July 21, 2026 - Minutes
|
Planning Committee
|
Date: |
Tuesday, July 21, 2026 |
|
Place: |
Anderson Room |
|
Present: |
Councillor Bill McNulty, Chair Mayor Malcolm Brodie |
|
Absent: |
Councillor Alexa Loo |
|
Also Present: |
Councillor Laura Gillanders (by teleconference) Councillor Michael Wolfe |
|
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 July 7, 2026, be adopted as circulated. |
|
|
|
CARRIED |
|
|
|
DEPUTY CAO’S OFFICE |
|
|
1. |
(File Ref. No. 08-4057-05) (REDMS No. 8425349) |
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
|
That Housing Agreement (9251 & 9291 Alexandra Road) Bylaw No. 9544, Amendment Bylaw No. 10739 be introduced and given first, second, and third readings. |
|
|
|
CARRIED |
|
|
|
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION |
|
|
2. |
(File Ref. No. RZ 22-027420) (REDMS No. 8445572) |
|
|
|
In response to a query from Committee, staff advised that the statutory right-of-way would be registered on the common property and each title of the individual units. |
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
|
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10780 to create the “Town Housing (ZT107) – Smith Crescent (Hamilton)” zone, and to rezone 4620 & 4640 Smith Crescent from “Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing (RSM/XL)” to “Town Housing (ZT107) – Smith Crescent (Hamilton)”, be introduced and given first, second and third reading. |
|
|
|
CARRIED |
|
|
3. |
(File Ref. No. RZ 23-015980) (REDMS No. 8413116) |
||
|
|
|
Discussion ensued with respect to the number of studios and one-bedroom units, noting interest to increase the number of family-friendly units as there are family-friendly amenities such as parks and an elementary school nearby. |
||
|
|
|
Staff will take the direction and advised that the mix of units could be considered and adjusted with the applicant to consider reducing the number of studio units and convert those to one bedroom or one bedroom plus den. Staff can provide an update to Council prior to the public hearing to be held in September 2026. |
||
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
||
|
|
|
(1) |
That Official Community Amendment Bylaw 10757, to amend: |
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
Schedule 1 of Official Community Plan Bylaw 9000 (City of Richmond 2050 OCP Land Use Map), including amending the land use designation of 9720 Cambie Road from “School” to “City Centre Perimeter - Tier 2”; and |
|
|
|
|
(b) |
Schedule 2.1 lA (West Cambie Area Plan) of Official Community Plan Bylaw 7100, including amending the Development Permit Guidelines: Alexandra Neighbourhood Character Areas Map to identify the subject site as “Medium Density Housing” and amending the land use designation of the subject site in the Alexandra Neighbourhood Land Use Map from “Community Institutional” to “City Centre Perimeter- Tier 2,” including making various text, map, and graphic amendments to accommodate the identified bylaw amendments and ensure consistency throughout the plan, be introduced and given first reading; |
|
|
|
(2) |
That Bylaw 10757, having been considered in conjunction with: |
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
the City's Financial Plan and Capital Program; and |
|
|
|
|
(b) |
the Greater Vancouver Regional District Solid Waste and Liquid Waste Management Plans; is hereby found to be consistent with said program and plans, in accordance with Section 477(3)(a) of the Local Government Act; |
|
|
|
(3) |
That Bylaw 10757, having been considered in accordance with OCP Bylaw Preparation Consultation Policy 5043, is hereby found not to require further consultation; and |
|
|
|
|
(4) |
That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10758 to create the “Low Rise Rental Apartment (ZLR50)-Alexandra Neighbourhood (West Cambie)” zone, and to rezone 9720 Cambie Road from the “Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing (RSM/XL)” zone to the “Low Rise Rental Apartment (ZLR50)-Alexandra Neighbourhood (West Cambie)” zone, be introduced and given first reading. |
|
|
|
|
CARRIED |
||
|
|
4. |
(File Ref. No. HRA 23-016568; HA 25-022755) (REDMS No. 8462167) |
||
|
|
|
Discussion ensued with regard to consistency with the Steveston Area Plan and the Steveston Village Conservation Strategy and the proposed setbacks. In response to queries from Committee, staff advised that (i) the entirety of the heritage building and rear extension added around 1930 will be retained; (ii) currently, a jewelry store operates in the retail space; and (iii) the application previously went to the Heritage Advisory Commission for consideration. |
||
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
||
|
|
|
(1) |
That Richmond Official Community Plan Bylaw 7100, Amendment Bylaw 10769, to revise Schedule 2.4 of the Official Community Plan (Steveston Area Plan) to provide that a maximum of three storeys and height of 12 m may be considered for the purposes of the long-term conservation and protection of the heritage building at 3831 Moncton Street, be introduced and given first reading; |
|
|
|
|
(2) |
That Richmond Official Community Plan Bylaw 7100, Amendment Bylaw 10769, having been considered in conjunction with: |
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
The City’s Financial Plan and Capital Program; and |
|
|
|
|
(b) |
The Greater Vancouver Regional District Solid Waste and Liquid Waste Management Plans |
|
|
|
|
is hereby found to be consistent with said program and plans, in accordance with Section 477(3)(a) of the Local Government Act; |
|
|
|
|
(3) |
That Richmond Official Community Plan Bylaw 7100, Amendment Bylaw 10769, having been considered in accordance with Official Community Plan (OCP) Bylaw Preparation Consultation Policy 5043, is hereby found not to require further consultation; |
|
|
|
|
(4) |
That Heritage Revitalization Agreement (3831 Moncton Street) Bylaw No. 10741 to permit the City to enter into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement substantially in the form attached hereto, in accordance with the requirements of Section 610 of the Local Government Act, to conserve Ikeda Dry Goods and to construct a hotel at 3831 Moncton Street, be introduced and given first reading; |
|
|
|
|
(5) |
That, following adoption of the Heritage Revitalization Agreement (3831 Moncton Street) Bylaw No. 10741, a Heritage Alteration Permit be issued to permit the proposed exterior changes, including restoration and rehabilitation work, for Ikeda Dry Goods and construction of a new hotel at 3831 Moncton Street; and |
|
|
|
|
(6) |
That a funding request in the amount of $239,610.00 be approved under the Steveston Village Heritage Conservation Grant Program to assist with the proposed conservation work for Ikeda Dry Goods at 3831 Moncton Street and disbursed in accordance with Council Policy 5900. |
|
|
|
|
CARRIED |
||
|
|
5. |
(File Ref. No. RZ 25-009451) (REDMS No. 8473645) |
|||
|
|
|
Staff provided clarification regarding Attachment 9 of the report noting the existing development located at 6160 and 6168 London Road is a four-story mixed-use development, not five stories as shown in the diagram. It was noted that additional information on the application was provided in the memorandum distributed to Committee (attached to and forming part of these minutes as Schedule 1). |
|||
|
|
|
Staff briefed Committee on the application, highlighting the following: |
|||
|
|
|
§ |
Building A is six stories and contains approximately 149 strata market residential units, while Building B is five stories and contains approximately 39 low-end market rental affordable housing units and 37 market rental units; |
||
|
|
|
§ |
Grade-level commercial uses are along No. 2 Road frontage and off-street parking is contained in one level of parking below grade and one level of enclosed parking at grade and loading and servicing functions are accessed from No. 2 Road; |
||
|
|
|
§ |
Outdoor amenity space is located in a central courtyard on top of the project podium; |
||
|
|
|
§ |
Built LEMR and market rental housing units in the proposal exceed City Affordable Housing Strategy and OCP market rental policy parameters; |
||
|
|
|
§ |
City infrastructure works include upgrades and raising of the existing dike on the west side of the site with road and pedestrian improvements on top; |
||
|
|
|
§ |
Frontage improvements along No. 2 Rd. to allow for pedestrian pathway and cycling infrastructure is proposed; and |
||
|
|
|
§ |
The site is subject to an environmentally sensitive area (ESA) marine designation that extends 30 metres inland from the highwater mark of the adjacent shoreline. |
||
|
|
|
Discussion ensued with respect to (i) concerns with the traffic study, (ii) the activity around the working harbour, (iii) the neighbourhood not wanting a storage locker facility, (iv) the importance of maintaining the village character and designing less intrusive residential units, (v) whether the project can be integrated with the existing neighbourhood, (vi) concerns connecting No. 2 Road to Dyke Road, (vii) concerns regarding overall height and density including number of stories and grade variation, and (viii) current LEMR and market rental requirements and economic viability of the project. |
|||
|
|
|
In response to queries from Committee, staff advised that (i) correspondence was received from the Steveston Harbour Authority expressing their traffic concerns (attached to and forming part of these minutes as Schedule 2), (ii) traffic fluctuates day-to-day, (iii) Dyke Road is built to a rural standard with enough pavement for two-way traffic and is a shared street with pedestrians and cyclists using the road with traffic, (iv) proposed road improvements will accommodate pedestrians and cyclists and will enhance overall traffic flow on Dyke Road, (v) the initial proposal from the applicant underwent an early review by Council and the applicant and their design team made significant changes to the proposal, (vi) the applicant has provided additional space for rental and market housing above City requirements, and (vii) the applicant was required to provide economic viability/feasibility study with market housing and rental included. |
||||
|
|
|
Discussion then ensued with regard to (i) park features and potentially losing the most densely treed area on the property, (ii) adhering to the City’s tree bylaw requirements, (iii) consideration of the developer-led engagement and public feedback summary, (iv) consideration of the proposed Trites Road connection between Dyke Road. and No. 2 Road, and (v) other components of the City’s diking program and designs. |
||||
|
|
|
Jordan Riley, Senior Manager, Investment and Developments with Jim Pattison Development, provided a PowerPoint presentation (copy on-file, City Clerk’s Office) and spoke on the following: |
||||
|
|
|
§ |
Public engagement reviewed (i) roof form, (ii) building height and massing, (iii) neighbourhood compatibility, (iv) loss of view, shadowing, and privacy, (v) housing affordability and community benefit, and (vi) traffic congestion and parking; |
|||
|
|
|
§ |
Dike, storm sewer, road, multi-use path and road enhancements are proposed; |
|||
|
|
|
§ |
Building massing was amended to better fit the neighbourhood fit and the proposed roof line tapers to the street with a reduced roof peak; |
|||
|
|
|
§ |
Traffic impact, road congestion and parking was reviewed noting substantial available road capacity; and |
|||
|
|
|
§ |
The frontage is aligned with other building heights in neighbourhood. |
|||
|
|
|
A copy of the presentation was requested by Committee and discussion ensued with regard to exploring other roof forms, such as flat roofs, that better integrates with the neighbourhood and mimics the original cannery buildings. |
||||
|
|
|
In response to a query from Committee, the developer advised (i) the project was redone based on feedback and does not work using four and five floors, (ii) economics have not been rerun on reducing LEMR requirements, (iii) there is no intention to build a storage locker facility, and (iv) a mixed-use development is the community preference. |
||||
|
|
|
Roy Oostergo, Richmond resident, spoke on the proposed project and expressed concerns regarding the proposed massing, density and building height in relation to Steveston’s character. Mr. Oostergo also referenced feedback from Steveston Harbour Authority and relayed the potential traffic impact of the proposed project. |
||||
|
|
|
Luke Rogalsky, Richmond resident, spoke on the proposed project amendments and expressed concern regarding (i) the proposed massing and form and character, (ii) proposed density and traffic impact, (iii) proposed Dyke Road extension, and (iv) removal of adjacent mature trees. Mr. Rogalsky added that the proposed development should reflect the character of Steveston. |
||||
|
|
|
Donna Hicks, Richmond resident, spoke on eagle habitat in the neighbourhood and expressed concern to potential habitat loss due to removal of mature trees. |
||||
|
|
|
Deneen Butler, Richmond resident, spoke on the city’s need for more housing and expressed concern on Richmond Hospital’s capacity in relation to Richmond’s growing population. |
||||
|
|
|
It was noted that neighbourhood residents have conducted a petition on the matter and submitted the petition to the City (copy on-file, City Clerk’s Office). |
||||
|
|
|
As a result of the discussion, the following referral motion was introduced: |
||||
|
|
|
That the application to rezone 13131, 13111, 13031, 12931, and 12771 No. 2 Road from “Light Industrial (IL) zone to the “Residential/Limited Commercial (ZMU63) – London Landing (Steveston)” zone be referred back to staff to work with the applicant to: |
||||
|
|
|
(1) |
Reduce the proposed building height and density; |
|||
|
|
|
(2) |
Examine the Trites Road connection to not be put through; |
|||
|
|
|
(3) |
Address concerns from the Steveston Harbour Authority; |
|||
|
|
|
(4) |
Revisit the traffic study; |
|||
|
|
|
(5) |
Adjust the amount of low-end market rental housing and market rental housing; |
|||
|
|
|
(6) |
Consider the loss of trees and environmental aspects; and |
|||
|
|
|
(7) |
Consider the roof form. |
|||
|
|
|
The question on the referral motion was not called as discussion ensued with regard to adjusting building height, massing and considering alternative roof forms. |
||||
|
|
|
The question on the referral motion was then called and it was CARRIED. |
||||
|
|
6. |
MANAGER’S REPORT |
|
|
|
None. |
|
|
|
ADJOURNMENT |
|
|
|
It was moved and seconded |
|
|
|
That the meeting adjourn (5:32 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 July 21, 2026. |
|
_________________________________ |
_________________________________ |
|
Councillor Bill McNulty |
Karen Miller |