May 15, 2019 - Minutes

Time:

3:30 p.m.

Place:

Council Chambers
Richmond City Hall

Present:

Cecilia Achiam, Chair 
John Irving, Acting General Manager, Engineering and Public Works 
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 April 10, 2019 be adopted.

CARRIED

1.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 17-771214   
(REDMS No. 6043764 v. 4)

APPLICANT:

Christopher Bozyk Architects Ltd.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

12580 Vickers Way

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

Permit the construction of a 3,379.9 m2 (36,382 ft2) industrial building at 12580 Vickers Way on a site zoned Industrial Retail (IR1); and

2.

Vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to:

(a)

reduce the required number of required parking spaces from 136 to 66;

(b)

reduce the required number of loading spaces from two medium and one large loading space to two medium loading spaces; and

(c)

permit car parking spaces for employees to be provided in a tandem arrangement.

Applicant’s Comments

Christopher Bozyk, Christopher Bozyk Architects Ltd., provided background information on the proposed development and highlighted the following:

§   

vehicular access to the proposed three-storey furniture retail store will be relocated from Vickers Way to Sweden Way;

§   

the proposed treatments to the north and south facades of the proposed building are intended to provide visual interest and revitalize the area;

§   

frontage improvements are proposed along Vickers Way and Sweden Way, including installation and improvement of curbs, sidewalks, boulevards, and road markings to enhance cyclists’ safety at the Sweden Way entry/exit driveway; and

§   

traffic and parking concerns of neighbouring developments have been addressed by the applicant.

In addition, Mr. Bozyk briefed the Panel on the main landscaping features of the project, noting that (i) the proposed landscaping on Vickers Way will upgrade the frontage, (ii) trees will be installed along the east property line, (iii) permeable pavers, trees, and low plantings are proposed on the surface parking area, and (iv) a substantial lawn area is proposed on the southeast corner of the property. 

In response to a query from the Panel, Wayne Craig, Director, Development, advised that the extensive lawn area on the southern end of the property was determined by a Kinder Morgan regulation prohibiting the planting of trees on their pipeline statutory-right-way (SRW) area.

Peter Joyce, Bunt & Associates Transportation Planning and Engineering, referenced the applicant’s site-specific parking and loading study, noting that (i) the City’s Zoning Bylaw parking requirement does not reflect the proposed use of the subject site, (ii) the peak parking demand for the proposed furniture retail store is from 20 to 30 parking spaces, (iii) the applicant is requesting a reduction of the required 136 parking spaces as the proposed 66 spaces is more than adequate, and (iv) the development’s potential traffic impact into the area would be modest as the peak traffic generation in the subject site is approximately 20 to 30 vehicles per hour.

In response to queries from the Panel, Mr. Joyce advised that (i) in response to neighbouring developments’ traffic concerns and in consultation with City staff, the applicant agreed that ingress and egress to/from the site’s driveway would be right-in and right-out only, (ii) left-turn out from the site’s driveway is restricted; however, a left turn entry is permitted, and (iii) the applicant’s parking study considered existing traffic volume in the subject site and other furniture stores across the region,

Oren Samuel, owner of Paramount Furniture, noted that the proposed furniture retail store is high-end in terms of retail price compared to other low to medium-end furniture stores in the area and as such, potential traffic increase to the subject site is not expected to be significant in the long term.

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Craig acknowledged that the proposed number of parking stalls for the subject development could accommodate the parking needs of other types of furniture stores.

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Bozyk noted that a low level entry sign, not a pylon sign, will be installed on the proposed development.

Gallery Comments

A property owner of 12520 Vickers Way spoke in favour of  the proposed development, noting that (i) the proposed high-end furniture retail store will revitalize the neighbourhood, (ii) Vickers Way needs improvements in terms of paving treatment and provision of sidewalks to enhance pedestrian circulation in the area, and (iii) an early approval of the subject development permit application would be appreciated.

Correspondence

Ben and Ingrid Gauer, 12660 Bridgeport Road (alternate address: 12651 Vickers Way) (Schedule 1)

In response to the issues raised in the correspondence, Mr. Craig noted that (i) the applicant had met with the property owners to address their concerns, and (ii) parking on Vickers Way is regulated by the City’s Traffic Bylaw and enforced by the Bylaws Department.

In addition, Mr. Craig confirmed that the proposed Sweden Way driveway is limited to right-in and right-out only; however, a left-in entry is permitted.

Staff Comments

Mr. Craig advised that (i) there is a Servicing Agreement associated with the project for frontage works on Vickers Way and Sweden Way, (ii) the 10 parking spaces in tandem arrangement are subject to a legal agreement restricting their use to employees,  (iii) the applicant is providing significant Traffic Demand Management (TDM) measures including one one-site electric vehicle (EV) charging station available for public use, end-of-trip cycling facilities within the building, a $50,000 cash contribution to the City for a future crosswalk on Sweden Way, and a $15,000 contribution towards public art.

Panel Discussion

The Panel expressed support for the project, noting that (i) the project is a welcome addition to the area, (ii) the building facades are well articulated, (iii) positive improvements are proposed on Vicker’s Way, and (iii) neighbours’ concerns regarding site access have been addressed by the applicant.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of a 3,379.9 m² (36,382 ft²) industrial building at 12580 Vickers Way on a site zoned Industrial Retail (IR1); and

2.

Vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to:

(a)

Reduce the required number of required parking spaces from 136 to 66;

(b)

Reduce the required number of loading spaces from two medium and one large loading space to two medium loading spaces; and

(c)

Permit car parking spaces for employees to be provided in a tandem arrangement.

CARRIED

2.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 17-778295   
(REDMS No. 6164058)

APPLICANT:

Dagneault Planning Consultants Ltd.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

7341 and 7351 No. 5 Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

To issue an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) Development Permit at 7341 and 7351 No. 5 Road, in order to allow a subdivision application for a lot line adjustment.

Applicant’s Comments

Brian Dagneault, Dagneault Planning Consultants Ltd., introduced the subject development permit application and noted that the intent of the subject application is to re-shape the on-site Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) on the subject properties in order to adjust the shared property line between the two properties and create two equal parcels and facilitate the construction of a single-family home on each parcel.

Bruce McTavish and Taisha Mitchell, McTavish Resources and Management Consultants,

with the aid of a video presentation (attached to and forming part of these Minutes as
Schedule 2) reviewed the results of the ESA environmental inventory and assessment conducted on the site and the applicant’s proposed ESA compensation scheme.

In addition, Ms. Mitchell stated that the (i) all existing trees on-site are proposed to be retained and protected, and (ii) a Qualified Environmental Professional (QEP) will monitor ESA enhancements for three years and provide an annual report. 

In response to a query from the Panel, Ms. Mitchell acknowledged that as part of the ESA compensation planting, four conifer species and two deciduous trees are proposed to be planted.

Gallery Comments

None.

Correspondence

None.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) Development Permit be issued at 7341 and 7351 No. 5 Road, in order to allow a subdivision application for a lot line adjustment.

CARRIED

3.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 17-792077    
(REDMS No. 6155885)

APPLICANT:

Konic Development

PROPERTY LOCATION:

9851, 9891 Steveston Highway and 10931 Southgate Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

Permit the construction of 11 townhouses at 9851, 9891 Steveston Highway and 10931 Southgate Road on a site zoned “Low Density Townhouses (RTL4)”; and

2.

Vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to:

(a)

allow seven resident vehicle parking spaces to be small-sized; and

(b)

reduce the minimum front yard on Southgate Road and the exterior side yard on Steveston Highway from 6.0 m to 5.0 m.

Applicant’s Comments

Jiang Zhu, Imperial Architecture, provided background information on the proposed development, and highlighted the following:

§   

the two three-storey townhouse buildings facing Steveston Highway have been stepped down to two-storeys at the west and east ends to provide an appropriate interface with the single-family neighbourhood;

§   

a Tudor architectural style is proposed and six different types of unit lay-outs are provided;

§   

the proposed development includes one convertible unit; and

§   

the project has been designed to achieve an EnerGuide rating of 82.

In reply to a query from the Panel, Mr. Zhu reviewed the rationale and history of the proposed building setback variances for the project.

Meredith Mitchell, M2 Landscape Architecture, briefed the Panel on the main landscaping features of the project, noting that protection and retention of two existing trees (one off-site and one on-site), provision of significant on-site pedestrian circulation areas, and accessibility to the site were important considerations in the landscape design for the project.

In addition, Ms. Mitchell further noted that (i) permeable paving treatment is proposed for the internal drive aisle on pedestrian circulation areas and at the drive aisle entry up to the entrance to the outdoor amenity area, (ii) a variety of plant materials are proposed along the Steveston Highway frontage to provide an active street frontage, (iii) there is a significant amount of natural surveillance on-site, (iv) the outdoor amenity area provides active and passive play opportunities, (v) individual rear yard spaces of two-storey rear units are larger due to the proposed reduction in building setback from the south property line, and (vi) the applicant will make a cash-in-lieu contribution to the City’s Tree Compensation Fund for replacement trees that cannot be accommodated on-site.

In response to queries from the Panel, Ms. Mitchell acknowledged that (i) the proposed landscaping along the Southgate Road frontage matches the existing single-family character of the neighbourhood, and (ii) the pad mounted transformer (PMT) at the northeast corner is accessible from the internal drive aisle and screened from the street frontage on Southgate Road.

Staff Comments

Mr. Craig advised that (i) the two proposed variances were identified at rezoning stage and no concerns were noted from the public, (ii) the proposed setback variance along Steveston Highway allows an  increase in rear yard spaces of rear units and provides greater separation from single-family units to the north, (iii) the distance between the curb of Steveston Highway and Southgate Road and the building face is between 9.0 to 9.5 meters, (iv) the applicant has submitted an acoustical and thermal report and noise mitigation is factored in the design of the buildings to ensure that they meet Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) standards, (v) there will be frontage improvements along both Steveston Highway and Southgate Road through a Servicing Agreement, and (vi) a cash-in-lieu contribution for affordable housing is included in the  rezoning considerations for the subject development.

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Craig confirmed that a future bicycle lane could be accommodated along the Steveston Highway frontage.

Panel Discussion

In response to queries from the Panel, the design team acknowledged that (i) a solid wood fence provides separation between the subject development and the adjacent property to the northeast,  (ii) the PMT at the northeast corner will be  screened and set back from the north property line, (iii) an air source heat pump will be provided for each unit and will be screened, and (iv) there is no clear delineation of the paving treatment for pedestrian and vehicular circulation at the site entry on Steveston Highway as the intended main pedestrian access to the site is at the pedestrian entry point off Southgate Road.

Gallery Comments

None.

Correspondence

None.

Panel Discussion

The Panel expressed support for the project, noting that the proposed setback variance along Steveston Highway will benefit the project and the adjacent single-family homes to the north.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

Permit the construction of 11 townhouses at 9851, 9891 Steveston Highway and 10931 Southgate Road on a site zoned “Low Density Townhouses (RTL4)”; and

2.

Vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to:

(a)

allow seven resident vehicle parking spaces to be small-sized; and

(b)

reduce the minimum front yard on Southgate Road and the exterior side yard on Steveston Highway from 6.0 m to 5.0 m.

CARRIED

4.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 18-816029, HERITAGE ALTERATION PERMIT 
18-840922, ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREA DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 18-8409     
(REDMS No. 6151211 v. 6)

APPLICANT:

Oval 8 Holdings Ltd. Inc. No. 0805724

PROPERTY LOCATION:

A Development Permit (DP) at 6811 Pearson Way, a Heritage Alteration Permit (HA) at 6900 River Road, and an Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) DP at 6900 River Road and portions of  6899 Pearson Way and 6811 Pearson Way

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

Issue a Development Permit (DP 18-816029) to:

(a)

permit the construction of 3 residential towers consisting of approximately 459 units at 6811 Pearson Way on a site zoned “High Rise Apartment and Olympic Oval (ZMU4) – Oval Village (City Centre)”; and

(b)

vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to:

(i)

waive the requirement for on-site large size loading spaces; and

(ii)

increase the maximum permitted building projection into the Pearson Way public road setback from 1 m up to 2.5 m for proposed Tower F and G balconies;

2.

Issue a Heritage Alteration Permit (HA 18-840992) to permit the construction of an elevated public walkway and installation of heritage interpretative panels at 6900 River Road; and

3.

Issue an Environmentally Sensitive Area Development Permit (ESA DP 18-840993) to permit construction of a public walkway and to introduce ecological enhancements at 6900 River Road and portions of 6899 Pearson Way and 6811 Pearson Way.

Applicant’s Comments

Gwyn Vose, IBI Group Architects Inc., with the aid of a video presentation (attached to and forming part of these Minutes as Schedule 3) provided background information on the proposed development and highlighted the following:

§   

the three buildings have been arranged to maximize views from the site and create as much open spaces as possible;

§   

Building H is angled to the side to open up a new public open space to the west;

§   

the new driveway to the south of Tower F is intended to provide access to loading and garbage for the tower and the entire development and the new driveway to the north provides access to the underground parkade;

§   

the building massing is controlled by the new flight approach slope determined by the Vancouver Airport Authority (VAA); 

§   

high quality building materials are proposed throughout the development, including dark and light stones, metal panels, and energy efficient glazing with low-e coating;

§   

vertical bands of stone cladding and glass strips between the balcony rows provide a vertical expression  to the proposed towers; 

§   

one to four-bedroom residential units are proposed in the project;

§   

the three towers are connected by a low-rise indoor amenity structure and common areas;

§   

the project has been designed to achieve LEED Silver equivalency and be connected to a District Energy Utility (DEU) system; and

§   

provision for electric vehicle (EV) charging is proposed for each parking stall in the parkade and a charging infrastructure for the secured bicycle storage areas.

Chris Phillips, PFS Studio, with the aid of a video presentation (attached to and forming part of these Minutes as Schedule 3), noted that (i) the project’s open space concept consists of the continuous riverfront, park system and dike trail and a series of open spaces that connect to these, (ii) the Middle Arm experiential walk tells the natural and cultural history of the Middle Arm, (iii) open spaces for the site includes a large public open space, a riverfront natural park, a natural area on Lot 14 and a north-south greenway along the east side, and semi-private courtyards, among others, (iv) there is a strong network of walking and cycling throughout the site, and (v) a wayfinding plan is provided for the site.

In addition, Mr. Phillips reviewed (i) the proposed landscaping for the public open space to the west, (ii) the landscape elements along the riverfront park and proposed improvements which  include increase the dike elevation, (iii) the landscaping for the courtyard, (iv) the role of the Gilbert Greenway to the east and proposed landscaping including the construction of an elevated walkway, (v) the heritage landscape and interpretation including the heritage plan for the site and its key components,  and (vi) the heritage interpretation panel design.

Keven Goodearle, PGL Environmental Consultants, with the aid of a video presentation (attached to and forming part of these Minutes as Schedule 3), reviewed the boundary for the current ESA within the site established in 2012, noting that three different ESAs had been established through rezoning. Mr. Goodearle clarified that the boardwalk encroachment into the ESA is actually only approximately 200 square meters, as the 516 square meters indicated in the presentation had not been updated.

Mr. Goodearle further noted that (i) mitigation of ESA encroachment and impacts to the site include creation of new ESA over parkade within the Riparian Management Area (RMA) on Lot 17, (ii) a modified natural successional approach will be used to compensate for ESA and RMA impacts, and (iii) the proposed ESA compensation and enhancement scheme will result in a net gain of 726 square meters of ESA.

In addition, Mr. Goodearle reviewed (i) the areas where native planting will be incorporated into the landscaping, (ii) the ESA existing conditions, and (iii) the habitat compensation plan.

Staff Comments

Mr. Craig noted that (i) the heritage aspects of the proposal were reviewed and supported by the Richmond Heritage Commission, (ii) the Transportation Demand Management  (TDM) measures strategy associated with the project includes three bicycle maintenance areas within the development as well as access to the private Aspac shuttle service, (iii) the project has been designed to achieve aircraft noise standards, and (iv) a five-year ESA enhancement monitoring period is proposed which exceeds the typical three-year period based on the type of planting proposed and the public access into the area.

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Craig confirmed that (i) the City-owned child care facility on Lot 13 will be subject to a separate process, and (ii) legal agreements secured to date require the child care facility to be delivered prior to occupancy of the development site.

Gallery Comments

None.

Correspondence

None.

Panel Discussion

The Panel expressed support for the project, noting that (i) the applicant has put a lot of thought and effort into the project, (ii) the dike improvements are an important addition to the island’s overall dike system, (iii) controlled access to the greenway and ESA are well done, and (iv) the large public open space area is well designed and a significant addition to the neighbourhood.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

1.

That a Development Permit (DP 18-816029) be issued, which would:

(a)

permit construction of 3 residential towers consisting of approximately 459 units at 6811 Pearson Way on a site zoned “High Rise Apartment and Olympic Oval (ZMU4) – Oval Village (City Centre)”; and

(b)

vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to:

(i)

waive the requirement for on-site large size loading spaces; and

(ii)

increase the maximum permitted building projection into the Pearson Way public road setback from 1 m up to 2.5 m for proposed Tower F and G balconies;

2.

That a Heritage Alteration Permit (HA 18-840992) be issued to permit construction of an elevated public walkway and installation of heritage interpretative panels at 6900 River Road; and

3.

That an Environmentally Sensitive Area Development Permit (ESA DP
18-840993) be issued to permit construction of a public walkway and to introduce ecological enhancements at 6900 River Road and portions of 6899 Pearson Way and 6811 Pearson Way.

CARRIED

5.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 18-829286   
(REDMS No. 6154118 v. 5)

APPLICANT:

Oris Developments (Hamilton) Corp.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

23200 Gilley Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

Permit the construction of a four-storey, mixed-use development with a partially below-grade parkade with 2,345 m2 (25,239 ft2) of commercial/retail space and 223 units at 23200 Gilley Road on a site zoned "Residential / Limited Commercial (ZMU35) – Neighbourhood Village Centre (Hamilton)”.

Applicant’s Comments

Dana Westermark, Oris Consulting Ltd, introduced the project, noting that (i) the proposed development is a continuation of the development across Gilley Road currently under construction, (ii) affordable housing units in a mix of unit types including three-bedroom units are proposed, and (iii) the project’s energy and sustainability features include a geo-exchange heating and cooling system and a variable refrigerant flow (VRF) system.

Bryce Rositch, Rositch Hemphill Architects, provided background information on the proposed development and highlighted the following:

§   

the project is part of a larger development in four parcels;

§   

the U-shaped and L-shaped buildings provide a street wall along Gilley Road, reduces the impact to the properties to the south, and allows the provision of south-facing landscaped courtyards;

§   

retail spaces are proposed along Gilley Road, including a large retail space in the east building, which is intended to accommodate a grocery store;

§   

the proposed north-south mews at mid-block is a continuation of the mews across Gilley Road, and includes surface parking, access to loading area, an outdoor plaza area; and

§   

the proposed architecture is vibrant and colourful.

Michael Patterson, P+A Landscape Architecture, briefed the Panel on the main landscaping features of the project, noting that (i) the south-facing courtyards allow good sunlight exposure, (ii) ground floor units facing to the courtyards are provided with generous patios and have direct access to the courtyards, (iii) the courtyards provide play areas, covered barbeque areas, spaces for social gatherings and connectivity to on-site and off-site pedestrian circulation areas, (iv) the mews provide pedestrian connectivity to the pathway along the southern edge of the site and the community centre and elementary school to the east, (v) potential locations have been identified for public art, and (vi) some existing trees will be retained and the number of replacement trees exceeds City requirements.

In addition, Mr. Patterson reviewed the proposed landscaping for the mews, particularly its paving treatment, noting that the mews is intended for shared pedestrian and vehicular use.

In reply to a query from the Panel, Mr. Rositch confirmed that a loading area is provided for the large retail space in Building A.

Staff Comments

Mr. Craig noted that (i) there is a Servicing Agreement associated with the project for frontage improvements along Gilley Road and Smith Drive as well as linear trail and RMA enhancements within Queens Canal adjacent to the site, (ii) 133 Basic Universal Housing (BUH) units are included in the project, (iii) the applicant has submitted acoustical reports to demonstrate that the project will meet CHMC noise standards, and (iv) 14 affordable housing units are included in the project and a housing agreement for these units have been adopted by Council.

Gallery Comments

None.

Correspondence

None.

Panel Discussion

In response to queries from the Panel, the project’s design team noted that (i) an elevated crosswalk will be installed across Smith Drive to provide safe pedestrian connection from the proposed development to Hamilton Community Centre and Hamilton Elementary School, (ii) a median boulevard will be installed along portions of Smith Drive and no vehicular access to the mews from Smith Drive will reduce vehicular circulation and enhance pedestrian safety on Smith Drive, and (iii) level pedestrian access to retail spaces along Gilley Road are limited to the mid-block portion.

In response to a query from the Panel, Mr. Westermark reviewed the proposed construction works on Gilley Road and provided a timeline for expected completion of surface works, noting that there will be traffic disruptions during road construction.

In response to further queries from the Panel, Mr. Westermark noted that (i) the applicant had conducted two neighbourhood information and consultation sessions, (ii) the surface parking stalls on the mews is primarily intended for commercial parking during daytime, (iii) the residential units along the mews are all single level, and (iv) limited business use, e.g. an accountant’s office, is allowed in the residential units.

It was noted that delineation between the mews and the public street through installing adequate signage to avoid parking complaints should be done, and staff was directed to take the matter under advisement.

Panel Discussion

The Panel expressed support for the project, noting that the project is well thought out and a welcome addition to the area.

In addition, the Chair advised the applicant to be mindful of reported security issues in the area during pre-construction activities.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would permit the construction of a four-storey, mixed-use development with a partially below-grade parkade with 2,345 m² (25,239 ft²) of commercial/retail space and 223 units at 23200 Gilley Road on a site zoned "Residential / Limited Commercial (ZMU35) – Neighbourhood Village Centre (Hamilton)”.

CARRIED

6.

Date of Next Meeting:  May 29, 2019

7.

Adjournment

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting be adjourned at 5:41 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, May 15, 2019.

_______________________________

_____________________________

Cecilia Achiam 
Chair

Rustico Agawin 
Committee Clerk