Planning Committee Meeting Minutes - November 5, 2002
Planning Committee
Date:
|
Tuesday, November 5, 2002
|
Place:
|
Anderson Room
Richmond City Hall
|
Present:
|
Councillor Bill McNulty, Chair
Councillor Lyn Greenhill, Vice-Chair
Councillor Linda Barnes
Councillor Sue Halsey-Brandt
Councillor Harold Steves
|
Call to Order:
|
The Chair called the meeting to
order at 4:00 p.m.
|
|
|
NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING DATE
|
|
2.
|
The next meeting of the
Committee will be held on Tuesday, November 19, 2002, at 4:00 p.m. in
the Anderson Room.
|
|
|
URBAN DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
|
|
3.
|
APPLICATION BY RAV BAINS
FOR REZONING AT 4280 NO. 5 ROAD FROM SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION AREA F (R1/F) TO
SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION AREA E (R1/E) AND SINGLE-FAMILY
HOUSING DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION AREA B (R1/B)
(RZ 02-209347
- Report: October 22/02, File
No.: 8060-20-7448) (REDMS No. 862823,
863268, 863272)
|
|
|
The Manager, Development Applications, Joe
Erceg, and Jenny Beran, Planner, were present.
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded
|
|
|
That Bylaw No. 7448, for the rezoning of 4280 No.
5 Road from Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area F (R1/F) to
Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area E (R1/E) and Single-Family
Housing District, Subdivision Area B (R1/B), be introduced and given first
reading.
|
CARRIED
|
|
4.
|
APPLICATION BY JAN KNAP
FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE WEST CAMBIE AREA PLAN FROM RESIDENTIAL (SINGLE
FAMILY ONLY) TO RESIDENTIAL AND FOR A REZONING AT 10420 AND 10440 ODLIN
ROAD FROM SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION AREA F (R1/F) TO
TWO-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT (R5) AND COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
(CD/28)
(RZ 02-206226 -
Report: Oct. 24/02, File No.: RZ
02-206226) (REDMS No. 778105)
|
|
|
The Manager, Development Applications, Joe
Erceg, said that the rezoning of the southern portion of the site was opposed
by staff as i) the rezoning was not consistent with the Official Community
Plan; ii) the use of CD/28 in this area was cause for concern as it only
applied to the City Centre; and iii)
the proposal put forth by the applicant was inconsistent with the
neighbourhood. In addition, advice
was given that the applicant was not prepared to enter into the usual noise
covenant required by the City as a condition of rezoning.
|
|
|
Mr. Knap referred to a letter he had written
on June 22, 2002, to the Development Co-ordinator, Holger Burke, a copy of
which is attached as Schedule 1 and forms a part of these minutes, which
indicated that the OCP amendment of September 18, 1995 would be complied
with, but that he was not in a position to sign the Noise Restrictive
Covenant due to the additional clauses it contained that could affect future
insurance coverage.
|
|
|
In response, the City Solicitor, Paul
Kendrick, indicated that as the intent of the covenant was to cover such
issues as noise and annoyances, the wording of the covenant could be amended
to reflect this distinction.
|
|
|
A discussion then ensued between Committee,
staff and the applicant which included the following points:
|
|
|
-
|
Mr. Knap considered that the narrow frontage
of his property precluded the R1/B recommendations of staff; Mr. Erceg said that insufficient frontage
on the rear lots could be dealt with by a variance;
|
|
|
-
|
the size of house that would be built on
R1/B lots would be too big for todays market;
|
|
|
-
|
although policy frameworks for new housing
types are developed, which would include how the housing type would be
integrated, as development progresses in Richmond, there are a number of
housing types that have yet to be completed.
Future population projections include numbers for the type of housing
suggested by Mr. Knap, however, the detail work, which would include a look
at each area plan as well as at the City as a whole, will not be completed in
the near future;
|
|
|
-
|
CD/28 has been exclusively used in the City
Centre area;
|
|
|
-
|
the back portion of Mr. Knaps property
could be developed now with continued discussion on the duplex property;
|
|
|
-
|
whether the access lane could be put through
to the cul-de-sac now with a possibility of opening it up in the future.
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded
|
|
|
That the amendment to
the West Cambie Area Plan from Residential (Single Family Only) to
Residential and for the rezoning of 10420 and 10440 Odlin Road from
Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area F (R1/F) to Two-Family
Housing District (R5) and Comprehensive Development District (CD/28), BE DENIED.
|
|
|
Prior to the question being called: i) Cllr. Steves said that he did not
believe that this type of flex housing should be promoted at the end of the
cul-de-sac in that it would be more beneficial on the duplex lot. In addition, Cllr. Steves said that the
property could be subdivided in a similar fashion to what exists in the
neighbourhood today; and, ii) Cllr. McNulty enquired whether the applicant
was prepared to consider the acceptable development options identified in the
staff report, however, the applicant indicated he was not prepared to do
so.
|
|
|
The question on the motion was then called
and it was CARRIED.
|
|
5.
|
SCHOOL SITE
ACQUISITION CHARGE ELIGIBLE SCHOOL SITES PROPOSAL FOR 2003/2004 FIVE-YEAR
CAPITAL PLAN
(Report:
October 21/02, File No.:
1000-08-012) (REDMS No. 881527)
|
|
|
The Manager, Development Applications, Joe
Erceg, said that the new proposal had the effect of reducing the existing
school site fee.
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded
|
|
|
That:
|
|
|
(1)
|
School District No. 38 (Richmond) Eligible School
Sites Proposal for 2003/2004
Five-Year Capital Plan, dated September 16, 2002, for MacNeill
Secondary School and the Dover Crossing neighbourhood be accepted; and
|
|
|
(2)
|
School District No. 38 (Richmond) be advised that
support of the Eligible School Sites Proposal for 2003/2004 Five-Year Capital
Plan should not be interpreted as support for sale of the Dover Park site.
|
CARRIED
|
|
6.
|
REDESIGNATION AT THE SOUTH-EAST CORNER OF NO. 5 AND
CAMBIE ROADS
(Report:
October 8/02, File No.:
8060-20-7447) (REDMS No. 876070, 881824, 881828)
|
|
|
The Manager, Policy Planning, Terry Crowe,
and Jenny Beran, Planner, were present.
|
|
|
In response to questions, Ms. Beran said
that the Neighbourhood Service Centre Designation would assume that 100% of
the site could be used for commercial purposes, which would not only reduce
residential opportunities but could result in empty storefronts. Further to this, Ms. Beran said that
research on early staff reports for this area indicated a Mixed Use concept.
|
|
|
Discussion then ensued on how the future
development of the Mitchell School site could impact the future need for
commercial or residential space and also the position of School District #38
on Mitchell School. As a result of
the discussion the following referral motion was put
forth:
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded
|
|
|
(1)
|
That Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No.
7447, which amends:
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7100, by
re-designating four of the five parcels on the Generalized Land Use Map on
the south-eastern corner of No. 5 Road and Cambie Road to Neighbourhood
Service Centre; and
|
|
|
|
(b)
|
Schedule 2.11B (East Cambie) of the Official
Community Plan Bylaw No. 7100 by:
|
|
|
|
|
i)
|
re-designating the five parcels on the Land Use
Map on the south eastern corner of No. 5 Road and Cambie Road to Mixed Use;
and
|
|
|
|
|
ii)
|
adding on the Land Use Map the following
definition Mixed Use Residential or Institutional uses with up to 25% of
the area permitted for Commercial uses;
|
|
|
|
be introduced and given first reading.
|
|
|
(2)
|
That Bylaw No. 7447, having been considered in
conjunction with:
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
the City's Financial Plan and Capital Program;
|
|
|
|
(b)
|
the Greater Vancouver Regional District Solid
Waste and Liquid Waste Management Plans;
|
|
|
|
is hereby deemed to be consistent with said
program and plans, in accordance with Section 882(3)(a) of the Local
Government Act.
|
|
|
(3)
|
That Bylaw No. 7447, having been considered in
accordance with the City Policy on Consultation During OCP Development, is
hereby deemed not to require further consultation.
|
|
|
be referred to staff
in order that i) discussions be held with School District #38 on the future plans
for Mitchell School; and, ii) staff look at the community need, over a
projected period of time, for this area.
|
|
|
The question on the referral motion was then called
and it was CARRIED.
|
|
7.
|
STEVESTON OFFICIAL
COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT 3860 REGENT STREET
(Report: Oct. 22/02, File No.: 8060-20-7446) (REDMS No. 878404, 878562,
878854)
|
|
|
The Manager, Policy Planning, Terry Crowe,
was present.
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded
|
|
|
(1)
|
That Bylaw No. 7446,
which amends Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7100, by
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
Repealing the existing
land use designation of Public and Open Space Use in the Generalized Land
Use Map, Attachment 1 to Schedule 1 of Bylaw No. 7100 (Official Community
Plan) thereof of 3860 Regent Street and by designating it Neighbourhood
Residential;
|
|
|
|
(b)
|
Replacing the
definition of Single-Family Residential in Appendix 1 of Schedule 2.4 (Steveston Area Plan) with
the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Single-Family
Residential - Means a detached
building used exclusively for residential purposes, containing one dwelling
unit only. A second dwelling unit may
be permitted under special policy and zoning controls.;
|
|
|
|
(c)
|
Repealing the existing
land use designation of Public Open Space in the Steveston Area Land Use
Map to Schedule 2.4 (Steveston Area Plan) thereof of 3860 Regent Street and
by designating it Single-Family;
|
|
|
|
be
introduced and given first reading.
|
|
|
(2)
|
That Bylaw No. 7446,
having been considered in conjunction with:
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
the City's Financial
Plan and Capital Program;
|
|
|
|
(b)
|
the Greater Vancouver
Regional District Solid Waste and Liquid Waste Management Plans;
|
|
|
|
is hereby deemed to be
consistent with said program and plans, in accordance with Section 882(3)(a)
of the Local Government Act.
|
|
|
(3)
|
That Bylaw No. 7446,
having been considered in accordance with the City Policy on Consultation
During OCP Development, is hereby deemed not to require further consultation.
|
CARRIED
|
|
|
Cllr. Barnes expressed an interest in pursuing a
relationship of City recreation and School District #38 staff to work with
the City's youth. It was suggested
that Cllr. Barnes contact the General Manager, Parks, Recreation and Culture
or the Director of Recreation and Cultural Services on this matter.
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded
|
|
|
That the meeting
adjourn (4:50 p.m.).
|
|
|
CARRIED
|
|
Certified
a true and correct copy of the Minutes of the meeting of the Planning
Committee of the Council of the City of Richmond held on Tuesday, November 5,
2002.
|
_________________________________
|
_________________________________
|
Councillor Bill McNulty
Chair
|
Deborah MacLennan
Administrative Assistant
|