home - district of mission, bc - special council agenda · 2019. 11. 22. · special council...

Special Council Agenda

The agenda for the Special Meeting of Council (Development Cost Charges Update) to be held in the Training Room of Fire Station No. 1, 33330 7th Avenue, Mission, British Columbia on Monday, March 12, 2018 commencing at 1:00 p.m.

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ADOPTION OF AGENDA

3. NEW BUSINESS (a) Development Cost Charge Bylaw Update

The purpose of this meeting is to present the first draft of the 2017 Development Cost Charge (DCC) Update Report for Council’s consideration and discussion, and to seek direction to proceed with stakeholder consultation, prior to considering updated DCC rates through a new DCC Bylaw.

(i) Presentation on Urban Systems Draft Report: 2017 Development Cost Charges Update

(ii) Discussion (iii) Recommendation: Council consider and resolve:

That staff proceed with stakeholder consultation for the Draft 2017 Development Cost Charge Update, as attached to the report from the Director of Finance dated March 12, 2018.

Page 2

4. ADJOURNMENT

1

Finance Department

Staff Report to Council

Page 1 of 4

File: 05-1765-30

DATE: March 12, 2018 TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Kris Boland, Director of Finance SUBJECT: Development Cost Charge Bylaw Update ATTACHMENT: Appendix A: Draft Report, 2017 Development Cost Charge Update

RECOMMENDATION: Council consider and resolve: That staff proceed with stakeholder consultation for the Draft 2017 Development Cost Charge Update, as attached to the report from the Director of Finance dated March 12, 2018.

PURPOSE: To present the first draft of the 2017 Development Cost Charge (DCC) Update report for Council’s consideration and discussion, and to seek direction to proceed with stakeholder consultation, prior to considering updated DCC rates through a new DCC Bylaw.

BACKGROUND: In accordance with Council’s 2016-2018 Strategic Plan, staff have been working for a number of months preparing the background information required for an update of the District’s DCC Bylaw. Following a Request for Proposals process, the District engaged consulting expertise for this project from Urban Systems Ltd. in November 2016. Project start-up meetings were held in January 2017, and work commenced over the following several months to update DCC project lists and cost estimates, and to revise the District’s growth projections. The result of this work is all compiled and presented in the attached Appendix A – Draft Report, 2017 Development Cost Charge Update. While the District’s Official Community Plan (OCP) update was running concurrently with this project, staff recognized early in the process that the timing of the OCP update was problematic given that the proposed changes in density projections and land uses will likely have an impact on DCC calculations. In simple terms, DCC rates are determined by taking the total cost of infrastructure projects required to service development, and dividing that amount by the forecast number of development units, to arrive at a per-unit DCC rate. While the 2018 OCP provides a new look at the forecast number of development units in the District, the underlying infrastructure planning requirements are yet to be completed to reflect the new OCP’s policies and projections. Consequently, only half of the information required to update the DCC equation is currently available. Various engineering master plans will commence in the very near future to ensure that the infrastructure needed to support the vision of the OCP is identified and funded appropriately. In other words, given the timing of supporting plans and the incompleteness of information at the time of the preparation of this DCC update, this report could not reflect the recently adopted OCP and as such the works conducted were done so with the best information available needed to populate both sides of the DCC calculation equation.

2

STAFF REPORT TO COUNCIL Page 2 of 4

In addition to the OCP timing being a challenge, staff acknowledges that the last update of the District’s DCC Bylaw occurred in 2012, which is longer than would typically be recommended in terms of best practices. Without taking into account the recently adopted OCP, enough new engineering information has been received since the last DCC update to create some sense of urgency to update the DCC Bylaw. The main point is while it would seem logical that the DCC update would reflect the recently adopted OCP; that would only be taking into account half of the information required to recalculate DCCs as the new engineering information is not reflected in this OCP. In essence, this DCC update is considered a “minor” update as it takes into account updated project cost estimates, and minor updates to growth projections and the DCC project lists. This is in contrast to a “major” DCC update, which would involve a detailed review of growth estimates based on the new OCP and an in-depth review of DCC project lists, typically based on updated infrastructure planning analysis.

DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS: The Draft DCC Update report attached as Appendix A includes all the required information to allow for a minor update of the District’s DCC Bylaw, including background information, growth projections, DCC project lists, and implementation issues. Also included are updated DCC rates, calculated based on the updated information gathered throughout the process thus far, as well as a comparison of those proposed rates to neighbouring municipalities. Details of the draft update report will be presented by Urban Systems and District staff at the March 12, 2018 Special Meeting of Council. Now that the background work is complete, as presented in this report, Council has the opportunity to review the resulting DCC calculations with the option to provide direction to staff ahead of the stakeholder consultation phase in which engagement is primarily focused on the development community. Following are areas where Council could provide direction that would affect the draft DCC rates currently proposed:

1. Municipal Assist Factor: as per legislation, municipalities are not able to entirely charge the full cost of development-related infrastructure through DCCs. The accepted practice is the municipality must fund at least 1% of DCC project costs, also known as the “municipal assist factor”; any amount up to the remaining 99% can be recovered through DCCs. The municipal assist factor is at the discretion of Council, and reflects whether or not Council desires to subsidize development. Currently, all of the District’s DCC programs are built with a 1% municipal assist factor, indicating that development should pay its fair share of related new infrastructure. Should Council deem it appropriate to subsidize the costs related to growth by allocating additional property tax revenue or user fee revenue to the DCC calculation, this could be accomplished by increasing the municipal assist factor. The result would be a decrease in DCC rates for the development community. Of course, any increase in the municipal assist factor will require additional municipal funding contributions to be identified. At this time, staff are not recommending any change to the municipal assist factor.

2. Will the DCC rates deter development? Council has a requirement under Section 564 of the Local Government Act to consider whether DCC rates will deter development, discourage the construction of reasonably priced housing stock or the provision of reasonably priced serviced land, or discourage development designed to result in a low environmental impact. In order to assist Council with this consideration, included in the information presented at this meeting is a comparison of Mission’s existing and proposed DCC rates to a number of other local municipalities. This is intended to provide perspective on how Mission’s DCC rates compare in the local development environment. Should Council have concerns that proposed DCC rates might deter development, consideration for increasing the municipal assist factor can be given, as that would decrease DCC rates by increasing the amount of subsidy the general taxpayer provides to support growth-related infrastructure.

3


3. DCC Waivers: The Local Government Act provides Council with the ability to consider

waiving/reducing DCCs for certain specific uses, namely not-for-profit affordable housing, for-profit affordable housing, small lot subdivision that results in low greenhouse gas emissions, or developments with a low environmental impact. The term “waiving” can be misleading, as the accepted practice is any waived DCCs cannot simply be reallocated to the other remaining development units within the District through higher DCC rates; instead, the District would need to identify a non-DCC funding source to compensate for any waived DCCs, in order to maintain the integrity of the DCC calculation formula. In the past, the District has never provided any DCC waivers. As this is a minor DCC update, the consideration of DCC waivers is not currently included in the scope of this update. However, should Council direct staff to investigate DCC waivers, this can be tackled as a separate project, and solidified through a separate DCC waivers bylaw. Staff would need the opportunity to scope out a DCC waiver project, as additional budget for consulting expertise would be required.

Next Steps Changes to the proposed DCC Bylaw can be made as directed by Council at almost any point during this DCC update process, whether that be feedback provided to date from Council, or following any subsequent feedback received from the stakeholder consultation process. Once Council is satisfied with the information contained in the Draft DCC Update Report, Urban Systems and staff will proceed with stakeholder consultation. Following stakeholder consultation, Council could consider the first three readings to the proposed DCC Bylaw. After the first three readings are complete, the proposed bylaw must then be sent to the Inspector of Municipalities for approval, prior to final bylaw adoption.

COUNCIL GOALS/OBJECTIVES: This report addresses Strategy 3.0 of Council’s 2016-2018 Strategic Plan, Update DCC Bylaw.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The financial implications associated with this DCC update involve ensuring DCC rates are as up to date as possible, in order to ensure development is paying its fair share of growth-related infrastructure costs. In order to maintain this equity, it is important for the District to keep up with regular DCC updates, as that allows for the correction of any of the many assumptions that go into calculating DCC rates. In terms of the consulting engagement for this DCC update, the project cost remains within the approved budget.

COMMUNICATION: External communication will begin following Council approval to proceed with stakeholder consultation on the proposed DCC Bylaw.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION: In accordance with Council’s 2016-2018 Strategic Plan, staff have been working for a number of months on the background information required to prepare for an update of the District’s DCC Bylaw. The Draft DCC Update report attached as Appendix A includes all the required information to update the District’s DCC Bylaw, including background information, growth projections, DCC project lists, and implementation issues. Also included in the draft report are updated DCC rates, calculated based on the updated information gathered throughout the process thus far.

4


Staff are seeking any feedback from Council on the Draft DCC Update Report, which could potentially result in changes to the proposed DCC rates. Ultimately, staff are seeking approval to proceed with stakeholder consultation, working towards the eventual adoption of an updated DCC Bylaw later this year.

SIGN-OFFS:

Kris Boland, Director of Finance

Reviewed by: Dan Sommer, Director of Development Services

Reviewed by: Tracy Kyle, Director of Engineering and Public Works

Comment from Chief Administrative Officer:

5

DRAFT REPORT Prepared for: District of Mission

2017 Development Cost Charge Update

#550 – 1090 Homer Street

Vancouver, BC, V6B 2W9

Contact:

T: 604.235.1701

E: [email protected]

urbansystems.ca

March 2018 | File: 0995.0042.01

Appendix A6

mailto:[email protected]

2017 Development Cost Charge Update Draft Report

Client: District of Mission Prepared by:

Urban Systems Ltd. #550 – 1090 Homer Street Vancouver, BC V6B 2W9

Phone: (604) 235-1701

Date issued:

March 2018

Project No.:

0995.0042.01

This report was prepared by Urban Systems Ltd. for the account of the District of Mission. The material reflects Urban Systems Ltd.’s best judgement in light of the information available to it at the time of preparation. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decisions to be made based on it, are the responsibility of such third parties. Urban Systems Ltd. accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this report.

7

Page (i) 0995.0042.01 / March 2018 2018-03-02-Mission DCC Background Report_draft_v3

TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 1

PART 1. BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................ 1

PART 2. DCC KEY ELEMENTS ..................................................................................................... 2

PART 3. GROWTH PROJECTIONS AND EQUIVALENCIES ....................................................... 5

3.1 Growth Projections ................................................................................................. 5

3.2 Equivalencies ......................................................................................................... 5

PART 4. DCC PROJECTS AND COSTS ....................................................................................... 8

4.1 DCC Costs ............................................................................................................. 8

4.2 Interest on Long-term Debt .................................................................................. 11

4.3 DCC Projects ....................................................................................................... 11

PART 5. DCC RATES ................................................................................................................... 14

5.1 DCC Rates ........................................................................................................... 14

5.2 Changes in Rates from Previous Update ............................................................ 17

PART 6. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ............................................................................... 18

PART 7. DCC IMPLEMENTATION ............................................................................................... 19

7.1 Bylaw Exemptions ................................................................................................ 19

7.2 DCC Waivers and Reductions ............................................................................. 19

7.3 Collection of Charges – Building Permit and Subdivision .................................... 19

7.4 Collection of DCCs on Redeveloped or Expanded Developments ...................... 20

7.5 In-Stream Applications ......................................................................................... 20

7.6 Rebates and Credits ............................................................................................ 20

7.7 DCC Monitoring and Accounting.......................................................................... 21

7.8 DCC Reviews ....................................................................................................... 21

TABLES Table ES 1 Proposed DCC Rate Summary .................................................................................... ES-2

Table 1 DCC Key Elements .................................................................................................................. 2

Table 2 Equivalencies ........................................................................................................................... 6

Table 3 DCC Program Overview and Capital Costs ............................................................................. 9

Table 4 Current and Proposed DCC Rate Comparison ..................................................................... 15

Table 5 Proposed DCC Rates ............................................................................................................ 16

8

Page (ii) 0995.0042.01 / March 2018 2018-03-02-Mission DCC Background Report_draft_v3

APPENDICES Appendix A DCC Growth Projections Appendix B DCC Program and Calculations Appendix C DCC Program Maps Appendix D Public Consultation Materials Appendix E Existing District of Mission Development Cost Charge Bylaw 5214-2011 Appendix F Proposed District of Mission Development Cost Charge Bylaw 5714-2018

9

Page ES-1 0995.0042.01 / March 2018 2018-03-02-Mission DCC Background Report_draft_v3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The District of Mission (District) last conducted a major review of its Development Cost Charge (DCC) Bylaw in 2012. Since the previous update, construction costs have increased, and new information has become available on infrastructure/parks needs. The District has chosen to conduct a minor review, including minor adjustments to growth projections and the DCC capital program, rather than a major one due to the timing of the Official Community Plan update, which was in process during the completion of this DCC review, and the need for future planning and infrastructure studies. Nevertheless, a DCC update is required at this time to ensure financial sustainability for the District while new studies are conducted. This update includes a review of growth estimates as well as a review of eligible projects. DCC eligible projects for transportation, drainage, sewer, and parks related to the District’s local DCC programs were identified through reference to current infrastructure planning documents and discussions with District staff. Project costs identified in infrastructure planning documents were reviewed to update costs based on inflation. Completed projects were removed from the DCC program. The District of Mission is updating their local DCC program that consists of the following programs:

• Roads – All Areas • Sewer – All Areas • Silvercreek Parkway Parkland (All Areas) • Cedar Valley Roads (Area B) • Cedar Valley Drainage (Area B) • Cedar Valley Water (Area B) • Cedar Valley Environmentally Sensitive Parkland Acquisition (Area B) • Cedar Valley Environmentally Sensitive Parkland Development (Area B) • Cedar Valley Sewer Extension (Area B1) • Silverdale Creek Bridge (Area E) • Silverdale Industrial Water (Areas D and E) • Silverdale Industrial Sewer (Areas D and E)

In addition to these local programs, the District’s regional DCC program, consisting of the Regional Sewage Treatment and Regional Water Supply programs (shared between District of Mission and City of Abbotsford), were also updated as part of this review. Updated Development Cost Charge rates for the District of Mission’s local DCC and regional DCC programs are provided in Table ES 1.

10

Page ES-2 0995.0042.01 / March 2018 2018-03-02-Mission DCC Background Report_draft_v3

Table ES 1 Proposed DCC Rate Summary

Areas Land Use Unit of Measure Roads - All Areas

Sewer - All Areas

Regional Sewage

Treatment(6)

Regional Water Supply (6)

Silvercreek Parkway

Parkland - All Areas

Cedar Valley Roads (Area B)

Cedar Valley Drainage (Area B)

Cedar Valley Sewer (Area B)

Cedar Valley Water (Area B)

Cedar Valley Environmentally

Sensitive Parkland

Acquisition (Area B)


Sensitive Parkland

Development (Area B)

Cedar Valley Sewer

Extension (Area B1)

Silverdale Creek Bridge

(Area E)

Silverdale Industrial

Water (Areas D and E)


Sewer(Areas D and E)

Total

Area "A"

Single Family (3) per dwelling unit 5,057.82 1,070.68 3,278.38 4,169.20 759.52 14,335.60$ Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex per dwelling unit 4,561.95 943.60 2,889.25 3,674.34 669.37 12,738.52$ Townhouse (1) per m2 of floor area 25.70 6.49 19.86 25.25 4.60 81.90$ Apartment (2),(4) per m2 of floor area 26.43 6.64 20.34 25.87 4.71 84.01$ Commercial per m2 of floor area 69.42 2.07 6.32 8.04 85.85$ Industrial per m2 of floor area 22.31 1.43 4.38 5.57 33.69$ Institutional (5) per m2 of floor area 89.26 1.43 4.38 5.57 100.63$

Area "B" -$ Single Family (3) per dwelling unit 5,057.82 1,070.68 3,278.38 4,169.20 759.52 6,323.09 5,931.06 668.77 1,602.99 372.80 113.71 29,348.01$ Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex per dwelling unit 4,561.95 943.60 2,889.25 3,674.34 669.37 5,703.17 4,744.85 589.39 1,412.72 328.55 100.21 25,617.41$ Townhouse (1) per m2 of floor area 25.70 6.49 19.86 25.25 4.60 32.13 27.43 4.05 9.71 2.26 0.69 158.16$ Apartment (2),(4) per m2 of floor area 26.43 6.64 20.34 25.87 4.71 33.05 15.20 4.15 9.95 2.31 0.71 149.37$ Commercial per m2 of floor area 69.42 2.07 6.32 8.04 86.79 18.98 1.29 3.09 196.00$ Institutional (5) per m2 of floor area 89.26 1.43 4.38 5.57 111.58 17.79 0.89 2.14 233.04$

Area "B1" -$ Single Family (3) per dwelling unit 5,057.82 1,070.68 3,278.38 4,169.20 759.52 6,323.09 5,931.06 668.77 1,602.99 372.80 113.71 337.56 29,685.57$ Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex per dwelling unit 4,561.95 943.60 2,889.25 3,674.34 669.37 5,703.17 4,744.85 589.39 1,412.72 328.55 100.21 297.50 25,914.91$ Townhouse (1) per m2 of floor area 25.70 6.49 19.86 25.25 4.60 32.13 27.43 4.05 9.71 2.26 0.69 2.04 160.20$ Apartment (2),(4) per m2 of floor area 26.43 6.64 20.34 25.87 4.71 33.05 15.20 4.15 9.95 2.31 0.71 2.09 151.47$ Commercial per m2 of floor area 69.42 2.07 6.32 8.04 86.79 18.98 1.29 3.09 0.65 196.65$ Institutional (5) per m2 of floor area 89.26 1.43 4.38 5.57 111.58 17.79 0.89 2.14 0.45 233.49$

Area "C" -$ Single Family (3) per dwelling unit 5,057.82 1,070.68 3,278.38 4,169.20 759.52 14,335.60$ Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex per dwelling unit 4,561.95 943.60 2,889.25 3,674.34 669.37 12,738.52$ Townhouse (1) per m2 of floor area 25.70 6.49 19.86 25.25 4.60 81.90$ Apartment (2),(4) per m2 of floor area 26.43 6.64 20.34 25.87 4.71 84.01$ Commercial per m2 of floor area 69.42 2.07 6.32 8.04 85.85$ Industrial per m2 of floor area 22.31 1.43 4.38 5.57 33.69$ Institutional (5) per m2 of floor area 89.26 1.43 4.38 5.57 100.63$

Area "D" Industrial per m2 of floor area 22.31 1.43 4.38 5.57 33.69$ West Silverdale Industrial (West of Silver Creek) Industrial per ha of development area 14,863.04 6,196.63 21,059.67$

Area "E" Industrial per m2 of floor area 22.31 1.43 4.38 5.57 33.69$ East Silverdale Industrial (East of Silver Creek) Industrial per ha of development area 44,246.42 14,863.04 6,196.63 65,306.09$

Notes:1.) Townhouse based on an average size of 125.415 sq.m. (1,350 sq.ft.). No maximum rates.2.) Apartment based on an average size of 97.545 sq.m. (1,050 sq.ft.). No maximum rates.3.) Single Family = Lots > 465m2 Single Family Compact = Lots < or = 465m2. .4.) Apartments include institutional residential units, except for Regional Water Supply program, which has a separate institutional residential category.5.) Institutional includes schools, except for Regional Water Supply program, which has a separate school category.6.) Regional Water Supply and Regional Sewer Treatment are levied per dwelling unit for townhouse and apartment.

Mission Central and Fraser Area

Cedar Valley Specified Area

Hatzic, SW Mission and Rural Areas

Cedar Valley

11

0995.0042.01 / March 2018 2018-03-02-Mission DCC Background Report_draft_v3

PART 1. BACKGROUND

The District of Mission felt it was time to complete a minor update to its Development Cost Charge Bylaw given that:

• The last update was completed in 2012

• Construction and land costs have risen since that time

• The District has updated information on infrastructure needs

This DCC update is based on the 2008 Official Community Plan as the District had not yet finalized its most recent OCP update until well after this DCC review was initiated. The District is also currently initiating a review of the Cedar Valley Comprehensive Development Plan (CVCDP). Once the CVCDP is complete, further updates will be made to the DCC program based on updated growth projections and subsequent infrastructure/parks plans.

This DCC update involved:

• Minor review of growth projections

• Review and update of eligible projects and costs

• Consultation with stakeholders and the public (to be completed)

This DCC program was developed to be consistent with the following legislation, guides, plans, and studies:

• Local Government Act

• District of Mission’s 2008 Official Community Plan

• Development Cost Charges Best Practices Guide

• District of Mission Transportation Master Plan, 2016

• District of Mission Sewer Modelling, 2017

• Development Cost Charges Bylaw 5214-2011

The material provided in the background report is meant for information only. Reference should be made to the current Bylaw 5214–2011 for rates until a new DCC bylaw has been adopted.

12


PART 2. DCC KEY ELEMENTS

The Development Cost Charge Best Practices Guide (prepared by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing) stipulates key elements that should be considered when determining DCC rates. Table 1 outlines the key elements, decisions and supporting rationale used in this update. Table 1 also indicates whether the proposed approach aligns with the Best Practices Guide.

Table 1 DCC Key Elements

Key Element Proposed DCC Update Rationale

Aligns with Best

Practices Guide?

Time Frame

Local Program (1): Residential: 44 years (build-out) Non-residential: 16 years (build-out) Regional Program (1): 20 years

• For local DCC programs, time frame horizons remain consistent with the previous major update. Past growth has been netted out, but growth projections have not been recalculated to extend the timeframe. A review of growth projections will occur in the future upon OCP adoption and to inform future infrastructure planning.

• For the regional program (water and sewer), the timeframe has been adjusted to a 20-year horizon to be consistent with the infrastructure planning horizons.

District-wide or area-specific charge

District-wide and area-specific

• Local transportation, sewer and parks programs, and regional sewer and water programs, apply District-wide as they provide a benefit to all growth within the District.

• Area-specific programs apply for transportation, drainage, sewer, water and parks for the areas of Cedar Valley and/or Silverdale. Projects in these areas provide specific benefit to users in these areas.

Grant Assistance

Yes • River Crossing project (#28 - Regional

Sewage Treatment program) accounts

13



Aligns with Best

Practices Guide?

for $6,898,023 in committed grant funding from the Clean Water and Wastewater Fund (CWWF). This amount is excluded from the project cost in the DCC program.

Developer Contribution

Yes

• Intersection Upgrade at Cherry Ave and Stave Lake St. (#12 - Roads All Areas program) accounts for $100,000 received from developer, and the cost estimate is updated. This amount is excluded from the project cost in the DCC program.

Interim Financing

Yes

• Several projects included in this update account for internal loan recovery amounts and exclude interest payments. These projects are discussed in Section 4.2 and identified in Appendix B.

Benefit Allocation

47-100% • Majority of projects 100% allocation to

reflect exclusive benefit to new development. (1)

Municipal Assist Factor

All infrastructure types – 1%

• Mission is contributing the minimum allowable assist factor to ensure the long- term financial sustainability of the District.

Units of charge

Per dwelling unit; per square metre of floor area; per hectare of development area

• Per dwelling unit for single-family and single-family compact/ duplex.

• Per m2 floor area for townhouse, apartment, commercial, institutional and industrial (except for Areas D and E, Silverdale Industrial – bridge, water and sewer).

• Per ha developable area for Areas D and E, Silverdale Industrial – bridge, water and sewer.

14



Aligns with Best

Practices Guide?

• Impact on infrastructure is expected to correlate most closely with the above units of measure per land use.

(1) Local Program and Regional Program Mission’s “local” program refers to the DCC programs applicable in the District of Mission. The “regional” program refers to the Regional Sewage Treatment and Regional Water Supply DCC programs that are joint programs with costs shared between the District of Mission and the City of Abbotsford.

(2) Benefit Allocation Details for Projects set at less than 100% Benefit to Development: Regional Sewage Treatment Projects with a benefit factor of 47% were calculated by City of Abbotsford staff and account for a redundancy component of plant upgrades as compared to straight capacity upgrades, in addition to replacement of existing capacity during upgrades. Projects with a benefit factor of 50% are those relating to the Wastewater System Master Plan and a specific upgrade to the wastewater treatment plant that will provide equal benefit to existing and future populations. Regional Water Supply Projects with a benefit factor of 50% are those related to the joint water master plan and will provide equal benefit to existing and future populations. Sewer – All Areas The benefit factor for the Fraser River Sanitary Crossing Force Main Upgrade project is 49%. This benefit factor is based on projected population growth as a percentage of total population at the end of the DCC horizon. Cedar Valley Environmentally Sensitive Parkland Acquisition All projects are set at a benefit factor of 81% which was calculated at the time the DCC program was created and reflects the existing population compared to potential developed population for these park acquisition projects. This remains consistent throughout the life of the DCC program.

15


PART 3. GROWTH PROJECTIONS AND EQUIVALENCIES 3.1 Growth Projections

The DCC program does not include a full update of growth projections as the District of Mission’s 2018 Official Community Plan was only recently adopted and did not inform this update. Updated growth projections resulting from the updated OCP will be incorporated into future infrastructure and park master planning and reflected in a future major DCC update. All growth projections used in this update are based on estimates developed during the previous 2012 DCC update. The Silverdale Industrial Water & Sewer (Areas D and E) and Silverdale Creek Bridge (Area E), growth projections were revised downward based on actual development statistics since the previous update. For all other areas of the District, the growth estimates used in the 2012 update have been revised downward based on assumed development activity since the previous update. The revised growth projections are included in Appendix A. These estimates were reviewed in consultation with District staff to ensure realistic development potential within the DCC time horizon. For the local DCC programs, the DCC horizons remain the same as in the previous program which is a build-out scenario to 2061 for residential growth and build-out scenario to 2033 for non-residential growth. For the regional programs, the past growth projections were calibrated to a 20-year horizon to better match the updated infrastructure planning horizon for these programs. The previous program used a 12-year timeframe for regional water and a 25-year timeframe for regional sewer. 3.2 Equivalencies

Equivalencies have been reviewed as part of this update to ensure any significant changes in expectations regarding relative impact are reflected. Equivalencies for drainage and parks are unchanged. The following updates to transportation, water and sewer are reflected in the proposed DCC calculations:

• Commercial and institutional equivalencies have been revised downwards for transportation to reflect suggested ratios provided in the Ministry’s Development Cost

Charges Best Practices Guide.

The equivalences used to calculate the proposed DCC rates are provided in Table 2.

16


Table 2 Equivalencies

Land Use Roads (trip ends)

Drainage (equivalent drainage

units)

Sewer (pop.)

Water (pop.)

Parks (pop.)

Single Family (per unit)

1.02 1.00 3.37 3.37 3.37

Single Family Compact/Duplex (per unit)

0.92 0.80 2.97 2.97 2.97

Townhouse (per unit)

0.65 0.58 2.56 2.56 2.56

Apartment (per unit)

0.52 0.25 2.04 2.04 2.04

Commercial (per ha for sewer and water; per m2 of floor area for roads and drainage)

0.014 0.0032 65 65 -

Industrial (per ha for sewer and water; per m2 of floor area for roads)

0.00451 - 45 45 -

Institutional (per ha for sewer and water; per m2 of floor area for roads and drainage)

0.018 0.003 45 45 -

1 The Industrial roads equivalency is set at 0.0045 trip ends per m2 of floor area for all Roads programs except for the Silverdale Creek Bridge. The equivalency for the Silverdale Creek Bridge has been set at 0.054 trips per m2 as per the “Silverdale Creek Bridge DCC Review” report by USL, 2004.

Roads For roads projects, the cost of development is distributed based on the trips generated by each land use.

17


Drainage In general terms, the impact on the storm drainage system of developing a parcel of land is expressed as the amount of stormwater run-off that must be accommodated by the system. The accepted parameter for expressing imperviousness in stormwater run-off calculations is the “run-off coefficient”. The run-off coefficient reflects the ratio between the impervious area on a parcel and the total area of the parcel. Run-off coefficients are then used to calculate drainage equivalencies per dwelling unit for residential uses and per square metre of gross floor area for non-residential uses. Sewer and Water Relative impact on sewer and water systems from new development is determined using estimated number of persons per unit for residential growth and equivalent population per hectare for non-residential growth.

Park Acquisition and Development Given that the need for new park space and park development is generated by new residents (as opposed to commercial, industrial, and institutional growth), the District will levy Parks DCCs only on residential development. For residential demand, occupancy rates can be used to project demands for park acquisition and development.

18


PART 4. DCC PROJECTS AND COSTS

4.1 DCC Costs

An overview of the DCC program costs by infrastructure type is provided in Table 3. The full DCC program and calculations are included in Appendix B. The District of Mission levies area-specific and all-areas DCCs. Refer to Appendix C for complete program maps. Area-specific DCCs are charged when infrastructure will only benefit a specific area; all-areas DCCs are charged where the entire District can benefit from new or upgraded infrastructure. DCC rates are determined by applying the key elements, growth projections and equivalencies described earlier in this report to projects that are DCC eligible and expected to be built within the specified DCC timeframe.

19


Table 3 DCC Program Overview and Capital Costs

DCC Program Total

Capital Costs

Benefit Allocation


DCC Recoverable

Program Costs Municipal Costs (1)

Roads - All Areas $58.9 M 100% 1% $58.3 M $589,000

Cedar Valley Roads (Area B) $13.9 M 100% 1% $13.8 M $139,000

Cedar Valley Drainage (Area B) $10.5 M 100% 1% $10.4 M $105,000

Sewer – All Areas $16.7 M 49-100% 1% $12.1 M $4.5 M

Cedar Valley Sewer (Area B) $1.3 M 100% 1% $1.3 M -

Cedar Valley Sewer Extension (Area B1) $0.3 M 100% 1% $0.3 M -

Cedar Valley Water (Area B) $3.9 M 100% 1% $3.9 M $39,000

Cedar Valley Environmentally Sensitive Parkland

Acquisition (Area B) $1.4 M 81% 1% $1.1 M $274,000

Cedar Valley Environmentally Sensitive Parkland

Development (Area B) $0.5 M 81% 1% $0.4 M $92,000

Silvercreek Parkway Parkland (All Areas) $3.4 M 100% 1% $3.3 M $34,000

Silverdale Industrial Water (Areas D and E) $0.3 M 100% 1% $0.3 M -

20


Note: (1) Includes municipal assist factor and portion allocated to existing development.

DCC Program (cont.) Total Capital Costs

Benefit Allocation


DCC Recoverable

Program Costs Municipal Costs (1)

Silverdale Industrial Sewer (Areas D and E) $0.1 M 100% 1% $0.1 M -

Silverdale Creek Bridge (Area E) $0.7 M 100% 1% $0.7 M -

Regional Sewage Treatment (All Areas) $17.6 M 47-100% 1% $13.4 M $4.2 M

Regional Water Supply (All Areas) $17.5 M 50-100% 1% $17.2 M $336,000

Total $147.2 M n/a n/a $136.9 M $10.3 M

21


4.2 Interest on Long-term Debt

Internal loan recovery amounts are included in this DCC program for the following: Cedar Valley Drainage Program (Area B); Cedar Valley Sewer Program (Area B); Cedar Valley Sewer Extension (Area B1); Regional Sewage Treatment Program; Silverdale Industrial Water (Areas D and E); Silverdale Industrial Sewer (Areas D and E); and Silverdale Creek Bridge (Area E). The costs included are outstanding internal loans calculated as the amount borrowed less repayments, excluding interest repayments; therefore, no interest on long-term debt is included. No external debt is included in the DCC program.

4.3 DCC Projects

The DCC program was updated through consultation with District staff and by reviewing the previous program to remove completed projects and inflate costs for existing projects to reflect current costs. A summary of project details for each class of infrastructure/parks is included below.

Roads The Roads DCC Program is separated into two programs: All Areas and Cedar Valley (Area B). These two separate roads programs ensure that the projects that are specific to Cedar Valley and required because of the new growth within that area are funded by that new growth. The list of District-wide and area-specific DCC projects consists of road, bridge and intersection upgrade projects, including land acquisition costs. Projects were determined through conversations with the District of Mission and based on the District of Mission Transportation Master Plan 2016. Projects were reviewed for DCC eligibility in consultation with District staff. The Silverdale Creek Bridge Program includes an outstanding internal loan amount (excluding interest repayments) carried over from the previous program, balanced to December 31, 2016. Drainage The Drainage DCC Program consists of projects that benefit only Cedar Valley (Area B). Specific projects include culvert crossings, detention ponds, storm sewers, ditch improvements and the Gaudin Creek South Realignment project. These projects were determined through a review of the previous program and were reviewed for DCC eligibility in consultation with District staff. This update includes an internal loan recovery for the property purchase for the Gaudin Creek DCC project as of December 31, 2016. Sewer The Sewer DCC Program is separated into four programs: Sewer All Areas (a new program); Cedar Valley (Area B); Cedar Valley (Area B1); and Silverdale Industrial (Areas D and E). These separate sewer programs ensure that projects specific to each area, and required because of the new growth

22


in those areas, are funded only by that new growth. (Note: The District also has a Regional Sewer program as outlined below). The list of District-wide DCC sewer projects was determined through conversations with District of Mission staff and is based on 2017 sewer modeling. Projects for sewer infrastructure include pipe upgrades, pump station upgrades, new forcemains and forcemain upgrades. Projects were reviewed for DCC eligibility in consultation with District staff. Area-specific sewer projects for Cedar Valley (Areas B and B1), and Silverdale Industrial (Areas D and E), consist of outstanding internal loan amounts (excluding interest repayments) carried over from the previous program, with updated balances to December 31, 2016. Water Water DCC programs exist for Cedar Valley (Area B) and Silverdale Industrial Water (Areas D and E). The project list for Cedar Valley consists of upgrades to a series of water mains to accommodate growth in that area. The Silverdale Industrial DCC consists of an outstanding internal loan amount (excluding interest repayments) carried over from the previous program, with balance updated to December 31, 2016. (Note: The District also has a Regional Water program as outlined below). Parkland Acquisition and Development The Parks DCC Program is separated into three programs: Silvercreek Parkway Parkland (All Areas); Cedar Valley Environmentally Sensitive Parkland Acquisition (Area B); and Cedar Valley Environmentally Sensitive Parkland Development (Area B). The Silvercreek Parkway Parkland DCC program applies District-wide and consists of land acquisition for parks and trail development projects. Based on a review of the previous DCC update, projects were determined and reviewed for DCC eligibility with District staff. The Cedar Valley Environmentally Sensitive Parkland Acquisition program consists of land acquisition costs associated with parks needs. The Cedar Valley Environmentally Sensitive Parkland Development consists of trail development projects associated with the open space land acquisition. Regional Water The Regional Water Supply DCC program is a joint program with costs shared between the District of Mission and the City of Abbotsford. Specific projects include additional water supply, joint water master planning, new watermains, watermain upgrades, river/creek crossings and other projects. These projects were determined based on the Draft 2018 Regional Financial Plan and were reviewed for DCC eligibility with District staff.

23


Regional Sewer The Regional Sewage Treatment DCC program is a joint program with costs shared between the District of Mission and the City of Abbotsford. Specific projects include joint wastewater master planning, treatment plant upgrades, river outfall, pump and pipe upgrades. These projects were determined based on the 2017 Regional Financial Plan and were reviewed for DCC eligibility with District staff. This program includes an outstanding internal loan amount (excluding interest repayments) carried over from the previous program, with balance updated to December 31, 2016.

24


PART 5. DCC RATES 5.1 DCC Rates

A comparison of current (2012) and proposed DCC rates, including regional water and sewer rates, is provided in Table 4. Detailed proposed DCC rates are included in Table 5.

25

0042.01 / March 20182018-03-02-Mission DCC Background Report_draft_v3

Table 4Current and Proposed DCC Rate Comparison

Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Proposed Existing Total

Proposed Total

ExistingArea "A"

Single Family per dwelling unit 5,057.82 2,275.02 1,070.68 3,278.38 4,894.21 4,169.20 5,345.73 759.52 812.93 14,335.60$ 13,327.89$Single Family Compact / Duplex per dwelling unit 4,561.95 2,051.98 943.60 2,889.25 4,313.30 3,674.34 4,711.22 669.37 716.44 12,738.52$ 11,792.94$Townhouse per m2 of floor area 25.70 11.56 6.49 19.86 29.64 25.25 32.38 4.60 4.92 81.90$ 78.50$Apartment per m2 of floor area 26.43 11.89 6.64 20.34 30.37 25.87 33.17 4.71 5.04 84.01$ 80.47$Commercial per m2 of floor area 69.42 64.68 2.07 6.32 9.44 8.04 8.72 85.85$ 82.84$Industrial per m2 of floor area 22.31 10.04 1.43 4.38 6.54 5.57 7.14 33.69$ 23.72$Institutional per m2 of floor area 89.26 44.61 1.43 4.38 6.54 5.57 7.14 100.63$ 58.29$

Area "B" -$ -$Single Family per dwelling unit 5,057.82 2,275.02 1,070.68 3,278.38 4,894.21 4,169.20 5,345.73 759.52 812.93 6,323.09 2,669.36 5,931.06 6,873.81 668.77 619.35 1,602.99 1,394.49 372.80 805.71 113.71 144.28 29,348.01$ 25,834.89$Single Family Compact / Duplex per dwelling unit 4,561.95 2,051.98 943.60 2,889.25 4,313.30 3,674.34 4,711.22 669.37 716.44 5,703.17 2,407.66 4,744.85 5,499.05 589.39 545.83 1,412.72 1,228.97 328.55 710.07 100.21 127.15 25,617.41$ 22,311.67$Townhouse per m2 of floor area 25.70 11.56 6.49 19.86 29.64 25.25 32.38 4.60 4.92 32.13 13.56 27.43 31.79 4.05 3.75 9.71 8.45 2.26 4.88 0.69 0.87 158.16$ 141.80$Apartment per m2 of floor area 26.43 11.89 6.64 20.34 30.37 25.87 33.17 4.71 5.04 33.05 13.95 15.20 17.62 4.15 3.84 9.95 8.65 2.31 5.00 0.71 0.90 149.37$ 130.43$Commercial per m2 of floor area 69.42 64.68 2.07 6.32 9.44 8.04 8.72 86.79 75.89 18.98 22.00 1.29 1.19 3.09 2.69 196.00$ 184.61$Institutional per m2 of floor area 89.26 44.61 1.43 4.38 6.54 5.57 7.14 111.58 52.34 17.79 20.62 0.89 2.76 2.14 6.21 233.04$ 140.22$

Area "B1" -$ -$Single Family per dwelling unit 5,057.82 2,275.02 1,070.68 3,278.38 4,894.21 4,169.20 5,345.73 759.52 812.93 6,323.09 2,669.36 5,931.06 6,873.81 668.77 619.35 1,602.99 1,394.49 372.80 805.71 113.71 144.28 337.56 263.08 29,685.57$ 26,097.97$Single Family Compact / Duplex per dwelling unit 4,561.95 2,051.98 943.60 2,889.25 4,313.30 3,674.34 4,711.22 669.37 716.44 5,703.17 2,407.66 4,744.85 5,499.05 589.39 545.83 1,412.72 1,228.97 328.55 710.07 100.21 127.15 297.50 231.85 25,914.91$ 22,543.52$Townhouse per m2 of floor area 25.70 11.56 6.49 19.86 29.64 25.25 32.38 4.60 4.92 32.13 13.56 27.43 31.79 4.05 3.75 9.71 8.45 2.26 4.88 0.69 0.87 2.04 1.59 160.20$ 143.39$Apartment per m2 of floor area 26.43 11.89 6.64 20.34 30.37 25.87 33.17 4.71 5.04 33.05 13.95 15.20 17.62 4.15 3.84 9.95 8.65 2.31 5.00 0.71 0.90 2.09 1.63 151.47$ 132.06$Commercial per m2 of floor area 69.42 64.68 2.07 6.32 9.44 8.04 8.72 86.79 75.89 18.98 22.00 1.29 1.19 3.09 2.69 0.65 0.51 196.65$ 185.12$Institutional per m2 of floor area 89.26 44.61 1.43 4.38 6.54 5.57 7.14 111.58 52.34 17.79 20.62 0.89 2.76 2.14 6.21 0.45 1.17 233.49$ 141.39$

Area "C" -$ -$Single Family per dwelling unit 5,057.82 2,275.02 1,070.68 3,278.38 4,894.21 4,169.20 5,345.73 759.52 812.93 14,335.60$ 13,327.89$Single Family Compact / Duplex per dwelling unit 4,561.95 2,051.98 943.60 2,889.25 4,313.30 3,674.34 4,711.22 669.37 716.44 12,738.52$ 11,792.94$Townhouse per m2 of floor area 25.70 11.56 6.49 19.86 29.64 25.25 32.38 4.60 4.92 81.90$ 78.50$Apartment per m2 of floor area 26.43 11.89 6.64 20.34 30.37 25.87 33.17 4.71 5.04 84.01$ 80.47$Commercial per m2 of floor area 69.42 64.68 2.07 6.32 9.44 8.04 8.72 85.85$ 82.84$Industrial per m2 of floor area 22.31 10.04 1.43 4.38 6.54 5.57 7.14 33.69$ 23.72$Institutional per m2 of floor area 89.26 44.61 1.43 4.38 6.54 5.57 7.14 100.63$ 58.29$

Area "D"

Industrial per m2 of floor area 22.31 10.04 1.43 4.38 6.54 5.57 7.14 33.69$ 23.72$West SilverdaleIndustrial Industrial per ha of development area 14,863.04 14,280.43 6,196.63 6,202.48 21,059.67$ 20,482.91$Area "E"

Industrial per m2 of floor area 22.31 10.04 1.43 4.38 6.54 5.57 7.14 33.69$ 23.72$East SilverdaleIndustrial Industrial per ha of development area 44,246.42 43,048.53 14,863.04 14,280.43 6,196.63 6,202.48 65,306.09$ 63,531.44$

Grand Total - Mission andRegional Rates

Silverdale IndustrialWater (Areas D and E)

Silverdale IndustrialSewer (Areas D and E)

Cedar Valley Water(Area B)

Silverdale CreekBridge (Area E)

Cedar Valley SewerExtension (Area B1)

Cedar ValleyEnviromentally

Sensitive ParklandDevelopment (Area B)

Cedar ValleyEnviromentally

Sensitive ParklandAcquisition (Area B)

Cedar Valley Roads(Area B)

Cedar Valley Drainage(Area B)

Cedar Valley Sewer(Area B)

Hatzic, SWMssion and RuralAreas

Silvercreek ParkwayParkland - All AreasRoads - All Areas Regional Sewage

Treatment

Mission Centraland Fraser Area

Cedar ValleySpecified Area

Unit of MeasureLand UseAreas

Cedar Valley

Sewer - All Areas Regional Water Supply (6),

(7)

26


Table 5 Proposed DCC Rates

Areas Land Use Unit of Measure Roads - All Areas

Sewer - All Areas

Regional Sewage

Treatment(6)

Regional Water Supply (6)

Silvercreek Parkway

Parkland - All Areas

Cedar Valley Roads (Area B)

Cedar Valley Drainage (Area B)

Cedar Valley Sewer (Area B)

Cedar Valley Water (Area B)


Sensitive Parkland

Acquisition (Area B)


Sensitive Parkland

Development (Area B)

Cedar Valley Sewer

Extension (Area B1)

Silverdale Creek Bridge

(Area E)


Water (Areas D and E)


Sewer(Areas D and E)

Total

Area "A"

Single Family (3) per dwelling unit 5,057.82 1,070.68 3,278.38 4,169.20 759.52 14,335.60$ Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex per dwelling unit 4,561.95 943.60 2,889.25 3,674.34 669.37 12,738.52$ Townhouse (1) per m2 of floor area 25.70 6.49 19.86 25.25 4.60 81.90$ Apartment (2),(4) per m2 of floor area 26.43 6.64 20.34 25.87 4.71 84.01$ Commercial per m2 of floor area 69.42 2.07 6.32 8.04 85.85$ Industrial per m2 of floor area 22.31 1.43 4.38 5.57 33.69$ Institutional (5) per m2 of floor area 89.26 1.43 4.38 5.57 100.63$

Area "B" -$ Single Family (3) per dwelling unit 5,057.82 1,070.68 3,278.38 4,169.20 759.52 6,323.09 5,931.06 668.77 1,602.99 372.80 113.71 29,348.01$ Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex per dwelling unit 4,561.95 943.60 2,889.25 3,674.34 669.37 5,703.17 4,744.85 589.39 1,412.72 328.55 100.21 25,617.41$ Townhouse (1) per m2 of floor area 25.70 6.49 19.86 25.25 4.60 32.13 27.43 4.05 9.71 2.26 0.69 158.16$ Apartment (2),(4) per m2 of floor area 26.43 6.64 20.34 25.87 4.71 33.05 15.20 4.15 9.95 2.31 0.71 149.37$ Commercial per m2 of floor area 69.42 2.07 6.32 8.04 86.79 18.98 1.29 3.09 196.00$ Institutional (5) per m2 of floor area 89.26 1.43 4.38 5.57 111.58 17.79 0.89 2.14 233.04$

Area "B1" -$ Single Family (3) per dwelling unit 5,057.82 1,070.68 3,278.38 4,169.20 759.52 6,323.09 5,931.06 668.77 1,602.99 372.80 113.71 337.56 29,685.57$ Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex per dwelling unit 4,561.95 943.60 2,889.25 3,674.34 669.37 5,703.17 4,744.85 589.39 1,412.72 328.55 100.21 297.50 25,914.91$ Townhouse (1) per m2 of floor area 25.70 6.49 19.86 25.25 4.60 32.13 27.43 4.05 9.71 2.26 0.69 2.04 160.20$ Apartment (2),(4) per m2 of floor area 26.43 6.64 20.34 25.87 4.71 33.05 15.20 4.15 9.95 2.31 0.71 2.09 151.47$ Commercial per m2 of floor area 69.42 2.07 6.32 8.04 86.79 18.98 1.29 3.09 0.65 196.65$ Institutional (5) per m2 of floor area 89.26 1.43 4.38 5.57 111.58 17.79 0.89 2.14 0.45 233.49$

Area "C" -$ Single Family (3) per dwelling unit 5,057.82 1,070.68 3,278.38 4,169.20 759.52 14,335.60$ Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex per dwelling unit 4,561.95 943.60 2,889.25 3,674.34 669.37 12,738.52$ Townhouse (1) per m2 of floor area 25.70 6.49 19.86 25.25 4.60 81.90$ Apartment (2),(4) per m2 of floor area 26.43 6.64 20.34 25.87 4.71 84.01$ Commercial per m2 of floor area 69.42 2.07 6.32 8.04 85.85$ Industrial per m2 of floor area 22.31 1.43 4.38 5.57 33.69$ Institutional (5) per m2 of floor area 89.26 1.43 4.38 5.57 100.63$

Area "D" Industrial per m2 of floor area 22.31 1.43 4.38 5.57 33.69$ West Silverdale Industrial (West of Silver Creek) Industrial per ha of development area 14,863.04 6,196.63 21,059.67$

Area "E" Industrial per m2 of floor area 22.31 1.43 4.38 5.57 33.69$ East Silverdale Industrial (East of Silver Creek) Industrial per ha of development area 44,246.42 14,863.04 6,196.63 65,306.09$

Notes:1.) Townhouse based on an average size of 125.415 sq.m. (1,350 sq.ft.). No maximum rates.2.) Apartment based on an average size of 97.545 sq.m. (1,050 sq.ft.). No maximum rates.3.) Single Family = Lots > 465m2 Single Family Compact = Lots < or = 465m2. .4.) Apartments include institutional residential units, except for Regional Water Supply program, which has a separate institutional residential category.5.) Institutional includes schools, except for Regional Water Supply program, which has a separate school category.6.) Regional Water Supply and Regional Sewer Treatment are levied per dwelling unit for townhouse and apartment.

Mission Central and Fraser Area

Cedar Valley Specified Area

Hatzic, SW Mission and Rural Areas

Cedar Valley

27


5.2 Changes in Rates from Previous Update

The new DCC rates differ from the previous rates as:

• Construction and land costs have risen;

• The Regional Water Supply program was updated, most notably to include additional water supply capacity, for which planning is currently underway (this program was not updated as a part of last DCC review);

• Growth projections have been revised downwards to reflect seven years of development since the projections used in the last DCC update;

• Commercial and institutional equivalencies for transportation were updated to reflect suggested ratios provided in the Ministry’s Development Cost Charges Best Practices Guide. The updated equivalencies better align with the typical burden on infrastructure for commercial and institutional land uses;

• The 2016 Transportation Master Plan provided new information on needed transportation infrastructure, resulting in new DCC eligible projects;

• Preliminary design was completed for multiple existing road projects, resulting in more accurate (and higher) cost estimates;

• 2017 Sewer modelling provided new information on needed sewer infrastructure, resulting in new DCC eligible projects and the creation of a new All-Areas Sewer DCC program; and,

• Some park acquisition projects were removed from the DCC program as they have been or are expected to be acquired directly through negotiations with developers. (Note: This has resulted in a decrease in parks DCCs despite rising land and development costs.)

28


PART 6. STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

The District of Mission invited public input on the proposed DCC program through:

• Add details after stakeholder consultation (public consultation materials to Appendix D).

29


PART 7. DCC IMPLEMENTATION

7.1 Bylaw Exemptions

The Local Government Act (LGA) is clear that a DCC cannot be levied if the proposed development does not impose new capital cost burdens on the District, or if a DCC has already been paid in regard to the same development; however, if additional further expansion for the same development creates new capital cost burdens or uses up capacity, the DCCs can be levied for the additional costs. The LGA further restricts the levying of the DCC at the time of application for a building permit if:

• The building permit is for a church or place of public worship as per the Community

Charter; or

• The value of the work authorized by the building permit does not exceed $50,000 or a higher amount as prescribed by bylaw; or

• Unit size is no larger than 29 sq.m. and only for residential use.

Changes to the legislation now allow local governments to charge DCCs (at the time of building permit) on residential developments of fewer than four self-contained dwelling units, if such a charge is provided for in the local government’s DCC bylaw. The District of Mission plans to maintain this exemption for building permits pertaining to developments with fewer than four dwelling units. (Note: This exemption does not pertain to DCCs levied at subdivision. All subdivisions for single family development will continue to be subject to DCCs.) 7.2 DCC Waivers and Reductions

Changes to the Local Government Act in 2008 provide local governments the discretionary authority to waive or reduce DCCs for certain types of development to promote affordable housing and low impact development. As this is a minor review, the District has decided not to make changes to DCC waivers/reductions.

7.3 Collection of Charges – Building Permit and Subdivision

The District of Mission will collect DCCs for single-family and duplex residential development at time of subdivision approval (or if subdivision is not required, at building permit). Of the two possible collection times, subdivision approval occurs earlier in the process. Collecting DCCs at subdivision for single-family and duplex development, where possible, will allow the District to ensure timely provision of infrastructure and services. DCCs for multi-family residential (apartment and townhouse), institutional, commercial, and industrial development will be levied DCCs at time of building permit. For these uses, DCCs will be

30


collected at building permit when total floor area is known as this will result in more equitable distribution of growth costs. 7.4 Collection of DCCs on Redeveloped or Expanded Developments

When an existing building or development undergoes an expansion or redevelopment there is usually an additional growth-related demand placed on District infrastructure and park requirements. The new developer/builder should pay the applicable DCCs based on the additional floor area/units for townhouse, apartment, commercial, industrial, and institutional land uses, at the DCC rates in the current DCC bylaw.

If a single-family or duplex residential unit is replaced by another single-family or duplex residential unit then no additional DCCs are payable. If a lot is subdivided into two, for example, to construct two single-family compact or duplex residential units, then DCCs are payable on the one additional single-family compact/duplex residential lot. 7.5 In-Stream Applications

The new DCC rates will be in force immediately after the updated Development Cost Charge Bylaw is adopted; however, the Local Government Act (LGA) provides special protection from rate increases for development applications that are submitted prior to the adoption date. In-stream protection applies to both building permit and subdivision applications received prior to the adoption of the new DCC Bylaw. Protection is also extended to rezoning and development permit applications that are submitted prior to the adoption of the new DCC Bylaw and that will result in a building permit within 12 months of the adoption of the Bylaw. Division 19, Sections 511 and 568 of the LGA outline the criteria that must be met for an application to qualify for in-stream protection. If an application meets the required criteria and is submitted prior to the adoption of the new DCC Bylaw, it will be provided protection from rate increases for a period of 12 months after the adoption date.

7.6 Rebates and Credits

The District is working to establish a policy or practice to guide staff in the collection of DCCs and the use of DCC credits and rebates as stipulated in the LGA. There may be situations in which it is not in the best interests of the District to allow an owner to build DCC services outside of their subdivision or development. Building such services may start or accelerate development in areas where the District is not prepared to support. Policies for DCC credits, rebates and latecomer agreements are often drafted to assist staff in development financing.

31


7.7 DCC Monitoring and Accounting

To monitor the DCC Program, the District has a system in place for tracking and accounting of DCC projects. The District should enter all the projects contained in the DCC program into this tracking system. The tracking system would monitor the status of the project from the conceptual stage through to its final construction and would include information about the estimated costs, actual construction costs, and funding sources for the projects. The construction costs would be based on the tender prices received, and the land costs based on the actual price of utility areas and/or other land and improvements required for servicing purposes. The tracking system would indicate when projects are completed, their actual costs, and would include new projects that are added to the program. 7.8 DCC Reviews

To keep the DCC program as current as possible, the District should review its program annually. Based on its annual review, the District may make minor amendments to the DCC rates. Typically, a major amendment to the DCC program and rates is needed every 2 to 5 years.

32

APPENDIX A

DCC Growth Projections

33

District of Mission DCC Review

District Wide Growth Projections (2017 Revision)Residential: 2017-2061 (Build-out)Commercial, Industrial, Institutional: 2017-2033 (16 year projection)

Area A (2) Area B and B1Area B andB1 sub total

Area C w/ SWMission (1)

SF (4) (units) 561 749 2,298 3,608SF Compact (4) (units) 338 381 3,030 3,749

1,130 All SF 7,357

TH (2) (units) 164 906 2,692 3,762Apt (2),(5) (units) 398 348 1,639 2,385

1,254All Multi-Family 6,147

Comm (m2) 24,863 7,960 1,183 34,006All Comm 34,006

Indust (m2) 11,171 22,922 34,093All Indust 34,093

Institu (m2) (6) 10,283 10,283All Instit 10,283

Regional Growth Projections Cedar Valley Sewer Extension2017-2036 (20 Year Projection) Growth Projections (Area B1)

Regional Total Total

SF (units) 2,780 SF (units) 362SF (4) 1,494 SF (4) 167SF Compact (4) 1,286 SF Compact (4) 195

MF (units) 1,641 MF (units) 573TH 1,117 TH 399Apt (5) 524 Apt (5) 174

Comm (m2) 36,618 36,618 Comm (ha) 2.77 2.77

Indust (m2) 32,716 32,716 Institu (m2) (6) 5.47 5.47

Institu (m2) (6) 11,826 11,826

Silverdale Industrial Water & Sewer Silverdale Creek BridgeGrowth Projections (Areas D and E) Growth Projections (Area E)

Area D & E (8) Area E (7)

Indust (ha.) 22.27 Indust (m2) 168,149

Growth Projections for Silvercreek Parkway ParklandResidential: 2017-2034 (17 Year Projection)

Area A Area B and B1Area B andB1 sub total

Area C w/ SWMission (1)

SF (4) (units) 140 516 690 1,345SF Compact (4) (units) 73 263 821 1,157

778 All SF 2,502

TH (units) 53 343 608 1,005Apt (5) (units) 184 61 227 472

405All Multi-Family 1,477

Notes:1.) Area C includes SW Mission and Rural Mission.2.) Area A TH and APT projections exclude waterfront development.

3.) Waterfront development is not included at this time since no program has not been developed.4.) Single Family = Lots > 465m2 Single Family Compact = Lots < or = 465m2.5.) Apartments include Institutional Residential units.6.) Institutional includes schools.

(From 2034 onwards: 40% of 194 units for TH and 60% of 517 units for APT due to waterfront development)

7.) Growth projections based on calculated parcel areas that already have or had building permits since previousupdate.8.) Except for areas D and E and the Regional Projections, District of Mission growth projections were revised to net out7 years of growth (assumed linear) since the last estimates were calculated. Time horizons used previously remain thesame.9.) Regional growth projections were revised to net out 5 years of growth to adjust from a 25 year timeframe to a 20 yeartimeframe. Linear growth was assumed.

Total

CV Sewer Extention

Total

Urban Systems Ltd.U:\Projects_VAN\0995\0042\01\D-Drafting-Design-Analysis\2017-12-07-Mission DCC Calculations_v9 - sewer adjusted

2018-03-054:06 PM

34

APPENDIX B

DCC Program and Calculations

35

DISTRICT OF MISSION

REGIONAL WATER UTILITY DCC PROGRAM (Draft)

Column Col. (2)2 Col. (3)

Col. (4) =Col.(1) X Col. (3) X

12.16%Col. (5) = Col.

(4) X 1%Col.(6) = Col. (4) -

Col. (5)Col. (7) = Col.(2) -

Col. (6)

MunicipalAssist Factor

1%1 2017 Joint water master plan $290,000 $52,766 50% $17,632 $176 $17,456 $35,3102 2021 Joint water master plan $306,000 $55,677 50% $18,605 $186 $18,419 $37,2583 2026 Joint water master plan $348,000 $63,319 50% $21,158 $212 $20,946 $42,3734 2031 Joint water master plan $395,000 $71,870 50% $24,016 $240 $23,776 $48,0945 2020 Gladwin transmission main $8,289,000 $1,007,942 100% $1,007,942 $10,079 $997,863 $10,0796 2017 Maclure Watermain ICCP System $101,000 $12,282 100% $12,282 $123 $12,159 $1237 2021 New watermain - Gladwin Road to Page Road $11,465,000 $1,394,144 100% $1,394,144 $13,941 $1,380,203 $13,9418 2019 Remove restriction at Clayburn Creek crossing $1,320,000 $160,512 100% $160,512 $1,605 $158,907 $1,6059 2020 New watermain - Bevan Wells to Maclure Reservoir $5,147,000 $625,875 100% $625,875 $6,259 $619,616 $6,259

10 2025 Third river crossing $24,613,000 $2,992,941 100% $2,992,941 $29,929 $2,963,012 $29,92911 2018 Planning, approvals, design (water source) $1,000,000 $121,600 100% $121,600 $1,216 $120,384 $1,21612 2023 Cedar Street main from Best Ave to Hwy 7 $8,153,000 $991,405 100% $991,405 $9,914 $981,491 $9,91413 2017 New source - preliminary investigations $200,000 $24,320 100% $24,320 $243 $24,077 $24314 2023 Construction and engineering services (water source) $51,200,000 $6,225,920 100% $6,225,920 $62,259 $6,163,661 $62,25915 New Watermain from 32811 Mission Way to Wren St. $3,720,100 $3,720,100 100% $3,720,100 $37,201 $3,682,899 $37,201

Totals $17,520,672 $17,358,452 $173,583 $17,184,869 $335,804

Notes1.) Project list from District of Mission October 13, 2017, as per Draft 2018 Regional Financial Plan2.) Mission's share of growth-related portion of projects is 12.16% based on the benefit factor, and Mission's share of the remaining non-growth portion is 24.23% (updated by KB Oct 13, 2017).

ProjectNo.

Project Description Benefit to NewDevelopment DCC Recoverable Total Municipal

Responsibility

Cost Estimate(Mission's Share of

DCC Eligible Works)2

ProjectTiming

BenefitFactor

Updated CostEstimate (Regional

Total)


2018-01-315:49 PM

36

DISTRICT OF MISSION

REGIONAL WATER UTILITY DCC RATES (Draft)

Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)

Estimated NewDevelopment Unit Person per unit (residential) Equivalent

Population/hectare (other land uses) % Population Equivalent

Single Family (3) 1,494 Dwelling Units 3.37 5,036.13 38%Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex 1,286 Dwelling Units 2.97 3,818.23 29%

Townhouse 1,117 Dwelling Units 2.56 2,859.01 22%Apartment (4) 524 Dwelling Units 2.04 1,068.96 8%

Commercial 3.66 Hectares 65 238.01 1.80%

Industrial 3.27 Hectares 45 147.22 1%

Institutional (5) 1.18 Hectares 45 53.22 0.4%Total 13,220.78 (a) 100%

Total DCCs Recoverable $17,184,869 (b)Less: Existing DCC Reserve Funds $828,761 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCC's $16,356,108 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Equivalent Water Unit $1,237.15 (e) = (d) / (a)

DCC Revenue EstimatesSingle Family (3) $4,169.20 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $6,230,453.71Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex $3,674.34 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $4,723,731.75

Townhouse (6) $3,167.11 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $3,537,026.26$25.25 per m2 of floor area

Apartment (7) $2,523.79 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $1,322,465.55$25.87 per m2 of floor area

Commercial $8.04 per square metres gross floor area (e) x Col (3)/10,000 $294,459.89

Industrial $5.57 per square metres gross floor area (e) x Col (3)/10,000 $182,135.93

Institutional (5) $5.57 per square metres gross floor area (e) x Col (3)/10,000 $65,835.27

Notes:

2.) DCC reserves from District of Mission May 18, 2017, balance to December 31, 2016.3.) Single Family = Lots > 465m2 Single Family Compact = Lots < or = 465m2.4.) Apartments include Institutional Residential units.5.) Institutional includes schools.6.) Townhouse based on an average size of 125.415 sq.m. (1,350 sq.ft.)7.) Apartment based on an average size of 97.545 sq.m. (1,050 sq.ft.)

1.) Growth projections provided by District of Mission for previous update and are based on build-out projection. For this minor update,assumed linear development for 7 years was subtracted from previous projections with the exception of Areas D and E. Growthprojections for Areas D and E are based on calculated parcel areas that already have or had building permits since previous update.

A: Water Impact Calculation

C: Resulting Water DCCs

Multiple

Col. (4) = Col. (1) xCol. (3)

B: Unit Water DCC Calculation

Land Use


2018-01-315:49 PM

37

DISTRICT OF MISSION

REGIONAL SEWAGE TREATMENT DCC PROGRAM (Draft)

Col. (1) Col. (2)2 Col. (3)

Col. (4) =Col.(1) X Col. (3) X

15.80%

Col. (5) =Col. (4) X

1%Col.(6) = Col. (4) -

Col. (5)Col. (7) = Col.(2) -

Col. (6)Municipal

AssistFactor

1%1 Secondary, Add TF/SC unit #3 2033 $18,763,000 $2,964,554 100% $2,964,554 $29,646 $2,934,908 $29,6462 Electrical SCADA upgrades various $2,752,000 $538,842 50% $217,408 $2,174 $215,234 $323,6083 General, JAMES environmental impact study 2017 $10,000 $1,580 100% $1,580 $16 $1,564 $164 Influent, Add #4 screw pump 2020 $1,007,000 $199,454 47% $74,780 $748 $74,032 $125,4225 Disinfection, Add #2 contact Channel 2017 $2,284,000 $452,387 47% $169,610 $1,696 $167,914 $284,4736 AMWSC Wastewater System Master Plan 2017 $290,000 $56,782 50% $22,910 $229 $22,681 $34,1017 AMWSC Wastewater System Master Plan 2021 $302,000 $59,132 50% $23,858 $239 $23,619 $35,5138 AMWSC Wastewater System Master Plan 2026 $333,000 $65,201 50% $26,307 $263 $26,044 $39,1579 AMWSC Wastewater System Master Plan 2031 $368,000 $72,054 50% $29,072 $291 $28,781 $43,273

10 AMWSC Wastewater System Master Plan 2036 $406,000 $79,495 50% $32,074 $321 $31,753 $47,74211 Solids, add digester #4 2028 $7,846,000 $1,239,668 100% $1,239,668 $12,397 $1,227,271 $12,39712 Secondary, add pump #2 to PEP station #2 2024 $604,000 $95,432 100% $95,432 $954 $94,478 $95413 Secondary, add pump #3 to PEP station #2 2033 $722,000 $114,076 100% $114,076 $1,141 $112,935 $1,14114 Centrate, add 8 cells centrate bioreactor 2021 $4,141,000 $820,200 47% $307,511 $3,075 $304,436 $515,76415 Solids, add pasteurization system #2 2028 $8,587,000 $1,356,746 100% $1,356,746 $13,567 $1,343,179 $13,56716 JAMES plant pad mounted transformers 2017 $295,000 $58,430 47% $21,907 $219 $21,688 $36,74217 Odour, cover #1 to #2 TF and ducting 2036 $11,943,000 $2,338,439 50% $943,497 $9,435 $934,062 $1,404,37718 Odour, add odour scrubber 2035 $2,811,000 $444,138 100% $444,138 $4,441 $439,697 $4,44119 Electrical, add 500 kW standby generator #2 2021 $533,000 $105,570 47% $39,581 $396 $39,185 $66,38520 Solids, add centrifuge #3 and extend dewatering building 2030 $4,949,000 $781,942 100% $781,942 $7,819 $774,123 $7,81921 Headworks, add screen #4 and washer compactor 2026 $719,000 $113,602 100% $113,602 $1,136 $112,466 $1,13622 Headworks, add grit tank #4 & #5 2024 $979,000 $154,682 100% $154,682 $1,547 $153,135 $1,54723 Secondary, add 1 pump to RBS pump station #3 2029 $831,000 $131,298 100% $131,298 $1,313 $129,985 $1,31324 Electrical, add 500 kW standby generator #3 2031 $649,000 $128,546 47% $48,195 $482 $47,713 $80,83325 Secondary, Add secondary clarifier #5 2029 $4,992,000 $788,736 100% $788,736 $7,887 $780,849 $7,88726 Effluent, twin existing river section of outfall 2029 $6,516,000 $1,029,528 100% $1,029,528 $10,295 $1,019,233 $10,29527 Primary, Add #8 and #9 primary sedimentation tanks 2028 $8,294,000 $1,642,776 47% $615,912 $6,159 $609,753 $1,033,02328 River crossing(3), (4) 2017 n/a $1,712,849 100% $1,712,849 $17,128 $1,695,721 $17,128

29Internal borrowing in 2011 for Headworks upgrade transformerinstallation (excluding interest)(5), (6) complete n/a $17,050 100% $17,050 $0 $17,050 $0

Totals $17,563,190 $13,518,503 $135,014 $13,383,489 $4,179,700

Notes1.) Project list from District of Mission May 18, 2017, as per 2017 Regional Financial Plan2.) Mission's share of growth-related portion of projects is 15.80% based on the benefit factor, and Mission's share of the remaining non-growth portion is 23.36%.3.) Project not shared with City of Abbotsford.4.) Total project cost is $8,610,872, less $6,898,023 CWWF grant5.) The District has already contributed a municipal assist factor when the project was constructed.6.) Amount from outstanding internal loans as at Dec. 31, 2016 (Amount borrowed less repayments, excluding interest). Provided by District of Mission May 18, 2017

ProjectTiming

Cost Estimate(Mission's Share of

DCC EligibleWorks)2

Total MunicipalResponsibility

ProjectNo.

Column

Benefit to NewDevelopment DCC RecoverableBenefit

FactorProject Description Cost Estimate(Regional Total)


2018-01-315:50 PM

38

DISTRICT OF MISSION

REGIONAL SEWAGE TREATMENT DCC RATES (Draft)

Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)

Estimated NewDevelopment Unit

Person per unit (residential)Equivalent

Population/hectare (other land uses)% Population Equivalent

Single Family (3) 1,494 Dwelling Units 3.37 5,036.13 38%Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex 1,286 Dwelling Units 2.97 3,818.23 29%

Townhouse 1,117 Dwelling Units 2.56 2,859.01 22%Apartment (4) 524 Dwelling Units 2.04 1,068.96 8%

Commercial 3.66 Hectares 65 238.01 1.80%

Industrial 3.27 Hectares 45 147.22 1%

Institutional (5) 1.18 Hectares 45 53.22 0.4%Total 13,220.78 (a) 100%

Total DCCs Receivable $13,383,489 (b)Less: Existing DCC Reserve Funds $522,142 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCC's $12,861,347 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Equivalent Unit $972.81 (e) = (d) / (a)

DCC Revenue EstimatesSingle Family (3) $3,278.38 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $4,899,211.00Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex $2,889.25 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $3,714,425.88


Apartment (7) $1,984.54 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $1,039,898.23$20.34 per m2 of floor area


Industrial $4.38 per square metres gross floor area (e) x Col (3)/10,000 $143,219.48


Notes


1.) Growth projections provided by District of Mission for previous update and are based on build-out projection. For this minor update,assumed linear development for 7 years was subtracted from previous projections with the exception of Areas D and E. Growthprojections for Areas D and E are based on calculated parcel areas that already have or had building permits since previous update.

C: Resulting Sewer DCCs

B: Unit Sewer DCC Calculation

A: Sewer Impact Calculation

Land Use

Col. (4) = Col. (1) xCol. (3)

Multiple


2018-01-315:50 PM

39

DISTRICT OF MISSION

ROADS DCC PROGRAM

ALL AREAS (Draft)

MISSION CENTRAL FRASER; CEDAR VALLEY; HATZIC, SW MISSION, SILVERDALE, RURAL AREAS

Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (4) = Col. (2) xCol. (3) Col. (5) Col. (6) = Col. (4) -

Col. (5)Col. (7) = Col. (2) -

Col. (6)Municipal Assist

Factor

On From To 1%1 6-10 years Intersection Murray Street Seventh Avenue Intersection upgrade 360,000$ 100% $360,000 $3,600 $356,400 $3,6002 1-5 years Stave Lake Street Best Avenue Cherry Avenue (22nd) Road Upgrade 5,600,000$ 100% $5,600,000 $56,000 $5,544,000 $56,0003 1-5 years Stave Lake Street Best Avenue Eleventh Avenue Road Upgrade 14,300,000$ 100% $14,300,000 $143,000 $14,157,000 $143,0004 11-15 years Stave Lake Street Cherry Avenue Dewdney Trunk Road Road Upgrade 4,300,000$ 100% $4,300,000 $43,000 $4,257,000 $43,0005 11-15 years Wren Street Teal Street Kenny Avenue Road Upgrade 1,887,000$ 100% $1,887,000 $18,870 $1,868,130 $18,8706 11-15 years Wren Street Seventh Avenue Teal Street Road Upgrade 1,275,000$ 100% $1,275,000 $12,750 $1,262,250 $12,7507 11-15 years Wren Street Tyler Street Wren Street Bridge Bridge Upgrade 1,200,000$ 100% $1,200,000 $12,000 $1,188,000 $12,0008 11-15 years Silverdale Ave. Hemlock St Silvercreek Bridge Bridge Upgrade 1,200,000$ 100% $1,200,000 $12,000 $1,188,000 $12,0009 6-10 years Fourteenth Grand Street Hurd Street Road Upgrade 3,621,000$ 100% $3,621,000 $36,210 $3,584,790 $36,21010 1-5 years Cedar Cedar 7th Avenue Intersection upgrade 3,774,000$ 100% $3,774,000 $37,740 $3,736,260 $37,74011 16-20 years Silverdale Silverdale Cherry Street Arterial Road & Bridge 20,655,000$ 100% $20,655,000 $206,550 $20,448,450 $206,55012 1-5 years Intersection Cherry Avenue Stave Lake St. Intersection upgrade 407,000$ 100% $407,000 $4,070 $402,930 $4,07013 6-10 years Intersection Wren Street Silverdale Avenue Traffic Signals - Wren Street & Silverdale 360,000$ 100% $360,000 $3,600 $356,400 $3,600

58,939,000$ $58,939,000 $589,390 $58,349,610 $589,390

Notes1.) Project list and updated cost estimates provided by the District of Mission. For projects where no new cost estimates are available, previous estimates were increased by 2% annually to account for inflation.

2.) Project 12 total cost estimate is $507,000 and developer contribution of $100,000 has been deducted for total of $407,000

ProjectNo. Cost Estimate Benefit

FactorLocation

Description

Column

Timeframe Total MunicipalResponsibility

Benefit to NewDevelopment DCC Recoverable


2018-03-054:09 PM

40

DISTRICT OF MISSION

ROAD DCC RATE CALCULATION

ALL AREAS (Draft)

MISSION CENTRAL FRASER; CEDAR VALLEY; HATZIC, SW MISSION, SILVERDALE, RURAL AREAS

Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)

Estimated New Development UnitTrips/Unit (residential - per peak

hr/unit; other - trips per peak hr/m2)% Trip Ends

Single Family (4) 3,608 Dwelling Units 1.02 3,680 32%Single Family Compact (4) / Duplex 3,749 Dwelling Units 0.92 3,450 30%

Townhouse 3,762 Dwelling Units 0.65 2,445 21%Apartment (5) 2,385 Dwelling Units 0.52 1,240 11%

Commercial 34,006 square metres gross floor area 0.014 476 4%

Industrial 34,093 square metres gross floor area 0.0045 153 1%

Institutional (6) 10,283 square metres gross floor area 0.018 185 2%

Total 11,630 (a) 100%

Net Road DCC Program Recoverable $58,349,610 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies $681,117 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $57,668,493 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Trip End $4,958.64 (e) = (d) / (a)

DCC Revenue EstimatesSingle Family (4) $5,057.82 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col. (3) $18,248,605Single Family Compact (4) / Duplex $4,561.95 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col. (3) $17,104,998

Townhouse (7) $3,223.12 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col. (3) $12,125,095$25.70 per m2 of floor area

Apartment (5),(8) $2,578.50 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col. (3) $6,150,530$26.43 per m2 of floor area

Commercial $69.42 per square meter gross floor area (e) x Col. (3) $2,360,701

Industrial $22.31 per square meter gross floor area (e) x Col. (3) $760,737

Institutional (6) $89.26 per square meter gross floor area (e) x Col. (3) $917,827

Notes

2.) DCC reserves from District of Mission May 18, 2017, balance to December 31, 2016.3.) Residential values include the Southwest Mission area.4.) Single Family = Lots > 465m2 Single Family Compact = Lots < or = 465m2.5.) Apartments include Institutional Residential units.6.) Institutional includes schools.7.) Townhouse based on an average size of 125.415 sq.m. (1,350 sq.ft.)8.) Apartment based on an average size of 97.545 sq.m. (1,050 sq.ft.)

1.) Growth projections provided by District of Mission for previous update and are based on build-out projection. For this minor update, assumedlinear development for 7 years was subtracted from previous projections with the exception of Areas D and E. Growth projections for Areas D andE are based on calculated parcel areas that already have or had building permits since previous update.

A: Traffic Generation Calculation

B: Unit Road DCC Calculation

C: Resulting Road DCCs

Land Use

Col. (4) = (1) x (3)

Trips


2018-01-315:50 PM

41

DISTRICT OF MISSION

ROAD DCC PROGRAM

AREAS B AND B1 (Draft) CEDAR VALLEY

Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (4) = Col. (2) x Col.(3) Col. (5) Col. (6) = Col. (4) -

Col. (5)Col. (7) = Col. (2) -


Factor

On From To 1%CVR1 11-15 years Cade Barr Widening DTR 14th Road Widening 3,130,168$ 100% 3,130,168$ 31,302$ 3,098,867$ 31,302$CVR2 6-10 years Cedar St. Laminman DTR Road Widening 1,522,009$ 100% 1,522,009$ 15,220$ 1,506,788$ 15,220$CVR3 6-10 years Cedar St. Eaglestone Tunbridge Road Widening 2,251,424$ 100% 2,251,424$ 22,514$ 2,228,910$ 22,514$CVR4 6-10 years Cedar St. Tunbridge Laminman Road Widening 819,645$ 100% 819,645$ 8,196$ 811,448$ 8,196$CVR5 16-20 years 14th Cade Barr Grand Road Widening 1,683,000$ 100% 1,683,000$ 16,830$ 1,666,170$ 16,830$CVR6 21-25 years Grand 14th 11th Road Widening 970,487$ 100% 970,487$ 9,705$ 960,782$ 9,705$CVR7 1-5 years Intersection 14th Grand Traffic Signal Installation 360,000$ 100% 360,000$ 3,600$ 356,400$ 3,600$CVR8 16-20 years Intersection Cedar Laminman Traffic Signal Installation 360,000$ 100% 360,000$ 3,600$ 356,400$ 3,600$CVR9 16-20 years Intersection Cedar Tunbridge Traffic Signal Installation 360,000$ 100% 360,000$ 3,600$ 356,400$ 3,600$CVR10 11-15 years Intersection Cherry Cade Barr Traffic Signal Installation 360,000$ 100% 360,000$ 3,600$ 356,400$ 3,600$CVR11 11-15 years Intersection DTR Cade Barr Traffic Signal Installation 360,000$ 100% 360,000$ 3,600$ 356,400$ 3,600$CVR12 21-25 years Intersection DTR Tunbridge Traffic Signal Installation 360,000$ 100% 360,000$ 3,600$ 356,400$ 3,600$CVR13 1-5 years Intersection Cade Barr Best Traffic Signal Installation 680,000$ 100% 680,000$ 6,800$ 673,200$ 6,800$CVR14 6-10 years Intersection Cedar DTR Traffic Signal Installation 360,000$ 100% 360,000$ 3,600$ 356,400$ 3,600$CVR15 1-5 years Intersection Horne Street 11th Ave. Traffic Signal Installation 360,000$ 100% 360,000$ 3,600$ 356,400$ 3,600$

TOTALS 13,936,733$ 13,936,733$ 139,367$ 13,797,365$ 139,367$

DCC Recoverable Total MunicipalResponsibility

BenefitFactor

Benefit to NewDevelopmentCost EstimateTimeframe

Project No. LocationDescription

Column


2018-01-315:52 PM

42

DISTRICT OF MISSION

ROAD DCC RATE CALCULATION

AREAS B AND B1 (Draft)CEDAR VALLEY

Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)

Estimated New Development UnitTrips/Unit (residential - per

peak hr/unit; other - trips perpeak hr/m2)

% Trip Ends

Single Family (4) 749 Dwelling Units 1.02 764 35%Single Family Compact (4) / Duplex 381 Dwelling Units 0.92 351 16%

Townhouse 906 Dwelling Units 0.65 589 27%Apartment (5) 348 Dwelling Units 0.52 181 8%



Total 2,181 (a) 100%

Net Road DCC Program Recoverable $13,797,365 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies $278,186 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $13,519,180 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Trip End $6,199.10 (e) = (d) / (a)

DCC Revenue EstimatesSingle Family (4) $6,323.09 per dwelling unit (e) x Col. (3) $4,735,123.01Single Family Compact (4) / Duplex $5,703.17 per dwelling unit (e) x Col. (3) $2,174,810.72

Townhouse (7) $4,029.42 per dwelling unit (e) x Col. (3) $3,650,177.84$32.13 per m2 of floor area

Apartment (5),(8) $3,223.53 per dwelling unit (e) x Col. (3) $1,120,778.42$33.05 per m2 of floor area

Commercial $86.79 per square metre of floor area (e) x Col. (3) $690,858.25

Institutional (6) $111.58 per square metre of floor area (e) x Col. (3) $1,147,431.37

Notes


1.) Growth projections provided by District of Mission for previous update and are based on build-out projection. For this minorupdate, assumed linear development for 7 years was subtracted from previous projections with the exception of Areas D and E.Growth projections for Areas D and E are based on calculated parcel areas that already have or had building permits sinceprevious update.

C: Resulting Road DCCs


Land Use


Col. 4 = Col. (1) xCol. (3)

Trips


2018-01-315:52 PM

43

DISTRICT OF MISSIONSILVERCREEK PARKWAY PARKLAND DCC PROGRAM

DISTRICT WIDE (Draft)

Column Col. (3) Col. (4) = Col. (2) x Col.(3) Col. (5) Col. (6) = Col. (4) -

Col. (5)Col. (7) = Col. (2) -


Factor

1%

Land Acquisition1 1-5 years 9429 Wiebe Street 612999000 10.4 10.4 $ 146,535 100% 146,535$ 1,465$ 145,070$ 1,465$2 1-5 years 32193 Mingo Avenue 612197000 43.3 43.3 $ 19,086 100% 19,086$ 191$ 18,895$ 191$3 6-10 years 9018 Clay Street 611199000 10.2 5.1 $ 242,000 100% 242,000$ 2,420$ 239,580$ 2,420$4 1-5 years 32251 Cherry Avenue 692354000 4.8 4.8 $ 508,000 100% 508,000$ 5,080$ 502,920$ 5,080$5 6-10 years 7792 Nelson Street 772191000 14.3 10.4 $ 5,684 100% 5,684$ 57$ 5,627$ 57$6 31529 Silverdale Avenue 772262000 7.7 1.9 $ 144,000 100% 144,000$ 1,440$ 142,560$ 1,440$7 6-10 years 7738 Hemlock Street 772300000 9.7 9.6 $ 13,206 100% 13,206$ 132$ 13,074$ 132$10 1-5 years 32310 Tunbridge Avenue 692081000 9.7 9.7 $ 36,000 100% 36,000$ 360$ 35,640$ 360$11 1-5 years 8088 Tyler Street 690943000 1.1 1.1 $ 318,000 100% 318,000$ 3,180$ 314,820$ 3,180$12 1-5 years 8085 Tyler Street 690941000 0.3 0.3 $ 256,000 100% 256,000$ 2,560$ 253,440$ 2,560$

Trail Construction13 Main Silver Creek Trail $ 555,000 100% 555,000$ 5,550$ 549,450$ 5,550$14 Main Trail Crossings $ 79,000 100% 79,000$ 790$ 78,210$ 790$15 Trailheads $ 552,000 100% 552,000$ 5,520$ 546,480$ 5,520$16 Northeast Loop Trail $ 255,000 100% 255,000$ 2,550$ 252,450$ 2,550$17 Southwest Loop Trail $ 113,000 100% 113,000$ 1,130$ 111,870$ 1,130$18 Loop Trail Crossings $ 106,000 100% 106,000$ 1,060$ 104,940$ 1,060$19 Crossing of Silver Creek $ 33,000 100% 33,000$ 330$ 32,670$ 330$

111.5 96.6 3,381,511$ $3,381,511 $33,815 $3,347,696 $33,815

Notes:


BenefitFactor %

Benefit to NewDevelopment DCC RecoverableCost Estimate

1.) Project list updated and provided by the District of Mission. For Land Acquisition projects, cost estimates are based oncurrent land value as available from BC Assessment, September 2017. For trail construction projects where no new costestimates were available, previous estimates were increased by 2% annually to account for inflation.

Name Roll #Total Site

Size(Acres)

Amount ofLand

Required(Acres)

Timeframe

UpdatedProject No.


2018-01-315:52 PM

44

DISTRICT OF MISSION

SILVERCREEK PARKWAY PARKLAND DCC

DISTRICT WIDE (Draft)

Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)

Estimated NewDevelopment Unit Equivalent Population

Factor % Population Equivalent

Single Family (3) 1,345 Dwelling Units 3.37 4533 39%Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex 1,157 Dwelling Units 2.97 3436 30%

Townhouse 1,005 Dwelling Units 2.56 2573 22%Apartment (4) 472 Dwelling Units 2.04 962 8%

Total 11504 (a) 100%

Net Park DCC Program Recoverable $3,347,696 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies $754,938 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $2,592,758 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Equivalent Person $225.38 (e) = (d) / (a)

DCC Revenue EstimatesSingle Family (3) $759.52 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $1,021,524.31Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex $669.37 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $774,487.23

Townhouse (5) $576.96 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $579,918.97$4.60 per m2 of floor area

Apartment (4),(6) $459.77 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $216,827.02$4.71 per m2 of floor area

Notes:

2.) DCC reserves from District of Mission May 18, 2017, balance to December 31, 2016.3.) Single Family = Lots > 465m2 Single Family Compact = Lots < or = 465m2.4.) Apartments include Institutional Residential units.5.) Townhouse based on an average size of 125.415 sq.m. (1,350 sq.ft.)6.) Apartment based on an average size of 97.545 sq.m. (1,050 sq.ft.)

A: Park Impact Calculation

B: Unit Park DCC Calculation

1.) Growth projections provided by District of Mission for previous update and arebased on build-out projection. For this minor update, assumed linear development for 7years was subtracted from previous projections with the exception of Areas D and E.Growth projections for Areas D and E are based on calculated parcel areas thatalready have or had building permits since previous update.

C: Resulting Parks DCCs

Land Use

Col. (4) = Col. (1)x Col. (3)

Multiple


2018-01-315:52 PM

45

DISTRICT OF MISSION

STORM DRAINAGE DCC PROGRAM


Column Col.(1) Col. (2) Col. (3) =Col. (1) xCol. (2) Col. (4) Col. (5) = Col. (3) -

Col. (4)Col. (6) = Col.(1) - Col.

(5)Municipal Assist

Factor1%

CVD1 6-10 years CV Culvert Area A 228,000$ 100% 228,000$ 2,280$ 225,720$ 2,280$CVD2 6-10 years CV Culvert 1 Area B 154,000$ 100% 154,000$ 1,540$ 152,460$ 1,540$CVD3 6-10 years CV Culvert 2 Area B 140,000$ 100% 140,000$ 1,400$ 138,600$ 1,400$CVD4 1-5 years CV Culvert Area E 57,000$ 100% 57,000$ 570$ 56,430$ 570$CVD5 6-10 years CV Trk Stm Sewer Area A 569,000$ 100% 569,000$ 5,690$ 563,310$ 5,690$CVD6 6-10 years CV Trk Stm Sewer Area B 768,000$ 100% 768,000$ 7,680$ 760,320$ 7,680$CVD7 1-5 years CV Trk Stm Sewer Area C 116,000$ 100% 116,000$ 1,160$ 114,840$ 1,160$CVD8 6-10 years CV Detention Pond B 2,903,000$ 100% 2,903,000$ 29,030$ 2,873,970$ 29,030$CVD9 6-10 years CV Detention Pond C 1,768,000$ 100% 1,768,000$ 17,680$ 1,750,320$ 17,680$CVD10 6-10 years CV Detention Pond D2 345,000$ 100% 345,000$ 3,450$ 341,550$ 3,450$CVD11 1-5 years CV Detention Pond D3 1,067,000$ 100% 1,067,000$ 10,670$ 1,056,330$ 10,670$CVD12 1-5 years CV Detention Pond D4 593,000$ 100% 593,000$ 5,930$ 587,070$ 5,930$CVD13 1-5 years CV Detention Pond E5 (2) 141,000$ 100% 141,000$ 1,410$ 139,590$ 1,410$CVD14 6-10 years Dewdney Trunk Ditch Improvements 538,000$ 100% 538,000$ 5,380$ 532,620$ 5,380$CVD15 1-5 years Gaudin Creek South Realignment 900,000$ 100% 900,000$ 9,000$ 891,000$ 9,000$

CVD16 n/a Gaudin Creek property purchase (internalloan recovery) 262,000$ 100% 262,000$ 2,620$ 259,380$ 2,620$

10,549,000$ $10,549,000 $105,490 $10,443,510 $105,490

Notes

1.) Project list and updated cost estimates provided by the District of Mission. For projects where no new cost estimates are available, previous estimates wereincreased by 2% annually to account for inflation.

DCC Recoverable Total MunicipalResponsibilityName Benefit Factor

%Benefit to NewDevelopmentCost EstimateTimeframe

Project No.


2018-03-054:11 PM

46

DISTRICT OF MISSION

STORM DRAINAGE DCC RATE CALCULATION


Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)

Estimated NewDevelopment Unit Impact Ratio % Equivalent Drainage

UnitsSingle Family (3) 749 Dwelling Units 1 749 43%Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex 381 Dwelling Units 0.8 305 18%

Townhouse 906 Dwelling Units 0.58 525 31%Apartment (4) 348 Dwelling Units 0.25 87 5%



Total 1,723 (a) 100%

Net Storm Drainage DCC Program Recoverable $10,443,510 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies $226,758 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $10,216,752 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Equivalent Drainage Unit $5,931.06 (e) = (d) / (a)

DCC Revenue EstimatesSingle Family (3) $5,931.06 per dwelling unit (e) x Col (3) $4,441,548.07Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex $4,744.85 per dwelling unit (e) x Col (3) $1,809,367.97

Townhouse (6) $3,440.01 per dwelling unit (e) x Col (3) $3,116,247.44$27.43 per m2 of floor area

Apartment (4),(7) $1,482.76 per dwelling unit (e) x Col (3) $515,536.83$15.20 per m2 of floor area

Commercial $18.98 per square metres gross floor area (e) x Col (3) $151,082.50

Institutional (5) $17.79 per square metre of floor area (e) x Col. (3) $182,969.52

Notes


A: Storm Drainage Impact Calculation

B: Unit Drainage DCC Calculation

1.) Growth projections provided by District of Mission for previous update and are based on build-out projection. Forthis minor update, assumed linear development for 7 years was subtracted from previous projections with theexception of Areas D and E. Growth projections for Areas D and E are based on calculated parcel areas that alreadyhave or had building permits since previous update.

C: Resulting Drainage DCCs

Land Use

Col. (4) = Col. (1) xCol. (3)

Multiple


2018-01-315:53 PM

47

DISTRICT OF MISSION

SANITARY SEWER PROGRAM

All Areas (Draft)


Col. (4)Col. (6) = Col.(1) - Col.

(5)

Name Municipal AssistFactor

1%1 1-5 years Harbour Pump Station(2) 600,000$ 100% 600,000$ 6,000$ 594,000$ 6,000$2 1-5 years Tunbridge Pump Station(2) 600,000$ 100% 600,000$ 6,000$ 594,000$ 6,000$3 1-5 years Forcemain at First Avenue & Lougheed(2) 2,346,000$ 100% 2,346,000$ 23,460$ 2,322,540$ 23,460$4 15-20 years Fraser River Sanitary Crossing Force Main Upgrade(3) 8,610,872$ 49% 4,219,327$ 42,193$ 4,177,134$ 4,433,738$

5 10-15 years Install new Forcemain from Wren St. and North Railway Ave. tothe River Crossing Siphon 3,077,500$ 100% 3,077,500$ 30,775$ 3,046,725$ 30,775$

6 5-10 years Gravity pipe upgrade from 32136 Rai Ave. to 32380 Rai Ave. 772,100$ 100% 772,100$ 7,721$ 764,379$ 7,721$

7 1-5 years Gravity Pipe Upgrade from 33475 Cherry Ave to 8356 CadeBarrSt. 281,500$ 100% 281,500$ 2,815$ 278,685$ 2,815$

8 1-5 years Gravity pipe upgrade along Horne St. between North Railway Ave.& Glasgow Ave. 162,200$ 100% 162,200$ 1,622$ 160,578$ 1,622$

9 5-10 years Gravity pipe upgrade from 33727 1st Ave. to Stave Lake St. 113,750$ 100% 113,750$ 1,138$ 112,613$ 1,138$10 10-15 years Gravity pipe upgrade from south of 7924 to 7911 Eagle Cr. 90,650$ 100% 90,650$ 907$ 89,744$ 907$

Totals 16,654,572$ $12,263,027 $122,630 $12,140,397 $4,514,175

Notes1.) New projects and cost estimates provided by District in May 2017 and Oct 2017. Where cost estimates were available prior to 2017, previous estimates were increased by 2% annually to account for inflation2.) Projects 1-3, benefit allocations and cost estimates confirmed through discussions with K.Boland and J. Klukas, May 10, 20173.) Project #4 rationale for benefit factor based on population growth as percentage of totalpopulation at end of DCC horizon

Benefit to NewDevelopment DCC Recoverable Total Municipal

Responsibility

ProjectNo. Cost Estimate Benefit Factor %Timeframe


2018-03-054:12 PM

48

DISTRICT OF MISSION

SANITARY SEWER DCC RATES

ALL AREAS (Draft)

Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)

Estimated NewDevelopment Unit Person per unit (residential)/ Equivalent


Single Family (4) 3,608 Dwelling Units 3.37 12,159 32%Single Family Compact (4) / Duplex 3,749 Dwelling Units 2.97 11,136 29%

Townhouse 3,762 Dwelling Units 2.56 9,630 25%Apartment (5) 2,385 Dwelling Units 2.04 4,866 13%

Commercial 3 hectares 65 221 1%

Industrial 3 hectares 45 153 0%

Institutional (6) 1 hectares 45 46 0%

Total 38,212 (a) 100%

Net Sanitary Sewer DCC Program Recoverable $12,140,397 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies (2) $0 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $12,140,397 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Equivalent Sanitary Sewer Unit $317.71 (e) = (d) / (a)

DCC Revenue EstimatesSingle Family (4) $1,070.68 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $3,863,020.86Single Family Compact (4) / Duplex $943.60 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $3,538,011.95

Townhouse (7) $813.34 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $3,059,704.04$6.49 per m2 of floor area

Apartment (5),(8) $648.13 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $1,545,991.18$6.64 per m2 of floor area


Industrial $1.43 per square metres gross floor area $48,741.88


Notes


1.) Growth projections provided by District of Mission for previous update and are based on build-outprojection. For this minor update, assumed linear development for 7 years was subtracted from previousprojections with the exception of Areas D and E. Growth projections for Areas D and E are based oncalculated parcel areas that already have or had building permits since previous update.

C: Resulting Sanitary Sewer DCCs

A: Sanitary Sewer Impact Calculation

Land Use

Col. (4) = Col. (1) x Col. (3)

Multiple

B: Unit Sanitary DCC Calculation


2018-01-315:54 PM

49

DISTRICT OF MISSION

SANITARY SEWER PROGRAM

AREAS B AND B1 (Draft)Cedar Valley


Col. (4)Col. (6) = Col.(1) - Col.

(5)

Municipal AssistFactor

0%CVS1 Gravity trunk sewer, forcemain and pump station (internal loan recovery) (2), (3) 1,346,000$ 100% $1,346,000 $0 $1,346,000 -$

Totals $1,346,000 $1,346,000 $0 $1,346,000 $0


ProjectNo. Name Benefit Factor % Benefit to New

DevelopmentCost Estimate


2018-01-315:54 PM

50

DISTRICT OF MISSION

SANITARY SEWER DCC RATES

AREAS B AND B1 (Draft)

Cedar Valley

Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)



Single Family (3) 749 Dwelling Units 3.37 2,524 37%Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex 381 Dwelling Units 2.97 1,133 17%

Townhouse 906 Dwelling Units 2.56 2,319 34%Apartment (4) 348 Dwelling Units 2.04 709 10%

Commercial 0.80 hectares 65 52 1%

Institutional (5) 1.03 hectares 45 46 1%

Total 6,783 (a) 100%

Net Sanitary Sewer DCC Program Recoverable $1,346,000 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies (2) $0 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $1,346,000 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Equivalent Sanitary Sewer Unit $198.45 (e) = (d) / (a)

DCC Revenue EstimatesSingle Family (3) $668.77 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $500,820.34Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex $589.39 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $224,755.87





Notes





C: Resulting Sanitary Sewer DCCs

Land Use

Col. (4) = Col. (1) x Col. (3)

Multiple


2018-01-315:54 PM

51

District of Mission - Extension of Sewer Facilities

SANITARY PROGRAM

AREA B1 (Draft)Cedar Valley

Column Col. (2) Col. (3) =Col. (1)x Col. (2) Col. (4) Col. (5) = Col. (3) -

Col. (4)Col. (6) = Col.(1) - Col.

(5)Municipal Assist

Factor (3)

0%1 Cedar Valley Specified Area Sanitary Sewer (internal loan recovery)(2) 295,000$ 100% $295,000 $0 $295,000 -$

Totals 295,000$ $295,000 $0 $295,000 $0

Notes:

ProjectNo. Benefit Factor % Benefit to New

DevelopmentTotal MunicipalResponsibilityDCC RecoverableName Cost Estimate


2018-01-315:55 PM

52

District of Mission - Cedar Valley Extension of Sewer Facilities

SANITARY DCC CALCULATION

AREA B1(Draft)Cedar Valley

A: Sanitary Sewer Impact CalculationCol. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)



Single Family (3) 167 Dwelling Units 3.37 564 19%Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex 195 Dwelling Units 2.97 579 20%


Commercial 2.77 Persons per Ha. 65 180 6%

Institutional (5) 5.47 Persons per Ha. 45 246 8%

Total 2,945 (a) 100%B: Unit Sanitary DCC CalculationNet Sanitary Sewer DCC Program Recoverable $295,000 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies $1 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $294,999 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Equivalent Sanitary Sewer Unit $100.17 (e) = (d) / (a)C: Resulting Sanitary Sewer DCCs DCC Revenue EstimatesSingle Family (3) $337.56 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $56,499Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex $297.50 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $58,006

Townhouse (6) $256.43 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $102,210$2.04 per m2 of floor area

Apartment (4),(7) $204.34 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $35,612$2.09 per m2 of floor area

Commercial $0.65 square metres gross floor area (e) x Col (3)/10000 $18,027

Institutional (5) $0.45 square metres gross floor area (e) x Col (3)/10000 $24,646

Notes


Land Use

Col. (4) = Col. (1) x Col. (3)

Multiple

1.) Growth projections provided by District of Mission for previous update and are based onbuild-out projection. For this minor update, assumed linear development for 7 years wassubtracted from previous projections with the exception of Areas D and E. Growth projectionsfor Areas D and E are based on calculated parcel areas that already have or had buildingpermits since previous update.


2018-01-315:55 PM

53

DISTRICT OF MISSION

WATERMAIN PROGRAM

AREAS B AND B1 (Draft)Cedar Valley

Column Col. (2) Col. (3) =Col. (1) xCol. (2) Col. (4) Col. (5) = Col.

(3) - Col. (4)Col. (6) = Col.(1) -

Col. (5)Municipal

Assist Factor

1%CVW1 1-5 years Emiry - North of Laminman 85,000$ 100% $85,000 $850 $84,150 $850CVW2 6-10 years Laminman - Cedar to Emiry 269,000$ 100% $269,000 $2,690 $266,310 $2,690CVW3 6-10 years Rosetta - Cedar to Hammond 347,000$ 100% $347,000 $3,470 $343,530 $3,470CVW4 1-5 years Egglestone - West of Cedar 644,000$ 100% $644,000 $6,440 $637,560 $6,440CVW5 11-15 years Right-of-way - Dewdney Trunk Rd. (DTR) to E. end of Rosetta 219,000$ 100% $219,000 $2,190 $216,810 $2,190CVW6 11-15 years DTR - Ferndale to Cedar 896,000$ 100% $896,000 $8,960 $887,040 $8,960CVW7 11-15 years DTR - Tunbridge to Ferndale 717,000$ 100% $717,000 $7,170 $709,830 $7,170CVW8 6-10 years DTR - Tunbridge to Harms 771,000$ 100% $771,000 $7,710 $763,290 $7,710

Totals 3,948,000$ $3,948,000 $39,480 $3,908,520 $39,480

Notes1.) Project list provided by the District of Mission. As no new cost estimates were available, previous estimates were increased by 2% annually to account for inflation.

DCCRecoverable


ProjectNo. Name Benefit

Factor %Benefit to NewDevelopmentCost EstimateTimeframe


2018-01-315:55 PM

54

DISTRICT OF MISSION

WATERMAIN DCC RATES


Cedar Valley

Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)





Commercial 0.80 hectares 65 52 1%

Institutional (5) 1.03 hectares 45 46 1%

Total 6,783 (a) 100%

Net Water DCC Program Recoverable $3,908,520 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies (2) $682,293 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $3,226,227 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Equivalent Water Unit $475.66 (e) = (d) / (a)

DCC Revenue EstimatesSingle Family (3) $1,602.99 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $1,200,416.61Single Family Compact (3) / Duplex $1,412.72 per Dwelling Unit (e) x Col (3) $538,717.51





Notes






Land Use

Col. (4) = Col. (1) x Col. (3)

Multiple


2018-01-315:55 PM

55

DISTRICT OF MISSIONCEDAR VALLEY ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS Park ACQUISITION DCC PROGRAM


Column Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (4) = Col.(2) x Col. (3) Col. (5) Col. (6) = Col.

(4) - Col. (5)Col. (7) = Col.(2) - Col. (6)


1%

1 6-10 years Cedar Street 8895 610280000 3.02 1.09 $25,000 $27,261 81% $22,081.41 $221 $21,861 $5,4002 6-10 years Cedar Street(OCP) 9023 610173000 4.90 1.67 $25,000 $41,717 81% $33,790.77 $338 $33,453 $8,2643 6-10 years Cedar Street 9118 621517000 2.47 0.25 $25,000 $6,268 81% $5,077.08 $51 $5,026 $1,2424 6-10 years Cedar Street 9138 621540000 1.15 0.32 $25,000 $7,921 81% $6,416.01 $64 $6,352 $1,5695 6-10 years Cedar Street 9156 621534000 1.16 0.31 $25,000 $7,717 81% $6,250.77 $63 $6,188 $1,5296 6-10 years Dalke Ave 33209 702781110 1.06 0.20 $25,000 $5,011 81% $4,058.91 $41 $4,018 $9937 6-10 years Dewdney Trunk Road 9021 620473000 0.97 0.15 $25,000 $3,726 81% $3,018.06 $30 $2,988 $7388 6-10 years Dewdney Trunk Road 9097 620526200 4.25 0.90 $25,000 $22,608 81% $18,312.48 $183 $18,129 $4,4799 6-10 years Dewdney Trunk Road 32858 621551000 1.02 0.67 $25,000 $16,678 81% $13,509.18 $135 $13,374 $3,30410 6-10 years Dewdney Trunk Road 32900 621454001 3.00 2.02 $25,000 $50,604 81% $40,989.24 $410 $40,579 $10,02511 6-10 years Dewdney Trunk Road 32932 621470600 1.08 0.09 $25,000 $2,266 81% $1,835.46 $18 $1,817 $44912 6-10 years Dewdney Trunk Road 33136 620808000 8.88 3.29 $25,000 $82,146 81% $66,538.26 $665 $65,873 $16,27313 6-10 years Dewdney Trunk Road 33172 620801000 1.47 0.70 $25,000 $17,452 81% $14,136.12 $141 $13,995 $3,45714 6-10 years Dewdney Trunk Road 33200 620557001 3.57 2.14 $25,000 $53,614 81% $43,427.34 $434 $42,993 $10,62115 6-10 years Emiry Street 8998 610161000 1.38 1.24 $25,000 $31,116 81% $25,203.96 $252 $24,952 $6,16416 6-10 years Emiry Street 9004 610167000 1.56 1.23 $25,000 $30,685 81% $24,854.85 $249 $24,606 $6,07917 6-10 years Emiry Street 9015 610541000 0.82 0.76 $25,000 $19,071 81% $15,447.51 $154 $15,293 $3,77818 6-10 years Emiry Street 9035 610542000 2.50 2.20 $25,000 $54,900 81% $44,469.00 $445 $44,024 $10,87619 6-10 years Emiry Street 9075 610586000 11.02 7.88 $25,000 $197,019 81% $159,585.39 $1,596 $157,990 $39,02920 6-10 years Emiry Street n/a 610635000 2.27 0.64 $25,000 $15,902 81% $12,880.62 $129 $12,752 $3,15021 6-10 years Hammond Street 8928 620955000 4.42 2.14 $25,000 $53,382 81% $43,239.42 $432 $42,807 $10,57522 6-10 years Laminman 32780 610142000 0.97 0.17 $25,000 $4,127 81% $3,342.87 $33 $3,309 $81823 6-10 years Laminman 32732 610138000 0.97 0.07 $25,000 $1,866 81% $1,511.46 $15 $1,496 $37024 6-10 years Neale Drive 8947 610543000 5.65 4.95 $25,000 $123,806 81% $100,282.86 $1,003 $99,280 $24,52625 6-10 years Rosetta Avenue 32909 621470100 0.99 0.50 $25,000 $12,436 81% $10,073.16 $101 $9,972 $2,46426 6-10 years Rosetta Avenue 32927 621470200 0.99 0.88 $25,000 $22,101 81% $17,901.81 $179 $17,723 $4,37827 6-10 years Rosetta Avenue 32937 621470300 1.02 0.57 $25,000 $14,221 81% $11,519.01 $115 $11,404 $2,81728 6-10 years Rosetta Avenue 32966 621159000 4.96 4.86 $25,000 $121,527 81% $98,436.87 $984 $97,453 $24,07429 6-10 years Rosetta Avenue 33126 620854000 7.12 2.87 $25,000 $71,749 81% $58,116.69 $581 $57,536 $14,213

ProjectNo.

Timeframe Cost Estimateper Acre (1)

DCC LandCost

Estimates (3)

Street Address Roll #Total Site

Size(Acres)

BenefitFactor % (2)

Benefit toNew

Development

DCCRecoverable


Amount ofLand

Required(Acres)


2018-01-315:57 PM

56

DISTRICT OF MISSIONCEDAR VALLEY ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS Park ACQUISITION DCC PROGRAM


Column Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (4) = Col.(2) x Col. (3) Col. (5) Col. (6) = Col.

(4) - Col. (5)Col. (7) = Col.(2) - Col. (6)


1%

ProjectNo.

Timeframe Cost Estimateper Acre (1)

DCC LandCost

Estimates (3)

Street Address Roll #Total Site

Size(Acres)

BenefitFactor % (2)

Benefit toNew

Development

DCCRecoverable


Amount ofLand

Required(Acres)

30 6-10 years Rosetta Avenue 33128 620895000 3.01 2.28 $25,000 $56,987 81% $46,159.47 $462 $45,698 $11,28931 6-10 years Tunbridge Avenue 32899 621296000 0.99 0.15 $25,000 $3,854 81% $3,121.74 $31 $3,091 $76332 6-10 years Tunbridge Avenue 32933 621266000 1.00 0.59 $25,000 $14,707 81% $11,912.67 $119 $11,794 $2,91333 6-10 years Tunbridge Avenue 32951 621261000 1.05 0.56 $25,000 $13,975 81% $11,319.75 $113 $11,207 $2,76834 6-10 years Tunbridge Avenue 32993 621256000 0.72 0.07 $25,000 $1,655 81% $1,340.55 $13 $1,327 $32835 6-10 years Tunbridge Avenue 33021 621231000 4.99 4.56 $25,000 $113,971 81% $92,316.51 $923 $91,393 $22,57836 6-10 years Tunbridge Avenue 33053 621000000 1.02 1.01 $25,000 $25,273 81% $20,471.13 $205 $20,266 $5,00737 6-10 years Tunbridge Avenue 33113 620955100 1.05 0.10 $25,000 $2,551 81% $2,066.31 $21 $2,046 $50538 6-10 years Tunbridge Avenue 33174 702344000 1.95 0.54 $25,000 $13,623 81% $11,034.63 $110 $10,924 $2,69939 6-10 years Tunbridge Avenue 33186 702354000 0.98 0.24 $25,000 $6,011 81% $4,868.91 $49 $4,820 $1,19140 6-10 years Tunbridge Avenue 33196 702359000 0.97 0.16 $25,000 $4,021 81% $3,257.01 $33 $3,224 $79741 6-10 years Tunbridge Avenue 33197 620907000 2.23 0.27 $25,000 $6,766 81% $5,480.46 $55 $5,426 $1,340

Totals 104.59 55.29 $1,382,291 $1,119,656 $11,197 $1,108,459 $273,832

Notes1.) Project list and costs confirmed by the District of Mission on Oct 31, 2017. Cost remain the same as in previous update.2.) The benefit factor of 81% was calculated at the time the DCC program was created and reflects the existing population compared to potential developed population. This remains consistent throughout the life of the DCC program.3.) These costs represent the cost of the area of each property to be acquired. The program only requires a portion of a property in some cases.


2018-01-315:57 PM

57

DISTRICT OF MISSION

CEDAR VALLEY

ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS PARK ACQUISITION DCC RATE CALCULATION

AREAS B AND B1

Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)Estimated NewDevelopment Unit Equivalent Population




Total 6,685 (a) 100%

NetPark DCC Program Recoverable $1,108,459 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies $369,001 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $739,458 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Equivalent Person $110.62 (e) = (d) / (a)




Notes:

2.) DCC reserves from District of Mission May 18, 2017, balance to December 31, 2016.3.) Single Family = Lots > 465m2 Single Family Compact = Lots < or = 465m2.4.) Apartments include Institutional Residential units.5.) Townhouse based on an average size of 125.415 sq.m. (1,350 sq.ft.)6.) Apartment based on an average size of 97.545 sq.m. (1,050 sq.ft.)

A: Park Acquisition Impact Calculation

B: Unit Park Acquisition DCC Calculation

1.) Growth projections provided by District of Mission for previous update and arebased on build-out projection. For this minor update, assumed linear development for 7years was subtracted from previous projections with the exception of Areas D and E.Growth projections for Areas D and E are based on calculated parcel areas that alreadyhave or had building permits since previous update.

Land UseCol. (4)

Equivalent Population

C: Resulting Park Acquisition DCCs


2018-01-315:57 PM

58

DISTRICT OF MISSION

CEDAR VALLEY

ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS PARK DEVELOPMENT DCC PROGRAM


Column Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (4) = Col. (2) xCol. (3) Col. (5) Col. (6) = Col. (4) x

Col. (5)Col. (7) = Col. (2) - Col.

(6)

Timeframe Name

Amount ofTrail

Required(metres)

Cost per LinearMeter

DCC Trail DevelopmentCost Estimates

BenefitFactor %

Benefit to NewDevelopment


1%DCC Recoverable Total Municipal

Responsibility

1 1-5 years Trails associated with the open spaceland aquisition 5829.00 $80 $466,000 81% $377,460.00 $3,775 $373,685 $92,315

Totals 5829.00 $466,000 $377,460 $3,775 $373,685 $92,315

Notes1.) Cost estimate updated to reflect 2017 unit pricing.

ProjectNo.


2018-01-315:57 PM

59

DISTRICT OF MISSION

CEDAR VALLEY

ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS PARK DEVELOPMENT DCC RATE CALCULATION


Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)Estimated NewDevelopment Unit Equivalent Population




Total 6,685 (a) 100%

NetPark DCC Program Recoverable $373,685 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies $148,135 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $225,550 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Equivalent Person $33.74 (e) = (d) / (a)




Notes:

2.) DCC reserves from District of Mission May 18, 2017, balance to December 31, 2016.3.) Single Family = Lots > 465m2 Single Family Compact = Lots < or = 465m2.4.) Apartments include Institutional Residential units.5.) Townhouse based on an average size of 125.415 sq.m. (1,350 sq.ft.)

A: Park Development Impact Calculation

B: Unit Park Development DCC Calculation

1.) Growth projections provided by District of Mission for previous update and arebased on build-out projection. For this minor update, assumed linear development for 7years was subtracted from previous projections with the exception of Areas D and E.Growth projections for Areas D and E are based on calculated parcel areas thatalready have or had building permits since previous update.

Land UseCol. (4)

Equivalent Population

C: Resulting Parks Development DCCs


2018-01-315:57 PM

60

DISTRICT OF MISSION

SILVERDALE INDUSTRIAL WATER PROGRAM

AREAS D AND E (Draft)

Column Col.(1) Col.(2) Col. (3) =Col. (1) XCol. (2) Col. (4) Col.(5) = Col. (3) - Col.

(4)Col. (6) = Col.(1) - Col.

(5)

Cost Estimate Municipal AssistFactor

0%1 Silverdale Industrial Water Works (internal loan recovery) (1), (2) 331,000$ 100.0% $331,000 $0 $331,000 -$

Totals $331,000 $331,000 $0

Notes:1.) Project list from District of Mission 03/08/2017.2.) Amount from outstanding internal loans (Amount borrowed less repayments, excluding interest repayments) provided by District of Mission 03/08/17 and balanced to December 31, 20163.) The District has already contributed a municipal assist factor when the project was constructed.



Development


2018-01-315:58 PM

61

DISTRICT OF MISSION

SILVERDALE INDUSTRIAL WATER DCC RATES


Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)



Industrial 22.27 hectares 45 1002 100%

Total 1002 (a) 100%

Net Water DCC Program Recoverable $331,000 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies (2) $0 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $331,000 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Equivalent WaterUnit $330.29 (e) = (d) / (a)

DCC Revenue EstimatesIndustrial $14,863.04 per hectare (e) x Col (3) $330,999.90

$1.49 per square metres gross site area

$330,999.90

Notes

2.) DCC reserves from District of Mission May 18, 2017, balance to December 31, 2016.



1.) Growth projections for Areas D and E are based on calculated parcel areas thatalready have or had building permits since previous update.


Land Use

Col. (4) = Col. (1) x Col. (3)

Trips


2018-01-315:58 PM

62

DISTRICT OF MISSION

SILVERDALE IND. SEWER PROGRAM


Column Col.(1) Col.(2) Col. (3) =Col. (1) XCol. (2) Col. (4) Col.(5) = Col. (3) - Col.

(4)Col. (6) = Col.(1) - Col.

(5)Municipal Assist

Factor0%

1 Silverdale Industrial Sewer Works (internal loan recovery) (1), (2) 138,000$ 100% $138,000 $0 $138,000 -$

Totals $138,000 $138,000 $0 $138,000 $0

Notes:1.) Project list from District of Mission 03/08/2017.2.) Amount from outstanding internal loans (Amount borrowed less repayments, excluding interest repayments) provided by District of Mission 03/08/17 and balanced to December 31, 20163.) The District has already contributed a municipal assist factor when the project was constructed.





2018-01-315:58 PM

63

DISTRICT OF MISSION

SILVERDALE INDUSTRIAL SEWER DCC RATES


Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)



Industrial 22.27 hectares 45 1002 100%

Total 1002 (a) 100%

Net Sanitary Sewer DCC Program Recoverable $138,000 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies (2) $1 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $137,999 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Equivalent Sanitary Sewer Unit $137.70 (e) = (d) / (a)

DCC Revenue EstimatesIndustrial $6,196.63 per hectare (e) x Col (3) $137,998.95

$0.62 per square metres gross site area

$137,998.95

Notes

2.) DCC reserves from District of Mission May 18, 2017, balance to December 31, 2016.



1.) Growth projections for Areas D and E are based on calculated parcel areas that already have or hadbuilding permits since previous update.

C: Resulting Sewer DCCs

Land Use

Col. (4) = Col. (1) x Col. (3)

Trips


2018-01-315:58 PM

64

DISTRICT OF MISSION

SILVERDALE BRIDGE ROAD PROGRAM

AREA E (Draft)

Column Col.(1) Col.(2) Col. (3) =Col. (1) XCol. (2) Col. (4) Col. (5) = Col. (3) -

Col. (4)Col. (6) = Col.(1) - Col.

(5)Municipal Assist

Factor0%

1 Silverdale Bridge (1), (2) 744,000$ 100% $744,000 $0 $744,000 -$

Totals $744,000 $744,000 $0 $744,000 $0

Notes1.) Project list from District of Mission 03/08/2017.2.) Amount from outstanding internal loans (Amount borrowed less repayments, excluding interest repayments) provided by District of Mission 03/08/17 and balanced to December 31, 20163.) The District has already contributed a municipal assist factor of 3% when the project was constructed.





2018-01-315:59 PM

65

DISTRICT OF MISSION

SILVERDALE BRIDGE DCC RATES

AREA E (Draft)

Col. (1) Col. (2) Col. (3) Col. (5) = (4) / (a)

Estimated NewDevelopment Unit Trips/ Day / m2 % Population Equivalent

Industrial 168,149 square metres gross site area 0.054 9080 100%

Total Trip Ends 9080 (a) 100%

Net Road DCC Program Recoverable $744,000 (b)Existing DCC Reserve Monies $1 (c)Net Amount to be Paid by DCCs $743,999 (d) = (b) - (c)DCC per Trip End $81.94 (e) = (d) / (a)

C: Resulting Road DCCs DCC Revenue EstimatesIndustrial $4.42 per square metres gross site area (e) x Col (3) $743,999.11

$17,906.28 per acre$44,246.42 per hectare

Notes1.) Growth projections for Areas D and E are based on calculated parcel areas that already have or had building permits since previous update.2.) DCC reserves from District of Mission May 18, 2017, balance to December 31, 2016.3.) Trips per sq.m. from "Silverdale Creek Bridge DCC Review" report by USL, 2004.

Land Use

Col. (4) = Col. (1) x Col. (3)

Trips




2018-01-315:59 PM

66

APPENDIX C

DCC Program Maps

67

GillAvenue

LougheedHighwayHurdStreet

Fennell Stree

t

WrenStreet

Egglestone Avenue

Cherry Avenue

10th Avenue

RaiAvenue

MitchellAvenue

Emiry Street

Ced

ar Stree

t

Brant AvenueSilverdaleAvenue

9th Avenue

LeeStreet

James

Street

ArbutusAvenue

Mary

Street5thAvenue

Melbur

nDrive

14thAvenue

Nels

onStreet

ArakiCo

u

rt

CaribouStree

t

Hurd

Street

None

FlemingAvenue

12

thAvenue12thAvenue

FraserCrescent

EagleCrescent

Nott

man

Street

DiamondAvenue

Eider

Street

HolidayAvenue

KudoDrive

11thAvenue

PtarmiganDrive

WestviewAvenue

Forbes

Street

KnightAvenue

Ryan

Street

Clay Street

CopperPlace

Israel Avenue

TaulbutStreet

BadgerAvenue

Grand Stree

t

Murray

Street

Birch

Stree

t

BobcatDrive

BlueberryDrive

7th Avenue

Tunbridge Avenue

5th Avenue

3rdAvenue

6th Avenue

3rd Avenue

LoganAvenue

8th Avenue

BeaverDrive

Dewdney Trunk Road

BestAvenue

6th Avenue

Loughe

edHig

hway

ScottAvenue

Melburn

Drive

DalkeAvenue

Stave Lake Stree

t

Whidden Avenue

Rosetta Avenue

Blott

Street

4th Avenue

MyrtleAvenue

2ndAvenueHillcrestAvenue

NorthRailwayAvenue

HerarLan

e

Horne Street

Olson Avenue

Dunsm

uir Stree

t

None

Laslo Avenue

ParrAvenue

Lougheed Highway

PhelpsAvenue

Barr Street

None

Stave Lake Stree

t

Prentis

Avenu

e

HoodAvenue

McRae Avenue 11th Avenue

Judith Stree

t

9th Avenue

None

Topper

D

rive

Grove Avenue

TurnerStreet

TylerStreet

None

OyamaStr

eet

6thAvenue

SumacPlace

Harm

s Street

1st Avenue

None

Ferndale Avenue

Kenney AvenueNea

leDrive

LarkspurAve

nue

Hawthorne AvenueBench Avenue

Viewcrest Avenue

CameronAvenue

None

Ceda

rV

alleyConnec

tor

1

CVR7

CVR13

CVR10

CVR11

CVR12

CVR9

CVR8

12

13

CVR14

CVR15

108

7

2

4

6

5

3

9

CVR2

CVR6

CVR3

CVR4

CVR5

CVR1

11

11

Coordinate System:

Data Sources:

FIGURE 1

- District of Mission

(When plotted at 11"x17")

The accuracy and completeness of information shown on thisdrawing is not guaranteed. It will be the responsibility of the userof the information shown on this drawing to locate and establishthe precise location of all existing informatin whether shown ornot.

0 100 200 300

Metres

Project #:Author:

Status:Revision:

Checked:

Date:

0995.0042.01LPAK/JK~DRAFT~A2018 / 3 / 5

|·|

N

District of Mission

Transportation DCC Program -All Areas & Areas B1 and B2

(Cedar Valley)

U:\P

roje

cts_

VAN

\099

5\00

42\0

1\D

-Dra

fting

-Des

ign-

Anal

ysis

\GIS

\Pro

ject

s\Pr

o_Pr

ojec

ts\P

ro_P

roje

cts.

aprx

La

st u

pdat

ed b

y lp

unt o

n M

onda

y, M

arch

5, 2

018

at 1

1:37

AM

Proposed Signalization

Proposed Intersection

Bridge Upgrade

Proposed Road Upgrade

Proposed Road Widening

Proposed Arterial Road

Silverdale Boundary

Cedar Valley Boundary

Urban Growth Boundary

Cadastral

Park

First Nation Reserve

Scale: 1:18,000

68

!

!

!! !!!

CVD13

CVD12

CVD10

CVD9

CVD8

CVD11

CVD15

CVD3

CVD1

CVD2

CVD4CVD14

Desbrisay Avenue

Judith Stree

t

Fennell Stree

t EgglestoneAvenue

Ced

ar Stree

t

Bobcat

Drive

MitchellAvenue

Emiry Street

Best Avenue

Terris

Street

Forbes Stree

t

StokesAvenue

CarterAvenue

CadeBarrStreet

PeacockStreet

Nott

man

Street

Thorpe Street

KudoDriveCopperPlace

TylerStreet

MillerCrescen

t

Blueberry Drive

Cherry Avenue

BowyerDr

ive

Tunbridge Avenue

Dewdney Trunk Road

CoxDr

ive

Dalke Avenue

Whidden Avenue

Rosetta Avenue

Myrtle Avenue

Fairban

ksSt

reet

Ferndale Avenue

MonteVistaStr

eet

Bail

eyPlace

Appleby Lane

AsterTe

rrace

PhelpsAvenue

Barr Street

Bracken Avenue

HoodAvenue

Mingo Avenue

Ham

mondStreet

None

SylviaAvenue

Ban

nister

D

rive

VickeryStreet

Harm

s Street

RoseAvenue

Boothby Avenue

Ihles Avenue

Laminman Avenue

NealeDrive

LarkspurAvenue

Hawthorne Avenue

Cameron Avenue

CVD7

CVD6

CVD5

Coordinate System:

Data Sources:

FIGURE 2




100 0 100 20050

Metres

Project #:Author:

Status:Revision:

Checked:

Date:

0995.0042.01LPAK/JK~DRAFT~A2017 / 12 / 14

|·|

N

District of Mission

Drainage DCC Program -Areas B1 and B2

(Cedar Valley)

U:\P

roje

cts_

VAN

\099

5\00

42\0

1\D

-Dra

fting

-Des

ign-

Anal

ysis

\GIS

\Pro

ject

s\Pr

o_Pr

ojec

ts\P

ro_P

roje

cts.

aprx

La

st u

pdat

ed b

y lp

unt o

n Th

ursd

ay, D

ecem

ber 1

4, 2

017

at 4

:25

PM

" Proposed Ditch

, , Proposed Culvert

Proposed Storm Sewer

Proposed Detention Pond

! ! Proposed Channel

Silverdale Boundary



Cadastral

Park


Scale: 1:10,500

69

GillAvenue

GlasgowAven

ue

LougheedHighwayHurdStreet

High

way

11

DraperStreet

Wren

Street

EgglestoneAvenue

Cherry Avenue

10th Avenue

RaiAvenue

LougheedH

ighwa

y

Highway11

MitchellAvenue

Ced

ar Stree

t

LeeStreet

HorneStree

t

Mary

Street5th Avenue

None

14th Avenue

London

Avenue

Hurd

Street

Jaspe

rAvenu

e

MansonSt

reet

12thAvenue

FraserCrescent

Nott

man

Street

Eider

StreetHolidayAvenue

Ku

doDrive

11thAvenue

PtarmiganDrive

KnightAvenue

Stave Lake Stree

t

Ryan

Street

ClayStreet

Israel Avenue

TaulbutStreet

BadgerAvenue

No

ne

Grand Stree

t

Murray

Street

BobcatDrive

BlueberryDrive

7thAvenue

Tunbridge Avenue

5th Avenue

3rdAvenue3rd Avenue

BeaverDrive

Best Avenue

DalkeAvenue

WhiddenAvenue

Blott

Street

4th Avenue

Forbes

Street

2ndAvenue

NorthRailwayAvenue

DewdneyTrunkRoad

Horne Street

NelsonStreet

Olson Avenue

Dunsm

uirStreet

None

ParrAvenue

Lougheed HighwayNone

StaveLakeStreet

PrentisAvenue

DuncanAvenue

McRae Avenue 11th Avenue

DunnStr

ee

t

TopperDrive

None

Grove Avenue

TylerStreet

None

Oyam

aStreet

PennerAvenue

1st Avenue

NoneSilv

erdaleAvenue

Kenney Avenue

HawthorneAvenue

None

Bench Avenue

HorneOfframpStreet

Viewcrest Avenue

None

CedarValley

Connecto

r

Gunn Avenue

Loft

usStreet

8

10

6

9

7

5

4

3

2

1

Coordinate System:

Data Sources:

FIGURE 3




0 500 1,000250

Metres

Project #:Author:

Status:Revision:

Checked:

Date:

0995.0042.01LPAK/JK~DRAFT~A2017 / 10 / 31

|·|

N

District of Mission

Sanitary DCC Program -All Areas

U:\P

roje

cts_

VAN

\099

5\00

42\0

1\D

-Dra

fting

-Des

ign-

Anal

ysis

\GIS

\Pro

ject

s\Pr

o_Pr

ojec

ts\P

ro_P

roje

cts.

aprx

La

st u

pdat

ed b

y lp

unt o

n Tu

esda

y, O

ctob

er 3

1, 2

017

at 1

:33

PM

Proposed Wet Well / Pump Station

Pipe Upgrade

Silverdale Boundary



Cadastral

Park


Scale: 1:25,000

70

CVW1CVW5

CVW2 CVW3

CVW8

CVW7

CVW4

CVW6

Desbrisay Avenue

Judith Stree

t

Fennell Stree

t EgglestoneAvenue

Ced

ar Stree

t

Bobcat

Drive

MitchellAvenue

Emiry Street

Best Avenue

Terris

Street

Forbes Stree

t

StokesAvenue

CarterAvenue

CadeBarrStreet

PeacockStreet

Nott

man

Street

Thorpe Street

Cail Stree

t

KudoDriveCopperPlace

TylerStreet

MillerCrescen

t

Blueberry Drive

Cherry Avenue

BowyerDr

ive

Tunbridge Avenue

Dewdney Trunk Road

CoxDr

ive

Dalke Avenue

Whidden Avenue

Rosetta Avenue

Myrtle Avenue

Fairban

ksSt

reet

Ferndale Avenue

MonteVistaStr

eet

Bail

eyPlace

Appleby Lane

AsterTe

rrace

PhelpsAvenue

Barr Street

Bracken Avenue

HoodAvenue

Mingo Avenue

Ham

mondStreet

None

SylviaAvenue

Ban

nister

D

rive

VickeryStreet

Harm

s Street

RoseAvenue

Boothby Avenue

Vishloff Street

Ihles Avenue

NealeDrive

LarkspurAvenue

Hawthorne Avenue

Cameron Avenue

Coordinate System:

Data Sources:

FIGURE 4




100 0 100 20050

Metres

Project #:Author:

Status:Revision:

Checked:

Date:

0995.0042.01LPAK/JK~DRAFT~A2017 / 10 / 30

|·|

N

District of Mission

Water DCC Program -Areas B1 and B2

(Cedar Valley)

U:\P

roje

cts_

VAN

\099

5\00

42\0

1\D

-Dra

fting

-Des

ign-

Anal

ysis

\GIS

\Pro

ject

s\Pr

o_Pr

ojec

ts\P

ro_P

roje

cts.

aprx

La

st u

pdat

ed b

y lp

unt o

n O

ctob

er 3

0, 2

017

at 4

:47

PM

Proposed Watermain

Silverdale Boundary



Cadastral

Park


Scale: 1:10,500

71

APPENDIX D

Public Consultation Materials

72

APPENDIX E

Existing District of Mission Development Cost Charge Bylaw 5214-2011

73

APPENDIX F

Proposed District of Mission Development Cost Charge Bylaw 5714-2018

84

home - district of mission, bc - special council agenda · 2019. 11. 22. · special council...

Documents