October 21, 2014 - Minutes

Date:

Tuesday, October 21, 2014

Place:

Anderson Room
Richmond City Hall

Present:

Councillor Bill McNulty, Chair
Councillor Evelina Halsey-Brandt
Councillor Chak Au
Councillor Linda Barnes
Councillor Harold Steves

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, October 7, 2014, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING DATE

Tuesday, November 4, 2014, (tentative date) at 4:00 p.m. in the Anderson Room

The Chair advised that Richmond Housing and Development Activity Statistics will be considered as Item No. 2A and that the order of the agenda would be varied to consider Item No. 1 last.

PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

2.

Application by 0868256 BC Ltd. for Rezoning at 10211 No. 5 Road from Single Detached (RS1/E) to Compact SingleDetached(RC2)
(File Ref. No. 12-8060-20-0009178; RZ 14-658540) (REDMS No. 4377554)

It was moved and seconded

That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 9178, for the rezoning of 10211 No. 5 Road from “Single Detached (RS1/E)” to “Compact Single Detached (RC2)”, be introduced and given first reading.

CARRIED

2A.

Richmond Housing and Development Activity Statistics
(File Ref. No.)

The Chair requested a summary of housing and urban development in the city, including data on development cost charges and affordable housing units.

In reply to queries from the Chair, Joe Erceg, General Manager, Planning and Development, advised that staff tracks housing and development data in the city on an annual basis. He added that a summary of the housing and development analysis can be distributed to Council.

Discussion then ensued with regard to the time range that would be included in the data analysis.

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

It was moved and seconded

That staff circulate to Council a summary of housing and development activity in the city including the years 2013 to 2014.

CARRIED

1.

Application by Polygon Development 273 Ltd. for Rezoning on a portion of 10440 and 10460 No. 2 Road from School & Institutional Use (SI) to Town Housing (ZT72) – London / Steveston (No. 2 Road)
(File Ref. No. 12-8060-20-009155/009156; RZ 13-649524) (REDMS No. 4277881 v.6)

Wayne Craig, Director, Development, briefed Committee on the proposed application noting that:

§   

the site will have 133 townhouse units;

§   

two parcels of land on the site, totalling  approximately five acres in size, is dedicated to the City for park land and a proposed community childcare facility;

§   

a proposed 12 metre wide public greenway will connect to No. 2 Road;

§   

the majority of the proposed park space will be located on the eastern portion of the site and will be subject to a park plan to be approved by Council prior to rezoning adoption;

§   

the proposed community child care facility will be located on No. 2 Road and will be designed and built by the applicant;

§   

the proposed development will have 12 affordable housing units with six units along No. 2 Road and another six units adjacent to the proposed community child care facility;

§   

the total value of the affordable housing units and proposed community child care facility is approximately $7.0 million;

§   

the proposed development will include frontage improvements as well as a fully signalized intersection at No. 2 Road and Wallace Road;

§   

road dedications being provided will enable future installation of left turn lanes on No. 2 Road should traffic volumes warrant them;

§   

the proposed tree retention plan will include plans to preserve a large cedar tree near the entrance of the proposed development on No. 2 Road;

§   

a shadow analysis was done on the proposed development and units along the north and south side of the site will have a six metre setback; and

§   

units along the north and south side of the site will be tiered to have a one storey interface and then rise to have two and three storeys as the setback increases.

Discussion ensued with respect to (i) the location of the former Steveston Secondary School in relation to the proposed development, (ii) the signalized intersection at No. 2 Road and Wallace Road, and (iii) the exterior finishes of the affordable housing units.

In reply to queries from Committee, Mr. Craig advised that architectural plans are still preliminary; however the affordable housing units are anticipated to have the same quality finish as the market housing units and will have access to all amenities in the proposed development.

Discussion then ensued regarding (i) the full integration of the affordable housing units within the proposed development, (ii) the setbacks and the height of the buildings, and (iii) the possible increase in traffic in the area.

In reply to queries from Committee, Victor Wei, Director, Transportation, spoke of the traffic in the area, noting the following:

§   

the intersection at No. 2 Road and Wallace Road will be upgraded with a traffic signal;

§   

the proposed traffic signal at No. 2 Road and Wallace Road will improve access to and from the site and the existing area on the west side of No. 2 Road;

§   

installation of two bus shelters and crosswalk improvements are proposed along No. 2 Road;

§   

a lay by is proposed in front of the proposed community child care facility;

§   

traffic volumes are anticipated to be approximately 100 vehicles per hour along the intersection of No. 2 Road and Wallace Road during peak times; and

§   

the proposed signalized intersection at No. 2 Road and Wallace Road will be able to handle anticipated traffic volumes in the area.

Discussion ensued with regard to the proposed park size and the pedestrian connections to the proposed park. Mike Redpath, Senior Manager, Parks, noted that the proposed park was the old Steveston Secondary School football field. He added that the proposed park will retain relatively the same area of open space as the Steveston Secondary School field. Also, he anticipates that the proposed park will strengthen neighbourhood connections.

Discussion then ensued with respect to having community awareness of and open community access to the proposed park.

In reply to queries from Committee, Mr. Wei noted that anticipated traffic volumes in the area will be relatively lower compared to the traffic volumes when Steveston Secondary School was operational. He added that he does not anticipate that any additional intersections in the area will require additional improvements.

Discussion ensued regarding the proposed lay by adjacent to the proposed community child care facility and the left turn lanes along No. 2 Road. In reply to queries from Committee, Mr. Craig and Mr. Wei noted that a road dedication along the east side of No. 2 Road will allow for the installation of left turn lanes along No. 2 Road without having to acquire additional land.

In reply to queries from Committee, Mark McMullen, Senior Coordinator-Major Projects, advised that the proposed greenway is anticipated to be landscaped and will be approximately 500 feet in length.

Discussion ensued with respect to the addition of street furniture or adult exercise equipment in the proposed greenway. Mr. Redpath noted that integration of the adult exercise equipment along the proposed greenway can be discussed during the park planning consultation process.

Staff were directed to examine options to integrate adult exercise equipment along the proposed greenway and park.

In reply to queries from the Chair, Mr. Craig noted that there is an Official Community Plan (OCP) amendment associated with the proposed application. He added that the parcels on the site will require a redesignation from School to Neighbourhood Residential or from School to Park.

The Chair then commented on the population increase in the area since Steveston Secondary School ceased operations and the anticipated effects that the proposed development would have on traffic.

Staff were then directed to examine options to install left turn lanes along No. 2 Road in association with the development of the subject site.

In reply to queries from the Chair regarding the distribution of the affordable housing units within the proposed development, Mr. Craig advised that the proposed affordable housing units are clustered into two blocks of six units each because there is a discrepancy in the unit typology with the market units.

Cathryn Volkering Carlile, General Manager, Community Services, advised that the said units were configured to be in proximity to the proposed development’s amenities, transit services, and the proposed community child care facility.

Mr. Craig then commented on the proposed community child care facility and noted that the proposed location of said facility provides good access for pick-up and drop-off but can be relocated if required.

Discussion ensued with respect to the height and setback of the proposed townhouses and the possible impact to adjacent properties.

Mr. Craig advised that staff worked with the applicant to minimize the potential shadowing effect and reduce the height of the building interfaces adjacent to the neighbouring properties. He added that the north-south configuration of the proposed buildings will reduce overall interface exposure to neighbouring properties. Also, he noted that analysis of the potential overlook can be done through the development permit once proposed architectural designs are received.

Discussion ensued regarding community awareness of the proposed park.

Discussion then ensued with regard to public access to the proposed park. Mr. Craig noted that refinement of the greenway entrance is possible in order to improve public access.

In reply to queries from the Chair, Mr. Redpath noted that access to the proposed park will be through the proposed development. He added that there will be no public parking for park users within the proposed development.

The Chair commented on access to the proposed park and noted that the proposed park should be accessible to all city residents.

Discussion ensued with regard to other sites in the city with a similar configuration to the proposed development. It was noted that sites such as the Mariner’s Village development in the Steveston area share a similar configuration to the proposed development and community awareness of the park adjacent to Mariner’s Village is perceived to be low.

It was suggested that the proposed greenway be relocated along the southern or northern edge of the development in order to provide open access to the greenway and proposed park. Mr. Craig advised that proposed configuration of the development was chosen in order to maximize the park space and provide the best passive surveillance along the greenway.

In reply to queries from Committee, Mr. Craig advised that buildings adjacent to the proposed greenway will have a setback of approximately 3.0 to 4.5 metres.

Discussion then ensued with regard to the management of the proposed park and greenway following the construction of the proposed development.

In reply to queries from Committee, Mr. Craig advised that the proposed greenway is subject to a Statutory Right-of-Way (SRW) so the City would have authority over the proposed greenway after completion of the proposed development.

Discussion ensued with respect to having complete contiguous public access to the proposed greenway and park.

In reply to queries from Committee, Joe Erceg, General Manager, Planning and Development, commented on the SRW and the areas dedicated to the City within the proposed development, noting that these areas are approximately five acres in size.

Chris Ho, Polygon Development 273 Ltd., spoke of the proposed development noting that:

§   

the applicant has no concern whether a SRW or a dedication is used for the proposed greenway and park areas, provided that the overall buildable area was not reduced;

§   

moving the proposed greenway to the northern or southern edges of the subject site will have the proposed greenway up against adjacent properties;

§   

the configuration of the buildings on-site minimizes frontage to adjacent properties;

§   

the applicant can examine configuration options to increase security and frontage concerns;

§   

the proposed park will be a passive park and can be accessed from Steveston London Secondary School;

§   

the affordable housing units are clustered into two blocks due to the discrepancy in unit type with the market units;

§   

the affordable housing units will be in proximity to transit services and will have the same exterior finishing as the market units;

§   

the applicant is willing to examine options to reconfigure the proposed greenway as long as the total size and density of the proposed development remain intact;

§   

the proposed development will be designed to meet or exceed EnerGuide 82 standards and all units will be pre-ducted for solar hot water heating; and

§   

water retention systems for the proposed development can be examined during the development permit phase of the application.

Barbara Parpara, 5631 Floyd Avenue, expressed concern with regard to the proposed development and read from her submission (attached to and forming part of these minutes as Schedule 1) and a referred to a petition (attached to and forming part of these minutes as Schedule 2) against the proposed application.

Michael Louvet, 6140 Goldsmith Drive, commented on the proposed development and expressed concern with respect to the size of the proposed buildings, the soil conditions in the area and the risk for damage during an earthquake. Also, he was of the opinion that the public consultation done for the proposed development was inadequate.

Jason Ma, 6220 Goldsmith Drive, spoke of the proposed development and expressed concern regarding the consultation process and the configuration of the proposed development. Also, he was of the opinion that public consultation done for the proposed development was inadequate.

Discussion ensued regarding how the proposed development could negatively affect property values in the area.

Discussion then ensued with regard to the consultation process and Mr. Erceg advised that the consultation process abides by the legislation. He added that there will be more opportunities for public consultation if the proposed project advances.

In reply to queries from Committee, Mr. Craig commented on the rezoning of the subject site, noting that the current school designation would change to residential or park. Mr. Craig added that rezoning a City owned and acquired park site to a residential designation would be a different process. Mr. Redpath noted that there are sites jointly owned by the City and the Richmond School District No. 38 and these sites are designated School-Park.

Steve May, 6240 Goldsmith Drive, commented on the proposed development and expressed concern with respect to the proposed setback. He suggested that the greenway be divided in two and relocated to the northern and southern edges of the site in order to provide a greater setback to adjacent properties. He expressed concern that the narrow setback would damage trees located on his property. Also, he was of the opinion that more public consultation should take place at the onset of the development proposal.

Councillor Au left the meeting (5:22 p.m.) and returned (5:23 p.m.).

In reply to queries from Committee, Mr. Erceg spoke of the public hearing process. He noted that Council must advance items past the first reading in order to have a public hearing. He added that the information meetings held by the developer are not a substitute to the public hearing. It was then noted that Council cannot receive more information regarding the proposed development following the public hearing.

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

It was moved and seconded

That the staff report titled Application by Polygon Development 273 Ltd. for Rezoning on a Portion of 10440 And 10460 No. 2 Road from School and Institutional Use (SI) To Town Housing (ZT72) – London / Steveston (No. 2 Road, dated October 15, 2014, from the Director, Development, be referred back to staff to examine the following:

(1)

the integration of the affordable housing units within the proposed development;

(2)

the layout of the proposed development including the placement of the greenway, community child care facility and access to the park land;

(3)

the effects of the proposed development on traffic in the area and the addition of left turn lanes along No. 2 Road and Wallace Road;

(4)

the possible effects of the height of the proposed buildings and setback on adjacent properties and trees;

(5)

the development’s drainage requirements;

(6)

increasing community awareness of the park land and greenway;

(7)

providing open community access to the park; and

(8)

adding more opportunities for public consultation;

and report back.

The question on the motion was not called as discussion ensued regarding (i) the configuration of the proposed development and integration of the affordable housing units, (ii) the traffic in the area and access to the site, (iii) the location of the community childcare facility, (iv) the proposed greenway, (v) the proposed development’s setbacks, (vi) the public consultation process, (vii) the tree retention plan, (viii) community awareness of the proposed park, (ix) sustainability features, (x) rezoning of the subject site, and (xi) proper draining of the subject site.

Discussion ensued with regard to solar heating pre-ducting on new developments. Staff were then directed to provide statistics on the conversion rate of solar heating pre-ducting to fully functional solar heating systems.

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

3.

MANAGER’S REPORT

None.

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (5:36 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, October 21, 2014.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Councillor Bill McNulty
Chair

Evangel Biason
Auxiliary Committee Clerk