HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-03-14 Council Workshop Agenda and Reports.pdf
City of Maple Ridge
1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
2. MINUTES
2.1 Minutes of the March 7, 2016 Council Workshop Meeting
2.2 Minutes of Meetings of Committees and Commissions of Council
• Maple Ridge Community Heritage Commission – February 2, 2016
2.3 Business Arising from Committee and Commission Minutes
3. PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL
3.1
4. MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS’ REPORTS
COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA
March 14, 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 14, 2016
Audit & Finance Committee Meeting 9:00 a.m.
Closed Council following Workshop
Committee of the Whole Meeting 1:00 p.m.
March 15
Public Hearing Cancelled
Council Workshop
March 14, 2016
Page 2 of 4
5. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
Note: Item 5.1 was deferred from the March 7, 2016 Council Workshop Meeting
5.1 Hammond Area Plan Process – Preliminary Concept Plan
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.
5.2 Maple Ridge Community Amenity Contribution Program –Proposed Community
Amenity Contribution Program Council Policy – Maple Ridge Official Community
Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7188-2015
Staff report dated March 14, 2016 recommending that the proposed Community
Amenity Contribution Program Council Policy be approved and that Maple Ridge
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7188-2015 be forwarded to a
Council meeting for consideration.
5.3 LMLGA Resolutions Sub-Committee Update
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.
6.1 Upcoming Events
March 16, 2016
7:00 p.m.
Emergency Town Hall on Housing Affordability in Metro
Vancouver, St. James Community Square, Vancouver
Organizer: David Eby, MLA Vancouver-Point Grey
April 7, 2016
5:30 p.m.
TELUS Open House, Maple Ridge Alliance Church, 20399
Dewdney Trunk Road
Organizer: TELUS
Council Workshop
March 14, 2016
Page 3 of 4
April 14, 2016
5:30 p.m.
TELUS Open House, St. Paul’s Lutheran Church, 12145 Laity
Street
Organizer: TELUS
April 22, 2016
11:30 a.m.
Green Team Open House and Earth Day Event, Maple Ridge
City Hall
Organizer: City of Maple Ridge
May 14, 2016
6:00 p.m.
Maple Ridge Community Foundation’s Annual Fundraiser, Pitt
Meadows Golf Club
Organizer: Maple Ridge Community Foundation
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
• 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 14, 2016
Page 4 of 4
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
March 7, 2016
The Minutes of the City Council Workshop held on March 7, 2016 at 10:10 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
C. Carter, Director of Planning
D. Pollock, Municipal Engineer
Note: These Minutes are posted on the City Web Site at www.mapleridge.ca
1.ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
R/2016-113
It was moved and seconded
That the meeting be closed to the public pursuant Section 90(1) and 90(2) of
the Community Charter as the subject matter being considered relates to the
following:
1.The acquisition and disposition of land and improvements that council
considers might reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the
municipality if disclosed
2.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.
3.The receiving of advice that is subject to solicitor-client privilege, including
communications necessary for that purpose.
2.1
Council Workshop Minutes
March 7, 2016
Page 2 of 6
4. 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;
5. Any other matter that may be brought before the Council that meets the
requirements for a meeting closed to the public pursuant to Sections 90
(1) and 90 (2) of the Community Charter or Freedom of Information and
Protection of Privacy Act.
CARRIED
Councillor Duncan, Councillor Speirs - OPPOSED
Note: The meeting reconvened at 3:45 p.m.
2. MINUTES
2.1 Minutes of the February 22, 2016 Council Workshop Meeting
R/2016-114
It was moved and seconded
That the minutes of the Council Workshop Meeting of February 22, 2016
be adopted as circulated.
CARRIED
3. PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL – Nil
4 MAYOR’S AND COUNCILLORS’ REPORTS
Item 4 was deferred to March 14, 2016
5. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
5.1 Parks and Recreation Infrastructure Prioritization
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.
Note: Item 5.1 was deferred to the March 14, 2016 Council Workshop Meeting.
Council Workshop Minutes
March 7, 2016
Page 3 of 6
5.2 Proposed Changes to Metro Vancouver Transfer Station Hours
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.
The Municipal Engineer reviewed the report.
R/2016-115
It was moved and seconded
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.
CARRIED
5.3 Hammond Area Plan Process – Preliminary Concept Plan
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.
Note: Item 5.3 was deferred to the March 14, 2016 Council Workshop Meeting
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.
The Director of Planning gave a power point presentation focusing on School
District No. 42’s decision, the implications of that decision for land use and
the process for the school site review.
Council Workshop Minutes
March 7, 2016
Page 4 of 6
R/2016-116
It was moved and seconded
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 matters
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;
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.
CARRIED
Council Workshop Minutes
March 7, 2016
Page 5 of 6
5.5 Thornhill Community Association’s Invitation to Event
Mayor Read provided an update on the invitation to Council by the Thornhill
Community Association advising that the request is to proceed initially with
cookies and coffee and a meet and greet one evening.
R/2016-117
It was moved and seconded
That a time be scheduled for a meet and greet with the Thornhill Community
Association.
CARRIED
6. CORRESPONDENCE
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.
R/2016-118
It was moved and seconded
That a letter be sent to the Minister of Health supporting the continuation of
funding for the Farmers’ Markets Nutrition Coupon Program.
CARRIED
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
Council Workshop Minutes
March 7, 2016
Page 6 of 6
R/2016-119
It was moved and seconded
That a sub-committee be struck to bring resolutions forward for consideration
of submission to the Lower Mainland Local Government Association; and that
the task force consist of Councillors Duncan, Shymkiw and Speirs.
CARRIED
It was requested that Councillors submit topics to the sub-committee.
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
8. MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT
9. ADJOURNMENT – 3:28 p.m.
_______________________________
N. Read, Mayor
Certified Correct
___________________________________
C. Marlo, Corporate Officer
The Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Community Heritage Commission, held in the Blaney
Room, at Maple Ridge Municipal Hall, 11995 Haney Place Road, Maple Ridge, British Columbia, on
Tuesday,February 2, 2016 at 7:00 p.m.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT
Len Pettit Community at Large
Eric Phillips Community at Large
Sandra Ayres Community at Large
Brenda Smith,Chair Maple Ridge Historical Society
Councillor Speirs Council Liaison
Steven Ranta,Vice-Chair Community at Large
Faye Isaac Maple Ridge Historical Society
STAFF PRESENT
Lisa Zosiak Staff Liaison, Community Planner
Sunny Schiller Committee Clerk
GUESTS
Erica Williams President, Maple Ridge Historical Society
REGRETS/ABSENT
1.CALL TO ORDER
There being a quorum present, the Chair called the meeting to order at 7:01 pm.
2.AGENDA APPROVAL
R16-006 It was moved and seconded
That the agenda be amended to add Items 7.3 Museum and Archives Conversation and 7.4
Haney House and be adopted as amended.
CARRIED
3.MINUTES APPROVAL
R16-007 It was moved and seconded
That the Minutes of the January 11, 2016 meeting be amended to reflect the correct spelling
of Len Pettit’s name and be adopted as amended.
CARRIED
4.DELEGATIONS -Nil
2.2
CHC Minutes
February 2, 2016
Page 2 of 5
5.FINANCE
5.1 Financial Update –2016 Budget
The Chair reported there have been no major changes to the CHC budget since the
last review. Councillor Speirs reported that $40,000 has been allocated for the
Heritage Inventory update.
6.CORRESPONDENCE
7.NEW & UNFINISHED BUSINESS
7.1 Membership
7.1.1 Calendar of Events
Printed copies of the calendar were provided and reviewed by the Chair. The
deadline for Music on the Wharf applications is coming up soon.The City of
Abbotsford is offering a history camp for kids. March 29th is the next CHC
presentation to Council.
7.1.2 CHC Member Flash Drives
The Committee Clerk checked in with members to see how the 2016 flash
drives are working.
7.2 Meeting Schedule
The next meeting will be held March 1, 2016.
7.3 Museum and Archives Conversation
Councillor Speirs reported that a productive conversation has been happening
regarding a modern museum and archives for Maple Ridge. The project may qualify
for federal financial support. A public engagement strategy needs to be developed.
R16-008 It was moved and seconded
That a Task Force be established to research building a new museum and archives and to
bring forward an engagement plan to Council.
CARRIED
7.4 Haney House
The Staff Liaison reported a Conservation Plan for Haney House has been completed.
The Plan includes a number of new details about Haney House that were uncovered
during research.The building date on the plaque at Haney House is incorrect and
needs to be updated.
8.SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS
8.1 Communications Subcommittee
8.1.1 Heritage Here Newsletter
The Chair reported the newsletter is under construction and will include some
advertising for the Heritage Awards.
8.1.2 Local Voices
The Chair reported that Local Voices is happening this Thursday, February 4
at the library. Fall dates are being scheduled now and speakers are needed.
CHC Minutes
February 2, 2016
Page 3 of 5
8.2 Recognitions Subcommittee
8.2.1 Heritage Marker Inventory Project
The Committee Clerk demonstrated the Inventory Marker database to the
committee. Next steps were discussed.The draft Marker Database
Protocols were reviewed. It was suggested that the annual review of the
database include other user groups (ie Parks Department).
R16-009 It was moved and seconded
That the Marker Database Protocols be adopted.
CARRIED
8.2.2 Heritage Awards
Faye Isaac let the Commission know a speaker will be making a presentation
in February on how to determine what material of historical merit.(RSVPs
should be sent to the Staff Liaison).This presentation will help define what
should be included in the Heritage Inventory Update.Cemetery tours are
being organized by MRHS as part of the History Week celebrations.
The Heritage Awards are February 17th. All members are asked to be there by
6:00 pm.Members were asked to distribute award invitations.
8.3 Education Subcommittee
8.3.1 CHC Field Trip Update
Sandra Ayres provided the details of the April field trip to the North Vancouver
archives.
8.3.2 BC Society Act Workshops
The Chair has proposed that the CHC and the Economic Development Office
co-host a regional workshop to educate people about the updates to the BC
Society Act. The Chair will contact and request support from the provincial
Registrar’s Office to develop the workshop.
Steven Ranta and Councillor Speirs volunteered to work with Sandra Ayres
and the Chair on a subcommittee to plan the event (tentatively planned for
the fall). It was suggested that Lino Siracusa, Manager of Economic
Development, be invited to join the subcommittee.
8.4 Digitization Project Subcommittee
The Chair shared a report from the digitization consultant which indicates that the
archive inventory is nearing completion.Some items not properly stored have been
found. The consultant will provide some recommendations on improving the storage
of records and undertaking a full cataloging.The digitization subcommittee will meet
soon and report at the March meeting.The consultant will be invited to a future CHC
meeting to fully explain her findings.
8.5 Heritage Inventory Project Update
The budget will be updated to include the $40,000 recently allocated for this project.
The Staff Liaison is drafting the Terms of Reference to hire a consultant for the first
phase.Next steps for the subcommittee were outlined.
CHC Minutes
February 2, 2016
Page 4 of 5
8.6 Robertson Family Cemetery Project Subcommittee
The Staff Liaison has contacted a survey company for a quote.A budget will be
presented at a future meeting.
9.LIAISON UPDATES
9.1 BC Historical Federation
The Chair reported the conference time table has been posted to the BC Historical
Federation website.
9.2 Heritage BC
The Chair reported she has received positive feedback from Heritage BC regarding
the CHC History Week events. Heritage BC is hosting a conference on Granville Island
during the first week of May on the theme “Place Making”.
9.3 Maple Ridge Historical Society
Faye Isaac reported the AGM is March 17th. Communications strategies for MRHS
were recently discussed in regards to the need for a modern museum and archives.
9.4 Council Liaison
Councillor Speirs reported a prioritization workshop for Council to review the
Agricultural Plan will be held soon. The Agricultural Fair continues to grow. Council
has been discussing the need for a modern museum and archives facility. Strategies
to house the remaining residents of the temporary homeless shelter are being
developed. Homelessness will be an ongoing issue that needs to be managed.
Councillor Speirs would like to see a focus on poverty alleviation and other root
causes that lead to homelessness.
10.QUESTION PERIOD
11.ROUNDTABLE
A meeting of the Chair, Council Liaison, Staff Liaison and Committee Clerk has been
scheduled for March 10th to discuss the recent bylaw amendments.
Eric Phillips reported a local music festival is considering being part of Country Fest this year.
The Commission discussed how gaming revenues are used.
A question was raised about the apple tree preservation project in Kanaka Park. Steven
Ranta will request an update.
Sandra Ayres reported the dress rehearsal of the Edge Family project presentation will be
held January 12th at the library. The project will be presented at the Heritage Awards.
12.ADJOURNMENT
It was moved and seconded that the meeting be adjourned at 8:57 pm.
CHC Minutes
February 2, 2016
Page 5 of 5
Chair
/ss
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.
5.1
[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 STMA
P
L
E
CR
E
S
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
GolfCourseMAP
L
E
C
R
E
S
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
erMAP
L
E
C
R
E
S
Fraser
Ri
v
er207 STLORNE AVE
WESTFIELD AVE
GolfCourseMAP
L
E
C
R
E
S
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 STP
R
I
N
C
E
S
S
S
TLORNE
AVE
HA
Z
E
LWOO
D
S
T MAP
L
E
CR
E
S
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 STP
R
I
N
C
E
S
S
S
TLORNE
AVE
HAZ
E
LWOOD
S
T MA
P
L
E
C
R
E
S
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 STP
R
I
N
C
E
S
S
S
TLORNE
AVE
HAZ
E
LWOOD
S
T MA
P
L
E
CR
E
S
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[OL ZHUK^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_JLLKPUN HJYLZH[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\W HJYLZWHY[
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`HYKZILNHUPU 3HIV\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[HUJLVM TPSLZVU[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
PU P[^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[)LNHUPU 9LJVYKZ: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.
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: March 14, 2016
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: Maple Ridge Community Amenity Contribution Program -
Proposed Community Amenity Contribution Program Council Policy
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7188-2015
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Council has been engaged in a discussion on establishing a city-wide Community Amenity
Contribution (CAC) Program since June 2015. As part of that discussion, staff have prepared a
number of reports providing Council with information related to the legislative authority for
community amenity contributions, legal advice regarding the recommended components of a CAC
Program, options for the establishment of the amount of CAC’s, on the forms of development that
the Program would apply and the types of amenities the contributions could be allocated to in the
future.
In October 2015, staff assisted Council in working through a number of options for each of the
proposed components of a city-wide program, culminating in a series of Resolutions for the Program.
In December 2015, two CAC Program Council Policy options were presented to Council for
discussion, along with a proposed Official Community Plan amending bylaw (Bylaw No. 7188-2015).
At that time, Council directed staff to obtain feedback on the proposed OCP amending bylaw and
draft Council policies, and provide a summary of input in a future report.
To obtain the requested feedback on the Program, two online questionnaires were posted on the
municipal website in December 2015 – one for the development industry (Appendix C) and one for
residents (Appendix D). In addition to the online questionnaires, municipal staff have met with the
UDI/GVHBA Liaison Committee on two occasions, most recently on March 8, 2016. The feedback
from those meetings helped inform the content of the questionnaire and the proposed Community
Amenity Contribution Program Council Policy.
As a result of the input received on the proposed CAC Council Policy (Appendix A), it has been
amended to include a number of new items, including one contribution rate of $3100 for all dwelling
units, alignment of the Albion Area Plan density bonus framework with the city-wide Program, a
provision for Council to consider CAC’s during development application extension requests and a list
of those amenities where the CAC revenue could be allocated.
Based on the average number of dwelling units and single family lots created over the past five years
(572) and the proposed CAC rate of $3100 per dwelling unit/lot, the estimated average annual CAC
revenue could be in the range of $1.7 million. It is important to note that this does not include the
additional density bonus revenue generated from the Albion Area Plan.
5.2
[2]
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That the proposed Community Amenity Contribution Program Council Policy, attached as
Appendix A to the report titled “Maple Ridge Community Amenity Contribution Program” and
dated March 14, 2016 be approved; and that Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No.
7188-2015, Attached as Appendix B, be forwarded to a Regular Council meeting for
consideration of the following recommendations;
A. 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 in considers appropriate for consultation with persons,
organizations and authorities it considers will be affected and has specifically considered
the matters referred to in Section 475 of the Act;
B. 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;
C. 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 or 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;
D. And that no additional consultation be required in respect of this matter beyond the
posting of two questionnaires on the City of Maple Ridge website seeking comments on
the proposed Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7188-2015 and proposed
Community Amenity Contribution Program Council Policy;
E. That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7188 -2015 be considered in
conjunction with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
F. That it be confirmed that Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7188 -2015 is
consistent with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan; and
G. That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7188-2015 be given First and Second
Readings and forwarded to Public Hearing.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Council has been provided with reports on June 15, October 19, and December 7, 2015 outlining the
various aspects and potential for establishing a city-wide community amenity contribution program.
[3]
The October 19, 2015 report included a set of legal principles regarding amenity contributions
derived from prior legal advice the City has received on establishing a community amenity
contribution program. These principles include:
i. A municipality has the authority to adopt density bonus bylaws and establish conditions
under which the density bonus is to be applied, including the payment of cash contributions;
ii. Density bonuses are the most defensible approach, should the required amenity contribution
be challenged on it’s legal basis;
iii. A community amenity contributions should be clearly tied to the impacts that are expected to
result from a zoning change;
iv. A community amenity program should be based on a ‘robust’ policy basis, rather than on a
simple decision of Council;
v. Establishing a contribution that is based on the amount of the increase in lot value could
provide a more equitable basis for the amenity program; and
vi. A site-by-site negotiated approach does not provide the clarity and consistency of application
of the program that the development industry needs, as well as potentially adding a
significant amount of time to the development approvals process.
With these principles in mind, Council was presented with a series of options for each component of
the City-wide Community Amenity Contribution Program.
At the October 19 and 27, 2015 Council Workshop meetings, the components of the CAC Program
were discussed and a Resolution passed for each. The following is a summary of the framework of
the CAC Program based on the content of the Resolutions:
1. Each CAC will be based on a percentage value of lift. [Note: A percentage value was not
included in the discussion]
2. The CAC Program will apply city-wide.
a. Those properties within the Town Centre Area Plan boundaries are exempt from the
CAC Program.
3. The Density Bonus Framework established in the Albion Area Plan will continue to apply, in
addition to the city-wide CAC Program. For developments that take advantage of the density
bonus provisions included in the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw for the Albion Area Plan, the
amenity contribution rate will be $3100 per lot or dwelling unit.
4. The CAC Program applies to the development of all residential dwellings1, including those
that are included in a mixed-use development (such as commercial and residential) with the
following exceptions:
a. Affordable and special needs housing that are secured through a Housing Agreement
as established in Section 905 of the Local Government Act;
b. Rental housing units that are secured through a Housing Agreement established
under Section 905 [now Section 483} of the Local Government Act will also be
subject to a covenant enacted under Section 219 of the Land Titles Act.
5. An Official Community Plan amending bylaw was to be prepared that includes the
components of the Community Amenity Contribution Program. Development applications that
are in process (in-stream) at the time of enactment of this Council Policy will be subject to
1 Note: Additional exemptions from the CAC Program include:
single family residential subdivisions proposing fewer than 3 lots;
duplex dwelling units where only one building is being constructed; and
triplex dwelling units where only one building is being constructed.
[4]
the provisions of the Policy unless the applicable Official Community Plan and/or Zoning
Bylaw amending bylaw has/have received Third Reading.
6. Council will establish one or more Reserve Funds and identify those amenities that may
benefit from the community amenity contributions.
These Resolutions formed the basis for the proposed CAC Program Council Policy, attached to this
report as Appendix A.
b) Citizen/Customer Implications:
i. Consultation Update:
The Greater Vancouver Home Builders Association (GVHBA) and the Urban Development Institute
(UDI) provided comments to Council via email in December 2015, on the then proposed contents of
the Maple Ridge Community Amenity Contribution Program. At that time, they requested that Council
refer the policy back to staff for further consultation and dialogue.
In response, Council passed the following Resolution:
That staff be directed to obtain feedback on the Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw
No. 7188-2015 and draft Council Policy and provide a summary of input to Council in a
future report.
Following the direction of the Council Resolution, two questionnaires were prepared, the first focused
toward the development industry and the second for the community, were posted on the municipal
website in December 2015. Both questionnaires were posted online for 10 weeks, following a
request for an extension to the original timeline from UDI and GVHBA via the Liaison Committee. The
responses received are attached to this report as Appendix C – CAC Developer Questionnaire and
Appendix D – CAC Resident Questionnaire.
Summary of Input – Developer CAC Questionnaire:
A total of 10 responses were received for the developer-focused CAC questionnaire. The key
messages that can be derived from the input are as follows:
A pre-determined rate per housing type is the preferred contribution approach (7 of 10
responses) with simplicity and predictability being the key benefits of the approach;
A contribution rate of $3000 per single family dwelling unit/lot was most supported, although
there were a number of other suggestions on how it could be calculated (such as a per
square foot rate);
A variety of rates and calculation methods for multi-family dwellings were suggested, with no
discernable preference from the respondents;
The three most important components of a city-wide CAC Program were felt to be:
o Consistent approach (7 of 10);
o Clearly defined community benefit (6 of 10); and
o Ease of understanding the process (5 of 10) and ‘in-kind’ contribution options (5 of
10).
Summary of Input – Resident Questionnaire:
A total of five responses were received for the resident-focused CAC questionnaire. The key
messages from the input are as follows:
The development industry should contribute to a CAC Program through financial
contributions and construction of in-kind contributions (both 3 of 5 responses);
[5]
The top two city-wide amenities supported were sports facilities/play fields and community
centres;
The top two neighbourhood amenities supported were local parks and playgrounds and
community halls.
In addition to the questionnaires, municipal staff have met twice with the UDI/GVHBA Liaison
Committee in the past several months (Dec 11, 2015 and March 8, 2016) to continue the
discussion about the proposed city-wide CAC Program. At the March 8 meeting, members of the
Committee indicated their support for the revised Council Policy as it has responded to their
comments and concerns.
ii. In-stream Development Applications:
When considering a change in Official Community Plan policy or Zoning Bylaw regulations, the
generally accepted practice for in-stream development applications is that those applications that
have been presented at Public Hearing and received Third Reading would be exempt from complying
with the new policies or regulations. The exception to this ‘rule of thumb’ is that since the summer
2015, development reports at first and second reading have included the following
recommendation:
That a voluntary Community Amenity Contribution be provided in keeping with the direction
given by Council with regard to amenities.
The proposed CAC Program Council Policy includes an option for Council to obtain city-wide CAC’s
when development applications are seeking an extension under the Development Procedures Bylaw.
The intent of this aspect of the proposed Council Policy is to enable Council to include the
Community Amenity Contribution Program as a condition of approval of the application extension.
c) Interdepartmental Implications:
Based on Council direction on the content and approach for the CAC Program, assistance from a
variety of City departments may be required to review the technical aspects of the Program. In
particular, assistance from the Finance Department will be required to prepare the Reserve Fund
bylaw(s).
d) Policy Implications:
i. Proposed CAC Council Policy
The proposed Community Amenity Contribution Program Council Policy (Appendix A) is aligned with
the proposed OCP policy amendments and provides the technical details of the city-wide CAC
Program. The content is derived from the Resolutions passed at the October 19 and 27, 2015
Council Workshop meetings, but also has been influenced by discussions and feedback from
Council, from the UDI/GVHBA Liaison Committee and by the review of similar CAC Programs
throughout the Lower Mainland.
At the December 7, 2015 Workshop, Council indicated a preference for a pre-determined rate (a
‘flat’ rate) rather than based on a percentage of land value increase (the ‘lift’) for a proposed
development. The results of the developer questionnaire and discussions with the UDI/GVHBA
Liaison Committee support this approach.
[6]
In addition, discussions on the contribution rate have resulted in a simplification of the approach.
Instead of establishing a rate for single family, townhouse and apartment buildings, a single rate of
$3100 for all dwelling units is proposed. This rate is based on the current density bonus framework
established in the Albion Area Plan and Zoning Bylaw and by discussions with the UDI/GVHBA
Liaison Committee to ensure that contribution value was not too high for the Maple Ridge housing
market.
The proposed CAC Council Policy also includes a list of the eligible amenities to which the CAC
revenue can be allocated.
Albion Area Plan – Density Bonus Framework Alignment
The city-wide CAC Program will also apply within the Albion Area Plan boundaries, in addition to the
established density bonus framework in the following way:
5. The Density Bonus Framework established in the Albion Area Plan will continue to apply, in
addition to the city-wide CAC Program.
a. For developments that take advantage of the density bonus provisions included in
the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw for the Albion Area Plan, the amenity contribution rate
will be $2000 per lot or dwelling unit in addition to the $3100 density bonus rate;
b. For developments that do not take advantage of the density bonus provisions
included in the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw, the CAC rate will be $3100 per lot or
dwelling unit;
The effect of the above clause is that for each new lot or dwelling unit that uses the density bonus
provisions established in the Zoning Bylaw for Albion, will be subject to a $5100 rate per lot. This
amount is the original rate recommended by GP Rollo and Associates as part of the Albion Area Plan
amenity zoning review in 2012-2013.
ii. Official Community Plan Amendments Summary
The attached Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7188-2015 (Appendix B) expands the
current policy framework based on the feedback received from Council at the June and October
2015 Council Workshop meetings. The proposed amendments to Section 2.1.2 Compact and Unique
Community establish a broader policy framework for a city-wide community amenity contribution
program. It includes the potential components of a program, where it could be applied within the
City, when the program would not apply and the identification of those potential community
amenities on which the revenue could be spent.
The proposed amendments to Section 10.2 for the Albion Area Plan introduce the potential for a city-
wide CAC Program in addition to the established density bonus framework. The technical details of
the existing Albion Area Plan density bonus framework and a new city-wide CAC Program are outlined
in the proposed Community Amenity Contribution Program Council Policy.
e) Recent Development Activity:
The December 7, 2015 report to Council, titled ‘Maple Ridge Community Amenity Contribution
Program Policies’ included a section on recent development activity from 2011 and the estimated
CAC revenues that may have been generated. That report included an estimate of the potential
revenue based on different contribution rates for single family dwellings ($7500 per unit) and
townhouses and low rise apartments (each $5100 per unit) with estimated annual revenues of $3.2
million. The updated table below, includes the data for all of 2015 and a 5-year average:
[7]
Housing Form 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Yearly
Average
Single Family new lots created 225 291 250 248 382 279
Townhouse BP’s 128 23 144 195 275 153
Apartment BP’s 158 307 180 49 6 140
Total Dwelling Units / Lots 511 621 574 492 663 572
Based on the average number of dwelling units and single family lots created over the past five years
(572) and the proposed CAC rate of $3100 per dwelling unit/lot, the estimated average annual CAC
revenue could be in the range of $1.7 million. It is important to note that this does not include the
additional density bonus revenue generated from the Albion Area Plan.
CONCLUSIONS:
The lessons learned through the establishment of the Albion Area Plan Density Bonus Framework
and from recent legal advice provide a number of general principles that the components of an
amenity program should incorporate. The components of the CAC Program determined by Council on
October 19 and 27, 2015 by Resolutions, achieve the principles of a consistent and equitable
framework.
The proposed OCP policy amendment will provide greater clarity for Council and the community with
respect to why and when CAC’s will be part of the development review process. The proposed CAC
Council Policies contain the technical aspects of the program that are of a greater level of detail than
is found in the OCP. As such, any future minor adjustments to the structure of the Program will not
be subject to OCP amendments or a Public Hearing.
“Original signed by Jim Charlebois”
Prepared by: Jim Charlebois, MURP, MCIP, RPP
Manager of Community Planning
“Original signed by Christine Carter”
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
“Original signed by Frank Quinn”
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A: Community Amenity Contribution Council Policy
Appendix B: OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7188-2015
Appendix C: CAC Developers Questionnaire Responses
Appendix D: CAC Community Questionnaire Responses
Page 1 of 3 Policy
POLICY MANUAL
Title: Community Amenity Contribution Program
Policy No :
Supersedes:
Authority: Legislative Operational
Approval: Council CMT
General Manager
Effective Date:
Review Date: 1 year from effective
date.
Policy Statement:
The City of Maple Ridge is committed to providing a variety of amenities throughout the
municipality, including the provision of affordable and special needs housing, in a financially
sustainable manner.
The Community Amenity Contribution Program (CAC Program) is comprised of the following
components:
1.The CAC Program will apply city-wide.
2.Each CAC will be based on a contribution rate of $3100 for each new dwelling unit or
single family lot created.
3.Those properties within the Town Centre Area Plan boundaries are exempt from the CAC
Program.
4.The CAC Program applies to the development of all residential dwellings, including those
that are included in a mixed-use development (such as commercial and residential) with
the following exceptions:
a)Affordable and special needs housing that are secured through a Housing
Agreement as established in Section 483 of the Local Government Act;
b)Rental housing units that are secured through a Housing Agreement established
under Section 483 of the Local Government Act will also be subject to a covenant
enacted under Section 219 of the Land Titles Act;
c)Single family residential subdivisions proposing fewer than 3 lots;
d)Accessory dwelling units such as a secondary suite or detached garden suite;
e)Duplex dwelling units where only one building is being constructed; and
f)Triplex dwelling units where only one building is being constructed.
5.The Density Bonus Framework established in the Albion Area Plan will continue to apply, in
addition to the city-wide CAC Program.
a)For developments that take advantage of the density bonus provisions included in
the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw for the Albion Area Plan, the amenity contribution
rate will be $2000 per lot or dwelling unit in addition to the $3100 density bonus
rate;
b)For developments that do not take advantage of the density bonus provisions
included in the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw, the CAC rate will be $3100 per lot or
dwelling unit;
6.The Official Community Plan may also establish additional or alternative community
APPENDIX A
Page 2 of 3 Policy
amenity contribution policies, guidelines and/or density bonus provisions for each Area
Plan.
7. Development applications that are in process (in-stream) at the time of enactment of the
CAC Program Council Policy, will:
a) be subject to the provisions of this Policy unless the applicable Official Community
Plan or Zoning Bylaw amending bylaw has received Third Reading; OR
b) be subject to the provisions of this Policy if a condition for the Policy to apply was
included in the first or second reading report of the applicable Official Community
Plan or Zoning Bylaw amending bylaw.
8. All development applications that are seeking an extension under Development
Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999 (as amended), may be subject to the city-wide
community amenity contribution program at the discretion of Council.
9. Council will establish one or more Reserve Funds and identify those amenities that may
benefit from the community amenity contributions. The Reserve Fund(s) will be
established to ensure that CAC revenues collected in
10. Community Amenity Contribution funds received will contribute to any of the following
eligible amenities:
a) Civic facility;
b) Public art;
c) Acquisition of land for the provision of:
o Affordable or special needs housing;
o Parks
o Trails
o Significant ecological features
d) Park or trail construction and/or maintenance;
e) Affordable or special needs housing units;
f) Heritage conservation; or
g) Conservation of significant ecological features.
11. The provision of a specific amenity, rather than a cash-in-lieu contribution may also be
considered by Maple Ridge Council. If Council determines that the provision of an amenity
is more desirable, the following list is to be used as a general guide for determining the
type of community amenity:
a) Daycare and childcare facilities;
b) Public art;
c) Heritage conservation;
d) Land for the provision of:
o Affordable or special needs housing;
o Parks
o Trails
o Significant ecological features
e) Affordable or special needs housing units;
f) Park or trail construction or improvements;
Purpose:
To provide direction on the implementation of a city-wide community amenity contribution (CAC)
program, including the process to determine the contribution amount.
Definitions:
“Community Amenity” means any public amenity that provides a benefit to the residents of
the city or a specific neighbourhood as the result of increased residential density.
Page 3 of 3 Policy
Key Areas of Responsibility
Action to Take
Responsibility
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7188-2015
A Bylaw to amend Schedule “A” of the Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014
_______________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS Section 477 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the Official
Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend Schedule "A" to the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
1.This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 7188-2015
2.That Section 2.1.2 Compact and Unique Community be amended by repealing policies 2-7
through 2-9 and replacing them with the following:
2-7 Maple Ridge may establish a city-wide Community Amenity Program with the
following components, to provide amenities, including the provision of affordable and
special needs housing, in a sustainable and economically viable manner:
a)Contribution approach;
b)Geographic area, including any portions of the City that may be excluded;
c)Approach for addressing existing density bonus policies and regulations in the
Albion Area Plan area;
d)Application of the program with respect to land uses and density;
e)Establishment of one or more Reserve Fund Bylaws, including the identification
of those potential community amenities to which the reserve funds can be
allocated.
2-8 The Community Amenity Program may also include areas where an approved Area
Plan applies and within the City where density bonus provisions apply. Where density
bonus provisions apply, they may be in addition to the city-wide program and will be
integrated into the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw.
2-9 Community Amenity Contributions and density bonuses may also be considered at
Council’s discretion for all Official Community Plan and Zoning Bylaw amending
applications that are seeking a higher density than is envisioned in Schedule “A”
and/or Schedule “B”, to help provide a variety of amenities and facilities throughout
the municipality.
3.That Section 2.1.2 Compact and Unique Community be amended by adding the following
policies in numeric order after policy 2-9:
2-10 Community Amenity Contributions which are specific for those portions of the City
where an Area Plan has been adopted, and as outlined in the subject Area Plan, may
be established at Council’s discretion.
2-11 Maple Ridge Council will establish one or more Reserve Funds for the Community
Amenity Program that will identify the type of community amenities to which the
amenity contributions will apply.
APPENDIX B
4. That Section 10.2.2 Residential Development and Community Amenity Program, Albion
Area Plan Community Amenity Program policy amended by changing the heading of the
policy section to “Albion Area Community Amenity Program and Density Bonus
Framework”.
5. That Section 10.2.2 Residential Development and Community Amenity Program, be
amended by repealing policy 10-4 and replacing it with the following:
10-4 The city-wide Community Amenity Program established in Section 2.1.2 Compact
and Unique Community will apply to the Albion Area Plan. A Density Bonus
Framework will also be permitted on lands designated Low Density Residential,
Low-Medium Density Residential and Medium Density Residential in the Albion
Area Plan.
6. That Section 10.2.2 Residential Development and Community Amenity Program policy
10- 5 be repealed and replaced with the following:
10-5 Where the density bonus option is utilized in a single-family subdivision, the
density bonus framework provisions established in the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw
will apply to all lots that exceed the base density permitted in the zone, in addition
to the city-wide Community Amenity Program established in Official Community
Plan Section 2.1.2 Compact and Unique Community.
7. That Section 10.2.2 Residential Development and Community Amenity Program policy
10-6 be repealed and replaced with the following:
10-6 Where the density bonus option is utilized in a multi-family development, the
density bonus framework provisions established in the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw
will apply to all dwelling units that exceed the base density permitted in the zone,
in addition to the city-wide Community Amenity Program established in Official
Community Plan Section 2.1.2 Compact and Unique Community.
8. That Section 10.2.4 Albion Zoning Matrix be amended by deleting the words “and Amenity
Contribution” from the notation section.
9. Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No.7060-2014 as amended is hereby amended
accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the day of , 20 .
READ A SECOND TIME the day of , 20 .
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the day of , 20 .
READ A THIRD TIME the day of , 20 .
ADOPTED, the day of , 20 .
___________________________________ _____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
1
CAC Developers Questionnaire Responses
Question 1a)Are you a member of UDI?
Response Chart Percentage Count
Yes 80.0%8
No 20.0%2
Total Responses 10
1b)Are you a member of GVHBA?
Response Chart Percentage Count
Yes 88.9%8
No 11.1%1
Total Responses 9
Question 2 Do you work in Maple Ridge?
Response Chart Percentage Count
Yes 90.0%9
No 10.0%1
Total Responses 10
2a)Do you work in any other Lower Mainland municipalities?
Response Chart Percentage Count
Yes 90.0%9
No 10.0%1
Total Responses 10
APPENDIX C
2
2b)If yes, which municipalities have you worked in within the past 2 years?
#Response1.Surrey, Langley2.Coquitlam, Langley, Surrey, Port Moddy and North Vancouver3.City of Surrey, Township of Langley, City of Burnaby.4.CoquitlamMaple RidgeNorth Vancouver DistrictPort MoodySurrey5.Surrey and Langley6.CoquitlamSurreyLangley7.Surrey, Langley, Burnaby, Coquitlam8.UDI has Liaison Committees with Vancouver, Richmond, Township of Langley,Coquitlam,Surrey and Squamish. We also work with the other local governments in the LowerMainland.9.North Vancouver District
Question 3a)What do you think is the best contribution approach for Maple
Ridge to include in a city-wide CAC Program?
Response Chart Percentage Count
i. Percentage value of lift (based on
developer pro forma)
0.0%0
ii. Pre-determined rate(s) per housing type
(i.e. flat rate)
70.0%7
iii. Per square metre of new residential
floor area rate
10.0%1
iv.Site-by-site negotiated process 10.0%1
v. Other 10.0%1
3
Total Responses 10
Question 3 (v. Other)
#Response1.Flat rate for Single Family. Per sq. meter for Multi family.
3b)What do you think are the key benefits of your preferred approach?
#Response1.Simplicity of flat rate calculation. Certainty in costs. Will not bog down City staff or slowdown the process of approval. Per sq. meter will keep smaller homes more affordable.2.cost certainty to developers prior to making land aquisition decisions; and removes unduepressure from staff from ongoing negotiations on a site by site basis.3.timing and predictability4.The flat rate method provides the cost consistency between developers and developments,and is the most clear contribution approach.The percentage value of lift is subject to developers "fudging" certain numbers on their proforma, and dissuades developers from using high-value construction methods andmaterials, which would increase their pro forma value.Per square metre of new residential floor area rate is also subject to developers "fudging"the area of their developments.Site-by-site negotiated process is almost impossible to make clear, fair, accountable, andtransparent.5.Predictability, and certainty. Lift based negotiations undertaken after lands have beensecured may or may not reflect good value. Knowing the costs prior to affecting landacquisition ensures commensurate value6.simplicity7.-Money targets specific needs-City could potentially derive more economic benefit under negotiated approach asopposed to a flat-fee model-Possibility for "in-kind" contributions and "site-specific" contributions in theneighbourhood and/or on the project site itself
8.Provides certainty to both the developer and the city. Determining value by land liftrequires a review of proforma values which can be difficult and the review may not result ina land lift at all.9.We would also be fine with the per square metre charge of new residential floor area -if it isa pre-determined set rate for each housing type. Overall this approach provides clarity to
4
our members about what their costs will be when they purchase land and do a pro formaanalysis. This makes the process in buying land more efficient as well as processing timeswith the local government, as negotiations are not bogged down with debates over each lineitem in a three page proforma. For example, when the Cambie Corridor Plan was initiallyapproved, there were negotiated CACs. Little development activity occurred -until a fixedCAC program was established.10.It is the Norm to use developed area calculations, though there should be also a creditingsystem to providing social housing, low cost units and etc. That is, some forms ofdevelopment should be exempt from the calculation.
The calculated formula should be due on Occupancy to help developments be plannedappropriately.
3c)Based on your response to b) above, what do you think would be a reasonable
contribution rate?
#Response1.$3000/ Single Family$18/ sq m Multi Family2.$3,000 per lot.3.$3,100 for single family$2,500 for town house$1,900 for condo4.An amount consistent with other municipalities in the Lower Mainland, with different ratesfor townhomes, apartments,and single family homes.5.it would be expected that different dwelling types would have different values ie)SFD -highest rate $3 -5KLow rise attached (med. density) $2 -3KMulti attached (high density)-lowest rate $1 -2K
values should reflect anticipated needs and avoid "market shock"6.50% of the calculated lift. I question whether there is much of lift related to groundoriented housing such as SF and townhomes. As you increase the density for townhomesyou decrease the value of land on a per unit basis. The land lift is marginal but the benefit isbeing able to deliver product that the market is demanding and quicker absorption. Lowerdensity equates to larger and higher priced units and lower absorption in the Maple Ridgemarket.
7.Depends on the project
5
8.The value should not be more than Albion. The city needs to review other jurisdictions forwhat may be reasonable.9.Before this question can be answered, it would be important to determine whatcommunities need to accommodate new growth. UDI would be very interested in discussingthis further with Maple Ridge.10.$1/psf
Question 4 Please indicate the 3 most important components for inclusion in the
Maple Ridge city-wide CAC program.
Response Chart Percentage Count
Consistent approach 70.0%7
Time Sensitive 20.0%2
Proportional to the size/scale of the
development
20.0%2
Clarity of approach / ease of understanding
the process
50.0%5
Clearly defined community benefit 60.0%6
Regional contribution amount/approach
alignment/consistency
10.0%1
‘In-kind’ contributions / construction of
community amenities
50.0%5
Other 0.0%0
Total Responses 10
Question 5a)What do you think the amenities should be for inclusion in a city -
wide CAC Program?
#Response1.Sports fields and community centres.2.local community items such as park improvements(spay parks, sport courts, bike parks,etc.) gathering places (town halls), community structure for use as daycare and pre-schoolfacilities etc. any other items in need to benefit area as a whole.3.Bike park, new pool, bike lanes.4.Environmental conservationCommunity centresRecreation centres
6
5.park/playgrounds, trails, events, public art, interpretive experiences, waterfront (river)edge development, community centers/ facilities6.Amenities should be in close proximity to the development and neighborhood based ratherthan community based7.Depends on the need8.Parks, community centres, walking trails, libraries. Part or all of the CAC should be directedto amenities near the development paying to benefit these homeowners.9.Amenities have included some funding from developers for park infrastructure, pools,community centres, arenas and other facilities. The people who should most determinewhat amenities are needed are those in the communities that are receiving growth.Developers in those neighbourhoods should also be consulted, as they will have a goodunderstanding about the buyers who are moving to them. In addition, we would want toensure that the neighbourhoods that are receiving the most development have the bestaccess to these facilities.
Maple Ridge needs to ensure that its rate is competitive with other markets. Some of thefigures being proposed are higher than Coquitlam's proposal -a market where house pricesare much higher than Maple Ridge.10.Trails
5b)Can you propose an alternative rate or rates for Council to consider?
#Response1.The rates I have proposed are fair and won't unduly burden new home owners.2.$3,5003.No
Question 6 Do you have any comments or suggestions related to the proposed
OCP Bylaw amendment?
#Response1.No2.No3.No.4.ensure flat rate format5.It seems from sections 6 and 7 that Maple Ridge is contemplating CAC and density bonusing
7
programs. We have been discussing CACs, but there has been little discussion regarding adensity bonusing beyond the Albion area.
Question 7 Do you have any suggestions or additional comments on the proposed
city-wide CAC Program you would like to provide?
#Response1.I would just like to caution Council not to continually erode home affordability through CAC's,bylaw changes or code changes.2.they CAC's should only be directed to community area that is collecting the fees,not moved toother areas, or other interests of the day.3.No4.City council should be mindful of actual land and housing values in Maple Ridge. They aremuch lower than Coquitlam or Port Coquitlam and cannot support overly high CACs.Developers are usually willing to contribute to community amenities. Certainty in the cost ofthe CAC is important to factor into their financial analysis. Ultimately, it is the land ownerselling to the developer and the end buyer who pay for CACs as the cost is pas t along -allresidents, voters and taxpayers in Maple Ridge.5.UDI would be pleased to continue working with Maple Ridge on this program.
CAC Residents Questionnaire Responses
Question 1)Do you live in Maple Ridge?
Response Chart Percentage Count
Yes 100.0%5
No 0.0%0
Total Responses 5
Question 2)Do you support the concept of a community amenity contribution
program where developers contribute a financial contribution or build an amenity
to help off-set the impacts of increased density in an area?
Response Chart Percentage Count
Yes 80.0%4
No 20.0%1
Total Responses 5
#Response1.This move adds to the cost of real estate at the end of the day. It's a tax on developers thatthey will recover in higher prices. The homeowner will pay in inflated prices. It's the market.2.I think this is the fairest way to ensure amenities keep up with demand. Developers arebenefiting so should the impacted neighbourhoods.3.Lots are smaller and smaller with the dwellings filling the whole lot. Thus creating hugepressure for more parks and other infrastructure the become a cost to the whole city
APPENDIX D
Question 3)How should the development industry contribute to providing
additional community amenities as part of the development approval process?
(Please select all that apply)
Response Chart Percentage Count
a. Financial contribution into a Reserve Fund for
future projects
60.0%3
b. Construction of a particular community amenity
i) anywhere in the City
20.0%1
c. Construction of a particular amenity ii) within the
neighbourhood where the development is occuring
60.0%3
d. A combination of the above (Please explain)0.0%0
e. Neither (Please explain)20.0%1
f. Other (Please explain)20.0%1
Total Responses 5
Question 3 d)A combination of the above (Please explain) )
#ResponseNo responses provided.
Question 3 e)Neither (Please explain) )
#Response1.Government takes enough already. Manage what you have.
Question 3 f)Other (Please explain))
#Response1.Combination of A and C, but expand the construction of amenities to include adjacentneighbourhoods which will be impacted by development.
Question 4)Community amenity contributions are a tool for BC municipalities to
use to help fund additional amenities (eg. community centres, parks, public art)
through the development approval process. The funds collected must be put
toward amenities that are identified in an associated Reserve Fund bylaw. Please
indicate what you think the top three city-wide and neighbourhood amenities
should be for the City’s Community Amenity Contribution Program:
Response Chart Percentage Count
Community centres 60.0%3
Sports facilities/play fields 80.0%4
Public art 0.0%0
Affordable/Special Needs Housing 20.0%1
Cultural facilities 40.0%2
Other 20.0%1
Total Responses 5
Question 4 (Other )
#Response1.Road improvements. It's a cow trail in Maple Ridge. Drive around and see.
Question 4 Neighbourhood Amenities (top three)
Response Chart Percentage Count
Trails and bike paths 20.0%1
Local parks and playgrounds 80.0%4
Cultural facilities 20.0%1
Dog parks 20.0%1
Community hall 60.0%3
Other 20.0%1
Total Responses 5
Neighbourhood Amenities (Other)
#Response1.Road improvements.
Question 5)Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7188-2015 outlines the
proposed changes to the City’s policy framework for community amenity
contributions. Do you have any comments or suggestions related to the proposed
bylaw amendment?
#Response1.Don't do it. You're adding a tax to home buyers who will pay with higher prices.2.This is long overdue. Thank you.3.$2,100 per lot or townhome
Question 6)Are there any other comments or suggestions you have for Council
on the proposed city-wide CAC Program?
#Response1.As a general point, I think Developers should pay MUCH higher fees for t he privilege ofdeveloping their profits in our community. As tax payers existing citizens are being short-changed by City Hall as we are funding development from which we derive no benefit.Developers should pay a sufficiently high fee generally, and if they don't like it, then stopdeveloping-simple.2.I'm not a developer but work in the industry. It's tough enough risking lending, markets andcosts without adding to the burden this way. You're closing the door to more investment inMaple Ridge,closing the door to more developers.3.Keep the fee reasonable to not to deter development Spend the money in the area in whichthe fee was collected