January 22, 2013 - Minutes
 |
Planning Committee
|
Date: |
Tuesday, January 22, 2013 |
|
Place: |
Anderson Room |
|
Present: |
Councillor Bill McNulty, Chair |
|
Absent: |
Councillor Linda Barnes |
|
Also Present: |
Councillor Linda McPhail |
|
Call to Order: |
The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. |
|
|
|
MINUTES |
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
|
That the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on Tuesday, January 8, 2013, be adopted as circulated. |
|
|
|
CARRIED |
|
|
1. |
(File Ref. No. 12-8060-20-8988/8989, RZ 10-556878, AG 10-556901) (REDMS No. 3736284) |
||
|
|
|
Wayne Craig, Director, Development, provided background information. In regards to the staff referral, Mr. Craig stated that staff recommend not proceeding with a review to ban or to restrict drive-through development in Richmond, and he spoke of more effective alternatives for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. |
||
|
|
|
Discussion ensued regarding the intent of the referral and it was noted that the current zoning bylaw has no provisions to prohibit a business from having a drive-through component; a comment was made that drive-throughs should be considered on an individual basis. |
||
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
||
|
|
|
(1) |
That Option 2 (in the report dated January 8, 2013 from the Director of Development), which recommends that no further review of restricting drive-throughs in Richmond’s Zoning Bylaw 8500 for new developments, be approved; |
|
|
|
|
(2) |
That authorization for Everbe Holdings Ltd. to apply to the Agricultural Land Commission to exclude 11120 and 11200 No. 5 Road from the Agricultural Land Reserve be granted; |
|
|
|
|
(3) |
That Official Community Plan Amendment Bylaw No. 8988, to re-designate 11120 and 11200 No. 5 Road from “Mixed Employment” to “Commercial” in the 2041 Official Community Plan Land Use Map to Schedule 1 of Official Community Plan Bylaw 9000 and to amend the Development Permit Area Map in Schedule 2.8A (Ironwood Sub-Area Plan) of Official Community Plan Bylaw 7100, be introduced and given first reading; |
|
|
|
|
(4) |
That Bylaw 8988, having been considered 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; |
|
|
|
|
(5) |
That Bylaw 8988, having been considered in accordance with the City Policy on Consultation During Official Community Plan development is hereby deemed not to require further consultation; and |
|
|
|
|
(6) |
That Bylaw 8989, for the rezoning of 11120 and 11200 No. 5 Road from “Agriculture (AG1)” to “Community Commercial (CC)”, be introduced and given first reading. |
|
|
|
|
CARRIED |
||
|
|
2. |
(File Ref. No. 12-8060-20-8957, RZ 12-602449) (REDMS No. 3741616) |
|
|
|
Mr. Craig noted that after revisions to the affordable housing component of the proposed application, staff support the submission of an Affordable Housing Special Development Circumstance in order to keep the location of the affordable housing units within one building block. Mr. Craig stated that the developer has agreed to provide interior finishes that are of similar value and quality to those found in the market units. Also, he advised that the developer has agreed to provide permanent access to the shared interior amenity space at no charge to the future occupants of the affordable housing units. |
|
|
|
Dena Kae Beno, Affordable Housing Coordinator, provided background information and advised that the proposed development has been revised to increase the number of affordable housing units to best support its target tenant group. She stated that the number of two-bedroom units has been increased to accommodate single parents with one or two children and that the sole studio unit would be suitable for an expectant mother. |
|
|
|
Ms. Beno commented on the proposed housing program, highlighting that the City would work with the future affordable housing provider and local non-profit community service and health providers to develop a coordinated approach for access and delivery of the housing support programs. Also, Ms. Beno spoke of the adjacent childcare facility, noting that spaces would be provided to accommodate children from the affordable housing units. |
|
|
|
Discussion ensued and Ms. Beno advised that the proposed affordable housing model builds community support and would be the first of its kind in Richmond. |
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
|
That Bylaw 8957 to rezone 5640 Hollybridge Way from “Industrial Business Park (IB1)” to “Residential / Limited Commercial (RCL3)” be introduced and given first reading. |
|
|
|
CARRIED |
|
|
3. |
(File Ref. No. 12-8060-20-8947/8948/8986, RZ 11-593406) (REDMS No. 3646966) |
|
|
|
|
Mr. Craig provided background information and advised that the complex leased by the City for the operation of gymnastics, air pistol and archery programming would remain in place as the lease would be in effect until February 2016. |
|
|
|
|
In reply to queries from Committee, Mr. Craig advised that (i) the proposed floor area ratio is 0.6; (ii) although the site is located within a High Aircraft Noise Area, the area does not restrict the development of multi-family dwellings; and (iii) a condition to building in a High Aircraft Noise Area is that the proposed development must be designed and constructed in a manner that mitigates potential aircraft noise. |
|
|
|
|
Discussion ensued and Committee expressed concern in relation to the potential loss in recreational space should the subject property be rezoned. In response to Committee’s concerns, Dave Semple, General Manager, Community Services, advised that staff are examining options on how to address this matter. |
|
|
|
|
In reply to queries from the Chair, Ken Chow, Architect, Interface Architecture Inc., stated that the subject site consists of approximately 76,000 square feet of recreational space. Also, Mr. Chow advised that the subject site could potentially be better utilized with a residential mixed-use development; however a residential mixed-use development would require an increase in density. |
|
|
|
|
In reply to queries from Committee, Mr. Craig stated that a residential mixed-use development was not considered due to access concerns with the subject site, the narrow site geometry, and adjacency concerns expressed from the existing single-family neighbourhood to the north. Also, he stated that the proposed $700,000 contribution towards the City’s Leisure Facilities Reserve Fund can be utilized at Council’s discretion. |
|
|
|
|
Discussion ensued and the following Committee comments were noted: |
|
|
|
|
§ |
a residential mixed-use development should be examined in pursuit of the best use of the subject site; and |
|
|
|
§ |
staff should research the history of the subject site as it relates to rezoning. |
|
|
|
Joe Erceg, General Manager, Planning and Development, advised that should the proposed application be referred back to staff, staff would require sufficient time to consider a residential mixed-use application for the subject site. Mr. Erceg stated that in consulting with the neighbourhood, the applicant has learned that the neighbourhood is sensitive to density matters and height of future buildings on the subject site. As such, a change from low density townhomes to residential mixed-use would require the applicant to further consult with the neighbourhood. |
|
|
|
|
Sean Lawson, 6463 Dyke Road, accompanied by Davy Sangara, 2485 West 5th Avenue, Vancouver, and Colin LaRiviere, 6200 25th Avenue, Delta, representing the applicant, provided background information and was of the opinion that the application before Committee was the best use for the subject site. |
|
|
|
|
Mr. Lawson commented on the neighbourhood consultations, highlighting that they were well attended and that the design of the proposed project was altered in an effort to complement the existing single-family neighbourhood north of the subject site. Also, he commented on nearby commercial centres, noting that there is a strip mall at the corner of No. 5 Road and Cambie Road. |
|
|
|
|
In relation to Committee’s concern regarding the potential loss in recreational space should the subject property be rezoned, Mr. Lawson advised that the majority of those that utilize recreation space at the subject site are non-Richmond residents. Mr. Lawson listed the various soccer and tennis facilities throughout Richmond, noting that these groups are well represented. |
|
|
|
|
Mr. Sangara commented on the traffic impact study, noting that the current use of the subject site creates surges in parking demand due to special events. As such, the proposed development would likely generate less parking spill over to adjacent neighbourhoods. |
|
|
|
|
Mr. LaRiviere commented on his business, noting that most programs are at full capacity. He stated the City has been successful in meeting the demands of various sports groups as many users of his facility are non-Richmond residents. Also, Mr. LaRiviere spoke of various recreational facilities in Richmond that offer similar space, and was of the opinion that any sport group that may be displaced could find comparable recreational space elsewhere in Richmond. |
|
|
|
|
Mr. Lawson commented on the proposed $700,000 contribution towards the City’s Leisure Facilities Reserve Fund, noting that the proposed contribution is generous in light of the density of the proposed development. |
|
|
|
|
Annie Watson, representing the Richmond Gymnastics Association, expressed concern regarding the future home of the Richmond Gymnastics Association. |
|
|
|
|
Mr. Semple advised that a staff report on matter was forthcoming. |
|
|
|
|
As a result of the discussion, the following referral was introduced: |
|
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
|
|
That the Application by Interface Architecture Inc. for rezoning at 4991 No. 5 Road from School & Institutional Use (SI) to Low Density Townhouses (RTL4) be referred back to staff to: |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
consider other development options including but not limited to commercial / retail or mixed-use development and an increase in density to ensure the best utilization of the site; |
|
|
|
(b) |
research the history of the subject site as it relates to the existing recreational uses on the site; and |
|
|
|
(c) |
examine the potential implications that the loss of the existing on-site private recreation facility space would have on the City’s recreation facility inventory and its various user groups. |
|
|
|
The question on the referral was not called as discussion ensued and it was noted that Committee would like to hear from the various sports groups that would be impacted by the proposed development. |
|
|
|
|
The question on the referral was then called and it was CARRIED. |
|
|
|
4. |
MANAGER’S REPORT |
|
|
|
|
(i) |
Lingyen Mountain Temple |
|
|
|
Mr. Craig advised that the Lingyen Mountain Temple has indicated that they are proposing to conduct a telephone survey of the immediate neighbourhood in relation to the future expansion of the temple. |
|
|
|
|
(ii) |
Neighbourhood Open House – Tait Area |
|
|
|
Mr. Craig spoke of a City-led open house that would take place on January 24, 2013 seeking the neighbourhood’s input on potential land use options and road alignment options for the extension of McKessock Place. |
|
|
|
|
(iii) |
Former Steveston Secondary School Site |
|
|
|
Discussion ensued regarding the status of the former Steveston Secondary School site, and Mr. Erceg advised that a copy of a past position paper regarding the City’s position on the matter would be re-circulated to Council. |
|
|
|
|
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, January 22, 2013. |
|
_________________________________ |
_________________________________ |
|
Councillor Bill McNulty |
Hanieh Berg |