August 24, 2016 - Minutes

Time:

3:30 p.m.

Place:

Council Chambers
Richmond City Hall

Present:

Catherine Volkering Carlile, Chair
Serena Lusk, Senior Manager, Recreation and Sports Services
Peter Russell, Senior Manager, Sustainability and District Energy

Minutes

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel held on July 13, 2016, be adopted.

CARRIED

1.

Development Permit 10-521415
(REDMS No. 4707564)

APPLICANT:

Matthew Cheng Architect Inc.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

6551 Williams Road  (formerly 6511/6531 and 6551/6553 Williams Road)

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

Permit the construction of 13 townhouse units at 6551 Williams Road  (formerly 6511/6531 and 6551/6553 Williams Road) on a site zoned “Low Density Townhouses (RTL3)”; and

2.

Vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to permit seven (7) small car parking spaces.

Applicant’s Comments

Matthew Cheng, Matthew Cheng Architect Inc., provided background information on the proposed development and highlighted the following:

§   

the proposed 13-unit townhouse development consists of two buildings at the front (along Williams Road) and three pairs of two-storey duplexes at the rear;

§   

the end unit of the east building (Building B) along Williams Road adjacent to the single-family homes to the east is stepped down from three to two storeys;

§   

the proposed development is designed to match the scale of its single-family neighbourhood;

§   

the proposed heritage colours and exterior cladding materials such as fiber cement siding, shingles and bricks are consistent with the character of the existing neighbourhood;

§   

the increased 6-meter rear yard setback provides a generous outdoor space for the rear units;

§   

two trees in the front yard and one tree located on the adjacent property to the north are proposed to be retained; a portion of the rear yard of two units fronting the retained tree, on the neighbouring property to the north, will be stepped down by approximately two feet to provide usable outdoor space and protection to the tree’s root system;

§   

a parking variance is requested by the applicant to allow one small car stall in each of the seven side-by-side double car garages;

§   

all indoor residential garages are provided with electric vehicle charging receptacles;

§   

the project is designed to achieve EnerGuide 82 rating and includes pre-ducting for solar hot water heating; 

§   

sustainability and aging-in-place features are incorporated into the project; and

§   

one convertible unit is provided for the townhouse development.

David Rose, PD Group Landscape Architecture Ltd., briefed the Panel on the proposed landscaping, noting that (i) a 12-inch high retaining wall and two landscape steps are provided to create a sunken area to protect the tree located on the adjacent property to the north, (ii) columnar trees will be planted along the side property lines, (iii) the front yards of front units and the rear yards of the back units are fully landscaped, (iv) permeable paving surface treatment is introduced on the entrance driveway, internal drive aisle and visitor parking, (v) compacted gravel pathway is provided between buildings, (vi) landscaping is incorporated on the internal drive aisle, (vii) the proposed entrance to the driveway is skewed to provide a small landscape area for soft entry into the townhouse development, and (viii) the outdoor amenity space provides for play equipment for toddlers, resilient surface paving, seating, and lawn areas.

Staff Comments

Wayne Craig, Director, Development, advised that there will be a Servicing Agreement for frontage improvements along Williams Road including storm sewer upgrades and site service connections.

Correspondence

Jinhe Pan, 6470 Sheridan Road (Schedule 1)

In response to the concerns expressed by the residents of 6470 Sheridan Road, Mr. Craig commented that (i) the proposed 6-meter rear yard setback to the duplex buildings meets the site’s zoning requirements and Arterial Road Guidelines for Townhouses in the Official Community Plan, and (ii) the architectural drawings submitted by the applicant show that the heights of the majority of the roof forms of the duplex buildings are significantly lower than a three storey building.

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of 13 townhouse units at 6551 Williams Road  (formerly 6511/6531 and 6551/6553 Williams Road) on a site zoned “Low Density Townhouses (RTL3)”; and

2.

Vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to permit seven (7) small car parking spaces.

CARRIED

2.

Development Variance 15-718208
(REDMS No. 5089208)

APPLICANT:

James and Sonal Leung

PROPERTY LOCATION:

11400 Kingfisher Drive

INTENT OF PERMIT:

Vary the maximum lot coverage permitted under “Land Use Contract (006) Bylaw No. 2938” from 33% to 40% to permit the construction of a new two-storey single detached dwelling at 11400 Kingfisher Drive.

Applicant’s Comments

Jim Toy, False Creek Design Group, with the aid of a visual presentation (attached to and forming part of these Minutes as Schedule 2), provided background information on the proposed development, noting that (i) the proposed single family home is designed to minimize the impact to its surrounding single-family neighbourhood, (ii) the massing is broken down through using varied materials and colours and altering the setbacks, (ii) the proposed height of the single-detached dwelling is 7.5 meters, which is lower than the permitted height under the Land Use Contract for the subject site and RS1/E zoning, and (iii) window openings are designed to minimize overlook into the adjacent side yards.

Keith Ross, K.R. Ross and Associates Landscape Architects, noted that (i) the proposed contemporary style of landscaping of the front yard matches the architecture of the proposed single-family dwelling, (ii) the front yard is landscaped with a mixture of materials, (iii) two new trees will be added in the front yard, (iii) existing trees in the rear yard are proposed to be retained and protected, (iv) the existing 6-foot high cedar fences are proposed to be retained in the rear and replaced in the north and south sides, (v)  a 4-foot Hicks Yew hedging will replace the existing hedges in the front yard, and (vi) a concrete walkway at the south side connects the front yard to the rear yard of the proposed development.

Staff Comments

Mr. Craig clarified that the 9 meters maximum building height for RS1/E zoning only applies to buildings with a sloped roof while for buildings with a flat roof, the maximum permitted height is 7.5 meters. Mr. Craig further noted that the proposed single family dwelling has a flat roof and its proposed height is consistent with RS1/E zoning regulations.

Also, Mr. Craig noted the applicant’s willingness to work with staff in the design review process and discuss the project’s design with immediate neighbours.

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Craig confirmed that the applicant’s neighbours have signified support to the proposed development.

Panel Discussion

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Toy acknowledged that energy efficiency will be incorporated into the design of the proposed development.

Correspondence

XXXX XXXX, XXXX (Schedule 3)

In response to the concerns expressed by XXXX, XXXX in her letter to the Panel, Mr. Toy and Mr. Ross noted that (i) subject to verification, the proposed replacement fencing along the north property line appears to extend up to the last six feet of the existing cedar hedge as suggested by XXXX XXXX, and (ii) the project’s contractor had advised that there is a possibility that the replacement fencing along the north property line will be damaged if installed prior to the demolition of existing structures and site preparation for the proposed development.

In response to XXXX XXXX correspondence, Mr. Craig advised that (i) the applicant has confirmed in writing that the replacement fencing along the north property line will extend up to garden gate of XXXX XXXX, (ii) the applicant has expressed willingness to discuss with XXXX XXXX regarding the timing of the installation of the replacement fencing at the north property line, and (iii) the proposed 4 feet high Hicks Yew hedging is consistent with the City’s regulations on maximum fence height within the front yard.

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Variance Permit be issued that would vary the maximum lot coverage permitted under “Land Use Contract (006) Bylaw No. 2938” from 33% to 40% to permit the construction of a new two-storey single detached dwelling at 11400 Kingfisher Drive.

CARRIED

3.

Development Variance 16-732402
(REDMS No. 5059809)

APPLICANT:

Jasbir Dhaliwal

PROPERTY LOCATION:

11871 Pintail Drive

INTENT OF PERMIT:

Vary the maximum lot coverage permitted under “Land Use Contract (036) Bylaw No. 3173” from 33% to 40% to permit construction of a new two-storey single detached dwelling at 11871 Pintail Drive.

Applicant’s Comments

Aman Dhaliwal, husband and representative of property owner Jasbir Dhaliwal, noted that the requested variance to allow a maximum lot coverage from 33 percent to 40 percent will enable their family of five to build a two-storey single-family home appropriate to their needs.

Jossy Sandjaja, Joss Design Inc., stated that a 40 percent lot coverage is necessary to build a two-storey single family dwelling with the design proposed by the applicant and to accommodate the number of rooms required by the applicant.

Keith Ross, K.R. Ross and Associates Landscape Architects, briefed the Panel on the proposed landscaping, noting that (i) additional trees are proposed to be planted for ornamental and screening purposes, (ii) low-lying mixed planting will be introduced at the southern edge of the driveway, (iii) a four-foot Yew hedge is proposed on the east side of the front yard, (iv) the existing hedges on the west side of the front yard and on the three sides of the rear yard are proposed to be retained, (v) existing trees in the rear yard are proposed to be retained and two trees will  be added, (vi) existing cedar fencing along the rear and interior side yards are proposed to be retained, and (vii) the proposed concrete paving treatment of the driveway is consistent with the design of the proposed single-family dwelling.

Staff Comments

Mr. Craig commended the applicant for (i) working with City staff in coming up with a design for the proposed single-family dwelling that responds to RS1/E zoning requirements and (ii) working with their neighbours with regard to the design of the proposal. Also, Mr. Craig noted the letters of support submitted by all of the applicant’s immediate neighbours.

Correspondence

Sonoko Takasaki (dated August 15, 2016), 11880 Pintail Drive (Schedule 4)

Sonoko Takasaki, (dated June 13, 2016), 11880 Pintail Drive (Schedule 5)

Albert Yap, 11851 Pintail Drive (Schedule 6)

Peter Ozorio, 5660 Plover Court (Schedule 7)

Ronald Bowers, 11891 Pintail Drive (Schedule 8)

Kwok Chiu Simon Chan, 11860 Pintail Drive (Schedule 9)

Michael Bradley, 5640 Plover Court (Schedule 10)

Gallery Comments

None.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Variance Permit be issued that would vary the maximum lot coverage permitted under “Land Use Contract (036) Bylaw No. 3173” from 33% to 40% to permit construction of a new two-storey single detached dwelling at 11871 Pintail Drive.

CARRIED

4.

New Business

It was moved and seconded

That the Development Permit Panel meeting scheduled on Wednesday, September 14, 2016, be cancelled.

CARRIED

5.

Date of Next Meeting:  September 28, 2016

6.

Adjournment

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting be adjourned at 4:20 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, August 24, 2016.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Catherine Volkering Carlile
Chair

Rustico Agawin
Auxiliary Committee Clerk