PDF - Maple Ridge

Transcription

PDF - Maple Ridge

District of Maple Ridge
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
AGENDA
January 7, 2013
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.
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
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 RZ/087/08, 23103 136 Avenue, Designated Civic Property
Staff report dated January 7, 2013 recommending that Option 3 to amend the
Official Community Plan from Civic to Residential to allow residential
development on the school site be supported and that a new zone amending
bylaw for residential development be considered which will include a
discussion on potential amenity contributions.
Committee of the Whole Agenda
January 7, 2013
Page 2 of 4
1102 2012-109-RZ, 24979 108 Avenue, RS-3 to RS-1b
Staff report dated January 7, 2013 recommending that Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012 to rezone from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to RS-1b (One Family Urban [Medium Density] Residential) be
given first reading and that the applicant provide further information under
Bylaw No. 5879-1999, along with information required for an Intensive
Residential Development Permit and a Subdivision application.
1103 2012-051-RZ, 11406 and 11414 205 Street, Heritage Designation and
Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw
Staff report dated January 7, 2013 recommending that Maple Ridge Heritage
Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No.
6962-2012 be given first and second readings and be forwarded to Public
Hearing.
1104 2012-085-AL, 12224 240 Street, Non Farm Use Application
Staff report dated January 7, 2012 recommending that Non-Farm Use
Application 2012-085-AL be forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission.
1105 RZ/028/10, 20623 and 20615 113 Avenue and 11312 206 Street, One
Year Extension
Staff report dated January 7, 2013 recommending that Maple Ridge Official
Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6882-2011 and Maple Ridge Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6738-2010 to permit future construction of an
apartment building with 36 units under the RM-2 zone be granted a one year
extension.
1106 2011-037-RZ, 24311 and 24361 124 Avenue, One Year Extension
Staff report dated January 7, 2013 recommending that rezoning application
2011-037-RZ to allow for future subdivision into 4 lots be granted a one year
extension.
1107 2011-008-DVP, 12640 and 12610 Ansell Street
Staff report dated January 7, 2013 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal 2011-008-DVP to reduce the road right-of-way
on Ansell Street and the road carriageway width and to reduce the principle
building’s and the accessory residential use area’s rear setback to permit a
four lot subdivision.
January 7, 2013
Page 3 of 4
1108 2012-026-DVP, 23930 and 23950 130 Avenue
Staff report dated January 7, 2013 recommending that the Corporate Officer
be authorized to sign and seal 2012-026-DVP to reduce road carriageways
and frontage standards to an existing gravel width and to reduce lot width for
Lot A to permit a subdivision of two RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
lots.
3.
FINANCIAL AND CORPORATE SERVICES (including Fire and Police)
1131 Disbursements for the month ended November 30, 2012
Staff report dated January 7, 2013 recommending that the disbursements for
the month ended November 30, 2012 be approved.
4.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND RECREATION SERVICES
1151
5.
CORRESPONDENCE
1171
6.
OTHER ISSUES
1181
7.
ADJOURNMENT
January 7, 2013
Page 4 of 4
8.
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
by-laws 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: ________________
TO:
FROM:
His Worship Mayor Ernie Daykin
and Members of Council
Chief Administrative Officer
MEETING DATE: January 7, 2013
FILE NO:
RZ/087/08
MEETING:
C of W
SUBJECT:
Designated Civic Property at 23103 136 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At the Council meeting on April 24, 2012 Council deferred First Reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No.
6900 – 2012, which is one of two zone amending bylaws for the proposed development of 23103
136 Avenue (Appendix A). The proposal for the site was to rezone the subject property from A-2
(Upland Agricultural) to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), R-1 (Residential District), RS-1b
(One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential), RM-1 (Townhouse Residential), and P-1 (Park and
School).
The deferred Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6900 – 2012 is to rezone land that is identified for a school
site in the Blaney Hamlet of the Silver Valley Area Plan to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) for the
development of approximately 68 townhouse units. The applicant is now proposing approximately 30
R-2 (Urban Residential District) zoned single family lots on the school site. It therefore would be
appropriate to bring forward a new Zone Amending Bylaw for consideration.
Council and senior staff have been in discussion with the School Board for some time over the status
of this school site. The developer has been seeking the purchase of the site, by either the School
District or District of Maple Ridge, to allow him to proceed with the broader residential development
planned for the site. On November 15, 2012 School District No. 42 provided the District with a letter
stating they do not intend to proceed with the purchase of the property located at 136 Avenue, Blaney
Hamlet, Silver Valley (Appendix B). The letter indicates that the School District will only need two
elementary schools in Silver valley and that this Blaney Hamlet site will not be one of them.
This decision runs counter to the Silver Valley Area Plan and will likely be perceived negatively by area
residents. New residential development has been promoted and developed for more than a decade
in Silver Valley with a school at the heart of the Blaney Hamlet.
This report identifies a number of options with regard to the future use of this site for Council’s
consideration. They are as follows:
Option 1:
(Status Quo)
This option would maintain the current OCP designation of this site as a future School/Park site and
not approve any alternative residential use of the site. The option would likely be legally challenged
by the property owners. Based on previous experience it is probable that the legal challenge could be
successful. Given that the School District has decided not to pursue this site, this option is not
recommended.
1101
Option 2:
(Purchase the Site)
Under this option the acquisition of the site would continue to be pursued, either by the District of
Maple Ridge or in conjunction with the School Board. Given that the School Board has decided not to
pursue this site for a school, this option is not recommended.
Option 3:
(Allow Residential Use)
Bring forward a new Zone Amending Bylaw for proposed residential development on the school site.
This option is recommended given the stated position of the School District.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that Option 3 of the staff report dated January 7, 2013 be supported and that
staff be directed to bring forward a new Zone Amending Bylaw for residential development for
consideration, and;
That the staff report include a discussion on potential amenity contributions.
DISCUSSION:
Background:
When this application was received in 2008, the applicant proposed a school/park site in the central
portion of the site, as identified on the Silver Valley Area Plan with a Civic land use designation. Since
then, the District of Maple Ridge has been actively pursuing the acquisition of the school site for an
elementary school in collaboration with the School District.
The Silver Valley Area Plan notes that its civic areas are the central focus of each neighbourhood, and
that each civic area is to contain a school, park area, and natural open space. School and Park sites
have been identified through the area planning process in collaboration with the School District. The
expectation in designating these sites was that they would be purchased for school use. Council
passed a Loan Authorizing Bylaw to acquire the school site if the School District could commit to a
future purchase of the site. Recently however, School District staff have indicated that the Province is
considering moving towards a model that would see fewer but larger elementary schools built.
In the absence of an agreement to purchase, the applicant is now seeking re-designation of the
school site for residential use. The school site represents 1.534 ha (3.79ac), approximately 26% of
the site. This OCP amendment request is the critical issue regarding this application. If approved by
Council, it will negate the possibility of a school in this part of Silver Valley, and will have a negative
impact on the existing Area Plan and the recent development in the area.
On April 24, 2012 this application RZ/087/08 was presented to Council for First Reading of Zone
Amending Bylaws No. 6899 – 2012 and 6900 – 2012. The First Reading Report is attached as
Appendix C to this report. The Planning Department recommended approval of First Reading for
Bylaw No. 6899 – 2012. Council approved First Reading of Bylaw No. 6899 – 2012. The Planning
Department did not recommend approval of First Reading for Bylaw No. 6900 – 2012, to permit
residential development (RM-1 Townhomes) in the area identified for a school site, as the proposal
conflicted with the policies of the Silver Valley Area Plan and its designation for Civic use. Council
deferred First Reading of Zoning Amending Bylaw No. 6900 – 2012.
-2-
Discussions on development of the school/park site continued between the District staff and the
applicant, and with the School District. An appraisal was undertaken to establish the land values of
the various park lands. On October 21, 2012 the District sent a letter to the Superintendent of
School District 42 requesting the School Board provide definitive direction on the purchase of the
school site. On November 15, 2012 the School District responded that the Maple Ridge - Pitt
Meadows Board of Education has given the matter careful consideration and has decided not to
proceed with the purchase of the 1.534 ha (3.79 ac) school site property. Reasons given for not
proceeding with acquisition of this site are: declining enrollment figures in the School District; the
existence of two other designated school sites in the Silver Valley area; and the lack of financial
commitments on the part of the Province to build a school on this site.
Project Description:
The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject site utilizing two distinct Zone Amending Bylaws
(6899 - 2012 and 6900 - 2012) to provide a variety of residential lot sizes and housing types. Bylaw
No. 6899 - 2012 was given First Reading on April 24, 2012.
Bylaw No. 6900 – 2012 is the subject of this report and proposes a residential use on the portion of
the site currently designated for “Civic” use (i.e. an elementary school).
At this time the current application has been assessed only to determine its compliance with the
Official Community Plan 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, Official Community Plan designations and Bylaw particulars, and may require
additional development applications.
Official Community Plan:
The subject site is located within the Blaney Hamlet in the Silver Valley Area Plan and currently has
eight land use designations: Civic, Conservation, Medium/High Density Residential, Medium Density
Residential, Low/Medium Density Residential, Low Density Urban, Eco-Clusters, and Neighbourhood
Park. The proposed development is consistent with the policies of the Silver Valley Area Plan for the
bulk of the property, with the exception of the “Civic” designated portion of the site. This “Civic” site is
divided into a 0.405 ha (1 ac) “park” portion, which will be purchased by the District of Maple Ridge
to be amalgamated with the existing park to the north for use as a future neighbourhood park, and
the 1.534 ha (3.79 ac) school site. Some of the area on the school site is designated for
Conservation and the boundaries will need to be adjusted as a result of ground truthing. The
applicant is proposing a residential use on the portion of the site currently designated for “Civic” use
(i.e. an elementary school).
Zoning Bylaw:
This application to develop the property located at 23103 136 Avenue is comprised of two Zone
Amending Bylaws, Bylaw No. 6899 – 2012 and Bylaw No. 6900 – 2012. The first bylaw, No. 6899 –
2012, proposes to rezone the property from A-2 (Upland Agricultural) to R-2 (Urban Residential
District), R-1 (Residential District), RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential), RM-1
(Townhouse Residential), and P-1 (Park and School) to permit the development of single family
-3-
residential and townhouse residential with park lands for Civic and Conservation uses.
represents all the land except that portion identified as a future school site.
This
The second bylaw, Bylaw No. 6900 – 2012, was separated from the first bylaw so that the other lands
could potentially proceed with the rezoning and development process while the issues related to the
school site could be resolved. When Council considered this bylaw in April 2012 the applicant
proposed to rezone land that is identified for a school site to RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) for the
development of approximately 68 townhouse units. The applicant is now proposing approximately 30
R-2 (Urban Residential District) zoned single family lots on the school site. It therefore would be
appropriate to bring forward a new Zone Amending Bylaw for consideration.
Development Options for the School Site:
Since the School Board has determined that they will not purchase the school site and the developer
is eager to proceed with a proposal for residential use of the site, the District is left in the position of
deciding what the best use for the site is. What follows below is a discussion of the possible options
for the site and implications of each:
Option 1:
(Status Quo)
Maintain the current Civic OCP designation for the school site and not support a rezoning
application to any other use.
Not supporting this rezoning request would still allow the bulk of the site to develop for residential
uses and permit the District of Maple Ridge to purchase the 0.405 ha (1 ac) park site. The
developer would be able to build one single family dwelling on the 1.534 ha (3.79 ac) site with the
A-2 (Upland Agriculture) zoning and sell the parcel as such. This approach could preserve the site
for future consideration and would also allow Council to re-evaluate the status of the site
periodically. The risk with this approach is that the applicant could seek legal action against the
District of Maple Ridge by arguing, as has been done in the past, that a parcel designated for Civic
use must be able to be purchased within a certain period of time.
Option 2:
(Purchase the Site)
Continue to pursue the acquisition of the property, either by the District of Maple Ridge or in
conjunction with the School District.
This approach would preserve the integrity of the Silver Valley plan with the thought that the site
will be used for a Civic use in the future as the area matures. The applicant has indicated he
would be willing to sell the site at fair market value to either the District of Maple Ridge or the
School District. The downside to this approach is that, given the School District’s position, it is the
District of Maple Ridge that would have to purchase the site in anticipation of a future school that
will in all likelihood never happen. This would place a burden on the District of Maple Ridge that
is a provincial responsibility.
-4-
Option 3:
(Allow Residential Use)
Amend the OCP from Civic to Residential to allow residential development on the school site.
This option is proposed by the developer to allow him to proceed with residential development of
the entire parcel at one time. The suggested use fits well with the overall neighbourhood. This
option would eliminate the possibility of a school site in the heart of Blaney Hamlet. This site was
originally chosen for a school because of its relative flatness and central location to the emerging
neighbourhoods. Area residents have purchased homes in the area in anticipation of the future
elementary school locating near them. There are no other comparable sites in the Blaney Hamlet
where a school could be accommodated. Should Council favour this option, then a new Zone
Amending Bylaw would be brought back for consideration.
Amenity Contribution:
An amenity requirement in exchange for the necessary OCP re-designation is similar to the approach
being contemplated by Council in Albion. The exact nature of what the amenity would be in this case
is still undetermined. There is also some debate as to whether or not there is any significant “lift”
associated with an OCP re-designation from “Civic” to “Medium/High Density Residential”. Land
purchase prices are generally determined by a highest and best use calculation. Since land value
cannot be determined by looking at the limited land value for “Civic” uses, a fair market value would
have to be the going rate of the residential lands nearby. Thus, the lift value on this land may be
limited. Council, however, could still make the case that the requested OCP designation is a
significant enough change to warrant an amenity contribution. The developer has indicated to staff
they are not in favour of an amenity contribution for the OCP re-designation request. Council would
therefore have to make it a condition of zoning approval.
Neighbourhood Context:
There have been numerous comments received from area residents at Public Hearings noting the
need for a local elementary school. The Silver Valley area is particularly challenged by topography
and there is a limited availability of suitable sites for school site acquisition. In addition, significant
residential development has occurred around the site in anticipation of an elementrary school
eventually being located there.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed zone amending bylaw to allow residential development on the school site is not in
compliance with the policies of the Silver Valley Area Plan. The School District’s decision not to
acquire the 1.534 ha (3.79 ac) school site presents a challenge to the District of Maple Ridge and the
existing neighbourhoods which have developed in anticipation of this school use. The developer is
willing to sell the land for this purpose to either the School Board or the District of Maple Ridge but
also seeks a residential use if a sale is not possible.
-5-
Based on the history of the OCP, three options are presented for Council’s consideration. Staff
recommends Option 3 based on the reality that the School District has decided that it does not want
the site any longer. A new Zone Amending Bylaw would be brought back for consideration of First
Reading. Staff also recommend that the First Reading report include a discussion on amenity
contributions for consideration.
"Original signed by Ann Edwards"
_______________________________________________
Prepared by:
Ann Edwards, CPT
Senior Planning Technician
"Original signed by Charles R. Goddard" for
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
Director of Planning
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
GM: Public Works & Development Services
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
_______________________________________________
Concurrence:
J. L. (Jim) Rule
The following appendices are attached hereto:
Appendix A – Subject Map
Appendix B – November 15, 2012 Letter from School District 42
Appendix C – April 16, 2012 First Reading report
-6-
APPENDIX A
SUBJECT PROPERTY
Scale: 1:2,500
^
District of Mission
´
City of Pitt
Meadows
District of
Langley
23103 136 AVENUE
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FRA SER R.
DATE: Jan 3, 2013
FILE: RZ/087/08
BY: DT
APPENDIX C
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
SUBJECT
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
April 16, 2012
RZ/087/08
C of W
First Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899 – 2012
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6900 – 2012
23103 136 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject property from A-2 (Upland Agricultural) to R-3
(Special Amenity Residential District), R-1 (Residential District), RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium
Density) Residential), RM-1(Townhouse Residential), and P-1 (Park and School). Two zone amending
bylaws are proposed.
The first, Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899 – 2012, is to permit the development of approximately 36
single family lots, 18 townhouse units, a neighbourhood park, a municipal park and a linear park for
a trail. As this development proposal is consistent with the Silver Valley Area Plan policies for
residential development in the Official Community Plan and an amendment to such is supportable
under the OCP Policies, it is recommended that Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899 – 2012 be given
First Reading.
The second zone amending bylaw is to rezone the land identified for a school/park site. When this
application was received in 2008, the applicant proposed a school/park site in the central portion of
the site, as identified on the Silver Valley Area Plan with the Civic land use designation. At the time
of writing of this report the matter is under consideration by the School District in conjunction with
the Provincial Government. The District of Maple Ridge is awaiting the outcome of that
consideration. The applicant is now requesting, in the absence of an agreement to purchase, that
the school site be re-designated for townhouse development, as shown on Zone Amending Bylaw No.
6900 – 2012. As the development proposal is not in compliance with the Official Community Plan
and an amendment to such is not supportable under the OCP Policies, it is recommended that Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6900 – 2012 not be given First Reading.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
In respect of Section 879 of the Local Government Act, requirement
requirement for consultation during the
development or amendment of an Official Community Plan, Council must consider whether
consultation is required with specifically:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
The Board of the Regional District in which the area covered by the plan is located, in the
case of a Municipal Official Community Plan;
The Board of any Regional District that is adjacent to the area covered by the plan;
The Council of any municipality that is adjacent to the area covered by the plan;
First Nations;
School District Boards, greater boards and improvements district boards; and
The Provincial and Federal Governments and their agencies.
and in that regard it is recommended that additional consultation with the School District be
required in respect of this matter,
matter, and no further
further consultation be required beyond the early posting
of the proposed Official Community Plan amendments on the District's website, together with an
invitation
invitation to the public to comment,
comment, and;
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899 – 2012 be given First Reading;
That Zone Amending Bylaw No.
No. 6900 – 2012 not be given First Reading; and
That if the bylaw(s) is/are
is/are given First Reading, the applicant provide further information as described
on Schedules A, C,
C, D, F and G of the Development Procedures
Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 – 1999, along with
Intensive Residential Development Permit and Subdivision applications
applications.
DISCUSSION:
a)
Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Joel Lycan, Campton Services Corp.
Campton Services Corp.
Legal Description:
Lot 10, Section 32, Township 12, NWD Plan 38408, except
Plan BCP48908
OCP:
Existing:
Civic, Conservation, Med/High Density Residential, Medium
Density Residential, Low/Medium Density Residential, Low
Density Urban, Eco-Clusters, Neighbourhood Park
Existing:
Proposed:
A-2 (Upland Agricultural)
R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), R-1 (Residential
District), RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density)
Residential), RM-1 (Townhouse Residential), P-1 (Park and
School)
Zoning:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
Use:
Zone:
Designation
South:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Park, Neighbourhood Park, Conservation, Townhouse,
Single Family Residential
P-1 (Park and School), A-2 (Upland Agricultural), RM-1
(Townhouse Residential), R-3 (Special Amenity Residential
District), R-1 (Residential District),
Civic, Neighbourhood Park, Conservation, Med/High
Density Residential, Medium Density Residential
Park, Single Family Residential
RS-3 (Rural Residential), RS-1b (One Family Urban
(Medium Density) Residential),
Conservation, Low/Medium Density Residential
East:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Single Family Rural Residential
RS-3 (Rural Residential), A-2 (Upland Agricultural)
Med/High Density Residential, Medium Density
Residential, Civic, Conservation
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Existing Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing requirement:
b)
CD-3-98
Low Density Urban, Eco-Clusters,
Rural Residential
Single Family Residential, Townhouse, Park, Conservation
5.896 HA.
136 Avenue, Gilbert Drive, 230A Street and 232 Street
Urban Standard
Site Characteristics:
The subject site slopes down on three sides towards the middle of the site at 136 Avenue. There are
two tributaries of Cattell Brook on the site: one crossing the eastern portion from north to south; and
the headwaters of a second tributary in the middle of the site, north of the proposed intersection of
136 Avenue and 230A Street. Both tributaries continue south from the site.
The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject site to provide a variety of residential lot sizes and
housing types within the development, in accordance with the Silver Valley Area Plan, and to permit
the future subdivision and development of approximately 36 single family lots, an 18 unit townhouse
site, and a 68 unit townhouse site. 136 Avenue will be constructed through the site and will connect
with the existing portion to the west, and Gilbert Drive and 230A Street will be constructed through
the site from the north to connect with 136 Avenue.
Park lands are proposed comprising of: a Municipal Park site of approximately 0.405 hectares (1
acre) abutting the Municipal Park site to the north; a Neighbourhood Park of approximately 0.128
hectares (0.3 acres) at Gilbert Drive and 137 Avenue; linear Park strips will be dedicated for a trail
along the 137 Avenue right-of-way between Gilbert Drive and 232 Street; and conservation areas for
the protection of Cattell Brook will be dedicated.
At this time the current application has been assessed to determine its compliance with the Official
Community Plan 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
application for further development permits.
c)
Planning Analysis:
Plan:
The subject site is located within the Blaney Hamlet in the Silver Valley Area Plan and currently has
eight land use designations: Civic, Conservation, Medium/High Density Residential, Medium Density
Residential, Low/Medium Density Residential, Low Density Urban, Eco-Clusters, and Neighbourhood
Park. The proposed development is consistent with the policies of the Silver Valley Area Plan for
residential development and works towards the desired community pattern within the Blaney
Hamlet, with the exception of the 1.534 hectare portion in the center of the site. This portion is
currently designated for Civic use and the applicant is proposing a Medium/High Density Residential
use for townhouses.
Background:
When this application was received in 2008, the applicant proposed a school/park site in the central
portion of the site, as identified on the Silver Valley Area Plan with a Civic land use designation.
Since then, the District has been actively pursuing the acquisition of the school site for an
elementary school, but has not been able to collaborate with the School District or the Ministry of
Education for its purchase. The property owners, frustrated in their attempts to sell or develop their
property, have sought legal council. In the absence of a clear purchase agreement, the District’s
abilty to retain the Civic designation on this site is legally tenuous.
The Silver Valley Area Plan notes that its civic areas are the central focus of each neighbourhood,
and that each civic area is to contain a school, park area, and natural open space. School and Park
sites have been identified through the area planning process, and, through this process, the District
has identified these sites up-front in collaboration with the School District. Although this
collaborative process is pro-active, it has caused problems for property owners, due to the delays in
acquiring these sites for school use. The expectation in designating these sites was that they would
be purchased for school use. This matter is presently under consideration by the School District in
conjunction with the Provincial Government.
In the area plan, the civic designation in the Blaney Hamlet consisted of three contiguous properties
west of the intersection of 136 Avenue and 232 Street. Multiple land use designations, including
residential, conservation and civic are associated with these properties. The civic designation
reflects the District’s intent to develop parks adjacent to school sites in order to maximize the
efficiency of these complimentary uses. The northern portion of the civic designated site was
recently rezoned to P-1 (Park and School) under application RZ/110/08 for Municipal Park. The
portion of that property with a civic designation was identified for park (not school) and the Distrcit
was able to secure a satisfactory purchase arrangement with the applicant.
It is important to note that Council is under no obligation to approve a rezoning application that could
undermine community need, and an Approving Officer could deny any subdivision application
deemed not in the community’s best interest. The Silver Valley area is particularly challenged by
topography and there is a limited availability of suitable sites for school site acquisition. In addition,
significant residential development has occurred around the site in anticipation of a school
eventually being located there.
Proposed amendments
amendments to the Official Community Plan:
The applicant for this development is now requesting, in the absence of an agreement to purchase,
that the school site be re-designated for townhouse development. This represents 1.534 hectares,
approximately 26% of the site, that is designated for civic uses. This OCP amendment, in support of
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899 – 2012, to re-designate 1.534 hectares from Civic use to
Medium/High Residential use is not supportable under the OCP policies, as discussed above.
Although the proposed development of the rest of the site is in accordance with the policies of the
Silver Valley Area Plan of the Official Community Plan, the applicant has requested an OCP
amendment in support of Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899 - 2012 to adjust the boundaries of the
land use designations on the site. There are several land use designations on the site and the
results of careful evaluation of the topographic conditions are that adjustments to the land use
boundaries are needed. This means the proposed density and housing forms will better fit the
terrain, a Neighbourhood Park of approximately 0.128 hectares (0.3 acres) is proposed at Gilbert
Drive and 137 Avenue, and a linear park trail will provide neighbourhood connectivity via the 137
Avenue right-of-way.
The boundaries of the area designated Med/High Density Residential will be adjusted to where it is
best suited for a townhouse development and the Low/Medium and Medium Density Residential
areas will be adjusted for single family development. The areas designated for Neighbourhood Park
will be amended to accommodate the most suitable areas for the playground and linear park and the
area identified for the Municipal Park site will designated Civic. Environmental assessment of the
designated Conservation areas has determined that the watercourse in the middle of the site has its
headwaters just north of the proposed intersection of 136 Avenue and 230A Street and the second
watercourse crosses the east side of the site from north to south. The boundaries of the
Conservation areas will be amended to align with the required setbacks from the watercourses.
Since the development of the rest of the site is in accordance with the policies for residential
development in the Silver Valley Area Plan, and an amendment to such is supportable under the OCP
Policies in support of Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899 - 2012.
Zoning Bylaw:
Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the property located at 23103 136 Avenue from A-2
(Upland Agricultural) to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential District), R-1 (Residential District), RS-1b
(One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential), RM-1 (Townhouse Residential), P-1 (Park and
School) to permit the development of single family residential and townhouse residential with park
lands for civic, neighbourhood and conservation uses.
Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zone will require a Development Variance
Permit application.
Development Permits:
Permits:
Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the Official Community Plan, 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.
Pursuant to Section 8.8 of the Official Community Plan, 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.
Pursuant to Section 8.9 of the Official Community Plan, a Watercourse Protection Development
Permit application is required to ensure the preservation, protection, restoration and enhancement
of watercourse and riparian areas.
Pursuant to Section 8.10 of the Official Community Plan, a Natural Features Development Permit
application is required for all development and subdivision activity to ensure the preservation,
protection, restoration and enhancement for the natural environment and for development that is
protected from hazardous conditions for;
•
•
•
All areas designated Conservation on Schedule “B” or all areas within 50 metres of an
area designated Conservation on Schedule “B”, or on Figures 2, 3 and 4 in the Silver
Valley Area Plan;
All lands with an average natural slope of greater than 15 percent;
All floodplain areas and forest lands identified on Natural Features Schedule “C”
to ensure the preservation, protection, restoration and enhancement of watercourse and riparian
areas. Within the Silver Valley Area Plan, the Conservation areas are shown on Figures 2, 3 and 4.
Advisory
Advisory Design Panel:
Panel:
A Multi-Family Development Permit is required and must be reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel
prior to Second Reading.
Development Information Meeting:
Meeting:
A Development Information Meeting is required for this application. Prior to Second Reading the
applicant is required to host a Development Information Meeting in accordance with Council Policy
6.20.
d)
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)
Engineering Department;
b)
Operations Department;
c)
Fire Department;
d)
Parks Department; and
e)
School District.
The above list is intended to be indicative only and it may become necessary, as the application
progresses, to liaise with agencies and/or 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. We anticipate that this
evaluation will take place between First and Second Reading.
e)
Early and Ongoing Consultation:
In respect of Section 879 of the Local Government Act for consultation during an Official Community
Plan amendment, it is recommended that additional consultation is required with the School District,
in addition to the early posting of the proposed OCP amendments on the District’s website, together
with an invitation to the public to comment. It is recommended that Council not require any further
additional consultation.
f)
Development Applications:
In order for this application to proceed, if First Reading is approved, the following information must
be provided, as required by Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 – 1999 as amended:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
An Official Community Plan Application (Schedule A);
A complete Rezoning Application (Schedule C);
Multi-Family Residential Development Permit Application (Schedule D);
Watercourse Protection Development Permit Application (Schedule F);
Natural Features Development Permit Application (Schedule G);
Intensive Residential Development Permit Application;
Subdivision Application.
The above list is intended to be indicative only, other applications may be necessary as the
assessment of the proposal progresses.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed development is in compliance with the policies of the Silver Valley Area Plan, with the
exception of the 1.534 hectare portion in the center of the site that is currently designated for Civic
use and the applicant is proposing a Medium/High Density Residential use for townhouses.
Justification has been provided to support an Official Community Plan amendment in support of
Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899 - 2012. It is, therefore, recommended that Council grant First
Reading to Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899 – 2012, subject to additional information being provided
and assessed prior to Second Reading.
In regard to the proposal for a townhouse development in the area designated as Civic for a
school/park site, the RM-1 (Townhouse Residential) zone conflicts with the policies of the Silver
Valley Area Plan and is not supported by the Official Community Plan designation of Civic use, as
outlined in this report. It is, therefore, recommended that Council not grant First Reading to Zone
Amending Bylaw No. 6900 – 2012.
The proposed layout has not been reviewed in relation to the relevant bylaws and regulations
governing subdivision applications. Any subdivision layout provided is strictly preliminary and must
be approved by the District of Maple Ridge’s Approving Officer.
_______________________________________________
Prepared by:
Ann Edwards, CPT
by:
Senior Planning Technician
_______________________________________________
Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP
Approved by:
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
_______________________________________________
Concurrence:
J. L. (Jim) Rule
AE/
Appendix B – Zone Amending Bylaw 6899-2012
Appendix C – Zone Amending Bylaw 6900-2012
Appendix D – Proposed Subdivision Plan
SUBJECT PROPERTY
Scale: 1:2,500
^
District of Mission
´
City of Pitt
Meadows
District of
Langley
23103 136 AVENUE
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FRA SER R.
DATE: Jan 3, 2013
FILE: RZ/087/08
BY: DT
APPENDIX
B
to April 16, 2012 Report
CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
BYLAW NO. 6899-2012
A Bylaw to amend Map "A" forming part
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended
___________________________________________________________
WHEREAS, it is deemed expedient to amend Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 1985 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple
Ridge, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6899-2012."
2.
That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 10 Section 32 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 38408 except
Plan BCP48908
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1558 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to R-3 (Special Amenity Residential
District), R-1 (Residential District), RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density)
Residential), P-1 (Park and School), and RM-1 (Townhouse Residential).
3.
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended and Map "A" attached
thereto are hereby amended accordingly.
READ a first time the 24th day of April, A.D. 2012.
READ a second time the
day of
PUBLIC HEARING held the
day of
READ a third time the
day of
RECONSIDERED AND FINALLY ADOPTED, the
_____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
, A.D. 20 .
, A.D. 20 .
, A.D. 20 .
day of
, A.D. 20 .
____________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
APPENDIX C
TO APRIL 16, 2012 REPORT
BYLAW NO. 6900-2012
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended
___________________________________________________________
1.
2.
That parcel or tract of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 10 Section 32 Township 12 New Westminster District Plan 38408 except
Plan BCP48908
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1559 a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to R-2 (Urban Residential District).
3.
READ a first time the
READ a second time the
day of
, A.D. 20 .
day of
PUBLIC HEARING held the
day of
READ a third time the
day of
_____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
, A.D. 20 .
, A.D. 20 .
, A.D. 20 .
day of
, A.D. 20 .
____________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
40
43
46
22
0
46
21
8
BC
P
RE
ST
0A
23
3
22866
13 70 1
137 AVE.
13673/91
9
13702
8
13680
P 38408
13670
7
13660
33861
2
13568
13 56
17 13 55 7
2
7
4
42
13 5
13
5
13 55
.
VE
BA
39
38
36
13 5
28
13 5
37
5
40
23106
23050
ST
.
23
0A
3
P
BC
0
P
13 51 9
LO O
13 52 5
22
229
3
49 30
BCP
13 53 1
21
5
0
PARK
BCP 48906
23 02
13 55
18 13 54 5
2
13565
6
6
13 55
1
13 57 5
BCP 48909
BCP 49 303
13578
13582
13569
19 13 53 7
20
23141
23103
22990
22982
13590
13585
13579
13572
16 13 56 3
8
BCP 42569
P 11173
7
13589
P 43567
9
90
48
13586
8
80
46
BC
306
P 49
13602 (PUMP STATION)
136 AVE.
RW
13 57
3
48
90
8
136 AVE.
PARK
RP 10274
13616
73 72
BCP 49303
13 12 11 10 9
14
15
74
Rem 6
A
13610
BCP 49 303
75
P 18410
RP 17267
13620
BC
P
22976
22966
22942
76
13660
A
136 AVE.
BCP 27887
13653
232 ST.
3
1
22975
22969
22963
22957
4
13630
23060
1
19 20 21 22 23
13640
23140
BCP 27893
LANE
A
RP 17234
BCP
229 A ST.
5
22970
22966
22960
22956
AK
EL
O
OP
136 A AVE.
27 26 25 24
22951
Rem. 10
13650
23183
OP
BL AKE LO
P 20132
13738
PARK
23154
13691
10
Rem 1
0
137 AVE.
13
69
3
13689
BC
P
BCP
4622
4
7
45 22 87 3
9
33 8
6
BL
1
44 2287
6
BC
P
5
SILVER VALLEY RD
PARK
BCP 43235
B
8
46 21
BCP
8
22 8
4
91 11413 73 1
24
62
P4
218
BC P 46
C
6223
BCP 4
1
42
9
22 8
BCP 33
BCP 43237
92 115 72 5
13
93
116 72 1
13
86
8
2
94
2
1173 71 5
1
80
22 8 95
11813 711
6
7
22 8 96
11913 70 5
70
22 8
97
120
9
22 88
862
P 33
7
13 68
13 6
8
13 6
7
6
22 89
41
8
22 8
3
22900
22 89 3
BCP 332
13771
PARK
RW 68113
22897
8
861
BCP 33 11
12
13
13 6
8
1
39
36
27
P2
34
BC P 22 7
13
68
5
5
T DR
.
38
22 90
9
22
92
6
ET
22
73
BCP
4
BCP 46223
46 21 BC
8
BC P 4
P 171
41
71 4
3
BCP 33858 GILBE R
37
10
BC
83 P 4 017
623
84 108
27261
13
85
75
22 9
7
109
20
13
86
75
3
110
22 91
13 7
6 87
4
111 9
13 74
22 91 0 88
5
22906
112
13741
BCP89
46224
90 11313735
22
93
0
36
22 9
0
22 90
6
9
BC
35
22
91
3
BC
P
MA N D
R IV E
BCP 22
738
FO R E
5
7
22 89
6
22
89
2
22
88
6
4
42
1292C0P 483
2B
4646
1
P
2P
22C4C
468B3B
PP 4
C
BBC
3
22 90 6
22 90 2
81
22
93 B 82
6 C 1
22
91
7
2
12
44
1
78
13
7
77
13
22 91 0
P
BC
4 377 9
10 1 1376 65
5 7
10 0613
1
22 91 2
22
94
0
6
17
BCP 49303
18
13547
19
5
13546
13527
P 43567
PARK
MAPLE RIDGE ZONE AMENDING
Bylaw No.
Map No.
From:
6900-2012
1559
To:
R-2 (Urban Residential District)
4
A-2 (Upland Agricultural)
´
SCALE 1:3,000
TO APRIL 16, 2012 REPORT
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
January 7, 2013
2012-109-RZ
C of W
First Reading
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012
24979 108 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject property from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential). To proceed further with this
application additional information is required as outlined below. This application does not propose
any change to the current OCP land use designation. It conforms to the current land use provisions
of the Albion Area Plan and pursuant to Council’s direction, can proceed through the approval
process.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6961-2012 be given First Reading; and;
That the applicant provide further information as described on Schedule B of the Development
Procedures Bylaw No. 5879 – 1999, along with the information required for a Subdivision
application.
DISCUSSION:
a)
Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Aplin & Martin Consultants Ltd. - Sandi Drew
Stanley R Stanowski & Cheryl L Stanowski
Legal Description:
Lot: A, Section: 11, Township: 12, Plan: 23702
OCP:
Existing:
Low/Medium Density Residential
Existing:
Proposed:
RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential)
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
Zoning:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
Use:
Residential
Zone:
Designation: LMRES (Low Medium Density Residential)
1102
South:
East:
West:
Site Area:
Access:
Use:
Residential
Zone:
R-1 (Residential District)
Designation: MRES (Medium Density Residential)
Use:
Residential
Zone:
Designation: SUBRES (Suburban Residential)
Use:
Residential
Zone:
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density
Residential)
Designation: LMRES (Low Medium Density Residential)
Residential
Residential
0.823 Ha (2.15 acres)
108th Avenue and Morrisette Place
Urban Standard
b) Site Characteristics:
The site is located at the eastern edge of the Albion area. It currently has one home at the southern
end of the property. To the west are single-family RS-1b (One Family Urban (Median Density)
Residential) lots; to the east are larger single family RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) lots. A
larger RS-3 (One Family Urban Residential) lot is situated north of this property; to the south are
several R-1 (Residential District) lots.
c)
The applicant proposes to rezone the subject site to allow for future subdivision into 13 lots. All of
the lots would be accessed from Morrisette Avenue.
At this time the current application has been assessed to determine its compliance with the Official
Community Plan and provide a land use assessment only. Detailed review and comments will need
to be made once a full application package has been received. A more detailed analysis and a
application for further development permits.
d)
Planning Analysis:
The development site is located within the Albion Area Plan and is currently designated Low/
Medium Density Residential. This application complies with the District’s Official Community Plan.
This land use designation provides for a single detached housing form on lots ranging in size from
557m2 to 891m2. The proposed RS1-b zone is in compliance with the zoning matrix within the Area
Plan, and the application is in compliance with OCP policies. The District is undergoing a review to
consider increasing the permitted density in the Albion Area Plan. Earlier this year Council passed a
resolution addressing how in-stream and new applications would be dealt with. Given that no OCP
-2-
amendment is required for this application, it is able to proceed through the development approvals
process.
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the property located at 24979 108 Avenue from RS-3
(One Family Rural Residential) to RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) to permit
subdivision into 13 lots.
Any variations from the requirements of the proposed zone will require a Development Variance
Permit application.
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)
Engineering Department;
Operations Department; and
Fire Department.
The above list is intended to be indicative only and it may become necessary, as the application
progresses, to liaise with agencies and/or 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)
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 B); and
2. A Subdivision Application.
The above list is intended to be indicative only, other applications may be necessary as the
assessment of the proposal progresses.
-3-
CONCLUSION:
The development proposal is to rezone the subject site from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to
RS1-b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential) to permit subdivision into 13 residential lots.
The application can proceed as it is incompliance with the Albion Area Plan and accompanying
zoning matrix. Therefore, it is recommended that Council grant First Reading subject to additional
information being provided and assessed prior to Second Reading.
“original signed by Siobhan Murphy”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by:
Siobhan Murphy, MA, MCIP, RPP
Planning Technician
“original signed by Jim Charlebois”
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
“original signed by Frank Quinn”
_______________________________________________
Approved by:
“original signed by Paul Gill”
_______________________________________________
Concurrence:
J. L. (Jim) Rule
-4-
APPENDIX A
SUBJECT PROPERTY
Scale: 1:2,500
District of
Langley
^
District of Mission
´
City of Pitt
Meadows
24979 108 AVENUE
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FRAS ER R.
DATE: Nov 13, 2012 FILE: 2012-109-RZ
BY: PC
APPENDIX B
BCP 49693
7
8
9
10921
F
E
24985
24947
9
24
108
36
108
22
25029
25050
25007
BCP49694
RW 2
8597
12
A
11
1
P 34411
27
RW 28597
P 65405
9
2
5
4
25019
24923
24912
24913
24902
24903
24871
32
2
3
P 23702
BC
P3 10
32
01
9
24
8
7
6 BCP 33200
2
2492
P 29987
108A AVE.
1
10848
MORRISETTE PL.
21
24943
24915
22
13
10860
Rem B
24979
249A ST.
20
P 23702
1
10872
BCP 33200
24905
21
24916
24906
249 ST.
19
37
0
32
P3
C
14
B
108B AVE.
10891
24950
24940
24930
24920
18
5
4
3
2
BCP 49693
BCP 33200
15
17
16
24927
24907
1
24917
24910
109 AVE.
20
P 29987
6
24937
24927
24917
24907
10
1
BCP496
95
11
19
24809
2
PARK
BCP 47594
24933
P 29987
10941
7
10
49
7
7
10
41
8 10 35
07
91
42
10711
35 10753
10 36
10745
7
10
25
1
1072
38
25010
79
BCP33320
39
42 41 40
24996
24988
78
29
11
77
43
10
7
10715
44
10733
24906
24900
24892
3
24886
107
2
24878
24872
16
3410761
10776
45
10737
50
10719
10782
10741
7
10
10792
ERSKINE ST.
7
17
31
7
75
10
7
10
58
7
6
65
.
PL
7
10
1
7
10
7
10
73
2
107
81
6
M
HA
EC
BE
7
10
24866
22
3010793
21
3110785
6
78
20 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
10
3210777
6
BCP 43944
19
77
14 13
10
12
6
6
18 15
3310769
07
9
107
24982
108 AVE.
BCP 33318
37
Bylaw No.
Map No.
From:
6961-2012
1578
To:
RS-1b (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
´
SCALE 1:2,500
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
January 7, 2013
2012-051-RZ
C of W
First and Second Reading
Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption
Agreement Bylaw 6962 -2012
11406 and 11414 205 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received for a Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption
Agreement Bylaw (HRA Bylaw), at the northeast corner of 114 Avenue and 205 Street, in historic
Hammond. This site known as the Whitehead property, is made up of two lots with two heritage
houses that encroach across the interior lot line of these lots. The larger of the two houses known as
the Whitehead residence, is located towards the street corner and is proposed to be revitalized and
added to. The interior is to be modernized in a way that will retain historical features inside of the
residence. There are also other buildings, including a garage and accessory buildings, that are not
sited in accordance with the Zoning Bylaw and will require variances as part of this HRA Bylaw.
The HRA Bylaw contains the Heritage Conservation Plan (HCP), which is based on the Standards and
Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, describing the Heritage Place
associated with the Whitehead residence, the Heritage Value that is embodied in the Heritage Place,
and the Character Defining Elements to be retained to preserve its Heritage Value. The actual
physical works to achieve the rehabilitation and restoration specified by this HCP will be governed by
a Heritage Alteration Permit (HAP). An HAP contains plans, elevations and other details that is issued
by Council in a similar fashion as a Development Permit, before a building permit is issued.
Consolidating the two lots forming the site into a single lot is a condition of receiving Final Reading
of this bylaw. The HRA Bylaw will supersede the regulations of the existing RS-1 Zone as necessary
to accommodate the existing houses, accessory buildings and existing lane standard, including
allowing the two single family residential uses (e.g. the Whitehead residence and the Whitehead
cottage) on one lot.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement
Bylaw 6962 -2012 be given First and Second Readings and be forwarded to Public
Hearing; and
1103
2. That the following term(s) and condition(s) be met prior to Final Reading:
i.
Registration of a Rezoning (or equivalent) Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive
Covenant and receipt of the deposit of a security, as outlined in the Agreement;
ii.
Registration of a Restrictive Covenant in lieu of road dedication for a corner truncation
at the Land Title Office;
iii.
Consolidation of the two lots into one parcel; and
iv.
A disclosure statement must be submitted by a Professional Engineer advising
whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there is evidence,
a site profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in accordance
with the regulations.
DISCUSSION:
a)
Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
James Rowley
Leanne H. Koehn and James M. Rowley
Legal Description:
Lot 650 & Lot 649, D.L 279, Plan 2180
OCP:
Existing:
Proposed:
Urban Residential
Urban Residential
Existing:
Proposed:
RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential)
Zoning:
Surrounding Uses
North:
South:
East:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Single-Family Residential
RS-1 (One Family Urban (Medium Density) Residential)
Urban Residential
Urban Residential
Urban Residential
Urban Residential
-2-
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing:
Companion Applications:
Single-Family Residential (2 dwellings)
Single-Family Residential (2 dwellings)
0.126 Ha. (0.31 acres)
114 Avenue and 205 Street
Urban Standard
none
b) Project Description:
The owner proposes to restore, add to, retain interior features and modernize the Whitehead
residence located in Hammond. This residence has been continuously owned by the descendants of
Carl Whitehead, who originally built the house ca. 1923. Mr. Whitehead purchased all the properties
along the north side of 205 Street, from 115 to 114 Avenue. Each was a rental property, except for
the subject house which was built as his family residence. Rather than fronting the houses on the
two westernmost lots to 114 Avenue like the other houses (e.g. all the front lot lines were toward
114 Avenue), the two houses at the western end were oriented to 205 Street to have western solar
exposure. Thus, both houses encumber the interior lot line of these two westernmost lots.
A Heritage Conservation Plan (HCA) has thoroughly researched and documented the Heritage Value
and Heritage Character of the house to form the basis of guidelines described by the consultant as:
“rehabilitation with most of the interior and exterior elements being preserved, except for those
areas disturbed for the rear additions.” The additions involve extending the basement and first floor
at the rear and adding a second floor dormer also at the rear to create a more useable second floor.
The interior will be modernized while preserving the interior detailing identified as Character Defining
Elements (CDE), including such details as wainscoting, fireplace, kitchen ceiling work, etc. The
mature landscaping and fence along the street complement the Heritage Character and are being
retained. Green design strategies, incorporated in a fashion compatible with the Heritage Character,
are proposed to be employed at a later date. This may include: capture of rainwater for domestic
use, on-site storm water and rain water infiltration, which would be concealed and would not impact
the Heritage Character or Heritage Value; and infrastructure for solar hot water collection and/or
using ground sourced heat, which may require future approval if there are physical changes to the
Character Defining Elements of the property or the Whitehead residence.
Recommendations have been provided on how to undertake this work, so that the Heritage Value
and Heritage Character of the building are protected throughout the process. The HCP and
architectural plans attached thereto also describe the known historical details and architectural
relevance of the site. This plan is attached as Schedule “B” to the HRA Bylaw (see Appendix “B”).
c)
Planning Analysis:
This site is located in historic Hammond, on a property that is designated Urban Residential in the
Official Community Plan. The Whitehead residence, including the proposed addition, is in keeping
with the historic character of the housing in the area as articulated in the OCP and supplementary
guidelines prepared by the Planning Department entitled “Hammond Design Characteristics.”
-3-
The proposal to revitalize and expand the Whitehead residence strengthens the prominence of this
dwelling on the lot. The character and density continues to be consistent with the surrounding
neighbourhood. This proposal for heritage conservation is in accordance with the following OCP
Policies related to heritage management:
4-43
The development application review process will include an opportunity to evaluate
the overall impact of proposed development on the heritage characteristics and
context of each historic community or neighbourhood. Conservation guidelines and
standards should be prepared to aid in this evaluation and provide a basis from
which recommendations can be made to Council.
4–44 Maple Ridge will endeavour to use tools available under Provincial legislation more
effectively to strengthen heritage conservation in the District. Other planning tools
will also be utilized where appropriate to establish a comprehensive approach to
heritage management in the District.
The Heritage Character and Heritage Value of these heritage buildings and the property has been
thoroughly assessed and the appropriate conservation strategy established in the HCP forming part
of the Heritage Revitalization Agreement that applies to this site. The Standards & Guidelines for the
Conservation of Historic Places in Canada were used by publicLAB Research in association with
Birmingham & Wood Architects, the consultants preparing this HCP for the Whitehead property and
residence in accordance with these OCP policies.
Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw
Bylaw Background:
This proposed bylaw will provide for the following in a single bylaw and associated agreement:

Heritage Designation – Under Section 967 of the Local Government Act (LGA), Council may
designate real property in whole or in part that is considered to have Heritage Value and
Heritage Character on terms and conditions it considers appropriate for heritage protection
by way of a bylaw. This designation enables, among other things, establishment of terms for
financial or other support for the conservation of designated properties. Designation also
means protected buildings and landscaping may not be altered or changed nor any
excavations or building take place on protected sites without prior District approval as may
be set out in the bylaw. A Heritage Designation Bylaw requires a Public Hearing under
Section 968 of the LGA, which follows the same process as for rezoning bylaws.
Designation also allows the owner to take advantage of the ‘equivalency’ provisions
contained in the BC Building Code and exemptions under the Energy Efficiency Act and
Homeowners Protection Act. Use of ‘equivalencies’ allows for Code compliance to be done in
a way that is more sympathetic to the structural realities of heritage buildings, making
building upgrades more feasible and lessening the impacts that Code upgrading may have
on the heritage fabric of heritage buildings. For example, original doors and windows could
-4-
be exempted from energy upgrades that could alter or destroy them as key Character
Defining Elements.

Heritage Revitalization Agreement (HRA) - Under Section 966 of the LGA, Council may
authorize the District to enter into an agreement with a property owner for the following: to
establish terms and conditions for undertaking heritage conservation, detailed within a
Heritage Conservation Plan (HCP) and Statements of Significance (SOS) attached to and
forming part of the HRA; to set out the phasing and timing on the start and the finish of
heritage conservation works; and to vary or supplement thus superseding the regulations a
number of District bylaws, including the Zoning Bylaw. Variances enable unique opportunities
and maximum flexibility to accommodate best practices for heritage conservation. The HRA
works in concert with Designation by detailing the alterations, changes and other actions
that are agreed to as being permitted to achieve the envisioned heritage conservation and
any necessary long-term maintenance.

Tax Exemption – Under Section 225 of the Community Charter Act, Council may pass a
bylaw and enter into an agreement to exempt a property owner from payment of municipal
property taxes, to the extent and under terms and conditions established in an agreement.
The intent of the legislation is to encourage heritage conservation by mitigating the costs
involved in revitalization and restoration of the building’s Heritage Value. The usual Council
terms for tax exemption agreements granted (or in process to be granted) to date include an
exemption period of five (5) years provided all agreed to heritage conservation work is
completed, all fees are paid and there is no contravention of any District bylaw. These
heritage properties include: Miller Residence (28594 104 Avenue), Billy Miner Pub
(22355 River Road), Daykin Residence (22031 Dewdney Trunk Road), and Turnock
Residence (22309 St. Anne Avenue). A designation bylaw requires an affirmative vote of at
least 2/3 of all Council members.
The municipal portion of property taxes (General Levies) for the Whitehead property for 2012
was $1,467.14.
Rationale for Designation:
The issues of having two heritage houses that encroach across the interior lot line of these lots as
well as other siting non-conformities are preventing the owners from undertaking their envisioned
addition and conservation works to the Whitehead residence. Therefore, an HRA application has
been submitted to resolve these impediments and to facilitate the conservation of the Whitehead
residence. This also gives the opportunity for Council to have the property designated thus
becoming protected heritage property under the LGA.
Where properties are designated, the LGA requires that the rational for the designation be specified.
The reasons for designating the Whitehead residence and property on which it is situated include
the following:
1. Heritage character - The Whitehead residence exemplifies the prominence and prosperity of
Port Hammond in the early 20th century due to the operation of the Hammond Cedar Mill,
-5-
one of the major mills along the Fraser River. It is also associated with Carl Whitehead, a
Finnish immigrant and mill worker, who built and resided in the house. The house is a well
maintained and excellent surviving example of the Craftsman bungalow style of house in the
community from the 1920’s. Further details are contained in the Heritage Conservation Plan
(HCP) attached as Schedule “B” to the HRA bylaw (see Appendix “B”).
2. Compatibility of Conservation with Community Plan and Adjoining Land Use - The planning
associated with the management of heritage resources is provided for in policies 4-41
through 4-45 of the Maple Ridge Official Community Plan (OCP). These Policies define a
clear process for evaluating applications with heritage-related issues and standards to be
applied to aid in conservation, interfacing with adjacent properties, and building public
awareness. The conservation of this exemplary heritage house is considered to be
compatible within its neighbourhood context of single family dwellings, and complies with
the heritage management policies of the OCP.
3. Condition and Economic Viability of the Property - The Whitehead residence is in sound
physical condition as it has been well maintained and has been in continuous ownership by
the original family. The continued condition and economic viability of the property is
considered assured given the building's good physical condition, the current owners’ strong
commitment to its rehabilitation and maintenance, its suitability for its continued use as a
single-family residence and the market value of the property within an established
residential neighborhood.
4. Possible Need for Financial Support to Enable Conservation - The building will continue to
be used as a private dwelling and maintained accordingly. Adoption of the HRA Bylaw by
Council will allow for the property to be consolidated and allow a sensitive addition to be
built to enhance livability in the home. A Five-year property tax exemption is being
recommended as an economic incentive to assist in offsetting some of the costs to revitalize
the Whitehead residence, and to help to ensure its continued protection and conservation.
The terms and conditions of this incentive are described in Section 14 of the Heritage
Revitalization Agreement attached as Appendix “1” to the HRA Bylaw (see Appendix “B” to
this report).
Heritage Revitalization Agreement (HRA):
The applicant is seeking to enter into an Heritage Revitalization Agreement (HRA) with the District for
the long term conservation of the Whitehead Residence and its associated cottage. The proposed
conservation works are to be based on a Heritage Conservation Plan (HCP) and Statement of
Significance (SOS) prepared by publicLAB Research in association with Birmingham & Wood
Architects. As permitted by the ACT, the HRA Bylaw contains a schedule specifying Zoning Bylaw
variances to reflect “as-is” siting of the buildings.
The 230 m2 (2,486 ft2) Whitehead residence is proposed to be restored and added to in a
sympathetic manner. Based on preliminary numbers, the residence will be expanded by about 20%
or 49.6 m2 (534 ft2), to have a floor area of 280.5 m2 (3,020 ft2) when work is completed. The
foundation will be upgraded to improve the habitability of the basement and extended to
-6-
accommodate the proposed addition to the rear. The basement will be expanded by 27.6 m2
(297 ft2). The addition on the main level will add 9.8 m2 (106 ft2) of floor area, a second floor
dormer and floor addition will add 12.2 m2 (131 ft2).
The HCP proposes to restore the exterior of the house, salvage and reuse exterior materials and
windows for the extension, and to use new wood siding, trim, windows and porch elements with the
same profile as the original in the extension or to replace damaged materials in the original portion
of the residence. Because the residence has been recently painted, the requirement to do a paint
scraping analysis to determine the original colour was not required. The Agreement allows the
house to be repainted using the current colour or a formal process to repaint it with a different
colour based on a paint colour analysis.
Further details are contained in the Heritage building plans and Specifications attached as Schedule
“C” to the HRA Bylaw (see Appendix “B” to this report).
Heritage Conservation Plan (HCP):
A Heritage Conservation Plan (HCP) was prepared for the Whitehead residence and the associated
Whitehead cottage by publicLAB Research in association with Birmingham & Wood Architects. The
main provisions of the Heritage Conservation Plan (HCP) are the following:

An Introductory section about the historical context and elements proposed to be conserved;

A Design Rationale section describing the form and character, and architectural expression
of the two existing heritage buildings (e.g. the Whitehead residence and the Whitehead
cottage), and the proposed conservation and Whitehead residence building extension
proposal;

The Statement of Significance (SOS) section follows. The property together with the
Whitehead residence and the Cottage are identified as part of the Historic Place. The
Character Defining Elements (CDE) are as follows:
For the Whitehead property:
o Parcel size and dimensions
o Frontage of three buildings onto 205 Street
o Frontage of fourth building onto the lane
o Mature trees and garden
o The street fence along the lot line
For the Whitehead residence:
o Cross-gabled form with gabled porch
o Shed roofed rear extension
o Front porch detailing: tapered porch piers and columns, generously sized wood trim,
brackets, dentil work, diamond-shaped window openings, shingled skirting, wood
stair and railings
o Wood doors and windows, original stained-glass transom lites
-7-
o
o
o
o
o
Shingle sided wall areas below and above main floor wall area
Beveled sided main wall area
Generous wood water table boards, belly boards and other miscellaneous trim
Brick chimney
Original interior detailing, such as wainscoting, fireplace, kitchen ceiling work
For the Whitehead cottage:
o Simple gabled-roof form (both house and outbuilding) w/gabled front porch element
o Building extensions
o Wood windows, including those with wood divided upper lites
o Bevel-sided pediments, with regular short lengths of siding, covered by battens
o Wood shingled main floor wall areas
o Drop-sided skirting between main floors and grade

Description of the applicable Standards and Guidelines from The Standards & Guidelines for
the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada used in developing the conservation
recommendations of the Plan; and

The recommended conservation strategy for the property.
The recommended conservation strategy, includes works or actions related to the Character
Defining Elements of the property and those related to the Whitehead residence, include the
following:
Strategies related to property:
o consolidating the site as a single lot
o adjusting the path to the rear door to accommodate the proposed extension
o retaining the picket fence with minor changes for the new gate location and truncation.
Strategy related to the Whitehead residence:
o repairing (and where deteriorated replacing with matching new materials) of the exterior
character defining building elements
o allowing for a rear extension with minimal physical intervention and impact on the
heritage value of the building by salvaging for reuse of displaced elements (e.g. doors,
windows, exterior siding, trims, etc.)
o reproducing the detail of the front porch in the proposed new rear porch
o expanding the usability of the second floor by adding a second floor shed dormer which
preserves the dominance of existing main roof area, and is not visible from the front of
the building.
o Adopting an approach for the additions that use the same finishes as the historical
building, while incorporating elements to allow the additions to be distinguishable such
as minimal glazing associated with the rear porch and other details to be determined
when detailed building plans are submitted for the Heritage Alteration Permit to be
issued.
-8-
Further details are contained in the Heritage Conservation Plan (HCP) attached as Schedule “B” to
the HRA Bylaw (see Appendix “B” to this report).
Zoning Bylaw and HRA Bylaw Variances:
The subject site consists of two lots, each of which is zoned RS-1 (One Family Urban (Medium
Density) Residential). Because the two lots face 114 Avenue but both dwelling units were built to
face 205 Street, they each encroach across the lot line common to the two lots. Historically, the
Whitehead residence and the associated Whitehead cottage have been treated as a single site,
including a single tax notice. This encroachment and nonconformity (e.g. 2 houses on one lot) is a
historical anomaly preventing the Whitehead residence for being modified or extended.
To accommodate the owner’s desire to revitalize and add to the Whitehead residence, the historical
anomaly is proposed to be solved by having the two lots consolidated into a single parcel. This
requires the provision of the RS-1 Zone allowing only a single one family residential use to be
superseded by a variance included in the HRA Bylaw allowing the two heritage buildings (e.g. 2 onefamily residential uses) on the consolidated lot. This is justified by a number of reasons. Firstly, is
the historic presence of the two dwelling on what was effectively a single lot or site. Secondly, there
is no change in the density thus no resulting impacts on the surrounding context of the single family
residential neighbourhood. Finally, the variance will facilitate the conservation of these heritage
buildings.
Two setback variances are required for the houses on the proposed consolidated lot. The Whitehead
cottage is sited too close to the lane along the north of the site. There is also an accessory structure
built at the front lot line along 205 Street between the two heritage houses. Therefore, the following
variances are proposed to be granted through the HRA Bylaw:
Part 6
Residential Zones
C. (3) (a) Permitted
number of dwellings
C. (3) (c) (ii) Setbacks
(interior lot line)
C. (5) (c) (ii) Setbacks
(front lot line)
Existing
Regulation
limited to 1
per lot
a minimum of
1.5 metres
a minimum of
3.0 metres
Proposed
Variance
2
a minimum of
1.03 metres
a minimum of
1.03 metres
Justification or Purpose:
To allow for the two existing heritage houses to be sited
together on one consolidated lot.
To accommodate the existing siting of the Cottage, which
is closer than allowed to the lot line common to the lane.
To accommodate the existing siting of the accessory
building, which is flush to the lot line common to 205 St.
This application is being processed like a rezoning application and thus it triggers a review of
compliance with servicing, road and other municipal standards. This site is in Hammond, which
possesses a “village-like” character. In the interest of preserving the heritage context of the site,
Schedule “A” Services and Utilities for the RS-1 Zone the Maple Ridge Subdivision and Development
Servicing By-law No. 4800 – 1993 is proposed to be varied or the provision of certain requirements
delayed as follows:

A corner truncation at the northeast corner of 114 Avenue and 205 Street will not be
required as no additional traffic is being generated by the proposal. In lieu of this dedication,
a Restrictive Covenant is to be registered at the corner, permitting the historic picket fence, a
-9-


Character Defining Element, and associated plantings to be retained, provided that they do
not impede vision across the corner;
The 7.5 metre right-of-way width and the 6.0 metre wide driving surface is reduced to a 4.6
metre right-of-way width and a 4.6 metre wide driving surface, thus preserving the historical
lane specification of the area as no additional traffic is being generated by the proposal; and
Sidewalks and associated curbs, gutters and lighting will not be required. Instead, the
applicant will deposit moneys in trust towards their share of constructing a sidewalk along
the full length of 205 Street, similar to the “village-like” standard provided for on other
streets in the Hammond Area.
These variances have been reviewed and are acceptable to the Engineering Department.
The variations to the Zoning Bylaw and the Subdivision and Development Servicing By-law are
identified in Schedule “F” to the HRA Bylaw (Appendix “B” to this report).
d)
Engineering Department:
The Engineering Department has reviewed the application and advised the existing concrete lane
curbing is to be replaced and separate service and underground utility (e.g. Hydro/Tel) connections
are required for each house. Engineering has reviewed and supports other engineering-related
requirements being varied (e.g. corner truncation), lane width and payment in trust for undertaking
sidewalk/curb/gutter upgrading, as part of the variance being to encourage the conservation of this
heritage site.
An agreement equivalent to a Rezoning Servicing Agreement will be required. The applicant has
been given a copy of the Engineering Comments outlining the requirements in detail.
Parks & Leisure Services Department:
The Parks & Leisure Services Department have identified that after the lot consolidation is
completed they will be responsible for maintaining the street trees. In the case of this project it is
estimated that there will be an additional tree required which is based on one tree per lot. The
Manager of Parks & Open Space has advised that the maintenance requirement of $25.00 per new
tree will increase their budget requirements by $25.00.
Fire Department:
The Fire Department has advised that sprinklering may be required for the project. The Maple Ridge
Sprinkler Bylaw requires the installation of an Approved Fire Sprinkler System, to service the
Whitehead residence, as a part of the construction of an addition or renovation to any building if the
value of the work exceeds 50% of the market value of the building. According to the Sprinklering
Bylaw, this value would be based on the value of the building as established by the BC Assessment
Authority.
- 10 -
The requirement for sprinklering is assessed at the time an application is made for a Heritage
Alteration Permit. If sprinklering is determined to impact the interior Character Defining Elements,
other less intrusive measures (Code equivalency) and/or exemption will sought from the Fire Chief
or the Manager of Inspection Services as provided for in the Building Code.
e)
Building Comments:
All new construction is to comply with the current BC Building Code. The owners may need to retain
a qualified professional to submit a report to the Manager of Inspection Services for alternative
solutions (Code equivalencies) as sanctioned in the BC Building Code, to lessen Code impacts on
buildings such as Whitehead residence having protected heritage status. The requirement for
sprinklering will be assessed in conjunction with the Fire Department at the time a Heritage
Alteration Permit is made.
CONCLUSION:
It is recommended that First and Second Reading be given to Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and
Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw 6962-2012, and that the application be
forwarded to February 19, 2013 Public Hearing.
"Original signed by Adrian Kopystynski"________________
Prepared by: Adrian Kopystynski, MCIP, RPP, MCAHP
Planner
"Original signed by Charles R. Goddard" for___________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"_____________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P.Eng
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"____________________
Concurrence: J. L. (Jim) Rule
Appendix B – HRA Bylaw
- 11 -
674
9
743
741
11314
City of Pitt
Meadows
^
District of
Langley
737
734
733
20575
20575
P 2180
730
20582
20574
20564
P 2180
738
20554
LORNE AVE.
11406/14 205 STREET
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FRASER R.
20582
20574
P 55931
20541
673
P 2180
20540
95
634
PARK
*PP044
2
11
P 114
637
Pcl. B
WARESELY ST.
20540
20536
670
742
636
P 114
20565
638
20557
20541
20531
20564
20540
20530
20523
20524
669
7
41
573
20522
20514
666
45
AY
ILW
20
1132 8
675
20
RA
SCALE 1:1,500
672
District of Mission
C
4
11
FI
575
671
20531
P
CI
PA
17
668
574
3
81
2
70
P
1
´
20506
10
3
11
639
641
642
667
20530
N
9
56
9
640
643
645
20523
IA
27
576
11386
20507
AD
3
11
8
8
32
11 18
3
11
.
N
CA
577
CR
35
38
11424
114 AVE.
20520
LE
3
11
7
3
11
P
MA
B
8
8
81
10
4
49
20
5
34
P 114
599
598
20565
20504
50
20
P 74898
LATVALLA LAN
2
597
*PP044
11395
P
11
34
11
646
P 2180
11406
11405
6
649
20515
11
C
5
3
0
36
650
11415
8
81
10
0
11414
20512
2
P
61
P
8
32
37
11
20478
12
20512
9
23
72
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
P 2180
651 648
647
644
205 ST.
8
0
P
11
P 20107
4
44
44
1
1
62
82
45
3
20
2
20
3
11
596
WESTFIELD AVE.
20464
P
20
06
69
581
1
11443
P 114
594 595
593
11440
57
56
P 74898
*PP044
(24000)
3
11
2
11450
20557
591
11460
20541
11416
P
4
11
20451
588
55
11463
P 114
589
590
3
114 B
AVE.
20531
11446
0
20523
11445
7
APPENDIX A
20515
8
P 11876
1
Rem 592
11450
2050
54
20505
11451
11479
6
RP 7595
Pcl. O
9
2
20483
11474
5
20471
11471
P 1440
BARCLAY ST.
10
11463
DATE: Apr 27, 2012 FILE: 2012-051-RZ
BY: PC
729
APPENDIX B
BYLAW NO. 6962-2012
A Bylaw to designate a property as a heritage property under Section 967 of the Local Government
Act and to enter into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement under Section 966 of the Local
Government Act and to grant a Tax Exemption under Section 225 of the Community Charter
____________________________________________________________________________________
WHEREAS the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge considers that the
properties located at 11406 and 11414 205 Street, Maple Ridge, BC have heritage value and that
the property and certain buildings on the property should be designated as protected under section
967 of the Local Government Act;
AND WHEREAS the District of Maple Ridge and Leanne Helen Koehn and James Maxwell Rowley
wish to enter into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement for the property;
AND WHEREAS the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge wishes to
exercise its discretion under section 225 of the Community Charter to exempt the property from
municipal property taxation subject to the terms of an exemption agreement;
AND WHEREAS the District of Maple Ridge has provided notice of a proposed tax exemption bylaw in
accordance with section 227 of the Community Charter;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge enacts as
follows:
Citation
1.1
This Bylaw may be cited as “Maple Ridge Heritage Designation and Revitalization and Tax
Exemption Agreement Bylaw 6962-2012”.
Interpretation
2.1
In this Bylaw, the terms “heritage value”, “heritage character” and “alter” have the
corresponding meanings given to them in the Local Government Act.
Heritage Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement
3.1
The District of Maple Ridge enters into a Heritage Revitalization and a Tax Exemption
Agreement (the “Agreement”) with the registered owner of the property located at
11406 and 11414 205 Street, Maple Ridge and legally described as:
PID: 012-547-069
Lot 649 District Lot 279 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 2180; and
PID: 012-547-077
Lot 650 District Lot 279 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 2180
(collectively the “Property”).
3.2
The Acting Mayor and Corporate Officer are authorized on behalf of the District of Maple
Ridge Council to sign and seal the Agreement in the form attached as Appendix “1” to this
Bylaw.
3.3
Subject to all of the terms and conditions set out in the Agreement, the Property and the
Whitehead residence and the Whitehead cottage (the “Existing Heritage Buildings”), as
described in the Agreement, shall be exempt from District property taxation for a term of five
(5) years effective from the date on which the Agreement comes into force.
Heritage Designation
4.1
Council hereby designates the Property and the “Existing Heritage Buildings”, as described in
the Agreement, as protected heritage property for the purposes of section 967 of the Local
Government Act of British Columbia.
Exemptions
5.1
5.2
The following actions may be undertaken in relation to the Existing Heritage Buildings
without first obtaining a heritage alteration permit from the District:
(a)
non-structural renovations or alterations to the interior of the building or structure
that do not affect any protected interior feature or fixture and do not alter the
exterior appearance of the building or structure; and
(b)
non-structural normal repairs and maintenance that do not alter the exterior
appearance of a building or structure.
For the purpose of section 5.1, “normal repairs” means the repair or replacement of
elements, components or finishing materials of a building, structure or protected feature or
fixture, with elements, components or finishing materials that are equivalent to those being
replaced in terms of heritage character, material composition, colour, dimensions and
quality.
READ A FIRST TIME this
READ A SECOND TIME this
day of
day of
PUBLIC HEARING held this
day of
READ A THIRD TIME this
day of
, 2013.
, 2013
, 2013.
, 2013.
APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation this
ADOPTED this
PRESIDING MEMBER
day of
day of
, 2013.
CORPORATE OFFICER
, A.D. 2013.
APPENDIX “1” – HERITAGE REVITALIZATION AND TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT dated for reference the
day of
, 20 is
BETWEEN:
Leanne Helen Koehn and James Rowley Maxwell
11406 – 205th Street
Maple Ridge, B.C. V2 X 1S4
(Collectively the “Owner”)
AND:
THE CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
11995 Haney Place
Maple Ridge, British Columbia
V2X 6A9
(the “District”)
WHEREAS:
A.
The Owner is the registered owner in fee simple of the land and all improvements located at
11406 and 11414 205 Street, Maple Ridge, B.C. and legally described as:
PARCEL IDENTIFIER: 012-547-069
LOT 649 DISTRICT LOT 279 GROUP 1 NEW WESTMINSTER DISTRICT PLAN 2180
PARCEL IDENTIFIER: 012-547-077
LOT 650 DISTRICT LOT 279 GROUP 1 NEW WESTMINSTER DISTRICT PLAN 2180
(the “Land”);
B.
There are two principal building currently situated on the Land, known as the Whitehead
residence and the Whitehead cottage, as shown on the sketch map attached as Schedule
“A” to this Agreement (the “Existing Heritage Buildings”), and the District and the Owner
agree that the Existing Heritage Buildings have heritage merit and should be conserved;
C.
The Owner intends to apply to the District for approval to construct an addition to the
Whitehead residence, as shown on the sketch map attached as Schedule “A”;
D.
Section 966 of the Local Government Act authorizes a local government to enter into a
Heritage Revitalization Agreement with the owner of heritage property, and to allow
variations of, and supplements to, the provisions of a bylaw or a permit issued under Part 26
or Part 27 of the Local Government Act;
E.
Section 225 of the Community Charter authorizes a local government to enter into an
agreement with the owner of eligible heritage property that is to be exempt from municipal
taxation, respecting the extent of the exemption and the conditions on which it is made;
F.
The Owner and the District have agreed to enter into this Heritage Revitalization and Tax
Exemption Agreement setting out the terms and conditions by which the heritage value of
the Land and the Existing Heritage Buildings are to be preserved and protected, in return for
specified supplements and variances to District bylaws and the exemption of the Land and
the Existing Heritage Buildings, from District property taxation for a specified term;
H.
The date of final adoption of the bylaw to which this Agreement is attached is the “Effective
Date”;
THIS AGREEMENT is evidence that in consideration of the sum of ten dollars ($10.00) now paid by
each party to the other and for other good and valuable consideration (the receipt of which each
party hereby acknowledges) the Owner and the District each covenant with the other as follows:
Conservation of the Existing Heritage Buildings
1.
The Owner shall, promptly following the Effective Date, commence and complete the
restoration, renovation and conservation of the Character Defining Elements of the Land and
the Existing Heritage Buildings (the “Work”), as identified in the Statement of Significance
attached as Schedule “B”, which Work shall be done in accordance with the approved plans
and specifications attached as Schedule “C” to this Agreement (the “Conservation Plans”).
2.
The Owner shall not alter the Character Defining Elements except in accordance with the
Conservation Plans.
3.
Prior to commencement of the Work, the Owner shall obtain from the District all necessary
permits and licences, including a heritage alteration permit.
4.
The Work shall be done at the Owner’s sole expense in accordance with generally accepted
engineering, architectural and heritage conservation practices. If any conflict or ambiguity
arises in the interpretation of the Conservation Plans, the parties agree that the conflict or
ambiguity shall be resolved in accordance with the Standards and Guidelines for the
Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, Second Edition, published by Parks Canada in
2010, or any future update to this edition.
5.
The Owner shall, at the Owner’s sole expense, engage a member of the British Columbia
Association of Heritage Professionals (the “Registered Professional”) to oversee the Work
and to perform the duties set out in section 6 of this Agreement.
6.
The Owner shall cause the Registered Professional to:
(a)
prior to commencement of the Work, provide to the District an executed and sealed
Confirmation of Commitment in the form attached as Schedule “D” to this
Agreement;
(b)
erect on the Land and keep erected throughout the course of the Work, a sign of
sufficient size and visibility to effectively notify contractors and tradespersons
entering onto the Land that the Work involves protected heritage property and is
being carried out for heritage conservation purposes;
(c)
throughout the course of the Work, effectively oversee the work of all contractors
and tradespersons and inspect all materials leaving and arriving at the site to ensure
that the Work is carried out in accordance with the Conservation Plans;
(d)
obtain the District’s approval for any changes to the Work, including any amended
permits that may be required;
(e)
upon substantial completion of the Work, provide to the District an executed and
sealed Certification of Compliance in the form attached as Schedule “E” to this
Agreement; and
(f)
notify the District within one (1) business day if the Registered Professional’s
engagement by the Owner is terminated for any reason.
Timing of Restoration
7.
The Owner shall commence and complete all actions required for the completion of the Work
in accordance with this Agreement within 12 months following the Effective Date.
Ongoing Maintenance
8.
Following completion of the Work, the Owner shall
(a)
in perpetuity, maintain the Existing Heritage Buildings and the Land in good repair in
accordance with the maintenance standards set out in Maple Ridge Heritage Site
Maintenance Standards Bylaw No. 6710-2009; and
(b)
prior to the having the Existing Heritage Buildings repainted to a different colour,
retain a Registered Professional to determine through a suitable analysis, the original
colours and a painting scheme acceptable to the District for the repainting of the
Existing Heritage Buildings.
Damage to or Destruction of the Existing Heritage Buildings
9.
If the Existing Heritage Buildings is damaged, the Owner shall obtain a heritage alteration
permit and any other necessary permits and licences and, in a timely manner, shall restore
and repair the Existing Heritage Buildings to the same condition and appearance that
existed before the damage occurred.
10.
If, in the opinion of the District, the Existing Heritage Buildings is completely destroyed and
the Owner wishes to construct a replacement building on the Land, such replacement
building must be constructed in compliance with the District’s Zoning Bylaw, in a style that is
acceptable to the District and substantially similar to that of the destroyed Existing Heritage
Buildings, after having obtained a heritage alteration permit and all other necessary permits
and licences.
11.
The Owner shall use its best efforts to commence and complete any repairs to the Existing
Heritage Buildings, or the construction of any replica or replacement buildings, with
reasonable dispatch.
Variations to District’s Zoning Bylaw
12.
District of Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510-1985 (the “Zoning Bylaw”) is varied and
supplemented in its application to the Land and the Existing Heritage Buildings in the
manner and to the extent set out in Schedule “F” to this Agreement.
Heritage Designation
13.
The Owner hereby irrevocably agrees to the designation of the Land and the Existing
Heritage Buildings as a municipal heritage site in accordance with section 967 of the Local
Government Act, and releases the District from any obligation to compensate the Owner in
any form for any reduction in the market value of the Land or the Existing Heritage Buildings
that may result from the designation.
Tax Exemption Conditions
14.
The District hereby exempts from District property taxation, for five (5) years following the
Effective Date, the Land and the Existing Heritage Buildings on the following conditions:
(a)
all items agreed to within this Agreement must be met;
(b)
any other fees and charges related to the Land, the Existing Heritage Buildings, and
securities or moneys in trust due to the District of Maple Ridge are paid or provided
in full; and
(c)
the Owner is not in contravention of any other District of Maple Ridge bylaw.
15.
If any condition set out in section 14 above is not met to the satisfaction of the District,
acting reasonably then the Owner must pay to the District the full amount of tax exemptions
received, plus interest, immediately upon written demand.
Interpretation
16.
In this Agreement, “Owner” shall mean the registered owner of the Land or a subsequent
registered owner of the Land, as the context requires or permits.
Conformity with District Bylaws
17.
The Owner acknowledges and agrees that, except as expressly varied by this Agreement, any
development or use of the Land, including any construction, restoration and repair of the
Existing Heritage Buildings, must comply with all applicable bylaws of the District.
Statutory Authority Retained
18.
Nothing in this Agreement shall limit, impair, fetter or derogate from the statutory powers of
the District, all of which powers may be exercised by the District from time to time and at any
time to the fullest extent that the District is enabled.
Indemnity
19.
The Owner hereby releases, indemnifies and saves the District, its officers, employees,
elected officials, agents and assigns harmless from and against any and all actions, causes
of action, losses, damages, costs, claims, debts and demands whatsoever by any person,
arising out of or in any way due to the existence or effect of any of the restrictions or
requirements in this Agreement, or the breach or non-performance by the Owner of any term
or provision of this Agreement, or by reason of any work or action of the Owner in
performance of its obligations under this Agreement or by reason of any wrongful act or
omission, default, or negligence of the Owner.
20.
In no case shall the District be liable or responsible in any way for:
(a)
any personal injury, death or consequential damage of any nature whatsoever,
howsoever caused, that be suffered or sustained by the Owner or by any other
person who may be on the Land; or
(b)
any loss or damage of any nature whatsoever, howsoever caused to the Land, or any
improvements or personal property thereon belonging to the Owner or to any other
person,
arising directly or indirectly from compliance with the restrictions and requirements in this
Agreement, wrongful or negligent failure or omission to comply with the restrictions and
requirements in this Agreement or refusal, omission or failure of the District to enforce or
require compliance by the Owner with the restrictions or requirements in this Agreement or
with any other term, condition or provision of this Agreement.
No Waiver
21.
No restrictions, requirements or other provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to have
been waived by the District unless a written waiver signed by an officer of the District has
first been obtained, and without limiting the generality of the foregoing, no condoning,
excusing or overlooking by the District on previous occasions of any default, nor any previous
written waiver, shall be taken to operate as a waiver by the District of any subsequent
default or in any way defeat or affect the rights and remedies of the District.
Inspection
22.
Upon request, the Owner shall advise or cause the Registered Professional to advise the
District’s Planning Department of the status of the Work, and, without limiting the District’s
power of inspection conferred by statute and in addition to such powers, the District shall be
entitled at all reasonable times and from time to time to enter onto the Land for the purpose
of ensuring that the Owner is fully observing and performing all of the restrictions and
requirements in this Agreement to be observed and performed by the Owner.
Enforcement of Agreement
23.
The Owner acknowledges that it is an offence under section 981(1)(c) of the Local
Government Act to alter the Land or the Existing Heritage Buildings in contravention of this
Agreement, punishable by a fine of up to $50,000.00 or imprisonment for a term of up to 2
years, or both.
24.
The Owner acknowledges that it is an offence under section 981(1)(b) of the Local
Government Act to fail to comply with the requirements and conditions of any heritage
alteration permit issued to the Owner pursuant to this Agreement and section 972 of the
Local Government Act, punishable in the manner prescribed in the preceding section.
25.
The Owner acknowledges that, if the Owner alters the Land or the Existing Heritage Buildings
in contravention of this Agreement, the District may apply to the B.C. Supreme Court for:
(a) an order that the Owner restores the Land or the Existing Heritage Buildings to its
condition before the contravention;
(b) an order that the Owner undertakes compensatory conservation work on the Land or the
Existing Heritage Buildings;
(c) an order requiring the Owner to take other measures specified by the Court to ameliorate
the effects of the contravention; and
(d) an order authorizing the District to perform any and all such work at the expense of the
Owner.
26.
The Owner acknowledges that, if the District undertakes work to satisfy the terms,
requirements or conditions of any heritage alteration permit issued to the Owner pursuant to
this Agreement upon the Owner’s failure to do so, the District may add the cost of the work
and any incidental expenses to the taxes payable with respect to the Land, or may recover
the cost from any security that the Owner have provided to the District to guarantee the
performance of the terms, requirements or conditions of the permit, or both.
27.
The Owner acknowledges that the District may file a notice on title to the Land in the land
title office if the terms and conditions of the Agreement have been contravened.
28.
The District may notify the Owner in writing of any alleged breach of this Agreement to the
Owner shall have the time specified in the notice to remedy the breach. In the event that the
Owner fails to remedy the breach within the time specified, the District may enforce this
Agreement by:
(a) seeking an order for specific performance of this Agreement;
(b) any other means specified in this Agreement; or
(c) any means specified in the Community Charter or the Local Government Act,
and the District’s resort to any remedy for a breach of this Agreement does not limit its right
to resort to any other remedy available at law or in equity.
Headings
29.
The headings in this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect the
interpretation of this Agreement or any of its provisions.
Appendices
30.
All schedules to this Agreement are incorporated into and form part of this Agreement.
Number and Gender
31.
Whenever the singular or masculine or neuter is used in this Agreement, the same shall be
construed to mean the plural or feminine or body corporate where the context so requires.
Successors Bound
32.
All restrictions, rights and liabilities herein imposed upon or given to the respective parties
shall extend to and be binding upon their respective heirs, executors, administrators,
successors and assigns.
Severability
33.
If any portion of this Agreement is held invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the
invalid portion shall be severed and the decision that it is invalid shall not affect the validity
of the remainder of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Owner and the District have executed this Agreement on the dates set
out below.
____________________________________
by its authorized signatory(ies):
Authorized Signatory:
______
Authorized Signatory:
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
______________________________
Date
The Corporate Seal of DISTRICT OF MAPLE
RIDGE was hereunto affixed in the presence
of:
Mayor:
Corporate Officer:
______________________________
Date
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
C/S
SCHEDULE “A”
PROPOSED PLAN
SCHEDULE “B”
HERITAGE CONSERVATION PLAN AND STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE
Whitehead Property - Conservation Plan
11406 +11414 205th Street, Maple Ridge
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
CON TE N TS
•
Carl [Walkeapaa] Whitehead retires
Project Introduction ...........................................................................................................01
Design Rationale ................................................................................................................02
2.1 The Existing Buildings
2.2 The Context
2.3 Architectural Expression
2.4 Architectural Expression
Site Introduction.................................................................................................................06
Description of the Site.........................................................................................................07
4.1 Brief Historical Context
4.2 Description + Site Context
Statements of Significance..................................................................................................08
5.1 The Whitehead Property, 11406 + 11414 205th Street
5.2 The Whitehead Residence, 11406 205th Street
5.3 The Whitehead Cottage, 11414 205th Street
Conservation Guidelines......................................................................................................11
6.1 National Standards and Guidelines
Conservation Recommendations.........................................................................................13
7.1 General Conservation Strategy
7.2 Conservation Strategy for the Whitehead Property, 11406 + 11414 205th Street
7.3 Conservation Strategy for the Whitehead Residence, 11406 205th Street
7.4 Conservation Strategy for The Whitehead Cottage, 11414 205th Street
Supporting archival material................................................................................................15
Conservation plan photo documentation [exterior + interior of existing] ............................17
9.1 The Whitehead Residence, 11406 205th Street
9.2 The Whitehead Cottage, 11414 205th Street
2
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
1
INTR ODU C TI O N
Project Introduction
The Whitehead property, which contains the Whitehead Residence
and the Whitehead Cottage, is situated on a large corner lot in
the Hammond neighbourhood of Maple Ridge. The corner lot and
buildings on the site are typical of a number of heritage houses
in the neighbourhood and add to the contextual and character
value contributing to the historic character of the streetscape
and surrounding area.
The Hammond neighbourhood is primarily residential with an
RS-1 zoning designation. The intent of the Heritage Revitalization
Agreement is to benefit the community through the long-term
legal protection of the heritage value of a property and to benefit
the property owner by enabling flexibility that would not be
permitted under existing municipal regulations.
•
11406 205th Street [The Whitehead Residence]
•
11414 205th Street [The Whitehead Cottage]
The proposal for The Whitehead Residence at 11406 205th Street
includes consolidation of the existing lots, individual engineering
services for both properties, and a modest addition to the rear
of the Whitehead Residence to modernize and retain interior
historical detailing, enhance the livability and create a more
usable second floor, upgrades to the main floor bathroom and
to create a larger basement storage area. Mature landscaping
and picket fencing on the site will be retained.
01
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
2
Design Rationale
2.1
The Whitehead Property
DESIGN R AT IO N ALE
The Whitehead Residence at 11406 205th Street will undergo a
renovation. An addition to the rear of the house will maintain
historic proportions and massing while allowing for a modern
update of the interior living space. A small dormer will be added
to the second floor to allow for an upstairs bathroom. Services
will be separated and upgraded for the site.
The Whitehead Cottage on the north side of the property has been
recently renovated and no further upgrades are anticipated. In
order to facillitate upgrading site services the cottage will have
independent water, electricity and sewer upgrades.
2.2
•
11406 205th Street - proposed massing from south
•
11406 205th Street - proposed massing from east
The Context
The Whitehead property includes two historic houses and two
outbuildings on the northeast corner of the intersection of 205th
Street and 114th Avenue in Hammond, Maple Ridge, B.C.
The continued existing use as residences is in keeping with the
District of Maple Ridge zoning intentions for this area.
2.3
Architectural Expression
The Whitehead Residence at 11406 205th Street is a good
example of residential building that used generous wood
detailing to achieve a delightful, sound design. The second
house, the Whitehead Cottage is a small bungalow, at 11414
205th Street is probably the earliest structure on the site, and
is typical of early wood residential buildings on cleared land.
The building used pre-manufactured building fabric, hallmarks
of early mill building-kit products, and possibly produced at the
Hammond Cedar Mill itself.
Original wood siding, shingles and gable end details are intact,
as well as generous wood water table boards, belly boards,
and other miscellaneous trim. Original windows, some with
stained-glass transom lites, and updated wood windows are
currently incorporated into the house. The front porch detailing is
prominent with tapered porch piers and columns, generous wood
detailing and wood stair and railings. These elements are typical
of the early Craftsman bungalow architecture of Maple Ridge
and the surrounding areas. These details will be undisturbed
during the project and will be replicated where they are detailed
in the new addition. The addition will replicate the language of
an earlier addition, extending a shed roof to extend the living
area at the rear of the house.
02
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
2.4
DESIGN R AT IO N ALE
Proposal
The Whitehead Residence has been continuously owned by the
descendents of the original builder and owner Carl Whitehead.
The current owners moved their young family to Maple Ridge
from Burnaby, taking over the stewardship of the property from
their parents generation. In doing so the current owners are
pursuing a heritage revitalization agreement with the District
of Maple Ridge to honour the unique history of the site and to
ensure that the heritage of the two properties is maintained.
Their intentions are to modernize and retain interior historical
detailing in the 1923 home to allow their family to continue
living in the house. To subdivide the lots and to update services
to both properties.
In conformance with standard conservation practices, the main
house [the Whitehead Residence] and the yellow cottage [the
Whitehead Cottage] will remain in their original locations.
The new addition on the site will be confined to the rear of the
main house and extend the foot print behind the original mass
to maintain the existing heritage streetscape on the lot. Design
elements will be incorporated from the original house to tie in
the new construction and maintain continuity. The addition of
a new second floor dormer will be significantly inset from the
original house to minimize the impact from the street, taking
cues from other dormers on houses in this era. Interior finishes
will be modern but compliment the original house.
The large covered deck at the rear of the main floor will enhance
the functional living space and provide the house with a defined
rear entry that is more welcoming and in line with exterior
walkways and gates.
Green design strategies will be employed in the project where
possible. The owners are interested in installing the infrastructure
for a solar hot water collection system on the roof, ground source
heat with the possibility of integrating the two systems and using
insulated concrete form work for the new foundation work for the
addition. Interior finishes will also reflect sustainable strategies
with energy star appliances and fixtures, double glazed windows
and LOV finishes.
•
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
Neighbour’s visiting the Whitehead Residence
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
03
Whitehead Residence - Conservation Plan
11406 205th Street [originally 80 Waugh Street], Maple Ridge
•
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
Ann E. Rowley, Whitehouse Residence [11406] portrait, watercolour
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
04
•
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
D. Sharpe, Whitehouse Residence [11406] portrait, pen + ink 05
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
3
STATEME N T O F
SIGNIFIC AN C E
Site Introduction
Name of Historic Place:
Address:
Significant Owner/Builder and
first owner at 11406 205th Street:
Date of Construction:
Whitehead Property
11406 & 11414 205th Street, Maple Ridge B.C.
Carl Whitehead
11406: ca. 1923
11414: ca. 191-
The earliest portion of 11414 205th Street (the yellow house [the Whitehead Cottage] in the photo above) is the
earliest building on the combined sites, perhaps along with an original portion of an outbuilding to its rear, off
the lane. Following the purchase of these properties (and the properties to their east to 206th Street) in 1922,
Carl Whitehead began to build a house for his family, and rental houses on the properties to its east.
The Whitehead Cottage at 11414 205th and its outbuilding display the hallmarks of mill kit house construction,
very likely material supplied by the mill in Port Hammond. The Whitehead Residence at 11406 205th Street is of
later design and detailing, incorporating details and construction techniques very common for houses of its era.
The houses and outbuilding on the subject property are generally well-built, and have been maintained in a
manner that has resulted in much of the building fabric being intact and in good repair. The proposed changes
to the property are largely changes to the Whitehead Residence at the back of the house. Additions there are to
make it suite the contemporary living needs of the family now living in the house.
06
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
4
STATEME N T O F
SIGNIFIC AN C E
Description of the Site
4.1
Historic Context
The houses and properties are closely associated with the early settlement of Port Hammond in the latter
decades of the 19th Century (Port Hammond was incorporated in 1883). At its heart, Port Hammond was a mill
town, and intimately linked with the Canadian Pacific Railway running through the heart of the settlement.
The cedar mill was the largest employer in the community and, in fact, in all of Maple Ridge. Because of the
number of workers employed by the mill, a thriving commercial centre developed along Maple Crescent by 1910,
with the Bank of Hamilton, Dale’s Hotel and Store, Wo Lung’s Store, and the Allison and Cross general store
establishing themselves as key businesses within the community. Other businesses included boarding houses
and hotels, which provided accommodation for travelers, businesspeople, and workers, and bars and halls,
which offered residents the chance to relax with their neighbours and fellow workers.
Since many mill workers lived in homes that were close to their workplace, many of the community’s businesses
remained in Hammond, even when the Lougheed Highway passed through the municipality north of the townsite.
Development associated with the new highway bypassed the early Port Hammond settlement, with the result that
the settlement retained much of its early buildings and small community atmosphere.
4.2
Description of the Site and its immediate context
The site is near the heart of the original community, with John Hammond’s house about a block away. The
orientations of the houses do not follow the lot lines typical for the block, but rather face the side street, not
call 205th Street. This allowed both houses to have good light and exposure (no inside lot). Carl Whitehead is
an example of the local millworker buying property in Port Hammond and settling in for the long term. What
is unusual about Mr. Whitehead is his purchasing of an entire row of properties on the north side of 114th
(then Stanton) between 205th and 206th (then Waugh and Wareslet), and building rental houses on all but the
westernmost property (now 11406 205th Street), where he built a house for himself.
At the time of Carl Whitehead’s purchasing the properties in 1922, there was the original portion of the Whitehead
Cottage at 11414 205th Street (originally 82 Waugh Street), and an original piece of the outbuilding to its east.
11406 and 11414
205th Street
Other properties
purchased and
developed by Carl
Whitehead
07
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
5
Statement of Significance
5.1
Whitehead Property
11406 and 11414 205th Street
Maple Ridge, B.C.
STATEME N T O F
SIGNIFIC AN C E
Description of the Historic Place
The Whitehead property includes two historic houses and two
outbuildings on the northeast corner of the intersection of 205th
Heritage Value
The Whitehead property as a whole is important for its formal and aesthetic values, and particularly for its
cultural value exemplifying the settlement and improvement of Hammond in the early 20th Century.
The arrangement of the two houses and single car garage straddling what was intended to be two standard lots
at the end of the block fronting onto what is now 114th Avenue, is important as a good typical example of such
property development in the settlements in the Lower Mainland at the turn of the 20th Century.
The siting of the Whitehead Cottage at 11414 205th Street tight to the lane exemplifies decisions made by
owners and builders without being constrained by lot line configuration, and without the presence of municipal
zoning or private setback regulations, which maximized usable south-facing yard space, and minimized less
usable north-facing yard space (along the lane).
The siting of the garage for 11406 205th Street is important for revealing the lack of setback regulations for
outbuildings at the time of its construction (certainly before 1928), and for having been moved on site to its present
location – a common practice with wood frame buildings in the early settlement years (the 1928 fire insurance map
shows it in the extreme northwest corner of the property). The resulting atypical arrangement of buildings serves as
a reminder of earlier less standardized site development regulations in early Port Hammond than is found today.
The site is also important as a remnant of the entire north side of the 20500 block of what was then called Stanton
Street, now 114th Avenue, a parcel owned by Whitehead, and developed with modest bungalows between 1922
(the year he purchased the property) and 1928 (as evidenced by the fire insurance map from that year).
Character-defining Elements
• parcel size, dimensions and rectangular shape
• frontage of three buildings onto 205th Street
• frontage of fourth building onto the lane
• mature trees and garden
• picket fencing
Property Chronology
• 1922
- Carl Whitehead purchases Lots 642,645, 646, 649, and 650 Stanton - now 114th Avenue; this is the entire block of properties between 114th Avenue and the lane north of 114th.
- One small house and at least one garage/outbuilding exist on the two westernmost properties (the subject site)
• by 1928 - Three rental houses and garages built by Carl Whitehead on the three lots to the east of the subject site
• < 1937
- second house built at 646 Stanton (burned down)
• ca. 1955 - well filled in with the arrival of water service (and probably sewers)
• by 1969 - At time of his death, Carl Whitehead still owned 646 as rental property in addition to the properties associated with his own residence.
08
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
5
5.2
Whitehead Residence
11406 205th Street (originally 80 Waugh Street)
(ca. 1923)
STATEME N T O F
SIGNIFIC AN C E
The Whitehead Residence is the 1 1/2 storey bungalow with a
prominent gabled front porch located on the northeast corner of
the intersection of 205th Street and 114th Avenue in Hammond,
Maple Ridge, B.C.
Heritage Value
The house at 11406 205th Avenue is important for its
aesthetic,cultural and social values. It is a good example of
residential building that used generous wood detailing to achieve a delightful, sound design that weathered
well: a style of building called the Craftsman bungalow, that the owner/builder copied from a house on
Dewdney Trunk Road near Webster’s Corner (the centre of the Finnish community in Maple Ridge).
The Whitehead Residence is important for displaying – through its substantial design – the prominence and
prosperity of Port Hammond in the Maple Ridge area in the early 20th Century, only overtaken by Haney after
the development of the Lougheed Highway in the 1930s. The house is also important for its association with
Carl Whitehead (originally Carl Konstantin Ollinpoika Walkeapaa, then C.K. Olson, a Finnish immigrant, and
millworker at the Hammond Cedar Mill, one of the major cedar processing mills on the Fraser, and the town’s
major employer), who built and moved into the house in 1923, after having lived in a smaller house next door
on 114th Avenue. The house is important for its association with Mr. Whitehead (a literal translation of his
original Finnish surname Walkeapaa) and the Finnish immigrant community in Maple Ridge.
The house is socially valued for inclusion on the current Heritage Inventory, and for its continued ownership by descendents
of Carl Whitehead, a valuable social continuity in the community spanning several generations. It is also a good record
of sensitive additions made over time to meet evolving residential needs over the decades of its existence.
• cross-gable form with gabled front porch
• shed roofed rear extension
• front porch detailing: tapered porch piers and columns, generously sized wood trim, brackets, dentil work,
diamond-shaped window opening, shingled skirting, wood stair and railings
• wood doors and windows, original stained-glass transom lites
• shingle sided wall areas below and above main floor wall area
• beveled sided main floor wall area
• generous wood water table boards, belly boards, and other miscellaneous trim
• brick chimneys
• original interior detailing, such as wainscoting, fireplace, kitchen ceiling work
11406 205th
• 1922
• by 1928
Street - Property Chronology
- bare land not yet built upon, at time of purchase by Carl Whitehead
- Cross-gabled house with poured concrete foundation and small back porch
- well to the south of the house
- pump house to the east of the house
- Eastern (rear) addition with Bathroom , Pantry (over top of pump house, enclosed
in new basement space), and enclosed Back Porch
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
09
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
Whitehead Cottage - Conservation Plan
11414 205th Street, Maple Ridge
STATEME N T O F
SIGNIFIC AN C E
5
5.3
11414 205th Street (originally
82 Waugh Street)
(ca. 191-)
The Whitehouse Cottage is the single-storey gable-roofed
bungalow located close to the lane, at the north end of the
property on the northeast corner of the intersection of 205th
Heritage Value
The Whitehouse Cottage is important as probably the earliest
structure on the site, along with the outbuilding to its east. The construction of the house and outbuilding
is of aesthetic and cultural interest for being typical of early wood residential building on cleared land. The
buildings are of particular interest for appearing to use pre-manufactured building fabric – short regular lengths
of siding, with joint lines covered by battens – that are a hallmark of early mill building-kit products, and possibly
produced at the Hammond Cedar Mill itself. The original wood windows with their divided upper lites in lateVictorian style, all are valuable physically as well as culturally, showing the common building practice for humble
bungalows in the early days of Port Hammond.
The house is also culturally significant for its additions, done to have the building continue to serve for family
accommodation as those needs evolved. The outbuilding facing the lane (with additions now demolished), is
culturally significant for being the site of the first recycling depot in Maple Ridge.
• simple gable-roof form (both house and outbuilding) w/ gabled front porch element
• building extensions
• wood windows, including those with wood divided upper lites
• bevel-sided pediments, with regular short lengths of siding, covered by battens
• wood shingled main floor wall areas
• drop-sided skirting between main floor and grade
11414 205th Street - Property Chronology
• by 1922 - Small mill 2-room mill kit house exists (present Kitchen and Bedroom)
• - Outbuilding probably exists probably utilizing same mill kit as house
• - Auto garage possibly exists (but located in extreme northwest corner of property)
• by 1928 - 2 front rooms added (present Living and Dining Rooms) with same interior wood detailing as seen in newly constructed Whitehead Residence by Carl Whitehead himself
- Eastern (rear) addition of Bathroom, Back Porch, and Breakfast Room
- Auto garage built or refurbished in the extreme northwest corner of the property
• < 1937
- Auto garage moved onto concrete foundations at its present location
Outbuilding east of
11414 205th Street
Auto garage at
11406 205th Street
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
10
6
Conservation Guidelines
6.1
National Standards and Guidelines
CONSERV ATI O N
P LAN
The Parks Canada Standards and Guidelines for Historic Places in Canada (2010) has been used to assess the
conservation interventions at the Whitehead Property. Conservation is defined as safeguarding heritage elements
of an historic place, so as to retain its heritage value and character. It can involve preservation, rehabilitation, or
restoration of that heritage value and character. The general conservation approach for the Whitehead Property
is mainly rehabilitation, although much of the site is being preserved as is.
Preservation: the action or process of protecting, maintaining, and/or stabilizing the existing materials,
form, and integrity of an historic place or of an individual component, while protecting its heritage value.
Restoration: the action or process of accurately revealing, recovering, or representing the state of an
historic place or of an individual component, as it appeared at a particular period in its history, while
protecting its heritage value.
Rehabilitation: the action or process of making possible a continuing or compatible contemporary use
of an historic place or an individual component, as it appeared at a particular period in its history, while
protecting its heritage value.
General Standards for Preservation, Rehabilitation and Restoration
Standard 1:
Conserve the heritage value of an historic place. Do not remove, replace or substantially alter its intact or repairable character- defining elements. Do not move a part of an historic place if its current location is a character-defining element.
Standard 2:
Conserve changes to an historic place that, over time, have become character-
defining elements in their own right.
Conserve heritage value by adopting an approach calling for minimal intervention.
Standard 3:
Standard 4:
Recognize each historic place as a physical record of its time, place and use. Do not create a false sense of historical development by adding elements from other historic places or other properties, or by combining features of the same property that never coexisted.
Standard 5:
Find a use for an historic place that requires minimal or no change to its character-
defining elements.
Standard 6:
Protect and, if necessary, stabilize an historic place until any subsequent intervention is undertaken. Protect and preserve archaeological resources in place. Where there is potential for disturbing archaeological resources, take mitigation measures to limit damage and loss of information.
Standard 7:
Evaluate the existing condition of character-defining elements to determine the appropriate intervention needed. Use the gentlest means possible for any intervention. Respect heritage value when undertaking an intervention.
Standard 8:
Maintain character-defining elements on an ongoing basis. Repair character-defining
elements by reinforcing their materials using recognized conservation methods. Replace
in kind any extensively deteriorated or missing parts of character-defining elements, where there are surviving prototypes.
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
11
Standard 9:
CONSERV ATI O N
P LAN
Make any intervention needed to preserve character-defining elements physically and visually compatible with the historic place and identifiable on close inspection. Document any intervention for future reference.
Additional Standards Relating to Rehabilitation
Standard 10: Repair rather than replace character-defining elements. Where character-defining elements are too severely deteriorated to repair, and where sufficient physical evidence exists, replace them with new elements that match the forms, materials and detailing of sound versions of the same elements. Where there is insufficient physical evidence, make the form, material and detailing of the new elements compatible with the character
of the historic place.
Standard 11: Conserve the heritage value and character-defining elements when creating any new additions to an historic place or any related new construction. Make the new work physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and distinguishable from the historic place.
Standard 12: Create any new additions or related new construction so that the essential form and
integrity of an historic place will not be impaired if the new work is removed in the future.
Additional Standards Relating to Restoration
Standard 13: Repair rather than replace character-defining elements from the restoration period. Where character-defining elements are too severely deteriorated to repair and where sufficient physical evidence exists, replace them with new elements that match the forms, materials and detailing of sound versions of the same elements.
Standard 14: Replace missing features from the restoration period with new features whose forms,
materials and detailing are based on sufficient physical, documentary and/or oral evidence.
•
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
Hammond Cedar Company photo c.1937
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
12
7
CONSERV ATI O N
P LAN
Conservation Recommendations
7.1
General Conservation Strategy
publicLAB RESEARCH + DESIGN has prepared a plan to add to and alter the rear of the Whitehead Residence at 11406
205th Street, with no lasting impact to the other buildings on the site, and no permanent change to the site.
7.2
Conservation Strategy for Whitehead Property, 11406 & 11414 205th Street
See the design drawings produced by publicLAB RESEARCH + DESIGN for the existing a proposed site plans for the
properties. The Whitehead Cottage at 11414 205th street is to be conserved as is; the Whitehead Residence at 11406
205th will have a small addition extending beyond the rear of the existing house for an additional 10’ the intervention
will require a new path to 114th Avenue and a reconfigured entry gate this will match the existing picket fence, and
incorporate existing paving stones into the landscape, the alterations will not affect the sites’ character-defining
elements.
7.3
Conservation Strategy for the Whitehead Residence, 11406 205th Street
See the design drawings produced by publicLAB RESEARCH + DESIGN for the as-is and proposed plans, sections
and elevations for the house. The conservation of the house is best described as a rehabilitation with most of
the interior and exterior elements preserved, except for those areas disturbed by the rear additions. The new
additions are designed to be compatible with the existing house, with subtle distinguishing elements. There is
ample existing material for good physical evidence for matching new material with existing.
Character-defining elements unaffected by the rear additions are to be conserved with ongoing maintenance
following Standards and Guidelines Standard 10
Standard 10: Repair rather than replace character-defining elements. Where character-defining elements are too severely deteriorated to repair, and where sufficient physical evidence exists, replace them with new elements that match the forms, materials and detailing of sound versions of the same elements. Where there is insufficient physical evidence, make the form, material and detailing of the new elements compatible with the character of the historic place.
Character-defining elements unaffected by the additions:
• cross-gable form viewed from the front of the house w/ gabled front porch
• wood doors and windows, original stained-glass transom lites, except at the rear of the house
• shingle sided wall areas below and above main floor wall area, except those areas affected by the rear addition
• beveled sided main floor wall area, except those areas affected by the rear addition
• generous wood water table boards, belly boards, and other miscellaneous trim, except those areas affected
by the rear addition
• brick chimneys
Character-defining elements affected by the rear additions are to be guided by Standards and Guidelines Standards 7 & 11:
Standard 7:
Evaluate the existing condition of character-defining elements to determine the appropriate intervention needed. Use the gentlest means possible for any intervention. Respect heritage value when undertaking an intervention.
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
13
CONSERV ATI O N
P LAN
Standard 11: Conserve the heritage value and character-defining elements when creating any new additions to an historic place or any related new construction. Make the new work physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and distinguishable from the historic place.
Character-defining elements affected by the additions:
• make rear porch compatible with the front porch by reproducing wood detailing, but make distinguishable
with minimal new glazing
• retain original doors and windows at the rear of the house affected by addition, for re-use or salvage
• re-use if possible siding removed to make way for the addition, or replicate shingle sided wall areas below
and above main floor wall area, where affected by the rear addition
• re-use if possible beveled siding removed to make way for the rear addition, or replicate beveled sided main
floor wall area
• re-use if possible generous wood water table boards, belly boards, and other miscellaneous trim needed to
be removed to make way for the rear addition
The character of the new additions is to be guided by Standards and Guidelines Standard 12:
Standard 12: Create any new additions or related new construction so that the essential form and integrity of an historic place will not be impaired if the new work is removed in the future.
• preserve cross-gable ridge line to preserve dominance of main roof form, second floor shed dormer to not
interrupt this cross-ridge
• The shed forms of the additions are in keeping with historic practices adding to gabled buildings; the result
is compatible with the gable form
7.4
Conservation Strategy for the Whitehead Cottage at 11414 205th Street
See the design drawings produced by publicLAB RESEARCH + DESIGN for the existing plans for the house. The
conservation of the house is best described as preservation of the existing character-defining elements, following
Standard 10 when maintenance is required.
Standard 10: Repair rather than replace character-
defining elements. Where character-
defining elements are too severly
deteriorated to repair, and where suffi
cient physical evidence exists, replace them with new elements that match the forms, materials and detailing of sound versions of the same elements. Where there is insufficient physical evidence, make the form, material and detailing of the new elements compatible with the character of the historic place.
•
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
BCFP Hammond Division Company photo c.1947 14
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
11406 and 11414
205th Street
ARCHIVAL MATERI AL
Other properties purchased and
developed by Carl Whitehead
Map of Hammond in 1911 (courtesy of the Maple Ridge Archives)
15
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
11414 205th Street ,
original portion built before
1922; additions between
1922 and 1928
ARCHIVAL MATERI AL
Outbuilding, original portion built
before 1922; additions between
1922 and 1928
Auto garage,
original location
Three Whitehead
rental properties built
between 1922 and 1928
Auto garage
moved to
present location
after 1937
11406 205th
Street , original
portion built
between 1922
and 1928
Lot 646,
replacement
house built by
Carl Whitehead
[photo 1969]
Lot 646, built by
Carl Whitehead
destroyed by fire < 1937
Fire Insurance Map for Hammond 1928, with revisions in 1937
(courtesy of the Maple Ridge Archives)
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
16
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
CONSERVATION P L A N
- EXISTING PH O TO S
Front facade unaltered:
• Porch preserved
• Main roof form preserved
Rear facade altered to accept shed
roof addition:
• Replicate front porch details
• Replicate siding and trim details
• Relocate window
• Replicate existing window
details for new windows
Exterior trim preserved:
• Painted 1x6 corner boards
• Painted 1x3 drip board
• 10” nominal water table
17
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
Interior stair finishes all preserved:
• wall boards
• Stained/varnished stair trim/baluster
18
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
South bay window with art glass glazing preserved:
• Painted original wood windows
• Original art glass upper lites
19
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
Interior wainscoting all preserved:
• Stained/varnished paneling,
boards, base, and crown
moulding
Interior door casing details all
preserved:
• Stained/varnished jambs, head
trim, and top moulding
20
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
Exterior finishes preserved generally,
replicated at sites of additions:
• Painted siding and trim preserved
• Painted siding and trim salvaged
and re-used and/or replicated for
rear addition
Front porch details and finishes preserved
generally, replicated at sites of additions:
• Painted dentil work, brackets, post
casing and base plates, guard, and trim
all preserved
• Painted shingling preserved and
replicated for rear addition
21
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
Interior tongue-and-groove
ceilings:
• Painted boards
preserved
• Light fixtures preserved
Interior doors and casings
preserved:
• Painted paneled interior
doors
• Glazed interior doors
• Original door hardware
22
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
•
Existing Elevation
•
Existing Section
- EXISTING DRA W I N GS
23
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
•
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
Existing Basement Floor Plan
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
24
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
•
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
Existing Main Floor Plan
25
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
•
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
Existing Second Floor Plan
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
26
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
•
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
Existing Roof Plan
27
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
Front facade preserved:
• Painted wood siding and trim preserved
• Porch and main roof forms preserved
• Existing doors and windows preserved
Rear facade preserved:
Wood exterior materials and details preserved:
28
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
Interior finishes preserved:
• Varnished and painted wainscoting
• Interior doors and hardware
• Baseboards and flooring
• Window stools and casing
• Remaining art glass lites
29
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
30
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
•
Existing Elevation
•
Existing Section
31
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
•
Existing Main Floor Plan
32
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
•
Existing Roof Plan
33
publicLAB
RESEARCH + DESIGN
B I R M I N G H A M
A R C H I T E C T S
•
&
W O O D
P L A N N E R S
SCHEDULE “C”
HERITAGE BUILDING PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS
publicLAB
DESIGN
3060 St Catherines St
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
17 DEC 12
Reissued for HRA +BP
25 APR 12
Issued for HRA + BP
12 SEP 11
Issued for SOS
Issue + Revision Record
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
All drawings and related documents are
the copyright property of the Architect
and must be returned upon request.
Reproduction of the contract documents
in whole or part is forbidden without the
Architect's written permission.
LOT O, BLOCK 173,
PLAN 5112, DISTRICT LOT 301
NEW WESTMINSTER DISTRICT
ZONING
RS-1
SITE
DIMENSIONS:
32.48' X 122.80'
AREA:
3988.54 SF
SITE COVERAGE:
GENERAL NOTES
ARCHITECTURAL DRAWING INDEX
A1.0
A2.0
A2.1
A2.2
A2.3
A3.0
A4.0
A4.1
A4.2
A4.3
A4.4
A5.0
COVER SHEET
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE - EXISTING PLANS
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE - EXISTING PLANS
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE - PROPOSED PLANS
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE - PROPOSED PLANS
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE - EXISTING + PROPOSED SECTIONS
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE - EXISTING ELEVATIONS
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE - PROPOSED ELEVATIONS
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE - PROPOSED ELEVATIONS
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE - CONSERVATION ELEVATIONS
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE - CONSERVATION ELEVATIONS
WHITEHEAD COTTAGE - EXISTING DRAWINGS
CITY OF VANCOUVER BUILDING BY-LAW NO. 9419 [2007]
PERMIT PROVISIONS AND BLDG. INSPECTORS REQUESTS
B.C. ELECT. CODE
B.C. PLUMBING CODE
LOCAL FIRE CODES AND SAFETY STANDARDS
SOUND ACCEPTABLE LOCAL CONST. TRADES PRACTICES
.2 THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR
VERIFYING ALL DIMENSIONS ON SITE. REPORT ANY SUBSTANTIAL
DISCREPANCIES TO THE DESIGNER FOR CLARIFICATION PRIOR
TO INSTALLATION OR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW WORK.
.3 ONE SET OF BUILDING PERMIT APPROVED DRAWINGS PLUS
CORRESPONDING JOB CARD MUST BE KEPT ON SITE AT ALL
TIMES DURING CONSTRUCTION
.4 ALL WOOD EXTERIOR DOOR TO BE SOLID CORE.
880.00 SF
225.00 SF
TOTAL:
1105.00 SF
28 %
SETBACKS AND YARDS
EXISTING
.1 ALL WORK SHOWN IN THESE DRAWINGS OR EXECUTED ON
SITE MUST CONFORM TO THE FOLLOWING:
-
HOUSE:
GARAGE:
FRONT YARD:
WEST SIDEYARD:
18.66'
3.50'
EAST SIDEYARD:
3.33'
REARYARD:
56.71'
Koehn + Rowley Residence
11406 205TH STREET
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Cover Sheet
CIVIC ADDRESS
HEIGHT
28'-5"
SITE STATISTICS
FSR
42 %
BASEMENT
MAIN FLOOR
UPPER FLOOR
880.00 SF
905.00 SF
585.00 SF
M+U TOTAL:
1490.00 SF
72 %
TOTAL:
2075.00 SF
0.52 FSR
1106
12 SEP 11
RENOVATION+DORMER ADDITION
1 1 4 0 6 2 0 5 T H S T R E E T, M A P L E R I D G E
-
A-0.0
648
651
FI
EX N.
. 13.
13 45
.4
5
FI
EX N.
. 13.
13 24
.2
4
89° 55' 56"
17'-9 1/2"
0.32Ø DECID
SPRD= 2
DESIGN
60'-2 1/2"
FI
EX N.
. 13.
13 23
.2
3
FI
EX N.
. 12.
12 86
.8
6
FI
EX N.
. 13.
13 03
.0
3
LANE
97
2. 7
. 1 .9
N 12
FI X.
E
49'-2 1/2"
9'-3 1/2"
11414 205TH
STREET
0.24Ø DECID
SPRD= 6
646
10.74
9
.0
13 09
. 13.
EX N.
FI
E
FI X.
N 12
. 1 .5
2. 0
50
3
.8
12 83
. 12.
EX N.
FI
1.30Ø DECID
SPRD= 9
18'-9 1/2"
23'-5"
3
.8
12 83
. 12.
EX N.
FI
22'-1 1/2"
0.28Ø DECID
SPRD= 5
34.424
69
2. 9
. 1 .6
N 12
FI X.
E
64
2. 4
. 1 .6
N 12 2
FI X. 2.6 2
E . 1 2.6
N 1
FI X.
E
0.18Ø DECID
SPRD= 7
E
FI X.
N 12
. 1 .5
2. 4
54
Issued for SOS
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
- PROJECT SITE -
E
FI X.
N 1
EX . 1 2.5
FI . 2.5 9
N 12 9
. 1 .6
2. 2
62
Issued for HRA + BP
12 SEP 11
FI
EX N.
. 12.
12 94
.9
4
0.33Ø DECID
SPRD= 6
11406 205TH
STREET
0.18Ø DECID
SPRD= 5
25 APR 12
53' 56"
FI
EX N.
. 12.
12 73
.7
3
649
32'-1"
W
17 DEC 12
7
.2
13 2 7
. 13.
EX N.
FI 359°
359° 54' 03"
34.456
36
2. 6
. 1 .3
N 12
FI X.
E
EX
FI .
N 12
. 1 .3
2. 4
34
1 CAR
GARAGE
0
.4
13 40
. 13.
EX N.
FI
E
FI X.
N 12
. 1 .9
2. 1
91
2
.1
13 12
. 13.
EX N.
FI
1 CAR
GARAGE
359° 53' 59"
34.440
E
FI X.
N 12
. 1 .4
2. 5
45
EX
FI .
N 12
. 1 .5
2. 3
53
0.42Ø DECID
SPRD=10
650
205TH STREET
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
5
.4
13 45
. 13.
EX N.
FI
52
2. 2
. 1 .5
N 12
FI X.
E
0.42Ø DECID
SPRD=10
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
Site Plan
67
2. 7
. 1 .6
N 12
FI X.
E
W
publicLAB
3'-4 1/2"
60'-2 1/2"
647
89° 52' 55"
FI .
N 12
. 1 .7
2. 6
76
EX
EX
FI .
N 12
. 1 .5
2. 1
51
EX
FI .
N 12
. 1 .3
2. 1
31
E
FI X.
N 12
. 1 .1
2. 6
16
6
.0
13 06
. 13.
EX N.
FI
0
.9
12 90
. 12.
EX N.
FI
6
.8
12 86
. 12.
EX N.
FI
W
6
.7
12 76
. 12.
EX N.
FI
EX
FI .
N 11
. 1 .9
1. 9
99
W
W
NORTH
1106
60'-2 1/2"
60'-2 1/2"
114TH STREET
1
SITE PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"
12 JUL 11
-
A-1.0
EL. 42.42'
STAIR
publicLAB
R: 6 @ 6"
T: 11"
N: 1"
STAIR
UP
R: 6 @ 6"
T: 11"
N: 1"
UP
DESIGN
EL.
EL. 46.00'
45.50'
EXISTING
EXISTING
LINEN
6
2
2
EXISTING
D102
W109
F
W108
30 70
6
4
EL. 45.95'
BATH
OFFICE
PORCH
7'-6" X 7'-6"
7'-0" X 7'-6"
10'-6" X 7'-6"
105
106
107
2
3
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
8
EXISTING
W107
5 10 3
CLOSET
ACCESS
HATCH
EXISTING
2
6
2
0
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
6
6
EXISTING
D108
UP
8
D107
EXISTING
1 RISER @ 7"
EL. 46.00'
60
D103
2
8
68
EXISTING
D106
2
6
66
EXISTING
W001
BASEMENT
30 1
15'-3" X 13'-5"
EXISTING
W106
5
4
4
6
MASTER
BEDROOM
11'-8" X 10'-6"
KITCHEN
104
15'-3" X 13'-3"
103
10
D/W
EL. 39.29'
STAIR
STAIR
UP
STAIR
R: 14 @ 6 3/4"
T: 9"
N: 1/2"
R: 11 @ 7"
T: 9"
N: 1/2"
EXISTING
W104
FURNACE
1
8
7
0
EXISTING
W105
5
4
4
6
EXISTING
R: 11 @ 7"
D105
DN2 0 6 8
T: 9"
N: 1/2"
F
STAIR
EXISTING
R: 4 @ 6"
T: 9"
N: 1/2"
UP
D104
2
0
68
25 APR 12
Issued for HRA + BP
12 SEP 11
Issued for SOS
EXISTING
W003
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
10
EXISTING
SITING
LVING
W002
11'-8" X 10'-10"
102
15'-3" X 13'-5"
101
30 1
10
EXISTING
W103
5
4
4
6
EL. 46.06'
EXISTING
4
4
EXISTING
EXISTING
W101
5
W102
D101
6
5
2 10 6 8
4
4
6
2% SLOPE
MINIMUM
EL. 45.96'
16'- 0" X 6'- 0"
Existing Plans
VERANDA
STAIR
UP
R: 8 @ 6 1/2"
T: 11"
N: 1"
STAIR
EL. 45.91'
R: 8 @ 6 1/2"
T: 11"
N: 1"
30 1
17 DEC 12
UP
EL. 41.47'
1
BASEMENT PLAN
1/4" = 1'-0"
1
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
W004
30 1
10
001
EXISTING
MAIN FLOOR PLAN
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
NORTH
1106
12 JUL 11
-
A-2.0
publicLAB
DESIGN
E
4:12
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
EXISTING
11'-5" X 13'-5"
201
D202
2
6
A
EXISTING
W201
4
0
3
6
62
15'-6" X 13'-5"
202
17 DEC 12
25 APR 12
Issued for HRA + BP
12 SEP 11
Issued for SOS
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
ATTIC HATCH
8:12
8:12
2
SECOND FLOOR PLAN
1/4" = 1'-0"
2
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
BEDROOM II
6
Existing Plans
3
C
0
B
62
BEDROOM I
W202
4
6
DN
D
EXISTING
D201
2
8:12
EXISTING
EL. 55.94'
STAIR
R: 14 @ 6 3/4"
T: 9"
N: 1/2"
8:12
ATTIC HATCH
ROOF PLAN
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
NORTH
1106
12 JUL 11
-
A-2.1
28'-4"
18'-6"
STAIR
RAIN
WATER
CISTERN
BELOW
STEPS
R: 5 @ 6"
T: 11"
N: 1"
UP
STAIR
R: 5 @ 6"
T: 11"
N: 1"
publicLAB
HATCH INDICATES
NEW CONSTRUCTION
EL. 42.65'
NEW
UP
HATCH INDICATES
NEW CONSTRUCTION
EL. 42.65'
STAIR
R: 6 @ 6"
T: 11"
N: 1"
UP
STAIR
R: 6 @ 6"
T: 11"
N: 1"
9'-10"
EL. 42.45'
EL. 42.45'
HATCH INDICATES
NEW CONSTRUCTION
UP
4'-6"
DESIGN
NEW PATHWAY
W110
2
EXISTING
RELOCATED
6
2
BENCH @+15"
EL. 45.95'
NEW
8'-10"
3 0 1 10
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
NEW
PORCH
18'-6" X 7'-0"
15'-3" X 13'-5"
002
109
7'-10" CEILING HEIGHT
SHELVING
ALCOVE
F
17'-6"
EL. 37.45'
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
BATH
8'-10" X 9'-3"
108
SHELVING
EL. 46.00'
LINEN
EXISTING
EXISTING
D102
W109
30 70
2
3 0 2 10
NOTE: DOTTED RED LINE INDICATES THE EXTENT OF NEW
INSULATED BASEMENT FLOOR SLAB, AND NEW FOAM
INSULATED FOUNDATION WALLS - ALL EXISTING EXTERIOR
FINISHES + WINDOWS WILL REMAIN IN PLACE AND BE
RESTORED + REPAIRED
W112
1 10
2
6
6
2'-8"
2
EXISTING
W108
6
4
7'-0"
OFFICE
STORAGE +
LAUNDRY
7'-0" X 7'-8"
106
WALK-IN
CLOSET
2
3
8
10'-6"
7'-8"
W001
4'-6"
NEW
7'-9"
NEW
EXISTING
10'-6" X 7'-8"
107
W107
5 10 3
8
7'-9" X 4'-6"
EXISTING
105
D107
NEW
D103
2
10'-6"
6
6
8
15'-3"
4
6
46'-2"
MASTER
BEDROOM
15'-3" X 13'-4"
104
EL. 37.60'
3 0 2 10
KITCHEN
11'-8" X 10'-6"
7'-10" CEILING HEIGHT
27'-4"
103
5'-0"
27'-1"
NEW STAIR IN
EXISTING LOCATION
EXISTING
W104
1
FURNACE
UP
8
7
0
STAIR
30 62
W105
4
6
NEW
D204
26 62
6'-2"
F
EXISTING
W202
EXISTING
UP
R: 14 @ 6 3/4"
T: 9"
N: 1/2"
4
D104
0
3
6
4'-6"
11'-5"
BEDROOM I
11'-5" X 13'-5"
D202
26 62
15'-6" X 13'-5"
202
11'-8"
Issued for HRA + BP
12 SEP 11
Issued for SOS
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
26 62
EXISTING
BEDROOM II
20 68
25 APR 12
D201
EL. 55.94'
DN
17 DEC 12
EXISTING
STAIR
STAIR
R: 4 @ 6"
T: 9"
N: 1/2"
8
203
62
12'-9"
EXISTING
R: 14 @ 7 1/4"
D105
DN2 0 6 8
T: 9"
N: 1/2"
6
NEW
13'-5"
STAIR
R: 14 @ 6 3/4"
T: 9"
N: 1/2"
2
D205
UP
STAIR
12'-9" X 6'-6
7'-2"
36'-2"
11'-8"
R: 14 @ 7 1/4"
T: 9"
N: 1/2"
D206
NEW
BUILT-IN
DRAWERS
4
3 10 2
7'-2" X 6'-6"
EXISTING
5
W205
8
PLAY AREA/
GUEST AREA
LINEN
4
3 10 2
NEW
CLOSET
W106
5
D/W
W004
EXISTING
8
BATH
204
13'-4"
W001
3 0 2 10
27'-4" X 27'-1"
001
NEW
W204
3 10 2
EXISTING
EXISTING
BASEMENT
EXISTING
NEW
W203
68
F
2
6
6'-6"
EXISTING
D106
13'-5"
66
CLOSET
6
EXISTING
6'-7"
2
D108
20 60
BUILT-IN
DRAWERS
EXISTING
201
EXISTING
W201
40 3
6
NEW
D203
2
6
62
15'-3"
NEW
BUILT-IN
DRAWERS
EXISTING
15'-6"
W003
3 0 2 10
102
101
EXISTING
9'-1"
W103
5
4
4
ATTIC HATCH
6
EL. 46.06'
EXISTING
4
4
EXISTING
EXISTING
W101
5
W102
D101
6
5
2 10 6 8
4
4
6
6'-0"
2% SLOPE
MINIMUM
EL. 46.00'
16'- 0" X 6'- 0"
VERANDA
6'-8"
STAIR
UP
R: 8 @ 6 1/2"
T: 11"
N: 1"
STAIR
EL. 45.95'
15'-3" X 13'-5"
LVING
11'-8" X 10'-10"
10'-10"
SITING
W002
Proposed Plans
EXISTING
13'-5"
3 0 2 10
R: 8 @ 6 1/2"
T: 11"
N: 1"
EL. 37.30'
480 S.F.
3'-0"
UP
EL. 37.60'
UP
10'-0"
W006
NEW
BASEMENT
R: 8 @ 7 1/2"
T: 12"
N: 1"
SHOWER
AREA
2% SLOPE
MINIMUM
NEW
STAIR
6
6'-6"
STAIR
BATH @ +15"
W111
40 1
UP
27'-4"
2 RISERS @ 7 1/2"
W005
3 0 1 10
R: 8 @ 7 1/2"
T: 12"
N: 1"
6
UP
EL. 41.47'
1
BASEMENT - PROPOSED PLANS
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
1
BATHROOM - PROPOSED PLANS
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
1
UPPER - PROPOSED PLANS
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
1106
NORTH
12 JUL 11
-
A-2.2
32'-4"
2'-0"
9'-10"
HATCH INDICATES
NEW CONSTRUCTION
18'-6"
2'-0"
publicLAB
HATCH INDICATES
NEW CONSTRUCTION
2'-0"
DESIGN
10'-0"
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
8'-4"
E
3:12
20'-6"
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
1'-0"
22'-11"
3 10 2
PLAY AREA/
GUEST AREA
7'-2" X 6'-6"
D206
12'-9" X 6'-6
6
203
62
20'-10 1/2"
1'-0" 2'-8"
12'-9"
F
NEW
D205
2
6
4'-6"
11'-5"
BEDROOM I
11'-5" X 13'-5"
EXISTING
D202
6
Issued for SOS
62
15'-6"
201
W201
4
0
3
6
D203
2
6
A
EXISTING
NEW
62
9'-1"
ATTIC HATCH
C
8:12
1
1/4" = 1'-0"
1
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
Proposed Plans
2
15'-6" X 13'-5"
202
B
D
BEDROOM II
CLOSET
6
NEW
BUILT-IN
DRAWERS
W202
40 3
13'-5"
EXISTING
DN
6'-7"
STAIR
R: 14 @ 6 3/4"
T: 9"
N: 1/2"
Issued for HRA + BP
12 SEP 11
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
62
8:12
6'-2"
25 APR 12
D201
EL. 55.94'
8:12
62
13'-5"
6
LINEN
D204
2
17 DEC 12
EXISTING
BUILT-IN
DRAWERS
NEW
CLOSET
30 62
8:12
2
7'-2"
NEW
BUILT-IN
DRAWERS
1'-0"
8
204
2'-8"
W205
8
6'-6"
F
NEW
W204
3 10 2
NEW
12'-0"
NEW
8
BATH
3:12
NEW
W203
3 10 2
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
1106
NORTH
12 JUL 11
-
A-2.3
T.O. ROOF RIDGE
65.80'
publicLAB
12
8
6'-9"
9' - 10 1/2"
DESIGN
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
T.O. SECOND FLOOR
55.94'
28'-2"
9' - 10 1/2"
9'-3"
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
T.O. MAIN FLOOR
6'-2"
6' - 9 1/2"
46.06'
T.O. EXISTING BASEMENT
39.29'
1' - 8 1/2"
T.O. NEW BASEMENT SLAB
2
37.60'
EXISTING SECTION
1/4" = 1'-0"
17 DEC 12
25 APR 12
Issued for HRA + BP
12 SEP 11
Issued for SOS
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
6'-2"
1'-0"
3
9' - 10 1/2"
DOTTED LINES
INDICATES NEW
CONSTRUCTION
- NEW ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF
- NEW ROOF UNDERLAY, SHINGLED
TO SHED WATER
- NEW PLYWOOD SHEATHING
- NEW 1X4 CROSS STRAPPING
- NEW 2X8 RAFTERS @ 16" O.C.
8
6'-9"
NEW ROOF ASSEMBLY
65.80'
12
12
6'-10"
3
EXISTING + NEW INTERIOR
FRAME WALLS
- TYPICAL
DORMER
- NEW/EXISTING GWB, PAINTED
- NEW/EXISTING 2X4[OR 6]
FRAME WALL
- NEW/EXISTING GWB, PAINTED
T.O. SECOND FLOOR
12
55.94'
EXISTING MAIN FLOOR
- EXISTING FINISH FLOORING
- EXISTING SUBFLOORING
- EXISTING 2X6 JOISTS
- EXISTING 1/2" GWB, PAINTED
NEW BASEMENT FLOOR
- NEW 3" CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE
- NEW 2 1/2" E.P.S
- NEW DRAINAGE GRAVEL
- NEW COMPACTED SOIL
- EXISTING FINISH FLOORING
- NEW R22 BATT INSULATION
- NEW 6 MIL. POLY VAPOUR
BARRIER
- NEW 5/8" TYPE X GWB,
PAINTED
T.O. MAIN FLOOR
STAIR
R: 14 @ 7 1/4"
T: 9"
N: 1/2"
NEW BASEMENT FLOOR
- NEW 3" CONCRETE
SLAB ON GRADE
- NEW 2 1/2" E.P.S
- NEW DRAINAGE GRAVEL
- NEW COMPACTED SOIL
46.06'
6' - 9 1/2"
NEW STRUCTURAL
POST ON NEW
FOOTING
7'-10"
EXISTING PORCH FLOOR
7'-10"
- NEW WOOD SIDING
- NEW PRESSURE TREATED
1X4 @ 16" O.C.
- NEW 2 LAYERS 60 MIN. BUILDING
PAPER SHINGLED TO SHED WATER
- NEW INSULATED CONCRETE FORM
- NEW 6 MIL. POLY VAPOUR BARRIER
- NEW 5/8" TYPE X GWB, PAINTED
7'-5"
NEW EXTERIOR FOUNDATION WALL
28'-2"
NEW PORCH
DETAILS TO
MATCH EXISTING
FRONT PORCH
9' - 10 1/2"
7'-2"
NEW WOODEN
PORCH, STAIR +
RAILING DETAILS
- NEW EXISTING FINISH FLOORING
- EXISTING 1/2" GWB, PAINTED
WOOD SOFFITT
DETAIL TO
MATCH EXISTING
1'-0"
9'-3"
EXISTING SECOND FLOOR
T.O. ROOF RIDGE
- NEW ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF
- NEW ROOF UNDERLAY, SHINGLED
TO SHED WATER
- NEW 1X4 CROSS STRAPPING
- NEW 2X8 RAFTERS @ 16" O.C.
NEW DORMER ROOF ASSEMBLY
Sections + Details
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
1106
STORM WATER DRAIN
AND PERIMETER FOOTING
DRAINAGE COVERED
IN FILTER CLOTH
STORM WATER DRAIN
AND PERIMETER FOOTING
DRAINAGE COVERED
IN FILTER CLOTH
2
1' - 8 1/2"
PROPOSED SECTION
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
39.29'
12 JUL 11
-
37.60'
A-3.0
publicLAB
DESIGN
12
8
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
EXISTING
4036
EXISTING ASPHALT
SHINGLE ROOFING
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
EXISTING ASPHALT
SHINGLE ROOFING
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
EXISTING ASPHALT
SHINGLE ROOFING
EXISTING
4040
EXISTING
2868
EXISTING
2868
4
EXISTING
2628
EXISTING
5346
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
EXISTING
5840
EXISTING
5346
EXISTING PAINTED
BEVEL WOOD SIDING
EXISTING PAINTED
BEVEL WOOD SIDING
FIN. 42.09'
EX. 42.09'
12
EXISTING
2 8 1 10
EXISTING
2050
FIN. 42.39'
EX. 42.39'
FIN. 41.40'
EX. 41.40'
FIN. 41.14'
EX. 41.14'
FIN. 41.01'
EX. 41.01'
EXISTING
3020
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
EXISTING
3020
FIN. 42.09'
EX. 42.09'
17 DEC 12
25 APR 12
Issued for HRA + BP
12 SEP 11
Issued for SOS
SOUTH ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
12
8
EXISTING
4036
EXISTING ASPHALT
SHINGLE ROOFING
EXISTING ASPHALT
SHINGLE ROOFING
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
4
12
EXISTING
2 0 2 10
EXISTING
5346
EXISTING
5346
EXISTING PAINTED
BEVEL WOOD SIDING
FIN. 42.39'
EX. 42.39'
EXISTING
3020
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
EXISTING
210 6 8
EXISTING
5346
4
1/4" = 1'-0"
EAST ELEVATION
Existing Elevations
4
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
EXISTING PAINTED
BEVEL WOOD SIDING
EXISTING
3020
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
FIN. 41.76'
EX. 41.76'
FIN. 41.63'
EX. 41.63'
FIN. 41.47'
EX. 41.47'
FIN. 41.76'
EX. 41.76'
FIN. 41.63'
EX. 41.63'
FIN. 41.47'
EX. 41.47'
FIN. 41.40'
EX. 41.40'
FIN. 41.14'
EX. 41.14'
FIN. 41.01'
EX. 41.01'
1106
12 SEP 11
-
4
NORTH ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
4
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
WEST ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
A-4.0
publicLAB
T.O. ROOF RIDGE
65.80'
9' - 10 1/2"
DESIGN
EXISTING GABLE WITH
SMALL WINDOW C/W
PAINTED WOOD DENTIL
MOULDING DETAIL
T.O. SECOND FLOOR
55.94'
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
EXISTING ASPHALT SHINGLE
ROOFING - TYPICAL
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
EXISTING PAINTED, ALUMINUM
GUTTER - TYPICAL
EXISTING PAINTED, WOOD
BRACKET - TYPICAL
9' - 10 1/2"
28'-2"
EXISTING 2X10 PAINTED WOOD TRIM BOARD
WITH OGEE MOULDING AT TOP, CURVED
PROFILE - TYPICAL
EXISTING PAINTED BEVEL
WOOD SIDING - TYPICAL
EXISTING
5346
EXISTING
5346
EXISTING
210 6 8
EXISTING PAINTED 1X4 TRIM
BOARDS - TYPICAL
EXISTING PAINTED WOOD
RAILING - TYPICAL
T.O. MAIN FLOOR
6' - 9 1/2"
46.06'
FIN. 41.76'
EX. 41.76'
FIN. 41.63'
EX. 41.63'
FIN. 41.47'
EX. 41.47'
FIN. 41.40'
EX. 41.40'
FIN. 41.14'
EX. 41.14'
FIN. 41.01'
EX. 41.01'
EXISTING PAINTED 1X12 BARGE BOARD
C/W CANTED WOOD RAIN DRIP
SHINGLE - TYPICAL
SHINGLE FLARED COLUMN
- TYPICAL
39.29'
1' - 8 1/2"
37.60'
17 DEC 12
25 APR 12
Issued for HRA + BP
12 SEP 11
Issued for SOS
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
WEST ELEVATION
2
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
65.80'
12
8
ROOFING - TYPICAL
NEW 2X10 PAINTED WOOD TRIM BOARD
PROFILE TO MATCH EXISITING - TYPICAL
NEW PAINTED WOOD SHINGLE
[TO MATCH EXISTING PROFILE ]
C/W RAINSCREEN - TYPICAL
EXISTING
PAINTED
WOOD
BRACKETS
DOTTED LINES
INDICATES NEW
CONSTRUCTION
NEW ASPHALT SHINGLE
ROOFING - TYPICAL
3
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
12
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD DENTIL MOULDING
ON PAINTED WOOD
TRIM BOARD
BOARDS C/W 1/1/2" MOULDING
W/ WOOD FLASHING STRIP
ABOVE - TO MATCH EXISTING
55.94'
EXISTING
PAINTED
WOOD
BRACKETS
PROFILE - TYPICAL
NEW
1826
EXISTING
2 0 2 10
EXISTING
5346
NEW PAINTED WOOD BEVEL SIDING
EXISTING PAINTED
BEVEL WOOD SIDING
FIN. 42.42'
EX. 42.42'
BOARDS - TYPICAL
RAILING - TYPICAL
46.06'
- TYPICAL
EXISTING PAINTED
1X4 TRIM BOARDS
42.76
T.O. NEW FOUNDATION
EXISTING
3020
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
EXISTING
3020
NEW CONCRETE STAIRWELL TO
BASEMENT DOOR C/W WITH DRAINAGE
[ T.O. CONCRETE EL. 42.94 ]
FIN. 41.76'
EX. 41.76'
FIN. 41.63'
EX. 41.63'
FIN. 41.47'
EX. 41.47'
6' - 9 1/2"
FIN. 42.45'
EX. 42.45'
EXISTING
BRICK
CHIMNEY
T.O. MAIN FLOOR
NEW PAINTED 1X12 BARGE BOARD C/W CANTED
WOOD RAIN DRIP - TO MATCH EXISTING
BRACKET - TYPICAL
28'-2"
NEW
4016
NEW PAINTED 1X4 TRIM
BOARDS - TO MATCH EXISTING
9' - 10 1/2"
NEW PAINTED, WOOD BRACKET
TO MATCH EXISTING - TYPICAL
NEW PORCH - TO MATCH EXISTING PORCH
ON EAST ELEVATION - ALL DETAILS, TRIMS,
RAILING DETAILS, SOFFITS, BEAM AND POST
DETAILS, PAINTED WOOD - TYPICAL - TO BE
MATCHED OR USED FOR PROPORTIONS
THROUGHOUT NEW CONSTRUCTION
GUTTER - TYPICAL
T.O. SECOND FLOOR
NEW PAINTED, ALUMINUM
GUTTER - TYPICAL
9' - 10 1/2"
EXISTING
4036
NEW INSULATED CONCRETE FORM FOUNDATION
1' - 8 1/2"
12
T.O. ROOF RIDGE
3
NEW ASPHALT SHINGLE
ROOFING - TYPICAL
GUTTER - TYPICAL
Proposed Elevations
NEW DORMER
SHINGLE - TYPICAL
39.29'
37.60'
1106
15 FEB 12
-
2
NORTH ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
A-4.1
publicLAB
NEW DORMER
DESIGN
T.O. ROOF RIDGE
65.80'
12
12
8
NEW ASPHALT SHINGLE
ROOFING - TYPICAL
3
GUTTER - TYPICAL
ROOFING - TYPICAL
9' - 10 1/2"
EXISTING
4036
EXISTING
PAINTED
WOOD
BRACKETS
DOTTED LINES
INDICATES NEW
CONSTRUCTION
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
GUTTER - TYPICAL
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
NEW ASPHALT SHINGLE
ROOFING - TYPICAL
T.O. SECOND FLOOR
55.94'
EXISTING ASPHALT
SHINGLE ROOFING
- TYPICAL
PROFILE - TYPICAL
12
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD DENTIL MOULDING
ON PAINTED WOOD
TRIM BOARD
GUTTER - TYPICAL
3
BOARDS - TYPICAL
EXISTING
5346
EXISTING
5840
EXISTING
5346
EXISTING PAINTED
BEVEL WOOD SIDING
EXISTING PAINTED
BEVEL WOOD SIDING
RAILING - TYPICAL
- TYPICAL
NEW PAINTED 1X12 BARGE BOARD C/W CANTED
WOOD RAIN DRIP - TO MATCH EXISTING
EXISTING PAINTED
1X4 TRIM BOARDS
SHINGLE - TYPICAL
FIN. 41.40'
EX. 41.40'
FIN. 41.01'
EX. 41.01'
FIN. 41.14'
EX. 41.14'
EXISTING
3020
EXISTING
3020
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
T.O. NEW FOUNDATION
42.76
FIN. 42.23'
EX. 42.23'
EXISTING SINGLE PANE
SLIDING WOOD WINDOWS
WITH INFIL PANELS AND
PORCH COLUMNS
NEW INSULATED CONCRETE FORM FOUNDATION
1' - 8 1/2"
FIN. 42.42'
EX. 42.42'
17 DEC 12
25 APR 12
Issued for HRA + BP
12 SEP 11
Issued for SOS
2
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
SOUTH ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
NEW DORMER
NEW ASPHALT SHINGLE
ROOFING - TYPICAL
GUTTER - TYPICAL
9' - 10 1/2"
NEW
310 2 8
NEW
310 2 8
NEW
310 2 8
NEW ASPHALT SHINGLE
ROOFING - TYPICAL
T.O. SECOND FLOOR
55.94'
28'-2"
9' - 10 1/2"
GUTTER - TYPICAL
EXISTING
4040
EXISTING
2868
EXISTING SINGLE PANE
SLIDING WOOD WINDOWS
WITH INFIL PANELS AND
PORCH COLUMNS
EXISTING
2628
NEW
2628
6' - 9 1/2"
39.29'
37.60'
T.O. MAIN FLOOR
46.06'
EXISTING
RELOCATED
2 8 1 10
FIN. 42.23'
EX. 42.23'
42.76
DOTTED LINES
INDICATES NEW
CONSTRUCTION
T.O. ROOF RIDGE
65.80'
6' - 9 1/2"
37.60'
T.O. MAIN FLOOR
46.06'
39.29'
NEW PAINTED
BEVEL WOOD SIDING
Proposed Elevations
9' - 10 1/2"
28'-2"
NEW PAINTED 2X8 WOOD TRIM BOARD
BRACKET - TYPICAL
FIN. 42.42'
T.O. NEW FOUNDATION
EX. 42.42'
1106
1' - 8 1/2"
15 FEB 12
-
2
EAST ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
A-4.2
publicLAB
12
12
DESIGN
3
8
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
12
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
3
TYPICAL OF ALL NEW BARGEBOARDS:
REPLICATE CURVED TAIL END FOUND ON EXISTING BARGEBOARDS
BATTERED CORNER PORCH POST :
REPLICATE MATERIALS AND DETAILS FOUND ON FRONT PORCH
17 DEC 12
25 APR 12
Issued for HRA +BP
12 SEP 11
Issued for SOS
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
3
12
12
8
3
12
CONSERVATION MEASURES LEGEND
1/4" = 1'-0"
SOUTH ELEVATION
Conservation Elevations
2
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
ORIGINAL BUILDING FABRIC RETAINED,
REFINISHED AS REQUIRED FOR GOOD MAINTENANCE
1106
NEW CONSTRUCTION WITH EXTERIOR TREATMENT TO MATCH
EXISTING MATERIALS AND DETAILS ON ORIGINAL HOUSE
15 FEB 12
-
NEW CONCRETE FOUNDATION; FINISH TO MATCH EXISTING
FOUNDATION FINISH
RELOCATED (REPAIRED IF NECESSARY) ORIGINAL WINDOW
(REPLICATE IF EXISTING ORIGINAL WINDOW BEYOND REPAIR)
SEE EAST ELEVATION FOR CONSERVATION MEASURES LEGEND
1
NORTH ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
NEW WINDOW WITH MATERIALS AND DETAILS
REPLICATED FROM ADJACENT EXISTING ORIGINAL WINDOW
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
A-4.3
publicLAB
DESIGN
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
17 DEC 12
25 APR 12
Issued for HRA +BP
12 SEP 11
Issued for SOS
SHINGLED WALL FINISH TO MATCH SHINGLED
FINISH OF PEDIMENT AREAS OF EXISTING ORIGINAL
HOUSE (SEE NORTH, WEST, AND SOUTH FACADES)
MAIN FLOOR ADDITION ROOFED BY A SIMPLE
SHED EXTENSION OF THE MAIN GABLE ROOF;
REPLACING AN EARLIER SHED ROOFED EXTENSION;
LOWER SLOPE PRESERVES THE DOMINANCE OF THE
ORIGINAL GABLE ROOF
RELOCATED KNEE BRACE
(REPLICATE IF BEYOND REPAIR)
RELOCATED KNEE BRACE
(REPLICATE IF BEYOND REPAIR)
BATTERED CORNER PORCH POST :
REPLICATE MATERIALS AND DETAILS FOUND ON FRONT PORCH
TYPICAL FOR REAR PORCH POSTS: REPLICATE
MATERIALS AND FORM FOUND ON FRONT PORCH
CONSERVATION MEASURES LEGEND
DETAILS OF NEW WOOD WINDOW TO REPLICATE
DETAILS OF ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS
TYPICAL OF 3 NEW WINDOWS: DETAILS OF NEW
WOOD WINDOW TO REPLICATE
DETAILS OF ORIGINAL WOOD WINDOWS
NEW SECOND FLOOR SHED DORMER WITH
ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOFING TO MATCH THE
ORIGINAL HOUSE EXISTING ROOFING; DORMER
KEPT NARROWER THAN MAIN ROOF IN ORDER
TO BE A SUBORDINATE TO THE MAIN ROOF
Conservation Elevations
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
ORIGINAL BUILDING FABRIC RETAINED,
REFINISHED AS REQUIRED FOR GOOD MAINTENANCE
1106
NEW CONSTRUCTION WITH EXTERIOR TREATMENT TO MATCH
EXISTING MATERIALS AND DETAILS ON ORIGINAL HOUSE
15 FEB 12
-
NEW CONCRETE FOUNDATION; FINISH TO MATCH EXISTING
FOUNDATION FINISH
RELOCATED (REPAIRED IF NECESSARY) ORIGINAL WINDOW
(REPLICATE IF EXISTING ORIGINAL WINDOW BEYOND REPAIR)
1
WEST ELEVATION - CONSERVATION PLAN
1/4" = 1'-0"
NEW WINDOW WITH MATERIALS AND DETAILS
REPLICATED FROM ADJACENT EXISTING ORIGINAL WINDOW
WHITEHEAD RESIDENCE
A-4.4
55
2. 5
. 4 .5
N 42
FI X.
E
FI
EX N.
. 43.
43 44
.4
4
EL. 43.41'
EXISTING ASPHALT
SHINGLE ROOFING
publicLAB
DESIGN
EXISTING
EXISTING
D102
2
8
W106
68
30 3
HWT
6
8
EXISTING
6:12
W105
30 3
8
E
F
6:12
6:12
W/D
12
G
Vancouver, BC
V5T 3Z1
Canada
F
EXISTING
W107
2
3
EXISTING
2
D103
2
EXISTING
2438
EXISTING
3850
0
0
66
EXISTING
3038
c 778.386.0352
www.publicLAB.ca
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
EXISTING
D105
6
8
D/W
2
8
EXISTING
D104
EXISTING PAINTED
BEVEL WOOD SIDING
FIN. 43.04'
EX. 43.04'
FIN. 43.44'
EX. 43.44'
26 66
EXISTING
EXISTING
W108
2
4
3
W104
8
2
4
3
8
A
7
SOUTH ELEVATION
6:12
F
WHITEHEAD COTTAGE
1/4" = 1'-0"
B
6:12
EXISTING
EXISTING
W109
38 1
W103
8
38 5
EXISTING ASPHALT
SHINGLE ROOFING
EXISTING
EXISTING
W101
W101
3
8
5
0
3
8
5
0
EXISTING
EX
FI .
N 42
. 4 .3
2. 6
36
Issued for HRA + BP
12 SEP 11
Issued for SOS
COPYRIGHT RESERVED:
D101
0
6'- 9" X 4'- 6"
VERANDA
2% SLOPE
MINIMUM
4
.0
43 04
. 43.
EX N.
FI
C
6:12
D
6:12
EXISTING
2438
FIN. 42.36'
EX. 42.36'
EL. 42.16'
WHITEHEAD COTTAGE
NORTH
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD COTTAGE
NORTH ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD COTTAGE
12
12
6
6
EXISTING BOARD
AND BATTEN GABLE
EXISTING ASPHALT
SHINGLE ROOFING
1038
EXISTING
2 106 8
1038
NORTH
EXISTING
210 6 8
EXISTING
3038
EXISTING
3850
EXISTING
3850
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
FIN. 43.44'
EX. 43.44'
ROOF PLAN
1
1/4" = 1'-0"
FLOOR PLAN
2
EXISTING PAINTED
BEVEL WOOD SIDING
6
6
.3
42 36
. 42.
EX N.
FI
'55.24 .NIF
'55.24 .XE
EX
FI .
N 42
. 4 .3
2. 2
32
EXISTING PAINTED
WOOD SHINGLE
Plan + Elevations
EXISTING
2032
25 APR 12
2 10 6 8
EXISTING
3818
17 DEC 12
'55.24 .NIF
'55.24 .XE
EXISTING PAINTED
BEVEL WOOD SIDING
EXISTING PAINTED
BEVEL WOOD SIDING
FIN. 42.36'
EX. 42.36'
FIN. 43.04'
EX. 43.04'
1106
12 NOV 11
-
5
EAST ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
4
WHITEHEAD COTTAGE
WEST ELEVATION
1/4" = 1'-0"
3
WHITEHEAD COTTAGE
SECTION
1/4" = 1'-0"
WHITEHEAD COTTAGE
A-5.0
SCHEDULE “D”
CONFIRMATION OF COMMITMENT BY REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL
This letter must be submitted before issuance of a Heritage Alteration Permit or a building permit.
To:
THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
(the authority having jurisdiction)
Re:
THE _______________ RESIDENCE
_______________ , Maple Ridge, B.C.
Address
PID_______________, ________________________________________________________
Legal Description
The undersigned has retained _____________________________________________ as a
coordinating registered professional with experience in heritage conservation to coordinate the
design work and field reviews of the registered professionals required 1 for this heritage project. The
coordinating registered professional shall coordinate the design work and field reviews of the
registered professional required for the project in order to ascertain that the design will substantially
comply with the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, the
B.C. Building Code, and other applicable enactments respecting safety, not including the
construction safety aspects.
For this project, field reviews are defined as those reviews of the work:
a) at a project site of a development to which a Heritage Alteration Permit relates,
and
b) at fabrication location where building components are made that will replace
deteriorated materials identified as character-defining elements for this project.
That a registered professional in his or her professional discretion considers necessary to ascertain
whether the work substantially complies in all material respects with the plans and supporting
documents prepared by the registered professional and with the Heritage Designation and
Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. _______________ -2012, for which the
Heritage Alteration Permit is issued.
The owner and the coordinating registered professional have read the _______________ Residence
Statement of Significance and the Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places
in Canada. The owner and the coordinating registered professional each acknowledge their
responsibility to notify the addressee of this letter of the date the coordinating registered
professional ceases to be retained by the owner before the date that the coordinating registered
professional ceases to be retained or, if that is not possible, then as soon as possible. The
coordinating registered professional acknowledges the responsibility to notify the addressee of this
letter of the date a registered professional ceases to be retained before the date the registered
professional ceases to be retained or, if that is not possible, then as soon as possible.
The owner and the coordinating registered professional understand that where the coordinating
registered professional or a registered professional ceases to be retained at any time during
construction, work on the above project will cease until such time as:
a)
b)
a new coordinating registered professional or registered professional, as the case
may be, is retained, and
a new letter in the form set out in Schedule C in the Heritage Designation and
Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. _______________ -2012, is
completed by the authority having jurisdiction.
The undersigned coordinating registered professional certifies that he or she is a registered
professional as defined in the British Columbia Building Code, who also has experience with heritage
conservation projects and agrees to coordinate the design work and field reviews of the registered
professionals required for the project as outlined in the attached plans and specifications.
Coordinating Registered Professional
Owner
_____________________________________
Name (Please Print)
_________________________________________
Name (Please Print)
_____________________________________
Address
_____________________________________
_________________________________________
Address
_________________________________________
_____________________________________
Phone
_________________________________________
Name of Agent or Signing Office (if applicable)
_________________________________________
Date
_________________________________________
Owner’s or Owner’s appointed agent’s signature (if owner is a
corporation the signature of a signing officer must be given
here. If the signature is that of the agent, a copy of the
document that appoints the agent must be attached.)
(Professional’s Seal and Signature)
_________________________________
Date
(if the coordinating registered professional is a member of a firm, please complete the following)
I am a member of the firm _________________________________________ and I sign this letter on
behalf of the firm.
__________________________________________________________________________________
1
It is the responsibility of the coordinating registered professional to ascertain which registered professionals are
required.
SCHEDULE “E”
CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE
This letter must be submitted after substantial completion of the project but prior to
final inspection by the authority having jurisdiction.
TO:
THE DISTRICT OF MAPLE RIDGE
(the authority having jurisdiction)
RE:
_____________________________________________
Discipline (e.g. Architectural, Engineering etc.) (Print)
_____________________________________________
Name of Project (Print)
_____________________________________________
Address of Project (Print)
_____________________________________________
Legal Description of Project (Print)
(Each registered professional shall complete the following:
Professional’s Seal and Signature
____________________________________________
Name (Print)
____________________________________________
Address (Print)
_____________________________________________
____________________________
Date
_____________________________________________
Phone
I hereby give assurance that:
a) I have fulfilled my obligations for field review as outlined in Section 6 of the Heritage
Designation and Revitalization and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. _______________ 2012 and the attached Schedule C, Confirmation of Commitment by Owner.
b) I am a registered professional as defined in the British Columbia Building Code.
(if the registered professional is a member of a firm, complete the following:)
I am a member of the firm _______________________________________ and I sign this letter on
behalf of the firm.
SCHEDULE “F”
VARIANCES AND SUPPLEMENTS
PERMITTED THROUGH
HERITAGE DESIGNATION AND REVITALIZATION AND TAX EXEMPTION AGREEMENT
BYLAW NO. 6962-2012
The variances identified in this Schedule “F” to the Heritage Designation and Revitalization
and Tax Exemption Agreement Bylaw No. 6962-2012 apply only to the Lands identified in the
Agreement to which this Schedule is attached as described below, any streets and lanes
abutting to the Lands, and any and all buildings, structure, features and other development
thereon:
Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985
1. Part 6 Residential Zones, C. (3) (a) which states:
(3) Buildings and Structures for One Family Residential Use in the RS-1, RS-1a, RS-2,
RS-3 and SRS Zones
(a) shall be limited to one per lot.
is hereby varied as follows:
In the event the lots legally described as LOT 649 DISTRICT LOT 279 GROUP 1 NEW
WESTMINSTER DISTRICT PLAN 2180and LOT 650 DISTRICT LOT 279 GROUP 1 NEW
WESTMINSTER DISTRICT PLAN 2180 are consolidated into a single lot (the
“Consolidated Lot”) such that the two heritage dwellings subject to this Agreement
are both on the same lot, the number of Buildings and Structures, including heritage
dwellings, shall be limited to two on the Consolidated Lot.
The variance effected by this section shall cease to have effect and Buildings and
Structures for One Family Residential Use on the Lands shall be limited to one per lot
in the event
(a) the Consolidated Lot is subdivided, or
(b) any building or structure for One Family Residential Use, other than the two
heritage buildings subject to this Agreement (or any replacement heritage building
constructed in accordance with the Agreement) is located on the Consolidated Lot.
2. Part 6 Residential Zones, C. (3) (c) (ii) which states:
(3) Buildings and Structures for One Family Residential Use in the RS-1, RS-1a, RS-2,
RS-3 and SRS Zones:
(c) shall be sited not less than:
(ii) a minimum of 1.5 metres from an interior side lot line, but with the sum of
the two interior side yards to be not less than 3.5 metres.
The northernmost heritage dwelling shall be sited not less than a minimum of 1.03
metres from the lot line common to the lane.
3. Part 6 Residential Zones, C. (5) (c) (ii) which states:
(5) Buildings and Structures for Accessory Residential Use or Accessory Off-Street
Parking use
(c) shall be sited not less than
(ii) 3.0 metres from a front and exterior side lot line except that no building or
structure for an accessory off-street parking use shall be sited within the
required front yard setback.
The existing garage fronting 205th Street shall be sited not less than 0 metres from
the lot line common to 205th Street and the exception shall not apply.
Maple Ridge Subdivision and Development Servicing By-law No. 4800 – 1993
1. Schedule “A” Services and Utilities, provides for the following requirements for streets,
services and lanes in the RS-1 zone:
All parcels within a proposed subdivision or development shall be provided with
services in accordance herewith and all highways within, or immediately adjacent to
a proposed subdivision or development shall be constructed in accordance herewith.
ZONE
RS-l
ST
W
SS
SD
STREETS
A
C
UW
BT
SERVICES
SW
SL
LANES
TB
A
The standard for the provision of Curbs and Gutters (C) and a corner truncation
immediately adjacent to this proposed development along 205th Street and 114
Avenue shall not be required but a no build covenant and condition that any
vegetation will be removed which in the opinion of the District obstructs the line of
sight will be applied to the property.
The standard for the provision of Street Lighting (SL), Sidewalks (SW) and Street Tree
Planting (ST) immediately adjacent to this proposed development along 205th Street
and 114 Avenue shall not be required, provided securities, including "in-trust" funds,
in an amount deemed sufficient by the Approving Officer to cover construction of
these works is deposited by the Owner with the Municipality.
2. Schedule “B” provides for the following requirement for lanes:
Highway Classification
Minimum Width
5. Lane
7.5 m
Min. R.O. W. Radius
The standard for the minimum width of the lane immediately adjacent to this
proposed development shall be reduced from 7.5 metres to 6.5 metres with a
4.6 metre wide driving surface, provided that the existing curb is replaced by a curb
that complies with the standard curb as provided for in Schedule “C” of the Maple
Ridge Subdivision and Development Servicing By-law.
3. The variance effected by this section shall cease to have effect and the full standards for
streets, services and lanes shall apply in the event
(a) the Consolidated Lot is subdivided, or
(b) any building or structure for One Family Residential Use, other than the two
heritage buildings subject to this Agreement (or any replacement heritage building
constructed in accordance with the Agreement) is located on the Consolidated Lot.
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
MEETING:
January 7, 2013
2012--0852012
085-AL
C of W
Non Farm Use Application
12224 240 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This non-farm use application is to expand the existing Meadowridge School. The school site is
situated on a 6.6 hectare (16.3 acres) site that is 94% within the Agricultural Land Reserve. The
proposal is to increase enrollment to 800 students and to construct new buildings on the existing P1 (Park and School) Zoned site. The facility has been limited by a restrictive covenant which caps
enrollment at 600 students and establishes a development plan that cannot be altered without the
Commission’s consent. If this application is successful, Council will be subsequently requested to
consent to amending the covenant in order to allow for this expansion proposal to increase the
maximum permitted enrollment to 800 students.
This facility has a history of applications and successive growth. Should the application be
forwarded to and subsequently approved by the Agricultural Land Commission then the impacts of
additional growth need to be determined and addressed. Prior to realizing this expansion proposal,
professional assurances from qualified specialists must be provided, such as:
•
•
•
A traffic study
stormwater management plan
agricultural impact assessment
In addition, previous conditions established by the Commission, such as the installation and
maintenance of an agricultural buffer to their specifications, must be either upheld or amended with
the consent of the Commission. With these considerations, the recommendation is to forward the
application to the Agricultural Land Commission.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Application 20122012-085085-AL be forwarded to the Agricultural Land Commission;
Commission; and
That Agricultural Land
Land Commission approval, if any, include a review of the existing Restrictive
Covenant including the agricultural buffer requirements.
requirements.
DISCUSSION:
a) Background Context:
Applicant:
Meadowridge School Society
1104
Owner:
Legal Description:
Meadowridge School Society
Lot 1, Section 22, Township 12, Plan BCP29123
OCP :
Existing:
94 % Agricultural & 6% Institutional
Existing:
P-1 (Park and School)
Zoning:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
Use:
Zone:
Designation
South:
Use:
East:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
West
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing:
Farm and Rural Residential
Agricultural, 100 % within the Agricultural Land
Reserve
Suburban Residential, Rural residential and Public
Utility (BC Hydro)
Agricultural
2 properties, rural residential use
RS-3 (Rural Residential)
Agricultural, 100 % within the Agricultural Land
Reserve
(Across 240th Street) 6 properties, urban
residential use.
RS-1b (One Family Urban Residential)
Urban Residential.
School (ALC approved non-farm use)
School
6.6 hectares (16.3 acres)
240th Street
Municipal Water and Sewer
Previous Applications:
The Meadowridge School site has experienced significant incremental growth since it originated and
has been the subject of several previous applications for non-farm use to the Agricultural Land
Commission. The original school site was approved under application AL/005/89. The school has
since made 3 applications for non farm use and consolidation of adjacent properties (also within the
Agricultural Land Reserve):
•
Non-farm use application AL/052/00 was approved by the Commission for school use and
site consolidation of 1.6 hectares (4 acres) from portions of the two properties to the south
of the original school site.
•
Application AL/012/05 was also approved by the Commission for non-farm use and
consolidation of a 0.8 hectare (2 acre) portion of the property at 24169 Dewdney Trunk Road
with the original school site. This application proposed a revised development plan that
placed structures where playing fields had been indicated earlier. This plan included a
cafeteria, theatre, science labs, 4 classrooms, and administrative offices. The Commission
approved the lot consolidation, which allowed the applicant to acquire the 0.8 hectare (2
-2-
acre) portion from the property at 24169 Dewdney Trunk Road. However, the Commission
did not approve the revised development plan.
•
Application AL/106/05 proposed a development plan that was consistent with the plan
shown in application AL/012/05. Under Resolution #39/2006 the Commission approved
Application AL/106/05 subject to the following conditions:
- maximum enrollment of 600 students
- adherence to submitted development plan
- construction of fence and vegetative buffer adjacent to ALR lands based on ALC
landscape buffer guidelines
- compliance with local authority with respect to zoning and other bylaws
To meet local government requirements, the newly acquired 0.8 hectare (2 acre) property was
rezoned from RS-3 One Family Rural Residential to P-1 Park and School to allow this use. The
conditions of Rezoning Application RZ/106/05 included the following:
i)
Registration of a Rezoning Development Agreement including the deposit of security
as outlined in the Agreement;
ii)
Registration of a Section 219 Covenant limiting the enrollment to no more than 600
students and adhering to the site plan as approved by the Agricultural Land
Commission;
iii)
Consolidation of the development site;
iv)
A landscape plan prepared by a Landscape Architect including the security to do the
works.
The requirement for a landscape buffer was included in the restrictive covenant registered as part of
this application. Further discussion of the landscape buffer is included further in this report.
This proposal is to expand the enrollment and the development plan of an existing private school
facility. The property is within the Agricultural Land Reserve and has been given a non-farm use
approval limited to 600 students with a prescribed development plan. This application is to increase
enrollment to 800 students. Additional school buildings are also proposed within the existing
development site on portions of the site that currently accommodate parking.
If this application is approved by the Commission, the applicant proposes to replace this lost parking
by extending parking onto the adjacent site at 12162 240th Street, a property that is owned by the
Meadowridge School Society, but is not within the Agricultural Land Reserve. The use of this
property would therefore not require Commission approval. However, to meet municipal
requirements, the use of the property for parking would require consolidation with the parent parcel,
rezoning to an institutional use, and an Official Community Plan amendment to Institutional (this
property is currently designated Estate Suburban Residential). This application does not propose
further incursions into the Agricultural Land Reserve as part of their development plan.
As noted, the previous conditions of approval as set out by the Commission have resulted in the
registration of a restrictive covenant on title, naming the District of Maple Ridge as a party. The
-3-
covenant limits student enrolment to 600 students, and requires the installation of an agricultural
buffer in accordance with Commission specifications.
Should this application be successful, each aspect of this covenant will require consideration by the
Commission and by Council. Expanding enrollment will require an amendment of the existing
covenant beyond the current limit of 600 students. In addition, if the Commission reviews and finds
the existing landscape provision to be sufficient, then the buffer requirements as set out in the
covenant must be amended to reflect this lesser standard. If the Commission finds the existing
buffer provisions to be deficient, then the applicant will be responsible for redress, and the existing
language of the covenant for the landscape provision will remain intact.
c) Planning Analysis:
Meadowridge School has been supported in its previous proposals for incremental growth by both
the Commission and by Council. However, the staff report in application AL/106/05 stated the
following:
the applicant should also be given a clear message that future intentions to expand the
School beyond the scope of this application, if any, may require more detailed analysis of
community impacts, especially with regards to traffic effects and agricultural potential.
The referral to the Engineering Department in support of Rezoning Application RZ/106/05 noted the
following potential servicing deficiencies:
• The development is occurring in an area designated as Agricultural within the Official
Community Plan.
• An increase in impermeable surface on the subject site could have storm water impacts that
would necessitate the construction of an on-site drainage detention system.
• The ditch on the east side of 240th Street is noted in the District’s stream inventory
information.
• A recreational trail is indicated along 240th Street on Figure 5 of the Official Community Plan.
It is not clear at this time that the Engineering Requirements established under Rezoning
Application RZ/106/05 anticipated further expansion of this school facility.
Required Landscape Buffer:
Buffer: Figure 1 is an excerpt from the Agricultural Land Commission
publication “Landscape Buffer Specifications”. The 3 metre buffer as indicated represents the
minimum specifications that would generally be approved by the Commission.
-4-
Figure 1 Minimum Buffer Requirements
Figure 2 indicates the actual landscape treatment that was provided by the applicant. Although a
chain link fence has been installed, the low density of this planting does not meet the minimum
specifications as indicated in Figure 1. However, correspondence from the Commission to the
applicant dated September 10, 2009 suggests that in this context, this reduced planting is
acceptable to the Commission.
The planting at Meadowridge School
is a row of red Maples that are
planted about 7 meters apart along
the south and east sides of the
property. In addition, a chain link
fence has been installed on the
property line.
Figure 2 (Picture taken Nov 8, 2012)
If this application is forwarded, the Commission will be given an opportunity to again comment on
the buffer planting. If it is acceptable to the Commission, the covenant should be amended
accordingly.
Development Considerations:
Considerations:
The incremental nature of the development of this school site within a rural area requires review.
This higher density of use, with greater impermeable surfaces is occurring at a site that has not been
planned to a standard of full urban services. A rezoning application could provide a legal mechanism
for requiring redress of servicing deficiencies through a rezoning servicing agreement. As noted
earlier in this report, the revised development plan includes the use of the subject property at 12162
240th Street for parking. In order to allow this use, this property would have to be consolidated with
the parent parcel, and rezoned. This process would provide the opportunity for redress of any
outstanding servicing requirements.
This process is also consistent with the anticipated direction of the Agricultural Land Commission.
Typically, the Commission reviews the development proposal and site plan as provided by the
applicant. Any approvals are typically made conditional. In this case, it is expected that the
Commission will require substantial compliance with the development proposal as submitted. If this
is the case, the applicant will be required to undertake a rezoning and lot consolidation as described.
However, there is no guarantee that the Commission will set such a condition in any approval.
If no such condition is established, it is important to consider that the proposed development plan
could possibly be revised to be contained within the existing site, and no rezoning would be
-5-
necessary. Viewed in this light, any decision to amend the existing covenant (which currently limits
development) should be considered in light of the potential implications of an expanded facility.
Amending the Covenant:
The registration of the covenant was conducted as a condition of rezoning. The amendment process
will therefore require a formal request from the applicant, and the request will be processed as a
regular application. The first step would be a review at Committee of the Whole, followed by a
Council decision to forward to a Public Hearing, and approval at a regular Council meeting. The
implications and potential impacts of an expanded facility have been noted in this report. From the
District’s perspective, it would be preferable if a request to amend the terms of the restrictive
covenant was accompanied by a rezoning application that would provide an opportunity to review
and require that deficiencies are addressed.
However, as noted, there is potential for an amendment to occur without rezoning, if the applicant is
able to adjust the development plan to fit within the boundaries of the existing property. In order to
assist Council with their decision, the application for amending the covenant must by supported with
reports from qualified professionals. Required reports could include a traffic study, stormwater
management assessment, agricultural impact assessment, and environmental assessment report.
d) Interdepartmental Implications:
Implications:
Engineering Department
The request to amend the covenant along with pertinent reports will be referred to the Engineering
Department for their review, as would a rezoning application. It should be noted that the property
north of the school site may be considered as a possible link to an east west connector to improve
access to 256 Street. This property is also owned by the Meadowridge School Society. The actual
alignment of this required access has not yet been established, but the applicant should be made
aware that this location may be considered.
Parks and Leisure Services
An equestrian trail is indicated along 240th Street in Figure 5 of the Official Community Plan. The
impacts of this proposal and other developments should be considered for the future of the 240
corridor as an equestrian trail. A rezoning application could trigger a requirement for additional
improvements along this corridor for a boulevard trail, if required.
e) Alternatives:
The current approach taken with this proposal seems to be desirable, as further incursions into the
Agricultural Land Reserve are not requested, and as a legal mechanism for redress of possible
servicing deficiencies will be provided through the required rezoning application. Other options
Council may wish to consider include:
•
•
Deny forwarding this application to the Agricultural Land Commission, in which case it will be
considered denied.
Recommend that the applicant revise the proposal to fit within the existing development site.
-6-
If Council denies this application, it will be considered closed and will not proceed further. If the
applicant is required to revise their proposal to remain within the existing development site, the
opportunity for redress of servicing deficiencies will be more limited.
CONCLUSION:
CONCLUSION:
This non-farm use application for Meadow Ridge School pertains to a proposal to expand the existing
facility from a current maximum of 600 students to 800, and the construction of additional buildings
on the existing school site. No further incursions into the Agricultural Land Reserve are proposed at
this time. The implications of this application, if successful, are that Council will be asked to amend
the covenant that has been registered in support of the Commission’s earlier conditions of approval.
The physical capability of the site and surrounding infrastructure will need further review to
determine whether the proposed expansion is supportable. In addition, a property fronting 240
Street is proposed to be used for parking, which would requirement consolidation with the parent
parcel, rezoning, and an Official Community Plan amendment.
Based on these considerations, the recommendation is to forward this application to the
Commission.
“Original signed by Diana Hall”
___________________________________________
Prepared by:
by: Diana Hall
Planner
“Original signed by Chuck Goddard” for
______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.PL, MCIP, RPP
“Original signed by Frank Quinn”
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Frank Quinn, MBA, P. Eng
Eng
GM: Public Works & Development
Development Services
“Original signed by Jim Rule”
______________________________________________
Appendix A - Subject Map
Appendix B - Approved Development Plan (2005)
Appendix C - Proposed Development Plan
Appendix D - Excerpts from Restrictive Covenant.
-7-
APPENDIX A
SUB JECT P ROP E RTY
S CA LE 1:3, 000
Distric t of M ission
´
City of Pitt
Meadow s
^
Distric t of
Langley
12224 240 S TREET
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
P L A N NIN G D E P A RT M E N T
FR AS ER
R.
DATE: Aug 14, 2012 FILE: 2012-085-AL
BY: PC
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
January 7, 2013
RZ/028/10
C of W
Rezoning – First Extension
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6882-2011
Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6738-2010
20623 and 20615 113 Avenue, and11312 206 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The applicant for the above noted file has applied for an extension to this rezoning application under
Maple Ridge Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999. This application is to permit future
construction of an apartment building with 36 units, under the RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment
Residential) zone.
The First Reading report identified that the proposal did not comply with the Residential Infill or
compatibility criteria and policies (Policies 3-18 through 3-21). Consequently, with the Second
Reading, a site-specific Official Community Plan amendment was required to Policy 3-18(2), to
support the apartment form and zone proposed. Council granted Third Reading to both the bylaws
on January 24, 2012.
RECOMMENDATION:
That a one year extension be granted for rezoning application RZ/028/10 and that the following
conditions be addressed prior to consideration of Final Reading:
a.
Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and receipt
of the deposit of security as outlined in the Agreement;
b.
Registration of a Geotechnical Report as a Restrictive Covenant which addresses the
suitability of the site for the proposed development;
c.
Road dedication as required;
d.
e.
Removal of the existing buildings;
f.
Registration of a Restrictive Covenant protecting the Visitor Parking.
-1-
1105
DISCUSSION:
a)
Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Wayne Bissky of Bissky Architect Inc.
Melissa R Zanna
Legal Description:
Lot: 720, D.L.: 278, NWD Plan: 114; PID: 009-360-051
Lot: 724, D.L.: 278, NWD Plan: 114; Group 1, Except
Plan East 7 FT; PID: 011-526-262 and PID: 011-526-254
Lot 723; D.L.: 278; NWD Plan 114; Group 1; PID: 011-526-254
Lot: 724, D.L.: 278, NWD Plan: 114; Group 1, Except Plan
East 7 FT. PID: 011-526-297
OCP:
Existing:
Proposed:
Urban Residential (Neighbourhood Residential)
Urban Residential (Major Corridor Residential)
Existing:
Proposed:
RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential)
Zoning:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Consolidated lot size:
Access:
Servicing:
Urban Residential
Urban Residential
Urban Residential
Urban Residential
Single Family Residential and Vacant
Multi-Family Residential (apartments)
0.49 acres (2016 m2)
206th Street
Full Urban Standard
DP/028/10
The proposal is to rezone the subject property from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to RM-2
(Medium Density Apartment Residential), to permit future construction of an apartment building with
36 units.
The following dates outline Council’s consideration of the application and Bylaws 6882-2011 and
6738-2010:
 First Reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6738-2010 was granted May 25, 2012;
-2-
 First Reading for Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6882-2011 and Second
Reading for Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6738-2010 was granted December 13, 2011;
 Public Hearing for both the bylaws was held January 17, 2012;
 Third Reading for both the bylaws was granted January 24, 2012.
Application Progress:
The applicant and his team have been actively working to meet Council’s terms and conditions for
Final Reading of both the bylaws. The applicant is working on finalizing the off-site servicing
drawings. All the required covenants have been finalized. The major outstanding items are a
Rezoning Servicing Agreement Restrictive Covenant, survey plan for road dedication and
consolidation of the site and demolition of the existing older house at 20615 113 th Avenue.
However, it is anticipated that these will be met in the next few months.
Alternatives:
Council may choose one of the following alternatives:
1. Grant the request for extension;
2. Deny the request for extension; or
3. Repeal Third Reading of the bylaw and refer the bylaw to Public Hearing.
CONCLUSION:
The applicant has been actively pursuing the completion of this rezoning application and has applied
for a one year extension. It is anticipated that within the next few months, consideration for Final
Reading approval will be applied for.
“original signed by Rasika Acharya”__________________
Prepared by: Rasika Acharya, B-Arch, M-Tech, LEED® AP, MCIP, RPP
Planner
“original signed by Charles R. Goddard”_____________
“original signed by Frank Quinn”____________________
‘original signed by Paul Gill’_________________________
Concurrence: J.L. (Jim) Rule
Appendix B – Second Reading Report
-3-
APPENDIX A
*
700
20674/84
20660/64
699
20656
20623
20591
*PP044
719 716
715
*
Scale: 1:1,500
20676
20624
20616
11278
1042
11266
761
Rem N 90'
768 & 769
11273
11272
S 1/2S 1/2
764 765
RP 7316A
SK 1840
11258 B
11261
11230
^
District of
Langley
N 1/2
790
11243/5
C
P 10059 S 1/2
790
P 12165
1114
11151
S 30' 778
S 1/2
786 & 787
11240 P 114 BCP 7202
P 64192
5
20615/23-113 Ave
11312-206 Ave
11233/9
District of Mission
P 74209
1
1113
11252
ORD ST.
20636
795
98
206 ST.
20591/93
PcL B
20581
City of Pitt
Meadows
11240
1
11284
BATTLE AVE.
P 88024
P 30
767 770 771
S
P 114
774 &
N 1/2
764 & 765
20631
756
20623
1043
P 43556
11271
05 RP 5103
´
11295
11277
20583
20591
20575
20565
20561
49
7
N 1/2 *
763 & 766
758 759 762
S 1/2
P 114
763 & 766
*PP044
Pcl A
60
20606
20582
20574
20556
P 114
P
P 8654
749 752 753
LMP 469
*PP044
113 AVE.
11289
LMS
1419
A
P 2180
LMP 12217 751 754 755
E 21'
of 11250
748
1
720
P 114 Rem
712 711 1123
Re
1122
P 48437
723
20615
724
20670
11310
20631
727
20583
20561
728
714 713 710
B
Subject
Properties
11334
11311
11312
LMS 629
A
LMP 1857
11329
P 114
20675
722 721
P 114
A
20665
726
P 4008
725
20622
20614
20606
20586/90
20582
20574
20554
20564
P 2180
733 730 729
*
11339
20680
*PP044
LORNE AVE.
734
702
20683
686
P 114
697 698 701
*
20675
20621/23
693 694
696
20665
689 690
695
20641
688
20657
691 692
P 114
DARTFORD ST.
SK 492
20631
11376
/88
11352
/70
20603/11
20617/25
P 55931
20622
*
P 55777
PARK
20606/12
20618/20
WARESELY ST.
687
Pcl. B
11391
P 6366
*PP044
114 AVE.
1
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: Dec 21, 2012 RZ/028/10
FRAS ER R.
BY: PC
APPENDIX B
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE: December 12, 2011
FILE NO:
RZ/028/10
MEETING:
C of W
First & Second Reading
Maple Ridge OCP Amending Bylaw No.6882-2011
Second Reading
20623 and 20615 113 Avenue; 11312 206 Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On May 25, 2010, Council granted First Reading to this proposal and in accordance with the
Development Procedural Bylaw, the applicant proceeded to the Advisory Design Panel and
conducted a Development Information Meeting. The applicant now seeks Second Reading and
wishes to proceed to a Public Hearing. The proposal is to rezone the subject property from RS-1 (One
Family Urban Residential) to RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential), to permit future
construction of an apartment building with 36 units.
The First Reading report identified that the proposal did not comply with the Residential Infill or
compatibility criteria and policies (Policies 3-18 through 3-21). In order to proceed with this project,
a site-specific Official Community Plan amendment is required to Policy 3-18(2).
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That in accordance with Section 879 of the Local Government Act opportunity for early and
on-going consultation has been provided by way of posting Official Community Plan Amending
Bylaw No. 6882-2011 on the municipal website and requiring that the applicant host a
Development Information Meeting, and Council considers it unnecessary to provide any
further consultation opportunities, except by way of holding a public hearing on the bylaw;
2. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6882-2011 be considered in
conjunction with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan.
3. That it be confirmed that Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No.68822011 is consistent with the Capital Expenditure Plan and Waste Management Plan;
4. That Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6882-2011 be given First and
Second Readings and be forwarded to Public Hearing;
5. That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6738-2010 be given Second Reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing; and
6. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to final reading.
a.
Registration of a Rezoning Servicing Agreement as a Restrictive Covenant and
receipt of the deposit of security as outlined in the Agreement;
b.
Registration of a Geotechnical Report as a Restrictive Covenant which addresses
the suitability of the site for the proposed development;
c.
d.
e.
Removal of the existing buildings;
f.
Registration of a Restrictive Covenant protecting the Visitor Parking.
DISCUSSION:
a)
Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Wayne Bissky of Bissky Architect Inc.
Melissa R Zanna
Legal Description:
Lot: 724, D.L.: 278, NWD Plan: 114; Group 1, Except
Plan East 7 FT; PID: 011-526-262 and PID: 011-526-254
Lot 723; D.L.: 278; NWD Plan 114; Group 1; PID: 011-526-254
Lot: 724, D.L.: 278, NWD Plan: 114; Group 1, Except Plan East 7
FT. PID: 011-526-297
OCP:
Existing:
Proposed:
Urban Residential (Neighbourhood Residential)
Urban Residential (Major Corridor Residential)
Existing:
Proposed:
Zoning:
-2-
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Consolidated lot size:
Access:
Servicing:
Urban Residential
Urban Residential
Urban Residential
Urban Residential
Multi-Family Residential (apartments)
0.49 acres (2016 m2)
206th Street
Full Urban
DP/028/10
The subject site totaling 2,016 m2 consists of 3 lots on the north-east corner of 113th Avenue and
206th Street in the Hammond area of Maple Ridge. Currently two of the lots are vacant and an older
single family house exists at 20615 113th Avenue. Removal of this house and consolidation of the 3
lots is required. The subject site is not in the flood plain and slopes gradually from the north-east
corner to the south-west corner at 206th Street and 113th Avenue.
A four storey apartment building with 36 units (3,116.4 m2 gross floor area) is proposed, with an
under-ground parkade. Access via the 7.0 m wide ramp to the under-ground parkade is from the
north-west corner of the site (206th Street). Pedestrian access to the building foyer is from 113 th
Avenue. Seven unit types are proposed with unit sizes ranging from 53.4 m2 to 74.5 m2 in area.
Specific details of the materials used and building design will be provided in the subsequent
Development Permit report. Common Usable Open Space is proposed within the northern and
eastern yards and the Common Activity Area is proposed near the main foyer facing 113th Avenue.
-3-
c) Planning Analysis:
The Official Community Plan designation for the subject site is “Urban Residential” within the
Neighbourhood Residential category. General characteristics within this designation include
predominantly single family residential dwellings with limited infill development, if in compliance
with the compatibility policies housed in the Official Community Plan. The proposed zone and
apartment form is not permitted under the current designation hence an OCP amendment is
required. In accordance with Council direction, the proposal is proceeding to Second Reading and
Public Hearing, but with a site-specific OCP amendment.
A site-specific Official Community Plan amendment to Policy 3-18 (2) Major Corridor ResidentialGeneral Characteristics, is proposed by the addition of the new item c) as stated below, shown in
bold print.
2) Major Corridor Residential- General Characteristics:
a) Major Corridor Residential is characterized by the following:
i)
has frontage on an existing Major Road Corridor as identified on Figure 4Proposed Major Corridor Network Plan, or has frontage on a road built in whole
or part to a collector, arterial, TransLink Major Road, or Provincial Highway
standard;
ii) may be adjacent to Community Commercial Node, or designated commercial
centre.
b) includes ground oriented housing forms such as single detached dwellings, garden
suites, duplex, triplex, fourplexes, townhouses, apartments, or small lot intensive
residential, subject to compliance with Major Corridor Residential Infill policies.
c) includes properties located at 20623 113 Avenue, 20615 113 Avenue and 11312
206 Street with legal description as stated below:
Lot: 720, D.L.: 278, NWD Plan: 114; PID: 009-360-051; Lot: 724, D.L.: 278, NWD Plan:
114; Group 1, Except Plan East 7 FT; PID: 011-526-262 and PID: 011-526-254; Lot
723; D.L.: 278; NWD Plan 114; Group 1; PID: 011-526-254, Lot: 724, D.L.: 278, NWD
Plan: 114; Group 1, Except Plan East 7 FT. PID: 011-526-297
After consolidation of the three lots, prior to Council granting Final Reading, a new legal description
will replace the above description. Prior to Final Reading, the Bylaw will need to be amended to
reflect the new legal description.
-4-
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the properties located at 20623 and 20615 113 Avenue
and 11312 206 Street from RS-1 (One Family Urban Residential) to RM-2 (Medium Density
Apartment Residential) to permit future construction of 36 apartment units.
The proposed RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential) zone allows a medium density
apartment use and specifies a maximum Floor Space Ratio of 1.8. The applicant has proposed a
four storey wood frame building with a Floor Space Ratio of 1.23. The RM-2 (Medium Density
Apartment Residential) zone requires a common usable open space of 20% of the net lot area and
the applicant has proposed an open space of 36% (726 m2). The zone also requires a Common
Activity Area of 36m2 which has been included within the Common Activity Area (Appendix C).
The proposed building complies with the density and height requirements of the zone but some
minor setback variances may be requested. These variances will need Council approval before the
Development Permit is approved. This will be the subject of a future Council report.
Maple Ridge Off-Street Parking & Loading Bylaw #4350-1990:
The proposed RM-2 (Medium Density Apartment Residential) zone requires a ratio of 1.5 spaces per
unit for residential parking and 0.2 spaces per unit for visitor parking. A total of 54 residential
spaces and 8 visitor parking spaces have been proposed, as required. This includes 1 handicapped
parking space.
Development Permits:
Pursuant to Section 8.7 of the Official Community Plan, a Multi-Family Development permit is
required to regulate the form and character of the proposed development, to ensure the current
proposal enhances existing neighbourhoods and minimizes potential conflicts with neighbouring
land uses. This will be the subject of a future Council report.
Advisory Design Panel:
On October 11, 2011, this proposal was reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel. The panel resolved
that the application be supported and the following concerns be addressed as the design develops.
They further resolved that revisions to the plans be submitted to Planning staff for follow up and
further that Planning staff forward the revisions to the Advisory Design Panel for information.






Consider deletion of the southwest parkade stairs in lieu of a corner feature
Provide a secondary overhead gate and enter phone at the bottom of ramp
Provide direct access from visitor parking stalls to elevator lobby
Provide window and glazed doors at parkade lobbies
Consider expanding common outdoor activity area along the west side of the
building and allowing resident access to northeast lawn area
Consider dropping main floor concrete slab on southwest and west portions of site
-5-











to reduce or eliminate retaining walls. If not possible add stone facing on
planter walls to match building
Consider revisiting the two arch ways at the south elevation
Consider providing trees on east and west elevation of building at blank walls
Coordinate slope landscaping with patio ramps
Consider extending entry paving to municipal sidewalk
Relocate fire door at corridor main floor
Consider enlarging ground floor patios where possible
Consider additional stone along base of building
Consider aligning main entry lobby with elevator
Re-label side elevations
Consider additional treatment of parkade retaining walls
Consider possible set back relaxation along 113th to allow building to shift south
to allow additional landscape buffer on north property line.
The project architect has incorporated some revisions which are being considered by the panel. This
will be discussed in the Development Permit report that will be considered by Council at a future
date.
Development Information Meeting:
The applicant is required to host a Development Information Meeting in accordance with Council
Policy 6.20. On December 1, 2011, the applicant held a Development Information Meeting at the
Hammond Elementary School, from 7:00 to 9:00 pm. This was an informal open house type of
meeting and included information such as complete sets of architectural and landscape drawings of
the building, comments sheets and frequently Asked Questions sheets. It was attended by 8
residents and neighbours of the community and while no written comments were submitted, the
attendees were encouraged to write to the Planning Department directly.
There were a variety of reactions to the proposal as summarized below:






d)
Most attendees agreed that the Hammond area needed improved safety, security and traffic
control; maybe speed bumps in this area could help.
Most attendees also expressed concern about vacant lots in this area and the derelict
conditions of some existing houses.
Some expressed concerns about the future of Hammond Mill and its property.
Most felt that this area should remain single family, except for one who wanted something
similar on his property.
Some felt that the proposed development will devalue the area and there was general
concern about augmenting crime and parking problems.
Generally a comprehensive plan could help better development in the Lower Hammond Area.
Citizen/Customer Implications:
The affected parties/citizens will get an opportunity to express any concerns at the Public Hearing.
-6-
e)
The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposal and has the following comments:





Road dedication of 0.85 metres along 113th Avenue frontage; a corner truncation of 3X3
metres at the intersection of 113th Avenue and 206th Street to make them 20.0 metres wide
collector standard roads, will be required;
Road upgrades along both the frontages of subject sites including curb, gutter, sidewalk,
street lighting (on the north side of 113th Avenue and east side of 206th Street only) and
street trees (on the north side of 113th Avenue and east side of 206th Street only) and
examining the existing manholes/catch basins, will be required;
Sanitary sewer capacity of the existing sewer to support the proposed density has to be
confirmed by the engineer of record and any upgrades if required need to be addressed in
the off-site civil design;
Capacity of the existing water main to support the proposed density and to ensure sufficient
pressure for both fire-fighting and domestic use has to be confirmed by the engineer of
record or the municipality has a process in place whereby the municipal water model can be
used through the firm of Kerr Wood Leidel, with all costs borne by the applicant. Any
upgrades if required need to be addressed in the off-site civil design;
All utility services (hydro, telephone and cable) servicing the site must be underground.
Overhead lines on the Street will remain but the aerial connections to the lots will be
removed along with disconnecting all services prior to demolition of the existing single family
houses on site.
The Parks & Leisure Services Department are in support of the proposed bike-way right-of-way
registration on title to facilitate an east-west bikeway and requires this bikeway to be open for public
use at all times. They have identified that after the development permit is approved they will be
responsible for maintaining the street trees. In the case of this project it is estimated that there will
be additional trees which is based on the landscaping plan attached (Appendix E). The Manager of
Parks & Open Space has advised that the maintenance requirement of $25.00 per new tree will
increase their budget requirements by $125.00.
Fire Department:
The Fire Department has reviewed the proposal and has the following comments:

Include all the locations and specifications of fire department connections in the Building
Permit drawings.
-7-



Fire Department access from underground to the outside needs to be easy and quick during
an emergency evacuation. Securing areas outside the building and installing a magnetic lock
to code is are examples of a way to achieve this.
Ensure address is visible from the street at all times.
Once the current house is vacant, it is to be maintained secure against unauthorized entry at
all times, as well as during the demolition phase until such time as it is totally demolished,
following a Demolition Permit.
Building Department:
Building Department has reviewed the proposal and their comments have been sent to the project
architect. Most of the concerns will be addressed through the Building Permit drawings. For areas
where excavation encroaches beyond property lines, encroachment agreements from neighbouring
property owners must be in place prior to Building Permit issuance.
f)
School District Comments:
A referral was sent to the School District Office and there was no response.
g)
Intergovernmental Issues:
Local Government Act:
An amendment to the Official Community Plan requires the local government to consult with any
affected parties and to adopt related bylaws in compliance with the procedures outlined in Section
882 of the Act. The amendment required for this application, (amendment to Policy 3-18 (2) Major
Corridor Residential, as explained in this report), 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.
h) Alternatives:
Council can choose one of three options, stated below:
a)
b)
c)
Defer Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6738-2010 and OCP Amending Bylaw No. 6882-2011;
Grant Second Reading and forwarded it to the Public Hearing, or
Defeat Zone Amending Bylaw 6738-2010 and OCP Amending Bylaw No. 6882-2011.
-8-
CONCLUSION:
The proposed level of density and a four-storey apartment form in the RM-2 (Medium Density
Apartment Residential) zone conflicts with the neighbouring single family houses and is not
supported by the Official Community Plan designation i.e. Neighbourhood Residential, as outlined in
this report. Some concerns have already been expressed by the public at the Development
Information Meeting. Residents will have another opportunity to voice their concerns at the Public
Hearing. A site-specific Official Community Plan amendment is required to Policy 3-18 (2) to permit
the proposed apartment form and zone, as described in the report.
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Rasika Acharya, B-Arch, M-Tech, LEED® AP, MCIP
Planner
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Christine Carter, M.Pl, MCIP
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
Appendix C -- OCP Amending Bylaw 6882-2011
Appendix D – Site Plan
Appendix E – Building Elevations & Sections
Appendix F – Landscape Plans
-9-
700
20674/84
20660/64
20623
20591
*PP044
719 716
715
*
Scale: 1:1,500
20676
20624
20616
11278
1042
11266
761
Rem N 90'
768 & 769
11273
11272
S 1/2S 1/2
764 765
RP 7316A
SK 1840
11258 B
11261
11230
^
District of
Langley
N 1/2
790
11243/5
C
P 10059 S 1/2
790
20683
P 12165
1114
11151
S 30' 778
S 1/2
786 & 787
11240 P 114 BCP 7202
P 64192
5
20615/23-113 Ave
11312-206 Ave
11233/9
District of Mission
P 74209
1
1113
11252
ORD ST.
20636
795
98
206 ST.
20591/93
PcL B
20581
City of Pitt
Meadows
11240
1
11284
BATTLE AVE.
P 88024
P 30
767 770 771
S
P 114
774 &
N 1/2
764 & 765
20631
756
20623
1043
P 43556
11271
05 RP 5103
´
11295
11277
20583
20591
20575
20565
20561
49
7
N 1/2 *
763 & 766
758 759 762
S 1/2
P 114
763 & 766
*PP044
Pcl A
60
20606
20582
20574
20556
P 114
P
P 8654
749 752 753
LMP 469
*PP044
113 AVE.
11289
LMS
1419
A
P 2180
LMP 12217 751 754 755
E 21'
of 11250
748
1
720
P 114 Rem
712 711 1123
Re
1122
P 48437
723
20615
724
20670
11310
20631
727
20583
20561
728
714 713 710
B
Subject
Properties
11334
11311
11312
LMS 629
A
LMP 1857
11329
P 114
20675
722 721
P 114
A
20665
726
P 4008
725
20622
20614
20606
20586/90
20582
20574
20554
20564
P 2180
733 730 729
*
11339
20680
*PP044
LORNE AVE.
734
702
20675
*
699
20656
P 114
697 698 701
*
20665
686
20641
20621/23
693 694
696
20657
689 690
695
DARTFORD ST.
691 692
P 114
688
20603/11
20617/25
P 55931
11376
/88
11352
/70
SK 492
20631
*
P 55777
PARK
11391
20622
Pcl. B
20606/12
20618/20
WARESELY ST.
687
P 6366
*PP044
114 AVE.
1
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: Dec 21, 2012 RZ/028/10
FRAS ER R.
BY: PC
BYLAW NO. 6738-2010
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended.
___________________________________________________________
1.
2.
Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as:
Lot: 724, D.L.: 278, NWD Plan: 114; Group 1, Except Plan East 7 FT; PID: 011-526-262 and
PID: 011-526-254
Lot 723; D.L.: 278; NWD Plan 114; Group 1;PID: 011-526-254
Lot: 724, D.L.: 278, NWD Plan: 114; Group 1, Except Plan East 7 FT. PID: 011-526-297
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1485, a copy of which is attached hereto
and forms part of this Bylaw, are hereby rezoned to RM-2 (Medium Density
Apartment Residential)
3.
READ a first time the 25th day of May, A.D. 2010.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 17th day of January, A.D. 2012.
READ a second time the 13th day of December, A.D. 2011.
READ a third time the 24th day of January, A.D. 2012.
_____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
day of
, A.D. 20 .
____________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
20704
20733
20721
11384
702 705
1
11261
1186
Bylaw No.
Map No.
From:
6738-2010
1485
To:
20685
A
B
LMP 1131
11264
11260
P 11457
2
1
11246
179
207 ST.
20732
20711
20710
P 9549
4
11280
11253
RW 71974
P 23319
207 ST.
20683
P 51275
P 51277
20680
20675
*PP044
20673
11208
20661
A
MAP
LE C
R.
3
11288
11267
111511249
S 30' 778
11239
S 1/2
2
786 & 787
11240 P 114 BCP 7202
3
P 64192
1
11235
5
P 114
*
Rem
781 780
11232
A/24B
P 12703
2
11296
11252
DARTFORD ST.
789
E 1/2
20645
/39
SK
B
2062
7
Rem
797
206 3398
17
P 74209
1
20636
11230
N 1/2
790
C 11243/5
P 10059 S 1/2
790
11233/9
1114
1
20732
RP 7316A
SK 1840
11258 B
11312
11236
180
11230
Rem 1
11226
B
EP 4672
11202
P 8318
S 1/2S 1/2
764 765
1113
*LMP 16828
2
EP 26083
11272
1
11304
20676
Rem N 90'
768 & 769
11273
20643
206
0
RW 52217
641
19
795
5
RW 71976
RP
11240
206
0
206 ST.
P 88024
11329
11315
11281
P 48437
N 1/2
764 & 765
20631
P 43556
11266
20623
20583
20591
1042
761
11339
1
RW 51276
11284
2
2
P 3034A
A
11291/93
767 770 771
S 1/2
P 114
774 & 775
11295
P 10601
20705
11365
13
P 10601
20720
*PP044
N 1/2 *
763 & 766
20720
14
B11381
P 36414
700
11391
20683
20665
20670
719 716
20665
715
*
20631
20623
20624
20616
20606
20582
99
0
P 4008
20622
20614
20615
20591
20583
20561
20606
20586/90
20582
20574
20575
1043
SK 2405 RP 5103
R
AI
LW
AY
71
2
*
A
P 114 Rem
712 711 1123
Rem
1122
11310
BATTLE AVE.
20591/93
PA
C
IF
IC
Pcl A
RW
11334
11277
11278
P 114
714 713 710
B
758 759 762
S 1/2
P 114
763 & 766
*PP044
PcL B
Rem 2 R
P
R
76
W P
60 6 0 64
49 4 9 5
7
8
11329
113 AVE.
756
0
CA
N
AD
IA
N
11339
A
11311
723 720
724
11271
RW 88025
LMP 469
P 8654
749 752 753
20581
E 21'
of 11250
748
1
20561
746
11312
727
113 AVE.
20574
11224
722 721
P 114
725
11289
LMS
1419
A
P 2180
LMP 12217 751 754 755
20556
7
49
60
Rem
745
P 114
P
RW 72041
*
726
728
*PP044
20565
20531
20564
20554
20540
20530
11302
736
11407
*PP044
P 2180
733 730 729
LMS 629
A
LMP 1857
11315
20540
44
P0
*P
RP 84831
Pcl. A 739
734
P 6366
20674/84
20660/64
699
P 114
697 698 701
*
LORNE AVE.
P 2180
741 738 737
P 80557
1
847
20675
P 114
20675
*
696
20657
20641
693 694
20631
20621/23
689 690
20656
691 692 695
P 114
DARTFORD ST.
11391
SK 492
20622
688
686
*PP044
20512
20520
*
11376
/88
11352
/70
20603/11
20617/25
P 55931
20606/12
20618/20
PARK
20541
20531
20523
20515
670 673 674
P 2180
11410
11417
846
P 41103
EP 47222
20657
20641
*
618 617
20682
20674
20664
20630
20631
20623
20615
20607
621
20665
206 ST.
20624
20614
20606
20590
20591
20583
20575
*
687
P 55777
669
11314
P 114
630 629 626 625 622
P 70943
RW 70942
*
615 612
*PP044
Pcl. B
WARESELY ST.
20540
20536
20524
20512
666
20507
668 671 672 675
743
P 114
620 619 616
*
628 627 624 623
631
114 AVE.
667
742
635 632
P 12165
*PP044
11386
20582
20574
20564
20557
20531
20523
639 636
P 114
P 114
641 638 637 634 633
646 645 642
P 2180
11406
20540
644 643
20541
650 649
640
20565
11414
20530
20522
20514
20506
P 2180
651 648 647
SK. 1503
´
SCALE 1:2,500
BYLAW NO. 6882-2011
A Bylaw to amend the Official Community Plan
_______________________________________
WHEREAS the Local Government Act empowers a local government to adopt or amend an
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 Corporation of the District of Maple Ridge, in
open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
2.
This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "Maple Ridge Official Community
Plan Amending Bylaw No. 6882-2011”.
That Policy 3-18(2) Major Corridor Residential- General Characteristics,
be amended by adding the following after 2b)
c) includes properties located at 20623 113 Avenue, 20615 113 Avenue
and 11312 206 Street with legal desctiption as stated below:
Lot: 720, D.L.: 278, NWD Plan: 114; PID: 009-360-051; Lot: 724, D.L.: 278,
NWD Plan: 114; Group 1, Except Plan East 7 FT; PID: 011-526-262 and
PID: 011-526 254; Lot 723; D.L.: 278; NWD Plan 114; Group 1; PID: 011-526
254, Lot: 724, D.L.: 278, NWD Plan: 114; Group 1,Except Plan East 7 FT.
PID: 011-526-297
3.
Maple Ridge Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 6425-2006 as amended
is hereby amended accordingly.
READ A FIRST TIME the 13th day of December, A.D. 2011 .
READ A SECOND TIME the 13th day of December, A.D. 2011.
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the 17th day of January, A.D. 2012.
READ A THIRD TIME the 24th day of January, A.D. 2012.
______________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
day of
, A.D. 201 .
______________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
January 7, 2013
2011-037-RZ
C of W
Rezoning – First Extension
24311 and 24361 124 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The applicant for the above noted file has applied for an extension to this rezoning application under
Maple Ridge Development Procedures Bylaw No. 5879-1999. The purpose of the application is to
rezone the subject property from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban
Residential) to allow for future subdivision into 4 lots.
RECOMMENDATION:
That a one year extension be granted for rezoning application 2011-037-RZ and that the following
conditions be addressed prior to consideration of Final Reading:
i.
ii.
Removal of existing deck on proposed Lot 1;
iii.
whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there is evidence,
a site profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in accordance
with the regulations;
iv.
Pursuant to the Contaminated Site Regulations of the Environmental Management Act,
the subdivider will provide a Site Profile for the subject lands.
DISCUSSION:
a)
Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Pasquale De Luca
Pasquale and Celeste De Luca
-1-
1106
Legal Description:
Lots 49 and 50, Section: 22, Township: 12, NWD Plan: 43885
OCP:
Existing:
Estate Suburban Residential
Existing:
Proposed:
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
Zoning:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
South:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
East:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Site Area:
Access:
Agricultural
Suburban Residential
1.62 ha (4 acres)
124 Avenue
Rural
This application is to permit future subdivision into four lots no smaller than 0.4 hectares each.
The following dates outline Council’s consideration of the application and Bylaw 6817-2011:




First Reading was granted May 10, 2011
Second Reading was granted November 8, 2011
Public Hearing was held December 13, 2011
Third Reading was granted December 13, 2011
Application Progress:
The applicant is in the process of completing most of the terms and conditions to be met prior to
Final Reading of the Zone Amending Bylaw. The major outstanding items are road dedication,
removal of the existing deck on proposed Lot 1, and a disclosure statement must be submitted by a
Professional Engineer advising whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks.
-2-
Alternatives:
Council may choose one of the following alternatives:
1. Grant the request for extension;
2. Deny the request for extension; or
3. Repeal Third Reading of the bylaw and refer the bylaw to Public Hearing.
CONCLUSION:
The applicant has been pursuing the completion of this rezoning application and has applied for a
one year extension. It is anticipated that within the next year consideration for Final Reading
approval will be applied for.
“original signed by Siobhan Murphy”
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Siobhan Murphy, MA, MCIP, RPP
Planning Technician
“original signed by Christine Carter”
_______________________________________________
“original signed by Frank Quinn”
_______________________________________________
“original by signed Jim Rule”
_______________________________________________
Appendix B – Second Reading Report
-3-
APPENDIX A
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
Scale: 1:2,500
^
District of
Langley
District of Mission
´
City of Pitt
Meadows
24311/61 124 AVENUE
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: Dec 17, 2012 FILE: 2011-037-RZ
FRAS ER R.
BY: PC
APPENDIX B
District Of Maple Ridge
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
November 7, 2011
2011-037-RZ
C of W
Second Reading
24311 and 24361 124 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
An application has been received to rezone the subject property from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential). This application is in compliance with the
Official Community Plan.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. That Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6817-2011 be given Second Reading and be forwarded to
Public Hearing;
and
2. That the following terms and conditions be met prior to Final Reading:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
Removal of existing deck on proposed Lot 1.
whether there is any evidence of underground fuel storage tanks. If there is
evidence, a site profile pursuant to the Waste Management Act must be provided in
accordance with the regulations.
Pursuant to the Contaminated Site Regulations of the Environmental Management
Act, the subdivider will provide a Site Profile for the subject lands.
DISCUSSION:
a)
Background Context:
Applicant:
Owner:
Pasquale De Luca
Pasquale and Celeste De Luca
Legal Description:
Lots 49 and 50, Section: 22, Township: 12, NWD Plan: 43885
OCP:
Existing:
Existing:
Proposed:
Zoning:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
South:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
East:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Site Area:
Access:
Agricultural
1.62 ha (4 acres)
124 Avenue
Rural
The applicant proposes to rezone the subject properties from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to
RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential), in support of a future subdivision into four lots no smaller
than 0.4 hectares each. The existing homes are proposed to be maintained; although the deck of
one of the homes will need to be removed to meet zoning requirements.
c)
Planning Analysis:
The proposed rezoning to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) is in accordance with the subject
properties’ designation as Estate Suburban Residential in the Official Community Plan (OCP).
Zoning Bylaw:
The current application proposes to rezone the properties located at 24311 and 24361 124 Avenue
from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) to permit the
future subdivision into four one acre lots. The applicant has requested a relaxation to the side yard
setback for proposed Lot 1. The proposed variance will be the subject of a future report to
Council.
d)
The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed project and has noted that there are no
services required in support of this rezoning application. As a result, no rezoning servicing
-2-
agreement is required. The Engineering Department has further determined that road dedication is
required along the subject site frontage.
The Parks Department has reviewed the application and has noted that a road shoulder equestrian
trail exists on 124 Avenue that will need to be considered in the development servicing plans for this
application.
e)
Environmental Implications:
The subject properties are located adjacent to land within the Agricultural Land Reserve, and the
applicant has completed an Agricultural Impact Assessment and a Groundwater Impact Assessment
in support of the proposed development.
CONCLUSION:
This application is in compliance with the Official Community Plan. Therefore, it is recommended
that Zone Amending Bylaw No. 6817 - 2010 be given Second Reading and be forwarded to Public
Hearing.
_______________________________________________
Prepared by: Amelia Bowden
Planning Technician
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Charles Goddard, BA, MA
Acting Director of Planning
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
AB/dp
Appendix C – Subdivision Plan
-3-
BYLAW NO. 6817-2011
of Zoning Bylaw No. 3510 - 1985 as amended.
___________________________________________________________
1.
This Bylaw may be cited as "Maple Ridge Zone Amending Bylaw No.6817-2011."
2.
Those parcels or tracts of land and premises known and described as:
Lot 49, Section 22, Township 12, New Westminster District Plan 43885
Lot 50, Section 22, Township 12, New Westminster District Plan 43885
and outlined in heavy black line on Map No. 1519 a copy of which is attached
hereto and forms part of this Bylaw, is hereby rezoned to RS-2 (One Family Suburban
Residential)
3.
READ a first time the 10th day of May, A.D. 2011.
READ a second time the 8th day of November, A.D. 2011.
PUBLIC HEARING held the 13th day of December, A.D. 2011.
READ a third time the 13th day of December, A.D. 2011.
_____________________________
PRESIDING MEMBER
day of
, A.D. 20 .
____________________________
CORPORATE OFFICER
P 70798
1
12530
P 43885
76
125 AVE.
54
1
P 43885
P 70674
EP 54608
24308
24280
24240
55
24358
125 AVE.
56
2
24365
12525
EPP 1414
2
24307
24265
1
53
2
12497
12490
1
12475
12460
2
12447
LMP 12744
50
24361
24311
24271
24221
24205
2
12440
ANSELL ST.
49
P 71164
48
2
1
P 43885
24421
LMP 12745
1
75
24383
Rem 64
1
24325
LMP 123
24209
ANSELL ST.
12552
P 43885
78
12420
21
P 3118
12384
N 190' 12
12370
12375
20
P 24328
124 AVE.
LMP 34711
12355
11
244 ST.
Rem 12
12342
Bylaw No.
Map No.
From:
6817-2011
1519
To:
´
SCALE 1:2,500
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
January 7, 2013
2011-008-DVP
CoW
Development Variance Permit
12640 and 12610 Ansell Street
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Development Variance Permit application 2011-008-DVP has been received in conjunction with
applications for rezoning and subdivision for a four lot RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential)
subdivision for two properties located at 12640 and 12610 Ansell Street. The requested variances
are to: reduce the road right-of-way on Ansell Street from 20 to 18.3 metres and the road
carriageway from 7 to 6 metres in width; and to reduce the principle building’s rear setback for Lot 2
from 7.5 to 3.32 metres, the accessory residential use rear setback from 1.5 to 1.25. It is
recommended that Development Variance Permit 2011-008-DVP be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2011-008-DVP respecting property located
at 12640 and 12610 Ansell Street.
DISCUSSION:
Applicant:
Owners:
Dennis Dickson
Dennis and Darlene Dickson
James and Frances Shull
Legal Description:
Lot 72 and Lot 73, Section 22, Township 12, NWD Plan 43885
OCP:
Existing:
Proposed:
Zoning: Existing:
Proposed:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
1107
East:
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Existing Use of Properties:
Proposed Use of Properties:
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing Requirement:
Concurrent Applications:
Vacant
Agricultural
1.67 ha (4.1 acres)
Ansell Street
Rural Standard
2011-008-RZ, 2011-008-SD
b) Requested Variances:
1. Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No 4800-1993, Schedule B, to reduce the
Ansell Street road right-of-way from 20 to 18.3 metres;
2. Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No 4800-1993, Schedule C, Drawing SD
R4, to reduce the road carriageway from 7 to 6 metres for a Local Rural Road;
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No 3510 -1985, Part 6, Section 601, C.3.c)iii), to reduce the
principle use rear setback for Lot 2 from 7.5 to 3.32 metres;
4. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No 3510 -1985, Part 6, Section 601, C. 5.c)i), to reduce the
accessory residential use rear setback for Lot 2 from 1.5 to 1.25 metres; and,
c) Project Description:
The applicant proposes to rezone and subdivide the subject properties from RS-3 (One Family Rural
Residential) to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) and subdivide into four lots. Panhandles are
proposed to access each of the two new lots, as the steep slopes on the north end of the property
are a geotechnical constraints hindering the northern property from subdividing and providing an
acceptable buildable area on its own. Proposed Lot 3 will have a width of 44.2 metres and a depth of
93.03 metres. Proposed Lot 4 will have a width of 38.16 metres and a depth of 113.75 metres. The
subject properties are adjacent to agricultural lands to the east and single family residential
properties to the north, west, and south.
d) Planning Analysis:
The proposed rezoning to RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) is in accordance with the subject
properties’ current designation as Suburban Residential in the Official Community Plan. There is a
current OCP amending bylaw application in process that will re-designate these properties as Estate
Suburban Residential, and the RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) zone is also in compliance
with this designation.
Zoning Bylaw:
The accompanying rezoning application 2011-008-RZ proposes to rezone the properties located at
12640 and 12610 Ansell Street from RS-3 (One Family Rural Residential) to RS-2 (One Family
Suburban Residential) to permit future subdivision into four lots under application 2011-008-SD.
The applicant has requested several variances to the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw and the following
rationale for support is provided by the Planning Department:
-2-
1. Part 6, Section 601, C.3.c) iii), to reduce the principle use rear setback for Lot 2 from 7.5
to 3.32 metres. This variance will allow the existing single-family house on Lot 2 to be
maintained in its existing location.
2. Part 6, Section 601, C. 5.c) i), to reduce the accessory residential use rear setback for Lot
2 from 1.5 to 1.25 metres. This variance will allow the existing pool on Lot 2 to be
maintained in its existing location.
The Engineering Department has reviewed the requested Subdivision and Development Servicing
Bylaw variances and the following rationale for support has been provided:
1. Schedule B, to reduce the Ansell Street road right-of-way from 20 to 18.3 metres. The
Engineering Department has advised that the required services can be accommodated
within the existing road right-of-way, and therefore no additional road dedication is
required.
2. Schedule C, Drawing SD R4, to reduce the road carriageway from 7 to 6 metres for a
Local Rural Road. The Engineering Department has determined that Ansell Street
currently has adequate capacity and width for the additional number of lots
CONCLUSION:
The requested variances are supported by the Engineering and Planning Departments and
considered to be minor. Therefore, it is recommended that Development Variance Permit 2011-008DVP be approved.
“original signed by Amelia Bowden”__________
Planning Technician
“original signed by Chuck Goddard”_________________
“original signed by Frank Quinn”_____________________
“original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule”___________________
Appendix B – Subdivision Plan
Appendix C – Plan Showing Existing Building
-3-
$33(1',;$
SUBJECT PROPERTIES
Scale: 1:2,500
^
District of
Langley
District of Mission
´
City of Pitt
Meadows
12610/40 ANSELL STREET
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: Dec 21, 2012 FILE: 2011-008-RZ
FRAS ER R.
BY: PC
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX C
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
MEETING DATE:
FILE NO:
MEETING:
January 7, 2013
2012-026-DVP
CoW
Development Variance Permit
23930 and 23950 130 Avenue
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
A Development Variance Permit application 2012-026-DVP has been received in conjunction with
a subdivision application for two RS-2 (One Family Suburban Residential) lots. The purpose of the
subdivision application is to adjust existing lot lines. The requested variances are to: reduce the
road carriageway and frontage standards from a 7 metre asphalt road to the existing gravel width;
and to reduce the lot width for Lot A from 36 to 27.8 metres. It is recommended that
Development Variance Permit 2012-026-DVP be approved.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Corporate Officer be authorized to sign and seal 2012-026-DVP respecting property located
at 23930 and 23950 130 Avenue.
DISCUSSION:
Applicant:
Owner:
Nancy Gomerich
Nancy Gomerich
Legal Description:
Lot: 2, Section: 28, Township: 12, Plan: 7794
Lot: 3, Section: 28, Township: 12, Plan: 7794
OCP :
Existing:
Proposed:
Low Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Existing:
Proposed:
Zoning:
Surrounding Uses:
North:
South:
East:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Two-Family Residential
RT-1 (Two-Family Urban Residential)
Low Density Urban
Low Density Urban
Low Density Urban, Conservation
1108
West:
Use:
Zone:
Designation:
Site Area:
Access:
Servicing:
Lot Size:
Concurrent Applications:
Low Density Urban, Conservation
Single-Family Residential, Vacant
0.607 ha (1.5 acres)
130 Avenue
Rural Standard
Lot A: 0.202 ha (0.5 acres), Lot B: 0.404 ha (1 acre)
2012-026-SD, 2012-026-DP
b) Requested Variances:
1. Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No 4800-1993, Schedule C, Drawing SD
R4, to reduce the road carriageway and paved road standard from 7 to 6 metres for a
Rural Local Road;
2. Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No 4800-1993, Schedule A, “Services and
Utilities”, to waive the frontage requirement for asphalt and boulevard treatment; and,
3. Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw No 3510 -1985, Schedule D–RS-2: To vary the minimum
lot width from 36 metres to 27.8 metres for Lot A.
c) Project Description:
The home owner has applied to subdivide the subject site into two lots under application 2012-026SD. The purpose of this application is to reconfigure the current property lines to correct the existing
home from encroaching into the eastern property. The requested variances are intended to move the
property located at 23930 130 Avenue towards compliance with the RS-2 (One Family Suburban
Residential) zone.
The westerly property (23950 130 Avenue) is currently accessed from an unopened and unpaved
130 Avenue road right-of-way, while 23930 130 Avenue fronts a steep portion of the unopened
right-of-way and gains accessed from a driveway across 23950 130 Avenue.
Millionaire Creek is located across both subject properties, and this project is therefore required to
complete a Watercourse Protection Development Permit. A conservation covenant will be registered
to protect the environmentally sensitive areas on the site.
d) Planning Analysis:
The subject site is located in the Silver Valley Area Plan and designated Low Density Urban and
Conservation in the Official Community Plan. The properties are zoned RS-2 (One Family Suburban
Residential), however the property located at 23930 130 Avenue is legally non-conforming and does
not meet the minimum width or area requirements of the zone. The existing lot frontage for this
property is 21.34 metres and the lot area is 0.202 hectares (0.5 acres). The applicant has requested
one variance to the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw and the following rationale for support is provided by
the Planning Department:
1. Schedule D–RS-2: To vary the minimum lot width from 36 metres to 27.8 metres for Lot
A. This variance will move the lot width towards compliance with the RS-2 (One Family
Suburban Residential) zone. Section 406 of the Maple Ridge Zoning Bylaw allows the
Approving Officer to consider lot and area adjustment to existing non-conforming lots
where changes will improve the non-conformance situation.
-2-
The Engineering and Fire Departments have reviewed the two requested Subdivision and
Development Servicing Bylaw variances and have provided the following response:
1. Schedule C, Drawing SD R4, to reduce the road carriageway and paved road standard
from 7 to 6 metres for a Rural Local Road; and,
2. Schedule A, “Services and Utilities”, to waive the frontage requirement for asphalt and
boulevard treatment.
As this application is not for rezoning, and a Building Permit typically does not trigger off-site works,
legislation service requirements cannot be required beyond the property frontages. The subdivision
could trigger some street upgrades to the site if the Approving Officer considered them necessary.
The District’s Approving Officer has consulted with the Engineering and Fire Departments and has
determined the existing condition is adequate given that no additional lots are being created and
vegetation has been cleared from the access road to the lots.
CONCLUSION:
The Development Variance Permit application will reduce the amount of non-conformance on the
subject site. It is therefore recommended that Development Variance Permit 2012-026-DVP be
approved.
"Original signed by Amelia Bowden"
________________________________________
Planning Technician
"Original signed by Christine Carter"
_______________________________________________
"Original signed by Frank Quinn"
_______________________________________________
"Original signed by J.L. (Jim) Rule"
_______________________________________________
Appendix B – Subdivision Plan
-3-
6
BCP 7889
130 29
PARK
130 13
130 09
Subject P roperties
E 1/2 2
25
239 92
239 70
130 05
239 30
BC S 4 198
239 26
239 21
239 15
238 90
239 01
.
*LMP 22960
239 05
238 65
238 79
P 7417
4
3
2
130 37
130 21
4
3
24 0 S T.
BCP 42732
P 64261
2
1
A
7
5
238 82
5
4
3
129 54
24
P 7794
P 7794
P 25056
B
(P 7417)
129 33
9
238 5
1
238 7
C
(P 7417)
P 10335
P 10335
7
46
6
1
238 9
11
5
87
4/
12
9
90
58
23
90
17
5
23
P 63118
Sca le: 1:1,5 00
5
92
4
9
23
23
District of Mis sion
City of Pitt
Meadows
91
P 26297
´
P 63118
45
91
26
23
VE
$33(1',;$
130 45
^
District of
Langley
23930/50-130th Ave
CORPORATION OF
THE DISTRICT OF
MAPLE RIDGE
P L A N NIN G D E P A RT M E N T
DATE: D ec 19, 2012 2012-026-VP
FR AS ER
R.
BY: J V
APPENDIX B
TO:
DATE:
January 7, 2013
Committee of the Whole
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Disbursements for the month ended November 30, 2012
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Council has authorized all voucher payments to be approved by the Mayor or Acting Mayor and a
Finance Manager. Council authorizes the vouchers for the following period through Council resolution.
The disbursement summary for the past period is attached for information. Expenditure details are
available by request through the Finance Department.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the “disbursements as listed below for the month ended November 30, 2012 now be approved”.
GENERAL
PAYROLL
PURCHASE CARD
$
$
$
$
6,529,936
2,490,880
133,556
9,154,372
DISCUSSION:
The adoption of the Five Year Consolidated Financial Plan has appropriated funds and
provided authorization for expenditures to deliver municipal services.
The disbursements are for expenditures that are provided in the financial plan.
b) Community Communications:
The citizens of Maple Ridge are informed on a routine monthly basis of financial
disbursements.
1131
c) Business Plan / Financial Implications:
Highlights of larger items included in Financial Plan or Council Resolution




Capilano Highway Services – 126 Avenue watermain replacement
G.V. Water District – water consumption Aug 1-28/12
Tag Construction Ltd – Abernethy Way intersection improvements
Wilco Civil Inc – Deer Fern Park & Cedar Park construction
$
$
$
$
207,805
802,288
510,168
178,151
d) Policy Implications:
Approval of the disbursements by Council is in keeping with corporate governance practice.
CONCLUSIONS:
The disbursements for the month ended November 30, 2012 have been reviewed and are in order.
______________________________________________
Prepared by: G’Ann Rygg
Accounting Clerk II
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Trevor Thompson, BBA, CGA
Manager of Financial Planning
_______________________________________________
Approved by: Paul Gill, BBA, CGA
GM – Corporate & Financial Services
_______________________________________________
gmr
MONTHLY DISBURSEMENTS - NOVEMBER 2012
VENDOR NAME
655287 BC Ltd
Accent Glass Ltd
Aecom Canada Ltd
Aplin & Martin Consultants Ltd
BC Hydro
BC SPCA
BFI Canada Vancouver
Bloom Holdings Ltd
Boileau Electric & Pole Ltd
CUPE Local 622
Canada Pipe Company Ltd
Capilano Highway Services
Chelsea Park Holdings Ltd
Chevron Canada Ltd
Coast Water Systems Inc
Columbia Bitulithic Ltd
Creative Transportation
Fitness Edge
Flynn Canada Ltd
Frazer Excavation Ltd
Fuseforward International Inc
Garmar Holdings Ltd
Greater Vanc Water District
DESCRIPTION OF PAYMENT
Security refund
Leisure Centre energy saving window blinds
Glass services: Fire Department - homeowner costs
Leisure Centre
Municipal Hall
Randy Herman Building
South Bonson Community Centre
Whonnock Lake Community Centre
National benchmarking initiative
River Road railway review
Multi-use pathway design along 122 Avenue
Electricity
Contract payment Nov
Waste disposal Sep & Oct
Security refund
Maintenance: 224th Street pump station
228th & 119th junction box
232nd & 132nd transformer switch & genset
256th Street water tower
3rd floor Tower
Albion Sports Park
Banners
Cliff Avenue Street Lights
Hammond Community Centre
Haney House
Leisure Centre
Memorial Park
Merkley Park
Municipal Hall
PLC cabinets
RCMP
Rock Ridge water tower
Street lights
Westend entrance sign
Dues - pay periods 12/22 & 12/23
124 Ave watermain replacement
126 Ave watermain replacement
Security refund
Gasoline & Diesel fuel
Sewer flowmeter chamber - landfill
Duraphalt
Traffic count program
Fitness classes & programs
RCMP roof replacement
Development deficiencies funded from developer securities
Ditch cleaning
See-It annual subscription
Security refund
Water consumption Aug 1-28/12
AMOUNT
674,838
14,110
1,261
302
231
81
505
203
20,160
1,680
165
174
4,787
17,964
378
90
445
10,080
2,130
539
848
215
207
720
765
648
217
1,283
204
1,583
437
31,290
10,125
16,693
21,840
34,059
102,005
27,527
17,269
30,000
43,880
23,300
22,993
207,805
100,000
83,649
18,241
35,432
16,856
37,669
68,904
41,415
17,920
16,140
802,288
Greater Vancouver Regional Dis
Imperial Paving
Inprotect Systems Inc
Interprovincial Traffic Serv
Jacks Automotive & Welding
Manulife Financial
Maple Ridge & PM Arts Council
McEachern Harris & Watkins
Medical Services Plan
Microserve
Municipal Insurance Assoc
Municipal Pension Plan BC
Newlands Lawn & Garden Mainten
Pacific Ace Sports Surfaces
Pacific Parklands Foundation
Paul Bunyan Tree Services
Popular Landscaping & Gardenin
Rainbow Paving Ltd
Raincity Janitorial Serv Ltd
Receiver General For Canada
Remdal Painting & Restoration
RG Arenas (Maple Ridge) Ltd
Ridge Meadows Recycling Society
RJ Construction
Ross Systems
School Community Connections
Scottish Line Painting Ltd
Strohmaiers Excavating Ltd
Sun Life Assurance Company
T & T Demolition Ltd
Tag Construction Ltd
Targa Contracting Ltd
2012 grant in lieu
Mosquito control program
Water sample analysis
2012 Paving Program
Roadworks
Cycling transportation signage
Abernethy Way Ph2 intersections
Fire Dept equipment repairs
Employee benefits premiums
Arts Centre contract payment Nov
Program revenue Oct
Theatre rental & catering
Security refund
Employee medical & health premiums
Fibre connectors
Phones & Licences
Server management interface
Wireless access points
Insurance deductibles
Employee benefits premiums
Grass cutting
Asphalt replacement at various parks
Kanaka Creek Watershed Stewardship Centre
Roadside overhead brushing
Tree removal at various locations
Landscaping services for Silver Valley
224 Street road & sidewalk improvements
Janitorial services:
Firehalls
Library
Municipal Hall
Operations
RCMP
Employer/Employee remit PP12/22 & PP12/23
Painting:
Hammond Community Centre
Leisure Centre
Maple Ridge Park
Ice rental Oct
Curling rink operating expenses Sept
Monthly contract for recycling Nov
Weekly recycling
Litter pick-up contract
3rd floor offices
Rental property fencing
Annual maintenance fees
Community gardens project funding
Road painting
Ansell Street sanitary sewer local area service
Property tax refund
Building foundation demolition at 21428 Dewdney Trunk Road
House demolition at 23448 105 Street
Abernethy Way intersection improvements
119 Avenue road & drainage improvements
13,971
470
2,240
78,530
13,466
48,007
2,785
3,038
5,813
7,681
15,373
5,708
8,470
12,734
6,637
6,423
3,130
3,151
4,638
3,320
3,527
198
40,964
179
61,364
3,188
104,180
487
3,601
16,333
980
5,706
15,423
16,681
91,996
22,341
103,656
20,886
135,316
53,830
268,164
32,880
34,575
17,634
376,511
21,885
41,826
30,000
21,204
15,702
29,030
30,825
536,688
41,342
64,552
108,268
17,313
79,393
22,500
29,533
17,763
42,720
21,129
510,168
20,106
Total Energy Systems Ltd
Total Power Inc
Urban Systems
Warrington PCI Management
Wilco Civil Inc
Young, Anderson - Barristers
Disbursements In Excess $15,000
Disbursements Under $15,000
Total Payee Disbursements
Payroll
Purchase Cards - Payment
Total Disbursements November 2012
Maintenance: Leisure Centre
Library
Maple Ridge Museum
Municipal Hall
Operations
Pitt Meadows Heritage Hall
RCMP
Whonnock Community Centre
Maintenance: Firehalls
Library
Municipal Hall
Operations
Pitt Meadows Family Rec. Centre
Pump Stations
RCMP
Tamarack Lane
Trails Edge
Whonnock Community Centre
Traffic calming
Transportation plan update
Advance for Tower common costs
Deer Fern Park construction
Cedar Park construction
Professional fees Oct
PP12/22, PP12/23 & PP12/24
GMR
\\mr.corp\docs\Fin\05-Finance\1630-Accts-Payable\01-General\AP Disbursements\2012\[Monthly_Council_Report_2012.xlsx]NOV'12
263
585
276
7,690
1,634
829
2,601
56,006
24,859
437
504
168
168
1,774
168
11784.25
168
698
702
168
3,499
17,628
103,631
74,520
95,180
16,303
21,127
60,000
178,151
40,373
5,748,277
781,658
6,529,936
2,490,880
133,556
9,154,372

PDF - Maple Ridge

Transcription

Similar documents

Open living room

BIRKDALE VILLAGE | HUNTERSVILLE, NC MIXED-USE

REAL PROPERTY TAX RATES IN HAWAII

Get the pdf HERE.

Residential Fire Safety Kits

Rafco Exceptional Service

Floodwatch®

Nanaimo Regional District Letter to the Honorable Mary Polak Re

Specialist Residential Risks