· 2020-02-27 · regular council meeting agenda march 2, 2020 at 6:00 p.m. council chambers 8645...

Regular Council Meeting Agenda

March 2, 2020 at 6:00 p.m.

Council Chambers

8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA

3. DELEGATIONS

(a) H.S. Kenny Braich and Bobby Braich

Re: Request to Rename Commercial Street

Page 8

4. PUBLIC HEARINGS

(a) Public Hearing Notice for March 2, 2020

For reference

Page 9

(b) (i) Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5914-2020

LUC18-022 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to terminate Land Use Contract 477-1976 for multiple properties on Badger Avenue, Boxer Court, Bobcat Drive, Bighorn Terrace, and Antelope Avenue

(ii) Amending Bylaw 5915-2020-5050(371)

LUC18-022 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to rezone property at multiple addresses on Badger Avenue, Boxer Court, Bobcat Drive, Bighorn Terrace, and Antelope Avenue from Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone

Copy of Notice to Owner/Occupant and previous staff report included as

background information

1

(c) (i) Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5916-2020

LUC18-028 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to terminate Land Use Contract 276-1973 for the property at 7436 Stave Lake Street

(ii) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5917-2020-5050(372)

LUC18-028 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to rezone the property at 7436 Stave Lake Street from Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone

Copy of Notice to Owner/Occupant and previous staff report included as

background information

Page 54

5. RESOLUTION TO RESOLVE INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

1

Regular Council Agenda March 2, 2020

6. CORPORATE ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE

(a) Request to Rename Commercial Street

RECOMMENDATION: Council consider and resolve:

That the name “Herman S. Braich” be added to Table 1: Pioneers and

Long Time Residents of Mission of the District’s Street Naming Policy

STR.28(C) with specific direction to reserve the name for a prominent

street in Mission’s waterfront area as the area redevelops through

comprehensive planning.

Page 99

7. PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURE

(a) Cycling Infrastructure in Mission

This report is provided for information purposes only. No staff

recommendation accompanies this report and Council action is not

required.

Page 105

(b) New Horizons Lawn Bowling Society Lease Renewal


That the Lease and Site License between the New Horizons Lawn

Bowling Society and the District of Mission be approved and the

Mayor and Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the License.

Page 122

(c) Heritage Park Centre Clarke Theatre and Community Gym - Funding

RECOMMENDATIONS: Council consider and resolve:

1. That the Clarke Theatre and Community Gymnasium Memorandum

of Understanding (MOU), as provided in the Director of Parks,

Recreation and Culture’s report dated March 2, 2020, be approved

and the Mayor and Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the

MOU;

2. That a $115,000 increase to the annual amount provided to the

Mission Public School District to offset the operating costs of the

Clarke Theatre and the community gym be approved;

3. That a one-time contribution of $15,595 toward the cost of the

replacement sound board for the Theatre be approved;

4. That the $115,000 increase for 2020 be funded from the Financial

Stabilization Reserve;

5. That the $115,000 increase for 2021 be funded from annual

property tax revenue;

6. That the $15,595 contribution for the sound board be funded from

the Gaming Reserve; and

7. That the Financial Plan be adjusted accordingly.

Page 136

2


(d) Public Art Policy and Public Art Program


1. That the current Public Art Policy – ADM.10(C) be repealed and

replaced with the revised Public Art Policy attached to the Deputy

Director of Parks, Recreation and Culture’s report dated

March 2, 2020; and

2. That LAN.40(C) Financial Contributions for Community Amenities

Policy be amended to include Public Art as a listed project.

Page 140

8. ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS

(a) Imposition of Latecomer Charges on Stave Lake Street


1. That the owner of 8208 Stave Lake Street, 33996, 34038, and

34048 Parr Avenue that is to be subdivided or developed provide

the excess and/or extended services shown on Attachment A,

Exhibit 1 in the report from the Engineering Technologist I –

Development dated March 2, 2020 (the Report);

2. That the cost to provide the excess and/or extended services shown

on Attachment A, Exhibit 1 of the Report, in whole or in part, is

considered excessive, and that the cost of providing these services

shall be paid for by the owner of the land being subdivided or

developed;

3. That Latecomer Charges be imposed for excess and/or extended

services, as shown on Attachment A, Exhibit 1 of the Report, which

are required to be installed as part of the referenced

Subdivision/Development project;

4. That Latecomer Charges will be imposed on the parcels listed in

Attachment A, Exhibits 6 and 8 of the Report in the amounts shown;

and

5. That the Mayor and Corporate Officer be authorized to enter into a

Latecomer Agreement with the owner of the land that is being

developed.

Page 145

9. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

(a) Universal Bus Pass (U-pass) Extension Agreement


That the Mayor and Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the

extension to the Universal Bus Pass (U-pass) Agreement, included as

Attachment A in the Manager of Long Range Planning and Special

Projects’ report dated March 2, 2020.

Page 160

3


(b) Rezoning Application (R19-019) - 7607 Wren Street

This report details the rezoning application for the property located at

7607 Wren Street and identifies the necessary amendment to the

Zoning Bylaw.

Staff support the application moving forward and, as such, have listed

Zoning Amending Bylaw 5918-2020-5050(373) under the “Bylaws for

Consideration” section of the Council Agenda.

Subject to Council’s approval, a Public Hearing will be scheduled for

March 16, 2020.

Page 165

(c) Rezoning Application (R18-037) - 7632 Hurd Street

This report details the rezoning application to rezone the property located

at 7632 Hurd Street from the Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to the

Multiple Family 52 Rowhouse (MR52) Zone and identifies the necessary

amendment to the Zoning Bylaw.

Staff support the application moving forward and, as such, have listed

Zoning Amending Bylaw 5922-2020-5050(375) under the “Bylaws for

Consideration” section of the agenda.

Subject to Council’s approval, a Public Hearing will be scheduled for

March 16, 2020.

Page 171

(d) Rescind Rezoning Application (R19-031) - 11546 and 11596

Dewdney Trunk Road

This report details the applicant’s request to close the development

application to rezone 11546 and 11596 Dewdney Trunk Road to the

Industrial Resource Extraction and Processing (INRP) Zone and to

discontinue the Repeal Bylaw of Land Use Contract 714-1978 under

Section 546 of the Local Government Act.

Zoning Amending Bylaw 5885-2019-5050(361) and Land Use Contract

Repeal Bylaw 5884-2019 are currently sitting at second reading, and all

readings need to be rescinded to close the file. Staff have listed the

bylaws under the “Bylaws for Consideration” section of the Council

agenda.

Page 189

(e) Development Variance Application (DV19-006) –

13-11540 Glacier Drive

This report details the development variance permit application seeking

to vary the permitted retaining wall height for the property located at

13-11540 Glacier Drive from 1.20 m (3.9 ft) to 2.3 m (7.55 ft) and

identifies the necessary variance to the Zoning Bylaw.

Development Variance Permit DV19-006 has been listed for approval

under the “Permits for Consideration” section of the Council agenda.

Page 195

10. RESOLUTION TO RISE AND REPORT

4


11. ADOPTION OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT

12. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MINUTES

RESOLUTION: That the following item be received as information:

(a) Cultural Resources Commission meeting minutes – December 18, 2019 Page 201

13. COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APPROVAL

RESOLUTION: That the following minutes be adopted:

(a) Regular Council Meeting – February 18, 2020 Page 204

(b) Special Council Meeting (for the purpose of going into a closed meeting)

– February 25, 2020

Page 215

14. BYLAWS FOR CONSIDERATION

(a) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5918-2020-5050(373)

R19-019 (Dhanju) – a bylaw to rezone property at 7607 Wren

Street from Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to

Urban Residential 558 Secondary Dwelling (R558s) Zone

See “Development Services” Section 9(b)

First and Second

Readings

Page 216

(b) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5922-2020-5050(375)

R18-037 (RAM Engineering) – a bylaw to rezone property at

7632 Hurd Street from Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to

Multiple Family 52 Rowhouse (MR52) Zone

See “Development Services” Section 9(c)

First and Second

Readings

Page 217

(c) Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5884-2019

R19-031 (Dean) – a bylaw to terminate Land Use Contract

714-1978 for the property at 11546 Dewdney Trunk Road

See “Development Services” Section 9(d)

Rescind First and

Second Readings

Page 218

(d) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5885-2019-5050(361)

R19-031 (Dean) – a bylaw to rezone the properties at 11546 and

11596 Dewdney Trunk Road from Industrial Resource Extraction

(INR) Zone to Industrial Resource Extraction and Processing

(INRP) Zone

See “Development Services” Section 9(d)

Rescind First and

Second Readings

Page 219

(e) Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5914-2020

LUC18-022 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to terminate Land Use

Contract 477-1976 for multiple properties on Badger Avenue,

Boxer Court, Bobcat Drive, Bighorn Terrace, and Antelope

Avenue

See “Public Hearings” Section 4(b)

Third Reading

Page 220

5


(f) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5915-2020-5050(371)

LUC18-022 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to rezone property at

multiple addresses on Badger Avenue, Boxer Court, Bobcat

Drive, Bighorn Terrace, and Antelope Avenue from

Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to Residential Two Unit

(RT465) Zone

See “Public Hearings” Section 4(b)

Third Reading

Page 223

(g) Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5916-2020


Contract 276-1973 for the property at 7436 Stave Lake Street

See “Public Hearings” Section 4(c)

Third Reading

Page 226

(h) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5917-2020-5050(372)

LUC18-028 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to rezone the property

at 7436 Stave Lake Street from Urban Residential 558 (R558)

Zone to Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone

See “Public Hearings” Section 4(c)

Third Reading

Page 230

(i) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5844-2019-5050(346)

R18-057 (Lacey Developments) – a bylaw to rezone property at

31124 Greenwood Drive from Rural Residential 7 (RR7) Zone to

Rural Residential 7 Secondary Dwelling (RR7s) Zone

Excerpt from Public Hearing minutes and previous staff report

included as background information

Adoption

Page 234

(j) Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5908-2020


Contract 628-1977 for the properties at 8481, 8515, 8523, 8531,

8536, 8528, and 32282 Terris Street

Adoption

Page 245

(k) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5909-2020-5050(369)

LUC18-025 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to rezone the

properties at 8481, 8515, 8523, 8531, 8536, 8528, and 32282

Terris Street from Rural Residential 7 (RR7) Zone to Suburban 36

(S36) Zone

Adoption

Page 247

(l) Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5910-2020


Contract 378-1974 for the property at 7581 Cedar Street

Adoption

Page 249

(m) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5911-2020-5050(370)

LUC18-021 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to rezone property at

7581 Cedar Street from Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone to

Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone

Adoption

Page 252

6


(n) 2019 to 2023 Financial Plan Amending Bylaw

5913-2020-5826(1)

A bylaw to amend 2019 to 2023 Financial Plan Bylaw 5826-2019

to include the Council approved 2019 budget amendments.

Adoption

Page 255

15. PERMITS FOR CONSIDERATION

(a) Development Variance Application DV19-006

(13-11540 Glacier Drive)

Development Permit to vary Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009, as amended, in

respect to the above-noted property.

See “Development Services” Section 9(e)

Page 261

16. NEW/OTHER BUSINESS

17. NOTICES OF MOTION

That staff prepare a report for the March 16 Regular Council Meeting summarizing how food trucks have been licensed within the District to date and proposed amendments to the Business Licence Bylaw to allow short-term or single-event food truck licenses.

18. QUESTION PERIOD

19. ADJOURNMENT

7

Delegation Request FormThe deadline for submission is by 4:00 p.m. on Friday, 10 days in advance of theCouncil Meeting.

Preferred MeetingDate

Alternative MeetingDate

Please refer to the Council Meeting Schedule on the District's Website for dates of Council Meetings, locatedat mission.ca/council-meeting-schedule.

Name/Title:

Organization beingRepresented:

Subject of thePresentation:

Action Requested:

Have you been incontact with DistrictStaff/Councilregarding yourmatter of interest?

If yes, what was theresult?

Background Material- Power Point?

File Upload

Background Material- Handout?

Each Delegation to Council is limited to ten (10) minutes. The District of Mission reserves the right to refuse any delegation request.If your request is approved, you will be provided with further details including the meeting time, date and what specificCommittee Meeting you will attend.Presenter(s) are limited to discussing only the above topic during the delegation.

Please note: This form will be published and made available for public viewing. Council meetings arerecorded and broadcast live on our website. A copy of the agenda, video recording, and written minutes ofthe meeting will be posted to our website. Presenters and presentations will form part of the public record.

Personal information contained on this form is collected under the authority of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, and will be used for the

purpose of providing correspondence relating to matters before Council.

Questions regarding collection of the information on this form may be directed to the Corporate Officer, 8645Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC V2V 4L9.

03/02/2020

03/02/2020

Individual(s) making the presentation

H.S. Kenny Braich

The Braich Group

Recognizing the contributions of Herman Singh Braich Sr.

Renaming Commercial St. in honour of Herman Singh Braich Sr.

Yes No

Delegation to Council.

Yes NoYour PowerPoint Presentation is required to be attached to this form OR submitted to [email protected] nolater than 12:00 PM on the Friday prior to the meeting.

Yes No

8

http://mission.ca/council-meeting-schedule

DISTRICT OF MISSION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

Pursuant to the provisions of Sections 464 and 466 of the Local Government Act, a Public Hearing will take place in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC at 6:00 pm on Monday, March 2, 2020 to consider the following proposed bylaws:

1. DISTRICT OF MISSION LAND USE CONTRACT REPEAL BYLAW 5914-2020 (LUC18-022 – DISTRICT OF MISSION)

The purpose of the Bylaw is to discharge Land Use Contract No. 477-1976 registered to the properties located at addresses listed below (shown on the maps below).

Addresses (Total 40):

32552, 32554, 32560, 32562, 32570, 32572, 32580, 32582, 32597, 32599, 32613, 32615, 32643, 32645, 32694, 32696, 32623, 32635 Bobcat Drive

32593, 32595, 32607, 32609, 32617, 32619, 32625, 32627 Badger Avenue

8127, 8129, 8131, 8133, 8134, 8132, 8128, 8126 Bighorn Terrace

8045, 8043, 32600, 32602 Antelope Avenue

8159, 8161 Boxer Court

2. DISTRICT OF MISSION ZONING AMENDING BYLAW 5915-2020-5050(371) (LUC18-022 – DISTRICT OF MISSION)

The purpose of the Bylaw is to rezone the subject properties located at addresses listed below (shown on the maps below) from the Urban Residential (R558) 558 Zone to the Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone.

Addresses (Total 38):

32552, 32554, 32560, 32562, 32570, 32572, 32580, 32582, 32597, 32599, 32613, 32615, 32643, 32645, 32694, 32696 Bobcat Drive

32593, 32595, 32607, 32609, 32617, 32619, 32625, 32627 Badger Avenue

8127, 8129, 8131, 8133, 8134, 8132, 8128, 8126 Bighorn Terrace

8045, 8043, 32600, 32602 Antelope Avenue

8159, 8161 Boxer Court

Note: There are no proposed changes to the existing buildings or land use.

9

3. DISTRICT OF MISSION LAND USE CONTRACT REPEAL BYLAW 5916-2020 (LUC18-028 – DISTRICT OF MISSION)

The purpose of the Bylaw is to discharge Land Use Contract No. 276-1973 registered to the property located at 7436 Stave Lake Street (shown on the maps below).

4. DISTRICT OF MISSION ZONING AMENDING BYLAW 5917-2020-5050(372)

(LUC18-028 – DISTRICT OF MISSION)

The purpose of the Bylaw is to rezone the subject property located at 7436 Stave Lake Street (shown on the maps below) from the Urban Residential (R558) 558 Zone to the Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone.


Copies of the proposed bylaws and reports relevant to these bylaws may be inspected at the Municipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC, Monday to Friday, excluding statutory holidays, from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm, from Friday, February 21, 2020 to Monday, March 2, 2020. The information is also available on our website at mission.ca by searching “Public Hearing Information”. For further information regarding these bylaws, please contact the Development Services Department at (604) 820-3748.

At the Public Hearing, persons who believe that their interest in property is affected by these proposed bylaws will have the opportunity to be heard.

Should you have any comments or concerns you wish to convey to Council and you cannot attend the meeting, please submit in writing to the Corporate Officer by 4:00 pm on Friday, February 28, 2020.

You may forward your submission by:

• Mailing or delivering to the Corporate Officer’s Office, P.O. Box 20, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC, V2V 4L9

• Faxing: 604-826-1363 (Attn: Corporate Officer)

• E-mail: [email protected] with PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS as the subject line

Please note: Submissions that are subject of a public hearing, public meeting or other public processes will be included, in their entirety, in the public information package and will form part of the public record. Council shall not receive further information or submissions after the conclusion of the Public Hearing.

Following the Public Hearing portion of the meeting, Council may consider advancing bylaws forward for additional readings.

Jennifer Russell Corporate Officer Dated at Mission, BC this 19th day of February, 2020.

10

http://www.mission.ca/

mailto:[email protected]

7 3 3 7 W e l t o n S t r e e t , M i s s i o n , B C V 2 V 3 X 1 Phone 604-820-3748 Fax 604-826-7951 & 604-820-3715 Web: mission.ca E-mail: [email protected]

D E V E L O P M E N T S E R V I C E S P L A N N I N G D I V I S I O N

File: 08-3310-18-P2018-005 February 19, 2020 Dear Owner/Occupant:

Re: Public Hearing Notification

Please note the following public hearing does not propose any changes to the existing buildings. The proposed bylaw and public hearing process are required to remove an old bylaw (Land Use Contract 477-1976) and to apply a current zone within the Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 that matches to the greatest extent possible. No changes to the ownership, occupancy or structure of the buildings are required or proposed by this application. As a property owner or neighbouring resident to the subject property located at the addresses listed below, you are invited to attend a Public Hearing at 6:00 pm on Monday, March 2, 2020 and make known any comments that you may have about the proposed bylaws. The Public Hearing will be held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC. The following is an excerpt from the Public Hearing Notice: 1. DISTRICT OF MISSION LAND USE CONTRACT REPEAL BYLAW 5914-2020

(LUC18-022 – DISTRICT OF MISSION) The purpose of the Bylaw is to discharge Land Use Contract No. 477-1976 registered to the properties located at addresses listed below (shown on the maps below). Addresses (Total 40):

32552, 32554, 32560, 32562, 32570, 32572, 32580, 32582, 32597, 32599, 32613, 32615, 32643, 32645, 32694, 32696, 32623, 32635 Bobcat Drive

32593, 32595, 32607, 32609, 32617, 32619, 32625, 32627 Badger Avenue 8127, 8129, 8131, 8133, 8134, 8132, 8128, 8126 Bighorn Terrace 8045, 8043, 32600, 32602 Antelope Avenue 8159, 8161 Boxer Court

11


2


2. DISTRICT OF MISSION ZONING AMENDING BYLAW 5915-2020-5050(371)

(LUC18-022 – DISTRICT OF MISSION) The purpose of the Bylaw is to rezone the subject properties located at addresses listed below (shown on the maps below) from the Urban Residential (R558) 558 Zone to the Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone.

Addresses (Total 38): 32552, 32554, 32560, 32562, 32570, 32572, 32580, 32582, 32597, 32599, 32613, 32615, 32643, 32645, 32694, 32696 Bobcat Drive

32593, 32595, 32607, 32609, 32617, 32619, 32625, 32627 Badger Avenue 8127, 8129, 8131, 8133, 8134, 8132, 8128, 8126 Bighorn Terrace 8045, 8043, 32600, 32602 Antelope Avenue 8159, 8161 Boxer Court


12


3


A copy of the proposed bylaws and report relevant to these bylaws may be inspected at the Municipal Hall, Monday to Friday, excluding statutory holidays, from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm, from Friday, February 21, 2020 to Monday, March 2, 2020. The information is also available on our website at mission.ca by searching “Public Hearing Information”. If you are unable to attend the Public Hearing, you may send a written submission, including your name and address, to the attention of Jennifer Russell, Corporate Officer, or email [email protected] by 4:00 pm on the Friday preceding the date of the Public Hearing. All submissions will form part of the record of the Hearing. For further information on Land Use Contracts is also available on our website at mission.ca/luc, or by searching “LUC” or “Land Use Contracts”. If you require additional information, please contact the Development Services Department at (604) 820-3748 or email [email protected].

Yours truly,

Ken Bourdeau Manager of Long Range Planning

13






Development Services Staff Report

STAFF REPORT Page 1 of 11

File: 08-3310-18 P2018-005 LUC18-022

DATE:

TO:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

ATTACHMENTS:

February 18, 2020

Chief Administrative Officer

Ken Bourdeau, Manager of Long Range Planning and Special Projects

Termination of Land Use Contracts 477-1976 and Rezoning of the Properties Located on Boxer Court, Bobcat Drive, Bighorn Terrace and Antelope Avenue

A – Location Map

B – Bill 17, 2014

C – Official Community Plan (OCP) Urban Residential

D – Land Use Contracts 477-1976

E – Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone

CIVIC ADDRESS: Boxer Court, Bobcat Drive, Bighorn Terrace and Antelope Avenue

APPLICANT: District of Mission under the authority of Section 548 of the Local Government Act (LGA)

OCP: Urban Residential

LAND USE CONTRACTS: 477-1976

UNDERLYING ZONING: Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone

PROPOSED ZONING: Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone

LOCATION: Mission Core

14


OVERVIEW AND STAFF COMMENTS:

This report details the District-initiated development application to terminate Land Use Contract 477-1976 and to rezone the properties as identified in Attachment A of this report, and identifies the necessary amendments to the Zoning Bylaw which will come into effect one year plus one day after Final Adoption of the Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw and Rezoning.

Staff support the application moving forward and as such have listed Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5914-2020 and Zoning Amending Bylaw 5915-2020-5050(371) under the “Bylaws for Consideration” section of the agenda.

Subject to Council’s approval, a Public Hearing will be scheduled for March 2, 2020.

BACKGROUND:

The Land Use Contract (LUC) was a form of development approval permitted by the Province for a short period of time during the 1970’s. An LUC typically included information related to zoning, development control and engineering servicing all contained within one document. As a result, areas located within an LUC became the governing regulations related to a property rather than the Zoning Bylaw. The legislation authorizing LUCs was repealed in 1978; however, LUCs approved prior to this date remain in force. Under the 1978 legislation, an amendment or termination of an LUC required the approval of both the property owner and District.

In May 2014, the Province passed Bill 17, 2014 (Attachment B), an amendment to the Local Government Act (LGA) that:

• terminates all LUCs in the province on June 30, 2024;

• directs municipalities to ensure zoning is in place on the subject properties prior to June 30, 2022;

• authorizes municipalities to terminate LUCs without property owner permission, should they choose to do so;

• requires local governments to give written notice of LUC termination, when LUCs are terminated early or in advance of the sunset date of June 30, 2024;

• extends non-conforming status to land, buildings and structures that are on land subject to a LUC after LUCs are terminated;

• provides the District’s Board of Variance (BoV) with new authority to extend the date set in early termination bylaws for reasons of hardship, up to the sunset date of June 30, 2024; and

• extends the no compensation payable provision to land use decisions related to properties subject to a LUC.

An LUC is a contract between a property owner and a municipality to address the use and development rights related to a property. The regulations in a LUC are similar to those found within a Zoning Bylaw, except that the LUC is registered to title and may contain other items typically not found within a zoning bylaw, such as engineering servicing standards and development cost charges.

Section 533 of the LGA provides legal non-conforming status to all properties subject to a land use contract at time of expiry of the land use contract (termination date set by the province or termination date set by a District bylaw) provided the land, building or other structure has been lawfully used and constructed.

Direction provided by Council on November 20, 2017 states “where possible, apply a zone to the subject property that provides similar land use rights that exist in the LUC” and “[for staff] to recommend a zone in compliance with the Official Community Plan”.

15


On November 20, 2017, Council directed staff to bring forward bylaws which would terminate LUCs within the District prior to the June 30, 2022 deadline. As a result, staff have brought forward a termination bylaw and associated Zoning Amending Bylaw in accordance with the approved process.

PLANNING ANALYSIS:

Staff have reviewed LUC 477-1976, the Official Community Plan (OCP) and Zoning Bylaw in relation to the subject property.

Current Land Use

The subject properties identified in Attachment A are currently occupied by fee-simple duplexes. Staff recommend that the properties be rezoned to the Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone.

The existing underlying zone of the subject properties is Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone.

Official Community Plan

The subject properties are designated Urban Residential (Attachment C) in the OCP. This designation envisions single detached residential buildings with provision for accessory buildings with home occupations and live work units. Provided certain conditions are met, the OCP also envisions Infill development in the form of duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes.

Land Use Contract

LUC 477-1976 (Attachment D), approved on May 3, 1976, permits the “Construction of duplex buildings to zero lot line requirements so that one-half of the duplex building only shall in each case be situated on an individual lot.”

Comparison

A comparison of the regulations contained within the LUC and Zoning Bylaw is typically provided for each LUC; however, for LUC 477-1976 it’s not possible to provide this comparison due to the ambiguous nature of the LUC. As highlighted in previous reports to Council, the primary reason for the termination of LUCs was to eliminate this ambiguity. In the case of LUC 477-1976:

• there is a lack of definitions to define key terms needed to interrupt the LUC;

• there are empty/blank fields where regulations should be listed;

• it refers to Bylaws no longer in effect;

• the District no longer has referenced plans and drawings that contained many of the regulations;

• ambiguously worded statements within the LUC that make it unclear exactly what was approved; and

• there were two discrepancies between District and Land Titles Office (LTO) records. In the case of 8159 Boxer Court and 32552 Bobcat Drive, District mapping did not indicate that a LUC was registered to title; however, after reviewing LTO data it shows that both of these properties are in fact regulated through LUC 477-1976. As a result, staff have included these properties as part of the early termination process.

Considering this information, staff believe that allowing these properties to be regulated by the Zoning Bylaw rather than by a LUC will improve the regulatory certainty for these properties. The proposed Residential Two Unit (RT465) zone is shown in Attachment E.

16


RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommend approval of Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5914-2020 and Zoning Amending Bylaw 5915-2020-5050(371) because:

• the existing development as identified in Attachment A is currently occupied by Duplex development. This type of development is generally in conformance with the OCP designation of Urban Residential. An OCP amendment is not required;

• the existing R558 Zone does not provide similar permitted uses to those found in LUC 477-1976;

BOARD OF VARIANCE (BoV):

If the property owner feels that the termination of the LUC will cause undue financial hardship, the property owner has the right to appeal the in-effect date of the Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw to the District’s Board of Variance (BoV). The BoV may extend the in-effect date of the Bylaw up to June 30, 2024; however, the BoV does not have the authority to over-turn Council’s decision to terminate the LUC or rezone the property.

COMMUNICATION:

Public Information Meeting

The Planning Division held a public information meeting on November 22, 2018 to gather feedback regarding LUCs. The purpose of the meeting was twofold: to inform affected property owners of the end to LUCs and to consult with affected property owners on the underlying zoning.

Property owners and occupiers directly affected by LUC 477-1976 were sent a notification letter inviting them to the meeting. At the public information meeting, staff identified multiple property owners and/or occupiers that attended the meeting. A number of discussions occurred between the owners, occupiers and staff; however, staff did not receive any written comments.

Due to a discrepancy between District and LTO records, property owners and occupiers of 8159 Boxer Court and 32552 Bobcat Drive were not notified of the November, 2018 public information meeting. When Staff discovered the error, notices were sent advising them of the process and providing them an opportunity to discuss the matter further with Staff. As of the writing of this report, no feedback has been received.

Website Communications

The District’s website provides general information on the LUC process. This includes:

• background & frequently asked questions (FAQs);

• Bill 17, 2014;

• copy of the November 20, 2017 staff report; and

• copy of all LUCs.

Policy LAN.50 - Pre-Public Hearing Information Packages

A pre-public hearing information package will be prepared to include copies of all applicable documents and will be made available online and at Municipal Hall for public viewing.

Land Use Application Procedures and Fees Bylaw 3612-2003

A Notice of Public Hearing will be prepared in accordance with Bylaw 3612-2003 and the LGA.

17


INFORMATIONAL NOTES / REQUIREMENT PRIOR TO FINAL READING:

The final reading of the amending bylaws will be held until the following has been satisfied:

1. The in-effect date of Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5914-2020 and Zoning Amending Bylaw 5915-2020-5050(371) will be one year plus one day from the final adoption date of the Bylaw. After application by an affected property owner, the BoV may extend the in-effect date of the Bylaw up to June 30, 2024.

SIGN-OFFS:


Reviewed by: Rob Publow, Manager of Planning

Comment from Chief Administrative Officer:

Reviewed.

18


Attachment A

Neighbourhood Overview

19


Attachment A

Addresses

20


Attachment B

Bulletin

Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2014 (Bill 17, 2014)

Amendments to Local Government Act, Community Charter and Vancouver Charter are now in force (as of the date of Royal Assent-May 29, 2014)

Bill 17, 2014, the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2014 includes amendments to streamline local and provincial government land use planning and development approvals, modernize outdated legislative tools and provide greater certainty and transparency for residents and those who develop and build within communities. Specifically, Bill 17 introduced amendments to the Local Government Act, Community Charter and Vancouver Charter to remove unnecessary ministerial approvals for certain land use planning and development bylaws; allow modern land use policies and practices to replace land use contracts; and, protect developers from increases in development cost charges (DCC) (or development cost levies (DCL) in the City of Vancouver) for 12 months after DCC/DCL rate increases are made, where a rezoning or development permit application is in process.

Amendments: Amendments to the Local Government Act, Community Charter and Vancouver Charter:

Removing the requirement for Ministerial approval for Regional District (RD) land use bylaws

The following amendments remove the requirement for Ministerial approval of certain RD land use

bylaws, streamlining the RD bylaw approval process. They also broaden the authority of the Minister to

develop provincial policy guidelines in relation to RD land use bylaws, providing an opportunity to

provide clarity regarding provincial interests and support the appropriate notification and referral of

regional district bylaws to Provincial ministries and agencies.

• Removes requirement for Ministerial approval of RD OCP, zoning, subdivision servicing and temporary use bylaws (LGA s. 882, 913, 921, 930, 938).

• Provides discretionary authority for the Minister to require approval of RD bylaws (LGA s. 874.1).

• Broadens the existing authority of the Minister to develop provincial policy guidelines in relation to RD zoning, subdivision servicing and temporary use bylaws (LGA s.873.2).

• Removes the requirement for the minister responsible for the Transportation Act to approve subdivision servicing bylaws, if a regional district provides the subdivision approving officer services, and provides discretionary regulatory authority for that minister to require approval of such bylaws (LGA s. 938(3.1)).

Note: Historical bulletins contain valuable information from a point in time and are not kept up to date.

For current information, users are advised to check legislation and the local government content on the

B.C. government website.

21


Removing Ministerial approval for soil removal and deposit bylaws that include fees Ministry of Community, Sport and Cultural Development Intergovernmental Relations and Planning

PO Box 9841 Stn Prov Govt Victoria, BC V8W 9T2

Phone: (250) 356-1128

Fax: (250) 387-6212

• Removes the requirement for the Minister to approve the application of fees within municipal soil removal and deposit bylaws (CC s. 195(3)), and for such regional district bylaws (LGA s. 723(7)).

• Note: The Ministry of Environment maintains its approval role for soil deposit bylaws, and the Ministry of Energy and Mines maintains its approval role for soil removal bylaws.

Terminating Land Use Contracts (LUC)

• Provides for the termination of all land use contracts in affected BC municipalities and regional districts on the “sunset” date of June 30, 2024 and requires all local governments to have zoning in place for lands covered by land use contracts by June 30, 2022 (LGA Part 26, Division 7.1, s. 914.1).

• Enables local governments to undertake early termination of land use contracts under certain conditions (LGA, Division 7.1, s. 914.2), namely:

o Early termination bylaw is adopted on or before June 30, 2022; o Early termination bylaw comes into force at least one year after it is adopted; o A public hearing, which cannot be waived, is held (LGA s. 892, 893); o Zoning is in place where land use contracts are to be terminated; and o Proper land title office is notified of early termination bylaw within 30 days of its adoption.

• Requires local governments to give written notice of land use contract termination, when land use contracts are terminated early or in advance of the sunset date of June 30, 2024 (LGA s. 914.3).

• Provides Boards of Variance with new authority to extend the dates set in early termination bylaws for reasons of hardship, up to the sunset date of June 30, 2024 at the latest (LGA s.901.1).

• Provides non-conforming use status to land, buildings and structures that are on land subject to a land use contract after land use contracts are terminated (LGA s. 911).

• Provides that compensation is not payable with regard to land use decisions for the termination of land use contracts, which extends the current no-compensation provisions currently provided in relation to land use bylaws (LGA s. 914).

• Note: this amendment does not impact the City of Vancouver, as there are no lands affected by land use contracts in the City.

Providing in-stream protection from DCC/DCL rate changes

• Provides developers with 12 months protection from increases to development cost charges (DCCs) if a DCC bylaw is adopted after an application for a rezoning or a development permit has been submitted to a local government for approval (in a form acceptable to the local government and fees paid) (LGA s.937.001).

o The same level of protection currently exists for subdivision (LGA s. 943) and building permit applications (LGA s. 937.001).

• Provides that the same 12-month protection applies to development cost levy (DCL) rate changes in the City of Vancouver for development permit and rezoning applications (in a form acceptable to the City and fees paid) (VC s.523D).

o The City of Vancouver currently has the same level of protection for building permit applications (VC s. 523D (8.2)).

22


2

Practical Considerations: • The changes came into force on the date that the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2014 (Bill

17) receives Royal Assent. Royal Assent was received on May 29, 2014.

Statutes Amended:

Local Government Act: sections 5, 723, 870, 873.2, 874.1, 876, 882, 890, 892, 893, 900, 901.1, 911, 913,

914, 914.1, 914.2, 914.3, 914.4, 921, 930, 937.001, 938

Community Charter: section 195

Vancouver Charter: sections 2.1, 523D

Link to Bill 17, 2014

http://leg.bc.ca/40th2nd/3rd_read/gov17-3.htm

23

http://leg.bc.ca/40th2nd/3rd_read/gov17-3.htm


Attachment C

24

Attachment D 25

Attachment D 26

Attachment D 27

Attachment D 28

Attachment D 29

Attachment D 30

Attachment D 31

Attachment D 32

Attachment D 33

Attachment D 34

Attachment D 35

Attachment D 36

Attachment D 37

Attachment D 38

Attachment D 39

Attachment D 40

Attachment D 41

Attachment D 42

Attachment D 43

Attachment D 44

Attachment D 45

Attachment D 46

Attachment D 47

Attachment D 48

Attachment D 49

SECTION 603 RESIDENTIAL MULTIPLE UNIT ZONES

District of Mission Page 122 Consolidated Zoning Bylaw

Residential Two Unit Zone RT465 Residential Boarding Use Zone RB558

A. Zone Intent

1. The intent of these zones is to provide one Single Family Dwelling, one Single Family Dwelling with anassociated Secondary Dwelling, one Duplex, or one Boarding House (RB558 only) in the UrbanCompact and Urban Residential areas and compatible accessory uses.

B. Permitted Uses

1. The following Principal Uses and no other shall be permitted in the RT465 Zone:

a. Residential limited to:

i. One Duplex provided the minimum Lot Area is 558 sq m (6,006 sq ft), orii. One Single Family Dwelling.

2. The following Principal Uses and no other shall be permitted in the RB558 Zone:

a. Accommodation limited to:

i. One Boarding House.

b. Residential limited to:

i. One Single Family Dwelling.

3. The following Accessory Uses and no other shall be permitted in the RT465 and RB558 Zones:

a. Agriculture limited to:

i. Hobby Greenhouse.

b. Residential limited to:

One of:

i. Secondary Dwelling Unit (Section106 Part F.) limited to:

• Secondary Suite, or

• Coach House, or

• Garden Cottage

And

ii. Detached Garage,iii. Home Occupation.

Attachment E 50



c. Storage limited to: i. Enclosed Storage.

4. Conditions of Use:

a. Where a Duplex or a Boarding House is sited on a lot, a Secondary Dwelling is not permitted. C. Lot Area

1. Except where such a Lot existed at the date of adoption of this Bylaw or Lots created under Section 104, Part D, each Lot shall have a minimum area, width, and depth as shown on the following table:

Zone: Area Width Depth

RT465 465 sq m (5,005 sq ft)

16.0 m (52.5 ft)

30.0 m (98.4 ft)

RB558 558 sq m (6,006 sq ft)

18.0 m (59.1 ft)

30.0 m (98.4 ft)

2. Notwithstanding Section 603, Part C.1, where a Lot contains an Undevelopable Area, that area shall

not be included in the calculation of minimum Lot Area. 3. Notwithstanding Section 603, Part C.1 and C.2, where a Lot contains natural slopes greater than or

equal to 33%, that sloped area shall not be included in the calculation of minimum Lot Area, or used as part of the measurement for minimum Lot Depth or Lot Width.

D. Setbacks

1. All Buildings and Structures shall be sited in accordance with the following minimum Setbacks:

Front Rear Interior Side Exterior Side

Principal Building 6.0 m (19.7 ft)

7.5 m (24.6 ft)

1.5 m (4.9 ft) minimum 4.5 m (14.76 ft) total combined

4.5 m (14.8 ft)

Accessory Building/Structure

7.5 m (24.6 ft)

1.3 m (4.3 ft)

1.5 m (4.9 ft)

3.0 m (9.8 ft)

2. Notwithstanding Section 603, Part D.1, where the lot is a cul-de-sac, all Interior Side Yard Setbacks

may be reduced to 1.5 m (4.9 ft). 3. The Front Yard Setback of the Principal Building may be reduced to a minimum of 4.0 m (13.1 ft)

provided the Front Yard Setback of a garage is a minimum of 6.0 m (19.7 ft).

4. Notwithstanding Section 603 Part D.1, all Buildings shall be sited a minimum of 6.0 m (19.7 ft) from all Undevelopable Areas as defined in this Bylaw.

5. Notwithstanding Section 603 Part D.1, the Buildable Area of any Lot shall be a minimum 150 sq m

(1,614.6 sq ft).

Attachment E 51



E. Lot Coverage

1. Buildings shall together cover not more than the Lot Area as noted in the following table:

Zone: Lot Coverage

RT465 40%

RB558 40%

F. Floor Space

1. The floor space should not exceed the following ratios or the maximum floor area, whichever is less, as listed in the following table (A Coach House, Garden Cottage, and Garage space, detached or attached, is not used in calculating total floor space):

Zone:

Floor Space Ratio

Maximum Floor Space

RT465 0.60 353 sq m (3,800 sq ft)

RB558 0.60 353 sq m (3,800 sq ft)

2. The maximum Floor Space of the upper most Storey of the Principal Building shall not exceed 80% of

the Floor Space of the Storey below it. The reduced Floor Space of the upper most Storey shall be accomplished by an offset from either the front exterior walls, side exterior walls or a combination thereof, of the Storey below. For the purposes of calculating the 80%, the following criteria apply: a. Notwithstanding the definition of Floor Space, the 80% shall be calculated by comparing the sum of

the area enclosed by the exterior walls of the upper most Storey with that of the Storey below it.

b. Garages, and covered, unenclosed, uninhabitable front porches & front verandas are included if they form part of the Storey below the upper most Storey.

G. Impervious Surfaces

1. Impervious Surfaces shall together cover not more than the Lot Area as noted:

Zone: Lot Area

RT465 55%

RB558 55%

H. Number of Residential Buildings

1. Buildings for a Residential Use shall be limited to one per Lot except where a Secondary Dwelling is located within a Coach House or Garden Cottage.

Attachment E 52



I. Height of Buildings

1. The intent of the Height of the Principal Building shall permit a two storey Building with a Basement not exceeding 9.5 m (31.1 ft).

2. The Height of an Accessory Building shall not exceed one storey to a maximum of 6.0 m (19.7 ft). 3. The Height of an Accessory Building for a Coach House shall not exceed the Height of the Principal

Building or 7.0 m (23.0 ft), whichever is less. J. Off Street Parking

1. Off Street Parking shall be in accordance with the provisions of Section 108.

2. Off Street Parking shall not occupy more than 30% of the Front Yard.

2. Access to the lot for Off Street Parking from the Front Lot Line shall be limited to a maximum of 5.0 m (16.4 ft).

K. Hobby Greenhouse Use

1. Shall be limited to a maximum of one Building not exceeding a total area of 20 sq m (215.3 sq ft).

L. Supportive Recovery

1. A Supportive Recovery Use may be permitted as a Residential Use on a lot in the RT465 zone only subject to the following conditions. A Supportive Recovery Use shall:

a. be subject to a Housing Agreement; b. have sleeping accommodation for not more than 10 persons (including site staffing); c. not be permitted where there is a Duplex, Secondary Dwelling Unit, Boarding Use, or a Home

Occupation Use on the lot; d. not permitted within 250 m of an existing Supportive Recovery Use, or a primary or secondary

school; excluding buildings for which a business license has been issued prior to Jan 31, 2009; e. be located within 250 m of a public transit stop; f. have no indication that the building is used for a purpose other than a Residential Use.

Attachment E 53


D E V E L O P M E N T S E R V I C E S P L A N N I N G D I V I S I O N

File: 08-3310-18-P2018-005 February 19, 2020 Dear Owner/Occupant:

Re: Public Hearing Notification - 7436 Stave Lake Street

Please note the following public hearing does not propose any changes to the existing apartment building. The proposed bylaw and public hearing process are required to remove an old bylaw (Land Use Contract 276-1973) and to apply a current zone within the Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 that matches to the greatest extent possible. No changes to the ownership, occupancy or structure of the building is required or proposed by this application. As a property owner or neighbouring resident to the subject property located at 7436 Stave Lake Street, you are invited to attend a Public Hearing at 6:00 pm on Monday, March 2, 2020 and make known any comments that you may have about the proposed bylaws. The Public Hearing will be held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC. The following is an excerpt from the Public Hearing Notice: 1. DISTRICT OF MISSION LAND USE CONTRACT REPEAL BYLAW 5916-2020

(LUC18-028 – DISTRICT OF MISSION) The purpose of the Bylaw is to discharge Land Use Contract No. 276-1973 registered to the property located at 7436 Stave Lake Street (shown on the maps below).

2. DISTRICT OF MISSION ZONING AMENDING BYLAW 5917-2020-5050(372) (LUC18-028 – DISTRICT OF MISSION) The purpose of the Bylaw is to rezone the subject property located at 7436 Stave Lake Street (shown on the maps below) from the Urban Residential R558 (R558) Zone to Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone.


54


2


A copy of the proposed bylaws and report relevant to these bylaws may be inspected at the Municipal Hall, Monday to Friday, excluding statutory holidays, from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm, from Friday, February 21, 2020 to Monday, March 2, 2020. The information is also available on our website at mission.ca by searching “Public Hearing Information”. If you are unable to attend the Public Hearing, you may send a written submission, including your name and address, to the attention of Jennifer Russell, Corporate Officer, or email [email protected] by 4:00 pm on the Friday preceding the date of the Public Hearing. All submissions will form part of the record of the Hearing. For further information on Land Use Contracts is also available on our website at mission.ca/luc, or by searching “LUC” or “Land Use Contracts”. If you require additional information, please contact the Development Services Department at (604) 820-3748 or email [email protected].

Yours truly,

Ken Bourdeau Manager of Long Range Planning

55






Development Services

Staff Report


File: 08-3310-18 P2018-005 LUC18-028

DATE: February 18, 2020

TO: Chief Administrative Officer

FROM: Ken Bourdeau, Manager of Long Range Planning and Special Projects

SUBJECT: Termination of Land Use Contract (LUC) 276-1973 at 7436 Stave Lake Street

ATTACHMENTS: A – Location Map

B – Original Staff report dated July 3, 2018

CIVIC ADDRESS: 7436 Stave Lake Street

APPLICANT: District of Mission under the authority of Section 548 of the Local Government Act (LGA)

OCP: Attached Multi-unit Residential

LAND USE CONTRACT: 7436 Stave Lake Street

UNDERLYING ZONING: Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone


56



This report details the District-initiated development application to rescind Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5758-2018 and Zone Amending Bylaw 5759-2018-5050(299) and replace them with new Bylaws, for the property located at 7436 Stave Lake Street. The new Bylaws will come into effect one year plus one day after Final Adoption of the new Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw and Zone Amending Bylaw.

Staff support the application moving forward and as such have listed Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5916-2020 and Zone Amending Bylaw 5917-2020-5050 (372) under the “Bylaws for Consideration” section of the agenda.


BACKGROUND:

On August 20, 2018 Council adopted Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5758-2018 that terminated Land Use Contract 276-1973, and Zone Amending Bylaw 5759-2018-5050(299) that rezoned the subject property to Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone. Due to an error in Bylaw 5758-2018 the Land Titles Office (LTO) rejected the termination of LUC 276-1973. The error was the omission from the Bylaw of the statement “This Bylaw shall come into force one year plus one day after the date of adoption, and in any event no later than June 30, 2024”. Direction from the Province states that all Section 548 repeals of LUCs must only take effect one year plus one day after Final Adoption of the Bylaws.

As a result, the original Bylaws must be rescinded and replaced with new Bylaws. A Public Hearing is required to correct the error. The original staff report is provided in Attachment B.

INFORMATIONAL NOTES / REQUIREMENT PRIOR TO FINAL READING:

The final reading of the amending bylaws will be held until the following has been satisfied:

1. The in-effect date of Land Use Contract Repeal Amending Bylaw 5916-2020 will be one year plus one day from the final adoption date of the Bylaw. After application by an affected property owner, the BoV may extend the in-effect date of the Bylaw up to June 30, 2024.

SIGN-OFFS:




Reviewed.

57


Attachment A

58

Development Services Staff Report to Council

STAFF REPORT TO COUNCIL Page 1 of 10

File Category: 3310-18 File Folder: P2018-005 LUC18-013

DATE: July 3, 2018

TO: Mayor and Council

FROM: Wesley Woo, Planner

SUBJECT: Termination of Land Use Contract (LUC) 276-1973 and Rezoning of the property located at 7436 Stave Lake Street to Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone

ATTACHMENT(S): Appendix 1 – Information for Corporate Officer

Appendix 2 – Location Map

Appendix 3 – Bill 17, 2014

Appendix 4 – Official Community Plan (OCP) designation: Attached Multi-unit Residential

Appendix 5 – Land Use Contract (LUC) 276-1973

Appendix 6 – Recommended Zone: Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone

CIVIC ADDRESS: 7436 Stave Lake Street

APPLICANT: District of Mission under the authority of Section 548 of the Local Government Act (LGA).

OCP: This application is in conformance with the property’s Attached Multi-unit Residential OCP designation


ATTACHMENT B59


OVERVIEW AND STAFF COMMENTS

This report details the District initiated development application to terminate Land Use Contract (LUC) 276-1973 for the property located at 7436 Stave Lake Street and identifies the necessary amendments to the Zoning Bylaw which will come into effect one year after final adoption of the Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw and Zoning Amending Bylaw.

Staff support the application moving forward and as such have listed the Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5758-2018 and Zoning Amending Bylaw 5759-2018-5050(299) under the “Bylaws for Consideration” section of the agenda.

Subject to Council’s approval, a Public Hearing will be scheduled for July 16, 2018.

BACKGROUND

The Land Use Contract (LUC) was a form of development approval permitted by the Province for a short period of time during the 1970’s. A LUC typically included information related to zoning, development control and engineering servicing all contained within one document. As a result, areas located within an LUC became the governing regulations related to a property rather than the Zoning Bylaw. The legislation authorizing LUCs was repealed in 1978; however, LUCs approved prior to this date remain in force. Under the 1978 legislation, an amendment or termination of an LUC required the approval of both the property owner and District.

In May 2014, the Province passed Bill 17, 2014 (Appendix 3), an amendment to the Local Government Act that:

• terminates all LUCs in the province on June 30, 2024;

• directs municipalities to ensure zoning is in place on the subject properties prior to June 30, 2022;

• authorizes municipalities to terminate LUCs without property owner permission, should they choose to do so;

• requires local governments to give written notice of LUC termination, when LUCs are terminated early or in advance of the sunset date of June 30, 2024;

• extends non-conforming status to land, buildings and structures that are on land subject to a LUC after LUCs are terminated;

• provides the District’s Board of Variance (BoV) with new authority to extend the date set in early termination bylaws for reasons of hardship, up to the sunset date of June 30, 2024; and

• extends the no compensation payable provision to land use decisions related to properties subject to a LUC.

An LUC is a contract between a property owner and a municipality to address the use and development rights related to a property. The regulations in a LUC are similar to those found within a Zoning Bylaw, except that the LUC is registered to title and may contain other items typically not found within a zoning bylaw, such as engineering servicing standards and Development Cost Charges (DCCs).

ATTACHMENT B60


Section 533 of the Local Government Act (LGA) provides legal non-conforming status to all properties subject to an LUC at time of expiry of the LUC (termination date set by the Province or termination date set by a District bylaw) provided the land, building or other structure has been lawfully used and constructed.

Direction provided by Council on November 20, 2017 states “where possible, apply a zone to the subject property that provides similar land use rights that exist in the LUC” and “[for staff] to recommend a zone in compliance with the Official Community Plan”.

On November 20, 2017, Council directed staff to bring forward bylaws which would terminate LUCs within the District prior to the June 30, 2022 deadline and, to review the suitability of the underlying zoning. As a result, Staff have brought forward a termination bylaw in accordance with the approved process.

PLANNING ANALYSIS

Staff have reviewed the current land uses, LUC 276-1973, the Official Community Plan (OCP) and Zoning Bylaw in relation to the subject property.

The review finds:

Current Land Use

The subject property is currently occupied by a four storey apartment building with the first storey being parking. The existing underlying zone of the subject property is Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone.

Official Community Plan

The subject property is designated Attached Multi-unit Residential (Appendix 4) in the Official Community Plan. This designation envisions multi-storey buildings near commercial nodes and key destinations, this includes: apartments, townhouses, rowhouses and duplexes.

Land Use Contract

LUC 276-1973 (Appendix 5) was approved on June 4, 1973 and permits the “erection of a 38 suite apartment complex, comprising of 26 one bedroom and 12 two bedroom units.”

ATTACHMENT B61


Zoning Bylaw

A comparison of the regulations contained within the LUC and proposed MA52 Zone is provided:

Land Use Contract:

276-1973

Zoning Bylaw:

Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone

Permitted Uses (Principal Uses) 38 unit apartment Apartments

Lot Area (Minimum) 0.2982 ha (0.74 acres) 0.2 ha (0.5 acres)

Front Yard Setback (Minimum) 9.1 m (30.0 ft) 7.5m (24.6 ft)

Rear Yard Setback (Minimum) 21.4 m (70.3 ft) 7.5m (24.6 ft)

Interior Side Yard Setback (Minimum)

5.5 m (18.0 ft) 7.5m (24.6 ft)

Exterior Side Yard Setback (Minimum)

7.3 m (24.0 ft) 7.5m (24.6 ft)

Lot Coverage (Maximum) 40% 40%

Floor Space Ratio 0.80 0.75

Maximum Height (Principal Building) 10.7 m (35 ft) 11m (36.1 ft)

Density (Maximum) 127 units per hectare (52 units per acre)

52 units per hectare (21 units per acre)

Maximum Density Specific To Site 38 units 16

Staff is not aware of any known implications associated with the recommended zoning of the subject property to MA52 Zone (Appendix 6).

RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommends approval of Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5758-2018 because:

• existing development on the property consists of an apartment. This type of development is generally in conformance with the Official Community Plan (OCP) designation of Attached Multi-unit Residential. An OCP amendment is not required;

• the existing R558 Zone does not provide similar permitted uses and related land use regulations to those found in LUC 276-1973; and

• the recommended MA52 Zone provides similar permitted uses and related land use regulations to those found in LUC 276-1973.

BOARD OF VARIANCE (BoV)

If the property owner feels that the termination of the LUC will cause undue financial hardship, the property owner has the right to appeal the in-effect date of the Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw to the District’s Board of Variance (BoV). The BoV may extend the in-effect date of the Bylaw up to June 30, 2024; however, the BoV does not have the authority to over-turn Council’s decision to terminate the LUC or rezone the property.

ATTACHMENT B62


COMMUNICATION

Public Information Meeting

The Planning Department held a public information meeting on January 18, 2018 to gather feedback regarding LUCs. The purpose of the meeting was twofold: to inform affected property owners of the end to LUCs and to consult with affected property owners on the underlying zoning.

All property owners and occupiers directly affected by LUC 276-1973 were sent a notification letter inviting them to the meeting. At the public information meeting, staff identified multiple property owners and/or occupiers that attended the meeting. A number of discussions occurred between the owners, occupiers and staff; however, staff did not receive any written comments.

Website Communications

The District’s website provides general information on the LUC process. This includes:

• Background & Frequently asked questions (FAQs).

• Bill 17, 2014;

• Copy of the November 20, 2017 Staff Report; and

• Copy of all LUCs;

Policy LAN.50 - Pre-Public hearing Information Packages

A pre-public hearing information package will be prepared to include copies of all applicable documents and will be made available online and at municipal hall for public viewing.

Bylaw 3612-2003 Land Use Application Procedures and Fees

A notice of Public Hearing will be prepared in accordance with Bylaw 3612-2003 and the Local Government Act.

INFORMATIONAL NOTES / REQUIREMENT(S) PRIOR TO FINAL READING

The Final Reading of the amending bylaw(s) will be held until the following have been satisfied:

1. The subject property is within 800m of a controlled access highway. Final Reading of the bylaws will be held until approval from Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MoTI) is obtained.

2. The in-effect date of the Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5758-2018 and Zoning Amending Bylaw 5759-2018-5050(299) will be one year from the final adoption date of the Bylaw. After application by an affected property owner, the BoV may extend the in-effect date of the Bylaw up to June 30, 2024.

SIGN-OFFS:

Wesley Woo, Planner

Reviewed by: Robert Publow, Manager of Planning

Comment from Chief Administrative Officer Reviewed.

ATTACHMENT B63


Appendix 1

Information for Corporate Officer

Civic Address: PID: Legal:

7436 Stave Lake Street No PID Common Property Strata Plan NWS380

101 – 7436 Stave Lake Street 001-310-313 Strata Lot 1 District Lot 1 Group 3 New Westminster District Strata Plan NW380 Together With An Interest In The Common Property In Proportion To The Unit Entitlement Of The Strata Lot As Shown On Form 1








109 – 7436 Stave Lake Street 001-310-399 Strata Lot 9 District Lot 1 Group 3 New Westminster District Strata Plan NW380 Together

ATTACHMENT B64


With An Interest In The Common Property In Proportion To The Unit Entitlement Of The Strata Lot As Shown On Form 1







216 - 7436 Stave Lake Street 001-310-488 Strata Lot 16 District Lot 1 Group 3 New Westminster District Strata Plan NW380 Together With An Interest In The Common Property In Proportion To The Unit Entitlement Of The Strata Lot As Shown On Form 1


218 - 7436 Stave Lake Street 001-310-500 Strata Lot 18 District Lot 1 Group 3 New Westminster District Strata Plan NW380 Together With An Interest In The Common Property In Proportion; To The Unit Entitlement Of The Strata Lot As Shown On Form 1

219 - 7436 Stave Lake Street 001-310-518 Strata Lot 19 District Lot 1 Group 3 New Westminster District Strata Plan NW380 Together

ATTACHMENT B65












329 - 7436 Stave Lake Street 001-310-623

Strata Lot 29 District Lot 1 Group 3 New Westminster District Strata Plan NW380 Together

ATTACHMENT B66












ATTACHMENT B67


Appendix 2

ATTACHMENT B68

BULLETIN

Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2014

(Bill 17, 2014)

FIRST READING in the Legislature March 11, 2014

Ministry of Community,

Sport and Cultural

Development

Intergovernmental Relations and

Planning

PO Box 9841 Stn Prov Govt

Victoria, BC V8W 9T2

Phone: (250) 356-1128

Fax: (250) 387-6212

Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2014 (Bill 17, 2014)

Amendments to Local Government Act, Community Charter and Vancouver Charter

Bill 17, 2014, the Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2014 includes a number of amendments intended to streamline local and provincial government land use planning and development approvals, modernize outdated legislative tools and provide greater certainty and transparency for residents and those who develop and build within communities. Specifically, Bill 17 introduces amendments to the Local Government Act, Community Charter and Vancouver Charter to remove unnecessary ministerial approvals for certain land use planning and development bylaws; allow modern land use policies and practices to replace land use contracts; and, protect developers from increases in development cost charges (DCC) (or development cost levies (DCL) in the City of Vancouver) for 12 months after DCC/DCL rate increases are made, where a rezoning or development permit application is in process. Proposed Amendments: Proposed amendments to the Local Government Act, Community Charter and Vancouver Charter: Removing the requirement for Ministerial approval for Regional District (RD) land use bylaws

The following amendments remove the requirement for Ministerial approval of certain RD land use

bylaws, streamlining the RD bylaw approval process. They also broaden the authority of the Minister to

develop provincial policy guidelines in relation to RD land use bylaws, providing an opportunity to

provide clarity regarding provincial interests and support the appropriate notification and referral of

regional district bylaws to Provincial ministries and agencies.

Removes requirement for Ministerial approval of RD OCP, zoning, subdivision servicing and temporary use bylaws (LGA s. 882, 913, 921, 930, 938).

Provides discretionary authority for the Minister to require approval of RD bylaws (LGA s. 874.1).

Broadens the existing authority of the Minister, to develop provincial policy guidelines in relation to RD zoning, subdivision servicing and temporary use bylaws (LGA s.873.2).

Removes the requirement for the minister responsible for the Transportation Act to approve subdivision servicing bylaws, if a regional district provides the subdivision approving officer services, and provides discretionary regulatory authority for that minister to require approval of such bylaws (LGA s. 938(3.1)).

Removing Ministerial approval for soil removal and deposit bylaws that include fees

Removes the requirement for the Minister to approve the application of fees within municipal soil removal and deposit bylaws (CC s. 195(3)), and for such regional district bylaws (LGA s. 723(7)).

Note: The Ministry of Environment maintains its approval role for soil deposit bylaws, and the Ministry of Energy and Mines maintains its approval role for soil removal bylaws.

Appendix 3ATTACHMENT B

69

kbourdeau

Highlight

Terminating Land Use Contracts (LUC)

Provides for the termination of all land use contracts in affected BC municipalities and regional districts on the “sunset” date of June 30, 2024 and requires all local governments to have zoning in place for lands covered by land use contracts by June 30, 2022 (LGA Part 26, Division 7.1, s. 914.1).

Enables local governments to undertake early termination of land use contracts under certain conditions (LGA, Division 7.1, s. 914.2), namely:

o Early termination bylaw is adopted on or before June 30, 2022; o Early termination bylaw comes into force at least one year after it is adopted; o A public hearing, which cannot be waived, is held (LGA s. 892, 893); o Zoning is in place where land use contracts are to be terminated; and o Proper land title office is notified of early termination bylaw within 30 days of its adoption.

Requires local governments to give written notice of land use contract termination, when land use contracts are terminated early or in advance of the sunset date of June 30, 2024 (LGA s. 914.3).

Provides Boards of Variance with new authority to extend the dates set in early termination bylaws for reasons of hardship, up to the sunset date of June 30, 2024 at the latest (LGA s.901.1).

Provides non-conforming use status to land, buildings and structures that are on land subject to a land use contract after land use contracts are terminated (LGA s. 911).

Provides that compensation is not payable with regard to land use decisions for the termination of land use contracts, which extends the current no-compensation provisions currently provided in relation to land use bylaws (LGA s. 914).

Note: this amendment does not impact the City of Vancouver, as there are no lands affected by land use contracts in the City.

Providing in-stream protection from DCC/DCL rate changes

Provides developers with 12 months protection from increases to development cost charges (DCCs) if a DCC bylaw is adopted after an application for a rezoning or a development permit has been submitted to a local government for approval (in a form acceptable to the local government and fees paid) (LGA s.937.001).

o The same level of protection currently exists for subdivision (LGA s. 943) and building permit applications (LGA s. 937.001).

Provides that the same 12-month protection applies to development cost levy (DCL) rate changes in the City of Vancouver for development permit and rezoning applications (in a form acceptable to the City and fees paid) (VC s.523D).

o The City of Vancouver currently has the same level of protection for building permit applications (VC s. 523D (8.2)).

Practical Considerations: If the legislation is passed, the changes will come into force on the date that the Miscellaneous

Statutes Amendment Act, 2014 (Bill 17) receives Royal Assent.

Statutes amended:

Local Government Act: sections 5, 723, 870, 873.2, 874.1, 876, 882, 890, 892, 893, 900, 901.1, 911, 913,

914, 914.1, 914.2, 914.3, 914.4, 921, 930, 937.001, 938

Community Charter: section 195

Vancouver Charter: sections 2.1, 523D

Link to Bill 17, 2014

http://www.leg.bc.ca/40th2nd/1st_read/gov17-1.htm

Appendix 3ATTACHMENT B

70

kbourdeau

Highlight

9 9OFFICI A L COMMU NIT Y P L A N – OCTOB E R 2 5 , 2 0 1 7

OCP Designation Characteristics Land Uses DensityAttached Multi-unit Residential • Multi storey buildings near

commercial nodes and key destinations

• Includes apartments, townhouses, rowhouses, and duplexes

• Heights are limited to 3 storeys (taller and varied building heights, and ground floor commercial, may be possible through a neighbourhood plan)

• Refer to DPA guidelines

• Multi-unit Residential

• Accessory commercial (associated with a residential care facility)

• H ome occupation, live/work

• 0.5 to 1.0 FSR

• 20-80 units/ha

Urban Compact • Small lot residential and infill residential

• Heights are limited to 2 storeys (3rd storey is possible within the roofline)


• Residential

• Residential with with accessory units with appropriate zoning


• 0.5 to 0.75 FSR

• 20-36 units/ha

Urban Residential • Traditional single detached residential with provision for accessory units

• Infill residential

• Heights are limited to 2 storeys (3rd storey is possible within the roofline)


• Residential

• Residential with with accessory units with appropriate zoning


• 0.5 to 0.75 FSR

• 10-22 units/ha

i ure : Land Use Designations (continued)

Appendix 4ATTACHMENT B71

kbourdeau

Highlight

kbourdeau

Highlight

kbourdeau

Highlight

kbourdeau

Highlight

Multiple Family 52 Apartment Zone MA52 Multiple Family 80 Apartment Zone MA80 Multiple Family 135 Apartment Zone MA135 A. Zone Intent

1. The intent of these zones is to provide medium to high density Apartment Buildings in an urban setting with compatible accessory uses. The MA52, MA80, and MA135 zones all have different maximum densities.

a. The intent of the MA52 zone is to allow 3 storey Apartment Buildings.

b. The intent of the MA80 zone is to allow up to 4 storey Apartment Buildings.

c. The intent of the MA135 zone is to allow up to 4 storey Apartment Buildings.

B. Permitted Uses

1. The following Principal Uses and no other shall be permitted in the MA52, MA80, and MA135 zones:

a. Residential limited to:

i. Apartments.

2. The following Accessory Uses and no other shall be permitted in the MA52, MA80, and MA135 zones:

a. Institutional limited to:

i. Child Care Centre.

b. Residential Uses limited to:

i. Home Occupation, ii. Indoor Amenity Space, and iii. Outdoor Amenity Space.

c. Storage limited to:

i. Enclosed Storage.


wwoo

Highlight

wwoo

Typewritten Text

wwoo

Typewritten Text

wwoo

Typewritten Text

C. Lot Area

1. The minimum Lot Area prior to rezoning must not be less than 0.2 ha (0.5 ac). 2. Notwithstanding Section 703, Part C.1, where a Lot contains an Undevelopable Area, that area shall

not be included in the calculation of minimum Lot Area. 3. Notwithstanding Section 703, Part C.1 and C.2, where a Lot contains natural slopes greater than or

equal to 33%, that sloped area shall not be included in the calculation of minimum Lot Area. D. Density

1. The maximum density shall be calculated as follows:

Zone: Maximum Density

MA52 52 upha (21 upa)

MA80 80 upha (32 upa)

MA135 135 upha (54 upa)

E. Setbacks

1. All Buildings and Structures shall be sited in accordance with the following minimum Setbacks:

Front Rear Interior Side

Exterior Side

Principal Building 7.5 m (19.7 ft)

7.5 m (24.6 ft)

7.5 m (24.6 ft)

7.5 m (24.6 ft)


7.5 m (24.6 ft)

4.5 m (14.8 ft)

1.5 m (4.9 ft)

1.5 m (4.9 ft)

2. Notwithstanding Section 703 Part E.1, all Buildings shall be sited a minimum of 6.0 m (19.6 ft) from all Undevelopable Areas as defined in this Bylaw.

F. Lot Coverage

1. Buildings shall together cover not more than the Lot Area as noted in the following table:

Zone: Lot Coverage

MA52 40%

MA80 40%

MA135 40%


G. Floor Space

1. The floor space should not exceed the following ratios or the maximum floor area, whichever is less, as listed in the following table (Neither indoor amenity space nor parking spaces, are used in calculating total floor area):

H. Height of Buildings

1. The Height of the Principal Building and Accessory Buildings shall not exceed the heights outlined in the following table:

Zone:

Principal Building

Indoor Amenity Building


MA52 11.0 m (36.1 ft)

11.0 m (36.1 ft)

4.5 m (14.8 ft)

MA80 13.0 m (42.7 ft)

11.0 m (36.1 ft)

4.5 m (14.8 ft)

MA135 15.0 m (49.2 ft)

13.0 m (42.7 ft)

4.5 m (14.8 ft)

I. Indoor Amenity Space

1. Developments that contain 25 units or more shall provide in Indoor Amenity Space at a rate of at least 2.8 sq m (30.0 sq ft) per unit.

2. The Indoor Amenity Space may house a Child Care Centre provided they comply with the following

requirements:

a. Have direct access from a highway, independent from the access to the residential uses, and b. Have direct access to an open space and play area within the lot.

J. Outdoor Amenity Space

1. Outdoor Amenity Space shall be provided at a rate of at least 50 sq m (549 sq ft) per unit.

2. Shall have a slope of 5% or less.

3. For developments that contain 10 or more units, a level children’s play area with play equipment shall be provided.

Zone:

Floor Space Ratio

MA52 0.75

MA80 1.00

MA135 1.25


K. Off Street Parking

1. Off Street Parking shall be in accordance with the provisions of Section 109.

2. Parking within the required setbacks is not permitted.

3. 75% of the required resident parking spaces must be provided as underground parking or as parking within the Building envelope.


Corporate Administration

Staff Report


DATE: March 2, 2020


FROM: Mike Younie, Chief Administrative Officer

SUBJECT: Request to Rename Commercial Street

ATTACHMENTS: A – Correspondence from Mr. H.S. Kenny Braich and Mr. Bobby Braich


That the name “Herman S. Braich” be added to Table 1: Pioneers and Long Time Residents of Mission of the District’s Street Naming Policy STR.28(C) with specific direction to reserve the name for a prominent street in Mission’s waterfront area as the area redevelops through comprehensive planning.

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to present the name Herman S. Braich with a brief family history as a prominent Indo-Canadian pioneer of Mission and have Council consider the family’s request to rename Commercial Street to Herman S. Braich Boulevard.

BACKGROUND:

Mr. H.S. Kenny Braich and Mr. Bobby Braich (the Braich’s) have made a written request to rename Commercial Street to Herman S. Braich Boulevard in honour of their late father (Attachment A). There is also an accompanying request to honour Surjeet K. Braich, the wife of Herman S. Braich who resided on the Braich’s family property at 32607 and 32641 Fraser Crescent, by reserving her name for a future park.

Mr. Herman S. Braich owned the lands between Highways 11 and 7 along the northern bank of the Fraser River between the CPR bridge and the Mission Raceway.

Mr. Herman S. Braich arrived in Canada in 1927, worked in the forestry sector in the Lower Mainland and established a trucking business in Victoria. Arriving in Mission in the late 1940’s, he established Herman Mills, a sawmill, dryland sort and barge loading company that quickly became Mission’s largest employer. Mr. Braich was also active in the logging industry, labour market and financing sectors. Mr. Braich was awarded the District’s Citizen of the Millennium honour posthumously in 2000 in large part to his extraordinary contributions and generosity to the development of Mission and in supporting a variety of initiatives in Mission and India.

The Mission Museum has prepared the following information regarding Mission’s prominent pioneers:

https://www.missionmuseum.com/local-history/shaping-our-community-prominent-indo-canadian-pioneers/

The Braich’s will appear as a delegation to Council at the March 2, 2020 meeting to give a full overview of Mr. Herman S. Braich’s life and the important contributions he made to the development of Mission.

99




DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS:

As Council is aware, staff were directed to prepare a bylaw to re-designate the lands along the Fraser River as a comprehensive planning area. This bylaw is currently under Council consideration. The Waterfront Comprehensive Planning Area (WCPA) is an area identified for future planning and development that will provide the basis for more detailed land use planning work. This work will certainly explore opportunities to highlight and recognize the various contributions made to Mission’s historical and cultural context including those made by long-standing and/or past businesses and industries as well as those contributions made by pioneer families and individuals from the Indo-Canadian, Japanese and First Nations communities.

Revitalization efforts on the waterfront are currently underway where land use planning for the area is expected to begin shortly. As with any land use planning, there is no certainty as to what the future land uses will be nor where the services, including roads, will ultimately lie. While there is the likelihood that the existing Commercial Street could be extended and become the main thoroughfare through the area, it could also potentially be relocated or removed entirely. As such, there is a risk that renaming Commercial Street at this time may not give the permanence that the Braich’s are seeking, let alone the due consideration that Mr. Herman S. Braich’s legacy deserves.

As stated, waterfront land use planning will involve rigorous research on local historical people and events which will likely be incorporated into the built form, including street naming. Similarly, First Nations’ history is also an important consideration. For this reason, it would be prudent to wait until a broader understanding of the waterfront’s history, people, places and events is gained thus allowing a comprehensive assessment and application of names.

In the interim, staff believe that Mr. Herman S. Braich’s contributions to Mission certainly warrant prominent recognition and therefore Council could formally recognize this pioneer family by including the names within the District’s Street Naming Policy STR.28(C) and in future park naming under Parks and Recreation Naming Policy LAN.63(C). This could include the attachment of a note that Herman S. Braich should be used for a prominent road in the waterfront area and specifically for a road on the lands he once owned.

While Council could decide to rename Commercial Street to Herman S. Braich Boulevard now, the advantage to waiting to rename Commercial Street is that the renaming would be part of a future celebration or grand opening event of the new waterfront area.

The Braich’s request (Attachment A) also includes support for naming a park after Surjeet K. Braich, the Braich’s mother, on the Braich’s family property at 32607 and 32641 Fraser Crescent. That request will be brought forward as part of any development proposal that is submitted on those properties in the future. It is noted that this request is consistent with the Parks and Recreation Naming Policy LAN.63(C) where the history of a person can play an important role in naming a park and is one of the three broad categories of naming requests.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no financial implications associated with this report.

COMMUNICATION:

Staff will convey Council’s decision to the Braich’s and other requirements set out in Street Naming Policy STR.28(C).

100


SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION:

Mr. H.S. Kenny Braich and Mr. Bobby Braich have requested that Commercial Street be renamed to Herman S. Braich Boulevard in honour of their late father. Mr. Herman S. Braich owned a significant amount of land along the Fraser River, was a leading figure in the development of Mission and was given the Citizen of the Millennium honour posthumously in 2000. Renaming at this time is certainly possible, but staff recommend that Council defer the renaming until such a time as the waterfront area land use planning is complete and includes a thorough review of all historically important people, places and events.

SIGN-OFFS:

Mike Younie, Chief Administrative Officer

101

From: H.S. Kenny BraichSubject: [EXTERNAL] Fw: Mom and Dad's "Legacy" Park and Street Naming Request

Date: October 31, 2019 at 3:26 AMTo: Mike Younie [email protected]: Pam Alexis [email protected], Bobby Braich

HiMike,

WithrespecttorenamingCommercialSt.inhonourofourlatefather,pleaseseetheoriginalrequestemailthatwasforwardedinNovember2017(includingreferencetotheparkformomaswell).Ishouldnotefortherecordthatmomdidnotwantherselfrecognizedinsteadofdadonthewaterfrontalthough57ofthe87acreswasownedbyherthroughthedecades!HavingsaidthatandtohelpintroduceCounciltowhodadwas,pleaseseethelinkbelowandreferencetheDistrict'sfileforwhendadwasposthumouslyawardedCiOzenoftheMillenniumwith12othersin2000.

hPps://missionmuseum.com/local-history/shaping-our-community-prominent-indo-canadian-pioneers/

IwillforwardacopyofhisobituarywhichprovidesspecificdetailsofhislifetomorrowasitisnotavailableonlineatthisOme.

ThankyouinadvanceforyoureffortsaPendingtothisasitisverymeaningfulandtheOmingperfectforallthereasonswediscussedtoday.

BestRegards,

Kenny.

H.S. Kenny BraichPresident

The Braich GroupP.O. Box 319033151 Commercial StreetMission, BC, CanadaV2V 4J4

T: C:

This message and any attachments are only for the use of the intended recipient(s), is confidential, and may be privileged.If you are not the intended recipient, please notify me at the telephone number shown above or by return e-mail anddelete this communication and any copy immediately. Thank you.

From:H.S.KennyBraichSent:November23,20175:04PMTo:RandyHawes<[email protected]>Cc:[email protected]<[email protected]>;MikeYounie<[email protected]>;BobbyBraich

Attachment A102







https://missionmuseum.com/local-history/shaping-our-community-prominent-indo-canadian-pioneers/

Subject:MomandDad's"Legacy"ParkandStreetNamingRequest HonourableMayorRandyHawesandMembersofMissionCouncil,

IamwriOngtoyouonbehalfofourfamilywithrespecttothepotenOalsaleofourhomesteadpropertylocatedat32607and32641FraserCrescentandourwaterfrontproperOesat33151CommercialStreet,etal.

AsyouareawareweareengagedinaglobalmarkeOngcampaignandanOcipatecompleOngthesaleofourlandsin2018andwouldliketoformallyrequestMissionCounciltograntalegacyparknamingreservaOoninthenameofourmom"SurjeetK.Braich"tobesituateonthehouseproperOesandalegacystreetnamingreservaOoninourlatefather'sname"HermanS.Braich"forthemainroadwaywhichwillbesituateacrossthewaterfrontproperOesandalsofacilitatetheExperiencetheFrasertrailsystem,etc.

Withrespecttothepark,wetrusttherewillbeparklanddedicatedasaresultofthenewmulO-familydevelopmentofthe12.3acrehomesteadsiteandaierlivingontheproperOes,beauOfyingthemandraisingherchildrenandgrandchildrenthereforcloseto70years,webelieveitwouldbeveryfijngtohonourourmomwiththisdedicaOon.

Withrespecttoayettobedevelopedmainroadwaythruthe87acrewaterfrontsite,itiscommonknowledgethatweasafamilyhavebeenblessedtobeownersandstewardsoftheselandsdueourlatefatherwhomfirstcametoMissionandpurchasedthelandsinthelate40's.Dadpassedonhis65thbirthdayonMay21st,1976andwehaveendeavoredtoprotectthelands(andhislegacy)forthebenefitofthecommunityatlargeandthus,webelieveitisOmelytoacknowledgedad'svisionandcontribuOonsatthisjunctureaswetransiOonourownershipandresponsibiliOestoothers.Asanaside,wedonotethatwearecurrentlytheonlyaddressonCommercialStreetsoperhapsanamechangeasopposedtoanamereservaOonwouldbemoreappropriateasCommercialStreet,orinthisinstance"HermanS.BraichBlvd."wouldthenbeextendedalongtheforeshore(whereweanOcipatethenewroadtobelocated)andulOmatelyjoinintoDykeRoadonthewestern(raceway)side.FYI,Iuse"Blvd."verypurposelyasIbelievehavinga"boulevard"ontheMissionwaterfrontwouldbeuniversallyappealing!

Inanyevent,itisourhopethatthesehearleltrequestsmeetwithyourapprovalaswewouldliketosharethiswiththeenOrecommunityandeliminateanychancethatthisopportunitywouldgetlostintransiOonfromoneowner,CouncilorgeneraOontothenext.

Finally,pleasebeadvisedthatitwouldbeourprivilegedtoformallyappearbeforeCounciltosharemoredetailsofmomanddad'sindependentandcollecOvecontribuOonstoourcommunityoverthelast70yearsinsupportofyourconsideraOonandapprovalasitisimpossibletoarOculatethemallinanemail.

WelookforwardtoyourresponseandanysuggesOonordirecOonyoumayprovide.

103

WelookforwardtoyourresponseandanysuggesOonordirecOonyoumayprovide.

Thankyoukindly,

Kenny.

H.S.KennyBraichPresident

TheBraichGroupP.O.Box319033151CommercialStreetMission,BC,CanadaV2V4J4

T:C:

ThismessageandanyaPachmentsareonlyfortheuseoftheintendedrecipient(s),isconfidenOal,andmaybeprivileged.Ifyouarenottheintendedrecipient,pleasenoOfymeatthetelephonenumbershownaboveorbyreturne-mailanddeletethiscommunicaOonandanycopyimmediately.Thankyou.

104


Parks, Recreation and Culture Staff Report to Council

File: 01-0550-20

DATE: March 2, 2020


FROM: Maureen Sinclair, Director Parks, Recreation & Culture

SUBJECT: Additional Cycling Infrastructure

ATTCHMENTS: Attachment A - Mission P&R Bike Skills Park Proposal

Attachment B - Kids and Bikes in Mission

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to respond to the November 4th resolution from Council as well as the November 12th presentation made by Rocky Blondin to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee at their regular December meeting.

BACKGROUND:

Although the District of Mission has many incredible recreational amenities including some of the best mountain biking in the country, there are fewer local cycling and family friendly options for those not yet ready to tackle Bear and Red Mountain trails. This report is provided in an effort to illustrate some of the limitations and seek Council input and direction on next steps.


The removal of the old skateboard park at the Mission Leisure Centre, the pop-up bike lanes on 7th Avenue during the 2019 Bike to School / Work event and changes to the management of trails on Crown Land have all created additional focus on trails and cycling options in Mission.

The community legacy of trails and trail development created to a large part by the tireless efforts of the Fraser Valley Mountain Biking Association and new generations of potential trail users leaves the community with a large network of trails that require skill and experience but few opportunities to learn for new and less experience riders. The recent addition of the skills park at Mill Pond Park will assist to some degree however the park is somewhat removed from the community and access is an issue for many.

The old skateboard park at the Mission Leisure Centre provided an opportunity for very young kids to test their skills and for less experienced cyclists to get a feel for the jumps and turns that they might experience on the various mountain biking trails elsewhere in the community. The removal of the park has left a void in the community and PR&C staff met with the FVMB Association to discuss possible options for a skills park or pump track to be located on lands north of the new skateboard park. Attachment A was provided by the FVMBA in response to a site meeting in the late summer of 2019. FVMBA provided two reports that provides a range of options that could be developed on the MLC site or elsewhere in the community and these were presented at the November 12, 2019 Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee meeting. (Both reports are attached for Council’s information). The Committee discussed the proposals in detail at

This report is provided to Council for information only and no staff recommendation is included.

105


their December meeting and passed the following motion:

“That the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee support the development of a

skills park at the Leisure Centre which serves as a central recreational hub in the community; and;

That an additional bike skills area be considered for the Cedar Valley area”.

In addition to the discussion within the PR&C Department Council received and passed the following resolution at their November 4, 2019 meeting:

“That staff investigate the cost of building and maintaining a pump track at a suitable location and report back to Council.”

Staff have been working over the last year in partnership with FVMBA to develop a skills park at Mill Pond Park and the work is nearing completion. While this development doesn’t fill all the needs staff believe it does provide a significant first step.

Given the number of projects that need to be managed and completed in 2020 staff would like to suggest that the development of a pump track be considered as a 2021 capital project and reviewed within the context of the 2021 budget review process.

COUNCIL GOALS / OBJECTIVES:

The development and expansion of cycling amenities and infrastructure supports Council’s goals related to creating a more livable community.


There are no final implications at this time.

COMMUNICATION:

Staff will continue to work with the Fraser Valley Mountain Biking Association to refine the plans for a future pump track.


This report is provided to Council to acknowledge and address the various requests related to cycling amenities and infrastructure.

SIGN-OFFS:

M. Sinclair Director of Parks, Recreation & Culture

J. Horton, Manager of Parks and Facilities


Reviewed.

106

1

FVMBA

Mission P&R Bike Skills Park Proposal 10th October 2019

OVERVIEW

This document outlines a high-level view of a bike skills park for Mission at the existing land at

the Leisure Centre, on the north side of the skatepark. This does not constitute a quote - a

detailed scope is required to create a quote which can be commercially valid.

GOALS

1. Create the first purpose-built bike skills facility in Mission

2. Replace the lost youth recreation capacity due to the loss of the old skatepark

3. Utilized an underutilized piece of land between the existing Seniors Centre and the

skatepark

4. Leverage FVMBA’s trail building skills and volunteer leveraging to deliver this project at

the lowest cost

SPECIFICATIONS

This project will consist of several bike skills park elements, assembled in a design-build format

to create a place for youth to ride. The elements will include:

- Progressive ramps and jumps

- Skill building trail sections

- All-weather and all-wheel pump track

107

2

SUBJECT AREA

The area being targeted is as shown. The existing Seniors Centre is to the north; the existing

(new) skatepark is to the south.

Target Area:

This area has a mix of trees and slope that can create a comfortable, safe, but also challenging

area to learn bike skills.

108

3

ELEMENT PROPOSAL

Progressive Ramps and Jumps

Combining shopping from a vendor catalog for pre-fabricated features, and hand-building select

features, we can create a set of progressive ramps, jumps and other features where a new and

old rider can build their bike skills:

Example of vendor catalog elements:

109

4

Skill-building trail sections

The entire area will be connected with trails which will have a mix of optional skill-building

sections. These will include rock gardens and some log ride-overs to give riders the right level of

challenge that they seek.

Rock Garden: Log-Over Feature:

All-weather, All-wheel Pump track

Working with the limits of the area, we will design and integrate a pre-fabricated pump track from

reputable vendors. The materials will be either composite, or concrete, and will be integrated into

the natural terrain. Pump tracks offer hours of skill-building and entertainment for riders of all

ages and types. Skateboards, scooters and bikes are at home on a smooth-surface pump track.

Smooth Surface Pump tracks:

110

5

COST ESTIMATES

This project can be achieved using FVMBA’s experience in constructing MTB trails in the entire

Fraser Valley region. The costs of the elements will not be marked-up. FVMBA will charge for

the required contracted labour, but also has the ability to leverage volunteer efforts for specific

functions to construct something of this nature. The estimated costs are as follows:

Progressive Ramps and Jumps: $35,000. This includes procurement, site-prep and installation.

Skill building trails: $17,500. This includes planning, site-prep and installation. Materials required

are extra and can be supplied by the District of Mission (rocks, cedar logs and lumber, nails, etc.)

All-weather, all-wheel pump track: $95,000 - $145,000. The price range is a function of final site

selection and track layout. This includes planning, site-prep and installation.

Total budget cost for a bike skill park as proposed: $147,500 - $197,500.

All fabricated elements come with a 10-year warranty.

With this investment in the local trail building and riding community via FVMBA, comes the

ownership of the skills park, much like the existing networks of trails in the Mission. FVMBA will

include the skills park in its regime of trail maintenance, which should minimize the maintenance

costs required of the District. It is worth noting that the construction cost proposed is 100x less

costly than an arena, and 100x less costly to operate and maintain and has 10x the capacity for

users. There are very few investments in recreation that a municipality can make that offer the

same cost-per-user benefit. And this project will serve the hundreds of existing young riders, and

potentially thousands more as the riding community now has a place to learn and grow!

111

Kids and Bikes in Mission Rocky Blondin

Cycling Advocate and Citizen @ Large

I write this open letter essay to the decision-makers and the community as a

whole in Mission about the state of affairs for kids who want to ride bikes in Mission. I

am writing on their behalf, but I do not speak for them. I met a great group of young

advocates from our kid’s school (Albert McMahon) last year who called a meeting with

the school’s administration to resolve some conflicts that were happening in relation to

riding bikes on school grounds. It was so rewarding to see a group of young people

working to effect change in their world through the right channels and I was very proud

to help facilitate that. I would like to suggest that they can speak for themselves, but I

also want to raise the issues I see on their behalf.

I write today as the situation for young cyclists in Mission today is quite dire and

getting worse, not better. This will be an overview, but essentially, there is a strong and

growing number of kids and youth that want to ride their bikes more in Mission and they

have a declining number of places to do it safely. This shrinking number of facilities

makes it harder for new riders to get into the sport and yet, in spite of this we see more

and more taking up cycling of all kinds as their activity of choice. It is exciting and also

distressing to see. I’ll attempt to quickly illustrate the current state of affairs, the calls

to action to address them, and then a detailed background to inform people involved in

the decision process.

112

2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The cycling situation for youth in Mission has become quite dire. There are an

exponentially-growing number of young riders in Mission (as well as adults) and these

growing number of cyclists have a declining number of safe places to ride. Combine

this with an ongoing lack of facilities to teach new riders how to get into the sport safely

and the situation has become quite chronic.

There is a MPSD mountain bike program which is losing its only viable place to host

students for group rides. This is due to a mix of conditions noted in detail below,

leading to the eventual closure and reclamation by the forest of the trail networks

adjacent to Heritage Park. Compounding this is the loss of a youth-constructed ‘bike

skills park’ in Cedar Valley to development. As noted below, this area was located on

private land and always slated for that development. But now that the development has

activated, the area is gone and the kids have nowhere to play on their bikes.

There was also the loss two years ago of a beginner-friendly riding area on Red

Mountain. This loss was due to exploration for gravel for the Highway 7 upgrade

project. They didn’t find any gravel, and re-activated Cannon Pit to get what they

needed, but in the process a bulldozer ran through the lower-elevation trails that catered

to new riders.

For transportation, there are virtually no dedicated cycling routes for students to get to

and from school. This is well documented and advocated for by the Mission

Community Cycling Coalition (M3C). However, there is little traction or action to getting

any safe routes for youth - and adult riders alike - to get to and from school safely.

If nothing is done - the hundreds of youth and thousands of adult cyclists in Mission are

seeing losses of places to do their sport, not gains needed to match the exponential

growth (606% over ten years!). The development and maintenance of trails and

mountain biking as a whole is done primarily by volunteers. That volunteer labour

source is waning due to the overwhelming demands and needs support urgently in the

form of the Calls to Action listed below.

113

https://www.nsnews.com/news/study-shows-big-growth-in-mountain-biking-on-the-north-shore-1.23408027

3

CALLS TO ACTION:

I put this out there as a call to action to the decision makers with both the District

of Mission (DoM), the Mission Public School District (MPSD) and other community

stakeholders contained within these challenges.

1) Fund and construct a bike skills park. I have presented to all levels of council,

committee, and to individuals on this matter multiple times and it has always

been well received, motioned to move forward with, and then seen zero action or

funding. This would help address the need for a place for kids to learn and

practice their sport - primarily mountain biking - but also be a replacement for the

loss of the old skate park for younger scooter and skateboard riders too, if done

well.

2) Fund and construct/or maintain a bike skills trail network. There are many places

within the District that have few land title and environmental hurdles to overcome

- they just require permission and resources to develop them. The volunteers

don’t have the capacity to do this. We are asking the DoM to fund and support

this with capital investment, and operating funding for staff to maintain these

types of public amenities. We also have the economic data that shows this type

of investment can and will pay for itself.

Alternatively to this - if the land title challenges near Heritage Park can be

resolved, and with the support of local First Nations, we can revive and revitalize

the trails on that land to serve this purpose. We acknowledge and respect

Indigenous rights and title and the need to do the right thing today. This includes

potentially and intentionally closing all the existing trails in that area.

3) Invest in Cycling infrastructure in our transportation networks and at the

facilities youth use. This amounts to the DoM investing in bike lanes and other

requests from the cycling community (M3C). And this is where the MPSD comes

in. Co-investing with PACs and other community supports in better bike racks,

bike lane markings on school grounds and the creation of cycling spaces just like

114

http://www.missionridesbikes.org/

4

other school sports - basketball, track and field, and now - cycling. Pump

tracks and other types of small and modest facilities on school grounds can

address this growing need.

4) Fund and install washroom facilities at Bear Mountain Park. This is one of the

busiest District parks on any given day, and there are no washroom facilities.

Several teachers host outdoor classrooms/hiking clubs/etc. from this park and

there are no washrooms for their students. This is something that was the top of

the list for the trail user community in the recent Parks and Rec. Master Plan and

yet the issue is awaiting funding and there are no firm timelines on getting one or

two simple washrooms installed.

Building a washroom is not something that the volunteer community can tackle

themselves, or they would have already! It is also a chronic environmental

problem when there are several hundred park users on a sunny weekend and

nowhere for them to ‘officially’ go to the washroom. They are going, and that is

not being managed. We have found the ‘results’ already once and it was cleaned

up. But this issue persists today.

115

5

BACKGROUND:

The photo at the top is the year-end ride for the various elementary school

mountain bike clubs that were running in 2018. A few schools have long had bike clubs,

but in 2018, there was a push to roll out a program district-wide, and the response was

astounding. From one school doing a bike club over the past decade, and a few small

programs run through the Leisure Guide, we now had over 50 kids each week come ride

bikes. We hosted a race that was extremely popular - in spite of pouring rain, and the

FVMBA hosted the Bear Cub Kids Classic with equal great results (64 young racers!).

All of this done with teachers in extra time and volunteers running everything.

Heritage Park:

The important thing about that photo - and the main reason for this letter - it was

taken at Thornhill in Maple Ridge. The leadership group for the school bike clubs

deemed to not have a suitable location in Mission to host the year-end event and had to

transplant the program to another city. The school programs, the race and the Bear Cub

are all held in the trail networks adjacent to Heritage Park in Mission. Those trails have

several challenges to being a viable venue and by June when the year-end event is

happening, the trails are choked with bushes and overgrowth that make them nearly

impassable.

Those trails were built by various individuals over the past few decades and are

currently adopted and maintained by the FVMBA and their volunteer builders. But they

also exist on land with unclear and controversial title and history. It is public land, but

the history of the adjacent residential school and the local First Nation’s goals for their

land are threaded deeply into its current standing. This (rightfully) limits the abilities of

the volunteers to legally improve the trail networks. And they are in dire need of

improvement.

There are many bridges in that network of 11km of trails that are at the end of

their life. They are anywhere from 5 to 10 to 15 years old and are becoming (or already

are) unsafe. The ice storm a few years back fell hundreds of trees in that area which the

volunteers cleared from the trails - to the celebration of the hundreds of users that love

116

6

the trails. However, the previous tree canopy is gone, and that is allowing the

underbrush to thrive. Nature is a wonderful thing, but nature is now reclaiming trails as

the brush and bushes are so thick, they are choking off trails that are used by hundreds

of Missionites weekly and once the trails close with brush, the forest will permanently

reclaim them quickly.

Due to this unclear future for the trails and the land, the volunteer’s abilities are

limited legally to just keeping things clear. No major trail construction and maintenance

can legally take place without proper approvals. Resolution to the land title challenges

has been suggested for 5+ years now, and while it is easy to appreciate the nuance of

the history and issues, it is also unfair to continually lead on the volunteers with

promises of a ‘new plan’.

As a result, the volunteers that try to keep the trails running can’t keep up with

these demands and have largely moved on to trails in other areas that are less

demanding of their scarce resources. These other trails are not in town and accessible

for kids, nor are they ‘beginner’ trails due to the steepness of the terrain - for example on

Bear and Red Mountains. Those trails are also seeing an increased amount of brushing

requirements in areas that have been clear-cut in the past decade. A longer and

warmer summer growing season has bushes taking over trails every year now when it

was every 2 or 3 years previously. This is increasing the demands for maintenance and

upkeep on the 100km+ of trails in the Mission Tree Farm which the same group of

volunteers is struggling to address as well.

117

7

All of this can be seen in the ridership comparison between any other riding area

and the trails adjacent to Heritage Park:

Figure 1: Rides per year @ Heritage Park

Figure 2: Rides per year @ Thornhill Trails - Maple Ridge

*Note - the ‘rides per year’ count above can be multiplied by roughly 8-10 to get the actual number of riders. That is because trail

counting studies we have done show only ~ 8-12% of riders track their rides using Trailforks.

The trails adjacent to Heritage Park are the only ones in the entire Fraser Valley that

have seen a decline in ridership in 2019. This is directly due to the poor condition of the

trails.

118

8

Cedar Valley Bike Park:

Added to the loss of trails near Heritage Park - a small ‘bike park’ which is on

private land in Cedar Valley is slated for development. Again, this land title is such that

the kids that use the area and have built jumps and bridges don’t have a leg to stand on

to save the are from development, but development is displacing their place to do their

thing - riding bikes and having fun.

Red Mountain Beginner Area:

There was an area at the bottom of Red Mountain which had trails of modest

grade and low elevation. As a result, these trails were beginner friendly and a place you

could take younger/newer riders for a short lap. Those trails are gone now due to the

exploration for gravel for the Highway 7 upgrade project. A bulldozer explored using the

trails as a path and it ran over them all. The area is still intact, and has dirt - no rocks! -

but there are no more trails with easy access.

Old Skate Park:

With the construction of the new Seniors Centre, this required the removal of the

old skate park at the Leisure Centre. This skate park was still in regular use by

younger/littler skaters and scooter-ers(?) who were looking for a modest challenge to

learn how to roll. This is another loss of recreation space for the younger and newer

skater/riders. Bikes also can enjoy features like these, and a new space can cater to all

young wheeled enthusiasts!

Safe Cycling Travels:

And finally, there is little to no safe cycling infrastructure for students to ride their

bikes to school. Bike racks are designs from years past that aren’t compatible with

many of today’s bikes. There is only one dedicated bike lane in Mission - along Cedar

St. for two blocks. And there is no safe connectivity for students to use that lane and

access the adjacent school and parks.

119

https://www.trailforks.com/skillpark/mission-skills-park/

9

So, to summarize - there are essentially no safe spaces for kids to ride their bikes

on the road, and now a declining number of places to do it off the road too.

The Consequences:

The elementary school bike club kicked off again this fall, but it has quickly

become clear that the trails near Heritage Park were not in safe condition. I personally

went to clear some fallen trees on the trails - but those were the least of the issues. The

brush and bush growth is such that half the trail network is closed currently. And the

previously mentioned bridge conditions mean that ride leaders have a very limited

selection of 1 or 2 short trails to take kids out and do their preferred sport.

The equivalent for baseball would be 6 out of 8 ball diamonds being deemed

closed due to the grass growing too long and the bases being so slimy that runners

would fall every time they rounded first! If this was the case, I can imagine that

resources would be deployed to remedy the matter. And the fact is resources are

deployed regularly to ensure this doesn’t happen to baseball. However, for the young

(and older) mountain (and road) cyclists in Mission, those resources have never been

there.

Data collection from Trailforks show that an estimated 3,600 individual riders

took to the trails in Mission in 2019. Of that, 40% are deemed ‘locals’ which means

around 1,440 riders in the local area enjoyed the various trail networks. 364 were

enjoying the trails near Heritage Park in 2019. And these statistics take into account

nearly zero of young riders as they are derived from people using a GPS device to track

their ride. We estimate around 150 young people from Mission ride and enjoy the trails.

We also see thousands of youngsters riding their bikes around town as from ages 4 to

16 - this is their primary mode of transportation which is good for both them, and the

environment.

Using another sport and facility analogy - the loss of trail access and lack of road

cycling infrastructure we see today would be equal to closing one arena and displacing

the 125 or so minor hockey players that use it. I feel like that would not be tolerated if it

came to be.

120

https://www.trailforks.com/

10

I hope this letter illustrates the enthusiasm the young people in our community

have for cycling - and this is without great places to do their sport of choice! We can get

more kids out to ride more bikes which will resolve many of the transportation issues

we currently have (parking & traffic), be better for the environment and be better for their

health. Kids can’t use screens when they are riding their bikes!

I also hope this letter communicates the challenges being faced by the volunteer

led and fueled cycling community and how a growing sport combined with declining

facilities = no way forward for our community’s young people to succeed in doing their

sport and having to hang up their bikes for good. That is the outcome we are aiming to

avoid.

I encourage you to engage the leadership from the FVMBA & the Elementary Bike

Club(s) to speak to the possibilities for mountain bike solutions, and to the leadership

from the Mission Community Cycling Coalition (M3C) to speak to the transportation and

facility opportunities that are already present and just require resourcing. These

volunteer organizations would love the support.

121


Parks, Recreation and Culture Staff Report to Council

File: 01-0550-20

DATE: March 2, 2020



SUBJECT: Lawn Bowling Lease Renewal

ATTACHMENT: 2020 Lease with Mission Lawn Bowling Club


That the Lease and Site License between the New Horizons Lawn Bowling Society and the District of Mission (DOM) be approved and the Mayor and Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the License.

PURPOSE:

This report is provided to Council as a follow-up to the request from the New Horizon Lawn Bowling Society to extend their lease of the Mission Lawn Bowling Club for an additional term.

BACKGROUND:

The New Horizons Lawn Bowling Society is a non-profit registered charity whose mandate is to “provide lawn bowling and other recreational activities for Senior Citizens” who reside in the District of District. The Society has advised the District that they wish to renew their current agreement, which has been in place since 1989.

The Society’s operational expenses are covered through annual membership fee, rental revenues and support from the District of Mission. The Club have not applied for a Fee for Service grant from the District of Mission since their 2017 operating year.


Lawn bowling in the District dates back to 1936. The New Horizons Lawn Bowling Society constructed the existing facility, located at 7560 Hurd, commencing in 1973. The lawn bowling facility includes the outdoor bowling greens as well as a small clubhouse used for social gatherings and carpet bowling during the fall and winter. The Society raised the necessary funds through various means to construct the building and develop the outdoor bowling greens and oversee the operation of the Club.

The Club has a membership that has fluctuated from a high of 36 to a low of 19 members. The Society has indicated by way of a letter from their current President that they would like to renew the agreement for a further term in order for the club to continue until they relocate to the new senior’s facility in 2021. This renewal provides the Society with a venue for indoor carpet bowling during the winter and throughout the year. The Club have not offered lawn bowling for several years as the lawn bowling grounds are not irrigated and keeping the greens in playable condition has become problematic without a significant capital input.

122


Given that the completion of the new facility is just over a year away and then followed by a move in phase, staff are recommending a two-year lease be signed with Council to allow for moving of the seniors centre and the Lawn Bowling Club.


This Lease and the service provided to DOM Seniors by the Society support several key recommendations included in the DOM Parks, Trails and Bicycle Master Plan related to providing active recreation for all ages.


The Lease obligates the DOM to act in the capacity of a Landlord but does not currently obligate the municipal to any additional financial commitments at this time.

COMMUNICATION:

Parks, Recreation & Culture staff has worked with the Society members to develop this report and will continue to support the Society’s efforts and encourage more community seniors to participate in the Club’s activities


Staff is seeking Council’s support for the Lease and the Site License attached to this report.

SIGN-OFFS:


S. Key Deputy Director of Parks, Recreation & Culture

Comment from Chief Administrative Officer: Reviewed.

123

of 14

APPENDIX A

LEASE AND SITE LICENSE THIS AGREEMENT made the ____ day of ________, 2020 BETWEEN:

DISTRICT OF MISSION P.O. Box 20

8645 Stave Lake Street District, BC V2V 4L9

(“the District”)

OF THE FIRST PART

AND:

NEW HORIZON LAWN BOWLING SOCIETY (Incorporation No. S-10558) 7560 Hurd Street

District, BC V2V 3H9

(“the Tenant”)

OF THE SECOND PART W H E R E A S: A. The District is the owner of the lands and premises described in Schedule “A” to this Agreement

(“the Premises”); ("the Premises"); B. The Tenant wishes to use the Premises to operate a lawn bowling facility; and C. The District has resolved to grant such permission to the Tenant subject to the terms, covenants,

and conditions contained in this Lease and Site License Agreement. NOW THEREFORE THIS LEASE AGREEMENT AND SITE LICENSE WITNESSES that in

consideration of the license fee, in the sum of One Dollar ($1.00), to be paid by the Tenant to the District and in consideration of the premises and covenants and agreements contained in this agreement (the “Agreement”), the District and the Tenant covenant and agree with each other as follows:

124

of 14

1.0 DEFINITION OF TERMS

For the purposes of this Lease the following terms shall have the following meanings:

Council means the Council of the District of Mission;

Premises means the lands, buildings and structures located at 7560 Hurd Street in the District

of Mission forming the Mission Lawn Bowling Club;

District means the District of Mission; Department means the Parks, Recreation & Culture Department of the District of Mission; Building means the Mission Lawn Bowling Clubhouse located at 7560 Hurd Street in the District of Mission; Society means the New Horizon Lawn Bowling Society (Incorporation No. S-10558); Board of Directors means the Board of Directors of the New Horizon Lawn Bowling Society (Incorporation No. S-10558);

2.0 RIGHT TO OCCUPY

2.1 The District, subject to the performance and observance by the Tenant of the terms,

conditions, covenants and agreements contained in this Agreement and to earlier termination

as provided in the Agreement, grants to the Tenant an exclusive right by way of license for the

Tenant, its agents, employees, and invitees to use the Premises in reasonable “quiet

enjoyment”, including the grounds and parking lot, for the purpose of operating a lawn bowling

club as well as other compatible recreational and community uses as seen fit by the Tenant

and with the approval of the District’s Director of Parks, Recreation and Culture.

3.0 LICENSE FEE

3.1 In consideration of the right to use granted under this Agreement, the Tenant must annually pay

to the District the sum of $1.00, to be paid at the commencement of the Lease and Site License

Agreement. Without in any way restricting the generality of the foregoing, the Tenant must pay

to the District G.S.T. on the licence fee.

4.0 TERM

4.1 The Term of the Lease granted under this Agreement commences on the 31st day of March,

2020 and expires on the 31st day of March, 2022 unless earlier terminated under this Agreement.

125

of 14

5.0 REGULATIONS

5.1 The Tenant must:

a) comply promptly at its own expense with the statutes, regulations and bylaws applicable to the Premises or the Tenant’s use of the Premises and other requirements of an association of fire insurance underwriters or agents, and all notices issued under them that are served upon the District or the Tenant; and

b) indemnify the District from all lawsuits, damages, loss, costs or expenses that the District may incur by reason of non-compliance by the Tenant with legal requirements or by reason of any defect in the Premises or any injury to any person or damage to any personal property brought on to the Premises. The Tenant is responsible for any damage to the Premises occurring while the Tenant is exercising its rights under the Agreement.

c) ensure that nothing be done that may become a nuisance or annoyance to adjoining properties.

d) not park, store, place or accumulate, or permit to be parked, stored, placed or accumulated on the Premises any vehicles, goods, materials or waste materials except as would typically be associated with the operation of a lawn bowling facility.

e) immediately respond to the reasonable requests of the District related to any action that, in the opinion of District, contravenes the intent of covenants included in this Lease.

6.0 RATES AND UTILITIES

6.1 The Tenant must pay all taxes, rates, duties and assessments whatsoever, whether federal,

provincial, municipal or otherwise charged upon the Tenant or the District in relation to the

Premises. Without in any way restricting the generality of the foregoing, the Tenant must pay

to the District G.S.T. on the similar tax.

7.0 CONSTRUCTION

7.1 The Tenant shall not construct, alter or place any buildings, structures or alterations or make

any other improvements on the Premises, unless it has the District’s prior written approval and

all such work shall be at the sole cost of the Tenant.

8.0 FIXTURES

8.1 That, unless the Tenant upon notice from the District removes them, all buildings, structures or improvements constructed on the Land by the Tenant will at the termination of the Agreement, become the sole property of the District at no cost to the District.

126

of 14

9.0 REPAIRS AND MAINTENANCE

9.1 The Tenant must repair reasonable wear and tear expected and maintain the Premises to a good standard of repair and cleanliness, including all portions of the Premises which may at any time become damaged.

9.2 The Tenant must keep and leave whole and in good repair all water, gas and electrical fixtures, plumbing, heating and cooling apparatus in, on or attached to the Premises.

9.3 The Tenant must ensure that the Premises are protected from any and all environmental damage resulting from any circumstances or activities within the control of the Tenant;

9.4 The Tenant shall allow the District to enter the property, upon proper notice, to view the condition of the Premises and satisfy itself as to the compliance with the Agreement.

9.5 If the Tenant fails to repair or maintain the Premises or improvements in accordance with Sections 9.1, 9.2, 9.3 and 9.4 of this Agreement, the District may, by its agents, employees or contractors enter the Premises and make the required repairs or do the required maintenance and the cost of the repairs or maintenance is a debt due from the Tenant to the District.

9.6 In making the repairs or doing the maintenance the District may bring and leave upon the Land the necessary materials, tools and equipment and the District is not liable to the Tenant for any inconvenience, annoyance, loss of business or other injuries suffered by the Tenant by reason of the District effecting the repairs or maintenance.

9.7 The District agrees to:

a) be responsible for maintenance of the structure, within the budget limitations of the Department, for items other than those identified in Sections 9.1, 9.2 and 9.3 of this Agreement which are the responsibility of the Tenant.

b) participate in an annual inspection of the Premises in advance of annual capital budget requests to Council.

10.0 INSURANCE

10.1 The Tenant must take out and maintain during the term of the Agreement a policy of

comprehensive general liability insurance against claims for bodily injury, death or property

damage arising out of the use of the premises by the Tenant in the amount of not less than two

million dollars per single occurrence or such greater amount as the District may from time to

time designate, naming the District as an additional insured party thereto and must provide the

District with a certified copy of such policy or policies.

10.2 All policies of insurance must contain a clause requiring the insurer not to cancel or change the

insurance without first giving the District thirty days prior written notice.

10.3 If the Tenant does not provide or maintain in force the insurance required by this Agreement,

the District may take out the necessary insurance and pay the premium for periods of one year

127

of 14

at a time and the Tenant must pay to the District as additional License fees the amount of the

premium immediately on demand.

10.4 If both the District and the Tenant have claims to be indemnified under any insurance required

by the Agreement, the indemnity must be applied first to the settlement of the claim of the District

and the balance, if any, to the settlement of the claim of the Tenant.

10.5 A cross-liability clause shall be made part of the insurance policy.

10.6 The deductible on the policy of insurance must be not more than five thousand dollars.

10.7 The District agrees to:

a) take out and maintain during the Term of this Lease a policy of insurance on the building

against the risk of loss or damage caused by or resulting from fire or any additional peril

against which the District normally insures District property.

b) If the building is destroyed by fire or any other means, the District has the sole discretion

to decide whether to rebuild it, and before making that decision, will consult with the

Tenant, and will take into consideration whether-

i. There are sufficient proceeds from the insurance policy together with any funds

held or raised by the Tenant to pay all costs of rebuilding;

ii. There is sufficient time in remaining in the Lease Term and Site License to justify

rebuilding on the lands;

iii. If the consideration in 10.7 b) (i) and (ii) are not favorable or if they are favourable

but there is insufficient funds acquired or raised under 10.8 b) (i) within 180 days

of the destruction of the Building, then the District may elect not to rebuild and, in

that case, this Lease Agreement and Site License will terminate

11.0 INDEMNIFICATION

11.1 The Tenant indemnifies the District, its elected officials, appointed officers, employees,

contractors, sub-contractors and agents from and against all lawsuits, damages, losses, costs,

expenses, liabilities or fees which the District may incur by reason of the use or occupation of

the Premises by the Tenant or the carrying on upon the land of any activity in relation to the

Tenant’s use or occupation of the Premises and in respect of any loss, damage or injury

sustained by the Tenant, or by any person while on the Premises for the purpose of doing

business with the Tenant or otherwise dealing with the Tenant, or by reason of non-compliance

by the Tenant with Laws or by reason of any defect in the Premises, including all costs and legal

costs, assessed on a solicitor and client basis, and disbursements and this indemnity shall

survive the expiry or sooner determination of this Agreement.

128

of 14

11.2 The Tenant releases the District, its elected officials, appointed officers, employees, contractors,

sub-contractors and agents from and against all claims, lawsuits, damages, costs, expenses,

losses, liabilities or fees (including fees of a solicitor on a solicitor and own client basis) which

the Tenant may incur, suffer or alleged by reason of the use of the Premises by the Tenant or

the Tenant’s directors, officers, employees, contractors, sub-contractors, agents, members,

volunteers and invitees. This release shall survive the expiry or sooner determination of this

Agreement.

12.0 BUILDERS LIENS

12.1 The Tenant agrees to not permit any liens to be registered against the property for any reason;

if any lien is registered against the property, the Tenant must immediately obtain its discharge

from title.

13.0 NOTICES

13.1 Notices

a) Each notice sent pursuant to this Agreement ("Notice") shall be in writing and shall be sent to the relevant Party at the relevant address, facsimile number or e-mail address set out below. Each such Notice may be sent by registered mail, by commercial courier, by facsimile transmission, or by electronic mail.

b) The Contact Information for the parties is:

DISTRICT OF MISSION PARKS, RECREATION & CULTURE DEPT.

NEW HORIZON LAWN BOWLING SOCIETY

7650 Grand Street Mission, BC V2V 3T3

7560 Hurd Street District, BC V2V 3H9

Tel: 604-820-5350 Tel: 604-826-8802

Director of Parks, Recreation & Culture President of the Lawn Bowling Society

c) Each Notice sent by electronic mail ("E-Mail Notice") must show the e-mail address of the sender, the name or e-mail address of the recipient, and the date and time of transmission, must be fully accessible by the recipient, and unless receipt is acknowledged, must be followed within twenty-four (24) hours by a true copy of such Notice, including all addressing and transmission details, delivered (including by commercial courier) or sent by facsimile transmission.

d) Subject to section 13.1e) through g) each Notice shall be deemed to have been given or made at the following times:

129

of 14

i. if delivered to the address (including by commercial courier), on the day the Notice is delivered;

ii. if sent by registered mail, seven (7) days following the date of such mailing by sender;

iii. if sent by facsimile transmission, on the date the Notice is sent by facsimile transmission; or

iv. if sent by electronic mail, on the date the E-Mail Notice is sent electronically by e-mail by the sender.

e) If a Notice is delivered, sent by facsimile transmission or sent by electronic mail after 4:00 p.m., or if the date of deemed receipt of a Notice falls upon a day that is not a Business Day, then the Notice shall be deemed to have been given or made on the next Business Day following.

f) Notice given by facsimile transmission in accordance with the terms of this section 13.1 will only be deemed to be received by the recipient if the sender's facsimile machine generates written confirmation indicating that the facsimile transmission was sent.

g) If normal mail service, facsimile or electronic mail is interrupted by strike, slow down, force majeure or other cause beyond the control of the parties, then a Notice sent by the impaired means of communication will not be deemed to be received until actually received, and the party sending the Notice shall utilize any other such services which have not been so interrupted or shall personally deliver such Notice in order to ensure prompt receipt thereof.

h) Each Party shall provide Notice to the other Party of any change of address, facsimile number, or e-mail address of such Party within reasonable time of such change.

14.0 TERMINATION

14.1 If the Tenant is in default on the payment of License Fees, or the payment of any other sum payable under this Agreement, or is in breach of this Agreement, and if the default continues after the giving of notice by the District to the Tenant, then the District may terminate this Agreement and the rights of the Tenant with respect to the Premises shall lapse and be absolutely forfeited

14.2 If, in the District’s sole opinion, the Tenant fails to make diligent use of the Premises for the purposes set out in this Agreement, and the Tenant’s failure continues after the giving of notice in writing by the District to the Tenant, then the District may terminate this Agreement and reenter the Premises and the rights of the Tenant with respect to the Premises lapse and are absolutely forfeited.

14.3 Either party of this Agreement may, at their sole discretion, exercise an early termination clause, subject to giving the other party of this Lease Agreement 365 days’ prior notice of pending termination.

130

of 14

14.4 On expiry or other termination of this Lease, at the Tenant’s own cost, the Tenant will:

a) Peaceably quit and deliver up possession of the Premises to the District in a safe, clean, and sanitary condition;

b) Remove any materials or things owned by the Tenant located on the Premises; c) Restore the Premises to the satisfaction of the District as identified in section 19.1.

14.5 Within 30 days of after the expiry or other termination of this Lease, and to the extent necessary, this clause shall survive the cancellation or other termination of this Lease; if after 30 days after the termination or other cancellation of this Lease any improvements or other materials or things remaining on the Premises, shall, at the option of the District, be absolutely forfeited to and become the property of the District, and the District may remove the improvements or things and restore the Premises or take any other action it may wish related to the use of the Premises.

14.6 The Tenant is not entitled to compensation for any loss, including economic loss, or injurious affection or disturbance resulting in any way from the termination of the Lease or the loss of the Tenant's interest in any building, structure or improvement built or placed on the Land.

15.0 INSOLVENCY

15.1 If:

a) during the Term or any of the goods or chattels on the Land are at any time seized or taken in execution or attachment by any creditor of the Tenant, or

b) if a writ of execution issues against the goods or chattels of the Tenant, or

c) if the Tenant makes any assignment for the benefit of creditors, or

d) being an incorporated company or society if proceedings are begun to wind up the company or society, or

e) if the Premises or any part of it becomes vacant or unoccupied for a period of thirty (30) days or is used by any other person or persons for any purpose other than permitted in this Lease Agreement without the written consent of the District,

the Term shall, at the option of the District, immediately become forfeited and the Tenant’s rights will terminate immediately despite any other provision of this Agreement.

16.0 FORFEITURE

16.1 The District, by waiving or neglecting to enforce the right to forfeiture of this Agreement or the right of reentry upon breach of this Agreement, does not waive the District's rights upon any subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement.

17.0 REMEDIAL ACTION

17.1 a) If the Tenant fails to do anything required of the Tenant under this Agreement, (the "Tenant Requirement") the District may fulfill or complete the Tenant Requirement at

131

of 14

the cost of the Tenant and may, if necessary, by its agents, officers, employees or contractors enter onto the Premises to fulfill and complete all or part of the Tenant Requirement as the District determines in its sole discretion.

b) The Tenant releases the District, its elected officials, appointed officers, employees and agents from and waives any claim, right, remedy, action, cause of action, loss, damage, expense, fee or liability which the Tenant may have against any or all of them in respect of an act of the District under this section or section 9.0Error! Reference source not found. except insofar as such claim, right, remedy, action, cause of action, loss, damage, expense, fee or liability arises from the negligence of the District, its elected officials and appointed officers, employees, agents or contractors.

18.0 TREE CUTTINGS, EXCAVATIONS AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES

18.1 a) The Tenant must not carry on or do or allow to be carried on or done on the land any cutting, clearing or removal of trees, bushes or other vegetation or growth or any excavation or disturbance of the surface of the Land and must not bring on or deposit any soil or fill on the Land except with the written consent of the District.

b) The Tenant must not bring on, deposit, store, spray or apply nor cause or permit to brought on, deposited, stored, sprayed or applied on or to the Land or any trees, bush or vegetation on the Land any chemical fertilizer, herbicide, pesticide or other chemical or petroleum product or any substance which is capable of contaminating the Land or any water on the Land.

19.0 CLEAN UP

19.1 At the end of the Term, the Tenant must clean up the Premises and restore the surface of the Land as reasonably as may be possible to the condition of the Land prior to the commencement of the Term of this Agreement.

20.0 MISCELLANEOUS

20.1 The Tenant warrants and represents that it has authority to enter into this Lease, taken all corporate steps necessary to authorize this Lease and to authorize the execution of this Agreement by the person on behalf of a group or organization and warrants and represents to the District that the Tenant has sufficient power, authority, and capacity to bind the group or organization with his or her signature.

20.2 The execution and delivery of this Agreement, and the completion of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement, if any, have been duly and validly authorized by all necessary corporate action of the Tenant, and this Agreement constitutes a legal, valid and binding obligation of the Tenant, enforceable against the Tenant in accordance with its terms.

20.3 In consideration of being granted the use of the Premises, the Tenant agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement and, if the Tenant represents a group or organization, the Tenant agrees to inform all responsible persons associated with the group or organization of the terms and conditions of this Agreement.

20.4 The Tenant shall provide District with a current and up to date list of responsible parties to be contacted related to the operation of the Club and the maintenance of the grounds.

132

of 14

20.5 The Tenant agrees that it will work closely with the District’s Parks, Recreation & Culture Department and the neighborhood to resolve issues that are within the neighborhood from time to time.

20.6 No term, condition, covenant or other provision herein shall be considered to have been waived by a party unless such waiver is expressed in writing by the party. Any such waiver shall not be construed as a waiver of any other portion of this Lease.

20.7 Waiver of any default by a party is not a waiver of any subsequent default.

20.8 The Lease is personal to the Tenant and the Tenant may not assign its interest to any other person without the written consent of the District, which consent may be withheld by the District in its sole discretion.

20.9 All rights and remedies provided in this Agreement are cumulative and not exclusive of any other rights or remedies that may be available to the parties, whether provided by law, equity, or statute.

20.10 Each schedule to this Agreement is an integral part of this Agreement as if set out at length in the body of this Agreement.

20.11 Time is of the essence of this Agreement.

21.0 INTERPRETATION

21.1 That when the singular or neuter are used in this Agreement they include the plural or the feminine or the masculine or the body politic or corporate where the context or the parties require.

21.2 The headings to the clauses in this Agreement have been inserted as a matter of convenience and for reference only and in no way define, limit or enlarge the scope or meaning of this Agreement or any provision of it.

21.3 That this Agreement must enure, to the benefit of and be binding upon, the parties hereto and their respective heirs, executors, successors, administrators and permitted assignees.

21.4 This Agreement must be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws applicable in the Province of British Columbia.

21.5 All provisions of this Agreement are to be construed as covenants and agreements as though the word importing covenants and agreements were used in each separate paragraph.

21.6 A provision in this Agreement granting the District a right of approval must be interpreted as granting a free and unrestricted right to be exercised by the District in its discretion.

21.7 The Tenant must not sub-let this Lease.

21.8 The Agreement is not assignable.

133

of 14

21.9 This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and no understanding or agreement, oral or otherwise, exists between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement except as expressly set out in this Agreement and this Agreement may not be modified except by subsequent agreement in writing between the parties.

21.10 If any section of this Lease and Site License or any part of a section is found to be unlawful or unenforceable, that part or section, as the case may be, shall be considered separate and severable and the remaining parts or sections, as the case may be, shall not be affected thereby and shall be enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by the law.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have set their hands and seals as of the day and year first above written. DISTRICT OF MISSION ) by its authorized signatories ) ) ) Pamela Alexis, Mayor

)

) ) Jennifer Russell, Corporate Officer ) NEW HORIZON LAWN BOWLING SOCIETY by its authorized signatories

) )

) ) Name: ) ) ) Name: )

134

of 14

SCHEDULE "A” DESCRIPTION OF LAND AND PREMISES

The area of land particularly described as Lot 300, Section 20, Township 17, Plan 50882, New Westminster District, 7560 Hurd Street situate in the District of Mission, Province of British Columbia and outlined on the sketch below in red.

135


Parks, Recreation and Culture

Staff Report to Council

File: 01-0550-20

DATE: March 2, 2020



SUBJECT: Heritage Park Centre Clarke Theatre and Community Gym - Funding

ATTACHMENT: Clarke Theatre and Community Gymnasium MOU


1. That the Clarke Theatre and Community Gymnasium Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), as provided in the Director of Parks, Recreation and Culture’s report dated March 2, 2020, be approved and the Mayor and Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the MOU;

2. That a $115,000 increase to the annual amount provided to the Mission Public School District to offset the operating costs of the Clarke Theatre and the community gym be approved;

3. That a one-time contribution of $15,595 toward the cost of the replacement sound board for the Theatre be approved;

4. That the $115,000 increase for 2020 be funded from the Financial Stabilization Reserve;

5. That the $115,000 increase for 2021 be funded from annual property tax revenue;

6. That the $15,595 contribution for the sound board be funded from the Gaming Reserve; and

7. That the Financial Plan be adjusted accordingly.

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to request Council’s support to provide additional funding to support the operation of the Clarke Foundation Theatre (Theatre) and the community gymnasium located at the Heritage Park Centre.

BACKGROUND:

The District of Mission (DOM), the Mission Public School District (SD) and the University of the Fraser Valley jointly developed the Heritage Park Centre creating a school / community venue which includes the Clarke Foundation Theatre and a community gymnasium. While the stated intent of the 2002 Operating Agreement references joint development and operation of the facility the contribution from the DOM has remained fixed at $35,000 for a number of years until the 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 school years when DOM Council temporarily increased the contribution to $100,000; this report is provided to Council in order to seek a new funding arrangement until a more thorough review and development of a new joint operating agreement can completed by staff.

136



During a recent meeting with the SD Trustees and DOM Council it was requested by the SD that the DOM needed to more fully support the community aspect of operating and managing the Theatre and community gymnasium used frequently for community programs, special events and productions.

Heritage Park Centre has always been intended to operate as a community facility and this is clearly set out in the 2002 Heritage Park Centre Operating Agreement’s Vision Statement:

“From the beginning, there was an understanding that Heritage Park Centre was a collaboration effort with a common goal of enriching the lives of people in our community by expanding cultural, recreational and educational opportunities. It was understood that by pooling and sharing resources, not only for capital construction, but also for the ongoing operations, programming, and service delivery, much more was possible than by one organization might accomplish on its own.

Community schools are multi-service centres working in partnership with other community agencies, organizations and individuals to improve the quality of life in the community. Community schools use process, which facilitates citizen involvement in local need identification, decision making, problem solving and program implementation. A community school is a designated school/facility open beyond the traditional school schedule to offer prevention and early intervention, community learning and participation opportunities to people of all ages.”

Currently over 80% of the use of the Theatre is for community or business purposes and not school use. Despite this strong community usage, the District contributed $35,000 annually up until the 2017-2018 school year when the amount was temporarily increased to $100,000 for two years for the ongoing operation of the Theatre and community gym. In 2015, Council also provided a one-time additional contribution of $75,000 for the replacement of the gymnasium floor. In order to provide a more equitable arrangement a two-year agreement was signed in 2018 that covered the 2017-2018 and the 2018-2019 school years. Staff are now seeking and additional commitment from Council to cover the next two school years.

The SD Trustees are requesting further assistance with the operating costs of the Clarke Foundation Theatre and the community gymnasium in the amount of an additional $115,000 in 2020 for the 2019-2020 school year and an additional $115,000 in 2021 for the 2020-21school year. In the interim staff will continue to develop a new joint use agreement to cover the operation of Heritage Park Centre and more specifically those elements that were envisioned for community usage. A memorandum of understanding setting out these changes is provided in Attachment A.

In addition to increased funding of the operational costs, the SD has also requested that the DOM contribute equally to the costs to replace the sound board for the Theatre. This equipment is critical to the operation of the theatre and the total replacement cost was $32,165.


This report addresses Council’s goals related to creating a more livable community.


Should Council support increasing the financial contribution to the Clarke Foundation Theatre and the community gymnasium, the additional $115,000 funding for 2020 could be taken from the Financial Stabilization Reserve. District staff recommend a property tax increase (approximately 0.35%) be considered in 2021 to fund the additional $115,000 in 2021 and beyond if approved.

Should Council consider a one-time contribution of $15,595 in 2020 for the replacement sound board the funding source for this expense could be the Gaming Reserve.

137


The Financial Stabilization Reserve has an uncommitted balance of approximately $400,000 above its recommend minimum balance and the Gaming Reserve has an uncommitted balance of approximately $350,000.

I have reviewed the Financial Implications of this report:

Doug Stewart, Director of Finance

COMMUNICATION:

Staff will advise the Mission Public School District immediately following Council’s decision.


This report is provided to Council to seek additional support for the operation of the Clarke Foundation Theatre and the Community Gymnasium in support of the original vision to provide better community amenities to increase cultural, recreational and educational opportunities for individuals who work and attend school in the mission community.

SIGN-OFFS:


S. Key Deputy Director of Parks, Recreation & Culture


Reviewed.

138

of 4

Attachment A

Clarke Theatre and Community Gymnasium Funding Memorandum of Understanding

BETWEEN: District of Mission

(hereinafter called the “DOM”)

AND: Mission School District #75

(hereinafter called the “School District”)

The DOM and the School District hereby understand and agree to the following funding for the

operation of the Clarke Theatre and Community Gym for the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 school years:

1. The DOM agrees to provide the School District with a total contribution of up to $150,000 in

each of the 2019-2020 and the 2020-2021 school years to offset costs to for the Clarke Theatre

and the Community Gym and a further one-time contribution of $15,595 in 2020 for the

replacement sound board.

2. The School District agrees to provide a total contribution of $80,000 in each of the 2019-2020

and the 2020-2021 school years to offset costs to operate the Clarke Theatre.

3. The School District and the DOM agree that any excess funding over operating expenses will be

held in a restricted reserve by the School District for future operating costs, repairs and / or

maintenance for the Theatre or the Community Gym. Annually, both parties will review the

operating budget and approve any planned draws from the restricted reserve.

4. The School District will continue to retain the Theatre Manager as previously agreed, and the

Theatre Manager remains an employee of the School District.

5. If the current Theatre Manager should leave the position, the parties agree that the new

Theatre Manager shall be mutually agreed to.

6. The School District will continue to maintain the status quo at the Theatre respecting issues

related to the care and upkeep of the Theatre.

7. All theatre equipment installed in or used by the Theatre remain in the Theatre for the school

years that are the subject of this funding agreement.

8. The School District and the DOM agree to review the Heritage Park Centre Operating Agreement

and consider recommended revisions before June 30, 2019.

DATED at Mission, B.C. this day of , 2020

SIGNED

ON BEHALF OF THE DISTRICT OF MISSION

ON BEHALF OF THE MISSION PUBLIC SCHOOL

DISTRICT # 75

Pamela Alexis, Mayor

Jennifer Russell, Corporate Officer

139

Parks, Recreation and Culture

Staff Report to Council

Page 1 of 5

File: 01-0550-20

DATE: March 2, 2020


FROM: Stephanie Key, Deputy Director Parks, Recreation & Culture

SUBJECT: Public Art Policy and Public Art Program

ATTACHMENTS: A – Revised Public Art Policy


1. That the current Public Art Policy – ADM.10(C) be repealed and replaced with the revised Public Art Policy attached to the Deputy Director of Parks, Recreation and Culture’s report dated March 2, 2020; and

2. That LAN.40 (c) Financial Contributions for Community Amenities Policy be amended to include Public Art as a listed project.

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to repeal the existing Public Art Policy and replace it with the revised Public Art Policy (Attachment A).

BACKGROUND:

The primary purpose of the Public Art Policy, which guides the Public Art Program, is to provide a mechanism by which the District develops and acquires Public Art through its commission, purchase, donation or community partnerships. The Public Art Program is the management and administrative arm of the Policy.

Council has asked staff to review the current Public Art Policy in light of the challenges experienced with the proposed 1st Ave Public Art Project in 2019. As a result, staff reviewed numerous policies and programs in other communities, utilized the Public Art Toolkit published by the Creative City Network of Canada (a national professional arts network that connects municipal cultural staff across Canada) and completed a re-write with consultation from the Cultural Resources Commission, Mission Arts Council and District Planning and Engineering Departments.


Key aspects of the revised Public Art Policy are listed below.

1. The Purpose of Public Art has been condensed and Guiding Principles and Values of Public Art have been included to complement the revised Purpose.

2. Administration of Public Art has been enhanced to define the 3 streams (Civic, Community and Private Sector) outlined in the Public Art Program.

3. Artist Selection Panels and Review Panels have been established to work with the Parks, Recreation and Culture Department to the guide the development and selection of projects and remove Council from the approval process.

140

of 5


This report addresses Council’s goals related to creating a more livable community.


There are no financial implications associated with this report.

COMMUNICATION:

The revised Public Art Policy has been reviewed by the Cultural Resources Commission, Mission Arts Council and District Planning and Engineering Department staff.


The Parks, Recreation & Culture Department is seeking Council’s approval to repeal the existing Public Art Policy – ORG.08 and replace it with the revised Public Art Policy attached to this report. Additionally, staff is seeking the inclusion of Public Art in LAN.40 (c) as a listed project applicable for the Community Amenity Reserve Fund.

SIGN-OFFS:

S. Key, Deputy Director of Parks, Recreation & Culture

M. Sinclair, Director of Parks, Recreation & Culture


141

of 5

Attachment A

POLICY AND PROCEDURE

MANUAL

Category: Parks, Recreation & Culture

Number: ADM.28(C) PUBLIC ART POLICY

Type: Authority: Approved By:

☒ Policy

☐ Procedure

☒ Council

☐ Administrative

☒ Council

☐ Chief Administrative Officer

☐ Department Head

Office of Primary Responsibility: Parks, Recreation & Culture

Date Adopted:

Council Resolution No: Date to be Reviewed:

INTRODUCTION:

Public Art facilitates healthy growth of a community. It creates a vibrant sense of place and contributes to a community’s unique cultural identity. It enhances the quality of life, contributes to economic development and celebrates a community’s heritage and distinctive cultural diversity. It brings art to life for its citizens in many everyday settings. Public Art shows a commitment to local artists and to providing citizens with access to art from Mission, British Columbia, Canada and around the world.

PURPOSE:

The purpose of the Public Art Policy is to define and guide the development and implementation of the Public Art in Mission. It reflects a commitment and desire to connect and engage with the community through art by creating vibrant and meaningful public places.

The Public Art Policy is administered by the Public Art Program.

DEFINITION:

“Public Art” means original art works, permanent or temporary, in any medium or discipline, placed or incorporated in public spaces, indoor or outdoor locations, for the benefit of the public. Public Art includes but is not limited to:

• Sculpture, in any combination of materials, whether in the round, bas relief, high relief, mobile, fountain, kinetic or electronic;

• Murals, mosaics, fibre works, glass works, photography, paintings or other art forms in any combination of materials;

• Aesthetic enhancements of Municipal infrastructure such as railings, street furniture, sidewalks, buildings, equipment, streetlights, manhole covers and waste receptacles.

142

of 5

For the purpose of further definition, the following elements are not considered Public Art:

• Directional elements, signage, or colour coding except where these elements are an integral part of the work of art;

• Objects that are mass-produced in a standard design, such as playground equipment, benches, drinking fountains and light fixtures;

• Art work that serves as advertising for a business (such as a mural depicting the services of the business). This type of commercial art is considered to be advertising and is reviewed as signage;

• Art work which has been placed in public places illegally or without the permission of the property owner.

GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF PUBLIC ART:

Public Art aims to ensure:

• That it is accessible to all;

• That considerations for Public Art are integrated into the planning, design and execution of civic projects;

• That various art mediums, types, sizes and different locations are considered;

• That Public Art illustrates the diversity and history of the community; and

• That the development and acquisition of Public Art is transparent and professional providing opportunities for public participation and community partnerships.

WHAT IS THE VALUE OF PUBLIC ART?:

• Public Art enriches the public environment and promote awareness, understanding, access and enjoyment of art as part of everyday life for Mission residents and visitors;

• Public Art promotes and encourages the development and public awareness of the arts;

• Public Art creates a vibrant sense of place and contributes to a community’s unique cultural identity;

• Public Art enhances the quality of life, contributes to economic development and tourism and celebrates a community’s heritage and distinctive cultural diversity; and

• Public Art creates opportunities and encourages all types of artists and artistic expression.

ADMINISTRATION:

Public Art will be divided into three distinct streams:

1. Civic Public Art

The goal of Civic Public Art is to enhance and animate civic facilities and spaces through art. The opportunities may emerge with new facilities and land being developed or revitalized.

2. Community Public Art

The goal of Community Public Art is to encourage resident engagement through participation in the creative process and the development of art that enlivens a neighbourhood and fosters a sense of place and connection.

143

of 5

3. Private Sector Public Art

The goal of Private Sector Public Art is to enhance a private or public space. In this case the private space must be visible and/or accessible in the public realm.

The administration and management of all Public Art will be led by the Parks, Recreation & Culture Department in consultation with other appropriate District departments, community Review and Selection Panels and the Cultural Resources Commission.

Parks, Recreation & Culture will establish either an Artist Selection Panel (Civic Public Art) or Review Panel (Community Public Art and Private Sector Public Art) for each project. The role of the Panels is to review the submissions or proposals that have been short-listed by Parks, Recreation & Culture and to make a final decision on approval or denial. Parks, Recreation & Culture will provide short-listed submissions or proposals to other District departments for comment. Additionally, Parks, Recreation & Culture may seek the expertise of outside consultants such as architects, arts educators, engineers, trades professionals, designers, etc for further comment.

The Panels will include the Parks, Recreation & Culture Project Lead, District Manager of Community & Civic Engagement, two members of the Cultural Resources Commission, Executive Director of Mission Arts Council, one professional artist and one member of the community with an impact/relationship to the project. The Panel may ask the short-listed artists to provide a presentation to them before making a decision. The ultimate objective of the Panel is to reach a unanimous decision, however members may be divided in their evaluations and as such a majority vote will determine the selection, if need be.

FUNDING:

The District is committed to the long-term development of Public Art and will provide funding based on financial priorities as determined by Council. Public Art projects, including acquisitions will be planned as part of the annual budgeting process and there must be sufficient funds and criteria in place before any project can be started.

RELATED DOCUMENTS, PROCEDURES, AGREEMENTS AND/OR BYLAWS:

Public Art Program

*** END OF POLICY ***

RECORD OF AMENDMENTS/REVIEW

Policy # Date Adopted Date Reviewed Amended (Y/N) Date Re-issued Authority (Resolution #)

144

Engineering & Public Works Staff Report


File: 11-5240-10-20

DATE: March 2, 2020 TO: Chief Administrative Officer FROM: Graham Harder, Engineering Technologist I - Development SUBJECT: Imposition of Latecomer Charges on Stave Lake Street ATTACHMENTS: A – Identification and Distribution of Extended Latecomer Charges on Stave Lake

Street B – S17-013 – Latecomers Agreement

RECOMMENDATIONS: Council consider and resolve: 1. That the owner of 8208 Stave Lake Street, 33996, 34038, and 34048 Parr Avenue that is to

be subdivided or developed provide the excess and/or extended services shown on Attachment A, Exhibit 1 in the report from the Engineering Technologist I – Development dated March 2, 2020 (the Report);

2. That the cost to provide the excess and/or extended services shown on Attachment A, Exhibit 1 of the Report, in whole or in part, is considered excessive, and that the cost of providing these services shall be paid for by the owner of the land being subdivided or developed;

3. That Latecomer Charges be imposed for excess and/or extended services, as shown on Attachment A, Exhibit 1 of the Report, which are required to be installed as part of the referenced Subdivision/Development project;

4. That Latecomer Charges will be imposed on the parcels listed in Attachment A, Exhibits 6 and 8 of the Report in the amounts shown; and

5. That the Mayor and Corporate Officer be authorized to enter into a Latecomer Agreement with the owner of the land that is being developed.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this report is to advise Council to establish latecomer charges in conjunction with subdivision file S17-013 for the parcels identified on Stave Lake Street and Parr Avenue in Attachment A, Exhibit 1. These charges will be collected together with interest, as specified in the Development and Subdivision Control Bylaw 5650-2017 (Bylaw) from latecomers who connect to or use the designated services within a Ten (10) year period, commencing from the date of substantial completion as determined by the Director of Engineering and Public Works.

BACKGROUND: The Bylaw requires that a report be forwarded to Council for approval of the imposition of latecomer charges, pursuant to Section 508 of the Local Government Act, on parcels identified on Stave Lake Street and Parr Avenue in Attachment A, Exhibit 1.

145


Where an owner of land that is to be subdivided or developed is required by a local government to provide excess or extended services, and where a local government considers that the cost to the municipality to provide these services would be excessive, the local government can require that a proportion of the cost of providing these services be paid by any latecomers. However, where the owner is required to pay for these costs, the local government is required to: 1. Determine the proportion of the cost of providing sewer, drainage, highway, or water services that it

considers constitutes the excess or extended services; 2. Determine which part of the excess or extended service that it considers will benefit each of the

parcels of land that will be served by the excess or extended service; and 3. Impose, as a condition of an owner connecting to or using the excess or extended service, a charge

related to the benefit as determined under item 2 above.

DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS: The extended services installed in conjunction with file S17-013 consists of the construction of a sanitary sewer main on Stave Lake Street. These works were installed to service the development; however, they would also be of benefit to other properties on Stave Lake Street looking to connect to the municipal sanitary sewer main. Latecomer charges try to ensure that the initial Developer is provided a means to recover some of their costs of constructing the works that will not only benefit their development, but also the adjacent properties should the adjacent properties wish to connect. The proportional costs to be recovered from the benefiting properties were reviewed by staff and are considered fair market value. Attachment A, Exhibits 1 through 8 give details of the services required, the benefiting area, and distribution of costs to each parcel within the benefiting area.


The District shall be responsible for collecting latecomer charges and applicable interest when the benefitting parcels identified in Attachment A, Exhibit 1 are connected or developed. The District will then pass these funds on to the initial Developer within 60 days of receipt in accordance with the Bylaw Schedule “F” Section 5.0. In accordance with the Bylaw, Introduction Section, Item 8.4, the interest rate applicable to latecomer agreements is 7%. In accordance with the Bylaw Schedule “F” Section 5.0 the interest will be calculated annually.

Notwithstanding the staff time cost to administer the agreement, there will be no direct financial impact on the District.

I have reviewed the financial implications Scott Ross, Manager of Accounting Services

146


COMMUNICATION: The Developer of 8208 Stave Lake Street, 33996, 34038, and 34048 Parr Avenue will need to be notified of the imposition of latecomer charges. The owners of the benefitting parcels will need to be notified of the latecomer charges applied to their properties when they inquire about a service connection, rezoning, or subdivision development of their land. The Planning and Engineering and Public Works departments will need to be notified of the imposition of latecomer’s charges on the identified parcels in Exhibit 1.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION: The details in Attachment A, provided by the Developer’s consultant, were reviewed by staff. The content is a fair representation of how the Local Government Act intends to impose latecomer charges on the benefitting parcels. In conclusion, staff support the latecomer charges detailed within this report pursuant to Section 508 of the Local Government Act, and recommend they be imposed on the benefitting properties. Staff also recommends that the Mayor and Corporate Officer be authorized to enter into a latecomer agreement (Attachment B) with the Owner of the land that is being developed.

SIGN-OFFS:

Graham Harder, Engineering Technologist I - Development

Reviewed by: Jay Jackman, Manager of Development Engineering, Projects & Design


147

X

X

XX X X X

XX

XX

XX

X X X X X X X X X X X X XX

X

X

X

X

www.wedler.com

Chilliwack

Courtenay

Surrey

THE WEDLER GROUP

1.604.792.0651

1.250.334.3263

1.604.588.1919

DISTRICT OF MISSIONAbbotsford

1.604.746.0300

NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

Exhibit 1A

Sanitary SewerExtended Service

Developer’s Lands

Developer’s Lands

Benefitting Lands

812080928056 8168

Attachment A 148

Developer’s Lands

Benefiting Lands

EXHIBIT 1Exhibit 1A149

Developer’s Name: Parr Ventures LtdFile No. S17-013Latecomer File No. S17-013Service: Sanitary Sewer

☐ 2A EXCESS SERVICES þ 2B EXTENDED SERVICES

No. Legal Description Benefiting Parcel Civic Address Designated

use per OCP

Area in Ha. EDU”s per Ha.

EDU”s per Parcel

1Lot C, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, EXC: PCL "E" (REF PL 3915)

8056 Stave Lake StreetAttached Multi-Unit

Res 3.68 35.00 128.80

2Lot D, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, EXC: PCL "E" (REF PL 3912)


Res 0.05 35.00 1.86

3Lot E, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, EXC: PCL "E" (REF PL 3915)


Res 0.11 35.00 3.68

4Lot B, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, EXC: PCL "E" (REF PL 3915)


Res 2.02 35.00 70.70

5

Lot A, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, EXC: PCL "ONE" (REF PL 5512)


Res 1.98 35.00 69.30

6

Lot A, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, PCL "ONE" (REF PL 5512), Manufactured Home Reg.# 102282


Res 2.02 35.00 70.70

To Exhibit 5 for Excess o Exhibit 6 for Extended 345.03

Developer’s Lands

No. Legal Description Benefiting Parcel Civic Address Designated

use per OCP

Area in Ha. EDU”s per Ha.

EDU”s per Parcel

1Lot B, Plan NWP8857, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District.

8202 Stave Lake Street; 2.153ha

Attached Multi-Unit

Res

2 Lot A, Plan NWP8857, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District.

33996 Parr Avenue; 1.542ha

Attached Multi-Unit

Res

3 Lot A, Plan LMP8769, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District

34038 Parr Avenue; 1.2145ha

Attached Multi-Unit

Res

To Exhibit 5 for Excess o Exhibit 6 for Extended 516.88

EXHIBIT 2A; Sanitary Sewer

EQUIVALENT DEVELOPMENT UNITS PER PARCEL

Note: Developer’s lands to be included in Exhibits 2A Excess Services only if service is a sewage pump station and forcemain system or a community storm water detention pond. Developer’s lands must be included in Exhibits 2B Extended Services.

4.91 35.00 171.85

150


A $1,433,490.00B 516.88C $2,773.35

Attach copy of detailed estimates.


COST PER EDU FOR EXTENDED SERVICE

Note: For this Exhibit the Total EDU’s shall exclude the Developer’s lands.

Costs in A shall be net of any credit given by the Municipality for Development Cost Charges payable where works are included in a Development Cost Charge Program.

Total extended service cost as per attached detailed estimateTotal EDU’s from Exhibit 2B (includes Developer’s lands)Extended service cost per EDU (A divided by B)

May 28, 2019

Tiegen Excavating Ltd.

Parr Ventures Ltd.

Dear Sirs;

Re: Parr Avenue Offsite Sanitary Works - Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC

We are pleased to quote the following:

D e s c r ip t io n U n it E x te n s io n

S a n ita ry S e w e r L S 9 8 7 ,3 4 0 .0 0$

A s p h a lt M ill & O v e r la y L S 1 6 2 ,4 6 0 .0 0$

L in e P a in tin g L S 1 7 ,9 4 0 .0 0$

G e n e ra l R e q u ire m e n ts L S 8 5 ,7 5 0 .0 0$

T o ta l L u m p S u m 1 ,2 5 3 ,4 9 0 .0 0$

GST is extra.

Notes and clarifications:

1. Overexcavation and replacement with gravel below pipe/bedding zone is extra at a cost of $36.00/mt plus crew

downtime.

2. We have assumed a maximum thickness of existing asphalt at 150mm. Asphalt thicker than this will be extra

at a cost of $260.00/m3.

3. This quotation is based on Husky Oil's listed CRP rack price for penetration graded 80\100A or PG graded

64-25 liquid asphalt binder cement. This quotation is subject to change based on the current rack price for liquid

asphalt at the time the specified work is completed.

4. Contract acceptance open for 30 days and subject to mutual agreement on construction schedule and contract.

5. We are not responsible for delays due to strikes, fire, accidents, or causes beyond our control, force majeure.

Exclusions:

Asphalt mill and overlay beyond limits shown on the drawings

Replacement of detector loops, if required

Landscaping

Erosion and sediment control works beyond that shown on the drawings

Overexcavation and backfill with granular material; see note 1. above

Geotechnical testing

Bonding and permits

Rock excavation

Excavation and removal of contaminated material

Dewatering

Drawing reference:

Wedler Engineering - Drawing No. A17-0747/D

- Sheet 00 to 06 - Rev C - May 7, 2019

Thank you for the opportunity to quote.

Yours truly,


Jason Tiegen

180,780.00

20,290.00

90,750.00

1,433,490.00$

1,141,670.00

151

May 28, 2019


Parr Ventures Ltd.

Dear Sirs;

Re: Parr Avenue Offsite Sanitary Works - Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC

We are pleased to quote the following:

D e s c r ip t io n U n it E x te n s io n

S a n ita ry S e w e r L S 9 8 7 ,3 4 0 .0 0$

A s p h a lt M ill & O v e r la y L S 1 6 2 ,4 6 0 .0 0$

L in e P a in tin g L S 1 7 ,9 4 0 .0 0$

G e n e ra l R e q u ire m e n ts L S 8 5 ,7 5 0 .0 0$

T o ta l L u m p S u m 1 ,2 5 3 ,4 9 0 .0 0$

GST is extra.

Notes and clarifications:

1. Overexcavation and replacement with gravel below pipe/bedding zone is extra at a cost of $36.00/mt plus crew

downtime.

2. We have assumed a maximum thickness of existing asphalt at 150mm. Asphalt thicker than this will be extra

at a cost of $260.00/m3.

3. This quotation is based on Husky Oil's listed CRP rack price for penetration graded 80\100A or PG graded

64-25 liquid asphalt binder cement. This quotation is subject to change based on the current rack price for liquid

asphalt at the time the specified work is completed.

4. Contract acceptance open for 30 days and subject to mutual agreement on construction schedule and contract.

5. We are not responsible for delays due to strikes, fire, accidents, or causes beyond our control, force majeure.

Exclusions:

Asphalt mill and overlay beyond limits shown on the drawings

Replacement of detector loops, if required

Landscaping

Erosion and sediment control works beyond that shown on the drawings

Overexcavation and backfill with granular material; see note 1. above

Geotechnical testing

Bonding and permits

Rock excavation

Excavation and removal of contaminated material

Dewatering

Drawing reference:

Wedler Engineering - Drawing No. A17-0747/D

- Sheet 00 to 06 - Rev C - May 7, 2019

Thank you for the opportunity to quote.

Yours truly,


Jason Tiegen

180,780.00

20,290.00

90,750.00

1,433,490.00$

1,141,670.00

152


No. Legal Description Benefiting Parcel Civic Address EDU's Extended (from Ex. 2B)

Cost / EDU's Extended (from

Ex. 4)

Extended Latecomer

Charge Total


8056 Stave Lake Street 134.33 $2,773.35 $372,542.46



3 Lot A, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, EXC: PCL "ONE" (REF PL 5512)


Lot A, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land 8168 Stave Lake Street 70.70 $2,773.35 $196,070.73


DISTRIBUTION OF EXTENDED LATECOMER SERVICE CHARGE

153


No. Legal Description Benefiting Parcel Civic Address Sanitary Sewer Drainage Highway Water


8056 Stave Lake Street $372,542.46



3Lot A, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, EXC: PCL "ONE" (REF PL 5512)


4 Lot A, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land 8168 Stave Lake Street $196,070.73

Totals $956,883.25 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

EXHIBIT 8

TOTAL EXTENDED LATECOMER CHARGE PER PARCEL

<------------------- Latecomer Charge ------------------->

154

S17-013 – Latecomer Agreement

THIS AGREEMENT made this 24 day of FEBRUARY , 2020:

BETWEEN: Parr Ventures Ltd.

(hereinafter called the 'Developer')

OF THE FIRST PART

AND

DISTRICT OF MISSION, a Municipal Corporation duly incorporated under the laws of the Province of British Columbia, with offices at 8645 Stave Lake Street, in the District of Mission, British Columbia

(hereinafter called the 'Municipality')

OF THE SECOND PART

WHEREAS

A. The Developer is the owner of and proposes to develop certain lands knownand described as:

Lot C, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, EXC: PCL "E" (REF PL 3915)

Lot D, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, EXC: PCL "E" (REF PL 3912)

Lot E, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, EXC: PCL "E" (REF PL 3915)

Lot B, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, EXC: PCL "E" (REF PL 3915)

Lot A, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land District, EXC: PCL "ONE" (REF PL 5512)

Lot A, Plan NWP2110, Section 27, Township 17, New Westminster Land

(hereinafter called the 'said lands')

for Multi-Family Residential use.

B. The Municipality has required the Developer to install or provide certain

Attachment B155

excess or extended services in connection with the proposed Subdivision/Development which may provide access to or serve land other than the said lands.

C. The Municipality does not have sufficient funds to make a contributiontowards the cost of all the said excess or extended services.

D. The Municipality intends to provide for the collection of a share of theconstruction cost of the required excess or extended services from theowners of other lands who may connect to or use the said excess orextended services and provide for the repayment of these monies to theDeveloper.

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual covenants and agreements hereafter set forth, it is agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows:

1. The terms and expressions used in this agreement shall be as defined in theMunicipality's currently enacted Development and Subdivision Control Bylaw 5650-2017 as.

2. The determination of Latecomer Charges shall be in accordance with theMunicipality's adopted Development and Subdivision Control Bylaw 5650-2017 andLocal Government Act Section 508.

3. The extent of the excess or extended services upon which the Latecomer Chargesare determined shall be as shown on Exhibit '1' attached hereto.

4. This agreement shall take effect as of the date of issuance of a Certificate ofCompletion of the construction of the excess or extended services as certified by theDirector of Engineering and Public Works.

5. The maximum total Latecomer Charge imposed by the Municipality, exclusive ofaccrued interest, shall be as follows:

(i) excess service:a. Sanitary system $__________________

b. Drainage system $__________________

(ii) Extended service:

a. Sanitary system $_1,433,490.00_______

b. Drainage system $___________________

c. Highway system $___________________

d. Water system $___________________

The actual total Latecomer Charge imposed by the Municipality will depend on the number of properties within the benefiting area which connect to or use the excess or extended services during the time that this Agreement is in force.

156

6. The total amount of contribution for excess water services to be paid to the Developer within 60 days of the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion is $ .

7. This Agreement shall become null and void upon the earlier of the fifteenth anniversary of the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for the excess or extended services, or when the total Latecomer Charges pursuant to clause 5 herein, plus accrued interest, have been paid.

8. The Municipality shall collect from the latecomers within the benefiting areas, the charges up to the amount recorded in Exhibit '8' at the time the latecomer applies to connect to or use the excess or extended service. For phased Subdivision/Development, the charges will be prorated and collected in each phase. The connection of a single family dwelling on a parcel designated for future higher use shall be considered a special case of a phased Subdivision/Development and dealt with in accordance with the Development and Subdivision Control Bylaw, Schedule F, 4.10.

9. The Latecomer Charges shall be collected by the Municipality at the time the latecomer applies to connect to or use the excess or extended services installed by the Developer within the time this Agreement is in effect as described in clauses 4 and 7 herein.

10. The Municipality shall pay any collected Latecomer Charges to the Developer within the time specified in the Municipality's Development and Subdivision Control Bylaw, Schedule F at the address of the Developer set forth in this Agreement, or at such other address as the Developer may provide. If the said payments are returned to the Municipality, they will be held in trust until the expiration of this Agreement, at which time the monies will be treated as unclaimed money in accordance with applicable legislation.

11. Should the Developer wish to assign his right to receive Latecomer Charges to others, he shall complete an Assignment or Transfer of Rights form pursuant to the Municipality's adopted Latecomer Policy.

12. The Developer covenants and agrees that there are no financial agreements or arrangements by which owners of land within the benefiting area as listed on Exhibit(s) 7' and/or '8' have contributed or will be contributing to the cost of the excess or extended services which are the subject of this Agreement.

13. The Municipality accepts no liability in the event that Latecomer Charges cannot be collected due to subsequent changes in design or catchment areas.

14. In the case that the Developer fails to complete the construction of excess or extended services to the point where a Certificate of Completion is issued in accordance with the Servicing Agreement covering the works, this Agreement shall become null and void and be of no further force or effect.

15. It is MUTUALLY UNDERSTOOD, agreed and declared by and between the parties hereto that:

a. Municipality has made no representations, covenants, warranties, guarantees, promises or agreements, oral or otherwise, with the Developer other than those contained in this Agreement;

b. nothing contained or implied herein shall prejudice or affect the rights and powers of the Municipality in the exercise of its functions under any public or private statutes, bylaws, orders and regulations, all of which may be fully and effectively exercised in relation to the said lands as if this Agreement had not been executed and delivered by the Developer;

c. wherever the singular or masculine is used herein, the same shall be construed as meaning the plural, feminine, or the body corporate or politic where the context of the parties so require and, where the Developer consists of more than one person, the term 'Developer' shall mean all such persons

157

jointly and severally; d. this Agreement shall ensure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties

hereto and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns; and

e. the parties hereto shall do and cause to be done all things and execute and cause to be executed all documents which may be necessary to give proper effect to the intention of this Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this contract the day and the

Y M D

158

year first above written. OFFICER SIGNATURE(S) PARTY(IES) SIGNATURE(S) by its authorized signatory/ies

________________________________

________________________________ ________________________________ (as to the signature of only or as to all signatures)

________________________________ DISTRICT OF MISSION by its authorized signatories _________________________________ (as to the signature of only)

________________________________

Mayor ________________________________

Director of Corporate Administration

159

Development Services Staff Report


File: 0340-50-02

DATE: March 2, 2020


FROM: Ken Bourdeau, Manager of Long Range Planning and Special Projects

SUBJECT: Universal Bus Pass (U-pass) Extension Agreement

ATTACHMENT(S): A – Draft U-Pass Extension Agreement


That the Mayor and Corporate Officer be authorized to execute the extension to the Universal Bus Pass (U-pass) Agreement, included as Attachment A in the Manager of Long Range Planning and Special Projects’ report dated March 2, 2020.

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report to request a decision from Council on the extension of the Universal Bus Pass (U-pass) Agreement.

BACKGROUND:

The U-pass Agreement (Attachment A) is an agreement developed by BC Transit to permit students at the University of the Fraser Valley the use of transit services upon presentation of a valid universal transit card. The following parties are signatory to the existing agreement:

• District of Mission

• City of Abbotsford

• City of Chilliwack

• BC Transit

• University of the Fraser Valley (UFV)

• University of the Fraser Valley Student Union Society (UFVSUS)

The objectives of the U-pass agreement are:

• Provide a lower cost sustainable transportation option for students;

• Ease traffic congestion and reduce automobile dependence;

• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions;

• Support provincial and regional environmental objectives; and

• Increase transit ridership

160



The existing U-pass agreement expires on August 31, 2020. The current agreement has UFV collect a mandatory fee from each eligible student and pass the revenue to the City of Abbotsford, who then distributes portions of the revenue to BC Transit, Chilliwack and Mission based on ridership surveys detailed in the agreement. The mandatory fee has three components (2020 rates):

U-pass Component CPI Item 2019 Fee 2020 Fee

Transit Transportation $34.65 $35.52

Student Union All items $5.51 $5.63

Recreation All items $5.51 $5.63

Total 2020 Fee for the academic year

$46.78

These fees increase annually based on the consumer price index (CPI). The municipal recreation centre component allows free access to recreational facilities in Mission and Abbotsford. A portion of the revenue that is received by Mission from Abbotsford goes to the Parks, Recreation and Culture budget.

A two-year extension is proposed because UFVSUS has expressed an interest in incorporating the Fraser Valley Express (FVX) into the U-pass agreement. This is dependent on UFVSUS providing BC Transit with useable ridership data from their existing inter-campus shuttle.

Any expansion of the scope of the U-pass agreement would necessitate a review of all components of the agreement, including: rate, terms and conditions and administration.


There are no financial implications associated with this report. The total revenue received by the District through the U-pass program was approximately $198,000 in 2019 and that is expected to increase with the expected increases in CPI and student enrollment.

COMMUNICATION:

Staff will apprise BC Transit representatives of Council’s decision.


The existing U-pass agreement is set to expire on August 31, 2020. A resolution of Council is required to extend the program for two years beyond this date to August 31, 2022.

SIGN-OFFS:


Reviewed by: Mike Dickinson, Senior Planner - Policy


161

of 3

University of the Fraser Valley:

U-PASS EXTENSION AGREEMENT

February 18, 2020

1.0 Purpose

The purpose of this agreement is to:

extend the current U-PASS agreement in the Fraser Valley

2.0 Partners

The partners in this agreement are:

CITY OF ABBOTSFORD

DISTRICT OF MISSION

CITY OF CHILLIWACK

(referred to collectively as as Local Government Partners (LGP))

BC TRANSIT

UNIVERSITY OF THE FRASER VALLEY (UFV)

UNIVERSITY OF THE FRASER VALLEY STUDENT UNION SOCIETY (UFV SUS)

3.0 Existing Term

In April 2018, the U-PASS agreement was extended for a two-year period (September 1, 2018 to August 31, 2020) based on the following considerations:

to provide further time for UFV students to evaluate the suitability of the Fraser ValleyExpress (FVX) service for incorporation into a future U-PASS agreement via astudent referendum.

All other terms and conditions of the U-PASS agreement remained the same.

4.0 Current Status

In the period since the most recent extension was signed, BC Transit has held discussions with UFVSUS and LGP in regards to incorporating the FVX service to the U-PASS agreement. At this point in time, further analysis is required to understand the potential impact that adding U-PASS ridership would have on existing capacity on the FVX. With this understood, all partners are agreeable to the principles of a 2-year extension of the current agreement, without inclusion of the FVX service. The extension would be moved forward on the basis that it does not preclude the ability for expanded U-PASS option(s) to be introduced, if agreed to by all partners, in order to better serve UFV students.

ATTACHMENT A162

of 3

5.0 Proposed Extension

It is proposed to extend the current U-PASS Agreement by two years to August 31, 2022 based on the following considerations:

to provide further time for analysis to be conducted on the impact that introducting of FVX service to the U-PASS agreement would have on FVX capacity and for UFV students to determine suitability for incorporation of the FVX service into a future U-PASS agreement via student referendum.

All other terms and conditions of the existing U-PASS agreement remain the same.

6.0 Proposed U-PASS Rate Adjustment for 2020

Please be advised that the agreement between the City of Abbotsford, City of Chilliwack, District of Mission, BC Transit, the University and Student Union Society establishes that changes in U-PASS fees will be adjusted annually based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) from the previous calendar year. The transit portion of the U-PASS program will be adjusted based on the CPI, Transportation Index for British Columbia. The recreation and value-added components of the U-PASS program will be adjusted annually based on the CPI, All-items Index for British Columbia. Per the agreement, BC Transit provides these adjusted rates by May 1 of each year based on a period of 12 months for implementation each September.

As part of this agreement, the indexed changes to the UFV U-PASS rate for the academic year 2020/2021 are listed in the table below:

U-Pass Component CPI Item 2019 Fee 2020 Fee

Transit Transportation $34.65 $35.52

Student Union All Items $5.51 $5.63

Recreation All Items $5.51 $5.63

Total $46.77

ATTACHMENT A163

of 3

APPROVAL

That all parties agree to the scope of the U-PASS extension as noted in this Extension agreement.

City of Abbotsford

Name: ______________________ Position:

Signature: _______________________ Date:_____________________

District of Mission

Name: Position:

Signature: _______________________ Date:_____________________

City of Chilliwack

Name: Position:

Signature: _______________________ Date:_____________________

BC Transit

Name: Position:

Signature: _______________________ Date:_____________________

University of the Fraser Valley

Name: Position:

Signature: _______________________ Date:_____________________

University of the Fraser Valley Student Union Society

Name: Position:

Signature: _______________________ Date:_____________________

ATTACHMENT A164

Development Services - Planning Division

Staff Report


Project: P2019-059 File: 08-3310-20

DATE: March 2, 2020

BYLAW / PERMIT #: 5918-2020-5050(373)

PROPERTY ADDRESS:7607 Wren Street

PID: 006-361-960 Legal: LOT 104 SECTION 19 TOWNSHIP 17 NEW WESTMINSTER DISTRICT PLAN 49875


CURRENT ZONING: Urban Residential 558 Zone (R558)

PROPOSED ZONING: Urban Residential 558 Secondary Dwelling Zone (R558s)

CURRENT OCP: Urban Residential

PROPOSAL:

To allow an existing secondary dwelling unit in the form of a secondary suite at 7607 Wren Street.

165



This report details the rezoning application for the property located at 7607 Wren Street and identifies the necessary amendment to the Zoning Bylaw.

Staff support the application moving forward and, as such, have listed Zoning Amending Bylaw 5918-2020-5050(373) under the “Bylaws for Consideration” section of the Council Agenda.

Subject to Council’s approval, a public hearing will be scheduled for March 16, 2020.

PURPOSE:

To rezone the property from Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to Urban Residential 558 Secondary Dwelling (R558s) Zone to allow a secondary dwelling unit.

RATIONALE OF RECOMMENDATION:

The proposal is consistent with the Official Community Plan (OCP).

• OCP Policy 5.1.26 encourages rezoning for secondary dwelling units as a form of infill housing. Secondary dwelling units may be considered on lots that are large enough to accommodate the following associated elements: on-site parking, private outside space, a separate entrance that is clearly secondary to the primary dwelling, and that the scale of the secondary dwelling is clearly ancillary to the primary use.

• The secondary dwelling unit already exists as part of the principal dwelling with further renovations proposed. The property is large enough to allow for the required off-street parking spaces. The proposed renovations will ensure the secondary suite is under the maximum allowance of 90 m² (968.8 ft) and permitted under the Zoning Bylaw.

• During the building permit review and plan check process, staff will ensure the proposed secondary suite meets the requirements of the BC Building Code.

SITE CHARACTERISTICS AND CONTEXT:

Applicant

Amandeep Dhanju

Property Size

Approximately 669 m² (7,201 ft²)

Neighbourhood Character

The subject property is located within an urban residential neighbourhood. It is comprised of single-family dwellings on urban-sized lots. The proposed secondary dwelling unit will fit within the context of the surrounding properties and is believed to have little impact on the surrounding neighbourhood. Typically, complaints that arise from secondary suites relate to inadequate off-street parking. As noted, this proposal meets the off-street parking requirements of the Zoning Bylaw.

REFERRALS:

Engineering Department: The Engineering Department has no objection to this proposal.

Building Division: No concerns.

Bylaw Enforcement Division: No concerns.

166


MOTI: No concerns.

COMMUNICATION:

Communication action, as listed below, is in accordance with Council Policy LAN.03 Development Notification Signs, Land Use Application Procedures and Fees Bylaw 3612-2003, and the Local Government Act.

Provided that a public hearing date is determined by Council:

1. the development notification sign will be modified to advertise the public hearing details and a notice will be mailed to the owners and occupiers of all properties within a radius of 152 m (498 ft) from the development site notifying them of the public hearing details;

2. a Notice of Public Hearing will be prepared in accordance with Bylaw 3612-2003 and the Local Government Act; and

3. a pre-public hearing information package will be prepared to include copies of all applicable documents and is available online or at Municipal Hall for public viewing (in accordance with Policy LAN.50 Pre-Public Hearing Information Packages).

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO FINAL READING:

The Final Reading of the amending bylaw will be held until the following has been satisfied:

1. Any requirements resulting from Council’s consideration of the Bylaw, including Public Hearing.

ATTACHMENTS:

A – Location Map

B – Engineering Comments

SIGN-OFFS:

Rob Publow, Manager of Planning

JH / rp


167


ATTACHMENT A – Location Map

168


ATTACHMENT B – Engineering Comments

169


170

Development Services - Planning Division Staff Report


File: 08-3310-18 P2018-042

DATE: March 2, 2020

BYLAW / PERMIT #: 5922-2020-5050(375)

PROPERTY ADDRESS:

7632 Hurd Street


CURRENT ZONING: Urban Residential 558 Zone (R558)

PROPOSED ZONING: Multiple Family 52 Rowhouse Zone (MR52)

CURRENT OCP: Attached Multi-unit Residential

PROPOSED OCP: No change

PROPOSAL: To rezone the property to allow for three fee simple row house units

171



This report details the rezoning application to rezone the property located at 7632 Hurd Street from R558 Zone to MR52 Zone and identifies the necessary amendment to the Zoning Bylaw.

A development permit application to address the form and character of the proposed development has also been received.

Staff support the application moving forward and as such have listed the Zoning Amending Bylaw under the “Bylaws for Consideration” section of the agenda. The development permit will be listed under the “Permits for Consideration” section of the agenda at the same time of the bylaw adoption.


PURPOSE:

To rezone the property to accommodate a 3 lot subdivision.


The proposal is consistent with the Official Community Plan.


Applicant

• RAM Engineering

Property Size

• 7632 Hurd Street is approximately 1,092.65 m² (11,761.18 ft²) in area.

• The property fronts on Hurd Street and has lane access at the rear of the property.

• The property is generally flat.

• There is one dwelling that will be removed as part of the subdivision process.


• The area is a built out primarily with single family dwellings in the neighbourhood. The developmentsite is adjacent to the Neighbourhood Centre OCP designation of Hurd Street and 7th Avenue.

• The development of row house multi-family units is a new form of housing for the area which isconsistent with the OCP designation and therefore is a housing form that can be expected in thearea in the future.

Environmental Protection

• There are no watercourses on the property. No report from a biologist is required.

Parks and Trails

• Kinsmen Park West is located across 7th Avenue to the south of the subject property.

Servicing

• Development of this area will require servicing, as outlined under "Referrals".

172


DEVELOPMENT PERMIT:

Development Permit Number and Type

DP18-036 Multi-Unit Development Permit

Development Permit Details

The purpose the of Multi-Unit Development Permit is to establish guidelines for the form and character of the development in order to achieve a higher standard of building design, housing alternatives, site compatibility and site aesthetics that are consistent with a vibrant residential neighbourhood.

The three row houses have been designed with varying roof lines, facades, materials and colours resulting in an individual look for each dwelling, as shown on Attachment B. The houses have been designed with well-defined entry ways and porches fronting Hurd Street, which provide good street presence, and addresses Crime Prevention Through Environment Design (CPTED) principles, with primary living areas having a clear view of the street. The landscape plans include plantings along the front of the building, grass, and concrete pavers from the street to each unit that provide increased individuality for each unit.

The design drawings and landscape drawings submitted for DP18-036 meet or exceed the Multi Family Development Permit guidelines outlined in the Official Community Plan, as such, staff recommend approval of the Development Permit.

REFERRALS:

Engineering Department: Refer to Attachment C. From an Engineering point of view, the application may proceed to 3rd Reading.

Community Amenity Contribution

The applicant has volunteered to contribute $2,815 per new lot/unit in accordance with Council Policy LAN.40(C).

Tree Management

As the application is for a Multi Family project LAN.32 Tree Retention and Replanting is not applicable. Landscaping for the development will be achieved with the Development Permit.

COMMUNICATION:


• The applicant has posted one development notification sign.

• Public Hearing Notification will be sent to all occupiers and owners of properties within 152 m from the development site, notifying them of the public hearing details.

173


REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO FINAL READING:

Final Reading of the Zone Amending Bylaw will be held until the following have been satisfied:

1. Substantial completion of subdivision application S18-016.

2. Collection of any volunteered contributions to the District’s community amenity reserve.

3. Completion of the Engineering requirements, as described in Attachment C.

4. Any other requirements resulting from Council’s consideration of the Bylaw, including Public Hearing.

ATTACHMENTS:

A – Location Map

B – Draft Development Permit (DP18-036)

C – Referral Comments

SIGN-OFFS:


MB / rp / sj


Reviewed.

174


ATTACHMENT A – Location Map

175


ATTACHMENT B – DRAFT Development Permit

176


ATTACHMENT B – DRAFT Development Permit (Continued)

177



178



179



180



181



182



183



184



185



186



187


ATTACHMENT C – Engineering Comments

188



Project: P2019-099 File: 08-3310-20

DATE: March 2, 2020


FROM: Hardeep Atwal, Planner

SUBJECT: Rescind Zoning Amending Bylaw 5885-2019-5050(361) and Land Use Contract (LUC) Repeal Bylaw 5884-2019

ATTACHMENTS: Appendix 1 – Information for Corporate Officer


Appendix 3 – File Closure Request

CIVIC ADDRESS: 11546 and 11596 Dewdney Trunk Road

APPLICANT: Tyler Dean

OCP: Resource Industrial

DATE APPLICATION COMPLETE: September 6, 2019

LOCATION: Steelhead Neighbourhood

189

of 6 STAFF REPORT TO COUNCIL


This report details the applicant’s request to close the development application to rezone 11546 and 11596 Dewdney Trunk Road to the Industrial Resource Extraction and Processing (INRP) Zone and to discontinue the Repeal Bylaw of Land Use Contract 714-1978 under Section 546 of the Local Government Act.

Zoning Amending Bylaw 5885-2019-5050(361) and Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5884-2019 are currently sitting at second reading, and all readings need to be rescinded to close the file. Staff have listed the bylaw under the “Bylaws for Consideration” section of the Council agenda.

SUMMARY:

A rezoning application was received from Tyler Dean, for the properties located at 11546 and 11596 Dewdney Trunk Road (Appendix 2). The application had proposed to rezone:

• 11546 Dewdney Trunk Road from Land Use Contract 714-1978 to Industrial Resource Extraction and Processing (INRP) Zone; and

• 11596 Dewdney Trunk Road from the Industrial Resource Extraction (INR) Zone to the Industrial Resource Extraction and Processing (INRP) Zone.

The rezoning application was presented to Council on the dates below:

• First and Second Reading: December 2, 2019

• Public Hearing and Third Reading: December 16, 2019 (deferred until further information provided).

The applicant, at the direction of the property owner, submitted a formal request to withdraw the rezoning application (R19-031) and all associated bylaw amendments on February 12, 2020. The applicant has stated their intent to apply for a Temporary Use Permit for the subject properties as an alternative to rezoning. As such, all bylaw readings of rezoning file R19-031 are to be rescinded and the rezoning file closed. The anticipated application will be forwarded for Council consideration, once complete.

Land Use Contract (LUC)

As part of the file closure, the LUC Repeal Bylaw 5884-2019 is to be rescinded because this process was initiated with the applicant’s approval under section 546 of the Local government act, which requires the owner’s approval. As approval has been withdrawn by the owner, staff intend to incorporate the removal of LUC 714-1978 into the municipal initiated process under section 548 of the Local Government Act, which does not require owner approval, and bring forward an independent report to council at a future date.

File Closure Request

In accordance with Land Use Development File Closure and Extension Policy - LAN.13, the applicant has provided a written request to close the rezoning file (R19-031) and all associated bylaw amendments. The file closure request is attached as (Appendix 3).

190


SIGN-OFFS

Hardeep Atwal, Planning

Reviewed by: Robert Publow, Manager of Planning


191


Appendix 1 - Information for Corporate Officer

Civic Address:

11546 Dewdney Trunk Road

PID: 006-136-397

Legal: Lot 2 Sections 16 and 17 Township 18 New Westminster District Plan 41306

Civic Address:

11596 Dewdney Trunk Road

PID: 006-136-371

Legal: Lot 1 Section 17 Township 18 New Westminster District Plan 41306

192


Appendix 2 - Location Map

193


Appendix 3 – Request to Close Rezoning Application R19-031

194

Development Services - Planning Division

Staff Report


Project: P2019-030 File: 08-3310-20

DATE: March 2, 2020

BYLAW / PERMIT #: DV19-006

PROPERTY ADDRESS:

13-11540 Glacier Drive

LOCATION: Stave Falls

CURRENT ZONING: Comprehensive Development 7 Zone (CD7)

PROPOSED ZONING: No change

CURRENT OCP: Rural Residential

PROPOSED OCP: No change

PROPOSAL:

To allow a retaining wall exceeding the maximum height built without a Building Permit.

195



This report details the application for a development variance to vary the permitted retaining wall height from 1.20 m (3.9 ft) to 2.3 m (7.55 ft) and identifies the variance to the applicable section of the Zoning Bylaw.

The Development Variance Permit has been listed for approval under the “Development Permits for Consideration” section of the agenda.

PURPOSE:

To accommodate an existing retaining wall built without a Building Permit and exceeding the maximum height permitted in the Zoning Bylaw.


The proposal fits with the character of the neighbourhood and is not anticipated to negatively impact any of the surrounding neighbourhood.


Applicant

• Thor Shay

Property Size

• 11540 Glacier Drive is approximately 4.92 ha (12.16 ac) in area.

• 11540 Glacier Drive is a strata lot on which several detached strata units have been constructed.


• This property is located within Glacier Estates, a stratified single-family style development in the Stave Falls neighbourhood.

• This property is surrounded by natural open space to the South, East, and West. Lands to the North are developed with rural residential and agricultural uses.

REFERRALS:

Engineering Department: The Engineering Department has no objection to this proposal.

Building Division: No comment.

Bylaw Enforcement Division: No comment.

DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS:

Rationale for Variance

• Due to the topographical constraints on the property, the retaining wall is required in order to accommodate the style of home that the owners have constructed.

• Staff does not believe that the retaining wall will have any significant impact on neighbouring properties.

196


Development Variance Permit

Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 establishes a maximum height for retaining walls of 1.20 m (3.9 ft) when they are not located at a property line. The applicant is seeking to vary Section 111 (B) (2) of the Bylaw by:

• Increasing the maximum height of a retaining wall from 1.20 m (3.9 ft) to 2.3 m (7.55 ft).

Staff support the proposal and have drafted the Development Variance Permit (Attachment C).

COMMUNICATION:


• A Notice of the Development Variance Permit application was sent to all owners and occupiers of properties within a radius of 10 m (30 ft), which amounts to 8 mailouts. As of February 24, 2020, no comments have been received.

ATTACHMENTS:

A – Site Plan

B – Photograph of Retaining Wall

C – Draft Development Variance Permit (DV19-006)

SIGN-OFFS:


KP / rp / sj


197


ATTACHMENT A – Site Plan

198


ATTACHMENT B – Photograph of Retaining Wall

199


ATTACHMENT C – Draft Development Variance Permit DV19-006

200

of 3

The Minutes of the Cultural Resources Commission meeting held in the Meeting Room at Ricky’s Country Restaurant, 32081 Lougheed Highway Mission, BC on Wednesday, December 18, 2019 commencing at 5:15pm.

Members Present: J. Priestley, Chair A. CharkerV. BillesbergerM. DavidsonM. Demers-ShavitzD. HandleyS. Key, Deputy Director, Parks, Recreation & Culture

Members Absent: C. Sarfeld, Vice Chair T. GibsonJ. Gill (Council Liaison)P. Alexis (Mayor)

1. CALL TO ORDER

J. Priestley called the meeting to order at 5:15pm.


Moved by V. Billesberger; seconded by A. Charker.1. That the agenda of the Wednesday, December 18, 2019 meeting of the Cultural

Resources Commission be approved as amended.CARRIED

3. MINUTES FOR APPROVAL BY AMENDMENT

Moved by V. Billesberger; seconded by A. Charker.1. That the Wednesday, November 20, 2019 meeting of the Cultural Resources

Commission be approved as amended. CARRIED

201

Cultural Resources Commission Minutes December 18, 2019

Page 2 of 3

4. BUSINESS ARISING FROM AGENDA

a) Public Art Policy and Program – Draft Discussion

- The Public Art Policy and Program draft was circulated in advance of the meeting for discussion. The following points were raised and considered. The Mission Arts Council and District Engineering and Planning Department representatives have reviewed the drafts.

The Policy

- Definition – sidewalks were included under aesthetic enhancements to Municipal infrastructure.

- Approvals for Public Art projects have been revised. Selection and review panels are proposed to provide for broader community representation. A question arose regarding Indigenous representation on the panels. It was felt this was covered off when necessary under the local professional artist or a member of the community with an impact/relationship to the project section. Council is not part of the approval process.

- Administration process was clarified to include the 3 Public Art Streams. - Guiding Principles and Value of Public Art was added. - A discussion arose regarding the semantics of some of the terminology. For

example, it was discussed that the term “administered” might be better used than the term “supported” (page one of the Policy). The word “support” could be misconstrued or used in a variety of different ways.

The Program

- The Program is more robust and contains more content information, in particular in the Management of Public Art and Maintenance and Conservation sections. Deaccession is further defined including process and criteria

- Newly added is a section on Managing Controversy. - A discussion arose regarding new Public Art opportunities and decision-making

processes, including prioritizing them. This will be included as an agenda item in early 2020.

- There seemed to be a consensus that many members of the public are not aware of Mission’s Public Art, the current Public Art inventory, the budget, or the CRC. This will be included as an agenda item in early 2020.

- Suggestion to reword bullets 7,8,9 and 10. Concern that the current phrasing will inhibit and create limitations.

- The new Policy goes to Council for review and approval. A question arose: Will the Program also be submitted to Council? S.Key will clarify this for the next meeting.

- A report will be submitted to Council and signed by S. Key and M.Sinclair. The Chair of the CRC and the Mission Arts Council Executive Director will also be asked to sign the report. These signatures will send a collaborative message to

202

Cultural Resources Commission Minutes December 18, 2019

Page 3 of 3

Council that demonstrates the breadth of people in the Public art decision-making process.

- Action Item: S. Key will make revisions to the Policy and Program drafts with the intent to bring them before Council early in 2020.

b) CRC Members - A warm, heartfelt “Thank you,” to D. Handley and V. Billesberger who have completed their terms.

5. NEW BUSINESS

a) Action Item: Agenda Topic for January: review the time frame of the CRC meetings.

6. NEXT MEETING

The next meeting is on Wednesday, January 15 at 5:15pm in the Conference Room at the Mission Leisure Centre.

7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 6:20pm.

TOPIC ACTION ITEMS 1. Public Art Policy &

Program S. Key will make revisions to the drafts in preparation for a report to go to Council in early 2020.

3. New Business J. Knowles to add the CRC meeting times to the January 15, 2020 agenda. 4. 5. 5.

203

MINUTES of the REGULAR MEETING of the COUNCIL of the DISTRICT OF MISSION and COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, British Columbia, on February 18, 2020 commenced at 6:00 p.m.

Council Members Present: Councillor Danny Plecas, Acting Mayor Councillor Cal Crawford Councillor Mark Davies Councillor Jag Gill Councillor Carol Hamilton Councillor Ken Herar Council Members Absent: Mayor Pam Alexis Staff Members Present: Barclay Pitkethly, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer Jennifer Russell, Corporate Officer *Kirsten Hargreaves, Manager of Social Development Tracy Kyle, Director of Engineering and Public Works *Kerri Onken, Deputy Treasurer/Collector Robert Publow, Manager of Planning *Scott Ross, Manager of Accounting Services *Clare Seeley, Manager of Tourism Dan Sommer, Director of Development Services Doug Stewart, Director of Finance Allyssa Fischer, Administrative Assistant *Present for a portion of the meeting

1. CALL TO ORDER

Acting Mayor Plecas called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.


RC20/086 FEB. 18/20

Moved by Councillor Herar, seconded by Councillor Crawford, and

RESOLVED: That the agenda for the Regular Council meeting of February 18, 2020 be adopted.

CARRIED

3. DELEGATIONS

RC20/087 FEB. 18/20

Kirsten Hargreaves and Katelyn Pesut

Kirsten Hargreaves and Katelyn Pesut appeared before Council to discuss the 2020 Homeless Count in Mission. Ms. Hargreaves stated that the Fraser Valley homeless count is undertaken every three years to determine the number and needs of people who are homeless throughout the Fraser Valley. She outlined the community coordination process and shared statistics from the past five homeless counts. She stated that a presentation of the results would be made to Council in the fall of 2020.

Ms. Hargreaves answered Council’s questions in regards to the accuracy of the numbers reported in the count, how the numbers influenced funding levels, and the geographical areas to be targeted during the 2020 count.

204

Regular Council Meeting Page 2 of 11 February 18, 2020

RC20/088 FEB. 18/20

Michelle Rhodes

Michelle Rhodes, Chair of the Mission Community Heritage Commission, appeared before Council to discuss the 2020 Heritage Awards and Heritage Week in Mission. She stated that in the absence of any Heritage Awards nominations in 2020, the Commission had decided to highlight two local businesses, Rex Cox Mens Wear and Eddy Match Company, and provided a brief history of both organizations.

Ms. Rhodes stated that 2020 Heritage Week would take place from February 17 to 23 and noted that a number of events had been planned by the Mission Archives and Mission Museum to celebrate Mission’s history.

RC20/089 FEB. 18/20

Heritage Week Proclamation

Moved by Councillor Davies, seconded by Councillor Gill, and

RESOLVED:

That February 17-23, 2020 be proclaimed “Heritage Week” within the District of Mission.

CARRIED

4. PRESENTATIONS

RC20/090 FEB. 18/20

Maria Sunder, BC Corrections

Maria Sunder, BC Corrections, appeared before Council to provide an overview of the BC Corrections organization. She presented information on the services provided by the organization, how supervision services were determined, and core programs administered by the organization.

Discussion ensued, and Ms. Sunder answered Council’s questions in regards to the public notification process for released offenders, types of conditional release, local programming options for inmates released on probation, and the role of the local police force in monitoring individuals deemed a high risk to reoffend.

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS

RC20/091 FEB. 18/20

Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5908-2020

LUC18-025 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to terminate Land Use Contract 628-1977 for the properties at 8481, 8515, 8523, 8531, 8536, 8528, and 32282 Terris Street

-AND-

Zoning Amending Bylaw 5909-2020-5050(369)

LUC18-025 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to rezone property at 8481, 8515, 8523, 8531, 8536, 8528, and 32282 Terris Street from Rural Residential 7 (RR7) Zone to Suburban 36 (S36) Zone

The purpose of the proposed Land Use Contract Repeal bylaw is to discharge Land Use Contract 628-1977 for the properties at 8481, 8515, 8523, 8531, 8536, 8528, and 32282 Terris Street.

The purpose of the proposed Zoning bylaw amendment is to rezone the properties at 8481, 8515, 8523, 8531, 8536, 8528, and 32282 Terris Street from Rural Residential 7 (RR7) Zone to Suburban 36 (S36) Zone to maintain the properties’ current uses. There are no proposed changes to the existing buildings or land use. The subject property is legally described in Appendix 1 of proposed Zoning Amending Bylaw 5909-2020-5050(369).

205


The Acting Mayor opened the public hearing.

The Manager of Planning showed a PowerPoint presentation that provided the following information:

1. Overview of District’s Land Use Contract termination project.

2. Purpose and outline of the proposal.

3. Subject property map.

The Corporate Officer stated that no written submissions pertaining to the subject application had been received.

The Acting Mayor opened the floor to the public for questions and comments.

Hearing no questions or comments, the Acting Mayor declared the Public Hearing for District of Mission Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5908-2020 and Zoning Amending Bylaw 5909-2020-5050(369) (LUC18-025 District of Mission) closed.

RC20/092 FEB. 18/20

Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5910-2020

LUC18-021 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to terminate Land Use Contract 378-1974 for the property at 7581 Cedar Street

-AND-


LUC18-021 (District of Mission) – a bylaw to rezone property at 7581 Cedar Street from Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone to Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone

The purpose of the proposed Land Use Contract Repeal bylaw is to discharge Land Use Contract 378-1974 for the property at 7581 Cedar Street.

The purpose of the proposed Zoning bylaw amendment is to rezone the property at 7581 Cedar Street from Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone to Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone to maintain the properties’ current uses. There are no proposed changes to the existing buildings or land use. The subject property is legally described in Appendix 1 of proposed Zoning Amending Bylaw 5911-2020-5050(370).

The Acting Mayor opened the public hearing.





The Acting Mayor opened the floor to the public for questions and comments.

Hearing no questions or comments, the Acting Mayor declared the Public Hearing for District of Mission Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5910-2020 and Zoning Amending Bylaw 5911-2020-5050(370) (LUC18-021 District of Mission) closed.

206


6. RESOLUTION TO RESOLVE INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

RC20/093 FEB. 18/20

Moved by Councillor Crawford, seconded by Councillor Hamilton, and

RESOLVED: That Council now resolve itself into Committee of the Whole.

CARRIED

7. PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURE

RC20/094 FEB. 18/20

Poverty Reduction Planning and Action Program Grant Application

A report from the Manager of Social Development dated February 18, 2020, seeking endorsement for a Poverty Reduction Planning and Action Program Grant application, was provided for the Committee’s consideration.

Moved by Councillor Hamilton, and

RECOMMENDED:

That the Poverty Reduction Planning and Action Program Grant Application be endorsed.

CARRIED

8. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES

RC20/095 FEB. 18/20

Mission Community Heritage Commission 2020 Work Plan

A report from the Senior Planner dated February 18, 2020, regarding the Mission Community Heritage Commission’s 2020 Work Plan, was provided for the Committee’s information.

Moved by Councillor Crawford, and

RECOMMENDED:

That the Mission Community Heritage Commission’s 2020 Work Plan, as described in the Senior Planner’s report dated February 18, 2020, be approved.

CARRIED

RC20/096 FEB. 18/20

Waterfront Comprehensive Planning Area

A report from the Director of Development Services dated February 18, 2020, regarding the proposed Waterfront Comprehensive Planning Area designation, was provided for the Committee’s consideration.

Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw 5912-2020-5670(15) is listed for first reading under the “Bylaws for Consideration” section of the agenda.


RECOMMENDED:

That upon due consideration of Section 475 of the Local Government Act, referrals go forward for Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw 5912-2020-5670(15) in accordance with LAN.47 Official Community Plan Referral Policy, that the persons, organizations, and authorities receiving those consultations referrals are considered to be those affected for purposes of this section.

CARRIED

207


RC20/097 FEB. 18/20

Termination of Land Use Contract (LUC18-022) - Multiple Addresses on Badger Avenue, Boxer Court, Bobcat Drive, Bighorn Terrace and Antelope Avenue

A report from the Manager of Long Range Planning and Special Projects dated February 18, 2020, regarding the proposed termination of the Land Use Contract for multiple addresses on Badger Avenue, Boxer Court, Bobcat Drive, Bighorn Terrace, and Antelope Avenue, was provided for the Committee’s information.

Staff supports the application moving forward and will schedule the Public Hearing for March 2, 2020 subject to Council granting first and second readings of the related Land Use Contract Repeal and Zoning Amending bylaws.

RC20/098 FEB. 18/20

Termination of Land Use Contract (LUC18-028) - 7436 Stave Lake Street

A report from the Manager of Long Range Planning and Special Projects dated February 18, 2020, regarding the proposed termination of the Land Use Contract for 7436 Stave Lake Street, was provided for the Committee’s information.

Staff supports the application moving forward and will schedule the Public Hearing for March 2, 2020 subject to Council granting first and second readings of the related Land Use Contract Repeal and Zoning Amending bylaws.

RC20/99 FEB. 18/20

Development Permit Application (DP19-129) - 32545 London Avenue

A report from the Senior Planner dated February 18, 2020, regarding a Development Permit application for the property at 32545 London Avenue was provided for the Committee’s information.

Staff support the application moving forward and, as such, have listed Development Permit DP19-129 under the “Permits for Consideration” section of the agenda.

RC20/100 FEB. 18/20

Development Variance Permit Application (DV19-018) - 32925 - 3rd Avenue (lots 17 and 18)

A report from the Planner dated February 18, 2020, regarding a Development Variance Permit application for the property at 32925 - 3rd Avenue, was provided for the Committee’s information.

Staff support the application moving forward and, as such, have listed Development Variance Permit DV19-018 for approval under the “Permits for Consideration” section of the agenda.

9. ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS

RC20/101 FEB. 18/20

BC Active Transportation Grant

A report from the Engineering Technologist II – Traffic & Transportation dated February 18, 2020, seeking support for the submission of a BC Active Transportation Infrastructure Application, was provided for the Committee’s consideration.

Moved by Councillor Hamilton, and

RECOMMENDED:

That the submission of a BC Active Transportation Infrastructure Application to the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure for a Sidewalk Project along Draper Street from McEwan Avenue to Dewdney Trunk Road be supported.

CARRIED

208


RC20/102 FEB. 18/20

Investing in Canada Infrastructure Program - Collector Well Grant Application

A report from the Director of Engineering & Public Works dated February 18, 2020, seeking support for a joint application to the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Grant Program for the Collector Well project, was provided for the Committee’s consideration.

Moved by Councillor Davies, and

RECOMMENDED:

That Council approve the submission of a grant application, jointly between the City of Abbotsford and the District of Mission, to the Investing in Canada Infrastructure Grant Program for the shared Collector Well Project.

CARRIED

10. CORPORATE ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE

RC20/103 FEB. 18/20

Amendment to Financial Plan 2019 to 2023 Bylaw 5826-2019

A report from the Accounting Clerk-General dated February 18, 2020, regarding proposed amendments to the 2019-2023 Financial Plan Bylaw, was provided for the Committee’s information.

The 2019-2023 Financial Plan Amending Bylaw has been listed under the “Bylaws for Consideration” section of the agenda for consideration of first three readings.

Discussion ensued and the Deputy Treasurer/Collector answered the Committee’s questions in regards to accumulated surpluses, budget reserves, and contingency funds.

RC20/104 FEB. 18/20

2019 Investment Performance Report

A report from the Manager of Accounting Services dated February 18, 2020, regarding the District’s 2019 year-end investment holdings, was provided for the Committee’s information.

The Manager of Accounting Services provided a presentation that included the District’s investment balances as of December 31, 2019, the investment portfolio history, a 2019 annualized investment return comparison, the 2019 investment performance, and current issues for 2020.

RC20/105 FEB. 18/20

Tourism Mission’s Brand, Vision and Mission Statement

A report from the Manager of Tourism dated February 18, 2020, regarding Tourism Mission’s Vision and branding, was provided for the Committee’s information.

The Manager of Tourism provided an overview of the rebranding project and answered the Committee’s questions in regards to social media and official merchandise.

RC20/106 FEB. 18/20

Silverdale Comprehensive Planning Area Neighbourhood Planning Terms of Reference

A report from the Deputy Chief Administrative Officer dated February 18, 2020, regarding a new Terms of Reference policy for the Silverdale Comprehensive Planning Area, was provided for the Committee’s consideration.

The Deputy Chief Administrative Officer provided a presentation that included background information on the policy’s history, an overview of the proposed policy, and the next steps for the Silverdale Comprehensive Planning Area following the adoption of the policy.

209


Discussion ensued, and the Deputy Chief Administrative Officer answered questions from the Committee in regards to the consultation requirements for the two proposed authorization streams, the different process phases, staff capacity, and funding resources.


RECOMMENDED:

1. That LAN.48 Silverdale Urban Residential Neighbourhood Plans Terms of Reference Policy be repealed; and

2. That LAN.64 Silverdale Comprehensive Planning Area Neighbourhood Planning Terms of Reference, as attached to the report from the Deputy Chief Administrative Officer dated February 18, 2020, be adopted.

CARRIED

11. RESOLUTION TO RISE AND REPORT

RC20/107 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED: That the Committee of the Whole now rise and report.

CARRIED

12. RESOLUTION TO ADOPT RECOMMENDATIONS OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

RC20/108 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED: That the recommendations of the February 18, 2020 Committee of the Whole, as contained in items RC20/094 to RC20/106 be adopted.

CARRIED

13. COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND MINUTES

RC20/109 FEB. 18/20

Council provided updates on recent committee and association meetings. Staff were directed to invite a representative from the Mission Division of Family Practice to appear before Council to provide an overview of the organization.

Moved by Councillor Herar, seconded by Councillor Hamilton, and

RESOLVED:

That the minutes from the November 7, 2019 Mission Sustainable Housing Committee meeting be received as information.

CARRIED

14. COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FOR APPROVAL

RC20/110 FEB. 18/20

Moved by Councillor Crawford, seconded by Councillor Hamilton, and

RESOLVED: That the following minutes be adopted:

(a) Regular Council Meeting (for the purpose of going into a closed meeting) – February 3, 2020

(b) Regular Council Meeting – February 3, 2020

CARRIED

210


15. BYLAWS FOR CONSIDERATION

RC20/111 FEB. 18/20

Moved by Councillor Crawford, seconded by Councillor Herar, and

RESOLVED:

That Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw 5912-2020-5670(15), a bylaw to add the Waterfront Comprehensive Planning Area designation to the Official Community Plan Bylaw and minor housekeeping amendments to accommodate the new designation, be read a first time.

CARRIED

RC20/112 FEB. 18/20

Moved by Councillor Davies, seconded by Councillor Crawford, and

RESOLVED:

That Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5914-2020 LUC18-022 (District of Mission), a bylaw to terminate Land Use Contract 477-1976 for multiple properties on Badger Avenue, Boxer Court, Bobcat Drive, Bighorn Terrace, and Antelope Avenue, be read a first and second time.

CARRIED

RC20/113 FEB. 18/20

Moved by Councillor Hamilton, seconded by Councillor Crawford, and

RESOLVED:

That Zoning Amending Bylaw 5915-2020-5050(371) LUC18-022 (District of Mission), a bylaw to rezone property at multiple addresses on Badger Avenue, Boxer Court, Bobcat Drive, Bighorn Terrace, and Antelope Avenue from Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone, be read a first and second time.

CARRIED

RC20/114 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED:

That Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5916-2020 LUC18-028 (District of Mission), a bylaw to terminate Land Use Contract 276-1973 for the property at 7436 Stave Lake Street, be read a first and second time.

CARRIED

RC20/115 FEB. 18/20

Moved by Councillor Davies, seconded by Councillor Crawford, and

RESOLVED:

That Zoning Amending Bylaw 5917-2020-5050(372) LUC18-028 (District of Mission), a bylaw to rezone the property at 7436 Stave Lake Street from Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone, be read a first and second time.

CARRIED

RC20/116 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED:

That 2019 to 2023 Financial Plan Amending Bylaw 5913-2020-5826(1), a bylaw to amend 2019 to 2023 Financial Plan Bylaw 5826-2019 to include the Council approved 2019 budget amendments, be read a first, second, and third time.

CARRIED

211


RC20/117 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED:

That Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5908-2020 LUC18-025 (District of Mission), a bylaw to terminate Land Use Contract 628-1977 for the properties at 8481, 8515, 8523, 8531, 8536, 8528, and 32282 Terris Street, be read a third time.

CARRIED

RC20/118 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED:

That Zoning Amending Bylaw 5909-2020-5050(369) LUC18-025 (District of Mission), a bylaw to rezone the properties at 8481, 8515, 8523, 8531, 8536, 8528, and 32282 Terris Street from Rural Residential 7 (RR7) Zone to Suburban 36 (S36) Zone, be read a third time.

CARRIED

RC20/119 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED:

That Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5910-2020 LUC18-021 (District of Mission), a bylaw to terminate Land Use Contract 378-1974 for the property at 7581 Cedar Street, be read a third time.

CARRIED

RC20/120 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED:

That Zoning Amending Bylaw 5911-2020-5050(370) LUC18-021 (District of Mission), a bylaw to rezone property at 7581 Cedar Street from Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone to Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone, be read a third time.

CARRIED

RC20/121 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED:

That Zoning Amending Bylaw 5857-2019-5050(353) R19-003 (Lacey Developments Ltd.), a bylaw to rezone property at 33481 Larkspur Avenue from Rural 16 (RU16) Zone to Rural 16 Secondary Dwelling (RU16s) Zone, be adopted.

CARRIED

RC20/122 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED:

That Zoning Amending Bylaw 5904-2019-5050(367) R18-044 (Mangat), a bylaw to rezone property at 8200, 8240, and 8270 Conley Terrace from Suburban 36 (S36) Zone to Suburban 36 Secondary Dwelling (S36s) Zone, be adopted.

CARRIED

212


RC20/123 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED:

That Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5905-2020 LUC18-024 (District of Mission), a bylaw to terminate Land Use Contract 610-1977 for the properties at 33214, 33220, 33242, 33252, and 33262 Cherry Avenue, be adopted.

CARRIED

RC20/124 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED:

That Zoning Amending Bylaw 5906-2020-5050(368) LUC18-024 (District of Mission), a bylaw to rezone the properties at 33214, 33220, 33242, 33252, and 33262 Cherry Avenue from Suburban 36 (S36) Zone to Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone, be adopted.

CARRIED

16. PERMITS FOR CONSIDERATION

RC20/125 FEB. 18/20

Development Permit DP19-129 (32545 London Avenue)


RESOLVED:

That Development Variance Permit DP19-129 (32545 London Avenue) to supplement the District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009, as amended, in respect to the above-noted property as follows:

• Section 804, E. Setbacks 1 by reducing the setback to the east interior side lot line from 3.0 metres to 0.6 metres;

• building design and siting as shown on Drawings Numbered A00-A04 inclusive, which are attached hereto and form part of this permit; and

• minor changes to the aforesaid drawings that do not affect the intent of this Development permit and the general appearance of the buildings and character of the development may be permitted, subject to the approval of the Municipality.

be approved.

CARRIED

RC20/126 FEB. 18/20

Development Variance Permit DV 19-018 (32925 - 3rd Avenue)


RESOLVED:

That Development Variance Permit DV19-018 (32925 - 3rd Avenue) to vary the District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009, as amended, in respect to the above-noted property as follows:

• reducing the required combined interior side setback from 4.5 meters (14.76 feet) to 3.0 meters (9.8 feet).

be approved.

CARRIED

213


17. RESOLUTIONS RELEASED FROM CLOSED

RC20/127 FEB. 18/20

Cultural Resources Commission Appointments

The following resolution was released from the Closed Council meeting held on February 3, 2020:

Cultural Resources Commission Appointments

The following individuals were appointed to the Cultural Resources Commission for two-year terms, commencing February 2020:

a) Marilyn Davidson;

b) Sandra Postlethwaite; and

c) Bailey Makayev.

18. NEW/OTHER BUSINESS

There was no new/other business.

19. NOTICES OF MOTION

There were no notices of motion.

20. QUESTION PERIOD

Jim Hinds, Mission, asked for further information on the proposed Waterfront Comprehensive Planning Area.

The Direct of Development Services stated that more information would be forthcoming as the proposed Official Community Plan Amendment moves toward a Public Hearing.

21. ADJOURNMENT

RC20/128 FEB. 18/20


RESOLVED: That the meeting be adjourned.

CARRIED

The meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m.

PAMELA ALEXIS, JENNIFER RUSSELL, MAYOR CORPORATE OFFICER

214

Minutes of the SPECIAL MEETING of the DISTRICT OF MISSION COUNCIL (for the purpose of going into a closed meeting) held in the Conference Room of the Municipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, British Columbia, on Monday, February 24, 2020 commencing at 1:02 p.m. Council Members Present: Mayor Pam Alexis Councillor Cal Crawford Councillor Jag Gill Councillor Carol Hamilton Councillor Danny Plecas Council Members Absent: Councillor Mark Davies Councillor Ken Herar Staff Members Present: Mike Younie, Chief Administrative Officer Jennifer Russell, Corporate Officer Barclay Pitkethly, Deputy Chief Administrative Officer Christine Brough, Executive Assistant

1. CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order.

2. RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE PUBLIC

SC(C)20/004 FEB. 24/20

Moved by Councillor Plecas, seconded by Councillor Crawford, and

RESOLVED: That, pursuant to Sections 90 and 92 of the Community Charter, this Special Meeting of Council be closed to the public as the subject matter being considered relates to the following:

• Section 90(1)(c) of the Community Charter – labour relations or other employee relations.

CARRIED

3. ADJOURN TO CLOSED COUNCIL MEETING

SC(C)20/005 FEB. 24/20

Moved by Councillor Plecas, seconded by Councillor Crawford, and

RESOLVED: That the Special Council meeting be adjourned.

CARRIED

The meeting was adjourned at 1:02 p.m.

_________________________ _____________________________________ PAMELA ALEXIS JENNIFER RUSSELL MAYOR CORPORATE OFFICER

215

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5918-2020-5050(373)

A Bylaw to amend "District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009"

WHEREAS, under the provisions of the Local Government Act, a Council may, by bylaw, divide the municipality into zones and regulate the use of land, buildings and structures within such zones; AND WHEREAS the Council of the District of Mission has adopted "District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009" and amended same from time to time; AND WHEREAS the Council of the District of Mission deems it advisable and in the public interest to amend the Zoning Bylaw; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the District of Mission, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw

5918-2020-5050(373).”

2. "District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009" as amended, is hereby further amended by:

a) rezoning the property located at 7607 Wren Street and legally described as:

Parcel Identifier: 006-361-960 Lot 104 Section 19 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 49875

from Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to Urban Residential 558 Secondary Dwelling (R558s) Zone; and

b) amending the zoning maps accordingly.

READ A FIRST TIME this __ day of ___, 2020

READ A SECOND TIME this __ day of ___, 2020

PUBLIC HEARING held this __ day of ___, 2020

READ A THIRD TIME this __ day of ___, 2020

APPROVED by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure this __ day of ___, 2020

ADOPTED this __ day of ___, 2020 PAMELA ALEXIS JENNIFER RUSSELL MAYOR CORPORATE OFFICER

216

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5922-2020-5050(375)



5922-2020-5050(375).”


a) rezoning the property located at 7632 Hurd Street and legally described as:


from Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to Multiple Family 52 Rowhouse (MR52) Zone; and


READ A FIRST TIME this __ day of ___, 2020

READ A SECOND TIME this __ day of ___, 2020




217

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5884-2019

A Bylaw to terminate “District of Mission Land Use Contract Bylaw 714-1978”

WHEREAS Council of the District of Mission, under Section 137 of the Community Charter, has the power to amend or repeal bylaws; AND WHEREAS Council of the District of Mission, under Section 546 of the Local Government Act, has the power to amend, modify or discharge Land Use Contracts; AND WHEREAS the Council of the District of Mission did, on the 16th day of October, 1978 enact a bylaw cited as “District of Mission Land Use Contract By-law No. 714-1978”; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the District of Mission, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as "District of Mission Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5884-2019”.

2. The Land Use Contract 714-1978 between the District of Mission and Mission Paving Services Co. Ltd., for the property located at 11546 Dewdney Trunk Road and legally described as:

Parcel Identifier: 006-136-397 Legal Description: Lot 2, Section 16 and 17, Township 18, New Westminster District Plan 41306

is hereby discharged.

3. “District of Mission Land Use Contract By-law No. 714-1978” is hereby repealed.

READ A FIRST TIME this 2nd day of December, 2019

READ A SECOND TIME this 2nd day of December, 2019

PUBLIC HEARING held this 16th day of December, 2019


ADOPTED THIS __ day of ___, 2020

PAMELA ALEXIS JENNIFER RUSSELL MAYOR CORPORATE OFFICER

218

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5885-2019-5050(361)



5885-2019-5050(361).”


a) rezoning the properties located at 11546 and 11596 Dewdney Trunk Road and legally described as:

Parcel Identifier: 006-136-371 Lot 1, Section 17, Township 18, New Westminster District Plan 41306

Parcel Identifier: 006-136-397 Lot 2, Section 16 and 17, Township 18, New Westminster District Plan 41306

from Industrial Resource Extraction (INR) Zone to Industrial Resource Extraction and Processing (INRP) Zone; and


READ A FIRST TIME this 2nd day of December, 2019

READ A SECOND TIME this 2nd day of December, 2019

PUBLIC HEARING held this 16th day of December, 2019



219

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5914-2020

A Bylaw to terminate “District of Mission Land Use Contract Bylaws 477-1976”

WHEREAS Council of the District of Mission, under Section 137 of the Community Charter, has the power to amend or repeal bylaws; AND WHEREAS Council of the District of Mission, under Section 548 of the Local Government Act, has the power to terminate a land use contract that applies to land within the jurisdiction of the local government; AND WHEREAS the Council of the District of Mission did, on the 3rd day of May, 1976 enact a bylaw cited as “District of Mission Land Use Contract By-law No. 477-1976”; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the District of Mission, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:


2. The Land Use Contract 477-1976 between the District of Mission and R.B.M. Construction (1975) Ltd. and Hawk Ventures Ltd. for the properties legally described as shown in Appendix 1 attached to and forming part of the Bylaw is hereby discharged.


4. This Bylaw shall come into force one year plus one day after the date of adoption, and in any event no later than June 30, 2024.

READ A FIRST TIME this 18th day of February, 2020

READ A SECOND TIME this 18th day of February, 2020





220

District of Mission Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5914-2020

Page 2 of 3

APPENDIX 1

Address PID Legal Description

32552 Bobcat Drive 004-037-472 Lot 238 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 50400








32593 Badger Avenue 003-790-932 Lot 246 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 50400








8127 Bighorn Terrace 004-037-570 Lot 254 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 50400








8045 Antelope Avenue 003-901-955 Lot 262 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 50400

221


Page 3 of 3




8159 Boxer Court 004-037-693 Lot 266 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 50400

8161 Boxer Court 004-037-723 Lot 267 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 50400




32615 Bobcat Drive 002-397-951 Lot 271, Except Part In Plan LMP2437, Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 50400





32623 Bobcat Drive 028-624-807 Strata Lot 1 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster District Strata Plan BCS4126 Together with An Interest in The Common Property in Proportion to the Unit Entitlement of The Strata Lot as Shown on Form V

32635 Bobcat Drive 028-624-874 Strata Lot 2 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster District Strata Plan BCS4126 Together with An Interest in The Common Property In Proportion To The Unit Entitlement of the Strata Lot as Shown on Form V

Common Property – BCS4126

No PID Common Property Strata Plan BCS4126

222

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5915-2020-5050(371)



5915-2020-5050(371).”


a) rezoning the properties legally described as shown in Appendix 1 attached to and forming part of the Bylaw from Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone; and








223

District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5915-2020-5050(371)

Page 2 of 3

APPENDIX 1

Address PID Legal Description

32552 Bobcat Drive 004-037-472 Lot 238 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster Dis-trict Plan 50400








32593 Badger Avenue 003-790-932 Lot 246 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster Dis-trict Plan 50400








8127 Bighorn Terrace 004-037-570 Lot 254 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster Dis-trict Plan 50400








8045 Antelope Avenue 003-901-955 Lot 262 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster Dis-trict Plan 50400

224


Page 3 of 3




8159 Boxer Court 004-037-693 Lot 266 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster Dis-trict Plan 50400

8161 Boxer Court 004-037-723 Lot 267 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster Dis-trict Plan 50400




32615 Bobcat Drive 002-397-951 Lot 271, Except Part In Plan LMP2437, Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 50400





225

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5916-2020


WHEREAS Council of the District of Mission, under Section 137 of the Community Charter, has the power to amend or repeal bylaws; AND WHEREAS Council of the District of Mission, under Section 548 of the Local Government Act, has the power to terminate a land use contract that applies to land within the jurisdiction of the local government; AND WHEREAS the Council of the District of Mission did, on the 4th day of June, 1973 enact a bylaw cited as “District of Mission Land Use Contract By-Law No. 276-1973”; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the District of Mission, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:


2. The Land Use Contract between the District of Mission and Regent Estates Limited, for the property legally described as shown in Appendix 1 attached to and forming part of this Bylaw, is hereby discharged.

3. “District of Mission Land Use Contract By-Law No. 276-1973 and “District of Mission Land Use Contract Repeal Bylaw 5758-2018” are hereby repealed.









226


Page 2 of 4

APPENDIX 1















227


Page 3 of 4















228


Page 4 of 4






Strata Lot 29 District Lot 1 Group 3 New Westminster District Strata Plan NW380 Together With An Interest In The Common Property In Proportion To The Unit Entitlement Of The Strata Lot As Shown On Form 1










229

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5917-2020-5050(372)



5917-2020-5050(372).”

2. "District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5759-2018-5050(299)” is hereby repealed.


a) rezoning the property located at 7436 Stave Lake Street and legally described as shown in Appendix 1 attached to and forming part of this Bylaw, from Urban Residential 558 (R558) Zone to Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone; and









230


Page 2 of 4

APPENDIX 1















231


Page 3 of 4















232


Page 4 of 4






Strata Lot 29 District Lot 1 Group 3 New Westminster District Strata Plan NW380 Together With An Interest In The Common Property In Proportion To The Unit Entitlement Of The Strata Lot As Shown On Form 1










233

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5844-2019-5050(346)



5844-2019-5050(346).”


a) rezoning the property located at 31124 Greenwood Drive and legally described as:


from Rural Residential 7 (RR7) Zone to Rural Residential 7 Secondary Dwelling (RR7s) Zone; and


READ A FIRST TIME this 17th day of June, 2019

READ A SECOND TIME this 17th day of June, 2019

PUBLIC HEARING held this 2nd day of July, 2019

READ A THIRD TIME this 2nd day of July, 2019


234

Excerpt from Public Hearing Page 1 of 1 July 2, 2019

1. PUBLIC HEARINGS

RC19/378 JUL. 02/19


R18-057 (Lacey Developments) – a bylaw to rezone property at 31124 Greenwood Drive from Rural Residential 7 (RR7) Zone to Rural Residential 7 Secondary Dwelling (RR7s) Zone

The purpose of the proposed Zoning bylaw amendment is to rezone the property at 31124 Greenwood Drive from Rural Residential 7 (RR7) Zone to Rural Residential 7 Secondary Dwelling (RR7s) Zone to allow for a secondary dwelling use. The subject property is legally described as:


The Mayor opened the public hearing.




3. Proposed site plan.


The Mayor opened the floor to the public for questions and comments.

Hearing no questions or comments, the Mayor declared the Public Hearing for District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5844-2019-5050(346) R18-057 (Lacey Developments) closed.

235


Page 1 of 9

File Category: 3310-19 File Folder: P2018-100 R18-057 DP18-113 DP18-114 DP18-115

DATE: June 17, 2019


FROM: Amina Yasin, Planner

SUBJECT: Rezoning Application (R18-057) to allow a Rezoning for the purpose of a secondary dwelling unit on the property located at 31124 Greenwood Drive

ATTACHMENTS: Appendix 1 – Information for Corporate Officer


Appendix 3 – Proposed Subdivision Plan

Appendix 4 – Engineering Department Rezoning Comments

CIVIC ADDRESSES: 31124 Greenwood Drive

APPLICANT: Lacey Developments

OCP: Rural Residential

DATE APPLICATION COMPLETE:

May 1st, 2019

LOCATION: Keystone

236

of 9 Staff Report to Council

This report details the development application to rezone 31124 Greenwood Drive to the Rural Residential 7 Secondary Dwelling (RR7s) Zone to facilitate a secondary dwelling use on the property, and identifies the necessary amendment to the Zoning Bylaw.

Staff support the application moving forward and such have listed Zoning Amending Bylaw 5844-2019-5050(346) under the “Bylaws for Consideration” section of the Council agenda.

Subject to Council’s approval, a Public Hearing will be scheduled for July 2, 2019.

SUMMARY

A rezoning application was received from Lacey Developments, for the property located at 31124 Greenwood Drive (Appendix 2). The application proposes to rezone the property from Rural Residential 7 (RR7) Zone to Rural Residential 7 Secondary Dwelling (RR7s) Zone to facilitate the development of a secondary dwelling unit, coach house as shown in Appendix 3.

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

The subject property is approximately 1.0 hectare (2.47 acres) in size and is located in the Keystone Neighbourhood, on the south side of Greenwood Drive. The subject property is currently developed with a single family dwelling and an accessory building, both of which are to be retained as part of the development application. The District’s mapping indicates a watercourse on the property.

PLANNING ANALYSIS

Official Community Plan & Zoning Bylaw Compliance

The subject property is currently designated Rural Residential in the OCP and zoned RR7 Zone. The proposal for a rezoning to the RR7s Zone will allow for the development of a secondary dwelling unit on the lot in the form of a coach house, garden cottage or secondary suite. The proposed RR7s Zone provides for a minimum lot size of 0.7 hectares (1.73 acres). The lot complies with the minimum lot area in the Zoning Bylaw.

The proposed rezoning meets the OCP objective to support diverse housing options that cater to different types of households and income levels.


The subject property is located within a rural residential neighbourhood comprised of single family dwellings on generally larger lots. The secondary dwelling unit will fit within the context of the surrounding properties and is believed to have little or no impact on the surrounding neighbourhood.

Servicing

Municipal water service is not available to the property. A hydrologist’s report, prepared by a professional engineer with expertise in ground water supply, will be required to ensure that the well(s) supplying water meets the provisions of Council Policy WAT. 19 – Well Water Quality – Aesthetic and Health Parameters. In addition, Fraser Health has specific requirements related to water system operators which would apply if more than one dwelling is serviced by a single well. Confirmation that the water supply is approved for a secondary dwelling unit will be required at time of building permit review.

Municipal sanitary sewer service is not available to the property. The property owner will be required to provide confirmation from a Registered Onsite Wastewater Practitioner (ROWP) that an onsite sewage treatment system can accommodate the discharge from the proposed principal dwelling and secondary dwelling unit.

Road upgrades are not required to Greenwood Street.

OVERVIEW AND STAFF COMMENTS

237


Development Permits

A Development Permit Area E for Environmental Protection is required.

A Development Permit Area H for Fire Interface is required.

A Development Permit Area G for Geohazard is required.

Tree Retention

In accordance with Council Policy LAN. 32 – Tree Retention and Replanting, the applicant will be required to plant a total of six (6) trees, two (2) trees for each of the three (3) lots created. This condition will be met as part of the subdivision approval. In addition to this requirement, the applicant is required to replace any significant trees (trees having a calliper of 0.2 m or greater) that will be removed except in the areas defined as (a) building envelope to a maximum of 2,000 m2 (21,528 ft2), (b) driveways, (c) septic field and (d) wells. No tree is permitted to be removed within an identified streamside protection and enhancement areas (SPEA).

Environmental Protection

The District mapping identifies a watercourse along the north property line. A Riparian Areas Regulation (RAR) report has been submitted and found to conform to the RAR methodology as the Secondary Dwelling Unit, Coach House will be built outside of the Streamside Protection and Enhancement Area (SPEA). A restrictive covenant to identify the appropriate SPEA and a reference plan will need to be registered on title of the property as a component of a Development Permit for Area E: Natural Environment Development Permit Area.

COMMUNICATION

In accordance with Land Use Application Procedures and Fees Bylaw 3612-2003, the developer has posted a development notification sign on the site summarizing the proposed development.

Provided that a public hearing date is determined by Council:

1. The development notification sign will be modified to advertise the public hearing details (i.e. date, time and place) and a notice will be mailed to the owners and occupiers of all properties within a radius of 500 metres (1,640 feet) from the development site notifying them of the public hearing details.

2. A notice of Public Hearing will be prepared in accordance with Bylaw 3612-2003 and the Local Government Act

3. A pre-public hearing information package will be prepared to include copies of all applicable documents and is available online or at municipal hall for public viewing (in accordance with Policy LAN. 50 – Pre-Public Hearing Information Packages).

REFERRALS

Engineering:

The Engineering Department has no objection to the project as outlined in Appendix 5.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO FINAL READING

The Final Reading of the Zoning Amending Bylaw will be held until the following have been satisfied:

1. A hydrogeology report completed by a qualified professional hydrogeologist is submitted prior to development.

238


2. Any other requirements resulting from Council’s consideration of the Bylaw including Public Hearing.

INFORMATIONAL NOTES

1. Approval of Development Permit DP18-113 (Environmental) is delegated to staff for approval.

2. Approval of Development Permit DP18-114 (Geotechnical) is delegated to staff for approval.

3. Approval of Development Permit DP18-115 (Fire Interface) is delegated to staff for approval.

SIGN-OFFS

Amina Yasin, Planner



239


Appendix 1: Information for Corporate Officer

Civic Address:

31124 Greenwood Drive

PID: 009-274-782

Legal: Lot 1 Section 12 Township 15 New Westminster District Plan 76415

240


Appendix 2: Location Map

241


Appendix 3: Proposed Subdivision Plan

242


Appendix 4: Engineering Department Rezoning Comments

243


244

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5908-2020

A Bylaw to terminate “District of Mission Land Use Contract Bylaws 628-1977”

WHEREAS Council of the District of Mission, under Section 137 of the Community Charter, has the power to amend or repeal bylaws; AND WHEREAS Council of the District of Mission, under Section 548 of the Local Government Act, has the power to terminate a land use contract that applies to land within the jurisdiction of the local government; AND WHEREAS the Council of the District of Mission did, on the 20th day of March, 1978 enact a bylaw cited as “District of Mission Land Use Contract By-law No. 628-1977”; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the District of Mission, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:


2. The Land Use Contract 628-1977 between the District of Mission and Donald Edward Lyttle and Doreen Elizabeth Lyttle, for the properties legally described as shown in Appendix 1 attached to and forming part of the Bylaw is hereby discharged.



READ A FIRST TIME this 3rd day of February, 2020

READ A SECOND TIME this 3rd day of February, 2020

PUBLIC HEARING held this 18th day of February, 2020

READ A THIRD TIME this 18th day of February, 2020



245


Page 2 of 2

APPENDIX 1


8481 Terris Street 005-332-508 Lot 15 Section 29 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 54898







246

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5909-2020-5050(369)



5909-2020-5050(369).”


a) rezoning the property legally described as shown in Appendix 1 attached to and forming part of the Bylaw from Rural Residential 7 (RR7) Zone to Suburban 36 (S36) Zone; and








247


Page 2 of 2

APPENDIX 1









248

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5910-2020


WHEREAS Council of the District of Mission, under Section 137 of the Community Charter, has the power to amend or repeal bylaws; AND WHEREAS Council of the District of Mission, under Section 548 of the Local Government Act, has the power to terminate a land use contract that applies to land within the jurisdiction of the local government; AND WHEREAS the Council of the District of Mission did, on the 20th day of January, 1975 enact a bylaw cited as “Mission District Land Use Contract By-law No. 378-1974”; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the District of Mission, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:


2. The Land Use Contract 378-1974 between the District of Mission and Cedarwood Industries Limited, for the property located at 7581 Cedar Street and legally described as shown in Appendix 1 attached to and forming part of the Bylaw, is hereby discharged.

3. “Mission District Land Use Contract By-law No. 378-1974” is hereby repealed.






APPROVED by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure this 25th day of February, 2020



249


Page 2 of 3

APPENDIX 1

PID: Legal:

001-449-796 Strata Lot 1 Section 20 Township 17 New Westminster District Strata Plan NW590 together with an interest in the common property in proportion to the unit entitlement of the Strata Lot 1 as shown on Form 1













250


Page 3 of 3

PID: Legal:






001-450-018 Strata Lot 19 Section 20 Township 17 New Westminster District Strata Plan NW590 Together with an interest in the common property in proportion to the unit entitlement of the Strata Lot 1 as shown on Form 1



251

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5911-2020-5050(370)



5911-2020-5050(370).”


a) rezoning the property located at 7581 Cedar Street and legally described as shown in Appendix 1 attached to and forming part of the Bylaw from Residential Two Unit (RT465) Zone to Multiple Family 52 Apartment (MA52) Zone; and







APPROVED by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure this 25th day of February, 2020


252


Page 2 of 3

APPENDIX 1

PID: Legal:














253


Page 3 of 3

PID: Legal:






001-450-018 Strata Lot 19 Section 20 Township 17 New Westminster District Strata Plan NW590 Together with an interest in the common property in proportion to the unit entitlement of the Strata Lot 1 as shown on Form 1



254

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5913-2020-5826(1)

A bylaw to amend District of Mission

2019 to 2023 Financial Plan Bylaw 5826-2019 WHEREAS pursuant to the provisions of Section 165 of the Community Charter, the Council for the District of Mission may, by bylaw, before the 15th day of May in each year, before the annual property tax bylaw is adopted, adopt a financial plan; NOW THEREFORE the Council for the District of Mission, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:

1. This Bylaw may be known and cited for all purposes as "District of Mission 2019 - 2023

Financial Plan Amending Bylaw 5913-2020-5826(1)".

2. "District of Mission 2019 to 2023 Financial Plan Bylaw 5826-2019", is hereby amended by:

(a) deleting in its entirety Schedules B, C, D and E and replacing them with Schedules B, C, D and E attached to and forming part of this bylaw.




ADOPTED this __ day of ___ 2020

PAMELA ALEXIS, MAYOR JENNIFER RUSSELL,

CORPORATE OFFICER

255

Schedule “B” of Bylaw No. 5913-2020-5826(1) 2019 Detailed Financial Plan

Page 2 of 6

General

Operating

Internal

Adjustments

Drainage

Operating

Water

Operating

Sewer

Operating

Refuse/

Recycling Forestry

General

Capital

Drainage

Capital Water Capital Sewer Capital Total

Revenue

Property taxation -$33,234,937 $0 -$1,894,444 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 -$35,129,381

Local Improvements 0 0 -121,900 0 -42,370 0 0 0 0 0 0 -164,270

Sale of services and regulatory fees -8,671,239 0 -101,115 -6,602,543 -5,013,342 -5,381,272 -3,666,800 -197,766 0 -100,000 0 -29,734,074

Government transfers -3,150,541 0 0 0 0 0 0 -412,981 0 0 -4,976,394 -8,539,916

Amortization of restricted revenue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -536,671 -593,930 -443,375 -3,363,642 -4,937,618

Investment income -1,082,833 0 -5,274 -401,779 -232,511 -40,914 -43,624 0 0 0 0 -1,806,935

Other revenue -1,758,458 0 0 -4,983 0 -390,930 0 -500,000 0 0 0 -2,654,370

Developer in-kind contribution for capital 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2,390,336 -1,231,957 -1,242,003 -979,074 -5,843,370

Total revenue -$47,898,007 $0 -$2,122,733 -$7,009,305 -$5,288,223 -$5,813,116 -$3,710,424 -$4,037,754 -$1,825,887 -$1,785,378 -$9,319,110 -$88,809,934

Expenses

Administration and finance $6,090,968 -$4,737 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,086,232

General government and fiscal services 2,234,292 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,234,292

Protective services 18,279,847 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18,279,848

Engineering and public works 7,661,167 -271,795 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7,389,371

Transit services 2,984,500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,984,500

Waste management 0 -398,271 0 0 0 5,950,392 0 0 0 0 0 5,552,123

Development services 3,506,382 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,506,382

Parks, recreation and cultural services 8,283,432 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8,283,426

Library 1,545,945 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,545,945

Cemetery 245,229 -15,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 230,229

Drainage Utility 0 -579,778 2,817,375 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,237,597

Water utility 0 -1,192,602 0 5,196,905 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,004,305

Sewer utility 0 -1,071,329 0 0 4,852,157 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,780,827

Forestry enterprise 0 -177,221 0 0 0 0 3,276,818 0 0 0 0 3,099,597

Internal recoveries -3,646,396 3,710,733 0 -64,337 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total expenses $47,185,368 $0 $2,817,375 $5,132,569 $4,852,157 $5,950,392 $3,276,818 $0 $0 $0 $0 $69,214,674

Annual (surplus) deficit -$712,639 $0 $694,642 -$1,876,736 -$436,066 $137,276 -$433,606 -$4,037,754 -$1,825,887 -$1,785,378 -$9,319,110 -$19,595,260

Reserves, capital and debt

Tangible capital assets purchased $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,959,207 $1,849,497 $4,596,738 $16,903,982 $51,309,424

Tangible capital assets contributed by developers 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,390,336 1,231,957 1,242,003 979,074 5,843,370

New debt/temporary borrowing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Repayment of debt 507,935 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 507,934

Transfers to reserves 7,518,830 0 410,319 3,259,455 1,636,456 470,435 471,364 0 0 0 0 13,766,860

Amortization -5,655,457 0 -1,104,961 -1,382,719 -1,200,390 -257,711 -37,758 0 0 0 0 -9,638,996

Reserves/surplus used for capital funding 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -26,311,790 -1,255,567 -4,053,363 -8,563,946 -40,184,666

Reserves/surplus used to fund operations -1,658,668 0 0 0 0 -350,000 0 0 0 0 0 -2,008,668

Total reserves, capital and debt $712,640 $0 -$694,642 $1,876,736 $436,066 -$137,276 $433,606 $4,037,753 $1,825,887 $1,785,378 $9,319,110 $19,595,258

256

Schedule “C” of Bylaw No. 5913-2020-5826(1) 2019 - 2023 Summary Financial Plan

Page 3 of 6

2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Total

Revenue

Property taxation -$35,129,381 -$36,093,689 -$37,084,822 -$38,110,708 -$39,168,557 -$185,587,157

Local Improvements -164,270 -164,270 -164,270 -164,270 -121,900 -778,980

Sale of services and regulatory fees -29,734,074 -30,062,916 -30,662,201 -31,261,479 -31,879,855 -153,600,525

Government transfers -8,539,916 -2,888,698 -2,894,938 -2,901,241 -2,907,606 -20,132,399

Amortization of restricted revenue -4,937,618 -1,203,840 -5,223,632 -5,926,557 -3,551,722 -20,843,369

Investment income -1,806,935 -1,819,453 -1,832,115 -1,844,920 -1,857,871 -9,161,294

Other revenue -2,654,370 -2,209,382 -2,283,029 -2,358,946 -2,437,204 -11,942,931

Developer in-kind contribution for capital -5,843,370 -6,077,104 -6,320,189 -6,572,997 -6,835,916 -31,649,576

Total revenue -$88,809,934 -$80,519,352 -$86,465,196 -$89,141,118 -$88,760,631 -$433,696,231

Expenses

Administration and finance $6,086,232 $5,757,741 $5,861,543 $6,062,519 $6,085,717 $29,853,752

General government and fiscal services 2,234,292 2,240,834 2,287,922 2,336,118 2,385,452 11,484,618

Protective services 18,279,848 18,588,428 19,174,322 19,780,447 20,407,542 96,230,587

Engineering and public works 7,389,371 7,730,232 7,942,519 8,160,151 8,383,270 39,605,543

Transit services 2,984,500 3,044,188 3,105,072 3,167,173 3,230,517 15,531,450

Waste management 5,552,123 5,322,631 5,435,660 5,551,197 5,669,302 27,530,913

Development services 3,506,382 3,228,432 3,542,849 3,358,552 3,425,569 17,061,784

Parks, recreation and cultural services 8,283,426 8,390,355 8,559,602 8,748,847 8,932,210 42,914,440

Library 1,545,945 1,591,334 1,638,068 1,686,182 1,735,719 8,197,248

Cemetery 230,229 234,805 239,536 244,363 249,289 1,198,222

Drainage utility 2,237,597 2,257,747 2,314,283 2,372,294 2,431,811 11,613,732

Water utility 4,004,305 4,014,645 4,098,947 4,192,682 4,361,158 20,671,737

Sewer utility 3,780,827 3,804,904 3,895,010 3,944,395 4,026,947 19,452,083

Forestry enterprise 3,099,597 3,068,161 3,126,720 3,181,827 3,243,527 15,719,832

Total expenses $69,214,674 $69,274,437 $71,222,053 $72,786,747 $74,568,030 $357,065,941

Annual (surplus) deficit -$19,595,260 -$11,244,915 -$15,243,143 -$16,354,371 -$14,192,601 -$76,630,290

Reserves, capital and debt

Tangible capital assets purchased $51,309,424 $14,015,995 $15,315,087 $16,150,924 $13,506,197 $110,297,627

Tangible capital assets contributed by developers 5,843,370 6,077,104 6,320,189 6,572,997 6,835,916 31,649,576

New debt/temporary borrowing 0 0 0 0 0 0

Repayment of debt - principal (see note below) 507,934 507,934 527,405 547,626 568,625 2,659,524

Transfers to reserves 13,766,860 14,137,230 14,391,667 14,685,527 14,842,588 71,823,872

Amortization -9,638,996 -9,928,167 -10,226,011 -10,532,792 -10,848,775 -51,174,741

Reserves/surplus used for capital funding -40,184,666 -12,712,155 -9,991,455 -10,124,367 -9,854,475 -82,867,118

Reserves/surplus used to fund operations -2,008,668 -853,026 -1,093,738 -945,544 -857,475 -5,758,451

$19,595,258 $11,244,915 $15,243,144 $16,354,371 $14,192,601 $76,630,289

Information details:

Principal $507,934 $507,934 $527,405 $547,626 $568,625 $2,659,524

Interest associated with debt 164,250 164,250 164,250 164,250 164,250 821,250

Total payments $672,184 $672,184 $691,655 $711,876 $732,875 $3,480,774

257

Schedule “D” of Bylaw No. 5913-2020-5826(1) 2019 - 2023 Capital Plan Summary

Page 4 of 6

PLANNED CAPITAL EXPENDITURES 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Totals

General Capital PlanCemetery $58,280 $0 $0 $0 $0 $58,280Corporate Administration 84,792 18,342 18,342 18,342 18,342 158,160 Engineering & Public Works 7,698,269 3,503,560 2,866,897 2,781,263 2,527,788 19,377,777 Finance & Purchasing 7,662 4,456 4,456 4,456 4,456 25,487 Fire/Rescue Services 102,259 78,609 78,609 78,609 78,609 416,695 General Government - Major Projects 11,905,700 - - 17,500 - 11,923,200 Information Services 270,393 264,500 364,500 263,500 295,500 1,458,393 Inspection Services 11,295 3,342 3,342 3,342 3,342 24,664 Library 1,114 1,114 1,114 1,114 1,114 5,570 Parks, Recreation & Culture 3,140,585 2,210,995 743,515 194,946 251,605 6,541,646 Planning 8,520 3,342 3,342 3,342 3,342 21,889 Police 19,916 7,798 7,798 7,798 7,798 51,109

Subtotal General Capital Plan 23,308,785 6,096,059 4,091,916 3,374,213 3,191,897 40,062,870

General Development Cost Charge (DCC) Capital PlanCedar Valley Environmentally Sensitive Parkland 298,142 - - - - 298,142 Cedar Valley Roads 61,725 - 360,000 360,000 - 781,725 Roads - All Areas 235,645 - 319,000 - - 554,645 Silver Creek Parkway Parkland 3,226 - 1,082,000 55,086 - 1,140,312

Subtotal General DCC Capital Plan 598,738 - 1,761,000 415,086 - 2,774,824

Waste Management Capital PlanLandfill 833,570 72,000 72,000 72,000 72,000 1,121,570 Abbotsford/Mission Recycling Depot 98,510 85,611 48,118 86,653 35,619 354,511 Subtotal Waste Management Capital Plan 932,080 157,611 120,118 158,653 107,619 1,476,081

Equipment Replacement Capital Plan 2,424,219 2,113,750 403,413 1,063,103 405,521 6,410,006

Forestry Capital Plan 695,385 - - - - 695,385

Drainage Utility Capital PlanDrainage Capital 1,249,568 120,000 54,000 800,000 365,000 2,588,568 Cedar Valley Drainage DCCs 599,929 - 734,000 116,000 - 1,449,929

Subtotal Drainage Utility Capital Plan 1,849,497 120,000 788,000 916,000 365,000 4,038,497

Water Utility Capital PlanCedar Valley Water DCC - - 644,000 85,000 - 729,000 Water Capital - Local 2,067,288 1,444,391 1,565,792 1,151,891 1,132,280 7,361,642 Water Capital - Regional 2,070,444 439,243 517,552 1,746,767 1,531,772 6,305,778 Regional Water Supply DCC 459,006 1,216,000 1,459,200 5,179,300 3,619,047 11,932,553

Subtotal Water Utility Capital Plan 4,596,738 3,099,634 4,186,544 8,162,958 6,283,099 26,328,973

Sewer Utility Capital PlanSewer Capital - Local 2,744,120 443,730 483,730 351,230 333,730 4,356,540 Sewer Capital - Regional 2,542,382 1,985,211 2,689,154 1,479,810 2,805,982 11,502,539 Sewer Capital - Local DCC - - 600,000 162,200 - 762,200 Regional Sewage Treatment DCC 11,617,480 - 191,212 67,671 13,349 11,889,712

Subtotal Sewer Utility Capital Plan 16,903,982 2,428,941 3,964,096 2,060,911 3,153,061 28,510,991

TOTAL PLANNED CAPITAL EXPENDITURES $51,309,424 $14,015,995 $15,315,087 $16,150,924 $13,506,197 $110,297,627

258

Schedule “D” of Bylaw No. 5913-2020-5826(1) 2019 - 2023 Capital Plan Summary

Page 5 of 6

PLANNED CAPITAL FUNDING 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Totals

General Capital PlanReserve Funds $20,602,281 $6,016,059 $4,091,916 $3,374,213 $3,191,897 $37,276,366Surplus 1,595,758 80,000 - - - 1,675,758 Donation 500,000 - - - - 500,000 Grants 412,981 - - - - 412,981 Third Party Recoveries 197,766 - - - - 197,766

Subtotal General Capital Plan 23,308,786 6,096,059 4,091,916 3,374,213 3,191,897 40,062,871

General Development Cost Charge (DCC) Capital PlanDCCs 536,671 - 1,743,390 410,935 - 2,690,996Reserve Funds 62,067 - 17,610 4,151 - 83,828

Subtotal General DCC Capital Plan 598,738 - 1,761,000 415,086 - 2,774,824

Waste Management Capital PlanRefuse Reserve Fund 932,080 157,611 120,118 158,653 107,619 1,476,081

Subtotal Waste Management Capital Plan 932,080 157,611 120,118 158,653 107,619 1,476,081

Equipment Replacement Capital PlanVehicle and Equipment Reserve Fund 2,424,219 2,113,750 403,413 1,063,103 405,521 6,410,006

Subtotal Equipment Replacement Capital Plan 2,424,219 2,113,750 403,413 1,063,103 405,521 6,410,006

Forestry Capital PlanForestry Reserve Fund 695,385 - - - - 695,385

Subtotal Forestry Capital Plan 695,385 - - - - 695,385

Drainage Utility Capital PlanReserve Funds 1,005,567 120,000 61,340 801,160 365,000 2,353,067 Cedar Valley Drainage DCCs 593,930 - 726,660 114,840 - 1,435,430 Accumulated Surplus 250,000 - - - - 250,000

Subtotal Drainage Utility Capital Plan 1,849,497 120,000 788,000 916,000 365,000 4,038,497

Water Utility Capital PlanWater Capital Reserve Fund 4,053,363 1,795,794 2,004,376 2,851,301 2,637,008 13,341,842 DCCs 443,375 1,203,840 2,082,168 5,211,657 3,546,091 12,487,131 Third Party Recoveries 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 500,000

Subtotal Water Utility Capital Plan 4,596,738 3,099,634 4,186,544 8,162,958 6,283,099 26,328,973

Sewer Utility Capital PlanSewer Capital Reserve Fund 8,553,946 2,428,941 3,292,682 1,871,786 3,147,430 19,294,785 Sewer Capital DCCs - Local - - 594,000 160,578 - 754,578 Sewer Capital DCCs - Regional 3,363,642 - 77,414 28,547 5,631 3,475,234 Water Capital Reserve 8,000 8,000 Equipment Reserve 2,000 2,000 Grants 4,976,394 4,976,394

Subtotal Sewer Utility Capital Plan 16,903,982 2,428,941 3,964,096 2,060,911 3,153,061 28,510,991

TOTAL PLANNED CAPITAL FUNDING $51,309,425 $14,015,995 $15,315,087 $16,150,924 $13,506,197 $110,297,628

259

Schedule “E” of Bylaw No. 5913-2020-5826(1) 2019 Change in Net Financial Assets

Page 6 of 6

Budget

2019

Surplus for the year $19,595,260

Acquisition of tangible capital assets (57,152,794)

Amortization of tangible capital assets 9,638,996

(Gain) / Loss on sale of tangible capital assets -

Proceeds on sale of tangible capital assets 198,978

(27,719,560)

(Increase)/Decrease in inventories of property -

(Increase)/Decrease in prepaid expenses -

(Increase)/Decrease in inventories of supplies -

-

Change in net financial assets/net debt ($27,719,560)

260

DISTRICT OF MISSION DEVELOPMENT VARIANCE PERMIT DV19-006

Issued pursuant to Section 498 of the Local Government Act

Issued to: Thor Shay 11590 Yeo Street, Mission, BC V4S 1C9

as the registered owner (hereinafter referred to as the Permittee) and shall only apply to ALL AND SINGULAR that certain parcel or tract of land and premises situate, lying and being in the Municipality of Mission, in the Province of British Columbia, and more particularly known and described as:

Address: 13 - 11540 Glacier Drive Parcel Identifier: 026-772-426Legal Description: Strata Lot 6 Section 14 Township 15 New Westminster

District Strata Plan BCS1989 Together with an interest inthe Common Property in Proportion to the Unit Entitlementof the Strata Lot as Shown on Form V

1. The said lands are zoned Comprehensive Development 7 (CD-7) Zone pursuant to “Districtof Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009” as amended.

2. “District of Mission Zoning Bylaw” as amended is hereby varied in respect of the said landsas follows:

(a) Section 111 (B) (2) from 1.20 m (3.9 ft) to 2.23 m (7.55 ft)

3. This Permit does not constitute a subdivision approval or a building permit.

4. This Permit applies only to the development or construction proposed within the associatedStaff Report and does not apply to future construction or reconstruction.

AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION NO. [Click here to type resolution number] passed by the Council on the 2nd day of March, 2020.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Development Variance Permit is hereby issued by the Municipality

signed by the Mayor and the Deputy Corporate Officer the [Click here to type day of the month]

day of [Click here to type month] , 2020.

___________________________ Pamela Alexis, MAYOR

___________________________ Jennifer Russell, CORPORATE OFFICER

261

· 2020-02-27 · regular council meeting agenda march 2, 2020 at 6:00 p.m. council chambers 8645...

Documents