You are on page 1of 152

SPECIAL MEETING OF

TOWNSHIP COUNCIL
Monday, October 19, 2009 at 3:00 p.m.
Fraser River Presentation Theatre
4th Floor, 20338 – 65 Avenue, Langley, BC

AGENDA
Page
A. ADOPTION OF MINUTES

1-11 1. Special Council Meeting – October 5, 2009

Recommendation that Council adopt the Minutes of the Special Council


meeting held October 5, 2009.

B. APPROVAL OF DELEGATION REQUESTS TO APPEAR AT THE


4:00 P.M. SPECIAL MEETING

B. APPROVAL OF DELEGATION REQUESTS TO APPEAR AT THE


7:00 P.M. REGULAR MEETING

MOTION TO RESOLVE INTO SPECIAL CLOSED MEETING

Recommendation that Council now resolve into a Special Closed Meeting


according to Section 90 of the Community Charter for discussion of the following
items identified under Section 90:

Item D.1 - Section 90(1) (e) Property;


Item G.1 - Section 90(1) (a) Personnel; and
Item G.2 - Section 90(1) (e) Property; (k) Negotiations.

C. PRESENTATIONS

1. Traffic Calming

Presentation by staff regarding traffic calming.


October 19, 2009
Special Council Meeting Agenda -2-

Page
C. PRESENTATIONS

2. Fraser Highway/248 Street Traffic Signal

Presentation by staff regarding Fraser Highway/248 Street traffic signal.

Clerk’s Note: Referred from the October 5, 2009 Special Council meeting.

D. REPORTS TO COUNCIL

13-26 1. Traffic Calming


Report 09-128
File ENG 5460-04

Recommendation that Council receive the Traffic Calming report; and

That Council approve the revisions to the Traffic Calming policy (05-763) as
presented.

27-31 2. Fraser Highway/248 Street Traffic Signal


Report 09-132
File ENG 5330-23

Recommendation that Council receive the Fraser Highway/248 Street


Traffic Signal report for information.

Clerk’s Note: Referred from the October 5, 2009 Special Council meeting.

33-39 3. Master Transportation Plan – Road Network Plan and Classifications


Report 09-133
File ENG 5260-23/3

Recommendation that Council receive the Master Transportation Plan


report; and
That Council endorse the Road Classifications Maps 6.2A (Attachment C)
and 6.2B (Attachment D) to replace the existing Highway Classification Map
P-1 (Attachment A) and the Master Transportation Plan – Road Cross-
Sections Map (Attachment E and F).

41-48 4. Long Range Planning Department Work Program


Report 09-130
File CD 6430-03

Recommendation that Council receive the report entitled “Long Range


Planning Department Work Program”, for information.
October 19, 2009
Special Council Meeting Agenda -3-

Page
D. REPORTS TO COUNCIL

49-105 5. Central Gordon Estate Neighbourhood Plan Charrette Summary


Report 09-131
File CD 6480-30-003

Recommendation that Council receive the report entitled “Central Gordon


Estate Neighbourhood Plan Charrette Summary” for information; and

That Council receive the April 29, 2009 and September 23, 2009 Central
Gordon Estate Charrette Follow-Up summaries for information; and further

That Council authorize staff to proceed to a public Open House with the
three options for the Central Gordon Estate Neighbourhood Land Use Plan.

107-113 6. Report on the Establishment of a Property Endowment Trust


Report 09-129
File CORPADM 0890-25

Recommendation that Council approve the formation of a Property Trust for


the Township of Langley including a Board of Directors, consisting of the
Mayor, two Councillors and the Township Administrator; and

That Council approve the Trust Principles and Structure as laid out in this
report; and

That Council appoint the Manager of Property Services as the Manager of


the Property Trust responsible for the day to day operation of the Trust; and

That Council consider the marketing for the sale of the surplus properties as
referenced by staff; and

That Council consider soliciting by Request for Proposal of an


architect/planner consultant for the design, massing, density and rezoning of
the surplus properties as referenced by staff and report back to Council
seeking Council approval of the consultant.

E. CORRESPONDENCE

115-118 1. Refugee Transportation Loans


File 4710-01

Letter received from Yvonne Hopp, New Directions, requesting Township


Council vote in favour of the resolution to eliminate refugee transportation
loans.

Clerk’s Note: Request Council consider the resolution to eliminate refugee


transportation loans.
October 19, 2009
Special Council Meeting Agenda -4-

Page

F. MINUTES OF COMMITTEES

119-124 1. South Fraser Family Court and Youth Justice Committee –


September 3, 2009
File 0540-20

Recommendation that Council receive the Minutes from the South


Fraser Family Court and Youth Justice Committee meeting held
September 3, 2009.

125-130 2. Youth Advisory Committee – September 23, 2009


File 0540-20

Recommendation that Council receive the Minutes from the Youth Advisory
Committee meeting held September 23, 2009.

131-137 3. Economic Development Advisory Committee – October 7, 2009


File 0540-20

Recommendation that Council receive the Minutes from the Economic


Development Advisory Committee meeting held October 7, 2009.

COUNCIL

Whereas the Economic Development Advisory Committee is offering advice


to Council on a number of economic issues in a time of significant economic
turmoil;

Whereas the reliability of this advice depends, in part, on all EDAC


members having a common understanding of economic factors affecting the
Township as well as projections of future conditions; and

Whereas Council has endorsed the EDAC Work Plan to develop a new draft
Economic Development Strategy.

Therefore be it Resolved that the Township of Langley Council endorse a


half day EDAC/Council Economic Forum with qualified speakers and
provide funding of up to a maximum of $3,000.

G. ASSOCIATIONS AND OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

139-141 1. Request for Provincial Funding Support to LMTAC


File 0400-70

Letter received from Mayor Ralph Drew, Chair, Lower Mainland Treaty
Advisory Committee requesting support for LMTAC’s request that the
Minister of Aboriginal Relations and Reconciliation fulfill its previous
October 19, 2009
Special Council Meeting Agenda -5-

Page
G. ASSOCIATIONS AND OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

commitment that LMTAC would receive a $40,000 grant for the


2009/10 fiscal year.

Clerk’s Note: Request Council write to the Minister of Aboriginal Relations and
Reconciliation supporting LMTAC’s request for Provincial funding.

143-146 2. Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy and


Establishment of Intergovernmental Advisory Committee
File 0400-60

Letter received from Lois E. Jackson, Chair, Metro Vancouver Board


requesting a Township of Langley representative be appointed to the
Intergovernmental Advisory Committee.

Clerk’s Note: Request Council to appoint a representative to the Intergovernmental


Advisory Committee.

H. INFORMATION ITEMS FROM SPECIAL CLOSED MEETINGS

I. ITEMS FOR INFORMATION

J. ITEMS FROM PRIOR MEETINGS

K. STAFF ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION WITH COUNCIL

L. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL MEMBERS

M. OTHER BUSINESS

1. Councillor Richter provided the following Notice of Motion at the


October 5, 2009 Special Council Meeting:

Healthy Eating Active Living for Youth

That $5,000 be allocated from the Council Contingency for the Healthy
Eating Active Living for Youth programs for use in the Township of Langley
Schools.
October 19, 2009
Special Council Meeting Agenda -6-

Page
M. OTHER BUSINESS

2. Councillor Richter provided the following Notice of Motion at the


October 5, 2009 Regular Council Meeting:

Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw - Stairwells and


Wet Bar Regulations

Based on the delegation to Council by Mr. A. Sivia on October 5, 2009


concerning Township of Langley Zoning Bylaw S. 104.4(9) and the
concerns raised about inconsistencies and gaps in this bylaw.

Therefore, be it resolved that staff review and revise Township of Langley


Zoning Bylaw S. 104.4(9) to tighten up and to include the interpretation
authorized by Council on October 5, 2009.

N. TERMINATE
A.1
- 366 -

SPECIAL MEETING OF
TOWNSHIP COUNCIL
Monday, October 5, 2009 at 3:00 p.m.
Fraser River Presentation Theatre
4th Floor, 20338 – 65 Avenue, Langley, BC

MINUTES
PRESENT: Mayor Green

Councillors J. Bateman, B. Dornan, S. Ferguson, C. Fox, M. Kositsky, B. Long,


K. Richter and G. Ward

M. Bakken, D. Leavers, R. Seifi, H. Tsikayi, J. Winslade and C. Wright

S. Carneiro, J. Chu, S. Palmer and L. Rebelato

Councillor Kositsky assumed the Chair in the Mayor’s absence

A. ADOPTION OF MINUTES

1. Special Council Meeting – September 21, 2009

Moved by Councillor Ward,


Seconded by Councillor Fox,
That Council adopt the Minutes of the Special Council meeting held
September 21, 2009.
CARRIED

B. APPROVAL OF DELEGATION REQUESTS

Moved by Councillor Fox,


Seconded by Councillor Long,
That Council approve the following Delegation Requests:

4:00 p.m.:

1. Deirdre Goudriaan
File 0550-07

Request by Deirdre Goudriaan, to appear before Council to discuss healthy


eating and active living for youth.
CARRIED

Page 1 of 146
A.1
October 5, 2009
Special Council Meeting Minutes - 367 -

B. APPROVAL OF DELEGATION REQUESTS

Moved by Councillor Long,


Seconded by Councillor Dornan,
That Council approve the following Delegation Requests:

7:00 p.m.:

2. Johnson A. Reddy
File 0550-07

Request by Johnson A. Reddy, to appear before Council to discuss


unauthorized suite enforcement and regulated compliance of the bylaw.

3. Gurdip Buttar
File 0550-07

Request by Gurdip Buttar, to appear before Council to discuss driveway


fees at 25075 40 Avenue.

4. A. Sivia
Sivia Construction
File 0550-07

Request by A. Sivia, Sivia Construction, to appear before Council to discuss


Section 104.4 (9) of the Township Zoning bylaw relating to stairwells and
wet bar regulations.
CARRIED

MOTION TO RESOLVE INTO SPECIAL CLOSED MEETING

Moved by Councillor Fox,


Seconded by Councillor Ward,
That Council now resolve into a Special Closed Meeting according to Section 90
of the Community Charter for discussion of the following items identified under
Section 90:

Item D.1 - Section 90(1) (e) Property; (k) Negotiations;


Item E.1 - Section 90(1) (a) Personal;
Item E.2 - Section 90(1) (e) Property; (g) Litigation;
Item G.1 - Section 90(1) (e) Property; (k) Negotiations; and
Item G.2 - Section 90(1) (e) Property.

Page 2 of 146
A.1
October 5, 2009
Special Council Meeting Minutes - 368 -

AMENDMENT

Moved by Councillor Long,


Seconded by Councillor Fox,
That the Agenda be amended by adding the following, thereto:
Item G.3. – Section 90(1) (a) Personnel.
CARRIED

AMENDMENT

Moved by Councillor Fox


Seconded by Councillor Dornan
That the Agenda be amended by adding the following, thereto:
Item G.4. – Section 90(2) (b) Intergovernmental Relations.
CARRIED

MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED

The question was called on the Main Motion, as Amended, and it was
CARRIED

MEETING RECESSED

The meeting recessed at 3:03 p.m.

MEETING RECONVENED

The meeting reconvened at 4:09 p.m.

The Mayor joined the meeting at 4:09 p.m. and assumed the Chair.

B. DELEGATION

1. Deirdre Goudriaan
File 0550-07

Deirdre Goudriaan, Michelle Kong and Salley Lee appeared before


Council to discuss healthy eating and active living for youth.

The model that the Healthy Eating and Active Living for Youth Committee
are working on is a mentorship model. The group feels that they are
empowered to make a difference to the community because they are more
informed. The plan has three phases, healthy living, healthy eating and
substance restrain.

They would like the Township to help financially, with media support and
access to the community kitchen at the Langley Events Centre.

Councillor Long rejoined the meeting at 4:10 p.m.

Page 3 of 146
A.1
October 5, 2009
Special Council Meeting Minutes - 369 -

C. PRESENTATIONS

1. Aldergrove Core Planning Program – Concept Options


Summary Report

J. Karakas gave an overview of the Aldergrove Core Planning Program. He


spoke on the design, the charrette, the two concepts that address the
environmental and social sustainability. He would like Council to authorize
staff to proceed with a Public Open House to obtain community feedback on
the preliminary design concepts of downtown Aldergrove on
October 29, 2009.

Councillor Ferguson joined the meeting at 4:32 p.m.

The order of the agenda was varied.

D. REPORTS TO COUNCIL

1. Aldergrove Core Planning Program


Report 09-122
File CD 6540-20

Moved by Councillor Long,


Seconded by Councillor Fox,
That Council receive the report entitled “Aldergrove Core Planning
Program”, for information;

That Council authorize staff to proceed with a Public Open House to obtain
community feedback on the preliminary design concepts for downtown
Aldergrove and copies of this report with a feed-back form be sent to all
land owners in the study area.
CARRIED

The original order of the agenda then resumed.

Councillor Dornan left the meeting at 5:14 and rejoined the meeting at
5:16 p.m.

C. PRESENTATIONS

2. Fraser Valley Rail Presentation

Mayor Green gave on overview of the Fraser Valley Rail Project.

Mr. Peter Holt reported that he represents citizens and organizations of


south of the Fraser.
The aim of the Fraser Valley Rail is to connect communities South of Fraser
with excellent public transit. This will result in acceleration of economic

Page 4 of 146
A.1
October 5, 2009
Special Council Meeting Minutes - 370 -

C. PRESENTATIONS

growth, integrate with urban freight, help the environment and improve
livability.

The Community Rail Demonstration Project will be designed to explore


service options using existing rail alignments, to validate project
assumptions and analyse and demonstrate cost efficiency.

He recommended that Council endorse the appointment of members of


Council members to the Fraser Valley Rail Task Force and further that
members of the task force be involved in the demonstration project and its
further utilization.

MOTION

Moved by Councillor Fox,


Seconded by Councillor Kositsky,
That Council support the South of Fraser Valley Rail Task Force; and further

That Councillor Bateman be appointed as Council representative to the task


force and Councillor Ferguson be appointed as alternate.
CARRIED

MOTION

Moved by Councillor Long,


Seconded by Councillor Ward,
That the Special Council Meeting terminate at 6:30 p.m.
CARRIED

D. REPORTS TO COUNCIL

2. Master Transportation Plan – Road Network Plan and Classifications


Report 09-126
File ENG 5260-23/3

The staff report was withdrawn.

3. Fraser Highway/248 Street Traffic Signal


Report 09-127
File ENG 5330-23

That Council receive the Fraser Highway/248 Street Traffic Signal report for
information.

Page 5 of 146
A.1
October 5, 2009
Special Council Meeting Minutes - 371 -

D. REPORTS TO COUNCIL

DEFFERAL
Moved by Councillor Long,
Seconded by Councillor Ferguson,
That the report be deferred until staff provide a presentation to Council.
CARRIED

E. CORRESPONDENCE

Moved by Councillor Ward,


Seconded by Councillor Fox,
That Council receive the information under “Correspondence” as presented.
CARRIED

1. Crohn’s and Colitis Awareness Month


File 0630-01

Letter from Ive Balins, Strategic Objectives, Crohn’s and Colitis Foundation
of Canada, requesting the month of November be proclaimed as Crohn’s
and Colitis Awareness Month.

2. Foster Family Month


File 0630-01

Letter from Mary Polak, Ministry of Children and Family Development and
Minister Responsible for Child Care advising the month of October has been
proclaimed as Foster Family Month in British Columbia.

3. Heart Month
File 0320-01

Moved by Councillor Long,


Seconded by Councillor Ferguson,
That Council approve the request from Lisa Catallo, Community Campaigns
Coordinator, Heart and Stroke Foundation of BC & Yukon to hold annual
canvassing campaign in February 2010.
CARRIED

4. Poppy and Wreath Sales


File 0320-01

That Council approve the request from Wilma McEwen, Poppy Chairperson,
Royal Canadian Legion, Langley Branch 21, to hold annual poppy
and wreath sales within the Township of Langley from October 19 to
November 10, 2009.

Page 6 of 146
A.1
October 5, 2009
Special Council Meeting Minutes - 372 -

E. CORRESPONDENCE

AMENDMENT

Moved by Councillor Ferguson,


Seconded by Councillor Ward,
That Council approve the annual Poppy Sales for any Royal Canadian
Legion branch located in the Township Langley; and further

That staff request that the Executives of the various Branches meet, review
and discuss their sales locations and protocols for the event.
CARRIED

The question was called on the Main Motion as amended and it was
CARRIED

F. MINUTES OF COMMITTEES

Moved by Councillor Ward,


Seconded by Councillor Dornan,
That Council receive the Minutes of Committees as presented.
CARRIED

1. Heritage Advisory Committee – September 8, 2009


File 0540-20

Minutes from the Heritage Advisory Committee meeting held


September 8, 2009.

MOTION

Moved by Councillor Fox,


Seconded by Councillor Ferguson,
That Council authorize placing the Willoughby Methodist (later United)
Church, the Tom and Dorothy Campbell Residence and the David Jones
Residence on the Township’s Community Heritage Register as requested
by the owners.
CARRIED

MOTION

That Council approve a $5,000 grant from the Heritage Building Incentive
Program for repair and restoration of the Coronation Block located on
Glover Road in Fort Langley.

Page 7 of 146
A.1
October 5, 2009
Special Council Meeting Minutes - 373 -

F. MINUTES OF COMMITTEES

REFERRAL

Moved by Councillor Kositsky,


Seconded by Councillor Ferguson,
That the item be referred to the budget process.
CARRIED

MOTION RECONSIDERED

Moved by Councillor Long,


Seconded by Councillor Bateman,
That the original Motion be reconsidered
CARRIED

Moved by Councillor Long,


Seconded by Councillor Fox,
That Council approve a $5,000 grant for repair and restoration of the
Coronation Block located on Glover Road.
CARRIED

2. Recreation, Culture, and Parks Advisory Committee – September 9, 2009


File 0540-20

Minutes from the Recreation, Culture, and Parks Advisory Committee meeting
held September 9, 2009.

3. Aldergrove Planning Committee – September 17, 2009


File 0540-20

Minutes from the Aldergrove Planning Committee meeting held on


September 17, 2009.

The following Motion was dealt with under D.1.

That Council:

1. Receive the draft Aldergrove Planning Program - Concept Options


Summary Report for information; and
2. Authorize staff to schedule a public open house to obtain community
input in October.

MOTION

Moved by Councillor Bateman,


Seconded by Councillor Fox,
That Council authorize staff to send a letter to the Boys and Girls Club
recommending that they initiate a discussion with Aldergrove
Neighbourhood Services regarding service programming in the area.
CARRIED

Page 8 of 146
A.1
October 5, 2009
Special Council Meeting Minutes - 374 -

F. MINUTES OF COMMITTEES

4. Community Safety Advisory Committee – September 24, 2009


File 0540-20

Minutes from the Community Safety Advisory Committee meeting held


September 24, 2009.

MOTION

Moved by Councillor Richter,


Seconded by Councillor Ward,
That Council endorse the following top five 2009 Work Plan initiatives of the
Community Safety Advisory Committee:

1:
• 200 Street Corridor (identify the major issues and look at some viable
solutions to combat the identified issues in both the short and long
term)
• Golden Ears Bridge Issues – Crime & Traffic
• Gateway Project (explore the possible impact of the project on the
Township of Langley)
• Traffic Safety
• Bicycle Safety
2:
• Gangs & Guns
• Drug Grow Operations and Drug Labs (identify community safety
concerns regarding the presence of these establishments in the
Township of Langley and explore possible measures to minimize their
frequency and impact)
3:
• A school program to instill a sense of safety in our youth (rather than
trying to change the ways of the youth later on in life, an early start to
this approach will make safety an easier concept to instill. Have a
youth component in the safety committee other than just a youth
representative).
• Availability of Services for Youth in the Township (look at initiating
programs that are designed to identify troubled youth early and prevent
them from becoming at risk. Explore improving the availability of
services for those youth who are at risk in the Township of Langley
[possible development of youth drop in centers in the Township of
Langley])
4:
• Fire Department
• Ambulance Service Response (look into concerns surrounding
ambulance response times and availability of ALS ambulances in the
Township. Explore pressuring BCAS to require that the TOLFD is sent

Page 9 of 146
A.1
October 5, 2009
Special Council Meeting Minutes - 375 -

F. MINUTES OF COMMITTEES

to a wider range of medical aid calls to ensure that TOL residents that
require medical attention will receive it in a timely fashion. Explore
pressuring the BCAS to allow TOLFD firefighters to be trained to a
higher level of medical certification to help buffer the gaps between the
response capabilities BCAA and TOLFD)
• Emergency Preparedness
• Fire Sprinkler Bylaw (look at upgrading the Bylaw to include fire
sprinkler requirements for all newly constructed or renovated single
family and double family occupancies in the Township as a possible
measure to combat the response time challenges of the TOLFD when
responding to the remote and rural properties)
5:
• Community Policing Umbrella (Inspector Richard Konarski)
• Community Policing
CARRIED

G. ASSOCIATIONS AND OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

H. INFORMATION ITEMS FROM SPECIAL CLOSED MEETINGS

I. ITEMS FOR INFORMATION

J. ITEMS FROM PRIOR MEETINGS

K. STAFF ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION WITH COUNCIL

L. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION BY COUNCIL MEMBERS

Page 10 of 146
A.1
October 5, 2009
Special Council Meeting Minutes - 376 -

M. OTHER BUSINESS

1. Notice of Motion

Councillor Richter provided the following Notice of Motion for consideration


at the next Regular Council Meeting:

That $5,000 be allocated from the Council Contingency for the Healthy
Eating Active Living for Youth programs for use in the Township of Langley
Schools.

N. TERMINATE

Moved by Councillor Bateman,


Seconded by Councillor Dornan,
That the meeting terminate at 6:27 p.m.
CARRIED

CERTIFIED CORRECT:

Mayor

Deputy Township Clerk

Page 11 of 146
Page 12 of 146
D.1

REPORT TO
MAYOR AND COUNCIL

PRESENTED: OCTOBER 19, 2009 - SPECIAL MEETING REPORT: 09-128


FROM: ENGINEERING DIVISION FILE: 5460-04
SUBJECT: TRAFFIC CALMING

RECOMMENDATION(S):
That Council receive the Traffic Calming report; and

That Council approve the revisions to the Traffic Calming policy (05-763) as presented.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Traffic Calming is defined by the Institute of Transportation Engineers as:
“the combination of mainly physical measures that reduce the negative effects of motor
vehicle use, alter driver behavior, and improve conditions for non-motorized street users.”
Typical traffic calming measures with design guidelines and principles have been summarized in
the Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) Canadian Guide to Neighborhood Traffic
Calming. The types of traffic calming to be used are largely guided by the class of the
road/function of the road. Traffic calming is only appropriate on roads of lower classification
(local) as it is desired to encourage travel on roads of higher classification (major collectors &
arterials) as opposed to extended travel on local roads.

Under the Township’s current policy (Attachment B) traffic calming is not permitted on major
collector roads and it is proposed to amend this policy (Attachment C) and allow limited forms
on these roads particularly fronting school and park sites. Staff has reviewed the policies of
other municipalities and the general concept (with some variation) of allowing traffic calming on
local roads and limited forms on collector roads is consistent.

The Township frequently receives requests for traffic calming and accordingly the staff has
developed criteria for evaluating locations. Staff has reviewed over 40 requests for traffic
calming. Of these, 10 locations are on roads that would be eligible under the recommended
revised policy only.

The top three locations are:


1. 32 Avenue: 270 Street to 272 Street
2. Willoughby Way: 197 Street to Wakefield Drive
3. Nash Street: 88 Avenue to St. Andrews Street

Subject to approval of the revised traffic calming policy, staff will begin community consultation
and design process for priority locations identified.

PURPOSE:
To update Council on current Traffic Calming policy in the Township and to propose allowing
some types of traffic calming on Major Collector roads.
Page 13 of 146
D.1
TRAFFIC CALMING
Page 2 . . .

BACKGROUND/HISTORY:
Traffic Calming has been defined by the Institute of Transportation Engineers as “the
combination of mainly physical measures that reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use,
alter driver behavior, and improve conditions for non-motorized street users.” Traffic calming
was developed as a response where motor vehicle traffic is/perceived to present a problem. As
municipalities started to implement physical measures to address these issues, the
Transportation Association of Canada and the Canadian Institute of Transportation Engineers
published the Canadian Guide to Neighborhood Traffic Calming in 1998. This guide identifies
and provides guidance on a range of measures that can be implemented following a number of
principles that must be addressed at the outset. These principles are as follows:

ƒ Identify the real problem


ƒ Quantify the problem
ƒ Consider improvements to the Arterial Street Network first
ƒ Apply traffic calming measures on an area wide basis
ƒ Avoid restricting access and egress
ƒ Use self-enforcing measures
ƒ Do not impede non – motorized modes
ƒ Consider all services
ƒ Monitor and follow-up

Failure to follow these principles or involve the community early in any traffic calming project
may result in significant public opposition. Correspondingly, a number of well intentioned traffic
calming projects in other municipalities were actually removed with a significant amount of
resources consumed.

As part of the Safer City program, Urban Systems was hired to undertake a review of Township
traffic calming and current policy. Through the review and use of the TAC guide, a number of
physical measures for traffic calming was compiled. All of these measures have pros and cons
and must be used discerningly, consistent with prevailing conditions. A list of measures in the
“toolbox” is presented below. A brief description of each item is included in Attachment A.

Vertical Deflection
ƒ Raised Crosswalk
ƒ Raised Intersection
ƒ Rumble Strip
ƒ Sidewalk extension
ƒ Speed Hump
ƒ Textured Crosswalk

Horizontal Deflection
ƒ Chicane
ƒ Curb extension
ƒ Curb radius reduction
ƒ On-Street Parking
ƒ Raised Median Island
ƒ Traffic Circle

Page 14 of 146
D.1
TRAFFIC CALMING
Page 3 . . .

Obstruction
ƒ Directional Closure
ƒ Diverter
ƒ Full closure
ƒ Intersection Channelization
ƒ Raised median through intersection
ƒ Right-in/Right-out island

Signing
ƒ Right (Left) Turn Prohibited
ƒ One-Way
ƒ Traffic Calmed Neighborhood

Additional signs are included in the TAC Canadian Guide to Neighborhood Traffic Calming
including Stop signs and Yield signs, however, these are not typically considered Traffic
Calming Devices, but are for potential safety improvements.

The type of traffic calming to be used is largely guided by the class of the road/function of the
road.

Roadway Classification
All of the roadways in the Township of Langley are classified based on their intended function
and purpose. There are multiple types of roads in the Township including provincial highways,
major arterials, minor arterials, major collectors, minor collectors, local roads, and lanes. Roads
of a higher classification such as highways and arterials are built primarily for mobility and
longer distance transport while the primary purpose of local roads is property access.
Accordingly, traffic calming is only appropriate on roads of lower classification as it is desired to
encourage travel on higher classification of roads as opposed to extended travel on local roads.
Maintaining design consistency, matching road classifications and ensuring proper connectivity
often alleviates the need for traffic calming as motorists will intuitively travel on roads of
appropriate classification.

As certain types of traffic calming are more restrictive (e.g. speed humps) than others (e.g. curb
extensions), the Engineering Division using the assistance of the Urban Systems study has
prepared the following table to indicate the types of traffic calming measures which are
appropriate on roads of different classifications. Under the current policy traffic calming is not
permitted on major collector roads and it is proposed to allow limited forms on these roads
particularly fronting school and park sites. Provincial highways and arterial roads are not on the
list as traffic calming is not permitted on these roads.

Page 15 of 146
D.1
TRAFFIC CALMING
Page 4 . . .

Road Classification
Major collector
Traffic Calming Major by School or Minor Minor Collector
Device Collector Park Collector by School or park Local/Lane
Vertical Deflection
Raised Crosswalk √ √ √ √
Raised Intersection √ √ √ √
Rumble Strip √ √ √ √ √
Sidewalk Extension √
Textured Crosswalk √ √ √ √ √
Speed Hump √ √ √ √
Horizontal Deflection
Chicane √
Curb Extension √ √ √ √ √
Curb Radius Reduction √ √ √
On Street Parking √ √ √
Raised Median Island √ √ √ √ √
Traffic Circle √ √ √ √
Obstruction
Directional Closure √
Diverter √
Full Closure √
Intersection Channelization √ √ √
Raised Median through
Intersection √ √ √ √ √
Right-In/Right-out Island √ √ √ √ √
1
Signage
Right (Left) Turn Prohibited √ √ √ √ √
One Way √ √ √ √ √
Traffic Calmed Neighborhood √ √ √ √ √
1
Signage must follow guidance of the Manual of Uniform
Traffic Control Devices for Canada

Key
√ − Μay be considered

Township of Langley History with Traffic Calming


The current Township of Langley traffic calming policy (Attachment B) has been in place since
April 5, 2004. Since that time the Township has constructed a number of capital projects with
typical traffic calming elements, for example, curb extensions were constructed at the
intersection of 222 Street and Old Yale Road and raised intersections were constructed on
0 Avenue. Curb extensions have also been installed at several crosswalks near schools. Other
traffic calming initiatives have been constructed as part of development projects such as the
curb extensions on 223 Street from 50 Avenue to 52 Avenue. The Township has also used
speed reader boards in various locations to educate drivers about their speeds. These boards
have typically been used fronting schools or parks with a reduction in operating speed noted.

Page 16 of 146
D.1
TRAFFIC CALMING
Page 5 . . .

Policies of Other Municipalities


To increase driver expectation when driving through the region, it is desired that the Township
traffic calming policy be consistent with other municipalities. Accordingly, staff has reviewed the
policies of other municipalities and summarized them below:

City of Surrey
o Traffic Calming is permitted on local roads only and collectors are not eligible.
o Requests for traffic calming must be received in writing and typically requests
from 10 households are required
o Prior to consideration for traffic calming the total volume on the road must exceed
500 vehicles/day and the 85th percentile of vehicle must be greater than 10km/hr
over the posted speed with locations that meet the requirements prioritized
accordingly.
o Once a traffic calming plan has been developed ballots are sent out to the
community to determine the level of support with a minimum of 60% of the ballots
being returned and 50% in favour.

City of Langley
o Traffic calming requests require support of the impacted neighborhood with 67%
in favour of the project
o Some types of traffic calming is permitted on collector roads

City of Abbotsford
o A review of the city website was silent on the topic of traffic calming

District of Maple Ridge


o Traffic calming is permitted on local roads and with only some types permitted on
collector roads
o Traffic calming utilizing vertical deflection is not permitted
o Minimum criteria for consideration of a location include that the 85th percentile
traffic speed must exceed the posted speed by 5km/hr, the minimum traffic
volume on local roads is 1500-2000 vehicles per day, the minimum traffic volume
on collector roads is 5000 vehicles per day, the percentage of through traffic on
local roads must exceed 30% and the percentage of through traffic on collector
roads must exceed 50%.
o Once the minimum criteria are met locations are prioritized based on speed,
volume, collisions, proximity to elementary schools, capital projects, pedestrian
generation facilities, routes to school, bike routes, transit routes, pedestrian
facilities, and roadway geometry.

City of Delta
o Traffic calming is permitted on locals and collectors and some types on arterial
roads
o Minimum criteria for traffic calming states the 85th percentile of vehicle speeds
must exceed 10 km/hr over the posted speed for local roads and 15 km/hr over
the posted speed for collector roads and the volume must exceed 1000 vehicles
per day for local roads and 4000 vehicles per day for collector roads.
o Prior to any installation surveys are issued to the surrounding neighborhood with
a minimum 50% response rate and 50% approval rate.

Page 17 of 146
D.1
TRAFFIC CALMING
Page 6 . . .

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
Considering the policies of other municipalities, there is some variation in how traffic calming is
applied. As mentioned a number of municipalities require a minimum threshold to be met when
considering traffic volume and the 85th percentile of vehicle travel speeds. The Township has
included both of these items as criteria when considering one location against another in
addition to other criteria developed. The general concept of allowing traffic calming on local
roads and limited forms on collector roads is consistent with other municipalities.

The Township frequently receives requests for traffic calming and accordingly the Engineering
Division has developed criteria for ranking these locations. The criteria include:

ƒ Proximity to schools
ƒ Proximity to parks
ƒ Land use in the immediate area
ƒ Traffic speed
ƒ Traffic volume
ƒ Road classification
ƒ Motor vehicle collision history
ƒ Cyclist/pedestrian collision history
ƒ Bike routes
ƒ Routes to school
ƒ Presence of sidewalks
ƒ Nearby arterial road improvements
ƒ Bus service
ƒ Potential for traffic diversion elsewhere

All of the eligible locations have been evaluated and prioritized with the top 3 locations as noted
below:
1. 32 Avenue: 270 Street to 272 Street
2. Willoughby Way:197 Street to Wakefield Drive
3. Nash Street: 88 Avenue to St. Andrews Street

The top location is currently classified as a major collector road and is currently ineligible under
the existing traffic calming policy. The Engineering Division is proposing a revision to the traffic
calming policy as shown in Attachment C to include limited forms of traffic calming on major
collector roads. Following approval of this revised policy the Engineering division will begin the
community consultation and design process for the top three priority locations.

Respectfully submitted,

Richard Welfing
PROJECT ENGINEER
for
ENGINEERING DIVISION

ATTACHMENT A Description of Available Traffic Calming Measures


ATTACHMENT B Existing Traffic Calming Policy
ATTACHMENT C Revised Traffic Calming Policy

Page 18 of 146
D.1
TRAFFIC CALMING
Page 7 . . .

ATTACHMENT A

Traffic Calming Types

Vertical Deflection
ƒ Raised Crosswalk – The elevation of the road is raised at the crosswalk location to
reduce vehicle speeds, improve pedestrian visibility, and reduce pedestrian vehicle
conflicts.
ƒ Raised Intersection – The elevation of the road including crosswalks is raised at the
intersection to reduce vehicle speeds, improve pedestrian visibility, and reduce
pedestrian vehicle conflicts.
ƒ Rumble Strip – Raised bars/grooves installed perpendicular to the travel direction to
create noise and vibration to alert motorists to unusual conditions ahead.
ƒ Sidewalk extension – A sidewalk that continues either raised/unraised across a local
road at an intersection indicating motorists must yield to pedestrians.
ƒ Speed Hump – A raised area of the roadway reducing vehicle speed.
ƒ Textured Crosswalk – The internal area of the crosswalk is textured/patterned
contrasting with the adjacent roadway to better define the crossing location of
pedestrians and reduce pedestrian vehicle conflicts.

Horizontal Deflection
ƒ Chicane – A series of curb extensions on alternating sides of the roadway requiring
drivers to steer from one side of the road to the other discouraging shortcutting traffic
and reducing vehicle speeds.
ƒ Curb extension – A horizontal extension of the curb into the roadway narrowing down
the roadway to reduce vehicle speeds, reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians,
increase pedestrian visibility, and prevent parking close to an intersection.
ƒ Curb radius reduction – The intersection corner is reduced to a smaller radius to slow
right turning vehicles, reduce crossing distance for pedestrians, and improve pedestrian
visibility.
ƒ On-Street Parking – Allowing vehicles to park on the road parallel to the curb to reduce
the overall travel portion of the roadway reducing vehicle speeds and reducing short-
cutting traffic.
ƒ Raised Median Island – An elevated median on the centre line of the roadway reducing
the travel portion of the roadway reducing vehicle speeds and pedestrian vehicle
conflicts.
ƒ Traffic Circle – A raised island in the centre of an intersection requiring vehicles to travel
counter clockwise around the circle reducing vehicle speeds through the intersection and
reducing vehicle-vehicle conflicts at the intersection.

Page 19 of 146
D.1
TRAFFIC CALMING
Page 8 . . .

Obstruction
ƒ Directional Closure – An extension of curb across one lane of the roadway limiting the
amount of shortcutting traffic.
ƒ Diverter – A raised barrier placed across an intersection forcing traffic to turn while
obstructing short cutting or through traffic.
ƒ Full closure – A barrier extending across the entire width of the roadway to eliminate
short cutting and through traffic.
ƒ Intersection Channelization – Raised islands at an intersection to obstruct certain
movements and eliminate short-cutting traffic.
ƒ Raised median through intersection – An elevated median at an intersection along the
centerline of the road preventing left turn movements to and from the crossing roadway
to obstruct shortcutting traffic and reduce the crossing distance for pedestrians.
ƒ Right-in/Right-out island – A raised triangular island at an intersection approach
restricting left turn and through movements to obstruct short cutting traffic.

Signing
ƒ Right (Left) Turn Prohibited – A sign to indicate to drivers that certain turning movements
are prohibited to prevent short cutting traffic.
ƒ One-Way – A sign that indicates travel is permitted in one direction only along the
roadway preventing traffic from shortcutting along the street.
ƒ Traffic Calmed Neighborhood – A sign indicating to drivers that the neighborhood is
traffic calmed to increase driver awareness, and discourage short cutting and speeding.

Page 20 of 146
D.1
ATTACHMENT B
POLICY MANUAL

Subject: NEIGHBOURHOOD TRAFFIC Policy No: 05-763


CALMING Approved by Council: Feb. 15, 1999
Revised by Council: Apr. 5, 2004

1. Purpose
1.1. To define the criteria and conditions to evaluate the installation of traffic
calming measures in neighbourhoods.

2. Background
2.1. The Engineering Department regularly receives requests for the implementation
of traffic calming measures in neighbourhood areas. This policy will set the
criteria for the review, implementation and monitoring of traffic calming
measures.

3. Related Policy
3.1. Township of Langley Subdivision and Development Control Bylaw 1994 No.
3335 with Amended Bylaw 1997 No. 3650 in conjunction with the P-1 Map and
amendments thereto such as the 2003 Interim P-1 Map.
3.2. Highway and Traffic Bylaw 1995 No. 3500 and amendments thereto.
3.3. Motor Vehicle Act (1996 c.318) of the B.C. Motor Vehicle Traffic Legislation
Manual and amendments thereto.
3.4. Operational Guideline 05-763

4. Policy
4.1. Suitable Locations:
4.1.1. Traffic calming will not be considered on arterial or roads.
4.1.2. Traffic calming will be not be considered on collector roads except those
defined as “Minor Collectors” in residential areas with traffic volumes
less than 5,000 vehicles per day fronting schools or playgrounds subject
to the criteria outlined in this policy.
4.1.3. Traffic calming requests may be considered on local roads or lanes at the
discretion of the Director of Engineering subject to the criteria outlined
in this policy.
4.1.4. Study area will depend on the location and extent of the traffic calming
measures proposed and must include a review of adjacent roads that
may be impacted by a shift of traffic.

4.2. Initiation:
4.2.1. Traffic calming requests will be initiated by written request(s) from
resident(s) or business owner(s) or by Township initiative.

Page 21 of 146
D.1
Policy 05-763
Traffic Calming
Page 2

4.3. Review Process


4.3.1. The eligibility of the road for traffic calming will be assessed by the
Director of Engineering or his designate.
4.3.2. If the location is eligible for consideration for traffic calming the study
area will be defined and the person(s) requesting traffic calming
contacted. The person(s) requesting traffic calming will be provided
with a plan showing the proposed affected area, and appropriate forms,
and requested to contact the property owners within the study area for
their support.
4.3.3. Community support in the form of a minimum of 66% of the total
number of households and businesses in the study area is required to
proceed to a detailed evaluation of the request.
4.3.4. Upon receipt of and verification of sufficiency of community support a
Public Review Process will be undertaken to consider appropriate
methods of traffic calming for the area and to determine support for the
options identified. As a minimum, this process will include
advertisements in local papers outlining the proposed traffic calming
measure(s).
4.3.5. Council will be informed of the installation of the traffic calming
measures.

4.4. Criteria:
4.4.1. Arterial and collector roads (as designated on the P1 Map) will not be
considered for traffic calming
4.4.2. Traffic volume.
4.4.3. Non-local traffic short cutting through a neighbourhood.
4.4.4. The 85 percentile speed.
4.4.5. Accident history.
4.4.6. Pedestrian activity.
4.4.7. Location of public facilities, such as schools, shopping or recreational.
4.4.8. Traffic calming measures must not have a negative effect on overall
traffic safety or emergency vehicle access

4.5. If appropriate, approved traffic calming measures shall be installed on a


temporary basis and be subject to a six month trial basis to determine the
effectiveness and allow time for evaluation by staff, emergency service
providers and residents.

4.6. The Director of Engineering at his discretion may remove any traffic calming
measure that is deemed to be inappropriate after a trial period. Council will be
consulted regarding the removal of the traffic calming measure prior to any
action being taken.

4.7. Installation will be subject to availability of funding.

4.8. Priorities for installations will be determined by a comparison of the criteria in


section 4.4.

Page 22 of 146
D.1
ATTACHMENT C
POLICY MANUAL

Subject: NEIGHBOURHOOD TRAFFIC Policy No: 05-763


CALMING Approved by Council: Feb. 15, 1999
Revised by Council: Oct. 19, 2009

1. Purpose
1.1. To define the criteria and conditions to evaluate the installation of traffic
calming measures in neighbourhoods.

2. Background
2.1. The Engineering Department regularly receives requests for the implementation
of traffic calming measures in neighbourhood areas. This policy will set the
criteria for the review, implementation and monitoring of traffic calming
measures.

3. Related Policy
3.1. Township of Langley Subdivision and Development Control Bylaw 1994 No.
3335 with Amended Bylaw 1997 No. 3650 in conjunction with the P-1 Map and
amendments thereto such as the 2003 Interim P-1 Map.
3.2. Highway and Traffic Bylaw 1995 No. 3500 and amendments thereto.
3.3. Motor Vehicle Act (1996 c.318) of the B.C. Motor Vehicle Traffic Legislation
Manual and amendments thereto.
3.4. Operational Guideline 05-763

4. Policy
4.1. Suitable Locations:
4.1.1. Traffic calming will not be considered on arterial roads.
4.1.2. Traffic calming will be not be considered on collector roads except as
outlined in the table in section 4.1.5.
4.1.3. Traffic calming requests may be considered on local roads or lanes at the
discretion of the Director of Engineering subject to the criteria outlined
in this policy.
4.1.4. Study area will depend on the location and extent of the traffic calming
measures proposed and must include a review of adjacent roads that
may be impacted by a shift of traffic.
4.1.5 Allowable forms of traffic calming are outlined in the following table:

Page 23 of 146
D.1
Policy 05-763
Traffic Calming
Page 2

Road Classification
Major collector
Traffic Calming Major by School or Minor Minor Collector
Device Collector Park Collector by School or park Local/Lane
Vertical Deflection
Raised Crosswalk √ √ √ √
Raised Intersection √ √ √ √
Rumble Strip √ √ √ √ √
Sidewalk Extension √
Textured Crosswalk √ √ √ √ √
Speed Hump √ √ √ √
Horizontal Deflection
Chicane √
Curb Extension √ √ √ √ √
Curb Radius Reduction √ √ √
On Street Parking √ √ √
Raised Median Island √ √ √ √ √
Traffic Circle √ √ √ √
Obstruction
Directional Closure √
Diverter √
Full Closure √
Intersection Channelization √ √ √
Raised Median through
Intersection √ √ √ √ √
Right-In/Right-out Island √ √ √ √ √
Signage1
Right (Left) Turn Prohibited √ √ √ √ √
One Way √ √ √ √ √
Traffic Calmed Neighborhood √ √ √ √ √
1
Signage must follow guidance of the Manual of Uniform
Traffic Control Devices for Canada

Key
√ − Μay be considered

4.2. Initiation:
4.2.1. Traffic calming requests will be initiated by written request(s) from
resident(s) or business owner(s) or by Township initiative.

Page 24 of 146
D.1
Policy 05-763
Traffic Calming
Page 3

4.3. Review Process


4.3.1. The eligibility of the road for traffic calming will be assessed by the GM,
Engineering or his designate.
4.3.2. If the location is eligible for consideration for traffic calming the study
area will be defined and the person(s) requesting traffic calming
contacted. The person(s) requesting traffic calming will be provided
with a plan showing the proposed affected area, and appropriate forms,
and requested to contact the property owners within the study area for
their support.
4.3.3. Community support in the form of a minimum of 66% of the total
number of households and businesses in the study area is required to
proceed to a detailed evaluation of the request.
4.3.4. Upon receipt of and verification of sufficiency of community support a
Public Review Process will be undertaken to consider appropriate
methods of traffic calming for the area and to determine support for the
options identified. As a minimum, this process will include
advertisements in local papers outlining the proposed traffic calming
measure(s).
4.3.5. Council will be informed of the installation of the traffic calming
measures.

4.4. Criteria:
4.4.1. Road Classification
4.4.2. Traffic volume.
4.4.3. Non-local traffic short cutting through a neighbourhood.
4.4.4. The 85 percentile speed.
4.4.5. Accident history.
4.4.6. Pedestrian activity.
4.4.7. Land Use.
4.4.8. Proximity to schools and parks
4.4.9. Traffic calming measures must not have a negative effect on overall
traffic safety or emergency vehicle access
4.4.10. Cycling routes and proximity to transit routes
4.4.11. Routes to schools
4.4.12. Presence of sidewalks
4.1.13. Nearby arterial road improvements
4.1.14. Traffic diversion potential

4.5. If appropriate, approved traffic calming measures shall be installed on a


temporary basis and be subject to a six month trial basis to determine the
effectiveness and allow time for evaluation by staff, emergency service
providers and residents.

4.6. The GM, Engineering at his discretion may remove any traffic calming measure
that is deemed to be inappropriate after a trial period. Council will be consulted
regarding the removal of the traffic calming measure prior to any action being
taken.

Page 25 of 146
D.1
Policy 05-763
Traffic Calming
Page 4

4.7. Installation will be subject to availability of funding.

4.8. Priorities for installations will be determined by a comparison of the criteria in


section 4.4.

Page 26 of 146
D.2

REPORT TO
MAYOR AND COUNCIL

PRESENTED: OCTOBER 19, 2009 - SPECIAL MEETING REPORT: 09-132


FROM: ENGINEERING DIVISION FILE: 5330-23
SUBJECT: FRASER HIGHWAY/248 STREET TRAFFIC SIGNAL

RECOMMENDATION:
That Council receive the Fraser Highway/248 Street Traffic Signal report for information.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At their regular meeting of June 15, 2009, Council requested that staff provide a report on how
the intersection at 248 Street and Fraser Highway can be improved and the timeline for such
improvements. A number of options were reviewed and considered including:

1. the addition of northbound and southbound left phases only, is the least expensive
option but will actually reduce the overall capacity and performance of the intersection;
significant delays are expected if this option is pursued alone.
2. the construction of northbound and southbound left turn bays would provide an
improvement to the overall capacity of the intersection over the existing condition;
however, this option will have impacts to the surrounding properties and will require
significant capital funds allocated to this intersection.
3. the construction of northbound and southbound left turn bays and the installation of left
turn phases are more costly than option 2 and actually decrease the performance of the
intersection as compared to option 2.
4. the widening of Fraser Highway to four lanes will also improve the intersection
performance.

While the existing configuration has delays to the northbound and southbound traffic in the peak
hour, priority is given to Fraser Highway, thereby minimizing overall delay at the intersection.
The cost of Option 2 is $430,000 plus property and business impact costs: all costs must be
funded from general revenue sources. There are several other locations within the Township
with similar or worse traffic conditions and as a result, the expenditure of these funds should be
considered in the overall context of Township needs and priorities.

PURPOSE:
This report responds to the request for further information and options for improvement for the
traffic signal at Fraser Highway and 248 Street.

Page 27 of 146
D.2
FRASER HIGHWAY/248 STREET TRAFFIC SIGNAL
Page 2 . . .

BACKGROUND/HISTORY:
Fraser Highway is a major East/West arterial road in the Township of Langley with an average
daily vehicle volume of approximately 25,000 vehicles per day (248 Street carries about 5000
vehicles per day). In situations where the volume on the major road is significantly larger than
the minor road, priority is given to the major road resulting in larger delays to the minor road.

At signalized intersections where a high number of left turning vehicles are present, a left turn
bay may be installed to separate this traffic from the other streams. This allows other
movements to proceed unhindered by waiting left turning vehicles. If the conflicting vehicle
volumes are high enough, a left turn phase may also be installed. Left turn phases are only
installed where the conflicting vehicle volume is high enough as the installation of additional
phases decreases the overall capacity of the intersection.

The Township installed left turn phases in the eastbound and westbound directions on
Fraser Highway at 248 Street. Following this installation, Council has requested staff to look
into further improvements particularly in the northbound and southbound directions.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
A number of options were reviewed and considered including:
1. the addition northbound and southbound left phases only
2. the construction of northbound and southbound left turn bays
3. the construction of northbound and southbound left turn bays and the installation of left
turn phases.

The table below provides a summary of the options reviewed in terms of the anticipated
construction costs and performance. The construction costs do not include any land acquisition
or compensation to property owners impacted by options 2 and 3. Also, as the majority of the
construction activity is on the cross street (248 Street), the project would not be eligible for
funding from the TransLink Major Road Network Minor Capital fund or from the Road DCC fund.
As a result, the funding would be required from General Revenue sources.

Option Estimated Cost Intersection Intersection Average NB


LOS Signal Delay Queue length
(s/veh) (m)
Existing 0 D 38.6 73

1. Installation of $30,000 E 60.0 104


NB/SB LT
phases only
2. Installation $400,000 C 23.9 25
NB/SB LT bays
only
3. Installation of $430,000 C 31.1 44
NB and SB LT
bays and
phases

Page 28 of 146
D.2
FRASER HIGHWAY/248 STREET TRAFFIC SIGNAL
Page 3 . . .

The installation of northbound and southbound left turn phases only (i.e. a dedicated left turn
arrow) without constructing left turn bays will have significant negative impacts to the overall
intersection performance and will not improve the capacity or operations of this intersection.

The provision of northbound and southbound left turn bays would be quite beneficial (either with
or without left turn phases) and improve the overall performance of the intersection, reduce
vehicle delays, and provide separation between left turning and through moving vehicles.
Options 2, the addition of northbound and southbound left turn lanes without left turn phases
would be the most efficient option.

The construction of left turn bays in the northbound and southbound directions would have
impacts on the surrounding properties. A concept drawing is provided as Attachment A showing
the existing configuration and Attachment B showing the addition of northbound and
southbound left turn bays. In order to accommodate the required turning movements, additional
widening on the northwest and southeast corners is likely required with the construction of
retaining walls due to the grades in the area. The large shoulder area on the southwest corner
would be significantly reduced with little to no parking remaining in this area impacting primarily
the business on this corner.

Not shown on the above table is the long term solution of widening Fraser Highway to 4 lanes.
While this would provide a significant benefit to traffic operations in this location for all
directions, this widening will not take place for some time with other portions of Fraser Highway
being widened prior to this location.

The estimated cost of Option 2 ($430,000 of general revenue funding) does not include land
and property impacts. As a result, this significant investment should be considered in the
context of the overall needs and priorities of the Township. There are numerous other locations
within the Township that are also experiencing similar or worse traffic delays including several
intersections along the 200 Street corridor, the 208 Street corridor, 56 Avenue/232 Street and
other intersections along the Fraser Highway corridor. For these reasons, the Township
Transportation Department does not recommend undertaking any further improvements at this
time. Alternatively, the performance of the intersection will continue to be monitored by staff
and potential upgrades may be brought forward by staff for the consideration of Council in future
years.

Respectfully submitted,

Richard Welfing
PROJECT ENGINEER
for
ENGINEERING DIVISION

ATTACHMENT A AERIAL VIEW OF EXISTING CONFIGURATION AT FRASER HIGHWAY


AND 248 STREET
ATTACHMENT B AERIAL VIEW OF IMPACTS OF NB AND SB LT BAYS AT FRASER
HIGHWAY AND 248 STREET

Page 29 of 146
D.2
ATTACHMENT A

Page 30 of 146
D.2
ATTACHMENT B

Page 31 of 146
Page 32 of 146
D.3

REPORT TO
MAYOR AND COUNCIL

PRESENTED: OCTOBER 19, 2009 - SPECIAL MEETING REPORT: 09-133


FROM: ENGINEERING DIVISION FILE: 5260-23/3
SUBJECT: MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN – ROAD NETWORK PLAN AND
CLASSIFICATIONS

RECOMMENDATION(S):
That Council receive the Master Transportation Plan report; and
That Council endorse the Road Classifications Maps 6.2A (Attachment C) and 6.2B
(Attachment D) to replace the existing Highway Classification Map P-1 (Attachment A) and the
Master Transportation Plan – Road Cross-Sections Map (Attachment E and F).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Township Engineering Division has been leading an update of the Master Transportation
Plan for the past several years. The plan update included a review of the transportation vision
and goals, examining existing conditions, identifying problems, transportation modeling,
identifying improvements, development of a plan, and public consultation throughout the
process. The latest version of the plan was presented to the public in the spring of 2007.
The plan incorporates changes resulting from revisions to Neighbourhood and Community
Plans as well as major regional projects, plans, and initiatives such as the Golden Ears Bridge,
the Provincial Transit Plan, the South of Fraser Transit Plan, the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor
Study and the Provincial Gateway Program. The Township is also undertaking a review of its
cycling routes. The changes resulting from the draft bike route map have been incorporated
into the transportation plan. The Township is also undertaking a review of its subdivision and
development control bylaw which includes modification to road cross sections.
As a result of these plans and initiatives, new road classification maps have been developed to
replace the existing Highway Classification P-1 Map. The new maps include a road
classification map for the entire Township that identify major and minor arterial and collector
roads, a similar classification map for the Willoughby area and a new Road Classification Map
that identifies road cross sections for every arterial and collector road within the Township. The
Engineering Division will recommend future updates to Council for changes to these maps
necessitated through changes in neighbourhood or community plans or provincial and regional
plans and initiatives.
The Master Transportation Plan also reflects the goals and objectives of the Township’s
Sustainability Charter, adopted by Council in June 2008; in particular with respect to:
• Integration of transportation in community planning;
• Conserving and enhancing our environment; and
• Reducing energy consumption.
PURPOSE:
To seek Council endorsement of the Road Network Classification Maps component of the
Master Transportation Plan.

Page 33 of 146
D.3
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN – ROAD NETWORK PLAN AND CLASSIFICATIONS
Page 2 . . .

BACKGROUND/HISTORY:
The Township of Langley is responsible for an extensive transportation system that provides for
the safe and efficient mobility of people and goods. The Township guides the development of
its transportation system through its Master Transportation Plan (MTP) primarily using the
Highway Classification P-1 Map (see Attachment A – Road Network and Classification).
The P-1 Map was last updated in 2004 to incorporate major changes as a result of
neighbourhood and community plans, as well as major regional road network changes such as
the Golden Ears Bridge. The Master Transportation Plan was last updated in 1988. The
current update of the Master Transportation Plan was undertaken by Ward Consulting. A copy
of the full report is available for viewing with the Township Clerk.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
The goal is to prepare a future Transportation Plan that will “guide the orderly long term
development of the Township’s transportation system in an effective and economical manner”.
The plan focuses on the development on an updated road network and classification map as the
basis for the transportation system. The information will be used to assist in updating future
transit and cycling routes and facilities within the Township.

The major steps undertaken as part of the Master Transportation Plan included:

• Examining existing transportation conditions


• Identifying problems
• Transportation modeling
• Identifying road network improvement options
• Developing a road network plan
• Public Consultation throughout the planning process

The project was initiated in 2003 with a review of the Township transportation vision and goals.
Public consultation and feedback was obtained throughout the planning process including
newspaper ads, public open houses, visioning workshops, and household surveys, with the
most recent meetings occurring in the spring of 2007. The plan has been revised to incorporate
the latest changes approved through neighbourhood and community plans amendments. The
draft plan has been revised to be consistent with other regional and provincial plans such as:

• The Golden Ears Bridge and related road network revisions


• The Provincial Transit Plan
• The South of Fraser Transit Plan
• The Roberts Bank Rail Corridor Study
• The Provincial Gateway Program

One of the major goals of the plan is to meet the needs of a growing community in a sustainable
manner while minimizing the negative impact such as the impact to the Agricultural Land
Reserve (ALR). Towards this end, the Township is also currently working on an amendment to
its subdivision and development control bylaw; part of that bylaw includes updated road
standards for arterial, collector and local roads. The road cross sections generally require
narrower vehicle travel lanes and the incorporation of cycling lanes. The transportation plan
also includes a road classification map that identifies road cross sections for each arterial and
collector road within the Township.

Page 34 of 146
D.3
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN – ROAD NETWORK PLAN AND CLASSIFICATIONS
Page 3 . . .

The Township of Langley is updating its cycling routes. The draft bike route plans (see
Attachment B) has been incorporated into the proposed road network classification maps and
the updated road standards in the subdivision and development control bylaw. The Engineering
Division plans to undertake a public consultation process on the draft bike route plans.
Revisions to the Transportation Plan will be required once the bike route plan is adopted.
Similarly, future revisions to neighbourhood and community plans will require revisions to the
road network classification plans.

The existing Highway Classification P-1 Map designates arterial and collector roads within the
Township. The P-1 Map also includes varying right of way widths that correspond to road
cross-sections within the previous subdivision and development control bylaw.

The new Road Classification Maps have incorporated the road network changes from regional,
provincial, and Township plans as well as subdividing the road system into major arterial, minor
arterial, major collector and minor collector roads. The intent of the new classification system is
to more accurately reflect the role and function of a road and to assist in operational decisions
such as the application of traffic calming measures.

The Road Classifications Map 6.2A (see Attachment C) provides the road classifications for the
entire Township. Due to the detail contained within the Willoughby area, a separate Road
Classification Map 6.2B (see Attachment D) has been created. The proposed road cross
sections are shown on Attachments E and F. The major highlights of the plan are:

North East Langley/Glen Valley:


The road network remains unchanged with the exception of defining of some routes as major
arterial, minor arterial, major collector, or minor collector. These definitions were based upon
issues such as connectivity, traffic volumes, truck routes and the adjacent land usage. The
major change was the incorporation of a rail overpass on 232 Street as per the Roberts Bank
Rail Corridor Study.

Gloucester
The road network was modified to become consistent with the Gloucester Neighbourhood Plan.
This included the removal of a proposed overpass on 56 Avenue across Highway 1 and
confirming the future need for an overpass of Highway 1 at 272 Street.

Aldergrove
The road network was modified to reflect the findings of the traffic study undertaken by Ward
Consulting as part of the initial review of the Aldergrove Neighbourhood Plan study currently
underway. The plan proposes a collector ring road system around Aldergrove and four lanes on
Fraser Highway in the future. As part of the Aldergrove visioning and planning process, it is
anticipated that the road network plan in Aldergrove will undergo revisions. Following that
process, the Road Classification Maps included in the Master Transportation Plan may need to
be revised.

South Langley
The road network in south Langley has seen some changes resulting from subdividing road
arterials and collectors into major and minor categories. The major change is the removal of the
24 Avenue and 32 Avenue connections through the Agricultural Land Reserve. The
classification of 16 Avenue remains unchanged as a major arterial route. The classification of
Zero Avenue is a minor collector to reflect its role and function.

Page 35 of 146
D.3
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN – ROAD NETWORK PLAN AND CLASSIFICATIONS
Page 4 . . .

Brookswood
The Brookswood Neighbourhood Plan is in need of a major update and revision. Due to the
lack of information in Brookswood, the road network plan is unchanged with the exception of
subdividing arterial and collector roads into major and minor categories.

Murrayville
The road network in Murrayville is substantially unchanged with the exception of subdividing
arterial and collector roads into major and minor categories.

Fort Langley
The road network in Fort Langley has seen some changes as a result of the closure of the
Albion Ferry. The network has been subdivided into major and minor categories with the
general trend of roads being classified into lower categories.

Milner
The Milner area includes the 64 Avenue rail overpass at Highway 10 and extension. This is
consistent with the previous road network map from 2004 and the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor
Study. The construction of the overpass project is subject to the approval of the Agricultural
Land Commission.

Northwest Langley/Walnut Grove


The road network in Northwest Langley and Walnut Grove has undergone substantial changes
as result of the Golden Ears Bridge, particularly with 200 Street, 199A Street, and 201 Street
now being classified as major arterial routes. Some of the routes under and north of the
structure have been classified into lower categories of roads. The plan shows the future
216 Interchange and the widening of the 208 Street overpass, which is unchanged from
previous plans. The plan now incorporates a proposed transit/HOV tunnel at 202 Street which
is consistent with the Provincial Gateway Program.

Willowbrook
The Willowbrook area has seen little change in the road network classification of the existing
routes. The major change in the incorporation of the overpass structures is included in the
Roberts Bank Rail Corridor Study such as the 204 Street, 196 Street, 192 Street, and
53 Avenue overpass structures. A new road link connecting 203 Street to the Langley Bypass
has been included in the plan.

Willoughby
The Willoughby plan has undergone substantial changes as a result of new Neighbourhood
plans being developed in the past several years. The road network and classification maps
have been modified to be consistent with those plans. In areas where neighbourhood plans
have not been completed, gaps between neighbourhoods have been filled in. The changes
include the connector road to the 216 Interchange, the widening of 208 Street, and the
extension of 202 Street to Highway 1. In addition, 200 Street has been identified as a future
rapid transit corridor.

Page 36 of 146
D.3
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN – ROAD NETWORK PLAN AND CLASSIFICATIONS
Page 5 . . .

The draft plan has undergone significant changes over the past several years since its inception
in 2003. Following the public open house held in 2007, there have been minor revisions
resulting from public input and ongoing changes from Neighbourhood plans. The Engineering
Division recommends that Council endorse the Road Classification Maps 6.2A and 6.2B and the
Master Transportation Plan – Road Classifications Map. If adopted, it is the intention of the
Engineering Division to continue updating the maps as needed following any changes resulting
from ongoing neighbourhood and community plans updates as well as any changes resulting
from Provincial or Regional Plans.

Respectfully submitted,

Paul Cordeiro
MANAGER, TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING
for
ENGINEERING DIVISION

ATTACHMENT A: EXISTING ROAD NETWORK AND CLASSIFICATION MAP


ATTACHMENT B DRAFT BIKE ROUTE MAP
ATTACHMENT C: ROAD CLASSIFICATION MAP OVERALL*
ATTACHMENT D: ROAD CLASSIFICATION MAP WILLOUGHBY*
ATTACHMENT E: ROAD CROSS-SECTIONS OVERALL*
ATTACHMENT F ROAD CROSS-SECTIONS WILLOUGHBY*

*Note: Attachments C through F will be provided at the October 19, 2009 Council Meeting

This report has been prepared in consultation with the following listed departments.

CONCURRENCES
Division / Department Name
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT R. SEIFI

Page 37 of 146
D.3
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN – ROAD NETWORK PLAN AND CLASSIFICATIONS
Page 6 . . .

ATTACHMENT A
EXISTING ROAD NETWORK AND CLASSIFICATION MAP

Page 38 of 146
D.3
MASTER TRANSPORTATION PLAN – ROAD NETWORK PLAN AND CLASSIFICATIONS
Page 7 . . .

ATTACHMENT B
DRAFT BIKE ROUTE MAP

DBB
Page 39 of 146
Page 40 of 146
D.4

REPORT TO
MAYOR AND COUNCIL

PRESENTED: OCTOBER 19, 2009 - SPECIAL MEETING REPORT: 09-130


FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION FILE: 6430 - 03
SUBJECT: LONG RANGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORK PROGRAM

RECOMMENDATION(S):
That Council receive the report entitled “Long Range Planning Department Work Program”, for
information.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
When considering a motion on regarding the waterfront planning process on September 14,
2009, Council referred the matter to staff to provide a report on the status, resources and
priorities to assist in reviewing the planning process for the Fort Langley waterfront.

The Long Range Planning Department is currently managing a large number of planning
initiatives as outlined in this report including provision of technical support staff for a number of
Council Advisory Committees and assisting in other on-going projects. This is expected to fully
occupy the Departmental staff’s time over the next 12 to 18 months. Additional tasks will have
the inevitable consequence of prolonging the timelines of projects currently underway, unless
additional resources are provided. A list of current and future projects and planning initiatives
complete with suggested timelines is provided, which is based on existing staff complement and
retention of current funding levels.

PURPOSE:
This report advises Council of the status of current long range planning projects and future
planning needs.

Page 41 of 146
D.4
LONG RANGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORK PROGRAM
Page 2 . . .

BACKGROUND/HISTORY:
The Fort Langley Waterfront project was initiated in 2007 and included ten community
workshops with representatives of various stakeholder organizations. A design charrette was
also held focusing on the waterfront area of Fort Langley. Planning of one of the elements has
proceeded; that being the trail connection across the Bedford House property providing a
pedestrian and cyclist connection from Glover Road to Marina Park.

On September 14, 2009, Council referred a resolution on activating the waterfront planning
process in Fort Langley to staff for a report on the “status, resources and priorities existing so
that a decision could be made on reviewing the planning process for the Fort Langley
waterfront”.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
Current initiatives: Staff is currently working on a number of major projects and has several
projects in the work program that have not been started yet. Major projects currently underway
are listed in the table below.

Community and
Status
Neighbourhood Planning Projects

Aldergrove Core Plan Underway, anticipated to be completed in 2010

Aldergrove Community Plan Update Work expected to start in early 2010, completion
anticipated in 2011

Jericho Sub-Neighbourhood Plan Underway, anticipated to be completed in 2010

Central Gordon Estate NP Underway, anticipated to be completed in 2011

Northeast Gordon Estate Special Underway, anticipated to be completed in 2011


Study Area and 208 Street Densities

Carvolth Business Park Expansion Underway, anticipated to be completed in 2010

Rural Plan Review Initial analysis completed, discussions with other


agencies are underway; anticipated to progress after
2012.

Other Initiatives Status

Sustainability Charter Implementation Work on sustainability checklist with partners of the


Livability Accord (Surrey, Abbotsford and Coquitlam)
and indicators is anticipated to be completed in 2010

MV Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) Underway and anticipated to be completed in 2010

Will necessitate further work in amending the OCP

Agricultural Viability Study Underway, first phase is anticipated to be completed


in 2010

Page 42 of 146
D.4
LONG RANGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORK PROGRAM
Page 3 . . .

Other Initiatives (cont’d.) Status

Employment Lands Study Underway, anticipated to be completed in 2009

Housing Action Plan Initial analysis underway, anticipated to be completed


in 2011

Murrayville Heritage Conservation Underway, anticipated to be completed in 2010


Area

Heritage Listing Update Underway, anticipated to be completed in 2010

Age-Friendly Project Underway, anticipated to be completed in 2010

Community Amenity Contributions Terms of Reference developed with UDI, anticipated


to be completed in 2010

Adaptable Housing Standards Underway with discussions with Urban Development


Institute, anticipated to be completed in 2009

Community Energy and Emissions Assist in developing a plan by 2010 and use the
Plan (CEEP) information to recommend amendments to the OCP
to meet the requirements of Bill 27 (Green
Communities Amendment Act)

Low Carbon Community Plan Working in collaboration with UBC Centre for
Sustainability to devise community planning
strategies to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions – ongoing

The Long Range Planning Department is also responsible to provide technical support to assist
with the work of the Heritage Advisory, Agricultural Advisory and Aldergrove Planning
Committees of Council. This includes preparing agendas, work programs, year end reports and
undertaking projects as deemed necessary by the Committees and approved by Council, such
as the annual Farm Tour. In addition, Long Range Planning manages the heritage Building
Incentive Program, represents the Township on several external committees and is the main
source of growth projections by custom geographic areas for future planning, development and
infrastructure projects.

The above projects, as well as a number of smaller projects, will continue to occupy the
Department’s time well into 2010 and beyond. Additional tasks will result in inevitable delays in
the projected completion times of the projects currently underway, unless additional resources
are provided.

Future Projects:
There are several major projects that have not been started yet and potential projects that
should be considered in the future. These include the following and are depicted on the plan
presented as Attachment A to this report:

Page 43 of 146
D.4
LONG RANGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORK PROGRAM
Page 4 . . .

• Latimer Neighbourhood Plan - Residents from the East Latimer area submitted a
petition requesting a neighbourhood plan in 2008. A similar process is currently
underway in the West Latimer area. If 75% of residents in West Latimer indicate
support for a neighbourhood plan, it is suggested that both plans be completed as
one Latimer Neighbourhood Plan, especially as they share a common boundary
along 200 Street which should be planned in a coordinated and comprehensive
manner. Council’s Neighbourhood Plan Initiation Policy sets out as one of its
principles the need for maintaining a seven year supply of land to accommodate
population growth. Based on current projections and the prevailing economic
environment, an eight year supply of developable land is estimated for the
Willoughby area. Additional land will also become available with the anticipated
completion of projects currently underway listed in the preceding section. While
there is no immediate need for a new neighbourhood plan to comply with the
aforementioned planning principle, completion of a plan for the Latimer
neighbourhood will likely take several years and such proposed for initiation next
year.

• Heritage Strategy – The Township currently has a heritage inventory, one heritage
conservation area and another one under consideration as well as a Heritage
Building Incentive Program. A Heritage Strategy would provide policy direction for
management of the Township’s heritage resources.

• Fort Langley Waterfront – As discussed above, community workshops and a design


charrette were held in 2007. Some elements considered in the 2007 waterfront plan
are in the process of being resolved. A plan for a trail connection between Glover
Road and Marina Park has been presented at an open house and ParkLane has
applied to develop a portion of their property along the waterfront. A waterfront
planning process could be reinstituted to review land use options and connections on
Township and federally owned properties east of Glover Road, design of a
pedestrian overpass to the Fort Langley Historic Site and water use issues on the
Bedford Channel.

• OCP Update – The current OCP was adopted in 1979; and while it has been
amended several times, mainly through adoption of more detailed community plans,
the overall plan is out-of-date in many respects. Planning philosophy, issues and
terminology have changed significantly in the past decades. Many municipalities try
to update their plans every five years. The Sustainability Charter adopted by Council
last year provides a comprehensive framework and overall direction for the future of
the Township. The OCP should be updated to support and be in harmony with the
Sustainability Charter and provide better direction for development decisions that will
assist in making the community more sustainable. Adoption of the Regional Growth
Strategy by the Metro Vancouver Board, which is currently anticipated in 2010, will
also necessitate considerable amendment of the Township’s OCP as an updated
Regional Context Statement will be required to show how the Township’s OCP is
consistent with the Regional Growth Strategy. Important background for an OCP
update will be provided through the completion of work such as the Wildlife Habitat
Strategy, Employment Lands Study, Housing Action Plan and Community Energy
and Emissions Plan. It is important to bring the Township’s basic document
expressing development policies up to date with current thinking. An updated OCP
will also identify and prioritize key focus areas, such as green initiatives or other
issues that will guide future work.

Page 44 of 146
D.4
LONG RANGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORK PROGRAM
Page 5 . . .

• Regional Context Statement – With the adoption of the Regional Growth Strategy
(RGS) which is anticipated next year, each municipality will be required to submit a
Regional Context Statement to Metro Vancouver within two years after the RGS is
adopted. A regional context statement identifies the relationship between the OCP
and the RGS and how the OCP is to be made consistent with the RGS.

• Milner Valley Plan – Trinity Western University has expansion plans and the
community of Milner faces a number of challenges in defining its future. A Milner
Valley Plan would address these issues and recommend policies for both
communities. A heritage conservation area for Milner would also be considered in
this project. Completion of a plan for Milner would also address some of the issues
relating to the proposed Mufford overpass project.

• Regional Town Centre Plan – The Willowbrook area of the Township and the
northern portion of the City of Langley are designated as Regional Town Centre in
the Livable Region Strategic Plan, with a similar designation in the Draft Regional
Growth Strategy. To fulfill its role in providing for accommodation of business
activities, employment, residential and cultural uses, the Langley Town Centre Plan
needs to be updated. This would also replace the existing Willowbrook Community
Plan.

• Fraser Highway Plan – A plan should be prepared for the Fraser Highway area
between Murrayville and Aldergrove to address appropriate uses on non-ALR lands
and servicing policies.

• Smith Neighbourhood Plan – There is some interest in initiating a neighbourhood


plan for the Smith area. As discussed above, with the current land supply for
development, there is no immediate need to complete another neighbourhood plan.
However, this plan has some strategic advantages in that development of the area
would allow completion of 208 Street and 72 Avenue to full urban standards.

• Hopington Aquifer Moratorium/ Salmon River Uplands – The Hopington Moratorium


and appropriate lot sizes in the Salmon River Uplands area need to be reviewed and
resolved. The Rural Plan, adopted by Council in 1993, indicates that a more detailed
plan should be prepared establishing policies for future growth, subdivision and
agriculture in the Salmon River Uplands area.

• Fort Langley Heritage Conservation Area – The Fort Langley Heritage Conservation
Area has been in existence since 1987, originally as a development permit area, with
design guidelines added in 1993 and then redesignated as a heritage conservation
area in 1997. The guidelines and the area covered by the designation should be
reviewed and updated.

• Williams Neighbourhood Plan – Timing of this neighbourhood plan will depend upon
interest of landowners and plans for an interchange at 216 Street and the freeway.

• Northwest Langley Plan – There is currently no community plan for the Northwest
Langley Industrial Area. With the opening of the Golden Ears Bridge and its location
adjacent to the 200 Street interchange with the freeway, a portion of this area has
long term potential to be a major employment/mixed use area.

Page 45 of 146
D.4
LONG RANGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORK PROGRAM
Page 6 . . .

• Brookswood/Fernridge Plan – Prior to the start of a planning process for the


Brookswood/Fernridge area , background work needs to be completed to identify
impacts of development on the aquifer, classification of watercourses, areas of
wildlife habitat and sites of heritage value.

• Social Planning Initiatives – With increasing population, an aging population and


increased concern about crime, housing, and other social issues, it is anticipated that
social planning will become an important element of planning in Langley as in many
other municipalities. A social plan would identify key issues and how social planning
should be undertaken to play an effective role.

The proposed timing of the above projects is suggested in the following table. Timing of the
projects is dependent on completion of existing projects and new priorities that may be
established by Council.

Project 2010 2011 2012 Future

Latimer Neighbourhood Plan X X X

Heritage Strategy X X

Fort Langley Waterfront X

OCP Update X X

Regional Context Statement X X

Milner Valley Plan X X

Langley Town Centre/Willowbrook Plan Update X X

Fraser Highway Plan X X

Smith NP X X

Review of Hopington Aquifer Moratorium/ Salmon X


River Uplands

Fort Langley Heritage Conservation Area X

Williams NP X

Northwest Langley Plan X

Brookswood/Fernridge Plan X

Social Planning Initiatives X

There are often new initiatives that staff is requested to undertake. While new projects with
limited scope and time can be incorporated in the work program with minimal disruption,
addition of other more significant initiatives, such as undertaking neighbourhood planning
processes will result in delays in current project and require the allocation of additional
resources.

Page 46 of 146
D.4
LONG RANGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORK PROGRAM
Page 7 . . .

Interdivisional Implications
Neighbourhood planning and all other projects undertaken by the Long Range Planning
Department require assistance and input from other Township Divisions and Departments.

Community Implications
All projects undertaken by the Long Range Planning Department have a public consultation
component. This is a critical element of all planning projects, but does take additional time in
arranging and holding workshops, open houses, charrettes or meetings, and then
understanding concerns raised by the public and trying to resolve them. This makes estimating
the timing of completion of current projects and initiation of new projects difficult.

In some cases, Council may find it desirable to establish a specific committee to provide
steerage and guidance in the development of a neighbourhood plan, such as the Aldergrove
Planning Committee, in which case additional staff resources will be required to provide the
necessary technical support to the work of the committee.

Financial Implications
Other than staff resources, consultants often need to be retained to assist with the planning or
engineering components of the work undertaken by Long Range Planning Department. Over
the past few years consultant funds allocated in the budget have been carried over to provide
funding for consultants when needed. These funds will be required in the coming years to
complete projects currently underway. These funds are as follows:

Description Purpose

Zoning Bylaw Review Account was established to assist in the Rural


Plan Review

Housing Action Plan Facilitator/consultant to assist in the final plan


and public consultation

Age Friendly To undertake the age friendly project (funded


Communities totally by a grant from UBCM)

Murrayville Five To complete work on a heritage conservation


Corners Heritage area in Murrayville
Conservation Area

NE Gordon Engineering plans for the Central Gordon, 208


Street and NE Gordon Special Study Area
projects

Carvolth Business Park Engineering plans for the Carvolth business park
expansion area

Jericho Sub- Account set up to transfer funds to the


Neighbourhood Plan consultant for the Jericho Sub-Neighbourhood
Plan for work done east of 200 Street.

Aldergrove Plan Engineering plans for the Aldergrove Community


plan update

Latimer Creek Plan Planning/engineering for Latimer area plans

Heritage Strategy Consultant for a heritage strategy


Page 47 of 146
D.4
LONG RANGE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORK PROGRAM
Page 8 . . .

Completion of projects currently underway and the initiation of future projects as detailed above
are based on the existing staff complement and contingent upon availability of financial
resources. The funding necessary for consultants would be provided in the form of currently
approved budgets being carried over from prior years and allocation of additional funding in
accordance with past practice in the amount of approximately $150,000 for unfunded projects.

Respectfully submitted,

Paul Crawford
MANAGER, LONG RANGE PLANNING
for
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

Page 48 of 146
D.5

REPORT TO

MAYOR AND COUNCIL

PRESENTED: OCTOBER 19, 2009 - SPECIAL MEETING REPORT: 09-131


FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION FILE: 6480-30-003
SUBJECT: CENTRAL GORDON ESTATE
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN CHARRETTE SUMMARY

RECOMMENDATION(S):
That Council receive the report entitled “Central Gordon Estate Neighbourhood Plan Charrette
Summary” for information; and

That Council receive the April 29, 2009 and September 23, 2009 Central Gordon Estate
Charrette Follow-Up summaries for information; and further

That Council authorize staff to proceed to a public Open House with the three options for the
Central Gordon Estate Neighbourhood Land Use Plan.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Staff and the Central Gordon Estate Neighbourhood Plan Team have had an all day charrette
on Saturday, March 28, 2009; and two evening meetings to prepare and refine three conceptual
land use options for the Central Gordon Estate area. Staff has further refined the concept land
use plans and added a third based on feedback given by the public, development community
and staff input. The next step in the process is to take the concept plans out to the public for
further feedback on the plan options. Feedback received to date indicates a preference for
option 1.

PURPOSE:
This report provides Council with information on three land use options resulting from the design
charrette process to proceed to a public open house.

Page 49 of 146
D.5
CENTRAL GORDON ESTATE
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN CHARRETTE SUMMARY
Page 2 . . .

BACKGROUND/HISTORY:
On February 16, 2009 Council received a report on the Central Gordon Estate Neighbourhood
Plan and directed staff to proceed with the planning process, including a design charrette and
follow-up meetings with the Neighbourhood Team.

Prior to the design charrette all respondents to staff’s invitation were sent out a design brief
containing a set of detailed planning principles and performance targets (see Attachment A).

Design Charrette

On March 28, 2009 staff hosted an all-day Saturday design charrette at the Christian Reformed
Church to work with stakeholders to develop conceptual land use plans for the Central Gordon
Estate Neighbourhood Plan area. A total of 41 stakeholders representing landowners, Langley
Environmental Partners Society, Langley Field Naturalists and development consultants were
present, as well as 10 staff members.

Staff provided an introduction and background of the planning process. Four working groups
were created mixing staff and stakeholders as evenly as possible. The charrette generated
involvement of all participants and one conceptual land use plan for each table. The four
concepts, which included some differences in land use concepts, as well as many similarities,
were presented to the participants at the conclusion of the charrette. A summary of the
charrette and the four options is provided in Attachment B.

Once the charrette was complete staff reviewed the four designs and refined them into two
options (discussed in Attachment C) based on location of the community centre, one at 72
Avenue and 204 Street and the other at 70 Avenue and 204 Street. In some areas changes
were made to better reflect the principles of providing a variety of housing forms and trying to
reduce impacts on adjacent existing or proposed development.

April 29, 2009 Design Charrette Follow-up

Staff hosted a charrette follow-up evening meeting at the Shepherd of the Valley Lutheran
Church to gather input from the Neighbourhood Team on the refined options. Notes from the
meeting and a description of the options are included as Attachment C.

September 23, 2009 Design Charrette Follow-up

Based on comments received at the April 29, 2009 follow-up meeting, staff developed Option 3.
This option is largely based on Option 1, but refined as a result of Neighbourhood Team and
staff input. This option was discussed with the neighbourhood team on September 23, 2009.
The summary of the meeting is provided in Attachment D.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

The differences in land uses between Option 2 and Options 1 and 3 are significant. The primary
difference between Option 2 and Options 1 and 3 is the location of the commercial core and
adjoining uses. Feedback gathered at the April 29, 2009 Charrette Follow-Up Meeting and
subsequent staff meeting indicated a preference for Option 1.

Page 50 of 146
D.5
CENTRAL GORDON ESTATE
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN CHARRETTE SUMMARY
Page 3 . . .

Following is a description of the land use options.

Option 1
• Mixed use pedestrian oriented neighbourhood centre at 204 Street and 70
Avenue
• Live-work townhouses adjacent to neighbourhood centre
• Apartment density around neighbourhood centre and along 72 Avenue
• 4 different townhouse densities proposed
• 6 to 8 unit per acre single family development on both sides of 204 Street
between 70 and 72 Avenue and east of 204 Street south of 70 Avenue
• 1 unit per acre proposed for 205 Street
• Pocket park and wildlife patch near the neighbourhood centre

Option 2
• Mixed use pedestrian oriented neighbourhood centre at 204 Street and 70
Avenue
• Live-work townhouses on 204 Street
• Apartment development along 72 Avenue adjacent to neighbourhood centre
• More single family development that Option 1
• Townhouse development on northernmost lots at 205 Street and 72 Avenue,
single family lots to the south, 1 acre lots for remainder of 205 Street area
• Pocket park and wildlife habitat patch located together along 204 Street between
70 and 72 Avenue

Option 3
• Similar to Option 1, in that the neighbourhood centre is located at 70 Avenue and
204 Street, added mixed use designated area (in apartment form) at northeast
corner of 70 Ave./204 St. to create a more dynamic neighbourhood core with
both mixed use areas having southern exposure to the sun.
• Added some Type ‘C’ Townhouse designated area north of the added mixed use
and expanded the Type ‘A’ Townhouse designation in the southwest to better
reflect the preservation of viewscapes.
• Single family provided in different forms.
o Minimum lot sizes of 371.6 m2 are proposed for the southwest area of
single family Residential 1 designated areas to protect views to the SE
and adjacent respect the land uses. With no compact lots permitted the
distance between house fronts and sides are increased. These increases
provide for more opportunity for some views being kept.
o No restrictions on lot size for the single family Residential 2 designated
areas are proposed considering the adjacent land uses and limited view
potential.
o The 205 Street residential densities are shown as 1 u.p.a. with no
development potential. Staff offered opportunities for those who wanted
to increase their opportunities along 72 Avenue, but no response was
provided.
• Added an additional acre for park/wildlife considering the higher densities of the
plan and existing coniferous tree patches in the area.
• Adjusted the north end of the ecological corridor away from the roads (in Option
1 and Option 2 this was called a street greenway north of 70 Avenue on 204
Street).

Page 51 of 146
D.5
CENTRAL GORDON ESTATE
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN CHARRETTE SUMMARY
Page 4 . . .

• Adjusted greenlink buffers as land uses were changed in order to provide


privately maintained public access corridors between uses.

Performance Target Assessment

All members of the Neighbourhood Team who responded to our invitation were provided a set
of performance targets for consideration when creating the plan. The performance targets are
outlined below with comments on how well each option meets these targets.

1. Provide a mixed use neighbourhood accessible to all.


o All options meet these requirements to provide traffic calmed interconnected
internal streets, greenways and pedestrian/bike linkages at appropriate intervals.
2. Provide different housing types.
o All options provide a wide variety of housing types. Including:
ƒ Stand alone apartment units, mixed use apartment units, ground-oriented
apartment units;
ƒ Two and three storey townhouses in different maximum densities;
ƒ Live-work units in a townhouse form;
ƒ Single family residential from 1 unit per acre to compact lots with some
lots restricted to a minimum lot size of 371.6m2.
3. Provide for a five minute walking distance (500m from commercial centre).
o Options 1 and 3 with the commercial centre at the intersection of 204 Street and
70 Avenue provide the most coverage under the five minute walking distance
design requirement. Most of the residents in the proposed neighbourhood will
have walking access to the proposed neighbourhood node.
4. Provide access to natural areas and parks.
o Both Option 1 and 2 provide target greenspace (including one acre each for a
Pocket Park and Wildlife Habitat Patch), connect to greenways inside the plan
and to community wide trails, protect fish habitat (through protection of the 204
Street and 68 Avenue DFO roadside ditches) and preserve and accentuate
viewsheds (through specific townhouse design criteria and public amenity
space).
o Option 3 provides one addition acre of wildlife/pocket park with a greater
potential of protecting individual specimen trees and small groups of trees along
the off-street alignment.
5. Provide lighter, greener, cheaper, smarter infrastructure.
o All options are predicted to achieve these targets through the engineering
servicing plan and the extension of drainage into some green streets.
6. Provide good and plentiful jobs close to home.
o About 30% of the neighbourhood is currently within 800 metres of a bus stop on
200 Street or 68 Avenue. All will be within reach with transit service expected in
the future along 72 Avenue.
o Most charrette options far exceeded the commercial floorspace target of 140m2
(1,500ft2). All Options have a relatively accurate reflection of the intended limits
on commercial development (mixed use area). Additional commercial space will
be in the live-work area and home based businesses.

Page 52 of 146
D.5
CENTRAL GORDON ESTATE
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN CHARRETTE SUMMARY
Page 5 . . .

TABLE 1. POPULATION PROJECTIONS


Blue Team Green Team Red Team Yellow Team
Population Low 3272 3,532 3,043 3,281
Population Medium 4223 3,844 3,765 4,043
Population High 5148 4,128 4,492 4,818
Overall Gross Density
Low 11 13 10 12
Medium 15 14 13 14
High 18 15 15 17

All three land use options result in a small increase in the projected populations for the
performance targets established as part of the charrette brief. The increase in population
targets can be accomplished while respecting existing neighbouring land use patterns in
adjoining plan areas. The height and massing of buildings have also been considered to
minimize potential conflict along the shared boundary with other plan areas.

Performance targets, shown below, were provided as general guidelines for the charrette
teams. The numbers represent estimates of population needed to support a viable commercial
node.

TABLE 2. POPULATION PROJECTIONS


Willoughby Performance Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Plan Targets
Population 2,201 3,178 3,251 3,409 3316
Low
Population 2,422 4,036 4,189 4,379 4283
Medium
Population 2,691 4,876 5,125 5,314 5230
High
Overall
Gross
Density
Low 6 11 11 12 11
Medium 7 14 15 15 15
High 8 17.5 18 19 18

Community Implications
A public open house will be held to gather input from the general public and afford all
landowners in and adjacent to the proposed Central Gordon Neighbourhood Plan area an
opportunity for meaningful input.

Increases in density in all the options include design considerations to help reduce potential
conflict with neighbouring plan areas. Compatible land uses, heights and massing of buildings
have been considered and will be carried through with the final plan.

It is expected that existing neighbourhood park and school sites will be able to accommodate
the additional increases in density. However, additional greenspace in the form of wildlife
habitat, public greenways and other greenspace is expected with the increase in density.

Page 53 of 146
D.5
CENTRAL GORDON ESTATE
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN CHARRETTE SUMMARY
Page 6 . . .

Environmental Implications
All options provide fisheries streamside habitat, land for wildlife habitat protection and a
roadside greenway connecting the neighbourhood to the wildlife habitat and fisheries features in
the Yorkson Plan and beyond. Option 3 has one additional acre of wildlife patch/pocket park
and additional opportunities to protect specimen and other small groups of trees within the off-
street alignment of the ecological corridor.

Respectfully submitted,

Patrick Marples
PLANNER
for
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

ATTACHMENT A Charrette Design Brief


ATTACHMENT B Charrette Summary, March 28, 2009
ATTACHMENT C Charrette Follow-up Summary, April 29, 2009
ATTACHMENT D Charrette Follow-up Summary, September 23, 2009

Page 54 of 146
D.5
ATTACHMENT A

Central Gordon Estate Neighbourhood Plan

Charrette Design Brief

Table of Contents

1. Charrette Process

2. Sustainability Charter

3. OCP/Willoughby Policies

4. Sustainable Planning
a. Mixed use
b. Pedestrian Oriented Design
c. Environmental considerations

5. Central Gordon Background


a. Site Context
i. General existing land use
ii. Adjacent NPs and land uses and densities
iii. Existing and planned commercial nodes
iv. Transit locations and major roads
v. Schools/parks and greenways
vi. Churches
vii. Water/Sewer/Drainage
b. Site Analysis
i. Landscape characteristics
ii. Watercourses
iii. Habitat
iv. Slopes and views
v. Barriers
vi. Major Transportation Connections/Nodes
vii. Noise

6. Design Performance Targets

Page 55 of 146
D.5
Page 2 . . .

1.0 Central Gordon Plan Process


1.1 Introduction

The Township of Langley is beginning preparation of a Neighbourhood Plan for the Central
Gordon Estate area. The area encompassed by the plan is shown on Map 1. The
Neighbourhood Plan will include:
• a land use plan that will identify areas of environmental significance, such as
watercourses and upland habitat areas, appropriate land uses such as residential or
commercial and allowed densities of development;
• park and school requirements to serve the neighbourhood (which may be located
outside the neighbourhood) and greenway and trail connections;
• servicing plans for roads, water, sanitary sewer and stormwater management; and
• an implementation policy to determine prerequisites before development can occur.

The planning process will involve affected landowners and representatives of the Township and
other government agencies. It is expected that the entire process will take between 2-3 years
and an additional year before any houses are built. A summary of the planning process is as
follows:

• Background information – stream classification review, site analysis


• Charrette – with area residents to discuss and generate ideas
• Preparation of a draft plan
• Public review
• Review of Engineering Servicing Requirements
• First and Second reading of Bylaw(s)
• Public Hearing
• Third Reading
• Adoption

1.2 Charrette

This design brief is provided for the charrette that is planned for the neighbourhood. A charrette
is a collaborative session in which a group prepares a design for a neighbourhood or a
development. A charrette provides a forum for consulting with all stakeholders and developing
a design that integrates their aptitudes and interests.

The background information includes:


• a summary of current planning policies related to the Central Gordon area,
• a review of sustainable development practices to provide a context for considering the
future of the Central Gordon area, and
• information on the site conditions within the area to assist in the charrette process.

The schedule for the charrette is provided below:

CHARRETTE PROCESS

1. Preliminary Meeting
a. Introductions (10 min.)
b. Proposed Plan Process (10 min.)
c. Background (from Design Brief) (45 min.)
d. Vision Workshop Part 1
i. Break into groups
ii. Opportunities and Constraints (30 min.)
Page 56 of 146
D.5
Page 3 . . .

iii. Report (10 min.)


e. Vision Workshop Part 2
i. Break into groups
ii. Vision (30 min.)
iii. Report (10 min.)

2. Design Charrette
a. Recap of vision, add and subtract to opportunities, constraints and vision (20-30
min.)
b. Break into groups
c. Work on 1+ Options (90 min.)
d. Report (20 min.)

3. Team Review of Draft Plan


a. Feedback from charrette process attendees.

4. Public Open House


a. Feedback to have checklist of agree/disagree with items in the Opportunities,
Constraints and Vision lists.

2.0 Township Planning Context


2.1 The Township of Langley Sustainability Charter

In 2008, Township Council adopted a Sustainability Vision: “to build a legacy for future
generations by leading and committing the community to a lifestyle that is socially,
culturally, economically, and environmentally balanced”. The concept of Sustainability (or
sustainable development) originated with the United Nations. In 1987, the UN World
Commission on Environment and Development published a report titled “Our Common Future”.
The report discussed a global agenda for change and defined Sustainability as “… development
that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs”.

The Charter is a high level document that provides the guiding principles and a basic framework
for future decision-making by the Township.

2.2 Sustainability Goals

The Charter contains fifteen Sustainability Goals that the Township of Langley needs to achieve
to realize the Sustainability Vision.

Social/Cultural Goals
¾ celebrate our heritage
¾ protect our people and properties
¾ build corporate and community capacity
¾ provide and support community based leisure opportunities
¾ nurture a mindset of sustainability

Economic Goals
¾ achieve fiscal stability and fiscal health
¾ develop livable and vibrant communities
¾ strengthen our economy
¾ invest in effective infrastructure
¾ integrate transportation into community planning
Page 57 of 146
D.5
Page 4 . . .

Environmental Goals
¾ conserve and enhance our environment
¾ increase biodiversity and natural capital
¾ respect our rural character and rural heritage
¾ reduce energy consumption
¾ promote stewardship

In addition to goals, there are a number of objectives, some of which directly relate to
neighbourhood planning:
¾ focus on compact form and mixed use neighbourhoods
¾ encourage high quality urban design
¾ provide flexible, affordable and mixed housing options
¾ make communities pedestrian and bicycle friendly
¾ protect and enhance environmentally significant areas

Participants should keep these sustainability goals and objectives in mind when considering
future land use options for the Central Gordon area.

Considering the long range effect of land use plans, staff has been investigating the creation of
sustainable walkable neighbourhoods in order to better meet the projected needs of the
Township’s residents. Increased housing prices, changes in the demographic make-up of the
population, volatility in the recent prices of energy and the rising costs of servicing low density
neighbourhoods are reasons for framing land use design around walkable neighbourhoods.
Sustainable walkable neighbourhoods are those that have the majority of population within a 5
minute walking distance (approx. 500m) of nodes that could provide their daily needs, provide a
mix of land uses and housing forms and provide access to a variety of transportation choices
(Map 2).
The recently reviewed Yorkson Plan considered a framework of walkable communities as a key
part of the land use concept.

2.3 Official Community Plan

The Township’s Official Community Plan (OCP) has included the Central Gordon area in the
Urban Growth designation since the plan was adopted in 1979. Since adoption of the OCP,
more detailed community plans have been prepared for various communities within the
Township. In 1988, Council adopted the Willoughby Community Plan that includes Central
Gordon. The Willoughby Community Plan includes Multi Family, Residential, and Suburban
land use designations for the Central Gordon area (Map 3). The Willoughby Community Plan
also includes a Neighbourhood Commercial designation shown as a symbol and intended to be
located in an appropriate site when a Neighbourhood Plan is developed. Permitted densities
within the designations are as follows:
• Multi Family (18 units per acre or 30 units per acre adjacent to commercial),
• Residential (6 units per acre), and
• Suburban (1 to 2 units per acre).

Page 58 of 146
D.5
Page 5 . . .

2.4 Neighbourhood Plans

The Willoughby Community Plan provides a generalized approach to land use and requires
more detailed neighbourhood plans to be prepared and adopted by Council before development
occurs in any area. A Neighbourhood Plan sets out a plan for developing a neighbourhood that
consists of the following components:
• a detailed land use plan - to identify the location, form, type and density of residential,
commercial, and other land uses in the neighbourhood, as well as areas that will be
protected;
• engineering servicing plan - will detail a road network for the neighbourhood and
required water, sewer and storm drainage facilities;
• policies for provision of school, park and greenway facilities;
• environmental protection policies; and
• implementation policies, including prerequisites (services or facilities required before
development can begin).

In 2007, the Willoughby Community Plan was amended to align neighbourhood planning areas
with drainage catchment areas (an area where water from rain or snow melt drains downhill into
a detention pond). This would allow detention ponds to be sized and located properly and allow
for efficient phasing of development. In the case of the Central Gordon area, the western,
southern and eastern boundaries are determined by the boundaries of the adjacent
neighbourhood plans determined prior to the requirement that boundaries be based on servicing
considerations. The area north of 72 Avenue does follow a catchment area boundary.

Page 59 of 146
D.5
Page 6 . . .

3.0 Sustainable Planning

3.1 Background
After the Second World War, North Americans began to move from central cities to the suburbs.
Affordability of automobiles to provide access to jobs and services in the central city allowed
development of low density single family homes over large areas of suburban land.
Development was dominated by single family homes located well beyond walking distance of
commercial services, and often schools and recreation facilities. Commercial development was
generally provided in car-oriented malls. In more recent years, traffic congestion, lack of
infrastructure and services and social problems have made this form of suburban development
less attractive. These concerns resulted in an urban design movement referred to as “Neo-
Traditional Neighbourhood Design”.

The “Neo-Traditional Neighbourhood Design” approach emphasizes infill development, mixed


residential and commercial land use, diverse housing types and walkable neighbourhoods.
Design concepts are based on early 20th century North American towns and provide for a
neighbourhood centre with commercial services fronting a “Main Street” that provide the daily
needs of residents within walking distance of homes. Residential development consists of a
variety of housing types (single family, townhouses, apartments, secondary suites) with single
family homes typically built on smaller lots with minimal setback to the street. Streets are based
on a grid system and designed to accommodate cars, bicycles and pedestrians. In residential
areas, streets are narrow. On-street parking and lanes are frequently associated with this form
of design. Wide sidewalks, interconnected walkways and open spaces such as parks, village
greens and plazas make the neighbourhood pedestrian friendly. Urban design is focussed on
providing a strong sense of place to make the area attractive and liveable.

Concerns about expensive housing, high energy prices, greenhouse gas emissions and an
aging population that will need less housing space have made the neo-traditional
neighbourhood design concepts more appealing.

3.2 Principles of Sustainable Planning


• Create Range of Housing Opportunities and Choices
Providing quality housing for people of all income levels is an integral component in any
sustainable planning project.

• Create Walkable Neighborhoods


Walkable communities are desirable places to live, work, learn, worship and play, and
therefore a key component of sustainable planning.

• Encourage Community and Stakeholder Collaboration


Growth can create great places to live, work and play -- if it responds to a community’s
own sense of how and where it wants to grow.

• Foster Distinctive, Attractive Communities with a Strong Sense of Place


Sustainable planning encourages communities to craft a vision and set standards for
development and construction which respond to community values of architectural
beauty and distinctiveness, as well as expanded choices in housing and transportation.

Page 60 of 146
D.5
Page 7 . . .

• Make Development Decisions Predictable, Fair and Cost Effective


For a community to be successful in implementing sustainable planning, it must be
embraced by the private sector.

• Mix Land Uses


Sustainable planning supports the integration of mixed land uses into communities as a
critical component of achieving better places to live.

• Preserve Open Space, Farmland, Natural Beauty and Critical Environmental Areas
Open space preservation supports sustainable planning goals by bolstering local
economies, preserving critical environmental areas, improving our communities quality
of life, and guiding new growth into existing communities.

• Provide a Variety of Transportation Choices


Providing people with more choices in housing, shopping, communities, and
transportation is a key aim of sustainable planning.

• Strengthen and Direct Development Towards Existing Communities


Sustainable planning directs development towards existing communities already served
by infrastructure, seeking to utilize the resources that existing neighborhoods offer, and
conserve open space and irreplaceable natural resources on the urban fringe.

• Take Advantage of Compact Building Design


Sustainable planning provides a means for communities to incorporate more compact
building design as an alternative to conventional, land consumptive development.

Page 61 of 146
D.5
Page 8 . . .

3.3 Create Range of Housing Opportunities and Choices


A mix of quality housing (multi-family, accessory units like
suite and carriage homes, rowhousing, traditional
suburban homes, or units in mixed use buildings, etc.) for
people of all income levels is fundamental in any
sustainable planning community. By using sustainable
planning approaches to create a wider range of housing
choices, access to transportation, services, education
and jobs can be enhanced while communities mitigate
the environmental costs of auto-dependent development,
use their infrastructure resources more efficiently, ensure
a better jobs-housing balance, and generate a strong
foundation of support for neighborhood transit stops,
commercial centers, and other services.

3.4 Create Walkable Neighborhoods


Walkable communities are desirable places to live, work,
learn, worship and play, and therefore a key component of
sustainable planning. Their desirability comes from two
factors. Goods (such as housing, offices, and retail) and
services (such as transportation, schools, libraries) that a
community resident or employee needs on a regular basis
are located close by. Second, by definition, walkable
communities make pedestrian activity possible, thus
expanding transportation options, and creating a
streetscape that better serves a range of users -- pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and
automobiles. To foster walkability, communities must mix land uses and build compactly, and
ensure safe and inviting pedestrian corridors. Communities that have a high proportion of their
residential population within 500m (1,600 ft.) of daily needs reflect neighbourhood walkability.

Within the last fifty years public and private actions often created obstacles to walkable
communities. Conventional land use regulation often prohibits the mixing of land uses, thus
lengthening trips and making walking a less viable alternative to other forms of travel. Many
communities -- particularly those that are dispersed and largely auto-dependent -- employ street
and development design practices that reduce pedestrian activity.

Benefits of walkable pedestrian friendly communities include lower transportation costs, greater
social interaction, improved personal and environmental health, and expanded consumer
choice. Land use and community design play a pivotal role in encouraging pedestrian
environments. By building places with multiple destinations within close proximity, where the
streets and sidewalks balance all forms of transportation, communities have the basic
framework for encouraging walkability.

A pedestrian friendly design of the neighbourhood may also include increased connectivity,
reduced lane widths on some roads, traffic calming measures (round-abouts, road pinches,
whoonerfs, etc), and varied and interesting streetscape (lighting, landscaping, places to sit,
places to meet and greet, interesting architectural elements, safety, etc).

Page 62 of 146
D.5
Page 9 . . .

3.5 Encourage Community and Stakeholder Collaboration


Growth can create great places to live, work and play -- if
it responds to a community’s own sense of how and
where it wants to grow. Communities have different
needs and will emphasize some sustainable planning
principles over others: those with robust economic growth
may need to improve housing choices; others that have
suffered from disinvestment may emphasize infill
development; newer communities with separated uses
may be looking for the sense of place provided by mixed-
use town centers; and still others with poor air quality
may seek relief by offering transportation choices. The
common thread among all, however, is that the needs of
every community and the programs to address them are best defined by the people who live
and work there.

Encouraging community and stakeholder collaboration can lead to creative, speedy resolution of
development issues and greater community understanding of the importance of good planning
and investment. Sustainable plans and policies developed without strong citizen involvement
will at best not have staying power. When people feel left out of important decisions, they will be
less likely to become engaged when tough decisions need to be made. Involving the community
early and often in the planning process vastly improves public support for sustainable planning
and often leads to innovative strategies that fit the unique needs of each community.

3.6 Foster Distinctive, Attractive Communities with a Strong Sense of Place


Sustainable planning encourages communities to craft a
vision and set standards for development and construction
which respond to community values of architectural beauty
and distinctiveness, as well as expanded choices in
housing and transportation. It seeks to create interesting,
unique communities which reflect the values and cultures of
the people who reside there, and foster the types of
physical environments which support a more cohesive
community fabric. Sustainable planning promotes
development which uses natural and man-made boundaries
and landmarks to create a sense of defined neighborhoods,
towns, and regions. It encourages the construction and preservation of buildings which prove to
be assets to a community over time, not only because of the services provided within, but
because of the unique contribution they make on the outside to the look and feel of a city.

Guided by a vision of how and where to grow, communities are able to identify and utilize
opportunities to make new development conform to their standards of distinctiveness and
beauty. Contrary to the current mode of development, sustainable planning ensures that the
value of infill and greenfield development is determined as much by their accessibility (by car or
other means) as their physical orientation to and relationship with other buildings and open
space. By creating high-quality communities with architectural and natural elements that reflect
the interests of all residents, there is a greater likelihood that buildings (and therefore entire
neighborhoods) will retain their economic vitality and value over time. In so doing, the
infrastructure and natural resources used to create these areas will provide residents with a
distinctive and beautiful place that they can call “home” for generations to come.

Page 63 of 146
D.5
Page 10 . . .

Retention of natural areas can help people identify with ‘place’. High standards of architectural
design and quality natural products increase the likelihood that people will like to live there.
Carefully selected public art can help define the area and reflect its ‘place’.

3.7 Make Development Decisions Predictable, Fair and Cost Effective


For a community to be successful in implementing sustainable planning, it must be embraced by
the private sector. Only private capital markets can supply the large amounts of money needed
to meet the growing demand for sustainable planning developments. If investors, bankers,
developers, builders and others do not earn a profit, few sustainable planning projects will be
built. Fortunately, government can help make sustainable planning profitable to private investors
and developers. Since the development industry is highly regulated, the value of property and
the desirability of a place are largely affected by government investment in infrastructure and
government regulation. Governments that make the right infrastructure and regulatory decisions
will create fair, predictable and cost effective sustainable planning.

Despite regulatory and financial barriers, developers have been successful in creating examples
of sustainable planning. The process to do so, however, requires them to get variances to the
codes – often a time-consuming, and therefore costly, requirement. Expediting the approval
process is of particular importance for developers, for whom the common mantra, “time is
money” very aptly applies. The longer it takes to get approval for building, the longer the
developer’s capital remains tied up in the land and not earning income. For sustainable planning
to flourish, local governments must make an effort to make development decisions about
sustainable planning more timely, cost-effective, and predictable for developers. By creating a
fertile environment for innovative, pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use projects, government can
provide leadership for sustainable planning that the private sector is sure to support.

3.8 Mixed Land Uses


Sustainable planning supports the integration of mixed
land uses into communities as a critical component of
achieving better places to live. By putting uses in close
proximity to one another, alternatives to driving, such as
walking or biking, once again become viable. Mixed land
uses also provide a more diverse and sizable population
and commercial base for supporting viable public transit.
It can enhance the vitality and perceived security of an
area by increasing the number and attitude of people on
the street. It helps streets, public spaces and pedestrian-
oriented retail areas to again become places where
people meet, attracting pedestrians back onto the street
and helping to revitalize community life.

Mixed land uses can convey substantial fiscal and economic benefits. Commercial uses in close
proximity to residential areas are often reflected in higher property values, and therefore help
raise local tax revenue. Businesses recognize the benefits associated with areas able to attract
more people, as there is increased economic activity when there are more people in an area to
shop. In today's service economy, communities find that by mixing land uses, they make their
neighborhoods attractive to workers who increasingly balance quality of life criteria with salary to
determine where they will settle.

Page 64 of 146
D.5
Page 11 . . .

3.9 Preserve Open Space, Farmland, Natural Beauty and Critical Environmental
Areas
Sustainable planning uses the term “open space” broadly to
mean natural areas both in and surrounding localities that
provide important community space, habitat for plants and
animals, recreational opportunities, farm land (working
lands), places of natural beauty and critical environmental
areas (e.g. wetlands). Open space preservation supports
sustainable planning goals by bolstering local economies,
preserving critical environmental areas, improving our
communities’ quality of life, and guiding new growth into
existing communities.

The availability of open space provides significant


environmental quality and health benefits. Open space
protects animal and plant habitat, places of natural beauty,
and farm lands by removing development pressure and
directing new growth to existing communities. Additionally,
preservation of open space benefits the environment by combating air pollution, attenuating
noise, controlling wind, providing erosion control, and moderating temperatures. Open space
also protects surface and ground water resources by filtering trash, debris, and chemical
pollutants before they enter a water system.

Protection of open space provides many fiscal benefits, including increasing local property value
(thereby increasing property tax bases), providing tourism revenue, and decreases local tax
increases (due to the savings of reducing the construction of new infrastructure). Management
of the quality and supply of open space also ensures that prime farm lands are available,
prevents flood damage, and provides a less expensive and natural alternative for providing
clean drinking water.

New innovations in the design and development of green roofs, green walls and green screens
can add visual and practical elements to a neighbourhood.

Page 65 of 146
D.5
Page 12 . . .

3.10 Provide a Variety of Transportation Choices


Providing people with more choices in housing, shopping,
communities, and transportation is a key aim of sustainable planning.
Communities are increasingly seeking these choices -- particularly a
wider range of transportation options -- in an effort to improve
beleaguered transportation systems.

In response, communities are beginning to implement new


approaches to transportation planning, such as better coordinating
land use and transportation; increasing the availability of high quality
transit service; creating redundancy, resiliency and connectivity within
their road networks; and ensuring connectivity between pedestrian,
bike, transit, and road facilities, thus creating a variety of
transportation options through a multi-modal approach to
transportation with supportive urban development patterns..

3.11 Strengthen and Direct Development Toward Existing Communities


Sustainable planning directs development towards existing communities already served by
infrastructure, seeking to utilize the resources that existing neighborhoods offer, and conserve
open space and natural resources on the urban fringe. Development in existing neighborhoods
also represents an approach to growth that can be more cost-effective, and improves the quality
of life for its residents. By encouraging development in existing communities, communities
benefit from a stronger tax base, closer proximity to jobs and services, increased efficiency of
already developed land and infrastructure and reduced development pressure in edge areas
thereby preserving more open space.

Developers and communities are recognizing opportunities for infill development, in response to
both demographic shifts and a growing awareness of the fiscal, environmental, and social costs
of development focused disproportionately on the urban fringe.

3.12 Take Advantage of Compact Building Design


Sustainable planning provides a means for communities to
incorporate more compact building design as an alternative
to conventional, land consumptive development. Compact
building design suggests that communities be designed in a
way which permits more open space to be preserved, and
buildings be constructed in a manner which makes more
efficient use of land and resources. By encouraging
buildings to grow vertically rather than horizontally, and by
incorporating structured rather than surface parking, for example, communities can reduce the
footprint of new construction, and preserve more greenspace. Not only is this approach more
efficient by requiring less land for construction. It also provides and protects more open,
undeveloped land that would exist otherwise to absorb and filter rain water, reduce flooding and
stormwater drainage needs, and lower the amount of pollution washing into our streams, rivers
and lakes.

Page 66 of 146
D.5
Page 13 . . .

Compact building design is necessary to support wider transportation choices. Communities


seeking to encourage transit use to reduce air pollution and congestion recognize that minimum
levels of density are required to make public transit networks viable. On a per-unit basis, it is
cheaper to provide and maintain water and sewer services and other utilities in more compact
neighborhoods than in dispersed communities.

Research based on these developments has shown, for example, that well-designed, compact
sustainable communities that include a variety of house sizes and types command a higher
market value on a per square foot basis than do those in adjacent conventional suburban
developments.

SOURCE: Smart Growth

Page 67 of 146
D.5
Page 14 . . .

4.0 Central Gordon Opportunities and Constraints

4.1 Context Analysis (Map 4)


Key Issues
ƒ Provide wildlife habitat where applicable
ƒ Provide contiguous system of greenstreets that meets Department of Fisheries and
Oceans (DFO) approval
ƒ Take advantage of views
ƒ Mitigate effects of 200 Street and 72 Avenue
ƒ Integrate sub-neighbourhood commercial nodes to promote walkable communities

The Neighbourhood Plan will need to integrate surrounding natural conditions, transportation
and consider surrounding land uses. The immediate Neighbourhood Plan areas are exemplified
by low density suburban housing with some low density townhouses along the escarpment to
the southwest. Employment and major shopping opportunities exist in the Langley Regional
Town Centre with other nodes at 200 Street and 72 Avenue and at 208 Street and 72 Avenue.

The surrounding undeveloped area is typified by moderate sized fragmented patches of trees
with a loose often incomplete network of interconnected corridors. Open roadside ditches are
common, often crossed by driveways and some are piped. Opportunities exist to maintain a
network of wildlife patches and corridors in conjunction with other functions such as, stormwater
drainage, parks requirements and greenway linkages.

The proximity of 202B Street and 72 Avenue as major arterial roads have a significant impact on
the neighbourhood. Considerations for land use will need to take this into account. Roads such
as 204 Street and 68 and 70 Avenues will have an impact, as major and minor collectors, but
are less of a concern. Bus stops exist at regular intervals along 200 Street and further
expansion of the transit network will take place as areas are developed. It is expected that
everyone will be within walking distance of a transit stop when the area approaches build out.
Pedestrian linkages are accommodated at intersections and along a greenways and sidewalk
network. Bike lanes are incorporated into the design of major streets and conform to the
Townships bike plan.

On a macro scale the Willoughby Community Plan is developing into a series of neighbourhood
plans that only incorporate a fragment of the overall vision for Willoughby. This plan can be
changed to incorporate new ideas that reflect the wishes of the public and reflect their future
needs. For example, the neighbourhood could be developed into one of a series of walkable
neighbourhoods based on a five minute walking distance, or 500 m (1,640 feet). Much of this
framework is already in the existing Willoughby Plan, but not all.

Surrounding land uses in existing and developing neighbourhood plans should be respected.
Densities should respect the surrounding developments through massing and design. Where
conflicts are anticipated additional design solutions may be warranted to help alleviate the
issues. The major transportation routes in surrounding areas are where commercial uses and
higher density developments are found. This allows for limited access to ease transportation
issues as well as providing a noise barrier to the lower densities behind. The views along the
escarpment could continue to be taken advantage of with higher densities.

Page 68 of 146
D.5
Page 15 . . .

The Willoughby Plan currently designates the area for mainly single family residential
development with some multi-family residential and a neighbourhood commercial centre
(location not determined). Thought can be given to whether this is the most sustainable form of
development and the best mix of housing for the future. The appropriate location(s) of
commercial activity need to be determined.

4.2 Site Analysis (Map 5)


Key Issues
ƒ Maintain views and key geomorphic features
ƒ Continue network of DFO approved greenstreets

There are four distinct landscape units that comprise the study area.

The Upland, at the north end, is mostly flat with moderate to imperfect drainage and invasion
species (black cottonwood, red alder, and paper birches) with only limited stands of succession
species (western red cedar and Douglas fir). This area has many large lot single family homes.
This unit will be affected by the increased use of 72 Ave and 204 Street which will increase the
barriers between the unit sections.

The Hillside has the most ‘rural feel’, with largely abandoned five acre fields interspersed with
well established evergreen wildlife habitat patches with large specimens of big leaf maples,
western red cedars and Douglas firs. The whole area is interspersed with well maintained
homes with some contiguous pockets maintaining their stature.

The Roadside Tributaries of the Nicomekl watershed are the most valuable natural resource in
the neighbourhood. It is crucial to identify, restore and maintain these watercourses for wildlife.
In specific the roadside ditches along 68 Avenue and 204 Street have been identified as being
Class B watercourses (which provide food or nutrients and cool water for downstream fish
populations, but have no documented fish presence or reasonable ability to support fish
populations) and as such will have to be dealt with accordingly.

The Milner Escarpment is located in the southwestern section of the plan area that offers the
best views of the valley. Due to the high visibility of the escarpment from Glover Road and
areas south of the planning area, it is essential to establish a high development standard.

4.3 Transportation (Map 6)


Key Issues
ƒ Provide safe and efficient transportation of people and goods from place to place
ƒ Provide linkages and alternative modes of transportation

There is one major north-south (202 Street) and one east-west (72 Avenue) arterial road in the
plan area. 202 Street will serve as a key link parallel to 200 Street from 86 Avenue through to
the Willowbrook Regional Town Centre. This road provides an alternative routing option parallel
to 200 Street. The road will have 4 lanes divided by a median, commuter bike lanes and a
greenway boulevard. It will have a street greenway linking this area into the Township’s
greenway network. 72 Avenue is a key link connecting Glover Road, 208 Street, 200 Street and
Surrey. The collector road standards in the plan area will draw traffic to and from the major
arterial road and local road network.

Page 69 of 146
D.5
Page 16 . . .

4.4 Environmental Features (Map 7)


Key Issues
ƒ Preserve wildlife habitat and environmental features (habitat patches and watercourses)
ƒ Link environment features together through a network of greenways

The low density character of the area provides multiple opportunities for preserving wildlife
habitat. A number of habitat patches have been identified. Additional habitat should be
protected from development through greenways, green streets and tree protection.

Watercourses in the area have been classified as red (Class A), yellow (Class B) or green
(Class C) (See Definitions).

4.5 Drainage (Map 8)


Key Issues
ƒ Provide drainage designs that respect natural systems while preventing storm events
from threatening life and property
ƒ Consider multi-purpose designs in conjunction with road and greenway designs

Drainage patterns bisect the area east and west along a ridge running at or near the 206 Street
alignment. Drainage is directly linked to Department of Fisheries and Oceans issues by the
requirement for engineered drainage systems to continue to supply red and yellow coded
streams with some water for most if not all times of the year.

The green street network from the Northeast Gordon Estate Neighbourhood Plan will be
extended into this area. Green streets are designed to promote stormwater volume control by
minimizing impervious area and increasing opportunities for infiltration by incorporating
measures such as roadside swales and reduced road widths to slow water runoff and cooling
and cleanse it. Green streets are proposed along 68 Avenue east of 206 Street and along most
of the length of 206 Street.

4.6 Definitions
Class ‘A’ Red – In habited year round or has potential for year round fish presence upon
reasonable means of access enhancements.

Class ‘B’ Yellow – Significant source of food, nutrient or cool water supplies to downstream fish
populations. These watercourses have no documented fish presence or reasonable potential
for fish presence.

Class ‘B’ Green – Insignificant food/nutrient value. No documented fish presence and no
reasonable potential for fish presence. These watercourses dry up soon after rainfall.

Page 70 of 146
D.5
Page 17 . . .

5.0 Performance Targets

5.1 THE CHARRETTE GOAL

Facilitate and implement a 50-year vision for a complete, vibrant and sustainable
urban community, primarily centred within a 5-minute walk around two compact
commercial and residential nodes, located north and south boundaries – and
capable of accepting 3,000 – 4,500 new residents in 1,400 – 2,200 housing units,
and space for 160 – 270 new jobs by 2050.

5.2 KEY DESIGN QUESTIONS and MAIN OUTPUTS

Key Design Questions

1. How can the area be developed to incorporate a mix of land uses and associated services,
designed to be pedestrian-friendly and sensitively integrated into surrounding land uses and
natural areas, and to establish an attractive and liveable neighbourhood?
2. How can commercial nodes be designed to be pedestrian friendly and well integrated into the
surrounding community?
3. How can the surrounding physical character, the escarpment, views, and be integrated
and/or referenced in the design?
4. How can the existing surface stormwater drainage system and vegetation be protected and
enhanced to serve both the needs of development and wildlife?

Main Outputs

1. Colour illustrative plan of the neighbourhood and surrounding context, including: land
uses; parks, open space & habitat network; schools and other civic uses, arterial and local
streets, etc.
a. Movement systems & road network integration diagram including streets, transit,
greenways & trails, and 5-minute walking distances from key points.
b. Parks & open space network diagram including preserved vegetation, creek corridors,
school/park sites, canopy cover etc.

(Potential outputs of charrette)

c. Draft plans, section/elevation, sketches, diagrams, notes of any of the below items

(To be added in final plan document)

d. Detail plans, section/elevations, sketches, diagrams of neighbourhood entry points,


surrounding neighbourhood and preserved open space.
e. Detail plan, section/elevations, sketches of typical greenway, trail, and water corridor
network segments, including creek crossings.
f. Detail plan, section/elevations, diagrams of traffic calming & pedestrian/bicycle
arterial crossing strategies.
g. Detail plans, section/elevations, sketches, diagrams of stormwater drainage concept.
h. Sketches, illustrations and images detailing Street & neighbourhood node identity
concept, including incorporation of historic and physical context.
i. Document, in text and drawings, achievement of targets.

Page 71 of 146
D.5
Page 18 . . .

5.2 PERFORMANCE TARGETS

5.2.1 MIXED USE neighbourhood ACCESSIBLE TO ALL

1 . Establish an interconnected network of streets that use traffic calming methods to allow easy
local traffic access to neighbourhood streets and direct through-traffic to arterials located at
appropriate intervals.
2 . Develop an interconnected greenway system in accordance with the Willoughby Community Plan
and with east-west connections into adjacent neighbourhoods, and additional north-south routes
through neighbourhoods as appropriate.
3 . Provide pedestrian/bike linkages across arterials at maximum 800 metre intervals and access
onto the greenway system every 300 metres.

5.2.2 DIFFERENT housing TYPES

4 . Locate 1,400 to 2,200 total housing units in the neighbourhood with a range of housing types and
tenures suited to a mix of ages, incomes, and abilities.
5 . Incorporate approximately 50% of residential development as multi-family units, particularly
medium- to high-density apartments, and multiple unit ground-oriented housing – including
townhouses, residential infill and secondary suites.
6 . Maintain a minimum gross density of 10 dwelling units per acre density, with a maximum gross
density of 20 du per acre within 5 minute walk of main nodal intersections.

5.2.3 FIVE MINUTE walking DISTANCE

7. Design higher density development around commercial nodes and near major roads.
8 . Orient all development to front on publicly owned and accessible streets.
9 . Ensure 100% of residents and workers are within 500 metres of basic daily needs, and a park or
an access point to the open space and trails network.

5.2.4 ACCESS TO natural AREAS AND PARKS

1 0 . Develop an interconnected system of municipal open spaces and trails connecting areas of
community value, including: conservation areas, buffers, stream corridors, wooded areas,
environmentally sensitive areas, parks, and park/school sites. Link trails to the public street and
greenway network and to other community trails beyond the study neighbourhoods.
1 1 . Provide one acre for a Pocket Park in accordance with park standards and one acre for wildlife in
accordance with the Wildlife Strategy.
1 2 . Preserve all large stands of evergreen trees. In locations where trees must be cleared replant
open areas such that there is a minimum 40% tree canopy cover within 20 years of planting.
Achieve no net loss of all watercourses, riparian areas, wetlands and ponds.
1 3 . Preserve and accentuate view sheds.

5.2.5 LIGHER, GREENER, CHEAPER, SMARTER infrastructure

14. Reduce impacts to streams and groundwater through the use of low impact infrastructure and
drainage in developed and non-developed areas, to conserve water and improve water quality,
and to infiltrate 1” of rainwater per day.
1 5 . Achieve a minimum of 50% effective impermeable surface area.
1 6 . Provide infrastructure that is both functional and ‘readable’.

5.2.6 GOOD AND PLENTIFUL jobs CLOSE TO HOME

1 7 . Provide buildable space for 160 - 270 new jobs in the commercial/retail sector: approximately
52,000 square feet (4,830m2) of commercial and retail space to balance jobs with the local labour
force.
1 8 . Ensure 100% residential and commercial units are within 800 metres of a transit stop.
SOURCE: Smart Growth

Page 72 of 146
D.5
Page 19 . . .

MAP 1 - CENTRAL GORDON ESTATE BOUNDARIES MAP

Page 73 of 146
D.5
Page 20 . . .

MAP 2 – WALKABLE NEIGHBOURHOODS

Page 74 of 146
D.5
Page 21 . . .

MAP 3 – WILLOUGHBY COMMUNITY PLAN

Page 75 of 146
D.5
Page 22 . . .

MAP 4 - CONTEXT MAP

Page 76 of 146
D.5
Page 23 . . .

MAP 5 - SITE ANALYSIS

Page 77 of 146
D.5
Page 24 . . .

MAP 6 - TRANSPORTATION

Page 78 of 146
D.5
Page 25 . . .

MAP 7 – ENVIRONMENTAL FEATURES

Page 79 of 146
D.5
Page 26 . . .

MAP 8 - DRAINAGE

Page 80 of 146
D.5
Page 27 . . .

ATTACHMENT B

CENTRAL GORDON ESTATE

CHARRETTE SUMMARY

MARCH 28, 2009

Background

The Central Gordon Estate Charrette was held at 9:00 a.m. on Saturday, March 28, 2009 at
Willoughby Christian Reformed Church, 20525 – 72 Avenue, Langley.

All landowners in the neighbourhood as well as representatives from the development


community and the environmental community were invited to a design charrette for the Central
Gordon Estate neighbourhood. Those who responded were sent an information package
(Design Brief) that outlined planning principles to be considered and some performance targets.
The purpose of the charrette was to:
• provide some background on sustainable planning and site conditions in Central
Gordon
• receive comments from the participants on their vision for the neighbourhood, and
• develop four design concepts to generate development alternatives.

Participants
Bob Morse Lisa MacNaughton Jag Sidhu
Jim Weatherdon Ena McInnis Mark Belling
Peggy Weatherdon Bill Christiansen Shawn Bouchard
Sherri-Lee Pressman Allan Ganske Peter Formby
Kam Girn Helen Firmino Olivera Formby
Larry Thorlakson Elaine Anderson Colleen Punt
Gurdeep Gill Ben Cooper Victor Tasic
Gurhimat Gill Liz Collins Maria Tasic
Lynn Knoblauch Lisa Rohweder Carol Louie
Donna Lutek Carrie Magee Andrew Meister
Rhys Griffiths Gary Galbraith Sandy Meister
Laureen Sawyer Bonnie Jackson Edith Barbati
Gary Sawyer John Joo Tommy Nguyen
Jack Aramini Ellen Joo

Staff

Patrick Marples Dave Anderson Paul Cordeiro


Jason Chu Robert Knall Mark Sloat
Elaine Horricks Patrick Ward Paul Crawford
Al Neufeld

Page 81 of 146
D.5
Page 28 . . .

Explanation of Program:

Staff provided introductory comments, outlining the purpose and process for the charrette and
how it fit into the overall process for the eventual adoption of the plan.

Presentation

Staff provided a presentation summarizing background information on:


• the Sustainability Charter,
• the Township’s planning process,
• sustainable planning principles,
• neighbourhood context, adjoining land uses,
• provision of greenspace, and
• site opportunities and constraints including environmentally sensitive areas (the
yellow coded creek along 204 Street and 68 Avenue), wildlife habitat, transportation,
drainage, views etc.
Participants were cautioned that they should not rely on the land use designs generated in the
charrette as further refinements would have to be made.

Opportunities and Constraints

Participants were divided into four teams (Blue, Green, Red, and Yellow). Staff, environmental
and development representatives were divided equally between the teams. Landowners were
randomly, but evenly, split between the teams. Each team listed and discussed opportunities
(things about Central Gordon that could make it a great neighbourhood and advantages of the
neighbourhood) and constraints (aspects that will make it difficult to develop or disadvantages of
developing the neighbourhood).

Opportunities

• Proximity to regional hubs and connectivity that exists


• Water & watercourses
• Coniferous forested areas
• Walkable in areas with increased opportunities
• Open space with large properties
• Wildlife
• Quiet living
• Existing green areas
• Views to city & valley
• Opportunity for innovation
• Existing road network
• Southern orientation
• Alternative energy opportunities
• Opportunity for change
• Architectural innovation for compact design
• To retain Langley’s identity
• To remain ‘estate’ low density
• Small scale commercial
• Traffic management & calming
• Connect green areas
• High density at commercial for live/work
• Create a fully walkable community
• DFO watercourse
Page 82 of 146
D.5
Page 29 . . .

Constraints

• Transportation (bus, bike)


• Walking & sidewalks
• Parking requirements
• Potential traffic increase & noise
• Slope for walkability
• 4 lane roads as barriers
• Challenge in maintaining current atmosphere
• Co-ordination between owners
• Distance to Commercial
• Current road patterns
• Climate & geography – stormwater run-off
• Polarized feelings about development

Vision Statements

Each participant was asked to write a statement summarizing their vision of the neighbourhood
when it is developed. These statements are provided below, categorized by major elements
mentioned in the statements.

Mixed Use/Density / Walkable


• To create a mini village node within the overall Langley area that expresses distinctive
architectural expressions, integrating principles of wide social and age demographics,
reduced reliance on vehicles in special zones, to include integrated locally relevant
commercial zones and adjacent higher density residential usage – pedestrian oriented
where possible.
• A mix of residential density with parks, schools, shopping within safe & comfortable
walking/cycling distance
• Mixed development so a person can stay in the neighbourhood when needs change.
• Ability to age in place, livable area that will accommodate people with mobility problems
in the community.
• 202B & 68 Ave busy street:
-high density condominium
-office space and commercial space.
• A variety of housing, close to stores and within walking distance.
• A neighbourhood that offers a high quality of life with opportunities to live, work & play.
• Maintain the atmosphere of the area while developing in way to mix density and “open
space”.
• Vision: Clusters of high density housing nestled between trees that allow filtered views
to the Langley City skyline and connected by safe & pleasant walkways to shopping and
parks.
• Maintain individuality with close commercial areas that are safe to access by foot, that
encourages long term residents with a variety of types of density homes with lots of
trees.
• I envision this area to be a walkable community with a mix of low to medium density with
a small commercial node. Retention of the established viable tree stands as park areas
and trails where possible.
• My vision is to see the development of multi-family-commercial on the main floor and
residential above.
• Walkable boulevards with commercial at street level & residential above.

Page 83 of 146
D.5
Page 30 . . .

Green
• Very important to keep green space parks, & trees, live for future people.
• Reflect Langley’s culture – green, low density garden city philosophy.
• Retention of some green space & trees.

Walkable & Green


• A reason to walk: park, corner store. Walkable – a place where you bump into your
neighbour.
-sidewalk
-safety
-beauty (green/trees/space).
• To create a liveable community for families in which green space and quality of life are
dominant.
• To create a desirable, visibly enhanced, diversified community that promotes warmth,
friendliness and is both green & environmental.
• Walkable – green spaces connected by paths.
• To maintain areas of existing trees and provide a walkable network to commercial and
park nodes – reduce road network.
• A community that would be pedestrian oriented, not vehicle oriented, an area that would
be unique in structure & layout.
• I envision a neighbourhood that is:
-walkable and connected to nearby amenities by foot and bike and transit
-developed in a way that maintains watershed function and enhances d/s fish
habitat.
• Some green lands, tall trees, walking trails.
• Vision: Pedestrian orientated community. Friendly streets/linkages that encourage
walking.
• An area that is reflective of its present state – walkable. Mature trees & wildlife friendly
& low density which is rare these days.

General
• Maintain uniqueness of area.
• Create a neighbourhood with a good mix of energy efficient homes that will allow me to
live comfortably and pass on to my children to raise their families.
• Development with diversity.
• To create a multi-use, unique, beautiful self sustained people friendly community – one
that is a focal point (provides a sense of place).
• Central Gordon will be a connected neighbourhood that supports people, environment &
community.
• To reflect & improve on the existing development & perhaps make our area unique to all
of Langley buy keeping some of the acreages intact but also incorporating high density.

Low Density
• A sensible low density development if possible.
• To stay single family acreage with sidewalks on 72nd Ave.
• Have Central Gordon as a ½ to 1 acre low density area.
• Preferably single family development. Langley Meadows is as small (per family) as you
want to go.
• Low density residential.

Page 84 of 146
D.5
Page 31 . . .

High density
• I want high density.

Affordable Housing
• I like to see South-East Gordon Estate as a community that provides young people and
family with housing in affordable way.

Design Charrette

The participants then worked on a design for the neighbourhood. Each team had a drawer and
a presenter while a staff member was appointed as facilitator. An overall facilitator kept
everyone on topic and pace.

The four designs produced by the teams are described below.

Blue Team

Pocket Park (PP), Wildlife Habitat Patch (WHP) and Greenspace – The one acre PP
requirement was located near the commercial centre to create a more dynamic neighbourhood
node. It was located adjacent to the WHP because the uses were seen as compatible and
complementary. Primary consideration for the WHP was for the existing mature stands of
evergreen trees. Additional treed areas (green circles) were hoped to be saved through other
mechanisms.

Commercial – Two commercial nodes were proposed, a local serving node at 204 Street and 70
Avenue and a car oriented single commercial unit at the southeast corner of 203 Street and 72
Avenue. The local commercial node was seen as the primary focus of the neighbourhood. It
was seen as mixed use commercial ground floor with residential above with the opportunity of
some offices, pedestrian friendly, possible live-work sites and serving the local area only. Live-
work sites provide the option for small businesses to locate in the area to serve the local
neighbourhood. Uses typically include barbers, architects, accountants and other home based
businesses.

Residential – Apartment densities were located to the southern edge of the neighbourhood.
Townhouse densities were proposed from the apartments north of 70 Avenue, along 203 Street
and north of 72 Avenue. The remaining portion of the plan is a combination of traditional single
family lots and low density residential along 205 Street and 71A Avenue (these two areas would
be allowed the ability to subdivide to double their existing density).

Page 85 of 146
D.5
Page 32 . . .

Blue Team Design

Traffic Calming – Traffic calming 204 Street was seen as a priority. Combinations of traffic
calming measures were seen as necessary to slow traffic, especially at the intersections of 204
Street and 68 and 70 Avenues.

Page 86 of 146
D.5
Page 33 . . .

Green Team

Pocket Park (PP), Wildlife Habitat Patch (WHP) and Greenspace – Similar to the Blue team the
one acre PP requirement was located near the commercial centre to create a more dynamic
neighbourhood node while considering the existing trees on the site. In this case the WHP was
located to the northeast to take advantage of the existing mature stands of evergreen trees. A
minor roadside wildlife connection was proposed on the east side of 204 Street to connect the
WHP to the 72 Avenue greenway. Additional greenway connections were seen as important
mid-block.

Green Team Design

Commercial – A small scale mixed use (commercial ground floor with residential above)
commercial node was located at 204 Street and 70 Avenue. The concept was for a pedestrian
friendly design rather then the typical car oriented strip mall.
Page 87 of 146
D.5
Page 34 . . .

Residential – Apartment densities with a senior’s orientation were located around the
intersection of 203 Street and 72 Avenue to take advantage of the flat land, nearby shopping
and access to existing and future transit and services. Townhouse densities were considered
around the commercial node and buffering apartment uses, 202B Street and the bulk of the
entire southern half of the plan. A wide variation of forms of townhouses was considered to try
and break up the types of townhouse units provided. Some single family residential was
proposed along the west side of 204 Street and north side of 70 Avenue with the majority of the
northeast quadrant allowing a doubling of current density.

Traffic Calming – Traffic calming 204 Street was seen as a priority. Combinations of traffic
calming measures were seen as necessary to slow traffic, especially at both intersections of 204
Street and 68 and 70 Avenues.

Red Team

Pocket Park (PP), Wildlife Habitat Patch (WHP) and Greenspace – The one acre PP
requirement was located adjacent the WHP because the uses were seen as compatible and
complementary. Primary consideration for the WHP was for the existing mature stands of
evergreen trees and its direct connection with the upper reaches of the creek compensation
area along 204 Street. Additional greenlinks were seen as important as linkages doubling as
buffers between higher densities.

Commercial – Unlike the other three teams an apartment mixed use commercial node was
proposed at the intersection of 204 Street and 72 Avenue. The commercial node was seen as
the primary focus of the neighbourhood. It was seen as mixed use commercial ground floor with
apartment residential above. Live-work sites within a townhouse form were considered. The
commercial and live-work units would face onto 204 Street rather than 72 Avenue. All vehicle
access would be off of 204 Street with parking behind with only some on-street parking directly
in front of the commercial units on 204 Street. A future major park designated near the
northeast corner of 204 Street and 72 Avenue would round off the pedestrian oriented dynamic
for the neighbourhood node.

Residential – Apartment densities were located adjacent to 72 Avenue and the commercial
node. Townhouse densities were proposed as a buffer between apartment and single family
densities and along 202B Street bulging out in the south end of the plan. Restrictions on
heights of the townhouses were considered in order to take advantage of the views. Single
family residential was considered at 7-9 for the rest of the plan area with adjacent land use
densities the main concern. The estate homes along 205 Street were left at their current
density.

Traffic Calming – Traffic calming 204 Street was seen as a priority. Combinations of traffic
calming measures were seen as necessary to slow traffic, especially at both intersections of 204
Street and 68 and 70 Avenues. Traffic signals were indicated for the major intersections.

Page 88 of 146
D.5
Page 35 . . .

Red Team Design

Page 89 of 146
D.5
Page 36 . . .

Yellow Team

Pocket Park (PP), Wildlife Habitat Patch (WHP) and Greenspace – The one acre PP
requirement was located near the commercial centre to create a more dynamic neighbourhood
node and adjacent the WHP. Primary consideration for the WHP was for the existing high
quality mature stands of evergreen trees. Additional treed areas (nodes marked in green) were
hoped to be saved through other mechanisms. One specific node was a small public amenity
located on the uphill side of 203 Street and 68 Avenue to give public access to the views. Other
linear buffers were conceptualized between various uses and densities of residential uses.

Commercial – Two commercial nodes were proposed; a local serving node at 204 Street and 70
Avenue and a car oriented single commercial unit at the intersection of 204 Street and 72
Avenue. The 204 Street and 70 Avenue commercial node was seen as the primary pedestrian
centre of the neighbourhood. It was seen as either mixed use commercial ground floor with
residential above or just small scale commercial serving the local area only. The 204 Street and
72 Avenue commercial node was seen as too noisy for pedestrians and therefore was seen
more for serving the needs of the traveling public. This node also was either mixed use
commercial ground floor with residential above or just small scale commercial.

Residential – Apartment densities were located along 204 Street and 70 Avenue in the centre of
the neighbourhood with another node adjacent to the commercial uses at the north commercial
node. A band of townhouse densities were conceptualized mid block between 202B and 204
Street north of 70 Avenue as a buffer with a couple of bands stretching east-west south of 70
Avenue to take advantage of the views. Maintaining views was also a prominent consideration
for the rest of the single family development south of 70 Avenue. Further single family uses
were proposed along 203 Street and north of 73A Avenue. The estate homes along 205 Street
were left at their current densities.

Traffic Calming – Traffic calming at 204 Street 70 Avenue in the form of a traffic circle was
discussed.

Report Back

Each team presented their option to all the charrette attendees at the end of the day. Staff
provided another overview of the next steps and got a very positive response regarding a
question of their feelings on the value of the charrette process.

Attendees were told that as Neighbourhood Team members they needed to sign the attendance
list and provide the appropriate contact information in order to be included in the charrette
follow-up meeting. The charrette ended at 2:15 p.m.

Page 90 of 146
D.5
Page 37 . . .

Yellow Team Design

Page 91 of 146
D.5
Page 38 . . .

ATTACHMENT C

CENTRAL GORDON ESTATE

CHARRETTE FOLLOW-UP SUMMARY

APRIL 29, 2009

Background

A Neighbourhood Team charrette follow-up meeting was held at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, April
29, 2009 at Shepherd of the Valley Lutheran Church, 20097 - 72 Avenue, Langley. The
purpose of the follow-up meeting was to review a vision statement developed from individual
statements submitted at the design charrette and to review two options developed from the
concepts prepared at the design charrette.

Attendees

Jim Weatherdon Liz Collins Edith Barbati


Peggy Weatherdon Lisa Rohweder Tommy Nguyen
Sherri-Lee Pressman Carrie Magee Fred Hu
Kam Girn Jim Magee Art Remillard
Lynn Knoblauch Gary Galbraith Colleen Schellenberg
Donna Lutek Bonnie Jackson Irene Griep
Laureen Sawyer John Joo Egan Griep
Gary Sawyer Jag Sidhu Barry Buchanan
Jack Aramini Shawn Bouchard Karin Deglan
Bill Christiansen Olivera Formby Gary Deglan
Allan Ganske Colleen Punt Sandy Mackenzie
Helen Firmino Carol Louie Charlie Mackenzie
Ben Cooper Andrew Meister

Township Representatives

Patrick Marples Paul Crawford

Central Gordon Estate Plan Vision

Staff developed the following vision based on the statements submitted at the design charrette.

“The vision for Central Gordon is to create a livable and sustainable neighbourhood that:
• takes advantage of the unique views and topography,

• provides a variety of housing types to accommodate people with varying affordability,


age and family structures,

Page 92 of 146
D.5
Page 39 . . .

• is walkable and accessible through greenway connections within the neighbourhood


and beyond,

• respects and enhances environmental features and incorporates environmental


areas and public space into the neighbourhood design,

• provides commercial services for the neighbourhood,

• provides some opportunities for employment,

• provides high quality and safe urban design, and

• provides green and efficient infrastructure.”

Central Gordon Estate Plan Options


Two land use options for Central Gordon Estate were presented. Option 1 provided a small-
scale mixed use neighbourhood centre at 70 Avenue and 204 Street that incorporated
commercial space as the ground floor of an apartment building, live-work sites and park space.
Option 2 provides a similar mix of land uses, but centred on 72 Avenue and 204 Street.

Option 1
Commercial – This option proposes a truly small scale mixed use pedestrian oriented
neighbourhood centre at 204 Street and 70 Avenue where people can meet and greet in and
enjoy a relatively quiet urban lifestyle. The commercial units are proposed as a few small scale
units for local use only fronting both 204 Street and 70 Avenue. They would be on the ground
floor of an apartment complex with some on-street angle or parallel parking with most parking to
the rear. The streetscape would be tight to the street with opportunities for patios and other
amenity features that make attractive and livable. Live-work sites in a townhouse form will front
onto 204 Street and 70 Avenue. Parking for clients is provided on-street as either angle or
parallel.

Residential – Apartment densities are proposed for two nodes. One node is located along 72
Avenue, is close to existing and future transit and provides a noise buffer for residents near 72
Avenue. The other node is part of the neighbourhood centre.

Townhouses of varying densities are proposed for the bulk of west side of 204 Street, adjacent
apartment uses and 72 Avenue. They provide a buffer use between higher and lower densities,
act as noise buffer and are used only when complimentary to adjacent uses unless mitigating
circumstances (e.g. wide roads separate densities/uses). Four densities of townhouses are
proposed:

Townhouse A –two storeys with a base density of 12-15 units per acre with the ability to
increase to about 40 units per acre if full shared underground parking is provided.
These units would preserve views maximum buildings heights on the uphill side of
development.

Townhouse B – a base density of 12-15 units per acre with the ability to increase to
about 40 units per acre if either full shared underground parking or on-site apartments
(four-storey maximum) are provided.

Townhouse C – 12-20 u.p.a three-storey maximum

Townhouse D – 12-15 units per acre to be sensitive to adjacent land uses and provide a
range of housing choice
Page 93 of 146
D.5
Page 40 . . .

Single family designations of varying densities are provided. Low density (one unit per acre) is
proposed for 205 Street and six to eight for the remainder. Where low densities are proposed
the location of the single family reflects basic planning principles, some residents wish to remain
relatively low density and also provide a buffer to adjoining existing and planned low density
neighbourhoods. For example, the low density single family on the east side of the 205 Street
alignment was designated to higher densities than currently planned for in the Willoughby
Community Plan yet still maintaining densities similar to adjacent land under application for six
u.p.a. in the Northeast Gordon Estate Plan.

Pocket Park (PP), Wildlife Habitat Patch (WHP) and Greenspace – The one acre PP
requirement is proposed near the commercial centre to create a more dynamic neighbourhood
node and adjacent the WHP. Primary consideration for the WHP was for the existing high
quality mature stands of evergreen trees. The WHP will have a demonstration aspect through
either/or direct exposure to nature and/or information plaques. A connection to the 204 Street
creek compensation area south of 70 Avenue has been extended north through the plan to aid
wildlife movement through the development area and eventually connecting to the Yorkson Plan
204 Street Creek Greenway. The width and design of both the creek compensation area and
the connection north has yet to be determined. However, designs will be consistent with current
Township requirements where applicable.

Other linear buffers are proposed as greenlinks between various densities of residential uses.
The design of these buffers is expected to be the same or similar to the greenlinks in Yorkson,
the exception being the possibility of taking more advantage of existing trees. These greenlinks
provide public access over privately maintained corridors. Further benefits include providing
ground oriented multi-family units directly accessing the greenlinks and visual buffers between
varying multi-family designations.

A small public amenity is located on the uphill side of 203 Street and 68 Avenue to give public
access to the views. Although not proposed for any of the concepts a landscape amenity
feature has been added to the southeast corner of 202B Street and 72 Avenue to indicate a
transition into a new neighbourhood and provide a rest stop for pedestrians using the street
greenways. The design of these amenities is yet to be determined.

Traffic Calming – Traffic calming elements are proposed for 204 Street at 68 and 70 Avenue in
the form of a traffic circle. A raised intersection with raised median islands combined with curb
extensions, on-street parking and special landscaping is proposed for the T-intersection of 204
Street and 68 Avenue. Traffic lights are indicated as needed on major roads

Page 94 of 146
D.5
Page 41 . . .

Page 95 of 146
D.5
Page 42 . . .

Option 2
Commercial – This option proposes the small scale mixed use pedestrian oriented
neighbourhood centre at the intersection of 204 Street and 72 Avenue. The advantage of this
location is the higher visibility for commercial tenants from vehicle traffic along 72 Avenue. The
drawback is that is far noisier at this location and therefore may not be as pedestrian friendly.

The commercial units are proposed as a few small scale units for local use only fronting 204
Street. They would be on the ground floor of an apartment complex with some on-street angle
or parallel parking with most parking to the rear. The streetscape would be tight to the street
with opportunities for patios and other amenity features that make attractive and livable similar
to Option 1.

As in Option 1 live-work sites in a townhouse form will front onto 204 Street. Parking for clients
is provided on-street as either angle or parallel.

Residential – Apartment densities are proposed for an expanded area adjacent the commercial
node.

Townhouses of varying densities are proposed for the bulk of west side of 204 Street, adjacent
apartment uses and 72 Avenue although to a slightly lesser extent. An additional strip of
townhouse is proposed for the area adjacent 72 Avenue and the north end of 205 Street. As in
Option 1 they provide a buffer use between higher and lower densities, act as noise buffer and
are used only when complimentary to adjacent uses unless mitigating circumstances (e.g. wide
roads separate densities/uses). Although only discussed and not shown on the land use option
concept Townhouse densities are categorized the same as Option 1 and are roughly in the
same area although less townhouse designated land is provided overall.

As in Option 1 Single family designations of varying densities are provided. In this case the
option is provided for the north section of 205 Street to develop some townhouse density with a
buffer of lower density (4 u.p.a.) single family adjacent the existing estate homes. Much more
single family is proposed for the centre of the plan. The same rationale has been used as in
Option 1 regarding designating land similar to or slightly higher than currently found in the
Willoughby Plan or by considering existing or planned neighbourhoods.

Pocket Park (PP), Wildlife Habitat Patch (WHP) and Greenspace – This option differs from
Option 1 by providing the PP/WHP combination at the mid-block of 204 Street between 70 and
72 Avenues only.

A connection to the 204 Street creek compensation area south of 70 Avenue has been
extended north through the plan to aid wildlife movement through the development area and
eventually connecting to the Yorkson Plan 204 Street Creek Greenway remains the same.

Other linear buffers are proposed as greenlinks between various densities of residential uses.
The design of these buffers is expected to be the same or similar to the greenlinks in Yorkson,
the exception being the possibility of taking more advantage of existing trees as per Option 1.

A small public amenity is located on the uphill side of 203 Street and 68 Avenue to give public
access to the views and the landscape amenity feature at the southeast corner of 202B Street
and 72 Avenue remains.

Traffic Calming – Traffic calming elements are proposed as per Option I.

Page 96 of 146
D.5
Page 43 . . .

Page 97 of 146
D.5
Page 44 . . .

DISCUSSION
Option 1:

The following items were discussed:


• widths of greenways – information was provided about the different types, locations
and widths
• locations of streams – information was provided on the types of streams and
requirement for swales; the watercourse along 204 Street only exists to 70 Avenue, a
greenway only (no watercourse) is proposed to extend north of 70 Avenue to
connect to the greenway system in Yorkson; it was noted that the roadside ditch on
204 Street would be treated similarly to the stream along 206 Street in Northeast
Gordon Estate
• 72 Ave – would be an arterial road with 2 lanes in both directions and left turn lanes
at major intersections
• 204 St. – would be a collector road and would extend north of 72 Avenue eventually
• Locating townhouses next to by low density was questioned
• It was noted that some owners on 205 Street may want development

Option 2:

The following points were raised:


• There should be a theme like White Rock or Fort. Langley that have pedestrian-
oriented centres; a centre on 72 does not accomplish this.
• Units for families with kids need for parks – all multi family projects require a child
friendly amenity
• 6 – 8 is not an option, should be 7 – 10
• Parcels shown as park may not actually develop as a Park, the Township has to
purchase park properties at market value
• Construction of 70 Avenue through to 202A Street will not happen until development
occurs.

Next Steps

The options will be refined and taken to Council, to authorize an Open House, hopefully before
the end of June. Once options go to council then plans will be available on the web site.

Questionnaire

Questionnaires were distributed to the team. Responses from the 28 questionnaires


received are detailed below.

Vision

1. Do you have any comments or suggestions regarding the vision statement for Central
Gordon Estate?

• I fail to see how NEGE will achieve the density necessary to access decent services
(ie: Buses) or even sidewalks and streetlights if the land is going to be used up with a
network of green trails and “low density garden city philosophy.” We are 40 min from
Vanc., 20 min from Port Mann, and pretty much on the South Fraser Ring Road. We
are (should be) city.
• Too much high density. There should be a much larger park proposed. Not enough
single family homes in plan.
Page 98 of 146
D.5
Page 45 . . .

• Why is it necessary to add commercial space to this neighbourhood when we have


lots of retail already very close & easily in walking distance. Home Depot, Walmart,
London Drugs & Save on Foods are all in walking distance NOW
• Would prefer a friendly walking community with parks more like Fort Langley – with
character compatible with what is there now.
• Regarding 202B Street area, I think this area should have higher density than area
behind it (ie along 204) And I think it is not feasible to put public-access view point
near 202B/68 Ave. Putting public-access view point in that spot is not possible.
• You say you want a walking community, with a 5 min walk to the store, so why Option
2
• No Development!!
• Too many walk ways & green ways.
• Vision Statement is good except for the Low Density Comment. I would prefer to
have Central Gordon as a high density area, that is walkable. We would like more
Apartments with Underground Parking. High Rise would good for area, much like
New Westminster to enjoy the view of Mountains & City.
• I do like the “option 1” plan. I would prefer multi-family development in more areas.
• Apple pie – motherhood.
• We think high density in this area close to city is the only way to develop
• All looks good. Car parking should be looked at – Just drive from 68 east. 202 B –
204.
• Like the vision although the word vision was spelled wrong on the board
• Option 1 is more to the thought of “walking community – 72nd far too heavy traffic (4
lanes) to add any “stop & go’ shopping
• Density seems high, like the idea of keeping larger trees in green areas.
• The vision statement for Central Gordon Estate is great as it is.
• Reasonably high density with Community feel. - You Havent done that
• Good. You say you want a walkway community with a 5 min walk to the Store, so
why Option 2!
• Good. You say you want a walking Community with a 5 min walk to the Store, so why
Option 2!
• Sounds good.
• I think the vision statement summarizes all the input given at the Charrette.
• I’d like the high density area includes my property. It doesn’t make sense to just skip
my property to make odd shape of the high density area. I want high density.

2. Do you approve of the vision statement as is?


Yes: 15 No: 9 No Response: 4

Comments:
• Statement yes Your options No
• NOT WITH RETAIL

Page 99 of 146
D.5
Page 46 . . .

Option 1

3. Do have any comments/suggestions or additions/deletions?

• Placement of commercial @ 70/204 would be problematic – bringing extra traffic into


the quieter area.
• Are there provisions for retirement communities, off leash areas for pets of all these
people that will migrate to this area.
• I want High density where my property is situated Town houses condominiums
• Best option but needs work – “Fort Langley” character.
• Best option, gives you a walking community with parks, a good mix of housing and is
family oriented.
• No Development!!
• We really like Option 1. We like the area the Commercial is located & the Park. We
would like to see the housing density increased to 10 per acre so it is viable to
developers. We would like to see an increase of “area C” within the development as
well. We would like to see more Apartment Development with Underground Parking.
We need to make this area the High Density area in order to preserve the Farmland
in the lower Valley.
• Would like to see area “C” extended down 70 Ave east to where 205 St meets 70th
Ave
More multi-family development
• I like it better than option 2.
• We prefer option 1 we like the area located for park and commercial. Residential
housing should be increased 8 to 10 per acre
• Have comm./residential 4 storey at 72/204 as per option 2 otherwise good job.
• 205 St needs to be polled to see if they want to stay the same
How much property will you take to widen 72 at 205!
• We should work to the vision… This is more evenly “laid out”
• Like the parks and green links, concerned with traffic circle at 68th & 204th.
Right now my property has part of it shown as a road (70th) the frontage on 202B will
be a greenway (18 meters). How and when will the road be built, is the plan as
shown changeable.
• Like the ideas that there is 40-60 upa @ 204 & 70, which release the traffic on 72
Ave.
• You took 4 ideas & went in what looks to be the opposite direction – Where the
people wanted density you went with single family – where they wanted townhomes it
looks like you went with apartments.
• Excellent – This is the best option – makes most sense
• Excellent - Works with the Vision
• Use a higher density than 6-8 upa for residential.
• Townhome parkade? $$
25 upa 2 storey?
• Prefer Optoin #1. Would like to see 205th Street extend down to 70th Avenue and
extend Block C east to the 205th Street. Makes more sense. 205th Street then
becomes clear division between higher + lower density.
• I prefer the “green team” which includes my property as the high density area.

Page 100 of 146


D.5
Page 47 . . .

Option 2

5. Do have any comments/suggestions or additions/deletions?

• Generally, an excellent plan; especially change to 205 street - much better for long
term. Very positive moves.
• Too much high density. There should be a much larger park proposed. Not enough
single family homes in plan.
• 72 Ave is already extremely busy; adding commercial space increases traffic
slowdown & congestion. If this is meant to be a main thoroughfare; lets keep the
traffic moving & not create bottle necks of drivers trying to get in/out of parking lots.
• Look at Fort Langley livability & do again.
• You might as well forget the commercial area, as people will use Walmart, 208/72 &
200/72.
• Prefer Option #2
• Not if favour of this option. We do not like the location of the commercial or the park.
Too much low density, this needs to be increased to Condos. Also… residential
density should be increased to 10 per acre to make it viable for development.
• Would prefer “Option 1”
• More condo development or row housing
• Happy with this option too as comm. is at the correct location. 72/204.
• What makes you think that the 2 properties at the corner of 205 & 72nd want to be
redesignated for 4UPA if the rest of the street doesn’t? I am baffled by this.
• Again, 72nd (commercial) too congested and busy for a ‘quiet’ shopping area
• Like the increase of single family homes along 204th.
• I strongly agree that the apartments must designated on along 72 Ave. & the park @
204 & 70 Ave moved together with the one on the middle of 72 & 70.
• Option 1 is better than 2 but both are showing a blatant disregard for the hours spent
by the committee on our previous Saturday.
• No. Already have commercial on 72nd – Need to move if you want “5 min walking”
District.
Terrible. Why do you need commercial 4 Blocks East of current commercial.
• No – 72 is too busy for firehall. Where will families walk children.
Condense commercial – Appears to be 4 blocks on total Commercial
Vision is for walking Distance to Commercial – How will this plan meet this vision
• Use a higher density than 6-8 upa for residential.
• I like Option 2 because the 4 storey apartments & commercial are on the 4 lane 72
Ave. Because land will be more + more valuable, I think high density townhomes
(perhaps even 30-45 UPA) + apartments are a necessity because we need more
population of all different ages to help pay for the utilities + facilities, where people
can walk to.
• Better plan
No townhome parkades 20 upa T/H.
More apartments less sprawl.
• I want high density for my property.
• I would like this option more than Option One, with consideration to develop 205th
Street.

Page 101 of 146


D.5
Page 48 . . .

Summary

Are there any aspects of either plan you would rather see in the other plan?

• What happened to the 7-10 minimum per acre. At Charrette we weren’t even allowed
to consider 6-8. (Not viable for Developers).
• Having park & quiet area beside 72/ & commercial will not be attractive or pleasant.
Traffic noise would be very distracting & dangerous for children & animals.
Willoughby has not had any green space to the public in 25 years. It is time in a
residential area. RC Garnett is the first green space we’ve had. Lets have it centrally
located & away from speeding traffic.
• Option 2 has too much low density housing. I would increase the density to “area C”
as indicated in Option 1. I would add more apartment complexes with underground
parking. Parking will be a problem, as it already is on 68th Ave., between 204 & 202.
More High Rise with views
• I think that people do want to walk and enjoy the paths or trails. I don’t think that
people will really walk to stores. Some stores will be too expensive. I would like to
have an independent survey of 205th St. I feel that the process was legitimate and
independent by a resident of the street. Most people will still feel the same way as
some residents have made extensive renovations and upgrades to their properties.
• If you move commercial to 72nd then higher density in option 2 as condo’s along 70th
Ave would be a great area
• No.
• What difference does it make.

The meeting ended at 8:25 p.m.

Page 102 of 146


D.5
Page 49 . . .

ATTACHMENT D

CENTRAL GORDON ESTATE

CHARRETTE FOLLOW-UP SUMMARY

SEPTEMBER 23, 2009

Attendees
Bill Christiansen Ben Cooper Helen Firmino
Gary Galbraith Kam Girn Bonnie Jackson
Donna Lutek Lisa MacNaughton Sherri-Lee Pressman
Lisa Rohweder Gary Sawyer Jag Sidhu
Larry Thorlakson Peggy Weatherdon Denise Emison
Wayne Emison Fred Hu Colleen Schellenberg
Richard Hull Karin Deglan Gary Deglan
Edith Barbati Shawn Bouchard

Township Representatives

Mayor Green Paul Crawford Patrick Marples

P. Crawford reviewed the process to date. After the April Team Meeting, staff considered
issues raised at the meeting and reviewed the densities and land uses, especially around the
neighbourhood centre, and how to make the centres more livable. This resulted in development
of a new Option 3, similar to Option 1 in terms of location of the neighbourhood centre.

Central Gordon Estate Plan Options


Option 3 for Central Gordon Estate also provides a small-scale mixed use neighbourhood
centre at 70 Avenue and 204 Street that incorporated commercial space as the ground floor of
an apartment building, live-work sites and park space.

P. Marples reviewed the similarities and differences between Option 1 and Option 3:
• No change north of 72Ave
• No response from the 205 St residents so land use was set at the current density of
1 unit per acre
• 205 Street will be opened to 70 Avenue
• Mixed use (apartment /commercial) was extended to the northeast corner of 204
Street and 70 Avenue to reinforce an urban neighbourhood, buffered with
townhouses
• Variety of townhouse designations to be continued
A. base density of12-15 units per acre or up to 40 u.p.a. if shared underground
or structured parking is provided for all units
B. 12-15 units per acre or up to 40 units per acre if an apartment building (4
storey max.) and townhouses are provided (with shared underground or
structured parking provided for all apartment units) or townhouses with
shared underground or structured parking provided for all units.
C. 15 - 20 units per acre
D. 12-15 units per acre to respect locational issues
Page 103 of 146
D.5
Page 50 . . .

• Two single family designations:


- 6-8 units per acre on either side of 204 Street
- 6-8 units per acre on slope in and around the southeast quadrant of the
proposed plan area (minimum lot size of 371.6 m2)
• An additional 1 acre pocket park/ wildlife patch has been provided. An
environmental corridor will extend north on 204 Street from the watercourse weaving
beside and behind existing properties to 72 Avenue
• The green links network has been expanded and will be provide public access
through right-of-way access over privately maintained corridors.

CENTRAL GORDON ESTATE PLAN – OPTION 3

Page 104 of 146


D.5
Page 51 . . .

Questions

Will 205 Street south of 70 Avenue join up with 205 Street north of 68 Avenue?
• logically it will, depends on subdivision to the east.

What will the mixed use consist of?


• It will be like the project at 68 Avenue and 194 Street in Surrey, but will include
residential use; commercial use will consist of about 800 sq. ft. stores; on street
parking will be provided

What will be built along 70 Avenue east of the plan area?


• Current application is 6 units per acre

How will the intersection of 68 Avenue and 204 Street be designed?


• A raised intersection will be provided with a pinched road

Are there plans to widen 204 Street?


• Potential widening by a couple of metres

Timing?
• About 1 ½ years, engineering servicing plan is tied to 208 Street review and
Northeast Gordon Special Study Area (Tara Farms)

What is the next step?


• Report to council in a few weeks, followed by Open House.

Who is pushing plan?


• 75% of owners indicated that they wanted a neighbourhood plan. Some owners
moved into the area after the petition was completed.

What if a petition is redone?


• Council would have to review and make a decision.

How will the watercourse along 204 Street be dealt with?


• It is a yellow coded, non fish bearing watercourse, will likely be green street design

Why is 70 Avenue curved at 202A Street?


• To align with local road west of 202A Street for safety

Sidewalks are needed on 72 Avenue for safety


• Sidewalks are put in when development occurs, need to consult Engineering if
sidewalks are wanted earlier

When will the pedestrian overpass on 200 Street be built?


• Project is set back due to design delays

How will people be informed of an open house?


• Everyone in neighbourhood will receive a mailed notice and a notice will be put in the
newspapers.

The meeting ended at 8:00 p.m.

Page 105 of 146


Page 106 of 146
D.6

REPORT TO
MAYOR AND COUNCIL

PRESENTED: OCTOBER 19, 2009 - SPECIAL MEETING REPORT: 09-129


FROM: CORPORATE ADMINISTRATION DIVISION FILE: 0890-25
SUBJECT: REPORT ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PROPERTY ENDOWMENT TRUST

RECOMMENDATION(S):
That Council approve the formation of a Property Trust for the Township of Langley including a
Board of Directors, consisting of the Mayor, two Councillors and the Township Administrator;
and

That Council approve the Trust Principles and Structure as laid out in this report; and

That Council appoint the Manager of Property Services as the Manager of the Property Trust
responsible for the day to day operation of the Trust; and

That Council consider the marketing for the sale of the surplus properties as referenced by staff;
and

That Council consider soliciting by Request for Proposal of an architect/planner consultant for
the design, massing, density and rezoning of the surplus properties as referenced by staff and
report back to Council seeking Council approval of the consultant.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
At its Regular Council meeting on March 2, 2009 Council passed the motion:

Whereas Mr. Maitland made a presentation to the joint Finance and Council Priorities
Committee meeting on the background and basic tenets of the Property Endowment Fund as it
works in the City of Vancouver which is governed by the Vancouver Charter;

Be is resolved that staff contract with Mr. Maitland to identify specific properties in the Township
“non-DCC” land identified inventory that has potential re-sale value and this be prepared as a
report to Council; and

Be it resolved that upon completion of the land review, Mr. Maitland review the Township
policies and processes as to land holdings and disposition and recommend amendments to the
Township’s current bylaws, policies and procedures to establish the transformation of the
Township’s Land Reserve fund to a Township Property Endowment Fund.

Mr. Maitland has since been working with staff to identify surplus properties that could be placed
in a Property Endowment Trust (the “Trust”). Mr. Maitland’s recommendations above flow from
his report which is attached hereto as Attachment A.

The properties that are the subject of this report will be distributed under separate cover.

Page 107 of 146


D.6
REPORT ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PROPERTY ENDOWMENT TRUST
Page 2 . . .

PURPOSE:
The purpose of this report is twofold. Firstly, it recommends the formation of a Property
Endowment Trust, the appointment of a Trust Board of Directors and Manager and identifies
initial properties for sale with proceeds funding the Trust. Secondly, it recommends
commissioning a consultant for preliminary design and rezoning application of surplus Township
property.

Page 108 of 146


D.6
REPORT ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PROPERTY ENDOWMENT TRUST
Page 3 . . .

BACKGROUND/HISTORY:
Mr. Maitland appeared before the Finance Committee on February 10, 2009 and made a
presentation on the benefits of a Property Trust, based upon his experience managing the City
of Vancouver’s Property Endowment Fund. At its March 2, 2009 meeting Council passed the
following motion:

Whereas Mr. Maitland made a presentation to the joint Finance and Council Priorities
Committee meeting on the background and basic tenets of the Property Endowment Fund as it
works in the City of Vancouver which is governed by the Vancouver Charter;

Be is resolved that staff contract with Mr. Maitland to identify specific properties in the Township
“non-DCC” land identified inventory that has potential re-sale value and this be prepared as a
report to Council; and

Be it resolved that upon completion of the land review, Mr. Maitland review the Township
policies and processes as to land holdings and disposition and recommend amendments to the
Township’s current bylaws, policies and procedures to establish the transformation of the
Township’s Land Reserve fund to a Township Property Endowment Fund.

Mr. Maitland has since been working with staff to identify surplus properties that could be placed
in the Trust. He has also drafted a Property Trust Charter for Council approval (see Attachment
A).

The Property Endowment Trust Charter

Principles

The Principles of the Property Trust are referenced in Attachment A.

Structure of the Trust

With reference to Attachment A, Mr. Maitland outlines the Structure of the Trust

Once established, the Trust would be responsible for paying all the costs associated with the
Trust. Anticipated expenses include salaries of Township staff conducting work on behalf of the
Trust and fees associated with consultants, lawyers, property managers and ongoing
maintenance of Trust assets.

The Trust will pay a yearly dividend into General Revenue with the amount of the dividend
determined by Council.

The Board of the Trust will meet periodically to review the status of the portfolio and provide
direction to the Manager of the Property Trust. The Board will prepare an annual report to be
presented to Council. This report will assist Council to determine the dividend to be paid by the
Trust into General Revenue. The purpose of this dividend is to defray property tax increases.

Mr. Maitland identifies two classes of property. Level 1 Properties are characterized as
Township holdings that are not required for present or future municipal purposes and have no
disposal or other restrictions. These properties would be available for immediate disposal.
Level 2 Properties are characterized as Township holdings that are not required for present or
future municipal purposes but have disposal or other restrictions.

Page 109 of 146


D.6
REPORT ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PROPERTY ENDOWMENT TRUST
Page 4 . . .

Transparency

Mr. Maitland recommends transparency for the Trust. To ensure transparency mapping should
be created and updated on a regular basis identifying the holdings within the Trust portfolio and
be made available for public inspection at the Civic Facility. To that end the same information
should be made available on the Township’s website.

All Trust lands available for sale or lease should be advertised to ensure the public is aware of
Trust activities and potential buyers and lessees are aware of Trust offerings. To that end the
Trust will utilize newspaper advertising, signage, the Township website, BC Bid and advising
members of the Fraser Valley Real Estate Board.

List of Properties Proposed For Sale

The properties that are the subject of this report are provided under separate cover.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
The purpose of the fifth and final recommendation contained in this report is to obtain
authorization to solicit by Request for Proposal (“RFP”) the services of an architect/urban
planner (the “Consultant”). When the RFP is completed a further report to Council will be
prepared seeking Council approval to engage the services of the Consultant.

The Consultant will conduct a review of the Township’s properties identified by staff and provide
a report. The Consultant will analyze the properties and issues related to zoning, density,
subdivision and the Official Community Plan with a view to determining the highest and best use
for these lands. This process would lead to a proposed redevelopment of these lands, subject
to Council approval, that will add value to these holdings and the Trust.

The objectives of the Trust are:

1. to manage and develop the Trust’s holdings in order to generate a reasonable economic
return;
2. to buy and sell lands in order to preserve and where possible increase the real value of
the Trust’s assets;
3. to support the Township’s public objectives; and
4. to develop a program to increase the Trust’s strategic holdings.

Currently, many Township holdings can be characterized as nonperforming or underperforming


assets. Nonperforming assets are characterized as properties that do not generate any rental
income or property taxes. Underperforming assets are characterized as properties that many
generate some income but the income does not represent a reasonable economic return on the
capital invested.

Assets that can be described as being at highest and best use but are nonperforming or
underperforming should be disposed.

Assets that are not at highest and best use would go through a value added process that may
include rezoning, subdivision, servicing, remediation etc. in order to enhance value prior to
disposal.

The acquisition of assets to the Trust should be strategic in nature and generate a reasonable
economic return in order to fulfill the objectives of the Trust. Dispositions and acquisitions can
be timed in order to take advantage of normal real estate market cycles.
Page 110 of 146
D.6
REPORT ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PROPERTY ENDOWMENT TRUST
Page 5 . . .

The portfolio of properties proposed to be placed in the Trust is relatively modest. However with
reasonable governance and management the Trust will grow over time providing ongoing and
increasing dividends to the Township.

Respectfully submitted,

Scott Thompson
MANAGER PROPERTY SERVICES
for
CORPORATE ADMINISTRATION DIVISION
This report has been prepared in consultation with the following listed departments.

CONCURRENCES
Division Name
Administration Mark Bakken

ATTACHMENT A Property Trust Charter


ATTACHMENT B List of Properties To Be Considered For Disposition (under separate
cover)

Page 111 of 146


D.6
REPORT ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PROPERTY ENDOWMENT TRUST
Page 6 . . .

ATTACHMENT A

PROPERTY TRUST CHARTER

PRINCIPLES

Purpose: To actively manage the real estate assets of the Township of Langley for
the benefit of the taxpayers.

Goal: To generate a reasonable return on the assets and (where possible not
jeopardizing the return) support Township objectives.

Objective: To buy, sell, lease and manage Township lands to generate a reasonable
return to the taxpayer over the long term.

Priorities: In making operating decisions the financial criteria must be met.


However, where possible preference will be given to development,
acquisition or disposal opportunities that also meet Township objectives.

Governance: Mayor and Council will have the final authority on any sale, purchase or
lease of Township real estate. The day to day management of the Trust
will be carried out by the Manager, Property Services.

A Board consisting of the Mayor, two Councillors and the Administrator


will provide advice and direction on the operation of the Trust.

STRUCTURE OF THE TRUST

Create the Trust with Level 1 and 2 properties as the Trust assets.

Level 1 Properties: Properties within the municipal land inventory that are not required for
present or future municipal purposes and have no disposal or other
restrictions.

Level 2 Properties: Properties that are not required for present or future municipal purposes
but have disposal or other restrictions.

Create a Trust cost centre with the Trust responsible for the paying of all
costs associated with the operation of the Trust. This would include but
not be limited to salaries of Township employees doing Trust work,
consultants, lawyers, property managers, and the costs of maintenance
and repair of Trust assets.

The Trust will pay a yearly dividend into General revenue to help offset
tax increases with the amount to be determined by Council.

TRANSPARENCY

Create a map with all Trust properties identified and available for public
inspection at the Township hall.

Page 112 of 146


D.6
REPORT ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A PROPERTY ENDOWMENT TRUST
Page 7 . . .

Major advertising of all lands for sale or lease to ensure the taxpayer is
aware of Trust activities and all potential buyers or lessees are aware of
Trust offerings.

LIST OF PROPERTIES PROPOSED FOR SALE

See Attachment B (under separate cover)

Page 113 of 146


Page 114 of 146
E.1

Page 115 of 146


E.1

Page 116 of 146


E.1

Page 117 of 146


E.1

Page 118 of 146


F.1

Page 119 of 146


F.1

Page 120 of 146


F.1

Page 121 of 146


F.1

Page 122 of 146


F.1

Page 123 of 146


F.1

Page 124 of 146


F.2

YOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE


September 23, 2009 commencing at 7:00 p.m.
Salmon River Committee Room
th
4 Floor, 20338 – 65 Avenue, Langley, BC

MINUTES

Present:

Chair, Peter Wang, Walnut Grove Secondary

Aldergrove Secondary: Taylor Connolly


Credo Christian: Cobi van den Bossch, Kelsey Alderliesten
DW Poppy Secondary: James McMillan and Josh Stelting
Langley Christian School: Adele Van Wyk and Anna Hayashi
Langley Fine Arts: Andhra Azevedo
Langley Secondary School: Bianca Czihaly and Catherine Thompson
RE Mountain Secondary: Julie Choi and Linh Phan
Walnut Grove Secondary: Paige Strand and Sterling Testini

Municipal Representative:
Councillor Steve Ferguson

Community Representative:
Todd Hauptman

School Board Representative:


R. McFarlane

STAFF:
Lesley Visser, Sylvia Carneiro, Val Keffer, Susan Palmer, Ryan Schmidt and
Alicia Stark

Guest :
Ellen Worrell

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

1. Youth Advisory Committee - September 23, 2009

Moved by C. Thompson,
Seconded by P. Strand,
Recommendation that the Youth Advisory Committee adopt the Agenda of the
September 23, 2009 meeting.
CARRIED

Page 125 of 146


F.2
September 23, 2009
Youth Advisory Committee Minutes -2-

A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

1. Youth Advisory Committee - May 27, 2009

Moved by A. Van Wyk,


Seconded by A. Azevedo,
That the Youth Advisory Committee adopt the Minutes of the May 27, 2009 meeting.
CARRIED

B. DELEGATIONS

C. PRESENTATIONS

1. Municipal Government’s Role

S. Palmer provided a presentation on the role of the municipal government.

2. Douglas Day

E. Worrell spoke on the Douglas Day Event that will be taking place at the Langley
Events Centre on November 19, 2009. The Douglas Day Committee is looking for
volunteers from the Youth Commission to take part in various duties. If any of the
youth are interested in volunteering they should contact L. Visser by email.

3. CEEP Stakeholder Advisory Committee

R. Schmidt, Environmental Coordinator, Township of Langley informed the members


that the Community Energy and Emission Plan Stakeholder Advisory Committee is
looking for two representatives from the Youth Advisory Committee to be involved in
it. The Committee is made up of volunteers from the Agricultural Advisory
Committee, the Economic Development Advisory Committee, BC Hydro, Terasen
Gas, general public and various other stakeholder groups who will explore ideas on
how to reduce emissions. The Terms of Reference was circulated at the meeting.

D. REPORTS (VERBAL)

1. Council Update

Councillor Ferguson gave an overview on Council. He reported that some of the


activities underway are:

• Team Building
• Aldergrove Planning Committee
• Budget deliberations (will begin in the fall)

Page 126 of 146


F.2
September 23, 2009
Youth Advisory Committee Minutes -3-

D. REPORTS (VERBAL)

2. School District Update

Robert McFarlane, School Trustee provided an update on the Langley School


District. He noted that the suggested changes put forward by the parents of the
Langley Secondary School have been implemented this year. Last year the deficit
for the Langley School District was $9.0 million, mainly due to wrong accounting.
This year spending will be very stringent.

3. Recreation Update

A. Stark reported that funding is available from the Community Justice Initiatives
Association to host the battle of the bands in 2010.

She informed the members that the one page Recreation Program will be given to
members to be displayed at their respective school every month. As per the
recommendation from the committee, the colours of the poster will be different from
month to month.

The Township is in the process of hiring a youth worker for the Walnut Grove
facilities. In winter all the facilities will be running programs for youth.

D. REPORTS (WRITTEN)

E. CORRESPONDENCE

1. British Columbia Youth Parliament

The BC Youth Parliament will be held in Victoria at the Legislative Chambers from
December 27 to 31, 2009. This is a province-wide non-partisan organization for
young people between the ages of 16 to 21 and teaches citizenship skills through
participation in parliamentary sessions in December. If any of the members are
interested in participating to register directly at www.bcyp.org .

2. Transit Police Transit Youth Workshop

Young people between the ages of 12 to 18 are invited to a free workshop where
they will be able to learn alongside local transit police the forty developmental assets
and ways they can make a positive change in their community. If any of the
members are interested in participating to contact Carly Hoogeveen at
604-534-5515 or carlyhoogeveen@cjibc.org .

F. 2009/2010 WORK PROGRAM

Page 127 of 146


F.2
September 23, 2009
Youth Advisory Committee Minutes -4-

G. COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS AND REFERRALS

H. COMMITTEE UPDATES

I. ITEMS FOR INFORMATION

1. Torch Relay

An email from Councillor Bateman regarding the Olympic Torch Relay Meeting was
circulated with the agenda package.

Members were informed that the 2010 Olympic Torch will be coming to Langley and
the Township is looking for youth to help plan the event. If any of the members are
interested in getting involved to contact Councillor Bateman
jordan@jhordanbateman.com.

2. Paint the Town Red

The letter from the Canadian Olympic Committee (COC) was circulated with the
agenda package.

The COC’s aim is to promote the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games and
Torch Relay’s and encourage businesses and communities to display and wear the
colour of the Canadian flag when the Torch Relay visits Langley.

J. ITEMS FROM PRIOR MEETINGS

K. OTHER BUSINESS

1. Rotational Chairperson Appointments

The following are the Chairs appointed for the 2009-2010 Committee year:

September 23, 2009 – P. Wang


October 28, 2009 – P. Strand
November 25, 2009 – C. Thompson
January 27, 2010 – S. Testini
February 24, 2010– A. Azevedo
March 24, 2009 – A. Van Wyk
April 28, 2009 – Brookswood Secondary School
May 26, 2009 – J. McMillan

2. Vice Chair Appointment

The adult Vice Chair appointment for the year 2009-2010 is Todd Hauptman.

Page 128 of 146


F.2
September 23, 2009
Youth Advisory Committee Minutes -5-

K. OTHER BUSINESS

3. Advisory Committee Representatives

The following members agreed to represent the Youth Advisory Committee on:

Community Heritage Advisory Committee - Adel Van Wyk and James McMillan
Community Safety Advisory Committee – Paige Strand and Sterling Testini
Economic Development Advisory Committee – Linh Phan and Andhra Azevedo
Recreation, Culture, and Parks Advisory Committee– Catherine Thompson and
Peter Wang
Agricultural Advisory Committee – Cobi van den Bossch and Kelsey Alderliesten
Community Energy and Emissions Plan Stakeholder Advisory Committee –
Andhra Azevedo, Anna Hayashi and Bianca Czihaly

The schedule for the meeting is as follows

Community Heritage Advisory 1st Tuesday 7:30 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.


Committee
Economic Development Advisory 1st Wednesday 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Committee
Recreation, Culture, and Parks 2nd Wednesday 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Advisory Committee
Community Safety Advisory Committee 3rd Wednesday 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.

Agricultural Advisory Committee 3rd Thursday 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.

L. ROUND TABLE

1. Walnut Grove Secondary School – P. Wang is on the Grad Council. The students
are organizing the Annual Watermelon Eating Contest and a dance. They are also
planning a Terry Fox run and a camp for cancer for 3 days at the school.

2. Credo Christian School – on September 18, 2009 the students went to Victoria to
visit the Royal BC Museum. They are planning to have a Terry Fox Run in
October.

3. Langley Secondary School – the students are organizing a Terry Fox Run.

4. DW Poppy Secondary School – students are collecting school bags for school
children in Afghanistan.

5. Aldergrove Secondary School – students will be participating in the Terry Fox Run
and are also planning a hot dog eating contest.

Page 129 of 146


F.2
September 23, 2009
Youth Advisory Committee Minutes -6-

L. ROUND TABLE

6. Langley Fine Arts – will be hosting the “Compassion 2 Action” Global Citizenship
Conference on October 23, 2009 and if any of the committee members would like
to participate, contact A. Azevedo andhra_s_a@hotmail.com

7. V. Keffer informed the members that courtesy passes to use the recreation facilities
at the Township have been sent to the Principals of various schools.

The contact information sheet will be emailed to members of the committee.

8. T. Hauptman reported that in spring he is involved in planning an event to raise


awareness in human trafficking. If the members would like to more information to
contact him toddhauptman@telus.net

9. Langley Christian School – are planning a “Change for Change” campaign and a
soup day and the profits will go to the food bank.

10. RE Mountain Secondary School – have introduced a program “Be a Buddy and Not
a Bully” for the grades 9 – 12. The students are trying to organize a “Fright Night”
and a Halloween dance.

M. NEXT MEETING

Date: October 28, 2009


Location: Salmon River Committee Room
4th Floor, 20338 – 65 Avenue
Time: 7:00 p.m.
Chair: Paige Strand

N. TERMINATE

Moved by C. Thompson,
That the meeting terminate at 8:35 p.m.
CARRIED

CERTIFIED CORRECT:

_______________
Chair, Peter Wang

Page 130 of 146


F.3

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE


Wednesday, October 7, 2009 commencing at 6:58 p.m.
Salmon River Committee Room
th
4 Floor, 20338 – 65 Avenue, Langley, BC

MINUTES

Present:
Acting Chair, Allan Robinson

Andhra Azevedo, John Graham, Kieron Hunt, Gerry Larson, Rian Martin,
Carol Paulson, Linh Phan, Carla Robin, Chul Seung Lee, Garry Tingley, and
Joe Zaccaria

Municipal Representative:
Councillor Jordan Bateman

Staff:
G. MacKinnon, Economic Development Manager
B. Andrews, Economic Development
S. Carneiro, Recording Secretary

In Attendance:
Councillor Grant Ward

INTRODUCTION OF YOUTH ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS

A. Robinson welcomed the two new Youth Representatives to the Committee and
there was a round table of introductions.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

1. Economic Development Advisory Committee - October 7, 2009

Moved by J. Zaccaria,
Seconded by J. Graham,
That the Economic Development Advisory Committee adopt the Agenda of the
October 7, 2009 meeting.
CARRIED

Page 131 of 146


F.3
October 7, 2009
Economic Development Advisory Committee Minutes -2-

A. ADOPTION OF MINUTES

1. Economic Development Advisory Committee - September 2, 2009

Moved by R. Martin,
Seconded by J. Graham,
That the Economic Development Advisory Committee adopt the Minutes of the
September 2, 2009 meeting.
CARRIED

B. DELEGATIONS

C. PRESENTATIONS

1. Langley 10 by 10 Challenge

The Minister's Council on Employment for Persons with Disabilities has invited
communities and organizations to join the 10 by 10 challenge to increase
employment of persons with disabilities by 10% by 2010.

A DVD on Langley’s 10 by 10 Challenge was shown to the members of the


Committee.

D. REPORTS (VERBAL)

1. Update on Employment Lands Study

G. MacKinnon reported that the first draft submitted by the consultants is being
reworked. Therefore, the document will be delayed.

2. Community Development Division Realignment

The Community Development Division hired a consultant to evaluate the Division


and look for opportunities in improving its efficiency. Subsequently, G. MacKinnon
recommended that the Economic Development function at the Township needed a
higher profile within Municipal Hall and in the business community. Arising out of
this recommendation, the Economic Development Department was formed as an
independent department - it no longer falls under the umbrella of Long Range
Planning. G. MacKinnon is the Economic Development Manager reporting directly
to the Director of Community Development and B. Andrews is a full time resource
person assigned to the Economic Development Department. A press release
regarding this change will be issued shortly.

D. REPORTS (WRITTEN)

Page 132 of 146


F.3
October 7, 2009
Economic Development Advisory Committee Minutes -3-

E. CORRESPONDENCE

F. ITEMS FROM PRIOR MEETINGS

G. 2009 WORK PROGRAM

H. COUNCIL RESOLUTIONS AND REFERRALS

1. The following Resolution was adopted at the Special Council Meeting dated
September 21, 2009.

Economic Development Advisory Committee – September 2, 2009


That Council receive the Minutes from the Economic Development Advisory
Committee meeting held September 2, 2009.

AMENDMENT (L.2)

That any Advisory Committee members seeking reappointment for the upcoming
appointment process must submit an application and participate in an interview
process.
CARRIED

AMENDMENT

That Council authorize funding from Council Contingency for up to four members of
the Economic Development Advisory Committee to attend the Surrey Regional
Economic Summit.
CARRIED

MAIN MOTION, AS AMENDED

The question was called on the Main Motion, as Amended, and it was
CARRIED

I. TASK FORCE UPDATES

1. Economic Forum Task Force

J. Graham reported that G. Larson, C. Paulson and A. Robinson met with G.


MacKinnon and B. Andrews on the previous two Fridays and had discussions
regarding the Economic Forum. The committee agreed that in order to get good
participation that they move away from having the event on Saturday and instead
have a half-day session a day prior to the November Economic Development Advisory
Committee meeting.

Page 133 of 146


F.3
October 7, 2009
Economic Development Advisory Committee Minutes -4-

I. TASK FORCE UPDATES

The forum will be held on November 3, 2009 in the afternoon at the Langley Events
Centre.

The format is to invite an economist, an urban planner and a futurist.

The speakers for the event are:


• Niels Veldhuis, Fraser Institute/Kwantlen Polytechnic University – “Economic
Forecast”
• Richard Wozney, Site Economics – “Real Estate/Planning – The Implications”
• Speaker to be announced – “Pulling it all together 25 years From Now”

The invitees to the forum will be members of Council and the Economic Development
Advisory Committee.

COUNCIL
Moved by C. Paulson,
Seconded by G. Tingley,
Whereas the Economic Development Advisory Committee is offering advice to Council
on a number of economic issues in a time of significant economic turmoil;

Whereas the reliability of this advice depends, in part, on all EDAC members having a
common understanding of economic factors affecting the Township as well as
projections of future conditions; and

Whereas Council has endorsed the EDAC Work Plan to develop a new draft
Economic Development Strategy.

Therefore be it Resolved that the Township of Langley Council endorse a half day
EDAC/Council Economic Forum with qualified speakers and provide funding of up to a
maximum of $3,000.
CARRIED

2. Community Energy & Emissions Plan (CEEP) Stakeholder Advisory


Committee

C. Paulson reported that the Community Energy & Emissions Plan Stakeholder
Advisory Committee has been formed to reduce greenhouse gas emission by 2010.
The committee consists of volunteers from various organizations, BC Hydro,
Terasen Gas, general public and various other stakeholder groups who will explore
ideas on how to reduce emissions. They will meet three times before the end of the
year. C. Paulson will report progress of CEEP at EDAC meetings when appropriate.

Page 134 of 146


F.3
October 7, 2009
Economic Development Advisory Committee Minutes -5-

I. TASK FORCE UPDATES

3. Aldergrove Planning Committee

A. Robinson reported that the consultants working with the Aldergrove Planning
Committee made a presentation at the Special Council meeting on October 5, 2009.

A tour has been planned for members of the Committee on October 17, 2009 to visit
sites outside of the Township that have been referenced in the Committee’s
meetings. The date of the Open House for public input is October 29, 2009 and
Economic Development Advisory Committee members were encouraged to attend.

4. Summer Games

C. Robin reported that the Summer Games will be held in July 2010. All the
Directors and Chair positions for the Games have been filled. The budget for the
games will be determined by the end of October. Best guess is that 2,000
volunteers from the community will be needed and the Committee is on the lookout
for these volunteers.

J. ITEMS FOR INFORMATION

1. From the EDM’s Desk #27 – Growth of Business Licences

K. OTHER BUSINESS

1. Surrey Regional Economic Summit

J. Graham, G. Larson, R. Martin and C. Paulson, attended the Surrey Regional


Economic Summit on October 6, 2009.

Highlights of the Summit


• The world is changing fast and we have to change too. No country can work
by itself; globally the power is shifting from the West to the East.
• Canada should be cautious as the interest rate and the currency rates will be
lower and the labour market will drive the economy backwards.
• BC needs to look at export markets.
• Be open to new ideas.
• The HST is expected to have a positive impact on the economy.
• Leaders need to focus on specific needs and keep the message simple,
clear and precise.

Moving Forward
• Improve the image of the Township as a place to do business.
• Branding is very important, the Township should mimic/improve on Surrey’s
branding policy, else, it will be left behind.
• The Township should invest in the economic development of the community
and improve its image.
Page 135 of 146
F.3
October 7, 2009
Economic Development Advisory Committee Minutes -6-

K. OTHER BUSINESS

• Local towns should be ready for the media that arrives four weeks prior to
the Olympics.
• Identify the no. 1 and 2 businesses; concentrate on these rather than being
too broad.
• Increase partnerships.
• The Township needs to identify its goal and vision and work towards
achieving it.

Moved by C. Robin,
Seconded R. Martin,
That the Chair of the Economic Development Advisory Committee send a letter to
Mayor and Council thanking them for their support regarding the Surrey Regional
Economic Summit, outlining the economic benefits of attending the conference.
CARRIED

C. Paulson agreed to prepare a detailed report of the Summit for attachment to the
Chair’s letter and for circulation to members of the Committee as well.

2. Advisory Committee Members Term

All Advisory Committee members whose membership term will expire on


December 31, 2009 and have not completed their 6 year term (as per Bylaw 4700)
are encouraged to submit their application for reappointment.

L. ROUND TABLE

1. C. Robin reported that the office of Tourism Langley will be moving to the Langley
Events Centre by the end of this year.

2. Councillor Ward agreed with the suggestion of putting up signs on the Highway
regarding the Township of Langley being open for business.

3. Invite representatives of Tourism Langley and the Chamber of Commerce to talk at


upcoming Economic Development Advisory Committee meetings.

M. NEXT MEETING

Date: Wednesday, November 4, 2009


Location: Salmon River Committee Room
4th Floor, 20338 – 65 Avenue
Time: 7:00 p.m.

Page 136 of 146


F.3
October 7, 2009
Economic Development Advisory Committee Minutes -7-

N. TERMINATE

Moved by R. Martin,
That the meeting terminate at 9:00 p.m.
CARRIED

CERTIFIED CORRECT:

___________________________
Acting Chair, Allan Robinson

Page 137 of 146


Page 138 of 146
G.1

Page 139 of 146


G.1

Page 140 of 146


G.1

Page 141 of 146


Page 142 of 146
G.2

Page 143 of 146


G.2

Page 144 of 146


G.2

Page 145 of 146


G.2

Page 146 of 146