December 16, 2019 - Minutes
|
Regular Council meeting for Public Hearings
Monday, December 16, 2019
Place:
Council Chambers
Present:
Mayor Malcolm D. Brodie, Chair
Claudia Jesson, Corporate Officer
Call to Order:
Mayor Brodie opened the proceedings at 7:01 p.m.
Richmond City Hall
Councillor Chak Au
Councillor Carol Day
Councillor Kelly Greene
Councillor Alexa Loo
Councillor Bill McNulty
Councillor Linda McPhail
Councillor Harold Steves
Councillor Michael Wolfe
1.
RICHMOND ZONING BYLAW 8500, AMENDMENT BYLAW 10060 (RZ 17-771371)
Applicant’s Comments:
Chris Bonkowski and Inder Johal, property owners, provided background information and noted that (i) Bricklane Properties is a mid-sized development company based out of Richmond, (ii) Bricklane Properties has worked with city staff to follow all procedures ensuring all criteria was satisfied, (iii) the project is a right fit for neighbourhood, (iv) there is a need for duplexes as they provide an affordable alternative to the single family dwelling, and (v) the original owners of the property plan to move into one of the duplexes.
(Location: 11480 and 11500 Railway Avenue; Applicant: Design Work Group Ltd.)
Written Submissions:
(a)
Valentina Wojna, 11460 Railway Avenue (Schedule 1)
(b)
Chris Bonkowski and Inder Johal, owners 11480 and 11500 Railway Avenue (Schedule 2)
Submissions from the floor:
Nadja Wojna, original owners of 11480 and 11500 Railway Avenue, expressed her support for the development. She noted that her family has owned the property since 1956 and feel strongly about the community and would like to age in place in this neighbourhood. Bricklane Properties is a member of the community and has proactively solicited input from the neighbours throughout the process.
In response to a query from Council, Ms. Wojna expressed that the proposed parking for the duplexes was adequate.
Ellen Gould, 11491 Kestrel Drive, was supportive of the application, noting that the proposed duplexes are attractive two storey homes.
Carmen Lam, 11511 Kestrel Drive, was supportive of the application, noting that they appreciated the developer working with the neighbours to ensure the building height was favourable.
PH19/12-1
It was moved and seconded
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10060 be given second and third readings.
CARRIED
2.
RICHMOND ZONING BYLAW 8500, AMENDMENT BYLAW 10091 (RZ 17-790028)
Applicant’s Comments:
Rosa Salcido, Architect, provided background information on the application noting that the surrounding neighbours were consulted and there was no opposition. One neighbour was concerned about the building height and parking but were ensured it is a two level project and shown a proposed site plan showing two parking spaces per unit plus the visitor parking space.
In response to the queries from Council, the applicant stated that (i) the hedge will remain and be protected during construction, (ii) in order to increase parking spaces, the outdoor or landscape area would be compromised, (iii) there are two parking spaces per unit and the proposal is not expecting additional cars, and (iv) the solid walls on the east and west provide privacy and is not a complete flat wall as there is a recess.
Written Submissions:
None.
Submissions from the floor:
Jim McGrath, 10131 Lawson Drive, expressed opposition to the application, noting that (i) there is too much densification for the lot size, (ii) the proposed height is much higher than other two storey properties, (iii) the square footage is excessive for each housing unit, (iv) the parking and turnaround space will reduce green space, (v) the eastern wall for the east side duplex is overbearing, (vi) the parking demands will overflow onto Lassam Road, (vii) higher density will increase traffic, and (viii) this type of housing is not affordable for young families.
(Location: 5500 Williams Road; Applicant: Vivid Green Architecture)
PH19/12-2
It was moved and seconded
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10091 be given second and third readings.
In response to query from Council, staff noted that a recent staff memorandum on the results of a shadow study included images showing the shadows from the existing hedge, which would create a strong shadow effect. The property is to the north and would not shade properties to the south.
The question on the motion was then called and it was CARRIED with Cllrs. Day and Greene opposed.
3.
RICHMOND ZONING BYLAW 8500, AMENDMENT BYLAW 10101 (RZ 19-850681)
Applicant’s Comments:
The applicant was available to respond to queries.
Written Submissions:
None.
Submissions from the floor:
None.
In response to queries from Council, staff noted that both secondary suites will be 500 square feet and one will be a bachelor suite, while the other, a one bedroom suite. Staff further noted that the three trees located on the eastern neighbouring property were removed under a separate rezoning on the neighbouring site.
(Location: 11891 Dunavon Place; Applicant: Dmitri Dudchenko)
PH19/12-3
It was moved and seconded
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10101 be given second and third readings.
CARRIED with Cllr. Greene opposed
4.
RICHMOND ZONING BYLAW NO. 8500, AMENDMENT BYLAW NO. 10107 (ZT 18-827860)
Applicant’s Comments:
The applicant was available to respond to queries.
Written Submissions:
Sandy Leung, Richmond resident (Schedule 3)
Submissions from the floor:
(Location: 3208, 3211, and 3328 Carscallen Road; Applicant: Pinnacle Living (Capstan Village) Lands Inc.)
PH19/12-4
It was moved and seconded
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10107 be given second and third readings.
CARRIED
5.
RICHMOND ZONING BYLAW 8500, AMENDMENT BYLAW 10108 (RZ 19-857867)
Applicant’s Comments:
The applicant was available to respond to queries.
Written Submissions:
None.
Submissions from the floor:
None.
Prior to Council consideration, Wayne Craig, Director, Development, summarized the memorandum to Council noting that the applicant was willing to consider increasing the size for one of the three secondary suites and in total there will be two one-bedroom suites and one two-bedroom suite.
(Location: 10671 and 10691 Gilmore Crescent; Applicant: Cherdu Properties Ltd.)
PH19/12-5
It was moved and seconded
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10108 be given second and third readings.
CARRIED
6.
OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN BYLAW 9000, AMENDMENT BYLAW 10110 AND RICHMOND ZONING BYLAW 8500, AMENDMENT BYLAW 10111 (RZ 18-835532)
Applicant’s Comments:
The applicant was available to respond to queries.
Written Submissions:
(a)
De Whalen, Richmond Poverty Response Committee (Schedule 4)
(b)
Henry Lau, 8091 Williams Road (Schedule 5)
Submissions from the floor:
None.
(Location: 9900 No. 3 Road and 8031 Williams Road; Applicant: Mosaic No. 3 Road and Williams Limited Partnership)
PH19/12-6
It was moved and seconded
The question on the motion was not called as discussion ensued regarding the provision of balconies.
In response to query from Council, Wayne Craig, Director, Development, noted that the developer has committed to explore the provision of balconies and an investigation would go through the Development Permit Panel; however, there are no assurances that balconies would be provided.
That Official Community Plan Bylaw 9000, Amendment Bylaw 10110 be given second and third readings.
The question on the main motion was then called and it was CARRIED
As a result of the discussion, the following referral motion was introduced:
PH19/12-7
It was moved and seconded
That the application be referred back and the applicant be directed to provide balconies with a depth of approximately 3 feet as set out in the staff memorandum.
The question on the referral motion was not called as discussion took place regarding the provision of balcony space and the reduction of the common outdoor space.
In response to queries from Council, Wayne Craig, Director, Development, noted that (i) staff worked with the developer to oversize the common outdoor amenity space on the rooftop in response to the lack of private balconies, (ii) if 3 foot balconies are provided, the developer would be required to reduce the size of the rooftop common space, (iii) 28 units have Juliet balconies, which are 1-1.5 foot deep, (iv) the reduction of the common space will not fall below the minimum requirement, (v) there is no quantitative amount of how much common space will be reduced, (vi) it is not an option to retain the common space and increase the size of the balconies due to building code regulations and costs to the developer, and (vii) the increased costs are due to structural and weatherproofing and there is no quantitative costs currently.
The question on the referral motion was then called and it was DEFEATED with Mayor Brodie and Cllrs. Au, Loo, McNulty, McPhail and Steves opposed.
PH19/12-8
It was moved and seconded
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10111 be given second and third readings.
CARRIED
In accordance with Section 100 of the Community Charter, Councillor Carol Day declared a conflict of interest as her husband owns a licenced bed and breakfast and Councillor Day left the meeting – 7:46 p.m.
7.
RICHMOND ZONING BYLAW NO. 8500, AMENDMENT BYLAW NO. 10066 (BOARDING & LODGING, HOSTED)
Applicant’s Comments:
Staff was available to respond to queries.
Carli Williams, Manager, Community Bylaws and Licencing noted that the amendment to the Bylaw is to clarify the definition of “Boarding and lodging” because the previous definition is too broad and open to interpretation. The new definition will not allow new homes to offer boarding and lodging and the Zoning Bylaw has always allowed up to two boarders or lodgers in a residence.
In response to queries from Council, staff noted that with the new definition it will be easier to enforce the bylaw. Staff further noted that Boarding and lodging allows two people, if there are more than two people, you must apply for a Bed and Breakfast licence.
Written Submissions:
(a)
Niti Sharma, Richmond resident (Schedule 6)
(b)
Judie Schneider, Richmond resident (Schedule 7)
Submissions from the floor:
Matthew Yeung, Richmond resident and owner occupier, expressed concerns regarding the bylaw amendment. Mr. Yeung noted that Council should consider a similar policy that the City of Toronto has passed and that this bylaw amendment will affect the Richmond School District and their Homestay Exchange Program and will hurt Homestay hosts. Mr. Yeung further noted that if the City makes it difficult to host, underground services will be created and the City may not find same level of cooperation from operators.
Niti Sharma, Richmond resident, expressed concern with the Bylaw amendment and read from her submission (attached to and forming part of these Minutes as Schedule 6)
Katherine McCreary, 7560 Glacier Crescent, expressed concerns to the bylaw amendment in regards to ensuring residents of a dwelling unit are individual owners and not a corporation. Ms. McCreary’s states that the bylaw is not consistent with Bed and Breakfast bylaw and should not allow hosts to be corporations.
In response to queries from Council, Carli Williams, Manager, Community Bylaws and Licencing noted that the rationale for having different regulations between Boarding and lodging and Bed and Breakfasts is because Boarding and lodging has a low barrier and minimal impact, whereas, once the amount of tenants surpass two, the impacts are more substantial and require greater regulations.
Brian Cooper, 5511 Cathay Road, owner and operator of Stone Henge Bed and Breakfast, expressed concerns with the enforcement of the bylaw amendment with the large amount of illegal short-term rentals.
In response to queries from Council, staff noted that (i) tickets are issued for short-term rentals found to have more than two boarders or lodgers, (ii) the City cannot issue tickets for operations advertising for more than two tenants; however, charges can be laid and licences can be suspended or cancelled, (iii) in order to be able to ticket for advertising, the bylaw would need to be amended and the legal department consulted, (iv) licences can be cancelled for absent tenants, (v) it is difficult for the City to enforce limitations on days for tenants, (vi) the operator of the bed and breakfast must reside at the property and would be the person ticketed if found in contravention of any bylaws, (vii) there are a variety of ticketing provisions and each contravention can incur a minimum of two thousand dollars up to a maximum of ten thousand dollars per count, per day, (viii) further penalties include suspension or cancellation of the licence and injunctions in the supreme court to prevent future operation, (ix) if a homestay program is organized through the school, the host would not require a business licence, and (x) the City is limited to charging one thousand dollars per ticket, per day until the illegal operation ceases.
Lynda ter Borg, 5860 Sandpiper Court, expressed concerns regarding the bylaw amendment and issues with loopholes and an underground economy of illegal rentals. Ms. ter Borg would like to see stricter regulations.
(Location: City Wide; Applicant: City of Richmond)
PH19/12-9
It was moved and seconded
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10066 be given second and third readings.
The question on the motion was not called as further discussion ensued regarding amending the bylaw so that the definition of the operator and the ownership structure of bed and breakfasts and boarding and lodging operations are restricted to a sole-proprietorship structure.
As a result of the discussion, the following referral motion was introduced:
PH19/12-10
It was moved and seconded
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10066 be referred back to staff to further refine the bylaw to include non-corporate ownership.
DEFEATED
Opposed: Mayor Brodie
Cllrs. Loo
McNulty
McPhail
Steves
Discussion further ensued regarding the need to protect renters, the increasing low vacancy rates, and the ability for renters to offset expenses by renting out units themselves.
The question on the main motion was then called and it was CARRIED with Cllrs Au, Greene and Wolfe opposed.
Direction was given to staff to conduct a review in 12 months.
PH19/12-11
It was moved and seconded
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10066 be adopted.
CARRIED
Opposed: Cllrs. Au
Greene
Wolfe
Councillor Day returned to the meeting – 8:52 p.m.
ADJOURNMENT
PH19/12-12
It was moved and seconded
That the meeting adjourn (8:53 p.m.).
Certified a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the Regular meeting for Public Hearings of the City of Richmond held on Monday, December 16, 2019.
Mayor (Malcolm D. Brodie)
Corporate Officer (Claudia Jesson)