1.

MINUTES

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel held on
August 10^th, 2005, be adopted.

CARRIED

2.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT DP 04-275373
(Report: July 29^th, 2005 File No.:  DP04-275373)   (REDMS No. 1367673)

APPLICANT:

Gomberoff Bell Lyon Architects

PROPERTY LOCATION:

9171 Ferndale Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

To permit the development of 11 townhouses and a nine-storey apartment over a three-storey parkade, with approximately 137 dwelling units, for a total of 148 dwelling units, on this site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/158) at 9171 Ferndale Road.

Applicant’s Comments

Mr. Julio Gomberoff, introduced the members of his team.  He then advised that: 

·            the site which is situated close to the corner of Westminster Highway and Garden City Road was a challenging one;

·            the development site is not permitted to have vehicle access to Garden City Road so vehicle access to the site is from Ferndale Road;

·            no variances were requested.

Mr. Paul Goodwin, Architect, advised that:

·            the development consisted of a 9-storey mid-rise apartment over a 3-storey parkade;

·            11 townhouses are located adjacent to the private driveway access to Ferndale Road;

·            the building was buffered from the gas station, to the north, by landscaping;

·            material used on the townhouses flanking the entry drive would be the same as that used on the apartment building to create a presence for the entrance of the property;

·            the apartment had a mixture of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units; and

·            a number of landscape areas were provided including an outdoor amenity area that included children play equipment.

Ms. Mary Chan, Landscape Architect, advised that:

·            the greenway on the Garden City Road side of the site was developed as a continuation to the greenway on Garden City Road, and noted that a 3m bicycle path was provided along this area as well;

·            stepped planters would be incorporated into the landscaping along Garden City Road which had been stepped back to deal with this edge and grading; entrances in this area would be treated with decorative columns and gates;

·            a pedestrian walkway from Garden City Road to the main building entrance is located along the south side of the proposed mid-rise apartment;

·            the vehicle entrances along Ferndale Road would be defined with flowering trees;

·            each townhouse had semi private garden space and there was a pedestrian connection from Garden City Road to the units facing Garden City Road;

·            a landscaped amenity area was provided on the second floor of the apartment buildings with a play area and trellis seating; and

·            decorative pavement was incorporated into the entrance to the apartment building to give the appearance of a Plaza.

Staff Comments

Mr. Holger Burke, Acting Director of Development, stated that staff had no concerns with this development and advised that the rezoning of the site had been approved by Council and that there were no concerns from the neighbours at a Public Hearing of this rezoning.

Mr. Burke then indicated a letter raising concerns related to the development had been submitted by Ms. Cynthina Lo and while he had spoken with Ms. Lo regarding her concerns the following information was provided in response to the concerns cited:

·            there was a restrictive covenant registered on this site prohibiting vehicle access to Garden City Road;

·            the proposed development was not required to provide access to 6100 Garden City Road.  The applicant for this development was the property owner of 6100 Garden City Road and was aware the site would not be granted vehicle access to Garden City Road upon redevelopment;

·            that staff had requested the applicant provide a development concept plan for the adjacent lots to the south as part of the site rezoning and that the development concept provided indicated the four adjacent lots to the south could be developed through a land assembly; and

·            access to Garden City Road would be prohibited if the properties to the south were redeveloped so vehicle access would have to be through Ferndale Road.

Correspondence

Ms. Cynthina Lo, Prudential Sussex Realty, representing property owners of 9071, 9131 Ferndale Road and 6120 Garden City Road (attached as Schedule 1 and forms a part of these minutes).

Gallery Comments

Ms. Cynthina Lo, Prudential Sussex Realty, stated that it was unfair that her clients were expected to provide 6100 Garden City Road vehicle access to Ferndale Road if the three properties she represented redeveloped.  She stated access to 6100 Garden City Road should be provided by the proposed development.

Panel Discussion

In response to queries from the Panel, Mr. Gumberoff, Mr. Goodwin and Ms Chan-Yip, advised that:

·         a pedestrian sidewalk was not provided along the private driveway to Ferndale Road although the driveway width and traffic was not anticipated to result in any conflicts.  Mr Gumberoff, further advised that pavement differentiation would be included in the building permit submission to identify a pedestrian area along the driveway;

·         the pedestrian walkway through the site connected to the existing sidewalk along Garden City Road;

·         garbage and recycling facilities were located in the parkade structure and met City guidelines for these type of facilities; and

·         6100 Garden City Road, is owned by the applicant, and could not be efficiently developed independently of the surrounding area due to the existing lot size and setback requirements to Garden City Road.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued that would permit the development of 11 townhouses and a nine-storey apartment over a three-storey parkade, with approximately 137 dwelling units, for a total of 148 dwelling units, on this site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/158) at 9171 Ferndale Road.

CARRIED

3.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT DP 04-287774
(Report: July 26^th, 2005; File No.:  DP 04-287774)   (REDMS No. 1616725)

APPLICANT:

ATI Construction Ltd.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

11100 No. 1 Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

To permit the construction of 17 two-storey townhouse units at 11100 No. 1 Road on a site zoned Townhouse District (R2-0.6); and

2.

To vary the provisions of Bylaw 5300 to locate a mailbox/recycling/signage enclosure along No. 1 Road with a 0 m front yard setback.

Applicant’s Comments

Mr. Yammamoto, representing the applicant, advised that:

·         this was a small development in scale with developments to surrounding the site;

·         he noted that a setback variance was requested for a combined mailbox/recycling area, and that garbage would be picked up at each individual unit; and 

·         the amenity area was a passive amenity space with a seating area.  No children’s play equipment was provided, as there was access to 2 nearby schools with playgrounds. 

Staff Comments

Mr. Holger Burke, Director of Development, advised that staff recommended approval of this project.  The applicant had retained existing trees, and had provided 4 adaptable units.

Correspondence

None.

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel Discussion

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Yammamoto stated that a agreement to plant landscaping with the existing sewer right of way would be obtained, and the individual property owners would be responsible for landscape in the right of way area.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of 17 two-storey townhouse units at 11100 No. 1 Road on a site zoned Townhouse District (R2-0.6); and

2.

Vary the provisions of Bylaw 5300 to locate a mailbox/recycling/signage enclosure along No. 1 Road with a 0 m front yard setback.

CARRIED

4.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT DP 05-290153
(Report: August 2, 2005 File No.:  DP 05-290153)   (REDMS No. 1621079)

(Note:  Correspondence – Owner of 7808 Bennett Road, Richmond)

APPLICANT:

Gurdev S. Lehl

PROPERTY LOCATION:

7831 Bennett Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

To permit the construction of four (4) two-storey detached townhouse units at 7831 Bennett Road on a site zoned “Comprehensive Development District (CD/120)”; and

2.

To vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to reduce the side yard setback from 1.2 m to 0.6 m for garage and fireplace projections.

Applicant’s Comments

Mr. Rod Lynde, representing the applicant, advised that he was available to answer questions.

Staff Comments

Mr. Holger Burke, Acting Director of Development, advised that a letter raising concerns over the application had been submitted and offered the following comments in response to the identified concerns:

·         the applicant has provided 2 visitor parking stalls, which exceeds the number required for the site;

·         the developer was responsible for installing perimeter drainage and there should be no drainage from this site to neighbouring properties;

·         a 1.8 m perimeter fence would be installed along the side property line, while a 1.2 m fence would be installed in the front yard; and

·         the City’s boulevard maintenance bylaw would require the property owners to maintain the boulevard in front of the proposed development. 

Correspondence

Richard and Sue Latham, 7851 Bennett Road, Richmond (attached as Schedule 2 and forms a part of these minutes).

Gallery Comments

Mrs. Sue Latham, 7831 Bennett Road, stated she was concerned about whether a curb would be installed infront of the site and when the curb would be installed.

In response to the query, Mr. Holger Burke advised:

·            that a curb would be installed in front of the site during its building stage.

Panel Discussion

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Lynde advised that there was a 10’ chain link fence and chestnut trees on the park side of the building.  Some landscape planting would be done in the rear yards adjacent to the park area but noted that larger trees were not allowed in the servicing right of way.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of four (4) two-storey detached townhouse units at 7831 Bennett Road on a site zoned “Comprehensive Development District (CD/120)”; and

2.

Vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to reduce the side yard setback from 1.2 m to 0.6 m for garage and fireplace projections

CARRIED

5.

DEVELOPMENT VARIANCE PERMIT DV 05-296470
(Report: August 3^rd, 2005 File No.:  DV 05-296470)   (REDMS No. 1623845)

APPLICANT:

Gertrude Kroke

PROPERTY LOCATION:

8051 Alanmore Place

INTENT OF PERMIT:

To reduce the minimum width requirement of Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area E (R1/E) from 18 m (59.055 ft.) to 14.846 m (48.7 ft.) for the proposed westerly lot (“Parcel A”) only in order to permit a two (2) lot single-family residential subdivision.

Applicant’s Comments

None.

Staff Comments

None.

Correspondence

None.

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel Discussion

None.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Variance Permit be issued for 8051 Alanmore Place which would reduce the minimum width requirement of Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area E (R1/E) from 18 m (59.055 ft.) to 14.846 m (48.7 ft.) for the proposed westerly lot (“Parcel A”) only in order to permit a two (2) lot single-family residential subdivision.

CARRIED

6.

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting be adjourned at 4:10 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, August 24^th, 2005.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Mike Kirk
Chair

Desiree Wong
Committee Clerk