February 5, 2008 - Minutes

Planning Committee

Date:	Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Place:	Anderson Room Richmond City Hall
Present:	Councillor Harold Steves, Chair Councillor Bill McNulty, Vice-Chair Councillor Linda Barnes Councillor Sue Halsey-Brandt Councillor Rob Howard Mayor Malcolm Brodie
Also Present:	Councillor Cynthia Chen
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, January 22, 2008, be adopted as circulated.*
		CARRIED

It was agreed to add Public Information Open Houses and Creation of Child Care Spaces in the City Centre to the agenda under: Item 6. MANAGER’S REPORT.

NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING DATE

The next meeting of the Committee will be held on Tuesday, February 19, 2008, at 4:00 p.m. in the Anderson Room.

DELEGATIONS

3.	*(1)*	*Kent Mullinix, Sustainable Horticulture / IPM Specialist, Institute for Sustainable Horticulture, Kwantlen University College (Surrey) – Agriculture Food Systems* (File No.: 01-0160-06)
		Kent Mullinix, Ph.D., Sustainable Horticulture/IPM Specialist, Institute for Sustainable Horticulture, Kwantlen University College, Surrey, addressed Committee and proposed that Kwantlen University College partner with the City, community organizations and citizens to develop an academic centre devoted to research, education and development expressly focused on urban agriculture. (A copy of Dr. Mullinix’s proposal is on file in the City Clerk’s Office)
		Some of the points Dr. Mullinex made in support of the proposed concept included:
		·	the world population is 6.5 billion today, with between 9.5 and 14 billion anticipated by mid-century;
		·	the majority of the world’s population is urbanized, and in developed countries 75% of the population is urbanized;

			·	in Canada, 3% of Canadians live on farms, 1.4% of the population is engaged in farming, and 97% have either limited or no connection to agriculture;
			·	cheap, high quality food is taken for granted in the developed world, and North Americans spend approximately 11% of disposable income on food, compared to Europeans who spend 20+% of disposable income on food;
			·	most of the world’s arable land is in production; Green Revolution technological gains have been maximized; and no technologies to increase yield are forthcoming;
			·	croplands are increasingly devoted to the production of high value export crops not regional food production; and
			·	industrial agriculture is dependent on the excessive use of fossil fuels, a situation that is not sustainable.
			In describing the proposed concept to develop North America’s first academic centre devoted to research, education and development expressly focused on urban agriculture in Richmond, Dr. Mullinex made the following points:
			·	the centre and its programs would be world-class;
			·	the uniqueness and breadth of offered programs would be unprecedented;
			·	research conducted at the proposed centre would address such challenges as technology, marketing and promotion;

			·	the formal education component would offer potential students degrees, diplomas and citations;
			·	the professional/continuing education component would offer workshops, seminars, conferences, field days and demonstrations;
			·	all infrastructure and funding requirements would have to be determined; land requirements would be modest and would depend upon the nature and extent of the proposed centre’s programs;
			·	either contiguous or decentralized lands could be utilized for experimentation, demonstrations, classes and incubator plots.
			In concluding his remarks Dr. Mullinex identified some of the benefits to the City of advancing urban agriculture: (i) contribution to sustainable and stable food supplies; (ii) ready access to fresh fruits and vegetables; (iii) less processing, packaging, transportation and energy use, thereby improving the ecological footprint of the agri-food system; (iv) a decreased dependence on fossil fuels and the global agri-food system; and (v) the spawning of a new and substantial economic sector.
			In response to a query regarding whether Dr. Mullinex’s proposed concept is referred to in the Garden City Lands staff report, Joe Erceg, General Manager, Planning and Development, advised that staff has had a number of discussions with Kwantlen University College regarding potential partnerships. He added that Dr. Mullinex’s proposed concept is not site specific.

			When the Chair asked if Kwantlen University College would be prepared to work with the Federal Government, if the Garden City Lands were kept in the Agricultural Land Reserve, Dr. Mullinex advised that he was not in a position to speak on behalf of the University. The Chair then made reference to the Experimental Farms Stations Act of 1886 and that at present there are 18 such research stations across the country.
			As a result of the presentation by Dr. Mullinex the following referral motion was introduced:
			It was moved and seconded
			That the proposed concept, to develop an academic centre devoted to research, education and development expressly focused on urban agriculture, be referred to staff for further study and comment.
			The question on the motion was not called as discussion took place among Committee members, staff and Dr. Mullinex on details of the proposed concept:
			·	it is not site specific; acreage would be between 40 and 50 acres;
			·	it is based on the idea that City land would be used and the college would provide such start up infrastructure as a tractor and a shed;
			·	it should be approached from a comprehensive perspective in order that the various pieces fit together;
			·	it would operate under accepted academic standards;
			·	the general public would be able to participate in non-academic programs and events, including continuing education opportunities;

			·	this proposal would not replace UBC’s School of Agriculture, but it would fill a niche that at present is not available in agricultural programs;
			·	the concept is not a formal proposal, it is an idea that has not been placed in front of the Board of Governors of Kwantlen University College, but it has received verbal support from Dr. Mullinex’s Dean; in addition the President of Kwantlen University College encouraged Dr. Mullinex to bring the concept forward to the City;
			·	it is unknown if Kwantlen University College is prepared to fund the concept.
			When asked if he had read the proposed concept for the Garden City Lands, written by the Food Security Task Force, Dr. Mullinex stated that he had read the Task Force’s proposed concept and that in his opinion his proposal and that of the Task Force were compatible.
			Dr. Mullinex further stated that he cannot speak for the University in terms of partners with whom it would work to advance the proposed centre.
			When asked by Committee what Dr. Mullinex wants the City to do, he replied that he is seeking an endorsement of the concept, and that it receive further examination, consideration and development, in the spirit of making the proposed concept happen.
			The question on the motion was called but discussion continued with regard to the scope of the study and comment to be undertaken by staff. As a result of the discussion the following was added to the main motion:

			That in studying the proposed concept, that staff:
			(a)	consult with Kwantlen University College’s administration to explore if, where and how the proposed concept is supported by Kwantlen University College;
			(b)	identify the infrastructure implications;
			(c)	explore various sites as a possible location;
			(d)	consider the possibility of the City utilizing any of its resources to support the proposal;
			(e)	consider which City resources might be contributed to the proposed concept; and
			(f)	investigate what other institutions could do as potential partners.
			The question on the motion was not called as discussion continued with regard to potential locations for the proposed centre. Staff was directed to look at a 48-acre parcel of the Garden City Lands, and a 50-acre parcel situated south of Steveston Highway when exploring locations for the proposed concept.
			Discussion continued regarding the question of the proximity of the proposed centre to the Richmond campus of Kwantlen University College. As a result of the discussion the following addition was made to the motion:
			*(g)*	*explore the locational and proximity needs, options and implications regarding the siting of the proposed academic centre in relation to the Richmond campus of Kwantlen University College.*

The question on the motion as amended to read as follows:
(1)	That the proposed concept, to develop an academic centre devoted to research, education and development expressly focused on urban agriculture, be referred to staff for further study and comment; and
(2)	in studying the proposed concept, that staff:
	(a)	consult with Kwantlen University College’s administration to explore if, where and how the proposed concept is supported by Kwantlen University College;
	(b)	identify the infrastructure implications;
	(c)	explore various sites as a possible location;
	(d)	consider the possibility of the City utilizing any of its resources to support the proposal;
	(e)	consider which City resources might be contributed to the proposed concept;
	(f)	investigate what other institutions could do as potential partners; and
	(g)	explore the locational and proximity needs, options and implications regarding the siting of the proposed academic centre in relation to the Richmond campus of Kwantlen University College.
was then called and it was CARRIED.

		*(2)*	*Shane McMillan, Student, Department of Horticulture, Kwantlen University College (Richmond) – Agriculture Food Systems* (File No.: 01-0160-06)
			Mr. McMillan addressed the Committee and spoke in support of an academic centre devoted to research, education and development expressly focused on urban agriculture, as proposed by Kent Mullinix. (A copy of Mr. McMillan proposal is on file in the City Clerk’s Office.)
			He advised Committee on the nature of the horticultural program at Richmond’s Kwantlen University College campus, and spoke briefly about: (i) how landscaping can contribute to the health of a community, (ii) the need to move horticulture into the realm of sustainable food production, (iii) how wide spread irrigation has impacted the water supply, and (iv) how industrial agriculture uses up fossil fuel and water supplies.
			He remarked that the proposed centre would: (i) promote sustainable practices in agriculture, (ii) attract people from throughout North America due to its unique nature.
			Mr. McMillan stated that if the proposed centre came to fruition it would put Richmond on the forefront of research into and delivery of sustainable urban agriculture education.
			In concluding his remarks Mr. McMillan recommended that the City accept Dr. Mullinex’s proposal, secure land for the proposed centre, and seek input from Richmond’s students, instructors, residents and others in the community who possess a wealth of expertise.
			As a result of Mr. McMillan’s presentation the following referral motion was made:

			It was moved and seconded
			That staff consider the presentation submitted by Shane McMillan, entitled “Urban Agriculture Research and Education Centre” in conjunction with recommendations made by the Planning Committee as a result of the presentation submitted by Dr. Kent Mullix, entitled “Urban Agriculture Research and Education Centre”.
			The question on the motion was not called as Mr. McMillan responded to the following queries from Committee:
			·	in a definition of “sustainability” urban agriculture is included, and one way to move toward sustainability is to practise urban agricultural techniques;
			·	if the proposed centre came to fruition, and if it was sited close to the Richmond campus of Kwantlen University College, it would make the delivery of programs easier than if the proposed centre was located at a distance from the Richmond campus;
			·	the two year diploma and the four year degree programs in landscaping, greenhouse and turf agriculture at the Richmond campus attracts between 60 and 80 students per year;
			·	students interested in theory are attracted to UBC’s agricultural studies, while students interested in theory combined with and practical activities enrol at Kwantlen University College.
			The question on the motion was then called and it was CARRIED.

PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

	4.	APPLICATION BY TARZAN S. SANDHU FOR REZONING AT 11260 WILLIAMS ROAD FROM SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT, SUBDIVISION AREA E (R1/E) TO SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING DISTRICT (R1-0.6) (RZ 07-375545 - Report: January 16, 2008, File No.: 12-8060-20-8325) (REDMS No. 2329331, 2325705)
		In response to a query staff advised that, as a result of previous Council direction, staff do advise applicants to provide coniferous trees on a project by project basis, but coniferous trees are not always appropriate in all circumstances.
		In response to a further query, staff advised that the four replacement 6 cm trees meet the Tree Protection Bylaw requirement and that the bylaw defines the calliper size of replacement trees.
		It was moved and seconded
		That Bylaw No. 8325, for the rezoning of 11260 Williams Road 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

		Discussion continued on whether a staff report regarding the quantity, the kinds, and the size of replacement trees should be forthcoming. As a result of the discussion the following motion was introduced:
		It was moved and seconded
		That staff submit a report with regard to removed trees and replacement trees on development sites that outlines: (1) the quantity and kinds of trees that replace removed trees; and (2) the range of the size of replacement trees.

		The question was not called as discussion continued.
		Mr. Erceg advised that the bylaw identifies the acceptable size of replacement trees. He added that, as part of each rezoning report submitted by staff, information with regard to the size of replacement trees, and compliance with the bylaw can be included.
		The question on the motion was then called and it was CARRIED with Councillors Barnes and Howard opposed.

5.	RIVER ROAD REFERRAL – PUBLIC CONSULTATION RESULTS AND STATUS REPORT (RZ - Report: January 8, 2008, File No.: 08-4040-01/2007-Vol 01) (REDMS No. 2297886, 2283415, 2284723, 2294929, 2303774)
	It was moved and seconded
	*That:*
	*(1)*	*the revised Interim and Long-Term Action Plans for the 16,000 Block of River Road (Attachment 7) be approved; and*
	(2)	OPTION 2 – Enable individual (or group of) rezoning applications along the 16,000 block of River Road to be processed pursuant to the revised Interim Action Plan (Attachment 7), be endorsed.
	The question on the motion was not called as Committee directed questions to Holger Burke, Development Coordinator, who clarified the following points:
	·	City staff are proposing a restrictive Comprehensive Development District zone in the area that, if approved, would permit and restrict outdoor storage and parking of vehicles if the following conditions were met: (i) fencing, (ii) screening, (iii) storage setbacks, and (iv) permeable surface treatment;
	·	a 20 metre roadway dedication through these properties has been a consistent approach for a number of years;
	·	currently designated for ‘Business and Industry’ in the City’s Official Community Plan (adopted in 1999), this land is not within the Agricultural Land Reserve and Agri-Industrial service activities can be considered as a potential land use under the current designation.

		Kiichi Kumagai, 8091 Rosebank Crescent, drew Committee’s attention to a letter he submitted earlier in the day (on file in the City Clerk’s Office), signed by owners of 16540 River Road, 167000 River Road, 16780 River Road and 16820 River Road. Mr. Kumagai remarked that he, and those who signed the letter, support the staff recommendation (Option 2) and that 16000 block River Road property owners would agree to work with City transportation staff to mitigate the traffic concerns.
		Mr. Kumagai made the point that the traffic study would be paid for by the three landowners who have submitted rezoning applications to the City, and that he was of the opinion accommodation could be made regarding the storage of vehicles.
		Discussion continued with Mr. Burke responding to further Committee enquiries:
		·	the Interim Strategy suggests that there be only one shared access and that flexibility is key, in that the one shared access could be through any one of the three sites that have a rezoning application;
		·	during the later rezoning process, the question of a cross access agreement can be discussed in detail;
		·	the land owners will be responsible for the cost of the road improvements, but the cost will be determined only after: (i) Transportation staff meet with the consultant, (ii) a study on River Road is completed, and (iii) the information is presented to the Planning Committee.

		Steve Easterbrook, a resident of River Road, advised Committee that he is opposed to the Option 2 proposal and believes it to be not only a desecration of Richmond lands, but also at odds with the stated planning vision of the City. He remarked that it was a contrast to hear Committee express interest in and support of the proposed academic centre devoted to research, education and development expressly focused on urban agriculture (Item 3) and at the same meeting support a lack of administration and enforcement of City Bylaws that are in place to mitigate the various problems in the 16000 block of River Road.
		Mr. Easterbrook has operated a certified organic egg production agricultural business on his River Road property since 1991, and he is in the process of developing an animal husbandry project in East Richmond. He expressed concern that he believes a “trial and erroring” process and not a planning process is underway.
		He stated his opinion that too much of Richmond’s agricultural land is being consumed by parking lots and strip malls and that property owners have created non-agricultural business on agricultural lands.
		The three questions Mr. Easterbrook had for Committee were:
		·	can access be from No. 7 Road in order to mitigate the amount of traffic on River Road;
		·	how the City can approve a project based on a framework that is not feasible; and
		·	if there is a compromise can it be a very clear one, where safety of the public is not compromised.

		Mr. Easterbrook stated that when driving east along River Road, accessed by either No. 7 or No. 6 Road the experience is like running the gauntlet. In the last two weeks he has been driven off River Road by trucks and his safety compromised. He noted that this beautiful part of Richmond is being destroyed by the storage of large vehicles.
		Mr. Easterbrook summarized his statements by noting that Option 2 is in direct contrast to the stewardship of the City and that it would not service the conceptual vision supported by the community.
		In response to queries, Victor Wei, Director, Transportation advised that staff has worked with various River Road residents and has discouraged big trucks by applying traffic measures.
		He stated that there has to be certainty of special treatments in the area as part of rezoning requirements that will ensure that truck activity will not intrude to the east, and that this certainty is needed before Transportation support would be given to any rezoning application in the area in question.
		Mr. Wei added that the access design has to be examined so that all trucks going in and out of the 16000 block River Road properties will only be able to do so when oriented to the west and not to the east.
		Mr. Erceg, advised Committee that staff is recommending an interim strategy so that the City can be prepared to entertain rezoning applications with certain conditions applying. If the recommendation is accepted by Committee, and adopted by Council, staff can process the three rezoning applications that are currently with the City. As part of that process a detailed traffic study would take place that would identify necessary improvements to River Road, and the applications would be required to commit to improvements that the comprehensive study would identify.

		Discussion ensued with regard to: (i) access alternatives and viability, (ii) sensitive areas, and (iii) the 20 metre right of way along the rail bed.
		Mike Petrich, Berane Construction Ltd., 16360 River Road, observed that River Road is a busy thoroughfare, with at least 50 businesses on the corner of No. 7 and River Road. He stated that despite the lack of sewer services in his area he pays City taxes that contribute to sewer services throughout the City, and that he was opposed to the idea of having to pay privately for a public road.
		Mr. Erceg clarified that Mr. Petrich would have to volunteer the 20 metres for the dedicated road right of way during the rezoning application, and that if the City adopted the interim strategy and one property owner failed to comply with the dedicated road right of way component, that the City would not have to proceed with the rezoning. Four owners have indicated they will volunteer the necessary dedicated road right of way.
		Committee directed staff to look into the history of the voluntary dedication of roadway from Mr. Petrich’s property that he indicated was previously given to the City.
		Mr. Petrich advised that when it comes time for his property to be rezoned for industrial purposes he will voluntarily dedicate the land necessary for the 20 metre road right of way.
		Balbir Jawanda, 16780 River Road addressed Committee and remarked that trucks were travelling safely west of Kartner Road, but not east of Kartner Road. In his opinion trucks should be stopped east of Kartner Road when they are heading toward No. 8 Road.
		Discussion continued and Mr. Burke responded to queries with the following advice:

		·	there is limited truck parking and industrial storage available in Richmond because industrial zoned properties are being used for other purposes;
		·	the intent of the Interim Strategy is to identify the 16000 block of River Road for potential truck parking and industrial storage, and that other properties could apply for a similar rezoning;
		·	if the current three separate rezoning applications involving five properties along River Road are successful, after meeting all the conditions, other applications for rezoning applications for truck parking businesses could come forward;
		·	the length of the interim strategy stage would be dictated by the lack of a sanitary sewer, estimated at a cost of $4 million, and because the City will not pay for sewer extension, a collective of developers needs to come forward to cover that cost.
		A brief discussion ensued with regard to: (i) Richmond’s lack of provision to allow for commercial trucks to park on the street, (ii) safety issues with trucks not being addressed, (iii) and the imperilling of Richmond’s trucking industry due to a lack of overnight parking places.
		Wayne Mercer, Manager, Community Bylaws responded to queries with regard to Bylaw enforcement for trucks speeding east along River Road, and advised that his staff is collecting evidence and working with the Law Department on prosecution options for properties that are not conforming to the zoning. He added that if Option 2 was turned down the same type of enforcement tactics would continue.

		In response to a further query, Mr. Mercer stated that since July 2007 City Bylaw staff has issued 320 tickets to trucks that are in contravention of City Bylaws along River Road and No. 7 Road, and that of those 50% have been paid. He added the RCMP and City Bylaws staff are working together to address the problem.
		Discussion ensued with regard to the benefits of adopting the staff recommendation, Option 2, and as a result of the discussion the following referral motion was introduced:
		It was moved and seconded
		That the report be referred back to staff for further investigation.
		The motion was not called as discussion continued and Mr. Burke gave the following advice to clarify that the intent of the Interim Strategy is to:
		·	ask each applicant to fully declare the number of vehicles on their property;
		·	build that information into the rezoning process so that there is clarity;
		·	bring forward applications after the applicant had offered the pertinent information;
		·	require the applicants to complete the necessary studies/work by March 31, 2008.
		Discussion ensued and remarks from Committee included the caution that, if the report is referred back to staff, that parked trucks will be pushed off River Road properties and onto Agricultural Land Reserve property.
		As a result of the discussion the referral motion was WITHDRAWN.

The question on the main motion was then called and it was CARRIED, with Councillors Sue Halsey-Brandt and Steves opposed.

Staff was directed to note more clearly that the restrictive Comprehensive Development District zoning being proposed would restrict the number of trucks.

Staff was further directed to work with the RCMP to document the license plates of parked trucks in order for the City to ascertain how many trucks are registered to Vancouver truck drivers versus the number of trucks that are registered to Richmond truck drivers.

MANAGER’S REPORT

	(1)	Public Information Open Houses
	In response to a query from staff regarding the Planning and Development Department’s method of hosting public information open houses to gain feedback from the public on planning issues, Mr. Erceg remarked that staff is in receipt of a letter of inquiry regarding the issue.
	Discussion ensued with regard to the issue and as a result the following referral was made:
	It was moved and seconded
	*That staff report on:*
	*(1)*	*ways to improve: (a) the format of public information open houses and (b) the methods of gathering input from the public; and*
	*(2)*	the methods of conducting public information open houses so that the public contributes in a meaningful way, and that the public is satisfied with the City’s response to input gathered at open houses.
CARRIED

		(2)	Creation of Child Care Spaces in the City Centre
		In response to a query Mr. Crowe advised that staff will reply to a letter from Linda Shirley, Chair, Child Care Development Advisory Committee, to let her know that the Policy Planning Division will bring forward a request for funding for (a) the City to update its Child Care Needs Assessment Study, (b) to authorize an amount of money for the 2008 child care grants, and (c) to hire a child care co-ordinator on contract for 2008 to assist in the proper design of child care facilities.

		(3)	City Centre Area Plan (CCAP)
			No report was given.

		(4)	Steveston Study
			No report was given.

		(5)	Official Community Plan (OCP)
			No report was given.

		(6)	Liveable Region Strategic Plan Review (LRSP)
			No report was given.

ADJOURNMENT

		It was moved and seconded
		*That the meeting adjourn (6:40 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 5, 2008.
_________________________________	_________________________________
Councillor Harold Steves Chair	Sheila Johnston Committee Clerk

Alerts