1.

Minutes

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel held on
October 12^th, 2005, be adopted.

CARRIED

It was moved and seconded

That the agenda be varied to hear Item No. 2 after Item 4.

CARRIED

3.

Development Permit DP 04-278285
(Report: October 3^rd, 2005; File No.:  DP 04-278285)   (REDMS No. 1647845)

APPLICANT:

Five and Steveston Development Ltd.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

11511 Steveston Highway

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

To permit the construction of 27 townhouse units at 11511 Steveston Highway on a site zoned “Townhouse District (R2 – 0.6)”; and

2.

To vary the Zoning & Development Bylaw No. 5300 to reduce the front yard setback from 6 m to 1 m for a mailbox and recycling cart enclosure.

Applicant’s Comments

Mr. Tom Yamamoto, Architect, representing the applicant, advised that in order to address the concerns of the neighbourhood, the Official Community Plan bylaw had  been revised to prevent ingress/egress to the site through the rear lane, access to the site was off Steveston Highway.  The buildings in the development were sited to compliment the surrounding development.  A two-storey building height was proposed along site edges and the three storey units would be placed at the entrance to the site to form a gateway into the project. All units had 2 side by side parking stalls.  Extra visitor parking was provided to address neighbourhood concerns. 

Staff Comments

Mr. Holger Burke, Acting Director of Development, advised that the rezoning of this site was a lengthy process.  He stated that the design of the development attempts to respond to neighbourhood concerns.  8 units were easily adaptable for accessibility.  In response to queries from the Panel, Mr. Burke advised that entrance into the complex was right in /right out only and that there was no mid-block pedestrian crossing.

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Yamamoto advised that the façade of the buildings consisted of woodgrain vinyl, wood baten, decorative wood brackets and asphalt roof shingles.

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Ito, Landscape Architect, advised that the play space  in children’s amenity area consisted of peat gravel, the remainder of the surface was grass.

Correspondence

None.

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel Discussion

On behalf of the Panel, Chair congratulated the applicant on doing such a good job responding to the neighbourhood’s concerns.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of 27 townhouse units at 11511 Steveston Highway on a site zoned “Townhouse District (R2 – 0.6)”; and

2.

Vary the Zoning & Development Bylaw No. 5300 to reduce the front yard setback from 6 m to 1 m for a mailbox and recycling cart enclosure.

CARRIED

4.

Development Permit DP 04-287631
(Report: October 4^th, 2005; File No.:  DP 04-287631)   (REDMS No. 1677025)

APPLICANT:

Hancock Bruckner Eng. & Wright Architects

PROPERTY LOCATION:

7371 Westminster Highway

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

To permit the construction of three (3) residential towers with approximately 285 dwelling units and 486 off-street parking spaces in a 3-storey parkade at 7371 Westminster Highway on a site zoned Downtown Commercial District (C7); and

2.

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

a)

Vary the front yard (Westminster Highway) setback for a portion of the south façade of Tower B (architectural fin extensions) from 3.0 m to 2.4 m;

b)

Reduce the manoeuvring aisle width in the parking structure from 7.5 m to
6.7 m;

c)

Increase the small car ratio from 30% to 32%; and

d)

Permit 55 tandem parking spaces.

Applicant’s Comments

Mr. Jim Hancock, representing the applicant, advised that this development consisted of 3 residential towers.  He stated that the variances requested were minor and standard for development of this type.  The setback required on Westminster Highway was for architectural fins to enhance the project.  He noted that the massing of the building was broken to accent vertical elements.

Staff Comments

Mr. Holger Burke, Acting Director of Development advised that staff supported this development permit application.  The variance requested on Westminster Highway was for an architectural fin to provide design articulation,  the manoeuvring aisle variance was one commonly requested, and that Transportation staff supported the variance for more small cars and for tandem parking spaces which would service the parking needs of the larger units in the complex.

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Hancock advised that pedestrians on Westminster Highway would see a water feature, a spa and the front entrances of townhouses when looking into the site.

Correspondence

None.

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel Discussion

The Chair advised that he liked the design of the project.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of three (3) residential towers with approximately 285 dwelling units and 486 off-street parking spaces in a 3-storey parkade at 7371 Westminster Highway on a site zoned Downtown Commercial District (C7); and

2.

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

a)

Vary the front yard (Westminster Highway) setback for a portion of the south façade of Tower B (architectural fin extensions) from 3.0 m to 2.4 m;

b)

Reduce the manoeuvring aisle width in the parking structure from 7.5 m to 6.7 m;

c)

Increase the small car ratio from 30% to 32%; and

d)

Permit 55 tandem parking spaces.

CARRIED

2.

Development Permit DP 03-249328
(Report: October 6^th, 2005 File No.:  DP 03-249328)   (REDMS No. 1435463)

APPLICANT:

Chris Dikeakos Architects Inc.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

8120 Lansdowne Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

To permit the construction of two 16-storey high-rises and a 9-storey mid-rise residential building containing a total of approximately 255 residential dwelling units with 416 parking spaces located in a 2 ½-storey parkade at 8120 Lansdowne Road on a site zoned Downtown Commercial District (C7); and

2.

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

a)

Vary the residents parking from 383 to 365;

b)

Vary the maximum height from 45 m to 47 m;

c)

Vary some of the manoeuvring aisles from 7.5 m to 6.7 m; and

d)

Permit tandem parking for 88 parking spaces.

Applicant’s Comments

Mr. Dikeakos, Architect, representing the applicant, advised that the request for a reduction in parking was done in an effort to move towards lessening the use of vehicles.  The variance in height was made to accommodate the elevator shaft.  The variance in the reduction of the manoeuvring aisles was standard in most municipalities and would help achieve a more compact parkade plan.  The tandem parking variance was requested in order to maximize parking on the site.  He stated that the project would have extensive brickwork at street level to tie in better with the landscape.  The tower would be stepped back to break up the mass.  There was extensive hard and soft landscape between towers as well as trellis work.

Staff Comments

Mr. Burke, Acting Director of Development apologised for not including the elevation drawings in the agenda package.  He stated that the applicant had done a shade study which indicated that shadows would be cast onto the street.

In response to a query from the Chair, Mr. Dikeakos advised that there was a lay by on Lansdowne Road which could be used for a drop off and pick up area.  He also stated that shadowing did not affect residents to the east.

Correspondence

Petition (signed by 70 owners) from the Strata Council of Richmond Towers, 8240, 8246 and 8248 Landsowne Road. (attached as Schedule 1 and forms a part of these minutes)

Gallery Comments

Mr. Lawrence Yu, 8248 Lansdowne Road, #502, on behalf of Strata Council, spoke in opposition to the development.  He stated that if the height variance was granted the tower would be higher than the Richmond Towers.  He also stated that signage for the development of the site had not been erected until recently.  In response to this allegation, Mr. Burke advised that the signage was erected on site but that this may have been inadvertently knocked over since the application has been in process since 2003.

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Dikeakos advised that the height variance was requested to accommodate the elevator shaft.

Panel Discussion

None.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of two 16-storey high-rises and a 9-storey mid-rise residential building containing a total of approximately 255 residential dwelling units with 416 parking spaces located in a 2 ½-storey parkade at 8120 Lansdowne Road on a site zoned Downtown Commercial District (C7); and

2.

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

a)

Vary the residents parking from 383 to 365;

b)

Vary the maximum height from 45 m to 47 m;

c)

Vary some of the manoeuvring aisles from 7.5 m to 6.7 m; and

d)

Permit tandem parking for 88 parking spaces.

CARRIED

5.

Development Permit DP 05-297766
(Report: October 3^rd, 2005 File No.:  DP 05-297766)   (REDMS No. 1623891)

APPLICANT:

TOYU Lansdowne Developments Ltd.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

8280 Lansdowne Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

To permit the construction of a mixed-use commercial and residential complex consisting of a 12-storey building and a 16-storey building containing a total of approximately 182 residential dwelling units, 310 parking stalls and 1,217 m² of commercial space at 8280 Lansdowne Road on a site zoned Downtown Commercial District (C7); and

2.

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

a)

Permit tandem parking for 34 parking stalls; and

b)

Reduce the internal manoeuvring aisle from 7.5 m to 6.7 m.

Applicant’s Comments

Mr. Tom Bell representing the applicant advised that the variance for tandem parking was requested in order to provide adequate parking for the larger units in the development, and noted that the request for manoeuvring aisle reduction was standard.  He stated that the project was of minimalist design to fit the site.

Staff Comments

Mr. Holger Burke, Acting Director of Development, advised that the applicant was aware of Richmond Tower’s concerns.  He stated that staff supported this development permit application and noted that both staff and the applicant had tried to address the concerns of the residents of Richmond Towers.

Correspondence

Petition (signed by 79 owners) from the Strata Council – Richmond Towers, 8240, 8246 and 8248 Lansdowne Road (attached as Schedule 2 and forms a part of these minutes).

David Wong, resident of Richmond Towers (attached as Schedule 3 and forms a part of these minutes).

Gallery Comments

Mr. Lawrence Yu, 8248 Lansdowne Road, #502, representing the Strata Council of Richmond Towers, spoke in opposition to the closeness of this development to the Richmond Towers buildings, the lack of privacy, and the blockage of sunlight this would cause.  He stated that the Strata Council was also concerned that the foundation of their buildings would be affected during the construction phase of this project and noted that the Council would hire a geotechnical engineer to monitor damages during construction. 

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Burke advised that this was a long narrow lot. He stated that the applicant had tried to partner with an adjacent property at 8380 Lansdowne Road but was not successful.  He noted that Richmond Towers was located quite close to the eastern property line and that the applicant had tried to move his buildings as far away from the Towers as possible.  The applicant had designed a lower building for the front of the site in order to address view line concerns.

Mr. Bell advised that the applicant was fully aware of the soil conditions in the City and would hire a geotechnical engineer to monitor the project during its construction phase, and any damage would be the responsibility of the applicant.  In response to a query from the Panel, he stated that the courtyard of the development would be fully landscaped and there would also be landscaping along the edges between Richmond Towers and this development.

Ms. Suzanna Young, 8240 Lansdowne Road, 1202, spoke in opposition to this application, stating her concerns about the buildings being too close, the lack of privacy this would cause, of the construction damage and the noise during construction.

Panel Discussion

Chair stated that to some extent, he understood the concerns of the residents about the closeness of the building, and the loss of sunlight.  He advised that the Panel was impressed with the steps that the applicant had taken to minimize the impact of the development.  Steps such as lowering the building height, as well as, the landscape treatment between the buildings which would be of benefit to Richmond Towers residents.  With respect to the foundations, he noted that  this would be closely monitored by the applicant for problems during construction.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of a mixed-use commercial and residential complex consisting of a 12-storey building and a 16-storey building containing a total of approximately 182 residential dwelling units, 310 parking stalls and 1,217 m² of commercial space at 8280 Lansdowne Road on a site zoned Downtown Commercial District (C7); and

2.

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

a)

Permit tandem parking for 34 parking stalls; and

b)

Reduce the internal manoeuvring aisle from 7.5 m to 6.7 m.

CARRIED

6.

Development Permit DP 05-298454
(Report: October 11^th, 2005 File No.:  DP 05-298454)   (REDMS No. 1542385)

APPLICANT:

Townline Homes

PROPERTY LOCATION:

Eastern portion of 7560 Acheson Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

To permit the construction of four (4) dwelling units on the eastern portion of 7560 Acheson Road on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/28); and

2.

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

a)

Permit 0.9 m building projections into the front yard setback;

b)

Permit 0.4 m fireplace projections into the side yard setbacks;.

c)

Permit 0.6 m building projections into the rear yard setback; and

d)

Permit no provision for visitor parking.

Applicant’s Comments

Mr. Rod Lynde, representing the applicant, stated that the design responded to the concerns of both the neighbourhood and staff.  Each unit had its own private yard.  He advised that Townline Developments had agreed to contribute funds in lieu of amenity space.  He also advised that the variances were consistent with those requested in the city centre.

Staff Comments

Mr. Holger Burke, Acting Director of Development, advised that the lack of visitor parking was unusual, however, a precedent had been set in other duplex developments in the Acheson/Bennett Sub-Area, where no visitor parking had been provided.  He noted that there was street parking on Minoru Boulevard and additional parking at Richmond High School which could potentially be used by visitors.

In response to a query from the Panel, he advised that staff did not encourage parking at the Richmond High School, and that he was not aware of time-sensitive parking on Minoru Boulevard.  He advised that information would be provided on parking on Minoru Boulevard as well as on Acheson Road, when this application was brought to Council for approval.

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Lynde advised that there may be opportunity for visitors to park on the drive aisle, and that the garages were fairly large and there was potential for parking if the garage door was opened.

Correspondence

Mr. Anthony Cowley, 7251 Minoru Boulevard (Schedule 4).

Claire P. Fanning, 7360 Minoru Boulevard, #8 (Schedule 5)

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel Discussion

On behalf of Panel, Chair advised that they liked the design of the project.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of four (4) dwelling units on the eastern portion of 7560 Acheson Road on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/28); and

2.

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

a)

Permit 0.9 m building projections into the front yard setback;

b)

Permit 0.4 m fireplace projections into the side yard setbacks;

c)

Permit 0.6 m building projections into the rear yard setback; and

d)

Permit no provision for visitor parking.

CARRIED

7.

Adjournment

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting be adjourned at 4:25 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 26^th, 2005.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Jeff Day, General Manager, Engineering
and Public Works, Chair

Desiree Wong
Committee Clerk