1.

Minutes

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel held on Wednesday, February 29, 2012, be adopted.

CARRIED

2.

Development Variance Permit 11-587706
(File Ref. No.:  DV 11-587706)  (REDMS No. 3360226)

APPLICANT:

Matthew Cheng Architect Inc.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

12226, 12228, 12248 & 12260 English Avenue, and 12231, 12233, 12235, 12237, 12239, 12251 & 12253 Ewen Avenue

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

To vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 “Single Detached (ZS10) – Steveston” in order to permit the construction of residential homes at 12226, 12228, 12248 & 12260 English Avenue, and 12231, 12233, 12235, 12237, 12239, 12251 & 12253 Ewen Avenue, as follows:

a)

allow an enclosed connection between the principal building and accessory garage located in the rear yard, provided that this enclosed connection is limited in height to a single storey no greater than 5.0 m, and does not exceed 3.2 m in width;

b)

allow front roof gables to project beyond the residential vertical envelope (lot depth) to a maximum width of the lesser of 4 m or 66% of the building width, and a maximum height of the lesser of 8 m or 1.5 m below the crest of the roof;

c)

allow side roof gables to project beyond the residential vertical envelope (lot width) with a minimum 1.5 m setback from the front building façade;

d)

allow the residential vertical envelope to be calculated from 2.6 m GSC.

Applicant’s Comments

Matthew Cheng, Matthew Cheng Architect Inc., advised that the adjacent townhouse development was now complete, and that the requested development variances applied to the eleven proposed single-family homes. He stated that during the design phase of the proposed homes, some challenges were identified. Mr. Cheng further outlined those challenges and commented that:

·          

in order for the homes to feature nine-foot ceilings in the ground floor rooms, and eight-foot ceilings in the upper floor rooms, the residential vertical building envelope should be calculated from 2.6 meter GSC, which is the former flood plain calculation, before recent amendments of the Flood Plain Designation and Protection Bylaw were made; and

·          

to achieve consistency in character with the existing single-family homes constructed in the Imperial Landing development area, variances that apply to roof gables and the enclosed connection between the eleven homes and their garages are requested.

Staff Comments

Brian J. Jackson, Acting General Manager, Planning and Development, advised that the nature of a Development Variance Permit Application, versus a Development Permit Application, means that the Panel sees only those details of the proposed development that apply to the requested variances.

Mr. Jackson then commented on the applicant’s requested variances and noted that:

·          

Council approved variances to the minimum setbacks and maximum heights for the existing approximately 40 single-family homes to the south of the subject site, in the neighbourhood known as Imperial Landing, in 2002 and 2003, and the applicant is requesting that the same consideration be given to the eleven proposed single-family lots in the neighbourhood;

·          

the proposed variances are more restrictive on the size and location of roof gables, and the allowable size is restricted for the enclosed connection between the proposed homes and their accessory garages;

·          

the applicant is requesting only one new variance to address the higher flood construction level requirement; and

·          

of the two ways to address the height issue, (i) allowing the properties to rise to the required 2.9 meters GSC, or (ii) calculating the height of the proposed homes from 2.6 meters GSC, staff supports the measurement from 2.6 meters GSC to achieve consistency in character with the homes already constructed, and occupied, in the neighbourhood.

Mr. Jackson referred to one piece of correspondence, received from Edwin Sharples and Wendy Phillips (attached to these Minutes as Schedule 1), and stated that the writers were concerned about the lane behind their unit and complex. Mr. Jackson advised that the issue of the lane was addressed as part of the rezoning, and that the location of the lane did not form part of the applicant’s development variance application.

In response to the Chair’s query regarding the size of the roof gables of the proposed eleven single-family homes, Mr. Jackson confirmed that there are restrictions in terms of width and setback of gables permitted, and that these restrictions mean that the size of the roof gables of the proposed development are smaller and set further back than the roof gables permitted on the constructed homes surrounding the subject site.

Gallery Comments

Mike Harper, 12222 Ewen Avenue, expressed concern regarding: (i) a lack of road access in the Imperial Landing neighbourhood; and (ii) a lack of safety for area children who use the back lane as a play area. He queried what the eventual use of the City-owned site at the corner of Moncton Street and Easthope Avenue would be.

Mr. Harper requested that the City delay, or stop, granting variances to developments in the Imperial Landing neighbourhood, until such issues as access are addressed.

The Chair advised Mr. Harper that City staff, including Bylaw Officers, can assist residents who have questions around bylaws, safety, and so on. He added that the Development Permit Panel’s mandate does not include neighbourhood transportation networks, or zoning issues, but strictly includes design and character issues.

A brief discussion ensued between Mr. Harper, Mr. Jackson, and the Panel, and advice was provided to Mr. Harper that Council reviewed the issue of access in 2008, and it was Council’s decision that Ewen Avenue not go out to Moncton Street.

Cynthia Rautio, 12282 English Avenue, asked whether the proposed development receives the requested variances, would the proposed eleven single-family homes have the identical appearance of the existing homes. She also queried whether English Avenue would go out to Moncton Street.

Mr. Jackson advised that: (i) English Avenue would not go out to Moncton Street; and (ii) the applicant’s request for variances would ensure consistency of character with the existing single-family homes in the neighbourhood.

Carol Day, 11631 Seahurst Road, opined that the City could improve communications with its residents in order to avoid confusion. She then queried whether the Development Permit Panel had the option to send the applicant’s Development Variance Application back to City Council.

When the Chair advised that the Panel can either approve or not approve the application, but did not have the option to send it back to Council, Ms. Day requested that the applicant’s requested variances be denied.

In response to the Chair’s request, Mr. Jackson confirmed that in terms of design, the requested variances would allow homes to match the design of homes that already exist to the south of the subject site. He added that the subject lots match the lots to the south.

With regard to the City-owned site at the corner of Moncton Street and Easthope Avenue, as referenced by the first speaker, Mr. Jackson advised that as yet the City has not determined a use for the site.

Correspondence

Edwin Sharples, Wendy Phillips, #6-4388 Moncton Street (Schedule 1)

John Taylor, #3-4388 Moncton Street (Schedule 2)

Panel Discussion

There was general agreement that the requested variances would allow the proposed eleven single-family homes to be developed with the same character as the existing neighbourhood.

The Chair reiterated that City staff are available to discuss such issues as access and egress with residents.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

1.

That a Development Permit be issued which would vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 “Single Detached (ZS10) – Steveston” in order to permit the construction of residential homes at 12226, 12228, 12248 & 12260 English Avenue, and 12231, 12233, 12235, 12237, 12239, 12251 & 12253 Ewen Avenue, as follows:

a)

allow an enclosed connection between the principal building and accessory garage located in the rear yard, provided that this enclosed connection is limited in height to a single storey no greater than 5.0 m, and does not exceed 3.2 m in width;

b)

allow front roof gables to project beyond the residential vertical envelope (lot depth) to a maximum width of the lesser of 4 m or 66% of the building width, and a maximum height of the lesser of 8 m or 1.5 m below the crest of the roof;

c)

allow side roof gables to project beyond the residential vertical envelope (lot width) with a minimum 1.5 m setback from the front building façade;

d)

allow the residential vertical envelope to be calculated from 2.6 m GSC.

CARRIED

3.

New Business - None

4.

Date Of Next Meeting:  Wednesday, March 28, 2012

5.

Adjournment

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting be adjourned at 4:14 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, March 14, 2012.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Robert Gonzalez

Chair

Sheila Johnston

Committee Clerk