Planning Committee
|
Date:
|
Thursday, January 6, 2022
|
|
Place:
|
Council Chambers
Richmond City Hall
|
|
Present:
|
Councillor Bill McNulty, Chair
Councillor Alexa Loo, (by teleconference)
Councillor Chak Au
Councillor Carol Day (by teleconference)
Councillor Andy Hobbs
Councillor Harold Steves (by teleconference)
|
|
Also Present:
|
Councillor Linda McPhail (by teleconference)
Councillor Michael Wolfe (by teleconference)
|
|
Call to Order:
|
The Chair called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
|
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded
|
|
|
|
That the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on December 9, 2021, be adopted as circulated.
|
|
|
|
CARRIED
|
|
|
1.
|
Application by Cao Construction for Rezoning at 6531 Francis Road from the "Single Detached (RS1/E)" Zone to the "Arterial Road Two-Unit Dwellings (RDA)" Zone
(File Ref. No. RZ 19-878165; 12-8060-20-010332) (REDMS No. 6789491)
|
|
|
|
Staff highlighted that (i) the application is for a rezoning to enable subdivision to create two duplex lots, (ii) the application is consistent with the Arterial Road Land Use policy, and (iii) a development permit application will be required to address the form and character of the proposed duplexes.
|
|
|
|
Discussion ensued regarding (i) any future changes in Step code 3 that will have provisions for grandfathering instream applications, (ii) the proposed frontage improvements, including proposals to relocate the existing sidewalk and adding landscape boulevard and new street trees, (iii) the accessibility of the sundeck from only one unit, (iv) concerns related to number of units proposed, and (v) lack of parking availability on the property site.
|
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded
|
|
|
|
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10332, for the rezoning of 6531 Francis Road from the "Single Detached (RS 1/E)" zone to the "Arterial Road Two-Unit Dwellings (RDA)" zone, be introduced and given first reading.
|
|
|
|
CARRIED
Opposed: Cllr. Day
|
|
|
3.
|
Application of Residential Rental Tenure Zoning to Preserve and Protect 60 Existing, Purpose-Built Rental Housing Sites
(File Ref. No. 08-4057-08) (REDMS No. 6762046)
|
|
|
|
Staff reviewed the application, noting that (i) the report was in response to a Planning Committee referral, (ii) the recommendation is to amend zoning for 60 existing, purpose built, 100 percent rental housing sites to specify that units are occupied as only rental units if redeveloped, and (iii) the proposed bylaw is consistent with the Official Community Plan (OCP) policy.
|
|
|
|
Discussion ensued in regards to (i) incentives to build residential units,
(ii) any additional density provided should be rental only, (iii) Provincial and Federal government responsibilities to support rental housing, (iv) developer incentives and encouraging developers to commit to seek funding resources to develop rental housing, (v) adapting the current policy into a bylaw that specifies that rental will remain rental but not limiting density.
|
|
|
|
In reply to queries, staff noted that (i) a policy is a general indicator of what the City would like whereas a bylaw is a more precise tool and provides clarity to developers, (ii) value of property should not be affected as there was already a policy in place, (iii) this bylaw will reinforce the City’s policy on the 60 existing 100 percent rental housing sites, (iv) staff will provide a memo listing the names of the 60 subject development sites, and (v) the 60 sites are buildings largely owned by corporations or developers rather than family owned.
|
|
|
|
John Roston, Richmond Rental Housing Advocacy Group, provided a submission ( attached to and forming part of these minutes as Schedule 1) and commented that he supports this bylaw and feels that a bylaw is stronger than a policy and that there is a need for purpose-built rentals not strata condos.
|
|
|
|
Dana Westermark, Richmond resident spoke on the proposed bylaw and commented that (i) the development community will still make inquires whether there is a policy or a bylaw in place, (ii) imposing a zoning on a property will negatively impact property owners, and (iii) staff should engage developers and other stakeholders in discussions on how to use residential rental tenure.
|
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded
|
|
|
|
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw No. 8500 Amendment Bylaw No. 10014 (Residential Rental Tenure to Preserve and Protect Existing, Purpose-Built Rental Housing Sites) be introduced and given first reading.
|
|
|
|
The question on the motion was not called as discussion ensued with regard to protecting the existing purpose built stock of rental housing, and the need for an economic impact analysis and incentives to building new rental stock.
|
|
|
|
The question on the motion was then called and it was CARRIED.
|
|
|
4.
|
MANAGER’S REPORT
|
|
|
|
City Snapshots
|
|
|
|
|
Staff noted that through online community engagement staff received about 100 comments and questions. A memo will be distributed to Council outlining the results of the engagement.
|
|
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded
|
|
|
|
That the meeting adjourn (5:13 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 January 6, 2022.
|
|
_________________________________
|
_________________________________
|
|
Councillor Bill McNulty
Chair
|
Raman Grewal
Legislative Services Associate
|
|
