May 28, 2008 - Minutes


PDF Document Printer-Friendly Minutes

City of Richmond Meeting Minutes

Development Permit Panel

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

 

Time:

3:30 p.m.

Place:

Council Chambers
Richmond City Hall

Present:

Joe Erceg, General Manager, Planning and Development, Chair
Robert Gonzalez, General Manager, Engineering and Public Works
Andrew Nazareth, General Manager, Business and Financial Services

The meeting was called to order at 3:30 p.m.

 


 

1.

Minutes

 

It was moved and seconded

 

That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel held on Wednesday, May 14, 2008, be adopted.

 

 

CARRIED

 

 

2.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 07-389190
(Report: May 1, 2008 File No.:  DP 07-389190)   (REDMS No. 2329646)

 

APPLICANT:

Oval 6 Limited Partnership

 

 

PROPERTY LOCATION:

5111 Hollybridge Way

 

 

INTENT OF PERMIT:

 

 

1.

Permit the development of an approximately (1,502 m2) 16,158 sq. ft. two-storey commercial building over one level of parking at 5111 Hollybridge Way on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD 157); and

 

2.

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

 

 

a)

increase the height from 18 m (59 ft.) geodetic to 20.6 m for a portion of the curved roof  and 23.6 m (77 ft.) for the elevator tower of the proposed building; and

 

 

b)

permit the building to encroach 2.1 m (6.8 ft.) into the north side yard setback.

 

 

Applicant’s Comments

 

James Cheng, architect for the project was in attendance as well as John Ryan, representing the applicant.  Mr. Cheng advised that the project was located close to the corner of the Oval building, and was part of the master plan. He explained that since the original master plan, a birch grove had been created next to the river and there was a continuation of the plaza. Mr. Cheng further advised that an arrival court had been included and the building was located exactly where it was on the master plan, together with a walkway at the back, and the canal had been upgraded. He noted that the building was intended to be seen as transparent from the dyke. Visitors would arrive from the lower road, into a three-storey atrium, and the building would be used originally for marketing, and eventually for a restaurant. He advised that the landscaping was naturalistic. Mr. Cheng then used a three dimensional computer graphic to further describe the building and he noted that the glass foyer was incorporated to allow people to see into the building.

 

Staff Comments

 

Brian Jackson, Director of Development stated that staff were recommending in favour of a development permit being issued and were also recommending approval of the variances.  He advised that there was a follow-up report from staff describing a change to the design to eliminate the public art from the roof which lessened the previous elevator tower height variance. The requested variance was to increase the height from 18 m. to 20.6 m. for a portion of the curved roof and to 23.6 m. for the elevator tower instead of the previously 31 m. 

 

Panel Discussion

 

In response to a question from the Panel on how trucks would make deliveries to a future restaurant in the building, Mr. Cheng advised that trucks would arrive from River Road to a loading bay located beneath the building where there was also a garbage holding area. This services area was fully enclosed within the building with large opening doors.

 

In response to further questions from the Panel on the finishes used on the building and the area adjacent to the river, Mr. Cheng described a water feature which would include a pond and a small waterfall.  There would be granite pavers on the plaza as well as coloured concrete. He noted that the same materials used in the landscaping for the Oval were being used on this site.  He stated that there was a “green” roof with a public viewing area, and that the building would be low maintenance, with a zinc roof, and anodized aluminium windows.

 

In response to a question from Chair on the connection to the water feature at the Oval, Mr. Cheng advised that because of seismic considerations it was a stand-alone feature. Mr. Cheng continued by saying that cobblestones had been used in the parking area to allow water to drain away.

 

 

Referring to the public art, he advised that although originally included in the design on the top of the building, it had been eliminated because it was felt that it would detract from the two spectacular public art features that were being incorporated into the adjacent Oval landscaping but that public art would be included elsewhere on the site and this feature would be included in a future overall public art and sustainability proposal for the future phases.

 

 

Correspondence

 

None.

 

 

Gallery Comments

 

Mr. Kush Panatch, President, Centro Properties Group, 200 – 6791 Elmbridge Way, asked about the timing for construction of the building, and Mr. Cheng advised that it was hoped to be completed by spring of next year. In response to a question from the Chair about security during the Olympic Games, Mr. Ryan explained that the applicant was obligated by its agreement with the City to close the building during the 4 months shutdown as part of secure zone of the Oval but were in discussions about the potential for part of the building to be used as part of the secure zone. He confirmed that after the Olympic Games, the building would continue to be used as a marketing centre and ultimately renovated in the future to restaurant use.

 

 

Panel Discussion

 

The Chair stated that there was a very complimentary staff report on the proposal, and that he was personally happy with the proposal.

 

 

Panel Decision

 

It was moved and seconded

 

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

 

1.

Permit the development of an approximately (1,502 m2) 16,158 sq. ft. two-storey commercial building over one level of parking at 5111 Hollybridge Way on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD 157); and

 

2.

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

 

 

a)

increase the height from 18 m (59 ft.) geodetic to 20.6 m for a portion of the curved roof  and 23.6 m for the elevator tower of the proposed building, and 31.0 m (101.7 ft.) to the top of the proposed public art piece; and

 

 

b)

permit the building to encroach 2.1 m (6.8 ft.) into the north side yard setback.

 

CARRIED

 

3.

Adjournment

 

It was moved and seconded

 

 

That the meeting be adjourned at 3.44 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, May 28, 2008.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Joe Erceg
Chair

Valerie Wilmot

Executive Assistant to the General Manager, Corporate Services