MINUTES

1.

It was moved and seconded

That the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on Tuesday, January 16, 2007, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

The Chair advised that the Food Security Task Force delegation would be removed from Item 7 and would be heard before Committee addressed Item 3.

NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING DATE

2.

The next meeting of the Committee will be held on Tuesday, February 20^th, 2007, at 4:00 p.m. in the Anderson Room.

DELEGATION

Ms. Arzeena Hamir spoke on behalf of The Richmond Food Security Task Force (RFSTF) and was accompanied by Mary Gazetas, Jason O’Brien and David Reay.

Ms. Hamir advised that the RFSTF was introducing a vision for a local food system initiative, and she distributed a Proposal for a Sustainable Food Systems Centre/Park, Garden City Lands, Richmond, B.C. and a Richmond Food System Assessment Report. (A copy of the proposal and a copy of the report are on file in the City Clerk’s Office.)

The RFSTF defines food security as: “Being assured when all people in the community, at all times, have access to nutritious, safe, personally acceptable and culturally appropriate foods, produced in ways that are environmentally sound and socially just.”

Ms. Hamir made the point that in order to ensure that Richmond has food security, the RFSTF supports food production locally.

To ensure local food production, the RFSTF proposed a Sustainable Food Systems Centre on the Garden City Lands. The Centre would promote sustainable agriculture, would include: space for growing native edible plants on land reserved for organic farming; a restaurant featuring locally grown food; and a teaching kitchen, and would have Community Supported Agriculture. In addition, the Centre would house a new Food Bank with garden plots accessible to clients, and would also provide space for cooking clubs and other activities that support food access and security, while fostering self-reliance and a sense of belonging and community.

Ms. Hamir concluded the presentation by stating that the plan is an innovative use of space and that a Food Systems Centre of the kind proposed would encourage young people to go into farming.

In response to inquiries the RFSTF representatives advised:

·      

the proposal for the Food Systems Centre does not include a formula for economic benefit, but the commercial production of food at the Centre would create some economic benefit;

·      

the Garden City lands are desirable for the proposed Centre because the concept is to practise urban agriculture in an urban area, not agriculture in a rural area; bearing in mind that the City does not own the Garden City Lands, the RFSTF would work with City staff if other arable lands were available;

·      

the Farmers’ Institute and local farmers were consulted during research for the Richmond Food System Assessment Report;

·      

the Richmond Food System Assessment Report, funded by a grant from the Province of BC’s “Act Now – Smart Fund”, and administered through the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority, was completed in 2006, and in 2007 the RFSTF will work on a 10-month action plan;

·      

the RFSTF envisions the Centre as fully accessible by both the general public and by those in the farming business.

Joe Erceg, General Manager, Planning and Development, advised that the Garden City Lands’ Memorandum of Understanding was issued to the City of Richmond and its two partners, the Canada Lands Company and the Musqueam First Nation. Any discussion of uses of the Garden City Lands in terms of the Richmond Food Security Task Force, would be problematic without consultation with other interested parties. Mr. Erceg advised that the Garden City Lands Master Plan process would be an open public process.

It was moved and seconded

That the urban agriculture proposal be received for information.

CARRIED

It was moved and seconded

That the Richmond Poverty Response Committee and the Richmond Food Security Task Force be included on any stakeholders list for the Garden City Lands Study.

CARRIED

Opposed:  Cllr. Howard

It was moved and seconded

That both the Richmond Food System Assessment report and the Proposal for a Sustainable Food Systems Centre/Park be received for information, and that staff be directed  to review and gather comments, including possible locations and community partners, and that City staff report to a future Planning Committee meeting on the outcome.

CARRIED

PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

3.

APPLICATION BY RAMAN KOONER FOR REZONING AT 11191 STEVESTON HIGHWAY FROM SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION AREA E (R1/E) TO SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT (R1-0.6)

(RZ 05-304459 - Report:  January 15, 2007, File No.:  12-8060-20-8015) (REDMS No. 1705916, 2013902, 1715945)

It was moved and seconded

That Bylaw No. 8015, for the rezoning of 11191 Steveston Highway from “Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area E (R1/E)” to “Single-Family Housing District (R1-0.6)”, be introduced and given first reading.

CARRIED

4.

APPLICATION BY AMANDEEP MANGAT TO DISCHARGE LAND USE CONTRACT (LUC 007) FOR 11091 STEVESTON HIGHWAY AND TO REZONE THE SITE TO SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT (R1-0.6)

(RZ 05-313184 - Report:  January 15, 2007, File No.:  12-8060-8017) (REDMS No. 1716252, 2013902, 1716374)

It was moved and seconded

That 11091 Steveston Highway be discharged from the provisions of “Land Use Contract (LUC 007)” and that Bylaw No. 8017 to rezone 11091 Steveston Highway to “Single-Family Housing District (R1-0.6)”, be introduced and given first reading.

CARRIED

5.

APPLICATION BY RAV BAINS FOR REZONING AT 5631 WALTON ROAD FROM SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION AREA E (R1/E) TO SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION AREA B (R1/B)

(RZ 06-352904 - Report:  January 15, 2007, File No.:  12-8060-8188) (REDMS No. 2060676, 1094880, 2061670)

It was moved and seconded

That Bylaw No. 8188, for the rezoning of 5631 Walton Road from “Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area E (R1/E)” to “Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area B (R1/B)”, be introduced and given first reading.

CARRIED

6.

OPTIONS FOR ENHANCED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN CITY COUNCIL AND THE SCHOOL BOARD

(Report:  January 24, 2007 , File No.:  01-0155-02/2007-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 2070614 )

Committee members made the following points during the discussion:

·      

the desire is for enhanced communication between City senior staff and School Board senior staff, in addition to enhanced communication between Councillors and Trustees;

·      

discussions are important but a reporting mechanism of those discussions is equally important;

·      

a good idea is to revitalize the committee already in place, the Council/School Board Liaison (CSBL) Committee;

·      

School Board Trustees are interested in more than planning ideas and issues;

·      

the timing of the Tuesday morning CSBL Committee meetings prevent the attendance of Councillors who are unable to attend meetings before 4:00 p.m.;

In answer to a query, David Weber, Director, City Clerk's Office advised that the desired outcome of the report is to invite the Richmond School Board to be involved in the process, and that it would be a legitimate route for the Planning Committee to take if the report was submitted to the School Board before it went forward to City Council.

In answer to a query, Joe Erceg, General Manager, Planning and Development stated that senior City staff had discussed ways to increase membership on both sides of the CSBL Committee. One idea was to have three members of Council on the CSBL Committee, with two of the three being members of the Planning Committee. Senior City staff felt that it is better to enhance the existing CSBL Committee instead of creating another entity. Also, when the City creates a plan, like the City Centre Area Plan, having one member of the School Board on hand is not as useful as conducting workshops, which all School Board Trustees could attend. This process would create meaningful participation.

Cathy Volkering Carlile, General Manager, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services advised that at the January, 2007 CSBL Committee meeting, Committee members agreed to review the CSBL Committee’s terms of reference.

School Trustee Chak Au remarked that the discussion was two-fold: one issue is City Council’s engagement with the School Board; and the second and more urgent issue concerned discussion of the City Centre Area Plan.

It was moved and seconded

That the report dated January 24, 2007, by the Director, City Clerk's Office, be referred to the Council/School Board Liaison (CSBL) Committee to be discussed at the CSBL Committee’s February 27, 2007 meeting to gather comments on how the options suit their needs, and that City staff report to a future Planning Committee meeting on the outcome.

CARRIED

7.

CITY CENTRE AREA PLAN CONCEPT

(Report:  Feb. 1/07, File No.:  08-4045-20-10) (REDMS No. 2070757) 

It was moved and seconded

That, (as per the report dated February 1, 2007, from the Manager, Policy Planning, and entitled, “City Centre Area Plan (CCAP) Update – Proposed Area Plan CONCEPT”):

(1)

The City Centre Area Plan CONCEPT (Attachment 5) be approved in principle;

(2)

Based on the approved in principle City Centre Area Plan CONCEPT, staff be instructed to prepare the City Centre Area Plan Bylaw and complementary Implementation Strategy for Council’s consideration;

(3)

Staff proceed with the improved consultation process with the Richmond School Board, as outlined in this report; and

(4)

Staff proceed with the proposed strategy for public consultation (e.g., Open House 3) scheduled for March 2007.

The question was not called as Terry Crowe, Manager, Policy Planning gave the Committee a general overview of the City Centre Area Plan (CCAP) Update. Part 1 of the Update is the preparation of an Area Plan Concept, and Part 2 is the preparation and adoption of the Area Plan Bylaw and Implementation Strategy, that would include any required financial and/or Development Cost Charge bylaws.

Mr. Crowe advised that the City is in a growth model and is in a good position for the proposed build-out population of 120,000. Feedback received at public open houses to date indicates acceptance of the 120,000 build-out number.

He commented that the growth model to achieve the proposed build-out is consistent with the City’s existing City Centre Area Plan (1995) and Official Community Plan (1999), with the Canada Line, and with the City Centre’s recognized capacity for densification.

Mr. Crowe stated that staff would conduct another open house in March, 2007, and that advertising would be done in advance.

He advised that the next steps in the CCAP process includes presenting concurrent studies, such as the City Centre Transportation Plan and Engineering Studies, throughout the coming months.

Suzanne Carter-Huffman, Senior Planner/Urban Design used a PowerPoint presentation to highlight the following features of the CCAP Concept:

·      

the CCAP Concept is composed of four Smart Growth goals: Build Community, Build Green, Build Economic Vitality and Build A Legacy;

·      

the CCAP was developed on the principals of Transit-Oriented Development, where residents are enabled to live, work, shop and recreate in a pedestrian-oriented environment in a series of “villages”;

·      

of the eight CCAP Concept Planning Objectives, four are new: jobs and business, mobility and access, social equity and continuity, arts and culture;

·      

the jobs and business opportunities component creates a distinctive mix of business opportunities tailored to take maximum advantage of the downtown’s characteristics;

·      

the ecology and adaptability component promotes an approach to community development that strives to provide for the best outcome for both human and natural environments;

·      

the social equity and continuity component provides a framework for an inclusive community that supports the diverse needs of citizens and their equitable access to community resources; and

·      

the arts and culture component provides a framework for a creative community where cultural, economic development and planning practices are coordinated to promote increased creative capacity.

Ms. Carter-Huffman concluded the presentation by stating that a phasing strategy will be prepared.

Mike Redpath, Manager, Parks -  Programs, Planning & Design, addressed the Committee and advised that the issue of parkland in the CCAP was a question of balance and determining where parks and open spaces should be located.

He stated that at the January 23, 2007 Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Committee meeting, the Middle Arm Open Space Master Plan Concept, which identified a strong park presence on Richmond’s changing waterfront, had been endorsed and would go to Council.

Mr. Redpath further advised that, the Middle Arm Open Space is part of the required additional 201 acres of parks in the City Centre. As the CCAP process moves forward to the next stage, the implementation process will be a creative one, and parkland and open space details in the CCAP, and in the Middle Arm Master Plan, will be scrutinized to ensure that the City can achieve its goals.

Discussion ensued and the following advice was given by staff:

·      

a City-wide report on commercial and industrial uses is being prepared;

·      

the forthcoming studies will be sorted into (1) those that are essential to the CCAP, and (2) those that can be brought forward later;

·      

the Industrial and Commercial Strategy report that will be presented to the Committee will be more detailed in terms of the location of retail, industrial and commercial sites;

·      

in the future, the site now occupied by the Lansdowne Mall will combine some park area with some density;

·      

the current standard of 3.25 acres of park per 1,000 residents is reasonable;

·      

the CCAP will look at ecology and adaptability in order to provide a framework for an “eco-regenerative” urban community that supports a greener downtown;

·      

City staff will undertake a range of environment studies and will work with the Richmond Advisory Committee on the Environment (ACE);

·      

City staff will continue to work with the Richmond School Board as the CCAP process continues; before the adoption of the Area Plan Bylaw and Implementation Strategy the School Board will know where residents in the City Centre will be located so that the Board can devise a school model it wishes to pursue;

·      

the City will advise the School Board at an early stage what lands it intends to buy for park and open spaces;

·      

in the near future TransLink will embark on a revision to the Richmond transit plan to better address public transit that will complement the Canada Line;

School Board Trustee Chak Au addressed the Committee regarding three issues:

·      

the Richmond School Board should be involved in discussions at both the conceptual stage and the implementation stage of the CCAP;

·      

the Richmond School Board should be a partner in the CCAP process, not a stakeholder;

·      

the issue of school space in the City Centre, and especially the concept of schools being hubs in the community, has not been addressed.

In response to a query from Mr. Au, Terry Crowe advised that the proposed City Centre population of 120,000 was arrived at after staff, following direction of City Council, examined a variety of scenarios to make Richmond a liveable city with maximum build-out. After a thorough consultation process, staff identified 120,000 and discounted a population total of 156,000, as manageable and preferable, to be achieved over the long term. 

Resident Jennifer Larsen of 8680 Foster Road, addressed the Committee and asked: how Council would ensure or encourage the building and accommodation of space for use by non-profit social service agencies; how City staff would monitor this; and if Council would consider a separate portfolio for a social plan.

Mr. Crowe advised that community groups are currently compiling an inventory of City-owned spaces and when the list of spaces is complete, staff would work with representatives of social service agencies, as well as with the Urban Development Institute and developers, on how best to accommodate social services in the City Centre.

Ms. Tamaka Fisher addressed the Committee on behalf of the Richmond Arts Coalition (RAC), and advised that the Coalition membership supported the idea of affordable live/work studio space in the City Centre. She remarked that whenever like businesses group together in a geographical location, those businesses benefit from increased traffic. She ended her remarks by stating that the RAC supports the idea of a new multi-disciplinary arts and performing facility for Richmond, and that the RAC would like to see flexibility in pursuing the idea if land for that purpose was available.

The question on the motion was then called and it was CARRIED.

8.

MANAGER’S REPORT

(1)

Affordable Housing – No report was given.

(2)

Steveston Study – No report was given.

(3)

Official Community Plan/Liveable Region Strategic Plan Review – No report was given.

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (7:00 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, February 6, 2007.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Councillor Harold Steves
Chair

Sheila Johnston
Committee Clerk