P7
                                                        POLICY REPORT
                           DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING

                                           Date: May 21, 1996
                                           Dept. File No. 95037 TWP


   TO:       Vancouver City Council

   FROM:     Director of Land Use and Development

   SUBJECT:  CD-1 Rezoning of 7400 Oak Street (Oakherst)


   RECOMMENDATION

        A.   THAT the application by Moodie Consultants Ltd., to rezone
             7400 Oak Street (Lots 1-3 of 5 and Rem. Lot 5; Block 16A; D.L.
             526; Plan 5858 and Lot 4; Block 16A; D.L. 526; Plan 11318)
             from RS-1 to CD-1, to permit 128 dwelling units in multiple
             dwellings at 0.90 FSR, be referred to a Public Hearing,
             together with:

             (i)    plans received April 16, 1996 and May 13, 1996;

             (ii)   draft CD-1 By-law provisions, generally as contained
                    in Appendix A; and

             (iii)  the recommendation of the Director of Land Use and
                    Development to approve, subject to conditions
                    contained in Appendix B.

             FURTHER THAT the Director of Legal Services be instructed to
             prepare the necessary CD-1 By-law for consideration at Public
             Hearing.

        B.   THAT, subject to approval of the rezoning at a Public Hearing,
             the Subdivision By-law be amended as set out in Appendix D.

             FURTHER THAT the Director of Legal Services be instructed to
             bring forward the amendment to the Subdivision By-law at the
             time of enactment of the Zoning By-law.

        C.   THAT the Parklane building (950 West 58th Avenue) be
             designated as protected heritage property, and added to
             Schedule 'A' of the Heritage By-law.

             FURTHER THAT the Director of Legal Services be instructed to
             prepare the amendment to the Heritage By-laws for
             consideration at Public Hearing.

   CONSIDERATION

        D.   THAT, Council instruct the Director of Legal Services to bring
             forward a Heritage Revitalization By-law at Public Hearing to
             allow for the Development Cost Levy (DCL) By-law variances, as
             set out in draft form in Appendix F.

   GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS

        The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of A,
        B and C above and CONSIDERATION of D.

   COUNCIL POLICY

   On May 8, 1989, Council approved community development objectives as the
   basis of the City's social housing policy, including:

   Encourage the distribution of acceptable housing forms and affordable
   shelter costs equally among all residential neighbourhoods of Vancouver.

   Council's Heritage Policies and Guidelines state that the City's
   long-term goal is to protect through voluntary designation as many
   resources on the heritage register as possible.

   On July 25, 1995, Council approved the Oakridge/Langara Policy
   Statement, which supports rezoning of a number of sites in the area,
   including the Oakherst site, for multiple dwelling development.

   PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

   This report assesses an application to rezone the 1.9 ha (4.7 ac.)
   former Oakherst private hospital site at West 59th Avenue and Oak
   Street, to permit 58 2-storey townhouses in clusters on the majority of
   the site, with 64 units in two 4-storey multiple dwellings near Oak
   Street and 6 units in the heritage 'A'-listed Parklane house at 950 West
   58th Avenue.  Public objectives for the site include retention of
   heritage and landscape resources while increasing the diversity and
   supply of housing in Oakridge-Langara, particularly of ground oriented
   units.

   Staff conclude that modifications resulting from the recommended
   conditions of approval would achieve a sufficient balance of these
   objectives to recommend approval.  Council's consideration is sought for
   the use of a Heritage Revitalization Agreement to vary the provisions of
   the anticipated DCL By-law for this area as it would apply to this site. 
   An accompanying IN CAMERA report deals with recommendations regarding
   Community Amenity Contributions.




























                                      MAP

   DISCUSSION

   Use  The Policy Statement concluded that this large assembly offers an
   unusual opportunity to provide ground-oriented and low-rise multiple
   dwellings, which requires no demolition of one-family development.  No
   other significant opportunities, such as industrial employment, would be
   sacrificed.  Potential friction between one-family use and more intense
   uses is minimized by the location of this site with one arterial edge,
   three institutional adjacencies and full street width separation from
   RS-1 development.  Houses fronting West 58th Avenue also benefit from
   unusually large front setbacks of about 10.7 m (35 ft.) due to greater
   lot depths.

   It is an objective of the Policy Statement to create opportunities for a
   broad range of housing forms.  It was hoped that a mix of 2-storey,
   3-storey, and stacked townhouses, together with low-rise apartments,
   would accommodate a broader range of the community's housing needs.  The
   Urban Design Panel has also noted these opportunities for this site. 
   The proposed mix of uses is positive but would have better achieved
   housing objectives by including 3-storey or stacked townhouses.

   Density  The Policy Statement concluded that density objectives of 0.80
   to 1.0 FSR for this site could be achieved with a well planned mix of 2-
   and 3-storey and stacked townhouses and low-rise apartments.  If the
   proposed range of built forms is narrowed, a density above 0.8 FSR may
   not be achievable.

   In this application a density of 0.89 FSR is proposed.  However, the
   applicant has declined to consider 3-storey or stacked townhouses.  This
   has reduced options for siting floor space potential with an optimal
   site plan which would achieve more open space and tree retention. 
   Therefore, by employing a narrower range of built forms, the applicant
   has reduced the likelihood of achieving the recommended density with an
   approvable form of development.  Although staff support the proposed
   density, this more narrowly defined approach to possible building forms
   has resulted in a series of significant concerns with the proposed form
   of development, as discussed below.

   Landscape Resources  This site hosts an unusually high quality and
   number of mature specimen trees, which are valued both at a local and
   city-wide level.  In turn, these trees have been observed to host a
   broad spectrum of bird life.  Many of the best tree specimens are
   associated with the Parklane house, its former tennis court siting,
   remnants of former gardens and the "park lane" approach which
   historically connected the house to West 59th Avenue at Fremlin Street. 
   Together, these form an historic landscape association.  Staff believe
   that the revised plans approach an acceptable balance of development
   opportunities with preservation of very significant landscape features. 
   Conditions of approval recommended in Appendix B would ensure a
   supportable compromise.

   Heritage  The Vancouver Heritage Register evaluated the former Parklane
   Hospital at 950 West 58th Avenue as an 'A' on the inventory list. 
   Although the register does not distinguish between the two structures
   which comprised the hospital, there is a comparably detailed description
   of the significant features of both the coach house and the principal
   building, which contribute to the evaluation as an 'A' category site. 
   The Senior Heritage Planner and Heritage Advisory Commission conclude
   that both structures are of significant heritage value and contribute to
   the context of the site and landscape.

   Staff conclude that the proposed exterior treatment of the principal
   building is appropriate.  Staff have suggested that an alternative
   rehabilitation plan for 3 units (rather than the proposed 6) would
   permit retention of  more interior features and could generate more
   usable space and revenue.  Fewer units would also need fewer surface
   parking spaces next to the heritage building.

   The relationship of new townhouses to this building is critical.  A
   minimum setback of 10.7 m (35 ft.) is recommended as a condition of
   approval to avoid a congested appearance which would make the heritage
   structure appear to be out of place.  Staff concede that the loss of the
   coach house cannot be avoided, given the economics of this scheme.

   Form  The Urban Design Panel noted that this site has four distinctly
   different contextual settings.  This both creates the opportunity for,
   and requires a response providing, quite varied forms of development. 
   The site faces some quite insensitive uses including the community
   centre and the fire hall, which provide a suitable context for 4-storey
   multiple dwellings.  These structures must taper in scale along Oak
   Street toward West 58th Avenue and along West 59th Avenue toward Fremlin
   Street.  To the east, the school presents a third institutional
   adjacency, but the scale of new multiple dwellings would have to be
   reduced to 2-storeys near West 59th Avenue, approaching RS-1 sites east
   of Fremlin Street.  The West 58th Avenue frontage requires the most
   sensitivity, with many low scale one-family houses on large lots across
   West 58th Avenue.  However, the heavily treed setting of the Parklane
   buildings offers significant visual relief to these neighbours.  

   The proposed maximum height of townhouses facing West 58th Avenue would
   be 9.2 m (30 ft.) which is the maximum height for RS-1 sites.  However,
   the continuous rooflines proposed would still block more views than
   individual houses, and should be broken between units.  The proposed
   14.6 m (48 ft.) height of the apartment building fronting Oak Street
   results from grade changes along the length of the building and the
   desire for a sloped roof form.  A flat roof would achieve a height of
   12.2 m (40 ft.), but is not recommended as it would detract from the
   character of the development.

   Proposed front setbacks of 6.7 m (22 ft.) are supported west of the
   Parklane house with 5.5 m (18 ft.) setbacks for five units near Laurel
   Street.  Given the large setbacks across 58th Avenue and the visual
   benefit of trees retained on this site, greater setbacks are not
   warranted and would diminish on-site livability.  The character of these
   units should complement the heritage building, but need not mimic it,
   nor be uniform.

   It is also essential that the traditional treed corridor along the "park
   lane" be unimpeded by buildings to permit a view corridor toward the
   Parklane house and associated trees from West 59th Avenue (greenway) at
   Fremlin Street.  A minimum width of 24.4 m (80 ft.) is recommended,
   although 30.5 m (100 ft.) is desirable.

   Both built and paved site coverage are major factors in the extent of
   tree retention which can be achieved.  Inclusion of 3-storey or stacked
   townhouses with underground parking would dramatically 
   improve site planning flexibility.  Floor space potential would not
   conflict with tree retention, setbacks from heritage buildings and view
   corridors if these options were pursued.  Given that the applicant has
   chosen to limit the built form to 2-storey townhouses with parking under
   each unit, the only avenue to reduce site coverage is to either
   eliminate units or unnecessary internal roadways and surface parking as
   recommended in Appendix B.

   As pointed out by the Urban Design Panel, the quality of the on-site
   environment will depend heavily on the detailed treatment of open spaces
   and of the road access corridors.  Several conditions in Appendix B
   address these issues.

   West 59th Avenue Greenway  The relationship of this development to the
   West 59th Avenue greenway must provide a compatible edge which permits
   casual public views through to the "park lane", trees and heritage
   house.  The breadth of such a view corridor must be sufficient that a
   pedestrian or cyclist is drawn to the view without feeling they are
   intruding by peering into a private site.

   Project Economics  A Real Estate Services review of the project proforma
   concluded that $1.3 million could be allocated to public benefits.  That
   figure was reduced to $1.1 million when the revised application proposed
   two less units.  One of those public benefits would be the restoration
   of the Parklane house at a net cost of $850,000, when converted to 6
   apartments.  With this figure deducted from the $1.1 million available
   there would be $250,000 left for other public purposes.  However, a
   minor savings of $50,000 on sewers is now anticipated.  Therefore, about
   $300,000 would be available to pay a Development Cost Levy (DCL).

   At the anticipated rate of $3.25 per buildable square foot, the DCL
   payment would be $587,000 at the proposed density of 0.88 FSR. 
   Therefore, the DCL would exceed the total shown to be available for
   public benefits in the proforma by approximately $300,000.  If Council
   wishes to compensate the applicant for this difference, the DCL By-law
   may be varied by approving a Heritage Revitalization Agreement, as
   presented for Council's Consideration (item D).  Draft variances of the
   DCL By-law are contained in Appendix G.

   To improve economic return and address housing variety objectives, staff
   have encouraged the applicant to include third storeys or stacked units
   in the least visible part of the site.  However, the applicant declined
   to pursue these suggestions for marketing reasons.

   CONCLUSION

   Planning staff conclude that, with further design development as
   reflected in conditions of approval in Appendix B, the proposed rezoning
   would offer a desirable balance among civic objectives expressed in the
   Oakridge-Langara Policy Statement to increase housing opportunities,
   particularly for ground-oriented units, 
   while protecting heritage and landscape resources.  It is recognized
   that a significant number of area residents prefer one-family
   development under the existing RS-1 zoning.  However, staff recommend
   approval, noting that existing zoning offers no assurance that any one
   of the stated civic objectives would be achieved.

   In response to the applicant's comments, staff note that the standard
   requirement for a Public Art Contribution was pointed out to the
   applicant.  However, staff recognize the financial implications of other
   public benefits and recommend that no Public Art Contribution be
   required in this case.

                                     * * *
                                                                 APPENDIX A
                                                                Page 1 of 2

                         DRAFT CD-1 BY-LAW PROVISIONS

   Use

                -  Multiple Dwellings containing a maximum  of 122 dwelling
                   units, based  on  calculation  provisions  of  the  RM-4
                   District Schedule;
                -  Multiple Conversion Dwelling containing  a maximum of  6
                   dwelling units; and
                -  Customarily ancillary uses.

   Conditions of Use                -  No listed  use will be permitted and no building will be
                   permitted to  be occupied  or continued  to be  occupied
                   unless  the trees  identified on  the  Plan referred  to
                   under Landscaping  and Trees are  retained in a  healthy
                   condition  on the  site,  except  that the  Director  of
                   Planning  may  permit  removal  or  alteration of  trees
                   pursuant to the Private Property Tree By-law.

   Density

                -  Maximum  floor  space  ratio  of   0.90  FSR,  based  on
                   calculation provisions of the RM-4 District Schedule.

   Height

                -  A  maximum of 14.6  m (48  ft.) or  4 storeys west  of a
                   line 145 m (475 ft.) west of Laurel Street; and
                -  A maximum  of 9.2 m (30 ft.) for multiple dwellings east
                   of a line 145 m (475 ft.) west of Laurel Street.

   Setback

                -  A  minimum  setback of  5.5 m  (18  ft.) from  the south
                   property line;
                -  A  minimum  setback of  5.5 m  (18  ft.) from  the north
                   property line  except that to  the west of  the Parklane
                   heritage  house  (950  West  58th  Avenue),  a   minimum
                   setback of 6.7 m (22 ft.) is required; and
                -  A minimum setback  of 6 m  (20 ft.)  from west  property
                   line.

                                                                 APPENDIX A
                                                                Page 2 of 2


   Landscaping and Trees

                -  Before any  development permit can  be approved for  the
                   site a  site plan showing  mature landscaping and  trees
                   which  will  be  retained  must   be  submitted  to  and
                   approved by the  Director of Planning.  For  the purpose
                   of this section the plan labelled "7400 OAK  STREET PLAN
                   OF  EXISTING TREES TO BE RETAINED", which is attached to
                   and forms part  of this By-law,  shall be  deemed to  be
                   the site plan  referred to in  this section  and in  the
                   above  Conditions of  Use.   All  landscaping and  trees
                   must be maintained in a healthy condition.

   Parking

                -  Per RM-4 standards of the Parking By-law, except  that a
                   minimum  of  1.75  spaces  per  unit  are  required  for
                   townhouse units and 1.0 spaces  per unit for units  in a
                   designated heritage structure.

   Acoustics

                -  Per RM-4N District Schedule.




                                                                 APPENDIX B
                                                                Page 1 of 6


                        PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL


   (a)    That the proposed form  of development be approved by  Council in
          principle,  generally as  prepared  by Eng  and Wright  Partners,
          Architects, and stamped "Received City Planning Department, April
          16,  1996,  and  May 13,  1996"  provided  that  the Director  of
          Planning may allow minor alterations to this form  of development
          when  approving the detailed scheme of development as outlined in
          (b) below.

   (b)    That,  prior to approval by  Council of the  form of development,
          the applicant shall obtain  approval of a development application
          by  the Director of Planning, who shall have particular regard to
          the following:

          (i)     the maximum  width of the West 59th Avenue crossing is to
                  be 7.3 m (24 ft.) wide at the property line;

          (ii)    design  development  to  better   distinguish  individual
                  apartment  buildings  and  townhouse  clusters from  each
                  other   by  use   of  materials,   colour,  detailing  of
                  secondary  architectural  elements  and landscaping,  and
                  introduce  greater  complexity  of  roof  forms  in  each
                  cluster to better articulate massing;

                  (Individual   continuous   streetscapes   should   better
                  integrate into  the existing  neighbourhood through  more
                  variety and less homogeneity.)

          (iii)   elimination of  a  continuous internal  street system  by
                  deleting  the  portion  that connects  the  easterly  and
                  westerly portions  of  the  development across  the  West
                  59th Avenue greenway view slot;

          (iv)    design  development to  reduce the  internal street width
                  and  maximize  open   space  in  consultation  with  City
                  Engineering staff;

          (v)     design development  to  refine  hard and  soft  landscape
                  transitions  from  individual  private  yards  to  public
                  areas, including  the  West  59th  Avenue  greenway,  the
                  internal  street/pathway  system  and other  semi-private
                  areas;

          (vi)    design development  to the West  59th Avenue greenway  to
                  clarify hard and soft landscape treatment and features;
                                                                 APPENDIX B
                                                                Page 2 of 6


          (vii)   design  development  to   the  site's  southeast   corner
                  townhouse  clusters  to  eliminate  visitor  parking  and
                  excessive   hard  surface  roadway   by  reorienting  and
                  consolidating  into a  single cluster  with a  3.7  m (12
                  ft.)  setback  along  Laurel  Street.    Townhouse  units
                  adjacent  to  the  Laurel  Street crossing  will  require
                  re-design to accommodate parking access requirements;

          (viii)  design  development  to  eliminate, or  relocate  to  the
                  southeast corner  cluster, one  townhouse unit  presently
                  located west of the view corridor;

          (ix)    design  development  to provide  a wider,  enhanced vista
                  towards the  heritage structure,  as seen  from the  West
                  59th  Avenue  greenway,  by  increasing  the  view   slot
                  opening  dimension to a  minimum of  24.4 m (80  ft.) and
                  accentuating    this   view    point   through   enhanced
                  landscaping;

          (x)     elimination  of  all surface  visitor  parking to  reduce
                  hard surface  area and  maximize on-site  open space  and
                  landscaping;  

          (xi)    design  development to the townhouse clusters adjacent to
                  and directly  west of the  heritage building to  maximise
                  separation between  structures, with townhouses  set back
                  a  minimum  of   10.7  m  (35  ft.)  from   the  heritage
                  structure;

          (xii)   design development  to  clarify internal  street  special
                  paving  and  other   landscape  enhancement  to   provide
                  attractive streetscapes;

          (xiii)  design  development  to  interior  street  elevations  to
                  provide   better   visibility   and   surveillance   from
                  townhouses at  grade and to  relieve monotony created  by
                  continuous garage doors;

          (xiv)   design development to reduce the  impact of the southerly
                  east-west internal street "cut" into existing grade; 

          (xv)    design  development   to   refine  Building   A's   north
                  elevation  to  create  a  better  transition in  massing,
                  scale and articulation to the single-family houses;

          (xvi)   clarification of privacy screen details and locations;
                                                                 APPENDIX B
                                                                Page 3 of 6


          (xvii)  design development to  make front yards and  ground level
                  units highly defensible and encourage surveillance;

                  (This can be achieved with  low fencing and gates  at the
                  property  line,  having ground  level  units facing  West
                  59th Avenue and  Laurel Street,  slightly [1.5  - 3  ft.]
                  above the sidewalk level.)

          (xviii) design development  to reduce  opportunities for  cutting
                  through  the   site  by   non-residents  and  to   reduce
                  opportunities for mischief and break  and enter to ground
                  level residential units;

                  (This can be achieved by  ensuring residential units face
                  on-site open spaces.)

          (xix)   design development  to  reduce  opportunities  for  theft
                  from auto; 

                  (This  can  be  achieved by  locating  exit  stairs  from
                  underground  parking out of  the vision of non-residents,
                  gating the vehicular  entrance and locking the  door from
                  the  elevator  lobby  to the  parking  [opposite  to  the
                  direction of the exit].)

          (xx)    submission of detailed exterior materials specification;

          (xxi)   clarification  of  Fire  Department  access,  paving  and
                  hydrant   locations   in  consultation   with   the  Fire
                  Prevention Officer;

          (xxii)  retention and  protection of all  trees identified to  be
                  retained on  the Tree Retention  Plan received April  16,
                  1994;

          (xxiii) submission  of  an  arborist's  report   to  assess  tree
                  retention   and  building   location   as  part   of  the
                  development application;

          (xxiv)  commitment that a ISA certified arborist  will be on site
                  during any excavation  within 10 m  of a tree  identified
                  to be retained;

          (xxv)   buildings to be  sited in such  a way  as to ensure  that
                  excavation and  disturbance will not  occur within a  2 m
                  radius of trees 47, 48 and 55;
                                                                 APPENDIX B
                                                                Page 4 of 6

          (xxvi)  all existing trees to  be retained must be protected  and
                  cared for  as per Schedule D of the Private Property Tree
                  By-law No. 7347; and

          (xxvii) tree protection  barriers will need  to be shown  for all
                  retained existing trees as per Schedule D of  the Private
                  Property  Tree By-law  No. 7347  and  the Landscape  Plan
                  amended to show "Existing Trees To Be Retained".

   (c)    That, prior to enactment of the CD-1 By-law, the registered owner
          shall:

          (i)     consolidate Lots  1-3 of  5, and Rem.  Lot 5;  Block 16A;
                  D.L. 526;  Plan 5858 and Lot 4; Block 16A; D.L. 526; Plan
                  11318;

          (ii)    make  arrangements  to  the  satisfaction   of  the  City
                  Engineer and Director of Legal Services for:

                  1.  rerouting  of the  existing  sewer line  which passes
                      through  the site.    The sewer  line can  either  be
                      routed around the site on public property, or through
                      an on-site, relocated 6.0 m wide easement.  This work
                      is to be all at the developer's expenses;

                  2.  upgrading of  the water  mains which  will serve this
                      development, at the developer's expense;

                  3.  provision of concrete  sidewalks on the south side of
                      West  58th  Avenue and  the north  side of  West 59th
                      Avenue from Oak Street to Laurel Street;

                  4.  provision of greenway streetscape  treatment on  West
                      59th  Avenue  from   Oak  Street  to  Laurel   Street
                      including  curb and  gutter and  asphalt pavement  to
                      road  centre line,  and curb,  gutter and  asphalt to
                      road  centre line  on  Laurel Street  from  West 58th
                      Avenue to 59th Avenue, at the developer's expense;

                  5.  potential upgrading of the  pedestrian signal at West
                      59th Avenue and Oak Street within 5 years of building
                      occupancy, at the developer's expense;

                                                                 APPENDIX B
                                                                Page 5 of 6

                  6.  clarification of  easement and  indemnity  agreements
                      Nos. 100340M, 337126M and 399352M; 

                  7.  provision of a traffic consultant's report consisting
                      of  a  traffic  volume  analysis  based  on  previous
                      hospital use for comparison purposes; and

                  8.  upgrading of the pedestrian  activated signal at West
                      59th  Avenue and  Oak Street  to a  bicycle activated
                      signal;

          (iii)   make  arrangements   for  all  electrical  and  telephone
                  services  to be  undergrounded  within and  adjacent  the
                  site from the closest existing suitable service point;

          (iv)    execute a  legal agreement satisfactory  to the  Director
                  of   Legal  Services  providing   that  owners  will  not
                  discriminate against  families with children in  the sale
                  of their property;

          (v)     provide a  covenant to the  satisfaction of the  Director
                  of Legal  Services to commit  the owner to  retaining and
                  protecting  all trees  identified on  the  Tree Retention
                  Plan received  April  16, 1996,  including  a  commitment
                  that  an  ISA  certified arborist  must  be  retained  to
                  periodically monitor  the health and  safety of trees  on
                  site,  report  any  damage or  neglect  to  the trees  to
                  Planning Staff immediately, undertake  any maintenance or
                  remedial care  as required to  ensure the ongoing  health
                  and safety  of the  retained trees during  all phases  of
                  construction  and   for  a  minimum   of  3  years   upon
                  completion of  construction.  The recommendations  of the
                  arborist must  be undertaken  with respect  to tree  care
                  and maintenance as well as construction practices;

          (vi)    provide a  covenant to the  satisfaction of the  Director
                  of Legal  Services  to  commit  the owner  to  cause  any
                  strata corporation formed  as a result of  strata titling
                  of the site  to provide a covenant in favour  of the City
                  of  Vancouver  committing  that   Strata  Corporation  to
                  retaining  all trees  identified  in the  Tree  Retention
                  Plan received April 16, 1996; 


                                                                 APPENDIX B
                                                                Page 6 of 6


          (vii)   obtain  designation of  the  principal Parklane  building
                  under   Schedule  A   of  the   City's  Heritage  By-law,
                  including those  affixed interior  fixtures and  features
                  as determined by the Director of Planning;

          (viii)  execute  an  agreement,  to  be  registered  against  the
                  property, to  the satisfaction of  the Director of  Legal
                  Services,  in  consultation  with appropriate  Department
                  Heads, by  which the  owner agrees  to provide  temporary
                  protection for  the heritage building  before and  during
                  construction  on the site  and that the  occupancy of the
                  new  buildings shall  be  subject  to the  completion  of
                  restoration  of the heritage building with this agreement
                  to be discharged when the heritage work is complete; and          (ix)    execute  an  agreement,  to  be  registered  against  the
                  property, to  the satisfaction of  the Director of  Legal
                  Services,  in  consultation  with appropriate  Department
                  Heads,  by  which   the  owner  secures  and   agrees  to
                  undertake the necessary  restorative work to the existing
                  heritage building,  noting  that all  future repairs  and
                  renovations  require  a heritage  alteration  permit, and
                  that in  the event the  heritage building is  irreparably
                  damaged,  the   owner  further   undertakes  to   conduct
                  whatever   necessary  and   reasonable  arrangements  are
                  needed   to   satisfactorily   replicate   the   heritage
                  building.

                                                                 APPENDIX C
                                                                Page 1 of 1

                                                                 APPENDIX D
                                                                Page 1 of 5

   ADDITIONAL INFORMATION


   Site, Surrounding Zoning  and Development   This 1.9 ha  (4.71 ac)  site
   bounded by Oak and Laurel Streets and West 58th and West 59th Avenues is
   comprised  of 5 parcels.  The site has a frontage of 204.6 m (671.4 ft.)
   on West 59th Avenue and a depth of 100.6 m (330 ft.).

   The  site faces one-family dwellings  on RS-1 zoned  parcels across West
   58th Avenue,  across West  59th Avenue east  of Fremlin  Street and  one
   flanking RS-1 zoned parcel west  of Oak Street at West 58th Avenue.   To
   the south, this site  faces Oak Park and the  Marpole-Oakridge Community
   Centre, with  a fire  hall to the  west across  Oak Street at  West 59th
   Avenue.  To the east is Laurier Elementary School.

   Proposed  Development   Two-storey townhouses  would face West  58th and
   59th Avenue frontages developed  with one-family dwellings.  Four-storey
   buildings  would  face Oak  Street  and  the Marpole-Oakridge  Community
   Centre,  but would  taper to  3-storeys to  reduce scale  in approaching
   lower buildings both on  site and at the  corner of Oak Street  and West
   58th  Avenue.    The principal  Parklane  structure  is  proposed to  be
   retained  and rehabilitated for 6  dwelling units, but  the former Coach
   House  would  be demolished.   Revised  plans  (see Appendix  C)  show a
   significant interior  open space around and  to the south of  the house,
   which assists in retaining 57% of the best trees on site (53% overall).

   Heritage  Designation    Staff recommend,  as  a  condition of  rezoning
   approval,  that the  former  Parklane building  be designated  under the
   City's  Heritage By-law.   As  a result  of recently  enacted provincial
   legislation and amendments to the Vancouver Charter, it is now necessary
   to  hold a  Public  Hearing for  any  heritage building  proposed to  be
   designated, irrespective of whether there  is a proposed zoning  change.
   The  legislation   also  requires  staff  to   include  the  appropriate
   assessment  of the building in terms of heritage value, compatibility of
   conservation with lawful  uses, condition and economic  viability of the
   property, and the need for financial and other support for conservation.

   -      Heritage Value:   Located at  the northern, central  edge of  the
          site,  the house is the historic home of Charles Gardner Johnson.
          Johnson  was a  shipping agent  and the  local representative  of
          Lloyd's of London.  The house was built in 1912 in a variation of
          the  Craftsman style.    The house  is  covered with  stucco  and
          unusual log  siding.  Period photographs illustrate the beauty of
          its original 



                                                                 APPENDIX D
                                                                Page 2 of 5


          appearance with its log siding, half timbering, stone foundation,
          the  original  open  porches  facing south  over  the  landscaped
          gardens.   The interior  features wood panelling,  ceiling beams,
          fireplaces and a central staircase of value.

          The  building rated an 'A' on the Vancouver Heritage Register for
          its  architectural  value,  being  a rare  example  of  log-faced
          construction.  In its restored condition, the building would make
          a significant  architectural and  heritage legacy of  this former
          rural section of  Vancouver.  The adjacent coach house is also of
          heritage value  but staff  reluctantly concur  that it  cannot be
          retained without impacting the overall proposal.

   -      Compatibility of Conservation with Community Planning Objectives:
          The  retention  and  restoration  of  the  Parklane  building  is
          consistent  with the  City's long-term  goal to  protect as  many
          resources as possible currently  listed on the Vancouver Heritage
          Register.   There  are few listed  heritage buildings  within the
          Oakridge-Langara area, and the  Policy Statement encourages  both
          housing diversity and the preservation of buildings with heritage
          character.

   -      Compatibility of Conservation with  Lawful Uses:  The use  of the
          heritage building  for residential  purposes is lawful  under the
          proposed CD-1 zoning.

   -      Condition and Economic Viability  of the Property:  The  house is
          in  reasonable physical condition and can be retained in situ and
          rehabilitated for residential use.  Sufficient archival  material
          exists to determine the restoration of the building.

   Heritage  Revitalization Agreement (HRA)   Section 592  of the Vancouver
   Charter makes provisions to vary a DCL By-law through an HRA.

   Public  Input  A notification letter  was sent to nearby property owners
   on November 29,  1995 and rezoning information signs  were posted on the
   site on December 5, 1995.  Six phone calls were received from residents.
   Concerns  focused on  density, traffic,  setbacks and  visual impact  of
   parking  in  front  of the  heritage  house.    Five letters  expressing
   opposition were  received from nearby residents  stating traffic, crime,
   open  space, tree  retention,  crowding and  architectural character  as
   principal concerns.  Twenty-two letters were also received from students
   at  Laurier Elementary School expressing concern about loss of trees and
   bird life on the site.

                                                                 APPENDIX D
                                                                Page 3 of 5

   Seven residents came as a  group to City Hall to view plans and identify
   concerns  to  Community  Planning  staff.   Concerns  expressed  include
   greater setbacks, particularly along West 58th Avenue, comparable to the
   10.7 m (35 ft.) setback of  houses across the street; leaving more space
   and  less parking around the heritage building; traffic impacts from the
   schools being compounded by this development; protecting trees and  bird
   life; and  fear that  having front  doors along  West 58th  Avenue would
   encourage traffic on  that street.   A significant  number of  residents
   strongly prefer single-family development of this site.  
   A facilitator engaged by  the Community Planning Division also  met with
   eight  residents who  noted  concerns regarding  school capacities,  the
   design  character of  the townhouses,  potential view  blockage, overall
   density and quality of  the site plan.  One  resident proposed a 30.5  m
   (100 ft.) by 30.5 m (100 ft.) passive park area on the site.  

   Finally,  a  public  open house  on  April  25,  1996, was  attended  by
   approximately  15 residents  who  felt tree  retention, building  scale,
   traffic impacts and school capacities were key concerns.

   These issues are addressed in the Discussion Section of the report.

   Comments of the City Engineer  The City Engineer has no objection to the
   proposed rezoning, provided that  the applicant complies with conditions
   as contained in Appendix B.

   School Capacity  School Board staff comment as follows:

   "School Board staff have been involved in numerous discussions with City
   staff during the ongoing Oakridge/Langara studies.  It has been noted on
   several  occasions  that the  schools  in the  area,  especially Laurier
   Elementary and Churchill Secondary, are operating above full capacity.

   All  things considered, Vancouver School Board staff support the view of
   the  local  residents  and oppose  rezoning  of  the  Oakherst site  for
   apartment and townhouse development.  If  the site is to be redeveloped,
   from  the interests of  the ability of the  local schools to accommodate
   increased  enrolments,   Vancouver  School  Board   staff  support   the
   single-family subdivision of the Oakherst site.

   There have  been no provisions made  by the City to  address the growing
   concerns  about  overcrowding  at  certain  schools  in  this  area,  in
   particular, and in the City in general.  As noted in the rezoning report
   from Moodie Consultants, dated November 14, 1995, 
                                                                 APPENDIX D
                                                                Page 4 of 5

   Page  8, one of the principles in the Oakridge/Langara Policy Statements
   is: "Ensure that public infrastructure and future expansion requirements
   are  considered when  redeveloping  private sites  and that  development
   contributes  to its share of  upgrades...".  The  Vancouver School Board
   staff  maintain  that   schools  are   a  basic  part   of  the   public
   infrastructure, and that some type of contribution should be provided to
   the district resulting from a required expansion of service  to meet the
   demands created by the redevelopment.

   Until there is a  better mechanism in place  to obtain development  cost
   charges or community amenity contributions (as schools must be viewed as
   either  part  of  the  basic infrastructure  or  a  community  amenity),
   Vancouver  School  Board  staff  cannot ignore  the  possible  costs and
   consequences  associated  with  a sizable  rezoning  of  a  site near  a
   school(s).    Therefore, if  redevelopment on  the  Oakherst site  is to
   occur, a  single-family subdivision  within the  existing zoning  is the
   least problematic for the School Board."

   [In  response to  the foregoing,  Planning  staff note  that the  VSB is
   legally obliged to provide school  facilities, not the City; if  the VSB
   is  inadequately funded to meet  its obligations it  should address this
   concern  to the  Province; and  the City  has its  own objectives  to be
   addressed, only a portion of which will be met through DCLs.]

   Therefore, Vancouver School Board  staff do not support the  rezoning of
   the Oakherst site from RS-1 to a Comprehensive Development.

   Urban  Design  Panel  Comment   The  Urban  Design  Panel reviewed  this
   proposal  on December  6,  1995 and  gave  it  Non-Support.   The  Panel
   subsequently reviewed the revised scheme on April 24, 1996 and supported
   the  proposed use, density and  form of development,  but noted concerns
   regarding the following issues:

   -      similarity of townhouses;
   -      relentlessness of garages;
   -      quality of mews at garage entries;
   -      adequacy of mews surveillance from townhouse units;
   -      opportunities to add third storey dormers to some units;
   -      opportunities to improve setbacks  from the heritage building and
          trees by closing slots between townhouses;
   -      opening up of view  from greenway to trees and  heritage building
          (eliminate one or two units);
   -      provision of better linkages from townhouses to apartments;
   -      reflect angularity of heritage house in some units;
   -      scale of retaining walls;
   -      lowering of  roof  eves  to  reduce  visual  scale  of  apartment
          buildings; and
                                                                 APPENDIX D
                                                                Page 5 of 5

   -      proximity of the northerly apartment building to Oak Street.

   The minutes of the Panel's deliberations are attached as Appendix E.

   Vancouver  Heritage  Commission Comment    The  Commission reviewed  the
   initial  application  on December  11, 1995  and  could not  support the
   scheme.  On  May 6, 1996,  the commission reviewed  revised plans  dated
   April 16, 1996 and supported the revised application, though loss of the
   coach house remained a concern.

   Public  Benefit  A revised  form of the  proposed development reflecting
   conditions  in Appendix  B  would increase  the  supply and  variety  of
   housing  forms and levels of affordability  in the Oakridge-Langara area
   while preserving  a good  representation of the  heritage and  landscape
   resources on the site.

   ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

   The  proposed rezoning  neither  contributes to  nor  detracts from  the
   objective of reducing atmospheric  pollution.  The resulting development
   would  likely  preserve  more  trees  than  would  be  retained  through
   subdivision and development under the existing RS-1 zoning.

   SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS

   This  proposal  provides  housing   well  suited  to  residents  seeking
   alternatives to one-family dwellings, including families, with immediate
   access to a park, community  centre and overcrowded schools.  There  are
   no  implications with  respect  to the  Vancouver  Children's Policy  or
   Statement of Children's Entitlements.

   CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENT

   If the proposed  rezoning is  approved at Public  Hearing, an  amendment
   will  need  to  be  made  to the  Subdivision  By-law,  at  the  time of
   enactment, to  delete the category 'D' standards  which were established
   in 1988 for this site.

   DEVELOPMENT COST LEVY

   An  accompanying report will recommend that Council approve a by-law for
   the  Oakridge-Langara  area requiring  payment  of  $3.25 per  buildable
   square  foot for  new  development.   This  by-law  would  apply to  the
   proposed development at 7400 Oak Street.

   COMMENTS OF THE APPLICANT

   The  applicant has  been provided  with a  copy of  this report  and has
   provided the comments attached as Appendix F.

                                                                 APPENDIX G

   Parklane                                        Draft for Public Hearing


                              BY-LAW NO. _______

                         A By-law to Authorize Council
               Entering into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement
                      with the Owner of Heritage Property


          WHEREAS Council has the authority under the Vancouver Charter  to
   make by-laws affecting and regulating the use of land within the City;

          AND WHEREAS a property  located within the City with  the address
   of 950 West  58th Avenue and legally described as Lots 1-3 of 5 and Rem.
   Lot 5;  Block  16A, Plan  5858,  District Lot  526  contains the  former
   Parklane building listed  as a  category 'A' building  on the  Vancouver
   Heritage Register;

          AND  WHEREAS  500242 B.C.  LTD. is  the  registered owner  of the
   property  and has agreed to  undertake certain measures  to conserve the
   building  in  return  for  certain  zoning  relaxations  proposed  under
   Development Application DE________;

          AND  WHEREAS  Council is  of the  opinion  that the  building has
   sufficient heritage value to justify its conservation;

          AND WHEREAS Council agrees that conservation of  the building can
   be facilitated by varying certain provisions of DCL By-law No. ____.

          AND WHEREAS Council and the registered owner of the property have
   agreed to certain other terms and conditions;

          NOW  THEREFORE  THE COUNCIL  OF THE  CITY  OF VANCOUVER,  in open
   meeting assembled, enacts as follows:

   1.     The Director of Legal Services is hereby authorized to execute on
   behalf of the City a heritage revitalization agreement in  substantially
   the  same form as  that which is  attached to and  forms a part  of this
   By-law.


                                                         [attach draft HRA]
                                                                 APPENDIX H




   APPLICANT, PROPERTY, AND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL INFORMATION


   APPLICANT AND PROPERTY INFORMATION 


       Street Address                    7400 Oak Street
       Legal Description                 Lots 1-3 of 5 and Rem. Lot 5; Block 16A; D.L. 526; Plan 5858 and Lot 4;
                                         Block 16A; D.L. 526; Plan 11318       Applicant                         J. Moodie, Moodie Consultants Ltd.

       Architect                         G. Eng, Eng and Wright Partners 

       Property Owner                    500242 B.C. Ltd.
       Developer                         B. Lee, Haseman Estates Ltd.


     SITE STATISTICS
                                                 GROSS                  DEDICATIONS                  NET

       SITE AREA                           1.9 ha (4.71 ac.)                 -                       same



     DEVELOPMENT STATISTICS
                                                                                                    RECOMMENDED
                                           DEVELOPMENT PERMITTED UNDER           PROPOSED         DEVELOPMENT (if
                                                 EXISTING ZONING               DEVELOPMENT        different than
                                                                                                     proposed)

       ZONING                                         RS-1                         CD-1

       USES                                   One Family Dwellings          Multiple Dwellings
                                                                           Multiple Conversion
                                                                                Dwellings

       DWELLING UNITS                                  20                          128
       MAX. FLOOR SPACE RATIO                           0.60                       0.90

       MAXIMUM HEIGHT                            9.2 m (30 ft.)              14.6 m (48 ft.)

       MAX. NO. OF STOREYS                            2-1/2                        2-4
       PARKING SPACES                          per parking by-law           per draft by-law 
                                                                               (Appendix A)

       FRONT YARD SETBACK                              20%                        Varied

       SIDE YARD SETBACK                               10%                         N/A
       REAR YARD SETBACK                               45%                         N/A