November 6, 2007 - Minutes
 |
Planning Committee
|
Date: |
Tuesday, November 6, 2007 |
|
Place: |
Anderson Room |
|
Present: |
Councillor Harold Steves, Chair |
|
Call to Order: |
The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. |
|
|
|
MINUTES |
|
|
1. |
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
|
That the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on Tuesday, October 16, 2007, be adopted as circulated. |
|
|
|
CARRIED |
|
|
|
NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING DATE |
|
|
2. |
The next meeting of the Committee will be held on Tuesday, November 20, 2007, at 4:00 p.m. in the Anderson Room. |
|
|
|
COUNCILLOR ROB HOWARD |
|
|
3. |
DOWNTOWN RICHMOND ‘GOOD NEIGHBOUR’ GUIDELINES FOR BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS (Report: Oct. 30/07, File No.: ) | |
|
|
|
Councillor Howard remarked that, as a result of construction activity at some of the sites for development projects currently underway in the City Centre, he has heard from some City Centre residents and businesses in the core, that they have been unduly subjected to the negative impacts of construction. He stated that construction sites can pose opportunities for construction materials to make their way onto neighbouring lots, and that instances of construction materials, as well as vehicles impinging on neighbouring sites, have been mentioned to him, and that his own office, situated in the City Centre, has experienced some negative impacts due to neighbouring construction sites. | |
|
|
|
Discussion ensued among Committee members and staff regarding Cllr. Howard’s recommendation that staff report to Committee on best practice policies and/or guidelines that Council may consider to better manage the situation of neighbouring construction. The following points were raised during discussion: | |
|
|
|
· |
in 2003 the issue was raised at the Planning Committee in relation to construction activities in single-family home neighbourhoods; as a result of the 2003 discussions regarding construction intrusion in residential areas, the City created the “Good Neighbour Program”, and a brochure describing, among other things, (i) protection and safeguards, (ii) clean up and close out, and (iii) six basic good neighbour practices for builders, is available from, and distributed by, the Building Approvals Division; |
|
|
|
· |
while the City is not responsible for enforcement of all good neighbour practices, depending on the type of complaints received or issues raised, City departments, such as Transportation and Community Bylaws, can and do respond if contacted by members of the public; in addition the RCMP has some regulatory powers; |
|
|
|
· |
City staff is involved in an ongoing process of communication with, and inspection of, construction sites; where intrusion issues are concerned, staff is confident that the majority of builders and developers do not ignore the impact that construction has on neighbouring buildings and their occupants, and do take necessary steps to lessen construction impact; |
|
|
|
· |
in cases where a builder or developer does not respond to requests from the City to lessen its intrusion in the community, the City has put a stop work order into effect; |
|
|
|
· |
with regard to traffic pattern changes necessary to move construction vehicles and materials on and off a construction site, the builder must get approval from the City’s Transportation Office; in addition, WorkSafe B.C. imposes traffic pattern change regulations; |
|
|
|
· |
at present the City’s Building Approvals Division is: (i) reviewing the model used by the City of Vancouver for construction intrusion issues, (ii) is working with both Transportation and Engineering staff regarding the issuance of permits for hoarding, and (iii) is working toward creating a more controlled situation; |
|
|
|
· |
in addition, through the Urban Development Institute’s (UDI) liaison committee, City staff members work with the bigger developers involved in the City Centre build-out, and this partnership with UDI allows the City to assess the construction activities of the developers and builders in Richmond’s City Centre. |
|
|
|
At the conclusion of the discussion, Cllr. Howard advised that education and awareness are the two key components to a “good neighbour” approach to construction sites in the City Centre. He added that (i) in the public realm construction companies must make sure roads are clean, sidewalks are cleared, there is fencing, lighting and preload containment and control, and (ii) in the private realm, the interface between construction companies and neighbours of construction sites, special attention must be paid in case grease (and other deleterious substances) falls from cranes onto privately owned parked cars that may happen to be in the area of a construction site. | |
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded | |
|
|
|
That staff, after consultation with UDI, GVHBA and any other stakeholders staff feel necessary, report to Committee on Best Practice Policies and/or Guidelines that Council may consider to better manage the situation of neighbouring construction. | |
|
CARRIED | |||
|
|
|
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT |
|
|
4. |
(RZ 06-348261 - Report: October 1, 2007, File No.: 12-8060-20-8251) (REDMS No. 2231369, 2294337) |
|
|
|
In response to two inquiries staff advised that: (i) the subdivision is for five single-family lots, and ownership will be “free hold”, and (ii) a landscaping plan for both the front yard and the flanking side yard, that would include replacement trees, shrubs and ground cover, will be required prior to final adoption. Further, if replacement trees cannot be accommodated on-site, the applicant is required to agree to a $500 per tree, cash-in-lieu for off-site planting arrangement. |
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
|
That Bylaw No. 8251, for the rezoning of 9940 and 9960 No. 4 Road, 10020 Albion Road and a portion of Albion Road from “Single-Family Housing District, Subdivision Area E (R1/E)” and “Two-Family Housing District (R5)” to “Single-Family Housing District (R1-0.6)”, be introduced and given first reading. |
|
CARRIED | ||
|
|
5. |
MANAGER’S REPORT |
|
|
|
(1) |
City Centre Area Plan (CCAP) |
|
|
|
No report was given. | |
|
|
|
(2) |
Steveston Study |
|
|
|
No report was given. | |
|
|
|
(3) |
Official Community Plan (OCP) |
|
|
|
Joe Erceg, General Manager, Planning and Development, advised that, by Provincial mandate, the City must review and update its OCP every five years. It is time to start the OCP update process which will occur from 2007 to 2009. | |
|
|
|
Mr. Erceg stated that: | |
|
|
|
a) |
instead of the mandated OCP review being at the mercy of a budget surplus each year, staff is exploring the idea of having an annual allocation for the OCP update within the Policy Planning base budget, so that specific funds can accumulate to the point where the City has the necessary funds for the OCP update every five years; and |
|
|
|
b) |
staff is preparing a report for Committee regarding the 2007 surplus revenue in the Building Approval’s budget, and requesting some of the surplus revenue for the OCP update. |
|
|
|
(4) |
Liveable Region Strategic Plan Review (LRSP) |
|
|
|
Terry Crowe, Manager, Policy Planning, reported that Metro Vancouver’s (MV) discussion paper on the LRSP will be released soon, and that MV will seek comments from municipalities until the end of March, 2008. | |
|
|
|
Mr. Crowe advised that as part of its campaign to engage the public in commenting on the LRSP discussion paper, MV will advertise an open house it will host at the Minoru Cultural Centre, planned for Wednesday, December 5, 2007. City staff will be in attendance at the event as observers. | |
|
|
|
In addition, Mr. Crowe stated that City staff will issue an invitation to MV staff to attend a future Planning Committee meeting to discuss the LRSP review process. | |
|
|
|
(5) |
Proposed Development at 3900 Moncton Street, at the Southwest Corner of No. 1 Road |
|
|
|
Councillor Bill McNulty stated that he had learned that eviction notices have been issued to Steveston businesses operating in the area of Moncton Street and No. 1 Road, and inquired whether a rezoning application or a development permit application was required for the proposed development at the southwest corner of Moncton Street and No. 1 Road | |
|
|
|
Staff advised that: (i) it was a Development Permit application, (ii) the design had been reviewed on two occasions by the Advisory Design Panel, and by the Richmond Heritage Commission in February, 2007 and again in September, 2007, (iii) the Development Permit applicant had been working with the tenants since 2006 to advise them of the proposed development, and (iv) that the applicant had offered extension of leases and lease opportunities for space in the proposed new building. | |
|
|
|
Discussion ensued among Committee members and staff, during which the following information was forthcoming, and the following comments were made: | |
|
|
|
· |
staff does not issue demolition permits for the Village of Steveston before alerting the General Manager, Planning and Development, and to Mr. Erceg’s knowledge no application has been made for a demolition permit for any structure at southwest corner of Moncton Street and No. 1 Road; |
|
|
|
· |
the City has mandatory Area Plan guidelines for any development projects in Steveston and proposed development projects in Steveston are subjected to a precise and demanding process; |
|
|
|
· |
the stringent guidelines include matters of height, finishing, cladding, facades, and signage, among other details; |
|
|
|
· |
the Draft Steveston Conservation Strategy, approved in principle earlier this year, has identified buildings of value in the Village and the current structure situated at 3900 Moncton Street does not fit the Strategy’s criteria for a building of value; |
|
|
|
· |
it could be problematic for the vision of the Village if a development comprises more than one lot, with the newly developed building extending past one lot, resulting in a new structure looking like fake, separate buildings; |
|
|
|
· |
the development is proceeding through the Development Permit process and only after that process has been finalized would a review of the proposed new building be brought before Council. |
|
|
|
Graham Turnbull, Chair, Richmond Heritage Commission, addressed Committee and commented that: (i) Steveston should not be frozen in time and be held to 1908 design standards; (ii) the process of creating guidelines for the Village has been a thorough one, and all buildings in the Village core have been reviewed; and (iii) certain individual buildings should be preserved, but it is not necessary to preserve all buildings. | |
|
|
|
Councillor Rob Howard, the Council Representative on the Richmond Heritage Commission, stated that the building under discussion has undergone much thought on the part of the Richmond Heritage Commission, and he reiterated that the proposed development is being managed by the City’s Development Permit process. | |
|
|
|
As a result of the discussion, Committee directed staff to submit the plans for the proposed development at 3900 Moncton Street to the Planning Committee at a meeting in the near future. | |
|
|
|
In addition, Committee requested that staff prepare an update on building heights allowed in the Zoning Bylaw including the history of height regulations in the Steveston Village. | |
|
|
|
(6) |
Height Restrictions in the City |
|
|
|
In response to a query regarding building height restrictions in the City, in relation to the Vancouver International Airport (YVR), staff advised that Committee will receive a staff report on the matter before the end of 2007, and that the report will include information on: (i) YVR is the entity that is to ask for increases in height, (ii) the City has asked Transport Canada for information on this subject, (iii) YVR’s 2027 airport plan has been delivered to the Federal Minister for consideration and approval, and (iv) the airport’s aeronautical zoning, which regulates building height, is registered with the Office of Land Titles. | |
|
|
|
(7) |
Processing Building Applications |
|
|
|
In response to an inquiry regarding the timely manner in which Building and/or Development Applications are processed, Mr. Erceg stated that he will investigate whether the process has slowed down in recent months. He added that, of the three parties involved (the City, applicants, and applicants’ clients) it is often the case that the clients perceive a slow down on the City’s part, but that the applicants are the party that may be slowing the process down, unbeknownst to their clients. | |
|
|
|
In response to a query regarding the progress on hiring an Affordable Housing Coordinator, staff advised that on October 29, 2007, Joan D’Angola had started working for the City, within the Real Estate Services division, and that Ms. D’Angola would be present at the November 20, 2007 Planning Committee meeting in order to be formally introduced to Committee. |
|
|
|
In response to a query regarding the upcoming new Social Planner in the Policy Planning office, Mr. Erceg advised that an investigation of need has been completed, and that the projected 2008 base budget for Policy Planning includes a line item for a Social Planner position. He added that recruitment will be undertaken shortly. |
|
|
|
ADJOURNMENT |
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
|
That the meeting adjourn (5:05 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 6, 2007. |
|
_________________________________ |
_________________________________ |
|
Councillor Harold Steves |
Sheila Johnston |