ca t~A COUNCIL REPORT AB BOTSFORD
Report No.: PDS 120-2016 Executive Committee
August 19, 2016 File Nos: 3360-20/PRJ 16-051
To: Mayor and Council From: Blake Collins, Senior Planner Subject: Rezoning application for the property located at 4585 Sumas Mountain Road Owners: Deborah and George Keys
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. THAT Bylaw No. 2628-2016, cited as "Abbotsford Zoning Bylaw, 2014, Amendment Bylaw No. 95", which rezones the property covered under application 3360-20/PRJ16-051 from Country Residential Zone (CR) to Compact Lot Residential Zone (RS6), be given first and second readings at the next Regular Meeting of Council, and advanced to an upcoming Public Hearing;
2. THAT prior to adoption of Bylaw No. 2628-2016, cited as "Abbotsford Zoning Bylaw, 2014, Amendment Bylaw No. 95'', the following conditions be satisfied:
(a) entering into a development agreement with the City to secure required road and utility upgrades and extensions in accordance with Development Bylaw No. 2070-2011 , including the provision of a 1.25m road dedication along the full length of the Sumas Mountain Road frontage; (b) registering all easements and statutory right-of-ways necessary to provide 4585 and 4573 Sumas Mountain Road with sanitary services to accommodate development permitted by the Urban 4 - Detached land use designation as identified in the 2016 OCP to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Engineering and Regional Utilities; and (c) issues of funding for items not budgeted by the City being resolved; and
3. THAT the Mayor and Corporate Officer be authorized to execute all documents related to this matter
SUMMARY OF THE ISSUE
The applicant has proposed to rezone the subject property from Country Residential (CR) to Compact Lot Residential (RS6). If approved, this application will allow the applicant to proceed with a 20 lot bare land strata single family residential subdivision. Report No. PDS 120-202016 Page 2 of 7
BACKGROUND
Proposal: The applicant has proposed to rezone the subject property from CR to RS6 to allow a 20 lot bare land strata single family residential subdivision.
Applicant: Bynett Construction Inc. (Mr. Dan Fisher)
Owner: Deborah and George Keys
Legal Description: Lot D Section 31 Township 19 New Westminster District Plan 70640
OCP Designation: Urban 4 - Detached
Existing Zoning: Country Residential (CR)
Proposed Zoning Site Area: 1.01 ha (2.49 acres)
Site Description: The subject property is a gently sloping large lot with an existing single family home. A number of trees are located around the perimeter of the property and are scattered sparing throughout the remainder of the site.
Surrounding Uses: N: Single Family Residential (zoned RS3-A) S: Large Lot Single Family Residential (zoned CR) E: Sumas Mountain Road beyond which is Large Lot Single Family (zoned RR) W: Large Lot Single Family Residential (zoned CR)
DISCUSSION
Official Community Plan (OCP) I Rezoning Proposal
1. The lands are designated Urban 4 - Detached in the Official Community Plan (OCP) (see Figure 3). The Urban 4 - Detached designation accommodates single detached housing at densities up to a maximum of 25 units per hectare based on Net Land Area.
2. Under the "Density and Development Calculations" of the OCP, the Net Land Area is determined by removing all lands with slopes in excess of 30%, streams and regional utility right-of-ways. In this case, approximately 116m2 of the subject property is identified as being in excess of 30% slopes (red areas shown of Figure 5). As such, the density calculation for the subject property as determined by the OCP is as follows:
Gross Site Area of the Subject property= 1.01 ha 2 Area in excess of 30% slope= 0.0116 ha (116m ) Net Site Area= 0.998 ha
Net Site Area of 0.998 ha x 25 units per hectare = 24.95 units Report No. PDS 120-202016 Page 3 of 7
Given the OCP contains a rounding prov1s1on that states when dealing with decimals units per hectare are rounded to the nearest whole number, the maximum permitted density on the subject property is 25 units.
Based on calculation above, the proposal to rezone the subject property from Country Residential (CR) to Compact Residential (RS6) to allow for a 20 lot bare land strata single family development is consistent with the OCP (see Figures 3 and 6).
3. Furthermore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed development is consistent and compatible with other recent residential developments located along the west side of Sumas Mountain Road in this area including at 4595 Sumas Mountain Road which is under the final phase of house construction as a 26-lot bare land strata single family residential development.
4. The lands are further designated as "New Neighbourhoods". Within the "New Neighbourhoods" designation, development will be phased in a manner to ensure details relating to infrastructure, environment, and land uses can be coordinated and implemented in a cost efficient matter. Under the "New Neighbourhoods" designation, new developments which result in higher densities than the current zoning permits are not supported until the completion of a neighbourhood plan by the City. The current OCP was adopted on June 2?1h, 2016 which saw the implementation of the "New Neighbourhoods" designation. Council endorsed a transition policy to address in-stream applications which allows the current proposal to proceed without the need for a neighbourhood plan. Any applications under the "New Neighbourhoods" designation that were received after April 41h, 2016 will be required to be in compliance with a neighbourhood plan created by the City prior to rezoning consideration.
5. As this proposal is consistent with the Urban 4 - Detached designation and is exempt from requiring a neighbourhood plan based on the existing transitional policy, staff has no concerns with the proposed rezoning.
Natural Areas Development Permit
6. A portion of the subject property lies within a Natural Environment Development Permit Area (NEDP) (see Figure 4). The purpose of these NEDP area is provide for and accommodate the use of the land for the intended purpose while also protecting and enhancing the City's natural areas; preventing the introduction and spread of invasive species; and, protecting water quality and quantity. The guidelines also establish exemptions from completing a Development Permit where a proponent provides satisfactory information to the City that clearly demonstrates that the proposed activity will not be in conflict with the guidelines.
7. The applicant has submitted a report prepared by Scott Resource Services dated April 8, 2016 that concludes that the site has low wildlife values and the proposed development is not anticipated to impact existing wildlife and wildlife features on or adjacent to the subject property (see Attachment A). The City's environmental coordinators have reviewed the report and concur with the conclusions. Therefore a NEDP is not required to proceed with the proposed development and the recommendations identified within the Environmental Report will be implemented in conjunction with existing City bylaws and/or through the subdivision process. Report No. PDS 120-202016 Page 4 of 7
Steep Slopes Development Permit
8. As per the OCP, development on lands greater than 20% and/or development within 20m of slopes that are 20% or greater are defined as a Development Permit Area (see Figure 5). The Steep Slopes Development Permit Guidelines also establishes an exemption where the proposed development is demonstrated to not be in conflict with the Development Permit Guidelines. Staff will review the need for a Steep Slope Development Permit and the geotechnical conditions of the site in greater detail with the subdivision application. If required, the Development Permit will be completed by staff and issued by the Director of Planning or designate in accordance with the Development Application Procedures Bylaw, 2016 prior to any subdivision approval. Staff notes that at this time given the very limited extent of the steep slopes on the subject property that a Development Permit is not anticipated.
Tree Removal I Retention
9. An Arborist report prepared by Central Valley Arborist Consulting dated August 18, 2016 was submitted by the applicant (see Attachment B). A total of 39 trees greater than 20cm Diameter at Breast Height (DBH) are identified on the property and are subject to the City's Tree Protection Bylaw. According to the Arborist's recommendations, 15 trees are identified to be removed as they are either located within the proposed building envelopes and the proposed strata road allowance or are in poor health (see Figure 7). A total of 24 trees are proposed to remain. The 2016 OCP broadly supports the retention of existing mature trees, where possible, as part of the Improve Natural and Build Systems objectives. Prior to removal of the trees, the applicant will need to obtain a tree cutting permit issued by the City's Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department. As part of the permit process, security or cash-in-lieu to provide for replacement trees at a ratio of 2: 1 for all trees to be removed with a size of 20- 30cm DBH and 3: 1 for all trees removed greater than 30cm DBH will be obtained in accordance with the Bylaw. At this time, based on the Central Valley Arborist Consulting report and the documented tree health, planning staff estimate that 25 replacement trees will be required (generally replacement trees are not required for trees removed that are in poor condition and/or that are hazardous). Notwithstanding, the total tree replacements will be reviewed and confirmed by the City's arborist in conjunction with the submission of a future Tree Cutting Permit.
Context Plan I Future Pedestrian Connections
10. During the review process both an Engineering Servicing Strategy and overall preliminary development context plan were prepared and reviewed for the lands north of Augustan Parkway East, south of Dawson Road and west of Sumas Mountain Road (see Figure 5). The purpose of this review was to ensure development proceeded in a manner that addressed the vision, land uses, and policies of the OCP and to ensure pedestrian and traffic connections could be accommodated between each area of development and the existing and future amenities in the neighbourhood (schools, parks, trails and commercial services). The context plan demonstrates how this and remaining development in this area will further the OCP's policies to "Make Walking, Biking, and Transit Delightful". During the subdivision process, City staff will be securing a pedestrian connection from the subject property into lands beyond and with the future Report No. PDS 120-202016 Page 5 of 7
development of adjacent parcels these connections are anticipated to be completed.
Site Development Issues
11 . A staff review of the works and services necessary to support this application has been completed and is outlined within Attachment C (dated August 31, 2016), the details of which will be incorporated into the Development Agreement, a prerequisite for adoption of the rezoning bylaw.
Dedication along Sumas Mountain Road along the subject properties frontage is required to accommodate a bicycle lane, parking lane, boulevard improvements including street trees and a 1.5m wide sidewalk. Staff recommends that these road improvements be constructed by the applicant as detailed in Attachment C.
12. Council should note that the review of the works required in support of this development revealed challenges with providing the property with City sanitary services as the existing sanitary main located on Sumas Mountain road is a forced main which limits the number of possible sanitary connections. As a result, the applicant has obtained an agreement in principle with 4595 Sumas Mountain Road (adjacent strata development to the North) to build and maintain a private sanitary system that results in these parcel requiring only one connection. As a condition of this rezoning application, this agreement must be formalized through the registration of a right-of-way I easement.
13. Additionally, as a condition of rezoning staff recommend that this agreement also accommodate and provide sanitary services for the future development of 4573 Sumas Mountain Road as similar sanitary challenges were noted on that property. The developer has prepared a servicing strategy that demonstrates through the construction of a series of private sanitary mains and pumps that both 4585 and 4573 Sumas Mountain Road can be provided with sufficient sanitary services to accommodate the proposed development and anticipated future development.
14. The Engineering and Regional Utilities Department has reviewed the preliminary design and is acceptable to the sanitary servicing strategy. The applicant is also supportive of providing the ability for 4573 Sumas Mountain Road to connect to sanitary services as a condition of this application provided costs are accommodated and shared proportionally. Cost sharing will be addressed in detail in the future easement I right-of-way agreement. As such, staff has no concerns with the works and services necessary to support this application.
15. In addition to the above comments, the developer is responsible to adhere to all other legislation, which may apply to the land, including:
a) complying with all applicable City bylaws, such as Official Community Plan, 2005, Development Bylaw, 2011 , Tree Protection Bylaw, 2010, Building Bylaw, 2003, Sign Bylaw, 2001 , Erosion and Sediment Control Bylaw, 2010, and Development Cost Charges Imposition Bylaw, 2010 administered by the City; and
b) obtaining all other necessary approvals and permits on such terms as they may be issued, including but not limited to a development permit, tree removal permit, subdivision approval, building permit, soil removal/deposit Report No. PDS 120-202016 Page 6 of 7
permit, Ministry of Health permit, Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure approval and Ministry of Environment approval.
Subdivision
16. The proposed preliminary lot layout plan to create 20 new bare land strata lots will be reviewed for acceptability by the Approving Officer, once the rezoning application receives third reading (see Figure 6). At that time, staff will conduct a formal subdivision review and the exact number and dimensions of the proposed lots will be finalized.
COMMUNICATIONS PLAN
If supported by Council, the Bylaw 2628-2016, cited as "Abbotsford Zoning Bylaw, 2014, Amendment Bylaw No. 95", will proceed to a Public Hearing. The City will notify in writing the owners and occupiers of land within a 100 meter radius of the property as per the Development Application Procedures Bylaw. Two advertisements for the Public Hearing will be published in the City Page of the local newspaper. The City received confirmation on August 19, 2016, that the Developer installed the required Development Notification Sign in accordance with the Development Application Procedures Bylaw, which required the sign to be placed a minimum of 3 weeks in advance of Council's consideration of the application.
FINANCIAL PLAN IMPLICATION
No financial plan implications are anticipated as a result of this application. Any capital works implications arising from this application have been addressed through the rezoning process.
IMPACTS ON COUNCIL POLICIES, STRATEGIC PLAN AND/OR COUNCIL DIRECTION
The proposed rezoning application aligns with the Complete Community cornerstone of the Strategic Plan 2015-18 by sensitively incorporating additional housing options into an existing neighbourhood that is serviced by transit, parks and commercial services.
SUBSTANTIATION OF RECOMMENDATION
Staff supports the rezoning of the subject property from Country Residential (CR) to Compact Residential (RS6) to permit the development of a 20 lot bare land strata residential subdivision given that the proposed development is in keeping with the broad objectives of the OCP.
"io': Prepared by: Blake Collins DepartmenteaPPf()Val: ~ Siri Bertelsen General Manager, Planning and Development ::~:~~ Services Darren Braun Director, Development Planning Report No. PDS 120-202016 Page 7 of 7
Attachments:
Figure 1: Location Map Figure 2: Context Plan Figure 3: OCP Land Use Designations Figure 4: Natural Environment DP Figure 5: Steep Slope DP Figure 6: Existing and Proposed Zoning ·Figure 7: Conceptual Sumas Mountain Road I Dawson Context Plan Figure 8: Preliminary Lot Layout Plan Figure 9: Proposed Tree Retention Plan
Attachment "A": Environmental Report (Dated April 11 , 2016) Attachment "B": Arborist Report (Dated August 18, 2016) Attachment "C": Rezoning Works & Services Comments (Dated August 31 , 2016) Attachment "D": Rezoning Bylaw 2628-2016 City Context Plan File: PDS 120-2016 Location: 4585 Sumas Mountain Road
0 I 1 I - I
-~ - - -· .. .,I Figure 1 - Location Plan Os ~A File No.:PRJ16-0S1 4585 Sumas Mountain Road ABBOTSFORD Date Planning and Development Services 8/25/2016 c::::J Urban Development Boundary -- Creeks and Streams L Bus Stops Bus Routes
Figure 2 - Context Plan Os ·~A File No.: PRJ16-051 4585 Sumas Mountain Road 50 0 150 N Date ABBOTSFORD ,.,...... J Planning and Development Services Meters A9 /1/2016 Urban Development Boundary
~~ [3] New Neighbourhoods .. Neighbourhood Centre
- Urban 2 - Ground Oriented Urban 4 - Detached
- High Impact industrial Institutional Country Rural
- Open Space
..J a. w u «::::> a. U) w :J« :c u""'
Subject Property Land Use=Urban 4 Detached
Figure 3 - Official Community Plan co '~A File No.: PRJ16-051 4585 Sumas Mountain Road ABBOTSFORD 50 0 150 N Date Planning and Davalopmant Services .·.··=--~ 8/25/2016 Meters A Streams 50m Buffer
- Sensitive ecosystems
Figure 4 - Natural Environment DP Os·~ File No.:PRJ16-051 4585 Sumas Mountain Road ABBOTSFORD 50 0 1so N Date Planning and Development Services -- - ~--~L~ - ---Meters - A8 /25/2016 ---, :o I /l \ , ___..... / I
/ I I / , I I I I I I ,---- I I / I I / /, \ r" ------, / / ----' __, '---.... I ,, \ --, ...... 1"" f ' ____ / ./-
.. I(- ~-- \ 1, I \ I I \ !... ', \ I \ I I I I \ I ' I ' \ ,,f '--·-
t,,.------..... ~ I 1') ,.--- - :f o ~ ~i I' ... _____ ,,, J ____ ,,,, / ,, \ ,, I \ I I I I I _____ .... ,,,,I \
Slope 30% or greater
Steep Slope 20m Buffer
/ ... -----....\ I 'I Figure 5 - Steep Slope DP Os ,~ File No.: PRJ16-051 4585 Sumas Mountain Road N ABBOTSFORD 50 0 150 Date Planning and Development Services 8/25/2016 ----- ~Meiers-, - A c ~ ....z ~ ~ (/) %m c ~ 8 ,, 8 :::> en (/) ~ ~ S:.;;;;;;i;:;;;:;;;:;;.;.·-;;i;- ·,;.,;;;---;;,;-- -;,;;- · ·;,;;-;:;=;i;;D~/lf.~W:;-;;.- -$:.;.J;;_>. t
-__ _I ..J Q. w [@ 0 ~ Q. (/) w 8 :J c~ ::c Rezone 0 from CR to RS-6
Figure 6 - Zoning Os ~A File No.: PRJ16-051 4585 Sumas Mountain Road ABBOTSFORD so 0 150 N Date Planning and Development Services . . . 8/25/2016 ··-Meters- - A [
lRAIL CONNECTIO~ lHROUGH PAR!< 1'0 FUl\JRE DIANNE flROOI< lllAIL
PEDESTRIAN WALXWAY TO CONNECT TO AUGUST~ SITE lHROUGH f\JlURE DEVELOPMENT
Figure 7 - Conceptual Sumas Mountain Os ~~ Road/Dawson Context Plan 4585 Sumas Mountain Road ABBOTSFORD File No.: PRJ16-051 I N IDate Planning and Development Services A8/26/2016 4595 I I
~· ·--!., I 11 2:oo0 1-1' "- ··~ ~ ~ -~-{ ( ' 1·(' (I I
\• iI I \I i1 I ~l·
i 12.000 j_ 14. ~ ~--~ - ~-
Figure 8 - Preliminary Lot Layout Os ~~ File No.: PRJ16-051 4585 Sumas Mountain Road ABBOTSFORD N IDate Planning and Development Services Aa 12s1201s ~-· -----
[.:/-- -- - ·,-
Ii '• ca::: l!( ·("'- ·--,.-,• _LI ' ,, -- ~· - ,., '°' MN'LE !! . -·-·· ' ...__/ \\ I/ ##---r· 300e SPRUCE f34E - 600t EMRCH , v ,-~i . ,, I ...,_ ii,, ' > l / I
..._ .Ii, '· 'I "" //)·· ' I i / I, 136 - 5001t BIRCH / ' , 1 ,. • r I .. 1• I , I . ~ , f \ ' f " I ' - >< »). ' I • 1 r I r '-'....!----- 0 l- _ I lt + > E- - t::i~~ +, -- -:-:--~ . ·-.: \ I~.~ H ,
"' ~. l/e #8 - 200t CEDAR ff8 - 250t CIDAR -l ·•&;f:0."'1\~-,,T ·;.::- - ~ I ,. 1 "?"·.._:...._. .... ~ •· ...,. ·~ 1 \. '~~ - I ," .."...... ~"·':n- , .. ,, , ' '~ '..... ii ' / ·c ' '"'~ ~---- "'--., Augftist 17t'°l b Client: ·--~--.---~----· - - - -- ! ~ Bynett Res1dent1al Construction Inc. l9 Total tagged trees located on development property 20cm (DBH) or greater l Attn; Dan Fisher 24 0 Total retained trees 20cm (DBH) o r g reater I... ;, ~ i~~~i 15 ll Total trees removed o n oe11elopment p roperty 20cm (DBH) o r greater Site Location: ARBORIST CONSULTING LID. ~ .. 4585 Su mas M<:luntain Road 1 4 0 Trees tagged 3 1A - 34E locatE!ffon neighbouring p roperty to the West Abbotsford, BC 604-850-4938 Figure 9 - Proposed Tree Retention Pia Os ~~ File No.: PRJ16-051 4585 Sumas Mountain Road ABBOTSFORD · N IDat e Planning and Development Services A s12s1201s SCOTI RESOURCE SERVICES 201 - 34143 Marshall Road, Abbotsford, BC, V2S lLS Tel: (604) 820-1415 Fax: (604) 820-1621 SCOTT [email protected] www.scottres.ca RESOURCE SERVICES
April 11, 2016 Your File: Our File: 1129-01 Dan Fisher Bynett Residential Construction Inc. Suite 427 -108 Kelly Road, Victoria , B.C. V9B 6J9
Re: Environmental assessment and impact assessment for proposed development at 4585 Sumas Mountain Road, Abbotsford BC.
1.0 Introduction Mountain West Properties Group (the proponent) has proposed to develop 4585 Sumas Mountain Road, Abbotsford, BC (subject property); (Attachment 1). The proposed development will consist of a 20 lot subdivision (Attachment 2).
Scott Resource Services (SRS) has been retained by the proponent to complete an environmental assessment and environmental impact assessment for this project as part of the development permit submission to the City of Abbotsford (COA). This report is intended to: 1) Describe existing fisheries and wildlife resources at the project location. 2) Identify potential impacts to existing fisheries and wildlife resources. 3) Describe measures to avoid or mitigate impacts to existing fisheries and wildlife resources.
2.0 Description of proposed work Development of the subject property will include the removal of the existing residential buildings and accessory buildings, decommission of a well and septic field, construction of a new cul-de-sac, and installation of servicing for the 20 new residential lots (Attachment 2). The subject property is currently zoned Country Residential Zone (CR) and has been proposed to be rezoned as Compact Lot Residential Zone (RS6).
3.0 Description of existing fisheries and wildlife resources 3.1 Methods A desktop literature search was completed prior to undertaking the field assessment. Google Earth, the Community Mapping Network's Sensitive Habitat Inventory and Mapping (SHIM), the provincial iMapBC, the COA WebMap, and the Sumas Mountain Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory (Durand 2010) report were used to review recent aerial photographs, to identify the local ecological context and known occurrences of sensitive species or ecosystems. Sensitive species with a nil probability of occu rrence per Durand (2010) are not discussed in this report. The BC Conservation Data Centre (BCCDC) online mapping software was searched for all known occurrences of provincially and federally listed species previously identified within two kilometers of the subject property. The Sumas Mountain Sensitive Ecosystem
Scott Resource Services (A wholly owned subsidiary af Pinchin West Ltd.) 1 ATTACHMENT A Mountain West: Environmental impact assessment of 4585 Sumas Mountain Road April 11, 2016
Inventory (Durand 2010} report was also reviewed for known occurrences of provincially and fed~rally listed species previously identified within the Sumas Mountain area. A literature search of environmental reports for the area was also completed in SRS's own library to identify any additional known occurrences for provincially and federally listed species not referenced within the BCCDC and the Sumas Mountain Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory (Durand 2010} report. A wildlife report prepared by the Fraser Valley Conservancy was not obtained, as occurrences of sensitive species and ecosystems in the project area have been extensively documented and are publically available The entire study area was traversed on foot on March 23, 2016 to ground truth watercourse mapping and to identify existing fisheries and wildlife resources on the subject property. Watercourses were visually assessed to determine whether they met the definition of a stream per the COA Streamside Protection Bylaw No. 465-2005 (SPB) . Under the COA SPB a stream includes, "a watercourse or source of water supply, whether usually containing water or not, a pond, lake, river, creek, brook, ditch and a spring or wetland that is integral to a stream and provides fish habitat." Per the bylaw, fish includes: "all life stages of salmonids, game fish, and regionally significant fish."
Assessment of existing wildlife and vegetation resources was completed by following random transects throughout the subject property and adjacent forested areas. All observed wildlife and vegetation species were documented, with attention paid for preferred habitats of listed species identified during the BCCDC search. In addition, presence of coarse woody debris (CWD), wildlife trees, and other critical wildlife habitat features were identified and documented. All wildlife and wildlife sign encountered were reported. An arborist assessment and report for the proposed development and trees that will be impacted was completed by Central Valley Arborist Consulting Ltd. and is included in Attachment 3. 3.2 Results and Discussion 3.2.1 Desktop search The subject property is 1.01 hectares, located on the west side of Sumas Mountain Road in Abbotsford, BC. The legal description of the parcel is:
• Civic Address: 4585 Sumas Mountain Road, Abbotsford BC; Lot: D Sec: 31 Twn: 19 Plan: 70640 (PID: 002-589-907). The study area included the subject property and undisturbed wooded areas immediately adjacent to the subject property. The study area fell within the Georgia Depression Ecoprovince, Cool Hypermaritime and Highlands Ecodivision, Humid temperate Ecodomain, Lower Mainland Ecoregion, Fraser Lowland Ecosection (iMapBC 2016}. The study area was situated in the Dry Maritime Coastal Western Hemlock biogeoclimatic subzone (Durand, 2010). The study area fell within the Not Sensitive (NS) Dominant Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory Class (Durand, 2010). Polygons identified as NS are those that have been permanently disturbed, provide limited wildlife habitat, serve as movement corridors, and have limited biodiversity values (Durand, 2010). The COA WebMap identified a single discontinuous constructed drainage feature adjacent to the eastern boundary of the subject property (Attachment 1). The same watercourses appeared to be mapped in the SHIM (Attachment 4). The BCCDC mapping identified the presence of Pacific Waterleaf (Hydrophyllum tenuipes), Roell's Brotherella (Brotherella roe/Iii), Oregon forestsnail (Allogona townsendiana), Pacific water shrew (Sorex bendirii}, Trowbridge's shrew (Sorex trowbridgii}, and Townsend's Mole (Scapanus townsendii) within two
Scott Resource Services (A wholly owned subsidiary of Pinchin West Ltd.) 2 Mountain West: Environmental impact assessment of 4585 Sumas Mountain Road April 11, 2016 kilometers of the subject property (Attachment 3). Although the BCCDC did not identify known occurrences of mountain beaver (Aplodontia rufa) near the subject property, this species has been identified in the neighbouring properties to the north (Bianchini, 2015). As a result, mountain beaver has been included in this report. Pacific sideband has also been identified in the Sumas Mountain area by SRS and Durand (2010), and has been included in this report. The legal designations of these species are summarized in Table 1, and summaries of the occurrence reports are provided below. Table 1. Conservation status of known occurrences identified during the desktop literature search.
Species Conservation Status Common name Latin name BC List SARA Pacific Waterleaf Hydrophyllum tenuipes Red No Schedule/Status Roell's Brotherella Brotherella roellii Red No Schedule/Status Oregon Forestsnail Allogona townsendiana Red Schedule 1 - Endangered Pacific Sideband Monadenia fidelis Blue No Schedule/Status Pacific Water Shrew Sorex bendirii Red Schedule 2 - Threatened Trowbridge's Shrew Sorex trowbridgii Blue No Schedule/Status Townsend's Mole Scapanus townsendii Red Schedule 2 - Threatened Mountain Beaver Aplodontia rufa Blue Schedule 1 - Special Concern
The BCCDC species occurrence report for Pacific waterleaf identified multiple subpopulations of the species throughout the Sumas Mountain area within moist riparian habitat and mixed stands of western redcedar (Thuja plicata), western hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), and red alder (Alnus rubra) (BCCDC 2014). The last reported observation date was in 2009 (BCCDC 2014). The BCCDC species occurrence report for Roell's Brotherella identified the presence of the moss within mixed forest habitat with abundant CWD in the Sumas Mountain area (BCCDC 2014). The last reported observation date was in 1966 (BCCDC 2014). The BCCDC species occurrence reports for Oregon forestsnail identified the presence of the species throughout the Sumas Mountain area, within mature forest stands with abundant leaf litter and moderate CWD (BCCDC 2014). The last reported observation date was in 2009 (BCCDC 2014). Oregon forestsnail was also identified by SRS in the adjacent property to the north as recently as 2011. The Sumas Mountain Sensitive Ecosystem Inventory report for Pacific sideband identifies 182 occurrences for Pacific sideband throughout the Sumas Mountain area (Durand, 2010). The project location was identified as nil mollusc habitat (Durand, 2010). The BCCDC species occurrence report for Pacific water shrew identified the presence of the species within the Straiton and Clayburn riparian areas of Sumas Mountain (BCCDC 2014). The last reported observation date was in 1995 (BCCDC 2014). The BCCDC species occurrence report for Trowbridge's shrew identified the presence of the species within the Straiton. and Clayburn riparian areas of Sumas Mountain (BCCDC 2014). The last reported observation date was in 1995 (BCCDC 2014). The BCCDC species occurrence report for Townsend's Mole the presence of the species within a golf course field in the McKee Peak area (BCCDC 2014). The last reported observation date was in 2001 (BCCDC 2014).
Scott Resource Services (A wholly owned subsidiary of Pinchin West Ltd.) 3 Mountain West: Environmental impact assessment of 4585 Sumas Mountain Road April 11, 2016
The report for Mountain beaver on the neighbouring north properties identifies this species was detected by SRS and Robertson Environmental Services Ltd. in 2005 and by Bianchini Biological Services in 2015 (Bianchini, 2015).
3.2.2 Field assessment The field assessment included a site inventory of wildlife and fisheries resources and was completed on March 23, 2016 by Remi Masson (B.Sc., R.P.Bio.) and Cassidy Hedden (B.Sc., BIT) of SRS. Weather conditions at the time of the assessment were overcast and cool (8°C) with no precipitation in the preceding 24 hours. The survey was completed in approximately two hours. A detailed description of potential vegetation, wildlife, and fisheries resources found on the subject property is provided below. Selected site photographs from the field assessment are included in Attachment 6.
3.2.2.1 Fish and Fish Habitat One constructed drainage feature was identified adjacent to the eastern property boundary. At the time of the assessment the drainage feature was conveying limited flows in a low gradient (1%) constructed channel, and flows appeared to be sourced primarily from stormwater draining from the subject property. The upper extent of the ditch was dry during the site assessment. The average wetted width was 0.5 m and the average bankfull width was 1.5 m. Substrate consisted of fines and roadside gravels. Riparian vegetation consisted of maintained lawn grasses and paved asphalt. Runoff from the ditch drained east through a small diameter pipe under Sumas Mountain Road. Based on the absence of natural headwaters, the limited volume of flow in the winter, and the constructed nature of the ditch, it was not considered to contribute a significant amount of food, nutrients, or base flows to downstream fish habitat, and was not considered integral to a stream. As a result, the constructed drainage feature was not considered a stream per the COA SPB, and will not require a streamside protection and enhancement area.
3.2.2.2 Vegetation Types Two vegetation types were identified within the study area: 1. Mixed Woodland Vegetation Type 2. Previously Cleared Vegetation Type The location of each of these vegetation types is provided in Attachment 5. Due to the timing of the assessment, only plant species that could be readily observed and identified were recorded. Representative photographs of the vegetation types are provided in Attachment 4. The two vegetation types are described in detail below. 3.2.2.2.1 Mixed Woodland Vegetation Type The Mixed Woodland Vegetation Type (MWVT) was located along the western property boundary, and in northwest and southwest corners of the property. As most of the property had been previously cleared of natural vegetation (see Section 3.2.2.2.2), the MWVT consisted of approximately 0.06 ha of edge habitat (Attachment 1). Undisturbed forested habitat occurred to west and southwest of the subject property. Disturbed forested habitat occurred in the MWVT at the northwest corner of the subject property. Portions of the understory had been cleared and replaced with lawn grasses and invasive and non-native vegetation (i.e. periwinkle (Vinca minor) and false lamium (Lamiastrum galeobdolon)) were more prevalent.
Scott Resource Services (A wholly owned subsidiary of Pinchin West Ltd.) 4 ( r1Nc1~. HY Mountain West: Environmental impact assessment of 4585 Sumas Mountain Road April 11, 2016
Undisturbed areas within the MWVT west of the subject property included a tree layer of mature western redcedar, western hemlock, red alder, Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), bigleaf maple, and paper birch (Betula papyrifera). Shrub staged vegetation consisted predominately of vine maple (Acer circinatum), salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), devils club (Oplopanax horridus), black gooseberry (Ribes lacustre), thimbleberry (Rubus parviflorus), red elderberry (Sambucus racemosa), and Indian plum (Oemleria cerasiformis). The dense herb layer predominately consisted of stinging nettle (Urtica dioica), false lamium, sword fern (Polystichum munitum), lady fern (Athyrium filix-femina), licorice fern (Polypodium glycyrrhiza), piggyback plant (Tolmiea menziesii), Pacific bleeding heart (Dicentra formosa), and periwinkle. 3.2.2.2.2 Previously Cleared Vegetation Type The PCVT was the dominant vegetation type on the subject property and was approximately 0.95 ha in size (Attachment 1). This vegetation type was dominated by maintained lawn grasses, ornamental shrubs, paved asphalt, and 23 mature trees. Mature trees within the PCVT included three bigleaf maple, three bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata), three paper birch, three western hemlock, two red alder, one spruce (Picea spp.), five western redcedar, and three Douglas·fir (Attachment 3).
3.2.2.3 Wildlife Trees and Coarse Woody Debris There are nine classifications of wildlife trees (both living and non-living), based on the stage of decomposition (MOE, 1997). Wildlife trees provide important habitat for a variety of bird and mammal species. No critical wildlife trees were identified on the subject property, as most of the trees within the disturbed MWVT were alive and class 1 (live with no decay) or class 2 (live with growth deformities and/or some internal decay). Class 3 to 7 trees were observed in the MWVT west of the subject property, and not present within areas that will be affected by the works. Raptor nests or songbird nests were not observed during the field assessment. CWD is defined as wood, including roots and logs in all stages of decay, that are greater than 7.5 cm in diameter (Stevens, 1997). CWD provides habitat for wildlife and vegetation, and provides an input of nutrients into the environment (Stevens, 1997). Moderate CWD cover was observed within the MWVT west of the subject property and included sporadic fallen trees and branches in various stages of decay.
3.2.2.4 Wildlife and Potential Vegetation Species General wildlife observations were made throughout the property. Wildlife species anticipated and observed to use the site included those species which are considered urban (i.e., deer, racoons, squirrels, songbirds). Birds that were observed or heard on the subject property included the American robin (Turdus migratorius) and dark-eyed junco (Junco hyemalis). No nests or nesting activity was observed during the field assessment. Wildlife corridors and/or aquatic habitats were not identified on the subject property. As aquatic habitats (i.e. vernal pools, permanently wetted areas) were not present on or adjacent to the subject property, sensitive aquatic or semi-aquatic wildlife species (i.e. red-legged frog [Rana aurora]) are not addressed in this report. The habitat potential for the listed wildlife species known to occur near the subject property is summarized in Table 2, and described in detail below.
Scott Resource Services (A wholly owned subsidiary of Pinchin West Ltd.) 5 Mountain West: Environmental impact assessment of 4585 Sumas Mountain Road April 11, 2016
Table 2. Probability of occurrence for listed species identified in Table 1 on the subject property.
Species Common name Latin name Probability of occurrence Pacific Waterleaf Hydrophyllum tenuipes Low Roell's Brotherella Brotherella roe/Iii Low Oregon Forestsnail Allogona townsendiana Low/High Pacific Sideband Monadenia fide/is Low/High Pacific Water Shrew Sorex bendirii Unlikely Trowbridge's Shrew Sorex trowbridgii Low/Moderate Townsend's Mole Scapanus townsendii Low Mountain Beaver Aplodontia rufa Low
3.2.2.4.1 Pacific Waterleaf Pacific waterleaf is typically found within moist woodlands and streambanks in the lowland zone of Coastal Western Hemlock Dry Maritime, Coastal Western Hemlock Eastern Very Dry Maritime, and Coastal Douglas-fir Moist Maritime biogeoclimatic zones (Douglas et al, 2002). This species was not detected during the field assessment, but potentially suitable habitat was identified in the MWVT to the west of the subject property. As Pacific waterleaf had started germinating within the Sumas area, it would have been evident at the project location if it was present. As a result, it was considered absent from the study area, and the probability of occurrence within the undisturbed forest was rated as low. 3.2.2.4.2 Roell's Brotherella Roell's brotherella moss occurs in isolated locations in southwestern British Columbia within mixed second growth forest habitat on stream terraces, moist floodplains, and creek ravines (COSEWIC, 2010). This species was not detected during the field assessment, but potentially suitable habitat was identified in the MWVT to the west of the subject property. The potential for occurrence in the undisturbed and disturbed portions of the MWVT were rated as low based on the dry nature of the site and absence of nearby watercourses. 3.2.2.4.3 Oregon Forestsnail In British Columbia, the Oregon forestsnail range occurs in the Lower Mainland from Surrey to Hope (MOE, 2007). The Oregon forestsnail typically is found in riparian areas or forest edges within moist deciduous or mixed woodland forest habitat at low elevations, and is usually closely associated with bigleaf maple and stinging nettle (MOE, 2007). Critical habitat features for Oregon forestsnails include moist conditions, soft soils, herbaceous plants (nettle, fringecup, herb-Robert, bleeding heart, and sword fern), abundant leaf litter, and CWD (MOE, 2007). Oregon forestsnails were not detected within the study area during the field assessment. The potential for occurrence of Oregon forestsnail within the undisturbed MWVT to the west of the subject property was rated as high based on the presence of bigleaf maple and suitable herb species, and on the known occurrence within the neighbouring property to the north. Habitat suitability and probability of occurrence was considered low in the disturbed portion of the MWVT at the west end of the subject property due to the limited amount of understory vegetation and CWD.
Scott Resource Services (A wholly owned subsidiary of Pinchin West Ltd.) 6 ( Pl NCl;!.!N> Mountain West: Environmental impact assessment of 4585 Sumas Mountain Road April 11, 2016
3.2.2.4.4 Pacific Sideband Pacific sidebands are commonly found throughout coastal British Columbia in wet, low elevation forest habitat (Brown and Durand, 2007). In the Fraser Valley, Pacific sidebands have been documented as being most commonly associated with mixed forest stands with vine maple, salmonberry, beaked hazelnut (Cory/us cornuta), and thimbleberry shrub understory species, and sword fern, stinging nettle, and Pacific bleeding heart herb species (Brown and Durand, 2007). Pacific sidebands were not detected within the study area during the field assessment. The potential for occurrence of Pacific sideband within the undisturbed MWVT to the west of the subject property was rated high based on the presence of suitable shrub and herb species. Habitat suitability and probability of occurrence was considered low in the disturbed portion of the MWVT at the west end of the subject property due to the limited amount of understory vegetation and CWD. 3.2.2.4.S Pacific Water Shrew
Pacific water shrews are the largest shrew found in the British Columbia (Lindgren, 2004). The range for Pacific water shrew in British Columbia occurs in the Lower Fraser Valley from Burrard Inlet to the Chilliwack River, in areas below 600 m elevation (Lindgren, 2004). Pacific water shrews are usually associated with moist, coastal forests that border streams and wetlands with abundant shrub stage vegetation, CWD, and extensive canopy closure (Lindgren, 2004). No Pacific water shrews were detected during the field assessment. Suitable habitat for this species was not observed on or adjacent to the subject property and the probability of occurrence was considered to be low or nil. 3.2.2.4.6 Trowbridge's Shrew Trowbridge's shrews are associated with low elevation forest habitats with dry, loose soil, deep litter layers, and dense shrub and herb cover (Zevit, 2010). Trowbridge's shrews can also be found in open grassland or disturbed areas (Zevit, 2010). Trowbridge's shrews were not detected during the field assessment. The probability of occurrence of this species was rated as moderate in the undisturbed portion of the MWVT to the west of the subject property based on the presence of dry loose soils and dense understory vegetation. The probability of occurrence was rated as low within the disturbed portion of the MWVT based on the limited amount of understory vegetation. 3.2.2.4.7 Townsend's Mole Townsend's moles are typically found in lowland areas, and can often be found in open forests, pastures, farmlands, and lawns with medium-textured silt loam soils (COSEWIC, 2003). Available habitat for Townsend's mole has been documented to be within the Huntingdon/Abbotsford area (COSEWIC, 2003). No Townsend's moles were detected during the field assessment. Suitable habitat for this species occurs within the PCVT on the subject property; however, mole hills were not observed during the site assessment. As a result, the probability of occurrence was rated as low. 3.2.2.4.8 Mountain Beaver
British Columbia is the only province in Canada in which the Mountain Beaver is found (MOE, 2013). The current range for Mountain beaver in British Columbia extends from the lower Fraser Valley south of the Fraser River northwards to the interior (MOE, 2013). Mountain beaver are typically associated with mid seral stage forest stands with abundant herbaceous vegetation, moist deep soils, and stream and
Scott Resource Services (A wholly owned subsidiary of Pinchin West Ltd.) 7 Mountain West: Environmental impact assessment of 4585 Sumas Mountain Road April 11, 2016 seepage systems (MOE, 2013). These features are critical for creating dens and tunnel systems, and foraging (MOE, 2013). Although Mountain beaver dens have been identified on the neighbouring properties to the north, the probability of Mountain beaver on the subject property was considered to be low based on the absence of suitable drainage features.
4.0 Description of potential impacts on fisheries and wildlife resources As there are no streams on the subject property, the proposed development will not result in impacts to fish and fish habitat. The proposed development will affect approximately 340 m2 of disturbed MWVT at the northwest corner of the subject property, and will not affect the undisturbed MWVT west of the subject property. Impacts will include the removal of trees from the disturbed MWVT as per the arborist report (Attachment 3), and removal of the remaining understory vegetation. The MWVT to the west of the subject property was considered to provide moderate habitat value to Trowbridge's shrew, and high value to Oregon forestsnail based on the undisturbed nature of the habitat, and connectivity to adjacent undisturbed area. On the subject property, the habitat value of the MWVT for these species was considered to be low based on the proximity to the PCVT and the partial absence of understory vegetation. As the proposed development will affect the disturbed MWVT habitat, and not affect the undisturbed habitat, impacts to these species are not anticipated. Mitigation measures described in Section 5.0 below may be required prior to clearing of vegetation to avoid harm to Oregon forests nail. The MWVT also provides potential breeding/nesting habitat for bird species. Mitigation measures as described in Section 5.0 below may be required to avoid harm to nesting birds or their eggs. The PCVT was considered to provide low wildlife value based on the absence of cover and routine disturbance from landscaping activities. Impacts to the PCVT will include the removal of trees per the arborist report (Attachment 3). Trees and ornamental shrubs within the PCVT were considered to provide potential habitat for birds, and mitigation measures as described in Section 5.0 below may be required to avoid harm to nesting birds or their eggs. As most of the subject property has been previously cleared of vegetation and has low habitat value, potential impacts resultant of this development will be limited to low value disturbed edge habitat at the western end of the subject property. As a result, it is anticipated that this project will not result in long term impacts to existing vegetation and wildlife resources.
5.0 Measures and standards to avoid or mitigate serious harm to fisheries and wildlife resources A detailed Environmental Management Plan has been prepared for this project to describe appropriate best management practices that should be employed to avoid or mitigate temporary impacts to existing fisheries and wildlife resources (Attachment 6). A summary of recommendations and mitigation measures associated with the proposed development is provided below.
• An Oregon forestsnail and Pacific sideband salvage following the most recent best management practices should be implemented prior to any works within the MWVT. • A certified arborist must be onsite to monitor the removal of trees required for the proposed development.
Scott Resource Services (A wholly owned subsidiary of Pinchin West Ltd.) 8 ( PINC~H---- 0 <-~G ) Mountain West: Environmental impact assessment of 4585 Sumas Mountain Road April 11, 2016
• All trees removed for this development must be replaced per the Central Valley Arborist Consulting Ltd. report (Attachment 3). • Clearing of. vegetation should be conducted outside of the bird breeding season (March 1 to August 31). A migratory bird nest survey following the most recent best management practices should be completed prior to vegetation clearing between March 1 and August 31. • The boundary of the development area is to clearly delineated with snow fencing (or equivalent) during construction, and delineated with a permanent fence (e.g. cedar or chain link fence) prior to substantial completion of construction. • The effectiveness of mitigation measures will be routinely monitored by a Qualified Environmental Professional for the duration of the works.
6.0 Closing The subject property has generally low wildlife values and has been previously identified as Not Sensitive. As a result, with implementation of appropriate best management practices, the proposed development is not anticipated to impact existing wildlife and wildlife features on or adjacent to the subject property. I trust this is the information you require at this time. If you have any questions, comments or require further information, please contact the undersigned at (604) 820-1415. Sincerely,
SCOTT RESOURCE SERVICES
it : .• 1,
Cassidy Hedden, B.Sc., BIT Remi Masson, B.Sc., R.P.Bio. Environmental Technologist Senior Project Biologist
Scott Resource Services (A wholly owned subsidiary of Pinchin West Ltd.) 9 , PINCH IN) ( wr .~ ·r Mountain West : Environmental impact assessment of 4585 Sumas Mountain Road April 11, 2016 limitations: This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the proponent subject to the conditions and limitations contained within the duly authorized work plan. This report is based on the best information available to Scott Resource Services at the time of preparing this report after conducting work using best industry practices to obtain information. Scott Resource Services can only comment on the environmental conditions observed on the date(s) the assessment was performed. To the extent that Scott Resource Services was required to rely on information from other persons, Scott Resource Services has verified such information to the extent reasonably possible in the circumstances. The material provided in this report reflects best industry judgment in light of the information available at the time of preparation of this report. Information provided by Scott Resource Services is intended for the proponent use only. Scott Resource Services will not provide results or information to any party unless disclosure by Scott Resource Services is required by law. Any use by a third party of reports or documents authored by Scott Resource Services or any reliance by a third party on or decisions made by a third party based on the findings described in said documents, is the sole responsibility of such third parties. Scott Resource Services accepts no responsibility for damages suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions conducted. If additional parties require reliance on this report, written authorization from Scott Resource Services will be required. Such reliance will only be provided by Scott Resource Services following written authorization from the proponent Scott Resource Services disclaims responsibility of consequential financial effects on transactions or property values, or requirements for follow-up actions and costs. No other warranties are implied or expressed. Scott Resource Services makes no other representations whatsoever, including those concerning the legal significance of its findings or as to other legal matters touched on in this report, including, but not limited to, ownership of any property, or the application of any law to the facts set forth herein. With respect to regulatory compliance issue, regulatory statutes are subject to interpretation and these interpretations may change over time.
The liability of Scott Resource Services or its staff will be limited to the lesser of the fees paid or actual damages incurred by the proponent. Scott Resource Services will not be responsible for any consequential or indirect damages. Scott Resource Services is only liable for damages resulting from the negligence of Scott Resource Services. All claims by the proponent shall be deemed relinquished if not made within two years after last date of services provided.
Scott Resource Services (A wholly owned subsidiary of Pinchin West Ltd.) 10 (_ RG'- Mountain West: Environmental impact assessment of 4585 Sumas Mountain Road April 11, 2016
REFERENCES B.C. Conservation Data Centre. 2014. Occurrence Report Summary, Shape ID: 77144, Roell 's brotherella. B.C. Ministry of Environment. Available: http://delivery.maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/sv/cdc, (accessed Mar 23, 2016). B.C. Conservation Data Centre. 2014. Occurrence Report Summary, Shape ID: 5126, Pacific waterleaf. B.C. Ministry of Environment. Available: http://delivery.maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/sv/cdc, (accessed Mar 23, 2016). B.C. Conservation Data Centre. 2014. Occurrence Report Summary, Shape ID: 31153, Oregon Forestsnail. B.C. Ministry of Environment. Available: http://delivery.maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/sv/cdc, (accessed Mar 23, 2016). B.C. Conservation Data Centre. 2014. Occurrence Report Summary, Shape ID: 23846, Oregon Forestsnail. B.C. Ministry of Environment. Available: http://delivery.maps .gov.bc.ca/ess/sv/cdc, (accessed Mar 23, 2016). B.C. Conservation Data Centre. 2014. Occurrence Report Summary, Shape ID: 49291, Oregon Forest snail. B.C. Ministry of Environment. Available: http://delivery.maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/sv/cdc, (accessed Mar 23, 2016). B.C. Conservation Data Centre. 2014. Occurrence Report Summary, Shape ID: 11913, Trowbridge's Shrew. B.C. Ministry of Environment. Available: http://delivery.maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/sv/cdc, (accessed Mar 23, 2016). B.C. Conservation Data Centre. 2014. Occurrence Report Summary, Shape ID: 11911, Pacific Water Shrew. B.C. Ministry of Environment. Available: http://delivery.maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/sv/cdc, (accessed Mar 23, 2016). B.C. Conse rvation Data Centre. 2014. Occurrence Report Summary, Shape ID: 40565, Townsend's Mole. B.C. Ministry of Environment. Available: http://delivery.maps.gov.bc.ca/ess/ sv/cdc, (accessed Mar 23, 2016). Bianchini, C. 2015. Bianchini Biological Services: Straiton Mountain Estates Phase 2 and Proposed Fill Site Wildlife and Vegetation Assessment. Scott Resource Services, Mission BC. Brown, D., and R. Durand. 2007. Habitat Assessment of the Pacific Sideband (Monadenia fidelis) In the Lower Fraser Valley British Columbia. Fraser Valley Conservancy Society, Abbotsford BC.
COSEWIC. 2010. COSEWIC assessment and status report on the Roell's Brotherella Moss Brotherella roellii in Canada. Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada . Ottawa. ix + 23 pp. (www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm).
COSEWIC 2003. COSEWIC assessment and update status report on Townsend's mole Scapanus townsendi in Canada . Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. Ottawa. vi + 24 pp. Douglas, G.W., D.V. Meidinger, J.L., Penny. 2002. Rare Native Vascular Plants of British Columbia 2"d ed. B.C. Ministry of Sustainable Resour. Manage. and B.C. Ministry of For., Victoria BC. 359pp. Durand, R. 2010. City of Abbotsford Sumas Mountain Sensitive Ecosystems Inventory. City of Abbotsford, Abbotsford, BC.
PINCHtNJ Scott Resource Services (A wholly owned subsidiary of Pinchin West Ltd.) 11 wr-sT Mountain West : Environmental impact assessment of 4585 Sumas Mountain Road April 11, 2016
Lindgren, P. 2004. Pacific Water Shrew (Sorex bendirii) account, Identified Wildlife Management Strategy Accounts and Measures for Managing Identified Wildlife. British Columbia Ministry of Water, Air and Land Protection.
[MOE] Ministry of Forests and Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks. 1997. Biodiversity guidebook. Victoria, BC.
[MOE] Ministry of Environment. 2007. Draft Gastropod Best Management Practices Guidebook: Oregon Forestsnail and Other Land Snails at Risk in the Coastal Lowlands.
[MOE] Ministry of Environment. 2013. Management plan for the Mountain Beaver (Aplodontia rufa) in British Columbia. B.C. Ministry of Environment, Victoria, BC. 28 pp.
Stevens, Victoria. 1997. The ecological role of coarse woody debris: an overview of the ecological importance of CWD in B.C. forests. Res. Br., B.C. Min. For., Victoria, B.C. Work. Pap. 30/1997.
Zevit, Pamela. 2010. BC's Coast Region : Species and Ecosystems of Conversation Concern Olympic Shrew (Sorex rohweri) and Trowbridge's Shrew (Sorex trowbridgii) factsheet.
Attachments (8) 1. Annotated Orthophotograph of the Project Location 2. Wedler Engineering Preliminary Lot Layout 3. Central Valley Arborist Consulting Ltd. Report and Drawing 4. SHIM Fish Presence Location Map 5. BCCDC Occurrence Location Map 6. Selected Site Photographs 7. Vegetation Type Location Map 8. Environmental Management Plan
Scott Resource Services (A wholly owned subsidiary of Pinchin West Ltd.) 12 ( PINCI~. !!~) - .- Attachment 1 Annotated Orthophotograph of the Project Location Q c :I ·:
Figure 1. Annotated orthophotograph of the subject property (outlined in red). Base mapping sourced from the Fraser Valley Regional Information Map and the City of Abbotsford WebMap (2016). Attachment 2 Wedler Engineering Preliminary Lot Layout i '< ~ w~~ ! ~ -~l § f "i' I' I '-' I ! ~ ·~ i
•ii i Ol:l N1v1Nno ~ sv ~ns ------·------! ; ~ ~ ~ ! ~g ~ $ ~ ~ ¥ ~ ;i; ni :> ! g ~ ~
~ I I I! I ! ~ I'~ [!
a::: w ...J "' 0 ~ w i ~ · l I ~ ~
¥ ~ ! / l 11 Ii :H I I . - - I II ,11 I 1· I I '·j i
0 I ~ .,. ~' :J!
..,"' I "' ~ ' r
I
I ' - - - - ·------' I ["- I ' ~ ~ "' • I I ~ ~ ~ I u -:J 5I ~ ·~;:::i ,'f'~I',_ .~ I~ i u ! I
~ ... ;. ~ . 2 a ~ ~; w ~ ~ i g § ~ id "'~ I • : ·Iii : 1 1! !.. J'l!. F• ile I ~5~l er lJ.J J~~ ...J n. ~ 0 •' lJ.J l I ~ I -- - -- _ __i_ ------I --- _ill!_!::!IVl Nno~ sv~ns - .---,------~ i ~ i l ! $ I I f I i "I J I ¥ : I I ~ i ~
I I ' I ______J ! i i~n i 1!~: ~ I: ~ ~ i I ; I I l .: I j l ,,..-- l ! ' ! ¥ [ ! ~ •: ~ I I' O~ VN l~V .:I ' f i f f ~ i ~ i ~ Ir I I ¥ ! ~ ? ? I I. ~ i lS N3HDl3~ i I~ ;
~ I ~ .l ! u I I . i • ir l'qq! fl I ! ...
i. t I i~ J I •I H+l-+-1-+-l-1if , 1
I l 'I I Ii i I
•I !
~~~~~~~~~~~~~--=:=:=:_:, _:u.:,, :,~:.«:_::__~=-:~=-=.:~: ,~_:_::~L__lj•-~ · "'ltn~~ ·! Attachment 3 Central Valley Arborist Consulting Ltd. Report and Drawing Attachment 4
SHIM Fish Presence Location Map
.-
..• 1\-- -- 1 l • I J '\ ~ .---· ' )
Figure 2. Annotated map of fish presence at the project location (outlined in black). Red watercourses represent known fish presence and yellow watercourses represent unknown fish presence. Base mapping sourced from the Community Mapping Network's Sensitive Habitat Inventory and Mapping (SHIM, 2016). Attachment 5 BCCDC Occurrence Location Map .~. BRITISH "•11•-R• ~COLUMBIA CDC Occurrence Map Legend
Species and Ecosystems at Available Occurrences - CD• FEATURE_CODE
Animal - Vertebrate •D Animal - Invertebrate Plant - vascular •0 Plant - Non-vascular 23~ Ecological Community 0 •Species and Ecosystems at Secured) Publicly Available Species and Ecosystems at Publicly Available Occurrenc FEATURE_ CODE
gon forestsn • Animal - Vertebrate n Animal - Invertebrate
0 0 0.81 1.63 km 32.329 ~ \..._...... / Trowbridge's shrew 1: 40,000 - Oreg CopyrighUDisclaimer G- ~•~'1-~R oeII' s Brotherella The material contained kl this web site is owned by the / Government of British Columbia and protected by copyright law. h may not be reproduced or redistributed without the prior written permission of the Province of
~ British Columbia. To request permission to reproduce .. all or part of the material on this web site ptease comptete the Copyright Permission Request Form C ' .., which can be accessed through the Copyright ~ ~ lnfn~tinn P 1u'I• CAUTION: Maps obtained using this site are not i . .. destgned to assist in navigation. These maps may be Pacific Vjlter shrew generalized and may not retied current conditions. .. Uncharted hazards may exist. DO NOT USE THESE ,.. .. MAPS FOR NAVIGATIONAL PURPOSES. .... Towns~d's mole ~ .. Datum: NAD83
,f! _ Alf '<'-, 73360 :.25''· Attachment 6 Selected site photographs Photograph 1. Northwest aspect of the MWVT located near the northwest corner of the subject property. Understory vegetation had been removed from this location. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016.
Photograph 2. Southeast aspect of the MWVT located near the northwest corner of the subject property. Removal of understory vegetation reduced the habitat value at this location. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016. Photograph 3. North aspect of the MWVT located from the northwest corner of the subject property. False lamium had spread into the undisturbed understory. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016.
Photograph 4. East aspect of the PCVT and MWVT located west of the residential house on the subject property. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016. Photograph 5. West aspect of the PCVT located south of the residential house on the subject property. The PCVT had limited value as wildlife habitat due to the absence of natural vegetation and structure. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016.
Photograph 6. Southwest aspect of the PCVT and MWVT located near the southwest corner of the subject property. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016. Photograph 7. West aspect of the MWVT located along the western property boundary. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016.
Photograph 8. Southwest aspect of the PCVT located near the southwest portion of the subject property. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016. Photograph 9. Southeast aspect of the PCVT located near the southeast portion of the subject property. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016.
Photograph 10. Paper birch tree located within the footprint of the proposed driveway. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016. Photograph 11. East aspect of the drainage feature culvert inlet that crosses under Sumas Mountain Road. There were minimal stormwater driven flows at the time of the assessment. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016.
Photograph 12. South aspect of the drainage feature located adjacent to the eastern property boundary. There was evidence of regular maintenance along the ditch line. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016. Photograph 13. Northwest aspect of the drainage feature located adjacent to the eastern property boundary. The upper portion of the ditch was dry; natural headwaters were not observed. Photograph taken on March 23, 2016. Attachment 7 Vegetation Type Location Map LEGEND
MWVT (disturbed) MWVT (undisturbed)
- PCVT Property Boundary E!1 ~ 604-850-4938 P.0 Box 82, Station A /\RBOHl~T CONSl ~ 1 : r1Nc ~ 1; rn. Abbotsford. BC \Tf 6Z-'
ARBORIST REPORT
For
. 4585 SUMAS MOUNTAIN ROAD
ABBOTSFORD, BC
Prepared for: Dan Fisher Bynett Residential Construction Inc. Suite 427, 108-800 Kelly Road, Victoria, BC V9B 6J9
Prepared by: Central Valley Arborist Consulting Ltd.
Robert F. Kwak Certified Arborist #PN 1736A
Date: April 4, 2016
Web: www.arborist-tree.com • E mail: k w ATTACHMENT B TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page# e Arborist Letter ...... 1-2
• Site Plan ...... 3
• Tree Evaluation Summary...... 4-5
• Tree Preservation Summary ...... 6
• Photographs ...... 7
• Protective Fencing ...... 8 o Qualifications of Author ...... 9
Assumptions and Limiting Conditions ...... 10 - ENTRAJ-J t fl- 1\LJ_J~Y 604-850--t938 P.O Box 82. Station A AllBOlH~T CON ~ llLTINford. BC Y2T 6Z-'
April 4, 2016
Bynett Residential Const ruction Inc. Suite 427, 108-800 Kelly Road, Victoria, BC V9B 6J9
Attention: Dan Fisher
The following arborist report has been completed by Bob Kwak (Certified Arborist) for the proposed development located at 4585 Sumas Mountain Road, Abbotsford, BC.
In March of 2016, I attended the property to review the existing trees and to give a tree inventory with the intent of making recommendations for removal and preservation. The trees on the property were tagged, and are numbered 1 to 43 (not consecutive). Information was documented with respect to the type of tree, diameter at breast height (DBH), and health. In total there are 38 trees with a DBH 20cm's or greater located on t he proposed development property. Included in this report are 5 neighboring trees, labeled 31A, 32B, 32C, 330 and 34E, which have been added to this report becau se of their proximity to the development property. (See Evaluation Summary and Site Plan for details)
There is an existing home on the development property that will need to be demolished or removed at some stage of the development. The property has a slight slope with the highest elevation at the rear (west side) of the property sloping down to Sumas Mountain Road .
Based on the proposed development, there are 25 trees that will require removal (4 trees with a DBH between 20 and 30 centimeters and 21 trees with a DBH greater than 30 centimeters.) As per the City of Abbotsford's Tree Replacement policy a total of 71 replacement trees will be required. (See Site Plan and the Preservation Summary for details.)
Web: www.arborist- t ree.com • Email: [email protected] Prior to the commencement of any work, a protective fence must be put in place around all retained trees to just outside the drip line. This includes the drip lines of the neighboring retained trees that extend into the proposed development property. (See attached fencing instructions) All protective fencing must be inspected by a certified arborist prior to construction. If there is to be any work within these boundaries a certified arborist must be on site to instruct on proper procedures. The protective fencing should be inspected weekly to ensure no damage occurs, and it stays in place until all work is completed.
Note: The neighboring trees labeled 31A to 34E are to be retained and cannot be removed unless authorization has been given by the respective property owner.
If there are any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Respectfully submitted
Robert F. Kwak Certified Arborist #PN 1736A
2 !r-
f28 - 200• CEDAR f24 - 7SO. MAPLE I__ JOOe CEDAR
110 -
-700•HEMLOCK
------f30 - 1400• CEDAR #JIA- 500• CHERRY - 3x700t!MAPLE JI ; .___==t
...... _ ...... c -- 12 - 400. HEMLOCK #328 - 400. BIRCH ------1 f25 - 1000• f'lR F! ___ '. . 350. f'lR 0 f.32C - 400• MAPLE 1---- a:: ~---~-,-----4 j #43 - 250• CHERRY I , 1/9 ...... -- ...... I ·,_,v \ I I --~------~ \ ~ --.-----I 112 - 2x700• MAPLE ; ,---- - · .-----i--~ 134 E -600• BIRCH ,J-, //' - / t----:"1' ' #42 - J0o. SPRUCE / l ! : l #JS - 2x400t! MAPLE I l' ..U... '-.,_ /' i® / j I I I I : ,' I I • : I : : : : I 250. F'IR #36 - 500. BIRCH ,/ 1' r '1 I I I I I .· ~ I I t -- t~ - • ' • 1 i ' ' :( : i i / i i I I ; I I I • #37 - 500. BIRCH I : 1 ! ! I I I ~ I I .~ ··- - ~ - ·- - . --· ·-· -- #3s - 70°' MAPLE 600. f'lR '-, ' ' ' Protective #39 - - 400. MAPLE 16 - Fencing ....._ '· ' _',:.'~~:. ·,, _,,.,.,,."" . ·'{ ~ . r. '-, - ' , ,., .·_ ~ f. " l ' ', .. 1' tt· I ~ --..,_ ' " ' " ' '-, ! ~.? ~l;:.: Client: '· ---- Ll.~ ~ . 38 Total tagged trees located o n development property 20cm (DBH) or greater Bynett Residential Construction Inc. t ·"· r.\. " Ci;NTRAL ~ - ~ Attn: Dan Fisher 13 0 Total retained trees 20con (DBHJ or g reater ~ - lf \/ALLEY !l, 25 I:l: Total trees removed on development property 20cm (OBH) or greater Site Location: ARBORJS1 CONSl~ITING LTD ~ 4565 Sumas Mountain Road 0 Trees tagged 31 A· 34E located on neighbouring property to the West Abbotsford. BC 604-850-4938 .." ... -, \ .... _ ' ·, CENTRAL VALLEY TREE & ARBO RIST SERVICES - TREE EVALUATION SUMMARY
TAG# SPECIES LOCATION #OF DBH (cm) TREE SUGGESTED COMMENTS TREES Diameter at HEALTH ACTION breast height
1 Birch See Site Plan 1 45 Good Remove In proposed building envelope 2 Hemlock See Site Plan 1 40 Good Remove In proposed building envelope 3 Fir See Site Plan 1 35 Good Remove In proposed building envelope 4 Fir See Site Plan 1 35 Good Retain - ·- 5 Fir See Site Plan 1 60 Good Retain 6 Cedar See Site Plan 1 25 Good Retain 7 Cedar See Site Plan 1 so Good Retain 8 Cedar See Site Plan 1 20 Good Retain 9 See Site Plan Signs of bronze birch borer beetle, severe decay Birch 1 30 Poor Remove at base and upper main stem 10 Birch See Site Plan 1 30 Poor Remove In proposed building envelope 11 Cherry See Site Plan 1 30 Good Remove In proposed building envelope 12 Maple See Site Plan 1 50/55 Fair Remove 2 stem maple in proposed building envelope 13 Cedar See Site Plan 1 30 Good Reta in 14 Cedar See Site Plan 1 70 Good Retain 15 See Site Plan 3 stem try to retain small hemlock, decay in Birch 1 30/30/30 Poor Remove north stem, heavy lean to neighboring property 16 Alder See Site Plan 1 . 25/25 Good Remove In proposed building envelope 17 See Site Plan Dead and decay branches in upper crown, decay Hemlock 1 70 Poor Remove at base, previous crown failure 18 See Site Plan 3 stem, previous crown failure, dead and decay Maple 1 70/60/60 Poor Remove branches in upper crown, heavy lean toward development property 19 Spruce See Site Plan 1 20 Good Retain 20 Hemlock See Site Plan 1 50 Good Retain 21 Maple See Site Plan 1 100 Poor Remove Decay in north stem, shear crack in center stem 22 Cherry See Site Plan 1 40 Good Remove In proposed building envelope 23 Hemlock See Site Plan 1 60 Good Remove In proposed building envelope 24 Maple See Site Plan 1 75 Fair Retain
4 CENTRAL VALLEY TREE & ARBORIST SERVICES -TREE EVALUATION SUMMARY
TAG# SPECIES LOCATION #OF DBH (cm) TREE SUGGESTED COMMENTS TREES Diameter at HEALTH ACTION breast height
25 Fir See Site Plan 1 100 Good Remove In proposed building envelope 26 Birch See Site Plan 1 30 Fair Remove In proposed building envelope 27 Maple See Site Plan 1 25 Poor Remove In proposed building envelope 28 Cedar See Site Plan 1 Good Retain 20 - 29 Birch See Site Plan 1 25/30/25 Fair Remove In proposed building envelope 30 Cedar See Site Plan 1 140 Good Retain 35 Maple Neighboring property 1 40-40 Fair Retain 2 stem cobra brace 10 meters from base to the west 36 Birch See Site Plan 1 50 Poor Remove Decay at base, dead and decay branches in upper crown 37 Birch See Site Plan 1 50 Poor Remove Decay at base, dead and decay branches in upper crown 38 Maple See Site Plan 1 70 Fair Remove Heavy lean toward proposed development, cut and fill required 39 Maple See Site Plan 1 60 Good Remove In proposed building envelope 40 Maple See Site Plan 1 90 Poor Remove Decay cavity at base, dead and decay branches in upper crown 41 Maple See Site Plan 1 40 Poor Remove Tree has been fallen 42 Spruce See Site Plan 1 50 Good Remove In proposed building envelope 43 Cherry See Site Plan 1 25 Good Remove In proposed building envelope
31A Cherry Neighboring property 1 so Fair Retain Protective fencing is required to the west 328/ Birch/Maple Neighboring property 2 40/40 Poor Retai n Previous failure in upper crown. Recommend 32C to the west removal. Owners permission is required 330 Hemlock Neighboring property 1 25/25 Good Retai n Protective fencing is required to the west (2 stem) 34E Bi rch Neighboring property 1 60 Poor Retain Severe decay/ fruity bodies on main st em. to the west Recommend removal. Owners permission is required
5 TREE PRESERVATION SUMMARY
Project Location: 4585 Sumas Mountain Road Abbotsford, BC Applicant/Developer: Dan Fisher Name, address, telephone: Bynett Residential Construction Inc. Suite 427, 108 800 Kelly Road Abbotsford, BC V9B 6J9 Consultant: Central Valley Arborist Consulting Ltd Name, address, telephone: PO Box 82, Station A, Abbotsford, BC, V2T 6Z4 Brain Kwak 604-850-4938
Summary of Proposed Trees Retained, Removed and Replaced
Thi s Tree Protection Summary is a quick reference for the Arborist's Eval uation Report submitted for this development and is to be read in conjunction with that report.
A Number of trees greater than 20 centimeters DBH 38 B Number of trees retained greater than 20 centimeters DBH 13 c Number of trees to be removed ( 4 between 20-30cm DBH and 21over30cm DBH) 25 D Number of replacement trees required (2 to 1 between 20-30cm and 3 to 1 over 30cm DBH) 71 E Credit for retained trees at 2:1 and 3:1 * F Number of replacement trees proposed to be planted (may differ from number of * replacement trees required due to site constraints/opportunities) G Shortfall of replacement trees to be planted (off-site or provision of cash-in-lieu) * H Number of trees greater than 20 centimeters DBH located in non-disturbance area above the n/a top of bank I Number of residential units or lots 20 J Average number of trees per unit 1.9 K Estimated number of trees greater than 20 centimeters DBH located below top of bank of a n/ a watercourse
* Unknown at this time (To be advised by City of Abbotsford)
Dat e: April 4, 2016
Summary Proposed and Submitted by: , <:r-?/ ,/ ~ -/;7 (.____,,c~ -~ Robert F. Kwak Certified Arborist #PN 1736A
6
------Photograph #1: View of the proposed development property looking west from Sumas Mountain Road
Photograph #3 : View of the development property from the rear of the property looking to the east.
7 PROTECTIVE FENCING INSTRUCTIONS
Solid barrier firmly staked into the ground {2"x4") Minimum outside of branches (d rip-line)
Plastic mesh screening on all
Note: No storage of building materials w ithin or against protection barrier and no booms or equi pment to enter drip-line at anytime. Barrier is not to be moved once erected. 8 Qualifications of Author
Robert F. Kwak
P.O Box 82, Station A Abbotsford, BC V2T6Z4
Cell: 604-850-4938 Email: [email protected]
• President and owner of Central Valley Arborist Consulting Ltd; 2015 to present
• President and owner of Central Valley Tree and Arborist Services Ltd; 2002 to 2015
• Manager of Westland Tree Services 2000 to 2002
• President and owner of B.K. Tree Services Ltd; 1981to1999
• International Society of Arboriculture; Certified Arborist PN-1736A o PNW-ISA, WCB Certified Tree Risk Assessor; Certification #0032
• WCB Wildlife Danger Tree Assessor: Parks and Recreation Module; Certification #P0072
• Consulting Arborist; June 2000 - Present
• Member: International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Pacific Northwest Chapter of Arborist
• Over 30 of years professional work in the tree industry and land clearing business.
• Insurance policy #040149195 ($5,000,000 Liability) - Saxbee Insurance Agencies Ltd.
• Business License: Abbotsford Intra Municipal #128082
• Work Safe BC - 961482-AA
9 Assumptions and limiting Conditions 1. Except as expressly set out in this report and in these Assumptions and Limiting Conditions, Centra l Valley Arborist Consulting Ltd. (Central Valley) makes no guarantee, representation or warranty (express or implied) with regard to: this report; the findings, conclusions and recommendations contained herein; or the work referred to herein. 2. This report has been prepared, and the work undertaken in connection herewith has been conducted, by Central Valley for Dan Fisher of Bynett Residential Construction Inc. re the development property at 4585 Sumas Mtn. Road, Abbotsford, BC. It is intended for the sole and exclusion use by the Client, for the purpose(s) set out in this report. Any use of, reliance on, or decisions made based on this report by any person other than the Client, for any purpose other than the purpose(s) set out in this report, is the sole responsibility of, and at the sole risk of, such other person or the Client, as the case may be. Central Valley accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for any losses, expenses, damages, fines, penalties or other harm (including without limitation financial or consequential effects on transactions or property values, and economic loss) that may be suffered or incurred by any person as a result of the use of or reliance on this report or the work referred to herein. The copying, distribution or publication of this report (except for the internal use of the Client) without the express written permission of Central Valley (which consent may be withheld in Central Valley's sole discretion} is prohibited. Central Valley retains ownership of this report and all documents related thereto both generally and as instruments of professional service. 3. The findings, conclusions and recommendations made in this report reflect Central Valley's best professional judgment in light of the information available at the time of preparation. This report has been prepared in a manner consistent with the level of care and skill normally exercised by arborists currently practicing under similar conditions in a similar geographic area and for specific application to the trees subject to this report as at the date of this report. Except as expressly stated in this report, the finds, conclusions and recommendations set out in the report are only valid for the day on which the assessment leading to such finds, conclusions and recommendations was conducted. If generally accepted assessment techniques or prevailing professional standards and best practices change at a future date, modifications to the findings, conclusions, and recommendations in this report may be necessary. Central Valley expressly excludes any duty to provide any such modification if generally accepted assessment techniques and prevailing professional standards and best practices change. 4. Conditions affecting the trees subject to this report (the "Conditions", including without limitation structural defects, scares, decay, funga l fruiting bodies, evidence of insect attack, discolored foliage, condition of root structures, the degree and direction of lean, the general condition of the tree(s) and the surrounding site, and the proximity of property and people) other than those expressly addressed in this report may exist. Unless otherwise expressed: information contained in this report covers only those conditions and trees that are expressly stated to be subject to this report and only reflects such Conditions and trees at the time of inspection; and the inspection is limited to visual examination of such Conditions and trees without dissection, excavation, probing, or coring. While every effort has been made to ensure that the trees recommended for retention are both healthy and safe, no guarantees. representations or warranties are made (express or implied) that those trees will remain standing or will not fail. The Client acknowledges that it is both professionally and practically impossible to predict with absolute certainty the behavior of any single tree, or group of trees, in all given circumstances. Inevitably, a standing tree will always pose some risk. Most t rees have the potential for failure and this risk can only be eliminated if the risk is removed. If Conditions change or if additional information becomes available at a future date, modifications to the findings, conclusions, and recommendations in this report may be necessary. Central Valley expressly excludes any duty to provide any such modification if Conditions change or additional information becomes available. 5. Nothing in this report is intended to constitute or provide a legal opinion, and Central Valley expressly disclaims any responsibility for matters legal in nature (including, without limitation, matters relating to title to and ownership or real or personal property and matters relating to cultural and heritage values). Central Valley makes no guarantee, representation or warranty (express or implied} as to the requirements of or compliance with applicable laws, rules, regulations, or policies established by federal, provincial, local government or first Nations bodies (collectively, "Governmental Bodies") or as to the availability of licenses, permits or authorizations of any Governmental Body. Revisions to any regulatory standards (including by-laws, policies, guidelines and any similar directions of a Government bodies In effect from time to time) referred to in this report may be expected over time. As a result, modifications to the findings, conclusions and recommendations in this report may be necessary. Central Valley expressly excludes any duty to provide any such modification if any such regulatory standard is revised. 6. Central Valley shall not be required to give testimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless su bsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement. 7. In preparing this report, Central Valley has relied in good faith on information provided by certain persons, Governmental Bodies, government registries and agents and representatives of each of the foregoing, and Central Va lley assumes that such information is true, correct and accurate in all material respects. Central Valley accepts no responsibility for any deficiency, misstatement or inaccuracy contained in this report as a result of omissions, misinterpretations or fraudulent acts of or information provided by such persons, bodies, registrie s, agents and representatives. 8. Sketches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys. 9. Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report.
10 I . 604-850-4938 P.O Box 82~ Station A ARBORIST CONSULTING LTD. Abbotsfonl, BC V2T .6Z4
REVISED ARBORIST REPORT
For
4585 SUMAS MOUNTAIN ROAD
ABBOTSFORD, BC
Prepared for: Dan Fisher Bynett Residential Construction Inc. Suite 427, 108·800 Kelly Road, Victoria, BC V9B 6J9
Prepared by: Central Valley Arborist Consulting Ltd.
Robert F. Kwak Certified Arborist #PN 1736A Wildlife Tree Assessor #P0072 Certified Tree Risk Assessor #0032
Date: August 18, 2016
W eb: www.arbori st· tree.com 0 Em a il: kwak ATTACHMENT B TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page#
• Arborist Letter ...... 1-2
• Site Plan ...... 3
• Tree Evaluation Summary...... 4-5
• Tree Preservation Summary ...... 6
• Photographs ...... 7
• Protective Fencing ...... 8
• Qualifications of Author ...... 9
• Assumptions and Limiting Conditions ...... 10 ~ 111 604-850-4938 P.O Box 82~ Station A ARBORIST CONSULTING LTD. Abbotsford, BC V2T 6Z4
August 18, 2016
Bynett Residential Construction Inc. Suite 427, 108-800 Kelly Road, Victoria, BC V9B 6J9
Attention: Dan Fisher
The following revised arborist report has been completed by Bob Kwak (Certified Arborist) for the proposed development located at 4585 Sumas Mountain Road, Abbotsford, BC.
In August of 2016, I re-attended the property to review the existing trees and to give a tree inventory with the intent of making recommendations for removal and preservation. The trees on the property were tagged, and are numbered 1 to 43. Information was documented with respect to the type of tree, diameter at breast height (DBH), and health. In total there are 39 trees with a DBH 20cm's or greater located on the proposed development property. (See Evaluation Summary and Site Plan for details)
There is an existing homes on the development property that will need to be demolished or removed at some stage of the development. The property has a slight slope with the highest elevation at the rear (west side) of the property sloping down to Sumas Mountain Road.
Based on the proposed development, there are 15 trees that will require removal (2 trees with a DBH between 20 and 30 centimeters and 13 trees with a DBH·greater than 30 centimeters.) As per the City of Abbotsford 's Tree Replacement policy a total of 43 replacement trees will be required. (See Site Plan and the Preservation Summary for details.)
Web: www.arborist-tree.com 0 Email: kwak@shaw. ca Prior to the commencement of any work, a protective fence must be put in place around the retained trees to just outside the drip line. (See attached fencing instructions) All protective fencing must be inspected by a certified arborist prior to construction. If there is to be any work within these boundaries a certified arborist must be on site to instruct on proper procedures. The protective fencing must stay in place until all work is completed and inspected weekly to ensure no damage occurs.
If there are any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Respectfully submitted ~· ·~~ Robert F. Kwak Certified Arborist #PN 1736A Wildlife Tree Assessor #P0072 Certified Tree Risk Assessor #0032
2 i~ -
#28 - 2004 CEDAR #24 - 750e MAPLE f 23 - 6001 HEMLOCK
113 - 300t CEDAR
1/21 - 2500 MAPLE #10 - 126 - JOOf BIRCH #19 - 200• SPRUCE
Jx250e BIRCH (117 -700tHEMLOCK #JO - HOOt CEDAR v 131 A- 500t CHERRY \ f1B - 3x700e MAPLE ' )I : -----=--t=1 I I #1 - 450• BIRCH I \ • ' _.J ! ! .,, I , j #32 8 - 4001 BIRCH - 40011 HEMLOCK #25 - 1000e FlR . ~ .-- ' f32C - 4001 MAPLE :'.Q()tJ i , Cl ~9Ja r------1 I# 43 - 250• CHERRY] a::: ,_ ~ : \ ~ 11 1 z #34E - 600• BIRCH _j \ ·®: ··--r----- #12 - 2x700t MAPLE -·---1 -----,--~ ~ r---_ ;-, "'/ I #42 - 300• SPRUCE I I I 1 ~ ,' "'t' _.,,,. f I f I t I z f35 - 2x400• MAPLE I I' ..U ) ::> / :(jf" I I I I I i 0 ~ 1 (14 - 250t FIR #36 - 500• BIRCH /,/ 1 I I i i ! ! ! ! ,!--_ : : i I I I ! ! ' #37 - 500. BIRCH I I I I ' t I I I I I I ------,..... , . ______v I '. ·\' &i') I: -· --- L ---·-L- I lo@..,, 4 ~ #38 - 700. MAPLE r . ------
/15 - 600t FIR
Protective #8 - 200t CEDAR Fenc ing
Aug'ust 17th, 2016 ______L__ _;;j '-- · -- Client: Bynctt Residential Construe lion Inc. !t C~NTRAL~ t 39 Total tagged trees located on development property 20cm (DBH) o r g reater Attn: Dan Fisher lf \h\l.LEY ~ ' 24 0 Total retained trees 20cm (DBI I) o r greater Site locatio n : ,\RllORfST C:ONSI HTTNC LID 15 .>% Total trees removed on development property 20cm (l)BH) or greate r 4585 Su mas M ountain Road 4 0 Trees tagged 31 A - 34E located on neighbouring property to the West Abbo t sford . BC 604-850-4938 ·-1- CENTRAL VALLEY TREE & ARBORIST SERVICES - TREE EVALUATION SUMMARY
4585 Sumas Road, Abbotsford August 18, 20 16
TAG# SPECIES LOCATION #OF DBH (cm) TREE SUGGESTED COMMENTS TREES Diameter at HEALTH ACTION breast height
1 birch Lot 3 1 45 good remove In proposed building envelope 2 hemlock - Lot 3 1 40 good remove In proposed building envelope 3 fir Lot 3 1 35 good remove In proposed building envelope 4 fir Lot 20 1 35 good retain s fir East of Lot 20 1 60 good retain 6 cedar Lot 20 1 25 good retain 7 cedar Lot 18 1 so good retain 8 cedar Lot 18 1 20 good retain 9 Lot4 Signs of bronze birch borer beetle, severe decay birch 1 30 poor remove at base and upper main stem 10 birch Lot 4 1 30 poor remove In proposed building envelope 11 cherry Lot S 1 30 good remove In proposed building envelope 12 maple Lot S 1 50/55 fa ir remove 2 stem maple in proposed building envelope 13 cedar Lot 6 1 30 good retain On property line 14 cedar Lot 6 1 70 good retain On property line 15 Lot 8 3 stem try to retain small hemlock, decay in birch 1 30/30/30 poor remove north stem, heavy lean to neighboring property 16 Lot 3 In proposed building envelope; 9 meters from alder 1 25/25 good remove fence to south side of drip line 17 Lot 1 Dead and decay branches in upper crown, decay hemlock 1 70 poor remove at base, previous crown failure 18 Lot 1 3 stem, previous crown failure, dead and decay maple 1 70/60/60 poor remove branches in upper crown, heavy lean toward development property 19 spruce Lot 1 1 20 good retain 20 hemlock Lot 1 1 good retain so -- 21 maple Lot 2 1 100 poor remove Decay in north stem, shear crack in center stem 22 cherry Lot 7 1 40 good remove In proposed building envelope 23 hemlock Lot 9 1 60 good retain Depending on building envelope location?
4 CENTRAL VALLEY TREE & ARBORIST SERVICES-TREE EVALUATION SUMMARY
458S Sumas Road, Abbotsford August 18, 2016
TAG# SPECIES LOCATION #OF DBH (cm) TREE SUGGESTED COMMENTS TREES Diameter at HEALTH ACTION breast height
24 maple Lot 9 1 7S fair retain Depending on building envelope location? 2S fir Lot 9 1 100 good retain Depending on building envelope location? 26 birch Lot 9 1 30 fair retain Depending on building envelope location? 27 maple Lot 9 1 2S Fair retain Depending on building envelope location? 28 cedar Lot 9 1 20 good retain 29 birch Lot 10 1 2S/30/2S fair retain Depending on building envelope location 30 cedar Lot 10 1 140 good retain Depending on building envelope location 3S maple Neighboring property 1 40-40 fair retain to the west 36 birch Lot 11 1 so fair retain 37 birch Lot 11 1 so fair retain 38 maple Lot 11 1 70 fair retain 39 maple Lot 12 1 60 good retain In proposed building envelope 40 maple Lot 13 1 90 fair retain Leans, dead wooding required in upper crown 41 maple Lot 13 1 40 fair retain 42 spruce Lot 13 1 so good remove In proposed building envelope 43 cherry Proposed roadway 1 25 good remove In proposed building envelope
31A cherry Neighboring property 1 so fair retain Protective fencing is required to the west 32B/ birch/ maple Neighboring property 2 40/40 poor retain Previous failure in upper crown. Recommend 32C to the west re moval. Owners permission is required 33D hemlock Neighboring property 1 2S/2S good retain Protective fencing is required to the west (2 stem) 34E birch Neighboring property 1 60 poor retain Severe decay/fruity bodies on main stem. to the west -- Recommend removal. Owners permissi on 1s required
s TREE PRESERVATION SUMMARY
Project Location: 4585 Sumas Mountain Road Abbotsford, BC Applicant/Developer: Dan Fisher Name, address, telephone: Bynett Residential Construction Inc. Suite 427, 108 800 Kelly Road Abbotsford, BC V9B 6J9 Consultant: Central Valley Arborist Consulting Ltd Name, address, telephone: PO Box 82, Station A, Abbotsford, BC, V2T 6Z4 Brain Kwak 604-850-4938
Summary of Proposed Trees Retained, Removed and Replaced
This Tree Protection Summary is a quick reference for the Arborist's Evaluation Report submitted for this development and is to be read in conjunction with that report.
A Number of trees greater than 20 centimeters DBH 39 B Number of trees retained greater than 20 centimeters DBH 24 c Number of trees to be removed ( 2 between 20-30cm DBH and 13 over 30cm DBH) 15 D Number of replacement trees required (2 to 1 between 20-30cm and 3 to 1 over 30cm DBH) 43 E Credit for retained trees at 2:1 and 3:1 • F Number of replace ment t rees proposed to be planted (may differ from number of • replacement trees required due to site constraints/opportunities) G Shortfall of replacement trees to be planted (off-site or provision of cash-in-lieu) • H Number of trees greater than 20 centimeters DBH located in non-disturbance area above the n/a top of bank I Number of residential units or lots 20 J Average number of trees per unit 1.9 K Estimated number of trees greater than 20 centimeters DBH located below top of bank of a n/a wat ercourse
* Unknown at this time (To be advised by City of Abbotsford)
Date: August 18, 2016
:1J::~P°J::;__subm itted by
Robert F. K~L Certified Arborist #PN 1736A
6 Photograph #1: View of the proposed development property looking west from Sumas Mountain Road
Photograph #3 : View of the development property from the rear of the property looking to the east.
7 PROTECTIVE FENCING INSTRUCTIONS
Solid barrier firmly staked into the ground (2"x4") Minimum outside of branches (drip-line)
Plastic mesh screening on all
Note: No storage of building materials within or against protection barrier and no booms or equipment to enter drip-line at anytime. Barrier is not to be moved once erected. 8 Qualifications of Author
Robert F. Kwak
P.O Box 82, Station A Abbotsford, BC V2T 624
Cell: 604-850-4938 Email: [email protected]
• President and owner of Central Valley Arborist Consulting Ltd; 2015 to present
• President and owner of Central Valley Tree and Arborist Services Ltd; 2002 to 2015
• Manager of Westland Tree Services 2000 to 2002
• President and owner of B.K. Tree Services Ltd; 1981 to 1999
• International Society of Arboriculture; Certified Arborist PN-1736A
• PNW-ISA, WCB Certified Tree Risk Assessor; Certification #0032
• WCB Wildlife Danger Tree Assessor: Parks and Recreation Module; Certification #P0072
• Consulting Arborist; June 2000 - Present
• Member: International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Pacific Northwest Chapter of Arborist
• Over 30 of years professional work in the tree industry and land clearing bu siness.
• Insurance policy #040149195 ($5,000,000 Liability) - Saxbee Insurance Agencies Ltd.
• Business License: Abbotsford Intra Municipal #128082
• Work Safe BC - 961482-AA
9 Assumptions and Limiting Conditions 1. Except as expressly set out in this report and in these Assumptions and Limiting Conditions, Central Valley Arborist Consulting Ltd. (Central Valley) makes no guarantee, representation or warranty (express or implied) with regard t o: this report; the findings, conclusions and recommendations contained herein; or the work referred to herein. 2. This report has been prepared, and the work undertaken in connection herewith has been conducted, by Central Valley for Dan Fisher of Bynett Residential Construction Inc. re the development property at 4585 Sumas Mtn. Road, Abbotsford, BC. It is intended for the sole and exclusion use by the Client, for the purpose(s) set out in this report. Any use of, reliance on, or decisions made based on this report by any person other than the Client, for any purpose other than the purpose(s) set out in this report, is the sole responsibility of, and at the sole risk of, such other person or the Client, as the case may be. Central Valley accepts no liability or responsibility whatsoever for any losses, expenses, damages, fines, penalties or other harm (including without limitation financial or consequential effects on transactions or property values, and economic loss) that may be suffered or incurred by any person as a result of the use of or reliance on this report or the work referred to herein. The copying, distribution or publication of this report (except for the internal use of the Client) without the express written permission of Central Valley (which consent may be withheld in Central Valley's sole discretion) is prohibited. Central Valley retains ownership of this report and all documents related thereto both generally and as instruments of professional service. 3. The findings, conclusions and recommendations made in this report reflect Central Valley's best professional judgment in light of the information available at the time of preparation. This report has been prepared in a manner consistent with the level of ca re and skill normally exercised by arborists currently practicing under similar conditions in a similar geographic area and for specific application to the trees subject to this report as at the date of this report. Except as expressly stated in this report, the finds, conclusions and recommendations set out in the report are only valid for the day on which the assessment leading to such finds, conclusions and recommendations was conducted. If generally accepted assessment t echniques or prevailing professional standards and best practices change at a future date, modifications to the findings, conclusions, and recommendations in this report may be necessary. Central Valley expressly excludes any duty to provide any such modification if generally accepted assessment techniques and prevailing professional standards and best practices change. 4. Conditions affecting the trees subject to this report (the "Conditions", including without limitation structural defects, scares, decay, fungal fruiting bodies, evidence of insect attack, discolored foliage, condition of root structures, the degree and direction of lean, the general condition of the tree(s) and the surrounding site, and the proximity of property and people) other than those expressly addressed in this report may exist. Unless otherwise expressed: information contained in this report covers only those conditions and trees that are expressly stated to be subject to this report and only reflects such Conditions and trees at the time of inspection; and the inspection is limited to visual examination of such Condit ions and trees without dissection, excavation, pro bing, or coring. While every effort has been made to ensure that the trees recommended for retention are both healthy and safe, no guarantees, representations or warranties are made (express or implied) that those trees will remain standing or will not fail. The Client acknowledges that it is both professionally and practically impossible to predict with absolute certainty the behavior of any single tree, or group of trees, in all given circumstances. Inevitably, a standing tree will always pose some risk. Most trees have the potential for failure and this risk can only be eliminated if the risk is removed. If Conditions change or if additional information becomes available at a future date, modifications to the findings, conclusions, and recommendations in this report may be necessary. Central Valley expressly excludes any duty to provide any such modification if Conditions change or additional information becomes available. S. Nothing in this report is intended to constitute or provide a legal opinion, and Central Valley expressly disclaims any responsibility for matters legal in nature (including, without limitation, matters relating to title to and ownership or real or personal property and matters relating to cultural and heritage values). Central Valley makes no guarantee, representation or warranty (express or implied) as to the requirements of or compliance with applicable laws, rules, regulations, or policies established by federal, provincial, local government or first Nations bodies (collectively, "Governmental Bodies") or as to the availability of licenses, permits or authorizations of any Governmental Body. Revisions to any regulatory standards (including by-laws, policies, guidelines and any similar directions of a Government bodies in effect from time to time) referred to in this report may be expected over time. As a result, modifications to the findings, conclusions and recommendations in this report may be necessary. Central Valley expressly excludes any duty to provide any such modification if any such regulatory standard is revised. 6. Central Valley shall not be required to give t estimony or to attend court by reason of this report unless subsequent contractual arrangements are made, including payment of an additional fee for such services as described in the fee schedule and contract of engagement. 7. In preparing this report, Central Valley has re lied in good faith on information provided by certain persons, Governmental Bodies, government registries and agents and representatives of each of the foregoing, and Central Valley assumes that such information is true, correct and accurate in all material respects. Central Valley accepts no responsibility for any deficiency, misstatement or inaccuracy contained in this report as a result of omissions, misinterpretations or fraudulent acts of or information provided by such persons, bodies, registries, agents and representatives. 8. Sket ches, diagrams, graphs, and photographs in this report, being intended as visual aids, are not necessarily to scale and should not be construed as engineering or architectural reports or surveys. 9. Loss or alteration of any part of this report invalidates the entire report.
10 Os ~~ ABBOTSFO RD DEVE LOPMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION
REZONING WORKS AND SERVICES REQUIREMENTS
File No: PRJ16-051 ------+- Planner: Blake Collins, Senior Planner
Prepared By: Julie Maerz, D velopment Technologist 2
Approved By: .. a '"' ,, .;~, ager of Developm~(-ineering
Date: August 31, 201
Applicant: Bynett Construction Inc.
4585 Sumas Mountain Road Development Property: Lot D Sec 31 TWP 19 Plan 70640
The Local Government Act authorizes local governments to require development to meet current works and services standards as set out in the City's Development Bylaw and Policies.
This report includes the Works & Services Requirements to meet the applicable bylaws and policies and Future Considerations that may apply to the next phase of development.
Please have your consulting engineer call Julie Maerz, Development Technologist 2 at 604-864- 5690 in regard to this report and any other servicing matters relating to this application.
Page 1of8 PRJ16-051 (REZONING) Os ·~..6 ABBOTSFORD DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERIN G DIVIS ION REQUIREMENTS
Dedicate sufficient land along the Sumas Mountain Road frontage to accommodate an "Urban Arterial Undivided" standard road on a 22.5m ROW.
Additional dedication may be required to accommodate the relocation of the existing water course.
Urban Roadways - Construction
On Sumas Mountain Road along the full frontage of the Lands from the north property line to the south property line design & construct Y2 of an "Urban Arterial" standard road. The Y2 road construction (7.95m wide pavement from centerline) will consist of Urban Highway design features as per Standard Drawing ES-R-7, including but not limited to;
• one southbound through lane; • bicycle lane; • parking lane; • barrier curb & gutter; • boulevard improvements; • soil(s) to support street trees; • 1.5m wide concrete sidewalk; • ornamental street lighting; • traffic lane markings; • traffic signage; • asphalt taper at both ends to meet existing; and • associated drainage works.
The above noted works are not eligible for Latecomer Charges. {900-9-01)
Urban Roadways - Access
The sightlines at the proposed strata road at Sumas Mountain Rd. are to be evaluated by a professional transportation consultant. The sightlines must meet the decision sight distance indicated in the TAC Geometric Deign Guide for Canadian Roadways. The road profile may need to be changed along Sumas Mountain Rd., to allow proper sightlines.
Page 2 of 8 PRJ16-051 (REZONING) Os ~~ ABBOTSFORD DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER ING DIVISION Drainage Collection and Disposal
A stormwater management plan (SWMP) is required to show how runoff is controlled onsite and discharged to the downstream drainage system. The plan needs to meet both the City's and DFO requirements.
If any road/ side walk improvement work happens, reserve a strip of the land alongside the watercourse/ ditch for possible relocation in the future along Sumas Mountain Road frontage.
Sewage Collection and Disposal
The strata subdivision shall be serviced to the existing private Straiton Pump Station (SPS).
The Developer shall arrange for the legal agreement between the Straiton Development and Bynett Development (4585 Sumas Mountain Road) that allows for the sewer system (sewer mains, private pump station, private forcemain, generator etc.) to be shared and privately owned and maintained. The legal agreement shall mention that Bynett extension (4573 Sumas Mountain Road) also has the right to use the private sewer system, as necessary.
The City will take ownership of the 100 mm private forcemain (downstream of the junction from the DPS forcemain and SPS private forcemain) on Sumas Mountain Road, which is currently owned by Straiton Development.
The developer's consulting engineer is entirely responsible for the performance of the SPS, when SPS and Diverse Pump Station are pumping simultaneously.
The developer shall provide a dry line from Bynett Development to Bynett extension ( 4573 Sumas Mountain Road).
The above noted works are not eligible for Latecomer Charges. (900-9-01)
Page 3 of 8 PRJ16-051 (REZONING) Os ·~.6 ABB OTSF O RD DEVELOPMENT ENGI NEER ING DIVIS ION Water Distribution Domestic and Fire Fighting
The existing 300mm diameter watermain fronting the development site on Sumas Mountain Road is capable of providing adequate domestic and fire flow to the site. ( Note latecomers payable on page 6).
City of Abbotsford Engineering Dep3rtment H20MAP St andard Fire Flow Report Applicant: Development Services 4.535 Sumas Mountain Location: Date: 6-May-16 F1 2 PRJ10-051 Road
Existin g Infrastructure . Peak Day+ FF Demands NoclelO# Static StaticPrKs FiRRow Res..PrKs.. • AIQibible Flew RnidNIPr. 9 ~ kP~(psll Delrund Fn f low I.Jn ...... "-lat* F6ow 4JmClgpm) Lpm(Jolnl o.n.a..d 11Pa(J>5'1 kPa(psit
JCT- 30~64 1 (0.1) 5Cl2 (84) 450D ( Q~D ) 5 11! (75 ) 1272D (2Bll-n) 172 (25) JCT-361Xl!I I (D.3) 530 (7B} 4500 (Q9D) 47a (BQJ 12720 (WCD) 161 (23) D 0 (0) O (D) D (0 ) 0 (D) O (D) 0 (0) The· City ~ot guar.in!eE prei;Lures wiUbr n n.g h as these shewn .n tn1s r.. j:Oft. Pluw·H and 1lcws aJE §Ub;e~
to change and 111 ., Cay shaft in n o ca5E be hable f0t dmuges arising o.. t of lhe Pltlll:Sion or '" " of t!l s infollJ".a1ion 1nclud'ng any co~EQu.,n1!2l, incr.i;ental DI direct oal'l'3lles \ ' 200 ~ Ii! . -- ·------·--·-----·---- ~ I -. .-'CT-36Sat I I I @ SITE s i!; .., ~ CIJ
::::J~ CIJ I I I I I JCT-a6996 ------•• : ~
Page 4 of 8 PRJ16-051 (REZONING) Os ·~~ AB BOTSFOR D DEVE LOPMENT ENGINEERING DIVISION
Power/Telecommunications
Pay the Streetscape Contribution Levy in accordance with the City of Abbotsford Development Bylaw 2011 , Bylaw No. 2070-2011 Schedule "D" at time of sub-division.
Development of the Lands shall be serviced by underground power/telecommunication services.
Geotechnical Requirements
Geotechnical reports are required;
• Prior to construction - outlining parameters and details of all cuts and fills in excess of 1.5 m in depth, stabilization practices and in-place testing requirements to be implemented during all stages of earthwork, retaining wall design, suitability of existing soil conditions and remedial measures to be employed by contractors and builders.
• Following construction and prior to release of building permits - certifying that construction practices, methods, procedures noted in the original reports were followed, identifying fills or cuts within proposed building envelope areas, confirming and certifying suitability and stability for building construction and providing guidelines for post-construction slope maintenance.
• Following construction and prior to release of building permits - certifying that construction practices, methods, procedures required for infrastructure servicing were followed.
Erosion and Sediment Control
All works shall be performed in substantial conformance with the City's Development By-law, the Provincial 'Land Development Guidelines' and the City's Erosion and Sediment Control Bylaw, in the control and prevention of erosion and sediment during all phases of construction. No release of silt, sediment laden waters or deleterious substances is permitted into any existing City storm or drainage system during any phase of development of the Lands.
The ESC Plan requires 4 drawings, each indicating the ESC methods for that stage of construction; • site preparation • site servicing • building construction • warranty period
Page 5 of 8 PRJ16-051 (REZONING} Os ·~~ ABBOTSFORD DEVELOPMENT ENG INEERING DIVISION
Rezoning Development Agreement Preparation Fee Pay $500 Development Agreement preparation fee.
Works & Services Security & Warranty Deposit
Provide as Security Deposit, the estimated construction cost plus 10% for engineering (min $25,000) and 5% for as-constructed drawings (minimum $15,000) in cash or letter of credit.
Administration & Inspection Fee
Pay 5% of the first $300,000 + 3% of the remainder of the estimated construction cost for administration and inspections.
City Services Fees
Tie-in inspection fee ($50 per inspection) for water, sanitary, and storm sewer services.
Water and sewer main connections and wet taps are supervised and/or performed by City crews at the developer's expense and payable upon invoice.
Street and traffic signs are supplied and installed by the City at the developer's expense and payable upon invoice.
Pay to energize street lights at $50 per street light.
Latecomer Charges - payable Policy 900-9-01
The Developer is required to make payment to the frontender of works and services for connection to the 300 mm watermain fronting the property.
Page 6 of 8 PRJ16-051 (REZONING) Os ·~~ AB BOTSFORD DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING DIVIS ION
FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS (Subdivsion) Upon further development an additional works and services review will apply related to that application. Listed below are some items to consider. Bylaws • the applicant is to be familiar with the Development Bylaw to ensure an understanding of possible future Works and services that may impact the development • the applicant is to review the Works and Services identified in the Development Agreement and how they may impact the building. Watter
• This property is outside the 10 minute fire response window and there may be a requirement for buildings to be constructed with fire suppression systems. Should a fire suppression system be required for any building on the site, the applicant will be responsible to ensure that the water service is appropriately designed and right-sized. Should coach house(s) be proposed for this site, the applicant will be responsible for providing calculations signed and sealed by a sprinkler design engineer that prove service and meter adequacy.
• Servicing for the proposed application shall be as follows:
o Each unit within single family on the new development site(s) will be required to have its own separate domestic water meter located in an outdoor meter pit, accessible and in a landscaped location (non-travel area) location approved by the City.
• Water mains supplying water to fire hydrants shall not be metered.
Stormwater Management • Detention and infiltration will be required. Ensure that adequate room and proper placement has been reviewed. • Provide an updated SWMP including detention and/ or infiltration. Provide ROW for all detention, infiltration, and runoff treatment facilities. The onsite detention/ infiltration facilities are to be privately owned and maintained with ROWs to allow the City to access for inspection and emergency access purposes. • Onsite detention for 1 in 100 year events is required with a release rate of 5L/s/ha. Provide onsite infiltration to capture 6 month 24 hour rainfall (51 mm), per recommendations of Clayburn Creek ISMP, unless otherwise recommended by a geotechnical engineer; in which case, provide additional detention for 1 in 2 year events • The following source controls apply to the development area, per recommendations of Clayburn Creek ISMP:
o 300 mm absorbent soil in impervious areas, and o terrace cleared lot areas (slopes between 10% and 35%). Page 7 of 8 PRJ16-051 (REZONING) Os ~~ ABB OTSFORD DEVE LOPMENT ENGINEERING DIV ISION
Traffic Management • road dedications, statutory rights-of-way and easements to accommodate the works and lot grading may require adjustments to the placement or size of the building. Service Connections • water, sanitary and storm connections may have specific tie in locations. Review and confirm locations prior to design. • calculations related to the required domestic and fire water demand will be reviewed. There may be a service, meter or flow restrictions. • Fire Department review may result in geometric changes to onsite roadways, additional fire hydrants, emergency access and building placement. • Provide underground power and telecommunications services from the distribution system to the proposed building(s).
Development Cost Charges. • Development Cost Charges are applicable prior to Subdivision approval. Lot Grading
• A Lot Grading Plan is required. Final lot grading shall conform to City's Lot Grading Policy and Guidelines. Any retaining walls that the Developer or Consulting Engineer consider are necessary to effectively grade the Lands to prevent negative impacts on finished neighbouring Lands, either existing or proposed, shall be constructed by the Developer. The standard "Lot Grading Covenant shall be registered against title to all proposed lots.
• Lot grading shall also provide for the collection of surface runoff and other drainage that will discharge to the City Drainage system. Lot grading may be designed to allow for surface sheet flows or collected in swales and directed to lawn basins as necessary to the satisfaction of the General Manager, Engineering. Any collection of surface flows to a concentrated point discharge location shall include provision for easements or rights of-way across impacted Lands as necessary. All lot grading shall be designed to take care of surface flows emanating from onsite grading.
Building Permit Submissions • In order to avoid delays in receipt of building permits, the builder shall be responsible for ensuring that building permit applications on the Lands conform to the intent of the accepted Lot Grading plan(s) prior to submission to the City. • The developer or his designate shall review and approve building permit applications prior to submission to the City. When submitted, the building permit plans shall provide lot grading information that shall, at time of final inspection for building occupancy or approval, comply with the accepted lot grading plan or the intent of the lot grading design accepted by the General Manager, Engineering prior to construction.
Page 8 of 8 PRJ16-051 (REZONING) CITY OF ABBOTSFORD ATTACHMENT D
ABBOTSFORD ZONING BYLAW, 2014, AMENDMEN1
Bylaw No. 2628-2016 PRJ16-051
The Council of the City of Abbotsford, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. CITATION
Bylaw No. 2628-2016 may be cited as "Abbotsford Zoning Bylaw, 2014, Amendment Bylaw No. 95" .
2. AMENDS ZONING MAPS
Abbotsford Zoning Bylaw, 2014, Schedule "D", Urban Area Zoning, as amended, is further amended by changing the zoning of:
P.l.D.: 002-589-907 Lot D Section 31 Township 19 New Westminster District Plan 70640
Located at 4585 Sumas Mountain Road
From: Country Residential Zone (CR)
To: Compact Urban Residential Zone (RS6), per the attached Appendix "A".
READ A FIRST TIME this day of ' 2016
READ A SECOND TIME this day of ' 2016
PUBLIC HEARING HELD this day of '2016
READ A THIRD TIME this day of ' 2016
APPROVED by the Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure this day of '2016
ADOPTED this day of ' 2016
Henry Braun Mayor
William Flitton Corporate Officer Final Draft- August 24, 2016 CITY OF ABBOTSFORD
ABBOTSFORD ZONING BYLAW, 2014, AMENDMENT BYLAW NO. 95
Bylaw No. 2628-2016 Page 2
APPENDIX "A" SCHEDULE BYLAW NO. 2628-2016 BEING ABBOTSFORD ZONING BYLAW, 2014, AMENDMENT BYLAW NO. 95 FROM: Country Residential Zone (CR) TO: Compact Lot Residential Zone (RS6)
10300
REM A 85100 4
2 59114<
EPSD1299 20420'
LANE
c 700-40
1 59944
1 01136
23 l6 E3S752 Z2 2• 21 35 From Country Residental Zone (CR) ,. 25 2G 19 To Compact Lot Residential Zone (RS6) 2.3 26 12 27 c .. " a: A =- ~ 17 l 29177 z ~~ JJ 29 2S ~ !! ., a: " ..~ ~ \f .. :IE ,. Text s s 10 11 r t2 t l
N B 7119 A
Final Draft- August 24, 2016