Public Hearing Agenda April 29, 2015 – 7:00 p.m.

A Public Hearing will be held in the small gymnasium of the Hatzic Secondary School at 34800 Dewdney Trunk Road, Mission, B.C.

1. CALL TO ORDER (7:00 P.M.)

2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA

3. PUBLIC HEARING

(a) i. Public Hearing Notice for April 29, 2015 Page 2

ii. Notice to Owner/Occupant Letter Page 4

iii. Zoning Amending Bylaw 5501-2015-5050(172)

R14-032 (Toor & Tiegen) – a bylaw to rezone property at 8455 and 8502 McTaggart Street from Urban Residential 930 (R930) and Rural 80 (RU80) Zones to the Urban Residential 669 (R669) Zone

Page 6

iv. Previous Staff Report dated April 7, 2015 Page 7

4. ADJOURNMENT

1

DISTRICT OF MISSION NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING

Pursuant to the provisions of Sections 890 and 892 of the Local Government Act, a Public Hearing will take place in the Small Gymnasium at Hatzic Secondary School, 34800 Dewdney Trunk Road, Mission, BC at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, April 29, 2015 to consider the following proposed bylaw:

1. DISTRICT OF MISSION ZONING AMENDING BYLAW 5501-2015-5050(172) (R14-032 – Tiegen and Toor)

The purpose of the amendment is to facilitate the subdivision of the lands to create up to sixty-one (61) single-family residential lots with a minimum lot area of 669 square metres (7,200 square feet).

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

Parcel Identifier: 016-788-648; Lot 2 Section 25 and 26 Township 17 and District Lot 476 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 87417; Parcel Identifier: 009-747-532; Lot “A” District Lot 476 Group 1 and Section 25 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 12639;

from Urban Residential 930 (R930) Zone and Rural 80 (RU80) Zone to Urban Residential 669 (R669) Zone.

The location of the subject properties is 8455 and 8502 McTaggart Street and is shown on the following maps:

Copies of the proposed bylaw and reports relevant to this bylaw may be inspected at the Municipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC, Monday to Friday, excluding statutory holidays, from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., and at the Mission Library, 33247 2nd Avenue, during regular opening hours, from April 15, 2015 to April 29, 2015. The information is also available on our website at www.mission.ca by searching “Public Meeting Information”. For further information regarding this bylaw, please contact the Development Services Department at (604) 820-3748.

2

At the Public Hearing, persons who believe that their interest in property is affected by this proposed bylaw 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 them in writing to the Acting Corporate Officer by 4:30 p.m. on Tuesday, April 28, 2015.

You may forward your submission by:

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

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

E-mail: info@mission.ca 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 the bylaw forward for additional readings.

Tina Penney Acting Corporate Officer Dated at Mission, BC this 14th day of April, 2015. G:\COMDEV\PUBLIC HEARINGS & PUBLIC INPUT MEETINGS\NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING\2015\April 30.docx

3

4

5

DISTRICT OF MISSION

BYLAW 5501-2015-5050(172)

A Bylaw to amend "District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009"

WHEREAS, under the provisions of 903 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

5501-2015-5050(172).”

2. "District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009" as amended, is hereby further amended by:

a) rezoning the properties located at 8455 and 8502 McTaggart Street and legally described as:

Parcel Identifier: 016-788-648 Lot 2 Section 25 and 26 Township 17 and District Lot 476 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 87417 Parcel Identifier: 009-747-532 Lot A District Lot 476 Group 1 and Section 25 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 12639 from the Urban Residential 930 (R930) and Rural 80 (RU80) Zones to the Urban Residential 669 (R669) Zone; and

b) amending the zoning maps accordingly.

READ A FIRST TIME this 7th day of April, 2015

READ A SECOND TIME this 7th day of April, 2015

ADVERTISED this 17th and 24th days of April, 2015

PUBLIC HEARING held this XX day of XXX, 2015

READ A THIRD TIME this XX day of XX, 2015

ADOPTED this XX day of XXX, 2015 RANDY HAWES, MAYOR TINA PENNEY ACTING CORPORATE OFFICER

6

Development Services Staff Report to Council

File Category: LGMA 3360 File Folder: R14-032

DATE: April 7, 2015

TO: Mayor and Council

FROM: Parissa Shafizadeh, Planner

SUBJECT: Rezoning Application for properties located on 8455 and 8502 McTaggart Street to facilitate a subdivision of the lands to create up to 58 single-family residential lots

ATTACHMENTS: Appendix 1 – Information for Corporate Officer Appendix 2 – Location maps Appendix 3 – Subdivision plan (conceptual) Appendix 4 – OCP land use designations Appendix 5 – Forward plan of subdivision Appendix 6 – Initial subdivision plan submission Appendix 7 – Public information meeting summary and response Appendix 8 – Parks, Recreation & Culture comments (email correspondence) Appendix 9 – Topographical and watercourse map Appendix 10 – Development proposal and neighborhood context Appendix 11 – Engineering Department comments Appendix 12 – Fire/Rescue Service Department comments Appendix 13 – RCMP comments

CIVIC ADDRESS:

8502 and 8455 McTaggart Street

DEVELOPERS: Gary Toor and Jason Tiegen on behalf of Colin and Catharine Jack, Mil-Kai Investments Ltd. and Kartar Holdings Ltd.

OCP: This application is in conformance with the current OCP designation of Urban Residential.

DATE APPLICATION COMPLETE:

February 26, 2015

7

LOCATION:

OVERVIEW AND STAFF COMMENTS

This report details the rezoning application for the properties located at 8455 and 8502 McTaggart Street and identifies the necessary amendment to the Zoning Bylaw to allow the subdivision of the lands for single-family residential lots. Staff support the application moving forward and as such have listed the Zoning Amending Bylaw under the “Bylaws for Consideration” section of the agenda.

Subject to Council’s approval, a Public Hearing will be scheduled for 7:00 PM on Thursday April 30th, 2015 at the Hatzic Secondary School.

SUMMARY

In late 2014, Mr. Gary Toor and Mr. Jason Tiegen (the developers), representing Colin and Catharine Jack, Mil-Kai Investments Ltd., and Kartar Holdings Ltd., (the property owners), initiated discussions with the District’s Development Services Department regarding a proposal to develop two of the last five remaining larger parcels in the Hatzic Bench area of Mission. Shortly following a number of pre-application discussions, rezoning and subdivision development applications were subsequently submitted for the development of the properties located at 8455 and 8502 McTaggart Street (Appendix 2).

While Council approval of supporting development variance permits, street naming and or road closure bylaws will likely be needed to facilitate a subdivision as proposed, the primary purpose of this report is to introduce the necessary amendment to the Zoning Bylaw that would allow the subject properties to be subdivided into lots with a minimum lot area of 669 square metres (7,200 square

8

feet). While conceptual at this time, the lot configuration proposes a possible yield of up to 61 residential lots (Appendix 3). Application details

Site specifics

Location 8455 McTaggart Street and 8502 McTaggart Street

Current Uses Single-Family Residential / Agriculture

Parcel Area(s) 2.58 hectares (6.37 acres) and 3.06 hectares (7.56 acres), respectively

Total Area 5.64 hectares (13.93 acres)

Official Community Plan

Future land Use Urban Residential

Growth Management Residential Infill

Zoning Bylaw

Existing Zoning Urban Residential 930 (R930) and Rural 80 (RU80), respectively

Proposed Zoning Urban Residential 669 (R669)

Purpose To facilitate a subdivision to create up to 61 single-family residential lots, each with a minimum lot area of 669 square metres (7,200 square feet).

Surrounding Land Uses

North Single-Family Urban Residential

South Single-Family Urban Residential and Agricultural Land Reserve

East Agricultural Land Reserve

West Single-Family Urban Residential and Parkland

The applications seek to rezone the properties located at 8455 McTaggart Street (currently zoned Urban Residential 930 (R930)) and 8502 McTaggart Street (currently zoned Rural 80 (RU80)) to Urban Residential 669 (R669). Rezoning of the properties to the R669 Zone would allow the creation of lots with a minimum area of 669 square metres (7,200 square feet) for a potential lot yield of up to sixty-one (61) single-family residential units.

The proposed rezoning to the R669 Zone is in conformance with the properties’ Official Community Plan (OCP) designation of Urban Residential and as such, no corresponding amendment to the OCP is required. Appendix 4 shows the OCP land use designations for the subject properties and surrounding area.

While the target zone will not allow any form of secondary dwelling unit including secondary suites, coach houses or garden cottages, the developers have advised staff that a pre-determined number of lots will accommodate basement entry homes that could facilitate future applications to rezone for secondary suites.

9

While the application seeks to rezone both properties, development of the lands is proposed under two subdivision phases; the first of which would create twenty-five (25) single-family residential lots, leaving two (2) larger remainder lots with further subdivision potential for an additional thirty-six (36) residential lots for a complete build-out of sixty-one (61) residential lots.

The decision to phase the development was based on the developers’ market absorption projections, retention of an existing home as well as the need for additional land assembly along McTaggart Street necessary to access some of the lots in Phase 2. Appendix 3 indicates the number and locations of the lots proposed in each phase of development where Appendix 5 shows the conceptual layout for the complete build-out of the entire area. While the second phase of development will be managed through a no-build restrictive covenant, successive build-out of the entire neighbourhood area is subject to separate rezoning and subdivision application approvals.

BACKGROUND

Pre-application review

Unlike Cedar Valley, where new development is seen as ushering in a higher-density housing form through a comprehensive development neighbourhood plan, development in this area of Hatzic is viewed as completing or “filling in” an established residential neighbourhood.

Staff’s preliminary investigation of the Hatzic Bench area revealed that the average lot size, width and depth of the surrounding neighbourhood lots are approximately 1,218 square metres (13,120 square feet), 24.8 metres (78 feet) and 43 metres (141 feet), respectively. Given the absence of municipal sanitary service to the area and therefore the need to accommodate individual on-site sewage disposal systems, residential lots in the Hatzic Bench area are comparatively larger than those typically associated with other urban designations in Mission.

Recognizing that the area is designated for fully serviced urban residential lots as identified in the OCP, a number of density options are available within the urban residential designation. Specifically, the urban residential zones offered in the District’s Zoning Bylaw identify five zoning possibilities with minimum lot sizes ranging from 930 square metres (10,010 square feet) down to 465 square metres (5,005 square feet). The reason the Zoning Bylaw provides for a suite of residential zones of varying lot size under one land use designation is to allow Council and the District’s approving officer to support densities that are considered the most appropriate fit for an existing or planned neighbourhood area. Much like staff have supported variance requests from developers to reduce minimum requirements in situations where flexibility would result in an improved lot layout, the same could be said for encouraging lot dimensions and areas that are above the minimum requirements offered in the Zoning Bylaw.

As shown in Appendix 6, the developers initially submitted an application to create ninety-five (95) single-family lots each with a minimum area of 465 square metres (5,005 square feet). This first proposal involved the development of three parent parcels which consisted of the two subject properties and the adjacent property located at 8394 McTaggart Street. In comparison, this initial submission would have proposed a lot yield of seventy-six (76) for the two subject properties to the 61 lots currently proposed under the R669 Zone. Early submissions also included provisions to allow each new lot to include a secondary dwelling unit in the form of a secondary suite, coach home or garden cottage with a new principal dwelling. It is noted that the current application is not requesting a zone that would allow for secondary dwellings.

10

Planning objectives

As part of staff's review of the various lot and road configuration options submitted by the developers, staff worked closely with the developers on revisions that would achieve specific planning objectives. Recognizing that the lands are designated for urban residential development in the OCP and that development must occur with municipal services (municipal water, sanitary and storm), the following objectives were established to strike a balance between the competing interests of “project viability” (with respect to the developers’ need to maximize lot yield and profit) and the obligation of the District to only consider a plan that would offer the most appropriate fit within this established neighbourhood.

Density (Lot Size): While staff did not specifically specify a particular density or lot dimensions for this development, it was important that any lot layout submitted by the developers identify lots that fit well within the neighbourhood context of the area. Briefly stated, the overall lot layout should complement and not disrupt the existing neighbourhood pattern and character.

Road Network: Road networks and servicing corridors within the development site must consider the development potential of the adjacent developable properties and ensure that there is efficient connectivity through the site and to the properties beyond. Variances to the subdivision control bylaw will be considered only where the additional flexibility would significantly improve the overall development.

Pedestrian Linkages and Public Interface to Hatzic Park: An important consideration for this development was to incorporate a significant public interface/connection between the development site and Hatzic Park. In the conceptual plan of subdivision prepared, this objective is accomplished with a flanking public road along the park’s easternmost property boundary. Doing this will not only maintain the open view and informal access points to the park that many local resident have come to appreciate, it also improves the parkland function and increases opportunities for positive park activities at this end of the park. Ensuring pedestrian connectivity and public access through the site and to Hatzic Park is an important objective for development of this site.

Forward Plan of Subdivision: Subdivision proposals submitted to District are evaluated from an overall community net benefit and not necessarily on a particular parcel’s development potential. Where possible, every effort is made to ensure that any required servicing infrastructure including road works, are equitably shared among all properties with adjoining development potential regardless of ownership. In areas where a road network and lot layout plan has not been prepared by the District, the developer is required to respond by preparing a forward plan subdivision for review that captures the development potential of all contiguous parcels.

While the subdivision and road network plan submitted to date is still considered conceptual and that approval of corresponding development variance permits, street naming and or road closure bylaws will likely be needed to facilitate the subdivision of these lands as proposed, staff believe the developers’ plan of subdivision (Appendix 3) has adequately addressed the above planning and community interest objectives while still providing a plan that is economically viable.

Public information meeting

On January 15, 2015, the developers held a public information meeting to present their development proposal to the Hatzic neighbourhood residents. 325 invitations were sent to the residents within a

11

600 metre radius (approx.1/3 mile) of the subject development properties. 114 persons attended the meeting to view the developers’ plan and to provide comments and to voice their support or concern about the proposed development. Since the meeting, approximately nine (9) written submissions were submitted to the District in addition to a number of telephone and front counter comments. Staff have also been advised that an on-line petition has been distributed to local residents through various social media channels.

The majority of the comments received at the public information meeting noted concerns about the appropriateness and fit of this development with the existing neighbourhood character, as well as concerns about the potential for increased traffic and parking conflicts, impacts on the existing services and road infrastructure and loss of farmland. A primary concern for many residents was about the ability of the surrounding neighbourhood schools’ (Hatzic Elementary School and Hatzic Secondary School) to absorb the potential influx of students that this development might create.

The following graph summarizes the primary areas of concern of the 42 responses recorded at the public information meeting. Further details on how some of the issues and concerns raised at the public meeting have been met by the developers are provided in Appendix 7.

While taking into account the cost of providing municipal services to the site as well as the cost of constructing internal road and servicing infrastructure, the developers have made a concerted effort to address the various concerns raised by making significant revisions to their plan. The changes included another reduction to the overall proposed density which was now accomplished with an increase to the minimum lot size proposed from 558 square metres (6,006 square feet) to 669 square metres (7,200 square feet).

In response to resident concerns about secondary suites and associated parking and traffic conflicts, the developers decided to eliminate the outright permitted use of secondary dwelling units and engaged the services of an engineering firm to prepare a traffic impact assessment report to identify potential traffic and parking issues.

12

In response to local area resident concerns whether the neighbourhood schools have the capacity to absorb additional students from this development, staff sought confirmation from the Mission Public Schools that students could indeed be accommodated in some manner. The School Board’s response was that the accommodation of students is a process of catchment boundary changes based on the number of students each school capacity can handle. They went on to say that while there is no assurance the school district can provide at this time as it would be a series of adjustments using the schools within the area, they do have space at Dewdney Elementary and Windebank Elementary that can be made available. They concluded by stating that each year the opportunity arises to look at the enrolment and make changes, if required.

The District's Parks Recreation and Culture Department also provided suggestions to the developers on to improve functionality of Hatzic Park as a neighbourhood park (Appendix 8).

SITE CHARACTERISTICS

The subject site is comprised of two lots with a total lot area of approximately 5.64 hectares (13.93 acres). The site is located at the intersection of McEwen Avenue and McTaggart Street. The properties are currently used for seasonal farming activities and each accommodates a single-family residence with associated accessory buildings. Apart from the existing dwelling located on 8455 McTaggart Street, all buildings and structures will be removed as part of the subdivision.

The properties have an overall slope of 3% to 7%, except the south-east boundary of 8502 McTaggart Street which has a significant drop off overlooking agricultural lands to the southeast. No watercourse or other environmentally sensitive areas have been identified within the properties. A topographical and watercourse map is attached as Appendix 9.

OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN COMPLIANCE (Bylaw 4052-2008)

The current OCP designation of the properties is Urban Residential (Appendix 4).While the OCP would support the preparation of a neighbourhood plan for the area under Policy 2.2.1 as growth warrants, the following policies apply immediately to any development proposals in this area:

New residential development must occur with complete municipal services (municipal water, sanitary and storm) in accordance with the Subdivision Control Bylaw standards;

Subdivision applications that propose lots smaller than traditional Hatzic lots should be considered on a site by site basis; and

Consideration should be given to proposals that would offer one-storey garden apartments, senior townhouse and retirement village proposals on a site specific basis through the rezoning process.

This rezoning application to allow lots with a minimum lot area of 669 square metres (7,200 square feet) under the proposed zone of R669 is in conformance with the area’s OCP designation and supported by policy. No OCP amendment is required.

ZONING BYLAW COMPLIANCE (Bylaw 5050-2009)

The developers propose to rezone both properties to R669 Zone to allow a minimum lot area of 669 square metres (7,200 square feet). The required minimum lot width and depth in R669 Zone are 18.0 metres (59.05 feet) and 30.0 metres (98.42 feet), respectively.

13

PLANNING ANALYSIS

The subject properties are located within the Hatzic Bench area of Mission and surrounded by urban residentially zoned properties to the north, west and southwest with rural zoned properties to the east and southeast. Overall, the majority of the properties in this area are designated Urban Residential except for those properties located farther east and southeast which are designated as Agricultural Land Reserve lands.

Neighbourhood character

The neighbourhood encompassing the development site consists of single-family properties with an average lot area of 1,219 square metres (13,120 square feet). In this neighbourhood, the average lot width is 23.8 metres (78 feet) and an average lot depth is 43.0 metres (141 feet).

Although the minimum required lot size in the R669 Zone is 669 square metres (approximately 7,200 square feet) the proposed development identifies lots with an average lot area of 730 square metres (7,858 square feet) in first phase and 688 square metres (7,403 square feet) in the subsequent phase. Similarly, the average lot width within the proposed development is 20.5 metres (67.3 feet) and the average lot depth is 32.2 metres (105.6 feet), slightly larger than bylaw requirements.

While this proposal will create lots that exceed the minimum requirements of the R669 Zone, they are still smaller than those of the surrounding properties. Appendix 10 shows the proposed development within the context of the surrounding neighbourhood. It should be noted that the proposed road and lot layout may change as part of further review and consideration of the accompanying subdivision application provided the plans meets the requirements of the R669 Zone.

The developers have also provided a forward plan of subdivision to conceptualize the complete build-out of the five larger remaining parcels under a similar development scenario (refer to Appendix 5).

Access and Servicing

The development site is currently accessed from Henry Avenue to the south, McEwen Avenue to the north with McTaggart Street bisecting the site in half. As part of the subdivision, the developers will be required to upgrade the portions of these adjacent roads to an 18.0 metres (59.06 feet) wide urban local residential road standard. Similarly the developers will be required to construct internal roads within the site to an 18.0 metres (59.06 feet) wide urban local residential road standard and provide access to the newly created lots. Construction of a road along Hatzic Park to the east will improve the park’s interface to the newly proposed neighbourhood by creating an open, visible and accessible space for the residents.

It is noted that once the draft plan of subdivision has been finalized, a portion of McTaggart Street may require to be closed and that a development variance permit to reduce the required road dedication from 18.0 metres (59.06 feet) down to 15.0 metres (49.21 feet) may be required in some areas. These concessions will be addressed through subsequent reports to Council.

While the proposed road layout will increase the connectivity and efficiency of the existing road network for vehicular and pedestrian access within and beyond the development site, staff are also working with the adjacent property owners to ensure that their interests have been considered with this development.

The OCP requires all urban residential development to be serviced by municipal water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer. Since municipal water is available to the site, no further upgrade is required as part of this development application. However, the developers are required to extend sanitary sewer from Lougheed Highway to the site by way of Dewdney Trunk Road and Henry Avenue. It is anticipated that the additional flows generated from this site will exceed the downstream systems current capacity

14

triggering the District to upgrade its sanitary sewer system. The developers are required to contribute $47,000 towards these upgrades to cover a portion of the cost of the upgrade.

The developers are also required to verify the capacity of the existing storm sewer downstream of the site and to upgrade any deficiencies identified. This includes the enclosing any section of open ditch between storm sewers. The various servicing requirement are outlined in Appendix 11.

Traffic Assessment

The developers have engaged the services of bunt & associates to prepare a traffic assessment report. The report, dated February 26, 2015 was completed in response to address the traffic and parking concerns raised at the public information meeting. Specifically, the terms of reference for the report required the engineering consultants to consider the following:

The existing street network and the traffic operation, including main intersections; Predicting the vehicle trip generation as a result of the proposed development; Future impact analysis of the proposed development on traffic, including the major

intersections; Pedestrian access along McEwen Avenue, and the parking issues adjacent to Hatzic

Elementary School.

While the entire traffic assessment report will be made available to the public as part of the public hearing package, the following provides a summary of the report’s findings:

The proposed development is expected to generate between 60 to 90 vehicle trips during the morning peak hour and between 80 to 120 vehicle trips during the afternoon peak. This estimate is based on trip generation rates suggested by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 9th Edition. It should be noted that this estimate is higher than the expected rate since it reflects a development proposal with a secondary dwelling unit on each new lot. As the proposed R669 Zone does not allow for any form of the secondary dwelling unit, the estimates provided in this traffic assessment report could be considered a worst case scenario.

Traffic operation results show that the studied intersections are expected to operate well within acceptable capacity and delay thresholds. Main traffic impacts will occur along McEwen Avenue and McTaggart Street, since these streets will be the main access to the future single family homes. However, the study shows that the performance along these streets will continue to operate at optimal levels following completion of the development.

The additional traffic as a result of the proposed development will not impose significant impact on the pedestrian activity along McEwen Avenue. The portions of both McTaggart Street and McEwen Avenue adjacent to the site should be upgraded to Urban Local Residential Road standard with sidewalks, which will improve pedestrian safety.

A number of angled parking spaces are designated along the Hatzic Elementary School frontage which requires vehicles to back onto Dewdney Trunk Road. Although this condition is not ideal, it is not considered unsafe due to the low traffic volumes along the road (especially southbound traffic). To improve this condition, the report recommends that this parking configuration be converted from angled parking spaces to parallel parking spaces which would reduce the number of parking stalls, provide a pick-up and drop-off location at the frontage of the school or widen Dewdney Trunk Road on that section to allow for additional manoeuvring space. It is noted

15

that since Hatzic Elementary School is outside the development site, the Subdivision Control Bylaw does not require these improvements as part of this subdivision application.

The traffic assessment report concludes that the proposed development is not expected to

have considerable impacts on the adjacent road network and traffic operation.

Parks and Trails (Section 941 of the Local Government Act, District of Mission Parks and Trails Master Plan)

The subject properties are located directly east of Hatzic Park. This park, which is primarily accessible from Draper Street at the west, has limited public access at the east side. Currently, there is a service road running from Draper Street through to the highest elevation point of the park, which is approximately 2/3 of the length of the park. This service road acts as an informal trail partway through the park. The developers have volunteered to extend this service road (trail) from where it currently terminates and continue it eastward towards their development site to ultimately tie into the proposed neighbourhood sidewalks. This extended trail connection would serve as a new entrance to the park on the east side of the park.

As part of providing improvements to the park, the Parks, Recreation and Culture staff are recommending the installation of a play-space on the flatter section of the park to the east. To help fund the play-space improvements, consideration may be given to reduce the developers’ cash-in-lieu contribution in return for a cash contribution equal to the cost of providing this improvement.

It is also suggested that planting beds, community flower garden, children’s garden and/or interpretive signage that is reminiscent of the dahlia farm be developed in the eastern section of the park.

In accordance with Section 941 of the Local Government Act and Council Policy LAN. 26, a developer contribution of up to five percent (5%) cash in lieu for parkland is applicable to the accompanying subdivision application. As these monies can only be used for parkland acquisition, staff are recommending a reduction to the 5% cash-in-lieu contribution commensurate to the cost of providing the children’s play-space to allow the developer to volunteer back funds to provide this public amenity. The play-space with a resilient surfacing access point is estimated at a cost of approximately $30,000 to $40,000 (refer to the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Department’s Comments attached as Appendix 8).

Proposed Housing Designs

The existing neighbourhood is comprised of mix of older ranchers, two-storey and basement entry style homes. The OCP does not require an Intensive Residential Development Permit to guide the form and character of homes in development areas which are designated Urban Residential. However, to provide some degree of certainly that the development would complement the existing neighbourhood area, the developers have agreed to enter into a Section 219 Covenant agreement, the terms of which would restrict at least 70% of the housing form in their development as ranchers or two-storey style homes where the remaining 30% of the housing will be in the form of basement entry homes. While staff recognize that basement entry homes can easily accommodate a secondary suite, any proposal to do so would be subject to rezoning approval and thus considered by Council on a case by case basis.

Tree Retention and Planting

In accordance with Council Policy LAN. 32 – Tree Retention and Replanting, the developers are required to plant two (2) trees per lot created. This is above what is required for boulevard tree planting along the sidewalks. This condition will be met as part of the subdivision approval process. In addition to this requirement, the developers is also required to replace any significant tree on site

16

(trees having a caliper of 0.2 metres or greater) that will be removed except within the proposed municipal infrastructure necessary to complete the development. Developer Contribution for Community Amenities

In accordance with Council Policy LAN. 40, the developers have volunteered to contribute $2,815 per new lot created. The contribution aims to offset the unique financial burden that residential development incurs on the District to fund new facilities and/or amenities. Based on a proposed lot yield of 61 lots less the 2 parent lots, the contribution will be in the order of $166,085. Should the lot yield change, the developers and the District have agreed to adjust the total contribution accordingly based on a volunteered contribution of $2,815 per new created lot.

COMMUNICATION

The developer will be posting two (2) development notification signs on the site summarizing the proposed development. Provided a public hearing date is determined by Council, the sign will be modified to advertise the public hearing details (i.e., date, time and place). In addition, a notice will be mailed to the owners and to the occupiers of all properties within a distance of 600 metres (approx. 1/3 miles) of the development site notifying them of the public hearing details. It should be noted that the same mail out radius has been used for notification of the public information meeting. This mail out notification radius is above what is required in the Land Use Application and Procedures Bylaw.

Given that the public information meeting was well attended by local residents and that there is a high level of interest in this development proposal, staff are recommending that the venue for the public hearing be moved to a larger facility and preferably nearer to the development site. Subject to Council’s approval, a Public Hearing will be scheduled for 7:00 PM on Thursday April 30th, 2015 at the Hatzic Secondary School.

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 or 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.

REFERRALS

Engineering

The Engineering Department has no objection to the project subject to the completion of engineering servicing requirements as outlined in Appendix 11.

Mission Fire/Rescue Service

The Fire Department has no objection to the proposed development provided that the design and construction of any vehicular access routes must meet the requirements of the B.C. Building Code along with any water distribution systems for fire suppression capabilities (Appendix 12).

Parks, Recreation and Culture

The Parks, Recreation and Culture Department has no objection to the development subject to the satisfaction of the requirements outline in Appendix 8.

RCMP

The RCMP has no objection to the proposed development. However, it was noted that the proposed

17

development, like any other development, will result in additional demand on services (Appendix 13).

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO FINAL READING

The Final Reading of the amending bylaws will be held until the following have been satisfied:

1. The community amenity contribution that has been volunteered in the amount of $166,085 (based on $2,815 per new lot) is received;

2. Registration of (or letter of undertaking to register) a Section 219 restrictive covenant for housing form and character with the Land Titles Office;

3. The engineering servicing requirements, as outlined in Appendix 11, have been addressed to the satisfaction of the District Engineer;

4. Parks requirements, as outlined in Appendix 8, have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Director of Parks, Recreation and Culture; and

5. Any other requirements resulting from Council’s consideration of the Bylaw including Public Hearing.

INFORMATIONAL NOTES

In accordance with Section 941 of the Local Government Act and Council Policy LAN. 26, parkland dedication of up to five per cent (5%) is applied as cash-in-lieu to subdivision application file S14-010. It is noted that a reduction to the contribution may be negotiated where funding equal to the amount reduced would be volunteered back to the District to fund the installation of a children’s play-space.

SIGN-OFFS:

Parissa Shafizadeh, Planner

Reviewed by: "Insert Name, Position(DH/Dir/Dep)"

Comment from Chief Administrative Officer Reviewed

18

Appendix 1 Information for Corporate Officer

Civic Address:

8455 McTaggart Street

PID: 016-788-648

Legal: Lot 2 Section 25 and 26 Township 17 and District Lot 476 Group 1 New Westminster District Plan 87417

Civic Address:

8502 McTaggart Street

PID: 009-747-532

Legal: Lot A District Lot 476 Group 1 and Section 25 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 12639

19

Appendix 2 Location maps

20

Location aerial view

21

Appendix 3 Subdivision plan and phasing (conceptual)

22

Appendix 4 OCP land use designations

23

Appendix 5 Forward plan of subdivisions

24

Appendix 6 Initial subdivision plan submission

25

Appendix 7 Pubic information meeting summary

The following table details the developers’ response to the various concerns identified by the public at the public information meeting held on January 15, 2015.

Concern Action to Address Concern

Increased traffic and parking issues

The developers engaged bunt & associates to prepare a traffic impact report to assess the impacts of the proposed development on the existing road network and traffic operation. In addition, the report addresses the parking issues particularly adjacent to Hatzic Elementary School and the pedestrian access within the development site.

It should be noted that the proposed development will meet the parking requirements of the Zoning Bylaw by providing a minimum two (2) off-street parking per residence on each lot.

High density (small lots)

The developers reduced the proposed density by increasing the minimum lot area from 558 square metres (6,006 square feet) to 669 square metres (7,200 square feet) and eliminating the secondary dwelling units.

School capacity in Hatzic area

Both the developers and staff consulted with Mission School Board to discuss about the potential impact of the proposed development on the neighbourhood schools’ capacity to absorb new students in the area. It was confirmed that despite the current full capacity of Hatzic Elementary School, adequate spaces are available in other neighbouring schools. The School Board will plan to accommodate the additional students when as needed.

Considering the timing of the construction and phasing of the proposed development and lack of demographic information on the future residents, it is difficult to predict the extent of issue related to school capacity at this time. It should be noted that there is no capacity issue related to Hatzic Secondary School.

Lack of sidewalks

The pedestrian linkages within and beyond the development site will be addressed as part of the subdivision process. The developers are required to improve the connectivity of Hatzic Park to the neighbourhood by constructing a sidewalk along the east boundary of the park. The sidewalk will connect the proposed trail within the park to the pedestrian sidewalk network within the development site.

Crime and safety

A referral has been sent to the Mission RCMP for comments on the potential for increased neighbourhood crime related to this development.

The RCMP did not identify any safety or crime concerns within the neighbourhood. However, it was stated that the proposed development will require additional policing services to maintain the safety of the community1.

It is noted that a number of incidences of vandalism that have occurred on the 1 The estimated demands for increased services are usually taken into account at time of an OCP’s adoption. Since no OCP

amendment is included in this application, Council is not obligated to consider the proposal in conjunction with the District’s Financial Plan, which includes the Capital Expenditure Plan, Operating Expenditure Plan and the Waste Management Plan.

26

eastern section of Hatzic Park. It is anticipated that the improvements proposed to the park’s interface will largely address this issue.

The developers have also volunteered to incorporate traffic calming measures in the design of the roads, including the road east of the park that would improve the safety of pedestrians in this area.

Secondary suite The target R669 Zone will not allow any form of the secondary dwelling as part of the development application.

Servicing

To meet the provisions of the OCP, the developers are required to provide full municipal services, i.e. water, sanitary and storm, to the site in accordance with the District’s Subdivision Control Bylaw.

Loss of farm land/green space

While the subject properties have been used for farmland for decades, the areas has long been identified as urban residential.

To maintain the open area of the site, the development plans have incorporated a flanking park road. In addition, the developers were asked to explore the opportunity to relocate some of the plants on the existing Dahlia farm to Hatzic Park in an attempt to maintain some of the history of the area. The developers have also volunteered to construct a connecting trail network through the park.

Cost of connecting to municipal sanitary for the neighbouring properties

The developers are required to enter into a late comers agreement to clarify the cost of residents outside the development site wishing to connect to the newly installed services.

Compatibility of the housing designs with the existing neighbourhood

The developers are required to register a restrictive covenant with the Land Titles Office as a requirement of the subdivision to ensure that the proposed housing designs and size of the buildings will complement the surrounding neighbourhood.

27

Appendix 8 Parks, Recreation & Culture Department comments (email correspondence)

28

Appendix 9 Topography and watercourse Map

29

Appendix 10 Development Proposal and Neighbourhood Context

30

Appendix 11 Engineering Department Comments

31

Appendix 12 Fire/Rescue Service Department comments

32

Appendix 13 RCMP comments

33