M DISTRICT OF lsslon ON THE FRASER Regular Council Agenda April 20, 2009 - 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC 1. RESOLUTION TO RESOLVE INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 2. PROCLAMATIONS (a) May 1 to 7, 2009 as "Youth. Week" Youth Week Planning Committee (b) May 4 to 8, 2009 as "Mental Health Week" Mission Mental Health Advisory Committee 3. DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS (a) Randy Heilbron, Fraser Health and Dirk Lewis, Morrow Bioscience Ltd. Re: 2009 Mosquito and West Nile Virus Control Programs Page 5 Page 7 (b) Bob O'Neal, Forestry Manager Re: Recreation Feasibility Schedule 4. FORESTRY (a) Tree Farm License 26 Recreational Opportunities Feasibility Analysis Page 8 5. PLANNING (a) Third Reading Report — 32625 Cherry Avenue (R07-010) Page 16 (b) Rezoning Application R07-030 (TGK Engineering) — 33769 and Page 27 33801 Knight Avenue (c) Rezoning Application R08-001 and Development Variance Permit Page 40 Application DV09-001 (Dinahan) — 33344 — 4 th Avenue (d) Minor Amendment to Floodplain Management Bylaw 4027-2007 Page 53 (e) Outcome from the Developer/Realtor Meeting held March 11, 2009 Page 54 (f) Major Development Project Update Page 68 (g) Minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission Meeting Page 76 held on October 1, 2008 (h) Minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission Meeting Page 80 held on November 12, 2008 1
Transcript
M DISTRICT OF
lsslonON THE FRASER
Regular Council AgendaApril 20, 2009 - 6:30 p.m.
Council Chambers
8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC
1. RESOLUTION TO RESOLVE INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
2. PROCLAMATIONS
(a) May 1 to 7, 2009 as "Youth. Week"Youth Week Planning Committee
(b) May 4 to 8, 2009 as "Mental Health Week"Mission Mental Health Advisory Committee
3. DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
(a) Randy Heilbron, Fraser Health and Dirk Lewis,Morrow Bioscience Ltd.Re: 2009 Mosquito and West Nile Virus Control Programs
Page 5
Page 7
(b) Bob O'Neal, Forestry ManagerRe: Recreation Feasibility Schedule
(c) Rezoning Application R08-001 and Development Variance Permit Page 40Application DV09-001 (Dinahan) — 33344 — 4 th Avenue
(d) Minor Amendment to Floodplain Management Bylaw 4027-2007 Page 53
(e) Outcome from the Developer/Realtor Meeting held March 11, 2009 Page 54
(f) Major Development Project Update Page 68
(g) Minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission Meeting Page 76held on October 1, 2008
(h) Minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission Meeting Page 80held on November 12, 2008
1
Regular Council AgendaApril 20, 2009
(j) Minutes of the Mission Communityheld on December 16, 2008
(k) Minutes of the Mission Communityheld on January 14, 2009
(I)
Minutes of the Mission Communityheld on February 4, 2009
2
Page 82
Page 85
Page 87
Page 90
Heritage Commission Meeting
Heritage Commission Meeting
Heritage Commission Meeting
(i)
Minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission Meetingheld on December 3, 2008
6. PUBLIC SAFETY AND HEALTH
(a) Mission Institution — March 2009 Report
(b) Air Quality Station — verbal report (Councillor Horn)
7. ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE
(a) Business Improvement Area Establishment Bylaw 5015-2009
(b) Fraser River Heritage Park Work Plan
(c) Council Remuneration and Expense Report
(d) Campaign Financing Disclosure Statements
(e) Mission Arts Council
(f) Fraser Valley Health Care FoundationRe: Council Appointment to Board of Trustees
(g)
Alternate Council Appointments to Transit Committee
8. ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS
(a) Increase Water Operational Expenditures
(b) Specific Curbside Collection Addresses on Dewdney Trunk Road
(c) Residential Metered Water Invoicing
(d) Promotion of Businesses that Collaborate with the District inImplementing Environmental Sustainability Initiatives
(e) Restricted Bottled Drinking Water Use in Municipal Facilities
(f) 2009 — 2010 Flood Protection Program Application
(g) 2008 Report — Leak Detection Program
(h) Mill Pond Compensation Plan Follow-up
(I)
Earth Hour 2009 Results
(j)
Update on Traffic Management Plan for Canada Day 2009
Page 92
Page 99
Page 101
Page 113
Page 115
Page 116
Page 125
Page 126
Page 127
Page 129
Page 163
Page 164
Page 167
Page 168
Page 170
Page 171
Page 174
Regular Council AgendaApril 20, 2009
(k) Fraser Valley Regional DistrictRe: Update of the Strategic Review of Transit in the Fraser Valley
(I)
Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commissionmeeting held on March 12, 2009
9. RESOLUTION TO RISE AND REPORT
10. ADOPTION OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT
11. MINUTES
(a) Special Council Meeting (Administration and Finance) —March 9 and 12, 2009
(b) Joint Meeting of Council (Abbotsford and Mission) — April 7, 2009
12. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
13. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER'S REPORT
14. MAYOR'S REPORT
15. COUNCILLOR'S REPORTS ON COMMITTEES, BOARDS, AND ACTIVITIES
3
Page 176
Page 192
Page 197
Page 208
16. BYLAWS
(a) District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 4075-2008-3143(308) (R07-010 - Sharma) — a bylaw to rezone propertyat 32625 Cherry Avenue from RS-2 One Unit SuburbanResidential zone to RS-1 F One Unit Compact Residential Twozone
(b) District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5012-2009-3143(321) (R07-030 — TGK Engineering) — a bylaw to rezoneproperty at 33769 and 33801 Knight Avenue from RS-3 LowDensity Rural Residential zone to RS-1 C Mixed One-UnitUrban and One Unit Small Lot Urban Residential zone
(c) District of Mission Business Improvement Area Bylaw 5015-2009 — a bylaw to establish a specified area for the purposes ofannually funding the Mission Downtown Business AssociationBusiness Improvement Area
(d) District of Mission Water Rates Amending Bylaw 5021-2009-2197(15) — a bylaw to establish water user rates for 2009, andto add subsection 5.4 (water metering)
(e) District of Mission Sewer Rates Amending Bylaw 5022-2009-1922(15) — a bylaw to establish sewer user rates for 2009
(f) District of Mission Floodplain Management Amending Bylaw5024-2009-4027(1) — a bylaw to amend Schedule "A" byupdating the floodplain boundary around Silvermere Lake
Third Reading
First and SecondReadings
Adoption
First, Second andThird Readings
First, Second andThird Readings
First, Second andThird Readings
Regular Council AgendaApril 20, 2009
(g) District of Mission Collection, Removal and Marketing ofRecyclables Amending Bylaw 5025-2009-2639(13) — a bylaw toestablish user rates
(h) District of Mission Subdivision Control Amending Bylaw 5026-2009-1500(32) — a bylaw to incorporate water meteringprovisions
(i) District of Mission Water Amending Bylaw 5027-2009-2196(15)— a bylaw to incorporate water metering provisions
(j) District of Mission Refuse Collection and Disposal AmendingBylaw 5028-2009-1387(44) — a bylaw to remove an addressfrom the list receiving curbside collection
4
First, Second andThird Readings
First, Second andThird Readings
First, Second andThird Readings
First, Second andThird Readings
17. CORRESPONDENCE
(a) Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General Page 215Re: News Release — New Rules of the Road Protect Emergency
Workers' Safety
(b) BC Transmission Corporation Page 218Re: BC Utilities Commission Long-term Electricity Inquiry
(c) Mission Arts Council Page 219Re: District of Mission Arts Council Request for Cap of Utilities
18. QUESTION PERIOD
19. ADJOURNMENT
April 8, 2009
To: Mayor and CouncilRe: Youth Week 2009
Youth Week is an international celebration of youth held annually from May 1-7. It is a week offun, interaction and celebration intending to build a strong connection between young people andtheir communities and to profile the issues, accomplishments and diversity of youth across theprovince.
Wherever Youth Week is celebrated, the idea behind it is the same: Young people are importantand need to be recognized in a constructive and positive manner. Their contributions need to beacknowledged and celebrated. The theme for Youth Week is 'Events for Youth by Youth'.
The key is to engage youth in the planning, implementation and evaluation of youth programs andservices with active support, supervision and encouragement from staff and the entirecommunity. Mission's Youth Week Planning Committee and Youth Lounge Staff have workedhard to prepare a variety of events and are excited to share the details with the youth andcommunity members.
The committee is writing to you today to ask for your support with Youth Week 2009 by officiallyproclaiming Youth Week as May 1-7 during the April 20 or 27 Council Meetings.
Thank you in advance for your time and attention to the above. If you have further questions withregards to Youth Week please contact Amanda Tesluck, Program Coordinator or visitvvww.bcvouthweek.com .
WHEREAS Youth in the District of Missionare valued citizens in our community; and
WHEREAS through their energy, involvement and enthusiasmyouth are a resource contributing to the well beingof community; and
WHEREAS
WHEREAS
the promotion of youth activitiessponsored by all segments of the communitywill encourage a greater understandingand acceptance of youth; and
celebration of youth in the District of Mission,other British Columbianmunicipalities and across Canadaduring Youth Week will encourage youthparticipation in positive activities andstrengthen the community;
NOW THEREFORE I, James Atebe, Mayor of the District of Mission do herebyproclaim the week of May 1st - May 7th, 2009 as Youth Week inMission.
James Atebe, MAYORDistrict of Mission
Request for Proclamation of Mental Health WeekMay 4-8, 2009
7
Dear
As chair cDistrict
Sample Proclamation:
WHEREAS the Canadian Mental Health Association has designated May 4 - 8, 2009 asMental Health Week; and;
WHEREAS the Mission Mental Health Advisory Committee (MMHAC) is holding a freecommunity event on May 8, 2009 at Heritage Park in Mission to celebrate thesuccesses of individuals with Mental Illness in our local community, and;
WHEREAS the District of Mission supports community diversity and the inclusion of all groups inthe spirit of community;
NOW THEREFORE, we do declareMay 4 - 8, 2009 as
Mental Health WeekIn the District of , British Columbia
MemoFORESTRY DEPARTMENT
FILE CATEGORY: FOR.INT.REC.File Folder: Stave Lake Recreation Project
That staff presents the Recreation Opportunities Feasibility Analysis to various agencies andinterested recreation user groups with the intent of obtaining their further financial and non-financial support; and
That staff pursues a Recreation Site designation for the western part of TFL 26 on theunderstanding that this will not unreasonably affect the non-recreation values of the TFL andalso allow the District of Mission to be able to charge user fees; and
That staff pursues obtaining the permission of the Ministry of Forests District Manager for themaintenance of a closed gate near the start of the Florence Lake Forest Service Road; and
That staff investigates what staff and financial resources (internal and external) are needed tocomplete any required Recreation Management Plan and Business Plans related to thefurtherance of this project; and
That staff investigates actual funding and grant programs that could help pay for projectimplementation; and
That staff discuss interest and terms with BC Hydro as to the operation of their Stave Lake boatlaunch; and
That staff further investigates and identifies opportunities to integrate commercial recreation inTFL 26.
Background
Attached is the Executive Summary of the TFL 26 Recreational Opportunities FeasibilityAnalysis by LEES + Associates Landscape Architects. This report was recently completedfollowing extensive consultation with the District of Mission, various agencies and First Nations.Also considered were more than 400 user surveys completed by recreation users of that area.
The Florence Lake Forest Service Road (FLFSR) area along the west side of Stave Lake haslong been an area of significant concern to the Forestry Department due to continuing illegaland social disorder activities including vandalism to parked cars, dumping of stolen vehicles,
PAGE 1 OF 3
8
degradation to the environment, rowdyism, improper discharge of firearms, untended campfiresand littering. Many legitimate recreation users have identified safety concerns to themselvesand their vehicles and do not use this area as a result. Staff feels that the status quo is notworking due to the above issues. The present situation is not favourable for attractinginvestment from commercial, industrial or non-profit groups.
However, staff recognizes that there is great recreation potential in this forested area includingcurrent uses such as camping (currently unregulated), hiking, site-seeing, off-road driving,boating, fishing, swimming and potential future commercial recreation activities. This area iswithin 1 1/2 hours driving time from an urban population base of about 2,000,000 people. Ifimplemented, this project would also provide an opportunity to diversify the forestry operationsand create employment in recreation based activities.
The analysis identified the following major issues, conclusions and/or suggested actions;
• Past and current access to the FLFSR is uncontrolled, thereby allowing thousands ofvehicles into this area annually. Monitoring control of access to the FLFSR would solvemany problems related to illegal activities and unmanaged use of the land which is thecurrent main reason discouraging use of the area by legitimate recreationalists. TheForest Service Road Regulation requires the permission of the Ministry of ForestsDistrict Manager to control access to a forest service road such as the FLFSR.
• Regulated camping would enhance the area with the effect of reduced rowdyism andincreased services and amenities.
• DOM could enter an agreement with the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Arts (MOTCA)for the entire west side of the TFL being declared a 'Recreation Site' or a RecreationOrder could be created by the government for specific regulations regarding campingand parking in this area. If designated a Recreation Site, MOTCA's RecreationRegulations would apply. Initial indications are that this could be structured in a way thatdoes not restrict the non-recreation activities of the TFL unreasonably. (On this basis,DOM staff plans to pursue the creation of a Recreation Site for the west side of the TFL).
• There are no MOF precedents for charging fees for general access to large tracts ofCrown Land. There are also no precedents where a large area of Crown Land has beendesignated as a Recreation Site. If TFL 26 were to be designated a Recreation Site andto charge a user fee, it would be a pilot project for addressing safe use of large tracts ofCrown Land for recreational purposes.
• Implement access control and enhance security and use of TFL 26 by:
o Installing a recreation gatehouse at the south end of the FLFSR;
o Monitoring use and adherence to Regulations in the Recreation Site;
o Developing campgrounds and enhanced recreational activities;
o Consider a partnership agreement with BC Hydro for the operation of their StaveLake boat launch, and
Identify opportunities to integrate commercial recreation in the comprehensiveRecreation Management Plan and as solicited and unsolicited proposals comeforward.
• A financial analysis was developed for the construction and operation of a gatehouseand campground facilities based on the assumption that the District will not borrow tofinance capital costs and that total capital costs will be funded by grants. The ExecutiveSummary of the analysis contains estimates of capital and operating costs and revenuesover several years for both the gatehouse and campground related facilities. The
9
PAGE 2 OF 3
analysis also discusses estimated losses, profits and break-even scenarios over time.The operating grants include contributions from government employment programs,community groups, non-profit organizations and trail building volunteers.
• The analysis says that the creation of a recreational destination in the TFL would be aviable initiative, based on the ability of the District to secure $1.4 million in capital costgrant funds, $670,000 in operating cost grants, and $175,000 in subsidies. Also, it isestimated by year 4 that the combined operations will generate net positive income.
• Support for this project exists at the senior staff level in the provincial government, withelected officials, with the RCMP and with BC Hydro.
The analysis recommends the following actions in order to control access, reduce rowdyism,enhance wholesome forest recreation opportunities and assist in the diversification of Mission'seconomy:
1. Create a comprehensive Management Plan and Business Plans.
2. Secure funding through a range of government, non-profit and for-profit organizations.
3. Designate the west side of TFL 26 as a Recreation Site.
4. Enter in to a Partnership Agreement with the MOTCA.
5. Install a Recreation Gatehouse at the south end of Florence Road.
6. Develop campgrounds and a network of trails.
7. Enter in to a Partnership Agreement with BC Hydro for the operation of the Stave Lakeboat launch.
8. Identify opportunities to integrate commercial recreation in the TFL.
Overall, staff is very encouraged by the potential of changing the nature of the western side ofStave Lake to a controlled-access, secured-recreation model as envisioned by the report.However, staff realizes that significant funding will be required to make this happen and intendsto pursue the initial recommendations in this memo and then come back to Council later withfurther recommendations based on the outcomes of the findings. At this time, there is not arequest for further major financial funding on this project other than internal staff time andrelated expenses.
The Executive Summary (attached) of the analysis is informative to read for a morecomprehensive synopsis and the entire report is available in the Council Reading basket if fulldetails are desired.
Kim Allan, RPFg:/Forestry/Kim/TFL 26 Recreational Opportunities Feasibility Analysis memo
Mission Recreational Feasibility Analysis, TFL 26 DRAFT April 14, 2009
1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROJECT SCOPEThe District of Mission is considering the enhancement of recreational opportunities available inthe western portion of Tree Farm License (TFL) 26. The District wishes to provide the communitywith an area in which to recreate safely in a forested setting.
In this study, two options for enhancing safety and recreation in .the TFL were assessed:1.A Recreation Gatehouse that would monitor access to the area, and2. The provision of campgrounds and related recreational activities.
The feasibility study summarized here is the product of work completed by LEES + AssociatesLandscape Architects, with G.P. Rollo and Associates Land Economists and Murray ManagementInc. The study included a critical review of background material, review of trends and precedents,evaluation of site opportunities and constraints, and the facilitation of an agency roundtable andpublic open house. Financial analyses of the proposed elements were conducted and thefeasibility of a Recreation Gatehouse and Campground were determined. Recommendationswere developed and next steps identified if the District decides to proceed.
TFL 26 CURRENT CONDITIONS
TFL Site and TenureTree Farm License 26 is located in the District of Mission, in the Stave River watershed.As well as being a designated TFL, the area is commonly referred to as the 'MissionMunicipal Forest.' TFL 26 is an active forest of second growth timber that generates animportant component of the District's economy. The size of the area analyzed for thisproject was 5000 hectares (12,000 acres).
TFL 26 is in the asserted traditional territories of several Fraser Valley First Nations.Coast Salish artifacts that date back 9,000 years are located in the reservoir drawdownzone and are sometimes exposed to damage by recreational vehicle use. The TFL isprimarily Crown Land, owned by the Province of British Columbia. The tenure has beenheld continuously by the licensee, the 'Corporation of the District of Mission,' since it wasfirst issued in 1958. Currently, the TFL agreement is in the process of being replaced foranother 25 year term.
Current Recreation UseTFL 26 is currently popular with recreational activities including: unregulated camping,off-road driving, motorized boating, fishing and swimming. Illegal activities occur in theTFL that discourage family recreational use. These activities include vandalism to parkedcars, dumping of stolen vehicles, degradation to the environment, rowdyism, improperdischarge of firearms, and littering. Users have identified concern for safety as their toppriority for change in the TFL (District of Mission TFL 26 User Survey summary, 2008).
5
13
Mission Recreational Feasibility Analysis, TFL 26 DRAFT April 14, 2009
Market AssessmentThe existing users of the TFL are estimated to be approximately 50 — 60,000 people,arriving in 30,000 vehicles per year. Based on the consultations undertaken to date, thisvolume of use is expected to increase. An analysis of other outdoor recreation andcamping sites highlights an opportunity to meet the needs of campers because RolleyLake, Golden Ears and BC Hydro campsites in the area are operating at or near capacity.In addition to camping, there is a market demand for other recreational activities in theFraser Valley, including a managed area for ATV riding and beginner mountain bikingtrails. The majority of users would consider user fees in order to enjoy their recreationalactivities in an improved, maintained and safe recreation area. TFL 26 is well situated toprovide easily accessible recreational activities in close proximity to the large populationbase of the Fraser Valley/ Lower Mainland.
Recreation Use Governance ModelsGovernance issues that need to be considered as recreation activity increases in the TFLinclude the role and function of Tree Farm Licenses, Partnership Agreements, RecreationSites and Recreation Orders.
A Tree Farm License allows a license holder to annually harvest a designated volume oftimber while requiring the license holder to manage, protect and conserve the CrownLands. Partnership Agreements can be struck between the Ministry of Forests andRange (MoFR) or the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and the Arts (MoTCA) with organizedgroups such as the District of Mission, for the purpose of managing Recreation Sites.
Typically, a Recreation Site is either a campground or day use area, a trail or trail system.Once designated a Recreation Site, the Site is subject to the MoTCA's RecreationRegulations. Rules specific to the Site and the particular Site's issues can be written intothe designation of a Recreation Site. Another tool for governance is the creation of aRecreation Order, which is typically used only if designation as a Recreation Site doesnot resolve all of the issues. An example of this is the Chilliwack River Valley, where aRecreation Order was created for specific regulations regarding camping and parking.
There are no precedents within the Ministry of Forest & Range for charging fees forgeneral access to large tracts of Crown Land. There are also no precedents where alarge area of Crown Land has been designated as a Recreation Site. If TFL 26 were tobe designated a Recreation Site and to charge a user fee, it would be a pilot project foraddressing safe use of large tracts of Crown Land for recreational purposes.
MANAGING RECREATION USE IN THE TFLMonitoring control of access in to TFL 26 would solve problems related to illegal activities andunmanaged use of the land- the current condition that presently discourages use of the area byfamilies. Regulated camping would enhance the area with reduced rowdyism and increasedservices and amenities.
6
14
Mission Recreational Feasibility Analysis, TFL 26 DRAFT April 14, 2009
The feasibility of two potential actions that would address the issues in the TFL include thefollowing "working" scenarios:
• Develop a comprehensive Recreation Management Plan for the west side ofTFL 26.
• Designate the west side of TFL 26 as a Recreation Site with the District ofMission entering in to a Partnership Agreement with the MoTCA.
Implement access control and enhance security and use of TFL 26 by:1. Installing a Recreation Gatehouse at the south end of Florence Road;2. Monitoring use and adherence to Regulations in the Recreation Site;3. Developing Campgrounds and enhanced recreational activities;4. Consider a Partnership Agreement with BC Hydro for the operation of the
Stave Lake boat launch, and5. Identify opportunities to integrate commercial recreation in the
comprehensive Recreation Management Plan and as solicited andunsolicited proposals come forward.
FINANCIAL ANALYSESFinancial analyses were developed for the construction and operation of a Gatehouse andCampground facilities. These were based on estimates of projected attendance, precedentstudies, recorded vehicle visitor data to the area, and over 400 user surveys.
Assumptions common to both analyses include:• The District will not borrow to finance capital costs, and that total capital costs will
be funded by grants.• The District will not borrow to finance operating costs. Shortfalls in operating
costs are assumed to be funded by grants or subsidized with no interest charges.
Key findings of the analyses are that:• The Gatehouse will require $73,000 in grants for capital costs in Year 1. The
Gatehouse will require $195,000 in operating cost grants over the 15 year period.The subsidy required to pay off the Gatehouse operating losses will be $199,187over the course of the first five years. The Gatehouse will repay those losses byYear 9.
• The Campground and related recreational facilities will require $1.3 million ingrants for capital costs over a 10 year period. The Campground will require$475,000 in operating cost grants over the 15 year period. The operating grantsinclude contributions from government employment programs, community groups,non-profit organizations, and trail building volunteers. The subsidy required topay off the Campground operating losses will be $6000 in the first year. TheCampground operations will repay that subsidy by Year 2.
• The combined Gatehouse and Campground construction will require $1.4 millionin grants for capital costs and $670,000 in grants for operating costs. TheGatehouse and Campgrounds will require $175,000 in operating subsidies for thefirst two years. By Year 4, the combined operations will generate net positiveincome.
7
15
Mission Recreational Feasibility Analysis, TFL 26 DRAFT April 14, 2009
These analyses indicate that significant grants will be required to fund the TFL 26 Gatehouse andCampground capital costs. If the District was unable to obtain grants, the tax-based burden onthis project would increase.
STATEMENT OF FEASIBILITYThe creation of a recreational destination in the TFL would be a viable initiative, based on theability of the District to secure $1.4 million in capital cost grant funds, $670,000 in operating costgrants, and $175,000 in subsidies. The provision of a manned Gatehouse and Campgrounds andrelated recreational opportunities in the TFL presents an opportunity for the District to offer anattractive resource for the broader Mission and Fraser Valley community.
RECOMMENDATIONSThe following actions are recommended in order to control access, reduce rowdyism, enhancewholesome forest recreation opportunities and assist in the diversification of Mission's economy:
1. Create Comprehensive Management Plan and Business Plans.2. Secure funding through a range of government, non-profit and for-profit organizations.3. Designate the west side of TFL 26 as a Recreation Site.4. Enter in to a Partnership Agreement with the MoTCA.5. Install a Recreation Gatehouse at the south end of Florence Road.6. Develop campgrounds and a network of trails.7. Enter in to a Partnership Agreement with BC Hydro for the operation of the Stave Lake
boat launch.8. Identify opportunities to integrate commercial recreation in the TFL.
BENEFITSThe provision of enhanced recreational activities in the TFL would complement existing loggingpractices and could have multiple economic, social and environmental benefits. Monitoringcontrol to the site would enhance security, create jobs, strengthen the District's relationship withFirst Nations, improve habitat and create opportunities for community stewardship.
Enhancing recreation in TFL 26 would create a ripple effect of economic benefits arising fromincreased visitors to Mission from across the Lower Mainland.
Support for this project exists at the senior staff level in the provincial government, with electedofficials, with the RCMP and with BC Hydro (Letters of support are included in the appendices).
CONCLUSIONThe Recreation Gatehouse and Campground improvements will secure and enhance the area forthe enjoyment of residents of Mission and the Lower Mainland. The TFL 26 Recreation Site hasthe potential to play an important long-term role in the economic, environmental and socialaspects of the Mission community. It is timely to move forward with a recreational area in the TFLthat will be a showpiece provincially and an attractive destination for both tourists and Missionresidents.
8
MemoFILE: PRO.DEV.ZONR07-010
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Senior Planner
Date: April 20, 2009
Subject: Third Reading Report — 32625 Cherry Avenue (R07-010)
Recommendation
That Zone Amending Bylaw 4075-2008-3143(308) for property located at 32625 Cherry Avenue(R07-010 Sharma) be considered for Third Reading.
Background
An application was received by Sanjay and Sara Sharma to rezone the property located at32625 Cherry Avenue (Map 1) from RS-2 One Unit Suburban Residential zone to RS-1F OneUnit Compact Residential Two zone. The proposal is for a five lot subdivision consisting of twoconventional single family lots fronting on Stokes Avenue and three compact single family lotsfronting on Cherry Avenue (Map 2).
Prior to the public hearing, a number of the owners along Stokes Avenue signed a petitionstating that they wanted conventional lots along Stokes to fit the existing neighbourhoodcharacter. The developer thus amended the lot layout to show two conventional size lots (ratherthan three compact lots) on Stokes Avenue prior to the rezoning proceeding to public hearing.Therefore, the lots fronting on Stokes Avenue are significantly larger than the minimum requiredby the zoning bylaw. It is noted that the application also includes a Development Permit fordesign.
This application went to Public Hearing on October 27, 2008 and at the March 16, 2009 RegularCouncil meeting Council requested a Third Reading report.
Issue
The primary issue regarding this proposal is that residents who spoke at the Public Hearing didnot support the two proposed house designs for Stokes Avenue as presented at the meeting.They requested house designs that were in character with the houses located on the north sideof Stokes Avenue. They also said that the houses should have an attached garage. It is notedthat staff spoke to residents after the public hearing regarding their concerns. Staff thenrequested the applicants' house designers to provide new house designs in keeping with thedesigns of the houses on the north side of Stokes Avenue. Staff forwarded photographs ofthese houses to the designers and new house designs for the two proposed lots on StokesAvenue were prepared. The following information pertains to the revised house designs forproposed Lots 4 and 5:
1) Overall Design— similar to the houses across the Street on Stokes Avenue withprominent front windows, gables, pillars, rockwork, and front porches.
2) Materials— heritage style vinyl siding, board and batten and shakes. Also, stone accents.
3) Rooflines- similar to the sloping rooflines across the street on Stokes Avenue.
16
PAGE 1 OF 2
4) Scale — the scale is two storeys (as viewed from Stokes) which is the same as thehouses across the street on Stokes Avenue. There is also a basement in each of theproposed houses (approx. 1500 sq. ft.) and it is noted that some of the houses onStokes Avenue have basements.
5) Square Footage of Main Floor and Upper Floor: Lot 4 — Main floor 1530 sq. ft. andupper floor 1064 sq. ft. & Lot 5 — Main floor 1571 sq. ft. and upper floor 1046 sq. ft. andthis is in keeping with the style of houses on Stokes Avenue.
6) Width of houses: 13.4 metres (44 ft.) wide. It is noted that the houses across the streeton Stokes Avenue are approximately 38 feet wide to 50 feet wide.
7) Height of houses: Approximately 9.6 metres (31.5 feet) and is less than the maximumheight within the zoning bylaw and is similar to the houses on Stokes Avenue.
8) Colours - beiges and browns for Lot 4 and tans and browns for Lot 5, similar to thecolours in the neighbourhood.
9) Garage - the garage is a detached garage located behind each house and the design ofthe garages (including colours) matches the houses. Access to the garage is from thelane. Rather than an attached garage, staff asked for a large front window feature facingStokes Avenue which is considerably more attractive than garage doors.
The design drawings showing these changes are attached as Drawing A (Lot 4) and DrawingB (Lot 5). Also attached are photographs of the houses across the street from the proposal sothat Council can see the existing houses in comparison (Drawings C, D, E, F and G). It is notedthat the proposed house designs as shown in Drawings A and B have many of the features ofthe existing houses without being copycat designs.
The only feature that has not been included in the proposed house designs is the attachedgarage. For a number of years Staff and Council have worked on a plan for the Cedar Valleyarea that allows for lanes and detached garages. Lanes provide two main advantages fordeveloping good neighourhoods in that they take some of the traffic off the main roads aspeople in their vehicles utilize the lanes to go to and from their garages and lanes also providefor a more pedestrian friendly frontage.
This development proposal has a lane that is an extension of previous development and will beextended to the west as further development occurs. It is staff's opinion that the detachedgarage is an important component of these types of developments.
Summary
In summary, the proposed house designs provide similar designed houses to fit with theneighbourhood character of the existing houses on the north side of Stokes Avenue includingthe incorporation of tan and beige colours.
Dayle Reti
G:COMDEV/Dayle/Sharma Third Reading Report (R07-010)
FILE:PRO.DEV.ZON PAGE 2 OF 2R07-010
17
32699 32 7 :
Cotn)
ooci)
co
O()IO
03ts)tr
CO
Cri%.;
03
cr
lAFFNER TERR.
coasco
cotr0
ooto03
coo)ID
coc.”to
COs.10
TANAKA TERR.
Ti cot.)tO
coIVcr*
coIV
A IV IV
co 03 co coK.1 IV K)
COts1cc)cri
CO
10
cotf100
Lr
326
32631326
32641 3264
3264 9 3265
326593266
32671 326711
32681 ---32632691,3270
32 70132716
32 711
32 7 21177
32593
132626
32631 c) Cf)
32636 yCo Co CO 00 CO
A A A0 r%) t./1 Col Ato ,(.4
32663
32 6 7 7
32 681
32 699
co
cnto
earcro
262
3262332633
32641
32693 „ W gym `
HARRIS ST
Ocn
8330
8326
8320
8316
facce
32638
32662 m'32654
tr") oo
(-" n Z.°. .326 70ty1
32654
LA
ID
32 502
32524
32538
32554
32596
32598
32604
32620
i); tsires,r4..uu 16]
/32482 -1
324 73
32469
324 72
32484
32496
32466
0 CD140 CO
0 0
coc.oco
oo
co
co cococ.tt
CO
(.,11
coNtTto
CO
ER CRES.
cors.)ab
03
N
UItn
oo coofUI
cotn)
cri
cocn
CO(.4 Co
cococoIr1Out
soCO
COtol0
32621otc
3262
3272
3272
• 1
CA
32551
32567
32625 1
32485
32499
32621
32633
32609
32615
32573
32593
32585
32626
32632
32606
32612
32 592 '
3258832572
cototo
32577
32585
32593
32603
McPHERSON ST
cotr
ALEXANDRA ST
coao
co 0132594• (.11 1s)crt U 32600
co [ CO COAU
1w1.110) 4b CO
COca
co
10
8556
r-CO
L %
rn
03trltit
aoal0)
32532E
3:
co illt
0 •40 •
325
32!
32661 32663 32662 32661326 7 7
-a32699
32676 326 7 5
32693
32 702
3 2 712
. —L.
32484
, co
cnOD
0)
03
tO0
co
W0
03 \torn)
cococo
co
co32 70 7 32702 32 70 7 32 704
3270832 7143271332 717 32712
32713
3272332726 32 7 2432 723IL, 7 ‘7 Vrr
3256632565
32 55232553
-44b1131 h.) I Co ih
MILLER CRES.
32663
32673
32653
8314
cs,
32465
32 4 71
rfi 32483
3 2 4 95/
mak
OD
10 5 0 lao 25.0
18 17 16
5
621ra2
4
851mZ
1705
2 3
458m2 3 455,4
mar 19
15 111314 I 81G
PIAN
DISTRICT OF MISSION FILE: S07-010
FUTURE POTENTIAL.LO7 LAYOUTSSHOW IN GRAYSCALE
PCL. DREF.PLAN 9259
of LOT 15 PLAN 665
PLAN 81863
OUIDING TO BE RONVED(APPROZLOGRON)
7
5
PLAN4
IZO5
LANE
11.38 11.36
LACERTE LANE
BU TO BE REMOVED
55P0ROX .0CATION 3
?LA 67269 2
Wade & Associates Land Surveying LtdB.C. Land SurveyorsMission & Maple RidgePhone: (604) 826-9561 or 463-4753File: M3558-02 RI
DRAWING Q47E:AUG.02, 2007
12
BCP71066
DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION OFLOT 63 SECTION 29 TOWNSHIP 17N.W.D. PLAN 67269Scale : 500An *dances aro in metros and deoinalsthereof organs othervist indicated.
1. That, in accordance with Rezoning Application R07-030 (TGK Engineering), the Director ofCorporate Administration prepare a bylaw to amend District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 by rezoning the properties located at 33769 and 33801 Knight Avenue and legallydescribed as:
Parcel Identifier: 011-074-680; Lot 6, Section 27, Township 17, NWD Plan 7020
011-074-671; Lot 5, Section 27, Township 17, NWD Plan 7020
from RS-3 Low Density Rural Residential zone to RS-1C Mixed One-Unit Urban and OneUnit Small Lot Urban Residential zone;
that the bylaw be considered for 1 st and 2nd reading at the Regular Council Meeting on April20, 2009; and
that following such a reading, the bylaw be forwarded to Public Hearing on May 25, 2009.
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 S07-027.
Proposal
The applicant is proposing to rezone the subject properties from RS-3 to RS-1 C toaccommodate a future nine (9) lot subdivision. The RS-1C zone requires that a minimum of70% of the proposed lots have an area not less than 558 square meters (6006.4 square feet)and no more than 30% of the proposed lots have an area not less than 465 square meters(5005.3 square feet). The proposed lots conform to this requirement as only two of the proposedlots are less than 558 square meters. Proposed lots 7 and 8 have areas of 556.92 squaremeters and 549.97 square meters respectively. The remaining 7 lots range from 558.04 squaremeters to 730.46 square meters.
The application will include the extension of Kettley Place forming a cul-de-sac at the southernend of the existing Kettley Place road (Appendix 1).
Site Description
The site slopes from north to south falling approximately 11 meters. The significance of theslope precludes Kettley Place connecting to Knight Avenue as a through road. No watercoursesor environmentally sensitive areas (ESA's) encumber the property. There is an existing dwellingon the site that will be removed as part of the development.
Neighbourhood Context
The subject property resides in an urban residential neighbourhood. Properties in the immediatevicinity are zoned RS-1 (One-Unit Urban Residential zone), RS-1A (One Unit Small Lot Urban
27
PAGE 1 OF 13
Residential zone), and RS-3 (Low Density Rural Residential zone). The RS-1 zone allows for aminimum parcel size of 558 square meters (6006.4 square feet), the RS-1A zone allows for aminimum parcel size of 465 square meters (5005.3 square feet), and the RS-3 zone allows for aminimum parcel size of 1.2 hectares (2.96 acres).
Rezoning to an RS-1C zone will create lots that are similar in size or slightly larger than the lotsin the immediate neighbourhood.
Official Community Plan Designation
The application is in conformance with the Official Community Plan and therefore does notrequire an Official Community Plan (OCP) amendment (Appendix 2).
Zoning
The application is to rezone the properties at 33769 and 33801 Knight Avenue from RS-3 to RS-1 C. The RS-1 C requires that a minimum of 70% of the proposed lots have an area not less than558 square meters (6006.4 square feet) and no more than 30% of the proposed lots have anarea not less than 465 square meters (5005.3 square feet). The proposal would result in nine(9) lots being created. Two (2) of the proposed lots are less than 558 square meters. Proposedlots 7 and 8 are 556.92 square meters (5,994.64 square feet) and 549.97 square meters(5,919.83 square feet) respectively. The remaining proposed lots (lots 1 to 6 and lot 9) rangefrom 558.04 square meters (6,006.7 square feet) to 730.46 square meters (7,862.61 squarefeet) in area.
Community Amenity
In accordance with Council Policy LAN. 40 — FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS FOR COMMUNITYAMENITIES POLICY, the applicant has submitted a letter volunteering to contribute $1,000 pernew lot with the amount of $7,000 payable prior to the adoption of the zone amending bylaw.
It is noted that this application was made on November 15, 2007 prior to the changes to theCommunity Amenity Contribution amounts.
As part of Council's consideration of .the RS-1C Zone, the developer has also volunteered anadditional public benefit of $6,000 for the additional lot achieved through the mixed density ofthe RS-1 C Zone. The contribution is to be put forward towards the embellishment ofneighbourhood park facilities at the discretion of the Parks, Recreation and CultureDevelopment.
Tree Retention and Replanting
In accordance with Council Policy LAN. 32 — TREE RETENTION REPLANTING POLICY, theapplicant is required to plant two (2) trees per lot, or cash-in lieu at the rate of $250.00 per tree.The submitted arborist report indicates that there twenty-eight (28) significant trees on the site,four (4) of which will remain. The applicant is planning to plant twenty-four (24) trees as part ofthe development (Appendix 3).
As there are fewer than ten (10) proposed lots, the Director of Planning is granted the authorityto approve Tree Retention/Replanting proposals.
Parkland
As greater than 3 lots are being proposed, the owner of the lands is required to either provide,without compensation, parkland not exceeding 5% of the land proposed for subdivision, or payto the municipality an amount that equals the amount of land required for parkland.
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON PAGE 2 OF 13R07-030
28
The development site is not identified in the Parks and Trails Master Plan as being in a locationin which future park development is required; Knightview Park is located within close proximityto the proposed development. Subsequently, the applicant will provide cash-in-lieu of an amountthat equals the requirement for parkland as per comments received from the Director of Parksand Recreation (Appendix 4).
Please note that the existing parks referenced by the Director of Parks and Recreation arenoted on the OCP Plan in Appendix 2.
Pedestrian Circulation
The applicant is proposing nine (9) lots, seven (7) of which will front Knight Avenue and BarnettStreet. Proposed lots 1 and 9 will front Kettley Place and will not have direct access to KnightAvenue.
Pedestrian destinations in the immediate neighbourhood include schools, parks, and transitservice. Please refer to the OCP Map in Appendix 2 — Maps for a visual on the followingdescriptions.
Hillside Elementary School is located north-west of the subject property and can be accessedby proposed lots 1 and 9 via Kettley Place, Melburn Drive and Best Avenue. For the remainderof the proposed lots, access to the school will occur via Knight Avenue and a pedestrianwalkway joining Knight Avenue and Dorothea Court.
The main park in the neighbourhood, Knightview Park, is accessed via the following routes:
■ Lots 1 and 9 — via Kettely Place and a future extension on Melbourne Drive whichwill connect to Knight Avenue (currently under application), and
■ Lots 2 to 8 — via direct access by Knight Avenue.
Existing transit service is available on Best Avenue with stops at the corner of Melburn Driveand at Hillside Elementary and is easily accessed within a 5 to 10 minute walking radius to allproposed lots.
The applicant is not being required to extend Kettley Place to Knight Avenue as the associatedslope is very steep, consequently precluding road development. Further, a proposeddevelopment directly to the east will provide direct access from Kettley Place to Knight Avenue(33811, 33835 Knight Avenue and 8135 Stave Lake Street). The grade of the proposeddevelopment to the immediate east provides viable access to Knight Avenue from KettleyPlace.
Internal Comments
The application was reviewed at the Development Review Committee meeting which hasrepresentation from Planning, Engineering, Inspection Services, Fire, RCMP, and Parks andRecreation. The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposal with comments outlined inthe Engineering Department Rezoning Comments attached (Appendix 5).
External Referrals
The usual referrals have been made to the various utility agencies as part of the subdivisionprocess. Responses have been received from Terasen Gas and BC Hydro with no significantconcerns.
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON PAGE 3 OF 13R07-030
29
Public Hearing Information PackageIn 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 Amending Bylaw
• Receipt of the Community Amenity contribution in the amount of $7,000 (the application wassubmitted on November 15, 2007, prior to the new Community Amenity ContributionAmounts); -
• Receipt of the public benefit contribution in the amount of $6,000;
• A letter of credit or cash in the amount of $6,000 for installing and maintaining trees proposedin the Tree Plan letter;
• Engineering requirements (see attached); and
• Any other items that Council may require resulting from the Public Hearing or Councilconsideration of the application.
SummaryIn sum, a fr.t.ff r ommend that the rezoning proposal proceed to Public Hearing on May 25,
Ryan son
a \COMD V\RYAN \Development Files \Khangura - Knight Avenue\Reports\Khangura 1st and 2nd.doc
30
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON PAGE 4 OF 13R07-030
-------6H t
MAL LC T FLA& ?D.2,,E.111:irt2L ltrAMI-P
411*
TOR DEVELOPMENT BUTA KHAtsIGURA DESEM: TOIL MC-ELT 4.515
ENGINEERING LTD.IILHM1 3.1M3NT W.
A.SekrIWT-fr) 6.selPROPOSED 9 LOT :SUBDIVISION
33759 e4 3,350t KNIGHT AVENUECitblo151' NCALE' I 514
rGK DEVELOPMENT -1 OU TAKt0I-iiGURAENONEERING LTD. PROPOSED 9 1_01 SUBOIVIS1ON!ce't77-..-PortlArgt::" 3769 & 33801 KNCHT AVENUE
. . .
AX,-
• .-
)2,2
• - .
1...*
Central Valley free & Arborist Services
Central VaLley Tree & Arbor ist Services
•
4/.
.0FCEZ:$ 9 LOT 9-1 1...'r'd,;13itk !,14.71 101114T ,viEht_ 4:_
Appendix 4 — Parks Referral Response
DISTRICT.. QF MISSION
PP14.114/11PIMPINiiiiMili
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBDIVISION APPLICATION COMMENTS
DISTRICT OF MIS ION PARKS RECREATI & CULTURE DEPARTMENT COMMENTS
Referral Date: October 1, 200B
Subject Property: 33769 & 33801 Knight Avenue
Legal Description: 33769 Knight Ave.: Parcel Identifier, O1l-0744SO; Lot 6 Section 27Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 702033801 Knight Ave,; Parcel Identifier; 011-074-67i; Lot t Section 27 Township 17 NewWestminster District Plan 7020
Pile Number: PRO.DEV.SUB S137-027
it or Proposed Lots: 9
Please provide your written comments within 1 month from the rolorral date (ie.November 1, 20081 toRyan Anderson, Planner, via inter-office mail,
Referral Date: October 1, 2000
Subject Property: 33769 & 33601 Knognt Avenue
Legal Description: 33769 Knight Ave.: Parcel Identifier: 011-074-680; Lot 5 Section 27Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 702033801 knight Ave,: Parcel Identifier; 011-074-671; Lot S Section V Township 17 NewWestminster District Plan 7020
Pile Numben PRO.DEV,,SLIB S07427
of Proposed Lots: 9
Please provide your written comments within 1 month from the referral date fie.November 1, 20081 to Ryan Anderson, Plannei via inIet-oltee mail_
• .ø- 4
4,t 7.1 rt.;
AI ke 44.7
Signed; -
Date:
DISTRICT OF MISSION 00X 20 MISSION, BC 112Y 4LSFH.DP4 61348713-374KIFAX 61)4412A.7951
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON PAGE 12 OF 13R07-030 and S07-027
Municipal water is available on Knight Avenue, Kettley Place and Barnett Street. Nofurther upgrading required at this time.
2. SANITARY SEWER REQUIREMENTS:
Municipal sanitary sewer is available on Barnett Street at the north property line andon Knight Avenue at Melburn Drive. The Developer is required to extend a sanitarysewer main west on Knight Avenue from Melburn Drive to the east boundary of33801 Knight Avenue. Engineered design required.
3. STORM SEWER REQUIREMENTS:
Municipal storm sewer is available on Barnett Street and on Knight Avenue, nofurther upgrading required at this time.
4. ROAD WORK REQUIREMENTS:
Knight Avenue and Barnett Street provide paved access to the site, no furtherupgrading required at this time.
5. FEES:
DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
100% CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT To be determined5% ADMINISTRATION FEE To be determinedGOODS AND SERVICES TAX (GST) To be determined
RECOMMENDATION
From an engineering point of view the rezoning application may proceed to third reading,the owner has volunteered to install all deficient works in connection with the rezoning.A secured development agreement for the above mentioned services must be in placeprior to adoption of the zoning amendment bylaw.
39
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON
PAGE 13 OF 13R07-030 and S07-027
MemoFILE: PRO.DEV,ZON/PRO.DEV.DEVR08-001/DV09-001
To: Chief Administrative OfficerFrom: PlannerDate: April 20, 2009Subject: Rezoning Application R08-001 & Development Variance Permit Application
DV09-001 (Dinahan) - 33344 4 th Avenue
Recommendation
1. That Development Variance Permit Application DV09-001, in the name of Justin Lee(property owner), be amended to include the following:
■ Vary Section 310.7 Setbacks of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 by reducingthe minimum required rear yard setback from 7.5 meters (24.6 feet) to 6.08 meters(19.95 feet);
And be forwarded to a public input meeting on May 25, 2009.
2. That zone amending Bylaw 5018-2009-3143(324) be forwarded to Public Hearing on May25, 2009.
Background
This proposal was originally considered for first and second reading by Council on March 16,2009. At that time, Council granted the application first and second reading and directed Staff toproceed to Public Hearing. In further discussions with the applicant it was discovered that aproposed lot layout and building scheme were available. However, the proposed layout requiredan additional variance to the rear yard setback. This new information necessitated therescinding of first and second reading, which was received on March 16, 2009, as the originalreport did not address the additional variance nor the new information.
Proposal
The applicant is proposing to rezone a portion of the subject property from RT-1 to RS-1A toaccommodate a two (2) lot subdivision (see Appendix 1).
A single family dwelling currently straddles the lot line which separates the two legal parcels.Subsequently, this application constitutes a boundary change subdivision and Section 105.13`Boundary Changes' of the Zoning Bylaw is applicable.
A reduced width panhandle is being proposed, however properties must have road frontage,and cannot simply front a lane. The panhandle accommodates the requirement for frontage, butwill not provide access. The applicant is also proposing a variance to the width requirement ofthe panhandle to alleviate setback variances associated with the location of the existing singlefamily dwelling and the proposed location of the panhandle.
Site Description
The subject site is comprised of two legal lots which front 4 th Avenue to the north and a lane tothe south. Lot 6 lies to the west and has an approximate area of 567 square meters (6,103square feet) and Lot 7, to the east, is approximately 284 square meters (3,057 square feet).
40
PAGE 1 OF 13
The subject site slopes sharply from the north to the south. An existing single family dwellingstraddles the lot line separating Lots 6 and 7 in the northern portion of the subject site. Nowatercourses, significant trees, or environmentally sensitive areas exist on the subject site.
While existing Lot 7 is non-conforming, it is a legal lot, and a single family dwelling could be builton this lot if a portion of the existing single family dwelling which straddles the lot line betweenLots 6 and 7 is removed.
Neighbourhood Context
The subject site is located in a residential neighbourhood which is predominated by RT-1 (TwoUnit Urban Residential Zone) lots, which have a minimum parcel size of 790 square meters(8,503.7 square feet) for a two-unit residential use and a minimum parcel size of 558 squaremeters for a one-unit residential use. Other properties in the vicinity of the subject site arezoned RS-1A (465 square meter minimum parcel size) with some multi-family and institutionalzones interspersed as well.
The subject site's neighbourhood is physically separated from neighbourhoods to the west by asignificant slope in the form of a ravine associated with Lane Creek (see Appendix 2).
Additionally, another slope prohibits access to some lots on the south side on 4 th Avenue. Thefour (4) lots east of the subject site front the lane and are accessed from the lane; consequently,proposed Lot B will fit with the form and character of the neighbourhood.
Appendix 2 attached has zoning and a topographic map for reference.
Official Community Plan Designation
The application is in conformance with the Official Community Plan and therefore, does notrequire an Official Community Plan (OCP) amendment.
The proposed development conforms with Section 2.4 Infill Residential of the District of MissionOCP. This section of the OCP encourages this style of small lot development, aims atcombating urban sprawl, and provides a variety of housing forms while increasing density inexisting neighbourhoods.
Zoning
The application is to rezone a portion of the site located at 33344 4 th Avenue from RT-1 to RS-1A in order to create proposed Lot A. In addition, the applicant is proposing a boundaryadjustment to the existing two (2) legal lots (see Appendix 3 attached).
Proposed Lot A would have an area of approximately 465 square meters (5,005.2 square feet);the RS-1A zoning requires a minimum 465 square meter (5,005.2 square feet) lot area.
Proposed Lot B would maintain its current RT-1 zoning and would have an approximate lot areaof 346 square meters (3,724.3 square feet). The RT-1 zoning requires a minimum lot size of 558square meters (6,006.3 square feet) for one unit residential development. However, Section105.13 Boundary Changes of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 allows for this type ofsubdivision that would otherwise not meet the conditions stipulated by the Zoning Bylaw.
Section 105.13 Boundary Changes
Section 105.13 Boundary Changes from the District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 readsas follows:
Where an application is made to subdivide two or more adjoining lots, any ofwhich are less in area than the minimum area provided elsewhere in this bylaw,
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 2 OF 13R08-001/DV09-001
41
which subdivision relocates the common boundary or boundaries between thelots being subdivided, the subdivision may be approved by the Approving Officer,provided that:
1. None of the lots proposed to be created are less in area than the smallestof the lots being subdivided.
2. The number of lots proposed to be created is not greater than the numberof lots being subdivided.
3. Such subdivision will not render any existing use or building(s) of the lotsbeing subdivided non-conforming.
4. The lots proposed to be created will comply with all other applicableprovisions of this bylaw.
5. No greater number of lots which do not comply with the minimum lot arearequirements shall be created.
Items 1, 2, 3, and 5 of Section 105.13 are satisfied by the proposed development. However,variances are required to create lots which conform to the requirements of the associatedzones.
Variances and Rationale
Urban Panhandle
The following variance to Section 105.14 of the District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 isrequired:
■ Vary Section 105.14 Panhandle Lots of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 byreducing the minimum required Panhandle width from 6.0 meters (19.687 feet) to 1.76meters (5.77 feet).
Planning Staff support varying the required width of the panhandle as it is a technicalrequirement, and is not intended to provide access to proposed Lot B.
Due to the slope associated with the site, access to proposed Lot B cannot be physicallyaccomplished from 4 th Avenue. However, all legally created lots must have frontage on ahighway, and not a lane. Therefore, although the panhandle will never be used to accessproposed Lot B, it satisfies the requirement that each lot having frontage.
Zoning Bylaw
The following variances to the District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 are required:
■ Vary Section 302.7 Setbacks of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 by reducingthe minimum required Front yard setback from 6.0 meters (19.68 feet) to 4.61 meters(15.12 feet);
■ Vary Section 302.3 Minimum Dimensions of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998by reducing the minimum required Lot depth from 25.0 meters (82.0 feet) to 22.01meters (72.51 feet);
■ Vary Section 310.3 Minimum Dimensions of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998by reducing the minimum required Lot depth from 30.0 meters (98.42 feet) to 15.18meters (49.80 feet); and
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 3 OF 13R08-001/DV09-001
42
■ Vary Section 310.7 Setbacks of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 by reducingthe minimum required rear yard setback from 7.5 meters (24.6 feet) to 6.08 meters(19.95 feet).
The proposed front yard setback variance is in regards to an existing situation associated withthe existing single family dwelling. Staff support the setback variance as it will create a legallyconforming situation where a legally non-conforming situation exists.
The proposed rear yard setback variance is in regards to providing an adequate buildingenvelope for the proposed single family dwelling on proposed Lot B (see Appendix 4 attached).The applicant will be required to enter into restrictive covenants to ensure the proposed buildingenvelope and building design are maintained and to ensure adequate amenity space is realizedfor the proposed Lot B, in this case a 6.7 meter x 15 meter (100.5 square meters or 1,081.8square feet) spacwe located to the west of the proposed residence.
Proposed Lots . A and B will require variances to minimum lot requirements for depth. Staffsupport this variance as the natural grade of the site partially dictates the proposed lotconfiguration. Further, the proposed layout creates more privacy than the two existing lots couldotherwise be afforded.
Subdivision Control Bylaw
The following variance to the District of Mission Subdivision Control Bylaw 1500-1985 isrequired:
■ Vary Schedule B-1 Service Requirements of the Subdivision Control Bylaw 1500-1985by waiving the requirement of a piped drainage system
As no additional lots are being created, Engineering Staff support this proposed variance.
Geotechnical Report
Two Geotechnical Reports from Fraser Valley Engineering Ltd. (FVEL) were submitted by theapplicant dated January 30th , 2008 and November 14 th , 2008. In addition a letter from FVEL wasreceived August 19 th , 2008.
The purpose of the January 2008 report was to identify subsurface conditions, determine thesuitability of the site for the proposed development, and prepare geotechnical recommendationsfor structural design and construction of the project. The report submitted in November 2008addressed drainage management and slope stability issues. The letter submitted from FVELsupplemented both reports and reiterated their findings.
Engineering Staff have reviewed the aforementioned reports and letter from FVEL and haveaccepted the recommendations. In addition, they have requested that both reports be registeredon title as restrictive covenants at the subdivision stage.
Engineering comments have been attached as Appendix 5.
Community Amenity
The applicant is proposing a rezoning to accommodate a boundary change subdivision. Thesubject site is currently two (2) legal lots, and the proposal is for two (2) legal lots.Consequently, the applicant is not proposing to create any new lots and no additional burdensare being placed upon the community.
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 4 OF 13R08-001/DV09-001
43
Tree Retention and Replanting
No trees are required to be removed for this application. Therefore the applicant is required onlyto plant two trees per lot or provide cash-in-lieu. The applicant will be planting two trees per lot(4 trees in total) as outlined in the District of Mission LAN. 32 Tree Retention Replanting Policy.
Parkland
Section 941 Provision of Parkland of the Local Government Act requires that an owner of landbeing subdivided must provide either parkland in an amount equal to 5% of the land beingsubdivided or cash-in-lieu for a comparable amount. However, this same section of the LocalGovernment Act does not apply should the proposal be for fewer than three (3) additional lots.Therefore, as the applicant is proposing fewer than 3 additional lots, no parkland requirement isapplicable to this application.
Internal Comments
The application was reviewed at the Development Review Committee meeting which hasrepresentation from Community Development, Engineering, Inspection Services, Fire, RCMP,and Parks and Recreation. The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposal withcomments outlined in the Engineering Department Rezoning Comments attached (Appendix5).
External Referrals
The usual referrals have been made to the various utility agencies as part of the subdivisionprocess.
Public Hearing Information Package
In accordance with Council Policy LAN.50 — PRE-PUBLIC HEARING INFORMATIONPACKAGES will be produced , containing material related to the development application.
Requirements Prior to Adoption of the Zone Amending Bylaw
• A letter of credit or cash in the amount of $1,000 to ensure the planting of 4 trees.
• Engineering requirements (attached as Appendix 5).
• Approval of Development Variance Permit DV09-001 will be considered as part of the sameCouncil agenda as the Official Community Plan and Zone Amending Bylaws are considered.
• Any other items that Council may require resulting from the Public Hearing or Councilconsideration of the application.
• Restrictive Covenant for Building Design and Building Envelope.
Summary
44
taff recommend that the development variance permit application proceed to aing a the rezoning proposal proceed to Public Hearing on April 27, 2009.
GACOMD RYAN \Development Files Dinahan - 33344 4th Ave\ Reports\ Dinahan 1st and 2nd.doc
FILE: P .DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 5 OF 13R08-001/1C/09-001
MAO
17
A
If
r.
MIR MOM
6 - I. et
AIN g pirit memos mcligieti I !rc
I e3u-
• F1.Aii IROP
I.
I
4111 "Eliafff gigigg au lit* grig
MA 0.006'10 4' U.
00)1 t41504 at 701,4
41. '1* VIP
Appendix 1 - Site Plan
45
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 6 OF 13R08-001 /DV09-001
Appendix 2
S08-002R08-001 ZONING (I\1 I
v t-,LWWI 4Mlia
/1>
Add
L PA1 1
10L. 74557
10 I
I
i 473 0,,r, 13 12'-L. '''' '9 z—
2
PL.
12 474.*a■•• 12 ni 13
O()
22 1
1613 9
7wiMir 15 24 15Cr,...0
NO ROAD 610 9 19 33060,,0 8
—
2
C./3
10 < L. 763E
89
MP226" 262 'I.? 0 „1
iNtI
306 w)22412 w>3.„,.. c■I J
3 ij:1 1 1.3 22
31PL
332 1640984
13I.,
W22
202 8
PL.A
182
...
1",A
PL.B
17340..____
-421p 76324
1P.
279 n
16 15
2124 15 1,..: 1
NO ROAD 5TH AVE. C/3 V)
9
11
]
P-11 PL. 1903 1_661
9 ,668 ,r3
e&
S 12 13 ...C.C. 12,,,...‘ PL. 277 2'1•■ 231
PL. 727...., 232
CI)3 Er 11ErilZ9 8 2216 /
IM r,giiii
KW
. 267151 •
NI riI01:r 21
olNul
o,', ,,, i, 235
,..j 234 7O 24 15 I
4TH A . 'Sr" 1.,I SPNWEmp
SUBJECTSITE
PL. 6145
mainilr
r . 3506 ai. i 1672 mpg,s ma rtISPNW 11869
1 ER1 ■ pkin,.":i---11
5 RIP, "14330 •
g ..:_
262 to3 3
PL 54258 5•11 Ill16 263 t14.,
CMP 264 --;
1
RD AVE. •■ I
15327
2814
5/6A
3
LMP M330 '-- ArillEFIIIII1112
5•
q I
II
1 1 II•IrB,
...1
E.Nn EASE. LMP 41■J
LMS 942C P I. A I1 17MP 42
A
PC154
1. • • Vro. ner111.11
1 1.. pcy5■71 awl i , -,. .!........- 'tag nom __
-
Mr IIIIII Ic. 18. 5A257
-....•
PL. 59002
1I
.i i-fal il 1
i1MI L, 703--
c1;3:immIE. 512
u,alp. 465 5
I-: AM
6 ,7;2r..: 2386
4 9 7 31II:
LA i1 2
1 3■"1/4J92 4 I,,,2Pe.,;464—
.41.1 Al
LAP. 49659
.L,
rijS 1A
O.--,
9.,
FL.
D 4
664II i 51
• 463A el,vA
1PL.
L. 34664 R 694 1 i rn _NORTH -0 ILWAY AVE
46
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 7 OF 13
R08-001/DV09-001
111
47
S08-002R08-001 WATERCOURSE / TOPO I
77
'77
7
77
/// •
•4;410 33432 7590 77584 ,7,1;
7580 ,c47572 I/ n
MCO
034,1NP.)
N40 40N cs4nennn
EM •
61.4
2 1332767540
75347524
CONN
CV,
CO
N
0.)
InN
0toN
44 7581 7582
'
0 7544
7574
7560
7552
\7557
7575
7567
75417553 7552 N
7566
7544
7574 \
7534 75317530
7522 7532°1
N
7522 7
I.
a
-7-41574it
ak'D AVE. ----- --33.4
18_ _
7386carnPc)In
,. coa.ol,InIn
a1')min,
ia-to"1
.1,7
-c5r..„
...,In
-7-3934,
---73733
9 9 -. ....
7364'-' .-- = -t r- -
_ -333491-4,I I `
---,i-gn'')
- \ ,\33371 1,
\ ;
It
\ \„,,
21.0
(0-
2 $.8 21.8 -2IVP AVE: ,49.0
5
1.97520010000E ,,./.(mo
----
lir
al
1 1 11011 . //1/74-66.6 / Sr/ ///:,
II I \\\
SUBJECTSITE
/
/%7/ Si
1 111''I//7
'1-31,3247-
-//7
441
3266M.I.4,1I1 alp ccMIN 411rim .1,`■II= REECEpluirviro
04-03
V —In InIt) In
59 SO /
7486 33436 '.
7478-
7470'7466
74W
No74221111
35.0 \
cv- CV\
441 V ,
N
7376•
it4r) \‘`) v• -in IDNn nvv'S v ,r)
7350 1.2) tn
- -
gInJO,
z*IN
I I1 I
0
7512s
7
3:
ii
, ;744447436 '‘
,74307422
In 40.
7482
■, '7
7
7
77
7
7
7368
004IP
WW1
1
In co
4414,1
coto
7360
40-V`
en_
86
7-7
6118587
61.8
25 (i)
1917
61.4
8
75
65
52 8
33351
t.t.„44
...N11.1
5.6 1ST AVE- -
, -- - ,
313EL_1411.1/11 65
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 8 OF 13
R08-001/DV09-001
DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION OFLOT 6 & W1/2 OF LOT 7BLOCK 94, D.L.411,N.W.D. PLAN 1900Score 1:250Ai 4.tetonnle fl metees owl doomsrow.' IMPSY Ow** iVxoted
LNSIRICT GE WSSION r:
5S lao Existing Lot Configuration —RT-1 Zoning
4th AVENUE(06 kaVJ =CU 114 PLAN 11.11)
AREA O XCONG LOT 6 = S67m7AREA OF EMT= LOT 7 = 284m2
Proposed Lot A — RS-1 A Zoning (Proposed)Proposed Lot B — RT-1 Zoning (Maintained)
100- ,09*. 0{11(0007, A!--V0
4th Avenue
49
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEVR08-001/DV09-001
PAGE 10 OF 13
yr,Ae 4o3 ';r2.
= 160
Appendix 4 — Proposed Site Layout and Building Design
Required Rear Yard Variance(from 7.5 meters to 6.08 meters)
Note - The applicant will be required to enter into restrictive covenants to ensure the proposedbuilding envelope and building design are maintained.
50
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 11 OF 13R08-001/DV09-001
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT REZONIN
Appendix 5 — Engineering Comments
Original Comments Prior to Acceptance ofGeotechnical Engineer (FVEL) Recommendations
FILE. R08-001
June 04, 2008.
CIVIC ADDRESS: 33344 4 th Avenue
1.DOMESTIC WATER REQUIREMENTS:
None.
2.SANITARY SEWER REQUIREMENTS:
None.
3.STORM SEWER REQUIREMENTS:
The Developer is required to extend a storm sewer main west from Murray Street toservice the proposed development. The Developers engineering consultant isrequired to prove that the existing 200mm storm sewer main on Murray Street hasthe capacity to accommodate this proposed development.
4.ROAD WORK REQUIREMENTS:
None.
5. FEES:
DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT PRICE AMOUNT
100% CONSTRUCTION DEPOSIT To be determined5% ADMINISTRATION FEE To be determinedGOODS AND SERVICES TAX (GST) To be determined
RECOMMENDATION
From an engineering point of view the rezoning application shall be deferred. The owner's shallbe advised of the above noted servicing deficiencies associated with the rezoning application. Ifthe owner's wish to proceed with the rezoning application, a letter of volunteering to install alldeficient works in connection with the rezoning is required in order to proceed to third reading. Asecured development agreement for the above mentioned services must be in place prior toadoption of the zoning amendment bylaw.
51
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV
PAGE 12 OF 13R08-001/DV09-001
Letter from Engineering Department to Planner indicating Acceptance of Geotechnical EngineerRecommendations and Amendment of Storm Sewer Requirements
Ryan,
I spoke to Rick about the drainage report for Mr. Dinahan's subdivision from Fraser Valley Engineeringdated November 14, 2008 and he is prepared to accept the recommendations of the report.
This means that Mr. Dinahan will not be asked to volunteer the installation of offsite storm sewer as partof the rezoning and that engineering will support a variance at subdivision stage to waive the requirementfor a piped drainage system. Normally we would not entertain such a variance; however, in this case,there are no additional lots being created.
At subdivision stage, the November 14, 2008 drainage report along with the -geotechnical report ofJanuary 30, 2008 should be registered on title as a restrictive covenant to ensure that the retaining wallnecessary to stabilize the lots against seismic activity as well as the drainage disposal system andassociated easements are provided and maintained. We should discuss with Inspections Serviceswhether the installation of the drainage works should be a requirement of the subdivision. It would bemore difficult to get the retaining wall done at subdivision stage since the January 2008 geotechnicalreport shows it as part of the house structure.
Doug Riecken
Deputy Director of Engineering
District of Mission
52
FILE: PRO.DEV.ZON/PRO.DEV.DEV PAGE 13 OF 13R08-001/DV09-001
To: Chief Administrative OfficerFrom: PlannerDate: April 6, 2009
Subject: Minor Amendment to Floodplain Management Bylaw 4027-2007
Recommendation
1. The Director of Corporate Administration prepare a bylaw to amend District ofMission Floodplain Management Bylaw 4027-2007 Section 6(c) Dyke Areas byadding the words "Hatzic Dyke" immediately following the words "Mission Dyke".
2. The Director of Corporate Administration prepare a bylaw to amend District ofMission Floodplain Management Bylaw 4027-2007 Schedule "A" by updating thefloodplain boundary around Silvermere Lake.
Background
The District of Mission Floodplain Management Bylaw was adopted in 2008 to ensure that theDistrict of Mission had a bylaw which was consistent with the Provincial Flood Hazard AreaLand Use Management Guidelines-May 2004 and Section 910 of the Local Government Act.
Proposal To add the Hatzic Dyke to clause 6(c) Dyked Areas of the Floodplain Management Bylaw, whichstates; "No building or structure is permitted to be constructed in the designated floodplain of theFraser River outside the area protected by the Mission Dyke or the Silverdale Dyke." AlthoughHatzic Dyke is identified on the Floodplain Bylaw map, Schedule "A", it was not referred to inSection 6(c) of the Bylaw.
Portions of Silvermere Lake that are within the Fraser River floodplain were inadvertentlyomitted from Schedule "A" of the Floodplain Management Bylaw. These areas adjacent toSilvermere Lake need to be included in the Fraser River floodplain on Schedule "A" of theFloodplain Management Bylaw.
Summa ry
Staff recommends that the - Floodplain Management Bylaw 4027-2007 be amended to include"Hatzic Dyke" and that the mapping error on Schedule "A" around Silvermere Lake be corrected.
Th(\. .b(NY)Marcy Bond
a \COMDEV\MARCY\Floodplain information\Flooding Bylaw\staff report for Bylaw amendment April 2009.doc
PAGE 1 OF 1
Mission Memo.
ON THE FRASERFILE: PRO.PLA.VAGDevelopers and Realtors Information Meeting March 11, 2009
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Director of Planning
Date: April 20, 2009
Subject: Outcome from the Developer/Realtor Meeting held on March 11, 2009
.Background
The District of Mission has recently amended the Official Community Plan and has the final draftof the Zoning Bylaw almost ready for Council consideration. Both documents provide newdevelopment opportunities for developers and property owners as well as provide an affordablerental housing and mortgage helper option that has not been available in Mission in the past. Inaddition to the changes to the above bylaws, staff believe that changes to the SubdivisionControl Bylaw and the development process will improve the development outcome in Mission.Given the current economic situation, Council requested that staff to organize a meeting withdevelopers, realtors and contractors to share the new information.
The meeting was held on March 11, 2009 and 30 people attended. The powerpoint presentationis attached as Appendix 1 and the minutes as Appendix 2.
Topics raised at the meeting
The following questions and comments resulted in further research and action:
■ Secondary Dwellings
While the opportunity for new forms of secondary dwellings are very attractive, it wassuggested that the District of Mission provide an affordable opportunity to propertyowners who have an existing un-authorized secondary suite that would enable them tobring the suite into compliance;
This was offered in the past. Staff could research the success of the past process andbring a proposal forward for Council to consider. Any legalizing of an existing suite wouldrequire an assessment of deficiencies for fire safety and building code requirements, asa minimum. For suites created without a building permit, this can be costly.
■ Duplexes with basements
It is felt by staff that duplexes can now have basements because duplexes have beendefined as intensive residential in the new Official Community Plan, and therefore,require a Development Permit for form and character. This enables staff to review thedesign and ensure that the layout will not enable outside access to the basement area,which will prevent an un-authorized basement suite in one or both sides of a duplex. Therequirement for a Development Permit will provide a tool for staff to ensure that thedesign and scale of a duplex will fit into an existing neighbourhood.
■ Development Process The new process includes a pre-application meeting between staff and the developer,and any consultant they may wish to bring, to discuss their proposal prior to submittingan application. The developer will receive a summary of expectations after the meetingin writing. It is felt that this will go a long way to:
54
PAGE 1 OF 4
- provide clarity at the beginning of the process,
result in complete applications being submitted, and
reduce the chance for unexpected costs late in the process.
The suggestion to let applications sit, while not something that is usually encouraged, isthought to be an approach that will let the applicant complete the time consuming portionof the process that includes the public hearing without undertaking the considerable costof putting services into the ground and constructing roads. While this is likely notbeneficial to seasoned developers, it may help smaller operations which are not wellfunded or those who already own the land. By having a Development Agreement draftedand ready to go, staff could forward the rezoning bylaw to Council within a couple ofweeks for final consideration as soon as the applicant pays the final fees and approval ofthe subdivision immediately following adoption of the zone and completion of theDevelopment Agreement. In this way the applicant would be able to market their lotswhile they are installing the hard services, and therefore, shorten the length of time thatthey are carrying the cost of hard services.
They could also choose to install the hard services during a slow market whilecontactors are available and costs are reduced by the slower market.
■ Site Assessment
It is important to note that the Site Assessment is a proposed amendment to LAN 41Guide to Land Development policy and will be forwarded to Council shortly. Theinformation that will be required in the Site Assessment is currently required in allapplications now; however, the Site Assessment will require the information sooner inthe process. This will ensure that applications are complete when they are submittedand reduce the chance of an expensive late-hit for the developer late in the applicationprocess.
The Site Assessment could also be an affective tool for developer to use whencalculating the development potential of a site once all encumbrances have beenindentified, and therefore, determine a more accurate land value.
■ Defer payment of Development Cost Charges for residential development to the BuildingPermit stage;
Development Cost Charges are currently collected for industrial, commercial and multi-family projects at building permit stage. Staff confirmed that Development Cost Chargesfor single family dwellings are not being collected at Building Permit stage in Chilliwack.Under the Local Government Act, Development Cost Charges can not be collected whenthere are fewer than 4 self-contained dwelling units (LGA s.933(4)(b)(i)). If we wait forbuilding permit stage, it would be one single family dwelling, and would therefore beexempt. For this reason, Development Cost Charges for single family dwellings arecollected prior to approval of the subdivision (LGA s.933(1)).
A suggestion to reduce Development Cost Charges (DCC) could only be achieved byremoving projects from the list or extending the time for collecting funds pushingconstruction farther into the future. These approaches for reducing DCC costs are notsupported by staff at this time, since projects currently listed and timeframes are stillrequired and removal would put the burden on individual developers.
While fewer projects would reduce the amount of DCCs paid, the projects that areremoved would still need to be undertaken. Those projects would become off-site
FILE: PRO.PLA.VAG PAGE 2 OF 4Developers and Realtors Information Meeting March 11, 2009
55
deficiencies that a developer would need to volunteer to do if they wanted to proceedwith their project. In doing this they would be accepting the risk of being able to recoversome of their costs at an unknown future date through latecomer's agreementsassuming other development proceeded within the timeframe of the latecomeragreement.
Council could consider removing an area from the DCC bylaw for all or some of thecharges, in essence, exempting that area from DCC. For example a specific section ofdowntown could be exempted from DCC in an effort to encourage redevelopment to amore intense land use. With the potential increase in water and sewer DCCs, staff donot recommend a change at this time, and more work would be need to confirm that thereduced DCC would stimulate development.
■ Age-in-place housing
In response to comments regarding the need for age-in-place housing, the enablingpolicies are in place in the new OCP specifically under Policies 2.5.1 to 2.5.14 andUrban Compact/Multiple Family and Compact Cluster designations. Appendix 3 showsdesignated sites appropriate for age-in-place housing. The new Zoning changes thatencourage main floor secondary suite, garden cottages and multi-family projects thatresult in smaller dwellings with ground floor master suites and laundry facilities as wellas outside amenities could be applied to any of the eleven sites for age-in-placedevelopment.
The difficulty with age-in-place housing is the inability to require developers to build it.Developers need to see that they are meeting a market demand that is currently notbeing met and take the risk and build it.
■ Home Based-Business
The proposed Zoning Bylaw increases the number of employees by 1 or 2 employees(provided there is sufficient parking on-site) with the number of employees connected tothe size of the lot. A new activity on sites with a home-based business is 'limited retailsales' of products associated with the business.
go-.kn.:4-ivabs
Sharon FletcherG:COMDEV/Sharon/COW report/Outcome from the Developer/Realtor meeting held on March 11, 2009. doc
56
FILE: PRO.PLA.VAG PAGE 3 OF 4Developers and Realtors Information Meeting March 11, 2009
Noted Use Milne scale withresidential or office abed)meal to irnersty IN landuse
Housing Choice and Quality
Tcomxxisel. imth streetCX‘danto and wises° roar wirdWaren detichod garage
relr441°11::
57
I APPENDIX 1
AGENDA• Official Community Plan policy changes
Inc/eased housing cho ce• Mid Residential• Zoning changes. Sublyisesn Control Bose
• Process and ImplementationSecenthey DeellingsPre-appkttiOn Meeting
•Site assessmettDeicsaticri of authority
1
Infill residential with purpose-built elements
Mitet$uya. snnovatove ird llei 4chome•basod Noisiomi of timondarysae
3
inn and Market AffordabilitySouwelary ()swing flails —
GatIon Gauge
Infill and Market AffordabilitySetardsiry Dooms ursis -Stvattrirstem so wow. to se othObasencrit
4
Zoning ChangeDecrease front yard setback for porch and living spacewith 6 metre setback for garage —
•more ground floor space to compensate for increasedside yard setback
parting in front of garage
•emphasize the entrance
Zoning ChangeNot just allowed in Cedar Valley
5000sf infiii lot size expandedto Pie urban area• 4000sf and 3000sfcompact single familyin the urban compact area
Zoning ChangeExisting RT-1 Two Unit Urban Residential zone will allowSecondary Oweangs or Duplexes
Single family and either:
•a stole within the primary buikling
•a coach house over a detached garage, or
•a garden cottage
Lot size reduced to 5000sf (465sm)
Or
a duplex
Lot size has been
reduced to a minimum of 6000sf (558 sm) from > 8000sf
Zoning ChangesReduce lot width for subdivisions with a mix
of 5000 and 6000sf lots• reduce need for Development Variances• more flexibility in the shape of the lots
Side yard setback totals 4.5 metres•flexibility in the house location•enables access to rear yard• enables parking for secondary dwelling•reduces the mass of the dwelling
5
Subdivision ControlBylaw
Managing $10anin9lor east a nalirnivi Sheet
L I
-1101 aw
MC 1 11 ;111
P4W1,41•91gitiPAiififf'11:
Subdivision Control Bylaw
Major policy review• More road standard options to reduce the
need for Development Variance Permits:reduced the lAidlh
,Ixerceohon of narrower streetsnarrower Ow where eepicable
Process and ImplementationSecondary Dwellings on an existing lot
• No community amenity contribution• Savesi.911:
• No development cost charges•ea,r ber•ren $1 4i;on S?/X00
• No rezoning for RT-1 zoned areasa,e• SJSti
• Rezoningsai$??:.? S$00 not 52600
• Requires a development permit ($2150)
6
(23
Process and Implementation• Submit a Development Inquiry application• Pre-application Review meeting• Staff forward a pre-application follow-up letter
•3 to 41 int.C.S .1•CcIts 0131114
• Submit a complete Development Applicatton with acomplete site assessment
• I St and 24 reading• Public Hearing• 34 reading — •hat..vt•csan rnasneaO,Karq. *paws**
so•urnd dxsrnrrlitcnanf fssro, cu•tsneno Sons
• Staff forward the PLA to the applicant- 3 MOrMS oppro• mat ,/
Site Assessmenttool submitted with a development application,
that identifies:• waxy:tows (setbacks)• Troo inyorrory• Floociplail anus• Swop Sbpos• Sat espebtly• Wed fro insedace areas• Kay %Wilde and podesoron inkageS to ailment
neohbouthoods• Aciacent torsi uee needs and (thornier
dear indication of development potential whichis linked to land value
Process and Implementation
Proposing a Bylaw to Delegate Authority for:• Industrial Development Permit Areas• Compact Single Family Dwellings• Secondary Dwellings• Infill Development
Summary• Unique and flexible products• Infill on existing lots• Work through the process now and sit at
3rd reading with a PLA and a draftdevelopment agreement and wait for theright time
7
I APPENDIX 2 ISummary of the DEVELOPER/REALTOR MEETING WITH STAFF held in theConference Room at City Hall, on March 11, 2009 commencing at 4:00 p.m.
Staff Members Present: Glen Robertson, Chief Administrative OfficerSharon Fletcher, Director of PlanningBarclay Pitkethly, Deputy Director of PlanningRick Bomhof, Director of EngineeringMike Younie, Manager of Environmental Services
The director of planning gave a power point presentation regarding the proposedOfficial Community Plan changes. The presentation outlined the increased housingchoice, infill residential lots, zoning changes and subdivision control bylaw changes.The presentation further explained the new processes and implementation of thechanges. Specifically information regarding, secondary dwellings, pre-applicationmeetings, site assessment requirements and the delegation of authority, wasprovided in detail.
Approximately 30 developers and realtors attended the meeting with a discussionensuing regarding the following topics:
Unauthorized Suites:
There was a suggestion made that the District Of Mission look into the process thatthe City of Abbotsford uses for legalizing suites. It was stated that the process thatMission uses is expensive and difficult, and needs to be reviewed. There are a largenumber of unauthorized suites in Mission with little control over them. The director ofplanning stated that in order to legalize existing suites, they would need to beinspected to ensure that the suite meets building code and fire safety requirements.
Garden Cottages:There were questions regarding the size of the garden cottages and whether themaximum size on rural lots could be larger than on urban lots? The deputy directorof planning explained the relation to the main dwelling and the size of the gardencottage. The intention is to have a garden cottage that is 40% of the size of the maindwelling to a maximum of 1182 square feet in a Rural and Rural Residentialdesignated area, 40% or a maximum of 1023 square feet in a Suburban designatedarea and 50% of the primary dwelling or a maximum of 807 square feet in an Urbandesignated area.
Duplex zone:There was a discussion regarding lot coverage for a duplex and what is included inthe square footage to estimate the size allowed. Will a duplex be allowed to have abasement in the new zoning bylaw? Duplexes will now be able to have basements.In addition other new requirements will include the ability to see both front doors fromthe road but do not need to be side by side. Duplexes are allowed on smaller lot thanwas previously allowed with a scale that fits the lot size. The units can be situatedbehind each other as well as side by side allowing duplexes on narrow existing lots.
64
Developer/Realtor Meeting with StaffWednesday, March 11, 2009 Page 2 of 3
Site assessment:
The deputy director of planning explained that the District will be looking for a snapshot of what is on a lot at the time an application is submitted for development. Theactual legal survey would not be necessary at this stage but a reference documentfrom a surveyor, which is what is normally required with an application, wouldprovide a site plan with the requested items. The site assessment would includeinformation that is required in all application now but would require it sooner.
Process:The director of planning explained the proposed process for developmentapplications, outlining the pre-application review meeting with staff and the developerfollowed by a written letter outlining application requirements. This will reduceconfusion around tasks and expectations. In addition it was suggested thatdevelopers could submit applications during the softer market time and complete therezoning to the 3rd reading stage with a Preliminary Layout Approval for thesubdivision and a draft development agreement, and wait for the right timing. Sheclarified that applications are valid for a one year period with the option of applyingfor an extension for a fee if the applicant did not want to process.
The chief administrative officer clarified that the developer could get their applicationto the 3 rd reading stage and complete many of the soft cost requirements while themarket is slow and they would be ready to complete the subdivision by installing themore expensive hard services when the market improves. As the district has fewerapplications currently coming in for processing the ability to proceed to 3 rd reading ina timely manner is better.
Development Cost Charges:
It was stated that city halls in the Fraser Valley (Chilliwack) are not chargingDevelopment Cost Charges (DCCs) until after the subdivision is sold. The director ofplanning confirmed that the District of Mission allows industrial and commercialdevelops to pay DCCs at building permit stage. This policy does not includedevelopment for residential properties. There was a suggestion to allow the samepolicy for single family subdivisions. It was agreed that the District would researchwhat other municipalities are doing for deferral of DCC's for subdivisions.
Separate but related, the chief administrative officer stated that there are proposalsto increase regional water and sewer DCCs. Council is contemplating an increase.There will be a separate meeting to present those proposals in the future.
Neighbourhood Commercial Downtown:
Questions focused on the ability to have a commercial building with a residenceabove such as the Abbotsford/Montrose area. The director of planning stated thatthe new Official Community Plan supports this mechanism for intensifying the use ofthe land and the social benefits of eye on a property and complete communities, andtherefore, the district supports neighbourhood commercial in the downtown area.Neighbourhood commercial provides a walkable community, intensifies the uses,provides opportunities for densification and makes for a healthy downtown.
65
Developer/Realtor Meeting with StaffWednesday, March 11, 2009 Page 3 of 3
Seniors — Aging in Place:It was acknowledged that there are opportunities for developments to includeproperties for seniors. The director of planning stated that there are many requestsfor dwelling units that include laundry and master bedroom on the main floor. Thismay be creating a pent up demand for people that want to stay in Mission but theoptions are not there for them. She suggested smaller dwellings, such as smallcluster housing developments with ground floor living space, that share commonland could meet this demand, however developer do not seem willing to respond tothis market.
Another opportunity would be a secondary dwelling such as a ground floorsecondary suite or a garden cottage. They will not be restricted to a relative as inthe past with the mobile home as a second dwelling on rural properties.
Live/Work Properties:
There were questions as to whether the new regulations will provide for live/workopportunities. Currently home-based businesses can exist where they are totallyenclosed in a building. Home-base business is a viable component for Mission'seconomy. The District is proposing to increase the number of employees allowed ina home-based business and allow a limited area to be used for retail sales of productproduced by the home-based business. The challenge is to ensure that the changesto the home-based business section of the zoning bylaw are seamless to theneighbourhood and do not create unforeseen issues. It was stated that althoughhome based businesses need business licenses we currently do not tax them as acommercial business. It is important to note that BC Assessment has assessed thebuilding and land used for a business as commercial, separate from the residentialcomponent, when they know there is a business.
Comments were received that the presentation was good and that the new policychanges are appealing to them.
The public information meeting was adjourned at 5:15 p.m.
66
Co
CCCC
Co
CC
CCDCCCCoCoCCCCC
8
0
CoCC
520.
DCC
CCo
VCC
CCC
COCC
Cog
gcE'E.Co
CCCo
CCCO
CC
COCo
8CC
CCCCz
CCCC
CC
oICCCDC
CC
CoCO
CC
8
Ui
Co
CCCo
CC
CCaC
CCV
CC
C
LU
'20
0
0
E2
0CCiCCCCCO
0 22
CC
020
8°
20
k>
0CCCC CC
gS Co
CD—
411 fill ! IiC '?.00NC-
csjI
CiCC
Co
Ci
Ci
N
03 CCgt '2 3Co
CO0
00
00N
Co
CD
IC0
CD
csi
CC000
CC
00 CC Co3
CC
N
CC0
c';
CC
U<I-..E.„0
,_,0 00.
(4 a;
-in to
So
CC0
iztCoa_
CoV0
LE)
CCCC
T5,a,
CCCC
Co
ON
Th. CoSi
= 00
CC
Co0
ICC
1
Cow
aCC
.Z
C l
CC
CC
Co0
Z N
15
12
0N COCDCO
MemoFILE: ADM.REP.COMDevelopment Projects
To: Chief Administrative OfficerFrom: Planning Technician
Date: April 20, 2009
Subject: Major Development Project Update
Attached is the Major Development Project Update dated April 20, 2009. The information contained inthe update includes commercial, industrial, institutional and residential development in the District ofMission.
Additional details regarding any of these development applications may be obtained from the PlanningDepartment.
\COMDEV\DONNA-LEE\COW Peports\2009 Reports\Major Development Project Update Cover Memo April 20, 2009.doc
68
PAGE 1 OF 1
DISTRICT OF MISSION
Major DeveProject Upd
opmentate
April 20, 2009
Major Development Project Update - April 20, 2009TYPE OF
DEVELOPMENTFILE NUMBER &
APPLICANT'S NAMECIVIC ADDRESSOR LOCATION
1. Commercial DP07-001 32471 LougheedMission Western HighwayDevelopmentsLtd./Harvey Weiss
5. Industrial DP08-007 7266 River PlaceKrahn Engineering
STATUS OFDEVELOPMENT
Approved (with conditions) onDecember 10, 2007. A letterrequesting an update wasrecently sent to the applicant.
Application is on hold pendingwaterfront planning.
Third reading grantedSeptember 6, 2005. Developerhas been granted a third 1-yearextension to finalizeoutstanding rezoningrequirements.
Development Permit approvedApril 7, 2008. The site iscurrently for sale.
The applicant has advised thatthe site plan and design may bechanging. A report to council isforthcoming once thegeotechnical report has beenreviewed and accepted.
3 commercial units on Wood, shingles and rockthe first floor above materials are proposed, andthe under building articulate the structure withparking layer and 5
large windows, decks andresidential units above dormer windows in a waythe commercial floor. that capitalizes on the view
of the Fraser River.
2,085 square foot
Convenience store, gasconvenience store pumps and commercialand gas pumps. Also space with a residence782 square feet of
(1,607 square feet) aboveother commercial
the store.space.
Approx. 1,409 square Convenience store and gasfoot convenience pumps with a residencestore with residence
(1,127 square feet) aboveabove, and gas the store.
pumps.
0.783 acre site 1,367.4 square metre
(14,719 sq. ft.) multi-tenantbuilding.
TYPE OF FILE NUMBER & CIVIC ADDRESS
DENSITY OF
PROJECT FEATURES
STATUS OF
DEVELOPMENT APPLICANT'S NAME OR LOCATION
DEVELOPMENT
& CHARACTERISTICS
DEVELOPMENT
6. Industrial
DP08-003 31510 Gill Avenue &
1.41 acre &Silvercreek Investments Lot 8 Gill Avenue (to
1.49 acresLtd. be consolidated)
7. Industrial -D08-001 31413 Gill Avenue 1.94 acre siteTeck Construction
8. Industrial R07-022 10100 Shaw Street Approx. 43 acresDistrict of Mission (Shaw Pit)
9. Industrial DP07-004 7252 River Place 0.765 acre siteKrahn Engineering Ltd.
11. Industrial DP06-013 7282 Fraserview Place 0.98 acre siteBEP EngineeringServices
12. Industrial DP06-009 7261 River Place 1.8 acre siteKeystone Architecture
3 tilt-up concrete buildingswith a total footprint of4,582.85 square metres(49,331 sq. ft.) & anadditional 845 squaremetres (9,100 sq. ft.) ofoffice space on a 2" °
mezzanine floor.
3,492.85 square metre(37,59R Aci ft multi -tenantbuilding (approx. 2,885.2m 2
of industrial space &607.66m 2 of office space).
Rezone the Shaw Pit toallow the District of Missionto extract and process gravelfrom the property.
Approx. 15,727 square footmulti-tenant building.
Two phases of development.Includes individual storageunits and office space for theoperation of the facility.
Two multi-tenantwarehouses; Building #1 —approx. 22,956 sq. ft. andBuilding #2 — approx. 14,839sq. ft.
Approved September 29, 2008.A building permit isforthcoming.
Approved June 23, 2008. Abuilding permit has beenapplied for.
Bylaw adopted October 6,2008. A request for proposals(RFP) will be issued shortly.
Development Permit approvedFebruary 25, 2008.Construction is 75% complete.
Development Permit approvedNovember 19, 2007.Construction is 98% complete.
Development Permit approvedOctober 30, 2006. A buildingpermit application isforthcoming.
Development Permit approvedAugust 28, 2006. Constructionis complete.
TYPE OF
FILE NUMBER &
CIVIC ADDRESS
DENSITY OF
PROJECT FEATURES STATUS OF
DEVELOPMENT APPLICANT'S NAME OR LOCATION
DEVELOPMENT
& CHARACTERISTICS DEVELOPMENT
13. Institutional R08-005 & DP08-002Ida Castro
33043 2nd Avenue 0.14 acre site 15-bed specialized carefacility.
Public Hearing held January26, 2009. A 3 rd reading report toCouncil is forthcoming.
14. Institutional
15. Institutional
16. Multi-unitResidential
R08-018
32646 Logan AvenueMission CommunityServices
R08-027
33038 Dewdney TrunkLJOILI I y uv V. III
FlodArchitect
R08-029 7251 Cedar ValleySlade Dyer/Points West ConnectorArchitecture
Existing 10,000square foot, two-storey building.
4.76 acre site
2.28 acre site
Homeless and emergencyshelter; a food bank; generalcounselling and life skillstraining.
Rezoning adopted October 14,2008. A building permit hasbeen issued.
Rezoning application hasbeen deferred pending thesubmission of a developmentpermit application.
84-unit multi-familyapartment.
Approximate 1497.1 square A report to Council ismetre (1R,116 SC1 ft) Church forthcoming.of Jesus Christ of Latter-DaySaints.
7260 & 7290 Maple 154 units with 1,017.3Street, 32848 & 32852 square metres1 st Avenue, 32851, (10,950 square feet)32853 & 32859 View of commercial space.Avenue
Three apartment buildings
A report to Council isincluding amenity space and forthcoming.commercial space on theground floor of buildings A &C.
17. Multi-unit
R08-010 & DP08-006Residential
PerspectiveInvestments Ltd.
32501 Fraser Crescent 26 townhouse units Five wood-framed buildingsincluding an amenitybuilding. Situated adjacentto the Cedar ValleyConnector.
Portion of SilverdaleNeighbourhood Onearea owned byGenstar & Madison
365 acres with density Country-estate lots, single-clustered around a family lots, townhouse,village and densities apartments, commercial anddetermined by the institutional land uses.topography of thehillside.
Rezoning adopted andDevelopment Permit approvedSeptember 17, 2007.Construction is complete.
Bylaws adopted March 2, 2009.Off-site service planning isunderway.
22. Comprehensive R08-007/S08-009/ 7655 Peterson Street 15 compact single-Development DP08-005 & 32477 7th Avenue family lots
Worthy Construction
23. Single Family R08-022 & S08-019 33764, 33782 & 33790 15 lotsResidential Darren Hall Dewdney Trunk Road
24. Single Family S08-014 32691 Best Avenue 11 lotsResidential Peter Haffner
25. Single Family R07-032/S07- 8556 Alexandra Street 14 lotsResidential 029/DV07-016 & 32578 Egglestone
S&S Titan AvenueDevelopment Group
Second and Third readingswere granted on July 12, 2007.The applicant has been granteda 1-year extension to completethe outstanding rezoningrequirements.
Development Permit approvedFebruary 7, 2005. Constructionis complete.
Third reading was grantedDecember 8, 2008. Staff willissue preliminary layoutapproval soon.
Third reading granted January5, 2009. Applicant is working tocomplete outstanding rezoningand subdivision requirements.
Applicant is working tocomplete outstandingsubdivision requirements.
Third reading granted July 7,2008. Applicant is working tocomplete outstanding rezoningand subdivision requirements.
Proposed suburbanresidential clusterdevelopment with overallaverage density of approx.1 dwelling per 0.88 acres.Lots range in size from10,961 sq. ft. to 25,523 sq.ft.
Market sales. Semi-independent apartmentresidential units that containkitchenettes with a commondining room andsocial/recreational rooms.
Intensive Single—family tallResidential development.The proposed lots range insize from 280 square metres(3,000 sq. ft.) for lots withlane access and 372 squaremetres (4,000 sq. ft.) for lotswith direct street access.
Urban residential lots (min.5,005 sq. ft.).
Urban residential lots (min.6,006 sq. ft.).
Urban residential lots (min.5,005 sq. ft.)
20. Comprehensive R06-023 & S08-001
8977 Edwards Street 109 bare land strataDevelopment
Lyle Holman West & 8980 Edwards lots (plus one 17.9
Street East acre ALR farm landparcel).
TYPE OFDEVELOPMENT
FILE NUMBER &APPLICANT'S NAME
CIVIC ADDRESSOR LOCATION
DENSITY OFDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT FEATURES& CHARACTERISTICS
26. Single Family R07-024 & S07-021 32663 & 32673 14 lots Urban residential lots (min.Residential 555891 BC Ltd Inc. Tunbridge Avenue 5,005 sq. ft.)
No. BCO555891(Roger Gill)
27. Single Family R07-021 & S07-019 34059, 34081, 34097 2009 proposal is for 71 single-family lots, 5Residential Rex.Blane Dewdney. Trunk Road; 94 units combined duplex lots (10 units) and 2
(previous applicant wasPaul Regnier)
34051, 34058, 34069,34085, 34072, 34088,34112 York Avenue;
of free-hold andstrata ownership
multi-family lots (13 units).
8738 Stave LakeStreet
28. Single Family R08-031 /S08-025 8414, 8434, 8478 26 lots Urban residential lots (min.Residential Carson Noftle Stave Lake Street & 5,005 sq. ft.)
33940 Cherry Avenue
29. Single Family R07-017/D PO7- 32603, 32621, 32643 33 lots Compact single familyResidential 006/DV07-010/
30. Single Family R06-038/DP06- 33000, 33090, 33126 65 lots Compact single familyResidential 015/SO6-036 & 33144 Tunbridge residential lots (min. 4,004.3
Gary Toor Avenue sq. ft.). Gaudin Creekrealignment continuation.
31. Single Family R07-009 & S07-009 8589, 8571 & 8526 37 lots Urban residential lots (min.Residential Gary Toor & G.
DhaliwalNottman Street; 8488,8510, 8464 & 8547
5,005 sq. ft.)
Judith Street
32. Single Family R06-026 & S06-024 32705 & 32689 10 lots Urban residential lots (min.Residential Brian Sharp Tunbridge Avenue 5,005 sq. ft.)
33. Single Family R06-025 & S06-023 8521, 8539 & 8569 17 lots Urban residential lots (min.Residential Jason Tiegen Alexandra Street 5,005 sq. ft.)
STATUS OFDEVELOPMENT
Third reading grantedDecember 22, 2008. Applicantis working to completeoutstanding rezoning andsubdivision requirements.
Council directed staff toprepare a i s` reading report andreport on the feasibility ofpreparing a local area plan forthe Hatzic/North Hatzic area.
A report to Council isforthcoming.
Subdivision has beencompleted and houses areunder construction.
Rezoning adopted November17, 2008. The subdivision isnearing completion.
A report to Council isforthcoming. Applicant hasbeen requested to submitadditional information.
Subdivision has beencompleted; building permits areforthcoming.
Subdivision has beencompleted and houses areunder construction.
TYPE OFDEVELOPMENT
FILE NUMBER &APPLICANT'S NAME
CIVIC ADDRESSOR LOCATION
DENSITY OFDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT FEATURES& CHARACTERISTICS
STATUS OFDEVELOPMENT
34. Single Family R06-018 & S06-019 8289 Manson Street 11 bare land Urban residential lots (min. Rezoning adopted DecemberReSidential Cartwright
Development Corp.strata lots 7,201.3 sq. ft.). 15, 2008. Subdivision is
nearing completion.
35. Single FamilyResidential
R06-035 & DP06-014Robert CiccozziArchitecture Inc.
34048, 34054 & 34142Parr Avenue
297 townhouse units& one 36-unit
apartment
Multi-family development Third reading granted March 3,2008. Applicant has beengranted a 1-year extension tocomplete the outstandingrezoning requirements.
36. Single Family SO4-041 & R04-040 8511 & 8531 Cedar 11 lots & 8 urban residential lots The final remaining townhouseResidential KC McPherson Street 25 unit townhouse (min. 6,006 sq. ft.) units are nearing completion.
3 compact single family lots(min. 4,004 sq. ft.)25 townhouse units
37. SuburbanResidential
R08-019 & S08-018Daren Alary
Lot 7 SilverdaleAvenue (68.71 acres)
22 lots Minimum 0.88 acre lots. Third reading granted March 2,2009. Staff willissue preliminary layoutapproval soon.
38. SuburbanResidential
SO4-038 & R04-031Mission Contractors
8973 Manzer Street 26 lots 2 fee simple .88 acre lots.24 bare land strata lots(min. 0.67 acre size).
Rezoning adopted June 5,2006. Applicant is working tocomplete subdivisionrequirements.
26 lots Twenty-five 1.98 acre sizelots and one 18 acreremainder parcel.
Public Hearing held March 26,2007. Staff will be providingadditional information toCouncil prior to consideration ofThird reading.
a \COMDEV\DONNA-LEE\COW Reports\2009 Reports \Major Development Project Update April 20, 2009.doc
Minutes
76
The Minutes for the Mission Community Heritage Commission (MCHC) meeting held in theConference Room at the Municipal Hall on October 1 st , 2008 commencing at 6:30 p.m.
Absent:Heather Stewart, Council LiaisonJenny Stevens, Alternate Council Liaison
1. PRESENTATION
The meeting was called to order at 6.30 p.m. Val Billesberger asked for a volunteer to takethe minutes. Sieglinde Stieda agreed to do so.
Bob Parliament, Regional Heritage Planner, BC Government, presented in lieu of DonBrown, Manager of the Mission Heritage Association (MHA), which operates the HeritageRiver Park. The presentation focused on the short-cut process for creating a CommunityHeritage Register, adding the Heritage Park as the first register record, a need for a valuestatement, and the importance of looking at the West Vancouver Heritage Commission as amodel.
ACTIONS: Val will ask Don Brown to prepare a three-sentence value statement. Then Valwill take the MCHC's recommendation and MHA's value statement to Council.
2. INTRODUCTION of newly appointed MCHC members: Kim Kokoszka, student of fashiondesign has . roots in Mission; Shirley Mitchell is active in the community including the MissionMuseum; Sieglinde Stieda, retired teacher & librarian is working on a bibliography of Mission;Guy Zecchini is retired from 42 years of construction and collects old tools.
3. MINUTES
(a) The minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission held on September3 rd , 2008. Corrections: Don Brown is the "administrator", not chair of the MHA.
Moved by Shirley Mitchell and seconded by Chris Gibson that the minutes beadopted as amended.CARRIED
FILE: ADM.COM .ADV Minutes Page 1 of 4Mission Community Heritage Commission
V.'s.- :1 Community HeritageMinutes1, 2008
4. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
(a) Celebration of Community Report by Chris Gibson: slow attendance, mostly ameet and greet, and review of photograph album of Mission. The Chair thankedChris Gibson, Mike Scudder, Shirley Mitchell and Kim Kokoszka for volunteeringtheir time at the event.
5.TASK GROUPS:
(a) Public Awareness & Education Task Group: Members: Chris Gibson, ShirleyMitchell, & Val Billesberger. Chris Gibson resigned from this task group as well as fromthe Commission. The Chair accepted his resignation with regret, noting the manycontributions he has made to the Commission during the past year and a half.
Val Billesberger outlined program for November 29 th , 2008 Networking mini-conference,at Mission Heritage Park Centre Cafetorium, which we are hosting. Members of theMission community and other BC heritage commissions will be invited. The six speakersfor Networking Conference are: Lisa Codd, Curator, Burnaby Museum will speak about acollaborative online heritage project. Other speakers include Sue Morhun, HeritageConsultant and former Langley Township Heritage Manager; Stephen Mikicich, WestVancouver Senior Community Planner; Denise Cook, Denise Cook Design Consulting orConnie Halbert of the Fraser Valley Regional District; and Don Luxton, HeritageConsultant. The program will also include an interactive open community forum facilitatedby Bob Parliament.
The following MCHC members volunteered for the various tasks of putting together theconference: Mike Scudder volunteered to introduce the speakers, to frame the door prizeconsisting of an old photo, and to check the cost and source of project binders. SieglindeStieda agreed to liaise with the Mission Chamber of Commerce to prepare 35+ MissionInformation packages. Kim Kokoszka is looking after the registration by email and agreedto keep Sieglinde informed as to the number of registrants. Fee remains $20.00 at thedoor. If a cheque is received, it should be made out to the District of Mission. BobParliament is willing to provide HPI folders.
The Commission's budget for the conference is $1,000. Expenses for the conferencecomprise the honoria and travel expenses for the speakers (@ 52 cents per kilometre);refreshments; sundries (such as name tags); and the services of a professionalphotographer, Margaret Peake. The cut-off day for registration will be November 15 th ,2008; however, we will allow for a certain leeway.
Moved by Mike Scudder and seconded by Mildred Vollick that the members of the PublicAwareness and Education Task Group be authorized to spend up to $1,000 on theNovember 29 th , 2008 mini-conference.
CARRIED.
FILE: ADM.COM.ADV Minutes Page 2 of 4Mission Community Heritage Commission
77
Mission Co, unity Heritage Commission MinutesOctober I, 2
Moved by Kim Kokoszka and seconded by Shirley Mitchell that all members of theMission Community Heritage Commission have their registration fees, of $20 each, comeout of the MCHC $2,000 Professional Development fund.
CARRIED.
(b)Recognition and Incentives Task Group:
The Chair provided a brief overview of the activities undertaken during the past year andstated that new members were required for the group. Guy Zecchini and Kim Kokoszkavolunteered to serve on this task group along with current members Mike Scudder andVal Billesberger.
(c)Heritage Register Task Group:
All members of the MCHC are members of this task group. Bob Parliament informed us thatour grant application to the BC Heritage Branch "Community Heritage Planning Program"had been approved. He will work on the contract next week. Bob is our contact person in theprovincial government, for this project. Val thanked Bob Parliament for his involvement inthis project.
Moved by Mike Scudder and seconded by Sieglinde Stieda that the MCHC hire SharonSyrette as the project manager for establishing the Mission Community Heritage Register.CARRIED.
ACTION: Val Billesberger will inform Sharon Syrette that she's been awarded the contractfor the project management of the Mission Heritage Register.
6. NEW BUSINESS:
(a) Revisions to Terms of Reference: The Chair reported on behalf of CouncillorHeather Stewart that Heather will be working with commission members to revise theTerms of Reference for the Heritage Commission to include working with the Planningdepartment on bylaws etc., identifying and prioritizing the heritage registry issue, anddefining quorum for the commission. Val Billesberger initiated a discussion regarding thesize of the MCH Commission. Bob Parliament strongly recommended that we not reducethe size, as we might be sorry later on. It's more difficult to increase the size of a heritagecommission.
ACTION: Val Billesberger will meet with Mission Councillors, Heather Stewart and JennyStevens.
(b)Heritage Commission Chair: The terms of reference require the Commission to electa chair in January of each year. Val Billesberger informed the group that she would not puther name forward next year.
(c) Commission Website: Members discussed an email from Jenn Murray that wasdistributed prior to the meeting which provided a link to a draft home page for a MCHC
FILE: ADM.COM .ADV Minutes Page 3 of 4Mission Community Heritage Commission
website and a quotation: "For $500, includes up to 10 pages; 5 hours of graphic work ifnecessary (i.e. photo editing, image creation, etc.) and three months of text updates towebsite to be performed on a bi-weekly basis. Also available...layout redesign amountingto no more than 5 hours of additional labour." Members reviewed the draft home page ona laptop computer.Moved by Sieglinde Stieda and seconded by Kim Kokoszka that Jenn Murray be paid$500 to design and maintain the MCHC website as specified in her email dated October 1,2008.CARRIEDACTION: Val Billesberger will meet with Jenn Murray to get her started on the website.
(d) 2009 Work Plan and Budget: Similar to last year, members agreed to hold a specialmeeting on October 15 th at 6:30 p.m. at the Mission Community Archives to draft theannual work plan and budget that must be submitted to Council in November.
7. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
The next regular Commission meeting will take place on Wednesday, November 5 th , 2008.[A special meeting will be held on Wednesday, October 15 th , 2008 at 6: 30 p.m. at theMission Community Archives.]
FILE: ADM.COM .ADV Minutes Page 4 of 4Mission Community Heritage Commission
Abssion Minutes
80
The Minutes for the Mission Community Heritage Commission (MCHC) meeting held in the MissionCommunity Archives on November 12, 2008 commencing at 6:30 p.m.
Absent:Heather Stewart, Council LiaisonJenny Stevens, Alternate Council Liaison
1. MINUTES
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m.
(a) The minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission held on October 1, 2008
Moved by Mike Scudder and seconded by Shirley Mitchell that the minutes be approved.
CARRIED
2. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
(a) Mission Heritage Association - A draft recommendation to establish a Community HeritageRegister and include the former OMI lands consisting of Fraser River Heritage Park at 7494Mary Street was presented.Moved by Mike Scudder and seconded by Kim Kokoszka that the draft recommendation beforwarded to Council for their consideration.CARRIED
(b) Revisions to Terms of Reference — Councillors Heather Stewart and Jenny Stevens met withVal Billesberger to review the terms of reference. A draft of the revisions will be distributed tomembers in December for comment. Members discussed ideas on how appointments aremade to the Commission.
(c) Commission Website — The website design and framework will be completed for members toreview prior to the next meeting. Once established, the website will be one of the responsibilitiesof the Public Awareness and Education Task Group.
(d) 2009 Work Plan and Budget — The draft 2009 Work Plan and Budget distributed prior to themeeting was discussed. A sentence in paragraph one was amended to read: "We are in theprocess of establishing a website and organizing a mini-conference where members of otherHeritage Commissions in B.C. can attend educational seminars on heritage conservation andmeet to share their recent successes and projects."Moved by Mike Scudder and seconded by Guy Zecchini that the amended 2009 Work Plan andBudget be approved and forwarded to Council for their consideration.
CARRIED
FILE: Minutes Page 1 of 2Mission Community Heritage Commission
Mission CommNovember
e Commission
81
Funds remaining from the 2008 budget were discussed. Since the budget for the upcomingyear has not yet been approved by Council, $3,000 will need to be earmarked for theCommunity Heritage Register project. These are the matching funds required for the provincialgrant recently approved to undertake the project.
Moved by Shirley Mitchell and seconded by Kim Kokoszka that $3,000 be carried over to 2009for the Community Heritage Register project.CARRIED
Members discussed outstanding expenses and the use of any remaining funds.
Moved by Mike Scudder and seconded by Guy Zecchini that any other remaining funds becarried over to 2009 for purchasing a laptop.CARRIED
ACTION: Once all 2008 expenditures have been identified, Val Billesberger will contact SharonFletcher, Director of Planning to advise her of the amount to be carried over to 2009.
3. TASK GROUPS(a) Public Awareness & Education — Sieglinde Stieda volunteered to serve on the task group along
with Shirley Mitchell and Val Billesberger. A special meeting of the task group will be held onNovember 18 m at 7:00 pm at the Mission Community Archives to finalize plans for theNetworking Conference on November 29 th .
(b) Recognition and Incentives — The task group is currently comprised of Mike Scudder, KimKokoszka, Guy Zecchini and Val Billesberger. A meeting of the group will be organizedfollowing the Networking Conference.
(c) Heritage Register — Project Manager Sharon Syrette distributed handouts and presented anoverview of the project, including the roles and responsibilities of the Commission, the HeritageConsultant and Project Manager.
ACTION: Sharon Syrette will amend the timeline and work plan for the Community HeritageRegister to ensure the project is completed by the beginning of March.
Draft terms of reference for the Project Manager and the preparation of terms of reference forthe Heritage Consultant were discussed.
ACTION: Val Billesberger will consult with District staff concerning the approval of the terms ofreference and contact Bob Parliament about Heritage Consultants
4. NEW BUSINESS(a) Membership of Commission — The terms of reference require the Commission to have 10 voting
members and at present there are 7 members. Members discussed ideas for inviting people tojoin the Commission.ACTION: Sieglinde Stieda, Guy Zecchini and Val Billesberger will jointly work on a recruitmentstrategy for the Commission.
5. OTHER BUSINESS None
6. ADJOURNMENTThe meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. Next meeting to be held on December 3, 2008 in theConference Room at the Municipal Hall at 7:30 pm.
FILE: Minutes Page 2 of 2Mission Community Heritage Commission
Minutes
82
The Minutes for the Mission Community Heritage Commission (MCHC) meeting held in the *MissionMunicipal Hall, Conference Room on December 03, 2008 commencing at 7:30 p.m.
Present:
Val Billesberger, ChairShirley MitchellSieglinde StiedaMildred VollickGuy ZecchiniJenn Murray
Absent:
Kim KokoszkaMike Scudder, Council Liaison
1. MINUTES
The meeting was called to order at 7:35 p.m.
(a) The minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission held on November 12, 2008.
Moved by Shirley Mitchell and seconded by Guy Zecchini that the minutes be approved.CARRIED
2. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
(a) Commission Website — The website was previewed online. Page configuration, preliminary`Links', and viability of purchasing a .ca domain name were discussed through Internic.ca .
ACTION: More information regarding .ca domains will be gathered by Jenn Murray anddistributed to members as soon as possible.
Moved by Mildred Vollick and seconded by Sieglinde Stieda that funds be expended this year tocommit to the creation and upkeep of the website..
CARRIED
(b) 2009 Work Plan and Budget — The 2009 Work Plan and Budget approved at the last meetingwas briefly discussed.
ACTION: Val Billesberger will forward the 2009 Work Plan and Budget to Sharon Fletcher totake to Council for their consideration.
(c) Membership of Commission — The resignation of Mike Scudder from the Commission, hiselection to Mission Council and appointment as the Commission's Council liaison wereacknowledged. Further discussion regarding the need for four more members to join theCommission will recommence in January 2009. Action item 4(a) from last meeting (recruitmentstrategy) postponed until a later date: to be determined outside of present meeting.
3. TASK GROUPS
(a) Public Awareness & Education — The success of the recent Heritage Conference wasdiscussed. The Chair recognized the outstanding contributions by individual members of theCommission: Kim Kokoszka for managing registrations; Shirley Mitchell for organizing
FILE: Minutes Page 1 of 3Mission Community Heritage Commission
Mission Community Heritage Corn sion AileenDecember 3,,2008
arrangements for the venue and the refreshments; Mike Scudder for serving as the facilitator atthe conference; Sieglinde Stieda for preparing the press release about the conference and theconference packages; Guy Zecchini for setting up the signage and assisting with the conferenceset up; and Mildred Vollick for assisting other members of the Commission at the conference.
Revenue funds are in the possession of District staff and information as to the total revenueswill be forthcoming. The conference revenues include a $1000.00 grant from the HeritageSociety of British Columbia. Expense claims were presented.
Moved by Guy Zecchini and seconded by Sieglinde Stieda that grant monies be paid out to allspeakers as stipulated and that all revenue generated be used to cover the additionalexpenses.CARRIED
Moved by Mildred Vollick and seconded by Guy Zecchini that the following expenses be paidout for the conference: Shirley Mitchell $519.63; Val Billesberger $87.34 and Gerhard vonRosen, photographer $200.CARRIED
Evaluation of the strengths and possible improvements to future conferences were discussed.The need for more time to network with conference attendees and acquire print or electroniccopies of seminar presentations was suggested. A follow-up evaluation form will be sent toconference attendees to inquire about improvements and to convey thanks.
ACTION: Val Billesberger will consult with Rick Goodacre at Heritage BC about developing theevaluation form and then email it to participants for their feedback.
(b) Recognition and Incentives — Val Billesberger, Guy Zecchini and Kim Kokoszka will arrange tomeet before January 07, 2009 to discuss possible candidates for recognition. Guy Zecchiniagreed to serve as Chair of the Task Group.
ACTION: Guy Zecchini to contact Bob Parliament and set up a meeting in January.
ACTION: Val Billesberger agreed to coordinate the compilation of a preliminary list of potentialhonourees.
(c) Heritage Register — Draft outline of job description for Project Manager Sharon Syrette wasdiscussed. The term of the contract changed to October 2008 to February 28th , 2009 so incompliance with grant requirements. Outlined payment schedule modified from "November 7 th ,2008" to 'December 8 th , 2008' and expense claim approval modified from "pre-approved by theHC Chair" to preapproval by 'the Commission'.
Moved by Shirley Mitchell and seconded by Mildred Vollick that the revised contract for theProject Manager be adopted.
CARRIED
4. NEW BUSINESS(a) Membership Renewals — Tabled until next meeting.
(b) 2009 Meeting Schedule — Meeting schedule for 2009 reviewed.
Shirley Mitchell moved and Guy Zecchini seconded that meeting schedule be adopted; howeverscheduling of July and August meetings will be subject to revision at the discretion of the Chair.
CARRIED
FILE: Minutes Page 2 of 3Mission Community Heritage Commission
83
84
Miss ,
unity Hera e C meeting?'.ber 3, 2008
(c) Commission Clerk — Draft job description for Commission Clerk distributed for review and laterdiscussion.
5. OTHER BUSINESS None
6. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
FILE:
Minutes Page 3 of 3Mission Community Heritage Commission
85
Dim Minutes
The Minutes for the Mission Community Heritage Commission (MCHC) special meetingheld in the Mission Community Archives on December 16, 2008 commencing at 7:00 p.m.
Present:Val Billesberger, ChairKim KokoszkaShirley MitchellSieglinde StiedaGuy ZecchiniSharon Fletcher, Director of Planning
Absent:Mike Scudder, Council LiaisonMildred Vo{lick
1. HERITAGE REGISTER PROJECT(a) Professional Heritage Consultant
Sharon Fletcher reviewed district policy regarding the awarding of contracts. Adiscussion was held regarding hiring Julie MacDonald to be the Professional HeritageConsultant for the District of Mission Heritage Register Project.
Moved by Guy Zecchini and seconded by Kim Kokoszka that Julie MacDonald behired as the Professional Heritage Consultant.
CARRIED
Sieglinde Stieda opposedACTION: Val Billesberger will inform Julie MacDonald that she's been awarded thecontract.The draft terms of reference for the Professional Heritage Consultant were reviewedand discussed by members. It was recommended by Sharon Fletcher that item 5under the work plan be amended as follows:
"All deliverables and invoices from this project will be given to the Mission CommunityHeritage Commission who will be responsible for forwarding them to Sharon Fletcher,Director of Planning for the District of Mission. All invoices to be made out to:Planning Department of the District of Mission."
Moved by Kim Kokoszka, seconded by Guy Zecchini that the Terms of Reference forthe Professional Heritage Consultant be approved as amended.
CARRIEDACTION: Val Billesberger will make the amendments and arrange for them to besigned.
FILE: ADM.COM .ADV Minutes Page 1 of 2Mission Community Heritage Commission
Mission Community Heritage Commission MinutesDecember 16, 2008
2. COMMISSION WEBSITE
Discussion held on naming of the Mission Community Heritage Commission web site.Moved by Guy Zecchini and seconded by Kim Kokoszka to adopt the domain nameHeritageMission.ca.CARRIEDACTION: Val Billesberger and Sharon Fletcher will arrange for Jenn Murray to register thename through Internic.ca.
3. ADJOURNMENTThe meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
86
FILE: ADM.COM .ADV Minutes Page 2 of 2Mission Community Heritage Commission
The Minutes for the Mission Community Heritage Commission (MCHC) meeting held in the MissionCity Hall, Council Chambers on January 14, 2009 commencing at 6:30 p.m.
Present:
Val Billesberger, ChairLinda FornalKim KokoszkaShirley MitchellJanis SchultzSieglinde StiedaMildred VollickGuy Zecchini
Mike Scudder, Council LiaisonSharon Fletcher, Director of PlanningSharon Syrette, Project Manager, Heritage Register (Arrived 7:45PM)Jenn Murray, Clerical Support
1. WELCOME
Janis Schultz and Linda Fornal, newly appointed members to the Commission, introducedthemselves and were welcomed by other members. Councillor Scudder also acknowledged the newmembers and thanked the Commission for their accomplishments thus far.
2. MINUTES
The meeting was called to order at 6:40 p.m.
(a) The minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission held on December 3, 2008.
Moved by Guy Zecchini and seconded by Kim Kokoszka that the minutes be approved.CARRIED
3. ANNUAL ELECTIONS
(a) Shirley Mitchell nominated Guy Zecchini for the position of Alternate Chair; seconded by KimKokoszka. There being no further nominations, the nominations were closed and Guy Zecchiniwas elected.Val Billesberger turned the chair over to Guy Zecchini.
(b) Kim Kokoszka nominated Val Billesberger for the position of Chair; seconded by Janis Schultz.There being no further nominations, the nominations were closed and Val Billesberger waselected.
4. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
(a) Commission Website
Website manager Jenn Murray presented an update on the Commission website status andreported that hosting and registration of the URL http://www.heritagemission.ca throughInternic.ca was completed successfully. Draft content will be uploaded over the coming weeksand a version for members to review should be ready soon. Search engine optimization (SEO)will also be performed in order to maximize the presence of heritagemission.ca over theInternet. •
FILE: Minutes Page 1 of 3Mission Community Heritage Commission
Sharon Fletcher presented information regarding the availability of district funding to theCommission for the 2009 fiscal year. She stated that Council is in the process of reviewing thebudget and therefore, the Commission's funding for 2009 is still subject to revision. Adetermination of the Commission's total income and expenditures for 2008 is currently beingprepared and will be available soon. Members discussed the expenditure of funds andapproved the following.Val Billesberger, Sieglinde Stieda and Mildred Vollick expressed interest in attending theseminar 'Conservation Planning: A Values Based Approach' being held at SFU Harbour Centrecampus on February 20, 2009.Moved by Shirley Mitchell and seconded by Kim Kokoszka that Commission membersinterested in attending the upcoming seminar 'Conservation Planning: A Values BasedApproach' being held at SFU Harbour Centre campus on February 20, 2009 be reimbursed theregistration fee of $100 if sufficient funds are available.
CARRIEDMoved by Sieglinde Stieda and seconded by Linda Fornal to pay Sharon Syrette $800 as part ofher contract wages as the Project Manager of the Heritage Register Project.
CARRIEDMoved by Kim Kokoszka and seconded by Mildred Vollick to renew the Heritage Society of BCmembership.
CARRIEDACTION: Linda Fornal will provide space in the Mission Library for keeping any hardcopymaterial sent by the Heritage Society of BC and other groups so that all members have accessto the information.
(c) Networking Conference
Sharon Fletcher reported that income from the conference totalled approximately $870.00.Val Billesberger reported that she had conducted a post-conference evaluation via email andthat although the results were very positive there was a low response rate (22%). Thank youletters were prepared and sent to all speakers.
ACTION: Val Billesberger was asked to send out a reminder email to conference participantswho have not yet responded to post-conference evaluation.
5.TASK GROUPS
(a) Recognition and Incentives
Guy Zecchini presented ideas as to what criteria may be applied to selecting award recipients.There was discussion of the West Vancouver Heritage Achievement categories and criteriawhich were used by the Commission last year. It was agreed that suggestions for nominationsand awards criteria be emailed to Kim Kokoszka who will forward them to Guy. A report will beprovided by Guy at the next meeting.ACTION: Sharon Fletcher agreed to try and set up a special meeting for February 9 2009, or asa second choice, February 16, 2009 so the Mayor and Council could attend a receptionfollowing the awards presentations.
FILE: Minutes Page 2 of 3Mission Community Heritage Commission
88
89
Mission Comm
Heritage ComissioJanuary 14,
(b) Heritage Register
The Heritage Consultant, Julie McDonald met with Val Billesberger and Planning Departmentstaff, Sharon Fletcher and Marcy Bond, to identify the remaining tasks to be completed withinthe remaining timeframe and the assignment of responsibilities for each one. Sharon Syrettewas unable to attend the meeting. The timeline and tasks for the Project Manager, HeritageCommission, and Professional Heritage Consultant were updated. In addition, theresponsibilities of the Planning Department were added.
Sharon Syrette presented her report on the progress of the Heritage Register project andchaired a discussion of the heritage value(s) from a local perspective associated with three ofthe six sites: the Power House at Stave Falls, Fraser River Heritage Park, and MissionMuseum. She has arranged open houses for some of the sites and will email updates toCommission members. Due to the tight timeframe for completing the project, members agreedto hold a special meeting on January 21s t for purposes of discussing the remaining three sites.
6. NEW BUSINESS
(a) Orientation for New MembersItem tabled to next meeting.
7. OTHER BUSINESS
(a) Membership of Commission — Recommendations for Recruitment Strategies
Item tabled to next meeting.
8. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
FILE: Minutes Page 3 of 3Mission Community Heritage Commission
Minutes
90
The Minutes for the Mission Community Heritage Commission (MCHC) meeting held in the MissionCommunity Archives on February 4, 2009 commencing at 6:30 p.m.
Mike Scudder, Council LiaisonJenn Murray, Clerical SupportSharon Syrette, Project Manager, Heritage RegisterKim Allen, Guest
Absent:Linda Fornal
1. MINUTES
The meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m.
(a) The minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission held on January 14, 2009.
Moved by Shirley Mitchell and seconded by Guy Zecchini that the minutes as corrected beapproved.
CARRIED
2. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
(a) Commission Website — Jenn Murray updated members as to website design progress. Sherequested information from the Education & Incentives Task Group for the Advocacy / PublicAwareness and Education web page content, and informed members that the link to thetemporary test website will be provided.
(b) 2009 Work Plan and Budget — Jenn Murray submitted invoice for payment of clerical servicesrendered.Moved by Shirley Mitchell and seconded by Kim Kokoszka that the invoice presented by JennMurray totalling $160.00 be paid.
CARRIED
Mike Scudder informed the Commission that the funding amount from the District should bedetermined by the end of February 2009.
(c) Orientation for New Members — Orientation binder was presented to new member JanisSchultz. Remaining orientation binder to be presented to Linda Fornal at later date. Updatedmaterials were distributed for members' orientation binders.
FILE: Minutes Page 1 of 2Mission Community Heritage Commission
Mission Community Heritage Commission MeetingFebruary. 2009
Members discussed requirements for an Orientation meeting. Meeting time and date set for thenext regular meeting of Commission on March 4, 2009 at 6:30 p.m. in the Municipal Hallconference room. Members are to submit questions to speakers in advance.
ACTION: Shirley Mitchell will contact potential speakers for orientation meeting.
(d) Membership of Commission: Recommendations for Recruitment Strategies — Ideas andchallenges with regards to recruitment and promotion were discussed. It was suggested thatagencies and organizations identified in the Commission's Terms of Reference be contactedabout appointing a representative to the Commission.
ACTION: Val Billesberger will speak to Sharon Fletcher about preparing a letter to inviteagencies and organizations to appoint a representative to the Commission.
3. TASK GROUPS
(a) Recognition and Incentives — Guy Zecchini presented a report on nominations for recognition.Moved by Guy Zecchini and seconded by Sieglinde Stieda that Dorothy Crosby and CathieMarcellus each be presented with a Heritage Achievement Award on February 16, 2009 in theMunicipal Council chambers.
CARRIED
ACTION: Shirley Mitchell will book conference room for a reception after awards presentation.
ACTION: Val Billesberger will contact Dorothy Crosby and Cathie Marcellus.
ACTION: Jenn Murray will attend awards and reception as photographer of events.ACTION: Sieglinde Stieda will submit a press release to the newspaper by February 9, 2009.
Guy suggested guidelines and criteria be affirmed for the 2010 awards. He provided memberswith materials to review for consideration regarding possible future awards nomination criteria.Mike Scudder encouraged the Commission to include its own ideas regarding criteria and toretain a distinct 'Mission' quality in the nominations process. Guest Kim Allen expressedinterest in joining the Recognition and Incentives Task Group for planning 2010 awards.
ACTION: Val Billesberger will provide access to the Maple Ridge nomination form read from atmeeting.
(b) Heritage Register — Val Billesberger reviewed some of the challenges communicated by theprofessional Heritage Consultant. Sharon Syrette presented her report and reminded theCommission that she had to submit their feedback on the draft statements of significance toJulie McDonald on Friday, February 5th. Members were asked to send their comments to heras soon as possible. She then facilitated a discussion on the open houses at each site. A dateand time for an open house at Stave Falls Power Dam was discussed and Janis Schultzsuggested it be set for Wednesday, February 11 from 2:00 to 4:00 p.m.
Sharon also informed the Commission of a need to determine what information to provide forthe district website and that she expects the project deadlines to be met.
4. OTHER BUSINESS
(a) Terms of Reference — TABLED.
5. ADJOURNMENTThe meeting adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Next meeting to be held on March 4, 2008 in the ConferenceRoom at the Municipal Hall at 6:30 pm.
91
FILE: Minutes Page 2 of 2
Mission Community Heritage Commission
04/02/2009 14:01 6048264319
MMSI WARDEN PAGE 02/08 92
DISTRICT OF MISSION REPORT
MARCH, 2009
Enclosures:
• District of Mission of Mission Public Safety Committee Report
• Definitions
• Major Offence Profile
• Institutional Programming and Community Involvement
i/case ragt/privatekcm-clic/District of Mission Report Enclosures
CORRECTIONAL SERVICE OF CANADAMISSION INSTITUTION
DISTRICT OF MISSION PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REPORT2009
STATISTICAL INFORMATION UP TO AND INCLUDING THE LAST DAY OF EACH MONTH
Number of Inmates at Outside Court 0 0 1Number of Inmates at Outside Hospital 0 0 0
Number of inmates on Bail 0 0 0Number of Inmates U.A.L. (1 since 1973) I f 1
Number of Inmates on Temporary Absence 0 0 0Total Number of Inmates at Mission 273 275 278
123 123
e..V 4T CID murzfox zuf.ird;titteimigRamiaecur .
...-,--..7-,.
Transfer Out to Mediu rn Security f 2 0Transfer Out to Minimum Security 6 6 2
Transfer Out to Other (Provincial, etc.) 0 0 0Transfer In from Maximum Security 1 2 1
Transfer In from Medium Security 4 5 5Transfer In from Minimum Securtly 2 0 0
Transfer in from Oilier (Provincial, etc) 0 0 0Transfer in from Mufti-level - Security 8 5 B
Transfer In from RRAG 3 5 2Admitted by Suspension 5 7 2
Revocation 2 1 3
,,----:,.--......-e . *:._ '''.- -,.....,{-1X1= 5FiCii1: -%-a2-,.:.-.5.--.1 ,,,Day Parole
iMT: -
Full Parole 0 0 0Statutory Release 11 9 5
Warrant Expiry 2 2 2Death 0 0 0
Bail 0 0 0U.A.L. 0 0 0
Court Ordered Release 0 0 0 •
. .: 4.-.1i UMB V.CitirlAt IME: NO W. 4M:17 --:.!;., :-=i-n' -M, , .Ti-r...,„ .... ,_:. tA, ;; „ '-e.fra,--..lNumber of individual Escorted Temporary Absences* for the month. 1 0 2Number of inmates on an Unescorted Temporary Absence during the month. 0 0 0Number participating in the Perimeter Work Clearance Program for the month. 3 3 1Number of Inmates participating in the Work Release Program for the month. 0 0 0
04/02/2009 14:01 6048264319
MMSI WARDEN ['AGE t14/ IOU
94
DEFINITIONS
BAIL
Bail Is an option for the courts or police to consider, in some cases, where an offender may be able to be released onconditions, rather than being detained in custody prior to court appearance. Bail is also known as Judicial Interim Release.
TEMPORARY ABSENCES AND DAY PAROLE
Temporary Absences (TAs) and Day Paroles allow the temporary release of offenders from institutions in order to accessprograms and services available in the community. All provinceslterritories operate TA programs, and TAs may be grantedfor personal development, medical, compassionate, employment, administrative, parental or family-related reasons. Inmost cases, TA's are utilized for pre-parole preparation and planning.
TA's are either escorted (ETAs) or unescorted (UTAs). Typically, ETAs are not longer than eight hours and UTAs mayrun from 8 hours to 60 days. The type of offence and sentence length determines whether the Correctional Service ofCanada or the National Parole Board has authority to issue TAs. In simplistic form, the National Parole Board determinesall TAs for offenders serving Life sentences and for other violent offences that resulted in serious harm to the victims. TheWarden, as the head of the releasing institution, retains complete responsibility for the final clearance of offenders beingreleased on TAs and provides a written recommendation to the N.P.B. when they possess the legal authority.
As a general rule, all offenders are eligible for E.T.A.s the moment they commence their federal sentences. In practicehowever, very few offenders will receive authorization for TAs early within their sentence, with the exception of TAs formedical and compassionate purposes. As a general rule, medical and compassionate TAs are escorted by what isdetermined as a security escort (two officers who possess and utilize restraint equipment). However, for other types ofETAs, the offender is usually escorted by one officer only. Variations in the level of security exist and is determined byassessing the level of risk the offender poses to the public.
In terms of offender's eligibility for UTAs, this is determined by legal calculations of eligibility and varies from one offender toanother depending on their sentence length. In the case of offenders serving a Life sentence, UTA eligibility is calculatedas three years before their full parole eligibility date.
Federal offenders may qualify to participate in work release programs outside of the correctional institution for a specifiedperiod of time. These type of releases could see a single offender going out to work as well as groups of offenders.However, they are usually escorted by at least one officer. In addition, UTAs may be. granted to allow offenders toparticipate in personal development programs or community service projects. UTAs are generally granted for a maximumperiod of 15 days, although if the UTA is for participation in a personal development program, it may be extended to 60days, renewable.
Day Parole is a flexible form of release that provides an opportunity for correctional officials to employ gradual release,preparing the inmate for release on full parole and allowing the inmate the opportunity to participate in community-basedprograms and become readjusted to life outside the institution,
Federal offenders, with the exception of those inmates in preventive detention or serving indeterminate sentences, areeligible for day parole six months prior to their parole eligibility date or after having served six months of their sentence,whichever is longer. The majority of the inmates on day parole reside in community-based facilities operated by theprovincial and federal corrections services or by private agencies on contract with the Correctional Service.
FULL PAROLE
Full Parole is a program of conditional release that allows inmates to serve a portion of their sentence in the communityunder supervision. Inmates are generally eligible for full parole after serving one-third of their sentence or seven years,whichever Is shorter. Under the Corrections and Conditional Release Act enacted in 1992, however, sentencing judgeshave the authority to set the parole eligibility for offenders convicted of violent and serious drug offences at one-half ratherthan one-third of the sentence. In such cases, the period until parole eligibility cannot exceed ten years. Federal inmatesserving Life sentences are eligible for parole consideration after seven years in confinement, dated from the day theoffender was arrested and taken into custody. The exception to this are situations in which an offender is serving a Lifesentence with a mandatory minimum sentence. For example, a First Degree Murder conviction carries a mandatory 25years confinement before parole eligibility.
STATUTORY RELEASE
Statutory Release has its origins in an amendment to the Parole Act in 1970, which created a mechanism to provideassistance and control during the offenders readjustment to life in the community for inmates who had been denied parole.In contrast to parole, statutory release involves the release of offenders from the institution after serving two-thirds of theirsentence, with the remaining one-third being served under supervision of the National Parole Board in the community.
Inmates released under statutory release are supervised by parole officers and must abide by mandatory and any additionalconditions set by the NPB that are deemed necessary to successfully manage the offender's risk in the community. Aviolation of the conditions can result in suspension and revocation and return to the institution where the offender may haveto serve the remainder of his sentence,
Inmates can be Detained by the NPB and thus not released on statutory release. However, it has been determined in lawthat offenders have the right to be released after serving two thirds of their sentences and thus, to detain an offender, theremust be significant grounds to establish that the offender would constitute a grievous threat to the community, or anymember thereof, if released. Following completion of their sentence, (Warrant Expiry Date), these inmates are releasedinto the community without any supervision or assistance. However, recent changes in the Corrections and ConditionalRelease Act have made provisions to allow for the supervision of some offenders beyond their Warrant Expiry dates.However, the changes in this law are not retroactive to offenders currently serving sentences and will-likely involve a verysmall group of offenders determined to be extremely dangerous.
04/02/2009 14:01 6048264319
MMSI WARDEN PAGE 05/08 95
Correctional Service of Canada
PROTECTED B
Major Offence ProfileOffenders profile at the specified site and proportion for each major offence
MISSION INSTITUTION
FAIL TO ATTEND COURT - UNDER/RECOG 1 0.37%
FAIL TO ATTEND COURT - UNDER/RECOG 1 0.37%
RAPE 2 0.73%
ESCAPE LAWFUL CUSTODY 1 0.37%
FAIL TO ATTEND COURT - JUDGE'S ORDER 1 0.37%
FAIL TO COMPLY W/COND OF UNDER/RECOG 1 0.37%
FAIL TO COMPLY W/COND OF UNDER/RECOG 4 1.47%
INDECENT ASSAULT FEMALE 1 0.37%
SEXUAL EXPLOITATION - TOUCH 1 0.37%
ANAL INTERCOURSE 1 0.37%
NON CAPITAL MURDER 2 0.73%
FIRST DEGREE MURDER 9 3.30%
SECOND DEGREE MURDER 6 220%
MANSLAUGHTER 1 0.37%
CAUSE BODILY HARM BY CRIM NEG 1 0.37%
FIRST DEGREE MURDER 25 9.18%
SECOND DEGREE MURDER 52 19.05%
MANSLAUGHTER 1 0.37%
ATTEMPT MURDER 2 0.73%
OVERCOME RESISTANCE - CHOKE 1 0.37%
KIDNAP - HOLD FOR RANSOM 1 0.37%
DANGEROUS OPERATION OF MOTOR VEHICLE 1 0.37%
FAIL TO PROVIDE BREATH SAMPLE 2 0,73%
IMPAIRED DRIVING - CBH 1 0.37%
OPERATE MV WHILE DISQUALIFIED 1 0.37%
UTTER THREAT TO CAUSE DEATH/HARM 2 0.73%
ASSAULT - USE OF FORCE 3 1.10%
ASSAULT WITH A WEAPON 2 0.73%
ASSAULT CAUSING BODILY HARM 1 0.37%
AGGRAVATED ASSAULT 5 1.83%
Date and time extracted; 2009/04/01 4:25:10PM EST Page 1 of 3Print Date: 2009/04/01 4:25:49PM EST
TRAFFIC IN SCHEDULE1/11 SUBSTANCE 1 0.37%POSS SCHEDULE I/Il SUBST FOR PURP TRAFF 6 2.20%UNLAWFULLY IN DWELLING HOUSE 1 0.37%UNAUTH POSS IN MN 1 0.37%B E & COMMIT - NOT DWELLING HOUSE 1 0.37%B E W/INTENT - NOT DWELLING HOUSE 1 0.37%FAIL TO STOP MVA - ANOTHER VEHICLE 1 0.37%OPERATE MV - FLIGHT 1 0.37%UTTER THREAT TO CAUSE DEATH/HARM 1 0.37%
Total Number of Offenders: 273
97
Date and time extracted: 2009/04/01 4:25:10PM ESTPrint Date: 2009/04/01 4:25:49PM EST
Page 1 of 3
04/02/2009 14:01 6048264319
MMSI WARDEN
PAGE 08/08 98
In March of 2009 Mission Institution completed or was involved in the following:
Special Initiatives - Art & Word Contest for offenders. 38 Offenders enrolled inthe event which is aimed at Harm Reduction amongst offenders by raisingawareness of the issues through written stories/prose or art.
Celebration of Black History Month - Mayor of Mission came to speak to our staffand a group of offenders about the significance of Black History Month.
M2 Night was very well attended this month. This group of volunteers attends theinstitution the 3rd Friday of every month to meet with members of our offenderpopulation.
We added a new Aboriginal Correctional Program Officer to our ranks. This issignificant as it will now permit us to run the In Search of Your Warrior Programfor our Aboriginal Offenders. This program is the equivalent to the High IntensityViolence Prevention Program offered to non-Aboriginals. This program will beginin two weeks on April 15, 2009 with 13 offenders.
In March, we had one Aboriginal Correctional Program Officer away on trainingfor the Aboriginal Basic Healing Program. This also contributes to maximizingaccess to correctional programs for our offenders.
April 1 we will be starting the long awaited Family Violence Prevention Programwith 12 offenders.
99Corporate Administration
MemorandumDISTRICT OFfissionON THE FRASER
Kelly Ridleyg:\clerk\kelly\2004\reports to council\bia bylaw - request for final reading.doc
TO: Mayor and Councillors
FROM: Deputy Director of Corporate Administration
DATE: April 15, 2009
SUBJECT: BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT AREA ESTABLISHMENT BYLAW 5015-2009
RECOMMENDATION:That the District of Mission Business Improvement Area Establishment Bylaw 5015-2009 beconsidered for adoption on April 20, 2009.
BACKGROUND:
Based on a request from the Mission Downtown Business Association (MDBA) for a renewal offunding and a subsequent staff report, Council gave first three readings to the District of MissionBusiness Improvement Area Establishment Bylaw 5015-2009 on March 2, 2009.
Section 215 of the Community Charter states Council may grant money to a corporation or otherorganization that has, as one of its aims, functions or purposes, the planning and implementingof a business promotion scheme.
The process for the implementation of the above noted bylaw involved the following:
• Bylaw received first three readings on March 2, 2009
• First newspaper advertisement Mission City Record — March 5, 2009
• Letters go out to 110 property owners advising them what the additional tax levy would be totheir property taxes for the next 5 years as well as outlining the process for opposing theprogram, and the period of opposition being 30 days after the second newspaper publicationof the notice — March 5, 2009
• Second newspaper advertisement Mission City Record — March 12, 2009
• Period of opposition ends — April 11, 2009
Successful opposition to the adoption of the bylaw must include a majority of the propertyowners, representing at least 50% of the 110 parcels subject to the Business Improvement AreaService tax registering their opposition. As well, these owners would need to represent at least50% of the assessed value of land and improvements, which has been valued at $42,994,600.Based on these numbers, a successful opposition to the adoption of the bylaw would requirevalid petition(s) signed by at least 55 owners, representing a total parcel value of $21,497,300.
The attached table illustrates the number of owners who submitted petitions by the requireddeadline are 11 or 10% of all owners. The value of the parcels owned by these individuals is$3,385,900 or 7.9% of the total value of the affected parcels. Based on these figures, the validpetitions opposed to the adoption of the bylaw are clearly insufficient.
Based on the lack of sufficient opposition to the adoption of the District of Mission BusinessImprovement Area Establishment Bylaw 5015-2009, staff recommends the adoption of thebylaw on April 20, 2009
FILE: ADM.BYL.BYL. PAGE 1 OF 2Bylaw 5015-2009
SUMMARY OF LETTERS RECEIVED
Valid Petitions Submitted in Opposition to the Adoption of Bylaw 5015-2009
Roll Number Property Owner Address Assessment850664100 0803552 BC Ltd. 7282 Home Street 349,000850849000 David Jang 33065 1 st Avenue 209,000850755000 471222 BC Ltd. 33276 2nd Avenue 964,000850624000 585226 BC Ltd. 33128 1 st Avenue 473,000831383001 Bellevue Hotel Ltd 32988 1 st Avenue 821,000850645000 0784790 BC Ltd. 33232 1 st Avenue 257,400850700100 Imperial Oil Ltd. 33321 1 st Avenue 62,500850700200 Imperial Oil Ltd. 33321 1 st Avenue 62,500850700300 Imperial Oil Ltd. 33321 1 st Avenue 62,500850700400 Imperial Oil Ltd. 33321 1 st Avenue 62,500850700500 Imperial Oil Ltd. 33321 1 st Avenue 62,500
11 owners Total $3,385,900
100
FILE: ADM.BYL.BYL PAGE 2 OF 2Bylaw 5015-2009
g: \cow \2009\april rhp 2009 workplan.doc
nnis Clar
MDISTRICT OF
issON THE FRASER
Corporate AdministrationINFORMATION Memorandum
101
File Category:
FIN.CON.VAGFile Folder:
Fraser River Heritage Park
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Director of Corporate Administration
Date: March 20, 2009
Subject: Fraser River Heritage Park Work Plan
Attached is a copy of the 2009 work plan for Fraser River Heritage Park. The planhas been reviewed by the director of parks recreation and culture, and received hisapproval.
Page 1 of 1
co0
102
0/4 Htli.), FRASER RIVER HERITAGE PARK
P.O. Box 3341, Mission, British Columbia, Canada. V2V 4J5Phone: (604) 826-0277 Fax: (604) 826-0333 E-mail: mhaacimin le Web site: www.heritagepark-mission.ca
Cl2
February 16, 2009
Mr. Dennis Clark,Director of Corporate Administration,District of Mission.
Re: 2009 Work Plan
Dear Dennis:
Our maintenance contract with the District calls for a work plan to be submitted for the current year. Ihave divided this report into two sections: the first deals with the work to be done under the contractitself for which we receive funding from the District (the required work plan); and the second covers theprojects that the MHA is undertaking as part of its charitable mandate in the park and for which wereceive no funding from the District.
Work to be Performed under Maintenance Contract in 2009
1) Building Maintenancea) Maintain and repair all structures as needed
i) Norma Kenney Houseii) Administration Buildingiii) Washroomsiv) Maintenance shedv) Bandstandvi) Bell towervii) Gateways (large and small)viii) Caretaker suite in the NKH
2) Equipment Maintenance and Repaira) Maintain and repair all equipment necessary for the maintenance of the grounds, gardens,
structures and furniture.3) Park Maintenance
a) This year we hope to find the resources in the budget to perform needed work on therhododendron beds. In my years at the park, beginning with the FVRD, there has been no fundstargeted for these beds. They have always been a volunteer project that has not been popularwith our regular garden volunteers. We hope to be able to find money for materials only, mainlysoil enrichment, since we will use our Ferndale volunteers to perfoini the labour.
4) Maintain the park grounds to an acceptable level.a) Mow grass in pre-determined areas.b) Clear snow from pathways and parking lot.c) Edge pathways, paint or seal all structures, reclaim overgrown land, power wash concrete areas.d) Collect and dispose of all refuse.e) Conduct regular, random security checks.f) Perfonn routine maintenance of garden areas.
5) Ensure the park is a welcoming and accessible venue for a wide range of community events andindividuals.
103
2009 Work Plan, and Planned Projects of the Mission Heritage AssociationAt Fraser River Heritage Park
In addition to the work undertaken in accordance with our Maintenance Contract with the District ofMission, the MHA, as part of its charitable mandate at Fraser River Heritage Park, has committed toseveral projects relating to the historical and cultural significance of the site, as well as to making thepark a more welcoming venue for the enjoyment of our community.
It should be noted that, although the cost of these improvements is high, the MHA is committed to raisethe money through fundraising and donations, and that no new funds will be requested from the Districtof Mission to complete the projects. We may approach the District for donations in kind whereappropriate, such as timber, but there will be no additional burden placed on the tax rolls. The estimatedvalue of the various projects underway is:
Perimeter Trail $225,000 with lighting $375,000Old Orchard to date $ 9,800 to completion $ 40,000 (estimate)
44 G4 developer contribution to date $ 60,000Heritage Walk $ 75,000Landscaping to be determined
104
raser River Heritage ParkMiSSIOTI Heritage Association Planned Projects
Map scale: 112000
Ortho rnap supplied byThstricttif
Map produced byloutiouse
LEGEND & STORYBOARD INDEXPerimeter Trail will citcumventthe boundaries of the park.
Heritage Walk
D'Herbomm Creek named afterBishcp D'Herbomez.,O.M.I.
Connecting Path between Hentade Walk &PerirneterTrallBoulevard sidewalk
iNDEX TO STORYBOARDS
A Entry GateMechanin Shop
CG Horseshoe PitD Bell Tower & Peggy Staber Memorial GardenE Mart Kenney Memorial Bandstand (presented July 1, 2007jF Geographic Features
• G Boys DormitoryfoundationH Heritage GardenI Girl's Dormitoryfotmdation & ONLI. Cemetery
• J Bakery and'Classroomsfoundations`. .1: Gymnasium• L Milking Barn and Orchard
Possiblyoan entranced pond area WM suitable naturaltau
Potential site tor specimen nem replacmd memo biackbeniek;
Theoki orchard' is bemd re!laimed & will be a IttlktforlOng&-77.17S ..,newly planted heritage fruit trees
Six majestic chermut meet line the procession to the cemetery.
IF1,,,e,4antiotcaxrhouse the original SuMary's Mission Bell eloriared by the Stodo
Menvorial benches& storyboarcls will provide a Ilistory of the nark.
--."%.5cxne of the 'foundations of the otioinal St Mary's Indian Residential '3‹ac 1892 a nd may be enhanced bytandscaped gardens
105
Concession Stand
Last year, in order to maximize use of existing space and to better serve the visitors to our events, weconverted the shed that previously held our tractor into a concession stand. We brought the concessionarea up to health standards by pouring a concrete floor, installing sinks, and acquiring more equipment.
We will be finishing this area over the winter by installing insulation and gyprock.
Perimeter Trail
One of the most requested improvements to the Park is more walking/jogging trails or paths. We arecurrently fundraising to create a path around the entire boundary of the Park — 2.3 kilometers or 1.4miles (see map, red line). Our proposed path will be 3 meters (10 feet) wide with a surface of crushedgravel.
The trail will be installed in stages as funding allows, with the first stage running up Mary Street fromthe open field, along 7 th Avenue from Mary Street to the end of the cul de sac, on the south (park) sideof the street. The area along 7th Avenue was cleared in 2006 with cooperation from the developer at nocost to the District (estimated value $60,000).
The estimated cost of the completed trail is $225,000. If we add lighting at 50-meter intervals, the costwill increase by an additional $150,000. These are construction costs only and do not include electricalconnection for the lights or annual maintenance of the trail. They also do not include garbagereceptacles or any signage or benches. $12,000 has been included in the estimate for drainage control,but this may not be enough for the steeper slopes.
The morning Rotary Club has donated $5,000, as has the Mission Foundation, and individuals from thecommunity an additional $8,100. The MHA has added another $4,000 for a total of $22,100. With thisseed money we have engaged a project manager.
2009
There is a strong possibility that the entire trail will be completed under a LocalMotion grant that hasbeen submitted by Parks and Recreation.
If the grant is again unsuccessful, we will try to complete as much as possible of the first phase that runsup Mary Street and along 7 th Avenue. This will require backhoe work on the Mary Street section andlikely the removal of some weed trees. However, we will not remove any of the heritage fruit trees thatare plentiful on this side (west) of the hill (see following).
Old Orchard Restoration
On the slope that lies on the north side of FRHP, between our open field and our 7 th Avenue boundary.one will find the remains of the original fruit orchard which was maintained by and served the needs ofSt. Mary's School. Starting, in 2004, the MHA has endeavoured to clear and reclaim this old orchard
106
area running from Mary Street east to the foundation of the milking barn. When finished, the projectwill have replanted the orchard with heritage species of fruit covering the area bounded by Mary Street,7 th Avenue, and the large field used for overflow parking (see map)
Each year we have put whatever resources we could find into this reclamation project which consists ofclearing the great blackberry forests that had taken over the slope, and stabilizing the remaining fruit andnut trees. To date we have spent $10,800 that has been raised through fundraising/grants, and severalhundred hours of volunteer labour.
2009
During the last year, with improved maintenance services and with the help of volunteers from thecorrections system and from arbourists, we have made great progress on this project and have addedseveral acres of usable area to the park. We have cleared the easternmost side of the hill and will beginreplanting this area with either grafts from the original trees or purchased heritage species. We havebeen in contact with Tree Canada who seems eager that we submit our application to their carbon offsetprogram. In conversation with this non-profit agency, it seems likely that we can secure $10,000 infunding in each of the next several years. Furtheimore, last year we were able to begin our landscapingplans by planting six mulberry trees along the eastern crest of the hill. Not only will these trees providean attractive addition to the park, but they will also provide habitat for birds and small animals.
As this project progresses, we will clear the scrub alders from the central portion of the hill and then thewesternmost side. However, the order of our replanting/reclamation may change since the western sideof the hill contains the majority of the original fruit trees extant, and we may decide that preservingthese is the highest priority. In this case, we will work on restoration from west to east.
In February, we continued clearing the blackberries from the area around the existing fruit and nut trees.Several of these trees are now so decayed that it is not possible to save them. We will be taking graftsfrom them and, unfortunately, cutting them down. We will replant, possibly with the grafts.
Heritage Walk
One project that began two years ago is our "Heritage Walk" (see map with yellow station indicators).This project envisions a rambling pathway through and around the park which will include at least 15resting points (stations). Each resting point (station) will include a bench and a storyboard. Theanticipated cost of each station is about $5,000. It is our expectation that each bench will be a memorialbench provided by a sponsor and each storyboard will feature the nearby historic, cultural or geographichighlights of the area. We hope to find sponsors for each storyboard through individual, corporate orclub sponsorships.
The first station, unveiled on Canada Day 2007, was a Mart Kenney memorial bench with adjacentstoryboard, placed facing the bandstand. The storyboard features the bandstand and its history, and abrief biography of this prominent citizen of our city. Also on that day, the bandstand was officiallyrenamed the "Mission Kinsmen Club's Mart Kenney Memorial Bandstand".
Last year we added three memorial benches to the park. They were deliberately placed at one of the"stations" we had previously identified: the Girls' Dormitory, the "view', and the "history" stations.
107
108
2009
We will continue to produce the text and graphics for each storyboard (drafts attached). As they arecompleted, we will be able to add them to our walk as soon as sponsors are found for the bases.Similarly benches will be purchased as donors come forward requesting a suitable memorial for lovedones. Since we have identified the locations for the storyboards and benches, we can place either orboth at any time depending on the donor.
There is a possibility that paths connecting the stations and linking to the Perimeter Trail will becompleted under the LocalMotion grant mentioned above, or with funds from the District's capitalreserves.
Facilities
The park is growing in usage, complexity, and the demands placed on us by the public. It is becomingapparent that more indoor space is needed for various purposes such as maintenance, washrooms(particularly women's), the kitchen, the caretaker, offices and meeting areas. The MHA will strive tocomplete as much of these facilities as possible for the lowest cost possible, but the District will have toearmark some of its capital reserves for one or more of these projects.
Landscaping Plan
While this taskforce, which is charged with looking to the long term landscaping needs of the park, isalso in its early stages, it may hold greater long term impact on the physical aspects of the park than anyof the other projects mentioned.
A concept plan emerged in December 2007:
I. Seventh Ave running east from Mary St. - screening trees north of old orchard.• Eastern end of area is now cleared entirely, western end contains soil and gravel berms
covered with native deciduous trees• Mixed deciduous trees Will be removed and the berets levelled. Area to be planted with
Douglas Fir as screening trees south of perimeter path. Plant other low growing nativevegetation between path and firs.
2. Old Orchard restoration.• Deadwood existing orchard trees (to be done prior to bud break in spring, 2008). (work to
be done by tree committee), then leave untouched for remainder of season.• Start remedial pruning in winter 2008/09 (tree committee to do work)• Take cuttings (bud and/or hardwood grafts). Find experienced personnel to do work.
Alternately locate heritage apple species and plant new stock.
3. Hillsides east of Condo development leading up to Grotto area.1. Islands of native species plantings (ie. D.Fir, G Fir and aspen with under plantings of
saial, sword fern etc.)
4. Riparian /pond area northeast of top road access
• Concept is to enlarge and deepen pond area. Line area with clay to hold water. Saveexisting plant material from wetland and use for replanting.
5. Horseshoe Arboretum, west of access road at east end of park• Tree committee to select species (non native specimen trees), ie. Liquidamber, oak, beech
etc.
6. East and South of access road up to but not including bank leading to LougheedHwy, southeast portion of park
• Due to condition of trees, remove existing cottonwoods• Deadwood existing large heritage aged trees (maples etc.)
7. Bank leading to Lougheed• Concept: Remove blackberries, trail access construction and bank stabilization
(geotechnical experts need to be involved). Plant specimen trees on hillside if reasonableconditions exist. Native planting may work better in this area.
8. Perimeter trail planting• Ongoing as the trail is developed. Note funding may be available through grants based
on wheelchair accessibility.
2009
We have begun the landscaping as resources allow. Late last year nine trees were planted along ourboundary with the new development on 7 th Avenue, and another six along the eastern crest of OrchardHill. Such plantings will continue this year.
At least part of any grant we receive from Tree Canada will be used to begin the landscaping of the parkbased on the preceding concept. If the funding is sufficient, we will begin by planting trees along thecrest of the hill south of 7 th Avenue (part of the area that was cleared last year).
At the east end of the park stands a large dirt pile that was dropped there about 15 years ago by theRegional District as a potential fundraiser. Since then nothing has been done and the pile has becomeovergrown by scrub trees, mostly alders. As time and funds permit, we will remove the trees and thepile to return the park to its original condition and drainage.
Similarly, another dirt pile was dumped by 7 th Avenue, and we will remove it and the scrub trees as weare able.
Conclusion
It is the MHA's hope that Council will see the park as a viable, ever expanding, ever improving andchanging entity. It is our further hope that Mission District Council will share our vision of the park,and will support our efforts to make it the envy of other municipalities and the pride of the citizens ofMission.
109
THE H EA RT & SOUL OF THE MISSION COMMUNITY
raser River Heritage. Pal k is a 50-acre parcel of land situated on aF-flat bench overlooking the Fraser River. In addition to its naturalbeauty, this park is one of the most culturally, geographically aridhistorically significant sites in the entire Fraser Valley.
During your visit to our park, we invite you to stop at the manystations and storyboards you will see throughOut the area Each ofthese stations provides a memorial bench and a storyboard whichhighlights one or more interesting ceatures or facts about the park.
This park hosts many of the major events in our community including:The Mission Folk MUsic Festival
• Mission's Canada Day Celebrations Old Car Fathers' Day Sunday• Celebration Of Community & Illuminaria_• 26 Twilight Concerts from June through Aug -List♦ The annual Pilgrimage to the Grotto
Many other community fundraising events.
Many lower key activities also take place in our park. If you come on a regular basis youwill no doubt, encounter some of the following activities:
• Exercise groups+ An annual easter egg hunt sponsored by the Mission ElkS Club4i■ WeddingS in the gazeboo Santa In The Park• Lure Field Trials▪ Horseshoes* Society For Creative Anachronism (Medieval Jousting)o Dog walking, people walking, picnicking etc. -^
7tet,,tk- //eie kr - Ly.(/// //76
Finally, and most important, our park is a place for rest, relaxation andreflection. The beatitiful setting and the peaceful surroundings provide, for:the residents of Mission and other visitors, an island of tranquility in an evermore stressful world: a place Where people can run, or walk, or sit where theycan picnic with their children or walk with their dogs.
We invite you to enjoy our park and We ask only that you respect it and thatyou leave it at least as well as you found it
Mission Heritage AssociationThe non-profit Society that manages and operates this Park
on behalf of the District of Mission
dlle6(0--
•
M 1H‘'''Acici r t-i gAri l Q.n sapf45..*.7* `;',1141to '
n the late 1940 s a young (loctor,, James Ma litis,I. .
piaitmed. tc) start a ilierlical j)laclice iri Niission. liiletouring the Mission area with his wi re, Catherine,
1)r. M-arcellus was very impressed with the 1)eautiftrlrhododendron bushes he saw in various tarts of theconnnunity.
The young cioetor bougirt a house on 3' Avenue and, ito1947 started his own rhododendron garden. Planting andcaring for this extensive, garcleti_Was to 1)ee()irie a lifeavocation for Jim,
lu "1986 he donated 55 diodos to aser River IIPark, at id in 2000 he donated ano r 14.-•Tile fatties 411uredius dodeitdron Walk nol,v featUies5 large' Rhode 'beds gp d over a A.acre area: The walkprovides a secluded area of serenity and tranquility whet evisitors can escape the noise aid bustle oftito ern life.
.7'
addition to eStablishing ati. env-tat-51e khododendronrden ofhiS o*ti, Di Marcellus also became intrigued
SpC010S of rhodosaeular::and perfect p
ti'hiated in his greatestdendron he
egistered as sucial floral ettibi
enetogity otivilgsioflan the aft • was moved fromits h _to its new home at Praser Myer Iletitage Part.such a large and mature. Olant is nd easy task.
FILE: ADM.COU.MEMRemuneration
113
MDISTRICT OF
lsslonON THE FRASER
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Deputy Treasurer/Collector
Date: March 24, 2009
Subject: Council Remuneration and Expense Report
Report
The attached 2008 Council Remuneration and Expense Report have been prepared pursuant toSection 168 of the Community Charter.
Each Councillor has received a copy of their Remuneration and Expenses prior to the reportgoing to a public meeting.
* The District of Mission has a contract with.one council member whose company manages rental properties on behalf of the municipality (Disclosurerequired as per Sections 107 & 168 of the Community Charter)
GAFINANCEAccounts Payable \SOFI REPORT\SOFI Report 2008\AGENDA SUBMISSION - council remuneration.xls 4/8/2009 11:22 AM
115
Corporate AdministrationMemorandum
DISTRICT OF
TO: Chief Administrative Officer
FROM: Deputy Director of Corporate Administration
DATE: April 16, 2009
SUBJECT: Campaign Financing Disclosure Statements
As Council is aware, all candidates that ran for office in the 2008 General Local GovernmentElection were required to file the necessary financial disclosure statements of campaigncontributions and election expenses with the Director of Corporate Administration no later thanMarch 16, 2009. If the disclosure statement is filed between March 17 and April 15, 2009, thecandidate must pay to the District of Mission a late filing penalty of $500.
Under Section 92 of the Local Government Act — "Candidate disqualification for failure to fileDisclosure Statement" failure to file a statement by the deadline results in the candidate beingdisqualified from being nominated for, elected to or holding office on a local government,Vancouver City Council, board of school trustees, or as a local trustee of the Islands Trust, untilafter the next general local election. In addition, a public statement that the candidate failed toprovide the financial disclosure must be made.
This is to advise that Mr. Scott Etches, a candidate for the position of Councillor in the 2008General Election has not complied with the requirements of the Act. Therefore in accordancewith the legislation, I am required to advise Council and the Inspector of Municipalities of thesecircumstances. Mr. Etches name will be added to the list of people disqualified from running inthe next local government election.
tKelly Ridley
g:\clerk \confidential \kelly\2009 \report to counciffiling financial disclosure forms.doc
PAGE 1 OF 1
DISTRICT OF
Finance DepartmentMemorandum
116
issionON THE FRASER ;Pp
File Category:
FIN.BUD.DOMFile Folder: 2009 Budget
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Deputy Treasurer/CollectorDate: April 16, 2009
Subject: Mission Arts Council
ReportAttached are e-mails between District staff and BC Assessment on available options to reduce theproperty tax for the location currently occupied by the Mission Arts Council.Currently, council assists the Mission Arts Council with a grant to offset the increase in municipal propertytaxes (includes property taxes identified for RCMP and Library) that has occurred since 2004. TheMission Arts Council pays a base amount of $2,103 and a grant is provided for the balance. The grantfor 2009 is $6,056.28 (based on an estimated 8% increases in the 2008 property taxes).There is no assistance for increases in user fees for utilities (water, sewer, garbage & recycling) or forincreases from other agencies (School Tax, FV Regional Health, FV Region District, BC Assessment orMunicipal Finance Authority).
Summary of 2008 property taxes listed by address:
33529 1 st Ave 9,476.1533535 1 st Ave 3 368.99
Total 2008 12,845.14
Summary of 2008 property taxes listed by type:
Municipal & RCMP taxes 7,241.11
Municipal utilities 718.56
FV Regional Library 338.78
Collected for other agencies 4,546.69Total 2008 12,845.14
BC Assessment did contact their legal department for an interpretation on an annual permissive taxexemption for an eligible organization that leases property from a taxable owner. This could be an optionstarting in 2010 and the grant assistance would be eliminated. The core impact would be a savings of$6,056.28 in 2010.
Kerri Onken, CGAG:\FINANCE\BUDGET\Budget 2009\Memo - Mission Arts Council.doc
Page 1 of 1
Kerri Onken
From: Paul Horn & Tracy Irwin [[email protected] ]Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2009 1:45 PMTo: Kerri Onken; James Atebe; Jenny Stevens [External]; Heather Stewart [External]; Mike
Scudder; Danny Plecas [External]; Terry GiddaCc: Glen Robertson; Dennis Clark; Ken BjorgaardSubject: RE: taxation - Mission Art Centre
Thanks Kerri. Can we please have this added to an upcoming CoW agenda then?
Paul
From: Kerri Onken [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 4:27 PMTo: James Atebe; Jenny Stevens [External]; Heather Stewart [External]; Paul Horn [External]; Mike Scudder; DannyPlecas [External]; Terry GiddaCc: Glen Robertson; Dennis Clark; Ken BjorgaardSubject: FW: taxation - Mission Art Centre
See below for response from BC Assessment on the first ave property.
From: Green, John A BCA:EX [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 3:59 PMTo: Kerri OnkenCc: Knight, Bonnie C BCA:EXSubject: RE: taxation - Mission Art Centre
Hi Kerri,
For the 2009 roll there will be no changes.
For the 2010 roll it is possible that the land may be classified as class 8 (I still have concerns about this that Iwill have to investigate as I am not confident that an art gallery can be considered a museum), this will in noway impact the valuation of the land or improvements, only the classification of the land.
Thanks.
John Greg Senior Appraiser 1 Fraser Valley R.eg on BC Assessment I #240S. Fraser Way ;' . )botsfo BC V2T 5N7 T 604.650.5900 x 287 or 1,800 .393.1.32 F 604.650.1394l'www.bcassessment.ca
From: Kerri Onken [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: March 16, 2009 3:55 PMTo: Green, John A BCA:EXSubject: RE: taxation - Mission Art Centre
Hi John,
I believe the Mission Arts Council will be suspending the services provided by the tea house and the gift shop (may haveceased activities already). Would that be enough to have the land classified as class 8?
117
1
If yes, what would happen to the value of the land? (2009 land assessed at $327,000, improvements assessed at$253,800)
From: Green, John A BCA:EX [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, March 16, 2009 9:13 AMTo: Kern OnkenSubject: RE: taxation - Mission Art Centre
Hi Kern,
The property would need to be used exclusively as a museum and even then only the land portion wouldqualify for class 8. Currently the Arts Council Building is used as an art gallery, tea house and gift shop sothere is no exclusive use as a museum. Additionally the intent is for outdoor recreational facilities to be in class8, in my mind Heritage Park is a great example of the intent of this section of the legislation. It fosters a deeperunderstanding and promotes the enjoyment and sharing of authentic cultural and natural heritage in theMission area.
I hope this helps.
John Green, AAC1,PAppi Senior Appraiser I Fraser Valley Region C Assessment #240 - 31935S. Fraser Way Abbotsford BC V2T 5N7 T 604.850.5900 x 287 or 1 00 93.13321 F 604.850.1394I www.bcassessment.ca
From: Kern Onken [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: March 11, 2009 5:04 PMTo: Green, John A BCA:EXSubject: RE: taxation - Mission Art Centre
Hi John,
Council would like to know why the Mission Arts Council could not come under the museums criteria - (xii) below?
Do you have a definition of museum? Are there certain activities or target groups or any criteria they should stop doing orstart performing to become eligible?
It is unlikely that this particular zoning change would have a negative impact on the assessed value. The P2zone allows for some fairly desirable uses including personal care and private hospital facilities, so marketdemand is high and may even result in an increase in value.
As far as classification goes, the property would remain in class 6, business and other, unless it met thefollowing criteria:
118
2
119
(a) land, but not improvements on that land, used solely as an outdoorrecreational facility for the following activities or uses:(i) golf;(ii) skiing;(iii) tennis;(iv) ball games of any kind;(v) lawn bowling;(vi) public swimming pool;(vii) motor car racing;(viii) trap shooting;(ix) archery;(x) ice skating;(xi) waterslides;(xii) rnuseiuns;(xiii) amusement parks;(xiv) horse racing;(xv) rifle shooting;(xvi) pistol shooting;(xvii) horse back riding;(xviii) roller skating;(xix) marinas;(xx) parks and gardens open to the public;(xxi) hang gliding;(xxii) bicycling in addition to, or as part of, one of the activities or uses set out
in subparagraphs (i) to (xxi);(xxiii) camping;
(b) that part of any land and improvements used or set aside for use as a place ofpublic worship or as a meeting hall for a non-profit fraternal organization ofpersons of either or both sexes, together with the facilities necessarily incidentalto that use, for at least 150 days in the year ending on June 30, of the calendaryear preceding the calendar year for which the assessment roll is being prepared,not counting any day in which the land and improvements so used or set aside arealso used for(i) any purpose by an organization that is neither a religious organization nor
a non-profit fraternal organization,(ii) entertainment where there is an admission charge, or(iii) the sale or consumption, or both, of alcoholic beverages.
Hope this helps.
John Green, AACI, P.Appl Sen77. I Fraser Valley Region BC Assessment I #240 - 31935S. Fraser Way Abbotsford BC V2T 5 • . 604,850.5900 x 287 or 1.800.393.13321 F 604,850.1394
It looks like the property at 33529 1st ave, (870 357 001) currently owned by Clifford Rock and leased to the Mission ArtsCentre, is looking at closing the Tea Room and Gift Shop (the money generating operations) and going for an applicationto be re-zoned to P2. There are looking at options to decrease their property taxes.
If this property was rezoned to P2 in 2008,
1. would the assessment remain at $415,000, and2. would the property be assessed as class 8, recreational/non-profit?
From: Dennis ClarkSent: Sunday, November 23, 2008 10:54 AMTo: Kern OnkenSubject: taxation - Mission Art Centre
Hi Kerri. The Mission Art Centre is located at 33529 1 st Avenue. The property is currently zonedas a commercial use. Can you tell me what the 2008 taxes were; and what they would havebeen if the property were zoned P2?Thanks.
Dennis
dennis clarkdirector of corporate administrationdistrict of mission
AN ACT OF KINDNESS IS NOT FULLY REALIZED UNTIL WE PAY IT FORWARD TO SOMEONE ELSE
From: Green, John A BCA:EX [[email protected] ]Sent: Monday, March 30, 2009 8:16 AMTo: Kern OnkenCc: Knight, Bonnie C BCA:EXSubject: FW: Mission Arts Council
Hi Kerri,
We would not take the position that the ownership by a taxable owner is a stumbling block to a permissiveexemption. It would be for an automatic (statutory) exemption, but we will give effect to permissive exemptionsgranted by a taxing jurisdiction for property owned by a taxable owner if the occupier would have been entitledto the exemption, and the wording of the exemption applies to property that is "held by" the occupier.
This position is supported by Property Assessment Appeal Board in some of their previous decisions.
So if the District wishes to pass a permissive exemption for the Mission Arts Council in their current location,BC Assessment would reflect that exemption on the roll. If you are concerned that the Arts Council mayrelocate or simply close down leaving the owner with an exempt property, perhaps a permissive exemption fora duration of one year could be issued and then renewed annually as needed.
Hope this helps.
Thanks.
-- .en, Senior Appra' j Fraser Valley Region BC Assessment j #240 - 31935rtaser Way /.1)Dotsforcl BC V21- 5N7 T 60 -.350.5900 x 246 or 1.800.393.1332j F 604.850.1394
I www.bcassessment.ca
From: Green, John A BCA:EXSent: March 25, 2009 9:39 AMTo: 'Kern Onken'Subject: Mission Arts Council
Hi Kerri,
Unfortunately my contact in the legal department is out of the office for the day so I won't be able to respond toyou until tomorrow at the earliest.
Thanks.
John GreE P,Appl Senior Fraser ment #2' 0 3193S. Fraser Way bbotsford BC V2T 5N7 j T 604.850.5900 x , I F 604.850,1.394
School Taxes Collected on Behalf of Province of B.C.RATE NO GRANT B BASIC GRANT
'-' UNDER AGE 65C ADDITIONAL GRANT
OVER AGE 65 & OTHER
Basic School 6.8000 1,059.44 1,059.44 1,059.44Total School 1,059.44 1,059.44 1,059.44Net School 1,059.44 1,059.44 1,059.44
Taxes and Other Levied by District of MissionMunicipal - General 8.6320 1,344.87 1,344.87 1,344.87Municipal - Policing 4.2801 666.84 666.84 666.84
Levies Collected on Behalf of Other AgenciesMunicipal Finance Authority Tax 0.0001 0.02 0.02 0.02Fraser Valley Regional District Tax 0.4985 77.67 77.67 77.67Fraser Valley Regional Hospital Tax 0.6145 95.74 95.74 95.74B.C. Assessment Authority Tax 0.1944 30.29 30.29 30.29Fraser Valley Regional Library 0.6041 94.12 94.12 94.12
2.c'0 g Sc.) of\
5
c__i (...)-Vt
CD-Octi2..e
co-kr_5
-116.51,
4 5 (46 693 38.18
121 8415 . \*
ELINQUENT TAXES IF TAXES ARE DELINQUENT THIS PROPERTY WILL BE SOLD FOR TAXESN SEPTEMBER 29th, 2008 UNLESS THE DELINQUENT TAXES WITH INTEREST ARE PAID BEFORE THAT DATE.
NTEREST ON ARREARS AND DELINQUENT TAXES IS CALCULATED FROM JANUARY 1, 2008 AT A RATERET BY THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT.
NTEREST ON ARREARS AND DELINQUENT TAXES WILL BE CALCULATED AT TIME OF PAYMENT.
=OR FURTHER INFORMATION REGARDING SCHOOL TAXES CONTACT THE SCHOOL TAX\DMINISTRATOR AT 250-356-0907.
JTILITY CHARGES ON THIS NOTICE REFLECT THE USE OF THESE LANDS FROM A UTILITY CONSUMP-HON STANDPOINT ONLY. IT MAY BE THAT THE USE OF THE LANDS BREACHES OTHER BYLAWS OFFHE DISTRICT OF MISSION (e.g. BUILDING BYLAW OR ZONING BYLAW.) THE DISTRICT RESERVES THERIGHT TO ENFORCE THOSE BYLAWS.
Web ID: rock1027Password: rock9031
IF ELIGIBLE FOR HOME OWNER GRANT, COMPLETE THE APPLICATION ON REVERSEBY THE DUE DATE. PAYMENT IS NOT REQUIRED TO OBTAIN THE GRANT.
School Taxes Collected on Behalf of Province of B.C.Basic SchoolTotal SchoolNet School
Taxes and Other Levied by District of MissionMunicipal - GeneralMunicipal - PolicingUtilities - SewerUtilities - WaterUtilities - GarbageUtilities - Recycling
Levies Collected on Behalf of Other AgenciesMunicipal Finance Authority TaxFraser Valley Regional District TaxFraser Valley Regional Hospital TaxB.C. Assessment Authority TaxFraser Valley Regional Library
8.63204.2801
,
118.61°
0.00010.49850.61450.19440.6041
123
DUE DATEWEDNESDAY JULY 2ND10% PENALTY AFTER DUE DATE
CURRENT 2008 DUE 9,476.15 9,476.15 9,476.15PREPAYMENT 0.00 0.00 0.002007 ARREARS 0.00 0.00 0.00
1ELINQUENT TAXES IF TAXES ARE DELINQUENT THIS PROPERTY WILL BE SOLD FOR TAXES 2006 DELINQUENT 0.00 0.00 0.00N SEPTEMBER 29th, 2008 UNLESS THE DELINQUENT TAXES WITH INTEREST ARE PAID BEFORE THAT DATE. GROSS BALANCE 9,476.15 9,476.15 9,476.15
NTEREST ON ARREARS AND DELINQUENT TAXES IS CALCULATED FROM JANUARY 1, 2008 AT A RATEINTEREST 2007 ARREARSINTEREST 2006 DELINQUENT
0.000.00
0.000.00
0.000.00
;ET BY THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT.PENALTY
NTEREST ON ARREARS AND DELINQUENT TAXES WILL BE CALCULATED AT TIME OF PAYMENT.TOTAL DUE 9 476.15 9,476.15 9,476.15
DR FURTHER INFORMATION REGARDING SCHOOL TAXES CONTACT THE SCHOOL TAXkDMINISTRATOR AT 250-356-0907.
PAYMENT
BALANCE DUE
JTILITY CHARGES ON THIS NOTICE REFLECT THE USE OF THESE LANDS FROM A UTILITY CONSUMP-- ION STANDPOINT ONLY. IT MAY BE THAT THE USE OF THE LANDS BREACHES OTHER BYLAWS OFHE DISTRICT OF MISSION (e.g. BUILDING BYLAW OR ZONING BYLAW.) THE DISTRICT RESERVES THESIGHT TO ENFORCE THOSE BYLAWS.
NO GRANTD BASIC GRANT0" UNDER AGE 65
rs ADDITIONAL GRANTs-• OVER AGE 65 & OTHER
Web ID: rock1027Password: rock9031
IF ELIGIBLE FOR HOME OWNER GRANT, COMPLETE THE APPLICATION ON REVERSEBY THE DUE DATE. PAYMENT IS NOT REQUIRED TO OBTAIN THE GRANT.
V DETACH AND RETURN LOWER PORTION V
DISTRICT OF MISSION5645 STAVE LAKE ST. BOX 20, MISSION, B.C. V2V 4L9PHONE: 604-820-3717 www.mission.caSEE INSTRUCTIONS TO TAXPAYER ON REVERSE
DISTRICT OF MISSIONDate Ackd 4itteDistdA.Date Scanned
ch I Fi e Category
File Folder Name
Mayor James Atebe Toilyayor 0Cauncillog 0 MayoiRB,DI Exempt COWDistrict of Mission Other AMU_ h Lje(.
Box 20Mission, BC V2V 4L9
For: DReport to COWRequested By CH r
°Information OReply for Mayors SigP.Pponse to Council Follow Lip
Dear Mayor Atebe,
On behalf of the Fraser Valley Health Care Foundation, I would like to thank you and Mr.Robertson for taking the time to meet with me and members of my Board of Trustees onMarch 5th , 2009.
It was exciting for us to learn that the strategic planning report identifying the health careneeds of Mission had been received. We welcome the opportunity to be involved in thenext steps and look forward to working with you to develop a case for support once afundraising goal has been identified.
As per our discussion, we truly see value in partnering with the District and kindlyrequest that you consider appointing a member of Council to our Board of Trustees. Thetime commitment is fairly small as this Board only meets once every other month.Perhaps the best link to our Board of Trustees is the current Chair of your Health CareCommittee however, should you have a more suitable candidate in mind, we would alsoappreciate the opportunity for myself or one of my Board members to join your HealthCare Committee.
I look forward to a positive response to these requests.
Sincerely,
' -11(Litz,/ )
Vicki RawExecutive Director
125
Abbotsford Office32900 Marshall Road, Abbotsford, BC V2S 0C2
T: 604.851.4890 F: 604.851.4898
Chilliwack Office45600 Menholm Road, Chilliwack, BC V2P 1P7
T: 604.701.4051 F:604.701.4050
Mission Office7324 Hurd Street, Mission, BC V2V 3H5
That Water Utility Operating Budget is increased by $29,991.74, by a reduction in the transfer to reserveswith the financial plan being amended accordingly, to fund works not completed in 2008. The specificaccounts and works are:
1. Health and Safety Account Number 91310 for Confined Space Rescue equipment and training asrequired by the Worksafe BC regulations.
2. Pressure Reducing Station, Account Number 91100 for installation of automated shelf-flushingscreen board to reduce staff maintenance time.
Background
At the end of 2008, staff requested the carry forward of some unexpended operational funds in the waterutilities; unfortunately at the time of finalizing the 2009 budget staff anticipated there would be insufficientunexpended funds to accommodate any carry forward of unexpended funds. Subsequent to finalizing thebudget staff has been advised by the City of Abbotsford staff that the operating costs for the Joint WaterSystem is less then anticipated and there is sufficient unexpended funding to accommodate the originalproposed for carry forward.
With the budget having been finalized staff is now requesting an increase to the two accounts equal tothe original proposed carry forward. The two accounts are:
1. Health and Safety - Account Number 91310; Confined Space Rescue equipment and training as requiredby the Worksafe BC regulations. This work was not completed in 2008 due to a delay by the consultant incarrying out his assigned work.
2. Pressure Reducing Station - Account Number 91100; Installation of automated shelf flushing screen boardto reduce staff maintenance time. This work was not completed in 2008 as Utilities staff was preoccupiedwith installing the many service connections requested by the various land developments that occurred lastyear.
Source of Funding
'; 9,991.7 twill come from a reduction in transfers the Water Capital Reserve Fund.
p
Ken Bjorgaard, I have reviewed the financial aspects of this report.
File g:pworks/greg/greg 2009/Memo Water Operations Funding.doc
Page 1 of 1
127
District of Mission MemoFile Category: INF.WAS.WASFile Folder: Changes to Collection List 2009
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Environmental Coordinator
Date: March 25 th , 2009
Subject: Specific Curbside Collection Addresses on Dewdney Trunk Road
Recommendation
THAT Section 4 of the Refuse Collection and Disposal Bylaw 1387-1984 be amended toexclude 10256 Dewdney Trunk Road from the specific address list receiving curbside collectionalong the access corridor to the landfill; and
THAT the owner of the property at 10256 Dewdney Trunk Road be reimbursed for curbsidecollection fees charged on his tax notice since 1999, and instead be charged the rural recyclingrate for those years.
Background
A staff report, dated February 11 th , 2009, recommended to amend Section 4 of the RefuseCollection and Disposal Bylaw 1387-1984 to reflect the curbside collection preferences ofproperty owners living along the access road to the landfill. In light of the significant rateincreases for curbside collection, staff had polled individual property owners to confirm theirpreferences for being included in or excluded from the curbside collection service.No feedback was received initially from the owner of the property at 10256 Dewdney TrunkRoad, so staff recommended to continue including this address in the curbside collectionservice. A recent phone call from the owner of the property at 10256 Dewdney Trunk Road tostaff revealed that the resident had been out of the country for an extended period of time, andtherefore did not receive staff's letter until now, but wished to be excluded from the curbsidecollection service. The property owner also stated that he had not ever received curbsidecollection service at 10256 Dewdney Trunk Road, and is requesting a reimbursement of thecharges dating back to 1999.
From:Sent: Wednesday, March 25, 2009 9:22 AMTo: Jennifer MeierSubject: Curbside Collection of Waste
In regards to our conversation of March 23, 2009, I wish to opt out of the curbside collection of waste, as per your letterdated November 18, 2008. Also, as per the conversation with Glen Robertson, I wish to be reimbursed for the recycle feesI have paid since 1999 for a service I did not recieve nor ask for.
Thank-you for your timeRod Sims
Mission,
128
1
Engineering and Public WorksMemorandum
129
M DISTRICT OF
fissionON THE FRASER
File Category: INF.WAT.METFile Folder: Residential. Metered Water—Report to Council
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Director of Engineering and Public Works
Date: March 26, 2009
Subject: Residential Metered Water invoicing
Recommendation
That Water Bylaw 2196 -1990, Water Rates Bylaw 2197-1990, and Subdivision Control Bylaw 1500-1985be amended as follows to incorporate water metering provisions:That Water Bylaw 2196-1990 as amended be further amended as follows:
• In Section 3.2 (b) add a subsection as follows:
" (iii) A meter prepayment fee described in Schedule A, if applicable."
• Delete Section 3.5 Location of Meters in its entirety and replace it with the following:
3.5 Metered Services
(a) All new service connections for one and two family residential developments shallincorporate a meter box, meter setter, and spool piece at property line in accordancewith the standards and specifications in attached schedule D. Fees and charges forinstallation of the service connection and prepaying the meter are set out in attachedSchedule A.
(b) All new service connections for triplex, fourplex and other multi-family developmentsshall incorporate a meter chamber and meter at property line supplied and installed bythe property owner in accordance with the standards and specifications in attachedschedule D.
(c) All industrial, commercial and institutional developments shall incorporate watermeter(s) supplied and installed by the property owner in accordance with thestandards and specifications in attached schedule D.
• In section 3.11 insert the word "existing" before the words "residential unit"
• In Section 4.2 insert the following between the word "use;" and the word "provided":
"No person shall obtain water from the works other than from a metered service for the purpose ofserving any triplex, fourplex or other multi-family use where a meter has been installed in a newservice in accordance with the standards and specifications of attached Schedule D;"
• in Schedule "A" replace the $530 fee for the first meter or less of 19 mm service with $860;• replacethe $557.50 fee for the first meter or less of 25 mm service with $1 029.59 and add the following:
"METER PREPAYMENT FEE
19 mm service $254.85
25 mm service $335.56
38 mm service $ 739.04
50 mm service $ 638.77
• Add the attached Schedule "D"
and;
That Water Rates Bylaw 2197-1990 as amended be further amended as follows:
• Add a subsection 5.4 as follows:"5.4 Where a metered water service has been installed in accordance with the provisions of Water
Bylaw 2196-1990 as amended, the consumer shall pay the quarterly metered rates as set out inSchedule "A" herein. For existing unmetered services the consumer shall pay the flat rate waterutility fees of Schedule A."
and;
That Subdivision Control Bylaw 1500-1985 as amended be further amended as follows:
• In Section. 3.14 (g) Service Connections in Schedule C Part 1Design Criteria Manual Section 3 —Water Distribution System;Replace "20 mm" with "19 mm" in the first sentence and insert the words "meter box, meter setter withspool piece" between the words "Corporation Stop" and "and" at the beginning of the secondsentence.Delete the second and third paragraphs.
• In Schedule C Part 11 Construction Specifications Waterworks;
In Section 2.4.8 "Brass Goods" add sub section (c) Meter Setters as follows:
"(c) Meter SettersApproved setters are Ford, Cambridge Brass or Mueller complete with dual check valves"
Add Section 2.4.2.11 Meter Boxes as follows:
"2.4.2.11 Meter Boxes
Meter boxes on 19 mm to 25 mm diameter service connections shall be Brooks #37 concrete boxesor approved equivalent complete with cast iron traffic cover having a 45 mm diameter countersunkhole and plug.Meter boxes on 38 mm to 50 mm diameter service connections shall be A.E. Concrete model 5686 orapproved equivalent boxes complete with cast iron cover having a 45 mm diameter countersunk holeand plug."
Re-number Sections 2.4.2.11 Concrete, 2.4.2.12 Asphalt Materials and 2.4.2.13 Granular and FillMaterials as 2.4.2.12 Concrete, 2.4.2.13 Asphalt Materials, and 2.4.2.14 Granular and Fill Materials.
• in Schedule "D" Subdivision Fees add the following"
"WATER METER PREPAYMENT
19 mm service $254.85
25 mm service $335.56
38 mm service $ 739.04
130
131
50 mm service $ 638.77"
• Replace Standard Drawing W-3 Typical Water Service with the attached revised drawing W-3
• Add the attached Standard Drawings CS-W-11, CS-W-21, and CS-W 21A
and;
That an interest earning fund be established for all payments received for the future purchase of one andtwo family residential water meters;
and;
That meters be installed at the one and two family residential lots which have a meter box at property lineonce a program to install water meters on the 8,500 existing residential services begins; with thisrecommendation being reviewed in five years if either:
• A program to install meters on existing service has not begun.• If more than 1,500 new lots with meter boxes at property line have been created.
BackgroundThe purpose of the above recommendations is to accomplish the following:
a. The construction of water meter boxes at the property line on all new water service connectionsfor one and two family residential developments to accommodate the installation of a water meterat a later date, .
b. An increase in the Service Connection Charges for the first meter of length from $530.00 to$860.00 for 19 mm services and from $557.50 to $1,029.59 for 25 mm services to cover theadditional cost to install water meter boxes complete with meter setters an a spool piece in placeof the meter on all newl 9mm and 25mm water services.
c. Impose a new charge of $255.00 for each new 19mm and $335.56 for each new 25mm waterservice connection to cover the future purchase and installation of a meter with radio readtechnology for these services.
d. The installation of water meter chambers with water meters at property line on all new multifamilyresidential developments at the developer's expense and requiring these new developments topay the applicable metered water rates rather than be afforded the option of paying the annualuser rate established per unit.
e. Maintain the current practice of installing water meters within the building for all new industrial,commercial and institutional developments but require the supply and installation of the meter toby the property owner at his expense. A meter rental rate would continue to be charged to covermaintenance and replacement costs.
f. All existing multifamily residential and commercial developments with water meters paying theapplicable metered water rates rather than the annual user rate established per unit and existingmultifamily developments without water meters continuing to pay the annual user rate per unituntil water meters are installed in each of these developments.
g. Amendment of the Subdivision Control Bylaw to require:
i. The installation of water meter boxes at property line to accommodate the installation of awater meter at a late date on all one and two family residential lots.
ii. Payment of a charge of $255.00 for each new 19mm and $335.56 for each new 25mm
water service connection installed in residential lots for the future purchase and installationof a meter with radio read technology.
h. Establishing an interest bearing fund to accumulate monies for future installation of meters in allservice connections where meter boxes have been installed.
Council has directed staff to require all new developments to install water meters at property line;however the transition from a flat rate residential utilities bill to metered rate charges raises a number ofkey questions that should be resolved for one and two family residential services before metered billing isimplemented.
Some of the basic questions to be answered prior to beginning a full water meter reading program are:
1. What type of water meters should be installed? Currently there is the touch read, drive-by radioread and recently introduced fixed-site radio read meters.
2. How often will the water meters be read and invoices sent to residents? Reads could be donebimonthly, quarterly semiannually or annually. Existing meters on industrial, commercial andinstitutional services are read quarterly.
3. What water usage rate structure will be applied? There is declining (more you use less you pay),flat line (rate per cubic meter is constant) and inclining (more you use more you pay) ratestructures.
These are not recommended rates just examples of the 3 types (declining, flat line and inclining) rate structures.
4. Will there be a different rate structure for one and two residential, multifamily, commercial,industrial and institutional water users?
5. Will there be a fixed minimum charge or rate structure based strictly on volume used?
With the resolution of the above questions, there still remains the basic question; when to start readingand invoicing residences based on metered usage? The basic choices are:
a. Start now with installation of the first meter; unfortunately this would be very costly due tothe limited number of meters in very sporadic locations, growth projections suggest only50 meter would be install this year and another 50 for a total of 100 by the end of 2010year scattered across the municipality.
b. Start once a significant new area (Cedar Valley or South West Mission) has developedwith approximately 1,500 service connections; unfortunately there can be still significantcosts due to limited number of meters in some what scatter locations.
c. Start when a program to meter the 9,000 existing water services in the Municipality isapproved; there would be a shorter timeline to meter reading efficiencies with more metersbeing installed.
d. Start when all existing water service in the Municipality are metered; this would maximizemeter reading efficiencies and reduce potential inequalities between fiat rate and meterresidents.
There can be significantly lower water usaae in new homes with low flow plumbing fixtures and enhancedlow water demand soils when compared to older homes without out these features; some studies
132
suggest the usage in a new home could half of an existing pre-2000 home. The variances in water usagecan create problems in establishing sustainably utility rates and inequities for residents when comparingmetered and flat rates utility bills.
Water meters have a limited service life typically 15 to 20 years; therefore installing meters now withoutan intention to read them for some time would result in unnecessary wear and reduce the potential totake advantage of newer technologies coming in the near future.
If Council accepts staff recommendations; amendments to the Water and Subdivision Control Bylaws willaddress the various specifications for the installation of water meters for the variety water service sizesand land uses that will occur.
Conclusion
There are a number of issues that need to be resolved before meter reading should begin on one andtwo family water services including;
A. Develop new residential and commercial meter water rates to encourage conservation.B. Provide time to implement a progressive change in commercial/industrial/institutional rate
structure from the existing declining to a future inclining rate structure.C. Analyze the budget revenue impact of new residential rates on the water and sewer funds.D. Evaluate the costs and benefits of annual versus quarterly versus bi-monthly reading frequency of
invoicing.E. Allow time to evaluate the potential benefits and reduction in costs of the new fixed radio meter
technology as it becomes more readily available.F. Avoid public pressure to proceed with metering existing residential services until adequate
funding has been secured for the program.
Staff is recommending that we proceed with the installation of a meter box and spool piece on each newone and two family water services immediately but postpone actual installation and reading of the watermeters until we have a program and sufficient funding in place to begin the installation of water meters onthe approximate 9,000 existing services.
Staff proposes that we review the recommendation to postpone the installation of water meter on oneand two family residential developments, if either occur with in the next 5 years:
• A program to install meters on existing service has not begun.• If more than 1,500 new lots with meter boxes at property line have been created.
Staff is also recommending that we immediately begin meter reading all new multifamily residentialdevelopments using current meter water rates and that any existing multifamily residential developmentswith water meters that are currently being charge flat rate user charges be charged metered rates.
Staff is further recommending all new water meters servicing multifamily developments be installed in achamber at property line rather than in the building, which is currently the practice fOr multifamiiyresidential, but that the commercial, industrial and institutional water users continue with our currentpractice of meters being installed With in the building. The basis for these recommendations are:
i. Commercial, industrial and institutional metering within the building will not impose the significantadditional costs and the'loss of usable lot area because the large water meter chambers required
133
for these larger services that often include separate fire suppression lines.ii. Multifamily metering at property line because of the space available at property line, this will help
identify water leaks between the building and property line and to reduce the potential water userstaking off water connections before the meter for sprinkler systems.
134
Ri k BOrnh(FAENGINEER\DRIECKTMemo Timing Water Meter Installations Rev4.doc
Encl
I have reviewed the financial aspects of this report.
Ken Bjorgaard
Consolidated Water Bylaw 2196-1990Page of
BYLAW NO.2196-1990
SCHEDULE "D"
WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS
1. Introduction
These specifications detail the District's requirements for the installation of cold-water meters on municipal water services.
1.1. Definitions
"Applicant"
Refers to a property owner, developer, orauthorized agent who makes an application forconnection to a water service.
"Applicant's Engineer" Refers to a professional engineer hired by theApplicant to design the installation of the meter.
"ASTM" Refers to the American Society for Testing andMaterials.
"AWWA" Refers to the American Water Works Association.
"CSA" Means the Canadian Standards Association.
"Developer" Means person(s) or organization(s) developingproperty as per District guidelines.
"District" Means the District of Mission
"District Engineer"
Means the Director of Engineering & Public Worksfor the District of Mission and such other personsauthorized by the Director of Engineering & PublicWorks to administer this bylaw or parts there of.
"Owner" Means the property owner.
2. Metering Requirements
The District of Mission Water Bylaw No. 2196-1990 (as amended) identifies that allnew service connections require water meters. For new connections, the installationof a meter is triggered by an application for building or plumbing permit. Thisrequirement for a meter applies to:
• Connection to a new or existing service;• Temporary service connections;• Connections that include an underground irrigation system.
For all new connections regulated under this bylaw, the applicant must pay for thesupply and installation of all piping and fittings to install the service connection plus:
• For one and two family residential service connections pay for the supply andinstallation of a meter chamber plus the future installation of a water meter.
• For multifamily residential service connections, supply and install a meter chamberand meter at property line in accordance with this bylaw.
• For commercial, industrial and institutional land uses service connections, supplyand install a meter and fittings in the building in accordance with this bylaw.
Table 1 — Supply of Meters, Chamber and Accessories and Meter Location
Type ofProperties
Type of House/ Building Size of Meter
Supply andInstallation of
Meter
Supply andinstallation of
Chamber &Accessories
Residential Single Family orTwo Family
Meter size50mm andbelow
District atOwner's Cost
District at Owner'scost
Triplex,Fourplex, Multi-family
All Sizes Owner Owner
Industrial,Commercial &Institutional
All Sizes Owner Within Building
Mixed See Note 1 All Sizes Owner Within Building
TemporaryConnection
All Sizes District atOwner's cost
Owner
Note 1:
Sites with mixed, residential plus either industrial commercial or institutionalland uses shall have a meter in the building.
3. Meter Selection
In cases where Applicant is expected to supply and install the meter, the Applicant'sEngineer must determine the connection size, and select the appropriate meter typeand size for the intended use according to this bylaw. Plans submitted as part of theplumbing permit application, must indicate the meter size, type, and chamber/vaultlocation. The plans for the proposed installation must indicate the expected range offlows (high and low consumptions), average expected flow, and the peak flow. Thesubmission should also include the pressure loss through the meter assembly.
For non-typical meter installations, and meters 50mm (2 inches) diameter or larger,the Applicant's Engineer must provide detailed drawings of the installation andrelevant calculations, to demonstrate the appropriateness of the sizing of the meter.
In cases where there is a requirement of a submission, installation of the metershould not begin prior to the approval of the submission.
136
Consolidated Water Bylaw 2196-1990Page of
The District will inspect the meter installation to ensure conformance to this Bylaw,the approved plan — if any, and the B.C. Plumbing Code.
3.1 Domestic Service
The type or combination of types of meters selected for recording water consumptionfrom a service must accurately record consumption for the expected range of flow.The size selection should not compromise the operating range of the meter, mustensure pressure losses are within acceptable limits (based on the existing District'spressure zones), and consider longer meter life. The Applicant's Engineer mustensure that the meter selection and installation requirements are appropriate for thedesigned application.
A meter may be smaller than the connection size but should meet the size selectioncriteria stated above.
3.2 Fire Services
Fire services must be metered to detect unauthorized use of water in accordancewith AWWA C703, and the Plumbing Code. Unless installed with a CSA approveddouble check detector valve assembly, all fire services must be installed with anappropriately sized remote digital read displacement type meter (typically a regular 3/4inch meter) on a bypass (refer drawing CS-WIV1-6) to check on any unauthorizedwater usage.
The wiring of the detector meter in the by-pass should be installed as per Sections4.3 and 5.2. The receptacle must clearly be marked "TATTLE-TALE" with a weatherresistant tag/label. The location where the receptacle is mounted should freely beaccessible by the meter reader / District staff.
Double check detector valve assemblies shall be installed as a complete unit. Referto Section 4.4.2 for details.
4. Water Meter and Fittings
4.1. Water Meters
Unless a variation is justified, the District will only accept positive displacement orcompound meters. In all cases of variation, approval must be obtained from theDistrict Engineer to use different types of meters. All meters must be new. Used orreconditioned meters are not acceptable.
Displacement meters must either be nutating disk or oscillating piston conforming toAWWA C700. Meters must have bronze case. Base plates for inside applicationswill be bronze. BaSe plates for outside installations may be plastic or cast iron.Meters 38mm (1 1/2 inches) and larger in diameter must have bolt flanged ends.
Compound meters must conform to AWWA 0702. All compound meters must havea bronze case and flanged ends.
NOTE: Alternate meters may be accepted but must be approve by the DistrictEngineer. The use of turbine meter may be considered if supported bydetailed calculations to justify its use.
4.2. Registers
Meters must have encoder-type remote-registration conforming to the latest versionof AWWA C707. Registers using generator pulses or low voltage conversions arenot permitted. Power requirement for data transmission must be supplied by aninterrogation device. Registers must be compatible with various brands ofinterrogation equipment.
The register must provide at least six-digit visual registration at the meter. The unitsmust be registered in cubic meters (m 3). The units, the month and year ofmanufacture, and other identification information must clearly be printed o the face ofthe register. The register must also have a full test sweep hand or dial.
The register must, in a digital format, simultaneously encode at least six significantdigits of the meter reading for transmission through the remotely located receptacle.A meter identification number must also be provided with each reading. For thepurposes of billing, electronic registration must return registration (meterread) to the nearest cubic meter.
Registers must easily be upgradeabie to Drive-by or Fixed Radio Meter Reading bysubstituting the remote receptacle with a Meter Interface Unit (MIU) or placing theMIU in series with the remote receptacle.
Materials used in construction of the register must be compatible with the normalwater meter environment. The unit must be sealed to prevent tampering. Allregisters must be provided with moisture protection for internal components whenoperating in flooded or humid pit/chamber conditions. The reaister and mountingbase must be integral components preventing disassembly.
The register must be attached to the meter case by a bayonet attachment. Atamper-proof plastic seal pin or other means must be used to secure the register tothe main case. The register must be removable from the meter withoutdisassembling the meter body, and must permit field installation or removal withouttaking the meter out of service. Terminal screws (three screws) must be available onthe register for transmission wire connection to the remote receptacle.
The materials used for contacts and the connectors must inhibit corrosion and mustsuffer minimal effect from environmental conditions to which they are exposed. Thenumber wheels used in the reaister assembly must be provided with spring-type or
magnetic sensing type contacts to ensure a high probability of data transmission. Aport cover must be provided to cover the terminals after they have been wired.
4.3. Remote Receptacles
Remote receptacles must either be wall or pit mount style. No identity numberstorage is permitted at the remote receptacle. There must be no data storage orpower source in the remote receptacle.
Color coded wire terminals (red, green and black) must be provided.
The materials employed must be corrosion resistant, resistant to ultravioletdegradation, unaffected by rain or condensation, and compatible with rugged serviceand expected life.
Wall mounted receptacles must be designed for terminal screw connection afterbeing fastened to the wall.
The receptacle construction must incorporate the function of a cable clamp or strainrelief coupling.
Design of the unit must be such that it provides for mechanical and electricalconnection between the receptacle and interrogation equipment. Interrogation mustbe achieved by inductive coupling without physical connection of the reading device.
4.4. Pipes and Fittings
Connections greater than 50mm (2 inches) in diameter should be restrained to theDistrict water main.
For installation of meters larger than 75 mm (3 inches).
All pipes, pipe fittings, and jointing methods for installation of meters larger than 75mm (3 inches) should comply with the latest requirements of the District'sSubdivision Control Bylaw.
For installation of meters 75 mm (3 inches) and below.
All pipes, pipe fittings, and jointing methods for installation of meters 75 mm(3inches) and smaller should comply with the latest requirements of the B.C.Plumbing Code and AWWA Standards.
4.4.1. Valves:
Valves up to 50 mm (2 inches) in diameter must meet AWWA C800, andmust.have brOnze case with National Pipe Threaded (NPT), solderedcompression type or flange connections. Valves may be ball or cylindertype using rubber 0-ring seals. Actuation is to be by a curb-stop-styleoperating nut. All bypass valves must have a lock wing on the operating nutand the case.
139
avn;'.B , riay.. "_19 1 D.oc--\ENC2,11 , =_:7-R\E
Consolidated Water Bylaw 2196-1990Page of
Valves over 50 mm in diameter must be ductile iron, resilient seat, with non-rising stem (NRS), gate valves with flanged ends, and must meet AWWAC509. Stem seal to be o-ring type. Actuation of valves, accessible by avalve key from the surface must be by a standard 50 mm square-operatingnut. Valves inaccessible from the surface and within chambers must beoperated by a hand wheel, to be supplied by installer. In all possible andappropriate instances a Nelson style valve box must be installed over buriedvalves.
4.4.2. Double check Valve Assembly and Double Check Detector ValveAssembly
Double check and Double Check detector valves must comply with AWWAC510.They must consist of two internally loaded and independentlyoperating check valves located between two tightly closing resilient-seatedshutoff valves, with four properly placed resilient-seated test cocks. Theymust have ductile iron cases with flange ends.
Double check or Double check detector valves must be installed indrainable chambers/vaults. Vaults should be the District approved ones. Incase of variations, a design should be submitted for District approval. Lidsof vaults should be large enough to service and remove the valve assembly.A minimum distance of 600 mm on test ports side and a minimum distanceof 300 mm on opposite side must be available between valve assembly andinside wall of the vault (refer Drawing CS-WM-4).
4.4.3.Fiange Adapters
Flange adapters for 38 mm (1 1/2 inches) to 200 mm (8 inches) sizes mustconform to AWWA C219.
4.4.4. Bolts and Nuts
Bolts and nuts must be stainless steel — to ASTM F-599 or F-731 for bolts,and ASTM F-574 or F-836 for heavy hex nuts. Threads, fit, and dimensionmust conform to AWWA C111.
4.4.5. Meter Chambers
Meter boxes and vaults must be pre-cast concrete to about the dimensionsprovided in Table 3. Variations are permitted where the dimensions areimpractical due to site conditions, but will subject to the approval of theDistrict Engineer. Above ground heated stainless steel or fiberglassenclosures on concrete pads may be approved at the discretion of theDistrict Engineer.
Lids/covers must be capable of withstanding 1-1-20.loading and to the sizeindicated (where practical) in Table 3. Lids/covers must have one pre-drilled 45 mm (1 inches) hole for mounting the remote receptacles asspecified in Section 5.2. The hole must be plugged in until the installation ofreceptaties.
140
F 219€-199C ScneciLpe
Consolidated Water Bylaw 2196-1990Page of
Exterior of all vaults must be damp proofed by applying grout and anasphalt emulsion coating to all exterior surfaces. Construction joints mustbe made water tight with an appropriate sealant. All pipe entrances on thevault must be sealed.
Access lids, latches and ladders must comply with the most currentrequirements of WorkSafe B.C.
5. installation Standards
5.1. Meter Installation
Location
For one and two family residential service connections the meter chamber will beinstalled by District Staff within the road allowance or municipal right-of-wayapproximately 300mm from the property line unless approved by the DistrictEngineer.
For multifamily residential service connections the meter chamber and meter will beinstalled by the Developer within the property approximately 300mm from the roadallowance or municipal right of way, unless approved by the District Engineer. If ameter is installed at another location with in the property or inside a building underspecial approval, the location must be accessible to District Staff, in the case of anyservicing of the meter or inspection. An area at least 300mm distance around themeter vault shall be free of major landscaping or other objects, including trees,shrubs, walls etc., to accommodate the future maintenance work of the meter. Themeter vault installation should be out of driveway and parking areas.
For commercial, industrial and institutional land use service connections or a mix ofthese with residential, the meter and fittings will be installed by the developer inside abuilding, unless under special approval it is installed in a chamber elsewhere on theproperty. The meter must be accessible to District Staff, in the case of any servicingof the meter or inspection.
installation reqUirements are summarized in Table 3 and illustrated on the attachedtypical drawings.
Table 3 — Meter Installation DetailsSize(mm) Type
By-passRequirement
Strainer 1
RequirementChamber
TypeChamber'Size (mm)
1 Lid size'Lid4 i (mm)
16X19 PD No No Meter Box 300X500 Steel i Std''19 PD No No Meter Box 300X500 Steel Std
25 PD No No Meter Box 425X750 Steel Std38 PD No No Meter Box 600X900 Steel Std'50 PD No • No Meter Box 600X900 Steel I Stc..50 Compound Yes' Yes Vault' 11200X2000 Galvanized 11200X1200
Note 1: ChambersNaults are only required for residential and uses.
Note 2: Bypass size must be the same size as the incoming line.
Note 3: In all cases vaults or chambers must be per CS-WM-2, CS-WM-3 or CS-WM-4.
Note 4: The chamber/vault sizes are for indication only and actual sizes should beto fit the distance requirement specified for the installation of requiredcomponents. Similarly the lids/covers/hatch openings should be sizedsufficient enough to move materials and equipment in and out of the vaultand should also meet the WCB requirements.
Note 5: 'Std.' refers to the standard lid sizes manufactured by A.E. Concrete to suitits precasted meter boxes. However, 'approved equal' lids can be used.
When a meter is installed in the utility room or elsewhere inside the building, theinstallation should be within reasonable distance of a floor drain. Under nocircumstances is a meter to be installed in a bathroom or a bedroom. The areaof 600 mm distance in front of the meter shall be free of obstruction, to allow forconvenient reading and servicing of the meter. The meter installed-area should havea minimum headroom clearance of 2 meters. No electronic, electrical, mechanical,and water sensitive equipment or machinery should be placed or installed under themeter installation, or in an area where splash or flow from the meter settings or pipescould occur during the servicing of the meter.
Meters should be installed horizontally with register casings plumb, facing upward.When a meter is installed in a chamber at the property line, the meter should becentered as much as possible in the chamber. Unless otherwise specified by themanufacturer, for meters greater than 50 mm (2 inches) in diameter — including 50mm dia. compound meter, a straight run of pipe with a minimum length equivalent often pipe diameters (100) should be installed upstream from the meter to full opencomponents: tees, bends, and concentric reducers -1 nominal reduction only.Where possible, the minimum distance between the meter and the upstream gatevalve should be equivalent to eight pipe diameters (80). Similarly, five pipediameters (50) of straight run pipe is required downstream of the meter. Thedistance between the meter and the downstream check valve should not be smallerthan five pipe diameters (50). Plumbed —in meter test port, if any, shouid not becloser than three pipe diameters (30) from the meter.
For meters 50 mm (2 inches) and larger in diameter (except for 50 mm positivedisplacement meter-which will be on a meter setter), a flanged coupling must beprovided on the downstream side of the meter for flexibility in case of meter removal.
142
at ScHedui:-
Consolidated Water Bylaw 2196-1990Page of
Meters, valves, and bypasses should be supported with appropriate steel pipestands. Meter installations must be checked for leakage at completion of theinstallation. Assembly should be flushed and air must be eliminated from thesystem. By running water through the meter and performing a visual check of thelow-flow indicator, the proper operation of the meter should be established.
For all temporary connections, meters must be installed at the upstream end of theconnection.
Strainer
Where required, as noted in Table 3, strainers should be installed immediatelyupstream of the meter using a flanged connection. Manufacturer's specification canbe adopted in terms of distance between the meter and the strainer. Strainers mustbe straight type and of the same size as the meter. Strainer mesh material shouldbe corrosion-resistant (such as stainless steel). Strainer should have an effectivestraining area of at least twice the bore diameter of the meter.
Isolation Valves (Inlet and Outlet Valves)
isolation valves must be provided, at specified distances, upstream and downstreamof the meter assembly to facilitate the removal of meter and strainer cases withoutthe wasteful flow of water. Valves should comply with the requirements stated inSection 4.4.1 above.
BV-Dass
By-pass should be of the same size and material as the meter setter or main line. Agate valve should be installed on the bypass. A lock wing should be available on theoperating nut of the bypass valve. After testing the installation, the by-pass valvemust be closed and sealed by the installer.
Test Port
A test point (port) must be provided for all meters 50 mm (2 inches) and larger indiameter. in the absence of a test port in the meter case, a test tee or plug must beinstalled with a 50 mm threaded lateral and plug on the meter piping, at a distance ofminimum three pipe diameters (30) downstream of the meter.
5.2. Receptacle installation
Wall mounted remote receptacles must be located near the gas or electric meterapproximately 1.2 meters above grade (ground) and easily accessible for reading.The communication cable (wire) from the meter to the receptacle must be installed inaccordance with the manufacturer's instructions and must not exceed 30 meters inlength. Cable must be run neatly in horizontal or vertical directions only, in anapproved casing or duct. Buried casing/duct should be at least 600 mm deep. Adrilled 10 mm (3/8 inch) diameter hole, sealed with sealing compound, at externalface of the receptacle must be provided.
For meters installed at the property line, remote register receptacles must bemounted in the meter box or chamber lid according to the manufacturer'sinstructions. Pit (chamber) mounted receptacles must be mounted to the meter boxlid in a single 45 mm (1 3/4 inches) hole. Compound meters with two registers willrequire two holes in the meter lid. The pit-mounted receptacle(s) must be providedwith a minimum length of 1800 mm (6 feet) of 22-gauge three-color (red, green,black) wire, connected and sealed at the receptacle without terminal exposure.Remote wiring connections must either be factory or field sealed to ensurewaterproof connections.
ALTERNATE METERCHAMBER ARRANGEMENTSWHERE SPACE RESTRICTED,REFER TO DETAIL DRAWINGS
PROPERTYLINE
FLANGE JOINT OVER 50 DIAL
CURB STOP - UP TO 50 DIA.OR. GATE VALVE.- OVER 50 DIA.
BRASS, SCREW TYPE CHECK. VALVE - UP TO 50 DIA.=4. OR SWING TYPE CHECK VALVE - OVER 50 DIA.
(1,D METER
CD TATTLE TALE METER
NOTES ,
i. THIS DRAWING SHOULD BE REVIEWED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DOCUMENT,"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS." IN SCHEDULE OF BYLAW 2196-1990
FOR SUPPLY. OF METERS REFER TO TABLE 1 OF THE"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS."
3. CONNECTIONS GREATER THAN 50 SHALL BE TO THE DISTRICT WATER MAIN
4. ALL FITTINGS OVER. 50 DIAMETER SHALL HAVE FLANGE OR HUB JOINTS. .
5, CHAMBERS AND VAULTS SIZED AS SPECIFIED IN TABLE 3 OF "WATER METERINSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS."
5. FOR INSTALLATIONS INSIDE BUILDING, SEE DWG.'s CS-WM-5, CS-WM-6. AND CS-WM-7
75mm SERVICE LINES ARE NOT ALLOWED.
DOMESTIC LINE
PROPERTY
LINElf,
DOMESTIC SERVICE CONNECTIONSEE DWG.'s CS-W-21, CS-W-21A, CS-WM-2
1. THIS DRAWING SHOULD BE REVIEWED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DOCUMENT,"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS. IN SCHEDULED' OF BYLAW 2196-1990
2. THIS DRAWING SHOULD ONLY BE ADOPTED IN CASE OF SPACE CONSTRAINTS AND MUSTBE APPROVED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER OF ENGINEERING.
3. FOR SUPPLY OF METERS REFER TO TABLE 1 OF THE— WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS."
4. ANCHOR PIPE TO WALL ( TO BE DESIGNED AND CERTIFIED BY A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER )
5. PROVIDE 10 DIAMETER LENGTHS OF STRAIGHT PIPE UPSTREAM OF METER. REFER TO SECTION 5.1OF THE DOCUMENT " WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS."
6. FLOOR • TO CENTER LINE OF PIPE DIMENSION TO BE MINIMUM 300mm.
7. THE BY-PASS PIPING SHALL BE THE SAME SIZE AND MATERIAL AS THE MAIN LINE.
8. THE LID/HATCH OPENING SHOULD BE POSITIONED OVER THE METER. REFER TO TABLE 3 OF THE" WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS"
1DRAWN Jon. 2009
REVISEDINSTALLATION OF 50mm DIA.COMPOUND METER AND METERS
DtSTR1CT C9 F
IS S '1.SCALE N-F,7
1)!-
/Th
-STRAINERCOUPLING
-OUTLMETER V AL V
DRAWN Jar., 2009
REVISED
SCALE 1\7;
148
TATTLE-TALE ASSEMBLY
COUPLING
DOUBLE CHECK VALVE
MIN. 300
E3—
a0000a
lao
\--MAINVALVE
500 to 1000
FLOW
MAIN -'
VALVE300
2.-
CHECKVALVE
4/-
DOMESTICLINE
FIRE LINE
MIN. 600BYPASS VALVE,CLOSED ANDSEALED
HATCHOPENING
COUPLING
MINIMUM 10 TIMESrr I PIPE DIAMETERa.'01
,a-
ROAD PRIVATER.O.W. PROPERTY
MINIMUM 5 TIMESPIPE DIAMETER
DOMESTIC METERASSEMBLY PERSSD-WM4ORSSD-WM4,1
SUMP C/WSUMP GRATING'
NOTES •1. THIS DRAWING SHOULD BE REVIEWED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DOCUMENT,
'WATER METER . INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS." IN SCHEDULE 'D' OF BYLAW 2196 - 1990
2. THIS DRAWING SHOULD ONLY BE ADOPTED IN CASE OF SPACE 'CONSTRAINTS
3. FOR SUPPLY OF METERS REFER TO TABLE 1 OF THE -"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS."
4. THE HATCH OPENING SHOULD BE APPROPRIATELY SIZED AND POSITIONED ABOVE THE METER.REFER TO TABLE 3 OF THE DOCUMENT, "WATER. METER INSTALLATION . STANDARDS AND SPEC,FICATIONS."
5. TOUCH READ .SENSOR(S) SHALL BE LOCATED AT THE TOP (HATCH OPENING).THE 45mm DIAMETER OPENING SHALL BE PLUGGED UNTIL METER 15 INSTALLED.
6. THE RECEPTACLE OF THE TATTLE-TALE METER SHOULD BE CLEARLY LABELLED AS "TATTLE-TALE."
INSTALLATION OF 50mm DIA.COMPOUND METER AND METERS
I 6,,,Prz= 7- 50mm=IR.= _
/1^- DISTRIC.-.7 OF
Liss-Ion^
INLETVALVE
•MAINVALVE 300 MINIMum
FLANGED SPOOL LENGTH SUFFICIENTTO INSTALL FUTURE FLOW METER ANDSTRAINER IN COMPLIANCE WITH FIREUNDERWRITERS AND ULC
SUMP C/W SUMP GRATING —
149
TATTLE-TALEMETER
DOUBLECHECKVALVE —\
COUPLING300
■
FIRE LINE
600 MINIMUM
METER(NOTE2)
MINIMUM 5 TIMESPIPE DIAMETER
MAINVALVE
STRAINER -7
500to 1000
01=1110111MFLOW
, DOMESTICLINE
25 DIA.—/
OUTLET CHECKVALVE VALVE
=too oilCOUPLING
BYPASS VALVE,CLOSED ANDSEALED
MINIMUM 10 TIMESPIPE DIAMETER
MINIMUM 5 TIMESPIPE DIAMETER
ROAD PRIVATER.O.W. I PROPERTY
NOTES
1. THIS DRAWING SHOULD BE REVIEWED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DOCUMENT,"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS." IN SCHEDULED' OF BYLAW 2196-1990
FOR SUPPLY OF METERS REFER TO TABLE 1 OF THE."WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS. AND SPECIFICATIONS."
3. THE HATCH OPENING SHOULD BE APPROPRIATELY SIZED AND POSITIONED, ABOVE THE METER.REFER TO TABLE 3 OF THE DOCUMENT, "WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATION'S."
4. TOUCH READ SENSOR(S) SHALL BE LOCATED AT THE TOP (HATCH OPENING).THE 4 5mrp DIAMETER OPENING SHALL BE PLUGGED UNTIL METER IS INSTALLED.
DRAWN
REVISED
SCALE
Jan. 2009
NTS
INSTALLATION OF 50mm DIA.COMPOUND METER AND METERS
3=.7 7-AN 51irri-SE":- , 1 1:EE
E DISTRI , C7 C:AF
METER
RECEPTACLE
APPROVED LOWVOLTAGE CABLE
' ALTERNATEENTRY
MAIN
FLOW EE0o
OUTLET CHECK ■-nVALVE VALVE
VALVE
FLOOR •
FLOW
D 'S T RA CT OF
150
TYPICAL METER SETTING
METER SIZE 'A' mm y " mm
16mmx19mm 191 I 32519mm 229 I 36325mm 273 4 413
NOTES:
1. THIS DRAWING SHOULD BE REVIEWED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DOCUMENT ,"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS." IN SCHEDULE OF BYLAW 2196-1990
2. FOR SUPPLY OF METERS REFER TO TABLE 1 OF THE"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS."
3. PIPING FOR METER MUST BE ON A HORIZONTAL PLANE.
4. MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN ANY WALL AND A METER SHOULD BE 300mm.
5. METER INSTALLATION MUST BE WITHIN REASONABLE DISTANCE OF •A FLOOR DRAIN.'
THE AREA FOR 600mm IN FRONT OF THE METER SHALL BE FREE OF OBSTRUCTION,6. TO ALLOW FOR CONVENIENT READING AND SERVICING OF THE METER.
!DRAWN Jan. 2009REVISED
!SCALE NTsUTILITY ROOM INSTALLATION
=OR. METERS 3& mm SIVAL` = 7-7'DN_
INLET VALVEALTERNATEENTRY MAIN VALVE.
METER (NOTE 2)
—11-
TATTLE -TALE METER
TO BE LABELLED"TATTLE - TALE"
25 DIA.
RECEPTACLE
FIRE LINE
s
DOUBLE CHECK VALVE
LENGTH SUFFICIENT TO INSTALL FUTURE FLOW METER ANDSTRAINERRAINER IN COMPLIANCE WITH FIRE UNDERWRITERS AND ULC
BY-PASS VALVECLOSED AND SEALED
FLOW ---- DOMESTIC LINE
i
OUTLET VALVE --\\ I-
LI01cc) Q
0
\ 1—_, (c)
0 1
111,,,,___ I3EZZIz
CI)FLOW -----
FLOW-
TYPICAL METER SETTING
a • .
FLOOR
CHECK VALVE
3
z
E
>̀
NOTES: 1. THIS DRAWING SHOULD BE REVIEWED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DOCUMENT,"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS." IN SCHEDULE 'D' OF BYLAW 2196-1990
2. FOR SUPPLY OF METERS REFER TO TABLE 1 OF THE"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS."
3. PIPING FOR METER MUST BE ON A HORIZONTAL PLANE.4. MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN ANY WALL AND A METER SHOULD BE 300mm.5. INSTALLATION MUST BE WITHIN A REASONABLE DISTANCE OF A FLOOR DRAIN.6, THE AREA FOR 600mm IN FRONT OF THE ME TER SHALL BE FREE OF OBSTRUCTION
10 ALLOW FOR CONVENIENT READING AND SERVICING OF THE METER.
TATTLE-TALEMETER
FLANGED SPOOL LENGTH SUFFICIENTTO INSTALL FUTURE FLOW METER ANDSTRAINER IN COMPLIANCE WITH FIREUNDERWRITERS AND ULC
CHECK1. VALVE
7— COUPLING/— BY-PASS/ VALVE CLOSED
ANDSEALED
FIRE LINE
RECEPTACLE
,-- DOUBLECHECKVALVE
MAINVALVE
D o
NOTES
(
MIN 5 TIMESPIPE DIAMETER
MINIMUM 10 TIMESPIPE DIAMETER
MIN 5 TIMESPIPE DIAMETER
DOMESTIC LINEINLET VALVE
COUPLING
OU-
E
- FLOW-0-
\--STRAINER
FLOOR .:I
C O0rn coz x2
1. THIS DRAWING SHOULD BE REVIEWED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DOCUMENT ,"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS." IN SCHEDULE 'DI OF BYLAW 2196-1990
2. FOR SUPPLY OF METERS REFER TO TABLE 1 OF THE"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS."
3. THE BY-PASS PIPE SHALL BE THE SAME SIZE AS THE MAIN PIPE.
UTILITY ROOM INSTALLATIONOR INTF-T=P,,S 50mr -
L1/4.:
DISTRICT OF
7 77
152
25 PVCCONDUIT
MAIN —
VALVE
153150 x 150 PRESSURE TREATEDWOOD POST SET IN CONC.
100 STYROFOAMINSULATION CUTTO FIT METERBOX OPENING
ROAD PRIVATER.O.W. PROPERTY
COVER PERSPECIFICATIONS
DIGITAL READOUT
45 DIA. OPENING FORREMOTE. METER RECEPTACLE,PLUGGED UNTIL METER ISINSTALLED
COVER PER •SPECIFICATIONS \ ,-- 45 DIAMETER OPENING
/ FOR REMOTE METER/ RECEPTACLE, PLUGGED UNTIL
METER IS INSTALLED
m
MAIN VALVE
DO NOT GROUTOPENING (TYP)
4 0 . .0 0 0 p0 .() o. 0
11•1>>. 6 a • 0 0 . •
I \VI"\ s\,\• \
0 a •6 \o 0 • \ 25mm BRACE,• 0\. •po PIPE FT YP)
//x\x/pi /A -\ \ y \ \\\\, CONCRETE BASE SECTIONIN TRAVELLED AREA.S,GRAVEL TO 150 DPFTI-1,ELSEWHERE.
\\\ 100mm CRUSHED' GRAVEL
50mm DRAIN HOLE
SPOOL FORFUTUREMETER
b --- FLOW
CD0
METER SETTER(FORD SERIES 70OR APPROVED EQUAL) —1
METER SIZE ' D '
• I 38mm positive displacement 330mm50mm Positive displacement ■ 432mm
NOTES;1. THIS DRAWING SHOULD BE REVIEWED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DOCUMENT,
"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS." IN SCHEDULE D' OF BYLAW 2196 - 19902. FOR SUPPLY OF METERS REFER TO TABLE 1 OF THE
"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS."
METER INSTALLATIONFOR 35mrrt 50mrit
cry,,N=771co,DMA
DRAWN Jar. 2009
DISTRICT OF
(77 E -
DRAWN Jan, 2009
' REVISED CA_ _
161
45 DIA. OPENING FOR REMOTEMETER RECEPTACLE. PLUGGEDUNTIL METER IS INSTALLED
100 STYROFOAM INSULATIONCUT TO FIT METER BOX OPENING
LID PER SPECIFICATIONS
;NI PTRA....LVALVE(PART OFSETTER)
X<
C CC C
r"-
ROAD PRIVATER.O.W. I PROPERTY
I METER SIZEiGx19 I 191
19 I 27925 I 273
/
19mm CLEAR CRUSHEDDRAIN ROCK
\ MAIN VALVE(CURB STOP w/ RISER)
SEP.ViCE CONNECTIONPIPE
METER SETTER(FORD 70 SERIES,OR APPROVED EQUAL)
NOTES;THIS DRAWINC. SHOULD BE REVIEWED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DOCUMENT,"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS" IN SCHEDULED' OF BYLAW 219E-1990
2. FOR SUPPLY D: METERS REFER TO TABLE 1 OF THE"WATER METER INSTALLATION STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS."
"
METER INSTALLATIONOR 25mm & SMALLER
E OD!qN=7......7rY\
I § TsR CoT of
162
163
MDISTRICT OF )1•00,0e:
lssion Engineering and Public WorksMemorandum
ON THE FRASER -40
File Category: INF.ENV.ENVFile Folder: Environmental Charter
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Manager of Environmental Services
Date: March 30, 2009
Subject: Promotion of Businesses that Collaborate with the District in ImplementingEnvironmental Sustainability Initiatives
Recommendation
That staff be permitted to publicly promote those businesses within and outside the District that fullycollaborate with the District to implement environmental sustainability initiatives.
Background
Questions arose from the recent Finance and Administration meetings regarding the best way toencourage businesses to collaborate with the District and support environmental sustainability initiatives.An example would be how the District can ensure that the correct type of sprinklers are available at localstores — is a bylaw required or is there adequate interest already?
It is clear that the majority of businesses within Mission are open to working with the District to supportenvironmental initiatives. This has become apparent in the case of switching to the new bags forcurbside compostables. In some cases, local businesses are leading the way and promoting initiativesthat the District has not yet considered. In some other cases, local businesses are not particularlyconcerned with environmental initiatives and it has been a struggle to get buy in. In some situations ithas helped by involving the head offices of these businesses.
Staff believes there is no need to regulate local businesses to support environmental initiatives. Theywould, however, appreciate the ability to publicly promote businesses that fully collaborate with theDistrict in delivering these initiatives. Promotion could take the form of verbal support, posting links onthe District's website, having District displays inside the businesses etc.
File Category: INF.ENV.ENVFile Folder: Environmental Charter
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Manager of Environmental Services
Date: March 30, 2009
Subject: Restricting Bottled Drinking Water Use in Municipal Facilities
Recommendation
That bottled drinking water, not including water sold in vending machines, is no longer providedat functions within municipal facilities where potable tap water is available.
Background
The Federation of Canadian Municipalities passed the attached resolution and released theattached press release on March 7, 2009. The resolution urges municipalities to considerphasing out the sale and purchase of bottled water at municipal facilities.
Staff recommends that bottled drinking water no longer be made available for consumption atfunctions (meetings, dinners, staff lunches etc) occurring within municipal facilities. Rather,drinking water should be made available in pitchers and served in re-usable containers.
Other environmental initiatives such as banning the purchase of Styrofoam cups & plates andusing 100% recycled paper are being examined by staff and will come forward as a separatereport.
Mike Younie
Manager of Environmental ServicesF:\ENGINEER\MYOUNIE\Memos\Bottled Water Ban.docx
Page 1 of 3
Communiqué
THE FEDERATION OF CANADIAN MUNICIPALITIESENCOURAGES REDUCED BOTTLED WATER USE AT MUNICIPAL
FACILITIES
Resolution urging tap water over bottled water where appropriate atmunicipal facilities passed at FCM "s national board meeting
VICTORIA, March 7, 2009 — Canada 's national municipal organization isencouraging local governments to reduce the use of bottled water in their own facilitieswhere other options are available.
Meeting today in Victoria, B.C., the National Board of Directors of the Federation ofCanadian Municipalities (FCM) passed a resolution encouraging municipalities to"phase out the sale and purchase of bottled water at their own facilities whereappropriate and where potable water is available."
"Today's action is another illustration of how municipalities are leading by example toencourage environmentally sustainable water choices," said FCM president JeanPerrault, mayor of Sherbrooke, Que.
The resolution does not call for a ban on the sale of bottled water to consumers."Regulating bottled water for public consumption falls under provincial and federaljurisdiction," said Perrault. "All orders of government must work together to reducereliance on a product that produces more waste, costs more and uses more energythan simple, dependable municipal tap water."
"This cooperation among governments must extend to investments in local watersystems. The most economical and reliable source of drinking water is a first-ratemunicipal water system. Where these systems are lacking, all orders of governmentmust help fund the necessary infrastructure."
FCM 's resolution also calls on municipalities to develop awareness campaigns aboutthe positive benefits and quality of municipal water supplies. Municipalities willdetermine their local course of action.
The resolution was put forward by the cities of Toronto and London, Ont., overgrowing concerns for environmental impacts related to the production of bottled water,the energy requirements for the production and transport of bottled water, as well asthe disposal and/or recycling of water bottles.
Bottled water containers may be recyclable but they still have to be manufactured andtransported, which uses significant energy. Between 40 and 80 per cent end up in thelocal landfill. That is a burden on the environment and a cost for municipal taxpayers.
About the Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM):FCM is the national voice of municipal governments, established in 1901, representingthe interests of municipalities on policy and program matters that fall within federaljurisdiction. With more than 1,775 members representing 90 per cent of Canadians,FCM members include Canada"s largest cities, small urban and rural communities, and18 provincial and territorial municipal associations.
- 30 -
For further information or to arrange interviews, contact Wendy Cumming: (613) 907-6356 / [email protected]
165
Page 2 of 3
FCM RESOLUTION — NATIONAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING — MARCH 7,2009
ENV09.1.02BOTTLED WATER
WHEREAS bottled water consumes significant amounts of non-renewable fossil fuelsto extract, package and transport water creating unnecessary air quality and climatechange impacts;
WHEREAS it takes about three litres of water to manufacture a one litre plastic bottleof water;
WHEREAS bottled water companies use municipal water and groundwater sourceswhen a growing percentage of Canadian municipalities have faced water shortages inrecent years;
WHEREAS although bottled water creates a container that can be recycled, between40% and 80% of empty bottles end up as litter and/or are placed directly into thegarbage and take up unnecessary space in landfills;
WHEREAS tap water is safe, healthy, highly regulated and accessible to residents,employers, employees and visitors to Canadian municipalities and substantially moresustainable than bottled water; and
WHEREAS some municipalities have enacted by-laws to restrict the sale and purchaseof water bottles within their own operations;
BE IT RESOLVED that the Federation of Canadian Municipalities urge allmunicipalities to phase out the sale and purchase of bottled water at their ownfacilities where appropriate and where potable water is available; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that municipalities be urged to develop awarenesscampaigns about the positive benefits and quality of municipal water supplies.
City of London and City of Toronto, Ontario
166
Page 3 of 3
MDISTRICT OF
issioON. THE FRASER
Engineering and Public WorksMemorandum
167
File Category: IN F.STO.DYKFile Folder: 2009-2010 Flood Protection Program
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Manager of Environmental Services
Date: April 15, 2009
Subject: 2009-2010 Flood Protection Program Application
Recommendation
That a resolution be passed in support of staff making an application for 2009-2010 Flood ProtectionProgram funds to complete dike upgrades to the Mission Dike along Harbour Ave.
Background
The provincial and federal governments have recently released the 2009-2010 Flood Protection Programcall for applications. The program is different this year in that the diking authority will have to fund onethird of any project.
Staff recommend that an application be submitted (by April 24) to complete the upgrade to the MissionDike along Harbour Ave west of the spirit square to the CPR tracks and east of the spirit square to the oldMeeker properties. Staff will not have the estimated costs for this work until early next week but theapplication must be accompanied by a Council resolution stating their support for the application. Fundsfor the District's share are available depending on cost and will be sourced from reserve funds to beconfirmed once the costs are known. Should the funds not be available due to elevated costs, theDistrict can decline to sign the Agreement if one is offered.
SummaryThe following summarizes the progress to the 2008 year end for the Leak Detection Program and willprovide the basis for our Provincial Infrastructure Grant claim:
1. Original budget $105,096 which included a $10,000 Provincial Government Infrastructure Grant.With $49,900.16 being expended in 2008; $32,332.68 on leak detection equipment and training(copies of the invoices are attached) with the balance $17,567.48 as expenses to locate andrepair leaks plus administration.
2. The type of leak detection equipment purchased is acoustic, which is a modern computer-basedinstrument that has a simple field setup and works by measuring leak signals (sound or vibration)at two points that bracket a suspected leak. The position of the leak is then determinedautomatically based on the time shift between the leak signals. Prior to excavation the location isconfirm by use of a powerful ground microphone. All excavations have found a leak; no dry holedug.
3. Leak detection survey work was carried out on 8.43 kilometers of water main. The District ofMission has approximately 170 kilometers of water main; therefore approximately 5 % wassurveyed.
4. The survey work in 2008 found 6 leaks, 4 with in the road allowance and 2 on private property; allhave been repaired. Copies of each of the 6 job orders are attached. The total annual estimatedwater saving is 13,140 cubic meters. A copy of the summary of located leaks for 2008 is alsoattached.
BackgroundThe Drought Management and Water Conservation Study completed in February 2006 for theAbbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commission, states "the given statistics suggest that leakage/UFW(UFW - unaccounted for water loss) is much higher in Mission than in Abbotsford, likely over 2 5 % " . Aspart of the reports many recommendations, number 48 states:
"Similarly, water losses cannot be directly calculated. The given statistics, however, suggests that leakageand losses are much higher in Mission than in Abbotsford, likely over 25%. This could be quantified byfurther analysis, but an implied conclusion is that accelerated leak detection should be considered".
It is noted that UFW is normally around 10 - 15 % in typical municipal water systems accounting for watermain flushing, fire flows and leakage. Based on the concerns raised in the report the District of Missionchose to undertake a leak detection program and sought grant assistance from the ProvincialGovernment, which was approved in 2008.
Page 1 of 2
2009
The survey work is continuing and as of the beginning of March another 4,000 meters has beencompleted with 1 leak found and repaired; estimated annual savings of 525 cubic meters. Significantlymore of the system will be surveyed in 2009 because of the demand on staff, to service newdevelopments, has reduced significantly.
Projections
Based on the information collected in 2008 (note only 5% of the system has been surveyed) the followingprojections have been prepared:
a. The total costs to complete the survey repairs to water services will be 'in the order of($17,567.4815%) $350,000; therefore approximately $300,000 needs to be budget in the next fewyears.
b. The total annual water saving could be in the order of (13,140 cubic meters/5%) 262,000 cubicmeters or 1 mega liter per day.
c. As a portion of our current average daily flow which is approximately 19 mega liters per day thatwould represent a 5% reduction.
d. Based on a total system (combined Abbotsford and Mission) average daily flow of 80 mega litersper day the District of Mission portion of the overall operating cost could be reduced by 1.25%.
CC Director of Engineering and Public Works
CC Director of Finance
File g:pworks/greg/2009/Memo Leak Detection Status Report 2008 Year End.doc
169
170
MDISTRICT OF-1'
issionio"°;.-,/ Engineering and Public WorksMemorandum
At the February 9, 2009 Council meeting, staff was asked to follow-up on two items associated with theMill Pond Habitat Compensation proposal:
• Naming of Mill Pond as Hammer's Mill Pond in the past
• Opportunity to stock Mill Pond with fish
Staff contacted the Mission Archives who responded that they could not find any evidence that Mill Pondwas known as Hammer's Mill Pond in the past. This was further substantiated by Mr. Don Hammerwhose uncle operated the mill in that area who also did not recollect the area being called Hammer's MillPond
Staff contacted Freshwater Fisheries BC whose mandate it is to develop local urban fisheries to supportangling opportunities. Freshwater Fisheries BC indicated they are very supportive of the restocking andestablishment of an urban fishery — particularly one such as this that could be wheelchair accessible.Ministry of Environment approval is required and they have indicated that they are willing to assist bycarrying out some water quality and current fish use assessments later this summer. Restocking couldoccur in 2010 if the MoE support restocking. A species at risk assessment is also required of the areawhich will be completed in April as part of the compensation planning.
Staff has also volunteered to meet with the Steelhead Community Association to discuss theEnvironmental Charter and Mill Pond restoration and is awaiting a date to be chosen by the Association.
Mike Younie
Manager of Environmental ServicesFAENGINEER\MYOUNIE\Memos\Mill Pond Compensation.docx
Page 1 of 1
MDISTRICT
issionON THE FRASER ",011
Engineering and Public WorksMemorandum
171
File Category: I NF.ENV.ENVFile Folder: 3 rd Party Initiatives
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Manager of Environmental Services
Date: April 1, 2009
Subject: Earth Hour 2009 Results
Recommendation
That this report be accepted as information.
Background
Earth Hour 2009 occurred from 8:30PM to 9:30 PM on Saturday March 28, 2009. The Districtparticipated for the second year and advertised the event via its website, posters at the LeisureCentre and advertising coupons handed out at City Hall and the Leisure Centre. The LeisureCentre also dimmed its lights during the hour.
The attached BC Hydro news release indicated that BC Hydro measured an average reductionof 1.1% or the equivalent of 1.5 million lights. The reductions ranged from a high of 4.60% inPemberton to a low of 0.1% in New Westminster. While Mission's results were not provided inthe summary, BC Hydro staff indicated to District staff that Mission's reduction was measured at2.9%. BC Hydro's interpretation of the results is also provided below.
Mike Younie
Manager of Environmental ServicesF:\ENGINEER\MYOUNIE\Memos\Earth Hour 2009 results.docx
Page 1 of 3
BC Hydro Interpretation
How did B.C. do?Last night, during Earth Hour, we saw an average decrease in our provincial load of 1.1 percent. We are quite pleased with this result — it is the equivalent of turning off 1.5 million lights.
Aren't the results lower than last year?This year's results are lower than last year and we think that's because of the weather. Tomeasure the decrease we compared our data last night to last Saturday (March 21) and thetemperatures were much cooler in the hours preceding Earth Hour throughout the province thanthey were last week.
Also, many businesses and individuals took steps to save electricity throughout the entire dayso the drop during Earth Hour was less noticeable, but for the entire day, we saved 1.8 per cent.
Are you disappointed that you didn't see an increase?Earth Hour is a symbolic event and we think any time there is this much awareness of energyconservation in communities and in the media, it's really a good thing. In fact, we had 84communities throughout the province sign up to participate this year - that's 32 morecommunities than last year.
March 29, 2009
B.C. Saves for Earth Hour
VANCOUVER — Electricity consumption in B.C. dropped by 1.1 per cent during Earth Hour lastnight. British Columbians saved 72.67 megawatts of electricity from 8:30 to 9:30 p.m., theequivalent of turning off 1.5 million lights.
The highest drop in consumption — 4.6 per cent — was recorded in Pemberton. Eighty fourcommunities throughout the province participated in Earth Hour this year.
In 2008, the overall reduction in load during Earth Hour was two per cent throughout the entirehour.
Organized by WWF and sponsored locally in part by BC Hydro, Earth Hour is an annual globaleffort to address climate change that emphasizes the importance of understanding thatindividual participation and simple changes can make a big difference to the planet.
If British Columbians implemented the same conservation measures just one hour everyevening, the combined savings would be enough power more than 2,400 homes for an entireyear.
Although Earth Hour is over, BC Hydro reminds British Columbians to keep conservation top ofmind and to practice energy efficient behaviours. By joining Team Power Smart, individuals
172
Page 2 of 3
can set an electricity conservation target of 10 per cent and get access to tools, tips andresources.
Savings in individual communities:
Abbotsford 3.8% Colwood 4.1% New Westminster 0.1%
Burnaby 1.4% Langford 4.1% North Vancouver District 2.7%
Coquitlam 2.9% Parksville 4.1% Port Coquitlam 3.1%
Delta 1.2% Bowen Island 3.1% Prince George 1.5%
Kamloops 1.1% Revelstoke 2.6% Richmond 0.3%
Langley Township 2.1% Oak Bay 3.3% Saanich 3.7%
Maple Ridge 3.1% View Royal 3.9% Surrey 1.5%
Vernon 0.9% Pemberton 4.6% Vancouver 1.3%
Victoria 3.1%
Contact:
Simi HeerBC Hydro Media RelationsPhone: 604 623 3963
173
Page 3 of 3
Engineering and Public WorksMemorandum
174
File Category: INF.TRA.TMP
File Folder: Heritage Park Events
To: Chief Administrative Officer
From: Director of Engineering and Public Works
Date: April 6, 2009
Subject: Update on Traffic Management Plan For Canada Day 2009
Further to the traffic management plan which was presented to Council on March 16, 2009, JasonRoufosse of Parks Recreation and Culture who is the District's representative on the Canada DayCommittee has reviewed the plan and noted some adjustments he plans to make for the 2009 event:
• The barricade suggested for Mary Street south of 5th Avenue will be placed instead on 3 rd Avenue atRiverview Street to allow some traffic to exit directly onto the Lougheed Highway westbound. Thebarricade would still achieve the objective of keeping this stream of traffic from trying to access StaveLake Street south of 5th Avenue.
• The Canada Day event does not have sufficient funds to pay for flag persons on Stave Lake Street at5th Avenue and at 7th Avenue this year. It is intended to monitor the traffic flow this year to determineif the flag persons are required in subsequent years.
• Eastbound traffic on 5 th Avenue will be restricted while traffic exits the park after the fireworks areover. This will help reduce congestion at the intersection of 5 th and Mary.
Jason has suggested that the construction of a second gate from the grass field where parking takesplace next to Mary Street just north of the existing gate would help reduce the bottleneck at 5 th and Mary.Traffic from the new gate would be directed north on Mary; Traffic from the existing gate would bedirected to 5th Avenue. Vehicles parked on Mary and in the gravel parking area to the south could exitsouth along Mary Street.
Don Brown, Heritage Park Manager, estimates that the cost of constructing a second gate and providingthe necessary asphalt aprons at the gate will be $3,000. Neither Mr. Brown nor Parks, Recreation andCulture have funds available to construct the gate. Both have suggested that they can make do with theexisting gate this year provided that some traffic control personnel are available at the end of thefireworks to manage the traffic flow out of the gate. An assessment can be made at this year's eventwhether a second gate is really needed.
However, if Council wishes to have the gate installed this year, funds could be allocated fromcontingency.
FAENGINEER \DRIECKEN \Traffic\Report Re 2009 Canada Day Traffic Management.doc
Encl
I have revi wed the financial aspects of this report
Ken Bjorgaard
Page 1 of 1
62175
FLAGPERSON VE 7TH AVE.
BARRICADEPREVENTING SIB
TRAFFIC 6TH AVEOPEN GATE ONMARY STREET
5A AVE.
FLAGPERSON -
l llllllll I5TH AVE.
TRAFFIC CONTROLBY HERITAGE PARK
VOLUNTEERS
BARRICADE4TH AV PREVENTING SIB
irrrm TRAFFIC -Lt
11111111b3RD AVE.
ARC. barrf
RCMP OFFICER FORTRAFFIC CONTROL
TRAFFIC CONTROLPLAN FOR EXIT FROM
CANADA DAYFIREWORKS EVENT
176
Fraser Valley Regional District45950 Cheam Ave, Chilliwack, BC V2P 1N6Phone: 1-800-528-0061 or (604) 702-5000Fax: (604) 792-9684
MEMORANDUM
To: The Chair and Members of the Executive Committee
From: Alison Stewart, Senior Planner
Subject: Update of the Strategic Review of Transit in the Fraser Valley
Date: March 5, 2009
File No.: 8330-21-006
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT this update of the Strategic Review of Transit in the Fraser Valley be received forinformation.
ISSUE:
The Fraser Valley Regional District is currently undertaking a Strategic Review of Transit in theFraser Valley in partnership with the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MoTI), BCTransit, and TransLink.
BACKGROUND:
On November 14, 2008 Urban Systems Ltd. was selected as the project consultant andsubsequently met with the Project Steering Committee and Project Technical Committee,consisting of representatives from MoTI, BC Transit, FVRD and TransLink. DuringDecember and January, Urban Systems Ltd. also met with local government engineeringand planning representatives to discuss the project and give local government staff anopportunity to provide an overview of current local transit systems as well as outlinecommunity objectives and plans in their respective communities with regards to transit.
Local government staff were also provided with copies of the draft Public AdvisoryCommittee (PAC) Terms of Reference for review and were asked to provide the projectmanager with feed back and an appropriate time-frame as to when respective FVRDCouncils would be able to forward nominations for the Committee. The project team isawaiting the final nominations for the PAC and will be conducting the first PAC meeting inmid-March.
Communications
The purpose of this memo is to outline the communications initiatives undertaken to dateand other initiatives planned to make sure there is a good information flow to local
Page 1 of 2
The Work Plan — 5 Phases
5. TransitConcept
6Document
the3. Regional
VisionMonmpalVision Ptiln
Strategy
2009 2[111 .2131,1 201e(X.-W.9er October ZRaura Album
ProjectThRiation
:20e&oneeenten
governments, the general public and other stakeholders in the strategic review.Communication initiatives include:
1. Project web site: http://www.th.qov.bc.ca/FraserValIevTransit/ ;
2. Project newsletter (Appendix A), which is available from the project web siteunder "publications";
3. A communication strategy as outlined in Appendix B;
4. Regular project update reports from staff to the FVRD Executive Committee andBoard; and
5. Regular staff meetings with the Transportation and Transit Working Groupconsisting of local government engineering and planning staff tasked by theirlocal governments to provide input and feedback to the project (Appendix C —draft meeting notes).
Progress
As shown in Figure 1, the project work plan consists of 6 phases. Although the PAC is stillunder development, the project is moving forward to Phase 2: "Building the Foundation".The work in Phase 2 provides the background information necessary for informeddiscussions and decisions to take place as the project moves forward.
COST: There is no fee associated with this update.
COMMENT BY DEPARTMENT HEAD: Reviewed and supported
COMMENT BY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: No requirement for comment
COMMENT BY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER: Reviewed and supported
177
Page 2 of 2
3trinegic A.eview oi i rcuisn in uie r raser v overview rage oi
178
BRITISH01141101 COLUMBIA
The Best Place asACINMESEMINEEMEMEME=6"..., '
B.C. Home
APPENDIX Aa All B.C. Government C Transportation and Infrastructure
B.C. Home Transportation and Infrastructure Strategic Review of Transit in theFraser Valley
Search I CIMain index
Contact UsHelp 0
. Printer rai lVersion
.4 B.C. Legislation
B.C.Acts andStatutes
-) Transportation Actsand Statutes
Strategic Review of Transit in the Fraser Valley
Overview
The Fraser Valley is one of the fastest growing regions in British Columbia and the needfor efficient transit services is growing along with the population.
Transit Vision for the Fraser Valley
In November 2008 Transportation and Infrastructure Minister Kevin Falcon announced acomprehensive study of the transit needs of the Fraser Valley. It will identify and assessoptions for transit services within the Fraser Valley and how to best provide transit servicebetween the Fraser Valley and Metro Vancouver. The Fraser Valley Transit Study willexplore all options available to address future demand, including the viability of using theSouthern Rail Corridor (Interurban Line, Chilliwack to Surrey) for commuter rail,
Transportation andInfrastructure Home
Strategic Review of Transitin the Fraser Valley
Overview
Overview
+ Publications
-I) Public Participation
-) Your Views
+ Project Partners
• Contacts
This study encompasses the communities within the boundary of the Fraser ValleyRegional District (Mission, Abbotsford, Chilliwack, Kent, Harrison Hot Springs, and Hope).The result of this study will be a series of working papers that will shape the future oftransit in the valley as we approach the benchmark years of 2020 and 2030 identified inthe province's Provincial Transit Plan. The working papers will focus on establishing afoundation for future transit services at both the municipal and regional scales and a finalconcept plan will outline an implementation strategy to deliver effective and reliabletransit in the Fraser Valley.
The Fraser Valley Transit Study is largely funded by the Province and is being developedin partnership with the Fraser Valley Regional District, BC Transit and TransLink. The$400,000 study was awarded to Urban Systems. An initial, assessment of transit demandwill be completed by April 2009 with stakeholder and public consultation to follow. A finalreport is expected in early 2010.
Top
B C. falNiSTR
F TRANSPOPTATIou,: -.ND INFR.,,STRUCTuRE
DISCLAIMER PRIVACY ACCES'SiBiL;
httn•//www th o-nv hp r.a/Frace.rVallmiTrancit/ (19/(11/111(19
Building theFoundation
March
179
BRITISHOWN COLUMBIA
1he Pate on 1.4rthSTRATEGIC REVIEW OF TRANSIT IN THE FRASER VALLEY
Project Status Update: February 7009
BACKGROUNDThe Fraser Valley is one of the fastest growing regions in British Columbia and the need for efficienttransit services is growing along with the population. In November 2008 Transportation andInfrastructure Minister Kevin Falcon announced a comprehensive study of the transit needs of theFraser Valley. This study will identify and assess options for transit services within the variouscommunities throughout the Valley and also determine how to best provide transit servicesbetween the Fraser Valley and Metro Vancouver. This study will explore all transit options toaddress future demands including the viability of the old Interurban line between Chilliwack andSurrey as a commuter route.
This review is largely funded by the Province and is being developed in partnership with the FraserValley Regional District, BC Transit and TransLink. The $400,000 study was awarded to UrbanSystems which expects to deliver a final report in early 2010. This final report will consist of a seriesof working papers that will shape the future of transit in the Fraser Valley to meet the objectivesset out in the Province's $14 billion Provincial Transit Plan.
PROJECT COMMITTEESSuccess of this review relies heavily on stakeholder engagement throughout the project's lifespan.A number of committees have been identified to liaise with the project team to provide valuableinput and feedback on a number of key deliverables. These committees include:
Steering Committee: comprised of representatives from each of the partner agencies and isresponsible for directing the project and approving the final strategy reports.
Technical Committee: each of the project partners will assign experts to this committee to provideinput on technical matters.
Transportation & Transit Working Group: comprised of municipal representatives from each ofthe communities in the Fraser Valley, including the regional district, to provide input into thereview
Public Advisory Committee (PAC): comprised of members of the public representing all areas inthe Fraser Valley. This group will represent present and future transit users and will be consultedon a regular basis throughout the project.
The project will also be consulting neighbouring communities, transit experts and organizationswith an interest in Fraser Valley transit. The general public will be engaged through a series ofopen houses. The dates and locations of the open houses are to be determined.
BRITISHar77-ansit TRANS (-1 --.INK (IM COLUMBIAIh Bts:P.ne
SRTFV Project Status Update (Newsletter 1, February 2009)
180
PHASE 1 - PROJECT INITIATIONThe first phase of this project is now complete as the partneragencies have met and have set the course to drive thisstrategic review forward. The project team has consultedneighbouring municipalities to further understand the impactsthe review will have on transit services outside the FraserValley.
During the project initiation, background information hasbeen collected and analyzed, including: relevant communityplans; transit and transportation documentation and data;transit plans and financial information and other relevant datasuch as land use information and census data.
Information gaps have also been identified and the projectteam is currently in the process of collecting additionalinformation pertinent to this study. The project has, forexample, expanded the scope of the study's data needs toinclude a survey of West Coast Express users.
PHASE 2 — BUILDING THE FOUNDATIONPhase 2 is now underway with an expected completion dateat the end of March. Through this phase, the project teamwill gain a better understanding of the local and regionalcontext underpinning this study.
The project team has also commenced the market analysisfocusing on existing transit services in the region and ontransit and travel nodes that affect current and future transitservices. Current market research is focusing on a communitybased phone survey and one-on-one interviews withemployment attraction centres.
Through this research the project team will ascertain bestpractices by identifying different ranges of transit services,integrating fixed and flexible services, fare comparisons andaccessible transit options.
The result of this phase will be a series of technical workingpapers that will provide the foundation for the next twophases in the study: the municipal transit vision and theregional transit vision.
UPDATE ON THE COMMUNICATIONS AND CONSULTATION PLANThe project team is currently anticipating the final nominations for the Public Advisory Committee (PAC.) and will be conductingthe first PAC session mid-March. A final Communications and Consultation Plan will be finalized in March.
For more information and to provide feedback on this project, please visit our website:
www.srtfv.ca
BRITISHTRANS COLUMBIA.
Placc
SRTFV Project Status Update (Newsletter 1, February 2009)
Hugh Sloan, FVRDSid Bertelsen, FVRDAlison Stewart, FVRDCorey Newcomb, FVRDGerald Kingston, FVRDRod Sanderson, City of ChilliwackKaren Stanton, City of ChilliwackElvis Riou, City of AbbotsfordRuss Mammel, City of AbbotsfordCarl Johannsen, City of AbbotsfordKerry Hilts, District of KentDarcey Kohuch, District of KentRick Bomhof, District of Mission
Delegations representatives also present:
Barclay Pitkethly, District of MissionPeter Klitz, TranslinkJim Prokop, TranslinkJim Hester, Min. of Transportation & InfrastructureAshok Bhatti, Min. of Transportation & InfrastructureMichael Braun, Min. of Transportation & InfrastructureJohn Steiner, Urban SystemsLorraine Martens, FVRD (Recording Secretary)
Regrets:
Larry Burk, Village of Harrison Hot SpringsBasse Clement, Urban Systems
Joe Zaccaria, South Fraser OnTraxBill Taylor, South Fraser OnTraxJordan Bateman, South Fraser OnTrax/Township of LangleyMichelle Sparrow, South Fraser On Trax
Myrtle Macdonald, Rail for the ValleyDonald Bellamy, Rail for the ValleySusan Blye, Rail for the ValleyJohn Vissers, Rail for the Valley
Hugh Sloan opened the meeting at 10:05 a.m. Round Table introductions were conducted forthe benefit of the delegation guests.
CAUsers\astewart\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\OLKF9BR2009 02 27 Meeting Notes TransportationTransit Working Group.doc
185Transportation & Transit Working GroupFebruary 27, 2009
Page 2
2. DELEGATIONS
Hugh Sloan advised that representatives from groups advocating the return for passenger railhad been invited to the meeting as an opportunity to present and discuss their perspective andvision on rail.
South Fraser OnTrax
Joe Zaccaria and Jordan Bateman spoke for the South Fraser OnTrax presentation
The South Fraser is a unique sub-region within southern BC and the Lower Mainland. SouthFraser OnTrax is an advocate for smart growth development and transit options.
Transit issues:
• Transit Deficit in the South Fraser region.• Current focus is on getting people to Vancouver.• Translink numbers show the need for South of Fraser community connections — there is no
LRT or Streetcars — only roads and buses.• Need for South Fraser community connections.• The need for long-term and sustainable living, working and transportation solutions.• Lack of progressive alternatives (water, rail and roads) that are now required to move
goods.• The need for innovative strategies that connect walking, cycling and overall people
movement within our communities and beyond.• We have roads but most don't have bike lanes.
Suggested Solutions:
• Reactivate Light Rail Transit from Abbotsford to Surrey.• Eventually connect to Chilliwack.• Local streetcar systems — Abbotsford, the Langleys and Surrey.• Frequent LRT service with connection to Abbotsford Airport.• Community Shuttle Service — connect to LRT.• Land use and transportation planning fit together.• Build complete communities (Metro Vancouver Liveable Region).• Build complete roads.• Install rail lines with all complete roads.• Coordinate all new underground utilities to facilitate LRT.
Friends of Rail for the Valley Society
Myrtle Macdonald, Don Bellamy, and John Vissers spoke for the Rail for the Valley Society.The Mission of Friends of Rail for the Valley Society is to advocate for the creation of acomprehensive passenger rail and transit network for the entire Fraser Valley, from Vancouverto Hope.
Issues:
186Transportation & Transit Working GroupFebruary 27, 2009
Page 3
• In the Upper Fraser Valley there is a strong support for Interurban passenger Rail, but notfor Rapid Transit Buses.
• In 2007 a petition for Rail for the Valley got over 900 signatures and recently an onlinepetition already has more than 600 names emphasizing the urgency for light railway servicesouth of the Fraser River.
• Seniors very frequently express dislike for the high speed, fumes and inconvenience ofbuses.
• Everyone in Chilliwack complains about traffic jams and the increasing number of hugetrucks.
• The long, flat, windy strip of highway between Abbotsford and Chilliwack lacks services,amenities and safety.
• The Upper Fraser Valley is no longer a tourist haven. No amount of bridge building, fastbuses and road widening will correct traffic congestion and smog.
• Travel by light railway is relaxing, scenic, safe and rapid.
Solutions:• It is timely and inexpensive to reopen Interurban Rail Service using the Southern Railway
line.• The Southern Railway route is convenient for students, the elderly, tourists and commuters.• The Southern Railway right-of-way is owned by the Provincial Government. The track is
owned by Southern Railway.• The line would be popular for Chilliwack students, seniors, tourist and commuter passengers
bound for Sumas.
John Vissers added:
• The role of transportation planning must anticipate future needs of the community.• There is an increasing growth in single occupancy vehicle (SOV) traffic.• The cost of moving people and goods around the Fraser Valley will dramatically increase.• Light rail, or regional rail, could provide an alternative to SOV and become the "leverage"
need to aid in the transition to a more sustainable future.
Don Bellamy mentioned that he had provided the constituency office of John Les, MLA with a copy of hispresentation for a demonstration project with respect to the work of the Rail for the Valley — Heritage Rail.Unfortunately that copy was Mr. Bellamy's only copy and although he has made a request for return of thecopy he has had no response. FVRD staff agreed to assist Mr. Bellamy to find that presentation.ACTION
VALTAC (Valley Transportation Advisory Committee)
Peter Holt spoke to the VALTAC presentation. VALTAC represents a South of Fraser (SoF)Regional perspective focusing on transportation and transit opportunities.
• SoF municipalities are groupings of smaller communities synonymous to metropolitanneighbourhoods.
• There is a need for better transit network to connect SoF communities based on currentreality and projected growth.
• VALTAC urges a detailed review of the feasibility of a passenger service using part or theentire BC Hydro rail corridor.
o Phase 1: Scott Road Sky Train to Langley City /Trinity Western University (TWU)
187Transportation & Transit Working GroupFebruary 27, 2009
Page 4
o Phase 2: Langley City/TWU to Abbotsfordo Phase 3: Abbotsford to Chilliwack
• New technologies are making rail options more attractive to passengers.• "Streetcar-Trains"-LRT are an environmentally friendly way of efficiently moving large
numbers of people.• Modern LRT systems attract new transit ridership. They do not need to be "rapid transit".• Early development in the Fraser Valley followed the interurban rail corridor. Many
employment centres and town centres are still on the line.
Summary of conclusions:
• The provincially owned BC Electric Rail Corridor needs to be incorporated in future transitplans.
• The Community Rail Partnerships currently being adopted in the UK could be a model thatworks for the Fraser Valley.
• The reintroduction of passenger service can be phased in so that it services the entireFraser Valley.
Hugh Sloan thanked the delegations for their presentations noting that this was a great firstcontact and that they had given the committee passionate, provocative and informativeperspectives on the issue of rail transportation. He asked for time for the Committee to thinkthrough and digest what was seen and heard.
The delegations left the meeting at this time. (12:12 p.m.)
3 MEETING NOTES3.1 Meeting Notes of January 19, 2009
Hugh Sloan asked if there were any errors or omissions in the Meeting Notes and hearing nonehe declared the Meeting Notes of January 19, 2009 accepted as circulated.
4 MATTERS ARISING
Rick Bomhof advised of a concern expressed at the recent Mission/Abbotsford TransitCommittee meeting. Their concern was what is this study going to accomplish, what is it goingto achieve, and what are the goals. He noted there was a sense of disconnection andfrustration with the level of communication between the Project team and municipal councils.
Discussion ensued.
• It was noted that there is an FVRD Board resolution to have a Council of Councils meetingand that at the last meeting of this committee it was agreed that Urban Systems woulddetermine when the study is at a proper state for this meeting (most likely after the firstphase of the study is completed).
• There is a need for clarity in any discussion/communication with councils on the process ofthis study. The process must be clearly defined and explained how this study links, overlapsand dovetails with other process such as the BC Transit five-year plan.
188Transportation & Transit Working GroupFebruary 27, 2009
Page 5
• Ongoing news items regarding TransLink are creating a diversion contributing to some ofthe confusion.
• BC Transit has just decided to place their bus service expansion plan for Mission on holdand also delayed work on the 5-year Business Plan for Abbotsford/Mission.
• At the Mission/Abbotsford Transit Committee and in the light of the BC Transit decision, aneed for more public consultation is necessary (over and above the PAC).
• It was agreed that the newsletter (previously distributed at the FVRD Executive Committee) will bedistributed more broadly, i.e, to all municipal CAOs and council members. ACTION
• The framework for this study provides that the engagement with councils and mayors wouldbe through the FVRD Executive Committee and Regional Board as well as the _Council ofCouncil mechanisms. However this does not preclude one-on-one council presentations.
• The website for the project will be up and running shortly which will help ease in thecommunication problems. It will include the Terms of Reference and the newsletter.
• There is a need to have some direct communication with both mayor and councils whichspells out what we are about and the kinds of next steps we envision between now and thenext few months to remove some of the concern that is occurring.
• It was agreed that a representative from the Project team will attend the next Mission/AbbotsfordTransit Committee meeting. ACTION
• One of the real functions of this group is to make sure we are connected with the councils toensure they know their input is important to this exercise.
• It is important to understand what the travel demands are, what the issues are in the Valley,between Valley communities, and between Valley Communities and Metro Vancouver.
• This issue of communication and connection to the councils will be discussed at the Project SteeringCommittee. ACTION
5 COMMUNICATIONS & CONSULTATION STRATEGY5.1 Update on Public Advisory Committee (PAC)
Ashok Bhatti reported he had received correspondence from City of Abbotsford, District of Hope, andDistrict of Kent but had not as yet received anything from the other three member municipalities.Representatives from the City of Chilliwack and the Village of Harrison Hot Springs were not present atthis time to comment. Project team staff will follow up with them to move things forward. ACTION
Barclay Pitkethly spoke for the District of Mission. He advised that they did not get anyapplications through a 2-week advertising campaign. They have reached out to some membersof the community and they have possibly three people to put their names forward. They areplanning to take this to council on Monday, March 3, and move forward from there.
Hugh Sloan advised that one of the things discussed at the FVRD Executive meeting was thearbitrary split of membership on the PAC. Collectively the mayors felt that wasn't necessary tobe bound to a certain number of members for a certain community. The key thing is thatnominees/appointees are what is needed.
It was noted that to enhance the process any barriers that may arise to prevent a person fromvolunteering on the committee should be identified as there may be a way to deal with them.
Discussion ensued:
189Transportation & Transit Working GroupFebruary 27, 2009
Page 6
• PAC Membership of elected officials would open up more avenues for the District ofMission.
• The University of the Fraser Valley (UFV) is very interested in participating on the PublicAdvisory Committee. UFV serves at least three different communities and could possibly bea member at large rather than representing just one community.
• The importance of the PAC was stressed as an integral part of the overall study.
John Steiner spoke about communication to councils. To underline the urgency of the situation,he suggested giving them a deadline for appointing members for PAC and give an approximatedate for the first meeting of the PAC.
Hugh Sloan added that communication is just as much about letting people know what is goingto happen as it is about specific transit issues. Encourage councils to be part of the process.Ensure confidence that they will be part of the process. There is value in that apart fromdiscussing transit issues right now.
6 MEETINGS WITH METRO STAFF (Update)Meetings were held with staff of the neighbouring municipalities of Maple Ridge (February 11),Langley Township (February 3), City of Langley (January 29), and the City of Surrey (January27). In his memo dated 2009 02 24, John Steiner provided a summary of comments andrequests from these communities in relation to the Fraser Valley Transit study.
Highlights:
• There was generally a strong interest in the study.• Known demand patterns between specific areas in the Fraser Valley and the neighbouring
communities were discussed and will be explored through the study.• South of Fraser communities confirmed their current long-term transit priorities are reflected
in the TransLink Area Transit Plan and they expect this could be augmented with thefindings from the Fraser Valley transit review in terms of future inter-regional connections tothe east.
• Municipal staff will report to their councils any information generated from the Fraser Valleystudy.
• Municipal staff would appreciate specific information and potential involvement in developinga vision for inter-regional services that extend into Metro Vancouver.
Ashok Bhatti added that one of the consistent themes heard was that travel patterns havechanged dramatically over the last 10-15 years with the emergence of the City of Abbotsford asa central hub for employment and for attractions such as the malls and the big box stores.
The focus of the study should be on the challenges in the Fraser Valley first and then on thelinkages with Metro Vancouver municipalities.
7 WEST COAST EXPRESS AND THE FVRD TRANSIT STRATEGY
A concern was raised as to the West Coast Express being a broader regional service ratherthan a municipal facility. Discussion ensued.
190Transportation & Transit Working GroupFebruary 27, 2009
Page 7
• There have been discussions at the FVRD Executive Committee for sometime with respectto this issue.
• Similarly, the same perspective would apply to connections to the Abbotsford Airport and inparticular road connections to the Airport which are currently viewed in a municipal sense.
• This issue will have to be carefully looked at in the study.• Construction of the Evergreen Line through to Coquitlam will not affect the West Coast
Express. They are two different markets.• There is a proposal for the development of a 10-year plan for the West Coast Express itself.• Through the study there will be an enhanced survey for the West Coast Express to provide
perspective on the ridership in terms of origins and destinations.• There is already some of this information out there and the study survey will add to that.• The study is not looking to provide specific commentary as to the cost sharing formula.• Everyone has to have the same vision of what transit is going to be doing in the Fraser
Valley and our first commitment is to get the information and bring it forward in a mannerthat allows discussion to occur.
• The information will be handed back for a political approach and decision from the FVRDBoard.
8 PROJECT STATUS
John Steiner reported:
• The working papers are coming together.• Market research is being conducted over the next two weeks.• Background information is being collected.• PAC appointments are urgently needed.
9 DISCUSSIONWith respect to the presentations from the delegations, it was noted that the study should notignore the rail links and concerns that were presented by the delegations but the main focus asa region should be on what is needed in terms of transit internally in the Fraser Valley, to ensurewe can continue to create strong and self sustaining communities. There is a need to set upsome dialogue with the rail groups to ensure they receive information. In addition, through PAC,perhaps someone who is centered in one of our communities in the Valley will become involvedand make sure all interests are represented on that group.
The application proposed by Greyhound Canada to reduce/cut service from the Fraser Valley toVancouver was briefly discussed. Hugh Sloan advised that this issue was addressed at theFVRD Board. The Board is concerned that as Greyhound is an exclusively licensed carrier,this proposal will put the economically challenged people in the Canyon at risk. A letter will bewritten to Greyhound requesting the service to be continued.
The issue of appointing elected officials to the PAC was discussed. The following was noted:
• The role of PAC is to provide an independent sounding board to vet the process.
191Transportation & Transit Working GroupFebruary 27, 2009
Page 8
• The PAC was intended to include people who represent transit needs - seniors, youth,students, employees of specific generators, people with disabilities, cultural groups,Chamber of Commerce members — people who see transit as part of an economicdevelopment vision for the Valley.
• Improved communication with the elected officials must be addressed to ensure that theyunderstand that they will be making decisions regarding the process and will be intimatelyinvolved in whatever the outcome.
9 ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 1:07 p.m.
Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commission meeting heldMarch 12, 2009, at 9:02 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall
WSC Members Present: Mayor Atebe (Vice Chair) (Mission); Councillor Gibson(Abbotsford); Councillor Gidda (Mission); Councillor Gill (Abbotsford); Councillor Piecas(Mission); and Councillor Ross (Abbotsford)
UMC Members Present: General Manager Engineering, Regional Utilities — J. Gordon(Abbotsford); Acting Director, Corporate Services J. Lewis (Abbotsford); Director ofFinance — K. Bjorgaard (Mission); and Director of Engineering and PublicWorks - R. Bomhof (Mission)
Other Staff Present: Manager of Utility Operations — L. Stein (Abbotsford);Wastewater & Asset Engineering Manager — R. Isaac (Abbotsford); Water & Solid WasteEngineering Manager — T. Kyle (Abbotsford); Utility Construction and Source ControlEngineering Manager - M. Mayfield (Abbotsford); and Recording Secretary — R. Brar(Abbotsford)
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 9:02 a.m.
Moved by Councillor Gill, seconded by Councillor Gidda,that the agenda be amended to add Report No.UMC 23-2009, dated March 9, 2009, from the Manager ofUtility Operations, regarding Dickson Snow PackEquivalent .
WSC 29-2009 CARRIED.
2. ADOPTION OF MINUTES
Minutes of the February 12, 2009 Meeting
Moved by Councillor Gibson, seconded by CouncillorRoss, that the minutes of the Abbotsford/MissionWater & Sewer Commission meeting held February 12.2009, be adopted.
WSC 30-2009 CARRIED.
3. DELEGATIONS
None.
192
Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commission meeting heldMarch 12, 2009. at 9:02 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Page 2
4. BUSINESS OUT OF MINUTES
.1 Monthly Follow-up Report
Moved by Councillor Gibson, seconded by Councillor Gill,that staff organize a meeting with the Members ofLegislative Assembly, Members of Parliament, FraserValley Regional Chair, Mayor Peary, Mayor Atebe and allWSC members to discuss the Sub-Regional System.
WSC 31-2009 CARRIED.
Moved by Councillor Gibson, seconded by Councillor Gill,that the monthly follow-up report be received.
WSC 32-2009 CARRIED.
.2 JAMES Plant Monthly Report — February 2009 (5700-02)
Moved by Councillor Gidda, seconded by Councillor Ross,that Report No. UMC 17-2009, dated March 2, 2009, fromthe Manager of Utility Operations, regarding JAMES PlantMonthly Report — February 2009, be received.
WSC 33-2009 CARRIED.
.3 Monthly Water Report — February 2009 (5720-02)
Moved by Councillor Gibson, seconded by CouncillorRoss, that Report No. UMC 20-2009, dated March 4, 2009,from the Manager of Utility Operations, regarding theMonthly Water Report — February 2009, be received.
WSC 34-2009 CARRIED.
.4 Financial Statements — January 2009 (5700-01)
Moved by Councillor Ross, seconded by Councillor Gidda,that Report No. UMC 18 -2009, dated March 3, 2009, fromthe Acting Director, Corporate Service (Abbotsford),regarding Financial Statements — January 2009, bereceived.
WSC 35-2008 CARRIED.
193
Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commission meeting heldMarch 12, 2009. at 9:02 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Page 3
5. REPORTS
.1 Sewer Use Bylaw Revisions -- Stakeholder Meetings Update (5750-07)
Moved by Councillor Gill, seconded by Councillor Ross,that Report No. UMC 14-2009, dated March 6, 2009, fromthe Utility Construction & Source Control EngineeringManager, regarding the Sewer Use BylawRevisions - Stakeholder Meetings Update, be received;and staff revise Mission and Abbotsford Sewer Use Bylawsto reflect the recommended action items in this report andbring the completed Sewer Use Bylaws back to the WSCfor endorsement.
WSC 36-2008 CARRIED.
.2 Norrish Creek Road Update (5710-04)
Moved by Councillor Pieces, seconded by Councillor Ross,that Report No. UMC 16-2009, dated February 24, 2009,from the Water & Solid Waste Engineering Manager,regarding the Norrish Creek Road, be received.
WSC 37-2009 CARRIED.
.3 Water Shortage Response Plan and Water Conservation 2009 (5710-40)
Moved by Councillor Pieces. seconded by Councillor Gill,that Report No. UMC 15-2009, dated February 23, 2009,from the Water & Solid Waste Engineering Manager,regarding Water Shortage Response Plan and WaterConservation 2009, be received; .and: (1) the WaterShortage Response Plan be approved; and (2) theAbbotsford/Mission Water and Sewer Services recommendthe City of Abbotsford and District of Mission Councilsadopt the Water Shortage Response Plan in their bylaws.
WSC 38-2009 CARRIED.
194
Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commission meeting heldMarch 12. 2009, at 9:02 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Page 4
.4 Amended Capital Financial Plans
Moved by Councillor Gidda, seconded by Councillor Ross,that Report No. UMC 19-2009, dated March 4, 2009, fromthe Budget Manager, regarding the Amended CapitalFinancial Plans, be received; and it be recommended tothe City of Abbotsford and District of Mission Councils thatthe amended twenty-year capital financial plans for theAbbotsford/Mission Water and Sewer Services, beapproved.
WSC 39-2009 CARRIED.
.5 "Gas Tax" Grant Applications by the Abbotsford/Mission Water & SewerCommission and Securing Safe and Sustainable Drinking Water in theAbbotsford-Mission Region
Moved by Councillor Gill, seconded by Councillor Plecas,that the Policy Discussion Paper on "Gas Tax" GrantApplications by the Abbotsford/Mission Water & SewerCommission and Securing Safe and Briefing Paper onSustainable Drinking Water in the Abbotsford-MissionRegion, be received.
WSC 40-2009 CARRIED.
.6 NEW BUSINESS
.1 Correspondence from Matsqui First Nation, Regarding the Proposed Expansionof the Bevan Wells Project
Moved by Councillor Ross, seconded by Councillor Gidda,that the correspondence from Matsqui First Nation,regarding the proposed expansion of the Bevan Wellsproject. be received.* and a letter be cant to Matsqui.•
e -,e
resolution for the City of Abbotsford and District of Missiontc forward to the Union of Britich Columbia Municipalitiesand Lower Mainland LOC3f, Government Accociation,regarding concultation with Firct Nation.s.
WSC 41-2009
CARRIED.
mended by Resolution No. WSC 45 -2009, April 9. 2009
195
Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commission meeting heldMarch 12, 2009. at 9:02 a.m. in Room 530 of Abbotsford City Hall Page 5
.2 Dickson Snow Pack Equivalent
Moved by Councillor Ross, seconded by Councillor Gill,that Report No. UMC 23-2009, dated March 9, 2009, fromthe Manager of Utility Operations, regarding Dickson SnowPack Equivalent, be received.
WSC 42-2009 CARRIED.
7. MOTION TO CLOSE
Moved by Councillor Gibson, seconded by CouncillorRoss, that the March 12, 2009, WSC meeting, beadjourned (10:13 a.m.).
WSC 43-2009
CARRIED.
Certified Correct:
196
Minutes of the SPECIAL MEETING (Administration .& Finance) of the DISTRICT OFMISSION COUNCIL held in the Conference Room at the Municipal Hall at 8645 Stave LakeStreet, Mission, British Columbia, on Monday, March 9, 2009 commencing at 6:00 pm andcontinuing on Thursday, March 12, 2009, commencing at 5:40 pm.
Committee Members Present: Mayor James AtebeCouncillor Terry GiddaCouncillor Paul HornCouncillor Danny PlecasCouncillor Mike ScudderCouncillor Jenny StevensCouncillor Heather Stewart
Staff Members Present: Glen Robertson, chief administrative officerDennis Clark, director of corporate administrationKen Bjorgaard, director of financeRick Bomhof, director of engineering and public worksKerri Onken, deputy treasurer/collectorDebi Decker, administrative clerk
March 9, 2009 - Staff members Ray Herman, director of parks, recreation and culturepresent for part of the meeting Mike Younie, environmental services manager
1. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
RESOLUTION TO RESOLVE INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
AF Moved by Councillor Stevens, seconded by Councillor Plecas and,09/56
RESOLVED: That council now resolve itself into committee of the whole.
CARRIED
ADMINISTRATION & FINANCE
Councillor Stevens assumed the chair.
AF Carry-Forwards09/57
The director of finance referred to the report dated March 5, 2009, and the listing of projectsrequesting to be carried forward.
Discussion ensued around the electronic ice detection at Dewdney Truck Road and StaveLake Street and Stave Lake Street North and playground equipment/landscaping, andwhether these projects had been started. Staff confirmed that they had not been started,and council questioned if this money could better be spent on other capital projects or parks.Council requested that these three carry-forward line item requests be deferred until staffcould investigate further and advise at the March 12, 2009, special council (administrationand finance) meeting.
197
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Special Council Meeting (Administration and Finance)
Page 2 of 11 198March 9, 2009 & March 12, 2009
Moved by Councillor Horn, and,
RECOMMENDED: That the projects identified below, be approved for inclusion in the 2009Financial Plan (final dollar amounts of carry-forwards will depend on year-end balances).
Heritage Register Community Health Planning - RecoveryHeritage Register — Funded by Provincial Grant IT Systems Security AuditOCP Project IT Systems Security Audit — Funded by
StabilizationOCP Project — Funded by Surplus Mission Community Heritage CommissionCommunity Health Planning Feasibility Study — Water to Triple Creek
2008 General Capital Carry -Forward RequestWorks Adjacent to Subdivision Hatzic Railway CrossingCedar Street Design — Cherry to Egglestone Minor CapitalSignals - Stave Lake Street at Cherry Avenue GIS EquipmentFiber Optics — Taulbut Street Corporate Printer ReplacementRepair - Dewdney Trunk Road at Wiebe Street Mgmt Information Systems EnhancementsWest Coast Express Sandblast and Paint Information Services Misc CapitalTransportation Study Web Content ManagementSignal Preemption — 7 th Avenue at Grand Street University Endowment LandsCulvert Lining — 7th Avenue and Murray Street Identix Livescan Fingerprint StationCulvert Lining — 7 th Avenue and Home Street Urban Trails (Master Plan)Burm at Ruskin Trailer Park Public Works RoofRainfall Monitoring Program Child Care GrantMission Dike Upgrades Fairbanks Street LandscapingCedar Valley Detention Pond D1 Leisure Centre RoofEquipment Shed Expansion RCMP Facility AnalysisRoad Salt Storage Expansion Phase I Waterfront PlanningTransit Shelter Spirit Square
2008 Water Capital Carry-Forward RequestsDevelopment of Backflow Prevention Hydrant ProgramBulk Supply to Wren / Highway #7 In-Line Valve ProgramTelemetry Blow-off Valve InstallationLeak Detection Program Pressure Reducing Station UpgradeFairbanks PRV Replacement
2008 Sewer Capital Carry -Forward RequestsCapital Equipment Additions Odour Control UnitScada Monitoring of Pumps Hwy #7 Sewer Main Replacement SLS/MarySewer Modeling Software Wren East Trunk Main StudyLift Station Upgrading
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Special Council Meeting (Administration and Finance)
Page 3 ofll 199March 9, 2009 & March 12, 2009
2008 Equipment Capital Carry-Forward Requests5187 '87 Ford Pumper Purchase alternate to 5342 18ft Trailer5345 '93 Trailer 5195 Single Axle Dump Truck5351 '94 Mikasa Plate Tamper Replace 5364 Sander for 51955361 '03 Big Shot Boring Machine Replace 5374 Belly Plow for 51955384 '96 John Deere Mower Deck Sale of 5345 '93 trailer Teca L275401 Hero Paint Machine Sale of 5187 '87 Ford pumper5689 Fuel System Sale of 5351 '94 Mikasa plate tamper
CARRIED
AF Gaming Reserve Projections09/58
The director of finance stated that council had requested at the last special council(administration and finance) meeting (March 3, 2009) that staff show the projected gamingrevenue and the projects, along with costs, that are utilizing these funds. He referred to thespreadsheet that shows the District projecting to receive $550,000 of gaming funds peryear, and that the District's portion of the Spirit Square costs, restorative resolutions andsocial development operating costs, and waterfront planning costs will be funded throughthis account.
AF Status of 2009, 2010, and 2011 Provisional Budget/Tax Increases, including09/59 Provisional Spending Packages
The director of finance advised, that staff had included all the priority spending packagesdiscussed at the last special council (administration and finance) meeting (March 3, 2009) ineach of the three scenarios.
Staff noted that regarding the RCMP guards moving to a 24/7 coverage, the dollar amountbeing requested was incorrect, and that the new amount was $24,416 for each of 2009 and2010. Staff pointed out that it was discovered that $5,000 for the Oyama delegation tripbudgeted for 2009 was approved in December of 2007 as a core budget increase. Staffwould be removing the $6,000 spending package and removing the $5,000 on-going corebudget increase, but would be including the $5,000 as a one-time expense.
AF Late Item #5 — Parks, Recreation and Culture Follow-up Items
The director of parks, recreation and culture referred to his late report that itemized thevarious follow-up requests council had from the last special council (administration andfinance) meeting (March 3, 2009).
09/60
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
200Special Council Meeting (Administration and Finance) Page 4 of /1March 9, 2009 & March 12, 2009
Discussion ensued around the hand railing at the north arena and while having no handrailing meets the building code it was felt that this should be reassessed as it could be apotential risk and should be addressed in next year's budget discussions.
Discussion 'continued around removing the "senior rate" for leisure centre programs, withstaff advising that a drop off in senior participation would be expected. Staff noted that ifseniors had paid the adult price in 2008, an additional $43,100 in revenue would have beenrealized.
AF Late Item #2 — Funding for Hedge Replacement09/61
The director of parks, recreation and culture referred to the second of his late reportsrequesting funding to replace the cedar hedges along Stave Lake Street (along residenceson Herar Lane).
Staff clarified that only the most southern six or seven houses would receive new cedartrees, and that 8' trees would be planted.
Moved by Councillor Horn, and,
RECOMMENDED: That funding of $8,400.00 be approved from the 2009 ContingencyAccount for partial replacement of the cedar hedge along Stave Lake Street in front ofresidences on Herar Lane.
CARRIED
AF Late Item #4 — Silverdale Avenue Soils Investigation and Remediation Design09/62
The director of engineering and public works referred to his late report, responding tocouncil's request for information on the phasing of the remedial work on Silverdale Avenue.
Moved by Councillor Horn, and,
RECOMMENDED:
1. That Valley Geotechnical Engineering Services Ltd. is retained at a cost of $8,000.00 tocomplete a geotechnical soils investigation, design and updated cost estimate toremediate Silverdale Avenue to a two lane cross-section; and
2. That funding comes from the Arterial Road Reserve.
OPPOSED: Councillor Stevens
CARRIED
File: ADM.COUREGMinutes 2009
201Special Council Meeting (Administration and Finance) Page 5 of 11
March 9, 2009 & March 12, 2009
AF Council Follow-ups — March 3, 200909/63
The environmental services manager stated that at the March 3, 2009, special council(administration and finance) meeting, council requested that he be present to discuss hisEnvironmental Charter spending package. He continued by advising that the Districtreceives a Carbon Tax Credit which could be used to fund the charter projects.
When questioned, the environmental services manager replied that he would like to goahead with the low-flow toilets program as the City of Abbotsford was initiating a similarprogram this year. He explained that there would be a limit, per year, on the number of low-flow toilets that the District would provide a credit towards. He further explained that the oldtoilets could be crushed and used as cover at the landfill.
The environment services manager confirmed that under the Environmental Charter, he isto provide an update to council each year.
Moved by Councillor Horn, and,
RECOMMENDED: That $20,000 worth of Environmental Charter initiatives be fundedthrough the Carbon Tax Credits that the District of Mission receives.
CARRIED
Discussion continued around the 7 th Avenue and Cedar Street/Cedar Connectorintersection, and a left-turn signal (when travelling east-west on 7 th. Avenue). Staff advisedthat this intersection is monitored on a continual basis, and that part of the problem might bea "sight distance issue", and not a left-turn signal issue.
Council requested that this topic be brought forward to a Traffic Safety Committeemeeting, with recommendations brought back to council.
AF Status of 2009, 2010, and 2011 Provisional Budget/Tax Increases, including09/64
Discussion continued on the public budget presentation document, and it was agreed thatonly three scenarios would be presented. It was discussed whether or not to defer thecomposite fire department by one year, and for staff to include the Fraser River HeritagePark — gardening services spending package on the budget/tax increase scenario list.
AF Late Item #1 — Cancellation of Business Licence and Kennel Licence09/65
The director of corporate administration referred to his late report. Council had a fewconfidential questions regarding this item, and requested that it be brought up at the closedcouncil meeting.
Provisional Spending Packages (continued)
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Special Council Meeting (Administration and Finance) Page 6 of 1 1 202March 9, 2009 & March 12, 2009
Moved by Mayor Atebe, and,
RECOMMENDED:That council advise Pawsative Pet Services, located at 34380 Kirkpatrick Avenue, Mission,British Columbia, that:
1. In accordance with the Community Charter council will, at its regular meeting ofcouncil held on March 16, 2009, consider the cancellation of business licencenumber 00007643 issued to Pawsative Pet Services;
2. The business owner may attend at that meeting to be heard on this matter; and
3. If, following any presentation by the owner, council determines to cancel thebusiness licence that council further direct staff to not issue a business licence toDalene Chysyk in the future for any activities related to animals.
CARRIED
AF Late Item #3 — Job Description for the Administrative Clerk - Governance09/66
Discussion ensued around the late item regarding a draft job description for theadministrative clerk - governance, and council requested that staff provide dollar amountsfor this position at the next special council (administration and finance) meeting.
RESOLUTION TO RISE AND REPORT
Mayor Atebe resumed the chair.
AF Moved by Councillor Horn, seconded by Councillor Stewart and,09/67
RESOLVED: That the Committee of the Whole now rise and report.
CARRIED
2. ADOPTION OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
AF Moved by Councillor Plecas, seconded by Councillor Scudder and,09/68
RESOLVED: That the recommendations of the committee of the whole, as contained initems AF09/56 to AF09/67, except item AF09/62, Silverdale Avenue Soils Investigation andRemediation Design, be adopted.
CARRIED
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Special Council Meeting (Administration and Finance) Page 7 of 11 203March 9, 2009 & March 12, 2009
AF Moved by Councillor Gidda, seconded by Councillor Scudder and,09/69
RESOLVED: That the recommendation of the committee of the whole, as contained in itemAF09/62, Silverdale Avenue Soils Investigation and Remediation Design, be adopted.
CARRIED
Moved by Councillor Stewart, seconded by Councillor Gidda and,
RESOLVED: The meeting be recessed until Thursday, March 12, 2009, at approximately4:30 pm in the Conference Room.
CARRIED
The meeting was recessed at 8:40 pm.
The meeting reconvened on Thursday, March 12, 2009, at 5:40 pm in the Conference Room.
Councillor Stevens resumed the chair.
AF Communicating Municipal Utility Rate Increases09/70
The director of finance referred to his report dated. February 26, 2009, and discussionensued around communicating the utility rate increases, and it was agreed that staff woulddetail the aspects for each utility service. Discussion continued around the large increasefor recycling user rates and staff confirmed that this was partly due to the fact that thesecosts were not visible or broken down in the old contract, but that with the new contract, thebreak-down of the costs was clear.
AF Council Follow-ups09/71
The council follow-ups for January 29th , February 9th , February 23 rd , and March 3, 2009were provided for council's information.
AF Late Item #6 — Carry Forward of Anti-Icing Budget Funds09/72
The director of engineering and public works referred to the late report dated March 10,2009, and advised council that staff had reviewed the estimate costs and the carry-forwardrequest could be reduced from $65,561 to $51,000.
Staff explained that this system was not for forecasted snowfall, but more for when theweather is cold enough to potentially create icy conditions, and that this would save stafffrom manually going out to check the road conditions in other areas.
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Special Council Meeting (Administration and Finance) Page 8 of 11 204March 9, 2009 & March 12, 2009
Moved by Councillor Plecas, and,
RECOMMENDED: That the lower capital carry-forward request amount of $51,000 forelectronic ice detection for the Dewdney Trunk Road at Stave Lake Street and Stave LakeStreet North projects be approved.
CARRIED
AF Late Item #4 — Carry Forward of Playground Equipment/Landscaping Funds09/73
The director of parks, recreation and culture referred to his late report dated March 12,2009, and commented that the funds for the playground equipment/landscaping came fromcommunity amenities, which are regulated in their use.
Moved by Mayor Atebe, and,
RECOMMENDED: That the capital carry forward request of $69,689 for installingplayground equipment at Bailey park, Tunbridge park and the Sports Park be approved.
CARRIED
AF Late Item #2 — New Employee — Part-time Administrative Clerk - Governance09/74
Discussion ensued around the new part-time administrative clerk - governance position withstaff pointing out that there was a $20,000 capital component attached to this operatingrequest. It was agreed to include this line item in the budget scenarios for discussion laterin the meeting.
Late Item #3 — Mission Arts Council — Budgeted Core Increase
Staff advised council that the Mission Arts Council were awaiting a response from councilregarding their earlier presentation and request for additional funding. Staff referred to thelate item that detailed what assistance was being provided to the Mission Arts Council.
Moved by Councillor Horn, and,
RECOMMENDED: That council communicate to the Mission Arts Council that the District ofMission has a standing motion to assist them financially, above the base amount of$2,130.13, with the yearly increase in municipal property taxes.
CARRIED
AF09/75
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Special Council Meeting (Administration and Finance) Page 9 of 11 205March 9, 2009 & March 12, 2009
AF Late Item #5 — General. Cost per Hectare data to Maintain Municipal Parks09/76
This item was provided for council's information.
AF Late Item #7 — Human Resources Exempt Staff Position09/77
Discussion ensued around the human resources exempt staff position, and it was agreed toinclude this line item in the budget scenarios for discussion later in the meeting.
AF Late Item #8 — Private Security Downtown Service09/78
Discussion ensued around the private security service in the downtown area, and it wasagreed to include this line item in the budget scenarios for discussion later in the meeting.
AF Late Item #1 — Provisional Budgets/Tax Increases Scenarios09/79
Discussion ensued around the public budget consultation document and how to present theinformation to the public. It was agreed to present one scenario, and to include the threerevenue sources in this option.
Discussion continued around: utilizing the new construction revenues from the industrialsubdivision, utilizing a portion of the 2008 excess development revenue, and continuing tofund social development and restorative resolutions with gaming revenue. The director offinance confirmed that there are risks associated with utilizing each of the three above listedrevenue sources.
After further discussion council agreed:
1. that the following budget items were to be included within the budget scenario:
Composite Fire Department ($205,321)Staff Recruitment costs ($50,000)Professional Development for Planners ($4,400)Software IT Support Staff (RCMP & Municipal Hall) ($13,068)Fire Emergency Vehicle Operators course ($12,500)Fire Emergency Turnout Gear ($12,000)Small Building Maintenance Projects ($10,000)Fraser River Heritage Park — Gardening Services ($10,851)RCMP Guards Moving to a 24/7 Coveiage ($24,416Full-time Maintenance Worker ($31,634)Part-time Administrative Clerk ($15,450)
2. that the following budget items were to be included within the budget scenario, withspecific public feedback requested:
One additional RCMP Officer in 2009 ($120,000)Private Security Service in the Downtown area ($40,320)
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Special Council Meeting (Administration and Finance) Page 1 0 of 9 1 206March 9, 2009 & March 12, 2009
3. that the following one-time funded budget items were to be included within thebudget scenarios, with a note that these items do not affect the budget/tax increase:
Full day Exercise for Emergency Response Plan ($5,000) — 2009Oyama Sister City visit ($5,000) — 2009Environmental Charter Implementation ($20,000) — 2009Refurbish Squash Court floors ($8,000) — 2010Relamping Field Lights at the Sports Park ($6,000) — 2011
Moved by Councillor Horn, and,
RECOMMENDED:
1. That council present 7.33% as a basic budget presentation at the public consultationmeeting, asking for public feedback on the budget as a whole, but particularly on theprivate security service in the downtown area and the additional RCMP officer for 2009;and
2. That staff present the composite fire department expenses as a separate line item in thebudget presentation.
CARRIED
AF Late Item #9 — 2009 Budget Planning Schedule09/80
The director of finance referred to the 2009 budget planning schedule and discussionensued around a day for the public budget presentation. It was agreed to hold this meetingprior to the regular meeting of council to be held on Monday, April 6, 2009, starting at 6:00pm.
RESOLUTION TO RISE AND REPORT
Mayor Atebe resumed the chair.
AF Moved by Councillor Stevens, seconded by Councillor Horn and,09/81
RESOLVED: That the Committee of the Whole now rise and report.
CARRIED
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Special Council Meeting (Administration and Finance) Page 11 of 11 207March 9, 2009 & March 12, 2009
3. ADOPTION OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
AF Moved by Councillor Scudder, seconded by Councillor Stewart and,09/82
RESOLVED: That the recommendations of the committee of the whole, as contained initems AF09/70 to AF09/81, be adopted.
CARRIED
4. OTHER BUSINESS There was no further business.
5. ADJOURNMENTMoved by Councillor Stevens, seconded by Councillor Gidda, and
RESOLVED: That the meeting be adjourned.
CARRIED.
The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 pm.
JAMES ATEBE, DENNIS CLARK,MAYOR DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE ADMINISTRATION
G:\finance\minutes\sc 090309-090312.doc
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Minutes of a JOINT MEETING between DISTRICT OF MISSION COUNCIL and CITY OFABBOTSFORD COUNCIL held in the conference room at the municipal hall at 8645 StaveLake Street, Mission, British Columbia, on Tuesday, April 7, 2009 commencing at 3:30 pm.
District of Mission Council Members Present:
Mayor James AtebeCouncillor Terry Gidda (arrived at 4:40 pm)Councillor Paul HornCouncillor Danny PlecasCouncillor Mike ScudderCouncillor Heather Stewart
District of Mission Council Members Absent:
Councillor Jenny Stevens
City of Abbotsford Council Members Present:
Mayor George PearyCouncillor Les BarkmanCouncillor Simon GibsonCouncillor Moe GillCouncillor Lynne HarrisCouncillor Dave LoewenCouncillor Bill MacgregorCouncillor Patricia RossCouncillor John Smith
District of Mission Staff Present:
Glen Robertson, chief administrative officerDennis Clark, director of corporate administrationKen Bjorgaard, director of financeRick Bomhof, director of engineering and public worksDebi Decker, administrative assistant (recording secretary)
City of Abbotsford Staff Present:
Frank Pizzuto, city managerJim Gordon, director of engineeringRuss Mammel, manager of transportationElvis Riou, manager of engineering services
208
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Joint Council Meeting — Mission/Abbotsford
Page 2 0 f 7 209April 7, 2009
1. WELCOMING REMARKS — MAYOR JAMES ATEBE
Mayor Atebe welcomed everyone to the meeting, noting that these meetings are verybeneficial as both municipalities jointly fund a number of infrastructure initiatives a wellas sharing common concerns.
Mayor Peary thanked Mayor Atebe for inviting City of Abbotsford council to meet andagreed that there are many common issues between the two communities. He alsoacknowledged the very long friendship and excellent working relationship betweenAbbotsford and Mission
2. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION STUDY (Mayor Atebe)
Elvis Riou, Abbotsford's manager of engineering services, gave a brief overview of thecurrent regional transportation study that is being funded by the Ministry ofTransportation and the Fraser Valley Regional District. He indicated that the study isexpected to be completed and delivered by January 2010.
After general discussion around the regional transportation study versus local transitplanning and how the delay in receiving the regional study could impede localplanning, it was agreed that direction be given to the Mission Abbotsford TransitCommittee that both District of Mission and City of Abbotsford councils want tocontinue with local transit/transportation planning, and to not wait until the regionaltransportation study has been completed in 2010.
Moved by Councillor Horn, and seconded by Councillor Scudder,
RESOLVED: That each mayor and council send a letter to the BC Transit and theMinister of Trabsportation expressing their desire that the regional planning process isto be a good faith process and that local planning is to be allowed to continue untileach council specifically resolves to make regional planning their first priority.
CARRIED
3. BC TRANSIT BUS EXPANSION
(a) Letter dated March 2, 2009 from Mayor Atebe to Dave Burns, DirectorMunicipal Systems, BC Transit
Rick Bomhof, Mission's director of engineering and public works, informed bothcouncils that the letter provided was for information purposes.
Concerns surrounding BC Transit's decision to postpone transit expansion plans werediscussed. It was noted that a decision from BC Transit is expected by the end ofApril.
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Joint Council Meeting — Mission/Abbotsford
Page 3 of 7 210April 7, 2009
4. ABBOTSFORD/MISSION WATER & SEWER UTILTIES
(a)Grant "Gas Tax" Application(b) Securing Safe and Sustainable Drinking Water — Cannell Lake
Treatment Facility
Mayor Atebe thanked Abbotsford for the comprehensive background report. Hecontinued by suggesting that the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer Commission beable to apply directly for Federal-Provincial infrastructure grants under the "Gas TaxAgreement" as a stand alone entity.
Mayor Peary advised that he was extending invitations to the local Members ofParliament (MP) and the Members of Legislative Assembly (MLA) to tour the CannellLake/Norrish Creek water sheds/systems. He reiterated that the water treatmentproject was the number one priority for Abbotsford.
Mayor Peary also confirmed that he and other City of Abbotsford representatives haddelivered prepared binders of information to a number of ministries, including theMinistry of Community Development. He said that a response is expected from theprovince and that a follow-up will occur after the provincial election has taken place.
General discussion occurred regarding: the Ministry of Health drinking waterrequirements; Stave Lake as a second water source; the water and sewer masterplans; and how First Nation Bands are asking for payment for "consultation" whenthere is a statutory requirement to consult with them. Councillor Ross stated that legaladvice had been sought regarding the First Nation payment for consultation requests,and it was agreed that Abbotsford would request a legal opinion stating thatmunicipalities are not required to pay First Nation Bands for consultation.
5. CENSUS METROPOLITAN AREA
(a) Letter dated July 17, 2006 from Mayor Atebe to the HonourableMaxime Bernier, Statistics Canada
(b) Letter dated February 7, 2007 from Mayor Atebe to the HonourableMaxime Bernier, Statistics Canada
(c) Letter dated March 7, 2007 from the Honourable Maxime Bernier,Statistics Canada
(d) Letter dated January 30, 2009 from Joseph Kresovic, DirectorStatistics Canada
Mayor Atebe commented that Mission had been trying to have the CensusMetropolitan area name changed for a number of years, and that any supportAbbotsford could provide would be helpful and appreciated.
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Joint Council Meeting — Mission/Abbotsford
Page 4 of 7 211April 7, 2009
Moved by Councillor Harris, and seconded by Councillor Loewen,
RESOLVED: That a joint letter be forwarded to the Minister responsible for StatisticsCanada advising the agreement between the two municipalities to have the currentAbbotsford Census Metropolitan Area renamed as "Abbotsford-Mission CensusMetropolitan Area".
CARRIED
Councillor Horn pointed out in the letter from J. Kresovic, Director of Statistics Canada,that the consultation period ends on April 30, 2009, and comments needed to bereceived by that date.
6. REGIONAL HOSPITAL FACILITIES MISSION HEALTH STUDY UPDATED
Glen Robertson, Mission's chief administrative officer noted that a Health Care studyhad been completed by Price Waterhouse and approved by a steering committeecomprised of Fraser Health and council members. He said that as the RegionalHospital District funded the study, the study would be presented to the RegionalHospital District board at their April 28 th meeting prior to it being released to the public.
Councillor Horn said that this study was really a report to explore ways to leveragecapital dollars, obtaining operating dollars, along with policies and procedures.
General discussion continued around the lower per capita funding that the FraserHealth Authority receives versus what the Vancouver Coastal Health Authorityreceives, and that both councils should be lobbying for equitable funding.
7. AIR QUALITY STATION IN MISSION
Mayor Atebe advised that Mission was requesting Abbotsford's support in obtaining anair monitoring system in our community.
Councillor Ross confirmed that the FVRD Air Quality Committee had been trying foryears to obtain more air monitoring systems in the Kent/Mission areas. She informedthe councils that the province pays the monitoring costs (approximately $50,000/year)in other areas of the province, but that the Fraser Valley Regional District pays for thesystems in this area. She advised that a study was being conducted to determine thebest locations and requested that Mission provide a letter that states "We propose asite (location) because (reason)" and forward it to Abbotsford.
Councillor Horn requested that this item be placed on the next regular meeting ofcouncil for Mission.
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Joint Council Meeting — Mission/Abbotsford Page 5 of 7 212• April 7, 2009
Moved by Councillor Horn, and seconded by Councillor Scudder,
RESOLVED: That a letter be written to the appropriate Minister, advising that there isjoint council support by the City of Abbotsford and District of Mission for an airmonitoring station to be placed in the same location as the private weather station (Mt.Mary-Ann/Westminster Abby) in Mission, and that the province provide funding for thisair monitoring station.
CARRIED
8. NEW GAS TAX PROGRAM (Mayor Peary)
Mayor Peary advised that Abbotsford was seeking new revenues other than propertytaxes and is considering instituting a 1 or 2 cent per liter fuel tax that would be usedexclusively for transit and road improvements/upkeep.
He stated that joining Metro Vancouver would raise gas prices by 6 cents per liter, butthat Abbotsford may receive only marginal services from such a decision. He furthernoted that he had made this potential funding source at a recent public councilmeeting, and expected that Abbotsford would proceed with a decision sometime in theearly fall of 2010.
Mayor Atebe agreed that Mission should also consider the fuel tax concurrently withAbbotsford, and that BC Transit could be approached to provide a business case thatcould be submitted with a request to the Minister.
General discussion took place and the following points were brought forward:
a. Governance/constitution — jointly or individually; Mission/Abbotsford Transit
b. If jointly, how will the funds be allocated
c. How will the funds be spent — transit and roads only
d. Strict guidelines need to be agreed upon first — a joint strategy
Moved by Councillor Smith, and seconded by Councillor Horn,
RESOLVED: That the City of Abbotsford and District of Mission councils give theirstaff direction to commence the studies and consultations with BC Transit with respectto having a "2 cent per liter" tax added to all fuel purchased within their municipalities.
CARRIED
File: ADM. COU. REGMinutes 2009
Joint Council Meeting — Mission/Abbotsford
Page 6 of 7 213
April 7, 2009
9. LOCAL CALLING AREA EXPANSION — TELUS PROPOSAL
(a) Letter dated June 30, 2008 from Abbotsford/Mission to CRTC(b) Letter dated August 11, 2008 from Telus
Glen Robertson advised that to-date, no further information has been received fromTelus regarding the local calling area expansion.
Moved by Councillor Horn, and seconded by Councillor Gibson
RESOLVED: That a letter be written to Telus and the Canadian Radio-televisionTelecommunications Commission (CRTC), with a copy to the local Members ofParliament and each councillor, requesting the status of the local telephone callingarea expansion, and to request that consultation with the City of Abbotsford and theDistrict of Mission begin on expanding the local calling area as soon as possible.
CARRIED
10. GUNS AND GANGS IN THE LOWER MAINLANDMayor Peary noted that the recent gang related arrests in Abbotsford were a positivestep, however there is much left to do to address this growing problem. He noted thathe has recently formed a crime [prevention task force, to advise council on a varietyof related topics.
He commented that when Abbotsford police officers worked with the RCMPIntegrated teams, the Province provides funding for the back-fill of the officers. Hedid note, that since uniformed police officers were used during the recentsurveillance, the City was responsible for all costs.
Moved by Councillor Smith, and seconded by Councillor Horn,
RESOLVED: That a joint public letter be written to the Solicitor General, requestingfinancial support to the City of Abbotsford in regards to the recent surveillance ofsuspected gang members, as this situation was not exclusively a City of Abbotsfordissue.
CARRIED
Councillor Scudder referred to the crime prevention task force that had been set-up inAbbotsford, requesting additional information be made available at the next jointcouncil meeting.
11. OTHER BUSINESS
Mayor Peary requested those council members who would be attending the upcoming
File: ADM.COU.REGMinutes 2009
Joint Council Meeting — Mission/Abbotsford Page 7 of 7 214April 7, 2009
Lower Mainland Government Association (LMGA) conference, to speak out and voteagainst allowing free-range chickens in urban areas.
12. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Atebe concluded the meeting by thanking Abbotsford council and staff for thisopportunity to meet and work together.
It was agreed that another joint meeting would be held in September, to be hosted inAbbotsford.
Moved by Councillor Gidda, seconded by Councillor Gibson, and
NEWS RELEASEFor Immediate Release Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General
2009PS SG0041-000675April 6, 2009
NEW RULES OF THE ROAD PROTECT EMERGENCY WORKERS' SAFETY
VANCOUVER — The Province will enhance the safety of emergency workers by requiring drivers toslow down and move over when passing parked emergency vehicles that have their lights flashing,Minister of Public Safety and Solicitor General John van Dongen and Transportation and InfrastructureMinister Kevin Falcon announced today.
"We're doing this for emergency workers who are out there, working to save lives on our roadsin all kinds of conditions," said van Dongen. "Too often, these workers face near-misses, injury oreven death — directly due to the carelessness of passing drivers."
"Between 2001 and 2007, 21 emergency workers were injured or killed on B.C. roads — 12 ofthem at the roadside," said Falcon. "We're joining other jurisdictions by fining those who don't slowdown and, where they safely can, move over, so emergency workers don't pay with their lives fordoing their jobs."
Beginning June 1, drivers must slow to 70 km/h on highways where the speed limit is 80 km/hor higher, and to 40 km/h where the limit is below 80 km/h, when approaching a stopped emergencyvehicle that has its lights flashing. If there is another lane going in the same direction, drivers must alsomove into that lane if it is safe to do so.
"My colleagues and I want motorists to consider not only the new penalty, but the safety of allemergency workers as they drive past an incident," said Supt. Norm Gaumont, RCMP B.C. TrafficServices. "In situations where every second counts, everyone benefits from safe, focused emergencyservices personnel."
The requirements will apply to drivers passing police, fire, ambulance and towing vehicles, aswell as vehicles used by commercial vehicle safety and enforcement personnel, passenger vehicleinspectors. conservation officers, park rangers, and special provincial constables employed in theMinistry of Forests and Range.
2Those found in contravention will face a fine and three penalty points against their licence. The
fine, including a 15 per cent victim surcharge, is $148 if paid within 30 days or $173 thereafter.Currently, five provinces and 40 U.S. states have similar requirements. An existing penalty remains inplace for failing to yield to a moving emergency vehicle.
-30-1 backgrounder(s) attached.
Media Cindy Rosecontact: Media Relations
Ministry of Public Safety and SolicitorGeneral250 356-6961
For more information on government services or to subscribe to the Province's news feeds using RSS,visit the Province's website at wwm7.gov.bc.ca.
216
BRITISHCOLUMBIA
Besz Face on Earth
BACKGROUNDER2009PSSG0041-000675
Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor GeneralApril 6, 2009
REGULATION PROTECTS EMERGENCY WORKERS' SAFETY
A new regulation under the Motor Vehicle Act will better protect the safety of police officers, fire andambulance personnel tow truck operators, special provincial constables, conservation officers and park rangerswho are working outside their emergency vehicles on B.C. roads.
The act already requires drivers to yield the right of way to approaching emergency vehicles that have theirlights and siren on. Drivers who fail to yield to a moving emergency vehicle face a fine and three penalty points.The fine, including a 15 per cent victim surcharge, is $84 if paid within 30 days or $109 if paid thereafter.
Beginning June 1, the act will also require drivers to slow to prescribed maximum speeds when approaching,from either direction, a stopped emergency vehicle that's on or beside an undivided highway and has its lightsflashing. (If the highway is divided — for example, by a concrete median — vehicles travelling in the oppositedirection are not required to slow.) In addition, drivers travelling in a lane containing or adjacent to a stoppedemergency vehicle must move into another lane to pass, if it is safe to do so and a police officer has not directedthem to do otherwise. This will give emergency workers as much space as possible.
The penalty for not slowing to the designated speed, not moving over if it is safe to do so, or both, will be a fineand three penalty points. The higher fine for the new infraction reflects the greater risk of injury or death foremergency personnel who may be working outside their vehicle.
This change was requested and is strongly supported by many stakeholders, who were consulted over more thantwo years. They include the Office of the Fire Commissioner and Fire Chiefs' Association of B.C., BCAmbulance Service, BC Association of Chiefs of Police, ICBC, BCAA, the Ministry of Transportation'sCommercial Vehicle Safety Enforcement Branch and the Police Services Branch, Ministry of Public Safety andSolicitor General.
To build driver awareness of the new regulation, the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure has designeda strategy to identify the best locations for "slow down, move over" signs. Existing electronic signs thatcurrently display road conditions may also be used. Five other provinces have passed "slow down, move over"laws. Most don't specify a speed, but require drivers to slow and proceed with caution.
-30-
Media Cindy Rosecontact: Media Relations
Ministry of Public Safety and SolicitorGeneral250 356-6961
For more information on government services or to subscribe to the Province's news feeds using RSS,visit the Province's website at WWW.20V.bc.ca .
RE: BC Utilities Commission Long-term Electricity Inquiry
Under the recently amended Utilities Commission Act, the British Columbia Utilities Commission (Commission) is directedto conduct an inquiry to make determinations with respect to British Columbia's infrastructure and capacity needs forelectricity transmission. On December 11, 2008, the Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources issued Termsof Reference to the Commission for the inquiry. On March 24, 2009, the Commission issued an Order launching theLong-term Electricity Transmission Inquiry (Inquiry).
As the primary transmission planner in the province, BCTC is excited by the opportunity to work together with BritishColumbians as we look ahead 30 years — to the beginning of 2040 — to determine our province's long-term transmissionneeds. As a first step, the Commission will host a workshop on April 17 th on the Terms of Reference and Inquiry issuesand processes. The workshop will be followed by an initial Procedural Conference on April 27 th to discuss Inquiry timingand procedures. For your convenience, a copy of the Commission's Notice of Preliminary Workshop and ProceduralConference is enclosed.
During the Inquiry, the Commission will make assessments on a wide range of electricity related topics including:
• assessment of generation resource potential in the province by region;• projected demand for electricity (including potential implications of climate change and fuel switching);• economic development opportunities; and• opportunities for trade in electric power with neighbouring jurisdictions.
Based on this information, BCTC will provide transmission planning expertise to assist the Commission in determiningtransmission capacity and infrastructure needs.
To learn more about BCTC, please visit our website at www.bctc.com . For additional information on the Inquiry, to viewthe Terms of Reference or to learn about BCTC's transmission planning activities, please visit BCTC's new websitewww.bctransmission2040.ca . In the meantime, if you have any questions about BCTC's long-term planning activities,please call 604.699.7456 or toll-free 1.866.647.3334.
District of MissionATTENTION: Dennis Clark - Director of Corporate Administration8645 Stave Lake StreetMission, BCV2V 4L9
RE: District of Mission Arts Council request for cap of Utilities.
Dear Mr. Clark,
On behalf of the Mission Arts Council, I would like to thank you for your continued supportand your guidance in the matters of taxes, zoning and fee for service inquiries from the ArtsCouncil.
At this time I would like to request that Council approve a cap on our Municipal Utility taxes(water, sewer, garbage and recycling) at the 2005 rate. This would assist in our ability tomaintain our tenancy at the Center located at 33529 1" Ave.
If you have further questions, please feel free to contact me @ 604-826-0029, Mondaythrough Friday 9 am to 2 pm. I thank you in advance fro this consideration, and lookforward to your reply.
With regards,
Nancy ArcandExecutive DirectorMission Arts Council
