1.

Minutes

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel held on Wednesday, October 13^th, 2004, be adopted.

CARRIED

2.

Development Permit DP 04-272882
(Report: October 20/04 File No.:  DP 04-272882)   (REDMS No. 1344723, 1316620)

APPLICANT:

Peter Yee

PROPERTY LOCATION:

9331 General Currie Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

To permit the construction of four (4) dwelling units at 9331 General Currie Road on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/120).                      

Applicant’s Comments

Mr. Alex Yip, property owner, with the aid of a site plan and other material, provided an update on the revised plan which included additional architectural details on the side elevations, improved access from the garage to the front units, and a professional landscape plan.

Staff Comments

The Development Co-ordinator, Holger Burke said that staff were satisfied with the revisions made to the proposed plan.

Correspondence

None

Gallery Comments

None

Panel Discussion

The Chair said that he appreciated the changes to the project and also the manner in which the issues were addressed.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would permit the construction of four (4) dwelling units at 9331 General Currie Road on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/120).

CARRIED

3.

Development Permit DP 03-253222
(Report: October 4/2004 File No.:  DP 03-253222)   (REDMS No. 1340483, 1319414)

APPLICANT:

Patrick Cotter Architect Inc.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

3251 Chatham Street

INTENT OF PERMIT:

To permit the construction of 105.6 m² (1,137 ft²) commercial space and six (6) dwelling units at 3251 Chatham Street on a site zoned Steveston Commercial (Two-Storey) District (C4).

Applicant’s Comments

Mr. Patrick Cotter, applicant, with the aid of a model and other materials, reviewed the two major changes that had been made to the project in response to the concerns of the Panel:  the opportunity for public on-street parking, and, the addition of a covered entry at the rear to provide access to the commercial unit.  Mr. Cotter also spoke about the change in paving materials, the full stair access to the roof levels, and, the retention of two street trees.

Staff Comments

The Development Co-ordinator, Holger Burke, had no additional comments.

Mr. Cotter responded to questions from the Panel regarding the screen treatment proposed for the west side and the results of the public consultation process undertaken.

Correspondence

None

Gallery Comments

None

Panel Discussion

The Chair said that although the project had been referred back it was a likeable project, with good articulation, detail and materials, and that it provided a good example of what Council was looking for in terms of the new design guidelines developed for Steveston.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would permit the construction of 105.6 m² (1,137 ft²) commercial space and six (6) dwelling units at 3251 Chatham Street on a site zoned Steveston Commercial (Two-Storey) District (C4).

CARRIED

4.

Development Permit DP 03-254303
(Report: September 29/04 File No.:  DP 03-254303)   (REDMS No. 1257989)

APPLICANT:

Chatham Development Ltd.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

3771 Chatham Street

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

To permit the construction of a three-storey building containing 140.4 m² (1,511 ft²) of commercial space at grade and two (2) dwelling units above on a site zoned Steveston Commercial (Three-Storey) District (C5); and

2.

To vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to:

a)

permit two (2) tandem parking spaces; and

b)

permit four (4) small parking spaces.

Applicant’s Comments

Mr. Yoshi Mikamo, of Tom Yamamoto Architect Inc., with the aid of a model and other materials, reviewed in his presentation the project details such as the traditional style proposed; the provision of angled parking to match that of the existing commercial development; the inability to retain existing trees; the private agreement reached with the  adjacent owner which addresses that owner’s concerns; and, the arrangement of the parking.

Staff Comments

The Development Co-ordinator, Holger Burke, said that although the parking off the lane was an unusual layout it had been developed in consultation with Transportation staff in an attempt to maximize the number of spaces on site.

Correspondence

None

Gallery Comments

Mr. Rick Taylor, Minister of the United Church located adjacent to this property, on behalf of the Board of Directors of the Church, said that the Board had reviewed the Development Permit application and had identified two areas of concern:  i)  the rear lane access and the location of the parking at the rear.  Included in this concern were the impacts that could result on the Church parking lot, and on the green space located between the subject property and the Church; and, ii) waste management.  Mr. Taylor noted that garbage containers for the medical building were currently located in the green space owned by the City.

Mr. Erceg noted, in response to Mr. Taylor’s comments, that the lane dedication that currently existed behind the medical centre would be extended for the width of this project, and that the garbage bins would have to be re-located onto the property of the medical building. 

In response to a further comment by the Chair that the visitor and commercial/residential parking spaces should be accessible at all times and not be blocked, Mr. Mikamo used a parking diagram to describe the parking configuration that would be required during loading activity.  He then spoke about the payment that could be offered in lieu of providing sufficient spaces to meet the bylaw requirement.  Mr. Mikamo also spoke about the potential availability of the commercial spaces for residential use during off hours.

Mr. Rocky Sethi, developer, provided a current example of a commercial/residential development on No. 2 Road that has a shared parking agreement.

A brief discussion ensued on the parking configuration and accessibility, during which a suggestion was made that staff should conduct a further review of the parking configuration and the proposed exterior materials for the rear of the building.

Ms. C. De Boeur, 3751 Chatham Street, said that she had written several letters outlining her concerns about the development and that those concerns had mostly been addressed with the exception of pedestrian and public safety for the parking area and its potential overflow.

Mr. Taylor, speaking for the second time, asked if consideration had been given to a full extension of the rear lane to provide access from both directions.

Panel Discussion

As a result of the previous discussion on the need for a further review of the rear parking and the need for independent access to the spaces, the following referral motion was introduced:

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That DP 03-254303be referred to the November 10, 2004 Development Permit Panel meeting in order for staff to:

a)

review the rear parking arrangement and the number of independently accessed stalls that would be required to meet the bylaw requirement; and, 

b)

determine whether a cash in-lieu-of parking payment would be appropriate.

CARRIED

5.

Development Permit DP 04-271790
(Report: September 29/04  File No.:  DP 04-271790)   (REDMS No. 1335202, 1335305)

APPLICANT:

Sohan and Jindo Toor

PROPERTY LOCATION:

6091 No. 5 Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

To permit the construction of a new two-storey single-family home of 1,460 m² (15,712 ft²) at 6091 No. 5 Road on a site designated as an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) and zoned Agricultural District (AG1).

Applicant’s Comments

Mr. J. Toor, the son of the applicants, indicated that he was available for questions.

Staff Comments

The Development Co-ordinator, Holger Burke, indicated that staff had attempted to have the size of the house reduced but that the applicant would not agree.  Mr. Burke then responded to questions pertaining to the covenant that would registered on the site to protect against the removal of vegetation to the west, north and south of the septic field.

Correspondence

Ms. K. Dahri, 6180 No. 5 Road – Schedule 1.

Gallery Comments

None

Panel Discussion

A brief discussion ensued on the wording ‘suite’ during which it was requested that the wording on the plans be amended to more accurately reflect the proposed use.  Further discussion then ensued among Panel members and Mr. Toor about the attempts made to reduce the size of the septic field; the large paved area and the use of permeable pavers; and, the reason for the location of the garages.

The Chair noted that although no variances were required, he was concerned about the fit into the existing area.  He also noted the care that had been taken with planting issues.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued that would permit the construction of a new two-storey single-family home of 1,460 m² (15,712 ft²) at 6091 No. 5 Road on a site designated as an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) and zoned Agricultural District (AG1).

Prior to the question being called direction was given to staff to amend the wording ‘nanny suite’ as contained in the plans.

The question was then called and it was CARRIED.

6.

Development Permit DP 04-273839
(Report: October 5/2004  File No.:  DP 04-273839)   (REDMS No. 1339539, 1339892, 1340764)

APPLICANT:

Andrew Terrett Architect

PROPERTY LOCATION:

11800 Cambie Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

To permit renovations and redevelopment of an existing building in order to accommodate a new commercial tenant occupying a total floor area of 1,832 m² (19,722 ft²) at 11800 Cambie Road on a site zoned Community Commercial District (C3); and

2.

To vary provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to:

a)

reduce the front yard setback from 4.5 m (15 ft.) to 2.5 m (8 ft.) for the building façade along Cambie Road; and

b)

permit sign canopies only to project a further 0.6 m (2 ft.) from the building façade into the front yard (north) and side yard (east) setbacks.

Applicant’s Comments

With the aid of elevations and an artists’ rendering, Mr. Andrew Terrett, architect, provided a brief overview of the project. 

Staff Comments

The Development Co-ordinator, Holger Burke, said that the variance for the front yard setback was a result of the required road dedication.  Mr. Burke also said that staff had met with the East Richmond Community Association who, although disappointed in the loss of a grocery store, appeared satisfied with the proposed development.

Discussion then ensued among Panel members and Mr. Terrett about the roof treatment, the presentation of the building to the street; the need to freshen up the streetscape, the addition of bike racks, and, the widening of the driveway to City standard.

Correspondence

Mr. and Mrs. J. Hobson, 11671 Cambie Road – Schedule 2

Mr. J. Lewisch, 11691 Cambie Road – Schedule 3

Gallery Comments

None

Panel Discussion

The Chair suggested that staff work with the applicant on requesting, prior to the application being presented to Council, that the property owner freshen up the existing landscaping.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit renovations and redevelopment of an existing building in order to accommodate a new commercial tenant occupying a total floor area of 1,832 m² (19,722 ft²) at 11800 Cambie Road on a site zoned Community Commercial District (C3); and

2.

Vary provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to:

a)

reduce the front yard setback from 4.5 m (15 ft.) to 2.5 m (8 ft.) for the building façade along Cambie Road.

b)

permit sign canopies only to project a further 0.6 m (2 ft.) from the building façade into the front yard (north) and side yard (east) setbacks.

CARRIED

7.

Adjournment

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting be adjourned at 4:55 p.m.

CARRIED

Certified a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel of the Council of the City of Richmond held on Wednesday, October 27^th, 2004.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Joe Erceg
Chair

Deborah MacLennan
Administrative Assistant