Regular Council Agenda - District of Mission

1Regular Council AgendaMarch 19, 2012 — 6:30 p.m.Council Chambers8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC1. CALL TO ORDER2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA3. PROCLAMATIONS(a) April 2012 as “Male Survivors of Sexual Abuse Awareness Month”BC Society for Male Survivors of Sexual AbusePage 54. DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS(a)(b)Presentation of Special Recognition Award – Kelly RidleyTony Lapointe, Executive Director, Mission CommunityServices SocietyRe: Overview of Mission Community Services--Page 6(c) Raphael SliverRe: Community Art Project--5. PUBLIC HEARING(a) Zoning Amending Bylaw 3943-2006(R06-023 – 602448 BC Ltd.) – a bylaw to add a ComprehensiveDevelopment Zone and to rezone the properties located at 8980 EastEdwards Street and 8977 West Edwards Street from Rural 80 andRural 16 Zones (RU80 and RU16) to Comprehensive Development14 Zone (CD 14)Page 76. ADOPTION OF INFORMATIONAL ITEMS(a) Ferndale Institution Population Profile – January to March, 2012 Page 88(b)(c)(d)(e)Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer CommissionSpecial Meeting held on February 6, 2012Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer CommissionMeeting held on February 9, 2012Minutes of the Abbotsford/Mission Water & Sewer CommissionSpecial Meeting held on February 27, 2012Minutes of the Emergency Planning Committee Meeting held onFebruary 23, 2012Page 91Page 93Page 97Page 99

2Regular Council AgendaMarch 19, 2012(f)(g)(h)(i)Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee Meeting held onNovember 29, 2011Minutes of the Mission Abbotsford Transit Committee Meeting held onFebruary 2, 2012Minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission Meetingheld on February 1, 2012Draft Minutes of the Mission Healthy Community Council Meetingheld on February 2,1 2012Page 101Page 104Page 109Page 1107. RESOLUTION TO RESOLVE INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE8. PLANNING(a) Rezoning Text Amendment to Section 108 Environmental Protection Page 117(b) Update of the Regional Growth Strategy Process Page 121(c)(d)Section 882 Declaration for Proposed Development at8711 Cedar StreetExcerpt from the Minutes of the Public Hearings held on May 25 andJune 22, 2009 and Staff Reports dated March 16, April 20 andSeptember 8, 2009Background for consideration of adoption of bylaw 5018-2009 –33344 – 4 th Avenue [Section 14(b)]Page 125Page 128(e) Excerpt from the Minutes of the Public Hearing held on November 28,2011 and Staff Reports dated September 19, 2011, and February 6,2012Background for consideration of adoption of bylaws 5244-2011-4052(16) and 5245-2011-5050(54) for 7324, 7338, 7348, 7366,32267 and 32299 Hurd Street [Sections 14(c) and (d)]Page 1729. PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURE(a) Community Art Project –Truth and Reconciliation Grant Page 20010. ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS(a) 2012 Sprinkling Restrictions Page 202(b) Transit Service Request for Seniors Center Page 204(c) Earth Hour 2012 Page 206(d) Household Hazardous Waste Collection Day Page 20711. ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCE(a) Section 882 Declaration on OCP Amendment (0916585 BC Page 208Ltd./Redekop) – 8711 Cedar Street – Bylaw 5278-2012-4052(21)(b) Traffic Fine Revenue Sharing Grant 2012 – 2014 Page 209

3Regular Council AgendaMarch 19, 2012(c) 2012 Application Intake – Gas Tax General Strategic Priorities Fundand Innovations FundPage 216(d) Core Services Review Update Page 22112. RESOLUTION TO RISE AND REPORT13. ADOPTION OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT14. BYLAWS FOR CONSIDERATIONMOTION: That the readings of all bylaws included in the Bylaws section of theMarch 19, 2012 regular council agenda be approved as listed.(a) Zoning Amending Bylaw 3943-2006(R06-023 – 602448 BC Ltd.) – a bylaw to add a ComprehensiveDevelopment Zone and to rezone the properties located at8980 East Edwards Street and 8977 West Edwards Street fromRural 80 and Rural 16 Zones (RU80 and RU16) toComprehensive Development 14 Zone (CD14)(b) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5018-2009(R08-001 – OTG Development Concepts) – a bylaw to rezoneproperty at 33344 – 4 th Avenue from Residential Two Unit Zone(RT465) to Residential Compact Zone (RC465)(c) OCP Amending Bylaw 5244-2011-4052(16)(R11-014 – Fraser Health Authority) – a bylaw to redesignateproperties at 7324, 7338, 7348, 7366, 32267 and 32299 HurdStreet from Urban Compact – Multiple Family to Institutional(d) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5245-2011-5050(54)(R11-014 – Fraser Health Authority) – a bylaw to add aComprehensive Development Zone and rezone properties at7324, 7338, 7348, 7366, 32267 and 32299 Hurd Street fromInstitutional Care Zone (IC) to Comprehensive DevelopmentZone 26 (CD 26)Third ReadingAdoptAdoptAdopt(e)In accordance with Section 882 of the Local Government Act,Council has considered District of Mission Official CommunityPlan Amending Bylaw 5278-2012-4052(21) in conjunctionwith the District of Mission's Financial Plan and WasteManagement PlanRescind andRe-Declare(f) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5282-2012-5050(74)(R12-009 – District of Mission) – a bylaw to amend the text ofSection 108 Environmental ProtectionFirst and SecondReadings15. MINUTES(a) Minutes of the Committee of the Whole (Planning Committee)Meeting held on January 30, 2012Page 232(b) Regular Council Meeting (Public Hearing) – February 27, 2012 Page 236(c) Regular Council Meeting (for the purpose of going into a Closed Page 242meeting) – March 5, 2012

4Regular Council AgendaMarch 19, 2012(d) Regular Council Meeting — March 5, 2012 Page 244(e) Special Council Meeting — March 12, 2012 Page 26916. OTHER BUSINESS(a) Development Variance Permit Application DV09-001 (OTGDevelopment Concepts) — 33344 — 4 th AvenueFor consideration of approval.Page 12817. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER’S REPORT18. MAYOR’S REPORT19. COUNCILLORS’ REPORTS ON COMMITTEES, BOARDS, AND ACTIVITIES20. QUESTION PERIODREMINDER: Council is not in a legal position to receive further information(including answering questions) regarding Zoning Amending Bylaw 3943-2006after the Public Hearing.21. ADJOURNMENT

7DISTRICT OF MISSIONNOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGPursuant to the provisions of Sections 890 and 892 of the Local Government Act, a PublicHearing will take place in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street,Mission, BC at 6:30 p.m. on Monday, March 19, 2012 to consider the following proposedbylaws:DISTRICT OF MISSION ZONING AMENDING BYLAW 3943-2006 (R06-023 – Holman)This bylaw proposes to amend District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 by:(a) adding the new CD-14 Comprehensive Development zone to accommodate a 109 unitclustered residential development consisting of bare land strata acreage lots, commonopen spaces and one approximate 17.9 acre fee simple farm property. The CD-14 zonesets out the permitted, principal and accessory uses, development conditions, lot area,density, number of residential buildings, lot coverage, height of buildings, setbacks,accessory off street parking, agricultural and accessory greenhouse uses; and(b) rezoning a portion of the property located at 8980 East Edwards Street (labelled Area A)and legally described as Parcel Identifier: 013 381 491; South East Quarter Section 35Township 17 Except: Firstly: Part on Plan 3767 Secondly: Parcel “7” (Explanatory Plan14778) New Westminster District from Rural 80 (RU80) zone to CD-14 ComprehensiveDevelopment zone; and(c) rezoning a portion of the property located at 8980 East Edward Street (labelled Area B)and legally described as Parcel Identifier: 013 381 491; South East Quarter Section 35Township 17 Except: Firstly: Part on Plan 3767 Secondly: Parcel “7” (Explanatory Plan14778) New Westminster District from Rural 16 (RU16) zone to CD-14 ComprehensiveDevelopment zone; and(d) rezoning the property located at 8977 West Edwards Street (labelled Area C) and legallydescribed as Parcel Identifier: 010 997 466; Lot 5 Section 35 Township 17 NewWestminster District Plan 3767 from Rural 16 (RU16) zone to CD-14 ComprehensiveDevelopment zone.The location of the subject properties is 8980 East Edwards Street and 8977 West EdwardsStreet and the portions to be rezoned are shown on the following maps:

8The purpose of the proposed amendment is to create a new comprehensive developmentzone (CD-14) to accommodate the subsequent subdivision of the subject properties into 109bare land strata lots ranging in size from 1,018 square metres (10,961 sq. ft.) to 2,185square metres (25,523 sq. ft.) and one (1) fee simple lot that is 17.93 acres in size (withinthe Agricultural Land Reserve).The application was originally considered by Council on October 25, 2006; a Public Hearing washeld on January 29, 2007 and the bylaws received third reading on May 7, 2007.The purpose of holding a second Public Hearing is to amend the requirements prior to Councilconsideration of adoption of the zone amending bylaw. Specifically, the applicant is seekingCouncil approval to enter into a Development Agreement with the District to secure off-siteservicing requirements to obtain zoning approval.Copies of the proposed bylaws and reports relevant to these bylaws may be inspected at theMunicipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BC, Monday to Friday, excluding statutoryholidays, from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., and at the Mission Library, 33247 2 nd Avenue, duringregular opening hours, from March 8, 2012 to March 19, 2012. The information is also availableon our website at www.mission.ca by searching “upcoming public hearing”. For furtherinformation regarding any of these bylaws, please contact the Planning Department at (604)820-3748.At the Public Hearing, persons who believe that their interest in property is affected by theseproposed bylaws will have the opportunity to be heard. If you are unable to attend, you maysend a written submission, including your name and address, to the attention of Paul Gipps,Deputy Chief Administrative Officer or email info@mission.ca by 4:00 p.m. on the date of thePublic Hearing. All submissions will form part of the record of the Hearing.Please note that no further information or submissions can be considered by Council after theconclusion of the Public Hearing.Immediately following the Public Hearing portion of the meeting, council may consider movingbylaws forward for additional readings.Paul GippsDEPUTY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERDated at Mission, BCthis 5th day of March, 2012.G:\COMDEV\PUBLIC HEARINGS & PUBLIC INPUT MTGS\NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING\2012\March 19.docx

88Ferndale Institution Population ProfileJanuary 2012Population Total as of January 3, 2012 152Number of Aboriginal Offenders 18Number of Other Ethnicities 45Number of Caucasian 89Age Groups

89Ferndale Institution Population ProfileFebruary 2012Population Total as of February 1, 2012 151Number of Aboriginal Offenders 17Number of Other Ethnicities 45Number of Caucasian 89Age Groups

90Ferndale Institution Population ProfileMarch 2012Population Total as of March 1, 2012 147Number of Aboriginal Offenders 18Number of Other Ethnicities 42Number of Caucasian 87Age Groups

99FIRE / RESCUE SERVICEThe Minutes for the EMERGENCY PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING held at Fire Station No. 1,located at 33330 – 7th Avenue on February 23, 2012 commencing at 0800 hours.Members PresentIan Fitzpatrick, Emergency Preparedness CoordinatorKris Boland, DOM, Dep. Director of FinanceRick Bomhof, DOM, Director of Engineering & Public WorksKerry Bysouth, DOM, Mission Leisure CentreBill Hopkins, Canadian Coast Guard AuxiliaryJames Miller, Canadian Coast Guard AuxiliaryDarryl Stroet, B.C. Ambulance ServiceDebbie Glenn, DOM, Recording Secretary1. NOTIFICATION OF MEETINGSDiscussion took place regarding notification of Emergency Planning Committee meetings to themembers. It was agreed that an “electronic invitation” would be sent to all members prior to themeeting each month.2. MINUTESThe minutes of the Emergency Planning Committee meeting held on February 2, 2012 werereviewed and accepted.3. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES(a) Emergency Planning Training CoursesIan reported that he was waiting for a reply from E.M.B.C. on what emergency planningcourses would be available in the new training year.(b) Updated Response and Recovery PlanIan reported that the revised Emergency Response and Recovery Plan had been reviewed byEmergency Management and would be available at the April Emergency Planning Committeemeeting.(c) B.C. Hydro Table Top ExerciseIan reported that he did not have a confirmed date yet for the B.C. Hydro table top exercise.He will advise members when a date has been confirmed.(d) E.S.S. TrainingIan reported that E.S.S. would be hosting two courses this year. Ian advised that in anemergency situation, a reception centre would be set up at the Mission Leisure Centre. Hesuggested that staff from the Leisure Centre that may be involved in assisting with a receptioncentre may want to participate in one of the E.S.S. Training courses. Ian advised that hewould send the course schedule to Kerry Bysouth.Kris Boland suggested that the name “Emergency Social Services” be changed to “EmergencySupport Services ” so as not to be confused with Social Services. Kris gave an example whereEmergency Social Services was mistaken for Social Service workers when they attended to anincident on a Native Indian reserve. Ian stated that the name could not be changed without33330- 7 t h Avenue, Mission, B.C. V2V 2E3Phone (604) 820-3794 Fax (604) 820-8624 Web Site: www.mission.ca E-mail: dglenn@mission.ca

2100Emergency Management B.C. approval, and if changed the name would be changed for allgroups within the organization.4. NEW BUSINESS(a) Emergency Planning TrainingIan reported that he has submitted our request for emergency planning training courses, andwe are hoping to host three courses this year.(b) Freshet Readiness TeleconferenceIan reported that he had a teleconference call earlier this week to discuss the upcoming springfreshet. He stated this is the first of a number of teleconferences that will be held during thespring freshet.(c) Weather Patterns TeleconferenceIan reported that he had a teleconference call with Environment Canada regarding the currentweather patterns and what is predicted in the coming week.(d) Emergency Operations Centre Manual (hand out attached)Ian handed out a copy of an Emergency Management Training Manual for members to review.He stated that at the next meeting there would be a power point presentation and review of thisdocument.(e) In House ExerciseIn advised that there would be an in house exercise conducted this year. He requested thatmembers bring their alternates to the next meeting and to a few meetings throughout theyear, so that they would be familiar with emergency operation procedures.5. AGENCY REPORTS(a) Leisure CentreKerry Bysouth reported that the new generator was scheduled to be installed in the LeisureCentre in mid April 2012.(b) B.C. AmbulanceDarryl Stroet reported that Allan McIlhargey was transferring to Chilliwack.(c) Emergency Planning Operations CentreIan reported that the Emergency Operations Centre was being updated with new equipment.He noted that new tables and dividers had been purchased. He also reported that flat screentelevisions, telephones and possibly a new printer would also be purchased.6. ADJOURNMENT (moved to a new date)The meeting adjourned at 0830 hours. The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, March29, 2012 to be held at Mission Fire Station No. 1 commencing at 0800 hours.

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109District of Mission MinutesThe Minutes for the Mission Community Heritage Commission (MCHC) meeting held in the ConferenceRoom of the Mission Municipal Hall on February 1, 2012 commencing at 6:37 p.m.Present:Absent:1. MINUTESJanis Schultz, ChairJim Hinds, Alternate ChairKim KokoszkaAndrea WolfeJenn Murray, Clerical Support(a) The minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission held on January 4, 2012.Moved by Kim Kokoszka and seconded by Andrea Wolfe that the minutes be approved.CARRIED2. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES(a) School Heritage Program ± Tabled(b) Heritage Awards ±Members reviewed the draft PowerPoint presentation to be played at the Awards ceremony. JimHinds reported that invitations have been sent to Council, as well as other groups and individuals.The Awards are scheduled to take place February 19, 2012 at 1:15 pm. Two awards will bepresented; Special Heritage Achievement to Sharon Syrette, and Education & Promotion of Heritageto the Mission District Historical Society.Janis Schultz has arranged for the production of the Awards trophies and is awaiting notice ofcompletion.ACTION: Janis Schultz will arrange purchase of refreshments for the reception, as discussed.(c) Context Planning ±Jim Hinds is awaiting review and revisions to the Draft Context Plan from Sharon Fletcher andMarcy Bond (Planning Department). The next revisions should be received by March 2012, at whichtime Commission members will review and consider it for acceptance.(d) Membership ± Two applications for membership will be presented to Council for considerationFebruary 20, 2012.4. OTHER BUSINESS(a) Heritage Register ± Members discussed adding two sites to the Heritage Register once the ContextPlan has been accepted. Several preliminary sites were proposed for later consideration.5. ADJOURNMENTThe meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.FILE: Minutes Page 1 of 1Mission Community Heritage Commission

District of Mission Draft Minutes110The Minutes of the Mission Healthy Community Council meeting held in the conferenceroom on February 21, 2012 commencing at 4:10 p.m.Members Present: Councillor Jeff Jewell, Co-ChairTed Adlem, MayorGlen Robertson, Chief Administrative OfficerRon Plowright, Community Health Specialist for Chilliwack & Mission,Fraser Health AuthorityKirsten Hargreaves, Manager of Social DevelopmentConnie Meskas, Site Director - Mission Memorial HospitalBob LaRoy, Manager, Mental Health and Substance Use Services,Abbotsford & Mission Mental Health Centres (Mental HealthServices Representative)Judith Ray, Community MemberBrian Muth, Community Engagement Coordinator, Aboriginal HealthFraser Health - Circle Fraser EastJulie Czerwinski, Program Coordinator, Mission Friendship CentreBrandi Matheson, Communitas Supportive Care Society — CentennialPlacePaul Horn, Community Member (arrived at 5:05 p.m.)Cynthia Coyle, Executive Director Fraser House Society Mission, FHADr. Carol Pomeroy, President, Mission Medical AssociationLisa Jarvos, Manager, Health Promotion and Prevention, Mission,Chilliwack and Nursing Support Services - Fraser Health,Fraser EastCyndie Anderson, Vice-Principal Student Services, Mission PublicSchool District #75 RepresentativeJonathan Wilkins, Division of Family PracticeMembers Absent: Diane Miller, Executive Director, Primary Health Care & AboriginalHealth, FHA, Co-ChairKaren Flanagan, Community MemberGurmeet M.P. Singh, Team Leader, Child & Youth Mental HealthProgramAnnie Silver, Community Development Worker, Fraser ValleyAboriginal Children and Family Services MissionGillian Arsenault, Medical Health Officer for MissionNavi Grewal, Mission Association for Community LivingAnnette Condon, Pleasant View HousingRosemary Fromson, Program Manager, Mission Community ServicesSociety (Multicultural Services Representative)Tricia Schweers, Mission Association for Seniors HousingDr. Andrew EdelsonLouise Tucker, Program Coordinator, Mission Community ServicesSociety (Community Programming Representative)Others Present: Tracey Takahashi, Administrative ClerkMichelle Lylyk, Mission Friendship Centre SocietyFile: ADM. COM. SEL Page 1 of 7Mission Healthy Community Council

111Mission Healthy Community Council MinutesFebruary 21, 20121. MINUTESMoved by Ted Adlem, andRECOMMENDED: That the minutes of the Mission Healthy Community Councilmeeting held on January 31, 2012 be approved.CARRIED2. NEW BUSINESS(a) Back to Health ... For Good 2012Ron Plowright and Paul Horn provided an overview of the February 8, 2012wrap-up meeting of the Back to Health... For Good organizing committee (seeAppendix 1) and the February 20, 2012 presentation to Council. It was notedthat the event, overall, was a great success, despite the bad weather. Theorganizing committee noted several areas for improvement, which will be takeninto consideration when planning the event for 2013.(b) Fraser Health Municipal Healthy Communities Partnerships Trade ShowGlen Robertson and Ron Plowright provided an update on discussions withregard to preparing for participation by the District of Mission in the April 20, 2012Healthier Communities Trade Show.It was noted that the objective of the video being planned for the trade show is tobe action-oriented, with a focus on recreational activities such as walking/bikingtrails. However, the booth can have a more general focus in terms of municipalinitiatives toward building a healthier community. Suggestions for materials to beincluded at the booth included the Price Waterhouse Coopers Community HealthPlan, a PowerPoint presentation on the Back to Health... For Good event, theMental Health and Substance Use Strategy, the Leisure Centre Spring intoMotion program, among others.It was suggested that perhaps members from this committee could take part inthe trade show as delegates and/or booth staff. Members were asked to checktheir own schedules to see if they would be able to participate. CyndieAnderson, Paul Horn, and Connie Meskas expressed interest in attending theevent on behalf of the committee.(c) Mission Community Services Society Meeting AttendancePaul Horn reported that he had spoken with Tony Lapointe about MissionCommunity Services Society (MCSS) attendance at meetings of this committee.The current meeting time (third Thursday of every month) presents a conflict forMCSS staff, making it difficult for them to attend. Tony Lapointe asked if it wouldbe possible to have sub-committee update meetings either with KirstenHargreaves or Paul Horn to keep MCSS up to date with what is happening in thelarger committee.(d) Mission Mental Health and Substance Use StrategyPaul Horn provided an overview of the February 16, 2012 Mental Health andSubstance Use Strategy subcommittee meeting (see Appendix 2). Thecommittee discussed how to approach the four themes identified in the MentalHealth and Substance Use Strategy. It was agreed that a subcommittee shouldFile: ADM.COM.SEL PAGE 2 of 7Mission Healthy Community Council

112Mission Healthy Community Council MinutesFebruary 21, 2012be formed for each theme, with captains identified to lead each sub-committee indiscussions and report back to the larger committee on progress and steps takenwith regard to their particular theme.Theme 1 – Guide to Local Services: Julie Czerwinski reported that the MissionFriendship Centre Society (MFCS) has applied for grant funds to employ apracticum student to compile a database of services that are currently available.Theme 1 Captains – Julie Czerwinski, Kirsten Hargreaves, Ron PlowrightTheme 2a Captains – Brandi Matheson, Brian MuthTheme 2b Captains – Judith Ray, Mission Community Services Society, MicheleLylyk, Brandi Matheson support, Mission Mental Health case manager(consultant)Theme 3 Captains – Paul Horn, Cynthia Coyle, Jason WongTheme 4 Captains – Kirsten Hargreaves, Cynthia Coyle, Connie MeskasMembers were asked to think about whether their organization might have thecapacity for as-needed IT or administrative support to ensure that the databaseinformation is kept current.(e) Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada Commemoration Initiative2012 Call for ProposalsA meeting took place between Brian Muth, Annie Silver, Julie Czerwinski, GraceCunningham and two elders, Cyril Pierre and Joe Ginger, from Mission who aresurvivors of residential school, to discuss the call for proposals.Julie Czerwinski will work on the proposal.Moved by Paul Horn, andRECOMMENDED: That the Mission Healthy Community Council and the Districtof Mission each provide a letter of support for the Mission Friendship CentreSociety, based on draft wording provided by Julie Czerwinski.CARRIED(f) Next Meeting:Moved by Connie Meskas, andRecommended: That the next meeting be moved from March 20, 2012 to March27, 2012.CARRIEDThe next meeting is set for March 27, 2012 at 4:00 p.m. in the Conference Roomat Municipal Hall.3. ADJOURNMENTMoved by Judith Ray, andRECOMMENDED: That the meeting be adjourned.CARRIEDThe meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m.File: ADM.COM.SEL PAGE 3 of 7Mission Healthy Community Council

113Mission Healthy Community Council MinutesFebruary 21, 2012APPENDIX 1Back to Health... For Good 2012 Review Meeting: February 8, 2012Numbers and other indicators• Subscription – participants (610 up from 560) and exhibitors (45 up from 44, 50 hadsigned up but weather and illness deterred) – budgeted for 10% and we got this.We’re pleased with this.• Feedback from both – Ron and Tracey will collate this data and send out via email byFeb 17.• Active Choices – 8 registered - 2 volunteers showed up for training; others cancelleddue to weather; trained the 2 who arrived and will reschedule for the others• Flu clinic – Ron will ask Lisa if Tracey does not have this information. Is this a gooduse of their time? (Number is 32.) Public Health is also getting a chance to exhibitre: their other resources.• Volunteers – from MPSD Leadership and Riverside CSW – let’s look at how weengage and orient these people in the future; skills development; other sources(seniors and MRR?)• Outcomes – exposed people to various resources; networking; made people thinkabout changing health-related behaviourThings to improve• Bus tickets■319 not used■Received them late■Only 6 asked for at leisure centre for return■Is it a barrier to ask for a return ticket?■Possible to get return ticket from same place you got it?■RECOMMEND: Use 50 tickets next year; market better with social serviceagencies; review• Who was there■RECOMMEND: Set a cap (45?) and a deadline■Assign people to spaces as they sign up (for internal use only)■Clear criteria to be established■Last year’s exhibitors get an email in late November; must meet same deadlineas others; first come first served■1 table per exhibitor■Encourage table sharing■Recommend to exhibitors that they bring staff and volunteers• Locations■ RECOMMEND: Designate spaces or areas up front – e.g. who needs power,who has equipment, who makes noise■ Invitation to askl more about specific needs of exhibitors■ Better map (to scale) – Tracey to follow up• Opening and closing■ Not very busy in the gym.■ RECOMMEND: Ask the MHCC, “Does event need an opening of any kind?■ Ask the MHCC is there another and more meaningful way to way to engage FNcommunity?”• Green room / networkingFile: ADM.COM.SEL PAGE 4 of 7Mission Healthy Community Council

114Mission Healthy Community Council MinutesFebruary 21, 2012• RECOMMEND: Turn this space into HQ• Encourage networking other ways• This is to be considered by planning committee next year• Publicity• RECOMMEND:• FB worked; add to FB capacity or other social media• Distribute through committee participants and event exhibitors• Volunteers• RECOMMEND: Explore Youth centre? Seniors Centre? MRR?• Designate an orientation date and make this social event; add a skills-buildingcomponent (Can Kirsten or Darryl Gehlen)• Ask MHCC members to search for volunteers• Consider volunteer recognition (passes, pins)• Food• No healthy special at Red’s Grill• Didn’t need all of food but did need more coffee• RECOMMEND: Less food and more coffee• Ask Red’s Grill to ensure that there are healthy spe cials available next year• Ask Parks and Recreation (Stephanie) to have Red’s Grill add such items to theirmenu or better publicize existing healthy options in future• Gym• Seemed to work well in the morning• RECOMMEND: repeat this but better market and use BIG signs (more easelsneeded; use coroplast signs)• Provincial and FHA representation• RECOMMEND: Send a letter to Heart & Stroke, 811, PAL asking them toconsider being there next year. Include info about growing subscription.• Send thank you letter/certificate to all participants and volunteers that did attendfrom Mayor• Budget• RECOMMEND: Need funding for signage (one-time), volunteer recognitiontraining• Don’t need as many bus tickets• Budget needs to be able to anticipate growing subscription (in-kind expense) –this year was 10% - should we cost by counting participants? Use actualsinstead.• Exit surveys• Need to train volunteers and have more doing this• Outcomes• Set goals next yearDelegation to council: Feb 20 th 6:30Paul to send out draft PowerPoint and ask who wants to speak to each partAdd context piece re: relationshipRecognitionLeadership recommendation• RECOMMEND: Using the subcommittee approach should continue• Choose subcommittee members and chair in October• Have one FHA, one Mission and one Miss ion Parks and Rec “captain” at the eventFile: ADM. COM. SEL PAGE 5 of 7Mission Healthy Community Council

115Mission Healthy Community Council MinutesFebruary 21, 2012MHSUS Subcommittee Meeting Feb 16, 2012APPENDIX 2Present: Jason Wong; Ron Plowright; Cynthia Coyle; Kirsten Hargreaves; Paul HornAbsent: Brandi MathesonAction Planning Recommendations:General Approach:Select “Theme Captains”Captains need not be expertsCaptains recruit help as needed within and outside of the committeeEach captain facilitates and liaises with people as needed to complete the themeCaptains report out at each meetingCaptains are not solely responsible for the tasks but for driving the process forward andusing the resources around the MHCCSearch for synergies in meeting the themesWe need all of the MHCC to take a lead role. All members can step forward. We cannotmerely be an advisory to Kirsten and Ron.Must make meetings about tracking progress on the MHSUSTheme 1: Guide to Local ServicesPursue a student from UFV Social Work practicum or a Communications student tocomplete database or check on what’s currently availableUltimate aim is an electronic interface for both professionals and public to accessservices – i.e. Type in your needs and it recommends options and pathwaysFriendship Centre to host the studentStudent on 3 month (final) placement preferredIntent is to pass on info to 211, 811, Crisis Line, school district counsellors; church youthleaders; infomission.ca/moltspaceCheck on FHA (Integrated Health Network – Mental Health) work re: their database andpathway work. Can we collaborate, assist or align?Ask MHCC members if there is capacity in any organizations for as-needed IT support oradmin to ensure database is kept current; contact personIT program student(s) to help create IT database or is this part of the plan in FHA?Can MHCC help to give FHA feedback about how well their information services areworking for people? Can we help market the interface through BTHFG and other MHCCmembers?Theme 2: a TransportationTalk to Care Transit (in Hope) and Canadian Cancer Society re: their modelso Volunteer-based system where people are reimbursed for mileageFile: ADM.COM.SEL PAGE 6 of 7Mission Healthy Community Council

116Mission Healthy Community Council MinutesFebruary 21, 2012Inventory each agency re: availability of vehicles and volunteer drivers; are they willingto explore new models; are there possible grant opportunities for a consortium ofagencies?Meet with MCSS re: the need to be present on these ideasTheme 2: b HousingInvite Rain City Society (others?) to present to MHCC and to see if they consult onmaterials and workshopsCan we organize regular workshops for landlords?Talk to Darryl Gehlen and MRR re: volunteer liaisonsMCSS mentorship program still active and could they help?Could MCSS advise re: housing issues and needs?Theme 3: First Responder TrainingWork with UFV re: Social Work practicum with RCMPOrganize a one-day workshop for First Responders, city staff, DBA and teachers(others?) (Clarke Theatre)Content includes Sec 28, referrals and mental health first aidBreak-out sessions to allow for specialized subject matterPosition around training days and Pro-D?Ensure focus is on first responseBut also discuss landlord-tenant issuesTheme 4: Service Connections & CoordinationAt meetings, have guests and allow members to do regular presentationsSocials and Open Houses (similar to Business After Business)Have two of our MHCC meetings per year as dinner meetings for reviewing servicesHave simple questionnaire for committee members to outline services and referralmechanisms. Ask for updates and additions at every meeting. And ask for otherassociated services to be addedAdd upcoming events section to minutes; minutes follow approx. one week aftermeetingsExplore mutual grant opportunitiesFile: ADM. COM. SEL PAGE 7 of 7Mission Healthy Community Council

117

118

119

120

121

122

123

124

125

126

127

128Excerpt from the Minutes of the Public Hearing held on May 25, 2009.PH09/032 (i) District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5018-2009-3143(324)MAY 25, 2009(R08-001 — Dinahan) — a bylaw to rezone property at 33344 — 4th Avenuefrom RT-1 Two Unit Urban Residential zone to RS-1A One Unit Small LotUrban Residential zone(ii) Development Variance Permit Application DV09-001 (Dinahan) —33344 – 4 th AvenueRyan Anderson, planner, provided information regarding District of Mission zoningamending bylaw 5018-2009-3143(324) (R08-001 — Dinahan) which proposes to amendDistrict of Mission zoning bylaw 3143-1998 for the property located at 33344 — 4thAvenue and legally described as parcel identifier:012-414-379 West Half Lot 6 Block 94 District Lot 411 Group 1 NewWestminster District Plan 1900012-414-379 West Half Lot 7 Block 94 District Lot 411 Group 1 NewWestminster District Plan 1900(shown on the following map) from RT-1 Two Unit Urban Residential zone to RS-1AOne Unit Small Lot Urban Residential zone.The purpose of the proposed amendment is to rezone a portion of the subjectproperties to accommodate a 2-lot subdivision.The planner stated that the proposed development variance permit application DV09-001, in the name of Justin Lee is to:(a) vary Section 105.14 Panhandle Lots of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 by reducing the minimum required Panhandle width from 6.0 meters(19.687 feet) to 1.76 meters (5.77 feet);

129(b)(c)(d)(e)vary Section 302.3 Minimum Dimensions of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw3143-1998 by reducing the minimum required Lot depth from 25.0 meters (82.0feet) to 22.01 meters (72.51 feet);vary Section 302.7 Setbacks of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 byreducing the minimum required Front yard setback from 6.0 meters (19.68 feet)to 4.61 meters (15.12 feet);vary Section 310.3 Minimum Dimensions of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw3143-1998 by reducing the minimum required Lot depth from 30.0 meters(98.42 feet) to 15.18 meters (49.80 feet);vary Schedule B-1 Service Requirements of the Subdivision Control Bylaw1500-1985 by waiving the requirement of a piped drainage system; and(f) vary Section 310.7 Setbacks of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 3143-1998 byreducing the minimum required rear yard setback from 7.5 meters (24.6 feet) to6.08 meters (19.95 feet).The planner stated that prior to adoption of the zone amending bylaw the followingrequirements would need to be met:(a) a letter of credit or cash in the amount of $1,000 to ensure the planting of 4trees;(b)(c)(d)engineering requirements (attached as Appendix 4 of the report of the plannerdated March 16, 2009);approval of development variance permit DV09-001;any other items that council may require resulting from the public hearing orcouncil consideration of the application; and(e) restrictive covenant for building design and building envelope.The deputy director of corporate administration stated that correspondence from Mr. AlCarter dated May 29, 2009 was received expressing the following concerns regardingthis application:(a)(b)(c)(d)slope stability;poor access from 4 th Avenue and the lane;power service;garbage pick up and parking; and(e) height and location of building.Leigh Boccius expressed concern with slope stability, increased noise, increase intraffic with construction equipment accessing the area with the development of homes.He also expressed concern with emergency vehicle access and noted that he does nothave garbage pick up or mail pick up on the lane and must move his garbage to thestreet and would the new development change this. He also asked when the proposalwill show all the engineering details on how the soil will be removed and noted he is notin favour of this application.The planner responded that geotechnical reports addressing the issues in questionhave been submitted and the engineering department notes that stabilizing the slopewill create a safer neighbourhood. He also noted that the lane is not unique in theMission area and the fire department has no concerns regarding access. He furthernoted that mail and garbage pick up will remain the same for the neighbourhood andnew homes.

130Mr. Boccius asked how the infrastructure will be impacted as the present lane is in astate of disrepair and expressed concern with the insufficient parking. He alsoquestioned if the construction of a retaining wall and panhandle will destabilize hisproperty.The planner responded that the applicant will provide parking on site that complies withthe bylaw and the geotechnical report indicates that stabilizing the slope will create asafer area.The deputy director of engineering responded that there are no planned driveways orwalkway construction on the panhandle linking to 4th Avenue. He noted that thegeotechnical report had concluded that the factor of safety for a failure on the steepslope during a seismic event was below acceptable standards, but that the factor ofsafety would be brought to an acceptable standard if a recommended retaining wallwere built on the property.Leigh Boccius expressed concern as he understood a walkway would be constructedand the construction will affect his property.Al Carter expressed concern regarding drainage, slope stability and snow removal fromthe lane. He noted that poor access to the lane has not allowed proper garbage ormail pickup, sewer and storm drainage and states that new hydro poles will affect theview in the area.Ray Goertz asked who will be responsible for the drainage issues should problemsarise and the lower properties experience water damage and expressed concerns withthe stability of the slope, parking in the area and access for fire service vehicles.The planner responded that one of the geotechnical reports addressed the drainageissue and the rock pit being proposed will improve drainage that exists in theneighbourhood. He noted that staff are requesting a covenant on the property for thebuilding design and the fire department has approved the plan and parking will beaccording to the bylaw.Denise Goertz asked if the laneway will be extended to Horne Avenue or remain a halflane.The planner responded that the lane will not be extended and the applicant may berequired to extend a small portion of the lane to provide access for the proposedhomes.Robert Demers questioned the size of the lane and commented that it is extremelydifficult to turn around in the lane.Leigh Boccius expressed concern with the proposed rock pit that this may be a longterm solution but during construction and prior to the rock pit being constructed whatwill protect the slope stability should there be an earthquake, heavy rain, or snowfalland how will emergency vehicles access the lane.Ray Gertz questioned if a rock pit is being constructed on the property to help with thedrainage.The deputy director of engineering responded that the engineering report notes thatthey completed percolation tests and took the lowest percolated measured which wasused as the criteria for the rock pit design and it will be constructed three times largerthan required.Al Carter also expressed his concern with the rock pit and the drainage.Lance Dinahan responded that the engineers retained considered the drainage issues

131and the rock pit would be constructed three times larger than required. He also statedthat the property would allow parking for two vehicles.Leigh Boccius expressed concern with parking and the condition of the lane.Councillor Horn asked for a third reading report setting out the following:(a)(b)whether the fire access for this property be the lane or 4 th Avenue; andwhat is the time frame for the lane resurfacing.In response to questions from council the deputy director responded that based on thedimensions of the lane a turn around cannot be constructed but the informationregarding the condition of the lane should be forwarded to the public works departmentto repair the current pot holes.Councillor Scudder asked if other properties in the area front on 4 th Avenue, if the sitecontains any environmentally sensitive areas and questioned the location of thegarbage collection.The planner responded that only two properties including the applicants are on the lanethat front 4 th Avenue and noted that the environmentally sensitive areas that isreferenced in the report is only to clarify that there are none designated on thisproperty.The deputy directed responded that the District of Mission has an obligation to pick upgarbage if the residents are being charged for this service but that the District has theright to designate where it is to be picked up.Councillor Gidda questioned the fire department access and questioned if the rock pitwill be sufficient for drainage.The planner responded the fire department has no issues with accessing the propertyand the rock pit will be constructed three times the size required.Danny Plecas requested the geotechnical report be included at third reading, will theretaining wall form part of the house design and what is the proposed length of theextension of the lane.The applicant responded that the design of the home has incorporated the slope intoits design and the retaining wall will be supported and incorporated into the home in astep formation. He also noted that the lane will be extended to allow access for the newhome as well as the neighbouring properties which will help with turn around forvehicles.Leigh Boccius asked if a walkway will be constructed and if so he is concerned with theexcavation and expressed concern again with drainage and garbage pick up.The planner responded that the property will not be excavated for a walkway but couldbe developed similar to that on other properties in the area.In response to a question from Jim Hinds, the deputy director of engineeringresponded that a rock pit’s life expectancy is dependent on how it is maintained by theproperty owner.Sharon Carter expressed concern with parking, access for garbage pick up and mailservice. She noted that she had a petition by residents on 4 th Avenue not in support ofthe application but did not submit it for council’s information.Hearing no further questions or comments the mayor declared the public hearing onDistrict of Mission zoning amending bylaw 5018-2009-3143(324) (R08-001-Dinahan)and development variance permit application DV09-001 (Dinahan) closed.

132Excerpt from the Minutes of the Public Hearing held on June 22, 2009.PH09/037 (i) District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5018-2009-3143(324)JUNE 22, 2009(R08-001 — Dinahan) — a bylaw to rezone property at 33344 — 4th Avenuefrom RT-1 Two Unit Urban Residential zone to RS-1A One Unit Small LotUrban Residential zone(ii) Development Variance Permit Application DV09-001 (Dinahan) —33344 – 4 th AvenueRyan Anderson, planner, provided information regarding District of Mission zoningamending bylaw 5018-2009-3143(324) (R08-001 — Dinahan) which proposes to amendDistrict of Mission zoning bylaw 3143-1998 for the property located at 33344 — 4thAvenue and legally described as parcel identifier:012-414-361 West Half Lot 6 Block 94 District Lot 411 Group 1 NewWestminster District Plan 1900012-414-379 West Half Lot 7 Block 94 District Lot 411 Group 1 NewWestminster District Plan 1900(shown on the following map) from RT-1 Two Unit Urban Residential zone to RS-1AOne Unit Small Lot Urban Residential zone.The purpose of the proposed amendment is to rezone a portion of the subjectproperties to accommodate a boundary change.The planner stated that the proposed development variance permit application DV09-001, in the name of Justin Lee is to:(g) vary Section 105.14 Panhandle Lots of District of Mission zoning bylaw 3143-1998 by reducing the minimum required Panhandle width from 6.0 meters(19.687 feet) to 1.76 meters (5.77 feet);(h)vary Section 302.3 Minimum Dimensions of District of Mission zoning bylaw3143-1998 by reducing the minimum required lot depth from 25.0 meters (82.0feet) to 22.01 meters (72.51 feet);

133(i)(j)vary Section 302.7 Setbacks of District of Mission zoning bylaw 3143-1998 byreducing the minimum required front yard setback from 6.0 meters (19.68 feet)to 4.61 meters (15.12 feet);vary Section 310.3 Minimum Dimensions of District of Mission zoning bylaw3143-1998 by reducing the minimum required lot depth from 30.0 meters (98.42feet) to 15.18 meters (49.80 feet);(k) vary Schedule B-1 Service Requirements of the subdivision control bylaw 1500-1985 by waiving the requirement of a piped drainage system; and(l)vary Section 310.7 Setbacks of District of Mission zoning bylaw 3143-1998 byreducing the minimum required rear yard setback from 7.5 meters (24.6 feet) to6.08 meters (19.95 feet).The planner stated that prior to adoption of the zone amending bylaw the followingrequirements would need to be met:(f) a letter of credit or cash for 4 trees ($1,000.00);(g)(h)(i)engineering requirements;approval of development variance permit DV09-001;any other items that council may require; and(j) restrictive covenant for building design and building envelope.The deputy director of corporate administration stated that correspondence from thefollowing had been received:1. letter from Mr. Al Carter dated May 29, 2009 was received expressing thefollowing concerns regarding this application:(a)(b)(c)(d)slope stability;poor access from 4 th Avenue and the lane;power service;garbage pick up and parking; and(e) height and location of building.2. letter from Anastasia Greenan, Margaret Riggins, Al and Sharon Carter andElizabeth Norris dated May 25, 2009 not in favour of the application;3. email from Leigh Boccius dated May 12, 2008 expressing concerns with theslope stability and his opposition to the application;4. email from Elizabeth and Bruce Norris dated May 28, 2008 expressing herconcern about the slope stability and asking for confirmation that a geotechnicalwas performed;5. email from Ryan Ruocco dated May 15, 2009 opposed to this application; and6. letter from Ray and Midge Goertz dated June 13, 2009 noting their objections tothe application.Larry Nundal noted that the architectural drawing is inconsistent with the engineeringgeotechnical report and expressed concern with the lack of proposed windows for theresidence as there appears to be no rear windows. He stated that the property has wetsoil and the property may contain a spring underground and noted that drainage maybe an issue in the future. He also expressed concern with the condition of the laneespecially with increased traffic and the design of the home. He is opposed to theapplication.

134Al Carter expressed concern with the design and the future problems that will arise withdevelopment on this property.Elizabeth Norris expressed concern with the slope stability and states that she is infavour of infill lots but not with this particular lot as it is a steep lot and with the additionof a rock pit it will destabilize the property.In response to questions from council, the planner responded that the applicant has anexisting legal lot and can build smaller homes rather than the homes proposed withoutcouncil’s approval and council would have no control over design. He stated that theproposal is a boundary adjustment and although it is perceived to be one lot it is twolegal lots and presently there is a non conforming building straddling one of the lotlines.Leigh Boccius expressed concern with the condition of the lane, increased traffic withconcrete trucks and construction workers during the construction stage of the homeand slope stability. He noted that many people already park illegally in the lane andwith construction, those neighbours will be inconvenienced as they will have to movetheir vehicles due to large trucks. He is opposed to this application.Councillor Horn asked what the time period would be for a pumper truck to fill thefoundations for a property such as that being proposed and is it possible to have thefoundation poured on an average home within 2 to 3 days. He notes that concretetrucks would not be pouring concrete for a longer period of time whether smaller orlarger homes are constructed.Mr. Boccius responded that it is difficult to estimate the time period as it is dependanton how much concrete is being poured for this property.Lance Dinahan noted that there are pumper trucks available which can pour from 4 thAvenue and he can have the plans revised to add a window to the left side of thebasement of the new dwelling and possibly a skylight in the dining room. The propertyis presently two legal lots and he is able to develop presently without council approvalbut the design of the homes would change. He stated the lane would be extendedwhich would help the neighbourhood.Larry Nundal noted that a surveyor should prepare new typography on the property,retaining walls should be in place prior to construction and expressed concern with thedrainage.Al Carter noted that the prior owner of the property had fill placed to the left of thegarage and the ground is not stable.Councillor Gidda questioned how many houses access the lane, if the houses in thearea presently have drainage, and if so where does the water go.The planner noted that 4 or 5 homes presently access the lane.Staff were asked to provide where the drainage presently goes and if there are drains.In response to questions from council, the deputy director of engineering and publicworks noted that the geotechnical engineering cannot confirm that the site wassurveyed but the cross section in the report is very detailed.Staff are to address the windows at the rear of the dwelling at third reading as theapplication does not show windows in the rear of the dwelling.The planner noted that the neighbourhood could provide design criteria which wouldform part of a covenant as part of the subdivision process and noted that the issuesthat are being brought forward would be the same whether the applicant builds smallerdwellings on the property or builds the dwellings as per this application.

135Lance Dinahan clarified that the geotechnical engineer attended the property on twooccasions. Firstly to determine land stability and secondly for the rock pits.Hearing no further questions or comments the mayor declared the public hearing onDistrict of Mission zoning amending bylaw 5018-2009-3143(324) (R08-001-Dinahan)and development variance permit application DV09-001 (Dinahan) closed.

136

137

138

139

140

141

142

143

144

145

146

147

148

149

150

151

152

153

154

155

156

157

158

159

160

161

162

163

164

165

166

167

168

169

170

171

172Excerpt from the Minutes of the Public Hearing held on November 28, 20111PH11/116 (i) District of Mission Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw 5244-NOV 28/112011-4052(16) (R11-014 — Fraser Health Authority) — a bylaw toredesignate properties at 7338 and 7348 Hurd Street from UrbanCompact — Multiple Family to Institutional(ii) District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5245-2011-5050(54)(R11-014 — Fraser Health Authority) — a bylaw to add aComprehensive Development Zone and rezone properties at 7324,7338, 7348, 7366, 32267 and 32299 Hurd Street from InstitutionalCare Zone (IC) to Comprehensive Development Zone 26 (CD 26)Barclay Pitkethly, Deputy Director of Planning, provided information regardingDistrict of Mission Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw 5244-2011-4052(16), which proposes to amend District of Mission Official Community Plan4052-2008 for the following legally described property:Parcel Identifier: 010-207-911 Lot “A” Section 20 Township 17, NewWestminster District Plan 16383Parcel Identifier: 010-207-945 Lot “B” Section 20 Township 17, NewWestminster District Plan 16383from Urban Compact/Multiple Family to InstitutionalThe location of the subject property is 7348 and 7338 Hurd Street (as shown onthe following map):The purpose of the proposed amendment is to accommodate Institutional usesand to bring these two lots into conformity with the Institutional designated ofother properties.

173The Deputy Director of Planning also provided information regarding District ofMission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5245-2011-5050(54) (R11-014-Fraser HealthAuthority), which proposes to amend District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009by amending the zoning of the following legally described properties:Parcel Identifier: 011-930-942 Lot 3 Except: Part Subdivided by Plan16383, Section 20 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan 905Parcel Identifier: 010-207-945 Lot “B” Section 20 Township 17 NewWestminster District Plan 16383Parcel Identifier: 010-207-911 Lot “A” Section 20 Township 17 NewWestminster District Plan 16383Parcel Identifier: 005-543-363 Lot 4 Except: Firstly: Part Road on PlanLMP12762, Secondly; Part on Plan BCP 17333 Section 20 Township 17New Westminster District Plan 905Parcel Identifier: 006-487- 289 Lot 36 Except: Parcel “A” (ExplanatoryPlan 32175); Section 20 Township 17 New Westminster District Plan30073Parcel Identifier: 006-457-215 Lot 38 Section 20 Township 17 NewWestminster District Plan 30364from Institutional Care (IC) zone to Comprehensive Development 26(CD26) zone.The location of the subject properties is 7324, 7338, 7348, 7366, 32267 and32299 Hurd Street and is shown on the following maps.The Deputy Director of Planning stated that the purpose of the proposedamendments is to allow for a new Campus of Care building for seniors with 200beds for people with complex 24/7 care needs including an adult day program. ACommunity Health Centre facility with programs including primary care, a

174diabetes and senior clinic, public health, home health, mental health andsubstance abuse, and lease space for physicians and retailers.The Planner stated that the following requirements would need to be met prior toadoption of the bylaw:• Comments from referrals regarding OCP amendment• Site Plan Reconciliation• Approval of DP - GeotechnicalEngineering Requirements• Ensuring existing storm system has adequate capacity for the proposeddesign.• Traffic impact analysis to prescribe any required upgrades to thesatisfaction of the District of Mission’s Engineer .The Deputy Chief Administrative officer stated that no written submissions werereceived.PH11/117NOV 28/11Moved by Councillor Horn, Seconded by Councillor Gidda, andThat the meeting be extended past 9:30 until all matters are dealt withRon Taylor noted that Mission Memorial Hospital differs from other Fraser Healthfacilities in the area as it is the only hospital that does not allow paid parking asthis was not a permitted use in the current zoning. He asked if the proposed CD26 Zone lists no paid parking as a permitted use and if not the same wording inthe current bylaw should be incorporated into the new CD 26 zone.The Deputy Director of Planning responded that the current CD 26 Zone doesnot include a permitted use of “no paid parking”.Eileen MacDonald asked how close the buildings are going to be to the localresidents and what is the height of the proposed building.The Deputy Director of Planning noted that the height of the buildings has notbeen finalized. The setbacks are 6 meters but the property backing onto HurdStreet may be reduced to 3 meters.Councillor Stevens asked how this application will affect the tax revenue overalland expressed that this facility should not include any paid parking areas.The Deputy Director of Planning replied that the intent of the Community HealthCentre is to be a commercial building which will be taxed at a commercial rate.He also noted that a restrictive covenant could be registered on title regardingthe “no parking”.Councillor Stewart noted that the “no paid parking ” issue must be dealt with priorto this application moving forward and asked if council has control over theproportion of usage of the business space that will be leased out.

175Mayor Atebe responded that the contractor will be retained and they will bepresenting their design and requesting further input from both the communityhealth practitioners and other stakeholders before it is finalized for construction.Councillor Horn noted that the facility and any space leased will becomplimentary to health.Councillor Horn noted that there are pending requests for council to makeconcessions or granting to offset Development Cost Charges or CommunityAmenity Contributions. Section 882 states that at the time Council makes bylawamendments similar to this application to the OCP then council needs to ensurethey have considered the financial impact. Does waiving any charges impacttaxation and the previous Section 882 reading?The Chief Administrative Officer responded that a different section applies forwaiving Development Costs Charges. He noted that waiving these charges isnot the intent of 882.Councillor Horn asked if the community will have input on the design.The Deputy Director of Planning noted that there is no process in place forcommunity input on the design.Ken Mah responded to questions from council that parking will be addressed andcomply with the municipal parking bylaw. They presently have not selected theproponent and there are three different designs that will address parking butcannot verify the plan until the proponent has been selected. He noted that someparking will be eliminated as a result of the new building but will be replaced andan additional 35 stalls will be added.Eileen MacDonald asked:(a) Will there be adequate parking.Mayor Atebe responded that the development will meet the parking bylawrequirements.(b) Will this development affect real estate prices in the area?Mayor Atebe noted that having a health facility in the area is beneficial to thecommunity as a whole.(c) She asked if the property that the hospital was donated to the city as long asthere was a hospital on this property.Mayor Atebe noted that the facility will still be a hospital but it will also have otherservices and shops available that will accommodate the hospital and patients.Councillor Horn responded that the current services in the hospital will remainincluding the emergency room. Fraser Health has provided a large amount of

176capital to ensure that it becomes a more modern facility. The new integratedhealth care centre will expand services including mental health programs, publichealth programs, diabetes clinics and new medical offices for specialists.The Chief Administrative Office noted that Fraser Health worked hard to securefunding from the Province Government for this project.Ann Harper is pleased to see this proposal moving forward and thanked councilfor this expansion.Chris McCarnell asked that a plan be implemented that ensure seniors are ableto easily access the medical and dental clinic to the south of the hospital onceconstruction commences.Hearing no further questions or comments the Mayor declared the Public Hearingon District of Mission Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw 5244-2011-4052(16) and District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5245-2011-5050(54)R11-014 Fraser Health Authority) closed.PH11/118NOV 28/11Moved by Councillor Horn, Seconded by Councillor Scudder, andRECOMMENDED: That a third reading report be prepared to address thefollowing:1. Does council need to revisit the Section 882 approval previously voted onand defer their work;2. Can the CD zone have a specified prohibition on parking fees and provideinput prior to third reading about size and design of parking areas; and3. Advise as to whether or not a process similar to that used in aDevelopment Permit Application can be used to garner public input intothe design of the facility.CARRIED

177

178

179

180

181

182

183

184

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

192

193

194

195

196

197

198

199

200

201

202

203

204

205

206

207

208

209

210

211

212

213

214

215

216

217

218

219

220

221

222

223

224

225

226

227

228

229

230

231

232Minutes of the Committee of the Whole (Planning Committee - EnvironmentalAgencies) meeting of the DISTRICT OF MISSION held in the Conference Room of theMunicipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, British Columbia, on Monday, January30, 2012 commencing at 3:03 p.m.Council Members Present: Councillor Dave Hensman (Chair)Mayor Ted AdlemCouncillor Jeff JewellCouncillor Tony LuckCouncillor Nelson TilburyCouncil Members Absent: Councillor Larry NundalCouncillor Jenny StevensStaff Members Present: Glen Robertson, Chief Administrative OfficerStacey Crawford, Economic Development OfficerSharon Fletcher, Director of PlanningPaul Gipps, Deputy Chief Administrative OfficerMike Younie, Manager of Environmental ServicesChristine Brough, Acting Executive AssistantGuests Present: Coral G. De Shield, Head, Program & PlanningCoordination Canadian Wildlife Service Pacificand Yukon Region, Environment CanadaCorino Salomi, acting Area Director — Lower Fraser Area,Department of Fisheries and OceansHeather MacKnight, Regional Executive Director, SouthCoast, Ministry of Forests, Lands and NaturalResource Operations1. CALL TO ORDERThe meeting was called to order.2. ADOPTION OF AGENDACOW 12/005JAN 30/12Moved by Mayor Adlem, andRESOLVED:1. That Item 3(b) be moved to the end of the agenda; and2. That the January 30, 2012 Committee of the Whole (Planning Committee)agenda be adopted as amended.CARRIED3. NEW BUSINESSCOW 12/006JAN 30/12IntroductionsThe Chair stated that the purpose of meeting is to provide Council with a greaterunderstanding of the decision-making processes for Canadian EnvironmentalAssessment Act approvals, Fisheries Act authorizations and BC Water Act approvals,

Committee of the Whole (Planning Committee) MeetingJanuary 30, 2012 Page 2 of 4233both in general terms and as they pertain to the Wren Creek file, and to communicateCouncil’s views on the process to the various government agencies involved.Ms. De Shield, Mr. Salomi and Ms. MacKnight introduced themselves and provided abrief summary of the roles of their respective agencies.COW 12/007JAN 30/12Agency Approval Processes and Timelinesi) Description of process and timelines by Fisheries and Oceans Canada,Environment Canada and Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural ResourceOperationsMs. De Shield, Mr. Salomi and Ms. MacKnight provided an overview of the processesand timelines involved and explained the relationship between their organizations.They noted that the length of time required for approvals and authorizations can varysignificantly depending on the number and complexity of the issues involved and thereferrals, assessments and approvals/authorizations needed. Mr. Salomi stated that awell laid-out plan which is consistent with guidelines can often be dealt with in one ortwo months.In response to questions from Council, Mr. Salomi confirmed that the length of time theWren Creek file has been in process is a function of the project which is significantlymore comprehensive than most projects.Ms. MacKnight stated that the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural ResourceOperations ’ goal is to make a decision within 140 days of the receipt of an applicationthat requires authorization for permission to makes changes in and around a stream.She noted that challenges sometimes arise if, for example, an application does notcontain all the information required or if new information becomes available during theprocess.ii) Comparison of public projects (Highway 1 Widening) vs. private projects (WrenCreek) in terms of decision-making criteriaCouncil questioned whether different standards/criteria are applied for public versusprivate projects.Mr. Salomi stated that the majority of private projects are smaller and undergo asimpler process than is required for public projects which typically larger in scope andhave a longer planning horizon. He also noted that, in terms of decision-makingcriteria, it is difficult to compare highway projects with non-highway projects as theenvironmental impact area for highway expansion is often large but linear with limitedoptions for redesign, whereas non-highway projects typically have a greater impact ina more localized area and, due to the nature of the project, have more options foraddressing/mitigating potential impacts.Further discussion ensued on various environmental challenges related to the WrenCreep application, Lougheed Highway expansion, the Golden Ears Bridge project andthe twinning of the Port Mann Bridge. Council expressed its frustration with theregulatory process for private projects.iii) How are economic implications accounted for in the decision-making process?Ms. De Shield, Mr. Salomi and Ms. MacKnight confirmed that federal and provincialregulators are required to follow established environmental laws and policiesregardless of economic considerations. Mr. Salomi did note, however, that theeconomic significance of a project, the expressed support of local government for a

Committee of the Whole (Planning Committee) MeetingJanuary 30, 2012 Page 3 of 4234development, and limited options for redesign are considered to some extent whenassessing/examining possible alternatives for carrying out a project.Council stated that it is dedicated to promoting development and increasing the Districtof Mission’s commercial to residential ratio.iv) Options for appealing decisionsMr. Salomi, speaking on behalf of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, said thatproponents who wish to appeal decisions made by his agency can contact thedecision-maker and/or his/her supervisor.Ms. MacKnight, of the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations,stated that provincial decisions can be appealed through the Environmental AppealBoard within 30 days of notification. She noted that the formal appeals process can belengthy which is why staff make every effort to resolve issues where possible.Ms. De Shield noted that, since Environment Canada does not issue the permit inthese situations, there is no appeals process for her agency’s decisions .COW 12/008JAN 30/12COW 12/009JAN 30/12Species at Risk (SAR) Act and Its Implications for Local Government LandUse Decisionsi) There appears to be conflicting requirements depending on the location of aproposed development. If a development proposal does not have a trigger for aCEAA (i.e.: Fisheries Act Authorization) there is no legal obligation to considerSpecies at Risk unless very specific provisions of the Act are implemented.Discussion ensued on what constitutes Species at Risk, what triggers a Species atRisk assessment, and various jurisdictional issues.i) Need for provincial or federal legislation if SAR is to be considered equitably fordevelopers and the species. i.e.: Local governments do not have the authority toimplement SAR specific bylaws.Discussion ensued on the roles of the federal, provincial and local governments.Agency Updates on Wren Creek FileMayor Adlem provided a brief summary of the history of the Wren Creek file to dateand noted that a report was received from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans onthe evening of Friday, January 27, 2012 which outlines numerous caveats but doesseem to indicate that approval will be forthcoming. Mayor Adlem expressed hisconcern that the development, which represents 12% of the District of Mission’sdevelopable land, has been delayed two and a half years as a result of this process.Mr. Salomi outlined the process involved in this case and reiterated that the January27, 2012 report identifies a number of details that still have to be worked out withregard to adapted management and monitoring.Discussion ensued on the difference between avoidance, mitigation andcompensation, the economic viability of the project if the footprint is significantlyreduced, wetland conservation, perceived inconsistencies in the January 27, 2012report, and differences of opinion between the proponent’s professional experts andthe professionals utilized by the governmental agencies.Jim Scott, of Scott Resource Services Inc., addressed questions on behalf of theproponent.

Committee of the Whole (Planning Committee) MeetingJanuary 30, 2012 Page 4 of 4235Ms. De Shield noted that additional work will need to be done with regard to thewetlands and SAR related issues.The Planning Committee Chair thanked Ms. De Shield, Mr. Salomi and Ms. MacKnightfor their attendance and reiterated Council’s commitment to sustainable economicdevelopment for the District of Mission.4. ADJOURNMENTCOW 12/010JAN 30/12Moved by Councillor Jewell, seconded by Councillor Luck, andRESOLVED: That the meeting be adjourned.CARRIEDThe meeting was adjourned at 5:16 p.m.WALTER (TED) ADLEM PAUL GIPPSMAYOR DEPUTY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

236MINUTES of the REGULAR MEETING of the COUNCIL of the DISTRICT OFMISSION held in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Hall, 8645 Stave LakeStreet, Mission, British Columbia on Monday, February 27, 2012 commencing at6:30 p.m.Council Members Present: Mayor Ted AdlemCouncillor Larry NundalCouncillor Dave HensmanCouncillor Tony LuckCouncillor Jeff JewellCouncillor Nelson TilburyCouncillor StevensStaff Members Present: Glen Robertson, Chief Administrative OfficerPaul Gipps, Deputy Chief Administrative OfficerKelly Ridley, Deputy Director of Corporate AdministrationTracey Takahashi, Administrative ClerkPH12/014FEB. 27/12PH12/015FEB. 27/121. RESOLUTION TO ADD AGENDA ITEMSMoved by Councillor Nundal, seconded by Councillor Hensman, andRESOLVED: That item 4. Bylaws for Consideration be added to the agenda for theFebruary 27, 2012 regular meeting of Council:CARRIED2. DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONSPaul HornRe: Business Licence FeesMr. Horn requested that Council:Mr. Horn stated:consider asking staff to provide Council with a report on options forreviewing business licensing to ensure that fees are reasonable, fair andrepresentative of actual service value, and not a disincentive to localbusiness development and retention; andconsider a particular focus in any review with respect to HomeBusinesses.Economic Development and the Official Community Plan promote homeand small businesses, but licensing has remained unchanged since 2005;There is low compliance from home businesses and it is often challengingto get renewals;After costs, business licensing is a marginal to moderate revenue source($250,000 before costs);Other communities are innovating by reducing fees for renewals, homebusinesses / cottage industries; andBusiness licences give Council some oversight and ensures compliancewith local bylaws, and offset costs associated with operating a business

237Regular Council Meeting Page 2 of 6February 27, 2012such as additional policing, security, snow removal and local amenities.Mr. Horn further stated that home businesses should be charged less because:Compliance check is not onerous (usually only necessary on first license);There is no additional burden on the system or environment, especiallywhen a business doesn’t host customers in the home;They are far more efficient and cost taxpayers less than conventionalbusinesses;There should be no duplication of revenue – currently home businessowners are essentially being taxed twice for the same services. Thecurrent approach requires a business to license in Mission, even though itmay have no Mission clientele. Must also license in the community whereclient is served.Mr. Horn asked Council to consider two options:Implementing a fee based entirely on cost recovery, reducing the fee topromote renewals, and reducing fees for home businesses significantly; orDirecting business license dollars to Economic Development and providemarketing and business development value for those dollars, learn fromother local neighbours, and be innovative in this area and promoteMission’s “open -door” policy to business.In response to questions from Council, Mr. Horn stated:Depending on the business, the $148 could be onerous; andIt is important to investigate what is being done in other communities beforemaking any decisions on how the business licensing system should look.The Mayor thanked Mr. Horn for his presentation.PH12/016FEB. 27/12Mark HeieisRe: SustainabilityMr. Heieis stated:The aim is to reduce costs through conservation;The Mission Public School District (MPSD) has 23 buildings anddemonstrates static growth, while the Municipality has significantinfrastructure and few large buildings, demonstrating dynamic growth;One facility (Leisure Centre) accounts for approximately 45% of District ofMission electricity consumption, and street lighting infrastructure accountsfor approximately 18% of electricity consumption;Accumulated avoided electricity cost to date from 2000/01 to present forMPSD has been substantial;Consumption is easier to track in MPSD due to legislation requirements, butthe District of Mission is in the process of implementing a similar processusing the Provincial “SmartTool”;

238Regular Council Meeting Page 3 of 6February 27, 2012Increased consumption demand by the District is due to growth, the LeisureCentre, and Firehall 1;Cost is expected to begin to rise beyond the rate of increased demand; andThe top 10 electricity accounts (Leisure Centre, ornamental street lighting,overhead street lighting, Public Works, RCMP, Fire Hall #1, City Hall,Library, Sports Park, and water pumping station) represent approximately87% of consumption and cost.Mr. Heieis further stated:Conservation – The District’s target was to reduce electricity consumptionby 10% (690,000 kWh or better), but the target was not reached due to fewsupporting processes (e.g. no sustainability policy), no champion, no formalmandate, no budget, budget cycle process;Several small projects have been undertaken, including the computerpower save project, which saves approximately $5,000 per year, and themove to automatic double-sided printing;The District requested to have the Energy Upgrade Incentive agreement inplace before final commitment to the project. A non-binding (30 day, nonbindingacceptance period) incentive agreement was received on February24, 2012 from BC Hydro for the energy upgrade projects; andA BC Hydro incentive review reduced incentive from $260,000 to $152,000.Some change was anticipated, but not to such a large extent. BC HydroEngineering validated the savings. With the proposed incentive, theestimated simple payback would be 4.8 years.In terms of next steps, Mr. Heieis stated:There are still conservation opportunities for the District of Mission,including Occupancy Sensors in Public Works;Ongoing cultural initiatives include the Sustainability Team and a residentialfocus; andThere are other programs that can be looked at which impact “energy” .In response to questions from Council, Mr. Heieis stated:If the District goes through with the project, once it is complete, there willbe a verification phase for approximately 12 months to check if the savingswere actually realized before paying out the final 10% of the incentive;BC Hydro generally gives incentives after the design phase, but in thiscase, the incentive has been requested prior to the design phase;The original Municipal Hall HVAC heating system does not work well withrobust constant heating, so the temperature control in older buildings isdifficult;The Sustainability Team is hoping to deal with “cultural” change wit hin theorganization;There is no way to accurately predict how much rates will actually go up inthe future, which poses a challenge;

239Regular Council Meeting Page 4 of 6February 27, 2012The 30-day non-binding agreement does not require the District to actuallybuild, but it does lock in the incentive; and90% of the incentive would be paid out upon completion of the project,with the remaining 10% held back to be paid upon verification of the actualsavings.The Mayor thanked Mr. Heieis for his presentation.3. PUBLIC HEARINGPH12/017FEB. 27/12District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5265-2012-5050(64) (R11-016-Gill)— a bylaw to rezone property at 31712 Bench Avenue from Rural 16 Zone(RU16) to Suburban 36 Zone (S36)Rupinder Basi, Planner, provided information regarding District of Mission ZoningBylaw 5050-2009 by amending the zoning of the following legally described property:Parcel Identifier: 008-873-704, Lot 2, Except: Parcel “A” (Explanatory Plan 23471),Section 30, Township 17, New Westminster District Plan 20599from Rural 16 (RU16) zone to Suburban 36 (S36) zone.Mr. Basi stated that the location of the subject property is 31712 Bench Avenue, asshown on the following maps:The Planner explained that the purpose of the proposed amendment is toaccommodate the subsequent subdivision of the subject property into 8 lots of aminimum 0.36 hectare (0.88 ac.) lot size.Mr. Basi stated that the following requirements would need to be met prior toadoption of the bylaw:

240Regular Council Meeting Page 5 of 6February 27, 2012• Receipt of Community Amenity Contribution in the amount of $19,705.00;• Engineering requirements for a secured development agreement prior to finaladoption of the Zoning Bylaw amendment;• Any other items that Council may require resulting from the public hearing orCouncil consideration of the application.The Deputy Chief Administrative Officer stated that no written submissions werereceived.Bob Behnke expressed concern about Kenney Avenue becoming a through street,noting that he hopes it does not.Councillor Hensman asked whether there are plans for Kenney Avenue to become athrough street.The Director of Engineering and Public Works replied that the intent has been forKenny Avenue to go through as properties are developed in the area.Peter Bulla asked what infrastructure would be available for the proposed lots.The Deputy Director of Planning replied that they would be serviced by municipalwater and each lot will be serviced by a septic system.Jim Hinds suggested that traffic calming measures such as a gate could beimplemented once the street goes through if traffic turned out to be a problem.Councillor Hensman inquired about the purpose of making Kenney Avenue a throughstreet as opposed to implementing cul de sacs in the area.The Director of Engineering and Public Works said the reason for the road goingthrough is for traffic flow.Mayor Adlem clarified that Kenney Avenue would not be made a through street withthis particular development.The Deputy Director of Planning clarified that Kenney Avenue will become a throughstreet as the remaining properties develop.Peter Bulla asked about the possibility of expropriating land for the future roadwayfrom the property owners before they develop.The Deputy Director of Planning clarified that each developer is required to buildtheir portion of the road as they develop.Hearing no further questions or comments, the Mayor declared the public hearing onDistrict of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5265-2012-5050(64) (R11-016-Gill)closed.

241Regular Council Meeting Page 6 of 6February 27, 2012PH12/018FEB. 27/124. BYLAWSMoved by Councillor Nundal, seconded by Councillor Luck, andRESOLVED: That the readings of all bylaws listed below be approved as listedfollowing the public hearing.(a) District of Mission Zoning Amending Bylaw 5265-2012-5050(64)(R11-016-Gill) — a bylaw to rezone property at 31712 BenchAvenue from Rural 16 Zone (RU16) to Suburban 36 Zone (S36)CARRIEDThird Reading5. ADJOURNMENTMoved by Councillor Luck, seconded by Councillor Jewell, andRESOLVED: That the meeting be adjourned.CARRIEDThe meeting was adjourned at 7:36 p.m.MAYOR WALTER (TED) ADLEM PAUL GIPPS, DEPUTY CHIEFADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

242Minutes of the REGULAR MEETING of the DISTRICT OF MISSION COUNCIL (for thepurpose of going into a closed meeting) held in the Conference Room of theMunicipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, British Columbia, on Monday, March 5,2012 commencing at 2:00 p.m.Council Members Present: Mayor Ted AdlemCouncillor Dave Hensman (joined the meeting at 4:02 p.m.)Councillor Jeff JewellCouncillor Tony LuckCouncillor Larry NundalCouncillor Jenny StevensCouncillor Nelson TilburyStaff Members Present: Glen Robertson, Chief Administrative OfficerPaul Gipps, Deputy Chief Administrative OfficerChristine Brough, Executive Assistant1. CALL TO ORDERThe meeting was called to order.2. RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE PUBLICRC(C)12/009MAR 5/12Moved by Councillor Nundal, seconded by Councillor Tilbury, andRESOLVED: That, pursuant to Sections 90 and 92 of the Community Charter, thisRegular Meeting of Council be closed to the public as the subject matter beingconsidered relates to the following:Section 90(1)(b) of the Community Charter – personal information about anidentifiable individual who is being considered for a municipal award or honour,or who has offered to provide a gift to the municipality on condition ofanonymity;Section 90(1)(c) of the Community Charter – labour relations or otheremployee relations;Section 90(1)(d) of the Community Charter – the security of the property of themunicipality;Section 90(1)(g) of the Community Charter – litigation or potential litigationaffecting the municipality;Section 90(1)(i) of the Community Charter – the receipt of advice that is subjectto solicitor-client privilege, including communications necessary for thatpurpose;Section 90(1)(k) of the Community Charter – negotiations and relateddiscussions respecting the proposed provision of a municipal service that areat their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the council, could reasonablybe expected to harm the interests of the municipality if they were held in public;andSection 90(2)(b) of the Community Charter – the consideration of informationreceived and held in confidence relating to negotiations between themunicipality and a provincial government or the federal government or both, orbetween a provincial government or the federal government or both and a thirdparty.

Regular Council MeetingMarch 5, 2012 Page 2 of 2243CARRIED3. RECESS TO CLOSED COUNCIL MEETINGRC(C)12/010MAR 5/12The meeting recessed at 2:02 p.m.4. RECONVENE TO REGULAR MEETING OF COUNCILRC(C)12/011MAR 5/12Moved by Councillor Stevens, seconded by Councillor Nundal, andRESOLVED: That the meeting be reconvened.CARRIEDThe meeting reconvened at 4:49 p.m.5. ADJOURNMENTRC(C)2012/012MAR 5/12Moved by Councillor Tilbury, seconded by Councillor Nundal, andRESOLVED: That the meeting be adjourned.CARRIEDThe meeting was adjourned at 5:00 p.m.WALTER (TED) ADLEM PAUL GIPPSMAYORDEPUTY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

244MINUTES of the REGULAR MEETING of the COUNCIL of the DISTRICT OF MISSIONheld in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission,British Columbia, on March 5, 2012 commencing at 6:30 p.m.Council Members Present: Mayor Ted AdlemCouncillor Dave HensmanCouncillor Jeff JewellCouncillor Tony LuckCouncillor Larry NundalCouncillor Jenny StevensCouncillor Nelson TilburyStaff Members Present: Glen Robertson, Chief Administrative OfficerPaul Gipps, Deputy Chief Administrative OfficerKelly Ridley, Deputy Director of Corporate AdministrationJennifer Russell, Legislative Assistant1. CALL TO ORDERMayor Adlem called the meeting to order.2. ADOPTION OF AGENDARC12/113MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Hensman, seconded by Councillor Nundal, andRESOLVED:1. That “Discussion of the BC Generations Project” be added to the Administration andFinance section of the agenda; and2. That the agenda for the regular Council meeting of March 5, 2012 be adopted, asamended.CARRIED3. PROCLAMATIONSRC12/114MAR. 05/12March 2012 as “Kidney Health Month”The Kidney Foundation of Canada, BC BranchMoved by Councillor Stevens, seconded by Councillor Nundal, andRESOLVED: That March 2012 be proclaimed as “Kidney Health Month” within the Districtof Mission; the District to assume no costs related thereto.CARRIEDRC12/115MAR. 05/12May 5, 2012 as “Ukrainian Festival Day”BC Ukrainian Cultural Festival SocietyMoved by Councillor Jewell, seconded by Councillor Hensman, andRESOLVED: That May 5, 2012 be proclaimed as “Ukrainian Festival Day” within theDistrict of Mission; the District to assume no costs related thereto.CARRIED

245Regular Council Meeting Page 2 of 25March 5, 20124. DELEGATIONS AND PRESENTATIONSRC12/116MAR. 05/12Colette Squires, Mission Child and Youth CommitteeRe: CYC Vision and Planning for One Day Event in November 2012Colette Squires with the Mission Child and Youth Committee appeared before Council toprovide an overview of the Committee’s purpose and vision, and to extend an invitation tothe one-day forum being held on November 2, 2012.Ms. Squires stated:The Mission Child and Youth Committee (CYC) is a multi-agency, interdisciplinary,and community based organization that provides leadership and advocacy forexcellence in service delivery for children, youth and families.She was contracted by the Ministry of Children and Families to coordinate withAbbotsford to discuss community concerns and ways to work on them together.Laura Wilson, Erica Jurgens and Kirsten Hargreaves are part of the CYC and havebeen instrumental in improving the collaboration for improved service delivery.The various member agencies have collectively identified community strengths (e.g.access to nature and small-town feel), concerns (e.g. poverty and domestic/familyviolence), needs (e.g. safe/accessible emergency youth shelter and parentcounselling/education), and gaps (e.g. weekend/after hours access to services andtransportation between Mission and other centres).The benefits of having a Child and Youth Committee include:– networking and relationship building, leading to cooperation and collaboration,– sharing information about programs, resources, and agencies; helping clients andimproving referral sources,– increased awareness of issues and events,– advocacy for youth clients, and– diminishing/overcoming barriers between agencies.The 2012 CYC “Pulling Together: For Families and Community” Forum is a one dayevent to bring all the service providers together and decide collectively how to moveforward.It is an opportunity to facilitate engagement and dialogue on community issues, and tocreate relationships and opportunities for collaboration.The forum will be held on November 2, 2012 at Camp Chehalis.The CYC is asking for Council support to continue the work that they are doing, aspositive community change is achievable.Mayor Adlem thanked Ms. Squires for the presentation.RC12/117MAR. 05/12Jim Hinds, Mission Community Heritage CommissionRe: Pending Closure of the Powerhouse at Stave FallsJim Hinds, of the Mission Community Heritage Commission, appeared before Council toexpress concern about the impending temporary closure of the Powerhouse at StaveFalls.

246Regular Council Meeting Page 3 of 25March 5, 2012Mr. Hinds stated that BC Hydro intends to close the Powerhouse in September 2012 andreopen it in April 2013, which is during the usual busy time for school tours. He noted thatother Hydro historical sites have not been closed in the same manner.Mr. Hinds asked Council to contact BC Hydro to ask them to consider a change inapproach for the closure of the Powerhouse.Mayor Adlem thanked Mr. Hinds for the information.Moved by Councillor Luck, seconded by Councillor Hensman, andRESOLVED: That staff schedule a meeting between Council and BC Hydro to discussthe temporary closure of the Powerhouse at Stave Falls.CARRIED5. ADOPTION OF INFORMATIONAL ITEMSRC12/118MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Nundal, seconded by Councillor Jewell, andRESOLVED: That the following items be received as information:(a) Mission Institution Report — December 2011;(b)Mission Institution Report – January 2012; and(c) Minutes of the Mission Community Heritage Commission Meeting held onJanuary 4,2012.CARRIED6. RESOLUTION TO RESOLVE INTO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLERC12/119MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Hensman, seconded by Councillor Luck, andRESOLVED: That Council now resolve itself into Committee of the Whole.CARRIED7. PLANNINGCouncillor Hensman assumed the Chair.RC12/120MAR. 05/12Correspondence from Mission Downtown Business AssociationRe: Various Recommendations to CouncilMoved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED: That staff provide a comprehensive report that addresses each of therecommendations contained in the correspondence from the Mission Downtown BusinessAssociation dated February 12, 2012.CARRIED

247Regular Council Meeting Page 4 of 25March 5, 2012RC12/121MAR. 05/12Development Variance Permit Application DV12-002 –32928 Egglestone AvenueMoved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED: That Development Variance Permit Application DV12-002, in thename of K.C. McPherson, to vary Section 601, Part D, 1. of the District of Mission ZoningBylaw 5050-2009, by reducing the minimum required Exterior side yard setback on theeastern lot line from 2.5 metres (8.2 ft.) to 0.76 metres (2.49 feet), be approved.CARRIEDRC12/122MAR. 05/12OCP Amendment and Rezoning Application R11-024, Development PermitApplication DP11-019 and Development Variance Permit Application DV11-013 (0916585 BC Ltd./Redekop) — 8711 Cedar StreetMoved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED:1. That a bylaw be prepared to amend District of Mission Official Community PlanBylaw 4052-2008 by re-designating the property located at 8711 Cedar Street from(1) Apartments, (2) Townhouse, and (3) Environmentally Sensitive Area to:a) Environmentally Sensitive Area on that portion of the property labelled as “AreaA” ,b) Urban Residential-Compact on that portion of the property labelled as “Area B” ,c) Townhouse on that portion of the property labelled as “Area C” ,as set out in Appendix 6 to the report from the Planner dated March 5, 2012;2. That a bylaw be prepared to amend District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 by:a) inserting the Comprehensive Development 27 Zone (CD27) as set out inAppendix 10 to the report from the Planner dated March 5, 2012, into Section1201 “CD Zones”,b) rezoning the portion of the property located at 8711 Cedar Street and labelled as“Area 1 ” in Appendix 5 to the report from the Planner dated March 5, 2012, fromSuburban 36 Zone (S36) to Institutional Parks, Recreation and Civic Zone(I PRC),c) rezoning the portion of the property located at 8711 Cedar Street and labelled as“Area 2” in Appendix 5 to the report from the Planner dated March 5, 2012, fromSuburban 36 Zone to Comprehensive Development 27 Zone (CD27),d) rezoning the portion of the property located at 8711 Cedar Street and labelled as“Area 3” in Appendix 5 to the report from the Planner dated March 5, 2012, fromSuburban 36 Zone (S36) to Urban Residential Compact 465 Secondary DwellingZone (RC465s) ;3. That the bylaws be considered for first reading at the Regular Council Meeting onMarch 5, 2012;4. That following such a reading, the bylaws be forwarded to a Public Hearing onMarch 26, 2012;5. That a bylaw be prepared to provide a road name for one road extension and onenew road with a cul-de-sac as follows:a) the logical southern extension of Machell Street be named “Machell Street”, and

248Regular Council Meeting Page 5 of 25March 5, 2012b) the new road with a cul-de-sac extending east from Machell Street be named“Burton Place”;6. That Development Permit Application DP11-019 to ensure the form and character ofthe development be forwarded to public input on March 26, 2012;7. That the Subdivision Control Bylaw 1500-1995 be varied by:a) reducing the laneway dedication within the development from 9 metres (29.5feet) to 6 metres (19.6 feet), andb) reducing the road dedication on “Burton Place” within the development from 18metres (59 feet) to 16 metres (52.5 feet);8. That upon due consideration of Sections 879 and 881 of the Local Government Act ,consultation referrals be forwarded to:a) School District 75; and that the persons, organizations and authorities receivingthose consultation referrals are considered to be those affected for the purposesof the Section;9. That, in accordance with Section 882 of the Local Government Act following firstreading of the Official Community Plan amending bylaw, staff report back to Councilregarding any potential financial effects the amending bylaw would have upon theDistrict of Mission’s Financial Plan (inclu des Capital Expenditure Plan and OperatingExpenditure Plan) and Waste Management Plan; and10. That the five percent parkland provision in Section 941 of the Local Government Actbe applied as cash-in-lieu of parkland to subdivision file S11-019.OPPOSED: Councillor JewellCARRIEDRC12/123MAR. 05/12Rezoning Application R12-002 (von Hardenberg) — OCP Amendment to32941, 32957, 32971 and 32985 Sylvia AvenueMoved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED:1. That a bylaw be prepared to amend the District of Mission Official Community Plan(OCP) Bylaw 4052-2008 by re-designating the portion of the properties shown as‘Area 1’ on Appendix 2 to the report of the Planner dated March 5, 2012, located at32941, 32957, 32971 and 32985 Sylvia Avenue, from Urban Residential to UrbanResidential — Compact;2. That the bylaw be considered for first reading at the Regular Council Meeting onMarch 5, 2012;3. That following such a reading, the bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing onMarch 26, 2012;4. That upon due consideration of Sections 879 and 881 of the Local Government Act ,consultation referrals be forwarded to:a. School District 75; and that the persons, organizations and authorities receivingthose consultation referrals are considered to be those affected for the purposesof the Section; and

249Regular Council Meeting Page 6 of 25March 5, 20125. That in accordance with Section 882 of the Local Government Act, Council hasconsidered the District of Mission Official Community Plan amending bylaw inconjunction with the District of Mission’s Financial Plan (includes Capital E xpenditurePlan and Operating Expenditure Plan) and Waste Management Plan.CARRIEDRC12/124MAR. 05/12Rezoning Application R11-028 (Renaud) — 32941 Sylvia AvenueMoved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED:1. That a bylaw be prepared to amend the District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009by rezoning the property located at 32941 Sylvia Avenue as follows:a) that portion of land shown as ‘Area A’ on Appendix 2 to the report from thePlanner dated March 5, 2012, from the Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to the UrbanResidential Compact 465 Zone (RC465), andb) that portion of land s hown as ‘Area B’ on Appendix 2 to the report from thePlanner dated March 5, 2012, from the Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to the UrbanResidential 930 Zone (R930);2. That the bylaw be considered for first reading at the Regular Council Meeting onMarch 5, 2012;3. That following such a reading, the bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing onMarch 26, 2012; and4. That all requirements to upgrade the storm sewer and roadway in accordance withSubdivision Control Bylaw 1500-1985 along Sylvia Avenue as part of subdivisionapplication S11-023 be waived.CARRIEDRC12/125MAR. 05/12Rezoning Application R11-031 (Lewis) — 32957 Sylvia AvenueMoved by Councillor Luck, andRECOMMENDED:1. That a bylaw be prepared to amend the District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009by rezoning the property located at 32957 Sylvia Avenue as follows:a) that portion of land shown as ‘Area A’ on Appendix 2 to the report from thePlanner dated March 5, 2012, from the Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to the UrbanResidential Compact 465 Zone (RC465), andb) that portion of land s hown as ‘Area B’ on Appendix 2 to the report from thePlanner dated March 5, 2012, from the Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to the UrbanResidential 930 Zone (R930);2. That the bylaw be considered for first reading at the Regular Council Meeting onMarch 5, 2012;3. That following such a reading, the bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing onMarch 26, 2012; and

250Regular Council Meeting Page 7 of 25March 5, 20124. That all requirements to upgrade the storm sewer and roadway in accordance withSubdivision Control Bylaw 1500-1985 along Sylvia Avenue as part of subdivisionapplication S11-025 be waived.CARRIEDRC12/126MAR. 05/12Rezoning Application R11-026 (von Hardenberg) — 32971 Sylvia AvenueMoved by Councillor Jewell, andRECOMMENDED:1. That a bylaw be prepared to amend the District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009by rezoning the property located at 32971 Sylvia Avenue as follows:a) that portion of land shown as ‘Area A’ on Appendix 2 to the report from thePlanner dated March 5, 2012, from the Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to the UrbanResidential Compact 465 Zone (RC465), andb) that portion of land s hown as ‘Area B’ on Appendix 2 to the report from thePlanner dated March 5, 2012, from the Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to the UrbanResidential 930 Zone (R930);2. That the bylaw be considered for first reading at the Regular Council Meeting onMarch 5, 2012;3. That following such a reading, the bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing onMarch 26, 2012; and4. That all requirements to upgrade the storm sewer and roadway in accordance withSubdivision Control Bylaw 1500-1985 along Sylvia Avenue as part of subdivisionapplication S11-021 be waived.CARRIEDRC12/127MAR. 05/12Rezoning Application R11-029 (Laslo) — 32985 Sylvia AvenueMoved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED:1. That a bylaw be prepared to amend the District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009by rezoning the property located at 32985 Sylvia Avenue as follows:a) that portion of land shown as ‘Area A’ on Appendix 2 to the report from thePlanner dated March 5, 2012, from the Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to the UrbanResidential Compact 465 Zone (RC465), andb) that portion of land s hown as ‘Area B’ on Appendix 2 to the report from thePlanner dated March 5, 2012, from the Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to the UrbanResidential 930 Zone (R930);2. That the bylaw be considered for first reading at the Regular Council Meeting onMarch 5, 2012;3. That following such a reading, the bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing onMarch 26, 2012; and

251Regular Council Meeting Page 8 of 25March 5, 20124. That all requirements to upgrade the storm sewer and roadway in accordance withSubdivision Control Bylaw 1500-1985 along Sylvia Avenue as part of subdivisionapplication S11-024 be waived.CARRIEDRC12/128MAR. 05/12Rezoning Application R11-001 (Simor) — 9376 Cedar StreetMoved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED:1. That a bylaw be prepared to amend District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 byrezoning the property located at 9376 Cedar Street from Rural 16 Zone (RU16) toRural Residential 7 Zone (RR7);2. That the bylaw be considered for first and second readings at the Regular Councilmeeting on March 5, 2012;3. That following such readings, the bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing onMarch 26, 2012; and4. That the five percent parkland provision in Section 941 of the Local Government Actbe applied as cash-in-lieu of parkland to Subdivision Application S11-001.CARRIEDRC12/129MAR. 05/12Rezoning Application R12-003 and Development Variance PermitApplication DV12-001 (Toor) — 33835 Knight Avenue and8135 Stave Lake StreetMoved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED:1. That a bylaw be prepared to amend District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 byrezoning the properties located at 33835 Knight Avenue and 8135 Stave Lake Streetfrom Rural Residential 7 Zone (RR7) and Urban Residential 558 Zone (R558) toUrban Residential 465 Zone (R465);2. That the bylaw be considered for first and second readings at the Regular Councilmeeting on March 5, 2012;3. That following such readings, the bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing onMarch 26, 2012;4. That Development Variance Permit Application DV12-001 to vary the following:a. Section 104 J (2):From:The Panhandle width shall be a minimum of an unobstructed 6.0 m (19.7ft.) for a single PanhandleTo:The panhandle width for proposed Lot 8 shall be a minimum of anunobstructed 4.0 metres (13.1 feet), as shown on Appendix 9 to the reportfrom the Planner dated March 5, 2012,

252Regular Council Meeting Page 9 of 25March 5, 2012b. Section 104 B (2):From:For pie-shaped or irregular shaped lots, frontage may be reduced below theminimum prescribed width by 50%, provided the minimum frontage is metat the mid point of the depth of the lot or 20.0 m back from the front lot line,whichever is less.To:For proposed Lot 9, the frontage may be reduced below the minimumprescribed width by 25%, as shown on Appendix 9, to the report from thePlanner dated March 5, 2012, provided the minimum frontage is met at themid-point of the depth of Lot 9 or 20.0 m back from the front lot line,whichever is less.c. Section 102 Part A. Definitions:From:Front Lot Line means the lot line common to the lot and an abutting thestreet.To:Front Lot Line means the north property line for proposed Lot 8, as shownon Appendix 9 to the report from the Planner dated March 5, 2012,of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 be forwarded to public input onMarch 26, 2012;5. That the five percent parkland provision in Section 941 of the Local Government Actbe applied as cash-in-lieu of parkland to Subdivision Application S12-001;6. That one road extension running south and east of Melburn Drive be named“Melburn Drive”; and7. That a security in the amount of $32,000.00 be required by Council to cover theremoval/replanting of 128 trees (for the total site), as shown on Appendix 4 to thereport from the Planner dated March 5, 2012.CARRIEDRC12/130MAR. 05/12Rezoning Application R12-001 (Valley Christian School Society) –8955 Cedar StreetMoved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED:1. That, in accordance with Policy 2.2.6. “Development Phasing in Cedar Valley” ofDistrict of Mission Official Community Plan Bylaw 4052-2008, Council allowconsideration of Application R12-001 (Valley Christian School) in Phase 2 of CedarValley as identified in the Official Community Plan;2. That a bylaw be prepared to amend District of Mission Official Community PlanBylaw 4052-2008 by re-designating a 0.42 hectare (1.04 acre) portion of theproperty located at 8955 Cedar Street, and identified as “Area A” on Appendix 10 tothe report from the Planner dated March5, 2012, from Townhouse to Institutional ;

253Regular Council Meeting Page 10 of 25March 5, 20123. That a bylaw be prepared to amend District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009 byrezoning the property located at 8955 Cedar Street from Suburban 36 Zone (S36) toInstitutional Educational Zone (IE);4. That the bylaws be considered for first reading at the Regular Council meeting onMarch 5, 2012;5. That following such a reading, the bylaws be forwarded to a Public Hearing onMarch 26, 2012;6. That, upon due consideration of Sections 879 and 881 of the Local Government Act,consultation referrals go forward to the following organizations:Department of Fisheries and Oceans; andSchool District No. 75;7. That in accordance with Section 882 of the Local Government Act, Council hasconsidered the District of Mission Official Community Plan amending bylaw inconjunction with the District of Mission’s Financial Plan (includes Capital ExpenditurePlan and Operating Expenditure Plan) and Waste Management Plan; and8. That vagrant Statutory Right of Way Plan 65813 on the property located at 8955Cedar Street be discharged.CARRIEDRC12/131MAR. 05/12OCP Amendment and Rezoning Application R06-023 (602448 BC Ltd.) –8980 East Edwards Street and 8977 West Edwards StreetMoved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED:1. That first, second and third readings of Official Community Plan Amending Bylaw3942-2006 to re-designate certain portions of the properties located at 8980 EastEdwards Street and 8977 West Edwards Street from Rural Residential to Suburbanbe rescinded.2. That second and third reading of Zone Amending Bylaw 3943-2006 to rezone thefollowing portions of the properties located at 8980 East Edwards Street and 8977West Edwards Street:a. “Area A” from Rural 80 (RU80) to Comprehensive Development 14 Zone(CD14),b. “Area B ” from Rural 16 (RU16) to Comprehensive Development 14 Zone(CD14), andc. “Area C ” from Rural 16 (RU16) to Comprehensive Development 14 Zone(CD14),as shown on Appendix 2 to the report from the Planner dated March 5, 2012, berescinded;3. That Section 1214 Comprehensive Development 14 Zone (CD14) be deleted in itsentirety and replaced with Section 1214 Comprehensive Development 14 Zone(CD14) attached as Appendix 4 to the report from the Planner dated March 5, 2012;4. That the bylaw be considered for second reading, as amended, at the RegularCouncil meeting on March 5, 2012; and

254Regular Council Meeting Page 11 of 25March 5, 20125. That following such a reading, the bylaw be forwarded to a Public Hearing onMarch 19, 2012.CARRIEDRC12/132MAR. 05/12Excerpt from the Minutes of the Public Hearings held on May 25 andJune 22, 2009 and Staff Reports dated March 16, April 20 and September 8,2009 (Background for consideration of adoption of bylaw 5018-2009 —33344 – 4 th Avenue)This item was deferred at the request of the applicant.RC12/133MAR. 05/12Excerpt from the Minutes of the Public Hearing held on January 30, 2012and Staff Report dated January 9, 2012(Background for consideration of adoption of bylaw 5260-2012-5050(62) –31504 Kenney Avenue)An excerpt from the minutes of the Public Hearing held on January 30, 2012 and a copy ofthe related staff report dated January 9, 2012 was provided for the Committee asbackground information to assist in the consideration of adoption of Zoning AmendingBylaw 5260-2012-5050(62) and the Development Variance Permit Application for 31504Kenney Avenue.8. PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURECouncillor Tilbury assumed the Chair.RC12/134MAR. 05/122012 Capital Projects Pre-Approval RequestMoved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED:1. That the Parks, Recreation and Culture Department 2012 Capital Budget request berevised to the following:Year Park Project Budget Funding Source2012 Centennial Park Tennis court resurfacing $22,281.00 General Capital Reserve2015 Wren Park Tennis court resurfacing $14,340.00 General Capital Reserve2. That the Parks, Recreation and Culture Department be granted early budgetapproval to proceed with the Centennial Park tennis court repairs.CARRIEDRC12/135MAR. 05/12Fraser River Heritage Park — 2012 Work PlanMoved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED: That Council, the Mission Heritage Association and relevant staffmeet to discuss the 2012 Fraser River Heritage Park Work plan, as well as other futurelong term plans for Fraser River Heritage Park to ensure that impact of these capital

255Regular Council Meeting Page 12 of 25March 5, 2012improvements on the ongoing operating costs are fully understood and committed to, priorto further development occurring within the Park.CARRIED9. FORESTRYCouncillor Stevens assumed the Chair.RC12/136MAR. 05/12Forestry Operation 2011 Financial ResultA report from the Director of Forest Management dated February 29, 2012 regarding theforestry operation 2011 financial results was provided for the Committee’s information.10. ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKSCouncillor Jewell assumed the Chair.RC12/137MAR. 05/12Garbage Collection and Loading Zone at Cottage Thrift ShopMoved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED:1. That Council not support Mission Healthcare Auxiliary Society's request for Districtcrews to pick up the Society's garbage from the Cottage Thrift Shop located at33228 First Avenue;2. That the Society's request for a Loading Zone for one vehicle outside the CottageThrift Shop not be supported; and3. That a letter explaining both decisions be drafted by staff for signature by the Mayorand sent to the Society.CARRIEDRC12/138MAR. 05/12Solar Hot Water Ready RegulationMoved by Councillor Stevens, andRECOMMENDED: That staff develop and implement a communications plan to engagethe local building industry to request feedback on what concerns they might haveregarding the District registering under the Solar Hot Water Ready Regulation.OPPOSED: Mayor AdlemCouncillor HensmanCouncillor JewellCouncillor LuckCouncillor NundalCouncillor StevensCouncillor TilburyDEFEATED

256Regular Council Meeting Page 13 of 25March 5, 2012RC12/139MAR. 05/12Project Management Policy and ProcedureMoved by Councillor Luck, andRECOMMENDED: That consideration of the proposed Project Management Policy bedeferred pending the outcome of a Council workshop to further review that policy.OPPOSED: Mayor AdlemCouncillor NundalCARRIEDRC12/140MAR. 05/12Request for Direction Re: 2011 Follow-up ItemsMoved by Councillor Tilbury, andRECOMMENDED: That staff provide a report containing options to regulate heavy truckuse of District roads, including appropriate routes and mitigation of wear and tear.CARRIEDRC12/141MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Hensman, andRECOMMENDED: That staff take no further action regarding traffic calming measures onSilverdale Avenue.CARRIEDRC12/142MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Luck, andRECOMMENDED: That staff provide a report detailing the criteria and suggesting optionsfor prioritizing requests for installation of sidewalks using the existing budget funds.CARRIEDRC12/143MAR. 05/12Installation Criteria for Horse Rider SignsMoved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED: That the report from the Engineering Technologist (Traffic) datedMarch 5, 2012 regarding the installation criteria for horse rider road signs be received asinformation.CARRIEDRC12/144MAR. 05/122011 Climate Action Revenue Incentive Program and Reporting ofClimate Action GoalsMoved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED: That the report from the Manager of Environmental Services datedFebruary 14, 2012 regarding the 2011 Climate Action Revenue Incentive Program bereceived as information.CARRIED

257Regular Council Meeting Page 14 of 25March 5, 2012RC12/145MAR. 05/12Waste Diversion TrendsMoved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED: That the report from the Environmental Coordinator datedFebruary 20, 2012 regarding curbside waste diversion trends over the last couple of yearsbe received as information.CARRIED11. ADMINISTRATION AND FINANCECouncillor Luck assumed the Chair.RC12/146MAR. 05/12Inter-Council CommunicationMoved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED:1. That proactive and timely communication between members of Council is importantand, therefore, Council members should practice “heads up” communication asstandard procedure;2. That staff practice a similar “heads up” communication with the Councillor liaison fortheir respective departments; and3. That late agenda items should be permitted only for emergent items as determinedby the Chief Administrative Officer or the Deputy Chief Administrative Officer.CARRIEDRC12/147MAR. 05/12Capital Budget Request for Photocopier Replacement — 2012Moved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED:1. That Council approve the 2012 capital budget request in the amount of $85,000 forthe replacement of five (5) multi-function photocopying machines with $20,000funded from the Information Systems Reserve Fund and $65,000 from the GeneralCapital Reserve Fund;2. That $90,000 be put into the reoccurring capital budget to replace the multi-functionphotocopying machines every five (5) years thereafter, with $20,000 funded from theInformation Systems Reserve Fund and $70,000 from the General Capital ReserveFund; and3. That Council support in principle, a right sizing initiative to reduce duplicated standalonedevices across District departments after the new multi-function photocopyingmachines are installed, with the Managers of Purchasing and Information Servicestaking the lead on the project.CARRIED

258Regular Council Meeting Page 15 of 25March 5, 2012RC12/148MAR. 05/12Staff Request for Expedited Budgetary ApprovalMoved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED: That early budgetary approval is granted for the following projectincluded in the 2012 Fleet Capital program:Description of Original Unit: 5312 Bomag Walk Behind RollerDepartment: Public WorksBudget: $23,690.00Preferred RFP Date: 29 February 2012CARRIEDRC12/149MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED: That consideration of early budgetary approval for replacement of the5110 Dodge Durango for the Mission Fire & Rescue Department be deferred.CARRIEDRC12/150MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED: That early budgetary approval is granted for the following projectincluded in the 2012 Fleet Capital program:Description of Original Unit: 5134 Ford F250 Sewer Mechanic TruckDepartment: Public WorksBudget: $40,340.63Preferred RFP Date: 14 March 2012CARRIEDRC12/151MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED: That early budgetary approval is granted for the following projectincluded in the 2012 Fleet Capital program:Description of Original Unit: 5141 Ford F250 Parks TruckDepartment: Parks, Recreation and CultureBudget: $39,113.10Preferred RFP Date: 14 March 2012CARRIEDRC12/152MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Tilbury, andRECOMMENDED: That early budgetary approval is granted for the following projectincluded in the 2012 Fleet Capital program:Description of Original Unit: 5153 03 Ford F450 Parks One-tonDepartment: Parks, Recreation and Culture

259Regular Council Meeting Page 16 of 25March 5, 2012CARRIEDBudget: $80,340.00Preferred RFP Date: 14 March 2012RC12/153MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Tilbury, andRECOMMENDED: That the District of Mission not replace the Forestry Department FordF350 Forestry Crummy.OPPOSED: Mayor AdlemCouncillor NundalCouncillor StevensCARRIEDRC12/154MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED: That early budgetary approval is granted for the following projectincluded in the 2012 Fleet Capital program:Description of Original Unit: 5197 92 International Whale (emergency responsesewer and water truck)Department: Public WorksBudget: $151,139.63Preferred RFP Date: 17 April 2012CARRIEDRC12/155MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Nundal, andRECOMMENDED: That early budgetary approval is granted for the following projectincluded in the 2012 Fleet Capital program:Description of Original Unit: 5302 Le Roi Portable CompressorDepartment: Public WorksBudget: $31,332.60Preferred RFP Date: 17 April 2012CARRIEDRC12/156MAR. 05/12Regional Water and Sewer Capital Budget ChangesMoved by Councillor Jewell, andRECOMMENDED: That the following regional water and sewer capital plan changes beapproved as follows:Water SupplyDefer the north phase of Gladwin transmission project in 2012 worth $7,500,000Defer the third Fraser River crossing from 2013 to 2016 worth $14,200,000

260Regular Council Meeting Page 17 of 25March 5, 2012CARRIEDDefer the Cannell Lake water treatment project from 2013 to 2016 worth$10,000,000Defer the new water source construction from 2016 to 2017 worth $84,000,000Advance the IWA leakage study from 2013 to 2012 worth $150,000Cannell Lake Treatment Project to be funded through grantsJAMES Treatment PlantDefer the structural review in 2012 worth $50,000Defer bio-solids truck replacement in 2012 worth $320,000Defer the odour projects in 2012 worth $450,000Defer the odour audit and asphalt/concrete repair from 2013 to 2016 worth$1,600,000Defer the west lagoon, scum dewatering and filter fly system from 2013 to 2016worth $4,000,000Defer the equipment replacements from 2013 to 2016 worth $280,000Defer co-generation conditional on grant funding from 2013 to 2016 worth $790,000RC12/157MAR. 05/12Adoption of Recommendations Committee of the Whole — Administrationand Finance Committee Meeting of February 20, 2012Moved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED: That the recommendations AF 12/028 through AF 12/041, ascontained in the February 20, 2012, Committee of the Whole (Administration and FinanceCommittee budget) meeting minutes, be adopted.CARRIEDRC12/158MAR. 05/12Core Services Review UpdateMoved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED: That the minutes of the Core Services Review Task Force meetingheld on February 16, 2012 be adopted.CARRIEDRC12/159MAR. 05/12Council Priority Areas and Goals 2012-2014Moved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED: That the summary of the Council planning session held on January 13and 14, 2012 to determine Council priority areas and goals for 2012 to 2014 be receivedas information.CARRIED

261Regular Council Meeting Page 18 of 25March 5, 2012RC12/160MAR. 05/12Correspondence from Pleasant View Housing Society 1980Re: Request for Council Appointment to PVHS BoardMoved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED:1. That Councillor Jeff Jewell be appointed as the Council representative to thePleasant View Housing Society Board; and2. That the correspondence from Pleasant View Housing Society dated February 20,2012 be received as information.CARRIEDRC12/161MAR. 05/12ADDITIONAL ITEM - Discussion of the BC Generations ProjectCouncillor Stevens stated:The BC Generations Project is part of a national health survey to find the causes ofcancer and other chronic diseases and reduce the number of cases.The BC Cancer agency is trying to recruit 40,000 volunteers who will give their healthinformation and biological samples to help create a research resource.Locally, these volunteers will have to spend some time at the Abbotsford RegionalHospital and Cancer Centre to complete paperwork and give samples.Fraser Health will not waive the parking fees at the Abbotsford Regional Hospital forthose volunteers, who have no control over how long they will be inside the hospitalfor that day.Advocates of the project have asked if Council can approach Fraser Health to askthem to waive the parking fees for this pr oject’s volunteers.Moved by Mayor Adlem, andRECOMMENDED: That a letter from the Mayor be sent to Fraser Health asking thatparking fees for the volunteer participants in the BC Generations Project be waived, withcopies of the letter sent to Mission’s Member of Parliament, Members of the LegislativeAssembly, and to the Mayor of Abbotsford.CARRIED12. RESOLUTION TO RISE AND REPORTMayor Adlem resumed the Chair.RC12/162MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Hensman, seconded by Councillor Jewell, andRESOLVED: That the Committee of the Whole now rise and report.CARRIED

262Regular Council Meeting Page 19 of 25March 5, 201213. ADOPTION OF COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORTRC12/163MAR. 05/12RC12/164MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Luck, seconded by Councillor Jewell, andRESOLVED: That the recommendations of the Committee of the Whole, as contained initems RC12/120 to RC12/161, except items RC12/122 (OCP/Zoning amendments, 8711Cedar St.), RC12/139 (project management policy), and RC12/153 (purchase of ForestryCrummy), be adopted.CARRIEDMoved by Councillor Luck, seconded by Councillor Nundal, andRESOLVED: That the recommendation of the Committee of the Whole, as contained initem RC12/122 (OCP/Zoning amendments, 8711 Cedar St.), be adopted.OPPOSED: Councillor JewellCARRIEDRC12/165MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Hensman, seconded by Councillor Luck, andRESOLVED: That the recommendation of the Committee of the Whole, as contained initem RC12/139 (project management policy), be adopted.OPPOSED: Councillor NundalCARRIEDRC12/166MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Luck, seconded by Councillor Hensman, andRESOLVED: That the recommendation of the Committee of the Whole, as contained initem RC12/153 (purchase of Forestry Crummy), be adopted.OPPOSED: Mayor AdlemCouncillor NundalCouncillor StevensCARRIED14. BYLAWSRC12/167MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Luck, seconded by Councillor Tilbury, andRESOLVED: That the readings of all bylaws included in the Bylaws section of theMarch 5, 2012 regular Council agenda be approved as follows:(a) OCP Amending Bylaw 3942-2006(R06-023 — 602448 BC Ltd.) — a bylaw to redesignate the propertieslocated at 8980 East Edwards Street and 8977 West Edwards Streetfrom Rural Residential to SuburbanRescind First,Second and ThirdReadings

263Regular Council Meeting Page 20 of 25March 5, 2012(b) Zoning Amending Bylaw 3943-2006(R06-023 – 602448 BC Ltd.) – a bylaw to add a ComprehensiveDevelopment Zone and to rezone the properties located at 8980 EastEdwards Street and 8977 West Edwards Street from Rural 80 and Rural16 Zones (RU80 and RU16) to Comprehensive Development 14 Zone(CD14)(c) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5018-2009(R08-001 – OTG Development Concepts) – a bylaw to rezone propertyat 33344 – 4 th Avenue from Residential Two Unit Zone (RT465) toResidential Compact Zone (RC465)(d) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5260-2012-5050(62)(R11-030 – Biason) – a bylaw to rezone property at 31504 KenneyAvenue from Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to Suburban Secondary DwellingZone (S36s)(e) Land Use Application Procedures and Fees Amending Bylaw 5267-2012-3612(9) – a bylaw to reduce fees for Waterfront DesignatedTemporary Use Permits(f) OCP Amending Bylaw 5278-2012-4052(21)(R11-024 – 0916585 BC Ltd/Redekop) – a bylaw to redesignate theproperty at 8711 Cedar Street from Apartments, Townhouse, andEnvironmentally Sensitive Area to Environmentally Sensitive Area, UrbanResidential-Compact, and TownhouseRescind Secondand ThirdReadingsSecond Reading,as amendedDEFERREDAdoptionAdoptionFirst Reading(g)In accordance with Section 882 of the Local Government Act, Councilhas considered District of Mission Official Community Plan AmendingBylaw 5278-2012-4052(21) in conjunction with the District of Mission'sFinancial Plan and Waste Management Plan--(h) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5273-2012-5050(69)(R11-024 – 0916585 BC Ltd/Redekop) – a bylaw to add aComprehensive Development Zone and to rezone the property at 8711Cedar Street from Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to Institutional Parks,Recreation and Civic Zone (IPRC), Comprehensive Development Zone27 (CD27) and Urban Residential Compact 465 Secondary DwellingZone (RC465s)(i) Street Naming (Burton Place/Machell Street Extension) Bylaw 5279-2012 – a bylaw to name one new road and an extension of road in a newsubdivision(j) OCP Amending Bylaw 5268-2012-4052(19)(R12-002 – von Hardenberg) – a bylaw to redesignate portions of 32941,32957, 32971 and 32985 Sylvia Avenue from Urban Residential to UrbanResidential CompactFirst ReadingFirst, Second andThird ReadingsFirst Reading(k)In accordance with Section 882 of the Local Government Act, Councilhas considered District of Mission Official Community Plan AmendingBylaw 5268-2012-4052(19) in conjunction with the District of Mission'sFinancial Plan and Waste Management Plan--

264Regular Council Meeting Page 21 of 25March 5, 2012(l) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5270-2012-5050(66)(R11-028 – Renaud) – a bylaw to rezone the property at 32941 SylviaAvenue from Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to Urban Residential Compact465 Zone (RC465) and Urban Residential 930 Zone (R930)(m) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5272-2012-5050(68)(R11-031 – Lewis) – a bylaw to rezone the property at 32957 SylviaAvenue from Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to Urban Residential Compact465 Zone (RC465) and Urban Residential 930 Zone (R930)(n) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5269-2012-5050(65)(R11-026 – von Hardenberg) – a bylaw to rezone the property at 32971Sylvia Avenue from Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to Urban ResidentialCompact 465 Zone (RC465) and Urban Residential 930 Zone (R930)(o) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5271-2012-5050(67)(R11-029 – Laslo) – a bylaw to rezone the property at 32985 SylviaAvenue from Suburban 36 Zone (S36) to Urban Residential Compact465 Zone (RC465) and Urban Residential 930 Zone (R930)(p) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5274-2012-5050(70)(R12-001 – Simor) – a bylaw to rezone the property at 9376 Cedar Streetfrom Rural 16 Zone (RU 16) to Rural Residential 7 Zone (RR7)(q) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5275-2012-5050(71)(R12-003 – Toor) – a bylaw to rezone the properties at 33835 KnightAvenue and 8135 Stave Lake Street from Rural Residential 7 Zone(RR7) and Urban Residential 558 Zone (R558) to Urban Residential 465Zone (R465)(r) Street Naming (Melburn Drive Extension) Bylaw 5280-2012– a bylaw to name an extension of road in a new subdivision(s) OCP Amending Bylaw 5276-2012-4052(20)(R12-001 – Valley Christian School Society) – a bylaw to redesignateproperty at 8985 Cedar Street from Townhouse to InstitutionalFirst ReadingFirst ReadingFirst ReadingFirst ReadingFirst and SecondReadingsFirst and SecondReadingsFirst, Second andThird ReadingsFirst Reading(t)In accordance with Section 882 of the Local Government Act, Councilhas considered District of Mission Official Community Plan AmendingBylaw 5276-2012-4052(20) in conjunction with the District of Mission'sFinancial Plan and Waste Management Plan--(u) Zoning Amending Bylaw 5277-2012-5050(72)(R12-001 - Valley Christian School Society) – a bylaw to rezone theproperty at 8985 Cedar Street from Suburban 36 Zone (S36) toInstitutional Educational Zone (IE)First ReadingCARRIED15. MINUTESRC12/168MAR. 05/12Moved by Councillor Stevens, seconded by Councillor Hensman, andRESOLVED: That the following minutes be adopted:(a) Regular Council Meeting (Public Hearing) – January 30, 2012;

265Regular Council Meeting Page 22 of 25March 5, 2012(b) Special Council Meeting (for the purpose of going into a Closed meeting) –February 20, 2012;(c) Regular Council Meeting (for the purpose of going into a Closed meeting) –February 20, 2012;(d)February 20, 2012 (Administration and Finance Committee); and(e) Regular Council Meeting — February 20, 2012.CARRIED16. OTHER BUSINESSRC12/169MAR. 05/12Development Variance Permit Application DV09-001 (OTG DevelopmentConcepts) — 33344 — 4 th AvenueThis item was deferred at the request of the applicant.RC12/170MAR. 05/12Development Variance Permit Application DV11-018 (Biason) –31504 Kenney AvenueMoved by Councillor Nundal, seconded by Councillor Jewell, andRESOLVED: That Development Variance Permit Application DV11-018 in the name ofRobert Biason, for the property located at 31504 Kenney Avenue, to vary the following:a) Section 102 Part A. Definitions from:to:Front Lot Linemeans the Lot line common to the Lot and an abutting Street. In the case of aCorner Lot the lot line having the shortest length abutting one street shall beconsidered the Front Lot Line; for Lots with a corner truncation of less than 6.0 m(19.68 ft), Front Lot Line shall be measured to the theoretical point of intersectionof front and exterior side property boundaries.For the purposes of double fronting lots, the Front Lot Line shall be determined bylogical orientation to the street, whether access is by vehicle, pedestrian ororientation of a Building .Front Lot Linemeans the Lot line common to the Lot and an abutting Street. In the case of aCorner Lot the lot line abutting Kenney Avenue shall be considered the Front LotLine; for Lots with a corner truncation of less than 6.0 m (19.68 ft), Front Lot Lineshall be measured to the theoretical point of intersection of front and exterior sideproperty boundaries.For the purposes of double fronting lots, the Front Lot Line shall be determined bylogical orientation to the street, whether access is by vehicle, pedestrian ororientation of a Building .b) Section 106 Use Regulations, Part F. Secondary Dwelling Units, Paragraph 2 (b) from:In SUBURBAN and URBAN areas, a Coach House or Garden Cottage shall belocated entirely to the rear of the Principal Building.

266Regular Council Meeting Page 23 of 25March 5, 2012to:In SUBURBAN and URBAN areas, a Coach House or Garden Cottage may belocated to the rear, or to the side, of the Principal Building.of District of Mission Zoning Bylaw 5050-2009, be approved.CARRIEDRC12/171MAR. 05/12Release from Closed Council – February 20, 2012The following resolutions were released from the Closed council meeting held onFebruary 20, 2012:That the District of Mission Council approves the recommendation of theEconomic Development Select Committee (EDC) to appoint the following twoindividuals to a two-year appointment to the EDC commencing March, 2012:a. Ms. Vicki Gould — Owner, Canadian Tire; andb. Mr. Allan Main — Executive Director, Community Futures North FraserThat the following individuals be appointed to the Mission CommunityHeritage Commission for a two year term commencing February 20, 2012:a. Michael Smith;b. George Candia; andc. Michael Yeomans.17. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER'S REPORTThe Chief Administrative Officer reported that the 10 th annual Fraser Valley CulturalDiversity Awards were held on March 2 nd in Abbotsford, and Ecole Mission CentralNeighbourhood Project won the award in the Inclusive Environment category. He statedthis was a collaborative project between School District 75, Mission Ministry of Child andFamily Development and District of Mission Social Development to develop theelementary school into a community hub.18. MAYOR’S REPORTThe Mayor reported on various activities, meetings and events attended since the lastregular Council meeting.Mayor Adlem announced that there will be a zero tax increase budget for 2012 presentedat the March 15th public budget consultation meeting.19. COUNCILLOR’S REPORTS ON COMMITTEES, BOARDS AND ACTIVITIESCouncillors Hensman, Jewell, Luck, Tilbury and Stevens reported on various activities,meetings and events attended since the last regular Council meeting.

267Regular Council Meeting Page 24 of 25March 5, 201220. QUESTION PERIODCouncil and staff responded to questions from the following people:Danny Plecas asked for clarification on the change in the sewer line for the proposedEdwards Street development.The Deputy Director of Planning responded that there will be a second public hearingbecause of the change in the application related to the sanitary sewer line. There is nochange in the routing of the sanitary sewer line. A portion of that line was originallycontemplated to be a private, however it was in a public right of way. The only change isthat the portion that was to be private will become public because it is in the public right ofway.He further stated that the developer is paying the full cost of the installation, and theDistrict is also building in some assurances, such as twinning the line, to curtail any riskassociated with the maintaining the line.Sandy Tilbury asked if the District was obligated to buy new equipment, and whether thepurchase of used equipment or vehicles would be considered as part of being fiscallyresponsible.Mayor Adlem responded that there was no requirement for the District to buy newequipment.Councillor Nundal responded that buying used equipment would not necessarily be thebest option to replace older equipment.Terry Mortimer:(a)Is this the first zero increase budget Mission has ever put out?Mayor Adlem responded that he cannot recall a zero increase budget since 1981. Hefurther stated that Council will not answer any budget related questions until the March15 th meeting.(b)It appears that there was only one person concerned about the sidewalk on 14 thAvenue, so how many complaints or concerns does it take to force a report fromstaff on such an issue?Councillor Stevens responded that there was more than one person concerned about thelack of a sidewalk on 14th Avenue.Mayor Adlem clarified that the issue before Council this evening was the sidewalk policy ingeneral.(c)Does Council think it necessary to have horse rider signs in an area where there isjust local traffic, where most people would already be aware there were horses in thearea?Mayor Adlem responded that the decision to install further horse rider signs was alreadymade by previous Council, and that work has already been done.(d)Is it necessary to have variances on top of increasing density, such as was asked inthe townhouse proposal on Cedar Street?

268Regular Council Meeting Page 25 of 25March 5, 2012Councillor Nundal responded that although there are set rules, there is always anopportunity to ask for leeway.The Deputy Director of Planning clarified that the actual density in the Cedar Streetapplication is decreasing. The District needs to contemplate that decrease in density incomparison to the OCP objectives for the development cost charges (DCCs). Therewould be about the same amount of the DCCs collected. Council was commenting earlierabout the density because the applicant has asked for coach houses and we do not addcoach houses into the calculations for density.He further stated that the variances requested in this application are on the laneways only,and they are actually the standards the District is contemplating in the new subdivisioncontrol bylaw.21. ADJOURNMENTMoved by Councillor Luck, seconded by Councillor Hensman, andRESOLVED: That the meeting be adjourned.CARRIEDThe meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m.WALTER (TED) ADLEM, MAYOR PAUL GIPPS, DEPUTY CHIEFADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERG:\clerk\m in utes\rc20120305.doc

269Minutes of the SPECIAL MEETING of the DISTRICT OF MISSION COUNCIL held inthe Conference Room of the Municipal Hall, 8645 Stave Lake Street, Mission, BritishColumbia, on Monday, March 12, 2012 commencing at 3:07 p.m.Council Members Present: Mayor Ted AdlemCouncillor Jeff JewellCouncillor Tony LuckCouncillor Larry NundalCouncillor Jenny StevensCouncillor Nelson TilburyCouncil Members Absent: Councillor Dave HensmanStaff Members Present: Glen Robertson, Chief Administrative OfficerPaul Gipps, Deputy Chief Administrative OfficerKen Bjorgaard, Director of FinanceMichael Giesbrecht, Manager of Purchasing & StoresKelly Ridley, Deputy Director of Corporate AdministrationChristine Brough, Executive Assistant1. CALL TO ORDERThe meeting was called to order.2. ADOPTION OF AGENDASC2012/001MAR 12/12Moved by Councillor Luck, seconded by Councillor Tilbury, andRESOLVED: That the March 12, 2012 Special Council meeting agenda be adopted.CARRIED3. NEW BUSINESSSC2012/002MAR 12/12SC2012/003MAR 12/12Phoenix Velo Training Group Bicycle Race — March 31, 2012A report dated March 12, 2012 from the Deputy Director of Corporate Administrationregarding the proposed Phoenix Velo Training Group Bicycle Race on March 31, 2012was provided for Council’s consideration.Discussion ensued and it was:Moved by Councillor Nundal, seconded by Councillor Luck, andRESOLVED: That Geoff Oram from Phoenix Velo Training Group be grantedpermission by Council to hold a bicycle road race on the streets around the municipalhall on Saturday, March 31, 2012 from 9:00 am to 3:00 pm.CARRIEDCouncil requested that, in the future, all races that have previously received approvalfrom Council be handled at the staff level with email notification sent to Council.Award of Core Services Review (CRS) ContractA report dated March 7, 2012 from Councillor Jewell, the Chair of the Core ServicesReview Task Force, and the Director of Finance, the primary staff contact for the taskforce, regarding the Core Services Review contract was provided for Council’s

Special Council MeetingMarch 12, 2012 Page 2 of 2consideration along with a copy of the consulting agreement, Acton Consulting Ltd. ’sproposal and the original Request for Proposals (REP) document.Discussion ensued and it was:Moved by Councillor Nundal, seconded by Councillor Stevens, andRESOLVED: That the District of Mission enter into an agreement with ActonConsulting Ltd. to undertake the 2012 District of Mission Core Services Review.CARRIEDThe Director of Finance stated that staff would be contacting Council to arrangemeetings with the consultant.2704. RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE PUBLICSC2012/004MAR 12/12Moved by Councillor Jewell, seconded by Councillor Tilbury, andRESOLVED: That, pursuant to Sections 90 and 92 of the Community Charter, thisSpecial Meeting of Council be closed to the public as the subject matter beingconsidered relates to the following:Section 90(1)(k) of the Community Charter – negotiations and relateddiscussions respecting the proposed provision of a municipal service that areat their preliminary stages and that, in the view of the council, could reasonablybe expected to harm the interests of the municipality if they were held in public.CARRIED5. RECESS TO CLOSED COUNCIL MEETINGSC2012/005MAR 12/12The meeting recessed at 3:20 p.m.6. RECONVENE TO SPECIAL MEETING OF COUNCILSC2012/006MAR 12/12Moved by Councillor Luck, seconded by Councillor Tilbury, andRESOLVED: That the meeting be reconvened.CARRIEDThe meeting reconvened at 4:38 p.m.7. ADJOURNMENTSC2012/007MAR 12/12Moved by Councillor Nundal, seconded by Councillor Tilbury, andRESOLVED: That the meeting be adjourned.CARRIEDThe meeting was adjourned at 4:38 p.m.WALTER (TED) ADLEM PAUL GIPPSMAYORDEPUTY CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER