July 8, 2025 - Minutes

Date:

Tuesday, July 8, 2025

Place:

Anderson Room
Richmond City Hall

Present:

Councillor Bill McNulty, Chair
Councillor Alexa Loo
Councillor Chak Au
Councillor Carol Day
Councillor Andy Hobbs

Also Present:

Councillor Laura Gillanders (by teleconference)

Councillor Michael Wolfe (by teleconference)

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 June 17, 2025, be adopted as circulated.

CARRIED

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION

1.

Early Council Review Process – Official Community Plan Amendment and Rezoning Application at 10471 No. 3 Road

(File Ref. No. RZ 25-012598) (REDMS No. 8064733)

Staff provided Committee with an overview of the report noting that their feedback and comments on the OCP and proposed amendments arising from the proposed rezoning will guide the comprehensive and technical review of the application.

Staff advised that they will consider all public correspondence, including those (attached to and forming part of these minutes as Schedule 1) as part of the technical review process for the application.

Discussion ensued with respect to (i) proposed building height and setbacks, (ii) the form and character of the proposed development, (iii) layout of the amenity space, (iv) benefits of ground oriented units, (v) the site’s close proximity to shopping, schools, and other amenities, and (vi) the ratio of family friendly units.

In response to queries from Committee, staff advised that (i) the proposed site access will be from No. 3 Road, (ii) there are no balconies on the north side of the subject property, (iii) the height for a three storey townhouse is about 11 metres (36’) to 12 metres (40’), (iv) staff will review building energy efficiency and emissions as part of the technical review, and (v) there are three significant trees on site, and one significant tree on the neighboring property.

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

It was moved and seconded

That the report titled “Early Council Review Process – Official Community Plan Amendment and Rezoning Application At 10471 No. 3 Road”, dated June 25, 2025 be referred back to staff for further review.

The question on the referral motion was not called as staff advised that (i) a referral would not be required as staff will provide Council and public feedback for the applicant’s consideration, and (ii) the rezoning and potential OCP amendment will be brought forward to Committee once staff complete their technical review.

As a result of the discussion there was agreement from the mover, the seconder and all members present to withdraw the referral motion, and the referral motion was WITHDRAWN.

It was moved and seconded

That the proposed Official Community Plan (OCP) amendment be considered concurrently with the rezoning application, and that staff work with the applicant to consider the comments provided by Council as part of the comprehensive and technical review of the rezoning application.

CARRIED

2.

Development Applications and Building Approvals Fees Update

(File Ref. No. 08-4000-01) (REDMS No. 8030144)

Staff provided a brief overview of the project noting that this report recommends amendments to the Development Applications and Building Approvals fees resulting from new types of development in response to the Provincial introduction of Bill 44 and Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing (SSMUH). In addition, administrative amendments are also proposed to remove fee applications that are no longer applicable and recognize existing practices.

Discussion ensued with respect to (i) proposed changes, fee calculations and fee schedules resulting from the implementation of the Small-Scale Multi-Unit housing, (ii) proposed amendment of the construction cost table for single-family homes to bring fees into closer alignment with actual building costs and City costs for permit review and inspections, and (iii) challenges in the real estate market and economy prompting concerns with large fee increases.

Staff were directed to amend Attachment 1 (Building Approvals: Estimated Cost per Square Foot for a 2,100 Square Foot Home in B.C.) to include Richmond as part of the list of identified Municipalities prior to Council consideration.

Discussion then regarding the fees related to Single-Family Dwellings and the small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing took place. As a result, the following motion was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That the Single-Family Dwelling fee structure remain unchanged and that only the Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing (SSMUH) fee structure be implemented.

CARRIED

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That Development Application Fees Bylaw No. 8951, Amendment Bylaw 10674, be given first, second and third readings; and

(2)

That Consolidated Fees Bylaw No. 8636, Amendment Bylaw 10675, be given first, second and third readings.

The question on the motion was not called as in response to queries from Committee, staff advised that the fee schedule currently being used for SSMUH is based on what applicants are directing as the construction value. Staff are proposing prescribing a construction rate that will be used to calculate the construction value.

The question on the motion with the changes to Development Application Fees Bylaw No. 8951, Amendment Bylaw 10674 and Consolidated Fees Bylaw No. 8636, Amendment Bylaw 10675 was then called and it was CARRIED.

Staff advised that they will provide Council with a revised bylaw and memorandum prior to Council consideration.

3.

Pilot Program for On-Demand/Irrevocable Surety Bonds

(File Ref. No. 08-4000-01) (REDMS No. 8067029)

Staff provided an overview of the proposed pilot project and in response to queries from Committee, staff advised that (i) the pilot project would allow the City to accept the use of On-Demand/Irrevocable Surety Bonds as an alternative form of Security, in addition to cash or Letter of Credit for the City’s Development Cost Charges instalment payments, Servicing Agreements and Development Permit (DP) landscaping securities, (ii) the funds collected through Letters of Credit do not accrue interest for the developer, (iii) staff will assess the utilization of the program in a year and report back to Council, (iv) landscaping securities for this program include any landscaping associated with the proposed development permit, (v) tree compensation is a fund paid directly to the city to plant city trees, and (vi) tree survival securities are held by the City as cash or letter of credit, they are not part of the proposed pilot program.

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

It was moved and seconded

That Tree Securities be included as part of the On-Demand/Irrevocable Surety Bonds Pilot Program.

CARRIED

Opposed: Cllr. Day

Staff advised that the pilot program is applicable to securities collected through a development permit, and may include cases where there is on-site tree retention as part of the development permit process.

It was noted that a separate referral to staff regarding surety bonds can be made as they relate to tree survival. As a result of the discussion, the Chair advised that the staff recommended motion without the inclusion of the Tree Securities motion will be put forward for consideration.

It was moved and seconded

(1)

That the pilot program outlined in the staff report titled “Pilot Program for On- Demand/Irrevocable Surety Bonds”, dated June 12, 2025, from the Director, Development and the Director, Finance, be approved;

(2)

That Subdivision and Development Bylaw No. 8751, Amendment Bylaw 10685, be introduced and given first, second and third readings;

(3)

That Development Application Fees Bylaw No. 8951, Amendment Bylaw 10687, be introduced and given first, second and third readings;

(4)

That Consolidation Fees Bylaw No. 8636, Amendment Bylaw 10688, be introduced and given first, second and third readings;

(5)

That staff review and report back in one year on the implementation of the pilot program; and

(6)

That On-Demand/Irrevocable Surety Bonds be approved for use, subject to the Pilot Program Criteria, in Servicing Agreements for any conditionally approved rezoning application, being those for which a zoning amendment bylaw has been given third reading, notwithstanding any executed rezoning considerations letter.

CARRIED

As a result of the discussion regarding the tree retention and potential securities related to trees, the following referral motion was introduced:

It was moved and seconded

That staff look at surety bonds as they relate to tree survival or some sort of mechanism to tie the survival of the tree to the user of the property and report back.

CARRIED

Opposed: Cllr. Day

4.

MANAGER’S REPORT

None

ADJOURNMENT

It was moved and seconded

That the meeting adjourn (4:55 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, July 8, 2025.

_________________________________

_________________________________

Councillor Bill McNulty
Chair

Raman Grewal
Legislative Services Associate