City of Surrey ADDITIONAL PLANNING COMMENTS File:

Transcription

1 City of Surrey ADDITIONAL PLANNING COMMENTS File: Planning Report Date: September 14, 2015 PROPOSAL: OCP amendment on a portion of the property from Urban to Conservation and Recreation NCP amendment adjusting the boundaries between the Preservation area/open space and Cluster housing designations Rezoning a portion of the site from A-1 to CD (based on RM-15) Development Permit to permit the development of 57 townhouse units LOCATION: OWNER: ZONING: A-1 OCP DESIGNATION: NCP DESIGNATION: Avenue B C Ltd Urban Preservation Area/Open Space and Cluster housing

2 Staff Report to Council File: Additional Planning Comments Page 2 RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY That Council receive the following information regarding development application prior to Public Hearing and instruct staff to resolve a number of ongoing issues prior to Fourth Reading. DEVIATION FROM PLANS, POLICIES OR REGULATIONS A housekeeping amendment to the Official Community Plan (OCP) is proposed to re-designate a portion of the site (the environmental lands being conveyed to the City) from "Urban" to "Conservation and Recreation". An amendment to the West Rosemary Heights Neighbourhood Community Plan (NCP) will adjust the boundaries of the existing cluster housing and preservation/open space area designations to reflect the development footprint. RATIONALE OF RECOMMENDATION On July 27, 2015, Council granted First and Second Reading to development application At that time, Council instructed staff to resolve a number of issues prior to Public Hearing including completion and City acceptance of : o o o a hydrological report assessing the impact of the development on the adjacent riparian area (slope and floodplain) to ensure the continued health and survival of trees in the area to be conveyed to the City for conservation and recreation purposes; a QEP report documenting how the developed site will preserve and protect the viability of the site s regional habitat corridor along the south side of the Nicomekl River; a Bald Eagle Nest Management Plan as per the City s Protected Species Management Plan Terms of Reference. The current report summarizes the information received to date and the outstanding work and conditions yet to be completed in order to move forward for final adoption, including resolution of the project s environmental setback from the two Senior Environmental Government agencies. The Provincial audit of the applicant s Riparian Areas Regulation (RAR) assessment report is currently underway but has not yet been finalized. The audit process must be completed, and any issues arising from the audit must be resolved, prior to final adoption.

3 Staff Report to Council File: Additional Planning Comments Page 3 RECOMMENDATIONS In addition to the items listed for resolution in the staff report to Council dated July 27, 2015, the Planning & Development Department recommends: 1. Council receive this report concerning development application as additional information prior to Public Hearing. 2. Council instruct staff to resolve the following additional issues prior to final adoption: a) Completion of the hydrology report for the site to the satisfaction of the City; b) Completion of wildlife corridor study for the site to the satisfaction of the City; and c) Resolution of issues arising from the Provincial audit of the RAR Assessment report establishing the proposed riparian environmental setback for this project. BACKGROUND On July 27, 2015, Council granted First and Second Reading to development application The application is to amend the OCP and the West Rosemary Heights NCP and to rezone a portion of the site from "General Agriculture Zone (A-1)" to a "Comprehensive Development Zone (CD)" to permit a 57 unit townhouse development. A Development Permit (DP) is also required to regulate the form and character of the development and address hazard lands conditions. The development site is located atop of a treed escarpment overlooking the Nicomekl River. Accessed via 150 Street, the site is bordered by the river to the north, City park to the west, unopened road allowance (36 Avenue) to the south and a natural ravine containing Barbara Creek to the east. Collectively, Hub J and the regional wildlife corridor identified in the BCS constitute the majority of the site and as part of the application, the developer will convey to the City, without compensation, 58,400 m 2 (14.4 acres) of sensitive, high quality habitat for conservation purposes. The proposed OCP amendment will re-designate the environmental lands conveyed to the City from "Urban" to "Conservation and Recreation". A further amendment to the West Rosemary Heights Neighbourhood Concept (NCP) will adjust the boundary of the cluster housing designation to accommodate the development footprint. The proposed net density of the development at 10 units per acre (u.p.a) will fall well below the maximum net density of 15 upa specified in the NCP.

4 Staff Report to Council File: Additional Planning Comments Page 4 ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED In the July 27 staff report to Council, (Appendix II), the following issues are also to be resolved prior to Public Hearing: o o o completion and City acceptance of a hydrological assessment report assessing the impact of the proposed cuts and fills, retaining walls and basements on the site on the hydrologic regime of the adjacent riparian area including recommended mitigation measures to ensure the maintenance of natural drainage and historic flow of water for tree health on the slope; completion and City acceptance of the QEP (R.P. Bio) report documenting how the developed site will maintain the viability of the site s habitat regional corridor along the south side of the Nicomekl River; and completion and City acceptance of a Bald Eagle Nest Management Plan as per the City s Protected Species Management Plan Terms of Reference. The above issues were identified in order to fully understand the environmental impacts of the development prior to Public Hearing. This report summarizes the information received to date and the outstanding work yet to be completed prior to final adoption. The report also outlines the status of the Provincial audit of the Riparian Areas Regulation (RAR) assessment report and recommends resolution of the environmental setback as a condition of Fourth Reading. DISCUSSION Site Hydrology One of the key issues to be addressed is ensuring the developed site will continue to allow for the historic flow of water (natural drainage) through the site to the riparian areas below, in order to maintain the health and survival of the trees within these areas. The treed canopy on the slope and in the floodplain plays an important role in ensuring the continued ecological functioning of the site, by providing debris, foliage and shading to the river, the floodplain and the BCS wildlife corridor. In August, the applicant s consultant, Kerr Wood Leidal Consulting Engineers submitted an updated Groundwater/ Interflow Plan for the site. The plan calls for the installation of foundation drains, trench dams and a series of underground sumps and perforated pipes to maintain the natural drainage throughout the site and direct stormwater towards the treed area below the development site. With the proposed system in place, the consultants estimate groundwater/interflow movement of water will be maintained, such that the trees in the park area should receive more than 80% of the pre-development flows.

5 Staff Report to Council File: Additional Planning Comments Page 5 While staff believe the approach presented appears viable, further information is required to refine the groundwater mitigation system and prepare the next level of detail i.e., a working design), of the proposed control/recharge systems based on the civil and geotechnical proposals. In particular the groundwater table depth, the elevations of utility trench and foundation depths and infiltration rates at roof runoff distribution trenches will all need to be reviewed and accepted through Engineering, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering prior to final adoption. Understanding the system's final design and the role the strata will play in maintaining and monitoring the system must also be demonstrated to the satisfaction of staff. At the same time the Geotechical report for the site will need to be updated to include the proposed groundwater/interflow system. In turn, the project s Geotechnical Engineer will need to accept the designed discharges on the slope and ensure such discharges are not detrimental to overall slope maintenance and stability. Wildlife Corridor Study As part of the review process and information to be provided prior to Public Hearing, the applicant was also asked to submit a report focusing on the wildlife corridor and how the developed site would continue to meet the objectives of the Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (BCS). The report to be completed by a Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP) was to document and propose recommendations to maintain the function and viability of the site s 60 metre habitat regional corridor along the south side of the Nicomekl River. In response, the applicant s environmental consultant, Envirowest Consultants Inc. (Envirowest), submitted an updated Assessment of Impacts to Ecological Features report to the City on September 4, The BCS is based on a Green Infrastructure Network (GIN) that includes interconnected natural areas that fulfill a variety of ecological functions, with three core principles: 1) preservation of large core habitat areas; 2) protection of connectivity between habitat areas; and 3) provision of a diversity of habitat features. Typically, hubs are large areas (more than 10 ha) of intact habitat, providing habitat for a diversity of species, including unique species and those less tolerant of human disturbance, while corridors are zones of habitat that link hubs and sites and provide pathways for wildlife to migrate. The present development property is encumbered by a 60 metre wide Regional BCS Corridor and Hub J in the Redwood management area. Both the corridor and hub have high ecological value and very high habitat suitability ratings.

6 Staff Report to Council File: Additional Planning Comments Page 6 As the QEP report notes, the existing undisturbed regional corridor on the development site provides the last remaining and critical movement corridor for many animals, including black tailed deer, between the ALR, the Sunnyside Acres Urban Forest and remainder of South Surrey. While there are currently few restrictions to deer movement through the property, the development of the project along the lower escarpment elevations will constrain the movement of deer to a narrow corridor or pinch point. Specifically, Envirowest s QEP report states that the development will retain a minimum of approximately 30 metres of undisturbed habitat extending from the river bank to the nearest building foundation through the narrowest section of the riparian zone. This narrow section of riparian zone (the Pinch point) extends approximately 40 metres along the river. A further narrowing of the riparian zone will occur at the existing storm sewer outfall, located at the base of the escarpment. The undisturbed riparian zone extending from the existing headwall to the nearest fill line will now measure 23 metres (versus 16 metres), as a result of staff working with the applicant to adjust the site layout and the location of buildings 17 and 18. A subsequent covenant on the development property will be required to ensure the enhanced corridor area (within the property boundaries) remains undisturbed and unfilled. While deer are expected to continue to move along the remaining riparian edge after completion of the development, the report also identifies and recommends several design impact mitigation measures to maintain the viability of corridor and improve movement of wildlife including: o o o o Extending the storm sewer outfall towards the river s edge by approximately 10 metres. Placing soil and planting on top of the outfall extension will increase the narrowest width of the corridor pinch point from 23 to 33 metres; Replanting the narrow strip of land between the building and the proposed property line which will be disturbed during construction; Augmenting deer movement along the western base of the escarpment by improving drainage and installing a swale near the base of the slope to drain soils following flood events and periods of wet weather; and Enhancing wildlife habitat with additional landscaping and tree planting to provide shade for the near shore habitats of the Nicomekl River. With these measures the report notes that the viability of the property as a movement corridor for wildlife, most notably deer is not expected to be significantly affected. While the report is acceptable in principle, staff are seeking further commitments to mitigation strategies and professional assurances of success. Without such assurances, a window of risk is open to both the developer and the City. Consequently staff would like to see the report revised to reflect these concerns.

7 Staff Report to Council File: Additional Planning Comments Page 7 The landscaping plan for the riparian area (which will be subject to a P-15 agreement and involve the removal of invasive species and other planting as recommended by staff) is also attached to the updated Assessment of Impacts to Ecological Features report. The updated versions of Envirowest Landscape Drawing Nos (Rev.05) and (Rev 3) dated September 4, 2015 now reflects the requirements of DFO s May 6, 2014 Letter of Advice as well as the City s requirement for minimal fill in the floodplain. In keeping with the request from the Parks, Recreation and Culture Department, the Wildlife Corridor report also includes some details of how the Nicomekl Greenway will be accommodated on-site by providing cross-sections and plans of the greenway s construction in relation to the proposed development, the BCS corridor, habitat compensation areas and flood elevations. In addition, the details of the proposed drainage channel through the future park including location, depth, impacts to hydrology and planting plans are required. Ultimately, extending the storm sewer outfall will also require Provincial Water Act Approval and DFO review. Given this, staff would like to see the Assessment of Impacts to Ecological Features report revised to address some of the concerns raised, including the lack of professional assurances and further information on proposed drainage measures to be taken in the floodplain. Eagle Nest Management Plan In keeping with Council s direction the City also received on August 27, 2015, a Bald Eagle Nest Management Plan submitted by the applicant s consultant Enkon Environmental Ltd. The QEP report looks at the potential impacts of the development and recommends mitigation measures to minimize disturbance to the eagle nest on the site. According to the QEP, the proposed mitigation measures will protect the eagle nest and ensure that any development activities will not result in the contravention of the BC Wildlife Act. The eagle nest is located in a Western Hemlock tree in the floodplain in the middle of the site. Development of the site will occur south and west of the nest. In accordance with MOE guidelines, the report identifies a buffer of undisturbed natural vegetation extending from the tree, resulting in a 70 metre vegetation disturbance buffer around the nest tree based on the criteria for urban areas i.e., 1.5 times the nest tree height of 46.6 metres as well as an additional breeding season quiet buffer of 100 metres past the vegetated buffer. To mitigate the impacts of clearing within the 70 metre vegetated buffer, the report makes recommendations to ensure the sightlines of the nest will be undisturbed. The latter breeding season buffer is intended to protect birds during the breeding season, when they are most sensitive to noise disturbance and acts to reduce the likelihood that birds will abandon their young. The project s tree removal and road base construction is therefore to occur in the least risk window so any disturbance to the eagle nest will be minimal during the breeding season from late December to early August.

8 Staff Report to Council File: Additional Planning Comments Page 8 Additional mitigation measures, along with the implementation of best management practices will be used during the cutting and grading of the site and construction to further reduce disturbance to the eagles. Throughout clearing and construction activities the applicant is to engage a QEP to monitor the nest. The Bald Eagle Nest Management Plan follows the City s Protected Species Management Plan Terms of Reference and is acceptable to City staff. It will be the QEP s responsibility to follow the plan and ensure that any development activities do not contravene the Wildlife Act. Environmental Riparian Setback The Provincial (MOE) audit of the applicant s detailed Riparian Areas Regulation (RAR) Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP) Assessment Report is currently underway, but has not yet been completed. On July 9, 2015, Envirowest Consultants Ltd. (Envirowest) submitted a RAR QEP Assessment Report which used the edge of the Nicomekl River as the high water mark (HWM) and the basis for identifying a 30 metre setback for the development. On August 21, 2015, the Province reported back and suggested that the submitted report didn't conform to the RAR methodology. Specifically the Province had issues with the QEP interpretation of the High Water Mark (HWM) and inferred the HWM was located at the edge of the active floodplain or the toe of the slope. The Province also did not make reference to the May 14, 2014 letter issued by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) which stated another similar proposal, with mitigation measures, would not result in serious harm to fish. On August 27, Envirowest submitted a revised RAR QEP Assessment Report to the Province in response to their comments of August 21, The revised report referenced the edge of the active floodplain as the HWM. The report also stated that in the QEP's professional opinion the development would not result in a harmful alteration, disruption or destruction (HADD) of natural features, functions and conditions that support fish processes in the riparian assessment area. The QEP has subsequently indicated to staff that they are seeking another DFO Letter of Advice to support their revised layout and associated habitat and servicing requirements. Despite this, there is still continuing discussion and dialogue concerning the process. The proposed development has always required a variance of the Streamside Protection and Enhancement Area (SPEA). The Province has also stated that a HADD cannot be authorized by a no serious harm to fish letter from DFO. Consequently the processes, and the issues yet to come forth out of the discussions, are as of yet incomplete. The final resolution of the issue will therefore be required as a condition of Fourth and final Reading.

9 Staff Report to Council File: Additional Planning Comments Page 9 SUMMARY In summary, the applicant has presented staff with the three reports required for Public Hearing: o o o The Groundwater/ Interflow Plan or hydrological report assessing the impact of the development on the adjacent riparian area (slope and floodplain) to ensure the future tree health and survival; the QEP Assessment of Impacts to Ecological Features report documenting how the developed site will preserve and protect the viability of the site s regional habitat corridor along the south side of the Nicomekl River; and the Bald Eagle Nest Management Plan as per the City s Protected Species Management Plan Terms of Reference. Of the three, only the Eagle Nest report has been fully accepted by City. Both the hydrological report and the wildlife corridor study, while acceptable in principle, need further refinement and information in order to receive staff acceptance and sign off. It is therefore recommended that both the hydrological report and the wildlife corridor study be updated and revised to address staff comments in order to achieve final acceptance prior to Fourth Reading. Similarly, this report has summarized the work and information received to date, as well as the outstanding conditions, necessary for the resolution of the project s environmental setback from the two Senior Environmental Government agencies. To address this issue and allow the project to move forward, staff are recommending that the determination of the project s final riparian environmental setback be a condition of Fourth Reading. The new condition, which enhances and more clearly defines the rationale for one of the project s existing Fourth Reading conditions - input Senior Government Environmental Agencies will allow the project to proceed to Third Reading. INFORMATION ATTACHED TO THIS REPORT The following information is attached to this Report: Appendix I Appendix II Lot Owners, Action Summary, Revised Site Layout, Preliminary Lot Grading Plan July 27, 2015 Staff Report to Council

10 Staff Report to Council File: Additional Planning Comments Page 10 INFORMATION AVAILABLE ON FILE Groundwater/ Interflow Plan Prepared by Kerr Wood Leidal Consulting Engineers Dated August 31, Assessment of Impacts to Ecological Features Prepared by Envirowest Consultants Inc. Dated September 4, Bald Eagle Nest Management Plan Prepared by Enkon Environmental Ltd. Dated August Riparian Areas Regulation (RAR) Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP) Assessment Report Prepared by Envirowest Consultants Inc. Dated August 27, 2015 original signed by Ron Hintsche Jean Lamontagne General Manager Planning and Development HP/da \\file-server1\net-data\csdc\generate\areaprod\save\ doc KD 9/10/15 4:31 PM

11 APPENDIX I Information for City Clerk Legal Description and Owners of all lots that form part of the application: 1. (a) Agent: Name: Randy Dick Portrait Homes Address: Westminster Highway, Unit 1100 Richmond, BC V6V 2X5 Tel: Work Cell 2. Properties involved in the Application (a) Civic Address: Avenue (b) Civic Address: Avenue Owner: BC Ltd Director Information: Harry Grimm Robert Grimm No Officer Information Filed PID: Lot A Section 27 Township 1 New Westminster District Plan LMP46260 \\file-server1\net-data\csdc\generate\areaprod\save\ doc KD 9/10/15 4:31 PM

12

13

14 City of Surrey PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORT File: Planning Report Date: July 27, 2015 PROPOSAL: OCP Amendment on a portion of the property from Urban to Conservation and Recreation NCP Amendment adjusting the boundaries between the Preservation area/open space and Cluster housing designations Rezoning a portion of the site from A-1 to CD (based on RM-15) Development Permit to permit the development of 57 townhouse units LOCATION: OWNER: ZONING: A Avenue BC Ltd OCP DESIGNATION: NCP DESIGNATION: Urban Preservation Area/Open Space and Cluster housing

15 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 2 RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY By-law Introduction and set date for Public Hearing for OCP Amendment. By-law Introduction and set date for Public Hearing for Rezoning. Approval t0 eliminate indoor amenity space. Approval to draft Development Permit. DEVIATION FROM PLANS, POLICIES OR REGULATIONS A housekeeping amendment to the Official Community Plan (OCP) is proposed to re-designate a portion of the site (the environmental lands) being conveyed to the City from "Urban" to "Conservation and Recreation". An amendment to the West Rosemary Heights Neighbourhood Community Plan (NCP) will adjust the boundaries of the existing cluster housing and preservation/open space area designations to reflect the development footprint. RATIONALE OF RECOMMENDATION The proposal largely complies with the Official Community Plan and the Rosemary Heights West Plan NCP. Housekeeping amendments will be required to adjust the boundaries of the urban and cluster housing designations to reflect the development footprint. The boundaries of new OCP designated area Conservation and Recreation will match and reflect the adjusted preservation/open space area in the NCP. The reconfigured development footprint is proposed to provide an efficient and workable layout on this topographically challenging site. The larger development footprint will provide the area to accommodate the internal road and the larger townhouse units. Despite the larger footprint the unit density of the project at 10 units per acre is in keeping with the NCP. The proposal will convey to the City without compensation approximately 5.84 ha (14.4 acres) of riparian area along the Nicomekl River for conservation. This represents 72% of the site s gross area, and approximately 77% of the target area outlined under the BCS/GIN. The conveyance of the lands, which will be subject to a P-15 agreement, will assist the City in protecting and enhancing the features and functions and natural biodiversity of this important ecological site. Through the application, the applicant will also provide a public pathway in the City s unopened 36 Avenue road allowance, along with a viewing platform on site. Given the sensitivity and complexity of the site, staff also recommend that a hydrological assessment report, a QEP (R.P. Bio) report addressing the functionality of the wildlife habitat corridor, and an eagle nest management plan for the site be completed and approved prior to Public Hearing.

16 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 3 RECOMMENDATION The Planning & Development Department recommends that: 1. A By-law be introduced to amend the OCP by re-designating a portion of the subject site from "Urban" to "Conservation and Recreation" and a date for Public Hearing be set. 2. Council determine the opportunities for consultation with persons, organizations and authorities that are considered to be affected by the proposed amendment to the Official Community Plan, as described in the Report, to be appropriate to meet the requirement of Section 879 of the Local Government Act. 3. A By-law be introduced to rezone a portion of the site shown as Block A from "General Agriculture Zone (A-1)" to "Comprehensive Development Zone (CD)" and a date be set for Public Hearing. 4. Council approve the applicant's request to eliminate the required indoor amenity space on the site. 5. Council authorize staff to draft Development Permit No generally in accordance with the attached drawings (Appendix II). 6. Council instruct staff to resolve the following issues prior to Public Hearing: (a) (b) (c) completion and City acceptance of a hydrological assessment report assessing the impact of the proposed cuts and fills, retaining walls and basements on the site on the hydrologic regime of the adjacent riparian area including recommended mitigation measures to ensure the maintenance of natural drainage and historic flow of water for tree health on the slope; completion and City acceptance of the QEP (R.P. Bio) report documenting how the developed site will maintain the viability of the site s habitat regional corridor along the south side of the Nicomekl River; and completion and City acceptance of an Eagle Nest Management Plan as per the City s Protected Species Management Plan Terms of Reference. 7. Council instruct staff to resolve the following issue prior to final adoption: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) ensure that all engineering requirements and issues including restrictive covenants, dedications, and rights-of-way where necessary, are addressed to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Engineering; submission of a subdivision layout to the satisfaction of the Approving Officer; approval from the Ministry of Transportation & Infrastructure; input from Senior Government Environmental Agencies; submission and approval of a geotechnical report for the site, the conditions of which will form the basis of a Hazard Lands DP for the site;

17 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 4 (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) submission of an acceptable tree survey and a statement regarding tree preservation; submission of a finalized tree survey and a statement regarding tree preservation to the satisfaction of the City Landscape Architect; submission of a landscaping plan and landscaping cost estimate to the specifications and satisfaction of the Planning and Development Department; resolution of all urban design issues to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Department; demolition of existing buildings and structures to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Department; the applicant satisfy the deficiency in tree replacement on the site, to the satisfaction of the Planning and Development Department; completion of a P-15 agreement with the City for maintenance and planting of riparian area; the applicant adequately address the impact of no indoor amenity space; registration of a Section 219 Restrictive Covenant advising future owners of adjacent agricultural operations; (0) registration of a Section 219 Restrictive Covenant outlining a no build, no disturb zone on the eastern side of the development site to protect the riparian area within 30 metres (100 ft.) of Barbara Creek; (p) (q) registration of a right of way securing public passage and access to the public viewing platform proposed on-site near the 150 Street cul-de-sac; and registration of a Section 219 Restrictive Covenant to adequately address the City s needs with respect to public art, to the satisfaction of the General Manager Parks, Recreation and Culture. 8. Council pass a resolution to amend the West Rosemary Heights Neighbourhood Concept Plan by adjusting the boundary of the cluster housing designation to incorporate the footprint of the proposed development site, when the project is considered for final adoption.

18 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 5 REFERRALS Engineering: School District: The Engineering Department has no objection to the project subject to the completion of Engineering servicing requirements as outlined in Appendix III. Projected number of students from this development: 11 Elementary students at Rosemary Heights Elementary School 6 Secondary students at Earl Marriot Secondary School (Appendix IV) The applicant has advised that the dwelling units in this project are expected to be constructed and ready for occupancy by Fall Parks, Recreation & Culture: A P-15 agreement will be required for monitoring and maintenance of re-planting of the conveyed riparian area. The applicant will also be required to create a pedestrian connection from the west end of the site linking into the public path be constructed in the City s unopened 36 Avenue road allowance. The Nicomekl Greenway is also identified on the site. The applicant will need to show how the greenway will be accommodated and provide cross-sections and plans showing the greenway in relation to the proposed development as well as consideration of the BCS corridor, habitat compensation areas and flood elevations. Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO)/ Ministry of Environment (MOE): Ministry of Transportation & Infrastructure (MOTI): Surrey Fire Department: The current proposal has been reviewed by DFO and received a Letter of Advice. A Riparian Assessment Regulation (RAR) assessment for the project has been peer reviewed and submitted to the Province for audit. Further details of the environmental approval process are provided in the context of this report. Preliminary Approval is granted for a one-year period. Fire advises the onsite road must comply to the requirements of an access route under the BC Building Code i.e., the change in gradient of an access route shall not exceed 1 in 12.5 over a minimum distance of 15 metres. At Building Permit, the Fire Department will confirm units 20 to 56 are in compliance.

19 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS Existing Land Use: Largely undeveloped lot with one single family residence Adjacent Area: Direction Existing Use OCP/NCP Designation Existing Zone North (Across Nicomekl River): Agricultural Uses Agricultural A-1 East: South : West: Barbara Creek Park, Threestorey apartment complex Largely vacant undeveloped land with some single family houses and townhouses west of 150 Street. City Park land under Hydro R/W (103 G) Urban& Multiple Residential/ Preservation Area/Open Space & Garden Apartments Urban/ Preservation Area/Open Space & Cluster Housing, Townhouse & Single Family Small Lots Urban/ Preservation Area/Open Space RF, CD (By-law No ) RA, RF-12, CD (By-law No A) A-1 JUSTIFICATION FOR PLAN AMENDMENT A housekeeping amendment to the OCP is proposed to re-designate the environmental area being conveyed to City, from "Urban" to "Conservation and Recreation". In all, the applicant proposes to convey to the City without compensation 58,400 m 2 (14.4 acres) of sensitive, high quality habitat adjacent to Nicomekl River. The re-designation will recognize the riparian/environmental area being conveyed for conservation purposes (See Subdivision Plan in Appendix II and OCP Re-designation Map Appendix VII) A further amendment to the West Rosemary Heights NCP will be required to adjust the boundaries of the cluster housing designation to match the proposed development footprint. The remaining preservation/open space designation will match the boundaries of OCP designated conservation land (Appendix VI). The reconfigured development footprint is proposed to provide an efficient and workable layout on this topographically challenging site. The proposed net density of the project at 10 upa falls below the maximum net density of 15 upa specified in the NCP.

20 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 7 DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS Background: The development site is located atop of a treed escarpment overlooking the Nicomekl River in the West Rosemary Heights Neighbourhood. The site, approximately 8.14 hectares (20 acres) in area, is designated "Urban" in the Official Community Plan (OCP), and "Preservation Area/Open Space and Cluster Housing" in the West Rosemary Heights NCP. The site is currently zoned "General Agricultural (A-1)". The site, accessed via 150 Street, is bordered by the Nicomekl River to the north, City park to the west, unopened road allowance (36 Avenue) to the south and the natural ravine containing Barbara Creek to the east. The site is largely undeveloped with one existing single family residence. Two yellow coded watercourses traverse the site, while a third red coded watercourse, Barbara Creek, roughly flows along the eastern property boundary before draining to the Nicomekl River. Collectively Hub J and the regional wildlife corridor identified in the BCS constitute 93% of the site s area. Approximately 50% of the site is located within the Nicomekl floodplain. Proposal: The applicant is proposing to rezone a portion of the site from "General Agriculture Zone (A-1)" to a "Comprehensive Development Zone (CD)" based on the RM-15 Zone to accommodate a 57 unit townhouse development at the top of the escarpment. As part of the development the applicant will convey to the City without compensation 58,400 m 2 (14.4 acres) of sensitive, high quality habitat adjacent to Nicomekl River for conservation purposes. As a result, staff are proposing a housekeeping amendment to the OCP which will re-designate the environmental area from "Urban" to "Conservation and Recreation" for conservation purposes. A further amendment to the West Rosemary Heights NCP will adjust the boundary of the cluster housing designation to accommodate the proposed development footprint and bring the plan into conformance with the NCP. A Development Permit (DP) will be required to regulate the form and character of the development and address hazard lands conditions. Under the new OCP, all parcels containing land with steep slopes in excess of 15 % gradient, or which are within 30 metres of a top of slope with steep slopes in excess of 15 %, are subject to the guidelines established under the new DP designed to protect development from hazardous conditions.

21 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 8 Under the OCP, the development is also subject to a Farming Protection DP. The site falls within the 50 metre (165 ft.) boundary of the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) directly to the north. Despite this, the development site is separated from the ALR boundary by the Nicomekl River, a natural boundary. The edge of the land to be developed under the NCP Cluster Housing designation is also nearly 80 metres (260 ft.) from the ALR. An exemption for a Farming Protection DP is therefore appropriate. However, given the proximity of the site to the ALR, a Section 219 covenant will be registered on title advising future owners of adjacent agricultural operations. CD Zone: A Comprehensive Development (CD) Zone has been crafted to regulate and govern the 57 townhouse units proposed for the development site. Overall the CD zone will provide the equivalent density (e.g., floor area ratio (FAR) and units per hectare/acre) and lot coverage as the RM-15 zone, with variations to building setbacks and height restrictions. As can be seen on Table One below, the proposed townhouse development will have an overall net density of 26 units per hectare (u.p.h.) or 10 units per acre (u.p.a), an FAR of 0.55 and lot coverage of 40% in keeping with the provisions of the RM-15 zone. These proposed densities are also in keeping with the West Rosemary Heights NCP. Under the NCP, areas designated for cluster housing allow for clustered developments at densities of up to 15 units per acre in developable areas, in order to preserve significant natural features such as the Barbara Creek Ravine and the Nicomekl floodplain and escarpment. The NCP also recommends Comprehensive Development (CD) zones for clustered housing forms to establish site specific regulations and to ensure that environmentally sensitive built developments are integrated into the natural environment. Table One RM-15 Zone CD Zone Density FAR Units per Hectare Units per Acre Lot Coverage 45% 40% Height 11 m (36 ft) 12.2 m (40 ft) Setbacks Front (S) 7.5 m (25 ft) 1.4 m (5 ft) Rear (N) 7.5 m (25 ft) 2.5 m(8 ft) Side (E) 7.5 m (25 ft) 4.0 m (13 ft) Side (W) 7.5 m (25 ft) 7.5 m (25 ft)

22 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 9 In keeping with this suggestion, each of the 7.5 metre (25 ft.) setbacks typically required under the RM-15 zone have been reduced to allow for the preservation of additional trees on the sloped hillside and to convey more environmental area to the City. The one exception is the 1.4 metre (5 ft.) setback along the southern property line near Building 27. The reduced setback is, however, supported by staff as it will only act as a side yard condition to townhouse unit 57, along the City s unopened 36 Avenue road allowance. The City s road allowance is to accommodate a 4 metre (13 ft.) public pathway, connecting to the larger greenway planned for the BC Hydro ROW corridor abutting the site, and will not be opened or used as public road. In addition, the applicant has requested a variance to the height of the proposed buildings. While all of the buildings on site will be two to three storey structures, the City s By-law calculates height from the existing grade. Given the amount of fill required on site and the final grades, the townhouses Buildings 10, 11 and 12 near the eastern edge of the site (atop a filled in ravine) will technically have highest heights (from finished grade) at 11.3 to 12.2 m, (37 to 40 ft.) followed by Buildings 19 and 24. Depending on the level of fill required the actual height of the building on-site will range from 5.1 metres (17 ft.) to 12.2 metres (40 ft.). PRE-NOTIFICATION On March 5, 2015 pre-notification letters for the project were sent out to the neighborhood. A development sign was later erected on the site in June In response, to the letter, staff received a total of nine telephone calls asking for additional information on the proposed development and two letters of concern. The two letters of concern focused on the traffic issues in the neighbourhood (largely as a result of one entry and exit to the Rosemary Heights area) and the extent to which the proposed development would negatively impact the environmental area recognized in the BCS. On April 23, 2015, the applicant held a public information meeting (PIM) for the project at Elgin Hall, which was attended by 43 individuals from 26 households. On the whole most people at the open house reserved judgment on the proposal and wanted to hear further about the proposal and the timing of the development. A great deal of discussion also focused on traffic circulation and transportation issues and recent road works in the Rosemary Heights area. Some people also spoke to the environmental impact of the project, the bald eagle nest on the property and the trees. The sign-in sheet confirmed that most of the attendees at the meeting were from the immediate neighbourhood. At the meeting, the developer received a total 16 comment sheets - 2 expressing support for the proposal and 14 with significant concerns. The developer reports that the comment sheets appear to represent the opinions of about 18 individuals from 16 households. Generally those in support thought the development project would be of benefit to the community, but voiced some concern with traffic issues and adjacent agricultural uses.

23 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 10 The majority of 14 comment sheets, citing concerns with the project, focused on three key issues traffic and safety (12), removal of trees and preservation of wildlife habitat (2) and density (6). In particular the comment sheets on traffic and safety focused on the issue of increased traffic on 150 Street and referenced the need for a second access point into the neighbourhood. They also highlighted the existing issue of street parking on 150 Street, congestion, construction access points and communicated frustration over construction traffic from the Polygon site. The comment sheets on the environment expressed the view that the area should be left alone as a natural preserve for wildlife habitat or made into a passive park. Finally on 6 of the 16 sheets the comment was made that the area should remain single family. These residents felt that the two multi-unit complexes (Harvard Gardens and Edgewater) in the neighbourhood already provided the area with enough multi-family housing options. (In response to the transportation issues raised, Engineering has noted both existing and projected traffic volumes on 150 Street are within the typical range for a local road. 150 Street currently functions as a queuing street with parking on both sides, with a pavement width that is typical and acceptable for queuing streets. In addition, it is noted that traffic speeds are generally lower on queuing streets and that residents have expressed that there is value in the on-street parking provided by a queuing street. As such, staff feel that removing parking is not an appropriate solution and that existing operations on 150 Street are acceptable. Further a road connection via 36 Avenue over Barbara Creek was not envisioned in the NCP due to significant environmental impacts. The primary connection of 34 Avenue was considered to be adequate to service the NCP with the provision of 33 Avenue and the Pioneer Greenway Multi-Use Pathway providing adequate secondary access in the event of an emergency. The proximity of Fire Hall No. 17 to the NCP was also a consideration in support of the single road connection. Staff are not opposed to the concept of a road connection for 36 Avenue to 152 Street as it is recognized that it would improve access and circulation for the neighbourhood and align with the principles and objectives of the City s Transportation Strategic Plan. Unfortunately, as the demand for a connection is a result solely of development in the area and no previous funds were collected for the connection, any new requirement for it would be fully funded by remaining applicant(s) in the area. However, Engineering is considering protecting the corridor for a future pedestrian and cycling bridge that would meet some of the strategic objectives as well as improve access to transit on 152 Street. The proposed site plan allocates side-by-side two-car garages for each unit and provides twice as many visitor parking stalls than required by the Zoning Bylaw. As such, it is not anticipated that significant overflow on-street parking demand would be generated by the proposed development. During the construction phase of the proposed development, staff will work with the applicant to ensure that parking related to construction activity can be accommodated onsite.

24 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 11 Planning staff also note that a portion of the development site has been designated for cluster housing development since the Rosemary Heights West NCP was adopted in July The present proposal will have a lower density than is called for in the plan, which will result in less traffic being introduced into the area. Further the cluster housing designation at low townhouse density of 15 upa is designed to protect the area s important natural features and functions. Such a large natural area could not be preserved with a single family development). PUBLIC CONSULTATION PROCESS FOR OCP AMENDMENT Pursuant to Section 879 of the Local Government Act, it was determined that it was not necessary to consult with any persons, organizations or authorities with respect to the proposed OCP amendment, other than those contacted as part of the pre-notification process. DESIGN PROPOSAL AND REVIEW Site Design and Layout: The applicant is proposing a 57 townhouse unit development at the north end of 150 Street on the escarpment in Rosemary Heights overlooking the Nicomekl River. The development will be accessed from the 150 Street cul-de-sac. In all the townhouse complex will be comprised of 27 separate buildings or 23 side-by-side (duplex) townhouse clusters and 4 three (3) unit (triplex) townhouse clusters. The buildings will be organized around an internal strata road which will wind down to a hammerhead turnaround at the west end of the site. The topography of the site will provide an opportunity for downhill (two-storey) and uphill (three-storey) building model types to take advantage of area s views. Specifically, a series of larger townhouse or downhill units are proposed along the northern sides of the internal road. In all, 33 of the 57 units will be downhill units, measuring in size from m 2 ( ft 2 ). These two-storey units will include 3 bedrooms, with a master bedroom on main floor and a daylighted basement. The grading of the site will allow for a one storey massing of these units along the internal roadway. In contrast, 22 of the 57 will be uphill two storey units. These smaller units, which will range in size from m 2 (2,089-2,175 ft 2 ) will be located mainly along the south side of the internal road and the east portions of the site overlooking the Barbara Creek ravine. The uphill three- storey units will also include 3 bedrooms and a flex space and provide outdoor terraces at the second level. Both the downhill and uphill units will provide fully enclosed double side-by-side parking stalls.

25 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 12 A third unit type E is also proposed for the remaining two units on site. Tucked away at the western corner of the site, these two units measuring approximately 218 m 2 (2350 ft 2 ) each in area, will also provide 3 bedrooms and a flex space, but unlike the predominant downhill and uphill units, the required double car garages for these units will be provided in a separate structure. In addition to the required resident parking, the site will provide a total of 22 visitor stalls, which is double the amount required under the By-law. This is to help ensure there is adequate parking on site to deter residents and visitors alike from parking and blocking the strata road and from parking along 150 Street. The style of the development will be finished in a west coast contemporary fashion, with the use of simple hip, gable and Japanese gable roofs, decorative columns, glazing and high quality of exterior siding. The principle materials to be used on the buildings include hardipanel siding, natural cedar wood columns with cultured stone bases, fiberglass roof shingles and vinyl windows. The buildings will be finished in a combination of warm taupe and grey colours (fieldstone, gray mountain), accented by natural wood, light gray ledgestone and darker grays on barge boards, eaves and fascia. In addition, the units are to include outdoor fireplaces and chimneys, trellises, and canopies. Photomontage: To ensure that the look of the townhouses will not dominate the escarpment (particularly from Highway 99), staff also requested that the applicant prepare a photomontage for the site showing the impact of the proposed development in relation to the trees being retained in the riparian/floodplain area, which will be conveyed to the City. (Appendix II), Altogether it is estimated there are approximately 249 trees in the riparian area. Of these, about 14 trees will need to be removed along the edge of the development site as a result of grading and required foundation walls. Approximately 235 trees will therefore be retained on the future City owned land. The resulting photomontage in Appendix II is based on the figures in the submitted arborist report and shows the effect the remnant forest canopy (retained trees in the riparian/ floodplain area) will have in both screening and softening the appearance of the development from the bottom of the escarpment, looking southeast east from the highway. As can be seen most of the proposed townhouse clusters will be screened by a veil of trees. It is the arborist s opinion that the grove of metres ( ft.) high, mainly coniferous trees (the remnant forest canopy) to be retained on the future City owned lands will provide: o strong and nearly continuous visual screening of the new buildings, o filtered screening (homes mostly concealed) in some areas with thinner tree canopies, and o some small gaps with peak-a-boo corridor views from Highway 99. In consideration of the views from directly north of the site, the arborist expects approximately 85% screening with similar filtering effects and slightly larger gaps.

26 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 13 Landscaping: In addition to the trees being retained on site, the landscaping plan calls for the planting of 164 replacement trees on site including 16 coniferous tree and 148 deciduous trees. Soft landscaping on the site will include shrubs, grasses and groundcover at the entrances and perimeters of townhouse clusters, and along the public paths, and common areas of the development. The applicant will also provide a seating area and public viewing platform on site directly north of the 150 Street cul-de-sac. A right-of-way will be registered on a portion of the site to provide public passage and access to the viewing platform. Through the application, the applicant will also be asked to construct a 3.0 metre wide gravel public path in the City s unopened 36 Avenue road allowance. This path is to extend west of 149A Street along the property frontage which will link up the trail system in the BC Hydro ROW. CONDITIONS TO BE RESOLVED PRIOR TO PUBLIC HEARING Staff have identified a number of issues that need to be resolved prior to Public Hearing. These issues are important because the applicant intends to request Council grant a special tree cutting permit to clear the development site after Third Reading. Specifically the applicant has asked that Council approve the issuance of tree cutting permit and lot grading plan for the site prior to final approval in order to start work on the site this fall. The issuance of the permit will ensure that clearing work can get underway before any bird nesting or habitat issues interfere with prepping the site. The applicant has indicated that delaying the startup of this project could force the project to sit for a full year and may affect its long term viability. Staff believe it is important that the information identified below is received and reviewed and accepted by City staff. A planning report with additional comments will be provided to Council on this issue prior to Public Hearing. Site Hydrology One of the key issues to be addressed prior to Public Hearing will be the completion and approval of a hydrological report assessing the impact of the proposed cuts and fills, retaining walls and basements on the hydrologic regime of the adjacent riparian/treed escarpment area. Staff has yet to receive detailed information on how pre and post development drainage regimes will be maintained to maintain the health of the retained trees. To this end the applicant has hired Kerr Wood Leidal Consulting Engineers to produce a stormwater management plan for the site to ensure adequate water flow to the existing treed areas after the cutting, filling and grading of the site is completed. Ensuring the developed site will continue to allow for the historic flow of water (natural drainage) will be essential to protect the long term health of trees on the slope and in the

27 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 14 floodplain. The retained tree canopy will play an important role in the continued ecological functioning of the site, and provide debris, foliage and shading to the river, its floodplain and the BCS wildlife corridor. Proper post development drainage regimes will also ensure the continued health of the protected trees which will screen the hillside development from public view along Highway 99 as shown on the submitted photomontages for this project (Appendix II). Wildlife Corridor Study The final site layout will also be subject to a qualified environmental professional (QEP) report focusing on the wildlife corridor and how the developed site will continue to meet the objectives of the BCS and the GIN. The applicant has retained Envirowest Consulting Ltd. (ECL) to prepare this report. Specifically staff have asked that the report document and propose recommendations to maintain the function and viability of the site s 60 metre habitat regional corridor along the south side of the Nicomekl River. To date ECL has prepared a preliminary report entitled Assessment of Impacts to Ecological Features report which identifies the wildlife corridor pinch point within the vicinity of the existing storm water outfall and identifies two mitigation strategies that may be employed to reduce impacts on deer movements. Staff have requested that the report identifies which mitigation strategy is most appropriate and to address other wildlife issues and impacts in the area. Both mitigation strategies may require Ministry of Forests Lands and Natural Resource Operations (FLNRO) and Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) review. This report should be approved by staff in principle prior to Public Hearing. Eagle Nest Management Plan The completion of an approved Eagle Nest Management Plan will also be required prior to Public Hearing to ensure the proposed tree clearing and development plan will not disturb the bald eagle nest on-site. To date a revised management plan has been submitted to staff, which upon further review, will be submitted to the Province. ENVIRONMENTAL RIPARIAN SETBACK One of the key issues concerning this application has been the determination of the appropriate environmental (riparian) setback of the development site from the Nicomekl River. To understand how the present development setbacks were established it is necessary to review the involvement of the Senior Government agencies concerning this application. This is important as the two bodies governing riparian areas, e.g., the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) and the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) now operate under separate legislation.

28 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 15 On July 27, 2004, the Provincial Government adopted the Riparian Areas Regulation (RAR) and local governments were tasked with either adopting RAR or developing bylaws to meet or beat RAR. At that time, DFO s legislation was in sync with and recognized RAR. Consequently at the City s Environmental Review Committee (ERC), DFO could vary a RAR environmental setback by granting HADDs (Harmful Alteration, Disruption and Damage to fish and fish habitat) in exchange for additional habitat planting, enhancement and other mitigation measures. Under these conditions, a previous proposal for this site (a bare land strata proposed by a different applicant and owner) was accepted in February, 2012 by DFO and the ERC. Later in September and October 2012 that same applicant came forward with greater setback variance proposals which were rejected by DFO, and later caused the agency to withdraw their February 2012 support of the project. One of the key issues of DFO concern was that none of the development footprints (February, September or October) could provide any assurance or level of certainty of the continued health or function of trees in the riparian area. There was incomplete information as to how the changes to the area s hydraulic and historic drainage flow would impact both the escarpment and slope. In November 2013, however the federal government amended the federal Fisheries Act and effectively disconnected the federal legislation from the Provincial RAR. Subsequently DFO removed itself from the City s ERC. Following this, the previous owner of the development property approached DFO with a revised project and a series of mitigation measures for review. On May 6, 2014, DFO provided a Letter of Advice stating the agency was of the opinion that the development proposal would not cause serious harm to fish (See Appendix II for the extent of the May 6, 2014 development footprint. The QEP on the project has since verified that the present development, which varies from the May 2014 proposal, does not require in their opinion any further review by DFO). The present development proposal reflects the arrangements prescribed in the DFO Letter of Advice along with all the mitigating measures including replanting and dedication to the City without compensation 5.8 ha (14.4 acres) of sensitive high quality habitat land. At the same time, the applicant has completed a Provincial Riparian Areas Regulation (RAR) assessment report and peer review, and filed the RAR report to the Ministry of Environment (MOE) for audit in accordance with the Provincial RAR regulation. Over the past few months, staff has worked with the applicant to further increase the development setback from the Nicomekl River by about seven (7) metres (23 ft.) by pushing development further up the hill (thereby eliminating the need for retaining walls, excessive fill and widening the pinch point of the wildlife corridor). It is noted however the present proposal does not meet the required setbacks under the RAR legislation.

29 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 16 TREES Norm Hol, ISA Certified Arborist of Arbortech Consulting prepared an Arborist Assessment for the subject property. The table below provides a summary of the tree retention and removal by tree species: Table 1: Summary of Tree Preservation by Tree Species: Tree Species Existing Remove Retain Alder and Cottonwood Trees Alder and Cottonwood Deciduous Trees (excluding Alder and Cottonwood Trees) Bigleaf Maple Bitter Cherry Coniferous Trees Grand Fir Douglas Fir Western Red Cedar Western Hemlock Total (excluding Alder and Cottonwood Trees) Additional Estimated Trees in the proposed Park/ Riparian Area - Total Replacement Trees Proposed (excluding Boulevard Street Trees) Total Retained and Replacement Trees ( on-site) Contribution to the Green City Fund Deciduous = 148 Coniferous = TBD *Numbers and estimates to be finalized with final review The Arborist Assessment states that there are a total of 145 By-law sized trees on the site, excluding alder and cottonwood trees, which made up approximately 28 % of the total trees on the site. Of the 145 By-law trees on site, 5 trees may be retained as part of this development proposal. The proposed tree retention was assessed taking into consideration the location of services, building footprints and lot grading.

30 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 17 Table 1 includes an additional 249 protected trees that are located within the proposed open space /riparian area. The trees within this area will be retained, except where shared trees on the edge of the slope impact the building footprint are not wind firm or removal is required due to hazardous conditions. At present it is estimated that about 14 shared trees at the edge of the development site will need be removed. A detailed planting plan prepared by a Registered Professional Biologist (R.P. Bio.) and an associated P-15 agreement will be required for the monitoring and maintenance of the proposed trees to be planted in the conveyed riparian area. For those trees that cannot be retained, the applicant will be required to plant trees on a 1 to 1 replacement ratio for alder and cottonwood trees, and a 2 to 1 replacement ratio for all other trees. The final number of acceptable replacement trees on the site and the deficit of replacement trees requiring a cash-in-lieu payment to the Green City Fund, in accordance with the Tree Protection By-law has yet to be determined. BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION STRATEGY In July 21, 2014, the City of Surrey Biodiversity Conservation Strategy (BCS) Green Infrastructure Network (GIN) map was adopted by Council. The map identifies a 60 metre wide Regional BCS Corridor and Hub J on the development site, in the Redwood management area. Both the corridor and hub have high ecological values and very high habitat suitability ratings, as derived from species at risk presence, species accounts and known ecosystem habitat inventories. Collectively the hub and corridor area encompass approximately 75,700 m 2 or 93% of the site. Protecting green infrastructure hubs (large habitat areas) and sites (smaller habitat areas) is critical to preserving natural habitat refuges. Further preserving a diversity of habitat features while maintaining/enhancing Corridors ensures connectivity between fragmented hubs for genetic variation throughout the City. The present development proposal will convey to the City without compensation approximately 58,400m 2 or 72% of the site s gross area. This represents approximately 77% of the target GIN area, and will assist in the long term protection of natural features and allow the City to better achieve biodiversity at this location consistent with the guidelines contained in the BCS. In order for the proposal to fully comply with the BCS target recommendations, an additional 17,300 m 2 would be required on the subject site. Conveyance of this additional land area would, however, leave only 5,700 m 2 (1.4 acres) of the site available for development which would render this parcel unsuitable for clustered townhouse development. The riparian/bcs corridor area will be subject to a P-15 planting and enhancement agreement, which will include provision of Parks greenway trail near the river.

31 Staff Report to Council File: Planning & Development Report Page 18 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT CHECKLIST In December 2014, the applicant prepared and submitted a sustainable development checklist for the subject site. The table below summarizes the applicable development features of the proposal based on the seven (7) criteria listed in the Surrey Sustainable Development Checklist. Sustainability Criteria Sustainable Development Features Summary 1. Site Context & Location (A1-A2) The site is located atop on an escarpment, overlooking the Nicomekl river in the West Rosemary Heights. 2. Density & Diversity (B1-B7) The density will comply with the OCP and NCP. 3. Ecology & Stewardship (C1-C4) The development will incorporate low impact development standards, contain provisions for recycling and organic waste programs and convey to the City a portion of highly valued habitat identified in the BCS/GIN. 4. Sustainable Transport & None Mobility (D1-D2) 5. Accessibility & Safety (E1-E3) The development includes some CPTED (Crime prevention through environmental design) principles 6. Green Certification (F1) None 7. Education & Awareness (G1-G4) None INFORMATION ATTACHED TO THIS REPORT The following information is attached to this Report: Appendix I Appendix II Appendix III Appendix IV Appendix V Appendix VI Appendix VII Appendix VIII Lot Owners, Action Summary and Project Data Sheets Proposed Subdivision Layout, Site Plan, Building Elevations, Landscape Plans, Photomontages, Environmental Setback Engineering Summary School District Comments Summary of Tree Survey and Tree Preservation NCP Plan OCP Re-designation Map Proposed CD By-law original signed by Nicholas Lai Jean Lamontagne General Manager Planning and Development HP/da \\file-server1\net-data\csdc\generate\areaprod\save\ doc DRV 7/23/15 2:42 PM

32 APPENDIX I Information for City Clerk Legal Description and Owners of all lots that form part of the application: 1. (a) Agent: Name: Randy Dick Portrait Homes Ltd. Address: Westminster Highway Richmond, BC V6V 2Y5 Tel: Work Cell 2. Properties involved in the Application (a) Civic Address: Avenue (b) Civic Address: Avenue Owner: BC Ltd Director Information: Harry Grimm Robert Grimm No Officer Information Filed PID: Lot A Section 27 Township 1 New Westminster District Plan LMP Summary of Actions for City Clerk's Office (a) (b) (c) Introduce a By-law to amend the Official Community Plan to re-designate the property. Introduce a By-law to rezone the property. Application is under the jurisdiction of MOTI. MOTI File No \\file-server1\net-data\csdc\generate\areaprod\save\ doc DRV 7/23/15 2:42 PM

33 SUBDIVISION DATA SHEET Proposed Zoning: CD Zone Requires Project Data GROSS SITE AREA Acres Hectares Proposed 14.4 acres 8.14 ha NUMBER OF LOTS Existing 1 Proposed 2 SIZE OF LOTS Range of lot widths (metres) N/A Range of lot area (square metres) 22,380 m 2 DENSITY Lots/Hectare & Lots/Acre (Gross) Lots/Hectare & Lots/Acre (Net) 7 uph/3 upa 25 uph/10 upa SITE COVERAGE (in % of gross site area) Maximum Coverage of Principal & Accessory Building 38 % Estimated Road, Lane & Driveway Coverage 20.8% Total Site Coverage 58.8% PARKLAND Area (square metres) 58,400 % of Gross Site 77 % Required PARKLAND 5% money in lieu NO TREE SURVEY/ASSESSMENT MODEL BUILDING SCHEME HERITAGE SITE Retention FRASER HEALTH Approval DEV. VARIANCE PERMIT required Road Length/Standards Works and Services Building Retention Others YES NO NO NO NO NO NO NO \\file-server1\net-data\csdc\generate\areaprod\save\ doc DRV 7/23/15 2:42 PM

34 PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF PART OF LOT A SECTION 27 TOWNSHIP 1 NEW WESTMINSTER DISTRICT PLAN LMP The intended plot size of this pion is 432mm in width by 280mm in height (B size} when plotted at a scale of 1:2000. All distances are in metres and decimals thereof. f ~ ~ I! f I I I II t --- N ~ ' ' C'\1 ' '' ~ ll:: ~ ' ~' ~' "3>, '' ' ' ' I July J, 2015!~ , 1-WSP i 0 WSP Surveys (Be) Limited Partnership Richmond St, New Westminster, BC '' SRW PWI BCP REM LOT A PLAN LMP46260 AREA=5.84 ho '' ' ' ' C! :!! AVE DETAIL A LOT 1 AREA=2.238 ho REM 1 ROAD AREA=64.7 m2 SRW PWI LJ.IP1222J 104.J DETAIL 8 ROAD SRW PWI LJ.IP J7 LOT 1 REM PCL if REF PLAN ::: REM AVE ~ PROJECT REF./DRAWING No. ~~--~0~61~4~00=2=2~7~P~SU=B~15=0~70=3~--._ ~

35 PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF PART OF LOT A SECTION 27 TOWNSHIP 1 NEW WESTMINSTER DISTRICT PLAN LMP The intended plot size of this pion is 432mm in width by 280mm in height (B size} when plotted at a scale of 1:2000. All distances are in metres and decimals thereof. f ~ ~ I! f I I I II t --- N ~ ' ' C'\1 ' '' ~ ll:: ~ ' ~' ~' "3>, '' ' ' ' I July J, 2015!~ , 1-WSP i 0 WSP Surveys (Be) Limited Partnership Richmond St, New Westminster, BC '' SRW PWI BCP REM LOT A PLAN LMP46260 AREA=5.84 ho '' ' ' ' C! :!! AVE DETAIL A LOT 1 AREA=2.238 ho REM 1 ROAD AREA=64.7 m2 SRW PWI LJ.IP1222J 104.J DETAIL 8 ROAD SRW PWI LJ.IP J7 LOT 1 REM PCL if REF PLAN ::: REM AVE ~ PROJECT REF./DRAWING No. ~~--~0~61~4~00=2=2~7~P~SU=B~15=0~70=3~--._ ~

36 AREA PLAN SCALE: 1 :2000 ~ NORTH P'ofeCt l TH AVENUE w "1 COivn'tio """'' *' " &' D DO ,. -Odcbtf ~14

37 c i I! I i I I I I i I i. 1-. G 0 Issue:._.,..,.,.. DIIIO ~'»l.s MGfd'l:l.. l$~1or~.m-oela:iois,..._.b'~ M '2015 htluedb~ \,_ \ \- - \ l I - I il....,,.,... "-':- =7.-~ \ \ ' ; I i 1.. I_... - P'ofeCt TH AVENUE w "1 COivn'tio """"' \\ H " N'...- ~... o-.~~~~~~~~~~~~r - ~ ---~ ' \ - ' - :,. r/,. :,r... ~r<--=t =-- --""" :_ ~-"-~<(~.. ~!~ ~- : ',"',.k. "-- r- ~ ~,---\- ',.. -MCH.NH -Odcbtf ~14 NORTH PLOT PLAN SCALE: 1 :000 SEE DRAWING A 1.o3 FOR ALL GRADING

38 - - -._ I \.,, \ \\ : , ~.. ::.. -\ \.. \ \"' I \ ' ; i!\ --._,... :: ~~~ ~:; Issue:._.,..,.,.. DIIIO ~'»l.s MGfd'l:l.. l$~1or~.m-oe la :IOIS,..._.b'~ M htluedb~ ~ blluedb~ ) ' \ DARK GREEN AREA INDICATES PROPOS~'!) NEW PARCEL -.apprqx acres P'ofeCt TH AVENUE w "1 COivn'tio """'' H " N' \ I I I I I D \ DO -MCH.NH -Odcbtf ~14 NORTH \-- (\ SITE PLAN......_ ~ ~ -A ,;, I '*"'" '*"'...

39 ..., , ~ ~-._......_, s~ ~ BUILDING TYPE 1 - SOUTH ELEVATION SCAlf: 116 (3/16" 1'4') () CAI.O.A- --.IIIJ._ ' ---- op "1 HO ~- ~ HO ko : - - HOO m ron &.II ~ - ~ - - n :::: ~ ~ -... i._., :::: - n ~ - -" - u -... ~ ~ ~ ~ , "" - :::. - ~ ~ - ~ ~ t~~ e._,.._...,..,...,..._... r.~...,- _*-,..Coo ~ ~~~--t0-00:'"' -Q)0--0t41-IIOOIIIIQIII -.-,.\_...,MIJIC''-"' ' fto II'\"'OIWo - ~... -~ n il: - ~ ~ - I poqod: TH A V NU ~- ldltlcourt:io ' f P " D DO -...,..._, 3116~ 1'4~,..,5 -Oeoembef:2014 BUILDING TYPE 1 - NORTH ELEVATION SCAlf: 116 (3/16' 1'.01 )

40 .. lssuo: JCII'I62016'-...:Ib~ ~ta:zots..._...,~,."" -"1; hlawdtar~ BUILDING TYPE 11 -SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1:64 (3/16" 1'.0") u.onini IIfJCAI.JUAI'= 5 -~~~AU.~--= -- "'JOII... no ::~... n o ~ "" ~: no n n no no no... ~ no no... ~ ~ - ~ -~ ;foil "" "" m o. ~ no... ~... ~ ~- "'' - ~ ~ ~ no no ""' - m ~... w... m -. ~ II II ;foil... IUD II ltllll "Ill ~ m.... ~ u IJ,!tll UADII m o.. ~ ~ -... IUD II ltllll $1)1 lft-al.ooi-au.e-nigaio-- -~ _ "" "'... """ n... ~ ~... nm ~... "" "" m. ~ - ~: ~~-... ~~ ~ =: ~ "!»... ~ ~ >11111 '" ' '' ~ ~ ~~~ m o ~~ - ".Gill... ~ m... u, m.... o m ,.. u.... ~ m... '" ~... II. -~,_..,._,..., c.,-~,... BuJTOWes Huggins ArdlitectJ prefect ~ TH AVENUE ~.alfiw!col.wl'tio v:n1w '* f' f'' D DO -~2:11 5 BUILDING TYPE 11 - NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1:<14 (3/16" = 1' , ~CI!lfVAnc:..l IUI..I»>OTYPE11

41 SDM ODM "' z ::J ~ 0 ~ -20.0M- I$.0M- IOJ)M SD - ===~a:=-~~.,- ~ _ D DO SITE SECTIONS SCALE: 1 :400

42 ~.OM O.OM w z :::J ~ w a ~ "' a.. I ~....OM.OM i l$j)m I IO.OM I S.OM 1 i.om 5 z 0 ~ iii.om ~... o<ojod: TH AVENUE bfey,.lilhcoluri:iio ""''"" ''!' ' D DO SITE SECTIONS SCALE: 1 :350 sheetlh: sne sec:nohs -Apil

43 25-0M S.OM tt===~== ==~= DM_ ~ = D DO SITE SECTIONS SCALE: 1 :350

44 ====~==~+1=+----l--l-i-ooM-~ M----25::: Ill i 1 1 :::_ ~~' =_-::::=_-::::=_-::::=_-::::=_-::::=_-::::=_-::::=_-::::=_-::::=_-::::=_-::::=_: ~:; ),...---~... -O.OM===~~=o:Oi;i=~~ ~ D DO -,..,. sheet l h : sne sec:nohs -Jt..ne 2015 SITE SECTIONS SCALE: 1 :350

45 r~onc ift.m : -'0 1'40"201$ ls..ed torliejcwiirg M\ 17 :1>1-t,.-*'kif~ MvOISJ:H.t,_~t<lf-117'4rg poj-ct TH AVENUE $4.rJW,81i'l~ Colvl'l'ti::J VJIIW 'i Bfh- D DO TYPE 1-3D BUILDING STUDIES CONCEPTUAL STUDIES ONLY, REFER TO BUILDING ELEVATIONS FOR ACTUAL COLOURS -- ~noted P-415 lh... lo I UILCI NG STUDIE$

46 r~onc ls..ed torliejcwiirg M\ 17 :1>1-t,.-*'kif~ MvOISJ:H.t,_~t<lf-117'4rg poj-ct TH AVENUE $4.rJW,81i'l~ Colvl'l'ti::J VJIIW 'i Bfh- D DO TYPE 4-3D BUILDING STUDIES CONCEPTUAL STUDIES ONLY, REFER TO BUILDING ELEVATIONS FOR ACTUAL COLOURS -- ~noted P-415 lh... lo I UILCI NG STU DIE$

47 r~onc ift.m : -'0 1'40"201$ ls..ed torliejcwiirg M\ 17 :1>1-t,.-*'kif~ MvOISJ:H.t,_~t<lf-117'4rg poj-ct TH AVENUE $4.rJW,81i'l~ Colvl'l'ti::J VJIIW 'i Bfh- D DO TYPE 11 (SIMILAR) - 3D BUILDING STUDIES CONCEPTUAL STUDIES ONLY, REFER TO BUILDING ELEVATIONS FOR ACTUAL COLOURS -- ~noted P-415 lh... lo I UILCI NGSTU DIE$

48 r~onc ift.m : -'0 1'40"201$ ls..ed torliejcwiirg M\ 17 :1>1-t,.-*'kif~ MvOISJ:H.t,_~t<lf-117'4rg p oj-ct TH AVENUE $4.rJW,81i'l~ Colvl'l'ti::J VJIIW 'i Bfh- D DO TYPE 14-3D BUILDING STUDIES CONCEPTUAL STUDIES ONLY, REFER TO BUILDING ELEVATIONS FOR ACTUAL COLOURS -- ~noted P-415 lh... lo I UILCI NGSTUDIE$

49 N Burrowes Huggins An;:hitecls,_.....,.. '"''.....,,..._, _,... ~ ' 36th Avenue South Surrey Surr.. y,br~mh Col umbr.~ P RTRAIT - - 1:500 tn./el 0 ~ 1CO =---==--= OVERALL SITE PLAN Ll.O

50 - ~ --~--... UlM.. -- u I ,,. '""'-"loti ~- -...,loa,.. I _....._. Burruwes Huggins Archilccts '-'" "' U J0\'-' 1~ ~~ v... Of ""'''" ' ' '"' " "' ''" I '"'.,.,,., "'~ 36th Avenue South Su rrey 'i.uir 'o!y dn! ll {Oiu rnbl.l ,_,... P RTRAIT r!1 ' 1f- SITE PLAN EAST i l SO 1 " " " , ' m I L 1.1

51 N :.t<aa ~!:.I!h<M O'<LJL.IN I I'L " l AAI HII U l ij I <'-l.,.. _""... o ~... UIII'IWJ..0. ~vl _,...,_,.,.I.UIWI olf..._.,... -.,.....,....,WI _._,- ---" "' ft!uii_u.... ~ th Ave nue So uth Surrey S urr~,broto ',h(olum bll -P RTRAIT - if-,.,.. OS/EL SITE PLAN - WEST,. L 1.2

52 N -- ~ ~.. -~,~~ - -.n"" UNITTYPE AI UNIT TYPE B3 UNITTYPE Bl UNITTYPE A 1 UNIT TYPE Bl UNITTYPE Bl UNITTYPE Al UNIT AI 13 GAili!L2440 MAlNEl 2455 LOW~El 2120 Building 07 TYPE.22 Colo 1.1 SUl cme G<a~ UNIT CAR El.23." MAINEt lowerel20.45 Building 08 TYI>E0-4 COOW~N..c.ocw UN A GAREL 2160 MAIN a 2115 LOWER B. 18.«) r IS Building 09 TYPE OS Ol/lot;ltknlde~ Gray UNITBl 19 ' GAft $ MAH EL towerel.i th Ave nue Soulh Suncy ~.. rn v, Dnrr." lol:, no,, P RT RAIT 1- ' ~ '0' D~/CL DETAIL SITE PLAN 1 io -- s, 2"iDilll lllli25m L3.1

53 _.._.,.0.10~-,..,.,,_ """_...,.~ UJ z ::::i - SHARP & DIAMOND :l!.llanu:>ca.p~ 411C~IHCTUI!l DOUNOT<:iUAIIANTU T~11liSIINCI IOC... ll<ln,anu!ltv~fiono<ulh.iuhanp/mcdoici"'-td UHUTIUANO/OIIf.ONtt"'-lOITHUCTU"I-',ANll" ~ -._. --' D SECTIONO s:.. 1,ra 25.0 M 20.0M UJ z ::::i ~ a:: UJ a_ 0 a:: a_ 0 <( 0 0.:: ls.om lo.om S.OM 36th Avenue South Surrey Surrey, BrmshColumb ~ P RTRAIT 1 Selle: N/A Or1wn; O.O M Revie~: Project No OS SECTION F Su'lt 1 W'l LANDSCAPE SECTIONS LS.O

54 m SHARP & DIAMOND LJ.J z ::J 25.0M 20.0M 0 <( 0 0.:: ro- -...,..,,... ~.,...,.~ l5.0m lo.om 5.0M --O.O M 1 G' SECTION G,, Sa~Je: 1: M LJ.J z ::J >- t;;; LJ.J "- 0 "' q. 0 <( 0 0.:: 20.0M ""' ""IUIW..Iw- -LC...,.., ~ ""'1"""..'"'''...'"""'"'' 36th Avenue South Surrey Surrl!"f,llrlt15hColumbloo P RTRAIT I O.OM Or:!!Wil: Proj!KtNo N/A EL Ob-416 LANDSCAPE SECTIONS LS.l

55 I I ~ r , I i i j--- W --~-- l j Protected Habitat Below High Water Mart< PORTRAIT HOMES Richmond, BC H~hWate< Mart< I REFERENCE ORAWIIIGS Jl 1-~06I _51Jrvey.~.-g. Roo!Md-klnt09, 21)15(WSP GIOI4l AVENUE e Sule I. ' 'I envirowest consultants inc BmeclwaVS!reet Port~m.Brttsn Cct.lmblit canedl. VJCEM'l l8cslr!k 6Q6.9ol4oo SCM y : i \ :., I, t.l_ 2. Emaa P415-Sh Plan 15061M.-g. RooeMd June 17, 2015: H"'"' Lalld Englnoeq Lid. 1: Emaa P< t ~150702Revlsec! SI18 Pin.-g. Roo!Md Jt.ly 03, ~nowes Huggi~Nthii8COS. Surrey, BC..,, """'- ~ ~1-20 {{!L-,_._Emaa,._~_a_TM_o_. ~- -~--'-~ -kl_l~y06~, 21)1 --5:~----~--~--~ L L L-----kl-ly_2_3._20_1_5 ~ ~

56 REFERENCE ORAI'IIHGS 1. Em~A 560~ppllclton.dwg. Rtoelvod Ocoobor :ttr,.,Latd Engtletmg Lid. 2. Em~A 5602_fiLL COMPARISOH.dwg. Received Ocoobor 04, lll12: ltrn1er Lot<l ~f'llld. 3. mal: 56QU(eybast_&lptrt0tdtd.dwg. RtcoM<I Ho>tmber H..,,..Latd Engtletmg Lid Legal Base Fm Clyol&.rrty. MR. RANDY BISHOP Surrey, BC e envirowest consultants inc. Svh t58~s1re«portcoc».ttam,brttsh Ccllmbh C.IIIICil V3CeM:2 """" -~ tar.ostmlt:~507 LANDSCAPE PLAN

57 --- -: JV1173:1161Sued11or~ '"'r0ft:ll$1:iel-dl'l:lr~ SITE PHOTO ~t TH A V!NUI! S4.rfllly.I~OOk.ln'tlb V3T1V8 ' ' ' D CONCEPTUAL STUDIES ONLY, REFER TO BUILDING ELEVATIONS FOR ACTUAL COLOURS DO canoted... P-415

58 SURREY the future lives here. INTER-OFFICE MEMO TO: FROM : Manager, Area Planning & Development - South Surrey Division Planning and Development Department Development Services Manager, Engineering Department DATE : July 8, 2015 PROJECT FILE: RE: Engineering Requirements Location: Avenue OCP AMENDMENT/NCP AMENDMENT Subject to the acceptance of the lands into the Metro Fraser Sewer Area by GVS&DD, there are no engineering requirements relative to the OCP Amendment/NCP Amendment. REZONE/SUBDIVISION Property and Right-of-Way Requirements Dedicate approximately 9.so metre wide road allowance west of the ISO Street cul-de-sac for ultimate 20 metre road allowance. Dedicate approximately 4.00 metre wide road allowance east of ISO Street for ultimate 10 metre (minimum) wide road allowance. Register o.so metre wide SRW on ISO Street and 36 Ave west of ISO Street to I49A St. Works and Services Obtain approval from GVS&DD to include the lands into the Metro Fraser Sewer Area. Construct north side of 36 Avenue connection to 149A Street to local road standard with minimum 6.oo metres of pavement width and I.SO metre wide sidewalk. Construct 3.00 metre wide gravel pedestrian connection on 36 Avenue west of I49A St along property frontage to future viewing platform. Path to meander around trees. Construct a 6.oo metre wide concrete pedestrian walkway connection with pedestrian lighting on 36 Avenue east oflso Street to connect to ISOA Street. Construct ISO Street to local road standard with minimum 6.oo metre pavement width. Confirm the downstream system capacity and construct storm drainage system to service the proposed development as required. If the existing storm trunk is relocated as proposed, the new storm trunk must be located in an accessible SRW. Unobstructed access is needed along the new storm trunk specifically to the manholes and flood box. Condition assessment of the existing trunk outlet/flood box is required. Provide geotechnical and hydrological reports to confirm slope stability and to assess the impact of the proposed cut and fills, and retaining walls, as well as the impact of the basement houses on the hydrologic regime of the adjacent creeks, and to document how the development will ensure maintaining natural drainage and historic flows from the site to the adjacent riparian/preservation area. Provide adequately sized, storm, water and sanitary service connection complete with inspection chamber to service the proposed development. A Servicing Agreement is required prior to Rezone/Subdivision. DEVELOPMENT PERMIT There are no ~uirements relative to issuance of the Development Permit. Remi Dube, P.Eng. ~ Development Services Manager IK1 NOTE: Detailed Land Development :gngineering Review available on file

59 Friday, June 26, 2015 Planning THE IMPACT ON SCHOOLS APPLICATION #: School Enrolment Projections and Planning Update: The following tables illustrate the enrolment projections (with current/approved ministry capacity) for the elementary and secondary schools serving the proposed development. Rosemary Heights opened in September 2008, relieving overcrowding at Morgan Elementary. The school reached capacity in 2010 and there are four modular classrooms on-site (capacity shown below does not include modular classrooms). The school district has received funding approval for additions to Rosemary Heights Elementary and Morgan Elementary (6 additional classrooms in total) and design is underway on these projects. The school district has purchased land for a new secondary school in the Grandview area adjoining the City of Surrey future Aquatic Centre and Recreation property. The school district has submitted a proposal for a new Grandview Area Secondary school as a high priority project to the Ministry of Education. Prior to additional elementary and secondary space being provided the school district will manage enrolment through the use of portable classrooms and school catchment area adjustments. SUMMARY The proposed 57 townhouse units Rosemary Heights Elementary are estimated to have the following impact on the following schools: 600 Projected # of students for this development: Elementary Students: 11 Secondary Students: Enrolment Capacity September 2014 Enrolment/School Capacity 200 Rosemary Heights Elementary Enrolment (K/1-7): 61 K Capacity (K/1-7): 40 K Earl Marriott Secondary Enrolment (8-12): 1946 Earl Marriott Secondary Nominal Capacity (8-12): 1500 Functional Capacity*(8-12); Projected cumulative impact of development Nominal Capacity (8-12): subject project) in the subject catchment areas: 2000 Elementary Students: 0 Secondary Students: 392 Total New Students: Enrolment Capacity Functional Capacity *Functional Capacity at secondary schools is based on space utilization estimate of 27 students per instructional space. The number of instructional spaces is estimated by dividing nominal facility capacity (Ministry capacity) by 25.

60 /., ,_, _..., )( "' ~ ~... -0(--f"

61 Future Crossing Mountain View NCP Amendment From Cluster Housing & Preservation Area/Open Space To Cluster Housing & Preservation Area/Open Space I - - Apartments (4-storey max) - Apartments (6-storey max) - Garden Apartments - Townhouse c::j Pond - Townhouse (30 upa max) B Cluster Housing Single Family Small Lots ROSEMARY HEIGHTS WEST LAND USE PLAN CITY OF SURREY - PLJINNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Approved by Council: Janu ary 26, 1999 Amended 13 November 2013 Indoor I Outdoor Amenity Space Preseryation Area/ Open ::>pace Major Linear Open Space Corridor (Multi-Use) Creeks - Commuter Neighbourhood Pedestrian & Bicycle Routes Bike Routes Potential For -- Pedestrian & Bike Bridge Landmarks r'1...j"""1. Meters Thic I'YIO.p ic provided ::~ c gono r::~l rcforcnco onl y_ Tho Cit y o f Surrey m :::~koc no w ::~ r r:::~ n t coc, C)(procc or implied, as to the _.itness of the info rma tion fo r any purp ose, or to the results obtained by in dividuals us in g the info rma tio n and is not responsible for any action ta ken in re lia nce on t he information co ntained herein

62 148 St URB TO C and R AGR RM 36 Ave Winter Cr 147A St 149A St URB 150A St No 99 Hwy 150B St 147 St 34A Ave 34 Ave 148 St 148A St 33A Ave 34 Ave 150 St RM 152 St 152B St 34 Ave 32A Ave 33 Ave COM Croydon Dr 32 Ave Div COM 32 Ave ME OCP Amendment Proposed amendment from Conservation Recreation