1.

Minutes

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel held on Wednesday, August 26, 2009, be adopted.

CARRIED

The Chair announced that Item 4 – Development Permit 09-463340 (Applicant: Matthew Cheng Architect Inc.; Property Location: 7531 No. 4 Road) was deleted from the agenda.

2.

Development Permit 08-431155
(File Ref. No.:  DP 08-431155)   (REDMS No. 2590959)

APPLICANT:

Oris Development (Cambie) Corp.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

9420, 9460 and 9480 Cambie Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

That a Development Permit be issued which would permit the construction of a mixed-use development including approximately 193 dwelling units in three (3) four storey buildings, as well as approximately 166 m² (1,788.1 ft²) of commercial space and 175.3 m² (1,886 ft²) of indoor amenity space at 9420, 9460 and 9480 Cambie Road on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/196).

Applicant’s Comments

Dana Westermark of Oris Development (Cambie) Corp., accompanied by Architect Patrick Cotter, addressed the Panel and provided the following details regarding the proposed mixed-use development that includes 193 residential units, a central courtyard, commercial space and an indoor amenity building:

§          

the proposed development at 9420, 9460 and 9480 Cambie Road is intended to work in tandem, and to integrate with, the urban design features of the proposed development to the west, across Stolberg Street (Cambie I);

§          

the driveway access to the subject site’s central courtyard area, as well as some amenities on the site, interconnect with Cambie I; the Cambie I development provides the subject development required affordable housing units and a daycare facility;

§          

the central courtyard which organizes the proposed development site plan, includes the indoor amenity space and a small commercial unit; and

§          

the 193 residential units in the development, plus 251 units at Cambie I, total 444 residential units between the two sites, including 22 affordable housing units.

Mr. Cotter described the proposed development and highlighted the following features:

§          

the placement of the building relative to the surrounding streets;

§          

consolidation of all open space to the centre of the proposed development to act as a focal point;

§          

all amenity components, such as the commercial building and amenity buildings, have been isolated as jewel design items;

§          

the Cambie I development includes three six-storey residential buildings, while the subject site includes three four-storey residential buildings which: (i) step down toward  future developments to the south, and (ii) provide a substantial setback to the east;

§          

the design achieves an adequate integration/relationship of massing with the Cambie I development across Stolberg Street; and

§          

the key features that distinguish this proposed development from others are:

(i)

the elevation of road grades toward the centre of the development which permit grade level access to the courtyard and to short-term surface parking, providing an attractive connection of open space to the street;

(ii)

units on the lower two floors feature two-storey townhouse units with direct access from the courtyard grade and from the garage below; the third and fourth floors feature single storey condo units;

(iii)

instead of a traditional ‘horseshoe’ design, the apparent mass of the proposed development has been sub-divided into three building components, each with a recessed portion of the wings of the building that  create  key-ways that  insinuate the separation of the three wings;  and

(iv)

the architectural expression relates to, but softens the urban treatment of Cambie I with details such as wood lattice thereby: (i) accommodating scale and expression, and (ii) creating a good connection between the building and the surrounding context and streets.

Staff Comments

Brian J. Jackson, Director of Development, advised that staff supports the application for a Development Permit, and noted that the applicant presented the project to the Advisory Design Panel (ADP) on two occasions. The concept of the development was discussed the first time the applicant presented to the ADP, and the development plans were discussed the second time. Mr. Jackson noted that the applicant had responded well to the ADP’s comments and suggestions, as well as to staff’s input.

In response to a query from the Chair regarding concerns identified during the rezoning process, Mr. Jackson advised that the proposed scheme had satisfactorily addressed the significant urban design issues identified.

Correspondence

None.

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel Discussion

Mr. Westermark, Mr. Cotter and landscape architect Mark VanderZalm advised the following in response to queries from the Panel:

§         

along Cambie Street is a generous amount of private outdoor space for each residential unit, including patio enclosures and planters; repetitive stairs were not brought down to the sidewalk in order to enable more planting and better screening from the busy street; screening is well integrated and provides a balance to provide visual connection with a little separation and screening;

§         

Stolberg Street would rise up to the centre of the site, and there would be steps to transition down in other areas;

§         

the landscape plan includes small to mid-stature flowering trees, planted mostly in the inner courtyard with a soil volume that provides a measure of protection as well as the ability to ensure the trees reach their mature height; 

§         

future adjacent development could include berming along the common property boundary to define a substantial landscaped area between developments and provide depth to planters that would allow for substantial planting;

§         

the trees have been set back from the building’s face to prevent any conflict  with the mature canopy; and

§         

there are no existing trees on the site as it is presently occupied by a paved parking lot.

In response to the Chair’s query regarding whether or not the resident of 9500 Cambie Road, immediately to the east of the development proposal and who had expressed a concern, had communicated further with staff, Mr. Jackson provided the following information:

(i)

the resident had attended the meeting of the Development Permit Panel (DPP) when Cambie I was presented at the November 26, 2008 meeting of the DPP;

(ii)

staff ensured that a notice of the September 16, 2009 DPP meeting had been sent to the resident at both of the mailing addresses the resident had furnished; and

(iii)

the applicant had attempted to directly contact the resident to inform her that the development application was being considered by the DPP on September 16, 2009.

Panel Deliberation

A comment was made that the staff report addresses sustainability-based objectives and that the applicant should be proud of the sustainability components of the project.

The Chair stated that he was pleased to see that concerns regarding the liveability of some of the internalized bedrooms were mitigated by the use of translucent, glazed panels on walls and doors framing the stairs, as well as the use of clerestory windows to bring light into the interior bedrooms.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would permit the construction of a mixed-use development including approximately 193 dwelling units in three (3) four storey buildings, as well as approximately 166 m² (1,788.1 ft²) of commercial space and 175.3 m² (1,886 ft²) of indoor amenity space at 9420, 9460 and 9480 Cambie Road on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/196).

CARRIED

3.

Development Permit 08-445014
(File Ref. No.:  DP 08-445014)   (REDMS No. 2666543)

APPLICANT:

Abbarch Architecture Inc.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

10151 No. 3 Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

That a Development Permit be issued which would permit alteration of a portion of the No. 3 Road façade at the Safeway store and improvements to the pedestrian circulation and landscaping adjacent to No. 3 Road on a site under “Land Use Contract 022 (LUC 022)”. 

Applicant’s Comments

Richard Lewthwaite, Area Real Estate Manager, Canada Safeway Limited introduced Thomas Llewellin of Abbarch Architecture Inc. and Landscape Architect Mary Chan Yip, of DMG landscape architects. Mr. Lewthwaite made the following comments:

§          

Safeway is undertaking a remodel project to renovate the existing store at the Richlea Shopping Centre at the corner of No. 3 Road and Williams Road; and

§          

the remodel includes: (i) a major interior renovation of the facility, (ii) the addition of new elements to the exterior, and (iii) changes to the landscape plan, including the addition of new trees, planting and a new pedestrian connection to No. 3 Road.

Mr. Llewellin added that the renovation refreshed and updated the image of the building by: (i) adding an entry element, and (ii) improving the building’s visibility from the street.

Ms. Yip provided the Panel with the following particulars regarding the proposed landscape design:

§          

the Yew hedge that is currently along No. 3 Road would be replaced with new Yew hedging and street trees to add some colour;

§          

one tree would be removed from the site but replaced with two new trees; and

§          

a new pedestrian path would be introduced in the existing landscaped area at the southeast corner of the site to: (i) connect the No. 3 Road sidewalk with the storefront sidewalk system, and (ii) improve pedestrian safety and circulation.

In response to a query from the Chair, Ms. Yip advised that the parking lot currently features islands with trees, and that the new trees would be placed in the buffer area along the south edge of the site.

Staff Comments

Mr. Jackson advised that the Safeway store at No. 3 and Williams Roads, at that location since the 1960s, is the last Safeway store in Richmond to be renovated and remodelled. He noted that the trees growing in the islands in the parking area are in good health and that they add to the overall greenness of the site. Further landscaping is appropriate. For these reasons staff supports the application for a development permit.

In response to a query from the Chair, Mr. Jackson advised that at the July 27, 2009 meeting of City Council, a Development Permit was approved for Kasian Architecture Interior Design and Planning Ltd. to permit façade, parking lot and pedestrian circulation improvements to the Broadmoor Shopping Centre property, adjacent to the subject Richlea Shopping Centre, where the Safeway store is located.

The Chair noted that with the recently approved Development Permit for Kasian Architecture, and with the application for a Development Permit by Abbarch Architecture, the Neighbourhood Service Centre at the corner of No. 3 and Williams Roads were undergoing an overall upgrade. He added that the upgrade is worthwhile and overdue.

Correspondence

Occupant, # 113 - 8031 Ryan Road (Schedule 1)

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel Discussion

In response to a query, Ms. Yip clarified that only one tree is to be removed from the landscape buffer on the south edge of the site in order to incorporate the pedestrian path, and that the Pine tree that is being removed would be replaced with two new Pine trees.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would permit alteration of a portion of the No. 3 Road façade at the Safeway store and improvements to the pedestrian circulation and landscaping adjacent to No. 3 Road on a site under “Land Use Contract 022 (LUC 022)”. 

CARRIED

4.

Development Permit 09-463340
(File Ref. No.:  DP 09-463340)   (REDMS No. 2708956)

APPLICANT:

Matthew Cheng Architect Inc.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

7531 No. 4 Road

Deleted from the agenda (see Page 1 of these Minutes).

5.

Development Permit 09-472234
(File Ref. No.:  DP 09-472234)   (REDMS No. 2680523)

APPLICANT:

Palmer Yachts Ltd.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

23740 Dyke Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

That a Development Permit be issued which would permit the construction of a mixed use industrial/water oriented shipyard marina complex with nine single-family character residential units and a lot transferred to the City for future park use at 23740 Dyke Road on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/204) and School & Public Use District (SPU).

Applicant’s Comments

Rod Lynde, Lynde Designs Ltd., noted that the shape of the subject site presented design challenges and thanked City staff for help in addressing unique issues throughout the design process that arose due to the unique nature of the site. He noted that the residential units and the marina office have been designed with a maritime character theme befitting the riverfront location. Mr. Lynde introduced the project by making the following points:

§          

the site is bounded by Dyke Road to the north, the Fraser River to the south, and is halved by the Highway 91A overpass;

§          

the three distinct uses on site are: (i) mixed-use industrial/water oriented shipyard marina complex, (ii) nine single-family residential units, and (iii) a Dyke Road lot transferred to the City for future park use;

§          

landscape plans have been reviewed and signed off by both the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) and Port Metro Vancouver;

§          

there are enough parking spaces and enough setbacks at the industrial marina portion on the eastern side of the site to accommodate the parking needs making an application for variances unnecessary; and

§          

the site necessitated a minimum flood construction elevation requirement of 3.5m GSC slab elevation, which necessitates the residential units having sloped driveways due to a gas line that precludes the road being raised.

In response to the Chair’s query regarding how the marina building would be used, Mr. Lynde advised that the building would: (i) have office space, and (ii) provide space for the maintenance and repair of boats located in the marina.

In response to a further question from the Chair regarding access to the riverfront, Mr. Lynde stated there is no public access to the water, as DFO restricts it, and Fraser River Estuary Management Program (FREMP) regards the whole area as sensitive. He added that there is: (i) a publicly accessible trail along the western portion of the site providing access adjacent to the riverfront; (ii) an amenity space located in the centre of the residential section that overlooks the riverfront, and (iii) a lot to be dedicated to the City for future park use.

Landscape Architect Mr. Fred Liu reported that there are no significant trees existing on the site, and that only one large tree at the south end of the site would be saved. Trees exist in the Dyke Road lot to be transferred to the City for future park use, and new native shrubs would be planted under the trees.

Mr. Liu added that the list of shrubs and plants to be added to the site are native species, and would be carefully placed among the buildings and along the riverfront to blend well with the natural landscape. A trellis structure would help to screen parking in front of the marina office.

Staff Comments

Mr. Jackson noted the complexity of the site, and stated that the applicant had found a way through myriad levels of government agencies to arrive at a plan that is acceptable to all interested parties, including the City. He added that FREMP and the DFO were consulted on the landscaping plan and that both entities have communicated that they accept the landscape plan. Mr. Jackson advised that staff supports the application for a development permit. 

Correspondence

None.

Gallery Comments

Rick Colborne, 3500 Cessna Drive spoke in favour of the application and stated his interest in knowing: (i) how the drainage on the subject site would be handled, and (ii) if drainage issues would impact his property and the future value of his property.

The Chair advised that the City has requirements for perimeter drainage. He added that Mr. Colborne could meet and speak with the City’s Director of Engineering to learn details with regard to his drainage queries.

Panel Discussion

In response to a query regarding the issue of the necessity of sound proofing, or other noise mitigation measures, to address any future noise concerns from potential residents of the site related to the proximity of the Highway 91A overpass, the applicant advised that an acoustical engineer engaged to investigate the issue advised that: (i) no structural changes are necessary, but (ii) added insulation and triple glazing would help to deaden sound. He added that the residential units would feature heat pumps and air conditioning units.

A brief discussion ensued between the Panel and the applicant with regard to access from the residential units to the riverfront. It was noted that the DFO and Port Metro Vancouver had allowed the design of the structures up to its property line, but that access from the rear of the residential units was not possible. A marina access is located at the end of the row of townhouses.

The Chair advised that a Development Permit, when issued, would offer some control over the potential of modification of units by future residents.

In response to a query from the Chair regarding the size of the residential units, Mr. Lynde advised that the size of the units is consistent with the measurements described during the rezoning application. He added that minor alterations to the design had been made, but that no changes to the floor area ratio had taken place.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would permit the construction of a mixed use industrial/water oriented shipyard marina complex with nine single-family character residential units and a lot transferred to the City for future park use at 23740 Dyke Road on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/204) and School & Public Use District (SPU).

CARRIED

6.

New Business

A brief discussion ensued between the Chair and staff regarding the City, at present, not requiring signage be displayed when the City secures public walkway access through private property.

The Chair directed Planning and Development staff to work with Parks and Recreation staff to explore, and report back to the Development Permit Panel, what could be done in this regard, including the possibility of appropriate signage installed at the same time as the installation of landscaping elements, to ensure the comfort of the public when walking along public walkways on public lands, and not have this activity discouraged by strata councils.

7.

Date of Next Meeting

Wednesday, September 30, 2009

8.

Adjournment

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting be adjourned at 4:30 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, September 16, 2009.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Joe Erceg

Chair

Sheila Johnston

Committee Clerk