. Annual Permit:
(a) for commercial or industrial facilities:
(i) per KVA of service capacity .13
(ii) minimum fee $52.00
(iii) maximum fee 1,576.00
(b) for educational or institutional facilities - $5.00 for each classroom, shop, laboratory,
office, etc.
8. Pool Grounding Permit - $27.00
9. Re-inspection fee where more than one (1) re-inspection is required due to faulty
workmanship or materials - $35.50 for each extra re-inspection required.
10. Permit Transfer - $30.25
11. Permit Renewal - $30.25
12. Miscellaneous and special inspections:
(a) During normal working hours - $38.50 per hour;
(b) Outside normal working hours - $55.50 per hour;
(c) Minimum charge - One (1) hour.
Building Bylaw No. 6925 - 2012 Page 45 of 45
SCHEDULE “F” – Electrical Permit Fees
Effective January 1, 1999
13. Charges as shown below will be applicable for examination of plans and specifications on
application of electrical Permit.
(a) Plan Check Fee - minimum $42.00 per hour
(b) Single or Two Family Dwellings - minimum $30.25 per unit.
(c) Other than Single or Two Family Dwellings - minimum $105.00 per Building.
14. Business Licence Inspection Fee - minimum $30.25 per inspection, maximum $121.00 per
inspection.
15. Where Construction is started prior to obtaining a Permit, the applicable Permit fee shall be
doubled, but in no case shall the penalty amount doubled, exceed $1,600.00 per Building.
16. If the applicant makes an erroneous declaration of the Permit value to obtain a lesser
Permit fee, the Permit shall be revoked and a new Permit issued using the corrected value.
The new Permit shall be calculated according to the corrected Permit value and a 50%
administrative fee shall be added to the calculated fee.
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 6932-2012
A Bylaw to amend Maple Ridge Recreation Facility Fees
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988 as amended.
__________________________________________________________
WHEREAS the Council may by bylaw establish and regulate the fixing of fees for admissions and/or
use of sports, recreation and community use facilities;
AND WHEREAS, the Council has imposed fees and now wishes to amend those fees;
NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the District of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as “Maple Ridge Recreation Facility Fees Amending Bylaw No. 6932-
2012.
2. That Maple Ridge Recreation Facility Fees By-law No. 4117 - 1988 as amended, be further
amended by deleting Schedules “A”, “B”, “C”, “D”, “E”, “F”, “G”, “H”, “J”, “K”, “L” and “M” in
their entirety and replacing with Schedule “A”, “B”, “C”, “D”, “E”, “F”, “G” “H”, “J”, “K”, “L”
and “M” as attached hereto.
3. This Bylaw shall come into force and effect as of January 1, 2013 for Schedules “A”, “B”, “C”,
“D”, “E”, “F”, “G”, “H”, “J”, “K”, “L” and “M”.
READ a first time this 12th day of June, 2012.
READ a second time this 12th day of June, 2012.
READ a third time this 12th day of June, 2012.
ADOPTED this
________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
Attachments: Schedules “A”, “B”, “C”, “D”, “E”, “F”, “H”, “J”, “K”, “L” and “M”.
1005
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988
SCHEDULE “A”
Arenas
Effective January 1, 2013
taxes extra Ice Ice Ice Dry Floor Planet Ice
Prime Non-Prime Early Bird Mtg Room
Youth/Senior Non Profit
Commercial
Use $138.71 $110.97
$70.66 $14.40
Fundraising $125.46 $97.72
$57.41 $7.20
Special Event $118.84 $91.10 $91.10 $50.79 $3.60
Regular Use $100.99 $76.02 $76.02 $39.74 $0.00
Adult Non
Profit
Commercial
Use $138.71 $110.97
$70.66 $14.40
Fundraising $138.71 $110.97
$70.66 $14.40
Special Event $133.71 $105.97 $105.97 $65.66 $7.20
Regular Use $128.71 $100.97 $100.97 $60.66 $0.00
Local, Private or Political Groups
Fundraising $193.16 $156.13
$105.99 $21.60
Special Event $185.84 $148.85
$88.32 $18.00
Regular Use $197.88 $143.72
$70.66 $14.40
Local Commercial
Fundraising $305.27 $235.64
$113.05 $23.04
Special Event $254.24 $203.88
$95.39 $19.44
Regular Use $209.87 $161.99
$77.72 $15.84
Non Resident Groups
Fundraising $307.07 $245.66
$120.12 $24.48
Special Event $263.21 $210.56
$102.45 $20.88
Regular Use $215.88 $172.70
$84.79 $17.28
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988
SCHEDULE “B”
Fairgrounds
Effective January 1, 2013
taxes extra Commercial or Beef Stage Grounds &
Exhibition Barn Showrings
Youth/Senior Non Profit
Commercial
Use $20.40 $30.58 $5.09 $17.85
Fundraising $10.20 $17.33 $2.55 $8.93
Special Event $5.10 $10.71 $1.27 $4.46
Regular Use $0.00 $3.67 $0.00 $0.00
Adult Non
Profit
Commercial
Use $20.40 $30.58 $5.09 $17.85
Fundraising $20.40 $30.58 $5.09 $17.85
Special Event $15.40 $25.58 $2.55 $12.85
Regular Use $10.40 $20.58 $0.00 $7.85
Local, Private or Political Groups
Fundraising $30.60 $45.87 $7.64 $26.78
Special Event $25.50 $38.22 $6.37 $22.31
Regular Use $20.40 $30.58 $5.09 $17.85
Local Commercial
Fundraising $32.64 $48.92 $8.15 $28.56
Special Event $27.54 $41.28 $6.88 $24.10
Regular Use $22.44 $33.64 $5.60 $19.64
Non Resident Groups
Fundraising $34.68 $51.98 $8.66 $30.35
Special Event $29.58 $44.34 $7.39 $25.88
Regular Use $24.48 $36.69 $6.11 $21.42
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988
SCHEDULE “C”
Maple Ridge Leisure Centre Pool Rates
Effective January 1, 2013
taxes extra Leisure Pool/Competition Pool Hammond Pool
Per Lane Full Pool
Youth/Senior Non Profit
Commercial Use $14.15 $61.02
Fundraising $10.32 $42.23
Special Event $8.38 $32.79
Regular Use $5.84 $21.08
Adult Non Profit
Commercial Use $14.15 $61.02
Fundraising $14.15 $61.02
Special Event $13.86 $53.91
Regular Use $12.69 $46.83
Local, Private or Political Groups
Fundraising $21.19 $91.51
Special Event $17.67 $76.26
Regular Use $14.15 $61.02
Local Commercial
Fundraising $22.63 $97.64
Special Event $19.10 $82.38
Regular Use $15.52 $67.12
Non Resident Groups
Fundraising $24.02 $103.73
Special Event $20.49 $88.47
Regular Use $16.96 $73.22
Lifeguard Fees are extra.
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988
SCHEDULE “D”
Maple Ridge Leisure Centre
Effective January 1, 2013
taxes extra Full Gym Half Gym 1/4 Gym (Multi-P) Preschool
Cap. 1000 Cap. 500 Cap. 80 Cap. 40
Youth/Senior Non Profit
Commercial Use $82.59 $41.30 $20.65 $11.01
Fundraising $69.34 $34.67 $17.34 $5.51
Special Event $62.72 $31.36 $15.68 $2.75
Regular Use $50.48 $25.24 $12.62 $0.00
Adult Non Profit
Commercial Use $82.59 $41.30 $20.65 $11.01
Fundraising $82.59 $41.30 $20.65 $11.01
Special Event $77.59 $38.80 $19.40 $5.51
Regular Use $72.59 $36.30 $18.15 $0.00
Local, Private or Political Groups
Fundraising $123.89 $61.94 $30.97 $16.52
Special Event $103.24 $51.62 $25.81 $13.76
Regular Use $82.59 $41.30 $20.65 $11.01
Local Commercial
Fundraising $132.15 $66.07 $33.04 $17.62
Special Event $111.50 $55.75 $27.88 $14.86
Regular Use $90.85 $45.43 $22.71 $12.11
Non Resident Groups
Fundraising $140.41 $70.20 $35.10 $18.72
Special Event $119.76 $59.88 $29.94 $15.97
Regular Use $99.11 $49.56 $24.78 $13.21
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988
SCHEDULE “E”
Maple Ridge Library Meeting Rooms
Effective January 1, 2013
taxes extra Alouette Room Fraser Room
Youth/Senior Non Profit
Commercial
Use $14.40 $20.70
Fundraising $7.20 $10.35
Special Event $3.60 $5.18
Regular Use $0.00 $0.00
Adult Non
Profit
Commercial
Use $14.40 $20.70
Fundraising $14.40 $20.70
Special Event $7.20 $15.70
Regular Use $0.00 $10.70
Local, Private or Political Groups
Fundraising $21.60 $31.05
Special Event $18.00 $25.88
Regular Use $14.40 $20.70
Local Commercial
Fundraising $23.04 $33.12
Special Event $19.44 $27.95
Regular Use $15.84 $22.77
Non Resident Groups
Fundraising $24.48 $35.19
Special Event $20.88 $30.02
Regular Use $17.28 $24.84
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988
SCHEDULE “F”
Maple Ridge Leisure Centre Admission Rates
Effective January 1, 2013
"Flexi" taxes extra
single 10 visits 20 visits 1 month 3 months 6 months 1 year
Children $2.90 $ 24.90 $ 44.20 $ 27.60 $ 70.38 $ 132.48 $ 264.96
Youth $3.71 $ 31.80 $ 56.50 $ 35.30 $ 90.02 $ 169.44 $ 338.88
Senior $3.71 $ 31.80 $ 56.50 $ 35.30 $ 90.02 $ 169.44 $ 338.88
Adult $5.70 $ 48.90 $ 86.90 $ 54.30 $ 138.47 $ 260.64 $ 521.28
Family $9.94 $ 85.30 $ 151.60 $ 94.70 $ 241.49 $ 454.56 $ 909.12
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988
SCHEDULE “G”
Sports Fields
Municipal & School District 42
Effective January 1, 2013
taxes extra CLASS A CLASS B CLASS C
Youth/Senior Non Profit
Commercial Use 22.07 16.44 5.49
Fundraising 11.04 8.22 2.75
Special Event 5.52 4.11 1.37
Regular Use 0.00 0.00 0.00
Formula was taken out for B16 and
C16
Adult Non Profit
Commercial Use 22.07 16.44 5.49
Fundraising 22.07 16.44 5.49
Special Event $17.07 $11.44 2.75
Regular Use $12.70 $6.65 0.00
Local, Private or Political Groups
Fundraising 33.11 24.66 8.24
Special Event 27.59 20.55 6.86
Regular Use 22.07 16.44 5.49
Local Commercial
Fundraising 35.31 26.30 8.78
Special Event 29.79 22.19 7.41
Regular Use 24.28 18.08 6.04
Non Resident Groups
Fundraising 37.52 27.95 9.33
Special Event 32.00 23.84 7.96
Regular Use 26.48 19.73 6.59
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988
SCHEDULE “H”
Drop In Skating Admission Rates Effective January 1, 2013
Pitt Meadows Arenas and Planet Ice Arena
taxes extra
single 10 visits 20 visits
Children $2.60 $ 22.40 $ 39.70
Youth $3.18 $ 27.30 $ 48.50
Senior $3.18 $ 27.30 $ 48.50
Adult $4.50 $ 38.70 $ 68.70
Family $7.57 $ 64.90 $ 115.40
Parent/Tot $3.76 $ 32.30 $ 57.30
(Adult + child under 3)
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988
SCHEDULE “J”
Greg Moore Youth Centre
Effective January 1, 2013
taxes extra Multi-Purpose Lounge
Inside Active
Area
Whole
Facility
Youth/Senior Non
Profit
Commercial Use $17.61 $24.64 $73.90 $116.16
Fundraising $8.81 $12.32 $60.65 $81.78
Special Event $4.40 $6.16 $54.03 $64.60
Regular Use $0.00 $0.00 $42.66 $42.66
Adult Non Profit
Commercial Use $17.61 $24.64 $73.90 $116.16
Fundraising $17.61 $24.64 $73.90 $116.16
Special Event $12.61 $19.64 $68.90 $101.16
Regular Use $7.61 $14.64 $63.90 $86.16
Local, Private or Political Groups
Fundraising $26.42 $36.96 $110.86 $174.24
Special Event $22.02 $30.80 $92.38 $145.20
Regular Use $17.61 $24.64 $73.90 $116.16
Local Commercial
Fundraising $28.18 $39.43 $118.25 $185.85
Special Event $23.78 $33.27 $99.77 $156.81
Regular Use $19.37 $27.11 $81.30 $127.78
Non Resident Groups
Fundraising $29.94 $41.89 $125.64 $197.47
Special Event $25.54 $35.73 $107.16 $168.43
Regular Use $21.13 $29.57 $88.69 $139.39
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988
SCHEDULE “K”
Hammond Community Centre
Effective January 1, 2013
taxes extra Large Hall 1/2 Large Hall Small Hall (Preschool Rm)
Youth/Senior Non Profit
Commercial
Use $56.93 $28.47 $23.45
Fundraising $43.68 $21.84 $11.73
Special Event $37.06 $18.53 $5.86
Regular Use $27.39 $13.70 $0.00
Adult Non
Profit
Commercial
Use $56.93 $28.47 $23.45
Fundraising $56.93 $28.47 $23.45
Special Event $51.93 $25.97 $18.45
Regular Use $46.93 $23.47 $13.45
Local, Private or Political Groups
Fundraising $85.40 $42.70 $35.18
Special Event $71.17 $35.58 $29.32
Regular Use $56.93 $28.47 $23.45
Local Commercial
Fundraising $91.10 $45.55 $37.52
Special Event $76.86 $38.43 $31.66
Regular Use $62.63 $31.31 $25.80
Non Resident Groups
Fundraising $96.79 $48.39 $39.87
Special Event $82.56 $41.28 $34.01
Regular Use $68.32 $34.16 $28.14
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988
SCHEDULE “L”
Park Shelter Fees
Effective January 1, 2013
taxes extra
Park Shelter
Rental $ 63.00
(Up to a full day)
Equipment Fee
Effective July 1, 2013
taxes extra
Event Trailer
$ 147.31
Tennis/Sport Court
Effective January 1, 2013
taxes extra
Courts
(commercial
use per hour)
$ 15.00
Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Bylaw No. 4117 – 1988
SCHEDULE “M”
Outdoor Pool Admissions
Effective January 1, 2013
Hammond Pool
taxes extra
single Season Pass
Children $1.60 $ 36.23
Youth $2.37 $ 39.85
Senior $2.37 $ 39.85
Adult $3.03 $ 44.63
Family $6.07 $ 98.86
Replacement Pass $5.00
District of Maple Ridge
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING
MINUTES
June 18, 2012
1:00 p.m.
Council Chamber
PRESENT
Elected Officials Appointed Staff
Mayor E. Daykin J. Rule, Chief Administrative Officer
Councillor C. Ashlie K. Swift, General Manager of Community Development,
Councillor C. Bell Parks and Recreation Services
Councillor J. Dueck P. Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services
Councillor A. Hogarth F. Quinn, General Manager Public Works and Development
Councillor B. Masse Services
Councillor M. Morden C. Carter, Director of Planning
C. Marlo, Manager of Legislative Services
Other Staff as Required
D. Pollock, Municipal Engineer
L. Holitzki, Director of Licences, Permits and Bylaws
A. Kopystynski, Planning Technician
R. Acharya, Planner
1.DELEGATIONS/STAFF PRESENTATIONS
1.1 Maple Ridge Economic Advisory Commission Presentation
Glenn Ralph, Chair, Economic Advisory Commission
Sandy Blue, Manager of Strategic Economic Initiatives
The Chair of the Economic Advisory Commission and the Manager of Strategic
Economic Initiatives gave a PowerPoint presentation which highlighted the
investment activity in Maple Ridge.
1.2 Street Trees Presentation
Bruce McLeod, Manager of Park Planning and Development
The Manager of Park Planning and Development provided a PowerPoint
presentation which gave an overview of the street tree program.
1100
Committee of the Whole Minutes
June 18, 2012
Page 2 of 8
2. PUBLIC WORKS AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Note: The following items have been numbered to correspond with the Council
Agenda:
Note: Councillor Hogarth excused himself from the discussion of Item 1101 at 1:39
p.m. as he manages a property in the vicinity of the application.
1101 2012-054-RZ, 23274 Silver Valley Road, RS-3 to RS-1b and RS-1
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6936-2012 to permit a subdivision of 8 lots be given first
reading and that the applicant provide further information as described on
Schedules A, C, F and G of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-
1999, along with the information required for a Subdivision application.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a Power Point
presentation providing the following information:
Application Information
Neighbourhood Context
OCP Context
Site Characteristics
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
Note: Councillor Hogarth returned to the meeting at 1:43 p.m.
1102 2011-055-RZ, 11461 and 11475 236 Street, RS-3 to RM-1
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6832-2011 to adjust designated
conservation areas be given first and second reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing and that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6833-2011 to
permit a 53 unit townhouse development be given second reading and be
forwarded to Public Hearing.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a Power Point
presentation providing the following information:
Application Information
Neighbourhood Context
OCP Context
Site Characteristics
Committee of the Whole Minutes
June 18, 2012
Page 3 of 8
Preliminary Design Plans
Landscape Plans
Dave Boswell – Application Architect
Mr. Boswell provided details on stormwater management and the sanitary
sewer proposed for the application.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
1103 2011-066-RZ, 26777 Dewdney Trunk Road, RS-3 to RS-2
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6934-2012 to amend a conservation
designation be given first and second reading and be forwarded to Public
Hearing and that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6841-2011 to
permit subdivision into two lots be given second reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing.
The Manager of Development and Environmental Services gave a Power Point
presentation providing the following information:
Application Information
Neighbourhood Context
OCP Context
Site Characteristics’
Subdivision Plan
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
1104 2011-050-RZ, 21165 River Road, RS-1 to RS-1b
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6846-2011 to permit a subdivision into seven lots be
given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
Committee of the Whole Minutes
June 18, 2012
Page 4 of 8
The Planning Technician gave a Power Point presentation providing the
following information:
Application Information
Neighbourhood Context
OCP Context
Site Characteristics
Proposed Subdivision Plan
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
1105 2011-054-RZ, 22327 River Road and Roll #31399-0000-4, RS-1 to CRM
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6827-2011 to permit future construction of a four-storey
apartment building with 43 units be given second reading and be forwarded
to Public Hearing.
The Planner gave a Power Point presentation providing the following
information:
Application Information
Neighbourhood Context
OCP Context
Site Characteristics
Proposed Site Plan
Proposed Underground Parking Plan
Fred Formosa - Applicant
Mr. Formosa provided clarification on the design plans for the proposed
apartment building. He advised that he has connected with the Port Haney
Neighbourhood Group.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
Committee of the Whole Minutes
June 18, 2012
Page 5 of 8
1106 2012-005-RZ, 20528 Lougheed Highway, CS-1 to C-2
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6926-2012 to permit an existing commercial building to
be expanded and allow a broader range of commercial uses be given second
reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
Tomm Cobban – Application Architect
Mr. Cobban provided an overview of the proposal.
The Planning Technician gave a Power Point presentation providing the
following information:
Application Information
Neighbourhood Context
OCP Context
Site Characteristics
Site Plan
Renderings
Landscape Plan
Edward Archibald – Applicant Representative
Mr. Archibald confirmed separate ownership of the property from the property
to the east. He also confirmed that the existing fencing will remain.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
1107 2012-027-DVP, 24207 102 Avenue
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer be
authorized to sign and seal 2012-027-DVP to vary road widths and
construction standards, minimum lot depth on lots fronting 102 Avenue and
reduction of side yard setbacks.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
Committee of the Whole Minutes
June 18, 2012
Page 6 of 8
1108 2012-027-DP, 24207 102 Avenue
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer be
authorized to sign and seal 2012-027-DP to permit development of 27 lots
under the R-3 zone.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
1109 Local Area Service – 11160 234A Street Paving
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that staff be authorized to
prepare a bylaw to establish a Local Area Service for 11160 234A Street.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
1110 Excess Capacity/Extended Services Agreement LC 151/12, 124 Avenue and
203 Street
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer be
authorized to sign and seal Excess Capacity Latecomer Agreement LC
151/12.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
1111 Award of Contract No. ITT-EN12-55, 122 Avenue Road and Walkability
Improvements (216 Street to 222 Street)
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Contract No. ITT-EN12-
55, 122 Avenue Road Improvements (216 Street to 222 Street) be awarded
to Imperial Paving Limited and that the Corporate Officer be authorized to
execute the contract.
The Municipal Engineer provided clarification on the layout of a traffic button.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
Committee of the Whole Minutes
June 18, 2012
Page 7 of 8
1112 Lava Room Dining and Lounge – Liquor License Application – Entertainment
Endorsement
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that Council decline
comment on the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch Application for a minor
amendment to include Patron Participation Entertainment at the Lava Room
Dining and Lounge.
The Director of Licences, Permits and Bylaws provided clarification on the
process for comments by Council to the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
3. FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE SERVICES (including Fire and Police)
1131 2011 Annual Report and 2011 Statement of Financial Information
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the 2011 Annual Report
be received and that the 2011 Statement of Financial Information be
approved.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
4. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND RECREATION SERVICES
1151 Cedar Park Construction – Award of Tender
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the contract for the
construction of Cedar Park be awarded to Wilco Civil Inc. and that the
Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
Committee of the Whole Minutes
June 18, 2012
Page 8 of 8
1152 Deer Fern Park Construction – Award of Tender
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the contract for the
construction of Deer Fern Park be awarded to Wilco Civil Inc. and that the
Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the agreement.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
5. CORRESPONDENCE – Nil
6. OTHER ISSUES
Note: Councillor Morden excused himself from discussion of Item 1181 at 2:37 p.m.
as he is a property owner in the Town Centre.
1181 Town Centre Incentive Program Partnering Agreements
Staff report dated June 18, 2012 recommending that the Corporate Officer be
authorized to execute Partnering Agreements for Building Permit Numbers 11-
120295, 12-109255 and 11-124858, 11-110037 and 12-112565 to provide
an upfront financial incentive as part of the Town Centre Investment Incentive
Program.
The Manager of Sustainability and Corporate Planning provided clarification
on the status of the development.
RECOMMENDATION
That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of June 26, 2012.
Note: Councillor Morden returned to the meeting at 2:41 p.m.
7. ADJOURNMENT – 2:41 p.m.
8. COMMUNITY FORUM – Nil
___________________________________
C. Ashlie, Acting Mayor
Presiding Member of the Committee
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012-054-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6936-2012
23274 Silver Valley Road
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject property from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) and RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential). To proceed further with this application additional information is required as outlined
below.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
In respect of Section 879 of the Local Government Act, requirement for consultation during the
development or amendment of an Official Community Plan, Council must consider whether
consultation is required with specifically:
i. The Board of the Regional District in which the area covered by the plan is located, in the
case of a Municipal Official Community Plan;
ii. The Board of any Regional District that is adjacent to the area covered by the plan;
iii. The Council of any municipality that is adjacent to the area covered by the plan;
iv. First Nations;
v. School District Boards, greater boards and improvements district boards; and
vi. The Provincial and Federal Governments and their agencies.
and in that regard it is recommended that no additional consultation be required in respect of this
matter beyond the early posting of the proposed Official Community Plan amendments o n the
District's website, together with an invitation to the public to comment, and;
That Zone Amending Bylaw 6936-2012 be given First Reading; and;
That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules A, C, F and G of the
Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 – 1999, along with the information required for a
Subdivision application.
1101
- 2 -
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: Damax Consultants Ltd. David Laird
Owner: 0752504 B C Ltd.
Legal Description: Lot: 3, Section 33, Township 12, Plan: 20132
OCP:
Existing: Medium Density Residential, Low/Medium Density Residential,
Low Density Residential, Open Space and Conservation.
Zoning:
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Proposed: RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential),
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density)
Residential), RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential)
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Low/Medium Density Residential, Low Density
Residential and Conservation
South: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Medium Density Residential, Low/Medium
Density Residential, Low Density Residential
and Conservation
East: Use: Conservation
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Conservation
West: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Medium Density Residential and Low/Medium
Density Residential
Existing Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Site Area: 0.936 HA. (2.3 acres)
Access: Silver Valley Road and Blaney Road from the North
Servicing requirement: Full Urban Standard
b) Site Characteristics:
The site is 0.936 ha in size and is bounded by Silver Valley Road to the west and the North Alouette
River to the east. The site slopes steeply down to the east forming part of the North Alouette river
valley. Approximately one-third of the site will be dedicated to the District as Park under the
- 3 -
Conservation designation of the OCP for the preservation of the hillside and the North Alouette
riparian area. The development site is within the Blaney Hamlet of the Silver Valley Area Plan which
forms part of the Official Community Plan.
c) Project Description:
The applicant is requesting rezoning of the site under the RS-1b (One Family (Medium Density)
Residential Zone on the west portion, and RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) on the eastern
portion, the area required to habitat protection of the North Alouette River will remain under the
present zoning. This would permit a future subdivision of the property into approximately six RS-1b
(One Family(Medium Density) Residential) lots, not less than 557 m2 and two RS-1 (One Family
Urban Residential) Lots, not less than 668 m2. A large portion will be dedicated to the District as
Park under the Conservation designation of the OCP for the preservation of the hillside and the North
Alouette riparian area. Access will be from Silver Valley Road and from Blaney Road which abuts the
north portion of the site.
At this time the current application has been assessed to determine its compliance with the Official
Community Plan and provide a land use assessment only. Detailed review and comments will need
to be made once full application packages have been received and reviewed by staff. Such
assessment may impact proposed lot boundaries and yields, Official Community Plan designations
and Bylaw particulars, may require application for further development permits. A detailed analysis
and a further report will be required prior to Second Reading.
d) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan:
The development site is within the Blaney Hamlet of the Silver Valley Area Plan which forms part of
the Official Community Plan. The subject property has multiple land -use designations: Conservation,
Low Density Urban, Low/Medium Density Residential, Medium Density Residential and Open Space.
For the proposed development an Official Community Plan amendment may be required to re-
designate a portion of the site to Conservation and realign the residential boundary to allow the
proposed zoning to proceed.
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the property located at 23274 Silver Valley Road from
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential), and
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to permit the furture subdivision into approximately seven lots.
Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zone will require a Development Variance
Permit application.
Development Permits:
Pursuant to Section 8.9 of the Official Community Plan, a Watercourse Protection Development
Permit application is required to ensure the preservation, protection, restoration and enhancement
of watercourse and riparian areas.
- 4 -
Pursuant to Section 8.10 of the Official Community Plan, a Natural Features Development Permit
application is required for all development and subdivision activity to ensure the preservation,
protection, restoration and enhancement for the natural environment and for development that is
protected from hazardous conditions for;
All areas designated Conservation on Figures 2, 3 and 4 in the Silver Valley Area Plan;
All lands with an average natural slope of greater than 15 percent;
All floodplain areas and forest lands identified on Natural Features Schedule “C”
to ensure the preservation, protection, restoration and enhancement of watercourse and riparian
areas.
Development Information Meeting:
A Development Information Meeting is not required for this application.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
In order to advance the current application, after First Reading, comments and input will be sought
from the various internal departments and external agencies listed below:
a) Engineering Department;
b) Operations Department;
c) Fire Department;
d) Parks Department;
e) School District;
f) Building Department
The above list is intended to be indicative only and it may become necessary, as the application
progresses, to liaise with agencies and/or departments not listed above.
This application has not been forwarded to the Engineering Department for comments at this time;
therefore, an evaluation of servicing requirements has not been undertaken. We anticipate that this
evaluation will take place between First and Second Reading.
f) Early and Ongoing Consultation:
In respect of Section 879 of the Local Government Act for consultation during an Official Community
Plan amendment, it is recommended that no additional consultation is required beyond the early
posting of the proposed OCP amendments on the District’s website, together with an invitation to the
public to comment.
g) Development Applications:
In order for this application to proceed the following information must be provided, as re quired by
Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 – 1999 as amended:
1. An Official Community Plan Application (Schedule A);
2. A complete Rezoning Application (Schedule C);
3. Watercourse Protection Development Permit Application (Schedule F);
- 5 -
4. Natural Features Development Permit Application (Schedule G);
5. Subdivision Application.
The above list is intended to be indicative only, other applications may be necessary as the
assessment of the proposal progresses.
CONCLUSION:
The development proposal is in compliance with the policies of the Official Community Plan. It is,
therefore, recommended that Council grant First Reading subject to additional information being
provided and assessed prior to Second Reading.
It is recommended that Council not require any further additional OCP consultation.
It is expected that once complete information is received, Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw
No.6936-2012 may be amended and an Official Community Plan Amendment for Conservation
boundary adjustment may be required.
The proposed layout has not been reviewed in relation to the relevant bylaws and regulations
governing subdivision applications. Any subdivision layout provided is strictly preliminary and must
be approved by the District of Maple Ridge’s Approving Officer.
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Gay McMillan
Planning Technician
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP
Director of Planning
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
GM/dp
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Zone Amending Bylaw 6936-2012
Appendix C – Area Context Plan
Appendix D - subdivision geometry
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
"Original signed by Gay McMillan"
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE : M ay 8, 2012 FILE: 2012-054-RZ BY: PC
23274 SILVER VALLEY ROAD
CORPOR ATION OFTHE DIST RIC T OFMAPLE R IDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
13660
13805
13772
13782
2326213860
13802
1
3
7
5
1
13812
13828
13776
13796
13673/91
13880
13702
13792
13757
13811
13825
13841
13802
13762
13616
13831
232502327413765
13762
13772
13887
13782
13738
13857
13782
13848
13856
13771
13762
13862
13773
13793
13750
13795
13653
13855
13822
13842
13763
13868
13852
13752
13781
13795
13753
13783
RO AD
232 ST.232 ST.BLANEY RDSILVER VALLEY RDSILV E R VA L LE Y R D 232A ST.ABCP 466581
1
7
15BCP 46698RP 10274
P 20132
2
11
S PART 9
8
16
8
N 200' 9
14
12
PARK
3
Rem Pcl B53
4
5
Rem 1
6
BCP 46658
19
5
6
2
2
BCP 42823
BCP 46658
4
P 240913
11
PARK
3
10 17
22
P 20132
3
3
2
13
12 14
7
5 21
4
9
10
PARK
*PP162
15
BCP 46698
BCP 428734 BCP 42873EP 4248
BCS 3588
3
2
1
1 9
1
18
20
P 20132
8
P 2409
P 13776
!(!(
!(
!(
!(
SUBJECT PROPERTY
SCALE 1:2,500
APPENDIX A
´
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6936-2012
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6936-2012."
2. That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 3 Section 33 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 20132
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1573 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium
Density) Residential) and RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential).
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the day of , A.D. 20 .
READ a second time the day of , A.D. 20 .
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 20 .
READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 .
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX B
138 63
13660
13805
13772
13782
23262138 59
13860
13802
1
3
7
5
1
13812
13828
13776
13796
13673/91
13702
13792
13757
13811
13825
13841
13802
13762
13831
232502327413765
13762
13772
138 87
13782
138 51
13738
13857
13782
13848
13856
13771
13762
13862
13773
13793
13750
1379523196
13653
13855
13822
13842
13763
13868
138 55
13852
13752
13781
13795
13753
13783232 ST.232 ST.BLANEY RDSILVER VALLEY RDSILV ER VA L LE Y R D 232A ST.ABCP 466581
7
15BCP 46698RP 10274
P 20132
2
11 16
8
N 200' 9
8
14
12
PARK
3
Rem Pcl B53
4
5
Rem 1
6
BCP 46658
19
5
6
2
2
BCP 42823
RP 17234
4
P 240913
11
B C P 4 1 7 1 3
3
10 17
22
P 20132
3
3
2
12
13
14
7
5
21
4
9
10
PARK
*PP162
15 BCP 428734 BCP 42873EP 4248
P 18410
1
BCS 3588
3
2
9
1
18
20
P 20132
8
P 2409
P 13776
BCP 33245BCP 42829
BCP 42874BCP 33247BCP 42875
RW 68113BCP 46660
BCP 42876BCP 33246BCP 46699BCP 48823BCP 42874
BCP 33248 BCP 33246BCP 41108SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No. Map No. From:
To:
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
6936-20121573
´
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2011-055-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First and Second Reading
Maple Ridge Of ficial Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6832-2011
Second Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6833-2011
11461 and 11475 236 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject properties from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential). The proposed RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) zoning
is consistent with the Major Corridor Residential development policies of the Urban Residential land
use designation in the Official Community Plan. An Official Community Plan amendment is required
to adjust the area designated Conservation on the south and west edges of the development area.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6832-2011 be given First and
Second Readings and be forwarded to Public Hearing;
2. That in accordance with Section 879 of the Local Government Act opportunity for early and
on- going consultation has been provided by way of posting O fficial Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6832-2011 on the municipal website and requ iring that the applicant host a
Development Information Meeting, and Council considers it unnecessary to provide any
further consultation opportunities, except by way of holding a public hearing on the bylaw;
3. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6832-2011 be considered in
conjunction with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
4. That it be confirmed that Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6832-
2011 is consistent with the Capital Expenditu re Plan and Waste Management Plan;
5. That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6833-2011 be given Second Reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing; and
1102
- 2 -
6. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to Final Reading.
i. Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt
of the deposit of a security as outlined in the Agreement;
ii. Amendment to Schedule s "B" and “C” of the Official Community Plan;
iii. Registration of a Geotechnical Report as a Restrictive Covenant which addresses the
suitability of the site for the proposed development;
iv. Road dedication as required;
v. Park dedication as required;
vi. Consolidation of the development site;
vii. Removal of the existing building s;
viii. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising
whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there is evidence,
a site profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in accordance
with the regulations.
ix. Registration of a Restricti ve Covenant protecting the Visitor Parking.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: Focus Architecture Inc.
Owner: Florence L Nicholson
Legal Description: Parcel “A” (ex plan 16722), Lot 4, Section 16, Township 12,
NWD Plan 7289; and
Lot 10, Section 16, Township 12, NWD Plan 21065
OCP: Existing: Urban Residential, Conservation
Proposed: Urban Residential, Conservation
Zoning: Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Proposed: RM-1 (Townhouse Residential)
- 3 -
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Townhouse Residential, Park
Zone: RM-1 (Townhouse Residential), RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential)
Designation Urban Residential, Conservation
South: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Urban Residential, Conservation
East: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential),
CD-1-93
Designation: Urban Residential
West: Use: Vacant
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Conservation
Existing Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Townhouse Residential
Site Area: 2.807 ha (6.9 ac).
Access: 236 Street
Servicing requirement: Urban Standard
Companion Applications: 2011-055-DP, 2011-055-VP, 2011-123-DP
b) Project Description:
The development site is located on the west side of 236 Street just north of 114A Avenue, and it is
comprised of 2 large lots with a total area of 2.8 hectares (6.9 acres). The eastern portion of the
property has a developable area that is relatively flat. The western portion of the property has some
steep slopes, some exceeding 25%, and watercourses that are part of the Cottonwood Creek
system. The geotechnical and environmental assessments have established the requirements and
setbacks for protection of these features. There is an existing strata development to the north, and
the property north of that is under application for a townhouse development (RZ/022/10). The
property to the south of this site is an existing large singe family residential lot with potential for
redevelopment in the future.
The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject site from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to
RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) to permit a townhouse development of approximately 53 units on the
developable portion of the site. The remainder of the site will be dedicated as Park for the
protection of the slopes and watercourse areas. Running concurrently with this application are a
Multi-Family Development Permit, a Watercourse Protection and Natural Features Development
Permit, and a Development Variance Permit.
- 4 -
c) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan :
The property is designated Urban Residential and Conservation. The proposed RM-1 (Townhouse
Residential) zoning is consistent with Major Corridor Residential Policies 3-18, 3-20 and 3-21 for
development on a major corridor. An Official Community Plan amendment is required to adjust the
boundaries of the area designated Conservation on the south and west edges of the development
area.
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the property located at 11461 and 11475 236 Street
from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) to permit the
construction of a townhouse development. A preliminary review of the plans in relation to the
Zoning Bylaw requirements has revealed that the proposal generally complies with the bylaw,
although a number of variances would be required if this proposal is to proceed.
Proposed Variances:
This application will require four variances that will be subject of a future Council report. The
variances are:
1. To allow the existing above-ground utility company plant on 236 Street to remain;
2. To reduce the front setbacks on 236 Street from 7.5 metres to approximately 5.8 metres;
3. To vary the maximum building height on some of the buildings from 10.5 metres to
approximately 11.0 metres.
4. To allow developer-built retaining walls to exceed the maximum height of 1.2 metres, as
required.
Off- Street Parking and Loading Bylaw:
The development proposal for 53 units requires 2 parking spaces be provided for each unit and 0.2
spaces per unit be provided as Visitor Parking spaces, for a total of 106 residential parking spaces
and 11 visitor parking spaces. A preliminary review of the plans in relation to the Off-Street Parking
and Loading Bylaw requirements has revealed that the proposal complies with the bylaw. The
applicant has provided the minimum required number of parking spaces on the site, with
approximately 45% of the required residential parking as tandem garage spaces, and the remainder
as double garage spaces.
Development Permits:
Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the Official Community Plan, a Multi-Family Development Permit
application is required to address the form and character of the proposed dwellings and to ensure
the current proposal enhances the existing neighbourhood with a compatible housing style and that
minimizes potential conflicts with neighbouring land uses. The development will be assessed
against the following Key Design concepts, which will be the subject of a future Council report:
- 5 -
1. New development into established areas should respect private spaces, and
incorporate local neighbourhood elements in building form, height, architectural
features and massing.
2. Transitional development should be used to bridge areas of low and high densities,
through means such as stepped building heights, or low rise ground oriented housing
located to the periphery of a higher density developments.
3. Large scale developments should be clustered and given architectural separation to
foster a sense of community, and improve visual attractiveness.
4. Pedestrian circulation should be encouraged with attractive streetscapes attained
through landscaping, architectural details, appropriate lighting and by directing parking
underground where possible or away from public view through screened parking
structures or surface parking located to the rear of the property.
Pursuant to Sections 8.9 and 8.10 of the Official Community Plan, a Watercourse Protection and
Natural Features Development Permit application has been received to ensure the preservation,
protection of the natural environment of Cottonwood Creek, its tributaries, and the adjacent slopes.
The developer will provide restoration, enhancement and replanting works as required, and a
Security will be taken as a condition of the issuance of the Development Permit to ensure that the
Development Permit Area guidelines are met.
Development Information Meeting :
A Development Information Meeting was held on April 2, 2012 at Thomas Haney Secondary School.
There was a very small turn-out (2) at the meeting and the following information was provided in the
meeting minutes from the applicant:
The residents of the strata development to the north were concerned about:
o increased noise due to the loss of tree cover on the development site; and
o loss of privacy and the impact on the usability of their rear yards.
The applicant explained that any increased noise to the neighbouring development may be
somewhat offset by the buildings being erected in place of the trees, and further noted that
more open spaces results in an increase in the ability for sound to travel.
Regarding the privacy concerns, the applicant noted that they will install fencing along the
property line, and a cedar hedge to increase the privacy for the neighbours to the immediate
north.
- 6 -
Advisory Design Panel :
The plans, design drawings and landscape plans submitted in support of the Development Permit
application were reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel at the Advisory Design Panel (ADP) on May
8, 2012. The ADP generally supported the application and resolved that the following concerns be
addressed. Revisions have been reviewed by Planning staff and found acceptable, as noted (in
italics):
Consider a dedicated pedestrian walkway from 236 Street with a pedestrian gate;
o The applicant has provided a walkway on the north side of the driveway.
Realign the northeast portion of the roadway to allow street trees to be behind Building 1;
o Mixed landscaping has been added between the unit driveways to the rear of
Building 1.
Look at the cultured stone treatment on the end elevations of Buildings 3, 5, 7 and 12;
o Cultured stone treatment has been extended around to the end elevations of units 3
and 12, and significant landscaping is provided between units 5 and 7.
Consider pedestrian connection to the property to the north;
o The applicant reviewed the connection options and determined that the opportunity
should be explored between the strata owners.
Consider pedestrian crosswalks at the entry, the child’s play area and the pathway to the
west;
o The applicant has provided the crossings as required;
Consider carrying the cultured stone down to grade on the retaining wall at the entry
elevations on 236 Street;
o The applicant has met this requirement.
Consider relocating the visitor parking further away from Building 6;
o The applicant has met this requirement.
Consider a different gable treatment for buildings 5, 7, and 12;
o The applicant has met this requirement.
d) Environmental Implications:
The Environmental Section has reviewed the environmental consultant reports, conceptual
stormwater/rainwater management plan, geotechnical reports, arborist report and proposals for
habitat compensation and mitigation. The geotechnical consultants are to coordinate their
recommendations with the environmental professionals, civil engineer and arborist to ensure
consistency in the environmental objectives is achieved. Restoration measures with a cost estimate
and security deposit are required, with the standard five year maintenance period.
- 7 -
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
Engineering Department:
The Engineering Department has identified that all the services required in support of this
development do not yet exist on the site. It will therefore be necessary for the owner to enter into a
Rezoning Servicing Agreement and post securities to do the work identified in that agreement.
Comments provided by the Engineering Department include:
Road widening of 236 Street to a Collector road standard, and the installation of curb, gutter
and separated sidewalk;
A review and upgrade of the existing storm sewer system;
A Development Variance Permit is required to retain the existing aboveground utility
company plant across the site frontage on 236 Street;
A charge will apply for works on 236 Street, under the Pavement Restoration Fees Bylaw, for
pavement cuts required for servicing upgrades.
Building Department:
The site grading review from the Building Department has identified that the geotechnical issues
identified early in the process have been addressed. Due to extenuating circumstances that exist
on the site around topography, slope stability and erosion, the Building Department will allow a
limited volume of stormwater to be pumped from the buildings at the west end of the site up to 236
Street. A restrictive covenant will be required to maintain minimum topsoil depths and plantings,
bioswales and other requirements for vegetative cover around the emergency over-flow of the
stormwater pump. The strata will be required to maintain these stormwater management features.
The Building Department will allow the pumping of sanitary sewer, but only from basement fixtures,
as required. A Development Variance Permit may be required for over-height retaining walls
Parks & Leisure Services Department:
The Parks & Leisure Services Department has identified that after the subdivision is completed they
will be responsible for maintaining the street trees. In the case of this project it is estimated that
there will be additional trees and the final servicing design will provide exact numbers. The Manager
of Parks & Open Space has advised that the maintenance requirement of $25.00 per new tree will
increase their budget requirements.
Fire Department:
The Fire Department has identified that all on-site carriageways must be a minimum of 6 metres in
width and posted with ‘fire lane – no parking – tow away zone’ signage. Requirements for fire
hydrant locations and unit addressing was provided to the developer.
- 8 -
f) Intergovernmental Issues:
Local Government Act:
An amendment to the Official Community Plan requires the local government to consult with any
affected parties and to adopt related bylaws in compliance with the procedures outlined in Section
882 of the Act. The amendment required for this application, Conservation boundary adjustment, is
considered to be minor in nature. It has been determined that no additional consultation beyond
existing procedures is required, including referrals to the Board of the Regional District, the Council
of an adjacent municipality, First Nations, the School District or agencies of the Federal and
Provincial Governments. The amendment has been reviewed with the Financial Plan/Capital Plan
and the Waste Management Plan of the Greater Vancouver Regional District and determined to
have no impact.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that First and Second Reading be given to Maple Ridge Official Community Plan
Amending Bylaw No. 6832-2011, that Second Reading be given to Maple Ridge Zone Amending
Bylaw No. 6833-2011, and that application 2011-055-RZ be forwarded to Public Hearing.
"Original signed by Ann Edwards"
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Ann Edwards , CPT
Senior Planning Technician
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
AE/
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – OCP Amending Bylaw No. 6832-2011
Appendix C – Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6833-2011
Appendix D – Site Plan
- 9 -
Appendix E – Building Elevation Plans
Appendix F – Landscape Plans
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE : Jun 15, 2012 FILE: 2011-055-RZ BY: PC
11461/75 236 STREET
CORPOR ATION OFTHE DIST RIC T OFMAPLE R IDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
11461
11470
11536
23602
11347 1133211342
11442 11506236582340811497
11523
11336
23608
11502236482364111513
23661234032340711355
11420 2361111375
11421
23606
23610
11356 23651114502
3
4
1
923411 23436
11475
11374
11410
11440
11365
11397
11411 2363111412
11510
11 4 4 0
23418
11460
113851150 111386
23614
11525
2341523422
11405
11346
11364
11494
11337
11431
11441
11509
11366
11422
11517
11521
2341223416
11535
11575
11354
11384
11398
11430
11496
11498
236282362111505
2363811376
11396
23612
11514
1 1 3 6 0
11316
23604
11355
11432236 ST.236 A ST.116 AVE.113 A AVE.114 A AVE.236 ST.113 A AVE.
1 1 4 A V E .
PAR K
EP 16722
6
SL7Pcl. 'A'SL115
2
12
1
3
26
25
20
LMP 50083
31
30
29
8
24
3 1
3 2
3 7
28PAR K
A
10
7
SL3SL224
5
6
37
36
8
BCP27984L M P 3 4 9 3 8
LMP 34938 SL14SL91
19
2
28
LMS 1325
3 3
29
BCP 9604
LMP 35464
3
SL16SL85
P 21065SL18
SL21SL4
13
11
2
3
27
3
21
4
PAR K
34
7
41
3 0
35
BCS 814 SL19
SL20CPP 21065SL22
SL26
18
15
1
BCP27984LMP 5008323
21
38
7
23
17
9
15
3 8
40
34
P 7289SL12 SL15
BCS 814P 21065LMS 3308SL5 17
4
22
LMP 11242
5
5
35
16
LMP 50083L M P 3 4 9 3 8
39 36 SL11SL10SL6SL24
16
14
4
20
18LMP 1124233
32
6
10
11
PAR K SL13SL17 BCS 814SL23
SL25
19
22
6
\\
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
SCALE 1:2,500
APPENDIX A
´
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6832-2011
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan
_______________________________________
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed desirable to amend Schedules "B" & "C" to the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open
meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6832-2011
2. Schedule "B" is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Parcel “A” (Explanatory Plan 16722) Lot 4 Section 16 Township 12 New Westminster District
Plan 7289;
Lot 10 Section 16 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 21065;
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 810, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by adding Conservation and area shown
hatched is hereby amended by adding Urban Residential.
3. Schedule “C” is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Parcel “A” (Explanatory Plan 16722) Lot 4 Section 16 Township 12 New Westminster District
Plan 7289
Lot 10 Section 16 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 21065
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 836, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by adding Conservation and area shown
hatched is hereby amended by removing from Conservation.
4. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No.6425-2006 is hereby amended accordingly.
APPENDIX B
2
READ A FIRST TIME the day of , A.D. 200 .
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the day of , A.D. 200 .
READ A SECOND TIME the day of , A.D. 200 .
READ A THIRD TIME the day of , A.D. 200 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED , the day of , A.D. 20 .
___________________________________ _____________________________
MAYOR CORPORATE OFFICER
11497
11374
11420
11347 11342 2366111433
11525
11530
11575
11494
11375 1150223610
11332
11357
11399
1 1 5 5 0
11405
11461
11460
11365
11505
11509
23608
11366
11396
11422
11521
11367
11529
1153311537
115261156011534
11535
11384
11496
11397
1143123621115 012363111356
11376
1143223641 11517
23612
11413
11424
11546
11475
11440
11498
11536
11337
11411
11441
11510
23614
11387
114232367111518
11451
11542
11523
23604
11355
11385
23606
11513
11457
11346
11354
11364
11398
23602
2361111386
11412
11442 1150611355
11336
11410
11430
11470
11421 2365111345
11335
11377
11443
115141 15412368111522
11414
11538
114 A AVE.116 AVE.CREEKSIDE ST.236 ST.236 A ST.236 B ST.BCP 9604 SL1010
SL19
CP P 21065SL4SL319
15
2
LMP 50083LMS 1325
LMP 11242
18
5
33
7
24
PARK
EP 16722SL117 SL51
20
5LM P 1124225
15 14
1LMP 1124235
36
PARK
P 7289
BCS 814 SL9SL8SL18 SL24
SL26SL1
1
12
3
28
25
5
37
34
46LMP 50083SL16
P 21065SL7LMS 3308
SL23
SL21
18
13
14
4
22
22
35
32
16
8
LMP 35464
3
SL17
SL15 SL20
16
BCP279844
7
30
10
PARK SL136
P 21065BCS 814
2
21
4
36
31
17
8
42
43
39
38
9
28
A
SL12BCS 814
Pcl. 'A'
SL22 SL217
27
19
29
6
23
BCP2798445
40
10
11
26
27
2
29LM P 14872A SL14SL6SL25
11
1
26
24
23
3
21
20
38
LMP 50083
6
8 9
44
41
13
12
BCP 3687236 ST.´
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No.Map No. From:
To:
6832-2011810Conservation and Urban Residential
Urban Residential Conservation
11497
11374
11420
11347 11342 2366111433
11525
11530
11575
11494
11375 1150223610
11332
11357
11399
1 1 5 5 0
11405
11461
11460
11365
11505
11509
23608
11366
11396
11422
11521
11367
11529
1153311537
115261156011534
11535
11384
11496
11397
1143123621115 012363111356
11376
1143223641 11517
23612
11413
11424
11546
11475
11440
11498
11536
11337
11411
11441
11510
23614
11387
114232367111518
11451
11542
11523
23604
11355
11385
23606
11513
11457
11346
11354
11364
11398
23602
2361111386
11412
11442 1150611355
11336
11410
11430
11470
11421 2365111345
11335
11377
11443
115141 15412368111522
11414
11538
114 A AVE.116 AVE.CREEKSIDE ST.236 ST.236 A ST.236 B ST.BCP 9604 SL1010
SL19
CP P 21065SL4SL319
15
2
LMP 50083LMS 1325
LMP 11242
18
5
33
7
24
PARK
EP 16722SL117 SL51
20
5LM P 1124225
15 14
1LMP 1124235
36
PARK
P 7289
BCS 814 SL9SL8SL18 SL24
SL26SL1
1
12
3
28
25
5
37
34
46LMP 50083SL16
P 21065SL7LMS 3308
SL23
SL21
18
13
14
4
22
22
35
32
16
8
LMP 35464
3
SL17
SL15 SL20
16
BCP279844
7
30
10
PARK SL136
P 21065BCS 814
2
21
4
36
31
17
8
42
43
39
38
9
28
A
SL12BCS 814
Pcl. 'A'
SL22 SL217
27
19
29
6
23
BCP2798445
40
10
11
26
27
2
29LM P 14872A SL14SL6SL25
11
1
26
24
23
3
21
20
38
LMP 50083
6
8 9
44
41
13
12
BCP 3687236 ST.´
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No.Map No.
Purpose:
6832-2011836
To Remove From Conservation To Add To Conservation
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6833 – 2011
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended.
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6833-2011."
2. Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as:
Parcel “A” (Explanatory Plan 16722) Lot 4 Section 16 Township 12 New Westminster
District Plan 7289
Lot 10 Section 16 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 21065
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1524 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential).
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 28th day of June, A.D. 2011.
READ a second time the day of , A.D. 20 .
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 20 .
READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 .
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX C
11497
11374
11420
11347 11342 2366111433
11525
11530
11575
11494
11375 1150223610
11332
11357
11399
1 1 5 5 0
11405
11461
11460
11365
11505
11509
23608
11366
11396
11422
11521
11367
11529
1153311537
115261156011534
11535
11384
11496
11397
1143123621115 012363111356
11376
1143223641 11517
23612
11413
11424
11546
11475
11440
11498
11536
11337
11411
11441
11510
23614
11387
114232367111518
11451
11542
11523
23604
11355
11385
23606
11513
11457
11346
11354
11364
11398
23602
2361111386
11412
11442 1150611355
11336
11410
11430
11470
11421 2365111345
11335
11377
11443
115141 15412368111522
11414
11538
114 A AVE.116 AVE.CREEKSIDE ST.236 ST.236 A ST.236 B ST.BCP 9604 SL1010
SL19
CP P 21065SL4SL319
15
2
LMP 50083LMS 1325
LMP 11242
18
5
33
7
24
PARK
EP 16722SL117 SL51
20
5LM P 1124225
15 14
1LMP 1124235
36
PARK
P 7289
BCS 814 SL9SL8SL18 SL24
SL26SL1
1
12
3
28
25
5
37
34
46LMP 50083SL16
P 21065SL7LMS 3308
SL23
SL21
18
13
14
4
22
22
35
32
16
8
LMP 35464
3
SL17
SL15 SL20
16
BCP279844
7
30
10
PARK SL136
P 21065BCS 814
2
21
4
36
31
17
8
42
43
39
38
9
28
A
SL12BCS 814
Pcl. 'A'
SL22 SL217
27
19
29
6
23
BCP2798445
40
10
11
26
27
2
29LM P 14872A SL14SL6SL25
11
1
26
24
23
3
21
20
38
LMP 50083
6
8 9
44
41
13
12
BCP 3687236 ST.´
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No.Map No. From:
To:
6833-20111524RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RM-1 (Townhouse Residentiall)
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2011-066-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First and Second Reading
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6934-2012 and
Second Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6841-2011
26777 Dewdney Trunk Road
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject property from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential), to permit the subdivision of the property
into two lots. This application is in compliance with the Official Community Plan; however, an
amendment for conservation designation is required.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That in accordance with Section 879 of the Local Government Ac t opportunity for early and on -
going consultation has been provided by way of posting Of ficial Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6934-2012 on the municipal we bsite, and Council considers it unnecessary to
provide any further consultation opportunities, except by way of holding a public hearing on the
bylaw;
2. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6934-2012 be considered in
conjunction with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
3. That it be confirmed that Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No.
6934-2012 is consistent with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
4. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6934-2012 be given First
Reading and Second Reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing;
5. That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6841-2011 be given Second Reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing; and
6. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to Final Reading:
i. Amendment to Schedule s “B” and “C” of the Official Community Plan;
ii. Registration of a geotechnical report as a Restrictive Covenant which addresses the
suitability of the site for the proposed development;
1103
- 2 -
iii. Road dedication as required;
iv. Park dedication as required ;
v. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising
whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there is evidence,
a site profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in accordance
with the regulations.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: Joel Lycan
Owner: Little Bear Development Ltd
Legal Description: Lot 11, Block 1, Section 19, Township 15, Plan 22220
OCP:
Existing: Suburban Residential
Proposed: Suburban Residential
Zoning:
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Proposed: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Vacant
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) - Proposed
rezoning to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
under application RZ/079/10
Designation: Suburban Residential
South: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Suburban Residential
East: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Designation: Suburban Residential
West: Use: Vacant
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Suburban Residential
Existing Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Site Area: 1.699 ha, (4.198 acres)
Access: Dewdney Trunk Road and 122 Avenue
Servicing: Rural Standard
Companion Applications: 2011-066-SD, 2011-066-DP
- 3 -
b) Project Description:
The applicant proposes to rezone the subject site to allow for future subdivision into two lots. One lot
would be accessed from the existing panhandle on Dewdney Trunk Road, while the second lot would
be accessed from 122 Avenue. The middle portion of the subject site containing McFadden Creek is
proposed to be dedicated as park, which requires an OCP amendment to designate the land as
Conservation. This zone is in compliance with this designation, and requires municipal water and
sewage disposal provided by a private system.
c) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan :
The proposed rezoning to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) is in accordance with the subject
properties designation as “Suburban Residential” in the Official Community Plan. The OCP
designates the site 100% Suburban Residential; however, the proposed residential development is
within 50m of the top of bank of McFadden Creek and is, therefore, subject to a Watercourse
Protection Development Permit. A portion of the site will be dedicated as Park, and this dedication
will trigger an Official Community Plan amendment to Schedules “B” and “C”. The subject site is
located on the Whonnock Aquifer and subject to the following OCP policy:
Policy 5-37 Maple Ridge will require an evaluation of groundwater flows, conducted by a
qualified environmental professional, for new development that is adjacent to areas reliant
on well water. Development proposals that cannot ensure adequate groundwater flows,
sufficient water quality or mitigate potential impacts to existing and surrounding well water
systems will not be supported.
A Groundwater Impact Assessment Report conducted by a qualified environmental professional has
been prepared for the proposed development.
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the property located at 26777 Dewdney Trunk Road
from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to permit future
subdivision into two single family lots. The proposed lots meet the minimum dimension
requirements and no variances are required.
Development Permits:
Pursuant to Section 8.9 of the Official Community Plan, a Watercourse Protection Development
Permit application is required to ensure the preservation, protection, restoration and enhancement
of watercourse and riparian areas.
Pursuant to Section 8.10 of the Official Community Plan, a Natural Features Development Permit
application is required for all development and subdivision activity for;
All lands with an average natural slope of greater than 15 percent;
- 4 -
to ensure the preservation, protection, restoration and enhancement of watercourse and
riparian areas.
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
Engineering Department:
The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed development and has determined that road
dedication is required along Dewdney Trunk Road in support of the rezoning application. As there
are no off-site works for this rezoning application, no rezoning servicing agreement will be required.
The proposed development will be serviced by municipal water and sewage disposal provided by a
private system. Additional comments from the Engineering Department will be addressed at the
Subdivision stage.
Building Department :
The Building Department has reviewed the proposed development and has determined that a
geotechnical report needs to be registered on title indicating that a geotechnical stability line (GSL)
is required to protect slope stability.
e) Environmental Implications:
This development application is subject to a Watercourse Protection Development Permit and a
Natural Features Development Permit. The applicant has completed an environmental assessment,
arborist report, and groundwater impact assessment report to review site conditions.
The certified arborist report characterized the proposed Lot 1 as mid to late seral second growth
forest, and contains western redcedar, coastal western hemlock and big leaf maple tree species.
The property contained within proposed Lot 2 has been altered by logging and land clearing.
Vegetation consists of grasses, Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor), and sapling red alder
(Alnus rubra). There are small groupings of mature coniferous trees located on the margins of the
property.
The Groundwater Impact Assessment report identifies the Whonnock Aquifer as a highly confined
aquifer, with low surface contamination. The nature and intensity of development does not
markedly increase the risk of contamination.
The applicant has proposed to use a combination of habitat protection covenant and park
dedication to ensure environmentally sensitive lands are not develop ed. Furthermore, the
geotechnical stability line has been determined to identify lands to be developed.
f) Intergovernmental Issues:
Local Government Act:
An amendment to the Official Community Plan requires the local government to consult with any
affected parties and to adopt related bylaws in compliance with the procedures outlined in Section
- 5 -
882 of the Act. The amendment required for this application, addition of conservation-designated
land, is considered to be minor in nature. It has been determined that no additional consultation
beyond existing procedures is required, including referrals to the Board of the Regional District, the
Council of an adjacent municipality, First Nations, the School District or agencies of the Federal and
Provincial Governments.
The amendment has been reviewed with the Financial Plan/Capital Plan and the Waste
Management Plan of the Greater Vancouver Regional District and determined to have no impact.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the review of supporting information regarding the proposed rezoning and subdivision
applications, it is recommended that First and Second Reading be given to Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6934-2012 and forwarded to Public Hearing; and further that
Second Reading be granted to Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6841-2011 and forwarded to
Public Hearing.
“Original signed by Siobhan Murphy”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Siobhan Murphy, MA, MCIP
Planning Technician
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development S ervices
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6934-2012
Appendix C – Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6841-2011
Appendix D – Subdivision Plan
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE : Jun 14, 2012 FILE: 2011-066-RZ BY: PC
26777 DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
CORPOR ATION OFTHE DIST RIC T OFMAPLE R IDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT2668326712268142672126755267772676612053
12176
12194
2686012238
267832685112042 269552678012075
12206
267332683012160
2696012097
12149
12150
2674312090
266572678812130
269 ST.269 ST.122 AVE.
Rem 3
2
EP 167042
P 65913
P 8097RP 12274
BCP 17138
1
9
RP 12275
Pcl A
32
LMP 22716
A
BCP 4477A
P 8097
11
LMP 14104BCP 50219
A
EP 13769
10
P 22220
33
BCP 5641
12
P 22220 3
Rem 40
A
B Rem 2
P 65913
1 LMP 22716
1
1
\\
\\
!(
!(
SUBJECT PROPERTY
SCALE 1:2,500
APPENDIX A
´
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6934-2012
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan
_______________________________________
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed desirable to amend Schedules "B" & "C" to the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in open
meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6934-2012
2. Schedule "B" is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Lot 11 Section 19 Township 15 New Westminster District Plan 22220,
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 835, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by changing from Suburban Residential to
Conservation
3. Schedule “C” is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Lot 11 Section 19 Township 15 New Westminster District Plan 22220
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 837, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by adding Conservation.
4. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No.6425-2006 is hereby amended accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the day of , A.D. 20 .
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the day of , A.D. 20 .
READ A SECOND TIME the day of , A.D. 20 .
READ A THIRD TIME the day of , A.D. 20 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED , the day of , A.D. 20.
APPENDIX B
___________________________________ _____________________________
MAYOR CORPORATE OFFICER
2668326712268142672126755267772676612053
12176
12194
2686012238
26620267832685112042
26914269552678012075
12206
26635267332683012160
2696012097
12149
12150
2674312090
266572678812130
A
Rem 3
EP 11548
2
LMP 23992
EP 16704P 7439
2
P 65913
P 8097RP 12274
BCP 17138
1
9
P 21387
RP 12275
Pcl A
LMP 22716
A
BCP 4477A
RP 14097P 8097
11
LMP 14104BCP 50219
Rem Pcl. B
2
A
EP 13769
10
P 22220
33
BCP 5641
12
P 22220 3
Rem 40
A
B Rem 2
P 8171
P 65913
1 LMP 22716
1
1
RP 12275
RW 24747
LMP 14105
LMP 22718BCP 17140P 57024
LMP 22717
LMP 26276BCP 50222LMP 14105
RW 72130
EP 76416
RP 65914
RP 65914 BCP 11415EP 65916
P 57024
RW 24748 BCP 17139LMP 40545
BCP 5642BCP 4478
LMP 23993
EP 65916
EP 65915LMP 22717
EP 65916
LMP 18037RP 65914
LMP 22718 BCP 50221BCP 50220BCP 11416BCP 4479
BCP 50225269 ST.122 AVE.
DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
SCALE 1:3,000
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No.Map No. From:
To:
6934-2012835Suburban Residential
Conservation
´
2668326712268142672126755267772676612053
12176
12194
2686012238
26620267832685112042
26914269552678012075
12206
26635267332683012160
2696012097
12149
12150
2674312090
266572678812130
A
Rem 3
EP 11548
2
LMP 23992
EP 16704P 7439
2
P 65913
P 8097RP 12274
BCP 17138
1
9
P 21387
RP 12275
Pcl A
LMP 22716
A
BCP 4477A
RP 14097P 8097
11
LMP 14104BCP 50219
Rem Pcl. B
2
A
EP 13769
10
P 22220
33
BCP 5641
12
P 22220 3
Rem 40
A
B Rem 2
P 8171
P 65913
1 LMP 22716
1
1
RP 12275
RW 24747
LMP 14105
LMP 22718BCP 17140P 57024
LMP 22717
LMP 26276BCP 50222LMP 14105
RW 72130
EP 76416
RP 65914
RP 65914 BCP 11415EP 65916
P 57024
RW 24748 BCP 17139LMP 40545
BCP 5642BCP 4478
LMP 23993
EP 65916
EP 65915LMP 22717
EP 65916
LMP 18037RP 65914
LMP 22718 BCP 50221BCP 50220BCP 11416BCP 4479
BCP 50225269 ST.122 AVE.
DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
SCALE 1:3,000
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING
Bylaw No.Map No.
Purpose:
6934-2012837
To Add To Conservation
´
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6841-2011
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended.
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6841-2011 ."
2. That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 11 Section 19 Township 15 New Westminster District Plan 22220
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1529 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RS-2 (One Family Suburban
Residential).
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 26th day of July, A.D. 2011.
READ a second time the day of , A.D. 20 .
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 20 .
READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 .
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX C
2668326712268142672126755267772676612053
12176
12194
2686012238
26620267832685112042
26914269552678012075
12206
26635267332683012160
2696012097
12149
12150
2674312090
266572678812130
A
Rem 3
EP 11548
2
LMP 23992
EP 16704P 7439
2
P 65913
P 8097RP 12274
BCP 17138
1
9
P 21387
RP 12275
Pcl A
LMP 22716
A
BCP 4477A
RP 14097P 8097
11
LMP 14104BCP 50219
Rem Pcl. B
2
A
EP 13769
10
P 22220
33
BCP 5641
12
P 22220 3
Rem 40
A
B Rem 2
P 8171
P 65913
1 LMP 22716
1
1
RP 12275
RW 24747
LMP 14105
LMP 22718BCP 17140P 57024
LMP 22717
LMP 26276BCP 50222LMP 14105
RW 72130
EP 76416
RP 65914
RP 65914 BCP 11415EP 65916
P 57024
RW 24748 BCP 17139LMP 40545
BCP 5642BCP 4478
LMP 23993
EP 65916
EP 65915LMP 22717
EP 65916
LMP 18037RP 65914
LMP 22718 BCP 50221BCP 50220BCP 11416BCP 4479
BCP 50225269 ST.122 AVE.
DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
SCALE 1:3,000
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No.Map No. From:
To:
6841-20111529RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
´
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2011-050-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Second Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6846-2011
21165 River Road
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On August 30, 2011, Council gave First Reading to Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw 6846-2011.
This application is to rezone the subject property from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to RS-1b
(One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) to permit a subdivision into about 7 lots. This
application is in compliance with the Official Community Plan.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6846-2011 be given Second Reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing; and
2. That the following term(s) and condition(s) be met prior to final reading.
i. Approval from the Ministry of Transportation;
ii. Registration of a geotechnical report as a Restrictive Covenant which addresses th e
suitability of the site for the proposed development;
iii. Removal of the existing building/s and structure/s;
iv. Approval from the appropriate authorities and removal of the in -ground swimming
pool;
v. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising
whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there is
evidence, a site profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in
accordance with the regulations.
1104
- 2 -
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: Citiwest Consulting Ltd.
Owner: Robert W Jones and Gordon J Kehler
Legal Description: Lot 3 Except: Part Subdivided by Plan LMP434;
District Lot 249 Group 1 New Westminster District
Plan 75991
OCP:
Existing: Urban Residential
Proposed: Urban Residential
Zoning:
Existing: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Proposed: RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density)
Residential)
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Designation Urban Residential
South: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Urban Residential
East: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Urban Residential
West: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Urban Residential
Existing Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Site Area: 0.457 HA.
Access: River Road and River Wynd
Servicing requirement: Urban Standard
Companion Applications: 2011-050-SD
b) Project Description:
The applicant proposes to rezone the subject property from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) to permit subdivision into approximately
seven lots.
- 3 -
c) Planning Analysis:
The applicant proposes to rezone the subject property from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) to permit subdivision into approximately
seven lots, ranging in size from 560 to 777 square metres.
Most of the property is located within 300 metres of the crest (top of bank) of the Fraser River
Escarpment area. Therefore, this site is subject to Council Policies 6.23 and 6.24 r especting the
control of surficial and groundwater discharge. The applicant will be required through the rezoning
servicing agreement to connect and direct storm and rain water into the District’s stormwater sewer
system in accordance with these policies.
The lot currently has an existing dwelling and out building (a former dwelling), a detached garage,
and a swimming pool. Each of these, together with their foundations and all components of the
in-ground pool, will need to be removed.
The majority of trees on the site are proposed to be removed in accordance with the
recommendations of the arborist. As part of the subdivision application, coordination will be required
between the geotechnical consultant and the arborist to take this into consideration preserving as
many healthy trees as possible.
Official Community Plan :
The Official Community Plan designates the property Urban Residential, and is subject to the major
corridor infill policies of the OCP. These policies require that development be compatible with the
surrounding neighbourhood, with particular attention to setbacks and lot configuration with the
existing pattern of development in the area. The proposed rezoning to RS-1b (One Family Urban
(Medium Density) Residential) is in conformance with the Urban Residential designation and infill
policies.
Zoning Bylaw:
The application proposes to rezone the property located at 21165 River Road from RS-1 (One Family
Urban Residential) to RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) to permit subdivision
into approximately 7 lots.
Although none are being currently contemplated, any variations from the requirements of the
proposed zone will require a Development Variance Permit application.
Development Information Meeting :
A development information meeting was not required because the proposal complies with the OCP
and has a development potential of fewer than 25 lots.
- 4 -
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
Engineering Department:
The current application must comply with the following Council Policies:
i. 6.24 Subdivision of, or building on, land within 300 metres of the crest of the Fraser River
Escarpment; and
ii. 6.23 Control of surficial and groundwater discharge in the area bounded by 207 Street, 124
Avenue, 224 Street and the crest of the Fraser River Escarpment.
The subdivision application is between 100 and 300m of the Escarpment Crest. Under the above
policies, prior to the subdivision approval, the applicant will be required to provide a written report,
signed and sealed by a qualified geotechnical engineer. The proposed development will be required
to extend the existing storm sewer and confirm the system capacity. This report has been submitted
and will be finalized to be acceptable to the District prior to final reading.
Road widening is not being required. However, at the time of subdivision, a development variance
permit will be required to allow the current road right-of-way for River Road and River Wynd to be
kept.
Parks & Leisure Services Department:
The Parks & Leisure Services Department have identified that after the subdivision is completed
they will be responsible for maintaining the street trees. In the case of this project it is estimated
that there will be an additional 7 trees which is based on one tree per lot; final subdivision design
will provide exact numbers. The Manager of Parks & Open Space has advised that the maintenance
requirement of $25.00 per new tree will increase their budget requirements by $175.00.
Fire Department:
The existing buildings are to be secured from unauthorized entry. Removal of any oil tanks on the
site requires a permit from the Fire Department.
e) Intergovernmental Issues:
Ministry of Tra nsportation and Infrastructure
The property is within the referral area for review by the Ministry of Transportation and
Infrastructure. The usual referral and request for bylaw approval has been made by the District.
- 5 -
CONCLUSION:
As the proposed development is in compliance with the Official Community Plan, it is recommended
that Second Reading be given to Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6846-2011 and be
forwarded to Public Hearing.
"Original signed by Adrian Kopystynski"
____________________________________________
Prepared by: Adrian Kopystynski, MCIP, MCAHP
Planning Technician
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
______________________________________________
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
/
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B –Zone Amending Bylaw 6846-2011
Appendix C – Site Plan
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE : Jun 15, 2012 FILE: 2011-050-RZ BY: PC
21165 RIVER ROAD
CORPOR ATION OFTHE DIST RIC T OFMAPLE R IDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT210602106721078211002111021108211072111111661
1 1 4 8 1
11610
11618
11629
11619
11608
11642
11512
11468
11601
11617
11484
11510
11632
21068210742108321095211022110121106
21097211081 1 4 9 1
1 1 5 2 7 1166011580
2113811654
114952120211550
11628
11640
11672
2106721088210872109221103116172110911677
11522 21144211651151521158
11480
11591
2121111606
1150111530
1 1 5 6 6
2107011690
211022110611508
11666 11659
11487
11609
11501
11596
211802119911528
11618
11527
11551
1 1 5 6 3
11502
11587
11601
11615
11657
11685 21093210992110511605
11609116 532111611608
11518 2113711672
11616
11532
11633
11641
11645
11651
11496
11624
2105911593
2107311628
210772109821104211311162421119
11484
11494
11639
11525 211692119011584
11515
11520
11542
11556
116712107321092
2108211618
210902110521108
21107211111 1 5 6 7
11649
11559
11662
11490
11502
11522
11585
11661
11546
11594
11537
115 59
11633
1161021102
210822111211606 11584
11628
11625
FRASERVIEW ST.211 ST.RIVER WYND212 ST.116 AVE.
BERRY AVE.212 ST.R IV E R R O A D
FRASERVIEW ST.RIVER WYNDWOOD ST.E D G E D A L E A V E .RIVER WYND160
163
165
166
P 43564EP 17246346P 4080464P 40804P 21754P 408044
2
319
P 9773Rem 7
P 35527
7
P 42541
P 4356458
192
325
34
204 P 43564P 21754P 4654912
11
1
107
P 43584P 144252
211
9
12
Rem L
2
384
3
133
2
197
141
193
194
326
129 P 43564203
P 45596
40Rem Pcl A62
65
66
70
13
P 85133 P 82848103
162
164
57
1
478
221
130
P 27978
REM.
Rem 3P 4073463
6
LMS 1692
106
A
105
2
1
2
P 57878
135
176
56
178
P 42541
P 42541
132
P 43564
140
324
206
202
2
1
110 109 108
P 2807810 Rem B3
P 44948
1 LMP 1644511
C
P 42541170
P 43564P 44555199
479
P 46549B
223
222
LMP 12576224
200
323
A
*PP057
73
41RP8369 P 2175468
1
2
13
1 P 14493P 1912110
Rem 381
82
P 11238
159P 42541
134
55
P 33537
189
P 61772
131LMP 3838191
P 44587
37
35
2
201
P 46549 72
71
7
8
43
69
P 40734
42
A
5P 14493127
210
2
8
9
18P 24973
53
P 30633
1
54
P 41783
161
196
169
188195
P 41783
220
P 44587
190
198
36
P 27978
1
205
322
P 75991
LMP 434P 759916
67 P 73040P 41753128
BCP 1606610
B
P 40734
11
104
RP 30767C
P 58286P 10206*PP169
SUBJECT PROPERTY
SCALE 1:2,000
APPENDIX A
´
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6846-2011
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended.
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6846-2011."
2. That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 3 Except: Part Subdivided by Plan LMP434; District Lot 249 Group 1 New
Westminster District Plan 75991
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1533 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium
Density) Residential).
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 30th day of August, A.D. 2011.
READ a second time the day of , A.D. 20 .
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 20 .
READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20 .
APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation this day of , A.D. 20 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 .
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX B
21057210602106721078211002111021108211072111111661
1 1 4 8 1
11610
11618
11629
11619
11608
11642
11512
11468
11601
11617
11484
11510
11632
11601
11498 2105121068210742108321095211022110121106
21097211081 1 4 9 1
1 1 5 2 7 1166011580
2113811654
114952120211550
11628
11640
11672
2106721088210872109221103116172110911677
11522 21144211651151521158
11480 2118611591
2121111606
115012123211530
1 1 5 6 6 212601 1 6 4 0
210582107011690
211022110611508
11666 11659
11487
11609
11501
11596
211802119911528
11618
11527
11551
1 1 5 6 3
1150221254
2104011587
11601
11615
11657
11685 21093210992110511605
11609116 532111611608
11518 2113711672
11466
11616 2117611532
11633
11641
11645
11651
11496
11624 21222212582127011583
2105911593
2107311628
210772109821104211311162421119
11484
1149421112 11639
11525 211692119011584
11515
11520
11542
11556
11666
116712107321092
2108211618
210902110521108
21107211111 1 5 6 7
11649
11559
11662
11490
11502
11522
11585
11661
11546
11594
11537
11559 2125611657
11543
11633
1161021102
210822111211606 11584
11628
11625
11641
212991 1 6 0 4
1 1 6 1 6
1 1 6 2 6
FRASERVIEW ST.LAITY ST.211 ST.RIVER WYND212 ST.116 AVE.
BERRY AVE.212 ST.R IV E R R O A D
FRASERVIEW ST.RIVER WYNDWOOD ST.E D G E D A L E A V E .RIVER WYND377
79
81
136
151
150
160
163
165
166
P 43564EP 1724638
321
39
346P 4080464P 40804P 21754P 408044
2
319
P 9773Rem 7
P 14425P 5812680
P 35527
7
157
P 42541
P 4356458
192
325
34
204 P 43564P 21754P 46549P 28078
12
11
1
107
P 43584P 144252
211
9
12
Rem L
2
384
3
4
P 39498
25 P 42541138
133
2
197
142
141
193
194
326
129 P 43564203
P 45596
40Rem Pcl A62
65
66
70
13
P 85133 P 82848103
7
5
385
E
177
26
162
164
139
57
1
478
221
130
P 27978
REM.
Rem 3P 4073463
6
LMS 1692
106
A
105
2
1
2
P 57878
P 34338
378
135
158
176
56
178
P 42541
P 42541
132
P 43564
140
324
206
202
2
1
110 109 108
P 2807810 Rem B3
P 44948
1 LMP 1644511
C
6
269P 692P 42541170
P 43564P 44555199
479
P 46549B
223
222
LMP 12576224
200
323
A
*PP057
73
41RP8369 P 2175468
1
2
14
13
1 P 14493P 1912110
Rem 381
275
274
82
P 11238
159P 42541
156
152
137
134
55
P 33537
189
P 61772
131LMP 3838191
327
P 44587
37
35
2
201
P 46549 72
71
7
8
45
43
69
P 40734
42
A
5P 14493127
210
2
8
9
18P 24973
53
P 30633
1
8
270
P 28112
456
155
154
153
54
175
P 41783
161
196
169
188195
P 41783
220
P 44587
190
198
36
P 27978
1
205
322
P 75991
LMP 434P 759916
67 P 73040P 41753128
BCP 1606610
B
P 40734
11
104
RP 30767C
P 58286P 10206*PP169
P 58126LMP 29183RW 58127
EP 23001RW 42542EP 61773
BCP 16067L
M
P 24899
E
P
4
6
8
6
6
L
M
P 21878
L M P 2 9 1 0 1
RW 58128E P 5 4 5 1 9
RW 56468
L M P 3 2 1 1 8
R
W 4
2
5
4
2
RW 42542E P 5 4 5 1 9 EP 27702L M P 2 8 4 8 4
EP 28014
BCP 21377
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No.Map No. From:
To:
6846-20111533RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
´
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2011-054-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Second Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6827 - 2011
22327 River Road and Roll #31399-0000-4 (no civic address)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On June 14, 2011, Council gave First Reading to Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw 6827–2011.
This application is to rezone the subject properties from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential zone) to
CRM (Commercial/Residential zone) to allow future construction of a four-storey apartment building
with 43 units.
This project meets the requirements for inclusion in the Town Centre Incentives (TCI) Program as it is
new residential construction within Sub Area 1 that is 4 storeys and higher and is subject to
compliance with the Town Centre Development Permit Guidelines and Policies.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6827 - 2011 be given Second Reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing; and
2. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to final reading.
i. Approval from the Ministry of Transportation;
ii. Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and
receipt of the deposit of security as outlined in the Agreement;
iii. Amendment to Schedule "B" of the Official Community Plan;
iv. Registration of a Geotechnical report as a Restrictive Covenant which addresses
the suitability of the site for the proposed development;
v. Road dedication as required;
vi. Consolidation of the development site;
1105
- 2 -
vii. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising
whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If t here is
evidence, a site profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in
accordance with the regulations.
viii. Registration of a Restrictive Covenant protecting the Visitor Parking.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: Fred Formosa of Falcon Homes Ltd.
Owner: Falcon Homes Ltd.
Legal Description: Lot: A, D.L.: 398, Block: 1, Plan: 155; PID: 011-537-604
Lot: 6, D.L.: 398, Block: 1, Plan: 155; PID: 011-537-060
OCP:
Existing: Port Haney Multi-Family, Commercial and Mixed-Use
Zoning:
Existing: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential zone)
Proposed: CRM (Commercial/Residential zone)
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Multi Family Residential and lane
Zone: CRM (Commercial/Residential zone) and RS-1 (One Family
Urban Residential zone)
Designation: Port Haney Multi-Family, Commercial and Mixed-Use
South: Use: Single Family Residential, Industrial and River Road
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential zone), RS-1 (One Family
Urban Residential zone) and M-2 (General Industrial zone
Designation: Port Haney Multi-Family, Commercial and Mixed-Use
East: Use: Heritage Commercial, Commercial and Industrial
Zone: H-1 (Heritage Commercial zone); C-4 (Neighbourhood Pub zone)
and M-2 (General Industrial zone)
Designation: Port Haney Multi-Family, Commercial and Mixed-Use
West: Use: Single Family Residential and 223rd Street
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential zone)
Designation: Low-rise Apartment
- 3 -
Existing Use of Property: Vacant
Proposed Use of Property: Multi-Family Residential (apartments)
Site Area: 1622.99 m2
Access: River Road and the lane
Servicing requirement: Full Urban
Companion Applications: 2011-054-DP and DVP
b) Project Description:
The subject sites (Appendix A) include two legal lots with a consolidated area of 1623 m2, north of
the Fraser River and east of 223rd Street, along the southern edge of the Town Centre Area.
Currently the site is vacant, surrounded by road on three sides (i.e. a lane on the north; River Road
on the south and 223rd Street on the west). The Billy Miner Pub is located on the east. The proposal
is strategically located to take advantage of the Fraser River views and opposite the West Coast
Express train station for commuters.
The subject site lies within the Fraser River Escarpment area and has a significant slope down from
the lane to River Road (north to south). The proposal is to rezone the subject sites to CRM
(Commercial/Residential zone) to permit a four-storey apartment building with 43 units; and
underground parkade. Most of the residential parking is proposed in the under-ground parkade,
except six spaces which are proposed in the three double car garages accessible at grade from the
lane on the north. The required visitor parking stalls are proposed at grade accessible from the
lane. The building will contain 43 apartments (one, two and three bedroom units) ranging in sizes
from 43.66 m2 (470 ft2) to 119.8 m2 (1290 ft2), proposed on four floors with viewing patios and
balconies for the units facing River Road. A ramp leading to the under-ground parkade is proposed
in the south-east corner of the site and pedestrian access to the building is through the entrance
lobby facing River Road (Appendix C). A small outdoor amenity area is proposed on the east with
some planters and movable seating for the residents to use (Appendix E).
c) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan & Town Centre Area Plan:
The Town Centre area is divided into seven precincts and the subject sites lie along the southern
edge of the Town Centre Area, within the “Port Haney and Waterfront Precinct”. This precinct is
bounded by the west boundary of the Town Centre Area Plan, 117 th Avenue, 224th street (including
some properties on the east side of 224th Street) and continues along the waterfront to the east
boundary of the Town Centre. Historically, Port Haney area served as the District’s commercial hub,
the remnants of which are heritage buildings such as Haney House, St. Andrew’s Church and the
Billy Miner Pub (on the east of the subject sites).
Today, the Port Haney & Fraser River Waterfront Area is recognized as an area in transition.
Retaining the historical character and encouraging pedestrian and multi-modal linkage to the central
business district are important for this area. This precinct is within walking distance of the civic core
area and serves as a vital walkable link to key destinations including the Fraser River waterfront and
the West Coast Express train station. This proposal will benefit from a future walkway and
- 4 -
development along the wharf. 223rd Street would be the shortest pedestrian connection to the
central business district. A separated sidewalk, boulevard, curb and gutter on 223rd Street, to match
the proposed development on the north of the lane, will further enhance the multi-modal linkages to
the civic core area of the town centre. The pedestrian underpass (tunnel) connecting to 224th Street
and the civic core area is in close proximity to the subject sites.
The uses permitted in the “Port Haney Multi-Family, Commercial and Mixed-Use” designation include
ground-oriented development forms such as row houses, town houses, stacked townhouses, low -
rise apartment, commercial or mixed-use. The proposed low-rise apartment form on subject sites,
aligns with this and aims to capitalize on important views of the Fraser River. The developer and his
team are working to consistency with the policies and development permit guidelines outlined in the
Town Centre Area Plan. This will be the subject of a future Council report.
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the subject properties from RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential zone) to CRM (Commercial/Residential zone). The proposed CRM
(Commercial/Residential zone) provides for a mix of residential and commercial uses and is
specifically for lands designated Commercial/Apartment in the Port Haney area. Apartment use is a
permitted principle use in this zone. The proposed apartment building complies with the maximum
height and setback requirements of the zone. This zone permits 90% lot coverage on main and first
floors and a reduced maximum lot coverage of 50% above the second floors. The applicant has
proposed reduced maximum lot coverage on main and first floors and increased maximum lot
coverage on third and fourth floors, to avoid a wedding cake like form. This is considered a variance
and will be the subject of a future Council report.
Off-Street Parking and Loading Bylaw:
The Town Centre Parking Strategy revisited parking standards for some uses within the Town Centre
Area and includes revised parking standards for residences based on number of bedrooms for a
multi-family residential use. This proposal benefits from the reduced parking standards due to its
location and because it is eligible for the Town Centre Incentive Program in Sub-Area 1. As per
Section 10 of the Maple Ridge Off-Street Parking and Loading Bylaw #4350-1990, a minimum of
0.9 spaces per unit are required for a bachelor apartment which increases by 0.1 space per
additional bedroom. Based on these parking standards, for a total of 43 units (16 one-bedroom
units plus 24 two-bedroom units plus 3 three-bedroom units), this project requires 46 residential
parking spaces and 5 visitor parking spaces. Total proposed parking spaces in the under-ground
parkade are 40 spaces and the remaining six spaces are provided in the three 2 -car garages facing
the lane (Appendix D). All the required visitor parking stalls are proposed at grade, covered above by
the first floor, facing the lane (Appendix C). The developer has opted to provide some additional
tandem parking stalls in the under-ground parkade which are anticipated to serve the same unit
owners and serve as an important marketing tool for the project. The required long-term bicycle
storage lockers are proposed in the under-ground parkade and the short-term bicycle parking
spaces have been proposed near the visitor parking stalls as shown on the site plan (Appendix C).
- 5 -
Development Permits :
Pursuant to Section 8.11 of the Official Community Plan the proposal is subject to the Town Centre
Area Development Permit Guidelines to address the form and character of the development. This
will be the subject of a future Council report.
Advisory Design Panel :
The proposal was first reviewed at the February 14, 2012 Advisory Design Panel meeting. The panel
had several concerns and passed the following resolution at this meeting:
The proposal be re-submitted and presented at a future Advisory Design Panel meeting with the
following concerns addressed;
Submit the following: a Context Plan; Streetscape Elevations; Coloured Elevations of the
building, with details of the east property line building and parking;
Consider a more cohesive design and material treatment for all the elevations of the
building;
Provide handicapped access to the garbage enclosure;
Provide appropriate access to the Outdoor Amenity Space;
Consider a landscape buffer along River Road;
Re-consider the suite/unit layout with bedroom that has no window;
Provide details of the long-term bicycle storage;
Provide details of the transformer location;
Coordinate the landscape and architectural drawings with the civil drawings with regard
to off-site works and boulevard location; ensure all drawings are accurate & complete.
Consider Children’s Play Area within the Outdoor Amenity Space;
Re-evaluate the need for enclosed balconies;
Consider additional tree planting along the lane, on both sides including reduction of
parking as needed;
Confirm and show that the garbage and recycling proposed, complies with the DMR
Waste Management Guidelines;
Provide direct access to the Mechanical Room;
Allocate extra space of Electrical Room to storage space;
Specify route of the second exit on the ramp going into the U/G parkade;
Review sizes of individual storages proposed in the U/G parkade;
Specify details of how the water is collected and drained, from the top deck;
Adjust the roof plan to show necessary slopes behind the towers.
- 6 -
After the applicant addressed the above concerns, the panel reviewed the revised proposal at the
April 10, 2012 Advisory Design Panel meeting. The resolution passed at this meeting was:
The following concerns be addressed and digital versions of revised drawings and memo be
submitted to Planning staff; and further that Planning staff forward this on to the Advisory Design
Panel for information;
Updated landscape plans to show street trees in correct locations;
Consider street front entrances where possible;
Consider addition of window to Units C, C1 and D;
Provide dimensions for the smaller storage lockers;
Consider providing details at the gables of the roof;
Provide an updated rendering;
Consider locating the entry feature on the grid of the buildings;
Provide handicapped ramp details at the front entry;
Provide exterior lighting details.
The revised drawings have been forwarded to the panel for review. The architectural details will be
the subject of a future Council report prior to approval of a Development Permit.
Development Information Meeting :
On May 31, 2012, the developer and his team of consultants hosted the “Development Information
Meeting” at the Fraser Room, in the Maple Ridge Library from 6:00 to 8:30 PM. This meeting was
attended by two persons who expressed concerns such as: noise from the train, increased traffic
and lack of street parking in this area. There was a positive comment about how this proposal will
bring some improvements to this area. One resident of this area who could not attend this meeting
and who is not opposed to this project, conveyed concerns regarding additional cars in an overall
constrained area and lack of street parking on the Haney Bypass, noting that densifying this area is
appropriate but needs careful attention to supporting infrastructure for auto-users and pedestrians
alike.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
The Development Information Meeting was an opportunity for any affected parties to express any
concerns and the future Public Hearing will be another opportunity to do the same.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
Engineering Department:
The Engineering Department reviewed the proposal and determined that all the required off-site
services do not exist. The deficient services which are required to be provided through a Rezoning
Servicing Agreement include the following: a 2.2 metre road dedication and upgrades such as
concrete curb, gutter, sidewalk and street trees on River Road; a separated sidewalk, boulevard,
- 7 -
curb, gutter and street trees on 223rd Street; a reconstructed lane with street parking on the north
side of the lane; new sanitary sewer connections; new storm sewer and catch basins; under -ground
wiring for utilities; new fire hydrant and service connection, etc. A servicing estimate will be
prepared once the developer’s engineer submits an acceptable off -site servicing design, which is a
standard practice for all development proposals.
Fire Department:
The Fire Department has reviewed the proposal and comments have been provided to the ap plicant.
The applicant has ensured that all these will be addressed through the Building Permit drawings.
Building Department:
The Building Department has reviewed the proposal and comments have been provided to the
applicant. The site is within the Fraser River Escarpment Area so the Geotechnical report should
address this policy. A more detailed review will take place prior to the Development Permit approval.
Parks & Leisure Services Department:
The Parks & Leisure Services Department have identified that after the Development Permit is
completed they will be responsible for maintaining the street trees. The Manager of Parks & Open
Space has advised that the maintenance requirement of $25.00 per new tree will increase their
budget requirements.
f) School District Comments:
A referral was sent to the School District office and no comments were received.
g) Intergovernmental Issues:
A referral was sent to the Ministry of Transportation and Highways, for preliminary approval, as the
subject site lies within 800 metres of the Haney Bypass. On June 11, 2012, preliminary approval for
the proposed bylaw was received.
- 8 -
CONCLUSION:
The applicant is seeking some variances that will need consideration at a future Council meeting.
The development proposal promises some off-site improvements which will benefit the over-all
multi-modal connectivity for the area and fits well with Council’s vision of densification within the
Town Centre Area. This proposal also qualifies for the Town Centre Incentives Program, therefore it
is recommended that Council grant Second Reading to Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6827 – 2011 and
forward it to Public Hearing.
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Rasika Acharya, B -Arch, M-Tech, UD, LEED® AP, MCIP
Planner
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP
Director of Planning
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6827 – 2011
Appendix C – Proposed Site Plan
Appendix D – Proposed Building Elevations
Appendix E – Proposed Landscape Plan
"Original signed by Rasika Acharya"
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE : Jun 15, 2012 FILE: 2011-054-RZ BY: PC
22327 RIVER ROAD &ROLL #31399-0000-4
CORPOR ATION OFTHE DIST RIC T OFMAPLE R IDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT2226911575223232236722375223001158022327223792235011613
11598
11650
11656
11587
11566
11630
11664
222332225922302223352234511617
11657
22272(Station)223442235511641
222682227922289/912234422410223812236211671
11612
116 AVE.
CALLAGHAN AVE.
RIVER RD.
GAZETTED ROAD
CALLAGHAN AVE.
HANEY BYPASS
A
N
B
H
BCP
10Rem Rem9
Rem Z
P 86773
1
18
4
P 155
4
15
31
129 Rem
18 A
2
P 14332RP 6579
LMS 752
P 155P 76188
Pcl.A
RP 65880
P 82887
11
P 638
22
11
RP 5374A
Sk. 4878*PP078128
SK 125 RP 7373
A
K
RP 4605
1
PARK
8
RP 6192
22
RP 6755RP 5978B
2
T
RP 52214F
LMS 3297
2 2
5
3
7
PRP 2100RP 2100
(P 155)
47640
P 155
P 155
L
25
M
23
2P 164641
P 155
RP 5637
P 59018
AP 1636621
9
24
14
A
S 1/2
1
Pcl. A
RP 5335
RP 4665
20
BCP 47338A
Rem.
Rem
EP 59768
14 Rem
P 15654FE 42' of 26131
EP 6698012 13
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
SCALE 1:2,000
APPENDIX A
´´
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6827 - 2011
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended.
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6827 - 2011."
2. Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as:
Lot “A” (N23985E) Block 1 District Lot 398 Group 1 New Westminster District
Plan 155
Lot 6 District Lot 398 Block 1, New Westminster District Plan 155
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1521 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to CRM (Commercial/Residential).
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 14th day of June, A.D. 2011.
READ a second time the day of , A.D. 2012.
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 2012.
READ a third time the day of , A.D. 2012.
APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation this day of , A.D. 20 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 .
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX B
11725
2226911575
11654
22323223672237522181 222772230011580
22327223282233122379223501161322369/7311598
11690
22177
11665/11667
223402233711650
11656
11682
11595
11587 223622237211566
11630
11664
11686
22233222592230222309223352234511617
11657
22488/9222272(Station)2231922344223552235111641
11672
22173
222682227922289/9122344223522235722410223812236211671
11683
11664
11612
116 AVE.
CALLAGHAN AVE.222 ST.RIVER RD.
GAZETTED ROAD
ST. ANNE AVE.
HANEY BYPASS
CALLAGHAN AVE.
HANEY BYPASS
214
210
ParkA
P11527
N
B
C
H
BCP
10Rem Rem
RP 53523
9
Rem
14
Z
P 86773
1
3
P 5871
18
4
P 155
4
15
31
Rem
129
11
Rem
18 A
Rem
A
2
P 14332P 34597211
BCS 2550
RP 6579
LMS 752
P 155P 76188
Pcl.A
RP 65880
P 82887
Rem
11
P 63822
11
RP 5374A
Sk. 4878
T
213
208
*PP078128
SK 125
P 155
RP 7373
A
10
K
RP 4605
1
PARK
12
8
RP 6192
22
RP 6755RP 597816 17
B
2
T
RP 52214F
NWS 3379
LMS 683
212
207
LMS 3297
2 2
5
3
7
PRP 21002
RP 2100
(P 155)
47640
P 155
P 155
L
25
M
23
2P 164641
P 155
N 1/2
RP 5637
NWS 3383
A
P 59018
AP 1636622 21
13
9
24
14
A
S 1/2
A
P 5871 74
P 69427Pcl. "1"
1
Pcl. A
RP 5335
9
RP 4665
20 19
*PP076
BCP 47338A
Rem.
P 6689
P 87404
A
LMP 1864
215
Rem
EP 59768
14 Rem
P 15654FE 42' of 26131
EP 6698012 13 LMS 274917NWS 1811P 85354224 ST.H
A
N
E
Y B
Y
PA
S
S
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No.Map No. From:
To:
6827-20111521RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
CRM (Commercial/Residential)
´
District Of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012-005-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Second Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6926-2012
20528 Lougheed Highway
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On May 22, 2012, Council gave First Reading to Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw 6926-2012.
This application is to rezone the subject properties from CS-1 (Service Commercial) to C-2
(Community Commercial), to permit an existing commercial building to be expanded and allow a
broader range of commercial uses.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6926-2012 be given Second Reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing; and
2. That the following term s and conditions be met prior to final reading.
i. Approval from the Ministry of Transportation;
ii. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising
whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there is
evidence, a site profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in
accordance with the regulations;
iii. Registration of a revised easement for mutual access, reconfiguration and
coordination of parking and maneuvering aisles with the adjoining lot to the east
(20580 Lougheed Highway).
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: Shauna Steven (Spire Development Corporation)
Owner: R. Tong MD Inc.
1106
- 2 -
Legal Description: Lot 1 Except: Part subdivided by Plan LMP20045;
District Lot 222 Group 1 New Westminster
District Plan 72179
OCP:
Existing: Commercial
Zoning:
Existing: CS-1 (Service Commercial)
Proposed: C-2 (Community Commercial)
Surrounding Uses
North: Use: Commercial
Zone: CS-1 (Service Commercial), &
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Designation Commercial
South: Use: Residential (south of abutting lane)
Zone: R-1 (Urban Residential)
Designation: Urban Residential
East: Use: Commercial
Zone: CD-1-92 (A Comprehensive Development Zone for
medically-related uses)
Designation: Commercial
West: Use: Commercial
Zone: CS-1 (Service Commercial)
Designation: Commercial
Existing Use of Property: Commercial
Proposed Use of Property: Commercial
Site Area: 0.327 ha. (0.8 acre)
Access: Lougheed Highway and lane behind
Servicing: Full Urban
Companion Applications: 2012-005-DP
b) Project Description:
The subject site is located on the south side of Lougheed Highway, across from Triple Tree
Nurseryland. The parcel is 0.327 ha. in size and has access to a lane from 118 Avenue.
The applicant proposes to convert and extend the existing commercial building. The current CS-1
zone limits the types of professional uses it permits. A drop-in medical clinic would be permitted, but
not medical specialist offices, a pharmacy and diagnostic facilities. The C-2 zone is less restrictive,
allowing the medical clinic and all of the proposed uses the applicant is seeking. The existing
building is approximately 646 m2 (6,958 ft2). With the proposed addition of about 524m2
(5,640 ft2), the total floor area of the proposed building will be 1,170 m2 (12, 598 ft2).
- 3 -
Parking is provided in two areas. In front, there will be 39 parking spaces, two of which will be
handicapped spaces. To the rear with lane access, w ill be 13 spaces intended to be for staff.
Access to the front parking area is by way of an existing driveway through the lands to the east
(20580 Lougheed Highway) as part of a previous development application for those lands. The
access is secured by way of an existing easement, with the District as a third party on the associated
restrictive covenant.
Running concurrently with this application is Development Permit application (2012 -005-DP). It will
govern the details of the proposed expansion, exterior renovations, parking layout, landscaping and
signage.
c) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan :
This western stretch of the Lougheed Highway was predominantly Service Commercial historically
and is designated General Commercial. The adoption of the Official Community Plan in 2006
introduced greater flexibility in the possible range of permitted commercial uses (including the C-2
Community Commercial Zone) in this designation. This change was in order to meet consumer
demand and respond to market trends. For this reason, this proposal is entirely consistent with the
Official Community Plan, and complies with the policies in section 6.3.4 General Commercial of the
Official Community Plan.
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the subject site from CS-1 (Service Commercial) to C-2
(Community Commercial) to permit the existing 646 m2 building to be expanded by 524 m2 and have
a total floor area of 1,170 m2. A preliminary review of the proposed building and associated parking
has concluded that the proposal complies with the applicable Zoning Bylaw and parking regulation.
Although none are currently being contemplated, any variations from the requirements of the
proposed zone would require a development variance permit application
Development Permits:
Pursuant to Section 8.5 of the Official Community Plan, a Commercial Development Permit
application is required to address the current proposal’s compatibi lity with adjacent development,
and to enhance the unique character of the community.
Development Information Meeting :
A Development Information Meeting was held by the applicant on June 11, 2012 at the Hammond
Community Centre. The number of individuals that attended was 22. Concerns raised by those
attending related to: parking and lane access, loading and access to the lane garbage enclosure,
- 4 -
safety and security, and landscaping and esthetics. The applicant proposes to respond to these
concerns as follows:
1. Relocate the garbage enclosure to the north side of building. Provide a small, one bin
enclosure constructed of concrete block, painted to match building with perforated
metal gates. Provide landscape screening.
2. All deliveries to be at north end of building through main doors. Only small, cube van
delivery vehicles are anticipated.
3. Provide a locking gate at the pedestrian corridor on the east end of building. Will be for
staff access only.
4. Discuss with city and engineering departments the installation of speed bumps, signage
and mirrors in rear lane to address traffic safety concerns of residents.
5. Provide landscaping at rear of building for esthetic enhancement.
As indicated above, a number of concerns were raised by the public at the DIM meeting. All appear
related to: building design; on-site parking and delivery issues. However, the most significant
concern expressed is over the applicant’s plan to utilize the existing lane for staff parking. The
history of the lane and area lot patterning needs some explanation. Prior to 1980, this portion of
Lougheed Highway contained a variety of odd, large sized lots extending southward s. Over time
subdivisions occurred which did not anticipate the need for lane network running parallel to
Lougheed Highway. In 1994, this changed with the submission of a subdivision application on the
subject site that proposed a 7 lot subdivision. The proposal consisted of two (2) commercial lots
fronting Lougheed Highway, each with an existing commercial building, and five (5) single family
residential lots fronting 118th Avenue. All but one of the single family lots had access from 118th
Avenue.
As part of this application the Ministry of Transportation and Highways required a lane be built as
alternative access for the two commercial lots. Given the lot pattern in the area, no further lane
extensions are possible. Air photo records from 1994 reveal the rear lane having been built but
only one of the commercial lots (20580 Lougheed) had access to the lane. No residential homes
were built on any of the lots in 1994. A review of the subsequent air photo records reveal that only
two of the 5 single family lots were built on by 2000. The subsequent three (3) additional lots were
built on after the year 2000.
In 2006, an area resident requested the lane be closed to commercial traffic that was using it as a
“rat run” from Lougheed Highway to destinations south, thereby avoiding the light and traffic
congestion at the 207th intersection. This request was reviewed and approved by the Municipal
Engineer in 2006. A 2.0 metre high chain link fence was subsequently erected among the north
side of the lane. Since that time the lane has served exclusively as access to the rear yards of the
six (6) adjoining residential lots fronting 118th Avenue.
Although it appears that the lane was intended to serve as an alternative access for one or both of
the existing commercial parcels fronting Lougheed, it actually only served 20580 Lougheed Highway
and for only a short time (1994-2006) before being closed off. There is no possibility of the lane
now being extended further east or west. Over the past few years, area residents have come to
regard the lane as a residential use, going as far as planting landscaping along the northern side of
- 5 -
the lane along the chain link fence. They are not in favour of the lane being reopened even for
limited use by medical staff as proposed by the applicant. The developer has responded by:
increasing the amount of landscaping at the rear of the building and in the staff parking area; and
relocating the garbage and delivery areas from the lane.
Advisory Design Panel :
The plans, design drawings and landscape plans submitted in support of the development permit
application were reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel at the June 12, 2012 meeting. The Advisory
Design Panel is in support of the general concept as submitted, and made the following resolution:
The application be supported and the following concerns be addressed as the design
develops and submitted to Planning staff for follow up;
Consider providing more detail on the face of the fascia of the decorative roof .
Provide details of signage on the East Elevation.
Provide civil drawings which explain the treatment along lane and Lougheed
highway.
Consider any improvements to the lane, in particular tree planting on the south side
of the lane.
Consider on-site storm-infiltration into the planting in the north of the parking lot.
Clarification of parking wheel stops requirements.
Consider reducing patron or visitor parking to establish a pedestrian access to the
building.
Consider as much of a landscape planting provision around the garbage enclosure
including additional trees.
Consider the addition of planting against the south and east walls.
Consider addition of lighting on the south side of the building.
Clarify that there is a low evergreen hedge on the North, Ea st and West edges of the
parking lot.
Provide sufficient soil depth for trees in the parking lot.
Consider a different location for the garbage enclosure (not at the entrance of the
parking lot).
Consider providing a parapet screen around the roof top to screen the roof-top units.
Consider providing a parking lot organization coordinated with the neighbor next door
to provide a functional solution.
The revised plans, once submitted, will be brought forward with a staff report for Council to consider
authorizing issuance of the development permit. After this, the applicant may obtain the required
building permits to undertake the extension and exterior renovations being proposed.
- 6 -
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
Engineering Department:
Engineering Department comments related to road improvements (roll-over curbs and gutter for lane
parking; sidewalk, street trees, lighting and underground wiring along Lougheed Highway),
confirming adequacy of service connections (currently in easements through the property to the
east), and legal arrangements for parking and access (the parking spaces and access is joined with
the land to the east and secured by easement).
The detailed Engineering Comments have been provided to applicant to be resolved prior to Council
granting Final Reading.
Fire Department:
The Fire Department has reviewed the application and has provided comments related to the usual
practices for fire safety. No issues were raised related to access to the site, proposed lane usage or
on-site circulation.
The detailed Fire Comments have been provided to applicant to be resolved at the building permit
stage.
e) Intergovernmental Issues:
Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure :
The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure has granted preliminary approval to this rezoning
for a one year period. This is subject to an application and issuance of a commercial access permit
to the applicant if the current access arrangements are to be changed. The approval also requires a
minimum setback of 4.5 meters (about 24 meters proposed) from the Lougheed Highway.
The District becomes responsible for maintaining boulevard landscaping, and sidewalks the
developer is required to construct along the Lougheed Highway. Responsibility related to highway
safety is under a Ministry’s maintenance contract.
- 7 -
CONCLUSION:
This proposal involves converting and expanding an existing service commercial building into a
building that will accommodate commercial community uses. A number of concerns have been
raised by area residents regarding the use of the lane. The applicant has suggested ways to
mitigate potential impacts. The proposed zone to accommodate the proposed uses would comply
with the existing OCP Commercial designation. It would be in order for Council to consider granting
Zone Amending Bylaw 6926-2008 Second Reading and forwarding the application to Public Hearing.
"Original signed by Adrian Kopystynski"
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Adrian Kopystynski, MCIP, MCAHP
Planning Technician
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B –Zone Amending Bylaw 6926-2008
Appendix C – Site Plan
Appendix D – Building Elevation Plans
Appendix E – Landscape Plans
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE : M ay 7, 2012 FILE: 2012-005-RZ BY: PC
20528 LOUGHEED HWY
CORPOR ATION OFTHE DIST RIC T OFMAPLE R IDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
204642047520484 20497206802044820478 20537205542045920473
20492 205472063020433204482043620468204902055720611206752045220458204562046120519205282056720580206102043220472
20498 204912053120556206252062920445205252052220592204402048320492205052050320577118 AVE.
119 AVE.
LOUGHEED HWY.206 ST.WALNUT CR.6
A
1 2
NWS 3141
Rem
5 7 LMP 20045(LEASE PLAN)
P 76445
A
4 16
P 86291
4
P 80213
6
P 75414
P 25311
803
1
P 77691
11
5
P 64073
17
1
2
RP 7130
1
38
9
2 Rem
LMP 46838
P 9801
1
LMP 25177
P 77800 P 13954
Pcl. 'One'
P 72179
Rem "D"
3
NWS 2745
2
10
Rem C
13
14
1
BCP 1643
4
2
NWS 2959
LMP 1703
P 9031
12
75
Rem
*LMP 36563
3
1
3
Rem. 1 P 78869
NWS 3136
P 87086
1
3
15
P 776913
1
P 69662
1
LMP 20045 P 75414
2
P 10201
P 75414
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
SCALE 1:2,000
APPENDIX A
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6926-2012
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6926-2012."
2. That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 1 Except: Part subdivided by Plan LMP20045; District Lot 222 Group 1
New Westminster District Plan 72179
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1570 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to C-2 (Community Commercial).
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the day of , A.D. 20 .
READ a second time the day of , A.D. 20 .
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 20 .
READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20 .
APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation this day of , A.D. 20 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 .
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX B
2047520484 204972068020478 20537205542045920473
20492 205472063020433204362046820490205572061120675204522045820461205192052820567205802061020498 20491205312062520629204452052520522205922048320492205052050320577118 AVE.
119 AVE.
LOUGHEED HWY.206 ST.WALNUT CR.6
A
1 2
NWS 3141
Rem
5 7 LMP 20045(LEASE PLAN)
4 16
P 86291
4
P 80213
6
P 75414
P 25311
803
P 77691
5
P 64073
17
1
2
1
2 Rem
LMP 46838
1
LMP 25177
P 77800 P 13954
Pcl. 'One'
P 72179
3
NWS 2745
2
Rem C
1
BCP 1643
4
2
NWS 2959
LMP 1703
P 9031
75
Rem
*LMP 36563
3 3
Rem. 1 P 78869
NWS 3136
P 87086
1
3
15
P 776913
1
P 69662
LMP 20045 P 75414
2
P 10201
P 75414
LMP 37752 (easement)RW 77801LMP 33006
LMP 25181RW 77448RW 86292LMP 25178LMP 749
LMP 46837
LMP 20046RW 79412
RW 77692RW 69663
RW 75415LMP 25179LMP 32053
LMP 37751 (lease)RW 77692RW 77448 BCP44492
EP 38535
EP 38535LMP 25180LMP 32054
0.569LOUGHEED HWY.
118 AVE.
´
SCALE 1:2,000
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No. Map No. From:
To:
CS-1 (Service Commercial)
C-2 (Community Commercial)
6926-20121570
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012-027-DVP
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: CoW
SUBJECT: Development Variance Permit
24207 102 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A Development Variance Permit has been received in support of a Subdivision application and an
Intensive Residential Development Permit application. The applicant is requesting variances to the
Maple Ridge Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw and the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw.
It is recommended that 2012-027-DVP be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2012-027-DVP respecting property located
at 24207 102 Avenue.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context
Applicant: CIPE Homes Inc.
Owner: Paul Kaczan
Legal Description: Lot: B, Section 3, Township 12, Plan: BCP9309
OCP :
Existing: Medium Density Residential
Proposed: Medium Density Residential
Zoning:
Existing: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Proposed: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Surrounding Uses
North: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Designation: Medium Density Residential
South: Use: Conservation
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Conservation
1107
- 2 -
East: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Designation: Medium Density Residential
West: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Designation: Medium Density Residential
Existing Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Site Area: 0.816 ha (2 acres)
Access: from the lane off of 241A Street
Servicing: Full Urban Standard
Previous Applications: RZ, SD, DP & VP/062/03 and 2012-SD, DP
Requested Variance: To Maple Ridge Subdivision and Development
Servicing Bylaw 4800-1993 Schedule “B” and “C”
& Section IV A 4. and
To Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 – 1985
Section 601 C. E,b.ii.
b) Project Description:
The subject property is located within the Albion Area Plan and is developing in accordance with the
established neighbourhood and road pattern. It was part of a larger parcel which was rezoned in
2004; at that time the north portion was subdivided into 25 lots, leaving the home site on this 0.861
ha parcel which fronts onto 102 Avenue. An application has now been received to subdivide the
remainder into 27 lots under the R-3 zone (Special Amenity Residential District), which permits lots
not less than 213 m2. The subdivision will connect 102A Avenue as well as the lane off of 102
Avenue through the site providing an improved circulation pattern for pedestrians and traffic. A
temporary access to 102 Avenue will be provided to minimize the construction impact on the
adjacent neighbourhood. The variances requested are to:
the Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw to permit the existing Albion Village
Standard for road widths and construction standards and for the minimum lot depth on
arterial roads for those lots which will front onto 102 Avenue; and
the Zoning Bylaw to allow a reduction in the side yard setback from 2 metres to 1.8
metres to allow for wider garages.
The Albion Village Standards were established in 1997 in support of the first R-3 (Special Amenity
Residential District) Zone. The standard approved was based on a traffic assessment prepared by
Trevor Ward and Associates and reviewed and supported by the Engineering Department. This
standard has been used throughout the area known as the Albion Village area. The specific
variances requested from those established in the Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw ,
are reflective of the established subdivision pattern, and are discussed in more detail below.
- 3 -
There are 3 variances being requested as follows:
1. Maple Ridge Subdivision and Development Services Bylaw:
a) Section IV General Requirements A. 4,
states “No parcel abutting a controlled
access highway or municipal arterial road
shall be created having a parcel depth of
less than 30 metres.” Lot depth for future
lots fronting onto an arterial (102 Avenue)
do not meet this minimum requirement
and;
b) Schedule “B”& “C” to achieve the Albion
Village street standard;
Schedule “B” 3., Minor Street, urban
standard, minimum width 18m;
Schedule “B” 5., Lane, minimum
width 7.5m; and
Schedule C the construction standard.
2. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw, Section 601C, E, b,ii) states “Buildings and Structures for
Accessory Residential Use and Accessory Off-Street Parking Use shall be sited not less than
0.45 metres from an interior side lot line provided that a minimum setback of 2 metres is
maintained for the other side yard”. (see Appendix B)
c) Planning Analysis of requested Variances:
1. Subdivision Servicing and Development Bylaw variances:
a. Section IV A. 4 - Lot Depth on Arterial Roads:
The overall subdivision lotting pattern for the “Albion Village” has already been established
through previous subdivision applications. This pattern established the lot depth fronting
102 Avenue (an arterial road), at 27.44 metres in depth. This reduction in lot depth will still
provide for an 11 metre rear yard setback for the principal building leaving this area for
accessory buildings and private yard space for these lots.
This variance would enable the continuation of the established lot pattern and complies with
the minimum depth requirement established by the Zoning Bylaw for the depth of R-3 lots.
b. Schedule B & C of the Maple Ridge Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw -
Road Standards:
Schedule “B” establishes the required road right-of-way width. The variances requested
are as follows for:
Urban Standard Minor Streets - from 18 metres to 15.5 metres,
Lanes - from 7.5 metres to 6 metres.
- 4 -
Schedule “C” - District of Maple Ridge Standard Drawings and Specifications establishes
the construction standards. The variance requested will be to achieve the Albion Village
standard. They are:
From an 18 metre right of way to a 15.5 metre right-of-way and from a 8.6 metre
pavement width to 8.0 metre pavement width; and
From a 7.5 metre lane right of way to a 6 metre right of way and from 6 metres of
pavement width to 5.6 metres of pavement width.
These requested variances are consistent with the road standards that have been
established in the surrounding neighbourhood and the properties immediately adjacent to
the subject properties.
2. Relaxation requested to the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw Section 601C, E,b,ii “Buildings and
Structures for Accessory Residential Use and Accessory Off-Street Parking Use shall be sited
not less than 0.45 metres from an interior side lot line provided that a minimum setback of 2
metres is maintained for the other side yard”. The applicant is proposing to construct either
garages or carports as part of their marketing strategy for the lots. They have requested a
relaxation from 2 metres to 1.8 metres for the interior side yard in order to provide a wider
garage which would allow greater maneuverability for access/egress. This variance was
discussed and given support by the Fire Department.
The form and character of all of the houses in this subdivision will be the subject to a n Intensive
Residential Development Permit that will be reviewed by Council in the near future.
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
Engineering Department:
The Engineering Department supports the requested variances to the Subdivision and Development
Servicing Bylaw for the Albion Village Standard. It was noted that the Developer will be required to
provide for “no parking” segments on 102A Avenue at the subdivision servicing stage of the
development.
Fire Department:
The Fire Department is prepared to support the requested variance to the Zoning Bylaw for the
interior side yard setback for the garage/carports from 2 metres to 1.8 metres.
e) Alternatives
The street abutting both sides of the site has used the Albion Village standard which has dictated the
lotting pattern specific to this site. If the variance to the Subdivision Development and Servicing
Bylaw is not approved the applicant will be unable to subdivide the site in accordance with the Albion
Village standard.
If the variance to the Zoning Bylaw is not approved the applicant will build garages/carports which
are not as wide. This would make the access/egress to the garage more difficult.
- 5 -
CONCLUSIONS:
The requested variances will permit the subdivision to proceed using established road patterns and
the garages to be wider making access/egress easier. It is therefore recommended that this
application be approved.
"Original signed by Gay McMillan"
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Gay McMillan
Planning Technician
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Site Plan of proposed variance for the garage interior side yard
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE : Jun 15, 2012 FILE: 2012-027-RZ BY: PC
24207 102 AVENUE
CORPOR ATION OFTHE DIST RIC T OFMAPLE R IDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT24111241062411524112241192412710151241292413824142241581012324175242232425624251242542425210131242592425510132
101282426924272 2427710260
10274
2428324286242842429610269
24304102 70
102 82
103 06
24315243162411024109241132411310142 241222412324125241232412524136241402415124158241672416924189241672419624210242062425324250242622425724266242492426524276102 80
102 92
2428824298103 15
2430724305102 76
102 88
243142431124312241122411424114241162411310152241172411824121 2412024128101412413324135 2414410152 24155241542418024165241702418310130241832421024219 242252425224259242632428424295102 93
103 05
103 12
103 1810320
243102411624117241232412624134241312413224139241472416124162241552416624186101402419124218 24207242602425824243242542426524266101482427324270
24282102 87
24302103 00
10324
101371014124109 10138 241212412024143241572417724192242022420724240242532423724268242582427410262
242802428324285242822429010281
24306102 60
243132431424100241092411524117241221013124133 24137241412415024154241662415910133 241862419924226242222425624260242612426710136 2427924278102 86
242812429210263
10275
10321
10327
24308102 64
1015124111241082411024111 24119241242412910130
10146
102 85 2419024226242162424324215242302424910121
101422427124274 2427524279242802427310268
102 98
24281242852429124286102 99
2430910330
2431710159 2411824121241302414210138 2415324162102 91
24162241782419524182242072419824231242382423110125 2426124264242562427224275242782428724282242842429424299102 94
101 A AVE.242 ST.243 ST.101 A AVE.242 B ST.103 AVE.
102 A AVE.102 A AVE.
102 B AVE.
102 AVE 243 ST.APNAUT ST.241 B ST.102 B AVE.241A ST.241 A ST.242 B ST.BCP 20970
(P 19526)
17
36 35
16
15
31
16
37
10
41 40BCP 1459538 21
6
29
PARK
2
28
37 38
4
LMP 36295
29
42
8 9
5 636236 71BCP 3493146
124
111772
27
38
PARK
14
15
33
19
BCP 3139
P 19526
1
3
20
13
6 30
14
39
54LMP
26
LMP 36295
15
9
20
34
12
1 LMP 3591866681
108
135 137
125
LMP 36295858025
LMP 51757
LMP 48057
32
(P 19526)
A
20
32
40
8
23
4
4
22
PARK
BCP 3300112
10
8
7
23
23
28
5036295
31
6
18
30
52
19
16
4
8
43 45 6112
23
47
A
147
26
9
6
20 19
37
7
16
30
17
14
33
11
BCP 3139
PARK
20
BCP 3139
9
24
18
BCP 3300126
5
BCP 9309
21
14
7
24
PARK
3
LMP 36295
55
32
LMP 35918
BCP 23558
33 35 6011 13
46
E 1/2 of 2
1
LMP 36295817934
BCP 2801128
LMP 51757 10
28
BCP 3139
34
34
35
13
35 33
43
BCP 1010
7
BCP 30529
27 1
11
Rem. B
3
13BCP 14595
BCP 14595
8
10
29
15
48
5
19
40
51
56 57
PARK
17
6
10
22 642
2574 134
144
109
10
LMP 51757
9
15
11
14 17
36
BCP 3139
34
21
21
31
BCP 1010
BCP 3139
38
3
16
4 5BCP 14595
9
25
BCP 2355827
LMP 36295
16
18
BCP 23558 10
7
13
266772
BCP 17490
BCP 32285
LMP 34684
145LMP 36295
136848276 BCP4026LMP 48057
26
8
27 29
BCP 2801130
12
18
44
45
42
2437
36
25
39
17
5
19
BCP 33001
6
14 12
BCP 9309
11
25
1 2
27
49
53
41
31
PARK
7
21 5914
11
24 36295P 17126
122123
11083
29
5
B
11 12 13
18
31
*PP004
BCP 3139
1 2
BCP 3139
22
BCP 2801139
30 28
23 22
2
PARK
15 9
24
BCP 18974
17
3
LMP 35918
44 5865LMP7069731
LMP 36295LMP 36295781
\\
SUBJECT PROPERTY
SCALE 1:2,000
APPENDIX A
´
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012-027-DP
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Development Permit
24207 102 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An Intensive Residential Development Permit application has been received for the subject site
located at 24207 102 Avenue for the R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) zoned lots. The site
is located within the Albion Area plan and has a land use designation of Medium Density Residential.
The Intensive Residential Development Permit provides a greater emphasis on high standards in
aesthetics and quality of the built environment, with the intent to provide an environment that is
safe, attractive, people-friendly.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2012-027-DP respecting property located
at 24207 102 Avenue.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context
Applicant: CIPE Homes Inc.
Owner: Paul Kaczan
Legal Description: Lot: B, Section 3, Township 12, Plan: BCP9309
OCP :
Existing: Medium Density Residential
Proposed: Medium Density Residential
Zoning:
Existing: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Proposed: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Surrounding Uses
North: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Designation: Medium Density Residential
South: Use: Conservation
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Conservation
1108
- 2 -
East: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Designation: Medium Density Residential
West: Use: Single Family Residential
Zone: R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Designation: Medium Density Residential
Existing Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Site Area: 0.816 ha (2 acres)
Access: from the lane off of 241A Street
Servicing: Full Urban Standard
Previous Applications: RZ, SD, DP & VP/062/03 and 2012-SD, DP
a) Project Description:
The subject property is located within the Albion Area Plan and is developing in accordance with the
established neighbourhood and road pattern. It was part of a larger parcel which was rezoned in
2004; at that time the north portion was subdivided into 25 lots, leaving the home site on this 0.861
ha parcel which fronts onto 102 Avenue. An application has now been received to subdivide the
remainder into 27 lots under the R-3 zone (Special Amenity Residential District), which permits lots
not less than 213 m2. A copy of the subdivision geometry is attached (Appendix D).
The development of the site will connect 102A Avenue and the lane off of 102 Avenue through the
site. This will improve pedestrian and traffic movement through the area.
b) Planning Analysis:
An Intensive Residential Development Permit is required for all new Intensive Residential
development in an area with an Area Plan. Residential development at densities greater than 30
units per net hectare that is typically zoned R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) is considered
as intensive residential. The Section 8.8 Intensive Residential Development Permit Area Guidelines
of the Official Community Plan aim to provide a greater emphasis on high standards in aesthetics,
with the intent to provide an environment that is safe, attractive, people-friendly and environmentally
responsive.
The key guideline concepts for the development permit area are as follows:
1. Neighbourhood cohesiveness and connectivity should be maintained through the design of
varied yet compatible buildings, in materials used and in architectural styles, in landscapes
and in recreational areas, and by facilitating a range of transportation choices.
Six different building types with variations in the detail finishes and 8 different colour
schemes will ensure that identical buildings will not be adjacent to each other. The building
design elements, materials and colour schemes, which are proposed to be along a heritage
theme, will compliment the adjacent single family development. A plan showing one of the
building’s design elements and front yard landscaping is attached (Appendix B). The site is
in close proximity to a Tot Lot and the future Jackson Farm Park; Albion Elementary School is
located approximately .6 km from the site.
- 3 -
2. A vibrant street presence is to be maintained through a variety of housing styles, by
maintaining street parking and by directing garage structures and off-street parking to the
rear of a property accessible by a lane.
For visual interest, there are different building finishes and the identical building design will
not be repeated within 3 adjacent lots. A Streetscape illustrating the variety of building
designs is attached (Appendix C). The project will provide lane access to either a two car
garage or carport.
c) Requested Variances:
Development Variance Permit application 2012-027-VP has been received to request to reduce the
required interior side yard for the garages from 2 metres to 1.8 metres in order to facilitate wider
garages. Additional variances are requested to vary the road right-of-way widths and carriageway
widths of the roads to be consistent with the intent of the Albion Area Plan. These variances are
discussed further in application 2011-052-VP which is also before Council for consideration.
d) Financial Implications:
There will be approximately 18 trees added to the municipal street tree inventory on completion of
the R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) zoned lots of this project. The costs associated with
maintaining these trees will need to be included in a subsequent operating budget.
CONCLUSION:
This proposal conforms to the OCP’s Albion Area Plan, the Intensive Residential DP Area Guidelines,
and the neighbourhoods’ existing lot and road pattern and housing form. Therefore, this
development is considered an “infill” project and it is recommended that the Development Permit be
approved.
"Original signed by Charles R. Goddard"
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Gay McMillan
Planning Technician
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
_____________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – An Elevation Plan and front yard landscape plan
- 4 -
Appendix C – Streetscape
Appendix D – Proposed Subdivision geometry
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: E02-010-174
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Local Area Service – 11160 234A Street Paving
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Over the past two years, District staff and residents have worked together to explore options for
paving the top lift of the Kanaka Village strata road; a deficiency remaining from a developer that
went bankrupt prior to completing all the private servicing work associated with the townhouses.
A solution to this issue has been found whereby the District would finance the cost of the final lift of
asphalt and the strata would pay these costs back through a Local Area Service (LAS).
Typically, LAS’s are not approved for the provision of services on private lands. Although the strata
road is a private facility servicing 28 units, it is also a right-of-way (ROW) accessed by District staff for
the maintenance of a District owned sanitary sewer.
The 28 residents have filed a valid formal petition, of which 100% have signed, and Council direction
is sought regarding preparation of a bylaw to establish an LAS.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
THAT staff be authorized to prepare a bylaw to establish a Local Area Service to provide the top lift of
asphalt to 11160 234A Street; and
THAT the capital program be amended to include the paving.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
In 2005, a development application at the corner of 234A Street and Kanaka Way was
received for the construction of both single family lots and a strata multi-family complex. The
subdivision and rezoning applications were completed in 2005/2006 and securities received
for all the off-site municipal servicing. The strata building permit was subsequently received
in 2007 and final construction completed in 2008. Prior to the acceptance of the municipal
services and issuance of final occupancy, the original developer declared bankruptcy and did
not complete the project deficiencies that had been identified.
A new developer arranged a private deal to take over the single family portion of the project
and completed the remaining municipal deficiencies. The private deficiencies however
remained with the original developer including the top lift of asphalt on the strata road and
were never completed. 1109
May 2010, the strata requested that the projects securities be used to complete the final lift
of asphalt. They were informed that the District only takes securities for the provision of the
municipally owned and maintained services and could not legally reassign the securities to
complete works not included in the agreement. The securities were subsequently returned to
the new developer who completed all the municipal service deficiencies.
In 2011, the strata was informed to arrange for the final inspection of the units, provision of
Schedules A/B and to pave the final lift of asphalt prior to the issuance of final occupancy for
the strata units.
In 2012, the strata contacted the District again to request that the strata road be included in
the annual capital program. While they were again made aware that it was not the
responsibility of the District to complete the private works, staff agreed to review other
avenues. One approach considered is a LAS as the District has an interest in the strata road
due to the access easement registered on title for the maintenance of the municipal sanitary
sewer. Following discussions with legal counsel it was determined that a LAS would be an
acceptable approach to paving the road.
In lieu of the preliminary petition, the LAS approach was presented to the strata council and
they agreed to proceed to the cost estimate and a formal petition stage. On April 13, 2012
the formal petition and cost estimate to pave the final lift of asphalt to serve 28 units in
Kanaka Village (shown on the attached sketch 1) were prepared and circulated to residents.
On May 2, 2012, the formal petition was returned and the Corporate Officer has determined
that the formal petition is sufficient and valid. A total of 100% of the number of properties
with a value of 100% of total land and improvements signed the petition.
b) Strategic Alignment:
The Corporate Strategic Plan includes financial management and environment as strategic
focus areas.
The financial management focus area encourages the continuation of a user -pay philosophy
and the provision of high quality municipal services to our citizens and customers in a cost
effective and efficient manner. This project meets these objectives.
c) Citizen/Customer Implications:
Costs of the final lift of asphalt have been estimated at $24,484.88, to be shared equally
among the 28 existing units (the per property cost amounts to $874.46). The owners will be
offered the option to either pay the ‘commuted’ cost or have the cost placed on the tax roll
and amortized over a period of 15 years at the interest rate agreed to, with the eligibility of
paying off anytime during the term without incurring a penalty.
This service will provide a 5.5m wide top lift of asphalt for approximately 310m length of
strata road. As this is a private road any future maintenance or repaving are the
responsibility of the strata. The unit charge is based on an equal division of the total paving
cost.
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
When the construction of the service is completed, the Finance Department will confirm the
actual costs, impose the agreed costs as a levy and place the notation on the tax roll of the
benefiting property owner.
e) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
The project will be financed initially from the Local Improvement Revenue. The construction
cost of the project will be borne by the owner and any municipal contribution will be provided
by the Local Improvement Revenue.
f) Policy Implications:
The LAS process was established to assist residents with the construction of municipal
services in support of community needs. The strata road identified in this LAS however is
private property in support of the 28 units and would typically not meet the LAS criteria. The
District however through legal opinion has determined that this will not set a precedence as
the District has a ROW registered on title over the road for access to maintain the municipal
sewer which is intended to service future developments if necessary.
As a result of the circumstances of this case, mechanisms are being explored with legal
counsel to enable securities to be held by the District for deficiencies internally within a
strata development.
g) Alternatives:
An alternative to address the final lift of asphalt is to not participate in LAS but rather that the
residents hire a contractor to pave the road.
CONCLUSION:
The top lift of asphalt has been requested by the residents of Kanaka Village through a formal LAS
Petition. Approval to prepare a bylaw to establish an LAS to provide the top lift of asphalt to 28 lots
in Kanaka Village is recommended.
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Stephen Judd, PEng.
Manager of Infrastructure and Development
_______________________________________________
Reviewed by: David Pollock, PEng.
Municipal Engineer
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, PEng.
General Manager: Public Works & Development Services
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
SJ/mi
"Original signed by Stephen Judd"
"Original signed by David Pollock"
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
2335923358
23328
23350
23331
11135
11125
233772339023422234191
1
1
5
5
234372337123366
23401234131112023376
2338323382233122340323407111
4
5
2343011160
23336
23342 23337
2339123406234272336523389233982338523345
2332
5
23419234252343123
3
2
0
11
1
6
5
233172341423411234 A ST.GRIF
F
E
N
R
O
A
DGRIFFEN ROADKANAKA
W
A
Y
KANAKA WAY
PROJECT LOCATION
11160 234A ST
PROJECT MAP:
Top Lift of Asphalt, 11160 234A Street
District of Maple Ridge
TO:His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE:June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO:E08-015-940
E01-052-001
FROM:Chief Administrative Officer MEETING:C of W
SUBJECT:Excess Capacity/Extended Services Agreement LC 151/12
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A developer has subdivided land at 124 Avenue and 203 Street . Part of the subdivision servicing is
considered to be excess or extended servicing in accordance with the Local Government Act. The
extended servicing benefits adjacent properties. Latecomer Agreement LC 151/12 provides the
municipality’s assessment of the attribution of the costs of the excess or extended ser vicing to the
benefiting lands.
RECOMMENDATION:
That with respect to the subdivision of lands involved in subdivision SD 013/01 located at 124
Avenue and 203 Street, be it resolved:
1.That the cost to provide the excess or extended services are, in whole or in part, excessive
to the municipality and that the cost to provide these services shall be paid by the owners
of the land being subdivided, and
2.That Latecomer Charges be imposed for such excess or extended services on the parcels
and in the amounts as set out in the staff report dated June 18, 2012;and further
3.That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal Excess Capacity Latecomer
Agreement LC 151/12 with the subdivider of the said lands.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
The attached map identifies the lands which are involved in the subdivision and those which
will benefit from the excess or extended services. The cost breakdown for e ach excess or
extended service is shown on attached Schedule A.
In addition, a copy of Excess Capacity Latecomer Agreement LC 151/12 is also attached for
information purposes.1110
b)Strategic Alignment:
Administration of excess or extended services legislation complies with the Smart Managed
Growth element of the Corporate Strategic Plan. The administration procedure supports the
requirement for a developer to construct municipal infrastructure in support of land
development and recognizes that the infrastructure may provide benefit to other land.
c)Policy Implications:
Part 26, Division 11, of the Local Government Act provides that where a developer pays all
or part of the cost of excess or extended services, the municipality shall determine the
proportion of the cost of the service which constitutes excess or extended service and
determine the proportion of the cost of the service to be attributed to parcels of land which
the municipality considers will benefit from the service. Latecomer Agreement LC 151/12
will provide such determination for Subdivision SD 013/01.
CONCLUSION:
A developer has provided certain services in support of Subdivision SD 013/01.Some of the
services benefit adjacent lands therefore, it is appropriate to impose Latecomer Charges on the
benefitting lands.Latecomer Agreement LC 151/12 summarizes the municipality’s determination
of benefitting lands and cost attribution and also establishes the term over which such Latecomer
Charges will be applied.
Prepared by:Stephen Judd,PEng.
Manager of Infrastructure Development
Reviewed by:David Pollock, PEng.
Municipal Engineer
Approved by:Frank Quinn, MBA, PEng.
GM: Public Works & Development Services
Concurrence:J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
TG/mc
"Original signed by Stephen Judd"
"Original signed by David Pollock"
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
Page 1
Schedule A
TYPE OF EXCESS OR EXTENDED SERVICE
1.EXTENDED NOMINAL SERVICE
SERVICE # BENEFITTING
LOTS
COST OF
BENEFIT
COST PER
LOT
BENEFIT
ATTRIBUTED
BY PROPERTY
EXCLUDING
SUBDIVISION
Sanitary Sewer 5 $48,600.00 $9,720.00 Lot 80 Plan 40628
124 Avenue RN 21161-0203-0
3x $9,720.00
A total of all of the aforementioned services for each property is as follows:
Lot 80 DL263 GP 1 NWD Plan 40628 $29,160.00
Page 1 of 3
EXCESS CAPACITY LATECOMER AGREEMENT
LC 151/12 -SD 013/01
THIS AGREEMENT made the day of ,2012:
BETWEEN:Simon J. Rogers &Jennifer M. Rogers
306 Mariner Way
Coquitlam, BC V3K 1N6
(Hereinafter called the “Subdivider”)
OF THE FIRST PART
AND:
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE,a Municipal Corporation under
the “Local Government Act”, having its offices at 11995 Haney Place, in the
Municipality of Maple Ridge,in the Province of British Columbia
(Hereinafter called the “Municipality”)
OF THE SECOND PART
WHEREAS:
A.The Subdivider has subdivided certain lands and premises located within the
Municipality of Maple Ridge, in the Province of British Columbia, and more
particularly known and described as:
Lot 79 DL 263 GP1 NWD Plan 40628
(Hereinafter called the “said lands”)
B.In order to facilitate the approval of the subdivision of the said lands, the Subdivider
has constructed and installed the sanitary sewer shown on the design prepared by
D.K. Bowins and Associates Inc.,titled:Sanitary Sewer 124 Avenue, 203 Street to
50m West, Revision 1,(Sheets 1 of 1),dated February 14, 2006.Municipal Project
No.E08-015-940.
(Hereinafter called the “Extended Services”);
C.The extended services have been provided with a capacity to service the said lands
and other than the said lands;
D.The Municipality considers its cost to provide the Extended Services to be excessive;
E.The Subdivider has provided the Extended Services in the Amount of $48,600.00.
Page 2 of 3
F.The Municipality has determined that:
Lot 80 DL263 Group 1 NWD Plan 40628
RN 21161-0203-0
(the “Benefitting Lands”) will benefit from the Extended Services;
G.The Municipality has imposed as a condition of the owner of the Benefitting Lands
connecting to or using the Extended Services, a charge (the “Latecomer Charge”) on
the Benefitting Lands in the following amounts:
Lot 80 DL263 Group 1 NWD Plan 40628
RN 21161-0203-0
$9,720.00 per lot to a maximum of $29,160.00 for use of the sanitary sewer on
124 Avenue,
plus interest calculated annually from the date of completion of the Extended
Services as certified by the General Manager –Public Works and Development
Services of the Municipality (the “Completion Date”) to the date of connection by the
Benefitting Lands to the Extended Services;
H.The Latecomer Charge when paid by the owner of the Benefitting Lands and
collected by the Municipality shall pursuant to Section 939 (7) of the Municipal Act
R.S.B.C. 1996, c.323 be paid to the Subdivider as provided for in this Agreement.
NOW THEREFORE AS AUTHORIZED BY Section 939 (9) of the Local Government Act R.S.B.C.
1996, c. 323, The parties hereto agree as follows:
1.The Latecomer Charge, if paid by the owner of the Benefitting Lands and collected by
the Municipality within fifteen (15) years of the Completion Date shall be paid to the
Subdivider and in such case payment will be made within 30 days of June 30th and
December 31st of the year in which the Latecomer Charge is collected by the
Municipality.
2.This Agreement shall expire and shall be of no further force and effect for any
purpose on the earlier of the payment of the Latecomer Charge by the Municipality to
the Subdivider, or fifteen (15) years from the Completion Date, and thereafter the
Municipality shall be forever fully released and wholly discharged from any and all
liability and obligations herein, or howsoever arising pertaining to the Latecomer
Charge, and whether arising before or after the expiry of this Agreement.
3.The Subdivider represents and warrants to the Municipality that the Subdivider has
not received, claimed, demanded or collected money or any other consideration from
the owner of the Benefitting Lands for the provision, or expectation of the provision
of the Extended Services, other than as contemplated and as provided for herein;
and further represents and warrants that he has not entered into any agreement
with the owner of the Benefitting Lands for consideration in any way related to or
connected directly or indirectly with the provision of the Extended Services. The
Page 3 of 3
representations and warranties of the Subdivider herein shall, notwithstanding
paragraph 2 of this Agreement, survive the expiry of this Agreement.
4.The Subdivider (if more than one corporate body or person) hereby agrees that the
Municipality shall remit the Latecomer Charge to each corporate body or person in
equal shares.
5.If the Subdivider is a sole corporate body or person, the Municipality shall remit the
Latecomer Charge to the said sole corporate body or person, with a copy to the
following (name and address of director of corporate body, accountant, lawyer, etc.):
6.In the event that the Subdivider is not the owner of the said lands, the owner shall
hereby grant, assign, transfer and set over unto the Subdivider, his heirs and
assigns, all rights, title and interest under this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have hereunto affixed their respective Corporate
Seals, attested by the hands of their respective officers duly authorized in that behalf, the
day and year first above written.
SUBDIVIDER
Subdivider -Authorized Signatory
Subdivider -Authorized Signatory
DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
Corporate Officer -Authorized Signatory
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: E02-010-161
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Award of Contract No. ITT-EN12-55
122 Avenue Road and Walkability Improvements (216 Street to 222 Street)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The 122 Avenue Road Improvements Project from 216 Street to 222 Street is in the District’s
approved Capital Program. The project objectives are to improve multi-modal transportation for the
corridor by providing improvements to pedestrian and cycling facility, and provide traffic calming
measures with curb extensions and traffic circles. Currently, pedestrians are walking along the
existing gravel shoulder and there are many students using the roadway to get to the Secondary
School on 122 Avenue. The project scope consists of concrete curb and gutter and asphalt multi-use
path on both sides of the roadway, catch basins and lawn basins, three traffic buttons (small traffic
circles), curb extensions, and new pavement markings. Pavement rehabilitation that was scheduled
in 2010 is now included in the 2012 proposed roadworks. Overall the project aims at improving
walkability, traffic safety and cycling mobility.
Additional funds for the project were included in the 2012 adopted Financial Plan. Tenders for
construction closed on June 4, 2012 with eight (8) bids received. The lowest compliant bid of
$1,229,570.00 excluding taxes was submitted by Imperial Paving Limited. The consultant, Aplin &
Martin Consultants Ltd. has analyzed the tenders and recommend that the contract be awarded to
Imperial Paving Limited.
The project is within budget and construction is anticipated to commence in July 2012 and
anticipated to be completed in approximately 12 weeks.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT Contract ITT-EN12-55, 122 Avenue Road Improvements (216 Street to 222 Street), be
awarded to Imperial Paving Limited in the amount of $1,229,570.00 plus applicable taxes; and
THAT the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the contract.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
Mountainview Crescent (122 Avenue) east of 216 Street is a collector road and bike route
that is currently approximately 8.5m wide with 2 paved travel lanes. The existing road is
wider in front of the Maple Ridge Secondary School to allow for parking on both sides and
there is existing concrete curb and sidewalks in the vicinity of the school. Beyond the school,
pedestrians currently walk along the gravel shoulders on 122 Avenue.
1111
The 122 Avenue Road Improvements project identified a need to improve the facilities on
this route for pedestrians and cycling so as to promote the use of other modes of
transportation. There have also been comments about speeding on this roadway resulting in
the proposed traffic calming.
The project scope involves construction of concrete curb and gutter and a 2.0m wide asphalt
multi-use path on both sides of 122 Avenue from 216 Street to 222 Street for a total length
of approximately 1.2 kilometers. To improve safety, three traffic buttons (similar to traffic
circles) and curb extensions will be constructed, new cross walks will be painted, and new
traffic control signs will be placed. There will be storm sewer work consisting of catch basins
and lawn basins connecting to the existing storm sewer in the roadway. A new section of
storm sewer east of 221 Street is also required.
The existing road is showing signs of pavement distress including alligator and edge cracks.
Based on the geotechnical engineer’s recommendation, the existing road will be
rehabilitated by grinding out the existing asphalt pavement and repaving with new pavement
structure. This will allow the road base and sub base to remain in place preventing a total
road failure. To allow for settlement of the storm sewer cross trenches, the top lift of asphalt
pavement will be deferred until 2013 during the overlay program. The completed works with
new curb and gutter from 216 Street to 222 Street will permit parking only at designated
areas by the school and east of York Street on the south side.
In the summer of 2011, Aplin & Martin Consultants Ltd. completed the design of the 122
Avenue Road Improvements Project and prepared a construction cost estimate. The
estimated cost exceeded the project budget and therefore did not proceed to the tender
stage. Additional funding for the project was budgeted and approved by Council in the 2012
Capital Budget. The tender drawings and documents were updated and the project was
tendered on May 10, 2012.
Tender results
Tenders closed on June 4, 2012 with eight tenders received as listed below from lowest to
highest price.
Tender Price (excluding taxes)
Imperial Paving Limited $1,229,570.00
Wilco Civil Inc. $1,284,800.00
Columbia Bitulithic (Lafarge Canada Inc.) $1,350,260.00
TAG Construction Ltd. $1,420,125.00
Marv's Excavating Ltd. $1,465,319.00
Winvan Paving Ltd. $1,565,070.00
B & B Contracting Ltd. $1,635,600.00
Jack Cewe Ltd. $1,645,994.00
Aplin & Martin Consultants Ltd. has analyzed all tenders and recommend that Imperial
Paving Limited be awarded the contract. District staff has also reviewed the tenders and
concur with the recommendation.
b) Desired Outcome:
The desired outcome of this report is to obtain Council’s approval to award the contract and
construct during the summer school break to minimize the impact to the public.
c) Strategic Alignment:
The 122 Avenue Road Improvements Project supports the following key strategies identified
in the District’s Strategic Plan:
Maintain and enhance a multi-modal transportation system within Maple Ridge to
provide citizens with safe, efficient alternatives for the movement of individuals and
goods
Promote alternative modes (pedestrian, bike, public transit) of travel to reduce
reliance on the automobile
d) Citizens/Customer Implications:
There have been three Open Houses hosted for this project. The last Open House was held
on May 3, 2012 to present the detailed design drawings and anticipated construction
schedule. The comments from the Open Houses were generally positive. Most of the
comments were property specific such as impact to driveway access and hedges. Some
residents also commented on the traffic and parking challenges during school drop-off times.
District staff will monitor this issue after completion of the proposed improvements to
determine its effectiveness.
The estimated construction duration is approximately 12 weeks, starting in July 2012. It is
anticipated that traffic through the work zone will be reduced to single lane alternating.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
Engineering staff have reviewed the traffic circle design with the Fire Department and
addressed their concerns for fire truck turning movements.
The Operations Department has provided input during the design stage. A District staff
inspector will provide inspection services during construction.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
The 122 Avenue Road Improvements Project is funded under LTC 8305 and 8546, with a
total budget of $1,575,000 including $155,600 from grants. The projected expenditures are
within budget.
2011 Construction Cost at 216 Street Intersection
Current miscellaneous expenditures
Consultant fees up to construction
2012 Construction Cost (low bid)
Taxes on construction
Contract Administration and Inspection
Contingency (5%)
Total Projected Project Cost
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
72,398
2,797
104,807
1,229,570
21,518
80,290
61,480
1,572,860
CONCLUSIONS:
The tender price of $1,229,570.00 excluding taxes, by Imperial Paving Limited for the 122 Avenue
Road Improvement Project from Laity Street to 216 Street is the lowest tendered price. Council
approval to award the work to Imperial Paving Limited is recommended.
“Original signed by Richard Wong”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Richard Wong, PEng.
Manager of Design & Construction
“Original signed by Trevor Thompson”
_______________________________________________
Financial review by: Trevor Thompson, CGA
Manager of Financial Planning
“Original signed by David Pollock”
_______________________________________________
Reviewed by: David Pollock, PEng.
Municipal Engineer
“Original signed by Frank Quinn”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, PEng.
General Manager: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: Lava Room Dining and Lounge - Liquor License Application – Entertainment
Endorsement
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Liquor Control and Licensing Branch (LCLB) has received an application from the Lava Room
Dining and Lounge at 101-22590 Dewdney Trunk Road, for an entertainment endorsement that will
run in conjunction with their existing food primary liquor license. The purpose of the application for
patron participation entertainment endorsement is to provide entertainment service to their
customers on an occasional basis. There is no plans to provide ongoing entertainment but rather to
only have the ability to provide entertainment such as karaoke or some other small forms of
entertainment for their dining guests from time to time throughout the year. One of the
considerations utilized by the LCLB in reviewing an application such as this is a resolution from the
local government. Council has three choices. Municipalities can provide a resolution to LCLB based
upon a number of regulatory criteria addressed in a Council resolution as well as comments
pertaining to the views expressed by area residents. Council has three choices. Council may choose
to support the application, not support the application or indicate that they have no comment.
Staff have reviewed the area surrounding the subject site and found that the business is surrounded
by other commercial businesses that either close at 6:00 p.m. or are similar type establishments to
themselves that are also open later on weekends. There does not appear to be any residential areas
that would be negatively affected by this minor change to the Liquor Licence for the Lava Room
Dining and Lounge. Therefore it does not appear to be any necessity to go the expense of seeking
the public input on this particular application. Instead, this appears to be an example of a situation
where Council should use their authority to opt out of commenting on an application. The LCLB
advises this will not have a negative impact on the application itself.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
That Council opt out of commenting on the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch Application for
Patron Participation Entertainment at the Lava Room Dining and Lounge at 101 – 22590 Dewdney
Trunk Road, Maple Ridge.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
The original application was submitted in November of 2010 however it was missing some
integral information from the application for the LCLB and the District to proceed and was
returned to the applicant for further information submission.
1112
In the past when liquor licence applications have been received staff has established a
procedure for sending out information on the application to the general public in the vicinity
of the applicant’s location by predefining a specific area and sending out specific name and
addressed letters to residents within that area to determine if there are any problems or
concerns regarding the application. The parking and access to the site are also checked.
Advertisements are placed in the local newspapers to ensure anyone who may have an
interest in the application is notified. A specific time frame is given for response. Once all
the information is received a report is submitted to Council with a recommendation that is
then referred to the LCLB.
b) Citizen/Customer Implications:
The subject business has been in operation in the same location since 2007 and there has
been no complaints filed against the business operation. The application before Council is a
minor change to their current business practice.
c) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
Should Council decide to not comment on this minor amendment there will be a financial
impact to the municipality The estimated costs to obtain public comment on the subject
application is in the area of $1,000.00 that includes the cost of materials, postage,
newspaper costs and staff resources. These are all required for the public input requirement
for LCLB.
d) Alternatives:
To not approve this recommendation and to request the LCLB provide additional time to the
District to seek public input.
CONCLUSIONS:
Since this is a minor alteration to the existing business operation it is recommended that Council
approve the recommendation to opt out of providing comments to the LCLB and allow this
application to proceed through the remaining of the Liquor Board processing. The expenditure of
municipal funds to seek public input on this minor change does not appear to be of value to the
District at this time.
“Original signed by E.S. (Liz) Holitzki”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: E. S. (Liz) Holitzki
Director: Licences, Permits and Bylaws
“Original signed by Frank Quinn”
__________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
General Manager, Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed J.L. (Jim) Rule”
__________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
Page 1 of 2
District of Maple Ridge
TO:His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin DATE:June 18, 2012
And Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM:Chief Administrative Officer ATTN:Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT:2011 Annual Report and 2011 Statement of Financial Information
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The 2011 Annual Report has been prepared in accordance with Section 98 of the Community Charter
and Municipal Council is required to formally receive this report before June 30. A major component of
the report is the 2011 Audited Consolidated Financial Statements. These statements were presented to
Council at the April 16 Committee of the Whole Meeting and Council passed a resolution formally
accepting the statements at the April 24 Council meeting.The 2011 Annual Report will be submitted to
the Government Finance Officers Association for consideration for the Canadian Award for Financial
Reporting, an award the District has received for the past twenty one years.
Under the Financial Information Act, the District is required to file a Statement of Financial Information
with the Province of British Columbia prior to June 30 each year. This report must approved by Council
and the Corporate Finance Officer.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the 2011 Annual Report be received as required by the Community Charter.
That the Statement of Financial Information be approved as required by the Financial Information Act.
DISCUSSION:
The 2011 Annual Report has been prepared in accordance with Section 98 of the Community Charter. As
required in the Charter, the report contains our Audited Consolidated Financial Statements; a Progress
Report detailing municipal objectives and progress toward their achievement; a Development C ost
Charges report showing collections and expenditures for each component; information about the services
provided by Municipal Departments; and lists the Permissive Tax Exemptions awarded for the 2011 fiscal
year. The report was made available for public inspection on June 4 and notice posted in the local
newspaper as required by Section 94 of the Charter indicating that the report is being presented at the
Council meeting of June 26.
The District of Maple Ridge has been a recipient of the Canadian Award for Financial Reporting for the
past twenty one years. This award is presented by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA)
to recognize Municipalities that publish high quality financial reports that are easily readable, efficiently
organized and clearly community the government’s financial picture. The 2011 Annual Report will be
submitted to the GFOA for consideration for this year’s award.
In addition to the Annual Report required by the Community Charter, the District of Maple Ridge is
required to publish an annual Statement of Financial Information (SOFI) under the Financial Information
Act. This report must be approved by Council and the Corporate Finance Officer, and filed with the
Province of British Columbia prior to June 30, 2012.
1131
Page 2 of 2
The SOFI is attached for your review and approval. The package consists of:
A completed checklist
A statement of assets and liabilities
An operational statement
A schedule of debt
A schedule of guarantee and indemnity agreements
A schedule of remuneration and expenses
A schedule of disbursements to supplies of goods or services
A statement of cash flow
A statement of change in net financial assets
Notes to the financial statements
A statement of change in equity in capital assets
A statement of severance agreements
A statement of approval of the financial information submitted
A management report
Citizen/Customer Implications:
The Annual Report and the SOFI provide additional information to the residents of Maple Ridge and the
general public, contributing to Council’s commitment to transparency.
CONCLUSIONS:
Prior to June 30 of each year council is required to receive the District’s Annual Report in accordance with
Section 98 of the Community Charter and to approve the Statement of Financial Information in
accordance with the Financial Information Act. It should ben noted that a detailed presentation on our
2011 Audited Consolidated Financial Statements was provided at the April 16 Committee of the Whole
meeting and Council passed a resolution formally accepting the statements at the April 24 Council
meeting.
The Statement of Financial Information is attached and the Annual Report is available for viewing on the
District of Maple Ridge website.
_______________________________________________
Prepared by:Catherine Nolan, CGA
Manager of Accounting
_______________________________________________
Approved by:Paul Gill, CGA
GM: Corporate and Financial Services
_______________________________________________
Concurrence:J.L. (Jim)Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
"Original signed by Paul Gill"
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
"Original signed by Catherine Nolan"
DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
2011
STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Financial Information Act
Financial Information Regulation (FIR), Schedule 1
Statement of Financial Information (SOFI)
Index to FIR Schedule 1 and the Checklist
Page 1: Corporation Information
Ministry Information
General: Section One 1(1)(a) Statement of assets and liabilities
1(1)(b) Operational statement
1(1)(c) Schedule of debts
1(1)(d) Schedule of guarantee and indemnity agreements
1(1)(e) Schedule of employee remuneration and expenses
1(1)(f) Schedule of suppliers of goods and services
1(2) [Explanatory information for reference]
1(3) Statements prepared on a consolidated basis or for each fund
1(4) & (5) Notes to the statements and schedules in section 1(1)
Page 2: Statement of Assets & Liabilities: Section Two 2 Balance sheet
Changes in equity and surplus or deficit
Operational Statement: Section Three 3(1) Statement of Income / Statement of Revenue and Expenditures
Statement of Changes in Financial Position
3(2) & (3) Omission of Statement of Changes in Financial Position, with explanation
3(4) Requirement for community colleges, school districts and municipalities
Statement of Debts: Section Four 4(1)(a) & 4(2) List and detail the schedule of long-term debts
4(1)(b) Identify debts covered by sinking funds / reserves
4(3) & (4) Omission of schedule, with explanation
Page 3: Schedule of Guarantee and Indemnity Agreements: Section Five 5(1) List agreements under the Guarantees and Indemnities Regulation
5(2) State the entities and amounts involved
5(3) & (4) Omission of schedule, with explanation
Page 3 & 4: Schedule of Remuneration and Expenses: Section Six 6(1) [Definitions for reference]
6(2)(a) List remuneration / expenses for each elected official, member of board, Cabinet appointees
6(2)(b) List each employee with remuneration exceeding $75,000, plus expenses
6(2)(c) Consolidated total for all employees with remuneration of $75,000 or less
6(2)(d) Reconcile difference in total remuneration above with operational statement
6(3) Exclude personal information other than as required
Index 1
Index 2
Page 3 & 4: Schedule of Remuneration and Expenses: Section Six (continued) 6(4) & (5) [Explanatory information for reference]
6(6) Report employer portion of EI and CPP as a supplier payment
6(7)(a) & (b) Statement of severance agreements
6(8) Explain an omission of statement of severance agreements
6(9) [Statement of severance agreements to minister – not required unless requested]
Page 4: Schedule of Suppliers of Goods or Services: Section Seven 7(1)(a) List suppliers receiving payments exceeding $25,000
7(1)(b) Consolidated total of all payments of $25,000 or less
7(1)(c) Reconcile difference in total above with operational statement
7(2)(a) [Explanatory information for reference]
7(2)(b) Statement of payments of grants or contributions
7(2)(c) [Explanatory information for reference]
Page 5: Inactive Corporations: Section Eight 8(1) Ministry to report for inactive corporations
8(2)(a) Contents of report – statements and schedules under section 1(1) to extent possible
8(2)(b) Contents of report – operational status of corporation
Approval of Financial Information: Section Nine 9(1) Approval of SOFI for corporations (other than municipalities)
9(2) Approval of SOFI for municipalities
9(3) Management report
9(4) Management report must explain roles and responsibilities
9(5) Signature approval is for all contents of the SOFI
Access to the Financial Information: Section Ten 10(1) to (3) [Explanatory information for reference]
"This organization has no guarantees or indemnities under the Guarantees
and Indemnities Regulation."
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Financial Information Act
Schedule of Guarantee and Indemnity Agreements
for 2011
Prepared pursuant to the Financial Information Regulation, Schedule 1, Section 1 (1) (d)
1 Elected Officials
Name Position Remuneration Benefits Expenses
Ashlie, Cheryl Councillor 42,976.21$1,653.24 2,001.55
Bell, Corisa Councillor 2,290.97$121.00 35.61
Daykin, Ernest Mayor 99,615.56$1,808.52 1,918.16
Dueck, Judy Councillor 42,869.76$1,509.24 696.31
Hogarth, Al Councillor 42,834.10$1,509.24 1,662.99
King, Linda Councillor 40,188.36$100.68 4,640.21
Masse, Robert Councillor 2,290.97$109.00 35.61
Morden, Michael Councillor 43,189.28$1,509.24 2,182.98
Speirs, Craig Councillor 40,543.28$201.24 6,283.55
Totals 356,798.49 8,521.40 19,456.97
2 Other Employees (excluding those listed in Part 1 above)
Name Position Remuneration Expenses
Acharya, Rasika Planner II $86,811.62 $839.80
Armour, Douglas M.Firefighter, Acting Lieutenant $104,902.42 $300.00
Armstrong, Fred Manager Corporate Communications $104,975.83 $969.89
Balatti, Christa Recreation Manager, Health & Wellness $99,511.73 $559.05
Barrett, Kevin G.Firefighter $94,303.12 $2,654.45
Bastaja, John Chief Information Officer $132,800.19 $176.44
Bayley, Christopher C.Fire Captain $114,216.27 $245.00
Benson, Laura Manager of Sustainability & Corp Planning $107,713.63 $1,456.54
Bevilacqua, Jim Fire Captain $120,469.87 $273.00
Blue, Sandra Manager Strategic Economic Initiatives $106,968.44 $8,974.04
Boag, David Director, Parks & Facilities $141,541.55 $756.63
Bonifazi, Marco Firefighter $79,489.87 $0.00
Bruce, Robert Firefighter $87,153.82 $16.28
Bryszewski, Sebastian Firefighter $79,860.12 $130.18
Burrell, Lorne Trades Foreman $79,090.47 $80.00
Butler, Mary Firefighter $83,126.14 $281.01
Carmichael, Russ Director, Engineering Operations $142,676.76 $4,782.36
Carter, Christine Manager of Community Planning $122,939.88 $504.32
Christensen, Robert Fire Captain $101,653.06 $0.00
Cooke, David GIS Coordinator $101,774.96 $2,529.11
Cote-Rolvink, Stephen J.Manager of Inspection Services $107,043.64 $3,052.45
Cotroneo, Tony Recreation Manager, Youth & Neighbourhood Serv $87,528.76 $112.65
Cotter, Steve Firefighter $92,538.58 $150.00
Crabtree, Christina L.Information Services Manager $106,043.65 $31.41
Cramb, Donald B.Senior Recreation Manager, Pitt Meadows Area $116,207.59 $1,519.46
Davis, Craig Firefighter $87,459.69 $0.00
Davis, Jeff Firefighter $85,914.53 $0.00
Denton, Darrell E.Business Retention & Expansion Officer $75,818.19 $4,372.21
Dickson, Janet Senior Analyst Programmer $80,436.40 $3,694.51
Dingwall, William J.Manager of Utility Engineering $121,178.89 $1,852.85
Eng, Michael Traffic & Transportation Technologist $81,423.04 $991.79
for 2011
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Financial Information Act
Schedule Showing the Remuneration and Expenses
Paid to or on Behalf of Each Employee
Prepared under the Financial Information Regulation, Schedule 1, Section 1 (1) (e) and Section 6 (2) (a-d), (3) (b) and Section (6)
for 2011
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Financial Information Act
Schedule Showing the Remuneration and Expenses
Paid to or on Behalf of Each Employee
Ettinger, Glenn Firefighter $88,225.43 $0.00
Exner, Howard Fire Assistant Chief, Training & Operations $133,016.44 $1,508.92
Franklin, Steven Fire Captain $104,797.77 $0.00
Gaudette, Christopher Firefighter $83,705.96 $0.00
Gill, Paul GM, Corporate & Financial Services $193,554.16 $5,980.76
Gjaltema, Michael Tradesperson II, Electrician $81,107.65 $61.71
Glasgow, Ian Firefighter $82,122.77 $225.00
Goddard, Charles Manager of Development & Environmental Services $127,358.95 $127.35
Gormley, Kathleen Manager of Business Systems $105,854.96 $2,955.76
Grootendorst, Peter Fire Chief, Director Fire Oper. & Staff Development $148,166.54 $9,039.28
Guerra, Maria Senior Project Engineer $99,563.63 $536.53
Guy, Ronald Engineering Works Inspector $77,402.40 $205.53
Hall, Diana Planner II $86,703.48 $1,507.92
Hansen, Damon Firefighter $84,247.67 $80.00
Harcus, David Fire Captain $107,228.85 $0.00
Hardy, Wayne Superintendent Roads & Equipment $107,390.09 $2,456.92
Harrison, Caroline Network Analyst $75,585.00 $7,435.40
Harwood, Kevin Fire Captain $114,825.23 $0.00
Hayes, Stephen Foreman II $80,103.83 $719.63
Holitzki, Elizabeth Director Licences, Permits & Bylaws $143,307.23 $3,980.85
Hopper, Clinton Firefighter $87,700.01 $0.00
Jonat, Cameron Firefighter $94,624.93 $90.00
Jones, Maureen Senior Manager of Police Services, Finance & Admin $99,801.93 $0.00
Jorde, Shelley Recreation Manager Community Connections $110,104.44 $197.68
Judd, Stephen Manager of Infrastructure Development $103,808.85 $654.17
Juoksu, Paul Building Inspector I $82,520.63 $1,306.77
Juurakko, Timo Fire Asst Chief, Community & Support Services $129,161.55 $3,446.99
Lamont, Kathy I.Personnel Officer $98,356.39 $83.48
Leeburn, John Executive Director to CAO $163,731.31 $1,074.52
Liu, Wilson Geomatics Supervisor $80,647.20 $881.48
Macdonald, Robert Firefighter $94,200.37 $1,977.36
Marlo, Ceri Manager of Legislative Services & Emerg. Program $129,594.86 $2,424.68
McCormick, Wendy Director of Recreation $122,775.60 $1,408.13
McKee, Christopher J.Firefighter, Acting Lieutenant $94,665.47 $0.00
McLeod, Bruce Manager, Parks Planning & Development $109,460.70 $4,008.67
Merenick, Diane Bylaw Services Supervisor $87,313.49 $1,702.65
Mikes, Daniela Manager of Procurement $86,480.32 $11,117.26
Millward, Michael Facilities Operations Manager $110,100.63 $1,543.23
Minaker, Glen Parks Superintendent $92,212.40 $4,272.57
Mitchell, Ed Superintendent Waterworks $112,383.19 $3,105.14
Moore, Kelly Fire Lieutenant $112,235.00 $563.31
Murray, Mike GM, Community Development & Recr.Services $138,212.09 $0.00
Narayan, Sureshwar Senior Analyst Programmer $87,879.37 $3,356.61
Negoita, Victor Electro/Mechanical Manager $107,043.67 $4,040.67
Nolan, Catherine Manager of Accounting $111,119.63 $2,179.27
Oleschak, Walter Foreman II $77,499.99 $0.00
Patel, Brian Recreation Coordinator $86,055.39 $486.22
Perkin, Kevin G.Fire Lieutenant $99,331.76 $27.15
Pickering, Jane Director of Planning $144,975.80 $3,321.03
Porter, Gary K.Fire Lieutenant $105,784.93 $245.00
Quinn, Frank GM, Public Works & Development Services $200,374.87 $1,141.27
Ramsay, Robert Fire Training Officer $112,239.14 $2,839.84
Riach, Ron Property & Risk Manager $103,711.07 $34.00
Prepared under the Financial Information Regulation, Schedule 1, Section 1 (1) (e) and Section 6 (2) (a-d), (3) (b) and Section (6)
for 2011
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Financial Information Act
Schedule Showing the Remuneration and Expenses
Paid to or on Behalf of Each Employee
Richmond, Calvin Foreman III $81,133.07 $1,591.87
Rule, James Chief Administrative Officer $246,488.83 $10,125.29
Rutledge, Silvia Manager of Revenue & Collections $107,705.65 $1,434.81
Schurer, Oliver Business Systems Analyst $83,767.80 $0.00
Serediuk, Sean Network Support Specialist $85,805.98 $189.52
Serne, Bernie Superintendent Sewer works $110,757.39 $2,141.31
Seward, Adam R.Firefighter, Acting Lieutenant $97,983.78 $0.00
Sinclair, James G.Fire Captain $109,729.48 $28.00
Smitton, Mark Fire Asst Chief, Fire Prevention & Communications $122,737.09 $2,605.27
Snow, Roy C.Firefighter, Acting Lieutenant $97,912.09 $476.18
Spence, Dane Fire Chief, Director Community Fire Safety Services $150,298.10 $10,155.90
Stewart, Michael Fire Captain $120,239.38 $0.00
Stott, Rodney C.Environmental Planner $86,030.78 $2,642.39
Swift, Kelly GM, Community Development, Parks & Recreation $154,999.86 $4,513.62
Teboekhorst, Dennis Fire Lieutenant $120,786.92 $0.00
Thompson, Trevor Manager of Financial Planning $117,202.55 $3,518.37
Todd, Thomas Foreman III $84,555.97 $131.57
Traviss, Stephen Senior Human Resources Officer $107,218.33 $2,120.09
Van Dop, Michael J.Firefighter, Acting Asst Fire Chief, Planning & Prev.$85,480.66 $329.00
Van Tunen, Randolph Foreman III $77,065.64 $27.17
Vandenbor, Paul J.Engineering Works Inspector $77,122.37 $0.00
Varcoe, Thomas Foreman II $86,523.49 $0.00
Veasey, Daryl Meter Maintenance Worker $76,984.16 $86.93
Vinje, Brock Firefighter $86,981.57 $0.00
Wetherill, Michelle Manager, Payroll & Employee Relations $104,223.61 $26.79
Wheeler, Susan Director of Community Services $122,320.39 $345.88
Wilson, Davin Engineering Technologist I $75,090.46 $2,471.88
Wing, Graham Firefighter $82,159.88 $100.00
Wong, Richard Manager of Design & Projects $121,553.43 $2,943.81
Wood, Andrew Municipal Engineer $161,106.59 $4,810.19
Zosiak, Lisa A.Planner II $86,873.53 $9,255.78
Subtotal $12,162,786.56 $197,727.74
Consolidated Total of 17,862,545.07 104,800.27
Employees with remuneration
less than $75,000
Total All Employees 30,025,331.63 302,528.01
3 Reconciliation
Total remuneration
Elected Officials 356,798.49
Other Employees 30,025,331.63
Subtotal 30,382,130.12
Other reconciling Items
Prepared under the Financial Information Regulation, Schedule 1, Section 1 (1) (e) and Section 6 (2) (a-d), (3) (b) and Section (6)
for 2011
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Financial Information Act
Schedule Showing the Remuneration and Expenses
Paid to or on Behalf of Each Employee
Employer portion of:
CPP 922,114.12
EI 436,181.42
Accruals 230,067.17
WCB 390,116.62
Pension 2,360,765.00
Other employer costs 1,212,788.55
(Medical, Dental, etc)
Wages & Salaries per pg 17, Financial Statements 35,934,163.00
Prepared under the Financial Information Regulation, Schedule 1, Section 1 (1) (e) and Section 6 (2) (a-d), (3) (b) and Section (6)
1 Alphabetical list of suppliers who received aggregate payments exceeding $25,000
Supplier Name Aggregate amount paid to supplier
775983 BC Ltd 80,511
A & A Testing Ltd 26,272
A & G Supply Ltd 56,556
A & H Drilling Ltd 26,447
A T & H Industries Inc 225,001
Accent Glass & Locksmith 56,641
ACM Environmental Corporation 71,795
Active Network Ltd 36,023
Adopt A Block Society 25,000
Advanced Drive Systems Inc 28,734
Aecom Canada Ltd 142,031
Alliance Painting & Decorating 26,012
Allstar Show Industries Inc 75,904
Allstream 37,962
Amec Earth & Environmental Ltd 36,245
Andrew Sheret Ltd 68,387
Aplin & Martin Consultants Ltd 96,882
Arbor Pro Tree Services Ltd 79,335
Atomic Crayon 30,707
AW Fire Guard & Supplies Ltd 33,361
Basic Business Systems (1995)42,701
BC Hydro 1,309,451
BC SPCA 955,261
BDO Canada LLP 82,933
BFI Canada Vancouver 120,330
Billesberger, Valerie 66,837
Black Press Group Ltd 42,206
Bob's A-Z Rentals Ltd 32,693
Boileau Electric & Pole Ltd 454,172
Brandt Tractor Ltd 221,962
Bray, Ronald & Kristina & Ingram, Guy 364,000
Business In Vancouver Media Group 31,371
Bynett Construction Services 207,772
Canada Pipe Company Ltd 33,110
Canadian Lawn Care Services 686,752
Canadian Pacific Railway 98,255
Carter Pontiac Buick Ltd 25,836
CDW Canada Inc 31,373
Centimark Corporation 64,533
Chevron Canada Ltd 825,762
City Of Coquitlam 46,994
City Of Pitt Meadows 289,999
Co Van International Trucks 320,888
Coast Water Systems Inc 41,584
Columbia Bitulithic Ltd 390,464
Commercial Aquatic Supplies 34,635
Commercial Solutions Inc 37,794
Co-Pilot Industries 121,921
Corix Water Products 48,601
Creative Transportation 27,806
Cross, Connie 50,540
Crown Contracting Limited 54,348
CSDC Systems Inc 67,034
Cubex Limited 189,064
Dams Ford Lincoln Sales Ltd 51,420
David Butcher Law Corporation 40,988
Deccan International 29,414
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Financial Information Act
Schedule Showing Payments Made for the Provision
of Goods or Services for 2011
Prepared under the Financial Information Regulation, Schedule 1, Section 1 (1) (f) and Section 7 (1) (a-c) and (2) (b)1/5
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Financial Information Act
Schedule Showing Payments Made for the Provision
of Goods or Services for 2011
Delcan Corporation 47,693
Dell Canada Inc 53,153
Directional Mining & Drilling 331,996
Dixon Networks Corporation 43,800
Double M Excavating Ltd 10,479,229
Douglas Lake Equipment 69,818
DSD Document Systems Direct Ltd 61,063
Durante Kreuk Ltd 56,026
Eagle Bridge Inc 118,579
EBA Engineering Consultants 33,067
Emerald Green Building Service 32,610
Emergency Communications SW BC 965,684
Empire Signworks Inc 50,168
ESRI Canada Limited 68,375
Farm Tek Turf Services Inc 49,656
FDM Software Ltd 59,091
Finning International Inc 32,544
Fitness Edge 209,633
Fitness Fixations 44,474
Fortis BC Energy Inc 39,037
FortisBC - Natural Gas 177,885
Fraser Valley Regional Library 2,488,982
Fred Surridge Ltd 87,428
Gibson Waterworks Supply Inc 78,094
Golden Ears Ortho & Sports 31,433
Golder & Associates 113,252
Greater Vancouver Sewerage & Drainage 32,895
Greater Vancouver Water District 6,158,632
Greater Vancouver Regional District 27,149
Green Landscape Experts Ltd 31,451
Guest Excavating Company Ltd 30,912
Guild, Yule & Company LLP 25,327
Guillevin International Inc 185,111
Halcrow Consulting Inc 44,740
Hanks Trucking And Bulldozing 63,659
Happy Heart Fitness & Education 101,418
HB Lanarc 44,272
Heenan Blaikie LLP 52,003
ICBC - Fleet Insurance 161,306
Imperial Paving 2,385,408
Inprotect Systems Inc 73,221
Integrated Direct Response Service 33,259
Interprovincial Traffic Services 126,665
ITT Water & Waste Water 56,662
Jack 4 Trade 46,566
Jacks Automotive & Welding 172,525
Justice Institute Of BC 42,982
Kainth, Gurmel 1,128,177
KBS Developments 31,094
Kerr Wood Leidal Associates 58,803
Lafarge Canada Inc 34,705
Langley Concrete Group 55,643
Landmark Enterprises 727,096
Leko Precast Products 75,824
Letts Environmental Consultant 67,352
Levelton Consultants Ltd 48,828
Lordco Parts Ltd 25,175
M2K Construction Ltd 594,625
Manulife Financial 942,319
Maple Ridge & PM Arts Council 747,307
Prepared under the Financial Information Regulation, Schedule 1, Section 1 (1) (f) and Section 7 (1) (a-c) and (2) (b)2/5
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Financial Information Act
Schedule Showing Payments Made for the Provision
of Goods or Services for 2011
Maple Ridge Historical Society 134,515
McElhanney Consulting Services 73,861
Medical Services Plan 246,443
Metro Motors Ltd 225,019
Microserve 212,655
Microsoft Licensing 117,718
Miles Mobile Tire Service Ltd 43,770
Mills Printing & Stationery 75,730
Min Of Finance Dept Of Transp.26,809
Mintha, Alfay & Sharon 380,439
Mission Contractors Ltd 200,880
MJT Enterprises Ltd 67,715
MMM Group Limited 51,104
Mobilecom Radio Company 26,795
Morrow Bioscience Ltd 31,744
Municipal Insurance Assoc 398,963
Municipal Pension Plan 2,365,417
Myra Systems Corp.30,838
Newlands Lawn & Garden Mainten 107,901
Norpac-Div Of Spartan Controls 28,856
North Of 49 Enterprises Ltd 40,799
North-Arm Machine Ltd 94,715
Northwest Hydraulic Consultant 40,948
Now Solutions 49,924
Oakcreek Golf & Turf Inc 64,411
Ocean Pipe T6045 51,793
Open Storage Solutions 34,706
Oracle Corporation Canada Inc.44,486
Pacific Ace Sports Surfaces 83,849
Pacific Flow Control Ltd 52,177
Panorama LMS 4011 116,320
Paragon Engineering Ltd 38,798
Pattison Sign Group 105,350
Paul Bunyan Tree Services 69,151
Pedre Contractors Ltd 419,331
People First Solutions 61,264
Phoenix Environmental Services 56,802
Pitneyworks Prepaid 33,600
Pitt Meadows Heritage & Museum 75,134
Popular Landscaping & Gardening 25,066
Precise Crossings Ltd 697,165
Prestige Telecom 49,411
Pro Sound & Stage Lighting Ltd 39,109
Professional Mechanical Ltd 200,135
Profire Emergency Equipment 57,887
Progressive Contracting Ltd 509,514
PW Trenchless Construction Inc 262,675
Raincity Janitorial Serv Ltd 342,326
Raybern Erectors Ltd 75,183
RCMP 12,587,566
RCR Technologies Inc 26,249
Receiver General-Payroll Deduction 1,357,302
Reliable Flagging Services Ltd 39,152
Remdal Painting & Restoration 66,373
RF Binnie & Associates Ltd 72,947
RG Arenas (Maple Ridge) Ltd 675,538
RGM Landscaping & Maint. Ltd 34,653
Ridge Meadows Seniors Society 189,895
Ridge Meadows Recycling Society 1,138,912
RJ Construction 120,036
Prepared under the Financial Information Regulation, Schedule 1, Section 1 (1) (f) and Section 7 (1) (a-c) and (2) (b)3/5
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Financial Information Act
Schedule Showing Payments Made for the Provision
of Goods or Services for 2011
Robson Crushing & Demolition 55,547
Rocky Mountain Phoenix 28,175
Rogers 129,261
Rollins Machinery Ltd 29,910
Ross Systems Inc 108,514
Sandpiper Contracting Ltd 310,956
School District#42 39,635
Scottish Line Painting Ltd 132,164
Seal Tec Industries Ltd 30,862
Shades Of Green Landscaping 44,442
Smart-Tek Communications Inc 43,596
Smithrite Portable Services 37,505
Specimen Trees 29,684
Springford, Nicola 53,323
Star Five Classic Country 55,335
Surfwood Supply Coquitlam 51,703
Surrey Fire Service 84,054
T & T Demolition Ltd 234,363
Tag Construction Ltd 189,124
Telus 161,053
Tempest Development Group 121,710
Terasen Gas 66,358
Thistle Plumbing Limited 28,377
Tikal Construction Ltd.109,673
Total Energy Systems Ltd 93,586
Tourism Maple Ridge & Pitt Meadows 42,749
Tundra Plumbing Ltd 113,487
Union of BC Municipalities 28,980
Universal Contracting Ltd.241,775
Valley Landscaping Ltd 106,255
Valley Traffic Systems Inc 174,605
Van Houtte Coffee Services Inc 47,083
Warrington PCI Management 851,254
Wedler Engineering 231,730
West Coast Elevator Services 87,857
Westridge Security Services 79,639
Westview Sales Ltd 71,157
Willis Canada Inc 211,691
Winvan Paving Ltd 109,896
Wireless Technical Services 39,922
Wolf Electric Ltd 49,000
Workers Compensation Board 402,798
Young, Anderson - Barristers 207,764
Zoom Audio Visual Networks Inc 26,593
Total aggregate amount paid to suppliers 69,397,466$
2 Consolidated total paid to suppliers who received aggregate payments of $25,000 or less
4,731,675$
3 Total of payments to suppliers for grants and contributions exceeding $25,000
Consolidated total of grants exceeding $25,000 223,141
Consolidated total of contributions exceeding $25,000 0
Consolidated total of all grants and
contributions exceeding $25,000 223,141$
Prepared under the Financial Information Regulation, Schedule 1, Section 1 (1) (f) and Section 7 (1) (a-c) and (2) (b)4/5
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge
Financial Information Act
Schedule Showing Payments Made for the Provision
of Goods or Services for 2011
4 Reconciliation
Total of aggregate payments exceeding $25,000 paid to suppliers $69,397,466
Consolidated total of payments of $25,000 or less paid to suppliers $4,731,675
Consolidated total of all grants and contributions exceeding $25,000 $223,141
Reconciling items Explanation below
Total per Financial Statements, Expenditures & Expenses, Goods & Services including Capital $71,681,325
Variance $(2,670,956)
Expenditures in the statements are on an accrual basis, whereas amounts paid are on a cash basis. It is
important to note that not all payments are expenditures and that not all expenditures are payments.
It is not practical to reconcile to those sets of data.
Prepared under the Financial Information Regulation, Schedule 1, Section 1 (1) (f) and Section 7 (1) (a-c) and (2) (b)5/5
Consolidated Statement of Change in Net Financial Assets
For the year ended December 31, 2011
Actual Budget
Restated
Actual
2011 2011
(Note 14)
2010
(Note 12)
Annual Surplus $35,483,699 $57,729,252 $32,863,582
Add (Less):
Change in Tangible Capital Assets
Acquisition of tangible capital assets (48,002,409)(111,830,820)(45,820,180)
Amortization 17,267,869 17,369,969 16,779,709
Proceeds from disposal of tangible capital assets 820,825 -478,083
Loss(gain) on disposal of tangible capital assets 632,238 -469,150
(29,281,477)(94,460,851)(28,093,238)
Change in Other Non Financial Assets
Decrease (increase) in supplies inventory (6,389)-(16,872)
Reclassification of undeveloped land bank --239,700
Acquisition of land bank properties (316,123)-(3,684,034)
Decrease (increase) in prepaid expenses (43,647)-(26,592)
(366,159)-(3,487,798)
Increase (decrease) in Net Financial Assets 5,836,063 $(36,731,599)1,282,546
Net Financial Assets beginning of the year 16,503,061 16,503,061 15,220,515
Net Financial Assets end of the year $22,339,124 $(20,228,538)$16,503,061
a). The notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement
b). Contingencies, Commitments and Unrecognized Liabilities (Note 10)
c). Pension Plan (Note 4)
Consolidated Statement of Cash Flow
For the year ended December 31, 2011
Actual
Restated
Actual
2011 2010
(Note 12)
Operating transactions
Annual surplus $35,483,699 $32,863,582
Items not utilizing cash
Amortization 17,267,869 16,779,709
Loss on disposal of tangible capital assets 632,238 469,150
Contributed tangible capital assets (21,582,148)(20,765,925)
Restricted revenues drawn in (3,615,693)(6,653,251)
(7,297,734)(10,170,317)
Change in non-cash operating items
Increase in prepaid expenses (43,647)(26,592)
Decrease (increase) in supplies inventory (6,391)(16,872)
Decrease (increase) in accounts receivable (1,145,435)(3,247,436)
Decrease (increase) in recoverable local improvements 703,568 85,249
Decrease (increase) in other assets (20,136)(11,700)
Decrease (increase) in inventory available for resale 471,471 -
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable and accrued liabilities 920,698 76,410
Increase (decrease) in deferred revenue (3,289,003)(796,741)
Increase (decrease) in refundable performance deposits 3,151,452 (549,472)
Increase (decrease) in employee future benefits 273,400 (57,200)
1,015,977 (4,544,354)
Cash provided by operating transactions 29,201,942 18,148,911
Capital transactions
Proceeds on disposal of tangible capital assets 820,825 478,083
Cash used to acquire tangible capital assets (26,420,261)(24,814,555)
Cash used to acquire land bank properties (316,123)(3,684,034)
Cash applied to capital transactions (25,915,559)(28,020,506)
Investing transactions
Decrease (increase) in portfolio investments (11,954,127)4,810,694
(11,954,127)4,810,694
Financing transactions
Debt repayment (1,878,010)(1,845,809)
Collection of restricted revenues 7,481,816 7,672,543
Cash applied to financing transactions 5,603,806 5,826,734
Increase in cash and temporary investments (3,063,938)765,833
Cash and temporary investments - beginning of year 30,062,599 29,296,766
Cash and temporary investments - end of year $26,998,661 $30,062,599
Supplementary information:
Non-cash transactions:
Transfer from undeveloped landbank properties to tangible capital assets -239,700
Transfer from inventory available for resale to tangible capital assets 471,471 -
a). The notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement
b). Contingencies, Commitments and Unrecognized Liabilities (Note 10)
c). Pension Plan (Note 4)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
For the year ended December 31, 2011
1.Cash and Investments
Cash and Temporary Investments:
Cash and temporary investments as at December 31, 2011 were comprised as follows:
Dec 31, 2011 Dec 31, 2010
Cash $4,929,549 $3,062,549
Temporary Investments 22,069,112 27,000,050
$26,998,661 $30,062,599
Temporary investments are comprised of BC Credit Union term deposits with effective interest rates of 1.6% -
2.00%. Additionally, the District holds temporary investments of $1,652,394 ($1,443,453 for 2010) and
agreements receivable of $258,450 ($159,918 for 2010) for trusts which are not reported elsewhere in the
financial statements. They are held for the following trusts:
Balance
Dec 31, 2010
Interest
Earned Receipts Disbursements
Balance
Dec 31, 2011
Latecomer Fees $59,059 $-$93,390 $87,226 $65,223
Cemetery Perpetual Care 774,062 99,878 50,978 99,878 825,040
Greater Vancouver Sewer & Drainage
District
340,831 -750,018 621,754 469,095
Albion Dyking District 429,419 106 133,187 11,226 551,486
$1,603,371 $99,984 $1,027,573 $820,084 $1,910,844
Portfolio Investments
Portfolio investments include Canadian bank notes and BC Credit Union term deposits with effective interest rates
of 1.90% - 6.43%. A portion of the bank notes held have interest payments linked to the performance of a set of
equities or a financial index without stated or certain interest rates. For these investments, income is recognized
as it is received; in 2011 returns were positive and ranged to 5.44%. Included in interest earnings are gains on
the sale of investments before maturity. In 2011 gains totalled $1,148,044 ($864,050 for 2010). The District
does not hold any asset backed commercial paper or hedge funds.
The carrying value of securities is based on the cost method whereby the cost of the security is adjusted to reflect
investment income that is accruing and any permanent decline in market value. During the term of individual
investments there will be fluctuations in market values. Such fluctuations are considered normal, and if held to
maturity, market value will be equal to face value.
The carrying value of Portfolio Investments at December 31, 2011 was $90,812,593 ($78,858,466 for 2010).
The market value at December 31, 2011 was $90,362,851 ($80,409,332 for 2010), included in this amount is
$nil ($500,000 for 2010) for securities shown at cost for investments for which there is no active market.
2.Accounts Receivable
2011 2010
Property Taxes $6,258,187 $5,749,866
Other Governments 4,770,393 4,211,654
General and Accrued Interest 2,531,650 2,063,871
Development Cost Charges 4,163,340 4,532,167
17,723,570 16,557,558
Less: Allowance for Doubtful Accounts (176,100)(155,523)
$17,547,470 $16,402,035
3.Recoverable Local Improvements
The District provides interim financing for certain geographically localized capital projects. It recovers these
amounts either from benefiting property owners or from provincial subsidies. Interest rates are established at the
outset of the process and are a function of borrowing rates at the time. Repayment is typically made over fifteen
years. As at December 31, 2011 the recoverable balance was comprised as follows:
2011 2010
Recoverable from property owners
Local improvement fund projects $1,637,104 $2,216,485
Recoverable from Province
Sewerage projects -124,187
$1,637,104 $2,340,672
4.Pension Plan
The District and its employees contribute to the Municipal Pension Plan (Plan), a jointly trusteed pension plan. The
board of trustees, representing plan members and employers, is responsible for overseeing the management of
the Plan, including investment of the assets and administration of benefits. The Plan is a multi-employer
contributory pension plan. Basic pension benefits provided are defined. The plan has about 173,000 active
members and approximately 63,000 retired members. Active members include approximately 35,000
contributors from local governments.
The latest valuation as at December 31, 2009 indicated an unfunded liability of $1,024 million for basic pension
benefits. The next valuation will be as at December 31, 2012 with results available in 2013. Defined contribution
plan accounting is applied to the Plan as the Plan exposes the participating entities to actuarial risks associated
with the current and former employees of other entities, with the result that there is no consistent and reliable
basis for allocating the obligation, Plan assets and cost to individual entities participating in the Plan.
The District paid $2,360,765 (2010 -$2,099,231 ) for employer contributions to the Plan in fiscal 2011, while
employees contributed $1,946,622 (2010 - $1,727,051) to the plan in fiscal 2011.
5.Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities
2011 2010
Accounts Payable:
General $5,093,886 $4,861,622
Other Governments 6,741,112 6,050,779
Salaries and Wages 663,536 620,986
12,498,534 11,533,387
Accrued Liabilities:
Vacation Pay 264,805 334,949
Other Vested Benefits 379,133 353,438
643,938 688,387
$13,142,472 $12,221,774
6.Long Term Debt (Schedule 4)
The District obtains debt instruments through the Municipal Finance Authority (MFA), pursuant to security issuing
bylaws under authority of the Community Charter, to finance certain capital expenditures. Debt is reported net of
Sinking Fund balances and interest expense is reported net of Sinking Fund earnings.
The District carries no debt for others.
Debt issued and outstanding as at December 31, 2011 was $38,505,484 ($40,383,494 for 2010). In 2012 the
District will enter into additional debt totalling $5.52M under loan authorization bylaw numbers 6659, 6560, 6562
and 6679. The amounts payable over the next five years reflect the District's commitment for both existing debt
and amounts that will be borrowed in 2012.
The following debenture debt amounts plus related interest are payable over the next five years:
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
$1,814,777 $2,428,959 $2,488,890 $2,550,786 $2,614,712
The District has the following authorized but un-issued long term debt as at December 31, 2011 :
L/A Bylaw L/A Amount Expiry Date
#6558 $6,000,000 July 2013
#6559 1,520,000 July 2013
#6560 900,000 July 2013
#6561 10,671,185 July 2013
#6562 2,675,000 July 2013
#6679 1,800,000 September 2014
#6680 4,680,000 September 2014
$28,246,185
7.Other Assets
Debt Reserve Fund:
The Municipal Finance Authority of British Columbia provides capital financing for regional districts and their
member municipalities. The Authority is required to establish a Debt Reserve Fund. Each regional district, through
its member municipalities who share in the proceeds of a debt issue, is required to pay into the Debt Reserve Fund
certain amounts set out in the debt agreements. The Authority pays into the Debt Reserve Fund these monies from
which interest earned thereon less administrative expenses becomes an obligation to the regional districts. It must
then use this fund, if at any time there are insufficient funds, to meet payments on its obligations. If this occurs,
the regional districts may be called upon to restore the fund.
Upon the maturity of a debt issue the unused portion of the Debt Reserve Fund established for that issue will be
discharged to the District. The District has estimated that there is only a remote possibility that these funds will
not be paid to it and therefore these funds have been included in Other Assets of $610,856 ($590,720 for 2010).
8.Employee Future Benefits
The District provides employee future benefits in the form of severance benefits and vested and non-vested sick
leave to qualifying employees. These benefits are not separately funded.
Severance benefits are cash settlements paid to employees who cease their employment with the District after a
specified period of time. Full time employees hired before February 11, 1999 qualify for five days pay per year of
employment, provided they either work a minimum of 20 years with the District or retire as defined by the Public
Sector Pension Plan Act. Full time employees hired after February 11, 1999 qualify for 20 days pay provided they
work a minimum of 10 years with the District and retire as defined by the Public Sector Pension Plan Act.
The District permits full time employees to accumulate up to 18 days per year of service for future illnesses up to a
maximum of 250 days. For certain qualifying employees a portion of this benefit vests; for the balance, this benefit
does not vest and cannot be converted to any other type of benefit.
An actuarial valuation of these benefits was performed to determine the District's liability and accrued benefit
obligation as at December 31, 2009 and updated for December 31, 2011. The valuation resulted in an
unamortized actuarial loss of $700,900 ($486,900 loss for 2010 ) at December 31, 2011. Actuarial gains or
losses are amortized over the expected average remaining service life of employees. The benefit liability at
December 31, 2011 was $4,684,900 , ($4,411,500 for 2010) comprised as follows:
2011 2010
Benefit Liability - Beginning of the year $4,411,500 $4,468,700
Add:Current service costs 341,900 313,800
Interest on accrued benefit obligation 213,400 224,900
Less:Amortization of actuarial loss (gain)44,500 13,200
Benefits paid during the year (326,400)(609,100)
Benefit Liability - End of the year 4,684,900 4,411,500
Less:Unamortized actuarial loss (gain)700,900 486,900
Accrued benefit obligation - End of the year 5,385,800 4,898,400
Actuarial assumptions used to determine the District's accrued benefit obligation are as follows:
2011 2010
Discount rate (long-term borrowing rate)3.40 %4.25 %
Expected future inflation rate 2.50 %2.50 %
Merit and inflationary wage and salary increases averaging 4.55 %4.55 %
Estimated average remaining service life of employees (years)10.3 10.3
9.Property Tax Levies
In addition to its own tax levies, the District is required to levy taxes on behalf of various other taxing authorities.
These include the provincial government for local school taxes, incorporated dyking districts located within the
District and, organizations providing regional services in which the District has become a member. Total tax levies
for 2011 of $98,359,060 , ($93,932,367 for 2010) were comprised as follows.
2011 2010
Municipal Tax Levies $61,065,872 $57,102,978
Levies for other authorities
School taxes 29,434,404 28,992,968
Greater Vancouver Transit Authority 5,623,557 5,664,892
British Columbia Assessment Authority 897,324 894,907
Greater Vancouver Regional District Parks 904,315 883,862
Dyking Districts 430,826 390,170
Municipal Finance Authority 2,762 2,590
Total Collections for Others 37,293,188 36,829,389
Total Tax Levies $98,359,060 $93,932,367
10.Contingencies, Commitments and Unrecognized Liabilities:
(a)Third Party Claims
Where losses related to litigation are possible and can be reasonably estimated management accrues its
best estimate of loss. For 2011 this estimate is $458,860 ($483,949 for 2010). These amounts are
included in accounts payable and accrued liabilities.
There are various other claims by and against the District, the outcome of which cannot be reasonably be
estimated. Any ultimate settlements will be recorded in the year the settlements occur.
(b)Contractual Obligations
(i)Water
(a)The District has entered into a cost share agreement with the Greater Vancouver Water District for
the construction of infrastructure. Under this agreement the District expects to incur costs of
approximately $6,985,712 over the next 3 years. The liability is recorded as the related costs are
incurred.
(ii)Recreation and Cultural Services
(a)In 1998 the District entered into an agreement to purchase ice sheet time for five years
commencing in 1999, with a five-year renewal option. In August 2008, the District renewed the
agreement for an additional five-year period. The minimum annual payment due for the provision
of ice time is $609,225. These payments are recorded as expenses when the ice time is provided.
(c)Unrecognized Liability
The District holds shares in a non-profit organization that provides protective services to its members. Should
the organization dissolve or management choose to withdraw from the organization the District would be
liable for a proportionate share of any debt the organization held at that time. The liability is expected to be
discharged over time through payments by the District and others for the provision of these services by the
organization. Due to the ongoing operations of the organization the liability could only be quantified if the
District chose to withdraw. Consequently no liability has been recognized in these financial statements.
11.Restricted Revenues
Restricted revenues held by the District as at December 31, 2011 of $41,042,622 , ($37,176,499 for 2010) were
comprised as follows:
Development
Cost Charges
Parkland
Acquisition Charges
Actual Actual Actual Actual
2011 2010 2011 2010
Beginning Balance $32,211,726 $31,644,928 $162,355 $-
Collections and interest 7,020,123 7,174,886 166,482 173,961
Disbursements - operating (610,934)(1,282,185)--
Disbursements - capital (2,959,941)(5,325,903)(33,755)(11,606)
Ending Balance $35,660,974 $32,211,726 $295,082 $162,355
Other
Restricted Revenues
Total
Restricted Revenues
Actual Actual Actual Actual
2011 2010 2011 2010
Beginning Balance $4,802,418 $4,512,279 $37,176,499 $36,157,207
Collections and interest 295,212 323,696 7,481,817 7,672,543
Disbursements - operating (11,064)(33,557)(621,998)(1,315,742)
Disbursements - capital --(2,993,696)(5,337,509)
Ending Balance $5,086,566 $4,802,418 $41,042,622 $37,176,499
12.Prior Period Adjustments
In 2009, the District adopted the provisions of Section 3150 of the PSAB Handbook and recorded the District's
tangible capital assets, net of related amortization, as non-financial assets. During 2011, additional information
became available about the District's inventory of tangible capital assets and the financial statements have been
retroactively adjusted. The change represents less than 0.5% of tangible capital assets.
The impact of these changes was to:
- Increase opening accumulated surplus by $333,832
- Increase closing accumulated surplus by $3,729,991 as follows:
2010 2010
(restated)(previously reported)
Net Financial Position $16,503,061 $16,503,061
Tangible capital assets (book value)779,162,639 775,432,647
Undeveloped land bank 14,515,918 14,515,918
Other non-financial assets 797,635 797,635
Accumulated Surplus $810,979,253 $807,249,261
- Increase annual surplus by $3,396,159 as follows:
2010 2010
(restated)(previously reported)
Revenues $129,555,181 $126,130,641
Expenses (expenditures) other than capital and
amortization
79,911,890 79,911,890
Amortization expense 16,779,709 16,751,328
Annual Surplus 32,863,582 29,467,423
13. Tangible Capital Assets
Net book value
2011 2010
(restated)
Land $163,746,422 $152,958,988
Buildings 54,492,347 56,027,780
Transportation network 188,149,163 187,574,645
Storm system 159,840,958 155,343,455
Fleet and equipment 12,531,688 12,975,149
Technology 3,822,127 3,682,668
Water system 95,625,842 93,146,901
Sanitary system 117,602,837 106,215,140
Other 12,632,730 11,237,913
$808,444,114 $779,162,639
For additional information, see the Schedule of Tangible Capital Assets (Schedule 5)
During the year there were no write-downs of assets (2010 - $Nil) and no interest was capitalized (2010 - $Nil).
In addition, roads and related infrastructure, underground networks and technology assets contributed to the
District totaled $21,582,148 ($20,765,925 for 2010) and were capitalized at their fair value at the time of
receipt. Property with a book value of $471,471, listed as available for sale at the end of 2010, was
reclassified to tangible capital assets during the year.
Works of art, artifacts, cultural and historic assets are not recorded as assets in the financial statements. The
District controls various works of art and historical treasures including artifacts, paintings, sculptures and
mosaics located at District sites and public display areas.
14. Budget
Budget amounts represent the Financial Plan Bylaw adopted by Council on May 10, 2011. The Financial Plan
anticipated use of suprluses accumulated in previous years to balance against current year expenditures in
excess of current year revenues.
The following shows how these amounts were combined:
Financial Plan
Bylaw
Financial Statement
Budget
Revenue
Taxation $60,849,203 $60,849,203
User fees and other revenue 33,191,738 33,191,738
Other 60,279,983 60,279,983
Contributed subdivision infrastructure 12,250,000 12,250,000
Total Revenue 166,570,924 166,570,924
Expenses
Protective services 29,661,630 29,661,630
Transportation services 16,581,090 16,581,090
Recreation and cultural 20,987,495 20,987,495
Water utility 12,677,615 12,677,615
Sewer utility 9,623,830 9,623,830
General Government 15,381,485 15,381,485
Planning, public health and other 3,928,527 3,928,527
Total expenses 108,841,672 108,841,672
Annual Surplus $57,729,252 $57,729,252
Less:
Capital expenditures 111,830,820
Debt repayment 4,741,276
Add:
Interfund transfers 18,734,460
Amortization 17,369,969
Borrowing proceeds 22,738,415
$-
15.Accumulated Surplus
Accumulated Surplus is comprised of operating surpluses and equity in tangible capital assets held in the
general, sewer and water funds as well as reserves. Accumulated surplus for 2011 is $846,462,952
($810,979,253 for 2010) and is distributed as follows:
2011
Restated
2010
Operating surplus (Schedule 1)General $5,750,719 $5,156,074
Sewer 2,508,311 2,515,823
Water 3,176,352 3,638,446
11,435,382 11,310,343
Equity in tangible capital assets (Schedule 2)General 566,526,923 552,530,544
Sewer 119,059,516 107,667,501
Water 96,533,666 93,962,893
782,120,105 754,160,938
Reserves (Schedule 3)Funds 25,144,547 21,275,267
Accounts 27,762,918 24,232,705
52,907,465 45,507,972
Accumulated Surplus $846,462,952 $810,979,253
16. Expenditures and Expenses by Object
Operations
Capital
Acquisitions 2011 Total 2011 Budget
Restated
2010 Total
Goods and services 45,780,996 25,900,329 71,681,325 154,177,700 72,332,910
Wages and salaries 35,098,108 836,055 35,934,163 35,597,288 33,608,597
Interest 2,391,798 -2,391,798 3,136,550 2,468,972
Total Expenditures 83,270,902 26,736,384 110,007,286 192,911,538 108,410,479
Amortization expenses 17,267,869 -17,267,869 17,369,969 16,779,709
Contributed tangible
capital assets -21,582,148 21,582,148 12,250,000 20,765,925
Total Expenditures and
Expenses 100,538,771 48,318,532 148,857,303 222,531,507 145,956,113
17.Undeveloped Land Bank
The District owns property in various areas identified for future growth in the Official Community Plan. These
properties are not currently used in the provision of service to the citizens of Maple Ridge. The properties
represent a strategic, non-renewable resource available for the advancement of Councils' strategic plan. In
2011, the District acquired land bank properties valued at $316,123.
18.Segmented Information
This District is a diversified municipal government entity in the province of British Columbia that provides a wide
range of services to its citizens. Municipal services have been segmented by grouping activities that have
similar service objections (by function) and separately disclosed in the segment report. Where certain activities
cannot be attributed to a specific segment they have been reported as unallocated. The segments and the
services they provide are as follows:
Protective Services
Protective Services is comprised of the Ridge Meadows RCMP detachment, the Maple Ridge Fire Department,
bylaw enforcement, inspection services and emergency services. Services provided by the segment are focused
on protecting the citizens of Maple Ridge.
Transportation Services
Transportation Services is comprised of Engineering, Operations, Drainage and Roads. Services provided by the
segment include the construction and maintenance of transportation related infrastructure.
Recreation and Cultural
Recreation and cultural services provides library services, access to recreation facilities and maintains and
operates District parks.
Water Utility
The Water Utility, in conjunction with Metro Vancouver, provides safe, clean, reliable water to the residents and
businesses of the District of Maple Ridge.
Sewer Utility
The Sewer Utility collects waste water and transports it to treatment plants operated by Metro Vancouver in
addition to maintaining the sanitary sewer infrastructure.
General Government
General Government provides administrative, legislative and support services for the District. Functions
include financial planning and reporting, information technology, economic development and communications.
Planning, Public Health and Other
This segment is comprised of Planning, Recycling, Cemetery and Social Planning. Activities include land use
guidelines, development of the District's official community plan, management of the recycling contract and
improving the social well-being of the community.
Unallocated
Unallocated includes revenues and expenses that cannot be directly attributed to the activities of an identified
functional segment.
Schedule 2
Schedule of Change in Equity in Capital Assets
For the year ended December 31, 2011
Actual Budget
Restated
Actual
2011 2011 2010
Revenue
Subdivision infrastructure contributions $21,582,148 $12,250,000 $20,765,925
Senior government transfers 10,086,063 25,052,578 6,694,315
Development fees 2,993,696 25,944,459 5,337,509
Other capital contributions 95,213 1,762,302 588,324
Disposal of tangible capital assets (1,453,063)-(947,234)
Total Revenue 33,304,057 65,009,339 32,438,839
Expenses
Amortization 17,267,869 17,369,969 16,779,709
Total Expenses 17,267,869 17,369,969 16,779,709
Annual Surplus 16,036,188 47,639,370 15,659,130
Internal Transfers
Transfers and principal payments from revenue funds 5,730,382 10,634,597 5,980,101
Transfers from reserves 6,192,597 18,189,744 11,851,675
Increase (decrease) in equity in capital assets 27,959,167 76,463,711 33,490,906
Equity in capital assets - beginning of the year 754,160,938 754,160,938 720,670,032
Equity in capital assets - end of the year (Note 15)$782,120,105 $830,624,649 $754,160,938
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: CDPR-0640-30
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: Cedar Park Construction – Award of Tender
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Tenders for the construction of Cedar Park, located at 23735-132 Avenue, were received on June 8,
2012. Two bids which were in compliance with the tender documents were received.
Based on the tenders received the cost of this project, in combination with the expenses to date for
design, survey and building demolition will exceed the previously approved budget of $310,644.
Recent experience with similar park construction projects would suggest this level of funding is no
longer adequate for the development of a neighbourhood park, particularly with the challenging
topography in Silver Valley. This budget figure has been revised for more recent park development
projects in the long term capital plan. Staff has considered reducing the scope of work, however
removing any of the play elements will only result in an incomplete project that will need to be
remedied at a later date.
This project is primarily funded through Development Cost Charges (DCC’s). As a result of under
spending of DCC funds budgeted to acquire a Silver Valley Neighbourhood Park in 2012, staff are
recommending that the construction budget for this Silver Valley Park be increased utilizing these
under-spent DCC funds. Award of this tender is recommended
RECOMMENDATION:
That the tender contract PL12-46 for the construction of Cedar Park be awarded to Wilco Civil Inc.
for $310,560 plus HST and that the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the agreement and
further, that the financial plan be amended to reflect this change.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
On March 27, 2012 Council authorized staff to proceed with the preparation of tender
documents for the construction of Cedar Park based on the concept plan dated February 16,
2012. Following this authorization staff have proceeded with demolition of the existing
residence, and issued a tender on May 22, 2012.
b)Business Plan/Financial Implications:
Two bids for Tender PL12-46 Cedar Park were received. The prices tendered were for the base
site works and a separate price list for park amenities. The selection of bids tendered is
determined by the base site work price submitted not including HST.
Base site work Bid Pricing:
Wilco Civil Inc. $250,926.00
Canadian Lawn Care Services Ltd. $279,982.96 1151
The approved budget for the total construction of this park is $310,644. Staff are
recommending the budget can be increased with DCC funds to include the base bid, park
amenity items listed separately in this tender, the demolition cost, site survey and consultant
services for a total project cost $376,610.
The DCC funds can be used for both new park acquisition and development of new park sites.
As a result of under spending funds to acquire a recent park site in Silver Valley, there is capacity
within the overall Park DCC budget to accommodate the additional cost for this park
construction.
Cost Breakdown
Consultant/Surveyor $ 26,000 (expended)
Demolition/Hazard Abatement 13,450 (expended)
Haz/Mat Consultant 1,800 (expended)
Base Site Work Tender Price 250,926
Park Amenities Cost 59,634
Construction Contract $310,560
Construction Contingency (8%) 24,800 (only to be used if needed)
Total Project Cost $376,610
Approved Budget $310,644
Required addition $ 65,966
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the Corporate Officer be authorized to enter into an agreement with Wilco
Civil Inc. for the construction of Tender PL12-46 at Cedar Park.
“Original signed by Bruce McLeod”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Bruce McLeod, MBCSLA
Manager of Parks Planning & Development
“Original signed by David Boag”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: David Boag, Director of Parks & Facilities
“Original signed by Trevor Thompson”
_______________________________________________
Reviewed by: Trevor Thompson, Manager of Financial Planning
“Original signed by Kelly Swift”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Kelly Swift,
General Manager Community Development,
Parks and Recreation Services
“Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
:BMcL
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council FILE NO: CDPR-0640-30
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: Deer Fern Park Construction – Award of Tender
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Tenders for the construction of Deer Fern Park, located on 236th Street just south of 134th Avenue
were received on June 8, 2012. Two bids which were in compliance with the tender documents were
received.
Based on the tenders received the cost of this project in combination with the expenses to date for
design and survey will exceed the previously approved budget of $310,488. Recent experience with
similar park construction projects would suggest this level of funding is no longer adequate for the
development of a neighbourhood park, particularly with the challenging topography in Silver Valley.
This budget figure has been revised for more recent park development projects in the long term
capital plan. Staff have considered reducing the scope of work, however removing any of the play
elements will only result in an incomplete project that will need to be remedied at a later date.
This project is primarily funded through Development Cost Charges (DCC’s). As a result of under
spending of DCC funds budgeted to acquire a Silver Valley neighbourhood Park in 2012, Staff are
recommending that the construction budget for this Silver Valley park be increased utilizing these
under spent DCC funds. Award of this tender is recommended
RECOMMENDATION:
That the tender contract PL12-45 for the construction of Deer Fern Park be awarded to Wilco Civil
Inc. for $313,431 plus HST and that the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the agreement
and further, that the financial plan be amended to reflect this change.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
On March 27, 2012 Council authorized staff to proceed with the preparation of tender
documents for the construction of Deer Fern Park based on the concept plan dated February 9,
2012. Following this authorization staff have proceeded with detailed design, and issued a
tender on May 22, 2012.
b)Business Plan/Financial Implications:
Two bids for Tender PL12-45 Deer Fern Park were received. The prices tendered were for the
base site works and a separate price list for park amenities. The selection of bids tendered is
determined by the base site work price submitted not including HST.
Base site work Bid Pricing:
Wilco Civil Inc. $266,437.00
Canadian Lawn Care Services Ltd. $268,731.26
The approved budget for the total construction of this park is $310,488. Staff are recommending
the budget be increased with DCC funds to include the base bid, park amenity items listed
separately in this tender, site survey and consultant services for a total project cost $359,231.
The DCC funds can be used for both new park acquisition and development of new park sites. As a
result of under spending funds to acquire a recent park site in Silver Valley, there is capacity within
the overall Park DCC budget to accommodate the additional cost for this park construction.
Cost Breakdown
Consultant/Surveyor $ 21,000 (expended)
Base Site Work Tender Price $266,437
Park Amenities Cost 46,994
Construction Contract $313,431
Construction Contingency (8%) $ 24,800 (only to be used if needed)
Total Project Cost $359,231
Approved Budget $310,488
Required addition $ 48,743
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the Corporate Officer be authorized to enter into an agreement with Wilco
Civil Inc. for the construction of Tender PL12-45 at Deer Fern Park.
“Original signed by Bruce McLeod”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Bruce McLeod, MBCSLA
Manager of Parks Planning & Development
“Original signed by David Boag”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: David Boag, Director of Parks & Facilities
“Original signed by Trevor Thompson”
_______________________________________________
Reviewed by: Trevor Thompson, Manager of Financial Planning
“Original signed by Kelly Swift”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Kelly Swift,
General Manager Community Development,
Parks and Recreation Services;
“Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
:BMcL
Page 1 of 16
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: June 18, 2012
and Members of Council
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C.O.W.
SUBJECT: Town Centre Incentive Program Partnering Agreements
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On November 1, 2010, Municipal Council approved the framework for an incentive program to
encourage accelerated private sector investment. On February 8, 2011, Council approved the use of
partnering agreements as one of the tools to support the program, for those projects that advance
Town Centre Area Plan goals and objectives. Several projects totaling $37 million in construction
value are nearing the stage where partnering agreements are required in order for the District to
provide the incentive. In accordance with Council direction, the agreements are presented for
consideration at a public meeting, and are subject to Council approval.
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute Partnering Agreements for Building Permit
Numbers 11-120295, 12-109255, 11-124858, 11-110037 and 12-112565 to provide
financial incentives of $201,212 as part of the Town Centre Investment Incentive Program.
DISCUSSION
The vision for the Town Centre is dependent upon numerous goals and objectives that cannot be
met solely through the actions of the District, and therefore private partners are a critical element in
achieving the vision. The projects referred to in this report help to achieve objectives within the Town
Centre Area Plan.
Building permit number 11-120292 is for the $7.8 million construction of a four-storey
apartment building in Town Centre Sub Area 1, at 12075 Edge Street;
Building permit number 12-109255 is for the $6.8 million construction of a community
gaming centre at 22710 Lougheed Highway;
Building permit number 11-124858 is for the $6.3 million construction of a four-storey
mixed-use building in Town Centre Sub Area 1, at 11882 226 Street (building 1 of a two
building project);
Building permit number 11-110037 is for the $8.9 million construction of a four-storey
apartment building in Town Centre Sub Area 1, at 12040 222 Street;
Building permit number 12-112565 is for the $7.5 million construction of a four-storey
apartment building in Town Centre Sub Area 1, at 11873 Burnett Street.
1181
Page 2 of 16
The residential projects are eligible for assistance of up to 10% of the Development Cost Charges, to
a project cap of $50,000. They do not qualify for the $75,000 cap for LEED-Silver certified
(minimum) or where greater than 50% of energy consumption will be sourced from
alternative/renewable energy.
The commercial project is eligible for assistance of up to 25% of the Development Cost Charges, to a
project cap of $25,000. It does not qualify for the $37,500 cap for LEED -Silver certified (minimum)
or where greater than 50% of energy consumption will be sourced from alternative/renewable
energy.
In alignment with the District’s desire for transparency, newspaper notices are scheduled for June 13
and June 20.
DESIRED OUTCOME
To provide financial incentives to encourage developments that support Council’s vision for a strong
and vibrant Town Centre.
BUSINESS AND FINANCIAL PLAN IMPLICATIONS
As part of a review of 2010 financial performance, General Revenue funding of $500,000 was
reserved to support the upfront incentive element of the Town Centre Investment Incentive Program.
In March 2012, after a status report indicated the funding was oversubscribed if projects in progress
met the program deadline, Council authorized a further $240,000 toward the program . The
partnering agreements referred to in this report will required that the reserve will be drawn down by
$201,212. In combination with two previous partnering agreements, the balance remaining in the
reserve will be $466,618.
Beginning Balance $500,000
January 2012 funding 240,000
11566 224 Street - 31,094 Paid
22308 Lougheed Highway - 41,076 Payment pending
12075 Edge Street - 47,076
22710 Lougheed Highway - 4,136
11882 226 Street - 50,000 Maximum
12040 222 Street - 50,000 Maximum
11837 Burnett Street - 50,000 Maximum
Balance Remaining $466,618
Page 3 of 16
CITIZEN IMPLICATIONS
The District’s approach to the incentive program is one of full transparency. After numerous Council
reports, presentations and newspaper notices, one citizen comment has been logged with respect to
the incentive program. The comment related to using property tax revenue, which is primarily
residential, supporting business. This comment should be considered in concert with the recent
citizen surveys which communicated strong support for the Town Centre, and a desire for expansion
of the commercial base. The incentive program was built upon expanded commercial development,
both directly through incentives, and indirectly by encouraging the residential density needed to
support businesses.
CONCLUSION
This report requests Council authorization to execute partnering agreements that will allow the
District to provide financial incentives for five development projects noted in this report. The
incentives total $201,212 and support the $37 million in construction value represented by these
projects. The partnering agreement incentives are a component of a comprehensive incentive
program that supports Council’s vision for the Town Centre.
“Original signed by Laura Benson”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Laura Benson, CMA
Manager, Sustainability and Corporate Planning
“Original signed by John Bastaja” for
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Paul Gill, BBA, CGA
General Manager: Corporate and Financial Services
“Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
Attachments: Project Information
Partnering Agreement Template
Page 4 of 16
PROJECT INFORMATION – BUILDING PERMIT NO. 11-120292
Figure 1: Subject Map, 12075 Edge Street
Figure 2: Rendering (may not reflect final plan)
Subject property
Page 5 of 16
PROJECT INFORMATION – BUILDING PERMIT NO. 12-109255
Figure 2: Subject Map, 22710 Lougheed Highway
Figure 2: Rendering (may not reflect final plan)
Subject property
Page 6 of 16
PROJECT INFORMATION – BUILDING PERMIT NO. 11-124858
Figure 3: Subject Map, 11882 226 Street
Figure 2: Rendering (may not reflect final plan)
Subject property
Page 7 of 16
PROJECT INFORMATION – BUILDING PERMIT NO. 12-110037
Figure 4: Subject Map, 12040 222 Street
Figure 2: Rendering (may not reflect final plan)
Subject property
Page 8 of 16
PROJECT INFORMATION – BUILDING PERMIT NO. 12-112565
Figure 5: Subject Map, 11873 Burnett (and 11865, 11785)
Figure 2: Rendering (may not reflect final plan)
Subject property
Page 9 of 16
PARTNERING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT dated for reference mmm dd, yyyy,
BETWEEN:
DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE, a municipal corporation under the laws of
British Columbia and having its offices at 11995 Haney Place,
Maple Ridge, British Columbia V2X 6A9
(“District”)
AND:
(“Owner“)
WHEREAS:
A. The Community Charter, Part 3, Division 1, Section 21 authorizes the District to enter into an
agreement for the provision of a service on behalf of the municipality;
B. The achievement of the District’s vision, goals and objectives for the Town Centre require private
sector development;
C. The Owner agrees to construct a Project that supports Town Centre goals and objectives, as
identified on Schedule A: Town Centre Goals and Objectives;
D. The District agrees to provide a financial incentive, as identified in section 4(a):
NOW THEREFORE in consideration of $1.00 paid by the District to the Owner, the receipt and
sufficiency of which the Owner acknowledges, the parties agree as follows:
1. In this Incentive Agreement,
a. ”Sub Area 1” means that area identified in Schedule B of this agreement
b. “Sub Area 2” means that area identified in Schedule B of this agreement
c. “Project” means:
Description of development project, address, number of units, building permit no.
2. The Owner agrees to:
a. Undertake the following service on behalf of the District: Either wholly or in part, achieve
goals and objectives outlined on Schedule A: Town Centre Goals and Objectives, through
construction and completion of a Project as described in section 1;
b. Comply with all other Municipal bylaws, regulations, agreements and permits in relation to
the Project;
c. Obtain final occupancy permit(s) for the Project within two (2) years from the date the
Building Permit was issued.
d. All work identified under the building permit is to be completed no later than 120 days after
the issuance of the first Provisional Occupancy Permit and an unconditional Occupancy
Permit is issued
Page 10 of 16
3. If the Owner or the Project causes any breach of any obligation set forth in this Incentive
Agreement, the Owner must forfeit the amount received under paragraph 4, or a lesser amount
agreed to by both parties. The forfeited amount must be received by the District within thirty (30)
days of the date the District issued notification of the breach.
4. The District agrees to pay to the Owner $XX,XXX, representing an amount equivalent to a portion
of Municipal Development Cost Charges assessed on the Project, as described in the Town
Centre Investment Incentives Program. Payment will be made on the eleventh (11th) business
day following the date on which the Development Cost Charges were received by the District.
Payment will be held back if the Project is not in compliance with all other Municipal bylaws,
regulations, agreements and permits.
5. This Incentive Agreement expires on the date all units in the Project have been issued final
occupancy permits.
As evidence of their agreement to be bound by the terms of this Incentive Agreement, the parties
have executed this Incentive Agreement as follows:
Date: ______________________, 2011
DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE )
by its authorized signatory: )
)
)
)
)
________________________________________ )
Ceri Marlo )
Corporate Officer )
Property Owner )
by its authorized signatories: )
)
)
)
)
)
_________________________________________ )
signature )
)
)
)
_________________________________________ )
print name
Page 11 of 16
Schedule A: Town Centre Goals and Objectives Checklist
PRINCIPLE: 1
Each Neighbourhood is Complete
Goal: Increase density and distribute a range of uses throughout the Centre
Objectives:
Increase density for residential and non-residential land uses
Incorporate a range of densities
Incorporate mixed use development opportunities
Ensure opportunities for living, working, shopping, and service provision
Integrate waterfront development into the Centre
Develop on currently undeveloped lots
Create links between the Centre and other hubs within Maple Ridge
Goal: Enhance opportunities for personal development and recreation
Objectives:
Provide educational/training facilities
Enhance technological capabilities so people can take advantage of world opportunities
Develop cultural facilities
Improve recreation opportunities, particularly for youth
Improve and secure public access to natural places, including streams and waterfront
Provide more public green space within the core
Promote the social integration of all ages and groups through shared or adjacent facilities
and spaces
Design easily accessed public spaces
Ensure public safety and security, and accessibility throughout the Centre
Page 12 of 16
PRINCIPLE: 2
Options to our cars exist
Goal: Acknowledge and respect pedestrian needs
Objectives:
Prioritize the safety of pedestrians
Enhance pedestrian experience
Designate pedestrian-only areas/no-car zones
Enhance connectivity of pedestrian and other non-vehicular routes
Utilize and upgrade laneways, sidewalks and other existing paths for pedestrians, bikes
Design for short walking distances to reach daily needs
Goal: Increase transit modes, availability and destinations
Objectives:
Establish an internal transit system for the Centre
Increase the frequency of transit service both internally and to out-lying areas
Consider other transit modes
Link new Abernethy crossing to transit
Increase and improve access from river to Centre
Provide water transportation options
Ensure public safety for all transportation modes
PRINCIPLE: 3
Work in harmony with natural systems
Goal: Preserve, enhance and capitalize on natural amenities and create new ones
Objectives:
Respect and enhance riparian areas and water resources
Maintain views of mountains
Maintain access and views to Fraser River
Protect and enhance a range of wildlife habitats
Reinstate historical streams
Goal: Protect natural systems from the impacts of development
Objectives:
Increase quality and amount of green space in the Centre
Establish a green system that is linked throughout the Centre and beyond
Reduce the generation of water pollution, air pollution and waste
Manage pollution and waste with Best Management Practices (BMPs)
Page 13 of 16
PRINCIPLE: 4
Buildings and infrastructure are greener and smarter
Goal: Make it easier to be environmentally friendly
Objectives:
Identify and act on appropriate urban ecology opportunities
Provide incentives for the development of environmentally friendly buildings
Have municipality adopt green building and infrastructure standards
Educate on environmental benefits of growing smarter
Increase quality, function and amount of mandatory public/open/green space built by
developers
Goal: Combine new technologies with rediscovered approaches
Objectives:
Incorporate alternative methods of power generation
Require sustainable buildings and building systems
Design buildings to adapt to future technologies and uses
Minimize environmental impact of erosion and waste disposal during construction
Adaptively reuse existing buildings, including heritage buildings
Manage urban stormwater with green infrastructure methods
Develop green infrastructure that provides for multiple land uses
PRINCIPLE: 5
Housing serves many needs
Goal: Increase housing options to provide for all ages, economic status, and life stages
Objectives:
Integrate housing for all demographics
Ensure a variety of housing types and tenures that are fully accessible and accommodate
special needs
Integrate affordable housing/low-cost housing with market housing
Improve rental housing stock and options
Improve housing quality and range of housing types
Design housing for flexibility of use over its lifetime
Design housing to strengthen social relationships
Provide housing for people in transition
Page 14 of 16
Goal: Increase density in the Centre by integrating housing with other uses
Objectives:
Increase residential density and identify density limits
Integrate housing with other uses at the scale of both building and block
Establish attractive form and character and mitigate noise to make housing in the centre
desirable
PRINCIPLE: 6
Jobs are close to home
Goal: Encourage all types of jobs, including new and non-traditional businesses and workplaces
Objectives:
Provide an educational centre to train for jobs and to provide teaching and other jobs
Increase civic development and retail development for job creation
Incorporate high tech, internet, home businesses
Incorporate live/work and work/live developments
Welcome unique industries/business opportunities
Make zoning and bylaws less restrictive for location and form of business premises, while
retaining a positive sense of community
Promote the film industry
Promote the tourism industry
Goal: Attract investment by supporting business needs
Objectives:
Attract investment in housing and business ventures
Densify the Centre to provide a customer base for businesses
Identify and promote niche markets for business
Develop the industry potential already present in Maple Ridge and support local businesses
Pre-install technological infrastructure in buildings to attract businesses
Streamline development approval processes and provide incentives
Provide venues to support arts and crafts businesses
PRINCIPLE: 7
The Centre is distinctive, attractive and vibrant
Goal: Cultivate an identity that grows from the heart of the community
Objectives:
Develop the “caring” identity of Maple Ridge
Ensure that historical and cultural assets are respected and celebrated
Feature the natural beauty and amenities of the place
Establish development guidelines that respect local heritage, natural settings and attributes
Support the arts in the community
Encourage art in public and private spaces
Page 15 of 16
Enhance the urban public environment
Goal: Establish the Centre as a hub of activity
Objectives:
Increase tourism
Provide opportunities for festivals and community events
Provide more entertainment and education venues
Encourage evening activities that cater to a broad demographic while benefitting the
community
Utilize park space for daily activities as well as special events
Create easily accessible routes to key destinations
Encourage symbiotic relationships among and between lands and land users
Support and encourage the vitality of small business
PRINCIPLE: 8
Everyone has a voice
Goal: Create safe spaces and opportunities for all members of the community
Objectives:
Create spaces and opportunities for all age groups and social stratas
Integrate spaces to foster social relationships
Empower the least powerful
Ensure safety
Goal: Create opportunities for open dialogue among members of the community
Objectives:
Establish ongoing public evaluation of smart growth strategies
Provide public gathering spaces
Ensure economic development office advocates for local business and interacts effectively
with all levels of government
Page 16 of 16
Schedule B: Town Centre Investment Incentives Area