Development

Three development projects are currently under consideration by the WPRRA. They are listed below with their current status. For your information, we have included a sections describing the typical development approval process followed by the City of Surrey. Note: this development process is only followed where subdivision of land occurs, not when a single existing lot is built upon, or when an existing home is torn down and replaced.

Typical development approval process

Step 1 Preliminary Information Gathering including: tree assessment, preliminary neighbourhood consultation (this is where the WPRRA is usually first contacted), finalize development principles, finalize conceptual subdivision layout.

Step 2 Submit Development Application to City including: internal review (Planning, Parks and Engineering), external review (School District, MoT), submit tree assessment, design guidelines and preliminary lot grading, public information meeting.

Step 3 Council Consideration including: first and second reading, a public hearing and third reading.

Step 4 Post Third Reading including: Detailed engineering and servicing agreement, and then fourth and final reading.

Neighbourhood "Policy" Guide: The updating of the land use and road network information

Three active development projects

Biggest proposed Ridge development: parcel between 128th and 132nd, Highway 10 and 56th

In our view, the most important current development is the land between 128th & 132nd and Hwy 10 & 56th as it affects the largest undeveloped section on the Ridge. A developer has obtained control of approximately one third of this section of land and is attempting to get a concept plan approved for the complete parcel. The initial stages of the development have been positive, with the developer proactively approaching the WPRRA to solicit our input and insights. Two key objectives of his concept plan are to maximize tree preservation and maintain the estate appearance along 56th Ave. In particular there is one of the last, large groves of coniferous trees on this parcel that the developer would like to see made into a city park. This developer is also looking to put together a smaller four parcel lot, the progress of which we will be following closely. The current position of the WPRRA is to support the concept of a public park to save these trees and to preserve the "estate" appearance along 56th avenue.

BFW development proceeds: One four lot parcel at New McLellan and 124th, and a second parcel at 56th and 122 Street

These BFW development proposals have been reported in previous newsletters. This development has a long history and involves three parcels zoned one acre, which the developer was seeking to have rezoned to half-acre. The previous (before last election) Council approved the sub-division of one parcel but rejected the application for the other two. The developer brought one of the parcels where re-zoning was denied back before Council and was successful in obtaining the half acre designation. It was not clear to the WPRRA why the re-zoning for this parcel was at first denied, and then only about six months later, the exact same application was approved. This is the development now underway along New McClellan near 124 St. The WPRRA originally opposed the re-zoning of the parcel along New McLellan as this parcel was heavily treed and the feeling was that if it was allowed to be re-zoned to higher density, most of the trees would be lost. It was re-zoned and many of the trees have now been removed.

The enforcement of covenants

The WPRRA has been engaged in a long-standing discussion with the City regarding the enforcement of covenants. Covenants are used as a vehicle to ensure appropriate development and both the City and the homeowners are parties to the covenant. As a community group, we look at the convenants proposed to determine if the final development will be appropriate for the community. We have been working for many years, and with little success, to try and have the City enforce existing covenants. The most recent response from the City stated that although they are party to the covenant, they are not willing to enforce them. Their position is that it is the responsibility of the homeowners who are party to a covenant to take action against those neighbours who are in contravention. For a variety of reasons, most neighbours are not going to take action against each other, resulting in covenants becoming an unreliable tool to ensure appropriate development. The position of the WPRRA is that if the City will not enforce the covenants, then they cannot be considered when trying to determine if a development is appropriate for the community.