June 13, 2007 - Minutes
|
|
 |
Development Permit Panel
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
|
Time: |
3:30 p.m. |
|
Place: |
Council Chambers |
|
Present: |
Jeff Day, Chair John Irving, Acting General Manager, Planning and Development |
|
The meeting was called to order at 3:39 p.m. | |
|
1. |
Minutes | ||
|
|
It was moved and seconded | ||
|
|
That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel held on Wednesday, May 30, 2007 be adopted. | ||
|
|
|
CARRIED | |
|
2. |
Development Permit 05-316398 | ||||
|
|
APPLICANT: |
Elegant Development Inc |
| ||
|
|
PROPERTY LOCATION: |
7231 No. 2 Road (Formerly 7191, 7211, 7231 and 7251 No. 2 Road) |
| ||
|
|
INTENT OF PERMIT: |
| |||
|
|
1. |
To permit the construction of 26 townhouse units on a site zoned “Townhouse District (R2 – 0.6)”; and | |||
|
|
2. |
To vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw | |||
|
|
|
a) |
Reduce the Side Yard Setback from 3 m to 2.1 m for the front portion of the northeast and southeast buildings. | ||
|
|
|
b) |
Permit 28 tandem parking spaces in 14 townhouse units. | ||
|
|
Applicant’s Comments | |
|
|
Patrick Cotter, of Patrick Cotter Architects highlighted the following details of the proposed project: | |
|
|
§ |
the organization of this 26 unit townhouse development site aligns the entrance to the centre of the site; |
|
|
§ |
the project massing has been developed to respond to the two storey condition of all three sides; |
|
|
§ |
the perimeter of the property has two-storey units with three-storey units in the centre along No. 2 Road; |
|
|
§ |
the architectural character is consistent to an Edwardian type “row house”; |
|
|
§ |
the central open amenity space is located at the core of project, and subdivides the site into two relatively equal portions; |
|
|
§ |
the central open amenity space is open with benches, a pathway, and a garbage, and mailbox enclosure; |
|
|
§ |
there are 10 boundary trees to be retained; |
|
|
§ |
additional planting and a six foot solid perimeter fence is proposed; |
|
|
§ |
the proposal includes street trees, sidewalks, and gates to access the units; |
|
|
§ |
adjacent neighbours have been consulted regarding landscaping and interfacing of the sites edge. |
|
|
Staff Comments |
|
|
Jean Lamontagne, Director of Development advised that the requested variance to reduce the side yard setback from 3 m to 2.1 m for the front portion of the northeast and southeast buildings is necessary to accommodate the one-storey interface of the two-storey units at each end of the development, and without the variance, integration of the units would be difficult. |
|
|
Mr. Lamontagne also advised that the project meets all other setback requirements, and integrates well with the neighbourhood. |
|
|
Correspondence |
|
|
|
|
Gallery Comments |
|
|
Nancy Haddix, 7160 Langton Road resides directly behind the proposed project and objects to the removal of a large 40 – 60 year old fir tree, feeling that the tree replacement plans will not provide adequate replacement of green space that will be lost to accommodate this project. |
|
|
Sheryl Dale, 7420 Langton Road disagreed with varying the provisions of the zoning bylaw to reduce the side yard setback from 3 m to 2.1 m, stating that it would position the building closer to her unit. She also disagreed with the three-storey building height. |
|
|
Aden Sokov, 7240 Langton Road questioned the rationale behind the requested variance for reduction of the side yard setback from 3m to 2.1 m, stating that it would have an impact on sound and sunlight for his unit. |
|
|
Adell Collins, 7240 Langton Road spoke against the requested variance to reduce the side yard setback from 3 m to 2.1 m. |
|
|
Panel Discussion | |
|
|
In response to inquiries Mr. Cotter advised that: | |
|
|
§ |
the building is located on the north side and will not impact the sun availability or cast a shadow on the neighbouring townhouse property to the south; |
|
|
§ |
the variance to reduce the side yard setback from 3 m to 2.1 m is necessary as the lower two storey units have a wider footprint than the three-storey units to provide sufficient living space, and accommodate a double-wide garage for each of the two-storey units proposed for the ends of the development; |
|
|
§ |
the length of the one-storey projection into the side yard down the side of the building is approximately 6 m; |
|
|
§ |
to allow light into the end units, there will be two decorative windows, approximately 18 inches squared in size, located symmetrically above eye level; |
|
|
§ |
the large evergreen tree is currently located in a building footprint and must be removed. |
|
|
Staff Comments | |
|
|
In response to queries, Mr. Lamontagne advised that: | |
|
|
§ |
reports provided by the applicant’s arborist were reviewed by the City’s tree preservation staff; |
|
|
§ |
tree removal and replacement proposed for this site is consistent with the guidelines of the City’s tree bylaw; |
|
|
§ |
this project exceeds the required provision of 18 trees by providing 22; |
|
|
§ |
the arterial road policy limits the height for the units at the end of a development to two-storey; |
|
|
§ |
this project exceeds the side yard setback of 1.2 m for single family homes; |
|
|
§ |
these projections were indicated in the report that went forward to the Public Hearing, and no comments were received from the public. |
|
|
Panel Decision | ||
|
|
It was moved and seconded | ||
|
|
That a Development Permit be issued which would: | ||
|
|
1. |
Permit the construction of 26 townhouse units at 7231 No. 2 Road (formerly 7191, 7211, 7231 and 7251 No. 2 Road) on a site zoned “Townhouse District (R2 – 0.6)”; and | |
|
|
2. |
Vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to: | |
|
|
|
a) |
Reduce the Side Yard Setback from 3 m to 2.1 m for the front portion of the northeast and southeast buildings. |
|
|
|
b) |
Permit 28 tandem parking spaces in 14 townhouse units. |
|
|
CARRIED | ||
|
3. |
Development Permit 05-317013 | ||||
|
|
APPLICANT: |
Lawrence Doyle Architect Inc. |
| ||
|
|
PROPERTY LOCATION: |
8200 Corvette Way |
| ||
|
|
INTENT OF PERMIT: |
| |||
|
|
1. |
To permit the construction of a mixed-use commercial residential development with two (2) 16-storey residential high-rise towers totalling 231 units and a 14-storey hotel with 176 rooms on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/173); and | |||
|
|
2. |
To vary the provisions of Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to: | |||
|
|
|
a) |
Vary the maximum height for the residential buildings from 45 m permitted to 47 m (geodetic); and | ||
|
|
|
b) |
Vary the side yard setback to Corvette Way from 6 m required to 5.75 m for a portion of Tower B. | ||
|
|
Applicant’s Comments | |
|
|
With the aid of two models and various artists renderings, Lawrence Doyle of Lawrence Doyle Architects reviewed the project, highlighting the following features: | |
|
|
§ |
the projects consists of two apartment buildings and a hotel to be situated on a new alignment of Corvette Way; |
|
|
§ |
the hotel will include an elaborate amenity building; |
|
|
§ |
parking levels are screened from the street, with one level located under grade and two above grade; |
|
|
§ |
a greenway suitable for bicycle and pedestrian traffic will be built along the west side of the site on a Greater Vancouver Sewer and Drainage District (GVS & DD) right-of-way (ROW); |
|
|
§ |
the drive-through is shared with the neighbouring site; |
|
|
§ |
the landscape scheme includes street trees, ground level planting, and a landscaped deck on the fourth level of the apartment and hotel towers; |
|
|
§ |
a large plaza feature will be constructed at the end of Sea Island Way; |
|
|
§ |
the applicant is proposing to provide new curbs and boulevards along two sides of the site and extending beyond the site to No. 3 Road; |
|
|
§ |
due to the angled nature of the site and GVS & DD trunk line ROW, the building locations for this site had to be shifted, resulting in a request for variance of the side yard setback to Corvette Way from 6 m to 5.75 m; and |
|
|
§ |
an elevator shaft will be projecting approximately two feet above the maximum permitted height, therefore a variance in height from 45 m to 47 m has been requested. |
|
|
Staff Comments |
|
|
Jean Lamontagne advised that the height variance was a result of this application proposing a higher density upon direction from Council, and that the height for this development is still below the maximum allowable height directed by the airport. He further advised that the proposed greenway meets the initiatives and vision of the Park’s Department for that area. |
|
|
Correspondence |
|
|
None. |
|
|
Gallery Comments |
|
|
None. |
|
|
Panel Discussion |
|
|
In response to a query regarding the height of the back doors and trail in relation to the dyke, Mr. Lamontagne advised that the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) will not allow any fill over the utilities at this time, and once development has occurred along the waterfront, the trail will likely be moved. He noted that this application was securing a critical link for bicycle pathways. He also noted that the applicant is providing upgrades to the area including lighting and access to Sea Island. |
|
|
Panel Decision | ||
|
|
It was moved and seconded | ||
|
|
That a Development Permit be issued which would: | ||
|
|
1. |
Permit the construction of a mixed-use commercial residential development with two (2) 16-storey residential high-rise towers totalling 231 units and a 14-storey hotel with 176 rooms on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/173); and | |
|
|
2. |
Vary the provisions of Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to: | |
|
|
|
a) |
Vary the maximum height for the residential buildings from 45 m permitted to 47 m (geodetic); and |
|
|
|
b) |
Vary the side yard setback to Corvette Way from 6 m required to 5.75 m for a portion of Tower B. |
|
|
CARRIED | ||
|
4. |
Development Permit DP 06-349392 | ||||
|
|
APPLICANT: |
Patrick Cotter Architect Inc. |
| ||
|
|
PROPERTY LOCATION: |
7700, 7720, 7740, and 7760 Bridge Street |
| ||
|
|
INTENT OF PERMIT: |
| |||
|
|
1. |
To permit the construction of 32 townhouses on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/128); and | |||
|
|
2. |
To vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to: | |||
|
|
|
a) |
Increase the maximum lot coverage to 43%; | ||
|
|
|
b) |
Reduce the minimum public road setback from Bridge Street from 5 m to 4.3 m for two-storey bay projections; | ||
|
|
|
c) |
Reduce the minimum property lines at a public road setback from Keefer Avenue from 4.57 m to 4 m for two-storey bay projections; and | ||
|
|
|
d) |
Reduce the minimum south side yard setback from 3 m to 2.5 m for two-storey bay projections. | ||
|
|
Applicant’s Comments | |
|
|
With the aid of a model and artists renderings, Patrick Cotter of Patrick Cotter Architects highlighted the following features of the proposed project: | |
|
|
§ |
an additional property was obtained to establish the Keefer Avenue connection from Bridge Street to No. 4 Road. As a result, the applicant is providing a road-way edge along the north edge of the development; |
|
|
§ |
interface of the ring road defines multi-family on the perimeter and single-family in the core. Bridge Street character and guidelines encourage larger estate size homes, with a mix of duplexes and triplexes; |
|
|
§ |
Tudor style architecture was chosen for this development, and the massing of the buildings will keep in context with the surrounding area; |
|
|
§ |
the site organization places the entrance on Keefer Avenue instead of Bridge Street allowing development of a full residential streetscape with trees and a sidewalk along Bridge Street; |
|
|
§ |
requests for variances are a result of the site being dimensionally tight due to the road dedications offered by the applicant. The variances were in keeping with the character of the adjacent Polygon townhouse development; and |
|
|
§ |
materials proposed for the development include brick accents surrounding the entrance areas, a light coloured stucco infill, darker contrasting facia and trim, painted black doors and black asphalt shingles on the roof. The exteriors were asymmetrical no not have the unit divisions read from the street. |
|
|
Staff Comments |
|
|
Jean Lamontagne advised that the architect for this project has worked closely with Planning Department staff in an effort to improve the neighbourhood. The encroachment of the projections was small and the character was consistent with the McLennan South Development Permit Guidelines. |
|
|
Correspondence |
|
|
None. |
|
|
Gallery Comments |
|
|
None. |
|
|
Panel Discussion |
|
|
In answer to a query about the applicant’s agreement to provide payment-in-lieu of indoor amenity space within the proposed project, Mr. Lamontagne advised that the applicant’s contribution would be allocated to fund indoor amenity space provided by the City. |
|
|
Panel Decision | ||
|
|
It was moved and seconded | ||
|
|
That a Development Permit be issued which would: | ||
|
|
1. |
Permit the construction of 32 townhouses at 7700, 7720, 7740, and 7760 Bridge Street on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/128); and | |
|
|
2. |
Vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to: | |
|
|
|
a) |
Increase the maximum lot coverage to 43%; |
|
|
|
b) |
Reduce the minimum public road setback from Bridge Street from 5 m to 4.3 m for two-storey bay projections; |
|
|
|
c) |
Reduce the minimum property lines at a public road setback from Keefer Avenue from 4.57 m to 4 m for two-storey bay projections; and |
|
|
|
d) |
Reduce the minimum south side yard setback from 3 m to 2.5 m for two-storey bay projections. |
|
|
CARRIED | ||
|
5. |
Development Permit DP 06-354860 | ||
|
|
APPLICANT: |
Sharif Senbel |
|
|
|
PROPERTY LOCATION: |
8640 Alexandra Road |
|
|
|
INTENT OF PERMIT: |
| |
|
|
To permit the construction of an approximately 970 m² (10,400 ft²) four-storey addition to an existing hotel on a site zoned “Automobile-Oriented Commercial District (C6)”. | ||
|
|
Applicant’s Comments | |
|
|
With the aid of a model and artist’s renderings, architect, Sharif Senbel, Studio Senbel provided a quick overview of the proposed project, and stated that: | |
|
|
§ |
the 24 room addition was anticipated when the original 50 room hotel was developed, and all preloading has been completed; |
|
|
§ |
parking will be at ground level; |
|
|
§ |
the massing has been stepped down from five-storeys to four-storeys; |
|
|
§ |
building details and colours of the proposed addition are similar to the original phase; |
|
|
§ |
the roof of the proposed addition includes an extensive green roof and there was also permeable surface parking; |
|
|
§ |
in an effort to minimize disruption to the existing hotel and neighbouring businesses, the guest rooms will be pre-fabricated off site and assembled onsite, minimizing the onsite construction time to approximately three weeks. |
|
|
Staff Comments |
|
|
Jean Lamontagne advised that staff worked with the applicant to develop the green roof as per Council’s recent request, and there was also outdoor roof space accessible for patrons of the hotel. |
|
|
With regard to a writer’s concern about increased traffic in the area, Mr. Lamontagne advised that hotel traffic has different peak hours than normal traffic. The project has been reviewed by the Transportation Department, and the current road capacity is sufficient to accommodate the small amount of additional traffic. He indicated that a copy of this letter has been provided to the Transportation Department. |
|
|
Correspondence |
|
|
|
|
Gallery Comments |
|
|
None. |
|
|
Panel Discussion |
|
|
In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Senbel advised that the extensive green roof would have 4 to 6 inches of growing medium and a low carpet of drought resistant planting. |
|
|
Panel Decision |
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
That a Development Permit be issued which would permit the construction of an approximately 970 m² (10,400 ft²) four-storey addition to an existing hotel at 8640 Alexandra Road on a site zoned “Automobile-Oriented Commercial District (C6)”. |
|
|
CARRIED |
|
6. |
Development Permit DP 07-359310 | ||||
|
|
APPLICANT: |
Simon Development Ltd. |
| ||
|
|
PROPERTY LOCATION: |
7791 and 7931 No. 4 Road |
| ||
|
|
INTENT OF PERMIT: |
| |||
|
|
1. |
To permit the construction of 12 townhouse units on a site zoned “Townhouse District (R2 – 0.6)”; and | |||
|
|
2. |
To vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to: | |||
|
|
|
a) |
Reduce the Side Yard Setback to Keefer Avenue from 6 m to 4.3 m and to permit porch projections of a maximum of 1.5 m; | ||
|
|
|
b) |
Permit garbage and recycling enclosures to be located within the Side Yard Setback to Keefer Avenue; and | ||
|
|
|
c) |
Permit 16 tandem parking spaces in eight (8) townhouse units. | ||
|
|
Applicant’s Comments | |
|
|
Taizo Yamamoto, architect, Yamamoto Architecture reviewed the site context and surrounding area, and provided the following comments about the proposed development: | |
|
|
§ |
three existing trees located in the amenity area will be retained; |
|
|
§ |
the requests for variances are a result of the narrow site after road dedication, minimum required foot print for garages, tree retention in the amenity area, and provisions taken for access to the site in anticipation of future development of the lots located to the south; |
|
|
§ |
in response to comments from the Advisory Design Panel, changes have been made to the roof lines to provide clarity, however the model had not been updated to reflect the changes; |
|
|
§ |
materials include hardi-plank siding, vinyl siding, wood trim, and asphalt shake appearance shingles; |
|
|
§ |
one A type unit is convertible to become accessible; |
|
|
§ |
the garbage and recycling is located at the west project entrance away from No. 4 Road in small one-storey roof structures; |
|
|
§ |
the building projects slightly forward to allow for retention of trees in the amenity space. |
|
|
Staff Comments |
|
|
Jean Lamontagne spoke about the variance for the Keefer Avenue setback, stating that it is in line with the neighbouring property also presented to the Panel that day, and allows for an even and proper streetscape. The variance resulting from tree retention, had been presented to Council at Rezoning and the Rezoning was supported by Council, and the variance for 16 tandem parking spaces is a typical request. The provision of tandem parking was being reviewed as a part of the review of the current zoning bylaw. |
|
|
Correspondence |
|
|
None. |
|
|
Gallery Comments |
|
|
None. |
|
|
Panel Discussion |
|
|
In answer to a Panel Member’s query regarding large trees at the east entrance of the site, Masa Ito of Ito and Associate Landscape Architects advised that these trees are used to form an entry sequence, and provide a gateway to the site. The trees are approximately 20 years old, and will be compatible with the development in the long term with a high canopy. |
|
|
Panel Decision | ||
|
|
It was moved and seconded | ||
|
|
That a Development Permit be issued which would: | ||
|
|
1. |
Permit the construction of 12 townhouse units at 7791 and 7931 No. 4 Road on a site zoned “Townhouse District (R2 – 0.6)”; and | |
|
|
2. |
Vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to: | |
|
|
|
a) |
Reduce the Side Yard Setback to Keefer Avenue from 6 m to 4.3 m and to permit porch projections of a maximum of 1.5 m; |
|
|
|
b) |
Permit garbage and recycling enclosures to be located within the Side Yard Setback to Keefer Avenue; and |
|
|
|
c) |
Permit 16 tandem parking spaces in eight (8) townhouse units. |
|
|
CARRIED | ||
|
7. |
Development Permit DP 07-367240 | ||||
|
|
APPLICANT: |
Fairchild Developments Ltd. |
| ||
|
|
PROPERTY LOCATION: |
4000 No. 3 Road |
| ||
|
|
INTENT OF PERMIT: |
| |||
|
|
1. |
To permit the construction of an eight-storey addition to the existing Aberdeen Centre consisting of retail space, approximately 150 room hotel and parking on a site zoned ‘Comprehensive Development District (CD/183)”; and | |||
|
|
2. |
To vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to: | |||
|
|
|
a) |
Vary the Cambie Road setback of the hotel portion of building (third to eighth floors) from 3.0 m to 1.1 m; | ||
|
|
|
b) |
Reduce the parking provision by approximately 7 %; and | ||
|
|
|
c) |
Allow columns encroachment of no greater than 0.15 m into a parking space in the proposed parkade. | ||
|
|
Applicant’s Comments |
|
|
The applicants reviewed the proposed project, and spoke about the integration of the third phase of the Aberdeen centre, the existing structure, and the Canada Line station. The project consists of a combination of hotel and retail, and takes inspiration from the Canada Line. Elements from the train will be reflected in the building, which will also be similar to the existing Aberdeen Centre, using the same colour glass and zinc panelling. |
|
|
Public art consisting of panes of etched glass behind the clear glass façade with a space behind and a painted wall background which could be painted different colours at different times. |
|
|
Staff Comments |
|
|
Jean Lamontagne advised that the proposed project is subject to the same parking standards as the larger phase 1 and meets the transportation guidelines for parking. The applicant has taken initiative to encourage the use of transit by providing $100,000 worth of fare savers to transit users. |
|
|
Correspondence |
|
|
None. |
|
|
Gallery Comments |
|
|
None. |
|
|
Panel Discussion |
|
|
In response to a query regarding the parking variance, the applicant advised that the Canada Line Station will reduce the demand for parking, and the existing parking will be shared between the three components on the site with connections at each floor. An additional underground parking lot will be provided, but will be designated for the hotel and staff. |
|
|
In response to a query about the setback variance on Cambie Road, the applicant advised that the upper floor of the hotel projects beyond the curb line, however, the frontage along Cambie Road will be developed as a lay-by onsite. Mr. Lamontagne provided further advice, stating that a right-of-way will be provided for the lay-by, and the encroachment is above street level, and is within the site. |
|
|
Panel Decision | ||
|
|
It was moved and seconded | ||
|
|
That a Development Permit be issued which would: | ||
|
|
1. |
Permit the construction of an eight-storey addition to the existing Aberdeen Centre consisting of retail space, approximately 150 room hotel and parking on a site zoned ‘Comprehensive Development District (CD/183)”; and | |
|
|
2. |
Vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to: | |
|
|
|
a) |
Vary the Cambie Road setback of the hotel portion of building (third to eighth floors) from 3.0 m to 1.1 m; |
|
|
|
b) |
Reduce the parking provision by approximately 7 %; and |
|
|
|
c) |
Allow columns encroachment of no greater than 0.15 m into a parking space in the proposed parkade. |
|
|
CARRIED | ||
|
8. |
New Business |
|
|
None. |
|
9. |
Date Of Next Meeting: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 |
|
10. |
Adjournment | |
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
|
That the meeting be adjourned at 4:42 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, June 13, 2007. |
|
_________________________________ |
_________________________________ |
|
Jeff Day |
Shanan Dhaliwal |