Application for Exclusion From ALR - North Lougheed

AECOM City of Pitt Meadows North Lougheed Land Use Study

i

City of Pitt Meadows

North Lougheed Land Use Study


ii

City of Pitt Meadows

North Lougheed Land Use Study

Prepared By:

AECOM

3292 Production Way, Floor 4 604.444.6404 tel

Burnaby, BC V5A 4R4 604.294.8597 fax

Project Number:

60189999

Date:

June 23rd, 2011


i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................. i

List of Figures ................................................................................................................. ii

List of Tables .................................................................................................................. iii

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................... iv

1. Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 1.1. Area Description and Context ................................................................................... 1 1.2. Study Objectives and Methodology .......................................................................... 7

2. Policy Context ..................................................................................................... 11 2.1. Pitt Meadows OCP 2008 ......................................................................................... 11 2.2. Pitt Meadows Agricultural Plan .............................................................................. 13 2.3. Pitt Meadows Economic Development Strategic Plan 2008 .................................. 13 2.4. North Lougheed Connector and Harris Interchange .............................................. 14 2.5. North Lougheed Highway Commercial Area Study ................................................ 15 2.6. Agricultural Land Commission ................................................................................ 16 2.7. Metro Vancouver Draft Regional Growth Strategy 2011 ....................................... 17

3. Agricultural Inventory ........................................................................................ 20 3.1. Current Land Use in the Study Area ....................................................................... 20 3.2. Agricultural Capability of Parcels in the ALR ........................................................... 21

4. Market Assessment ............................................................................................ 22

5. Guiding Principles and Evaluation Criteria ...................................................... 26

6. Stakeholder Consultation .................................................................................. 27 6.1. Summary of Process and Key Findings ................................................................... 27

7. Preliminary Land Use Concepts ........................................................................ 38 7.1. Land Use Categories ................................................................................................ 38 7.2. Draft Concepts ........................................................................................................ 41 7.3. Evaluation Matrix .................................................................................................... 48

8. Recommended Land Use Concept ................................................................... 50 8.1. Recommended Land Use Concept .......................................................................... 50 8.2. Financial Evaluation Highlights ............................................................................... 52 8.3. Agricultural Impact and Benefits ............................................................................ 54 8.4 Transportation and Transit Considerations ............................................................ 56

9. Urban Design ...................................................................................................... 60 9.1. Building Form and Character / Streetscape ............................................................ 60 9.2. Gateway Features ................................................................................................... 61 9.3. Circulation and Access ............................................................................................ 63 9.4. Landscape Strategy ................................................................................................. 64 9.5. Transitional Plantings and Buffer Zones ................................................................. 65 9.6. Gathering Places ..................................................................................................... 66


ii

10. Summary Recommendations ............................................................................ 68

Appendices .................................................................................................................... 70 1. Survey Results/Public Open House Comments ...................................................... 70 2. ALC Decisions .......................................................................................................... 93 3. Detailed Evaluation Matrix ..................................................................................... 99 4. Land Use Market Review ...................................................................................... 102

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.a. North Lougheed Study Area Boundary ......................................................................... 4

Figure 1.b. Study Area Context ....................................................................................................... 4

Figure 1.c. North Lougheed Corridor Potential Road Network ...................................................... 5

Figure 1.d. Site Pictures .................................................................................................................. 6

Figure 1.e. Schedule of Work for North Lougheed Land Use Study ............................................. 10

Figure 2.a. Existing OCP Designation ............................................................................................ 12

Figure 2.b. Map Showing Metro Vancouver Special Study Areas ................................................ 19

Figure 6.a. Summary of Stakeholder Input Presented at the Public Open House ....................... 34

Figure 6.b. Public Open House ...................................................................................................... 36

Figure 7.a. Examples of Mixed Employment Uses ........................................................................ 38

Figure 7.b. Examples of Retail‐Commercial Uses ......................................................................... 39

Figure 7.c. Examples of Agricultural and Agri‐business Uses ...................................................... 40

Figure 7.d. Kerr Avenue Business Park, Chilliwack, BC ................................................................. 41

Figure 7.e. Concept A .................................................................................................................... 45

Figure 7.f. Concept B ..................................................................................................................... 46

Figure 7.g. Concept C .................................................................................................................... 47

Figure 7.h. Evaluation Matrix ........................................................................................................ 48

Figure 8.a. Recommended Land Use Concept .............................................................................. 51


iii

Figure 9.a. Banners contribute to a sense of place ...................................................................... 62

Figure 9.b. Example of Pedestrian Crossing/Gateway Feature .................................................... 62

Figure 9.c. Pedestrian and Cycling Overpass, Central Valley Greenway, Burnaby ....................... 63

Figure 9.d. Raised Planted Buffer Zone ........................................................................................ 65

Figure 9.e. Example of an Urban Farmers Market ........................................................................ 67

LIST OF TABLES

Table 6.a. North Lougheed Land Use Study Meeting Log of External Stakeholders .................... 28

Table 8.a. Estimated Inbound and Outbound Trips ...................................................................... 56

Table 8.b. Vehicle Trips To and From the Site .............................................................................. 57


iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The City of Pitt Meadows has undertaken this land use study to better assess the

economic, agricultural, transportation and urban design opportunities presented by

development of a 50‐hectare study area north of Lougheed Highway, between Harris

Road and Meadow Gardens Way.

2. The key objective of the study was to identify a preferred land use mix which would take

into consideration the area’s location, community goals, OCP policies, proximity to the

ALR and development permit area guidelines.

3. The study considered several city wide and regional objectives, including:

Creation and retention of jobs and viable commercial activity within Pitt Meadows

as part of a complete community;

Protection of agricultural land;

The need to address commuter and agricultural traffic in the city/region specifically

along Old Dewdney Trunk Road.; and

Support for pedestrian and cycling connections.

4. These objectives were framed as five guiding principles, shown below, and were used to

evaluate draft land use concepts:

Long term financial sustainability;

Benefit to agriculture;

Employment generation;

Transportation; and

Robust urban design.

5. A comprehensive consultation process was undertaken as part of the study. The process

included Council committees, property owners, agencies and the general public.


v

6. Three general land use concepts were prepared and evaluated, based on consideration

of the above objectives. The concepts varied primarily by land use mix and internal road

layout.

7. Mixed employment land uses were proposed in each concept. Such uses may include

commercial/hotel, meeting space and/or business park uses. Retail‐commercial uses

would take advantage of highway exposure and may include destination and lifestyle

retail with retail anchor uses, as well as some highway commercial uses. Two concepts

identified the potential for flex areas where the amount of retail commercial or mixed

employment uses may expand to take advantage of market opportunities. Agriculture or

agri‐processing uses were considered on two concepts. Each concept identified

pedestrian and cycling improvements, gateway features and landscape buffers.

8. The three land use concepts were taken to an Open House on April 18, 2011.

Participants were asked to consider the draft evaluation criteria and identify a preferred

concept. Key comments at the Open House were:

“Long term financial sustainability” and “benefit to agriculture” were cited as “very

important” by participants who completed an on‐line comment form after the Open

House;

Concept A was preferred by more survey respondents, due to the retention of

agricultural land; Concept C was least preferred.

9. A more in‐depth financial evaluation was conducted in order to understand which

option would be able to generate a sufficient contribution to pay for the North

Lougheed Connector. Only Concept C, with its more extensive mixed employment and

retail‐commercial land uses, was shown to have the capacity to generate sufficient

revenue to offset the capital costs for the North Lougheed Connector.

10. A recommended land use concept, based on Concept C, was identified. The concept

was modified to include a larger gathering space at the eastern edge of the study area,

to benefit nearby residents and future employees/visitors to the area.

11. The recommended land use concept includes the use of the entire study area for mixed

employment and retail‐commercial uses, together with public gathering places in key

locations.

12. The concept is acknowledged to have a significant impact on agriculture in that no land

is proposed to be retained for either farming or agri‐processing. Several benefits to


vi

agriculture, however, are expected and may include reduction of traffic on Old Dewdney

Trunk Road, land consolidation and covenants on the north side of the North Lougheed

Connector, and financial contributions used to improve agriculture in other parts of the

City.

13. It is recommended that a comprehensive area plan be created either before or

concurrently with a development application. This is to protect against uncoordinated

development patterns that may affect the overall quality of the site.


1

1. INTRODUCTION

In late 2010, the City of Pitt Meadows initiated a land use study for a 50.5 hectare (125 acre)

area along the north side of Lougheed Highway, between Harris Road and Meadow Gardens

Way. The “North Lougheed Land Use Study” includes a market analysis, agricultural assessment

and high level urban design review.

AECOM Canada Ltd., in partnership with Colliers International Ltd. and Zbeetnoff Agro‐

Environmental Consulting, formed a multidisciplinary team with expertise in urban planning

and design, retail market analysis, and agrology to undertake the study.

This report outlines the objectives of the study and work methodology, input received from

consultation, findings of the area inventory and analysis, and recommendations for a preferred

land use concept for the study area.

1.1. AREA DESCRIPTION AND CONTEXT

Community Context

Located in the Lower Fraser Valley, Pitt Meadows is approximately35 kilometres east of

Vancouver in south western British Columbia. Offering residents a small town feel with

accessibility to big city comforts, Pitt Meadows is one of the fastest growing urban areas in

British Columbia. The City is blessed with significant natural assets that contribute to an

abundance of green space, recreational opportunities and a desirable quality of life. It is made

up primarily of a low‐lying agricultural area with access to several bodies of water (Fraser River,

Pitt River, Alouette River, and other sloughs and waterways), and the Thompson Mountain

Range on the north‐eastern edge of the City.

Agriculture characterizes a significant part of the City’s character as well as economic output.

With 86% of the City’s land base comprised of agricultural land within the Agricultural Land

Reserve, Pitt Meadows is the 6th largest agricultural area in the province in terms of economic

significance. In spite of this, census data show that only 4% (the smallest share) of Pitt

Meadow’s total labour force work in agriculture or other resource‐based industries1. The

1 Statistics Canada. 2007. Pitt Meadows, British Columbia (table). 2006 Community Profiles.2006 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92‐591‐XWE. Ottawa. Released March 13, 2007.http://www12.statcan.ca/census‐recensement/2006/dp‐pd/prof/92‐591/index.cfm?Lang=E (accessed November 5, 2010).


2

majority (85%) of the labour force works in other communities2, mostly in business and other

services3.

Pitt Meadows is surrounded by other rapidly developing municipalities, including Coquitlam,

Port Coquitlam, Surrey, Langley and Maple Ridge. Port Coquitlam, and to a lesser degree, Maple

Ridge, are Pitt Meadow’s biggest competitors for retail and related commercial businesses4. A

2003 study of commercial development opportunities in Pitt Meadows stated that there is

evidence of continued demand among retailers for sites within the City to serve it as well as

adjacent markets, especially those accommodating larger‐format retail stores.

The opening of the new Golden Ears Bridge, connecting Pitt Meadows to Surrey and Langley,

along with the redesign of the Pitt River Bridge, has positioned Pitt Meadows as the new

gateway between the Lower Mainland and the north side of the Fraser Valley. It has further

enhanced the area’s appeal to new residents and businesses by improving the region’s

transportation network and creating better access to and from Pitt Meadows. These recent

transportation improvements are expected to further stimulate economic opportunities and

increase demand for industrial, commercial and retail development within the City.

With these improvements, the City is presented with the opportunity to create places to shop

and work locally, decrease commuting outside of the community (and thus GHG emissions),

and move the City away from being a bedroom suburban community.

Study Area

The North Lougheed Land Use Study area consists of approximately 50.5 hectares of land south of Old Dewdney Trunk road in the City of Pitt Meadows. The study area is bounded by Harris Road – Pitt Meadow’s central commercial spine – to the west, Lougheed Highway to the south, and Meadow Gardens Way to the east. The eastern boundary abuts the Meadow Gardens Golf Course, agricultural land use, and residential development. The northern boundary of the site approximately parallels the northern boundary of the Meadow Gardens Golf Centre (see Figures 1.a and 1.c) and the proposed North Lougheed Connector.

2 December 2008 Pitt Meadows Community Profile

3 Statistics Canada. 2007. Pitt Meadows, British Columbia (table). 2006 Community Profiles.2006 Census. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 92‐591‐XWE. Ottawa. Released March 13, 2007.http://www12.statcan.ca/census‐recensement/2006/dp‐pd/prof/92‐591/index.cfm?Lang=E (accessed November 5, 2010).

4 Harris Consulting Inc et al.., 2003. North Lougheed Highway Commercial Area Study: District of Pitt Meadows.


3

This places it in an important strategic location relative to the upgraded 7‐lane Pitt River Bridge

roughly 3.2 km to the northwest, and the new 6‐lane Golden Ears bridge 3 km to the south east

as it enjoys strong connections to other locations within the Lower Mainland.

The study area is the last large tract of potential commercial land in the City. It is currently

designated as highway commercial and agricultural under the City’s 2008 Official Community

Plan and is a Special Study Area5 within Metro Vancouver’s Draft Regional Growth Strategy (see

section 6.10). The study area is largely vacant with the exception of small offices and the

Ramada hotel complex near Harris Road, and an automobile dealership off Meadow Gardens

Way.

The OCP supports commercial development in this area and identifies it as suitable for highway‐

oriented retail and service commercial uses, including automotive, accommodation, food

service and hospitality uses. Arising out of a 2003 study, the depth of the urban “Highway

Commercial” designation was widened to achieve an intensive, pedestrian‐oriented building

form.

The North Lougheed Connector (NLC), a proposed road alignment linking Lougheed Highway to

the Golden Ears Way, aims to relieve congestion on Old Dewdney Trunk Road, benefiting of

local agricultural traffic. The NLC is a key infrastructure project for the City and for the region.

The Connector physically frames the northern boundary of the Study Area (aligning with the

northern edge of the golf course) and is one of the key drivers behind this land use study.

Figure 1.c depicts the study area boundary as well as a road network proposed within the 2008

Official Community Plan.

5 ‘Special Study Areas’ identify locations where, prior to the adoption of the Regional Growth Strategy, a municipality has expressed an intention to alter the existing land use, and is anticipating a future regional land use designation amendment.


4

Figure 1.a. North Lougheed Study Area Boundary

Figure 1.b. Study Area Context

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

5

Figure 1.c. N

orth Lougheed Corridor Potential Road

Netw

ork

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

6

Figure 1.d. Site Pictures


7

1.2. STUDY OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY

The objectives of the land use study were to:

Identify an optimal land use mix for the North Lougheed Study Area that considers and

balances market demands, transportation demands, protection of agricultural land,

community/landowner aspirations, and other city and regional objectives.

Establish options for strengthening pedestrian connections and access for public transit;

Establish solutions for supporting agriculture within the study area as well as within the

City as a whole;

Create an iconic entry point and identity for the City by establishing meaningful design

guidelines; and

Ensure the plan is supported by stakeholders and is grounded in technical, market and

financial reality.

Study Methodology

The North Lougheed Land Use Study was conducted from December 2010 to May 2011 and

consisted of four phases:

Phase 1 – Technical Review and Area Inventory Analysis;

Phase 2 – Land Use Option Preparation;

Phase 3 – Consultation and Evaluation of Options; and

Phase 4 – Final Plan Preparation.

The first phase of the project focused on developing a genuine and comprehensive

understanding of the study area, its issues and opportunities, and the policy context. This

included:

A tour of the study area;

Review of plans, policies, and relevant background materials; and

An area inventory and analysis.

A summary of relevant plans and policies that guide development of the study area is found in

Section 2.


8

The inventory and analysis of the area involved two key components of the study, an

Agricultural Impact Assessment (Section 3) and a Land Use Market Review (Section 4), both of

which served as a base of information from which land use concepts were developed and

evaluated. The Agricultural Impact Assessment was prepared by Zbeetnoff Agro‐Environmental

Consulting and provided an inventory of the existing agricultural land in the study area. It also

provided an analysis of the potential impacts of various development scenarios on agriculture

in the community as well as examined the viability of agricultural activity in the study area.

The Land Use Market Review was prepared by Colliers International Ltd., and provided market‐

based rationale for supportable major land uses within the study area (Industrial/Business Park,

Retail‐Commercial and Residential).

As part of a robust and meaningful stakeholder engagement and consultation process, a

Communication and Consultation Strategy was developed during Phase 1 of the study. The

strategy identified the stakeholders to be contacted and indicated the method of consultation,

which varied from meetings, workshops, to a community‐wide public open house. Consultation

took place throughout the period of the study. The following groups were consulted:

Study area property owners;

Local developers;

City staff and Council;

City of Pitt Meadows Economic Development Corporation;

Pitt Meadows/Maple Ridge Chamber of Commerce;

City of Pitt Meadows Bicycle Advisory Committee;

City of Pitt Meadows Agricultural Advisory Committee;

Agricultural Land Commission;

TransLink;

Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure; and

Pitt Meadows residents.

A Public Open House was held on April 18, 2011 at the Pitt Meadows Community Recreation

Centre to present the three draft land use concepts and obtain feedback from the public.

Comment sheets were made available at the open house as well as online. The results of the

survey are presented in Appendix 1.

Section 5 provides a summary of the consultation process and all stakeholder input received.


9

Guiding Principles were developed to provide direction for land use concept development.

These principles were vetted with City staff, Council, and the public, and form a broad

framework against which the land use concepts were evaluated. These principles are outlined

in Section 6.

Three land use concepts were drafted based on the guiding principles, agricultural and market

analyses, and input received from stakeholders. Each concept is summarized in Section 7.

Following the initial development of the three land use concepts, a financial evaluation

of the proposed land uses was undertaken (Section 8.2) to provide added assessment of

their economic feasibility. A high level development proforma was undertaken by

Colliers International Ltd.

A recommended land use concept is identified which is based on all input gathered, as well as

more in‐depth analysis (e.g. financial evaluation). It is described in Sections 8 and 9 along with

transportation and urban design recommendations.

Section 10 summarizes the key recommendations arising out of this study.

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

10

34

12

34

12

34

12

34

12

34

12

34

PH

AS

E 1

: P

RO

JEC

T I

NIT

IAT

ION

& R

ES

EA

RC

H

Pa

rt A

: P

roje

ct I

nit

iati

on

& T

ech

nic

al

Re

vie

wM

eet

with

City

sta

ffTo

ur t

he s

tudy

are

aR

evie

w a

vaila

ble

info

rmat

ion

Pre

pare

a c

omm

unic

atio

n &

con

sulta

tion

stra

tegy

Che

ck-in

with

AA

C

Che

ck-in

with

Cou

ncil

Pa

rt B

: A

rea

In

ven

tory

& A

na

lysi

sC

ondu

ct s

ite a

naly

sis

Con

duct

mar

ket

anal

ysis

Con

duct

agr

icul

tura

l ana

lysi

s C

onta

ct e

xter

nal a

genc

ies/

stak

ehol

ders

Che

ck-in

with

Cou

ncil

(Feb

ruar

y 22

, 20

11)

PH

AS

E 2

: L

AN

D U

SE

OP

TIO

N P

RE

PA

RA

TIO

N &

EV

AL

UA

TIO

N

Cre

ate

crite

ria t

o gu

ide

& a

sses

s la

nd u

se o

ptio

nsD

raft

land

use

con

cept

sC

heck

-in w

ith A

LC

PH

AS

E 3

: C

on

sult

ati

on

& E

valu

ati

on

of

Op

tio

ns

Pre

sent

Lan

d U

se C

once

pts

to C

ounc

il (A

pril

5, 2

011)

Con

duct

a P

ublic

Ope

n H

ouse

(A

pril

18,

2011

)

PH

AS

E 4

: F

ina

l P

lan

Pre

pa

rati

on

Fin

aliz

e P

refe

rred

Opt

ion

P

repa

re P

olic

ies

and

Impl

emen

tatio

n M

easu

res

Pre

sent

to

Cou

ncil

Tas

kD

ec

2010

Jan

ua

ry 2

011

Fe

bru

ary

201

1M

arc

h 2

011

Ap

ril

2011

Ma

y 20

11

Figure 1.e. Schedule of Work for North Lougheed Lan

d Use Study


11

2. POLICY CONTEXT

The following subsections provide an overview of the policy context related to the North

Lougheed Land Use Study.

2.1. PITT MEADOWS OCP 2008

The City of Pitt Meadows Official Community Plan (2008) identifies two land use designations

for the study area; Highway Commercial and Agricultural (Figure 2.a).

Highway Commercial: The area adjacent to Lougheed Highway stretching from Harris Road to

Meadow Gardens. This designation permits highway‐oriented retail and service commercial

uses, including automotive, accommodation, food service and hospitality uses. This area is

depicted in dark pink in Figure 2.a below;

Agricultural: The area north of the commercially designated area and generally corresponding

to lands located within the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR). This area is shown in white in Figure

2.a below;

The study area also lies within the Official Community Plan Development Permit (DP) Area No.

10: North Lougheed Commercial. This permit area was established to provide guidelines for the

form and character of development in this area.

The OCP also shows a proposed road network (Figure 1.c) for the study area consisting of the

North Lougheed Connector (NLC), the Harris Interchange, and an internal site road system

connecting to the NLC and Meadow Gardens Way.

While no decision has been made at this point, the City may in the future, depending on the

final location of the proposed North Lougheed Connector, choose to amend Schedules 1 (ALR),

2 (Green Zone), and 3A (Urban Land Use) to make the land between this corridor and the

Lougheed Highway available for non‐residential urban uses, subject to the amendment of the

LRSP if necessary.

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

12

Figure 2.a. Existing OCP Designation


13

2.2. PITT MEADOWS AGRICULTURAL PLAN

The Pitt Meadows Agricultural Plan6, completed in 2000, recognizes the prominence of the

agricultural industry in Pitt Meadows and supports the long‐term viability of agriculture in the

District and the further development of a well‐integrated agriculture industry. In the plan, key

issues identified as critical to the future survival of agriculture, and relevant to the study area,

include:

Need for a focused agricultural transportation plan, that includes short‐term

transportation options to relieve immediate traffic problems;

Water management strategy for agricultural drainage and irrigation;

Need for an agricultural industrial park, to complement on‐farm value‐added activities

in the Agricultural and Farm Enterprise (AFE) zone; and

Need to follow ALC buffering guidelines to ensure proper buffering in future

development areas abutting the ALR.

The vision for agriculture, articulated in the plan, is:

“The District of Pitt Meadows supports a viable and progressive agriculture industry and will

strive to optimize the use of all designated agricultural lands within the Agricultural Land

Reserve. The District will be proactive in fostering a strong and progressive agriculture industry

by supporting farmers in cooperation with the Farm Practices Protection Act (Right To Farm)

Legislation, by seeking provincial regulatory reform to ensure fair and equitable taxation, and by

establishing policies that encourage farmers to maintain a healthy, prosperous, and sustainable

agriculture industry."

2.3. PITT MEADOWS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLAN 2008

The Pitt Meadows Economic Development Strategic Plan (2008) has as one of its objectives to

“…attract new destination retail to the Lougheed Corridor in Pitt Meadows.” This plan provided

6 Jack Reams Agri‐Business Consulting. 2000. The Future of Agriculture: The District of Pitt Meadows. http://www.pittmeadows.bc.ca/EN/main/business/1156/1182.html


14

one of the rationales for undertaking the Pitt Meadows North Lougheed Highway Commercial

Area Study. It further identifies key economic goals and actions. Elements of the plan that

pertain to the North Lougheed Land Use Study area include:

Capitalize on new transportation infrastructure being developed;

Maintain a supply of employment lands within the community in order to create new

opportunities for new and expanding industry;

Create strategies and rationale for non‐residential development in key highway

corridors in partnership with Metro Vancouver to maximize the benefits of these key

locations;

Support the growth of the agriculture industry;

Work with the agriculture industry ,the ALC (Agricultural Land Commission) and the City

of Pitt Meadows planning department to identify lands within the community to

stimulate attraction, retention and expansion of agriculture processing;

Increase the awareness of Pitt Meadows;

Install signage at the gateway entrance to the City; and

Recognize opportunity for agri‐industrial uses.

2.4. NORTH LOUGHEED CONNECTOR AND HARRIS INTERCHANGE

The North Lougheed Connector (NLC) is proposed to provide a link from Lougheed Highway to

the Golden Ears Way and presents several advantages. It is expected to relieve congestion on

Old Dewdney Trunk Road to the benefit of local agricultural traffic. It is also expected to reduce

traffic volumes on Lougheed Highway. Notwithstanding the outcomes of the study area, the

NLC could also serve as a boundary between agricultural uses north of the connector and non‐

agricultural uses on the south side.

The NLC has been supported by the Agricultural Land Commission, local farming organizations,

and the previous OCP Steering Committee, provided that ALR impacts are minimized and traffic

on Old Dewdney Trunk Road is reduced. The ALC attached a number of conditions to their

support of the NLC. These include requirements that restrictive covenants be placed on land


15

parcels north and south of the new road, that topsoil be transferred to neighbouring farms

under agrologist supervision and that the August 2013 completion date be met.

Primary funding for the NLC is expected to be derived from the land lift generated by

development of the North Lougheed Study Area and associated Development Cost Charges. As

such, proposed land uses for the site need to consider the ability to financially support

construction of the NLC.

The Harris interchange is designed to improve circulation at Lougheed Highway and Harris Road

and provide good east‐west continuity between the North Lougheed Connector and Lougheed

Highway. Currently, the intersection operates at a Level of Service (LOS) E or F, which translates

into a congested or failing condition. In general, according to accepted Ministry of

Transportation guidelines, capacity or intersection improvements are required if any

intersection is approaching LOS E or F.

The construction of the Harris Interchange will be affected by the establishment and feasibility

of the North Lougheed Connector. As such, the NLC is an important consideration for the City of

Pitt Meadows and the North Lougheed Land Use Study.

For a conceptual diagram of the NLC and Harris Interchange, refer to Figure 1.c.

2.5. NORTH LOUGHEED HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL AREA STUDY

The North Lougheed Highway Commercial Area Study was conducted in 2003 to review and

assess commercial development opportunities along the north side of Lougheed Highway,

between Harris Road and Meadow Gardens Way. The objectives of the study were to:

establish a strategy to assist the community in optimizing the potential for growth while

recognizing community quality of life issues; and

Establish fundamental development and design principles for any commercial

development that may occur along the portion of Lougheed Highway.

The study resulted in amendments to the area’s OCP designations and Development Permit

Area guidelines. Despite these changes, the area had not developed in accordance with the

revised provisions of the OCP. The City decided in 2010 that further study was required in

order to consider the interest of farming in and around the area, the challenge of ensuring an

adequate supply of commercial lands, the highest and best use of land in the area and

opportunities to strengthen pedestrian and transit opportunities in the study area.


16

2.6. AGRICULTURAL LAND COMMISSION

The Agricultural Land Commission has rendered several decisions related to the study area

since 1985. The ALC Commissioners weigh their decisions against the purposes of the

Commission. These purposes are:7

Purpose #1: To preserve agricultural land;

Purpose #2: To encourage farming on agricultural land in collaboration with other communities of interest; and

Purpose #3: To encourage local governments, First Nations, the government and its agents to enable and accommodate farm use of agricultural land and uses compatible with agriculture in their plans, bylaws and policies.

The key ALC decisions are summarized below:

June1985 – ALC approved exclusion of 7.26 ha of ALR land in study area for commercial

designation, subject to conditions, including:

commitment by City to rezone for commercial use only;

consolidation of some lots still in the ALR;

fencing & drainage be constructed; and

The NLC will take 7.4 ha of farmland and 0.3 ha at the junction of

2 watercourses.

1990 – 2002 – various exclusion applications received but not approved, except for one

parcel of 1.6 ha at the east end;

March 2004 – ALC approves exclusion for widened commercial designation in study

area, increasing total exclusion to 8.9 ha;

Early 2006 – City begins to consider options for North Lougheed Connector (NLC);

August 2010 – ALC approves exclusion for NLC alignment:

7 Agricultural Land Commission. ALR & Community Planning Guidelines. http://www.alc.gov.bc.ca/publications/Community_Planning_Guidelinescolour.pdf


17

The ALC has consistently approved in principle the exclusion of the proposed commercial

development area. Additional detail related to ALC decisions in the study area is provided in

Appendix 2.

In order to ensure that the ALC was fully apprised of the objectives and preliminary findings of

this current study, meetings were held with ALC staff in March and April 2011.

2.7. METRO VANCOUVER DRAFT REGIONAL GROWTH STRATEGY 2011

The area south of the proposed North Lougheed Connector is identified as a Special Study Area

in the draft Regional Growth Strategy.

Special Study Areas are locations where, prior to the adoption of the Regional Growth Strategy,

a municipality has expressed an intention to alter the existing land use, and is anticipating a

future regional land use designation amendment.

The City of Pitt Meadows expressed this interest to Metro Vancouver in March 2010, in

anticipation of the important role the study area lands play within the city and in recognition of

the impact future road infrastructure will have on the area. Amending a regional land use

within a Special Study Area is a minor amendment under section 6.3.4 of the RGS, which will

require a 50%‐plus‐1 weighted vote of the Metro Vancouver Board. It does not require a public

hearing.

The draft Regional Growth Strategy identifies two land use designations and other overlays that

pertain to the North Lougheed Land Study Area:

1. General Urban (corresponds generally to the lands designated as highway commercial in

the OCP):

Intended for residential neighbourhoods and centres and are supported by shopping,

services, institutions, recreational facilities and parks;

Within general urban areas, higher density trip‐generating development to be directed

to Urban Centres – the primary focal points for concentrated growth and transit – Pitt

Meadows urban centre is located south of Lougheed Highway on Harris Road;

Emphasizes place‐making, an enriched public realm and promote transit‐oriented

communities, where cycling and walking are preferred modes of transportation.


18

2. Agricultural (generally corresponding to lands with the OCP’s agricultural designation.

Intended primarily for agricultural uses, facilities and supporting services with an

emphasis on food production where appropriate;

Strategy 2.3: “Protect the region’s supply of agricultural land and promote agricultural

viability with an emphasis on food production.

o 2.3.4. Work with the Agricultural Land Commission to protect the region’s

agricultural land base and not amend the Agricultural land use designation of a

site if it is still part of the ALR, except to change it to an Agricultural land use

designation.

3. Frequent Transit Development Area ‐ Lougheed Highway

Additional priority locations to accommodate concentrated growth in higher density

forms of development;

Based on TransLink’s Frequent Transit Network (e.g. proposed rapid transit (bus/rail)

along Lougheed Highway);

Designed to be transit, pedestrian and cycle friendly

Section 2.3.4 of the Draft RGS emphasizes the importance and support for the ALR.

Metro Vancouver has indicated that the Region would not want to act (in relation to amended

land uses in the study area) if the land is in the ALR. The Metro Vancouver Board will want to

know what land is being changed to. In their view, most commercial uses should be in urban

centre. The City will thus need to make a case regarding potential land use change of a

commercial nature within the study area.

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

19

Source: M

etro Van

couver

Figure 2.b. M

ap Showing Metro Van

couver Special Study Areas


20

3. AGRICULTURAL INVENTORY

3.1. CURRENT LAND USE IN THE STUDY AREA

In the ALR ‐ Agricultural Land Use

Five of the properties in the study area have fields of agricultural use. Crops grown include corn

for silage, forage, and blueberries. A dairy farm, with older buildings, is no longer in dairy

production. The corn and forage production is produced under lease by a farmer located

adjacent to the study area.

In the ALR ‐ Idle and Non‐Farm Land Use Outside the Proposed Commercial Development

Area

Four of the properties in the study area and outside the designated commercial development

area have portions that are idle from an agricultural perspective. In one case, the area suffers

from extremely poor drainage and consists of a wetland. In another case, the property on

which the blueberry acreage is situated contains a pond and various other human‐altered

landscape features and is used for storage in a non‐farm business. A third property is a service

area to the Meadow Gardens Golf Course. The fourth property has a small remnant strip that is

outside the proposed commercial development area and kept in an agriculturally non‐

productive state.

In the ALR ‐ Land Use in the Proposed Commercial Development Area

Nine parcels in the ALR are partially or wholly within the designated commercial development

area. Several of these parcels have received fill materials in anticipation of development.

Outside the ALR – Land Use in the Proposed Commercial Development Area

Seven properties, outside of the ALR, are in commercial uses in the southwest corner of the

Study Area, north of Lougheed Highway and east of Harris Road.

There are 9 parcels, wholly or partially in the study area with ALR designation.

Remnants of three ALR parcels in the study area are located immediately north of the proposed

North Lougheed Connector (NLC). In addition, the road allowance for Bonson Road extends

north of the proposed NLC.


21

3.2. AGRICULTURAL CAPABILITY OF PARCELS IN THE ALR

3.2.1 SOILS

The agricultural capability of ALR lands in the study area are reported in unimproved state as

Class 4 in the Canada Land Inventory Classification. The primary subclass constraints consist of

excess water (W) due to poor drainage and undesirable soil structure/low perviousness (D).

With improvements, these soils increase in capability to Class 2 and represent highly productive

land in Pitt Meadows and BC.8

3.2.2 DRAINAGE AND IRRIGATION

Drainage has been allowed to deteriorate in the study area. Some areas that have received fill

are above the grade of adjacent agricultural properties causing water to pool on farmland.

Drainage ditches have not been regularly maintained and regional drainage does not effectively

remove stormwater. On‐farm drainage improvements, such as sub‐drainage, have not been

installed.

Even with improvements, the study area experiences excess water due to other factors, such as

poor draining soils, high water tables, seepage, and/or runoff from surrounding areas. As such,

irrigation is not presently utilized and the area does not have a source of surface water for

irrigation. The quality and quantity of groundwater supply in the area is not known.

Greenhouses in the general area are on municipal water.

3.2.3 ACCESS

Farmland on the north side of Lougheed Highway has experienced worsening access from

Lougheed Highway as the highway had been widened and traffic has increased. Leased parcels

in the study area are currently farmed by operators located south of Old Dewdney Trunk Road

and immediately adjacent north of the parcels. Access to the farmland in the study area is

possible off Harris Road but increasingly difficult due to the traffic congestion on Harris Road.

8 Class 2 lands have minor limitations that require good ongoing management practices or slightly restrict the range of crops, or both. Land in Class 2 has limitation which constitute a continuous minor management problem or may cause lower crop yields compared to Class 1 land but which do not pose a threat of crop loss under good management. The soils in Class 2 are deep, hold moisture well and can be managed and cropped with little difficulty (Source: Canada Land Inventory, Land capability for Agriculture, Explanatory notes).


22

4. MARKET ASSESSMENT

Colliers International Consulting conducted a land use market review to examine potential

market support for potential development within the North Lougheed Study Area. This market‐

driven review which was completed in early March, 2011, was intended as one key input into

the larger North Lougheed Land Use Study process.

Study findings are summarized as follows (the full report is available in Appendix 3):

Strategic Position: The North Lougheed Study Area occupies a strategic commercial

location which is central not only to the larger Lower Mainland region, but also relative

to the two major transportation infrastructure upgrades which have generated a

significant increase in market and development interest: the 7‐lane Pitt River Bridge and

the tolled 6‐lane Golden Ears Bridge. Advantages from a potential retail‐commercial

development perspective include easy regional accessibility and high exposure to

growing traffic volumes (in excess of 88,000 vehicles per day) along Lougheed Highway.

Advantages from a potential retail‐industrial/mixed‐employment perspective include

ease of regional access, relative proximity to the US‐Canada border and significant

Lougheed Highway exposure. The location also ties in directly to the larger Gateway

Project (North and South Fraser Perimeter Roads, Port Mann‐Highway 1), whose

highway upgrades are intended to facilitate goods movement for the economic region;

Commercial Gateway Potential: The North Lougheed Study Area, from both market

and commercial planning perspectives, also offers the potential to create more of a

gateway feature for the City of Pitt Meadows, focused mainly on the important

Lougheed Highway‐Harris Road intersection;

Importance of North Lougheed Connector: The proposed North Lougheed Connector

(NLC) offers an opportunity to divert traffic from the relatively congested Old Dewdney

Trunk Road, with the intention of supporting the long‐term sustainability of local

agricultural production but also the creation of a defined study area with a hard

northern urban development boundary. The additional accessibility and visibility that

the proposed NLC will provide is expected to elevate interest from both prospective

business operators and developers, as it offers both market support and site planning

advantages;

Industrial/Business Park Market Review: Colliers’ market review resulted in the

following findings:


23

The Metro Vancouver‐wide vacancy for industrial property stood at 4.7% for 4th

Quarter 2010, while the combined Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows rate stood at

1.4%. Port Coquitlam’s rate was 2.9%. A healthy market range tends to be 4% to

5%, as this tends to provide an adequate balance between range and quality of

supply and demand from a range of user types;

Market supply has been constrained since 2006 and has since increased only by

the 80,000 square feet first building at Golden Ears Business Park;

Golden Ears Business Park Supply – This important project is ultimately planned

to accommodate a range of small bay to large build‐to‐suit users and total

building area of roughly 1.5 million sf. Given historical and recent activity

(absorption) patterns in Maple‐Ridge/Pitt Meadows and in surrounding

municipalities (such as Port Coquitlam), Colliers expects build out in roughly 10‐

12 years;

Latent demand for product as a result of overly constrained local supply

conditions. While Port Coquitlam saw an increase in inventory of 1.99 million sf

(194,000 sf/year) over the 2001‐10 period, the entire Maple Ridge/Pitt Meadows

market only recorded growth of 520,000 sf (45,000 sf/year).

Latent demand for high exposure business park/retail‐industrial property. There

is a lack of high exposure property, which a project like Golden Ears Business

Park cannot provide, particularly to uses requiring both showroom and

warehousing/distribution space. Lougheed Highway and the North Lougheed

Study area offer an important opportunity to meet both latent and future

demand for such property. Particularly relevant comparables include Retail‐

Industrial uses such as those found along United Boulevard in Coquitlam and in

Port Coquitlam, catering to custom manufacturers and showrooms;

Strata‐titled Industrial Sales. There has been clear growth in market interest for

strata‐titled light industrial product across the Metro Vancouver market which,

when combined with constrained supply conditions, has created difficult

conditions for prospective users actively looking to establish business

operations;

Agri‐Business Park Potential. Kerr Avenue Business Park in Chilliwack is an

example of this type of development, which offers specialized zoning on ALR

land focused on growth and attraction of food‐related production businesses.

While two major tenants currently occupy this park (Vantage Foods and Sandel


24

Foods), there has been no activity in 24 months and build‐out is likely to take

roughly five years. The market challenge with agri‐business is that the focus is on

a small slice of the overall market and buyers in that market pool are typically

not interested in high exposure property and the higher land costs that

accompany such parcels;

Retail Market Review: As retail‐commercial uses are being actively proposed for

parcels within the North Lougheed Study Area, Colliers investigated market conditions

for retail, with highlights of this analysis provided below:

Existing Competitive Supply: Meadowtown Centre, opened in 2004, a 420,000 sf

open format shopping centre, is the closest regional‐serving retail project,

anchored by Real Canadian Superstore and a Cineplex movie theatre complex.

While a successful project, most stakeholders engaged throughout the North

Lougheed Land Use study process indicated a desire for a denser, more

pedestrian‐friendly environment for potential future retail‐commercial uses

within the study area. Meadowvale Shopping Centre is a smaller, community‐

oriented shopping centre of just under 108,000 square feet that underwent a

major renovation in 2008. In terms of look and feel, stakeholders tend to be

more complimentary on this project’s aesthetics;

Future Competition: The major proposed competitor having the greatest

relevance for the North Lougheed Study Area is Fremont Village, a 500,000

square foot Wal‐Mart Supercentre‐anchored hybrid project that includes major

anchor uses as well as a significant pedestrian‐friendly retail district. While a

Wal‐Mart Supercentre will not likely locate an additional store within the study

area due to market overlap issues, there are a growing number of anchor‐worthy

tenants already operating in Canada or who are exploring Canadian markets for

entry;

Market Support: Based on trade area market analysis, and accounting for

competitive influences both existing and planned, there is nevertheless support

for a centre of roughly 300,000 square feet over the short term, with expansion

potential to allow for accommodation of additional anchors and supporting retail

in future. This would require land area of roughly 25 acres over the short term,

with future expansion area of an additional 10 to 25 acres, depending on market

and retail anchor interest;


25

Residential Market Review: While residential uses are not being actively considered for

potential inclusion in the North Lougheed Study Area, it is nonetheless expected that

there will be market support and developer interest in the possibility of residential

development along the study area’s eastern flank – in proximity to Meadow Gardens

Way;

Stakeholder Interviews: Colliers met with representatives from the Pitt Meadows

Economic Development Corporation and the Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Chamber of

Commerce to discuss the potential role of North Lougheed Study Area in Pitt Meadows’

stated economic and business development objectives. Brief summary highlights of

comments are included in Section 6 Stakeholder Consultation.


26

5. GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND EVALUATION CRITERIA

A set of guiding principles were used to develop three proposed land use concept plans. The

guiding principles reflect community values and objectives for the North Lougheed Study Area.

These principles, which were reviewed City Council, stakeholders and the public, are listed

below, together with more detailed considerations or objectives related to each:

Long Term Financial Sustainability

Diversify tax base

Ability to pay for needed road infrastructure

Benefit to Agriculture

Land retention

Encourage farming

Enable supporting land uses

Impact compensation

Overall impact

Employment Generation

Employment intensification

Quality jobs

Community‐based employment

Transportation

Access, integration

Supports a safe walking and cycling environment

Supports transit

Robust Urban Design

Gateway plus other features such as gathering spaces and pedestrian improvements.


27

6. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

6.1. SUMMARY OF PROCESS AND KEY FINDINGS

Stakeholder consultations related to the North Lougheed Land Use Study took place from

January through to April 2011. The consultation program included a variety of elements to

ensure a comprehensive, transparent and iterative process:

Meetings with stakeholders and external agencies to identify key issues;

Council presentations and workshops;

A public open house;

A paper and online survey to solicit public feedback; and

Several “check‐in” meetings with City staff and Council and key agencies, such the

Agricultural Land Commission, throughout the entire process.

The comments received during the consultation are summarized in this section. Table 6.a

below lists the stakeholders and the method with which they were consulted.


28

Table 6.a. North Lougheed Land Use Study Meeting Log of External Stakeholders

Stakeholder/ Participant Meeting Details

Maple Ridge Pitt Meadows Chamber of Commerce January 17, 2011 In person

Economic Development Corporation (EDC) January 17, 2011 In person

Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC) January 13, 2011 In person

Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MoTI) March 8, 2011 Telephone April 6, 2011 In person

TransLink

March 17, 2011 In person

Agricultural Land Commission (ALC Staff) March 04, 2011 In person April 4, 2011 In person June 13, 2011 In person

Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) February 21, 2011 In person

Metro Vancouver

January 20, 2011 Telephone

City Council (presentation to introduce scope of project)

Jan 25, 2011 In person meeting

Land Owners February 16, 2011 In person

City Council (workshop on evaluation criteria, preliminary market and agricultural review findings, considerations for options) Review of preliminary land use concepts.

February 22, 2011 April 5, 2011

Public Open House April 18, 2011 Open house at Pitt Meadows Community Recreation Centre

City Council (preliminary findings and recommendations)

May 24, 2011


29

Summary of Comments from Consultation with External Agencies

1. Agricultural Advisory Committee

North Lougheed Connector (NLC) is expected to benefit farming in that it will remove traffic from Old Dewdney Trunk Road (ODTR);

The NLC may make an appropriate boundary for agriculture (to the north);

Lands to the south will be difficult to access for farming purposes; an underpass (under the NLC) may be needed if lands in the study continue for farming;

Any development in the study area would need to provide a net benefit to farming ;

This might take the form of a monetary contribution to an agricultural trust fund (e.g. Abbotsford model);

Net benefit must be clear; removing traffic from ODTR is not sufficient on its own;

AAC will want to see a comprehensive development plan for the study area.

2. Agricultural Land Commission (ALC)

The ALC wishes to see a comprehensive plan for the study area;

Provision for covenants placed on remnant parcels associated with the approval of the North Lougheed Connector (NLC) are intended to convey the position that the ALC does not see conversion of ALR land south of the NLC as inevitable;

ALC wishes to see the following principles employed:

o Locate agri‐industrial where soil and/or site condition is lower;

o Maneuver access to benefit agriculture;

o Consider transitional land use issues to protect the ALR boundary;

o Emphasize agri‐centric land use that contributes to agricultural development;

o Work on the principle of deriving benefits from development not extracting them.

The ALC is not supportive of the “net benefit to agriculture” criterion for evaluating the acceptability of agricultural impacts because of the potential to manipulate ALR land conversion.

3. Pitt Meadows Economic Development Corporation:

While a vital addition to Pitt Meadows’ industrial supply, Golden Ears Business Park cannot meet the needs of all interested parties, particularly those seeking higher exposure locations (preferably Lougheed Highway) and those seeking strata‐titled ownership rather than a lease arrangement;


30

There is unmet demand for high exposure business locations which Golden Ears Business Park cannot provide. In particular, national and regional businesses requiring both showroom and warehousing operations have few local options and must look elsewhere in the Lower Mainland for locations;

In terms of unmet retail potential, Pitt Meadows is seen to be under‐represented in higher quality restaurants. As residents and workers are seeking out lunch and dining opportunities outside of Pitt Meadows, there is likely opportunity to stem this outflow with quality new establishments in a future North Lougheed development;

Given that Walmart is developing its Supercentre concept in ONNI’s planned Fremont Village on the Port Coquitlam side of the Pitt River bridge, and given the proximity of both Meadowvale and Meadowtown shopping centres, any planned retail‐commercial uses within the North Lougheed study area will need to be carefully and creatively considered in order to generate interest;

Potential hotel/conference‐meeting facilities are being explored for Pitt Meadows, with potential locations being along the waterfront near the airport or along Lougheed Highway near Harris Road;

Pitt Meadows’ strategic position central to the Lower Mainland offers an opportunity for the City to accommodate a mix of much‐needed land uses, both to round out the appeal of Pitt Meadows as a resident and employment location option, and also in terms of achieving better fiscal balance.

4. Maple Ridge‐Pitt Meadows Chamber of Commerce

The business community would like to see a higher standard of retail‐commercial development quality in Pitt Meadows – one that signals the City’s “coming of age” as a more complete community. From their perspective, this means, for example, retail development that does more than the existing Meadowtown Centre to create an attractive and pedestrian‐friendly environment and makes better (more intensive) use of the land area;

The need for retail anchor uses is recognized, but there is a strong desire to move away from the big‐box style “power centre” development of the 1990s, which was focused mainly on facilitation of auto accessibility;

High quality restaurants are viewed by both residents and business owners as being in short supply in Pitt Meadows, resulting in outflow of related spending to other surrounding municipalities;

From business owners’ perspective, the top two priorities for Pitt Meadows are: 1) increase in quality employment opportunities; and 2) better quality and range of local shopping options;

Exploration of a potential hotel/conference/meeting facility is strongly supported by the business community, with a preferred location along the Lougheed Highway corridor, due to improved visibility, accessibility, and profile relative to other potential locations (e.g. South waterfront, near airport);


31

Labour and spending outflow: Pitt Meadows does tend to serve as a classic bedroom community, with the vast majority of local residents commuting to work in other municipalities in the Lower Mainland. That being said, it is felt that Pitt Meadows can and should become more of a complete community by leveraging its strategic location in the region to provide an improved balance of both jobs and shopping opportunities to reduce both worker and spending outflow.

5. Local Developers

Note: David Bell of Colliers had informal conversations with representatives from local developers, including Magusta, Mosaic Homes, Smart Centres, and GEB in order to gain a broader understanding of local trends/perspectives. However, as they were not included as part of the original Communication and Consultation Strategy for the North Lougheed Study, their conversations were not officially recorded and have not been summarized here;

The outcome of these conversations are reflected and referenced as sources in the Market Review report by Colliers, highlighting relevant market trends and implications for the North Lougheed study area.

6. Metro Vancouver

“Special Study Area” is not a land use designation but an area descriptor (over the agricultural area only);

Special Study Area extends to the west side of Harris Road;

Section 2.3.4 of Draft RGS indicates support for ALR; Region does not want to act if land is still in the ALR;

Metro Vancouver Board will want to know what land is being changed to; commercial uses should be in Centres; City will need to make a case;

Timing of discussion with ALC on the North Lougheed Land Use Study is up to City; if and when the matter comes forward, Region will ask if ALC (Tony Pellett) was involved;

Regional interest is to support the ALR; out‐of‐centre commercial uses are not supported;

Area may be within a “Frequent Transit Development Area”; as such, area should be designed to be pedestrian friendly.


32

7. Land Owners

A meeting was held at Pitt Meadows City Hall where property owners within the Study Area were invited to attend a discussion facilitated by AECOM. The objective of the meeting was to present the objectives. The meeting was attended by 12 people;

Ensure that long‐term interests of land owners are represented, with consideration for opportunities for land owners to benefit;

Consider the effects of increased regional connectivity on the site and City (e.g. from opening of Golden Ears Bridge, Abernethy Connector, and new Pitt River Bridge);

Importance of job creation for the City, especially quality jobs for the young;

Importance of North Lougheed Connector; it has to happen;

o Several long‐term and strategic benefits for agriculture (traffic relief from Old

Dewdney Trunk) and retail;

The role of development in financing of infrastructure (North Lougheed Connector

and Harris Interchange);

Ensuring a true net benefit to agriculture;

Plan will have to look at the whole agricultural piece, not just individual parcels;

Justify why and what kind of agri‐business uses should locate here (e.g. large

processing site, agricultural servicing, research, farm gate retail);

Importance of diversifying Pitt Meadow’s tax base;

Both Metro Vancouver and ALC will have to agree to the plan; Metro Van currently

doesn’t prioritize commercial development. An exclusion application will need to be

approved by Metro Vancouver as well;

What will the impact of different types of development be on rent factors;

Summary of landowners’ visions for their property/site:

o Shopping centre;

o High quality design;

o Not another Meadowtown;

o Mix of uses that create jobs while creating net benefit to agriculture;


33

o Light industrial;

o Conference centre with an agricultural trade exhibition space.

8. Bicycle Advisory Committee

Preference for an off‐road bike connection on north side of Lougheed, similar to south side;

Need for a connection to Harris Road; could be an overpass in the vicinity of Harris Road or in the middle part of the study area;

Do not want to see a Meadowtown type development – not pedestrian or bike friendly.

9. Ministry of Transportation

As part of the Lougheed Highway widening, a two metre wide shoulder in the right‐of‐way will be provided to accommodate cyclists and pedestrians;

Funding sources for a pedestrian overpass are uncertain. Development community would likely have to play a role in achieving this;

o Important constraint to consider for the study area is the existence of a BC Hydro

transmission line on the south side of Lougheed Highway. This will have an

implication if, for instance, a pedestrian overpass were being considered.

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

34

Figure 6.a. Summary of Stakeholder Input Presented at the Public Open House


35

10. TransLink

Translink and SNC Lavalin are currently doing a study of the Major Road Network (MRN) in Pitt Meadows for completion in September 2011;

Gateway is also doing a study of the Harris Intersection with Tetratech;

AECOM should consider these other studies in developing options;

There is currently no transit service on the portion of the Lougheed Highway fronting the proposed development site. The 701 and 791 buses bypass this section of the highway in order to serve Pitt Meadow’s city centre;

There are no current plans to implement service on this section of Lougheed Highway;

Transport 2040, TransLink’s long‐term transportation plan, does show a “Proposed Rapid Transit (Bus/Rail)” service along this corridor, connecting to Coquitlam. However, this map in Transport 2040 is not intended to represent specific routes and service levels. It is simply a conceptual map;

TransLink’s preference and mandate is to expand existing services rather than create new services. Land use options selected should be cognizant of this; e.g. don’t try to create new demand along future North Lougheed Connector;

The Province is building a new priority lane on Lougheed Highway in Pitt Meadows. Only a westbound lane (no eastbound lane) is being built. Westbound bus stops are being designed and constructed, but TransLink currently has no resources to implement service to take advantage of these lanes and stops. They are being built in anticipation of future service;

TransLink’s policies and preferences align with that of Metro Vancouver’s Regional Growth Strategy (RGS); land use developments should coincide with the RGS.

11. City of Pitt Meadows Council Workshop #1

Must consider the site in the context of its surrounding uses and its contribution in

creating a sense of place or gateway into the community;

The entire length of the North Lougheed Connector has to be considered.

No auto sales type uses within the study area;

Walkability, accessibility and a retaining a ‘small town feel’ are essential to maintain a

Pitt Meadow’s character;

Priorities include: employment generation; fiscal sustainability; provision of quality

and a range of shopping options;


36

Interest in understanding AAC’s ideas (area will be under a lot of stress; could lead to

conflict between uses and be used to support agriculture elsewhere);

Ideas for possible agricultural uses: museum farms; teaching farms (educational

facilities); agri‐industrial businesses;

Interest in uses that are economically viable and can support cost of future roads;

Do not consider remnant parcels north of the North Lougheed Connector within the

scope of the study; area is preserved for agriculture.

Public Open House

A public Open House was held April 18th,

2011, at the Pitt Meadows Recreation Centre

to present information and invite public

feedback on three proposed concept plans

for the study area. This was attended by

approximately 60 members of the public.

A public comments survey was available

(both hard copy and on‐line). Forty‐six

completed surveys were received, in addition

to two letters.

Through the online and paper surveys, the

public identified long term financial

sustainability, benefit to agriculture as the

most important criteria in evaluating the land

use concepts.

Below are some sample comments from the

survey which capture the diverse and often

competing interests related to the study

area:

Leave valuable farmland alone;

Forget agriculture in this area;

Figure 6.b. Public Open House


37

Generate sufficient funds to pay for the road so taxpayers are not dinged again;

Keep shopping dollars at home;

Maintain small town, agri‐based feel to whatever concept flies;

Create a unique area; no big box stores; and

Farming, trees, bird habitat, park for picnic and perhaps a nice café to sit and enjoy the

surroundings.

The results of the paper and online comment form/survey are summarized in Appendix 1.


38

7. PRELIMINARY LAND USE CONCEPTS

7.1. LAND USE CATEGORIES

This section describes the land use designations proposed in each of the concepts: mixed

employment, retail‐commercial, and agricultural or agri‐business.

Mixed Employment

Land classified as ‘Mixed Employment’ could include a range of employment facilities such as

commercial and light industrial development, business hotels, meeting space facilities, business

parks and mixed use retail/industrial development.

Figure 7.a. Examples of Mixed Employment Uses


39

Retail‐Commercial

Land classified as Retail‐Commercial may include Destination Retail (e.g. anchor stores and

restaurants), Lifestyle Retail (typically open‐air,”main street”‐like development), Highway

Commercial (car‐oriented retail) or Hybrid projects which involve some combination of retail

styles.

Figure 7.b. Examples of

Retail‐Commercial Uses

: (top row) destination retail;

(middle row) lifestyle retail; and

(left) highway commercial


40

Agriculture or Agri‐business

Possible agricultural and agricultural supporting activities/uses include the growing of crops,

community assisted agriculture, artisan products (e.g. cheese, jams, baked goods), agricultural

learning or teaching facility, museum farm, agri‐processing, and agri‐servicing. This also

includes the distribution of agricultural products.

Figure 7.c. Examples of Agricultural and Agri‐business Uses


41

7.2. DRAFT CONCEPTS

Three draft concept plans were developed for the study area. These were drafted with

consideration of the established guiding principles, stakeholder input, market and agricultural

analyses, as well as existing policies. The land use concepts depict a range of amount of

development, i.e. from near status quo (most of the agricultural land remaining) to complete

exclusion of agricultural land.

Figure 7.d. Kerr Avenue Business Park, Chilliwack, BC


42

The concepts are shown in Figures 7.e. to 7.g. and include additional notes.

All three concepts contain some consistent elements. These are:

Pedestrian and cycling improvements along Harris Road and Lougheed Highway;

Community gathering space;

Gateway features; and

Buffer to the existing residential area (i.e. the Dorado) on the west of the study area.

All three concepts suggest the need for access into the site from Lougheed Highway, as

depicted by a traffic signal. The exact location for transportation infrastructure is subject to

further detailed review. Transportation is further discussed in Section 8.

Mixed employment land use designation is shown at the western edge of the study area (by the

Harris Road and Lougheed Highway intersection and Harris Road and NLC intersection) on each

of the land use concepts. It capitalizes on the high visibility of this location.

Further, all three concepts suggest that the internal road structure need not necessarily follow

the original concept proposed in the 2008 OCP in order accommodate varying site layouts

and/or to maximize the potential of proposed land uses.

Concept A

Land use mix:

Mixed Employment: 19%

Retail‐commercial: 20%

Agriculture: 32%

Retail‐Commercial or Mixed Employment: 29%

Concept A retains the most amount of agricultural land (16 ha) of the three concepts, and is

thus most similar to the status quo. This concept takes advantage of and preserves the existing

high quality agricultural land in the northern central portion of the study area. Alignment of the

agricultural area builds upon the agricultural uses already in place. It is further suggested that

the agricultural lots be consolidated in order to maximize the area and benefit to farming or

agricultural use. The internal road network shown in Concept A differs slightly from the existing

system shown in the 2008 OCP (see Figure 1.c). Instead of three internal roads connecting to


43

the NLC, only two are shown here in order to minimize interruption to agricultural activity. The

roads further act as a buffer around the entire perimeter of the agricultural area.

Concept A builds in flexibility for development in the south eastern area of the site. This 15 ha

area may accommodate expanded retail‐commercial or mixed‐employment uses. Flexibility

would afford the opportunity to capitalize on future changing market forces that are difficult to

predict at this time. Absorption and build‐out of the site is further expected to occur from west

to east, according to the Market Review completed by Colliers. The lots by the Harris Road and

Lougheed Highway intersection are likely to be developed first.

Concept B

Land use mix:


Retail‐commercial: 33%

Agri‐business: 24%

Retail Commercial or Mixed Employment: 8%

The “agricultural or agri‐business” uses in Concept B is aligned with the areas of lower soil

quality on the site, which includes the existing golf course works yard and the man‐made pond

on the Dream Valley property. This acknowledges that agri‐business uses typically do not

require high quality soil to operate.

The retail‐commercial area in Concept B is expanded to take advantage of Lougheed Highway

and NLC frontage along the northern and southern perimeters of the site.

A smaller amount of flexible retail‐commercial or mixed employment lands (4 ha), relative to

Concepts A and C, is retained in the south eastern corner of the site. A total of 18 ha of mixed

employment lands are proposed.

A community gathering space is proposed at a unique space within the site where the differing

land uses meet, bringing together agricultural and non‐agricultural uses and an opportunity for

the different users of the site to interact and appreciate the study area’s varying built

environment.


44

Concept C

Land use mix:


Retail‐Commercial: 34%

Retail‐Commercial or Mixed Employment: 23%

Contrary to the previous concepts, this concept shows the future NLC to be fronted only by

non‐agricultural uses. This alternative focuses on the ability of land development to financially

compensate for the future NLC. It is the most “aggressive” with respect to amount of

development proposed. No agricultural land remains in this concept. It is assumed that all

existing agricultural land will have to be taken out of the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR),

subject to approval from the Agricultural Land Commission following an exclusion application

by the City.

This concept focuses the site as an intensive employment centre, with a total of 30 ha available

for mixed employment uses. In between the two nodes of mixed employment lands, the retail‐

commercial area remains at 17 ha as in Concept B. Also similar to Concept B is the 4 ha of

flexible retail‐commercial or mixed employment land in the south eastern corner of the site

adjacent to Meadow Gardens Way.

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

45

Figure 7.e. C

oncept A

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

46

Figure 7.f. C

oncept B

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

47

Figure 7.g. C

oncept C


48

7.3. EVALUATION MATRIX

A matrix was developed that evaluated each land use concept against the guiding principles developed earlier in the study (Figure 7.h below). The matrix was designed to depict how well each concept responded to each criterion relative to one another (e.g. the more tick marks shown, the better the concept was able to satisfy the criterion, while more crosses indicated that the concept performed more poorly than the other concepts (see note in Figure 7.h below)).

Figure 7.h. Evaluation Matrix

The results depicted in the matrix were derived from a more detailed qualitative assessment of the land use concepts, as shown in Appendix 4. The following section provides a summary of this assessment.

1. Long term financial sustainability. Concept C was considered the best overall in its ability to

assist the City of Pitt Meadows in diversifying its tax base as well as helping to fund desired road

infrastructure (e.g. the North Lougheed Connector) through land development. As Concept A

contained the most amount of agricultural land, or in other words, the least amount of land

development, it was considered the least able to help fund future road infrastructure. However,


49

it is recognized that agricultural activity is an important contributor to a diversified economy and

tax base in Pitt Meadows, and therefore Concept A was given one check mark.

In Concept B, a longer take up period was assumed for land allocated for agri‐business (as evidenced by other agri‐business areas in the Lower Mainland). This therefore may affect its overall financial viability, and has thus been rated less positively than Concept C.

2. Benefit to agriculture. While varying amounts of agricultural land are lost in each of the

concepts, Concept A retained the most amount of agricultural land and therefore performed the

best, relative to the other concepts with respect to its ability to encourage or sustain farming

activity within the study area. The agricultural land preserved in Concept A is also considered to

be of high quality. On the other hand, Concept C retains no agricultural land and therefore does

not support agricultural activity in this area.

3. Employment Generation. Concepts B and C were considered to perform relatively better than

Concept A under the “Quality jobs” sub‐criterion (this relates primarily to the potential for

higher salaries from mixed employment or light industrial jobs). Agri‐business, however,

provides opportunities to support community‐based employment (e.g. jobs based on local

agricultural products). Concepts A and B perform better than Concept C in this regard.

However, as Concept C introduces the most amount of mixed‐employment (two‐thirds of the

site) and retail‐commercial land (one third of the site), it is considered to perform the best with

regards to employment intensification.

4. Transportation. The ability to help fund pedestrian or cycling infrastructure is potentially more

limited in Concepts A and B as less area is dedicated to development. Transit is however, likely

to be better supported in Concepts A and B as development (and therefore more people with

potential transit demand) is concentrated more toward Lougheed Highway where transit

infrastructure (bus stops) is already being built by the Ministry of Transportation and

Infrastructure for future use. Concept C, however, would spread potential transit users and

transit demand out towards the North Lougheed Connector. It was noted from consultation

with TransLink that concepts that support or build upon existing transit service and routes are

preferred to those that would require adding new service.

5. Robust Urban Design. For all three concepts, gateway features have been included at key

points. Concepts A and B identify the need for buffers (e.g. landscaping, berms, roads) along

agricultural and residential uses. Buffering of agricultural land is not as critical in Concept C given

that no agricultural interface is present within the study area. Concepts A and B offer the

opportunity to create a public gathering space that integrates an agricultural element (e.g.

teaching farm or museum farm). Concept C, however, with its higher amounts of future

development, offers the potential to fund more design components and amenities.

Urban design recommendations for the site are discussed in more detail in Section 9.


50

8. RECOMMENDED LAND USE CONCEPT

8.1. RECOMMENDED LAND USE CONCEPT

The three land use concepts described in Section 7 were taken to an Open House on April 18,

2011. As noted above, the two evaluation criteria that were identified as “very important” to

survey respondents were “long term financial sustainability” and “benefit to agriculture”.

Respondents also expressed a preference for Concept A. Given this strong focus on both long

term financial responsibility and preserving agriculture, it was determined that a more detailed

fiscal evaluation was required in order to help understand if and how the two criteria could be

reconciled. Such an analysis would help to shed light on how specific land use concepts may

contribute to funding for a range of important off‐site requirements including the North

Lougheed Connector. The methodology and highlights of the financial evaluation are described

in Section 8.2, below.

The financial evaluation concluded that only Concept C, with its more extensive mixed

employment and retail‐commercial land uses, could be expected to generate sufficient revenue

to pay for the a range of important off‐site improvements (including signalized intersections).

Despite the general interest for agri‐business uses, both from a community and economic

development perspective there was deemed to be little market demand for these uses. A

benefit to agriculture, however, could be achieved through a number of mechanisms including

traffic reductions on Old Dewdney Trunk Road, and improvements to agriculture in other parts

of the city (possible through financial contributions secured at the time of development). These

potential benefits are further described in section 8.3.

Figure 8.a, below, identifies a recommended land use concept for the North Lougheed Study

Area. This recommendation is based on the suite of objectives identified by the City, feedback

from the broad consultation process and the desire for financial sustainability. In order to

ensure adequate traffic flow associated with the proposed land use mix, an all‐turn signalized

intersection on Lougheed Highway between Harris Road and Meadow Gardens Way is

recommended. Transportation opportunities related to this land use concept, which also

include pedestrian and cycling improvements, are provided in section 8.4. Urban design

opportunities, including gateway features and a public gathering space on the eastern side of

the study area, are described in Section 9.

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

51

Figure 8.a. R

ecommended Lan

d Use Concept


52

8.2. FINANCIAL EVALUATION HIGHLIGHTS

As part of this planning exercise a high level development proforma was undertaken in order to

model the potential viability of Land Use Concept C. Concept C was used as the starting point

for evaluation to determine whether the most aggressive of the land use concepts, in terms of

amount of development proposed, was enough to meet the Financial Sustainability criteria, i.e.

help pay for needed road infrastructure. A Net Present Value (NPV) model was utilized to

determine the present value of future cash flow upon full build out of the overall development

of this 126 acre (51 ha) site. Approximately 20 acres of the site was allocated for internal roads

as well as parks and open space dedications, leaving a net developable area of approximately

106 acres.

The retail commercial component was modeled utilizing a 0.40 FAR yielding 607,800 square

feet of leasable area. The mixed employment component was modeled utilizing a 0.60 FAR

yielding 1,851,000 square feet of leasable area. This FAR ratio allowed for suitable on‐site

parking requirements to be made assuming single level retail development with at grade

parking and 40% of the mixed employment buildings being multi‐level with at grade parking.

All approval fees, DCC’s and other development costs were assumed to be consistent with

those typically expected through the approvals process in Pitt Meadows. In addition, a $9.5

Million off site requirement allowance for two signalized intersections, an overpass on

Lougheed as well as the construction of the North Lougheed Connector to Harris was included

in the modeling.

Given the significant scale of the development, a ten year build out and absorption period was

utilized. While reasonable, this absorption period is aggressive and assumes the retail

component to be fully built out over five years with the mixed employment component built

out over ten years at approximately 185,000 square feet per year.

The two critical factors impacting the viability of the model was the absorption period as well as

the initial land costs. Any changes in these factors significantly impacted the overall financial

performance of the development. Any reduction to the absorption period increased the overall

financial viability, and hence, ability to pay for additional off site requirements. The model was

not overly sensitive to the $9.5 Million requirement and as such, it is reasonable to assume that

the construction of the North Lougheed Connector can be accommodated under Concept C.

Concept C represents the best opportunity for the City of Pitt Meadows to avoid paying any

development costs associated with the North Lougheed Connector and other offsite


53

improvements. The fundamental challenge with Concept A & Concept B is that there is

currently little market support for additional ‘agri‐business’ lands inventory in the short term.

As such, this component of any development precinct would be modeled on the basis of zero

absorption and hence zero revenue over the first years of development. Essentially, this would

require modeling this land use as a subsidized use by other streams of revenue as it would still

incur the same off site expenditures modeled in Concept C.

The key outcomes of the financial modeling are briefly outlined below:

1. At 2.4 million square feet of gross buildable area, this development precinct represents

a significant introduction of new mixed employment and retail inventory to the regional

marketplace (let alone the Pitt Meadows market);

2. There is already significant retail inventory and industrial inventory under construction

(Pitt Meadows Airport lands & Freemont Village) and as such, adding additional density

is unlikely to improve the overall financial performance of the development precinct due

to the overall rate of absorption;

3. The key variables in the model were the overall absorption period as well as land costs.

As such, if flexibility is allowed for in the form of development as well as types of uses

within the mixed employment lands a shorter absorption period is a reasonable

expectation leading to better overall financial performance of the development

precinct;

4. Any agri‐business/ park component would be assumed to provide zero income/

absorption over the short term and as such, the introduction of this use would require a

form of subsidy from the other development components within the precinct to pay for

both onsite and offsite servicing requirements; and,

5. While greater density and a high quality built form is desired, there is limited ability to

introduce additional density to the financial model without significantly altering the

assumed built form outlined above.

Overall, the financial modeling still remains at a high level with more detail required for the

mixed employment component of the development concept. If greater flexibility (in form of

development, type of uses, ratio of use within a specific category, setbacks, etc.) can be

provided for this component of the development concept leading to a shorter absorption

period it is reasonable to assume a greater financial performance in the development of the

entire precinct.


54

8.3. AGRICULTURAL IMPACT AND BENEFITS

It is recognized that the land use concept presented in figure 8.a. has a significant impact on

agriculture in that no land is proposed to be retained for agriculture, either for growing of

crops, or for agri‐business uses. A number of benefits to agriculture, however, are associated

with this concept. These are described below.

1. Reduced traffic on Old Dewdney Trunk Road

Upon completion of the North Lougheed Connector, traffic on Old Dewdney Trunk Road

(ODTR) would be reduced. This has been cited as a key objective of the City’s AAC as it

would facilitate current farm traffic movements on ODTR. The recommended land use

concept was the only one of three preliminary concepts that was demonstrated to have the

ability to pay for the NLC.

2. Consolidation of agricultural land on north side of the North Lougheed Connector

The three parcel remnants that are in the study area and north of the proposed NLC could

be consolidated as a condition of future development approval. This would result in a larger

site for farming.

3. Covenants to protect agricultural land on the north side of the North Lougheed Connector

Covenants to restrict the use of remnant parcels north of the future NLC to agriculture,

could also be made a requirement of future development in the study area. It is recognized

that the ALC ‘s provision for covenants placed on remnant parcels associated with the

approval of the North Lougheed Connector – on both the north and south sides ‐ was

intended to convey the position that the ALC does not see conversion of ALR land south of

the NLC as inevitable;

4. Agricultural character associated with future development in the study area

This may be achieved through the integration of specific urban design elements into future

development patterns of the study area. This may include landscaping and gathering places

that have an agricultural or food focus, building character, streetscape features, buffers and

other transitional features. The opportunity for a museum farm integrated with future

public open space is not precluded with the recommended land use concept.


55

5. Financial contribution to improve agriculture in other parts of the study

Lands removed from the ALR could be required to provide a financial contribution (e.g.

price per hectare) that would be used to improve agriculture in others parts of the City. (e.g.

drainage improvements). The City’s Agricultural Advisory Committee has expressed their

interest in this approach.

Despite its application in other areas, the ALC has indicated their declining interest n the

“net benefit to agriculture” criterion for evaluating the acceptability of agricultural impacts

(because of the potential to manipulate ALR land conversion). However, there remains an

opportunity associated with development in the study area to secure a tangible benefit to

agriculture within the City of Pitt Meadows.

6. Potential inclusion of other City‐owned lands into the ALR

Although Pitt Meadows does not have a policy for replacement lands, the City has noted the

possibility of including other lands into the ALR (e.g. specific lands south of Lougheed

Highway, near Bonson Road). This could be a possible compensation for lands removed

from the ALR in the study area and warrants further exploration.

The preliminary concepts developed for the study area considered key principles identified

through discussion with the ALC. These included:

o Locating agri‐industrial where soil and/or site condition is lower; (e.g. Concept B);

o Maneuvering access to benefit agriculture (e.g. road pattern proposed in Concepts A and B);

o Considering transitional land use issues to protect the ALR boundary;

o Emphasizing agri‐centric land use that contributes to agricultural development;

o Working on the principle of deriving benefits from development not extracting them.

While not all of these principles continue to be fully expressed in the recommended land

use concept for the study area, solutions for supporting agriculture within the study area as

well as within the City as a whole, have been identified. Further, the interests of farming

and the protection of agricultural land have been considered and balanced with the other

stated objectives of the study. The findings of this study also point to the need for a more

detailed comprehensive area plan.


56

8.4 TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT CONSIDERATIONS

Transportation issues related to this recommended land use concept that need to be addressed

include:

Road access;

Internal circulation;

Transit service;

Pedestrian and cycling access; and

Staging of development and road network.

8.4.1 ROAD ACCESS

The site is bounded by Lougheed Highway to the south, Harris Road to the west, the proposed

alignment of the North Lougheed Connector to the north and undeveloped land and residential

development at Meadow Gardens Way to the east. The site currently includes the Ramada Inn

which is accessed by a “right‐in‐right‐out” (RIRO) driveway on Lougheed Highway. The

remainder of the land is currently agricultural and in accessed primarily from Dewdney Trunk

Road located north of the proposed North Lougheed Connector.

When fully developed, under the recommended land use concept, the site will generate

approximately 2000 vehicles trips in the AM peak hour and approximately 4500 trips in the PM

peak hour. Estimated inbound and outbound trips based on average trip rates by land use

category documented Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual for each

development option are shown in Table 8.a.

Table 8.a. Estimated Inbound and Outbound Trips

In Out In Out

1197 228 549 1839

68 44 63 55

353 151 844 1266

1619 423 1455 3160

Retail Commercial

Total

Mixed Employment

(Existing) Hotel

Peak Hour Vehicle Trips

AM Peak Hour PM Peak HourDevelopment Option


57

Based on Vancouver Regional Model 2031 forecast trip distribution for the site location, vehicle

trips to and from the site will be broken down by direction as shown in Table 8.b.

Table 8.b. Vehicle Trips To and From the Site

Peak

HourDirection

City of Pitt

MeadowsWest of Pitt River

Maple Ridge and

Fraser Valley

Inbound 291 308 1020

Outbound 76 97 250

Inbound 204 437 815

Outbound 442 853 1864

AM

PM

Origins and Destinations of Forecast Vehicle (Driver) Trips

Potential access/egress locations for the site include:

Lougheed Highway – retain existing RIRO hotel access and one additional access

(signalised or RIRO);

Harris Road – one access, likely RIRO because of proximity to Harris Road/Lougheed

Highway intersection;

Meadow Gardens Way – extension of the existing right‐of‐way would provide indirect all

turn access to Lougheed Highway at the existing signalised intersection of Meadow

Gardens Way and Lougheed Highway; and

North Lougheed Connector – the eventual construction of this roadway could provide

for up to three all‐turn intersections (probably signalised) between the connector and

the proposed developments internal road system.

Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MOTI) staff have indicated that they will not

support an additional signalised intersection on Lougheed Highway between Harris Road and

Meadow Gardens Way. Staff will only endorse additional access provided that it was restricted

to RIRO. Until construction of the North Lougheed Connector, access/egress to the

development would be restricted to RIRO on Lougheed Highway and Harris Road and to the

signalised intersection at Meadow Gardens Way and Lougheed Highway. Traffic inbound to the

development from the west would be restricted to Harris Road and Meadow Gardens Way.

Outbound traffic to the east would be restricted to Meadow Gardens Way and Harris Road.

The construction of the North Lougheed Connector appears to be contingent on the

development of the northern part of the site. Consequently, it is possible that the development

will be completed and operational before the Connector is completely constructed. This means

that up to 2000 vehicles could be exiting the site via Meadow Gardens Way during the PM peak


58

hour. This volume is likely to create operational problems at the Lougheed/Meadows Garden

intersection. It appears desirable that, despite the opposition of MOTI staff, the City of Pitt

Meadows should petition the Ministry for an additional all‐turn signalised intersection on

Lougheed Highway approximately midway between Harris Road and Meadow Garden Way.

It should also be noted that provision of a signalised intersection at the recommended location

would improve pedestrian access to the site, including access to bus stops of the north side of

Lougheed Highway. It would also eliminate the need for a midblock pedestrian/bicycle

overpass to serve the development.

8.4.2 INTERNAL CIRCULATION

The design of internal road system will be undertaken as part of the design of the overall site

and will depend on the layout of the various parcels for development. However, because of

the access/egress restrictions it is important that all parts of the site should be connected by

the internal road system to all external access/egress locations.

8.4.3 TRANSIT SERVICE

Currently the site is not served directly by transit service. Bus routes C41, 701 and 791 provide

service close to the boundaries of the proposed development. The section of Lougheed

Highway through Pitt Meadows is defined as part of the proposed Frequent Transit Network.

This could lead to improved transit service to the proposed development’s Lougheed Highway

frontage network. A possible future location for a bus stop would be mid‐way between Harris

Road and Meadow Gardens Way. However, TransLink staff have indicated that it is unlikely that

direct transit service will be provided to the development even when fully developed. The

attractiveness of transit for access/egress to the site is likely significantly affected by the

distance from potential bus stop locations from much of the site and limited opportunities for

pedestrians to cross Lougheed Highway.

Long term, there could be further improvements in the transit service in the Lougheed Highway

Corridor – it has been identified as a potential rapid transit corridor by 2040. However, given

the anticipated dispersed distribution of origins and destinations of site‐generated trips, it is

unlikely that transit will replace private vehicles as the major mode of access/egress to the

development within any foreseeable timeframe.


59

8.4.4 PEDESTRIAN AND CYCLING ACCESS

It is important that the development is designed and constructed to provide safe and efficient

pedestrian and bicycle circulation. However, access and egress for pedestrians and cyclists to

and from the development is likely to be somewhat impeded by the limited opportunities for

at‐grade crossing of Lougheed Highway. This problem will be somewhat alleviated if the City

can gain approval from MOTI for an additional signalised crossing of the Highway approximately

midway between Harris Road and Meadow Garden Way. Pedestrian and cycling access may

also be provided by a grade‐separated overpass. Although a mid‐block location may be

desirable, it is likely that an overpass would be situated closer to Harris Road in order to avoid

conflicts with utility infrastructure (in the vicinity of Bonson Road).

8.4.5 STAGING OF DEVELOPMENT AND ROAD NETWORK

The completion of the North Lougheed Connector between Lougheed Highway and Abernathy

Way may not occur within the timeframe for the development of the northern part of the

proposed development. It is, however, important that as the development proceeds,

alternative access/egress be provided in order to relieve Meadow Garden Way. It will be

desirable to construct a minimum 2‐lane section of the proposed Connector from Harris Road

to Abernathy Way in conjunction with the first stage of the proposed development. The

completion of the Connector between the proposed interchange at Lougheed Highway and

Harris Road and the upgrading to a basic 4‐lane cross‐section will be desirable as the

development approaches full‐build‐out.

8.4.6 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY

It is recommended that the issues associated with the impact of site‐generated traffic on the

existing road network, including Meadow Garden Way be addressed at an early stage of the site

development through a detailed Site Traffic Impact Study. Although the usual timetable for

such studies would be at the rezoning stage, because of the complexity of the issues involved

and the potential for significant site traffic use of Meadow Garden Way, it is recommended the

Traffic Impact Study be initiated once approval has been received to remove lands within the

site from the Agricultural Land Reserve.


60

9. URBAN DESIGN

Redevelopment of the North Lougheed Study Area provides the opportunity to achieve a high

standard of urban design in a highly visual location. A range of key design elements are

proposed and described below. It is recommended that the urban design directions arising out

of this study be further refined in a comprehensive plan for the study area. These directions

would thus form the basis of amendments to existing Development Permit guidelines (DP Area

No. 10 North Lougheed Commercial). The proposed urban design elements described below

are presented in a format that generally corresponds to the structure of the current DP Area.

These amendments may include, for example, an additional objective that acknowledges the

key corridor location of the site.

9.1. BUILDING FORM AND CHARACTER / STREETSCAPE

The site’s building form and character, as well as the overall quality of the streetscape

should reflect a cohesive and well coordinated design effort. The massing and style of

buildings, as well as public realm qualities should be compatible and complimentary to

the surrounding neighbourhood context. Examples of items to be considered include:

o Building height;

o Architectural style;

o Materiality;

o Setbacks and street frontage articulation;

o Street corridor widths (building face to building face); and

o Street planting and furniture.

Corner sites are an important dimension within the overall site layout of any plan. The

buildings and public spaces that occupy these strategic locations often play an

important role in the overall readability of a place. Therefore attention should be given

to how these particular sites may help in the context of framing views, acting as

informal gateways, or terminating streetscapes;

There is an opportunity here to take full advantage of the great views afforded by the

local scenery. With the backdrop of the Coastal Mountain Range not far away, it would

be a lost opportunity if development did not ultimately take full advantage of that

existing natural amenity. It is therefore highly recommended that the street layout and


61

orientation, along with massing and siting guidelines, work towards achieving maximum

views toward the mountains;

It is recommended that all development sitting along the perimeter of the site ‐ where

an external road sits adjacent ‐ that the buildings are oriented outward. That is to say

the ‘face' of the development is presented to the surrounding streets rather than having

the backs of buildings and lots facing those streets. In the case of buildings that face

Lougheed Highway, and in order to accommodate this physical arrangement along with

access and parking, further study is needed into how such an arrangement could work

(e.g. possible perimeter blocks with internal courtyard parking);

This study identifies the need for at least one access point into the site from Lougheed

Highway. If included, this road access will help tremendously to alleviate induced traffic

flow into and out of the development at the new North Lougheed Connector. Lougheed

Highway will also be the primary face of the development, and as such, provides an

important gateway access into the site.

9.2. GATEWAY FEATURES

Gateway features are urban design elements which are used to create a sense of arrival. They

are used to strengthen the sense of identity and provide an enhanced sense of place. They may

also be used to mark a transition from one land use type to another.

The recommended concept identifies gateway features be incorporated at the four main entry

points to the study area:

Northeast corner of Lougheed Highway and Harris Road;

Southeast corner of Harris Road and the future North Lougheed Connector;

Along the future North Lougheed Connector, at the southeast corner of the study area;

and

At the intersection of Lougheed Highway and Meadow Gardens Way. It is acknowledge

that this proposed gateway feature is not within the study area and may require

alternate funding mechanisms.

Two other gateway opportunities exist within the study area:


62

New access on Lougheed Highway: It is strongly recommended that the main gateway of

the project should be at this location; and

Southeast corner of study area: It is also strongly recommended that the existing large

stand of evergreen trees in the S/E corner of the study area be further assessed to

determine if they can be retained and used as a major gateway feature. The stand is

very well positioned to demarcate the site and would make a wonderful entry point

from Meadow Gardens Way.

Gateway features may be designed to reflect the

character of the community and may include new

signage, landscaping, lighting, road narrowing,

changes to paving or an architectural feature such

as a monument or sculpture to mark a threshold.

Examples of gateway features were displayed at

the Public Open House.

Figure 9.a. Banners Contribute to a

Sense of Place

Figure 9.b. Example of Pedestrian Crossing/Gateway Feature


63

9.3. CIRCULATION AND ACCESS

The proposed internal road network includes three roads that provide access to the North

Lougheed Connector. The central of these roads will provide access to the southern portion of

the site and will connect to an extension of Meadow Gardens Way. All internal roads should be

public rights‐of‐way.

The circulation and access framework arising out of this study will prompt a number of

amendments to the existing DP Area guidelines:

A road parallel to Lougheed Highway will no longer be required along the entire length

of the study area. While an extension of Meadow Gardens Way into the site is

required, it is anticipated that this road will move northward in order to facilitate land

development for mixed employment and retail‐commercial uses;

A new full‐access, signalized intersection mid‐way between Meadow Gardens Way and

Harris Road is recommended. This will allow for a more distributed flow of traffic,

facilitate pedestrian and cycling movements in and out of the site, and serve as perhaps

the key gateway into the site. The language in the existing guidelines should be

strengthened to reflect the need for a full movement intersection;

A comprehensive design of parking and access areas is required as part of a more

detailed area plan. This would include policies related to joint or shared access

between adjoining developments (to minimize disruption to pedestrian movement) and

the location of parking away from Lougheed Highway and North Lougheed Connector.

The development should be designed

to provide safe and efficient

pedestrian and bicycle circulation

across the entire site. Recommended

elements include:

An off‐road bike path on the

north side of Lougheed

Highway across the length of

the study area. This may be

similar to the existing

pathway on the south side of Figure 9.c. Pedestrian and Cycling Overpass, Central

Valley Greenway, Burnaby


64

Lougheed Highway. Further details on pathway width and alignment would be

determined in conjunction with a more detailed area plan;

Pedestrian and cycling connections to the south side of Lougheed Highway and

westward to Harris Road. Preference is for a grade‐level crossing on Lougheed Highway

(e.g. in conjunction with a full intersection midway between Harris Road and Meadow

Gardens Way);

o If an overpass is shown to be desirable, the overpass will be designed to

accommodate both cyclists and pedestrians, and be both interesting and

contextual;

Safe and comfortable pedestrian circulation routes that link all developments and sites

within the study area as well as pedestrian access points along all four edges of the site

to adjacent roads;

o This should include stronger language to require crosswalks to be clearly

designated where the public realm (e.g. sidewalks, open space, gathering areas)

intersects with service or access roads.

9.4. LANDSCAPE STRATEGY

It is important to acknowledge the natural history of area, particularly the presence of large

evergreen trees, a number of which continue to grow on site. It is also recognized that many of

these trees (e.g. cluster at the southeast corner of the site) may be difficult to retain, not only

due to the lack of a tree retention bylaw, but also due to drainage issues in the area. It should

be noted that the drainage issue in that location could be made worse with the felling of this

large group of trees. Further recommendations include:

Utilize a mix of native species, especially evergreen trees, as much as possible within the

site planting scheme in open space situations (e.g. pocket parks and buffer areas). Using

native species ‐ Western Red Cedar, Western Hemlock and Douglas Fir ‐ will help

alleviate the strain on natural systems such as site drainage and soil disturbance. Local

wildlife, particularly local bird populations, will also benefit from the re‐establishment of

their native plant habitat;


65

Consider including edible plants as part of the planting strategy across the site. Many

native species of deciduous trees and shrubs are fruit producing, benefiting both the

local human population and local wildlife;

Consider the inclusion of a small dedicated park space within the development to

benefit the on‐site working population. Ideally this park space would be centrally

located, and perhaps 1 ha in size. Using a retention pond (Best Management Practice) as

a central water feature within the park has a number of benefits. The primary role of the

pond would be to capture local run‐off and drainage which would otherwise get

shunted into an expensive underground drainage sewer. These ponds reduce the costs

associated with local sewer infrastructure. Furthermore, the pond acts as a valuable

resource for local wildlife, particularly bird and amphibious species when edge‐planted

appropriately. And of course the pond becomes an attractive visual feature for people

within the park setting.

9.5. TRANSITIONAL PLANTINGS AND BUFFER ZONES

Buffer zones act as an attractive

physical or visual barrier between

different land uses. They are used to

minimize issues which may arise from

conflicting land use activities (e.g. to

shield unsightly views, block noise,

wind, odours etc). Buffers are created

by dedicating a strip of land along the

perimeter of each land use type,

where a combination of grading and

planting can be used to hide or

separate out incompatible adjacent activities. .

Buffer zones are recommended in the study area to separate residential land uses from mixed

use employment centres.

In other areas, such as along the shared boundary of the golf course for example, or along the

edge of a parking lot, a transitional landscape should be employed. Rather than physically

blocking or separating out land uses, transitional planting is simply meant to soften the

interface of adjoining land uses.

Figure 9.d. Raised Planted Buffer Zone


66

Buffer Zones:

A buffer zone is needed along the shared boundary between the site and existing

residential neighbourhood next to Meadow Gardens Way, in the S/E corner of the site.

The north end of this buffer would connect directly to the south end of the transitional

planting running the length of the golf course, along the shared eastern boundary (see

Transitional Planting list below); and

Ideally a buffer zone would be located along the length of the western boundary of the

site. This would be to alleviate the negative effects of the proposed interchange across

Harris Road. This new traffic pattern has the potential to be busy, noisy and unsightly.

Transitional Planting:

Transitional planting is needed along the shared boundary with the golf course on the

east side of the study area. This green strip of land should range from 10‐15 metres in

width and planted with a mix of native conifers and deciduous trees. A meandering

pedestrian path should be incorporated into this linear green space, turning the strip

into an attractive and usable green amenity for local workers as well as local residents in

the surrounding neighbourhoods;

Transitional planting would be beneficial in all locations where parking lots are located.

Transitional planting is recommended along both Lougheed Highway and the proposed North

Lougheed Connector. This planting would help to moderate the effects of traffic flow (e.g.

exhaust fumes and visual intrusion) and at times extremely heavy. The planting along these

corridors should be largely ornamental (visually attractive), while also carefully designed in such

a way as not to block views to retail and commercial businesses from the road.

9.6. GATHERING PLACES

Gathering places play a significant role in building community life. In the study area a central

gathering place could provide a forum for public events, community markets, festivals and local

gatherings.

It is recommended that development proposals for the area include provision for public spaces

which are attractive, safe, comfortable and welcoming to all members of the community.


67

Separate to the dedicated park space recommended earlier (See Landscape Strategy), a number

of smaller more urban types of gathering spaces are recommended within the development.

These urban squares would provide a place for residents and employees to gather and enjoy

the outdoors as well as each other’s company. A number of spaces, perhaps in the range of

three to four should be allocated across the site. They would be small in scale, anywhere from

approximately 500 square feet, up to a larger square of 3‐4,000 square feet. Ideally the largest

of these would be built as part of, and adjacent to, the park space. Activities like a farmers

market or other civic/community gatherings would be an ideal way to activate these spaces.

This would also help to create activity and energy in the area on weekends and during times

when business areas tend to be quiet and inactive. . Designs that celebrate or acknowledge the

agricultural character of Pitt Meadows are encouraged.

This central gathering space may consist primarily of hard surface landscaping with appropriate

seating and rest areas, coupled with public art opportunities.

Figure 9.e. Example of an Urban Farmers Market


68

10. SUMMARY RECOMMENDATIONS

1. The land use concept shown in Figure 8.a. is considered to respond most favourably to

the range of objectives for the North Lougheed Study Area. This recommendation is

based on discussion, analysis and feedback undertaken during this study.

2. It is recommended that a comprehensive plan for the study area be prepared either

before or concurrently with the first development application in the study area. This

will allow for refinement of the urban design framework provided in this study. It will

also help to protect against uncoordinated development patterns that may affect the

overall quality of the site.

3. In order to offset the potential loss of agricultural land associated with future

development within the study area, a number of directions are recommended. These

directions are aimed at securing a benefit to agriculture within Pitt Meadows and could

be conditions of development of agricultural lands within the study area:

a. Consolidation of the remnant parcels between the north side of the future North

Lougheed Connector and Old Dewdney Trunk Road;

b. Registration of Restrictive Covenants on the remnant parcels north of the North

Lougheed Connector;

c. A financial contribution associated with the potential removal of lands from the

ALR that would be dedicated to improving agriculture in other parts of the City

(e.g. drainage improvements);

d. The possible of inclusion of other lands within Pitt Meadows into the ALR (e.g. to

offset any removal of lands from the ALR).

6. The City should lobby the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MOTI) for an all

turn signalized intersection along Lougheed Highway, midway between Harris Road and

Meadow Gardens Way;

7. As development proceeds, alternative access/egress should be provided in order to

relieve Meadow Gardens Way. It will be desirable to construct a minimum 2‐lane

section of the proposed North Lougheed Connector from Harris Road to Abernathy Way

in conjunction with the first stage of the proposed development;


69

8. It is recommended that the issues associated with the impact of site‐generated traffic

on the existing road network, including Meadow Gardens Way be addressed at an early

stage of the site development through a detailed Site Traffic Impact Study. Although the

usual timetable for such studies would be at the rezoning stage, because of the

complexity of the issues involved and the potential for significant site traffic use of

Meadow Gardens Way, it is recommended the Traffic Impact Study be initiated once

approval has been received to remove lands within the site from the Agricultural Land

Reserve;

9. It is anticipated that construction of the North Lougheed Connector will significantly

reduce traffic on Old Dewdney Trunk Road (ODTR), to the benefit of local farmers.

Additional traffic calming on ODTR may be required and should be explored. This may

include a review of various traffic calming devices such as curb bulges, plantings, visual

indicators and pavement markings and narrower lanes; and

10. It is recommended that the existing large stand of evergreen trees in the southeast

corner of the study area be assessed to determine if they can be retained and

incorporated into future development plans. If retention is not feasible, due to filling

and flood control issues, any loss of trees should be reasonably compensated for with

replacement evergreen trees.


70

APPENDICES

1. SURVEY RESULTS/PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE COMMENTS

Question 2.1: How important are the following principles to consider in evaluating options for

development in the Study Area? Please rank them in order of importance to you.

Total respondents: 26 Total respondents: 29

Total respondents: 28 Total respondents: 25


71

Total respondents: 32

Question 2.2: If applicable, please specify your interpretation of “Other” in the previous

questions.

Because there are no "other" suggestions I don't have an interpretation.

Creating a walkable centre, focus on pedestrian not the car. This would include better bus service to the site.

I prefer the option of forgetting a Lougheed Connector and thereby not having to pay for it. The previously paved

mall areas such as the plaza anchored by the "7‐11" could be redeveloped to provide office space. Greenhouses to

grow vegetables or more community garden space for the apartment‐dwellers on the north side of the highway

would be acceptable. An agricultural college would have been good but I believe Coquitlam is already building one.

We would be better served by increasing transit options especially with the new bus/HOV lane. This would reduce

the number of cars on the road therefore negating the need for the new road. This option should be tried first; at

least until the new tolled Port Mann bridge is opened. Once that toll bridge is opened we will see whole new

patterns of commuting emerge since drivers will start using the Golden Ears bridge more since they have to pay a

toll in either case.

Pedestrian and cycling access to all facilities in order to limit the necessity for vehicle traffic in the area.

1. Keep area unique to Pitt/MR, not turn it into urban disaster like Poco, Coq & Burnaby. NO highrises or

condos!


72

2. Interesting only one choice per principal, benifit to agriculture and employment at very important, but I can

not mark as such thus the other

3. Katzie Heritage and Culturally significant sites

4. Keeping farm land ‐ farm land ‐ protect farm land

5. NO BIG BOX STORES. PITT MEADOWS IS BECOMING A CITY WITHOUT A PERSONALITY OR THEME. WE

MOVED HERE BECAUSE OF ITS NATURAL BEAUTY ‐ NATURE, FARMING, VIEWS ETC.

6. It is very important to enforcer that anything built here is unique and can create a reason for outsiders to

come visit our town. Another boring box mall or strip mall is a waste of time. This must be a destination

with architecture that inspires (that does not mean calling it Frank Loyd Wright inspired becasue he built

some boring buildings too). We should pick a concept which will make people want to come visit.

Shopping choice

Question 2.3: How important is the protection of agricultural land in the Study Area?

Question 2.4: In your opinion, how important is the development of commercial/retail in the

Study Area?

Very important

50%

Somewhat important

18%

Neutral7%

Somewhat unimporta

nt9%

Not Important

16%

Total respondents: 44


73

Question 2.5: What kind of development, in your opinion, is needed/best for the community?

According to the news article 2nd and 3rd options would generate sufficient funds to build the proposed 3.6 km

North Lougheed Connector, So they will build it not matter what so lets generate "sufficient funds" so tax

payers are not dinged again.

Business Park, Retail Combo Residential/Retail/Professional

Large Retail ‐ Keep shoping dollars at home; Employment Generation: jobs for young people; jobs that people

who live in Pitt Meadows don't need to drive their cars too; Provide funding for new road ‐ golden Ears

Way to Lougheed west of Harris Road.

One that permits community gathering such as with small scale agriculture for residents and a walkable, inviting

place to eat, shop and gather.

AIt seems to me there has always been excess available retail space in Pitt Meadows. I do not support the option

of adding more people to support more retail space. I support the option of learning to live a balanced life

with our current population. A nursing care facility for seniors should be built within the community so

seniors can age in place. Where I grew up we had a couple of private fitness facilities that included

swimming pools and people could pay for memberships. Banks are always good steady businesses and

Very important

38%

Somewhat important

20%

Neutral9%

Somewhat unimporta

nt13%

Not Important

20%

How important is the development of commercial/retail in the Study Area?


74

they give back to the community. Look for banks that don't already have outlets in the area. Getting

businesses into the Osprey Village complex should be a priority. Maybe do a survey at the High School to

find out what sorts of occupations graduating seniors aspire to and whether they would like to stay in Pitt

Meadows if they could find satisfying employment opportunities here.

shopping,

suitable mix of shopping and retail/commercial development

commercial retail

Stay with the existing commercial strip along Lougheed as shown in the current OCP and leave the rest in the ALR.

We do not need more strip malls that include underutilized office and retail space. We do not need big box stores

‐ Coquitlam has them all! We do need community shopping opportunities that are street‐fronted and

accessible by foot or bicycle.

I would support agri‐business along with majority agricultural land

none

Unique to area, no big box stores! Create jobs for locals.

Diversified employment generator and preserving?enhancing our agriculture base

A mixed use, mixture of agriculturual usage, biggest concern is that we do not want a huge heat sink, with the

other large mall already in place the amount of heat generated by two large parking areas is of extreme

concern, more grass and tree's less black top and roofs

Expansion of Ramada Inn ‐ even better with a small to medium sized conference centre. Hope they are encouraged

to do this.

transportation local jobs support of tax base

Instead of choosing box stores focus on increasing the airport development. These have the opportunity to bring

higher paying jobs.


75

Mixed

Maple Ridge has a strong agricultural background that we should continue to focus on and develop further. I think

a farm school or opportunity for willing young farmers to input healthy, local food into the economy will

contribute to a stable, strong community.

I think that development should be encouraged on the South side of the Lougheed and farming should be

encouraged on the North side of the Lougheed. If more commercial and retail are needed ‐ look to the

South side.

Commercial, residential mixed use

Mixed use, residential, retail/commercial and business.

Whatever brings in the most for the long term Financial stability of Pitt Meadows. Especially if it lowers the

personal taxes of the home‐owners, brings shoppers to our area and offers employment opportunities

closer to home.

Availability of major shopping center to keep the money in our own community

FARMING, TREES, BIRD HABITAT, PARK FOR PICNIC & PERHAPS A NICE CAFE TO SIT AND ENJOY THE

SURROUNDINGS. NO STRIP MALLS OR BIG BOX STORES.

In that spot, agriculture. Elsewhere, public recreation (e.g. community facility for seniors, pool, arts center)

My ideal vision would be a European village concept with squares and walkable paths between stores so that once

you arrive you may leave your car and still visit all the stores. The squares could be used for events, to sit

out in a restaurant talking and joking with friends, and as part time community markets (just as they are

used in Europe after 1500 years of perfecting). The open paths between stores and the squares should

be covered just as the Denver Airport, Canada Place and many malls in sunny locations around Australia

and the US which are covered (those roofs let light in for plants, keep the area open and airy, yet protect

against rain). This is an inexpensive weather proofing which is easy to maintain but allows for year round

shopping.

Commercial Development‐Shopping


76

Retail Commercial so that we may shop local.

I think that there should be a lifestyle, village concept with 1‐2 larger anchor stores. I think there is the ability to

make it a very pleasant shopping experience w/ plaza areas and open spaces along with a strong mix of

retail tenants

high paying jobs

Question 3.1: What do you like about Concept A?

Nothing

DON'T

The large component of agriculture, retail‐commercial bordering the existing residential homes with mixed

employment on the west periphery

This has the highest percentage of agriculture

teaching farm varied plan many different ideas

Agriculture

shopping

it has a little bit of everything, a good mix.

It has the most agricultural land.

The improvements to the pedestrian/cycling routes along Lougheed. Community oriented gathering space.

saving farm land

Hopefully the land left for agriculture will be left for use by local farmers and not set aside for "ag reserch" or farm


77

museum! It's the best farmland in Pitt Meadows!

Has significant agriculture identified ‐ But not enough

preserves majority of agriculture at northern edge of development/ gathering place for community

Iy offers all items that appeal to us, employment opportunities, retail and agri, but I stress that we can not afford

to have a huge heat generation area that blows over the close by residential areas, Pitt Meadows needs to

be cognisent of the amount of blacktop we have covering our communitee

Largest (32%) area for agriculture of the plans. Hope that this would be mostly or all crops. Road alignment

creates largest area of contiguous farm land, especially if N.L. Connector doesn't happen. Also slows

down traffic on N..L. Connector if it does happen. (Dorado, apartments, and golf course would need

traffic lights here!)

not sure we need that much retail..shopping centre across the street.

Provides a variety of employment opportunities

Nothing

Potential community oriented/gathering space for employees/residents. Community garden proposal, cyclist

route,

Not enough agriculture

bigger agri aerea

More retail commercial

Mixed employment & retail commercial

I like that it contains a variety of uses.

CYCLE/WALK WAY ALONG LOUGHEED. I COULD LIVE WITH THE 16 ha GREEN ZONE


78

not too much, the agriculture part is too small

This has a mix of concepts which I like. The agricultural section will be cut off from anything to do with agricutlrure

by the road though. You could use the farm section as a tourism draw which focusses on farming

(pumpkin farm, corn maze, educational section)

I am not in support of Concept A as there is not enough developable area to offset the cost of the North Lougheed

Connector. The whole point of the study is to bring further employment/commercial lands to Pitt

Meadows along w/ the Connector. So, why consider something that is not going to provide those 2

important 'wants'?

Question 3.2: What could be improved in Concept A?

Forget AG component

No mixed employment bordering the existing residential homes. With light industrial comes large trucks and that

would not permit an inviting, walkable centre.

Scrap the remainder.

Remove Hotel & business park as we have too many in Pitt Meadows

less agriculture

less agriculture

The agricultural land should stretch along the whole south side of the proposed NLC. The covenants required by

the ALC should be then put on these parcels and those north of the proposed NLC.

Cultural venues: art gallery, theatre etc.

MORE FARM LAND Harris road and lougheed hwy is so congested now what is going to be like and with the trains

being longer now how are we suppose to get out on to the hwy. with on the lights on Harris Rd. does

anybody care do we really need big box stores


79

Leave all that is in ag land in ag land and only develope the land zoned for commercial.There is enough unused

land and unused and undeveloped properties in Pitt meadows that could be used for retail other than

this land. And perhaps council should start charging land owners commercial tax rates for ag land that is

being unutilized and made unavailable for local farmers to benefit from, such as the land at the end of Old

Dewdney and Harris Road and the land on the North side of Old Dewdney and Harris Road. This would

smarten up land owners waiting to apply for re‐zoning of ag‐land

Increase the agriculture component and delete the north lougheed connector

Ensure ther is no housing allowed, in mixed development areas as there is no transportation alternatives avaiable

More green space is essential

The 15 ha of Retail‐Commercial or Mixed Employment rather vague. Could be good or awful (tractor repair?) Next

to Dorado ‐ needs tough control of noise and lights.

I am not qualified to really do that

Could use more retail‐commercial

Strengthening the agricultural businesses which have been the back bone of many of the features of Pitt

Meadows.

Developing this area with more lights will only slow morning/afternoon rush‐hour congestion. There are enough

retail shops at Meadowtown Centre

It should all be left agriculture

roundebout harris road

make the agriculture component smaller

More agriculture

Include residential as well ‐ no point in creating commercial space if there are no residents to work there. Split the

16 ha. of agriculture to include residential or use some of the commercial/retail/ employment for


80

residential ‐ again, no point in creating amenities without people to use them. Let's see how the Golden

Ears Business Park is used before building more...

NO ADDITIONAL "ROAD RE‐ALIGHMENT" ‐ THAT'S JUST A FANCY NAME FOR A NEW HIGHWAY!

shrink down the size of retail and commercial

I had hoped that some of the farm land could be cut back to allow better access to the other sections. Could we

offer other land for farming to help with taking this part out of the ALC?

Question 4.1: What do you like about Concept B?

Seems the one that comes closest to meeting all points of views. Pleases no one, info is extreme, but could be

economically viable.

Large amount of retail‐commercial

Agriculture

still maintains farmland

commercial and retail

less agriculture

It has at least some agricultural component.

Same as Concept A

not sure if I like this or not

Nothing!

Don't like


81

Like the addition of agribusiness

Agri business I like, make it bigger

The division of the 8 ha into Mixed Employment & Retail Commercial much better use of the space and of possible

direct highway access. Provides more direct access to Nissan ‐ with careful development of area above

could give better privacy to Dorado.

I like the increase in mixed employment I am infavour of a convention type concept it will bring people into the

comunity ..

Nice mix of employment opportunities

Nothing

Not enough agriculature ‐

good mix

much larger retail

Not much

Again ‐ good mix of uses

CYCLE/WALK WAY ALONG LOUGHEED. NOT MUCH ELSE.

the trees along the road would be nice

This is my favourite plan. I love it! We could still use the agricultural land for agri‐tourism or agri‐education. I

hope this plan wins.

I think Concept B is headed in the right direction w/ respect to land use distribution and the mix of proposed uses.

However, I still question whether or not this option would actually be able to deliver the North Lougheed

Connector based on the size/cost of such a lengthy roadway.


82

Question 4.2: What could be improved about Concept B?

Forget AG component

Move the mixed employment away from the existing residential area.

Scrap the rest

less agriculture

more retail

The agricultural land should stretch along the whole south side of the proposed NLC. The covenants required by

the ALC should be then put on these parcels and those north of the proposed NLC.

As above

MORE FARM LAND

Leave more in Ag‐land

Does not allow for just agriculture maintained. Too much commercial and don't need N. Lougheed connector

reduce retail commercial

Increase agricultural area by changing the "Mixed Employment part of the 8ha to agriculture only.

There again am I qualified. to make those suggestions. We pay people to do that.

No additional comments at this time


83

I know that the tax base comes from commercial development but this is just another drive to increase

consumption not promoting the out of the box innovative creative thought processes which have been on‐going in

Pitt Meadows for years. Think of Churchill and the polar bears. If the surrounding region is going to grow why

would they want to come to Pitt Meadows. Shopping is not the answer.

more agricultural land

More agriculture ‐ this is prime farming property ‐ don't lose the little we have

roudebout harrisroad

need to make the retail commercial section run along the lougheed

More agriculture or Agri‐business zoning

Needs some residential

MAINTAIN AGRICULTURE. NO EXTENSION OF MEADOW GARDENS WAY.

no mixed employment, commercial or retail should be here

The only improvement I could think of does not exist yet. We need to create the best design for the actual

structures which will go here by creating a concept plan ourselves (ie what the buildings and layout should look

like) to ensure the best possible outcome and not just another strip mall or box mall. If we think ahead the

builders will follow but if they decide then square stucko with little design embellishments is the cheapest to build.

You are doing a wonderful job.

I believe that words such as 'agro industrial', etc are 'buzz words' right now at the ALC level; however, there are

few examples of such initiatives in play that are successful. I believe one of the consultants last night referenced

Kerr Farms and the fact that there has just not been the demand for such uses in that location. Why would it be

any different here? Would the land not be further sterilized?

Question 5.1: What do you like about Concept C?

Nothing


84

Probably the most economically feasible.

Nothing

Nothing. This is the worst.

pays for infrastructure

Nothing

no agriculture

no agriculture

Nothing.

Nothing

NO FARM LAND LEFT I GUESS WE CAN EAT THE PAVEMENT

Nothing!

Don't like

Pdesestrian consideration, and Cycling, opportunity to develop the harris road clover leaf

Nothing good about Concept C, No agricultural uses at all. (See Other Comments and Suggestions)

We need to save some farmland. This concept does not seem to take that into consideration

Provides numerous employment opportunities

Nothing

Worst concept around


85

no agriculture

maximizes employment best option so far

Nothing

Consistency of vision

Allows for more potential in development which gives more tax dollars for the City and the Community and

provides for employment opportunities.

PATH/CYCLEWAY ALONG LOUGHEED HIGHWAY

nothing, except the trees shown

This looks good too.

North Lougheed Connector will be a hard strong seperation between the farm lands to the north and

developement.

I believe this Concept delivers everything that the City and the community wanted out of the NLC Study ‐ more

employment, more shopping, and most importantly, the North Lougheed Connector.

Question 5.2: What could be improved about Concept C?

We need some agriculture area.

Unlikely that all land would be removed from the ALR.

Way too much mixed employment. Business parks bring larger trucks and create a sterile uninviting space for

residents. If there were more office spaces this area would benefit more.

Scrap the Lougheed Connector. Encourage local employers, including the City, to hire local labour. I read last year

in the local paper that a large portion of Maple Ridge residents work withing 7 km. of their homes. Find out what

people leave their communities to do and develop those things here.


86

keep some farmland

Add Agricultural areas

it's a good mix of retail/commercial

enclosed shopping centre

See Concept A and B

Agricultural component

WHAT HAPPEN TO FARM LAND JUST PAVE OVER EVERYTHINGTHAT WILL SURE FEED US

No Ag‐land whatsoever!

Doesn't include any agriculture at all.

the addition of an agribusiness area as in Concept B

reduce the blacktop

I am not qualified only to make the observation that the farm land is not there. We are a farming community

Could use some agricultural component

This is this the worst of all the choices. It lacks any kind of innovation. They typical bring the people more stores to

shop at and watch them fail because the consumer debt increases while their disposable income decreases.

More agricultural land

This is ALR land ‐ the Land Commission already stated to keep it agriculture ‐

run the retail commercial along the lougheed


87

No agriculture or agri‐business

It will get alot of resistance from agricultural interests, and still no residential use.

LEAVE IT ALONE. CONSOLIDATE ALL THE RETAIL/COMMERCIAL AREAS TOGETHER INSTEAD OF FRACTURING PITT

MEADOWS. EXTEND EXISTING AREAS OF RETAIL & COMMERCIAL. TRY TO MAKE IT SO RESIDENTS CAN ON‐STOP

SHOP INSTEAD OF HAVING TO GET IN CARS AND TRAVEL FROM ONE SHOPPING CENTRE TO ANOTHER AND ONE

INDUSTRIAL AREA TO ANOTHER. STOP TRYING TO PUT LITTLE POCKETS OF DEVELOPMENT HERE, THERE AND

EVERYWHERE. I ABSOLUTELY OPPOSE THE ABERNETHY CONNECTOR.

needs agricultural preserved

I like this but it would be nice to keep that piece of green space for esthetics and to promote agri‐tourism.

Question 6.1: Which concept do you prefer?

Question 6.2: Why do you prefer the Concept you chose in the last question?

[insert]

Question 6.3: Are there alternatives to the Concepts we have not considered?

14

10

7

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Concept A Concept B Concept C

Which Concept do you Prefer?


88

Develop from Harris Road ‐‐> EAST

Yes, keep the mixed employment away from the existing residential area. Provide more of a

patchwork of agri‐business and retail to create greater number of green zones and places for

community members to learn about agriculture.

Scrap the Lougheed connector. Get Translink to lower the Golden Ears Bridge toll to $2.00 and

encouage traffic to use the roads already built.

Working Farms, training institutions relating to this area

not that I know of.

not really

Yes, leave the OCP designated commercial strip the size it is and hold off on the proposed NLC

until the tolled Port Mann bridge is opened. Traveling patterns will change once drivers realize

they will be paying a toll either way. Also, increase transit frequency, taking advantage of the new

bus/HOV lane.

Cultural component.

need retail that will bring in customers with out having a big box store that will only take away

from the little shops

You have your mind set and nothing is going to change it! Leave the Ag land alone it's the best

farmable land in the area!

Yes ‐ more agricultural component along with agri‐business for the majority of the area. No N.

Lougheed connector required. Keep commercial to the strip along the Lougheed only.

More greenspace that is not agriculture.

Focus on Agri business and get away from blacktop and movie theatres

Yes ‐ Councillor Becker's Concept D ‐ do nothing, keep all (or most) in ALR. Only remove what is

necessary for traffic along Lougheed.


89

probably

I think there is lack of thinking towards what type of draw that Pitt Meadows can have that

surrounding areas do not. What features of Pitt Meadows can be enhanced through small business

opportunities or co‐ops which increases the destination traffic.

More land aside for sustainable smaller‐scale farms with diversified crops.

Keep it as farm land

Assists the farm community to take traffic off old dewdney

run the retail commercial portion along the highway

More agriculture & agri‐business

Add some residential uses! People need somewhere to live if they're going to work here!

YES ‐ PUT THE BUSINESSES YOU WANT ALONGSIDE EXISTING RETAIL‐COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES.

KEEP ALL THE LAND IN THE ALR AND QUIT TRYING TO MAKE PITT MEADOWS AN UNATRACTIVE &

UNDESIRABLE PLACE TO LIVE. THERE HAVE BEEN MISTAKES MADE IN THE PAST ‐ AN EXAMPLE

MIGHT BE "DORADO" BUT DON'T PUNISH THE "DORADO" RESIDENTS & OTHER PITT MEADOW

RESIDENTS WITH FURTHER MISTAKES. LEARN FROM YOUR MISTAKES AND PROVIDE THE

RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTS WITH APPROPRIATE NEIGHBOURS. RESIDENTS DO NOT WANT TO LIVE

NEXT DOOR TO INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT ‐ THEY WANT THEIR NEIGHBOURHOOD TO BE

COMPATIBLE ‐ THAT'S WHY THEY MOVED HERE!

Pitt Meadows already has a bunch of flat retail and commercial space. try building upwards adn

not encourage so much sprawl

I like the concepts you have presented.

Question 6.4: Do you have any other comments, questions, or suggestions on any part of the

North Lougheed Land Use Concepts or Guiding Principles?


90

Forget Agriculture in this area ‐ it's a commercial retail area ‐ Don't knock yourself out trying. TAXES increase to

muni Agriculture decrease taxes to muni = no road Thank you to staff & Council for doing this study (money well

spent)

This is a once in a liftime chance for the City of Pitt Meadows to become a "whole" community. Let's do it right!!

Leave farmable land alone.

none

should be used for a big enclosed mall

Council has to think long term (not just the next few elections) before trying to take more land out of the ALR.

Rising energy prices and climate change will make our ability to grow our own food very critical to our region's

future viability. We have enough undeveloped industrial land adjacent to the airport.

All concepts look to me like more of the same unappealing retail/commercial spaces that line Lougheed Highway

already. If we want to provide community access, then let's create a community environment.

fixing the congestion at Harris and Lougheed

If you keep eating up farmland you will destroy the ag community that created this city! There's enough retail and

big box stores in Coquitlam and Langley to serve our area! Find your tax money elsewhere!

Ensure ther is no further encroachment into the ALR. The road must remain as a solid division

Only that I live right across the street and I hope that we try to maintain a small town, agri based feel to shatever

concept flys, lets keep away from huge tracks of blacktop, as heat biuld up in the area is already reaching extreme

levels with the other mall down the road.

It seems to me that the importance of this relatively small area of agricultural land has only been considered in this

study as a place for development and change. However, it does have current use for the Pitt Meadows

environment. The trees are a sound buffer for Dorado and, along with the other vegetation, help lower the local

air pollution. This is very likely to become a serious problem in the future for Pitt Meadows because of increased

traffic. Also, in the past few years, there has been use of these fields as a foraging area for Sandhill Cranes

(possibly because of the disruption of their habitat by the South Perimeter Road construction). Dorado residents

have heard them and seen them fairly often, including this spring. As the Fraser Valley gets more and more filled

up, the consideration and planning for the preservation and protection of what wild life we have left in Pitt

Meadows should be included in municipal planning ‐ not treated as an after thought, or as the concern of a few


91

devoted naturalists.

It is necessary to get the cars off of Old dewdney we need employment.. local...we need to encourage people to

work, play and live in c ommunity

The potential for archaeological sites is very high and the cost of investigation like to site at Golden Ears Way

should have unaffordable. The heritage site there was a world class site deserving of UNESCO protection and what

did the bureaucracy choose, a paved road and now you are looking at putting a paved parking on known sites.

traffic in the morning for commuters heading west get's really bottle‐necked before harris road, I fear that more

commercial/retail development will add even more intersections and make traffic worse for people trying to get to

work in the morning.

If you want a road so badly then why aren't you taking it as close to the golf course as possible and saving the rest

for farming ‐ these concepts show that saving the farm land is not important at all. Once we lose this valuable

farm land it is lost forever ‐ so think this through ‐ don't try short term quick solutions which take away from our

food sources

When, also when will there be an overp[ass // interchange at the harris rd lougheed intersection

Pitt Meadows has plenty of blueberry farms. We should encourage more of a variety of crops, especially with our

warm summers. A permanent year‐round farmer's market would encourage citizens to buy local, thus reducing

each person's carbon footprint.

Make sure you design it with some green space ‐ people like to get outside even where they work ‐ big slabs of

concrete and asphalt are ugly ‐ not 'modern'.

IT WOULD SEEM THAT YOUR PROPOSALS WOULD HAVE TO GO HAND‐IN‐HAND WITH THE (PROPOSED)

ABERNETHY CONNECTOR. I AM OPPOSED TO TO PUTTING IN A NEW MAIN ROAD NORTH OF LOUGHEED. THE

NOISE FROM SPEEDING MOTOR‐BIKES AND REVVED UP CARS ALONG OLD DEWDNEY IN THE MIDDLE OF THE

NIGHT IS ALREADY A PROBLEM ‐ IF YOU GIVE THOSE INDIVIDUALS ARE NICE NEW HIGHWAY TO RACE ON, IT WILL

BE AS NOISY AS LOUGHEED HIGHWAY HAS BECOME.

How do you expect to keep agriculture at all if council keeps letting unneeded retail and commercial development

sprawl over it all.

It would be nice to have a conference facility in this area with a trade‐ex style floor to be used for tractor auctions,

tradeshows, adventure tourism and other uses. The conference facility could also house the ED office, Tourism,

Educational institutions or satellite campuses, the Chamber of Commerce, etc.


92

Timing is very important and we believe is now as stores like Walmart will move to neighbouring communities

where we will loose the development which we need to pay for infrastructure and roads.


93

2. ALC DECISIONS

1. Early correspondence between the City and ALC concerns a block exclusion of the

commercially designated properties in 1980. This application and subsequent

applications are denied by the ALC until June, 1985, when the ALC approved in principle

to formally exclude 7.26 ha subject to:9

A clear commitment being made by CPM to rezone for commercial use only

Location of a proposed service road to be adjacent to Lougheed Hwy

ALR remainders of specific lots be consolidated with adjacent property in the ALR

That the properties be subdivided along the proposed ALR boundary

That fencing and drainage be constructed paralleling the new boundary of the

ALR.

The terms of the approval and pre‐agreement with the City provide for an “as needed”

development approach permitting phased exclusion of the subject parcels so as

minimize disruption to existing agriculture. In addition, the provisions are considered to

establish a clear and defensible ALR boundary.

2. Subsequent to the approval, CPM indicates that the conditions attached to the

exclusion were not conducive to development of the property. The ALC reconsiders the

application and relaxed its requirements regarding the location of the service road,

allowing the service road to be located along the south side of the new ALR boundary.10

Exclusion is granted subject to meeting the ALC’s conditions.

3. Exclusion applications arre received from time to time between 1990 and 2002 from

individual owners of parcels within the commercial development area. These

applications are not coordinated with an overall commercial plan and created some

difficulty for the ALC as prescribed conditions were not being met. Nevertheless, one

parcel of 1.6 ha is excluded at the east end of the proposed commercial strip.

9 Agricultural Land Commission to City of Pitt Meadows. June 03, 1985. Re: exclusion application #01‐K‐84‐18338.

10 ALC to Pitt Meadows. Oct 22, 1990. Exclusion Application #01‐K‐84‐18338.


94

4. In August, 2003, the North Lougheed Commercial Area Study (NLCAS) is completed for

CPM. Three potential locations for a 10.12 ha (25 ac) commercial centre are examined.

These options supported additional exclusions of the ALR while vouching for

maintenance of net agricultural productivity within Pitt Meadows by consolidating small

agricultural holdings into more efficient parcels, additions to the ALR, and also, possibly,

by permanently retaining the lands within the ALR that were earlier approved for

phased exclusion. The NLCAS envisions a commercial area access route parallel to

Lougheed Hwy.

5. In Sep 2003, the CPM indicates to the ALC that a more northerly alignment of the

Meadow Gardens Way along an existing farm drainage ditch is required to provide more

width for commercial development than was contemplated in 1985. The ALC is willing to

consider, preferring the ”Central Option” in the NLCAS.. At the same time, the impact of

the proposed Abernethy Connector in Maple Ridge also comes to the ALC’s attention.

Talk also emerge about exclusion beyond the ditch to provide “…an even firmer

urban/agricultural boundary,” tied to providing significant benefits to agriculture by the

inclusion of organic soils into the ALR (Columbia Bithulithic Quarry property) and

consolidation of Aquilini properties in conjunction with subdivision of non‐ALR lands.11

6. In Nov. 2003, CPM formally applies for a block exclusion of ALR land along the north

boundary of the original commercial development area to accommodate widened

commercial development, increasing the total exclusion area for commercial

development to 8.9 ha. In Mar, 2004, the ALC approves this amendment to relocate the

north boundary of the commercial development area subject to:

Commercial zoning of the excluded areas

A number of more specific consolidations of ALR remainders to each other and

preferably with appropriate parts of the Bonson Road allowance (to be closed)

Construction of a Schedule D.6 fence along the south side of the drainage ditch

Registration of a covenant to ensure that the fence is maintained and not

removed and that the ditch will not be moved without prior Commission

approval.

11 Pellett, T. ALC Memo. Sep 18, 2003


95

7. By early 2006, ALC staff is anticipating the impact on the ALR of Abernethy Way and

Translink’s plans to provide an efficient, continuous route between Queensborough

Bridge in New Westminster and The Golden Ears Bridge. In a staff report, need is

recognized to plan for a connector from the west end of Abernethy Way to Lougheed

Hwy to alleviate rural congestion in Pitt Meadows specifically on Old Dewdney Trunk

Road (ODTR).

Three options for the location of the North Lougheed Connector (NLC) and

accommodation of agriculture are examined by ALC staff. These are:

Option 1: NLC immediately north of Meadow Garden Golf Course, dipping

downward to form the ALR boundary with the commercial development, with

exclusion of all ALR south of the NLC, and consolidation of remnants north of the

NLC with other ALR land north of the connector (Figure 2)

Option 2: A straight NCS immediately north of the golf course, with agricultural

underpass to ALR lands south of the NLC, and consolidation of ALR remnants

north and south of the NLC with other ALR land north of the NLC (Figure 3)

Option 3: NLC through the golf course and dipping south to form the ALR

boundary with the commercial development, reconfiguration of the golf course

using ALR lands south of the NLC and consolidation of ALR remnants with other

ALR land north of the connector (Figure 4)

Also noted, the Pitt Meadows Farmers’ Institute (PMFI) is pressing the need to have

ODTR traffic congestion alleviated. Delisting ODTR as a regional arterial would allow

changes to be made but that was only possible if another parallel road was created to

serve the regional arterial purpose. The anticipated benefits included:

The NLC is anticipated to reduce traffic on ODTR significantly, specifically

commuter traffic coming from Maple Ridge and Mission to the east.

Delisting from arterial status would enable traffic calming and other measures

that would benefit agriculture

Possibility of raising taxes that could be used to assist drainage funding.

8. On Mar 08, 2007, the AAC discusses an application to exclude land from the ALR for

commercial development in the North Lougheed Area in concert with a proposal by

proponent to construct an east/west connector road at the north boundary of the

excluded lands. By resolution, the PMFI does not support the ALR exclusion on the


96

grounds that the application was premature, in view of questions about phasing,

funding, land use and the impact of the new Golden Ears Bridge opening in 2009.

9. In August, 2007, the CPM decides to proceed with an application to the ALC for the NLC

transportation corridor through the ALR. CPM reports having contacted property

owners in the study area and receiving a favourable response to the proposed NLC,

provided that adverse impacts to the ALR are minimized. At the same time, CPM

indicated intent to include NLC in the City’s Major Road Network Plan and that “… the

road be designed to have the least impact possible on the ALR while meeting

transportation needs.” Recognized challenges include:

Funding for the road not secured

Need for minimum 70 km design speed

Routing of the road to minimize loss of agricultural land and/or functionality of

the road

Need for access to the North Lougheed Commercial Area from the NLC

10. In late 2007, the Official Community Plan Review process begins. The NLC is included in

the review.

11. In Sep, 2007, Pitt Meadows Shopping Centres Ltd. makes application to the ALC to

import subgrade structural fill as preload, available from the Golden Ears Bridge

construction.

12. In Sep, 2007, the AAC indicates its support for a 70 km/h design road aligned as far

south as possible and to be competed in its entirety to be acceptable

13. In Oct, 207, CPM retains an Engineering consultant to assess and refine the alignment of

the NLC. The study provides support for a straight line alignment through the ALR and

forecasts substantial reduction in vehicle trips on ODTR. The proposal includes provision

for a farm access to connect the ALR lands south of the NLC with those north of the

NLC using the existing road right of way (Bonson Road)

14. In Feb 2008, an ALC Staff Report discusses issues related to :12

12 ALC Staff Report. Nov 15, 2007.


97

The proposed NLC and impact on ODTR

Changing traffic patterns related to the impending opening of Pitt River Bridge

and the Golden Ears Bridge

Need for the NLC to provide “…a substantial overall benefit to agriculture”

Developer of shopping malls buying up ALR south of the proposed NLC

A need to decouple the NLC approval in principle from potential exclusion of

lands south of the NLC

15. Jan and Mar, 2008, Pitt Meadows Shopping Centres Ltd. (PMSC) requests

reconsideration for the partial exclusion of two properties located in the North

Lougheed commercial development area. This application asks for reconsideration to

redefine the ALR boundary to follow the northern legal lot lines of the affected

properties. The rationale includes:

Legal lot lines or, at minimum, the NLC should form the boundary with the ALR

Large retail cannot be accommodated under current size and configuration of

parcels designated for commercial development

Consolidation of isolated remnants of the ALR south of the NLC is not practical or

obtainable

Early approval would allow the PMSC to accept fill/preload over the entire lot

area as it becomes available from Golden Ears Bridge construction

16. On Aug 25, 2010, ALC informs CPM of decision on the exclusion application in favour of

the NLC has been successful

“Although the proposal would impact existing or potential agricultural uses of the

affected lands, in balance it would increase the ability of farmers in a significant area

of Pitt Meadows to make more effective use of their lands”

Points noted:

Downgrading of ODT as a regional arterial road, as requested by PMFI

Traffic levels on ODT have not declined below levels that lead farmers to first

request downgrading


98

Ongoing growth of Maple Ridge will continue to increase traffic in Pitt Meadows

PMFI continues to support ODT downgrading

Downgrading ODT will have less impact west of Harris Road

The connector will take 7.4 ha of farmland and 0.3 ha at the junction of 2

watercourses

The connector would sever six parcels, of which 4 are actively farmed

Severed portions of parcels south of the new connector and west of Meadows

Golf Course would be under pressure for conversion to non‐farm use

One farmer is firmly opposed to the connector because of the waste of farmland

Subject to the following conditions:

Registration of a covenant on each affected parcel for the purpose of:

i. Restricting the use of the land north of the road to farm use

ii. Restricting the use of the land south of the road to farm use or any other

use which may be specified by an existing Commission order

Supervision by an agrologist of the disposition of topsoil to adjoining farms

Completion of the road within 3 years

A request for reconsideration must be received within one year

17. Subsequent events

Press coverage of positions for and against the NLC

Local MLA Sather against the project

o Questioning the level of diligence taken by the ALC

o Questioning the premise that supporting the NLC would significantly

improve the movement of traffic between Abernethy Way and the

Lougheed Hwy west of Harris Road

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

99

3.

DETAILED EVALU

ATIO

N M

ATRIX

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

100

AE

CO

M

City

of

Pitt

Mea

dow

s

Nor

th L

ough

eed

Land

Use

Stu

dy

101


102

4. LAND USE MARKET REVIEW – COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL CONSULTING

MAPLE RIDGE/PITT MEADOWSHISTORICAL ANNUAL INDUSTRIAL MARKET ACTIVITY (Year-End)

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Period Avg.

Inventory (sf) 1,370,950 1,370,950 1,370,950 1,625,968 1,687,540 1,753,112 1,810,984 1,810,984 1,810,984 1,810,984

Annual New Supply (sf) 0 0 0 255,018 61,572 65,572 57,872 0 0 0 44,003

Annual Absorption (sf) -85,316 80,056 -66,125 339,751 31,717 52,761 58,869 7,142 19,474 15,903 45,423

Vacancy Rate (%) 9.1% 3.3% 8.1% 1.6% 3.3% 3.9% 3.8% 3.4% 2.3% 1.4%

Vacant Space (sf) 124,756 45,241 111,047 26,015 55,689 68,371 68,817 61,573 41,503 25,600

Source: Colliers Industrial Market Reviews, 2001-2010.

PORT COQUITLAMHISTORICAL ANNUAL INDUSTRIAL MARKET ACTIVITY (Year-End)

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Period Avg.

Inventory (sf) 5,494,800 5,710,800 6,154,300 6,337,300 6,447,105 6,499,786 6,669,786 6,763,140 7,277,140 7,482,408

Annual New Supply (sf) 215,000 216,000 443,500 183,000 109,805 52,681 0 93,354 514,000 0 182,734

Annual Absorption (sf) 72,983 346,154 488,922 77,042 131,901 85,272 74,382 73,354 469,657 117,550 193,722

Vacancy Rate (%) 5.0% 2.4% 1.5% 3.1% 2.7% 2.2% 1.0% 1.3% 1.8% 2.9%

Vacant Space (sf) 274,740 137,059 92,315 196,456 174,072 141,851 67,469 84,978 131,454 200,340

Source: Colliers Industrial Market Reviews, 2001-2010.

2001 - 2010 Industrial Market Comparison

Industrial Market Indicator MR/PM PC

Increase in Inventory (sf) 520,034 1,987,608

Avg. Annual Absorption (sf) 45,423 193,722

1 Please note that, for 2010, “ttd” means total to date.

2 Figures in brackets after Retail Category descriptions are North American Industry Classification (NAICS) codes, as reported to Statistics Canada.

RETAIL EXPENDITURE POTENTIAL

North Lougheed Shopping Centre - Primary Trade Area

2010 2020POPULATION 51,291 57,789 INCOME (PDI) 29,085$ 30,569$

TOTAL INCOME POTENTIAL $1,491,820,470 $1,766,560,660RETAIL SALES / INCOME 44.2% 44.2%

TOTAL RETAIL POTENTIAL $659,701,200 $781,194,600

Grocery stores (4451) 128,663,272$ 152,358,451$ Specialty food stores (4452) 8,689,785$ 10,290,134$ Beer, wine and liquor stores (4453) 37,980,989$ 44,975,731$ Health and personal care stores (446) 43,971,300$ 52,069,243$ General merchandise stores (452) 77,380,031$ 91,630,669$ Clothing stores (4481) 28,902,158$ 34,224,903$ Shoe stores (4482) 4,225,236$ 5,003,374$ Jewellery, luggage and leather goods stores (4483) 4,129,024$ 4,889,442$ Electronics and appliance stores (443) 24,487,449$ 28,997,163$ Furniture stores (4421) 13,536,818$ 16,029,817$ Home furnishings stores 9,086,918$ 10,760,403$ Building material & garden equipment/supply dealers 39,815,323$ 47,147,883$ Sporting goods, hobby, music and book stores (451) 19,242,440$ 22,786,211$

Miscellaneous store retailers (453) 18,592,120$ 22,016,125$ Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers (441) 128,144,860$ 151,744,566$

Gasoline stations (447) 72,853,477$ 86,270,485$

TOTAL RETAIL EXPENDITURES 659,701,200$ 781,194,600$

Source: Colliers International Realty Advisors, 2010

Detailed Restaurant Spending Breakdown Pitt Meadows Total Trade

Food Service Sub-Category (BC Avg.) Area Potential

Full-service restaurants [7221] 834$ 48,213,079$ Limited-service eating places [7222] 676$ 39,092,195$ Special food services [7223] 135$ 7,783,583$ Drinking places (alcoholic beverages) [7224] 147$ 8,505,428$ Total, food services and drinking places 1,793$ 103,594,286$

3 Please note that these sales potential figures are illustrative of what could be achieved on-site given reasonable assumptions of continued spending outflow and continued support of other existing trade area commercial facilities. If quoted, these figures should be rounded and described as such.

Detailed Restaurant Spending Breakdown Total Trade Potential Mkt. Study Area With Inflow of:

Food Service Sub-Category Area Potential Capture Resident Sales 15%

Full-service restaurants [7221] 48,213,079$ 10% 4,821,308$ 5,672,127$ Limited-service eating places [7222] 39,092,195$ 10% 3,909,220$ 4,599,082$ Special food services [7223] 7,783,583$ 10% 778,358$ 915,716$ Drinking places (alcoholic beverages) [7224] 8,505,428$ 10% 850,543$ 1,000,639$ Total, food services and drinking places 103,594,286$ 10,359,429$ 12,187,563$

NET RETAIL EXPENDITURES, 2020

North Lougheed Shopping Centre - Primary Trade AreaMarket

Capture 2010 2020(%)

Grocery stores (4451) 20% $25,732,654 $30,471,690Specialty food stores (4452) 15% $1,303,468 $1,543,520Beer, wine and liquor stores (4453) 15% $5,697,148 $6,746,360Health and personal care stores (446) 15% $6,595,695 $7,810,386General merchandise stores (452) 20% $15,476,006 $18,326,134Clothing stores (4481) 15% $4,335,324 $5,133,735Shoe stores (4482) 15% $633,785 $750,506

Jewellery, luggage and leather goods stores (4483) 15% $619,354 $733,416Electronics and appliance stores (443) 15% $3,673,117 $4,349,574Furniture stores (4421) 20% $2,707,364 $3,205,963Home furnishings stores 20% $1,817,384 $2,152,081Building material & garden equipment/supply dealers 20% $7,963,065 $9,429,577Sporting goods, hobby, music and book stores (451) 15% $2,886,366 $3,417,932Miscellaneous store retailers (453) 15% $2,788,818 $3,302,419Motor Vehicle & Parts Dealers (441) 15% $19,221,729 $22,761,685

TOTAL COMMERCIAL $101,451,277 $120,134,978


Potentially Supportable Floor Area Estimates By Category - N. LougheedNorth Lougheed Shopping Centre - Primary Trade Area

Sales

Reqm't 2010 2020($/Sq. Ft.)

Grocery stores (4451) $650 46,575 55,152 Specialty food stores (4452) $700 2,191 2,594

Beer, wine and liquor stores (4453) $1,000 6,703 7,937 Health and personal care stores (446) $750 10,346 12,252 General merchandise stores (452) $300 60,690 71,867 Clothing stores (4481) $350 14,573 17,256

Shoe stores (4482) $400 1,864 2,207 Jewellery, luggage and leather goods stores (4483) $400 1,822 2,157 Electronics and appliance stores (443) $1,000 4,321 5,117 Furniture stores (4421) $400 7,963 9,429 Home furnishings stores $500 4,276 5,064 Building material & garden equipment/supply dealers $250 37,473 44,374 Sporting goods, hobby, music and book stores (451) $500 6,791 8,042

Miscellaneous store retailers (453) $400 8,202 9,713

Food Services/Restaurants $600 18,029 20,313 Service Commercial/Professional Services Offices 25% 53,448 63,291

TOTAL COMMERCIAL 285,266 336,766

Associated Land Area at FSR of 0.28 23 28

Associated Land Area at FSR of 0.3 22 26


Note: Inflow factor of: 15% of total sales volume

4 ONNI’s Golden Ears Business Park has a later phase planned which can accommodate built-to-suit needs for 80,000 sf to as much as 300,000 sf.

5 Please note that these estimates were based on conversations with these individuals. Actual Statistics Canada data indicate commuter “outflow” of roughly 50% for Maple Ridge and 70% for Pitt Meadows.

Documents

Application for Exclusion From ALR - North Lougheed