HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-03-07 Council Workshop Agenda and Reports.pdf
City of Maple Ridge
1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
2. MINUTES
2.1 Minutes of the February 22, 2016 Council Workshop Meeting
3. PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL
4. MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS’ REPORTS
5. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
5.1 Parks and Recreation Infrastructure Prioritization 10:15-11:15 a.m.
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that staff be directed to prepare
a draft schedule and funding model for a multi-use wellness facility with an
aquatic centre, synthetic fields and a stadium, a cultural facility, ice rinks and
neighbourhood amenities, recognizing the aquatic facility as the highest priority.
COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA
March 7, 2016
10:00 a.m.
Blaney Room, 1st Floor, City Hall
The purpose of the Council Workshop is to review and discuss policies and
other items of interest to Council. Although resolutions may be passed at
this meeting, the intent is to make a consensus decision to send an item to
Council for debate and vote or refer the item back to staff for more
information or clarification. The meeting is live streamed and recorded by
the City of Maple Ridge.
REMINDERS
March 7, 2016
Closed Council 12:00 noon
Committee of the Whole Meeting 1:00 p.m.
March 8, 2016
Council Meeting 7:00 p.m.
Council Workshop
March 7, 2016
Page 2 of 5
5.2 Proposed Changes to Metro Vancouver Transfer
Station Hours 11:15-11:30 a.m.
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that a letter of support for the
proposed Metro Vancouver Transfer Station hours be sent to Metro Vancouver and
that the options for the Ridge Meadows Recycling Society with respect to revised
operating hours be discussed as part of 2017-2021 Business Planning.
5.3 Hammond Area Plan Process – Preliminary Concept Plan 11:30 a.m. to noon
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 providing summaries of the Hammond Historic
Character Area Study, the Residential Density Bonus/Density Transfer Program
Assessment and the Commercial Demand and Capacity Analysis for the Hammond
Area Plan.
5.4 Silver Valley School Site - Update on School District No. 42 Decision and School
Site Review Process
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that the process for discussing
the future land use of superfluous school sites be endorsed.
5.5 Thornhill Community Association Invitation to Event
Update by Mayor Read
6. CORRESPONDENCE
The following correspondence has been received and requires a response. Staff is
seeking direction from Council on each item. Options that Council may consider include:
a) Acknowledge receipt of correspondence and advise that no further action will be
taken.
b) Direct staff to prepare a report and recommendation regarding the subject matter.
c) Forward the correspondence to a regular Council meeting for further discussion.
d) Other.
Once direction is given the appropriate response will be sent.
Council Workshop
March 7, 2016
Page 3 of 5
6.1 BC Association of Farmers’ Markets
Letter dated January 22, 2016 from Jon Bell, President, BC Association of
Farmers’ Markets providing information on the BC Farmers’ MarketsNutrition
Coupon Program (“FMNCP”) and requesting that a letter be sent to the Minister of
Heath supporting the continuation of funding for this program.
6.2 Lower Mainland Local Government Association (LMLGA) 2016 Resolutions and
Nominations
Memorandums dated February 18, 2016 from LMLGA providing information on
Resolution and Nomination submissions for the LMLGA Conference and AGM on
May 11-13, 2016.
Proposed topics:
• Increase in ambulance service
• Increased funding for Ministry of Children
• Replace statutory newspaper notification
6.3 Upcoming Events
March 7, 2016
6:00 p.m.
Strong Kids Forum; The ACT Arts Centre
Organizer: Maple Ridge Resilience Initiative
March 12, 2016
6:30 p.m.
Style ‘n 50’s Fundraiser, Maple Ridge Legion
Organizer: Maple Ridge Legion
April 10, 2016
9:00 a.m.
Volunteer Breakfast, Red Robin, Maple Ridge
Organizer: Volunteer Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows
April 24, 2016
5:30 p.m.
ACT Presents Performance, Tour and Reception, The ACT Arts
Centre
Organizer: The Act
May 11-14, 2016 2016 Lower Mainland Local Government Association (LMLGA)
Conference, Whistler, BC
June 3-7, 2016 2016 Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) Conference
and Trade Show, Winnipeg, Manitoba
7. BRIEFING ON OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST/QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL
Links to member associations:
• Union of British Columbia Municipalities (“UBCM”) Newsletter The Compass
o http://www.ubcm.ca/EN/main/resources/past-issues-compass/2016-
archive.html
Council Workshop
March 7, 2016
Page 4 of 5
• Lower Mainland Local Government Association (“LMLGA”)
o http://www.lmlga.ca/
• Federation of Canadian Municipalities (“FCM”)
o https://www.fcm.ca/
8. MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT
9. ADJOURNMENT
Checked by: ___________
Date: _________________
Council Workshop
March 7, 2016
Page 5 of 5
Rules for Holding a Closed Meeting
A part of a council meeting may be closed to the public if the subject matter being considered relates to one
or more of the following:
(a) personal information about an identifiable individual who holds or is being considered for a position as
an officer, employee or agent of the municipality or another position appointed by the municipality;
(b) personal information about an identifiable individual who is being considered for a municipal award or
honour, or who has offered to provide a gift to the municipality on condition of anonymity;
(c) labour relations or employee negotiations;
(d) the security of property of the municipality;
(e) the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements, if the council considers that
disclosure might reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the municipality;
(f) law enforcement, if the council considers that disclosure might reasonably be expected to harm the
conduct of an investigation under or enforcement of an enactment;
(g) litigation or potential litigation affecting the municipality;
(h) an administrative tribunal hearing or potential administrative tribunal hearing affecting the municipality,
other than a hearing to be conducted by the council or a delegate of council
(i) the receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for
that purpose;
(j) information that is prohibited or information that if it were presented in a document would be prohibited
from disclosure under section 21 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act;
(k) negotiations and related discussions respecting the proposed provision of a municipal service that are at
their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the council, could reasonably be expected to harm the
interests of the municipality if they were held in public;
(l) discussions with municipal officers and employees respecting municipal objectives, measures and
progress reports for the purposes of preparing an annual report under section 98 [annual municipal
report]
(m) a matter that, under another enactment, is such that the public may be excluded from the meeting;
(n) the consideration of whether a council meeting should be closed under a provision of this subsection of
subsection (2)
(o) the consideration of whether the authority under section 91 (other persons attending closed meetings)
should be exercised in relation to a council meeting.
(p) information relating to local government participation in provincial negotiations with First Nations, where
an agreement provides that the information is to be kept confidential.
City of Maple Ridge
COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES
February 22, 2016
The Minutes of the City Council Workshop held on February 22, 2016 at 10:00 a.m.
in the Blaney Room of 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 C. Bell K. Swift, General Manager of Community Development,
Councillor K. Duncan Parks and Recreation Services
Councillor B. Masse P. Gill, General Manager Corporate and Financial Services
Councillor G Robson F. Quinn, General Manager Public Works and Development
Councillor T. Shymkiw Services
Councillor C. Speirs C. Marlo, Manager of Legislative Services
Other Staff as Required
W. McCormick, Director of Recreation
C. Carter. Director of Planning
J. Charlebois, Manager of Community Planning
L. Zosiak, Planner 2
L. Siracusa, Manager of Economic Development
D. Pollock, Municipal Engineer
L. Benson, Manager of Sustainability and Corporate
Planning
Note: These Minutes are posted on the City Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca
1.ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
The agenda was adopted with the following revisions:
Category 4 Mayor’s and Councillors’ Report will be dealt with following
Category 6 Correspondence; Item 6.2 Traffic Calming Strategy for 123 Avenue
will be added following Item 6.1; Item 6.2 will be renumbered to 6.3
2.1
Council Workshop Minutes
February 22, 2016
Page 2 of 6
2. MINUTES
2.1 Minutes of the February 15, 2016 Council Workshop Meeting
R/2016-085
It was moved and seconded
That the minutes of the Council Workshop Meeting of February 15, 2016
be adopted as circulated.
CARRIED
3. PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL – Nil
Note: Category 4 was dealt with following Category 6
4 MAYOR’S AND COUNCILLORS’ REPORTS
Councillor Bell reminded Council of deadline dates for resolutions and
nominations for LMLGA. She also requested that Council members complete
a survey put forward by UBCM.
5. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
5.1 Interim Shelter Update
Verbal presentation by Greg Richmond, Executive Director and Sean Speer,
Director, RainCity Housing and Support Society
Mr. Richmond and Mr. Speer provided information on the remaining residents
of the interim shelter and the process for closing the shelter. A written
summary of the number of clients using the shelter, client health profiles and
housing status was circulated. Mr. Richmond identified the need for low
barrier housing in Maple Ridge.
The General Manager Community Development, Parks and Recreation
advised that Fraser Health is conducting clinical assessments of the
individuals to identify the clinical requirements that may need to be provided
by health authorities.
Council Workshop Minutes
February 22, 2016
Page 3 of 6
5.2 Albion Community Centre Concept Plan
Presentation by Paul Fast, HCMA Architecture + Design
Mr. Fast provided an overview of the open house and public consultation
workshop held in February 2016 and site plan options for the shared property
in Albion with School District No. 42.
Note: The meeting was recessed at 12:06 p.m. and reconvened at 12:50 p.m.
5.3 Parks, Recreation and Culture Infrastructure Update
Staff report dated February 22, 2016 recommending the endorsement of the
next steps in development of an overall program for the development of
parks, recreation and culture amenities.
5.3.1
R/2016-086
It was moved and seconded
That staff be directed to prepare a report that provides information on
repairing the leisure centre pool.
DEFEATED
Mayor Read, Councillor Duncan, Councillor Shymkiw,
Councillor Speirs - OPPOSED
5.3.2
R/2016-087
It was moved and seconded
That the staff report entitled “Parks, Recreation and Culture Infrastructure
Update dated February 22, 2016 be received for information and the next
steps outlined in the report be endorsed.
R/2016-088
It was moved and seconded
That the motion be amended to remove the text “Water Play Park” from
Appendix A.
AMENDMENT DEFEATED
Mayor Read, Councillor Duncan, Councillor Shymkiw,
Councillor Speirs – OPPOSED
MOTION CARRIED
Councillor Masse, Councillor Robson - OPPOSED
Council Workshop Minutes
February 22, 2016
Page 4 of 6
5.4 Albion Flats Area Plan - Land Use Planning Workshop
Staff report dated February 22, 2016 providing information for the
preparation for the land use planning workshop for the Albion Flats Area Plan.
The Manager of Community Planning led Council through a discussion of land
use priorities for Albion Flats and identification of issues and opportunities for
technical review.
5.5 Child Care Major Capital Funding
Staff report dated February 22, 2016 recommending that staff be directed to
prepare an application for Child Care Major Capital Funding for a multi-age
childcare centre to be included in the design of the Albion Community Centre.
R/2016-089
It was moved and seconded
That staff be directed to prepare an application for Child Care Major Capital
Funding for submission to the Ministry of Children and Family
Development, requesting the maximum of $500,000 to fund a multi-age
childcare centre to be included in the design of the Albion Community
Centre noting that the City is responsible for providing 10% of the funding.
CARRIED
5.6 Council Priorities – Approach
Staff report dated February 22, 2016 recommending that the approach to
establishing Council’s priorities be implemented as described.
The Manager of Sustainability and Corporate Planning reviewed the report.
R/2016-090
It was moved and seconded
That the approach outlined in the report entitled “Council Priorities-
Approach” dated February 22, 2016 be implemented.
CARRIED
Council Workshop Minutes
February 22, 2016
Page 5 of 6
6.0 CORRESPONDENCE
6.1 Alouette River Management Society (“ARMS”) – Project Proposal
E-mail dated February 14, 2016 from Greta Borick-Cunningham, Executive
Director, ARMS requesting a letter of support for an application by ARMS to
the Pacific Salmon Foundation Community Salmon Program for funding for a
project proposed for the 232 Street Off-Channel near the South Alouette
River.
R/2016-091
It was moved and seconded
That a letter of support for the application for funding for a community
salmon program for the 232nd Street Off-Channel be provided to the
Alouette River Management Society.
CARRIED
6.2 Traffic Calming 123rd Avenue
Councillor Bell requested an update on traffic calming on 123rd Avenue. The
Municipal Engineer provided background information on the request from the
neighbourhood for traffic calming measures and an update on the progress to
identify and implement appropriate measures.
6.3 Upcoming Events
Date: April 13, 2016
Time: 1:30 p.m.
Exploring Substance Use & Addictions – Clarke Foundation
Theatre
Organizer: District of Mission
7. BRIEFING ON OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST/QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL
Links to member associations:
• Union of British Columbia Municipalities (“UBCM”) Newsletter The
Compass
o http://www.ubcm.ca/EN/main/resources/past-issues-compass/2016-
archive.html
Council Workshop Minutes
February 22, 2016
Page 6 of 6
• Lower Mainland Local Government Association (“LMLGA”)
o http://www.lmlga.ca/
• Federation of Canadian Municipalities (“FCM”)
o https://www.fcm.ca/
8. MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT
9. ADJOURNMENT - 3:07 p.m.
_______________________________
N. Read, Mayor
Certified Correct
___________________________________
C. Marlo, Corporate Officer
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: March 7, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: Parks and Recreation Infrastructure Prioritization
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At a Special Workshop on December 15, 2015, Council embarked on a process to prioritize
community infrastructure projects along with a funding plan for major projects identified as
recommendations in the 2010 Parks, Recreation and Cultural Plan.
This report provides a summary of the application of Council’s criteria and weighting to each
potential project, as well as a description of which projects are already included in the current work
plan, a listing of projects that require a more modest investment that can largely be incorporated
into future work plans as annual Capital funding comes available. The five projects that remain are
the main focus for Council in this prioritization process. This list includes: the Multi-use Wellness
Facility with an Aquatic Centre; Synthetic Fields and a Stadium; a Cultural Facility; Ice Rinks; and,
Neighbourhood Amenities.
RECOMMENDATION:
That staff prepare a draft schedule and funding model for a multi-use wellness facility with an
aquatic centre, synthetic fields and a stadium, a cultural facility, ice rinks, and neighbourhood
amenities that recognizes the aquatic facility as the highest priority.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
On December 15, 2015 Council held a Special Workshop to identify needs for Parks and
Recreation Community Infrastructure and criteria to guide prioritization of those needs. That
discussion was based on recommendations included in the Parks, Recreation and Cultural
Plan which was developed after significant community input in 2010.
On January 11, 2016 Council continued this process by confirming the list of facilities and
amenities, reviewing “facility bundles” that demonstrated synergies between amenities, and
by confirming the criteria that were developed. Following some discussion, Council
requested that the criteria be applied to the facility list and that this information be brought
back to Council.
Results of the Application of Criteria to Facility Bundles
A grid showing the full result of the application of Council’s criteria to the Facility Bundles is
attached for Council’s review. There is a level of variance (plus or minus) that must be
assumed when interpreting these results, recognizing that the application of these criteria
5.1
required a level of subjectivity. Below is a summary of these results in the order that resulted
from the application of Council’s criteria and weighting.
Ranking Project/Bundle Weighted Total
1 Maple Ridge Leisure Centre 28.0
1 Trail Expansion: Blue Mountain or Thornhill 28.0
3 Water Play Park in the Downtown 26.0
4 Synthetic Field and Stadium 24.8
5 Dog Parks 25.0
6 Multi-Use Wellness Complex 24.8
7 Farm and Agricultural Facilities 22.7
8 Jackson Farm 22.0
9 Neighbourhood Amenities 21.0
10 Active and Youth Facilities 20.5
11 Cultural Facility 20.0
12 Ice Rinks 18.0
The above is provided for Council’s information and consideration for your discussion on the
level of priority to be assigned to each amenity.
Current Funding Context
The attachment titled Facility Bundles for Parks and Recreation Community Infrastructure
Prioritization Discussion is attached to provide more detail on each of the proposed
amenities. The facilities in this list have been placed into three categories shown below.
The first category includes items that are in the current work program,
the second category includes items that could be accommodated within current funding
plans, and
the third category includes Facility Bundles that are unfunded that will require borrowing
in order to proceed.
1. Current Work Plan Items:
The following facilities are currently planned to proceed, noting that some additional
funding will be required as described below:
The Maple Ridge
Leisure Centre
Retrofit
Funding of $5M is planned within the Infrastructure Replacement
Fund. Additional funding will be required to recognize the cost of
this work in the future.
Youth Action
Park
Fifty percent of planned funding of $750K for this project is in the
2018 Capital Plan and the remainder is planned to come from
Gaming Revenue. Additional funding of $50 to $100K will be
required to achieve the project scope.
Water Play Park Currently $300K for a water play park is in the 2019 Capital Plan.
An additional $300K is required to achieve a small water play
amenity and washrooms. The downtown location that was
anticipated for this project is Memorial Peace Park on the concrete
pad behind the Leisure Centre. Net operating costs would be
approximately $50K per year.
2. Future Work Plan Items:
With direction from Council, the following items could be built into future work programs
largely within the current funding plans. Operating costs are not significant and will be
addressed through growth to the extent possible.
Emerging
activities such
as Parkour
These projects can be invited through expressions of interest
targeting firms with expertise in these areas, similar to a WildPlay
model. While there is not enough information at this time to
forecast costs, they would be expected to be minimal if
accommodated on municipal lands/facilities.
Community
Gardens
Community Gardens could be added on existing City owned lands.
Capital costs would be modest and could be accommodated within
the annual Capital Program. Operating costs would be close to
neutral if the model employed is similar to existing community
gardens.
4-H Facilities These would best be considered in combination with any changes or
improvements to the Agricultural Fairgrounds. Again, both capital
and operating costs would be modest. Discussions with the
Agricultural Association suggest that this is not an immediate need.
The North Fraser
Therapeutic
Riding Centre
This program is currently housed. There may be a future need that
could be considered in tandem with any changes to the Agricultural
Fairgrounds, with the Fair Board’s approval. Capital costs are
unknown. Operating costs beyond facility preventive maintenance
would be neutral.
Three to five new
dog off leash
parks
These can be added to existing parks for a Capital Cost of
approximately $50-100K or less depending on size and if parking is
required. Net operating costs would be minimal.
Trail Expansions
such as a Blue
Mountain or
Albion “Grind”
This amenity, including parking and washrooms will need further
exploration, including the consideration of specific sites in order to
determine cost implications. At this time, we would estimate $1-2M
for Capital costs and operating costs of $50K per year.
Jackson Farm Prior to proceeding with any development of Jackson Farm, staff
recommend that a comprehensive community consultation process
be undertaken at some point to determine the community’s interest
in the type and extent of use of the Jackson Farm lands. The cost to
conduct the consultation process is estimated at $50K, which would
deliver a community concept and a determination of Capital and
Operating cost implications.
3. Unfunded Major Infrastructure Projects:
The following facilities are the main focus of the prioritization discussion, as these much
larger infrastructure projects identified in the Parks, Recreation and Culture Master Plan
remain unfunded at this time. In order to proceed with these projects, staff will require
direction from Council on which items to move forward with.
Facility/Bundle Size Capital Cost
Estimate
Operating Cost
Estimate
Multi-Use Wellness Facility
with an Aquatic Centre
117,500 sq. ft. $60-70M $2M per year
Synthetic Field, Stadium and
Event Setting
30,000 sq. ft.
for stadium and
washrooms
$20M Modest/unknown
Cultural Facility 20,000 sq. ft. $10-11M $1-1.5M per year
Ice Rinks 39,000 sq. ft. $15-25M $500-750K per
year
Neighbourhood Amenities Not defined. $6-12M $100-200K per
year
Total $111-138M $3.6-4.45M per
year
Note that the above costs are in order of magnitude and will need to be more fully defined.
In addition, they do not include land acquisition or site development costs.
Aquatic Facility
In December 2015, Council directed staff to “bring back a report that recommends a site, a
concept plan, a public engagement process, and a plan that outlines the funding and
approval process for a new aquatic facility”.
Concurrent with this resolution was a decision to not proceed with the renovation of the
Maple Ridge Leisure Centre (MRLC). If a new aquatic facility is approved, Council expressed
interest in opening that facility prior to proceeding with a retrofit to the MRLC to limit the
impact on the members of the public that rely on this service.
While the MRLC remains safe to use, it is important that necessary repairs are addressed in
a timely manner. With this in mind, staff are particularly awaiting a decision on whether or
not Council wishes to proceed with a new aquatic facility, and if so, what configuration of
amenities that would include. For instance, it could include the full Multi-Use Wellness
Facility including an Aquatic Centre as described in the attachment document titled “Facility
Bundles for Parks and Recreation Community Infrastructure Prioritization Discussion”, or an
alternate configuration.
Next Steps:
Once the prioritization process for Parks, Recreation and Culture infrastructure projects is
complete, staff will return to Council with a draft implementation schedule that sets out
proposed timing for each of the infrastructure priorities that Council has selected, along with
a refined funding model and borrowing strategy for Council’s consideration. A
recommendation to this effect is included in this report.
At that time, Council will be asked to make a decision on a public approval process for the
authorization to borrow the funding required to proceed with the priority projects.
Following that, assuming that Council endorses a list of priority projects and a funding
program, staff will develop a community engagement and consultation process for the overall
Parks, Recreation and Culture infrastructure program for Council’s consideration. The final
step in developing a parks, recreation and culture infrastructure program will include
implementation of an approved community engagement program and public approval
process.
b) Desired Outcome:
The desired outcome is to ensure that a plan is in place to meet the future sport, recreation
and cultural needs of the community.
c) Strategic Alignment:
The projects identified in this report align with recommendations in the Parks, Recreation
and Cultural Plan adopted by Council in 2010.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
While citizens will greatly benefit from the use of new amenities, staff are cognizant that
citizens are also the primary funders. With this in mind, great effort will be made to secure
grant and partnership opportunities that come available for projects of this nature, as well as
the establishment of cost-effective operating models.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
A number of departments provide support to new infrastructure developments including
Planning, Engineering, Building, Clerks, Communications and Finance.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
Council was presented with a sample strategy that could be used to invest up to $110M in
parks, recreation and cultural amenities over the next four years. The final funding strategy
will need to be refined to fit the priority projects and implementation schedule that Council
establishes. When priority projects have been finalized, they will be incorporated into Capital
and operating budgets.
g) Alternatives:
Council may wish to “unbundle” the Multi-use Wellness Complex if the cost is too great, and
consider prioritizing particular components of that amenity. Staff’s recommendation
however, is that the current bundle be retained to gain the programming and operating
synergies that can be achieved by co-locating these amenities.
CONCLUSIONS:
It is important to make a timely decision on whether or not Council wants to proceed with a new
Aquatic Facility, as this will inform the preferred approach to address the need to retrofit the Maple
Ridge Leisure Centre.
If Council has been provided with all necessary information to make a decision on which priorities to
proceed with, staff can then prepare a draft implementation schedule that sets out proposed timing
for each of those priorities, along with a refined funding model and borrowing strategy for Council’s
consideration. A recommendation to this effect is included in this report.
Following Council’s endorsement of an implementation schedule and funding model, a community
engagement and consultation process will be undertaken to inform the community about this
opportunity and confirm citizen’s support to fund these projects.
“Original signed by Kelly Swift”
Prepared by: Kelly Swift, General Manager,
Community Development, Parks & Recreation Services
“Original signed by Ted Swabey”
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
:ks
Attachments
Facility Bundles for Parks and Recreation Community Infrastructure Prioritization Discussion
Prioritization Grid Completed by Brian Johnston, PERC
Criteria for Evaluating Maple Ridge Facility Project Priority
1
Facility Bundles for Parks and Recreation Community Infrastructure Prioritization Discussion
This list is provided in no particular order
1.Multi-Use Wellness Facility with an Aquatic Centre
Amenities Size Capital and
Operating Costs
Land Needs
& Location
Aquatic Facility with a Wellness / Leisure
focus –
Lazy river, hot pool, saunas/steam, 6
lane 25m pool with 1m and 3m dive
30,000 sq. ft.$60-70 m.
Capital
investment not
including land
and servicing
Net operating
costs will likely
be approx. $2
m. per year
Options for a
location will
be brought
forward to a
Closed
Council
Meeting
Multipurpose Rooms –
Small to large spaces for meetings, social
events and programming
10,000 sq. ft.
Event Space –
Large, clear span space that can
accommodate 2 full size basketball
courts, bleacher seating, and host
community and sporting events
(equivalent to a field house)
20,000 sq. ft.
Indoor Running Track –
3 lane, 200m length
7,500 sq. ft.
suspended in
Event Space
Fitness Centre –
Free weights,spin, cardio, aerobic
equipment
10,000 sq. ft.
Curling Rink –
6 sheets, change rooms, storage, pro
shop, etc.
20,000 sq. ft.
Lobby / Social / Circulation Space –
Soft seating, control desks, food service
10,000 sq. ft.
Site Development –
Parking, landscape, civil work
10,000 sq. ft.
Wellness focused fitness facilities which emphasize social, therapeutic and spa-like
components are prevalent in Europe and are emerging in North America.There is not currently
a strong example of such a facility in the Metro Vancouver region, which may provide an
opportunity for differentiation and regional draw.
There are a number of synergies that can be gained by combining an aquatic and curling
facility including energy efficiencies as well as shared space for social gatherings and
programming.
A fitness component is complementary to this model as it will expand the diversity of users,
serve a demographic that the private fitness facilities does not cater to, and offer a holistic
user experience. There is also synergy between the fitness component, walking track and large
versatile space for dry land training.Emerging sports such as pickle ball could be
accommodated in this and other sites.
The development of a multi-use aquatic facility as described here assumes that a downtown
aquatic asset will be retained;otherwise this aquatic facility would need to be expanded.
2
2.Maple Ridge Leisure Centre
Amenities Capital and Operating
Costs
Upgrade the current Leisure Centre facility:
Upgrade the facility to better serve competitive swimming, e.g.
expanded deck, spectator seating, storage and increased access
for competitive swim clubs, etc., above and beyond what the prior
retrofit project included.
A diverse mix of programming and amenities in a facility located in
the town centre is desirable.
The majority of future growth in Maple Ridge will occur in the
downtown.
The cost to increase the 6 lane 25 m pool concept to 8 lanes
significantly exceeds the cost to upgrade the current facility to
improve the competitive swimming environment in this facility.
$10 –15 m. Capital
investment
Net operating costs
will remain within the
current funding plan
3.Synthetic Field,Stadium and Event Setting
Amenities Size Capital and
Operating
Costs
Land Needs &
Location
Two fields planned:
1 synthetic field in 2016
A retrofit of all-weather fields at
Albion Sports Complex to a
synthetic field in
2017.Consultation with the
sport community will determine
the final configuration
$3-4m
Grant funding
of $0.5 m. is
attached to
the 2017
project
Future field needs
might be
accommodated at the
Albion Flats to
capture the
opportunity provided
by locating multiple
fields in one area.
This will be
dependent on the
outcome of the Albion
Area Plan and
approval from the
ALC
Stadium –
5,000 seat covered outdoor
seating
25,000 sq. ft.$5m
Change Rooms, Washrooms,
Concession
5,000 sq. ft.$3m
Synthetic Playing Surface –
2 pitches sized for soccer and or
baseball/field hockey.
$6m
Site Development –
Parking, landscape, etc.
2.5m
A hub that includes multiple fields,covered spectator seating, washrooms and change rooms
that will serve the field user community and provide a welcoming environment in which to host
tournaments and large events is envisioned.
Special event infrastructure would be added.
A needs assessment will more specifically determine future field requirements.
3
4.Cultural Facility
Amenities Size Capital and
Operating
Costs
Land
Requirements &
Location
Museum Overall size is
approximately
20,000 sq. ft.
$10 –11 m.
Capital
investment
not including
land, etc.
Net operating
cost may be
between $1
and 1.5 m.
per year
The prime
location for this
facility would be
in or near the
downtown. A
more specific
discussion on
location will be
brought to a
Closed Council
meeting.
Archives shared between the museum,
the City and perhaps Katzie or Kwantlen
Performing Arts Theatre that seats 150
Educational, programming and studio
space that is highly versatile and which
can be reconfigured to seat up to 200 for
larger events
Access to an outdoor gathering space
Tourist information area
Parking would need to be accommodated as part of the downtown parking strategy.
There are programming and operating efficiencies that can be gained through the above
service mix. In addition, a combination of activities such as this will draw people in and ensure
a consistent level of use.
There is a critical need for archive space for the Museum and the City that needs to be
addressed at some point. An archive fits nicely within this opportunity. A museum can operate
more efficiently when located near to their archives. In addition, this amenity may provide a
significant opportunity for partnership with Katzie or Kwantlen and potential grant
opportunities will need to be explored.
5.Active and Youth Focused Facilities
Amenities Capital and Operating Costs Land Requirements &
Location
A youth action park
is planned for 2018
in the current
budget
Currently $750 K is funded for this project.
Additional Capital funding of $50 to $100K is
required.
Net operating costs would increase by about
$50K per year
In an existing park
location
Emerging activities
such as Parkour
Request expressions of interest to invite firms
to consider bringing opportunities to Maple
Ridge, similar to the WildPlay model.
There is not enough information available at
this time to forecast costs.
4
6.Ice Rinks
Amenities Size Capital and
Operating Costs
Land Needs &
Location
Retrofit the existing curling
sheets to 3rd NHL Ice sheet
25,000 sq.
ft.
$15 –25 m. Capital
investment would be
required
Operating costs
would increase by
approximately $0.5
to 0.75 m. per year
Existing location
includes planned
space for a fourth
rinkAdd a 4th NHL ice sheet
8 Team Change Rooms to
service 3rd and 4th ice sheets
10,000 sq.
ft.
Skating Lounge -
Multipurpose space added to
fourth arena to provide
enhanced leisure skating
component. Includes seating,
fireplace, skate rental, access
controls, etc.
4,000 sq. ft.
Site Development -
Parking, landscaping, etc.
This would expand the Planet Ice Arena from 2 to 4 rinks for minor sports to meet the growing
demand for ice needs for the next several years and to better serve the current sport
community when hosting tournaments and events.
This assumes that the curling facility will be rebuilt as part of the Multi-use Aquatic Complex.
A number of stakeholders would need to be consulted including RG Properties who operate
Planet Ice, Search and Rescue in the event there is an impact on their facility, and the ALC.
7.Neighbourhood Based Community Halls and Amenities
Amenities Capital and
Operating Costs
Land Needs &
Location
Albion Community Hall -new $6 –12 m. Capital
investment
Net operating cost
for two new
amenities may be in
the range of $.1 -
.2m per year
Albion location would
be discussed with
SD42 to explore
opportunities to
combine with a new
school development.
The Municipality
owns existing
facilities and land in
Silver Valley
Silver Valley –new
The type of amenity would depend on
neighbourhood consultations but could include
a building, a youth action park, a field, a gazebo
or other project that will assist in fulfilling the
social gathering function that the area plan
anticipates
Hammond Community Hall -retrofit
Thornhill and Ruskin Community Centres are not owned by the City. The Whonnock Lake
Community Centre does not require a retrofit, although an expanded training facility for the
Ridge Canoe and Kayak Club could be considered.
5
8.Farm and Agricultural Facilities
Amenities Capital and
Operating Costs
Land Requirements & Location
Community gardens Net operating cost
is close to neutral
Suggest assessing existing City owned land
4-H Facilities Recommend that 4-H be considered in
combination with any changes or
improvements to the Agricultural Fairgrounds.
The Albion Area Planning process will inform
this discussion
North Fraser Thera-
peutic Riding Centre
The NFTR program is currently housed. There
may be a future need that could be considered
9.Trail Expansion
Amenities Capital and Operating Costs Land Requirements
& Location
Blue Mountain Grind,
including parking,
washrooms and other
amenities
Capital cost is unknown without exploration. A
conservative estimate may be $1 to 2 m.
Net operating cost is $.05 m per year
Blue Mountain
This project would require the support of the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resources
as well as other agencies and stakeholders.
10.Water Play Park
Amenities Capital and Operating Costs Land Requirements & Location
Water Play Park Capital cost of $500K.
Net operating costs of about
$50K per year
A downtown location is available in
Memorial Peace Park on the
concrete pad behind the Leisure Ctr.
11.Dog Parks
Amenities Capital and Operating Costs Land Requirements & Location
3-5 Dog Off Leash
Parks
Add $50 -$100K Capital
Net operating costs would be
minimal
It is anticipated that these amenities
will be located within existing
parkland
12.Jackson Farm
Amenities Capital and Operating Costs
It is recommended that a comprehensive community
consultation process be undertaken at some point to
determine the community’s interest in the type and
extent of use of the Jackson Farm lands.
The cost to conduct the consultation
process is estimated at $500K to
determine what the capital and
operating implications might be
2 3.0 2.0 1.0 3.0
RegionalAttractionMagnitude ofUnmet NeedYouth or FamilyFocusComplies withCompelling TrendsCost EfficiencyWeighted totalBundle Rank1 Multi-Use Wellness Complex 1.8 3.7 2.3 7.0 2.0 4.0 2.7 2.7 2.5 7.5 24.8 6
a Aquatic Facility 2 3 3 3 2
b Multipurpose Rooms 1 2 3 3 3
c Event Space 3 3 3 3 3
d Indoor Track 3 3 1 3 3
e Fitness Centre 1 2 1 3 3
f Curling Rink 1 1 1 1 1
2 Maple Ridge Leisure Centre 2 4.0 2.0 6.0 3.0 6.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 9.0 28.0 1
3 Synthetic Fields/Stadium 2.3 4.7 2.3 7.0 2.7 5.3 2.0 2.0 2.3 7.0 26.0 4
a 2 New Planned Synthetic Fields 2 3 3 2 3
b 2 Additional Synthetic Fields 2 2 3 2 3
c Stadium 3 2 2 2 1
4 Cultural Facility 1.8 3.6 2.4 7.2 1.8 3.6 2.0 2.0 1.2 3.6 20.0
a Museum 3 3 2 2 1
b Archives 3 3 1 2 1
c Performing Arts Theatre 1 3 2 2 1
d Program/Educational Spaces 1 2 3 3 2
e Tourist Information Area 1 1 1 1 1
5 Active and Youth Facilities 2 4.0 2.0 3.0 6.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 7.5 20.5
a Youth Action Park 2 2 3 3 3
b Emerging Activities (e.g. Parkour)2 2 3 3 2
6 Ice Rinks 2 4.0 1.5 4.5 2.5 5.0 1.5 1.5 1.0 3.0 18.0
a Retrofit Curling into 3rd Sheet 2 2 3 2 1
b Add 4th Sheet 2 1 2 1 1
7 Neighbourhood Amenities 1 2.0 1.3 4.0 3.0 6.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 6.0 21.0
a New Albion Hall 1 2 3 3 2
b New Silver Valley Amenity 1 1 3 3 2
c Hammond Hall Retrofit 1 1 3 3 2
8 Farm/Agricultural Facilities 1.3 2.7 1.0 3.0 2.7 5.3 2.7 2.7 3.0 9.0 22.7
a Community Gardens 1 1 2 3 3
b 4-H Facilities 1 1 3 2 3
c N. F. Therapeutic Riding Centre 2 1 3 3 3
9 Trail Expansion 3 6.0 2 6.0 2 4.0 3 3.0 3 9.0 28.0 1
a Blue Mountain Grind 3 2 2 3 3
10 Water Play Park 2 4.0 2 6.0 3 6.0 3 3.0 3 7.5 26.5 2
11 3-5 Dog Parks 1 2.0 3 9.0 1 2.0 3 3.0 3 9.0 25.0 5
12 Jackson Farm 2 4.0 1 3.0 2 4.0 2 2.0 3 9.0 22.0
Amenities
Weights
Criteria for Prioritizing Amenities
Criteria for Evaluating Maple Ridge Facility Project Priority
Each of these criteria will be considered separately and will influence overall priority. A project
scoring high on a number of these criteria will rise to the top of the priority scale, and projects that
score highly on only one or two, or score lower across all criteria will sink to the bottom of a priority
list when Council considers how to invest limited available public resources on public service
improvements.
1.Regional Attraction/Trip Generator
A project that is somewhat unique in the region, and will generate trips into Maple Ridge to use
it, will be considered higher priority than one which doesn’t. So, projects that support major
events with a regional draw and projects that are unique and attractive within the region will be
higher priority.
2.Magnitude of Currently Unmet Need
A project that will significantly reduce current waiting lists, increases service levels which are
substandard to a provincial standard, fills a gap in a specif ic market that can be clearly
demonstrated, and/or serves a broad cross section of the community will be considered higher
priority than a project that makes only a small incremental difference to service levels within
Maple Ridge, increases service levels beyond provincial service norms, or caters to a very
narrow segment of interest within Maple Ridge.
3.Youth or Family Focus
Projects that focus on serving youth under 18 or family units will be considered to be higher
priority than projects which focus on other age groups.
4.Complies with Compelling Trends
If a project which creates opportunities in areas which are either trending downward in Maple
Ridge, or trending downward generally in the region, province or country will be considered to be
lower priority than projects which create opportunities in areas that have long term increases in
per capita activity. This is due to the risk of investing in services which will be well used in the
long term future.
5.Cost Efficiency
A project that requires less capital investment and operating subsidy per use and/or has more
opportunity for sharing those costs with other partners who will help to fund them has a higher
priority than a project that requires more capital investment and annual operating subsidy per
use and/or less chance of partners to share the costs.
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: March 7, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 11-5380-01
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: Proposed Changes to Metro Vancouver Transfer Station Hours
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Metro Vancouver Maple Ridge Transfer Station in Albion is a drop-off facility for residential
garbage and green waste, located adjacent to the Ridge Meadows Recycling Depot. It is one of two
Transfer Stations in the Metro Vancouver Region (MV) that is set up to accept only residential, or
small load disposal, the other being the Langley Transfer Station.
All five MV Transfer Stations are operated under a contract that expires at the end of 2016. MV has
initiated a competitive selection process for the operation and maintenance of the regional Transfer
Stations and part of the contract specifications under consideration is the standardization of
operating hours at all Transfer Stations. Currently the operating hours at all facilities vary by site,
albeit not significantly on the regular daily schedule – the single largest difference is that both the
Langley and Maple Ridge sites currently close on all Statutory Holidays whereas the other sites close
only on December 25 and January 01. In addition, the Maple Ridge Transfer Station is open until 7
PM on both Tuesdays and Wednesdays, while all other facilities cease residential drop-off at 5 PM.
Through their competitive selection process, MV is seeking to standardize and simplify the facility
operating hours of their Transfer Stations with the intent of optimizing customer usage of the
facilities. For the Maple Ridge Transfer Station it is proposed that the operating hours be amended
as follows:
Existing
Monday – Friday Saturday – Sunday Stat. Holidays Closures
8 AM – 7 PM (Tu-Wed)
8 AM – 5 PM (Mon, Th, Fr)
8 AM – 5 PM Closed All Stat. Holidays
Proposed
Season Monday – Friday Saturday Sunday Stat. Holidays
Apr. 01 – Sept. 30
Oct. 01 – March 31
8 AM – 6 PM
8 AM – 5 PM
8 AM – 6 PM
8 AM – 5 PM
9 AM – 5 PM
9 AM – 5 PM
9 AM – 6 PM
9 AM – 5 PM
**All facilities closed December 25 and January 01
The proposed schedule represents a net increase in the Transfer Station operating hours of 172
hours per annum. Keeping the Transfer Station open for more hours has an impact on the operation
of the Ridge Meadows Recycling Society Depot and a number of concerns are noted in this report
along with any potential financial implications.
The purpose of this report is to outline the proposed changes to the MV Transfer Station operating
hours, ascertain Council’s support for the proposal as well a s outline implications for the Recycling
Depot. 5.2
RECOMMENDATIONS:
THAT a letter be sent to Metro Vancouver indicating the City of Maple Ridge’s support for the
proposed operating hours, as noted in the report “Proposed Changes to Metro Vancouver Transfer
Station Hours” dated March 7, 2016; and
THAT the options for the Ridge Meadows Recycling Society Depot with respect to the revised Maple
Ridge Transfer Station operating hours be evaluated and included in the 2017-2021 Business
Planning deliberations.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The Maple Ridge Transfer Station in Albion is one of five MV Transfer Stations in the Region and one
of two residential garbage and green waste drop-off facilities, the other being located in the
Township of Langley. All five MV Transfer Stations are opera ted under a contract that expires at the
end of 2016 and MV has initiated a competitive selection process for the operation and
maintenance of the regional Transfer Stations.
The MV selection process to secure a new contractor includes as part of that process the
standardization of the operating hours at all Transfer Stations starting in 2017. The current
operating hours at all facilities under the existing contract vary from site to site; while the regular
daily schedule has minor variations the single largest difference is that both the Langley and Maple
Ridge sites currently close on all Statutory Holidays whereas the other sites close only on December
25 and January 01.
MV’s goal in seeking to standardize and simplify the facility operating hours of their Transfer Stations
in their current competitive selection process is to optimize customer usage of the facilities. For the
Maple Ridge Transfer Station it is proposed that the operating hours be amended as follows:
Existing
Monday – Friday Saturday – Sunday Stat. Holidays Closures
8 AM – 7 PM (Tu-Wed)
8 AM – 5 PM (Mon, Th, Fr)
8 AM – 5 PM Closed All Stat. Holidays
Proposed (As of 2017)
Season Monday – Friday Saturday Sunday Stat. Holidays
Apr. 01 – Sept. 30
Oct. 01 – March 31
8 AM – 6 PM
8 AM – 5 PM
8 AM – 6 PM
8 AM – 5 PM
9 AM – 5 PM
9 AM – 5 PM
9 AM – 6 PM
9 AM – 5 PM
**All facilities closed December 25 and January 01
The proposed schedule represents a net increase in the Transfer Station operating hours of 172
hours per annum by opening the Transfer Station on Statutory Holidays (excluding Christmas Day
and New Years Day) along with a minor revision to the closing hours.
Increasing the Transfer Station operating hours has a knock-on impact to the Ridge Meadows
Recycling Society Depot as a significant proportion of residential customers to the Transfer Station
will also drop off items at the Recycling Depot. Opening the MV Transfer Station on the Statutory
Holidays, but not having the Recycling Depot open at the same time may result in recyclable
materials being dumped in the garbage containers at the Transfer Station or left at the gate of the
Recycling Depot as residents often “double up”, bringing both garbage and recycling for drop-off.
This issue aside, it seems reasonable for the City to endorse the proposed change in hours for the
MV Transfer Station to standardize the MV facilities across the Region.
Consideration of how the operating hours of the Recycling Depot are modified, if at all, to reflect the
MV Transfer Station schedule is an issue that requires some careful deliberation as the decisions
made may have financial or staffing implications. It is recommended that this matter be brought
back to Council in the latter part of 2016 after Council has had time to deliberate the overall solid
waste collection issue, or it be part of that discussion. There could be a decision to match the MV
Transfer Station hours as well as the potential of expanding curbside collection on those additional
Statutory Holidays - residents on the Monday curbside route often miss collections due to the
Statutory Holiday often being on that day. Both matters would have financial implications for RMRS
as a result of staff working the Statutory Holidays. For example, RMRS staff have indicated that
opening the Recycling Depot on the ten Statutory Holidays could result in increased labour costs of
approximately $40,000.
b) Desired Outcome:
It is the objective of Council to support the diversion of materials from the solid waste stream withi n
Metro Vancouver along with other municipalities. Ensuring that residents have consistent and
reliable access to the Transfer Station and Recycling Depot will further those waste diversion goals.
c) Strategic Alignment:
Waste reduction and diversion is a requirement of all municipalities in the Lower Mainland as part of
the Integrated Solid Waste and Resource Management Plan (ISWRMP).
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
Increasing the hours of the Transfer Station and correspondingly the Recycling Depot should
increase the convenience for residents to drop off garbage and recyclable materials. Not having
matching hours of operation may well deter residents from making the effort to maximise their
recycling efforts.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
RMRS provides the curbside and depot recycling functions under a partnership agreement in the
City; staff from Operations and Engineering provide support in assisting to administer the operations
as well as provide and maintain the fleet and machines in support of the recycling function.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
As noted previously, increasing the recycling operations to include Statutory Holidays will require
additional costs for labour to staff the depot and perhaps undertake curbside collection. It is
recommended that the financial implications be discussed within the context of the overall solid
waste discussion that Council wishes to have later in 2016, for consideration in the 2017 -2021
Financial Plan deliberations.
g) Alternatives:
Council may elect not to align the Recycling Depot operating hours with the schedule proposed by
MV starting in 2017, choosing rather to maintain the current operating hours.
CONCLUSIONS:
Metro Vancouver’s current operating contract for their five Transfer Stations in the Region expires at
the end of 2016 and are seeking to standardize the operating hours at all locations as part of the
competitive process. While this request is supportable, it does raise concerns for the operation of
the Recycling Depot located next to the Transfer Station, and it is recommended that those issues be
discussed later in 2016 as part of Council’s deliberations around solid waste collection.
“Original signed by David Pollock”
Prepared by: David Pollock, PEng.
Municipal Engineer
“Original signed by David Pollock” for:
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, PEng.
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
DP:dp
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: March 7, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2014-009-CP
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: Hammond Area Plan Process – Preliminary Concept Plan
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On March 2, 2015, Council received a summary on the outcomes of the Hammond Area Plan public
consultation process, along with a brief presentation of the project background and public
engagement approach. Since that time, the following three studies have been completed:
Hammond Historic Character Area Study, Donald Luxton & Associates
Residential Density Bonus/Density Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan,
Urban Systems
Commercial Demand and Capacity Analysis for Hammond Area Plan, Rollo & Associates
It was envisioned at the project’s outset that technical studies would be needed to fully inform the
content of the Concept Plan. These studies were commissioned based on the input received from
the community through the public consultation process. A summary of these studies is attached as
Appendix B and the studies attached as Appendices C, D, and E, respectively.
Additionally, the draft Guiding Principles presented during the public consultation process were
refined and presented in a #MyHammond video update that incorporated neighbourhood examples
for each. This video was posted on the municipal website in October 2015. The Guiding Principles
and supporting objectives are incorporated into the Hammond Preliminary Concept Plan, attached as
Appendix A.
The Hammond Area Plan is in Phase III, which involves the preparation of a Preliminary Concept Plan
and is the subject of this report.
A public open house has been planned for March 30, 2016 for feedback on the Preliminary Concept
Plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the staff report entitled “Hammond Area Plan Process – Preliminary Concept Plan”, dated
March 7, 2016, be received for information.
5.3
[2]
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The #MyHammond Area Plan process was endorsed by Council on March 3, 2014 and the public
process was launched shortly thereafter. There are five phases for this project:
Phase I: Neighbourhood Context - complete
Phase II: Public Consultation - complete
Phase III: Draft Hammond Area Plan (Concept Plan) - current phase
Phase IV: Area Plan Endorsement
Phase V: Plan Approval
The approach to public consultation at the outset has been to engage the community through
various forms of social media, as well as incorporating traditional methods, such as open house
events. Additionally, the public has been asked to provide input through photos of the
neighbourhood, online discussion topics, videotaped interviews, comments at open house events
and open house questionnaires. Each of the open house questionnaires were posted online after
each event and remained open for community input for at least two weeks.
The opportunity to provide input or ask questions through email was established using a
#MyHammond@mapleridge.ca email address. All information produced through the Area Plan
process is posted on #MyHammond webpage http://www.mapleridge.ca/794/MyHammond-
Hammond-Area-Plan-Process for the community to stay updated and keep track of progress.
On March 2, 2015, the outcomes of the public consultation were presented to Council. The process
is currently nearing the end of Phase III. Phases IV and V will include one more public open house,
Council endorsement of the Concept Plan, preparation of the Area Plan Bylaw for Council
consideration and approval.
b) Outcomes of Phase III:
1. Guiding Principles and Objectives
The following ten Guiding Principles have been developed from community input through the
Area Plan process:
1. Neighbourhood character is retained
2. A range of housing forms are supported
3. New development enhances and compliments existing built form and neighbourhood
character
4. Historic commercial area serves community needs
5. Innovative building technologies are utilized
6. Flood risks are minimized through a variety of mitigation measures
7. Natural landscape is maintained and enhanced
8. Transportation routes are safe and effective
9. Open spaces and recreational opportunities contribute to the enjoyment and well-being
of residents
10. Employment opportunities are close to home
[3]
Objectives in support of each Guiding Principle have also been developed and are
incorporated into the Hammond Preliminary Concept Plan, attached as Appendix A. The
Guiding Principles have informed the proposed land use designations and objectives, which
in turn will inform the policies in the Area Plan.
2. Hammond Preliminary Concept Plan
The 10 Guiding Principles create the foundation for the Area Plan and have guided the
preparation of the Preliminary Concept Plan (Appendix A). This Preliminary Plan identifies the
main sections or topic areas that will be included in the Hammond Area Plan Bylaw:
1.0 Guiding Principles
2.0 Neighbourhood Characteristics
3.0 Land Use Designations
4.0 Transportation & Connectivity
5.0 Water & Habitat
6.0 Land Use Plan
Each section includes a description of the topic, the intention of what each topic area will
aim to achieve, and the Guiding Principles and Objectives that each topic area is built upon.
Proposed land uses are shown on a Concept Plan map, with supporting maps for each of four
sub-neighbourhoods, or precincts, identifying specific focal topics for each. Three maps are
presented for Precinct 2, each showing a different option for discussion with Council and the
community.
3. Technical Studies
Both the community and technical inputs are essential for developing sound policies within
the Area Plan Bylaw. Part of Phase III involved commissioning three technical studies for the
Area Plan. Input received through the public consultation process contributed to determining
the research focus for each study. The three studies are as follows:
Hammond Historic Character Area Study, Donald Luxton & Associates
Residential Density Bonus/Density Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area
Plan, Urban Systems
Commercial Demand and Capacity Analysis for Hammond Area Plan, Rollo & Associates
The outcomes of these studies (attached as Appendices C, D, and E) have contributed to the
Preliminary Concept Plan content as a layer of technical information that is essential for
shaping policy development. A summary of the three technical studies undertaken in Phase
III of the Area Plan process is attached as Appendix B.
c) Next Steps:
A third public open house is planned for March 30, 2016 where the Preliminary Concept Plan will be
presented to the community for discussion and feedback. The open house will be held at Hammond
Elementary School. It will be advertised in the newspaper, through social media, and on the City’s
website.
[4]
Community feedback from this open house event will be incorporated into the final draft Concept
Plan and presented to Council for endorsement later this spring and direction to proceed to bylaw
preparation.
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
A number of departments have provided significant support and technical knowledge into the
planning process. These include Communications, Engineering, Parks & Leisure Services, and
Licences, Permits & Bylaws. Economic Development will also be included in discussions on
expanding employment opportunities in the Hammond neighbourhood, particularly the historic
commercial node.
CONCLUSION:
The Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan is an integration of the information collected through
the public process along with the supporting technical studies that followed. Ten Guiding Principles
were developed through this process with supporting objectives and these have set the Plan’s
foundation. The Preliminary Concept Plan includes proposed land uses and corresponding
objectives for each of the four precincts.
Following the next open house and summary report to Council, a final Concept Plan will be prepared
for Council’s endorsement prior to proceeding to the OCP amending bylaw stage
“Original signed by Lisa Zosiak”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Lisa Zosiak, M.R.M., MCIP, RPP
Planner
“Original signed by Christine Carter”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
“Original signed by David Pollock” for
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng.
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A: Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan
Appendix B: Summary of Technical Studies for Hammond Area Plan
Appendix C: Hammond Historic Character Area Study, Donald Luxton & Associates, February 2015
Appendix D: Residential Density Bonus/Density Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan,
Urban Systems, October 16, 2015
Appendix E: Commercial Demand and Capacity Analysis for Hammond Area Plan, Rollo & Associates,
September 2015
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
1
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan
The Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan is comprised of five main sections forming a
comprehensive outline for the Hammond Area Plan. These sections are as follows:
1.0 Guiding Principles
2.0 Neighbourhood Characteristics
3.0 Land Use Designations
4.0 Transportation & Connectivity
5.0 Water & Habitat
6.0 Land Use Maps
Section 1.0 sets the foundation for the Area Plan with ten Guiding Principles and supporting objectives.
The remaining four sections build upon the Guiding Principles and establish the framework for the Area
Plan, which includes an introduction to each topic and the intent for future policies and what they will
aim to achieve.
1.0 Guiding Principles
The Hammond Area Plan process has produced 10 Guiding Principles to help navigate content
development for the Preliminary Concept Plan. Supporting Objectives have been developed to
create clear linkages between the Guiding Principles and the policies that will be developed for
the Area Plan Bylaw.
1.Neighbourhood character is retained
Objectives:
Promote retention of heritage character elements
Retain historic street grid pattern, including laneways
Encourage retention of mature trees and established garden spaces
Celebrate Hammond’s history in ways that identify special places, people, features, or
events
2.A range of housing forms and tenures are supported
Objectives:
Permit diversity in housing forms and densities for modest cost housing options
Plan for development that enables “aging in place” for residents
Facilitate a greater supply and variety of rental housing forms
APPENDIX A
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
2
3. New development enhances and compliments existing built form and neighbourhood character
Objectives:
Plan for a range of development forms that fit with surrounding character
New development is designed to foster “eyes on streets” and laneways
Public spaces are attractive and inviting with plant materials and seating areas
Enhanced neighbourhood vibrancy leads to development on vacant lots
All new development incorporates useable and attractive greenspace
4. Historic commercial area serves community needs
Objectives:
Plan for a pedestrian-oriented commercial hub of shops and services that meet
residents’ daily needs
A greater density of mixed-use development contributes to viability of the village
commercial area
Short-term pop-up commercial ventures help revitalize village commercial area and
enhance other employment areas
5. Innovative building technologies are utilized
Objectives:
Adaptively reuse existing buildings, particularly those with heritage value or character
Design buildings to adapt to future uses
Encourage the use of innovative building technologies and materials
Continue to promote sound management of all waste materials
6. Flood risks are minimized through a variety of mitigation measures
Objectives:
Continue to manage Wharf Street dyke as a defence against flood events
Apply floodplain construction standards for new development
Continue to make flood mitigation and emergency program information available to the
public
Natural drainage areas are recognized for the important role they play in flood
mitigation
7. Natural landscape is maintained and enhanced
Objectives:
Promote maintenance and expansion of the tree canopy on public and private lands
Improve the quality and function of greenspace in Hammond
Maintain and enhance drainage canals for greater biodiversity
Encourage and support local stewardship activities
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
3
8. Transportation routes are safe and effective
Objectives:
Ensure streets provide safe and walkable surfaces
Promote identified bicycle routes throughout the neighbourhood
Incorporate traffic calming measures where warranted
Ensure community gathering spaces and points of interest are identified along
pedestrian and bicycle routes
9. Open spaces and recreational opportunities contribute to the enjoyment and well-being of
residents
Objectives:
Plan for new recreation trails, where opportunities exist, to improve pedestrian and
bicycle network connections
Work with community to identify and support local food production opportunities
Identify opportunities to enhance public spaces through improved or new park space,
public art, interpretive signs, and wayfinding signs
10. Employment opportunities are close to home
Objectives:
Continue to support operation of the Hammond Cedar Mill and recognize its historical
presence in the community
Provide for a range of shops and services in the historic commercial area that contribute
to Hammond’s small business community
Continue to support and encourage business development in the Maple/Meadows
Business Park and the Hammond General Employment designation
Mitigate impacts of industrial use on adjacent and nearby residents
2.0 Neighbourhood Characteristics
The Hammond neighbourhood has grown significantly since it was registered as a Township in
1883 and the character of each development era reflects the time period in which it was built.
Differences in character of developed areas are evident in land use, street grid pattern, built
form, and design of public space. Retaining neighbourhood characteristics that contribute to
the vitality and livability of Hammond over the long term is a primary goal of the Hammond Area
Plan. One approach to achieving this goal is in the identification of precinct areas where clear
differences in neighbourhood character exist and are considered as each of these areas evolves
over time.
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
4
Using input received through the public consultation process, four precinct areas have been
identified:
Precinct 1: North Hammond
Precinct 2: Upper Hammond
Precinct 3: Lower Hammond
Precinct 4: Maple/Meadows Business Park
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
5
Guiding Principles:
1. Neighbourhood Character is retained
3. New development enhances and compliments existing built form and neighbourhood
character
Objectives:
Promote retention of heritage character elements
Retain historic street grid pattern, including laneways
Encourage retention of mature trees and established garden spaces
Celebrate Hammond’s history in ways that identify special places, people, features, or
events
Plan for a range of development forms that fit with surrounding character
2.1 Precinct 1: North Hammond
Intent:
North Hammond is predominantly low-density residential in single-family form. One large
pocket of townhouse development is located at 207th Street, 118th Avenue, and Thorne Avenue.
The North Hammond area was developed in the 1980’s, long after the residential areas to the
south were established. Characteristics such as curved roads, cul-de-sacs, and sidewalks
confirm North Hammond’s more contemporary era. Compared to earlier eras, many of North
Hammond houses are large with smaller yards and gardens and garages prominently facing the
street. These building features indicate a mid to late 20th century style.
Although North Hammond development is more recent than the areas to the south, it is well
established and many of the trees and shrubs planted during development are large enough to
contribute character to the urban landscape.
A key focus for this area is retaining existing connectivity for pedestrian and cycling activity and
creating new opportunities wherever possible.
2.2 Precinct 2: Upper Hammond
Intent:
When the Hammond Township plan was registered in 1883, Upper Hammond began to expand
rapidly. The opening of Hammond train station in 1885 resulted in more homes, commercial
businesses, and industry. As the commercial hub grew into a bustling centre of activity, the Port
Hammond Lumber Company began its operation on the riverfront in 1908.
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
6
Much of the unique character that grew out of Hammond’s early days remains evident within
Precinct 2 and retaining this character was the predominant message received through the
public consultation process.
A heritage character study was undertaken by Donald Luxton & Associates and the findings were
summed up as follows:
The concentration of heritage and character sites is situated in Upper Hammond,
where a significant number of resources exist in fairly close conjunction.
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
7
The above map, prepared by Donald Luxton & Associates, shows the boundaries of the heritage
character area identified through the study. The characteristics that contribute to the
concentration of these features include:
Built form – “Small commercial buildings and modest wood frame houses reflect the
working class nature of the settlement…”.
Land Use Pattern – “The early commercial area contains a number of modest early
commercial buildings…This has always been the location of commercial activities, across
from the mill site. The residential areas developed north of the commercial area and
also to the west. This pattern continues to the present day.”
Lot Pattern and Street Grid – “The very tight street grid provides more of a village
atmosphere and a more walkable environment”.
Landscaping – “Landscaping has matured to provide visual interest”.
Additional Details:
The heritage character study identifies the potential for a Heritage Conservation Area as a
regulatory tool within Upper Hammond. A Heritage Conservation Area is one option for
retaining historic value. Other options include Development Permit Area Guidelines and zoning
regulations specific to lands within the heritage character area.
Alternatives:
Three Heritage Character Area land use scenarios are presented as options in Hammond’s
Preliminary Concept Plan. Each of these options may be discussed in the context of a
Heritage Conservation Area Bylaw, or as a stand-alone alternative. Each alternative is
discussed below.
Heritage Conservation Area: A Heritage Conservation Area Bylaw is the most effective
tool available in the Local Government Act for preserving heritage character within a
neighbourhood. For properties identified as being important to the heritage character
of the area, alterations beyond regular building maintenance, such as painting, replacing
existing materials, or re-roofing, will require a Heritage Alteration Permit. Design
standards would be required within the Bylaw for building additions, exterior
modifications, and new development.
Expanding Commercial Uses in the Heritage Character Area: This approach would
involve creating an “Expanded Commercial Use” zone to apply to single-family
properties within the heritage character area. Such a zone would enable expanded
commercial uses such as art studio/gallery, retail, coffee shop, bakery, antiques, hair
stylist, flower shop etc., either within the existing primary building or within an
accessory building on site.
o If combined with Heritage Conservation Area Bylaw, the “Expanded Commercial
Use” zone would be applied to the entire area covered by the HCA Bylaw and
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
8
property owners would have the option to utilize the permitted commercial
uses or continue to retain the single-family use of their property.
o If this approach is not used in conjunction with a Heritage Conservation Area
Bylaw, it may still be considered as a viable heritage conservation tool. As such,
the “Expanded Commercial Use” zone could be made available to residential
property owners who are willing to designate their property as heritage in
exchange for the expanded commercial use.
Development Permit Area Guidelines: Note that Development Permit Area Guidelines
for form and character may be established for new multi-family, commercial, mixed-use,
institutional, and industrial forms of development. Single-family form is exempt from
Development Permit Area Guidelines. DP Guidelines help inform building and site
design so that new development complements the existing character. This includes
information on the use of appropriate building materials, siting, colours, and design
features, such as encouraging front porches, shed dormers, and multi-paned double
hung windows. Also incorporated into Development Permit Area Guidelines is the use
of landscaping, advising on outdoor features such as era appropriate trees, shrubs, and
fencing.
2.3 Precinct 3: Lower Hammond
Intent:
The development era of Lower Hammond is mixed. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries,
when Upper Hammond was growing rapidly, Lower Hammond was growing at a slower pace.
There are a number of older homes scattered throughout Lower Hammond, described in Donald
Luxton & Associates’ heritage character study, as being “pre-1940’s wood frame structures that
reflect the working-class nature of the area”, but lacking in concentration of similar structures
found in Upper Hammond. Most development in Lower Hammond represents eras from the
mid to late 20th and early 21st centuries. The study also identified Lower Hammond’s grid-
pattern road network and lot configuration, which is similar to that found in Upper Hammond,
contribute heritage character to the area. The grid-pattern roads and lot configuration define
the precinct boundaries as “Lower Hammond”, but the different eras of development
throughout have created an eclectic and interesting mix of housing form. Also noteworthy in
the study is the following observation:
Upper and Lower Hammond are also at a different orientation, with Upper
Hammond oriented north-south and Lower Hammond angled relative to
True North. This gives each area a more distinct identity and provides visual
containment.
Lower Hammond is located in the Fraser River floodplain and this will continue to impact the
form and design of new development into the future. This area has been described by some as
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
9
having a rural character not typically found in single-family suburban areas. Features that
contribute to this character, not already discussed above, are:
Numerous vegetated open drainage channels with adjacent informal trails that connect
various blocks
Roads with a narrower paved width compared to other suburban residential areas (such
as Precinct 1)
Very few sidewalks, and
Two areas of focus for Lower Hammond in the Area Plan are:
1) Maintaining the rural character;
2) Enhancing connectivity within Precinct 3 and identifying opportunities to link with
other Hammond Precincts and beyond.
2.4 Precinct 4: Maple/Meadows Business Park
Intent:
Although land use is a primary factor that sets Precinct 4 apart, the area does have other
characteristics important to its future. Most of the northern portion of Maple/Meadows
Business Park was constructed in the early 1990’s and the southern portion is currently
undeveloped. Because the business park has grown slowly over the years, the pattern of older
to newer light industrial building design is clearly evident. Part of the Katzie Slough is located at
the western edge of the Precinct and provides natural drainage for the area. All of Precinct 4 is
located in the Fraser River floodplain.
A key feature of Maple/Meadows Business Park is auto-oriented connectivity with the regional
highway network. The Business Park is a prime location very close to Lougheed Highway and
adjacent to Golden Ears Way and Golden Ears Bridge. When the southern lands eventually
develop, an alternative access to the area will be constructed. This is particularly beneficial for
emergency access.
Considerations regarding development in the floodplain will continue to be a focus for Precinct
4, including best practices for stormwater management. Additionally, there will be a focus on
enhancing local and regional connectivity with improvements to roads and routes, as well as
increasing pedestrian and bicycle opportunities within and through the area.
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
10
3.0 Land Use Designations
3.1 Residential
Hammond is an established neighbourhood and it is important that new development is
compatible with existing character. Retaining neighbourhood character is a key aim for the
Hammond Area Plan, while allowing for increased residential densities that support a more
vibrant community. Additionally, introducing new forms of residential development is intended
to attract new residents and enable current residents to “age in place”.
Guiding Principles:
1. Neighbourhood character is retained
2. A range of housing forms and tenures are supported
3. New development enhances and compliments existing built form and neighbourhood
character
5. Innovative building technologies are utilized
Objectives:
Promote retention of heritage character elements
Retain historic street grid pattern, including laneways
Encourage retention of mature trees and established garden spaces
Celebrate Hammond’s history in ways that identify special places, people, features, or
events
Permit diversity in housing forms and densities for modest cost housing options
Plan for development that enables “aging in place” for residents
Facilitate a greater supply and variety of rental housing forms
Plan for a range of development forms that fit with surrounding character
New development is designed to foster “eyes on streets” and laneways
Enhanced neighbourhood vibrancy leads to development on vacant lots
All new development incorporates useable and attractive greenspace
Adaptively reuse existing buildings, particularly those with heritage value or character
Design buildings to adapt to future uses
Encourage the use of innovative building technologies and materials
Continue to promote sound management of all waste materials
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
11
3.1.1 Low Density Residential:
Intent:
Single-family dwellings, duplex, and triplex are the forms of development permitted in the areas
of Hammond identified for Low Density Residential. The intent is to allow for some density
increase that is compatible with existing single-family form and neighbourhood character.
Secondary suites and garden suites are also encouraged outside of the floodplain area.
3.1.2 Low Density Multi-Family:
Intent:
Encouraging an increase in density and expanding residential form is the intent of the Low
Density Multi-Family designation, which permits townhouse, fourplex and courtyard
development forms. Lands in this designation are primarily located in high activity areas along
major corridor roads, where appropriate, adjacent to large community gathering spaces and the
West Coast Express. It also serves as a transitional development form and density between Low
Density Residential and the Medium Density Multi-Family designations. Consideration of
Hammond’s existing neighbourhood character, that includes historic building elements and
attractive garden spaces, is an important aspect of this designation.
3.1.3 Medium Density Multi-Family:
Intent:
Providing for a level of density aimed at establishing a vibrant Hammond neighbourhood is the
intent of the Medium Density Multi-Family designation, which permits residential forms of
townhouse, rowhouse and apartment. Similar to the Low Density Multi-Family designation,
this future land use is primarily located along major corridors with focus areas being where
Hammond’s highest density is most suitable and beneficial to neighbourhood vibrancy – for
example, some lands east of 207th in Precinct 2 and some lands within 100m of the Lougheed
Highway in Precinct 1.
3.2 Employment
Four land use designations for employment within Hammond are Hammond Village
Commercial, Maple/Meadows Business Park, Hammond General Employment and Hammond
General Industrial. The intent is to provide a range of employment options for local residents
and the region, support the local economy, and provide nearby shops and services that will help
meet the community’s daily needs.
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
12
Guiding Principles:
1. Neighbourhood character is retained
3. New development enhances and compliments existing built form and neighbourhood
character
4. Historic commercial area serves local community needs
5. Innovative building technologies are utilized
10. Employment opportunities are close to home
Objectives:
Promote retention of heritage character elements
Retain historic street grid pattern, including laneways
Encourage retention of mature trees and established garden spaces
Celebrate Hammond’s history in ways that identify special places, people, or features
Plan for a range of development forms that fit with surrounding character
New development is designed to foster “eyes on streets” and laneways
Public spaces are attractive and inviting with plant materials and seating areas
Enhanced neighbourhood vibrancy leads to development on vacant lots
Plan for a pedestrian-oriented commercial hub of shops and services that meet
residents’ daily needs
A greater density of mixed-use development contributes to viability of the village
commercial area
Short-term pop-up commercial ventures help revitalize village commercial area
Adaptively reuse existing buildings, particularly those with heritage value or character
Design buildings to adapt to future uses
Encourage the use of innovate building technologies and materials
Continue to promote sound management of all waste materials
Continue to support operation of the Hammond Cedar Mill and recognize its historical
presence in the community
Provide for a range of shops and services in the historic commercial area that contribute
to Hammond’s small business community
Continue to support and encourage business development in the Maple/Meadows
Business Park and the Hammond General Employment designation
Mitigate impacts of industrial use on adjacent and nearby residents
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
13
3.2.1 Hammond Commercial
Intent:
Hammond Commercial designated lands are mainly concentrated in Hammond’s historic
commercial node at Maple Crescent and Dartford Street. Creating a hub of vibrant commercial
activity is encouraged through mixed-use development forms that include ground level retail
shops and services with apartments or offices above. Additional ways to attract people and
enliven the area are seasonal or temporary “pop-up” businesses and the incorporation of pocket
parks into new development.
Additional Details:
Intended uses are very similar to those in C-3, C-5 and H1 zones – however, a new
commercial zone will be created so that it is specific for Hammond. This zone will
include a ground-oriented multi-family form combined with commercial use to ensure
viability of a mixed-use development form.
3.2.2 Maple/Meadows Business Park
Intent:
Maple/Meadows Business Park designated lands encompass most of Precinct 4. This area has
been an employment generator since its inception in the early 1990’s and accommodates many
large, medium and small businesses. It is well located close to Lougheed Highway and Golden
Ears Bridge, both routes being part of the regional highway network. The Business Park has
experienced significant growth over the years and it is anticipated it will continue to expand and
evolve into the future.
3.2.3 Hammond General Employment
Intent:
The Hammond General Employment designation is applied to mostly underutilized lands
adjacent to the railway tracks in Precincts 2 (Upper Hammond) and 3 (Lower Hammond). These
lands are narrow and limited in potential for redevelopment. The intent of Hammond General
Employment is to create opportunities for businesses that do not generate much traffic and
have minimal need for public parking. Additionally, this designation is limited to businesses that
do not produce much noise, odor, or fumes and blend well into the nearby residential areas
either through attractive building design or landscape screening.
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
14
Additional Details:
A new Hammond General Employment zone will be created for properties under this
designation with considerations for proximity to a residential area and close to historic
commercial node.
Proposed is a maximum height of 3 storeys to mitigate building heights adjacent to
residential uses.
3.2.4 Hammond General Industrial
Intent:
The Hammond Cedar Mill lands make up the Hammond General Industrial designation and this
operation is anticipated to continue for the foreseeable future. The Mill has been providing
local jobs since 1908 and is as much a part of Hammond’s historic character as the railway and
street grid pattern.
3.3 Parks and Open Space
Intent:
Hammond has a number of Park spaces that include:
Hammond Stadium, Pool, and Community Centre
Hammond Park
Maple Ridge Golf Course
Tolmie Park
Emmeline Mohun Park
The Parks and Open Space designation continues to include lands dedicated to a range of
recreational activities located within all three of Hammond’s residential Precincts. It is intended
to identify a suitable location for a community garden within Hammond to contribute further to
outdoor leisure activity, neighbourly interactions, and locally organized events.
Guiding Principles:
1. Neighbourhood character is retained
7. Natural landscape is maintained and enhanced
9. Open spaces and recreational opportunities contribute to the enjoyment and well-being of
residents
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
15
Objectives:
Celebrate Hammond’s history in ways that identify special places, people, features, or
events
Promote maintenance and expansion of the tree canopy on public and private lands
Improve the quality and function of greenspace in Hammond
Maintain and enhance drainage canals for greater biodiversity
Encourage and support local stewardship activities
Plan for new recreation trails, where opportunities exist, to improve pedestrian and bicycle
network connections
Work with community to identify and support local food production opportunities
Identify opportunities to enhance public spaces through improved or new park space,
public art, interpretive signs, and wayfinding signs
3.4 Institutional
Intent:
Hammond has a broad range of Institutional uses that are both public and private operations.
An Institutional use includes services such as education, government, fire protection, public
transit, health and welfare, and cultural/spiritual.
Guiding Principles:
1. Neighbourhood character is retained
2. New development enhances and compliments existing built form and neighbourhood
character
3. New development enhances and compliments existing built form and neighbourhood
character
5. Innovative building technologies are utilized
9. Open spaces and recreational opportunities contribute to the enjoyment and well-being of
residents
Objectives:
Promote retention of heritage character elements
Retain historic grid pattern, including laneways
Encourage retention of mature trees and established garden spaces
Celebrate Hammond’s history in ways that identify special places, people, features, or
events
Plan for a range of development forms that fit with surrounding character
New development is designed to foster “eyes on streets” and laneways
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
16
Public spaces are attractive and inviting with plant materials and seating areas
Adaptively reuse existing buildings, particularly those with heritage value or character
Design buildings to adapt to future uses
Encourage the use innovative building technologies and materials
Continue to promote sound management of all waste materials
Work with community to identify and support local food production opportunities
Identify opportunities to enhance public spaces through improved or new park space,
public art, interpretive signs, and wayfinding signs
3.5 Conservation
Intent:
This land is adjacent to the Golden Ears Bridge and part of the Katzie Slough. The Slough was
once an area rich in biodiversity, but today mainly provides natural drainage for the surrounding
developed area, including Lower Hammond (Precinct 3). The Slough’s drainage capability
provides an essential benefit to nearby property owners and as such it is important that the
ecology of these lands are maintained and enhanced where possible.
Additional Details:
The Agricultural Land Commission has identified this property as one that they would
support removal from the ALR and this will be pursued through the Area Plan process;
It is anticipated that with ALC approval of the ALR lands, the more suitable designation
of “Conservation” will be applied through the Area Plan process.
Guiding Principles:
6. Flood risks are minimized through a variety of mitigation measures
7. Natural landscape is maintained and enhanced, wherever possible, for aesthetics and
ecological value
Objectives:
Natural drainage areas are recognized for the important role they play in flood mitigation
Continue to make flood mitigation and emergency program information available to the
public
Promote maintenance and expansion of the tree canopy on public and private lands
Improve the quality and function of greenspace in Hammond
Maintain and enhance drainage canals for greater biodiversity
Encourage and support local stewardship activities
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
17
4.0 Transportation & Connectivity
Intent:
The original 1883 Port Hammond Junction Township plan laid out numerous short blocks, some
containing laneways, enabling numerous connections for local residents to travel from one area
of the neighbourhood to another. As Hammond grew over the years, the grid pattern for new
areas was not laid out in the same manner and resulted in longer blocks, numerous cul-de-sacs,
and fewer connectivity options for local residents.
Today, connectivity in Hammond is provided through various modes, such as Major Corridor
routes to manage large volumes of traffic within and through the neighbourhood, defined
bicycle routes, sidewalks, and formal and informal recreation routes. Walking and cycling are
popular activities in Hammond and the community has expressed a desire for road and route
improvements to make these activities safer and more desirable. A West Coast Express Station,
part of the Translink network, is located in the northwest corner of Hammond and provides
regional connectivity via railway. Translink also provides one regular bus route through
Hammond, along with two limited bus service routes.
Although the railway provides regional access, it has also been identified as an obstacle to
connectivity within Hammond, particularly Lower Hammond, with longer and more frequent
trains impacting four railway crossings.
Guiding Principles:
5. Innovative building technologies are utilized
6. Flood risks are minimized through a variety of mitigation measures
8. Transportation routes are safe and effective
Objectives:
Encourage the use of innovative building technologies and materials
Continue to promote sound management of all waste materials
Continue to management Wharf Street dyke as a defense against flood events
Natural drainage areas are recognized for the important role they play in flood mitigation
Ensure streets provide safe and walkable surfaces
Promote identified bicycle routes throughout the neighbourhood
Incorporate traffic calming measures where warranted
Ensure community gathering spaces and points of interest are identified along pedestrian
and bicycle routes
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
18
5.0 Water & Habitat
Intent:
Approximately half of the Hammond area is located in the floodplain and flooding has long been
a concern for residents, particularly during peak storm events. Existing flood mitigation
measures in Hammond include the Wharf Street dyke, vegetated drainage canals, and the
Princess Street Pump Station.
Effectively managing rainwater runoff is important in the protection of property and the natural
environment. It is an approach concerned with both water quantity and quality, each impacted
by the amount of effective impervious surfaces within a drainage area. Two key components of
rainwater management are: 1) capitalizing on opportunities to reduce impervious surfaces; and
2) enhancing natural areas to help slow and infiltrate rainwater. Selecting an appropriate mix of
plant materials promotes biodiversity in natural drainage areas. Healthy natural environments
help improve water quality, slow volume during peak events, and reduce pressure on nearby
Hammond Area Preliminary Concept Plan - DRAFT
19
floodplain pump stations. The pump stations are designed for large scale water conveyance
from flood prone areas.
There are a number of opportunities for increasing biodiversity within existing drainage canals in
Lower Hammond located in road right-of-ways and on vacant municipally owned lots.
Increasing biodiversity not only contributes to effective rainwater management, but also
improved function as habitat for a range of insects and freshwater invertebrates.
Guiding Principles:
6. Flood risks are minimized through a variety of mitigation measures
7. Natural landscape is maintained and enhanced, wherever possible, for aesthetics and
ecological value
Objectives:
Continue to manage Wharf Street dyke as a defence against flood events
Apply floodplain construction standards for new development
Continue to make flood mitigation and emergency program information available to the
public
Natural drainage areas are recognized for the important role they play in flood mitigation
Promote maintenance and expansion of the tree canopy on public and private lands
Improve the quality and function of greenspace in Hammond
Maintain and enhance drainage canals for greater biodiversity
Encourage and support local stewardship activities.
Hammond Preliminary Concept Plan
6.0 Land Use Maps
This section contains the land use maps supporting the written text of the Hammond Preliminary
Concept Plan. As an introduction to this land use plan section, the Hammond Precincts map is included
to highlight the four distinct areas within the Hammond neighbourhood. Specific focus areas for each
precinct are also indicated on the attached maps.
Hammond Preliminary Concept Plan
Precinct 1 - Pedestrian Connections
Legend
Low Density Residential
Low Density Multi-Family
Medium Density Multi-Family
Hammond Commercial
Institutional
Park
Potential Pedestrian Connections
Existing Pedestrian Connections
Hammond Area Plan Boundary
Railway
West CoastExpress
LOUGHEED
H
W
Y
207 ST203 STMAPLE
CRES
Hammond Preliminary Concept Plan
Precinct 2 - Heritage Character Area - Option 1
Legend
Low Density Residential
Low Density Multi-Family
Medium Density Multi-Family
Hammond Commercial
Hammond General Employment
Institutional
Park
Conservation
Heritage Character Area
Hammond Area Plan Boundary
Railway 207 STLORNE AVE
WESTFIELD AVE
GolfCourseMAPLE
CRES
Fraser
Ri
v
er
Hammond Preliminary Concept Plan
Precinct 2 - Heritage Character Area - Option 2
Legend
Low Density Residential
Low Density Multi-Family
Medium Density Multi-Family
Hammond Commercial
Hammond General Employment
Institutional
Park
Conservation
Heritage Character Area
Hammond Area Plan Boundary
Railway 207 STLORNE AVE
WESTFIELD AVE
GolfCourse
Fraser
Ri
v
erMAPLE
CRES
Fraser
Ri
v
er207 STLORNE AVE
WESTFIELD AVE
GolfCourseMAPLE
CRES
Precinct 2 - Heritage Character Area - Option 3
Hammond Preliminary Concept Plan
Legend
Low Density Residential
Low Density Multi-Family
Medium Density Multi-Family
Hammond Commercial
Hammond General Employment
Institutional
Park
Conservation
Heritage Character Area
Hammond Area Plan Boundary
Railway
Legend
Low Density Residential
Low Density Multi-Family
Hammond General Industrial
Park
Hammond General Employment
Hammond Area Plan Boundary
Potential Trails/Pedestrian Routes
Railway
Area for Further Discussion
Hammond Preliminary Concept Plan
Precinct 3 - Potential Trails/Pedestrian Routes
Fraser
Ri
v
er 207 STPRINCESS
S
TLORN
E
A
V
E
HAZE
LWOOD
S
T MAPLE
CRES
Hammond Preliminary Concept Plan
Precinct 4 - Major Corridors
Legend
Major Corridors
Maple Meadows Business Park
Conservation
Hammond Area Plan Boundary
Railway
Fraser
Ri
v
er 207 ST203 STPRINCESS
S
TLORN
E
A
V
E
HAZE
LWOOD
S
T MAPLE
CRES
Legend
Low Density Residential
Low Density Multi-Family
Medium Density Multi-Family
Hammond Commercial
Hammond General Employment
Maple Meadows Business Park
Hammond General Industrial
Institutional
Park
Conservation
Railway
Hammond Area Plan Boundary
Area for Further Discussion
Fraser
Ri
v
er
See Options for
Precinct #2
Hammond Preliminary Concept Plan
LOUGHEED
H
W
Y
207 ST203 STPRINCESS
S
TLORN
E
A
V
E
HAZE
LWOOD
S
T MAPLE
CRES
1
Summary of Technical Studies for Hammond Area Plan
Residential Density Bonus/Density Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Residential Density:
Urban Systems undertook a study to look at the potential of a Density Bonus and/or Density Transfer
Program in Hammond. One part of the study looked at the value of land lift by rezoning single-family
zoned lands to a higher density. The higher density development forms proposed for this analysis were
low-density apartment, mixed-use, and townhouse. In the study’s outcomes, Urban Systems states that
“it is clear that the optimal value of additional density in the Hammond area would be townhouse
zoning” and “at the present time, townhouses are the only higher density residential form for which
there is strong measurable demand”. The land lift value was determined to average $10,250 per door.
The study found that “the current land value lift associated with both apartments and mixed use
developments is substantially less than the land value lift associated with townhouses”. These values
are approximately $5,000 per door for apartment use and $2,750 per door for mixed-use.
Based on the outcomes of the US analysis, it is clear that new development in Hammond will come
much sooner through land-use policies that support townhouse form (i.e. ground-oriented multi-family)
of development. The future potential for four or more storeys of apartment and mixed-use must also be
planned for, as it is possible that with market shifts demand for higher density forms may increase over
time.
Ground-oriented multi-family is a medium density form that was discussed with the community at the
November 2014 public open house and includes duplex, tri-plex, four-plex, and townhouse. This is the
level of density that received the majority support from the community through the Hammond Area
Plan process.
Funding for Community Amenities:
Urban Systems looked at the potential for funding community amenities for the Hammond
neighbourhood through a Density Bonus Program, similar to that in the Albion Area Plan, and also
looked at whether a Density Transfer Program to help retain Hammond’s heritage character would be
viable.
A. Density Bonus Program
As previously discussed, Urban Systems found townhouse to be the most viable form of residential
development, at present, for a Density Bonus Program. With an average land lift value at approximately
$10,000 per door, through rezoning, a percentage of the lift value could result in amenity contributions
of $3,300 to $5,000 per townhouse unit.
APPENDIX B
2
Urban Systems concluded that neither apartment nor mixed-use development would currently be viable
for a Density Bonus Program in Hammond, due to significantly lower land lift values that average $5,000
to $2,270 per door, respectively.
The Urban Systems analysis includes discussion on an alternative Amenity Contribution Program, which
may be set-up with a fixed rate charge (either per unit or square foot of gross floor area) for all or most
forms of development. The difference with this alternative program is that the fixed rate is applied to
the entire development and not just to the “bonus” density. Ultimately, this alternative program would
result in a greater amount of contributions for neighbourhood amenities. It is noted in the study that
although this alternative approach is “not specifically authorized by legislation, and their application
generally relies on the provision of ‘voluntary’ contributions at time of rezoning”, it is the approach used
by a number of other municipalities.
B. Density Transfer Program
A program to transfer density from a property with heritage value to a nearby development site is not a
viable approach for a formalized program. Urban Systems found that “the value of the heritage
conservation is far greater than the value of additional density that could be accommodated on virtually
any site in the Hammond neighbourhood”. Additionally, US found this approach to be complicated to
administer between more than one land owner and challenging to explain to neighbouring residents,
property owners, and the public in general. However, US notes that this option could be considered on
a case by case basis.
Commercial Demand and Capacity Analysis for Hammond Area Plan
Rollo & Associates undertook a study to determine the viability of commercial land-use in Hammond
given three potential residential density scenarios over the next 30 years:
1. Base/existing density;
2. Medium Density (GOMF form);
3. Medium/High Density (GOMF, apartment, mixed-use).
Within this time horizon, Rollo &Associates identifies the kinds of local shopping and service needs that
would most likely be in demand under the three density scenarios:
Pharmacy
Restaurant
Wine & beer store
Personal services
Café
Grab & go/Bakery/Deli
General Store/Green Grocer
3
Comparison Boutiques
Hardware
Demand for a supermarket, at approximately 15,000 square feet, would be generated only within the
high/medium residential density scenario.
The demand for commercial gross floor area under the three scenarios ranges from approximately
20,000 to over 63,000 square feet. Rollo & Associates states that “depending on future demand and
built density” the commercial land area needed to support this floor area is in the range of 1.4 to 5.8
acres. This is based on a FSR between 0.25 and 0.35. Presently the commercially designated lands in
Hammond’s commercial node total approximately 5.5 acres (does not include roads, but does include
the two sites near Hammond Park).
Based on the outcomes from the Urban Systems study and the community input received, it will be
prudent to craft Area Plan policies that encourage townhouse development in Hammond within areas of
the neighbourhood that are most suitable for this form of density increase. For the medium density
scenario, Rollo & Associates has determined that the total land requirements will range from 1.7 (at 0.35
FSR) to 2.4 (at 0.25 FSR) acres in total.
Both Rollo & Associates and Urban Systems note that changes in Hammond’s residential market
demand to an increase in density (i.e. apartment use) is possible over the 30 year period. Flexibility in
land-use policies to accommodate a potential change in residential density over time and the most
suitable location(s) to accommodate denser development forms must also be thought through.
For present commercial demand in Hammond’s commercial node, Rollo & Associates concluded that
there is support for between 5,000 to 7,000 square feet of combined retail and service commercial floor
area.
Heritage Historic Character Area Study
Donald Luxton & Associates were asked to complete a study on identifying a heritage character area (or
areas) within the lands registered as Port Hammond Junction in 1883 – presently, these lands are
identified in Hammond as Precincts 2 and 3. DLA found the greatest concentration of heritage and
character sites are located in Precinct 2 (i.e. Upper Hammond). These are categorized in the study as
sites:
Protected through a Heritage Revitalization Agreement;
Listed on the Community Heritage Register;
Listed on the Heritage Inventory;
With heritage potential for inclusion on Inventory or Register; and
With heritage character.
4
Additional key elements that contribute to heritage character in Upper Hammond include:
Land use pattern – has remained the same since very early 1900’s;
Lot pattern and street grid – very small lots make up a tight grid system without alleys and
provides more of a village atmosphere and walkable environment than other older communities
with larger lot sizes and blocks;
Landscaping – mature landscaping, predominantly found in Upper Hammond, provides visual
interest ; and
Other historic activities – a legacy of human activity is commemorated with several plaques.
Heritage Conservation Area:
The heritage character area identified through the DLA study provides the potential boundaries for a
Heritage Conservation Area. Next steps involved in moving towards a HCA are discussed by DLA and
include refining the heritage character area boundaries “based on further study of area characteristics,
historic sites and other planning considerations” and identifying other possible planning tools “that
would complement and enhance heritage conservation”.
Urban Systems also looked at the DLA study and the outcomes of the Hammond Area Plan public
process. They note that community input through the Hammond Area Plan process suggests some
interest for this approach. US also identified the pros and cons of implementing a Heritage Conservation
Area:
Pros:
Provides the City and neighbourhood with increased ability to manage retention to existing
heritage resources and retain important existing neighbourhood elements.
A HCA indicates to the community and those who may want to move to Hammond or acquire
property that the historic elements of the HCA will be retained.
Cons:
A HCA places additional administrative requirements on landowners/developers, thereby adding
complexity, time, and cost in the modification or redevelopment of a site.
Note: A HCA bylaw may be designed to be flexible in order to minimize impacts to property
owners/developers who are modifying or redeveloping a site and to also minimize the increased
workload on municipal staff and Council.
HAMMOND HISTORIC
CHARACTER AREA
FEBRUARY 2015
APPENDIX C
&DONALD LUXTON
ASSOCIATES
HAMMOND HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA
Above: [Maple Ridge Museum & Archives P00360]
Cover Image: [Maple Ridge Museum & Archives P00358]
DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC. | FEBRUARY 2015 i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................ 1
HISTORY OF EARLY HAMMOND .............................................................. 2
HAMMOND NEIGHBOURHOOD CHARACTER ........................................ 10
POTENTIAL HERITAGE CONSERVATION AREA BOUNDARIES ................ 14
NEXT STEPS .......................................................................................... 16
APPENDIX A: LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT ............................................. 17
APPENDIX B: IDENTIFIED HERITAGE AND CHARACTER SITES .............. 18
REFERENCES ........................................................................................ 19
TABLE OF CONTENTS
&DONALD LUXTON
ASSOCIATES
HAMMOND HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA
DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC. | FEBRUARY 2015 1
Hammond is one of the oldest Townships in Maple
Ridge. It was registered as Port Hammond Junction
in 1883, and the original street grid pattern has
largely remained intact over time. There are a number
of heritage sites within the Hammond Area Plan
boundaries that are listed in “The Heritage Resources
of Maple Ridge”, as sites with heritage value to the
JVTT\UP[`;OLZLZP[LZHYLZPNUPÄJHU[[V[OLWLVWSL
activities, and structural form from Hammond’s early
days and include the John Hammond Residence (one
of the founders of Port Hammond Junction), the Dr.
)YVL9LZPKLUJL[OLOV\ZLVM[OLÄYZ[WO`ZPJPHUPU
Hammond), and the Thompson Residence (Dr. Broe’s
ÄYZ[OV\ZLHUK[OLUOPZVMÄJL
The intent of this project is to identify Hammond
Historic Character Area preliminary boundaries that
^PSS OLSW KLÄUL JVYL HYLHZ JVU[HPUPUN [OL OPNOLZ[
concentration of heritage features within the original
Port Hammond Junction Township plan boundaries.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Maple Crescent, Hammond, 1910s [Maple Ridge Museum & Archives P03759]
&DONALD LUXTON
ASSOCIATES
HAMMOND HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA2
Prior to settlement, the area we know today as
/HTTVUK ^HZ VUL VM Ä]L 2H[aPL JVTT\UP[PLZ
located in various areas of southwestern British
Columbia. Settlement in this area of Maple Ridge
ILNHUPU[OLZHUK^HZYLMLYYLK[VHZ¸2H[aPL¹
prior to it being a registered township. Many of the
2H[aPLSP]PUNPU[OLHYLHKPLKMYVTZTHSSWV_PU[OL
early days of Hammond.
;OLÄYZ[ZL[[SLTLU[ILNHUPU[OL`LHY^OLU[OL
ÄYZ[7YLLTW[PVUHJ[^HZWYVT\SNH[LKI`.V]LYUVY
+V\NSHZVU1HU\HY`HUKWYV]PKLKMVY[OLNYHU[PUN
VMYPNO[Z[V\UZ\Y]L`LKJYV^USHUKZ[VHUL_[LU[
UV[L_JLLKPUNHJYLZH[HW\YJOHZLWYPJLUV[
L_JLLKPUN[^VKVSSHYZHUKÄM[`JLU[ZWLYHJYL0U[OL
ZHTL`LHYT`MH[OLY1VOU4J0]LYYL[\YULKMYVT
[OLZLY]PJLVM[OL/\KZVU)H`*VTWHU`^OVTOL
OHKZLY]LKMVYLPNO[`LHYZ[VVR\WHJYLZWHY[
VM^OPJOPZ^OLYL^LHYL[VKH`;OLILH\[PM\SOVTL
HUKNYV\UKZVM[OLWYLZLU[/HY[ULSSOVTLPZSVJH[LK
VUWHY[VMP[
John McIver (written in 1933, published in The
.HaL[[L
In his 1933 notes, John McIver described the area
during early settlement as “heavily timbered down
to the river’s edge”. The Fraser River was the major
travel route, transporting people and goods. During
WHY[PJ\SHYS`JVSK^PU[LYZ[OLYP]LY^V\SKMYLLaLHUK
prevent travel until it thawed.
The Hammond brothers, William (aged 19) and John
(aged 22) arrived in Maple Ridge from Fenstanton,
England, in 1862. The brothers originally resided on
Hammond’s Island (now Cod Island), in the then-
undrained Sturgeon Slough. Ten years later, after the
rejection of their plan to dam the mouth of the Pitt
River and divert the water to a proposed canal to the
Burrard Inlet, they pre-empted the 120 acres of land,
part of which they would eventually donate to the
future town of Port Hammond.
Once the Fraser Canyon was chosen as the route
for the federally promised railway in 1881, the only
question that remained locally was where the route
would pass through Maple Ridge. After an all-night
debate at Haney House, it was settled that the route
HISTORY OF EARLY HAMMOND
Plan of the Town of Port Hammond Junction, 1882
DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC. | FEBRUARY 2015 3
would follow the Fraser River to Hammond, at which
point it would leave the shores of the Fraser River. The
Hammond brothers donated several acres of land to
[OL*79VU[OLJVUKP[PVU[OH[[OLÄYZ[YHPS^H`Z[H[PVU
in Maple Ridge would be in Hammond. Emmeline
Mohun donated most of the lower portion of Hammond,
southwest from the railway.
;OLÄYZ[YLNPZ[LYLKV^ULYZPU[OLHYLH^LYL!
• Lot 278: W. Hammond, Lee Chew and the
Corporation of Maple Ridge
• Lot 279: W. & J. Hammond
• Lot 280: Callaghan et al.
• Lot 281: Mohun
In December 1882, the Town of Port Hammond Junction
was mapped by Emmeline’s husband, Civil Engineer E.
Mohun, a subdivision of Lots 278, 279, 280 and 281 of
Group 1, Township No. 9. It was deposited as Plan 114
VU(\N\Z[/HaLS^VVK-HYTZ[YHKKSLK3V[Z
and 281 directly to the west of the Townsite.
*VUZ[Y\J[PVUVM[OL*HUHKPHU7HJPÄJ9HPS^H`SPUL
Z[H[PVUHUK`HYKZILNHUPU3HIV\YLYZÅVJRLK
to the area during railway construction, which
included Chinese immigrants, and Hammond
became a tent town overnight. In these early years,
Port Hammond Junction also served as a supply
depot and headquarters for railway construction
and the town continued to grow with businesses,
such as hotels and bars, as well as several boarding
OV\ZLZPUYLZWVUZL[V[OLPUÅ\_VMSHIV\YLYZHUK
industry.
;OL*OPULZLL_WLYPLUJLVM^VYRPUNVU[OLYHPSYVHK
in Hammond was typical of the time. Chinese
workers built shacks along the dyke on Wharf
:[YLL[HZ^LSSHZULHY[OLPU[LYZLJ[PVUVM4J2LUUL`
Road and Maple Crescent. The workers commonly
undertook dangerous work, and often received poor
treatment from their European foremen. During the
digging for the section of railway between Haney
and Hammond as many as seventy people were
killed, including one incident where three Chinese
labourers were swept away in a landslide caused
HISTORY OF EARLY HAMMOND
*HUHKPHU7HJPÄJ9HPS^H`>H[LY;HURH[/HTTVUKJPYJH
[Onderdonk Albums; British Columbia Archives D-08575]
&DONALD LUXTON
ASSOCIATES
HAMMOND HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA4
by a steam-shovel near McIver’s property. After the
steam-shovel incident, the surviving Chinese workers
were forced back to work at gunpoint. The Chinese
were considered to be non-persons, and store owners
are the only Chinese people listed by name in
Hammond in B.C. Directories from the time.
Hammond also served as a steamboat junction with
Victoria, thanks to Captain John Irving, founder of the
*HUHKPHU7HJPÄJ5H]PNH[PVU*VTWHU`
7VY[/HTTVUKPZ[OLZOPWWPUNWVPU[^OLYLZ[LHTLYZ
MYVT=PJ[VYPHJVUULJ[^P[O[OL*79HUKOHZ
ILJVTLHZ[H[PVUVMZVTLPTWVY[HUJL
British Columbia Directory, 1884-85, page 186.
;OLVWLUPUNVM[OLYHPS^H`L_WHUKLK[OL[YHUZWVY[H[PVU
network year-round and put Port Hammond Junction
VU[OLTHW;OLYHPS^H`^HZL_[LUKLKM\Y[OLY^LZ[[V
Vancouver in 1887, and Vancouver’s importance to
Hammond became greater as the railway and roads
between the two centres improved.
The year of 1885 was a big one with the opening
VM [OL /HTTVUK 7VZ[ 6MÄJL HUK JVTWSL[PVU VM
[OL /HTTVUK :[H[PVU ;OL ÄYZ[ [YHPU W\SSLK PU[V
Hammond in November 1885 and for many years
after, the CPR continued to employ many of the
labourers who helped construct the railway as section
hands. Trains, which had overtaken riverboats in their
importance in Hammond, were eventually overtaken
by trucks and cars, and in 1965 the CPR no longer
stopped in Hammond or Haney.
Maple Ridge Municipality ¶;OPZ PZ [OL VUS` Y\YHS
T\UPJPWHSP[`PU)YP[PZO*VS\TIPH[OYV\NO^OPJO[OL
*HUHKPHU7HJPÄJ9HPS^H`WHZZLZ0[L_[LUKZMYVT7P[[
9P]LY[V:[H]L9P]LYHKPZ[HUJLVMTPSLZVU[OL
YPNO[ IHUR VM [OL -YHZLY 9P]LY 0[ OHZ [OYLL YHPS^H`
Z[H[PVUZ]Pa!/HTTVUK/HUL`HUK>HYUVJRBZPJD
/HUL`»ZJOPLMPUK\Z[Y`PZIYPJRTHRPUN0[HSZVOHZH
ZHSTVUMYLLaPUNLZ[HISPZOTLU[/HTTVUKPZ[OLTVZ[
PTWVY[HU[WVPU[VU[OLYPNO[IHURVM[OL-YHZLYHIV]L
5L^>LZ[TPUZ[LY)LPUNJLU[YHSS`SVJH[LKPU[OLILZ[
HNYPJ\S[\YHS ZLJ[PVU VM [OL T\UPJPWHSP[` P[ WYLZLU[Z
HK]HU[HNLZMVYI\ZPULZZ^OPJOHYLKLZ[PULK[VTHRL
P[HUPTWVY[HU[[V^U+HPY`PUNHZHUPUK\Z[Y`OHZUV[
`L[ILLUWYVZLJ\[LK[VHU`NYLH[L_[LU[I\[[HRPUN
PU[V JVUZPKLYH[PVU [OL THU` [OV\ZHUKZ VM HJYLZ VM
TLHKV^SHUKZPU[OL]PJPUP[`VM/HTTVUKWYVK\JPUN
U\[YP[PV\ZNYHZZLZPUHI\UKHUJL[OPZPUK\Z[Y`PU[OL
ULHYM\[\YL^PSSILHUPTWVY[HU[MHJ[VYPUJVUK\JPUN
[V[OL^LHS[OVM[OLT\UPJPWHSP[` British Columbia
Directory, 1887, page 238.
Port Hammond¶6U[OLTHPUSPULVM[OL*79
TPSLZLHZ[VM=HUJV\]LYYHPS^H`Z[H[PVUJHSSLK
/HTTVUK"OHZWVZ[VMÄJL4HPSZKHPS`,_WYLZZHUK
[LSLNYHWOVMÄJL/LUKLYZVU»Z.HaL[[LLY
+PYLJ[VY`
1889, page 345.
By the late 1890s, fruit growing was listed as the
principal industry and remained so for a number of
years.
A one-room schoolhouse was opened on the current
site of Hammond Elementary School in 1900. Prior
to this schoolhouse the Maple Ridge School had
served the community of Hammond. A two-room
schoolhouse replaced the one-room building in
1912, and the 1900 school was renamed Fossett Hall
and relocated to Lorne Road to be used for meetings.
/HTTVUK»ZÄYZ[IHUR[OL)HURVM/HTPS[VUVWLULK
PU 7YPVY[V[OLVWLUPUNVM[OPZIHUR[OLJP[PaLUZ
of Hammond had to travel to New Westminster to
do their banking. New Westminster had been the
trading centre for the Fraser Valley, but as transport
improved between Hammond and Vancouver, New
Westminster became less central to life in Hammond.
ZH^HSHYNLÄYLKLZ[YV`TVZ[VM[OLI\ZPULZZ
ZLJ[VYVM/HTTVUK;OLÄYLOHKZ[HY[LKPU[OLMYHTL
hotel’s restaurant kitchen, and though many buildings
were burned down the postmaster managed to save
[OLWVZ[VMÄJLI`JV]LYPUN[OLL_[LYPVY^HSSZ^P[O^L[
ISHURL[Z0UHKKP[PVU[V[OLWVZ[VMÄJL[OL[LSLWOVUL
L_JOHUNLI\PSKPUN^HZHSZVZH]LKI`KLTVSPZOPUN[OL
adjacent burning stable with dynamite. The rebuilding
took several years due to wartime interruptions in
labour and material. The Bank of Hamilton burned
down in 1916, and re-opened in a house until a
UL^I\PSKPUN^HZÄUPZOLKMVY[OLIHURPU 0U
1924 the Bank of Hamilton merged with the Bank of
Commerce, and during the Depression the Hammond
branch became the Bank of Montreal. The bank
closed in 1935, only to reopen again in 1948 as the
Bank of Montreal.
DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC. | FEBRUARY 2015 5
PORT HAMMOND
7VY[/HTTVUKPZJOPLÅ`RUV^U[V[OL^LZ[IV\UK
[V\YPZ[HZHZ[H[PVUHIV\[TPSLZMYVT=HUJV\]LY
^OLYL[OL*HUHKPHU7HJPÄJ9HPS^H`SLH]LZ[OL
-YHZLYILZPKL^OPJOP[OHZY\UMVYTHU`TPSLZ7VY[
/HTTVUKOV^L]LYOHZV[OLYJSHPTZ[VH[[LU[PVU
;OL[V^UP[ZLSMWVZZLZZLZNVVKNLULYHSZ[VYLZH
[LSLWOVULHUK[LSLNYHWOZ`Z[LTHUKTHU`V[OLY
JVU]LUPLUJLZ^OPSZ[[OLOPNOWV^LYSPULVM[OL
>LZ[LYU7V^LY*VTWHU`^OPJOOHZILLUYLJLU[S`
JHYYPLK[OYV\NO[OLKPZ[YPJ[^PSSZOVY[S`Z\WWS`
LSLJ[YPJSPNO[HUKWV^LYMVYHSSW\YWVZLZ0[PZ^VY[O`
VMUV[L[OH[^OLU[OL[V^UZP[L^HZYLNPZ[LYLK
PUP[^HZPU[LUKLK[VMVYT[OL[LYTPU\ZVM
[OL*HUHKPHU7HJPÄJ9HPS^H`HUK[OLPTWVY[HUJL
^OPJO/HTTVUK^V\SKOH]LH[[HPULKOHK[OPZ
PU[LU[PVUILLUHKOLYLK[VHMMVYKHTWSLZJVWLMVYHU
PU[LYLZ[PUNPMPKSLZWLJ\SH[PVU;OLYHPS^H`OV^L]LY
WYVJLLKLK[VP[ZTVYLUH[\YHSOHS[PUNWSHJLHUK7VY[
/HTTVUKILJHTLSHYNLS`KLWLUKLU[VU[OLUH[\YHS
YLZV\YJLZVM[OLZVPS0U[OLTH[[LY[OLJVUÄKLUJL
VM[OL[V^U^HZM\SS`Q\Z[PÄLKHUK[VKH`H]LY`
JVUZPKLYHISLWHY[VM[OLZ\YYV\UKPUNJV\U[Y`PZ
\UKLYJ\S[P]H[PVU6U[OLÅH[TLHKV^SHUKZTHU`
KHPY`MHYTZJHUILMV\UK^OPSZ[ÄULOH`HUKWV[H[V
JYVWZHYLYHPZLKOLYL(Z[OLSHUKZSVWLZNYHK\HSS`
\W^HYKZ[V^HYK[OL7P[[4V\U[HPUZ[OLZVPSILJVTLZ
SLZZZ\P[HISL[V[OPZMVYTVMPUK\Z[Y`HUKMY\P[MHYTZ
[HRL[OLWSHJLVMOH`ÄLSKZHUKWHZ[\YLSHUKZ4\JO
VM[OLMY\P[NYV^UOLYLÄUKZHUH[\YHSTHYRL[PU
=HUJV\]LY(JVUZPKLYHISLHTV\U[OV^L]LY[YH]LSZ
HZMHYLHZ[HZ>PUUPWLNHUK6U[HYPV(STVZ[L]LY`
]HYPL[`VMMY\P[PZJ\S[P]H[LK[OLJYVWZVMHWWSLZ
WLHYZX\PUJLZZ[YH^ILYYPLZYHZWILYYPLZJOLYYPLZ
J\YYHU[ZNVVZLILYYPLZHUKV[OLYMY\P[ZILPUN]LY`
ZH[PZMHJ[VY`(KKP[PVUHS]HS\LPZSLHU[[V[OLSHUK
I`[OLMHJ[[OH[UVZ`Z[LTVMHY[PÄJPHSPYYPNH[PVUPZ
ULJLZZHY`-YVT[OLZWVY[ZTHU»ZWVPU[VM]PL^7VY[
/HTTVUKHMMVYKZHJVU]LUPLU[JLU[YL)LHYJV\NHY
KLLYWOLHZHU[ZNYV\ZLK\JRZHUKNLLZLHYL
WSLU[PM\SPU[OL7P[[4V\U[HPUZHUKL_JLSSLU[ÄZOPUN
PZ[VILOHK^P[OPU[OLYHKP\ZVMHML^TPSLZ
Henry J. Boam. )YP[PZO*VS\TIPH!0[Z/PZ[VY`7LVWSL
*VTTLYJL0UK\Z[YPLZHUK9LZV\YJLZ London,
England: Sells Ltd., 1912, page 279.
HISTORY OF EARLY HAMMOND
“Bank of Hamilton Builds New Premises at Port Hammond.” Architect’s rendering by A.E. Henderson;
JVU[YHJ[VYZ)H`ULZ
/VYPLB/HTTVUK/HUL`HUK*VX\P[SHT>LLRS`.HaL[[L6J[VILY WHNLD
&DONALD LUXTON
ASSOCIATES
HAMMOND HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA6
;OLÄYZ[[LSLWOVULL_JOHUNLPU4HWSL9PKNLVWLULK
in Hammond in 1908. Built at a cost of $500, it
was a prefabricated structure ordered from the B.C.
Mills Timber & Trading Company. This patented
modular system used panels assembled from short
ends of milled lumber, which were delivered by rail,
HUKIVS[LK[VNL[OLYVUZP[L0U [OL,_JOHUNL
JVU[HPULK[OLÄYZ[H\[VTH[PJKPHSL_JOHUNLPU4HWSL
Ridge, with 125 subscribers.
The Bailey Lumber Company’s mill, complete with
two water towers and a wharf on the Fraser River, has
been a vital industry in Hammond since its opening
in 1910. In 1912 the mill became the Port Hammond
Lumber Company, then the Hammond Cedar mill
PU HUK^HZÄUHSS`[HRLUV]LYI`)*-VYLZ[
Products in 1946. At one point the mill was the largest
red cedar mill in the world, and the largest employer
in Maple Ridge.
+\YPUN[OLÄYZ[KLJHKLZVM[OL[^LU[PL[OJLU[\Y`[OL
businesses of Hammond were more prosperous than
those of Haney, and the populations of both towns
grew steadily with each other. In 1919 Hammond has
a population of 750, Haney had 800, and in 1925
Hammond had 950 residents, Haney had 1,000.
The two towns grew in tandem until the Lougheed
Highway was built in 1931. Haney was able to shift its
business district towards the new highway; however,
in Hammond, where the mill still played a central
role, the businesses were not able to move away from
the river.
:[YLL[:JLULPU/HTTVUKMYVT4PSS:[Y\J[\YL:OV^PUN[OL;LSLWOVUL6MÄJL Z
[Detail from Maple Ridge Museum & Archives, P09078]
DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC. | FEBRUARY 2015 7
HISTORY OF EARLY HAMMOND
Top to Bottom: Hammond Train Station, circa 1922. [Philip T. Timms,
photographer. City of Vancouver Archives CVA 677-1068]; Staff in front
of Hammond Mills, between 1935-38. [City of Vancouver Archives CVA
1376-308]; Lumber piled in Hammond Cedar Co. yard, 1928. [Leonard
Frank Studio. Vancouver Public Library #5821].
&DONALD LUXTON
ASSOCIATES
HAMMOND HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA8
St. Andrew’s Presbyterian Church, Hammond, circa 1921. [Philip T. Timms, photographer.
City of Vancouver Archives CVA 677-1068]
DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC. | FEBRUARY 2015 9
HISTORY OF EARLY HAMMOND
Fire Insurance Plan, Maple Crescent [Maple Ridge Museum & Archives]
View from atop a mill building looking north to Maple Crescent.
[Maple Ridge Museum & Archives P09090]
&DONALD LUXTON
ASSOCIATES
HAMMOND HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA10
HAMMOND NEIGHBOURHOOD CHARACTER
Neighbourhood character refers to the ‘look and feel
of an area,’ and also includes the activities that occur
there. In everyday usage, it can often be synonymous
with local character, residential character, urban
character and place identity. Planning policies impact
the way a place is used and what it feels like to be
there, along with a range of other social, cultural,
ecological, physical and economic factors that shape
human settlements. As interest in the concept of place
has increased since the 1970s, urban designers and
planners have accordingly become more focused
on issues of character. The way that character is
regulated varies from place to place, with some areas
being planned in more proscriptive ways than others,
including areas that are managed for their heritage
value to a community.
In its formal use in the planning system, neigh-
bourhood character refers to the qualities that make
one neighbourhood distinct from another, and
encompasses a range of physical components of the
built environment, architectural style, street width
and layout, vegetation, fence height and style. Every
urban place has a neighbourhood character.
The urban fabric of historic upper and lower
/HTTVUKYLÅLJ[[OLLHYS`^VYRPUNJSHZZVYPNPUZVM
the settlement, focused on workers who made a living
in local industries and farming. Small commercial
I\PSKPUNZ HUK TVKLZ[ ^VVK MYHTL OV\ZLZ YLÅLJ[
the working class nature of the settlement, and
KPZWSH`WYV_PTP[`[V[OL4PSS[OH[^HZ[OLTHQVYSVJHS
LTWSV`LY;OLYLPZHUV[HISLJS\Z[LYVMOV\ZLZÄYZ[
11406 205th Avenue
DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC. | FEBRUARY 2015 11
HAMMOND NEIGHBOURHOOD CHARACTER
occupied by Scandinavian immigrants who worked
at the Mill. The availability of wood – again due to
[OLWYV_PTP[`VM[OL4PSS¶WYV]PKLYLHK`YLZV\YJLZ
for the construction of local buildings, some of which
display a high degree of sophistication in their use
of wooden ornamentation (e.g. 11252 Dartford Street
and 20259 Wanstead Street).
;OL MVSSV^PUN YLZV\YJLZ OH]L ILLU PKLU[PÄLK HUK
mapped in order to determine the concentration of
heritage resources and heritage character sites within
the 1882 Hammond boundaries.
Heritage Revitalization Agreement
Legally Protected Heritage Sites. Statements of
:PNUPÄJHUJLOH]LILLUWYLWHYLKMVY[OLZL[^VZP[LZ
Heritage Register
9LJVNUPaLK MVY [OLPY OLYP[HNL ]HS\L HUK VMÄJPHSS`
Listed on the Maple Ridge Community Heritage
9LNPZ[LY :[H[LTLU[Z VM :PNUPÄJHUJL OH]L ILLU
prepared for these two sites.
Heritage Inventory
0KLU[PÄLKPU¸;OL/LYP[HNL9LZV\YJLZVM4HWSL9PKNL
¹HZOH]PUNOLYP[HNL]HS\LI\[UV[`L[VMÄJPHSS`
YLJVNUPaLK:[H[LTLU[ZVM:PNUPÄJHUJLOH]LUV[ILLU
prepared for these sites.
Heritage Potential
There are a number of sites within the area boundaries
that have high potential for inclusion on the Maple
Ridge Heritage Inventory or Register. These sites have
not been fully researched or evaluated, but they make
a strong contribution to neighbourhood character and
OH]LILLUÅHNNLKMVY[OLPYWV[LU[PHSOLYP[HNL]HS\L
Heritage Character
These sites contribute to the heritage character of the
neighbourhood. They are generally modest in scale,
WYL Z ^VVK MYHTL Z[Y\J[\YLZ [OH[ YLÅLJ[ [OL
working-class nature of the area. Some of the sites have
ILLUZPNUPÄJHU[S`HS[LYLKI\[TH`OH]LWV[LU[PHSMVY
ZLUZP[P]LYLUV]H[PVU;OLZLZP[LZOH]LILLUPKLU[PÄLK
at this time through a visual survey only, and are
noted as supporting overall neighbourhood character.
20259 Wanstead Street 20583 114
th Avenue
&DONALD LUXTON
ASSOCIATES
HAMMOND HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA12
Top: 11252 Dartford Street; Bottom Left: 20582 113th Avenue; Bottom Right: 11339 Dartford Street
DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC. | FEBRUARY 2015 13
The following map shows the concentration of these
sites within the 1882 Hammond Townsite boundaries:
HAMMOND NEIGHBOURHOOD CHARACTER
Map Showing Concentration of Heritage Sites within the 1882 Hammond Townsite Boundaries
&DONALD LUXTON
ASSOCIATES
HAMMOND HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA14
POTENTIAL HERITAGE CONSERVATION
AREA BOUNDARIES
Under the 3VJHS.V]LYUTLU[(J[, a municipality is
LUHISLK[VLUHJ[SLNPZSH[PVU[OH[^PSSKLÄULHZWLJPHS
HYLHPU[OL6MÄJPHS*VTT\UP[`7SHU[VWYV]PKLSVUN
term protection to a distinctive heritage area. Heritage
conservation areas may require a heritage alteration
permit for:
An HCA is intended to provide long-term protection
to a distinctive area that contains resources with
special heritage value and/or heritage character. A
heritage conservation area can provide protection to
all or some of the properties within its boundaries.
7YVWLY[PLZ[OH[HYL[VILWYV[LJ[LKT\Z[ILZWLJPÄJHSS`
PKLU[PÄLKPU[OLI`SH^0UHOLYP[HNLJVUZLY]H[PVUHYLH
a property owner may not do any of the following
without a heritage alteration permit:
• subdivision of a property;
• HKKP[PVUVMHZ[Y\J[\YLVYHKKP[PVU[VHUL_PZ[PUN
structure;
• construction of a new building; or
• alteration to a building, structure, land, or feature.
A local government establishes a heritage conservation
HYLH^OLUP[OHZPKLU[PÄLKHKPZ[PUJ[P]LHYLH[OH[P[
feels should be managed by long-term protection:
1. Through a process of planning and research, a
JVTT\UP[`PKLU[PÄLZHKPZ[PUJ[P]LHYLH[OH[P[
determines should be managed by long-term
heritage protection.
2. Local government, in consultation with the
area property owners, agrees that a heritage
conservation area is the best tool to provide
long-term protection.
3. Local government consults with area property
owners regarding the control mechanisms
(including design controls) that may be included
in the bylaw.
4. Local government prepares a bylaw to amend
[OLVMÄJPHSJVTT\UP[`WSHU[VPKLU[PM`[OL
heritage conservation area. The bylaw must
include:
• a description of the special features or
characteristics which justify the establishment of
a heritage conservation area
• the objectives of the heritage conservation area
• guidelines for how the objectives will be
achieved
The bylaw may also:
• identify circumstances for which a permit is not
required
• include a schedule listing the protected
properties in the area, and identify features or
characteristics that contribute to the heritage
value or heritage character of the area
5. At least ten days before a public hearing is held
to discuss the amendment, local government
UV[PÄLZHSSV^ULYZVMWYVWLY[`SPZ[LKVU[OL
heritage conservation area schedule.
6. Local government adopts the heritage
conservation area bylaw.
7. 3VJHSNV]LYUTLU[UV[PÄLZ[OL3HUK;P[SL6MÄJL
and the minister responsible for the Heritage
Conservation Act of the adoption of the heritage
conservation area bylaw, as well as any
additions or deletions that may be made to the
heritage conservation area schedule.
Please refer to Appendix A: Local Government Act for
further information.
The 1882 Hammond Map area has been assessed
for the potential for a Heritage Conservation Area.
The concentration of heritage and character sites is
ZP[\H[LK PU <WWLY /HTTVUK ^OLYL H ZPNUPÄJHU[
U\TILYVMYLZV\YJLZL_PZ[PUMHPYS`JSVZLJVUQ\UJ[PVU
6[OLY JOHYHJ[LYKLÄUPUN LSLTLU[Z [OH[ HYL
contributing features that contribute to the historic
character of the area include:
LAND USE PATTERN
The early commercial area contains a number of
modest early commercial buildings, some dating
back to the very early 1900s. This has always been
the location of commercial activities, across from the
mill site. The residential areas developed north of the
commercial area and also to the west. This pattern
continues to the present day.
DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC. | FEBRUARY 2015 15
POTENTIAL HCA BOUNDARIES
LOT PATTERN AND STREET GRID
Very small lots divided into a tight grid system,
^P[OV\[HSSL`ZJOHYHJ[LYPaL[OL;V^UZP[L;OPZ]HYPLZ
from a more typical townsite grid system (e.g. as seen
in much of Vancouver) that is based on a 66’ module
Z\Y]L`VY»ZJOHPUYLZ\S[PUNPU_MVV[SV[Z^P[O
24-foot alleys. The very tight street grid provides
more of a village atmosphere and a more walkable
environment. Notably there are generally only 10 lots
to a block, providing a very generous street allowance.
There are also a number of irregular and triangular
lots caused by the curving sweep of the CPR right-of-
way that provide variety and visual interest.
Upper and Lower Hammond are also at a different
orientation, with Upper Hammond oriented north-
south and Lower Hammond angled relative to True
North. This gives each area a more distinct identity
and provides visual containment.
LANDSCAPING
Landscaping has matured to provide visual interest,
especially in Upper Hammond. Due to its lower
elevation and drainage issues, Lower Hammond does
not appear to have been as heavily planted. Some
sites have spectacular south-facing views to the Fraser
River.
OTHER HISTORIC ACTIVITIES
Throughout Hammond Townsite, there is a legacy
of human activity that is commemorated with
several plaques. This celebration of intangible
cultural heritage could be continued through further
interpretive information that tells the history of the
area and stories of people and activities of the past.
The above map shows the greatest concentration
of heritage and character sites within the 1882
Hammond Townsite boundaries, and a potential
IV\UKHY`[OH[KLÄULZ[OPZJVUJLU[YH[PVU7SLHZLUV[L
that the vacant properties on the south side of Maple
Crescent have been included within the boundary to
provide consistency in design control for any potential
HCA area.
Map Showing Concentration of Heritage Sites within the 1882 Hammond Townsite Boundaries
with Proposed Heritage Conservation Area
&DONALD LUXTON
ASSOCIATES
HAMMOND HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA16
NEXT STEPS
Further steps could be undertaken to understand
NYLH[LY [OL OLYP[HNL JOHYHJ[LY HUK [OL ZPNUPÄJHUJL
of Hammond, and assist in the development of
appropriate mechanisms to manage heritage values.
• The heritage merit of individual properties could
be further evaluates to determine those that have
Z\MÄJPLU[OLYP[HNLZPNUPÄJHUJL[VILVMÄJPHSS`
YLJVNUPaLK(U\TILYVMZP[LZOH]LILLUÅHNNLK
in this report based on visual appearance,
but further research and evaluation would be
required.
• The understanding of the area’s heritage
ZPNUPÄJHUJLJV\SKILHZZLZZLK[OYV\NO[OL
development of a Statement of Heritage Value.
This could ultimately be included as a part of an
HCA Bylaw, which must include “a description
of the special features or characteristics
which justify the establishment of a heritage
conservation area.”
• ;OL/*(IV\UKHYPLZJV\SKILYLÄULKIHZLKVU
further study of area characteristics, historic sites
and other planning considerations.
• The potential planning mechanisms that would
complement and enhance heritage conservation
ZOV\SKILZ[\KPLK[VLUZ\YLWYVWLYÄ[IL[^LLU
allowable development potential and protection
of the modest nature of the area’s historic
resources.
• ;OLYLHYLV[OLYPKLU[PÄLKHUKWV[LU[PHS
heritage resources located outside the 1882
map boundaries but within the Hammond
neighbourhood that could be further assessed
and considered.
DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC. | FEBRUARY 2015 17
NEXT STEPS / APPENDIX A
APPENDIX A: LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT
Designation of heritage conservation areas
970.1
(1.) For the purposes of heritage conservation, an
VMÄJPHSJVTT\UP[`WSHUTH`KLZPNUH[LHUHYLH
as a heritage conservation area to which section
971 (1) applies.
(2.) If a heritage conservation area is designated
under subsection (1),
H[OLVMÄJPHSJVTT\UP[`WSHUT\Z[
(i) describe the special features or
characteristics that justify the designation, and
(ii) state the objectives of the designation, and
ILP[OLY[OLVMÄJPHSJVTT\UP[`WSHUVYH
aVUPUNI`SH^T\Z[ZWLJPM`N\PKLSPULZYLZWLJ[PUN
the manner by which the objectives are to be
achieved.
(3) If a heritage conservation area is designated
\UKLYZ\IZLJ[PVU[OLVMÄJPHSJVTT\UP[`
plan may do one or more of the following:
(a)specify conditions under which section 971
(1) does not apply to property within the area,
which may be different for different properties or
classes of properties;
(b) include a schedule listing buildings,
structures, land or features within the area that
are to be protected heritage property under this
Act;
(c) for the purposes of section 971 (3), identify
features or characteristics that contribute to the
heritage value or heritage character of the area.
(4) At least 10 days before the public hearing on an
VMÄJPHSJVTT\UP[`WSHU[OH[PUJS\KLZHZJOLK\SL
under subsection (3) (b), the local government
must give notice in accordance with section
974 to the owner of each property that is to be
included in the schedule, unless the property
was already included in the schedule.
(5) Within 30 days after the adoption of a bylaw
that includes a property in or deletes a property
from a schedule under subsection (3) (b) to an
VMÄJPHSJVTT\UP[`WSHU[OLSVJHSNV]LYUTLU[
must
HÄSLHUV[PJLPU[OLSHUK[P[SLVMÄJLPU
accordance with section 976, and
(b) give notice to the minister responsible for the
/LYP[HNL*VUZLY]H[PVU(J[ in accordance with
section 977.
Heritage conservation areas
971
0MHUVMÄJPHSJVTT\UP[`WSHUKLZPNUH[LZH
heritage conservation area, a person must not do
any of the following unless a heritage alteration
WLYTP[H\[OVYPaPUN[OLHJ[PVUOHZILLUPZZ\LK!
(a) subdivide land within the area;
(b) start the construction of a building or
Z[Y\J[\YLVYHUHKKP[PVU[VHUL_PZ[PUNI\PSKPUN
or structure within the area;
(c) alter a building or structure or land within the
area;
(d) alter a feature that is protected heritage
property.
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if conditions
established under section 970.1 (3) (a) apply.
(3) If a heritage alteration permit is required by
subsection (1), a delegate may only act in
relation to such a permit if
(a) the property is protected heritage property, or
(b) the permit relates to a feature or characteristic
PKLU[PÄLK\UKLYZLJ[PVU J
&DONALD LUXTON
ASSOCIATES
HAMMOND HISTORIC CHARACTER AREA18
APPENDIX B: IDENTIFIED HERITAGE AND
CHARACTER SITES
Heritage Revitalization Agreement
11406 205th Street - Whitehead Residence
11414 205th Street - Whitehead Cottage
Heritage Register
11395 205th Street - McFarlane House
20540 Lorne Avenue - Renstrom Residence
Heritage Inventory
20591 114th Avenue - Harry Residence
11391 207th Street - Smith Residence
11329 Dartford Street - Thompson Residence
11339 Dartford Street - Dr. Broe Residence
3VYUL(]LU\L2OHS\JR9LZPKLUJL
20541 Lorne Avenue - John Hammond House
11224 Maple Crescent - Hartnell Residence
4HWSL*YLZJLU[)*;LSLWOVUL*V,_JOHUNL
20617 Maple Crescent - Bank of Hamilton
Latvalla Lane
Heritage Potential
20582 113th Avenue
20540 114th Avenue
20583 114th Avenue
11405 205th Street
11415 205th Street
11281 207th Street
11339 207th Street
11239 Dartford Street - Commercial Building
11245 Dartford Street - Commercial Building
[Former Birthing House]
11252 Dartford Street
11273 Dartford Street
11284 Dartford Street
11334 Dartford Street - McMillan House [druggist]
11430 Dartford
11338 Maple Crescent
20581 (20591) Maple Crescent - Hammond Hotel/
Maple Crescent Lodge
20275 Ospring Street
20311 Ospring Street
11143 Princess Street - Rogers House
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L3H[]HSSH/V\ZL
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
Heritage Character
20591 113th Avenue
20606 113th Avenue
20665 113th Avenue
20512 (20514) 113th Avenue
20523 114th Avenue
20565 114th Avenue
20575 114th Avenue
20607 114th Avenue
20615 114th Avenue
20623 114th Avenue
20641 114th Avenue
20656 114th Avenue
11386 205th Street
11240 206th Street
11249 207th Street - Church
11293 207th Street
11381 207th Street
11407 207th Street
20631 Battle Avenue
11100 Beckley Street
11258 Dartford Street - William Hope House
11391 Dartford Street - Church
20337 Ditton Street
/HaLS^VVK:[YLL[
2LU[:[YLL[
2LU[:[YLL[
20275 Lorne Avenue
20382 Lorne Avenue
20383 Lorne Avenue
20530 Lorne Avenue
20564 Lorne Avenue
20590 Lorne Avenue
20614 Lorne Avenue
20621 Lorne Avenue
20623 Lorne Avenue
20657 Lorne Avenue - Garage
20675 Lorne Avenue
20683 Lorne Avenue
11348 Maple Crescent
11369 Maple Crescent
11406 Maple Crescent
20643 Maple Crescent - Commercial Building
20645 Maple Crescent - Commercial Building
4HWSL*YLZJLU[6SK7VZ[6MÄJL
DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC. | FEBRUARY 2015 19
APPENDIX B / REFERENCES
REFERENCES
;OL.HaL[[L: Nickols, Sheila (editor), Violet
Bokstrom, Isabelle MacDonald, Grace Mussallem,
Daphne Sleigh, Margaret Smith. Maple Ridge:
(/PZ[VY`VM:L[[SLTLU[. Maple Ridge: Canadian
Federation of University Women (Maple Ridge
Branch), 1972.
/HTTVUK+LZPNU*OHYHJ[LYPZ[PJZ.
3\_[VU+VUHSK
(ZZVJPH[LZ;OL/LYP[HNL
9LZV\YJLZVM4HWSL9PKNL. District of Maple Ridge,
1998.
McIver, John, -YVT1VOU4J0]LY»Z5V[LZ!-PYZ[
:L[[SLTLU[)LNHUPU9LJVYKZ:OV^. [www.
mapleridgemuseum.org].
Maple Ridge Museum & Community Archives
(2009). *VTT\UP[`/PZ[VY`.
Waite, Donald.4HWSL9PKNL
7P[[4LHKV^Z!(
/PZ[VY`PU7OV[VNYHWOZ. Maple Ridge: Waite Bird
Photos Inc., 2008.
4HWSL9PKNL6MÄJPHS*VTT\UP[`7SHU (Bylaw No.
7060-2014)
4HWSL9PKNL*VTT\UP[`/LYP[HNL9LNPZ[LY (2008)
4HWSL9PKNL/LYP[HNL+PZJ\ZZPVU7HWLY (2004)
Hammond Area Plan process web page, including
historical background papers entitled, “Early History
of Hammond” and “History of Community Spaces”.
Back Cover: Staff in front of Hammond Mills,
between 1935-38. [City of Vancouver Archives CVA
1376-308]
Heritage Character (continued)
20685 Maple Crescent
11275 Princess Street
20224 Wanstead Street
20225 Wanstead Street
20259 Wanstead Street
20274 Wanstead Street
20282 Wanstead Street
20290 Wanstead Street
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
>LZ[ÄLSK(]LU\L
&DONALD LUXTON
ASSOCIATES
Residential Density
Bonus/Transfer Program
Assessment for Hammond
Area Plan
October 16, 2015
In association with
Richard White Planning Advisory Services
and Site Economics
FINAL
REPORT
APPENDIX D
File: 1279.0026.01
urbansystems.ca
Report to:
City of Maple Ridge
Municipal Hall
11995 Haney Place
Maple Ridge, BC V2X 6A9
Prepared by:
Urban Systems Ltd.
550 - 1090 Homer Street
Vancouver, BC V6B 2W9
604.235.1701
In association with Richard White Planning
Advisory Services and Site Economics
Contact:
James Klukas, M.Pl., MCIP, RPP
jklukas@urbansystems.ca
2015
This report is prepared for the sole use of the City of Maple Ridge. No representations
of any kind are made by Urban Systems Ltd. or its employees to any party with whom
Urban Systems Ltd. does not have a contract. Copyright 2015.
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Table of Contents
1.Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1. Study Objectives ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.2. Background .............................................................................................................................. 1
2.Contextual Review ....................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 Heritage Conservation Options ................................................................................................. 3
2.2 Amenity Funding Options ......................................................................................................... 8
3.Hammond Area Analysis and Key Findings ................................................................................ 13
3.1 Heritage Density Bonuses/Transfers....................................................................................... 13
3.2 Density Bonus Amenity Zoning Analysis ................................................................................. 14
3.3 Key Findings .......................................................................................................................... 22
4.Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 24
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |1
1.Introduction
1.1. Study Objectives
As part of the Hammond Area Plan process, the purpose of this Study is to assess the favourability of
market conditions for a density bonus and density transfer program in Hammond. This work builds from a
previous Amenity Zoning Study completed for the City of Maple Ridge in 2012. For this Hammond
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment, objectives are to:
•Determine the potential for a density transfer program for heritage conservation;
•Determine the viability of a density bonus program for community amenities (e.g. trail construction
in Precinct #3);
•Identify essential conditions for success for both programs; and,
•Identify whether it may be possible to have a combined program of density bonus and density
transfer.
1.2. Background
Hammond Area Plan
The City of Maple Ridge is currently in the process of
preparing an Area Plan for the Hammond
neighbourhood. In consultations for the Hammond Area
Plan, local residents have highlighted the importance of
the current neighbourhood character and the strong
sense of community that exists today. Hammond has
been called “charming” and a “jewel in Maple Ridge’s
crown.”
While Hammond residents wish to retain the
neighbourhood’s historic character, there is also some
community support for increased residential density along certain streets. As the neighbourhood evolves
over time, there is a need to ensure that:
•important heritage values (as identified in the Hammond Historic Character Area Study) are
preserved in order to maintain the overall neighbourhood character even while change occurs; and,
•neighbourhood amenities keep pace with growth – in particular, there is an identified need for
additional pedestrian/cyclist trails in Hammond Precinct #3 (see Figure 1.1).
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |2
Figure 1.1 – Hammond Study Area
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |3
2.Contextual Review
As indicated, this Study is intended to support the City in identifying approaches to realize heritage
conservation and amenity provision goals in the Hammond neighbourhood, as part of the Hammond Area
Plan process. In Section 3 of this report, the focus of analysis is on determining the viability of a heritage
density bonus/transfer program and a density bonus program for community amenities. However, to
provide an overview of broader options for heritage conservation and the provision of community
amenities, this contextual review provides an overview of options for both heritage conservation (Section
2.1) and amenity funding (Section 2.2).
2.1 Heritage Conservation Options
The City of Maple Ridge has an active
Community Heritage Commission, which
developed a Heritage Plan for the City in 2013.
As well, the City has a Heritage Register and a
Heritage Inventory (“The Heritage Resources
of Maple Ridge, 1998”), both of which include
sites within the Hammond Area. It is noted that
the Heritage Register and Heritage Inventory
facilitate the integration of heritage
considerations with planning processes, but do
not in and of themselves provide heritage
protection to specific properties.
As part of the Hammond Area Plan process, the City commissioned a study of the heritage features in the
neighbourhood, completed by Donald Luxton and Associates in February 2015. Luxton’s “Hammond
Historic Character Area” study identifies a number of heritage resources remaining in the area of the
neighbourhood that was settled as Port Hammond Junction in the late 1800’s. The heritage resources are
primarily single detached homes, and they include a legally protected heritage site (through a Heritage
Revitalization Agreement), sites officially listed on the Maple Ridge Community Heritage Register, sites
identified in a heritage inventory, and sites that either have high potential for inclusion in the Heritage
Inventory or Register, or make a contribution to the heritage character of the neighbourhood.
In Hammond there is an expressed desire to retain the heritage character of the neighbourhood, including
some of the best heritage buildings and other key features such as mature trees, garden spaces, front
verandas, and drainage canals. At the same time, there is a desire to accommodate growth and
redevelopment in Hammond. Using modern planning and zoning tools, there is an ability to shape new
development on old lot patterns while retaining and revitalizing some of the original building stock. In this
manner, the City can manage the impacts of growth and change that might be desirable and that often are
inevitable.
A variety of heritage conservation tools are potentially available, including:
•Heritage Density Bonuses and Density Transfers;
•Heritage Conservation Area Designation;
•Heritage Revitalization Agreements; and,
•Property Tax Exemptions.
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |4
These tools are reviewed in brief below, before focusing on the viability of heritage density bonuses and
transfers in Section 3.
2.1.1 Heritage Density Bonuses and Density Transfers
A good heritage density program will encourage higher quality development and improve its acceptability.
Often the process of incorporating a neighbourhood’s best historic attributes will actually speed up desired
changes. It will also make the redevelopment process more interesting and the resulting development
more comprehensive, finely knit, and desirable. This section provides an overview of both on-site heritage
density bonuses and off-site heritage density transfers. These tools are analyzed in more detail in Section
3 of this report.
On-Site Heritage Density Bonuses
Section 904 of the Local Government Act gives municipalities the authority to provide a density bonus
through zoning in relation to the conservation or provision of amenities. A number of communities have
used this legislation as the basis for density bonusing in relation to heritage conservation on a site. A
density bonus is a land use incentive that the municipality provides usually in the form of allowing more
floor area on a property with heritage character than would otherwise be allowed. Alternatively, the
municipality may exempt all or part of the heritage building’s floor area through a rezoning process, thus
enabling more new floor area than otherwise allowed under existing site zoning. These two approaches
both have the same effect of providing for more saleable floor area than otherwise allowed under existing
zoning.
Usually a municipality will have a land use policy statement to notify property owners and prospective
purchasers of this density bonus potential. For instance, the City of North Vancouver has the following
broad enabling statement in its recently adopted Official Community Plan (Section 2.2 – Density Bonusing):
For lots in any OCP designation, Council may approve additional floor area for the purposes of
heritage conservation. As a result of the unique circumstances of heritage buildings, density
bonuses in return for the retention and legal protection of heritage building will be judged on their
individual merits and needs through a rezoning process.
The City of Maple Ridge also has a broad, enabling Official Community Plan policy (2-9), which states:
Density Bonuses and Amenity Contributions may be considered at Council’s discretion for all
Official Community Plan and Zoning Bylaw amending applications to help provide a variety of
amenities and facilities throughout the municipality.
In relation to heritage, a density bonus is typically offered in exchange for the conservation and guaranteed
preservation of identified heritage resources. The February 2015 Luxton Study helps to determine which
buildings may qualify for special bonus consideration in the Hammond neighbourhood. On-site heritage
density bonuses can be considered on a case-by-case basis to facilitate heritage conservation along with
intensification of large sites.
In many cases where heritage preservation is a goal, density bonusing policies are viewed favourably by
the neighbourhood and properties owners because they provide a tool to protect valuable heritage
resources. In effect, density bonusing facilitates heritage preservation by providing an allowance for
additional density, which helps to offset the expenses associated with heritage preservation. A review of
the public input for the Hammond Area Plan suggests that there are supporters of this approach in the
neighbourhood. If the City is prepared to offer extra density for heritage conservation and if site and
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |5
development economics are positive, there is a good chance that this approach will result in some projects
that retain important buildings and allow viable project economics.
Heritage Density Transfers
Heritage density transfers provide bonuses, usually in the form of more floor area, to property owners for
heritage preservation or restoration. Density transfers are utilized in cases where it is not possible or
preferable to add additional development to an existing site with a heritage building. In these instances,
the property owner is permitted to transfer or sell the bonus density to another property in exchange for the
long-term preservation of the heritage resource.
Density transfers (and density exclusions and bonus provisions) are well established development
incentives for many municipalities in British Columbia, particularly to respond to the unique challenges and
expenses associated with conserving important heritage resources. In British Columbia, the Local
Government Act does not specifically authorize the development of comprehensive density transfer
schemes wherein density is ‘banked’ by a local government and traded on a market-driven basis. An
exception is the City of Vancouver, where Section 595A of the Vancouver Charter allows Council to
establish a heritage density transfer system. Notwithstanding, Section 903(1)(c)(ii) of the Local
Government Act allows municipalities to use zoning to regulate the density of the use of land, buildings and
other structures. A number of municipalities use the authority provided under the Local Government Act to
transfer development rights directly from one parcel to another to achieve certain planning objectives, such
as heritage conservation.
On their own, transfers do not involve an increase in total development rights. Rather, they involve the
relocation of development rights. Density transfers require a rezoning process with a public hearing, and if
approved, typically a Land Title Act covenant is registered on all affected properties confirming that the
transfer has occurred.
The following discussion reviews the application of density transfers in the City of North Vancouver, City of
New Westminster, City of Kitchener, and City of Calgary. Section 3 of this report provides further analysis
to determine the viability of a density transfer program in the Hammond neighbourhood.
City of North Vancouver
The City of North Vancouver has had an active Heritage Conservation program for more than 25 years.
There is a long term interest in heritage preservation opportunities for heritage density transfers.
Nevertheless, in a smaller municipality there are relatively low densities, relatively few identified heritage
buildings (250 or so in the City), and limited staff resources. Where the City has been occasionally
successful encouraging heritage retention and upgrading is in the higher density areas where the donor
site (the heritage building) and the recipient site are both clearly able to benefit from the transfer and absorb
the density.
A good example is the Aberdeen Block (Comprehensive Development Zone 453 — Bylaw 7493) where the
City allowed 21,000 square feet of density to be transferred from the small Aberdeen site (about 3.1 FSR
to another site and almost the same total area to be restored and added to the Aberdeen Block — in total
6.39 FSR). The transferred density went to a high density mixed use site over a kilometre away from the
Aberdeen building. The typical maximum density allowed in the City was 2.6 FSR at the time — so this type
of bonus, though necessary for the project to be economically viable, was highly unusual but supported by
the community and Council.
This project took many months to negotiate and considerable amounts of staff and Council were devoted
to making the rezoning a success.
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |6
City of New Westminster
Within the City of New Westminster’s historic downtown, sites on the Heritage Register are included in the
City’s density transfer system. The City’s transfer system allows density to be sold from a donor heritage
site to a recipient development site. This transfer system is detailed in the City of New Westminster Zoning
Bylaw (Section 190.49.4), which specifies that:
•the amount of density transferred from the donor site must not exceed the amount of unused density
currently available on the donor site, including any permitted bonus density for residential uses;
•unused density may be transferred in whole or in part to a recipient site until all unused density has
been transferred from the donor site;
•the owners of the donor site and the recipient site must enter into a three-party agreement with the
City, stating the amount of the density transferred and the consideration that the owner of the
recipient site is providing to the owner of the donor site for the transfer, acknowledging the voluntary
nature of the transaction;
•the owner of the donor site must enter into a heritage revitalization agreement;
•following the transfer, the density of development of the recipient site must not exceed the
maximum permitted density in the relevant zoning district, including permitted bonus density; and,
•the owner of the recipient site shall be exempt from other amenity contribution payments in relation
to each square foot of density transferred from a heritage donor site.
It is important to note that the City of New Westminster also has a separate density bonus program related
to the provision of amenities in the downtown. In order to protect the City’s heritage assets, the City’s
separate density bonus program (related to the provision of amenities) does not apply to the heritage sites
that are subject to the City’s heritage density transfer system.
City of Kitchener
The Ontario Planning Act provides for increases in the height and density of development otherwise
permitted in return for facilities, services or matters such as heritage conservation. In this respect, in 2007,
the City of Kitchener completed a Heritage Conservation District Plan which recommended that the City
further investigate and consider density bonusing and transfer of density rights for development that
conserves heritage buildings. The City has since implemented transferable density bonuses for heritage
conservation. The owner of a heritage property is eligible for an increase in floor area if the heritage
property is designated under the Ontario Heritage Act, which ensures protection of the building. In cases
when bonus floor area is permitted but not applied to the heritage property, it may be transferred another
property with the same land use designation or to lands in the downtown.
Kitchener’s updated Official Plan includes the following bonusing provisions that permit the transfer of
bonus density achieved through heritage conservation (Section 14. E.17.5):
An owner may transfer the increase in height or density achieved through Policy 17.E.17.2.j from
lands on which such community benefit is provided to lands having the same land use designation
or to lands in the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown).
Kitchener’s Zoning Bylaw (2013) contains regulations to determine the amount of bonus applied to a
heritage property. The bonus floor area is calculated using a “heritage bonus value” contained in the
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |7
regulations of the applicable zoning category. The bonus floor area which may be obtained in return for a
heritage building or heritage façade must not exceed 20,000 square metres. The Zoning Bylaw also states
that before the development rights can be transferred, both property owners must enter into a bonus
transfer agreement with the City. This agreement determines the details of the transfer, including the
amount of bonus floor area being transferred. The agreement also contains a provision requiring the
approval of the City to transfer all or any part of the bonus floor area, permitted but not built on the lot, to
another lot. The owners of both the donor and recipient sites must also enter into covenants to register the
agreement on the lots.
City of Calgary
In 2010, the City of Calgary conducted a study of heritage preservation incentive programs. Building on
this study, the City implemented two incentives to encourage the conservation of historic buildings and sites
in the downtown. These programs include a traditional heritage density bonus incentive and a heritage
density transfer incentive. The heritage density transfer incentive allows the property owner to transfer or
sell unused density that is currently allowed on their historic property to other sites in the downtown, in
exchange for protecting the historic building. In order to be eligible to transfer bonus density, the historic
property must be designated as a municipal historic resource by the Calgary Heritage Authority and listed
on the City’s Inventory of Evaluated Historic Resources list. In accepting the historic resource designation,
the property owner must be willing to legally protect the historic building. There are currently 53 properties
listed in the City’s Transferable Heritage Density Inventory.
Calgary’s density transfer incentive program requires that both properties be located in the downtown area.
The City also requires that both properties be rezoned to a Direct Control District. A specific set of uses
and rules apply to each Direct Control District in the city. The authority for this approach comes from the
Alberta Municipal Act,which allows municipalities to designate direct control districts to exercise particular
control over the use and development of land or buildings in any manner that they consider necessary.
The City does not participate in density transfer negotiations. Any agreement reached must be between
property owners. Once an agreement is reached, the owner of the site that is receiving the additional
density applies for the transfer at the time that they submit a development permit application. City staff
then confirm the transfer with the owner of the historic property and processes the development permit.
2.1.2 Heritage Conservation Area Designation
Luxton’s “Hammond Historic Character Area” study identifies the possibility of establishing the Hammond
townsite as a Heritage Conservation Area. The existing Official Community Plan includes a policy (4-41)
which states that the City will continue to recognize significant heritage areas and consider identification of
these areas as Heritage Conservation Areas or Heritage Districts. Recent public input suggests some
potential interest in the identification of Hammond as a Heritage Conservation Area. A Heritage
Conservation Area is a powerful tool requiring a Heritage Alteration Permit for any alterations that may
impact heritage value, including:
•subdivisions;
•additions; and,
•new construction.
With establishment of a Heritage Conservation Area, City Council, staff and the neighbourhood would have
more ability to manage the retention of existing heritage resources and to retain important existing elements
of the neighbourhood. Importantly as well, a Heritage Conservation Area is an indication to the community
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |8
and those who may want to move to Hammond or acquire property that Hammond’s historic elements will
be largely retained.
2.1.3 Heritage Revitalization Agreements
With or without the establishment of a proposed heritage conservation area (HCA), heritage revitalization
agreements (HRAs) are widely used to encourage heritage preservation, restoration and rehabilitation.
Heritage revitalization agreements are authorized under Section 966 of the Local Government Act.The
terms of a heritage revitalization agreement supersede City zoning regulations, and they may vary use,
density, and siting regulations. Heritage revitalization agreements are entered into on a voluntary basis,
and they are tailored to suit unique properties and situations that might demand creative situations. For
example, the City has already entered into a heritage revitalization agreement with an owner in the
Hammond neighbourhood to permit two single-family dwelling units on one single-family lot in exchange for
protection of the site’s heritage value.
2.1.4 Property Tax Exemptions
Under Sections 25 and 225 of the Community Charter,a municipal council has the power to provide
property tax exemptions to private property owners that conserve their heritage properties if a property is:
•a protected heritage property;
•subject to a heritage revitalization agreement; or,
•subject to a heritage conservation covenant under the Land Title Act.
The extent and term of the property tax exemption must be specified by a municipal bylaw. To date,
Maple Ridge City Council has adopted four Heritage Revitalization Agreement Bylaws and each one has
included a property tax exemption for five years.
2.2 Amenity Funding Options
As identified in the Hammond Area Plan process, the City
would like to develop a pedestrian/cyclist trail network within
the neighbourhood, particularly in the Lower Hammond area
(Precinct #3). Trails would primarily be located on existing
rights-of-way or municipally-owned land. Therefore, it is
anticipated that the bulk of required funding is for trail
construction, as opposed to land acquisition. At this stage,
the City has not completed cost estimates for the trail
projects within the neighbourhood. While general municipal
revenues and grant funding are sometimes available to
assist with trail projects, there is also a growth-related
impetus for the provision of these amenities within the
neighbourhood. Therefore, there is a need to review
development finance options for trails in Hammond.
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |9
Because of the infill character of the Hammond neighbourhood, requirements for trail construction at time
of development would likely result in incremental establishment of trail routes. Therefore, there is a need
to explore options to assist in providing funding for neighbourhood trails or other amenities. In the
Hammond area context, options include:
•development cost charges (DCCs);
•road closures and sale;
•community amenity contributions (CACs); and,
•density bonus amenity zoning.
At this stage, the City primarily wishes to confirm the potential viability of a density bonus program for
amenities, similar to the program that has been implemented in the Albion neighbourhood through the
adoption of the Albion Area Plan. Nevertheless, all tools are reviewed in brief, below, before focusing on
the potential viability of a density bonus program in Section 3. It is recognized that the City may also wish
to use these funding tools for other forms of amenities as required in the future.
2.2.1 Development Cost Charges
Development cost charges (DCCs) are a means of collecting fees from all development projects to assist
municipalities in recovering monies expended on growth-related infrastructure. DCCs may be charged for
roads, water, sewer, stormwater and parkland acquisition and improvement projects, in accordance with
the provisions of the Local Government Act. Projects are formalized in a DCC program, with DCC rates
established by municipal bylaw. DCCs are payable by developers at time of subdivision or building permit
approval. DCCs collected may only be used for the purpose for which they were levied (e.g. parks DCC
revenues can only be expended on parks DCC projects), and they may only be expended in the defined
geographic area in which they were collected (may be municipal-wide or area-specific).
The City of Maple Ridge has area-specific DCCs, including charges for roads, drainage, water, sanitary
sewer, and open space. The City uses DCCs as the main funding tool for park acquisition. However, for
trail improvement projects, the City has started to use density bonus amenity zoning as a funding tool for
the Albion neighbourhood. This approach is identified in policy in the Albion Area Plan.
The City’s density bonus amenity zoning approach allows it to access amenity contributions rather than
DCCs, which take into account projected growth and an allocation of benefit between new and existing
development. Potentially DCCs could be used to assist with the growth-attributable costs of trail
construction in Hammond. However, this approach would be inconsistent with the approach taken by the
City in the Albion neighbourhood.
2.2.2 Road Closures and Sale
The City of Maple Ridge has a flexible Official Community Plan that allows for a range of residential
densities, so adding density to heritage properties can be done simply by allowing extra floor area or units
per hectare through the rezoning process. To provide more space for development, one approach that
may have some applicability in Maple Ridge is to expand the size of lots with road closures and sale (or to
maintain existing narrower road rights-of-way where they are already in existence). Hammond has historic
street patterns and generally adequate public rights of way based on modern residential standards.
However, over most of the last seventy years, it has been typical for municipalities to require more road
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |10
right of way when lands are subdivided rather than looking to reduce road and right of way widths.1 A
detailed analysis may reveal that this primarily residential neighbourhood does not require street rights of
way of 22 and 26 metres in width that are typically required in the neighbourhood.
If the City determined that 15 to18 metres was an adequate road width for most of Hammond’s streets,
then it would be theoretically possible to sell surplus road right-of-way to land owners adjoining these roads.
On corners or in other irregular locations, more road right of way might be deemed surplus, as the early
surveyors of Hammond often left additional land in the public domain where the survey pattern resulted in
unconventional intersection angles or where more lots were not possible. Adding area to some lots in
Hammond should enable more attractive heritage conservation and infill in some cases. In cases where
heritage conservation is a consideration, it is possible that the City would benefit from a review of existing
subdivision standards.
It is also possible for lanes and flanking streets deemed useful only for infrastructure routing and pedestrian
and bicycle traffic to be closed and sold to adjoining owners when suitable redevelopment is proposed.
Potentially the City could take back a right of way over a portion of the closed road, requiring the owners of
new construction to maintain the right of way for pedestrian/cycling use. The property could also be left
accessible for infrastructure maintenance as well.
Any revenue from the sale of closed roads would likely go into the City’s general revenue. Council can
determine by policy to direct these funds into paths and trail construction each year as the sales occur.
Another possibility would be for the City to advance funds for pathway construction with the understanding
that general revenues will be replenished by the eventual sale of these surplus lands as redevelopment
occurs.
2.2.3 Community Amenity Contributions
As indicated in the Amenity Zoning Study completed for the City of Maple Ridge in 2012, Community
Amenity Contributions (CACs) stem from a request by a developer to increase the density of a site, and
they are based on the discretionary authority that a municipality has to rezone or not to rezone a given site.
The premise behind CACs is that increased density imposes a capital cost burden for amenities on the
municipality, and that increased density also typically results in an increased land value (i.e. a lift in land
value), which can be shared between the municipality and the developer/landowner.
As highlighted in the 2012 Amenity Zoning Study, CACs can be implemented on a site-by-site basis
(discretionary based on a single project) or through an area-wide program that bases fixed charges on
identified development impacts and community amenity needs. Unlike density bonus amenity
contributions, CACs are not based on a specified base density and bonus density articulated within the
municipal Zoning Bylaw. Rather, they are applied to all rezonings (e.g. on a per unit or gross floor area
basis). As an example, the Township of Langley funds greenway projects in new neighbourhoods through
an amenity zoning policy, with charges applicable to all new developments that require rezoning. In
1 The case studies in Section 3 of this report all appear to require road dedications, which may reduce many
owners’ interest in development, suggest increased traffic to neighbours, and likely change the look and
feel of the heritage neighbourhood when larger street cross sections and more impervious surfaces are
eventually developed.
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |11
Langley’s case, the charges are based on development area (as opposed to units or GFA), given the
greenfield context.
In March 2014, the Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development released a Guide to Community
Amenity Contributions. The guide encourages local governments to avoid a heavy reliance on land lift
(particularly when negotiated on a site by site basis) in establishing the amount of contributions, and to
borrow the principles and practices that apply to DCCs to develop estimated CAC amounts. The guide
encourages local governments to tie CACs back to capital costs for growth-related amenities. Furthermore,
the guide encourages the use of density bonus zoning (see Section 4.4, below) to encourage new
development and achieve contributions to amenities while minimizing the impact on housing affordability.
Notwithstanding, CACs are a useful potential tool, and could be considered in Hammond. CACs would
provide a mechanism to provide an amenity contribution associated with a change in zoning from existing
single detached zoning to a variety of multi-family (e.g. townhouse or apartment) zones. A CAC approach
alleviates the need to build a base density and bonus density into multi-family zones, and it potentially
allows the City to use a portion of the land value lift from single family to multi-family (as opposed to the
land lift between multi-family at a base density and multi-family at a bonus density) to contribute to the
provision of neighbourhood amenities. However, unlike density bonus amenity zoning, the CAC approach
relies on ‘voluntary’ contributions at time of rezoning, as opposed to incentives that are ‘fixed’ in the City’s
Zoning Bylaw (see below).
2.2.4 Density Bonus Amenity Zoning
Section 904 of the Local Government Act enables municipalities to use density controls in zoning to obtain
community amenities (or contributions towards community amenities). Under the legislation, municipal
zoning bylaws may specify one density for projects that do not provide a community amenity (or
contribution), and another higher density for projects that provide the community amenity (or contribution).
The density bonus zone must specify the “number, kind and extent” of the amenity that must be provided
to earn the additional density. Because it can be difficult for many small projects to provide a physical
amenity, various municipalities have adopted a cash-in-lieu approach so that every project can obtain bonus
density by contributing to a fund specifically used for the given amenity.
The City has already established a density bonus amenity zoning program in the Albion neighbourhood.
Within the Albion neighbourhood, collected amenity funds contribute to the following eligible amenities:
•park construction;
•park maintenance;
•multi-use trail construction;
•multi-use trail maintenance;
•civic facility/community gathering place construction; and,
•civic facility/community gathering place maintenance.
Density bonus amenity contributions are built into three land use zones:
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |12
•Within the RS-1d zone, the base density is a minimum net lot area of 2,000 square metres. With
an amenity contribution of $3,100 per lot, the maximum permissible density is a minimum net lot
area of 557 square metres.
•Within the RS-1b zone, the base density is a minimum net lot area of 557 square metres. With an
amenity contribution of $3,100 per lot, the maximum permissible density is a minimum net lot area
of 371 square metres.
•Within the RM-1 (townhouse) zone, the base density is a maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of 0.6.
With an amenity contribution of $3,100 per lot, the maximum permissible density is an FSR of 0.75
(conforming with the regulations of the RM-4 zone).
Within the Hammond neighbourhood, density bonus amenity zoning could be considered as a potential
tool, consistent with the approach set out in Albion. However, market conditions must be favourable,
showing the potential for a significant land value lift between a base multi-family density and an ultimate
permissible multi-family density with the provision of the amenity contribution. Put differently, the value of
additional density (over and above the base density written into the multi-family zoning) must be greater
than the cost of the amenity contribution.
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |13
3.Hammond Area Analysis and Key Findings
To assess options for heritage density bonuses/transfers and amenity density bonuses in conjunction with
the Hammond Area Plan process, Site Economics Ltd. was retained to conduct market analysis related to
both options.
3.1 Heritage Density Bonuses/Transfers
Within Hammond, there are many single detached homes with heritage value (i.e. sites on a heritage
register or heritage inventory) or having heritage potential (i.e. sites that could possibly be included on the
heritage register or inventory pending further research or evaluation). The City has also identified a number
of additional sites that contribute to the heritage character of the neighbourhood. These sites likely do not
have sufficient heritage value to merit listing in the heritage register or heritage inventory; however, they
contribute to the heritage character of the neighbourhood, particularly in the Hammond Historic Character
Area in Precinct 2 (Upper Hammond) and beyond to Precinct 3 (Lower Hammond).
On-Site Density Bonuses
As indicated earlier, the first preference is typically to provide an option for an on-site density bonus
associated with heritage preservation. An on-site density bonus allows for intensification of sites having
potential for additional residential units. A heritage-related density bonus can be considered on a large
single site that has the potential for intensification (e.g. new garden suites) in association with heritage
conservation. A heritage-related density bonus can also be considered on an assembled site that has a
heritage home that will be preserved, but which also offers a land area suitable for townhouses or even
apartments.
In the Hammond neighbourhood, there are numerous possibilities for the provision of on-site density
bonuses. These on-site bonuses are ideally negotiated on a case-by-case basis, with the heritage home
preserved through a Heritage Revitalization Agreement. If an on-site bonus is not possible, then an off-site
transfer can be considered.
Off-Site Density Transfers
As indicated earlier, off-site heritage density transfers are utilized in cases where it is not possible or
preferable to add additional development to an existing site with a heritage building (referred to as an on-
site density bonus in this report). In these instances, the property owner is permitted to transfer or sell
bonus density in exchange for the long-term preservation of the heritage resource, typically through a
Heritage Revitalization Agreement. Heritage density transfers can be negotiated on a case by case basis
(e.g. if a single developer has multiple properties in the neighbourhood and is protecting a heritage resource
on one of the properties). Alternatively, heritage density transfers can be formalized in a density transfer
program that allows the sale of density from the owner of a donor site to the owner of a receiver site, as
identified in policy and zoning.
Market Analysis
To assess the potential for density bonuses and density transfers associated with heritage preservation, a
typical case study was reviewed, assuming the renovation of an existing 2,000 square foot heritage home.
In considering the value of heritage preservation and the viability of a density bonus or density transfer,
heritage preservation is not subject to a pro forma. It is more accurate to simply indicate that an unknown,
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |14
typical heritage renovation costs $125 per square foot more in hard and soft costs (over and above $200
per square foot for a standard new home). Thus, it is logical that the City should provide at least $125 per
square foot plus a 20 percent profit and return on equity of $25 per square foot to any developer who
renovates that heritage home.
Carrying this case study forward, the value of the available bonus or transferable density would be a total
of $150 per square foot multiplied by the size of the heritage house. If the house is 2,000 square feet, then
the developer would have a density bonus or density transfer worth $300,000. A site valuation comparison
(see Section 3.2) indicates that the value of a land lift for a rezoning from single detached home to
townhouse results in approximately $10,000 in new land value per new additional unit. Therefore, based
on this model, a density bonus or transfer worth $300,000 in value would provide the right to build an
additional thirty townhouse units (or approximately 40,000 square feet of gross floor area assuming 1,300
square feet per unit).
Given the relatively small land value lift from single detached to townhouse, there are several implications
for a density bonus or transfer approach:
•For an on-site density bonus, the land economics is such that the value of the heritage conservation
is far greater than the value of additional density that could be accommodated on virtually any site
in the Hammond neighbourhood. Logically, approximately six to eight assembled single family
home sites would be required to theoretically support a thirty unit townhouse project, in addition to
the home that is subject to heritage conservation.
•For an off-site density transfer, the current value of the transfer (approximately equivalent to thirty
townhouse units) is also far more than the amount of available density that would be permissible
on a typical historic home site had it been rezoned and redeveloped. Logically, any off-site density
transfer should only allow a transfer of unused density currently available on a donor site. Because
of the significant difference between the unused density on the donor site (of perhaps four to five
units on a single detached site if it were rezoned), and the equivalent value of the heritage
conservation (approximately $300,000 in value, or the right to build approximately thirty townhouse
units), there appears to be limited potential for a formal, systematized, off-site density transfer
program at this time. However, if a developer wishes to take advantage of an off-site density
transfer related to heritage conservation, the City could consider such requests on a case-by-case
basis, where retention and revitalization are important to the broader community.
3.2 Density Bonus Amenity Zoning Analysis
To assess the potential viability of a density bonus amenity zoning program in Hammond, the City of Maple
Ridge provided three case studies of representative site assemblies and potential future development
scenarios. In each scenario, analysis was undertaken to assess the potential lift in land values created by
rezoning to permit additional density (as compared to a base case scenario under existing zoning). In turn,
this assessment provides an indication of the value of additional density per unit or per square foot of gross
floor area (GFA). This information can be used by the City to confirm whether or not to proceed with a
program to secure amenity contributions through a density bonus program, similar to the program that was
established as part of the Albion Area Plan.
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |15
3.2.1 Case Studies
All three case studies involve theoretical site assemblies and rezoning from low density existing
development (primarily single detached residential except for Site B) into higher density development. The
case studies are used for illustrative purposes only, and they do not represent any actual development
proposals associated with the Hammond Area Plan.
Site A involves the rezoning of five single detached lots to an RM-2 low density apartment use. The
analysis compares a base case scenario of five units (assuming no further subdivision under existing
zoning) to a development with an FSR of 1.5, resulting in 42 units (average unit size of approximately 1,100
square feet). This representative case study is illustrated in Figure 3.1, below.
Figure 3.1: Site A Case Study
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |16
Site B involves the development of a site already partially zoned for commercial/mixed use to an FSR of
3.0, resulting in about 50 units (average unit size of approximately 1,000 square feet) and a 5,000 square
foot commercial area. This representative case study is illustrated in Figure 3.2, below.
Figure 3.2: Site B Case Study
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |17
Site C involves the rezoning of four single detached lots to RM-1 medium density townhouse/apartment
uses. The analysis compares a base case scenario of 9 single detached units (estimated potential under
existing zoning) to a development with an FSR of 0.75, resulting in 35 units (average unit size of
approximately 1,300 square feet). This representative case study is illustrated in Figure 3.3, below.
Figure 3.3: Site C Case Study
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |18
The site information for each case study is summarized below:
Site Description Location Future
Zoning
Floor
Space
Ratio
(FSR)
Gross
Floor
Area
(sq. ft.)
Unit
Count
Site A Low Density Apartment 203 & Hammond RM-2 1.5 51,277 42
Site B Mixed Use Dartford & Maple C-3 3.0 63,380 50
Site C Townhouse 207 and River Rd. RM-1 0.75 46,919 35
3.2.2 Market Context
This section of the report provides background material on the value of comparable properties in the area
and market selling prices across Maple Ridge. According to the Real Estate Board of Greater Vancouver’s
recent Home Price Index report, the average sale price of an existing single-family home in Maple Ridge
was $510,400 in July 2015. Existing townhouses sale prices were $292,000 while condominium sale prices
were $167,000 as of July 2015.
According to the Multiple Listing Service MLS the most recent values for new and existing properties in and
around the community of Hammond, Maple Ridge are:
Current Snapshot of Housing in Maple Ridge: New Builds
Housing Type Average Price Average Square Feet
per Unit
Average Price per
Square Foot
Single-Family $659,800 3,249 $203
Townhouse $358,500 1,576 $227
Condo Apartment $249,450 761 $328
Current Snapshot of Housing in Maple Ridge: Resale Market
Housing Type Average Price Average Square Feet
per Unit
Average Price per
Square Foot
Single-Family $458,000 2,116 $216
Townhouse $243,000 1,265 $192
Condo Apartment $174,000 896 $194
A currently listed single-family home has an average resale price of $458,000 for an average of $216/square
foot, while a currently listed townhouse in Maple Ridge has an average resale price of $243,000 with an
average of $192/square foot. As for currently listed apartment condominiums, on average, the resale price
is $174,000 with an average of $194/square foot.
On the new construction side, new builds in Maple Ridge are priced higher as would be expected in this
case. A new single-family home in Maple Ridge, on average, would cost $659,800 with an average of
$203/square foot. This is similar to the $/square foot of a resale house currently offered in Maple Ridge.
On the other hand, a new townhouse, on average, would cost $358,500 with an average of $227/square
foot and a condominium apartment, on average would cost $249,450 with an average of $328/square foot.
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |19
Both new build townhouse and condominium apartments experience a substantial increase in the $/square
foot when compared to resale units.
Of all the new housing developments in 2015, only one new build is geographically close to the Hammond
area. Conecon Project’s, the Meadows Pointe, located at 20331 Dewdney Trunk Road, is a four-story, 22
unit, boutique condo development, situated just north of the Lougheed Highway and north of Hammond.
The majority of all other new housing developments, whether single-detached, townhouse or apartment
condominium, are all situated further east along the Lougheed Highway, between 227 th and 240th Street in
Maple Ridge.
For example, some recent single family home developments such as Falcon Homes’ Wynnridge and
Foxridge’s Cliffstone are offering 3 to 4 bedroom homes at prices starting at $560,000 and $600,000. On
the other hand, Wallmark’s Two Bird Townhomes are offering 3 to 4 bedroom townhomes priced between
$300,000 and $450,000. The location of these new housing developments are about 10 km east of
Hammond and closely situated to downtown Maple Ridge with easy access to the Lougheed Highway.
While Hammond offers accessibility to the bridges, shopping, public transit, the Fraser River and other
amenities, it is an older neighborhood with rail and industrial development nearby.
In order to establish property values a selection of residential units, currently listed for sale, is provided
below.
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |20
3.2.3 Site Valuation Comparison
This section provides the results of the preliminary pro forma for the case study sites under a base case
scenario (current zoning) and under potential rezoning to higher densities. The potential range of land
values is outlined in the land residual model and the difference between the two equals the net value or
financial lift, which could be attributed to the rezoning. The valuation has been prepared for the current
zoning and for the proposed zoning using reasonable assumptions about possible densities and values. In
terms of the market it is clear that the optimal value of additional density in the Hammond area would be
townhouse zoning. The current market for apartment condominiums is moderate as is the market for mixed
use with grade level commercial in this area.
Cost and Revenue Assumptions
Financial valuation includes a discussion of the financial costs, revenues, benefits, and sensitivities. A
number of industry standard cost and revenue assumptions have been made for the preparation of this
financial pro forma analysis. Estimated costs and revenues are as follows:
•Off-site services: Both scenarios are likely to have off site costs but the exact amount and scale of
the “off sites” are not known with certainty.
•The estimated construction cost for a new single family housing, townhouses and wood frame low
rise have all been taken from industry standards and sources.
•Soft costs: All scenarios are expected to have roughly similar soft costs and vary primarily due to
differences in scale and density for each scenario.
•Average sale price: The sale price is based upon comparable unit sales in the area.
•The assumed required developer profit is industry standard and includes their return on equity.
These values reflect reasonable cost and revenue estimates for comparable properties, plus or minus 10
percent depending on the development plan and assumptions. This estimate is based upon very broad
assumptions. A Financial Analysis with typical industry standard costs and revenues is shown below for
each of the three scenarios.
Financial Comparison
As indicated in the table below, the most significant land value lift is associated with townhouse
development. The addition of density, in an optimistic scenario would equal $5,000 per additional door for
an apartment, $2,750 per additional door for a mixed use project and $10,000 per additional door for a
townhouse project.
Site Description Land Value Lift Value Per Door Value per Sq. Ft.
Site A Low Density Apartment $180,000 $5,000 $6
Site B Mixed Use $130,000 $2,750 $3
Site C Townhouse $266,000 $10,250 $14
As illustrated, at the present time, townhouses are the only higher density residential form for which there
is strong measurable demand. The land value lift for apartments is higher than the land value lift for mixed
use development primarily due to the present lack of demand for commercial space in the Hammond
neighbourhood. Nevertheless, the current land value lift associated with both apartments and mixed use
developments is substantially less than the land value lift associated with townhouses. In the future, as
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |21
development progresses in Hammond, there is potential for this situation to change, with increasing values
for both apartments and mixed use developments.
Potential for a Density Bonus Amenity Zoning System
The benefits of the additional value created by rezoning can be targeted and assessed for the purposes of
the City. Theoretically, the City could potentially access about one-third to one-half of the land value lift in
a density bonus amenity contribution. For instance, for a townhouse development at an FSR of 0.75, an
amenity contribution of $3,300 to $5,000 per unit may be feasible. This approach assumes that the density
bonus is associated with the land value lift between the density that is permissible under current zoning and
the density permissible under rezoning.
For comparative purposes a pro forma was completed for a low density townhouse development with an
FSR of 0.6, in order to evaluate the potential for a density bonus program similar to that in the Albion
neighbourhood (where a base density of 0.6 FSR is provided, with a density bonus possible to an FSR of
0.75). For a townhouse development at an FSR of 0.6, the value of the density per door is comparable to
that of a single detached development. Therefore, for an increase in density to 0.75 FSR, the land value
uplift per door is approximately $10,000. This analysis indicates that for townhouses, a formal density
bonus regime is possible, with potential amenity contributions of $3,300 to $5,000 per unit.
For apartments and mixed use developments, a density bonus system would be more challenging to
implement at this time. For example, with a land value uplift per door of $5,000 for apartments, the City
could theoretically access an amenity contribution of $1,600 to $2,500 per unit (based on the assumption
that the City could access about one-third to one-half of the land value lift). However, it is noted that this
amenity contribution is associated with the land value lift from single detached to apartment use. If the City
were to pre-zone lands for multi-family development and allow for a higher base density (e.g. 1.3 FSR) with
an incrementally higher bonus density (e.g. 1.7 FSR), the analysis would not support significant density
bonus amenity contributions.
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |22
3.3 Key Findings
Based on the contextual review and the results of the analysis, key findings are summarized below.
Heritage Conservation Options
Tool Potential Advantages Potential Drawbacks
On-Site Density
Bonus
•Provides landowner with additional
density in exchange for heritage
conservation
•Flexible tool, can be customized to
circumstance
•Some sites may not be conducive to
additional density
•Current market conditions are such
that value of additional density on a
typical site is substantially less than
the value associated with heritage
preservation
Off-Site Density
Transfers
•Provides tool for heritage
conservation when density bonus
cannot be achieved on-site
•Provides mechanism for a developer
to transfer unused density to another
site
•Can be complicated to administer
between more than one land owner
•Current market conditions are such
that value of unused density on a
typical site is substantially less than
the value associated with heritage
preservation
Conservation Area
Designation
•Provides formal mechanism to
preserve heritage values through
heritage alteration permit process
(required for subdivisions, additions
and new construction)
•Provides indication that historic
elements of neighbourhood will be
retained
•Heritage alteration permit places
additional administrative
requirements on
landowners/developers, making it
more challenging to
develop/redevelop
Heritage
Revitalization
Agreements
•Familiar tool that is already in use
•Provides mechanism to encourage
heritage preservation, restoration
and rehabilitation, with ability to
supersede City zoning regulations
•Can be combined with property tax
exemptions
•Administrative requirements for both
City and landowners (formal
agreement required)
Property Tax
Exemptions
•Familiar tool that is already in use
•Provides mechanism to encourage
heritage preservation, restoration
and rehabilitation
•Temporary loss of property tax
revenue for City
•Administrative requirements to
manage property tax exemptions
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |23
Amenity Funding Options
Tool Potential Advantages Potential Drawbacks
Development Cost
Charges
•Well-established tool to collect fees
associated with growth-related
impact on roads, water, sewer,
stormwater, and parkland acquisition
and improvement projects
•May be used for trail projects
•DCCs may not be used for
community amenities (with the
exception of park and trail projects)
•DCC program must be formally
established by bylaw and approved
by Province
•Use of DCC approach for trail
funding would be inconsistent with
approach taken in Albion
Road Closures and
Sale
•Provides source of funds associated
with the disposition of surplus road
rights-of-way
•Involves sale of publicly owned lands
•Approach may require exploration of
feasibility of reduced road standards
Community
Amenity
Contributions
•Provide funding tool for amenity
contributions at time of rezoning
•Can be easily be applied to a variety
of development types (e.g.
townhouse, apartment, mixed use)
•Approach relies on ‘voluntary’
contributions at time of rezoning
•Guidance from the Province
suggests borrowing principles and
practices that apply to DCC
calculations to develop estimated
CAC amounts (requires cost
estimates for amenities and growth
projections for neighbourhood)
Density Bonus
Amenity Zoning
•Familiar tool that is already in use in
the Albion neighbourhood
•Analysis suggests financial viability
for townhouse projects
•Requires development of land use
zones with base density and
maximum permissible density with
bonus
•Analysis suggests limited ability to
develop density bonus system for
apartment and mixed use projects at
this time (base density would need to
be equivalent to single detached)
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |24
4.Conclusions
Heritage Conservation Options
The Hammond neighbourhood has a strong heritage character, and through the Hammond Area Plan
process it is clear that the neighbourhood wishes to see this character retained, while also allowing for
growth and development. The City of Maple Ridge already successfully uses heritage conservation tools
such as heritage revitalization agreements and property tax exemptions to allow for development while also
encouraging the preservation of historic resources. Thus, for this Study, the focus of analysis was on the
viability of on-site density bonuses and off-site density transfers associated with heritage conservation.
As indicated in the analysis, on-site density bonuses are a flexible tool that can be used to encourage
heritage preservation while allowing for intensification of sites having the potential for additional
development. In situations where there is a small home on a large lot, or if there is a heritage home as part
of a land assembly, on-site density bonuses are a practical way to allow for both heritage conservation and
development. The analysis suggests that at the present time, the value of heritage conservation is typically
greater than the value of additional density that could be accommodated on most sites. However, it is
recommended that the City continue to pursue on-site density bonus strategies where possible.
For off-site density transfers, the analysis also suggests that there is a significant difference between the
value of unused density on a typical donor site (i.e. a preserved single detached home site that could
accommodate perhaps four to five units if it were to be rezoned) and the equivalent value of the heritage
conservation (approximately $300,000 in value, or the right to build approximately thirty townhouse units
based on the current value of density per door). For this reason, there appears to be limited potential for a
formal, systematized, off-site density transfer program at this time. It is also noted that heritage density
transfer proposals can be complicated to process and challenging to explain to neighbouring residents,
property owners, and the public in general. Nevertheless, the City may be able to benefit from heritage
density transfers on a case by case basis, particularly in situations where a developer restoring a
home/building also has a different or adjacent site available for a multi-family project.
Amenity Funding Options
The City is currently exploring potential strategies to fund amenities in the Hammond neighbourhood. While
development cost charges can be used for parks and trails, the City’s approach has been to use other tools
(such as density bonus amenity zoning in Albion) for trail construction. As well, development cost charges
may not be used for other amenities such as affordable housing, community facilities, certain public realm
improvements, etc. Therefore, for this Study, the focus of analysis was on the viability of community
amenity contributions and density bonus amenity zoning.
Community amenity contributions have become a common tool to help municipalities fund amenities.
However, community amenity contributions are not specifically authorized by legislation, and their
application generally relies on the provision of ‘voluntary’ contributions at time of rezoning. Historically,
some municipalities have negotiated community amenity contributions based on the land value lift
associated with individual rezonings. However, recognizing the challenges associated with community
amenity contributions, a number of municipalities have started to develop community amenity contributions
that charge a fixed rate (per unit or square foot of gross floor area) based on a DCC-like calculation that
considers the cost of desired neighbourhood amenities and the projected neighbourhood growth. If this
methodology could be applied in Hammond, community amenity contributions could potentially be a useful
tool for amenity contributions associated with all development types (e.g. townhouse, apartment, mixed
use) at time of rezoning.
City of Maple Ridge
Residential Density Bonus/Transfer Program Assessment for Hammond Area Plan
Page |25
Density bonus amenity zoning, in contrast, requires the establishment of land use zones that provide for a
fixed base density and a maximum permissible density that a developer could achieve by voluntarily
providing a given amenity (or amenity contribution). The analysis indicates that at this time, a density bonus
system for townhouses could feasibly be developed for Hammond, similar to the density bonus system that
is in place in the Albion neighbourhood. However, for apartments and particularly for mixed use
developments, the land value lift per door is actually less than it is for townhouses, and a density bonus
amenity zoning approach would be less feasible.
Based on the value of density per door for apartments and mixed use developments, a density bonus
system for these uses would only be feasible at this time if the base density written into the zoning bylaw
was equivalent to single detached development. As indicated, at this time the financial analysis does not
support pre-zoning lands for apartment or mixed use developments and providing an incrementally higher
bonus densities. Therefore, to establish a comprehensive amenity funding program including townhouses,
apartments, and mixed use buildings, a community amenity contribution approach would be more practical.
If the City proceeds with the establishment of community amenity contributions in Hammond, contributions
could be provided either on a site specific basis or based on a fixed rate per unit or square foot of gross
floor area. As indicated, a number of municipalities are moving towards a fixed rate approach. If a fixed
rate approach were to be used, ideally it would be based on the cost of the desired amenities and the
growth projections for the neighbourhood.
A final funding approach, the closure and sale of surplus road rights-of-way, would require further study to
confirm viability. However, based on an initial review it appears that there may be potential for road closures
and sales within Hammond. As noted, funding from the sale of surplus road rights-of-way could be used
for amenities within the neighbourhood.
Commercial Demand & Capacity Analysis for
Hammond Area Plan
City of Maple Ridge
September 2015
APPENDIX E
2
Executive Summary
Project Overview & Objective
G.P. Rollo & Associates Ltd. (GPRA) has been retained by the City of Maple Ridge to provide an
analysis of the future commercial demand, and associated capacity to accommodate that
demand, at the Hammond Historic Commercial Node under a variety of future neighbourhood
growth scenarios.
Planning & Competitive Context
Historic commercial nodes are intended to provide small scale convenience shopping and a
limited range of services to local area residents. The Hammond node is located at the southern
end of the Hammond Area Plan; it does not benefit from highway or major arterial visibility.
Furthermore, it is located in relatively close proximity to 2 major retail clusters that will continue to
draw the majority of spending from the Hammond neighbourhood: Meadowtown power centre
in Pitt Meadows, and the variety of shopping centres along the Lougheed Highway from Maple
Meadows Way to 119 Avenue.
Hammond commercial node should be positioned to provide day-to-day shopping, service,
recreational and social needs of the immediately adjacent population.
Retail Market Demand Analysis
The major market segments for Hammond retail are: immediately adjacent residents
(primary trade area - PTA), residents up to a 3-5 minute drive away (secondary trade
area - STA), and nearby employees (employee trade area).
The City of Maple Ridge has defined three market build-out scenarios, with combined
PTA + STA populations in 30 years ranging from about 7,900 up to 20,000.
The employee trade area (south of 116 avenue and west of 209 street) is projected to
have an effective employee population of 7,200.
According to a Baseline scenario, it is estimated that retail floor space demand will be
around 16,000 square feet in 2045. Under a medium-density scenario, demand is
projected to reach 20,000 square feet. Under a medium/high density scenario, demand
could reach nearly 50,000 square feet. In this final scenario, there would be sufficient
population to support a commercial village with a retail grocery anchor.
It is recommended that non-retail commercial floor space (i.e. office / institutional
space) also be included in the commercial node, both as an added amenity to the
community and to help bolster overall retail demand.
Supportable Tenant Mix & Required Land Base
Floor area demand is converted into commercial development scenarios (preliminary
tenant mixes), presented in the table below. Total commercia l floor area ranges from
under 21,000 square feet to over 63,000 square feet. These figures include non-retail
commercial floor area that could be included in a future building program.
3
Required land area ranges from 1.4 acres up to 5.8 acres, depending on future demand
and built density. The existing land base could support this through redevelopment of
currently built-out properties.
Consideration should be given to additional commercial and/or mixed-use
designation/zoning in the Hammond node area in the future, depending on market
responsiveness and desired retail building layout. There may be a need in the future to
shift the commercial land pattern in the node in order to allow for development that is
most market supportable and leasable.
Preliminary Tenant Mix - Hammond Village
Baseline Medium
Density
Medium/High
Density
Pharmacy 2,000 2,500 4,000
Restaurant 2,500 3,000 5,000
Wine & Beer Store 1,500 2,000 3,000
Personal Services 1,500 1,500 3,000
Café 1,500 2,000 3,500
Grab & Go / Bakery / Deli 1,500 2,000 3,500
General Store / Green grocer 2,500 3,000 4,000
Comparison Boutiques 2,000 3,000 6,000
Supermarket 0 0 15,000
Hardware 1000 1000 2000
Total Retail / Service Commercial
Floor Space 16,000 20,000 49,000
Non-Retail Commercial floor area
(@30%)*4,800 6,000 14,700
Total Commercial Floor Area 20,800 26,000 63,700
Land Requirements (acres)
0.25 FSR 1.9 2.4 5.8
0.35 FSR 1.4 1.7 4.2
*Space for community use, daycare, martial arts/yoga, professional office etc.
4
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................... 2
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................................... 5
HAMMOND’S PLACE IN THE MAPLE RIDGE COMMERCIAL HIERARCHY .................................................................. 6
PLANNING CONTEXT ........................................................................................................................................................ 6
COMPETITIVE AREA REVIEW ............................................................................................................................................. 7
ACCESSIBILITY, VISIBILITY.................................................................................................................................................. 9
FORM & CHARACTER ...................................................................................................................................................... 9
FUTURE ROLE AND POSITIONING OF THE HAMMOND COMMERCIAL AREA ............................................................................... 10
COMMERCIAL SPACE DEMAND PROJECTIONS ..................................................................................................... 10
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................ 10
RESIDENTIAL TRADE AREA BOUNDARIES ............................................................................................................................ 11
TRADE AREA BUILD-OUT POPULATION SCENARIOS ............................................................................................................. 12
EMPLOYEE TRADE AREA DELINEATION .............................................................................................................................. 13
EMPLOYMENT GROWTH PROJECTIONS .............................................................................................................................. 14
EMPLOYEE RETAIL EXPENDITURES .................................................................................................................................... 15
RETAIL EXPENDITURES & SUPPORTABLE FLOOR AREA .......................................................................................................... 16
COMMERCIAL STRATEGY RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................. 20
RETAIL POSITIONING ..................................................................................................................................................... 20
NON-RETAIL OFFICE SPACE ............................................................................................................................................ 20
NON-COMMERCIAL AMENITY DEMAND DRIVERS ................................................................................................................ 20
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM........................................................................................................................... 21
5
Introduction
G.P. Rollo & Associates Ltd. (GPRA) has been retained by the City of Maple Ridge to undertake
an analysis of the future commercial demand, and associated capacity to accommodate that
demand, at the Hammond Historic Commercial Node (henceforth the “Hammond node”)
under a variety of future neighbourhood growth scenarios. Hammond’s historic commercial
area contains 6.2 acres of zoned commercial land, of which 0.8 acres ca n be classified as
“underutilized” and 1.7 acres as vacant.
The City of Maple Ridge has undertaken an analysis which explores three potential residential
build-out scenarios for the Hammond Area Plan. The first scenario (base density) is based on a
continuation of the recently observed Hammond neighbourhoods’ growth rate, and makes no
allowance for major land use changes. The second scenario (medium density) projects future
population under a set of conditions in which land use policy is modified to allow for a variety of
new built forms along major corridors, including triplex, four-plex, townhouse and garden
apartments up to 3-storeys. In addition, some sensitive infill redevelopment would be permitted
within the neighbourhood residential areas (i.e. garden suites, duplex, cottage clusters). The
third scenario (medium-high density) projects future population under conditions of even more
four-plex, ground-oriented townhouses, and 4-storey apartments along major arterials.
GPRA’s analysis examines the future commercial square footage supportable at the Hammond
node under each of the three population growth scenarios . Supportable floor area calculations
for each scenario are then converted into preliminary recommended tenant mixes, with
associated amounts of land required under each build-out scenario.
6
Hammond’s Place in the Maple Ridge Commercial Hierarchy
Planning Context
Any future development or redevelopment of commercial space in the Hammond area will be
guided by land use vision and objectives as laid out in the OCP.
Hammond is a designated historic commercial centre. The central objective for historic
commercial centres in Maple Ridge is, according to OCP section 6.3.8, to “facilitate commercial
centres that serve as a historic focus for existing historic community neighbourhoods.” To do so,
historic commercial nodes are to provide for the “commercial needs of the adjacent
population”, and are “intended to provide small scale convenience shopping and a limited
range of service to residents.”1 In other words, these are not intended as destination shopping
areas drawing on large residential trade areas.
At present, the Hammond node (shown in red in Figure 1 below) consists of one larger
contiguous commercially designated area, and 3 smaller commercial corner lots.2 The larger
cluster extends west-east along Maple Crescent from approximately Waresley Street to just east
of Dartford Street, and north-south on both 206 Street and Dartford Street to Battle Avenue. The
three smaller nodes are located on the northwest corner of Dartford Street and Battle Avenue,
the southwest corner of 206 Street and Lorne Avenue, and the northeast corner of Dartford
Street and Lorne Avenue. These nodes are home to businesses operating in the categories of
food & beverage, personal services, convenience store and automotive.
Figure 1: Designated Commercial Area (Red) in
Hammond as per OCP Schedule B
1 Maple Ridge OCP, By-Law 7060-2014, Policies 6-38 and 6-39.
2 Maple Ridge OCP, By-Law 7060-2014, Schedule B (last revised January 6, 2015).
7
Competitive Area Review
There is significant commercial competition north and northwest of the Hammond Area Plan,
including big-box retail just west of the City, as well as a variety of commercial a long the
Lougheed Highway from the western gateway of the City, east to 119 Avenue. These
commercial areas will continue to draw the majority of current and future Hammond area retail
spending. This sizeable nearby competition serves to underscore the Hammond node’s primary
intended role as a convenience-serving commercial area catering to the immediate local
population’s day-to-day needs.
Figure 2 below shows the two commercial clusters that will have the greatest influence on future
spending potential at the Hammond Node: Meadowtown power centre at the Pitt
Meadows/Maple Ridge border, and the variety of shopping centres clustered alo ng the
Lougheed Highway from Maple Meadows Way to 119 Ave.
Figure 2: Major Commercial Clusters of Influence for Hammond Commercial Area
Meadowtown Centre
Meadowtown Centre is a 420,000 square foot
open format power centre anchored by
several big box anchor tenants. Anchors
include: Superstore (147,000 sf), Cineplex
Theatres, Winners HomeSense and JYSK. The
site offers 1,950 parking spaces (4.6/1,000 sf).
The mall is a solid performer due to its
strategic location and significant market
area. It has a sub-4% vacancy rate, and
draws a large amount of spending from West
Maple Ridge including the Hammond area.
Hammond Commercial Node
Meadowtown
Power Centre Lougheed /Dewdney
Commercial Cluster
8
Lougheed / Dewdney Commercial Cluster
The Lougheed/Dewdney commercial cluster extends 1.6 linear kilometres, from the intersection
of Lougheed Highway and Dewdney Trunk Rd./Maple Meadows Way in the west to the
intersection of Lougheed Highway and 119 Avenue in the east. Figure 3 below shows the various
commercial nodes within this cluster.
Figure 3: Lougheed / Dewdney Commercial Cluster, West Maple Ridge
1. Safeway shopping centre: anchored by 50,000 square foot Safeway (with Starbucks).
Also contains Envision Financial, Tim Hortons, and Westminster Savings.
2. Westgate Centre: anchored by 49,000 square foot Save-On Foods and 17,000 square
foot Shoppers Drug Mart. Other notable tenants include: TD Bank , Dollarama,
McDonald’s, Pet Food ‘n More, De Dutch, Swiss Chalet, and Fox’s Reach Liquor Store
3. Small Food & Beverage cluster with A&W, Dairy Queen, and Browns Social House.
4. Health Services cluster, anchored by Medlandia Pharmacy
5. Most significant potential commercial/mixed-use redevelopment site within the corridor.
Most significant current tenant is The Keg Steakhouse.
6. Westridge Centre: Sub-30,000 square foot local shopping centre anchored by
Cloverdale Paint.
7. Hammond Mill Centre: an 18,000 square foot local retail node containing Maple Ridge
Liquor Store, Townhall Public House, The Cash Store, Pizza Hut, The Co-Operators, and
Waves Coffee House.
8. Meadow Ridge Shopping Centre: anchored by Dollar Giant and Value Village.
1
2
3 4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11
1,700m to Hammond
commercial node
1,400m to Hammond
commercial node
9
9. A 300 linear metre commercial strip with a mixture of automotive, health services and
food & beverage uses.
10. Strip Centre featuring a mini-mart and various personal services, food & beverage.
11. Retail strip anchored by Mark’s Work Wearhouse.
Accessibility, Visibility
The Hammond commercial node, located at the southern edge of the plan area, is relatively
isolated and does not have any direct highway or major art erial access or visibility. It is unlikely
that it will exert sufficient influence to draw patronage from anywhere north of the Lougheed
Highway, west of Golden Ears Way, or east of 210 Street.
Form & Character
Figure 4: Hammond Historic Commercial Node, excluding corner of Lorne & Dartford
The Hammond node is largely characterized by older, varied single storey construction and an
eclectic mix of commercial businesses within a tightly gridded, historic neighbourhood. The
main commercial areas have frontages along both an arterial road (Maple Crescent) as well as
2 local roads (206 St. and Dartford St.).
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
10
Future Role and Positioning of the Hammond Commercial Area
Given the intended role of historic commercial clusters as laid out in the OCP, and the
competitive and geographic landscape within which the Hammond area is operating, the
focus of the Hammond area should be convenience, day-to-day retail and service commercial
for the local population, in line with current OCP policy. These uses may be supplemented by
limited, unique ground and second-floor office space as well as other ‘community’ type space
such as a multi-purpose area for community events, and/or a fitness centre-type facility. The
amount of space that may be supportable will be dependent on the size of the
neighbourhood’s population and employment areas in the years to come.
Commercial Space Demand Projections
Introduction
In order to evaluate the market potential for new retail and service commercial at the
Hammond node, GPRA analyses the retail expenditure patterns of the future customer base.
The market influence attributable to any retail node, of an y size, will always extend beyond any
precisely defined boundaries. However, in order to construct reliable estimates of future market
support, well-defined trade areas must be delineated.
The geographic area of influence from which a small retail cluster could normally expect to
derive the majority of its total sales volume is defined as its primary trade area (PTA). This is
supplemented by one or more secondary trade areas (STA), from which the bulk of additional
sales are derived. Any additional sales volumes beyond those areas is typically defined as
‘inflow’. In addition to these trade areas – which account for the spending associated with the
residents located in the ascribed areas – an ‘employee trade area’ overlay is delineated and
assessed. This area encompasses those who are employed within the commercial node’s area
of influence, and analyses the potential for daytime expenditures from those patrons.
The most significant factors that are considered in the delineation of the trade areas for the
Hammond node are the location and magnitude of competitive areas of influence,
psychological/physical barriers to access, and OCP policy pertaining to historic commercial
nodes.
11
Residential Trade Area Boundaries
Based on our assessment of the competitive environment, the locational attributes of the
Hammond area, and existing policy, GPRA has delineated the following commercial trade
areas:
Figure 5: Hammond Commercial Node Trade Areas & Competitive Influence Areas
Primary Trade Area
The Primary Trade Area (PTA) for the Hammond node has been defined on the basis of a
modified 10-minute ‘walk-shed’. The walk-shed extends slightly beyond 10 minutes to the west
(into the Port Hammond area) due to a lack of any competitive commercial influence in that
neighbourhood, and is curtailed to the north to account for the relative proximity and outsized
influence of the variety of shops and services along the Lougheed Highway as noted above.
The PTA is bounded by:
Hazelwood Street alignment to the west;
Northern boundary of Lower Hammond
115 / 115a Avenue
Western edge of Maple Ridge Golf Course
The trade area is characterized by predominantly single family homes. It has an estimated 2014
population of 3,561. The average household income is $89,300, 5% below the Metro Vancouver
average. 85% of households live in owned dwellings, vs. 66.5% for the region overall.
Hammond Commercial Area
Lougheed /Dewdney
Commercial Cluster
Meadowtown
Power Centre
SECONDARY TRADE AREA
PRIMARY TRADE AREA
12
Secondary Trade Area
The Secondary Trade Area (STA) for the Hammond node has been defined as the area
stretching from Maple Meadows Way in the west to 210 Street in the east, south of Lougheed
Highway and north of the PTA. This area has been delineated on the basis of a 3-5 minute drive
time from the commercial node, while accounting for the relative proximity of goods and
services along the Lougheed. The STA is bounded by:
Maple Meadows Way in the west
Lougheed Highway commercial areas in the north
PTA boundary in the south
210 St in the east.
Like the PTA, the STA is characterized by predominantly single family homes. It has an estimated
2014 population of 3,139. The average household income is $87,800, 6% below the Metro
Vancouver average. 87% of households live in owned dwellings.
Trade Area Build-Out Population Scenarios
As noted in the introduction to this report, the City of Maple Ridge has produced three potential
build-out scenarios for the trade areas.
Scenario 1 – Base Density/Existing Policy
This scenario projects the future populations for the PTA and STA at current growth rates, within
the existing policy framework assuming no major land use changes aside form minor sensit ive
residential infill. Under this scenario, the trade areas could accommodate a total of 3,068
dwelling units, housing an estimated population of 8,568 persons. Applying current growth rates,
the population for the combined PTA + STA would reach about 7,850 by 2045 (4,177 in the PTA
and 3,680 in the STA).
Scenario 2 – Medium Density
This scenario projects the future populations for PTA and STA on the basis of the following
changes to land use policy:
Triplexes, four-plexes, townhouses and garden apartments up to 3 storeys maximum
permitted along major corridors;
Sensitive infill redevelopment permitted within the neighbourhood residential including
single family, garden suites, duplex, and cottage cluster housing;
Minor changes to land use designations in areas where the goal is to preserve heritage
character adjacent to the neighbourhood commercial node.
Based on assumed densities, development yields and family size ratios, the build -out population
capacity in this scenario is 5,229 residents for the PTA and 5,837 residents for the STA (11,066
total). This is a 29% increase over the population capacity in Scenario 1. It is assumed that this
capacity will be reached within 30 years.
Scenario 3 – Medium/High Density
This scenario projects the future populations for the PTA and STA on the basis of the following
changes to land use policy:
13
Four-plex, ground-oriented townhomes and 4+ storey apartment permitted along major
corridors;
Sensitive infill redevelopment permitted within neighbourhood residential, including
single family, garden suites, duplex, triplex and cottage cluster housing;
Minor changes to land use designations and density transfer program in areas where the
goal is to preserve heritage character.
Based on assumed densities, development yields and family size ratios, the build-out population
capacity in this scenario is 6,968 residents for the PTA and 13,041 residents for the STA (20,009
total). This is a 133% increase over the population capacity in Scenario 1. It is assumed that this
capacity will be reached within 30 years.
Employee Trade Area Delineation
In addition to resident spending from the trade areas under the three build-out scenarios,
employees working near the Hammond commercial node are another important source of retail
and service commercial sales potential.
An employee trade area has been delineated (see Figure 6) on the basis of approximately a 10-
12 minute walk-shed around the commercial node, with some extension to the west and
northwest to encompass the entirety of the Maple Meadows business park and its potential
future expansion area to the south. Within this trade area, it is estimated that in 2012 there was a
daytime employee population of approximately 6,300 including those working from home.
Figure 6: Daytime Employee Trade Area
Lougheed /Dewdney
Commercial Cluster
Meadowtown
Power Centre
DAYTIME EMPLOYEE
TRADE AREA
Hammond Commercial Area
14
Employment Growth Projections
New Development
The vacant property to the south of the existing Maple Meadows Business Park (11055
Hazelwood Street) is currently being considered for rezoning to allow business park use (M -3).
Based on preliminary site plans from the applicant, the subject property contains approximately
25.45 developable acres.3
It is assumed that rezoning to M-3 will be granted for this property, allowing for the creation of a
business park. It is also assumed that restrictions will be placed on the development of large
format retail within this zone. Future tenants of the business park are likely to be a variety of
medium-sized light industrial users, including wholesale, distribution, warehousing, and potentially
one larger light industrial tenant at the site’s southern portion.
3 City of Maple Ridge. Second Reading, Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6914 -2012, 11055
Hazelwood Street. File no: 2012-031-RZ.
Hammond Commercial Area
Maple Meadows
Business Park
Potential Future
Business Park (M-3)
15
To estimate the future employment at this site at full build-out, GPRA has applied employment
density assumptions (employees per acre) derived from Maple Ridge-specific calculations
originally performed for the Commercial & Industrial Strategy. This research indicated
employment densities of approximately 41 employees per acre at light industrial parks. If we
assume that new construction will yield a 10% increase in employment density over existing
development in Maple Ridge, this figure reaches 45 employees per acre. On the basis of 25.45
developable acres and the higher employment density assumption, the employment yield is
projected to be 1,145 employees.
Other Employment Growth & Considerations
The existing Maple Meadows Business Park contains an estimated 1,200 employees. The park is
largely built-out, so any future employment growth would come by way of built -form
densification through redevelopment, or changes in employment use that result in more
‘employment dense’ businesses. For the purpose of this analysis, we assume that there will be
10% more employees working in this business park by 2045.
Beyond this intensification, no further employment growth is projected.
One consideration is the proportion of employees in the trade area that are working out of their
own homes. For this analysis, those working at home-based businesses must be discounted, as
their retail spending would already be captured within the residential trade area analysis. Total
employment has therefore been reduced by 5% to account for current and future home-based
employees.4
The result of this projection is a total employee population in the trade area of 7,565 in 2045.
After discounting the assumed 5% of home-based employees, the effective employment figure
used in the projections to follow is 7,187, which is rounded up to 7,200.
Employee Retail Expenditures
To estimate per capita worker spending, we use data derived from the 2011 ICSC Office-Worker
Retail Spending in a Digital Age report that surveyed employees in various contexts. A
consistent finding of the worker surveys are that per-employee spending is far broader than
simply lunch time food spending. In fact, F&B spending comprises a minority of overall spending.
Workers spend on a wide variety of retail categories, particularly during the lunch hour or on the
way home.
A second important finding from ICSC’s surveys are that per-employee spending often exceeds
that of per-capita residential spending. This is a result of residential per-capital spending
including household members that are minimally economically active (i.e. children, seniors).
We expect that only a small portion of employee spending would trickle to the Hammond
commercial node given proximity to the Lougheed/Dewdney cluster, Meadowtown Power
Centre, as well as downtown Maple Ridge to the east.
4 There are currently 73 licensed home based businesses operating within the Hammond Area Plan
boundary. Assuming 2 employees per business (limit under the zoning bylaw), this equals 146 employees.
This figure is approximately 2% of the total daytime employment estimate for the area. It is assumed that
home-based employment will increase in the coming years, therefore a 5% discount is applied.
16
Retail Expenditures & Supportable Floor Area
Demand Today
Based on current trade area populations and employment figures, and applying reasonable
market capture rates for a local-serving commercial node that also take into consideration
proximity to the Lougheed Corridor and Meadowtown Centre, there is currently support for
between 5,000 and 7,000 square feet of combined retail and service commercial floor area at
the Hammond node. There are a number of existing obstacles to attracting commercial tenants
to the Hammond area, most notably:
Age and quality of building stock
Relative isolation, both real and perceived
Area reputation (viewed by many as an area in decay, not an up-and-coming
neighbourhood).
Projecting Future Demand
To project future demand for commercial floor area, GPRA has modelled each of the potential
future build-out scenarios discussed above. Per-capita expenditure potential has been forecast
by retail category, taking into consideration real change in spending as well as s pending
elasticity by category. Future expenditures have been converted to square feet of space
supportable through application of per-square-foot performance metrics that are based on
observed category-specific performance in the local and regional market. Expenditure capture
rates have been set based on typical market capture for neighbourhood serving nodes, taking
into consideration both proximity to competitive destination retail, as well as the potential inflow
that could come to the Village as it builds out, matures, and is connected into a regional
waterfront trail network.
Projection Scenario 1
By 2045 the PTA + STA residential population is expected to reach 7,857. These residents would
have a combined retail expenditure potential of just under $144 million.
Using reasonable market capture rates for a local-serving commercial node, taking into
account proximity to the Lougheed corridor and Meadowtown Centre, we expect that
approximately 5% of this expenditure could be captured at the Hammond node, translating to
approximately 8,500 square feet of retail floor area. To this we add an additional 35% for
personal services, professional services, and food & beverage space, bringing the total up to
11,300 square feet.
In addition 7,200 local daytime employees would provide support for an additional 4,900 square
feet, bringing the grand total of space supportable in this scenario to 16,000 square feet.
17
Table 1: Supportable Floor Space Forecast, Scenario 1
Assuming density levels of 0.25 to 0.35 FSR, 16,000 square feet of built space would require
anywhere from 45,000 to 64,000 square feet of gross land area (1.0 to 1.5 acres)
2045 PTA STA Employees
Residential + Employee Population:4,177 3,680 7,200
Retail Categories
Supermarkets -$ 550.00$ - - - -
Convenience and specialty food
stores 957,386$ 375.00$ 959 208 1,385 3,000
Beer, wine and liquor stores 1,898,489$ 925.00$ 1,621 235 197 2,000
Pharmacies and personal care
stores 2,369,301$ 775.00$ 1,479 415 1,163 3,000
Department Stores -$ 425.00$ - - - -
General merchandise stores 395,394$ 225.00$ 1,152 - 606 2,000
Clothing stores -$ 325.00$ - - - -
Shoe, clothing accessories and
jewellery stores -$ 275.00$ - - - -
Home Centres, Hardware
Stores/Garden Stores 299,483$ 350.00$ 464 392 - 1,000
Home electronics and appliance
stores -$ 275.00$ - - - -
Furniture stores 98,392$ 250.00$ 293 100 - -
Home furnishings stores 68,008$ 250.00$ 203 69 - -
Sporting goods, hobby, music and
book stores 108,629$ 350.00$ - 93 217 -
Miscellaneous store retailers 219,641$ 275.00$ 393 336 70 1,000
- Service Commercial (including
F&B) @ 35%2,297 647 1,273 4,000
Total Floor Area Supportable 8,860 2,496 4,912 16,000
* If category total is <500sf, the assumed floor space supportable is zero.
Forecasted
Retail Sales
Supportable Floor Space by
Spending Source
Sales
Performance
$/sf/yr
Total Floor Space
(sq.ft.) (rounded)*
18
Projection Scenario 2
By 2045 the PTA + STA population is projected to reach 11,066. This population would have a
combined retail expenditure potential of over $202 million.
Applying the same market capture rates as used in Scenario 1, net local expenditures would
translate to demand for approximately 11,000 square feet of retail floor area. Adding 35% for
service commercial, plus the support from daytime employees, brings this total to 20,000 square
feet.
Table 2: Supportable Floor Space Forecast, Scenario 2
Assuming density levels of 0.25 to 0.35 FSR, 20,000 square feet of built space would require
between 57,000 and 80,000 square feet of land (1.31 to 1.84 acres).
2045 PTA STA Employees
5,229 5,837 7,200
Supermarkets -$ 550.00$ - - - -
Convenience and specialty food
stores 1,093,739$ 375.00$ 1,201 330 1,385 3,000
Beer, wine and liquor stores 2,403,277$ 925.00$ 2,029 373 197 3,000
Pharmacies and personal care
stores 2,846,336$ 775.00$ 1,851 658 1,163 4,000
Department Stores -$ 425.00$ - - - -
General merchandise stores 460,611$ 225.00$ 1,441 - 606 2,000
Clothing stores -$ 325.00$ - - - -
Shoe, clothing accessories and
jewellery stores -$ 275.00$ - - - -
Home Centres, Hardware
Stores/Garden Stores 420,728$ 350.00$ 581 621 - 1,000
Home electronics and appliance
stores -$ 275.00$ - - - -
Furniture stores 131,554$ 250.00$ 367 159 - 1,000
Home furnishings stores 90,930$ 250.00$ 254 110 - -
Sporting goods, hobby, music and
book stores 127,797$ 350.00$ - 148 217 -
Miscellaneous store retailers 300,995$ 275.00$ 491 533 70 1,000
Service Commercial (including
F&B) @ 35%2,875 1,027 1,273 5,000
Total Floor Area Supportable 11,090 3,959 4,912 20,000
* If category total is <500sf, the assumed floor space supportable is zero.
Forecasted
Retail Sales
Sales
Performance
$/sf/yr
Supportable Floor Space by
Spending Source Total Floor Space
(sq.ft.) (rounded)*
19
Projection Scenario 3
In Scenario 3, the build-out population of the trade areas (over 20,000 residents) is sizeable
enough to potentially support a small grocery store (<15,000 sf). In this scenario, it is assumed
that up to 20% of PTA spending and 5% of STA spending at supermarkets would flow to a grocery
store at Hammond.
The 2045 population of the PTA + STA would have a combined retail expenditure potential of
over $364 million. Applying the same capture rates as in the foregoing scenarios (with the
exception of the supermarket category), there is support for nearly 50,000 square feet of
combined retail and service commercial floor area.
Table 3: Supportable Floor Space Forecast, Scenario 3
Again assuming density levels of 0.25 to 0.35 FSR, the warranted built space in this scenario
would require between 166,000 and 232,000 square feet of land (3.2 to 4.5 acres).
2045 PTA STA Employees
6,968 13,041 7,200
Supermarkets 6,881,887$ 550.00$ 8,795 3,245 472 13,000
Convenience and specialty food
stores 1,396,413$ 375.00$ 1,600 738 1,385 4,000
Beer, wine and liquor stores 3,452,799$ 925.00$ 2,704 832 197 4,000
Pharmacies and personal care
stores 3,953,074$ 775.00$ 2,466 1,471 1,163 5,000
Department Stores -$ 425.00$ - - - -
General merchandise stores 568,467$ 225.00$ 1,921 - 606 3,000
Clothing stores -$ 325.00$ - - - -
Shoe, clothing accessories and
jewellery stores -$ 275.00$ - - - -
Home Centres, Hardware
Stores/Garden Stores 756,675$ 350.00$ 774 1,388 - 2,000
Home electronics and appliance
stores -$ 275.00$ - - - -
Furniture stores 211,192$ 250.00$ 489 356 - 1,000
Home furnishings stores 145,975$ 250.00$ 338 246 - 1,000
Sporting goods, hobby, music and
book stores 191,802$ 350.00$ - 331 217 1,000
Miscellaneous store retailers 526,844$ 275.00$ 655 1,191 70 2,000
Service Commercial (including
F&B) @ 35%6,910 3,429 1,439 13,000
Total Floor Area Supportable 26,652 13,227 5,549 49,000
* If category total is <500sf, the assumed floor space supportable is zero.
Supportable Floor Space by
Spending Source Total Floor Space
(sq.ft.) (rounded)*
Forecasted
Retail Sales
Sales
Performance
$/sf/yr
20
Commercial Strategy Recommendations
Retail Positioning
As a primarily local serving, convenience-oriented neighbourhood retail node, Hammond is
unlikely to attract significant interest from retailers selling ‘comparison’ goods (i.e. clothing,
shoes, jewellery, home furnishings and the like), beyond a few one-off independent boutique
and specialty retailers. Overall, the Hammond node should focus on offering day-to-day goods
and services, some seasonal uses, and should be positioned as the neighbourhood ‘heart’ for
socializing. The amount and mix that is supportable will vary depending on the ultimate build -
out scenario.
Under the highest density scenario in which the trade areas have a combined population
exceeding 20,000 residents (and nearly 7,000 residents within the immediately adjacent PTA), it is
likely that the Hammond node could become a vibrant commercial village with nearly 50,000
square feet of retail and service commercial space. This population would be sufficient to
support a small community grocery store (6,000 up to 15,000 square feet), which would be the
anchor for the village. An idealized tenant mix for such a village would also include a
pharmacy, bakery/deli, liquor store, hardware store, a few local comparison boutiques (home
furnishings & accessories, toys, hobbies, books, etc.), at least one and maybe multiple casual / sit
down restaurants, plus an assortment of personal and professional services.
At base (existing) density levels, 16,000 square feet of retail and non -retail commercial space is
supportable by 2030. Today, only about 5-7,000 square feet of space is supportable.
Non-Retail Office Space
Including a small office component within a retail village can have a number of positive
implications including:
Further bolstering the retail market demand by having a captive, on-site audience,
particularly for food & beverage components;
Enhancing village animation by creating visitor activity throughout the day;
Providing professional working spaces for potential residential buyers that are attracted
to the amenity of an office close to home;
Two storey structures can add a design elements
Adding a second storey can be a cost-effective way of creating more gross leasable
area;
Risk mitigation: 2nd storey vacancies are not as detrimental to projects in early stages.
Office tenants that may be interested in space in the Hammond village could include: real
estate offices, lawyers, accountants, notaries, small consulting firms in a variety of industries.
Non-Commercial Amenity Demand Drivers
Non-commercial components can be integrated with retail to act as drivers of commercial
demand. This could include:
Fitness space (gym, yoga studio, other)
Programmed events such as farmer’s markets, crafts fairs, which can appeal to all ages
and bring the community together;
21
Daycare
Commercial Development Program
Taking the supportable floor area calculations and translating them into a preliminary
tenant mix, we arrive at total retail/service commercial floor area of between 16,000 and
49,000 square feet, depending on residential density.
Non-retail office and non-commercial amenity space (institutional, civic, fitness etc.) is
also factored in, at 30% of total retail floor space.
Accordingly, total recommended commercial floorspace for the Hammond node ranges
from just under 21,000 square feet to over 63,000 square feet at full build-out.
Required land area ranges from a low of 1.4 acres to a high of 5.8 acres. Through re-
development of existing commercially-zoned space, Hammond has the zoned land
base required to accommodate future demand.
Consideration should be given to additional commercial and/or mixed-use
designation/zoning in the Hammond village area in the future, depending on market
responsiveness and desired retail building layout. Ultimately there may be a need to
‘shift’ the commercial land pattern in the Hammond node in order to allow for
development of the most market supportable and leasable product. It is unlikely though
that a gross land base of more than 6 acres will be required.
22
Leasing Considerations
Incentives & Marketing
To ensure that Hammond emerges over the long term as a vibrant commercial village in a
revitalizing historic neighbourhood, the City and land owners will need to make concerted
efforts on both the tenant attraction and retention fronts. A package of incentives will be
required as part of a concerted ‘nurturing’ program for local businesses and property owners,
and should include property tax abatements, generous tenant improvement allowances, and
significantly reduced rent periods in order to allow business to e stablish themselves and for the
village to begin to solidify its customer base. Over time, Hammond may find it prudent to jointly
market itself as part of a riverfront and river proximate village network, along with Osprey Village
in Pitt Meadows. Further research and consideration on incentives and marketing will be
warranted after completion of the Hammond Area Plan.
Impact of Trails
In the near future, the extensive Pitt Meadows dyke and inland trail network will be extended to
connect with the Lower Hammond Area. This trail extension/integration could benefit and
accelerate interest in redevelopment and leasing at the Hammond node.
Preliminary Tenant Mix - Hammond Village
Baseline Medium
Density
Medium/High
Density
Pharmacy 2,000 2,500 4,000
Restaurant 2,500 3,000 5,000
Wine & Beer Store 1,500 2,000 3,000
Personal Services 1,500 1,500 3,000
Café 1,500 2,000 3,500
Grab & Go / Bakery / Deli 1,500 2,000 3,500
General Store / Green grocer 2,500 3,000 4,000
Comparison Boutiques 2,000 3,000 6,000
Supermarket 0 0 15,000
Hardware 1000 1000 2000
Total Retail / Service Commercial
Floor Space 16,000 20,000 49,000
Non-Retail Commercial floor area
(@30%)*4,800 6,000 14,700
Total Commercial Floor Area 20,800 26,000 63,700
Land Requirements (acres)
0.25 FSR 1.9 2.4 5.8
0.35 FSR 1.4 1.7 4.2
*Space for community use, daycare, martial arts/yoga, professional office etc.
23
While for many commercial tenants the foot, bicycle and other traffic that will be generated by
the trail network will likely not impact their business viability or business planning considerations,
for businesses in certain categories the additional traffic associated with the trail system may be
a factor that improves their business viability and their willingness to locate in the area. Some
categories that may see benefits from the trail network extension include:
Fitness / yoga type businesses
Cafes and grab ‘n go restaurants
Seasonal businesses catering to specific trail user groups (e.g. bike accessories,
ice cream, other goods/services geared toward recreational trail activities.
Osprey Village in Pitt Meadows has been benefited by its location along the trail network, with
recreational and food & beverage tenants seeing positive benefit particularly in the summer
months.
1
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: March 7, 2016
and Members of Council
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: Silver Valley School Sites – Update on School District 42 Decision and School
Site Review Process
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On February 12, 2016, School District 42 sent a letter to the City of Maple Ridge regarding eligible
schools sites in Silver Valley. That letter notes that the Board of Education had approved a motion,
adopting the eligible school sites proposal for inclusion in the Board’s Capital Plan. The letter also
advised the City that the eligible school sites proposal included only the River Village Hamlet site in
Silver Valley. (Refer to appendix A)
The result of the School District decision to pursue a school at the River Village location is that three
OCP designated school sites are now superfluous: namely the sites located in the Blaney, Forest and
Horse Hamlets. This decision necessitates a discussion regarding the future land use of these
surplus Civic designated properties. (Refer to Appendix B)
The purpose of this report is to update Council on the School District correspondence and to outline
a process for discussing the future land use for the resulting superfluous school sites.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1)Whereas Council has considered the requirements of Section 475 of the Local Government Act
that it provide, in respect of an amendment to an Official Community Plan, one or more
opportunities it considers appropriate for consultation with persons, organizations and authorities
it considers will be affected and has specifically considered the ma tters referred to in Section
475 of the Act;
2)And whereas Council considers that the opportunities to consult, proposed to be provided by the
City in respect of an amendment to an Official Community Plan, constitute appropriate
consultation for the purposes of Section 475 of the Act;
3)And whereas, in respect of Section 475 (2) 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:
a.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;
b.The Board of any Regional District that is adjacent to the area covered by the plan;
c.The Council of any municipality that is adjacent to the area covered by the plan;
d.First Nations;
e.School District Boards, greater boards and improvement district boards, and
f.The Provincial and Federal Governments and their agencies;
5.4
2
4) And that the only additional consultation to be required in respect of this matter beyond the
consultation program outlined in this report titled, “Silver Valley School Sites – Update on School
District 42 Decision and School Site Review Process”, dated March 7, 2016, and the early
posting of the proposed Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw on the District’s
website, together with an invitation to the public to comment, is referral to School District 42;
5) And that the process identified in the report entitled “Silver Valley School Sites – Update on
School District 42 Decision and School Site Review Process” be endorsed.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
The Silver Valley Area Concept Plan was prepared By Civitas Urban Design and Planning in 2001 and
was the result of an intensive public consultation program with the community. The plan was based
on a series of workshops and open houses with broad representation from the community,
government agencies, non profit groups and the School District.
The Plan envisioned a planned community that was sensitive to the environment and was guided by
a series of Guiding Principles, which resulted in densities being distributed within three Hamlets and
a River Village. Each hamlet featured a central area with amenities that included a park, school,
local commercial space, civic uses and higher density residential uses. In addition, each hamlet was
comprised of multiple residential neighbourhoods developed in a manner to foster incremental
density increases nearest the hamlet centre.
Residential forms in each Hamlet differed based on their designation within the Plan, and include
High, Medium and low density residential, or a combination. The River Village, located on Fern
Crescent between Maple Ridge Park to the south and an escarpment to the north and east was
identified as the commercial heart of the Silver Valley area. This centre was anticipated to serve
local needs for retail, service, office and civic uses. The proposed design integrates a main street
shopping street with multi-family housing, a school, community and mixed use buildings.
From the outset, the Silver Valley Planning process was collaborative. School District 42 was
consulted as the Silver Valley Land Use Review was being prepared. During the 2006 OCP review,
staff met with the School District staff to discuss school sites identified in the Plan, including the
Silver Valley sites. No changes were requested at that time. A formal referral was also sent to the
School District and no comments were received.
In 2014, the Board directed School District staff to prepare a Strategic Facilities Plan to “identify and
rationalize current and future capital requirements for new schools; school expansion and
consolidation; school replacement or upgrades based on building condition, seismic vulnerability and
ongoing maintenance/life cycle costs; as well as new government initiatives”. It was envisioned that
the Strategic Facilities Plan would provide the context for discussions with municipalities regarding
the eligible school sites.
In March 2015, the City received a letter from the School District advising that “The School District
will need to acquire one school site in Silver Valley that would, at a minimum, accommodate a school
with a nominal capacity of 550 students”. The preferred site was not identified at that time.
3
The Final Phase of the Strategic Facilities Plan was completed in October 2015. This Plan also noted
that the School District will need to acquire and develop only one school site in Silver Valley, but did
not identify the preferred site.
On February 12, 2016, School District 42 sent a letter to the City of Maple Ridge regarding eligible
schools sites in Silver Valley. That letter notes that the Board of Education had approved a motion,
adopting the eligible school sites proposal for inclusion in the Board’s Capital Plan. The letter also
advised the City that the eligible school sites proposal included the River Village Hamlet site.
The School District decision to proceed with a school in the River Village necessitates a consideration
of the future land use designation for three sites in the Silver Valley Area Plan that are identified but
will not be developed as school properties.
b) Reconsideration of Designated School Sites
As noted above, there are three designated Civic sites in the Silver Valley Area that require
reconsideration of the Land Use designations. Two out of the three sites identified are held by
private land owners who likely have alternative development options for the site. The third site (in
the Forest Hamlet) is owned by the City. The following Section of this report provides a brief overview
of those sites.
Blaney Hamlet:
The Area Plan identifies that the Blaney Hamlet should be centred at 232 Street and approximately
137th Avenue. The Hamlet centre “should contain a civic area, comprised of park, school and
community facility, such as a daycare. The centre should also include a small commercial area
limited to retail floor space of 90-140 m2”.
The following figure identifies the property that was designated Civic in the Area Plan and was
intended as a future school site. It is noted that the City has purchased the northerly 2 properties for
future park use.
4
As illustrated on the map figure above, the property subject to discussion is privately o wned and
there is some urgency on behalf of the owners to resolve the land use discussion. Recognizing that
this property is meat-hooked to the lands fronting 232 Street, staff has identified a mechanism to
advance the development on the 232 Street fronting portion of the property. This would require that
a rezoning and subdivision application be submitted by an applicant, but is a supportable approach
from a land use planning perspective. This solution should reduce some of the urgency while Counci l
resolves the future land use of the Civic designated portion of the property.
5
Horse Hamlet:
The Area Plan notes that the Horse Hamlet is located on the eastern sector of the Area, within the
crescent formed by the Alouette River and adjacent to an entry to the Golden Ears Provincial Park.
The policies further note that the Horse Hamlet “should be centred on an elementary school located
within a 5 minute walk of most residents, and the principal commercial and community facilities
should be located across a creek on 128th Avenue. The Hamlet Centre should contain a civic area,
comprised of a park, school and community facility such as a daycare. The centre should also
contain a small commercial area limited to retail floor space of 90-140m2”.
The majority of the property designated Civic and intended for school is in Private Ownership.
6
The Forest Hamlet
The Forest Hamlet is located in the central sector of Silver Valley, on the upper slopes adjacent to
the UBC Research Forest. The policies state that the “Forest Hamlet should be centred at the
intersection of 2 main streets, and should contain a civic area, comprised of park, school and
community facility such as daycare. The centre should also include a small commercial area limited
to retail floor space of 90-140m2”.
The Civic designated property (i.e. school site) is owned by the City of Maple Ridge, and forms part of
the City’s larger land holdings in this area. Given that the City owns the sites and they will likely
develop as part of a master planned neighbourhood, it is noted that there is no urgency to change
the land use designation, and it is recommended that the land use designation for this property be
considered as a component of any future proposal to develop the 170 ha (420 acre) holding.
c) Land Use Review Considerations:
Civitas Urban Design and Planning
The recent decision by the School District to proceed with only one school site in Silver Valley has
generated discussion regarding the community role that the Civic sites have in contributing to the
health or success of the Hamlet Centres. In reviewing the Area Plan policies, staff have noted that
the Area Plan was written to be adaptive and that there are other land uses that can provide an
integral component to the Hamlet Centres. While schools are clearly identified in the Area Plan as
being integral to the hamlet centres, other uses such as commercial space, parks, other civic uses,
and community facilities such as daycares are equally important to the health and vitality of the
hamlets.
7
Civitas Urban Design and Planning, in consultation with the Community, were the authors of the
Silver Valley Concept Plan, and were contacted to provide some comments on the implications of the
hamlets not containing an elementary school site. Their response was as follows:
“there exist other ways to provide a 'civic heart' to each hamlet using a park or other
open space, community facilities, and/or day care, to name a few, in place of the
schools…
The key to the vision was the creation of a very robust plan that could accommodate a diversity of
people, housing types, and amenities and was balanced ecologically, socially, and economically. A
good plan should be structured to adapt to reasonable changes in market and amenity demand that
can be expected to occur over the time of build out. I believe the Silver Valley Plan achieves all that.
The presence of a community 'civic heart' to each Hamlet is an important component
of the plan and those 'civic hearts' should be retained. A school/park combination, as
proposed in the Area Plan, makes an excellent component of this, but the presence
of the school may not be imperative. The challenge now is to ensure that other viable
and appropriate civic or community uses can be found for these sites that will ensure
they remain the 'civic heart' for each Hamlet.”
Parks, Recreation and Culture Infrastructure
During the Business Planning process Council discussed a lack of investment in significant sports
and recreation infrastructure, and staff responded by bringing forward a funding strategy for parks
and recreation community investments. Council has recently been discussing a number of projects
related to parks, recreation and culture infrastructure in the community, and are moving forward in
identifying short, medium and long-term priorities. Once the confirmed list of Council priorities is
completed, a comprehensive community engagement process will be undertaken to seek community
feedback.
On February 22, 2016, Council received a report which included a Summary of Parks, Recreation
and Culture Facility Bundles. In reviewing the list, it is noted that a recreation amenity in Silver Valley
that would serve as a gathering place is specifically identified. In reviewing the list, it is also noted
that there are other components identified that may be deemed suitable for the Civic designated,
Silver Valley sites. Examples of such uses may include fields, youth action parks/spaces, community
gardens, dog parks, and recreation amenities.
d) Process:
Given that the City owns the property in the Forest Hamlet, it is recommended that discuss ion
regarding future land use for the Civic sites be focused on the Blaney and Horse Hamlets. Future
land use decisions for the Forest Hamlet would be undertaken when the City determines it timely to
pursue the advancement of development of the City owned lands in the Forest Hamlet.
Typically, a land use discussion would consider the merits of a variety of land uses, including
Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Institutional and Recreational uses. Should the outcome of the
consultation result in one or more of these sites being designated for Park purpose, then the Parks
and Leisure Services Department would undertake a Neighborhood Consultation process to define
the specific amenities that would be provided.
8
The following 5 Phase process is identified:
Phase 1 Council Endorsement of Process March 7, 2017
Phase 2 Council Roll-up-Sleeves workshop -
discussion of land use options
To commence with hire of Community
Planner position & Council direction on
Recreation Priorities
Phase 3 Public Consultation
On-line questionnaires
Public Workshop focused around Blaney &
Horse Hamlet
Discussions with School District
Phase 4 Consultation Update Council Workshop
Phase 5 OCP Amendment Bylaw Adoption Bylaw Readings & Public Hearing
Includes formal referral to School District
Local Government Act
As the reconsideration of the Silver Valley Civic sites may result in a redesignation of these
properties, public consultation is required to ensure compliance with the following provisions of
Sections 475 and 476 of the Local Government Act:
“Consultation during OCP development
Section 475
(1) During the development of an official community plan, or the repeal or amendment of an
official community plan, the proposing local government must provide one or more
opportunities it considers appropriate for consultation with persons, organizations and
authorities it considers will be affected.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), the local government must:
a. Consider whether the opportunities for consultation with one or more of the persons,
organizations and authorities should be early and ongoing, and
b. Specifically consider whether consultation is required with the following:
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.
(3) Consultation under this section is in addition to the public hearing required under section
477(3) (c).
(4) If the development of an official community plan, or the repeal or amendment of an official
community plan, might affect agricultural land, the proposing local government must
consult with the Agricultural Land Commission.”
9
In addition, Section 476 of the Act requires consultation with the School Board during the
preparation of an Official Community Plan amendment:
“
(1) If a local government has adopted or proposes to adopt or amend an official community plan
for an area that includes the whole or any part of one or more school districts, the local
government must consult with the boards of education for those school districts
a. At the time of preparing or amending the official community plan, and
b. In any event, at least once in each calendar year.”
CONCLUSIONS:
On February 12, 2016, School District 42 advised the City of Maple Ridge of their intention to pursue
the development of a future elementary school in the River Village, in Silver Valley. As a result of this
decision, the City will need to determine what the future land use will be for the three Civic sites
located in the Blaney, Horse and Forest Hamlets.
In considering the Silver Valley Area Plan policies, it is noted that while these schools were deemed
to be integral to the development of the hamlets, other opportunities exist for the development of
these sites. Such opportunities may include uses such as commercial spaces, parks, civic uses that
are equally important to the health and vitality of the Hamlets.
Recognizing that Council is in the process of discussing priorities for park, recreation and culture
facilities in the community, this discussion may inform land use decisions for the Civic sites in Silver
Valley, and for that reason, it is recommended that the Silver Valley process not comme nce until
Council has finalized their prioritization list. Once completed, it is recommended that the Review
process for the Blaney and Horse Hamlets commence with a roll-up-your-sleeves workshop with
Council, followed by a community consultation program.
“Original signed by Christine Carter”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
“Original signed by David Pollock” 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
CC/
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – February 12, 2016 letter from School District 42
Appendix B – Silver Valley Area Plan, Figure 2 Land Use Plan
APPENDIX A
´
BLANEY
HORSE
RIVER VILLAGE
FOREST
GOLDEN EARS
RESEARCH FOREST
PROVINCIAL PARK
ECO CLUSTERS
LOW DENSITY URBAN
LOW/MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
MED/HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
NEIGHBOURHOOD PARK
OPEN SPACE
CIVIC
CONSERVATION
TOURIST
SECONDARY TRAIL
HORSE TRAIL
WATERCOURSE
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGEPlanning Dept
BYLAW: 6067-2002ADOPTED: OCT. 22, 2002DRAWN BY: T.M.
OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLANPART VIA - SILVER VALLEYFIGURE 2. LAND USE PLAN
1:15,000
Re-adopted by Bylaw No. 7060-2014 Feb. 11, 2014
REVISED: Oct 14, 2014BYLAW REVISION: 7082-2014REVISED BY: D.T.
APPENDIX B