The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2015-11-10 Council Meeting Agenda and Reports.pdfCity of Maple Ridge COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA November 10, 2015 7:00 p.m. Council Chamber Note: This Agenda is also posted on the City’s 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 INTRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS 300 APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 400 ADOPTION AND RECEIPT OF MINUTES 401 Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of October 27, 2015 402 Minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meetings of October 28, 2015 500 PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL 600 DELEGATIONS 601 Operation Red Nose • Joshua Shopland – Business Development for PacificSport Fraser Valley, the Operation Red Nose Ridge-Meadows host organization 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 behavior will be reprimanded. The meeting is live streamed and recorded by the City of Maple Ridge and filmed by Shaw Communications Inc. Page 1 Council Meeting Agenda November 10, 2015 Council Chamber Page 2 of 4 700 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 800 CORRESPONDENCE 900 BYLAWS COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1100 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 1100 Minutes – November 2, 2015 Public Works and Development Services 1101 2015-062-AL, 20232 Powell Avenue, Non-Farm Use Application Staff report dated November 2, 2015 recommending that Non-Farm Use Application No. 2015-062-AL to allow a family daycare be forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission. 1102 2015-181-RZ, 12117 Laity Street, RS-1 to R-1 Staff report dated November 2, 2015 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7158-2015 to rezone from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-1 (Residential District) to permit a subdivision of approximately six lots be given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing. 1103 Fraser Valley Intermunicipal Business Licence Program Staff report dated November 2, 2015 recommending that the continuance of the Fraser Valley Intermunicipal Business Licence on a permanent basis be approved and that Maple Ridge Intermunicipal Business Licence Scheme Amending Bylaw No. 7175-2015 be given first, second and third reading. The following issues were presented at an earlier Committee of the Whole meeting with the recommendations being brought to this meeting for City 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 November 10, 2015 Council Chamber Page 3 of 4 Financial and Corporate Services (including Fire and Police) 1131 Proposed Cottonwood Cell Tower – Support For Next Steps Staff report dated November 2, 2015 recommending that the construction and operation of a telecommunications tower at 11400 Cottonwood Drive by SBA Inc. be supported, that the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign the Licence of Occupation agreement and that SBA be required to complete stipulated conditions prior to undertaking construction. Community Development and Recreation Service 1151 Correspondence 1171 Other Committee Issues 1181 1200 STAFF REPORTS 1201 2016-2020 Business Planning Dates Staff report dated November 10, 2015 providing the schedule for the 2016-2020 Business Planning sessions. 1300 RELEASE OF ITEMS FROM CLOSED COUNCIL 1400 OTHER MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT 1500 NOTICES OF MOTION AND MATTERS FOR FUTURE MEETING Council Meeting Agenda November 10, 2015 Council Chamber Page 4 of 4 1600 QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC 1700 ADJOURNMENT Checked by:________________ Date: ________________ 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. City of Maple Ridge COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES October 27, 2015 The Minutes of the City Council Meeting held on October 27, 2015 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber of the City Hall, 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, British Columbia for the purpose of transacting regular City business. PRESENT Elected Officials Appointed Staff Mayor N. Read F. Quinn, Acting Chief Administrative Officer/General Councillor C. Bell Manager Public Works and Development Services Councillor B. Masse K. Swift, General Manager of Community Development, Councillor G. Robson Parks and Recreation Services Councillor T. Shymkiw P. Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services Councillor C. Speirs C. Carter, Director of Planning D. Denton, Acting Corporate Officer ABSENT A. Gaunt, Confidential Secretary Councillor K. Duncan Other staff as required C. Goddard, Manager of Development and Environmental Services A. Kopystynski, Planner 2 Note: These Minutes are also posted on the City’s Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca The meeting was filmed by Shaw Communications Inc. and live streamed and recorded by the City of Maple Ridge 100 CALL TO ORDER 200 INTRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS 300 APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA The agenda was approved with the postponement of Item 602 Maple Ridge Library Update 401 Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 2 of 14 400 ADOPTION AND RECEIPT OF MINUTES 401 Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of October 13, 2015 R/2015-459 It was moved and seconded That the minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of October 13, 2015 be amended to indicate that Councillor Duncan was absent from the meeting and be adopted as amended. CARRIED 402 Minutes of the Public Hearing of October 20, 2015 R/2015-460 It was moved and seconded That the minutes of the Public Hearing of October 20, 2015 be adopted as circulated. CARRIED 403 Minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meeting of October 7, 14 and 19, 2015 R/2015-461 It was moved and seconded That the minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meeting of October 7, 14 and 19, 2015 be received. CARRIED 500 PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL – Nil 600 DELEGATIONS 601 Maple Ridge Community Heritage Commission Update • Brenda Smith, Chair Ms. Smith gave a PowerPoint presentation providing information on the mandate of the Maple Ridge Heritage Commission and outlining the upcoming 2016 Business Plan. She focused on the ongoing projects and spoke to the special project of the Community Heritage Plan. Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 3 of 14 Note: Item 602 was postponed. 602 Maple Ridge Library Update • Shawna Kristin, Library Manager 700 UNFINISHED BUSINESS 701 Motion by Councillor Bell Councillor Bell provided a background on the motion she put forward. R/2015-462 It was moved and seconded That staff be directed to review section 8.1.21 of Maple Ridge Parks and Facilities Regulation Bylaw No. 7085-2014 and report back to Council on recommended amendments to that section. CARRIED 800 CORRESPONDENCE – Nil 900 BYLAWS Note: Items 901 to 904 are from the October 20, 2015 Public Hearing Bylaws for Third Reading 901 2014-019-RZ, 24837 Dewdney Trunk Road 901.1 Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7086-2014 To add a village commercial node Third reading R/2015-463 It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 7086-2014 be given third reading. CARRIED Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 4 of 14 901.2 Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7171-2015 To designate a portion of property from Estate Suburban Residential to Commercial Third reading R/2015-464 It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 7171-2015 be given third reading. CARRIED 901.3 Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7070-2014 To rezone from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to C-1 (Community Commercial) to permit a future subdivision of approximately 3 single family lots Third reading R/2015-465 It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 7070-2014 be given third reading. CARRIED 902 2014-110-RZ, 11716 Burnett Street Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7123-2014 To rezone from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) TO R-1 (Residential District) to permit a future subdivision of approximately 3 single family lots Third reading R/2015-466 It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 7123-2014 be given third reading. CARRIED 903 2015-212-RZ Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7162-2015 To prohibit the sale of liquor and wine in grocery stores Third reading Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 5 of 14 R/2015-467 It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 7162-2015 be given third reading. DEFEATED Mayor Read, Councillor Masse, Councillor Shymkiw – OPPOSED Bylaws for Third and Final Reading 904 2015-160-RZ Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7165-2015 To increase the maximum height of principal dwellings in residential zones to a unified 11.0 metres across all single family and in specific multi-family zones Third and Final Reading R/2015-468 It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 7165-2015 be given third and final reading. CARRIED Bylaws for Final Reading 905 RZ/021/04, 20870 Lougheed Highway Staff report recommending final reading 905.1 Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6638-2008 To designate land use from Urban Residential to Commercial Final reading R/2015-469 It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 6638-2008 be adopted. CARRIED 905.2 Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6639-2008 To rezone from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to CS-1 (Service Commercial) to permit mobile equipment storage and improve internal circulation for the existing equipment rental business Final reading Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 6 of 14 R/2015-470 It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 6639-2008 be adopted. CARRIED COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1100 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE Minutes – October 19, 2015 R/2015-471 It was moved and seconded That the minutes of the Committee of the Whole Meeting of October 19, 2015 be received. CARRIED Public Works and Development Services 1101 2015-155-RZ, 23702 132 Avenue, RS-2 to R-1 Staff report dated October 5, 2015 recommending that Application 2015- 155-RZ to rezone from RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to R-1 (Residential District) to create a 23 lot residential subdivision be denied. R/2015-472 It was moved and seconded That Application No. 2015-155-RZ be denied. CARRIED Councillor Masse - OPPOSED 1102 2015-253-RZ, 23539 Gilker Hill Road, RS-3 to RM-1 Staff report dated October 19, 2015 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7179-2015 to rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) to permit development of approximately 43 townhouse units be given first reading and that the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules A, C, D, E, F, and G of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999. Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 7 of 14 R/2015-473 It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 7179-2015 be given first reading; and That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules A, C, D, E, F, and G of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879–1999. CARRIED 1103 2015-275-RZ, 23227 Dogwood Avenue Staff report dated October 19, 2015 recommending that Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7176-2015 to allow for temporary off-street parking as a principal use be given first reading and that the applicant provide further information as described on Schedule H of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999. R/2015-474 It was moved and seconded 1. 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 on the City’s website, together with an invitation to the public to comment; Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 8 of 14 2. That Bylaw No. 7176-2015 be given first reading; and 3. That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedule H of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879–1999. CARRIED Councillor Masse - OPPOSED 1104 2015-201-RZ, 22830 Nelson Court, R-1 to R-2 Staff report dated October 19, 2015 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7163-2015 to rezone from R-1 (Residential District) to R-2 (Urban Residential District) to permit a subdivision of 11 lots be amended, given second reading as amended and be forwarded to Public Hearing, R/2015-475 It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 7163-2015 be amended as identified in the staff report dated October 19, 2015 be given second reading, and be forwarded to Public Hearing. CARRIED Note: Mayor Read excused herself from discussion of Item 1105 at 8:37 p.m. as she lives up the street from the property. The Deputy Mayor took over as Chair. 1105 2013-086-RZ, 23262 Silver Valley Road, 13738, 13702 and 13660 232 Street, Addendum to Second Reading Report Staff report dated October 19, 2015 recommending that the motion deferred at the September 8, 2015 Council Meeting with respect to Application 2013-085-RZ be withdrawn and that Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7160-2015 to revise land use designation boundaries and an equestrian trail location be given first and second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing and that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7023-2013 to rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential), RS-1b (One Family Urban [Medium Density] Residential), R-1 (Residential District), R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), RST-SV (Street Townhouse – Silver Valley), C-5 (Village Centre Commercial) and P-1 (Park and School) to allow subdivision of approximately 51 single family lots, 16 street townhouse lots, one commercial lot and a future neighbourhood park be amended, be given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing. Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 9 of 14 R/2015-476 It was moved and seconded 1) That the motion deferred at the September 8, 2015 Council meeting with respect to 2013-86-RZ, 23262 Silver Valley Road, and 13878, 13702 and 13660 232 Street be withdrawn. 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 Bylaw No. 7160-2015 on the municipal website and requiring that the applicant host a Development Information Meeting (DIM), and Council considers it unnecessary to provide any further consultation opportunities, except by way of holding a Public Hearing on the bylaw; 3) That Bylaw No. 7160-2015 be considered in conjunction with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan; 4) That it be confirmed that Bylaw No. 7160-2015 is consistent with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan; 5) That Bylaw No. 7160-2015 be given first and second readings and be forwarded to Public Hearing; 6) That Bylaw No. 7023-2013, be amended as identified in the staff report dated October 19, 2015, be given second reading, and be forwarded to Public Hearing; 7) 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 Official Community Plan Schedule “A”, Chapter 10.3, Part VI, A – Silver Valley, Figure 2 - Land Use Plan, Figure 3A - Blaney Hamlet, and Figure 4 - Trails / Open Space, iii) Road dedication on 232 Street and Silver Valley Road as required; iv) Park dedication as required, including construction of multi-purpose trails; and removal of all debris and garbage from park land; v) Purchase of the land identified for future neighbourhood park by the City of Maple Ridge; vi) Consolidation of the subject properties; vii) Registration of a Restrictive Covenant for the geotechnical report, which addresses the suitability of the subject properties for the proposed development and confirms that the slope failure area has been remediated; viii) Removal of existing buildings; Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 10 of 14 ix) Approval from the Ministry of Forest, Lands and Natural Resources for in-stream works on the site; x) In addition to the site profile, a disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks on the subject properties. If so, a Stage 1 Site Investigation Report is required to ensure that the subject property is not a contaminated site. xi) Registration of a Housing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant to ensure two residential units in the proposed commercial building remain as rental units; xii) Registration of a Restrictive Covenant protecting the visitor parking and residential parking for the commercial building; xiii) Provision of a voluntary Community Amenity Contribution of $3,100.00 for each residential lot created; and xiv) Registration of a Restrictive Covenant limiting the use of Commercial Unit 1 and the adjacent outdoor play space, a total of 104.2 m2 of indoor floor area and 93 m2 of outdoor space, to a commercial daycare use in perpetuity. CARRIED Note Mayor Read returned to the meeting at 8:41 p.m. and resumed as Chair. 1106 2013-103-RZ, 12366 Laity Street, First One Year Extension Staff report dated October 19, 2015 recommending that a first one year extension be granted for Application 2013-103-RZ to permit a future subdivision of approximately 4 lots in a first phase and an additional 2 lots in a second phase. R/2015-477 It was moved and seconded That a one year extension be granted for rezoning application 2013-103-RZ and that the following conditions be addressed prior to consideration of Final Reading: i. Road dedication on Laity Street, as required; ii. Registration of a Restrictive Covenant for Tree Protection; and iii. In addition to the Site Profile, a disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks on the subject property. If so, a Stage 1 Site Investigation Report is required to ensure that the subject property is not a contaminated site. CARRIED Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 11 of 14 Financial and Corporate Services (including Fire and Police) 1131 Tourism Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows Contract Overview Staff report dated October 19, 2015 recommending that the contract with Duckworth Management/Tourism Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows for provision of tourism services be allowed to expire and that the $35,000 allocation be used by the Economic Development Office for tourism marketing and product development. R/2015-478 It was moved and seconded That the contract with Duckworth Management/Tourism Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows for the provision of tourism services be allowed to expire, and further that the $35,000 allocation be used by the Economic Development Office for tourism marketing and product development. CARRIED 1132 Disbursements for the month ended September 30, 2015 Staff report dated October 19, 2015 recommending that the disbursements for the month ended September 30, 2015 be received for information. R/2015-479 It was moved and seconded That the disbursements as listed below for the month ended September 30, 2015 be received: General $ 9,861,810. Payroll $ 1,764,235. Purchase Card $ 71,077. $ 11,697,122. CARRIED Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 12 of 14 1133 2015 Council Expenses Staff report dated October 19, 2015 providing on update on Council expenses to the end of September for 2015. For information only No motion required Community Development and Recreation Service 1151 Ridge Canoe & Kayak Club – New Lease Staff report dated October 19, 2015 recommending that the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal the Ridge Canoe & Kayak Club Lease Agreement 2015-2020. R/2015-480 It was moved and seconded That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal the Ridge Canoe and Kayak Club Lease Agreement 2015-2020. CARRIED 1152 Maple Ridge Lapidary Club – Lease Renewal Staff report dated October 19, 2015 recommending that the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal the Maple Ridge Lapidary Club Lease Agreement 2015-2018. R/2015-481 It was moved and seconded That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal the Maple Ridge Lapidary Club Lease Agreement 2015-2018. CARRIED 1153 Emerald Pig Theatrical Society – Lease Staff report dated October 19, 2015 recommending that the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal the Emerald Pig Theatrical Society License to Occupy Lease Agreement to December 2018. Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 13 of 14 R/2015-482 It was moved and seconded That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal the Emerald Pig Theatrical Society License to Occupy Lease Agreement to December 31, 2018. CARRIED 1154 Fees and Charges Amending Bylaw Staff report dated October 19, 2015 recommending that Maple Ridge Recreation Facility Fees Amending Bylaw No. 7181-2015 be given first, second and third readings. R/2015-483 It was moved and seconded That Bylaw No. 7181-2015 be given first, second and third readings. DEFEATED Mayor Read, Councillor Bell, Councillor Masse, Councillor Robson, Councillor Speirs, Councillor Shymkiw - OPPOSED Correspondence – Nil Other Committee Issues – Nil 1200 STAFF REPORTS – Nil 1300 RELEASE OF ITEMS FROM CLOSED COUNCIL – Nil 1400 OTHER MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT – Nil 1500 NOTICES OF MOTION AND MATTERS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS – Nil Council Minutes October 27, 2015 Page 14 of 14 1600 QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC 1700 ADJOURNMENT – 8:57 p.m. _______________________________ N. Read, Mayor Certified Correct ___________________________________ D. Denton, Acting Corporate Officer 402 City of Maple Ridge COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING MINUTES November 2, 2015 1:00 p.m. Council Chamber PRESENT Elected Officials Appointed Staff Councillor C. Bell P. Gill, Acting Chief Administrative Officer/General Councillor K. Duncan Manager of Corporate and Financial Services Councillor B. Masse W. McCormick, Acting General Manager of Community Councillor T. Shymkiw Development, Parks and Recreation Services Councillor C. Speirs F. Quinn, Manager of Public Works and Development Services ABSENT C. Carter, Director of Planning Mayor N. Read C. Marlo, Manager of Legislative Services Councillor G. Robson Other Staff as Required C. Goddard, Manager of Development and Environmental Services J. Bastaja, Director of Corporate Support D. Hall, Planner 2 R. MacNair, Manager of Bylaws and Licences Deputy Mayor Shymkiw announced the addition of Item 1.2 Fire Apparatus Service Life Analysis from the November 2, 2015 Council Workshop to the Committee of the Whole agenda. 1.DELEGATIONS/STAFF PRESENTATIONS 1.1 Golden Ears Winter Club Presentation •Jeff Cawker, President, Board of Directors Mr. Cawker gave a power point presentation providing an overview of the Golden Ears Winter Club including its history, finances, tournaments, programs, and membership. 1100 Committee of the Whole Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 2 of 4 1.2 Fire Apparatus Service Life Analysis The Manager of Corporate Planning and Sustainability reviewed the staff report dated November 2, 2015 which provided information on the truck replacement practice of the Fire Department. The Deputy Fire Chief expanded on the considerations of the Fire Department when determining whether to replace a vehicle. 2. PUBLIC WORKS AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Note: The following items have been numbered to correspond with the Council Agenda: 1101 2015-062-AL, 20232 Powell Avenue, Non-Farm Use Application Staff report dated November 2, 2015 recommending that Non-Farm Use Application No. 2015-062-AL to allow a family daycare be forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission. The Planner read the recommendation. RECOMMENDATION That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of November 10, 2015. 1102 2015-181-RZ, 12117 Laity Street, RS-1 to R-1 Staff report dated November 2, 2015 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7158-2015 to rezone from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-1 (Residential District) to permit a subdivision of approximately six lots be given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing. The Manager of Community Development and Environmental Services gave a Power Point presentation providing the following information: • Application Information • Subject Map • Neighbourhood Context • Official Community Plan Context • Site Characteristics Committee of the Whole Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 3 of 4 • Development Proposal • Considerations • Proposed Site Plan • Recommendation in staff report Jonathan Craig, Applicant Mr. Craig provided clarification of discussions held with neighbouring property owners. RECOMMENDATION That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of November 10, 2015. 1103 Fraser Valley Intermunicipal Business Licence Program Staff report dated November 2, 2015 recommending that the continuance of the Fraser Valley Intermunicipal Business Licence on a permanent basis be approved and that Maple Ridge Intermunicipal Business Licence Scheme Amending Bylaw No. 7175-2015 be given first, second and third reading. The Manager of Bylaws and Licences provided further details of the program. RECOMMENDATION That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of November 10, 2015. 3. FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE SERVICES (including Fire and Police) 1131 Proposed Cottonwood Cell Tower – Support For Next Steps Staff report dated November 2, 2015 recommending that the construction and operation of a telecommunications tower at 11400 Cottonwood Drive by SBA Inc. be supported, that the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign the Licence of Occupation agreement and that SBA be required to complete stipulated conditions prior to undertaking construction. The Director of Corporate Support reviewed the report. RECOMMENDATION That the staff report be forwarded to the Council Meeting of November 10 , 2015. Committee of the Whole Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 4 of 4 4. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND RECREATION SERVICES – Nil 5.CORRESPONDENCE – Nil 6.OTHER ISSUES – Nil 7.ADJOURNMENT – 1:55 p.m. 8.COMMUNITY FORUM Nick Peereboom Mr. Peereboom indicated his home is closest to the proposed Cottonwood cell tower and he has requested that Industry Canada require that the tower be set further away from his home. He felt the tower would be an impediment to future development of his property. Timothy Karrys Mr. Karrys reported on the total number of residents who oppose the location of the proposed Cottonwood cell tower and spoke to the lower health standards set by the federal government with respect to the placement of these towers. ___________________________________ T. Shymkiw, Deputy Mayor Presiding Member of the Committee City of Maple Ridge TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: November 2, 2015 and Members of Council FILE NO: 2015-062-AL FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W SUBJECT: Non-Farm Use Application 20232 Powell Avenue EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This non-farm use application pertains to a proposed neighbourhood daycare for the property at 20232 Powell Avenue. The subject property is within the Agricultural Land Reserve. The proposed use is permitted outright in the RS-3 One Family Rural Residential Zone in the Zoning Bylaw, but exceeds the maximum number of children permitted under Agricultural Land Commission Regulations. This report will outline the implications of permitting this use on the subject property, which could include requirements such as structural retrofits for code compliance. In general, however, this proposal is supportable as this use complies with the Zoning Bylaw. For this reason, the recommendation is to forward the application to the Agricultural Land Commission for their approval. RECOMMENDATION: That non-farm use application # 2015-062-AL be forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission. DISCUSSION: a)Background Context: Applicant: Reaghan L Gasparre Owner: Francesco Gasparre & Reaghan L Gasparre Legal Description: Lot 69, District Lot 263, Plan: NWP38722 OCP : Existing: Agricultural Proposed: No Change Zoning: Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) Surrounding Uses: North: Use: 3 properties, rural residential use Zone: RS-3 One Family Rural Residential Designation Agricultural South: Use: 8 properties, urban residential use Zone: RS-1 One Family Urban Residential Designation: Urban Residential 1101 - 2 - East: Use: 2 properties, rural residential use Zone: RS-3 One Family Rural Residential Designation: Agricultural West: Use: Farm and rural residential use Zone: RS-3 One Family Rural Residential Designation: Agricultural Existing Use of Property: Rural Residential Proposed Use of Property: Rural Residential with daycare business as an accessory use Site Area: 0.883 hectares Access: Powell Avenue Servicing: Municipal Sewer and Water connection b) Project Description: This application is for permission for a neighbourhood daycare on the subject property. Subject to compliance with specific regulations prescribed in the bylaw, the use is permitted under current zoning up to a maximum of 15 children in care. However, the property is within the Agricultural Land Reserve and therefore subject to the regulations of the Agricultural Land Commission. These provincial regulations have an established maximum of 8 children in care. The proposed neighbourhood daycare will be within the home and the applicant is not proposing changes to the existing building or property beyond those required for code compliance. The subject property is 0.883 hectares (2.2 acres) and has a driveway that can accommodate parking during pickup and drop off times. c) Planning Analysis: Official Community Plan Child care facilities are valued for the role they provide in the community, as recognized in Policy 4- 36 of the Official Community Plan, as follows: Maple Ridge supports the establishment of child-care facilities in Residential, Institutional, Commercial, and Industrial land use designations subject to compliance with District bylaws and regulations. Zoning Bylaw As small scale child-care facilities are generally compatible with residential uses, the Zoning Bylaw recognizes and permits 2 categories of child care facilities, as follows: Family Day Care, which means the provision of care of children in a home environment, licensed for this use in accordance with the Community Care and Assisting Living Act, and includes Group Daycare, Out of School Care, Pre-School, Emergency Care and Child Minding, as defined under the Child Care Licensing Regulation, not to exceed a maximum of 8 children in care. and - 3 - Neighbourhood Daycare, which means an establishment for the provision of care and supervision of a maximum of 15 children in a home environment, licensed for use in accordance with the Community Care and Assisted Living Act, and includes Group Daycare, Out of School Care, Pre-School, Emergency Care and Childminding, as defined under the Child-Care Licensing Regulation. d) Interdepartmental Issues: Licences, Permits and Bylaws. This department issues business licenses for Family and for Neighbourhood Daycares. The issuance of a license for a Family Daycare is conditional upon approval of the Fire Department and Fraser Health. The issuance of a license for a Neighbourhood Daycare is conditional upon compliance with BC Building Code requirements for assembly use. Business licence requirements include professional assurances confirming that the structure is safe for the use intended based on structural and electrical inspections. In addition, approvals from the Fire Department and Fraser Health are required. e) Intergovernmental Issues: Daycare uses and the subject property are under the jurisdiction of senior agencies, whose role for this purpose may be summarized as follows: Fraser Health; in addition to being an integral part of the approvals and licensing process, Fraser Health prescribes a complement of number of employees to children in care, based on the children’s ages. Provincial Building and Safety Standards Branch: This provincial agency has established building requirements for daycare use. These requirements are included in the BC Building Code and are adhered to by the building permit process and inspection services of the Building Department. Ministry of Health: This agency administers the Community Care and Facilities Act. Section 20 of the Act states that licensed child care facilities that accommodate no more than 8 children shall not be required to conform to any BC Building Code requirements beyond those that apply to a single family dwelling. Therefore, a neighbhourhood daycare of up to 15 children in care must comply with BC Building Code requirements for assembly use. Agricultural Land Commission: The subject property is within the Agricultural Land Reserve and therefore subject to the requirements of the Agricultural Land Commission. Commission Policy #7 establishes regulations around home occupation use in the Agricultural Land Reserve, which does not require that the parcel has ‘farm’ classification. Pertinent excerpts from this policy are as follows: Home occupation use may be more specifically defined and regulated in a local government bylaw. For Commission purposes a home occupation use does not include the following facilities, where more than 8 persons or clients are served or accommodated at one time: On this basis, as the current proposal exceeds this maximum, this non-farm use application and Commission approval is a requirement of this use being permitted on the subject property. - 4 - f) Citizen/Customer Implications: As noted, daycare facilities provide an essential service in the community, and are needed near residential neighbourhoods. For this reason, this application is supportable. g) Alternatives: Based on the findings of this report, the recommendation is to forward this application to the Commission for final approval. However, Council has the option to deny this application from proceeding further, and it would therefore this matter would be be considered closed. CONCLUSION: This non-farm use application is for a permitted use within the Zoning Bylaw under the existing zoning of the subject property. The use – a child care facility – is permitted under the regulations of the Agricultural Land Commission, However, the size of this proposed facility exceeds the maximum permitted under Commission regulations, and therefore, the Commission’s approval is required prior to allowing this proposal to proceed further. On this basis, the recommendation is to forward the application to the Commission for their approval. “Original signed by Diana Hall” _______________________________________________ Prepared by: Diana Hall, M.A, MCIP, RPP Planner 2 “Original signed by Christine Carter” _____________________________________________ Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning “Original signed by Frank Quinn” _______________________________________________ Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services “Original signed by Frank Quinn” _______________________________________________ Concurrence: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng Acting Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A – Subject Map Appendix B – Ortho Photo Appendix C – Letter from applicant City of PittMeadows District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R. ^ DATE: Mar 13, 2015 FILE: 2015-062-AL BY: PC CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT 12420213 1248120283 2029412491 20383/4052037112464 204062025112476 202951246920 20205 1202871248920225 12480 124 372024312433 1 2467 12471 12440 12469 1247020295202752026312490 12468 20383451 53821247420232112450 120293124552029912531 12498 203702026012606 203772022012451 112486 20 2 3 5 202021246612518 2024012024712484 12513 9012494 124 437 202692027720274425 12555 12426/28 20291124B AVE.202B ST.POWELL AVE. . .202 ST.1 2 5 AVE .202A ST.203 ST.POW 125 AVE 125 AVE. SUBJECT PROPERTY ´ Scale: 1:2,000 20232 POWELL AVENUE APPENDIX A City of PittMeadows District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R. ^ DATE: Mar 13, 2015 FILE: 2015-062-AL BY: PC CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT 12420213 1248120283 2029412491 20383/4052037112464 204062025112476 202951246920 20205 1202871248920225 12480 124 372024312433 1 2467 12471 12440 12469 1247020295202752026312490 12468 20383451 53821247420232112450 120293124552029912531 12498 203702026012606 203772022012451 112486 20 2 3 5 202021246612518 2024012024712484 12513 9012494 124 437 202692027720274425 12555 12426/28 20291124B AVE.202B ST.POWELL AVE. . .202 ST.1 2 5 AVE .202A ST.203 ST.POW 125 AVE 125 AVE. SUBJECT PROPERTY District of Maple Ridge´ Scale: 1:2,000 20232 POWELL AVENUE(2011 photography image) APPENDIX B APPENDIX C - 1 - City of Maple Ridge TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: November 2, 2015 and Members of Council FILE NO: 2015-181-RZ FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W SUBJECT: Second Reading Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7158-2015 12117 Laity Street EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: An application has been received to rezone the subject property, located at 12117 Laity Street, from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-1 (Residential District), to permit a future subdivision of approximately six lots. Council granted first reading to Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7158-2015 on July 28, 2015. The minimum lot size for the current RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) zone is 668 m2, and the minimum lot size for the proposed R-1 (Residential District) zone is 371 m². This application is in compliance with the OCP. Pursuant with Council direction, information regarding Community Amenity Contributions is included in this report, and an option for including an additional recommendation has been provided for Council’s consideration. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1)That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7158-2015 be given second reading, and be forwarded to Public Hearing; 2)That Council require, as a condition of subdivision approval, the developer to pay to the City an amount that equals 5% of the market value of the land, as determined by an independent appraisal, in lieu of parkland dedication in accordance with Section 941 of the Local Government Act; and, 3)That the following terms and conditions be met prior to final reading: i)Approval from the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure; ii)Road dedication as required; iii)Removal of existing building; and iv)In addition to the site profile, a disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage ta nks on the subject property. If so, a Stage 1 Site Investigation Report is required to ensure that t he subject property is not a contaminated site. 1102 - 2 - DISCUSSION: 1) Background Context: Applicant: Jonathan Craig Owner: Wade Gienow Legal Description: Parcel “E” (Reference Plan 3460) District Lot 242 Group 1 Except: The North 180 Ft., New Westminster District OCP: Existing: Urban Residential Zoning: Existing: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) Proposed: R-1 (Residential District) Surrounding Uses: North: Use: Church Zone: P-4 (Place of Worship) Designation: Institutional South: Use: Vacant (Fortis Right-of-Way) Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) Designation: Urban Residential East: Use: Residential; Lions Park Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) Designation: Urban Residential; Park West: Use: Residential Zone: RG (Group Housing Zone) Designation: Urban Residential Existing Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential Site Area: 0.33 Ha (0.8 acres) Access: Laity Street and 212 Street Servicing requirement: Urban Standard Companion Applications: 2015-181-SD 2) Project Description: The applicant proposes to rezone the subject property, located at 12117 Laity Street, from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-1 (Residential District) to permit future subdivision into six single family residential lots not less than 371 m² (3,994 ft²) (see Appendix D). The subject property is bound by St. Paul’s Lutheran Church to the north, single family residential and Lions Park to the east, a vacant lot owned by FortisBC Energy Inc. with a Fortis Gas Right-of-Way to the south and townhomes to the west (see Appendix A). The subject property is flat with some sparse vegetation located throughout the site. Three of the lots will be accessed from Laity Street, while the other three lots will be accessed from 212 Street. It is noted that the proposed lot sizes are significantly larger than the minimum R-1 (Residential District) requirements. The larger lot size of 530-540 m² (5,705-5,813 ft²) will ensure compatibility with the existing lot sizes in the surrounding neighbourhood. - 3 - 3) Planning Analysis: i) Official Community Plan: The OCP 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 given to site design setbacks and lot configuration with the existing pattern of development in the area. The proposed rezoning to R-1 (Residential District) is in conformance with the Urban Residential designation and infill policies. In order to fit the surrounding neighbourhood context, the lots exceed the minimum lot size. ii) Zoning Bylaw: The applicant proposes to rezone the subject property from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-1 (Residential District) (see Appendix C) to permit future subdivision into approximately six single family residential lots (see Appendix D). The minimum lot size for the current RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) zone is 668 m² (7190 ft²), and the minimum lot size for the proposed R-1 (Residential District) zone is 371 m² (3994 ft²). iii) Development Permits: A Form and Character Development Permit is not required for this single family residential development. iv) Advisory Design Panel: A Form and Character Development Permit is not required and therefore this application does not need to be reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel. v) Development Information Meeting: A Development Information Meeting was held at the Maple Ridge Library on October 19, 2015. Five people attended the meeting. A summary of the main comments and discussions with the attendees was provided by the applicant and include the following main points:  Concern that the homes would be situated too close to Laity Street.  Concern that Laity Street is too busy for an additional three driveways.  Concern that the size of the lots and massing will not fit in with the surrounding neighbourhood. The following are provided in response to the issues raised by the public:  Road dedication will remove approximately 3 m of frontage from Laity Street; as well there is consideration of situating the homes further back to allow more off-street parking and to create more distance between the street and homes.  The subject property is within a park zone, so speed limits are reduced in this area.  The current proposal indicates that lot sizes will be considerably larger than the minimum requirements for the R-1 (Residential District) zone. As well, it is the developer’s intention to enhance the neighbourhood with a style and massing that fits the surrounding area. - 4 - vi) Parkland Requirement: As there are more than two additional lots proposed to be created, the developer will be required to comply with the park dedication requirements of Section 941 of the Local Government Act prior to subdivision approval. For this project, there is no suitable land for park dedication on the subject property and it is therefore recommended that Council require the developer to pay to the City an amount that equals the market value of 5% of the land required for parkland purposes. The amount payable to the City in lieu of park dedication must be derived by an independent appraisal at the developer’s expense. Council consideration of the cash-in-lieu amount will be the subject of a future Council report. vii) On October 19, 2015 Council passed a number of resolutions pertaining to the establishment of a Citywide Community Amenity Contribution (CAC) program. Options for dealing with in-stream applications were discussed and staff were directed to include information on the proposed CAC program in future staff development reports. It is noted that the Resolutions passed at the Council Workshop can be used as a guide for determining CAC contributions, in the interim period while the CAC OCP amending Bylaw is being considered. As this is the first application to be considered by Council since the CAC discussion occurred, Council may wish to include the following term in Recommendation 3). That a voluntary Community Amenity Contribution be provided in keeping with the direction given by Council with regard to amenities. Should Council elect to include the above noted term in the Recommendation, staff will include this item as a Recommendation in all subsequent reports while the CAC OCP Amending Bylaw is being considered. 4) Environmental Implications: The subject property is located within the Fraser River Escarpment area, where stormwater must be directed to Municipal storm sewer, as per Council Policy 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. 5) Traffic Impact: As the subject property is located within 800 metres of the Lougheed Highway, a referral has been sent to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure, and granted Preliminary Approval on September 1, 2015, for one year, pursuant to section 52(3)(a) of the Transportation Act. Ministry approval of the Zone Amending Bylaw will be required as a condition of final reading. - 5 - 6) Interdepartmental Implications: i) Engineering Department: A Rezoning Servicing Agreement is not required for this rezoning application, as there are no works or services required for the rezoning. All deficient services will be provided through a Subdivision Servicing Agreement at the time of subdivision. 7) School District No. 42 Comments: The School District has noted that the subject properties fall within the Glenwood Elementary and Westview Secondary school catchments. Actual numbers for 2013 indicate that Glenwood Elementary is at 79% utilization, with 289 students. In terms of secondary school enrollment capacity, actual numbers for 2013 indicate that Westview Secondary is at 63% utilization, with 768 students. Therefore, there is available elementary and secondary school capacity for the proposed development. CONCLUSION: As this application is in compliance with the OCP, it is recommended that second reading be given to Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7158-2015, and that application 2015-181-RZ be forwarded to Public Hearing. It is further recommended that Council require, as a condition of subdivision approval, the developer to pay to the City an amount that equals 5% of the market value of the land, as determined by an independent appraisal, in lieu of parkland dedication. “Original signed by Adrian Kopystynski” for _______________________________________________ Prepared by: Adam Rieu Planning Technician “Original signed by Christine Carter” _______________________________________________ Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning “Original signed by Frank Quinn” _______________________________________________ Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng GM: Public Works & Development Services “Original signed by Frank Quinn” _______________________________________________ Concurrence: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng Acting Chief Administrative Officer The following appendices are attached hereto: Appendix A – Subject Map Appendix B – Ortho Map Appendix C – Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7158-2015 Appendix D – Proposed Subdivision Plan DATE: Jul 7, 2015 2015-181-RZ BY: JV PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT PROPERTY DEWDNEY TRUNK RD LAITY ST212 STWICKLUND AVE 121 Ave ´ Scale: 1:2,500 12117 Laity St Legend \\Wetlands GPS Creek Centrelines Streams & Rivers (Topographic) Feature Type Indefinite Creek Centreline Ditch Centreline River Centreline Rivers & Lakes (Topographic) Feature Type Canal Flooded Land Lake/Reservoir Marsh River APPENDIX A DATE: Jul 7, 2015 2015-181-RZ BY: JV PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT PROPERTY DEWDNEY TRUNK RD LAITY ST212 STWICKLUND AVE 121 Ave City of Maple Ridge´ Scale: 1:2,500 12117 Laity St Legend \\Wetlands GPS Creek Centrelines Streams & Rivers (Topographic) Feature Type Indefinite Creek Centreline Ditch Centreline River Centreline Rivers & Lakes (Topographic) Feature Type Canal Flooded Land Lake/Reservoir Marsh River (2011 photography image) APPENDIX B CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE BYLAW NO. 7158-2015 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 City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows: 1.This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7158-2015." 2.That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as: Parcel “E” (Reference Plan 3460) District Lot 242 Group 1 Except: The North 180 feet, New Westminster District and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1640 a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to R-1 (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 28th day of July, 2015. READ a second time the day of , 20 PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , 20 READ a third time the day of , 20 APPROVED by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure this day of , 20 ADOPTED the day of , 20 _____________________________ ____________________________ PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER APPENDIX C 211522116621161211782119012090 12098 2123112089 12025 12161 21295120391204712022 21322213281202821334 2114221149211602117021175211932120112073 12081 12171 12062 12070 12086 12186 120232129221312 12010211502115321167211752117821188211891202012037 12145 12156 213012130921321120591 2 0 3 221151211552118521190/92211991205021221 12061 12117 12020 12032 12044 12031 2131421311213231203621145211442115421158211652116121175211912119512069 2121121196/982120712116 212972130012007 12011 12015 12018 213192114712038 1207021210 12101 21282212901201321299 1206321146211492117012101-53 2120021220212412123012047 12050 12056 12128 12138 213181205521328211462118821198212002124012196 12014 120261205121320 21327WICKLUND AVE. 122 AVE.McINTYRE CT.212 ST.McINTYRE CT. 121 AVE.LAITY ST.CAMPBELL AVE. P 15470 293 10 156 155 297 2 1 *LMP 23192P 62355 130 P 59 0 03 B BCP 161921 2 1114P 70 7 21 22 2 25 6P 4667223 3 310 P 47383 6 308 P 53420 P 46290P 47383 NWS 1462P 15078 5 304 P 14112 358 303 300 P 47517 EP1 62 8 5 1 66LMP 413381 28 7P 601004 22 0 22 1P 56 8 96 P 5798025 3 22 4 10 9 309 126 154 298 357 Rem N 180' E 4 P 8790 360 of 2 A BCP 303 2 4 3 18 6 25 9 25 5 Rem 323 8Rem 4P 56 8 96 292 NWS 336 11 5 295 301 181 3 Rem 1 3 3 P 74 5 04P 1468667P 32 5 05 23423525 7 25 2 P 74 9 9of 3P 36 5 19 P 56 8 96 P 79726 2 120 305 2 122 Rem E 359 P 378892 2 1 2 W 100'25 8P 53420 P 19872 157 294 P 48094306 296 P 77954 P 53420 2 6 124 P 3460125 C D P 9327PARKRem 2 23 1 P 56 8 96 23 7 23 0 25 1 25 4 158 1 4 175 119110 302 P 53420 182 Rem 1 Rem N 1 /2 P 47 0 1 LMP 57 683 P 57 9 80 68 22 9 22 3 LMP 11122 PL. (EP 47384) P 48094 121 1 P 58583 P 53420 299 P 47383 P 48995 P 47383 E 2 of S 1 /2 A P 74 9 9 Rem 2 23 2 23622 5 RW 18394 EP 53421LMP 39636P 62150EP 53421 LMP 38963LMP 5769 LMP 39238LMP 38783 LMP 39238RW 18394 LAITY ST.W ICK LUN D AV E . ´ SCALE 1:2 ,0 00 MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDINGBylaw No. Map No. From: To: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) R-1 (Residential District) 7158-20151640 APPENDIX D Page 1 of 3 City of Maple Ridge TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: November 2, 2015 and Members of Council FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: CoW SUBJECT: Fraser Valley Intermunicipal Business Licence Program EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On January 1, 2013, nine Fraser Valley municipalities implemented a one year Intermunicipal Business Licence (IMBL) Pilot Project. The participating municipalities included the Township of Langley, City of Langley, City of Abbotsford, City of Surrey, City of Maple Ridge, City of Pitt Meadows, District of Mission, City of Chilliwack and the District of Hope. Maple Ridge took a leadership role in implementing the IMBL project. During the two year pilot program, the IMBL Committee worked closely with the Province’s Small Business and Red Tape Reduction Branch to ensure the successful development of an Intermunicipal Business Licence Program taking into consideration the addition of other municipalities to the program, developing a more sustainable revenue sharing formula, and expanding the eligible business types. The Ministry has provided a commendation to Maple Ridge for the work done on this project (appendix II). With the continuation of the program on a permanent basis, both the Corporation of Delta and the District of Kent have confirmed their interest in joining the Fraser Valley IMBL program bringing the total number of participating municipalities to eleven. The committee has also agreed on a new method of revenue sharing for 2016 which proposes that each participating municipality retains 90% of the IMBL revenues and redistributes the remainder evenly to the other participating municipalities. The new formula is a more economical system that will allow for the inclusion of additional municipalities who may wish to join the program in future. Furthermore, the committee has reviewed the definition of current eligible business types and are proposing that the existing definition be modified to include other mobile businesses who may not be directly related to the construction industry however provide similar types of services. After further review, the IMBL Committee recommendation is to continue with the Fraser Valley IMBL Program on a permanent basis. All participating municipalities are bringing forward proposed amendments to their current Intermunicipal Business Licence Bylaw for their Councils consideration. The proposed bylaw amendments include changes to remove the provisions identifying the program as a pilot, adding the Corporation of Delta & the District of Kent to the list of participants, revising the revenue sharing method to a more sustainable formula, and expanding the definition of “Mobile Business” to expand the scope of businesses that will be eligible to purchase an IMBL. RECOMMENDATION(S): 1.That approval be given for the Fraser Valley Intermunicipal Business Licence Program to be continued on a permanent basis; and further 2.That Maple Ridge Intermunicipal Business Licence Scheme Amending Bylaw No. 7175 -2015 be given first, second and third readings. 1103 Page 2 of 3 DISCUSSION: a) Background Context: Prior to the implementation of the Intermunicipal Business Licence Pilot Program, non-resident (mobile) trade contractor businesses were required to obtain a business licence from their home municipality in which they were based, as well as purchase a non-resident business licence from each municipality in which they operated. Under the Intermunicipal Business Licence Program, the participating municipalities have agreed to allow non-resident (mobile) trade contractor businesses from within the participating municipalities to operate in their municipality on the basis of one Intermunicipal Business Licence purchased from their home municipality. The cost of the IMBL is $250 annually, and each mobile trade business is still required to purchase a resident business licence from their home municipality. The revenue generated from sales of Intermunicipal Business Licences is shared among the participating municipalities. The initial Fraser Valley Intermunicipal Business Licence Pilot Program was adopted for one year and was set to expire on December 31, 2013. On October 3, 2013 the IMBL Committee conducted a review of the existing pilot to determine if the Fraser Valley Intermunicipal Business Licence program was meeting the needs of the municipalities and businesses and whether the program should be continued. Upon further discussion, it was determined that additional time was required to allow for a more comprehensive review of the program and therefore, with participating Councils’ approval, the initial one year pilot program was extended for an additional two years expiring on December 31, 2015. During the two year pilot extension, the IMBL Committee has worked closely with the Province’s Small Business Branch to ensure the successful development of an Intermunicipal Business Licence Program taking into consideration the addition of other municipalities to the program, developing a more sustainable revenue sharing formula, and expanding the eligible business types. Currently the list of municipalities participating in the Fraser Valley IMBL Program in clude the Township of Langley, City of Langley, City of Abbotsford, City of Surrey, City of Maple Ridge, City of Pitt Meadows, District of Mission, City of Chilliwack and the District of Hope. Since that time, both the Corporation of Delta and the District of Kent have confirmed their interest in joining the program as it moves forward to a permanent basis. The revenue sharing formula that was originally implemented for the pilot program calculated the percentage of revenue distribution based on the non-resident license sales of each participating municipality at the start of the pilot. While this method initially appeared feasible, as the program progressed and with additional municipalities expressing interest in joining the program, it was determined that a more sustainable revenue sharing method was required. The new proposed method of revenue sharing proposes that each participating municipality retains 90% of the IMBL revenues and redistributes the remainder evenly. For the purpose of the pilot project it was agreed that the type of businesses that would be eligible to purchase an IMBL would be specific to trade contractors or other professionals related to the construction industry. With the differing regulations surrounding mobile businesses in each municipality, it was found that all participating municipalities share similar regulations with regards to trade contractors and therefore it was agreed to use this specific business type for the pilot project. Upon further review of the types of businesses that may be eligible to purchase an IMBL, it was determined that expanding the types of businesses beyond the construction industry was not viable. Local Government bylaws are implemented taking into consideration the specific needs of each respective community which often differ from one municipality to another. Broadening the list of eligible business types outside of the construction industry poses concerns Page 3 of 3 that the bylaws of each participating municipality may be compromised. The Committee did however recognize that the current definition of a “Mobile Business” could be amended to allow for additional types of mobile businesses by adding provisions that allow for mobile businesses that perform maintenance and or repair of land & buildings other than from their ”Premises”. The proposed new definition expands the list of eligible mobile businesses to those who may not be directly related to the construction industry however are similar in the types of services provided. b) Financial Analysis: The cost of an IMBL is $250 annually, and businesses are still required to purchase a resident business licence from their home municipality. The revenue generated from the IMBL sales is distributed among the participating municipalities using a revenue sharing formula. The current pilot program requires that revenue be distributed between the participating municipalities based on a percentage derived from the non-resident license sales of each participating municipality at the start of the pilot. While this formula initially appeared to be adequate for the purpose of the pilot program, it did not allow for future expansion of the program. The new revenue sharing formula offers more flexibility and lends itself to support future growth of the program while maintaining a level of revenue neutrality. c) Desired Outcome(s): To obtain Councils approval for the continuance of the Fraser Valley Intermunicipal Business Licence Program on a permanent basis. CONCLUSIONS: The IMBL Committee will continue working closely with the Province’s Small Business Branch to ensure the ongoing delivery of a successful Intermunicipal Business Licence Program. Consideration will also be given to the addition of other municipalities into the program, developing a more sustainable re venue sharing formula, and possibly expanding the eligible business types. “Original signed by R. MacNair” _______________________________________________ Prepared by: R. MacNair Manager of Bylaw and Licencing Services “Original signed by Frank Quinn” _______________________________________________ Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng General Manager: Public Works and Development Services “Original signed by Frank Quinn” _______________________________________________ Concurrence: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng Acting Chief Administrative Officer RM/jd Attachments: Appendix I – Maple Ridge Ticket Intermunicipal Business Licence Scheme Amending Bylaw No. 7175-2015 APPENDIX I City of Maple Ridge Maple Ridge Intermunicipal Business Licence Scheme Amending Bylaw No. 7175-2015 A bylaw to amend Maple Ridge Intermunicipal Business Licence Scheme Bylaw No. 6957-2012 WHEREAS the Council of The City of Maple Ridge deems it expedient to amend Maple Ridge Intermunicipal Business Licence Scheme Bylaw No. 6957-2012; NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows: 1. This bylaw may be cited as Maple Ridge Intermunicipal Business Licence Scheme Amending Bylaw No. 7175 -2015 2. Maple Ridge Intermunicipal Business Licence Scheme Bylaw. No. 6957-2012 is amended as follows: (a) Part 3, section 3.2 is deleted in its entirety (b) Part 4 definition “Mobile Business” is amended by deleting the words “that provides a service or product other than from their Premises” and replacing them with “or a contractor who performs maintenance and/or repair of land & buildings from other than their Premises.” (c) Part 4 definition “Participating Municipality” is amended by adding the words “Corporation of Delta” before the words “District of Hope” and adding the words “District of Kent” before the words “City of Langley” (d) Part 5, number 5.10 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with new number 5.10 as follows: 5.10 The revenue generated from Intermunicipal Business Licence fees collected by the Participating Municipalities will be distributed by each Participating Municipality to the other Participating Municipalities as follows: a) The revenue generated from Intermunicipal Business Licence fees collected from January 1 to December 31 inclusive will be distributed by February 28 of year following the year in which the fees were collected. (e) Adding a new Part 6 as follows: Part 6 Intermunicipal Business Licence Fee Sharing Formula 6.1 The revenue generated from Intermunicipal Business Licence fees is shared on the following formula: a) The Principal Municipality is to retain 90% of the fee collected and the remaining 10% is to be distributed to the remainder of the Participating Municipalities. (f) Deleting Schedule A in its entirety READ A FIRST TIME this ____ day of ______________, 2015. READ A SECOND TIME this ____ day of ______________, 2015. READ A THIRD TIME this ____ day of ______________, 2015. ADOPTED this ____ day of ______________, 2015. PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER City of Maple Ridge TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: November 02, 2015 and Members of Council FROM: Acting Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: CoW SUBJECT: Proposed Cottonwood Cell Tower – Support For Next Steps EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The City undertook a Request For Proposals (RFP) process last year to identify cell tower sites. The intention was to use City lands first for cell towers, to promote sharing of the towers with other service providers, and to gain secondary revenue for the City. The successful candidate from that RFP evaluation was SBA Inc., a cell tower building and leasing company. They have agreed to terms to build 2 cell towers, one at the Rock Ridge reservoir site in Silver Valley, and another at the old Cottonwood landfill site. Prior to building the towers, SBA had to hold a public consultation process for each site, in accordance with our Telecommunications Tower Siting Protocol V2. SBA decided to complete the Rock Ridge consultation process first, which occurred in April of this year and was the subject of a memo to Committee of the Whole on April 28th. That process was to be followed by one for the Cottonwood site in September. The Cottonwood consultation process occurred during August 21st to September 27th. The SBA report on the Cottonwood project and the consultation process is appended. In summary, the consultation process: - notified all residences within 300m radius of the proposed tower site by mail, a total of 436 owners and occupants; - newspaper advertisements were run in 2 consecutive issues of each newspaper – a total of 4 advertisements -- in the 2 week period prior to the public meeting; - a public open house meeting was held at Thomas Haney Secondary School September 17th with 16 members of the public attending. At the open house, there were 3 representatives from SBA and 2 City staffers in attendance to engage the public and answer any questions that arose. Attendees could fill out a comment sheet at the meeting, or submit one later, or write in with questions. The period for public comment, and response from SBA, began August 21st and ended September 27th. Of 25 members of the public that responded during the formal consultation process, 17 were in favour of the project. Just after the formal consultation process concluded, 10 residents along Cottonwood Drive and 116 Ave. became aware of a proposed cell tower in the area and emailed comments, concerns and 1 1131 objections. The concerns and comments were included into the feedback process, and responses were provided. Of these, 9 objected to cell towers on grounds of health concerns, aesthetics, and property value impacts. The central message from most of these folks was they do not want a tower in the neighbourhood. The appended report summarizes the public feedback and response from SBA in Section 3, and Appendix C provides a more thorough summary. Suffice it to say, concerns expressed were legitimate and the reponses from SBA were appropriate. From the staff perspective, there is insufficient reasons to cancel the project and any evident impacts can be managed. Further, the City needs to rely on the guidance of senior government agencies responsible for protecting public health (ie – Health Canada and the Provincial Medical Health Officer) and their view at present is that safety codes are adequate for protecting public health. They have also noted current research evidence does not support any additional concerns over public health. Staff are recommending support for the project, as the proposed tower: - meets Council objectives with respect to promoting use of appropriate City lands and could prevent other towers from going into the neighbourhood; - builds in excess capacity to accommodate 3 other carriers; - is sited a minimum of 100m away from the nearest residences at the east end of 116 Avenue, and is much more distant from residents on 236A St and from those on Cottonwood Drive; - the former landfill property is an appropriate location to host such a use; - the lower half of the tower is screened from view by tree cover; and - there is support for the project from some residents as there is a phone service deficiency in the neighbourhood. The report of the consultation effort and outcome are attached. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1.That the construction and operation of a telecommunications tower at the former Cottonwood landfill property, 11400 Cottonwood Drive, by SBA Inc. be supported; 2.That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign the Licence of Occupation agreement between the City of Maple Ridge and SBA Inc.; and 3.That SBA be required to complete the following prior to undertaking construction of the tower: - that the proposed tower be painted a suitable colour to improve background blending; - that SBA provide a Safety Code 6 impact analysis as tenants are added to the tower; - that SBA receive support of Industry Canada; and - that SBA successfully apply for a building permit. 2 BACKGROUND: An information memo was distributed to Council in February that gave an update on our telecommunications tower Request for Proposals (RFP) and discussed the outcome of that process. That memo noted we had come to terms with SBA Inc., a tower building company, to build two cell towers on City land. One of the tower locations is beside the City water reservoir at Rock Ridge in the Silver Valley neighbourhood, and the other location is at the old Cottonwood landfill site. Council of the day felt that it was through the RFP process that we had more local control over siting decisions given it is City lands and not private property. The agreement that came out of the RFP process provides for the construction of a 50m monopole structure at each site, both of which are designed to accommodate not only an anchor tenant but 3 other service providers. It is anticipated the project will reduce the demand for other tower building sites in residential neighbourhoods and will generate ongoing secondary revenue for the City. As a critical step in the site review process, SBA was required to undertake public consultation on the proposals in both neighbourhoods in accordance with our Telecommunications Tower Siting Protocol V2. SBA completed the public consultation requirements for the Rock Ridge tower site back in April and Council supported the staff recommendations at the April 28, 2015 Committee of the Whole meeting1. For the Cottonwood proposal, property owners/occupants within a 300m radius of the site were notified of the project by mail beginning on August 21st. Four advertisements were run in the local newspapers, and a public open house attended by 16 members of the public occurred on September 17th at the Thomas Haney Secondary School. Additionally, SBA received 17 comment sheets and several emails. The public consultation period concluded September 27th. For a description of the consultation process, the public feedback and responses to questions, please see the attached SBA report on the project. In summary: - concerns were expressed about the consultation process - concerns were expressed about the aesthetic impact of the tower - concerns were expressed about potential human health impacts of background radio radiation - concerns were expressed about impacts on property values Please see the attached for more detailed review of the specifics of the feedback and the responses provided by SBA. 1 Recommendations from CoW meeting of April 28, 2015 regarding the Rock Ridge cell tower site: That the construction and operation of a telecommunications tower at the Rock Ridge property, 13550-240 St., by SBA Inc. be supported; That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign the Licence of Occupation agreement between the City of Maple Ridge and SBA Inc.; and That SBA be required to complete the following prior to undertaking construction of the tower: - receiving support of Industry Canada; - the satisfactory completion of the Natural Features Development Permit Area; and - the successful issuance of a building permit. 3 The next steps, to allow SBA to proceed to build and operate the tower, requires a Council resolution of support for the project. This resolution is to be sent to Industry Canada, the approval authority, so that SBA may get a radio broadcasting licence. As well, SBA will need to sign the Licence of Occupation agreement with the City and receive a building permit. CONCLUSION: With respect to public concerns, staff feel the proposal, in terms of siting, appearance, and commitment to monitor background radiation, strikes a balance that meets a variety of objectives and minimizes undue neighbourhood impacts, while filling in a service gap in cellular network performance. In summary: - the tower is sited on the north-east portion of the landfill a minimum of 100m away from the nearest residences; - is located in an isolated portion of the landfill site, away from areas to be rehabilitated and away from any future park areas; - is located in a bowl, 12m below the ground elevation of the nearest residences, and as a consequence, is well-screened on it’s lower half by trees; - is separated by a fenced public right-of-way from the rural property to the north. The property to the north is bisected by a major ravine and as a consequence has very limited development potential; - the tower will employ a painted monopole design that is much more aesthetically sensitive than alternative lattice work towers; and - the tower will require a building permit before it can be completed which should ensure it is safely constructed. The proposed tower project had received public objections, but also significant public support. and has modified characteristics and siting that should minimize any negative impacts. Staff feel the design characteristics and siting go along way to address neighbourhood concerns and are thus satisfied with the consultation process and conclusions. The successful conclusion to the RFP and the construction of the Cottonwood telecommunications tower will meet a variety of Council objectives. It will signal to the communications industry that Council is interested in finding a balance between community impacts and support for the industry, and It will leverage City assets and support measured entrepreneurship for community benefit. 4 “Original signed by John Bastaja”_____________________ Prepared by: John Bastaja Director Corporate Support “Original signed by Darrell Denton”____________________ Prepared by: Darrell Denton Property and Risk Manager “Original signed by Paul Gill”_________________________ Approved by: Paul Gill General Manager, Corporate and Financial Services “Original signed by Frank Quinn”_______________________ Concurrence: Frank Quinn Acting Chief Administrative Officer 5 1 Date: October 13, 2015 To: The City of Maple Ridge Attention: Properties Manager From: SBA Canada ULC C/O Brian Gregg, SitePath Consulting Ltd. RE: Proposed 50 meter Telecommunications Tower Project: Cottonwood SBA Canada File: BC70908-B - Cottonwood Site Address: 11400 Cottonwood Drive, Maple Ridge, BC SECTION 1 - PROPOSAL SUMMARY SitePath Consulting Ltd. (“SitePath”) is representing SBA Canada ULC (“SBA”) regarding a proposed telecommunications tower installation on City-owned land. Address: 11400 Cottonwood Drive Coordinates: 49° 12' 46.84" North, 122° 34' 20.99" West Legal Description: LT A; SEC 16; TWP 12; NWD; PL NWP6682 PID: 005-811-830 Zoning: RS-3 – One Family Rural Residential Objective • In response to the City’s Request for Proposal (RFP), SBA is proposing to install a new cell tower at the former Cottonwood Landfill property. • The proposed facility, if approved, will provide high-speed, high-bandwidth cellular service to the Maple Ridge community and improve public safety through the enablement of mobile communication with emergency responders. This is particularly important given that more than 70 percent of all calls to emergency responders are now placed through mobile devices. • The proposed telecommunications tower will be designed to enable multiple carriers to co-locate thereby mitigating the proliferation of towers in the community. • Initially, Rogers Communications has agreed to install their equipment on the subject proposed tower. Description of Proposed Site • SBA is proposing the construction of a 50-meter monopole structure at the municipal-owned former landfill property. • If constructed, all of the equipment necessary to operate this facility will reside within an approximately 10.0 meter x 10.0 meter fenced compound located at the base of the monopole in the northeastern portion of the subject property. • As the existing zoning permits “public service” uses including telephone-related utilities and there are no setback requirements for such utility structures, the proposal is permitted from a local land use policy perspective. The proposed tower is setback approximately 100 m from the nearest residence. SitePath Consulting Ltd. Telephone: 778-870-1388 Suite 1903, 838 West Hastings Street Email: briangregg@sitepathconsulting.com Vancouver, B.C. V6C 0A6 www.sitepathconsulting.com 2 Aerial Photograph (Source: Google Earth) Zoning Map (Source: City of Maple Ridge “Ridge View 2.0” GIS) City of Maple Ridge Property Report (11400 COTTONWOOD DR) Street (large) Public Facility or Attraction Railway Major River or Lake Edge Major River or Lake Interior Lot Boundary School Park Property Municipal Boundary Scale 1:3,500 The City of Maple Ridge makes no guarantee regarding the accuracy or present status of the information shown on this map. ´ Printed: October 20, 2014 District of Maple Ridge RidgeView 2.0 Property ID:22103 Address:11400 COTTONWOOD DR Folio:84520-0000-5 Plan:NWP6682 Lot:A Legal:LT A; SEC 16; TWP 12; NWD; PL NWP6682 PID:005-811-830 LTO:BM138047 Zoning:RS-3 OCP Land Use:PARK CONSRV Closed to Backyard Burning:Yes Within the Fraser Sewerage Area:Yes Recycling Pickup Day:Thursday Approx. Area:5.253 ha. 0 250 500125 ft 0 75 15037.5 m 3 Existing Structures and Co-location Analysis •SBA has conducted extensive fieldwork as well as reviewed Industry Canada’s database to determine the location of all existing structures within the search area and has confirmed that there are no existing antenna-support structures of a suitable height or location to enable co- location. •Specifically, the closest tower is an existing Rogers structure approximately 1.62 kilometers away at 24186 Dewdney Trunk Road. The existing Rogers tower services a different area and would not enable the provision of dependable wireless service in the subject search area via co- location. •The proposed tower will therefore be designed for co-location and will eliminate the need for additional towers in the area. Visibility •The upper portion of the proposed tower site may be visible within the Maple Ridge community from some of the adjacent properties. •Given that the proposed tower location is adjacent to residential properties albeit setback significantly, SBA is proposing an aesthetically integrated monopole structure painted a colour of the City’s preference. Photo Simulation 1 – View Looking East from Cottonwood Drive and 116a Street (for discussion purposes only) 4 Photo Simulation 2 – View Looking West from Kanaka Mews and 236 Street (for discussion purposes only) Site Plan (for discussion purposes only) 5 Elevation Plan (for discussion purposes only) 6 SECTION 2 – PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS SBA worked closely with City staff to ensure that the public and land use authority consultation requirements noted in the City’s Telecommunication Antenna Structures Siting Protocol have been followed. A. Property owner notification • Notification of all property owners within a 300 m radius of the proposed tower occurred on August 21st, 2015. The recipients of the mail-out package were provided with a deadline of September 27, 2015 to submit any comments. • 436 property owners received notification packages via regular mail. • Non-owner occupants (e.g. renters) were also notified as the envelopes were addressed to “occupant” and labeled as specifically required in the protocol. • Please refer to the notification radius map, sample mail-out envelope and a copy of the mail- out consultation package in Appendix A. B. Newspaper notices • Voluntary notices were placed in the Maple Ridge News and Maple Ridge Times for two issues in each paper to welcome broader public dialogue. This is not required in the City’s protocol however the goal of including a newspaper notification was to welcome input from any interested community members. • Copies of the newspaper notices are located in Appendix B. C. Public Meeting • A public meeting was held at Thomas Haney Secondary School September 17th, 2015 from 6:00 PM until 8:00 PM. • The public meeting was held in the school’s Rotunda Room in an open house format. • Sixteen (16) members of the public attended the meeting. Above: A photo from the public meeting at Thomas Haney Secondary School. • A summary of the public comments received and responses provided are in Appendix C. 7 SECTION 3 – ISSUES & SBA RESPONSES During the public consultation period, the following general concerns were raised: •Health and safety concerns; •Potential visual impacts and the perception that this may impact property values; •Land use and site selection concerns. In response to the above noted concerns, SBA acknowledged receipt of each comment in writing and welcomed each individual to the public meeting. The following detailed information was also provided to each commenter regarding each of the above noted concern categories. Health & Safety Concerns – SBA Response SBA provided information sheets from Health Canada and the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority Chief Medical Health Officer and noted the following information on health and safety: •Canada has one of the most rigorous safety codes in the world for devices that emit radio frequency (RF) energy. Specifically, wireless carriers in Canada must comply with Health Canada's Safety Code 6 - a standard that is comparable to the European Union safety regulations. •Safety Code 6 was developed and recently updated in March of 2015 by Health Canada as the exposure standard for the regulation of mobile phones, base stations, Wi-Fi and other radio communications emitting infrastructure. •The exposure limits are the result of thorough and ongoing scientific review and are comparable to similar safety codes in Europe, the USA, Japan and Australia. •Industry Canada has made compliance with Safety Code 6 a condition of license for all Canadian wireless carriers. •Regarding public safety, over 70% of all calls to 9-11 and other emergency service providers are now made through wireless communication devices. Visual Impact and Property Value Concerns – SBA Response •SBA provided three photo simulations showing how the proposed tower would look, if constructed, from various vantage points including Cottonwood Drive and 116th Ave and Kanaka Mews. •SBA explained that the photo simulations demonstrate that only the upper half of the monopole will be visible due to the fact that the lower portion of the tower is to be screened by mature trees. •SBA noted that an aesthetic monopole design was selected to minimize view impacts, rather than a more obtrusive guyed tower or lattice tower structure. •It was also confirmed that there is no consistent evidence to suggest that property values are impacted by the presence of cell towers as supported by Industry Canada. Land Use and Site Selection Concerns – SBA Response In response to concerns regarding land use compatibility and the site selection process, SBA provided the following information: •The proposed site location was selected in response to a City-led initiative that is attempting to use City lands for such towers where possible; •The subject property is a large former landfill property making it compatible for the proposed use; •The large subject lot enables the tower to be setback approximately 100 meters from the nearest residences, mitigating potential impacts on adjacent residences; •The footprint of the proposed monopole has been kept to a minimum as only 10 m x 10 m of space is needed for the foundation and ancillary equipment; •Existing access roads can be used to service the tower thereby preventing the need for timber removal; •The proposal is for an aesthetically integrated cellular phone tower (monopole design) in the northeast corner of the subject property; 8 • There are mature trees on the site that will mitigate view disturbances; • The proposed communication site is located in such a way as to not impede the decommissioning of the landfill, nor affect the future use as a park, which is still the plan according to the City; • The tower will address cellular phone coverage issues in the area for multiple carriers, mitigating the proliferation of cell towers in the community; • The objective of the proposed tower is to provide high-speed, high-bandwidth wireless service to the Cottonwood community and, as a result, the infrastructure needs to be located in the immediate vicinity of the community; • Locating the tower further afield on a mountainside would not provide the needed service improvements to the desired service area; • There are no industrial or commercial zoned lands of an appropriate location that would enable the needed service improvements; • An environmental assessment was completed for the proposal and the consultant found that there will be no significant impacts due to the small footprint of the proposed facility. SECTION 4 – NEXT STEPS Land Use Concurrence Industry Canada requires SBA to consult with the City of Maple Ridge as a commenting body in the siting of antenna support structures. As a form of comment, SBA is requesting land use concurrence from the City given that SBA has met the expectations of the protocol and addressed all relevant public comments. In order to satisfy Industry Canada’s requirements, land use concurrence may come in the form of Council-adopted resolution or a Council authorized letter from the City of Maple Ridge. Although not required in order to satisfy Industry Canada, SBA has also filed a Development Permit application along with an Environmental Assessment in order to adhere to the City’s approval process requirements. SBA will also submit a Building Permit application. Construction Schedule Construction is expected to commence shortly after the Development Permit and Building Permit are issued by the City. Construction is estimated to last approximately three (3) months. 9 APPENDIX A – PUBLIC NOTIFICATION RADIUS, SAMPLE ENVELOPE AND SAMPLE MAIL-OUT CONSULTATION PACKAGE • Note: All property owners and occupants within a 300-meter radius of the proposed tower received notification packages via regular mail and were invited to the public meeting. The notification occurred on August 21st, 2015 and the public comment period ended on September 27, 2015. ("$(. #*+ +$(&#*(#) +$(&-%(&() +$(&(&'(*.&() (*+'%*#) $'(&,$%*!()!&# #)&(#&#&-%()&+'%*)&%#. 10 MAIL-OUT CONSULTATION PACKAGE – SAMPLE COPY Dear Resident/Landowner August 21st, 2015 Re: Proposed 50-meter SBA Canada Radiocommunications Tower 11400 Cottonwood Drive, Maple Ridge, BC 49° 12' 46.84" North, -122° 34' 20.99" West SBA Canada File – Cottonwood (BC70908-B) Wireless technology offers many benefits to Canadians. Millions of individuals rely on wireless communications to enhance their personal security and safety, enjoy more frequent contact with family, friends and business associates, and to make more productive use of their personal and professional time. Additionally, cellular coverage improves public safety as more than 70 percent of all calls to emergency responders are placed through wireless devices. SBA Canada Proposal SBA Canada is proposing a 50-meter monopole tower at 11400 Cottonwood Drive in Maple Ridge, BC. All of the equipment necessary to operate this facility will reside within a compound located at the base of the tower. The proposed facility is to be located at a former landfill property owned by the City of Maple Ridge. The tower, if constructed, will be designed to enable multiple carriers to co -locate thereby mitigating the proliferation of towers in the community while enabling wireless service improvements. Authority Although Industry Canada has exclusive jurisdiction over the placement of wireless telecommunications facilities, it requires the carriers to consult with the local municipality and the general public regarding new installations. The municipal consultation process is intended to provide an opportunity to have landowner questions addressed while respecting federal jurisdiction over the installation and operations of telecommunications systems. Public Consultation and Notification Process As the City of Maple Ridge has a Council-adopted Telecommunications Antenna Structures Siting Protocol, SBA Canada is required to follow the relevant public and municipal consultation requirements outlined in the protocol. The protocol requires that SBA Canada undertake the following steps: • Notification: All property owners within a 300-meter radius of the proposed tower must be notified via regular mail of the proposal at least 21-days in advance of the required public consultation meeting. Your property falls within 300-meters of the proposed tower location and, as a result, we are consulting you and welcome your attendance at the upcoming public consultation meeting. A courtesy notification will also be posted in the Maple Ridge News on September 4th, 2015 and September 11th, 2015 and the Maple Ridge Times on September 3rd, 2015 and September 10th, 2015. • Public consultation meeting: The public consultation meeting will be held at Thomas Haney Secondary School on September 17th, 2015 from 6:00-8:00 PM. The address for Thomas Haney Secondary is 23000 116 Ave, Maple Ridge, BC V2X 0T8. Note that the public meeting will occur in the rotunda room. • After the public consultation meeting: Following the public consultation meeting, SBA Canada will respond to all reasonable and relevant public comments. The public will be provided with 10 working days to provide any comments after the public consultation meeting. The public comment period will close on September 27th, 2015. Upon closing of the public comment period, SBA Canada will summarize for City staff the public comments received and responses provided prior to seeking land use concurrence from City Council. Site Details 1. Purpose - The purpose of the proposed tower is to improve wireless service within the community of Maple Ridge through the implementation of a co-locatable multi-carrier tower. Currently, there are no suitable existing antenna support structures or other feasible infrastructure that can be utilized; as a result, a new antenna support structure is required. 11 2. Location - The tower will be located on a municipal-owned former landfill property within Maple Ridge. The geographical coordinates for the proposed tower site are 49° 12' 46.84" North, -122° 34' 20.99" West. 3. Safety Code 6 - Industry Canada requires all wireless carriers to operate in accordance with Health Canada’s safety standards. SBA Canada confirms that the tower described in this notification package will be installed and operated on an ongoing basis so as to comply with Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 including combined effects with the local radio environment, as may be amended from time to time. 4. Site Access – The site will be accessed via an existing road that will be minimally extended into the proposed tower compound. 5. Environment – SBA Canada confirms that the installation is excluded from environmental assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. 6. Design - This proposal is for a multi-carrier 50-meter monopole structure. The monopole design was selected to minimize view disturbances while enabling multiple tenants (cellular companies 1, 2 and 3) to install their equipment on the tower in the future. A preliminary design of the tower profile and compound plan is included in this notification for your reference. 7. Transport Canada - The tower will be marked in accordance with the Department of Transportation and NAV Canada requirements. 8. Structural Considerations - SBA Canada confirms that the antenna structure described in this notification package will apply good engineering practices including structural adequacy during construction. 9. Land Use Authority – The City of Maple Ridge has a Council-adopted Telecommunications Antenna Structures Siting Protocol and, as a result, SBA Canada is required to follow the relevant public and municipal consultation requirements outlined in the protocol. 10. General Information- General information relating to antenna systems is available on Industry Canada's Spectrum Management and Telecommunications website: http://www.ic.gc.ca/epic/site/smt-gst.nsf/en/h_sf01702e.html. 11. Contacts: SBA Canada C/O Brian Gregg, SitePath Consulting Real Estate/Government Affairs Specialist 1903 - 838 W Hastings Street Vancouver, BC V6C 0A6 Phone: 778 870 1388 Email: briangregg@sitepathconsulting.com Industry Canada Industry Canada – Lower Mainland Office 13401 - 108 Avenue, Suite 1700 Surrey, BC V3T 5V6 Phone: 604-586-2521 Fax: 604-586-2528 Email: vancouver.City@ic.gc.ca Attention: Manager City of Maple Ridge 11995 Haney Place Maple Ridge, BC V2X 6A9 Phone: 604-463-5221 Email: telecomtowers@mapleridge.ca Should you have any specific questions regarding the proposal, please feel welcome to contact the contacts listed herein, or return the comment sheet by mail to SBA Canada by September 27th, 2015. 12 Aerial Location Plan Site Plan (for discussion purposes only) 13 Elevation Plan (for discussion purposes only) 14 COMMENT SHEET PROPOSED TELECOMMUNICATIONS TOWER 49° 12' 46.84" North, -122° 34' 20.99" West City of Maple Ridge SBA CANADA FILE: BC70908-B – Cottonwood 1. Are you a cellular phone or wireless device user? Yes No 2. Do you feel this is an appropriate location for the proposed facility? Yes No Comments ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 3. Are you satisfied with the appearance / design of the proposed facility? If not, what changes would you suggest? Yes No Comments ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ Additional Comments ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ Please provide your name and full mailing address if you would like to be informed about the status of this proposal. This information will not be used for marketing purposes. Name___________________________________________________________ (Please print clearly) Mailing Address __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ Please email to briangregg@sitepathconsulting.com or mail to 1903 – 838 W Hastings Street, Vancouver BC V6C 0A6 ATTENTION: Brian Gregg by September 27th, 2015. Thank you for your input. 15 APPENDIX B – NEWSPAPER NOTICES MAPLE RIDGE & PITT MEADOWS TIMESA18 Thursday, September 3, 2015 16 PUBLIC NOTICE PROPOSED SBA CANADA TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 50-METER MONOPOLE STRUCTURE CottonwoodDrivePROPOSED STRUCTURE:SBA Canada is inviting the public to comment on a proposed multi-tenant telecommunications facility consisting of a 50-meter monopole structure and ancillary radio equipment situated on a former landfill property on Cottonwood Drive, Maple Ridge. LOCATION:11400 Cottonwood Drive, Maple Ridge, BC. COORDINATES:49 12' 46.84 North, -122 34' 20.99 West ANY PERSON may comment by close of business day on September 27 th, 2015 with respect to this matter. SBA CONTACT:Further information can be obtained by contacting: Brian Gregg, SitePath Consulting Ltd. 1903 ± 838 W Hastings Street,Vancouver, BC V6C 0A6 Email: briangregg@sitepathconsulting.com REAL ESTATE 633 MOBILE HOMES & PARKS DON’T OVERPAY! rtmihomes.com “Your Smart Housing Solution” Canada’s Largest provider of manufactured housing. Text or call (844-334-2960). In stock 16’/20’/22’ Homes on Sale Now! 636 MORTGAGES Mobile Mortgage Specialist1=F==#M:GAKV3#"9F9<93JMKLCall: 778-686-5107E-mail: renee.dubois@td.com RENTALS 706 APARTMENT/CONDO AMBER ROCHESTER 545 Rochester Avenue,Coquitlam Close To Lougheed Mall, Transportation, &SFU, Colleges. Near Coq./Bby. Border. Linda 604-813-8789 AMBER (W)401 Westview Street,Coquitlam Large Units. Near Lougheed Mall, All Transportation, SFU & Colleges.Near Coq./Bby. Border. 604-727-5178 ARBOURGREENE552 Dansey Avenue,Coquitlam Extra Large 2 Bedroom’s.Close To Lougheed Mall,All Transit,SFU & Colleges.Near Coq./Bby. Border. Of ce: 604-939-4903Cell: 778-229-1358 BURQUITLAM APTS561 Cottonwood Avenue,CoquitlamBachelor, 1 BR & 2 BR Includes heat, hot water, underground parking, near bus stop, school, SFU, Lougheed Mall. No pets.604-773-6467 CALYPSO COURT 1030 - 5th Avenue, New Westminster Near Transit & Skytrain,Douglas College & More.Well Maintained Building. Call for info/viewing604-813-8789 COTTONWOOD PLAZA555 Cottonwood Avenue,Coquitlam Large Units. Some With 2nd Bathrooms or Den. On Bus Routes, Close To SFU & Lougheed Mall. 604-936-1225 GARDEN VILLA1010 6th Avenue,New Westminster Suites Available. Beautiful atrium with fountain. Byshops, college & transit.Pets negotiable. Ref req. 604-715-7764Bayside Property Services bcclassified.com MERCHANDISE: Antiques & collectibles, to sporting goods & electronics, to parakeets & pet supplies, if it’s considered merchandise for sale, you can find it here. RENTALS 706 APARTMENT/CONDO HARRIS ROADHOUSING CO-OPPitt Meadows 3 BR $1235/mo$3500 Share purchase.Available Sept 1st.V%=F;=<:9;CQ9J< Near bus & school. No subsidy.Pets OK. Email for INCENTIVE:grotaru@baywest.ca 604-465-1938 JUNIPERCOURT 415 Westview Street, Coquitlam Close to Lougheed Mall,All Transit Connections, Skytrain & Schools;SFU, BCIT, Colleges. 604-939-8905 KING ALBERTCOURT 1300 King Albert, Coquitlam GREAT LOCATION;Close To Lougheed Mall,All Transportation, SFU,BCIT, Colleges & More. Of ce: 604-937-7343Cell: 778-863-9980 NEW WESTMINSITER,2 bdrm Apt., $980 incl ht/cbl.Nr college/mall. N/P. Refs req’d.Available now.778-980-417 Park TerraceStarting at2 Bdrm. $870 In beautiful Langley City. Also Available:ï Bachelor $700ï 1 Bdrm.V2 Bdrm. $870In beautiful Langley City.Includes Heat, Hot Water,Parking. On-Site Manager. 604-530-0030www.cycloneholdings.ca Find the H OMEof Your Dreams! bcclassified.com Real Estate Section - Class 600’s RENTALS 706 APARTMENT/CONDO ROYAL CRESCENTESTATES22588 Royal Crescent Avenue, Maple Ridge Large Units. Close To Golden Ears Bridge,Shopping & More. GREAT RIVER VIEW! Of ce: 604-463-0857Cell: 604-375-1768 SKYLINE TOWERS102-120 Agens Street,New Westminster Hi-Rise Apartment withRiver View & Indoor Pool.1 BR 7 2 BR Available. Rentincludes heat & hot water.Remodeled building andCommon Area. Gatedunderground parking available.References required. 604-525-2122Bayside Property Services VILLA MARGARETA320-9th Street,New WestminsterSuites Available. All suites have balconies,Underground parking available.Refs. req. Small pet OK. 604-715-7764Bayside Property Services 736 HOMES FOR RENT Maple Ridge - Smaller 3 bdrm. house. Pets welcome. Avail. Oct. 1 $1300/mo. 1-250-379-2123 748 SHARED ACCOMMODATION CENTRAL MAPLE RIDGE house to share, all utils incl. Near amens & WCE. $500/mo. 778-689-8424 749 STORAGE Pitt Meadows Marina 14179 Reichenback Rd!""#$%&'(&)*$+,&$#'"#'-&./0$))1$+21*3""#'-*"#$%&'45$/+$6+&'-*$#*/)%4*'789:.")*;'<"#'="$*>?''(@A>?'B$#>?'C#1DE>'F'C#$/+&#>''G$1)D;'($.H'I/*;'8'+/)&>'$)3$.H+&'H$#E/)%'<"#'*#$DE>'$)3'*#$/+&#>'2)>/*&'!$)$%&# 604.465.7713 RENTALS 752 TOWNHOUSES COQUITLAM - 2 Bdrm. townhouse. $1005/mo. Quiet family complex. No pets. Call: 604-942-2277 Pitt Meadows 19250-119 Ave. Townhouses; 3 BR $1235, share $3500 & 2 BR $1130 shares $2500. Small pet ok. 604-465-1938 PORT COQUITLAM - 2 bedroom townhouse. $905/mo. Quiet family complex! No pets. 604-464-0034 TRANSPORTATION 845 SCRAP CAR REMOVAL ï Autos ï Trucksï Equipment RemovalFREE TOWING 7 days/wk.We pay Up To $500 CA$H Rick Goodchild 604.551.9022 990 FEATURE PAGE <IMG SRC=””http://xsrv212.server-logistics.com/nw-ads/imag-es/ads/Susan Hillis.jpg”” ALT=””http://xsrv212.serverlogis-tics.com/nw-ads/images/ads/Susan Hillis.jpg””>HILLIS, Susan Margaret 1953 - 2015 Susan passed Away peacefully at home August 18th. She had suffered for a number of years with the complications of dia-betes. Her passing ended a long battle fought without complaint. She kept a brave face and always had a positive outlook for her many friends, family and acquaintances. All those who loved and respected Sue’s tenacity and many craft tal-ents will miss her very much. Su-san’s son Damian and husband Geordie will morn the loss of her love. We would like to remind eve-ryone to hug their loved ones lots, as you never know when they will not be there. There will be a cele-bration of life for family and friends the 3rd of September. Com munity N ewspapers We' re at the heart of things 'RQҋWWDNH\RXUPXVFOHV IRUJUDQWHG2YHU &DQDGLDQVZLWKPXVFXODU G\VWURSK\WDNHWKHPYHU\ VHULRXVO\ /HDUQPRUHDWPXVFOHFD ,WWDNHV PXVFOHV WRIROG XSWKLV QHZVSDSHU MAPLE RIDGE & PITT MEADOWS TIMES Thursday, September 10, 2015 A23 Troy Landreville/TIMES Homes continue to sprout up in the Albion area of Maple Ridge. Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows continue to be popular places to buy – especially for single- family homes. TROY LANDREVILLE tlandreville@mrtimes.com House prices continues to inch up in Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows, but that doesn’t seem to be deterring homebuyers. The two communities combined for 151 sales of detached homes in August, second most in 16 regions under the Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver (REBGV) umbrella. Only Richmond (181) saw more detached homes change hands last month. As well, 63 attached homes (such as rowhomes and townhouses) and 25 apartments were sold in Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows last month. This, despite what’s been a steady rise in prices. The benchmark price for a detached home in Maple Ridge is $518,400. That’s up 1.6 per cent from July and nine per cent from August 2014 (the bench- mark price is the estimated sale price of a benchmark property; benchmark represents a typical property within each market). In Pitt Meadows, a detached home was worth, on average, $572,900 in August, up 1.3 per cent from July and 8.5 per cent more expensive than last August. Even so, Maple Ridge is far and away the cheapest place to buy a detached house in Metro Vancouver, and Pitt Meadows isn’t all that far behind. Compare Maple Ridge’s bench- mark price to that of Greater Vancouver, at an eye-popping $1,159,600, and snapping up a house locally is a relative steal. The benchmark price for all residential properties in Metro Vancouver is $708,500. This repre- sents a 12 per cent increase com- pared to August 2014. In the townhouse market, the benchmark price in Maple Ridge last month was $289,600, with Pitt Meadows setting a buyer back, on average, $367,700. Price are down 0.8 per cent in Maple Ridge and up 1.7 per cent in Pitt Meadows from July. The condo market in Maple Ridge has stalled, which is relatively good news for buyers, with the bench- mark price for apartments aver- aging at $169,300. That’s down 0.2 per cent from July. In Pitt Meadows, the average price for a condo is $252,600, up 1.2 per cent from July and 8.3 per cent from August 2014. Sizzling summer Meanwhile the market across Metro Vancouver shows no signs of cooling down. Between June and August, home sales were between 25 and 30 per cent above the 10-year sales average. The REBGV reports that residen- tial property sales in Metro Vancouver reached 3,362 on the Multiple Listing Service in August. This represents a 21.3 per cent increase compared to the 2,771 sales recorded in August 2014, and a decrease of 15.5 per cent compared to the 3,978 sales in July 2015. July sales were 27.9 per cent above the 10-year sales average for the month. “There was no summer lull in our market this year,” said Darcy McLeod, REBGV president and Maple Ridge resident. “They’re motivated, but they’re competing for a smaller supply of homes for sale than is typical for this time of year – that’s the dynamic driving our market right now.” REAL ESTATENo summer ‘lull’ in the housing market “There was no summer lull in our market this year.”Darcy McLeod 17 The two cities are mem- bers of the Pitt Meadows Airport Society, a non- profit volunteer organi- zation that operates the airport. It was supposed to be a recipe for success. ™ Because the airport is publicly owned by the municipalities, the public has a high expectation for efficiency and finan- cial performance and especially for transpar- ency and accountability. Performance has been far below the public expecta- tion, Blakely adds. He criticizes the group's long-range planning, lack of transparency, spot zon- ing, lack of written oper- ating and policy manuals, and ™ appalling relations with tenants and neigh- bours. ™ Lease holders are the sole source of income for the airport, and it makes sense to treat them with respect, and not give them an unnecessary hard time, he said. Although Blakely speaks only for him- self, his comments were echoed by airport busi- ness owners who wished to remain anonymous, because they are tenants at YPK, and fear reper- cussions. ™There's a high level of animosity around the air- port, Blakely said. There is a movement to begin an airport busi- ness owners association, so tenants have a unified voice. YPK business own- ers have been requesting meetings with Pitt Mead- ows Mayor John Becker. Blakely would also like to see the City of Pitt Meadows in sole control of the airport. ™ It would be a lot sim- pler. The duties of that group would be obvious, and the responsibilities, as well. Pitt Meadows residents should decide the future of the airport, since it is entirely within their city, he asserts. He has flown across the country and back five times in his 1947 Luscombe, and makes a point of stopping at small airports like Pitt Mead- ows ± they're often close to town, and have a flying club that welcomes visi- tors. ™ In talking to the peo- ple, the common factor in successful airports is that they're really tied into the community, he said. ™ It should be what the community wants. The biggest deficiency has been the failure to evolve a vision for the future of the airport. That's the opinion of Becker. He has not given up on the idea of Pitt Meadows being the sole member of the airport society, even though Maple Ridge Mayor Nicole Read said it's not going to happen. On July 29, the day be- fore the airport society's AGM, Pitt Meadows council shocked Read and her council with a request that Maple Ridge leave the society. ™ º We have no inten- tion of divesting ourselves in our interest in our joint asset, Read responded in a letter. That's not the end of the conversation. The issue caused the airport society's AGM to be recessed until Oct. 29. City staff have been on holidays and both coun- cils on hiatus, but Becker will soon seek a conversa- tion about control of the airport. It may be him and Read and respective city administrators, or sub committees of coun- cils. ™ We cannot let this sit in the middle of the road, said Becker. He wasn't surprised by Maple Ridge's reaction. But he points out Pitt Meadows gets all of the tax revenue from the air- port businesses, and Pitt council deals with issues arising from ™ the inter- face with the community and the airport, such as resident worries about increased air traffic, noise and safety. He asks what value Ma- ple Ridge's involvement adds to the society. Becker also believes that a future vision of the air- port is critical to ™ take it to a new level. Vancouver Internation- al Airport is pushing out many of its smaller ten- ants, and that is creating an economic opportunity for other airports. ™They are exactly the kinds of businesses we would welcome in Pitt Meadows, he said. Becker also said he knew of problems at the airport in his capac- ity as a local lawyer, and they were coming before council in 2002, when he was first elected. ™ I'm acutely aware of the issues at the airport, he said. Those issues have changed over time, from financial shortfalls to run- way expansion, but there are always challenges. However, Dale Floyd at Coast Dog Aviation is an entrepreneur whose busi- ness has flourished in the environment of the Pitt Meadows airport, and from his perspective the facility is well run. ™ I'm very happy with it, everything is going good, he said. ™ We're trying hard to make it a profes- sional airport. !"#$%&'()('&*+&,-#.*/#012 Airport from front www.rmcollege.ca email rmc@sd42.ca T 604 466 6555 F 604 463 5437 20575 Thorne Avenue, Maple Ridge, BC How To Get Better Grades In School 20017 T Oct 13 7:00 -8:30 Pm $49/1 Session Pilates With Kathy White, Professional Trainer And Stott Pilates Certifi ed Since 2003. 20013 W Sep 9-Dec 16 6:30 -7:30 PM $119/14 Sessions $10 Drop-In Fee Downsizing And Clearing Clutter (Or How To Organize Your Life) With Simplifi ed Solutions 20022 M Oct 5 6:30-9:00 PM$39/1 Session Hair Cutting Class20031 W Sep 30 6:00-9:00 PM $129/1 Session Equipment Included In Course Fee Computers For Absolute Beginners20000 Sa Oct 17-Nov 7 10:00 AM-12:00 PM $119/4 Sessions Soap Making, Pure And Simple All Supplies Included In Course Fee. 20001 W Oct 7 6:30 -9:00 PM $49/1 Session Writing Under The Skin Memoir Writing As A Tool For Insight And Healing.20016 W Sep 23-Oct 28 6:30 -9:00 PM $179/6 Sessions Introduction To Your Digital Camera With Eric Svendsen20018 T Sep 22-Oct 13 7:00 -9:30 PM $119/4 Sessions Finding Your Family Tree Introduction To Genealogy 20028 Sa Sep 26 9:00 AM-4:00 PM $79/1 Session How To Overcome Obstacles In Your Life: Kiss Your Excuses Goodbye! With Christina Waschko 20037 Sa Oct 17 9:00AM-12:00PM$39/1 Session Assertiveness And Self Confi dence With William Duncan 20009 T Sep 22 6:30 -9:30 PM $79/3 Sessions Stop Lecturing Start CommunicatingWith Maria Gallo. 20014 Sa Sep 19 10:00 Am-12:00 Pm $39/1 Session Smarter Selling 101 With Dominic Kotarski 20040 Th Sep 24 6:30-9:30Pm $39/1 Session Italian Conversation & Food With Maria Angotti20043 M Sept 28-Dec 7 6:30-8:00Pm $159/10 Sessions $10 Material Fee Spanish Beginners Spanish With Adriana Cassullo 20003 T Sep 22 6:30 -8:00 Pm$159/10 Sessions Text: $25 Spanish For Travelers Spanish With Adriana Cassullo 20004 W Sep 23 6:30 -8:00 Pm $159/10 Sessions Text: $25 Spanish For Travelers 2 20005 T Sep 22 8:00 -9:30 Pm $159/10 Sessions Spanish Intermediate Pre Requisite: Spanish Beginners Or Equivalent. Uses The Same Text As Spanish For Beginners. 20006 W Sep 23 8:00 -9:30 Pm $159/10 Sessions Spanish Advanced Pre Requisite: Spanish Intermediate Or Equivalent. Uses The Same Text As Spanish For Beginners. 20007 Th Sep 24 6:30 -8:00 Pm $159/10 Sessions Spanish For Travelers 3 20008 Th Sep 24 8:00 -9:30 Pm $159/10 Sessions General Interest & Personal Development PROPOSED STRUCTURE: SBA Canada is inviting the public to comment on a proposed multi tenant telecommunications facility con sisting of a 50 meter monopole structure and ancillary radio equipment situated on a former landfill property on Cottonwood Drive, Maple Ridge. LOCATION: 11400 Cottonwood Drive, Maple Ridge, BC. COORDINATES: 49 12í 46.84î North, 122 34í 20.99î West ANY PERSON may comment by close of business day on September 27th, 2015 with respect to this matter. SBA CONTACT: Further information can be obtained by contacting: Brian Gregg, SitePath Consulting Ltd. 1903 ñ 838 W Hastings Street, Vancouver, BC V6C 0A6 Email: briangregg@sitepathconsulting.com PUBLIC NOTICE PROPOSED SBA CANADA TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 50 METER MONOPOLE STRUCTURE !!"##"$%""&'()*+,'Call Cheryl today to ask about our all inclusive, just one fl at fee, monthly rate. 604-467-2808 greystoneresidence.ca 11657 Ritchie Ave, Maple Ridge, Behind McDonalds on 228th St. Come join the fun starting at 10:30 am Open to everyone! Join us for a day of fun as we celebrate Grandparents Day with a Country Fair. 100th birthday celebration for our princess Joan Martin with a performance by Lauren Webb Co n c e s s io n sG am e sPriz e s& M o r e m e sGRANDPARENTS DAY ANDPAPPRENTS DA SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 13 QQQQQQQQQQQQQQ A&W 228th & Lougheed Hwy A&W Haney Place Mall A&W 20468 Lougheed Hwy A&W Fremont Village Port Coquitlam ! " # $ $ " % ! & ' % % $ ( ! ! " # $ $ " % ! & ) # * + (A ! " # ! " # $ % & # M' ( ) & # C% * ( + $ ) & #P ! " B# $ % & $ ' DELICIOUS! A&W 8 11 15! ! ! " # 4 On Thursday, August 27, we came together as an A&W family all across Canada, united under the great cause of ending multiple sclerosis. QQQQQQQQQQQQQQ CRUISIN’ TO END MS A hugeThank You QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ QQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQQ to our community for your contributions! 16 -- Friday, September 4, 2015 -- THE NEWS - www.mapleridgenews.com 18 pmelnychuk@mapleridgenews.com Maple Ridge fire, police and public works were kept hopping Aug. 29 when a wild storm with winds of up to 100 km/h walloped the West Coast. Public works crews an- swered 180 calls relating to downed trees, power outages and live wires on the ground. Russ Carmichael, direc- tor of engineering opera- tions, told council Tues- day that 11 trees fell on to houses in Maple Ridge. As for the Maple Ridge Fire Department, it re- ceived 75 calls in a 12- hour period compared to an average of about a doz- en calls a day, deputy chief Howard Exner added. However, there was only one car crash, when trees at 116th Avenue crashed down on to a moving vehicle and two parked cars. With no electricity as a result of widespread out- ages across Metro Van- couver, there was no pow- er to pump out the sewage stations. That required crews to move mobile generators from station to station in order to keep them pumped out. ™ A lot of stuff you didn't see, but at least we kept the taps running, Carmi- chael said. Carmichael agreed with the theory that the extensive damage from the storm was caused by drought-stressed trees in full foilage in soil recently softened by rain were eas- ily blown down by the wind. !"#$%&'()*%&+,%#-&-"#.&/011(1*2 PHOTO COURTESY OF GORVING.COMOFGORVING.COMTICKETS ADULT $8 | SENIORS $6 | YOUTH $5 | CHILDREN FREE FAMILY PACK $20 | MULTI DAY PASS $10 | TRADEX ABBOTSFORD rvshowsbc.com | 1.866.739.4999 BC’S ONLY FALL RV SHOW SEE THE LATEST MOTORHOMES, TOWABLES, CAMPERS AND MORE! SELLINGYOUR RV? CALL 604.870.4678OR VISITRVSHOWSBC.COM TO BOOK YOURSPOT! FREE RVLIFESTYLE SEMINARS: t RV TRAVEL ADVICE t TECHNICAL & DIY TOPICSPHOTO COURTESY OF GORVING.COMTICKETS ADULT $8 | SENIORS $6 | YOUTH $5 | CHILDREN FREE FAMILY PACK $20 | MULTI DAY PASS $10 | TRADEX ABBOTSFORD rvshowsbc.com | 1.866.739.4999 BC’S ONLY FALL RV SHOW SEE THE LATEST MOTORHOMES, TOWABLES, CAMPERS AND MORE! SELLINGYOUR RV? CALL 604.870.4678OR VISITRVSHOWSBC.COM TO BOOK YOURSPOT! FFFFRRREEEEEE RRRVVVVVLLLLIIFFFFEEESSSTTTTYYYYLLLLEEE SSSEEEMMMMIINNNNAAAARRRSSS::: tttt RRRVVVVV TTTTRRRAAAAVVVVAAAAEEELLLLL AAAADDDDVVVVIICCCCEEE tttt TTTTTEEECCCCHHHNNNNIICCCCAAAALLLLL &&&&DDDIIYYYYY TTTTOOOOPPPPIICCCCSSS FREE RVLIFESTYLE SEMINARS: t RV TRAVEL ADVICE t TECHNICAL & DIY TOPICS 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, BC V2X 6A9 T: 604-463-5221 F: 604-467-7329 mapleridge.ca Notice of Public Hearing TAKE NOTICE THAT a Public Hearing will be held in the Council Chamber of the Municipal Hall, 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, North-East corner entrance, at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, September 15, 2015 to consider the following bylaws: 1) 2014-014-RZ MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING BYLAW NO. 7071-2014 LEGAL: Lot 3, Section 28, Township 12, New Westminster District, Plan 3007 Except: Reference Plan 15218, Plans 66891, LMP46668, LMP47584, BCP10664, BCP42355, EPP9001 and EPP23139 LOCATION: 13316 235 Street FROM: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) TO: R-1 (Residential District) and RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) PURPOSE: To permit a subdivision into 13 lots. 2) 2015-212-RZ MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING BYLAW NO. 7161-2015 PURPOSE: To amend the Maple Ridge Zoning bylaw to prohibit the sale of liquor and wine in grocery stores by adding the following under Part 4, GENERAL REGULATIONS, Section 401(3); g) The sale in or from a grocery store, or in or from a store located in a grocery store, of beer, cider, wine or spirits, or any other product intended for human consumption, that contains more than 1% alcohol by volume, except a product produced primarily for cooking purposes. AND FURTHER TAKE NOTICE that a copy of the aforesaid bylaws and copies of staff reports and other information considered by Council relevant to the matters contained in the bylaws will also be available for public inspection at the Municipal Hall, Planning Department counter, between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. from September 3, 2015 to September 15, 2015, Saturdays, Sundays and Statutory Holidays excepted. Some of this information will also be posted on the City website www.mapleridge.ca on the Your Government /Meet Your Council/Council Meetings page. ALL PERSONS who deem themselves affected by any of these bylaws shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard at the Public Hearing before Council on the matters contained in the bylaws or by making a written submission to the attention of the Manager of Legislative Services or by sending an e-mail to the Clerk’s Department at clerks@mapleridge.ca, by 4:00 p.m., September 15, 2015. Please note that all written submissions provided in response to this consultation will become part of the public record which includes the submissions being made available for public inspection.. Dated this 3rd day of September, 2015. Ceri Marlo Manager of Legislative Services PROPOSED STRUCTURE: SBA Canada is inviting the public to comment on a proposed multi tenant telecommunications facility con sisting of a 50 meter monopole structure and ancillary radio equipment situated on a former landfill property on Cottonwood Drive, Maple Ridge. LOCATION: 11400 Cottonwood Drive, Maple Ridge, BC. COORDINATES: 49 12í 46.84î North, 122 34í 20.99î West ANY PERSON may comment by close of business day on September 27th, 2015 with respect to this matter. SBA CONTACT: Further information can be obtained by contacting: Brian Gregg, SitePath Consulting Ltd. 1903 ñ 838 W Hastings Street, Vancouver, BC V6C 0A6 Email: briangregg@sitepathconsulting.com PUBLIC NOTICE PROPOSED SBA CANADA TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY 50 METER MONOPOLE STRUCTURE !!"##"$%""&'()*+,'www.discoverycommunitycollege.com 604-463-1174 Call now to receive a free information package Your Career Starts Here DCC Campus located inside Retirement Concepts GRADUATEEMPLOYMENTRATE (2014)96%.25 Just laid off? WE HAVE RETRAINING OPTIONS. You will qualify for a $1500 bursary. Funding may be available. Evenings & Weekends Available Become aHEALTH CAREASSISTANT Join one of the most in demandprofessions in B.C. Earn your Diploma in only 39 weeks Hands-on accelerated training by skilled professionals, with a schedule that lets you earn while you learn. Get credit for your training towards a nursing career 2.5 days per week 14 -- Friday, September 11, 2015 -- THE NEWS - www.mapleridgenews.com 19 APPENDIX C - PUBLIC COMMENTS AND RESPONSES A. Comments Received During the Public Comment Period – August 21st to September 27th, 2015 During the public comment period, SBA received comments from twenty-five (25) members of the public regarding the proposed communication site. Of the twenty-five (25) comments received, seventeen (17) support the proposal, five (5) are non-supportive, and three (3) are neutral or pertain to information seeking only. The fact that the vast majority (68 percent) of the commenters provided supportive feedback reflects the fact that there is a need to improve wireless service in the community. This level of support is not common for proposed towers such as this. Regarding the method through which comments were submitted, fifteen (15) were received via e-mail, six (6) were received at the public meeting, three (3) were received via regular mail, and one (1) was received via a phone discussion. Supportive Comments Seventeen (17) project supporters stated the following reasons for their support: •The majority of the supporters are wireless device users and they feel that there is very poor or no wireless service in the Cottonwood community across all wireless carriers; •The tower design and location are acceptable; •This project is long overdue due to a long-standing lack of service. In response to receiving the supportive comments, SBA acknowledged receipt of each comment in writing and welcomed each individual to the public meeting. Opposed Comments Five (5) non-supporters stated the following general reasons for their opposition to the project: •Health and safety concerns; •Potential visual impacts and their perception that this may impact property values; •Land use and site selection concerns. In response to receiving the non-supportive comments, SBA acknowledged receipt of each comment in writing and welcomed each individual to the public meeting. The following detailed information was also provided to each commenter regarding each of the above noted concern categories. Health & Safety Concerns – SBA Response SBA provided information sheets from Health Canada and the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority Chief Medical Health Officer and noted the following information on health and safety: •Canada has one of the most rigorous safety codes in the world for devices that emit radio frequency (RF) energy. Specifically, wireless carriers in Canada must comply with Health Canada's Safety Code 6 - a standard that is comparable to the European Union safety regulations. •Safety Code 6 was developed and recently updated in March of 2015 by Health Canada as the exposure standard for the regulation of mobile phones, base stations, Wi-Fi and other radio communications emitting infrastructure. •The exposure limits are the result of thorough and ongoing scientific review and are comparable to similar safety codes in Europe, the USA, Japan and Australia. •Industry Canada has made compliance with Safety Code 6 a condition of license for all Canadian wireless carriers. •Regarding public safety, over 70% of all calls to 9-11 and other emergency service providers are now made through wireless communication devices. •The following link from Industry Canada discusses frequently asked questions regarding health and safety and supports the above noted points: http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf08792.html •The following fact sheet link from Health Canada discusses what Safety Code 6 is and also supports the above noted points: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/radiation/radio_guide- lignes_direct/safety_code_6_fs-code_securite_6_fr-eng.php 20 •The following link from the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority indicates that there are no science-based health concerns associated with wireless infrastructure as long as Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 is followed: https://www.vch.ca/media/CMHO_CellPhones-June2011.pdf Visual Impact and Property Value Concerns – SBA Response •SBA provided three photo simulations showing how the proposed tower would look, if constructed, from various vantage points including Cottonwood Drive and 116th Ave and Kanaka Mews. •SBA explained that the photo simulations demonstrate that only the upper half of the monopole will be visible due to the fact that the lower portion of the tower is to be screened by mature trees. •SBA noted that an aesthetic monopole design was selected to minimize view impacts, rather than a more obtrusive guyed tower or lattice tower structure. •It was also confirmed that there is no consistent evidence to suggest that property values are impacted by the presence of cell towers as supported by Industry Canada. •The following Industry Canada webpage discusses various property value studies and the rationale as to why property values are not to be the subject of an antenna consultation: http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf08353.html Land Use and Site Selection Concerns – SBA Response In response to concerns regarding land use compatibility and the site selection process, SBA provided the following information: •The proposed site location was selected in response to a City-led initiative that is attempting to use City lands for such towers where possible; •The subject property is a large former landfill property making it compatible for the proposed use; •The large subject lot enables the tower to be setback approximately 100 meters from the nearest residences, mitigating potential impacts on adjacent residences; •The footprint of the proposed monopole has been kept to a minimum as only 10 m x 10 m of space is needed for the foundation and ancillary equipment; •Existing access roads can be used to service the tower thereby preventing the need for timber removal; •The proposal is for an aesthetically integrated cellular phone tower (monopole design) in the northeast corner of the subject property; •There are mature trees on the site that will mitigate view disturbances; •The proposed communication site is located in such a way as to not impede the decommissioning of the landfill, nor affect the future use as a park, which is still the plan according to the City; •The tower will address cellular phone coverage issues in the area for multiple carriers, mitigating the proliferation of cell towers in the community; •The objective of the proposed tower is to provide high-speed, high-bandwidth wireless service to the Cottonwood community and, as a result, the infrastructure needs to be located in the immediate vicinity of the community; •Locating the tower further afield on a mountainside would not provide the needed service improvements to the desired service area; •There are no industrial or commercial zoned lands of an appropriate location that would enable the needed service improvements; •An environmental assessment was completed for the proposal and the consultant found that there will be no significant impacts due to the small footprint of the proposed facility. B. Comments Received at the Public Meeting – September 17th, 2015 Beyond the above noted public comments, SBA also had sixteen (16) attendees at the public meeting. Of the sixteen (16) public meeting attendees, only six (6) submitted comment sheets during the public meeting, five (5) of which stated support for the proposed communication site and one (1) neither stated support nor opposition but had questions about potential environmental impacts. Given that 436 members of the public were invited to the public meeting via regular mail and only 16 attended, this suggests that there is limited public concern with the proposal. 21 C. Comments Received by the Private Property Owner Directly to the North of the Proposed Tower (The Peereboom Family) During the consultation, SBA received detailed feedback from the Peereboom family as they own the large lot directly to the north of the proposed tower. The Peereboom’s expressed the following general concerns via the submission of two letters and a comment sheet. •The proximity of the proposed tower relative to the what they perceive to be the most developable portion of their large property; •Privacy concerns during tower construction and maintenance; •A fear that the tower could collapse onto their property, if constructed; •Health concerns and the perception that this could impact property values; •The location of the SBA tower within a sanitary sewer right of way and the concern that this could hinder future development of the Peereboom’s property; •A preference to relocate the proposed tower approximately 50-100 meters south of the current proposed location; •A preference for a group presentation at the public meeting rather than one-on-one discussions; •The fact that only sixteen (16) members of the public attended the public meeting and that it could have been better attended; •A concern that the comments submitted at the public meeting were not recorded; •A suggestion that business cards should have been provided at the public meeting; •An opinion that they did not leave the public meeting better informed than when they arrived. D. Comments Received After the Public Comment Period - September 28th onward (Late Comments) Upon the closing of the public comment period required by the City’s Telecommunications Antenna Structures Siting Protocol, SBA received ten (10) additional public comments via email. Of these ten (10) late comments, nine (9) state opposition to the proposed facility and one (1) states support. The nine (9) late oppositional comments are largely the result of the fact that a community member went door- to-door requesting community members to write letters of opposition regarding the proposal. The concerns expressed reflect the same general concern categories noted above including health and safety concerns, visual impact concerns, potential property value impacts and land use or site selection concerns. Most of the late comments were submitted by residents who live in the community the west of the proposed tower. Many of these commenters had the misapprehension that the tower is proposed for Cottonwood Drive and 116 Avenue which is not correct since the tower is setback significantly into the former landfill property. City of Maple Ridge TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: November 10, 2015 and Members of Council FILE NO: FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Council SUBJECT: 2016-2020 Business Planning Dates EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Presentation of departmental Business Plans to Mayor and Council is scheduled for December 1, 2, and 3, 2015. These presentations will assist Council in development of the five year financial plan. In addition, the evening of Thursday, December 3, the City will host a public information session where staff will present an overview of the financial plan and engage in a question and answer period with the public through a variety of media including Facebook, twitter and email. Below is the schedule for the sessions. A more detailed agenda and background material will be provided to Council and the public the week of November 9, 2015. All sessions will be in Council Chambers at Municipal Hall and will be live-streamed on the website. A public question and answer period will follow the presentations. Tuesday, December 1 10:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m. Department Presentations Public Question & Answer Period Wednesday, December 2 10:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m. Department Presentations Public Question & Answer Period Thursday, December 3 10:00 a.m. – 3:00 p.m. Department Presentations Public Question & Answer Period 6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Public Information Session RECOMMENDATION: This report is provided for information only. No resolution is required. “Original signed by Ceri Marlo”___________ Prepared by: Ceri Marlo, C.M.C. Manager of Legislative Services and Emergency Program “Original signed by Paul Gill”____________ Concurrence: Paul Gill, B.B.A, C.G.A, F.R.M Acting Chief Administrative Officer :cm 1201