O E ASE - Mission, British Columbia · O E ASE lr Cnl And vd Otbr 24, 20 — 6:0 p.. Cnl Chbr 864...

M iLD sl S TsR ILI CoT nO F

ON THE FRASER

Regular Council Agenda - Revised

October 24, 2011 — 6:30 p.m.Council Chambers

8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC

1. REMEMBRANCE DAY CEREMONY

2. PROCLAMATIONS

(a) Veterans' Week — November 5 through 11, 2011Royal Canadian Legion Branch 57

3. DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

(a) Staff Service Recognition PresentationMike Schmidt — 20 years of service

(b) Diane Miller, Executive Director, Fraser Health AuthorityFraser Health Healthier Community Partnership

4. PUBLIC HEARING

Page 3

(a) District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5229-2011-5050(49) (R10- Page 4025 — N & J Developments) — a bylaw to rezone property at 32526,32540 and 32562 Richards Avenue from Rural 16 Zone (RU16) toRural Residential 7 Secondary Dwelling Zone (RR7s)

(b) (i) District of Mission Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw 5247- Page 202011-4052(17) (R11-007 — Keystone Architecture & Planning Ltd.)— a bylaw to redesignate property at 32921 — 14 th Avenue fromUrban Residential to Urban Compact — Multiple Family

(ii) District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5248-2011-5050(55)(R11-007 — Keystone Architecture & Planning Ltd.) — a bylaw torezone property at 32921 — 14 th Avenue from Urban ResidentialZone (R558) to Multiple Family 40 Townhouse Zone (MT40)

5. NEW BUSINESS

(a) Gaudin Creek Diversion Costs Page 39

6. BYLAWS

MOTION: That the readings of all bylaws listed below be considered forthird reading following the public hearing.

(a) District of Mission. Zoning Amending Bylaw 5229-2011-5050(49)(R10-025 — N & J Developments) — a bylaw to rezone property at32526, 32540 and 32562 Richards Avenue from Rural 16 Zone(RU16) to Rural Residential 7 Secondary Dwelling Zone (RR7s)

(b) District of Mission Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw 5247-2011-4052(17) (R11-007 — Keystone Architecture & Planning Ltd.) —a bylaw to redesignate property at 32921 — 14 th Avenue from UrbanResidential to Urban Compact — Multiple Family

(c) District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5248-2011-5050(55)(R11-007 — Keystone Architecture & Planning Ltd.) — a bylaw torezone property at 32921 — 14 th Avenue from Urban ResidentialZone (R558) to Multiple Family 40 Townhouse Zone (MT40)

7. QUESTION PERIOD (on new business only)

Third Reading

Third Reading

Third Reading

2

8. ADJOURNMENT

THIS INFORMATION COLLECTED FOR INTERNAL OFFICE USE ONLY

Address:

City/Province:

Portal Code: Telephone:

[

med: m / : oc-r07, 2-0ff

Date Confir

Delegaeon Confirmed to Appear

Confirmed by: 1iT ---

MissionON THE FRASER

REQUEST TO APPEAR AS A DELEGATION

Date: OCTOBER 19, 2011

To: Director of Corporate Administration

I hereby request permission to appear as a delegation beforeDistrict of Mission Mayor andCouncil with reference to the following topic:

FRASER HEALTH HEALTHIER COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP

I understand that the deadline for submission of the request, including any presentation orsupporting material, is 4:30 p.m. on the Monday preceding the date of the meeting and thatonce my appearance has been confirmed, I will be allotted a maximum of 10 minutes to makemy presentation.

Name: DIANE MILLER

3

GVAPIVVITTMNIQUOSI to Ifspear an a cleissimon.eloc

JEST PROPERTIES

ro

DISTRICT OF MISSION ZONING AMENDING BYLAW 5229-2011-5050(49) (R10-025) — N. & J. Developments Ltd.

This bylaw proposes to amend District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 by amending thezoning of the following legally described properties:

Parcel Identifier: 010-073-353 Lot 1 Section 5 Township 18 New Westminster District Plan20926

Parcel Identifier: 023-691-794 Lot 2 Section 5 Township 18 New Westminster District PlanLMP32001

Parcel Identifier: 023-691-786 Lot 1 Section 5 Township 18 New Westminster District PlanLMP32001

from RU 16 (Rural 16) zone to RR7s (Rural Residential 7 Secondary Dwelling) zone.

The location of the subject properties is 32526, 32540 and 32562 Richards Avenue and isshown on the following maps:

4

SUBJECT PROPERTIES

14'

The purpose of the proposed amendment is to accommodate the subsequent subdivision ofthe subject properties into ten (10) lots of a minimum 0.7 hectare (1.73 ac.) lot size.

MissionON THE FRASER

Planning DepartmentMemorandum

5

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZONR10-025

To: Chief Administrative OfficerFrom: PlannerDate: August 22, 2011Subject: Rezoning Application R10-025 - (N & J Developments) - 32526, 32540 and

32562 Richards Avenue

Recommendation

1. That, in accordance with Rezoning Application R10-025 (N & J Developments), theCorporate Officer prepare a bylaw to amend District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 byrezoning the property located at 32526, 32540 and 32562 Richards Avenue and legallydescribed as:

Parcel Identifier: 010-073-353 Lot 1, Section 5, Township 18, New Westminster District,Plan 20926

Parcel Identifier: 023-691-794 Lot 2, Section 5, Township 18, New Westminster District,Plan LMP32001

Parcel Identifier: 023-691-786 Lot 1, Section 5, Township 18, New Westminster District,Plan LMP32001

from Rural 16 (RU16) to Rural Residential 7 (RR7);

that the bylaw be considered for first and second readings at the Regular Council meetingon August 22, 2011; and

that following such readings, the bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing on September 12,2011.

2. That the five percent parkland provision in Section 941 of the Local Government Act beapplied as cash-in-lieu of parkland to subdivision file S10-012.

3. That two road extensions be named:

• That extension of road running south from Richards Avenue be named VerchereStreet;

■ That portion of road running west from Verchere Street be named Vollans Avenue.

4. That the applicant be required to provide an arborist report prior to Public Hearing toaddress all significant tree removal that will be required as part of development activities.

Summary of Proposal

An application has been received from N & J Developments to rezone three properties locatedat 32526, 32540 and 32562 Richards Avenue (Map 1) from Rural 16 (RU16) to RuralResidential 7 (RR7). The proposed rezoning is to facilitate a ten (10) lot subdivision; the draftsite plan is attached as (Plan 1). The development roadway configuration will provide for properaccess to lands beyond and provide for future roadway network options. Two existingresidences are slated to be retained as part of the development proposal.

PAGE 1 OF 12

Site Description and Neighbourhood Context

The three properties which comprise the development site have a total area of 8.92 hectares(22.04 acres). The development site generally slopes in a westward direction and there arethree existing homes present. 32526 Richards Avenue has a mobile home located close toRichards Avenue which will be removed as part of the development process. Two residences tobe retained located on 32562 and 32540 Richards Avenue are accessed by a long graveldriveway that follows the general direction of the proposed new roadway servicing thesubdivision (Map 2).

The overall residential neighbourhood character along Richards is comprised of largerproperties which are heavily treed with single family residences. The majority of surroundingproperties are generally considered rural with a number of properties further developed to RuralResidential densities within the last five to ten years (Zoning Map).

Zoning

The development site is zoned Rural 16 (RU16) which permits a minimum lot size of 1.6hectares (3.95 acres). This rezoning application proposes to rezone the three properties whichcomprise the development site to Rural Residential 7 (RR7) which permits a minimum lot size of0.7 hectares (1.72 acres). The intent of the RR7 zone is to provide for one unit residentialdwellings outside the urban development area.

Official Community Plan (OCP) Designation

The proposed zone (Rural Residential 7) is permitted within the Rural Residential OCPdesignation. The proposed Rural Residential development does not require an OCPamendment and is in keeping with the future densities envisioned within the OCP. Allsurrounding properties are also designated as Rural Residential within the OCP.

Tree Retention and Replanting

A recent aerial photo provides a clear indication of the tree cover on the property. Generallyspeaking, the property has moderate tree cover comprising of mainly larger evergreen trees(Map 2). According to the applicant, no significant trees (greater than 20 centimetres diametermeasured at breast height) have been removed as part of the development process; however,additional trees may be removed to provide for building envelopes, septic areas and roadwayconstruction. Planning staff recommend that the applicant provide an arborist report to addressall proposed significant tree removal prior to Public Hearing.

In addition to all significant tree removal, in accordance with the District of Mission TreeRetention Policy, the applicant is required to plant two (2) trees for each lot created bysubdivision. Thus, the applicant must provide an additional twenty (20) trees above and beyondany planned tree removal as part of the development requirements.

Environmental Protection

District of Mission watercourse mapping indicates that there are two (2) watercourses that flowwestward and one (1) driveway-side ditch that flows southward (Watercourse Map).Accordingly, the applicant provided a biologist report which is to outline all environmentalprotective measures related to watercourses that must be completed through the subdivisionprocess. In addition, the applicant also provided a legal survey from a British Columbia LandSurveyor (B.C.L.S.) of both watercourses. Both the surveyor and the biologist determined, intheir professional opinion that all watercourses did not connect through overland flows todownstream watercourses. Mike Younie, Manager of Environmental Services has reviewed thefindings of the applicant's professional biologist and agrees with the findings (that there are no

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON PAGE 2 OF 12R11-025

6

watercourses on the property that require protection through the zoning bylaw). Furthermore,the Department of Fisheries and Oceans visited the development site and did not provide anyconclusion on the presence of significant watercourses and left the findings to be determined bya professional biologist. Given that a professional biologist has determined that all watercourseson the development site do not connect to downstream fish habitat, the zoning bylaw (Section108 — Environmental Protection) does not require any specific protection measures ordevelopment activity setbacks. The roadway designs must ensure that all surface water runoffmust be drained to roadside ditches that utilize best management practices to reduce peak flowrunoff during storm events.

Development Abstract

The development proposal entails the creation of 10 lots which will be accessed from a newlyconstructed roadway that extends southward from Richards Avenue. The applicant will berequired to build a new road to a full rural municipal standard. Each lot will have a minimum lotsize of 0.7 hectares (1.73 acres) and each lot will be serviced by private well and septic field.The subdivision control bylaw requires that each lot provide adequate well water quality andquantity and that each lot has proper soil conditions for septic disposal (Plan 1).

Through the survey of the development site, it was determined that there is an accessorybuilding located on 32562 Richards Avenue that encroaches onto the property to the east (Map3). As required by the Land Titles Act, all aspects of a subdivision must conform to all applicableland use bylaws; therefore the structure must be removed or moved in order to attain therequired setbacks of the proposed RR7 zoning. A resolution to this issue must be addressedprior to adoption of the zone amending bylaw and has been included within the zone adoptionrequirements section within this report.

The subdivision involves road to be constructed towards the western properties. Unconstructedroad dedication will be required on the southern portion of the property to provide roadwaynetwork options for future subdivisions. The roadways, both constructed and unconstructed, willensure that properties within the immediate area are provided the opportunity for futuresubdivision. Specifically, the property to the west (which has considerable developmentpotential) will benefit from the road construction that will be provided by the developmentproposal.

As the proposed density is consistent with the densities outlined in the Official Community Planand that the development will not adversely affect local watercourses, planning staff support thedevelopment proposal. Additionally, the new roadway will provide for improved potential accessfor properties within the general vicinity of the subject property.

Community Amenity Contribution

It is recognized that residential development imposes a unique financial burden on thecommunity by creating a need or demand for new/upgraded public facilities or amenities. Inorder to address this unique financial burden, rezoning applicants are requested to make acontribution to the District's Community Amenity Reserve Fund for new/upgraded publicfacilities or amenities. The applicant has agreed to contribute $2,680.00 per unit as part of thisrezoning application. Accordingly, the applicant has agreed to provide $18,760.00 (7 additionallots x $2680.00 per lot).

Parkland

The development• proposal was forwarded to Ray Herman, Director of Parks, Recreation andCulture in order to obtain internal comment on the proposal. As the development proposal issomewhat distant from higher densities, the Director of Parks, Recreation and Culture


7

recommends that the District of Mission should accept cash-in-lieu of parkland. The amountpaid will be in accordance with Section 941 of the Local Government Act and will not exceed 5%of the value of the land being proposed for subdivision.

Internal Comments

Engineering Department

The application was forwarded the District of Mission Engineering Department. The EngineeringDepartment has reviewed the proposal has stated that "from an engineering point of view therezoning application may proceed to final adoption" (Appendix I).

External Referrals

Utility Agencies (B.C. Hydro, Fortis BC, Telus)

The development proposal has been sent to all utility agencies as part of the subdivisionprocess.

Road Naming

The new roads within the proposed development will be named in accordance with STR. 28Street Naming. Roads that generally extend in a North-South direction should be designated asStreets. Accordingly, the proposed road running south from Richards Avenue will be namedVerchere Street. The Verchere Family were long time Mission residents; their biographysynopsis is provided below:

• Anthony (Tony) and Francis. Tony was born in 1868 in India and died in 1918; Franciswas born in 1865 and died in 1946. They came to Mission in 1893

• Anthony was a clerk for Council in 1894; 1896, appointed clerk again; 1916, he wasassessor, secretary and collector; 1917, secretary; 1918, secretary.

• Anthony was a business man (notary public, real estate and fire insurance) and he hadan office on Washington Street (now called Main Street); he was president of theMission Branch of the Canadian Patriotic Fund — taking much pride in looking after wivesof soldiers and their dependents by sending them regular monthly cheques

• Francis and his family were the first family to settle in the Ferndale area. He farmedmixed cattle and fruit on 40 acres

• Francis had two wives: first wife Winnie Hargitt died and he later married her sister FloraSharpe (widow)

• Francis eventually turned his farm over to his son Frank who was also a councillor in theDistrict of Mission and School Trustee

As seen in the draft plan of subdivision (Plan 1), a road will be constructed westward fromVerchere Street within the subdivision. The street naming policy requires that roads thatgenerally extend in an East-West direction should be designated as Avenues. Accordingly, theproposed road running west from Verchere Street will be named Vollans Avenue. HerbertVollans was a long-time Mission resident; his biography synopsis is provided below:

• Herbert was born in 1869 and no information on date of death• He came to Mission in 1891• He worked 23 years for CPR becoming road master of all terminals west of Pitt River• He married Annie Elizabeth Dowding in 1903• He was Secretary of Municipal Council; secretary of the school board; member of

numerous committees pertaining to agriculture development and organization• He belonged to Mission City Lodge


• Herbert and Elizabeth were residents of Mission until 1908

Public Hearing Information Package

In accordance with Council Policy LAN.50 — PRE-PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATIONPACKAGES, a package will be produced containing material related to the developmentapplication.

Requirements Prior to Public Hearing

■ Planning Department Receipt and Approval of a professionally prepared Arborist Report;

Requirements Prior to Adoption of the Zone Amending Bylaw

• Receipt of the Community Amenity contribution in the amount of $18,760 (7 Lots X$2,680.00);

• Confirmation that the encroaching structure on proposed Lot G has been:

a. moved with confirmation provided by a B.C.L.S. survey that the structure's setbacksare in accordance with the zoning bylaw; or

b. removed/demolished.

• Any other items that Council may require resulting from the Public Hearing or Councilconsideration of the application.

Erik Wilhelm

GACOMDEV\ERIK\WORKING DEVELOPMENT PLANNING STAFF REPORTS \RICHARDS AVENUER10-025.DOCX

9


Plan 1Draft Plan ofSubdivision

Proposed Verchere Street

Proposed Vollans Avenue

Road Reservation -Unconstructed

Legend:Hatched portion of roadway is to be constructed by the applicant (with proper cul-de-sac onthe southernmost portion of roadway)

10

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON

PAGE 6 OF 12R11-025

947740

32370/ 9452 /

MAP 110068

10014

3254932417

9928

32384 32434

32468

9826

32751

32741

32779

32772

875632714

32526

973232788

9716

32642

4032540

32672 . 32794

9608 3268632648

32656

32341

SUBJECT PROPERTIES


3233132351 947

32340

3249532413 32501

32625

N-

R7

RR7

ZONING

12

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON

PAGE 8 OF 12R11-025

WATERCOURSE / TOPO

13

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON

PAGE 9 OF 12R11-025

14

Map 2

Aerial Photo ofDevelopment Site

2011 Google

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON

PAGE 10 OF 12R11-025

Appendix I

ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT REZONING COMMENTS

FILE: R10-025CIVIC ADDRESS: 32526, 32540 and 32562 Richards Avenue

1. DOMESTIC WATER REQUIREMENTS:

No municipal water available. Developer to provide potable water for each parcel anda hydrogeology report to confirm that the well/s meet the requirements of theSubdivision Control Bylaw.

2. SANITARY SEWER REQUIREMENTS:

No municipal sanitary sewer available.

3. STORM SEWER REQUIREMENTS:

None.

4. ROAD WORK REQUIREMENTS:

None.

RECOMMENDATION

From an engineering point of view the rezoning application may proceed to final adoption.

15


Accessory Structure whichencroaches onto

neighboring lands to theeast

16

Map 3Encroachment of Accessory Structure Survey

Lot G

See Map 2 for overall context - cluster of structures located on the northeast of the development site

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON

PAGE 12 OF 12R11-025

M DISTRICT OF

ON THE ERASER


17


To: Chief Administrative Officer

From: Planner

Date: September 6, 2011

Subject: Rezoning Application R10-025 — Amendment to Target Zone

Recommendation

1. That the second reading of zone amending bylaw 5229-2011-5050(49) be rescinded and amendedto read:

That, in accordance with Rezoning Application R10-025 (N & J Developments), the CorporateOfficer prepare a bylaw to amend District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 by rezoning theproperty located at 32526, 32540 and 32562 Richards Avenue and legally described as:

Parcel Identifier: 010-073-353 Lot 1, Section 5, Township 18, New Westminster District, Plan 20926

Parcel Identifier: 023-691-794 Lot 2, Section 5, Township 18, New Westminster District, PlanLMP32001

Parcel Identifier: 023-691-786 Lot 1, Section 5, Township 18, New Westminster District, PlanLMP32001

from Rural 16 (RU16) zone to Rural Residential 7 Secondary Dwelling (RR7s) zone; and

2. That the bylaw be considered for second reading as amended at the Regular Council meeting onSeptember 6, 2011; and

3. That following such reading, the bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing on October 24, 2011.

Background and Planning Analysis

Development application R10-025 is associated with the rezoning of the properties located at 32526,32540 and 32562 Richards Avenue (Map 1). The purpose of the rezoning application is toaccommodate the subdivision of the subject properties into ten (10) individual residential lots.

The zone amending bylaw received 1 st and 2nd readings on August 22, 2011 and the public hearing wassubsequently scheduled for September 12, 2011.

The Planning Department was made aware by the applicant that there was an oversight within therecommendation put forward by staff. The recommendation (given on August 22, 2011) outlined that thesubject properties be rezoned to the Rural Residential 7 Zone. However, the applicant had originallyapplied for the site to be rezoned to Rural Residential Secondary Dwelling 7 zone (RR7s) to allow forsecondary dwelling uses on each of the properties within the subdivision. As the standingrecommendation does not permit secondary dwelling options, the Planning Department puts forward arevised recommendation that reflects the applicant's original request to Council.

After considering the application in terms of allowing secondary dwelling uses with the proposed lots andthe Rural Residential 7 Secondary Dwelling (RR7s) zone's consistency with OCP objectives, PlanningDepartment staff recommend that the zone amending bylaw be amended to allow for secondary dwellinguses.

Erik Wilhelm, PlannerG:\COMDEV\ERIK\Working Development Planning Staff Reports R10-025_N and J Developments.docx

PAGE 1 OF 2

MAP 1

18

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON

PAGE 2 OF 2

M DISTRICT OF

ON THE FRASER /006111PLANNING DEPARTMENT


October 12, 2011

Dear Owner/Occupant:

Re: Public Hearing Notification for Rezoning Application R10-025 (N&J DevelopmentsLtd.) - 32526, 32540 and 32562 Richards Avenue

As a neighbouring resident or property owner to the subject properties located at 32526, 32540and 32562 Richards Avenue, you are invited to attend the Public Hearing and make known anycomments that you may have.

The Public Hearing will be held as part of the Regular Council meeting on the evening ofMonday, October 24, 2011 in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Hall, 8645 Stave LakeStreet, Mission, BC at 6:30 p.m.

Reference should be made to Item # 3 in the enclosed Public Hearing notice.

Additional information may be obtained by contacting the District of Mission PlanningDepartment at (604) 820-3748.

Yours truly

Sharon FletcherDIRECTOR OF PLANNING

Encl.

G:\COMDEV\PUBLIC HEARINGS & PUBLIC INPUT MTGS PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION LETTERS\R10-025 (N&J) NOTN OWN OCC,DOCX

P.O. Box 20, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, B.C. V2V 4L9Phone (604) 820.3748 Fax (604) 826-795 I & (604) 820.37 15 Web Site: www.mission.ca E•mail: [email protected]

19

DISTRICT OF MISSION OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDING BYLAW 5247-2011-4052(17) (R11-007) - Keystone Architecture & Planning Ltd.

This bylaw proposes to amend District of Mission Official Community Plan 4052-2008 for thefollowing legally described property:

Parcel Identifier: 011-402-857 Lot "A" Except: Firstly: East 102.31 Feet Secondly: PartSubdivided by Plan 16787, Section 28 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 8999

from Urban Residential to Urban Compact/Multiple Family.

The location of the subject property is 32921 14 th Avenue and is shown on the followingmaps:

20

CHERRY AVE

HAWTHORNE AVE

WHIDDEN AVE8

5 BEST (18th) AVEBRACKEN

MYRTLE AVEj ARBUTUS ,),..r.i1HILL AVE I

BAKERVIEWm BRUCE co'

LI. -at.'ccORCHID ciCRES

, ccco (zp ,

5• _ . ORCHID DR SUBJECT PROPERTY(EAST] .

ca

12th AVE 9611th AVE c0 •

1 10th AVE 10th RL

P.

N.

8

The purpose of the proposed amendment is to accommodate a multi-family development.

DISTRICT OF MISSION ZONING AMENDING BYLAW 5248-2011-5050(55) (R11-007) -Keystone Architecture & Planning Ltd.

This bylaw proposes to amend District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 by amending thezoning of the following legally described property:

Parcel Identifier: 011-402-857 Lot "A" Except: Firstly: East 102.31 Feet Secondly: PartSubdivided by Plan 16787, Section 28 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 8999

from Urban Residential 558 (R558) zone to Multiple Family 40 Townhouse (MT40) zone.

The location of the subject property is 32921 14th Avenue and is shown on the precedingmaps.

The purpose of the proposed amendment is to accommodate a 23-unit townhousedevelopment.

Mi3sISTsRilOT nOF

cK/1ON THE FRASER FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEVR11 -007/DP11-004/DP11-005


21

To: Chief Administrative OfficerFrom: PlannerDate: October 3, 2011Subject: Rezoning Application R11-007 & Development Permit Applications DP11-004

& DP11-005 (Keystone Architecture & Planning Ltd.) — 32921 14 th Avenue

Complete Application Date

Staff received all required information from the applicant and external agencies on August 22,2011.

Recommendation

1. That in accordance with Rezoning Application R11-007 (Keystone Architecture & PlanningLtd.), the Corporate Officer prepare a bylaw to amend District of Mission Official CommunityPlan Bylaw 4052-2008 by re-designating the property located at 32921 14 th Avenue andlegally described as:

Parcel Identifier: 011-402-857, Lot "A" Except: Firstly: East 102.31 Feet, Secondly: PartSubdivided by Plan 16787, Section 28, Township 17, New Westminster District Plan 8999

from Urban Residential to Urban Compact/Multiple Family;2. That the bylaw be considered for first reading at the Regular Council Meeting on October 3,

2011,

3. That following such a reading, the bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing on October 24,2011;

4. That in accordance with Rezoning Application R11-007 (Keystone Architecture & PlanningLtd.), the Corporate Officer prepare a bylaw to amend District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 by rezoning the property located at 32921 14th Avenue and legally described as:

Parcel Identifier: 011-402-857, Lot "A" Except: Firstly: East 102.31 Feet, Secondly: PartSubdivided by Plan 16787, Section 28, Township 17, New Westminster District Plan 8999

from Urban Residential 558 (R558) zone to Multiple Family 40 Townhouse (MT40) zone;

5. That the bylaw be considered for first reading at the Regular Council Meeting on October 3,2011;

6. That following such a reading, the bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing on October 24,2011;

7. That upon due consideration of Sections 879 and 881 of the Local Government Act,consultation referrals go forward to:

(a) School District #75 (Mission Public Schools);8. That Development Permit Application DP11-005, in the name of William Blakeston, to provide

conformity to the Official Community Plan guidelines respecting building form and characterfor a proposed townhouse development on the property located at 32921 14 th Avenue beforwarded to Council for public input on October 24, 2011; and

PAGE 1 ,

9. That in accordance with Section 882 of the Local Government Act, Council has consideredthe District of Mission Official Community Plan amending bylaw in conjunction with theDistrict of Mission's Financial Plan (includes Capital Expenditure Plan and OperatingExpenditure Plan) and Waste Management Plan.

Background

An application has been received from Keystone Architecture & Planning Ltd. to amend theOfficial Community Plan (OCP) and rezone the property located at 32921 14 th Avenue to allowconsideration of a 23 unit townhouse development (Map 1).

In addition to the OCP amendment and rezoning application, development permits to ensure theoverall form and character of the development and slope stability have also been submitted bythe applicant.

It is noted that all the required information was received from the applicant on August 22, 2011and this application is considered a complete application as of that date.Site Characteristics and Neighbourhood Character

The subject property is on the northern side of 14 th Avenue and slopes upwards from theroadway. The site is bound on all sides by residentially developed properties and there iscurrently a house and two outbuildings on the property.

The surrounding neighbourhood character is primarily residential in nature. Centennial Park islocated to the southeast of the development site and there is an apartment complex withassociated townhouses located to the southwest. 14 th Avenue is a major roadway and exhibitshigher traffic volumes that other local roadways in the surrounding area and there are nosidewalks contiguous to the property.

Environmental Management and Tree Retention

District of Mission mapping and a planning staff site visit have confirmed that there are nowatercourses or other environmentally sensitive areas on the property.

The applicant submitted a professional arborist in an effort to retain as many significant trees aspossible. The arborist determined that 26 trees on the site can remain and should be protectedthroughout the development process. The landscape architect incorporated the arborist'sfindings and provided an overall landscape plan that incorporates all 26 trees to be retained(Plan 2). The planning department determined that the development provides appropriate treeretention given all the requirements for site grading, in-ground servicing, building envelopes andinternal roads.

OCP Designation

Background

Currently, the OCP designation for the development site is Urban Residential; the applicant hasrequested an OCP designation change from Urban Residential to Urban Compact/MultipleFamily.

The properties on the south side of 14 th Avenue are designated Urban Compact/Multiple Family.The OCP also identifies the majority of the properties south of 14th Avenue between the HomeStreet Corridor to the east and the Cedar Street Corridor to the west as Urban Compact/MultipleFamily. Purposefully, these properties were designated Urban Compact/Multiple Family to takeadvantage of easy access, existing services, available transit, relative connectivity to thedowntown and utilization of nearby amenities such as Centennial Park and the Leisure Centre.

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 2 OF 17R11-007/DP11-004 /DP11-005

22

Property Specific

The subject property is bound by eight (8) properties and has limited frontage for a larger 1.48acre site (Map 1). The surrounding development, location of pre-existing roads (Bruce Avenue tothe northeast and Bluebell Street to the northwest), and the slope of the property do not lendthemselves to development of the property into conventional urban residential lots. A multiplefamily development which allows for internal roads that are insular to the development providesfor the highest and best use of the site.

The planning department supports the OCP amendment for the following reasons:

• The site's location on a major road;

• The site's access to transit;

• The slope of the site, surrounding properties and existing roadways lend themselves tomultiple family development on the site;

• The development provides ample setbacks and landscaping that would not adverselyaffect neighbouring properties;

• The townhouse development provides compatible intensification of a developed area inorder to take advantage of existing service capacity;

• The proposed townhouse complex is considered a low/medium density within theconfines of the available multiple family zones; and

• The development will provide for proper sidewalks and roadway upgrades on the northside of 14th Avenue.

Zoning

The subject property is currently zoned R558 and the surrounding neighbourhood is zonedR558. A large property located southwest of the subject property is under a land use contractand provides for a midrise apartment and townhouse complex.

The rezoning application is to rezone the property from the Urban Residential (R558) zone whichallows single family home development to the Multiple Family 40 Townhouse (MT40) zone whichallows townhouses. The intent of the MT40 zone is to allow ground oriented townhouses with acombination of two and three storey units. The zoning bylaw permits a range of densitiespermitted within multiple family zones which range from 12 units per acre and 32 units per acre.As the area of the subject property is 0.6 ha. (1.48 ac.), the proposed development equates to 16units per acre which is the maximum density allowed within the MT40 zone.

Development Permit Application DP11-005 (Form and Character)

Unit type and Density

All 23 townhouses within the development are a range of 2 or 3 storey three bedroom units withvarying square footage. Plan 1 provides an indication of the number of units for each buildingwithin the complex and the following table provides an indication of the development typeprovided within the complex:

Unit Type Square Footage Number of UnitsA 1418 16

B 1600 5

C 1674 2 (Adaptable Units)

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 3 OF 17R11-007/DP11 -004 /DP11-005

23

Landscape Plan

The landscape plan entails the retention of 26 existing trees and provides for ample plantingsthroughout the development, strategically placed decorative pavers and perimeter fencing madeof wood with decorative wrought iron crowns (Plan 2). Particularly, the front of the developmentalong 14 th Avenue will provide for cultured stone fencing and an array of flowering plants and twolarger trees.

Setback Variances

The development requires a number of variances to the MT40 zone setbacks which are outlinedin a letter provided by the applicant (Appendix I). The zoning bylaw requires setbacks within allmultiple family zones of 7.5 metres (24.6 feet) for all side yard and rear lot lines. The requiredsetbacks exist to address all variables that can be present within a multiple family development.Variables such as slope, retaining walls, landscaping, siting, building design, access,neighbouring uses and structures can affect many of the setbacks within a development.Depending on the siting of townhouse structures, these setback areas are often used as amenityspaces for the townhouse developments.

Given that the applicant is providing perimeter wood fencing with wrought iron crowns, ampleplantings on all rear and side yard setbacks and that private amenity spaces are not adverselyaffected by the proposed variances, planning staff supports the proposed setbacks to beincorporated within the development permit. The variances allow the development to maintainthe proposed design while still maintaining the privacy of potentially affected neighbours. Allother building setbacks will maintain the setbacks required within the MT40 zone.

Building Fagades and Siting

Appendix II provides an artist rendering of the southern portion of the development site whileAppendix III displays the elevations for each building within the complex. Briefly stated, it is theplanning department position that the development proposal generally meets or exceeds theOCP's multi-family residential development permit area guidelines. The applicant's architecturefirm worked collaboratively with planning staff to provide for the proposed site plan and buildingdesigns through a number of design alterations. Through a development permit area checklistprocess, planning staff determined that the proposal attains urban design principles of character,scale, massing, viewscapes, pedestrian access, circulation, layout, landscaping, and variety ofbuilding articulations and height as outlined in the OCP.

Housing Affordability and Accessibility

Staff met with the applicant and property, owners regarding affordability and accessibility of theunits proposed for the site. Staff concur with the applicant that townhouses provide relativeaffordability given that townhouse units generally sell for less than single family houses. It isnoted that the units are for market sales and not rental; although investors could rent the units ifthey wished.

As for accessibility, there are two universally accessible units (master bedroom on the main floorand wheelchair accessible rooms throughout the main floor) located adjacent to 14 th Avenue.Although no formal disability appurtenances are slated to be installed by the developer, thesetwo units are considered 'adaptable units' that may easily be modified by a future owner toprovide increased accessibility. Additionally, the complex's shared amenity room will bewheelchair accessible and provide for a dedicated parking spot adjacent to the amenity room.

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 4 OF 17R11-007/DP 11-004 /DP 11-005

24

Parking

The zoning bylaw requires 2 parking stalls per unit plus 0.2 parking stalls per unit for visitorparking. Accordingly, the development provides for 46 parking spaces (located within encloseddouble garages for the residents) and 5 visitor parking spaces which achieve the zoning bylawstandard. It is noted that there is driveway space in front of most of the townhouse units foradditional parking for residents and/or visitors.

Slope Stability — Development Permit (DP11-004)

Given the incline on the property, Levelton Consultants Limited provided a landslide hazardassessment report to address any potential slope stability issues. Staff (through therecommendations of professional private engineers) will ensure that the development will be safefor the use intended as part of the hazardous lands development permit approval process.

Community Amenity Contribution

In accordance with Council Policy LAN.40 — FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS FOR COMMUNITYAMENITIES POLICY, the applicant has submitted a letter volunteering to contribute $2680.00per unit.

Internal Comments

The Fire Department's comments are attached (Appendix IV). Given the comments from theFire Department, the applicant has agreed to sprinkler all units within the development. All otherFire Department requirements will be incorporated into the development and ensured throughthe development permit process. (i.e. form part of the development permit).

The Engineering Department comments are attached (Appendix V). The EngineeringDepartment requires a number of requirements involving installation of municipal water, sanitary,storm sewer services to the development site and roadway improvements with sidewalkconstruction adjacent to the subject property. All engineering requirements must be completedby the applicant; acceptance of a 'volunteering letter' is required prior to adoption of the OCP andzoning bylaw amendments.

Sections 879 and 881 Referrals

When an amendment is proposed to an Official Community Plan, the District of Mission will referthe proposed amendment to the organizations listed below following first reading of the bylaw,subject to provisions set out in Council Policy LAN.47 - Official Community Plan Referral. Theorganizations identified in the policy are as follows:

• Fraser Valley Regional District• District of Maple Ridge;• City of Abbotsford;• First Nations;• School District No. 75;• Ministry of Water Land and Air Protection;• Fraser Health Region;• Ministry of Transportation;• Department of Fisheries and Oceans;• Land Reserve Commission;• Utility Companies and the;• Canadian Pacific Railway.


25

In accordance with the provisions of the policy, Council is to consider the requirement to makereferrals on a case-by-case basis and adopt a resolution to clarify that the referral requirementshave been considered. Considering the referral criteria detailed in Policy LAN.47, referralsneeded for this bylaw amendment will go to:

• School District #75 (Mission Public Schools)

Impact of Application under Section 882 of Local Government Act

The Local Government Act requires that when Council is considering adopting or amending anOfficial Community Plan, it must consider the implications of the change to the OfficialCommunity Plan on the District's:

• Financial Plan (includes Capital Expenditure Plan and Operating Expenditure Plan); and

• Waste Management Plan.

Since the proposed development is part of an existing Waste Management route anddevelopment of this area is included in the current long-range plan, there is no impact to theWaste Management Plan.

Having regard to the above, it is considered that the proposed amendment will not have anadverse impact on the District's Financial Plan, which includes the Capital Expenditure Plan andOperation Expenditure Plan, and Waste Management Plan.

Public Hearing Information Package

In accordance with Council Policy LAN.50 — PRE-PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATIONPACKAGES, a package will be produced containing material related to the developmentapplication.

Requirements Prior to Adoption of the Zone and OCP Amending Bylaws

• Receipt of the Community Amenity contribution in the amount of $58,960.00;

• Receipt of a 'Volunteering Letter' that ensures all Engineering Department requirements arefulfilled as part of the site's development;

• Receipt of Comments from School District 75;

• Approval of Development Permit DP11-005 (Form and Character Development Permit - whichwill be considered as part of the same Council agenda as the Official Community Plan andZone Amending Bylaws are considered);

• Staff Approval of Development Permit DP11-004 (Hazardous Lands Development Permit);

• Any other items that Council may require resulting from the Public Hearing or Councilconsideration of the application.

Erik Wilhelm, Planner

I have reviewed the financial aspects of this report.

AKen Bjorgaard, Director of FinanceG:COMDEV/Dayle/C0Wreport(KeystoneArchitecture)14thAve.R11-007


26

32914

32918

32920

32944

32948

32956

32964

TFrn

O • •

o -u

0bm<O

4" 0b zjj0

O •0m

0m

3Z!/0 OZ1 ID LOULI1')32774 32773 32780 32777

32782 32779 Co Co

8135 a, 0)8087 8117

327753278432783 32801COco 32783

\327993279232791 8067

CEDAR ST.11

21

9

39

12847

12849

32865

32871

32881

391

397

32811CO CO CO8016 80)

8086 coa,coin

Co01

8 rn 32821328198020

32820 32835

cmoCO

03282932827

32832CornCO

CO

a,

3283932836015>32839

615,

C)

32862 Ei32868 29 3286

au

111

a I 1

3283932830

3283432846 3284532845 32840

32850

32860

3284832854 32855m co 8181

32865 w OD)

BERGEN ST.

32853 32857328553286532862

32877 823287332872 32870 823287332873 32879

32881 coCO32880 McICococo 32890 32891 32890

BLUEBELL ST.0ti

821821232895

82(tocn

3291932908CO coa,

CO32914 82( 32902 32901

3291832905

32909 VNON ST329V32913

CO32927

32921 CO co 3293332930

(nORCHID

RT

O 'e

•

l

rn ORCHIDPL.

I• '9

32929 3294132946

3295332935!934

?946

1952

3295732956329503296932943 329633296232954

32949 3297332974 3297132956

LA' c,40151- •satio32957 VI32982 32981?958 32963 32964

3296 822632990"I 329952964 3299332973 3297632974 33004 330132976 3300532983 1)1 3300932980 33017 832984 33010 821133019

0:41 CO03 CDCr) 01

32986 rriIDco 3302803 33025COCO

CO01 33027 33032ID7907 8 33030 33031833035 330488159

33045

0 HYDE ST.en 8082

33061 8134 8160 Co in8160B

O 33070 nnnrn,33067 1%17'1 3311711

VIOLA33065

28

Plan 1Site Plan

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 8 OF 17R11-007/DP1 1-004 /DP11-005

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEVR11 -007/DP11-004 /DP11-005

PAGE 9 OF 17

Plan 2Landscape Plan

Tiered RetainingWalls with ample

plantings

29

I Appendix I

'37231KEYSTONE

ARCHITECTURE

January 31, 2011 Project #09-122/3.6

District of Mission8645 Stave Lake RoadPO Box 20Mission, BC V2V 4L9Attn. Planning Department

Re: List of Variances for 23 Unit Residential Development - 32921 14th Ave. Mission, BC

- Existing Zoning - 558 Urban Residential- Proposed Zoning - Multiple Family 40 Townhouse Zoning

A. Proposed Variance to Setbacks "E"

1. Required front setback - 6 .0 M.Proposed setback for Building 1 - 4.0 M.

2. Required sideyard (interior) - 7.5 M.i) Proposed setback for Bldg. 5, 6, & 7 (East) - 4.0 M.ii) Proposed setback for Bldg. 1 (West) - 2.4 M.iii) Proposed setback for Bldg. 2 (West) - 4.6 M.iv) Proposed setback for Bldg. 3 (West) - 6.0 M.

B. Proposed Variance for Parking

Variance to allow 3 parking spaces in setbacks. Note that these 3 stalls are separatedby landscape trellis to help conceal the stall and adjoining maneuvering aisles.

30

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 10 OF 17

R11 -007/DP11 -004 /DP11-005

Appendix II

31

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 11 OF 17R11 -007/DP11-004 /DP11-005

Building 3South Elevation (Facing Private Amenity Space)

I Appendix III

32

Building 1South Elevation (Facing 14th Avenue)

Building 1North Elevation (Facing Internal Driving Aisle)

Building 2South Elevation (Facing Internal Driving Aisle)

Building 2North Elevation (Facing Private Amenity Space)

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV

PAGE 12 OF 17R11 -007/DP11-004 /DP11-005

Appendix III Continued

Building 4South Elevation (Facing Internal Driving Aisle)

Building 5 and 6(Facing Internal Driving Aisle)

Building 4North Elevation (Facing Private Amenity Space)

33

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 13 OF 17R11 -007/DP11 -004 /DP11-005

34

Fire/Rescue ServiceMemorandum

Appendix IV

M DISTRICT OF

ON THE FRASER

File Category: PRO.DEV.ZONFile Folder: R11-007 (14 th Avenue 32921)

To: Dayle Reti, Senior Planner, Land Use

From: Assistant Fire Chief

Date: August 17, 2011

Subject: 32921-14th Avenue, Mission BCFile #R11-007

Dayle, after reviewing Rezoning Application (R11-007) for 32921-14th Avenue, I would like to commenton the following before I am comfortable with this project's approval. The Mission Fire/Rescue Servicewould like to request:

1. The Development has fire suppression system installed meeting NFPA 13r with provisions includingattic, patio/balcony sprinkler protection, OR

2. The Development has fire suppression system installed meeting NFPA 13.

3. Installation of a third hydrant at the entrance of the development.

4. Provide civil profile drawings for roadway grade, meeting the performance expectation for our fireapparatus at no more than 1 m grade change over 12.5m over a minimum distance of 15m at amaximum 12 degree grade.

5. For required access during construction and development completion, no vehicles shall park on theroadway; signage must be installed to support this.

6. Required Water Supply for Fire Protection. An approved water supply capable of supplying therequired fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to all premises upon which facilities, buildings orportions of buildings are hereafter constructed.

7. Fire hydrant systems shall be subject to such periodic tests as required by the Fire Chief. Fire hydrantsystems shall be maintained in an operative condition at all times and shall be repaired wheredefective. Installation, additions, repairs, alterations %and servicing shall be in accordance withapprov standards.

rry V atkinsong:f ireigicorresp/32921-14th

Page 1 of 1


Appendix V

ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT REZONING COMMENTS

FILE: R11-007

August 17, 2011.

CIVIC ADDRESS: 32921 14th Avenue

DOMESTIC WATER REQUIREMENTS:

Municipal water is available on 14 th Avenue.

In accordance with the District of Mission Water Bylaw No. 2196-1990, the Developer is requiredto pay for one (1) 150mm diameter water connection. The water connection will be installed to thenew proposed property line by the District of Mission on a at cost basis, therefore the Developershall provide a $15,000.00 cash deposit for these works.

In addition to the above and in accordance with the District of Mission Water Bylaw No. 2196-1990, the Developer shall install a 150mm diameter compound type water meter. EngineeredDesign required.

Once the water meter has been installed and accepted by the District of Mission, the water metervault and the internal appurtenances shall became property of the District of Mission. TheDeveloper shall submit a Right of Way agreement in the accordance with the District of Mission'Works Only" Right of Way template which can be obtained from the Engineering Department. TheDeveloper's solicitor shall provide the District of Mission with a letter of undertaking to ensure theregistration of the Right of Way agreement with the Lands Title Office will be carried out and acopy of the registered document will be forwarded to the District of Mission for their records.

SANITARY SEWER REQUIREMENTS:

Municipal sanitary sewer is available on 14 th Avenue.

In accordance with the District of Mission Sewer Bylaw No. 5033-2009, the Developer shall pay forone (1) 150mm diameter sanitary sewer connection. Engineered Design required.

The sanitary sewer connection will be installed by the District of Mission. Breakdown of therequired fee for the sanitary sewer connection is as follows.

1. To tie-in to the existing 300mm diameter municipal sanitary sewer main on 14 th Avenueand Install of a 1050mm diameter manhole. The 1050mm diameter manhole will beinstalled by the District of Mission on a at cost basis therefore the Developer shall providea $10,000.00 cash deposit for these works.

2. Installation of 10.60 meters of 150mm diameter sanitary sewer connection to the newproposed property line, $2,676.80

• $788.00 for the first meter of 150mm diameter sanitary sewer connection.• $196.75 per meter beyond 1.0 meter (9.60 meters)

STORM SEWER REQUIREMENTS:

Municipal storm sewer is available on 14 th Avenue.

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 15 OF 17R11 -007/DP11 -004 /DP11-005

35

In accordance with the District of Mission Sewer Bylaw No. 5033-2009, the Developer shall for one(1) 250mm diameter storm sewer connection. Engineered Design required.

The storm sewer connection will be installed by the District of Mission. Breakdown of the requiredfee for the storm sewer connection is as follows.

3. To tie-in to the existing 750mm diameter municipal storm sewer main on le Avenue andInstall of a 1350mm diameter manhole. The 1350mm diameter manhole will be installedby the District of Mission on a at cost basis therefore the Developer shall provide a$10,000.00 cash deposit for these works.

4. Installation of 2.7 meters of 250mm diameter sanitary sewer connection to the newproposed property line.

• The storm sewer connection will be installed to the new proposed property line bythe District of Mission on a at cost basis, therefore for providing these works shallbe included with the installation of thel 350mm diameter manhole.

Storm Water Management at Building Permit Stage

Best management practice (BMP) measures shall be incorporated into the design of thesubdivision to achieve, to the extent possible given the particular site conditions, the objective ofmaintaining the mean annual flows in watercourses which receive drainage from the subdivision atthe pre-development level after the development is built out.

Measures may include groundwater recharge systems and/or other related best managementpractices. It shall be the designer's responsibility to select BMP's which are best suited to the siteconditions.

Designs shall be accompanied by a report from a fully qualified professional engineer which clearlyidentifies the specific opportunities and constraints for implementing best management practices inthe subdivision, demonstrates that groundwater recharge and/or other appropriate bestmanagement practices are sustainable and have been maximized for the particular site andprovides examples of similar installations which demonstrate the sustainability and ease ofmaintenance of the works to be constructed.

Proposed measures shall be subject to acceptance by the Director of Engineering and PublicWorks.

36


ROAD WORK REQUIREMENTS: 14 th Avenue

In accordance with the District of Mission Subdivision Control Bylaw No. 1500-1985, the Developershall provide the following.

1. Dedicate sufficient property adjacent to 14 th Avenue to provide for a total road dedicationwith of 20.0. meters on 14th Avenue.

2. Constructed 14th Avenue adjacent to the site to a Half (1/2) Major Collector Standardcomplete with road drainage, underground hydro and telephone, street lighting andboulevard tree planting. See District of Mission Standard Drawings No. R-5, L1 and L2.Engineered design required.

OTHER COMMENTS:

Should removal of soil from a site exceed 100 cubic meters (approximately 10 tandem axletrucks), the following provisions applies:

• the applicant's engineer shall provide the District of Mission with an estimate of the quantity ofmaterials to be removed from the site;

• the applicant shall obtain a Soil Removal Permit as outlined in the Soil Removal Bylaw 3088-1997;

• the applicant will be responsible for the cost of the Permit and the removal fee per cubic meteror per metric tonne, payable to the District of Mission;

• the applicant shall comply with all provisions of the Soil Deposit Bylaw.

Please contact Jennifer Meier, Environmental Coordinator, at (604) 820-3795 for information andto apply for a Soil Removal Permit.

FEES:

DESCRIPTION AMOUNT

WATER SERVICE CONNECTIONS $15,000.00 DepositSANITARY SERVICE CONNECTIONS Manhole $10,000.00 DepositSANITARY SERVICE CONNECTIONS $2,676.80STORM SERVICE CONNECTIONS C/W Manhole $10,000.00 DepositSTREET LIGHTING BULLDOG LOCKS To be determinedBOULEVARD TREES DEPOSIT To be determined100% CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT To be determined5% ADMINISTRATION FEE To be determinedHARMONIZED SALES TAX (HST) 12% To be determined

RECOMMENDATION

From an engineering point of view the rezoning application is NOT to proceed any further thanthird reading until the owner has volunteered to install all deficient works for the above mentionedservices prior to adoption of the zoning amendment bylaw.

Originally Signed

Originally SignedSalem Abushawashi

Sterling ChanDeputy Director of Engineering Engineering Technologist

37

FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV

PAGE 17 OF 17R11 -007/DP11-004 /DP11-005

Nlip ssTsRion.,ON THE FRASER cr

PLANNING DEPARTMENT


October 12, 2011

Dear Owner/Occupant:

Re: Public Hearing Notification for R11-007 (Keystone Architecture & Planning Ltd.) —32921 14th Avenue

As a neighbouring resident or property owner to the subject property located at 32921 14 th

Avenue, you are invited to attend the Public Hearing and make known any comments that youmay have.

Reference should be made to Items # 1 and 2 in the enclosed Public Hearing notice for morespecific information regarding the proposal. Details of the Public Hearing time and location arestated at the top of the Public Hearing notice.

Additional information may be obtained by contacting the District of Mission PlanningDepartment at (604) 820-3748.

Yours tr.,

/.4 OF PLANNING

End.

G:\COMDEV\PUBLIC HEARINGS & PUBLIC INPUT MTGS \PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION LETTERS \R11-007R11-007 (KEYSTONE) NOTN OWN OCC.DOCX

38

P.O. Box 20, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, B.C. V2V 4L9Phone (604) 820-3748 Fax (604) 826-795 I & (604) 820.37 15 Web Site: www.mission.ca E-mail: planning mission.ca

Corporate AdministrationON THE FRASER "

Memorandum

To: Mayor and Council

From: Chief Administrative OfficerDate: October 24, 2011

Subject: Gaudin Creek Diversion Costs

RecommendationNo recommendation accompanies this reportBackgroundThe Gaudin Creek Crossing project began as an add-on project to the multimillion dollar upgrade of theCedar street widening project. This project started in September, 2011, however, due to a variety ofissues the project has not gone smoothly.Most recently and more clearly explained in the attachment to this memo, this project has incurredadditional costs not foreseen nor brought to the attention of administration or Council. This is certainlynot the norm.The intent of this memo is to assure Council that this is an unusual circumstance and, as such, I will beasking our Deputy Chief Administrative Officer to review the project process and procedures to reducethe likelihood of this happening again.

Glen Robertson

39

Page 1 of 1

40

Engineering and Public WorksMemorandumM

D1STRICT OFis ionON THE FRASER

File Category:File Folder,

INF.ROA.CONCedar Street Construction

To: Chief Administration Officer

From: Deputy Director of Engineering

Date: October 22, 2011

Subject: Gaudin Creek Diversion Costs

RecommendationThat Council authorize staff to complete the full Gaudin Creek diversion at an additional cost of $136,803,with funding as follows:

■ $20,000 from the Water Capital Contingency;

• $30,000 from the Cedar Valley Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) Enhancementfund;

• $86,803 from Cedar Valley Roads Development Cost Charge (DCC) program; and,

That the financial plan be amended accordingly.

BackgroundThe purpose of this report is to advise Council of extra costs which have been incurred for the GaudinCreek diversion located north of Tunbridge Avenue and east of Cedar Street and to request approval foradditional costs over the budget.

The Cedar Street widening project extending from Cherry Avenue to Tunbridge Avenue was completedsubstantially under budget ($4,787,875), at a cost of $3,962,000, leaving a savings of approximately$826,000. These savings would be apportioned between the District, the Provincial and Federalgovernments if they remain unspent.

Staff requested and received approval from the Federal and Provincial governments to utilize thesesavings to complete additional works related to the Gaudin Creek diversion project. The Gaudin Creekdiversion project was then designed and tendered, and awarded to Mission Contractors by Council in itsmeeting on August 8, 2011 in the amount of $596,354, including net HST. This left $229,646 remaininguncommitted project budget.

The contractor mobilized and started the works in August. As the culvert excavation reached the depthof the footings in the first week of October, the excavation revealed various issues involving design andunderground conditions that have resulted in change orders, with the changes as follows:

• $52,707 - Addition of reinforced concrete footings (design called for metal footings, but due topoor soil-bearing capacity this needed to be changed);

• $82,112 - Lowering of the 400 mm joint Abbotsford/Mission watermain, adding joint restraints,hydrostatic testing, air-valve with manhole, blow-offsfcaps and a blow-down chamber (This hadto be done as the main was lower than the design plans indicated);

■ $32,560 - Additional excavation and backfilling under footings (due to poor soil conditions);

• $39,683 - Other items such as extra filter fabric installation, I-beam support for watermains,additional asphalt with base, shipping and fabrication, etc.;

Page 1 of 4

• $13,533 - Overtime to complete the project sooner; and

• $23,854 - Additional security and overhead related to delays resulting from the watermain design.The total cost of changes is $244,449.These change orders were approved verbally due to the October 31 grant deadline, a strong desire bythe public to re-open Cedar Street and the fact that the site excavation had already taken place. Thescope of the changes was not anticipated to utilize the remaining project budget of $229,646, Inretrospect, this change order approval process was flawed as they should have been formalized inwriting and written approvals given, with Council approval for any required budget increase.Upon receipt of the written change orders on Wednesday, October 19, they were found to be over thecontract value by $244,449, bringing the total contract price to $840,803, including net HST, leaving abudget shortfall of $14,803. This, however, does not complete the full scope of the original project. Inorder to complete the full scope, an additional $102,000 is needed to pay for additional project costs thathave not yet been approved or acted upon, plus $20,000 contingency for the Tunbridge Avenue crossing.Therefore, without a project scope change, i.e. completing all the intended works, the resulting budgetshortfall is $136,803 ($14,803 + $102,000 + $20,000).Summary of Overall Project Costs

Item Cost CommentsOriginal Contract to Mission Contracting $596,354

Approved Change Orders $244,449

Total Contract to date $840,803

Additional project costs

$102,000

$30,000 for plantings, $20,000 for the watermainlowering and the remaining $52,000 for theTunbridge crossing.

Total Cost of project $942,803

Available Budget

$826,000

$596,354 awarded to Mission Contracting, plusremaining $229,646 of uncommitted projectbudget. Equals $826,000.

Budget Shortfall before contingencies $116,803

Contingency $ 20,000

TotalA

$136,803

Options

In order to finalize this project, staff has looked at various options as follows:Option 1: Complete the full Gaudin Creek diversion at an additional cost of $136,803, with funding

as follows:

■ $20,000 from the Water Capital Contingency;• $30,000 from the Cedar Valley ESA Enhancement fund; and• $86,803 from Cedar Valley Roads DCC.

41

Page 2 of 4

Advantages - Completes the full creek diversion, satisfies Department of Fisheries andOceans (DFO) requirements, allows adjacent properties to develop to the OfficialCommunity Plan (OCP) designation, and avoids additional cost of doing the same work inthe future.

Disadvantage — Additional budget required.

Option 2: Complete the Cedar Street crossing, delete the Tunbridge culvert crossing and install anew culvert at the Tunbridge Avenue/Cedar Street Intersection at an additional cost of$95,236, to be funded as follows:

• $30,000 from Cedar Valley ESA Enhancement fund; and• $65,236 from Cedar Valley Roads DCC.

Advantages — It is less costly than Option 1.

Disadvantages — It would be redundant work as we would still need to replace theTunbridge Avenue crossing in the future, another road closure on Cedar Street, inhibitingdevelopment in the area as the creek is not diverted. It would also impact our agreementwith the owner of 8850 Cedar Street since they dedicated the land for the construction inexchange for ESA credits, with the intent to enable development of this property, 8863Cedar Street and other properties.

Option 3: Same as Option 2, but repair the existing culvert at Cedar Street and Tunbridge Avenueinstead of replacing it at a cost of $55,000 to be funded. as follows:• $30,000 from Cedar Valley ESA Enhancement fund; and• $25,000 from Cedar Valley Roads DCC.Advantages — There is less immediate cost.

Disadvantages — In addition to the disadvantages noted in Option 2, this option is a veryhigh risk from the engineering staff view due to the very poor condition of the existingculvert and risk of collapse during the works.

Option 4: Stop the project after Cedar Street is completed and leave the culvert at Cedar Street andTunbridge Avenue in an as-is condition. No additional costs, except the already incurredincrease of $14,436 to be funded from the roads DCC.Advantages — This represents the lowest cost option.Disadvantage — There is risk of the creek backing up and flooding the area east of CedarStreet. The culvert repair at Cedar Street and Tunbridge Avenue used a smaller diameterpipe as the existing pipe was in very poor condition, so a smaller pipe was placed a smalldistance inside it. The plan was to replace this culvert entirely before we embarked on thecreek diversion project. The existing culvert is in very poor condition and could alsocollapse at any given time, which could be a safety concern and require emergencyrepairs. This would also impact our agreement with the owner of 8850 Cedar Street sincethey dedicated the land for the construction in exchange for ESA credits with the intent toenable development of this property, 8863 Cedar Street and other properties.

42

Page 3 of 4

Ken Bjorgaard, 1 have reviewed the proposed funding sources.

Comments on Funding

The rationale for the funding sources for the recommended Option 1 is as follows:

■ Water Capital Contingency ($20,000) — This is proposed to be used for the required watermainlowering on Tunbridge Avenue. There is approximately $35,000 remaining in the 2011 CapitalContingency account, which is unallocated and available for this project;

■ Cedar Valley ESA Enhancement fund ($30,000) - This is proposed to be used for theenvironmental planting along the creek channel to satisfy DFO requirements. There isapproximately $58,000 remaining in this account. The Enhancement fund has been collectedfrom developments to enhance and improve ESA areas in Cedar Valley; and

■ Cedar Valley Roads DCC ($86,803) — This is proposed to be used for the Tunbridge Avenueculvert crossing. The entire project is part of the Cedar Valley Roads DCC program; therefore,DCC funds can be used. -

Project status update

The creek channel from Tunbridge Avenue to Cedar Street is complete and the Cedar Street crossingculverts are installed and being backfilled at the time of writing this report. The contractor is working thisweekend (October 22 and 23) to complete the animal crossing pipe, watermain connection/flushing andbackfiliing up to road grade. On Monday, they will be grading and cleaning up the site in preparation forpaving on Tuesday or Wednesday. We would like to open up the road as soon as possible; however, toopen it up before paving would further delay it and add costs since more preparation work is required.The weather forecast looks favourable, so we'd like to stay the course and have it paved by Wednesdayat the latest. I would like to mention that Mission Contracting has been very good to work with, hasprovided quality workmanship and has been helpful in finding solutions to the technical and schedulingissues.

41 j I

Salem Abushawashi

43

Page 4 of 4

O E ASE - Mission, British Columbia · O E ASE lr Cnl And vd Otbr 24, 20 — 6:0 p.. Cnl Chbr 864...

Documents

Transcript of O E ASE - Mission, British Columbia · O E ASE lr Cnl And vd Otbr 24, 20 — 6:0 p.. Cnl Chbr 864...