LATE DISTRIBUTION
FOR COUNCIL JULY 30, 1996
4
CITY OF VANCOUVER
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
June 27/July 23, 1996
A Special Meeting of the Council of the City of Vancouver was held
on Thursday, June 27, 1996, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber, third
floor, Vancouver City Hall, for the purpose of holding a Public Hearing
to consider proposed amendments to the Zoning and Development and
Heritage By-laws.
The meeting subsequently reconvened on Tuesday, July 23, 1996 at
7:30 p.m., to complete Item #4, 7400 Oak Street (Oakherst). These
minutes represent a consolidated version of the two meetings.
PRESENT: Mayor Owen
Councillors Bellamy, Chiavario, Clarke
(Items 1-3 only), Hemer, Ip,
Kennedy (Item 4 only), Price,
Puil (Item 4 only) and Sullivan
ABSENT: Councillor Kwan (Leave of Absence)
CLERK TO THE COUNCIL: Gary MacIsaac
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MOVED by Cllr. Bellamy,
SECONDED by Cllr. Hemer,
THAT this Council resolve itself into Committee of the Whole, Mayor
Owen in the Chair, to consider proposed amendments to the Zoning and
Development and Heritage By-laws.
- CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
1. Rezoning: 3350 East Hastings Street
(Emergency Operations & Communication Centre)
An application by Brook Development Planning Inc. was considered as
follows:
The proposed rezoning from CD-1 and RS-1S Districts to CD-1
Comprehensive Development District, would permit the City of
Vancouver to develop a 6 503 m2 (70,000 sq. ft.) communication
facility for Vancouver fire and police and RCMP emergency
communications, regional 9-1-1 systems and Vancouver, Regional and
Provincial post-disaster emergency operations, with ancillary
communications antennae, offices, recreation facilities and
community facilities.
The Director of Land Use and Development recommended approval of
the application, subject to the following conditions as proposed for
adoption by resolution of Council:
A. THAT, prior to approval by Council of the form of development,
the applicant shall, after carrying out a public process to
the satisfaction of the Director of Planning, obtain approval
of a development application by the Development Permit Board,
who shall have particular regard to the following:
i) demonstrate that options are preserved to achieve a safe
public pedestrian/bicycle connection across Hastings
Street at both Rupert and Cassiar Streets;
ii) provide an acoustic impact assessment report to the
satisfaction of the Vancouver Health Board Director of
Environmental Health;
iii) demonstrate that the installation of
transmitters/microwave antennae would comply with Safety
Code 6 of the Federal Government Radio Frequency and
Microwave Exposure Standards to ensure that
electromagnetic fields do not endanger health and safety;
iv) provide an appropriate transition in massing, scale and
building articulation along the southern edge to respect
the adjacent RS-1S neighbourhood;
v) provide view analysis to demonstrate how the siting and
massing of the proposed development have minimized
significant mountain view loss for RS-1S development on
the south side of Pender Street;
cont'd....
Clause No. 1 (cont'd)
vi) provide a landscape plan that achieves screening for
surface parking, exposed equipment and utilities;
vii) provide non-obtrusive site lighting, including parking
areas, that respects the adjacent RS-1S neighbourhood;
and
viii)reduce opportunities for theft from auto, bicycle
theft, break and enter and mischief such as graffiti and
skateboarding. Design that reduces fear should also be
considered.
B. THAT, prior to enactment of the CD-1 By-law, the registered
owner shall:
i) consolidate lots 1-14 and 30-32 of Lot 60; T.H.S.L.; Plan
330; and the adjacent portion of Rupert Street;
ii) also consolidate with Lots 1-14 and 30-32; of Lot 60;
THSL; Plan 330; and the adjacent portion of Rupert
Street; the adjoining Lots 27-29; of Lot 60; THSL; Plan
330; if purchased by the City;
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) dedicate portions of Lots 1, 2 and 9 through 15 for road,
approximately as shown on the site plan attached to the
rezoning application;
v) provide an access corridor to the Hastings Street transit
tunnel. (Note: Clarification from the Ministry of
Transportation and Highways and B.C. Transit is required
to determine an adequate width for this corridor.);
vi) abandon existing sewers in lanes within the proposed site
area;
cont'd....
Clause No. 1 (cont'd)
vii) provide a right-of-way between Hastings and Pender
Streets to accommodate the existing 8" watermain,
electrical lines and power poles on Rupert Street, and
for future water and sewer mains, as well as to ensure
the provision of an adequate right-of-way width for road
purposes, with the cost of any required street works to
be borne by the developer;
viii)relocate the existing utilities and power poles
which are located in the two lanes. Note: Although the
buildings have been removed from Lots 16 to 25, there is
still a legal obligation to provide service to these lots
until consolidation is completed;
ix) obtain City Council approval for the closure and
stopping-up of the lane north of Pender Street east of
the lane east of Rupert, the lane east of Rupert from
Hastings to Pender Street, and a portion of Rupert Street
from Hastings to Pender Street;
x) provide a traffic/parking study to determine impacts to
adjacent local and arterial streets, having particular
regard to site access;
xi) acquire privately owned Lots 27, 28 and 29, or provide a
six metre wide laneway to serve the lots; and
xii) complete acquisition of the portions of Lots 25 and 26
not needed for the Cassiar Connector.
STAFF OPENING COMMENTS
Mr. Tom Phipps, Planner, advised this application, on behalf of the
City, would provide zoning to accommodate the use and development
potential necessary for a day-to-day and post-disaster communications
and operations centre with City, regional and Provincial functions.
These functions would not normally include dispatch of emergency
vehicles from the site.
Mr. Phipps advised this site is better suited to an institutional
use of this type, not involving the public on a day-to-day basis, than
it is to most other types of uses. The proposed density marginally
exceeds that of the adjacent RS-1 districts, and is well within the
range of density typically recommended for sites adjacent to RS-1
districts.
cont'd....
Clause No. 1 (cont'd)
Detailed design issues will be dealt with through the development
permit process, with opportunity for the public to appear at the
Development Permit Board. Prior to that meeting the applicant is
encouraged to conduct an open dialogue on design questions.
APPLICANT OPENING COMMENTS
Mr. Chuck Brook, on behalf of the Emergency Operations and
Communications Centre team, briefed Council on the public consultation
which has occurred to date.
The team has had several meetings with the Hastings Park Planning
Committee and has responded to the nine directives that were put forward
by the Committee. Also, a community meeting was held and the team has
attempted to accommodate public concerns in the evolving design of the
EOCC. The development permit application will be presented to the
community at the same time it is submitted to the City, and the
community will have a full opportunity to present their views to the
Development Permit Board.
Mr. Brook requested the following amendments to the application
before Council:
- Condition B(v) calls for the provision of an access corridor to the
Hastings Street transit tunnel. Discussions with the Hastings Park
Working Committee have indicated there is no intention to have bus
service flow through the tunnel into the Hastings Park site.
Therefore, it is requested this condition be deleted.
- Condition B(xii) requires the completion of the acquisition of
portions of Lot 25 and 26 not needed for the Cassiar Connector.
These are Ministry of Highways owned lots beside the Cassiar
Connector. This is an issue of ownership rather than function, as
this land already functions as a lane. The City is presently
pursuing this acquisition, but if unsuccessful, this would prevent
by-law enactment. It is recommended this condition be deleted and
the acquisition be pursued outside the context of the rezoning
application.
- An amendment to Section 3.3 of the draft by-law is requested which
would permit exclusions contained in RM-4 zoning, rather than the
current exclusions which are based on RS-1 zoning. Specifically,
the following amendment is requested:
"The following shall be excluded in the computation of floor
space ratio:
cont'd....
Clause No. 1 (cont'd)
(c) where floors are used for off-street parking and loading,
bicycle storage, electrical and mechanical equipment, or
uses which in the opinion of the Director of Planning are
similar to the foregoing, those floors or portions
thereof so used, which are at or below the base surface."
SUMMARY OF CORRESPONDENCE
The following correspondence was received regarding this
application:
- Copy of neighbourhood information meeting minutes of June 4th and
June 5th, 1996. Minutes prepared by Brook Development Planning
Inc.;
- Memorandum from the Board of Parks and Recreation dated June 27,
1996 recommending that the development be required to:
a) provide a greenway linking the tunnel into the Hastings site.
b) work out an arrangement regarding parking spaces so that they
are outside of the Hastings park site.
- letter acknowledging the project needs to proceed, and suggesting
citizen-friendly and user-friendly criteria to be incorporated into
the development.
SPEAKERS
Mr. Victor Gallagher, area resident, registered concerns about
traffic implications arising from this project, particularly the
installation of another traffic signal on Hastings Street between
Windermere and Cassiar Streets.
Ms. Marion Olivieri, on behalf of the Hastings Community
Association and Hastings Park Working Committee, advised the community
recognizes the importance of the functions the EOCC will provide for the
City and the Province. However, the community has not welcomed the
placement of this project in the neighbourhood and is not convinced this
is the only site that could accommodate this development. It was
questioned whether a project this size is suitable next to a major green
park in the City.
cont'd....
Clause No. 1 (cont'd)
Ms. Olivieri advised of two problems with the project which need to
be addressed: the transformation of Rupert Street into a parking lot
and the negative impact this will have on pedestrians and cyclists
accessing Hastings Park, and safety conditions associated with the
transit tunnel on the eastern edge of this project, which will be
negatively impacted by this development.
A proposed amendment to the conditions of approval was also put
forward recommending: "that options be preserved to achieve a safe
public pedestrian and bicycle connection across Hastings Street at both
Rupert and Cassiar Street, and that these two connections be improved
and that it is the responsibility of the EOCC project team to design and
implement these improvements."
APPLICANT CLOSING COMMENTS
Responding to questions from members of Council concerning the
installation of a light at Hastings Street and Rupert Street, Mr. Chuck
Brook advised this issue will be resolved at the Development Permit
stage. However, the EOCC team does favor a light because they are
trying to prevent traffic from the EOCC using the neighbourhood to the
South, even though traffic volumes are small. Three options were
developed by a traffic consultant and they are currently under review by
the Engineering Department.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
During discussion, a member of Council commented on the potential
safety problems arising from a light at Hastings and Rupert and
suggested the team consider utilizing the existing transit tunnel at
this site.
MOVED by Cllr. Hemer,
THAT the application be approved, subject to the conditions as set
out in this minute of the Public Hearing, and subject to deletion of
conditions B(v) and B(xii), and the following amendment to Section 3.3
of the draft by-law:
"The following shall be excluded in the computation of floor space
ratio:
(c) where floors are used for off-street parking and loading,
bicycle storage, electrical and mechanical equipment, or uses
which in the opinion of the Director of Planning are similar
to the foregoing, those floors or portions thereof so used,
which are at or below the base surface."
- CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
Items 2(a) and 2(b) were considered by Council concurrently.
2(a) Rezoning: 901-967 and 940-990 Seymour Street
(Dominion Motors Building)
An application by Architectura, Waisman Dewar Grout Carter, Inc.
was considered as follows:
The proposed rezoning from DD Downtown District to CD-1
Comprehensive Development District, would permit the transfer of 7
125.4 m2 (76,000 sq. ft.) of developable floor area (heritage bonus
and residual density) from 901-967 Seymour Street, across the
street to 940-990 Seymour Street, thereby allowing the
rehabilitation and heritage designation of the former Dominion
Motors Building and preservation of a Council-approved view
corridor. Subsequent development of the remaining portions of the
two Sites will be generally controlled by Downtown South
Guidelines. Amendment to the Sign By-law and other consequential
amendments are required.
The Director of Land Use and Development recommended approval of
the application, subject to the following conditions as proposed for
adoption by resolution of Council:
A. THAT, Council, at the time of CD-1 By-law enactment, adopt
guidelines entitled "901-67 and 940-90 Seymour Street CD-1
Guidelines", presented at the Public Hearing;
B. THAT, prior to approval by Council of the form of development,
the applicant shall obtain approval of a development
application by the Development Permit Board who shall have
regard to the following:
i) design details to incorporate crime prevention through
environmental design (CPTED) principles;
ii) provision of recycling/garbage facilities to the
satisfaction of Engineering Services;
iii) submission of a detailed landscape plan; and
iv) submission of an acoustical consultant's report assessing
noise impacts on the site in particular noise generated
by the adjacent Granville commercial district,
recommending noise mitigation measures to achieve noise
livability criteria;
C. THAT, prior to enactment of the CD-1 By-law, the registered
owner shall, at no cost to the City:
cont'd....
Clause No. 2 (cont'd)
i) obtain and submit to the City a letter from the Ministry
of Environment indicating that a soils analysis site
characterization has been completed by a professional
recognized in this field; and provide a legal agreement,
which may be registered against the property, at the
discretion of the Director of Legal Services, in
consultation with appropriate Department Heads,
indemnifying the City against any liability which may be
incurred by the City as a result of any contamination
present on the site and providing a program of
remediation as may be deemed necessary and approved by
the Ministry of Environment, in a sequence of steps to be
prescribed, monitored and certified complete by such a
professional and approved by the Ministry;
ii) execute an agreement, to the satisfaction of the Director
of Legal Services, to not discriminate against families
with children in the sale of residential units;
iii) make suitable arrangements, to the satisfaction of the
Director of Legal Services and the Approving Officer, to
provide for:
- subdivision of the westerly site into two parcels
(Dominion Motors/Staples and remaining); and
- future consolidation of the easterly site in
accordance with a development permit;
(Note to the applicant: Parking for the Dominion Motors
site will need to be secured on the adjoining site at the
time of subdivision.)
iv) make suitable arrangements, to the satisfaction of
Engineering Services, for any new electrical and
telephone services to be undergrounded within and
adjacent to the site from the closest, existing suitable
service point;
v) designate the building at 901 Seymour Street (Dominion
Motors Building) under Schedule "A" of the City's
Heritage By-law;
(NOTE: Prior to enactment of the CD-1 By-law, the registered
owner will provide a letter waiving future compensation
demands for this designation.)
cont'd....
Clause No. 2 (cont'd)
vi) execute an agreement, to the satisfaction of the Director
of Legal Services in conjunction with the Director of
Planning, which will provide for completion of the
historically-accurate window replacement on the Dominion
Motors Building prior to issuance of occupancy permits on
the adjoining site; and
vii) execute an agreement, to the satisfaction of the Director
of Legal Services, to ensure participation in the City of
Vancouver public arts program, including the contribution
of $0.95 per sq. ft. ($10.23 per m2) of commercial and
residential floor area, and excluding bonused floor area
related to heritage preservation, totalling $379,860.
2(b) Heritage Designation: 901 Seymour Street
(Dominion Motors Building)
An application by Architectura, Waisman Dewar Grout Carter, Inc.
was considered as follows:
The proposed amendment to Heritage By-law No. 4837 would designate
the Dominion Motors Building (901 Seymour Street), as protected
heritage property.
The Director of Land Use and Development recommended approval of
the application, subject to the following condition proposed for
adoption by resolution of Council:
That, prior to enactment of the CD-1 By-law for the site, and the
enactment of the Heritage By-law, a letter waiving claims for
future compensation be signed by the owner, to the satisfaction of
the Director of Legal Services.
Also before Council was a memorandum from R. Scobie dated June 27,
1996, which recommended the following amendments to the application
before Council:
1. Amend Section 2 (Uses) in the draft By-law with the following
additions:
- Add Item (f) (Retail Uses) "Furniture or Appliance
Store";
- Add to Item (g) (Service Uses) "Animal Clinic", "Catering
Establishment", "School - Arts or Self-improvement",
"School - Business", "School - Vocational or Trade"; and
cont'd....
Clause No. 2 (cont'd)
- Add "Print Shop" and "Production Studio" as uses which may be
permitted in the existing Dominion Motors building only.
2. Amend Section 4 (Floor Space Ratio) in the draft By-law by
changing the floor space ratio for the listed uses from 1.0 to
1.5.
3. Amend Section 7(c) (Off-Street Parking and Loading) by
deleting the words "and one space for each of the three
towers" and replace with "(minimum of one per tower)".
4. Modify condition of approval 3(iv) to read provide for
"historically-accurate replication of the outside appearance
of the windows."
5. Amend the Draft CD-1 By-law under Section 6 (Height) by adding
the following:
The Director of Planning may relax the height on Site 1, where
demonstrated that such relaxation will not adversely affect
Council-adopted guidelines for view corridors.
6. Add the following condition of approval to Appendix B:
2(v) submission of additional graphic material to determine
compliance of mechanical penthouse with Council-approved
view cones.
STAFF OPENING COMMENTS
Mr. Rob Whitlock, Planner, advised this application provides for
the transfer of approximately 50,000 square feet of density and 26,000
square feet of residual density, due to a view cone requirement. The
approach here involves a CD-1 zoning with guidelines but no specific
form of development.
Mr. Whitlock referred to a number of amendments contained in a
memorandum from Rick Scobie dated June 27, 1996, which provide greater
flexibility for this site. Staff support these amendments because of
the importance of securing the retention of the Dominion Motors
Building. In addition to the amendments contained in the June 27
memorandum, Mr. Whitlock recommended Section 3 of the draft by-law also
be amended to state the Dominion Motors Building is exempted from this
section.
Mr. Whitlock noted that issues relating to height of the ceilings
in the units and public art contributions will require direction from
Council.
cont'd....
Clause No. 2 (cont'd)
APPLICANT OPENING COMMENTS
Mr. Bruce Hamilton, on behalf of the property owners, advised an
essential element of this rezoning is the designation of the Dominion
Motors building as a heritage property. Council was requested to
consider two items in the recommendations which are of concern to the
applicant.
The first matter relates to the issue of extra height floors. The
Planning Department recommends that any ceiling height over twelve feet
be counted at double FSR, while the applicant feels it should be counted
at 1.4 FSR, in order to accommodate the development of mezzanines. The
staff recommendation will make the project uneconomic, and is unfair
because it will treat this property differently than other properties in
the Downtown. The ceiling height issue is expected to be before Council
for a policy decision shortly, but it is unfair to treat this property
differently until the policy has been established.
The second matter relates to the applicant's request that the
entire site be exempted from a public art contribution. Mr. Hamilton
advised the establishment of a public art contribution is typically set
on a case by case basis. The applicants rationale is based on the
substantial amount of money already spent on the heritage designation,
and the fact the Vancouver Charter does not permit the waiving of
Development Cost Levies for the heritage bonus area. This request is
consistent with other precedents in the City.
SUMMARY OF CORRESPONDENCE
A review of the correspondence indicated one letter supporting the
application and one letter opposing the application.
SPEAKERS
Mr. E.R. Shymka, adjoining property owner, expressed support for
the application, and suggested the same type of flexibility be extended
to his adjoining property when it is redeveloped.
Mr. Brad Holme advised that with respect to the ceiling issue, this
has been an issue that staff have been working on for over a year, and
no report has been forthcoming to Council. This is creating uncertainty
in the market, and staff should be requested to bring forward this
policy report as soon as possible.
cont'd....
Clause No. 2 (cont'd)
APPLICANT CLOSING COMMENTS
Mr. Hamilton reiterated this application will retain the Dominion
Motors Building, which was deemed by the City to be a valuable
objective. The concessions being granted in exchange for this
designation are not out of the ordinary.
STAFF CLOSING COMMENTS
Mr. Rob Whitlock advised staff recommend approval of this
application, noting the preservation of the Dominion Motors Building is
the prime focus here.
Responding to questions from members of Council concerning the
issue of ceiling heights, Mr. Whitlock advised that if Council has
reservations concerning the staff proposal of double counting FSR for
floor to ceiling heights greater than 12 feet, then staff recommend this
clause be deleted at this time.
Responding to questions about noise at this location and the impact
on future residents, Mr. Whitlock advised the Police Department
recommendation that potential occupants sign a covenant advising they
are aware this is a noisy area, is not supported by the Law Department.
Instead staff recommend they be instructed to review the issue of noise
relating to the abutting Entertainment District at the Development
Permit stage.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
During debate on this issue, Council members expressed concern with
being required to make a decision on the ceiling height issue at this
time, before Council policy has been set in this area. After receiving
assurances from staff that this is a CD-1 rezoning, and this decision
will not prejudge the policy, Council was in agreement that twelve foot
ceiling heights should not be encouraged in this application, because
they will result in illegal and unlivable mezzanines being developed in
the future.
Council was also in agreement that the issue of noise must be
carefully considered, noting that perspective occupants will be
voluntarily residing in a busy traffic area and an area abutting the
Entertainment District. It was agreed staff should further review this
matter at the Development Permit stage.
cont'd....
Clause No. 2 (cont'd)
MOVED by Cllr. Price,
THAT this application be approved, subject to the conditions as set
out in this minute of the Public Hearing, and subject to the amendments
set out in the memorandum from R. Scobie dated June 27, 1996, and
subject to amendment to Section 3 of the draft by-law to state the
Dominion Motors Building is exempted from this section, and subject to
the removal of the following clause from Section 4.2 of the draft
by-law:
"Residential floor areas with a ceiling height greater than 3.7 m
shall be counted twice for the purposes of calculating floor space
ratio."
- CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
3. Rezoning: 5592-5650 Oak Street
An application by Neale Staniszkis Doll Adams Architects was
considered as follows:
The proposed rezoning from RS-1 One Family Dwelling District to
CD-1 Comprehensive Development District, would permit development
of a four-storey multiple dwelling with a maximum height of 12.2 m
(40 ft.) and a revised maximum density of 1.55 Floor Space Ratio
(FSR). Six of the 33 dwelling units proposed would be
wheelchair-accessible rental units. The Director of Land Use and
Development recommends a reduced density of 1.45 FSR.
The Director of Land Use and Development recommended approval of
the application, subject to reducing the maximum density in the draft
by-law to 1.45 FSR and the following conditions proposed for adoption by
resolution of Council:
A. THAT the proposed form of development be approved by Council
in principle, generally as prepared by Neale Staniszkis Doll
Adams Architects, and stamped "Received City Planning
Department, December 28, 1995", 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.
cont'd....
Clause No. 3 (cont'd)
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) design development to improve the character of the roof
and eaves;
ii) design development to improve the privacy of units,
particularly at grade, along the south end of the
building adjacent to the gasoline station;
iii) further development to increase the usability of the
amenity room;
iv) design development to improve the safety and surveillance
of entries, exits, refuse storage area and pathways;
v) design development to reduce opportunities for theft from
the underground parking;
(This can be achieved by providing a separate, locked room for
bicycle parking and storage in the southeast corner of the
garage; and relocating exit stairs from parking to be less
visible to people walking or driving by. These exit stairs
become an easy access to the underground if they can be easily
seen from the street or lane.)
vi) design development to reduce fear in the underground by
painting ceilings, utility pipes and walls white;
vii) applicant to provide new street trees along Oak Street
adjacent to the development site. Final spacing of
street trees should be coordinated with Kraige Sammsen
(871-6131), Engineering, Streets Division prior to
Development Permit submission. Street tree species
should be coordinated with Bill Stephens (257-8587) of
the Vancouver Park Board;
viii)design development to retain the large Douglas Fir
located in the southeast corner of the site adjacent to
the lane; and
cont'd....
Clause No. 3 (cont'd)
ix) design development to provide front door wheelchair
access to each unit and ensure that one toilet is fully
accessible in each unit.
C. THAT, prior to enactment of the CD-1 By-law, the registered
owner shall:
i) consolidate Lots 11-13, Block 865, D.L. 526, Plan 8170;
ii) make arrangements to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer and Director of Legal Services for paving of the
lane north of West 41st Avenue from Oak Street east to
the east property line of the site;
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) dedicate a portion of the site for widening of Oak Street
consisting of the west 2.15 m of Lot 13 and a strip along
the west side of Lots 11 and 12, which tapers from 2.15 m
at the south property line of Lot 12 to 1.08 m at the
north property line of Lot 11; and
vi) execute the following agreements with the City to the
satisfaction of the Director of Legal Services:
1) a 215 Covenant requiring the strata title
subdivision of the project;
2) an option to purchase the 6 handicapped units at a
nominal price. The City shall have the right to
direct that the strata lots go into the name of a
nominee, which in all likelihood will be the
Vancouver Resources Society. The nominee must grant
the City a 215 Covenant that the 6 strata lots will
not be separately sold or transferred;
cont'd....
Clause No. 3 (cont'd)
3) a housing agreement by which the 6 handicapped units
may only be occupied by severely handicapped people
at a rent which is equal to the shelter component of
GAIN or 30% of gross income (up to a market rent),
whichever is greater;
4) a 215 Covenant:
a) requiring the design and layout of the parkade
to accommodate vehicles which transport
handicapped people; and
b) requiring that at least one parking space be
available for each of the 6 handicapped units
at no additional charge; and
5) all agreements shall be drawn to the satisfaction of
the Manager of the Housing Centre and Director of
Legal Services and registered in priority over all
charges which might defeat or delay same in the
opinion of the City's solicitors.
STAFF OPENING COMMENTS
Mr. Tom Phipps, Planner, advised this application is for the most
southerly 3 of 13 lots fronting Oak Street south of 38th Avenue. These
lots are immediately north of the Petrocan station on 41st Avenue at Oak
Street. The approved Oakridge/Langara Policy Statement supports
eventual rezoning of all these lots for a 3-4 storey multiple dwelling
development at a density of 1.0 to 1.2 FSR with a possible 20% bonus to
1.45 FSR for inclusion of a publicly desirable and significant public
amenity.
This application does offer a desirable public amenity in the form
of six fully accessible rental units, to be made available to
handicapped residents by the Vancouver Resources Society.
Mr. Phipps advised staff support this application at 1.45 FSR.
However, the applicant is requesting 1.55 FSR, because of a proposed
deep internal subsidy to the rental units. Staff do not support a
density beyond 1.45 FSR, because this is the first rezoning in Oakridge
since the policy statement was developed, and it could result in
pressure to approve similar or yet higher densities on other sites.
cont'd....
Clause No. 3 (cont'd)
APPLICANT OPENING COMMENTS
Mr. Ken Fraser, on behalf of the Vancouver Resources Society,
explained the rationale for requesting a density of 1.55 rather than
1.45 FSR.
The six rental units would be available to people with severe
disabilities, and in order to facilitate this, the units need to be
affordable, with a 24-hour shared care model in operation. If 1.55 FSR
is approved, this density reduces the cost of the 6 rental units by an
additional $200,000. Without the increased density the number of rental
units would be decreased, and the shared care model would no longer be
workable.
CORRESPONDENCE
The following correspondence was received on this application:
- letter from the applicant containing a summary of the project;
- comments from the Vancouver School Board on the application;
- three letters opposing the application.
SPEAKERS
Messrs. Reuben Moses and Maurice Moses appeared on behalf of their
elderly mother who resides in house next to the proposed development.
It was recommended the application be refused due to the impact it will
have on their elderly mother who will be forced to leave her home due to
the impact of construction. Concerns were also expressed with
shadowing, density and height of the application.
Ms. Alice Wong, area resident, urged Council to reject the
application.
Mr. Robert Fisher, on behalf of Yaffa Housing, recommended Council
approve the application. Yaffa Housing is seeking opportunities to
locate accessible housing for disabled persons in the Jewish Community,
and will rent one or more of the six available units from the Vancouver
Resource Society.
cont'd....
Clause No. 3 (cont'd)
Mr. Larry Kerr, Board member of Vancouver Resource Society,
indicated support for the application. This application is indicative
of the move away from the traditional institutional approach for persons
with disabilities, to one of integration into the community.
APPLICANT CLOSING COMMENTS
Mr. Tom Stanizskis, Architect, provided additional information on
the height of the proposed development, noting it will be only one story
higher than the adjacent single-family house, and shadowing and privacy
concerns have been addressed.
STAFF CLOSING COMMENTS
Mr. Tom Phipps advised staff have no concerns with issues of
shadowing or privacy, but rather with density and the precedent arising
from approving additional density than is recommended in the
Oakridge/Langara guidelines.
MOVED by Cllr. Sullivan,
THAT the application be approved with a maximum density of 1.55
FSR, and subject to the conditions as set out in this minute of the
Public Hearing.
- CARRIED
(Councillor Hemer opposed)
(Councillor Bellamy was absent for the vote on the above item)
Items 4(a) and (b) were considered concurrently by Council.
4(a) Rezoning: 7400 Oak Street
(Oakherst)
An application by Moodie Consultants Ltd. was considered as
follows:
The proposed rezoning from RS-1 to CD-1 Comprehensive Development
District, would permit development of 58 two-storey townhouses
occupying most of the site and 64 apartment units in 2 four-storey
multiple dwellings adjoining Oak Street. The 'A'-listed Parklane
heritage house would be designated, restored and converted to
6 dwelling units. More than half of the significant trees on site
would be retained.
cont'd....
Clause No. 4 (cont'd)
The Director of Land Use and Development recommended approval of
the application, subject to the following conditions proposed for
adoption by resolution of Council:
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;
cont'd....
Clause No. 4 (cont'd)
vi) design development to the West 59th Avenue greenway to
clarify hard and soft landscape treatment and features;
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 maximize
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;
cont'd....
Clause No. 4 (cont'd)
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;
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;
cont'd....
Clause No. 4 (cont'd)
xxiv)commitment that an 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;
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 expense;
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;
cont'd....
Clause No. 4 (cont'd)
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;
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;
cont'd....
Clause No. 4 (cont'd)
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;
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 protects the
heritage building prior to and during construction to
standards establishment by the Director of Planning, 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.
D. THAT Council instruct the Director of Legal Services to
prepare a Heritage Revitalization Agreement, pursuant to
Section 592 of the Vancouver Charter for the purpose of
varying the Development Cost Levy By-law for this site, to
relieve the owner of up to $150,000 in costs related to the
retention of the heritage building.
cont'd....
4(b) Heritage Designation: 7400 Oak Street
(Oakherst)
An application by Moodie Consultants Ltd. was considered as
follows:
The proposed amendment to Heritage By-law No. 4837 would designate
the 'A' listed Parklane heritage house (950 West 58th Avenue), as
protected heritage property.
The Director of Land Use and Development recommended approval of
the application, subject to the following condition proposed for
adoption by resolution of Council:
That, prior to enactment of the CD-1 by-law for the site, and the
enactment of the Heritage by-law, a letter waiving claims for
future compensation be signed by the owner, to the satisfaction of
the Director of Legal Services.
ADDITIONAL STAFF CORRESPONDENCE
The following additional material from staff was distributed to
Council:
- Memorandum from Rick Scobie, Director of Land Use and
Development, dated June 26, 1996 providing information
regarding implications of the Board of Parks and Recreation
resolution seeking dedication of a park on the Oakherst site;
- Memorandum from Rick Scobie dated June 26, 1996 discussing the
amount Council may consider if it chooses to utilize a
Heritage Revitalization Agreement By-Law to vary the
Development Cost Levy (DCL) payable to this site, as described
in Consideration D in the May 21, 1996 Council report.
NOTE FROM CLERK: The foregoing memorandum was superseded by a later
memorandum from staff.
- Memorandum from Bruce Maitland, Manager of Real Estate
Services, dated July 11, 1996, revising the project's pro
forma following further discussions with the applicant;
- Memorandum from Rick Scobie dated July 19, 1996, providing new
information and superseding the June 26, 1996, memorandum.
cont'd....
Clause No. 4 (cont'd)
STAFF OPENING COMMENTS
Mr. Rick Scobie, Director of Land Use and Development, advised this
application proposes to rezone the 1.9 hectare former Oakherst private
hospital site at West 59th and Oak Street, to permit 58 two-storey
townhouses in 14 clusters, with all units having basement parking via an
internal, private road system. In addition, 64 units are proposed in
two four-storey apartment buildings adjacent to the Oak Street frontage.
The Parklane Heritage building will also be retained and converted to
six units.
Mr. Scobie commented on the following issues arising with this
application:
- The building form on the easterly two-thirds of the site continues
to unduly compromise both the landscape and heritage aspects of the
site. Conditions of approval before Council will ensure further
design development at the development application stage, to achieve
a supportable compromise;
- The conditions of approval also call for design development to both
the townhouse and apartment buildings, to introduce greater variety
and improved relationship to the adjacent single-family homes and
the Parklane Heritage building;
- Further work will also be required at the development application
stage to ensure suitable greenway development along West 59th
Avenue, and provision of a compatible relationship with the
adjacent dwellings proposed. These are also addressed in the
conditions of approval;
- The issue of parks, and the implications of the resolution of the
Board of Parks and recreation, is addressed in the June 26, 1996
memorandum to Council;
- In terms of school funding, further analysis by Planning staff with
School Board staff indicates the development contemplated may not
have a greater impact on existing schools than would site
subdivision and development under current RS-1 zoning;
- In terms of Community Amenity Contributions (CACs), and Development
Cost Levies (DCLs), a further review of economic pro forma related
to the Parklane heritage building, and sewer relocation impacts on
significant trees, has led to changes.
cont'd....
Clause No. 4 (cont'd)
In essence, an "in kind" CAC valued at $760,000 is to be paid by
the developer for retention and restoration of the Parklane
heritage building. This results in a residual of $340,000
available from the developer for DCL payment. This is $247,000
less than is payable under the DCL by-law. Council may wish to
compensate the developer for this shortfall via a Heritage
Revitalization Agreement.
APPLICANT OPENING COMMENTS
Mr. Jim Moodie, on behalf of Moodie Consultants, advised the
application before Council meets the objectives of the Oakridge/Langara
Policy Plan; retains the heritage building on site; retains 57% of the
significant trees on site; and can provide open space and view
corridors.
Mr. Moodie stated the process leading to public hearing has been
difficult, with a number of different groups and issues at the
forefront. The applicant has tried to balance some of the resident's
concerns, and the result is an application to develop at a lower density
than is permitted in the Oakridge/Langara Policy Plan. Also, the
townhouse component of the project will reflect single-family
characteristics, such as height and building setbacks.
City staff and the developer have reached agreement on a revised
pro forma which will require a change in Recommendation D of the staff
report, by substituting the figure of $247,000 with $150,000.
Mr. Moodie expressed frustration with the late recommendation of
the Park Board, given that staff had been involved with the
Oakridge/Langara Policy Plan for two years.
In a memorandum to City Council dated June 27, 1996, Mr. Moodie
requested that Clause "5. Height" in the draft CD-1 By-law be amended by
adding a the following phrase to section 5.2:
5.2 For multiple dwellings on the portion of the site not
described in section 5.1 the maximum building height above the
base surface is 9.2m except that portion of the site south of
a hypothetical line drawn 23.5m north of and parallel to 59th
Avenue and east of and parallel to a hypothetical line drawn
24.9m west of Laurel Street the maximum building height
measured above the base surface is 10.7m.
cont'd....
Clause No. 4 (cont'd)
Mr. Moodie explained that during discussions with the community,
the applicant proposed to maintain RS-1 building heights for the
townhouse portion of the site. RS-1 permits 30 foot heights, and
conditionally allows up to 35 feet for planning and design reasons.
This increase in height to 35 feet will allow the developer to satisfy
conditions b(vii), b(viii), and b(x).
SUMMARY OF CORRESPONDENCE
The following correspondence was received:
- Memorandum from the Board of Parks and Recreation requesting
dedicated parkland and a public pedestrian right-of-way
entrance to the parkland with a binding agreement on the
preservation of trees at Oakherst.
- Letter supporting the application but disagreeing with the
concept of a development cost levy;
- Letter supporting the heritage aspects of the application;
- 15 letters opposing the application, registering concerns
about parkland, urban landscape, architectural design and
school overcrowding;
- 10 letters from Don Larsen requesting designation of public
park space;
- Petition containing 38 signatures opposing the application.
SPEAKERS
The following speakers specifically addressed their comments toward
preserving trees and parkland on this site:
- Valerie Jerome, Green Party (brief on file)
- Don Larsen, CRAB Park (photo and briefs on file)
- Clive Justice, Friends of Stanley Park (brief on file)
- Richard Stace-Smith, Save our Parkland Association
- John Switzer, 8100 block Fremlin Street
- Isabel Minty, 1900 block West 57th Avenue
The foregoing speakers supported the retention of trees based on
one or more of the following grounds:
- This site currently has mature, beautiful trees which should be
preserved;
cont'd....
Clause No. 4 (cont'd)
- A passive, treed park should be created. The adjacent parks are
full of playing fields and gravel. They are not treed areas and
have little grass;
- The resolution submitted to Council by the Board of Parks and
Recreation should be supported;
- The retention of the heritage house is diverting funds that could
be used to retain additional trees. The heritage house is not even
visible from the street in some areas;
- Organizations such as the Friends of Stanley Park have adopted the
position that in order to provide new parkland throughout
Vancouver, additional density and height may be necessary in some
areas, in order to encourage open space;
- Retention of the trees will make this site a treasure for future
generations.
The following speakers urged Council to reject the application:
- Diana Hu, 8000 block Laurel Street (brief on file)
- Abe Kroeker, 6800 block Heather Street
- Annie Kroeker, 6800 block Heather Street
- Stuart Galbraith, 6200 block Ash Street (brief on file)
- Brian Buchanan, 700 block West 62nd Avenue
(brief on file)
- Zena Wagstaff - 6200 block Ash Street
- John Twochin - 900 block West 58th Avenue
- Sophie Li
The foregoing speakers objected to the application on one or more
of the following grounds:
- Residents of the Oakridge/Langara are being treated unfairly by
City Hall. CityPlan has failed this neighbourhood, and the views
of the citizens have not been listened to;
- Densification will lead to the destruction of the RS-1
neighbourhood. The developer is attracting people to this
neighbourhood through the amenities that currently exist, but this
will lead to the erosion of these amenities;
- The development will lead to increased traffic in the
neighbourhood;
- The City's own planners advise there is room for 3000 people on
unbuilt land in Oakridge/Langara with existing zoning. These areas
should be developed first;
cont'd....
Clause No. 4 (cont'd)
- The Oakherst site should be developed with single-family dwellings
built on 40 foot lots, which would generate the same total value as
the proposed rezoning;
- Retention of the trees and parkland on this site is critical;
- Too much attention is paid to the needs of the developer, rather
than the area residents;
- The school infrastructure in the area cannot handle the additional
density;
- The neighbourhood is unanimous in its opposition to this proposal.
Mr. Wayne DeAngelis, on behalf of the Vancouver Heritage
Commission, advised the Commission supports the application before
Council. The project maintains the heritage building and the adjacent
landscaping.
APPLICANT CLOSING COMMENTS
The applicant offered no additional comments.
STAFF CLOSING COMMENTS
Mr. Rick Scobie addressed the following issues raised by
delegations:
- The interim tree retention by-law will not impact this site.
Retention of trees is covered in conditions of approval;
- There is an additional capacity of about 3000 residents under
existing zoning, but this is mostly in commercial areas, and would
result in residential development over commercial uses. The
established Council priority is ground-oriented housing, suitable
for families with children;
- The residential capacity could be increased by provision of 40 foot
lots, if Council were to allow amendment of the Subdivision By-law.
However, this would likely prove to be an arduous process in terms
of impacts on the existing community;
- In terms of the delegation who favored additional density along Oak
Street as a way of preserving parkland, this does not meet the City
priority of ground-oriented housing, and is not supported by the
neighbourhood.
cont'd....
Clause No. 4 (cont'd)
Mr. Scobie concluded that there are few sites in this area that
will allow the City to achieve these housing objectives without
significantly impacting on single-family housing. Staff recommend
approval of this application.
COUNCIL DISCUSSION
After hearing from the delegations, Council members agreed to
adjourn the public hearing, and defer a final decision on this
application to the Regular Council meeting on July 30, 1996. Staff were
instructed to undertake additional economic analysis of the park and
heritage house issues, and report back to Council.
RISE FROM COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MOVED by Cllr. Bellamy,
THAT the Committee of the Whole rise and report.
- CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
ADOPT REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MOVED by Cllr. Bellamy,
SECONDED by Cllr. Puil,
THAT the report of the Committee of the Whole be adopted, and the
Director of Legal Services be instructed to prepare and bring forward
the necessary by-law amendments.
- CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
* * *
The Special Council meeting on July 23, 1996,
adjourned at 9:50 p.m.