South Britannia Beach Master Plan

South Britannia Beach Master PlanVOLUME • 1 OF 3 • V3 NOVEMBER, 2014

Master Plan

South Britannia Beach Master PlanVOLUME 1 OF 3 • V3 NOVEMBER, 2014

T A I C H E N G D E V E L O P M E N T C O R P O R A T I O NSuite 710, 100 Park Royal South, West Vancouver, BC V7T 1A2 Canada Tel: 778-279-7930 Fax: 778-279-7920

SUBMITTED BY

T A I C H E N G D E V E L O P M E N T C O R P O R A T I O NSuite 710, 100 Park Royal South, West Vancouver, BC V7T 1A2 Canada Tel: 778-279-7930 Fax: 778-279-7920Taicheng Development Corporation

710-100 Park Royal South

West Vancouver, British Columbia V7T 1A2

CONSULTING TEAM

Michael von Hausen, MCIP, MLAUD, CSLA, LEED AP, Project Director

Paul Turje, P. Eng., Director of Engineering

MVH Urban Planning & Design Inc.

12601 19A Avenue, Surrey, British Columbia V4A 7M1

Telephone (604) 536-3990 Fax (604) 536-3995

Website: www.mvhinc.com Email: [email protected]

IN ASSOCIATION WITH:

• Whistler Centre for Sustainability (Project Sustainability and Public Engagement),

• Kerr Wood Leidel Associates (Civil Engineering and Costing),

• Bunt & Associates (Transportation Planning and Engineering),

• Hatch Mott MacDonald (Transportation Engineering),

• Piteau Associates (Geotechnical and Hydrogeological Engineering),

• Cascade Environmental Resource Group (Environmental)

• Calum Srigley Design Consultant (Illustrations and Community Design)

• Perry & Associates (Landscape Architecture and Community Design),

• Endall Architecture (Architecture and Community Design),

• Frank Ducote Urban Design (Architecture and Community Design),

• Rollo and Associates (Land Economics)

• Perrier Design (Graphics)

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.1 Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.2 Policy Context And Development Intent . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.3 Scope Of Plan and Systemic Sustainability . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.4 Public Engagement Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2 Site Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2.1 Location and Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2.2 Existing and Adjacent Land Use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

3 Policy Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

3.1 SLRD Regional Growth Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

3.2 SLRD Integrated Sustainability Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3.3 SLRD Official Community Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

3.4 Zoning Bylaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

3.5 Public Lands And Foreshore Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

3.6 Environmental Reserve/Municipal Reserve . . . . . . . . . . . 19

3.7 Provincial Highways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

3.8 CN Rail and Crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

4 Site Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

4.1 History and Special Site Features. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

4.2 Topography and Vegetation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

4.3 Environmental Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Terrestrial Ecosystem Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Wildlife and Wildlife Habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Aquatic & Marine Habitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Environmental Opportunities and Constraints . . . . . . . . 28

Proposed Development Impacts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Environmental Permitting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

4.4 Geotechnical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

4.5 Transportation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

4.6 Market and Economic Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Residential Market Opportunity Assessment . . . . . . . . 34

Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Sea-to-Sky Market Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Development Capacity of Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

Directly Competitive Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

Residential Target Markets – Introduction . . . . . . . . 36

Residential Demand in Study Area:

Standard Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

Residential Demand in Study Area:

New Market Segments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

Unit Absorption at South Britannia Beach . . . . . . . . 40

4.7 Retail & Service Commercial Market

Opportunity Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

Expenditures Potential & Market Capture . . . . . . . . . 43

Employment Projections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

4.8 Summary Of Site Opportunities And Constraints . . . . . 46

5 Master Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

5.1 South Britannia Beach Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

5.2 South Britannia Beach Neighbourhood

Desired Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Our Unique Neighbourhood And Homes . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Our Healthy and Thriving Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Our Transportation and Infrastructure Systems. . . . . . . 54

Our Recreation, Leisure and Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

Our Natural Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

5.3 Alternative Concept Explorations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Green Structure Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Green Fingers Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

Hub Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

Bowl Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

Common Design Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

5.4 Land Use Allocations and Population . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

5.5 Special Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

Design and Building Style. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

5.6 Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

Housing Form And Overlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

Cluster Housing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

6 Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

6.1 Plan Phasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

6.2 Policy Amendments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

6.3 Other Approvals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

6.4 Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

7 Servicing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

7.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

7.2 Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

Development Traffic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

Highway 99 Access Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

Phases 1-2 (by 2016 – 2026). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

Phase 3 (by 2026 – 2031) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

Phases 4-5 (by 2031 – 2036) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Rail Crossings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Pedestrian / Cyclist Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

Transit Service. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93

7.3 Water Servicing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

Water Source. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

Demand Calculations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

Water Storage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96

Water System Integration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

7.4 Wastewater Servicing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Regulatory Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

Wastewater Criteria and Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

Sewage Collection and Pumping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

7.5 Stormwater. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

DFO Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

SLRD Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

Level 1 – Source Control Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

Level 2 – Minor System Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

Level 3 – Major System Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

Regional Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

7.6 Flood Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

Stream Flood Hazard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

Coastal Flood Hazard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

7.7 Electricity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

7.8 Natural Gas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

7.9 Telecommunications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

7.10 Other Development Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

CN Railway. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

Public Safety . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

Wildfire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112

Appendix A: Sustainability Checklist and Evaluation . . . . . . . 115

Appendix B: Public Engagement Summary and Comments . 125

B1 Workshop Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

Consultations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

Communications About The Workshop. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

B2 Workshop Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

Tuesday, April 22, 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

Wednesday, April 23, 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

Thursday, April 24, 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

Friday, April 25, 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

B3 Public Meeting #1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

B4 Goals And Desired Outcomes Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Our Unique Neighbourhood And Homes . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Our Healthy And Thriving Community. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Our Transportation And Infrastructure Systems . . . . . . 129

Our Recreation, Leisure And Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

Our Natural Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

B5 Comments On Master Plan Presentation

(April 25, 2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

List of Figures

Figure 1 – South Britannia Beach Summary Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

Figure 1 – Regional Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Figure 1 – Regional Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Figure 2 – Property Ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Figure 3 – Context Topography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Figure 4 – Regional Growth Strategy Maps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Figure 5 – SLRD Official Community Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Figure 6 – CN Rail North Crossing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Figure 7 – CN Rail South Crossing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Figure 8 – Context Aerial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Figure 9 – Slope Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Figure 10 – Pre-Development Environmental Opportunities

And Constraints. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Figure 11 – Post-Development Environmental Opportunities

And Constraints. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Figure 12 – Existing transportation features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Figure 13 – South Britannia Beach trade area

population projections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Figure 14 – South Britannia Beach Neighbourhoods. . . . . . . . . . . 48

Figure 15 – Land Use Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

Figure 16 – Illustrated Master Plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

Figure 17 – Special Features . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

Figure 18 – View of Minaty Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Figure 19 – Copper Pedestrian Bridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

Figure 20 – Waterfront Trail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

Figure 21 – Tunnel Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

Figure 22 – The Community Hub. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

Figure 23 – Regional Tourism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70

Figure 24 – Making Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

Figure 25 – Single-family and mixed residential homes . . . . . . . . 72

Figure 26 – Housing site sections, looking north . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

Figure 27 – Parks, recreation and amenities plan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

Figure 28 – Phasing Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Figure 29 – Transportation Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

Figure 30 – Servicing Water. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

Figure 31 – Sewage Collection and Pumping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

Figure 32 – Marine Flood Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

List of Tables

Table 1 – Development Response to OCP Objectives

for Britannia Beach. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Table 2 – Average Annual Dwelling Unit Demand:

South Britannia Beach Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Table 3 – Total Dwelling Unit Demand:

South Britannia Beach Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Table 4 – Comparison of Study Area

Residential Absorption Potential. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Table 5 – South Britannia Beach Employment Projections . . . . . 45

Table 6 – Site Opportunities and Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

Table 7 – Land Use Allocations and Population Density. . . . . . . . 58

Table 8 – Phasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

Table 10 – Water Demands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

Table 11 – Design capacity of existing WWTP. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Table 12 – Britannia WWTP Effluent Quality Requirements . . . . 100

Table 13 – Wastewater criteria and flows for South Britannia . . . 101

Table 14 – Source Control Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

Table 15 – Creek Flow Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

Table 16 – Year 2100 Marine FCL Estimate

for Squamish River Delta. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

SOUTH BRITANNIA BEACH MASTER PLAN i

Acknowledgements

The consulting and development team would

like to thank all participants for their generous

individual contributions and support during

the South Britannia Master Plan process. In

particular, we would like to thank the Britannia

Beach Community Association (BBCA) exec-

utive who spent time and effort meeting with

the Master Plan team and helped invite the

rest of the Britannia Beach community to the

community design workshop events.

We would like to thank MacDonald Develop-

ment Corporation for their support through-

out the process. School District #48 and

the Sea-to-Sky Trail Society also contrib-

uted to the discussions during the first day

of the workshop, along with the Future of

Howe Sound Society during the first night

of the community workshop. The Britan-

nia Mine Museum also supported the pro-

cess both in the workshop and following the

workshop. We would finally like to thank our

graduate student volunteers Darren Proulx,

Pino Frustaci, Imelda Nurwisah, and Athena

von Hausen for their help.

Lastly, a sincere thank you to all the Britannia

Beach community members who took part in

our workshop, drop-in sessions, and presen-

tations from April 22nd to April 25th, 2014.

We also recognize the following important stakeholders in the creation of this Master Plan:

Britannia Beach community Waterfront component and other infrastructure improvements

Squamish-Lillooet Regional District (SLRD) Planning and Minaty Bay Regional Park

Britannia Mine Museum Tourism and access between North and South Britannia Beach

Squamish First Nation Tourism development and heritage

District of Squamish Planning, entrepreneurship/employment and life-long learning

Resort Municipality of Whistler Corridor and tourism planning

School District #48 Community’s school and potential joint use agreement with local community

MacDonald Development Corporation Tourism and infrastructure

The Province of British Columbia Waterfront lands for recreation and tourism

BC Transit Transit

Start-up Squamish Potential partnership for business entrepreneurship on site

Sea-to-Sky Trail Society Water and land-based connections to the regional network

Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MOTI)

Access and roads

Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) Creeks and waterfront

Ministry of Environment (MOE) Environmental assessments

CN Rail Rail crossings

Sea-to-Sky Gondola Tourism

Squamish Adventure Centre Tourism

BC Parks / Parks Canada Parks and trails

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0 m

100

m

Britannia Crossing

Soundview

Britannia Meadows

Minaty

Legend

Single Family

Mixed Residential

Commercial

Institutional

Tourist Commercial

Trails

Phases0M 50 100 5001:5000

N

North Britannia

Community Resourceand Learning Centre

3

2

3

5

1

4

Community Park

Waterfront Trails

Minaty BayRegional Park

Tourist Commercial(Hotel)

Main Entrance

Figure 1 – South Britannia Beach Summary Plan

SOUTH BRITANNIA BEACH MASTER PLAN iii

Executive Summary

South Britannia Beach will be a distinct and compact community. It will

comprise a mixture of housing options that are beautifully designed, en-

ergy efficient, sited sensitively, and reflective of a mountain and ocean

setting with a small town feel. South Britannia Beach will help complete

and complement the existing North Britannia Beach community.

Diversity and choice of housing will be central to the Master Plan which

will provide between 850 to 1,000 residential units with an equal mix

of single-family and multiple-family units. Housing will consist of com-

pact to larger single-family lots, which will also permit suites or lane

houses (in lane accessible areas). A variety of multiple-family housing

will include townhouses, rowhouses and stacked townhouses set in a

variety of site plans including cluster, courtyard and greenway housing

designs. Apartments will be four to six stories and will be located in

the Minaty neighbourhood.

Creating a ‘sense of place’ will be important in establishing South

Britannia Beach as a unique community. Social support and local

community services will be keystones for the South Britannia Beach

community. The community gathering place – Britannia Crossing will

be conveniently located near the main entrance of the development.

Britannia Crossing will consist of commercial and institutional uses

along with a central community park surrounded by multiple-family

housing. The commercial uses will primarily support the residential

community. Institutional uses will include a community resource and

learning centre, transit hub, and emergency services. The community

resource and learning centre will include a daycare, a local business

centre, and a potential kindergarten to grade 3 school.

Britannia Crossing will be linked to the other three residential neigh-

bourhoods: Britannia Meadows, Soundview, and Minaty. Neighbour-

hoods will be connected by local streets and trail systems that are

pedestrian and bike friendly. The transit hub will support potential local

bus and shuttle transportation.

A combination of active and passive parks in South Britannia Beach will

provide a variety of recreational experiences for residents and visitors.

The proposed active community park in Britannia Crossing, consisting

of sports areas and community gardens, will be complemented by local

neighbourhood parks. These parks will be connected by a nature trail

system that will follow the creeks and wetlands. The creation of the Mi-

naty Bay Regional Park on Minaty Bay south of Highway 99 will provide

a waterfront recreation focus on Howe Sound. A proposed waterfront

trail (subject to the approval of the Province of British Columbia) will

connect Minaty Bay to North Britannia Beach.

The South Britannia Beach community will be developed in phases over

the next 15 to 20 years. The initial phases 1 (Britannia Meadows) and

2 (Britannia Crossing), developed over the next 2 to 12 years (2016 –

2026), will comprise a mix of single-family and multiple-family housing

with up to 400 to 500 units in the north and central parts of the site.

Phase 3 will follow from 2026 – 2031 with a mix of 200 to 300 housing

units in the Minaty neighbourhood south of Highway 99. Phases 4 and

5, in the final 5 years (2031 – 2036), will expand the community with

up to 200 housing units. Phase 4 (the Soundview neighbourhood), will

include larger single-family lots on the slopes overlooking Howe Sound.

Phase 5 will see the development of the Tourism Commercial area on

Minaty Bay including a hotel with up to 100 rooms.

SOUTH BRITANNIA BEACH MASTER PLAN 1

1

INT

RO

DU

CT

ION

1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose

The South Britannia Beach Master Plan provides the basis for the appli-

cation to amend the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District (SLRD) Official

Community Plan (OCP). The OCP for this area is the Howe Sound East

Sub-area Plan (Schedule C to the SLRD Area D OCP Bylaw 1135-2013).

This Master Plan also provides the basis to amend the Zoning Bylaw

(Bylaw 540) to accommodate the proposed development. It is sup-

plemented by Volume 2 - Maps and Volume 3 – Technical Studies that

support this plan and will accompany the application.

1.2 Policy Context And Development IntentThis Master Plan follows the direction of the policies and plans set out

by the SLRD, which are further detailed in Chapter 3 – Policy Context.

It supports the SLRD Regional Growth Strategy (RGS) and Integrated

Sustainability Plan (ISP). The development intent is to stay within the

bounds of the SLRD Official Community Plan (OCP) policies and spec-

ified development boundaries. Each OCP policy response relating to

development within Britannia Beach is detailed in Chapter 3. The Plan

adheres substantially to the OCP but does contain slight modifications

that will require amendments. The existing zoning will require more

extensive amendments to accommodate the diverse land uses, parcel

sizes, densities, setbacks and other associated requirements of the Plan.

1.3 Scope Of Plan and Systemic SustainabilityAlthough the Master Plan is focused within its development boundaries,

it includes specific recommendations to improve connections to North

Britannia Beach and the waterfront. In addition, associated community

amenities that improve Britannia Beach as a whole (referring to both

North and South Britannia Beach together) are included in this Master

Plan. This idea of building South Britannia Beach, and at the same time,

improving the whole of Britannia Beach was a common thread of pub-

lic input into the Plan development, referred to as “One Britannia.” In

addition, the new neighbourhood’s

contribution to the Sea-to-Sky Corridor

is important from social, environmen-

tal and economic perspectives. This

will ensure that the plan makes both a

local and regional contribution.

Sustainability is addressed as a basis

for development throughout the Mas-

ter Plan, from the specific goals and

desired outcomes described in Chapter

5.2, to the Sustainability and Evaluation Checklist in Appendix A.

1.4 Public Engagement SummaryThe project team believed that meaningful public engagement would

be instrumental to the success of this project, and therefore designed

a targeted and collaborative approach to engagement. As South

Britannia Beach will become part of a greater Britannia Beach com-

munity, the most important people to engage in this project were the

current residents of Britannia Beach. Furthermore, as South Britannia

Beach will become a new community in the Sea-to-Sky Corridor, it was

essential that the other communities impacted, namely Whistler and

Squamish, were engaged in the planning process as well. Members of

the communities were invited to participate in the four-day commu-

nity design workshop held from April 22nd to April 25th, 2014 at the

Britannia Beach Community Hall. The workshop and associated events

were well received and there was strong support for the proposed plan

directions as voiced by the participants and further evidenced in the

comment sheets at the presentation on the final day of the workshop.

The continuing importance of community and corridor partnerships

was emphasized throughout the workshop events as evidenced by the

comments included in Appendix B.

I have seen five plans. This is the best. It has a ‘community’ feel.–Britannia Beach resident

Figure 1 – Regional ContextFigure 1 – Regional Context

N0 1

Kilometres


2

SIT

E D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

2 Site Description

2.1 Location and Size

The South Britannia Beach site is in the SLRD and flanks Highway 99

(the Sea-to-Sky highway). The site is approximately 55 kilometres (34

miles) north of the city of Vancouver, 33 kilometres (21 miles) north of

Horseshoe Bay, and 12 kilometres (8 miles) south of Squamish. The site

is also north of the existing communities of Furry Creek and Porteau

Cove. The development area is immediately south of the historic Britan-

nia Beach community (North Britannia), a community of approximately

300 residents and associated mining facilities including the Britannia

Mining Museum. The site borders the eastern shores of Howe Sound

with Highway 99 and the CN Rail line bisecting the site and separating

the main part of the site from the waterfront. The proposed Highway

99 bypass and existing hydro right-of-way shape the eastern boundary

of the site on the lower part of the mountainside.

The total land owned by Taicheng Development Corporation is 186.41

hectares (460.63 acres). This Master Plan includes 72.37 hectares

(178.83 acres) which represents approximately 39 percent of the gross

property area. The majority of the waterfront (Lots 5208 and 5210) is

owned by the Province of British Columbia (the Crown), except for the

Minaty Bay area in the southwest corner of the property. Most of the

developable area is focused on the lower slopes and previous gravel

extraction operations area as well as the Minaty Bay area.

The Master Plan area includes the low level lands owned by Taicheng

Development Corporation (Taicheng), noted as Blocks A, B, and part

of Block C on Figure 2 (noted in the hatched lined area), as well as the

Howe Sound waterfront properties owned by the Crown, both in front

of the Taicheng lands (Lot 5210) and the Britannia Mine Museum (Lot

5208). The Crown has officially permitted Taicheng (letter dated June

2013) to include their lands in the Master Plan and formal application

but did not provide any further approval or consent.

The Master Plan follows the development limits within the Official Com-

munity Plan for this area outlined in the Howe Sound East Sub-area

Plan (Schedule C to SLRD Area D OCP Bylaw 1135-2013). The Master

Plan does not include the uplands parcels owned by Taicheng, except

for the necessary trail and road connections, as well as the siting of a

proposed water reservoir to service the development.

4 SOUTH BRITANNIA BEACH MASTER PLAN

Figure 2 – Property Ownership


2

SIT

E D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

2.2 Existing and Adjacent Land UseThe Master Plan consists of three planning areas:

1. North Gravel Extraction Area: The north area of the site consists

of a former gravel extraction operation. Much of this area has been

disturbed but still has two creeks (Gravel and Thistle Creeks) run-

ning through it to Howe Sound. The main access from Highway 99

to the site is located on the upper west side of this area. The area

is bordered to the north by steep rocky slopes that separate it from

the Britannia Mine Museum property and the existing Britannia

Beach town site. The existing hydro right-of-way approximates the

eastern border of this site with the south and west borders defined

by Highway 99 (see Block C on Figure 2).

2. Minaty Bay: The south area of the site is connected to the north area

by a single lane tunnel under Highway 99. This area is bordered by

Highway 99 to the north and east, an undeveloped forested area

to the south and Howe Sound to the west. It is partially disturbed

by gravel extraction and the remainder forested with a mix of veg-

etation. Two creeks run through the area: Daisy Creek, the larger

named creek, and a small unnamed water course (referred to as Mi-

naty Creek). The creeks discharge independently into Howe Sound.

The waterfront of the Minaty Bay area was the site of a community

associated with the Britannia Beach mine when it was in operation.

The houses have since been removed but some foundations remain.

The Minaty waterfront is a spectacular site with a small protected

cove and a peninsula that affords excellent views to Howe Sound

and the mountains beyond. Informal recreation use is evidenced

by fire pits, sitting areas and a trail that follows the waterfront to

Highway 99 (see Block A and B on Figure 2).


Figure 3 – Context Topography


2

SIT

E D

ES

CR

IPT

ION

3. Howe Sound Waterfront: This area extends from Minaty Bay to the Britannia Beach community marina facility in front of the Britannia Beach

town site, and is owned by the Crown (District Lots 5208 and 5210). The land of these remnant parcels has been disturbed by previous wa-

terfront industrial activity and is separated from the both the Taicheng lands and the Britannia Beach town site by the CN Railway tracks and

Highway 99 (see area west of Block C on Figure 2).


Figure 4 – Regional Growth Strategy Maps

3

PO

LIC

Y C

ON

TE

XT


3 Policy Context

3.1 SLRD Regional Growth StrategyThe SLRD Regional Growth Strategy Bylaw No. 1062, 2008 outlines

the vision, goals, and strategies for the District, member municipali-

ties and electoral areas. The purpose of the Regional Growth Strategy

(RGS) (under the Local Government Act, Part 25) is to promote human

settlement that is socially, economically, and environmentally healthy

and makes efficient use of public facilities, services, land and other

resources. The RGS is intended to provide a broad policy framework

describing the common direction that the regional district and its

member municipalities follow in promoting development and services

that are sustainable, recognizing the long term responsibility for the

quality of life for generations to come.

The following are the SLRD’s Smart Growth Principles. These principles

summarize the core values that have guided the development of the

RGS and that will also guide its application in the SLRD.

1. Direct urban development towards existing communities

(avoiding urban and rural sprawl);

2. Build compact, complete, mixed-use neighborhoods;

3. Create walkable communities;

4. Promote a variety of low impact transportation options;

5. Advocate a range of affordable housing options;

6. Foster distinct, attractive, economically sustainable communities

with a strong sense of place;

7. Protect and promote responsible stewardship of green spaces

and sensitive areas;

8. Ensure the integrity of a productive agricultural and forestry land

base;

9. Endorse energy efficient infrastructure;

10. Ensure early and ongoing public involvement that respects

community values and visions; and

11. Cultivate a culture of cooperation, coordination and collaboration

between local governments, provincial agencies, federal agencies

and First Nations.

The vision of the SLRD, as articulated in the RGS, is to develop a region

comprised of diverse, distinct and liveable communities that share a

commitment to:

1. Practice economic, social and environmental sustainability;

2. Protect the region’s natural beauty;

3. Enhance the region’s world-class outdoor recreation;

4. Foster balanced and equitable economic growth; and

5. Make decisions that engage local, provincial, federal, and First

Nation governments, and reflect the values of communities.

The SLRD, member municipalities and electoral areas strive to achieve

the following nine goals that provide strategic directions over the next

20 years:

1. Focus development into compact, complete, sustainable,

communities;

2. Improve transportation linkages and options;

3. Support a range of affordable housing;

4. Achieve a sustainable economy;

5. Protect natural eco-system functioning;

6. Encourage the sustainable use of parks and natural areas;

7. Create healthy and safe communities;

8. Enhance relations with aboriginal communities; and

9. Improve collaboration among jurisdictions.

The SLRD RGS principles, vision and goals have been integrated into

this plan as a framework from which the South Britannia Beach Master

Plan was built.


Figure 5 – SLRD Official Community Plan

3

PO

LIC

Y C

ON

TE

XT


3.2 SLRD Integrated Sustainability PlanThe SLRD Integrated Sustainability Plan (ISP), adopted on April 22nd,

2013, is a vision, plan and process to the year 2030 to position the re-

gion for ongoing success and sustainability. The ISP framework includes

criteria, objectives, descriptions, and actions.

The SLRD developed a Smart Growth and Sustainability Checklist that

is used in the creation of this Master Plan and has been enhanced and

customized for this project. See Chapter 5.2 for a detailed description of

the alignment of this Master Plan’s goals and desired outcomes as well

as the Sustainability and Evaluation Checklist responses in Appendix A.

3.3 SLRD Official Community Plan The Howe Sound East Sub-Area Plan (Schedule C to SLRD Area D

OCP Bylaw 1135-2013) includes the communities of Britannia Beach

and Furry Creek as well as the future community of Porteau Cove as

part of the OCP.

The overall vision of the OCP is to develop a community that:

• respects the natural environment and adheres to principles of

environmental sustainability;

• respects and promotes the historic aspects of the community;

• promotes a “sense of community” by encouraging social

interaction and providing employment opportunities;

• is compatible with the other communities and patterns of growth

in the Sea-to-Sky corridor;

• promotes tourism, outdoor recreation potential, and film

industry use;

• promotes the waterfront as a destination for residents and

tourists; and

• focuses on livability for residents with appropriate parks, local

services, and community facilities.

This OCP, specifically Chapter 4.0 – Britannia Beach Neighbourhood,

specifies objectives and policies as well as guidelines that shaped the

South Britannia Beach Master Plan including transportation, infra-

structure, environmentally sensitive areas, heritage resources, natural

hazards, environmental contamination, residential, parks and open

space, institutional, commercial development, and flood management.

Each of these objectives and policies will be addressed in the policy

analysis that follows. These policies and guidelines are also covered in

the Sustainability and Evaluation Checklist in Appendix A.


The following table (Table 1) responds to each of the OCP policies that apply to South Britannia Beach. For the purposes of this analysis, the

policies have been summarized and the responses outline how the proposed development will respond to each policy directive.

Table 1

Development Response to OCP Objectives for Britannia Beach

POLICY DIRECTIVE RESPONSE AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS

4.2.1 Transportation – Highway and Local Access street network

4.2.1.1 Consider the realignment of Highway 99 around Britannia Beach.

The Plan includes provision for a high level highway bypass.

4.2.1.2 Support 2-lanes through Britannia North. There is principal access into South Britannia Beach at the existing access point; bike/pedestrian path beside the highway connecting North and South Britannia Beach, and one potential pedestrian overhead bridge connection to Minaty Bay Regional Park.

The internal tunnel access between the north bowl area (former gravel pit) and the south bowl area (known as Minaty Bay) under Highway 99 will be retained and improved. The planned internal roadway network will build on this assumption.

4.2.1.3 Encourage and support internal community roads.

The internal street network is one of an interconnected street system for easy access and pedestrian orientation (slow streets and “woonerfs” or “living” streets).

4.2.1.4 Encourage transportation demand management such as park and ride/car pool lot.

The Master Plan includes the provision for ride-share, van-pool, shuttle and bus services either as commercial or community driven enterprises.

4.2.1.5 Support commuter rail, ferry and bus services such as space for train stations, ferry terminals and bus stations.

The Master Plan includes a transit hub in the village area and associated drop-off areas with some potential commuter parking.

4.2.1.6 Encourage bicycle paths and trails. The Plan includes bike paths and a pedestrian trail network associated with road routes and along greenways, connecting to the existing Britannia Beach community, waterfront, and upper slopes.

3

PO

LIC

Y C

ON

TE

XT


4.2.2 Infrastructure

4.2.2.1 Water and sewer systems must comply with provincial regulations and those of the Coast Garibaldi Health Services Society.

The proposed water and wastewater systems are conventional and incorporate best management practices to reduce water consumption and therefore environmental impacts. The systems will meet current regulations.

4.2.2.2 Adhere to best management sewer treatment odour control.

The sewer odour control will be part of the upgrading requirements of the existing system.

4.2.2.3 Adhere to best practices for rainwater design.

South Britannia Beach will use “natural” rain water best management practices using infiltration, natural surface flow, and temporary retention on surface including techniques such as “rain gardens” along streets where appropriate.

4.2.3 Environmentally Sensitive Areas

4.2.3.1 Streamside protection in accordance with regulations.

The Plan largely retains the current stream alignments of the larger Daisy and Thistle Creeks in order to protect the riparian zones that have naturally begun healing after disturbance by the gravel operations. Gravel Creek will be realigned to its probable original location and connected to the shared outlet with Thistle Creek through a reconstructed wetland/pond system. Minaty Creek (furthest south) will be realigned in order to respond to the extensive regrading of the Minaty Bay development area that is required to make the site useable.

4.2.3.2 Require environmental assessments prior to subdivision.

The two larger creeks (Daisy and Thistle) have been provided with 25 metre (82 feet) riparian setbacks. The two smaller creeks (Gravel and Minaty) have been provided with 15 metre (49 feet) riparian setbacks. These exceed the minimum requirements of the environmental assessment.

These streams are included as part of the trail and parks network as well as a natural stormwater management system.

The riparian areas that were disturbed in the past and remain barren will be restored. The riparian areas that will be disturbed by construction will also be restored.

The streams are all ephemeral thus their ability to support salmon spawning/rearing is compromised.

Trees and associated vegetation will be retained in environmentally sensitive areas.

One or two large detention ponds will be included in coordination with the wetland management strategy on site.


4.2.4 Heritage Resources

4.2.4.2 Support the establishment of a Maritime Heritage Society at Britannia Beach.

The project is considering a contribution toward upgrading of the existing small community boat marina for the benefit of the existing and future Britannia Beach residents.

4.2.5 Natural Hazards

4.2.5.1 Require detailed geotechnical studies in the areas identified and steep slopes and hazard areas.

Geotechnical studies have indicated no slope related hazards. Nevertheless, the steep residual slopes of both the north and south gravel pits will be regraded and vegetated to reduce erosion potential and fall hazard as well as to make the sloped areas suitable for development.

4.2.5.2 Include flood mitigation measures for Thistle and Daisy Creeks.

Detailed flood studies will be carried out during the design phase and any flood risk will be mitigated by raising adjacent lands, building low dykes at the riparian boundary, or incising of relocated creek beds.

4.2.6 Environmental Contamination

4.2.6.1 Include remediation of acid rock drainage.

Contamination remediation studies and measures are underway. Contaminated rock will either be covered, removed, or reused and capped. All work will conform to applicable regulations.

4.3.1 Residential

4.3.1.1 Residential to generally follow OCP locations.

Residential areas generally follow OCP locations.

4.3.1.3 Range of housing to include single-family residential at 15 uph (6 upa) and mixed residential at 15 to 40 uph (6 to 16 upa) plus live/work units; Apartments maximum 6 stories.

A variety of different housing forms include single-family and multiple-family housing using the flex-block approach. The property will have single-family areas ranging from 20 – 40 units per hectare (uph) (8 - 16 units per acre), mixed residential (MR) areas range from 40 – 70 uph (16 - 28 units per acre), with three apartment sites ranging up to 150 uph (60 units per acre) with a maximum height limit of four to six stories. These densities will require an amendment to the OCP. This is based on net density calculations.

4.3.1.4 Allocation of 850 to 1,000 housing units for South Britannia Beach.

The Master Plan will not exceed 1,000 housing units.

4.3.1.5 Promote energy conservation in building design.

Local materials, passive solar orientation, passive energy design, site fit and compact footprints will be included in the residential unit/cluster designs and architectural expression (between west coast mountains and ocean).

3

PO

LIC

Y C

ON

TE

XT


4.3.1.6 Conserve existing trees and plant new trees to provide neighbourhood character and reduce visual impacts.

The development will retain trees and vegetation to the degree possible within the active development boundaries. The areas disturbed by construction will be extensively replanted with predominantly native trees and vegetation to re-establish a natural setting, attenuate precipitation run-off and provide habitat pockets and wildlife movement corridors. It is noted that the site is currently highly disturbed and that development will benefit much of the site when compared to the current condition.

4.3.1.7 Complete an infrastructure servicing plan.

An infrastructure servicing and phasing plan has been developed that conforms to regulations and engineering standards that can be built and maintained using conventional and familiar methods.

Phasing will be north to south (former gravel pit to Minaty Bay) to follow the progression of water and sewer servicing. The lower lands will be developed first, with upper sloped lands developed later in the phasing. This approach is also based on convenient access and visibility of the first phase from Highway 99. However, a recreation, open space and trail system will accompany Phase 1 to connect the existing and new community to the Minaty Bay waterfront, the adjacent trail networks, and associated amenities.

4.3.2 Parks and Open Space (Community Meeting/Gathering Open Space and Trail Network)

4.3.2.1 Provide at least 3.5 to 4 hectares (8.5 to 10 acres).

12.48% or 9.04 hectares (22.33 acres) of the site are provided as parks and open space including the Minaty Bay Regional Park and the community park adjoining the community resource and learning centre.

4.3.2.2 Locate community park adjacent to elementary school in South Britannia Beach.

An active use community park/sports field is located with the proposed learning centre and associated community facilities (known together as the Community Resource and Learning Centre).

4.3.2.3 Develop a waterfront park in Minaty Bay with the minimum size of 4.9 hectares (12 acres).

The Minaty Bay Regional Park area on the south shoreline of the site will be a regional park. The central park near the community hub at the north end of the site will be connected to the regional park via a comprehensive trail network also connecting to smaller sub-neighbourhood parks.


4.3.2.4 Develop a shoreline tail/pathway to connect along the Howe Sound shoreline.

The Britannia Beach community will be connected by a waterfront trail extending from Minaty Bay to the community marina site opposite Copper Drive. The portion of the trail located in the Minaty Bay Regional Park and at the mouth of Daisy Creek will be upgraded in the first phase of development. The remaining trail development will be deferred to later phases and subject to resolution of the following issues: securing Crown Land Leases or License of Occupation over Crown Lands; willingness of the SLRD to assume ownership and maintenance of the combined trail and boardwalks; environmental approvals for foreshore construction and piling; permission from CN Rail for construction adjacent to and within the rail setback for portions of the trail; cleanup of contaminated soils by the Province on the Crown Lands to be occupied by the trails; and construction of the pedestrian crossings over Highway 99.

4.3.2.5 Provide natural areas in the locations not intended for future development.

A regional trail network will be enhanced by using the existing forestry roads off site in the upper lands, connecting to the waterfront and North Britannia Beach.

4.3.2.6 Provide a comprehensive trail network. The trail network will connect through South Britannia Beach to North Britannia Beach, Minaty Bay and the waterfront.

4.3.2.7 Link to the Sea-to-Sky Trail. There will be a link to the Sea-to-Sky Trail at the south end of Britannia Beach and Minaty Bay Regional Park will support the marine portion of the Sea-to-Sky Trail.

4.3.3 Institutional and Community

4.3.3.1 Provide an elementary school and potentially a second school if the proposed population warrants it.

The maximum 1,000 housing units will support at most a small learning centre and will possibly be limited to K-3 with integrated private daycare facilities. Secondary students and older primary students will be bussed to schools in Squamish.

4.3.3.2 Provide a site within the school park site area for a public indoor recreational facility.

The community resource and learning centre adjacent to the community park will allow for community uses during non-school hours and located within a 20 minute walk from every residence.

4.3.3.3 Work with government agencies to determine future needs for a police office and ambulance station.

A public safety facility will be located near the main community entrance to provide access for the entire Britannia Beach community.

4.3.4 Commercial

4.3.4.3 Support the ongoing operations of the B.C. Museum of Mining.

The Master Plan supports the B.C. Museum of Mining.

3

PO

LIC

Y C

ON

TE

XT


4.3.4.4 Siting of commercial buildings should not fully block views from the highway and residential areas.

The commercial buildings will be sited near the steep rock formation so not to obstruct views from the highway and residential areas.

4.3.4.5 Provide non-polluting recreational marine commercial services such as a marina and mooring facilities, canoe and kayak rentals and a windsurfing shop.

A potential small boathouse could be built in the Minaty Bay area. The boathouse would be modelled after a Coast Salish bighouse with a welcoming figure (public art) which could greet touring kayakers to wilderness style camping sites. The North Vancouver Deep Cove kayaking centre is a model.

4.3.4.6 Support up to 1,500 m2 (16,000 ft2) of community commercial space located at or near a major road away from Highway 99 with convenient pedestrian access.

Local community commercial uses will be provided within a footprint of 1,393 square meters (15,000 square feet) in the north end of the property near highway 99 with convenient pedestrian access.

4.3.4.7 Ensure the provision of adequate off-street parking for commercial uses.

Significant off-street parking is not anticipated, as there will be no large retailers. Street parking will be emphasized. The Miner’s Market and the learning and community resource centre will incorporate sufficient parking spaces.

4.3.4.8 Support tourist accommodation to a maximum size of 100 bedrooms.

The development concept will recognize the existing North Britannia Beach commercial area (Tourist Commercial) as the commercial hub of the overall community. The South Britannia Beach hub will introduce commercial uses in the community that compliment these uses and cater to local needs as the neighbourhood expands. The commercial floor space will initially be limited to 1,393 square metres (15,000 square feet) in phase 2. In the long term and in correspondence with the economic analysis, 2,790 to 3,250 square metres (30,000 to 35,000 square feet) plus a possible 465 square metres (5,000 square feet) for a destination restaurant could be justified.

A hotel of up to 100 rooms may be built in phase 5 of the project, possibly located on the lands at Minaty Bay.

4.3.6 Flood Management (Climate Change)

4.3.6.1 Temporary tourist commercial uses and other uses not used for accommodation can be used in that area.

The lower elevation development areas are below the marine flood construction level (FCL) resulting from a combination of high tide, wind surge, wave runup and climate change. Flood risk will be mitigated by the dyking of the property fronting on Highway 99 and a raised main entrance intersection with minor land raising within the property. Refer to the KWL engineering report for a more detailed description.

3

PO

LIC

Y C

ON

TE

XT


3.4 Zoning BylawElectoral Area D Zoning Bylaw, (Bylaw 540, consolidated to October

2012) specifies that the property is currently zoned Resource Use (RU).

The property will require rezoning as part of the OCP amendment

process to permit the land uses and residential densities identified in

the OCP and by the proposed development.

3.5 Public Lands And Foreshore PoliciesThe foreshore is governed by the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural

Resource Operations. This provincial body gave approval on June 13,

2013 to include the lands along the foreshore in the formal develop-

ment application to the SLRD without giving formal approval to lease

or do otherwise with the land. Although the Province has permitted

the waterfront crown lands to be included in the application, no other

consent or approvals were given with the permission.

3.6 Environmental Reserve/Municipal ReserveStream (creek) setbacks associated with these Environmentally Sen-

sitive Areas have a minimum development setback of 15 to 30 metres

(49 to 98 feet) governed by the Streamside Protection Regulation

contained in the Fish Protection Act (Streamside Protection and En-

hancement Areas – SPEA). A minimum 30 metres (98 feet) riparian

area must be maintained as a riparian area until the streams (creeks)

are assessed by a qualified environmental professional. A standard

requirement of 5% of the net development area is also required as

municipal reserve for parks and open space in addition to a school site

dedication under the Local Government Act (LGA).

3.7 Provincial HighwaysHighway 99 is controlled by the British Columbia Ministry of Transpor-

tation and Infrastructure (MOTI). This provincial ministry has standards

and regulations associated with access, egress, setbacks, and associated

design requirements for subdivision. The design team conducted an ex-

tensive exploration of the options during consultations with MOTI staff.

Although MOTI staff are not permitted at this stage of negotiations to

make any commitments, the intersection and highway bypass proposals

appeared to satisfy their primary concerns. The proposed upgrades as-

sociated to improve access and the associated increased traffic volumes

will require further consultation and approvals from MOTI.


3.8 CN Rail and CrossingsThere are two informal legacy road and pedestrian crossings of the

CN Rail, neither of which have signals nor controls. The existing north

rail crossing is located at North Britannia Beach and is used to provide

access to the EPCOR water pumping station, the community marina

and the art gallery. This is a legacy crossing that does not conform

to crossing standards and has a poor geometric connection to the

highway. Improvements or relocation of the north crossing are the

responsibility of the MOTI and CN Rail. The existing south crossing is a

gravel access road that crosses the track to the proposed Minaty Bay

Regional Park. It is also an informal earth/gravel ramp across the rail-

way that does not conform to crossing standards. The south crossing

will be relocated and improved by Taicheng and will consist of a gate

controlled combined road and pedestrian crossing. CN Rail will likely

request an elevated pedestrian crossing, but this will provide marginal

benefit as pedestrians will likely take the at-grade crossing except when

a train is passing, and for this reason an exemption will be requested.

Figure 6 – CN Rail North Crossing

Figure 7 – CN Rail South Crossing

4

SIT

E A

NA

LYS

IS


4 Site Analysis

4.1 History and Special Site FeaturesAn archaeological study has verified that there are no artifacts or ar-

eas of further interest on the site. The site is located on the traditional

territory of the Squamish First Nation. It is also part of the Britannia

Beach community, which has a rich history of mining and associated

activities between 1900 and 1974, when the mine closed. The Britan-

nia Mine Museum and buildings are a BC Historic Landmark and was

designated a National Historic Site in 1988. The historical character of

the North Britannia Beach community is reflected by the buildings in

the existing commercial area.


Figure 8 – Context Aerial

4

SIT

E A

NA

LYS

IS


The South Britannia Beach site is shaped by eastern steep mountain

slopes, and Howe Sound to the west, with the site bisected by Highway

99 and the CN Railway. The upper slopes offer spectacular views of

Howe Sound and the rugged Tantalus Range, which is a sub-range of

the Coast Mountains. Much of the site has been significantly disturbed

by the former gravel operations. The more treed southern developable

area, known as Minaty Bay, is connected to the north area by a one

lane tunnel. This area of former miner homes (since removed) is divid-

ed by the CN Railway but has a direct connection to the waterfront.

Recognition of the former home sites, and associated community, could

be part of a historical interpretation program linked with the regional

park development.

The small cove (Minaty Bay) and associated picturesque features

provide a significant natural asset for the site. The balance of the

waterfront to the north is narrow and wedged between the CN Rail

right-of-way and the water’s edge. It is owned by the Crown. An exist-

ing Britannia Beach Community Marina at the north edge of the site

fronting on the Britannia Beach town site is actively used but requires

improvements and is viewed to have tourism potential related to the

maritime history of British Columbia.

Major development of the foreshore area is constrained by Crown

ownership. The following low impact development is contemplated

on the Crown lands as well as the Minaty Bay property:

1. Foreshore pedestrian/cycle path between Minaty Bay and Copper

Point, which might be permitted by the Crown and would need only

low-risk construction (minor rock fill and piling for a timber walkway

where land is constrained).

2. Potential community boathouse in Minaty Cove.

3. Potential contribution to upgrading of the existing small boat com-

munity marina on Copper Point.

4. Contribution to the possible development of dry land boat storage

and boat launch ramp on Warehouse Point, associated with the

community marina.

5. Potential for a 100 room hotel in accordance with the Howe Sound

East Sub-Area Plan Section 4.3.4.8 (OCP).

Figure 9 – Slope Analysis

4

SIT

E A

NA

LYS

IS


4.2 Topography and VegetationThe Master Plan area is best defined as a “bowl” – flatter areas sur-

rounded by the steep slopes of the mountains. The moderate to steep

slope at the base of the mountains graduate to relatively flat terrain in

the north gravel extraction area and flat to moderate topography in the

southern Minaty Bay area, eventually sloping toward Howe Sound. The

southern edge of Minaty Bay is defined by moderate to steep slopes

to the water’s edge. The lower slopes and flatter areas are excellent

development sites, especially considering the general rugged nature

of other sites between Horseshoe Bay and Squamish.

Vegetation in this area has been removed and has only partially regen-

erated along Thistle Creek that runs from the base of the mountains to

Howe Sound. Much of this regenerated vegetation are not significant

species, but are useful for restoring the riparian areas along the creek.

On the upper northern and eastern benches of the mountainside, more

significant stands of second and third growth mixed forests emerge,

with the most significant vegetation concentrated in the non-develop-

ment areas. The Minaty Bay area is more forested with mixed deciduous

and coniferous trees, and a central disturbed area remains due to soil

extraction operations. The proposed Minaty Bay Regional Park is well-

treed throughout.

Trees along the riparian areas of the creeks will be retained by required

setbacks and the trees in the proposed Minaty Bay Regional Park will

be protected as part of the park development concept. Other areas

will retain trees where possible trees will be re-planted as part of the

site redevelopment program along streets, on lots, in proposed parks

and along trails.

4.3 Environmental ReviewCascade Environmental Resource Group (CERG) conducted a terres-

trial ecosystem assessment following the standards developed by the

provincial Resource Inventory Committee (1998). An underwater survey

of the Howe Sound foreshore along the property was also conduct-

ed using a Towed Optical Assessment Device (TOAD). Streams and

wetlands on site were also delineated and assessed. Wildlife habitat

was determined through direct observation and through ecosystem

suitability analysis.

TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEM MAPPING

The site contains a single biogeoclimatic subzone: Coastal Western

Hemlock Dry Maritime subzone (CWHdm). This subzone is charac-

terized by warm, relatively dry summers and moist, mild winters with

little snowfall. The environmental assessment indicates that the site has

been largely influenced by past gravel extraction activities (in addition

to past logging and electrical transmission lines), with approximately

25% of the site currently consisting of exposed soils or managed veg-

etation (low growing shrubs/ground cover). The remaining vegetated

portion of the site was further divided into four site areas, which were

further divided into 20 ecosystem units based on the site series, site

condition modifiers, structural stage and stand composition. The site

series included: CWHdm01 Western Hemlock – Flat Moss, CWHdm03

Douglas-fir Western Hemlock – Salal, CWHdm05 Western Redcedar –

Sword Fern, and CWDdm07 Western Redcedar – Foamflower. One of

the site series, CWHdm05, is blue listed in British Columbia indicating

that there is not an immediate threat, but there is special concern

due to sensitivity to human activities or natural events. The proposed

development layout avoids these units, except for 1.88 hectares (5

acres) of proposed single-family residential in the northern portion of

the subject site.

WILDLIFE AND WILDLIFE HABITAT

Wildlife and wildlife signs were observed and habitats could potentially

exist on site, based on habitat conditions. Ten bird, four mammal, three

amphibian and three invertebrate species are identified by the BC Con-

servation Data Centre as blue (special concern) or red (threatened or

4

SIT

E A

NA

LYS

IS


endangered) listed species that occur in the CWHdm biogeoclimatic

zone within the SLRD. Two blue listed species are confirmed to occur

on the subject site and four blue listed species possibly occur. Red

listed species are unlikely to be found on site. Of the two confirmed

blue listed species, the great blue heron occurs as a transient species

(i.e., passing through or feeding at the site), but are very unlikely as a

breeding resident as heron rookeries are relatively obvious to observe

(which they weren’t). The coastal tailed frog, the other confirmed

species, has been found in Daisy Creek, and is likely to occur in This-

tle Creek as well. Tailed frogs live in steep mountain streams and in

adjacent riparian forests, which are protected by the Riparian Areas

Regulation (RAR). The northern red-legged frog and the western toad

are other blue listed amphibians that potentially could occur on site,

particularly in the wetlands. Two bird species, the band-tailed pigeon

and the olive-sided flycatcher also have the potential to occur on site.

AQUATIC & MARINE HABITAT

Several creeks, ponds and wetlands are present within the proposed de-

velopment area; these include Thistle Creek, the first tributary to Thistle

Creek (Gravel Creek and associated ponds and wetlands), the second

tributary to Thistle Creek (Drainage 2), Daisy Creek, and Drainage 3

(Minaty Bay Creek). Several other creeks and drainages occur on the

subject site, but are not in the vicinity of the proposed development.

Thistle Creek flows north-westerly from the steep slopes character-

izing the eastern half of the property to discharge into Howe Sound

approximately 490 metres (1,608 feet) north of Minaty Bay. Its first two

reaches are known to be fish bearing (coho salmon, rainbow trout and

cutthroat trout); however a large waterfall prevents fish movements

into the creek’s steeper third reach. Due to gravel extraction activities,

a portion of the creek’s second reach is perched above the lands to

the north.

Thistle Creek’s first tributary consists of a series of two wetlands and

two ponds, fed by Gravel Creek. Fish have been captured in the first

pond above Thistle Creek, but not further upstream, likely due to the

ephemeral conditions, low flows and shallow depths. Gravel Creek

is known to be dry in summer through early fall. Downstream of the

creek’s headwaters, between the powerlines and the gravel pit, Gravel

Creek is confined in a series of roadside ditches. The pool/wetland

complex that forms the lower reach of Gravel Creek appears to be a

remnant of past gravel extraction activities. The system consists of two

pools that vary in depth from approximately 0.5 to 3 metres (2 to 10

feet) that are joined by a ditch and then discharge to Thistle Creek via

a ditch and a small diameter culvert. The entire system from the water

input to the outflow is constructed in what appears to be a haphazard

fashion and not designed for fisheries or other habitat interests. Rain-

bow trout have been caught in the pool closest to Thistle Creek causing

the low gradient pool/ditch system to be considered fish habitat due to

its connectivity and lack of fish barriers; however the wetland and pond

complex appear to provide better amphibian than fisheries habitat.

The second tributary of Thistle Creek is a small channel that tends

westward through the powerlines above the proposed development,

before flowing into a north-south tending cut-off ditch. Water entering

the cut-off ditch generally tends southward, although it can flow either

direction, and has been known to flow northward into Gravel Creek

and occasionally flow overland into the gravel pit causing erosion of

the gravel embankment. The water flowing in the channel southwards

makes its way into Thistle Creek. The lowest reach has an average gra-

dient of 19%, and as there are no barriers to fish movements, should be

considered potentially fish bearing.

Daisy Creek flows roughly parallel to Thistle Creek and discharges into

Howe Sound approximately 210 metres (689 feet) north of Minaty Bay.

Daisy Creek is known to be fish bearing upstream from its mouth to

Highway 99. CERG has captured cutthroat trout throughout this sec-

tion of the creek, and the FISS data base indicates unknown salmon

species present in the drainage. Coastal tailed frog has also been found

throughout this creek, but particularly upstream of Highway 99.

Drainage 3 (Minaty Bay Creek) flows approximately parallel to Daisy

Creek and into Minaty Bay. The drainage is small with an approximate

wetted width of 1 metre (3 feet), and flows from a culvert that drains

lands upslope of Highway 99. Although stream gradient is not great

enough to preclude fish presence, the small size of the drainage and

very shallow depths does not present quality fish habitat. For this rea-

son, this drainage is not likely fish habitat.

A foreshore assessment along Howe Sound and a marine assessment


were also conducted as part of the Environmental Review. North of

Thistle Creek the foreshore exhibits the highest level of disturbance,

with evidence of old wharfs, old concrete and some riprap sections.

South of Thistle Creek the Howe Sound foreshore is more natural, with

gravel/pebble beaches and bedrock outcroppings. The subsurface

marine assessment indicates substrates dominated by gravel in the

north, pebble, cobble and boulder nearer Thistle Creek, and areas of

bedrock with steep vertical faces in Minaty Bay. Sea life is generally

sparsely distributed in the north of Minaty Bay, with the occasional

crab, sea star and empty cockle clam shell, while striped seaperch is

abundant near the sunken vessels. A variety of sea life was observed

including anemones, green sea urchin, sea stars, tube worms and sea

cucumbers, among others.

ENVIRONMENTAL OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS

The Environmental Review identified several invasive plant species

that should be addressed if the property is developed. These species

include English holly, Japanese knotweed, Himalayan blackberry and

periwinkle. No rare or endangered plant species were encountered,

but one blue listed ecological community was noted (CWHdm03

Douglas-fir – western hemlock/salal). Large tracts of undisturbed

plant communities are considered more ecologically important than

disturbed, fragmented or second growth communities. The proposed

development will disturb approximately 1.88 hectares (5 acres) of

young forest within this site.

Preserving or rehabilitating key ecosystem components, including

Thistle and Daisy Creeks and their associated riparian areas, the pool/

wetland system, and large veteran trees, will serve to protect wildlife

values and mitigate development impacts. To protect nesting birds, as

required under the Wildlife Act, clearing of vegetation should be con-

ducted outside the typical breeding bird window of April 1 to July 31,

unless a song bird nest survey is conducted by a qualified professional

to identify and establish buffers around any active nests, until the young

have fledged. These measures will also serve to protect the olive sided

flycatcher (threatened) and the band-tailed pigeon (special concern)

should they occur on site. The great blue heron (special concern) is

known to visit the site, and will continue to do so, providing the aquatic

and riparian habitat is maintained or enhanced. The retention and/or

enhancement of the aquatic habitat and associated riparian habitat will

also ensure the continued presence on site of the confirmed coastal

tailed frog, and the likely presence of the northern red-legged frog and

western toad (all species of special concern).

Streamside protection and enhancement areas (SPEAs) were calculat-

ed for the various drainages on site using the RAR detailed methodol-

ogy, with the following results:

• Daisy Creek – 22.0 metres (72 feet)

• Minaty Bay Creek – 10.5 metres (35 feet)

• Thistle Creek Reach 1 (approximately from the bridge downstream

– 16.2 metres (53 feet)

• Thistle Creek Reach 2 (upstream of the bridge) – 15.0 metres (49

feet)

• Gravel Creek – 13.2 metres (43 feet)

• Wetland 1 and 2 – 15 metres (49 feet), 30 metres (98 feet) to South

• Pond 1 and 2 – 15 metres (49 feet), 30 metres (98 feet) to South

SPEAs for creeks outside the current development area (Minaty Bay

northward and from Howe Sound upslope to the electrical transmis-

sion powerline) have not been established; A 30 metre (98 feet) RAR

assessment area should be established along those drainages (as well

as the drainages where the SPEA has been calculated, until those RAR

assessments have been filed).

A marine foreshore buffer of 15 metres (49 feet) is recommended,

subject to review by Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO).

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS

The present proposed development plan calls for preservation of Daisy

Creek within a 25 metre (82 feet) buffer, which exceeds the recommen-

dation of the RAR. Thistle Creek would also receive a 25 metre (82 feet)

buffer, which also exceeds the RAR requirements; however, as a portion

of the second reach is perched, some remedial engineering work may

be required. Any such works would require provincial Water Act ap-

proval as well as approval or project review under the federal Fisheries

Act. To conform to those acts, any remedial stream work would likely

involve some mitigation/compensatory stream/riparian enhancements.


Upstream drainageunknown beyondthis point.

Ê

Ê

Ê

Ê

Ê

A

B

C

D

Minaty

BayCre

ek

Wetland#2

Seato

SkyHigh

way

"

"

Reach 2

Reach

1

Dai

syC

reek

Thist

leCre

ek

Grave

l Cre

ek

Pond #2

Pond #1

Wetland #1

UndefinedChannel

Un-namedChannel

HoweSound

Upstream drainageunknown beyondthis point.

4842

00

4844

00

4844

00

4846

00

4846

00

4848

00

4848

00

4850

00

4850

00

4852

00

4852

00

4854

00

4854

00

4856

00

4856

00

4858

00

4858

00

5493800

5493800

5494000

5494000

5494200

5494200

5494400

5494400

5494600

5494600

5494800

5494800

5495000

5495000

5495200

5495200

5495400

5495400

5495600

5495600

5495800

5495800

5496000

5496000

5496200

5496200

5496400

5496400

5496600

5496600

¸Environmental Constraints and Opportunities

Pre-DevelopmentSouth Britannia Beach, British Columbia

0 100 200 300

Meters

Project Boundary

Gravel Roads (CAD & TRIM)

Paved Roads (TRIM)

Hydrology (CAD)

Water Courses

Hydrology (Interpretted Topo/GPS)

Culverts (from CAD)

High Water Mark Survey

RAR SPEA

Blue Listed Ecological Communities

GIS Cartographer: Todd HellingaDate: June 18, 2014

CERG File#: 454-01-06Projection: UTM Zone 10N NAD83

Figure 10 – Pre-Development Environmental Opportunities And Constraints


Upstream drainage unknown beyond these locations.

Ê

Ê

Ê

Ê

Ê

A

B

C

D

Seato

SkyHigh

way

"

"Reach 2Rea

ch 1

Thistle

Creek

Pond

How

eS

ound

re-a

l igne

dG

rave

llC

reek

cut-off Ditch

Dai

syCr

ee

k

Min

aty Bay

Creek

Tributary 2

Upstream drainage unknown beyond these locations.

4844

00

4844

00

4846

00

4846

00

4848

00

4848

00

4850

00

4850

00

4852

00

4852

00

4854

00

4854

00

4856

00

4856

00

4858

00

4858

00

5493800

5493800

5494000

5494000

5494200

5494200

5494400

5494400

5494600

5494600

5494800

5494800

5495000

5495000

5495200

5495200

5495400

5495400

5495600

5495600

5495800

5495800

5496000

5496000

5496200

5496200

5496400

5496400

5496600

5496600

¸Environmental Constraints and Opportunities

Post-DevelopmentSouth Britannia Beach, British Columbia

0 100 200 300

Meters

Project Boundary

Watercourse - Post Development

RAR SPEA

Blue Listed Ecological Communities

Proposed Development - Base CADA - BOUNDARY property

Mapx - land use areas

P - BLOCKS

P - ROAD -row

P - TRAIL

X - CONTOUR-major

X - ROAD - paved

GIS Cartographer: Todd HellingaDate: June 18, 2014

CERG File#: 454-01-06Projection: UTM Zone 10N NAD83

Figure 11 – Post-Development Environmental Opportunities And Constraints

4

SIT

E A

NA

LYS

IS


A 15 metre (49 feet) buffer is proposed for Minaty Bay Creek (Drainage

3), which is greater than the 10.5 metre (35 feet) SPEA as determined

by the detailed RAR assessment. The location of this creek needs to

be surveyed to accurately determine its location. Depending on that

survey, the creek may be relocated as part of the development. As with

Thistle Creek any works in and about the creek would be subject to the

noted federal and provincial legislation.

The proposed development plan calls the for relocation of Gravel Creek

(Thistle Creek Tributary #1) and the associated ponds and wetlands.

These features will be located to the north and west of the existing

features and be designed primarily as amphibian habitat, although the

connection to Thistle Creek would not preclude the presence of fish. A

riparian buffer within a width of 15 metres (49 feet) would be located

on either side of the aquatic features. As the current vegetation in the

Gravel Creek area is predominantly juvenile red alder amongst exposed

soils and gravel, this area will be revegetated with appropriate native

species. In addition to these enhancement works, the section of Gravel

Creek and Thistle Creek Tributary #3 between the powerlines and the

gravel pit will likely be realigned out of the present ditch system to

provide better flood protection for the development and to provide

enhanced aquatic and riparian habitat.

These works will require provincial Water Act approval as well as ap-

proval or project review under the federal Fisheries Act. As the current

alignment of these drainages is within drainage ditches and through

a gravel pit, it is the intention to have a net increase in usable aquatic

and riparian habitat as a result of the above enhancement program.

ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITTING

As proposed, there are no identified Canadian Environmental Assess-

ment Act (CEAA) triggers associated with the project, and therefore,

a CEAA review/application is not required. The British Columbia Envi-

ronmental Assessment Act (BCEAA) will be triggered by the project

if groundwater extraction required for the project exceeds the rate of

75 litres per second; otherwise the BCEAA will not be applicable. The

project will have to conform to various federal and provincial envi-

ronmental legislation with specific applications submitted under the

Fisheries Act and Water Act for any works in and about creeks and

watercourses, and an application under the Wildlife Act for salvage

and inventory permits.

4.4 Geotechnical1

The proposed development site is made up of the following types of

geology/topography:

• Gravel pit floor – flat or hummocky and highly disturbed

consisting of sand, sandy gravel, or gravelly sand with occasional

piles of waste cobbles or stripped overburden.

• Gravel pit slopes – steep slopes surrounding the gravel pit floor

terminating at natural topography, also highly disturbed and with

small unstable over-steepened areas requiring remediation and

consisting of sand, sandy gravel, or gravelly sand.

• Alluvial and glacio-fluvial fan – moderately to steeply sloped

with remnants of the original fans left undisturbed by gravel

extraction. These likely consist of poor quality sandy gravel, or

they would have been exploited already.

• Bedrock slopes – steep to very steep upland areas consisting

of bedrock with colluvial veneer, glacial till veneer and bedrock

outcrops.

The proposed development area is limited to the first three types of

topography located in the fans.

The geology of the site is typical of the area and does not present any

unusual development constraints. The gravel pit slopes and some of

the steeper original fan slopes require re-grading to make them stable

and suitable for development. The geotechnical assessment report

prepared by Thurber and Associates recommends that the slopes

around the gravel pit be regraded to a maximum slope of 2H:1V (50%)

for stability and to allow vegetation growth. Re-grading to 30% or less

will permit use of the site for housing without extraordinary measures.

Much of the upper rock area is steeply sloped, often in excess of 50%

(2:1). Most of this upper area is therefore not suitable for development

as the steeper slopes create difficult road access and house locations

1 Reference: Village of Britannia Beach, Interim Geotechnical Assessment, Thurber Associates, February 2012.


and introduce the possibility of slope instability caused by excavations.

However, the report noted that the existing steep areas did not appear

to contain any areas of unstable slopes.

The site contains two larger creeks that have a minor debris flow po-

tential that can be mitigated. Potential avulsion or diversion points

on Thistle Creek should be securely blocked off by erosion resistant

earthworks. Alternatively, small sediment basins, racks and culverts

could be provided on the crossings of all the potential avulsion paths.

The geotechnical report recommends that residences below Highway

99 in the vicinity of Daisy Creek (in the Minaty Neighborhood) should

incorporate a concrete (foundation) wall to 1 metre (3 feet) above the

ground surface on the uphill side. This is presumably recommended in

order to raise the building above flood and debris flows, and provide a

deeper foundation to resist washout or displacement. For liability and

marketing reasons this recommendation is unacceptable and therefore

it will be necessary to expand the existing debris barrier to remove the

need for the extended foundations. Further study will be carried out

during pre-design to develop detailed recommendations and design

specific mitigation measures.

The Taicheng property includes approximately 800 metres (2,625

feet) of waterfront centred on the outlet of Daisy Creek. The oppor-

tunity exists to double this length if the Crown waterfront lands are

included in the development plan. The use of this Crown land, together

with extensive land filling, can almost double the foreshore land area.

Placement of fill into Howe Sound may be considered, though a 1957

collapse of the railway embankment at Britannia Beach into Howe

Sound resulting from fill placement, points to the necessity for detailed

and careful investigation.

There are significant problems with using existing dams and building

any new dams on Britannia Creek for water supply. Use of a surface

water supply on Britannia Creek should be avoided and in any case, is

not needed due to a proven stable groundwater supply.

4.5 TransportationTransportation access is a key planning consideration for the successful

growth and integration of the Britannia Beach South and North areas.

This includes access connections to Highway 99 and also between the

North and South areas of the future Britannia Beach community. The

access strategy includes provision for transit, possibly in the form of

a private shuttle initially, which could evolve to a public transit service

once it’s becomes established along the Sea-to-Sky Corridor between

Vancouver and Squamish.

North Britannia Beach is currently connected to Highway 99 at Copper

Drive with a traffic signal controlled intersection. The waterfront land

opposite Britannia Beach is accessed via a right-turn in/out only con-

nection to southbound Highway 99 located approximately 90 metres

(295 feet) south of the Copper Drive intersection, with an at-grade rail

crossing of the CN Rail tracks directly adjacent to the highway.

The Britannia Beach South lands are presently connected to Highway

99 with a stop sign controlled intersection located approximately 725

metres (2,379 feet) south of the Copper Drive intersection. This inter-

section operates with stop sign control on the westbound approach

exiting from the gravel pit area. Further south, Highway 99 begins to

climb and crosses over a culvert tunnel with a narrow road connection

linking the gravel pit area with Minaty Bay.

Between the North and South Britannia Beach areas there is a small

pocket of commercial development (the popular Galileo Coffee Com-

pany) directly accessed from the highway. The parking area in front of

Galileo is also a winter chain up area for northbound Highway 99 traffic.

Existing traffic flows on this section of Highway 99 generally operate

well within capacity; however, the existing traffic signal at Copper

Drive with its single lane northbound and southbound approaches is

routinely a major traffic congestion point for “end of weekend” traffic

flows returning southbound toward the Metro Vancouver Region, on

Sunday and long weekend holiday Monday afternoons. This is an ex-

isting operational issue and will intensify in the future with continuing

increases in Sea-to-Sky Corridor development and traffic growth.


&

Britannia Beach - Existing Transportation FeaturesExhibit 1

N

NorthBritannia

SouthBritannia

Hwy 99

CN Rail

Tracks

Hwy 99

CN RailTracks

Howe Sound

Two LaneHwy 99 BridgeCrossing over

Britannia Creek

Copper DriveIntersection

(Traffic Signal)

At-GradeRail Crossing

BC MiningMuseum

GalileoCafe

Main StreetIntersection

(Stop Sign Controlled)

Single LaneCulvert

Underpassbelow Hwy 99

South Britannia Beach Master Plan4983.01 June 19, 2014 Scale NTS

Figure 12 – Existing transportation features

N


There are currently no pedestrian/cyclist paths connecting the North

and South Britannia Beach areas nor is there any public transit service.

Figure 10 illustrates the existing transportation access condition for the

Britannia Beach community.

4.6 Market and Economic Analysis

RESIDENTIAL MARKET OPPORTUNITY ASSESSMENT

In undertaking a residential market assessment for South Britannia

Beach, the project team used as a starting point, two recently com-

pleted market demand assessments for the site: Site Economics’ 2011

study commissioned by Taicheng Development Corp, and Coriolis

Consulting’s 2012 assessment commissioned by the SLRD. The project

team first reviewed each study’s underlying assumptions, methods and

conclusions. Then, with a firm understanding of each study’s approach

and the team’s own views on the Britannia Beach and Sea-to-Sky

residential market, the team undertook an independent assessment

to determine what the market could likely absorb at South Britannia

Beach over the next 10 years, 20 years and beyond.

The team opted to largely adopt the market demand methodology

employed by Coriolis in 2012.2 This method was both thorough and

innovative, and its definitions of target market segments by and large

lined up with both the team’s initial understanding of market trends in

the Sea-to-Sky corridor and information obtained through interviews

with prominent Metro Vancouver and Sea-to-Sky area realtors. Given

soundness of method and assumptions, the team also felt that consis-

tency between studies would be in the interest of both Taicheng and

the SLRD, allowing for clear understanding and ease of comparability.

Study Area

The team has adopted Coriolis’ South Britannia Beach study area,

which includes: the District of Squamish and Electoral Area D of the

SLRD including Britannia Beach, Furry Creek, Black Tusk Village and

all aboriginal communities. It also includes the Village of Lions Bay and

the western portion of the District of West Vancouver, bound on the

east by 27th Street. The team agrees with Coriolis’ rationale for study

area delineation and its divergence from the area proposed by Site

Economics in 20113:

2 The team has made subtle adjustments to Coriolis’ target market assumptions, market share capture rates, and methods of quantifying demand associated with projected population growth. We have also made adjustments to account for changes in data reporting as well as data availability/unavailability.

3 Site Economics viewed the Britannia Beach project as an extension of the Metro Vancouver region as a whole.

4

SIT

E A

NA

LYS

IS


• If a growing share of market demand from Metro Vancouver can be

shifted into the Sea-to-Sky Corridor, it is likely that South Britannia

Beach will compete for buyers with other projects between West

Vancouver and Squamish;

• The majority of the North Shore competes with other parts of the

urban Metro Vancouver housing market;

• Whistler is a unique residential market, appealing to a different type

of buyer than other offerings in the Sea-to-Sky Corridor. Commuters

in the corridor have many options closer to Whistler.

Sea-to-Sky Market Trends

The Sea-to-Sky Corridor’s real estate market is slowly rebounding from

the depths of the 2008 recession, but recovery is slow and unsteady.

• During the recession, the overpriced Whistler, Sea-to-Sky and Met-

ro Vancouver housing markets all experienced falling prices and

decreases in demand. While Metro Vancouver’s market dip was

relatively short lived, the market along the Sea-to-Sky corridor has

remained quite depressed.

• Some impacts of the recession have included:

o Declining international demand (particularly from the USA) and

demand for investment properties, resulting in falling prices,

project bankruptcies and deferrals.

o Major bankruptcies, including the 1,400 unit Waterfront Landing

and Coastal Village projects in Squamish.

o Porteau Cove development put on hold with no known timeline

for revival.

o Furry Creek experiencing decreased demand (although demand

was never particularly strong even during the ‘boom’ period),

largely due to its focus on higher priced homes and its distance

from commercial amenities.

• The Sea-to-Sky residential market today is very price sensitive. De-

velopers misjudged the depth of demand for larger, pricier homes.

As a result, many developers are now re-orienting projects to pursue

a more affordable price point in the hopes of attracting interest from

new market segments, particularly the young family seeking more

affordable and innovative housing options.

• As of early 2014 there are signs of increasing housing demand, but

it is too early to tell whether this is the start of a sustained market

recovery. The project team expects a market recovery to be slow and

prolonged, and does not foresee a return to conditions of demand

price run-ups witnessed in the 2002-2008 period.

Development Capacity of Study Area

The Coriolis report identified 14,196 units worth of remaining devel-

opment capacity in the study area and nearly 12,700 proposed units.

This estimate included capacity for 8,500 multi-family units (with over

10,600 proposed), and nearly 5,700 single-family units (with nearly

2,100 proposed). Coriolis acknowledged the possibility that “some of

these projects will not develop” as well as the possibility that “other

projects will be proposed in the future if market conditions are favour-

able.4”

With the assistance of Sea-to-Sky area realtors, the study team updated

the inventory of proposed units. In doing this update, the team was

less concerned with smaller projects that will be marketed over the

next 2-5 years than with lands that could be developed over the longer

term (10+ years). Accordingly, the team offers the following comments

regarding the changing nature of supply, both in terms of new, revised

or cancelled project proposals and shifts in the competitive landscape.

• Waterfront Landing, Squamish: has recently gone bankrupt, hence

1,400 multi-family units may be withdrawn from the market. The

project may be revived in a lower density format.

• Larger phased developments: developments are emerging in the

Squamish area that have the potential to provide thousands of

additional housing units. Recognizing the price sensitivity of the

market, it is expected that many projects will be planned to meet

this shift in demand. Following are examples of such projects. There

are likely to be others that have not been identified:

o Chekeye Fan – 750 ground oriented units

o Garibaldi Highlands – 1,200+ units

o Brenner Park area – 250+ units

o Loggers Lane area – 300+ units

4 Coriolis Consulting Corp, 2012: 12


o Holburn Creek area – 1,000+ units

o University Heights – can accommodate an additional 900 units.

In summary, using the Coriolis report’s inventory of proposed units as

a starting point, and assuming that Waterfront Landing is revived at

a lower density (2,000 +/- ground oriented units), the project team

estimates perhaps 1,000 more units in the pipeline than indicated in

the Coriolis report.

Directly Competitive Projects

Coriolis indicated that the South Britannia Beach project would primar-

ily compete with the master planned communities of Furry Creek and

Porteau Cove, with secondary competition coming from the District

of Squamish and the western portion of West Vancouver. The team

believes that, despite significant numbers of potentially competitive

units based on the review of proposed projects, the competitive mar-

ket may not be as oversaturated as it first appears. Projects such as

Porteau Cove and Furry Creek are, in the team’s opinion, not directly

competitive in their current format. These projects were directed to

a ‘pre-2008’ market environment, one which was driven by strong

economic growth, significant real estate speculation, and demand

from both Metro and international investors, much of which has since

evaporated. Projects with potential to pursue more affordable ground

oriented units – for instance the 750 proposed units in the Chekeye

Fan area – will be most directly competitive to South Britannia Beach.

Residential Target Markets – Introduction

Assessing the potential residential mix and absorption at South Britan-

nia Beach requires answers to two fundamental questions:

(i) What is the projected population and housing growth in the study

area, and how much of that demand could be redirected to South

Britannia Beach?

(ii) What other market segments might be attracted to the Sea-to-Sky

Corridor that are not accounted for in the ‘standard course’ housing

projections, and what proportion of that new demand could be

captured at South Britannia Beach?

To answer the first question, the project team began by conducting

an updated forecast of housing demand in the overall study area. Like

Coriolis, the consulting team relied on available BC Stats population

forecasts for the SLRD, the West Van Local Health Area and Metro Van-

couver overall, as well as historic growth trends identified in the national

Census data. Unlike Coriolis, the team also examined in some detail the

age cohort breakdown of past and projected population groups within

each component sub-region of the study area, applied age and unit-

type occupancy maintainer rates (specific to each sub-region of the

study area), and trended those rates over time, to arrive at a projection

of occupancy demand by unit type for the study area. The team then

assigned “% capture at South Britannia Beach” variables to each hous-

ing type in each study-area submarket to account for the amount of

demand that could potentially be re-directed to South Britannia Beach.

To answer the second question, the study team re-visited the potential

to draw new market segments to the study area over and above a base-

line projected demand. Potential new market segments were originally

identified by Site Economics in 2011 and quantified by Coriolis in 2012.

The team updated Coriolis’ quantification of those segments, made

adjustments to definitions and assumptions as deemed appropriate,

and finally assigned “% capture at South Britannia Beach” variables.

Results are presented below.

4

SIT

E A

NA

LYS

IS


Residential Demand in Study Area: Standard Growth

This baseline growth scenario examines the potential future residen-

tial demand across the study area as a function of each sub-region’s

projected population growth by age cohort.

Area #1: District of Squamish:

• Average annual residential demand for approximately

70 single-family and 130 multi-family dwellings over 20

years.

• 20 year demand for just over 4,000 units (1,400

singles, 2,600 multis)

Area #2: SLRD Electoral Area D

• Average annual residential demand for 4 single-family

and 4 multi-family dwellings.

• 20 year demand for 150 units.

Area #3: Western portion of West Vancouver5

• Average annual residential demand for 16 single-family

and 12 multi-family dwellings over 20 years.

• 20 year demand for over 430 units.

5 Encompasses the census tracts west of 27th Street (consistent with Coriolis study).

Area #4: Lions Bay

For the purpose of this forecast, no allowance is made for

growth in Lions Bay. In recent years the Lions Bay popula-

tion has shrunk, and there is no indication that this trend

will reverse in the next decade. There may be potential for

introduction of some multi-family housing in the form of row

houses or townhouses, catering both to existing residents

looking to downsize and a purported latent market amongst

young families with a connection to Lions Bay but who

cannot afford the community’s single-family homes (de-

spite recent price declines). Realtors in Lions Bay indicate

that the market for homes is primarily coming from those

cross-shopping with North Vancouver (City and District). If

revisions are made to the Lions Bay OCP to accommodate

higher density multi-family housing, Lions Bay could poten-

tially grow by 200-400 residents.


The tables below show the average annual dwelling unit demand and total dwelling unit demand across the study area. Under baseline pop-

ulation growth conditions, study area occupancy demand is forecasted for about 236 units per year, on average, over a 20 year period. These

projections are conservative as they are inherently built upon forecasts of population, which themselves take a historic trend-based approach.

As such, they do not make allowance for ‘game changing’ development proposals or major macro-economic shifts. In the section to follow, the

study team builds upon Coriolis’ 2012 quantification of potential additional market segments that could be attracted to the study area if the right

combination of product and marketing is put in place.

Table 2

Average Annual Dwelling Unit Demand: South Britannia Beach Study Area

Squamish SLRD Area D Western West Vancouver Total Study Area*

Singles Multis Singles Multis Singles Multis Singles Multis

2014-23 80 119 4 4 12 12 96 135

2024-33 63 140 3 4 19 11 86 155

20 Years 71 130 4 4 16 12 91 145

• Assumes no growth in Lions Bay

Table 3

Total Dwelling Unit Demand: South Britannia Beach Study Area

Squamish SLRD Area D Western West Vancouver Total Study Area*

Singles Multis Singles Multis Singles Multis Singles Multis

2014-23 795 1,194 41 36 124 116 960 1,346

2024-33 630 1,396 34 38 195 115 859 1,549

20 Years 1,426 2,590 76 74 319 231 1,820 2,895

• Assumes no growth in Lions Bay

4

SIT

E A

NA

LYS

IS


Residential Demand in Study Area: New Market Segments

The results of the ‘additional market segment’ demand forecasting

exercise is provided through the following brief overview:

Segment #1: Metro Vancouver Long Distance Commuters:

In 2011 there were nearly 8,800 Metro Vancouverites whose commute

time would be equal or less were they to relocate to South Britannia

Beach. This figure is projected to reach over 14,600 by 2033.6 It is fore-

casted that between 20 and 40 long-distance-commuting households

could be attracted to the North Shore on an annual basis, and between

five and nine could be attracted to the study area.7 These figures are

slightly higher than those arrived at by Coriolis for the 2012-2031 pe-

riod, primarily due to a change in the assumption for share of annual

movers by municipality.

Segment #2: Semi-Retired Metro Vancouver Residents

By 2033, Metro Vancouver is projected to have nearly 794,000 resi-

dents aged 50 to 69. Based on assumptions around mobility, attraction

to the North Shore and proportionate growth shares to the study area,

it is estimated that between 41 and 46 households could be attracted

to the study area on an annual basis. These figures are 13-18% higher

than Coriolis’ projections, a difference attributable to a combination

of higher overall population figures for the 50-69 age group in Metro

(as per updated BC Stats data), and a greater proportion of assumed

movers in any given year.

Segment #3: Aging Whistler Residents

By 2033, Whistler is expected to have a permanent resident population

of approximately 12,500. In any given year, 13-14 households from Whis-

tler could be expected to relocate to the study area.8 This absorption

rate is significantly lower than the 49-54 households per year projected

by Coriolis, a function of the team’s assumption that not more than 5%

of households moving out of Whistler in any given year would consider

relocating to the study area.

6 2011 National Household Survey commuting flows by Census Subdivision, by place of work and place of residence. Rate of change projection based on changes recorded between 2001 and 2011.

7 Assumes that 25% of long distance commuters who would likely move to, or remain in, the North Shore each year would end up locating in the study area. This is consistent with the study area’s share of North Shore population over the last decade.

8 BC Stats PEOPLE 2013 for Metro Vancouver.

Segment #4: Young Sports-Minded Families

The young, active buyer market is, in the project team’s opinion, the

most important of the additional market segments that could be tar-

geted for relocation to the study area in general and South Britannia

Beach in particular.9 This segment includes many current or potential

residents of Metro Vancouver’s eastern suburbs (including long dis-

tance commuters) who are looking for greater affordability and value.

Coriolis quantified this market segment as potentially adding 22 units

per year of absorption to the study area. The team believes that this

figure could be significantly higher, possibly averaging 95 to 105 units

per year.

9 The team defines this segment as Metro Vancouver population aged 30-44.


Total Study Area Demand: Standard Growth + New Market Segments

The table below provides a summary of the team’s annual residential

absorption projections for the study area over 20 years and compares

the figures to those projected by Coriolis.

Table 4

Comparison of Study Area Residential Absorption Potential

Coriolis GPRA

Absorption from forecasted household growth

240 to 300 230 to 240

Potential additional absorption from new segments

112 to 129 154 to 174

Active Commuters 4 to 5 5 to 9

Affluent semi-retired

Metro Vancouver residents

36 to 39 41 to 46

Former Whistler residents 49 to 54 13 to 14

Young sport-minded from

Metro Van

22 95 to 105

Total Households per year over 20 years*

351 to 420 384 to 414

* Coriolis forecasts for 2012-2031. GPRA forecasts for 2014-2033.

Unit Absorption at South Britannia Beach

The following are core assumptions underpinning the unit absorption

projections:

• South Britannia Beach will not contain more than 1,000 residential

units.

• It is assumed that 100% of Area D growth will occur within the

boundaries of the study area.

• One should not expect that one should expect more than 3-5% of

Squamish area demand redirected given the number of competitive

projects and proximity to services and amenities.

• No more than 2-3% of west side West Vancouver growth can be

re-directed to new master planned projects in the study area, at

South Britannia Beach or elsewhere.

• Demand from long distance commuters will be split amongst at

least a half-dozen projects in the study area. South Britannia Beach

should not expect to capture more than 25-35% of demand from

this segment.

• Demand from semi-retired Metro Vancouver residents will be split

amongst a number of projects; the team assumes capture at South

Britannia Beach at 10-15%.

• Demand from former Whistler residents will be split amongst various

projects and will mostly be directed to Squamish. The team has set

capture rates of 10-15% for this segment.

• Demand from young sports-minded families will also be split

amongst a number of projects. Capture rates of 30-35% for this

segment have been set.

The team’s projections indicate that residential units at South Britannia

Beach could be absorbed in a period of 15 to 20 years at an average

rate of 50 to 65 units per year. Assuming the first units are absorbed

in 2016, the project would be complete between 2033 and 2036.

Over the first phases of development (first 5-10 years), it is expected

that 40-50% of product demand will be for single-family detached units

with an emphasis on smaller more affordable homes on smaller lots

(e.g. sub-186 square metres [2,000 square foot] homes on 372 square

metres [4,000 square foot] lots or smaller). The balance of demand

will be for a combination of ground-oriented multi-family typologies

including townhouses, triplexes, and fourplexes. In the latter phases

(years 10-15 or 10-20, depending on length of absorption period),

demand is expected to shift toward more multi-family units, including

some low-rise apartments.

4

SIT

E A

NA

LYS

IS


Assuming that 1,000 housing units are developed at South Britannia Beach, sources demand are expected to break down as follows:

• From SLRD Area D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 - 15%

• From west part of West Vancouver . . . . . . . . . . . 1%

• From Squamish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 - 15%

• Additional Market Segments

o Active Commuters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10%

o Semi-retired . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 - 9%

o Young buyers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 - 55%

o Former Whistler. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 3%


4.7 Retail & Service Commercial Market Opportunity AssessmentThe following is a brief review of retail and service commercial demand potential at South Britannia Beach under a scenario of 50-65 units per

year of absorption.

In the works of both Site Economics and Coriolis, a South Britannia Beach retail trade area encompassing Britannia Beach and Furry Creek was

used. This analysis uses the same trade area for sake of consistency and comparability. Using 2011 Census data, the combined Furry Creek/Bri-

tannia Beach population is 469 residents. By the end of 2013, the population was estimated at just under 500. Forecasts for the future trade area

population are as follows:

1,452

2,716

1,657

3,206

-‐

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033

South Britannia Trade Area Population Projections

S. Britannia Conservative S. Britannia Optimistic N. Britannia Furry Creek TOTAL (low) Total (high)

Figure 13 – South Britannia Beach trade area population projections

4

SIT

E A

NA

LYS

IS


Context

By virtue of the relatively small size of the trade area’s population

base, proximity to significant regional-serving retail just to the north

in Squamish, and the potential plans to develop up to 65,000 square

feet of additional retail capacity in North Britannia Beach, the team

does not believe that any sort of region-serving retail is warranted for

South Britannia Beach. Any retail/service commercial developed on

site should be geared toward serving the local on-site population first

and foremost. As such, in the forecasting of retail demand by retail

goods category, low to zero on-site capture has never been assumed

for categories that typically will require larger retail agglomerations.

Expenditures Potential & Market Capture

In 2013, the total pool of retail spending within the trade area was

estimated at $7.9 million. By 2023 that pool is expected to reach be-

tween $15.2 and $17.2 million and by 2033 it is projected to reach $35

to $41 million.

Market capture rates allow estimatation of the percentage of overall

spending that is likely to flow to retailers/service providers at the sub-

ject site. In the case of South Britannia Beach, capture rates are set

based on the understanding of competitive retail existing today to the

north and south, the understanding of planned retail expansion both

locally and regionally and the team’s knowledge of market support

required to sustain both neighbourhood and regionally-oriented retail

locations including grocery-anchored community shopping centres.

The trade area population could support between 4,645 - 5,574 square

metres (50,000 and 60,000 square feet) of gross floor area by 2023

and between 10,033 and 11,891 square metres (108,000 and 128,000

square feet) by 2033. It is estimated that South Britannia Beach could

reasonably capture about 20-25% of spending in convenience goods &

services categories and restaurant/coffee shop categories at build-out.

This would translate to support for the following:

• 371 to 650 square metres (4,000 to 7,000 square feet) of basic or

specialty grocery (e.g. convenience store, bakery) and a small-

scale pharmacy.

• 418 to 570 square metres (4,500 to 5,500 square feet) of

personal service (e.g. salon, drycleaner, pet groomer etc.)

• 185 to 232 square metres (2,000 to 2,500 square feet) of

restaurant and coffee shop space.

• 975 to 1,393 square metres (10,500 to 15,000 square feet) overall.

Adding in community recreation and services (e.g. child care and

multi-purpose rooms) and limited office space possibly in the form

of shared professional office and conference space could justify up to

1,858 to 2,322 square metres (20,000 to 25,000 square feet) overall

at build-out.

Phasing should be such that most or all of the retail and service space

comes online in the latter phases of the residential absorption peri-

od, while community service space is built and accessible to the first

residents moving onto the site. Assuming the 6,038 square metres

(65,000 square feet) of commercial space at North Britannia Beach

goes forward and there are strong linkages between North and South

neighbourhoods, there will be more than sufficient retail amenity for

day-to-day needs of residents. If the North Britannia Beach commer-

cial space does not proceed, the total demand will still be limited to

an estimated 3,715 square metres (40,000 square feet). In the team’s

opinion there is unlikely to be sufficient support at South Britannia

Beach for a full-line grocery store or larger scale pharmacy until the

trade area surpasses a population threshold of 8-10,000, which is many

years in the future.


Employment Projections

Based on the market and economic studies conducted for this Master

Plan, there are four potential employment generators in South Britannia

Beach. These employment generators include a hotel, the community

resource and learning centre, commercial development, and home

based businesses. The total number of jobs projected for the South

Britannia Beach area is between 285 and 435 (see Table 5).

Commercial

The extent of the commercial space in South Britannia Beach depends

partly on the Macdonald Development Corporation proposal for 6,040

square metres (65,000 square feet) of commercial space in North

Britannia Beach. The commercial floor area proposed with the North

Britannia commercial development proceeding is 1,393 square meters

(15,000 square feet). If this proposal does not proceed, the maximum

justifiable commercial area calculated for the South Britannia Beach

area is between 2,790 and 3,250 square metres (30,000 and 35,000

square feet) constructed in a period of 15 to 20 years. If there was a

destination place, an example being a highly sought after restaurant,

an additional 465 square metres (5,000 square feet) could be justified.

With the current proposed 1,393 square metres (15,000 square feet)

of commercial space there would be a total of 43 employees, assum-

ing 33 square metres (350 square feet) per employee. If the demand

exists for more commercial space at the higher end of 3,720 square

metres (40,000 square feet), 114 employees could be employed. The

commercial space and employee estimate includes the concept of

developing a destination “Winery” (wine-tasting and storage facility)

in the Britannia Crossing area. The production of the grapes for this

facility will most likely be in the Okanagan Valley.

Community Resource and Learning Centre

Educational employment density was calculated using a 23 square

metres (250 square feet) per employee assumption. The average was

increased slightly to 28 square metres (300 square feet) per employee

if a daycare was included. Currently, the estimate for community re-

source and learning centre as well as daycare employees is between 11

and 13 people. This is dependent on further discussions with the SLRD

and School District #48.

Home based business

In Metro Vancouver, 11% of people work from home based businesses.

The percentage of home based businesses is lower in Squamish at 5%.

Another comparative location is Langley, where 17% of people work

from their homes. Using these areas, the projected range for home

based businesses in the South Britannia Beach area is from 10% to

15%. The total number of jobs produced by home based businesses

will therefore be between 100 and 150 jobs assuming a total of 1,000

housing units. This estimate could be higher if people work in a home

based business but are from outside of the Britannia Beach area or it

could be lower if multiple family members work out of the same home

based businesses.

Hotel

The market does not currently support a hotel with 100 rooms, but if

this were to change, the hotel would generate 125-150 jobs depend-

ing on the type of hotel. The Britannia Beach economy would greatly

benefit from this type of business and there could also be a 5% spin

off of related employment in Britannia and Squamish based on this

development.

4

SIT

E A

NA

LYS

IS


Table 5

South Britannia Beach Employment Projections

Employment Area

Number of jobs

produced

Variables Assumptions

Commercial 43-114 • Spending inflow (commuter/tourist traffic)

• Trade area population projections

• Anticipated capture rates

• Destination tourist commercial

• Base commercial floor area of 1,393 square meters or 15,000 square feet

• All or most of the North Britannia Beach commercial cannot simply be transferred to the South Britannia Beach site

• Further potential of 2,790 and 3,250 square metres (30,000-35,000 square feet) in 15-20 years could be possible if proposed North Britannia commercial development does not proceed

• Potential for additional +465 square metres (+5,000 square feet) if there is a destination spot for tourists (i.e. restaurant)

• 1 employee/33 square metres (350 square feet)

• 43 employees/1,393 square metres (15,000 square feet)

• 114 employees/3,720 square metres (40,000 square feet)

Community Resource and Learning Centre (K-3) + Daycare

11-13 • Demand for a K-3 school is dependent on the number of children living in the area

• Business resource centre – “Start up Britannia” is dependent on local business support

• Inclusion of daycare services

• School District #48 approval/support

• 23 square metres (250 square feet) per employee

• 28 square metres (300 square feet) per employee if there is a daycare

• 1 full time employee (FTE) for Business Resource Centre (2 part-time positions)

Home Based Businesses

100-150 • Home based businesses attracting people from outside of Britannia Beach

• Multiple family members working out of a home based business

• 10% to 15% of jobs estimated to be home based businesses (comparables of Metro Vancouver 11%, Langley 17%, and Squamish 5%)

• Could be lower or higher depending on the outlined variables

Hotel 125-150

6-8

• Estimated 5% potential spin off jobs created

• Market demand (currently lacking)

• 100 room hotel

• 125 full time employees (FTE)

• 150 FTE if the hotel is higher end

• Great benefit to the Britannia Beach economy

Total 285-435


4.8 Summary Of Site Opportunities And ConstraintsBelow is a summary of the opportunities and constraints of the site:

Table 6

Site Opportunities and Constraints

Components Opportunities Constraints Responses

History and Special Site Features

• Tourism and access to waterfront

• Minaty Bay Regional Park development

• Recognize Squamish First Nations and mining history

• Limited access to waterfront because of highway and CN Rail

• Improve access to waterfront and connection between South Britannia Beach and the Britannia Beach town site

• Connect along the waterfront

• Create interpretative historical and interpretative program in association with park and trail development

Topography and Vegetation

• Flat areas and cleared areas on site for development

• Some vegetated areas add amenity to site

• Steeply sloped areas difficult to develop

• Creek and associated riparian areas

• Create primary development areas on flat and moderately sloped terrain

• Retain treed areas where possible including Minaty Bay Regional Park

Wetland and Hydrology • Creek areas as amenity areas for site development

• Pond and wetland area as nature park amenity area

• Creek areas and required setbacks

• Pond and wetland area limited alteration

• Retain creek areas with setbacks

• Retain ponds and wetlands as part of natural areas

4

SIT

E A

NA

LYS

IS


Components Opportunities Constraints Responses

Geotechnical • Development potential in flatter areas

• Stable soils and structure

• Steep upper slopes limited development potential

• Potential debris flow in creeks

• Potential unstable foreshore areas

• Focus development in moderate slope and flatter areas

• Protect against debris flow in creeks

• Limit development to minor recreation improvements to foreshore in early phases

Transportation • Existing access to site

• Potential trail and pathway system

• Emphasis on alternative transportation and work in place

• Constrained access to waterfront

• CN Rail crossings

• Limited connection to North Britannia Beach

• Limited access to Minaty Bay

• Develop an incremental approach with MOTI

• Consider overhead pedestrian bridges to waterfront

• Improve CN Rail crossings

• Limit development to 1,000 units

• Support alternative transportation including transit and car-share

• Support shared local workspace

Market and Economic Analysis

• Special location and site

• Waterfront connection and potential views

• Existing community of Britannia Beach and associated history of place

• Proximity to Squamish and Vancouver

• Build on existing infrastructure and services

• Diversity and choice of housing

• Potential appeal to young sporty demographic

• Large supply of various housing types in the region

• Longer absorption period

• Need for development of amenities and improvements

• Costs associated with new infrastructure and amenities

• Follow a phased approach

• Provide diversity of multiple-family and single-family housing

• Create a waterfront park and trails and other amenities as well as sense of place developed early in process

• Provide daycare and other required services in the early phases

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0 m

100

m

0M 50 100 5001:5000

N

Britannia Crossing

Soundview

Britannia Meadows

Minaty

Figure 14 – South Britannia Beach Neighbourhoods

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


5 Master Plan

The South Britannia Beach Master Plan shapes development for the

next 20 years within the bounds of the designated development area

of the Official Community Plan (OCP) known as the Howe Sound East

Sub-area Plan (Schedule C to SLRD Area D OCP Bylaw 1135-2013). The

following names have been assigned as placeholders for the 4 neigh-

bourhoods that will collectively shape South Britannia Beach:

1. Britannia Crossing

Located in the north area and functioning as the core and “Main Street”

of South Britannia Beach, this area will include community resource

and learning centre, community park, retail and service commercial

uses, transit hub, and support emergency/fire and municipal service

facilities, as well as mixed residential housing surrounding the centre.

2. Britannia Meadows

The central or former gravel pit area will be redeveloped into a sin-

gle-family area featuring Gravel and Thistle Creeks along with recon-

structed wetlands and an extensive trail system.

3. Minaty

The south area featuring Minaty Bay will include single-family and

mixed residential housing, and the proposed Minaty Bay Regional Park

along Howe Sound. This area also includes a hotel along the waterfront

with up to 100 rooms.

4. Soundview

This neighbourhood will be located on the upper slopes consisting of

single-family housing and connected to North Britannia Beach by an

upper road.


Figure 15 – Land Use Plan

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


The South Britannia Beach Master Plan accommodates up to 1,000

single and multiple-family homes. This is contingent upon negotiations

with the province regarding ownership, remediation of contamination

and access. Commercial services at Britannia Crossing will initially be

limited to the 1,393 square meters (15,000 square feet) and would be

expanded only if supported. A community resource and learning centre

is planned to include a K-3 school, library and small gym as well as a

business centre and daycare.

Approximately half the housing will be single-family ranging between

20 - 40 units per hectare (uph) (8 – 16 units per acre [upa]) net density,

while the balance of the multiple-family sites will range between 40

– 70 uph (16 – 28 upa) net density. The maximum building height will

be four to six stories. Most of the housing will be two to three stories

with the exception of some multiple-family apartments in the Britannia

Crossing and Minaty neighbourhoods ranging up to 150 uph (60 upa).

There will be a mix of housing within some blocks to create a mixed

population of singles, young families and mature adults. The mixed

housing areas will be on the lower flatter areas, while the slopes will

be primarily single-family housing, except for a few areas with difficult

access that might be allocated to multiple-family units.

The main access off of Highway 99 will create a principal street through

the community hub connecting to Minaty Bay via the existing tunnel un-

der the highway. The balance of the street network will be local streets

designed to encourage walking and biking. An extensive pathway sys-

tem on the streets and off-street trails beside the creeks and wetlands

will interconnect the community with the community hub, transit,

learning centre and the waterfront at Minaty Bay. A series of local parks

will be connected with the proposed Minaty Bay Regional Park and the

surrounding upper trail system on the mountainside as well as to the

Sea-to-Sky Trail. Minaty Bay Regional Park will be connected along

the waterfront by a waterfront trail to the Britannia Beach town site

community marina. This is contingent upon negotiations with the prov-

ince regarding ownership, remediation of contamination and access.

Further improvements to the existing pathway connection on the east

side of Highway 99 between the Britannia Beach town site and South

Britannia Beach will reinforce the connections between the two areas.

One pedestrian bridge over Highway 99 and the CN Rail – connecting

to Minaty Bay – is planned so that connections with the waterfront are

easier and safer.

The development infrastructure, housing, and amenities will be phased

over 20 years starting in the north area working south. South Britannia

Beach is meant to be part of “One Britannia” that complements the

existing Britannia Beach town site and improves the community overall.

BRITANNIA CROSSING

Transit Hub / Emergency

Potential Winery Sites

Wetlands

Community Park

Pedestrian Bridge

Tourist Commercial

Minaty Regional Park

Waterfront Trail

Minaty Creek

Thistle Creek

Learning and Community Resource Centre

BRITANNIA MEADOWS

0M 50 100 5001:5000

N

Daisy Creek

MINATY

Gravel CreekLookout Park

Figure 16 – Illustrated Master Plan

SOUNDVIEW

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


5.1 South Britannia Beach Goals

Britannia Beach comprises five integrated systems, each with a distinct

goal that aligns with the vision articulated in the SLRD’s RGS and ISP.

Our Unique Neighbourhood and Homes – A unique, distinctive and

compact community using a mixture of housing options that are beau-

tifully designed, energy efficient, sited sensitively, and reflective of a

mountain and ocean setting and small town feel.

Our Healthy and Thriving Community – A vibrant community with a

strong sense of place, that has healthy, happy and secure residents that

contribute to a thriving Britannia Beach community.

Our Transportation and Infrastructure Systems – A community in

which residents have minimal need to drive, water and energy is used

efficiently, stormwater is treated naturally, and waste is minimized.

Our Recreation, Leisure and Education – An active community with a

strong culture and history, and access to numerous recreational, leisure

and educational opportunities locally.

Our Natural Environment – A community that is nestled within, and

protective of a unique natural environment.

5 Keystones of Neighbourhood Planning and Design

Our healthy and thriving community

Our transportation and

infrastructure systems

Our unique neighbourhood and homes

Our recreation, leisure and education

Our natural environment

5.2 South Britannia Beach Neighbourhood Desired Outcomes

OUR UNIQUE NEIGHBOURHOOD AND HOMES

Desired Outcomes:

• A mix of housing types provides diversity and choice for a range

of incomes, and some offer accessibility features for people of

various ages and abilities.

• Homes are energy efficient, provide comfortable healthy

environments, reduce energy costs for residents, and are sited to

maximize the green space around them.

• The Britannia Beach community has a strong sense of place, with

access to public spaces for community interaction, and a strong

connection between north and south.

• Compact neighbourhoods conserve and enhance natural areas,

green spaces and wildlife habitats and avoid hazards.

• The commercial area provides services to support all Britannia

Beach residents.

• The Minaty Bay Regional Park and waterfront improvements

retain their beautiful natural qualities, are accessible to all, and

attract visitors to stop and enjoy.

• Building materials are sustainably sourced and assembled locally

where possible.

OUR HEALTHY AND THRIVING COMMUNITY

Desired Outcomes:

• The commercial centre, when fully developed, provides goods,

services and shared facilities, and is easily accessible to meet

most of the residents’ daily needs.

• There are opportunities for residents to work within their

residences and the neighbourhood.

• Britannia Beach supports, enhances and grows local economic

development opportunities in the Corridor.

• Gathering places and community programs help create a strong

sense of community where residents know and support each other.


• Residents are happy and healthy, and the community is safe from

crime and natural hazards.

• There are opportunities for residents to grow their own food or

access local food.

• The Britannia Beach community offers services and amenities

that attract tourism.

OUR TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS

Desired Outcomes:

• Residents of Britannia Beach are able to access most daily needs

within the community without driving. Reliable and affordable

transportation services allow residents to get to nearby

communities on a daily basis.

• Safe and accessible paths and trails allow people to travel safely

within the community, between the north and south areas, to

adjacent hillside areas, and to the waterfront.

• All stormwater is treated on site, and everyone has sufficient

access to high quality water.

• There is a strong culture of energy conservation.

• Composting and recycling initiatives minimize solid waste

disposal needs.

• Efficient, reliable and affordable communications infrastructure

allows residents to connect beyond the community.

OUR RECREATION, LEISURE AND EDUCATION

Desired Outcomes:

• Arts, culture and heritage are conserved and enhanced, generate

tourism, and are a sense of pride for the community.

• Numerous and diverse year-round recreational opportunities

attract residents and tourists alike.

• Educational and childcare facilities exist within the community.

• Shared community indoor and outdoor spaces are available

learning and leisure activities for residents of all ages.

• Residents and visitors have access to community spaces that

encourage interaction and healthy activities.

• All residents have easy access to the natural environment, parks,

trails, and waterfront.

OUR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Desired Outcomes:

• The natural environment and all environmentally sensitive areas

are protected and enhanced.

• Significant existing ground vegetation and trees are retained

restored or replaced as much as possible within development areas.

• Ecosystems, watersheds and creeks are healthy and flourishing.

• Land disturbance in areas subject to possible erosion is

minimized.

• There is a strong culture of environmental protection.

• Residents enjoy beautiful viewscapes, clean air and water, and a

dark night sky.

• Minaty Bay Regional Park is retained in a natural state.

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


5.3 Alternative Concept ExplorationsFour different land use concepts were explored as part of developing the preferred Master Plan. Each concept followed different themes and

contributed to developing common and best elements for the final preferred Master Plan. During the community workshop held April 22nd –

25th, 2014, these concept explorations provided community members, team members and other participants a basis to compare and contrast

different components as well as comment on the final Master Plan.

GREEN STRUCTURE PLAN

The Green Structure Plan used the existing natural areas to direct the

form of development. The green framework made evident the impor-

tance of retaining and connecting to the greenbelt around the devel-

opment area. The plan also emphasized the importance of retaining

and connecting to the creeks, wetlands, waterfront, and Minaty Bay as

natural areas in development planning. The community hub was located

in the north area incorporating a learning centre, a park and sports field.

Housing density was dispersed throughout the site.

GREEN FINGERS PLAN

The Green Fingers Plan emphasized the importance of the creeks and

linear greenways as form-makers for future development. The resulting

plan divided the site into distinct development areas or “fingers” that

would extend from the mountainside to the highway. A community hub

was again located in the north area but the learning centre and park

were located further south adjoining the highway. Housing density was

again dispersed throughout the site.


HUB PLAN

The Hub Plan concentrated higher density residential in a central hub

area, focused in the north of the site. The natural areas and creeks were

retained. This hub consisted of community facilities, a learning centre

site, and commercial services.

BOWL PLAN

The Bowl Plan reflected the “bowl” character of the development area

in the street patterning and open space form. Green fingers shaped the

open space structure – retaining the creeks, waterfront, and capitalizing

on the upper area’s view potential to Howe Sound. The community hub

of commercial services was located in the north end of the site.

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


COMMON DESIGN ELEMENTS

The four design concepts created design criteria for the preferred

Master Plan. These design criteria included:

• Use the natural bowl shape as a form-maker to shape the

development elements including the natural creek basins, streets,

and view potential;

• Design the streets to respond to the terrain;

• Retain and enhance the creeks as natural site elements;

• Locate the community hub at the north end of the site to be

closer to the North Britannia Beach town site;

• Connect the community learning centre and park to the

community hub site;

• Limit building height to a maximum of six stories to integrate with

the rural character and mountain context;

• Build diverse housing types within blocks to respond to a variety

of age groups and needs;

• Connect all parts of the community by including the waterfront,

trails and pathways;

• Ensure that all phases are complete (stand-alone phases) in order

to well serve the community; and

• Create improved connections to the existing North Britannia

Beach town site.


5.4 Land Use Allocations and PopulationThe development area is 72.37 hectares (178.83 acres). The park and environmental areas contribute 45% or 32.3 hectares (79.82 acres) to the

Master Plan leaving 40.08 hectares (99.04 acres) for development. Single-family residential areas contribute 520 units while mixed residential

areas contribute 480 units to the maximum 1,000 units permitted on the site. The units are almost evenly split 50/50 to provide a rich mix of

housing options. The total population is projected to be approximately 2,600 persons assuming a density of 2.6 persons per household (refer

to Tables 7 & 8 below).

Table 7

Land Use Allocations and Population Density

Area ha (acre) % UnitsPopulation @2.6 ppu

Density units/hectare

(units/acre)

Net Density with Roads – units/hectare (units/acre)

Population Density per net

development hectare (acre)

Gross Area 72.37 (178.83) 100% 13.82 (5.59)

Less Environmental Sensitive Areas 23.25 (57.45) 32.13%

Less Parks 9.04 (22.34) 12.49%

Net Developable Area 40.08 (99.04) 55.38% 24.95 (10.10)

Residential 24.45 (60.41) 33.78%

– Single-Family 14.73 (36.40) 20.35% 520 1,352 35.30 (14.29)

– Mixed Residential 9.72 (24.01) 13.43% 480 1,248 49.38 (19.98)

Total: 1,000 2,600 64.87 (26.25)

Service Commercial (mixed with residential)

0.55 (1.36) 0.76%

Minaty Bay Tourism Commercial (TC)

1.63 (4.03) 2.25%

Institutional 0.65 (1.61) 0.90%

Streets (Rights-Of-Way) 12.80 (31.63) 17.69%

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


Table 8

Phasing

Neighbourhoods Single Family Mixed Residential Hotel Rooms Total

1 Britannia Meadows 234 106 340

2 Britannia Crossing - 175 175

3 Minaty 69 201 1 270

4 Soundview 215 - 215

5 Minaty Tourist Commercial 1002

Total Residential Units 518 482 1,000

1 100 units- 4-6 storey apartments

2 100 hotel rooms are not part of the total 1,000 residential units

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0 m

100

m0

m10

0 m

0M 50 100 5001:5000

N

Figure 17 – Special Features

Britannia Crossing

Trails

Copper Pedestrain Bridge

Waterfront Trail

Housing

Tunnel Connection

Minaty Bay Regional Park

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN



5.5 Special Features

MINATY BAY REGIONAL PARK

Approximately 4.86 hectares (12 acres) will be retained as a regional

park for all to enjoy. The majority of the park will be conserved in its

natural state except for minor improvements including a boat house

for non-motorized craft storage and a food vending concession, wash-

rooms, a small pavilion and open grassed area for weddings and cele-

brations and a parking lot for visitors.

A trail system will connect the waterfront to the Copper Pedestrian

Bridge, and the waterfront trail to the Britannia Beach Community

Marina by the existing Britannia Beach town site. The beach will be

retained and the area enhanced with picnic tables, but the essence of

this special place will remain untouched. Minimum disturbance of the

site will be paramount – retaining the trees, the beach and the steep

treed knoll that helps protect the beach area from high winds along

Howe Sound. There is the possibility of developing a site interpretation

program that recognizes the original Squamish First Nations and the

Britannia Beach mining families. To the east along the waterfront, a

small tourism commercial component (retreat or hotel/inn) is planned

to complement the Minaty Bay Regional Park uses.

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


Figure 18 – View of Minaty Bay

LOCATION MAP


COPPER PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE

The proposed Copper Pedestrian Bridge will connect the Britannia

Meadows neighourhood with Minaty Bay. The bridge will also connect

the wetland trail on the north side of Highway 99 with the Minaty Bay

trail and the Waterfront trail. Reflecting the history of the Britannia

mine, the bridge deck and armature will be clad in Corten steel that will

create a historical, rustic look over time to reflect the mining history of

the area. The bridge will cross over Highway 99 and will also announce

entry into the Britannia Beach community.

Figure 19 – Copper Pedestrian Bridge

LOCATION MAP

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


WATERFRONT TRAIL

The waterfront trail will connect Minaty Bay with the Britannia Beach

Community Marina adjoining the existing Britannia Beach town site.

This waterfront area is owned by the Crown and will require their ap-

provals to proceed with any development (Lots 5208 and 5210).

The proposed trail will extend from Minaty Bay by way of trails on land

and two sections of boardwalk (elevated walkways) in the foreshore

areas that do not have adequate space for a land-based trail. A mini-

mum trail setback of 15 metres (49 feet) is required from the CN Rail

along with other safety measures including fencing. Lookout areas,

rest areas and a historic/wildlife interpretive signage program could be

incorporated with the trail program. The trail development program will

minimize disturbance of the sensitive waterfront areas by improving

the existing trail fragments and creating elevated boardwalks above the

foreshore area. The trail will be connected to the proposed pedestrian

bridge at Minaty Bay so that easy and safe connections will be possible

over Highway 99 and the CN Rail tracks.

Figure 20 – Waterfront Trail

LOCATION MAP


TUNNEL CONNECTION

The existing tunnel connection under Highway 99 between the proposed Britannia

Meadows neighbourhood and Minaty Bay will be improved to permit a safer and

more attractive connections between the two areas. Improvements could include a

formalized car and bike lane, a raised sidewalk for pedestrians, stone approach walls,

tree and shrub planting, and a new concrete lining with interior lighting for improved

safety, attractiveness, and structural integrity.

Figure 21 – Tunnel Connection

LOCATION MAP

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


BRITANNIA CROSSING – THE COMMUNITY HUB

Britannia Crossing will be the community hub located at the north end

of the site and will minimize the distance to the existing Britannia Beach

town site. Shared pedestrian-bike pathways will further enhance this

connection on the east side of Highway 99.

The Britannia Crossing neighbourhood will include services such as

community mail boxes, a small market, a coffee shop, a neighbourhood

pub and restaurant, a transit hub with bike parking, a fire and medical

emergency facility that may also accommodate other municipal sup-

port facilities. In addition, a community resource and learning centre will

include a potential school (K-3), a library, a business centre, community

gym, and a daycare facility. The intention of the community hub is to

complement and complete, not compete with, existing community ser-

vices in North Britannia. Multiple-family residential units, a community

resource and learning centre, and a community park/open space will

surround this community hub.

The Britannia Crossing Main Street, located central to the community

hub, will include shops and other professional and community services

that are in scale and character of the existing Britannia community.

This area will be part of the “central community living room” where

Britannia Beach residents will meet and interact.

Figure 22 – The Community Hub

LOCATION MAP

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


DESIGN AND BUILDING STYLE

The architecture should follow a contemporary interpretation of the for-

mer mining community. Prominent use of wood for extended porches

(pedestrian arcade), framing and facades should be part of the building

structure to provide pedestrian scale and weather protection along the

building faces. An assortment of roof forms (the majority could be shed

and gabled roofs) should be encouraged to provide variety. Colours

should be earth tones with colourful accents. Signage should be small

blade and facade signage to inform, but not overpower, in prominence

on the building facades. Height should be limited generally to two to

three stories to maintain the appropriate pedestrian scale and sunlight

to the street. Uses on the second and third floors could include service

commercial, professional office space and other similar uses. Parking

should be limited to parallel parking along the street with additional

visitor parking located in the rear yards. These should be planted with

trees and use various paving materials (including rain gardens and

some pervious paving for more natural drainage) to emphasize the

pedestrian orientation of these parking “courts.” Bike parking, pedes-

trian-scaled lighting, and street tree planting should be provided along

the street as well as sitting areas and outdoor patios.


Figure 23 – Regional Tourism

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


TRAIL CONNECTIVITY AND REGIONAL TOURISM

The proposed comprehensive trail system, Minaty Bay Regional Park,

other local parks, open spaces, creeks and wetlands connect the Bri-

tannia Beach community and create a regional tourism asset for the

Sea-to-Sky Corridor. The enhancement and improved access to the pro-

posed Minaty Bay Regional Park, combined with the proposed pedestri-

an bridge connection, will create a safe pedestrian and bike experience.

The trail system is intended to connect to both the land and water-based

regional Sea-to-Sky Trail network. Combined with historical (Squamish

First Nation and mining) and wildlife (Howe Sound) interpretation, the

trail network can become both a recreational and cultural attraction

in the Sea-to-Sky Corridor. Complemented by commercial services

including food and beverage and recreation facilities in the Minaty

Bay Regional Park, this area will enhance the tourism attractiveness

of the Corridor.

Figure 24 – Making Connections


5.6 Housing Housing diversity and choice is central to the South Britannia Beach

Master Plan to provide accessible and more affordable alternatives.

South Britannia Beach will provide a balanced mix of single-family and

multiple-family housing with a general form of two to three stories. A

limited number of areas will allow a building height of four to six storeys

and these buildings will be limited to specific areas where the form is

appropriate.

Mixed residential blocks with various housing forms and types will

shape the South Britannia Beach community. Mortgage helpers com-

prising in-house suites, lane houses, and lock-off suites can provide

options for new homebuyers. Single-family units and multiple-family

housing units will be balanced in the community with an overall 50/50

split. Generally, the majority of housing units will be ground oriented

(fronting on the street with direct entrances or patios) and will in-

clude: single-family homes (small, medium, large), townhouses, and

rowhouses.

Higher density housing including apartments will be emphasized in

cluster pockets along the outer edges and in the steeper southern por-

tion of the site. The Soundview and Britannia Meadows neighbourhoods

will consist of single-family or semi-detached housing units with some

multiple-family housing units in steeper sloped areas.

To retain the site character and extensive environmentally sensitive

areas of the site, a number of housing types and housing cluster typol-

ogies were developed that complement the overall land use concept

and are illustrated in the section that follows.

HOUSING FORM AND OVERLOOK

The higher elevation housing in the Soundview neighbourhood will take

advantage of the views of Howe Sound and the mountains beyond. The

lower Britannia Meadows neighbourhood area will provide views by

stacking housing in the upper areas. The Soundview neighbourhood

area will also provide views by terracing housing (illustrated in the ac-

companying sections through the Britannia Meadows and Soundview

areas of the site). Similarly, terraced housing in the Minaty neighbour-

hood area will improve views.

0 m

100

m

0 m

100

m

0 m

100

m

0M 50 100 5001:5000

NLegend

Single Family

Mixed Residential

Soundview

Britannia Meadows

Britannia Crossing Minaty

Figure 25 – Single-family and mixed residential homes

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


Figure 26 – Housing site sections, looking north


FLEX-BLOCKS

The flex-blocks idea introduces the concept of different housing types on the same block to create a localized diversity of housing. In the block

with lane access illustrated below, the housing includes larger single-family houses, compact single-family houses, and row-houses.

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


CLUSTER HOUSING

The housing cluster illustrated below in Britannia Crossing shows three storey stacked townhouses oriented toward the street with an interior

parking courtyard. Like units in Cheakamus Crossing (the former Olympic Athletes’ Village) in Whistler, covered parking can be added to the

parking courts. At the same time, surface parking makes the units more affordable. The townhouse orientation of front doors toward the street

integrates the cluster with the surrounding housing and creates a safer “eyes on the street” condition.


PODS – SURROUNDING A COURTYARD OR GREENWAY

More compact housing forms using shallow lot rowhouses with lane access, narrow single-family lots and semi-detached houses as illustrated

below and on the next page, emphasize community orientation.

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN



COURTYARD HOUSING

These proposed courtyard housing forms, including cottage courtyard housing and courtyard townhouses as illustrated below, create more com-

pact neighbourhoods with an emphasis on a central common space for gathering, community gardens, and other activities. The common areas

reduce private yards, making the housing more affordable, more compact, and more community-oriented. These are shown with lane access

and parking to the outside of the courtyard areas.

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN



SLOPE ADAPTIVE HOUSING

Slope adaptive housing will be developed throughout the steeper areas of the site including the Soundview and Minaty neighbourhoods. This

housing will minimize slope cut and fill by using front/back splits while buffering views from outside the community using vegetation between

sections of development. These units can be single-family or multiple-family stacked units as illustrated below with common parking. Again, this

type of housing provides more diversity and choice of housing to expand affordability and access.

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN



CREEKSIDE HOUSING

Creekside housing will be developed closer to the street for community orientation and to afford a generous backyard and riparian area setback

for the creeks on the property. A direct connection to the proposed trail along the creek increases connectivity and recreation in the community

as seen below.

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN


APARTMENT HOUSING

Apartment housing will be limited

to specific areas on the site and

will not exceed six stories. This

housing will consist of specific

clusters located on the steeper

portions of the site on the edge

of the Minaty neighbourhood as

illustrated.


PARKS, RECREATION AND AMENITIES PLAN

The Minaty Bay Regional Park, waterfront trail, local parks and interior trails will collectively create a network for an outstanding parks and

recreation system. Anchoring the Parks Plan will be the Minaty Bay Regional Park as well as the community park and community resource and

learning centre in Britannia Crossing. The Copper Pedestrian Bridge will extend over Highway 99 to connect the Meadows neighbourhood with

the Minaty neighbourhood and regional park. Additional local parks in the Soundview and Britannia Meadows neighbourhoods will provide

children’s play areas and view parks. Trails will also follow the creeks and wetlands offering access to natural areas throughout the community.

Figure 27 – Parks, recreation and amenities plan

5

MA

ST

ER

PL

AN



Figure 28 – Phasing Plan

6

IMP

LE

ME

NTA

TIO

N


6 Implementation

6.1 Plan PhasingSouth Britannia Beach will start with the mixed housing area of the

Britannia Meadows neighbourhood, then move north in Phase 2 to the

community mixed use hub of Britannia Crossing. Phase 3 will move

across Highway 99 to the mixed housing area of the Minaty neigh-

bourhood. Phase 4 will focus on the lower density housing in the upper

Soundview neighbourhood. Finally, Phase 5 will develop the commer-

cial tourist area in Minaty Bay.

The project is phased over 15 - 20 years. The initial phases 1 and 2

comprise up to 500 residential units. Completion of Phases 1 and 2 is

anticipated between 2016 – 2026.

The Phase 3 development features an additional 300 residential units

are located on the west side of the highway corridor next to Minaty

Bay. Completion of Phase 3 is anticipated between 2026 – 2031.

Phases 4 and 5 complete the South Britannia Beach Master Plan with

200 residential units in the Soundview neighbourhood and the Minaty

Bay tourist commercial area. Completion of the Phases 4 and 5 is an-

ticipated between 2031 – 2036. Refer back to Table 8 on page 59 for

more information.

6.2 Policy AmendmentsThe SLRD OCP – the Howe Sound East Sub-area Plan (Schedule C to

SLRD Area D OCP Bylaw 1135-2013) and Electoral Area D Zoning Bylaw,

Bylaw 540 (consolidated to October 2012) will need to be amended to

accommodate the development at South Britannia Beach. The applicant

will support the amendment to the OCP by providing the documentation

for required densities and land use areas as well as other information that

varies from the current policies within the OCP. The applicant will also

support the Zoning Bylaw amendment requirements that include provid-

ing the appropriate land use zones, regulations, and design guidelines for

each. Clear zoning regulations will help implement the intention of the

OCP policies and includes addressing the specific needs of mixed residen-

tial densities and forms, varied development standards, and requirements

associated with the wetlands, creeks, parks, and other open spaces.

There are a number of areas in the Master Plan that may require cus-

tomized zones including:

• Areas permitting secondary suites, lane houses and lock-off

suites within specific zones that are not currently permitted;

• Areas permitting townhouses, rowhouses, and semi-detached

units may require reduced or expanded lot depths to allow for

front end access and increased depth for rear lane access; and

• The north mixed use community hub (commercial, residential,

and institutional uses) may require a specific zone to permit the

specific uses and associated customized lot requirements.

6.3 Other ApprovalsOther approvals associated with the application to amend the SLRD’s

OCP and Zoning Bylaw that govern this area will be required and co-

ordinated through circulation by the SLRD. The applicant will make

every effort to support the required circulation requirements by pro-

viding supplemental information and attending additional meetings.

Subsequent subdivision and development permit applications are part

of a separate process and will be governed by the statutory process,

policies, and procedures of the SLRD.

6.4 InterpretationThe interpretation of this Master Plan, phasing and associated implemen-

tation requirements will be by SLRD staff with SLRD Directors making

the final decisions. This Master Plan will be the reference for detailed

OCP and Zoning Bylaw amendments in accordance with the policies and

procedures of the SLRD. These OCP and Zoning Bylaw amendments will

supersede the Master Plan in any dispute in interpretation.

7

SE

RV

ICIN

G


7 Servicing

7.1 SummarySite access strategies have been developed by the project transporta-

tion consultants. The lands are currently accessed from a connection

to Highway 99. This current configuration is expected to serve the

early phases of development. Later phases will require a right in, right

out connection to the southbound lanes of Highway 99 in the Minaty

Bay area. Upgrades to the primary highway connection, such as a two

lane roundabout, or signalized intersection will be required during the

last phase of development. Also, a right of way allowance has been

identified for a future high-level highway bypass located immediately

west of and partially inside the BC Hydro transmission line right-of-way.

The internal road network includes a single collector road that links the

current highway connection to the future right in, right out connec-

tion. This collector road will run through the existing single lane tunnel

under the highway that will be signalized when traffic warrants it. The

remaining roads are local access roads and lanes. Proposed 22 metre

(72 feet) collector, 20 metre (66 feet) local, and 6 metre (20 feet) lane

rights-of-way are ample to support the SLRD and MOTI road standards,

although more pedestrian friendly and environmentally sustainable de-

signs are desired. The last phase includes a higher elevation road that

would connect North and South Britannia Beach. A lower bicycle and

pedestrian connection to North Britannia Beach will be constructed in

the first phase. It is proposed that the existing rail crossing at Minaty

Bay be shifted and upgraded to current safety standards.

Water supply and fire protection can be supplied from groundwater

wells located on site. Well testing during the summer drought period

in 2013 confirmed a capacity of 46.6 Lps. This can adequately supply

over 1000 units based on 2.6 people per unit and 1000 L/c-d, consistent

with typical current practice in the SLRD. Even at the SLRD’s historic

by-law provisions of 4 persons per single-family dwelling unit (SFD),

3 units per multiple-family dwelling unit (MFD), and 1500 L/c-d, the

wells can support approximately 850 units depending on the mix of

SFD’s and MFD’s. The water supply system will be contained within the

site and include wells, treatment, pumping, a reservoir, and distribution

watermains and appurtenances. Connections to the North Britannia

Beach water system are desirable for increased reliability and improved

operations of both systems.

Sanitary sewage will be collected and conveyed to low points on the

site and pumped through a forcemain to the existing North Britannia

Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP). The internal conveyance system

will be constructed as needed to service development phasing. Some

elements of the WWTP, such as the outfall, were constructed with


capacity for the full OCP build-out population. Other elements, such

as additional sequencing batch reactors, will require expansion as the

population and loading increases. It is expected that WWTP capacity

expansion will be required prior to occupancy of the South Britannia

Beach units.

The site slopes towards and drains into Howe Sound via a single de-

fined drainage crossing of the highway and CN Rail at Thistle Creek,

and two crossings of CN Rail at Daisy Creek and an unnamed creek at

the south end of the Minaty Bay area. The lower, flatter portions of the

site consist of permeable sand and gravel. The development is planned

to maintain hydrologic values of the site, protecting watercourses with

riparian areas, the re-establishment of disturbed creeks and riparian

areas, and rain-gardens, swales and ponds to maximize biofiltration

and infiltration.

The lower areas of the site are exposed to potential storm surges from

Howe Sound. The design elevation for flood protection measures is 5.6

metres (18 feet) including a 1 metre (30 feet) allowance for 100 years

of sea level rise. Inland of the highway, the lands may be protected by

a 5.6 metre (18 feet) crest elevation dike (approximately 1.5 metres [5

feet] above existing grades) and the buildings should be constructed

to a minimum 4.35 metre (14 feet) flood construction level (FCL).

Buildings on the water side of the dike should be constructed to the

full 5.6 metre (18 feet) FCL along with adequate erosion protection.

BC Hydro power lines run through the lands on the east side, and a

substation that services North Britannia Beach is at the north edge of

the site. Modifications to the existing substation or a similar arrange-

ment will be provided for South Britannia Beach.

There is no natural gas servicing at or near the site that can be extend-

ed economically. Therefore, gas servicing will not be provided. Instead,

buildings will be highly energy efficient and heated with electricity.

7.2 Transportation This transportation section provides a high level rationale of the trans-

portation access strategy proposed for the South Britannia Beach Master

Plan. The rationale includes a description of the planned access connec-

tions to Highway 99 as well as a planned road connection between North

and South Britannia Beach, planned bicycle/pedestrian connections, and

planned access across the CN Rail tracks to the Howe Sound waterfront.

A more comprehensive Transportation Impact Assessment report is

to be submitted to both the SLRD and the Ministry of Transportation

and Infrastructure (MOTI) and will provide additional detail and tech-

nical analysis supporting the proposed transportation access strategy.

There has been considerable consultation to date between the project

team and the MOTI regarding the future access strategy for the entire

Britannia Beach community. A revised Terms of Reference for the

Transportation Impact Assessment of the new Master Plan for South

Britannia Beach is underway for review by MOTI and the SLRD.

DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC

Bunt & Associates, the project transportation consultants, have ob-

served and documented the vehicle trip generation characteristics

of existing residential communities along this section of the Sea-to-

Sky corridor, including Lions Bay and Furry Creek. This information,

together with other Bunt & Associates database material, has been

used to develop representative trip rates for the future development

anticipated at South Britannia Beach for the weekday AM, weekday

PM and Sunday afternoon peak traffic periods.

For the initial Phases 1-2 of development, the anticipated vehicle trip

generation is 290 vehicles per hour during the weekday morning peak

period (total inbound and outbound trips combined), 365 vehicles per

hour during the weekday afternoon peak period, and 290 vehicles per

hour during the Sunday afternoon peak period. This level of traffic rep-

resents on average between five to six vehicles per minute of combined

inbound and outbound trips.

With the completion of Phase 3, the overall development traffic for the

site is anticipated to increase to 470 vehicles per hour for the weekday

morning peak period, 604 vehicles per hour for the weekday afternoon

7

SE

RV

ICIN

G


&

South Britannia Beach - Transportation StrategyExhibit 3

Traffic Roundaboutor Upgraded Intersection(add 2nd lane southbound)at Copper Drive by 2025

Pedestrian/CyclistMulti-use Path bywith Phases 1-2development

Existing Main Street intersectionto remain as is for Phases 1-2development to Year 2020.

Upgrade to traffic roundabout ortraffic signal control with 2nd lanenorthbound with Phase 2 developmentby Year 2025

Possible FuturePedestrian / CyclistOverpass aboveHighway 99

Pedestrian / CyclistOverpass aboveHighway 99 withPhases 1-2 developmentby Year 2020

Pedestrian / CyclistAt-Grade Rail Crossingwith Phases 1-2 developmentby Year 2020

New Right-Turn Entry/ExitAccess for SouthboundHighway 99 for Phase 3development by 2025

Existing Underpassbelow Highway 99to Remain forPhase 3 development

Possible InterchangeLocation for FutureHighway 99 Bypass

Possible Alignmentfor Future Highway 99 Bypass

Possible Future Collector RoadConnection to North Britannia


Figure 29 – Transportation Strategies&

South Britannia Beach - Transportation StrategyExhibit 3

Traffic Roundaboutor Upgraded Intersection(add 2nd lane southbound)at Copper Drive by 2025

Pedestrian/CyclistMulti-use Path bywith Phases 1-2development

Existing Main Street intersectionto remain as is for Phases 1-2development to Year 2020.

Upgrade to traffic roundabout ortraffic signal control with 2nd lanenorthbound with Phase 2 developmentby Year 2025

Possible FuturePedestrian / CyclistOverpass aboveHighway 99

Pedestrian / CyclistOverpass aboveHighway 99 withPhases 1-2 developmentby Year 2020

Pedestrian / CyclistAt-Grade Rail Crossingwith Phases 1-2 developmentby Year 2020

New Right-Turn Entry/ExitAccess for SouthboundHighway 99 for Phase 3development by 2025

Existing Underpassbelow Highway 99to Remain forPhase 3 development

Possible InterchangeLocation for FutureHighway 99 Bypass

Possible Alignmentfor Future Highway 99 Bypass

Possible Future Collector RoadConnection to North Britannia



peak period, and 480 vehicles per hour for the Sunday afternoon pe-

riod. This level of traffic amounts to, on average, between eight to ten

vehicles per minute.

For the build out condition of the South Britannia Beach Master Plan,

the anticipated development traffic is 585 vehicles per hour during

the weekday morning peak period, 745 vehicles per hour during the

weekday afternoon peak period, and 595 vehicles per hour during

the Sunday afternoon peak period. This level of traffic amounts to on

average between 10 to 12 vehicles per minute.

Based on observations of existing residential traffic trip distribution

for the North Britannia Beach area, the new development traffic gen-

erated by the South Britannia Beach area is anticipated to be evenly

split north and south along the Highway 99 corridor (i.e. between five

to six vehicles per minute added to Highway 99 both north and south

of Britannia Beach). In addition to the traffic generated by the South

Britannia Beach area, the traffic analysis accounts for general traffic

growth along the Sea-to-Sky Corridor with an assumed 1.8% per year

compound growth factor (as per MOTI direction).

HIGHWAY 99 ACCESS STRATEGY

Phases 1-2 (by 2016 – 2026)

For the initial development phase of South Britannia Beach with up to

500 residential units, the existing highway access intersection to the

former gravel extraction area (Britannia Meadows neighbourhood) will

operate as the single point of vehicle access to South Britannia Beach.

The team’s analysis confirms that there will be sufficient capacity at

this existing intersection to accommodate Phases 1-2 development up

to the year 2026. The westbound left-turn to southbound Highway 99

is the pressured traffic movement; however, the upstream traffic sig-

nal at Copper Drive creates regular gaps in the southbound highway

traffic flow, which will serve to lessen delays for the left-turn traffic to

acceptable levels.

The Copper Drive intersection to North Britannia Beach already re-

quires a second southbound lane to provide additional capacity for

the weekend afternoon peak traffic returning to the Metro Vancouver

Region from Squamish and Whistler. With existing physical constraints

on both sides of the highway just south of the Copper Drive intersection

(BC Mining Museum and rock bluffs along the east side and the CN

Rail tracks along the west side), a second southbound lane through

the intersection would necessarily have to taper back to a single lane

just south of the intersection, and as such provide only limited benefit.

Through this near term condition over the next five years to the year

2020 the “end of weekend” southbound congestion at the Copper Drive

intersection will persist and become marginally more pressured with

continuing increases in highway traffic. This increase would include trips

generated by Phases 1-2 development at South Britannia Beach though

this would amount to only slightly more than one vehicle per minute

on southbound Highway 99 through the Copper Drive intersection.

Phase 3 (by 2026 – 2031)

With the addition of 300 additional residential units in the southern bowl

area next to Minaty Bay as well the commercial and institutional use

development in the lands to the north (tentative), and highway traffic

growth generally to 2031, the highway access requirements will become

more significant. The proposed highway access to accommodate the

completion of Phase 3 development involves the following elements:

• A widening of Highway 99 fronting the South Britannia Beach

area to provide two lanes northbound to match the two lane

southbound configuration in place today;

• An upgrade to the traffic control at the Highway 99/Main Street

intersection to either a traffic roundabout or a traffic signal, and

the addition of a second northbound traffic lane on Highway 99

through the Main Street intersection, tapering back to a single

lane at the north edge of the South Britannia Beach community;

and

• The addition of a right in/out access on southbound Highway 99

at a point approximately 600 metres (1,969 feet) south of the

Main Street intersection where the highway rises up and away

from the CN Rail tracks.

7

SE

RV

ICIN

G


To accommodate continuing increases in Sea-to-Sky Corridor traffic

and to address the already evident congestion at the Highway 99/

Copper Drive intersection at North Britannia Beach, a second south-

bound traffic lane on the highway through this intersection will be re-

quired prior to Phase 3 completion. Analysis indicates that this second

southbound lane is required whether the intersection remains under

traffic signal control or as a traffic roundabout. To achieve a second

southbound highway traffic lane continuous between the Copper Drive

intersection and the Main Street intersection will likely require a west-

ward shift of the CN Rail tracks along the west side of the highway.

Phases 4-5 (by 2031 – 2036)

The future Phases 4-5 at South Britannia Beach require no additional

highway access beyond those described above for Phase 3. What is

proposed with the Phases 4-5 development on the upper lands above

the north bowl area at South Britannia Beach is a collector road con-

nection to the upper area road network of North Britannia Beach. This

new route is not anticipated to carry any significant volume of traffic

but does provide a more localized street connection between the North

and South Britannia Beach areas and an alternative route for vehicle

traffic through the community in the event of any temporary closure

of Highway 99. Access to the tourist commercial area in Minaty Bay

will require formal approval from CN Rail.

RAIL CROSSINGS

The existing at-grade rail crossing for vehicle access to the Warehouse

Point waterfront lands opposite North Britannia Beach will be main-

tained with access via right-turn entry/exit from southbound Highway

99 just south of the Copper Drive intersection.

For the South Britannia Beach development, an at-grade pedestri-

an crossing is contemplated for the Minaty Bay area connecting to a

planned trail system within the Minaty Regional Park lands and to the

north along the Howe Sound waterfront. A grade separated pedestrian

overpass above Highway 99 and the rail tracks is planned in the vicinity of

Thistle Creek as part of Phases 1-2. This overpass will provide convenient

pedestrian access linking to the Howe Sound waterfront trail system and

provides an opportunity for a looped pedestrian/cyclist route using the

Minaty Bay at-grade pedestrian/cyclist rail crossing described above.

PEDESTRIAN / CYCLIST FACILITIES

The South Britannia Beach community will be developed with street

designs intended to encourage walking and biking trips. The relatively

level terrain of much of the development lands making up the South Bri-

tannia Beach area is highly advantageous for pedestrians and cyclists.

A major feature of Phases 1-2 at South Britannia Beach will be a sepa-

rated pedestrian/cyclist multi-use trail connecting the North and South

Britannia Beach areas and running along the east side of Highway 99.

The pedestrian/cyclist overpass above Highway 99 at Thistle Creek

as described above, together with the proposed pedestrian/cyclist

at-grade rail crossing at Minaty Bay, will connect to an array of trails

contemplated for Minaty Bay Regional Park and along the Howe Sound

waterfront.

TRANSIT SERVICE

The establishment of a public transit service along the Sea-to-Sky

Corridor linking Squamish and Metro Vancouver and the communities

in between is clearly very desirable, though may not take hold for a

number of years. In the interim, Taicheng is prepared to consider the

implementation of a private shuttle/transit service to connect to the

TransLink regional bus services at Horseshoe Bay in West Vancouver

and to Squamish.

The South Britannia Beach Master Plan does contemplate a future

transit hub in the vicinity of Main Street just in from the Highway 99

intersection. The transit hub would likely involve on-street bus loading

and unloading bays as well as space for bus layovers if required.


7.3 Water Servicing

WATER SOURCE

KWL examined the following water supply options: surface water (local

creeks and Britannia Creek), fresh water from wells and brackish water

from over-pumped wells. Fresh water from wells is the selected option

after long term fresh water well testing proved to provide sufficient

water quantity and acceptable water quality.

Piteau Associates were retained by Taicheng to carry out investigations

for groundwater supply. Two test well drilled into the alluvial and gla-

ciomarine fan near Thistle Creek are estimated to provide a firm dry

season fresh water supply of 46.6 L/s over a period of 100 days with

little risk of saltwater intrusion.

The groundwater is of the calcium-carbonate type, slightly acidic

and very low in dissolved minerals. Concentrations of all chemical pa-

rameters tested were less than the Guidelines for Canadian Drinking

Water Quality (GCDWQ) and there were no detectable concentrations

of hydrocarbons or herbicides associated with potential sources of

contamination.

Groundwater at risk of containing pathogens (GARP) is defined as a

groundwater supply that is likely to be contaminated by any source of

pathogens (anthropogenic or natural), or disease causing organisms.

In accordance with Section 5(2) of the B.C. Drinking Water Protection

Regulation, a water supply requires disinfection if it poses a significant

threat to public health. Pathogens include various types of bacteria, vi-

ruses, and protozoa (e.g., Giardia and Cryptosporidium), and commonly

originate from human and agricultural waste streams, and surface water.

Sources of pathogens in surface water include animal excrement and

decomposing terrestrial and aquatic organisms. Groundwater that is

under the direct influence of surface water (GWUDI) is groundwater

that is hydraulically connected to surface water, and should be consid-

ered GARP unless hydrogeological evidence indicates that filtration by

the aquifer matrix is sufficient to remove all pathogens. With reference

to the most recent guidance document on the subject (Ministry of

Health, 2013), groundwater from TW1 and TW2 is likely to be consid-

ered GARP and as such requires treatment by two stage disinfection

and possibly also filtration unless it can be demonstrated that filtration

is not required.

The primary risks to the quality of groundwater pumped from TW1 and

TW2 that have been considered during this investigation are intrusion

of saltwater from Howe Sound and pathogens from surface water. Risks

associated with the historic activities at the former Britannia Mine, or

gravel extraction at the Site, are judged to be low based on the absence

of any known impacts to aquifer water quality. The aquifer is unconfined

and vulnerable to contamination from surface sources. While there are

no other industrial or agricultural activities nearby that could lead to

groundwater contamination, spillage of hazardous materials such as

gasoline and chemicals transported via Highway 99 or CN Rail onto the

ground above the aquifer, and/or into Thistle or Daisy creeks, represent

perhaps the greatest hazard. Although the duty to clean up after a

spill occurring on the highway or railway rests with the owner and/or

transporter of the spilled product, it would be prudent to develop spill

response and contingency plans to ensure that protection of ground-

water resources and drinking water are properly taken into account in

the event of a spill in the vicinity of the aquifer.

DEMAND CALCULATIONS

Current SLRD criteria requires a water supply of 1500 L/person/day

(maximum day demand). Squamish criteria is 1000 L/p/da (maximum

day demand) which was accepted in Workshop#7 April 16, 2013, of the

predecessor design, as a starting point for this approval process. KWL

assert in previous studies that the water demand can be realistically

reduced to 450 L/p/da (maximum day demand) using current best

management practices.

Similarly, current SLRD development criteria define residential occu-

pancy rates as: single family residential and duplex = 4 persons per unit;

and multi-family = 3 occupants per unit. As above, SLRD accepted a

reduced occupancy criteria of 2.6 persons/unit for all residential, as a

starting point for this approval process.

7

SE

RV

ICIN

G


The water demand criteria adopted for this development proposal are:

Residential

• A conservative occupancy of 3.1 persons/unit that is subject to fu-

ture adjustment but shall not be less than 2.6 persons/unit, applied

to 1000 residential units.

• Average Day Residential Demand = 600 L/ca/d

• Maximum Day Residential Demand = 1000 L/ca/d

Industrial, commercial and institutional (ICI)

• Britannia Crossing “Community Resource and Learning Centre”. This

facility will include day-care, gym, business resource centre, library

and potential K-3 elementary school, all in one building complex:

floor area 1600m2

• Britannia Crossing Transit/Recycling centre/coop bike repair: 150m2

• Britannia Crossing Fire and Police/Emergency Centre: 500 m2

• Britannia Crossing Municipal Office: 500 m2

• Britannia Crossing Commercial Hub: 1,500 m2 (could expand to

4,200 m2 but not included in demand calculations due to uncer-

tainty)

• Minaty Bay: Boathouse, washrooms, food concession, and wedding

pavilion: 160m2

• Minaty Bay: Future hotel, 100 rooms

• Average day industrial, commercial and institutional (ICI) demand =

0.70 L/s/ha for 2 ha of land area (using usual engineering criteria)

• Maximum day ICI demand = 1.0 L/s/ha for 2 ha of land area

The resulting estimated water demands for 1000 residential units, 4410

m2 of ICI floor area, plus 100 future hotel units, are:

Table 10

Water Demands

Demand Component

Average Day Demand, (L/s)

Maximum Day Demand, (L/s)

Residential 21.5 35.8

ICI 2.0 2.8

Total 23.5 38.6

WATER SUPPLY & TREATMENT

Water supply will consist of multiple wells with total withdrawal limited

to the actual observed maximum daily demand rate but no greater than

the aquifer capacity of 46.6 L/s. The wells are developed in an uncon-

fined aquifer and the water is considered to be under the influence of

surface water, thus requiring treatment. Other parameters meet the

required potability standards.

The BC Drinking Water Treatment Objectives (2012) and Vancouver

Coastal Health authority considers a GARP water source to require the

same level of treatment as surface water which includes filtration and

disinfection, unless water quality data demonstrates compliance with a

four part filtration exclusion criteria in which case it might be possible

to replace the filtration requirement with dual barrier ultra-violet light

plus chlorine disinfection. The existing water quality data appears to

support a filtration exemption.

In summary, the wells will pump raw water to a treatment plant that

provides pH adjustment, UV disinfection and chlorination without fil-

tration if the filtration exemption can be secured. Otherwise, the plant

will also provide filtration.


WATER STORAGE

The lowest pressure zone in North Britannia is serviced by a reservoir

with a top water level of 125m (or ground elevation around 120m)

which provides service from about 95m to 5m elevation. In order to

interconnect the North Britannia and South Britannia water systems

in the future, the new North Britannia reservoir should be built to the

same elevation as the South Britannia system, thus allowing service

up to around 95m elevation in South Britannia. The highest service

elevation in South Britannia is at the end of Soundview at ground

elevation 80m. Appropriate reservoir locations are illustrated on the

water servicing figure.

The total reservoir capacity is the greater of:

1. the Average Day Demand = 2,030 m3

2. or the sum of A+B+C where:

A = fire storage = 150 L/s for 2 hours or 1,080m3

B = equalization storage of 25% of MDD = 0.25 * 3,266 = 834m3

C = emergency storage of 25% of A + B = 479m3

Total = 2,371m3

The required reservoir capacity is therefore 2,393m3.

The proposed reservoir will be partially buried concrete. Two cells are

required for operational purposes to allow for isolation of one cell for

repair and cleaning, even though the development bylaw would allow

a single cell at this size.

The reservoir should be filled by an independent supply main to provide

for chlorine contact time prior to the water reaching the reservoir. Chlo-

rine residual modeling will be carried out during design to determine if

re-chlorination is required at the reservoir, especially during early stages

of development when low water demands can result in long reservoir

residence times that can lead to chlorine residual decay.

DISTRIBUTION

Water will be pumped from the water treatment plant to the reservoir

in a dedicated supply main in order to provide chlorine contact time

and good water flushing through the reservoir. Domestic demand and

fire protection flows will return to the community through a large di-

7

SE

RV

ICIN

G


ameter distribution main that will feed a looped and interconnected

distribution piping network. Water distribution piping will be sized for

the estimated built-out population and a commercial/institutional fire

protection flow of 150 L/s. The attached servicing figure illustrates the

proposed layout of the looped distribution system. The interconnec-

tions to North Britannia will be routed beside the highway within the

pedestrian / bike connection, and along the upper connector road.

The water system will be designed to completely satisfy the require-

ments of the proposed developments on the South Britannia lands,

independently of the North Britannia system, but still allow for inte-

gration of the systems at any time.

WATER SYSTEM INTEGRATION

The existing water system servicing North Britannia was constructed

in 2005 to service the residential development and the existing and

proposed commercial development adjacent to the mining museum.

• The design is based on the SLRD criteria without reduction

(1,500 L/person/d), resulting in a computed maximum day water

demand of 26.1 L/s.

• Six production wells were developed on the north side of the

Britannia Creek between the highway and the Copper Drive

Bridge. The six wells are rated for a total flow of 26.4 L/s and

the wells are considered as “groundwater under the influence of

surface water”.

• These wells pump water to a water treatment building and pump

house located near the well field where it is adjusted for PH,

disinfected with UV and chlorinated.

• The water is then pumped through a dedicated 200 mm diameter

water main to the Britannia North Lower Reservoir (top water

level 125 m) located on Copper Drive on the south side of

Britannia Creek. The Lower Reservoir services the North Britannia

from about elevation 95 m to sea level through two pressure

zones (Zones 1 and 2). A pressure reducing station on Rainbow

Lane near the Upper Crescent cul-de-sac services Zone 1, the low

pressure zone. The zones are supplied by a 250 mm water main

from the Lower Reservoir.

• Water is pumped from the Lower Reservoir further up Copper

Drive to the Upper Reservoir (top water level 247 m) through

150 mm and 250 mm water mains. The Upper Reservoir

services the development area from about elevation 217 m to

the 95 m elevation in two pressure zones. A pressure reducing

station on Copper Drive services Zone 3, the lower of the two

zones. Each zone is supplied by a 250 mm water main from the

Upper Reservoir.

It is possible to integrate the lowest pressure zone in North Britannia with

the single pressure zone of South Britannia using a low level water main

connection. This will allow emergency supply redundancy and reservoir

volume sharing that will provide for a more robust system for both parts

of the community. The interconnection can be located in the shared pe-

destrian / bike path that connects the two communities. A second upper

level water connection along the connector road is optional.

References:

1. Groundwater hydrology reports by Piteau Associates dated November 2011, February 2012, November 2012 and March 2013.

2. South Britannia Beach Master Waterworks and Wastewater Plans, Initial and Complete Buildout, Kerr Wood Leidal Associates, June 2013

3. Hydrogeologic Assessment for Groundwater Supply, Britannia South, Britannia Beach, BC – Phase 3, Piteau Associates Engineering Ltd, January 15, 2014.

4. Engineering Servicing for South Britannia Beach, Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd, Final Report, November, 2014.


Figure 30 – Servicing Water

7

SE

RV

ICIN

G


7.4 Wastewater ServicingThe existing North Britannia community is serviced by a gravity collec-

tion system and pumped sewers discharging to a Wastewater Treat-

ment Plant (WWTP) located on the north side of Britannia Creek and

on the east side of Hwy 99. The treated effluent discharges through a

marine outfall into Howe Sound.

The existing treatment plant includes the following components:

• Headworks with coarse screening, fine screening, flow

measurement and flow distribution to the treatment units.

• Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) treatment units.

• Ultraviolet disinfection.

• Piped marine outfall.

• Odor control.

• Biosolids treatment (aerobic digestion, thickening, dewatering

and disposal).

The treatment level of the plant is suitable for marine discharge using

the regulations in force in 2007. It does not conform to current regula-

tions, nor does it provide treatment sufficient for water reuse.

The designed capacities of the existing WWTP are listed below (as

derived from the referenced KWL report):

Table 11

Design capacity of existing WWTP

Component / Criteria

North Britannia

South Britannia TOTAL

Population Equivalent

2042 4000 6042

Outfall Design Flow 11,000 m3/d

Average Dry Weather Flow (ADWF)

715 m3/d 1400 m3/d

2,115 m3/d

The existing WWTP was registered under the provincial Municipal

Sewage Regulation (MSR) in 2007 and its design conforms to the re-

quirements of that registration. The system was sized using the SLRD

subdivision bylaw wastewater flow criteria of 350 L/person/d, which

is a reasonable criteria for systems that do not use water conservation,

but possibly greater than necessary when using water conservation.

The WWTP inlet, treatment system and outfall is sized to handle an

average dry weather flow (ADWF) of 715 m3/d of wastewater from

North Britannia. Space is available for expansion of the plant to treat an

additional ADWF of up to 1,400 m3/d for flows from South Britannia.

Any expansion beyond this flow will require more extensive upgrades.

The current WWTP was designed to accept the flow from both N and

South Britannia. The plant headworks and outfall were built to accept

the anticipated total community flow. The plant power supply and

treatment system were built to accept only the flow from North Britan-

nia with space provided for the addition of treatment units and other

components required to treat flows from South Britannia.


REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

Current provincial and federal wastewater disposal regulations both

apply to sewage discharges from the site and are inconsistent. A

summary of the governing criteria of both are shown in the following

table (from KWL):

Table 12

Britannia WWTP Effluent Quality Requirements

Parameter Effluent Quality

Carbonaceous BOD < 25 mg/L average (BOD5 < 45 mg/L)

Suspended solids <25 mg/L average and not to exceed 45 mg/L

Effluent disinfection

≤200 MPN/100 mL in the effluent based on 30-day geometric mean

Total residual chlorine

<0.02 mg/L average, if chlorine used for effluent disinfection at WWTP

Un-ionized ammonia

<1.25 mg N/L, at 15°C, maximum

Again, we note that the current treatment criteria above require a high-

er standard of treatment than the standard in force when the existing

WWTP was built. This might, subject to clarification, imply a require-

ment to both expand and upgrade the plant in order to accommodate

additional flows.

Connection of South Britannia to the WWTP is the most appropriate

sewage treatment and disposal option and no other options were

explored. Given that portions of the plant were built to accommodate

future flows, we anticipate that latecomer fees will apply in order to

compensate the developer of the North Britannia lands for this excess

capacity.

7

SE

RV

ICIN

G


WASTEWATER CRITERIA AND FLOWS

The wastewater design criteria are determined by the SLRD Subdivision and Development Bylaw and are used to estimate the design flows for

the WWTP. The sanitary sewer design criteria in the SLRD Subdivision and Development Bylaw are:

• Residential Average Daily Dry Weather Flow (AADWF)= 350 L/ca/d = 0.35 m3/ca/d (water conservation would reduce this criteria)

• Commercial and Institutional Average Daily Dry Weather Flow = 40,000 L/ha/d = 40 m3/ha/d

• Dry Weather Flow peaking factor = 80% of Harmon Factor = 2.74

• Infiltration and Inflow (I&I) allowance = 11,200 L/ha/da = 11.2 m3/ha/d

Table 13

Wastewater criteria and flows for South Britannia

Condition CriteriaDesign Value (South Britannia only)

Conservative residential occupancy rate 3.1 persons per unit x 1000 units1 3100 persons

Commercial and Institutional area Commercial = 5467 m2 Tourist Commercial = 16269 m2 Institutional = 6489 m2 TOTAL = 28,225 m2 say 3 ha

3 ha

Average Dry Weather Flow (ADWF) residential: 350 L/c/d commercial / institutional: 40,000 l/ha/d

(3100*350)+(3*40000)=1205000 L/da = 1205 m3/d

Peak Dry Weather Flow (PDWF) ADWF x 0.80 (PF) where Harmon PF = (1+(14/(4+(P/1000)^0.5))) = 3.4

1205 * 0.8 * 3.4 = 3278 m3/d

Land development area Total land use area = 72.3ha less Environmental = 23.2 ha less Park = 9.1

72.3 – 23.2 – 9.1 = 40 ha

Infiltration and Inflow (I&I) 11.2 m3/ha/d 40 ha * 11.2 m3/ha/d = 448 m3/d

Design condition for low flow ADWF 1205 m3/d

Design condition for SBR units PDWF 3278 m3/d

Design condition for hydraulic design of headworks and outfall

PWWF = PDWF + I&I 3726 m3/d

1 2.6 persons per unit for primary family plus allowance of 0.5 persons per unit as safety factor to be confirmed during design


The designed ADWF capacity of the plant allocated to South Britannia

is 1,400 m3/d compared to the estimated flow of 1,205 m3/d. The PDWF

and PWWF capacities of the plant were not reported and must be con-

firmed and accommodated in the design. The designed PWWF capacity

of the outfall is 11,000 m3/da and the estimated flow is 2,350 + 3,726

= 6076 m3/d therefore the outfall capacity of 11,000 m3/d is sufficient.

Figure 31 – Sewage Collection and Pumping

7

SE

RV

ICIN

G


SEWAGE COLLECTION AND PUMPING

The sewage collection system will consist of conventional gravity sew-

ers and pump stations pumping through a force main located parallel

to Highway 99 and discharging into the headworks of the sewage

treatment plant.

Future foreshore developments (if any) at the Docklands, Warehouse

Point and Copper Point can be serviced by individual small lift stations

or building pumps discharging through a common forcemain into the

Central Lift Station.

References:

1. South Britannia Beach Master Waterworks and Wastewater Plans, Initial and Complete Buildout, Kerr Wood Leidal Associates, June 2013

2. Engineering Servicing for South Britannia Beach, Project No. 2957.006-300, Kerr Wood Leidal Associates, November, 2014

7.5 StormwaterThe majority of the proposed development is located on pervious

fluvial outwash sediments on the fan of four small ephemeral creeks.

A portion of the Phase 4 single family area is located above the rock

bluff at the north east part of the site on likely thin soil cover over rock.

DFO REQUIREMENTS

The stormwater generated within the site will discharge to sensitive

fisheries habitat. Therefore, the following Fisheries and Oceans Canada

(DFO) guidelines will guide the design of the drainage systems:

• Urban Stormwater Guidelines; and

• Best Management Practices for Protection of Fish and Fish

Habitat (draft 2001).

A summary of the stormwater guidelines follows:

Volume Reduction: 6-month/24 hour post-development volumes from

impervious areas are not discharged and are infiltrated to ground. If

infiltration is not possible, the rate-of-discharge from volume reduction

Best Management Practices (BMPs) will be equal to the calculated

release rate of an infiltration system.

Water Quality Control: Collect and treat the volume of the 24 hour

precipitation event equaling 90% of the total rainfall from impervious

areas with suitable BMPs. Rate of discharge will not be greater than

required to provide suitable hydraulic retention time as to maximize

the effectiveness of the specific BMP. Remove 80% of Total Suspended

Solids (TSS) and 95% of floatable free oil.

Rate Control or Detention: Post-development flows match the volume,

shape and peak instantaneous rates of pre-development flows for

the following precipitation events: 6-month/24 hour, 2-year/24 hour,

5-year/24 hour.

All three of the above guidelines will be required for the Soundview neigh-

borhood and for the upper areas of the Minaty Bay neighborhood. Deten-

tion and volume reduction will probably not be require for the Meadows

and the lower Minaty Bay neighborhoods, or for the Tourist Commercial

area, where storm water discharges at creek outlets to ocean.


The applicable technologies for stormwater treatment (water quality

control from above) will include the following:

• Source controls (land development practices that reduce the

impact to the environment), for frequently occurring and small

events, including:

o biofiltration,

o minimize impervious surfaces,

o maximize hydraulic disconnects,

o disburse runoff,

o maximize flow path length,

o increase surface roughness,

o promote infiltration, evaporation and transpiration

o slow (detain) flows.

• preserve natural features.

• Constructed wetlands;

• Oil and grit separators;

• Sediment and erosion control during construction;

• Settling and wet detention ponds;

• Operational management such as street sweeping;

• Pollutant removal through physical and biological treatment

processes that occur in the plant and soil complex such

as filtration, decomposition, ion exchange, adsorption and

volatilization.

SLRD REQUIREMENTS

SLRD Bylaw 746 specifies the requirements for the following:

• Minor System – consisting of storm sewers, culverts and channels

to convey up to the 10-year return period event.

• Major System – surface flood paths, swales and roadways to

convey the 100-year return period event.

The guidelines and regulations promote a three tiered approach:

Level 1 – The lowest level is source controls and treatment as described

above that apply to frequent and small events (0.5, 2 and 5-year events)

and that account for the majority of the cumulative impacts.

Level 2 – The next level is the SLRD Minor System requirement for con-

veyance of 10-year events in a manner that avoids flooding of public

areas in order to maintain convenience.

Level 3 – The highest level is the SLRD Major System requirement for

conveyance of 100-year events where inconvenience is permitted but

flood damage is avoided.

LEVEL 1 – SOURCE CONTROL ELEMENTS

The Level 1 elements are the primary means of returning precipitation

to the ground in order to maintain groundwater base flows, which

are important for maintaining stream flows and especially for aquifer

recharge for the water supply wells. The following are examples of

source control elements that will be used for the frequent and small

events (0.5 to 2-year):

7

SE

RV

ICIN

G


Table 14

Source Control Elements

Surface System

Public Areas – town center and commons

• Roof runoff directed to garden areas and infiltrated to ground or directed to infiltration facilities

• Porous paving for rain gardens in pedestrian areas.

• Treat runoff from paved parking and truck loading areas. Cover if possible to divert precipitation.

• Direct runoff to irrigation storage.

• Porous road and parking pavements.

Housing – multi-family, cluster and single family housing

• Topsoil or amended soil applied to pervious areas to store and treat runoff.

• Direct roof runoff to French Drains or rock pits with Major Flows directed to downslope yard. If it is not possible to disconnect roof drains, then direct to infiltration that is part of the road system. Overflow to drainage collection system.

• Direct runoff to irrigation storage.


Major roads • Use catch basins and curb cutouts to direct runoff to off-line treatment and infiltration areas such as rain gardens and underground infiltration or storage.


Minor and local roads • Ditch or swale on both sides of road to detain 6 month rainfall.

• Direct runoff from on-lot French Drains with excess road runoff to infiltration, detention and treatment facility.


Parking lot • Infiltration swales to detain, treat and infiltrate runoff

• Local detention and infiltration facilities to capture 6 month event.

• Porous pavements

Constructed park • Provide topsoil cover and vegetation to maintain infiltration to underlying permeable soils.

Natural area • Preserve and protect

• Ditches beside paths and trails to convey major flows without washing out trails


LEVEL 2 – MINOR SYSTEM ELEMENTS

The minor system will carry 10 year return period runoff flows that

exceed the capacity of the Level 1 source controls, in a manner that

avoids inconvenience to residents. The Minor System typically consists

of a system of high level diversions, catch basins and curb cuts leading

to above ground ditches and underground pipes, that carry the flow to

the same wetlands system described above. Short term detention for

flow attenuation will be provided by the wetland freeboard. Discharge

will be to one of the highway culverts that direct stream flow to Howe

Sound. Although the wetland will provide some treatment (primarily

sedimentation) and infiltration, the contribution is relatively minor when

compared to the Level 1 contribution, due to the short residence time

in the wetland.

LEVEL 3 – MAJOR SYSTEM ELEMENTS

The major system provides emergency overflow of the 100-year re-

turn period flows in order to avoid flooding of property. This is done

by directing flows along roads and lower elevation pathways to a

suitable outlet and raising of buildings to provide freeboard above

the major flow elevation. The major system provides emergency relief

to flooding caused by intense and rare precipitation events, or more

commonly caused by intense warm frontal system rains on previously

frozen ground and snow. There is no pretense of convenience, but only

avoiding property damage or life hazard to the degree possible.

REGIONAL FACILITIES

A central regional stormwater treatment facility is located west of the

Meadows neighborhood bordering Highway 99. This will capture and

treat runoff from the Village Centre that is discharged to the ocean at

the outlet of Thistle Creek. Several neighborhood wetlands might be

included to serve a similar purpose.

References:

1. South Britannia Beach, Concept Stormwater Management Planning, Kerr Wood Leidal, February 2012.


7.6 Flood Protection

STREAM FLOOD HAZARD

The development lands are traversed by four watercourses. There are

no historical flow records for these creeks, therefore KWL undertook

a regional flood analysis to estimate the flows summarized in the fol-

lowing table:

Table 15

Creek Flow Summary

CreekDrainage Area, km2

Mean Annual Flood, m3/s

200 year Instantaneous Peak Flow, m3/s

Gravel 1.0 1.3 9.2

Thistle 2.1 2.5 17

Daisy 3.3 3.7 25

Minaty (NoName)

0.22 0.36 2.5

From Reference 2

Gravel Creek

Gravel Creek is a tributary of Thistle Creek that has been diverted

during gravel mining operations into local road ditches and overland

across the gravel pit floor, feeding a seasonal wetland that has devel-

oped in the gravel pit floor. Overflow from the wetlands joins Thistle

Creek and is conveyed across Hwy 99 through a concrete box culvert.

The creek is totally disturbed and will be re-routed, with restored ri-

parian border, to a more natural location that will assist neighborhood

definition.

Thistle Creek

Thistle Creek drains the steep slopes above the development site, flow-

ing over a steep falls before moving through the fan. The upper part of

Thistle Creek on the fan/gravel pit seems to be occupying its original

7

SE

RV

ICIN

G


channel that is now perched due to adjacent gravel mining. The lower

reach of the creek has been substantially disturbed and rerouted by

gravel mining. The creek is well confined by natural banks and man-

made berms that are well vegetated but will require protection against

erosion. The upper, perched, reach will require re-grading to lower it to

below the proposed development grades as a perched stream poses a

sever flood risk that cannot be practically mitigated. This will require

disruption and reconstruction of the stream bank and riparian margins

that will require additional study and negotiation with agencies. The

creek flows through a concrete box culvert under Hwy 99 that has

sufficient capacity to convey the flood flows.

Daisy Creek

Daisy Creek has the largest catchment and it has received extensive

study during the Hwy 99 upgrading studies. The creek is subject to

debris floods and flows that are mitigated by a debris catchment and

barrier upstream of its Hwy 99 crossing. In order to further protect

buildings from debris run-out, Thurber provided the following alter-

native recommendations:

• Provide residential units in the Minaty neighborhood, that might

be in the path of debris run-out, with a concrete foundation wall

to 1m above the ground level on the uphill side; or

• Increase the ground level around each building by 1 m above the

surrounding ground level, leaving the ground between and uphill

of each building low to allow flood water and /or debris to bypass

the building; or

• Increase the storage volume of the debris catchment above

Highway 99, although the current volume (25,000 m³) exceeds

the design debris flow magnitude of 17,500 m³. Negotiations

with MoTI would have to be carried out.

The creek downstream of Hwy 99 has been partially altered in the past,

likely to protect the historical mining community that lived in this area.

Areas upstream of the highway crossing tunnel are poorly confined and

potentially subject to overflow, thus requiring flood protection works.

The creek flows under a bridge near the tunnel, a bridge under the

railway and then exits to the ocean through a concrete box culvert. The

tunnel bridge will require replacement to suit development. The railway

bridge has inadequate capacity due to sedimentation that might be

mitigated by a clearing regime or alternatively by bridge replacement.

The culvert at the foreshore no longer serves a useful purpose and

should be removed to allow for fish passage.

Minaty Creek

Minaty Creek has a small catchment area draining the southern portion

of the site in the Minaty Neighborhood. The exact route of the creek is

in question due to inaccurate topographic mapping because of dense

tree cover. The creek has lower environmental values than the others

due to the small catchment size and will be re-routed with restored

riparian boundary to provide a more rational development layout.

Flood Protection Plan

The provincial Flood Hazard Area Land Use Management Guidelines,

2004 addresses official community planning, bylaws, development

permits, subdivision approval and other issues in flood prone areas.

Under the guidelines, all streams in the development area are consid-

ered to be “smaller streams” or less. The following recommendations

are based on that document:

1. Daisy Creek overbank flow area – construct berm along left bank

outside of riparian setback area with a berm height based on the

flood hydraulic profile to be determined during design.

2. Crossings – the hydraulic capacity of existing and proposed new

stream crossings will be designed to pass the design flood com-

plete with sedimentation allowance.

3. Flood protection setbacks – the guidelines require buildings to be

a minimum of 15m from the active bank of “smaller streams”.

4. Riparian Area Regulation (RAR) setbacks – either a 30 m setback

or as determined by a detailed environmental survey, as has been

completed and reported earlier. The development master plan uses

a 15m setback for Gravel and Minaty Creeks and a 25m setback for

Thistle and Daisy Creeks, which exceed the recommendations in

the environmental assessment.


5. Zoning setbacks – the SLRD requires “principal” and “accessory”

building setbacks of 25m and 15m respectively, which is a more

stringent requirement than the guidelines. Lot dimensions in the

master plan are sufficient to permit a 25m principal building set-

back.

6. Flood Construction Level (FCL) – the FCL is determined by adding

the design flood elevation + sedimentation allowance + freeboard

(usually 0.6m) of streams that can impact the site and is the re-

quired elevation of the underside of a wooden building floor system

or the top of slab of a concrete building slab for habitable buildings.

KWL’s preliminary analysis indicates that the depth of flow can vary

from 0.5m to 1.4m depending on the stream and the location. To

this must be added sediment allowance and freeboard to arrive at

the FCL due to streams. Detailed site grading and channel designs

are required to establish the FCL and design response which can

include: raised site, raised building or dyking of streams.

COASTAL FLOOD HAZARD

The marine flood elevation presented in the 2012 KWL report was based

on information provided in Ausenco Sandwell (2011b) for the Squamish

River Delta, incorporating sea level rise to the Year 2100 time horizon.

The Squamish River Delta is relatively near to the Taicheng Lands:

located about 9 km to the north. The Year 2100 FCL for the Squamish

River Delta presented in Ausenco Sandwell (2011b) is 5.6 m Canadian

Geodetic Datum (CGD) as detailed below:

Table 16

Year 2100 Marine FCL Estimate for Squamish River Delta

Water Level Component Description Estimate1

Tide Higher High Water Large Tide : the average of the highest high waters, one from each of 19 years of predictions

2.05

Storm & wind surge

Estimated 1:500 year storm surge plus allowance for local wind set. Return period based on consideration of extensive foreshore development in downtown Squamish, industrial development and high ecological value. A lower return period could be justified for Britannia due to lower density of development, though the resulting reduction in water height is minor and therefore not used.

1.30

Sea level rise Estimate of sea level rise year 2100 and requiring further analysis

1.0

Wave runup on beach

Allowance for wave runup on natural gravel-pebble beach, which is not representative of the development site but is used lacking better data and is likely to be conservative.

0.65

Freeboard Standard allowance applied to either stream or coastal flood hazard

0.60

Total Marine FCL, elevation in m CGD

Underside of wood floor structure or top of slab of habitable building or floor. Alternatively, top of protective dyke.

5.60

1 Subject to change by regulation and further studies

7

SE

RV

ICIN

G


Figure 32 – Marine Flood Protection

7

SE

RV

ICIN

G


The following figure illustrates the extent of the marine flood boundary

together with the location of the proposed coastal flood protection

dyke constructed to a top elevation of 5.6 m. The dyke would serve

both flood protection, and as a visual and sound barrier to the highway

traffic. The main entrance into the site will have to be raised to act

as a dyke, which is easily accomplished by ramping up the entrance

road. The dyke extends along the right bank of Thistle Creek until it

meets the flood boundary. Gravel Creek and the constructed wetland

will drain into Thistle Creek through a flood box that will be manually

closed during high coastal water levels. Future studies will confirm if

the wetland has sufficient capacity to store the flow from Gravel Ck

during the peak marine flood event (a duration of a few hours during

the peak of a tide cycle), or if a fixed or portable pump will be required

to pump the accumulated stream flow to discharge.

The FCL for the improvements at Minaty Bay would be 5.60 m, includ-

ing the park buildings and future tourist/commercial developments.

Note that the flood construction level of the dyke, and any development

not protected by the dyke, is 5.60 m. The flood construction level inside

of the dyke would be 4.35 m, which is the full flood construction level

less freeboard and less wave run-up.

References:

1. Village at Britannia Beach, Interim Geotechnical Assessment, Thurber Engineering Ltd., February 15, 1012

2. South Britannia Beach, Concept Flood and Foreshore Protection, File 2957.001-300, Technical Memorandum by Kerr Wood Leidal Associates Ltd., March 5, 2012


7.7 ElectricityBC Hydro is responsible for the power system planning, design and in-

stallation, with construction of associated civil works the responsibility

of the Developer. The electrical load for system design is estimated on

the basis of building types and projected energy uses.

BC Hydro transmission lines run along the eastern boundary of the

development area. North Britannia is serviced from a sub-station above

the mine building on the north boundary of the development area. The

sub-station will require upgrading and costs and details are subject to

negotiation with BC Hydro.

The electrical distribution system will be constructed underground in

the boulevard behind the curb line or in the road shoulder in the public

road right-of-way. Major structures such as pull boxes, transformers and

switching kiosks will be located in boulevards with protection provided

from snow removal equipment.

References:

1. Engineering Servicing for South Britannia Beach, Project No. 2957.006-300, Kerr Wood Leidal Associates, June 2014


7.8 Natural GasNatural gas system design and installation is the responsibility of

FortisBC. There is currently no natural gas supply near the site and

preliminary discussions indicated that the system could be extended to

Britannia but at substantial cost to the developer due to the extended

time frame required to sell the properties and therefore recoup the

infrastructure investment. Further discussions will be carried out to

determine if the cost can be absorbed by the project. The fall-back

position is to use electricity for heating combined with high efficiency

building envelopes and appliances in order reduce energy use and cost

to the building owners.

7.9 TelecommunicationsBell Canada is the telecommunications service provider for the Bri-

tannia community. The developer will be responsible for installation of

the civil works (ducts, vaults, boxes) in the streets and into buildings,

normally in common trench with the underground electrical distribution

system. The utility company will install the wire/fibre.

The cablevision provider is responsible for system planning and design

and is normally responsible for all installation costs, including under-

ground civil works.

7.10 Other Development Considerations

CN RAILWAY

The previous planning exercise included extensive discussions with

CN Railway regarding road and pedestrian crossings of the railway.

The current development plan includes one signalized / gated road

crossing into the Minaty Bay Regional Park with associated at-grade

pedestrian crossing, and one overhead pedestrian crossing of Highway

99 and the railway.

PUBLIC SAFETY

The community will require the usual public safety facilities that will be

integrated with those presently serving North Britannia. Specifically,

the Britannia Beach Volunteer Fire Department must be expanded to

provide fire protection and first responder services. This might also

include an ambulance service.

WILDFIRE

The community is surrounded on three sides by forested land that could

pose a wild fire hazard. The next stage of design will include a wildfire

assessment and mitigation plan.


AP

PE

ND

IX A

P

UB

LIC

EN

GA

GE

ME

NT

SU

MM

AR

Y A

ND

CO

MM

EN

TS

Appendix A: Sustainability Checklist and Evaluation

CRITERIA COMMENT

1.0 BASE INFORMATION

1.1 Indicate if the project is within a RGS-designated future settlement area. If no, then an RGS amendment may be required.

Yes Y

1.2 Anticipated population of development 1,000 units @ 2.6 p/u = 2,600 people NA

1.3 Anticipated population density per developable hectare? 2,600/24.45 = 106.34 persons per hectare NA

1.4 Anticipated price range of units per square foot? $250 – $400 (preliminary estimate only) NA

2.0 OUR UNIQUE NEIGHBOURHOOD AND HOMES

2.1 Is LEED, ASHRAE or NET ZERO certification being pursued for the neighbourhood? If so, describe the type and level of certification

Formal certification is not being proposed. N

2.2 Are the building footprints clustered to minimize sprawl and maximize greenspace?

The Master Plan incorporates a number of housing styles that are clustered to conserve the valuable green space and minimize development footprint.

Y

2.3 Is the development on slopes of less than 40%? Development is limited to areas less than 40% slopes. Y

2.4 Indicate if there are mixed uses proposed

a) Live-work units (indicate the number of units) There are no specific live/work units designated but may be incorporated during a more detailed zoning of the property.

N

b) Commercial (indicate the size in square metres) The commercial floor space will be limited to 1500 m2

unless there is demand for more space.Y

c) Educational (describe) Educational facilities are part of the Master Plan and include a designated site for a learning centre and recreational area. This site will initially support a community facility until there is enough population growth to support an learning centre.

Y


2.5 Does the proposed development include non-market housing (affordable, seniors or other)? If yes:

No N

a) Number of units:

b) As percentage of total units:

c) Form of tenure (e.g. Rental, co-op, owner, secondary suite):

d) Targeted population

e) Total rental units:

2.6 Indicate if housing units are ground-oriented (include total % ground oriented)

The majority (70-80%) of housing units will be ground oriented.

Y

2.7 Indicate if any accessible or adaptive units are available (e.g. With wider door openings, reinforced walls and grab bars in bathrooms, accessible entries, etc.)

No units are included at this point in the process. N

2.8 Walking distance to transit service in metres – percentage of developed area

a) under 200 metres Estimated 20%

b) 200-500 metres 50%

c) 500 + metres 70%

2.9 Within 800 metres (10 minute walk) from (percentage of developed area)

a) neighbourhood store 70% Y

b) a public school 70% Y

c) community services (library, community centre) 70% Y

d) child care facility 70% Y

e) health services (hospital, doctor’s office) 70% Y

f) Other amenities (describe) Connected trail system (100%), toy storage area, community garden, post office, pub, coffee shop, community park (80%).

Y

2.10 Water efficiency measures


AP

PE

ND

IX A

P

UB

LIC

EN

GA

GE

ME

NT

SU

MM

AR

Y A

ND

CO

MM

EN

TS

a) Drought resistant landscaping including xeriscaping, permaculture, etc.

Native plant use and minimum water requirement. Y

b) Use of non-potable or reclaimed water for irrigation Possibility in learning/community resource centre park area.

Y

c) High efficiency irrigation Community park, allotment gardens. Y

d) Water cisterns and rainwater/snowwater collection devices for irrigation

Possibility for a community “Rain Barrel” program to conserve rainwater for home watering of plants.

Y

2.11 Water use reduction measures

a) Low flow/consumption fixtures (e.g. Faucets <6.5L/minute at 415 kPa, showerheads <7.5L/minute at 550 kPa

Should be built in as standard water conservation measures.

Y

b) Stormwater irrigation Rain Barrel program possibility (2.10 d. Above). Y

c) Greywater reuse (e.g. Separate toilet and kitchen sink drains from all other drains to point of exit, install an approved greywater reuse system)

N

d) Dual flush toilets (e.g. At least 2 toilets are dual flush, maximum 6L per flush)

Should be built in as standard water conservation measures.

Y

e) Other

2.12 Energy reduction measures

a) High performance building envelopes Y

b) Passive solar gain Y

c) Net zero energy construction Striving for modified Passivhaus standard proposed for all buildings in order to reduce energy use and enhance comfort.

S

d) Solar shading Y

e) Natural ventilation Partial Y

f) Ground heating or cooling N

g) High efficiency fixtures Y

h) Outdoor lighting with motion detectors Y

i) Other (describe)


2.13 Use and re-use of materials and resources- major building element (floors, walls, roofing, etc.) having >40% salvaged material, or > 3% of materials substituted by salvaged materials

There are no existing materials onsite. N

2.14 Use of environmentally sensitive or recycled materials

a) High volume fly-ash concrete To be determined. N

b) Non-toxic finishing materials Y

c) Use of materials that are certified for recycled content (>10% of flooring or >5% of other materials)

To be determined. N

d) Other (describe)

2.15 Renewable Content – Use of one major renewable material made from plant fibre with less than 10 year rotation (e.g. Straw, bamboo, organic cotton)

N

2.16 Locally Sourced – Use of several major materials (e.g. Exterior walls or floors, windows, doors) and/or systems (e.g. Insulated panels, lighting, heating) produced in B.C.

Y

2.17 Certified Wood – Use of certified sustainably harvested wood for one major structural or finishing application (e.g. Framing, plywood, floors, etc.)

To be determined.

2.18 Enhanced durability of construction materials

a) Wall systems (e.g. Cladding >40 year warranty) Y

b) Roof materials (e.g. >35 year warranty) Y

c) Flooring materials (e.g. >30% of flooring with >10 year warranty)

Y

d) Other (describe)

2.20 Fire Resistance – Roofing is Class A, non-combustible, cladding is BC Fire Smart rated not greater than +1

Y

2.21 Indoor Environmental Quality

a) Low-emitting materials are proposed (paints, carpet, sealants and adhesives)

Y

b) Heat and light control systems are proposed Y


AP

PE

ND

IX A

P

UB

LIC

EN

GA

GE

ME

NT

SU

MM

AR

Y A

ND

CO

MM

EN

TS

c) Natural ventilation systems Natural ventilation was addressed through housing options that are permeable to allow for natural air flow.

Y

d) Daylighting and views are considered Sunlight and views were a main factor in the site’s design and orientation. Where possible, housing units were designed with south facing backyards to maximize light exposure. Slope adaptive housing was also incorporated to ensure that views to the ocean were maintained. Green buffers were integrated to protect and maintain the greenscape and low profile of the area.

Y

e) Will there be any site remediation works (describe as necessary)?

Acid rock remediation on upper slopes. Y

f) Noise reduction measures Sound berms will be placed along the east side of the highway to mitigate noise from highway and railway traffic.

Y

3.0 OUR TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS

3.1 On-site stormwater drainage management

a) Green roof (more than 60% of proposed roofs) N

b) Permeable surfacing (note the percentage of pervious surfaces)

Will try to maximize in all areas. Y

c) On-site detention (as opposed to “pipe and pump”) Detention ponds will be located in the north portion of the site to manage on-site water.

Y

d) Fish or aquatic habitat protection The natural habitats of Gravel, Daisy, Thistle and Minaty creeks will be maintained and enhanced to protect the ecology and wildlife in the area.

Y

e) Roads designed to minimize storm water run-off (permeable shoulders, ditches, swales, etc.)

Rain gardens in residential streets. Y

3.2 On-site wastewater treatment Expanding existing wastewater treatment in the Britannia Beach town site.

N

3.3 Indicate if there will be any site remediation works (describe, as necessary)

Acid rock remediation on upper slopes. Y


3.4 Waste diversion facilities (e.g. On-site waste and recycling, on-site composting)

Located at the community hub (Britannia Crossing). Y

3.5 Renewable energy alternatives

a) Geothermal – Ground source heat pump N

b) Solar PV N

c) Solar thermal hot water N

d) Off-grid N

e) Wind turbines N

f) Grey water heat recovery unit N

g) District Energy (describe the proposed format) N

h) Other (describe)

3.6 Located on a trail or cycling route The site will incorporate formalized trails within the Minaty Bay area and the existing trails of North Britannia Beach that will run through the entire site through a series of connected green paths. The waterfront trail will also enhance active transportation in the area.

Y

3.7 Supports alternative transportation use

a) Secure bicycle storage (for every residential unit) The toy storage that will be incorporated as part of the community benefits package will provide secure bicycle storage.

Y

b) Covered bike racks (for all commercial or industrial uses >500m2)

Covered bike racks will be provided for all commercial uses on the site.

Y

c) Designated parking for van pools and car pools or car share spaces (for projects >3 units)

Car share spaces will be integrated into the commercial areas on the site including at least 3 spaces.

Y

d) Provision of Car Share vehicle(s) (for projects >10 units) N

e) Electric vehicle plug-ins N

f) Provision of a neighbourhood jitney (for projects >100 units)

N


AP

PE

ND

IX A

P

UB

LIC

EN

GA

GE

ME

NT

SU

MM

AR

Y A

ND

CO

MM

EN

TS

g) TDM (transportation demand management) measures (describe):

Transit, care share and shuttle services are being considered for the project.

Y

h) Change rooms (for commercial or industrial uses >800m2) NA

3.8 Streets designed to encourage walking and cycling, while providing for vehicles

Y

a) Paths for cutting through A series of trails throughout the site create a connected walkway/cycleway system.

Y

b) Minimal cul-de-sacs Only one cul-de-sac exists on the site due to engineering constraints.

Y

c) Short block lengths Blocks were designed to be small in size to maximize permeability for pedestrians/bikes.

Y

d) Trees, buffers from roads, benches/rest areas, sidewalks, etc to make street(s) inviting, safe, age-friendly

Streets were designed to include trees, various benches, adequate sidewalk areas, lighting, and careful housing orientation to increase pedestrian safety.

Y

3.9 Traffic and speed controls by design

a) On-street parking Street parking lines both sides of the street throughout the majority of the development.

Y

b) Mini round-abouts None designed to date.

c) Narrower roads Residential streets were designed to have 18 metre right-of-ways to provide a traffic calming effect.

d) Does the project use existing infrastructure and services (e.g. roads, water, sewer, drains, police, fire) without requiring expansion?

The existing services do not provide enough support for the development so expansions are required.

N

4.0 OUR HEALTHY AND THRIVING COMMUNITY

4.1 Indicate if any of the following amenities will be provided:

a) Community garden The community garden will be incorporated into the community central park area.

Y

b) Community greenhouse Community garden. Y


c) Child care facility Y

d) Walking/bike trails (indicate total length of trails) At least 5 kilometres of trails. Y

e) Play areas and tot lots A recreational amenity area located adjacent to the learning centre/community facility will provide a play area for children along with Minaty Bay Regional Park and various neighbourhood pocket parks located throughout the community.

Y

f) Community gathering areas (indicate the total area) 1.48 hectares community resource and learning centre and community park area.

Y

g) Open spaces (indicate the total area) 9.04 ha parks and 23.25 ha environmental (45% of gross site area).

Y

h) Park (indicate total area) 12.48 ha of parks. Y

i) Public Art Y

j) Edible trees and landscaping Y

k) Other amenities (describe) Rehabilitated stream riparian zones, naturalized ponds, kayak and windsurfer boathouse, small sailboat dock, waterfront trail, Minaty Bay Regional Park, and community toy storage.

4.2 Indicate if the following community buildings will be provided and how flexibility/multi-uses will be built-in to ensure changing needs can be accommodated:

a) Community kitchen Possibility in the community resource and learning centre.

Y

b) Community meeting space A community meeting space will be integrated into the learning centre site to provide for a community amenity space.

Y

c) Community workshop for carpentry, etc. Crafts and carpentry will be incorporated into the design of the community facility.

Y

d) Community craft room As above. Y

e) Community storage room A community storage room will be integrated into the community facility.

Y


AP

PE

ND

IX A

P

UB

LIC

EN

GA

GE

ME

NT

SU

MM

AR

Y A

ND

CO

MM

EN

TS

f) Community garden shed A community garden shed will be located adjacent to the community garden for storage.

Y

4.3 Does the project preserve agricultural capability in the area? NA

4.4 Are community members or end-users involved in the planning process?

Community members were involved in the process through a four day design workshop and continue to have input in the planning process.

Y

4.5 Will there be long-term jobs created after the project is complete?

Long term jobs will be created through the community resource and learning centre, home-based businesses and commercial centre development, which will include a grocery store, doctor’s office and other support services. The range of jobs is between 285 and 435.

Y

4.6 If yes, how many long-term jobs will be created? Not determined. Y

4.7 Does the project promote diversification of the local economy? (describe)

Diversification is promoted by providing the community with economic assets that do not already exist within Britannia Beach.

Y

4.8 Are there any other components of economic sustainability that will be advanced by this project? Please describe:

The idea of “Start-Up Britannia” to promote local entrepreneurs.

Y

5.0 RECREATION, LEISURE AND EDUCATION

5.1 Will the project provide for any public education opportunities? (e.g. Training, recreation, entertainment, education, arts/culture)

The learning centre is seen as a life-long learning centre through joint use agreements with the community.

Y

6.0 OUR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

6.1 Floodplain mitigation (a requirement in floodplain areas) Y

6.2 Is the proposal in an environmental development permit area? If not, describe:

Creeks and wetlands on the property. Y

6.3 Was an environmental assessment completed prior to the design work?

Yes, please refer to: Cascade Environmental Report. Y

6.4 Are any of the following environmental features present on the site?


a) Significant trees Y

b) Old Growth trees Y

c) Natural grassland areas N

d) Wetland habitat (and other water bodies: streams, lakes, etc)

Y

e) Riparian areas Y

f) Wildlife (red or blue listed species) Y

g) Wildlife corridors Y

h) Rocky knolls or visible outcrops Y

i) Has the site been previously disturbed? (describe) The site was previously a gravel pit area. Y

6.5 Have preservation or enhancement areas been incorporated in the project? (describe)

Minaty Bay Regional Park has been designated as both an enhancement area and a preservation area to serve the community. The creeks have also been conserved along with their required setback areas.

Y

6.6 Is there a plan in place for the reparation of cut and fill slopes? Y

6.7 Does the cut and fill plan leave enough space for tree buffering of upland slopes in order to preserve visual quality?

Visual quality will be preserved through a series of green buffers to maintain view quality.

Y

6.8 Indicate the percentage of existing trees to be retained on site Site is extensively disturbed and existing trees are alder and other low value pioneer species.

Y

6.9 Indicate the amount of trees to be replaced in square metres Exact area not known. Y

6.10 Are view corridors preserved within the development? View corridors are preserved through slope adaptive housing and green buffers between housing clusters.

Y

6.11 Light pollution mitigation (e.g. Spill over lighting and off-site glare avoidance)

Dark sky policy with full cut-off lighting – direct lighting in all areas.

Y

6.12 Innovation – Is there something else that is unique or interesting about your project that is not included in this checklist that you’d like included? Describe.

The pedestrian and bike orientation of the South Britannia Beach community created by the friendly street and trail system at every door. Multiple options to get around the community without the car.

Y

Y = yes, N=no, S=somewhat, ?=unknown, NA= not applicable

9

AP

PE

ND

IX B

| P

UB

LIC

EN

GA

GE

ME

NT

SU

MM

AR

Y A

ND

CO

MM

EN

TS


Appendix B: Public Engagement Summary and Comments

B1 Workshop Preparation

CONSULTATIONS

Prior to the Design Workshop, the project team met with the Executive

of the Britannia Beach Community Association (BBCA). The purpose

of the meeting was to provide an update of the revised project scope

of the neighbourhood plan, most importantly the goal of keeping

development within the designation of 1000 units stipulated in the

Official Community Plan and the Regional Growth Strategy, and to

hear any concerns and input from the BBCA members. Generally, the

BBCA Executive members were very supportive of the new scope and

of the process, including the upcoming community design workshop.

The project team also met or had phone conversations with staff from

the Resort Municipality of Whistler and the District of Squamish to

provide an update of the revised proposed scope of the neighbour-

hood plan and to inform staff of the planning process, including the

public consultation.

COMMUNICATIONS ABOUT THE WORKSHOP

Letters were sent to 18 stakeholders in the Sea-to-Sky Corridor to

provide them with information on the neighbourhood planning pro-

cess, and to invite them to the Design Workshop. In addition, a letter

was delivered to every household in Britannia Beach inviting resi-

dents to the Workshop. An email was also forwarded by a member

of the BBCA Executive to her email list of 100 residents informing

and inviting recipients of the Workshop. A message was also posted

on the Britannia Beach Community Bulletin Facebook page to invite

residents to the Workshop. The team provided regular email updates

to staff at the Squamish Lillooet Regional District to keep them

apprised of the process.

B2 Workshop ProcessThe Britannia Beach Design Workshop was a four day workshop held

at the Britannia Beach Community Hall Tuesday April 22nd to Friday

April 25th 2014. The purpose of the Design Workshop was to devel-

op a draft Master Plan of the South Britannia Beach neighbourhood

using a collaborative design process and public input cycles. Posters

were displayed on the walls during the whole four days, and people

were encouraged to provide comments on the draft goals and desired

outcomes for the community. Participants wrote comments on sticky

notes, which were then incorporated into the revised goals and desired

outcomes. A summary of the workshop format and the community and

stakeholder engagement is as follows:

TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 2014

The morning of the first day was spent by the project team touring the

site and discussing main design concepts. In the afternoon, the project

team met with the President of the Sea-to-Sky Trail Society to learn

about the plans for the Sea-to-Sky Marine Trail in Howe Sound, and the

Society’s desire to create a camping spot for kayakers at Minaty Bay.

The project team also met with two representatives from School District

#48 to discuss the current schooling needs and services for Britannia

Beach students. Both meetings helped to inform the Master Plan in the

design of the recreational areas and proposed learning centre.

The Macdonald Development Corporation representative also came into

the Workshop to provide an update of their property development plans.

In the evening, a community workshop was held to solicit input on op-

portunities and challenges for Britannia Beach, as well as what the new

neighbourhood could contribute. Approximately 15 people from the

community attended and participated in roundtable discussions. The

key opportunities that were identified were to create a more self-suf-

ficient community comprising both neighbourhoods; to provide more

opportunities to work, play and go to school in the community; to have

public access to the waterfront; and to create a strong connection

and access between the two parts of the community.


WEDNESDAY, APRIL 23, 2014

During the day, the design team refined the four draft concepts they

developed from the site visit on the first day, based on the community

input from the workshop. The concepts were combined into one main

preferred concept, incorporating a community hub that would be easily

accessible by both parts of the community, residential areas, recreation-

al trails, waterfront access, and connections between the two parts of

the community. The Community Hall was open to any member of the

community, and during the day, a couple of people dropped by to ob-

serve what the designers were doing, and to provide additional input.

In the evening, ten people from the community dropped in to get an

update on the process and concept options. The Project Manager pro-

vided a brief, informal presentation on how the concept was derived,

and led a discussion with the participants.

THURSDAY, APRIL 24, 2014

On the third day, the design team continued to refine the concept,

with each member of the team focusing on a major element of the

neighbourhood design (e.g., transportation, housing typologies). Road

widths and right-of-ways were sketched out, and housing mix was

determined. Again, the Community Hall was open to members of the

community to drop in at any time.

In the late afternoon and evening, eight people dropped in to find

out about the plan. The majority of these participants were not able

to attend earlier sessions, but there were a few participants who had

become ‘regulars’ and had dropped in every day. General comments

were supportive of the plan directions, and re-emphasized the need

to think of Britannia Beach as one community, not ‘north’ and ‘south.’

FRIDAY, APRIL 25, 2014

On the final day of the workshop, the designers focused on drawing

the details of the neighbourhood concept plan. The team also focused

on preparing for the community presentation, which would incorpo-

rate the goals of the community into design elements. Posters were

created, and all designs were scanned into electronic format to insert

into a PowerPoint presentation.

35 residents attended the presentation in the evening. The presentation

was very well received, and there was generally very strong support

for the proposed plan, voiced by the participants at the session as well

as from comment sheets.

B3 Public Meeting #1The following comments were recorded during the April 22, 2014 eve-

ning meeting with the community members.

Opportunities

• Rebuild customs house and marina

• Public access beach and park

• Walking/biking path to connect north and south Britannia

• Widen back road or trail to connect north and south

• Eat and sit on the waterfront

• Entrepreneurial opportunities/less commuting

• Jobs

• Waterfront and access to seawall trail

• Community centre

• Shops

• Could support a local school

• Story of a mine/historic gazebo customs house

• Could support daycare

• Artist village (destination stop)

• Plan commercial areas to complement each other

• Connectivity

• Local employment/business

• South Britannia as commercial hub

• Tourist base industries, grocery stores

• Institutional services in S. Britannia

• Pedestrian overpass

• Recreation Centre/Marine Centre

• Railway corridor future trail opportunity

• Young, family-oriented community with kids

• New enthusiasm

• Better mix of ages, more rooted

• Will need school/learning centre and more facilities

9

AP

PE

ND

IX B

| P

UB

LIC

EN

GA

GE

ME

NT

SU

MM

AR

Y A

ND

CO

MM

EN

TS


• Waterfront – maintain natural state; keep public access

• Lots of passion and experience with community development

• Recreational access/park on water

• Development of marina

• Re-aligned highway

• Tunnel access under highway

• Walkway to water where old conveyor belt is

• Commuter rail (shared? partner with First Nations?) to Mt Currie

• Destination area (waterfront) – how not to conflict

• Natural

• Recreational

• Howe Sound communities work together to create cohesive plan

for Howe Sound

• Independent power project on one of creeks

• Geothermal energy from effluent

• Higher density to create more open space

Constraints

• How to access N. Britannia through road choke point?

• Waterfront – crown land contamination, pilings

• Stability of banks unknown

• Rough water summer

• Fire protection

• Highway congestion access

• Railway limits access and joining up

• Parking in N. Britannia to access amenities

• Ministry of mines

• Highway access

• North and South access

• Waterfront access

• Highway right of way

• Noise/sound issues

• Railway access (safety)

• A pedestrian/bike access (cost of land for residents to cross

access points)

• Increase taxes

• Flood plan/stabilize soil

• Access to waterfront for marina

• Safety/access past highway

• Highway – needs to be re-aligned and increased in capacity –

impacts on businesses

• LNG plant in Howe Sound (impact on tourism/destination)

• Drinking water?

• Jobs (lack of)

What is Missing?

• School (shared facility)

• Recreation Centre

• Pub/restaurants

• Gas station (small)

• Civic hub (medical, library, ambulance station)

• Connection between south, north and waterfront

• Bus service

• Public restrooms

• Marina upgrade

• Access to beach/bay

• Trail network (formalized)

• Children’s playground and sports fields

• Public art (voted by community)

• Theatre

• Indoor civic art space

• Multi-use entertainment space

• Flood protection

• Debris flow protection

• Culture and history (S. Britannia built on gravel pit)

• Need to build on history that exists

• Small town element

• Infrastructure (water, sewer, etc.)

• Jobs for people to live and work (road, rail and sea access

available)

• School


• Day care

• Grocery store (keep out big box stores and drive-thru’s)

• Good restaurant

• More recreation (more bike trails and hiking)

• Amenities for visitors and residents

• Activities for kids

• Playing field, swimming pool

• Community gardens

• Determine Taicheng’s intentions

• Fill missing pieces (school, civic/medical, recreational, connection,

green space, commercial hub that is community based)

• Bring two communities into one

• Enhance existing community

How Can South Britannia Beach Contribute?

• Don’t do any development at all!

• Develop renewable energy resources/systems

• Cost effective/affordable in longer term

• More environmental

• Electric vehicle charging station

• Town Centre

• Develop amenities in first place, including water treatment plant

• Keep Minaty Bay as parkland

• Land bridge to foreshore/marina

• Public access seawall

• Don’t look like a subdivision

• Industrial heritage continuing in S. Britannia

• Helping support N. Britannia

• Not have houses look same; same uniqueness as N. Britannia

• Nicole’s bakery

• Public space for community events

• Rob’s taco stand

• Support small businesses – no chains

• Right of first refusal for Britannia residents

• Tap into traditions via fire department

• Community-oriented events; expand what we have

• Join community association

• Take part in Easter Egg hunt, longboard competition, fire brigade

garage sale

• Know their neighbour

• Work to keep that small town feel

• History of traditions involve south

• Waterfront hangout

• One cohesive vision

• Shared services

• Recreation

• Opportunity to work in local community

• Galileo as gathering space

• Backcountry recreation vs safety concerns for Ministry of Mines

• Community hub/town centre (sheltered but outdoors)

• Amenities, shops

• Gate blockade to prevent pickup trucks

• Keep enchanted forest behind Opus Dei’s property

• Water access and parks

• Transit to Vancouver, Squamish/Whistler

• Trails up to creek and waterfall

• Dry land marina because rough water

• How/what does Opus Dei contribute?

• Roadway to connect

9

AP

PE

ND

IX B

| P

UB

LIC

EN

GA

GE

ME

NT

SU

MM

AR

Y A

ND

CO

MM

EN

TS


B4 Goals And Desired Outcomes Comments

OUR UNIQUE NEIGHBOURHOOD AND HOMES

• Build the single-family houses in the scale of existing historic

housing at Britannia (not sprawling mansions); cluster duplexes,

townhouses in town square area – no higher than three storeys

• Geothermal energy from ARD effluent being treated by Epcor

1100 homes

• Design ‘industrial’ element into architectural features

• Allow for lots of green canopy in residential

• Can we refer to ‘historic’ and ‘new’ Britannia if we must

distinguish (please not North and South)

• Passive house standards (50 year durable building envelope)

• Is this a gated community?

• What % of units will be strata units?

• South Britannia? I thought would be Britannia (Brenda)

OUR HEALTHY AND THRIVING COMMUNITY

• Design a community cooperative store so that residents are

empowered to support it

• Community garden for townhouse/condo residents

• A community gathering area for yoga, meeting, etc.

• Healthy community requires good paying jobs, small

industry, businesses

OUR TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS

• Whereas Britannia will be a commuter hub, viable commuter

options necessary

• Trails needn’t meet municipal standards initially

• Rail transport FN Mosquito Creek to MtCurry 1st phase

• Nice, long, integrated trail (running, biking)

• Need to include parking strategy for locals and visitors to

businesses

• Existing road from Upper Copper Drive to undeveloped lands

could be a community connection

• Use existing road above Museum for vehicle connectivity

• Use of traffic circles for highway access will better slow through

traffic than signals, while having less impact on flow

• Build residential roads with ‘swale’ drainage rather than curb

and gutter

• Have the thousands of tons of debris and tailing moved to the

Makin Lands from the 1991 flood been remediated?

• Perhaps Highways was involved as it was to be temporary?

OUR RECREATION, LEISURE AND EDUCATION

• English Bay style salt water swimming pool; winter ‘bowl’

alternative uses

• Community is too small to support pool/arena (we already pay

for Squamish)

• Recreation centre (swimming pool, ice rink)

• G.E.P. Productions film studio in Britannia

• Integrate a ‘bowl’ or alternative venue for theatre/shows as part

of Minaty Bay Regional Park

OUR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

• Too steep! Mouth of creek level

• Work with Macdonald Development Corp to build salmon

spawning channels north side Britannia Creek

• Parkland area in Minaty Bay retained in a natural state, not

developed with fancy boardwalks


B5 Comments On Master Plan Presentation (April 25, 2014)• Fire protection needs to be considered

• Upper connection for residents – use road from upper Copper

Drive; existing residents will definitely use it

• Roundabouts would be great

• Housing affordability – what does that mean? What are the

prices?

• The price range for ‘affordability’ is $300-500,000 (according to

a realtor in audience)

• When will the project start?

• How large is the Taicheng property site? Is there going to

be more development in the future after the existing site is

developed?

• How does the ‘south’ connect with the ‘north’? Connecting what’s

missing will create a complete community

• Make it one Britannia; connect the two communities

• Will Britannia become incorporated? Will the southern part be

incorporated?

• What are the specifics proposed for Minaty Bay? Need to

maintain publicly accessible trails

• Britannia Mine Museum – was not indicated on list of partners;

very willing to partner. The Mine owns the properties that connect

the two sections of the community (between north Britannia

and Galileo)

• Accessibility to Minaty Bay very important; need to clean up the

park and maintain the heritage

• Hoping that Minaty Bay Regional Park would be larger than the

proposed 12 acres

• Will there be sufficient drinking water?

Master Plan

South Britannia Beach Master Plan

Documents

Transcript of South Britannia Beach Master Plan