ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Date: June 26, 1995
Dept. File No. AMH
TO: Vancouver City Council
FROM: Associate Director of Planning, Land Use and Development
SUBJECT: Re-Approval of Strata Title Conversion - 869-883 East Hastings
Street
RECOMMENDATION
A. THAT the application to convert the premises at 869-883 East
Hastings Street (Lot C, Block 61, D.L. 181, Plan 13940) to
strata title ownership be re-approved in principle, but that
pursuant to Section 9(1) of the Condominium Act, the
Certificate of Approval (Form 10) shall not be issued unless
the following condition has been met within one year of the
date of this re-approval in principle:
Completion of all work required by the City Building
Inspector, under the required permits, at no cost to the City,
and issuance of an Occupancy Permit, in order that this
previously-occupied building substantially complies with all
relevant by-laws.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of
the foregoing.
COUNCIL POLICY
Council policy is reflected in the City's Strata Title and Cooperative
Conversion Guidelines, which outline factors which Council will consider
in reviewing applications for converting previously-occupied buildings
to strata title or cooperative ownership.
PURPOSE
Council re-approval is requested for the application to convert the
previously-occupied building at 869-883 East Hastings Street (Lot C,
Block 61, D.L. 181, Plan 13940) to strata title ownership.
BACKGROUND
The site is zoned M-1 and is developed with a three-storey building,
constructed in 1984, consisting of retail uses on the main floor and
offices above. The location of the building is illustrated in Figure 1,
below.
Figure 1
On June 14, 1994, Council granted approval in principle to an
application to convert this building to 21 strata lots, subject to
completion of upgrading work required by the City Building Inspector and
issuance of an Occupancy Permit. That condition has not been satisfied,
and pursuant to Council's policy, the approval in principle lapsed on
June 14, 1995. On June 21, 1995, the architect for the project
submitted a request for Council's re-approval in principle, to be valid
for a further year.
The architect has advised staff that he has been unable to complete the
required renovations of the building due to his difficulty in gathering
information on the original construction methods in the building and
performing new calculations with respect to loading and seismic
restraint. The architect also cites a delay in the processing of the
building permit application for the upgrading work as a reason that the
applicant has been unable to complete Council's condition of approval
within the one-year time period given.
STAFF ANALYSIS
The intent in establishing the one-year limit for completion of Council-
imposed conditions was not to necessarily expect that-in every instance,
all conditions of approval could be completed within a year. Rather,
the intent was to terminate approvals in principle where applicants
clearly had no plans to proceed toward final approval by completing the
required works. Staff were concerned that either revisions to relevant
City by-laws or the possible introduction of new tenants who were not
aware of the strata title approval in principle, could make the approval
in principle passe.
Strict interpretation of Council's policy would lead to requiring that
the applicant submit a new application for the strata title conversion,
as the request for re-approval was not received within the one-year time
period when Council's approval in principle was valid. However, this is
not a residential building where new tenants may have been introduced
without being made aware of the conversion proposal. Further, given
that the applicant submitted an application for a building permit in
March and that it is now in process, the City Building Inspector does
not believe that a new strata title conversion application, requiring
payment of a fee and completion of new inspections, is warranted. All
inspections of the necessary work will be completed under the auspices
of the permits which will be issued.
Due to the extensive nature of the renovations which are to be carried
out in the building, the City Building Inspector supports the request
for re-approval, to be valid for a further one-year period.
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, the Associate Director of Planning - Land use
and Development, supports this application for re-approval.
* * * * * * *