HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018-04-17 Council Workshop Agenda and Reports.pdf
City of Maple Ridge
1. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
2. ADOPTION OF MINUTES – Nil
3. PRESENTATIONS AT THE REQUEST OF COUNCIL
4. UNFINISHED AND NEW BUSINESS
4.1 Development Liaison Committee – Feedback on Community Amenity Contributions
(“CACs”)
• Jeff Fisher, Urban Development Institute
• Mark Sakai, Greater Vancouver Homebuilders Association
4.2 The Heritage Resources of Maple Ridge “Heritage Inventory”
Presentation by Don Luxton, Donald Luxton and Associates
Staff report dated April 17, 2018 recommending that the Heritage Resources of
Maple Ridge 2018 document be endorsed.
COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA
April 17, 2018
5:30 p.m.
PLEASE NOTE THE CHANGE IN TIME
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
REMINDERS
April 17, 2018
Public Hearing 7:00 p.m.
Council Workshop Agenda
April 17, 2018
Page 2 of 2
4.3 Open Government Application
Staff report dated April 17, 2018 recommending that staff be directed to submit
an application to the Smart Cities Challenge and that the application endorsed.
5. CORRESPONDENCE
5.1 Upcoming Events
April 23, 2018
6:00 p.m.
14th Anniversary Celebration – Maple Ridge Baptist Church,
22155 Lougheed Highway, Maple Ridge BC
Organizer: Ridge Meadows Celebrate Recovery
May 2, 2018
All Day Event
McHappy Day Drop In – McDonald’s, 22780 Lougheed
Highway, Maple Ridge, BC
Organizer: Ronald McDonald House of BC
May 7, 2018
7:00 p.m.
2018 Youth Talent Show – The ACT, Maple Ridge BC
Organizer: City of Maple Ridge
May 12, 2018
11:00 p.m.
Haney Farmers Market Opening Ceremony – Memorial Peace
Park, Maple Ridge BC
Organizer: Haney Farmers Market Society
May 12, 2018
6:00 p.m.
Citizen of the Year Dinner – Meadow Gardens Golf Club,
19675 Meadow Gardens Way, Pitt Meadows, BC
Organizer: Maple Ridge Community Foundation
6. MAYOR AND COUNCILLORS’ REPORTS
7. BRIEFING ON OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST/QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL
8. MATTERS DEEMED EXPEDIENT
9. ADJOURNMENT
Checked by: ___________
Date: ________________
-1 -
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: April 17, 2018
and Members of Council
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: The Heritage Resources of Maple Ridge “Heritage Inventory”
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In Fall 2016, the Community Heritage Commission (CHC) commenced a process to update the
Heritage Resources of Maple Ridge (HRMR) document, also known as the heritage inventory, that
was first created in 1998 by Donald Luxton & Associates. The 1998 document contains 95 sites, 6
cemeteries and 13 historic landscapes that have been identified with significant heritage value.
The update project involved assessment and evaluation of the existing HRMR listed sites along with
new ones nominated by the community. The updated 2018 Heritage Resources of Maple Ridge
(Appendix A) lists 122 sites, 25 cultural landscapes and 4 historic features. The work for this update
project was undertaken by Donald Luxton & Associates.
It is important to note that the HRMR is an inventory of sites with significant heritage value only and
does not provide any form of legal protection. Having an inventory listing of heritage sites is a useful
resource that identifies the value of heritage features within the community that helps support:
heritage conservation activities,
the development of heritage planning policies;
awareness and appreciation for local history and heritage resources;
and cultivate a local identity and a sense of place within the community.
Building off of this update to the heritage inventory, the CHC is intending to start an update to the
Maple Ridge Community Heritage Register, which was last updated in 2008.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT The Heritage Resources of Maple Ridge 2018 document be endorsed.
4.2
- 2 -
1.0 BACKGROUND:
Since 1998, the HRMR has provided the foundation for heritage conservation and management
within Maple Ridge. The sites listed collectively provide a comprehensive compendium of Maple
Ridge history and as new information becomes known or available, it is important to keep this
document updated. While the HRMR does not provide any legal protection to sites listed, some of
the sites included do have other forms of heritage status, including being listed on the Community
Heritage Register, and/or legal protection through an adopted bylaw.
For HRMR listed sites that do not have any other form of heritage status or legal protection, the
HRMR list identifies a site as having significant heritage value. As such, sites listed on the HRMR are
eligible for inclusion on the Community Heritage Register (a formal listing of heritage resources
enabled through the Local Government Act) and/or legal protection through bylaw adoption, such as
a Heritage Revitalization Agreement Bylaw, or a Municipal Heritage Designation Bylaw. Additionally,
sites listed on the HRMR also become eligible for a heritage award in celebration of heritage
conservation at the CHC’s annual heritage awards event.
Heritage Management in Maple Ridge has been established primarily through policies in the Official
Community Plan, wherein a number of policies are included to help strengthen heritage
management within the community. Two heritage policies speak specifically to creating and
maintaining a heritage resources inventory as follows:
Policy 4-38:
Maple Ridge will work cooperatively with the Community Heritage Commission and
other relevant groups and organizations to establish an information database of all
types of built, natural and cultural heritage resources within the City, including
evaluation criteria for each type. This inventory would be updated on an ongoing basis
evolving and responding to theoretical and practical changes in the heritage arena.
Policy 4-40:
Maple Ridge will encourage the conservation and designation of significant heritage
structures, and natural and cultural landscape features in each neighbourhood.
In December 2013, Maple Ridge Council endorsed the CHC’s Heritage Plan, which outlines a work
program for the Commission to 2020. Each year of the plan focusses on a specific project aimed at
adding strength and vitality to the existing heritage management program. The Plan recommends the
HRMR update to include:
Determining which sites should be removed, which new sites should be added and improved
historical profiles. Digital posting should be considered.
A public nomination process for identifying a broad range of potential heritage sites.
Mechanisms for updating the Heritage Register should be considered, including direct
contact with property owners and a program to prepare Statements of Significance.
- 3 -
2.0 PUBLIC CONSULTATION AND SITE NOMINATIONS PROCESS
Creating community awareness regarding the HRMR update process was a key aim of the public
consultation process, but also to incorporate the knowledge and experience of the community in
identifying historic sites that are not currently on the 1998 HRMR.
The HRMR update project commenced with a public open house on October 3, 2016 at the Ridge
Meadows Seniors Activity Centre. A total of 30 people attend the event. Advertisement for the open
house was through newspaper advertisement, municipal website and FaceBook, as well as
communications through the Maple Ridge Historical Society’s newsletter.
Poster boards with background information and the intent of the update project were presented at
the open house event (Appendix B). Attendees were also asked to nominate potential heritage sites
for the updated list. Nomination forms were made available at the open house event and online until
January 2017. Well over 80 nominations were received during this time.
Donald Luxton presented the project workplan to Council on October 11, 2016 and outlined the
consultation process, heritage evaluation strategy, heritage evaluation best practices, and the
approach for researching the recommended inventory sites (Appendix C).
Since January 2017, Donald Luxton & Associates have been working closely with a sub-committee
that was struck early on in the process, made up of some members of the Community Heritage
Commission and the larger community. Meetings led by Donald Luxton with the sub-committee were
held:
January 30, 2017 – this meeting included some additional community heritage experts to
brainstorm additional nominations.
October 30, 2017 – an early draft of the inventory update was presented with a request for
feedback and to identify any missing information.
January 29, 2018 - a more complete draft of the inventory update was distributed and
discussed with the sub-committee with a request for feedback to be incorporated into a final
draft.
Additionally, the Maple Ridge Museum’s Director, Val Patenaude and community historian Fred
Braches provided assistance with research for many of the nominations.
The potential inventory sites reviewed for the update are as follows:
The 80+ nominations received were assessed and evaluated, after removal of duplicates
and those already on the 1998 HRMR;
All of the original sites from the 1998 HRMR were assessed with 10 removed due to
demolition and 4 removed due to substantial loss of integrity;
The final draft of the HRMR was distributed to all members of the Community Heritage Commission
for the April 12, 2018 regular meeting and a resolution from that meeting will be presented at the
April 17, 2018 Council workshop.
- 4 -
3.0 HERITAGE RESOURCES OF MAPLE RIDGE - OVERVIEW
The breakdown of the Table of Contents for the 2018 HRMR is similar to the 1998 version, in an
effort to maintain consistency between the two documents. To view the 1998 HRMR visit the Maple
Ridge website through the following link: https://www.mapleridge.ca/241/Heritage-Inventory-
Resources.
3.1 Historic Communities
In the 1998 version, each site is listed under the historic community (eight in total) in which it is
located. While this approach is replicated in the 2018 version, nine historic communities are now
included, with the addition of East Haney, which was identified as an additional historic community
through a Heritage Discussion Paper (that included a historic communities map) completed by the
CHC in 2004. The nine historic communities have been incorporated into the Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan as Figure 1 and are as follows:
1. Hammond
2. The Ridge
3. Haney
4. Yennadon
5. East Haney
6. Albion
7. Webster’s Corners
8. Whonnock
9. Ruskin
3.2 Methodology
The evaluation criteria used for the 1998 HRMR are no longer considered to be best practice in the
professional heritage conservation field. A values-based approach to heritage conservation is the
globally-recognized practice in heritage conservation and this has been adopted and advocated by
major conservation authorities at an international level e.g., UNESCO World Heritage Centre and with
major research and educational institutions. These standards have been adopted at a national level
by many countries worldwide including Australia, UK, Canada, and the USA. In Canada, “The
Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places”, is the relevant document that
establishes a consistent, pan-Canadian set of conservation principles and guidelines and is
grounded on a values-based approach. The values-based approach represents a fundamental shift
away from the traditional emphasis on architectural typologies and aesthetics and the materials-
based approach that was used as the basis of the 1998 MRHR.
An updated Evaluation Framework for the 2018 MRHR (Appendix D) was formulated after a review of
best practices in the cultural resource management field and also a review of evaluation systems
used worldwide. Progressive and relevant criteria have been sourced from the various systems
studied in order to strengthen the existing evaluation framework in Maple Ridge. The original 1998
HRMR was calibrated by the community to ensure each area was represented and this intent has not
changed.
- 5 -
Based on the progressing standards of heritage management and evaluation, it was discussed and
recommended to the Community Heritage Commission that the current evaluation framework be
moved to a values-based approach. Eight criteria have been identified and these are outlined in
Appendix D. Rating ‘High’ in any one criterion is sufficient for a place to attain heritage status, as is
four ‘Moderate’ ratings. Following a ‘Yes’ rating, there is a threshold for integrity that reflects best
practice worldwide and ensures that the significance of a place can still be communicated.
3.3 Other Noteworthy HRMR Updates
Since the 1998 HRMR was created, much more research has been undertaken on various
significant heritage sites within the community. As such, the information provided on each historic
community and many of the individual sites listed are more robust than previous and excerpts from
publications written during the time period are interspersed throughout to help describe the place or
people connected with it and allow a glimpse into what was deemed important and newsworthy in
the community’s past.
Additional new directions in the 2018 update versus the 1998 document is as follows:
The First Nations section which previously only discussed the Katzie now provides a broader
perspective of the Coast Salish people who are the larger indigenous ethnic origins of the
Katzie and Kwantlen First Nations. Brief histories of both the Katzie and Kwantlen are now
included with descriptions of their traditional territories and discussion of how their people
were impacted by European settlement.
During the nomination process, attention was paid to expanding the forms of heritage sites
beyond mostly buildings, cemeteries, and trees and now also includes farms, roads and
more parks and community gathering spaces.
An additional 51 sites were added to this updated HRMR list.
4.0 NEXT STEPS
4.1 2018 Heritage Resources of Maple Ridge
The CHC acknowledges that this HRMR update has been long overdue and now that it is complete,
the group is recommending that sufficient funds and resources, as determined through the annual
business planning process, are considered to ensure that smaller reviews and updates are
undertaken every two to five years. The HRMR is an important document that sets the foundation for
the conservation and awareness of significant heritage sites within Maple Ridge.
4.2 Update to Maple Ridge Community Heritage Register
With the updated and more comprehensive HRMR listing now complete, through the CHC’s Heritage
Plan, the CHC is preparing to next undertake an update to the Maple Ridge Community Heritage
Register (https://www.mapleridge.ca/DocumentCenter/View/378). There are currently 28 sites on
the Heritage Register and the last update was undertaken in 2008.
Adding sites to the Heritage Register requires on-site investigation to create a Statement of
Significance (SoS), which is more comprehensive and detailed than a listing created for the HRMR. A
SoS document discusses the site’s heritage significance and identifies character-defining elements
that are very informative in preserving or restoring a heritage site. The Community Heritage Register
does not provide any legal protection to a heritage site, but it does enable a municipality to withhold
- 6 -
a demolition permit for a maximum of 60 days to work with the property owner in potentially
preserving the site’s heritage value. Benefits of inclusion on the Heritage Register allow the property
owner access to the alternate compliance equivalencies available under the BC Building Code,
Energy Efficiency Act and the Homeowner Protection Act when undertaking restoration or renovation
work on the heritage building.
Updating the Heritage Register is discussed in the CHC’s 2013 Heritage Plan for inclusion in a future
workplan as follows:
Mechanisms for updating the Heritage Register should be considered,
including direct contact with property owners and a program to prepare
Statements of Significance.
Funds have already been allotted for the Heritage Register update project through the CHC’s 2018
Business Plan.
5.0 CONCLUSION:
The update to the HRMR re-establishes the strong foundation for community heritage management
that was created with the original version in 1998 and will continue to support policy and
development planning initiatives. It also provides an even more comprehensive compendium of
Maple Ridge history with more information that has been uncovered on historic sites over the past
two decades. With this update now complete, the CHC may commence new work, which could
include an update to the Heritage Register, along with ongoing heritage education and awareness
activities.
“Original signed by Lisa Zosiak”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Lisa Zosiak, MRM, MCIP, RPP
Planner
“Original signed by Chuck Goddard” for
_______________________________________________
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 Paul Gill”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: Paul Gill, CPA, CGA
Chief Administrative Officer
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A: The Heritage Resources of Maple Ridge – Final Draft – April 2018
Appendix B: Information Boards for October 3, 2016 Open House Event
Appendix C: Presentation by Donald Luxton at October 11, 2016 Council Meeting
Appendix D: Evaluation Framework for The Heritage Resources of Maple Ridge (2018)
THE HERITAGE RESOURCES OF
MAPLE RIDGE
APRIL 2018
Link to full Heritage Resources of Maple Ridge document
APPENDIX A
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
Maple Ridge Heritage Inventory Donald Luxton & Associates
- 1 -
PROPOSED HERITAGE EVALUATION SYSTEM
UPDATED EVALUATION FRAMEWORK FOR THE 2018 MAPLE RIDGE HERITAGE REGISTER
VALUES-BASED APPROACHES
In Canada, The Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places, a document
that establishes a consistent, pan-Canadian set of conservation principles and guidelines, is
based on a values-based approach. This change represents a fundamental shift away from the
traditional emphasis on architectural typologies and aesthetics, and the materials-based
approach that was as the basis of the 1998 Maple Ridge Heritage Inventory.
Values-based heritage management has been most thoroughly formalized in Australia where
the Burra Charter (first adopted in 1979) guides administrators and practitioners. Values-based
approaches start by analyzing the values and significance attributed to cultural resources; they
then consider how those values can be protected most effectively. A wide range of values is
recognized in this approach, which could include historic, economic, architectural, aesthetic,
spiritual or rarity values. This method is seen to have a number of advantages – it requires an
awareness of all the values of the site (necessitating research), it relies on consultation and
therefore involves more of society in the conservation process, it creates a deeper
understanding of the resource, and is a means of achieving sustainability for the heritage
resource by promoting the participation and involvement of all those who care (Marta de la
Torre, 2005, Getty Institute). It reflects the move in cultural heritage conservation towards an
emphasis on cultural diversity and to broadening the scope of what is conserved, taking a more
democratic view in understanding what is significant. The UNESCO Convention on the Protection
and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions (2005) is a landmark agreement in
modern international cultural practice; it reflects a diverse and pluralist understanding of
culture, as well as its growing commercial dimension.
‘Heritage Value’ is defined by the Standards and Guidelines as the aesthetic, historic, scientific,
cultural, social or spiritual importance or significance for past, present and future generations.
The heritage value of an historic place is embodied in its character-defining materials, forms,
location, spatial configurations, uses and cultural associations or meanings.
METHODOLOGY
An updated Evaluation Framework for the Maple Ridge Heritage Register has been formulated
after a review of best practices in the cultural resource management field and also a review of
evaluation systems used worldwide. Progressive and relevant criteria have been sourced from
the various systems studied in order to strengthen the existing evaluation framework in Maple
Ridge. The original 1998 Heritage Inventory was calibrated by community to ensure each area
was represented; this intent has not changed
RECOMMENDATIONS
Although an inventory of intangible heritage could be important, particularly as a way of
recognizing aspects of First Nations heritage, this would need to be a separate list / project from
the tangible Register. The Local Government Act only makes provisions for ‘real property’ to be
included on the Register, which would make purely intangible heritage ineligible. For the
APPENDIX D
Maple Ridge Heritage Inventory Donald Luxton & Associates
- 2 -
purposes of the proposed Evaluation Framework, all categories of potential historic resources
have been grouped together as ‘place,’ as this follows the terminology of the Standards and
Guidelines and reinforces the requirement for all listings on the Register to be real property.
Based on the progressing standards of heritage management and evaluation, it is recommended
that the current evaluation framework moved to a values-based approach. Eight criteria have
been proposed. Multiple values can and will often be determined through this values-based
approach. The updated criteria have been particularly influenced by systems from West
Vancouver and the Australian states of Victoria and New South Wales.
The proposed methodology is no longer additive, but within each criterion, there is an inherent
comparison of a place against similar places within the city. Rating ‘High’ in any one criterion is
sufficient for a place to attain heritage status, as is four ‘Moderate’ ratings. Following a ‘Yes’
rating, there is a threshold for integrity that reflects best practice worldwide and ensures that
the significance of a place can still be communicated.
EXPLANATORY NOTES
Eligibility for inclusion on the Heritage Register:
Places include: buildings, structures, groups of buildings or structures, landscape features
(gardens, but not individual trees unless commemorative), cultural landscapes and engineering
works.
Excluded places include archaeological sites, individual trees unless commemorative, movable
objects and intangible heritage.
Assessing Level of Heritage Significance:
Within each criterion, there should be a comparison of the place to similar places within the City of
Maple Ridge in order to determine the relative merit of the place.
Maple Ridge Heritage Inventory Donald Luxton & Associates
- 3 -
MAPLE RIDGE HERITAGE EVALUATION FRAMEWORK
CRITERIA Level of Heritage Significance
N/A Low Moderate High
1. The place is closely and meaningfully associated with
one or more themes, events, periods of time, or cultural
traditions considered important in the history of Maple
Ridge. (Historic)
2. The place is strongly associated with the life or work of
a person, group of persons, or institution(s) of
importance in Maple Ridge history. (Historic)
3. The place is important in demonstrating aesthetic
characteristics and/or represents an important creative
achievement in design, architecture, landscape
architecture, planning, construction, materials, or
technology. (Aesthetic, Architectural, Technical)
4. The community, or a social or cultural group within
the community, is deeply attached to the place for social,
cultural, or spiritual reasons. (Social, Cultural, Spiritual)
5. The place, by virtue of its location, its symbolism, or
some other element, serves to communicate the
heritage of Maple Ridge to a broad audience. (Landmark,
Symbolism)
6. The place could yield important information that will
contribute to the understanding of Maple Ridge past.
(Scientific, Educational)
7. The place possesses uncommon, rare or endangered
aspects of Maple Ridge cultural history. (Historic, Rarity)
8. The place is important in the historic urban
development of the community or city.
(Context, Landscape, Cultural Landscape, Group Value)
Based on the above criteria, does the place merit
inclusion on the Register? (at least 1 ‘High’ or 4
‘Moderate’)
NO:
YES:
THRESHOLDS (If the place qualifies above as ‘Yes’)
Does the place retain sufficient integrity to convey
significance? If not, the place will not qualify.
YES:
FINAL EVALUATION
ELIGIBLE:
NOT ELIGIBLE:
Maple Ridge Heritage Inventory Donald Luxton & Associates
- 4 -
CRITERIA
CRITERION 1 – This criterion assesses the place’s association with broad themes, events, periods of time
and cultural traditions of local/civic history, including settlement patterns, economic growth/ production,
community development, cultural knowledge base and traditions, and government systems.
N/A The place exhibits a limited connection to one or more of the identified citywide historic
themes or subthemes.
Low The place exhibits a recognizable connection to one or more of the identified citywide
historic themes or subthemes.
Moderate The place exhibits a significant connection to one or more of the identified citywide historic
themes or subthemes.
High The place exhibits a direct connection to one or more of the identified citywide historic
themes or subthemes and is an excellent, tangible expression of one or more of the
themes/subthemes.
CRITERION 2 – This criterion assesses the place’s association with a particular person, group of people or
institution(s), including the importance of the architect, builder, landscape architect, or planner.
N/A Little or no known historic association.
Low Connected with a person, social or cultural group, or institution that is of limited importance
to the community.
Moderate Closely connected with a person, social or cultural group, or institution that is of
considerable importance to the community, or moderate importance to the city.
High Closely connected with a person, social or cultural group, or institution that is of
considerable importance to the city, province or nation.
CRITERION 3 – This criterion assesses the place’s architectural significance; its expression of style; its
design details and features; its building materials; its method of construction; and its planning context.
N/A An average example of a style, type, design or technology that remains common in Maple
Ridge.
Low A good example of a style, type, design or technology that is common in Maple Ridge or in a
community.
Moderate A very good example of a style, type, design or technology in Maple Ridge or in a
community, or a good example of a style, type or design that is notably early or rare in
Maple Ridge or in a community.
High An excellent example of a style, type, design or technology in Maple Ridge or one of few
surviving and very good examples of a style, type, design or technology in Maple Ridge.
CRITERION 4 – This criterion assesses evidence of a strong/special association between the place and a
particular community/cultural group.
N/A The place possesses limited social, cultural or spiritual value.
Low There is a weak social, cultural or spiritual connection between the place and a particular
community/cultural group.
Moderate There is a moderate social, cultural or spiritual connection between the place and a
particular community/cultural group.
High There is a strong social, cultural or spiritual connection between the place and a particular
community/cultural group.
Maple Ridge Heritage Inventory Donald Luxton & Associates
- 5 -
CRITERION 5 – This criterion assesses the visual landmark status or cultural, spiritual or symbolic value of
the place.
N/A A place of no landmark or symbolic significance.
Low A landmark in an immediate area or a place of symbolic importance to an immediate area.
Moderate A major landmark within a community or a place of symbolic importance to a community.
High A landmark of civic importance or a place of significant symbolic value to the city, province
or nation.
CRITERION 6 – This criterion assesses the physical fabric, documentary evidence, or oral history relating to
the place that could yield meaningful information about Maple Ridge’s cultural history.
N/A The place is not able communicate the history of the immediate area, community, or city.
Low The place communicates (physically or through documented/oral evidence) an aspect or
aspects of the immediate area’s history.
Moderate The place communicates (physically or through documented/oral evidence) an aspect or
aspects of history on a community scale.
High The place directly communicates (physically or through documented/oral evidence) an
aspect or aspects integral to the historic or cultural development of Maple Ridge, or is of
provincial or national importance.
CRITERION 7 – This criterion assesses how rare or uncommon the place is within Maple Ridge, or whether
it is among a small number of extant places that demonstrate an important style, phase, event, etc.
N/A There are a significant number of similar places.
Low The place demonstrates an uncommon, rare or endangered aspect of the immediate area’s
cultural history.
Moderate The place demonstrates an uncommon, rare or endangered aspect of the community’s
cultural history.
High The place demonstrates an uncommon, rare or endangered aspect of the city’s cultural
history.
CRITERION 8 – This criterion assesses the significance of the place (building, landscape, cultural
landscape) within the historic urban development of the community and/or city, including its place within
a group of similar buildings, landscapes, or cultural landscapes.
N/A A place with little evidence of a recognizable historic pattern.
Low A place that provides some evidence of an historic pattern of importance for the immediate
area.
Moderate A place that can be directly linked to the establishment of an historic pattern of community
importance.
High A place that can be directly linked to the establishment of an historic pattern of civic
importance.
BASED ON THE EIGHT CRITERIA, THE PLACE MERITS INCLUSION ON THE MAPLE RIDGE HERITAGE
REGISTER WITH AT LEAST 1 ‘HIGH’ RATING OR AT LEAST 4 ‘MODERATE’ RATINGS. (TO BE TESTED)
THRESHOLD
Integrity: This refers to the degree to which the heritage values of the place are still
evident/authentic, and can be understood and appreciated (for example, the degree to which
the original design or use of a place can still be discerned). This includes authenticity of materials,
technology and design. If considerable change to the place has occurred, the significant values
may not be readily identifiable. Changes that are reversible are not considered to affect integrity.
REPORT: Open Government Application Page 1 of 2
Date: April 17, 2018
City of Maple Ridge
TO: Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read MEETING DATE: April 17, 2018
and Members of Council FILE NO:
FROM: Chief Administrative Officer MEETING: Workshop
SUBJECT: Open Government Application
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Smart Cities Challenge is an inspirational call to Canadian communities to define their future
with the help of residents through a Smart City approach. It is a cross-country competition sponsored
by the Federal Ministry of Infrastructure and Communities. The Smart Cities approach is in alignment
with principles of the Open Government Project and current practices employed by the City of Maple
Ridge, including openness, integration, transferability and collaboration. Participating in the Smart
Cities Challenge is an excellent fit given the Challenge’s objectives and our work in the Open
Government Project. We are seeking Council’s endorsement to participate in this Challenge.
RECOMMENDATION:
That staff be directed to submit an application to the Smart Cities Challenge that includes the
following Challenge Statement: the City of Maple Ridge will provide its citizens access to the data,
information, tools and applications that they need to connect with each other and with their local
government to empower them to become more engaged in the community and in leveraging local
talent, assets and resources; and further
That the application be endorsed.
DISCUSSION:
a)Background Context:
In January 2015, Council began work on an Open Government initiative to increase citizens’
access to information; increase citizen participation, engagement and collaboration in
community issues; and to increase transparency and accountability of actions. Integral to the
process was the formation of the Citizens’ Representative Working Group (CRWG), established
in February 2015. The CRWG produced a report in October 2015 which included 58recommendations that the group identified to achieve a gold standard in open governance.
The CRWG recommendations were achieved through the establishment of an extensible web
based portal; employee service training; policies that meet legislative requirements and
define standards of practice; a communication plan to increase public awareness and access
to the portal; and a focus on internal business value.
The Open Government Portal was launched on October 17, 2017. The data, tools and
applications delivered with the Open Government Portal have been received positively by the
CRWG, community and staff.
By participating in the Smart Cities Challenge, we are proposing to take the work that the City
has done on open governance to the next level by developing a platform that allows citizens to
4.3
REPORT: Open Government Application Page 2 of 2
Date: April 17, 2018
actively engage with local government and each other on initiatives, projects and the local
economy.
b) Desired Outcome:
The desired outcome is that Council endorses the City’s application to the Smart Cities
Challenge.
c) Citizen/Customer Implications:
If the City is successful in being short listed in this Challenge, we will be required to develop a
comprehensive project plan to achieve the objectives set out in our application. This process
will include public engagement and will be a significant benefit to the community, as finalists
are awarded $250,000.00 to complete this step in the process.
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
Resources from departments across the organization will be called upon to contribute their
advice and expertise to successfully complete the project plan. This will provide further
opportunities for staff to support customer service improvements and organizational
efficiencies through the development of tools that empower citizens to get the information they need and further engage in community life.
e) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
There is no application fee required to participate in the Smart Cities Challenge. If the City of
Maple Ridge is successful in becoming a finalist, we will be awarded $250,000.00 to deliver
on the next steps in this process.
CONCLUSIONS:
If we win the Smart Cities Challenge, the City will receive $10 million dollars to realize our goal to
take our Open Government Portal to the next level. If shortlisted as a finalist, the City will receive
$250,000.00 to finalize our proposal and deliver a comprehensive project plan. If the City is not
successful in this application round, a second opportunity will be available in 2020 and the lessons
learned from this application process will assist in strengthening a second submission.
“Original signed by Christina Crabtree”_________________
Prepared by: Christina Crabtree, Chief Information Officer
“Original signed by Kelly Swift”________________________
Approved by: Kelly Swift, MBA, BGS
General Manager Parks, Recreation & Culture
“Original signed by Frank Quinn”______________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng.
General Manager Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by Paul Gill”__________________________
Concurrence: Paul Gill, CPA, CGA
Chief Administrative Officer