The Chair advised that the following matters would be added to the agenda as additional items:

(1)

A newspaper article entitled “Coming to a  Neighbourhood Near You – Traffic Snarl”;

(2)

Bonus density to facilitate the inclusion of affordable or subsidized Housing in an upcoming rezoning application; and

(3)

A development currently under construction at Fifth Avenue and Chatham Street.

MINUTES

1.

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meetings of the Planning Committee held on Wednesday, June 1st, 2005 and Tuesday, June 7th, 2005, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING DATE

2.

The next meeting of the Committee will be held on Tuesday, July 5^th, 2005, at 4:00 p.m. in the Anderson Room.

URBAN DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

3.

AGRICULTURAL LAND RESERVE APPEAL APPLICATION BY LITT FARMS LTD. FOR SUBDIVISION AT 14420 CAMBIE ROAD

(AG 04-286476 - Report:  May 27/2005, File No.:  AG 04-286476) (REDMS No. 1531744)

The applicant was not in attendance.

It was moved and seconded

That authorization for Litt Farms Ltd. to apply to the Agricultural Land Commission for Subdivision of 14420 Cambie Road, BE DENIED.

CARRIED

4.

APPLICATION BY KHALID HASAN FOR REZONING AT 5280 WILLIAMS ROAD FROM SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION AREA C (R1/C) TO TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT (R2-0.6)

(RZ 04-269099  Report:  June 7/05, File No.:  8060-20-7927/7928) (REDMS No. 1589909, 1443032, 1463827, 1583454, 1583469, 1443168, 1443167, 1443172)

The Acting Director of Development, Holger Burke, reviewed the report with the Committee, during which he noted that the response from area residents to the City’s survey about the new proposal was mixed.  Mr. Burke stated that for this reason, staff were recommending that the application proceed to public hearing to try and obtain a better idea of the wishes of area residents. 

In response to questions, Mr. Burke stated that the applicant had endeavoured to speak to a number of the residents about the proposal, and that residents had held their own meeting to discuss the new project.  Mr. Burke added that he was not sure why a better response had not been received from area residents.

Discussion then ensued among Committee members and staff on the issue of parking, whether the proposed visitor parking spaces would be sufficient, and whether the concept could be redesigned to add an additional visitor parking stall.  It was noted that parking was not allowed on Williams Road, and concern was expressed that visitors to the new complex could conceivably end up parking on Hollycroft Gate.  In response to questions, information was provided that the project exceeded the parking requirements by providing three visitor parking spaces.

Mr. Gary Toop, of 10020 Hollycroft Gate, read aloud, correspondence from Greg and Maria Hourston, of 5231 Hollycroft Drive, which expressed their concern that the proposed development did not fit the neighbourhood profile.  A copy of this correspondence is attached as Schedule A and forms part of these minutes.

Mr. Toop then voiced his concerns about the proposed development, and his submission is attached as Schedule B and forms part of these minutes.

In response to questions, Mr. Toop advised that he would prefer that single family detached homes be constructed on the subject property.  He referred to the proposal which he had provided to the developer, which suggested a 6 unit detached strata housing development with private lane access, and indicated that this concept would be acceptable, and would provide more parking.

Mr. Burke, in answer to questions from Committee, indicated that staff were aware of Mr. Toop’s proposal and had suggested it to the applicant.

In concluding his presentation, Mr. Toop referred to the City’s Arterial Road Policy, and questioned why area residents should be subjected to increased road noise rather than less.  He stated that a majority of the neighbourhood did not support small lot developments.

Mr. Wayne Fetterly, of 5051 Williams Road, spoke in support of the project, stating that most young people today could not afford to purchase a single family home, and that townhouses were an affordable alternative.  He stated however that he had concerns with statements allegedly made by Councillor Steves that there were no townhouse developments on Williams Road, and he then provided examples of such developments, which all had the same parking situation.  He stated that the proposed development would be (i) an asset to the neighbourhood; and (ii) affordable to people who wished to purchase townhouses.  (A copy of correspondence received from Wayne Fetterly and Marilyn Kelder is attached as Schedule C and forms part of these minutes.)

In response to questions, Mr. Fetterley explained that visitor parking was provided within his complex, and that for the most part, it was not used.  He then referred to developments located in the area of No. 2 Road and Blundell Road which had no re-entry access and questioned how residents would access No. 2 Road because of the existing traffic congestion in the area.  Mr. Fetterly stated that he could see more of a problem with these developments than the proposed project on Williams Road.

Ms. Kathleen Beaumont, 5237 Hollycroft Drive, spoke about the proposal and the misconception on the part of the developer that discussions between area residents and the applicant about the project, somehow meant approval for the proposal.  She then spoke about the history of the original property and the efforts of developers over the years to subdivide the land.  She stated that adjacent owners had anticipated that the subject property would become two single-family dwelling lots and were surprised to learn that the land would become a multiple family development because of the adoption of the City’s Arterial Road Policy.

Ms. Beaumont then spoke about the traffic congestion in the area of Hollycroft Gate and voiced concern about the possible overflow of parking from the proposed development onto Hollycroft Gate.  She spoke in support of affordable multi-family housing but expressed her strong opposition to the location of such housing in her neighbourhood because this type of housing was not compatible with the surrounding area. 

Ms. Beaumont indicated that she was not prepared to support any of the proposals being put forward by the developer.  She concluded by stating that she did not support detached houses because they would be small in size and would be constructed adjacent to the rear fence.

In response to questions, advice was given by staff that if the application had been submitted after the adoption of the Revised Interim Strategy for Managing Rezoning Applications During the Review of the Lane Establishment and Arterial Road Redevelopment Policies, the application for the proposed townhouse concept would not be considered.

Discussion ensued with Ms. Beaumont about the control with the City had with respect to design and landscaping plans for multiple family developments as compared to the lack of control over single family developments.  Also addressed were traffic issues on Williams Road and Hollycroft Gate.

A brief discussion then ensued on the feasibility of constructing coach homes on the subject property, with information being provided that the subject property was of sufficient depth that coach homes could be considered if such a proposal was acceptable to area residents and the applicant, and if the property was successfully rezoned to accommodate such a proposal.

Mr. Khalid Hasan, applicant, advised that he had had some consultation with the neighbours and had made improvements to the proposed development to address their concerns.  He indicated that the height of the complex had been reduced from three storeys to two to provide additional privacy; that the number of units had been reduced from eight to seven; that the rear setback had been increased to 6 metres; that the setbacks to the west property line had been increased to 5.3 metres; that visitor parking had been increased to three; and that the front units would be detached.  A site map of the development was used to further explain the amendments to the proposal.

Mr. Hasan then addressed the traffic issues which had been raised, stating that the proposed development would reduce the number of driveways accessing Williams Road.  He further advised that the existing trees on the property would be retained.  Mr. Hasan provided examples of other small lot developments in the City and explained that his proposal would be similar.  In concluding his presentation, he asked the Committee to give serious consideration to this proposal.

Discussion then ensued on whether the results of the last neighbourhood meeting held on April 30^th, 2005, were available, as well on the results of the survey sent out by City staff.  Information was also provided on how the neighbourhood had been consulted about the proposed development.

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 7927, to re-designate 5280 Williams Road from “Single-Family" to "Multiple-Family" on the Steveston Area Land Use Map, Schedule 2.4 of Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 7100 (Steveston Area Plan), be introduced and given first reading;

(2)

That Bylaw No. 7927, having been considered in conjunction with:

(a)

the City’s Financial Plan and Capital Program; and

(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. 7927, having been considered in accordance with the City Policy on Consultation During OCP Development, is hereby deemed not to require further consultation; and

(4)

That Bylaw No. 7928, for the rezoning of 5280 Williams Road from “Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area C (R1/C)” to “Townhouse District (R2-0.6)”, be introduced and given first reading.

(5)

That the Public Hearing Notification Area be expanded to include all of the properties between Hollycroft Gate and Lassam Road fronting Williams Road and on the north side of Hollycroft Drive.

The question on the motion was not called, as discussion ensued among Committee members on (i) whether such a proposal should be considered for the property, (ii) the need to listen to the concerns of the neighbourhood, (iii) possible alternative concepts, such as coach houses, and (iv) whether the changes made by the developer to address the concerns of area residents should be considered.

As a result of the discussion, the following referral motion was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That the report (dated June 7^th, 2005, from the Acting Director of Development), regarding an application for rezoning from Khalid Hasan for property at 5280 Williams Road, be referred to staff to have discussions with the applicant about the development of the property with a coach house concept; and that full consultation take place with the surrounding property owners, to arrive at a solution which would be acceptable to all, and that a report be submitted to the Planning Committee at the earliest opportunity.

Prior to the question on the motion being called, staff were directed to ensure that the owners of the adjacent properties, and the properties to the rear of the subject property.

Discussion then ensued among Committee members on whether the developer or City staff should be responsible for consulting with the property owners, during which the suggestion was made that staff could provide direction to the applicant on the process to follow, rather than having City staff undertake the notification.

The question on the motion was then called, and it was CARRIED with Cllr. Howard opposed.

5.

APPLICATION BY PAUL LEONG ARCHITECT INC. FOR REZONING AT 8580, 8600 AND 8680 CAMBIE ROAD FROM BUSINESS PARK INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (I3) TO COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (CD/163)

(RZ 04-271116 - Report:  June 3/05, File No.:  8060-20-7886) (REDMS No. 1412817, 1412757, 1432452)

It was moved and seconded

That Bylaw No. 7886, to introduce a new Comprehensive Development District (CD/163) zone and for the rezoning of 8580, 8600 and 8680 Cambie Road from “Business Park Industrial District (I3)” to “Comprehensive Development District (CD/163)”, be introduced and given first reading.

CARRIED

6.

APPLICATION BY MATTHEW CHENG ARCHITECT INC. FOR REZONING AT 9800 ALBERTA ROAD FROM SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION AREA F (R1/F) TO COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT (CD/155)

(RZ 04-277069 - Report:  May 31/05, File No.:  8060-20-7926) (REDMS No. 1448519, 1464670, 1464672)

It was moved and seconded

That Bylaw No. 7926, for the rezoning of 9800 Alberta Road from “Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area F (R1/F)” to “Comprehensive Development District (CD/155)”, be introduced and given first reading.

CARRIED

Cllr. Howard, in accordance with Section 100 of the Community Charter, declared himself to be in a possible conflict of interest, and he then left the meeting – 5:05 pm.

7.

APPLICATION BY PATRICK COTTER ARCHITECT INC. FOR REZONING OF A PORTION OF 12251 NO. 2 ROAD FROM “LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT (I2)” TO TOWNHOUSE DISTRICT (R2-0.7)

(RZ 04-277620  Report:  June 7/05, File No.:  8060-20-7944; xr 12-8060-20-7722/7723) (REDMS No. 1362067m 1478696m 1488522, 1488526)

A brief discussion ensued on the history of the previous applications to develop the subject property.  Information was provided that the project now being presented complied with the plan adopted for this area.  Further information was provided that the applicant had proposed two storey townhouses with setbacks increased to six metres along the interface with the single-family homes along Moncton Street.

Reference was made to the fact that there was nearby land being actively farmed, and in response to a question, information was provided on the requirement for a covenant to be placed on the title, in the name of the City, which would allow the lawyers to advise potential purchasers that farming was active in the area. 

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That Bylaws No. 7722 and No. 7723, associated with previous rezoning application RZ 03-252028 (NCL Real Estate Management Ltd.), be abandoned.

(2)

That Bylaw No. 7944, for the rezoning of a portion of 12251 No. 2 Road from "Light Industrial District (I2)" to "Townhouse District (R2-0.7)", be introduced and given first reading.

CARRIED

8.

APPLICATION BY FARRELL ESTATES LTD. TO AMEND THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (C3) IN ORDER TO ADD EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION AS A PERMITTED USE AND FOR REZONING AT 8040 GARDEN CITY ROAD IN ORDER TO PERMIT A PRIVATE LIQUOR STORE [LICENSEE RETAIL STORE (TYPE 2)] ON A SITE SPECIFIC BASIS

(RZ 04-286382 Report:  June 6/05, File No.:  8060-20-7959/7960) (REDMS No. 1367459, 1505481, 1503153, 1527015, 1583163, 1583154)

The Chair confirmed that the application now being considered complied with the Liquor Licence process which was currently in place.

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That Bylaw No. 7959, to amend Zoning and Development Bylaw 5300 by:

(a)

introducing a new definition for “Licensee Retail Store (Type 2)”;

(b)

amending the “Community Commercial District (C3)” to permit a “Licensee Retail Store (Type 2)” at 8040 Garden City Road only; and

(c)

amending the “Community Commercial District (C3)” to add “Educational Institution” as a permitted use

be introduced and given first reading.

(2)

That Bylaw No. 7960, to amend Zoning and Development Bylaw 5300 by:

(a)

repealing the existing definition and introducing a new definition for “Neighbourhood Public House”; and

(b)

amending the “Steveston Commercial (Two-Storey) District (C4)”, “Steveston Commercial (Three-Storey) District (C5)” and “Automobile-Oriented Commercial District (C6)” by deleting Licensee Retail Store as a permitted use

be introduced and given first reading.

CARRIED

Councillor Howard returned to the meeting – 5:10 p.m.

9.

APPLICATION BY ENDALL ELLIOT ASSOCIATES FOR REZONING AT 8899 ODLIN CRESCENT

(RZ 05-295609  Report:  June 3/05, File No.:  8060-20-7958) (REDMS No. 1573522, 1573653, 1573932)

It was moved and seconded

That Bylaw No. 7958 for the amendment of “Business Park Industrial District (I3)” to permit Adult Educational Institution use limited to the location at 8899 Odlin Crescent only, be introduced and given first reading.

CARRIED

Cllr. Barnes, in accordance with Section 100 of the Community Charter, declared herself to be in a conflict of interest because she owned property on Garry Street, and she then left the meeting – 5:12 pm.

10.

APPLICATION BY ELEGANT DEVELOPMENT LTD. FOR REZONING AT 4240 AND 4260 GARRY STREET FROM SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION AREA E (R1/E) TO SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION AREA A (R1/A)

(RZ 05-296540 Report:  June 8/05, File No.:  8060-20-7964) (REDMS No. 1590625, 1590681, 1590680)

In response to a question about the orientation of the four lots to be created as a result of the subdivision, advice was given that three lots would front Garry Street, and the fourth lot would front Fentiman Place.

Reference was made to the numerous trees located around the perimeter of the property, and advice was given that staff had not yet discussed a possible tree retention program with the developer.  The Chair then questioned whether the developer could be directed to implement such a program.

Mr. Allan Owen, 4226 Garry Street, indicated that it was his understanding that the scope of the project had been reduced to three rather than four lots.  As a result of the discussion which ensued, the Chair asked staff to resolve the matter prior to the upcoming June 27^th, 2005 Regular Council Meeting.

It was moved and seconded

That Bylaw No. 7964, for the rezoning of 4240 and 4260 Garry Street from “Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area E (R1/E)” to “Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area A (R1/A)”, be introduced and given first reading.

CARRIED

11.

DELTA'S OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN REVIEW
(Report:  June 6/2005, File No.:  01-0155-20-DELT1) (REDMS No. 1589452)

It was moved and seconded

That Delta City Council be advised that Richmond has no concerns with the proposed new Delta Official Community Plan, (as presented in the report dated June 6, 2005 from the Manager, Policy Planning).

CARRIED

Councillor Barnes returned to the meeting at 5:16 p.m.

(Please refer to Item No. 14 for additional discussion on this matter.)

12.

NEWS PAPER ARTICLE – “IN YOUR NEIGHBOURHOOD – TRAFFIC CONGESTION”

Councillor Steves referred to a newspaper article which had appeared in the June 20^th, 2005 edition of the Vancouver Sun, entitled “Coming to a  Neighbourhood Near You – Traffic Snarl”, and noted that the newspaper article had referred to a study regarding the possible redevelopment of the area surrounding Highway 17 where it meets Highway 99, to address increased truck traffic.  As a result of the discussion on this matter, the following referral motion was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That the matter be referred to staff for review, and that staff endeavour to obtain a copy of the study referred to in the newspaper article.

CARRIED

13.

DEVELOPMENT CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION AT FIFTH AVENUE AND CHATHAM STREET

Councillor Sue Halsey-Brandt referred to correspondence received from D. D. Forest regarding a building now under construction at Fifth Avenue and Chatham Street which did not resemble the design which had been presented to area residents.  The General Manager, Urban Development, Joe Erceg, indicated that staff would follow up on the concern.

14.

DELTA'S OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN REVIEW – FOLLOW-UP

Councillor Barnes referred to Delta's Official Community Plan Review (Item 11 of this agenda), and referred to Clause 2.9.18, ‘Support and facilitate alternative public transit initiatives such as the pedestrian/bicycle ferry between Richmond and Delta’.  She asked that staff endeavour to find out more about this proposal. 

Cllr. Barnes also referred to Clause 2.10.13, ‘Encourage proper and sustainable dredging of the Fraser River and secondary channels through cooperative efforts with ports and other applicable government authorities taking into consideration environmental issues’. 

A brief discussion ensued among Committee members and staff on this matter, with Cllr. Howard providing information on action being taken by the LMMA and the Flood Management Committee for the preparation of an overall river strategy.

(Mayor Brodie entered the meeting at 5:21 p.m., during the above discussion.)

15.

BONUS DENSITY TO FACILITATE INCLUSION OF AFFORDABLE OR SUBSIDIZED HOUSING IN AN UPCOMING REZONING APPLICATION

It was moved and seconded

That staff attempt to negotiate with an appropriate rezoning applicant, a bonus density to facilitate the inclusion of affordable or subsidized housing.

CARRIED

16.

MANAGER’S REPORT

There were no reports.

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (5:25 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, June 21^st, 2005.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Councillor Bill McNulty
Chair

Fran J. Ashton
Executive Assistant – City Clerk’s Office