REG 5 - Century Group

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF LANGLEY
TOWNSHIP OF LANGLEY OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN BYLAW 1979 NO. 1842

AMENDMENT (MURRAYVILLE COMMUNITY PLAN) BYLAW 1988 NO. 2661
AMENDMENT (CENTURY GROUP) BYLAW 2008 NO. 4646
EXPLANATORY NOTE
Bylaw No. 4646 proposes to amend the Murrayville Community Plan to redesignate property
located north of Fraser Highway east of 222 Street (22301 Fraser Highway) from ‘Residential
3’ and ‘Commercial’ to ‘Institutional’, to permit development of a 155 unit seniors housing
complex, and ‘Multi Family Three’, to permit development of two (2) four storey apartment
buildings (114 units) and 8 single family lots. The Bylaw also proposes to amend the
Development Permit Area designation for the site to Development Permit Area A.
TOWNSHIP OF LANGLEY OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN BYLAW 1979 NO. 1842

AMENDMENT (MURRAYVILLE COMMUNITY PLAN) BYLAW 1988 NO. 2661
A Bylaw to amend Township of Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979 No. 1842,
WHEREAS it is deemed necessary and desirable to amend “Township of Langley Official

Community Plan Bylaw 1979 No. 1842” Amendment (Murrayville Community Plan) Bylaw
1988 No. 2661 as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the Township of Langley, in
Open Meeting Assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as “Township of Langley Official Community
Plan Bylaw 1979 No. 1842 Amendment (Murrayville Community Plan) Bylaw 1988
No. 2661 Amendment (CENTURY GROUP) Bylaw 2008 No. 4646”
2. Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979 No. 1842 Amendment (Murrayville
Community Plan) Bylaw 1988 No. 2661 is further amended by adding Section 10c. to
Section 3.9 Institutional Policies as follows:
“The lands designated Institutional located north of Fraser Highway, east of
222 Street and south of 50 Avenue may accommodate seniors housing.”
3. Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979 No. 1842 Amendment (Murrayville
Community Plan) Bylaw 1988 No. 2661 is further amended by designating lands
described as:
Lot 1 Section 6 Township 11 New Westminster District Plan BCP27705
PID: 026-919-834
as shown on Schedule A attached to and forming part of this Bylaw:

a. “Institutional” and “Multi Family 3” as shown on Schedule B attached to
and forming part of this Bylaw; and,
b. “Development Permit Area A”.
READ A FIRST TIME the 18 day of February , 2008

READ A SECOND TIME the 18 day of February , 2008
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the 10 day of March , 2008
READ A THIRD TIME the 07 day of April , 2008
RECONSIDERED AND ADOPTED day of , 2008
the
Mayor Township Clerk

Bylaw 4646
Page 2 . . .
Bylaw 4646
Page 3 . . .
SCHEDULE “B”
TOWNSHIP OF LANGLEY ZONING BYLAW 1987 NO. 2500

EXPLANATORY NOTE
Bylaw No. 4647 rezones property located north of Fraser Highway east of 222 Street (22301
Fraser Highway) from Suburban Residential SR-1 and Residential Mobile Home Park MH-1 to a
new Comprehensive Development Zone CD-73 to permit development of a 155 unit seniors
housing complex, two apartment buildings (114 units), and eight single family lots.
TOWNSHIP OF LANGLEY ZONING BYLAW 1987 NO. 2500

A Bylaw to amend Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw 1987 No. 2500
WHEREAS it is deemed necessary and desirable to amend “Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw
1987 No. 2500” as amended;
NOW THEREFORE, the Municipal Council of the Corporation of the Township of Langley, in
Open Meeting Assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as “Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw 1987
No. 2500 Amendment (CENTURY GROUP) Bylaw 2008 No. 4647”.
2. The “Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw 1987 No. 2500” as amended is further
amended:
(a) by adding to the end of Section 104.1 – Zones, the words “Comprehensive
Development Zone CD-73”
(b) by adding to the end of Section 110.1 the following:
Zone Minimum Lot Area Minimum Frontage Minimum Lot Depth

CD-73 1000 m2 -- --
371.6 m2 (single family) 12 m (single family) 24 m (single family)
(c) by adding after Section 972 “Comprehensive Development Zone CD-72” the
following as Section 973 “Comprehensive Development Zone CD-73”:
973 - COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT ZONE CD-73
Uses Permitted
973.1 In the CD-73 Zone only the following uses are permitted and all other
uses are prohibited:
(1) accessory buildings and uses

(2) accessory home occupations subject to Section 104.3
(3) apartments
(4) single family dwellings subject to no more than one single family dwelling
being permitted on any one lot
(5) seniors housing not exceeding a total of 155 units
Bylaw No. 4647
Page 2
Residential Density
973.2 The maximum overall residential density permitted on the combined apartment
and single family portion of the CD-73 site shall not exceed 87 units per hectare
(35 units per acre) of lot area.
Lot Coverage
973.3 Buildings and structures shall not cover more than 35% of the lot area.
Siting of Buildings and Structures
973.4 Seniors housing building, apartment buildings and single family dwellings 5 to 8,
and structures shall be sited in accordance with the provisions of a Development
Permit.
Single family dwellings shall be sited in accordance with section 401.4.
Height of Buildings and Structures
973.5 Except as provided for in Section 104.5 the height of seniors housing and
apartment buildings and structures shall not exceed 4 storeys or 15.5 metres,
whichever is less.
The height of single family dwellings shall be in accordance with section 401.5.
Parking and Loading
973.6 Parking and loading shall be provided in accordance with Section 107.
Subdivision Requirements
973.7 All lots created by subdivision shall comply with Section 110 of this bylaw and
the Township of Langley “Subdivision and Development Control Bylaw.”
Landscaping, Screening and Fencing
973.8 Landscape areas, landscape screens and fencing shall be provided in

accordance with the Development Permit.
973.9
Development Permit Requirements
973.10 An application for a Development Permit shall be submitted to Council for its
consideration prior to issuance of a building permit.
Bylaw No. 4647
Page 3
3. The “Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw 1987 No. 2500” as amended is further
amended by rezoning the lands described as:
Lot 1 Section 6 Township 11 New Westminster District Plan BCP27705

PID: 026-919-834
as shown delineated on Schedule “A” attached to and forming part of this Bylaw to
Comprehensive Development Zone CD-73.
READ A FIRST TIME the 18 day of February , 2008

READ A SECOND TIME the 18 day of February , 2008
PUBLIC HEARING HELD the 10 day of March , 2008
READ A THIRD TIME the 07 day of April , 2008
RECONSIDERED AND ADOPTED day of , 2008
the
Mayor Township Clerk

Bylaw No. 4647
Page 4
REPORT TO
MAYOR AND COUNCIL
PRESENTED: FEBRUARY 18, 2008 - REGULAR MEETING REPORT: 08-32

FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION FILE: 11-06-0176
SUBJECT: OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT
AND REZONING APPLICATION NO. 100056 AND
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO. 100506
(CENTURY GROUP)
RECOMMENDATION(S):
That Council receive this report entitled “ Official Community Plan Amendment and Rezoning
Application No. 100056 and Development Permit Application No. 100506 (Century Group)”, for
information;
That Council rescind first and second reading of Township of Langley Official Community Plan
Bylaw 1979 No. 1842 Amendment (Murrayville Community Plan) Bylaw 1988 No. 2661
Amendment (Century Group) Bylaw 2007 No. 4632 and Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw
1987 No. 2500 Amendment (Century Group) Bylaw 2007 No. 4633;
That Council give first and second reading to Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No.
4646 and Rezoning Bylaw No. 4647, subject to the following seven (7) development
prerequisites being satisfied prior to final reading;
1. Applicant entering into a Servicing Agreement with the Township to secure required works
and services in accordance with the Township’s Subdivision and Development Control
Bylaw and the Erosion and Sediment Control Bylaw, to the acceptance of the General
Manager of Engineering;
2. Dedication of additional road allowance on Fraser Highway to accommodate construction of
a deceleration lane to the acceptance of the General Manager of Engineering;
3. Provision of a right of way for construction of adequate road support along Fraser Highway
to satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering;
4. Registration of a restrictive covenant restricting Fraser Highway access to right in right out
only and prohibiting parking on Fraser Highway;
5. Registration of a restrictive covenant securing the provision of applicable multiple family
parking spaces, Child Friendly Amenity Areas, and payment of multiple family Development
Cost Charges (DCC’s) should the seniors housing units be converted to strata title or market
housing;
6. Compliance with the Township’s Tree Protection Bylaw including provision of a final tree
protection plan incorporating tree retention, replacement and protection details to the
acceptance of the Manager of Parks Design and Development; and,
7. Payment of supplemental rezoning application fees;
That Council authorize staff to revise accompanying Development Permit No. 100506 by:
1. Replacing Building 4 with 8 single family homes as shown in revised Schedules A, U, V, W,

X, Y and Z;
2. Removing Schedules T through W as Building 4 has been deleted;
f:\data\council\2008 agenda\02-18\regular agenda\cd official community plan amendment and rezoning application 100056 and
development permit application 100506 century group.doc
OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 2 . . .
3. Increasing the number of units in Building 2 from 51 to 67 as shown in revised Schedules K

through N;
4. Decreasing the number of units in Building 3 from 48 to 47 units as shown in revised
Schedules O through S;
5. Revising the site and landscape plan to accommodate the removal of Building 4 and
proposed changes to Buildings 2 and 3 as shown in revised Schedule A and Z; and,
6. Adding a condition to the Development Permit requiring registration of an exterior design
control agreement prior to issuance of any Building Permits for the single family portion of
the development; and further,
That Council authorize staff to schedule the required public hearing for Bylaws No. 4646 and
4647 in conjunction with Development Permit No. 100506.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On December 3, 2007 Council considered third reading for Bylaws No. 4632 and 4633
(concerning the original application for one seniors housing building and three apartment
buildings). The Bylaws were referred back to staff to address comments and concerns raised
by the public at the November 26, 2007 Public Hearing. The bylaws (and Development Permit
No. 100506) were again considered by Council on January 21, 2008. Council did not grant third
reading to the bylaws, but instead requested the developer to replace Building 4 (four storey 35
unit apartment building) with two storey single family houses adjacent to existing single family
homes on 50 Avenue and along the eastern property line. Century Group has made the
changes requested by Council and submitted a revised development proposal. Because the
changes involve use and density it was deemed appropriate to draft new bylaws and to require
another Public Hearing for the revised development proposal.
It is recommended that Council receive this report for information and that Bylaws No. 4646 and
4647 (permitting the revised application consisting of one seniors housing building, two
apartment buildings and eight single family units) be considered for first and second reading
(subject to completion prior to final reading of seven (7) development prerequisites) and that a
new Public Hearing be scheduled. It is also recommended that Development Permit No.
100506 be revised to reflect the changes to Century Group’s development plans as noted in this
report.
PURPOSE:
This report provides Council with information with respect to changes made to the Century
Group’s development project located at 22301 Fraser Highway in Murrayville.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 3 . . .
BACKGROUND/HISTORY:
The following is the sequence of events with respect to the Century Group’s development
proposal:
Nov 5, 2007 First and Second Reading granted for Bylaws 4632 and 4633 (See original
Report to Council dated November 5, 2007 included as Attachment B to
Appendix C).
Nov 20, 2007 Century Group hosted an Open House (See summary in original Report to
Council dated November 5, 2007 included as Attachment B to Appendix C).
Nov 26, 2007 Public Hearing held for Bylaws 4632 and 4633 (See minutes included as
Attachment A to Appendix C).
Dec 3, 2007 Third Reading considered for Bylaws 4632 and 4633. Council referred the
application “back to staff for a report dealing with concerns raised at the Public
Hearing”. (See minutes included as Appendix B)
Jan 8, 2008 Century Group revised the development proposal to introduce a townhouse
scale apartment building in the northeast corner of the site adjacent to existing
single family homes. A second Open House was held (See summary in second
Report to Council dated January 21, 2008 included as Appendix C)
Jan 21, 2008 Third Reading again considered for Bylaws 4632 and 4633 (See Report to
Council dated January 21, 2008 included as Appendix C). Council passed the
following resolutions (See minutes included as Appendix D):
“That Official Community Plan Amendment and Rezoning Application
No. 100056 and Development Permit Application No. 100506 (Century
Group) be referred back to staff to work with the developer to achieve a
row of single family homes along 50 Avenue on the north-eastern portion
of the property and also on the eastern boundary adjacent to existing
single family homes.”
and
“That staff review the issues of parking and traffic calming on 50 Avenue
and 222 Street.”
and
“That a second Public Hearing be scheduled when the revisions are
brought back to Council.”
Feb 11, 2008 Century Group revised the development proposal by removing the apartment
building in the northeast corner of the site and replacing it with eight single
family homes adjacent to existing single family homes. Century Group hosted a
third Open House (summarized in this Report to Council and Appendix E)
Feb 18, 2008 Report to Council concerning the revised development proposal and first and
second readings for new Bylaws 4646 and 4647 considered by Council.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 4 . . .
PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE:
Century Group hosted a third Open House on February 11, 2008 at Magnolia Gardens.
Residents of the Murrayville neighbourhood were invited to review the proposed changes to
Century’s development plans. The Open House was attended by 20 people. Appendix E
includes a copy of the “Guest Sign In and Comment Sheet” collected by Century Group at the
Open House. Overall, feedback at the Open House regarding the proposed addition of single
family homes adjacent to existing single family homes was positive; however, a number of
residents remain concerned about the overall density proposed and traffic/parking issues in the
neighbourhood.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
As directed by Council, Century Group has significantly revised its application to introduce
single family units adjacent to existing single family homes along the eastern property line and
on 50 Avenue. As a result, Building 4 (the apartment building in the northeast corner of the site)
has been deleted from the plan. In order to facilitate this change, the following adjustments to
the overall development plan were made:
1. Building 4 has been replaced by eight (8) single family units that are designed based
on the Residential R-1A Zone to the east of the subject site (see schedule A to revised
DP100506). Note: the four lots fronting 50 Avenue are fee simple, the four lots fronting
the internal road are strata.
2. The internal road and surface parking have been realigned (see schedule A to revised
DP100506).
3. Building 3 in the northwest corner of the site has been reduced by one unit from 48 to
47 units (see schedules O to S of revised DP100506).
4. Building 2 in the southwest corner of the site has been increased by 16 units from 51 to
67 units (see schedules K to N of revised DP100506).
5. The landscape plan has been revised to reflect new building placement and sizes (see
schedule U to revised DP100506). The landscape plan requires final approval from the
Manager of Parks Design and Development prior to issuance of the Development
Permit.
6. Revised Child Friendly Amenity Areas are required for Buildings 2 (268 m2 / 2885 ft2)
and 3 (188 m2 / 2024 ft2). Including the Child Friendly Amenity Area required for
Building 1 (seniors housing), the minimum Child Friendly Amenity Area required for the
subject site is 526 m2 (5662 ft2). Final landscape plans showing acceptable child
friendly amenity areas require approval from the Manager of Parks Design and
Development prior to issuance of the Development Permit.
7. 20 significant trees are proposed for retention. As a result, 106 replacement trees are
required to be planted.
a. The location of the trees that can be retained has changed as a result of the
revised building footprints. Three significant trees can be retained in the rear
yards of the proposed single family lots which front onto 50 Avenue.
b. The landscape plan indicates that the eastern section of the hedge along 50
Avenue in front of the single family lots will be removed in order to
accommodate driveways and to provide a consistent single family streetscape.
The western portion of the hedge fronting Building 3 is proposed to be retained.
As retention of the hedge was raised as an issue during previous public
consultation, the approach described here will be taken unless Council directs
otherwise.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 5 . . .
Final Tree Protection and Replacement Plans require approval from the Manager of
Parks Design and Development prior to issuance of the Development Permit.
8. The applicant proposes to provide a total of 318 parking spaces on the subject site (29
parking spaces in excess of Zoning Bylaw requirements). 72 of the parking spaces are
dedicated visitor parking spaces.
Resident/Employee Dedicated Visitor Total # of

Parking Spaces Parking Spaces Parking Spaces
Building 1 43 22 65
Building 2 101 28 129
Building 3 74 22 96
Single Family 28 28
9. The access to the site from 50 Avenue has been designed by the developer to
discourage access to and from the site from the east.
10. The addition of single family units in the northeast corner of the site and the removal of
Building 4 reduces the overall proposed density for the “Multi Family 3” area of the site
from 99 units per hectare (40 units per acre) to 87 units per hectare (35 units per acre).
Staff have not proposed to change the Murrayville Community Plan Amendment Bylaw
because the proposed density is less than the density permitted in the proposed “Multi
Family 3” designation. The single family lots provide a transition between the proposed
apartment buildings and existing single family homes in conformance with the
requirements of Development Permit Area A.
11. As the original Bylaw No. 4633 considered by Council did not permit single family
dwellings a new rezoning bylaw (Bylaw No. 4647) has been drafted. Bylaw No. 4647
creates a new Comprehensive Development Zone CD-73 which also allows single
family dwellings. The revised development proposal complies with the provisions of the
proposed CD-73 zoning.
As discussed previously, on-street parking currently occurring in the neighbourhood is believed

to be caused by employees/visitors avoiding the pay-parking lot at Langley Memorial Hospital.
The Century Group proposal meets Zoning Bylaw parking requirements, and is not anticipated
to further impact the existing situation. The Pacific Pointe development is completing the east
side of 221A Street, north side of 50 Avenue and both sides of 222 Street which will provide
additional on-street parking capacity and traffic calming (with curb bulges) in the neighbourhood.
Access to the Century Group site from westbound 50 Avenue is being discouraged through a
revised design of the 50 Avenue access.
Future consideration could be given to parking restrictions (e.g. “resident only” parking zones) or
additional traffic calming measures in the neighbourhood as a whole. These should be
evaluated concerning impacts on Township resources (e.g. costs of enforcement; emergency
services access) and would require further discussion and concurrence by affected Township
divisions (Engineering, Bylaw Enforcement, Fire Department).
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 6 . . .
Policy Considerations:
Century Group’s revised proposal reflects the direction given by Council on January 21, 2008. It
is recommended that Council receive this report; that Council give first and second reading to
Bylaws No. 4646 and 4647; and, that Council authorize staff to schedule a new Public Hearing
in conjunction with revised Development Permit No. 100506.
Respectfully submitted,
Teresa Hanson
DEVELOPMENT PLANNER
for
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
APPENDIX A Revised Development Permit No. 100506
Schedule A Site Plan
Schedule B Underground Parking Plan
Schedule C Building 1 (Seniors Housing) Rendering
Schedule D Building 1 – Main Floor Plan
Schedule E Building 1 – 2nd Floor Plan
Schedule F Building 1 – 3rd Floor Plan
Schedule G Building 1 – 4th Floor Plan
Schedule H Building 1 – Roof Plan
Schedule I Building 1 – East, North and South Elevations
Schedule J Building 1 – West Elevation and Building Section
Schedule K Building 2 - Rendering
Schedule L Building 2 – Main Floor Plan
Schedule M Building 2 – 2nd, 3rd & 4th Floor and Roof Plan
Schedule N Building 2 - Elevations
Schedule O Building 3 – Rendering
Schedule P Building 3 – Main Floor Plan
Schedule Q Building 3 – 2nd, 3rd & 4th Floor Plans
Schedule R Building 3 – Roof Plan
Schedule S Building 3 – Elevations
Schedule T Colour and Material
Schedule U Landscape Plan
APPENDIX B December 3, 2007 Third Reading Minutes
APPENDIX C January 21, 2008 Report to Council
Attachment A Minutes from the November 26, 2007 Public Hearing
Attachment B November 5, 2007 Report to Council
Attachment C Ward Consulting Group Trip Generation Comparison for
Two Development Options
Attachment D Century Group Summary of January 8, 2008 Open House
Attachment E Revised Development Permit No. 100506 and Schedules
A through Z
APPENDIX D January 21, 2008 Third Reading Minutes
APPENDIX E February 11, 2008 Open House Guest Sign In and Comment Sheets
APPENDIX A
Development Permit No. 100506
1. This Permit is issued this day of , 2007

to:
NAME: Century Group Lands Corporation
ADDRESS: 5499 – 12 Avenue

Delta, BC V4M 4H4
2. This permit applies to and only to those lands within the Municipality described as follows
and to any and all buildings, structures and other development thereon:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 1 Section 6 Township 11

New Westminster District Plan BCP27705
PID: 026-919-834
(hereinafter called the “said lands”)
CIVIC ADDRESS: 22301 Fraser Highway
3. This Permit is issued subject to compliance with all of the Bylaws of the Municipality of
Langley applicable thereto, except as specifically varied or supplemented by this permit as
follows:
a) Building plans being in substantial compliance with Schedules “A” through “T”;
b) Landscaping plans being in substantial compliance with Schedule “U”, and in compliance
with the Township’s Street Tree and Boulevard Treatment programs and Child Friendly
Amenity Area requirements, to the acceptance of the Manager of Parks Design and
Development;
c) Landscaping and boulevard treatment to be secured by letter of credit at the building
permit stage;
d) All signage being architecturally consistent with Schedules “A” through “T” and in
compliance with the Township’s Sign Bylaw;
e) Rooftop mechanical equipment to be located so that it is not visible from adjacent roads
and properties or alternatively screened from view by compatible architectural treatments;
f) All refuse areas to be located in the underground garages;
g) Final approval being obtained from Transport Canada with respect to the height of the
buildings in relation to the Langley Municipal Airport, including incorporation of any
recommendations from the federal agencies into the final development plans;
h) Provision of a CPTED (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design) review of the
development (including design and operation of parkades, elevators, pedestrian
walkways/connections, amenity areas, playgrounds, and lighting) by a qualified CPTED
professional (in consultation with the Langley RCMP), to the acceptance of the Director of
Century
Page 2
Community Development, including incorporation of the CPTED recommendations into

the final development plans; and,
i) Registration of an exterior design control agreement for all CD-73 zoned single family lands
ensuring that building design and site development standards are high quality, and
consistent with surrounding lots and development.
4. Although not part of the Development Permit requirements, the applicant is advised that
prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items will need to be finalized:
j) Provision of an Exterior Lighting Impact Plan prepared by an electrical engineer in

compliance with the Township’s Exterior Lighting Impact Policy to the acceptance of the
Manager of Permits and Licenses;
k) Payment of supplemental Development Permit application fees; and,
l) Payment of the cost recovery fee for the overpass crossing of Fraser Highway.
5. The land described herein shall be developed strictly in accordance with the terms, conditions
and provisions of this Permit and any plans and specifications attached as a Schedule to this
Permit which shall form a part hereof.
This Permit is not a Building Permit.
All buildings and structures forming part of this Development Permit shall be substantially
commenced within two years after the date the Development Permit is issued.
This permit shall have the force and effect of a restrictive covenant running with the land and
shall come into force on the date of an authorizing resolution passed by Council.
It is understood and agreed that the Municipality has made no representations, covenants,
warranties, guarantees, promises or agreement (verbal or otherwise) with the developer other
than those in this Permit.
This Permit shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their
respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns.
AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION PASSED BY COUNCIL THIS DAY OF , 2007.
Attachments:
Century
Page 3

Schedule T Colour and Material
Schedule U Landscape Plan
Note: See revisions dated January 19, 2009 re: Building
B1 revised unit counts and parking calculations.

SCHEDULE A
SITE PLAN

Note: See revisions dated January 19, 2009 re:
revised underground parking size/layout.

SCHEDULE B
UNDERGROUND PARKING PLAN

SCHEDULE C
BUILDING 1 (SENIORS HOUSING) RENDERING

Note: See revisions
dated January 19,
2009 re: Building
B1 revised main
floor layout.

SCHEDULE D
BUILDING 1 ‐ MAIN FLOOR PLAN

SCHEDULE E
BUILDING 1 – 2ND FLOOR PLAN

SCHEDULE F
BUILDING 1 – 3RD FLOOR PLAN

SCHEDULE G
BUILDING 1 – 4TH FLOOR PLAN

SCHEDULE H
BUILDING 1 – ROOF PLAN

SCHEDULE I
BUILDING 1 ‐ EAST, NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS

SCHEDULE J
BUILDING 1 ‐ WEST ELEVATION AND BUILDING SECTION

SCHEDULE K
BUILDING 2 ‐ RENDERING

SCHEDULE L

SCHEDULE M
BUILDING 2 – 2ND, 3RD & 4TH FLOOR AND ROOF PLANS

SCHEDULE N
BUILDING 2 – ELEVATIONS

SCHEDULE O

SCHEDULE P

SCHEDULE Q
BUILDING 3 ‐ 2ND , 3RD & 4TH FLOOR PLANS

SCHEDULE R
BUILDING 3 ‐ ROOF PLAN

SCHEDULE S
BUILDING 3 ‐ ELEVATIONS

SCHEDULE T
COLOUR AND MATERIALS

The landscape plan
must be revised to
the final satisfaction
of the Manager of
Parks Design and
Development Prior
to Issuance of the
Development
Permit at Final
Reading.

SCHEDULE U
LANDSCAPE PLAN

APPENDIX B
December 3, 2007
Regular Council Meeting Minutes - 583 -
G. BYLAWS FOR CONSIDERATION AT THIRD

READING
Development Permit Running concurrently with this bylaw is Development

Application DP100475 Permit Application No. 100475 (640056 BC Ltd.) in
accordance with Attachment B subject to the
following conditions:
a) Building plans being in substantial compliance

with Schedules “A” through “J”;
b) Landscaping plans being in substantial compliance
with Schedule “K”, and in compliance with the
Township’s Street Tree and Boulevard Treatment
programs, to the acceptance of the Manager of
Parks Design and Development;
c) Landscaping and boulevard treatment to be secured
by letter of credit at the building permit stage;
Although not part of the Development Permit
requirements, the applicant is advised that prior to
issuance of a building permit the following items will
need to be finalized:
d) Payment of supplemental Development Permit

application fees.
CARRIED
Councillor Fox opposed
3. Bylaw No. 4632 Moved by Councillor Ward,

Bylaw No. 4633 Seconded by Councillor Long,
Report 07-193 That Council give third reading to Township of
Official Community Plan Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw 1979 No. 1842
Amendment and Amendment (Murrayville Community Plan) Bylaw
Rezoning Application 1988 No. 2661 Amendment (Century Group) Bylaw
No. 100056 2007 No. 4632”; and
Development Permit
Application No. 100506 “Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw 1987 No. 2500
(Century Group) Amendment (Century Group) Bylaw 2007 No. 4633”.
File CD 11-06-0176
Development Permit Running concurrently with these bylaws is

Application No. 100506 Development Permit Application No. 100506 (Century
Group) in accordance with Attachment E subject to the
a) Building plans being in substantial compliance with

Schedules “A” through “Y”;
with Schedule “Z”, and in compliance with the
December 3, 2007

READING
Development Permit programs and Child Friendly Amenity Area

Application No. 100506 requirements, to the acceptance of the Manager of
(Century Group) Parks Design and Development;
(continued) c) Landscaping and boulevard treatment to be secured
d) All signage being architecturally consistent with
Schedules “A” through “Y” and in compliance with
the Township’s Sign Bylaw;
e) Rooftop mechanical equipment to be located so that
it is not visible from adjacent roads and properties
or alternatively screened from view by compatible
architectural treatments;
f) All refuse areas to be located in the underground
garages;
g) Final approval being obtained from Transport
Canada with respect to the height of the buildings
in relation to the Langley Municipal Airport,
including incorporation of any recommendations
from the federal agencies into the final development
plans; and,
h) Provision of a CPTED (Crime Prevention through
Environmental Design) review of the development
(including design and operation of parkades,
elevators, pedestrian walkways/connections,
amenity areas, playgrounds, and lighting) by a
qualified CPTED professional (in consultation with
the Langley RCMP), to the acceptance of the
Director of Community Development, including
incorporation of the CPTED recommendations into
the final development plans.

issuance of a building permit, the following items will
i) Provision of an Exterior Lighting Impact Plan

prepared by an electrical engineer in compliance
with the Township’s Exterior Lighting Impact
Policy to the acceptance of the Manager of Permits
and Licenses;
j) Payment of supplemental Development Permit
application fees; and,
k) Payment of the cost recovery fee for the overpass
crossing of Fraser Highway.
December 3, 2007

READING
Development Permit
Application No. 100506
(Century Group)
(continued) Moved by Councillor Vickberg,
Seconded by Councillor Richter,
Referral That Bylaw No. 4632 and Bylaw No. 4633 (Century
Group) be referred back to staff for a report dealing
with concerns raised at the Public Hearing.
CARRIED
Councillors Ferguson and Ward were opposed.
4. Bylaw No. 4553 Moved by Councillor Fox,

Report 07-31 Seconded by Councillor Vickberg,
Report 07-116 That Council give third reading to
Langley Official “Township of Langley Official Community Plan 1979
Community Plan Bylaw No. 1842 Amendment (High Density
Amendment (High Development) Bylaw 2007 No. 4553”.
Density Residential)
File CD 6480-02
Moved by Councillor Richter,

Seconded by Councillor Kositsky,
Amendment That at least 10% of all units in high density
development be designated as social housing units.
DEFEATED
Mayor Alberts and Councillors Bateman, Ferguson,
Fox, Long, Vickberg, and Ward opposed
Main Motion The question was called on the main motion, and it was
CARRIED
Councillors Bateman and Richter opposed
H. BYLAWS FOR FINAL ADOPTION
1. Bylaw No. 4517 Moved by Councillor Bateman,

Rezoning Application Seconded by Councillor Ferguson,
RZ100240 That Council give final reading to “Township of
(Gloucester Industrial Langley Zoning Bylaw 1987 No. 2500 Amendment
Estates) (Gloucester Industrial Estates) Bylaw 2006 No. 4517”.
File CD 14-05-0063 CARRIED
APPENDIX C
REPORT TO
MAYOR AND COUNCIL
PRESENTED: JANUARY 21, 2008 - REGULAR MEETING REPORT: 08-08

(CENTURY GROUP)
RECOMMENDATION(S):
That Council receive this report entitled “Official Community Plan Amendment and Rezoning
Application No. 100056 and Development Permit Application No. 100506 (Century Group)”, for
information; which pertains to comments and concerns raised by the public at the November
26, 2007 Public Hearing for Bylaws No. 4632 and 4633, and Development Permit No. 100506;
and further
That Council consider Bylaws No. 4632 and 4633 for third reading, subject to the following nine
(9) development prerequisites being satisfied prior to final reading;
1. Applicant entering into a Servicing Agreement with the Township to secure required
works and services in accordance with the Township’s Subdivision and Development
Control Bylaw and the Erosion and Sediment Control Bylaw, to the acceptance of the
General Manager of Engineering;
2. Dedication of additional road allowance on Fraser Highway to accommodate
construction of a deceleration lane to the acceptance of the General Manager of
Engineering;
3. Provision of a right of way for construction of adequate road support along Fraser
Highway to satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering;
4. Dedication of a 1.0 metre wide road widening along the south side of 50 Avenue for the
full frontage of the subject site to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering;
5. Registration of a restrictive covenant limiting access to the site from Fraser Highway to
right in right out only and prohibiting parking on Fraser Highway;
6. Registration of a restrictive covenant securing the provision of multiple family parking
spaces, Child Friendly Amenity Area, and payment of multiple family Development
Cost Charges (DCC’s) should the seniors housing units be converted to strata title or
market housing;
7. Compliance with the Township’s Tree Protection Bylaw including provision of a final
tree protection plan incorporating tree retention, replacement and protection details to
the acceptance of the Manager of Parks Design and Development;
8. Registration of a restrictive covenant defining the maximum number of apartment units
as 134; and,
9. Payment of supplemental rezoning application fees; and further,
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 2 . . .
That accompanying Development Permit No. 100506 be revised by:

1. Reducing the number of units in Building 4 from 40 to 35 as shown in revised Schedules
A, U, V, W, and X to the Development Permit;
2. Reducing the height of Building 4 from 3-4 storeys to 2-3 storeys (with a two storey
townhouse component facing east and north) as shown in revised Schedule T and X to
the Development Permit;
3. Revising the architecture of Building 4 (facades facing east and north) to reflect
surrounding single family homes as shown in revised Schedule T and X to the
Development Permit;
4. Revising the site and landscape plan to accommodate the proposed changes to Building
4 as shown in revised Schedule A and Z; and,
5. Revising the 50 Avenue driveway to discourage right turns out onto 50 Avenue as
shown in revised Schedule A.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On December 3, 2007 Council considered Bylaws No. 4632 and 4633 for third reading. The
Bylaws were referred back to staff to address comments and concerns raised by the public at the
November 26, 2007 Public Hearing. In response to these concerns, the applicant has reduced
the number of units in Building 4 (located in the northeast corner of the site) from 40 to 35;
reduced the height of Building 4 from 3-4 storeys to 2-3 storeys (with a two storey townhouse
component facing single family uses to the east and north); revised the architecture of Building
4 to reflect surrounding single family homes; adjusted the site and landscape plan to
accommodate the revised footprint of Building 4; submitted a traffic generation report for the
site; and hosted a second Public Open House (held January 8, 2008 at Magnolia Gardens).
It is recommended that Council receive this report for information and that Bylaws No. 4632
and 4633 be considered for third reading (subject to completion prior to final reading of nine (9)
development prerequisites). It is also recommended the Development Permit No. 100506 be
revised to reflect the changes to Century Groups development plans as noted in this report.
PURPOSE:
As requested by Council, this report provides Council with information with respect to
concerns and comments raised by the public at the November 26, 2007 Public Hearing for
Bylaws No. 4632 and 4633, and Development Permit No. 100506.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 3 . . .
BACKGROUND/HISTORY:
At its December 3, 2007 regular meeting Council considered Community Plan Amendment
Bylaw No. 4632 and Rezoning Bylaw No. 4633 for third reading. Council did not give third
reading, but referred the application to staff for a report addressing the concerns raised by the
public at the November 26, 2007 Public Hearing.
All significant comments and concerns raised at the Public Hearing were reviewed by staff.
Public concerns primarily focused on traffic, parking, density, neighbourhood character, tree
preservation and drainage. This report contains a summary of the staff review and steps taken
by the applicant to address the concerns raised at the Public Hearing.
It is noted that Century Group hosted an additional Open House on January 8, 2008 at Magnolia
Gardens in the City of Langley. Residents of the Murrayville neighbourhood were invited to
review the proposed changes to Century’s development plans. Attachment D is a summary of
the second Open House and provides more detailed information with respect to the changes
proposed by the Century Group to Building 4.
Also attached to this report are the minutes of the November 26, 2007 Public Hearing
(Attachment A), the original Community Development Division report to Council dated
November 5, 2007 (Attachment B), and a Trip Generation Report by Ward Consulting
(Attachment C).
In accordance with Council’s direction, staff reviewed comments and concerns raised by the
public at the November 26, 2007 Public Hearing as follows:
Density:
Concerns were expressed regarding the proposed increase in density on the subject site. As
described in the November 5, 2007 report to Council, although the proposed density is a site-
specific increase, the proposed uses and overall density support the intent of the Township’s
Official Community Plan and the Murrayville Community Plan. The proposed apartment
buildings will contribute to the development of a compact community in Murrayville and
provide alternative housing options for Township residents. By changes made to Building 4,
the applicant has reduced the overall number of apartment units by 5 to 134 units (96 uph / 39
upa). If Council proceeds with the rezoning, registration of a restrictive covenant limiting the
maximum number of apartment units on the site to 134 will be required.
Interface with existing Neighbourhood Character:

Concerns were expressed with respect to how the Century development interfaced with
existing development in the area. The subject site is surrounded by undeveloped lands, and
existing residential, institutional and commercial development. Specifically, residents
questioned the fit of the proposed apartment buildings with the existing single family
residential character on 50 Avenue to the north and 49A Avenue to the east with respect to
privacy, building height, roof design and building setbacks.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 4 . . .
In anticipation of these concerns, the applicant originally designed the site:
1. to retain approximately 1/3 of the significant trees (not including the existing hedge
along 50 Avenue which will also be retained) to reduce visual change to the
neighbourhood;
2. to architecturally complement the single family homes through the inclusion of ground-
floor entrances, peaked roofs and reduced height where fronting single family
development;
3. to reduce overlook and privacy concerns by providing additional setbacks from
property lines shared with single family homes; and,
4. to provide significant landscape screening including trees along property lines shared
with single family homes, particularly adjacent to the east property line.
These design details were shared with residents both at the initial Open House hosted by the
applicant and through the November 5, 2007 Report to Council. In response to the
dissatisfaction with the design expressed by some of the local residents at the Public Hearing,
the applicant agreed to redesign proposed Building 4 at the northeast corner of the site. The
new design reduces the number of units in Building 4 to 35, and reduces the height of Building
4 from 3-4 storeys to 2-3 storeys. Two storey townhouse-like units now face the existing single
family homes to the east and 50 Avenue to the north. The proposed rear yard setback varies
from 10 metres (33 feet) to 11.9 metres (39 feet). The remainder of the northeast building is a
three storey apartment building facing inward to the site. As shown in the building section
below, the design amendment is intended to result in the apartments being essentially invisible
from adjacent single family homes. The proposed change however will result in the removal of
two significant trees, a reduction in surface parking for the development (replaced
underground) and a small reduction in the development’s overall open space.
WEST
EAST
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 5 . . .
WEST
EAST
NEW
A summary of changes proposed for the northeast building (Building 4) follows:
Type # of # of East East North

Units Storeys Setbacks Setbacks Setbacks
(Adjacent (Adjacent (Across
to Single to Single from
Family Family Single
Rear Side Yards Family
Yards) on 50 Ave) Front Yard)
Original Condo 40 3 and 4 12.2 12.2 metres 23 metres /
/ Apt metres / / 40 feet 75 feet (plus
40 feet 50 Avenue
roadway)
Revised Condo/ 35 2 and 3 10 metres 5 metres / 7.8 metres /
Apt / (with 2 / 33 feet 17 feet 25.5 feet to
Two storeys to 11.9 8.4 metres /
Storey facing metres / 27.5 feet
Town- all 39 feet (plus 50
houses single Ave
family roadway)
homes)
The revised Building 4 now includes units ranging in size from one bedroom (66 m2 / 710 ft2) to
two storey, two bedroom townhouse type units with dens (120 m2 / 1,292 ft2). Building 4 steps
down from three to two storeys in the north and east to provide a two storey townhouse
character where the building faces existing single family homes. The northern units are
designed to front 50 Avenue. The eastern units include significant private yard space and
staggered rear yard setbacks (10 m / 33 ft to 11.9 m / 39 ft). The entire building is provided
underground parking (51 parking stalls for residents plus 14 dedicated visitor spaces) and five
surface parking spaces in compliance with the Township’s Zoning Bylaw requirements. 140 m2
(1,507 ft2) of Child Friendly Amenity Area will also be provided.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 6 . . .
The revisions to Building 4 result in an increase in overall lot coverage from 32% to 35%. Also,
two significant trees retained by the previous design must be removed. As a result, 20
significant trees will now be retained on the overall site.
The proposed changes to Century Group’s development plans continue to comply with the
provisions of the original Comprehensive Development Zone CD-72. As Century proposes to
reduce the number of units to five below those permitted in the CD-72 Zone, a restrictive
covenant is required prior to final reading to limit the number of apartment units to 134 total.
Traffic:
Concern was expressed regarding the potential traffic impact of the proposed land use
(primarily on 50 Avenue). Residents were concerned that the proposed number of apartment
units will result in more traffic locally and increased use of 50 Avenue.
In response to resident concerns, Ward Consulting Group (traffic engineers) provided a “Trip
Generation Comparison” using standard engineering practices. The potential build out of the
subject site according to the existing Murrayville Plan was compared to Century Group’s
proposed build out. The comparison demonstrated that the number of trips generated by
Century Group’s proposed land use would be less than the traffic that would be generated by
the mix of uses currently permitted in the Murrayville Plan (see Appendix C for details).
The decrease in number of trips is attributed to:

1. the inclusion of seniors housing;
2. the removal of commercial development; and,
3. the inclusion of apartment units rather than single family units.
The subject site is proposed to be accessed from Fraser Highway (right-in, right-out only) and
50 Avenue. The Fraser Highway access provides a direct link to the remainder of the
community. Because access to Fraser Highway is limited to right-in, right-out only for safety
reasons, an additional access was required onto 50 Avenue. Access is not provided to 222 Street
to retain the stand of significant trees and because 222 Street would also be limited to right-in,
right-out only. As a result, 50 Avenue (connecting 222 Street to 224 Street) is the only point
where full movements from the site can be achieved. Residents expressed concerns that traffic
on 50 Avenue would be greatly increased as a result of the development. Overall, however, due
to the lower number of trips generated by the Century project (compared to the existing
Community Plan), and the anticipated completion of the 224 Avenue/Fraser Highway/48
Avenue intersection, staff believe that traffic on 50 Avenue will be well within accepted limits.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 7 . . .
Parking:
This area of Murrayville has a well-documented history of on-street parking challenges
resulting from hospital staff overflow and secondary suite occupants believed to be parking on
local streets, particularly 50 Avenue. These existing parking issues are not directly related to
the Century Group development. Some area residents however expressed concerns that the
addition of apartment buildings would increase demand for on-street parking. As described in
the November 5, 2007 Report to Council (Attachment B), Century Group is proposing to
provide parking in excess of the current requirements listed in the Township’s Zoning Bylaw
(i.e. at a rate of 1.5 spaces per one bedroom unit and 2.1 spaces per units with more than one
bedroom). The total number of parking spaces to be provided for the development will be 320.
If Council requires, a restrictive covenant preventing parking on 50 Avenue could also be
prescribed as a condition of final reading. However, considering current parking challenges are
not directly related to the proposed development, it would be more appropriate to deal with 50
Avenue on-street parking in a more comprehensive fashion.
A concern was also raised regarding the safety of underground parking. As described in the
November 5, 2007 Report to Council (Attachment A), the applicant is required to provide a full
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) evaluation of the proposal in
consultation with the Langley RCMP as a condition of the Development Permit.
Tree Protection:
At the public hearing, concerns were expressed that too many significant trees were being
retained on site. Residents cited specific concerns related to potential damage to their property
from failure of retained trees and debris currently generated by the trees during wind storms.
As required by Council policy, staff encouraged Century to retain healthy significant trees on
the subject site. The trees have been assessed by an arborist to determine their suitability for
retention based on their current health, the potential impact of the development on the long
term health of the trees, and safety. The trees identified for retention are a result of that
assessment. The trees will be pruned and monitored to insure their long term survival.
Overall, 20 significant trees will be retained onsite plus the existing cedar hedge on 50 Avenue
(approximately 38 trees) and the existing street trees on 224 Street and Fraser Highway
(approximately 11 trees) for a total of 69 retained trees. 106 replacement trees are also required
to be planted resulting in a minimum of 175 trees onsite after development.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 8 . . .
Drainage:
Residents expressed concerns regarding the impact of the development on stormwater
management in the area. The Township’s Subdivision and Development Control Bylaw
requires that post-development stormwater flows are the same as pre-development stormwater
flows from the site. A stormwater management plan is required as a condition of rezoning. The
developer is required to confirm the adequacy of the existing stormwater detention pond and
pipe system. If necessary, onsite detention may be required at Building Permit stage.
Temporary changes to local stormwater flows resulting from construction will be addressed by
completion of an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan prior to final reading. Staff note that the
proposed Century development will result in less impervious surface area than a single family
or townhouse development, consequently easing local stormwater impacts of the development.
Public Open House:

Following the Public Hearing, the applicant hosted a second Open House on Tuesday, January
8, 2008 at Magnolia Gardens in the City of Langley. 272 people of the Murrayville
neighbourhood were notified by mail in advance of the Open House. Approximately twenty-
five residents attended the Open House.
At the Open House, Century Group provided a presentation (Attachment D) describing the
proposed changes to Building 4 and spoke directly to the concerns raised by the residents at the
previous Open House and Public Hearing. According to the Century Group, response to the
proposed changes to Building 4 was favorable; however, some residents remain concerned
about traffic, the number of new residents added to the neighbourhood, and the potential
impact on 50 Avenue parking.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 9 . . .
Policy Considerations:
As requested by Council, this report addresses significant comments and concerns raised by the
public at the November 26, 2007 Public Hearing. It is recommended that Council receive this
report for information and that Bylaws No. 4632 and 4633 be considered for 3rd reading. Final
reading should only be considered after the proponent completes the nine (9) development
prerequisites identified for the development. It is also recommended that revised Development
Permit No. 100506 (incorporating the changes to the development described in this report) be
issued at time of final rezoning.
Teresa Hanson
DEVELOPMENT PLANNER
for
ATTACHMENT A Minutes from the November 26, 2007 Public Hearing
ATTACHMENT B November 5, 2007 Report to Council
ATTACHMENT C Ward Consulting Group Trip Generation Comparison for Two Development Options
ATTACHMENT D Century Group Summary of January 8, 2008 Open House
ATTACHMENT E Revised Development Permit No. 100506
Schedule A Site Plan (Revised)
Schedule B Underground Parking Plan (Revised)
Schedule T Building 4 – Rendering (Revised)
Schedule U Building 4 – Main Floor Plan (Revised)
Schedule V Building 4 – 2nd & 3rd Floor Plans (Revised)
Schedule W Building 4 – Roof Plans (Revised)
Schedule X Building 4 – Elevations (Revised)
Schedule Y Colour and Material
Schedule Z Landscape Plan (Revised)
ATTACHMENT A
November 26, 2007
Special Meeting for Public Hearing and Development Permits Minutes - 568 -
B. PUBLIC HEARING
3. Bylaw No. 4632 Township of Langley Official Community Plan Bylaw

Bylaw No. 4633 1979 No. 1842 Amendment (Murrayville Community
Report 07-193 Plan) Bylaw 1988 No. 2661 Amendment (Century
Official Community Plan Group) Bylaw 2007 No. 4632”; and
Amendment and
Rezoning Application “Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw 1987 No. 2500
No. 100056 Amendment (Century Group) Bylaw 2007
Development Permit No. 4633”.
Application No. 100506
(Century Group)
File CD 11-06-0176


programs and Child Friendly Amenity Area
requirements, to the acceptance of the Manager of
garages;
plans; and,
November 26, 2007
B. PUBLIC HEARING
Development Permit amenity areas, playgrounds, and lighting) by a

Application No. 100506 qualified CPTED professional (in consultation with
(continued) the Langley RCMP), to the acceptance of the


and Licenses;
Explanation J. Geraghty, Community Development Division,

Bylaw No. 4632 explained that Bylaw No. 4632 proposes to amend the
Murrayville Community Plan to redesignate property
located north of Fraser Highway east of 222 Street
(22301 Fraser Highway) from ‘Residential 3’ and
‘Commercial’ to ‘Institutional’, to permit development
of a four (4) storey 155 unit strata seniors housing
complex, and ‘Multi Family Three’, to permit
development of three (3) four (4) storey apartment
buildings (139 units). The Bylaw also proposes to
amend the Development Permit Area designation for
the site to Development Permit Area A. He noted that
272 Public Hearing Notices were mailed out to area
residents.
Explanation J. Geraghty, Community Development Division,

Bylaw No. 4633 explained that Bylaw No. 4633 rezones property located
north of Fraser Highway east of 222 Street (22301 Fraser
Highway) from Suburban Residential SR-1 and
Residential Mobile Home Park MH-1 to a new
Comprehensive Development Zone CD-72 to permit
development of a four (4) storey 155 unit strata seniors
housing complex and three (3) four (4) storey
apartment buildings (139 units).
November 26, 2007
B. PUBLIC HEARING
Proponent Jan Timmer, Jan H. Timmer Architecture Ltd., 6655

Madrona Place, West Vancouver, B.C., was in
attendance and commented that the proposal follows
the principles of the Murrayville Neighbourhood Plan.
He continued that a variety of housing types and
densities would be provided to serve a range of
lifestyles including a seniors care home, and a large
proportion of seniors residences would be featured in
apartment buildings. He added that the project
supports the principles for complete, compact,
integrated, and sustainable development. He pointed
out that it is across from a main retail shopping area
and there is a hospital and fire hall on the north side.
He added that great emphasis has been placed on a
pedestrian pathway system adjacent to major transit
routes which should reduce the number of car trips,
improving transit. He added that the project team
worked hard to achieve balance between the interests
and concerns of neighbours on existing vegetation on
site. He stated that they concentrated density and
footprints so that only 31% of the site would be covered
by buildings. He added that they had preserved a
majority of major tree stands, notably along 222 Street.
He continued that there would be two parking stalls
per unit including visitor parking and then discussed
the access point off 50 Avenue.
Submissions The following submissions regarding Bylaw No. 4632

Bylaw No. 4632 were received from the public:
Bylaw No. 4633
1. Randall Bartsch, 22311 - 50 Avenue, was in
attendance and commented that he was not
opposed to the project; however, he prefers single
family homes. He expressed concerns relative to
traffic flow and speed control.
2. Donna Labinsky, 22352 - 50 Avenue, was in

attendance and commented that she had concerns
relative to property devaluation, parking, density,
building height, child friendly amenity areas, and
stated that the proposal does not fit in with the
Murrayville Neighbourhood Plan or the Langley
Official Community Plan. She advised she was not
opposed to the seniors’ care home and would prefer
single family development and less density.
November 26, 2007
B. PUBLIC HEARING
Councillor Vickberg left the meeting at 9:03 p.m. and

returned at 9:05 p.m.
Submissions 3. Jim Thomlinson, 22386 – 50 Avenue, was in

Bylaw No. 4632 attendance and commented that he had concerns
Bylaw No. 4633 relative to increased traffic and asked that traffic not
(continued) flow from this development down 50 Avenue. He
also noted concerns relative to building height, roof
design, character, parking, traffic calming measures,
and access to 50 Avenue. He advised he would
support a seniors’ care home.
4. Rick Harman, 4937 – 223B Street, was in attendance

and commented that his property would be
devalued due to its proximity to the development.
He expressed concerns relative to building height,
density, parking, increased traffic, loss of privacy
and sun penetration, and incompatibility with area
development.
5. Kimberly Cantwell, 22342 – 50 Avenue, was in

attendance and commented that she had concerns
relative to tree preservation, setbacks, tree topping
of trees near her home, property devaluation, loss of
sun penetration, drainage, and building height. She
advised she was not opposed to the Seniors Care
Home, but that she was against the four storey
building development.
6. Paul McGowan, 4928 - 223B Street, was in

attendance and expressed concerns relative to
proposed traffic calming devices, CPTED principles,
and underground parking.
7. John Brown, Century Developments Ltd.,

5499 – 12 Avenue, Delta, B.C., was in attendance
and commented that the site was a campground
previously. He continued that they had an interest
in developing a seniors’ care home, and other types
of housing. He added that the project would
feature a right turn in, right turn out access off 50
Avenue. He continued that they moved the siting
of the seniors’ facility to Fraser Highway, which
would be heavily landscaped, and feature
pathways. He added that they tried to orient the
building away and taper buildings toward 50
November 26, 2007
B. PUBLIC HEARING
Submissions Avenue, which would be stepped down and angled

Bylaw No.4632 to the right adding view corridors and pedestrian
Bylaw No. 4633 walkways. He added that they listened to the
concerns of residents and did their best to
accommodate them. He noted sufficient parking
stalls would be provided and there would be
underground parking. He commented on shading
and placement of balconies along buildings facing
neighbouring residential properties.
Written Submission The following written submission was received from

the public regarding Bylaws No. 4632 and 4633:
1. Paula Thomlinson, 22386 – 50 Avenue, expressing

opposition to the proposal. She noted concerns
relative to increased traffic, access to the site,
parking, tree preservation, and loss of
neighbourhood character.
2. John Brown, CA, Sr. Vice-President, Century Group,

providing detailed information of the proceedings
of the Public Information meeting held November
20, 2007 at W.C. Blair Recreation Centre for the
Sunridge Place development proposal.
C. TERMINATE
Meeting Terminate Moved by Councillor Bateman,

Seconded by Councillor Fox,
That the Meeting terminate at 9:48 p.m.
CARRIED
CERTIFIED CORRECT:
Mayor
Township Clerk
ATTACHMENT B
REPORT TO
MAYOR AND COUNCIL
PRESENTED: NOVEMBER 5, 2007 - REGULAR MEETING REPORT: 07-193

AND REZONING APPLICATION NO. 100056
(CENTURY GROUP)
PROPOSAL:
Application to amend the Murrayville
Community Plan and Zoning Bylaw and issue a
Development Permit to permit the construction
of a four storey (115 unit and 40 care bed) seniors
housing building and three (3) apartment
buildings (total of 139 units) at 22301 Fraser
Highway in Murrayville.
RECOMMENDATION(S) SUMMARY:
That Council give 1st and 2nd readings to Bylaws
No. 4632 and 4633 subject to the completion of
eight (8) conditions; and issuance of
Development Permit No. 100506 (subject to
eleven (11) conditions) at the time of final
reading; and that staff be authorized to schedule
the required Public Hearing.
RATIONALE:
Staff supports the development proposal as it
meets the overall objectives of the Murrayville
Community Plan. The proponent has also
complied with Council’s Mobile Home Parks:
Redevelopment Policy and will comply with the
provisions of the Manufactured Home Park
Tenancy Act.
f:\data\council\2007 agenda\11-05\regular agenda\e.1_cd official community plan amendment & rezoning application 100056
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 2 . . .
RECOMMENDATION(S)
That Council give first and second reading to Rezoning Bylaw No. 4633 (and accompanying
Murrayville Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 4632) rezoning a 2.24 ha (5.53 acre) site
located 22301 Fraser Highway to Comprehensive Development Zone CD-72 subject to the
following development prerequisites being satisfied prior to final reading:
Engineering;
market housing;
8. Payment of supplemental rezoning application fees.
That Council at time of final reading of Rezoning Bylaw No. 4633 authorize the issuance of
Development Permit No. 100506 subject to the following conditions:
a) Building plans being in substantial compliance with Schedules “A” through “Y”;
b) Landscaping plans being in substantial compliance with Schedule “Z”, and in
compliance with the Township’s Street Tree and Boulevard Treatment programs and
Child Friendly Amenity Area requirements, to the acceptance of the Manager of Parks
Design and Development;
permit stage;
d) All signage being architecturally consistent with Schedules “A” through “Y” and in
and properties or alternatively screened from view by compatible architectural
treatments;
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 3 . . .
recommendations from the federal agencies into the final development plans; and,
walkways/connections, amenity areas, playgrounds, and lighting) by a qualified
CPTED professional (in consultation with the Langley RCMP), to the acceptance of the
Director of Community Development, including incorporation of the CPTED
recommendations into the final development plans.
Although not part of the Development Permit requirements, the applicant is advised that prior
to issuance of a building permit, the following items will need to be finalized:
i) Provision of an Exterior Lighting Impact Plan prepared by an electrical engineer in

j) Payment of supplemental Development Permit application fees;
k) Payment of the cost recovery fee for the overpass crossing of Fraser Highway; and
further,
That Council authorize staff to schedule the required Murrayville Community Plan
Amendment and Rezoning public hearings in conjunction with Development Permit No.
100506.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Century Group Lands Corporation has applied to amend the Murrayville Community Plan
from ‘Residential Three’ and ‘Commercial’ to ‘Multifamily 3’ and ‘Institutional’, and rezone
from ‘Suburban Residential SR-1’ and ‘Residential Mobile Home Park MH-1’ to
‘Comprehensive Development CD-72’ to accommodate four buildings on a 2.24 ha (5.53 acre)
site located at 22301 Fraser Highway. The proposed development consists of a four storey
seniors housing complex (115 units and 40 care beds) and three (3) three to four storey
apartment buildings (139 units).
The property is designated a mandatory Development Permit area to allow Council the
opportunity to review the form, character and siting of the proposed development. Additional
details are contained in the attached materials. Staff recommends that Council consider the
development request subject to completion of eight (8) rezoning development prerequisites and
issuance of Development Permit No. 100506 (subject to eleven (11) conditions).
Staff supports the development proposal as it meets the overall objectives of the Murrayville
Community Plan by contributing to the viability of the Township’s institutional core,
encouraging the development of the community primarily as a residential area with a variety of
housing types and densities suitable to a range of life-styles, and providing population to
support the existing commercial businesses. The proponent has also complied with the
Township’s Mobile Home Park: Redevelopment Policy and will comply with the provisions of
the Manufactured Home Park Tenancy Act.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 4 . . .
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this report is to advise and make recommendations to Council with respect to
Murrayville Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 4632, Rezoning Bylaw No. 4633 and
Development Permit 100506.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 5 . . .
SUBJECT
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 6 . . .
ZONING BYLAW NO. 2500
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 7 . . .
SITE PLAN – SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT
Green = retained trees

Pink = proposed pedestrian network
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 8 . . .
EXTERIOR RENDERING – SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT
Building 1 – North Elevation
Building 2 – West Elevation
Building 3 – East Elevation
Building 4 – East Elevation

(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 9 . . .
SITE CROSS SECTIONS – SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 10 . . .
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
Owner / Applicant : Century Group Lands Corporation
5499 – 12 Avenue
Delta, BC V4M 4H4
Agent: Jan H. Timmer Architecture Ltd.

6655 Madrona Place
West Vancouver, BC V7W 2K1
Legal Description: Lot 1 Section 6 Township 11

PID: 026-919-834
Location: Northeast of the intersection of Fraser Highway

with 222 Street (22301 Fraser Highway)
Area: 2.24 ha (5.53 acres)
Existing Zoning: Suburban Residential Zone SR-1 and

Residential Mobile Home park Zone MH-1
Proposed Zoning: Comprehensive Development Zone CD-72
Murrayville Community Plan: Commercial and Residential Three (maximum

permitted density: 25 uph / 10 upa)
E.S.A Designation: 066 – Murrayville Urban Area (Rating – 3)
BACKGROUND/HISTORY:
The subject site is located northeast of the intersection of Fraser Highway with 222 Street at
22301 Fraser Highway. The majority of the site has been historically operated as Datwilers’s
Mobile Home Park and Campground. The applicant has owned the property since 2006. As
described in detail below, the applicant has been working with the residents of the Mobile
Home Park in accordance with Council policy and provincial legislation.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 11 . . .
The proposed development site consists of a 2.24 ha (5.53 acre) lot located northeast of the
intersection of Fraser Highway with 222 Street. The site is bordered by Fraser Highway to the
south, 222 Street to the west, 50 Avenue to the north, and a combination of existing residential
homes (zoned R-1A and R-1B) and undeveloped lands (zoned SR-1 and C-3) to the east. To the
north of 50 Avenue are existing residential homes (zoned R-1B). Northwest of the subject site
are lands under application by Pacific Pointe Homes (Murrayville) Ltd. for single family lots,
townhouses and an apartment building. The subject site is currently occupied by a small
number of Datwiler’s Mobile Home Park residents, and is zoned Suburban Residential SR-1 and
Residential Mobile Home Park MH-1.
Mobile Home Parks Redevelopment Policy:

Council’s ‘Mobile Home Parks: Redevelopment Policy’ (Attachment A) encourages proponents
of a redevelopment of a Mobile Home Park site to engage in an open process with tenants
which includes notification, relocation and options to purchase by:
1. prenotifying residents that the site is the subject of a development application;

2. notifying residents when the development application is anticipated to be considered by
Council;
3. where feasible, accounting for the relocation of residents; and,
4. where feasible, providing tenants first right of refusal to purchase prior to giving notice
to the tenants that they must vacate the site.
The applicant has complied with Council’s policy as described below and in correspondence
included as Attachments B and C:
“Immediately after acquiring the property we gave the short term renters/campers
notice we would not be carrying on in the summer or winter camping business and
we closed the sanitary-dump station. At the same time we asked the seller of the
property to introduce us to all the longer term residents. We met about 25 of the 31
long term residents at that time and others later. We explained to everyone who we
were and what we were going to try to achieve. We explained their rights and our
obligations and we asked them to contact us if they needed help with their future
planning. We followed the meetings with written communication to confirm what
was discussed. We advised renters that we would not be able to give them notice until
we had a development permit and that at that time we would give them 12 months
notice and at the end of the notice period would reimburse them for the previous 12
months rent which is what is required by Act. At that time we told those who
intended to leave earlier that we would pay them the same amount no matter when
they left. Between then and now all but 6 have moved somewhere else either with or
without our additional help. The type of help provided to those who left who had
asked for help included:
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 12 . . .
1. Taking care of demolishing their trailer where it had no value for future
use and could not be moved.
2. Introducing individuals to places and people they could discuss subsidized
living with.
3. Individual incentives based on specific requests when made.
Whereas all were initially told they could be granted priority in selection in the new
development when it was marketed or in the seniors' facility if they were senior, none
showed any interest and believe most thought the opportunity would be something
they would not be able to afford at any price.”
Council’s policy is in addition to the requirements of the provincial Manufactured Home Park
Tenancy Act which requires developers to have all necessary permits and approvals required
by law to redevelop the site and the intention to convert the park to another use in order to end
a tenancy. The developer is required to give residents 12 months notice from the time that
permits are granted and pay residents 12 months rent. The applicant has provided the tenants
with this information and committed to complying with the provisions of the Act.
In addition, the applicant is proposing to host a Public Information meeting with the remaining
and surrounding residents after Council has had the opportunity to review the application at
First and Second reading. This additional meeting will be held before the Public Hearing (and
has tentatively been scheduled at WC Blair Recreation Centre on November 20, 2007 at 7 pm).
The purpose of the public information meeting is for the proponents to identify and address
any remaining concerns that may be raised by the occupants of the six remaining mobile homes
and by area residents prior to the Public Hearing. A summary of the Open House, including
Century Group’s proposed resolution of any concerns that are raised, will be provided to
Council at or before the Public Hearing.
Development Proposal:
The proposed development consists of four (4) buildings summarized as follows:
Building Type Units Storeys

1 Seniors 115 independent living 4
Housing 40 care beds
155 total
2 Condominium 51 total 4
Apartment
3 Condominium 48 total 3 to 4
Apartment
4 Condominium 40 total 3 to 4
Apartment
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 13 . . .
Parking for the four buildings will be provided in two shared underground parking garages.
The development is served by an internal private drive through the middle of the site running
parallel to 222 Street connecting Fraser Highway to 50 Avenue. Existing pedestrian connections
in the neighbourhood are utilized and enhanced by a comprehensive network of pathways
within the development.
Building 1 - Seniors Housing

The seniors housing complex (Building 1) includes a mix of 80 one bedroom units (43 to 51 m2 /
460 to 549 ft2), 13 bachelor units (37 to 49 m2 / 395 to 524 ft2), 6 one bedroom plus den units (58
m2 / 619 ft2), 16 two bedroom plus two bathroom units (64 m2 / 687 to 693 ft2), and 40 care bed
units. The care bed units do not include cooking facilities and are designed so as to comply
with Fraser Health Authority requirements. The entire building is intended to be owned and
operated by the Century Group on a rental basis. The ‘H’ shaped building fronts Fraser
Highway with access from the internal road. Private outdoor amenity space is oriented south
primarily between the east and west wings of the building. The eastern outdoor space
(associated with the care beds) is secured by fencing in accordance with Fraser Health
Authority safety requirements. Access to the western outdoor space is from the common areas
(associated with the apartment units) on the ground floor. Landscaping and berming are
included to reduce the noise generated by Fraser Highway on the outdoor space.
Typical cross-section from the proposed seniors housing complex to Fraser Highway. Note: berming,
screened fencing and landscaping proposed to reduce impact of Fraser Highway.
Century Group currently operates a seniors’ housing facility (Magnolia Gardens) on Glover
Road in the City of Langley. The subject development proposes to follow the same model. The
independent living seniors’ housing units each include full kitchens (excluding ovens) and
residents are provided two meals daily in the ground floor dining room. Century Group also
provides residents the opportunity to age in place by offering 40 care bed units for residents
who require a greater level of care. The care bed units are proposed to be licensed by the Fraser
Health Authority and are served by registered nurses, Licensed Practical Nurses and care aides.
Independent
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 14 . . .
residents are provided priority access to the care suites as their needs change. The care units
have no kitchens and residents are provided 3 meals per day. In addition to meals, residents
are provided a variety of personal services including weekly laundry (full service for care
residents and towels and sheet service for independent residents), security, 24 hour emergency
response systems and social event coordination. Common spaces include free laundry facilities
for the independent residents, as well as gardens, a library, lounges, a fitness center, and
activity rooms for all. In total, Century Group anticipates employing approximately 60 people
both full time and part time with a maximum of 25 employees onsite during the busiest shift.
Buildings 2 to 4 - Apartments
The three (3) proposed apartment buildings (strata ownership) have units ranging in size from
one bedroom (61 m2 / 660 ft2) to two bedrooms plus dens (100 m2 / 1079 ft2). Building 2 is
oriented towards the intersection of Fraser Highway and 222 Street. Building 3 steps down
from four to three storeys in the north in consideration of the existing residents north of 50
Avenue. Both Building 2 and Building 3 provide direct pedestrian connections from the
internal path system to each ground floor unit, as well as the main lobby. Building 4 steps
down from four to three storeys in the east also to respect existing residents. Although only
connected to the pathway system on the west side of the building, the eastern ground floor
units of Building 4 are provided significant private yard space.
The applicant is intending to phase the development beginning with Building 1 (seniors
housing facility). To accommodate phasing and simplify the establishment of strata council’s
for the proposed apartment buildings, a subdivision application is also being pursued. Each lot
is required to individually address the requirements of the Rezoning Bylaw (lot size, parking,
child friendly amenity area, etc.) at time of subdivision.
Murrayville Community Plan Amendment:

The subject site is currently designated ‘Residential Three’ (maximum density of 25 uph / 10
upa) and ‘Commercial’ in the Murrayville Community Plan. Bylaw 4632 proposes to designate
the southeast portion of the site occupied by the seniors housing facility ‘Institutional’ and the
remainder of the site ‘Multi Family 3’ to accommodate the proposed apartment buildings. A
text amendment to the Murrayville Community Plan is also included to specify that the area
designated ‘Institutional’ may include seniors housing. The Bylaw also proposes to adjust the
Development Permit designation to include areas currently in Development Permit Area B
(Commercial) as part of Development Permit Area A (Residential).
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 15 . . .
Murrayville is defined as the institutional centre of the Township in the Murrayville

Community Plan. The seniors housing building (115 units plus 40 care beds) proposed on the
southeastern third of the site will contribute to the mix of institutional uses in Murrayville. The
Murrayville Community Plan also calls for Murrayville to be developed as a residential area
with a variety of housing types and densities suitable to a range of lifestyles. By proposing both
seniors housing and apartment buildings (139 units), the applicant is supporting this goal. In
addition, the location is well served by the hospital, WC Blair Recreation Center, medical clinics
and doctor’s offices, as well as the Murrayville core commercial area. The proposed
development supports the overall intent of the Murrayville Community Plan.
Approximately 75% of the subject site is currently designated ‘Residential 3’ permitting a

maximum residential density of 25 uph / 10 upa (or approximately 34 units on the apartment
portion of the site). The applicant is proposing to construct three apartment buildings totaling
139 units at a residential density of 99 uph / 40 upa. In accordance with the Murrayville Plan,
which states that the boundaries of the multifamily areas are conceptual in nature and
variations which do not alter the intent and substance of the plan may be permitted, a
continuation of the ‘Multi Family 3’ designation to the northwest is proposed to accommodate
the use. ‘Multi Family 3’ permits a maximum density of 124 uph / 50 upa. Through the
Development Permit Area A Guidelines, development on the subject site is also required to
integrate with the existing residential uses to the north and east through compatible siting of
buildings, exterior finishes and designs. To respect existing homes, the applicant proposes to
retain existing mature trees, increase building setbacks from the property line (greater than 12
metres / 40 feet or approximately double the rear yard setback required on the adjacent R-1A
lots) and downscale the height of the proposed buildings facing single family uses.
The Murrayville Community Plan also recognized that access to the subject site could be
difficult and would require a coordinated approach. By proposing a change of use for this
specific site, the developer has reduced the traffic and access demands on the site from those
required by commercial development. In addition, it was recognized that the demand for
commercial properties in the area may not be as high as initially proposed.
Rezoning:
The subject site is currently zoned Suburban Residential Zone SR-1 and Residential Mobile
Home Park Zone MH-1. Rezoning Bylaw 4633 proposes to create a new Comprehensive
Development Zone (CD-72) designed to specifically accommodate the seniors housing building
in combination with the apartment buildings. The project complies with the provisions of the
site’s proposed CD-72 zoning in terms of building height, siting, site coverage, parking, Child
Friendly Amenity Area and use.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 16 . . .
Development Permit:
Development in the Murrayville core area is regulated by “Residential Development Permit
Area A” Guidelines (Attachment D) adopted by Council under Bylaw No. 2661 in 1989. The
subject site is designated a mandatory Development Permit area “to ensure safe and attractive
multiple family developments and to reduce conflicts with adjacent users”. The applicant has
provided a rendering, site plan, building elevations, colour and material information, landscape
plan and signage plan in accordance with Council’s policy. Development Permit No 100506 is
attached as Attachment E.
Throughout the design process, the architect, Jan H. Timmer Architecture Ltd., focused on
designing the development to fully integrate with the surrounding community in conformance
with the objectives of the plan. Particular attention was dedicated to the retention of existing
healthy significant trees on the subject site. Through the retention of the stand of trees along the
222 Street frontage and the cedar hedge along the 50 Avenue frontage, the site retains a familiar
feel for the existing neighbours. The retained trees are complemented by apartment buildings
that are individually designed to respond to each edge of the site. On the north and east, facing
existing homes, the buildings are proposed to step down from four to three storeys, providing
ground floor entrances and private yard spaces, and set back a minimum of 12 metres (40 feet)
from the property line. These steps ensure that the proposed buildings relate well to the
existing homes (see the Site Building Elevations). As stated by the architect:
“In order to respect and blend into the existing character in the neighbourhood and to
address livability and overview concerns of the immediate neighbours, the larger 4-
storey buildings are located along Fraser Highway and 222nd Street and are
stepping down towards the North and East property lines. The smaller apartment
building in the NE corner of the site steps down to 3 storeys towards the east
property line and is also setback from the East property line 40 feet or more. In
addition there is a 71 foot open space between the buildings along the East property
line. The twelve foot tall existing hedge along the North property line will be
substantially retained. This existing evergreen buffer, combined with the generous
setbacks at the North and East property lines and stepped building profiles will allow
for ample sunlight on the residences and their gardens to the North and East of our
site and the least visual impact.”
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 17 . . .
The architect provides the following architectural design rationale for the proposed buildings:
“The design language of the buildings is traditional in character and follows a

conventional tri-partite horizontal build-up of the main building components.
The extensive use of brick for the major components of the first floor of the Seniors
Residence provides a strong visual base for the building, connected by a strong
horizontal band of a lower roof shape and various porch and canopy elements. The
mid portion of the building will be a rain screen application of horizontal siding. The
upper part of the building features a generous roof overhang and soffit, which
protects the upper band of windows and the vertical board and batten detailing above
the waist level of this upper floor level.
These high quality and long lasting building materials, details and finishes will
contribute a sense of permanence and stability to the neighbourhood.
The rooflines are generally sloped back with a flat top to reduce the visual impact on
the neighbours. These roof shapes step down to the north and east on the residential
buildings, to blend in and be in keeping with the general residential neighbourhood
character. The building massing is carefully articulated to achieve a simple but
dignified building and to reduce the scale and visual impact at the pedestrian level.”
The buildings will incorporate three colour schemes (grey, green and blue) accented by clay
brick and white wood trim (Schedule Y). The colours have been selected to accent the retained
trees and provide individual identities for each building. Hardiplank siding is proposed. The
rendering and building elevations are attached to the Development Permit as Schedules C, I, J,
K, N, O, S, T and X.
As the applicant is proposing to retain ownership of the seniors housing building, the developer
is pursuing long term sustainability measures in the project including “LEED” energy and
environmental measures for the seniors housing facility. Geothermal heating and solar hot
water panels are being considered. A condition of the Development Permit is that all rooftop
mechanical equipment be located or screened in such a way that it is not visible from adjacent
roads or properties.
The proposed building height (4 storeys), site coverage (32%) and building siting comply with
the provisions of the proposed CD-72 zone. The development in staff’s opinion complies with
the Development Permit guidelines for the area (see Attachment A). The applicant has worked
with staff to ensure that pedestrian connections and a pedestrian oriented environment are
provided as a component of the development.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 18 . . .
Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design:

Given the scale of the development, the use of underground parking structures and its location
adjacent to institutional developments, staff has included the requirement for a CPTED (Crime
Prevention Through Environmental Design) assessment as a development prerequisite. The
CPTED assessment will identify measures to be incorporated into the final design of the
development to assist in preventing crime and will specifically review the design and operation
of the parkade, elevators, pedestrian walkways/connections, amenity areas, playgrounds and
lighting. Consultation with the Langley RCMP is underway.
Langley Municipal Airport:

The height of the four buildings requires approval from Transport Canada because of the site’s
proximity to the Langley Municipal Airport. The applicant has commenced the Transport
Canada application process by applying to NAV Canada for review and approval. Experience
has been that similar applications in the Murrayville core area are routinely approved by
Transport Canada. Final approval from the federal agencies responsible for the Airport is a
condition of the Development Permit.
Pedestrian Overpass:
The Murrayville Community Plan requires the collection of a cost recovery fee from all new
residential units north of Fraser Highway in support of construction of a proposed pedestrian
overpass over Fraser Highway. In conformance with the plan, this fee will be collected at time
of Building Permit.
Child Friendly Amenity Area:

The Township’s Zoning Bylaw requires provision of one 70 m2 (753 ft2) Child Friendly Amenity
Area for the seniors housing complex and 4 m2 (43 ft2) of Child Friendly Amenity Area for each
residential unit in the apartment buildings (minimum 556 m2 (5977 ft2) of Child Friendly
Amenity Area). Each building is provided a dedicated Child Friendly Amenity area that
includes children’s play equipment, sitting areas, and free play space. The general design of
and inclusion of these features into the onsite landscape plans satisfies the Child Friendly
Amenity Area requirements of the Zoning Bylaw. Final plans will need the approval of the
manager of Parks Design and Development prior to issuance of the Development Permit.
Landscaping:
The landscape plan (Schedule Z of the Development Permit) proposes extensive plantings of
trees, shrubs and groundcovers throughout the site. In combination with the retained trees, the
plantings are designed to accentuate the development and define the separation between public
and private space.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 19 . . .
There are numerous connections between the site and the street. A significant trail network
connects the four buildings to each other and the street. At each connection of the trail network
to the public sidewalk, a pergola is proposed. The applicant is also proposing a landscaped
seating area at the intersection of Fraser Highway with 222 Street and 50 Avenue with 222
Street. These parkettes both provide entry features for pedestrians and provide a public
amenity. The entrance to the internal drive is marked by low brick features that coordinate
architecturally with the buildings.
Existing street trees and boulevard treatment along 222 Street will be protected throughout the
development period. New street trees are required along Fraser Highway and will be secured
in the Servicing Agreement in accordance with Township policy. The retention of the hedge on
50 Avenue does not leave sufficient space to install new street trees.
Tree Protection:
Durante Kreuk Ltd. prepared a tree summary report in accordance with the Township’s Tree
Protection Bylaw for the subject site. 68 significant trees were identified on site. The
development was designed to retain a significant proportion of the existing trees onsite. 22
significant trees were identified as suitable for retention including the established stand of trees
on the western edge of the site. 46 trees are recommended for removal. In accordance with the
Tree Protection Bylaw, 100 replacement trees are required to be planted on the subject site. The
applicant is proposing to plant 263 trees. In total, after development, in excess of 285 trees will
be distributed over the site (not including street trees or the retained cedar hedge along 50
Avenue which would amount to an additional 57 trees in place as a result of the development).
Access and Parking:

Access to the four buildings and associated parking is provided via an internal private
driveway bisecting the subject site parallel to 222 Street between 50 Avenue and Fraser
Highway. The Fraser Highway entrance will be restricted to right in right out turning
movements and includes a deceleration lane constructed by the developer. Each building has a
surface drop off zone, large enough to accommodate emergency vehicles, and dedicated
underground parking. Surface parking on the site is limited to visitor parking. The applicant
proposes to provide a total of 335 parking spaces onsite which is in excess of the 322 parking
spaces required by the Zoning Bylaw requirements. 53 of the parking spaces are dedicated
visitor parking spaces. The parking is distributed as listed below:
Building Underground Surface Total Dedicated Visitor

1 52 12 64 21
2 96 3 99 12
3 87 0 87 2
4 75 10 85 18
Total 310 25 335 53
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 20 . . .
Garbage and recycling facilities are proposed within the underground parking structures.
Pedestrians can access the site and its comprehensive internal trail network from sidewalks on
50 Avenue, 222 Street and Fraser Highway. The onsite pedestrian system is designed to connect
to Murrayville’s existing trail network, provide a convenient link to the commercial centre
south of Fraser Highway and provide exercise opportunities for the residents.
Signage:
The applicant does not propose signage at this time. Should the applicant propose to add
signage to the development in the future, the signage must be designed to coordinate with the
approved architectural features of the Development Permit and to comply with the Township’s
Sign Bylaw.
Servicing:
The applicant is required to provide full municipal services to the site and, in the process,
confirm the adequacy of existing services. A servicing agreement with the Township will be
required (prior to consideration of final reading) to secure servicing works such as
alterations/improvements to area roadways, construction of adequately sized storm sewer,
sanitary sewer and watermains to service the site, and offsite sidewalk construction. Prior to
work commencing on the site, an Erosion and Sediment Control Permit based on an approved
stormwater management plan including erosion and sediment control measures in accordance
with the Township’s Erosion and Sediment Control Bylaw is also required.
Transit:
Transit service is available adjacent to the subject site on 222 Street and 50 Avenue, and also
within one block (100 metres) of the site on Fraser Highway. Three bus routes (502, C60 and
C61) provide direct service to downtown Langley and Aldergrove with connections to other
communities in Langley and Skytrain (via Surrey Central and King George Skytrain stations).
Environmental:
The Township’s Environmentally Sensitive Areas (E.S.A.) Study identifies the site as forming
part of the Murrayville Urban Area. As part of the Servicing Agreement, the applicant will be
required to provide full urban services as well as a stormwater management plan and sediment
control measures. The provision of these items, and compliance with the Township’s Tree
Protection Bylaw and Erosion and Sediment Control Bylaw satisfy the management guidelines
identified in the Township’s E.S.A. Study. No watercourses exist on the property. A yellow
coded roadside watercourse fronting the site was removed and compensated for by the
Township through the recent Fraser Highway widening project.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 21 . . .
Exterior Lighting:
Council adopted an Exterior Lighting Impact Policy in 2002 intended to address concerns
regarding off-site lighting impacts from commercial and industrial development located
adjacent to residential and rural properties. In consideration of surrounding residents, the
applicant has agreed to comply with the provisions of the Exterior Lighting Impact Policy as a
condition of the Development Permit. The applicant will be required to provide full cut-off
fixtures (i.e. shielded so that no light shines above the bottom of the light fixture). The retention
of significant trees on the property will also assist in reducing off-site lighting impacts.
Development Prerequisites:
Prior to final reading of the rezoning bylaw, the following items must be finalized:
Engineering;
market housing;
8. Payment of supplemental rezoning application fees.
POLICY CONSIDERATIONS:
Staff supports the development proposal as it meets the overall objectives of the Murrayville
Community plan by contributing to the viability of the Township’s institutional core,
encouraging the development of the community primarily as a residential area with a variety of
housing types and densities suitable to a range of life-styles, and providing population to
support existing commercial businesses. The proponent has also complied with the Township’s
Mobile Home Park: Redevelopment Policy and will comply with the provisions of the
Manufactured Home Park Tenancy Act.
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 22 . . .
Staff support the proposal subject to eight (8) rezoning development prerequisites and eleven
(11) Development Permit conditions.
Teresa Hanson
DEVELOPMENT PLANNER
for
TEH/
ATTACHMENT A Mobile Home Parks: Redevelopment

ATTACHMENT B Letters from Century Group to residents of Datwiler’s Mobile Home Park
ATTACHMENT C Letter from staff to residents of Datwiler’s Mobile Home Park site
ATTACHMENT D Murrayville Community Plan Development Permit Area A Guidelines
ATTACHMENT E Development Permit No. 100506
Schedule T Building 4 – Rendering
Schedule U Building 4 – Main Floor Plan
Schedule V Building 4 – 2nd & 3rd Floor Plans
Schedule W Building 4 – 4th Floor and Roof Plans
Schedule X Building 4 – Elevations
Schedule Z Landscape Plan
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 23 . . .
ATTACHMENT A
POLICY MANUAL
Subject: Mobile Home Parks: Redevelopment Policy No: 07-121

Approved by Council: 98.07.20
Revised by Council:
1. Purpose
To encourage proponents of redevelopment to engage in an open process with tenants
which includes notification, relocation and options to purchase.
2. Background
Redevelopment of Mobile Home Parks may disrupt the living arrangements of tenants.
Experience has shown that the needs of tenants must be taken into account if plans are
to succeed.
3. Related Policies
07-120
4. Policy
4.1 That prenotification notices be sent to all occupants or tenants of a manufactured
home park subject to a redevelopment or strata conversion application, once the
file has been assigned to a staff member to process.
4.2 That the applicant of any manufactured home park site undergoing
redevelopment or strata conversion provide all tenants of the park with a letter at
least 10 days prior to the matter being presented to Council for consideration.
This letter should advise the tenants of the time and date of the Council meeting
when such application is to be considered, and that any tenants who deem their
interest to be affected by such redevelopment or strata conversion may contact
the Township to advise on their views regarding redevelopment or strata
conversion.
4.3 That, where feasible, redevelopment or strata conversion applications included

proposed plans for relocation of persons occupying the current manufactured
home park site.
4.4 That, where feasible, the owner of any manufactured home park site proposing
to redevelop to another residential zone or strata title the lots, provide present
tenants with a first refusal to purchase prior to giving notice to tenants that they
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 24 . . .
must vacate the manufactured home park site.
ATTACHMENT B
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 25 . . .
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 26 . . .
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 27 . . .
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 28 . . .
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 29 . . .
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 30 . . .
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 31 . . .
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 32 . . .
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 33 . . .
ATTACHMENT C
(CENTURY GROUP)
Page 34 . . .
ATTACHMENT D
3.4 Residential Development Permit Area
Multi Family and adjacent Institutional areas are designated as development permit areas under
Section 945(4)(e) of the Municipal Act to establish objectives and provide guidelines for the form
and character of development. These areas are shown as Development Permit Area A on Map 3.
The objective of the development permit area designation is to ensure safe and attractive multiple
family neighbourhoods and to reduce conflicts with adjacent uses. The development permit
guidelines for this area are:
(a) Development should be designed to integrate with and be compatible with adjacent
development with respect to siting of buildings, exterior finish and design. Pitched roofs
shall be encouraged.
(b) Buildings should be designed and sited so that sun penetration to roads and adjacent
properties is maximized.
(c) Landscaping shall be required to enhance the appearance of the development. Careful
consideration shall be given to retaining as many of the existing trees as possible. Buildings
and parking, loading and storage areas should be screened from adjacent roads and single
family residential development. Garbage receptacles and other service areas should be
screened. A landscaping plan shall be submitted as part of a development permit
application.
(d) Building materials, design and massing shall support the creation of an attractive residential
environment. The use of "untreated" concrete or "unfinished" metal or aluminum as a final
building finish shall not be permitted.
(e) Signs should be designed so that they are compatible with buildings.
(f) Walkways should be developed to ensure convenient access to and from adjacent
commercial and institutional uses. For security, walkways should be lighted and allow
overview from adjacent dwellings.
(g) Ravine and creek areas shall be treated under the provisions of Development Permit Area F,
Section 3.11.
ATTACHMENT E

to:

Delta, BC V4M 4H4

PID: 026-919-834
follows:
b) Landscaping plans being in substantial compliance with Schedule “Z”, and in compliance
Development;
permit stage;
F:\data\council\2007 Agenda\11-05\Regular Agenda\DPs\dp100506 Century Group.DOC

Century
Page 2


j) Payment of supplemental Development Permit application fees; and,
k) Payment of the cost recovery fee for the overpass crossing of Fraser Highway.
Attachments:
f:\data\council\2007 agenda\11-05\regular agenda\dps\dp100506 century group.doc

Century
Page 3
Schedule W Building 4 – 4th Floor and Roof Plans
f:\data\council\2007 agenda\11-05\regular agenda\dps\dp100506 century group.doc

SCHEDULE A
SITE PLAN

SCHEDULE B

SCHEDULE C

SCHEDULE D

SCHEDULE E

SCHEDULE F

SCHEDULE G

SCHEDULE H

SCHEDULE I

SCHEDULE J

SCHEDULE K

SCHEDULE L

SCHEDULE M

SCHEDULE N

SCHEDULE O

SCHEDULE P

SCHEDULE Q

SCHEDULE R

SCHEDULE S

SCHEDULE T

SCHEDULE U

SCHEDULE V
BUILDING 4 ‐ 2ND & 3RD FLOOR PLAN

SCHEDULE W
BUILDING 4 – 4TH FLOOR AND ROOF PLAN

SCHEDULE X

SCHEDULE Y

Basement
Ground

SCHEDULE Z
LANDSCAPE PLAN

ISSUE FOR USE
ATTACHMENT C
November 30, 2007 EBA File: V31201151
Century Group Email:brownj@centurygroup.ca

5499 -12th Avenue
Tsawwassen, Delta, BC V4M 4H4
Attention: John Brown

Senior vice president
Dear John:
Subject: Trip generation Comparison for two development options

Fraser Highway/222 Street, Township of Langley, BC
As requested by the Township of Langley, we have now undertaken a comparison of the traffic
generated by alternative development scenarios for a site located at the northeast corner of Fraser
Highway/222 Street. The following compares the traffic generated with the site developed as
currently zoned and with the uses proposed by the Century Group. The comparison covers
weekday peak hours, weekday daily trips and Saturday daily trips.
1.0 DEVELOPMENT ARRANGEMENTS

The subject site is located to the east of 222 Street between Fraser Highway and 50 Avenue. The
total site area covers in the order of 5.5 acres (239,580ft2).
1.1 EXISTING ZONING (PLAN A)

Based on the existing zoning, referred to as Plan A, under the Murrayville Community Plan the site
is permitted to be developed with a mix of commercial and single family residential uses, with
commercial use covers approximately 1.5 acres (65340ft2) while the residential use (R-3) covers the
remaining 4.0acres (174240 ft2).
According to the Township of Langley Bylaw, the maximum building structure coverage allowed for
the commercial portion of the site is 40% of the lot size, while for the residential use (R-3) the site is
permitted to be developed with up to 10 units per acre. In order to not overstate the potential
traffic generation under the existing zoning, two development scenarios were considered for Plan A
Scenario A.1: This scenario considers 40% building coverage area for the commercial use and a total
of 40 single family residential units (10 unit/acre*4 acre).
trip generation comparison.doc
Ward Consulting Group – A Division of EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd.

p. 604.688.8826 • f. 604.688.9562 • Oceanic Plaza, 9th Floor
1066 West Hastings Street • Vancouver, British Columbia V6E 3X2 • CANADA
V31201151
November 30, 2007
ISSUED FOR USE 2
Scenario A.2: Under this scenario, the commercial portion of the site was assumed to be developed at
only a 30% building coverage. The residential uses were unchanged at 40 single family residential
units.
1.2 PROPOSED USES (PLAN B)

The Century Group has proposed the site be developed with 295 multi-family residential units
allocated as follows:
• 115 independent living units;
• 40 licensed health care units; and
• 140 condominium units.
The Century Group plan (Plan B) is targeted at seniors.
The breakdown of the two development options is summarized in Table 1.
In order to not understate traffic generation for the proposed uses, two alternative development
scenarios were also considered for Plan B:
Scenario B.1: In this scenario, traffic generation was based on all 295 units being market housing.
Scenario B.2 With this scenario the trip generation from the 140 condominium units was calculated
using the standard trip rate for condominiums, while the trip generation from the remaining 155
senior housing units was based on trip rates for a rate for Continuing Care Retirement Community
(CCRC).
TABLE 1: DEVELOPMENT PLAN

Lot Area(ft2) units permitted building Permitted
area (ft2) Density
Plan A (Existing zoning plan)
Commercial 65,340 26,135 40% FAR
Single family residential (R-3) 174,240 40 10/acre
Total 239,580
Plan B (Proposed by Century Group)
-Senior living units 115
-Senior health care facility 40
Condominium up to 140
Total ~295 units

V31201151
November 30, 2007
ISSUED FOR USE 3
2.0 TRIP GENERATION

The traffic generated by the two proposed development options was calculated using the Institute of
Transportation Engineers (ITE) standard trip generation rates. As mentioned above Plan A is split
between commercial use (1.5 acres) and residential use (4 acres). The trip generation results for the
four scenarios is summarized in Table 2 and described below. A graphical illustration for the
weekday peak hour trip generation is given in Exhibit 1 and for the daily trips in Exhibit 2. Detail
trip generation analysis results are given in the appendix.
TABLE 2: TOTAL TRIP GENERATION SUMMARY

Peak hour Daily
a.m. p.m. weekday Saturday
Scenario A.1 – Existing 40% coverage 105 305 3290 4410
for commercial
Scenario A.2 – Existing 30% coverage 95 260 2800 3750
for commercial
Scenario B.1 – all market 125 145 1610 1490
Scenario B.2 – Market/seniors housing 95 125 1290 1400
Following is a summary of the key results of the trip generation comparison:

• Under the existing zoning (Plan A) the maximum weekday peak hour trip generation is expected
to be approximately 305 vehicles per hour (veh/h) in the p.m. peak hour, and a minimum of 95
veh/h in the a.m. peak hour.
• With the proposed uses (Plan B) the maximum peak hour trip generation is 145 veh/h (p.m.
peak hour) and the minimum is again 95 veh/h (a.m. peak hour).
• With Plan A (existing) the weekday daily trip generation ranges between 2,800 to 3,300 veh/day
while for Plan B the range is between 1,290 and 1,610 veh/day.
• On a Saturday the daily trip generation with the existing zoning ranges between 3,750veh/day
and 4400 veh/day, while for the proposed uses the range is again much lower at between 1400
veh/day to 1500 veh/day.
• During the weekday a.m. peak hour, the trip generation from the different scenarios is similar;
however, for the p.m. peak hour the average trip generation from Plan A is almost twice that of
Plan B.
• The maximum weekday daily trip generation from Plan B is only 60% of the minimum daily
weekday trip generation from Plan A

V31201151
November 30, 2007
ISSUED FOR USE 4
• The maximum Saturday daily trip generation from Plan B is only 40% of the minimum daily
weekday trip generation from Plan A
The weekly trip generation with the two alternative plans, was calculated using five times the
weekday trips, one Saturday and with Sunday based on 50% of the average for a Saturday. Based on
this the existing uses are projected to generate a minimum of 19,625 trips per week (Scenario A.2)
and the proposed uses a maximum of 10285 per week (Scenario B.1). The proposed uses will
therefore generate no more than 52% of the weekly traffic that could be generated by the existing
uses.
EXHIBIT 1
Weekday Peak hour Trip Generation Comparison
350
300
250
trips (veh/h)
200
150
100
50
0
A.M. P.M.
Peak hour
Scenario A1 -Existing high (40% commercial)
Scenario A2 - Existing low (30% commercial)
Scenario B1 - proposed high (all market housing)
Scenario B2-proposed (condominium & senior housing)

V31201151
November 30, 2007
ISSUED FOR USE 5
EXHIBIT 2
Daily Trip Generation Comparison

5000
4000
trips (veh/day)
3000
2000
1000
0
Weekday Saturday
Daily
Scenario A1 - Existing high (40% commercial)
Scenario A2- Existing low (30% commercial)
Scenario B1-proposed high (all market &housing)
Scenario b2-proposed (condominium&senior housing)
3.0 CONCLUSION
From the trip generation comparison of the two development arrangements it is concluded that the
proposed uses under the Century Group plan (Plan B) will generate considerably less traffic than
could occur if the site were to be developed to the levels permitted under the existing zoning (Plan
A). This conclusion would still be reached were the site to be developed with 295 market based
condominiums as opposed to the mix of market and seniors oriented housing that is proposed.

V31201151
November 30, 2007
ISSUED FOR USE 6
I trust that this provides the information that you require. Please do not hesitate to call if you have
any questions.
Yours truly,
WARD CONSULTING GROUP

A Division of EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd.
Daniel B. Ghile, M.Sc., Stephen Gardner, M.Sc.,

Traffic/Transportation Planner Transportation Planning Specialist
Ph: 604-688-8826 Ph: 604-688-8826
dghile@wardconsulting.ca sgardner@wardconsulting.ca

V31201151
November 30, 2007
ISSUED FOR USE 7
APPENDIX
TABLE 1 A : WEEKDAY PEAK HOUR TRIP COMPARISON
a.m. peak hour p.m. peak hour
units Area(ft2) Rate trips Rate trips
Scenario 1A
- commercial (40%) 26,135 2.68/1000ft2 70 9.88/1000ft2 258
- residential (40) 40 0.94/unit 37 1.18/unit 47
-total 107 306
Scenario 21A
- commercial (30%) 19,600 3.0/1000ft2 59 10.89/1000ft2 214
-total 96 261
Scenario 1B
- condominium 295 0.42/unit 123 0.49/unit 145
- senior facility units 0 0 0
-total 123 145
Scenario 1B
- senior facility units 155 0.18/unit 28 0.29/unit 45
-total 96 124

V31201151
November 30, 2007
ISSUED FOR USE 8
TABLE 2 A : DAILYT TRIP COMPARISON

Weekday Saturday
units Area(ft2) Rate trips Rate trips
Scenario 1A
- commercial (40%) 26,135 108.6/1000ft2 2839 152/1000ft2 3967
-total 3287 4412
Scenario 21A
- commercial (30%) 19,600 120/1000ft2 2355 168.9/1000ft2 3310
-total 2802 3755
Scenario 1B
- senior facility units 0 0 0
-total 1610 1496
Scenario 1B
- senior facility units 155 2.81/unit 436 3.0/unit 465
-total 1290 1400

/1
ATTACHMENT D
January 9, 2008
Township of Langley
20338 – 65 Avenue
Langley, BC V2Y 3J1
To Mayor and Council:
Re: Murrayville Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 4632

and Rezoning Bylaw No. 4633 (CENTURY GROUP)
Sunridge Place Development________________________
This letter is to provide detailed information of the proceedings of the Public Information Meeting
which was held from 7:00 PM to 10:00 PM on January 8, 2008 at Magnolia Gardens in the City of
Langley, for the Sunridge Place Development proposal, 22301 Fraser Highway.
SUMMARY OF MEETING
Modified colour boards and illustrations of changes made to the proposed development were
presented, and a summary board with matching handouts (attached) was presented and provided to
outline Century Group’s “Response to Neighbourhood Concerns” raised at earlier sessions, hearings
and meetings. Comments and questions from the neighbours were discussed and noted. Following
the presentation, numerous one on one discussions took place.
Following is a summary of the discussions and continuing concerns raised by those attending the
meeting.
ATTENDANCE
In attendance at the meeting were:

John T. Brown, Century Group, developer
Klaus Budde, architectural design associate
Teresa Hanson, Planner, Township of Langley
Approximately 25 ± people from the neighbourhood attended
ILLUSTRATIONS
The modified illustrations presented, were provided separately to Teresa Hanson, Development
Planner and are not attached to this letter.
RESPONSE TO NEIGHBOURHOOD CONCERNS

Refer to attachment which was presented to those attending on a board and provided by hand out
and discussed.
/2
PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING NO. 2

JANUARY, 2008-01-09
Sunridge Place Development, Township Of Langley

222nd Street and Fraser Highway
RESPONSE TO NEIGHBOURHOOD CONCERNS
CONCERN RESPONSE
1. Building Height Reduced height of building No. 4 to 2 storeys at east and north facades.
2. Building Type In building No. Four only 2 storey townhouse-like units will face the single
“No 4 storey condo building next to single family family neighbours to the east and north.
residences.”
3. Overview of Neighbours’ Yards All townhouses have their living spaces and patios at ground level only and
bedrooms only on level 2.
“No apartment units looking down into our
Backyards.”
The main floor of the townhouses are at grade which is generally 3 feet lower
than the adjacent single family residences.
The townhouse-like components retain the increased setbacks from the east
property line to almost 2 times the setback distance required.
4. Streetscape and Neighbourhood Character The scale, massing and sloped rooflines of the townhouses facing the neighbours
are similar to the existing single family houses.
5. Increase of traffic in the neighbourhood The traffic study shows that the land use in the proposed project will generate
Substantially fewer car trips than the land use currently designated in the OCP,
especially in the afternoon.
5. Visitor parking below grade will be no very Visitors parking below grade will be made attractive and secure by providing
well used because of safety concerns. additional security gates in coordination with the RCMP and the CPTED safety
guidelines.
/3
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS NOTED
Discussion revolved around building 4 only at the northeast corner of the site as other than
additional traffic generated and it’s flow there have not been issues with the design proposals for
buildings 1, 2, and 3 being the Seniors’ facility and the condominium buildings south and west of
the building 4 area of concern.
The changes proposed to building 4 were considered by those attending to be better and now
acceptable, primarily because the revised development now has one family townhomes facing
single family homes, with the three storey components hidden and screened in the design.
ADDITIONAL PREFERANCES EXPRESSED
1. Keep the hedge on 50th at the north end of the site. Whereas a few people thought it
should come down because they considered it messy, those who live directly across from
it, like it.
2. Implementation of preventative measures to discourage people from turning right on 50th

when leaving the north entrance to the site. This will need to be done in consultation
with the Township engineering department.
3. The primary continuing concern is traffic flow through the neighbourhood. At this time,
many drivers from many areas use 50th as a short cut to the freeway.
Century Group advised those attending that based on a Trip Generation Comparison
report prepared by Ward Consulting Group that there would be less new traffic
generated by the Century Group proposed development than would have been generated
by a development built in accordance with the old Murrayville Community Plan adopted
in 1989.
Century Group also explained that the development will have more on site parking than
currently required or proposed to be required.
Century Group believes it has adequately addressed the concerns of the neighbourhood with respect
to; building heights, building types, building and neighbouring building overviews, streetscape and
parking and that the significant concern remaining is traffic generation and flow. As the Century
Group proposal generates less new traffic than would have been generated by following the old
community plan, the issue becomes flow and the neighbourhood would like to prohibit flow
eastward on 50th. Century Group will try to prohibit increases to this eastbound flow from this site
with signage and physical barriers, where possible in consultation with the Township engineering
department.
Yours truly,
CENTURY GROUP LANDS CORPORATION
John T. Brown
Vice President
ATTACHMENT E

to:

Delta, BC V4M 4H4

PID: 026-919-834
follows:
b) Landscaping plans being in substantial compliance with Schedule “Z”, and in compliance
Development;
permit stage;
F:\data\council\2008 Agenda\01-21\Regular Agenda\DPs\dp100506-revised Century Group.doc

Century
Page 2


j) Payment of supplemental Development Permit application fees; and,
k) Payment of the cost recovery fee for the overpass crossing of Fraser Highway.
Attachments:
f:\data\council\2008 agenda\01-21\regular agenda\dps\dp100506-revised century group.doc

Century
Page 3
Schedule W Building 4 – Roof Plans
f:\data\council\2008 agenda\01-21\regular agenda\dps\dp100506-revised century group.doc

SCHEDULE A
SITE PLAN

SCHEDULE B

SCHEDULE C

SCHEDULE D

SCHEDULE E

SCHEDULE F

SCHEDULE G

SCHEDULE H

SCHEDULE I

SCHEDULE J

SCHEDULE K

SCHEDULE L

SCHEDULE M

SCHEDULE N

SCHEDULE O

SCHEDULE P

SCHEDULE Q

SCHEDULE R

SCHEDULE S

SCHEDULE T

SCHEDULE U

SCHEDULE V
BUILDING 4 ‐ 2ND & 3RD FLOOR PLAN

SCHEDULE W
BUILDING 4 –ROOF PLAN

SCHEDULE X

SCHEDULE Y

Basement
The landscape plan must be revised to the final

satisfaction of the Manager of Parks Design
and Development Prior to Issuance of the Ground
Development Permit at Final Reading.

SCHEDULE Z
LANDSCAPE PLAN

APPENDIX D
January 21, 2008
B. PRESENTATIONS
Intelligent Transportation the Regional Condition Reporting System (RCRS). He

Systems continued that benefits of IRSS include improved traffic
(continued) flows, environmental benefits, better safety, data
sharing between municipal partners, and strengthened
institutional ties. He added that a Railway Advance
Warning Signal (AWS) will pre-detect arrival of trains
on Roberts Bank line and provide warning to motorists
so they may choose an alternate route. He continued
that iMove (www.imove.ca) features a multi-modal,
multi-agency web portal providing access to dynamic
and static information on road incidents, service
disruption, congestion, YVR/BC Ferries information,
border wait times, CCTV images, and parking. RCRS
allows the ability for contributions of information from
municipalities, UBC, VPA and VANOC. Coverage may
extend to Washington state, Fraser Valley, Vancouver
Island, and Whistler in the future.
Councillor Bateman left the meeting at 7:16 p.m. and

rejoined the meeting at 7:19 p.m.
C. DELEGATIONS (UP TO 5 DELEGATIONS)
D. REPORTS TO COUNCIL
E. BYLAWS FOR FIRST AND SECOND READING
F. BYLAWS FOR FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD

READING

READING
1. Bylaw No. 4632 Moved by Councillor Long,

Bylaw No. 4633 Seconded by Councillor Fox,
Report 08-08 That Council receive this report entitled “Official
Official Community Plan Community Plan Amendment and Rezoning
Amendment and Application No. 100056 and Development Permit
Rezoning Application No. Application No. 100506 (Century Group)”, for
100056 and Development information; which pertains to comments and concerns
Permit Application raised by the public at the November 26, 2007 Public
No. 100506 Hearing for Bylaws No. 4632 and 4633, and
(Century Group) Development Permit No. 100506; and further
File CD 11-06-0176
That Council consider Bylaws No. 4632 and 4633 for
third reading, subject to the following nine (9)
development prerequisites being satisfied prior to final
January 21, 2008

READING
Official Community Plan reading;

Amendment and
Rezoning Application No. 1. Applicant entering into a Servicing Agreement with
100056 and Development the Township to secure required works and services
Permit Application in accordance with the Township’s Subdivision and
No. 100506 Development Control Bylaw and the Erosion and
(Century Group) Sediment Control Bylaw, to the acceptance of the
(continued) General Manager of Engineering;
2. Dedication of additional road allowance on Fraser
Highway to accommodate construction of a
deceleration lane to the acceptance of the General
3. Provision of a right of way for construction of
adequate road support along Fraser Highway to
satisfaction of the General Manager of Engineering;
4. Dedication of a 1.0 metre wide road widening along
the south side of 50 Avenue for the full frontage of
the subject site to the satisfaction of the General
5. Registration of a restrictive covenant limiting access
to the site from Fraser Highway to right in right out
only and prohibiting parking on Fraser Highway;
6. Registration of a restrictive covenant securing the
provision of multiple family parking spaces, Child
Friendly Amenity Area, and payment of multiple
family Development Cost Charges (DCC’s) should
the seniors housing units be converted to strata title
or market housing;
7. Compliance with the Township’s Tree Protection
Bylaw including provision of a final tree protection
plan incorporating tree retention, replacement and
protection details to the acceptance of the Manager
of Parks Design and Development;
8. Registration of a restrictive covenant defining the
maximum number of apartment units as 134; and,
9. Payment of supplemental rezoning application fees;
and further,
That accompanying Development Permit No. 100506 be

revised by:
1. Reducing the number of units in Building 4 from 40
to 35 as shown in revised Schedules A, U, V, W, and
X to the Development Permit;
2. Reducing the height of Building 4 from 3-4 storeys to
2-3 storeys (with a two storey townhouse component
facing east and north) as shown in revised Schedule
January 21, 2008

READING
Official Community Plan T and X to the Development Permit;

Amendment and 3. Revising the architecture of Building 4 (facades
Rezoning Application No. facing east and north) to reflect surrounding single
100056 and Development family homes as shown in revised Schedule T and X
Permit Application to the Development Permit;
No. 100506 4. Revising the site and landscape plan to accommodate
(Century Group) the proposed changes to Building 4 as shown in
(continued) revised Schedule A and Z; and,
5. Revising the 50 Avenue driveway to discourage right
turns out onto 50 Avenue as shown in revised
Schedule A.


programs and Child Friendly Amenity Area
requirements, to the acceptance of the Manager of
garages;
plans; and,
January 21, 2008

READING
Development Permit amenity areas, playgrounds, and lighting) by a

Application No. 100506 qualified CPTED professional (in consultation with
(continued) the Langley RCMP), to the acceptance of the


and Licenses;
Moved by Councillor Ferguson,

Seconded by Councillor Bateman,
Referral That Official Community Plan Amendment and
Rezoning Application No. 100056 and Development
Permit Application No. 100506 (Century Group) be
referred back to staff to work with the developer to
achieve a row of single family homes along 50 Avenue
on the north-eastern portion of the property and also on
the eastern boundary adjacent to existing single family
homes.
CARRIED
Councillor Long opposed
Moved by Councillor Kositsky,

Seconded by Councillor Richter,
Motion That staff review the issues of parking and traffic
calming on 50 Avenue and 222 Street.
CARRIED
Moved by Councillor Richter,

Seconded by Councillor Ferguson,
Motion That a second Public Hearing be scheduled when the
revisions are brought back to Council.
CARRIED
APPENDIX E

REG 5 - Century Group

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

REG 5 - Century Group

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF LANGLEY

TOWNSHIP OF LANGLEY OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN BYLAW 1979 NO. 1842

TOWNSHIP OF LANGLEY OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN BYLAW 1979 NO. 1842

WHEREAS it is deemed necessary and desirable to amend “Township of Langley Official

as shown on Schedule A attached to and forming part of this Bylaw:

READ A FIRST TIME the 18 day of February , 2008

Mayor Township Clerk

TOWNSHIP OF LANGLEY ZONING BYLAW 1987 NO. 2500

TOWNSHIP OF LANGLEY ZONING BYLAW 1987 NO. 2500

A Bylaw to amend Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw 1987 No. 2500

(b) by adding to the end of Section 110.1 the following:

Zone Minimum Lot Area Minimum Frontage Minimum Lot Depth

973 - COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT ZONE CD-73

(1) accessory buildings and uses

Siting of Buildings and Structures

Single family dwellings shall be sited in accordance with section 401.4.

Height of Buildings and Structures

Parking and Loading

Landscaping, Screening and Fencing

973.8 Landscape areas, landscape screens and fencing shall be provided in

Lot 1 Section 6 Township 11 New Westminster District Plan BCP27705

READ A FIRST TIME the 18 day of February , 2008

Mayor Township Clerk

MAYOR AND COUNCIL

PRESENTED: FEBRUARY 18, 2008 - REGULAR MEETING REPORT: 08-32

1. Replacing Building 4 with 8 single family homes as shown in revised Schedules A, U, V, W,

3. Increasing the number of units in Building 2 from 51 to 67 as shown in revised Schedules K

Resident/Employee Dedicated Visitor Total # of

As discussed previously, on-street parking currently occurring in the neighbourhood is believed

THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF LANGLEY

Development Permit No. 100506

1. This Permit is issued this day of , 2007

NAME: Century Group Lands Corporation

ADDRESS: 5499 – 12 Avenue

LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 1 Section 6 Township 11

(hereinafter called the “said lands”)

CIVIC ADDRESS: 22301 Fraser Highway

Community Development, including incorporation of the CPTED recommendations into

j) Provision of an Exterior Lighting Impact Plan prepared by an electrical engineer in

This Permit is not a Building Permit.

AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION PASSED BY COUNCIL THIS DAY OF , 2007.

Schedule J Building 1 – West Elevation and Building Section

G. BYLAWS FOR CONSIDERATION AT THIRD

Development Permit Running concurrently with this bylaw is Development

a) Building plans being in substantial compliance

d) Payment of supplemental Development Permit

3. Bylaw No. 4632 Moved by Councillor Ward,

Development Permit Running concurrently with these bylaws is

a) Building plans being in substantial compliance with

G. BYLAWS FOR CONSIDERATION AT THIRD

Development Permit programs and Child Friendly Amenity Area

Although not part of the Development Permit

i) Provision of an Exterior Lighting Impact Plan

G. BYLAWS FOR CONSIDERATION AT THIRD

Councillors Ferguson and Ward were opposed.

4. Bylaw No. 4553 Moved by Councillor Fox,

Moved by Councillor Richter,

H. BYLAWS FOR FINAL ADOPTION

1. Bylaw No. 4517 Moved by Councillor Bateman,

MAYOR AND COUNCIL

PRESENTED: JANUARY 21, 2008 - REGULAR MEETING REPORT: 08-08

That accompanying Development Permit No. 100506 be revised by: