HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-04-16 Public Hearing Meeting Agenda and Reports.pdfDistrict of Maple Ridge
PUBLIC
HEARING
April 16, 2013
DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TAKE NOTICE THAT a Public Hearing will be held in the Council Chamber of the Municipal Hall,
11995 Haney Place, Maple Ridge, North-East corner entrance, at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, April 16, 2013
to consider the following bylaws:
1a) 2012-047-RZ
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING BYLAW NO. 6927-2012
LEGAL: Lot 9, District Lot 401, Group 1, New Westminster District, Plan 4769
Parcel A (Explanatory Plan 8125) Lot 8, District Lot 401, Group 1, New
Westminster District, Plan 4769
Lot D, District Lot 401, Group 1, New Westminster District, Plan 21162
Lot 8 Except Parcel “A” (Explanatory Plan 8125 District Lot 401, Group 1, New
Westminster District, Plan 4769
LOCATION: 22577, 22569, 22557 Royal Crescent & 11771 - 226 Street
FROM: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
TO: RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential)
PURPOSE: To permit the future construction of a five storey, 48 unit apartment building.
1b) 2012-047-RZ
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING BYLAW NO. 6967-2013
LEGAL: Lot 9, District Lot 401, Group 1, New Westminster District, Plan 4769
Parcel A (Explanatory Plan 8125) Lot 8, District Lot 401, Group 1, New
Westminster District, Plan 4769
Lot D, District Lot 401, Group 1, New Westminster District, Plan 21162
Lot 8 Except Parcel “A” (Explanatory Plan 8125 District Lot 401, Group 1,
New Westminster District, Plan 4769
LOCATION: 22577, 22569, 22557 Royal Crescent & 11771 - 226 Street
PART 6, RESIDENTIAL ZONES, SECTION 604, RM-2 MEDIUM DENSITY APARTMENT
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT is amended as follows:
i. SECTION 5, Density, is amended by adding the following after 5 (e):
f) The maximum floor space ratio shall be 1.89 at the following locations:
22577 Royal Crescent
Parcel A (Explanatory Plan 8125) Lot 8, District Lot 401, Group 1, New Westminster District
Plan 4769
22569 Royal Crescent
Lot 9, District Lot 401, Group 1, New Westminster District, Plan 4769
22557 Royal Crescent
Lot D, District Lot 401, Group 1, New Westminster District, Plan 21162
11771 226 Street
Lot 8 Except Parcel “A” ( Explanatory Plan 8125) District Lot 401, Group 1, New Westminster
District, Plan 4769
2)MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING BYLAW NO. 6971-2013
PURPOSE: To amend the Zoning bylaw to establish zoning regulations for the commercial
production of medical marihuana as authorized under Federal legislation.
To establish the definition of the commercial production of medical marihuana as authorized
under Federal legislation, with all associated uses, to be directed into Agricultural Zones with
prescribed setback requirements from property lines/schools and residential structures.
AND FURTHER TAKE NOTICE that a copy of the aforesaid bylaws and copies of staff reports and other
information considered by Council relevant to the matters contained in the bylaws will also be
available for public inspection at the Municipal Hall, Planning Department counter, between 8:00
a.m. and 4:00 p.m. from April 5 to April 16, 2013, Saturdays, Sundays and Statutory Holidays
excepted. Some of this information will also be posted on the District website www.mapleridge.ca on
the Mayor & Council/Council Meetings page.
ALL PERSONS who deem themselves affected by any of these bylaws shall be afforded a reasonable
opportunity to be heard at the Public Hearing before Council on the matters contained in the bylaws
or by making a written submission to the attention of the Manager of Legislative Services or by
sending an e-mail to the Clerk’s Department at clerks@mapleridge.ca , by 4:00 p.m., April 16, 2013.
All written submissions and e-mails will become part of the public record.
Dated this 5th day of April, 2013.
Ceri Marlo
Manager of Legislative Services
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION CHECKLIST
FOR FILE 2012-047-RZ
File Manager: Amelia Bowden
Official Community Plan or Zoning Bylaw Amendments: RECEIVED NOT REQUIRED
1.A completed Application Form
(Schedule “A” – Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999)
2.An application fee, payable to the District of Maple Ridge, in
accordance with Development Application Fee Bylaw no. 5949-2001.
3.A Certificate of Title and Consent Form if the applicant is different
from the owner shown on the Certificate of Title.
4. A legal survey of the property(ies)
5. Subdivision plan layout
6. Neighbourhood context plan
7. Lot grading plan
8. Landscape plan*+
9.Preliminary architectural plans including site plan,
building elevations, accessory off-street parking and
general bylaw compliance reconciliation*+.
*These items may not be required for single-family residential applications
+ These items may be required for two-family residential applications, as outlined in Council Policy No. 6.01
Additional reports provided:
Geotechnical Report
Stage 1 Investigation
1.
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: March 4, 2013
and Members of Council FILE NO: 2012-047-RZ
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: First and Second Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6967-2012
Second Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6927-2012
22577, 22569 , 22557 Royal Crescent and 11771 226 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject properties located in the South of Lougheed
Precinct of the Town Centre Area, from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to RM-2 (Medium
Density Apartment Residential) to permit future construction of a five storey, 48 unit apartment
building. Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6927-2012 was granted First Reading on May 22,
2012 to rezone the properties to RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential). A second bylaw is
now also required for a site specific text amendment to adjust the maximum density. This
application is in compliance with the Official Community Plan.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1.That Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6967- 2012 be given first and second reading
and be forwarded to Public Hearing; and
2.That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6927-2012 be given second Reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing; and
3.That the following terms and conditions be met prior to final reading:
i.Approval from the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure;
ii.Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt
of the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement;
iii.Road dedication as required;
iv. Consolidation of the development site;
v.Registration of a Restrictive Covenant at the Land Title Office protecting the Visitor
Parking;
- 2 -
vi. Removal of the existing buildings; and,
vii. A disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising
whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there is evidence,
a site profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in accordance
with the regulations.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant: 625536 B.C. LTD. Mohinder Gosal
Owners: Gurbhawan and Karminder Grewal
Gurjeet Johal
Mukhpal and Iqbal Sangha
Simranjeet Sekhon
Legal Descriptions: Lot 9, D.L.:401, Group 1, NWD Plan 4769
Parcel A (Explanatory Plan 8125) Lot 8, D.L 401, Group 1, NWD Plan
4769
Lot D, D.L. 401, Group 1, NWD Plan 21162
Lot 8 Except Parcel “A” ( Explanatory Plan 8125) D.L 401, Group 1,
NWD Plan 4769
OCP:
Existing: Low-Rise Apartment
Zoning:
Existing: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Proposed: RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential)
Surrounding Uses:
North: Use: Commercial
Zone: C-3 (Town Centre Commercial)
Designation: Town Centre Commercial
South: Use: Multi-Family Residential, Single Family Residential
Zone: RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential), RM-3 (High Density
Apartment),
Designation: Ground Oriented Multi-Family
- 3 -
East: Use: Congregate Care (Residential)
Zone: LUC (Land Use Contract)
Designation: Low-Rise Apartment
West: Use: Multi-Family Residential
Zone: RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment)
Designation: Low-Rise Apartment
Existing Use of Property: Vacant
Proposed Use of Property: Multi-Family Residential
Site Area: 0.28 HA (0.7 acres)
Access: Royal Crescent Lane
Servicing requirement: Urban Standard
b) Project Description:
The applicant proposes to rezone the subject sites to allow for future construction of a five storey
wood frame apartment building with underground parking. Parking will be accessed via the existing
lane to the north of the site. There are a total of 48 units ranging is size from 83.5 – 139m2 (899 –
1,497ft2). The majority of dwelling units will have two bedrooms, with five one bedroom units.
An indoor amenity room is provided on the ground floor, and a children’s play area is located in the
north-east corner of the property. In addition to the outdoor play structure, the project Landscape
Architect has incorporated seating within the landscape areas for residents to sit and enjoy the
gardens on site. First floor units are designed to be ground-oriented, with outside locking doors that
provide direct access to the street.
The building materials will include brick veneer at the lower levels, cement panel cladding on the
higher storeys, and vertical wood beams to tie the two materials in visually. The design character of
this development will inform future projects in the neighbourhood. A shadow analysis was prepared
by the project Architect, demonstrating the location of shadow impacts. The project has been
reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel.
The development site is located in the South of Lougheed Precinct of the Town Centre, and is
therefore within Sub Area 1 of the Town Centre Area Incentive Program. The proposed project meets
the conditions to be included in the incentive program.
c) Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan:
The subject properties are designated Low-Rise Apartment in the South of Lougheed Precinct,
and are subject to the policies of the Town Centre Area Plan. The Low-Rise Apartment
designation is intended for development in a three to five storey apartment form where units
are accessed from an internal corridor and residential parking is provided underground. The
Development Permit Guidelines note that residential land use form and design should
- 4 -
accommodate ground-oriented units with direct entrances and connection to the sidewalk. In
addition, ground-oriented units provide for a pedestrian-oriented sidewalk, and are desirable
for families and accessibility. The proposed development and the application for RM-2
(Medium Density Apartment Residential) zoning is consistent with this designation.
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the properties located at 22577, 22569, and
22557 Royal Crescent and 11771 226 Street from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to
RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential) to permit construction of a five storey 48 unit
apartment building.
A site specific text amendment is also required to change the existing Floor Space Ratio (FSR)
for the RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential) zone from 1.8 to 1.89. This project
aligns with the proposed changes to the RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential) zone in
the draft Zoning Bylaw. The draft zone includes an increase in height to align with the Town
Centre Area Plan and an increase in density to reflect one additional storey. The proposed
development aligns with these future changes.
Proposed Variances:
A Development Variance Permit application has been received for this project and involves the
following relaxations:
1. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No 3510 -1985, Part 6, Section 604, 6.3.a), to reduce the
front yard setback from 7.5 to 5.6 metres;
2. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No 3510 -1985, Part 6, Section 604, 6.3.a), to reduce the
exterior yard setback from 7.5 to 3.32 metres;
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No 3510 -1985, Part 6, Section 604, 6.3.a), to reduce the rear
yard setback from 7.5 to 5.48 metres;
4. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No 3510 -1985, Part 6, Section 604, 7, to increase the
maximum height from 4 to 5 storeys.
The requested variances to the RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential) zone are
supported by the Planning Department and will be the subject of a future Council report.
Off-Street Parking and Loading Bylaw:
The proposed project is in compliance with the Off-Street Parking and Loading Bylaw. In total,
55 residential parking spots and 5 visitor parking spots have been provided underground
based on the reduced Town Centre Area parking requirements of one space per one bedroom
unit, 1.1 spaces per two bedroom unit and 0.1 spaces per unit for visitor parking.
Additionally, the applicant has provided long-term and short-term bicycle parking as required in
the Town Centre Area section of the Off-Street Parking and Loading Bylaw. Based on the size
of the proposed development, 14 short-term and 12 long-term bicycle parking spaces are
required. Space for 16 bicycles to lock up at bike racks will be provided at the building’s front
entrance, as reflected in the site and landscape plans which will satisfy the short-term
- 5 -
requirements. A bicycle storage room has also been provided in the underground parking area
for long term bicycle parking in excess of the 12 required spaces.
Development Permits:
Pursuant to Section 8.11 of the Official Community Plan, the applicant has submitted a Town
Centre Area – South of Lougheed (SOLO) Development Permit application to ensure the
current proposal complies with key guideline concepts as outlined below:
Develop a diverse shopping, employment and residential district,
The proposed higher density infill development will enhance the SOLO residential
district adjacent to the shopping and employment uses on Lougheed Highway by
providing an opportunity for a mixed demographic.
Create pedestrian-oriented streetscapes;
The proposed project seeks to enhance the pedestrian realm with strong visual
orientation from within the building and permeable visibility through landscaping to the
street.
Enhance the quality, character and vibrancy of SOLO;
The proposed project is designed to bring new vitality to the area with an increase in
the number of residents and establish a precedent for future development.
Maintain cohesive building styles;
The proposed building is consistent with similar scale buildings to the south, and will
help shape a precedent for future development.
Capitalize on important views;
The east/west longitudinal orientation of the proposed building allows for maximizing
the number of units at the upper levels to maximize views north for mountain views
and south for river views, while not affecting existing adjacent buildings’ views.
Provide public outdoor space;
Given the residential nature of the proposed development, provided outdoor space is
private. A children’s play area, seating, and landscaping is provided on site.
Provide climate appropriate landscaping and green features; and,
The internal climate will be moderated to a degree at lower levels through shade and
wind permeability of plant materials. Internal climate at the underground parking level
is proposed to be moderated by landscaping over parking structure.
Maintain street interconnectivity.
Access to the underground parking facility is from the rear lane to maintain a
continuous sidewalk along Royal Crescent.
- 6 -
Advisory Design Panel:
The Advisory Design Panel reviewed the form and character of the proposed apartment
building development and the landscaping plans at a meeting held September 11, 2012.
Following presentations by the project Architect and Landscape Architect, the Advisory Design
Panel made the following resolution that:
The following concerns be addressed and digital versions of revised drawings and
memo be submitted to Planning staff; and further that Planning staff forward this on
to the Advisory Design Panel for information.
Consider providing day light to the living room of unit B5 (SW corner)
Consider the use, color and organization of materials and details
Consider simplifying the roof line
Provide a drop in the slab outside the building to accommodate proper planting
depth
Consider changing the river rock area at the ramp to a planted area (green)
Consider providing a lattice or trellis screen to the ramp
Consider matching the color of the battens to the siding
Consider the use of panel siding as opposed to beveled siding
Consider the use of brick or concrete (instead of stone) on the landscape wall
Consider matching the design of the landscape fence with balcony railings
Consider the design of the lobby elevation to create more of a residential feeling
Provide interphone and door for visitor parking
Provide detailed trellis design
Provide details of the garbage enclosure at the lane
Locate the garbage area closer to the ramp or the security gate
Consider providing an elevator lobby access from the north side of underground
parking area
Provide a properly rendered 3D depiction of the site showing the final colors and
details to include the landscaped walls and trellis’
The ADP concerns have been addressed and are reflected in the current plans. A detailed
description of how these items were incorporated into the final design will be included in a
future development permit report to Council.
Development Information Meeting:
A Development Information Meeting was held at the Fraserview Community Hall on September
10, 2012. Following this meeting, staff were made aware that non-resident owners within 50
metres of the development site were not directly notified by mail. The applicant agreed to host
a second development information meeting, and invitation letters were sent to all non-resident
owners as well as occupants living within 50 metres of the development site. The second
meeting was held at the Maple Ridge Leisure Centre Preschool Room on November 15, 2012.
Two people attended the September meeting and six people attended the November 2012
- 7 -
meeting. A summary of the comments and discussions with the attendees was provided by the
applicant and include the following:
1. Traffic volume increases, traffic safety, traffic calming measures, lane traffic
2. On-street parking, adequate parking standards
3. Height and Massing
4. Form of Ownership (renters vs. owners)
5. Impact on Drainage
6. Excavation/Construction
The following are provided in response to the issues raised by the public:
1. Road improvements on Royal Crescent will be required as part of the rezoning process.
2. Two additional underground parking spaces were added to the project. The provided
parking meets the Off-Street Parking and Loading Bylaw.
3. The height of the proposed building is consistent with the South of Lougheed Development
Permit Guidelines and a variance for building height is supported by the Planning Department.
4. The proposed development is anticipated to be individual strata units.
5. Provision for stormwater will be addressed through servicing drawings prior to Building
Permit issuance.
6. The developer will be responsible for maintaining a safe site during construction.
d) Traffic Impact:
As the subject sites are located within 800 metres of the Lougheed Highway, a referral has
been sent to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. Ministry approval of the Maple
Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw will be required as a condition of Final Reading. At this time, the
Ministry has granted preliminary approval of the development application.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
Engineering Department:
The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed development and has noted that road
dedication will be required along the property frontage on Royal Crescent as well as along the
rear lane. The project Engineer will be responsible for determining the necessary upgrades
required for sanitary, storm, and water requirements of this development, which will be
secured through a Rezoning Servicing Agreement. Upgrading of the road frontage and lane to
an urban standard will also be required.
Parks & Leisure Services Department:
The Parks and Leisure Services Department have identified that after the subdivision is
completed they will be responsible for maintaining the street trees. In the case of this project it
is estimated that there will be an additional eleven trees. The Manager of Parks & Open
Space has advised that the maintenance requirement of $25.00 per new tree will increase
their budget requirements by $275.00.
- 8 -
CONCLUSION:
As this project is compatible with the Town Centre Area Plan in the Official Community Plan, It is
recommended that first and second reading be given to Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.
6967-2012, that second reading be given to Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6927-2012,
and that application 2012-047-RZ be forwarded to Public Hearing.
“original signed by Amelia Bowden”________________
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden
Planning Technician
“original signed by Christine Carter”___________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
“original signed by Frank Quinn”______________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule”_____________________
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B - Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw 6927-2012
Appendix C – Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw 6967 - 2012
Appendix D – Building Rendering
Appendix E - Site Plan
Appendix F – Building Elevation Plans
Appendix G – Shadow Analysis
Appendix H – Landscape Plans
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.
^
DATE: Apr 25, 2012 FILE: 2012-047-RZ BY: PC
22557/69/77 ROYAL CRESCENT &11771 226 STREET
CORPORATION OFTHE DISTRICT OFMAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
11715
11735 22516225692257011771
11698
2
2
5
3
3 225752259611698 226122263911767
11692
11724
05/07/09 22527225292253422538/4222535/3722544/462255022554/5822581226112261511771
11742 22541225572260222624/26226252263362/64/66
2253522565225372258011837
11778 226212264122528/302255611711 2250422503 225222254822535225882257711834
2263211760 22564/68226 ST.SELKIRK AVE.225 ST.LOUGHEED HWY.LOUGHEED
H
I
G
H
W
A
Y
LANE
SELKIRK AVE.
ROYAL CRES.ROYAL CRES.
P 8641
3
21
A
12
A
P 18056P 63225
Rem. 58
2
12
P 1009122
9 8
P 18056
22
BCP 44924
P 70416
P 48518
P 77953
1
18
2
Plan 4834 P 654524
A
E P 4769
10
7
13
Rem. 1
Rem. 23
P 4769
6
P 70416
E
D
EP 8215REM.
15
19
19
P 21162
79
6
PARK *PP085P 8615
A1
14 13
20
W 3 5
P 4834
BCP 8886
P 9819EP 1197016
1
P 12503
1
2
15
1
P 4769
P 4769
P 8615
C
7
P 476911
PARK P 8615P 13017
LMS 715
P 9372
1
NWS 2316
70
1
W
P 8615
BCP 22107
14 2
BCP 4492420
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
´
SCALE 1:1,500
APPENDIX A
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6927-2012
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 -
1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6927-2012."
2.Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 8 Except: Parcel “A” (Explanatory Plan 8215); District Lot 401 Group 1 New
Westminster District Plan 4769
Parcel “A” (Explanatory Plan 8215) Lot 8 District Lot 401 Group 1 New Westminster
District Plan 4769
Lot 9 District Lot 401 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 4769
Lot “D” District Lot 401 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 21162
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1571 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to RM-2 (Medium Density
Apartment Residential).
3.Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 22 day of May , A.D. 2012 .
READ a second time the day of , A.D. 20 .
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 20 .
READ a third time the day of , A.D. 20 .
APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation this day of , A.D. 20 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 .
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX B
11759/61 2246111667
11715
11735 2251611900
22525
22529 225692257011771
11857
2246622471/8511698
22531
2
2
5
3
3 225752259611698 226122263911889
11844
11771
1168822464 11767
11656
11692
11724
05/07/09 22527225292253422538/4222535/3722544/462255022554/58225812261122615226472266111695
11850
2249011697
11771
11742
22515
22527 225412255722532 2260211862
22624/2622625226332269211770
11681
11683
62/64/66
11668
11686 22535225652253022537 2258011837
11778 2262122641227102247111825
22528/3022521 22522
225242255611675
11711 2250411662
11674
22503 2252222523 2254822535225882257711834
2263211869
11876
11685
Zellers
2245611760
11680
Haney Place Mall
22526
2252822564/6811858
NORTH AVENUE 226 ST.SELKIRK AVE.225 ST.SELKIRK AVE.
LOUGHEED HWY.227 STREET225 ST.226 ST.118 A AVE.
LOUGHEED HIGHWAY
LANE
SELKIRK AVE.
LANE
227 STREETFRASER ST.BRICKWOOD CLOSEROYAL CRES.ROYAL CRES.
5
BCS 1620'1'
E 106'
P 8641
3
16
18
21
A
12
A
P 1805617
*LMP 21534
3
D
P 5 414
P 4202*LMP38099Pcl
EP 8383
Rem 3
6
3
P 63225
Rem. 58
2
14
12
28 P 1009122
9 8
P 18056
22
P 9190
BCP 44924
A
1
Rem.P 8658C
RP 68557CP 5194
9
B
N 1/2 2Rem P 8641P 43090P 414907 P 70416P 48518
P 77953
15
1
18
2
Plan 4834 P 6545227
4
A
E P 4769
10
7
13
Rem. 1
Rem. 23
5
6
PARK
PARK
A
7
1
93
4
P 4769
6
P 70416
E
D
EP 8215REM.
15
BCP 44924P 6524P 9800
6
P 8181
P 19374
1
19
19
P 21162
79
24
6
15
PARK *PP085P 8615
18
A
B
2
P 1244510
3Rem.of 3
3
92
1
14
P 65997
13
13
26
20
W 3
25
5
P 4834
BCP 8886
P 9819EP 1197016
1
P 12503
1 P 12445P 9800
P 24524
8
2
15
1
P 4769
P 4769
P 8615
C
7
P 476923
11
PARK P 8615P 13017
16
21
19
NWS 2977LMP 19737BCP 22107
RW 79939
EP 1 04 5 9
1
P 19374P 6645P 71022'A'
2
LMS 715
P 9372
5
1
17
NWS 2316
70
1
W
P 8615
BCP 22107
14 EPP 12098B
2
BCP 4492420
P 76002P 9236BCP 44924LMP 19737LMP 9820
LMP 12816
EP 64018
RW 61238
RW 61238
EP 63801
BCP44925RW 7 7 6 4 1
BC P 9285EP 70417BCP 9286EPP 14312BCP44926
LMP 9307
EP 70417
BCP 9286LMP 46994RP 63699LMP 31454&LMP 51165 (EASE.)
E
P 70417
EP 65137
´SCALE 1:2,500
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No. Map No. From:
To:
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential)
6927-20121571
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO.6967-2012
A Bylaw to amend the text of Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended.
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as
amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in
open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6967-2012."
2.PART 6, RESIDENTIAL ZONES, SECTION 604, RM-2 MEDIUM DENSITY APARTMENT
RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT is amended as follows:
i.SECTION 5, Density, is amended by adding the following after 5 (e):
f) The maximum floor space ratio shall be 1.89 at the following locations:
22577 Royal Crescent
Parcel A (Explanatory Plan 8125) Lot 8, District Lot 401, Group 1, NWD Plan 4769
22569 Royal Crescent
Lot 9, District Lot 401, Group 1, NWD Plan 4769
22557 Royal Crescent
Lot D, District Lot 401, Group 1, NWD Plan 21162
11771 226 Street
Lot 8 Except Parcel “A” ( Explanatory Plan 8125) District Lot 401, Group 1, NWD Plan 4769
3.Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended is hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the day of , A.D. 200 .
READ a second time the day of , A.D. 200 .
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of , A.D. 200 .
READ a third time the day of , A.D. 200 .
APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation and Highways this day of , A.D. 20 .
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of , A.D. 20 .
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX C
APPENDIX D
197'-5 1/2"191'-11 1/2"90'-0"14'-9 1/4" [4.50m]28'-0" [8.53m](SETBACK)2'-9 1/2" [0.85m]2'-9 1/2" [0.85m]5'-6"14'-9 1/4" [4.50
m]19'-8 1/4" [6.00m]18'-4 1/2" [5.60m]CA4.0114'-5 3/4" [4.41m](SETBACK)31'-0 1/2"31'-0 1/2"36'-6 1/2"17'-11 3/4" [5.48m]20'-9" [6.33m]14'-9 1/2" [4.51m]10'-10 3/4" [3.32
m](SETBACK)3'-10 1/2" [1.18m]SETBACKSETBACKSETBACK
MAILROOMOFFICEUPINDOOR AMENITY1,037 SFLOBBYCORRIDORUNIT B21,093 SFLIVING11'-6"x14'-0"DINING11'-6"x11'-7"BED8'-0"x13'-8"MASTER BED11'-10"x16'-6"W.I.C.8'-0"x6'-6"ENSUITE8'-0"x8'-0"BATH5'-0"x9'-5"KITCHEN8'-0"x9'-4"LANEROYAL CRESCENT40.3741.1041.4041.3741.4041.5741.35
41.2740.86
40.8140.6841.1441.2140.21m82.25mUNIT B41,337 SFLIVING14'-9"x14'-0"DINING12'-9"x9'-0"KITCHEN10'-3"x8'-0"ENSUITE8'-0"x8'-9"MASTER BED15'-8"x12'-1"LAUND.5'-0"x10'-9"BATH5'-0"x7'-0"W.I.C.9'-6"x5'-0"DEN9'-0"x9-0"BED10'-0"x11'-2"UNIT B31,229 SFBATH 5'-0"x8'-0"ENSUITE9'-0"x8'-0"W.I.C.9'-0"x7'-0"LIVING12'-0"x14'-0"DINING12'-0"x9'-10"KITCHEN8'-0"x9'-0"LAUND/STORAGE7'-8"x9'-0"BED9'-0"x10'-5"MASTER BED10'-0"x15'-7"DEN10'-0"x8'-0"ELEV.ELEV.UNIT A1899SFBED.10'-7"x13'-5"BATH8'-0x5'-0"KITCHEN8'-0"x9'-8"DEN9'-7"x7'-11"LIVING11'-3"x13'-6"DINING8'-0"x10'-7"UNIT B51,497 SFMASTER BED14'-0"x11'-6"W.I.C.7'-5"x8'-1"ENSUITE8'-0"x8'-3"STORAGE6'-3"x4'-0"DEN8'-5"x8'-0"KITCHEN8'-10"x7'-11"DINING11'-11
"
x
1
4
'
-
6
"LIVING11'-11"x15'-6"ENSUITE8'-0"x8'-0"W.I.C.6'-3"x8'-0"LAUNDRY7'-5"x3'-1"MASTER BED15'-10"x11'-7"BATH5'-0"x8'-3"UNIT B1,062 SFBED.9'-0x13'-0"MASTER BED.11'-7"x15'-0"W.I.C.8'-6"x6'-4"ENSUITE8'-6"x8'-0"BATH7'-6"x5'-0"KITCHEN8'-5"x9'-4"LIVING11'-0"x17'-6"DINING8'-5"x5'-4"DEN7'-6"x5'-11"UNIT B1,062 SFBED.9'-0x13'-0"MASTER BED.11'-7"x15'-0"W.I.C.8'-6"x6'-4"ENSUITE8'-6"x8'-0"BATH7'-6"x5'-0"KITCHEN8'-5"x9'-4"LIVING11'-0"x17'-6"DINING8'-5"x5'-4"DEN7'-6"x5'-11"UNIT B1,062 SFBED.9'-0x13'-0"MASTER BED.11'-7"x15'-0"W.I.C.8'-6"x6'-4"ENSUITE8'-6"x8'-0"BATH7'-6"x5'-0"KITCHEN8'-5"x9'-4"LIVING11'-0"x17'-6"DINING8'-5"x5'-4"DEN7'-6"x5'-11"136810131415ABCDE2457911121415ABCDE2'-3 1/2" [0.70m](SETBACK)LINE OFWALL ABOVESETBACK10% RAMP DNRAMP UPRAMP UPP. EL.=40.86mP.EL.=134.06'P. EL.=38.70mP.EL.=126.97'AT DRIVEWAY RAMPPATIOPATIOPATIOPATIOPATIOPATIOPATIOPATIOPATIOPATIOPATIOQUIC
K
R
E
S
P
O
N
S
E
SPRINKLER HEADS ATWINDOW OPENINGQUICK RESPONSESPRINKLER HEADSAT WINDOWOPENINGSEL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.10m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.43m (TOP OF LANDING)EL.41.32m (TOP OF LANDING)EL.41.10m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)
EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)
EL.41.65m (TOP OF PAVERS)
EL.41.05m (TOP OF WALL)
EL.41.05m (TOP OF WALL)
EL.41.05m (TOP OF WALL)
EL.41.45m (TOP OF WALL)
EL.41.45m (TOP OF WALL)EL.41.45m (TOP OF WALL)EL.41.65m (TOP OF WALL)EL.41.45m (TOP OF WALL)EL.41.65m (TOP OF WALL)EL.41.65m (TOP OF WALL)EL.41.65m (TOP OF WALL)EL.41.55m (TOP OF PAVERS)
EL.40.70m (TOP OF CONC.)EL.41.55m (TOP OF CONC.)EL.41.15m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.45m (TOP OF WALL)EL.41.70m (TOP OF PAVERS)EL.41.50m (TOP OFWALKWAY)EL.41.05m (TOP OF WALKWAY)EL.41.45m (FIN GRADE)EL.41.35m (FIN GRADE)QUICK RESPONSESPRINKLER HEADS ATDOOR OPENINGEL.41.05m (TOP OF WALL)EL.41.05m (TOP OF WALL)
EL.41.05m (TOP OF WALL)PATIO0.85m ROAD DEDICATION0.85m ROAD DEDICATION0.70m ROAD DEDICATIONPARKING REQUIREMENTSREQUIREDPROPOSEDRESIDENTIAL52.3 STALLS RESIDENTIAL 55 STALLSVISITOR4.8 STALLSVISITOR5 STALLSTOTAL57.1 STALLS TOTAL60 STALLSSYNOPSISZONING PROPOSED ZONING: RM-2CIVIC ADDRESS22557, 22569, 22577 ROYAL CREST.LEGAL DESCRIPTIONLOT 8 EXCEPT:PARCEL "A", PARCEL "A" (EXPLANATORY PLAN 8215) LOT 8, ANDSITE AREAGROSS SITE AREA =2,832.26 SM (30,486.15 SF)DENSITYPERMITTEDPROVIDED1.85,084.07 SM / 2,688.67 SM = 1.89SITE COVERAGEGROSS SITE COVERAGE = (1,414.45 SM./2,832.26 SM.)=0.499SETBACKS (APARTMENT)REQUIREDFRONT YARD4.5M3.32 M (COLUMN FACE TO ROAD DEDICATIOWEST SIDE YARD 7.5 M8.50 MREAR YARD6.0 M5.48 M (BUILDING FACE TO LANE DEDICATIOREQUIREDPROVIDEDLOT 9 DISTRICT LOT 401 GROUP 1 NEW WESTMINSTER DISTRICT PLAN 4769LOT "D" DISTRICT LOT 401 GROUP 1 NEW WESTMINSTER DISTRICT PLAN 2116211771 226 STREET, MAPLE RIDGE B.C.BUILDING AREAGROUND FLOOR BUILDING AREA =1,182.01 SM (12,723 SF)LEVEL 2 TO LEVEL 5 BUILDING AREA =12,942 SF x 4= 4,809.41 SM (51,768 SF)BICYCLE PARKING REQUIREMENTSREQUIREDPROPOSEDSHORT TERM14.41 PER 4 UNITS=48/4=12TOTAL26.4TOTAL 2743 (2 BEDRM)x1.1 CARS=47.3 CARS 5 (1 BEDRM)x1.0 CAR= 5 CARS TOTAL BUILDING AREA =5,993.18 SM (64,510 SF)0.283226 Ha (0.699867 acres)48 UNITS/ 0.268867 Ha= 179 UHa48 UNITS/ 0.66438 Acres=72 UPA48 (1 BEDRM)x0.1 CAR= 4.8 CARS6 SPACE EVERY 20 UNITS=48/20x6=14.4LONG TERM12REQUIRED (20%)PROVIDED 20.2% 537.73 SM (2,688.67 SMx20%) (544.3 SM/2,688.67 SM=20.2%) UNIT TYPESNO. OF UNITS SM / UNIT SF / UNIT TOTAL SM TOTAL SFUNIT B3 - 2 BDRM+DEN5 114.181,229570.90 6,145UNIT B4 - 2 BDRM+DEN5 124.211,337621.05 6,685TOTAL48UNIT B - 2 BDRM+DEN19 98.661,0621,874.54 20,1785,084.07 SM 54,725 SFF.A.R.UNIT A1 - 1 BDRM+DEN5 83.52899417.60 4,495UNIT B5 - 2 BDRM+DEN5 139.081,497695.40 7,485 UNIT B2 - 2 BDRM5 101.541,093507.70 5,465INDOOR AMENITYPROVIDED=96.3 SM (1,037 SF)PARKING AREAPARKING AREA =2,189.17 SM (23,564 SF)UNIT B1 - 2 BDRM+FLEX499.221,068396.88 4,27254,725 SF / 28,940.6 SF = 1.89NET SITE AREA =2,688.67 SM (28,940.63 SF)0.268867 Ha (0.66438 acres)NET SITE COVERAGE = (1,414.45 SM./2,688.67 SM.)=0.526OPEN SPACE(NET SITE AREA)(NET SITE AREA)(GROSS SITE AREA)PERMITTEDPROVIDED1.85,084.07 SM / 2,832.26 SM = 1.8048 UNITS/ 0.283226 Ha= 170 UHa48 UNITS/ 0.699867 Acres=69 UPA54,725 SF / 30,486.15 SF = 1.80 4.41 M (COLUMN FACE TO LANE DEDICATIOAnkenman Associates Architects Inc.12321 Beecher St., Crescent Beach, BC V4A 3A7 604.536.1600JAN 11, 2013PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEV. FOR22557, 22569, 22577 ROYAL CREST. ANDSCALE: 1/16"=1'-0"SITE PLAN1203A1.111771 226 STREET MAPLE RIDGE, B.C.MAPLE RIDGE MEADOWS MANAGEMENT INC.1A1.1SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"SITE PLANREV. DATEDESCRIPTIONBY1 JULY 27, 2012 ISSUED FOR REVIEWCYW2 AUG. 21, 2012 ISSUED FOR ADPCYW3 DEC 12, 2012 RE-ISSUED FOR DPCYW4 JAN 11, 2013 RE-ISSUED FOR DPCYWAPPENDIX E
EX. GRADE AT ⅊TOP OF CONC. SLAB ATEDGE PARKADE ADJACENTTO ⅊ (EL. 40.56m)13EX. GRADE AT ⅊TOP OF CONC. SLAB ATEDGE PARKADE ADJACENTTO ⅊ (EL. 40.56m)213723684569101112ELEVATION KEY NOTES:WOOD COLUMNS ON BRICK BASE1BUILT-UP WOOD FASCIA2CEMENTITIOUS CLADDING PANEL43 1/2" WIDE WOOD BATTENSINSTALLED HORIZONTALLY ANDVERTICALLY5PRECAST CONCRETE SILL6PRECAST CONCRETE LINTEL7PRE-FINISHED METAL CAP FLASHING8PRE-FINISHED VINYL DOORS ANDWINDOWS C/W DOUBLE GLAZINGAND LOW 'E' COATING3PRE-FINISHED METAL RAILING C/WTEMPERED GLAZING9BRICK VENEER10PRECAST CONCRETE CAP11DECORATIVE WOOD TRELLIS1213CONCRETE PEDESTAL BASE C/WSAND BLASTED FINISHAnkenman Associates Architects Inc.12321 Beecher St., Crescent Beach, BC V4A 3A7 604.536.1600JAN 11 2013PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEV. FOR22557, 22569, 22577 ROYAL CREST. ANDSCALE: 3/32"=1'-0"ELEVATIONS1203A3.111771 - 226 STREET MAPLE RIDGE, B.C.MAPLE RIDGE MEADOWS MANAGEMENT INC.1A3.1SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"SOUTH/ FRONT ELEVATION2A3.1SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"EAST/ FRONT ELEVATIONREV. DATEDESCRIPTIONBY1 JULY 27, 2012 ISSUED FOR REVIEWCYW2 AUG. 21, 2012 ISSUED FOR ADPCYW3 DEC 12, 2012 RE-ISSUED FOR DPCYW4 JAN 11, 2013 RE-ISSUED FOR DPCYWAPPENDIX F
EX. GRADE AT ⅊TOP OF CONC. SLAB ATEDGE PARKADE ADJACENTTO ⅊ (EL. 40.56m)1040.81mEX. GRADE AT ⅊21378569410111213ELEVATION KEY NOTES:WOOD COLUMNS ON BRICK BASE1BUILT-UP WOOD FASCIA2CEMENTITIOUS CLADDING PANEL43 1/2" WIDE WOOD BATTENSINSTALLED HORIZONTALLY ANDVERTICALLY5PRECAST CONCRETE SILL6PRECAST CONCRETE LINTEL7PRE-FINISHED METAL CAP FLASHING8PRE-FINISHED VINYL DOORS ANDWINDOWS C/W DOUBLE GLAZINGAND LOW 'E' COATING3PRE-FINISHED METAL RAILING C/WTEMPERED GLAZING9BRICK VENEER10PRECAST CONCRETE CAP11DECORATIVE WOOD TRELLIS1213CONCRETE PEDESTAL BASE C/WSAND BLASTED FINISH8x8 WOOD POST SECUREDTO CONC. RET. WALL (O/SFACES ALIGNED WITH BRICKCOLUMNS OPPOSITE)3x12 WOOD BEAM BOTHSIDES OF 8X8 WOOD POSTS8x8 KNEE BRACE SECUREDTO 8X8 POST ANDCONTINOUS BETWEEN3X12BEAMS3'-10"3'-0"10'-10"3'-0"10'-10"3'-0"8'-4"3'-0"3'-10"3X12 WOOD PURLINSSPANNING WIDTH OFACCESS RAMP4X4 CROSS PURLINS(9 TOTAL AT EACHSECTION OF SPANNING3X12'S)8x8 WOOD POST SECUREDTO CONC. RET. WALL (O/SFACES ALIGNED WITH BRICKCOLUMNS OPPOSITE)10'-6"EQ2'-2"2'-2"2'-2"EQ2'-10"2'-10"ALUMINUM FENCE(REFER TO LNDSCP. DWGS)TOP OF CONC. WALLEX. GRADE AT ⅊LINE OF ACCESS RAMPAnkenman Associates Architects Inc.12321 Beecher St., Crescent Beach, BC V4A 3A7 604.536.1600JAN 11 2013PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEV. FOR22557, 22569, 22577 ROYAL CREST. ANDSCALE: 3/32"=1'-0"ELEVATIONS1203A3.211771 - 226 STREET MAPLE RIDGE, B.C.MAPLE RIDGE MEADOWS MANAGEMENT INC.1A3.2SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"NORTH/ REAR ELEVATION2A3.2SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"WEST/ SIDE ELEVATIONREV. DATE DESCRIPTION BY1 JULY 27, 2012 ISSUED FOR REVIEW CYW2 AUG. 21, 2012 ISSUED FOR ADP CYW3 DEC 12, 2012 RE-ISSUED FOR DP CYW4 JAN 11, 2013 RE-ISSUED FOR DP CYW3A3.2SCALE: 3/16" = 1'-0"TRELLIS AT PARKADE ENTRY
APPENDIX G
CHK'D:DRAWN:DESIGN:SCALE:DATE:M2LA PROJECT NUMBER:DRAWING TITLE:PROJECT:DRAWING NUMBER:REVISION DESCRIPTIONNO. DATE DR.property of M2 Landscape Architects and may not bereproduced or used for other projects without their permission.c Copyright reserved. This drawing and design is theSEAL:New Westminster, BCFax: 604-553-0045V3M 3L7Tel: 604-553-0044220 - 26 Lorne MewsAPPENDIX H
CHK'D:DRAWN:DESIGN:SCALE:DATE:M2LA PROJECT NUMBER:DRAWING TITLE:PROJECT:DRAWING NUMBER:REVISION DESCRIPTIONNO. DATE DR.property of M2 Landscape Architects and may not bereproduced or used for other projects without their permission.c Copyright reserved. This drawing and design is theSEAL:New Westminster, BCFax: 604-553-0045V3M 3L7Tel: 604-553-0044220 - 26 Lorne Mews
2.
1
District of Maple Ridge
TO: His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin MEETING DATE: March 4, 2013
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: C of W
SUBJECT: Proposed Bylaw Amendments to direct the use of Medical Marihuana Production
First and Second Reading
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6971-2013
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This report introduces a Zoning Bylaw amendment to establish zoning regulations for the commercial
production of medical marihuana as authorized under Federal legislation. It summarizes the
rationale for this approach and the steps taken in affirming Council direction for this process.
To advance this matter further, a report was presented at the November 19, 2012 Council Workshop
that outlined a rationale for restricting this use to agricultural zones. The report was then forwarded
to the Council meeting of November 27, 2012, where Council passed the following resolution:
That staff be directed to work with legal counsel to prepare Zoning and other bylaw
amendments as needed to establish the production of medical marihuana (as
authorized under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations) as a permitted use in
agricultural zones only, in suitably designed and serviced structures, subject to siting
and setback restrictions.
Council raised additional concerns requiring separation between this use and schools. This issue
will be explored further in the body of this report.
It is important to note that Federal Marihuana Regulation is changing rapidly. It is expected that the
current system of existing personal use licences and designated person licences will be phased out
by April 14, 2014. In its place, new Federal licences are anticipated, geared to larger scale
production facilities capable of meeting the needs of greater numbers of prescription users. As an
interim measure, in anticipation of being granted a commercial licence, interested parties may
engage in research and development activities. This research and development phase is intended to
improve quality and efficiency in the production process and requires approval from Health Canada
in order to proceed.
To regulate this use, it is recommended that Council proceed with the Zoning Bylaw amendment as
proposed. This is a timely matter, as recent history has revealed the potential adverse health and
safety, social, environmental and law-enforcement implications of marihuana production in the
community. However, if this use is directed into appropriate zones, with the requirement of
appropriate security measures, these impacts may be minimized.
2
RECOMMENDATION:
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6971-2013, to establish the regulations for the commercial
production of medical marihuana, be given First and Second Readings and be forwarded to Public
Hearing.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Information in the November 19, 2012 Council Workshop report may be summarized as follows:
In 1997, the use of medical marihuana became accepted as necessary for medical
treatment for those with legitimate need, although it remained illegal to distribute
marihuana.
In 2001, the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations were adopted by the Federal
Government, based on the understanding that it could ease symptoms related to terminal
illness or chronic conditions, and provided a means of access for those afflicted.
In 2003, under the authority of Health Canada, dried product or seeds became available to
those authorized to obtain them. That plan remains largely intact to this day.
As of December 2011, there were 3600 people within British Columbia authorized to
possess medical marihuana. About 1200 people are licensed to grow the product. Many of
those licensed to possess medical marihuana also grow it within their homes.
In practice, allowing this use in residential areas and other population serving areas is associated
with numerous issues, including;
the need for appropriate communication channels between growers, building officials, and
law enforcement officers.
potential fire, electrical and safety code violations leading to health and safety concerns
potential increased risk of electrical fires damaging adjacent properties or businesses
sharing a common wall.
combined impacts of home invasions, organized crime infiltrating legal operations, poor
accountability with those licensed to grow, and significant potential for diversion of legal
product to the illegal market.
carbon monoxide is commonly a high risk in non professional grow operations which is a
undetectable but serious health risk.
current practices often lead to the generation of large amounts of often improperly handled
waste.
The November 19, 2012 report also acknowledged that changes were being proposed for Federal
legislation regarding this use:
Health Canada, the licensing authority for medical marihuana, was revising its program for
regulating licensed producers and is introducing additional compliance standards related to
public health, best management practices, and accountability.
3
Licensed producers would have to demonstrate compliance with requirements for product
quality, personnel, record-keeping, safety and security, disposal and reporting.
The existing system of individual growers and licenses would likely be phased out in favour of
new Federal legislation in 2014.
New Federal Legislation
On December 16, 2012, the Federal Minister of Health released a press release proposing a new
program, called Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations (MMPR). The objective of the new
program is to redress problems incurred by the current Marihuana Medical Access Program, and to
establish a regulated commercial market of licensed producers responsible for the production and
distribution of medical marihuana. Extensive security and quality control requirements are to be
established, such as:
Employment of a quality assurance person with appropriate training, experience and
technical knowledge to improve marihuana quality;
Indoor production site in a non-residential structure to maximize security and minimize risks
to human health and safety;
Extensive security measures such as;
o restricted-access areas, which would include all areas where a licensed activity is
conducted;
o controlled access to the production site with 24/7 visual monitoring systems and an
intrusion detection system to detect unauthorized access;
o valid security clearance for staff, issued by the Federal Minister of Health; and,
o full disclosure of operation to the local police force, local fire authority and local
government.
Prospective producers will not become licensed until the proposed Marihuana for Medical Purposes
Regulations come into effect. However, they have the option to become authorized to conduct
research and development activities with marihuana, including testing marihuana plant materials
and growing conditions. Engaging in research and development activities could assist potential
licensed producers in obtaining a licence once Federal regulations are adopted.
These proposed regulations will change the way Canadians access marihuana for medical purposes,
but will not be finalized until the proposed Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations (MMPR)
come into force (expected in spring 2013). It is expected that for a short time, there will be some
overlap between the emerging Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations (MMPR) program and
the Marihuana Medical Access Program (MMAP) which will end on March 31, 2014.
Legislative changes and technological advances will assist in alleviating some of the problems
associated with the current situation. Health Canada regulations will increase the potential for
improved management practices and better regulation of the industry. Technological advances will
favour strategic capital investment to create energy efficient production in secure buildings.
b) Desired Outcome:
The challenge for the District of Maple Ridge is to manage risks by directing this land use into an
appropriate zone in a purpose built structure. The District also must recognize the issue of personal
access and supply to medical marihuana as authorized under the Marihuana Medical Access
Regulations. A further challenge is to prepare for the changes in Federal legislation under the new
Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations (MMPR).
4
A proposed Zoning Bylaw amendment for this purpose is timely, as the District has the option of
directing this use into areas that will cause the least amount of negative impact. In a recent bulletin
published by Young Anderson, the following statement was made:
Municipalities should expect that business enterprises will be aggressive in establishing these
uses, given the significant demand for the product, the scarcity of legal supply that can be
expected when existing personal-use licenses are phased out, and the financial advantages that
will accrue to early entrants into the industry1.
Due to odor, indoor air quality impacts, and fire and safety concerns, it is recommended that
residential and commercial zones and other population serving areas not be considered for the
commercial production of marihuana as authorized under Federal legislation.
Industrial zones may be considered suitable, however, the challenges associated with this use
include maintaining air quality in multi-tenanted structures. In addition, industrial sites may be less
suitable for processing the significant amount of organic waste produced as part of the operation.
On this basis, the recommendation is to direct the commercial production of medical marihuana as
authorized under Federal legislation into agricultural zones, within purpose built structures and with
siting regulations from property lines and residential uses. It should also be pointed out that future
trends in greenhouse production indicate capital intensive investments specifically designed to
create a controlled environment conducive to predictable plant growth. With the use of energy
efficient LED lighting, unpredictable but formerly essential elements such as weather will not be
required with this process. Purpose built structures, if constructed for marihuana production, could
also be used for other horticultural products. By directing these uses in agricultural areas, a wider
range of potential horticultural uses is possible. The lifecycle of such a structure and the value of
this asset could be thereby extended if a license to grow medical marihuana was discontinued2.
c) Strategic Alignment
The District acknowledges through its Corporate Strategic Plan the responsibility and jurisdiction for
many decisions that support sustainability and minimize global impacts in managing land use, water,
and waste. One of the major contributing factors to achieving sustainability in Maple Ridge is
addressing climate change. To address climate change, Maple Ridge is seeking to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions both in corporate operations and in the community. These reductions are
part of the District’s commitment to becoming carbon neutral and reducing the District’s carbon
footprint. The Maple Ridge Official Community Plan contains policies with a similar goal, as follows:
5 - 43 The District of Maple Ridge will use an integrated approach to reduce and mitigate
the effects of climate change through the following;
g) encouraging low impact development measures where possible.
5 - 45 The District of Maple Ridge has a goal to reduce community greenhouse gas
emissions by 33% below 2007 levels by 2020 and 80% by 2050.
Significant environmental impacts are associated with current practices and production techniques
for medical marihuana, including greenhouse gas emissions. It is therefore consistent with the
1 Young Anderson, Barristers and Solicitors, Client Bulletin “Changes in Federal Marihuana Regulation”
January 16, 2013, p 3.
2 Current land values would likely make it economically feasible for a wider range of horticultural products to
be produced in greenhouse structures on agricultural land as opposed to industrial land.
5
District’s strategic direction that the commercial production of medical marihuana as authorized
under Federal legislation be directed into areas that are suitable for all stages of its productive cycle,
including the management of organic wastes. In this instance, the most suitable location is within
an agricultural zone.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
This Zoning Bylaw amendment is intended to meet the needs of Maple Ridge residents. Those with
demonstrated need require a reliable source of medical marihuana. The District has a responsibility
to ensure that its structures intended for human habitation are safe for the use intended. By
establishing a separation between this use and residential structures, the District will be reducing
the risks of secondary impacts on residential users. These impacts include air quality impacts,
increased risk of fire, and potential theft and violence.
At the Council meeting of November 27, 2012, Council indicated that a separation requirement be
made between this proposed use and school sites within the District. Section 53 of the Marihuana
Medical Access Regulations provides that the holder of a licence issued under the Regulations shall
not produce marihuana outdoors if the production site is adjacent to a school, public playground, day
care facility or other public place frequented mainly by persons under 18 years of age. The proposed
Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations does not address the issue presumably because the
Regulations only permit the production of medical marihuana indoors.
There are currently three agriculturally zoned sites in close proximity to schools (attached as
Appendix B), but aside from these exceptions, there is generally significant separation between
zones which permit schools and properties with agricultural zoning. Recognizing the proposed
changes in Federal legislation and in order to minimize the potential for conflicts between the use
and children under the age of 18 in attendance at a school, a minimum distance separation
requirement is recommended.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
As the municipal implications of anticipated changes to Federal legislation become clearer, other
Maple Ridge bylaws, such as the Business Licensing and Regulation Bylaw may require further
review in order to adapt to these changes.
In advance of a formal Council direction for the commercial production of medical marihuana as
authorized under the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations, the Building Department has
developed guidelines aimed at protecting residential users from some of the deleterious effects of
these operations. The Building Department confirms that as a condition of issuance of a building
permit, adequate ventilation must be provided in all facilities that produce medical marihuana.
These ventilation requirements must meet Workers Compensation Benefit guidelines.
Policy Implications:
By recognizing the commercial production of medical marihuana as authorized under Federal
legislation as an agricultural use, and by this use into agricultural zones, the District is ensuring a
consistent direction with its Official Community Plan and its Agricultural Plan.
6
Official Community Plan. Policy 6-9 of the Official Community Plan states the following:
Maple Ridge supports the policies and regulations of the Agricultural Land Commission Act
and the Farm practices Protection Act in its land uses and will review its bylaws affecting
farmland and farm operations for consistency with these provincial acts regulations, and
guidelines.
As this use is permitted within the Agricultural Land Reserve, and is recognized as a farm use, it is
consistent with the direction of the Official Community Plan and with the mandate of the Agricultural
Land Commission to allow this use on agricultural land.
Agricultural Plan
The Maple Ridge Agricultural Plan notes that there is limited diversity in our agricultural sector. As
stated in Goal 8 of the Plan:
Pursuing diversity in local agriculture is a way of ensuring that agricultural land use is
capable of adaptive response to, and recovery from, challenges to food security, and other
amenities valued by society. More diversity creates more ability for successful response and
promotes resiliency in agricultural land use. Diversified agricultural activity (equestrian, agro-
tourism) will protect the land base through active use, create demand for services and
workers, and support the infrastructure also required for food production.
While limited, the potential benefits that could arise from directing this use on agricultural land
include the increased incentive for private investment in improvements on agricultural properties.
The life cycle of a “cutting edge” compact facility could be extended to other agricultural uses,
including food production. There would also be greater potential for other complementary uses on
the same site, such as composting.
Proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendments
A recommended approach is to recognize the commercial production of medical marihuana as
authorized under Federal legislation and establish standards for its siting in the Zoning Bylaw. If this
use is to be included in the Zoning Bylaw, the following amendments are proposed:
Part 2 Interpretation - Definitions:
Medical marihuana is an agricultural use but due to the impacts it has in proximity to residential
areas and other population serving areas, it is recommended that it be defined specifically. This
proposed bylaw amendment provides an opportunity to establish regulations in the Zoning bylaw
specifically for this use, as follows:
Medical Marihuana, Commercial Production means the use of premises for the cultivation,
processing, testing, packaging and shipping of marihuana used for medical purposes as authorized
under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Canada) or any regulations made pursuant to that
Act, and includes the sale of marihuana used for medical purposes only to customers who are not
present on the premises.
Part 4 General Regulations:
Section 401 of the Zoning Bylaw prohibits uses of Land, Buildings and Structures. It is recommended
that a subsection be added to make it clear that the commercial cultivation, processing, testing,
packaging, shipping and sale of marihuana for medical purposes is only permitted in the agricultural
zones and is not permitted in any other zone.
7
Part 5 Agricultural Zones:
Section 503 of the Zoning Bylaw establishes siting requirements for permitted uses use in
agricultural zones. The Bylaw has established siting requirements for mushroom growing and the
keeping of swine that exceed other siting requirements in the Bylaw and are considered suitable for
the commercial production of medical marihuana as authorized under Federal legislation.
Recognizing the proposed changes in Federal legislation and in order to minimize the potential for
land use conflicts between the use and schools, Zone Amending Bylaw 6971-2013 includes the
requirement that the commercial production of medical marihuana shall not be located within 200
metres of an elementary or secondary school.
The recommended siting requirements for the commercial production of medial marihuana are as
follows:
“503(7) Buildings and structures for Medical Marihuana, Commercial Production as authorized
under Federal legislation:
(a) shall be sited not less than:
(i) 60 metres from front and exterior side lot lines;
(ii) 30 metres from rear and interior side lot lines;
(iii) 30 metres from all wells and streams;
(iv) 30 metres from all buildings used for one family residential use, accessory
employee residential use or temporary residential use.
(b) shall be located not less than 200 metres from an elementary or secondary school,
measured from the nearest point of the lot line of the Medical Marihuana,
Commercial Production use to the nearest point of the lot line of the elementary or
secondary school.”
Alternatives:
The recommended approach is to amend the Zoning Bylaw to permit the commercial production of
medical marihuana as authorized under Federal legislation in the agricultural zones. This approach
is consistent with Council direction given on November 27, 2012. A municipality may, however,
have the right to prohibit the commercial production of medical marihuana:
Whether municipalities are required to accommodate commercial marihuana production under
the proposed new federal scheme is a different question. As a general proposition, it is not
necessary for a local government to permit every conceivable land use in its zoning regulations.
If patients with marihuana prescriptions are able to fill the prescription by registered mail or
bonded courier, or by dealing with a licenced producer / supplier in a neighbouring
municipality, they might be considered to have reasonable access to the drug such that a local
prohibition of this use would not be a contravention of the Charter3.
Based on this information, Council may have the option of prohibiting this use but further review is
advised.
3 Young Anderson, Barristers and Solicitors, Client Bulletin “Changes in Federal Marihuana Regulation”
January 16, 2013, p 2.
8
CONCLUSION:
Local governments have the power and the responsibility to direct suitable locations for the
commercial production of medical marihuana as authorized under Federal legislation, based on
sound planning rationale. For the District of Maple Ridge, Council direction has been to permit this
use to take place in agricultural zones. The proposed Zoning Bylaw amendment aims to meet current
and future needs and challenges, and minimize the social, economic, and environmental impacts
within the community. The recommendation is to give Bylaw No. 6971-2013 First Reading and
Second Reading and forward to Public Hearing.
"Original signed by Diana Hall"
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Diana Hall, MCIP, RPP
Planner II
"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 J.L. (Jim) Rule"
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A: Zoning Text amendment 6971-2013
Appendix B: Agricultural Zoned properties in close proximity to schools.
Appendix C: Young Anderson, Barristers and Solicitors, Client Bulletin “Changes in Federal
Marihuana Regulation” January 16, 2013
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6971-2013
A Bylaw to amend the text of Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in
open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.This Bylaw may be cited as “Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6971-2013”
2.Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 – 1985 is hereby amended as follows:
a)PART 2 INTERPRETATION, is amended by the addition of the following definition in correct
alphabetical order:
“Medical Marihuana, Commercial Production means the use of premises for the commercial
cultivation, processing, testing, packaging and shipping of marihuana used for medical
purposes as authorized under the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Canada) or any
regulations made pursuant to that Act, and includes the sale of marihuana used for medical
purposes only to customers who are not present on the premises.”
b)PART 4, GENERAL REGULATIONS, Section 401, USES OF LAND, BUILDINGS AND
STRUCTURES is amended by the addition of the following prohibited use as subsection (3)(e):
“commercial cultivation, processing, testing, packaging, shipping and sale of marihuana,
except as specifically permitted in the A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, and A-5 zones.”
c)PART 5, AGRICULTURAL ZONES, Section 501, PERMITTED USES OF LAND, BUILDINGS AND
STRUCTURES IN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONES is amended by the addition of the following
permitted use after Detached Garden Suite Use:
“(16) Medical Marihuana, Commercial Production”
d)PART 5, AGRICULTURAL ZONES, Section 503, SITING OF BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES IN
AGRICULTURAL ZONES is amended by the addition of a new subsection (7) as follows:
“(7) Buildings and structures for Medical Marihuana, Commercial Production as authorized
under Federal legislation:
(a) shall be sited not less than:
(i) 60 metres from front and exterior side lot lines;
(ii) 30 metres from rear and interior side lot lines;
(iii) 30 metres from all wells and streams;
(iv) 30 metres from all buildings used for one family residential use, accessory
employee residential use or temporary residential use.
APPENDIX A
(b) Shall be located not less than 200 metres from an elementary or secondary school,
measured from the nearest point of the lot line of the Medical Marihuana, Commercial
Production use to the nearest point of the lot line of the elementary or secondary
school.”
READ a first time the day of 2013
READ a second time the day of 2013
PUBLIC HEARING held the day of 2013
READ a third time the day of 2013
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the day of 2013
_____________________________ ____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.DATE: Feb 1, 2013FILE: SchoolSitesALR_Letter BY: DT
School Sites and Agricultural Zones
CORPORATION OFTHE DISTRICT OFMAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
121 AVE LANE240 ST243 ST238B ST241 ST124 AVE
240 ST124 AVE
125 AVE
ABERNETHY WAY
238A ST238B ST240 ST241 ST120A LANE
124 AVE
240 ST120B AVE
120B AVE
LANE
239B ST240 ST240 STMeadowridge
A-4
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridgemakes no guarantee regarding the accuracyor present status of the information shown onthis map.
´
Scale: 1:5,000
100m
APPENDIX B
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.DATE: Jan 30, 2013FILE: SchoolSitesALR_Letter BY: DT
School Sites and Agricultural Zones
CORPORATION OFTHE DISTRICT OFMAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
MEADOW PL
SKILLEN STWICKLUND AVE NORFOLK PL123 AVE
124 AVE
125 AVE
123 AVE
MCTAVI
SH PLFOREST PLDAWSON PL208 ST209 ST212 ST123B AVE
209 ST210 ST123 AVE
MCCALLUM CRT
WICKLUND AVE
ALPINE CRES
210 ST122 AVE
STONEHOUSE AVE
FABER CRES208 STSKILLEN ST211 STSCHMIDT CRESMEADOW BROOK PL212 STSKILLEN STBLANSHARD STDOUGLAS AVE
122 AVE
LANE
123 AVE
Westview Secondary
Laity View Elementary
A-2
A-2
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridgemakes no guarantee regarding the accuracyor present status of the information shown onthis map.
´
Scale: 1:5,000
City of PittMeadows
District ofLangley District of MissionFRASER R.DATE: Feb 1, 2013FILE: SchoolSitesALR_Letter BY: DT
School Sites and Agricultural Zones
CORPORATION OFTHE DISTRICT OFMAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT232 ST232 ST128 AVE
126 AVE
128 AVE
129 AVE
1 3 0 A V E
DOGWOOD AVE
128 AVE234B ST231 ST232 ST128 AVE
235 ST232 STDOGWOOD AVE
CALVIN CRES
235 STYennadon Elementary
A-1
The Corporation of the District of Maple Ridgemakes no guarantee regarding the accuracyor present status of the information shown onthis map.
´
Scale: 1:5,000
45m
JANUARY 16, 2013 CLIENT BULLETIN
Changes in Federal Marihuana Regulation
Late in 2012 the federal Minister of Health announced pending changes in federal policy regarding
the production of marihuana for medicinal purposes. Essentially, the government is proposing to
abandon the “personal use license” approach that has led to the establishment of thousands of
individual “grow-ops” around the country, and the related “designated person licenses”, in favour
of the licensing of more centralized, commercial-scale indoor marihuana production facilities. The
government would close its marihuana production facility in Saskatchewan and get out of the
business of marihuana sales, existing personal use licences and designated person licences (under
which non-patients were allowed to grow marihuana to meet someone else’s medical needs)
would expire on April 1, 2014, and new licence applications under the existing regulations would
not be accepted after September 30, 2013. While the government is not changing the basic rule
that possession and use of marihuana for medicinal purposes requires a prescription, it is
proposing to eliminate the closed list of categories of conditions or symptoms for which
marihuana may be prescribed, leaving this up to the patient’s physician to determine. Persons for
whom the use of marihuana has been prescribed for medicinal purposes would be able to
purchase the drug in dried form from licensed suppliers in person, or by registered mail or bonded
courier. If the take-up of personal use licences is any indication – the number of licensees
increased nationally from 477 in 2002 to about 25,000 in 2012 - we should expect that there will
be a high degree of interest in commercial marihuana production.
These changes have important implications for Canadian municipalities, which were heavily
involved in efforts to have the federal government re-assess the existing regulatory scheme. Some
B.C. municipalities have amended their zoning regulations to prohibit marihuana production by
holders of personal use or designated person licences – a prohibition that engages Charter of
Rights and Freedoms issues – while others have attempted to expressly accommodate such
production as a use accessory to residential uses where required for medical purposes, while
prohibiting production facilities (such as marihuana dispensaries and so-called “compassion
clubs”) having a larger scale or lacking a federal licence. Many municipalities have adopted bylaws
that address the remediation of residential premises that have been damaged by marijuana
production activities, many of which are suspected of operating under the cover of federal
personal-use or designated-person licences, and attempt to recover municipal bylaw enforcement
and policing costs as well. All of these approaches will have to be carefully reconsidered in view of
the proposed changes in federal law.
APPENDIX C
2
Under the new federal scheme, we believe that federally licensed marihuana producers would
have to comply with all applicable provincial and municipal regulations, including building and
zoning bylaws. In regard to zoning, this will immediately raise questions as to whether this land
use – which is essentially a horticultural use with onerous security requirements – is permitted by
existing commercial, industrial or agricultural zoning regulations; if so, whether the use should
continue to be permitted given the particular land use impacts associated with the production of a
federally controlled substance (which might be different from those associated with the
production of other plant-based medical products like ginseng); and if not, whether and where the
use might be suitable in the municipality or rural area in question. (Ordinarily a commercial drug
production use of this type would not fit within the regulations applicable to residential zones.)
Relevant considerations will include whether existing zoning already permits the commercial
production of drugs or controlled substances other than marihuana (usually this would be a
manufacturing use), and whether there is anything different about marihuana production that
warrants different zoning treatment; whether the federal government’s security requirements for
these facilities can be accommodated given building form and character requirements (for
example the government requires physical barriers such as fencing); and whether requirements
for air filtration systems and an uninterruptible supply of power for on-site security systems
(which will necessitate the installation and use of on-site generators) can be accommodated
without creating a local nuisance.
The case law on the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act has established that individuals who
need marihuana for medical purposes have a right to reasonable access to a legal source of
marihuana under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the proposed changes to
federal regulations are an attempt on the part of Health Canada to accommodate this right.
Municipalities are also subject to the Charter, and we have in the past suggested that local zoning
regulations that prohibit the growing of medical marihuana under a personal use licence may be
unconstitutional. Whether municipalities are required to accommodate commercial marihuana
production under the proposed new federal scheme is a different question. As a general
proposition, it is not necessary for a local government to permit every conceivable land use in its
zoning regulations. If patients with marihuana prescriptions are able to fill the prescription by
registered mail or bonded courier, or by dealing with a licenced producer/supplier in a
neighbouring municipality, they might be considered to have reasonable access to the drug such
that a local prohibition of this use would not be a contravention of the Charter.
The proposed federal regulations would not permit marihuana production in residential dwellings,
and would permit only indoor marihuana production and storage. Applicants for federal licences
(which would be good for three years, and renewable) would be obliged to give notice of their
application to the local police force, local fire authority and local government. The proposed
regulations do not require applicants to make any representation to Health Canada as to whether
marihuana production and storage are permitted under local zoning regulations, or expressly
require or allow Health Canada to refuse to approve a licence application if it would not comply
with local zoning, but local governments should obviously advise Health Canada as to any zoning
issues as soon as they receive notice of a licence application from the applicant (providing a copy
of that advice to the applicant). Our review of the proposed regulation suggests that Health
Canada will have discretion not to approve a licence if the appropriate local zoning is not in place.
3
In the event that a federal licence is issued notwithstanding that the use is not permitted by the
applicable zoning regulations, we see no reason that the zoning regulations would not be
enforceable should the licence holder undertake the use.
Health Canada’s regulatory impact analysis statement for the proposed regulations states that
“the proposed [Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulation] would enable an entirely new
industry to be created in Canada”. Some B.C. municipalities have already received inquiries from
entrepreneurs inquiring as to whether and where commercial marihuana production would be
permitted by existing zoning regulations. Municipalities should expect that business enterprises
will be aggressive in establishing these uses, given the significant demand for the product, the
scarcity of legal supply that can be expected when existing personal-use licenses are phased out,
and the financial advantages that will accrue to early entrants into the industry. Some
municipalities may see these changes as opening opportunities for economic development and the
creation of long-term local employment, while others may see the social, environmental and law-
enforcement implications of marihuana production in local commercial-scale facilities as
something to be avoided.
Local governments should also be considering the effect of the expiry of existing personal-use and
designated-person licences, including whether the continuation of marihuana production in
previously licensed premises would constitute an offence under local bylaws, whether police
forces will be enforcing the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act in relation to such premises, or
whether the local government will be left to consider on its own whether to attempt to enforce
local bylaws in relation to such activities.
The new federal regulations and related material, including draft building and production security
requirements for marihuana production facilities, can be reviewed on the Health Canada website
at
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media/nr-cp/_2012/2012-193-eng.php
Bill Buholzer
Alyssa Bradley