December 11, 2019 - Minutes

Time:

3:30 p.m.

Place:

Council Chambers
Richmond City Hall

Present:

Joe Erceg, Chair
Cecilia Achiam, General Manager, Community Safety 
Milton Chan, Acting Director, Engineering

Minutes

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Development Permit Panel held on November 26, 2019 be adopted.

CARRIED

1.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 17-791045 
(REDMS No. 6288179)

APPLICANT:

BOLD Properties (Cooney) Limited Partnership

PROPERTY LOCATION:

6333 Cooney Road

INTENT OF PERMIT:

Permit the construction of a high-rise building containing approximately 83 dwelling units at 6333 Cooney Road on a site zoned “High Rise Apartment (ZHR8) Brighouse Village”.

Applicant’s Comments

Simon Ho, S2 Architecture, with the aid of a visual presentation (copy on file, City Clerk’s Office), provided background information on the proposed development including the site context and layout, the project’s design rationale, and building floor plans, highlighting the following:

§   

an interim City lane will be constructed along the south edge of the subject site that will provide vehicular and pedestrian access to the proposed development; 

§   

80 percent of the 83 residential units have two or more bedrooms;

§   

the penthouse units are typically larger and set back further than the majority of units in the building to minimize shadowing;

§   

an outdoor amenity space and indoor amenity room pavilion are located on the podium roof level;

§   

the building is sited as close as possible to the southwest corner of the site to minimize shadowing on adjacent developments and maximize sunlight exposure to the outdoor amenity area; 

§   

the building is fairly articulated on all sides to break up the massing;

§   

the parkade wall will be screened to avoid light pollution from vehicles coming out from the parkade; and

§   

high quality materials are proposed for the building, including cementitious panel with metal trim.

David Stoyko, Connect Landscape Architecture, briefed the Panel on the main landscape features of the project, noting that (i) the proposed landscape design is integrated with the architecture of the building, (ii) climbing plants will help mitigate the blank parkade wall on the south side of the building, (iii) active and passive spaces are proposed for the outdoor amenity area including a children’s play area for different age groups, (iv) a green roof is proposed on top of the indoor amenity room pavilion, and (v) the proposed planting palette will provide seasonal interest.

In addition, Mr. Ho advised that the developer and the project development team  will undertake the following measures to address the neighbours’ construction-related concerns: (i) assessing and documenting existing conditions by engineers prior to construction, (ii) monitoring impacts during construction stage, (iii) assessing and documenting impacts after completion of construction, and (iv) addressing construction related impacts.

In reply to queries from the Panel, Wayne Craig, Director, Development, noted that (i) there is no condition associated with the subject Development Permit application that will ensure that the applicant will undertake the proposed measures to address construction-related concerns; however, staff will work with the applicant to ensure that these will be undertaken, and (ii) the applicant had provided voluntary cash contributions for the City’s Affordable Housing Strategy through previous rezoning applications and will be providing an additional voluntary contribution in the amount of $100,000.

Discussion ensued with regard to the proposed play equipment in the outdoor amenity area and it was noted that (i) the proposed play equipment is not adequate for the family-oriented development, and (ii) the applicant should work with staff to review the proposed children’s play area including the play equipment to be installed prior to the application moving forward for Council consideration.

Gallery Comments

Shenwei Wang, 8288 Saba Road, queried about the type of the foundation that will be used for the subject development and expressed concern regarding (i) the foundation of the building at 8288 Saba Road which had caused the building to tilt and damage the sidewalk, (ii) the sanitary sewer currently servicing the building at 8288 Saba Road appears to be exceeding its capacity, and (iii) potential shadowing, traffic and privacy impacts of the subject development on the neighbourhood.

In reply to the query and concerns expressed by the Mr. Wang, Mr. Ho noted that the project’s geotechnical consultant will determine the appropriate foundation for the proposed development and ensure that it would not negatively impact neighbouring developments. In addition, Mr. Craig confirmed that (i) the applicant will be required to provide geotechnical reports as part of the Building Permit process, (ii) the existing sanitary sewer will be removed and a new sanitary sewer upgraded to current City standards will be installed, (ii) the proposed development complies with the City’s tower separation guidelines, (iii) the siting of the proposed building at the southeast corner of the site was would minimize shadowing on adjacent developments, and (iv) the project was reviewed by the City’s Transportation Division with regard to the potential traffic that will be generated on the site.

Correspondence

Shenwei Wang, 8288 Saba Road (Schedule 1)

Mr. Craig noted that Mr. Wang and staff have exchanged a series of emails regarding Mr. Wang’s queries and concerns, including the process to be followed for approval of a Development Permit application.

Andy Gao, GUD Group (on behalf of the owner of 6371 Cooney Road) (Schedule 2)

Mr. Craig noted that Mr. Gao, representing the owner of the property directly to the south of the proposed development, indicated support for the proposal.

Panel Discussion

The Panel expressed support for the application subject to (i) the applicant working with staff to review the design of the children’s play area and proposed play equipment to ensure that these are adequate for a family-oriented development, and (ii) the applicant’s proposed measures to address potential construction-related impacts to neighbouring developments be included as a condition for Building Permit issuance. 

In addition, the Panel noted that the family-oriented project is well designed and expressed appreciation for the applicant’s additional voluntary contribution to the Affordable Housing Fund.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would permit the construction of a high-rise building containing approximately 83 dwelling units at 6333 Cooney Road on a site zoned “High Rise Apartment (ZHR8) Brighouse Village”.

CARRIED

2.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 18-797785 
(REDMS No. 6342646)

APPLICANT:

Sian Group Investments Inc.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

9680 Williams Road (formerly 9620, 9640, 9660 & 9680 Williams Road)

INTENT OF PERMIT:

Permit the construction of 28 townhouse units, including six affordable housing units, at 9680 Williams Road (formerly 9620, 9640, 9660 & 9680 Williams Road) on a site zoned “Medium Density Town Housing (ZT82) – Williams Road”.

Applicant’s Comments

Eric Law, Eric Law Architect, with the aid of a visual presentation (copy on file, City Clerk’s Office) provided background information on the proposed development, noting that (i) six affordable housing units are proposed in the 28-unit townhouse project, (ii) two-storey rear units in duplex form are proposed to provide an appropriate interface with adjacent single-family homes, (iii) three-storey units are proposed along Williams Road, and (iv) the architecture, materials and colours of the proposed development are compatible with neighbouring developments.

Denitsa Dimitrova, PMG Landscape Architects, briefed the Panel on the main landscaping features of the project, noting that (i) the existing off-site Cherry tree at the northwest corner of the site will be retained and protected, (ii) each unit will be provided with a private yard with patio, lawn area and shade tree, (iii) the proposed play equipment for the children’s play area provide different  play opportunities for different age groups, and (iv) permeable pavers are proposed on certain areas of the site.

In reply to queries from the Panel, the project’s design team noted that (i) the proposed children’s play equipment include arch rock climber, craw tube, and mini pod toad stool which provide active play opportunities for children, (ii) a seating area is provided close to the children’s play area for parents and caregivers, (iii) the elevation of the subject site along the south property line is higher than the adjacent properties to the south by 0.5 to 0.7 meters, and (iv) there is an existing utility right-of-way along the south property line.

Staff Comments

Mr. Craig noted that (i) the proposed six affordable housing units will be subject to a housing agreement with the City, and (ii) there will be a Servicing Agreement associated with the project for frontage improvements along Williams Road and upgrades to the public walkway along the east property line.

Gallery Comments

None.

Correspondence

Pushpinder and Usha Chhibbar, 9831 Swansea Drive, Hofit Sabi, 9851 Swansea Drive, Jeff Kwai Chugg Lau and Ruby Oi Yee Kwok, 9871 Swansea Drive (Schedule 3)

Mr. Craig noted that neighbours to the south have expressed concerns regarding privacy and requested the installation of a hedge along the south property line of the subject site. He added that the a hedge cannot be installed along the south property line due to the existing utility right-of-way; however, the applicant is proposing to increase the height of the fence on top of the retaining wall to address the neighbours’ privacy concern.

With regard to the neighbours’ other concerns, Mr. Craig noted that (i) the applicant is willing to implement a pest management program prior to demolition of existing structures on the subject site, and (ii) the project developer will prepare a construction management program to address the neighbours’ concerns regarding potential construction impacts.

In reply to a query from the Panel, Mr. Craig advised that no trees or hedges are allowed to be planted within the utility right-of-way along the south property line as these will potentially cause damage to the infrastructure.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would permit the construction of 28 townhouse units, including six affordable housing units, at 9680 Williams Road (formerly 9620, 9640, 9660 & 9680 Williams Road) on a site zoned “Medium Density Town Housing (ZT82) – Williams Road”.

CARRIED

3.

DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 18-818671 
(REDMS No. 5856972)

APPLICANT:

Christopher Bozyk Architects Ltd.

PROPERTY LOCATION:

4693, 4720, 4740 Vanguard Road and Road Parcel Richmond Key 20909

INTENT OF PERMIT:

1.

Permit the construction of two industrial buildings on the consolidated parcel including 4693, 4720, 4740 Vanguard Road and Road Parcel Richmond Key 20909 on a site zoned “Industrial Retail (IR1)”; and

2.

Vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to:

(a)

Increase the maximum height for buildings from 12.0 m to 16.15 m; and

(b)

Reduce the minimum vehicle manoeuvring aisle width from 7.5 m to 6.7 m.

Applicant’s Comments

Christopher Bozyk, Christopher Bozyk Architects, Ltd., accompanied by Gordon Yeh, Alliance Partners, provided background information on the proposed development, noting that (i) the proposed height for the two buildings would allow more intensive use of the industrial space, (ii) the applicant has reduced the amount of glazing for the buildings in response to comments of staff and the Advisory Design Panel to enhance energy efficiency and sustainability, and mitigate the potential for bird strikes on the two buildings.

In reply to queries from the Panel, Mr. Bozyk and Mr. Yeh noted that (i)  the two industrial buildings will provide stacked warehouse units, (ii) the two large freight elevators provided in each building can accommodate vehicles such as vans and forklifts, (iii) there is a large drive aisle on the second floor of the two buildings, (iv) an elevator for pedestrian use will be provided in each building, (v) each warehouse unit is approximately 3,000 square feet, and (vi) large loading spaces are provided on the site.

Staff Comments

Mr. Craig noted that (i) staff support the two  proposed variances, (ii) the proposed height variance will allow for more intensive use of the site, (iii) the proposed variance for minimum vehicle manoeuvring aisle width has been reviewed and supported by Transportation staff and is consistent with similar variances granted to other projects, (iv) changes to the buildings’ cladding materials have been made in response to ornithologist’s recommendations to mitigate potential bird strikes,  (v) green roofs and solar panels will be installed on the two buildings, (vi) 10 percent of the required parking stalls or seven parking stalls will be provided with Level 2 electric vehicle charging, and (vii) the applicant will provide a voluntary contribution to the City’s Public Art Fund. 

In reply to queries from the Panel, Mr. Craig noted that (i)  historically, the neighbouring property to the north of the subject site has informal loading access to the subject site; however, an easement formalizing the arrangement is not in place or currently proposed by the applicant, (ii) the number of parking stalls proposed for the project exceeds the minimum requirement in the Zoning Bylaw, (iii) the neighbouring property to the north has the ability to provide on-site loading, and (iv) there will be a  restrictive covenant registered on Title as a condition of Development Permit issuance to reinforce the site zoning and provide notification to future purchasers of strata lots with regard to the zoning of the property.

Panel Discussion

The Panel expressed support for the project, particularly the design of the two buildings, the loading scheme, servicing of upper levels of the buildings, and the project’s sustainability features.

Gallery Comments

None.

Correspondence

None.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That a Development Permit be issued which would:

1.

permit the construction of two industrial buildings on the consolidated parcel including 4693, 4720, 4740 Vanguard Road and Road Parcel Richmond Key 20909 on a site zoned “Industrial Retail (IR1)”; and

2.

vary the provisions of Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500 to:

(a)

increase the maximum height for buildings from 12.0 m to 16.15 m; and

(b)

reduce the minimum vehicle manoeuvring aisle width from 7.5 m to 6.7 m.

CARRIED

4.

GENERAL COMPLIANCE – REQUEST BY GBL ARCHITECTS FOR A GENERAL COMPLIANCE RULING AT 6340 NO. 3 ROAD 
(File Ref. No.:  DP 18-822743)  (REDMS No. 6337388)

APPLICANT:

GBL Architects

PROPERTY LOCATION:

6340 No. 3 Road

INTENT OF APPLICATION:

Consider the attached plans to apply a public art element to the glazing of the southwest corner of the project facing No. 3 Road and Cook Road, to change the glazing on the second floor west and south elevations of the office building facing No. 3 Road and Cook Road, and include painted design elements on the east elevation of the parkade podium wall facing the lane/pedestrian mews to be in General Compliance with Development Permit (DP 18-822743).

Applicant’s Comments

Zora Katic, GBL Architects, accompanied by Katya Yushmanova, PWL Partnership, with the aid of a visual presentation (copy on file, City Clerk’s Office), briefed the Panel regarding the proposed changes to the previously approved Development Permit plans for the 15-storey mixed use development, highlighting the following:

§   

the large triangular angled façade at the southwest corner of the office building previously designated as a placeholder for a public art element in the original Development Permit plans will be utilized to incorporate a public art design by a commissioned artist on glass material;

§   

clear glass will be used in lieu of coloured glass on the west and south facades of the Early Childhood Development (ECD) Hub on the second floor; and

§   

painted, artistic design elements and modifications to landscaping will be applied on the lower east elevation of the office building facing the pedestrian mews in lieu of the previously proposed artistic decorative finish.

In reply to queries from the Panel, Ms. Katic acknowledged that (i) the proposed façade treatment on the lower east elevation of the office building will improve the pedestrian experience, (ii) external lighting is not proposed for the public art element, and (iii) there will be lighting along the east elevation of the office building facing the pedestrian mews; however, wall mounted lighting is not proposed.

Staff Comments

Mr. Craig noted that staff is supportive of the General Compliance application as it fulfills the intent of the approved Development Permit.

Gallery Comments

None.

Correspondence

None.

Panel Decision

It was moved and seconded

That the attached plans to apply a public art element to the glazing of the southwest corner of the project facing No. 3 Road and Cook Road, to change the glazing on the second floor west and south elevations of the office building facing No. 3 Road and Cook Road, and include painted design elements on the east elevation of the parkade podium wall facing the lane/pedestrian mews be considered to be in General Compliance with Development Permit (DP 18-822743).

CARRIED

5.

Date of Next Meeting:  January 15, 2020 (Tentative)

6.

Adjournment

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting be adjourned at 5:00 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, December 11, 2019.

_______________________________

_____________________________

Joe Erceg 
Chair

Rustico Agawin 
Committee Clerk