HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-12-06 Council Agenda and Reports.pdf
Page 1
City of Maple Ridge
COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
December 6, 2016
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 AMENDMENTS TO THE AGENDA
300 APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
400 ADOPTION AND RECEIPT OF MINUTES
401 Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 29, 2016
402 Minutes of the Special Council Meetings of:
• November 28, 2016
• November 29, 2016
• November 30, 2016
500 PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL
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.
Council Meeting Agenda
December 6, 2016
Council Chamber
Page 2 of 8
600 DELEGATIONS
601 CP Holiday Train Event and Update on the Friends in Need Food Bank
Programs
• Lynda Lawrence, Chairperson, Board of Directors, Friends in Need
Food Bank Society
700 ITEMS ON CONSENT
701 Minutes
701.1 Minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meetings of
November 24 and November 30, 2016
701.2 Minutes of Meetings of Committees and Commissions of Council
• Public Art Steering Committee – September 20, 2016
702 Reports
703 Correspondence
704 Release of Items from Closed Council Status
800 UNFINISHED BUSINESS
900 CORRESPONDENCE
1000 BYLAWS
Note: Item 1001 is from the December 6, 2016 Public Hearing
Bylaws for Third Reading
1001 2016-436-RZ
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.7298-2016
To establish a farm home plate that limits house size and setbacks for
residential and accessory residential uses on properties within the
Agricultural Land Reserve.
Third reading
Council Meeting Agenda
December 6, 2016
Council Chamber
Page 3 of 8
Bylaws for Final Reading
1002 2014-104-RZ, 23050 136 Avenue
Staff report dated December 6, 2016 recommending final reading
1002.1 Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7167-2015
To designate land adjacent to proposed Lot 8 from Eco Clusters to
Conservation
Final reading
1002.2 Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7124-2014
To rezone from R-1 (Residential District) and R-3 (Special Amenity
Residential District) to R-2 (Urban Residential District) to permit a future
subdivision of 21 lots
Final reading
1003 2012-109-RZ, 24979 108 Avenue
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012
Staff report dated December 6, 2016 recommending final reading of Maple
Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012 to rezone from RS-3 (One
Family Rural Residential) to RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density)
Residential) to permit a future subdivision of 13 lots
Final reading
COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1100 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Public Works and Development Services
1101 2016-299-AL, 12176 237 Street, Application for Exclusion from the
Agricultural Land Reserve, Addendum Report
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 providing options for consideration
for Application 2016-299-AL to exclude approximately 1.12 hectares (2.8
acres) from the Agricultural Land Resrve.
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.
Amended
December
6, 2016
Council Meeting Agenda
December 6, 2016
Council Chamber
Page 4 of 8
1102 2016-434-AL, 11680 252 Street, Application for Exclusion from the
Agricultural Land Reserve
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that Application
2016-434-AL to subdivide 2.5 hectares (6.2 acres) of land within the
Agricultural Land Reserve not be forwarded to the Agricultural Land
Commission and providing options for consideration.
1103 2016-411-RZ, 21188 Wicklund Avenue, RS-1 to R-1
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that Application
2016-411-RZ to rezone from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-1
(Residential District) to permit subdivision into two single family residential
lots not be given first reading.
1104 2016-052-RZ, 22260 and 22292 122 Avenue and 12159 and 12167 223
Street, LUC and RS-1 to RM-2
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7243-2016 to designate
subject properties from Single Family to Low Rise Apartment be given
second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing and that Maple Ridge
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7244-2016 to rezone from LUC (Land Use
Contracts) and RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to RM-2 (Medium
Density Apartment Residential) to permit construction of a 291 unit multi-
family rental housing development within the Town Centre.
1105 2016-325-RZ, 22606 Dewdney Trunk Road, Temporary Taxi Dispatch Use
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7283-2016 to designate
22606 Dewdney Trunk Road to permit a temporary taxi dispatch use be
given second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
1106 2014-104-SD, 23050 136 Avenue, Local Area Service
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that a local area
service bylaw be authorized for enhanced landscape maintenance costs of
lands referred to as “East Hampstead” and that East Hampstead Local
Area Service Bylaw No. 7278-2016 to require property owners within the
development to pay an annual fee as a Local Service Tax for enhanced
landscape maintenance areas be given first, second and third readings.
Amended
December
6, 2016
Council Meeting Agenda
December 6, 2016
Council Chamber
Page 5 of 8
1107 2015-346-CP, Wildfire Development Permit Update
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7187-2015 to amend
recently adopted Wildfire Development Permit Areas to remove references
to the National Fire Protection Association standards and provide greater
flexibility when reviewing development applications be given second
reading as amended and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
1108 2016-448-CP, 13150, 13120, 13070, 13030, 12990 ,12940, 13655 256
Street; 25775, 25801, 25927 128 Avenue; 26185 130 Avenue; 13301
251A Street; 13055 251A Street; and 25100 Alouette Road
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7299-2016 to designate 15
properties in the 256 Street and 128 Avenue vicinity from Suburban
Residential and Institutional to Industrial to expand employment
opportunities in the vicinity of existing and well-utilized employment lands.
1109 2012-109-DVP, 24979 108 Avenue
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that the Corporate
Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2012-109-DVP to reduce minimum
lot widths for lots 1, 10, 11, 12 and 13,
1110 Council Policy 6.21 – Development Sign Policy Review
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that Council Policy
6.21 –Development Sign Policy dated September 12, 2012 be repealed
and replaced with the revised Council Policy 6.21 – Development Sign
Policy.
Financial and Corporate Services (including Fire and Police)
1131 2017-2021 Financial Plan Bylaw
Staff report dated December 6, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge
2017-2021 Financial Plan Bylaw No. 7300-2016 be given first, second and
third readings.
1132 Council Procedure Amending Bylaw No. 7301-2016 – Release of Vote
Pattern from Closed Meetings
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge
Council Procedure Amending Bylaw No. 7301-2016 be given first, second
and third readings.
Amended
December
6, 2016
Council Meeting Agenda
December 6, 2016
Council Chamber
Page 6 of 8
1133 2017 Acting Mayor, Committee & Commission Appointments
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that the Acting Mayor
schedule and appointments to Government Agencies, Advisory and/or
Legislated Committees, Special Committees, Community Groups and
Organizations and Standing Committees be approved.
1134 Bylaw for Highway Closure & Dedication Removal for a Portion of Laneway
(18000 Block of 226 Street and 227 Street)
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge
Highway Closure & Dedication Removal Bylaw No. 7291-2016 for closure
and dedicate removal of a portion of laneway in the 18000 block of 226
Street and 227 Street be given first, second and third readings.
1135 Award of Contract, Construction of Fire/Tanker Truck, Fire Truck
Replacement, Engine 32
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that the contract for
construction of one fire pumper/tanker truck be awarded to Hub Fire
Engines Ltd. and that the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the
contract.
1136 Award of Contract, Construction of Tower Truck Fire Apparatus, Fire Truck
Replacement, Tower 1
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that the contract for
construction of one tower truck fire apparatus be awarded to Safetek
Emergency Vehicles Ltd. and Smeal Fire Apparatus and that the Corporate
Officer be authorized to execute the contract.
Community Development and Recreation Service
1151 Maple Ridge Civic and Cultural Facility – Phased Design Process
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that Phase One of the
design process for the Maple Ridge Civic and Cultural Master Plan be
funded from the Parks Recreation and Culture Master Plan funding and
that staff be directed to issue a Request for Proposal to conduct phase one
of the detailed design process.
Amended
December
6, 2016
Council Meeting Agenda
December 6, 2016
Council Chamber
Page 7 of 8
1152 Municipal Advisory Committee on Accessibility Issues Recommendations
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that the Maple Ridge-
Pitt Meadows Municipal Advisory Committee of Accessibility Issues
continue as a joint committee with the City of Pitt Meadows, sharing all
associated costs equally and that staff work with the committee to
establish an updated committee structure and bylaw.
1153 Maple Ridge Leisure Centre Retrofit Update
Staff report dated December 5, 2016 recommending that a report be
provided on the process of updating existing Leisure Centre retrofit costs,
communication plan and customer accommodations.
Administration
1171
Other Committee Issues
1191
1200 STAFF REPORTS
1300 OTHER MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT
1400 NOTICES OF MOTION AND MATTERS FOR FUTURE MEETING
1500 QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
Council Meeting Agenda
December 6, 2016
Council Chamber
Page 8 of 8
1600 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 bylaws 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
November 29, 2016
The Minutes of the City Council Meeting held on November 29, 2016 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 E.C. Swabey, Chief Administrative Officer
Councillor B. Masse W, McCormick, Acting General Manager of Parks,
Councillor G. Robson Recreation and Cultural Services
Councillor T. Shymkiw P. Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services
Councillor C. Speirs F. Quinn, General Manager Public Works and Development
Services
ABSENT C. Carter, Director of Planning
Councillor C. Bell L. Darcus, Manager of Legislative Services
Councillor K. Duncan A. Gaunt, Confidential Secretary
Other staff as required
C. Goddard, Manager of Development and Environmental
Services
M. Baski, Planner 1
B. Elliott, Manager of Community Planning
D. Pollock, Municipal Engineer
Note: These Minutes are also posted on the City’s Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca
The meeting was live streamed and recorded by the City of Maple Ridge
100 CALL TO ORDER
200 INTRODUCTION OF ADDITIONAL AGENDA ITEMS
A presentation of the Business Partner Award by the Agricultural
Association to the City of Maple Ridge was added to the agenda as Item
601. Section 600 was renumbered.
401
Council Meeting Minutes
November 29, 2016
Page 2 of 10
300 APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
The agenda as revised was approved.
400 ADOPTION AND RECEIPT OF MINUTES
401 Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 15, 2016
R/2016-533
It was moved and seconded
That the minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of November 15, 2016 be
adopted as circulated.
CARRIED
402 Minutes of the Public Hearing of November 22, 2016
R/2016-534
It was moved and seconded
That the minutes of the Public Hearing of November 22, 2016 be adopted
as circulated.
CARRIED
500 PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL – Nil
600 DELEGATIONS
601 Presentation of Business Partner Award by the Agricultural Association to
the City of Maple Ridge
•Lorraine Bates, Manager, Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows Agricultural
Association
•Tom Cameron, President, Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows Agricultural
Association
Ms. Bates provided information on the 2016 Outstanding Business Partner
Award which she is presenting to the City of Maple Ridge and described the
quality partnership between the Agricultural Association and the City of
Maple Ridge. She spoke highly of Parks, Recreation and Culture staff and
their responses to the needs and concerns of the Association and thanked
the City for its support over the last 25 plus years.
Council Meeting Minutes
November 29, 2016
Page 3 of 10
Mayor Read accepted the award from the Agricultural Association. On
behalf of Council she thanked the Association for the nomination for the
award and thanked them for their continuing work.
Mayor Read acknowledged Tom Cameron’s award as National Fair
Champion which he recently received from the Canadian Association of
Fairs and Exhibitions. She spoke of Mr. Cameron’s commitment as a
volunteer for the local fair and highlighted his numerous contributions to
the community. She presented Mr. Cameron with a thank you gift for his
dedication.
602 Wildsafe BC Presentation
•Dan Mikolay, Wildsafe BC Coordinator for Maple Ridge
Mr. Mikolay gave a PowerPoint presentation providing an update on the
Wildsafe BC Program. He provided a history of the program, highlighted the
bear resistant organics bins available at the Recycling Society and outlined
education programs and found milestones for the program. He advised
that the Wildsafe BC program has applied for “Bear Smart” Community
status and is on track to being one of first in the Lower Mainland to obtain
that status.
700 ITEMS ON CONSENT
701 Minutes
701.1 Minutes of the Development Agreements Committee Meeting of November
17, 2016
701.2 Minutes of Meetings of Committees and Commissions of Council
•Municipal Advisory Committee on Accessibility Issues – March 17, 2016
•Municipal Advisory Committee of Accessibility Issues – May 19, 2016
•Environmental Advisory Committee – October 12, 2016
701.3 Minutes of the Committee of the Whole of November 21, 2016
702 Reports
702.1 2016 Council Expenses
(Item 1131 on the November 21, 2016 Committee of the Whole Agenda)
Staff report dated November 21, 2016 providing an update on Council
expenses to the end of October 2016.
Council Meeting Minutes
November 29, 2016
Page 4 of 10
702.2 Disbursements for the month ended October 31, 2016
(Item 1132 on the November 21, 2016 Committee of the Whole Agenda)
Staff report dated November 21, 2016 recommending that the
disbursements for the month ended October 31, 2016 be received for
information.
702.3 Filming Review
(Item 1171 on the November 21, 2016 Committee of the Whole Agenda)
Staff report dated November 21, 2016 providing highlights of the film
industry in BC in general and Maple Ridge in specific.
703 Correspondence – Nil
704 Release of Items from Closed Council Status
From the November 21, 2016 Closed Council Meeting
04.01 Active Transportation Advisory Committee Membership –
2017/2018 Member Appointments of Kino Roy, David Rush,
Bijan Naghipour, Ineke Boekhorst
04.02 Sale of Municipal Property – Laneway (22600 Block of 119
Avenue/ Selkirk Avenue)
R/2016-535
It was moved and seconded
That items 701.1 to 704 on the Consent Agenda be received.
CARRIED
800 UNFINISHED BUSINESS – Nil
900 CORRESPONDENCE – Nil
Council Meeting Minutes
November 29, 2016
Page 5 of 10
1000 BYLAWS
Note: Item 1001 is from the November 22, 2016 Public Hearing
Bylaws for Third Reading
1001 2015-253-RZ, 23539 Gilker Hill
1001.1 Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7284-2016
To designate from conservation to urban residential
Third reading
R/2016-536
It was moved and seconded
That Bylaw No. 7284-2016 be given third reading.
CARRIED
1001.2 Maple Ridge Zoning Amending Bylaw No. 7179-2016
To rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse
Residential) to permit the future development of 43 townhouse units
Third reading
R/2016-537
It was moved and seconded
That Bylaw No. 7179-2016 be given third reading.
CARRIED
Bylaws for Final Reading
1002 Maple Ridge Business Licencing and Regulation Amending Bylaw No.
7250-2016
To allow food truck vending on City Property, including streets
Final reading
R/2016-538
It was moved and seconded
That Bylaw No. 7250-2016 be adopted.
CARRIED
Council Meeting Minutes
November 29, 2016
Page 6 of 10
1003 Maple Ridge Highway Closure and Dedication Removal Bylaw No.7293-
2016
To permanently close a portion of 136 Avenue Roadway (23050 block of
136 Avenue) and remove the public highway dedication
Final reading
R/2016-539
It was moved and seconded
That Bylaw No. 7293-2016 be adopted.
CARRIED
1004 Maple Ridge Highway Closure & Dedication Removal Bylaw No. 7294-2016
To permanently close a portion of 127 Avenue Roadway (22300 block of
127 Avenue and remove the public highway dedication
Final reading
R/2016-540
It was moved and seconded
That Bylaw No. 7294-2016 be adopted.
CARRIED
Public Works and Development Services
1101 2014-009-CP, Hammond Area Plan Bylaw, Second Reading
Staff report dated November 21, 2016 recommending that Hammond Area
Plan Bylaw No. 7279-2016 to guide land use and development in the
Hammond Area be given second reading as amended and be forwarded to
Public Hearing.
R/2016-541
It was moved and seconded
That Bylaw No. 7279-2016 as amended be given second reading and be
forwarded to Public Hearing.
CARRIED
Council Meeting Minutes
November 29, 2016
Page 7 of 10
1102 2014-009-CP, 11240 and 11230 206 Street; 20605, 20617, 20627,
20643, 20645, 20661 Maple Crescent; 11233, 11202 and 11391
Dartford Street; 20657 and 20598 Lorne Avenue; PIDs 003-435-181 and
004-963-415, Rezoning of Hammond Village Commercial Area and Zoning
Bylaw Amendments
Staff report dated November 21, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7292-2016 to create the H-2 (Hammond Village
Commercial) zone and to rezone from C-3 (Town Centre Commercial) and
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to H-2 (Hammond Village Commercial)
and P-4 (Church Institutional) to align with the policies of the Hammond
Area Plan be given first and second readings and be forwarded to Public
Hearing.
R/2016-542
It was moved and seconded
That Bylaw No. 7292-2016 be given first and second readings
and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
CARRIED
1103 Award of Contract ITT-EN16-51: Installation of Rectangular Rapid Flashing
Beacons (RRFB) at Six Uncontrolled Crosswalks on Dewdney Trunk Road
Staff report dated November 21, 2016 recommending that Contract ITT-
EN16-51: Installation of Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) at Six
Uncontrolled Crosswalks on Dewdney Trunk Road be awarded to Fraser City
Installations (1989) Ltd., that a project contingency of 10% be approved to
address variations in field conditions and that the Corporate Officer be
authorized to execute the contract.
R/2016-543
It was moved and seconded
That Contract ITT-EN16-51, Installation of Rectangular Rapid Flashing
Beacons (RRFB) at Six Uncontrolled Crosswalks on Dewdney Trunk Road,
be awarded to Fraser City Installations (1989) Ltd. in the amount of
$168,200 excluding taxes; and
That a project contingency of 10% or $16,800 be approved to address
potential variations in field conditions; and further
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the contract.
CARRIED
Council Meeting Minutes
November 29, 2016
Page 8 of 10
1104 Local Area Service – 20300 Block of Hampton Street
Staff report dated November 21, 2016 recommending that a Request for
Proposal for consulting services to design and manage the construction of
the 20300 Block of Hampton Street Local Area Service be prepared and
that staff proceed with the Local Area Service if received quotations are
within the identified value on the formal petition and within the Purchasing
Policy.
R/2016-544
It was moved and seconded
That staff prepare and advertise a Request for Proposal for consulting
services to design and manage the construction of the 20300 Block of
Hampton Street Local Area Service; and
That if the received quotations are less than the identified value on the
formal petition and within the Purchasing Policy, staff proceed with the
20300 Block of Hampton Street Local Area Service.
CARRIED
Financial and Corporate Services (including Fire and Police)
Note: Items 1131 and 1132 have been placed in the “Items on Consent” agenda
1131 2016 Council Expenses
1132 Disbursements for the month ended October 31, 2016
1133 2017 Council Calendar
Staff report dated November 21, 2016 recommending that the Council
Meeting schedule for 2017 be adopted or that the Council Meeting
schedule for 2017 be adopted as amended.
R/2016-545
It was moved and seconded
That the September 26, 2017 Council Meeting be cancelled and that all
items from the September 18, 2016 and October 2, 2016 Committee of
the Whole Meetings be forwarded to the October 10th Council meeting.
CARRIED
Council Meeting Minutes
November 29, 2016
Page 9 of 10
R/2016-546
It was moved and seconded
That the Council Meeting schedule attached to the staff report dated
November 21, 2017 be adopted as amended.
CARRIED
1134 Property and Liability Insurance
Staff report dated November 21, 2016 recommending the approval of
expenditures for the City’s liability and property insurance coverage policies
as offered through the Municipal Insurance Association of BC.
R/2016-547
It was moved and seconded
That the expenditures of $375,396 and $238,064 for the City’s liability
and property insurance coverage policies as offered through the Municipal
Insurance Association of BC be approved.
CARRIED
Community Development and Recreation Service – Nil
Administration
Note: Item 1171 has been placed in the “Items on Consent” agenda
1171 Filming Review
Other Committee Issues – Nil
1200 STAFF REPORTS – Nil
1300 OTHER MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT – Nil
1400 NOTICES OF MOTION AND MATTERS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS – Nil
Council Meeting Minutes
November 29, 2016
Page 10 of 10
1500 QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC – Nil
1600 ADJOURNMENT – 7:57 p.m.
_______________________________
N. Read, Mayor
Certified Correct
___________________________________
L. Darcus, Corporate Officer
402 Minutes of Special Council Meetings
402
City of Maple Ridge
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
November 28, 2016
The Minutes of the City Council Meeting held on Monday, November 28, 2016 at
1:00 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 E.C. Swabey, Chief Administrative Officer
Councillor K. Duncan K. Swift, General Manager of Community Development,
Councillor B. Masse Parks and Recreation Services
Councillor T. Shymkiw P. Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services
Councillor C. Speirs F. Quinn, General Manager Public Works and Development
Services
ABSENT C. Carter, Director of Planning
Councillor C. Bell L. Darcus, Manager of Legislative Services
Councillor G. Robson A. Gaunt, Confidential Secretary
Other staff as required
L. Benson, Manager of Sustainability and Corporate
Planning
F. Armstrong, Manager Corporate Communications
L. Siracusa, Manager of Economic Development
T. Thompson, Manager of Financial Planning
Note: These Minutes are also posted on the City’s Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca
The meeting was live streamed and recorded by the City of Maple Ridge
1.0 CALL TO ORDER
2.0 ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was adopted as circulated.
Special Council Meeting Minutes
November 28, 2016
Page 2 of 2
3.0 2017-2021 BUSINESS PLAN REVIEW
3.1 BUSINESS PLANNING & FINANCIAL OVERVIEW
The Mayor introduced the City’s process and the importance of business
planning.
The Manager of Sustainability and Corporate Planning provided an overview of
the schedule and the business planning process.
The General Manager of Corporate and Financial Services presented the
Financial Plan Overview.
3.2 ADMINISTRATION DIVISION
The Manager of Sustainability and Corporate Planning presented the
Administration Division Business Plans and individual directors and managers
responded to Council questions.
Note: Councillor Masse left the meeting at 3:46 p.m.
4.0 ADJOURNMENT – 4:10 p.m.
_______________________________
N. Read, Mayor
Certified Correct
___________________________________
L. Darcus, Corporate Officer
City of Maple Ridge
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
November 29, 2016
The Minutes of the City Council Meeting held on Monday, November 29, 2016 at
10:00 a.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 E.C. Swabey, Chief Administrative Officer
Councillor K. Duncan K. Swift, General Manager of Parks, Recreation and
Councillor B. Masse Cultural Services
Councillor G. Robson P. Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services
Councillor T. Shymkiw F. Quinn, General Manager Public Works and Development
Councillor C. Speirs Services
C. Carter, Director of Planning
ABSENT L. Darcus, Manager of Legislative Services
Councillor C. Bell S. Schiller, Committee Clerk
A. Gaunt, Confidential Secretary
Other staff as required
L. Benson, Manager of Sustainability and Corporate
Planning
H. Exner, Fire Chief
D. Fleugel, Superintendent, Officer in Charge Ridge
Meadows RCMP Detachment
C. Nolan, Manager of Accounting
D. Boag, Director of Parks & Facilities
T. Cotroneo, Manager of Community Services
S. Matthewson, Social Planning Analyst, Recreation and
Community Services
Note: These Minutes are also posted on the City’s Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca
The meeting was live streamed and recorded by the City of Maple Ridge
1.0 CALL TO ORDER
Special Council Meeting Minutes
November 29, 2016
Page 2 of 3
2.0 ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was adopted as circulated.
3.0 2017-2021 BUSINESS PLAN REVIEW
3.1 Corporate & Financial Services Division
The General Manager of Corporate and Financial Services presented the
Corporate Services and Financial Services Division business plans. Specific
managers responded to questions from Council.
R/2016-531
It was moved and seconded
That staff bring back a report for increased policing/security in the Downtown
Core.
CARRIED
Councillor Duncan - OPPOSED
R/2016-532
It was moved and seconded
That staff include a line item in the business plan for development of a
Community Safety Plan.
CARRIED
Note: The meeting was recessed at 11:59 a.m. and reconvened at 12:20 p.m.
3.2 Parks, Recreation and Culture division
The General Manager of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services reviewed
Division business plans.
Note: The meeting was recessed at 11:59 a.m. and reconvened at 12:20 p.m.
Councillor Robson was not in attendance at the start of the reconvened
meeting
The General Manager of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services and specific
managers responded to questions from Council related to their business plan.
Note: The meeting was recessed at 12:58 p.m. and reconvened at 1:38 p.m.
Councillor Robson rejoined the meeting.
Special Council Meeting Minutes
November 29, 2016
Page 3 of 3
The General Manager of Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services and specific
managers continued to respond to questions from Council related to their
business plan.
4.0 ADJOURNMENT – 3:08 p.m.
_______________________________
N. Read, Mayor
Certified Correct
___________________________________
L. Darcus, Corporate Officer
City of Maple Ridge
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
November 30, 2016
The Minutes of the City Council Meeting held on Monday, November 30, 2016 at
10:00 a.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 E.C. Swabey, Chief Administrative Officer
Councillor K. Duncan K. Swift, General Manager of Community Development,
Councillor B. Masse Parks and Recreation Services
Councillor G. Robson P. Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services
Councillor T. Shymkiw F. Quinn, General Manager Public Works and Development
Councillor C. Speirs Services
C. Carter, Director of Planning
ABSENT L. Darcus, Manager of Legislative Services
Councillor C. Bell S. Schiller, Committee Clerk
A. Gaunt, Confidential Secretary
Other staff as required
L. Benson, Manager of Sustainability and Corporate
Planning
D. Pollock, Municipal Engineer
J. Storey, Director of Engineering Operations
S. Cote-Rolvink, Manager of Inspection Services
W. McCormick, Director of Recreation & Community
Services
C. Crabtree, Chief Information Officer
Note: These Minutes are also posted on the City’s Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca
The meeting was live streamed and recorded by the City of Maple Ridge
1.0 CALL TO ORDER
2.0 ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was adopted as circulated.
Council Meeting Minutes
November 30, 2016
Page 2 of 2
3.0 2017-2021 BUSINESS PLAN REVIEW
3.1 Public Works and Development Services Division
The General Manager of Public Works and Development presented the Public
Works and Development Services Division business plans and specific
directors and managers responded to questions from Council.
Note: The meeting was recessed at 12:05 p.m. and reconvened at 1:00 p.m.
3.2 Financial Plan Overview
The General Manager of Corporate and Financial Services reviewed the past
few days of business plan presentations. He presented each incremental
package to Council for approval.
R/2016-548
It was moved and seconded
That all incremental packages be approved as per attached list noting that:
The Social Planning incremental package approval is contingent upon holding
a workshop with Council to define policy and planning, including a discussion
on Council priorities; and
That an additional incremental expense be included for increased security in
the downtown core ($20,000).
CARRIED
4.0 ADJOURNMENT – 2:58 p.m.
_______________________________
N. Read, Mayor
Certified Correct
___________________________________
L. Darcus, Corporate Officer
700 ITEMS ON CONSENT
700
701.1
City of Maple Ridge
PUBLIC ART STEERING PUBLIC ART STEERING PUBLIC ART STEERING PUBLIC ART STEERING COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTESCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTESCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTESCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Public Art Steering Committee, held in the Coho
Room, at Maple Ridge City Hall, 11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, British Columbia, on Tuesday,
September 20, 2016 at 3:00 p.m.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENTCOMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENTCOMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENTCOMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT
Susan Hayes, Chair Artist
Councillor Duncan City of Maple Ridge
Donald Luxton Cultural Resource Management Consultant
Wayne Bissky, Vice Chair Architect
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENTSTAFF MEMBERS PRESENTSTAFF MEMBERS PRESENTSTAFF MEMBERS PRESENT
Sunny Schiller Committee Clerk
Yvonne Chui Manager, Arts and Community Connections
REGRETS/ABSENTSREGRETS/ABSENTSREGRETS/ABSENTSREGRETS/ABSENTS
Wan-Yi Lin Artist
Barbara Duncan Arts Council Representative / Curator, ACT Art Gallery
Leanne Koehn Community at Large Member
1.1.1.1. CALL TO ORDER AND INTRODUCTIONSCALL TO ORDER AND INTRODUCTIONSCALL TO ORDER AND INTRODUCTIONSCALL TO ORDER AND INTRODUCTIONS
There being a quorum present the Chair called the meeting to order at 3:16 pm.
2222.... AGENDA ADOPTIONAGENDA ADOPTIONAGENDA ADOPTIONAGENDA ADOPTION
R16-016
It was moved and seconded
That the Agenda be That the Agenda be That the Agenda be That the Agenda be amended amended amended amended to to to to defer defer defer defer Item 4.1Item 4.1Item 4.1Item 4.1 Community Foundation presentation Community Foundation presentation Community Foundation presentation Community Foundation presentation to a to a to a to a
future future future future meeting and meeting and meeting and meeting and be be be be adoptedadoptedadoptedadopted as amendedas amendedas amendedas amended. . . .
CARRIED
3333.... MINUTE APPROVALMINUTE APPROVALMINUTE APPROVALMINUTE APPROVAL
R16-017
It was moved and seconded
That the Minutes of That the Minutes of That the Minutes of That the Minutes of June 28June 28June 28June 28, 201, 201, 201, 2016666 be be be be approvedapprovedapprovedapproved....
CARRIED
4.4.4.4. DELEGATIONSDELEGATIONSDELEGATIONSDELEGATIONS - Nil
701.2
PASC Minutes
September 20, 2016
Page 2 of 3
5.5.5.5. QUESTION PERIODQUESTION PERIODQUESTION PERIODQUESTION PERIOD
6.6.6.6. NEW & UNFINISHED BUSINESSNEW & UNFINISHED BUSINESSNEW & UNFINISHED BUSINESSNEW & UNFINISHED BUSINESS
6.16.16.16.1 Hammond Public Art Wrap Up Hammond Public Art Wrap Up Hammond Public Art Wrap Up Hammond Public Art Wrap Up
The Staff Liaison provided a final update on the Hammond Stadium public art
installation. Councillor Duncan reported the Ridge Meadows Minor Baseball
Association found their participation on the project to be beneficial and is currently
holding a photo contest that involves the “Play Ball” installation.
6.26.26.26.2 Developer Public Art Update: ArtWorks for Development forum Developer Public Art Update: ArtWorks for Development forum Developer Public Art Update: ArtWorks for Development forum Developer Public Art Update: ArtWorks for Development forum
Members were encouraged to attend the ArtWorks for Development breakfast on
October 4 at 7:00 am at Chances. The event will provide an opportunity to contribute
to the vision for public art in Maple Ridge development projects.
6.36.36.36.3 Public Art 2017 Priorities and BudgetPublic Art 2017 Priorities and BudgetPublic Art 2017 Priorities and BudgetPublic Art 2017 Priorities and Budget
The Committee discussed different scenarios for the 2017 work plan pending
approval of the Canada 150 grant application. Potential projects include two
Gateways, a Donor Recognition project and Community Public Art (mural intersection
project, Ridge walk, civic banners). The Committee discussed community
engagement and the need to provide different levels of opportunity to engage. It was
suggested that the mural intersection project be deferred to 2018. The Committee
will report back to Council during the fall, once the outcome of the grant process is
known.
Changes to a variety of programs and events as a result of the dissolution of the Joint
Leisure Services Agreement were considered.
The Staff Liaison will prepare a budget and timeline for 2017 projects.
6.46.46.46.4 Cultural Plan UpdateCultural Plan UpdateCultural Plan UpdateCultural Plan Update
The Staff Liaison reported the Request for Proposals for the Cultural Plan Update is
underway. After discussion
R16-018
It was moved and seconded
ThatThatThatThat thethethethe Request Request Request Request ffffor Proposalor Proposalor Proposalor Proposalssss for the Cultural Plan Update for the Cultural Plan Update for the Cultural Plan Update for the Cultural Plan Update be amended to allow more timbe amended to allow more timbe amended to allow more timbe amended to allow more timeeee
for responses and to reallocate $5,000 from the Pfor responses and to reallocate $5,000 from the Pfor responses and to reallocate $5,000 from the Pfor responses and to reallocate $5,000 from the Public ublic ublic ublic AAAArt rt rt rt SSSSteering teering teering teering CCCCommitteeommitteeommitteeommittee budget and budget and budget and budget and
to continue to work with proponents to further define a scope of work.to continue to work with proponents to further define a scope of work.to continue to work with proponents to further define a scope of work.to continue to work with proponents to further define a scope of work.
CARRIED
PASC Minutes
September 20, 2016
Page 3 of 3
A Cultural Plan Update steering committee is being formed. The Staff Liaison
reviewed steering committee membership. Work will begin in October and the group
will meet monthly. Donald Luxton and Susan Hayes volunteered to participate in the
Steering Committee.
6.56.56.56.5 Work Plan 2017Work Plan 2017Work Plan 2017Work Plan 2017
The Staff Liaison reviewed the details of the draft 2017 Work Plan with the
Committee.
6.66.66.66.6 Creative Cities Conference 2016Creative Cities Conference 2016Creative Cities Conference 2016Creative Cities Conference 2016
The Committee reviewed the schedule for the Creative Cities Conference. The
Committee has registered two delegates.
7.7.7.7. ROUNDTABLEROUNDTABLEROUNDTABLEROUNDTABLE
Yvonne Chui - has videos and slides from recent festivals to share at the next meeting.
Wayne Bissky – reminded members about the Picasso show at the Vancouver Art Gallery.
Donald Luxton – working on the Maple Ridge Heritage Inventory Update. Nominations are
being sought from the public. Further information can be found at www.mapleridge.ca/1384
Councillor Duncan – mentioned some heritage locations with Japanese ties.
Yvonne Chui – reminder of Culture Days coming up September 30, October 1 and 2, 2016.
7777.... ADJOURNMENTADJOURNMENTADJOURNMENTADJOURNMENT
It was moved and seconded
That the meeting be adjourned at That the meeting be adjourned at That the meeting be adjourned at That the meeting be adjourned at 5555::::11115555 pm.pm.pm.pm.
Chair
/ss
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7298-2016
A Bylaw to amend the text of Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985 as amended
____________________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend the 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. 7298-2016”.
2.Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985 is hereby amended as follows:
PART 2, INTERPRETATION
Insert the following definition in alphabetical order after the definition of “Family Day Care”.
FARM HOME PLATE means an area allocated for all principal and accessory residential
buildings, structures and land uses on a lot that is designated on the Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014 as “Agricultural”; is located within the Agricultural
Land Reserve; and is subject to the regulations of the Agricultural Land Commission.
3.PART 4 GENERAL REGULATIONS, SECTION 402 REGULATIONS FOR PERMITTED USES OF
LAND, BUILDINGS, AND STRUCTURES.
Insert the following as subsection (15) Farm Home Plate
For properties within the Agricultural Land Reserve, the following limits to residential
development shall apply:
(a) The area of the farm home plate shall not exceed a maximum of 0.2 hectares.
(b) The maximum depth of a farm home plate shall not exceed 60.0 metres from the lot
line that abuts the fronting road to the rear of the farm home plate.
(c) The one family residential, boarding, agricultural employee residential, temporary
residential, secondary suite residential, detached garden suite residential, and bed
and breakfast uses shall be sited within the farm home plate.
(d) The gross floor area for the one family residential use shall not exceed 650.0 square
metres.
1001
(e) The maximum distance from the lot line that abuts the fronting road to any portion of
the one family residential use shall not exceed 50.0 metres.
(f) The maximum building separation between the one family residential use and any of
the agricultural employee residential, temporary residential, secondary suite
residential, boarding, and bed and breakfast uses shall not exceed 20.0 metres.
4. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985 as amended is hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 21st day of November, 2016.
READ a second time the 21st day of November, 2016.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 6th day of December, 2016.
READ a third time the day of , 2016.
ADOPTED the day of , 2016.
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 6, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2014-104-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Final Reading
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7167-2015
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7124-2014
23050 136 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Bylaws 7167-2015 and 7124-2014 have been considered by Council and at Public Hearing and
subsequently were granted third reading. The applicant has requested that final reading be granted.
The purpose of the rezoning is to permit subdivision into 21 single family lots under the R-2 (Special
Amenity Residential District) and RS-1b (One Family (Medium Density) Urban Residential) zones, with
the lots being not less than 315 m2 (3,390 ft2) in area.
Council granted first reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7124-2014 on February 10, 2015.
Council granted first and second reading for Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7167-
2015 and second reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7124-2014 on November 24, 2015. This
application was presented at Public Hearing on December 8, 2015, and Council granted third
reading on December 8, 2015.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7167-2015 be adopted; and
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7124-2014 be adopted.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
Council considered this rezoning application at a Public Hearing held on December 8, 2015. On
December 8, 2015 Council granted third reading to Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No.
7167-2015 and Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7124-2014 with the stipulation that the following
conditions be addressed:
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)Park dedication as required and removal of all debris and garbage from park land;
1002
- 2 -
iv) Registration of a Restrictive Covenant for the geotechnical report which addresses the
suitability of the subject property for the proposed development;
v)Removal of existing buildings, and
vi) A voluntary citywide Community Amenity Contribution (CAC) be provided in keeping with the
direction given by Council with regard to amenities.
The following applies to the above:
1.A Rezoning Servicing Agreement has been registered at the Land Title Office, and the security
amount outlined in the agreement has been provided.
2.The necessary OCP Amending Bylaw and associated schedules will be approved with final
reading of Bylaw 7167-2015.
3.A park dedication plan has been registered at the Land Title Office.
4.A Geotechnical Restrictive Covenant has been registered at the Land Title Office.
5.The existing home has been demolished.
6.The applicant has provided a Community Amenity Contribution in the amount of
$ 107,100.00, which is equivalent to $5,100.00 for each single family lot created through
subdivision.
CONCLUSION:
As the applicant has met Council’s conditions, it is recommended that final reading be given to
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7167-2015 and Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7124-
2014.
“Original signed by Amelia Bowden”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden, M.Urb
Planner 1
“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 E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7167-2015
Appendix C – Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7124-2014
Appendix D – Subdivision Plan
DATE: Jan 27, 2015 FILE: 2014-104-RZ BY: DT
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
13528
13569
1 3511
2303622981135822301313486
2298713537
2301913 501
13485
13509229
134852294 2315413472229513521
13
4
7813550
230281350 0
2297513557
2300113573
2298613 53622962
23031229781349 3
135 19
134 6 5
229662299522956 22969230502
3
0
0
2
1 35632296
1 3 529
13
4
68135782299023007229721352 5
13531
1356 2 230602310313 5 37
2
3
0
1
2 2310613 545
13508
1 3 47513585229522966
230252296134922298222976
1349522952
13477
13516 13517
13542
230201354522990 2314113568
22996135651357913572
13555
2296
0 231401359013503
13575
1 3556
135B
A
V
E .229 LOOP1 34 LOOP 230A ST.136 AVE.230A ST.136 AVE.
70
24
54
1
16
67
PARK
58
1
61
62
9
BCP 27885
74
BCP 51504
EP 15824
39
72
25
75 73
71
P 43567
A
35
53
B
A
37
4
48
38
36
PARK
LMP 9042
43
P 817
6
BCP 49303
19
19
34BCP 49303E
40
P 1
Re
29
27
BCP 48906
7
BCP 49303
*PP154
P 7855
10BC
32
EPP 44846
5
PARK
PARK
66
11
8
PARK
P 11173
47
17
14
BCP 5150441
46
57
3
73
50BCP 49303
3
EPP 44846
59
22
B
BCP 48907BCP 51504
56 BCP 4930349
68
45
17
69
PARK
55
13
BCP 4930365 BCP 51504
P 8175
20
28
2
26
72
35
18
60
6
44
12
P 11173
PARK
63
P 43567
30
Rem. 2
64
15
PARK
BCP 48906
P 5116
7
EPP 32166
31
18
23
52
33
2
36
21
4
5
RP 11765
51
42
\\
\\
!(
!(
!(
!(´
Scale: 1:2,500
23050 136 AVENUE!(Ponds
\\Wetlands
GPS Creek Centrelines
Streams & Rivers (Topographic)
Feature Type
Indefinite Creek Centreline
Ditch Centreline
River Centreline
Rivers & Lakes (Topographic)
Feature Type
Lake/Reservoir
SUBJECT PROPERTY
APPENDIX A
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7167-2015
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014
_______________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend Schedule "A" to the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge, enacts as follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 7167-2015”.
2.Schedule “A” Chapter 10.3, Part VI, A – Silver Valley, Figure 2 - Land Use Plan and Figure 3A
- Blaney Hamlet are hereby amended for the parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Lot 2 Section 29 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 5116 Except Plans BCP42569
and BCP48907
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 913, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this bylaw, is hereby designated as shown.
3.Schedule “A” Chapter 10.3, Part VI, A – Silver Valley, Figure 4 - Trails / Open Space is hereby
amended for the parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 2 Section 29 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 5116 Except Plans BCP42569
and BCP48907
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 914, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this bylaw, is hereby designated as shown.
4.Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No.7060-2014 as amended is hereby amended
accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the 24th day of November, 2015.
READ A SECOND TIME the 24th day of November, 2015.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the 8th day of December, 2015.
READ A THIRD TIME the 8th day of December, 2015.
ADOPTED the day of , 20 .
___________________________________ _____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX B
1002.1
136 AVE.
136 AVE.232 ST.135B AVE.230A ST.229 LOOP
134 LOOP 230A ST.232 ST.136 AVE.
13474
13480
134
6
6
229901359013610
13562
13503
134122295713516
13573
13536
13508
134852302013565
13519
2299
5
13542
13572 2315413545 229822303
6
13546
13555
23
0
1
2
13545
13568
13407
13485
2297513527
13501
2301
9
13486
13528
13637
2314013495 13578135792297622956 2306013557
1346513511
13537
1349213582
13381229692295213509
13461
13517
229722302
5
2300
1
1338522990 13586
13490
13525
229601
3
4
7
813530
2320913569 23106231032302
022930 2302
81347522975 230412314113517
13426
2298
7
13547
13521 231832299613625 2296922963230062301213529
13563
13439
13631
229662300
7
1351622945 2303122811
13493
23
0
0
2
1
3
4
6
8
2301
32296213531
13429
229862295113442/58
1
3
4
7
2
13575
2298113602 (PUMP STATION)
13449229181358513550
13500
13556
2303
1
13477
22978229962305013616
13486 13493
229661353723000 1358923027
29
PARK
B
4
18
42
13
D
43
61
75
52
2
PARK
46
9
40
26
69
5
60
36
PARK
44
62
27
36
62
21
50
Rem 6
65
72
48
17
53
24
35
Rem 1
27
7
21
56
45
34
A
47
A
25
73
71
70
49
19
38
57
2
68
34
61
PARK
74
19
14
18
PARK
18
5
6
10
41
17
51
63
30
23
9
55
11
12
12
E
18
20
10
72
1
2
54
28
13
67
73
23
66
15
Rem. 2
37
64
16
20 20
1
35
19
6
B
PARK
7
8
22
59
19
8
31
11
3
58 A
3
32
39
22
33
77
4
53
52
51
PARK
PARK
50
49
48 P 8175
BCP 27885
BCP 51504EPP 52568EPP 49138
P 5116
P 21219
P 7855
EP 15824
P 11173
BCP 27885
P 43567
BCP 51504
*PP154
EPP 32166
P 43567BCP 33861EPP 44846
BCP 49303
BCP 49303
P 11173
BCP 48906
EPP 44846
BCP 51504BCP 33861
LMP 9042
P 19056
BCP 48907
P 8175BCP 51
504
BCP 48906 BCP 49303BCP 49303BCP 49303BCP 49303RP 11765BCP 27893
EPP 49227
BCP 27887
B
C
P
4
9
3
0
5
BCP 49304
BCP 51506
BCP 51506BCP 48909BCP 49342BCP
5
1
5
0
6 BCP 48909BCP 51505
BCP 51506
BCP 48909
BCP
4
8
9
0
8
BCP 42569
BCP 48909BC
P
2
9
5
2
5
E
P
P
3
3
3
6
6
BCP 49304
BCP 49306
EPP 52781
´
SCALE 1:3,000
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDINGBylaw No. Map No. Purpose:
From:To:
To Amend Figure 2 (Land Use Plan) and 3A (Blaney Hamlet)of the Silver Valley Area PlanEco ClusterConservation
7167-2015913
1 3 6 A V E .
1 3 6 A V E .232 ST.135B AVE.230A ST.229 LOOP1 34 LO O P 230A ST.232 ST.136 AVE.1359013474
13480
13466
2299013610
1 3 5 6 2
13573
1 3 5 3 6
1 3 5 0 3
13412
1356522957
13516
23012
1 3 4 8 5 13485
13508 2302013527
1 3 5 1 9
1 3 5 4 2
22
995
13572
13501 231541 3 5 4 5 2298223
036
13546
1 3 5 5 5
1 3 5 4 5
13568
1340722976229751348623019134751346513582
13381229722314013528
1 3 4 9 5
13637
1 3 5 5 7
2295613579 230601 3 5 3 7
22969135782295213492
23
025
13509
13517
23
0012299013525
1 3 5 1 1
13461
13385
13586
13490
23
020
1
3
4
7
8
2296013493
23209231062293023
0282297513531 231031353013426
13569 231412304113517
22
987
229961 3 5 2 1 23183230062296313547
13625 22969230121 3 5 6 3
13439
1 3 5 2 9
13631
2294523
0072296613516 2303122811
1
3
4
6
8
23002
2298613575
23
013
134292295122962 13442/582291813585
1
3
4
7
2
2298113602 (PUMP STATION)
13477
1 3 5 5 6
1344922996135502305023031
13486
13500
13616
2297813493
22966230001 3 5 3 7 2302713589
29
PARK
B
4
18
42
13
D
75
43
61
62
2
52
PARK
21
46
9
48
40
26
60
5
69
36
7
44
27
PARK
36
62
53
35
Re m 6
72
50
65
24
17
Re m 1
5
27
A21
25
45
56
A
4734
49
19
73
70
57
34
38
2
71
PARK68
PARK
19
61
41
18
74
18
14
6
10
17
23
35
5130
63
19
9
11 12
10
55
12
73
54
E
Re m. 2
18
8
20
72
13
1
2
37
28
67
20
66
15
23
64
B
32
1
8
PARK
16
22
7
20
22
6
77
59
31
3
19
A58
3
11
39
33
4
53
52
51
PARK
PARK
50
49
48 P 8 175
B C P 2 7 8 8 5
BCP 515 04EPP 52568E P P 4 9 1 3 8
P 5 116
P 21219
P 7 855
EP 15824
P 11173
BC P 2 7 8 8 5
P 43567
BCP 515 04
*PP154
E P P 3 2 1 6 6
P 43567BCP 33861EPP 44 84 6
BC P 493 03
BCP 49303
P 11173
BCP 48906
EPP 44 84 6
BCP 51504BCP 33861LMP 9042
P 19056
BCP 48907
P 8 175BCP 51504BCP 48906 BCP 49303BCP 49303BCP 49303BCP 49303RP 11765BCP 27893E P P 4 9 22 7
BCP 27 88 7
B
C
P 4
9
3
0
5
BCP 49304
B C P 5 1 5 0 6BCP 51506BCP 48909BCP 49342BCP
5
1
5
0
6 BCP 48909BCP 51505
BCP 51506
BCP 48909
BCP 48908
BCP 42569
BCP 48909BCP 29525
E
P
P
3
3
3
6
6
BCP 49304
B C P 4 9 3 0 6
EPP 52781
´
SCALE 1:3,000
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDINGBylaw No. Map No. Purpose:To Add to Conservation on Figure 4 (Trails/Open Space) of the Silver Valley Area Plan as shown
7167-2015914
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7124-2014
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. 7124-2014."
2.That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 2 Section 29 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 5116 Except Plans
BCP42569 and BCP48907
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1632 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to R-2 (Urban 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 10th day of February, 2015.
READ a second time the 24th day of November, 2015.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 8th day of December, 2015.
READ a third time the 8th day of December, 2015.
ADOPTED the day of , 20
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX C
1002.2
13625 229571 3 5 6 3
22956
229661 3 5 5 6
1
3
4
7
2
2299023002
1 3 5 5 5
13589
13439
13449
13547
13385
13516
13637
229452296322969229751 3 4 9 5
1346513590135782298622
995
13516
23
00723013
13461
134932295122962
2296922982229811 3 5 4 2
13492
13508
23012 23
025 231032314113407
13527
134122291813531
1 3 5 3 7
1 3 5 1 1
1 3 5 0 3
134751
3
4
7
8
1 3 5 3 6
1 3 5 4 5
13575 230502306013546
13426
13631
229521 3 5 5 7
1 3 5 2 522976 13610
13572
13486
1 3 5 3 7
13477
13485
13493
1 3 5 2 1
23
02823031 2318313517
13602 (PUMP STATIO N)
13616
13442/58
1 3 5 4 5 13579229751
3
4
6
8
1 3 5 6 2
1 3 5 5 0
2299613565
23
020
13501
13517
1 3 5 2 9
23
036 2310623140134291353022930135692296013485
1 3 5 1 913585 135822299022
987 23
001
1 3 5 2 8
13490
1357322966
229722297813568
13500
23
019
13509 2315413381
13586230A ST.232 ST.1 34 LO O P
1 3 6 A V E .232 ST.229 LOOP135B AVE.1 3 6 A V E .230A ST.BC P 27 8 85
20
21
13
BCP 51 5 04
BCP 49303
BC P 49 3 03
68
8
35
3
46
18
2
19
17
25
24
64
11
2
66
57
30
39
PARK
41
2
51
17
P 43567
A
Rem 1
P 8175
P 8175
5
19
27
BCP 48906
14
35
BCP 4930374
67
7
PARK
52BCP 49303BCP 515041
48
44
PARK
P 43567
RP 11765
P 11173
4
Rem A
16
15
36
21
22
27
29
4
70
34BCP 4930371
43
PARK
EPP 44846PARK
B
3
6
20
22
72
65
59
BCP 51 5 04
31BCP 4930333
32
50
EP 15824
P 19056
B
D
Rem A
62
18
34 BCP 33861E P P 3 21 6 6
62
26
23
75BC P 27 8 85
63
28
1
56
6
54 53
40
45
EPP 44846
LM P 9042 P 7855
P 11173
A
A
61
20
60 58
9
55
5
69
37
72BCP 5150473
Rem . 2
P 21219
Rem 6
77
18
18
PARK
19
23
12
73
10
38
36
PARK
49
47
42
BCP 48906
BCP 48907
PARK
P 5116
19
*PP154
E
7
´
SCALE 1:3 ,0 00
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDINGBylaw No. Map No. From:
To:
R-1 (Residential District)R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District))R-2 (Urban Residential District)
7124-20141632
APPENDIX D
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 6, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012-109-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: COUNCIL
SUBJECT: Final Reading
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012
24979 108 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012 for the subject property, located at 24979 108 Avenue, has
been considered by Council and at Public Hearing and subsequently was granted third reading. The
applicant has requested that final reading be granted. The purpose of the rezoning is to permit
subdivision into 13 RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) lots not less than 557
m² in area.
Council granted first reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012 on January 8, 2013 and
second reading on September 24, 2013. This application was presented at Public Hearing on
October 15, 2013, and Council granted third reading on October 22, 2013. Council granted a first
extension on January 13, 2015, and a second extension on January 12, 2016.
Pursuant with Council direction, this application is exempt from the Community Amenity Contribution
(CAC) program because it was presented at Public Hearing and subsequently received third reading
prior to the adoption of the CAC program.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012 be adopted.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
Council considered this rezoning application at a Public Hearing held on October 15, 2013 and
subsequently granted third reading to Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012 with the stipulation that
the following conditions be addressed:
i.Road dedication as required;
ii.Removal of the existing buildings; and
iii.A disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising whether
there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there is evidence, a site
profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in accordance with the
regulations.
1003
- 2 -
The following applies to the above:
i.Road dedication has been provided;
ii.Removal of the existing buildings occurred; and
iii.A disclosure statement, submitted July 4, 2013, indicates that no underground fuel
storage tanks exist on the subject property.
CONCLUSION:
As the applicant has met Council’s conditions, it is recommended that final reading be given to Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012.
“Original signed by Adam Rieu”
_______________________________________________
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 E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012
Appendix C – Preliminary Subdivision Plan
City of Pitt
Meadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Jul 8, 2013 2012-109-SD BY: JV
24979-108 Ave
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT2488610891
10921 249071084824937 249852490310793
10822
10860
249002490624913249172492224927107922493724940 24979249022490510785 249271087224947
2498224988249062491524930249432500725010248922491024916249332
4
9
3
2
10836
2499624912249502490724917249202492310782249 ST.109 AVE.MORRISETTE PL.108B AVE.249A ST.108A AVE.
108 AVE.
27
BCP 33200
1
BCP 49693
15
31
10
3
45
4
11
6
P 23702
26
22
20
16
21
17
9
14
P 23702
27
1
19
2
8
BCP 33200
5
10
BCP 33200
2
18
11
44
12
P 34411
6
7
BCP 49693
3
4
9
5
A
Rem B
28 29
30
8 7
13
79
Subject Property
´
Scale: 1:1,500
APPENDIX A
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6961-2012
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge, enacts as
follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012."
2.That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot “A” Section 11 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 23702
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1578 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium
Density) Residential).
3.Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 8th day of January, 2013.
READ a second time the 24th day of September, 2013
PUBLIC HEARING held the 15th day of October, 2013.
READ a third time the 22nd day of October, 2013.
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the ___ day of ________________, 2016
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX B
1076610941
249002490724912107412494010725249882501910921
1 0 7 1 9 249072
4
9
3
2 24950249852502910786107421
0
7
3
124878 249052491010745
10793 2492710776
1083610822
107372499625007250101075710741107352490624902107772491324922 10782
10848
107331 0 7 2 11072924979107582487224903249061077310749248091077610750248661
0
7
2
724886 2489210769
10785249152491624920 249301086024937
2494325050107811 079610711
1079224933249371087224947
2498210765248711072310891
10715 10753
107612491724917 24923249278
21 23P 2998717
15
20
26 28 32
31
19
BCP 47594
3
10
15
78
F
7
21
27
6
18
1
11
3
4
8
12
13
5
6
18P 2998724
BCP 33200
33
2
41 40
9
2
Rem B
P 65405
14
34
7BCP 33200
20
BCP 49693
BCP 49693
PARK
16
43
14
79
2
25
11
36
30
1
22
17
8
11
6
39
22
16
19
35
7
45
5
A
P 23702
27
P 34411 1
9
13
21
10
BCP 33200
44
37
E
19
20 BCP 43944
10
12
29
2
9
42
4
77
38
P 23702
1
P 29987BCP33201
BCP49695
BCP 33318BCP49694BCP33201 BCP33320RW 28597
RW 28597MORRISETTE PL.108 AVE.249 ST.109 AVE.
108B AVE.249A ST.108A AVE.ERSKINE ST.B
E
E
C
H
A
M P
L.
´
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDINGBylaw No. Map No. From:
To:
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
6961-20121578
APPENDIX C
1100 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ITEMS
1100
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2016-299-AL
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Addendum Report
Application to Exclude Land fro m the Agricultural Land Reserve
12176 237th Street.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At their October 11, 2016 Council meeting, Council considered and deferred Application 2016-299-
AL to exclude the 1.12 hectare (2.8 acres) parcel from the Agricultural Land Reserve, under Section
30 (1) of the Agricultural Land Commission Act. It was understood that Council wished to have an
accompanying development proposal in support of the application.
The exclusion application occurred concurrently with exclusion application 2016-298-AL, for the
subject property at 12102 237th Street, which was forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission
on October 11, 2016. The Commission had previously recommended excluding this parcel, and this
recommendation formed the basis of Council’s decision to forward the application. It is assumed
that this application will be successful, based on the Commission’s recommendation.
Should Council forward Application 2016-299-AL, and if the Commission agrees to its exclusion, the
applicant will have a contiguous block of 3 properties, including 12102 and 12146 237th Street.
The parcel at 12146 237th Street was previously excluded under application AL/045/04.
This report includes the applicant’s response to Council’s request. The original report is attached as
Appendix A.
RECOMMENDATION:
The following resolutions are provided for Council’s consideration:
i.That the application not be authorized to go forward to the Agricultural Land Commission;
ii.That the application be authorized to go forward to the Agricultural Land Commission with a
summary of Council’s comments and the staff report.
1101
- 2 -
DISCUSSION:
Applicant: Paul Hayes
Owner: R C B Enterprises Limited
Legal Description: Lot: 2, Section: 21, Township: 12, Plan:
NWP72342
OCP :
Existing: AGR (Agricultural)
Zoning:
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Surrounding Uses
North: Use: Rural Residential
Zone: A-2 Upland Agriculture
Designation Agriculture
South: Use: Rural Residential
Zone: RS-3 One Family Rural Residential
Designation: Agricultural
East: Use: 3 properties, urban residential
Zone: RS-1b One Family Urban Medium Density
Residential
Designation: Urban Residential
West: Use: Townhouse Residential
Zone: RM-1 Townhouse Residential
Designation: Urban Residential
Existing Use of Property: vacant
Proposed Use of Property: not explicitly stated
Site Area: 1.12 hectares (2.8 acres)
Access: 237th Street
Servicing: On-site sewer and water
a) Project Description:
This application is to exclude the subject property from the Agricultural Land Reserve. In response
to Council’s request for more development details, the applicant provides the following:
The owner does not have an explicit development plan as two of the three properties are
presently within the Agricultural Land Reserve. However, the intention of the owner (if and
when ALR exclusion occurs) is to consolidate the three properties at 12102, 12146, and
12176 237th Street and present a proposal for residential development that will meet the
Planning Department’s recommendations and expectations that will fit with the
neighbouring urban residential lands and the ALR lands to the north, and also that may be
supportable by the Maple Ridge City Council. Thank you for your consideration.
Paul Hayes
- 3 -
CONCLUSION:
This report has provided, for Council’s consideration, a response to their request for more
information about the development intentions for the subject property should this application for
exclusion from the Agricultural Land Reserve be successful. The recomm endations provided in this
report are consistent with Council direction for processing exclusion applications.
“Original signed by Diana Hall“
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Diana Hall, MA, (Planning), MCIP
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 E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Report dated October 3, 2016, and titled, Application for Exclusion from the
Agricultural Land Reserve, 12176 237th Street
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: October 3, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2016-299-AL
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Application for Exclusion from the Agricultural Land Reserve
12176 237 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received under Section 30 (1) of the Agricultural Land Commission Act to
exclude approximately 1.12 hectares (2.8 acres) of land from the Agricultural Land Reserve. The
applicant’s submission conforms with the notice of application requirements of the Agricultural Land
Commission.
The applicant has not provided an explicit development plan with this proposal, but indicates an
intent to assemble the subject property with the 2 parcels to its south (12146 and 12102 237th
Street), as attached to this report (Appendix C)
This property is designated Agricultural in the Official Community Plan and in the Regional Growth
Strategy of Metro Vancouver. Redevelopment of this property for urban uses would be contrary to
these long range plans and would require approval from municipal, regional, and provincial agencies.
On this basis, this application could be considered not supportable.
The recommendation of this report has been provided in accordance with Council direction for
applications for exclusion from the Agricultural Land Reserve. However, other options for Council’s
consideration are presented in the Alternatives section of this report.
RECOMMENDATION:
In accordance with Council direction for applications for exclusions from the Agricultural Land
Reserve, the following resolutions are provided for Council’s consideration:
a)That the application not be authorized to go forward to the Agricultural Land Commission;
b)That the application be authorized to go forward to the Agricultural Land Commission with a
summary of Council’s comments and the staff report.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
Applicant: Paul Hayes
Owner: R C B Enterprises Limited
Legal Description: Lot: 2, Section: 21, Township: 12, Plan:
NWP72342
APPENDIX A
- 2 -
OCP :
Existing: AGR (Agricultural)
Zoning:
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Surrounding Uses
North: Use: Rural Residential
Zone: A-2 Upland Agriculture
Designation Agriculture
South: Use: Rural Residential
Zone: RS-3 One Family Rural Residential
Designation: Agricultural
East: Use: 3 properties, urban residential
Zone: RS-1b One Family Urban Medium Density
Residential
Designation: Urban Residential
West: Use: Townhouse Residential
Zone: RM-1 Townhouse Residential
Designation: Urban Residential
Existing Use of Property: vacant
Proposed Use of Property: not explicitly stated
Site Area: 1.12 hectares (2.8 acres)
Access: 237th Street
Servicing: On-site sewer and water
b) Project Description:
This application is to exclude the subject property from the Agricultural Land Reserve. The applicant
does not have a stated land use plan for the site, but indicates a desire to assemble this property
with the 2 parcels to its south ( 12146 and 12102 237th Street) for redevelopment, likely to an
urban standard. Of these 3 properties, this most northern parcel, if excluded, would require an
amendment to Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy prior to redevelopment to an urban
standard. The other two parcels are currently designated urban in this regional plan, and therefore,
urban development would be possible south of the subject property, without first requiring regional
approvals. The parcel at 12102 237th is concurrently being proposed for exclusion under application
2016-298-AL. The Agricultural Land Commission indicated support for its removal from the ALR
under Commission Resolution # 2635/2011. The property at 12146 237th Street was previously
excluded under Application AL/045/04.
A number of letters have been received in opposition to this application, due to a concern over the
loss of farmland. These letters will be circulated to the Commission, should this application be
supported.
c) Planning Analysis:
On July 19, 2004, a report for processing exclusion applications was received by Council outlining
legal implications and the local government’s role in processing applications for exclusion from the
Agricultural Land Reserve. Council resolved to consider the following options for referring
applications to the Agricultural Land Commission:
- 3 -
The application be authorized to go forward to the Agricultural Land Commission with no
comment.
The application be authorized to go forward to the Agricultural Land Commission with
comments.
The application be authorized to go forward to the Agricultural Land Commission with a
recommendation to exclude the property with or without comments.
The application be authorized to go forward to the Agricultural Land Commission with a
recommendation to not exclude the property with or without comments.
The application not be authorized to go forward to the Agricultural Land Commission.
The process for decision making on applications for exclusion from the Agricultural Land Res erve
was further refined by Council at their February 14, 2005 Workshop. At that time, Council resolved
that the process for referring applications for exclusion to the Agricultural Land Commission include
the following options:
a) That the application not be authorized to go forward to the Agricultural Land Commission;
b) That the application be authorized to go forward to the Agricultural Land Commission with a
summary of Council’s comments and the staff report.
The above resolution forms the recommendations presented in this staff report. To assist Council in
the decision of allowing this application to proceed further, this development proposal will be
reviewed in light of the policies of the Official Community Plan and the Agricultural Plan.
OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN
The Official Community Plan, adopted by Council on November 14, 2006, provides a policy context
that has relevance to this application, and the agricultural future of the subject property. The
following outlines some of the relevant sections from the Official Community Plan.
Official Community Plan Agricultural Policies
The Maple Ridge Official Community Plan emphasizes the value of agriculture in contributing to the
local economy and to the rural character of the community. It is noted that Maple Ridge agriculture
faces considerable challenges, but there is consistent community support for local farming. Policy
6-12 of the Official Community Plan states:
Maple Ridge will protect the productivity of its agricultural land by:
a) Adopting a guiding principal of “positive benefit to agriculture” when making land
use decisions that could affect the agricultural land base, with favourable
recognition of initiatives including but not limited to supportive non-farm uses,
infrastructure improvements for farmland, or the inclusion of land elsewhere in the
Agricultural Land Reserve:
b) requiring agricultural impact assessments (AIAs) and Groundwater Impact
Assessment of non-farm development and infrastructure projects and identifying
measures to off-set impacts on agricultural capability;
- 4 -
c) preserving larger farm units and areas by using appropriate buffers such as roads,
topographic features, watercourses, ditching, fencing, or gradually reduced
residential densities on properties adjacent to agricultural land;
d) discouraging the subdivision of agricultural land into smaller parcels, except where
positive benefits to agriculture can be demonstrated;
e) reinforcing the concept that the Agricultural Land Reserve is intended for
agricultural use by increasing the minimum lot size for ALR properties that are
zoned Rural Residential;
f) encouraging the amalgamation of smaller parcels of farmland into larger, more
cohesive parcels.
Section 6.2 of the Official Community Plan, which pertains to Agricultural opportunities. states that
the value of agriculture is consistently recognized and supported within the community, as follows:
Agricultural land is a key component of the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy
and provides many benefits of local and regional significance. As an economic
generator it contributes to a more complete community.
Official Community Plan - Growth Management Policies
Section 2.1 of the Official Community Plan states that in Maple Ridge th e majority of the growth in
population, jobs and housing will be accommodated within the Urban Area Boundary where services
are readily available or infrastructure is already in place. The subject property forms the legal
boundary of the Agricultural Land Reserve at this location. The Official Community Plan emphasized
that adjustments to the Urban Area Boundary, if required, must follow a specified process.
Although additional adjustments may occur in the future, this process was generally concluded,
thereby clarifying the location of the Urban Area Boundary, through the completion of the Maple
Ridge Agricultural Plan in 2009 and the adoption of the Metro Vancouver Regional Growth Strategy
in 2011.
The 2 parcels to the south of the subject property have either been excluded (12146 237th
Street) from the Agricultural Land Reserve, or identified as appropriate for this purpose (12102
237th Street) by the Commission. They have both been designated urban in the Regional Growth
Strategy, demonstrating the extent of cooperation between the agencies involved. For these
reasons, the exclusion and redesignation of these adjacent properties is supportable. However,
urban development of the subject property is not supportable.
AGRICULTURAL PLAN
The Maple Ridge Agricultural Plan, adopted by Council on December 15, 2009, provided additional
direction for advancing agricultural opportunities in Maple Ridge. Although adopted, specific actions
related to the implementation of the Plan are currently being prioritized by Council. Pertinent
excerpts of the Plan are included below.
Issue 1 in the Agricultural Plan notes the difficulty faced by farmers in gaining access to underutilized
agricultural land. Specific issues included the following:
• Absentee landlords
• Agricultural land held in idle state
• Landless operators unable to find land to farm
• High land cost restricts access.
- 5 -
The Plan indicates that an appropriate means to address these issues would be to encourage non-
farming land owners to make idle land available to farmers or to start farming it themselves. The
Plan notes the need to re-emphasize the role of agriculture in the Agricultural Land Reserve and to
remove some of the perception that the Agricultural Land Reserve is a land reserve for eventual non -
agricultural development in Maple Ridge.
Issue 5 of the Agricultural Plan discusses the loss of the agricultural land base and notes the
following specific issues:
• Many small parcels
• High level of rural residential incursion into Agricultural Land Reserve
• Non-farmed areas of the Agricultural Land Reserve tend to be smaller parcels
• Limited availability of irrigation water
• Continued conversion pressure from the District of Maple Ridge’s urban growth
• Financial pressure on farming
The Agricultural Plan recognizes that there may be situations in the future where exclusions may be
required to meet community needs, for example employment generating lands. In instances where
land conversion is unavoidable, levies or other means be established by the City in order to
compensate for the loss of agricultural land.
Goal 6 of the Plan discusses the issue of the conversion of agricultural land as follows:
The primary goal with respect to larger established farming operations in Maple Ridge is to
plan for their retention as farms, rather than watch them languish and deteriorate, so that
the community can optimize the rewards and advantages of having agriculture in its midst.
Limited to highly specific situations, the secondary goal (if the primary goal is not feasible) is
to explore establishing a policy of compensation from development that enables funds to be
generated and expended so that the net agricultural capability of the District is enhanced by
investment elsewhere.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES
Agricultural Land Commission
The Commission has established guidelines for local governments regarding the timing of application
processing. These guidelines are provided by the Commission in their document, the Agricultural
Land Reserve Use, Subdivision And Procedure Regulation. The local government is normally
required to address the application within 60 days of its receipt under Section 21.1 of this
Regulation, but has an option to hold a public meeting which would extend the application
processing time to 90 days.
Metro Vancouver
The subject property is designated for Agricultural use in the Official Community Plan. If the property
was excluded from the Agricultural Land Reserve, its Agricultural designation would remain in the
Official Community Plan. Any change in permitted uses would require an amendment to the Official
Community Plan, which in turn would require the approval of Metro Vancouver to amend the
Regional Growth Strategy. This type of amendment would be considered by Metro Vancouver to be a
Type 2 Minor Amendment. The bylaw amendment process would include a regional public hearing
and a two-thirds weighted vote of the Metro Vancouver Board. In this instance, the municipal
government would apply for the amendment to Metro Vancouver.
- 6 -
d) Alternatives:
The report recommendations follow Council direction as noted earlier in this report. The property has
not been identified for exclusion from the Agricultural Land Reserve, and is not considered available
for urban development in the Regional Growth Strategy. On this basis, this application could be
considered not supportable.
CONCLUSION:
This application for exclusion from the Agricultural Land Reserve has been considered in the context
of the policies of the Official Community Plan, and the Agricultural Plan. On review of this context,
this application is found to be not supportable. However, the report recommendation has been
prepared in accordance with previous Council direction for applications for exclusion from the
Agricultural Land Reserve.
“Original signed by Diana Hall”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Diana Hall, MA (Planning), MCIP
Planner II
“Original signed by Christine Carter”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, MCP, MCIP
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” for
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Photo
Appendix C – Development Sketch prepared by Applicant.
DATE: Sep 26, 2016
FILE: 2016-299-AL
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
AL/045/04
(EXCLUDED)
2016-009-RZ
(41 UNIT RM-1 PROPOSAL)
2016-298-AL
(IN PROGRESS)
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,500
12176 237 STREET
Legend
Stream
Ditch Centreline
ALR
City of PittMeadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Aug 9, 2016
FILE: 2016-299-AL
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:3,784
12176 237 STREET
Aerial Imagery from the Spring of 2015
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2016-434-AL
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Application to Subdivide Land within the Agricultural Land Reserve
11680 252 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received under Section 21 (2) of the Agricultural Land Commission Act to
subdivide 2.5 hectares (6.2 acres) of land that is within the Agricultural Land Reserve. The
Applicant’s submission conforms with the requirements of the Agricultural Land Commission.
This report evaluates the merits of this subdivision proposal within the policy context of the Official
Community Plan and the Agricultural Plan. Based on this analysis, the recommendation is not to
support this application for subdivision within the Agricultural Land Reserve. On this basis, the
recommendation is not to forward the application to the Agricultural Land Commission.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Application 2012-107-AL not be forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission based on the
considerations as outlined in this report, dated December 5, 2016.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
Applicant: Justin Endresen
Legal Description: Section: 14, Township: 12
OCP :
Existing: Agricultural
Proposed: No Change
Zoning:
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Proposed: No Change
Surrounding Uses
North: Use: Rural Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation Agricultural
South: Use: Park
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation Park
1102
- 2 -
East: Use: Park
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation Park
West: Use: 2 Properties, Rural Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation Agricultural
Existing Use of Property: Agriculture & Rural Residential
Proposed Use of Property: No Change
Site Area: 2.5 hectares (6.2 acres)
Access: 252 Street
Servicing: Water, on site septic
b) Project Description:
The applicant wishes to subdivide the 2.5 hectare (6.2 acre) subject property into 3 parcels to
develop into smaller lot hobby farms.
This proposal conforms with the minimum parcel sizes of the RS-3 One Family Rural Residential
Zone which is 0.8 hectares (2 acres) where municipal water is available. Kanaka Creek traverses
the site at its eastern property line.
If this application is forwarded by Council, and receives Agricultural Land Commission approval, the
applicant will have to apply for a subdivision through the municipality. Through this process, the
applicant will have to demonstrate that all of the proposed lots will have on-site septic capability to
current standards. All new parcels must comply with municipal requirements with respect to lot
geometry, servicing, road frontage and parcel size.
c) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan
The property is designated Agriculture in the Official Community Plan, which contains policies in
support of agriculture. On December 16, 2009 Council adopted an Agricultural Plan to support
agriculture within the rural area and the Agricultural Land Reserve. The merits of this application will
be viewed within this policy context.
Section 6.2.2 Sustainable Agriculture
Policy 6-12 states:
Maple Ridge will protect the productivity of its agricultural land by:
a) adopting a guiding principle of ”positive benefit to agriculture” when making land use
decisions that could affect the agricultural land base, with favourable recognition of
initiatives including but not limited to supportive non-farm uses, infrastructure improvements
for farmland, or the inclusion of land elsewhere in the Agricultural Land Reserve;
b) requiring agricultural impact assessments (AIAs) and Groundwater Impact Assessment of
non-farm development and infrastructure projects and identifying measures to off-set
impacts on agricultural capability;
c) preserving larger farm units and areas by using appropriate buffers such as roads,
topographic features, watercourses, ditching, fencing, or gradually reduced residential
densities on properties adjacent to agricultural land;
- 3 -
d) discouraging the subdivision of agricultural land into smaller parcels, except where positive
benefits to agriculture can be demonstrated;
e) reinforcing the concept that the Agricultural Land Reserve is intended for agricultural use by
increasing the minimum lot size for ALR properties that are zoned Rural Residential;
f) encouraging the amalgamation of smaller parcels of farmland into larger, more cohesive
parcels.
Policy 6-12 emphasizes the importance of discouraging the subdivision of agricultural land into
smaller parcels, increasing the minimum parcel size of ALR properties with Rural Residential zoning,
and amalgamation to create larger farm parcels. Reasons for discouraging subdivision within the
Agricultural Land Reserve include minimizing incentives for land speculation in the Agricultural Land
Reserve, which increases the market value of farmland, and exacerbates the issue of economic
barriers to entry for legitimate farming interests.
Section 6.2.1 Economic Development Strategy.
Policy 6-6 of the Official Community Plan describes alternatives to subdivision such as
leaseholds that could ensure greater utilization and retain larger parcels, as follows:
Maple Ridge will develop an Agricultural Plan that:
a) maintains an inventory of local agricultural products and agricultural land use;
b) develops and maintains a database of farm businesses and operators;
c) promotes leasing opportunities of agricultural land;
d) promotes agricultural heritage initiatives;
e) identifies appropriate land uses within agricultural areas and at the rural/urban
interface;
f) promotes urban agriculture;
g) recognizes the positive role that agricultural lands have on the environment;
h) will identify a variety of mechanisms to assist farm operators and to protect agricultural
lands, including but not limited to the creation of trusts, endowments, and life-leases;
i) includes an assessment of the agricultural land base; and
j) develops Development Permit area guidelines to direct non-agricultural development at
the urban/rural interface.
One reason for promoting alternative tenures (Policies 6-6 c and h) relates to the high cost of land,
which is a known barrier for new farmers wishing to start an agricultural business. By supporting
other forms of tenure that can delay or avoid the need for this capital investment by individual
farmers, the municipality can improve its agricultural potential, and bring more of its agricultural land
into full production.
For the above noted reasons, this application does not comply with the Agricultural policies of the
Official Community Plan.
- 4 -
Agricultural Plan
Issue 5 of the Agricultural Plan notes concerns with the loss of the agricultural land base, describing
the following situations that are pertinent to this application:
• Many small parcels
• High level of rural residential incursion into Agricultural Land Reserve
• Non-farmed areas of the Agricultural Land Reserve tend to be smaller parcels
• Continued conversion pressure from the District of Maple Ridge’s urban growth
• Financial pressure on farming
The Plan also notes that more recent priorities given to food safety, food security, and climate
change, includes the development of a local food system. Towards this end, the community would
benefit from greater certainty that the agricultural land base is not undermined by incremental land
use decisions. The Plan makes the following recommendations that pertain to this application:
b) Continue to implement the OCP policies to protect the agricultural land base by creating
guidelines for reviewing applications for non-farm use, exclusions, fill applications,
transportation and utility applications, subdivisions, and government applications;…
g) Explore retention of lots 2 ha (5 acres) and larger in the Agricultural Land Reserve.
Currently, the minimum parcel size in the RS-3 One Family Rural Residential Zone is 0.8 hectares
(2.0 acres) where community water is available. This zone pertains to most of the land that is within
the Agricultural Land Reserve, including the subject property. The RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) zone pre-dates the creation of the Agricultural Land Reserve. Although designated for
Agriculture, there is a concern that this historic zoning contributes to the perception that farming is
not the primary use of this zone. The Agricultural Plan recommends that 2.0 hectares (5 acres) is a
more appropriate minimum parcel size for lands within the Agricultural Land Reserve.
Ministry of Agriculture
Research provided by the Ministry of Agriculture in their most recent inventory work validates
concerns raised in the Agricultural Plan about small lot sizes1. Conclusions drawn from this region
wide information have been summarized by Metro Vancouver, as follows:
Evidence exists that small parcels are less likely to be farmed and therefore further
subdivision of parcels in the ALR is not warranted and will only encourage more non-farm
use of ALR land. Currently 75% of the parcels less than 2 ha (5 acres) are not farmed. The
average size of parcels not used for farming is 3 ha (7.4 acres), while the average size of
parcels used for farming is 7 ha (17 acres).2
1 Maple Ridge was a project partner for the Ministry of Agriculture inventory work in 2011
2 Metro Vancouver, Farming in Metro Vancouver, Metro Facts in Focus | Policy Backgrounder, 2014
- 5 -
Figure 1 Source: Metro Vancouver, Farming in Metro Vancouver, Metro Facts in Focus | Policy
Backgrounder, 2014
Based on Ministry data, the above table demonstrates the connection between parcel size and
farming activity. This information indicates that the subdivision of this property will significantly
increase the probability that the 3 new parcels created will not be used for farming.
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
Engineering Department
The Engineering Department would review this proposal for its servicing requirements as part of the
municipal subdivision application should Commission approval be granted. It should be noted that
the subject property has unconstructed access to 252nd Street. Road construction would be
required to serve all properties. Water connection to each parcel would be required and septic
capacity to current municipal standards for each parcel would need to be determined by a qualified
professional.
e) Alternatives:
If Council decides not to forward this application to the Commission, it will be considered denied and
will not proceed further. However, if Council decides to forward this application to the Agricultural
Land Commission, the Commission will evaluate the merits of this application, and make their
decision accordingly.
- 6 -
CONCLUSION:
This application has been evaluated for its consistency with the policies of the Official Community
Plan, and its implications for the Agricultural Plan, and is found not to comply with this policy
framework. On this basis, the recommendation is that this application for subdivision not be
supported.
“Original signed by Diana Hall”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Diana Hall, MA (Planning), MCIP, CIP
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 E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Photo
Appendix C – Subdivision Sketch prepared by Applicant
DATE: Nov 29, 2016
FILE: 2016-434-AL
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
252 ST116 AVE
´
Scale: 1:2,500
11680 252 STREETLegend
Stream
Ditch Centreline
Edge of River
Indefinite Creek
Lake or Reservoir
River
Major Rivers & Lakes
APPENDIX A
City of PittMeadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Nov 4, 2016
FILE: 2016-434-AL
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,500
11680 252 STREET
Aerial Imagery from the Spring of 2015
APPENDIX B
SUBJECT PROPERTY:PCL. 30; SEC. 14; TWP. 12;
LD. 36; PL. 68686
PROPOSED ROAD ACCESS86 METERS86 METERS86 METERS70 METERS
122 METERS
FLOWS INTO KANAKA CREEKPROPOSED LOT 1
PROPOSED LOT 2
PROPOSED LOT 3
TENNIS COURT
POOL
HOUSECONNECTS TO 252ND STREET117 AVENUE
( 0.8 HA )
( 0.8 HA )
( 0.9 HA )
Te
UNCLEARED LAND
WITH DECOMISSIONED ROAD
#1
#2 #3
#4
#5
#6
#7
#8
#9
#10+11
APPENDIX C
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2016-411-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First Reading
21188 Wicklund Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject property, located at 21188 Wicklund Avenue,
from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-1 (Residential District) to permit subdivision into two
single family residential lots. As the application does not align with policies within the Official
Community Plan (OCP), the recommendation is to not support this development proposal.
This application proposes the creation of fewer than 3 new lots; therefore, it is exempt from the
requirements under the Community Amenity Contribution (CAC) Policy 6.31.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the subject application not be given first reading.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
Applicant: Anita Chowdhury
Legal Description: Lot 119 District Lot 242 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan
47383
OCP:
Existing: Urban Residential
Zoning:
Existing: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Proposed: R-1 (Residential District)
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Residential
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) and RS-1b (One Family
Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
Designation: Urban Residential
South: Use: Residential
Zone: RG (Group Housing Zone)
Designation: Urban Residential
1103
- 2 -
East: Use: Residential
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Urban Residential
West: Use: Residential
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Designation: Urban Residential
Existing Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential
Site Area: 969 m² (0.24 acres)
Access: Wicklund Avenue
Servicing requirement: Urban Standard
b) Site Characteristics:
The subject property is 969 m² (0.24 acres) in size and is bound by single family residential lots to
the north, west and east, and townhomes to the south. The subject property is flat with a row of
hedges to the rear of the property and a few trees located in the front and rear yards. There is an
existing house on the property that will require removal.
c) Project Description:
The applicant proposes to rezone the subject property, from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to
R-1 (Residential District), to permit future subdivision into two single family residential lots not less
than 371 m². It is noted that the proposed lot sizes are larger than the minimum R-1 (Residential
District) requirements.
Staff had a pre-application meeting with the applicant advising that an application to rezone and
subdivide to the R-1 (Residential District) zone would not be supported. Alternative development
options were discussed noting that either Duplex or Triplex housing that would achieve similar
density and would be in compliance with the OCP.
At this time the current application has been assessed to determine its compliance with the OCP and
provide a land use assessment only. Detailed review and comments will need to be made if Council
supports the proposal and once full application packages have been received. A more detailed
analysis and a further report will be required prior to second reading, should Council support this
development. Such assessment may impact proposed lot boundaries and yields, OCP designations
and Bylaw particulars, and may require application for further development permits.
d) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan:
The subject property is currently designated Urban Residential-Neighbourhood Residential. The
Neighbourhood Residential designation allows for single detached dwellings and other housing
forms, subject to the Neighbourhood Residential Infill policies. The rezoning and subdivision of this
property into two single family residential lots and, specifically, use of the R-1 (Residential District)
zone is not in compliance with the OCP, as per Policy 3-19 (a) (i), which states:
- 3 -
The proposed lot area and widths should be not less that 80% of the lot area and width
prescribed under the predominate or adjacent zoning in the surrounding neighbourhood.
During the OCP review, the above noted policy was created stemming from conversatio ns with
residents, who advised that infill developments need to fit the character of a neighbourhood. It was
acknowledged that slightly reduced lot sizes were considered appropriate in older, larger lot
neighbourhoods; however, there was recognition that the reduction in lot size should be nominal,
and that compatible lot width was key to preserving the character of a neighbourhood. For that
reason, the policies were written to allow for a lot width not less than 80% of the zoning in the
surrounding area. In addition, residents noted a preference to a Duplex or Triplex form, instead of
subdivision, to achieve similar density, noting that the lot area and width would remain unchanged.
The current RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) zone requires a minimum lot area of 668 m² and lot
width of 18 m. The proposed R-1 (Residential District) zone would result in a lot area of 371 m² and
lot width of 12 m. Under this policy, the RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
zone would be considered the appropriate zone, with a minimum lot area requirement of 557 m² and
a lot width of 15 m; however, the applicant can not achieve the minimum lot area required for two
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) zoned lots. It has been suggested to the
applicant that a Duplex or Triplex housing form could be alternative options to achieve additional
density, without subdividing.
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the subject property, located at 21188 Wicklund Avenue,
from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-1 (Residential District) to permit subdivision into two
single family residential lots. The minimum lot size for the current RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential) zone is 668m2, and the minimum lot size for the proposed R-1 (Residential District)
zone is 371 m2.
The surrounding neighbourhood is made up of predominantly RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
zoned lots, with the exception of two properties north-east of the subject property, and two
properties to the west, which are zoned RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential).
Alternatives:
That staff be directed to prepare a Bylaw in support of the development application to the R-1
(Residential District) zone. Should Council support this development application, it should be noted
that it would not be referred to the Advisory Design Panel or is a Development Information Meeting
required, as it is for a two lot single family subdivision. Comments and input will need to be sought
from the various internal departments and external agencies and a complete rezoning and
subdivision application would be required.
The other alternative would be that the application be deferred, and the applicant be requested to
revise the application pending direction from Council.
- 4 -
CONCLUSION:
The development proposal is not in compliance with the OCP, as per Policy 3-19, and an amendment
to such is not supportable, therefore, it is recommended that this application be denied.
“Original signed by Chuck Goddard” 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 E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Map
City of PittMeadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Oct 21, 2016
FILE: 2016-411-RZ
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENTFOREST PL.GLENWOOD AVE.212 ST.WICKLUND AVE.
122 AVE.212 ST.NOLAITY ST.12069 2122021170210971221912216
12240
12047
12245
2114521133211912111112115
211422116012116
12230
2111212243
12156
12239
1
2
0
2
0
12090
12056
12218
2110221111211582115321137211342113621210121122114612101-53
2113221151211062120721116211072108812098
121111222921195
12089
12061 2124012234
2117021101211552117821149120502119821103
2119312086
12
12200
120732117521188211662113912
2
3
1
2124712105
120702116112208
210962117512242
2115012128
2108921200211542118921152211472112812070
211122112312225
12217
121162112012222
211012109712062
12186
12050
12037
12038
12213
12219
1210621211211752112021196/9812145 212822118812138
12227
1223
9
211992111921190/92211021223512209
2110221178212412114412212
21201212302118512196
212002123121146120442110412203
18
12081
12209
2116521124211672122112101
12161
12171
21190211612114921127SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,000
21188 WICKLUND AVENUE
APPENDIX A
City of PittMeadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Oct 21, 2016
FILE: 2016-411-RZ
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENTFOREST PL.GLENWOOD AVE.212 ST.WICKLUND AVE.
122 AVE.212 ST.NOLAITY ST.12069 2122021170210971221912216
12240
12047
12245
2114521133211912111112115
211422116012116
12230
2111212243
12156
12239
1
2
0
2
0
12090
12056
12218
2110221111211582115321137211342113621210121122114612101-53
2113221151211062120721116211072108812098
121111222921195
12089
12061 2124012234
2117021101211552117821149120502119821103
2119312086
12
12200
120732117521188211662113912
2
3
1
2124712105
120702116112208
210962117512242
2115012128
2108921200211542118921152211472112812070
211122112312225
12217
121162112012222
211012109712062
12186
12050
12037
12038
12213
12219
1210621211211752112021196/9812145 212822118812138
12227
1223
9
211992111921190/92211021223512209
2110221178212412114412212
21201212302118512196
212002123121146120442110412203
18
12081
12209
2116521124211672122112101
12161
12171
21190211612114921127SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,000
21188 WICKLUND AVENUE
Aerial Imagery from the Spring of 2011
APPENDIX B
- 1 -
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2016-052-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First and Second Reading
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7243-2016 and
Second Reading
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7244-2016
22260 & 22292 122nd Avenue, and 12159 & 12167 223rd Street.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject properties located at 22260 & 22292 122
Avenue and 12159 & 12167 223 Street from LUC (Land Use Contracts) & RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential) to RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential), to permit the future construction of a
291 unit multi-family rental housing development within the Town Centre. On April 26, 2016,
Council granted first reading to Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7244-2016 and considered the early
consultation requirements for the Official Community Plan (OCP) amendment. In their consideration,
Council expressed concern that the existing tenants would be accommodated with rental housing at
rates within their means.
This application requires an amendment to the Official Community Plan (OCP) to redesignate the
subject properties at 12159 & 12167 223 Street from Single Family to Low Rise Apartment. This
proposal is consistent with Council priorities for the provision of rental housing, and is therefore
supportable. The minimum lot size for the current RM-2 Medium Density Apartment Residential
District Zone is 1300 m2.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1)That, in accordance with Section 475 of the Local Government Act, opportunity for early and
on-going consultation has been provided by way of posting Official Community Plan Bylaw No .
7243-2016 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;
2)That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7243-2016 be considered in conjunction with
the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
3)That it be confirmed that Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7243-2016 is consistent
with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
4)That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7243-2016 be given first and second
readings and be forwarded to Public Hearing;
5)That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7244-2016 be given second reading, and be forwarded to Public
Hearing;
1104
- 2 -
6) That the following terms and conditions be met prior to final reading:
i) Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt of the
deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement;
ii) Approval from the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure;
iii) Amendment to Official Community Plan Schedule “A”, Chapter 10.4 Town Centre Area Plan,
Schedule 1 – Town Centre Area Land-Use Designation Map;
iv) Road dedication on 223 Street as required;
v) Consolidation of the subject properties;
vi) Registration of a Housing Agreement in accordance with Section 483 of the Local
Government Act and a Restrictive Covenant stating that the use of the property as
consolidated will be restricted to residential rental units;
vii) Removal of existing vacant structure at 22292 122nd Street and existing houses at 12159
& 12167 223rd Street.
viii) 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.
DISCUSSION:
1) Background Context:
Applicant: Ciccozzi Architecture Shannon Seefeldt
Owner: Viam Holdings Ltd.
Legal Description: Lot: 44, D.L.: 399, Plan: NWP41066, Lot: 48, D.L.: 399, Plan: NWP44211,
Lot 1; D.L.: 399 NWD; Plan: NWP14397, Lot 2; D.L.: 399; NWD; Plan
NWP14397
OCP:
Existing: APTL (Low-Rise Apartment) and Single Family
Proposed: Medium and High-Rise Apartment
Zoning:
Existing: LUC (Land Use Contracts) and RS-1 One Family Urban Residential
Proposed: RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential)
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Apartment and Single Family uses
Zone: RM-2 Medium Density Apartment Residential,
RM-5 Low Density Apartment Residential, and
RS-1 One Family Urban Residential
Designation: Apartment and Ground Oriented Multi-Family
- 3 -
South: Use: Seniors apartment and congregate care
Zone: CD-1-00 (Seniors Apartment and Private Hospital)
Designation: Low Rise Apartment
East: Use: Urban Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1 One Family Urban Residential
Designation: Ground Oriented Multi-Family
West: Use: Strata Lot Condominium
Zone: LUC (Land Use Contracts)
Designation: Low Rise Apartment
Existing Use of Property: Vacant, Rental Apartment, and Single Family
Proposed Use of Property: Rental Apartment
Site Area: 1.03 HA. (2.5 acres)
Access: 122nd Avenue and 223 Street.
Servicing requirement: Urban Standard
2) Background:
This development proposal is for 291 rental housing units. There are 4 properties included in this
application. The multi-family development on the property at 22292 122nd Avenue (Sunrise Court)
was destroyed by fire in 2015. This proposal will replace this structure with a larger multi-family unit
structure. The property at 22260 122nd Avenue will also be replaced at a later phase of this
development. This phased approach allows current tenants to be accommodated, initially in the
existing structure, and then later, in the first of the two new buildings. The applicant has committed
to providing assistance to existing tenants with the transition to new living arrangements, which may
be in the new building.
3) Project Description:
This proposal will assemble the two smaller single family properties along 223 rd Street into this
development, which will rebuild existing or previous rental accommodation along 122nd Avenue. A
total of 291 dwelling units are proposed, with a mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units, and a projected
floor area of approximately 200,000 square feet.
PLANNING ANALYSIS:
i) Official Community Plan:
Official Community Plan / Town Centre Area Plan:
The development site is located within the North View subarea of the Town Centre Area Plan and is
currently designated Low Rise Apartment and Single Family. An OCP amendment will be required to
re-designate the portions of the site that front 223rd Street from Single Family to Low Rise Apartment
to allow the proposed RM-2 Medium Density Apartment Zoning.
These two smaller parcels were designated Single Family in the Town Centre Area Plan as they were
perceived to have limited development options for a site assembly with sufficient lot depth to create
a multifamily development and road dedication for the widening of 223rd Street.
These constraints will be alleviated by the consolidation of these two parcels with the larger
properties to their west. For this reason, the proposed amendment to the Official Community Plan
designation from Single Family to Low Rise Apartment is supportable. The resulting assembly will be
- 4 -
able to provide required road dedication along 223rd Street, and create a sufficiently large parcel for
a comprehensive development plan.
The applicants were not able to acquire the corner parcel at 22306 122nd Avenue. However, due to
its location, this parcel will be able to develop independently as a multi-family development, and
does not need to be part of an assembly to realize its development potential.
Rental Housing Accommodation. The proposed rental accommodation will improve the housing
stock diversity in the Community. The Maple Ridge Official Community Plan notes that Maple Ridge
has a shortage of specific types of rental accommodation, including 3 bedroom apartments, which
are proposed with this application. The following OCP policies support rental housing:
Policy 3-33 – Maple Ridge supports the provision of rental accommodation and encourages the
construction of rental units that vary in size and number of bedrooms.
Policy 3-34 – Maple Ridge supports the provision of affordable, rental and special needs housing
throughout the District.
OCP policy 3-33 supports the provision of rental accommodation in varying dwelling unit size and
number of bedrooms, and OCP policy 3-34 supports the provision of affordable, rental and special
housing needs throughout the City. A recommended approach to secure these units as rental
housing will be through a Restrictive Covenant and a Housing Agreement with the property owner.
Housing Action Plan:
The Housing Action Plan, endorsed by Council on September 15, 2014, identifies rental housing as a
priority. Strategy 4 of the Housing Action Plan is to Create New Rental Housing
Opportunities. Strategy 4 notes that Municipalities can support the development of new rental
housing through a set of incentives, such as a reduction in parking requirements or waiving
permitting fees. The units could be “secured” as market rental housing, with a covenant on title.
A number of incentives are being considered to facilitate the development of rental housing. The
2017 Planning work program includes consideration for relaxation of parking standards to reduce
construction costs to facilitate affordable housing. Reducing the amount of parking required per
dwelling unit enables a higher potential dwelling unit count relative to site area, and reduced
constructions costs, particularly in large multi-family buildings with underground parking. Of
particular relevance to this application, the relaxation of parking requirements is supported in the
Housing Action Plan as a means to facilitate the development of rental housing. In Maple Ridge, this
practice is currently negotiated during the development process on a case by case basis. The
development of a transparent formal process using defensible criteria, such as proximity to services
and transit, should be considered as a possible incentive. This concept is currently being used by
other Metro Vancouver municipalities including the Corporation of Delta, City of Langley, City of New
Westminster, District of North Vancouver, City of Surrey and the City of Vancouver.
As this proposed development will increase the amount of rental housing stock in the community,
this proposal will meet the objectives of the Housing Action Plan. The parking provisions it proposes
comply with the requirements of the Central Business District of the Town Centre for non-market
housing. However, this development is close (within 300 metres) but not within the Central Business
District and therefore does not qualify for this reduced parking requirement. However, as it is
consistent with the policy direction of the Housing Action Plan and proposes rental housing that is
near services and transit, a parking reduction may be supportable through a development variance
- 5 -
permit or other mechanisms. The applicant has agreed to secure this supply of rental housing in
perpetuity through a restrictive covenant registered on title1
ii) Zoning Bylaw:
There are 2 Land Use Contracts for the subject properties fronting 122nd Avenue. Land Use Contract
#H33588 applies to the subject property at 22260 122nd Avenue, while Land Use Contract
#P108265 applies to the subject property at 22292 122nd Avenue. Both contracts must be
discharged prior to zoning the properties RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential). To address
this issue, the attached zoning amendment bylaw will also discharge these Land Use Contracts.
This application also proposes to rezone the properties located at 12159 and 12167 223rd Street
from RS-1 One Family Urban Residential to RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential) to permit
a 4 storey apartment building. 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 RM-2 (Medium Density
Apartment Residential) zone is 1300 m2. Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zone
will require a Development Variance Permit application. Appendix C describes the Zoning Map
Amendment proposed with this development.
iii) Off-Street Parking And Loading Bylaw:
The Off Street Parking and Loading Bylaw establishes that 1.5 parking stalls and 0.2 visitor stalls are
required for each dwelling unit in the RM-2 Zone. For the 291 housing units proposed, the full
complement of parking would be 495 stalls. The parking provided is consistent with requirements
for non-market multi-family development in the Central Business District of the Town Centre. For this
reason, a parking relaxation will be required, and is supportable due to the proximity of the site to
transit services along Dewdney Trunk Road and the rental tenure of the proposed housing stock.
Parking information provided by the applicant indicate that their existing rental buildings consistently
have more parking than is used. The following table shows three rental housing developments
managed by the applicant. Two of these are within the Maple Ridge Town Centre but out of the
Central Business District (one of these is the existing Sorrento building on the subject site). The
other building is in the City of Coquitlam.
Parking stalls used in 3 rental housing developments in Maple Ridge and Coquitlam
Site Total suites Total parking
provided
Stalls in use Vacant stalls stalls used /#
suites
Coquitlam 53 78 35 43 0.66
Sorrento (MR) 22 54 22 32 0.53
Maple Ct. (MR) 108 150 53 97 0.49
1 Council has requested information on rental rates and how existing tenants will be accommodated with the
transition to new housing. Dialogue with the applicant reveals concessions are being considered as follows:
Right of first refusal in new building
Offer of available unit in other buildings owned by the applicant (one of these is within Maple Ridge)
Financial compensation to all tenants to assist with relocation.
- 6 -
In all of these examples (involving over 180 rental units), the parking complement is less than 1 stall
used per dwelling unit. This ratio is significantly lower than the Off Street Parking Bylaw requirement,
even for the reduced standards of the Central Business District. On this basis, a parking variance is
supportable. A parking reduction study prepared by a qualified professional has been provided,
offering further justification for a parking reduction, as follows:
A key finding in the MVAPS (Metro Vancouver Apartment Parking Study) was that residents of
rental apartment units (both market and non-market units combined) had average auto
ownership levels of 0.82 vehicles per household, approximately 65% of that of strata units …2
Section 3.4 of the Off-Street Parking Bylaw provides a cash in lieu option for relaxing parking
requirements for properties that are within a 930 metre radius of the boundary of the Municipal
parking lot in the Town Centre. This option could be a consideration. However, the cash contribution
that required would be $8000.00 per stall, which would be onerous for the applicant to provide.
Additional options for consideration could be providing car share facilities. A mix of options could be
considered, including granting a variance, cash in lieu, electric car charging stations, provision of
some non-market rental, and car share facilities.
iv) Proposed Variances:
A Development Variance Permit application has been received for this project and involves the
following relaxations:
1. To vary the exterior side yard setback: (North PL along 122nd Avenue) from the required 7.5
metres to 6.0 metres.
2. To vary the interior side yard setback: (West and South PL) from the required 7.5 metres to
6.0 metres.
3. To vary the front yard setback: (East PL along 223rd Street) from 7.5 metres to 3.6 metres.
Note: this setback is measured from the new property line established after a 3.9 metre road
dedication along 223rd Street).
4. Parking requirements. The parking provided (288 stalls) generally complies with
requirements in the Central Business District for non-market housing. However, parking
requirements for the site, which is within 300 metres, but not within the CBC, are 1.7 stalls
per dwelling unit, amounting to 495 stalls required.
The requested variances to the setback and parking requirements in the RM-2 Medium Density Zone
will be the subject of a future Council report.
v) Development Permits:
Pursuant to Section 8.11 of the OCP, a Town Centre Development Permit application is required for
all multifamily residential, flexible mixed use and commercial development located in the Town
Centre.
vi) Advisory Design Panel:
The Advisory Design Panel (ADP) reviewed the form and character of the proposed development and
the landscaping plans at a meeting held on October 11, 2016.
2 Sunrise Re-Development Parking Variance Study, Bunt & Associates, November 2016
- 7 -
Following presentations by the project Architect and Landscape Architect, the ADP made the
following resolution that:
The proposal be re-submitted and presented at a future Advisory Design Panel meeting with
the following concerns addressed:
1. Consider relocating the office, multi purpose room, and fitness area to a central location
and access to courtyards. Stacking program spaces is an option.
2. Consider further natural light elements along length of corridor and throughout building.
3. Consider further variation and diversity of building elevations for building as a whole.
4. Consider allowing additional natural light into courtyard areas by addressing building
massing.
5. Consider further enhancements to courtyard resident entries.
6. Consider distributing underground bike parking throughout parking area.
7. Consider CEPTED issues and weather protection related to parking stairwells.
8. Consider additional variation of treatments and breaking up of building elevations on
south façade.
9. Provide further enhancement and design forward play area for west play area.
10. Provide additional vertical elements to central play area.
11. Provide drop off area.
12. Reconsider activities for programming within courtyard area and noise conflicts.
13. Diversify the planting design within the massed planting areas.
The applicant has responded to these comments as follows:
1. Consider relocating the office, multi purpose room, and fitness area to a central location
and access to courtyards. Stacking program spaces is an option.
Response: The location for the amenity areas was carefully selected in efforts to minimize
the negative impacts to the neighbouring units and therefore livability. Having the
amenities located near the front entrance of the building also allows for the office to
ensure a secure building by way of having clear sight lines to who is entering/exiting the
building and subsequently who is utilizing the amenity areas. Therefore, the current
location of our office and amenity package serves to maintain a high level of security and
consequently reduce theft/damage to the building.
2. Consider further natural light elements along length of corridor and throughout building.
Response: Natural light elements in a corridor is uncommon in condo/apartment buildings,
as the natural light comes at the expense of reducing unit sizes. For this proposal, we have
made every effort to ensure the units are as livable as possible, with ample windows
creating a vast improvement on the current condition. The corridors will be well lit and
have security features throughout.
3. Consider further variation and diversity of building elevations for building as a whole.
Response: Consideration will be made to bring more individual identity to the three end
elevations fronting 223rd.
4. Consider allowing additional natural light into courtyard areas by addressing building
massing.
Response: The building was oriented to maximize the amount of south facing units.
Adjusting massing at this point will reduce the number of units that directly face the sun
throughout the day, therefore not gaining a net positive offset through more light into
courtyards. During the summer months, our shadow study shows that throughout the day
that majority of the courtyard areas will see sunshine into the late afternoon.
- 8 -
5. Consider further enhancements to courtyard resident entries.
Response: Lobby entry points will be investigated for the potential to be further refined
and enhanced.
6. Consider distributing underground bike parking throughout parking area.
Response: A revised parkade plan has been developed and is appended to this report.
7. Consider CEPTED issues and weather protection related to parking stairwells.
Response: Stairwells will be secure with residents accessing through exits from the
parkade below in emergency situations only. Stairwells are also located directly in front of
multiple unit windows and balconies which will give many tenants a direct sightline into
them. Should any issues arise, tenants will be able to contact building management who
will take the appropriate steps to correct. The stairwells are also located within the
boundaries/fencing of the property and will only be accessible by tenants. Additional
security measures will be discussed and investigated. It is important to also consider that
this will be a rental building and any security issues or damage to the building will need to
be remedied at the cost of Amacon (the Landlord). It is therefore in our best interests to
carefully consider the security of this building in efforts to reduce future issues.
8. Consider additional variation of treatments and breaking up of building elevations on
south façade.
Response: Consideration will be made to varying the massing on the south elevation.
9. Provide further enhancement and design forward play area for west play area.
Response: Landscape architect will revise to maximize the ‘fun’ potential of play area while
ensuring a high level of safety is maintained.
10. Provide additional vertical elements to central play area.
Response: Landscape architect will revise to maximize the ‘fun’ potential of play area while
ensuring a high level of safety is maintained.
11.Provide drop off area.
Response: Architect and Civil engineer will investigate possibility of having loading and
pickup/drop off area near front entrance of building. This will be dictated by Maple Ridge
Engineering’s direction for the road widening at 223rd Street.
12. Reconsider activities for programming within courtyard area and noise conflicts.
Response: Any activities that cause excessive noise will be limited (ie no basketball hoop).
13. Diversify the planting design within the massed planting areas.
Response: Landscape architect will investigate other low-maintenance vegetation that
could also be planted.
The applicant has considered and addressed ADP concerns as noted above and reflected in the
current plans. A detailed description of how these items were incorporated into the final design will
be included in a future report to Council pertaining to the required development permit.
- 9 -
Not all of the Advisory Design Panel’s recommendations have been provided by the applicant.
However, Council is not required to insist on strict adherence to the recomm endations of this
advisory committee. On this basis, Council may wish to approve or defer the applicant’s latest
submission.
vii) Development Information Meeting:
A Development Information Meeting was held at the Maple Ridge Legion at 12101 on July 20, 2016.
There were 17 attendees 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:
Concerns:
1. Basketball court/hoop in play area
2. Skylights on top floor
3. Dishwashers
4. Amenity room rentable
5. Wooden blinds (or like material)
6. Swings in the courtyard area
7. Secluded area for smoking tenants
8. Unit square footages to remain same as those in previous buildings
9. Need big bedrooms and storage room
10. Rent to remain the same as current rates
The following are provided by the applicant in response to the issues raised by the public:
1. Basketball court/hoop in play area. Though we will have a courtyard suitable for all children
of all ages, we will not be able to include a basketball hoop on site. There is a park on 222nd
St and 121st Ave that has a basketball hoop and is within a 5 minute walk from the building.
2. Skylights on top floor. Skylights will require additional structural design and reinforcement
which will add substantial cost to the building construction in addition to added ongoing
maintenance. The rental homes on the top level will have significant natural light through
oversized windows.
3. Dishwashers. This again comes down to the cost benefit of including a dishwasher vs the
affect it will have on the rental rates. We will review as we progress.
4. Amenity room rentable. This is typical in condominium buildings we have done in the past
and rental of the amenity room will be managed by the on – site building manager.
5. Wooden blinds (or like material). Each unit will come equipped with sets of blinds though the
exact material has not been specified yet.
6. Swings in the courtyard area. As the exact play equipment has not been selected, we still
have the potential to include swings in the courtyard. Liability concerns may be raised here
due to potential injury on private property.
7. Secluded area for smoking tenants. Tenants who wish to smoke will be able to use their
personal balconies unless future law requires a designated area. If so, a designated area will
be provided.
8. Unit square footages to remain same as those in previous buildings. Our square footage for
the proposed units will be smaller in size than the old Sunrise and Sorrento buildings.
However, the new units will be more efficiently laid out to maximize the full potential of the
unit an create a much more livable space.
9. Need big bedrooms and storage room. Our bedrooms will be sized to support full size
bedroom furniture. We will also have entry closets and storage closets in all units. Some
units will also include dens (ie 2 bedrooms + a small den).
- 10 -
10. Rent to remain the same as current rates. This cannot be guaranteed as this will be a brand
new rental building at market rental rates to be assessed at completion.
viii) Parkland Requirement:
As this development proposes to consolidate 4 parcels into one, there will be no parkland dedication
required for this proposal.
4) Traffic Impact:
As the subject properties are located within 800 metres of the Lougheed Highway, a referral has
been sent to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. Ministry approval of the Zone
Amending Bylaw will be required as a condition of final reading. A traffic study will be forwarded to
the Ministry for its approval.
5) Interdepartmental Implications:
i) Engineering Department:
Comments provided by the Engineering Department pertain to required servicing upgrades, traffic
impacts, and road dedication. The conditions set out by the Engineering Department will be included
as part of the Rezoning Servicing Agreement, stated as a condition of final approval, or will be
addressed during the phase of construction by the Building Department.
ii) License, Permits and Bylaws Department:
The License, Permits and Bylaws Department will be addressing all matters relating to building
permits and the demolition of the existing structures on the subject site. As noted, the construction
process will proceed as a phased process, with the Sorrento Building that is currently occupied
remaining until the initial construction is complete. At that time, the existing tenants will be
relocated, and the Sorrento building will be demolished. The other 3 structures are currently
undergoing demolition.
iii) Fire Department:
The Fire Department will require the applicant to provide a construction safety plan to cover the
construction process. Additional information and requirements include structural details for
emergency planning, Fire Department access based on established protocols, fire safety plan prior to
occupancy, security measures, and address visibility.
6) Intergovernmental Issues:
i) Local Government Act:
An amendment to the OCP requires the local government to consult with any affected parties and to
adopt related bylaws in compliance with the procedures outlined in Section 477 of the Local
Government Act. The amendment required for this application, for the two parcels at 12159 & 223rd
Street, from single family to low rise apartment, is considered to be minor in nature. It has been
determined that no additional consultation beyond existing procedures is required, including
referrals to the Board of the Regional District, the Council of an adjacent municipality, First Nations,
the School District or agencies of the Federal and Provincial Governments.
- 11 -
The amendment has been reviewed with the Financial Plan/Capital Plan and the Waste
Management Plan of the Greater Vancouver Regional District and determined to have no impact.
7) Citizen/Customer Implications:
The provision of rental housing is needed in the community and is a Council priority. This proposal
will assist with meeting these objectives, and is therefore supportable.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that first and second reading be given to OCP Amending Bylaw No . 7243-2016,
that second reading be given to Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7244-2016, and that application 2016-
052-RZ be forwarded to Public Hearing.
“Original signed by Diana Hall”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Diana Hall, MA (Planning), 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 E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Map
Appendix C – OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7243-2016
Appendix D – Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7244-2016
Appendix E – Site Plan and Parking Plan
Appendix F – Building Elevation Plans
Appendix G – Landscape Plan
DATE: Feb 29, 2016
FILE: 2016-052-RZ
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
´
Scale: 1:2,000
22260/92 122 AVENUE &
12159/67 223 STREET
122 AVE
223 ST222 STLegend
Stream
Ditch Centreline
Indefinite Creek
APPENDIX A
City of PittMeadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Feb 29, 2016
FILE: 2016-052-RZ
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
´
Scale: 1:2,000
22260/92 122 AVENUE &
12159/67 223 STREET
Aerial Imagery from the Spring of 2011
122 AVE
223 ST222 STAPPENDIX B
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7243-2016
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014
_______________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend Schedule "B" to the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge, enacts as follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 7243-2016."
2.Schedule "B" is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Lot 44 District Lot 399 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 41066
Lot 48 District Lot 399 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 44211
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 924, a copy of which is attached hereto and
forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby designated/amended as shown.
3.Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014 is hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the day of , 20
READ a second time the day of , 20
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , 20
READ a third time the day of , 20
ADOPTED, the day of , 20 .
____________________________________________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX C
BROWN AVE.222 ST.DELCREST ST,222 ST.123 AVE.
123 AVE.223 ST.122 AVE.224 ST.GARDEN ST.121 AVE.
12128
12310
12251
222602219012101
2222512121
12104
12286
12093
12087
120612222912295 2233312083
12151/73
12241
12096
12219
1216722230
2216112170 12175
12159
12228
12283
12117
12210
12147
12128 222921207222160/9012275
12250
12230
2225512157
12127
12255
12097
12130
12150
12220
221602221322207222752231512082
12191
1227522175
121232218512231 2232812154
1211122160 12135
12294
12118
121421213122306
1212412119
12130
12092
12241
2232012170 2229512096
12151
221791212722229
12084
12258
2216212238
12107
221782230512075
12129
12209
22332222771220722165
12149
12139
12240
12
4
CP
1
B
1
1
1
8
Q
C
H
17
8
9
12
16
D
2
Rem 7
2 11 23
4
11
Pcl."A"
57
8
Rem
6
1
18
O
21
A
M
51
10
212
M
10
58
12
14
19
I
40
5356
Pcl. 1
11
20
12
B
Rem 3
3
41
9
5
274
G
L
9
10
29
A
3
1398
13
2
275
2
K
13
13
11
16
14
3
14
15
A
15
14
15
15
L
48
7
"A"
9
13
"B"
N
272
28
P
13
7
1
44
Rem 8
273
P 16997 P 16012NWS 612
LMS 1802
LMP 39518(lease)
P 57090
LMP 27702
NWS 1357
P 41066
BCP 30288
P 49482
P 14543P 15728P 1112
P 8813(P 9669)
P 13442
P 8540P 14397LMP 27701
LMP 26249
LMP 15241
P 22111P 36736BCS 3724
P 16012
P 13752P 58218LMP 50617
NWS 1615P13752NWS 133
P 30167BCP 48429
P 10689
P 15022*LMP 22261*PP119
P 13752P 16997
LMP 24836P 18496
LMS 3721
P 60017 P 20588NWS 1531
P 16132
P 15728
P 61062P 15022
LMP 12218 P 13752(P 38752)
BCS 3276
P 16997
P 44211
P 51690
*PP119
L M P 5 1 6 8
LMP 50618
LMP 27700RW 18394
LMP 35734RW 78233LMP 26402
LMP 37897
RW 81544LMP 7151EP 70164
BCP 48430
RW 75573LMP 87 LMP 24837EP 30259
LMP 26401RW 80320P 28405
BCP 15939
BCHPA
LMP 15242LMP 24835RW 45029
EP 70164
LMP 24838EP 72617
RW 48132LMP 26325LMP 35899´
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDINGBylaw No. Map No. Purpose:From:
To:
To Amend the Town Centre Area Plan Schedule 1Single-Family Residential
Low-Rise Apartment
7243-2016924
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7244-2016
A Bylaw to amend Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 and to discharge certain Land Use
Contracts
______________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as
amended; and
WHEREAS a land use contract may, under s.546 of the Local Government Act, be discharged
by bylaw with the agreement of the local government and the owner of any parcel of land
that is described in the bylaw as being covered by the discharge; and
WHEREAS the owner of land legally described as:
Lot 44 District Lot 399 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 41066 and
Lot 48 District Lot 399 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 44211
has agreed in writing to the discharge of the land use contracts charging each of those
parcels;
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 and Land Use Contract
Discharge Bylaw No. 7244-2016."
2.Those parcel (s) or tract (s) of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 44 District Lot 399 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 41066
Lot 48 District Lot 399 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 44211
Lot 1 District Lot 399 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 14397
Lot 2 District Lot 399 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 14397
as shown outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1674 a copy of which is attached
hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to RM-2 (Medium Density
Apartment Residential).
3.Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
4. The land use contract registered on April 12, 1972 and assigned registration number
H33588 is discharged from the land described as Lot 44 District Lot 399 Group 1
New Westminster District Plan 41066 (PID 002-539-187).
APPENDIX D
5. The Land Use Contract registered on November 6, 1978 and assigned registration
number P108265 is discharged from the land described as Lot 48 District Lot 399
Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 4421(PID 00-354-991).
6. The Corporate Officer shall register in the Land Title Office a discharge of each of the
land use contracts that is subject to this bylaw, together with a certified copy of this
bylaw, in accordance with the Land Title Act and Sections 546 and 547 of the Local
Government Act.
READ a first time the 26th day of April, 2016.
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
222 ST.123 AVE.DELCREST ST,222 ST.123 AVE.
BROWN AVE.223 ST.122 AVE.224 ST.GARDEN ST.121 AVE.
12128
12310
12251
222602219012101
12231
2222512121
2216212093
12061 2233312083
12151/73
12241
12096
12219
12295
1216722230
2216112170
12159
12228
12283
12154
12117
12210
12104
12147
1209622292
1207222160/9012275
12250
12230
2225512157
12127
12255
1209722277 12130
12150
22160222132227512286
2231512128
12087
12124
12082
12191
1227522175
1212322185 1217522328
1211122160 12135
12294
12119
12118
12142221651213122306
2220712130
12092
12241
2232012170 2229512151
12220
221791212722229
12084
12258
12238
12107
22178223052222912075
12129
12209
2233212207
12149
12139
12240
3
29
1
A
1
8
C
17
8
272
12
48
D
2
40
1 Rem 7
1
2 11 23
4Pcl."A"
6 16
18
14
O
21
M
51
12
10
15
7
212
3
M
10
58
14
19
I
8
11
53
14
56
Pcl. 1
20
B
Rem 3
11
41
5
274
G
L
9
10
9
Rem
A
1
H
3
139B
13 275
2
12
K
13
CP
13
4
16
A
8
13
9
9
14
15
15
L
"A"
2
15
13
11
"B"
N
28
P
57
Q
7
1
44
Rem 8
12
273
P 16997 P 16012NWS 612
LMP 39518(lease)
P 57090
NWS 1357
P 41066
BCP 30288
P 49482
P 1112
P 14543P 16132
(P 9669)P 8540P 14397LMS 1802
LMP 27701
LMP 26249
LMP 15241P 36736BCS 3724
*LMP 22261P 16012
P 13752P 58218LMP 50617
NWS 1615P13752P 15728NWS 133
P 30167BCP 48429
P 10689
P 15022P 8813P 61062*PP119
P 13752LMP 27702P 16997
LMP 24836P 18496
LMS 3721
P 60017 P 20588NWS 1531
P 15728
P 15022
LMP 12218 P 13752P 22111(P 38752)
BCS 3276
P 13442
P 16997
P 44211
P 51690
*PP119
RW 78233LMP 50618
LMP 27700RW 18394
LMP 35734LMP 15242LMP 26402
RW 81544
L M P 5 1 6 8 LMP 7151LMP 37897
EP 70164
BCP 48430
LMP 87 LMP 24837EP 30259
LMP 26401RW 80320LMP 24838P 28405
BCP 15939
BCHPA
LMP 24835RW 45029
EP 70164
EP 72617
RW 48132RW 75573
LMP 26325LMP 35899´
SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDINGBylaw No. Map No. From:
To:
LUC (Land Use Contracts) Registration #H33588 & #P108265RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential)
7244-20161674
LUC #H33588 LUC #P108265
APPENDIX F
11.09.2016SUNRISE RE-DEVELOPMENT22260, 22292 122ND AVE & 12159-12167 223RD ST, MAPLE RIDGE RENDERINGLOOKING AT MAIN ENTRY FROMY 233RD STREET
APPENDIX G
- 1 -
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2016-325-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Second Reading
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7283-2016
22606 Dewdney Trunk Road
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A Temporary Use Permit application has been received for the subject property, located at 22606
Dewdney Trunk Road, to permit a temporary taxi dispatch use. The applicant is currently operating a
taxi dispatch office at 20542 Dewdney Trunk Road; however, this property is not commercially zoned
and the previous temporary use permit has lapsed. A previous application to rezone 20542
Dewdney Trunk Road and bring the taxi dispatch use into compliance was received in 2013 but the
applicant did not proceed beyond first reading and the application was subsequently closed due to
inactivity. The applicant no longer intends to develop 20542 Dewdney Trunk Road to include the
existing non-compliant taxi business. The purpose of the subject application is to temporarily
relocate the taxi business to 22606 Dewdney Trunk Road to rectify the current business’ non -
compliance at the current location. Council granted first reading and considered the early
consultation requirements for the Official Community Plan (OCP) Amending Bylaw No. 7283-2016,
on September 20, 2016.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1)That, in accordance with Section 475 of the Local Government Act, opportunity for early and
on-going consultation has been provided by way of posting Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 7283-2016 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;
2)That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7283-2016 be considered in conjunction with
the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
3)That it be confirmed that Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No . 7283-2016 is consistent
with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
4)That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7283-2016 , as amended, be given second
reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing;
5)That the following terms and conditions be met prior to final reading:
i)Amendment to Official Community Plan Appendix D – Temporary Use Permits, to add the
subject property to the list of properties; and
1105
- 2 -
ii) Provision of a refundable security equivalent to 100% of the estimated landscape cost, in
accordance with the terms and conditions of the Temporary Use Permit.
DISCUSSION:
1) Background Context:
Applicant: SDM Transport Ltd.
Legal Description: Lot 4 Except Westerly 81.1 Feet District Lot 401 Group 1 New
Westminster District Plan 7863
OCP:
Existing: Town Centre Commercial
Proposed: Temporary Use Permit
Zoning:
Existing: CS-1 (Service Commercial)
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Automotive Repair, Indoor Recreation
Zone: CS-1 (Service Commercial)
Designation: Town Centre Commercial
South: Use: Road, Vacant, Bus Loop
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential), C-3 (Town Centre
Commercial)
Designation: Medium and High-Rise Apartment, Town Centre Commercial
East: Use: Child Care
Zone: C-3 (Town Centre Commercial)
Designation: Town Centre Commercial
West: Use: Restaurant, Office
Zone: C-3 (Town Centre Commercial)
Designation: Town Centre Commercial
Existing Use of Property: Vacant
Proposed Use of Property: Taxi Dispatch Office
Site Area: 0.168 ha. (0.4 acres)
Access: Dewdney Trunk Road, 226 Street
Servicing requirement: Urban Standard
2) Background:
The applicant proposes to amend Appendix D - Temporary Use Permits of the OCP to allow a
Temporary Use Permit for a taxi dispatch office. The uses requested for the temporary use permit
include a taxi dispatch office and taxi parking. The applicant proposes to improve the overall
appearance of the property by painting the existing building, and adding landscaping.
- 3 -
The applicant is currently operating a taxi dispatch office at 20542 Dewdney Trunk Road; however,
this property is not commercially zoned and the previous temporary use permit has lapsed. A
previous application to rezone 20542 Dewdney Trunk Road and bring the taxi dispatch use into
compliance was received in 2013 but the applicant did not proceed beyond first reading and the
application was subsequently closed due to inactivity. The applicant no longer intends to develop
20542 Dewdney Trunk Road to include the existing non-compliant taxi business. The purpose of the
subject application is to temporarily relocate the taxi business to 22606 Dewdney Trunk Road to
rectify the current business’ non-compliance at the current location (see Appendix A and B)
3) Project Description:
The subject property has vehicular access via Dewdney Trunk Road and 226 Street, which the
applicant proposes to keep fenced with a chain link gate for security purposes. A total of 43 parking
spaces will be provided on the property for taxi parking and taxi driver parking. The existing building
on the property will be utilized for a taxi dispatch office, which operates 24 hours per day, seven days
a week. No propane refueling will take place on the property.
4) Planning Analysis:
i) Official Community Plan:
An OCP amendment is required to add the subject property into Appendix D – Temporary Use
Permits of the OCP. Appendix D of the OCP states the following:
1. Lands in the City may be designated to permit temporary uses if a condition or circumstance
exists that warrants the use for a short period of time but does not warrant a change of land use
designation or zoning of the property.
2. Council has the authority by resolution to issue Temporary Use Permits to allow temporary uses
on specific properties. Council may specify conditions for the temporary use.
3. Designated Temporary Use Permit areas will require guidelines that specify the general
conditions regarding the issuance of permits, the use of the land, and the date the use is to
terminate.
4. As a condition of issuing the permit, Council may require applicants or owners to remove
buildings, to restore the property to a specific condition when the use ends, and to post a
security bond. A permit may be issued for a period of up to three years, and may be renewed
only once.
5. Council may issue Temporary Use Permits to allow:
a) temporary commercial uses, i.e., temporary parking areas; and
b) temporary industrial uses, i.e. soil screening.
c) other temporary uses.
6. A Temporary Use Permit is issued in accordance with the provisions of Section 492 of the Local
Government Act.
7. The following section lists areas designated for Temporary Uses and describes the purpose of
the use. The described purpose and the specified general conditions for issuing a Permit for the
declared areas are described as part of the Temporary Use Permit.
The main difference between rezoning and temporary use permits is the duration of time that the
use is permitted on the property, and the removal and restoration requirements. The bylaw has
been amended to add the Permit Area Number “4”, to be in sequential numeric order within
Appendix D of the OCP (see Appendix C).
- 4 -
ii) Development Information Meeting:
A Development Information Meeting was held at the Maple Ridge Library on November 22, 2016. A
total of three people attended the meeting from surrounding apartment buildings and were
concerned that the applicant intended to construct a tall building that would impede their view. After
the applicant presented the proposal (see Appendix D), the attendees felt that the presence of an
office operating 24 hours per day would increase safety in the neighbourhood.
5) Interdepartmental Implications:
The Licenses, Permits and Bylaws Department (the Bylaws Department) has provided the following
draft operating requirements for the business license, which are in line with the City’s Taxi Bylaw.
The records of all daily trips for each taxi must be kept in the place of business for a period of
six months and shall be produced for inspection at any time on request by the Police or the
Bylaw department.
Any taxi that is older than 7 years must be removed from the fleet.
The drivers must always have a current chauffeurs permit and the Company must send the
bylaw department updated lists of all current drivers.
All drivers must clearly display photo identification inside the taxi.
Each taxi must display a vehicle for hire plate that is valid for the current year. These plates
are not transferrable from vehicle to vehicle.
A list of complaints must be forwarded to the Bylaw Department twice monthly.
As the Bylaws Department is currently dealing with infractions at the existing business location, the
above noted conditions will need to be resolved to the satisfaction of the City prior to issuance of a
Temporary Use Permit on the subject property. The property located at 20542 Dewdney Trunk Road
holds a valid business license which expires on December 31, 2016. Due to the RS-1 (One Family
Urban Residential) zoning of that property, which does not permit a taxi dispatch use, the business
license will not be renewed for that property.
6) Intergovernmental Issues:
i) Local Government Act:
An amendment to the OCP requires the local government to consult with any affected parties and to
adopt related bylaws in compliance with the procedures outlined in Section 477 of the Local
Government Act. The amendment required for this application, to amend Appendix D - Temporary
Use Permits of the Official Community Plan (OCP) is proposed to allow a Temporary Use Permit on
the subject property, is considered to be minor in nature. It has been determined that no additional
consultation beyond existing procedures is required, including referrals to the Board of the Regional
District, the Council of an adjacent municipality, First Nations, the School District or agencies of the
Federal and Provincial Governments.
The amendment has been reviewed with the Financial Plan/Capital Plan and the Waste
Management Plan of the Greater Vancouver Regional District and determined to have no impact.
- 5 -
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that first and second reading be given to OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7283-2016,
and that application 2016-325-RZ be forwarded to Public Hearing.
“Original signed by Amelia Bowden”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden, M. Urb
Planner 1
“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 E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Map
Appendix C – OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7283-2016
Appendix D – Site and Landscape Plan
City of PittMeadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Aug 22, 2016
FILE: 2016-325-RZ
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SELKIRK AVE.
McINTOSH AVE.
121 AVE.
BROWN AVE.227 ST.227 ST.121 AVE.
LANE
LANE
SELKIRK AVE.227 ST.226 ST.EDGE ST.DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
LANE
BRO WN AVE.
119 AVE.
SELKIRK AVE.226502271211857
12075
226061185822602226452256722626120182258311937
1197122681225962258722519
11920/3622588120872263012085
11890
119702262012077
11882 225972256122481226102257612070
11900 225901196322574RCMP22577
11844
11910
11990 22557226252226112261522610226332264022490226242263411980
11996
2271122577Haney Place Mall 2256222701/226482255022680118692262122530/62
22625226392270511931225402258822582
1187622640225042255811960
2264722631Courthouse 22610225542251411944
226491190922644/482264112003 225892256622603Municipal Hall
1186222597 119472267422661
22637-4512047
11834 22611Arts Centre
227202260611940/48226602268012060
12038
11995
/09
1188922670 2270822596SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,500
22606 DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
APPENDIX A
City of PittMeadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Aug 22, 2016
FILE: 2016-325-RZ
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SELKIRK AVE.
McINTOSH AVE.
121 AVE.
BROWN AVE.227 ST.227 ST.121 AVE.
LANE
LANE
SELKIRK AVE.227 ST.226 ST.EDGE ST.DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
LANE
BRO WN AVE.
119 AVE.
SELKIRK AVE.226502271211857
12075
226061185822602226452256722626120182258311937
1197122681225962258722519
11920/3622588120872263012085
11890
119702262012077
11882 225972256122481226102257612070
11900 225901196322574RCMP22577
11844
11910
11990 22557226252226112261522610226332264022490226242263411980
11996
2271122577Haney Place Mall 2256222701/226482255022680118692262122530/62
22625226392270511931225402258822582
1187622640225042255811960
2264722631Courthouse 22610225542251411944
226491190922644/482264112003 225892256622603Municipal Hall
1186222597 119472267422661
22637-4512047
11834 22611Arts Centre
227202260611940/48226602268012060
12038
11995
/09
1188922670 2270822596SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,500
22606 DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
Aerial Imagery from the Spring of 2011
APPENDIX B
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7283-2016
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014
_______________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend Schedule "A" to the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge, enacts as follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 7283-2016."
2.Appendix D. TEMPORARY USE PERMITS, Section TEMPORARY USE PERMIT AREA is amended
by deleting Temporary Commercial Use Permit Area Location No.2 in its entirety and
renumbering subsequent locations accordingly.
3.Appendix D. TEMPORARY USE PERMITS, Section TEMPORARY USE PERMIT AREA is amended
by the addition of the following, in sequential numeric order:
Temporary Commercial Use Permit Area Location No. 4
Purpose:
To permit a temporary taxi dispatch office and taxi parking located at 22606 Dewdney Trunk
Road.
Location:
Those parcels or tracts of land shown on Temporary Commercial Use Permit Area No. 5 map,
and known and described as:
Lot 4 Except: Westerly 81.1 feet; District Lot 401 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan
7863
is hereby designated to permit a temporary commercial use for a taxi dispatch office, for the
lesser of a three-year maximum period or in the event of an offence to any City bylaw. The
time period becomes effective upon adoption of this bylaw.
4. Appendix D. TEMPORARY USE PERMITS, Section TEMPORARY USE PERMIT AREA is amended
by the addition of the attached Temporary Commercial Use Permit Area Location No. 4 map,
in sequential numeric order.
APPENDIX C
5. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No.7060-2014 as amended, is hereby amended
accordingly.
READ a first time the 20th day of September, 2016.
READ a second time the day of , 20
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , 20
READ a third time the day of , 20
ADOPTED, the day of , 20 .
___________________________________ _____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
DATE: Sep 6, 2016 BY: DT
McINTOSH AVE.
BROWN AVE.227 ST.227 ST.LANE
LANE
SELKIRK AVE.227 ST.226 ST.EDGE ST.DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
LANE
BROWN AVE.
119 AVE.2265012075
226062260222645225672262612018 2258311937
1197122681225872251922588
11920/36
12087
2263011890
11970
12077
11882 2259722561226102257612070
225901196322574RCMP22577
11910
11990 225572262522611226242263411980
11996 22577Haney Place Mall 2264822550226802262122530/62
1193122540
2264011876225581196022631Courthouse226102255411944226491190922644/482264112003 225892256622603Municipal Hall 22597119472267422661
22637-4512047
22611Arts Centre
11940/48
12060
12038
/09
118892267022596Rem.
2956
2
81.5
14
Rem.
16
A
56
299
61
301
296
3
9
1
7
Rem.64 652
8
313118
9
Rem 127 11
3
Rem
7
Rem. A
Feet
298
B
11
Rem 120
6
5
3
A
CP
2
294
4
15
West
Rem 1205
Rem. A
Rem.
1
2
3
300
4
4
293
A
1
1
E
297
A
8
5
C
4
B
Rem.
LOT A6
2
Rem 2
4
1
1
78
303
3
292
4
2 ARem.
4
117
A
1
13P 47933P 7863
P 60562
P 68843
P 9541
*PP094
P 14185P 9446
P 60562
P 9446
RP 84340
P 8081P 8081Plan 81350
P 7997 P 80888P 8695
P 12640
P 9446
(P9687)
EPP 12098
RP 79869
*PP093
P 9541
(P 9541)
NWS 2403 LMP 37413P 12215P 9541
P 51167
*PP088P 43724LMP 19460
EPS 2538
P 65997 *PP086P 12215BCP 34253
P8695*PP088
P 8843
P 22418LMP 15424
LP 73289
P 43724 (EPS 2806)
P 8081
P 9687
P 9190NWS 2403P 12567P 20546
P 60451
(EPS 1223)
*PP084
P 9236P 8844P 44882
P 58055*LMP18210 P 43724
P 8679P 54086EP 69139RP 69394
BCP 52040BCP 49797
RW 59110
RW 18394
P 57372LMP 46994EPP 14312EP 65137
LMP 52324
RW 18394
LMP 45326 BCP 13823
RP 68844 RW 18394RW 68845
P 70955
EPP 13648
RW 61238
´
Scale: 1:2,000
TEMPORARY COMMERCIAL USE PERMIT AREALocation No. 5
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
APPENDIX D
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2014-104-SD
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First, Second, and Third Reading
East Hampstead Local Area Service Bylaw No. 7278-2016
23050 136 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The developer of the property located at 23050 136 Avenue has made a formal petition (Appendix
“D”), per the Community Charter, Part 7, Division 5, 211 (1)(a), requesting the City provide a Local
Area Service Bylaw specific to those properties to be created by subdivision. The service is for
enhanced landscape maintenance including road bioswales and two parkettes within the
development. The bylaw will require the future property owners of each the 21 single family lots to
pay an annual fee as a Local Service Tax for these enhanced landscape maintenance areas within
the development. Similar Local Area Service bylaws have been established in Albion and Silver
Valley. A concurrent rezoning application (2014-104-RZ) is scheduled for final reading on December
6, 2016.
Local Area Service Bylaws have previously been applied in other areas of Maple Ridge,
predominantly in growth areas such as Silver Valley and Albion. Staff will be preparing an
information report to Council in the near future outlining the current practices and performance of
Local Area Service Bylaws.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1.That a Local Area Service Bylaw, as formally petitioned by the developer of the lands referred
to as ‘East Hampstead’, and per the Community Charter, Part 7, Division 5, 211 (1)(a), be
authorized for the enhanced landscape maintenance costs to be levied on the benefitting
properties to be created by subdivision of the land; and further
2.That East Hampstead Local Area Service Bylaw No. 7278-2016 be given first, second and
third readings.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
The subject property located at 23050 136 Avenue is 1.7 ha (4.22 acres) in size. The applicant is
proposing to rezone a portion of the property from R-1 (Residential District) and R-3 (Special Amenity
Residential District to R-2 (Urban Residential District) to permit a future subdivision with a total of 21
lots. If approved, this will result in the addition of two lots from the previously proposed subdivision
plan.
1106
- 2 -
In revising the subdivision plan for the R-2 (Urban Residential District) zoned lots, the applicant has
enlarged the park area adjacent to Lot 8 resulting in 352m² of additional land to be dedicated as
Park. This will provide increased green space between the groups of lots, which is one of the
features of an Eco Clusters development.
b) Desired Outcomes:
A Local Area Service Bylaw is required for the enhanced landscape maintenance of an enhanced
road bioswales and two parkettes within the development in order for subdivision approval under
application 2014-104-SD. The developer has made a formal petition, per the Community Charter,
Part 7, Division 5, 211 (1)(a), requesting the City provide a Local Area Service Bylaw, specific to
those properties to be created by subdivision.
The developer of the site will be responsible for the enhanced landscaped areas installation costs
and maintenance costs, ensuring 100% survival, for the two years after completion of planting. The
costs for ongoing maintenance in subsequent years will then be provided by the 21 property owners
after subdivision. The cost recovery method will be through the collection of 100% of the enhanced
landscaping maintenance costs as a Local Service Tax.
c) Enhanced Landscape Area Requirements:
The enhanced landscape maintenance areas include enhanced road bioswales and two parkettes.
These areas are identified on the Bylaw Map (Schedule “A” of Appendix “C”). The planting concept
for these landscape areas is for enhanced natural areas that will be planted with a variety of native
trees and shrubs.
The planting plan for the enhanced landscape planting areas was prepared by Phoenix
Environmental Services and is attached as Schedule “C” of Appendix “C”. The recommended
procedures and frequencies for maintenance is attached as Schedule “B” of Appendix “C”. This
standard is for preservation of natural conditions, with weeds and debris removed periodically. The
standard includes maintaining areas to preserve natural plantings in a natural condition. Phoenix
Environmental Services has provided an estimate for the yearly maintenance of $2,820.00 per year
after the developer’s initial two year maintenance period, attached as Schedule “B” of Appendix “C”.
d) Citizen Implications:
The estimated cost of the petitioned service will be $134.29 per year for each residential lot of the
21 lots in the East Hampstead Local Area Service. It is anticipated that this charge will start in 2020,
after the completion of the two year maintenance period required from the developer. Potential
buyers prior to 2020 will be advised of the future charge through a notation on the Property Tax
Information Sheet. Once the charge comes into effect, the cost will be included in the property tax.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
Operations Department:
The enhanced landscaping maintenance requirements for the enhanced landscape planting areas in
this development are in excess of the funded base level of maintenance provided throughout Maple
Ridge, and therefore would be unfunded by the City. Local Area Service Bylaws have been
established in several other areas in the City, including Albion and Silver Valley.
- 3 -
Finance Department:
The Property Tax section of the Finance Department will impose the cost of this service as a levy and
place the notation on the tax roll of the benefitting property owners, anticipated to be in 2020.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that the formal petition by the developer for a Local Area Service be authorized by
Council for the enhanced landscape maintenance costs to be levied on the benefitting properties to
be created by subdivision of the land; and that first, second and third readings be given to East
Hampstead Local Area Service Bylaw No. 7278-2016.
“Original signed by Amelia Bowden”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden. M.Urb
Planner 1
“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 E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Photo
Appendix C – Local Area Service Bylaw No. 7278-2016
Appendix D – Petition for Local Area Service
DATE: May 8, 2015 2014-104-SD BY: JV
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,500
23050 136 AvenueLegend
!(Ponds
\\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: May 8, 2015 2014-104-SD BY: JV
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
City of Maple Ridge´
Scale: 1:2,500
23050 136 Avenue
Legend
!(Ponds
\\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 B
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
LOCAL AREA SERVICE
BYLAW NO. 7278-2016
A Bylaw to authorize a municipal service to maintain enhanced landscape areas;
to define the benefitting lands; and to establish that the cost of the municipal service shall be borne
by the owners of real property within such defined area.
______________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, Council has been petitioned to provide a municipal service pursuant to Division 5, Section
210 of the Community Charter S.B.C. 2003, c.26 (the “Community Charter”);
AND WHEREAS the Corporate Officer has certified that the petition received for the municipal
services does constitute a sufficient and valid petition;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to proceed with the works;
AND WHEREAS the “Maple Ridge Local Area Service Policy”, as amended, provides that the cost of
providing a municipal service shall be recoverable from each of the existing parcels of land and all
future lots created by subdivision of the parcels, specifically:
Lot 2 Section 29 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 5116 Except Plans BCP42569 and
BCP48907
that will benefit from the service.
1.This Bylaw may be cited as “East Hampstead Local Area Service Bylaw No. 7278-2016”.
2.The contents of Schedules “A”, “B”, and “C” attached hereto are hereby declared to be made
an integral part of this Bylaw.
3.The Local Area Service of the City for the benefit of which the enhanced landscape areas are
to be maintained as a municipal service are defined as the hatched areas on the attached
Schedule “A”.
4.The recommended procedures and frequencies for maintenance and Annual Charges are
described on the attached Schedule “B”.
5.The Enhanced Landscape Area planting and design plans “21-Lot Residential Subdivision
23050 136 Avenue, Maple Ridge, BC” by Phoenix Environmental Services Ltd.
dated October 2016; and “Typical Cross Sections & Curb Returns by Aplin & Martin dated
August 2015 are attached as Schedule “C”.
6.This bylaw shall take effect as of the date of adoption hereof.
READ a first time the day of , 20
READ a second time the day of , 20
READ a third time the day of , 20
ADOPTED, the day of , 20
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX C
136 AVE.
136 AVE.
1 3 4 L O O P135B AVE.232 ST.229 LOOP230A ST.136 AVE.232 ST.230A ST.1351722945
13412
13449229
952296613610
22956
1 3 4 8 5
135461354523154
229721350813579
23
0
07
1 3 5 3 7
2
3
02
813477
135161353013563
22811
2299013466
229751 3 5 1 1
134392295713547
13569
13442/581
3
4
7
8
2
3
00
1229751342923020136371359013519
13586
2
3
03
622981134071346522918230002301213500
13625
229511 3 4 9 5
1 3 5 5 7
13385
1349322976
13426
13517
13493
1 3 5 3 7
13490
13572
2
3
0
2
5
13616
1346123140 13602 (PUMP STATION)
13575
229962310613631
23012
1 3 5 3 613585 230601
3
4
6
8
13486
134751 3 5 4 2
13573
1350113582
13492
2
3
01
922969230312298613485
1
3
4
7
2
1 3 5 5 5
2
3
02
022966229821 3 5 5 6
23
0
31
1 3 5 2 922996 13589
1 3 5 0 3
13516 2318313527
1356822990 23050135782297823141229301 3 5 2 5 1 3 5 2 122963
13381
1 3 5 3 1
229601 3 5 4 5
13565
1 3 5 6 222962
229692310313486 2300623002 230412
2
98
72
3
01
313480 229521 3 5 5 0
13474
1 3 5 2 8
13509
7
53
5
45
B
16
18
E
48
35
53
14
18
D
50
10
B
4
Rem. 2
35 36
1
68
3
A
69
74
23
PARK
4
PARK
43
Rem 1
56
52
54
58
32
27
49
PARK
19
23
70
28
19
13
31
PARK
22
17
21
40
38
60
64 67
46
71
59
62
75
6
61
55
44
PARK
Rem 6
15
5
10
PARK
41
2
2
9
72
21 37
11
A
52
7
25
PARK
39
3
18
6
9
29
18
8
42
22 8
34
26
20
51
19
A
13
PARK
24
33
49
19
30
11
57
66
77
63
73
34
48
72
62
17
36
51
50
12
20
27
47
12
1
65
73
EP 15824
P 19056
P 43567
BCP 49303
BCP 27885
EPP 44846
RP 11765BCP 51504*PP154BCP 49303BCP 51504BCP 49303BCP 51504 BCP 49303BCP 48906
LMP 9042
P 5116
P 8175
BCP 48906
BCP 27885
P 21219EPP 52568P 7855
P 43567
BCP 49303
P 11173
BCP 48907
P 8175
EPP 32166
BCP 49303EPP 44846
P 11173BCP 33861BCP 51504
E P P 4 9 1 3 8
BCP 48908
BCP 49342BCP 48909BCP
5
1
5
0
6
BCP 49304
BCP 51505BCP 49304
BCP 42569
BCP 27887
BCP 51506BCP 48909B
C
P 4
9
3
0
5
B C P 4 9 3 0 6
EPP 49227
BCP 51506 BCP 48909B C P 5 1 5 0 6
EPP 52781
BCP 48909
BCP 29525
E
P
P
3
3
3
6
6
´
SCALE 1:3,000
MAPLE RIDGE LOCAL AREA SERVICE BYLAWBylaw No. Enhanced Landscape Areas
Original Lot Boundary
7278-2016
"Schedule A"
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
LOCAL AREA SERVICE
BYLAW NO. 7278-2016
SCHEDULE “B”
Class of Work:
The establishment, maintenance and replacement of enhanced road bioswales and two rain gardens
indicated by bold outline on Schedule “A” are to be maintained as per the attached recommended
procedures and frequencies.
Annual Charge:
The Annual Charge is based on a per lot basis for each of the 21 lots created by the subdivision of:
Lot 2 Section 29 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 5116 Except Plans BCP42569 and
BCP48907
of $134.29 starting in 2020.
The charges established under this Bylaw shall be specifically charged against the parcels
benefitting from the work, payable by a per lot basis levied year by year.
The Annual Charge Adjustment:
The annual charge will be reviewed each year by the Operations Department, and adjusted
accordingly to reflect any change in maintenance requirements or costs, and to reflect any increase
in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Vancouver, BC for the immediately preceding year, as provided
by Statistics Canada.
23050136Avenue,MapleRidge,BCProcedure Schedule(Month) FrequencyYearlyCostJan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov DecInspection/ReportingxxxxxxxxxAsshown$450.00GarbageRemovalxxxxxxxxxAsshown$600.00Weedingx x x x x x x Monthlyingrowingseason$600.00InvasiveplantremovalxxxxxxMonthlyingrowingseason $300.00PruneshrubsAsrequiredonly $200.00HazardtreeassessmentandabatementEvery5yearsorwhenreported$200.00Note:Propertydeveloperisresponsiblefor2yearsofestablishmentmaintenanceandwarrantyonplantmaterialSubͲTotal $2,350.0015%AdministrationFee $352.50GST $117.50CityofMapleRidgeorcontractorwillbeginmaintenanceafter2yearsestablishmentmaintenanceTotal $2,820.00LocalAreaService(LAS)AgreementLandscapeMaintenanceProgramBylaw#7246Ͳ2016
PROPOSED 21-LOT SUBDIVISIONDEVELOPER:PROJECT:GRD MITCHELL HOMES INC.23050 136 AVENUEMAPLE RIDGE, B.C.41-1145 INLET STREET, COQUITLAM, BC V3B 6E8PH (604) 474-2123171014-318-10TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS&CURB RETURNS#505 – 1755 W. Broadway Street, Vancouver, B.C. Canada V6J 4S5Tel: (604) 224-6827, Fax: (604) 597-9061, Email: general@aplinmartin.com
APPENDIX D
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2015-346-CP
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Wildfire Development Permit Update
Second Reading
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7187-2015
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On July 26, 2016, Council gave first reading to Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7187-
2015, to amend the recently adopted Wildfire Development Permit Area Guidelines to remove the
references to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards and provide greater
flexibility when reviewing development applications, while still offering a satisfactory measure of risk
management for wildfire events.
In the first reading report, a commitment was made to consult with the Urban Development Institute
(UDI) and Greater Vancouver Home Builders Association (GVHBA) through the UDI/GVHBA Liaison
Committee, as well as the Maple Ridge Builders’ Forum, prior to seeking second reading on the
bylaw. As these consultations have now occurred, the Official Community Plan Amending bylaw is
coming forward for second reading and to be forwarded to Public Hearing.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7187-2015, as amended, be given second
reading, and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
DISCUSSION:
On July 26, 2016, Council gave first reading to Official Community Plan (OCP) Amending Bylaw No.
7187-2015, to amend the recently adopted Wildfire Development Permit Area bylaw to remove the
references to the NFPA Standards and provide greater flexibility when reviewing development
applications (see Appendix A).
1107
CONSULTATION UPDATE:
UDI/GVHBA
The proposed OCP amending bylaw was presented at the September 16, 2016 Maple Ridge
Development Liaison Committee meeting, and a positive written response was received on
September 27, 2016 (see Appendix B). Both the UDI and GVHBA are supportive of the proposed
amendments as their members have also found that some of the NFPA standards conflicted with
Official Community Plan policies and could undermine the unit yields for some projects . They feel
that staff have provided a good compromise that limits the loss of dev elopment yields while still
providing wildfire protection. The UDI and GVHBA also appreciated the approach of reviewing the
policy one year after adoption to assess the impacts and fine-tune the policy.
Builders’ Forum
The proposed OCP amending bylaw was also presented at the November 16, 2016 Builders’ Forum.
Approximately 45 builders were in attendance. There was discussion around coordination of the
various consultants involved in a development proposal; however, no serious concerns were raised
with the proposed amendments.
Agricultural Land Commission
A referral was sent to the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) regarding the proposed amendments.
A response has not been received. Comments from the ALC on the original OCP amending bylaw
were received on September 18, 2014. The ALC comments were related to the definition of farm
use and the ALC in the Development Permit Area Exemptions section.
The current exemption section in the bylaw reads as follows:
“On lands where a farm use, as defined in the Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision
and Procedure Regulation B.C. Reg. 171/2002 or its successor, is being practiced and
where the building design for residential buildings comply with the NFPA 1144 (latest
edition) building guidelines, a Wildfire Development Permit will not be required. Non-
residential farm buildings are exempt from all Wildfire Development Permit requirements, as
long as they are sited at least 10 metres away from all residential buildings.”
In order to remove the reference to the NFPA standards, the proposed wording reads as follows:
“For non-residential farm buildings, located on lands where a farm use is being practiced, as
defined in the Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision and Procedure Regulation B.C.
Reg. 171/2002 or its successor, provided that they are sited at least 10 metres away from
any residential building(s) and wildfire interface. If within 10 metres, then a restrictive
covenant detailing building design and landscaping requirements will be required for these
types of developments within the Wildfire Development Permit Area.”
This wording has been revised slightly from what had been proposed at first reading, to remain
consistent with the ALC’s original comments. The bylaw has been amended to reflect this revision
(see Appendix C).
CONCLUSION:
As there were no significant concerns with the proposed amendments to the Wildfire Development
Permit Guidelines, it is recommended that second reading be given to OCP Amending Bylaw No.
7187-2015, as amended in this report, and that application 2015-246-CP be forwarded to Public
Hearing.
“Original signed by Michelle Baski”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Michelle Baski, AScT, MA
Planner 1
“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 E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – First reading report
Appendix B – UDI/GVHBA response letter
Appendix C – OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7187-2015
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: July 25, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2015-346-CP
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: COW
SUBJECT: Wildfire Development Permit Update
First Reading
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7187-2015
Development Procedures Amending Bylaw No. 7233-2016
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On October 28, 2014, Council approved Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7101-2014
and Development Procedures Amending Bylaw No. 7102-2014 for the Wildfire Development Permit
Guidelines. At that time, there was also a commitment made to report back to Council one year
after adoption. Since the adoption of the bylaws, several development applications have been
subject to the Wildfire Development Permit and staff and the consultants have had an opportunity to
further evaluate the program. For the most part, the Wildfire Development Permit has been
successful; however, there have been some challenges in applying the Wildfire Development Permit
Guidelines as they were originally written. Specifically, the guidelines refer to compliance with the
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards, which have proven to be significantly
restrictive, resulting in potential reductions to development potential within the Wildfire
Development Permit Area and substantially increased construction costs.
The following report provides an update on the Wildfire Development Permit and includes
recommendations intended to fine-tune the policy. Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No.
7187-2015 and Development Procedures Amending Bylaw No. 7233-2016 are intended to amend
the recently adopted bylaws to remove the references to the NFPA Standards and make the
Development Procedures Schedule J consistent with the other schedules within the bylaw.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1.That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7187 -2015 be given first reading;
2.That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7187-2015 be considered in conjunction
with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan ;
3.That it be confirmed that Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7187 -2015 is
consistent with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Wast e Management Plan;
APPENDIX A
- 2 -
4. In respect of Section 475 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. Boards of Education, Greater Boards and Improvements District Boards; and
vi. The Provincial and Federal Governments and their agencies.
and in that regard it is recommended that additional consultation be required with the Urban
Development Institute and Greater Vancouver Home Builders Association via the Maple Ridge
UDIGVHBA Liaison Committee, and the Maple Ridge Builders’ Forum prior to second reading ,
in addition to the early posting of the proposed Official Community Plan amendments on the
City’s website, together with an invitation to the public to comment, and;
5. That Development Procedures Amending Bylaw No. 7233-2016 be given first and second
reading.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
In 2004, the Provincial Government recommended that all communities undertake a Community
Wildfire Risk Assessment and funding was established to help municipalities pay for this work.
A Maple Ridge Wildfire Risk Assessment and a Wildfire Protection Plan were produced for the City in
2007. These documents discussed the risk of wildfire in Maple Ridge and the Plan provided the
following context in the executive summary:
“The District of Maple Ridge is embedded within the forest; approximately 60% of
the community is forested. This region of the Province is susceptible to both
lightning and human caused fires. Overall, the community could be classified with
a fire risk profile described by a low to moderate fire probability and high to
extreme consequences based on the values at risk.”
The Community Wildfire Protection Plan provided 21 recommendations on:
Risk assessment;
Education and communication;
Structure protection;
Emergency response;
Training
Fuel management; and
Post fire rehabilitation.
- 3 -
On July 10, 2007, Council passed the following resolution:
“That the recommendations contained in the Community Wildfire Protection Plan be
adopted in principle pending the development of a detailed implementation plan
with an associated financial plan which will be brought back to Council for their
consideration and adoption; and
That staff be instructed to make application to the Union of British Columbia
Municipalities for grant funding to develop an implementation plan for the
Community Wildfire Protection Plan recommendations.”
In the Fall of 2007, Maple Ridge was awarded a grant for the development of municipal wildfire
legislation. At that time, a staff working group was formed with representatives from Fire, Planning,
Engineering, Operations, Building, and Parks and Leisure Services Departments to develop a draft
Wildfire Development Permit. During that time, staff worked together to ensure the draft
incorporated:
risk mitigation measures;
a process that would work concurrently and in concert with existing related regulations; and
built-in flexibility to allow for alternative options that effectively mitigate risk.
At the January 7, 2013 Council Workshop, Council raised concerns with the technical aspects of the
boundaries of the Wildfire Development Permit Area and the potential costs that would be incurred
by the development community and referred the Wildfire Development Permit back to staff. A peer
review was conducted and it was determined that the methodology used to prepare the Wildfire
Development Permit Area was sound and that the forests around Whonnock Lake and Webster’s
Corner should also be included in the Wildfire Development Permit Area.
Over the course of developing the Wildfire Development Permit Area Guidelines, four consultation
events occurred in 2012, and one in 2014 when the boundaries were revised to include the forests
around Whonnock Lake and Webster’s Corner. On May 27, 2014, Council passed a resolution
directing staff to prepare the bylaws for the Wildfire Development Permit Area Guidelines. A Public
Hearing for the Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7101-2014 was held on October 21,
2014. The Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7101-2014 and Development Procedures
Amending Bylaw No. 7102-2014 received third and final reading on October 28, 2014. The areas
included within the Wildfire Development Permit Area are not proposed to change as a result of this
report.
b) Update:
The Wildfire Development Permit Guidelines were originally written to be as flexible as possible with
built-in exemptions and options if the requirements were not feasible. The requirements to meet the
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards referenced made it difficult to develop within
the Wildfire Development Permit Area without significantly reducing the developable area or
significantly increasing the cost of building. This was not the intent of the Wildfire Development
Permit Guidelines.
- 4 -
In addition, staff have identified concerns with the NFPA standards, noting that they often conflict
with the Official Community Plan Silver Valley Area Plan, which was developed through extensive
public consultation in 1994 and adopted in 1996. Examples of Development Principles from the
Silver Valley Area Plan that conflict with the NFPA and FireSmart principles include:
Plan compact housing clusters as a solution to preserving natural environments and
significant vegetation.
Promote patterns and forms of development that allow for retention of existing mature trees
and vegetation.
Adopt road and street types and standards that limit speed, fit to topography and minimize
impervious areas.
Utilize reduced road width to achieve traffic calming, reduced site consumption, and
maintenance of the desired rural character.
Encourage unpaved, shared driveways and narrow paved lanes to housing clusters to
minimize paved areas.
Since the Wildfire Development Permit Area Guidelines were adopted on October 28, 2014, twelve
Wildfire Development Permit applications have been received and three have been approved. Of
the twelve Wildfire Hazard Assessment reports that have been provided by consultants to the City, 9
have been prepared by Diamond Head Consultants Ltd. and 3 have been prepared by B.A. Blackwell
and Associates. Both consultants have expressed concern with preparing Wildfire Hazard
Assessment reports in accordance with the NFPA standards.
The main examples of NFPA code requirements that conflict with the Silver Valley Area Plan
Development Principles and/or Zoning Bylaw No. 3510–1985 siting regulations include the
following:
Building Separation:
Issue
During the Development of the Wildfire Development Permit Guidelines, there was always an
awareness that establishing separation distances in the bylaw could be problematic. NFPA 1141
requires that any building shall be separated from another building by at least 9.1 metres (30 ft.)
and shall be set back at least 9.1 metres (30 ft.) from a property line.
The FireSmart Protecting Your Community from Wildfire manual requires a minimum of 15 to 20
metres of space separating dwellings to minimize the spread of fire. Current Zoning Bylaw siting
requirements are as follows:
Zone Interior Side
Setback
Front Setback Rear Setback
R-1 Residential District 1.2 m (4 ft.) 5.5 m (18 ft.) 8.0 m (26 ft.)
R-2 Urban Residential District 1.2 m (4 ft.) 3.0 m (10 ft.) 8.0 m (26 ft.)
R-3 Special Amenity Residential District 1.2 m (4 ft.) 3.0 m (10 ft.) 6.0 m (20 ft.)
- 5 -
The Fire Chief at the time had indicated a comfort in using his discretion when considering
alternatives to the NFPA standards. However, when reviewing the Wildfire Hazard assessments,
concerns with variances and liability have since arisen from staff and the consultants.
Recommendation
The proposed alternative to the siting requirements is to manage the building construction materials
at wildfire interfaces and provide landscaping treatment within the different priority zones. This is
addressed through the proposed revisions to the Wildfire Development Permit Area Guidelines (see
Appendix A). The FireSmart Homeowner’s Manual provides guidance for how to reduce the risk of
wildfire hazard with respect to building construction and landscaping treatments.
Access:
Issue
NFPA 1141 requires a minimum clear width of 3.7 metres (12 ft.) for each lane of travel, excluding
shoulders and parking, which conflicts with the Road Cross Sections identified in the Maple Ridge
Supplementary Standard Detail Drawings. The typical lanes of travel for arterial and collector roads
range from 3.4 metres (11 ft.) in typical areas, to 3.1 metres (10 ft.) in Silver Valley areas. In
addition, when vehicles are parked on both sides of a local road, the width does not accommodate
the ability for two vehicles to pass and requires drivers to yield to oncoming vehicles.
Recommendation
As an alternative for developments with a single access, the Registered Professional Forester, in
consultation with the Project Engineer, will be required to identify strategic locations to provide
passing lanes within Wildfire Development Permit Areas. This is addressed through the proposed
revisions to the Wildfire Development Permit Area Guidelines (see Appendix A).
Building Materials:
Issue
NFPA 1144 requires exterior vertical walls to “meet the requirements for heavy timber construction,
ignition-resistive material, fire-retardant-treated wood, or be a minimum 20 minute fire-rated
assembly where walls are potentially exposed to a wildland fire”. FireSmart recommends that “any
material used for siding purposes should be fire-resistant, such as stucco, metal siding, brick,
cement shingles, concrete block, poured concrete and rock. Siding material should be at least 12
millimetres thick and extend from ground level to the roofline.”
When the Wildfire Development Permit Guidelines were initially under review, developers had a
concern with the additional cost of ignition-resistant or non-combustible materials for the exterior
cladding. Since the adoption of the Wildfire Development Permit Guidelines, the option of using
vinyl siding with external sprinklers has been considered and deemed unsuitable. Upon further
review, the logistics of managing the external sprinklers and the lack of reference standards for
installation of such sprinklers made the option unfeasible. It was also problematic to ensure there
would be the capacity to run the external sprinklers without impacting the water pressure and
storage capacity required for Fire Department suppression needs.
- 6 -
In the interim, serious wildfires in the country illustrated the importance of target -hardening
buildings, noting that vinyl siding easily melts, exposing combustible building materials which
catches fire.
Recommendation
It is recommended that exterior elevations exposed to the wildfire interface be constructed of
ignition-resistant or non-combustible materials (i.e. stucco, metal siding, brick, cement shingles,
cement board, concrete block, poured concrete, concrete composite, rock and logs or heavy timber).
The approximate cost of installing vinyl siding ranges from $2.40 -$3.10 per square foot. The
approximate cost of installing non-combustible hardie board and rainscreen ranges from $5.75-
$6.75 per square foot. A typical rear elevation of an R-1 sized home, minus the windows, is
approximately 530 ft², so the difference in cost for this example could range from $1,400.00 to
$2,300.00. This amount would vary, depending on the size of the home and number of elevations
that are exposed to the wildfire interface.
Additional Proposed Revisions:
In addition to the revisions to the Wildfire Development Permit Area Guidelines described above, a
minor revision to Section 8.4, Development Permit Area Exemptions is proposed to exclude a single-
family home Building Permit from requiring a Wildfire Hazard Development Permit, as long as a
restrictive covenant is registered on title, specifying the building design, siting, landscaping and
open space requirements, as specified in the guidelines.
Schedule J of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879–1999 is also proposed to be amended
to include the requirement for the application form and fee and to remove the details of the Wildfire
Hazard Assessment report (see Appendix B) and to provide these details as a separate hand-out for
applicants. This practice is consistent with other technical report guidelines, such as Geotechnical
Reports or Agricultural Impact Assessments.
c) Early and Ongoing Consultation:
In respect of Section 475 of the Local Government Act for consultation during an Official Community
Plan amendment, it is recommended additional consultation is conducted with the Urban
Development Institute and Greater Vancouver Home Builders Association via the Maple Ridge
UDIGVHBA Liaison Committee, and the Maple Ridge Builders’ Forum, prior to second reading, in
addition to the early posting of the proposed OCP amendments on the City’s website, together with
an invitation to the public to comment.
CONCLUSION:
As with current City practice, this report represents a review of the Wildfire Development Permit that
was adopted in 2014. Since that time, the City has reviewed twelve Wildfire Hazard Assessment
Reports and has had an opportunity to review the Wildfire Development Permit Guidelines. For the
most part, the Wildlfire Development Permit has been successful; however, there have been
challenges in applying the Wildfire Development Permit Guidelines as they were originally written.
Specifically, the guidelines refer to compliance with the NFPA standards, which have proven to be
- 7 -
significantly restrictive, resulting in potential reductions to development potential within the Wildfire
Development Permit Area and substantially increased construction costs.
The proposed amendments to the Official Community Plan Wildfire Development Permit Area
Guidelines, Exemptions and Development Procedures Bylaw Schedule J will help to reduce the
difficulty in applying NFPA standards and provide greater flexibility when reviewing development
applications, while still offering a satisfactory measure of risk management for wildfire events.
It is recommended that Council grant first reading to Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No.
7187-2015 and first and second reading to Development Procedures Amending Bylaw No. 7233-
2016.
“Original signed by Michelle Baski”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Michelle Baski, AScT, MA
Planner 1
“Original signed by Michael Van Dop”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Michael Van Dop
Assistant Chief Planning and Prevention
“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 E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7187-2015
Appendix B – Development Procedures Amending Bylaw No. 7233-2016
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO.7187-2015
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan
_______________________________________
WHEREAS the Local Government Act empowers a local government to adopt or amend an
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed desirable to amend Schedule "A" to the Official Community
Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge, enacts as follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan
Amending Bylaw No.7187-2015."
2.Section 8.4 Development Permit Area Exemptions, Item 4 is replaced with the
following:
“4. A Wildfire Development Permit is not required under the following circumstances:
a)For an addition or renovation to any existing building in the municipality where the
value of the work indicated on the building permit application does not exceed 50%
of the assessed value of the improvements on the property on the date of the
building permit application. For the purposes of this section the value of the building
on the date of the building permit application is deemed to be the value as shown on
the most recent assessment, by the British Columbia Assessment Authority, where
such an assessment is available.
b)For interior renovations to an existing lawfully constructed, or legally non-conforming,
building or structure wholly contained within, and not projecting beyond, the
foundation.
c)For a single family home or a subdivision resulting in the creation of not more than
two residential lots. A restrictive covenant detailing building design and landscaping
requirements will be required for these types of developments within the Wildfire
Development Permit Area.
d)For non-residential farm buildings, provided that they are sited at least 10 metres
away from any residential building(s) and wildfire interface. If within 10 metres, then
a restrictive covenant detailing building design and landscaping requirements will be
required for these types of developments within the Wildfire Development Permit
Area.
e)For public works and services and maintenance activities carried out by, or on behalf
of, the City.
f)For any construction of a building or structure or any alteration of land that does not
require a permit from the City.”
3.Section 8.12 Wildfire Development Permit Guidelines, Subsection 8.12.1 Key
Guideline Concepts and 8.12.2 Guidelines, Items A -D are replaced with the
following:
“Intent
The Wildfire Development Permit Area Guidelines are intended for the protection of life and
property in designated areas that could be at risk of wildfire and where this risk, in some
cases, may be reasonably abated through implementation of appropriate precautionary
measures.
A Development Permit will be required for all development and subdivision activity or
building permits for areas identified as Wildfire Risk Areas identified on Map 1: Wildfire
Development Permit Area. A Development Permit may not be required under certain
circumstances indicated in the Development Permit Exemptions, Section 8.4, Item 4. These
Development Permit Guidelines are to work in concert with all other regulations, guidelines
and bylaws in effect.
8.12.1 Key Guideline Concepts
The intent of the Key Guideline Concepts is to ensure that development within the Wildfire
Development Permit Area is managed to minimize the risk to property and people from
wildfire urban interface hazards and to further reduce the risk of potential post-fire
landslides and debris flows.
Applications for Wildfire Development Permits will be assessed against the following key
guideline concepts:
1.Locate development on individual sites so that, when integrated with the use of
mitigating construction techniques and landscape management practices, the risk of
wildfire hazards is reduced;
2.Mitigate wildfire impacts while respecting environmental conservation objectives and
other hazards in the area;
3.Ensure identified hazard areas are recognized and addressed within each stage of the
land development process; and
4.Manage the interface forest fuel components, including vegetation and structures,
thereby increasing the probability of successful fire suppression, containment and
minimize adverse impacts.
8.12.2 Guidelines
The design and construction of buildings and structures located within the boundaries of th e
Wildfire Development Permit Area shall be in accordance with the following key guidelines.
Additional details can be found in the BC Wildfire Service FireSmart manuals.
The City may consider alternative design and construction solutions if the alternative
solution meets the intent of these guidelines.
A. Subdivision Design and Construction
1.The development building face should be located a minimum of 10 metres away from
the adjacent forest interface. This 10 metre distance (Priority Zone 1) should be created
between all sides of the foundation and the forest interface (vegetation shall be
modified to mitigate hazardous conditions within 10 metres of the foundations prior to
the start of construction). The treatment within Priority Zone 1 may include: treating fuel
on the existing parcel; developing a trail as a part of the Priority Zone; or including an
environmental and geotechnical setback, if such treatment is mutually beneficial to the
intent of the setback areas and FireSmart principles.
2.Priority Zone 1 may incorporate cleared parks, roads, or trails to meet the 10 metre
distance requirement.
3.Development shall be set back a minimum of 10 metres from the top of ridgelines, cliffs
or ravines. Variations may be considered if a wildfire hazard assessment can justify a
change in the setback distance.
4.Where the City requires fire hydrants within a development, these must be fully
functional prior to construction above the foundation level.
5.For subdivisions where a secondary access is not provided and an emergency Utility
Vehicle (UTV) trail system is planned as an alternative, the trail access must be
constructed with a 1.5 metre trail width and a minimum height and width of 2 metres
cleared of vegetation, with pullouts for passing and turnaround every 500 metres, where
appropriate. In areas where a 30 metre environmental setback is required, the City may
consider including the trail within the 30 metre setback; however, it must be located
outside of a 15 metre watercourse setback from the top of bank. Trails or turnaround
points must consider appropriate design measures for protecting environmentally
sensitive and/or geotechnical sensitive areas.
6.Access points suitable for evacuation and the movement of emergency response
equipment must be provided. The number of access points and their capacity should be
determined during subdivision design. Two means of access are preferred for
subdivisions in a Wildfire Development Permit Area. If two access points are not
possible, then the single access must have the capability of accommodating two fire
trucks - each with a width of 2.9 metres – safely passing each other at strategic
locations.
B. Building Design and Siting
1.Locate building sites on the flattest areas of the property and avoid gullies or draws that
accumulate fuel and funnel winds.
2.Steep roofs and closed or screened gutters are preferred in order to prevent the
collection of leaves or needles, and to reduce the risk of ember shower accumulation.
3.Buildings must comply with the requirements listed below. Accessory buildings located
within the Wildfire Development Permit Area must meet the same building standards as
the principal residence.
Roofing Materials
a)Roof materials shall have a Class A or B fire resistance rating as defined in the current
British Columbia Building Code, as amended. Examples of typical Class A or B roofing
products include, but are not limited to: asphalt shingles, metal, concrete tile, clay tile,
synthetic, slate, and hybrid composite materials. Note: Wood shakes and shingles are
not acceptable, unless certified to Class A or B.
Exterior Cladding
a)Exterior cladding on elevations adjacent to the wildfire interface shall be constructed
of ignition-resistant or non-combustible materials such as: stucco, metal siding, brick,
cement shingles, cement board, concrete block, poured concrete, concrete composite,
rock and logs or heavy timber.
b)Decorative construction features, such as fascia, trim board materials and trim
accents, are exempted from this requirement, to a maximum of 10% per elevation.
Overhanging Projections and Cantilevered Floors
a)Overhanging projections attached to buildings and their support (i.e. decks, balconies,
porches, structural columns, and beams) shall be constructed of heavy timber
construction, ignition-resistant or non-combustible materials, similar to those allowed
in the “Exterior Cladding” section above.
b)The underside of all exposed floors (i.e. underside of balconies, decks and porches)
shall be sheathed or skirted with fire-resistant materials, similar to those allowed in the
“Exterior Cladding” section above.
c)The underside of all cantilevered floors (i.e. bay windows, hutches, and window seats)
shall be protected with fire-resistant materials and have the floor system fire-blocked
at the exterior wall plane.
d)Areas under overhang projections must be kept clear of debris.
Exterior Doors and Windows
a)Exterior doors and garage doors shall be constructed of non-combustible materials (i.e.
metal clad, solid core wood or have a 20 minute fire protection rating), and must meet
the requirements of the North American Fenestration Standard (NAFS).
b) Exterior windows and glazing within doors exposed to the wildfire interface and
skylights shall be tempered glass, multi-layer glazing, or have a fire protection rating of
not less than 20 minutes, and must meet the requirements of the NAFS. Openable
windows shall be covered with non-combustible, corrosion-resistant screens.
Eaves, Soffits and Vents
a) All eaves and ventilation openings in exterior walls, roofs, and soffits shall be covered
with non-combustible, 3 millimetre corrosion-resistant wire mesh, or be designed to
prevent flame or ember penetration into the structure.
b) Eaves and soffits shall be constructed of ignition-resistant or non-combustible
materials.
Chimney
a) Spark arrestor screens are required on all wood-burning appliances.
C. Landscaping and Open Spaces
1. Landscaping within the 10 metre Priority Zone 1 should be designed based on FireSmart
landscaping standards to ensure minimal fuel loading within the landscaped areas and
provide ongoing resistance to wildfire. The type and density of fire resistive plantings
incorporated within landscaped areas will assist in mitigating the wildfire hazard.
2. Removal of all debris (wood and vegetation) after land clearing for development must be
completed prior to the approval of any new subdivision plan.
3. A landscaping security may be required for landscaping works in accordance with the
Maple Ridge Landscape Security Policy No. 6.28.”
4. Subsection 8.12.2 Guidelines, Item E be renumbered accordingly.
5. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014 as amended is hereby amended
accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the day of , 2016.
READ A SECOND TIME the day of , 2016.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the day of , 2016.
READ A THIRD TIME the day of , 2016.
ADOPTED, the day of , 2016.
______________________________ ______________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICE R
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7233-2016
A Bylaw to amend the Maple Ridge Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999
____________________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend the Maple Ridge Development Procedures
Bylaw No. 5879-1999 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 Development Procedures Amending Bylaw. No. 7233-
2016”.
2.Maple Ridge Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999 be further amended by replacing
the Development Application Submission Checklist for Schedule J - Wildfire Development
Permit Application with the following:
“Schedule J
WILDFIRE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION
The City will provide the opportunity for applicants to meet with staff from the appropriate
departments early in the application process. Applications for Wildfire Development Permits are to
be made to the Planning Department, and must include the following:
1)A completed application form with the prescribed fee.
2)A Certificate of Title and a Consent Form (if the applicant is different from the owner shown
on the Certificate of Title) plus copies of any restrictive covenant documents registered
against Title.
3)A Site Profile.
4)A Site Plan prepared by a certified BCLS including:
i.Topography and natural features;
ii.Parcel boundaries;
iii.Adjacent streets and Rights-of-Way;
iv. Existing structures and infrastructure;
v.Location of watercourses, wetlands, ponds, etc. and approved environmental
protection setback and geotechnical setback areas for steep slopes;
vi. Proposed tree retention areas;
vii. Proposed subdivision plan or lot layout;
viii. Building envelopes, driveways, parking areas and impervious surfaces;
- 2 -
ix. Servicing infrastructure such as water, sewage disposal systems, stormwater
detention, and surface drainage; and
x. The extent of the proposed site clearing and lot grading.
5) A Wildfire Hazard Assessment, prepared by a Registered Professional Forester, qualified by
training or experience in fire protection engineering, with at least two years of experience in
fire protection engineering and with assessment and mitigation of wildfire hazards in British
Columbia (see Wildfire Hazard Assessments Guidelines). The Wildfire Hazard Assessment
will also need to include:
i. A Comprehensive Plan indicating proposed modifications to retained interface areas;
new plantings; proposed enhancement planting works for adjacent park land; trees
to be retained and protected; and trails on or adjacent to the site. A cost estimate
for the proposed works must be included. The cost estimate amount will be used to
determine the security amount taken for the Wildfire Development Permit.
ii. A plan for ongoing landscaping maintenance for park areas must also be provided,
including a cost estimate. The amount will be used to help determine a Local Area
Service Bylaw fee.
iii. A summary of proposed exterior building materials exposed to the wildfire interface.
Reference Documents:
BC Wildfire Service: bcwildfire.ca/Prevention/firesmart.htm
FireSmart Homeowner’s Manual – FireSmart Begins at Home
FireSmart – Protecting Your Community from Wildfire
National Fire Protection Association 1141 Standard for Fire Protection Infrastructure for Land
Developments in Suburban and Rural Areas
National Fire Protection Association 1144 Standard for Reducing Structure Ign ition Hazards from
Wildland Fire”
READ a first time the day of , 2016.
READ a second time the day of , 2016.
READ a third time the day of , 2016.
ADOPTED the day of , 2016.
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX B
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO.7187-2015
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan
WHEREAS the Local Government Act empowers a local government to adopt or amend an
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed desirable to amend Schedule "A" to the Official Community
Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge, enacts as follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan
Amending Bylaw No.7187-2015."
2.Section 8.4 Development Permit Area Exemptions, Item 4 is replaced with the
following:
“4. A Wildfire Development Permit is not required under the following circumstances:
a)For an addition or renovation to any existing building in the municipality where the
value of the work indicated on the building permit application does not exceed 50%
of the assessed value of the improvements on the property on the date of the
building permit application. For the purposes of this section the value of the building
on the date of the building permit application is deemed to be the value as shown on
the most recent assessment, by the British Columbia Assessment Authority, where
such an assessment is available.
b)For interior renovations to an existing lawfully constructed, or legally non-conforming,
building or structure wholly contained within, and not projecting beyond, the
foundation.
c)For a single family home or a subdivision resulting in the creation of not more than
two residential lots. A restrictive covenant detailing building design and landscaping
requirements will be required for these types of developments within the Wildfire
Development Permit Area.
d)For non-residential farm buildings, located on lands where a farm use is being
practiced, as defined in the Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision and
Procedure Regulation B.C. Reg. 171/2002 or its successor, provided that they are
sited at least 10 metres away from any residential building(s) and wildfire interface.
If within 10 metres, then a restrictive covenant detailing building design and
APPENDIX C
landscaping requirements will be required for these types of developments within
the Wildfire Development Permit Area.
e) For public works and services and maintenance activities carried out by, or on behalf
of, the City.
f) For any construction of a building or structure or any alteration of land that does not
require a permit from the City.”
3. Section 8.12 Wildfire Development Permit Guidelines, Subsection 8.12.1 Key
Guideline Concepts and 8.12.2 Guidelines, Items A -D are replaced with the
following:
“Intent
The Wildfire Development Permit Area Guidelines are intended for the protection of life and
property in designated areas that could be at risk of wildfire and where this risk, in some
cases, may be reasonably abated through implementation of appropriate precautionary
measures.
A Development Permit will be required for all development and subdivision activity or
building permits for areas identified as Wildfire Risk Areas identified on Map 1: Wildfire
Development Permit Area. A Development Permit may not be required under certain
circumstances indicated in the Development Permit Exemptions, Section 8.4, Item 4. These
Development Permit Guidelines are to work in concert with all other regulations, guidelines
and bylaws in effect.
8.12.1 Key Guideline Concepts
The intent of the Key Guideline Concepts is to ensure that development within the Wildfire
Development Permit Area is managed to minimize the risk to property and people from
wildfire urban interface hazards and to further reduce the risk of potential post -fire
landslides and debris flows.
Applications for Wildfire Development Permits will be assessed against the following key
guideline concepts:
1. Locate development on individual sites so that, when integrated with the use of
mitigating construction techniques and landscape management practices, the risk of
wildfire hazards is reduced;
2. Mitigate wildfire impacts while respecting environmental conservation objectives and
other hazards in the area;
3. Ensure identified hazard areas are recognized and addressed within each stage of the
land development process; and
4. Manage the interface forest fuel components, including vegetation and structures,
thereby increasing the probability of successful fire suppression, containment and
minimize adverse impacts.
8.12.2 Guidelines
The design and construction of buildings and structures located within the boundaries of the
Wildfire Development Permit Area shall be in accordance with the following key guidelines.
Additional details can be found in the BC Wildfire Service FireSmart manuals.
The City may consider alternative design and construction solutions if the alternative
solution meets the intent of these guidelines.
A. Subdivision Design and Construction
1. The development building face should be located a minimum of 10 metres away from
the adjacent forest interface. This 10 metre distance (Priority Zone 1) should be created
between all sides of the foundation and the forest interface (vegetat ion shall be
modified to mitigate hazardous conditions within 10 metres of the foundations prior to
the start of construction). The treatment within Priority Zone 1 may include: treating fuel
on the existing parcel; developing a trail as a part of the Pri ority Zone; or including an
environmental and geotechnical setback, if such treatment is mutually beneficial to the
intent of the setback areas and FireSmart principles.
2. Priority Zone 1 may incorporate cleared parks, roads, or trails to meet the 10 metre
distance requirement.
3. Development shall be set back a minimum of 10 metres from the top of ridgelines, cliffs
or ravines. Variations may be considered if a wildfire hazard assessment can justify a
change in the setback distance.
4. Where the City requires fire hydrants within a development, these must be fully
functional prior to construction above the foundation level.
5. For subdivisions where a secondary access is not provided and an emergency Utility
Vehicle (UTV) trail system is planned as an alternative, the trail access must be
constructed with a 1.5 metre trail width and a minimum height and width of 2 metres
cleared of vegetation, with pullouts for passing and turnaround every 500 metres, where
appropriate. In areas where a 30 metre environmental setback is required, the City may
consider including the trail within the 30 metre setback; however, it must be located
outside of a 15 metre watercourse setback from the top of bank. Trails or turnaround
points must consider appropriate design measures for protecting environmentally
sensitive and/or geotechnical sensitive areas.
6. Access points suitable for evacuation and the movement of emergency response
equipment must be provided. The number of access points and their capacity should be
determined during subdivision design. Two means of access are preferred for
subdivisions in a Wildfire Development Permit Area. If two access points are not
possible, then the single access must have the capability of accommodating two fire
trucks - each with a width of 2.9 metres – safely passing each other at strategic
locations.
B. Building Design and Siting
1. Locate building sites on the flattest areas of the property and avoid gullies or draws that
accumulate fuel and funnel winds.
2. Steep roofs and closed or screened gutters are preferred in order to prevent the
collection of leaves or needles, and to reduce the risk of ember shower accumulation.
3. Buildings must comply with the requirements listed below. Accessory buildings located
within the Wildfire Development Permit Area must meet the same building standards as
the principal residence.
Roofing Materials
a) Roof materials shall have a Class A or B fire resistance rating as defined in the current
British Columbia Building Code, as amended. Examples of typical Class A or B roofing
products include, but are not limited to: asphalt shingles, metal, concrete tile, clay tile,
synthetic, slate, and hybrid composite materials. Note: Wood shakes and shingles are
not acceptable, unless certified to Class A or B.
Exterior Cladding
a) Exterior cladding on elevations adjacent to the wildfire interface shall be constructed
of ignition-resistant or non-combustible materials such as: stucco, metal siding, brick,
cement shingles, cement board, concrete block, poured concrete, concrete composite,
rock and logs or heavy timber.
b) Decorative construction features, such as fascia, trim board materials and trim
accents, are exempted from this requirement, to a maximum of 10% per elevation.
Overhanging Projections and Cantilevered Floors
a) Overhanging projections attached to buildings and their support (i.e. decks, balconies,
porches, structural columns, and beams) shall be constructed of heavy timber
construction, ignition-resistant or non-combustible materials, similar to those allowed
in the “Exterior Cladding” section above.
b) The underside of all exposed floors (i.e. underside of balconies, decks and porches)
shall be sheathed or skirted with fire-resistant materials, similar to those allowed in the
“Exterior Cladding” section above.
c) The underside of all cantilevered floors (i.e. bay windows, hutches, and window seats)
shall be protected with fire-resistant materials and have the floor system fire-blocked
at the exterior wall plane.
d) Areas under overhang projections must be kept clear of debris.
Exterior Doors and Windows
a) Exterior doors and garage doors shall be constructed of non -combustible materials (i.e.
metal clad, solid core wood or have a 20 minute fire protection rating), and must meet
the requirements of the North American Fenestration Standard (NAFS).
b) Exterior windows and glazing within doors exposed to the wildfire interface and
skylights shall be tempered glass, multi-layer glazing, or have a fire protection rating of
not less than 20 minutes, and must meet the requirements of the NAFS. Openable
windows shall be covered with non-combustible, corrosion-resistant screens.
Eaves, Soffits and Vents
a) All eaves and ventilation openings in exterior walls, roofs, and soffits shall be covered
with non-combustible, 3 millimetre corrosion-resistant wire mesh, or be designed to
prevent flame or ember penetration into the structure.
b) Eaves and soffits shall be constructed of ignition-resistant or non-combustible
materials.
Chimney
a) Spark arrestor screens are required on all wood-burning appliances.
C. Landscaping and Open Spaces
1. Landscaping within the 10 metre Priority Zone 1 should be designed based on FireSmart
landscaping standards to ensure minimal fuel loading within the landscaped areas and
provide ongoing resistance to wildfire. The type and density of fire resistive plantings
incorporated within landscaped areas will assist in mitigating the wildfire hazard.
2. Removal of all debris (wood and vegetation) after land clearing for development must be
completed prior to the approval of any new subdivision plan.
3. A landscaping security may be required for landscaping works in accordance with the
Maple Ridge Landscape Security Policy No. 6.28.”
4. Subsection 8.12.2 Guidelines, Item E be renumbered accordingly.
5. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014 as amended is hereby amended
accordingly.
READ a first time the 26th day of July, 2016.
READ a second time the day of , 2016.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the day of , 2016.
READ a third time the day of , 2016.
ADOPTED, the day of , 2016.
______________________________ ______________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICE R
1
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2016-448-CP
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First Reading
OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7299-2016
13150, 13120, 13070, 13030, 12990 ,12940, 13655 256 Street;
25775,25801,25801,25927,25927 128 Avenue; 26185 130 Avenue;13301 251A
Street; 13055 251A Street, 25100 Alouette Road; 51 lots comprised of Kanaka
Business Park and adjacent park land
Employment Land Use Suitability Assessment (Located East and West of 256 Street and
North of 128 Avenue)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On September 19, 2016, Council authorized staff to begin preparing an OCP Amending Bylaw to
redesignate the above noted properties in the 256 Street and 128 Avenue vicinity under the
following resolution:
That staff draft a bylaw amendment to the Official Community Plan to redesignate lands in
the 256 Street vicinity to Industrial from Suburban Residential and Institutional.
This OCP amendment will serve to facilitate future employment uses and development. These lands,
while not identified in the 2012-2014 Commercial and Industrial Strategy, evolved from an
investigation of suitable employment land across the City. These subject properties were seen as
another means of expanding employment opportunities in the vicinity of existing and well-utilized
employment lands. This report summarizes the existing policy and site context of the subject lands
and outlines considerations stemming from a redesignation of the lands to Rural Resource, along
with minor portions of land to be redesignated as Park, Suburban Residential, and Estate
Residential. The 51 M-2 (General Industrial) zoned properties in the Kanaka Business Park are also
included in the OCP amending bylaw to align to the existing zone with the Industrial and
Conservation land use designations.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1)That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7299-2016 be given first reading;
2)That, in respect of Section 475(2)(b) 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;
1108
2
v. boards of education, greater boards and improvement district boards;
vi. the Provincial and federal governments and their agencies.
3) That the only additional consultation to be required in respect of this matter beyond the
consultation and communication process outlined in this report titled “Employment Land Use
Suitability Assessment (Located East and West of 256 Street and North of 128 Avenue)” and the
early posting of the proposed Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw on the City’s website,
together with an invitation to the public to comment, are meetings with the subject property
owners.
DISCUSSION:
It is the purpose of this report to present the results stemming from a high-level land use
assessment intended to investigate the suitability of the lands located generally to the east and west
of 256 Street and north of 128 Avenue for an employment designation (see Figure 1). The report
also presents OCP Amending Bylaw 7299-2016 to redesignate the subject lands from Suburban
Residential and Institutional, to Rural Resource, Industrial, Park, Suburban Residential and Estate
Suburban Residential. The Rural Resource land use designation would allow for a variety of
industrial and light-industrial activities to be considered in the future, including gravel extraction.
While Council had originally directed staff to consider an Industrial redesignation, further analysis
revealed that a Rural Resource designation would accommodate Council’s industrial employment
goals while preserving potential gravel resources.
Figure 1: The Subject Lands Located to the East and West of 256 Street and North of 128 Avenue
1
2 3
4
3
a) Background Context:
On October 5, 2015, Council endorsed the Commercial and Industrial Strategy Implementation Plan
Matrix. The Commercial and Industrial Strategy indicates that the City needs a range of 69-93
hectares (170-230 acres) of additional industrial lands by 2040. As part of the ensuing discussion
with Council, a number of areas that could potentially accommodate employment-based land uses
were identified (See Figure 2), along with the following Council Resolutions:
That staff be directed to obtain a more detailed site analysis [of each identified location] to
determine feasibility as employment generating lands. (Dec. 2, 2013); OR
For this work to be completed as part of development application information.
On September 19, 2016, Council authorized staff to begin preparing an amending bylaw to
redesignate the lands in the 256 Street and 128 Avenue vicinity with the following resolution:
That staff draft a bylaw amendment to the Official Community Plan to redesignate lands in
the 256 Street vicinity to Industrial from Suburban Residential and Institutional.
Again, staff have noted that a Rural Resource designation aligns with Council’s direction while also
acknowledges the presence of gravel resources and their importance to the City. Further, these
lands, under the proposed Rural Resource land use designation, offer another means of expanding
employment opportunities in vicinity of existing and well-utilized employment lands.
Figure 2: Potential Employment Lands City-Wide
256th St Lands
1
4
b) Property Description:
The subject lands are located to the east and west of 256 Street and to the north of 128 Avenue.
These properties represent approximately 153 gross hectares (378 acres) comprised of multiple
properties, many with different land use designations. As such, staff have grouped the various
properties for clarification purposes. As shown in Figure 1:
The properties in group “1” are currently a mix of Suburban Residential, Rural Resource,
and Agricultural designated properties. The properties are located immediately west of
the existing Kanaka Business Park.
The property identified as “2” is comprised of two smaller properties immediately
adjacent to Suburban Residential properties which are hooked to a larger parcel. The
property is currently designated Institutional in reflection of past land use activities, and
is generally surrounded by Rural Resource land.
The property identified as “3” has a current split land use designation of Rural Resource
and Suburban Residential, and is zoned A-2 (Upland Agricultural).
The land identified as “4” is a portion of a larger parcel that has a number of different
zones including A-2 (Upland Agricultural), M-2 (General Industrial), M-4 (Extraction
Industrial) and P-5 (Corrections and Rehabilitation). The portion of the lot in question is
currently designated Institutional based on historic uses, while the remainder of the
parcel is designated Rural Resource to reflect the current gravel extraction operation.
All of the properties in Figure 1 are located outside of the City’s Urban Area Boundary. Regionally, the
sites are not within the Metro Vancouver Urban Containment Boundary, and are designated either
Industrial or Rural in the Regional Growth Strategy and are adjacent to lands designated Industrial by
Metro Vancouver. The properties identified as “2” is within the Fraser Sewerage Area, while portions
of group “1”, “3”, and “4” are either outside of, or partially within, the Fraser Sewerage Area. Those
properties that are included or are partially within the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) do not form
part of OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7299-2016 and are to remain designated Agricultural and within
the ALR.
c) Property Assessment:
In consideration of Council’s earliest motion, namely to investigate the suitability of lands within the
City for a employment designation, staff undertook a high-level assessment of the potential
environmental and technical requirements that face any future redevelopment of these lands,
regardless of land use designation.
Topography and Watercourses – The properties in this area are relatively level, although
changes in topography are notable in proximity to known watercourses. As well, any future
development will be impacted by the setbacks associated with the watercourses present
(ranging from 10 m to 30 m). A Watercourse Protection Development Permit will be required
for those properties that are within 50 metres of a watercourse, pond, or wetland feature to
ensure riparian areas and environmentally sensitive habitat remains protected.
Soils and Geology - Given the topography and presence of watercourses, hydro-geotechnical
issues likely exist, requiring further hydro-geotechnical studies to determine setbacks from
top of slope and toe of slope. A Natural Features Development Permit is required for
development of sites on slopes over 15% to consider OCP Hillside Management Policies.
5
Significant Trees and Forest Areas – While some of the lands in this area are already cleared
as a result of past land use activities, there are remaining portions of the sites that would
require clearing and tree removal. A Tree Cutting Permit is required under the Tree
Protection and Management Bylaw. Further investigation through a Tree Management Plan
is required to determine potential retention areas for significant tree clusters, especially on
the periphery of the sites and around conservation boundaries. In addition, appropriate
studies, mitigation, and coordination measures are required to manage tree retention and
tree removal areas on site, including tree replacement requirements.
Surface Water, Groundwater and Vulnerable Aquifer Management – This area is accessible
and serviceable, which reduces uncertainty with respect to groundwater impacts and aquifer
management. At the time of any future development, groundwater issues will need to be
dealt with through measures including adaptive stormwater management plans and
coordination with grading, conservation areas, and geotechnical setback recommendations.
A Groundwater Impact Assessment is anticipated to be required for stormwater management
purposes depending on proximity of future development to steep slopes and the scale of any
clearing that may be needed.
Stormwater Management – Floodplain issues are peripheral to these lands. At the time of a
development application, any implicated lands, especially those that are in proximity to the
Alouette River, would need to demonstrate compliance with the City’s stormwater
management requirements with respect to three tier on-site source controls using Provincial
and Metro Vancouver design standards. Emphasis within the three tier approach is on
management of volumes, runoff rates, and water quality improvements which need to be
coordinated with geotechnical recommendations, environmentally sensitive areas, and tree
retention areas.
Agriculture Impacts – Some of the subject lands are adjacent to land in the Agricultural Land
Reserve. All future development of these lands will be required to complete an Agricultural
Impact Assessment for adjacent Agricultural Land Reserve properties. Mitigation
recommendations may include; but are not be limited to: landscape buffering, fencing, and
road design with each future development application.
d) Engineering Considerations:
Access – In general, many of the properties in this area either abut or are readily accessible
from 256 Street. For those parcels located in the northwesterly extent of the area, access
may be more challenged. Any future developments on these properties will need to confirm if
access to those portions of land available for development can be achieved within the design
and construction standards set out in the Maple Ridge Subdivision and Development
Servicing Bylaw; as well as meet the requirements for emergency access identified by the
Maple Ridge Fire Department.
Furthermore, truck traffic stemming from this area, if redesignated, may warrant an
examination of the Strategic Transportation Plans recommendations, specifically regarding
the identified routes for access to this area and consider if specific improvements are
necessary such as the turning movements at the intersection of 256 Street and Dewdney
Trunk Road.
6
Municipal Water – Municipal watermains are currently located along 256 Street and 128
Avenue; however, not all of the subject lands fronting these roads have a water connection.
There is no municipal watermain on Alouette Road, which provides road frontage to some of
the subject lands. The Engineering Department has identified an upcoming capital works
project scheduled for spring 2018 that will increase the water capacity and fire flow potential
through an upgrade to the 270A Street reservoir. Although this capital project will address
such likely needs for the subject lands in the short term, a detailed review of water
requirements will be required to confirm the need for any upgrades to accommodate the
change in land use.
Sanitary Service – The subject lands have varying degrees of access to the municipal
sanitary sewer system depending on their status in the Fraser Sewerage Area. Some of the
properties are partially or wholly within the Fraser Sewerage Area, allowing full or limited
sanitary connections; whereas as some of the lands are not within the Fraser Sewerage
Area. Properties within the latter category will require a private septic system to deal with
sanitary requirements. Industrial development on private septic systems is currently the case
at the M-2 (General Industrial) zoned Kanaka Business Park to the east of the subject
lands. A study is required to determine what upgrades to the sewage collection system
would be required to accommodate the proposed change in land use.
e) Development Potential:
Once combined, the environmental and technical requirements will inherently limit the development
of these lands, regardless of future land use designation. With attention solely on the topography
and the known watercourses, staff prepared a summary illustration of the areas available for
development to the east and west of 256 Street and to the north of 128 Avenue. As shown in more
detail in Figure 3, which identifies the possible development potential for each property or group of
properties, overall it was identified that of the possible 153 gross hectares (378 acres) of site area,
the total resulting development area is approximately 115 hectares (284 acres) or 75%.
Figure 3: Potential Lands Available for Development to the East and West of 256 Street and to the North of
128 Avenue (Allowing for Slope and Watercourses).
7
f) Policy and Zoning Assessment:
Aside from environmental factors, the site will be further influenced by the City’s policy and
regulatory directions.
Official Community Plan
The Rural Resource land use designation supports industrial and employment uses and aligns
with the M-2 (General Industrial), M-4 (Extraction Industrial) and M-5 (High Impact Industrial)
zones. The Rural Resource land use is intended to identify potential gravel deposits given its
importance as a natural resource.
The OCP outlines a long-term vision for identifying additional employment generating lands, yet
equally places an emphasis on ensuring the suitability of any lands contemplated for new
opportunities. As a result, the OCP provides a set of evaluation parameters for potential lands
being considered for employment, be it industry or business park. These include:
Policy 6-41 The identification of additional employment generating land is a priority for the
District. Maple Ridge will evaluate alternate locations for a large block or blocks of additional
employment generating land to support the growth of the employment sector in the future.
Location parameters for suitable industrial land may include, but is not limited to:
a) land that is relatively flat;
b) land that is conducive to industrial development;
c) land that is contiguous to a full range of municipal services;
d) land that is strategically located near the Regional transportation network.
While the above noted policy emphasizes the presence of municipal services, it is noted that
Schedule A of the Maple Ridge Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw exempts
developments under the Industrial zones from the requirement to provide municipal services
outside of the Urban Area Boundary, excluding municipal water connections.
Gravel Deposits
Properties in group “1” and property “3” are currently designated in part Rural Resource, and
several gravel extraction businesses are in operation in this area. Two policies guide the
development of Rural Resource designated land in Maple Ridge:
Policy 6-45 Rural Resource Industrial lands are located in the northern portion of the
community and provide for a range of general industrial, heavy industrial and high impact
resource based industrial uses following the removal of gravel resources on these lands.
Policy 6-46 The gravel reserves in the Rural Resource area at the north end of 256 Street
will be considered for use prior to development of the industrial potential. However, before
any additional gravel extraction traffic occurs, beyond historic levels, alternative access
needs to be developed to prevent increased impacts on the residential character of the
neighbourhood.
8
As a result of these policies, the process for consideration of any other general industrial use
aside from resource extraction under the Rural Resource designation is to first identify if gravel
deposits exist, and second, for identified gravel deposits to be removed. At this time, no analysis
of the extent of gravel deposits on the subject lands has taken place; however anecdotal
knowledge and existing topography indicates that some gravel deposits have historically been
removed.
The City’s Soil Removal Bylaw No. 6398-2006 permits a maximum threshold of 300,000 cubic
metres of gravel to be extracted per year. As current rates have yet to approach this threshold, it
would appear that continued gravel extraction could take place on some of these lands in the
future. Given that, while the expansion of the Rural Resource designation may permit a wide
array of industrial activities, any future redevelopment will be required to assess the gravel
extraction potential of any such lands and/or identify any implications to the Soil Removal Bylaw
No. 6398-2006, as a condition of development.
Commercial and Industrial Strategy:
The Commercial and Industrial Strategy presented an industrial land demand forecast based on
employment growth, which indicates that Maple Ridge will require between 170 and 230 acres
(69 to 93 hectares) of additional industrial lands by 2040. The Strategy recognized the inherent
challenge of finding industrial land in the medium to long term in an already competitive region.
It also identified that Maple Ridge currently has vacant and/or underutilized lands that may be
suitable for industrial redevelopment in the short term. Various long-term directions were offered
as ways to meet future demand, including maintain the status quo supply. However, in the
interim it was emphasized that the City should begin planning for the anticipated long-term
growth now so it can best accommodate demand for industrial lands whenever it occurs.
The subject lands under current consideration were reviewed in the Commercial and Industrial
Strategy, but the area was identified as not being viable in the short term. Land sales for
industrial properties have increased recently, reducing the number of vacancies and unsold
properties significantly, and indicating that there is local market demand for industrial land in
North-East Maple Ridge. The Commercial and Industrial Strategy further noted that the 256
Street industrial lands were more likely to attract M-2 (General Industrial) zoning uses (i.e
industrial activity unenclosed by a building) due to the Albion Industrial Area’s classification as a
Business Park and alignment with the M-3 (Business Park) zone.
Regional Policy Context:
The subject lands are currently designated Industrial and Rural in Metro Vancouver’s Regional
Growth Strategy (RGS). The Industrial land use designation aligns with both heavy and light
industrial uses that have access to municipal services such as water and sanitary sewer. The
Rural land use designation is a non-urban land use designation that allows a range of small
scale low density uses, including industrial uses that do not require the provision of urban
services. As a result, industrial activity on the subject lands can proceed without an amendment
to Metro Vancouver’s land use designation or the Greater Vancouver Sewerage and Drainage
District’s Fraser Sewerage Area boundary. Should a more intensive scale of industrial
development, or an expansion of the Fraser Sewerage Area be desired in this area in the future,
an amendment to the Fraser Sewerage Area boundary and the Regional Growth Strategy would
be required.
9
Compatibility with Surrounding Development:
The lands to the east and west of 256 Street and to the north of 128 Avenue are surrounded in
part by residential uses along 130 Avenue, agricultural uses south of 128 Avenue and Rural
Resource and other industrial uses to the north. Building off of the industrial context of this area,
the industrial Kanaka Business Park is also present immediately east of the properties grouped
as “1” in Figure 1 along 128 Avenue. While not abutting, the residential neighbourhood of
Whispering Falls is also in close proximity to this area, and will share access along 128 Avenue.
Existing institutional uses in the vicinity of the subject lands also include the Fraser Regional
Correction Centre and the Justice Institute Fire and Safety Training Centre.
g) Land Use Redesignation Implications:
While acknowledging the environmental and technical issues that would need to be addressed
through any future development of these lands, the high-level staff assessment has identified that
approximately 115 hectares (284 acres) or about 75% of the gross site area could be suitable for an
employment land use designation. Based upon anecdotal observations from within the Maple
Meadows Business Park and operations in the 256 Street industrial area, such combined industrial
development potential could equate to 10-12 industrial units per acre. Using this anecdotal rule of
thumb further, it suggests that industrial development could result in the creation of thousands of
employment-generating units over the long term future. Further, the properties present possible
synergies with surrounding industrial and institutional land uses, offering an opportunity to satisfy in
a large part the future demand for employment lands in one consolidated location.
The staff analysis also identified that access, especially by truck traffic servicing any future industrial
uses, could be a limiting factor and may require additional assessment of the City’s road network.
Ongoing monitoring and assessment of existing gravel deposits in this area would also be an ongoing
consideration of any future industrial development. As well, it is noted that the existing suburban
residential development in this area could be further impacted by an expansion of employment-
generating land uses. Given that, and reflecting that limited discussion has occurred in terms of the
types of employment uses and levels of land use intensity that may be appropriate on the subject
lands, further community dialogue is encouraged as Council considers OCP Amending Bylaw 7299-
2016.
h) Other Considerations:
Five other land use amendments are proposed under OCP Amending Bylaw 7299-2016: Industrial,
Park, Estate Suburban Residential, and Suburban Residential. In the high-level examination
undertaken it was noted that the property identified as “2” in Figure 1 is hooked to two smaller
parcels. These two parcels currently abut existing residential properties. It is therefore
recommended through OCP Amending Bylaw 7299-2016 that these properties be designated Estate
Suburban Residential and Suburban Residential to accommodate a continuation of the adjacent
residential uses.
Furthermore, an exisiting city right-of-way adjacent to the subject lands is proposed to be
redesignated to Park. This right-of-way is not anticipated to be constructed as a road, and in
discussion with Parks, Recreation and Culture Department staff it was identified as a desirable trail
connection. Identifying this right-of-way as park for the purpose of accommodating future greenways
will create a buffer between residential and employment uses in this area.
10
Lastly, the Kanaka Business Park is included under OCP Amending Bylaw 7299-2016 to be
redesignated to Industrial and Conservation from Suburban Residential and Rural Resource. This
will bring the existing zoning into alignment with the appropriate land use designation.
i) Consultation and Communication:
The Local Government Act (LGA) Section 475 provides the framework to guide consultation for OCP
amendments. Council must consider if consultation should be early and ongoing with one or more
persons, organizations and authorities. Specifically with:
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. boards of education, greater boards and improvement district boards;
vi. the Provincial and federal governments and their agencies.
In light of the challenges inherent to these lands, but in recognition of the employment potential in
this general area, further engagement with the land owners is warranted. For the subject lands, the
following consultation and communication process is proposed:
a. Interdepartmental referrals will be sent to Engineering for comments on traffic and servicing,
Finance Department for consistency with the Five Year Financial Plan, Parks, Recreation and
Culture for consistency with the Parks Master Plan, and Economic Development for comment
on the consistency of the proposed use in conjunction with the Economic Development Plan;
b. Intergovernmental referral will be sent to Metro Vancouver and the Greater Vancouver
Sewerage & Drainage District for comment on the consistency with the Regional Growth
Strategy;
c. Engagement with owners of the subject lands will be undertaken. Invitations for discussion
with adjacent land owners such as the Katzie First nation and the Province of B.C will also be
issued to determine the vision for these properties.
Following Council consideration of first reading, letters to property owners will be mailed out with an
invitation to participate in a consultation meeting. It is anticipated, based on the wider consultation
and the discussions with the community and stakeholders that refinements to OCP Amending Bylaw
7299-2016 may be needed, which will be completed prior to Council reading of the Bylaw a second
time.
j) Alternative:
Staff’s high-level assessment suggests that the subject lands are suitable in the long-term for
employment-generating activities. However, an alternative direction would be for Council to direct
staff not to redesignate these lands at this time, and to engage the community prior to bringing
forward an OCP Amending Bylaw for first reading.
11
CONCLUSION:
The Commercial and Industrial Strategy recognized that regional competition and an existing supply
of under-utilized industrial lands elsewhere in the community, give the City time to plan for future
land use changes. Towards that end, and in response to direction from Council, staff has
undertaken an assessment of various properties to the east and west of 256 Street and to the north
of 128 Avenue to assess their long-term suitability for employment-generating land uses, all in a
proactive attempt to meet anticipated future demand. OCP Amending Bylaw 7299-2016, which
seeks to redesignate the subject lands to a Rural Resource land use designation, is based upon the
findings of the assessment, which point to the potential availability of 115 hectares (284 acres) of
land that could accommodate future employment interests. However, while these lands might be
located in proximity to an already existing industrial node in the City, recognition is also given to the
presence of many suburban homes which might be impacted by increased employment activities.
Combining these perspectives suggests that early consultation be undertaken with the property
owners in the vicinity of the subject lands to better understand the land use vision for this area. Such
input will be brought back to Council, potentially in the form of a revised OCP Amendment Bylaw
7299-2016, prior to second reading.
“Original signed by Amelia Bowden”
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden, M. Urb
Planner 1
“Original signed by Christine Carter”
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
“Original signed by Christine Carter” for
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
Appendix A – OCP Amendment Bylaw 7299-2016
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7299-2016
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014
_______________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS Section 477 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the Official
Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend Schedule "B" to the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge, enacts as follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 7299-2016."
2.Schedule "B" is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Part Southwest ¼ Group 1 Lot 1 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan
NWP41107
Group 1 Lot 1 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan LMP26779
Group 1 Lot 2 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan LMP26779
Part Southwest ¼ Lot 3 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan
NWP70124
Part Southwest ¼ Group 1 Lot 2 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan
NWP70124
Part Southwest ¼ Group 1 Lot 4 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan
NWP41107
Part Southwest ¼ Group 1 Lot 1 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan
NWP70124
Parcel 1 Part Southwest ¼ Reference Plan 17316 of Parcel A Reference Plan 3015 Section
25 Township Plan 12 NWD
Parcel A Part Southwest ¼ Reference Plan 3015 Excluding Parcel 1 Reference Plan 17316
Section 25 Township Plan 12 NWD
Legal Subdivision 7 Group 1 Section 25 Township Plan 12 NWD (PID 013-301-748)
Group 1 Lot A Section 26 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan NWP83431
Lot 22 Section 26 Township plan 12 New Westminster District Plan LMP25391
Lot A Section 26 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan BCP45610
PID 000-947-261
Lots 1-5,8-11, and 13-51 Section 25 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan BCP42202
and four adjacent park parcels
Lots 1-3 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan BCP44861
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 926, a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part
of this Bylaw, is hereby designated as shown.
APPENDIX A
3. Schedule "C" is hereby amended for that parcel or tract of land and premises known and
described as:
Part Southwest ¼ Group 1 Lot 1 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan
NWP41107
Group 1 Lot 1 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan LMP26779
Group 1 Lot 2 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan LMP26779
Part Southwest ¼ Lot 3 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan
NWP70124
Part Southwest ¼ Group 1 Lot 2 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan
NWP70124
Part Southwest ¼ Group 1 Lot 4 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan
NWP41107
Part Southwest ¼ Group 1 Lot 1 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan
NWP70124
Parcel 1 Part Southwest ¼ Reference Plan 17316 of Parcel A Reference Plan 3015 Section
25 Township Plan 12 NWD
Parcel A Part Southwest ¼ Reference Plan 3015 Excluding Parcel 1 Reference Plan 17316
Section 25 Township Plan 12 NWD
Legal Subdivision 7 Group 1 Section 25 Township Plan 12 NWD (PID 013-301-748)
Group 1 Lot A Section 26 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan NWP83431
Lot 22 Section 26 Township plan 12 New Westminster District Plan LMP25391
Lot A Section 26 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan BCP45610
PID 000-947-261
Lots 1-5,8-11, and 13-51 Section 25 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan BCP42202
and four adjacent park parcels
Lots 1-3 Section 25 Township Plan 12 New Westminster District Plan BCP44861
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 927, a copy of which is attached hereto and forms part
of this Bylaw, is hereby amended by adding Park and Conservation.
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014 is hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the day of , 20
READ a second time the day of , 20
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , 20
READ a third time the day of , 20
ADOPTED, the day of , 20 .
______________________________ ______________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
´
SCALE 1:18,000
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDINGBylaw No. Map No. Purpose: From:To:
To Amend Schedule BInstitutional, Rural Resource, and Suburban ResidentialIndustrial Estate Suburban ResidentialRural Resource Suburban Residential
7299-2016926
ParkConservation
´
SCALE 1:18,000
MAPLE RIDGE OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDINGBylaw No. Map No. Purpose: To Amend Schedule C as shown
To Add to Park To Add To Conservation
7299-2016927
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012-109-DVP
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: CoW
SUBJECT: Development Variance Permit
24979 108 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A development Variance Permit application 2012-109-DVP has been received in conjunction with a
rezoning and subdivision application to rezone the subject property from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) to allow for future subdivision
into 13 single family residential lots. The requested variance is to:
Reduce the minimum lot width for lots 1, 10, 11, 12 and 13 from 15 m (50 ft.) to:
14.6 m (47.9 ft.) for lot 1
14.7 m (48.2 ft.) for lot 10
14.7 m (48.2 ft.) for lot 11
14.3 m (46.9 ft.) for lot 12
14.3 m (46.9 ft.) for lot 13
Council will be considering final reading for rezoning application 2012-109-RZ on December 6,
2016.
It is recommended that Development Variance Permit 2012-109-DVP be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2012-109-DVP respecting property located
at 24979 108 Avenue.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context
Applicant: Aplin & Martin Consultants Ltd.
Legal Description: Lot “A” Section 11 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan
23702
OCP:
Existing: Low/Medium Density Residential
Zoning:
Existing: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Proposed: RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
1109
- 2 -
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Residential
Zone: RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) with
Density Bonus to R-1 (Residential District)
Designation: Low/ Medium Density Residential
South: Use: Residential
Zone: R-1 (Residential District)
Designation: Medium Density Residential
East: Use: Residential
Zone: RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Designation: Suburban Residential
West: Use: Residential
Zone: RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium DensityResidential)
Designation: Low/Medium Density Residential
Existing Use of Property: Residential
Proposed Use of Property: Residential
Site Area: 0.82 Ha (2.15 acres)
Access: 108 Avenue and Morrisette Place
Servicing requirement: Urban Standard
b) Project Description:
The subject property, located at 24979 108 Avenue, is within the Albion Area Plan. The single family
home that was located on the property has recently been demolished, as a condition of rezoning. To
the west are single family RS-1b (One Family Urban (Median Density) Residential) lots, to the north
are single family RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential), with a Density Bonus to R-
1 (Residential District) sized lots; to the east are single family RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
lots; and to the south are R-1 (Residential District) lots. The applicant is proposing subdivision into
13 single family residential lots.
c) Variance Analysis:
The Zoning Bylaw establishes general minimum and maximum regulations for single family
development. A Development Variance Permit allows Council some flexibility in the approval
process.
The requested variance and rationale for support are described below:
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -1985, Schedule D – Minimum Lot Area Dimensions.
To reduce the minimum required lot width of 15 m (50 ft.) for the following lots to:
14.6 m (47.9 ft.) for lot 1
14.7 m (48.2 ft.) for lot 10
14.7 m (48.2 ft.) for lot 11
14.3 m (46.9 ft.) for lot 12
14.3 m (46.9 ft.) for lot 13
The proposed reduction in lot width, to the above mentioned lots, is required to allow for a future
potential Lot 14, directly north of the development site. Potential Lot 14 is currently hooked to Lot 1
on the adjacent northern development, located across 109 Avenue, which was recently rezoned to
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential), with a Density Bonus to R-1 (Residential
- 3 -
District), (see Appendix D). The property owner of the subject property and owner of the adjacent
northern Lot 1 are currently negotiating the terms for a purchase of proposed Lot 14, which would be
the subject of a separate subdivision application at a later date. The future potential Lot 14 would
remain as an RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) zoned lot, and would use the
Density Bonus to R-1 (Residential District) specifications. A no-build covenant will be placed on a
portion of the subject application Lot 13, 1.4 m in width, to ensure that proposed Lot 14 meets the
minimum requirements for lot width of the R-1 (Residential District) zone.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
In accordance with the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, notice of Council
consideration of a resolution to issue a Development Variance Permit was mailed to all owners or
tenants in occupation of all parcels, any parts of which are adjacent to the property that is subject to
the permit.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed variance to reduce the minimum lot width to lots 1, 10, 11, 12 and 13 is supported to
allow a future potential Lot 14 to develop, currently hooked to Lot 1 on the adjacent northern
development (see Appendix D). The variance will allow for an effective assembly of land between the
neighbouring properties; otherwise, the hooked portion could become an unkempt remnant parcel.
The subject property owner and the neighbouring property owner are currently negotiating the terms
for purchase of potential Lot 14.
It is therefore recommended that this application be favourably considered and the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal Development Variance Permit 2012-109-DVP.
“Original signed by Adam Rieu”
___________________________________________
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 E.C. Swabey”
__________________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Map
Appendix C – Subdivision Plan, indicating proposed width variances for Lots 1, 10, 11, 12 and 13
Appendix D – Land Assembly Map, necessary to create future combined Lot 14
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Jul 8, 2013 2012-109-VP BY: JV
24979-108 Ave
CORPORATION OFTHE DISTRICT OFMAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT2488610891
10921 249071084824937 249852490310793
10822
10860
249002490624913249172492224927107922493724940 24979249022490510785 249271087224947
2498224988249062491524930249432500725010248922491024916249332
4
9
3
2
10836
2499624912249502490724917249202492310782249 ST.109 AVE.MORRISETTE PL.108B AVE.249A ST.108A AVE.
108 AVE.
27
BCP 33200
1 BCP 49693
15
31
10
3
45
4
11
6
P 23702
26
22
20
16
21
17
9
14
78
P 23702
27
1
19
2
8
BCP 33200
5
10
BCP 33200
2
18
11
44
12 P 34411
6
7
BCP 49693
3
4
9
5
77
A
Rem B
28 29
30
8 7
13
79
Subject Property
´
Scale: 1:1,500
APPENDIX A
City of PittMeadows
District of
Langley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Dec 9, 2015
FILE: 2012-109-RZ
BY: PC
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,000
24979 108 AVENUE
Aerial Imagery from the Spring of 2011
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
Proposed Lot 14
Currently hooked to Lot 1
at above development
APPENDIX D
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2016-389-CP
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: CoW
SUBJECT: Council Policy 6.21 – Development Sign Policy Review
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On October 24, 2016, staff presented a draft Council Policy 6.21 - Development Sign Policy and
updated sign template that included seven revisions to the existing Council policy. The revisions
proposed are to address the recommendations of the Mayor’s Open Government Task Force and to
improve how development applications are communicated and advertised to the public. At the
October 24, 2016 Workshop, staff recommended forwarding the proposed changes to the
Development Liaison Committee for review by the Urban Development Institute (UDI) and the Greater
Vancouver Homebuilders’ Association (GVHBA). This referral has occurred and no revisions were
suggested. Accordingly, it is now recommended that the draft policy be adopted.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Council Policy 6.21 - Development Sign Policy, dated September 12, 2012 be repealed and
replaced with the attached draft Council Policy 6.21 - Development Sign Policy.
DISCUSSION:
The proposed Council Policy 6.21 - Development Sign Policy included a new sign template as well as
the following changes:
Increasing the duration of sign posting;
Building in flexibility for the Director of Planning to require additional signs depending on land
size and geometry;
Including a subdivision layout or building rendering on the sign prior to Public Hearing;
Removing technical jargon and using easily understood language;
Adding colour for visual interest;
Adding email contact information, with opportunities to direct residents to the Land
Development Application Viewer (gis.mapleridge.ca/LandDevelopmentViewer); and
Adding Land Use Contract Amendments and Discharges to list of applications requiring a
development sign, and Director of Planning discretion for all other applications as necessary.
Following the October 24, 2016 Workshop, a referral was sent to the Development Liaison
Committee requesting review of the draft policy and sign template by the Urban Development
Institute (UDI) and the Greater Vancouver Homebuilders’ Association (GVHBA). The UDI and GVHBA
circulated the information to their members and responded that they support the policy and feel it
brings more clarity to developers and the public. No suggestions for change were provided through
that referral process.
1110
- 2 -
CONCLUSION:
The revisions proposed to Council Policy 6.21 - Development Sign Policy are to address the
recommendations of the Mayor’s Open Government Task Force and to improve how development
applications are communicated and advertised to the public. It is recommended that the attached
draft Council Policy 6.21 -Development Sign Policy be adopted.
“Original signed by Amelia Bowden”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden, M.Urb
Planner 1
“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 E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Current Council Policy 6.21
Appendix B – Proposed Council Policy 6.21
Appendix C – Revised Template
Page 1 of 7 Policy 6.21
POLICY MANUAL
Title: DEVELOPMENT SIGN POLICY
Policy No : 6.21
Supersedes: Revised
Authority: Legislative Operational
Approval: Council CMT
General Manager
Effective Date: September 12, 2012
Review Date: 2013
That with respect to the posting of development signs, be it resolved that the policy take effect
when approved by Council.
1.This policy shall apply to all Official Community Plan, Rezoning, and Heritage Revitalization
Agreement development applications.
2.Development signs shall be placed to indicate to the general public the intent of a
development application and to indicate the property(ies) involved in an application.
3.The applicant shall be solely responsible for the preparation, placement, maintenance and
removal of the sign(s) and there shall be no cost to the municipality.
4.The sign(s) shall be placed on the site a minimum of 10 calendar days prior to
consideration of the application for First Reading at Committee of the Whole. Failure to
place the sign at the property will prevent further processing of the application. A photo of
the sign on the property must be provided prior to consideration of the application for First
Reading at Committee of the Whole.
5.The following information shall be added to the development sign only when required:
Notification of a Development Information Meeting (D.I.M.) must be placed on the
site a minimum of 10 calendar days prior to the Development Information
Meeting. Failure to place the sign at the property 10 days prior to the scheduled
Development Information Meeting will invalidate the Development Information
Meeting and another meeting will be required.
Notification of a Public Hearing (P.H.) must be placed on the site a minimum of 10
and no more than 20 calendar days prior to the Public Hearing. Failure to place the
sign at the property 10 days prior to the scheduled Public Hearing will result in the
application being withdrawn from the agenda of that Public Hearing.
6.The sign(s) shall be placed in a prominent location on the site, shall be clearly visible and
shall not be obscured. Where a site abuts more than one road, one sign for each road
frontage may be required. The sign shall not obstruct visibility for vehicle traffic.
APPENDIX A
Page 2 of 7 Policy 6.21
7. The size, layout and arrangement of text on the sign(s) sha ll be in accordance with the
attached sketches. The overall dimensions of the sign shall be 1.2 m by 2.4 m (4 ft by 8
ft).
8. The content of the sign shall be subject to the approval of the municipality and shall
contain the following information:
a) The development application number;
b) The purpose of the application (e.g. single family lots, townhouses, commercial
units, or heritage revitalization);
c) A description of the development proposal:
i. For subdivision: Proposed number of lots, lot size range; or;
ii. For multi-family, commercial, or industrial: Proposed number of
units and total site area.
d) The date, place and time of the Development Information Meeting (if required);
e) The date, place and time of the Public Hearing;
f) An invitation to obtain information from the applicant and the Planning Department
with contact numbers and the District of Maple Ridge website;
g) Additional information as may be deemed necessary by the Director of Planning.
9. The sign(s) shall contain a 0.6 m by 0.6 m (2 ft by 2 ft) map showing the location of the
property involved in the application.
10. The sign shall be removed within 30 days following the Public Hearing or upon denial of
the application. The sign removal shall be solely the responsibility of the applicant.
11. The sign shall be maintained by the applicant and any required repair or replacement due
to damage, theft, or vandalism shall be solely the responsibility of the applicant.
Purpose:
To ensure proper notification to the public of proposed development changes in their community.
Definitions:
Page 3 of 7 Policy 6.21
Key Areas of Responsibility
Action to Take
Development application received
Applicant is provided a copy of the Development Sign
Policy 6.21
Correspondence sent to applicant requesting draft of sign
for review and approval
Applicant submits proof of sign installation for file record
Application forwarded to Committee of the Whole for First
Reading
Applicant submits proof of Development Information
Meeting notification decal submitted to the Planning
Department (if required)
Applicant submits proof of Public Hearing notification
decal submitted to Planning Department
Applicant confirms sign removed after Public Hearing
Responsibility
Planning Development
Services Technician or
Planning Technician/
Planner
Planning
Technician/Planner
Planning
Technician/Planner
Planning
Technician/Planner
Planning
Technician/Planner
Planning
Technician/Planner
Planning
Technician/Planner
Page 4 of 7 Policy 6.21
Page 5 of 7 Policy 6.21
Page 6 of 7 Policy 6.21
Page 7 of 7 Policy 6.21
Page 1 of 2 Policy
POLICY MANUAL
Title: DEVELOPMENT SIGN POLICY
Policy No : 6.21
Supersedes:
Authority: Legislative Operational
Approval: Council CMT
General Manager
Effective Date:
Review Date:
That with respect to the posting of development signs, be it resolved that the policy take effect
when approved by Council.
1.This policy shall apply to development applications including: Official Community Plan
amendments and Rezoning, and other applications at the discretion of the Director of
Planning. This policy shall also apply to amendments or discharges of Land Use Contracts
and Heritage Revitalization Agreements involving changes to use or density.
2.Development signs shall be placed to indicate to the general public the intent of a
development application and to indicate the property(ies) involved in an application.
3.The applicant shall be solely responsible for the preparation, placement, maintenance and
removal of the sign(s) and there shall be no cost to the City.
4.A subdivision layout or building rendering (minimum 300 DPI), as applicable, shall be
installed on the sign no less than 10 days prior to consideration at Public Hearing.
5.The sign(s) shall be placed on the site a minimum of 10 calendar days prior to
consideration of the application for First Reading at Committee of the Whole. Failure to
place the sign at the property will prevent further processing of the application. A photo of
the sign on the property must be provided prior to consideration of the application for First
Reading at Committee of the Whole.
6.The following information shall be added to the development sign only when required as a
76 cm by 15 cm (30 in by 6 in) white decal:
Notification of a Development Information Meeting (D.I.M.) must be placed on the
site a minimum of 10 calendar days prior to the Development Information
Meeting. Failure to place the sign at the property 10 days prior to the scheduled
Development Information Meeting will invalidate the Development Information
Meeting and another meeting will be required.
Notification of a Public Hearing (P.H.) must be placed on the site a minimum of 10
and no more than 20 calendar days prior to the Public Hearing. Failure to place the
sign at the property 10 days prior to the scheduled Public Hearing will result in the
APPENDIX B
Page 2 of 2 Policy
application being withdrawn from the agenda of that Public Hearing.
7. The sign(s) shall be placed in a prominent location on the site, shall be clearly visible and
shall not be obscured. Where a site abuts more than one road, one sign for each road
frontage may be required. Additional signs may be required at the discretion of the
Director of Planning due to the size or geometry of the land under development. The sign
shall not obstruct visibility for vehicle traffic.
8. The size, layout and arrangement of text on the sign(s) sha ll be in accordance with the
attached sketch. The overall dimensions of the sign shall be 1.2 m by 2.4 m (4 ft by 8 ft).
9. The content of the sign shall be subject to the approval of the City and shall contain the
following information:
a) The development application number;
b) The purpose of the application (e.g. single family lots, townhouses, commercial
units, or heritage revitalization);
c) A description of the development proposal:
i. For subdivision: Proposed number of lots, lot size range; or;
ii. For multi-family, commercial, or industrial: Proposed number of
units and total floor area and number of storeys.
d) The date, place and time of the Development Information Meeting (if required);
e) The date, place and time of the Public Hearing;
f) An invitation to obtain information from the applicant and the Planning Department
with contact numbers, email addresses and the City of Maple Ridge website;
g) Additional information as may be deemed necessary by the Director of Planning.
10. The sign(s) shall contain a 0.56 m by 0.56 m (1.8 ft by 1.8ft) map showing the location of
the property involved in the application. The sign(s) shall also contain a 0.56 m by 0.56 m
(1.8 ft by 1.8 ft) subdivision layout or coloured building rendering, as applicable.
11. The sign shall be removed within 7 days following final approval or upon denial of the
application from Council. The sign removal shall be solely the responsibility of the
applicant.
12. The sign shall be maintained by the applicant and any required repair or replacement due
to damage, theft, or vandalism shall be solely the responsibility of the applicant.
Purpose:
To ensure proper notification to the public of proposed development changes in their community.
Definitions:
CITY OF
HAVE
YOUR
SAY !
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
MAPLE RIDGE
D.I.M. Decal
Install on sign min. 10days before D.I.M Install on sign min. 10days before Public Hearing
All text must be approved by the Planning Department prior to construction of the sign.
All text is Franklin Gothic Book
2.4 m1.2 m*Provide information on proposed # of lots at subdivision or # of units and storeys as well
as size range of lots at subdivision or total floor space for other developments
Development Sign Drawing & Specifications 0.13m0.76 m
BE PART OF
THE PROCESS D.I.M DECAL PUBLIC HEARING DECAL
SUBDIVISION PLAN
OR RENDERING
PROPOSED BUILDINGLOCATION
SUBJECT PROPERTY MAP
-Subject Parcel shaded
-North arrow
-Adjoining Roads and parcels
-Road names and addresss in bold
PLANNING DEPARTMENT:
604-467-7341
planning@mapleridge.ca
gis.mapleridge.ca/
LandDevelopmentViewer
APPLICANT:
SPR Development Group
604-123-4567
development@spr.com
sprdevelopmentgroup.com
FOR MORE INFO
To enable development of _____
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
(These numbers are approximate only
and may change before final approval)
PROPOSED REZONING
*
DEVELOPMENTAPPLICATION 12345 LOUGHEED HWY
NO. 2016-001-RZ
Public Hearing in the Council Chambers at the
Municipal Hall on _______,_____ at_____ pm
Development Information Meeting
_______________________ __ pm to ___ pm
APPENDIX C
Public Hearing in the Council Chambers at the Municipal Hall on _______,_____ at_____ pm Development Information Meeting_______________________ __ pm to ___ pmBE PART OF THE PROCESSSUBDIVISION PLANOR RENDERINGPROPOSED BUILDINGLOCATIONSUBJECT PROPERTY MAP-Subject Parcel shaded-North Arrow-Adjoining roads and parcels-Road names and addressses in boldPLANNING DEPARTMENT:604-467-7341planning@mapleridge.cagis.mapleridge.ca/LandDevelopmentViewerAPPLICANT: SPR Development Group604-123-4567development@spr.comsprdevelopmentgroup.comFOR MORE INFOTo enable development of ______________________________________________________________________________________(These numbers are approximate only and may change before final approval)PROPOSED REZONINGDEVELOPMENTAPPLICATION 12345 LOUGHEED HWYNO. 2016-001-RZ
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read and
Members of Council
MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: 2017-2021 Financial Plan Bylaw
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Municipal Council received presentations on the 2017-2021 Business Financial Plans and the
Financial Overview Report at public meetings held on November 28, 29 and 30. A Financial Plan
overview was presented again on the evening of November 30th. That meeting was livestreamed
over the Internet and a public question and answer period followed.
As part of its deliberations, Council voted on each of the incremental packages that were
recommended by staff and shown on Page 18 of the Financial Overview Report. Council supported
the staff recommendations with the following exceptions:
1.The Social Planning incremental request was approved contingent upon Council approving a
plan to be developed at a future Workshop.
2.Council also approved an additional incremental expense for increased security in the
downtown core ($20,000) to be funded from Accumulated Surplus.
Council's direction is incorporated into the attached Financial Plan Bylaw. Final consideration of this
bylaw will not occur until the New Year, thus allowing additional time for public input.
The Financial Plan Bylaw is a consolidated plan that includes the general revenue fund, the sewer
and water utility funds and the capital program. It is in a format that follows the legislated
requirements. This includes revenue and tax policy disclosure, the objectives and policies regarding
the proportions of revenue proposed to come from various funding sources, the distribution of
property taxes among property classes, and the use of permissive tax exemptions.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
That Maple Ridge 2017-2021 Financial Plan Bylaw No. 7300 - 2016 be given first, second and third
readings.
1131
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context
The 2017–2021 Financial Plan was presented to Council at public meetings along with the
Business Plans from all areas. The Financial Plan Bylaw incorporates the following direction from
Council:
1.General Purpose Property Tax Increase: 1.90% in 2017 and 2018 and 2.00% per year in
2019 through 2021
2.Infrastructure Sustainability Property Tax Increase: 0.70% per year
3.Parks, Recreation and Culture Property Tax Increase: 0.25% per year
4.Storm Water Property Tax Increase: 0.30% per year
5.Water Levy Increase: 4.50% per year
6.Sewer Levy Increase: 3.60% per year
7.Recycling Levy Increase: 1.67% in 2017 and 2018 and 2.75% per year in 2019 through
2021
8.Growth in Property Tax Revenue Assumption: 2.00% per year
9.Incremental Adjustments (as outlined in pages 14 to 18 of the Financial Overview Report
2017 – 2021) were approved with the following amendments:
a.The incremental for additional staffing in Social Planning (page 15) was approved, but no
spending will occur until further Council discussion.
b.An additional incremental adjustment of $20,000 for security was approved, and will be
funded through Accumulated Surplus.
10.Provision for costs associated with growth as outlined on page 12 of the Financial Overview
Report, subject to available funding
11.Capital Works Program totaling $32.9 million 2017, $27.8 million in 2018, $24.9 million in
2019, $26.5 million in 2020 and $23.5 million in 2021
12.Cost and revenue adjustments from page 13 of the Financial Overview Report, which
reconciles the 2016-2020 Financial Plan with the 2017 - 2021 Financial Plan
The financial strategy for additional Parks, Recreation & Culture investments (discussed on page
38 of the Financial Overview Report) was presented to Council, and feedback from the
community will be sought during the public consultation process.
We have about $1.6 billion invested in our infrastructure and it is important that we protect this
investment. This financial plan continues the dedicated funding strategy for sustaining our
infrastructure. As well, we are a growing community and along with that growth comes pressure
on our existing services. This financial plan provides funding to help meet growth related
demands. The funding for growth and for infrastructure sustainability are in line with Council’s
Financial Sustainability Policies.
The amount of incremental property tax revenue from new construction will not be known until
property assessments are finalized. The growth assumption built into the financial plan for 2017
is 2.0%.
Future budget amendments will include the actual growth revenue as well as projects that were
approved in 2016 and are still in progress. The previously approved funding sources will also be
included in the plan, placing no burden on 2017 property taxes.
b)Desired Outcome
A financial plan that accurately reflects planned expenditures and methods of funding that are
consistent with corporate strategic plans, policies and Council direction.
c)Strategic Alignment
All departments submitted Business Plans which considered relevant strategic and master plans.
The Financial Plan reflects Council’s Strategic Financial Sustainability Policies and Infrastructure
Funding Strategy.
d)Citizen/Customer Implications
The business plans have far-reaching citizen and customer implications. The Financial Plan
reflects the financial impact of the business plans. Property tax revenue and user fees are
planned to increase as described in the above discussion.
e)Statutory Requirements and Policy Implications
The financial plan has been prepared in accordance with statutory requirements and Municipal
financial policies. There are several requirements in the Community Charter for the Financial
Plan Bylaw, including: disclosure of the proportions of revenue proposed to come from various
funding sources, the distribution of property taxes among property classes, and the use of
permissive tax exemptions. Explicit policies and objectives in each of these areas are also
required. Maple Ridge’s approach to business planning, property taxation policies and other
financial policies have addressed all these reporting requirements. The attached bylaw includes
this information.
Public consultation is an important and legislated component of financial plan preparation.
Regular feedback and interaction with the public is also considered when business plans are
developed. The business planning presentations were open to the public; there was also a live
question and answer period where comments and questions were accepted in person as well as
by phone, email and social media like Facebook and Twitter.
f)Alternatives
Council is required to adopt a five year Financial Plan Bylaw prior to May 15 each year. There are
very tangible benefits to adopting the bylaw early in the year. Work plans can proceed with more
certainty and construction projects can be tendered to secure companies availability in seasonal
construction windows, maximizing competition and likely reducing costs.
In the event that this bylaw is not adopted, the City is not authorized to make any expenditures
other than those identified in the existing 2016-2020 Financial Plan Bylaw. This will require
departments to curtail or delay expenditures and only proceed with capital projects that were
identified in the previous financial plan.
CONCLUSIONS:
The Financial Plan is a multi-year planning, reviewing and reporting tool that represents Council’s
priorities and commitment to providing quality services to the residents of Maple Ridge. The
Financial Plan provides a forecast of the financial resources that are available to fund operations,
programs and infrastructure for the five year period.
The Financial Plan Bylaw is routinely amended in late April or early May to include the projects that
were approved but not completed in the prior year. The change also includes an update to reflect the
actual property tax revenue due to the amount of real growth.
"Original signed by C.K. Lee"
Prepared by: C.K. Lee, Financial Analyst
"Original signed by Trevor Thompson"
Approved by: Trevor Thompson, Manager of Financial Planning
"Original signed by Trevor Thompson"
Approved by: Paul Gill, General Manager
Corporate and Financial Services
“Original signed by Christine Carter”
Approved by: Frank Quinn, General Manager,
Public Works & Development
“Original signed by David Boag”
Approved by: Kelly Swift, General Manager,
Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services
"Original signed by E.C. Swabey"
Approved by: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7300-2016
A bylaw to establish the five year financial plan for the years 2017 through 2021
____________________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, through a public process in an open meeting the business and financial plans were
presented;
AND WHEREAS, the public will have the opportunity to provide comments or suggestions with respect
to the financial plan;
AND WHEREAS, Council deems this to be a process of public consultation under Section 166 of the
Community Charter;
NOW THEREFORE, the Council for the City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited as “Maple Ridge 2017-2021 Financial Plan Bylaw No. 7300-2016”.
2.Statement 1 attached to and forming part of this bylaw is hereby declared to be the Consolidated
Financial Plan of the City of Maple Ridge for the years 2017 through 2021.
3.Statement 2 attached to and forming part of the bylaw is hereby declared to be the Revenue and
Property Tax Policy Disclosure for the City of Maple Ridge.
4.Statement 3 attached to and forming part of the bylaw is hereby declared to be the Capital
Expenditure Disclosure for the City of Maple Ridge.
READ a first time the day of , 20 .
READ a second time the day of , 20 .
READ a third time the day of , 20 .
PUBLIC CONSULTATION completed on the day of , 20 .
ADOPTED the day of , 20 .
________________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
________________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
ATTACHMENT: Statement 1, Statement 2 and Statement 3
Attachment to Maple Ridge 2017-2021 Financial Plan Bylaw 7300-2016
Statement 1
Consolidated Financial Plan 2017-2021 (in $ thousands)
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
REVENUES
Revenues
Development Fees
Developer Contributed Assets 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
Developer Cost Charges 4,478 1,189 5,703 8,906 7,447
Developer Specified Projects -----
Parkland Acquisition 200 200 200 200 200
Contributions from Others 1,300 1,338 1,307 1,329 1,321
Development Fees Total 25,978 22,727 27,210 30,435 28,968
Property Taxes 78,526 82,600 86,828 91,255 95,917
Parcel Charges 3,012 3,085 3,181 3,282 3,385
Fees & Charges 40,256 41,793 43,409 44,994 46,664
Interest 1,898 1,913 1,928 1,943 1,958
Grants (Other Govts) 4,500 3,899 3,709 4,168 4,379
Property Sales 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,000 -
Total Revenues 155,670 157,517 167,765 177,077 181,271
EXPENDITURES
Operating Expenditures
Interest Payments on Debt 2,006 1,940 1,815 1,687 1,554
Amortization Expense 19,780 19,780 19,780 19,780 19,780
Other Expenditures 103,333 106,439 109,898 113,589 117,317
Total Expenditures 125,119 128,159 131,493 135,056 138,651
ANNUAL SURPLUS 30,551 29,358 36,272 42,021 42,620
Add Back: Amortization Expense (Surplus) 19,780 19,780 19,780 19,780 19,780
Less: Capital Expenditures 32,952 27,831 24,859 26,520 23,530
Less: Developer Contributed Capital 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000
CHANGE IN FINANCIAL POSITION (2,621) 1,307 11,193 15,281 18,870
OTHER REVENUES
Add: Borrowing Proceeds 6,000 7,000 ---
OTHER EXPENDITURES
Less: Principal Payments on Debt 3,706 3,723 3,803 3,886 3,972
TOTAL REVENUES LESS EXPENSES (327) 4,584 7,390 11,395 14,898
INTERNAL TRANSFERS
Transfer from Reserve Funds
Capital Works Reserve 3,849 150 150 150 150
Equipment Replacement Reserve 2,298 3,921 2,307 1,671 1,603
Fire Department Capital Reserve 585 ----
Land Reserve -----
Local Improvement Reserve -----
Sanitary Sewer Reserve -----
Transfer from Reserve Fund Total 6,732 4,071 2,457 1,821 1,753
Less :Transfer to Reserve Funds
Capital Works Reserve 1,915 3,364 3,803 2,292 2,626
Equipment Replacement Reserve 2,760 2,893 3,028 3,192 3,358
Fire Dept. Capital Acquisition 783 861 991 1,127 1,267
Land Reserve 5 5 5 5 5
Local Improvement Reserve -----
Sanitary Sewer Reserve 30 30 30 30 30
Total Transfer to Reserve Funds 5,493 7,153 7,857 6,646 7,286
Transfer from (to) Own Reserves (74) (271) (826) (1,303) (1,109)
Transfer from (to) Surplus (838) (1,231) (1,164) (5,267) (8,256)
Transfer from (to) Surplus & own Reserves (912) (1,502) (1,990) (6,570) (9,365)
TOTAL INTERNAL TRANSFERS 327 (4,584) (7,390) (11,395) (14,898)
BALANCED BUDGET -----
Attachment to Maple Ridge 2017-2021 Financial Plan Bylaw 7300-2016
Statement 2
Revenue and Property Tax Policy Disclosure
REVENUE DISCLOSURE
Revenue Proportions 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
$ ('000s) % $ ('000s) % $ ('000s) % $ ('000s) % $ ('000s) %
Revenues
Property Taxes 78,526 48.6 82,600 50.2 86,828 51.8 91,255 51.5 95,917 52.9
Parcel Charges 3,012 1.9 3,085 1.9 3,181 1.9 3,282 1.9 3,385 1.9
Fees & Charges 40,256 24.9 41,793 25.4 43,409 25.9 44,994 25.4 46,664 25.7
Borrowing Proceeds 6,000 3.7 7,000 4.3 - - - - - -
Other Sources 33,876 21.0 30,039 18.3 34,347 20.5 37,546 21.2 35,305 19.5
Total Revenues 161,670 100 164,517 100 167,765 100 177,077 100 181,271 100
Other Sources include:
Development Fees Total 25,978 16.1 22,727 13.8 27,210 16.2 30,435 17.2 28,968 16.0
Interest 1,898 1.2 1,913 1.2 1,928 1.1 1,943 1.1 1,958 1.1
Grants (Other Govts) 4,500 2.8 3,899 2.4 3,709 2.2 4,168 2.4 4,379 2.4
Property Sales 1,500 0.9 1,500 0.9 1,500 0.9 1,000 0.6 - -
33,876 21.0 30,039 18.3 34,347 20.5 37,546 21.2 35,305 19.5
OBJECTIVES & POLICIES
Property Tax Revenue
Property tax revenue is the City’s primary revenue source, and one which is heavily reliant on the
residential class. Diversification of the tax base and generation of non-tax revenue are ongoing
objectives, outlined in Financial Sustainability Policy 5.52 section 6.
The Financial Plan includes property tax increases that are as listed below:
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
General Purpose 1.90% 1.90% 2.00% 2.00% 2.00%
Infrastructure Replacement 0.70% 0.70% 0.70% 0.70% 0.70%
Parks & Recreation 0.25% 0.25% 0.25% 0.25% 0.25%
Drainage 0.30% 0.30% 0.30% 0.30% 0.30%
Total Property Tax Increase 3.15% 3.15% 3.25% 3.25% 3.25%
Additional information on the tax increases and the cost drivers can be found in the most recent
Financial Plan Overview Report. Specific policies discussing the tax increases are included in the
Financial Sustainability Plan and related policies which were adopted in 2004.
Property tax revenue includes property taxes as well as grants in lieu of property taxes.
Parcel Charges
Parcel charges are comprised of a recycling charge, a sewer charge and on some properties, a local
area service or improvement charge. Parcel charges are a useful tool to charge all or a subset of
properties for a fixed or variable amount to support services. Unlike property taxation the variable
amount does not need to be related to property assessment value, but can be something that more
accurately reflects the cost of the service.
Attachment to Maple Ridge 2017-2021 Financial Plan Bylaw 7300-2016
Statement 2 (cont.)
Revenue and Property Tax Policy Disclosure
Fees & Charges
Fees should be reviewed annually and updated if needed. Recent fee amendments include
recreation fees, development application fees, business license fees and cemetery fees. A major
amendment to the Development Costs Charges (DCC), recommended no more frequently than every
five years, was completed in 2008. Minor DCC amendments are done more frequently. Some fees
are used to offset the costs of providing specific services. The utility fees are reviewed annually with
a view towards using rate stabilization practices to smooth out large fluctuations in rates, as set out
in the Business Planning Guidelines.
Borrowing Proceeds
Debt is used when it makes sense, and with caution as it commits future cash flows to debt
payments, restricting the ability to use these funds to provide other services. The source of the debt
payments needs to be considered as does the justification for advancing the project. More
information on previously approved borrowing can be found in the most recent Financial Plan
Overview report.
Other Sources
This will vary greatly year to year as it includes:
Development fees which fund capital projects from the DCC Reserve
Contribution from others in relation to capital
Grants which are sought from various agencies and may be leveraged with City funds
PROPERTY TAX DISCLOSURE
The 2017 property tax revenue and updated rates will be included in a Financial Plan Amending
Bylaw that proceeds the Property Tax Rate Bylaw, as the 2017 property assessed values are not yet
finalized. For information purposes the 2016 distribution is included.
Property Tax Revenue Distribution
Property Class Taxation Revenue Assessed Value Tax Rate Multiple
('000s) ('000s) ($/1000) (Rate/Res.Rate)
1 Residential 56,532 78.3% 12,918,297 91.2% 4.3761 1.00
2 Utility 541 0.8% 13,516 0.1% 40.0000 9.14
4 Major Industry 591 0.8% 17,291 0.1% 34.1952 7.81
5 Light Industry 2,760 3.8% 232,323 1.7% 11.8801 2.71
6 Business/Other 11,565 16.0% 973,520 6.9% 11.8801 2.71
8 Rec./ Non-Profit 39 0.1% 2,577 0.0% 15.2783 3.49
9 Farm 164 0.2% 4,852 0.0% 33.7082 7.70
Total 72,192 100% 14,162,376 100%
Attachment to Maple Ridge 2017-2021 Financial Plan Bylaw 7300-2016
Statement 2 (cont.)
Revenue and Property Tax Policy Disclosure
PROPERTY TAX DISCLOSURE
Objectives & Policies
Property taxes are the City’s largest source of revenue and are contained by efficient business
practices. Annual business planning practices are the mechanism for resource allocation decisions.
The City’s Financial Sustainability Policy section 6 discusses the necessity of diversifying the tax
base. Development of employment-related properties is one method of diversification; therefore a
key performance measurement in Strategic Economic Initiatives tracks the increased investment
and development of non-residential properties.
A policy in the Financial Sustainability Plan that calls for stable tax increases and the adoption of the
annual increase early in the prior year in the Business Planning Guidelines provides citizens with a
more stable and predictable set of cost increases. In some cases costs are phased in over multiple
years to stay within the set tax increases.
Property Tax Rates
It is policy to adjust property tax rates annually to negate the impact of fluctuations in the market
values of properties. Tax rates are reduced to negate the market increases. Property tax increases
are then applied at the same relative increase for all classes, unless legislation restricts the rates, as
with Class 2, Utility.
The Business Class and Light Industry Class properties have the same tax rate and are treated as a
composite class when setting the tax rates, as the types of businesses in each class are similar. In
2016, the increase was reduced from 3.15% to 1.85% to reduce the relative property tax burden for
these properties.
A review was done on the Major Industry Class rates and the recommendation from the Audit and
Finance Committee and Council was a 5% property tax reduction in both 2009 and 2010 to support
additional investments in the subject property and to keep rates competitive. In 2014 and 2015,
property taxes charged to major industrial class properties were reduced by $70,000 in each year.
In reviewing tax rates to ensure competitiveness, absolute rates, tax multiples and overall tax burden
are considered. The impact that assessed values have when comparing to other geographical areas
must be considered in a comparison of tax rates.
Permissive Tax Exemptions
Council has set policies around the use of permissive tax exemptions. These are Council Policies
5.19 through 5.24. These policies discuss Churches, Community Halls, Heritage Sites, Homes for the
Care of Children and the Relief of the Aged, the Poor, the Disabled and the Infirm, Municipal
Recreational Services, Private Hospitals and Daycares, Private School and Youth Recreation Groups.
Revitalization Tax Exemption Program
The Employment Land Investment Incentive Program is designed to encourage job creation by
supporting private investment in buildings and infrastructure on identified "employment lands".
More information on this tax exemption can be found on our website.
Attachment to Maple Ridge 2017-2021 Financial Plan Bylaw 7300-2016
Statement 3
Capital Expenditure Disclosure
The sole purpose of this statement is to meet legislative requirements and highlight the value of the
DCC program; no other conclusions should be drawn from the figures as the information could be
misconstrued. This disclosure is required under the Local Government Act s. 560 (2); capital costs
attributable to projects to be partially funded by Development Cost Charges (DCC) must be included
in the financial plan. The DCC program includes projects as far out as 2035 so the capital
expenditures must be extended to match. Certain types of projects are not planned past the five year
time horizon of the financial plan. Much less scrutiny is given to projects that are planned in years
2022 through 2035. Projects in these years typically exceed likely funding available.
Capital Works Program for 2022 – 2035
(in $ thousands)
Capital Works Program 336,703
Source of Funding
Development Fees
Development Cost Charges 145,877
Parkland Acquisition Reserve -
Contribution from Others 3,304
149,181
Borrowing Proceeds -
Grants 42,664
Transfer from Reserve Funds 18,792
Revenue Funds 126,066
187,522
336,703
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Council
SUBJECT: Council Procedure Amending Bylaw 7301-2016
–Release of Vote Pattern from Closed Meetings
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At the November 21, 2016 Council Meeting staff were directed to prepare a Council
Procedure Amending Bylaw to include:
When a resolution is released by Council from Closed status, and unless otherwise resolved
by Council, the names of any members who voted in the negative will be released as decided
on a case by case basis.
Bylaw 7301-2016 is included as attachment A and will amend the Council Procedure Bylaw
6472-2007 with the change noted above.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That Bylaw 7301-2016 be given first, second and third reading.
DISCUSSION:
For transparency, it is prudent for Council to release resolutions from Closed Meetings as soon as is
possible after the matter has been settled. Council has directed staff to prepare a bylaw
amendment to release the voting pattern on a case by case basis to ensure that consideration is
given to sensitive matters when necessary.
Should the bylaw be given first, second and third readings, the amendment will be advertised to
allow for public comment.
“Original signed by Laurie Darcus”
______________________________________________
Prepared by: Laurie Darcus, MA, MMC, SCMP, CPM
Manager of Legislative Services and Emergency Program
“Original signed by Paul Gill”
_______________________________________
Approved by: Paul Gill, B.B.A, C.G.A, F.R.M
General Manager: Corporate & Financial Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer 1132
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7301-2016
A Bylaw to amend Maple Ridge Council Procedures Bylaw No. 6472-2007
______________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Council Procedures Bylaw No.
6472-2007 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Council Procedure Amending Bylaw No.
7301-2016.”
2.That Maple Ridge Council Procedure Bylaw No. 6472-2007, be amended as follows:
a)That Part 13 – Voting at Council Meetings, be amended by:
Adding to - Recording of Votes, the following:
37.1 When a resolution is released by Council from Closed status, and unless
otherwise resolved by Council, the names of any members who voted in
the negative will be released as decided on a case by case basis.
READ a first time the th day of , 2016.
READ a second time the th day of , 2016.
READ a third time the th day of , 2016.
ADOPTED the th day of , 2017.
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
1594917
District of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read DATE: December 5, 2017
and Members of Council FILE NO: 0530-01
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer ATTN: C of W
SUBJECT: 2017 Acting Mayor, Committee & Commission Appointments
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The attached list of appointments has been reviewed by the Mayor and is now presented to Council
for consideration.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Acting Mayor schedule and appointments to Government Agencies, Advisory and/or
Legislated Committees, Special Committees, Community Groups and Organizations and Standing
Committees as attached to the staff report dated December 5, 2017 be approved.
DISCUSSION:
Council is required under its Procedure Bylaw to appoint from amongst its members, for defined
periods of the year, members to serve on a rotating basis as the Acting Mayor. The current Acting
Mayor schedule concludes on January 31, 2017. Appointments to Committees and Commissions
are traditionally reviewed annually. Respecting this tradition, the attached list provides the proposed
2017 appointments.
“Original signed by Laurie Darcus”
Prepared by: Laurie Darcus, MA, MMC, SCMP, CPM
Manager of Legislative Services and Emergency Program
“Original signed by Laurie Darcus” for
Approved by: Paul Gill, B.B.A., C.G.A., F.R.M.
General Manager: Corporate & Financial Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
:ld
Attachments: Committee and Commission Appointments and Acting Mayor Appointments 2017
1133
City of Maple Ridge
Committee & Commission Appointments for 2017
Government Agencies 2017 Appointments
Fraser Basin Council Councillor Masse
Fraser Valley Regional Library Councillor Bell
Alternate: Councillor Duncan
Metro Vancouver Board
Mayor Read
Alternate: Councillor Shymkiw
Mayors’ Council on Regional
Transportation
Mayor Read
Alternate: Councillor Shymkiw
Advisory and/or Legislated Committees 2017 Appointments
Active Transportation Advisory Committee Councillor Duncan
Alternate: Councillor Masse
Agricultural Advisory Committee Councillor Speirs
Alternate: Councillor Duncan
Community Heritage Commission Councillor Speirs
Alternate: Mayor Read
Economic Development Committee Councillor Shymkiw
Alternate: Mayor Read
Environmental Advisory Committee Councillor Masse
Alternate Councillor Duncan
Municipal Advisory Committee on
Accessibility Issues
Councillor Speirs
Alternate: Councillor Duncan
Public Art Steering Committee Councillor Duncan
Alternate: Councillor Bell
Social Policy Advisory Committee Councillor Masse
Alternate: Councillor Speirs
Special Committees 2017 Appointments
Parcel Tax Review Panel (formerly Court
of Revision or Frontage Tax)
Mayor Read
Councillor Bell
Councillor Robson
Pitt Meadows Airport Society
Mayor Read
Councillor Masse
Maple Ridge & Pitt Meadows Policing
Task Force
Mayor Read
Councillor Robson
Committee and Commission Appointments 2016
Page 2
Community Groups &
Organizations/Liaisons 2017 Appointments
Alouette River Management Society Councillor Masse
Alternate: Councillor Robson
Business Improvement Association Staff member as appointed
Alternate: Councillor Shymkiw
Chamber of Commerce Staff member as appointed
Alternate: Councillor Shymkiw
Fraser Health Authority Mayor Read
Alternate: Councillor Shymkiw
Fraser Regional Correctional Centre Mayor Read
Alternate: Councillor Robson
Ridge Meadows Seniors Society Councillor Bell
Alternate: Mayor Read
Malcolm Knapp Research Forest
Community Advisory Board
Councillor Speirs
Alternate: None
Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Arts Council Councillor Bell
Alternate: Councillor Duncan
Ridge Meadows Recycling Society Councillor Duncan
Alternate: Councillor Masse
Ridge Meadows Youth Justice Advocacy
Association
Councillor Shymkiw
Alternate: Councillor Duncan
Standing Committees 2017 Appointments
Committee of the Whole All Members of Council Chaired by the Presiding
Councillor
Audit & Finance Committee All Members of Council
Councillors Presiding as Chair at
Committee of the Whole and as Acting
Mayor
2017 Acting Mayor
December 2016/January 2017 Councillor Masse
February/March 2017 Councillor Duncan
April/May 2017 Councillor Shymkiw
June/July 2017 Councillor Speirs
August/September 2017 Councillor Robson
October/November 2017 Councillor Bell
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C.O.W.
SUBJECT: Bylaw for Highway Closure & Dedication Removal for a portion of Laneway
(18000 Block of 226 Street and 227 Street)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In the fall of 2015, the City completed negotiations for the sale of 14 properties it had acquired in
the City’s Town Centre. The development plan will see these 14 properties consolidated and then
later subdivided to create five separate parcels. These five parcels will in turn form the footprint for
the five planned phases of residential and commercial development.
An east-west laneway currently bisects the 14 properties, between Selkirk Avenue and 119 Avenue
(18000 Block of 226 Street and 227 Street). While the westerly portion of the lane currently
services the existing residential development, the developer has approached the City to request
closure and sale of the easterly portion to support both the construction of an underground parking
lot and a more fulsome development design. While the closure of the lane will limit east-west
vehicular access through the proposed development, pedestrian mobility will be maintained. See
attached survey plan (Appendix B) for location of the proposed lane closure.
In order to sell the subject property, Council would first have to pass the attached bylaw closing the
highway and removing the road dedication. At that point, the City would take ownership in title,
subdivide to create two legal lots and could dispose of the property as allowed under Section 26 of
the Community Charter.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
That Maple Ridge Highway Closure & Dedication Removal Bylaw No. 7291-2016 be given first,
second and third readings.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
The attached advisory from the Government of British Columbia, titled “Highway Closure &
Removal of Highway Dedication”, describes the process as required under the Community
Charter. Upon approval of the above recommendation, staff will provide public notice of the
highway closure and road dedication removal in the local newspaper, in accordance with
Section 40 and Section 94 of the Community Charter. Persons affected by the bylaw will be
given an opportunity to submit written responses to the Corporate Officer for Council
consideration before final reading.
Operators of utilities would not be affected by the closure and no property owner will be
deprived of access to his or her property. The closed portion of highway will be subdivided
1134
into a legal residential lot and this residential lot disposed of as per the provisions contained
within Sections 40 and 94 of the Community Charter.
b) Interdepartmental Implications:
The Property Management Committee and the Planning, Engineering and Fire Departments
support the highway closure and dedication removal.
“Original signed by Darrell Denton”_______________
Prepared by: Darrell Denton
Property & Risk Manager
“Original signed by Laurie Darcus” _________
Approved by: Laurie Darcus
Manager of Legislative Services & Emergency Program
“Original signed by David Pollock”_________________
Approved by: David Pollock, P. Eng
Municipal Engineer
“Original signed by Paul Gill”_______________________
Approved by: Paul Gill, BBA, CGA
General Manager – Corporate & Financial Services
“Original signed by Frank Quinn”____________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng,
General Manager, Public Works and Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
Attachments
Appendix A: Bylaw for Highway Closure & Dedication Removal within the Municipality
Appendix B: Survey Plan of Proposed Roadway Closure
Appendix C: Government of British Columbia Advisory - Highway Closure & Removal of Highway Dedication
Appendix A: Bylaw for Highway Closure & Dedication Removal within the Municipality
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7291-2016
A Bylaw for Highway Closure & Dedication Removal within the Municipality.
WHEREAS Council may, in the same bylaw, close all or part of a highway and remove the dedication
of a highway;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as “Maple Ridge Highway Closure & Dedication
Removal Bylaw No. 7291-2016".
2. Attached hereto and forming part of this Bylaw is a copy of Reference Plan EPP65494 dated
September 21, 2016 and prepared by Michael Bernemann, Terra Pacific Land Surveying, a
B.C. Land Surveyor, and marked as Appendix “B”.
3. That portion of public highway comprised of 666m2 identified as ‘Lane’ outlined in heavy
black line on the aforementioned described Reference Plan is hereby declared stopped and
closed to public traffic and shall cease forever to be dedicated as public highway.
4. The portion of the public highway outlined in heavy black line and identified as “Lane” on the
Reference Plan attached to and made part of this Bylaw has its dedication as a highway
removed.
5. Council shall, before adopting this Bylaw, cause Public Notice of its intention to do so to be
given by advertisement once each week for two consecutive weeks in a newspaper published
or circulating in the City of Maple Ridge and posted at the public posting places as required
by Sections 40 and 94 of the Community Charter.
READ a first time the day of , 2016.
READ a second time the day of , 2016.
READ a third time the day of , 2016.
ADOPTED the day of , 2016.
_________________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
________________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
Appendix B. Survey Plan of Proposed Roadway Closure
Appendix C: Government of British Columbia Advisory - Highway Closure & Removal of Highway
Dedication
Prior to the Community Charter municipalities had right of possession of local highways but ownership was in
the name of the province. The Community Charter gives municipalities ownership of most municipal highways
(exceptions are listed in s. 35(2)). Municipalities also have authority to regulate and prohibit in relation to
highways, (subject to provincial legislation) and the authority to close highways. Since municipalities now own
local highways (subject to the provincial right of resumption), provisions have been established if a municipality
wants to use a portion of the highway for a different purpose, or if it wants to dispose of it. All of these
provisions can be found in Part 3, Division 5 of the Community Charter.
What Is Required
1. Highway Closure and Removal of Highway Dedication
Municipalities can close a highway and remove its highway dedication by bylaw. These actions can be done
either in one bylaw, or by separate bylaws. The bylaw(s) must include a reference plan or explanatory plan
outlining the portion of road that will be affected. If done separately, the bylaws can be passed concurrently, or
at different times.
Prior to adopting a highway closure bylaw, a municipality must:
• provide public notice in accordance with section 94;
• provide an opportunity for persons who are affected by the bylaw to make representations to council;
• deliver notice of its intention to close a highway to operators of utilities whose works council considers
will be affected by the closure. The operator of a utility affected by a closure may require the
municipality to provide reasonable accommodation of the utility’s works. If the municipality and utility
are unable to reach an agreement the matter may be settled by arbitration under the Commercial
Arbitration Act;
• ensure that a proposed highway closure does not completely deprive an owner of access to his/her
property unless the municipality receives consent from the property owner or compensates the owner
and provides alternative access;
• refer any highway closure bylaws to the Minister of Transportation (through the local Ministry of
Transportation District office) for approval where the proposed highway closure is within 800 metres
of an arterial highway (note that specified District staff may grant such approval on behalf of the
Minister of Transportation).
Prior to adopting a highway dedication removal bylaw, a municipality must:
• provide public notice in accordance with section 94;
• provide an opportunity for persons who are affected by the bylaw to make representations to council;
• obtain consent of the owner of property if the highway in question is part of a subdivision, where the
highway has not been developed and the owner of the land who created the subdivision continues to
own all the parcels. Circumstances in which these conditions apply are rare.
2. Raising Title
Once the highway closure bylaw and removal of highway dedication bylaw are adopted, and the removal of
highway dedication bylaw is filed in the appropriate Land Title Office, the property ceases to be a highway, its
dedication as a highway is cancelled and title to the property will be registered in the name of the municipality,
in accordance with section 120 of the Land Title Act. In order for title to be raised in the name of the
municipality, the Land Title Office requires that municipalities submit the bylaw and plan package to the
registrar, together with an application in Form 17, a Property Transfer Tax form and the prescribed fee. As
raising title and disposing of the land may occur in close conjunction, note also the Land Title Office filing
requirements discussed under Disposing of Property.
3. Disposing of Property
Once title is raised, municipalities who want to dispose of the property must do so in accordance with the
property disposal rules set out in Part 3, Division 3 of the Community Charter. If a municipality plans to dispose
of property for a closed highway that removes public access to a body of water, it must either provide
alternative public access to the same body of water, or set aside money in a reserve fund to acquire property
that will provide public access to the same body of water.
The Community Charter provides a provincial right to resume property that was once a highway for the purpose
of: an arterial highway; other transportation purposes; or a park, conservancy, recreation area, ecological
reserve or other area established under the Park Act, the Ecological Reserve Act, the Protected Areas of British
Columbia Act or the Environment and Land Use Act. The right of resumption can be removed by order of the
Minister of Transportation. Alternatively, the Minister of Transportation can by regulation set out the
circumstances in which the right is automatically removed.
The Minister of Transportation has adopted a regulation (BC Reg 245/2004 (12 KB)) that provides that the
right of resumption is automatically removed if the corporate officer of the relevant municipality files with the
Land Title Office a statement certifying the following 3 facts:
• the municipality has, by bylaw, closed the highway and removed its dedication;
• the closed highway is not adjacent to a park, conservancy, recreation area, ecological reserve or other
area established under the Park Act, the Ecological Reserve Act, the Protected Areas of British
Columbia Act or the Environment and Land Use Act; and
• the closed highway land is to be disposed of for either of the following two purposes:
o in exchange for land necessary for the purpose of improving, widening, straightening,
relocating or diverting a highway, or
o to one or more adjacent land owners for the purpose of consolidating it with the landowners’
existing adjacent parcel or parcels of land.
The certifying statement must be satisfactory to the Land Title Office. Typically, this means a written statement
from the municipality that: identifies the closed highway land; states the 3 conditions in the regulation; certifies
that the land at issue satisfies those conditions and therefore the right of resumption is to be removed; is
signed by the corporate officer; and is accompanied by the prescribed Land Title Office fee.
Under this regulation, if the closed highway land satisfies the regulation – in other words, if the corporate
officer of the municipality can certify that the transaction meets the circumstances set out in the regulation –
then the municipality does not need a specific order removing the right of resumption. Instead, the right of
resumption is automatically removed on the date that the certifying statement is filed in the Land Title Office.
As noted, the municipality is responsible for satisfying itself that the 3 conditions in the regulation are met. This
means the municipality is responsible for confirming the boundaries of the road in question and, in relation to
the second condition (parks/conservancy), is responsible for confirming those boundaries relative to the
boundaries of provincial parks/conservancy. To assist in determining the location of a road relative to
provincial parks/conservancy, a municipality can obtain a list of provincial parks/protected areas in its region
from the appropriate regional office of the Ministry of Environment:
Only if the municipality has confirmed that the road in question is in fact adjacent to a provincial
park/conservancy would the municipality need to contact the Ministry of Environment regional planner to
identify if there are any issues with the proposed disposal of the closed road. In that case, the matter would
not be within the circumstances set out in the regulation. For any situations not covered by the regulation, a
municipality will still need to seek a possible order from the Minister of Transportation to remove the right of
resumption.
City of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: Award of Contract, Construction of One Fire Pumper/Tanker Truck.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Fire Department recommends the purchase of a new fire pumper/tanker apparatus from our capital
replacement budget to replace a current ageing fire engine at Fire Hall 3. In the summer of 2016, a
request for proposal (RFP) was issued and these proposals have been evaluated based on the
criteria contained in the RFP document.
We are now seeking Council approval to award a contract for the construction of this truck.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the contract for the construction of one fire pumper/tanker truck at the cost of $596,154.00
plus applicable taxes and a 10% contingency be included for any unanticipated scope changes; be
awarded to Hub Fire Engines and Equipment Ltd. of Abbotsford, B.C. and that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to execute the contract.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
The Maple Ridge Fire Department is working to maintain a modern and current fleet of fire
trucks. In this case, a 1992 fire engine is in need of replacement.
Further, we have been working towards standardizing the chassis style and body component
of the fire trucks within our department. This will reduce the maintenance costs by
standardizing the required parts to maintain the trucks and will improve operational
efficiency.
The RFP described the fire truck design specifications and 3 proponents made initial
submissions with detailed drawings. All designs required the fire trucks to comply with our
operational requirements and all Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Canada
Transport Regulations, National Fire Protection Association, 1901 standards and
Underwriters Laboratory - Canada Standards.
The Request for Proposal process was completed within the purchasing guideline with
oversight from Daniela Mikes, Manager of Procurement.
1135
b) Desired Outcome:
To obtain Council’s approval to proceed with the awarding of a contract and construction of a
fire tanker, apparatus for the fire department.
Strategic Alignment:
The purchase of these trucks is in alignment with the Council adopted Fire Department
Business Plan and the Equipment Replacement Reserve fund.
c) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
Proposal analysis
Three manufactures responded with proposals. The fire department apparatus evaluation
team, which consisted of two fire administration staff, performed an analyses of these
submissions based on the criteria described in the RFP.
At the conclusion of the evaluation process the fire department apparatus evaluation team
awarded the highest score to the Hub Fire Trucks proposal.
CONCLUSIONS:
The Maple Ridge Fire Department believes that standardizing the chassis and body style of our fire
trucks will improve operational efficiency and lower maintenance cost. The specifications and costs
proposed by Hub Fire Engines Ltd. represent the best value and product to meet the needs of the fire
department. Therefore we recommend the awarding of a contract for the construction of the
“pumper/tanker” to Hub Fire Engines and Equipment Ltd. of Abbotsford, B.C.
“Original signed by Doug Armour”___________________
Prepared by: Doug Armour, Acting Assistant Fire Chief
“Original signed by Howard Exner”___________________
Prepared and Approved by: Howard Exner, Fire Chief
“Original signed by Laurie Darcus”___________________
Approved by: Paul Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services
“Original signed by Ted Swabey”_____________________
Concurrence: Ted Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
City of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Committee of the Whole
SUBJECT: Award of Contract, Construction of a Tower Truck Fire Apparatus.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Fire Department recommends the purchase of a new Tower Truck Fire Apparatus from our capital
replacement budget to replace a current ageing Tower Truck in Fire Hall 1. In the summer of 2016,
a request for proposal (RFP) was issued and these proposals have been evaluated based on the
criteria contained in the RFP document.
We are now seeking Council approval to award a contract for the construction of this truck.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the contract for the construction of one Tower Truck Fire Apparatus at the cost of
$1,585,925.00 plus applicable taxes and a 10% contingency be included for any unanticipated
scope changes; be awarded to Smeal Fire Apparatus Company of Snyder, Nebraska and that the
Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the contract.
And, that the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign SafeTek Emergency Vehicles LTD “offer to
purchase” wherein the existing Tower Truck, (VIN# 4S7AT9D00TC021345), would be traded in for
the amount of $25,000.00 CAD.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
The Maple Ridge Fire Department is working to maintain a modern and current fleet of fire
trucks.
This truck is a key piece of fire fighting apparatus as it is the only ladder truck in the
department. This ladder truck is used at all large structure fires. Tower 1 was built 1996 and
if approved will be replaced in January of 2018.
The RFP described the fire truck design specifications and 2 proponents made initial
submissions with detailed drawings. All designs required the fire trucks to comply with our
operational requirements and all Canadian Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Canada
Transport Regulations, National Fire Protection Association, 1901 standards and
Underwriters Laboratory - Canada Standards.
The Request for Proposal process was completed within the purchasing guideline with
oversight from Daniela Mikes, Manager of Procurement.
1136
Desired Outcome:
To obtain Council’s approval to proceed with the awarding of a contract and construction of a
tower truck fire apparatus for the fire department.
Strategic Alignment:
The purchase of these trucks is in alignment with the Council adopted Fire Department
Business Plan and the Equipment Replacement Reserve fund.
b) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
Proposal analysis
Two manufacturers responded with proposals. The fire department apparatus evaluation
team, which consisted of two fire administration staff who performed an analyses of these
submissions based on the criteria described in the RFP.
At the conclusion of the evaluation process the fire department apparatus evaluation team
awarded the highest score to the Safetek proposal.
CONCLUSIONS:
The Maple Ridge Fire Department believes that there are essential benefits of purchasing this truck
for the citizens and businesses in the City. The specifications and costs proposed by Smeal Fire
Apparatus Company represent the best value and product to meet the needs of the fire department.
Therefore, we recommend the awarding of a contract for the construction of the “tower truck” to
Smeal Fire Apparatus Company of Snyder Nebaska. And to accept the offer to purchase of the
existing Tower Apparatus from SafeTek Emergency Vehicles LTD.
“Original signed by Doug Armour”___________________
Prepared by: Doug Armour, Acting Assistant Fire Chief
“Original signed by Howard Exner”__________________
Prepared and Approved by: Howard Exner, Fire Chief
“Original signed by Laurie Darcus” for_______________
Approved by: Paul Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services
“Original signed by Ted Swabey”___________________
Concurrence: Ted Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
1
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 05, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: COW
SUBJECT: Maple Ridge Civic and Cultural Facility – Phased Design Process
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At the November 15, 2016 Council meeting, staff was directed to identify a funding source to
incrementally advance the detailed design process of the Civic and Cultural Facility towards a
“shovel ready” project. Further, that once a funding source is identified, staff issue a request for
proposals (RFP) to conduct phase one of a multiple phased design process for the Maple Ridge Civic
and Cultural Facility for an estimated cost of $525,000. Through the RFP process staff will ensure
the design team includes a heritage/museum archives professional.
This would bring the design process to approximately 25% of the final construction document, or
design development stage. Funding for this project would be achieved through the Parks Recreation
and Culture Master Plan reserve.
RECOMMENDATION:
1.That phase one (25%) of the design process be funded from the Parks Recreation and Culture
Master Plan reserve in an amount estimated to be $525,000; and
2.That staff be directed to issue a Request for Proposal to conduct phase one (25%) of the
detailed design process for the Maple Ridge Civic and Cultural facility.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
The Government of Canada is committed to funding community infrastructure to assist in
building strong, inclusive and sustainable communities by increasing infrastructure funding over
the next ten years. Funding details for the 2017 infrastructure grant intake have not been
announced at this point; typically grant application criteria gives priority to shovel ready projects
that have design, detailed costing and funding mechanisms identified.
In May 2, 2016, Council directed staff to prepare concept designs and high level
costing estimates for proposed Parks, Recreation & Culture facilities to be brought to
the public for consultation. This work has been completed and a high level concept
plan has been presented to Council. Before proceeding with detailed design, the
1151
2
successful proponent will be required to consult with community members and subject
matter experts for advice on design elements of the various components.
T he estimated capital cos ts based on concepts for the Civic Facility, Parkade and
Youth Wellness components are estimated to be $18,300,500. Detailed design fees for
projects of this nature typically range from 10 – 12% of construction value or approximately
$2,196,060. It is important to note that the design fees of any additional floors beyond the civic
use component are not included in this cost or scope of work.
On October 17, 2016, Council adopted a resolution authorizing the Mayor and staff to travel to
Ottawa to meet with Federal Ministers about funding opportunities related to the Maple Ridge
Civic and Cultural facility. On October 24 & 25, 2016, Mayor Read and staff went to Ottawa to
meet with Cabinet Ministers and key staff from a number of Government Ministries to request
financial support and leadership to advance Council’s number one priority for grant funding; the
proposed Civic and Cultural Facility in downtown Maple Ridge.
What emerged was a clear consensus that the design development of the Civic Centre project
requires further clarity to ensure it is shovel ready for the next round of grant funding
applications and to properly identify the many potential streams of funding possibilities that the
project may qualify for.
Taking this project to design development, approximately 25% of the final construction
documents will move the city towards a shovel ready project that may be eligible for Federal and
Provincial funding. This is a four to six month design process which starts after the project is
awarded.
Should Council approve funding, the project timeline is estimated to be:
December/January - Develop the RFP for p hase o ne (25%) of the design process .
January/February – RFP issued, evaluated and awarded.
February/July – Community consultation completion of phase on e of the design
development.
b) Desired Outcome:
To initiate phase one (25%) of the detailed design process of the proposed Civic and Cultural
Centre and provide enough information to demonstrate confidence in our costing estimates to
secure Provincial and Federal infrastructure funding. The advancement of this project will
demonstrate the city’s commitment to moving this project through to completion.
c) Strategic Alignment:
This Maple Ridge Civic and Cultural Facility aligns with recommendations in the Parks,
Recreation & Culture Master Plan adopted by Council in 2010 and conveys Council’s
commitment to increasing the likelihood of securing Federal and Provincial Infrastructure
Funding for this project.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
Parks, Recreation & Culture infrastructure supports citizens in maintaining healthy lifestyles
through their participation in sport, recreation, arts, and culture in venues that allow them to
connect with their neighbours and communities of common interest. Funding partnerships with
3
senior governments help address local and regional infrastructure needs while reducing costs for
local governments.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
Various departments provide support to Parks, Recreation & Culture in these processes including
Planning, Engineering, Building, Clerks, Communications and Finance.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
Proceeding with a phased/incremental approach is critical to securing Federal and Provincial
government funding. Phase 1 of the detailed design process for the Maple Ridge Civic and
Cultural Centre, Youth Wellness Centre and underground parking is estimated at $525,000. In
2017 the Parks Recreation and Culture Reserve will have sufficient capacity to accommodate an
expenditure of this amount.
CONCLUSION:
Significant emphasis has been placed on discussing Parks, Recreation & Cultural amenities over the
past number of months. Council endorsement of the resolutions in this report will initiate a key
step in the process necessary to secure grant funding for the Maple Ridge Civic and Cultural Facility
project. The recommendations in this report will advance Council’s priorities and incrementally move
this project towards shovel ready to take advantage of available grant funding.
“Original signed by Don Cramb”
Prepared by: Don Cramb, Sr. Recreation Manager
“Original signed by Wendy McCormick”
Approved by: Wendy McCormick, Director Recreation and Community Services
“Original signed by David Boag for Kelly Swift”
Approved by: Kelly Swift, General Manager,
Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services
“Original signed by Ted Swabey”
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
:dc
1
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: COW
SUBJECT: Municipal Advisory Committee on Accessibility Issues Recommendations
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Municipal Advisory Committee on Accessibility Issues (MACAI) has been a joint committee with
the City of Pitt Meadows since 1999. MACAI, as a joint committee, has enjoyed great success
working together and, in most cases, the work has benefitted the citizens of both communities.
The dissolution of the Joint Leisure Services Agreement (JLSA) has naturally led to a review of the
current collaborative structure. Due to committee members such as School District No. 42, Ministry
of Children and Family Development, Ministry of Social Development and Social Innovation, Ridge
Meadows Association for Community Living and Fraser Health all serving both communities, it is
recommended that MACAI remain a joint committee. This will ensure that community groups are not
split between the two communities, allowing for greater representation. As a joint committee, it is
recommended that each city be responsible for sharing all related costs equally.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Municipal Advisory Committee on Accessibility Issues continue as a joint committee with the
City of Pitt Meadows sharing all associated costs equally; AND,
That staff be directed to work with Pitt Meadows City staff representative and the committee to
establish an updated committee Terms of Reference and bylaw and report back to Council.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
As a long standing joint committee the Municipal Advisory Committee on Accessibility Issues
(MACAI) has successfully applied for and participated in several provincial grants and initiatives
for the City of Maple Ridge and the City of Pitt Meadows such as, Legacy Now 2010, Rick Hansen
Community Grants and Age Friendly Initiatives. These funds have been used for a number of city
specific and joint community projects, such as; the purchasing of accessible outdoor play
equipment, accessible and inclusive fitness equipment, and the publication of “Plan and Design
for Choice – Universal Design Guidelines for Outdoor Spaces” and the Age Friendly community
engagement and recognition process.
Additionally, MACAI continues to organize the Annual Accessibility Awards which are hosted
alternately in the two communities. This recognition event is entering its 15th year and honors
service providers, businesses and citizens who are ‘difference makers’ in their community and in
the lives of individual’s with varying abilities.
1152
2
MACAI was founded in 1993 and formalized by a Maple Ridge bylaw in 1996. In 1999 the
bylaw was rewritten to align with the Joint Leisure Services Agreement.
MACAI’s mandate is to advise, inform and educate the Councils, municipal departments,
service providers and general public on accessibility and disability issues. The service
providers represented on the committee serve both cities and have expressed that it would
be difficult to resource committees in each city.
MACAI is currently comprised of fifteen members; eight of the fifteen members represent the
following governments, and/or service providers:
One Councillor for the City of Maple Ridge
One Councillor for the City of Pitt Meadows
One School District No. 42 Trustee
Ministry of Children and Family Development
Ministry of Social Development and Social Innovation
Ridge Meadows Association for Community Living
Fraser Health
Members-at-large include:
Six residents, employed within or eligible to be on the Municipal Voters List for the City of
Maple Ridge (and)
Two residents, employed within or eligible to be on the Municipal Voters List for the City
of Pitt Meadows.
As a joint committee, MACAI has found the current structure to be very successful. The
collaboration of the two municipalities has created the above mentioned successes. As we
move forward, MACAI will revisit its structure and staff supports to reflect shared support and
cost associated with supporting the committee.
b) Desired Outcome:
To welcome residents and community members into participating in all aspects of
community living in a progressive accessible and inclusive environment.
To align with and support Accessibility 2024, a Provincial initiative for the purpose of
implementing a ten year action plan with the goal of making BC more accessible for all.
c) Strategic Alignment:
As stated within the Maple Ridge Parks, Recreation and Culture Master Plan (2010), “strive
to break down barriers by bringing people together and supporting participation by those who
are hard to reach along with everyone else.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
A joint committee allows service providers to allocate resources to better respond to the
needs of the citizens of Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
MACAI supports interdepartmental information sharing and works closely with engineering
and planning when required.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
All costs associated with the committee will be shared equally.
3
g) Policy Implications:
Bylaw No. 5845 – 1999 will need to be updated to reflect the new committee structure and
will be brought back to Council for final reading and approval.
Conclusion:
The membership believes that a joint committee is an asset to both the City of Maple Ridge and the
City of Pitt Meadows. Shared resources will provide both communities with the necessary expertise
in becoming fully accessible communities and offering residents the opportunity to participate in all
aspects of community life. Losing this shared, collaborative resource could result in the loss of
valuable service provider participation because the agencies are already feeling their resources are
limited and they may be unable to attend meetings in both communities.
“Original signed by Petra Frederick”
_______________________________________________
Submitted by: Petra Frederick, Recreation Coordinator Leisure Access
MACAI Staff Liaison
“Original signed by Tony Cotroneo”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Tony Cotroneo, Recreation Manager Community Services
“Original signed by Wendy McCormick”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Wendy McCormick, Director Recreation & Community Services
“Original signed by David Boag for Kelly Swift”
________________________________________________
Approved by: Kelly Swift, General Manager,
Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services
“Original signed by Ted Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: Ted Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
1
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: December 5, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: COW
SUBJECT: Maple Ridge Leisure Centre Retrofit Update
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On December 10, 2015, Council deferred repairs of the Leisure Centre to allow for a second aquatic
facility to be considered in order to mitigate the impact on the public when the aquatic facility would
need to be closed for repairs. The Recreation Facilities Infrastructure Plan is now underway and
community consultation will provide Council with the public’s feedback on the proposed
infrastructure. It has become clear that the full scope of the work required to complete projects of
this magnitude is a four to five year process.
Council may wish to reconsider delaying the retrofit of the Leisure Centre Aquatic facility to coincide
with the proposed Civic and Cultural Facility should it proceed and, direct staff to bring back a report
on how the retrofit and improvements to the Leisure Centre might be achieved, which may be prior to
the construction and completion of the proposed Wellness Centre.
RECOMMENDATION:
That staff provide a report outlining the process of updating the Leisure Centre retrofit plan
including, proposed timeline, customer implications and potential funding source.
a)Discussion
For over 35 years, the Leisure Centre has been providing recreation, cultural and social
programs and services. Over this time minor improvements to interior design, changes to space
allocations, purchase of new equipment, furnishings and fixtures has contributed to the facility’s
welcoming environment and to meeting the community’s programming needs.
In 2001, the addition of the teach pool, wading pool and water slide created much needed
additional aquatic space for the increased growth and demand for aquatic amenities at that
time. Although this expansion introduced new filtration systems specific for the operation of the
new pools, the original aquatics facility filtration and mechanical system were not upgraded as
these two systems operate independently of each other. Staff routinely maintain the pool
systems to ensure continued safe operation of the facility with the replacement of mechanical
components, many of which are now obsolete and must be custom manufactured.
As identified in the 2014 business plan, staff utilized a consultant to complete detailed planning
of a retrofit to the Leisure Centre aquatics area. The retrofit would have been timely due to the
increasing age of the facility, and the impending timeline of replacing key mechanical and
electrical components of the aquatics pool systems. The community consultation currently
underway for Parks, Recreation and Culture Infrastructure projects will generate a final report
1153
2
compiling the residents’ feedback for Council’s review and is anticipated for March 2017. If
Council determines the Multi-Use Wellness Facility with an Aquatic Centre and Curling Facility is
one of the community’s top priorities the completion could be approximately five years away.
Staff recommends that Council consider proceeding with the Leisure Centre retrofit in
conjunction with the proposed Civic and Cultural Facility.
Retrofit Background
Early in 2013, staff retained the services of Bruce Carscadden Architect Inc. (BCA) and their
team of structural and mechanical engineering consultants to conduct a comprehensive
architectural and engineering review and assessment of the pool mechanical and safety
systems, and effected areas at the Maple Ridge Leisure Centre. The main objectives of the
project were to:
Consider a change from a gas chlorination system to liquid chlorination system.
Review chemical treatment systems to achieve best practices and ensure continued safe
delivery and use of pool chemicals.
Assess the condition of existing equipment.
Review life-cycle replacement of major pool systems that were showing risk of failure or
were beyond expected useful life.
The architectural review included the following notes:
Electrical Room – The equipment exposed to pool atmosphere is corroded. Relocation of
the electrical room/panels and creating environmental separation must be a part of the
consolidated mechanical upgrades.
Mechanical Room – The existing chlorine is remotely located and has been identified as a
potential safety issue. The options to address current code and safety concerns however,
will require new and renovated facilities adjacent to the existing basement mechanical; 12’
Ceilings are identified for the preferred filtration system.
Pool Tank Accessibility – The toddler pool, leisure pool, swirl pool and lap pools do not have
wheel chair access and limit accessibility. Important aspirations for accessibility should be
included in the mechanical renovations of the tanks.
Pool Deck Safety –Removing visual barriers and enhancing pool deck circulation to ensure
full visibility for effective lifeguarding.
In 2015, Shape Architecture was retained to develop a detailed construction design for the
aquatics retrofit. The completed design expanded the existing leisure pool to include
programmable water walking space along with beach entry to improve accessibility and leisure
play for toddlers and preschoolers, ramp entry to a relocated and larger swirl pool, removal of the
existing guard towers and rising of the leisure pool to create a single level throughout the
aquatics area. This included an expansion to the mechanical room that would house a complete
upgrade of all mechanical and filtration systems for the newly designed leisure pool and swirl
pool.
In order to mitigate the displacement of the swim club athletes, staff worked with surrounding
municipalities to develop a pool rental agreement whereby the City could purchase pool and lane
time to ensure adequate time and space was available for training. In addition the outdoor pool
operation provides another opportunity for lesson and leisure programming May through
September. However the retrofit would have an impact on the public as pool amenities will be
reduced during the length of the construction.
To date, we have not experienced a significant mechanical failure and the facility continues to
work safely and in full operation. However, some critical pool components are well beyond
3
estimated lifespan and therefore significant repair or renovations to the existing facility would be
necessary in the event of a system failure, and would result in an extended closure of the facility.
Staff continues to ensure that the aquatics area is kept at the maximum operating capacity and
plan for regular preventative maintenance improvements at scheduled intervals and at the
annual shutdown to minimize the likelihood of an unplanned repair and closure. However, as the
system and major components are beyond the expected useful life, emergency repairs and
replacement of minor operating parts have occurred. These unplanned deficiencies do cause
disruption to service levels and result in unplanned closure of one or more pools.
Non-Aquatics Leisure Centre Areas
In addition to the retrofit project, staff retained the services of a consultant to conduct a
functional and physical space assessment of the Leisure Centre excluding the aquatic facility.
This space review was identified in the 2015 business plan. The consultant solicited feedback
from key stakeholders, including user groups, contract service partners, and facility and program
users.
The consultant developed a short term and long term concept plan with recommendations that
would produce the following key outcomes for improvements to customer experiences and
service provision:
Provide more community gathering spaces; a place to socially connect in a safe, welcoming
and central location.
Improve customer entry, circulation, accessibility and visual connectivity i.e. rethinking the
control access points and public connectivity between the Leisure Centre and Greg Moore
Youth Centre.
Provide more functional multipurpose space for programs, services, rental and meeting
opportunities i.e. renovate existing rooms with limited functionality to be more multi purpose
oriented.
Relocate and/or expand programmable spaces i.e. expand Fitness Centre, rethink quantity of
raquet sport courts.
The improvements would produce a greater holistic wellness experience for customers,
deepening the relationship customers have with each other and fostering heightened enjoyment
within the programs and services offered at the Leisure Centre. The space plan
recommendations should be considered in conjunction with the aquatics facility upgrades and
could be funded through general capital.
Update on the YMCA
Council has previously considered a relationship with the YMCA and invited the CEO of the
Greater Vancouver YMCA, Steve Butz, to speak to Council about the potential of a YMCA in Maple
Ridge.
Mr. Butz indicated that the YMCA works through building relationships with communities,
Councils, staff and citizens to determine if the City and the YMCA’s values align. More
importantly the YMCA gets to know a community to determine whether or not their presence in
the community, in partnership with the City, would provide value to the community. Mr. Butz
used the analogy of a relationship with the agreement to go forward in partnership, being like a
marriage and indicating that there needs to be a period of dating to determine if a long-term
4
relationship is in the future. Mr. Butz also spoke about other communities that the YMCA is
currently working with and indicated that they were further along in the process. He then used
the analogy that we were ‘on the bus,’ but had a backseat.
It is important that Council understands the YMCA runs YMCA’s; they do not operate community
recreation facilities, they are not a contracted service. In a recent conversation with Mr. Butz, he
informed staff that the City has moved past the point where the YMCA would typically begin their
involvement, as YMCA’s are informed by a variety of other factors rather than community
consultation. In addition, if the City would like the YMCA to build and operate a facility in Maple
Ridge, the earliest that they could begin to have the conversation with us would be 2018 -2020
as they are currently at capacity. Correspondence from Mr. Butz attached.
Staff continues to build this relationship and are partnering in a Healthy Heart program with the
YMCA that will see programming and support for Maple Ridge residents in receiving
cardiovascular rehabilitation whereby most residents are currently travelling west to receive this
service.
b) Desired Outcome:
Continue to provide high calibre recreation facilities for the benefit and enjoyment of the
community now and into the future.
c) Strategic Alignment:
Manage existing municipal infrastructure through the preparation of appropriate plans to ensure
development, maintenance and renewal of parks and open spaces, roads, sidewalks, water,
sewer and storm water systems, public buildings as well as data and communications technology
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
The retrofit upgrades along with the short term recommendations in the facility space plan would
further enhance the customer experience when using the Leisure Centre, modernizing the 35
year old facility and providing accessible amenities in both the aquatics and non-aquatics area
for all residents to enjoy. As the only recreation facility in the City, the Leisure Centre is well used
by residents and improvements will ensure relevancy and reliability for use by future generations.
e) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
The initial retrofit budget in 2015 was $5.5 million; however, it is likely to be significantly higher
as this estimate is almost two years old now. The longer the project is delayed, construction
costs will continue to increase thereby increasing budgeted costs year over year. The
consultant’s recommendations include general scope of work however; detailed pricing has not
been retained at this time. Staff is recommending that some of the short term projects be
considered for advancement together with the aquatic retrofit to improve the functionality and
flexibility of the existing program spaces.
5
CONCLUSIONS:
In consideration of the proposed addition to the civic complex, as a result of the significant redesign
that will be required for the aquatic filtration and mechanical systems to accommodate the
underground parking, staff is recommending that some of the non-aquatic upgrades also be
included with the redesign process to enhance the functionality and flexibility of the centre.
Doing this work in conjunction with the Civic and Cultural Facility design will ensure that the two
facilities complement each other and that the civic centre will continue to be a desired location for all
citizens to enjoy.
“Original signed by Wendy McCormick”
Prepared by: Wendy McCormick, Diretor of Recreation and Community Services
“Original signed by David Boag for Kelly Swift”
Approved by: Kelly Swift, General Manager
Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services
“Original signed by Ted Swabey”
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
:cb
Attachment: Email Correspondence S. Butz
Wendy McCormick
Director of Recreation and Community Services
11925 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, BC V2X 6A9
Tel: 604-467-7328
Web Facebook YouTube
Our service commitment: fair, friendly, helpful.
Survey Email Comments
From: Steve Butz [mailto:steve.butz@gv.ymca.ca]
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2016 9:25 AM
To: Wendy McCormick
Subject: Re: FW: Community Consultation Will Shape Future of Recreation Facilities in Maple Ridge -
2016-10-26
Hi Wendy...
I think the answer to your question is -it's up to you....
Your attachment offers what I would describe as a typical
facility development approach led by a municipality. As I have
mentioned, working with the Y would demand a more equitable
approach, driven less by facility and amenity and more how
critical community needs are met in a sustainable manner -
through a collaborative approach.
This is another way of saying we have no interest in an
operating agreement for a municipal facility - a operating
agreement with a municipality for the purposes of operating a
YMCA does have potential assuming a period of due diligence
would allow both parties to decide whether there was a workable
model.
That said, we are not interested in a informal process given our
current priorities - ie: if the City is not genuinely interested as
noted I would prefer not to advance the conversation at this time
- ie: it's ok by us if you wish to pass.
Hope this helps...S
On 3 November 2016 at 18:07, Wendy McCormick <wmccormick@mapleridge.ca> wrote:
Hello Steve, I have attached the recent press release that went out to the local press. It describes
how Maple Ridge is moving forward with infrastructure planning. In our last conversation you
indicated that given the direction Maple Ridge Council has taken at this time, the YMCA would
not be interested in this particular opportunity.
Council had given our department direction to explore a formal relationship with YMCA
regarding future partnership opportunities.
Sometime ago I reported out that :
YMCA met with both Council and staff. Their key message was the importance of building an
inter-agency relationship. PRC has pursued program-level partnerships to continue to build
relations, and has kept YMCA staff apprised of potential infrastructure opportunities.
At this time I need to close this item and I am wondering if you would be willing to provide me
a written response on whether or not the YMCA has any interest in being involved in this
process.
Thanks Steve,
Wendy
Wendy McCormick
Director of Recreation and Community Services
Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Parks & Leisure Services
11925 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, BC V2X 6A9
Tel: 604-467-7328