December 12, 2013 - Minutes

Time:

3:30 p.m.

Place:

Council Chambers
Richmond City Hall

Present:

Joe Erceg, Chair
John Irving, Director, Engineering

Victor Wei, Director, Transportation

1.

Minutes

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel held on Wednesday, November 27, 2013, be adopted.

CARRIED

2.

Development Permit DP 12-617455
(File Ref. No.:  DP 12-617455)  (REDMS No. 3999647)

APPLICANT:

Matthew Cheng Architect Inc.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

6511 No. 2 Road (formerly 6471, 6491 and 6511 No. 2 Road)

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

Permit the construction of 15 townhouses on a site zoned “Low Density Townhouses (RTL4)”; and

2.

Vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to increase the maximum ratio of tandem parking spaces from 50% to 60% of the total residential parking spaces required.

Applicant’s Comments

Matthew Cheng, Matthew Cheng Architect, Inc., provided the following details on the proposed  townhouse development:

§   

the project is located at No. 2 Road, on the second block north of Granville Avenue;

§   

15 townhouse units in two rows are proposed with a total floor area ratio (FAR) of .594;

§   

the front yard setback is six meters; the rear yard setback is 5.4 meters which is greater than the 4.5 meters minimum requirement as per Arterial Road Guidelines for Townhouses (OCP Bylaw 9000);

§   

the location of the internal drive aisle responds to the request of the owner of the property to the north of the subject site;

§   

the end units of the 3-storey townhouse clusters fronting No. 2 Road are stepped down from 3 to 2 ½ storeys;

§   

the skirt roof at the second floor of the buildings fronting the street echoes the two-storey houses in the neighbourhood;

§   

hip and gable roofs are also proposed to reflect the rhythm of the neighbouring roofs;

§   

the three 2-storey duplexes at the rear provide a smooth transition to the adjacent single family houses;

§   

the three trees along the west property line will be retained and incorporated into the outdoor amenity space;

§   

garbage and recycling enclosures are located at the driveway entrance; a covered mailbox is located behind the garbage enclosure;

§   

four visitor parking spaces are proposed including one accessible parking space;

§   

the accessible parking space is located near the entry to the development and adjacent to the convertible unit;

§   

a convertible unit is proposed near the amenity space and site entrance  and adjacent to the accessible parking space;

§   

the convertible unit meets all the City requirements including the provision of  space for future installation of a vertical lift;

§   

the proposed building materials include high quality fiber cement board and cultured stone at the base of the buildings; and

§   

neutral and warm colours are proposed to harmonize with the existing houses in the neighbourhood.

Denitsa Dimitrova, PMG Landscape Architects, provided the following information on the landscaping aspect of the proposed development:

§   

the existing grade at the west property line will be maintained;

§   

each townhouse unit has its own private yard;

§   

low aluminum fences with gates to individual townhouse unit front doors are provided for units along No. 2 Road;

§   

the landscape treatment for each unit’s private yard includes small shrub and grass planting;

§   

the children’s play area on the outdoor amenity space features a play equipment intended for children two to five years old; a bench is provided for the children’s caregivers; a bike rack for three bikes is also proposed;

§   

permeable pavers are proposed for the internal drive aisle and visitor parking spaces;

§   

a hedge provides visual screening for the transformer along No. 2 Road; and

§   

two large trees are proposed along No. 2 Road.

Panel Discussion

In response to a query from the Panel regarding the applicant’s non-compliance with the current Arterial Road Guidelines (Official Community Plan Bylaw 9000) which require that end units of street fronting  townhouse buildings should be stepped down to two storeys, Mr. Cheng stated that the development permit application for the subject development was submitted prior to the adoption of the current Guidelines and was therefore based on the previous Guidelines (OCP Bylaw 7100) which allowed the end units to be stepped down to 2 ½ storeys.

In response to a query from the Panel, Wayne Craig, Director of Development, advised that the current Guidelines (OCP Bylaw 9000) were adopted in November 2012.

The Chair commented that the applicant should have followed the new Guidelines considering the length of time since its adoption.

In response to a query from the Panel, Ms. Dimitrova stated that (i) a Fibar playground surface is proposed for the children’s play area, (ii) the area under the trees in the lower outdoor amenity area is covered with mulch, and (iii) a spider web like climbing equipment is proposed on the children’s play area.

Staff Comments

Mr. Craig advised that the applicant is proposing that (i) three trees will be retained and incorporated in the outdoor amenity space, (ii) two specimen trees will be planted along the No. 2 Road frontage, and (iii) a convertible unit will be provided in the proposed townhouse development.

Also, Mr. Craig commented that the requested variance to increase the maximum ratio of tandem parking spaces from 50% to 60% was submitted prior to the adoption by Council of the Bylaw amendment on tandem parking.  The proposed tandem parking variance comes with (i) the proposal to provide an additional visitor parking stall, and (ii) a restrictive covenant prohibiting the conversion of the garage area into habitable space.

Correspondence

Johnny Leung, 6451 No. 2 Road (Schedule 1)

Johnny Leung, 6451 No. 2 Road, dated December 11, 2013 (Schedule 2)

Mr. Craig advised that there were two letters sent by the property owners of 6451 No. 2 Road addressed to the Panel expressing their concerns regarding (i) the requested variance on tandem parking, (ii) the potential conversion of the tandem parking space into habitable area, and (iii) the height of the proposed buildings fronting No. 2 Road, and (iv) the future development of their lot.

Gallery Comments

Amy and Johnny Leung, 6451 No. 2 Road,  owners of the property which abuts the subject site to the north, spoke in opposition to the proposed development and expressed concern regarding the requested variance on tandem parking spaces, noting the absence of justification for the proposed variance. The property owners were also concerned regarding the possibility that (i) the garage area might be converted into a habitable space, and (ii) the proposed buildings might cast shadows onto the south side of their property where their landscape plantings and house windows are located.

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Craig advised that as a condition for approval of a tandem parking proposal, the City registers a covenant on title of the property indicating that the tandem parking space can only be used exclusively for its intended use and conversion to habitable space is prohibited.

Panel Discussion

The Panel commented about the positive elements of the project such as the retention of some existing trees on-site; however, the Panel noted that (i) the massing of the two buildings fronting No. 2 Road, i.e. Buildings A and B, need further design development, (ii) the design of the buildings is similar to the previous projects of the applicant, (iii) the end units of the two street fronting buildings appear like three storeys and do not comply with the current Guidelines, and iv)  the stairwells should be redesigned and relocated.

Also, the Panel noted the need to review the size and location of the outdoor amenity space and investigate the potential for additional play equipment.

Panel Decision

As a result of the discussion, the following referral was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That  DP 12-617455 be referred back to staff and staff to undertake the following:

1.

review further  the design and massing of the buildings fronting No. 2 Road to ensure compliance with the current Arterial Road Guidelines for Townhouses (OCP Bylaw 9000) relating to the two-storey maximum height of the end units of the buildings;

2.

examine further the design and location of the stairwells;

3.

investigate the potential for additional play equipment on the outdoor amenity area; and

4.

report back on the January 15, 2014 meeting of the Development Permit Panel.

CARRIED

3.

Development Permit 13-643519
(File Ref. No.:  DP 13-643519)  (REDMS No. 4031357)

APPLICANT:

Christopher Bozyk Architects

PROPERTY LOCATION:

11100 Cambie Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

Permit the construction of an automobile repair facility on a lot at 11100 Cambie Road on a site zoned Industrial Retail (IR1); and

2.

Vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to:

a)

increase the maximum site coverage from 60% to 73%; and,

b)

reduce the minimum exterior side yard setback from 3.0 metres to 1.5 metres along the Cambie Road frontage.

Applicant’s Comments

Laurence Cohen, Wales McLelland Construction, provided the following information regarding the proposed development:

§   

it is a joint Mercedez Benz and BMW state of the art certified factory repair facility;

§   

the facility will not do oil changes and heavy engine repair;

§   

the design of the facility is prescribed by Mercedez Benz and BMW head offices;

§   

the two repair facilities will share a common roof for parking and storage; and

§   

no repair work will be  done outside of the building.

Ernst Loots, Christopher Bozyk Architects Ltd, reviewed the design rationale of the proposed facility and provided the following information:

§   

the design of the building is unique as there are two facilities in one building;

§   

the proposed development is a basically one-storey building with a two-storey component on the north side of the building;

§   

it is a modern contemporary industrial building;

§   

durable, low-maintenance and high-tech building materials are proposed;

§   

the north side of the building relates to a more urban context;

§   

the design of the back of the building is toned down;

§   

the west side of the building features a vegetation wall to break down the monotonous façade and to comply with the Green Roof Bylaw requirements; and

§   

the location and design of the signage elements relate to the building.

Also, Mr. Loots presented the materials palette board and reviewed the materials used in the building elevations.

Mr. Loots commented that some of the responses made by the applicant in order to comply with the Green Roof Bylaw requirement include the installation of an on-site storm water storage tank system and a vertical green wall on the west side of the building.

In response to queries from the Panel, Mr. Loots advised that (i) the storm water storage tank is still being developed and will be located underground; and (ii) the roof top vehicle parking will be screened by building parapets and will not be significantly visible from Highway 99.

In response to a further query from the Panel, Mr. Loots reviewed the design and materials used in the south side of the building.

In response to a further query from the Panel, Al Tanzer, LandSpace Design, Inc., advised that the applicant’s landscaping response to the proposed reduction of the minimum exterior side yard setback along the building frontage with Cambie Road includes planting of low growing plants such as flowering evergreens in order to address CPTED concerns.

Staff Comments

Mr. Craig advised that the proposed development provides substantial dedications along the Cambie Road frontage which consist of a 4.2 meter wide road dedication for future road widening, establishment of a grassed/treed boulevard and a new sidewalk. Also, Mr. Craig noted that there will be improvements along the Vanguard Road frontage.

Mr. Craig also stated that the applicant’s response to the Green Roof Bylaw meets the intent of the Bylaw.

Correspondence

None.

Gallery Comments

Ken Sodhi stated that he has a development project across the subject site. Mr. Sodhi  expressed concern regarding the proposed reduction of the exterior side yard setback along the Cambie Road frontage. He also queried about the location of the vehicle entrance to the automobile repair facility and sought clarification regarding the proposed variance on site coverage.

In response to the query of Mr. Sodhi, staff clarified that (i) the exterior side yard setback variance applies only to a portion of the BMW Building along Cambie Road and the variance is a direct result of the road dedication being provided, (ii) the vehicle access to the automobile repair facility is off Vanguard Road, and (iii) the applicant is requesting a variance to the site coverage, not to the density of the proposed development.

Panel Discussion

The Panel expressed support for the proposed development and commended the applicant for a well done project which is expected to transform the neighbourhood.  Also, the Panel noted the (i) high quality of materials proposed for the project, (ii) efforts made by the applicant to provide visual screening for the roof top parking and (iii) treatment to all the building elevations, particularly the green wall at the west elevation.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of an automobile repair facility on a lot at 11100 Cambie Road on a site zoned Industrial Retail (IR1); and

2.

Vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to:

a)

increase the maximum site coverage from 60% to 73%; and,

b)

reduce the minimum exterior side yard setback from 3.0 metres to 1.5 metres along the Cambie Road frontage.

CARRIED

4.

New Business

5.

Date Of Next Meeting:  Wednesday, January 15, 2014

6.

Adjournment

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting be adjourned at 4:45 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 Thursday, December 12, 2013.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Joe Erceg
Chair

Rustico Agawin
Auxiliary Committee Clerk