Time:

3:30 p.m.

Place:

Council Chambers

Richmond City Hall

Present:

Joe Erceg, Chair

Robert Gonzalez, General Manager, Engineering and Public Works

Jeff Day, General Manager, Olympic Business and Major Projects

The meeting was called to order at 3:35 p.m.

1.

Minutes

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel held on Wednesday, September 30, 2009, be adopted.

CARRIED

2.

Development Permit 08-432218
(File Ref. No.:  DP 08-432218)   (REDMS No. 2727136)

APPLICANT:

Polygon Development 222 Ltd.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

9420, 9460, 9480 and 9500 Odlin Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

Permit the construction of a 229-unit, four-storey residential condominium development at 9420, 9460, 9480 and 9500 Odlin Road on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/201); and

2.

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

a)

Increase the maximum permitted percentage of small car parking spaces to 33%.

Applicant’s Comments

Steve Jedreicich, Vice-President for Development, Polygon Development 222 Ltd.,  provided the  following background information on the  proposed development:

§          

the project is called Cambridge Park, a two-phased four-storey development consisting of 229 units over a parkade in the West Cambie Area;

§          

the project is Polygon’s second apartment development and third project in the West Cambie Area;

§          

the project has addressed flood plain requirements and air traffic noise considerations; and

§          

provides 22 units of affordable housing which include units transferred from the Fisher Gate development.

Architect Robert Ciccozzi of Robert Ciccozzi Arhitecture, Inc. presented the site context and pointed out the following salient features of the proposed development:

§          

located in the West Cambie Area, the site fronts Odlin Road to the north, the new Tomicki Avenue to the south, the new May Drive to east and a future development to the west;

§          

the project is basically comprised of two buildings with a large opening that faces the future public park across May Drive and a central courtyard that overlooks the park which could be accessed from the buildings or from the sidewalk through stairs;

§          

the project’s contemporary approach features flat roofs with extended overhangs which provide an up and down movement along the  street;

§          

the upper floor is purposely lightened up by using a white colour and large openings to mitigate apparent building height;

§          

the large window expression is carried right down to the entrance to provide articulation  and helps break down the massing of the building along Odlin Road into two halves;

§          

contemporary colours which are sort of monochromatic lighter brick are used;

§          

there is extensive use of brick on all visible sides of the development, particularly on the sides fronting the streets and at the entrance;

§          

firewalls are detailed to match the privacy walls between balconies; and

§          

horizontal bands of black anodized aluminum provide texture, horizontality and a three-dimensional quality to the project.

In response to the queries from the Chair on the landscaping and amenity area features, Mr. Jedreicich provided the following details:

§          

the indoor amenity area, which  is approximately 2,000 square feet, includes a lounge area and an exercise room; there is a guest suite for the use of the residents  and a suite for a full-time concierge;

§          

the project is able to accommodate a large courtyard which has a lot of green space;

§          

the project provides an outdoor play area and a large patio off the amenity area in the inside corner of the northwest end of the building;

§          

the courtyard is approximately one and a half meters higher than the street level because of flood plain requirements; and

§          

the project is able to make public contributions such as beautification of parks, childcare, and public art which will be built on a still undetermined location within the site.

Staff Comments

Brian J. Jackson, Director of Development, advised that staff supports the application for a Development Permit and stated that the applicant has worked with staff to resolve the challenges presented by the site. He noted that the applicant has successfully addressed these issues through the following responses:

(i)

placing individual and combined stairs down to the street level in units fronting public streets to address the change in grade between the street and subject site;  and

(ii)

staggering the  landscaping so that no wall effect has resulted in the development.

Mr. Jackson added that staff is also supportive of the parking variance sought by the applicant which is equivalent to just an additional seven small car parking spaces. He also mentioned that the central courtyard provides a significant amenity for the residents and is accessible by stairs and elevators from the main lobby entrances to the development.

Correspondence

None.

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel Discussion

In response to a query on the sustainability and the Leadership on Education and Energy Design (LEED)  features of the project, Mr. Jedreicich stated that the project has replaced the previously proposed solar assist system with a geothermal assist system for domestic hot water pre-heating in all the buildings and that there are no air conditioning in the units themselves.

Mr. Jedreicich also provided the following information  in response to queries on how the  proposed geothermal system works and the project’s compliance with the West Cambie Area Plan requirement for air conditioning of the units:

§          

the project provides a geothermal system for pre-water heating only as the cost of the cooling units would be in the range of eight to ten thousand dollars per unit while the cost of producing a geothermal system to cool those units would require an additional cost of  four to five thousand dollars for each residential unit;

§          

the additional costs associated with the air conditioning of the units would make the price of the apartments  unaffordable to their intended buyers;

§          

the Official Community Plan requires an air conditioning system or an alternative;

§          

the applicant’s ventilation report for previous projects in the West Cambie Area cited that the required level of comfort in the individual units was achieved using the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)  standard;

§          

in the previous and present projects of the applicant, a system was designed with a  fresh air intake and heat exchanger to produce chilled air on the roof that supplied the pressurized central corridors; the system included drawing the cooled air from the corridors into the units and air was circulated around the units through the use of  transfer grilles, ceiling fans and exhaust fans; the movement of air created a cooling effect;

§          

the ceiling fans in the main living rooms and bedrooms that provide air movement have low sone ratings and are of the quiet type;

§          

the comfortable temperature in the project’s residential units during the summer months would be approximately in the range of 73 to 75 degrees Fahrenheit; and

§          

the applicant has complied with commitments made during the rezoning stage with regard to the provision of a geothermal system in the project.

In response to a query whether the project provides for storm water reuse, Mr. Jedreicich stated that the project has designed large areas with heavy landscaping to assist in water retention on the site and will look into the issue of storm water reuse.

Mr. Ciccozzi, in response to a query from the Chair whether or not the project fully complies with the Zoning Bylaw’s requirements for barrier-free units to be entitled to additional density, advised that all the barrier-free units in the project complied, incorporating  all the basic universal housing features required in the Zoning Bylaw.

Panel Deliberation

The Chair stated that he is pleased to support the project. He further remarked that he sought clarification on the maintenance of the noise level of the ventilation and air conditioning because it had not been clear to him that the standards set in the West Cambie Area Plan could be met without the air conditioning of the units.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of a 229-unit, four-storey residential condominium development at 9420, 9460, 9480 and 9500 Odlin Road on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/201); and

2.

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

a)

Increase the maximum permitted percentage of small car parking spaces to 33%.

CARRIED

3.

Development Permit 08-433637
(File Ref. No.:  DP 08-433637)   (REDMS No. 2661444)

APPLICANT:

Harry Pargat Singh Tatla

PROPERTY LOCATION:

9391 Alberta Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

Permit the construction of 23 Townhouse units at 9391 Alberta Road on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/128); and 

2.

Vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw 5300 to:

a)

Reduce the front yard setback from 6.0 meters to 5.0 meters along Alberta Road;

b)

Reduce east side yard setback from 3.0 meters to 0.3 meters to allow for a self-containing garbage/recycling enclosure; and

c)

Reduce the front yard setback from 6.0 meters to 5.0 meters along Hemlock Drive.

Applicant’s Comments

Yoshi Mikano of Yamamoto Architecture Inc. provided the following background and main features of the proposed development:

§          

the 23-unit proposed development is situated on a narrow site;

§          

to the north of the site, across from Hemlock Drive, is an existing five-storey apartment buildings, to the west  is a four-storey apartment building, and to the south and east are single-family houses;

§          

separation from neighbouring developments is provided by the driveway between the buildings and the single-family house to the east and through preservation of five existing trees along the property lines, particularly the existing cedar tree in the neighbouring property to the west which is close to the amenity area;

§          

the area is seen as a growing area with many future developments to be expected but will retain its quiet residential character;

§          

the project uses high quality exterior finish to blend with the single-family residential area atmosphere;

§          

the units have three bedrooms and their prices are affordable;

§          

the project has two adaptable units; and

§          

the large 500 - square yard amenity area is centrally located and provides a sanctuary area for the residents near the existing cedar tree and a children’s play area.

In response to a query on the accessibility features of the adaptable units, Mr. Mikano stated that the two adaptable units provide space for a residential elevator which could be accessed from the road and have bathroom features which comply with the requirements for adaptable units such as the installation of lever-type faucets.

In response to further queries, Mr. Mikano advised the following:

§          

there is an intention to use rainwater in providing irrigation to the landscaping;

§          

the lights on the wall of the garage help provide lighting along the driveway;

§          

the amenity area is lit by the lighting in the mailbox area and along the walkway; and

§          

the amenity area has a children’s play structure in the middle, a seating area, and a cedar tree which is a prominent feature  in the amenity area.

Staff Comments

Mr. Jackson advised that staff is supportive of the development and provided the following information:

(i)

the project’s rezoning application, which was approved,  triggered the formulation of a new lot size policy for the area plan;

(ii)

the present plan recognizes that the applicant was not successful in acquiring an adjacent property so staff recommended that the rezoning application of the subject property proceed on its own; and

(iii)

the applicant has worked with staff in responding to the issues raised on the proposed development given the constraints of the site.

In response to a query on the changes made to the site lay-out of the proposed development  since rezoning, Mr. Jackson stated the following:

(i)

the site lay-out has changed since rezoning;

(ii)

at the rezoning stage, there was a block of townhouses on one side of the road with the road curving through the site and going to the other side; and

(iii)

when the project was presented to the Advisory Design Panel for its review, the Panel expressed concerns on the site lay-out which were addressed by the applicant through straightening out the road, increasing the amenity space and introducing paving differentiation to break up the long alley effect of the driveway.

In response to further queries, Mr. Jackson provided the following additional information:

§          

the reduction of the curve decreased the total amount of pavement in the site from ten to twenty percent, consolidated the play area and increased its space by around ten to twenty percent;

§          

the slight curve to the driveway and the introduction of unit pavers between the asphalt road mitigate the impact of the long driveway; and

§          

the two future access points are secured by covenant for future access to the property to the east of the subject site.

Correspondence

Guenter Blatt, #225-9373 Hemlock Drive (Schedule 1)

Mr. Jackson informed the Panel that Mr. Guenter Blatt wrote a letter expressing his opposition to any new development in McLennan North for reasons of inadequate planning and increased congestion.  He added that Mr. Blatt also pointed out that the high rise towers in the area did not provide adequate parking for their residents which should be in the ratio of 1.5 parking spaces per suite. In response to Mr. Blatt’s concern, Mr. Jackson advised that the proposed development provides two parking spaces per unit and five visitor parking spaces which are in excess of the bylaw requirement.

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel Discussion

The Chair expressed his reluctant support to the project due to the inappropriate redesign of the project which occurred in the Advisory Design Panel review. He pointed out that  the establishment of Council of some basic parameters in site planning should provide guidance to the Advisory Design Panel in terms of seeking dramatic changes to site plans. He added that he appreciates the efforts made to mitigate the impact of the driveway but these were of no avail because the driveway remained to be long and visible. He further remarked that this kind of project would be the last to be seen in the neighbourhood.

Mr. Gonzalez concurred with the comments of the Chair and expressed his opinion that the proposed development could be viewed from a larger perspective as it could enhance the neighbourhood and provide future driveway access to the adjacent property to the east of the subject site.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of 23 Townhouse units at 9391 Alberta Road on a site zoned Comprehensive Development District (CD/128); and 

2.

Vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw 5300 to:

a)

Reduce the front yard setback from 6.0 meters to 5.0 meters along Alberta Road;

b)

Reduce east side yard setback from 3.0 meters to 0.3 meters to allow for a self-containing garbage/recycling enclosure; and

c)

Reduce the front yard setback from 6.0 meters to 5.0 meters along Hemlock Drive.

CARRIED

4.

Development Variance 09-482429
(File Ref. No.:  DV 09-482429)   (REDMS No. 2708354)

APPLICANT:

Sid Gupta

PROPERTY LOCATION:

8300 Railway Avenue

INTENT OF PERMIT:

Vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to reduce the minimum lot width required for:

a)

a corner lot from 20 m to 17.8 m; and,

b)

an interior lot from 18 m to 17.4 m;

to permit a two (2) lot subdivision fronting Colbeck Road on a lot zoned “Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area E (R1/E) at 8300 Railway Avenue.

Applicant’s Comments

Noting that the project is simple, the Chair suggested that the meeting proceed directly to staff comments. The applicant concurred with the suggestion of the Chair.

Staff Comments

Mr. Jackson advised that staff  supports the variances sought by the applicant. He also mentioned that the applicant could have proceeded with the two-lot split in the direction of Railway Avenue with no variances but the applicant chose to work with staff to have the lots front onto Colbeck Road instead, which had the positive effect of relocating driveway crossings from Railway Avenue onto the internal street.  He added that the architectural drawings included in the staff report conformed with the look of newer development within the rest of the community.

Correspondence

Hung On Lai and Lorinda Lai, #5060 Calder Court Road (Schedule 2)

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel’s Decision

That a Development Variance Permit be issued which would vary the provisions of the Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300 to reduce the minimum lot width required for:

a)

a corner lot from 20 m to 17.8 m; and,

b)

an interior lot from 18 m to 17.4 m;

to permit a two (2) lot subdivision fronting Colbeck Road on a lot zoned “Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area E (R1/E) at 8300 Railway Avenue.

5.

New Business

As a result of the discussions on Item No. 2, the Chair directed Planning and Development staff to coordinate with Policy Planning and expedite a review of the noise level  standards and the air conditioning requirement for developments  in the West Cambie Area to clarify said requirement or propose possible amendments to the area plan. He   requested that the review be concluded before the Panel considers other projects located in the West Cambie Area.

6.

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 14, 2009.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Joe Erceg

Chair

Rustico Agawin

Committee Clerk