Mar 7, 2016 - Maple Ridge

Transcription

City of Maple Ridge
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
AGENDA
March 7, 2016
1:00 p.m.
Council Chamber
Committee of the Whole is the initial venue for review of issues. No voting
takes place on bylaws or resolutions. A decision is made to send an item to
Council for debate and vote or to send an item back to staff for more
information or clarification before proceeding to Council. The meeting is live
streamed and recorded by the City of Maple Ridge.
Note: If required, there will be a 15-minute break at 3:00 p.m.
Chair: Acting Mayor
1.
DELEGATIONS/STAFF PRESENTATIONS – (10 minutes each)
1:00 p.m.
1.1
ARMS (Alouette River Management Society) Annual Update
- Greta Borick-Cunningham, Executive Director
2.
PUBLIC WORKS AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Note:
Owners and/or Agents of Development Applications may be permitted
to speak to their applications with a time limit of 10 minutes.
Note: The following items have been numbered to correspond with the Council
Agenda:
1101 2016-006-AL, 22270 128 Avenue, Non-Farm Use Application
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that Non-Farm Use
Application 2016-006-AL for value added agriculture and 2 accessory
employee dwellings be forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission.
Committee of the Whole Agenda
March 7, 2016
Page 2 of 5
1102 2015-327-RZ, 21710 and 21728 Lougheed Highway, RS-1 to C-2
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 7196-2015 to rezone from RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential) to C-2 (Community Commercial) to permit a commercial
development comprised of a two-storey Gold’s Gym and two smaller
commercial buildings be given first reading and that the applicant provide
further information as described on Schedules C, D and E of the Development
Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999.
1103 2016-009-RZ, 23729 Dewdney Trunk Road, RS-3 to RM-1
Amending Bylaw No. 7220-2016 to rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) to permit construction of
approximately 41 townhouse units be given first reading and that the
applicant provide further information as described on Schedules C, D, and E
of the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999.
1104 2011-137-RZ, 12257 227 Street, RS-1 to R-3
Residential to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) to permit a future
subdivision of approximately 3 lots be given second reading and be forwarded
to Public Hearing.
1105 2013-117-RZ, 12182 228 Street, RS-1 to R-3
Residential) to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) to permit a future
subdivision of approximately 3 single family lots be given second reading and
be forwarded to Public Hearing.
1106 2014-003-CU, 19975, 19989 and 19997 Dunn Avenue, Temporary Use
Permit
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7064-2014 to allow temporary vehicle
inventory storage under a Temporary Use Permit be given second reading and
be forwarded to Public Hearing.
March 7, 2016
Page 3 of 5
1107 2014-054-DVP, 23627 and 23598 Dogwood Avenue
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that the Corporate Officer be
authorized to sign and seal 2014-054-DVP to waive road construction
standards on Dogwood Avenue, to reduce the road carriageway width around
the ‘parkette’ and to reduce exterior side yard setbacks for proposed lots 1
and 12.
1108 Billy Miner Pub Liquor License Amendment Application – Change to Liquor
Service Hours
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that the application by B.
Miner Hospitality Ltd. at 22355 River Road, Maple Ridge, BC for a change in
opening hours be approved and that a copy of the resolution be forwarded to
the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch.
1109 Planet Ice Breakaway Bar & Grill (Maple Ridge) Liquor License Amendment
Application – Increase in Seating Capacity
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that the application by
Planet Ice Breakaway Bar & Grill (Maple Ridge) at 23588 105 Avenue, Maple
Ridge, BC for an increase in seating capacity be approved and that a copy of
the resolution be forwarded to the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch.
1110 Witch Craft Beer Market & Bistro Liquor Primary Licence Amendment
Application – Change to Liquor Service Hours
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that the application by Witch
Craft Beer Market & Bistro at 22648 Dewdney Trunk Road, Maple Ridge, BC,
for a change in opening hours be approved and that a copy of the resolution
be forwarded to the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch.
1111 Maple Ridge Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw No. 7210-2016
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that Maple Ridge Ticket
Information Utilization Amending Bylaw No. 7210-2016 to reflect changes
resulting from the new Tree Protection and Management Bylaw be given first,
second and third readings.
1112 Speed Reader Boards Strategy
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending the creation of a Three
Strike Strategy pertaining to vehicle speeding be endorsed and that $150,000
from the Police Services Reserve be authorized to fund the Three Strike
Strategy.
March 7, 2016
Page 4 of 5
1113 Award of Contract, Recycling Trucks
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that Request for Proposal
(RFP-OP15-70) for replacement of recycling trucks be collapsed and that a
new Request for Proposal be issued for supply of up to six recycling trucks,
suitable for curbside collection, for a minimum two-year lease.
3.
FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE SERVICES (including Fire and Police)
1131
4.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND RECREATION SERVICES
1151 Downtown Security Patrols
Staff report dated March 14, 2016 recommending that enhanced security
coverage in the downtown core be approved.
1152 Joint Leisure Services Agreement – Arts & Recreation Programming
Staff report dated March 7, 2016 recommending that staff be authorized to
continue joint program delivery on the behalf of the City of Pitt Meadows
through to December 31, 2016, that staff work with the City of Pitt Meadows
to explore an approach and costs for continued involvement in the Arts &
Recreation Guide and subsidized access to Maple Ridge facilities for Pitt
Meadows families facing financial barriers.
5.
ADMINISTRATION
1171
6.
CORRESPONDENCE
1181
7.
1191
OTHER ISSUES
March 7, 2016
Page 5 of 5
8.
ADJOURNMENT
9.
COMMUNITY FORUM
COMMUNITY FORUM
The Community Forum provides the public with an opportunity to ask questions of
Council on items that are of concern to them, with the exception of Public Hearing
bylaws that have not yet reached conclusion.
Council will not tolerate any derogatory remarks directed at Council or staff
members.
Each person will be permitted 2 minutes to speak or ask questions (a second
opportunity is permitted if no one else is sitting in the chairs in front of the
podium). Questions must be directed to the Chair of the meeting and not to the
individual members of Council. The total time for this Forum is limited to 15
minutes.
If a question cannot be answered, the speaker will be advised when and how a
response will be given.
Other opportunities are available to address Council including public hearings and
delegations. The public may also make their views known to Council by writing or
via email and by attending open houses, workshops and information meetings.
Serving on an Advisory Committee is an excellent way to have a voice in the future
of this community.
For more information on these opportunities contact:
Clerk’s Department at 604-463-5221 or [email protected]
Mayor and Council at [email protected]
Checked by:________________
Date: ________________
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Her Worship Mayor Nicole Read
and Members of Council
Chief Administrative Officer
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
March 7, 2016
2016-006-AL
C of W
Non-Farm Use Application
22270 128 Avenue (Golden Ears Cheesecrafters)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This application is to construct a separate single family dwelling on the subject property referred to
above. The subject property is within the Agricultural Land Reserve and has been part of a dairy
farm for several years. In 2010, the property owners commenced a value added operation, (cheese
making and retailing). A compact mixed use structure has existed on the property since 2011.
Currently, the mix of uses includes two dwelling units on the second storey, a cheese processing and
storage facility, and retail space, which includes a commercial kitchen. The property is part of a
family dairy farm. The retail and processing facilities were permitted under ALC policies 1 and 2,
which conditionally designates farm product processing and on-site retail as farm uses.
This application includes a proposal for a detached dwelling, which will be considered the principal
dwelling unit on the subject property, should the application be successful. The existing two dwelling
units will then be considered employee residential uses, (necessitating a site specific zoning bylaw
text amendment). The Zoning Bylaw implications will be discussed further in this report.
In accordance with Council Resolution (R/2014-397), Council has directed that all requests for
accessory employee residential uses first be processed as a non-farm use application. This
application also seeks Commission review and approval for the existing value added activities on the
subject property. Based on the information within this report, the recommendation is for Council to
forward this application to the Agricultural Land Commission.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Non-Farm Use Application 2016-006-AL for value added agriculture, and 2 accessory employee
dwellings, be forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission, in accordance with Council direction as
outlined in the staff report dated March 7, 2016, and titled “Non-farm Use Report, 22270 128th
Avenue.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context
Applicant:
Owner:
Kerry Davison
Barbara Davison & Kerry Davison
Legal Description:
OCP :
Existing:
Proposed:
Lot: 5, D.L.: 400, Plan: 69867
Agricultural
Agricultural
1101
Zoning:
Existing:
Proposed:
Surrounding Uses
North:
South:
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
East:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Existing Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Vacant
Agricultural
8 properties, 7 Urban Residential, 1 Rural Residential
7 properties zoned RS-1b (One Family Urban
Residential), 1 property zoned RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential)
7 properties designated Urban Residential, 1 property
split designated Agricultural and Urban Residential
Vacant
RS-3 One Family Rural Residential
Agricultural
Farm Use
RS-3 One Family Rural Residential
Agricultural
Farm use
Farm use
b) Project Description:
This proposal is to construct a detached house on a 4.86 hectare (12.0 acre) property that is within
the Agricultural Land Reserve. If this application is successful, the existing 2 dwelling units within
the existing building will be considered accessory employee residential uses.
The general location for the principal dwelling is attached as Appendix C.
The current application is part of a value added operation (cheese making and retail) that has been
in place for a few years. The purpose of this request is to meet the housing needs of one of the farm
operators who has since married and started a family. There are two dwelling units currently on the
subject property within the existing mixed use building. One of these units is considered to be an
accessory employee residence, while the other is considered as a principal dwelling unit. However,
both of these units are small (80 square metres each) and no longer meet the needs of a growing
family. If this application is successful, both of these existing dwelling units will be retained and
considered as accessory farm help units. The diverse uses in this structure are identified through a
covenant and through a previous development variance permit that was approved for the mixed use
building.
c) Planning Analysis:
ALC Policy #9 provides an interpretation of Agricultural Land Commission Act for accessory farm help
residential, as pasted below:
Unless permitted by this Act, the regulations or the terms imposed in an order of the
commission,
-2-
(a) a local government, or an authority, a board or another agency established by it or a
person or an agency that enters into an agreement under the Local Services Act may
not
(ii) approve more than one residence on a parcel of land unless the additional
residences are necessary for farm use.
The Agricultural Land Commission gives considerable autonomy to local governments in determining
whether there is sufficient agricultural activity to justify the need for an additional residential use.
However, the Commission does stipulate that the need must be legitimate. One criteria is farm
status through BC Assessment Authority. However, in many instances, especially for leased
properties, having farm status does not necessarily justify having an extra dwelling. Commission
Policy #9 states that if a local government has any question with regards to need, a non-farm use
application is required.
There are 2 Agricultural Land Commission policies for value added agriculture that are pertinent to
this application. Commission Policy #1 interprets the Agricultural Land Commission Act for farm
product processing, stating the following:
The storage, packing, product preparation and processing of farm products are designated
by the Regulation as farm uses, and as such, may not be prohibited by a local government
bylaw, except a farm bylaw approved by the Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries
under Section 917 of the Local Government Act. This permitted farm activity is in addition to
general farm uses permitted under the Act. The Regulation permits farm product processing
and related activities on a farm in the ALR provided at least 50 % of the farm product is
produced (i.e. grown or raised) on the farm on which the processing or related activity takes
place. The farm may be comprised of one or several parcels of land owned or operated by a
farmer as a farm business.
Commission Policy #2 interprets the Agricultural Land Commission Act for farm product retail with
the following:
Farm retail sales are designated by the Regulation as a farm use, and as such, may not be
prohibited by a local government bylaw, except a farm bylaw approved by the Minister of
Agriculture, Food and Fisheries under Section 917 of the Local Government Act. This
permitted farm activity is in addition to general farm uses permitted under the Act. The
Regulation permits, as a farm use, farm retail sales on a farm in the ALR. If all products
originate or are produced on the farm on which the sales are taking place there is no
limitation for the retail sales area. If farm or non-farm products offered for sale originate
elsewhere, there is a retail sales area limitation or threshold. In this case, where products
not originating from the farm are also sold, at least 50% of the retail sales area must be
used for the sale of farm product produced on that farm and the total retail sales area for all
products, both farm and off-farm in origin, must not exceed 300 square meters. The farm
may be comprised of one or several parcels of land owned or operated by a farmer as a farm
business.The 50% area limitation is based on the area devoted to the retail sale of farm
products produced on that farm. Wholesale sale of farm product is considered to be a farm
activity within the meaning of the definition of ‘farm use’ in the Act and thus is not restricted
by the Regulation.
It should be noted that the applicant has developed this property in accordance with municipal
regulations and has followed the appropriate process for required permits. However, although not
overtly prohibited in the Commission policy for retail uses, the existing commercial kitchen that is
-3-
part of the facility has been called into question. For this reason, this application includes a request
that this portion of the operation be reviewed and approved by the Commission
Current Application.
The agricultural operations on the property include hedging cedars as well as forage for the family
dairy farm. The value added portion of the operation has a high profile within the community and is
generally reviewed favorably. The operation appears to justify providing enough full-time
employment to justify the accessory farm help dwellings. It is also understood that the commercial
kitchen is used for product processing as part of the retail portion of the business. Based on these
factors, this application is found to be supportable.
Zoning Bylaw:
If this application is successful, a principal dwelling will be constructed in accordance with the
regulations of the RS-3 Zone. The two existing dwelling units will then be considered as accessory
employee residential. A text amendment to the Zoning Bylaw will be required to permit a second
dwelling for this purpose, as currently the bylaw sets limits of 1 employee dwelling use per property.
For this purpose, a site specific text amendment is supportable.
If the Commission approves the commercial kitchen, and recognizes the use as consistent with the
farm operation, the use will be able to continue without a zoning bylaw amendment. If the use is
approved as not consistent with farm use, a site specific text amendment may also be required for
this food service use.
In 2010, a development variance permit (VP/096/10) was approved in order to facilitate the mixed
use building. The approved variances were:
 To waive the required 15 metre separation between principal dwelling unit and agricultural
building;
 To waive the required 3 metre separation between principal dwelling unit and accessory
employee residential unit;
 To vary the height limit for an employee residential unit from 7.5 metres to 10.5 metres; and
 To vary the height limit for an agricultural building from 9.5 metres to 10.5 metres.
In order for this project to proceed, the applicant is required to provide a restrictive covenant noting
that three of the proposed uses – processing, retail, and accessory employee residential – can only
take place on the property while it is being actively farmed as determined by BC Assessment
Authority information. Should the farm operation cease to exist, the existing structure would either
have to be demolished or repurposed in compliance with the regulations of the Zoning Bylaw and the
Agricultural Land Commission. Securities will be required to cover the cost of demolition should the
farm use discontinue.
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
The subject property is within the floodplain and therefore subject to a Natural Features
Development Permit. The site is served with water, and presumably this service could be extended
to a new residential structure. The existing facility is served by sewer, but the new residence will
need to be served by septic disposal. The Engineering Department confirms that septic disposal and
related approvals would be required.
-4-
e) Intergovernmental Issues:
Agricultural Land Commission. The subject property is under the jurisdiction of the Agricultural Land
Commission, and Commission Policy #9 requires sufficient demonstration of need before an
employee dwelling could be permitted for farm purposes. This application also seeks Commission
review of the commercial kitchen component of the facility.
Ministry of Agriculture. At the April 12, 2011 Council meeting, Council considered the findings of the
Maple Ridge Agricultural Advisory Committee in their review of the Ministry of Agriculture document,
titled “Bylaw Standard for Residential Uses in the Agricultural Land Reserve”. For Council’s
consideration, the Agricultural Advisory Committee passed the following resolution on March 24,
2011:
That within the Agricultural Land Reserve in the District of Maple Ridge, the following limits
to residential development be considered:
 A maximum house size of 7,000 square feet,
 A maximum 0.2 hectare residential footprint,
 A maximum footprint depth of 60 metres from the fronting road to the rear of the
footprint.
Council indicated their support for the Agricultural Advisory Committee findings by authorizing the
Committee’s report to be circulated to the Ministry of Agriculture as feedback to the Bylaw Standard
document. The Council resolution is as follows:
That report titled “Ministry of Agriculture Bylaw Standard for Residential Uses in the Agricultural
Land Reserve”, dated April 4, 2011 be forwarded to the Ministry of Agriculture for information.
The Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw, currently under review, will be incorporating these standards into the
regulations for land that is within the Agricultural Land Reserve. It should be noted, however, that at
present, the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw does not prevent extremely large houses or excessive front
yard setbacks from being constructed within the Agricultural Land Reserve. These regulations are
within the jurisdiction of the local government to create.
The applicant has indicated their siting preference which is attached as Schedule C. If this
application is forwarded to the Commission, the Commission will have the option of setting
conditional approvals for the placement and size of the new structure. It should be noted that the
compact design of the existing structure maximizes the available land base for farming.
f)
Alternatives:
The recommendation is to forward this application to the Commission for their review. If this
application for accessory employee residential is not successful, the applicant could alternatively
choose to decommission one of the existing two units, thereby retaining one existing dwelling unit for
accessory employee residential use, as this use was previously permitted. In this case, the applicant
would then have the ability to construct a principal dwelling with secondary suite as a detached
structure.
If the Commission denies the commercial kitchen, the applicant may be faced with having to
decommission the space. As it stands, the retail use and the processing portion of the facility
comply with Commission regulations for farm products.
-5-
CONCLUSION:
This application proposes to construct a principal dwelling unit and retain the existing dwelling units
for accessory farm help. The application is being made In accordance with Council resolution
R/2014-397, which directs that requests for accessory farm help dwellings first be processed as a
non-farm use application.
In addition, this application seeks Agricultural Land Commission affirmation of the existing facility,
and most particularly for its commercial kitchen. It is generally felt that this facility is an asset to the
community and is supportable. The recommendation therefore is to forward the application to the
Agricultural Land Commission for their review.
“Original signed by Diana Hall”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by:
Diana Hall MA, MCIP, RPP
Planner 2
“Original signed by Christine Carter”
_____________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
“Original signed by David Pollock”
for
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
“Original signed by E.C. Swabey”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C. Swabey
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – Ortho Photo
Appendix C – Applicant’s Preferred Siting for New Residential Structure
-6-
APPENDIX A
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,500
Legend
22270 128 AVENUE
Stream
Ditch Centreline
Edge of River
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Edge of Marsh
Indefinite Creek
River Centreline
Lake or Reservoir
Marsh
River
Major Rivers & Lakes
FILE: 2016-006-AL
DATE: Jan 22, 2016
BY: PC
APPENDIX B
SUBJECT PROPERTY
Scale: 1:2,500
City of Pitt
Meadows
District of Mission
´
Aerial Imagery from the Spring of 2011
^
22270 128 AVENUE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
District of
Langley
FRASER
R.
FILE: 2016-006-AL
DATE: Jan 22, 2016
BY: PC
APPENDIX C
Preferred locaƟon
of detached
dwelling
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
March 7, 2016
2015-327-RZ
C of W
First Reading
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7196-2015
21710 and 21728 Lougheed Highway
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject properties, located at 21710 and 21728
Lougheed Highway, from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to C-2 (Community Commercial) to
permit a commercial development comprised of a two-storey Gold’s Gym, as well as two smaller
commercial buildings with the potential for a drive-through restaurant and second floor apartment
units. This development proposal is in compliance with the Official Community Plan (OCP). To
proceed further with this application additional information is required as outlined below. Pursuant
to Council’s resolution, this application is not subject to the Community Amenity Contribution
Program. If the second storey apartments proposed are not rental units secured through a Housing
Agreement, a Community Amenity Contribution per unit charge would apply as they are located
outside of the Town Centre.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7196-2015 be given first reading; and
That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules C, D, and E of the
Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879–1999.
DISCUSSION:
a)
Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Joseph Park Architecture
Norman and Maureen Owen
Legal Description:
Lots 1 and 2, District Lot 247, Group 1, New Westminster
District Plan 6664
OCP:
Existing:
Commercial
Existing:
Proposed:
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
C-2 (Community Commercial)
Zoning:
1102
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing requirement:
Hotel
CS-1 (Service Commercial)
Commercial
Single Family Residential, Two Family Residential
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential), RT-1 (Two Family
Residential)
Urban Residential
Church
P-4 (Place of Worship Institutional)
Institutional
Mobile Home Park
CS-3 (Recreation Commercial)
Commercial and Urban Residential
Single Family Residential
Commercial
0.81 ha (2 acres)
Lougheed Highway
Urban Standard
b) Site Characteristics:
A single family home is currently located on each of the subject properties, located at 21710 and
21728 Lougheed Highway (see Appendix A and B). The properties are treed around the perimeter
and in the southern third of the properties. Both properties are flat, with narrow frontages on
Lougheed Highway and significant lot depths of approximately 129 metres (425 ft).
c) Project Description:
The applicant proposes to rezone the subject properties to permit a commercial development. The
development proposal is comprised of three buildings on the site, the largest building is anticipated
to be Gold’s Gym. Two additional smaller commercial buildings are also proposed, which may
contain second floor apartment units and a drive-through restaurant use. Access in and out of the
development will be from Lougheed Highway (see Appendix D).
At this time, the current application has been assessed to determine its compliance with the OCP
and provide a land use assessment only. Detailed review and comments will need to be made once
full application packages have been received. A more detailed analysis and a further report will be
required prior to second reading. Such assessment may impact proposed lot boundaries and yields,
OCP designations and Bylaw particulars, and may require application for further development
permits.
d)
Planning Analysis:
Official Community Plan:
The subject properties are designated Commercial in the OCP and fall within the General
Commercial category, due to their location along Lougheed Highway within the Urban Area Boundary
and outside of the Town Centre. The objective of the General Commercial category as stated in the
OCP is to “respond to emerging market trends and shopping preferences and to permit greater
-2-
flexibility in the range of commercial uses”. The C-2 (Community Commercial) zone aligns with the
General Commercial category.
On September 30, 2014 Council endorsed the Housing Action Plan. This plan contains a number of
action items to protect existing and create new rental housing stock in the City. One key component
is to create new rental units above commercial developments. Currently, this practice is being
negotiated on an individual basis during the development process.
This project is of a suitable scale and a desirable location to incorporate apartments. Provision of
apartments in this part of the community would help to achieve a better mix of housing types, can
utilize available school capacity, and increase density on along a major corridor without detracting
from the expected commercial potential. Apartments being proposed on the site would not only
assist in implementing the future Housing Action Plan, but would also achieve the following OCP
policies:
Policy 3-31 Maple Ridge supports the provision of rental accommodation and encourages the
construction of rental units that vary in size and number of bedrooms. Maple Ridge may
also limit the demolition or strata conversion of existing rental units, unless District-wide
vacancy rates are within a healthy range as defined by the Canada Mortgage and
Housing Corporation.
Policy 3-32 Maple Ridge supports the provision of affordable, rental and special needs housing
throughout the District. Where appropriate, the provision of affordable, rental, and
special needs housing will be a component of area plans.
Policy 3-33 Maple Ridge will encourage housing that incorporates “age-in-place” concepts and
seniors housing designed to accommodate special needs.
To this end, staff has sought the inclusion of rental units on the second floor of proposed Building B
in the current proposal. This would align with other developments granted third reading by Council
where all or a portion of the proposed units would be secured though a Housing Agreement for rental
and adaptive units under SAFER housing Standards. The applicant has expressed an interest in
providing apartment units in Building B, with the potential to provide up to three storeys above
ground floor commercial with underground parking. Such a proposal would require the approval of a
building height variance above 7.5 metres (25 ft) and this would possibly impact neighbouring single
family residential lots to the south. If this option is developed further, the commitment on the
division of rental and market units would need to be negotiated with the developer, subject to the
outcome of first reading and further feasibility studies.
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the subject properties from RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential) to C-2 (Community Commercial) to permit a commercial development (see Appendix C).
Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zone will require a Development Variance
Permit application. The applicant has indicated that they are seeking a building height of
approximately 13 metres for the Gold’s Gym building, to reflect the business needs and corporate
building design. The applicant has sited this over-height building along the eastern property line, to
avoid interface issues with the single family lots to the south.
-3-
The zoning requirements for the C-2 (Community Commercial) zone allow a two storey height building
provided that the second storey does not exceed 50% of the ground floor area. In recent commercial
projects on 203 Street, 240 Street and 112 Avenue, and Dogwood Avenue, the Planning Department
has supported a site specific variance to permit a full second storey provided that the developer
creates rental housing units above the commercial units and entered into a Housing Agreement,
protecting the apartments as rental units in perpetuity.
A draft Zoning Bylaw is in process, and one of the proposed zoning changes is to permit a full second
storey in the C-2 (Community Commercial) zone. Should this application be approved prior to the
new Zoning Bylaw, a variance will be required to permit a second floor that exceeds 50% of the
ground floor for the proposed two larger buildings on the site. In the event that the draft Zoning
Bylaw is adopted with the proposed changes to the C-2 (Community Commercial) zone in advance of
this rezoning application, a variance permit for the second storey would not be required.
Staff have had preliminary discussions with the applicant on the provision of rental housing in
proposed Building B; however, at this stage in the rezoning process, the developer is hesistant to
conduct extensive feasibility studies prior to first reading. Additionally, in the absence of a Council
policy regarding the provision of rental housing through re-development, discussions regarding this
type of use have been based on a case-by-case basis through discussions with developers. Further
discussions during the detailed design stage between staff and the applicant will finalize the
opportunity for rental housing provision with this project, as well as the supportable variances and
zone amendments needed to realize the development.
Development Permits:
Pursuant to Section 8.5 of the OCP, a Commercial Development Permit application is required to
address the current proposal’s compatibility with adjacent development, and to enhance the unique
character of the community in accordance with the following key development permit guidelines:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Avoid conflicts with adjacent uses through sound attenuation, appropriate lighting,
landscaping, traffic calming and the transition of building massing to fit with adjacent
development;
Encourage a pedestrian scale through providing outdoor amenities, minimizing the visual
impact of parking areas, creating landmarks and visual interest along street fronts;
Promote sustainable development with multimodal transportation circulation, and low
impact building design;
Respect the need for private areas in mixed use development and adjacent residential
areas; and
The form and treatment of new buildings should reflect the desired character and pattern of
development in the area by incorporating appropriate architectural styles, features,
materials, proportions and building articulation.
Important design considerations for this development include the interface between the proposed
commercial building and adjacent single family homes, prioritizing the pedestrian in building siting
and parking lot considerations, and using high quality building materials and design elements to
create an attractive building façade.
-4-
Advisory Design Panel:
A Commercial Development Permit is required and must be reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel
prior to second reading.
Development Information Meeting:
A Development Information Meeting is not required for this application, as an OCP amendment is not
required, and the accessory apartment dwelling unit count is not anticipated to exceed 25 dwelling
units. Should the proposed dwelling unit count exceed 25 when the site design is finalized after first
reading, then a Development Information Meeting will be required prior to second reading.
e) Interdepartmental Implications:
In order to advance the current application, after first reading, comments and input, will be sought
from the various internal departments and external agencies listed below:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Engineering Department;
Operations Department;
Licenses, Permits, and Bylaws;
Fire Department; and
Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MoTI).
The above list is intended to be indicative only and it may become necessary, as the application
progresses, to liaise with agencies and departments not listed above. This application has not been
forwarded to the Engineering Department for comments at this time; therefore, an evaluation of
servicing requirements has not been undertaken. This evaluation will take place between first and
second reading.
f)
Traffic Impact:
As the subject properties are fronting Lougheed Highway, and under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of
Transportation and Infrastructure, review and approval of the proposed development is a
requirement of the rezoning application. A referral will be sent to the Ministry of Transportation and
Infrastructure following first reading and any conditions or servicing design requirements must be
considered and accommodated prior to final approval.
g) Development Applications:
In order for this application to proceed the following information must be provided, as required by
Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879–1999 as amended:
1. A complete Rezoning Application (Schedule C);
2. A Commercial Development Permit (Schedule D); and
3. A Development Variance Permit (Schedule E).
The above list is intended to be indicative only, other applications may be necessary as the
assessment of the proposal progresses. Also, information is required to establish a suitable
stormwater management strategy, potential for tree retention, provision of public art, rental/adaptive
housing and access meeting for MoTI requirements.
-5-
h) Alternatives:
Council could elect not to support this application in its current form and insist that rental
apartments be provided above the ground floor commercial units. This position would align with
recently completed commercial developments on 203 Street, 240 Street and 112 Avenue, and
Dogwood Avenue, as well as Town Centre Area projects. It is noted that preliminary discussions with
the applicant have included the potential to build up to three storeys of apartments above proposed
building B, with a mix of rental and market units. The scope of the residential component in a
commercial development outside of the Town Centre would be significantly larger than similar
precedents in the community. The proposed C-2 (Community Commercial) zone currently permits a
1.5 storey building (maximum height of 7.5 m/25 ft), and a variance for additional storeys would
require a variance permit.
CONCLUSION:
The subject application is for a three building service commercial development, with Gold’s Gym as
the anchor tenant. There is potential for rental housing to be integrated into this proposal. The
development proposal is in compliance with the OCP, therefore, it is recommended that Council
grant first reading subject to additional information being provided and assessed prior to second
reading.
“Original signed by Amelia Bowden”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by:
Amelia Bowden
Planning Technician
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
for
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng
_______________________________________________
Concurrence:
E. C. Swabey
Appendix B – Ortho Map
Appendix C – Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7196-2015
Appendix D – Preliminary Site Plan
-6-
APPENDIX A
216
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,500
Legend
Stream
21710/21728 Lougheed Hwy
2011 Image
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Indefinite Creek
River Centreline
2015-327-RZ
DATE: Oct 27, 2015
BY: JV
APPENDIX B
216
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,500
Legend
Stream
21710/21728 Lougheed Hwy
2011 Image
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Ditch Centreline
Indefinite Creek
River
2015-327-RZ
DATE: Oct 27, 2015
BY: JV
APPENDIX C
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7196-2015
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended
______________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as
amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
1.
This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7196-2015."
2.
Those parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 1 District Lot 247 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 6664
Lot 2 District Lot 247 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 6664
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1653 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to C-2 (Community Commercial).
3.
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the
day of
READ a second time the
, 20
day of
PUBLIC HEARING held the
day of
READ a third time the
day of
, 20
, 20
, 20
APPROVED by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure this day of
ADOPTED, the
day of
_____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
, 20
, 20
____________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
21795
218 ST.
121
00
21795
123
124
81
82
Bylaw No.
Map No.
From:
7196-2015
1653
To:
C-2 (Community Commercial)
88
89
5
BCP4891
15
16
11772
11748
11747
11738
11737
11728
11721
11699
11691
11720
CARR ST.
11709
P 13161
4
3
2
1
7
11708
6
11702
11690
5
4
11662
3
11683
BCP
43175
5
11754
11757
11717
6
11762
11767
P 17205
17
18
BCP49047
7
P 13161
*PP067
P 13161
C
P 13839
14
21848
21842
21830
P 12386
P 12386
13
21821
80
21808
242
P 15184
C
B
10
12
P 17205
21778
21768
21756
90
9
11
11670
P 32510
74
P 13876
241
11696
87
P 33311
P 38855
21695
240
11706
21769
21759
21747
NWS 1848
21730
21716
21744
83
84
P 32510
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
21677
185
11712
243
244
P 35974
21759
2
21733
21715/19
6
186
11726
11713
11707
85
21745
5
W1/2 E1/2
D
D
79
21731
LMP 12706
P 13429
75
21713
21721
11666
11652/54
71
11738
117 AVE.
EP 77956
11653
B
LMS 3673
P 38052
11663
1
76
11729
187
279
P 32510
77
78
EP 77957
P 11112
11680
LMP 12706
A
73
70
P 32510
21699
21649
163 164
P 36904
21692
162
RP 30988
P 77955
P 13429
3
117 AVE.
P 32510
P 30039
124
11688
11677
21623
117 AVE.
EP 36421
21674
11685
11722
161
11741
8
11750
P 35974
277
278
21646
11691
158
P 32876
159
160
21637
11703
P 32876
21640
11723
11742
188
11753
11714/16
11718/20
21626
11731
11762
276
P 6664
B
P 8409
7
21805
P 6664
A
189
21801
2
11748
P 5046
Rem 3
21800
21746
21768
21728
3
218 ST.
P 8950
P 11112
N 50' of 3
21710
21698
"B"
Rem
2
21783
11754
C
1
125 126
LOUGHEED HW
275
*PP066
*PP075
21771
P 87322
*
(P 84920)
1
21668
Rem
B
P 7433
LP 59245
21818
8
21
21814
B
21808
1
LOUGHEED HWY.
21650
21626
2
P 76203
148
11829
122
RP 84920
RP 76202
151
149
21803
11841
21810
150
11851
120
237
EP 10251
P 12044
2
11863
P 44518
21796
21784
21774
21764
21750
21742
21736
LP 77304
P 35428
21621
21732
P 61812
P 1007
RP 74552
192
319
21707
"A"
229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236
P 36099
21787
Rem
6
LMP 22030
118
119
21773
EP 75514
21720
226 227 228
225 238
DOVER RD.
11873
P 13839
2
BCP
BCP
43175 52239
21841
213
21807
21785
210
21806
211
21771
21741
21731
21723
21711
21701
214
21735
21755
216 ST.
P 56604
MP 34333
224
21710
21656
21662
324
11858
217 216
HOWISON AVE.
EP 36356
P 64655
21685
P 79206
220 219 218
21694
2
221
21674
21684
11868
222
21667
11875
11861
223
21655
21665
11882
21675
P 79206
11885
11881
SCALE 1:2,500
APPENDIX D
[email protected]
Direct 604-771-5695
Telephone 604-917-0154
Facsimilie 604-565-0234
www.jpai.ca
#207-508 Clarke Road
Coquitlam BC Canada V3J 3X2
THIS DRAWING MUST NOT BE SCALED. THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY
ALL DIMENSIONS AND LEVELS PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF WORK. ALL ERRORS
AND OMISSIONS SHALL BE REPORTED IMMEDIATELY TO THE ARCHITECT. COPYRIGHT
RESERVED. THIS PLAN AND DESIGN ARE AT ALL TIMES REMAIN THE EXCLUSIVE
PROPERTY OF JOSEPH PARK ARCHITECTURE AND MAY NOT BE USED OR
REPRODUCED WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT.
ISSUED
Date
Issued for
OCT 09, 2015
SCHEME 1- ISSUED FOR CLIENT'S REVIEW
OCT 25, 2015
ISSUED FOR RZ APPLICATION-1ST READING ONLY
DEC 20, 2015
DEC 30, 2015
JAN 11, 2016
JAN 19, 2016
JAN 25, 2016
ISSUED FOR RZ APPLICATION-1ST READING ONLY
REVISIONS
Date Remarks
#
OCT 19, 2015
REVISED AS PER CLIENT'S COMMENTS
OCT 25, 2015
REVISED AS PER CLIENT'S COMMENTS
CONSULTANT
PROJECT TITLE
OCT 23,2012
Gold's Gym Commercial Development
21710, 21728 Lougheed Hwy.
Drawn:
YY
Designed:
Checked:
JP
Checked:
10 --
Project Number
DISCLAIMER:
THIS DRAWING IS PREPARED BY JOSEPH PARK ARCHITECTURE FOR THE ACCOUNT OF
GG PO CO PROPERTIES LTD. PARTNERSHIP, THE CLIENT. ANY USE WHICH A THIRD
PARTY MAKES OF THIS DRAWING, OR ANY RELIANCE ON OR DECISIONS TO BE MADE
ON IT, ARE RESPONSIBILITY OF SUCH THIRD PARTIES. JOSEPH PARK ARCHITECTURE
ACCEPTS NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR DAMAGES, IF ANY SUFFERED BY ANY THIRD PARTY
AS A RESULT OF DECISIONS MADE OR ACTIONS BASED ON THIS DRAWINGS. THIS
DRAWING IS ISSUED BY JOSEPH PARK ARCHITECTURE FOR BUILDING PERMIT
APPLICATION ONLY. THIS IS NOT ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION. FOR ANY USE BY
CONTRACTORS INCLUDING GG PO CO PROPERTIES LTD. PARTNERSHIP, OR ANY
RELIANCE ON OR DECISIONS TO BE MADE ON IT FOR CONSTRUCTION, ARE
RESPONSIBILITY OF SUCH PARTIES. JOSEPH PARK ARCHITECTURE ACCEPTS NO
RESPONSIBILITY FOR DAMAGES, IF ANY SUFFERED BY ANY PARTY AS A RESULT OF
DECISIONS MADE OR ACTIONS BASED ON THIS DRAWINGS FOR CONSTRUCTION.
Preliminary Site Plan
-
A1
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
March 7, 2016
2016-009-RZ
C of W
First Reading
23729 Dewdney Trunk Road
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject property from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) to permit future construction of approximately 41
townhouse units. This application is in compliance with the Official Community Plan (OCP). To
proceed further with this application additional information is required as outlined below. Pursuant
to Council resolution, this application is subject to the Community Amenity Contribution Program.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7220-2016 be given first reading; and
That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedules C, D, and E of the
Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879–1999.
DISCUSSION:
a)
Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Focus Architecture Inc.
Chang Long Jay and Mee Yuen Jay
Legal Description:
Parcel “2” (J43410E) of Parcel “A” (Explanatory Plan 1734) of
the South East Quarter Section 21 Township 12 Except Firstly:
Parcel “One” (Explanatory Plan 17000); Secondly: Part
Subdivided by Plan LMP36965; New Westminster District
OCP:
Existing:
Urban Residential
Existing:
Proposed:
RM-1 (Townhouse Residential)
Zoning:
1103
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Site Area:
Access:
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
Urban Residential
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential),
CD-1-93 (Amenity Residential District)
Urban Residential
Urban Residential
Single Family Residential, Multi-Family Residential
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), RM-1 (Townhouse
Residential)
Urban Residential
Multi-Family Residential
1.0 ha (2.5 acres)
237 Street
Urban Standard
b) Site Characteristics:
The subject property is located at the corner of 237 Street and Dewdney Trunk Road. An existing
home and accessory buildings are currently located on the property. The subject property is flat with
no watercourses. Existing stands of trees are located in the eastern and southern portions of the
property.
c) Project Description:
The applicant proposes to rezone the subject property from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to
RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) to permit approximately 41 townhouse units. The entrance to the
development is via 237 Street; however, dedication of a rear lane will be achieved to complete 120A
Lane between 237 Street and 238 Street in the future when the remaining lots in this block are redeveloped. All of the units are proposed to have double car garages and three bedrooms. The
proposed unit size ranges from 126 m2 to 139 m2 (1,355 ft2 – 1,492 ft2).
At this time the current application has been assessed to determine its compliance with the Official
Community Plan (OCP) and provide a land use assessment only. Detailed review and comments will
need to be made once full application packages have been received. A more detailed analysis and a
further report will be required prior to second reading. Such assessment may impact proposed lot
boundaries and yields, OCP designations and Bylaw particulars, and may require application for
further development permits.
-2-
d)
Planning Analysis:
The subject property is located within the Urban Area Boundary and is designated Urban Residential
in the OCP. The subject property fronts Dewdney Trunk Road, which is identified as a Major Corridor
in Figure 4, Appendix E of the OCP. There are a range of development options that comply with
Major Corridor Residential Infill policies subject to neighbourhood compatibility and context. Major
Corridor residential infill options are described in Policy 3-20, as follows:
3 - 20
Major Corridor Residential Infill developments must be designed to be compatible with
the surrounding neighbourhood and will be evaluated against the following criteria:
a)
building forms such as single detached dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes,
townhouses, apartments, and small lot intensive residential developments subject
to Policy 3-21;
b)
a maximum height of two and one-half storeys with an emphasis on ground oriented
units for all developments except for apartments;
c)
a maximum height of four storeys for apartments; and
d)
adherence to Development Permit Guidelines for multi-family and intensive
residential developments as outlined in Chapter 8 of the Official Community Plan.
Compatibility criteria for residential infill are further detailed in Policy 3-21 which states:
3 - 21
All Neighbourhood and Major Corridor Residential infill developments will respect and
reinforce the physical patterns and characteristics of established neighbourhoods, with
particular attention to:
a)
the ability of the existing infrastructure to support the new development;
b)
the compatibility of the site design, setbacks, and lot configuration with the existing
pattern of development in the area;
c)
the compatibility between building massing and the type of dwelling units in the
proposed development and the surrounding residential properties;…
The proposed RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) zone is in compliance with the Urban Residential land
use designation. Neighbourhood compatibility considerations include similar height and massing to
existing single family homes. Construction of 120A Lane along the north property line will ensure an
additional setback distance between then existing single family homes and the new proposed
townhouses.
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the subject property, located at 23729 Dewdney Trunk
Road, from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) to permit
approximately 41 townhouse units. The minimum lot size for the current RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) zone is 8,000 m2, and the minimum lot size for the proposed RM-1 (Townhouse
Residential) zone is 557 m2. Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zone will require
a Development Variance Permit application. Based on the preliminary site plan, an exterior side yard
setback reduction will be sought by the applicant for the Dewdney Trunk Road frontage.
-3-
Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the OCP, a Multi-Family Development Permit application is required to
ensure the current proposal enhances existing neighbourhoods with compatible housing styles that
meet diverse needs, and minimize potential conflicts with neighbouring land uses.
Advisory Design Panel:
A Multi-Family Development Permit is required and must be reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel
prior to second reading.
A Development Information Meeting is required for this application, as more than 25 units are
proposed. Prior to second reading the applicant is required to host a Development Information
Meeting in accordance with Council Policy 6.20.
In order to advance the current application, after first reading, comments and input, will be sought
from the various internal departments and external agencies listed below:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
Engineering Department;
Operations Department;
Fire Department;
Building Department;
Parks Department;
School District; and
Canada Post.
The above list is intended to be indicative only and it may become necessary, as the application
progresses, to liaise with agencies and departments not listed above. This application has not been
forwarded to the Engineering Department for comments at this time; therefore, an evaluation of
servicing requirements has not been undertaken. This evaluation will take place between first and
second reading.
f)
Early and Ongoing Consultation:
In respect of Section 475 of the Local Government Act for consultation during an OCP amendment, it
is recommended that no additional consultation is required beyond the early posting of the proposed
OCP amendments on the City’s website, together with an invitation to the public to comment.
g) Development Applications:
In order for this application to proceed the following information must be provided, as required by
Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879–1999 as amended:
1. A complete Rezoning Application (Schedule C);
2. A Multi-Family Residential Development Permit Application (Schedule D);
3. A Development Variance Permit (Schedule E);
-4-
The above list is intended to be indicative only, other applications may be necessary as the
assessment of the proposal progresses.
CONCLUSION:
The subject application is to permit approximately 41 townhouse units and the provision of a 120A
Lane connection in the RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) zone. The development proposal is in
compliance with the OCP, therefore, it is recommended that Council grant first reading subject to
additional information being provided and assessed prior to second reading.
_______________________________________________
Prepared by:
Amelia Bowden
Planning Technician
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
for
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng
_______________________________________________
Concurrence:
E.C. Swabey
Appendix D – Proposed Site Plan
-5-
APPENDIX A
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,000
23729 DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
Legend
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Stream
Ditch Centreline
Indefinite Creek
FILE: 2016-009-RZ
DATE: Jan 22, 2016
BY: PC
APPENDIX B
SUBJECT PROPERTY
Scale: 1:2,000
City of Pitt
Meadows
District of Mission
´
^
23729 DEWDNEY TRUNK ROAD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
District of
Langley
FRASER
R.
FILE: 2016-009-RZ
DATE: Jan 22, 2016
BY: PC
APPENDIX C
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7220-2016
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;
1.
2.
That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Parcel “2” of Parcel “A” (Explanatory Plan 1734) of the South East Quarter
Section 21 Township 12 EXCEPT: FIRSTLY: Parcel “One” (Explanatory Plan 17000);
SECONDLY: Part subdivided by Plan LMP 36965; New Westminster District
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential).
3.
READ a first time the
day of
day of
day of
day of
ADOPTED, the
day of
_____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
, 20
, 20
, 20
, 20
, 20
____________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
BCP 49651
11
11909
11914
11908
Bylaw No.
Map No.
From:
7220-2016
1662
To:
Urban Area Boundary
14
07
119
238B ST.
23889
11983
11980
14
11970
11971
11959
15
238B ST.
13
P 76536
23807
P 85134
1
3
4
1191
8
11
11 90
90 8
4
5
11940
P 76536
11939
11930
17
18
11927
11917
19
11911
20
23825
11928
11949
16
23808
P 85134
2
11960
11950
119B AVE.
238A ST.
EP 76537
31
9
LMP 30401
11995
12
Rem 1
EP15903
11921
11915
23850
23838
LMP 3166
23818
RW 72574
11
119
10
LMP 3040
DEWDNEY TRUNK RD.
EP 76228
5
237
6
23760
23750
23
17
15
BCP 21771
23831
23795
23755
23735
23745
237A ST.
11915
24
18
16
LMP 4613
9
23822
10
11926
11920
11923
BCP 21769
B 12005
238B ST.
11918
10
11932
11931
25
26
BCP 21770
P 76536
11
9
23780
22
19
75
25
BCP 19841
P 85134
11942
11930
20
21
P 72572
11938
11937
8
12
30403
23831
24
120A LANE
238A ST.
7
5
12055
LMP 27920
26
7
23
119B AVE.
23730
23740
25296
13
12069
BCS 3574
1190
0
2
11954
27
P 85134
11917
6
11943
12073
23840
23830
23820
21 22 23
LMP 30403
LMP 30403
27
P 72572
3
14
11949
LMP
78
12
0
12082
12083
20
23810
23800
23794
23788
23780
23770
19
LMP 3333
RW 7
2574
11941
11929
5
11957
P 72572
30 29 28
LMP
23760
23750
23740
23730
23729
4
15
11966
LMP
5
4
P 72572
237 ST.
11953
11978
11967
RW 72573
23716
23712
23708
23702
6
237 ST.
LMP
11965
3
16
11979
237A ST.
P
LM
7
LMP 25297
11977
2
25296
LMP
P 72572
6
9
*LMP10227 EP 17000
PcL 1
BC
P9
714
23683
23691
23697
23698
8
LMP 25297
5
85
63
111991
11988
11987
25296
23682
23694
LANE
25296
P 20770
48
8
RW 72573
LMP 16374
4
12077
3
30403
7
6
RW 28408
EP 1734
22 21 20 19 18 17
LMP
25296
RP 8312
7
Rem Pcl. 2 of Pcl. A
23687
23679
23675
23671
23667
23652
P 10361
CP
LMP 8074
Rem
W
80.7'
of E
1/2
7
6
LMP 39850
70
Rem
Pcl.
A of 7
5
4
39851
3
12085
2
120B AVE.
7
23
SL5
SL3
SL4
SL6 Rem 3
BCS 1441
P 20770
23663
23659
23655
23643
23639
23628
BCP 17477
BCP 19100
27307
3
4
18
LMP
8
B.C. TELEPHONE CO.
RP 86679
RP 57263
23638
23622
23616
23635
23631
23627
23623
23619
23612
LMP 787
LMP 3164
23720
LMP 9545
23700
23710
LMP 9545
LMP 9546
BCP 6847
LMP 9545
BCP 9713
BCP 9713
1112 13 14 15 16 17 18 1920 21
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
PARK
2
12070
9
23823
45
2
LMP
1
LMP 9544
LMP
17
10
12073
12057
120B AVE.
LMS 988
47
11
12071
23815
7
23
LMP 39851
16
15
12074
16
12090
12080
1
11
10
23791
12087
12099
46
237A ST.
14
79
1207
5
12094
2
45
15
12
12
238 ST.
2
98
LMP
237 ST.
0
12
13
14
12
0
39851
LMP
30403
13
Urban Area
Boundary
3 4
5
BCP 17476
LMP 30404
12102
BCP 49654
LMP 4233
12111
17
P 5812
BCP 49651
(EPS 1766)
´
SCALE 1:2,500
APPENDIX D
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
March 7, 2016
2011-137-RZ
C of W
Second Reading
12257 227 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject property, located at 12257 227 Street, from
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), to permit a future
subdivision of approximately 3 lots. Council granted first reading to Zone Amending Bylaw No. 71692015 on October 13, 2015. This application is in compliance with the Official Community Plan.
Pursuant to Council Resolution, this application is exempt from the Community Amenity Charge due
to its location in the Town Centre.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1) That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7169-2015 be given second reading, and be forwarded to Public
Hearing;
2) That the following terms and conditions be met prior to final reading:
i)
Road dedication on 227 Street as required;
ii)
Registration of a Restrictive Covenant for Stormwater Management;
iii)
Removal of existing buildings; and
iv)
In addition to the site profile, a disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional
Engineer advising whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks on the
subject property. If so, a Stage 1 Site Investigation Report is required to ensure that the
subject property is not a contaminated site.
DISCUSSION:
1)
Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Legal Description:
Vijay Mehta
Vijay Mehta
Lot 224, Section 20, Township 12, NWD Plan 42134
-1-
1104
OCP:
Existing:
Proposed:
Single-Family Residential
Existing:
Proposed:
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District)
Zoning:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Site Area:
Access:
Companion Applications:
2)
Single Family Dwelling
Ground-Oriented Multi-Family
947 m² (10,193 ft²)
122 Avenue and 227 Street
Full Urban Servicing
2011-137-SD/DP/VP
Project Description:
The subject property is within the Town Centre area, is relatively flat, and is bounded by single family
residential properties to the north, west, east and south (see Appendices A and B).
3)
Planning Analysis:
An application has been received to rezone the subject property from RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential) to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) (see Appendix C), to permit future
subdivision into three single family lots (see Appendix D). A new lane will be dedicated to access the
lots from the rear.
i)
The subject property is designated as Single Family Residential in the North View Precinct of the
Town Centre Area Plan, which provides options for increasing density and choice of housing form,
while retaining the single family character in these established neighbourhood blocks. The R-3
(Special Amenity Residential District) zone is compatible with the Zoning Matrix for the Single Family
Residential designation within the Town Centre Area Plan in the Official Community Plan (OCP).
-2-
ii)
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the subject property from RS-1 (One Family Urban
Residential) to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) to permit future subdivision into 3 single
family lots. The minimum lot width and length for the R-3 (Special Amenity Resdiential District) zone
is 7.9 metres (25.9 ft.) and 27 metres (88.6 ft.), respectively, for a lot accessed via a rear lane. The
proposed lots satisfy these requirements, as well as the minimum lot area of 213 m² (2,293 ft²).
iii)
Off-Street Parking And Loading Bylaw:
The Off-Street Parking and Loading Bylaw No. 4350-1990 requires two off-street parking spaces per
dwelling unit, which are provided through detached double-car garages for lots 1 and 2, and a
detached single-car garage and concrete parking pad for lot 3.
iv)
Proposed Variances:
A Development Variance Permit will be required to vary the Subdivision and Development Servicing
Bylaw No. 4800-1993, to reduce the road allowances along 227 Street, 122 Avenue, and the
proposed lane. Additional variances will be required to the Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985 to reduce
the minimum visual clearance at intersections from 7.5 metres (24.6 ft.) to 6 metres (19.7 ft.) and
the minimum distance for a driveway from an intersection from 7.5 metres (24.6 ft.) to 6 metres
(19.7 ft.). The requested variances will be the subject of a future report to Council.
v)
The subject property is located in the Town Centre Area Plan, which states that small lot SingleFamily development in the Town Centre is subject to the Intensive Residential Development Permit
Area Guidelines of the OCP. Pursuant to Section 8.8 of the OCP, an Intensive Residential
Development Permit application is required to ensure the current proposal provides emphasis on
high standards in aesthetics and quality of the built environment, while protecting important
qualities of the natural environment. The form and character of the single family homes will be the
subject of a future report to Council.
vi)
A Development Information Meeting was not required as there are fewer than 25 lots being created
and an OCP amendment is not required.
vii)
Parkland Requirement:
As there are not more than two additional lots proposed to be created, the developer is not required
to comply with the park dedication requirements of Section 510 of the Local Government Act prior to
subdivision approval.
-3-
4)
Interdepartmental Implications:
i)
Engineering Department:
The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed development and has determined that all
required services exist; therefore, a Rezoning Servicing Agreement is not required. Aside from the
road dedication required along 227 Street, all servicing upgrades will be provided at the Subdivision
stage, through a Subdivision Servicing Agreement.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that second reading be given to Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7169-2015, and that
application 2011-137-RZ be forwarded to Public Hearing.
“Original signed by Michelle Baski”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by:
Michelle Baski, AScT, MA
Planner 1
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
for
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
_______________________________________________
Concurrence:
E.C. Swabey
Appendix D – Site Plan
Appendix E – Building Elevation Plans
Appendix F – Landscape Plan
-4-
APPENDIX A
227 St
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,000
Legend
12257-227 St
2011 Image
Canal Edge
Ditch Centreline
Edge of River
Edge of Marsh
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Edge of Flooded Area
Indefinite Creek
River Centreline
Canal
Marsh
River
2011-137-RZ
DATE: Sep 16, 2015
BY: JV
APPENDIX B
227 St
SUBJECT PROPERTY
´
Scale: 1:2,000
City of Maple Ridge
Legend
Edge of River
12257-227 St
2011 Image
Edge of Marsh
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Canal Edge
Ditch Centreline
Edge of Flooded Area
Indefinite Creek
River Centreline
Canal
Marsh
River
2011-137-RZ
DATE: Sep 16, 2015
BY: JV
APPENDIX C
CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7169-2015
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;
1.
2.
Lot 224 Section 20 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 42134
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential
District).
3.
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
READ a first time the 13th day of October, 2015.
day of
day of
day of
ADOPTED the
day of
_____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
, 20
, 20
, 20
, 20
____________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
Rem.
225
P 7219
Rem. A
P 21417
4
3
2
12230
12219
12214
12211
12208
330
331
12192
Bylaw No.
Map No.
From:
7169-2015
1644
To:
2
22730
22704
12275
87
PARK
221
12271
122
12261
123
12253
2
P 14396
P 28939
131
130
1
P 25555
P 25555
1
86
P 28579
121
2
66
12195
12187
220
12290
85
12243
12231
12240
FLETCHER ST.
226
12244
1
12302
12297
197
P 39649
12239
88
P 39918
22666
RP 84324
12254
12311
1
84
12314
89
P 28497
12257
2
12321
12203
265
12230
12228
12222
12218
12216
12221
198
P 44381
RW 41758
229
22632
230
22620
22612
22592
22582
231
12264
224
122 AVE.
227
228
12263
22642
252
22611
253
22587
22579
12250
12272
90
P 56893
251
12284
223
P 42134
250
12260
12298
12281
0
27
12
122 AVE.
232
42134
249
12293
B
A
BCP 12842
P 29696
127
22652
261
22610
22590
22580
22570
22569
260
2
12308
227 ST.
248
HINCH CRES.
259
P 42134
P 42134
254
3
7
247
22642
4
22609
246
22589
245
22577
44389 P 42134
22634
5
22 6
1
22622
6
7
P 19358
22608
22596
123 AVE.
3
P 72365
12316
P 19921
22702
12311
91
P 21837
22641
22631
21
4
P 70504
20
22663
19
22619
18
22607
22597
22587
P 19358
17
16
P 40438
219 218
12208
12193
12194
264
´
SCALE 1:1,500
LINE OF ALLOWABLE
EAVE ENCROACHMENT
INTO FRONT YARD
TO FACE OF POST
LINE OF ALLOWABLE
EAVE ENCROACHMENT
INTO SIDE YARD
LINE OF ALLOWABLE
EAVE ENCROACHMENT
INTO REAR YARD
APPENDIX D
TO FACE OF POST
BUILDING DEPTH
BETWEEN STRUCTURES
PROPOSED PLROPERTY LINE
30.07
36.56
FG
36.56
Proposed Lot 1:
37.0
FG
37.1
36.55
FG
36.50
TO FOUNDATION
36.85
FG
36.80
36.57
FG
36.44
8.50
BUILDING DEPTH
BUILDING WIDTH
LOT 2
8.50
LANE
R-3 MINIMUM BUILDING ENVELOPE 5X0
R-3 MINIMUM LOT AREA 213 SQ.M
PATH
TO FACE OF POST
BUILDING DEPTH
36.90
FG
36.90
The contractor shall check and verify all
dimensions and data noted on site and
is responsible for reporting any discrepancies
to Owner prior to commencement of
work. All drawings are the property of
Designer and shall not be reproduced
without written consent of the Designer.
Drawings shall not be scaled.
NO.
ISSUED / REVISED
DATE
1
ISSUED FOR DP
FEB 8, 2016
TO FOUNDATION
36.95
FG
36.95
BETWEEN STRUCTURES
TO FND
AVERAGE GRADE
CALCULATION
36.58
FG
36.55
SIDE YARD
SET BACK
SIDE YARD
SET BACK
TO FOUNDATION
SIDE YARD
SET BACK
TO FND
TO FND
TO ROOF
30.06
SIDE YARD
SET BACK
FRONT YARD
SET BACK
36.58
FG
36.52
ACTUAL LOT AREA: 261.8 SQ.M
MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA: .7 = 183.26 SQ.M 1972.59 SQ. FT.
ACTUAL FLOOR AREA: 170.79 SQ.M 1838.34 SQ FT.
FRONT YARD
SET BACK
BETWEEN STRUCTURES
TO FND
2748.58 sq. ft.
255.44 sq. m.
36.85
FG
36.70
127th Street
TO FACE OF POST
TO FND
TO FOUNDATION
SIDE YARD
SET BACK
30.06
TO FND
SIDE YARD
SET BACK
TO FND
36.58
FG
36.58
TO ROOF
Proposed Lot 2:
8.50
BUILDING DEPTH
36.57
FG
36.56
SIDE YARD
SET BACK
SIDE YARD
SET BACK
BUILDING WIDTH
2748.58 sq. ft.
255.44 sq. m.
8.50
LOT 1
TO FND
FRONT YARD
SET BACK
6.00
8.89
BUILDING WIDTH
TO FND
37.41
FG
37.41
27.06
6m FROM INTERSECTION
SITE PLAN
37.3
FG
36.85
37.11
FG
37.11
SIDE YARD
SET BACK
PATH
2818 sq. ft.
216.80 sq. m.
8.89
LOT 3
BUILDING DEPTH
LINE OF ALLOWABLE
EAVE ENCROACHMENT
INTO SIDE YARD
Proposed Lot 3:
TO FND
TO FND
TO ROOF
LINE OF ALLOWABLE
EAVE ENCROACHMENT
SIDE YARD
SET BACK
6.00
122nd Avenue
SCALE: 1:100
CLIENT:
PROPOSED
MAPLE RIDGE, BC
V
DRAWING TITLE:
SITE PLAN
DRAWN BY:
SCALE:
DATE:
CN
1:100
Feb, 2016
DRAWING NUMBER:
A 1 OF 10
APPENDIX E
MAX BUILDING HT. 48.01m
RIDGE
ELEVATION 47.89m
RIDGE
ELEVATION 47.89m
UNDERSIDE OF CEILING
ELEVATION 45.14m
ELEVATION 45.17m
PROPOSED UPPER LVL FLOOR
ELEVATION 42.68m
ELEVATION 42.68m
PROPOSED MAIN LVL FLOOR
ELEVATION 39.66m
ELEVATION 39.66m
1
FG
37.4
FG
37.4
1
5
AVERAGE GRADE 37.01m
PROPOSED BASEMENT FLOOR
ELEVATION 36.95m
FG
36.9
ELEVATION 36.95m
NO.
ISSUED / REVISED
DATE
1
ISSUED FOR DP
FEB 8, 2016
8
FG
36.5
RIDGE
ELEVATION 47.89m
RIDGE
ELEVATION 47.89m
ELEVATION 45.17m
ELEVATION 45.17m
ELEVATION 42.68m
ELEVATION 42.68m
ELEVATION 39.66m
ELEVATION 39.66m
CLIENT:
PROPOSED
MAPLE RIDGE, BC
1
ELEVATION 36.95m
1
FG
FG
36.5
8
37.1
ELEVATION 36.95m
1
FG
37.1
FG
37.4
DRAWING TITLE:
ELEVATIONS
DRAWN BY:
ELEVATIONS
SCALE:
SCALE: 1:50
DATE:
CN
1:50
Feb, 2016
DRAWING NUMBER:
A 7 OF 10
NO.
ISSUED / REVISED
DATE
1
ISSUED FOR DP
FEB 8, 2016
GARAGE
SCALE: 1:50
CLIENT:
PROPOSED
MAPLE RIDGE, BC
DRAWING TITLE:
GARAGE
DRAWN BY:
SCALE:
DATE:
CN
1:50
Feb, 2016
DRAWING NUMBER:
A 8 OF 10
APPENDIX F
6
Cercidiphyllum japonica
COMMON NAME
SIZE
Katsura Tree
SPACING
6cm cal., min. 2.0m standard, B&B
Tree #4
30cm Cedar
(retain & monitor)
1.8m
2.1m
Picea omorika
Serbian Spruce
RORY DAFOE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ASSUMES NO
RESPONSIBILITY WHATSOEVER FOR ACCURACY OF BASE
INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY OTHERS. BASE INFORMATION
SUPPLIED BY RUSBOURNE DESIGN.
THE SOLE TERMS OF THE LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTS SCOPE OF WORK AND
PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES ARE DEFINED
ON THE LANDSCAPE SCHEDULES SUBMITTED
FOR THIS PROJECT.
9.9m
LANE
TREE PROTECTION FENCING
See detail this sheet
3
LANDSCAPE PLANS FORM AN INTEGRAL PART OF
THE DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING PERMITS AND
MUST BE ADHERED TO FOR RELEASE OF THE
LANDSCAPING LETTER OF CREDIT.
Tree #5
25cm Cedar
(retain & monitor)
1.8m
QUANTITY BOTANICAL NAME
NOTES:
OFF-SITE
TREES
Tree #3
40cm Fir
(retain & monitor)
Tree #2
35cm Fir
(retain & monitor)
2.4m
SYMBOL
EXISTING OFF-SITE TREES
TO BE RETAINED
PROVIDE TREE
PROTECTION FENCING
DURING CONSTRUCTION
SEE DETAIL THIS SHEET
2.1m
PLANT LIST
ALL DESIGNS & DRAWINGS (PAPER & DIGITAL COPIES)
ARE COPYRIGHT & REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF RORY
DAFOE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT AND
ARE NOT TO BE REPRODUCED, REVISED OR COPIED
WITHOUT PRIOR CONSENT.
5' HIGH WOOD FENCE
min. 2.0m ht, B&B
wood
gate
wood
gate
SHRUBS
11
Azalea 'Hino White'
Hino White Azalea
5' HIGH WOOD FENCE
#2 Cont.
6M FROM INTERSECTION
Rainbow Leucothoe
#2 Cont.
30
Prunus l. 'Otto Luyken'
Otto Luyken Laurel
#2 Cont.
17
Thuja occidentalis 'Smaragd'
Smaragd Cedar
1.2m ht.
0.75m O.C.
garage
PATH
Leucothoe fontanesiana 'Rainbow'
sodded boulevard
18
GRAVEL MULCH
OVER LANDSCAPE
FILTER FABRIC
sod
garage
garage
sod
GROUNDCOVERS AND PERENNIALS
PATH
53
Erica carnea 'Springwood White'
Springwood White Heather
#1 Cont.
0.60m O.C.
22
Helictotrichion sempervirens
Blue Oat Grass
#1 Cont.
0.60m O.C.
23
Hemerocallis 'Stella D'Oro'
Stella D'Oro Daylily
#1 Cont.
0.60m O.C.
PATH
PATH
sod
5' HIGH WOOD FENCE
deck
above
deck
above
2-Feb. 15/16 City comments/ site plan
changes
36.56
FG
36.56
36.57
FG
36.56
36.55
FG
36.50
36.57
FG
36.44
36.58
FG
36.55
PROPOSED STREET
TREES
1-Dec. 21/15 Added parking stall- lot 3
GRAVEL MULCH
OVER LANDSCAPE
FILTER FABRIC
sod
36.58
FG
36.58
Contact the Landscape Planning Technician at 604-467-7499 for a review
of staked street tree locations prior to planting.
36.58
FG
36.52
-Final locations, species and installation of Street Trees to be to the satisfaction of the
City of Maple Ridge.
sod
deck
above
37.11
FG
37.11
OFF-SITE STREET TREE NOTES
sod
sod
sod
REVISIONS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT:
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
MINIMUM STREET TREE PLANTING CLEARANCES
25mm DEPTH COMPOSTED HEMLOCK / FIR BARK MULCH
IN TREE SAUCER KEEP MULCH OFF TRUNK.
LOT 3
LOT 1
EXISTING CEDAR HEDGE
ON ADJACENT PROPERTY
(shown approximate)
PROJECT
PROPOSED 3 LOT SUBDIVISION
12257 227TH STREET
Tree #1
50cm Cherry
(remove)
MAPLE RIDGE, BC
37.0
FG
37.1
36.85
FG
36.70
36.85
FG
36.80
36.90
FG
36.90
36.95
FG
36.95
37.3
FG
36.85
7.5m STREET TREE CORNER OFFSET
37.41
FG
37.41
4"X4" DECORATIVE WOOD
POST CAP
2"X4" TOP RAIL
SHEET TITLE
LANDSCAPE PLAN
& STREET TREE PLAN
sodded boulevard
sodded boulevard
Sidewalk
+/- 1.5"
5'-0" max.
DATE
Concrete Curb
2"X4" MID RAIL
1"X1" NAILER STRIP HORIZ.
& VERT., BOTH SIDES
1"X6" T&G FENCE BOARDS
W/ V- JOINTS
2"X4" MID RAIL
4"X4" POSTS AT MAX.
8'0" ON CENTRE
2"X4" BOTTOM RAIL
2"X6" KICK RAIL
7.5m STREET TREE CORNER OFFSET
ALL WORK & MATERIALS TO CONFORM TO THE LATEST EDITION OF THE BC LANDSCAPE STANDARD AND
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE STANDARDS, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.
IN THE EVENT OF A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE B.C. LANDSCAPE STANDRD AND CITY OF MAPLE RIDGE STANDARDS,
CITY OF MAPLE STANDARDS SHALL TAKE PRECEDENCE.
NOTES:
CONCRETE FOOTING, min.24" deep
& 12" dia.
.15m DEPTH COMPACTED GRAVEL
COMPACTED SUBGRADE
WOOD PRIVACY FENCE
PROPOSED STREET TREES
NOTES:
FINISHED GRADE
not to scale
Posts & perimeter frame to be pressure
treated fir/hemlock.
All other wood members to be Cedar
Fence to be constructed with spiral
galv'd. nails. and/ or treated screws.
All other hardware to be galvanized.
Provide 2 coats of stain. Color as selected
by Developer.
Landscape Architect
BCSLA CSLA
EXISTING TREE
TO BE REMOVED
(also refer to tree
assessment letter)
8'-0" max.
GRAPHIC DESIGN DIGITAL ILLUSTRATION
RORY DAFOE
11278 Eltham Street
[email protected]
Maple Ridge
British Columbia
Canada
Office & Mobile: (604) 460 0606
V2X 1P3
ALL BOULEVARDS TO BE
SODDED OVER MIN. 100mm
DEPTH APPROVED
GROWING MEDIUM TYPE '2-L'
+/-6"
LOT 2
sodded boulevard
Concrete Curb
Refer to street tree planting detail on this sheet.
February 17, 2015
Letdown
DRAWN R.D.
CHECKED R.D.
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'0"
PROVIDE FERTILITY & PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS TEST FOR GROWING MEDIUM PRIOR TO STARTING WORK.
GROWING MEDIUM TO BE WEED FREE AND COMPOSTED, CONFORMING TO BCNTA STANDARD FOR 'LEVEL 2 SOILS'.
PROVIDE TOPSOIL DEPTHS AS FOLLOWS:
TREES-Min. 2' IN ALL DIRECTIONS FROM ROOT BALLS. Min. 1 m3 PER TREE.
SEE MAPLE RIDGE STREET TREE PLANTING DETAIL FOR BOULEVARD STREET TREE INSTALLATION.
SHRUB & GROUNDCOVER BEDS:18" DEPTH CONTINUOUS.
LAWN AREAS-Min. 4" DEPTH CONTINUOUS.
PROVIDE 5CM DEPTH (2") COMPOSTED BARK MULCH IN ALL PLANTING BEDS.
ONE YEAR PLANT WARRANTY SITE REVIEW WILL BE CONDUCTED
ALL PLANT MATERIAL TO COME FROM A CERTIFIED DISEASE-FREE NURSERY. PROVIDE CERTIFICATION UPON REQUEST.
SHEET NUMBER
L-1
Rev. #2 - Feb. 15/16
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
March 7, 2016
2013-117-RZ
C of W
Second Reading
12182 228 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject property located at 12182 228 Street from
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), to permit a future
subdivision of approximately 3 single family lots. Council granted first reading to Zone Amending
Bylaw No.7055-2014 on February 11, 2014. This application is in compliance with the Official
Community Plan.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1) That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7055-2014 be given second reading, and be forwarded to Public
Hearing;
i)
Registration of a temporary Statutory Right of Way on the proposed center lot, to provide
temporary access to the rear lane, until such time as alternative access is provided via a
lane system;
ii)
Registration of a Restrictive Covenant for Stormwater Management;
iii)
Removal of existing building;
iv)
Dedication of the 7.5m wide lane, to be projected on the Subdivision plan as per
Subdivision and Servicing Amending Bylaw # 7093-2014.
v)
Registration of a ‘No Build’ Restrictive Covenant on the remnant land east of the lane;
vi)
In addition to the site profile, a disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional
Engineer advising whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks on the
subject property. If so, a Stage 1 Site Investigation Report is required to ensure that the
subject property is not a contaminated site.
-1-
1105
DISCUSSION:
1)
Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Gary Tiwana
Paramjit Joshi
Legal Description: Lot 1, Except Firstly the North 75 feet and Secondly Part subdivided by Plan
44214, Section 20, Township 12, New Westminster District Plan 4836
OCP:
Existing:
Zoning:
Existing:
Proposed:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing:
Companion Applications:
2)
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) and
0.138 ha (0.34 acres)
228 Street
Urban Standard
2013-117-SD and 2013-117-DP
The subject property is situated in a block bound by 122 Avenue to the north, Greenwell Street to the
east, Purdey Avenue to the south, and 228 Street to the west (see Appendix A and B). The subject
property fronts 228 Street, and is located in the Town Centre Area Plan. A single family home is
currently located on the property. No watercourses or steep slopes exist on the subject property.
The applicant is proposing to develop 3 single family lots with detached homes, consisting of a
basement and 2 storeys. Detached garages are projected in the rear yards, with rear lane access.
Also included in the project is a portion of remnant land that will be consolidated for future
subdivision with the adjacent property to the east.
-2-
It is anticipated that through redevelopment of other properties within this block, the rear lane will be
extended and accessed via Greenwell Street. 228 Street is designated as a collector road intended
to accommodate both a high volume of vehicle traffic and on-street parking. Providing a rear lane
will eliminate driveway letdowns, maximizing the available on-street parking for new developments
on 228 Street.
3)
Planning Analysis:
i)
The subject site is located within the North View Precinct of the Town Centre Area Plan and is
currently designated Single-Family Residential, which allows for intensive single family and duplex
development as a transition from higher densities in the downtown area to existing larger lot single
family residential areas outside of the Town Centre Area. The North View Precinct of the Town Centre
encompasses a range of land uses. The highest residential densities, such as high-rise apartments,
are permitted adjacent to the civic core and transition down to lower single family residential
densities closer to the area plan boundaries. The Town Centre Area Plan states the following in the
Single-Family Residential designation:
The Single-Family Residential designation in the Town Centre provides options for increasing
density and choice of housing form, while retaining the single family character in these
established neighbourhood blocks.
Policy 3-17
To enable some densification in areas designated for Single-Family Residential,
Maple Ridge will consider:
a. A Detached Garden Suite, subject to consistency with the Maple Ridge
Detached Garden Suites policy;
b. A Secondary Suite within a principle single-family use dwelling, subject to
consistency with the existing Maple Ridge Secondary Suite Bylaws.
c. Lot size of 213m2 to 370m2 is permitted, where vehicle access is from a
rear lane only.
d. Minimum lot size of 371m2 is permitted, where driveway access is located
from the rear lane or the street.
e. Duplex development will be permitted on a corner lot or a lot with lane
access to concealed parking.
The minimum lot size for duplex
development is 557m2 and the character of the development should be
similar to a single-family development in its size, scale, and massing.
Policy 5-9
Maple Ridge will encourage the retention of laneways and the creation of new
laneways should be considered, where appropriate and feasible.
The proposed single detached form with vehicle access from the lane is consistent with the Town
Centre Area Plan policies.
ii) Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the subject property located at 12182 228 Street from
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) to permit future
subdivision into approximately three single family lots and a lane. (see Appendix C) The proposed
lots are approximately 327 m2 in area and 9.2 metres in width. The minimum area requirement for
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District) is 213 m2.
-3-
iii) Off-Street Parking And Loading Bylaw:
Schedule A of the Off-Street Parking and Loading Bylaw states that for a building with One Family
Residential, and Two Family Residential uses, a number of 2.0 parking spaces on the property is
required. The proposed plan shows double garages on each lot.
iv) Development Permits:
Pursuant to Section 8.8 of the OCP, an Intensive Residential Development Permit application is
required to ensure the current proposal provides emphasis on high standards in aesthetics and
quality of the built environment. Compliance with the key guidelines will be the subject of a future
report to Council for application 2013-117-DP. The proposed form and character of the buildings
consist of detached 2 storey residences with a basement.
v) Parkland Requirements:
As there are fewer than three additional lots proposed to be created, the developer will not be
required to comply with the park dedication requirements of Section 510 of the Local Government
Act prior to subdivision approval.
4)
i)
Engineering Department:
The Subdivision and Servicing Amending Bylaw No. 7093-2014 requires a right-of-way width of 7.5 m
for a lane but the subdivision plan originally submitted by the applicant proposes a 6m wide lane for
access to the garages (See Appendix D). It is noted that the property can accommodate a 7.5m wide
lane. The Engineering Department therefore does not support a variance to reduce the lane
width. The applicant is advised on the new standard and needs to submit a new plan for subdivision.
Consistent with the Town Centre Area Plan and the intended functionality of a collector road, the
Engineering Department supports the lane access requirement for newly created lots less than
370m2 in area. At this time, a statutory right-of-way will be required over one of the proposed lots
until such time that lane access can be connected through to Greenwell Street, or the lane is
extended and a new temporary access is provided on an adjacent property.
A Stormwater Management Plan has been prepared by Civic Consultants in Abbotsford, received
November 26, 2015. It is part of a conceptual servicing design and therefore reviewed by our
Engineering Department.
ii) Fire Department:
A Statutory Right of Way is required on the proposed center lot of the subject subdivision, to provide
temporary access to the rear lane way. Use of the center lot will facilitate a natural hammerhead
turn around which is preferred for heavy truck traffic (i.e. emergency response vehicles). Temporary
access on the center lot is to be constructed to similar standard as the regular municipal lanes. A
sign stating ‘Fire Lane – No Parking’ is required to be posted on the lane.
-4-
CONCLUSION:
The proposed application is to permit future subdivision into three (3) single family lots in the North
View Precinct of the Town Centre Area Plan. As this proposal is in compliance with the OCP, it is
recommended that second reading be given to Zone Amending Bylaw No.7055-2014, and that
application 2013-117-RZ be forwarded to Public Hearing.
“Original signed by Therese Melser”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by:
Therese Melser
Planning Technician
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
“Original signed by Frank Quinn”
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
_______________________________________________
Concurrence:
E.C. Swabey
Appendix C - Zone Amending Bylaw No. 7055-2014
Appendix D – Subdivision Plan
Appendix E – Building Elevations
-5-
401
P 67081 121 21
*PP090
5
N 50' 5 1211
City of Pitt
340
121 28
121 20
229 43
229 35
229 23
229 13
228 83
228 73
229 40
107
108
118 119
229 41
229 11
228 81
229 21
117
116
229 34
105 106
229 33
229 22
229 12
228 82
P 41774
114 115
228 75
228 24
228 36
121 67
339
337
121 51
121 60
121 47
P 44858
294
295
121 50
121 43
121 40
District of
Langley
229 36
229 24
229 14
229 21
229 11
228 91
229 01
229 02
235
252
236
251
237
250
230 231
P 44292
121 60
121 55
121 50
121 45
121 35
229 18
228 229
229 08
228 98
226 227
228 88
225
121 57
228 82
121 66
338
^
216
132
130 131
P 42872
P 44292
217 218 219
EA G L E AV E .
228 72
336
215
129
228 81
121 80
128
228 71
304
121 61
127
213 214
121 85
335
228 80
126
297
Meadows
104
P 44292
121 40
121 39
121 31
Scal e: 1:1,50 0
P 44396
121 54
B
A
LMP 4065
122 24
District of Mis sion
S. 52.5' 2
113
289
341
121 51
228 74
G RE E NW E L L S T.
P 57241
228 33
122 38
P 44292
121 66
121 61
Rem 2
121 41
P 11845
12 2 AV E .
121 95
P 4836
Rem. 1
303
92
P 92
roperty
288 Subject121
121 94
P 52578
BCS 569
91
69
70 A
68APPENDIX
71
P 41773
P 41774
96
94
95
97
93
67
ST O RE Y AV E .
Rem. N
75' of 1
121 82
66
122 58
6
P 44214
P 81396
121 69
65
102 103
P 13667
P 52578
P 11845
121 83
228 S t
121 91
1
122 08
122 01
´
353
1
2 3 4
BCP 21032
122 11
BCP 23946
A
228 18
228 06
228 12
122 29
P 82923
1 122 03
2
402
3
352
12 2 AV E .
8
336
292
122 55
4
122 43
9
P 58171
122 58
122 40
10
P 14396
22 8 S T.
5792
122 76
122 74
122 53
309
P 44873
P 13667
222
P 40082
122 61
A
RP 16335
121 40
253
254
255
12182-228 S T
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
P LA N N I N G D E P A R T M E N T
FR AS ER
R.
DATE: Jan 22, 2014
2013-117-RZ
BY: J V
12 2 AVE .
2 3 4
1
BCP 21032
8
12211
P 82923
1 12203
1
12208
12191
12183
12169
P 81396
P 23946
A
36
Rem. N
75' of 1
P 4836
Rem. 1
12182
P 11845
S. 52.5' 2
P 44396
289
12185
213 21
12180
304
335
341
12161
12166
340
B
A
LMP 4065
12140
12139
12131
339
P 52578
12141
City of Pitt
Meadows
P 52578
12154
336
225
12157
22
337
12151
235
12160
District of Ma ple R idge
338
12182-228 S t
District of Mis sion
´
1
126
12167
12166
12151
12192
12195
303
12161
288
12194
BCS 569
Rem 2
12224
P 13667
12201
58171
113
P
1
6
P 44214
2
22836
22806
22812
12229
102 10
22824
9
22818
P 1439
APPENDIX B
^
SKRWRJUDSK\LPDJH
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
District of
Langley
P LA N N I N G D E P A R T M E N T
Scal e: 1:1,00 0
DATE: Dec 17, 2013
FR AS ER
R.
2013-117-RZ
BY: J V
APPENDIX C
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7055-2014
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
2.
Lot 1 Except: Firstly: The North 75 Feet and Secondly: Part Subdivided by Plan
44214; Section 20 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 4836
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential
District).
3.
READ a first time the 11th day of February, 2014.
READ a second time the 12th day of January, 2016
day of
day of
ADOPTED the
day of
_____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
, 20
, 20
, 20
____________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
331
P 56987
338
P 62211
12139
12131
401
P 67081 12121
*PP090
N 50' 5
12140
12128
294
To:
P 11845
GREE
P 44858
12157
12166
225
337
12151
338
12147
295
12143
12160
12150
12140
105
22911
22881
22902
22881
226 227
129
216
22891
22875
22880
128
215
EP 4
22888
336
127
213 214
12180
22912
22882
22874
22833
GREENWELL ST.
P 44214
12161
Bylaw No.
Map No.
From:
22836
22824
335
339
12120
126
12167
12154
340
12185
P 44396
304
341
12141
B
A
LMP 4065
289
12192
22882
12166
12195
12224
22871
303
12151
S. 52.5' 2
22818
P 4836
Rem. 1
BCS 569
12161
288
12194 RW 45948
12182
12169
Rem 2
402
Rem. N
75' of 1
113
104
P 41774
114 115 116
22872
P 11845
S 1/2 10
P 11845
336
12238
6
P 13667
P 52578
P 42772
12191
12183
1
12208
12201
P 58171
N 1/2 10
S 1/2 9
P 82923
1 12203
122 A
102 103
1
2 3 4
BCP 21032
12211
BCP 23946
A
279
N 1/2 9
8
2
280
12229
P 81396
6
P 14396
353
122 AVE.
9
228 ST.
2
P 71970
12243
P 52578
P 14396
340
P 62578
339
3
P 57241
10
22806
22812
P 57607
333
334
12240
P 13667
P 45792
228
235
252
236
251
237
250
12155
12145
12135
7055-2014
1607
´
SCALE 1:1,500
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX E
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
March 7, 2016
2014-003-CU
C of W
Second Reading
Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7064-2014
19975, 19989, 19997 Dunn Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received for a Temporary Use Permit to temporarily allow vehicle inventory
storage on the three subject properties, zoned RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential). The subject
properties are located at 19975, 19989, and 19997 Dunn Avenue (see Appendices A and B).
Council granted first reading to Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7064-2014 and
considered the early consultation requirements for the Official Community Plan (OCP) amendment on
March 25, 2014.
A text amendment to Appendix D - Temporary Use Permits of the OCP is proposed to allow a
Temporary Use Permit on the subject properties (see Appendix C). It is recommended that
application 2014-003-CU be granted second reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1) That, in accordance with Section 477 of the Local Government Act, opportunity for early and ongoing consultation has been provided by way of posting Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw
No. 7064-2014 on the municipal website, and Council considers it unnecessary to provide any
further consultation opportunities, except by way of holding a Public Hearing on the bylaw;
2) That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7064-2014, as amended in the March 7,
2016 staff report, be considered in conjunction with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste
Management Plan;
3) That it be confirmed that Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7064-2014 is consistent
with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
4) That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 7064-2014 be given second
reading and be forwarded to Public Hearing;
i)
Amendment to Official Community Plan Appendix D – Temporary Use Permits to add the
subject properties to the list of Temporary Use Permit locations;
ii)
Provision of a landscape security for fencing and perimeter hedge planting; and
iii)
Issuance of a Highway Use Permit to restore the existing boulevard and provision of a
security as outlined in the permit.
-1-
1106
DISCUSSION:
1)
Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Maple Ridge Chrysler Dodge Jeep
BC Transit
Legal Descriptions:
Lot 15 Except: Firstly; the West Half Secondly; Parcel 11 (Bylaw
Plan LMP34902) Thirdly Part in Plan BCP29640 District Lot
222 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 11194
West Half Lot 15 Except First: Parcel 7 (Bylaw Plan LMP34902)
Secondly; Part in Plan BCP29640 District Lot 222 Group 1 New
Westminster District Plan 11194
Lot 16 Except Firstly: Parcel 8 (Bylaw Plan LMP34902)
Secondly: Part in Plan BCP29640 District Lot 222 Group 1 New
Westminster District Plan 11194
OCP:
Institutional
Temporary Industrial Use Permit
Existing:
Proposed:
Existing:
Zoning:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Site Area:
Access:
Previous Applications:
2)
Use:
Highway Commercial
Zone:
Designation:
Commercial
Use:
Off-Street Parking (Park and Ride)
Zone:
Designation:
Institutional
Use:
Vacant
Zone:
RS-3 (On Family Rural Residential)
Designation:
Institutional
Use:
Vacant
Zone:
Designation:
Commercial
Outdoor Vehicle Storage
Outdoor Vehicle Storage
0.74 ha (1.8 acres)
Dunn Avenue
Urban Standard
2013-005-RZ
The applicant proposes to amend Appendix D - Temporary Industrial Use of the OCP to allow a
Temporary Use Permit on the three subject properties. The subject properties are currently being
used for outdoor storage of vehicle inventory for the adjacent Maple Ridge Chrysler Dodge Jeep car
dealership (see Appendix D), and this OCP amendment will bring the properties into compliance. The
long-term use of the subject properties is expected to be an expansion of the West Coast Express
Park-and-Ride facility on the south side of Dunn Avenue, once capacity of the existing parking lot is
reached, potentially in the next five to ten years.
-2-
3)
Planning Analysis:
i) Official Community Plan:
The subject properties are located in west Maple Ridge and are currently designated Institutional.
An OCP amendment is required to add the subject properties into Appendix D – Temporary Use
Permits of the OCP. Appendix D of the OCP states the following:
1. Lands in the District may be designated to permit temporary uses if a condition or circumstance
exists that warrants the use for a short period of time but does not warrant a change of land use
designation or zoning of the property.
2. Council has the authority by resolution to issue Temporary Use Permits to allow temporary uses
on specific properties. Council may specify conditions for the temporary use.
3. Designated Temporary Use Permit areas will require guidelines that specify the general
conditions regarding the issuance of permits, the use of the land, and the date the use is to
terminate.
4. As a condition of issuing the permit, Council may require applicants or owners to remove
buildings, to restore the property to a specific condition when the use ends, and to post a
security bond. A permit may be issued for a period of up to three years, and may be renewed
only once.
5. Council may issue Temporary Use Permits to allow:
a) temporary commercial uses, i.e., temporary parking areas; and
b) temporary industrial uses, i.e. soil screening.
6. A Temporary Use Permit is issued in accordance with the provisions of Section 492 of the Local
Government Act.
The subject properties are currently owned by BC Transit and are anticipated to be used for an
expanded West Coast Express Park and Ride facility in the future; therefore, a Temporary Use Permit
as outlined in points 1 and 2 above is more appropriate than a rezoning application.
Furthermore, as outlined in points 2 and 3 above, the Temporary Use Permit may have conditions
and guidelines for the use to occur, as well as removal and restoration requirements once the permit
terminates. These conditions and guidelines are similar to rezoning conditions such as engineering
servicing improvements, landscaping, and fencing.
It is important to note that the Temporary Use Permits are now valid for a period of up to three years,
and may be renewed and extended only once. The main difference between rezoning and temporary
use permits is the duration of time that the use is permitted on the property.
ii) Zoning Bylaw:
The subject properties are zoned RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) and this zoning will remain in
place over the duration of the Temporary Use Permit.
iii) Development Information Meeting:
A Development Information Meeting was held at Meadow Garden Golf Club on February 10, 2016.
There were no attendees at the meeting, and no concerns were raised with the applicant.
4)
Traffic Impact:
As the subject properties are located within 800 metres of the Lougheed Highway, a referral has
been sent to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure. At this time, the Ministry has
reviewed the proposal and has no concerns.
-3-
5)
The Temporary Use Permit has been reviewed by the Engineering, Fire, and Licenses, Permits and
Bylaws Departments. The Engineering Department requires that the boulevard be reinstated and
remain free of vehicles. The Fire Department requires that the lot surfacing can support the weight
of a fire truck, and that a minimum six metre (20 ft) manoeuvring aisle is maintained to provide
emergency vehicle access.
6)
School District No. 42 Comments:
Pursuant to Section 476 of the Local Government Act, consultation with School District No. 42 is
required at the time of preparing or amending the OCP. A referral was sent to School District No. 42
on January 26, 2016.
7)
Intergovernmental Issues:
i) Local Government Act:
An amendment to the OCP requires the local government to consult with any affected parties and to
adopt related bylaws in compliance with the procedures outlined in Section 477 of the Local
Government Act. The amendment required for this application, to amend Appendix D - Temporary
Use Permits of the OCP is proposed to allow a Temporary Use Permit on the subject properties, is
considered to be minor in nature. It has been determined that no additional consultation beyond
existing procedures is required, including referrals to the Board of the Regional District, the Council
of an adjacent municipality, First Nations, the School District or agencies of the Federal and
Provincial Governments. The amendment has been reviewed with the Financial Plan/Capital Plan
and the Waste Management Plan of the Greater Vancouver Regional District and determined to have
no impact.
CONCLUSION:
This Temporary Use Permit application is to bring the existing vehicle storage use into compliance.
The subject properties are currently owned by BC Transit and are anticipated to be used for an
expanded West Coast Express Park-and-Ride facility in the future; therefore, a Temporary Use Permit
is more appropriate than a rezoning application. It is recommended that second reading be given to
OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7064-2014, and that application 2014-003-CU be forwarded to Public
Hearing.
______________________________________
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden
Planning Technician
_________________________________________
__________________________________________
_________________________________________
Appendix C – OCP Amending Bylaw No. 7064-2014
Appendix D – Site Plan
Appendix E – Landscape Plan
-4-
for
APPENDIX A
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
Scale: 1:2,500
District of Mission
´
City of Pitt
Meadows
^
19975/89/97 DUNN AVENUE
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
District of
Langley
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FRASER R.
DATE: Jan 13, 2014
FILE: 2014-003-CU
BY: PC
APPENDIX B
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
Scale: 1:2,500
City of Pitt
Meadows
District of Mission
´
District of Maple Ridge
^
19975/89/97 DUNN AVENUE
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
District of
Langley
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FRASER R.
DATE: Jan 13, 2014
FILE: 2014-003-CU
BY: PC
APPENDIX C
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 7064-2014
A Bylaw to amend Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7060-2014
_______________________________________
WHEREAS Section 882 of the Local Government Act provides that the Council may revise the
Official Community Plan;
AND WHEREAS it is deemed desirable to amend Schedule "A" to the Official Community Plan;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the City of Maple Ridge, in open meeting assembled,
ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No.7064-2014."
2.
Appendix D. Temporary Use Permits, Section TEMPORARY USE PERMIT AREA is amended by
the addition of the following:
“TEMPORARY INDUSTRIAL USE PERMIT AREA LOCATION No. 4”
Purpose:
To permit outdoor storage of vehicles.
Location:
Those parcels or tracts of land and premises shown on Temporary Industrial Use Permit Area
Location No. 4 map, and known and described as:

Lot 15 Except: Firstly; the West Half Secondly; Parcel 11 (Bylaw Plan LMP34902)
Thirdly Part in Plan BCP29640 District Lot 222 Group 1 New Westminster District
Plan 11194

West Half Lot 15 Except First: Parcel 7 (Bylaw Plan LMP34902) Secondly; Part in
Plan BCP29640 District Lot 222 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 11194

Lot 16 Except Firstly: Parcel 8 (Bylaw Plan LMP34902) Secondly: Part in Plan
BCP29640 District Lot 222 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 11194”
are hereby designated to permit a temporary industrial use for outdoor storage of
vehicles, for a three-year period, effective upon adoption of this bylaw.
4.
5.
Appendix D. Temporary Use Permits, Section TEMPORARY USE PERMIT AREA is amended
by the addition of the attached Temporary Industrial Use Permit Area Location No. 4 map
in sequential numeric order after Temporary Industrial Use Permit Area Location No. 3:
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 6425-2006 is hereby amended accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the 25th day of March, 2014.
READ A SECOND TIME the
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the
READ A THIRD TIME the
ADOPTED the
day of
______________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
day of
, 20 .
day of
, 20 .
day of
, 20 .
, 20 .
______________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
MAPLE LAN
P 78905
P 78861
20086
20078
20070
3
P 68232
11890
LMP 47
1
1
11870
LMP 2183
3
20010
11850
Rem 10
LOT 1
2
1
2
DUNN AVE.
LMP 38773
WEST ST.
20035
20019
Rem 18
LMP 38773
11911 WEST ST.
P 11194
LMP 38773
20097
20082
11900
Rem 17
Rem 16
19997
19989
19975
Rem
E 1/2
of 15
P 73373
20083
P 83667
2
1
LMP 31913
Rem
W 1/2
of 15
11901
20085
LE
MA
P
3
MAP
L
LOT A
2
1
E M
EAD
OW
LMP 43275
8
2
LMP 37906
S W
AY
LOT B
11919
Rem. Pcl. 'ONE'
1
11950
11940
20070
M
T.
EA
0S
BCP 3423A
WEST ST.
20
DO
W
S
W
AY
11979 WEST ST.
P 11194
9
11830
10
A
11810
11
BCP 68
11790
(COMMUTER RAIL STN.)
P 67774
22
11770
P 80527
´
Scale: 1:2,000
PARK
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
TEMPORARY INDUSTRIAL
USE PERMIT AREA
Location No. 4
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: Feb 19, 2015
BY: DT
APPENDIX D
APPENDIX E
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
March 7, 2016
2014-054-DVP
CoW
Development Variance Permit
23627 and 23598 Dogwood Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Development Variance Permit application 2014-054-DVP has been received in conjunction with
rezoning and subdivision applications 2014-054-RZ and 2014-054-SD to permit future subdivision
into 12 single family lots. The requested variances are to:
1.
Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No. 4800-1993, Schedule A, to waive road
construction standards on Dogwood Avenue east of the entrance to the subdivision.
2.
Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No. 4800-1993, Schedule C, Section 3.5 Roads,
SD-R1 Urban Local Street to reduce the road carriageway width around the ‘parkette’ from 8.6
m (28.2 ft) to 7.3 m (24 ft).
3.
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985, to reduce the exterior side yard setback for
proposed lots 1 and 12 from 9 m (29.5 ft) to 4.5 m (14.7 ft).
Council will be considering final reading for rezoning application 2014-054-RZ on March 8, 2016. It
is recommended that Development Variance Permit 2014-054-DVP be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2014-054-DVP respecting property located
at 23627 and 23598 Dogwood Avenue.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context
Applicant:
Owner:
Damax Consultants Ltd.
AFN Enterprises Inc.
Legal Descriptions:
Parcel One (Exp. Plan 8154) of Parcel “B” (Reference Plan
8155) of the Southeast Quarter of Section 28, TWP 12 NWD;
Lot 1 Except: Firstly: Part on Plan 7806, Secondly: Part
Subdivided by Plan 38973, Section 28 TWP 12 NWD Plan 1105
OCP:
Existing:
Proposed:
Estate Suburban Residential
Estate Suburban Residential, Conservation, Forest
1107
Zoning:
Existing:
Proposed:
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential), with a site specific
Zoning Bylaw text amendment
Surrounding Uses:
North:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
South:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
East:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Site Area:
Access:
Concurrent Applications:
3.3 ha (8.2 acres)
Dogwood Avenue
Urban Standard
2014-054-RZ, 2014-054-DP, 2014-054-SD
b) Project Description:
The applicant proposes to subdivide the subject properties into 12 single family lots with a density
bonus to the RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) zone to allow lot sizes equivalent to the RS1-c
(One Family (Low Density) Residential). The proposed lots range in size from 1,200 m2 – 2,323 m2
(12,917 ft2 -25,000 ft2). The lots will be accessed via a new local road running north-south.
Dogwood Avenue will be extended to a local urban standard from the western property line to the
new north-south road. To the east of the new road, a 4 metre (13 ft) vehicle access lane will be
constructed to facilitate maintenance of a new stormwater outfall.
c) Variance Analysis:
The Zoning Bylaw establishes general minimum and maximum regulations for single family
development. The Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw establishes regulations for the
subdivision and development of property. A Development Variance Permit allows Council some
flexibility in the approval process. The requested variances and rationale for support are described
below (see Appendix C).
1. Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No. 4800-1993, Schedule A - Services and
Utilities, to waive road construction standards on Dogwood Avenue east of the entrance to
the subdivision.
-2-
In discussions between the Engineering, Fire, and Parks Departments, the desired final design of
Dogwood Avenue east of the subdivision’s local road connection is to support an emergency and
maintenance vehicle access only. The Strategic Transportation Plan identifies the Dogwood Avenue
right-of-way as a potential corridor for emergency vehicle and pedestrian access across the South
Alouette River into Silver Valley as an alternate to the 240 Street bridge, given the high cost of the
proposed 240 Street crossing. The developer has taken this requirement into consideration for the
servicing design, which includes a 4 metre (13 ft) gravel access road that allows preservation of the
existing trees.
2. Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No. 4800-1993, Schedule C, Section 3.5
Roads, SD-R1 Urban Local Street to reduce the road carriageway width around the ‘parkette’
from 8.6 m (28.2 ft) to 7.3 m (24 ft).
This variance is required because the new local road has been designed to maintain a large isolated
stand of mature trees through the creation of a 1,158 m2 (12, 464 ft2) ‘parkette’ within the road
allowance. The ‘parkette’ feature is land in excess of the road allowance requirement; however, a
variance is required for the width of the carriageway around the ‘parkette’. Similar road designs
have been used in Silver Valley Eco-Cluster developments, and in Albion. On-street parking will not
be permitted around the ‘parkette’ due to the reduced width.
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985, Part 6 RESIDENTIAL ZONES, Section 601, C.
REGULATIONS FOR THE SIZE, SHAPE AND SITING OF BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES, 15) d)
iii) to reduce the exterior side yard setback for proposed lots 1 and 12 from 9 m (29.5 ft) to
4.5 m (14.7 ft).
The current setback for a side yard adjacent to a street in the RS-1C zone is 9 metres (29.5 ft). As
Dogwood Avenue will not be constructed adjacent to proposed lot 12, a reduced side yard setback is
supportable as the northern property line will appear and function as an interior side yard. The
developer has also requested a reduced side yard setback of 4.5 m (14.7 ft) for the exterior side
yard for proposed lot 1, across from lot 12. This will create better symmetry with lot 1 across the
street. The proposed setback of 4.5 m (14.7 ft) will still maintain privacy and separation between
the future home and Dogwood Avenue. It is noted that the reduced setback is equivalent to the
current RS-2 (Suburban Residential) exterior side yard setback on the property, and for the
residences to the north, south, east and west of the subject properties.
d) Citizen Implications:
In accordance with the Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999, notice of Council
consideration of a resolution to issue a Development Variance Permit was mailed to all owners or
tenants in occupation of all parcels, any parts of which are adjacent to the property that is subject to
the permit.
-3-
CONCLUSION:
The requested variances reflect site specific design considerations such as tree preservation and
alternative road design in discussion with city staff. It is therefore recommended that this
application be favourably considered and the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal
Development Variance Permit 2014-054-DVP.
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden
Planning Technician
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Concurrence: E.C Swabey
Appendix C – Subdivision Plan
-4-
APPENDIX A
FERN CR
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
128 AVE
Scale: 1:2,500
District of Mission
´
City of Pitt
Meadows
^
23598 & 23627 DOGWOOD AVENUE
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
District of
Langley
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FRASER R.
DATE: Jun 16, 2014
FILE: 2014-054-RZ
BY: PC
APPENDIX B
FERN CR
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
128 AVE
Scale: 1:2,500
City of Pitt
Meadows
District of Mission
´
District of Maple Ridge
^
23598 & 23627 DOGWOOD AVENUE
SKRWRJUDSK\LPDJH
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
District of
Langley
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FRASER R.
DATE: Jun 16, 2014
FILE: 2014-054-RZ
BY: PC
APPENDIX C
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
March 7, 2016
MEETING:
COW
Billy Miner Pub Liquor License Amendment Application – Change to liquor service
hours
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Liquor Control and Licensing Branch (LCLB) have received an application from B. Miner
Hospitality Ltd. located at 22355 River Road for a permanent change to their liquor service hours.
(Appendix I).
The applicant is seeking a change to the start time, not the closing time. Currently the hours are
11:00 am to Midnight Sunday through Thursday, 11:00 am to 1:00 am Friday and Saturday. The new
hours will change the opening time to 9:00 am every day. This does not mean that the pub intends to
open every day at 9:00 am but it would provide the flexibility to open earlier when needed.
One of the considerations utilized by the LCLB in reviewing an application for occupancy increases of
a liquor primary license is a resolution from the local government. A number of regulatory criteria
must be addressed in the Council resolution as well as comments pertaining to the views expressed
by area residents. Council may choose to support the application, not support the application or
indicate they do not wish to comment.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
1. That the application by B. Miner Hospitality Ltd. at 22355 River Road Maple Ridge, BC a
change of opening hours to 9:00 am every day as an amendment to Liquor Primary Licence
No. 035096, be approved based on the information contained in the Council report dated
March 7, 2016.
2. That a copy of the resolution be forwarded to the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch in
accordance with the legislative requirements.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
On January 13, 2016, B. Miner Hospitality Ltd. through the Liquor Control and Licensing
Branch submitted a structural change application to their Liquor primary Licence #035096.
The LCLB guidelines request a specific Council resolution commenting on the application in
terms of community impacts which may occur as a result of the proposed change to the
establishment operations as a result to the proposed change. Part of the process requires
Page 1 of 3
1108
Council to gather views of the residents who may be affected by the establishment of the
liquor primary license in their neighbourhood.
In following the public input requirement, 514 letters were sent to owners and occupants of
property within approximately 300 metres of the subject site with the vast majority of the
recipients being residents and the rest of the property owners showing as registered
companies. There were 0 responses to the 514 letters sent to surrounding property owners
and occupants.
The City also posted a public notice in the local newspaper running in two separate editions
the week of January 22, 2016 and then again the week of January 29, 2016.
The Maple Ridge RCMP Detachment was asked for their input on this matter and they have
confirmed they do not have any operational issues with this application.
The three closest liquor primary licensed premises to the subject property are:



Chances Maple Ridge – 22710 Lougheed Highway
The Wolf Bar – 22336 Lougheed Highway
Haney Motor Hotel – 22222 Lougheed Highway
b) Desired Outcome(s):
That Council supports the application from B. Miner Hospitality Ltd. to change the opening
time of the establishment.
c) Intergovernmental Issues:
Both local government and the provincial government have an interest in ensuring that liquor
regulations are followed and that licensed establishments listen to the needs of the
community.
d) Citizen/Customer Implications:
The review of this application has taken into consideration the potential for concerns from
surrounding properties in terms of parking, traffic and noise generation as well as the
proximity of schools and similar establishments.
The Licences, Permits and Bylaws Department has coordinated in the review process and
solicited input from the public, other municipal departments as well as the RCMP.
f)
Alternatives:
To not approve the application and provide conditions to the approval in the form or
recommendations to forward to the LCB.
Page 2 of 3
CONCLUSIONS:
That Council passes the necessary resolution supporting the application from B. Miner Hospitality
Ltd. as submitted based upon the staff findings set out in this report.
“Original signed by R. MacNair”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: R. MacNair
Manager of Bylaws and Licencing
__________________________________________
General Manager: Public Works and Development Services
_______________________________________________
/jd
Attachments:
Appendix I –LCLB application for a permanent change to a liquor licence
Page 3 of 3
APPENDIX I
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
March 7, 2016
MEETING:
COW
Planet Ice Breakaway Bar & Grill (Maple Ridge) Liquor License Amendment
Application – Increase in Seating Capacity
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Liquor Control and Licensing Branch (LCLB) have received an application from Planet Ice
Breakaway bar & Grill (Maple Ridge) located at 23588 105 Avenue for an increase in their seating
capacity (Appendix I). Currently they hold a Food Primary Licence for 200 occupants and a Liquor
Primary Licence for 100 occupants however they wish to cancel the Food Primary Licence and
increase the occupant load on their Liquor Primary Licence. Operationally they wish to keep things
the same but have one licence instead of two.
a liquor primary licence is a resolution from the local government. A number of regulatory criteria
RECOMMENDATION(S):
1. That the application by Planet Ice Breakaway bar & Grill (Maple Ridge) at 23588 105 Avenue
Maple Ridge, BC for an increase in their seating capacity as an amendment to Liquor License
No. 185930, be approved based on the information contained in the Council report dated
March 7, 2016.
DISCUSSION:
On January 20, 2016, Planet Ice Breakaway Bar & Grill (Maple Ridge) through the Liquor
Control and Licensing Branch submitted a structural change application to their Liquor
primary Licence #185930.
The LCLB guidelines request a specific Council resolution commenting on the application in
terms of community impacts which may occur as a result of the proposed change to the
establishment operations as a result to the proposed change. Part of the process requires
Council to gather views of the residents who may be affected by the establishment of the
liquor primary license in their neighbourhood.
Page 1 of 3
1109
property within approximately 300 metres of the subject site with the vast majority of the
recipients being residents and the rest of the property owners showing as registered
companies. There were 0 responses to the 535 letters sent to surrounding property owners
and occupants.
The City also posted a public notice in the local newspaper running in two separate editions
the week of February 12, 2016 and then again the week of February 17, 2016.
That Council supports the application from Planet Ice Breakaway Bar & Grill (Maple Ridge) to
increase their seating capacity as requested.
regulations are followed and that licensed establishments listen to the needs of the
community.
surrounding properties in terms of parking, traffic and noise generation as well as the
proximity of schools and similar establishments.
The Licences Permits and Bylaws Department has coordinated in the review process and
f)
Alternatives:
To approve the application and provide conditions to the approval in the form or
recommendations to forward to the LCB.
CONCLUSIONS:
That Council pass the necessary resolution supporting the application from Planet Ice Breakaway Bar
& Grill (Maple Ridge) as submitted based upon the staff findings set out in this report.
_______________________________________________
Page 2 of 3
__________________________________________
_______________________________________________
/jd
Attachments:
Appendix I – Licence Primary Structural Change application
Page 3 of 3
APPENDIX I
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
March 7, 2016
MEETING:
COW
Witch Craft Beer Market & Bistro Liquor Primary Licence Amendment Application
– Change to liquor service hours
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Liquor Control and Licensing Branch (LCLB) has received an application from Witch Craft Beer
Market & Bistro located at 22648 Dewdney Trunk Road for a permanent change to their liquor
service hours.
The applicant is seeking a change to the start time, not the closing time. Currently the hours are
10:00 am to Midnight Monday through Thursday, 11:00 am to Midnight Sunday and 11:00 am to
1:00 am Friday and Saturday. The new hours will change the opening time to 9:00 am every day.
This does not mean that the pub intends to open every day at 9:00 am but it would provide the
flexibility to open earlier when needed.
a liquor primary license is a resolution from the local government. A number of regulatory criteria
RECOMMENDATION(S):
1. That the application by Witch Craft Beer Market & Bistro at 22648 Dewdney Trunk Road
Maple Ridge for a change of opening hours to 9:00 am every day as an amendment to Liquor
Primary Licence No. 033021 be supported, based on the information contained in the
Council report dated March 7, 2016.
DISCUSSION:
In January 2016 Witch Craft Beer Market & Bistro submitted an application (Appendix I) to
the LCLB for a permanent change in hours to their Liquor Primary Licence for their facility at
22648 Dewdney Trunk Road. The proposed change would allow the pub to open at 9:00 am
every day with no change to their closing hours. This does not mean that the pub intends to
open every day at 9:00 am but it would provide the flexibility to open earlier when needed.
Page 1 of 3
1110
property within approximately 300 metres of the subject site. There was one response to the
445 letters sent to surrounding property owners and occupants.
The City also posted a public notice in the local newspaper running two separate editions the
week of January 27, 2016 and then again the week of February 3, 2016. There were no
enquiries in response to this advertisement.
There is adequate parking, on the subject property to satisfy municipal parking requirements
for this proposed additional use.
That Council support the application from Witch Craft Beer Market & Bistro to change the
opening time of the establishment.
regulations are followed and that licenses establishments have the support of their
communities.
surrounding business and residential properties in terms of parking, traffic and noise
generation as well as the proximity of schools and similar establishments.
The Licences, Permits and Bylaws Department has coordinated in the review process and
f)
Alternatives:
To not approve the application or to provide conditions to the approval.
CONCLUSIONS:
That Council pass the necessary resolution supporting the application from Witch Craft Beer Market
& Bistro as submitted based upon the staff findings set out in this report.
_______________________________________________
Page 2 of 3
_________________________________________
_______________________________________________
/jd
Attachments:
Appendix I – Liquor primary licence change application
Page 3 of 3
APPENDIX I
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
MEETING DATE:
March 7, 2016
MEETING:
COW
SUBJECT:
Maple Ridge Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw No. 7210-2016
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The purpose of this report is to present the Maple Ridge Ticket Information Utilization Amending
Bylaw No.7210-2016 (Appendix I) to bring forward specific sections in one Maple Ridge Bylaw that
has been amended and therefore an update to the Municipal Ticketing Bylaw must made to match
these changes.
The Maple Ridge Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw No.7210-2016 has been prepared to
update and coordinate the bylaw with other City bylaws. With the adoption of a new tree protection
bylaw, the bylaw number has been changed and must be reflected in the MTI bylaw. There is also a
fine in the amount of $5000.00 which needs to be changed as the maximum fine for an MTI is
$1000.00 as well as some section numbering issues.
RECOMMENDATION(S):
That Maple Ridge Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw No.7210-2016 be given first,
second and third readings.
DISCUSSION:
Background Context:
A new Tree Protection and Management Bylaw was adopted in January 2016 with a new
bylaw number. This new number must be added to the MTI bylaw so that both bylaws
coincide. A new fine schedule was also added. One of the fines was in the amount of $5000.
Under the legislation for Municipal Ticket Information Bylaws, no fine can exceed $1000 so
this change is required to coincide with provincial legislation. There is also a housekeeping
change regarding changing a section number to align with the new tree bylaw.
The MTI Bylaw needs to be updated to reflect these changes so that issued tickets will
include the correct wording and refer to the applicable sections.
CONCLUSIONS:
Maple Ridge Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw No.7210-2016 ensures coordination and
compliance with other City bylaws.
Page 1 of 2
1111
___________________________________________
Manager, Bylaws and Licencing
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
_______________________________________________
RM/
Appendix I - Maple Ridge Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw No. 7210-2016
Page 2 of 2
APPENDIX I
City of Maple Ridge
Maple Ridge Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw No.7210-2016
A bylaw to amend Maple Ridge Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw No. 6929-2012
WHEREAS the Council of The City of Maple Ridge deems it expedient to amend the Maple Ridge
Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw No. 6929-2012
NOW THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Maple Ridge enacts as follows:
1. This bylaw may be cited as Maple Ridge Ticket Information Utilization Amending Bylaw
No. 7210-2016
2. Maple Ridge Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw No. 6929-2012 is amended by changing
the fine amount in Schedule 25 Section 4.4 to $1000.00
the numbering in Schedule 25 for “cut replacement tree without Permit” from Section
9.4 to Section 9.5
the number of the Maple Ridge Tree Protection Bylaw in Schedule 1 to read Maple Ridge
Tree Protection Bylaw No. 7133-2015.
READ A FIRST TIME this ____ day of ______________, 2016.
READ A SECOND TIME this ____ day of ______________, 2016.
READ A THIRD TIME this ____ day of ______________, 2016.
ADOPTED this ____ day of ______________, 2016.
PRESIDING MEMBER
CORPORATE OFFICER
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Speed Reader Boards Strategy
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
March 7, 2016
11-5460-01
C of W
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Vehicular speeding is a concern in all jurisdictions, not just at the municipal level, but on the
provincial system also. Concern around vehicle speeding in the City was raised in the Business
Planning presentations in December 2015 and staff were asked to provide information on the
effectiveness of speed reader boards, potential costs and to evaluate options for a strategy to install
additional speed reader boards in the community.
Staff undertook a literature review of nineteen existing studies and papers pertaining to the use and
effectiveness of speed reader boards and found that generally there is evidence of speed reduction
by having the speed reader boards in place albeit short term unless it is accompanied by police
enforcement.
In conjunction with the RCMP Traffic Section and ICBC, a Three Strike strategy is proposed, where at
agreed locations on corridors where there is systematic speeding concerns the City will install
additional speed limit signs, mount speed reader boards and the RCMP will ensure regular
enforcement. ICBC has indicated their willingness to share in the capital costs of the speed reader
boards as well as being open to consider participation in the promotion of the strategy through social
media.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
THAT the creation of a Three Strikes Strategy to address concerns pertaining to systematic vehicle
speeding be endorsed; and
THAT $150,000 from the Police Services Reserve be authorized to fund the Three Strikes Strategy,
as outlined in the March 7, 2016 staff report and these changes be included in the next Financial
Plan Bylaw amendment.
DISCUSSION:
Even though vehicle speed limits are applied consistently throughout the Province, the effective
management of vehicle speed is a challenge in all municipalities. Enforcement of speed limits
falls under the jurisdiction of the RCMP but there are a number of educational tools that the City
and its partners such as ICBC can utilize in a supportive role such as awareness campaigns or
remedial engineering design for roadways.
Concern around vehicular speeding in the City was raised in the Business Planning presentations
in December 2015 and staff were asked to provide information on the effectiveness of speed
reader boards, potential costs and evaluate options for a strategy to install speed reader boards
in the community.
1112
Literature Review
The first task was to undertake a literature review of existing studies in both Canada and the
United States related to the use and effectiveness of speed reader boards. Nineteen reports and
papers were reviewed and while the general sentiment was that the use of speed reader boards
did reduce vehicle speed, the effectiveness over an extended period was noted to vary. A
number of studies and articles indicated short term effectiveness such as the BC Ministry of
Transportation and Infrastructure that stated “the effectiveness of speed reader boards is
limited and decreases shortly after drivers pass the board. Longer term effectiveness has not
been determined.”
ICBC undertook a study in 2011 that evaluated the performance of speed reader boards in a
number of cities in British Columbia, including the City of Maple Ridge and the review indicated
“that motorist speeds were reduced in areas where the speed reader boards were located; the
85th percentile speeds were reduced on average by 5.2 km/h. The average speed reduction was
greater within 2 months of the installation of the speed reader boards (6.8 km/h reduction)
compared to after 2 months from installation (2.6 km/h). These trends appear to be consistent
with studies conducted throughout North America.”
ICBC has requested that only the Executive Summary of their report be made public for reasons
of confidentiality, and a copy is appended to this report.
The majority of speed reader boards have the ability to record the speed of oncoming vehicles
and for the ICBC study, most municipalities recorded traffic speed data upon placement of the
speed reader boards but before they went into use (“dark” mode) as a benchmark to compare to
the data collected when in operation (‘active” mode).
In Maple Ridge the test location for the ICBC study was on Dewdney Trunk Road around 205
Street and the 85th percentile speed in dark mode, measured over one week was 61 km/h.
From March to December 2010, data was collected on six occasions, each for one week
duration. The recorded 85th percentile speed averaged 60.2 km/h when the speed reader board
was active, a less than 1 km/h reduction, which is significantly less than the study’s average
measured speed reduction of 5.2 km/h.
One study, for the City of Bellevue does report ongoing success using speed reader boards to
reduce speed but it is not clear whether the benefits are directly from the use of the speed
reader boards or through more external influences such as land use changes and increasing
densification in the study area.
In considering the results of the various studies and papers reviewed, it is reasonable to state
that the use of speed reader boards results in decreased speeding, at least in the short term. It
is believed that regular enforcement by the RCMP is necessary to ensure the long term goal of
lowering the speed of vehicles on an on-going basis.
Existing Equipment
The City currently utilizes four speed reader boards that were purchased between 2009 and
2010, one of which was funded by ICBC. Two of the existing reader boards are hard wired, the
other two are powered by a solar array and battery. The two solar boards are permanently
installed at locations on River Road and 224 Street; the other two are moved as needed in
support of traffic calming initiatives – they are currently located on 123 Avenue and Creekside
Street.
A speed reader board unit has recently been installed on the Memorial Peace Park Ring Road by
Community Development, Parks & Recreation which is appropriate for its location but it is a
basic, low specification item that is not deemed suitable for application along roadways.
The challenge with the solar powered units is the amount of ultra-violet light required to power
the units, especially in the winter season. The manufacturers have stated that it is not necessary
that the units are in direct sunlight but they will not guarantee that the solar units will function
through the winter. When a unit is to be in a permanent location it is more effective to have
them hard-wired, thereby guaranteeing their continual operation.
The manufacturers have stated that the life span of a unit can range between 7 and 15 years so
it is reasonable to assume that the existing units are approaching the latter part of their
operational life.
Replacement or Additional Speed Reader Boards
The existing speed reader boards are an all-digital display that displays text in a standard speed
sign format, as well as flashing warning beacons. Drivers are not informed of the speed they are
driving, rather that they are advised of the regulatory speed limit with the request to slow down.
In addition, the existing speed reader boards have the ability to record the speed of oncoming
vehicles for data evaluation which is very useful in comparing the effectiveness of the units and
recording the “before” and “after” speeds. Data can be collected even when the unit display is
not active.
It is recommended that should additional speed reader boards be purchased that they be similar
in features to the models currently in use. The cost of such units is approximately $11,000 per
unit with installation costs between $1,000 and $4,000 depending upon the location. The cost
of moving a unit and hard-wiring it on a street light is estimated at approximately $2,000.
Proposed Strategy
Staff have met with representatives from the RCMP and ICBC to consider what would be an
effective implementation strategy moving forward to best utilize the speed reader board
technology. Through those discussions, and the review of traffic operations in the City, a two part
approach has been developed that would not require large numbers of speed reader boards
throughout the City but rather utilizing a smaller number of units, placed strategically at problem
areas.
The Engineering Department has a regular traffic count program that measures both vehicle
speed and volume at a number of locations throughout the City each year as well as deploying
the counters as required in response to concerns from residents. The RCMP Traffic Branch
noted also that they receive calls from residents concerned about speeding but have limited
resources. Excessive speeding may occur along certain road corridors on an infrequent basis but
it may also be an ongoing concern at locations along some corridors, especially major corridors
such as Dewdney Trunk Road, or the City’s portion of Lougheed Highway and different strategies
may be considered accordingly.
Where speeding is not a persistent problem along a corridor but there are complaints about
excessive speeding it is suggested that RCMP would liaise with Engineering to determine the
degree of speeding by deploying traffic counters at a location than sending out limited RCMP
staff resources. Upon determining that vehicles were driving at excess speed in the area,
Engineering staff would liaise with RCMP to see if traffic resources could be dispatched to
address the concern and undertake enforcement as required. An alternative to the RCMP
members going out would be to have Speed Watch volunteers go out to the sites in question,
although they cannot issue tickets, only warnings in the form of letters sent directly to the
address of the Registered Owner of the vehicle on RCMP letterhead. As locations may vary it is
not a requirement that speed reader boards would be used, but they could be installed on a
short term basis if needed which lends itself to the use of speed reader boards that are solar
powered.
Along corridors where there ongoing excessive speeding, a more permanent solution may be
considered, and this is the second component of the two-part approach. The Community Policing
and Crime Prevention sections of the RCMP currently have a program to deal with systematic
speeding that is sponsored and supported by ICBC Road Safety called the “Three Strikes
Program” that utilizes Speed Watch volunteers and portable speed reader boards. It is suggested
that the City, in conjunction with the RCMP and ICBC, could establish a variation on that existing
initiative. At any location on a corridor the ICBC program considers speeding by the speed limit
sign as the first strike, the Speed Watch volunteers and reader board as the second with the
RCMP as the third and final strike, issuing tickets as appropriate. ICBC has indicated that they
wish that this initiative to remain in place but are open to a slightly different interpretation should
pole-mounted speed reader boards be installed which would be:



Strike One :
Strike Two:
Strike Three:
Speed Limit Sign
Speed Reader Board
RCMP Enforcement
The expectation is that the speed reader boards would stay in place on corridors with consistent
speed issues but there would be periods where the boards would be dark (still collecting data),
then in the active mode for periods of time. When the speed reader boards would be active the
RCMP may or may not be in attendance, the intent being to make the drivers uncertain if there
is indeed enforcement up ahead thereby hopefully influencing their driving behaviour.
In discussions with the RCMP Traffic Division it was confirmed that there are certain road
corridors, largely arterials where there is systemic concerns around vehicle speeds and it is
recommended that on such corridors that speed reader boards be permanently installed. It is
expected that there would be up to six locations where the boards would be installed.
To deal with intermittent speed concerns it is recommended that up to four speed reader boards
be purchased that would in time replace the existing units. Two of these units could be solar
powered to provide flexibility.
b) Desired Outcome:
The goal of implementing an integrated strategy with the RCMP would be to reduce the
incidences of excess speeding and make the City roads a safer environment for all users.
c) Strategic Alignment:
Reducing excessive vehicle speeds would assist in creating desirable corridors for all modes of
transportation and improve livability within neighbourhoods.
Speeding is a concern in all municipalities and the intent is to initiate a program that would not
impinge upon residents driving throughout the City in a responsible manner but set in place a
process that would dissuade drivers, residents or not, from driving at excessive speeds
throughout the City.
The Transportation Section of the Engineering Department works closely with the Operations
Department to install traffic control devices throughout the City and liaise with the RCMP on
seeking to resolve speeding issues. A strategy such as outlined in this report will require all
three parties to work cooperatively to ensure its success, but past experiences have proved that
there is a high degree of collaboration already in place.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
As previously noted, the cost to purchase a suitable speed reader board is approximately
$11,000 with installation costs up to $4,000 and subsequent relocates estimated at $2,000
including power.
Should Council endorse the strategy as laid out, it is recommended that up to ten speed reader
boards be purchased at an installed cost of approximately $110,000 to $150,000.
Upon consultation with the Finance Department it is recommended that the purchase and
installation be funded from the Police Services Reserve Account. ICBC has indicated that they
will be willing to cost share up to 50% of the capital costs of the speed reader boards, but not
the installation or subsequent costs to relocate.
g) Alternatives:
Should a strategy to address systematic vehicle speed concerns not be pursued, then staff
would continue to work with the RCMP on a case by case basis to resolve vehicle speed
concerns.
CONCLUSIONS:
The use of speed reader boards is seen as a way to affect driver behaviour, but recent studies
indicate it to be a short term behavioural modifier unless it is accompanied by RCMP enforcement.
Vehicle speeding is a concern in all jurisdictions, not just in the City of Maple Ridge. The initiation of
a speed reader board strategy, targeting areas where speeding is a concern utilizing the “Three
Strikes” principles is seen as a way to reduce excessive vehicle speeding. The strategy would focus
on known areas of concern.
Prepared by:
David Pollock, PEng
Municipal Engineer
“Original signed by Trevor Thompson”
Financial Trevor Thompson, BBA, CPA, CGA
Concurrence: Manager of Financial Planning
“Original signed by David Fleugel”
Reviewed by:
David Fleugel, Superintendent
Ridge Meadows RCMP Detachment
“Original signed by David Pollock” for:
Approved by:
Frank Quinn, MBA, PEng.
DP:dp
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Contract Award: Recycling Trucks
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
March 7, 2016
11-5380-01
C of W
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The City of Maple Ridge is a leader in the Metro Vancouver Region in the provision of recycling
services and a strong partnership with the Ridge Meadows Recycling Society is the basis for the
City’s ability to provide a collection and processing system that results in high quality recyclable
products.
There are eleven recycling trucks in the City’s fleet that collect recyclable materials at curbside for
single family dwellings and townhouses as well as apartments. The funding for the City’s recycling
collection and processing is funded in part through Multi Materials British Columbia with a portion
funded through a per household levy. The City is in the middle of a five year contract with Multi
Materials British Columbia that expires in 2018 at which time the City may elect to continue the
current model or turn the curbside collection over to MMBC. At this time a large number of
municipalities are still maintaining a wait and see approach with regards to what to do after the
current contract expires.
The ability to provide high quality recycling services is in part a result of having a well maintained
vehicle fleet. Of the eleven recycling vehicles there are three vehicles due for replacement and a
Request for Proposal (RFP-OP15-70) was recently issued for the supply of three single axle trucks.
The results of the detailed evaluations concluded that the best value proposal for the City was
submitted by First Truck Centre Vancouver, Inc.
Assuming that the City continues with the current business model to collect recyclable materials
from curbside and apartments in partnership with the RMRS, it would seem prudent to proceed with
the purchase of the three trucks to ensure that the current business model and high level of service
is maintained. However, there are alternative business model scenarios that may be considered
including:
Option One – Status Quo
This is the current business model and continuance of this model would include regularly
scheduled vehicle replacements as needed, as well as adding potential additional vehicles to
the fleet as the City continues to develop and the service areas increase. This would mean
extending the contract with MMBC past the current contract end in 2018.
Option Two
Transition to having MMBC take over curbside collection at the end of the current contract in
2018 but purchase the new vehicles as identified in the replacement schedule for 2016 (but
not 2017) and have RMRS continue to collect all recyclables until MMBC takes over in 2018.
1113
Option Three
As in Option Two, there would be a transition to MMBC in 2018 although in this case it does not
allow for the replacement of all the trucks but the City may choose to purchase a partial quota of
new vehicles and/or seek to extend the life of the existing vehicles. In this case it is expected
that there would be a need to rent vehicles to cover breakdowns.
Option Four
This option would require the collapse the current Request for Proposal (RFP) and issuance of a
new RFP to lease up to six vehicles for a two year period through to the end of the current
contract with MMBC. It is expected that any such short-term lease vehicles would be used, and
specifications may vary from truck to truck.
In considering the four options, Option One (to purchase the new trucks) and Option Four (to lease
up to six trucks) are the only ones that provide some degree of cost certainty – with Option Two and
Three the cost impacts may vary considerably depending upon the amount of maintenance and
repairs needed to keep the fleet on the road, and in the case of Option Two, the capital loss when
selling the newer vehicles.
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with information on the issues pertaining to the
recycling operations, especially the supply of vehicles for curbside collection.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
THAT the Request for Proposal (RFP-OP15-70) be collapsed; and
THAT a new Request for Proposal be issued for the supply of up to six recycling trucks, suitable for
curbside collection, for a minimum two-year lease.
DISCUSSION:
Curbside collection in the City is undertaken by Ridge Meadows Recycling Society (RMRS), using
a fleet of eleven purpose-built trucks that are run as part of the City’s vehicle fleet. The funding
for the recycling efforts – curbside, apartments and Depot – is funded in part through Multi
Materials British Columbia (MMBC), with the remainder funded through a per household levy.
Ridge Meadows Recycling Society (RMRS)
The Ridge Meadows Recycling Society has been providing recycling services since the 1970’s
and was officially created as a society in 1980. RMRS provides recycling services for the City
under a fee for service agreement. In addition to the collection of recyclables at curbside and
apartments, RMRS operates the Recycling Depot and includes among their staff complement a
unique Supported Work Program for approximately thirty people with developmental disabilities.
The comprehensive multi-stream curbside pick-up and the resulting high-grade materials
collected and processed at the depot ensure that recycling services in the City are a leader in
Metro Vancouver, if not the Province.
Since 1991 when records were first kept RMRS has advanced from removing 2,900 tons
annually of recyclable materials from the waste stream to 10,500 tons removed in 2015. Over
the past decades Maple Ridge residents have come to rely on and appreciate all of the services
provided by RMRS.
Multi Materials British Columbia (MMBC)
MMBC is the not-for-profit industry association that delivers a province-wide Extended Producer
Responsibility (EPR) program for Packaging and Printed Paper (PPP), on behalf of producers, as
required under the BC Recycling Regulation with the goal of increasing the overall recycling rate
from the current estimated rate of 50-57% to 75%. The EPR model, regulated by the Provincial
Government, shifts the burden and cost for the management of a wide range of product-related
wastes including packaging and printed paper. The basic tenet of this model is to hold producers
responsible for recyclable materials that they produce. This is consistent with the regional Zero
Waste goals.
In May 2014, following a number of detailed reports and presentations to Council, the City
commenced a five-year contract with MMBC, under which MMBC provides financial incentives to
the City for the services currently provided by RMRS on behalf of the City.
Through the development of the MMBC Stewardship Plan and subsequent contract documents
in 2013 and 2014, all local regional governments had concerns around the methodology that
MMBC utilized and their somewhat heavy-handed approach. There were, and continue to be
concerns around the possible reduction in levels of service as well as financial stability of the
MMBC PPP model, although those concerns have diminished somewhat over the first eighteen
months of the contract as some issues have been resolved.
The vast majority of local governments in Metro Vancouver and throughout BC signed up with
MMBC; at that time the City of Coquitlam was the largest municipality to cede the responsibility
of curbside recycling collection to MMBC. In recent months Vancouver and Pitt Meadows are
the most recent examples of cities passing the curbside collection role to MMBC, although their
rationales for doing so differ.
MMBC & Disentangling of Curbside Recycling from Solid Waste Contracts
Prior to MMBC, solid waste (garbage and organics) and recycling collection was typically
tendered as a package, with contractors bidding on all three elements and awarded to a single
operator. With the advent of MMBC this is no longer the case. Previously the contractor would
collect the recyclable material and seek to sell it on the open market, in essence subsidizing the
cost of collection. Now, MMBC control the sale and revenue of the recyclable materials so the
municipality pays the full cost of collection, with the MMBC subsidy offsetting some of the cost.
So as noted in Vancouver and Pitt Meadows, the most recent examples, the local governments
are passing the curbside recycling collection over to MMBC. Pitt Meadows is in the process of
preparing a tender package for solid waste collection but it does not include curbside recycling;
Vancouver notes that the MMBC program funding does not cover the cost for the City to offer
curbside collection, whereas if MMBC assumes full responsibility for those services then the City
receives largely the same level of service for the recycling function but at no cost.
Vehicle Fleet Management
The City supplies and maintains a significant fleet of trucks and mechanical equipment to
facilitate the wide range of tasks that City Departments undertake. Vehicles all have a lifespan
that varies depending upon the class of equipment; that lifespan is determined through
consideration of industry standards as well as experience within the City. Once a piece of
equipment is purchased, an established annual rental fee is paid into the City’s Fleet
Replacement Reserve for the duration of the equipment’s lifespan so that when it comes time to
dispose of the vehicle and replace it with a new vehicle there are adequate funds in place.
Fleet managers will typically review the use and condition of vehicles to see if their lifespan may
be extended past the established lifespan – sometimes a vehicle may have lower than expected
mileage, or light usage that makes it practical to extend the life of the vehicle without
compromising the required functionality or reliability. Extending the lifespan of an industrial or
municipal vehicle is somewhat different to a personal decision to defer, say a roof replacement
on a home. A working vehicle is undertaking a function at a certain level of service to customers
or residents and may involve several employees, whereas on the personal level a leaking roof
may be seen as an inconvenience – impactful, but manageable without reducing the
functionality of the dwelling.
Request for Proposal (RFP-OP15-70) for Replacement of Recycling Trucks
There are eleven trucks used by RMRS to collect recyclable materials from single family curbside
as well as apartments. Through 2016 Business Plan presentations, Council was informed that
the replacement of three recycling trucks was pending. These are replacement units for recycling
trucks that have eight years of service. A condition assessment in 2014 allowed extension of one
additional year of service before replacement was required. Normally these trucks would have
been up for replacement in 2014; however a further two years of useful life has been extracted
from the vehicles. An additional three vehicles are scheduled for replacement next year.
A Request for Proposals (RFP-OP15-70) for the supply of three single axle recycling trucks was
publicly advertised and closed January 05, 2016. Two (2) proposals were received and the
tender prices are listed below. Upon evaluation it was determined that the best value proposal
for the City was submitted by First Truck Centre Vancouver, Inc.
First Truck Centre Vancouver Inc.
Peterbilt
$716,400.00, exc. Taxes ($238,800.00 each)
$784,914.00, exc. Taxes ($261,638.00 each)
The Financial Plan includes $1,022,000 in the Equipment Replacement Reserve Fund to fund
the purchase of the three recycling trucks. The vendor will honour the submitted vehicle bids to
March 31, 2016.
POSSIBLE SERVICE DELIVERY OPTIONS
Assuming that the City continue with the current business model to collect recyclable materials
from curbside and apartments in partnership with the RMRS it would seem prudent to proceed
with the purchase of the three trucks to ensure that the current business model and high level
of service is maintained. However, this is not the only model that could be considered as there
are alternatives including:
Option One – Status Quo
This is the current business model, where RMRS collects the recyclable materials and MMBC
provides funding for the curbside collection, apartments and Depot. Continuance of this model
would include regularly scheduled vehicle replacements as needed, as well as potential
additional vehicles as the City continues to develop and the service areas increase. This would
mean extending the contract with MMBC past the current contract end in 2018.
Option Two
Transition to having MMBC take over curbside collection at the end of the current contract in
2018 but purchase the new vehicles as identified in the replacement schedule for 2016 and
have RMRS continue to collect all recyclables. The vehicles used for curbside collection would
then be sold off upon transference to MMBC – the two trucks servicing the apartments would be
retained should the City choose to retain that role. It is not likely that the trucks could be sold to
MMBC as their methodology includes automated collection and totes.
Option Three
As for Option Two, there would be a transition to MMBC in 2018 - continue to have RMRS collect
all recyclables for the remainder of the current contract with MMBC, but then transition to have
MMBC collect the curbside recyclables. Option Three though does not include the replacement
of all the trucks but the City may choose to:
3.1
3.2
Purchase one or two new vehicles in 2016 to improve the fleet stock but do not
proceed with the purchase of the three currently scheduled trucks in 2017.
Not purchase any new vehicles to refresh the fleet and seek to extend the life of the
existing vehicles to the end of the MMBC contract in 2018
In the case of both Options 3.1 and 3.2, in order to minimise down time it may well be necessary
to rent vehicles for short durations to maintain service levels while existing vehicles are under
repair.
Other concerns with the Option Three variations are the ability to maintain the current level of
service as well as the potential to reduce confidence in the City’s recycling “brand” that has
been established over decades.
When seeking to extend the life of vehicles past their scheduled replacement there is a range of
mechanical issues that could arise although the extent may vary considerably. Each mechanical
failure results in two consequences, namely repair expense and lost productivity. Safety is
foremost and some repairs are critical safety issues; each unit is inspected three times per year
and a formal Motor Vehicle Inspection (MVI) is required annually. Potential failures may range
from brake or electrical wiring failure that would typically result in down-time of one to two
weeks through to engine failure or structural body issues that could have a truck out of service
for up to two months. The cost of bringing in a rented truck from a private hauler is
approximately $125 (including a driver) per hour, greater than the approximately $92 per hour
cost of a City truck and driver.
Option Four
This option would require the collapse the current Request for Proposal (RFP) and issuance of a
new RFP to lease up to six vehicles for a two year period through to the end of the current
contract with MMBC. It is expected that any such short-term lease vehicles would be used, and
specifications may vary from truck to truck.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Option One: Status Quo
This option represents maintenance of the status quo – MMBC would continue to contribute a
per household amount for curbside and apartment collection but whether the amounts for
future contracts would be the same as the current is unknown and thus the amount of the per
household levy may vary also from the current. The annual cost of operating a City fleet vehicle
for recycling is approximately $180,000, including the driver. In 2016, should the vehicle
purchase proceed the capital cost for the year is approximately $717,000, with a similar
amount expected in 2017.
Option Two: Maintain Current Operations Through to 2018 - Purchase New Vehicles
In this instance the operating and capital costs will be the same as Option One, except that the
trucks originally scheduled for purchase in 2017 would probably not proceed. Upon completion
of the contract the vehicles used for curbside collection would be sold. The depreciation rate for
this type of vehicle is approximately 15% of the original cost per year, although this may not
reflect the actual market value. It may be reasonable to expect that there would be some
additional vehicle repairs needed towards the end of the term that would require the rental of
trucks, although the severity of the repair, amount of time out of service and cost to remedy may
vary considerably.
Option Three: Maintain Current Operations Through to 2018, but Limited New Vehicles
Purchased
The challenge with this option is trying to forecast the costs of maintaining the full complement
of vehicles on the road at all times to preserve the current high level of service. Purchasing one
or two new vehicles would alleviate the reliability risk somewhat but there is always a risk of
breakdowns and a considerable range cost and loss of availability.
Option Four: Collapse Current RFP and Issue RFP to Lease Vehicles for Two Years
This option should lessen the risk of a reduction in the level of service due to mechanical
breakdowns as the onus to ensure vehicles would be available would shift to the contractor
supplying the vehicle. The cost of leasing a vehicle would be approximately thirty-five percent
higher than a City-owned vehicle. The unknown in this case is the availability of compatible
vehicles as well as the actual condition of the vehicles, assuming they would be used given the
short term lease. The City would seek to enforce determined levels of service but depending
upon the commitment and quality of the contractor it may be a challenge to meet the requisite
performance standards.
It is estimated that the cost to lease a vehicle is approximately 35% higher than to finance a
vehicle through the City fleet; therefore if the monthly charge for a new City recycling truck is
$5,300 then the cost to lease a similar vehicle would be approximately $1,900 higher, so for six
trucks the additional annual leasing cost would be approximately $140,000.
Selecting Option Four will allow the City flexibility to pursue different options in the future:
selecting a short term lease while retaining the current allocation in the Equipment
Replacement Reserve Fund allows for purchasing of trucks in the future should the City decide
to retain the curbside collection function past 2018. Alternatively if the decision is to have
MMBC collect the curbside function then the leased vehicles would be returned to the vendor.
Selecting either Option One or Four provides a level of cost certainty but for the other options,
and especially Option Three it is not possible to forecast costs with any degree of confidence.
SUMMARY OF REVIEW
If the City’s desire is to continue to provide a high level of service for curbside collection it is
prudent to refresh the vehicle fleet in accordance with the established lifecycles. That said
there will be a need for the City to decide whether or not it wishes to turn the curbside collection
over to MMBC upon the conclusion of the current five year contract and if that is the intent then
the purchase of new vehicles would seem less beneficial. There are financial implications
related to seeking to extend vehicles well beyond their lifecycle but the magnitude can’t really
be established given the uncertainty around the potential severity of breakdowns.
b) Desired Outcome:
The goal of the PPP Stewardship Plan is to contribute to the increased overall diversion of
recyclables from the currently estimated 50-57% up to 75% in a reasonable time frame.
c) Strategic Alignment:
The Region’s goal to increase the amount of recyclable materials diverted out of the solid waste
stream is in alignment with the City’s goals of sustainability.
The residents in Maple Ridge benefit from a high quality curbside recycling collection that is
source separated and that results in high-grade recyclable materials. The challenge over the
next two to three years is to maintain the current high level of service, and similar high degree of
commitment of residents toward recycling in the City until a decision is made whether or not to
transition to having MMBC take over the curbside collection.
The Operations Department currently maintain the City’s vehicle fleet. If a decision is made to
extend the existing vehicle lives further that will likely create additional workload for the Garage.
The City has a strong relationship with RMRS and it is not desirable to do anything that would
impact the strong commitment that the residents of Maple Ridge have towards recycling.
f) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
Depending upon the choice of option there will be impacts to the Financial Plan that would need
to be considered in the next cycle of Business Planning and the development of the 2017-2021
Financial Plan.
CONCLUSIONS:
The City provides a high level of recycling services to its residents whether that be at the curbside for
single family dwellings and townhomes, in apartments or at the Depot in Albion. That high level of
service is obtained in large part through having a well maintained fleet of trucks. Moving forward,
the City will need to decide whether it continues to collect curbside materials under contract with
MMBC or if it is more beneficial to let MMBC take over the collection with their own contractor. The
challenge is how best to provide the curbside recycling service in the intervening period. There are a
number of alternatives as to how that can be achieved, each with their own complexities and varying
financial impacts.
Prepared by:
David Pollock, PEng.
Municipal Engineer
“Original signed by Russ Carmichael”
Concurrence: Russ Carmichael AScT, Eng. L.
Director of Operations
“Original signed by David Pollock” for:
Approved by:
Frank Quinn, MBA, PEng.
DP:dp
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Downtown Security Patrols
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
March 7, 2016
COW
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On September 21, 2015, Municipal Council received a presentation on the review that was
conducted for city funded security services in the downtown. The review identified that by blending
funding envelopes, coordinating security efforts and some additional funding, a more visible security
presence could be provided. The additional funding required to provide enhanced mobile security is
available through the end of March, 2016.
The purpose of this report is to seek funding to allow the enhanced level of mobile security to
continue until December 31, 2016. Funding for future years will be addressed as part of the 20172021 Business Plans.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the enhanced security coverage in the downtown core as outlined in the staff report dated
March 7, 2016 be approved, noting that the 2016 cost of $60,000 be funded from the Police
Services Reserve and that these changes be included in the next Financial Plan Bylaw amendment.
DISCUSSION:
On September 21, 2015, Council received a presentation on the city funded security services in
the downtown. Council heard that while Warrington Properties, the City and the Business
Improvement Area were providing security patrols, there was duplication and gaps in their
services. The total cost of these services was about $203,000, largely funded through taxation.
The staff presentation highlighted that with increased coordination and additional funding for 6
months of $32,000 we could enhance mobile security coverage in the key service areas in the
Downtown. This was scheduled to coincide with the operation of the temporary shelter.
1
1151
Here is a summary of the enhanced delivery model that was implemented in September, 2015.
B.I.A + City of Maple Ridge
Mobile Security Patrol
Enhanced Mobile Security
1 year cost for extended security coverage and random
early morning patrols to continue to support business,
service providers, local residents and identified
hotspots in the Downtown Core.
City of Maple Ridge Staff + BIA Administration
City of Maple Ridge
16Hrs/day (7:00AM - 11:00PM)
Move from 3 to 6 random patrols (12:00AM - 6:00AM)
Downtown Core Business
Community Parks
Rental Properties
Safe Walk Program
Identified Hotspot Areas
Annualized Cost $282,000
Program Administrator - Gatekeeper
Centralized Billing and Reporting
Hours of Coverage - 7 Days Week
Random Patrols -Early Morning hours
Area Covered:
Since the new delivery model was implemented, communication has been enhanced, information
sharing has improved and there has been a greater security presence in the service areas.
A survey was also conducted after implementing the new model. A total of 120 surveys were handed
out to businesses in the downtown area and 85 responses were received. Out of the 85 responses,
74 or 87% rated the services as good or excellent. These surveys were distributed in December
2015 and collected early in January 2016.
Downtown Core Service Providers, Business & Residents
Overall satisfaction of service provided
5
3 2
28
Excellent
Good
Acceptable
46
Needs Improvement
Unsatisfactory
85
Total
Not Applicable
Eight businesses adjacent to the temporary shelter were also contacted. All of the adjacent business
rated the services as good or excellent.
2
Businesses surrounding the Interim Shelter
Overall satisfaction of service provided
4
Excellent
Good
Acceptable
4
Needs Improvement
Unsatisfactory
8
Total
Not Applicable
Respondents were asked for their suggestions on improvements and it has been pointed out that
random patrols from 11:00 pm to 7:00 am would help. We estimate the annual costs of this to be
about $15,000 a year.
b) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
The annualized costs of the enhanced security, including the random patrols is estimated at
$79,000. For nine months, the prorated 2016 costs would be about $60,000. The Police
Services Reserve has the capacity to pay for this. If approved by Council, the Financial Plan will
be amended at the next opportunity. Future years' funding will be addressed as part of the
2017-2021 Financial Plan.
The on-going administration of this security, including improved reporting to the RCMP and BIA,
has been dealt with by existing staff. We are experiencing some pressures that suggest
additional staff support estimated at $10,000 is required. We will continue to monitor this and
see what staff resources can be reallocated. A request for addition resources may have to be
considered as part of the 2017-2021 budget deliberations.
CONCLUSIONS:
This program is working well and we recommend its continuance on the basis outlined. If funding is
not approved, mobile patrols will be reduced to eight hours per day and some efficiencies will be lost.
“Original signed by Brian Patel”
Prepared by:
Brian Patel, Recreation Coordinator Core Area
“Original signed by Kelly Swift”
Approved by:
Kelly Swift, General Manager, Community Development
Parks & Recreation Services
“Original signed by Trevor Thompson”
Approved by:
Trevor Thompson, Manager Financial Planning
“Original signed by Ted Swabey”
Concurrence: E.C. (Ted) Swabey
:bp
3
City of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
March 7, 2016
SUBJECT:
Joint Leisure Services Agreement - Arts & Recreation Programming
COW
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In the Joint Leisure Services Transition Plan report dated January 18, 2016, staff recommended a
report be brought back to Council on the implications and costs associated with continuing the arts
and recreation programming function as a joint service until December 31, 2016. The following
report provides Council with the estimated cost implications to provide the City of Pitt Meadows
(CPM) with joint programming through December 31, 2016.
RECOMMENDATION:
A. That staff be authorized to continue joint program delivery to the City of Pitt Meadows through to
December 31, 2016; AND,
B. That staff work with the City of Pitt Meadows to explore an approach and costs for the City of Pitt
Meadows continued involvement in the Arts & Recreation Guide for registered program content;
AND,
C. That staff work with the City of Pitt Meadows to explore interest and an approach for City of Pitt
Meadows to subsidize access to Maple Ridge facilities for Pitt Meadows families who face
financial barriers to access recreation opportunities.
DISCUSSION:
On October 31, 2016 the Joint Leisure Services Agreement between the City of Maple Ridge
and the City of Pitt Meadows will conclude and following that date each community will
deliver parks and recreation services separately to their citizens. In the Joint Leisure
Services Transition Plan report dated January 18, 2016, staff recommended a report be
brought back to Council on the implications and costs associated with continuing the arts
and recreation programming function as a joint service until December 31, 2016.
Joint Programming
The Fall programming season runs from September until December with multiple lesson sets
available ranging from 4 lessons – 10 lessons per set, depending on the service area and
activity; this model is the general practice for Parks and Recreation departments.
Staff reviewed 2015 Fall programming and have based 2016 cost implication assumptions
on a comparable service delivery which included 31 programs; 18 offered through Parks &
Leisure Services and 13 through the Arts Council at the Pitt Meadows Family Recreation
Centre, South Bonson Community Centre and Highland Park Elementary.
1152
The work associated with program development and delivery begins months before course
start dates. Staff research best practices, analyze programming trends, review facility
allocations and liaise with contract service providers to finalize the course offerings. All of
this occurs approximately four months prior. As well, the production of the Arts & Recreation
Guide will begin in June for Fall programming and this work includes components such as
program inputting, facility booking, and guide development. As a result the “heavy lifting” for
program delivery happens well before participants attend their classes.
Staff reviewed costs associated with arts and recreation programming and identified the
following: payment processing charges, brochure print costs, instructor costs, programmer
administration time, registration staff time and administration support time. As previously
mentioned, the majority of staff time dedicated to program development occurs prior to
October 31; therefore, programmer administration costs are relatively low for the period of
November 1 – December 31.
Program revenue
Payment processing, marketing, supplies
Administrative support (registration,
customer service, program management)
Program instructor costs
Net cost
$(15,700)
$ 1,100
$ 7,200
$ 14,200
$ 6,800
Staff estimate the cost implications related to continuing joint programming until December
31, 2016 to be approximately $7,000. This projection is based on 2015 actuals; therefore,
staff recommend that the accounts be reconciled in December 2016 to determine actual
costs in order to bill the CPM appropriately.
It should be noted that this does not include birthday parties at the Pitt Meadows Family
Recreation Centre, which will not be offered by Parks & Leisure staff for the Fall session due
to the minimal parties booked (5) in 2015 and to provide the CPM with access to the PMFRC
gymnasium for other purposes. In addition the Active Kids Club (AKC) program at Highland
Elementary is not included in the cost assumptions as separate discussions are underway
with School District No. 42 to continue to provide the AKC program after the dissolution of
the joint leisure services agreement.
Joint Program Planning
Community Development Parks and Recreation (CDPR) staff meet annually with local
program agencies such as Continuing Education and the Fraser Valley Regional Library to
discuss the complimentary programming needs of the community and to avoid duplication of
services. In addition, CDPR program staff are part of a regional municipal program team
which meets to discuss trends and best practices. As the CPM moves towards delivering
recreation services their staff groups will be invited to join these existing teams to ensure
communication and collaboration at the local and regional programming level. Staff
recognize the value of the two municipalities working together to provide citizens with high
quality, barrier free programming at a local level.
Skating Lessons
Skating lessons are offered at Planet Ice and Pitt Meadows Arenas (PMA). The contract for
skate lesson services expires on June 30, 2016. Parks & Leisure staff will be re-negotiating
with the current provider for lessons beginning in the fall of 2016 and recommend to
continue managing this service on behalf of CPM at the PMA until December 31, 2016. This
will provide CPM with time to determine the best model for future skate lesson delivery
beginning January 2017. The CPM could enter into a contract for service with the current
skate lesson provider for example, for January 2017.
Recreation Software
The CPM is currently determining their needs for service delivery which includes a robust
registration software system. These systems include components such as registration,
facility bookings, point of sale, membership sales, customer relations and financial
integration and marketing integration. CDPR staff are working closely with the CPM through
this process to ensure the needs of customers, stakeholders and future staff are met. The
industry standard currently has the majority of municipalities utilizing the same system;
however, this may change in the future with the end of life for the CLASS registration system
pending (November 2017).
Staff have heard from some stakeholders that a joint registration system between the two
communities may eliminate duplication of resources from a staff perspective and streamline
the process for customers who participate in programs across borders. Unfortunately due to
the sophistication of the software systems, it is not possible to treat the registration
component as a stand-alone function. The facility bookings and registration modules work in
conjunction with one another and double bookings of space would occur under this solution
causing frustration and potential disappointment for users. In addition, challenges could
arise from scheduling facilities that CDPR staff don’t directly operate. However, staff have
collaborated on a solution that will deliver the same end goal to users.
Although an ongoing joint program delivery model is not feasible, there is potential to
participate in joint marketing campaigns for the Arts & Recreation Guide. This would allow
residents from both communities to stay informed on opportunities in both communities and
also provides the CPM with access to pre-existing marketing tools. CDPR staff would manage
the integration of information, printing services, and design in a manner that protects the
integrity of both the CMR and CPM brands. This model supports the mandate of recreation
by encouraging residents to participate in activities benefiting their personal well-being and
the overall health of our community.
Staff recommend that CMR and CPM enter into an agreement whereby CMR will continue to
provide marketing services for registered programs to CPM in the form of an insert in the Arts
& Recreation Guide.
Barrier Free Access
The current Participation Program offers reduced admissions and program fees to Maple
Ridge and Pitt Meadows residents who meet eligibility, to ensure that cost is not a barrier to
accessing our services. As of December 31, 2015 this program had 847 families
participating. The make up of this as a percentage of users is 85% CMR residents and 15%
CPM residents.
A Framework for Recreation in Canada 2015 states that high quality, accessible recreation
opportunities are integral to a well-functioning society and that all people and communities
deserve equitable access to recreational experiences. Recreation must be accessible and
welcoming to all. Staff recognize this as an important consideration that was embedded in
the joint leisure services transition Guiding Principles developed by Council(s). Therefore, it is
likely that CPM will look at a similar subsidy program for their residents.
With this in mind, staff recommend that staff work with CPM to explore the option to
maintain subsidy access for its citizens for admittance to the Maple Ridge Leisure Centre
under the existing Participation program; which would have CPM reimbursing CMR for the
discounted admissions of residents.
b) Desired Outcome:
To provide citizens of Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows a seamless and streamlined
registration process and program delivery throughout the Fall programming season.
c) Business Plan/Financial Implications:
The estimated net cost to provide the CPM with joint programming service up to December
31, 2016 is $7,000. If CPM agrees to this proposal, staff will reconcile near year end to
determine the actual recovery cost. It should be noted that the projection is based on 2015
fall programming.
d) Alternatives:
To conclude the arts & recreation programming function in tandem with the conclusion of the
Joint Leisure Services agreement on October 31, 2016.
CONCLUSIONS:
The benefits related to continued joint programming through December 31 include seamless and
efficient registration methods, a standard level of service through the Fall season and providing the
CPM with the appropriate time to determine a service delivery model and build a team. As well,
customers that register in programs in CMR and CPM facilities tend to be residents of both
communities, therefore by continuing services CDPR fosters trust and confidence in customers
through arts and recreation program delivery.
“Original signed by Danielle Pope”
Prepared by:
Danielle Pope, Business Operations Manager
“Original signed by Don Cramb for”
Approved by:
Wendy McCormick, Director Recreation and Community Services
“Original signed by Kelly Swift”
Approved by:
Kelly Swift, General Manager,
Community Development, Parks & Recreation Services
“Original signed by Ted Swabey”
:dap

Mar 7, 2016 - Maple Ridge

Transcription

Similar documents

Nanaimo Regional District Letter to the Honorable Mary Polak Re

Home Digest – April 2016

Get the pdf HERE.

I`m helping to end MS by participating in the 2016 Jayman BUILT MS

Specialist Residential Risks

REAL PROPERTY TAX RATES IN HAWAII

multifamily development and investment

The Board of Directors of Qatar Fuel (WOQOD) is pleased to invite

Brotoloc South Brochure

Autumn Statement 2014