January 30, 2019 - Minutes

Time:

3:30 p.m.

Place:

Council Chambers
Richmond City Hall

Present:

John Irving, Chair 
Laurie Bachynski, Director, Corporate Business Service Solutions 
Jane Fernyhough, Director, Arts, Culture and Heritage Services

Minutes

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel held on January 16, 2019 be adopted.

CARRIED

1.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 17-788728 
(REDMS No. 6065449 v. 3)

APPLICANT:

Parc Thompson Project Inc.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

4300, 4320, 4340 Thompson Road and 4291, 4331,4431, 4451 Boundary Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

Permit the construction of a 120-unit townhouse project at 4300, 4320, 4340 Thompson Road and 4291, 4331,4431, 4451 Boundary Road on a site zoned “High Density Townhouses (RTH1)”; and

2.

Vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to increase the height of an accessory building for a centrally-located indoor amenity space from 5.0 m (16.4 ft.) to 8.3 m (27.2 ft.).

Applicant’s Comments

Taizo Yamamoto, Yamamoto Architecture, Inc., provided background information on the proposed development and highlighted the following:

§   

the site plan for the project is organized around the east-west and north-south pedestrian pathways/strollways intersecting in the middle of the site as well as the existing on-site trees to be retained;

§   

an indoor amenity building and an outdoor amenity area are located at the intersection of the east-west and north-south pedestrian strollways;

§   

children’s play areas are located adjacent to the retained trees on the north side of the site and along the north-south pedestrian strollways;

§   

pedestrian entrances to townhouse units are located as much as possible off pedestrian pathways to activate the pedestrian realm and allow segregation from vehicular circulation;

§   

two subtly different colour schemes are proposed for townhouse units in the perimeter and interior of the site to provide differentiation and variety of units;

§   

six affordable housing units, 26 convertible units, and one fully accessible unit are provided; 

§   

there are Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) compensation planting areas on site as well as off-site; and  

§   

a Pressure Reducing Valve (PRV) station will be constructed on the subject site as a voluntary contribution by the applicant to the City.

Meredith Mitchell, M2 Landscape Architecture, briefed the Panel on the main landscaping features of the project, noting that (i) the overall landscape design complements the architectural design to create a single-family character to the townhouse units, e.g., with individual gate entries, yards, and patios, (ii) the proposed public pedestrian pathways create public interaction, visual interest and connectivity to the external community, (iii) passive and active children’s play areas are proposed on the subject the site, (iv) ESA compensation areas are provided on-site, including contiguous on-site ESA compensation areas along the east-west strollway adjacent to the yards of units, (v) native materials for on-site ESA planting are chosen to provide habitat value and visual interest, (vi) six existing coniferous trees on the site will be retained and protected, (vii) private patios facing the public pathways are slightly elevated to provide separation between public and private realms, and (viii) off-site ESA compensation planting is proposed on the City’s Hamilton Highway Park to the west of the subject site.

In reply to queries from the Panel, Ms. Mitchell noted that (i) native planting materials will be installed on the park for off-site ESA compensation, (ii) on-site ESA planting along the east-west public pathway is also part of the landscaping for the yards of townhouse units, and (iii) there are separate maintenance requirements for ESA and non-ESA planting on the site.

In addition, Mr. Yamamoto clarified that fencing along the east-west public pedestrian pathway is quite open so that the ESA planting could be stretched along the public pathway to provide visual interest to the residents and the public.

In reply to a query from the Panel, Wayne Craig, Director, Development advised that on-site ESA compensation areas are subject to a legal agreement with the City which specifies maintenance and monitoring requirements for these areas.

Staff Comments

Mr. Craig noted that (i) there is a Servicing Agreement associated with the project for frontage works along the Boundary Road and Thompson Road frontages, (ii)  the internal drive aisle and east-west strollway that connect Boundary Road and Thompson Road will  be covered by a statutory right-of-way (SRW) allowing public access along the roadway and walkway; (iii) there is also a park Servicing Agreement for the off-site ESA planting within the City’s Hamilton Highway Park which includes the removal of invasive species from a 5.45 acre area within the park and the planting of approximately 1,200 native trees  and 6,500 shrubs within a 1.6 acre area of the park, (iv) the planting plan associated with the off-site ESA planting is included in the staff report, (v) the six affordable housing units have been secured by a housing agreement with the City, and (vi) the project will be designed to achieve LEED Silver equivalency and EnerGuide 82 rating for energy efficiency. 

In reply to queries from the Panel, Mr. Craig confirmed that (i) the off-site ESA planting covered by a Servicing Agreement is a condition in the rezoning application of the subject site, and (ii) the environmental strategy for the project is detailed in the rezoning application which Council considered. 

Panel Discussion

In reply to queries from the Panel, the design team acknowledged that (i) open picket fencing is provided along the yards of townhouse units facing the east-west strollway and is set back towards the units to allow for larger ESA planting areas along the strollway, (ii) there is limited planting along the internal drive aisles due to limited available planting areas and survivability concerns, (iii) proposed planting along the internal drive aisles includes columnar trees, (iv) pedestrian scale bollard lighting is proposed along the strollways to provide ambient light which is appropriate for ESA planting and addressing pedestrian safety, and (v) controlled architectural lights are provided in the porches of units along the strollways.

In reply to a query from the Panel, Mr. Craig advised that the (i) design of the publicly accesible east-west and north-south strollways will be further refined as part of the Servicing Agreements, (ii) bollard lighting details are included in the landscape plan, (iii) details for the proposed bollard lighting will be further refined through the Servicing Agreement process to ensure pedestrian safety during low light times of the day, (iv) low-level pedestrian scale bollard lighting and not overhead lighting is proposed along the strollways, and (v) lighting details for the porches of units will be reviewed through the Building Permit process to ensure that they will not negatively impact ESA planting along the strollways.

The Chair advised that appropriate lighting for the project should be a condition of Development Permit to ensure that it will address both on-site ESA planting and pedestrian safety.

In reply to further queries from the Panel, the design team noted that (i) proposed on-site ESA planting includes native trees and non-ESA on-site planting includes non-native trees such as Japanese cherry trees, (ii) off-site ESA planting consists solely of native trees and plant materials, (iii) non-ESA on-site planting includes a mix of native and non-native plant materials, (iv) sunny and shaded areas are proposed in the outdoor amenity areas, (v) passive and active spaces for different age groups are proposed for the children’s play areas using natural materials and manufactured play equipment, (vi) engineered wood fiber and rubber tile ground surfacing materials are proposed for the children’s play area, (vii) the children’s play areas adjacent to the strollways are publicly accessible, and (viii) irrigation is provided in the ESA and non-ESA planting areas.

In reply to a query from the Panel, Ms. Mitchell noted that the project’s ESA enhancement and compensation planting scheme was reviewed by a Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP).

In reply to the same query from the Panel, Mr. Craig confirmed that (i) a third party QEP had conducted a baseline assessment of existing on-site ESA condition as part of the rezoning review, and (ii) the proposed on-site and off-site ESA compensation and enhancement scheme provides for a much higher value habitat in the area than currently exists.

Gallery Comments

A resident in a neighbouring property noted that the ground in the area has been sinking and that previous construction activities in the area have resulted in damage to her property. She expressed concern that construction activities on the subject site will cause further damage to her property. In addition, she also expressed concern regarding the potential negative impact of raising the grade of the subject site to neighbouring properties.

In response to the resident’s concerns, the Chair advised that (i) the applicant coordinate with City staff regarding her concerns as they are outside the jurisdiction of the Panel, (ii) the developer/contractor is responsible for any damage to City or private property as a result of construction activities, (iii) the developers/contractors are expected to fully communicate with owners of neighbouring properties and address their concerns as provided in the City’s Good Neighbour Policy, and (iv) she could likewise coordinate with City staff regarding her concerns on flooding.

In response to the resident’s concern, Mr. Craig advised that (i) the Flood Construction Level for the subject site is 3.5 meters geodetic, (ii) the applicant is required to provide geotechnical reports to deal with foundation settlement as part of the Building Permit process, and (iii) the resident could work directly with the developer regarding her concerns.

Jimmy Dhillon, 23960 Thompson Gate, expressed concern regarding the proposed development’s interface with his property which is located immediately adjacent to the north of the subject site, noting that his property’s elevation is currently higher than the subject site’s.

In response to Mr. Dhillon’s concern, Mr. Yamamoto noted that (i) the existing grade of the subject site will be raised; however, the final grade will still be lower than Mr. Dhillon’s property, (ii) the existing retaining wall adjacent to Mr. Dhillon’s property will be retained, and (iii) the applicant’s decision whether to install reinforcements to the existing retaining wall will be subject to a geotechnical analysis.

Mr. Dhillon asked for clarity regarding the proposed height variance for the project’s indoor amenity building.

In response to Mr. Dhillon’s query, Mr. Craig advised that with the proposed additional height, the final height of the indoor amenity building will still be lower than the height of the three-storey townhouse buildings in the proposed development.

Correspondence

None.

Panel Discussion

The Panel expressed support for the townhouse buildings’ design and colour scheme, substantial off-site ESA compensation planting, and proposed pedestrian and vehicular circulation on the site; however, the applicant was encouraged to investigate opportunities for enhancing the proposed on-site ESA and non-ESA landscaping, particularly in the interior of the site. 

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

permit the construction of a 120-unit townhouse project at 4300, 4320, 4340 Thompson Road and 4291, 4331,4431, 4451 Boundary Road on a site zoned “High Density Townhouses (RTH1)”; and

2.

vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to increase the height of an accessory building for a centrally-located indoor amenity space from 5.0 m (16.4 ft.) to 8.3 m (27.2 ft.).

CARRIED

2.

Date of Next Meeting:  February 13, 2019

3.

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, January 30, 2019.

_______________________________

_____________________________

John Irving 
Chair

Rustico Agawin 
Committee Clerk