Place:

Council Chambers

Richmond City Hall

6911 No. 3 Road

Present:

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie

Councillor Linda Barnes

Councillor Derek Dang

Councillor Evelina Halsey-Brandt

Councillor Greg Halsey-Brandt

Councillor Sue Halsey-Brandt

Councillor Ken Johnston

Councillor Bill McNulty

Councillor Harold Steves

Gail Johnson, Acting Corporate Officer

Call to Order:

Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie opened the proceedings at 7:07 p.m.

1.

ZONING AMENDMENT BYLAW 8429 (RZ 08-432190)

(2451 & 2471 McLeod Avenue;  Applicant:  Swarn Panesar)

Applicant’s Comments:

The applicant was not in attendance.

Written Submissions:

None.

Submissions from the floor:

None.

PH09/10-1

It was moved and seconded

That Zoning Amendment Bylaw 8429 be given second and third readings.

CARRIED

2.

ZONING AMENDMENT BYLAW 8545 (RZ 08-431606)

(6451 Princess Lane;  Applicant:  Penta Homes Ltd.)

Applicant’s Comments:

The applicant was available to answer queries.

Written Submissions:

None.

Submissions from the floor:

None.

PH09/10-2

It was moved and seconded

That Zoning Amendment Bylaw 8545 be given second and third readings.

CARRIED

3.

NEW ZONING BYLAW 8500 

(Entire City of Richmond;  Applicant:  City of Richmond) (Complete Bylaw 8500)

Applicant’s Comments:

Holger Burke, Development Coordinator, City of Richmond, provided a brief overview of the new Zoning Bylaw, explaining that the review to update and replace the existing Zoning and Development Bylaw No. 5300, which was initially adopted in 1989, was undertaken to address inconsistencies, provide clarity and implement new policy initiatives adopted by Council.  A consultant was retained to assist with this task.  Mr. Burke noted this is a regulatory Bylaw, not a policy document.

In addition, Mr. Burke highlighted two issues which have been the subject of recent correspondence to Council as follows:

(a)

a provision in the new Bylaw related to screening of “travel trailers” (recreation vehicles and boats) that are not parked on a required on-site parking space, on residential property.  Mr. Burke clarified the intention of this provision and how storage of existing travel trailers would be “grandfathered” from the requirements of the bylaw; and

(b)

the development of a new residence in the Richmond neighbourhood of Westwind which is subject to the requirements of Land Use Contract 157, and not the existing Zoning and Development Bylaw or the new Zoning Bylaw.  Neighbours have expressed their strong opposition to the large size and height of the proposed house and have requested a public meeting with City officials to voice their concerns.

Mr. Burke referenced a legal opinion obtained on the Land Use Contract issue which confirmed there is no relationship between the building permit/land use contract and the new Zoning Bylaw.  However, to acknowledge these concerns, it was suggested that staff could establish a working group, with representatives of the area whose property falls under this particular Land Use Contract, and provide a report back to Planning Committee in December.  The building permit has not been issued for the subject property, as discussions are being held with the owner about the neighbourhood concerns.  Mr. Burke stressed that the City cannot discharge the entire Land Use Contract without the permission of every affected property owner and Provincial Government approval.  He noted that there are several other Land Use Contracts in place in Westwind and other areas of the city, all of which were implemented in the 1970’s.

In summary, Mr. Burke suggested that staff could bring forward a resolution to be submitted to the Union of BC Municipalities to deal with the issue of Land Use Contracts in Richmond and elsewhere in the Province, if Council so desired.

Following further discussion amongst Council members and Planning and Development staff, the Mayor ruled that no delegations would be heard at this Public Hearing on the subject of the Land Use Contract, in recognition of the legal advice that it has no relationship with either the new Zoning Bylaw, or the existing Zoning and Development Bylaw.

Written Submissions:

(a)

Douglas Schwenning, 7540 Sunnybank Avenue

(b)

Arnold E. Shuchat, Richmond

(c)

Mella and George Langevin, 10011 Seacote Road

(d)

Kelvin Higo, Richmond

(e)

Heidi Tims, Richmond

(f)

Scott Stewart

(g)

Gord Cameron, 22080 Chaldecott Drive

(h)

Gerard Brunel, 11206 Kingcome Avenue

(i)

Daphne Stabler

(j)

NormDeGirolamo, 10791 Hollymount Drive

(k)

Glenn Wilson, 6300 Riverdale Drive

(l)

Melanie Arnis, 3131 Garry Street (Schedule 1)

Submissions from the floor:

Janice Frail, 4431 Candlewood Drive, spoke in opposition to the Bylaw.  Mrs. Frail expressed concern regarding the requirement to screen recreational vehicles that are visible from a public road, and believed this requirement should be omitted from the Bylaw.

Ken Frail, 4431 Candlewood Drive, spoke in opposition to the Bylaw, and made the following comments:  (i)  the best protection from vandalism is to keep recreational vehicles visible;  building hedges or fences around recreational vehicles may increase opportunities for vandalism and subsequently may increase police calls;  (ii)  hedges and fences constructed around recreational vehicles may obstruct the ability of Richmond Fire-Rescue (RFR) to safely attend fires, and that RFR and the Police should have been consulted regarding this section of the proposed bylaw;  (iii)  residents may have less opportunity to use their recreational vehicles if, as a result of this bylaw, they must store their vehicles off-site; and  (iv)  many homes do not have lane access, which potentially limits storage options.  A copy of Mr. Frail’s submission is attached to these Minutes (Schedule 2).

Norm DeGirolamo, 10791 Hollymount Drive, sought and received clarification regarding whether the grandfathering clause would apply to the owner of a recreational vehicle, if that owner was to replace a grandfathered vehicle with a newer vehicle.  He stated his opposition to this section of the Bylaw and suggested it be deleted.

Arlene Turner, 6040 Canim Place, sought and received clarification on the definition of “parking space”, the number of vehicles that are allowed on a lot, and whether grandfathering would apply to a resident who relocated a recreational vehicle from an off-site location onto his or her property.  Ms. Turner also commented on the following:  enforcement of the bylaw on the basis of a complaint seems unfair;  the proposed height of the screening fence/hedge is not adequate enough to screen most recreational vehicles;  and, the definition of “travel trailer” needs further exploration.  Ms. Turner stated she did not support the Bylaw.

Lynda Terborg, 5860 Sandpiper Court, indicated her support of the new Zoning Bylaw and queried the legal provisions of Bylaw 8500 and how it captures the amendments of Bylaw 5300.

Mark Dostie, 5580 Woodpecker Drive, commented that his property backs on to the property under discussion and questioned whether there was time for a report to be produced and sent back to Planning Committee before building permits were issued and construction began.

A resident of 20 years expressed interest in the working group and queried how it was going to be formed and who would be chosen to participate.

Michael Woytowich, 11480 Kingfisher Drive, commented that if the building permit conforms to the land use contract then he strongly supported a working group.

Rajko Jakopin, 11511 Pelican Court, commented about the inequity of the requirement for screens having to be built for recreational vehicles but not for (home occupation) commercial vehicles.

Tom Martin, a Vancouver resident and architect, referenced residential building heights and the impact of development on neighbours. Mr. Martin believed that resolving the building height issue for the property in Westwind may lead to a good solution.

The Mayor acknowledged the conclusion of the opportunity for first time presentations, and the following speaker addressed Council for the second time with new information:

Janice Frail, 4431 Candlewood Drive, commented that the definition of “travel trailer” requires more clarification, and that the bylaw seems to discriminate against recreational vehicles whereas there are other types of vehicles or trailers that look far worse. 

Discussion ensued and Council members were of the opinion that the new regulations concerning screening of travel trailers were unnecessary as:  (i)  they were not aware of complaints regarding recreational vehicles parked on residential properties;  (ii)  the nature of enforcement based on complaints received could pit neighbour against neighbour;  (iii)  this section appears to unfairly single out and discriminate against travel trailers, as opposed to other similar types of vehicles; and  (iv)  a proliferation of screening fences could be unsightly.

PH09/10-3

It was moved and seconded

That Zoning Bylaw 8500 be amended by deleting section 6.4.5 in its entirety and the term and definition for “Travel Trailer” from section 3.4  the Use and Term Definitions of the Bylaw.

CARRIED

PH09/10-4

It was moved and seconded

That Zoning Bylaw 8500 be given second reading, as amended on this day.

CARRIED

PH09/10-5

It was moved and seconded

That Zoning Bylaw 8500 be given third reading.

CARRIED

PH09/10-6

It was moved and seconded

That Zoning Bylaw 8500 be adopted.

CARRIED

The Mayor then turned the discussion towards Land Use Contract 157 and following comments and questions put by Council members to staff, there was a general understanding that the establishment of a working group comprised of a cross-section of property owners, would proceed immediately.  Following their deliberations a public meeting would be arranged and duly advertised.  Mayor Brodie stressed the limitations the City has in addressing this issue, as the Land Use Contract is a legal contract that supersedes the current Zoning Bylaw, and that there is no provincial legislation or otherwise that allows it to be ignored.  He added that approaching the UBCM and seeking the support of other BC municipalities regarding legislation to deal with Land Use Contracts was an important next step.

PH09/10-7

It was moved and seconded

That staff establish a working group for the entire area of Land Use Contract 157 with the Westwind residents and report back to the Planning Committee with the results as soon as possible following a public meeting, including information on the history and legal requirements of the existing Land Use Contract 157.

CARRIED

PH09/10-8

It was moved and seconded

That staff bring forward a resolution for submission to the Union of BC Municipalities with regard to the issue of Land Use Contracts in Richmond and elsewhere in the Province, giving notice of this action to other municipalities in the Metro Vancouver Region.

The question on the motion was not called as Council members discussed the merits of waiting until the results of the working group’s deliberations are known before taking the proposed action.  Accordingly, the following tabling motion was introduced:

PH09/10-9

It was moved and seconded

That Resolution No. PH09/10-8 be tabled until the results of the working group on Land Use Contract 157 are known.

CARRIED

ADJOURNMENT

PH09/10-10

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (8:50 p.m.).

CARRIED

Certified a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting for Public Hearings of the City of Richmond held on Monday, November 16, 2009.

Mayor (Malcolm D. Brodie)

Acting Corporate Officer,

City Clerk’s Office (Gail Johnson)