april 6, 2017 cotw meeting victoria city...

April6,2017COTWMeeting–Transcription Page1of44

April6,2017COTWMeetingVictoriaCityHall

Startingat3:00–3:16

LH:Sothattakesusdowntoitems5Aand5Barezoningapplicationfor1201FortStreetand1050PentrelewPlaceandassociatedOCPamendment.Iwillinviteourplanningstafftothetabletowalkusthroughthereport.Thankyouandgoodmorning.

3:42–4:00

AJ…thepresentationhaschangedfromtheoneattachedintheagenda…

Thefirstpartofthepresentationfocusesontherezoningapplication.ThesubjectpropertiesformalargesitewithdualfrontageonFortStreetandPentrelewplace.

4:02–

AJ:Theregulargeometryofthesiteandthemanylargetrees,themajorityofwhichareby-lawprotected,presentsseveralconstraintstoredevelopingthesiteunderthecurrentzoning.TheproposalistoamendtheOCPandtorezonetoanewsitespecificzoneinordertoincreasethedensityto1:38:1FSRandallowfortheconstructionofa6storeymulti-unitresidentialbuilding,a5storeyresidential


buildingand12townhouses.Additionally,anumberofvariancesarebeingproposedandwillbediscussedinrelationtotheconcurrentvariancesapplication.

4:47

AJ:ThesitecurrentlycontainsaChurchbuildingunitat1201FortStreetandasinglefamilydwellingat1050PentrelewPlace.Thisslideshowsthenorthportionat1201FortStreet,wherethemajorityofthelargematuretreesarelocated.

5:01

AJ:Thisslideshowsseveralviewsof1201FortStreetfromPentrelewPlace.Theexistingchurchbuildingisvisibleintheseimages.


5:12

AJ:Thisistheexistingsinglefamilydwellingat1050PentrelewPlaceandthenextfewslidesshowtheimmediatecontextoftheproposeddevelopment.

AJ:TothewestofthesitealongFortStreetaretwoheritagedesignatedhouses,betweenLindenAvenueandOrmondStreetacrossfromthesubjectsiteareseveralheritagedesignatedhousesthatarenotshownintheimages.Theseheritagehouseshavebeenconvertedintoaprofessionalofficeandothercommercialuses.


AJ:TotheeastofthesiteatthecornerofFortStreetandPentrelewPlaceisafourstoreymulti-unitresidentialbuilding.

AJ:ThisimageshowstheoneandahalfsinglefamilydwellinglocatedtothesouthofthesitealongPentrelewPlace.

6:05


AJ:Tothesouthwestofthesitearetwofour-storeymulti-unitresidentialbuildingsfrontingontoLindenAvenue.

AJ:TheOCPidentifiesthenorthernportionof1201FortStreetasbeinglocatedintheUrbanResidentialUrbanPlacedesignationwhichenvisionsbuildingsupto6storeyswithFSRsofgenerallyupto1:2:1FSRwithincreaseddensityupto2:1FSRwhereaproposalsignificantlyadvancesplanobjectivesandisadjacenttoasecondaryarterialroad.ThemajorityofthesiteisidentifiedintheOCPasbeinglocatedintheTraditionalResidentialUrbanPlacedesignationwhichenvisionsbuildingsuptothreestorieswithFSRsofupto1:1FSRwhereareproposalisadjacenttoasecondaryarterialroad.Inthisinstance,thepropertyislocatedonFortStreet,whichisclassifiedasasecondaryarterialroad.AblendedmaximumFSRforthesitebasedonthetraditionalresidentialandtheurbanresidentialurbanplacedesignationsisupto1:29:1FSRthereforetheproposedFSRof1:38:1isgenerallyconsistentwiththemaximumenvisionedintheOCPforthissiteundertheurbanplacedesignations.


7:29

AJ:TherequesttoamendtheOCPisnecessaryinordertochangethedesignationofthesouthportionof1201FortStreetand1050PentrelewPlacefromthetraditionalresidentialtotheurbanresidentialurbanplacedesignationtoprovideconsistencywiththenorthportionof1201FortStreettoallowforthedensitytobeshiftedsouthonthesitetoretainthematuretreesalongtheFortStreetfrontage.Basedonthisobjective,stafffeeltherequesttoamendtheOCPissupportable.

UndertheCityofVictoria’sbonuspolicythevalueofacommunityamenitycontributionforrezoningthatrequiresnoOCPamendmentisnegotiateddependentonanindependentlandliftanalysis.Theanalysisofthisproposalindicatesthatthevalueofthesubjectsitewillnotincreaseduetotheproposedrezoningapplicationandrecommendsthattheproposedpublicpathwaybeconsideredacommunityamenitycontributionfromtheproject.

TheproposalisinconsistentwiththeRocklandNeighbourhoodPlanpolicythatdiscouragesanychangestotheboundaryofthecurrentapartmentzoningandtheneighbourhood.However,giventhelargeirregularsitesizeandthesiteconstraintspresentedbythelargematuretrees,amorecomprehensivelysiteplanthatrequiresashiftinthecurrentzoningboundariesissupportable.TheneighbourhoodplanalsoencouragesnewapartmentdevelopmentalongFortStreettorelateinscaletotheresidentialpropertiestothesouthsubjecttorevisionstoaddressstaffconcernswithregardstothelineandlivabilitythetownhousesproposedalongPentrelewPlacewillprovideatransitioninscalebetweenthemulti-unitresidentialbuildingsandtheexistingsinglefamilyhomestotheeastandsouth-eastsectionsofthesite.

9:17

TheproposedpublicpathwayandtheretentionandenhancementoftheGarryOakecosystemisconsistentwiththeneighbourhoodplanpolicyrelatedtotheretentionoftheprivategreenspaceastheamountofparkspaceintheRocklandneighbourhoodisbelowtheCity’sstandards.Theproposalis


generallyconsistentwiththeOCPasitrelatestolow-risemulti-unitresidentialdevelopmentwithinurbanresidentialareashoweverstaffrecommendthatCouncilrefertheapplicationbacktostafftoworkwiththeapplicantonsiteplanningtransitionandbuildingdesignrefinements.ThatconcludestherezoningpartofthepresentationandnowIwilldiscussthedevelopmentpermitapplication.

9:52

AJ:Thisisadevelopmentpermitapplicationwithvariancestoallowthe6-storeymulti-unitresidentialbuilding,a5-storeymulti-unitresidentialbuildingandtwelvetownhouses,thevariancesarerelatedtoheight,sitecoverage,set-backs,andparking.TheOCPamendmentincludestherequesttoextendtheboundaryofdevelopmentpermitarea7B-HCcorridorasheritagetoincludethesouthportionof1201Fortstreetconsistentwiththenorthportionof1201FortStreetand1050PentrelewPlace.ThisDPAareasupportshumanscaledesignandhighqualityarchitecturethatenhancestheheritagecharacteroftheFortStreetCorridor.

10:31


AJ:Thisslideshowstheproposedsiteplan.OnelevelofundergroundparkingwouldbeprovidedandaccessedviaarampoffofFortStreetasideofthesite.Asixstoreybuilding,BuildingA,wouldfrontontoFortStreetandhasbeensetbackfromthestreetinordertoretainseverallargeby-lawprotectedGarryOaktrees.Afivestoreybuilding,BuildingB,wouldbelocatedtothesouthofbuildingA,andwouldhavevehicleandpedestrianaccessfromPentrelewPlace.Threetownhousebuildingsof4unitseachBuildingsC,DandEwouldbefrontingontoPentrelewPlace.Theproposalretainsover50%ofthesiteasopensitespacehoweverthebuildingrelationships,particularlybetweenbuildingsBandC,wouldbenefitfromfurtherrefinementtoimprovelivabilityandensureabettertransitiontothesouthalongPentrelewPlace.

11:23


AJ:Theproposedundergroundparkinglayoutwouldprovide107parkingstallsincluding24parkingstallsforthetownhousesandsixvisitorparkingstalls.Theundergroundparkinglevelalsoaccommodates47securebicycleparkingstalls.AdrivewayfromPentrelewPlaceprovidesaccesstothreevisitorsurfaceparkingstallsandsixteenupgradeparkingspotsenclosedatthegroundlevelofbuildingB.Andasecurebicyclestorageroomwith34Class1parkingstalls.

11:56

AJ:Thisslideshowstheproposedgroundlevelfloorplanforeachbuilding.ThegroundlevelofBuildingAwouldhaveacommonindooramenityareawithaccesstoasharedoutdooramenityspaceonthewestsideofthebuilding.Therearealsofiveunitsonthegroundfloor.ThegroundlevelofbuildingBwouldhaveanenclosedparkingarea,securebicyclestorageroomandthreedwellingunits.ThegroundfloorofbothdwellingunitsplusthetownhouseunitsofBuildingC,DandEeachhaveaccesstoprivateupgradepatiospaces.

12:26


AJ:Levels2–5ofBuildingAandlevels2–4ofBuildingB,wouldhavenineunitsperfloorwithamixofoneandtwobedroomunits.

TheupperstoryofbuildingAwouldhave5units,and


theupperstoreyofBuildingBwouldhave4units.Thenextthreeslidesshowtheproposedfloorplansforthetownhouses.

Theproposed3leveltownhouseswouldeachhavebasementsplustwolevelsaboveandarooftopamenityarea.Furtheranalysisisrequiredtodemonstratethattheroofdeckswouldnotnegativelyimpacttheneighbouringproperties.


13:11


AJ:ThisimageshowsthefrontelevationofbuildingAasviewedfromFortStreet.Stafforiginallyraisedconcernswiththebuilding’srelationshipwiththestreethowevereffortshavebeenmadetoaddresstherelationshipbyintroducingamoreprominentlobbyandmodificationstoground-buildingextensionsabovetheparkadeentrance.Theorientationofthebalconieswasalsochangedtoimprovethebuilding’srelationshiptoFortStreet.

ThisimageshowsthewestsideelevationofbuildingA,and[below]isthewestelevationofbuildingB.


Theenclosedparkingareawithlandscapepatioareasaboveisvisibleintheforegroundoftheimage.

ThisslideshowsthesouthelevationofbuildingBwhereitmeetstheadjacentpropertytothesouth.Theupperstoreysprojectoverthedrivewayandaresupportedbysteelcolumns.Theupperstoreyissteppedbacktohelpmitigatepotentialoverlooktotheneighbourstothesouth.


Thisslideshowstheneighbours’treestopropertyattherearwhichhelpstomitigatethevisualimpactofbuildingB.

14:27

AJ:ThesearetheproposedtownhousesalongPentrelewPlacewhichwouldprovideasensitivetransitiontothetraditionalformoftheproposedmulti-unitresidentialbuildingsandtheadjacentlowerdensitydevelopmentandacrossthestreet.However,thethreeblocksoftownhousesdonotsufficientbreathingroomtothenorthorsouthendofthesite,adjacenttothepublicpathwayandbuildingBrespectively.

TheproposalwouldbenefitfromdesignrenovationstoaddressthesepinchpointsandtoimprovethetransitiontothesouthalongPentrelewPlace.


14:57

AJ:Asstatedintheapplicantsletter,oneoftheprincipaldesignobjectivesistopreservethematuretreesandthecharactertheylendtothesite.TothisendthebuildingsaresituatedanddesignedtoserveasabackdroptotheexistingtreecanopyafeaturethataddstothespecialcharactertotheFortStreetcorridor.Althoughthisconceptalignswiththeguidelines,theoverallarchitecturalexpressioncouldbemoresympathetictothehistoriccontextalongthissectionoftheFortStreetcorridorwhichincludesseveralheritagedesignatedhousesclusteredbetweenLindenAvenueandOrmondStreet.Specifically,thechoiceofwhiteacrylicstuccoisthepredominantclouding(?)materialandtheplacementofthewindowsofthemulti-unitbuildingresidentialbuildingsisofparticularconcerntostaff.

15:40


AndthisshowsthestreetcontextalongPentrelewPlacewiththerowoftownhousesinthefrontandthemulti-residentialbuildingsarevisibleinthebackgroundoftheimage.

Theproposalwouldretainover50%ofthesiteasopenspaceincludingtheretentionofthemajorityoftheby-lawprotectedtreesandwouldaddanadditional71newtreesplantedtothesite.ApublicpathwayconnectingFortStreettoPentrelewPlacewouldformalizeanexistingdesirelinethroughthesitehoweverstafffeeltheproposalwouldbenefitfromfurtherrefinementtothelocationandthedesignofthepathway.Astatutoryrightofwayonthewestsideofthesiteisalsoproposedandwouldprovideforafuturepathwayconnection.ThelocationofthisfutureconnectionisgenerallyconsistentwiththeconceptualalignmentofthePembertonTrailasisidentifiedintheOCP.

16:34


Thenextseveralslidesprovideadditionalviewsoftheproposedbuildingsandlandscapetreatment.TheapplicationwasreviewedbytheAdvisoryDesignPanelinJanuaryandthepanelrecommendedtocouncilthattheapplicationbeapprovedwitharecommendationtoreviewthetownhouseelevation

anddesignandlayouttoalleviatethepinchpointsbetweenBuildingsBandC.InresponsetotheADPrecommendationtheapplicantprovidedaletterofrationalefortheproposeddesignandanadditional

figurestoillustratetheprivacymitigationmeasures.[FromLynnette:nothingwassaidforthefollowingslides–hejustkeptchangingtheimages.]


17:18


AJ:Thisslideshowsthegreatestimpactsontheadjacentpropertiestothenorthandeastwilloccurinthefallandthewinter.

Sotoconcludetheproposalfortwomulti-unitresidentialunitsand12townhousesisgenerallyconsistentwithandtheobjectivesofthedevelopmentpermitarea7B-HChoweverseveraldesignrevisionsarerecommendedtoensuretheproposalismorefullyconsistentwiththeapplicableguidelines.Staffrecommendsforcouncil’sconsiderationthattheapplicationbereferredbacktostafftoworkwiththeapplicantonsiteplantransitionanddesignworkandrefinements.Thankyou.

17:58

LH:Thankyouverymuchforaverythoroughpresentationandgoodworkonthisfile.

Councilwillbeginwithquestions.[skippedthroughthechitterchatter]

18:23

JL:OnethingI’veheardfromneighboursistheyareconcernedaboutthefactwhetherornottheGarryOaksandothertreescansurviveblastingandactualconstructiononthesite.Ithinkthatitisgreatthattheyarebeingprotectedbutcanyouspeaktothatatallorwhatassurancescanbegiventhatthetreescanbeprotectedthroughaprocesslikethis.


AJ:…aspartoftheapplicationtheapplicanthasprovidedanarborist’sreportthatprovidesananalysisofthetreesthataretoberetainedinthedevelopedcontextandtheyhaverecommendedinthatreportthatthetreescouldbesustainedpostdevelopment.

JL:So,thearborists,dotheyusuallylookatblastingasoneofthefactors?

LH:I’mgoingtogotooneofourdirectorofparksMr.Tillier.

DoP[DirectorofParks]:Sothearboristdoeslookatallthepotentialriskstothosetreesandtheymakerecommendationsonthemitigationstrategiesthatwouldbestfittheindividualsituation.Ourstaffhasreviewedthoseaswellandasamatterofpracticewewouldbeonsitecheckinginontheprogressoftheproject.

JL:I’veheardstaffsaythatmoreanalysiswouldneedtobedonetolookattheimpactsoftherooftoppatios.Canyoujustspeaktowhatthatanalysismightlooklike?

[AlisonMeyer?]:Wedohaveconcernsaboutthepotentialprivacyandtheoverlookimpactsoftherooftopbalconiesaswellasthepotentialimpactofaddingtothemassingofthetownhouses.Howevertheapplicanthaspointedoutthatitmightnotbeasseriousasstaffthinks.Sowehavesuggestedfurtheranalysistoshowwhatitwouldbelikeifyouweresomebodystandingonthedecklookingovertheparapet,wouldyoubelookingintosomebody’selse’sunit,wouldyoubepeeringontotheirbalcony,andalsowantingtodosomeviewanalysisofthetownhousesfromvariousplacesonPentrelew,upWilspencerPlace,asifyouarepedestriantounderstandwhenyoucanactuallyseetheaccessareaspokingupabovetherooftop.

21:07

JL:Thisisabigsiteanditisabigrezoning.Whatwouldittaketotriggerourinclusionaryzoningpolicy.Likebonusdensity.Iknowitdoesn’tbutwhynot?Whatpolicywouldweneedtogetaffordabilityoutofadevelopmentthisbig?

AM:Therehasbeenalandliftanalysiscompletedonthissiteandalthoughthesiteisbigtheadditionaldensityisfairlyminorandwhentheanalysiswasdonetolookatwhatthevalueofthatdensitywas,itdoesn’ttriggeracontributiontothelandlift.Therereallyisn’tapolicytotriggertheinclusionofaffordablehousinginthis.


MarianneAlto[MA]:Haveyouhadanyconversationswiththeapplicantaboutastaffproposalforarevieworrevisionsandifyoucancommentonthelengthoftimethatthiswouldtake.

AM:Thelengthoftimethereviewwouldtakewouldlargelybedependentontheapplicantproducingalternatedesignoptions.WewouldworkwiththeapplicantasquicklyaspossibletoreviewthoseandbringthembacktotheCOTW.

MA:Andhaveyoualreadyconsultedwiththeapplicantonthisgeneraldirection?

AM:Theyhaveindicatedawillingnesstoworkwithstaffbutwehavenotseendesignrevisionsatthispoint.

23:07

CTJ:Lookingatsomeoftheletterswereceivedtherewasquiteabitofconcernabouttheremovalofsomeofthesequoiatrees.Whatwouldittakeforthesequoiatreestobemaintained?Woulditmeanthatthetownhouseswouldbelessornotatall?Andaretheyprotectedinanywayorisitjustbecausetheneighbourshavecometoenjoythem?

AJ:ThetwosequoiatreesarelocatedontheportionofthesitewherebuildingAisproposedsotheyfallwithinthebuildingfootprintofbuildingA.Soinordertoretainthosetreesitwouldrequireashiftinthelocationoftheproposedbuildings.

CTJ:TherewasalsocommentabouttheheightofthetownhousesandinthereportIthinktherewascommentaboutthehousesonPentrelewareasimilarheight.DoweknowtheheightsofthebuildingsonPentrelewincomparisontotheheightsofthetownhouses?Ithinktherearecommentsthatthetownhousesareactuallyhigherthanmostofthehouses.

AJ:wedonotknowtheexactheightofthehousesonPentrelew.TheyarewithintheheightsoftheR1Bzonewhichallowsforamaximumheightof7.6m.There’sarangeoftwostoreyandoneandhalfstoreybuildingsinthearea.Thetownhousesaretallerthanthosebuildingsbuttheydo,instaff’sopinion,provideatransitionalformbetweenthetallermulti-unitresidentialandthelowerdensityresidentialstothesouthandsoutheast.

LH:Ihavetwoquestions.Thefirst–IjustwanttobesureIcompletelyunderstandbecauseIthinkI’vebeenconfusedaboutthisthroughouttheprocessandthecorrespondence.IsthemainoronlyreasonthatanOCPamendmentisrequiredisbecausewearetryingtoretainthetrees?


AJ:Yes.Itistheprimaryobjective,uh,oneoftheprimaryobjectivestheapplicanthasprovidedfortheapplicationandshiftingthatdensityawayfromFortStreetandoutoftheurbanresidentialdesignationtriggerstheOCPamendment.

LH:Okay,IreallywanttomakesureI’mcrystalclearonthis.SoalongonFortStreetitisurbanresidentialandbehindFortStreetitistraditionalresidential.BymovingthebuildingsbacktokeepthetreecanopyalongFortStreet,theurbanresidentialpushesbackintothetraditionalresidentialandthat’swhat’striggeringtheOCPamendment?Isthatcorrect?

AJ:Yes,that’scorrect.

LH:Okay,thankyou.That’sveryhelpful.Mysecondquestioniswithregardsto…[interruption].

AM:oneothersmallnuanceisthattheOCPamendmentisalsoneededtoextendthedevelopmentpermitareaandthedensityisshiftedandincreasedslightlyabovewhatwouldbepermittedifyoutrulyblendthedensitythatwouldbepermittedwiththeR1Bzoning.IamlookingatMr.JohnstontoensurethatIamnotstraying.Wehavesomanyapplicationsonthegosothereisaminorincreaseinthedensityaswell.

27:27

LH:Myotherquestionis,andI’mgoingtoneedtoaskustogobacktothepresentation,particularlywithregardtothetwopathwaysthroughthesite…

sostaff’srecommendationisthatthereneedstobemorebreathingroomalongthatpathway[publicpathway–withthetwosolidredarrows]socanyoushowmewiththemousewherethesecondPembertonTrailwouldgo?[seebrokenredarrowsforthePotentialfuturepublicpathway]

AJ:thepotentialfuturepublicpathwaywouldgoalongthewestpartofthesiteandconnecttoapathway[lowerarrow]heremostlikely.


LH:Andwouldthefuturepathwayalsogothroughthesite

AJ:TheproposalwouldbethatthepublicpathwaywouldbecomethePembertonTrailandthenthenconnectalongFortStreetandcomebackdowntothepotentialfuturepublicpathwayandcontinuetothewest.

LH:Andwhereisthatinrelationto…isthatinbetweentwoproperties?

AJ:Yes,itwouldbeinbetweentwoproperties.

LH:OK,myquestioniswhywouldn’twedothatnowaspartofthisdevelopment?

AJ:wellbecausewiththisdevelopmentwewouldsecuretherightofwayonthepropertyandfuturedevelopmenttothewestandanopportunitytoconnectthenwewouldbeabletoprovideapublicpathwayinthatlocation.Soitsecuresthefutureopportunitybutrightnowitwouldn’tconnecttoanything.

30:09

BI:whatkindsofbuildingswouldbepermittedonthissitewiththeexistingzoning?Orhowmuchdensitycomparedtowhattheapplicantisaskingfor?

AJ:ThenorthportionofthesiteiscurrentlyzonedR3AM2whichallowsforbuildingsupto4storeys.

Thereisaprovisionwithinthezoningthatallowsforincreaseddensityupto1.6ifparkingisprovidedinanenclosedparkingareasuchasundergroundorandacertainpercentofthesiteremainsasopensitespace.

ThesouthportionofthesiteandonPentrelewPlacearecurrentlyzoneR1Bwhichallowsforsinglefamilydwellingswithsecondarysuites.

BI:Sohowdoesthepermissiblebuildablefloorspaceunderthecurrentzoningcomparewithwhattheapplicantisproposing?Dowehavethosefigures?

AJ:Idon’thaveitoffthetopofmyheadbutitis…[referringtoastackofdocuments]

LH:Aretheyinthetableinthereport?

AJ:Yes.

BI:IwillasktogoafterThornton-Joe’sfollowupandbeaddedtothelistafter.

LH:Yes.[banteraboutwherethestatsare…]


AJ:It’sonp.4oftherezoningapplicationandwithinthattableithasatotalfloorareamaximum[didnotcatchit]andforthetotalsiteitwouldbe6K+m2comparedto10,833.

BI:MyquestionfollowsuponcouncilorLovedays.Soifthezoningcurrentlypermits6,000squaremetres,andtheapplicantisaskingfor10Ksq.m.,whyaren’twecapturingsomesubstantialpublicamenityintheformofhousingaffordabilityorotherformsofamenity?Sincethereseemstobeafairlysubstantiallandlift...unlessourpolicyistosupportwindfallprofitsforlandowners.Idon’tunderstandhowthepublicinterestisbeingserved.

AM:Ifyounoticeinthecolumnsontherightonp.4&8youwillseethatundertheOCPdesignations,thecombinedentitlement,thecombinedpolicyvision,isfor10,106[?]sotherereallyisonlyaslightdifferencebetweentheenvisioneddensityinthepolicywhencomparedtotheproposal.SowhenlandliftanalysesaredonebasedonCouncilspolicyondensitybonusit’sbasedonthedifferencebetweenthepolicyandtheproposal.Sothat’swhenthelandliftanalysishappenstodetermineifthereisawindfallfortheapplicant.Sotheprocessthatisundertakenistolookatwhatisthedevelopmentpotentialbasedonthecurrentpolicy,whatisbeingproposed,thenthereisamarginofvalueorprofitallocatedfortheapplicant.Ifthereissomethingthatisconsideredawindfallabovethat,thatiswherethepolicykicksinasacontributiontothecommunityamenityfund.Inthiscasetheanalysiswascompletedanditwasdeterminedthatitwasn’tthatvalue.

33:51

BI:Sothatdoesn’taccountforanyprofitbetweenwhat’spermittedinthezoningandwhat’spermittedintheOCP?SoyoubasicallytaketheOCPmaximumandthenaddtheprofit,or…becausepresumably,isn’tprofitgeneratedinconvertingthelandfromwhat’sintheexistingzonetotheOCP?

AM:ThedensitybonuspolicyisbasedonthedifferencebetweentheOCP,thepolicyoftheproposalnotfromthebasezoning.

BI:SotofollowuponCouncillorLoveday’squestion,ifcouncilwantedtoachievehousingaffordability,inthesekindsofprojects,wouldwehavetorevisethatpolicy–tochangehowtheamenityiscalculatedandhowthelandliftiscalculated?

AM:[frustrated]Iam,it’squitecomplicatedthewholeprocessoflandliftandeconomicsandsoIamnotoffthetopofmyheadinapositiontosaywhatwouldneedtohappentoassureacontributiontoaffordablehousinginthisinstance.

BI:Butonthisone,ifwedidwanttobehearingarecommendationthatXunitsbeaffordableorthattheapplicantcancontributeXMilliondollarswewouldneedadifferentformulaandadifferentpolicypresumably.


AM:Iwouldimagineitwouldbeadifferentaffordablehousingpolicyratherthantheeconomicanalysis.Thisprojectalsowentthroughtheprocessoflookingatwhatcouldbeachievedundertheexistingzoningandevenifyoudotheanalysisthatway,therestillisn’tagreatmargin.BecausetheexistingpropertyfacingFortStreetdoespermitadensityof1:6:1soanywaythatitwasanalysedtherewasn’treallyamarginforcontribution.

35:43

CTJ:CanyoumovetheslidetowhatthehousesonPentrelewwouldbelookingatiftheywerelookingouttheirwindow.

SomyunderstandingisifIhadahouseacrossthestreet,thisistheviewthatIwouldhave?

AJ:Ican’tverifybytheelevationthisimageshowswhatperspectiveisbeingshownhere.Alsothecontextelevationdoesflattentheimage.Soinreality,buildingAandBuildingB,aresetbackfurtherfromthestreetthanwhat’sconveyedwiththisimage.Therearesomeotherimagesinthepresentationthatbetterrepresentastreetperspective.


AJ:That’sabetterrepresentation.

CTJ:Myquestionthenis–Ithinktherewassomediscussioninyourpresentationaboutbreathingroom,andtheADPlookingatsomethingmoresympathetic,thattheclatting[?]needstobechanged.Hastherebeenanydiscussion,whenIlookatthat,itisabitofawall,andhastherebeenanydiscussionaboutlookingatwhatneedstobedone,whetheritsheightmassingorsomethinginthedesigntobreakitupsoit’snotfeelinglikeawalloftownhousesalongthere.AndisthatsomethingthatstafforADPwillbelookingat/wouldhavelookedat?

LH:And/oristhatdirectionwecangivebacktostaff?

AJ:ThediscussionwithADPtherewassomediscussionaroundtheformofthetownhousesandpriortomakingtherecommendationtherewasadiscussionaroundbreaking,ordoingsome,introducingmorevarietytotheformofthetownhousestobreakupthemonotonyfindit’sway,ultimatelytherecommendationwastofocusonthetownhousestoaddressthepinchpointatthesouthendofthesite.Butitdidincludeareview,arecommendationforareviewofthedesignofthetownhousestolookattheelevations,thedesign,themassingandtheform.So…andyes,thatisdirectionthatcouldbegiventostaff.

39:07

CTJ:ThenextquestionIhaveiswheretheparkingentrancesare.ItismyunderstandingthattherewilldefinitelybeanincreaseoftrafficintheareaespeciallyoffofFortStreetside.Wasthereatrafficstudydoneandifso,diditshowanyconcernsandifso,anymitigationsthatneedtobedoneorlookingattheentranceswhereparkingisbroughtoffof?SoIknowoneisbroughtoffofFort,sowasatrafficstudydoneandifsowhatdiditreveal?


AJ:Atransportation[that’swhathesaid]studywasnotprovidedforthisapplication.Theapplicationwasreviewedbyourtransportationstaffandtheydidnotprovidea,theydidnotrequireatransportationstudy.

CJT:Mylastquestion,whenIwasreadingtheneighbourhoodassociationletter,therewasacommentthatbecausethechurchstatus,theremaybeashesonthegrounds.Doweknowwhatthepolicyis?Iknowthatinsomesituationswherewe’veactuallyhadsomegravesontheproperty,theyareprotected.Doweknowifthereareanygravesorwhatistheprotocolforashes,noprotocol?Justacuriousquestionasitwasintheletter.

AJ:Myunderstandingisthatthesitewasnotdesignatedasaformalgraveyardorcemeterysite,andifthereareashespresentandtheremaybeashespresent,theapplicanthasbeenworkingwiththeformerowneroftheTruthCentretoremovesomeofthesoilswheretheashesbelocatedandrelocatedtothenewTruthCentresite.

41:26LH:Iseenowfurtherquestions.Staffthankyouforyourpresentation.Let’sgetthecouncilrecommendationup.Doesanyonewishtoputthestaffrecommendationonthetable?

MotionedbyAltothensecondedbyLoveday.

MA:…basedonthepresentationandtheinputfromthepublicandtheADPandothers,thereismerithereinreturningthistostafftodofurtherworkwiththeapplicant.Thesespecificitemscertainlycapturesomeofthespecificconcerns,Ithinkthattheapplicant’sawareofthisandiswillingtoworkwithstaffIthinktheseparticularthingswillprovideadditionalchangeswhichwillbenefittheapplicationandaddtotheconversation.Iwouldsupportsometypeofamendmentthatspoketothedesigndiversityofthetownhouses.Iwouldbehopefulifmycolleagueswouldlookatthat.Overall,IthinkthatthethrustofthisrecommendationisthatthereismoreworktobedoneandIthinkthat’sappropriateatthistime.

JL:I’llpassfornow.I’mworkingonadifferentamendment.

LH:MyproposedamendmentistoaddD–howIwouldworditis,andwecanfixthewordingifwedon’tlikeit,is:morebreathingroom,lesswall-likefeel,andmoredesigndiversityofthetownhouses.(nooppositiontotheamendment)


BI:…Ithinkitrequiresamorerobustlookatwhatisappropriateforthesite.SoIamgoingtomoveanewamendmentthatwillbecomeanewitemAtoputpriorityonitanditwouldread:A-Density,massing,heightandset-backsofbuildings.[secondedbyLoveday–motivationexplainednext].Thiswouldproposeafairlyrobustrethinkingofwhathappensonthissite.ButIthinkthisiswhatwearehearingoverwhelmingfrompeoplenotonlyonthenearbystreetsbutmorebroadlyinthecommunity.I’mnotseeingverymuchsupportatallforthisprojectandIthinkitprettymuchhastogobacktothedrawingboardifithasanychanceatsucceedingatapublichearing.

PM:IfthatwasconsideredanamendmentIwouldaddanamendmenttotheamendment;itwouldbeaddingarchitecturalexpression.[movedandseconded–noopposition]

CTJ:IappreciatethestaffexplainingthedifferencebetweenthecombinedzonestandardandtheOCPandalthoughtheproposaldoesnotexceedtheOCPIthinkthereneedstobe–whenyoulookatoneendofthezonestandardandtheotherend–theOCPallowance,IwouldliketoseeitnotquitesofartotheOCPallowableandsohavingthatlookedatwillgivememorecomfortbeforeIwouldevenconsideritgoingtopublichearing.

JL:Isupportstaffhavingthesediscussions,andperhapstherewillbechangesthatcomeoutofit.Idon’twanttoseethiscomebackassinglefamilyhomesonthissite,andIknowthattherearesomeresidents,neighbours,whowouldliketoseethat.Idon’tthinkweareatthatpointofcitybuildingandsoIdothinktherewillbemoredensityonthissitenowthanwhatiscurrentlyanticipatedforthesite.DoIthinkthisnailedit?Notquite,soIthinkwe’veheardfromalotofresidentswhodon’tthinkthisistheappropriateproposalforthissite.AndIthinksomeadditionalchangescouldhelpitalong.ButIdon’twantthistocomebackassinglefamilyhomesandsojustintermsofdiscussingdensity,that’soneconcernthatIwouldhavewiththatwordbeinginthisamendment.

LH:Iamgoingto,IagreeexactlywithwhatcouncilorLovedaysaid.ThisisnotasinglefamilydwellingsitesoIamgoingtoproposeanamendmentthat–Ithinkmassing,height,architectural


expressionandsetbacks,absolutely,butthedensity,it’satinyamountabovewhatisanticipatedbytheOCPsoI’mgoingtoproposeanamendmenttotheamendmentthatwestrikedensityfromA.(secondedbyAlto)

BI:Idon’tsupportthat.Thesouthernpartofthissiteparcelisasinglefamilysite.Ithinkthisisadiscussion.MaybetownhomeswouldworktherethataremorearchitecturallycreativeandhigherqualitythanarchitecturallybutIthinkthatisanopenquestionofhowmuchdensitybeyondR1Borwhateverstaffsaidwasappropriateforthesouthernparcel.Thenorthernparcelthedeveloper[?]alreadyenvisionsanapartmentbuildingbutitisanopenquestionbeyondthezoningisappropriate.IthinkourOCPoverreachesinanumberofareasanditisamuchmoreaspirationalandvaguedocumentinmanysensesandtheironcladregulationisthezoningregulationby-law–that’swhatmanymembersofthepublicbasetheirpurchasingdecisionson–manypeoplewholiveinthisareamovedintotheirhomesbeforethenewOCPwasadoptedandtheownerknewwhatthezoningwasonthelandandknowshowcontentioustheOCPhasbeeninRockland.So,Ithinkitisanopenquestionaboutwhatkindofdensityisappropriateandwehavetoallowthosediscussionstoproceed.Icertainlywouldn’tfavourground-orientedresidentialalongtheFortStreetfrontagebutwhathappenselsewhereonthesiteissubjecttodebateandinput.

LH:Ireallyhopethatcouncilsupportsthisamendmenttotheamendment.TherearetownhousesproposedalongPentrelewbuttheydoneedtobebetter,theyneedtoreflecttheneighbourhoodmorebutintermsofthedensitytheOCPisbarelyabove–theproposalisbarelyabovetheOCPandIthinkwesendreallymixedmessagesifwesaythatthezoningby-lawthat’sinplaceisallaroundthecityiswhatweareaspiringto.

LH:Itisnotveryaspirationaltoaspiretothestatusquo.

LH:SoI’mgoingtocallthequestiontotheamendmentontheamendment.Ohyes,sorry,CouncillorAlto,goahead–onremovingtheworddensity.

MA:Ithinkthatoneofthereasonswearestrugglingwiththeconcept[?]ofcombineddensityisbecauseoftheoverwhelmingmessageswe’veheardpertaintosomeofthetreesonFortStreet.So,ifwewanttosticktothewayitiscurrentlyzoned,wecantakedownallofthosetreesandbuildabigbuildingonFortStreet.Andwecanbuildsomethingsmallertothesouth.Andthat’snotsomethingIthinktheneighborswouldlikeeither.SoIdosupportthepreviousamendmentbutIthinktheissueofdensityreflectsnotjustwhatwearethinkingaboutinthefuturebutalsothenotionof


tryingtoretainasmuchaspossibleinwhatisclearlygoingtobeamuchmoredensifiedcityasmuchofthegreenspaceandtreesaswecan.Idosupportlosingthedensityword.

50:41

[2opposedtoremovingtheworddensity–butitcarried]

LH:Furtherdiscussionoramendments.

ChrisColeman(CC):NotanamendmentbutIthinkthisisaclassicwhereyoublendthewishesanddesiresofthepeoplewholiveintheneighbourhoodswiththewishesanddesiresofhowweembracedensity.Anditisatrade-offthatallowsustoprotecttheurbanforestrysideofthisandyoumovedensitytothebackofthelot.IthinktheareawereallyneedtolookatistheamendmentsthatweremadetoD–morebreathingroom,lesswalllikefeelandmoredesigndiversity.Thatcanbeachievedinanumberofwaysandinthisexpressionitisthree4-unittownhousecomplexes.Therewasanearlierdiscussioninwhichitcouldbea10townhousecomplexandinthatcaseyoucanmakeittwo5-unittownhousecomplexeswhichwouldactuallyaddsomemorebreathingspaceandacarveoutinthemiddle.Andifyouangleitslightlydifferentlyitmighthaveabetterrelationship.IdohavesomeconcernaboutthesixstoreybuildingbutIthinkintheprotectionofthetreesitmakessomesense.IalsothinkthereisaprofoundimpactthatisnotbeingfeltonPentrelewbymovingmostofthevehicularaccessintoparking[?]offFort.Thatdoesn’tapplyeverywhere,butIthinkthatit’saplayofthehousesthatareacrossthestreetonPentrelewandwhatweseeasawalloftownhousesiswhatmakesthisareallytoughnuttoswallowforeverybody.IgetthatsoIthinkifwecanaddressDparticularlyyoumayfindsomelatitude.Thatwon’tmakeeverybodyhappybutitwillachievesomeofthedensityweneedmovingforwardanditwillgetnotthesinglefamilyresidencesthatcouncilorLovejoy–ImeanLoveday…butthatisalegitimateconcernthatwefindtherightbalanceondensity.SoIsupportthismovingbacktostafftodosomeworkonthat.

JL:Intermsofheight,Iheardthatthereneedstobesomediscussionthere.I’vetalkedtoanumberofresidentswholiveimmediatelycloseonPentrelew,theydon’tmindtheideaoftownhouses,theywantthemtobeaheightthattheirstoriesorthefearsthatpresentsthis3storeysthatcouldpresentas2storeysandconnectwiththehousesthatareacrossthestreet.Andsolookingatthat,theywouldsupportafewlesstownhousessothatthereismorespaceinbetweentheminbreakingupthatwallorifthatcouldbedonebydesign,I’mnotsure.ButIthinklookingatthatIthinktherearewaysthatcanmaketownhousesworkinthissiteandIthinkstaffthroughmorediscussionscanhelpbringthataboutandthesixstoreys,it’soneofthosethingsthatIthinkhypotheticallyIdon’thaveaproblemwithitbutgoingthereandstandingonPentrelewandstandingbytheArtGalleryandseeinghowitslopesdownandlookingupitwillbequiteloomingwhereasa6storeybuildingmightnotloominadifferentlocation.Sothatismyfearishowitpresentsfromthatside;it’snothowitpresentsfromFortStreet.Ithink6storeysdrivingupFortStreetwouldbefinebutitishowitpresentsfromtheneighbourhoodandsothat6storeysstartsbecomingproblematicforme.SoIwouldliketoseethataddressedintermsofthe


discussionswithheightandalsohowthatmightbeaddressedthrougharchitecturalexpression,andmassingandwhatnothowittransitionsfromthatdensityalongFortStreetintobeingaliveableneighbourhoodwithouta…doesn’tfeellikea6storeybuildinglooming…thatwasn’tanticipatedwhentheymovedthere.

LH:Sure,Iseemtobemakingamendmentsbasedonwhatotherpeoplearesaying.Maybethat’smyjobsometimes.Uhmmm.ButIthinkCouncillorLovedaymakesareallygoodpointandthatis,Iknowthattheapplicantandthearchitectarebothhere,butifwegivestaffdirection,IthinkitisprobablyanE,attentiontothelookandfeelofthe6storeybuildingfromthepointofviewofPentrelewStreet.Isthatalreadythere?Butheightisdifferentthanlookandfeel.Ithinkwearetalkingaboutdesignelements.IfyouarestandingonPentrelewPlace.

[secondedbyPamMadoff]Wecanmakeitbetter.Isthereanychangestothat?

JL:I’llamendittosaythe5and6storeybuildings.

LH:Sure,okay.I’llsecond.

JL:perhapsitcan’tbedonethroughdesign.Perhapsitisjustaheightissue.But,we’veaddressedheightandnowweareaddressingthelookandfeel.

LH:Correct.

JL:AndIthinkthelookandfeelmayonlybeabletobeaddressedbyheight.LH:Sowhatweareworkingonrightnowistheamendmenttotheamendmenttoaddtheword5.Furtherdiscussionontheamendment?

BI:TomovetheamendmentthattheybereferredtobuildingsAandB,sothatitdoesn’tspecifytheheight.

LH:Thatismorespecificanyway.Okay.

[passed]

LH:Furtherdiscussion.

57:16

PM:IcertainlyappreciatethediscussionaroundtheCounciltablethismorningandinreviewingthisapplicationinouragendareportIamsurethatIwasn’ttheonlyonewhowasreallystrugglingwithit,andwhetherIcouldsupportitatall.Normally,IamverysupportiveofsendingsomethingbackfortheinputfromstaffbutbasedonspecificsbutIwasveryconcernedaboutthe


specificityofthespecifics.AnditwaslookingatthisproposalinmyviewatamicrolevelbasicallytweakingwhenI’mstillatthemacrolevelofwhattheapproachshouldbeinaddressingthissite.SoI’mstillnot,it’scertainlybetterthanitwas,andIreallypleasedtoseethatthespecificissuesthathavebeencapturedinthemotionandthecommentsthathavebeenmadebymycolleaguesoncouncilbutasIsaid,I’mstillatthemacrolevelwhichis:WhatdoesitsayintheOCP?WhatdoesitsayintheRocklandPlan?Andhowhasthatbeeneitheraddressedoratleastacknowledgedandperhapsexplainedaboutwhyithasn’tbeenaddressed.AndtheparticularsectionsoftheOCPandtheRocklandNeighbourhoodPlanbecauseitiswhatIamgoingtobelookingfor–shouldthisadvancetoapublichearing.AndMat.57oftheOCPwhichistheheritagecorridoronFortStreetstatestoconservetheheritagevalues,specialcharacterandthesignificanthistoricbuildingsfeaturedandcharacteristicsofthearea.Soalthoughwearenotdealingwithaheritagebuildinghere,Ineedtohearabouthowthisprojectrespondstothespecialcharacteroftheheritagecorridorandthecharacteristicsoftheneighbourhoodaswell.IfyougoonintheOCPsection4C,itspeakstoachieveamorecohesivedesignandadherencetohighqualityarchitecture,landscapeandurbandesignrespondstoitshistoriccontextthroughsensitiveandinnovativeinterventions.

Andagain,Ihaven’tseenthecasebeingmadeabouthowthisissensitivetothatandhowdoesitrespondtothatprinciplethatiscapturedintheOCP.

IfyoumoveontotheRocklandNeighbourhoodPlan,ittalksaboutRockland’suniqueandattractiveneighbourhoodfeaturesshouldberetainedandenhanced.Sowearenotretainingaheritagebuildingforexample,buthowareweenhancingwhatmakesRocklanduniqueandattractive?WhenwelookatthisproposalhowcanwesaythatitisonlyinRocklandandthisisaRocklandresponsetoadevelopmentopportunity?Andagain,thatiswhatIamgoingtobelookingforinthestaffresponseasitcomesforward,ifthisdoesgoforward,toapublichearing.TheRocklandPlangoesontotalkabouttheexcellenceinarchitecturaldesignandconstructionthatiscompatiblewiththecharacteroftheRocklandneighbourhood.Andagain,howisthisproposalcompatiblewiththenatureoftheRocklandneighbourhood?Itfurtherstatesthatthearchitectureofnewdevelopmentscomplementnearbyheritagesites.Ihaven’theardanythingabouthowitcomplementstheadjacentheritagebuildingorthegeneralheritagecharacterofRocklandwhichisoneofitsmajorcharacterdefiningelements.

ItalsotalksabouttheheightofanyfuturedevelopmentalongFortStreetshouldbeinscalewiththeresidentialpropertiestothesouth–werecognizethatisincontradictionoftheOCP–butasaprinciple,Ithinkitisimportanttoacknowledgethatandthewaystoamelioratethatanotherwaystodothatthatwerenotconsideredpreviously.

Lookingatthestaffreport,ittalksaboutthatitwillincludeconsiderationoftheconsistencywithallrelevantpoliciesintheOCPandlocalareaplans.ButagainwhenIreadthereportIjustdon’tseeequalinformationbeingprovidedaboutalocalareaplanandwhetheraproposaldoesordoesnotmeetthoseaspirationalgoals.Soit’snotsuggestingthatithastomeetthembutwhatI’mwantinginastaffreportis:Thisiswhatthegoalwas,thisiswhatthepolicywasandindoingtheanalysis,thisproposaleitherdoesordoesnotmeetthat.Soitisbroughttoourattentioninareallyclearway.Again,inthelocalareaplan,andIthinkthisisactuallyinconcertwiththeOCPitstatesthattheapplicationisinconsistentwith


theareaDP7BwhichencouragebuildingsthatenhancetheheritagecharacteroftheFortStreetcorridor.Thatstatementisinourreportbutitdoesnotconsiderhowthisapplicationcouldbemadecompliantinthatway.SoIthinkforustomakeinformeddecisionswithouthavingtodelveintoitallonourownitwouldbereallyusefultojusthavethatlaidoutsayinghowitdoesordoesnotmeetthosegoalsofbothofalocalneighbourhoodplanandtheofficialcommunityplan.

Andthat’swhyIwasstrugglingwiththisrecommendationbecauseagainitistakingitdowntoamicrolevelwhileIfeelthatthemacrolevelofthisproposalhasnotbeenfullyaddressedinorderforustofullyunderstandwhattheopportunitiesandchallengesare.Thankyou.

62:53

CTJ:IappreciateCouncilorMadoff’smotionandIwonderifthereissomewaytoaddanadditionalpointinthemotionto–insteadofjustsendingitofftothestafftowriteareporton–IwouldliketheapplicanttoconsiderthosethingsbeforetheapplicationcomesbacktotheCOTW.SoIwasjustwonderingiftherewasanywordingthatmightcapturethediscussionsregardingtheheritagecorridororsomeofthecommentsintheRocklandplanwhenitcomestokeepingthefeelwhetheritsdesignorcharacteristic.BecauseIthinkthatmotionwouldjustaddtoitandifwearesendingitbacktotheapplicanttoconsiderIwouldn’twanthim/themtocomebackandsaywellthatwasn’toneofthemotionaspectsweneededtodealwith.SoIdon’tknowifanyoneelsehasanyquestions.IseecouncilorMadofftryingto…

LH:Okay,sure.IwillgotoCouncilorLucaswhohasnotspokenonthisyet.Iwouldjustliketo..actuallyIwilljustputmyselfonthespeaker’slistbecauseIreadthedevelopmentpermitandapplicationreportverydifferentlythanCouncillorMadoff.CouncilorLucas,goahead.

ML:ThankyouandIguessIwouldliketoaskstaffifthatwasconsidered–thisheritagecorridoronFortStreetwhenyouwereworkingwiththeapplicantduringthisproposal.

AJ:Yes,itwasconsideredandwedidevaluatetheproposalagainsttheobjectivesoftheDPareaandspecificallytheonesmentionedbycouncilorMadoff.ThereissomeresponsetotheproposalthatstafffeelarerelevanttoelementsoftheFortStreetcorridorbyretainingthegreenspaceandthelargetreesthatarepartofthecorridor’sheritagecharacterhoweverwedofeeltheproposalwouldbenefitfromsomerevisions,architecturalinterventions,changesperhapstothemassandheightandscaleandtheexteriormaterialscolourandhelpitbemoresympathetictotheheritagecontext.


ML:YouknowIthink,andI’velistenedtoeverybodyandIthinkit’sreallyimportanteverythingthathasbeenstressedheretoday.WEdoknowthattherearesomeissuesstillthatcouldbeenhanced,couldbemadebetter,butIthinkwearegettingtoofarintothedetails,Ithink–formeAsays:massing,height,architectureexpressions,theset-backsandthebuildingsAandBperspectiveofPentrelewPlace.Ithinkifwegettoomuchfurtherwehavetoallowourstafftoworkwiththeapplicantandcomebacktous.Ithinkforustosithereandgointodetail,detail,detailthatwhatIthinkstaff’sjobis.Ithinkthey’veheardusheretoday,andIthinkit’stimeforthemtogobackandthey’veheardfromtheneighbours,they’veheardfromusIthinkwecouldbehereforquitesometimegoingthroughthe–forme–becauseIthinkitiscapturedinmostofthemotionthat’sonthetablewiththefewamendmentsthathavealreadybeenmade.

LH:Yeah.CouncillorMadoff,areyoureadywithyouramendment?

66:31

PM:ifIcouldjustfollowupwithCouncillorLucas’scomment,whatweheardfromstaffintheirresponserightnowisextremelyhelpful.Ididn’tseethatinthereport.Anditismuchmoreextensivethanwhatwascapturedintheoriginalrecommendationwiththe3or4points.SoIthinkthisconversationisreallyuseful.Thatmayhavebeeninherent,itwasn’tstated.Andwhenwesendthisbackitgivesaveryspecificrangeoftermsofwhatourstaffcanactuallydiscusswhichiswhywehavetobesospecific.AsIsaidearlier,Iwouldbemuchhappiertobeatamuchhigherlevelbutwearegoingintothismicrolevelsowehavetobeverycarefulaboutwhatwearesayingbecauseifitisnottherethenitwon’tcomebacktousintermsoftheresponse.

AllIcanthinkofintermsofanamendmentthroughtheMayorwouldbeanadditionalstatementthatwouldrequestthatstaffreportbackontheproposal’sresponsetoprinciplesidentifiedindevelopmentpermitarea7BwhichisaheritagecorridorandtheRocklandneighbourhoodplan.[movedandseconded]

LH:Furtherdiscussion.

PM:Andagain,it’snottosaythatthisproposaldoesordoesnotcomply,Iamnotprejudgingthat,Ijustwanttohavethatfeedbackfromaprofessionalpointofview.

LH:MaybeitwasIwasonanairplanebutIreadthewholedevelopmentasdoingthis.Iagreethatitisnot,andI’mgladwearedoingthisbecauseandI’mgladthatitisoneoftherecommendations,butIactuallywroteinmynotes“OhCouncillorMadoffwillbehappytoseethiskindofanalysis!”Soanyway,Ifeelthatstaffhavedonethatwork,they’vesaidthisisaheritagecorridor,this


doesnotrespond,weneedabetterresponse.Butmaybeitisjustimportantthatwestateithere,andshedidareallygoodjobandIthinkitwasraisedbycouncilorMadoffineveryheritagesitewherethereisaheritagebuildingthereandwhyweneedtomentionthatandIthoughtstafftookthatdirectionreallywellandsonowwehaveitintheamendmentandIamhappytosupportit–Ijustdidn’twantittogounrecognizedthatstaffhadalreadydone,inatleastmyviewsomeofthisworkalready.

CTJ:IagreeIdothinkitisinthereportandIdoagreethatwhenthequestionwasposedtostafftheirresponsewasthattheyhadsomeconcernsandtheyfeltitwasn’tdoingcertainthings.Thisamendmentassistsusinhavingtheapplicantlooktoeitherwhethertheycanaddressthoseconcernsorwhetherstaffinthenextreportcanatleastnarrowitdown,whereithasbeenaddressedandwheretherecanstillbesomeroomforimprovements.SoIthinkitjustaddstoitalittlebitmore.

70:00

MA:Justaquestionforstaff,inthereportitspeaksveryspecificallytotheseissuesandIjustwantedtoaskstaffhowtheyanticipatehowthereportwillchangefromwhat’sonpage4ofthedevelopmentreport.

AM:Whenweworkwiththeapplicantandimaginingtheapplicantwillmakerevisionstotheproposalinordertoaddresssomeoftheissuesspecifictotheheritageconservationarea,wewouldreiteratesomeoftheinformationprovidedatthatwasverbalizedtodaybutwasn’tincludedinthereportandthenindicatehowtheapplicanthasorhasnottieditalltogethertoadvancetheobjectivesoftheheritagecorridor.[Questionfromoffscreen:isitasignificantamountofwork?]No.

LH:Furtherdiscussionontheamendmentmanytimesamended.

BI:I’vejustre-readtheletterfromtheapplicantsayingthatitisabalancingactintermsofresidents’visionsfortheirneighbourhood,andalsotheneedsfortheregion.AndIguessmyconcernisthatIamnotsuretheregionorthecityneedsthetypeofunitsthattheapplicantisproposingtobuildandthatmightcomeacrossasajarringcommentbecauseofhowwe’vedonebusinesswithlandusebuttherealityisthatthevastmajorityofthecranesinthecityarebuildingunitsthataretotallyoutofreachforthepeoplewhoarefacingtheacutehousingaffordabilitycrisisinthecommunity.Ijustdidsomeroughcalculations;ifyoutakeamemberofthepublicearning$50K/yearwhichisIthinkbeyondthemedianincomeforindividuals,theycanaffordtoborrowabout$240Konamortgage.Nowweare


notseeinganybuildingsbuiltintermsofstratacondominiumsthatarebeingsoldforlet’ssay$250Kbutthat’sactuallythepricepointforsomeonewho’sworkingatadecentjobwheretheycanactuallypaywhattheCanadianMortgageandHousingadvisesas30%oftheirgrossannualincometowardstheircostofhousing.Ifyougetintofamilyhousing,thecostescalateswith2–3-4bedroomgroundorientedandmultifamilydwellings.SoIwouldactuallychallengetheassertioninthatletter–Idon’tthinktheregionactuallyneedsbuildingswiththispricepoint.Thisisaprimedevelopmentsitebutthecommunitygrewaccustomedtoithavinganinstitutionaluse–Idon’tknowwhy–Ipersonallythinkalotofourchurchesshouldhavethezoningofinstitutionaluse–andthenwhenit’sonthemarketsomeonecanbuyittorunachurch,runacommunitycentre,butwhenthere’snobuyersyouhavethediscussion–isthisamoreunencumbereddevelopmentsite–butthenIthinkthosehavetobetargetedforaddressingthehousingaffordabilitycrisis.AndifanyonewantstogobeyondthatinstitutionaluseorbeyondthatzoningthentoincreasedensitythenIthinkithastobeapplieddirectlytoaffordableunitsratherthanhigherendstrataunits.Sothat’sadifferentphilosophyoflandusebutthatisaphilosophywehavetostartapplyingifwearenotgoingtoseeallthevacantsitesinthecommunitybuiltupwithunitsthatareoutofreachwiththecitizenswhoneedtobehoused.SoformewhenthiscomesbackIwouldliketoseesomethingforhousingaffordabilityiftheapplicantproposestogobeyondtheapartmentbuildingonthenorthendandsomethingmoregroundorientedonthesouthend.BecausetherealityisthatisanR1Blotthattheapplicantisproposingtoputa5storeyapartmentbuildingon.That’samassivechangetowhat’shappeningtherewithoutasingleaffordableunitinthatbuilding.SoformeI’mgoingtohavealotoftroublesupportinganythingbeyondagroundorientedonthesouthernparcelwithoutafairlysubstantialdegreeofaffordablehousingcreatedintoit.

74:00

LH:IwillcallthequestioninamomentbutIreallywouldliketorespondtothisnotionofaffordability.ThecityofVictoriahasamunicipalhousingstrategyasweareallawareandoneoftheactivitiesinthatstrategywastoholdaworkshoponaffordableownership,andourstaffdidthatandIfacilitatedthatandalotofgreatworkcameoutofit.Thereweredevelopersthere,therewerenotforprofitdevelopersthere,therewerecitizensthereandeveryoneagreedthatthiswasaregionalissue.SonowattheregionwehaveahousingandhospitalscommitteeandthehospitalscommitteenowhasamandatetolookataffordableownershipintheregiontobuildthosekindsofunitsthatcouncilorIsittistalkingaboutforworkingpeople.Sothatworkisunderway,it’sveryexcitingthestaffoverattheCRDisveryexcitedaboutitandtheyarejustgettingunderwaysoIwantusalltobeawarethatishappening.ItmightnotbehappeningatthissitebutIdon’tthinkthateverydevelopmentapplicationthatcomestous..uhm..Idothinkthatwhenthereisasignificantincreaseindensity,andI’mgladthatcouncilorLovedayaskedthequestion–thenumberonepriorityinthiscitynowisaffordablehousingsoanyextradensitywegetshouldgotowardaffordablehousing.ONthissite,thedensityincreaseinmarginalaccordingtothelandliftanalysisbutIjustwantedtoleteveryoneknowthatcouncilandthepublicthat


thisaffordableownershipresponsibilityistakenveryseriouslyoverattheregionandthereisexcitementacrosstheregionwhichisgood.Anythingelse?Yes,CouncilorLoveday.

JL:onthenotionofaffordability,I’mexcitedfortheworkonaffordablehomeownership.Idothinkthatwhatweneedisrentalunitsandweneed1000’sand1000’sand1000’softhemandweneedthemtokeepcoming.SoIthink,IwasthinkingthatwehaveanAnnualDevelopmentSummit.IthinkweshouldhaveanAnnualRentalSummitwherewegetalldevelopersinaroomandeverybodyinaroomandsayhowcanwegetyoutodeveloprentalunitsinthiscity?It’sacrisisandweneedtostarttreatingitlikeone.Andlookingatthissite,maybethisisn’tthedevelopmentforthisbutmaybeitisforadifferentsite.Youknowtherearedifferentwaystogetcreativeanddoit.Thefactiswehavecranesthroughoutthedowntowncoreandmanyoftheresidentsinthiscitywon’tbeabletoaffordtoliveinanyofthosebuildings.Andthat’sforustofigureoutthough,that’sapolicything,weneedtofigureouthowtogetmoreunitsbuiltformorepeopletoaffordtolivein–workingpeople.

Intermsofthis,Iwilltryanamendmentthatmaybeitwillbenumber3,thatcouncildirectstafftonegotiatewiththeproponenttoincludeaffordability.[secondedbyBI]

77:21

BI:ontheamendmentonaffordability,tobeslightlymorespecific,toincludeaffordability–Iguessreplacethewordaffordabilitytoinclude–adegreetoincludehousingaffordabilityintotheproject.

LH:Okay,discussiononchangingthewordsdegreetohousingaffordability.[nooppositiontoamendment]

BI:Iamjustgoingtostrikeoutadegreeof…Ijustmadethatuponthefly–toincludehousingaffordabilityintotheproject.Sotheamendmentistodelete‘adegreeof’.

LH:sureokay.Allthoseinfavourofdeleting‘adegreeof’[passedwithnoopposition].Sureuh…CouncilorAlto,goahead.

MA:Yes,IthinkIunderstandthemotivationforthisandIabsolutelyapplauditbutIwonderaboutthepracticalityofit.Whatdoesthatmean?Youarenotaskingforanythingspecific,likethenumberofunits,thepricepoint,youarenotaskingforapercentage,ImeanthatallgoesbacktoourearlierdiscussiononinclusionaryzoningwhichIsupportbutwedon’thavethatyet.Itisagreatapplepiestatementthatnoonecanvoteagainstbutwhatdoesthatmean?IfI’mtheapplicanthowdoImeetthatstandard?


ML:Idon’twanttorepeatwhatCouncilorAltosaidbutwhatisexactlytheaffordabilityonthisproject?Whatisthenumber?Idon’t…itit…foronepersonaffordabilityisdifferentforonepersonthatanother.WEhavetobealotmorespecifichereinordertogivestaffdirectiononwhatthatisbutIalsothinkthestatementonresidentsthatcan’taffordtolivethere,youknow,therewillbemoving,therewillbeshifting.Wewillseepeoplethatareinstartercondosmovinguptothenextlevelandthenthenextlevel,orwehavepeoplethatahm,areuhm,leavingtheirhomes,theyaretransitioningintoasmallerspacethat’sgoingtofreeupsomehousingandsomehomesforfirsttimers.ItisacitywherewedohavesignificantproblemswithaffordabilitybutIdon’tthinkwecansaythatourresidentscan’taffordtolivethere.Thereisasegmentthat’sshiftingandmovingthat’sgoingtoallowit.MayorhelpsyoujustbroughtupthattherearethingsthatarehappeningwiththeCRDtohelpwiththisbecausenobodywantstoseeouryoungpeoplenotbeabletoaffordtoliveandstayinthiscity.ButIthinkthisoneisalittlebitdifficultjusttosayhousingaffordabilityonthisproject.

BI:WEarenotplanners,economistsordevelopers,Ithink,asCouncilorLovedaysaid,ourjobisaboutpolicy.Thisbulletisfocusedsquarelyonpolicyanditstellingstaffwhoareexpertsinplanningtoworkwiththeapplicantwhoisaprofessionalbuilderandwhoknowsnumbersandpro-formatocomebackwithadegreeofhousingaffordability.Ifcouncildoesnotwantthatworktotakeplaceitdoesn’thavetosupportthisamendmentbutifwethinkthatessentiallyachurchandanopengreenspacecanbeconvertedintotwoapartmentbuildingsandhowevermanytownhomes,thatthereshouldn’tbeatleastasingleunit,andIthinkithastobeashareoftheunit,andnotjustatokenhandful,itshouldbesignificantshare,butIthinkthat’sfortheexpertstocomebackandtelluswhatthatwouldlooklike.Butintheabsenceofthis,thatnumberwillbezero.Andanotherlargedevelopmentsiteandanotheropportunitytoimprovethesituationratherthannotwouldbelost.

CTJ:ImaybewordsmithingbuthearingCouncilorIsitt’scommentsandtheamendmentasitstandsIwouldhavetroublesupportingitbecauseitisaskingtheapplicanttoincludeanditleavesitopentowhatdegree.Sowordsmithingwouldbeanamendmenttotheamendmentthatsaystotheapplicanttoconsiderhousingaffordability.IwouldliketheapplicanttotakealookbutifhecomesbackandsaysIcan’tbecauseofthis,thisandthat,that’snotgoingtobethereasonthatIacceptordecline.IthinkthatthereshouldalwaysbeaconsiderationofaffordabilitybutIthinkCouncilorIsitt’swordingisalittlebitstrongerthanIwouldbeabletosupport.[secondedbyLucas]

82:42


JL:Ithinktheapplicanthasalreadyconsideredincludingaffordabilityandhaschosennottoandourpolicyisnotstrongenoughtomakethathappen.Sotomeifitcan’thappenonthissitethenmaybeitcouldbetiedtothisproject.ButIknowtheapplicanthashaddealslikethatinthepastonprojectssobut,tome,Iimagineathoroughconsiderationofmanydifferentthingsthatdon’tendupaspartoftheproject.SoIdon’tsupporttheamendment.

BI:Iagreethattheapplicanthasalreadyconsidered,theapplicantisproceedingwithrentalhousinginSaanich,thereisapreliminaryproposalonthewayrightattheOaklands/[?]border,soweknowtheapplicantisactivelylookingatthosekindsofprojectsbutthefactisthechoicehasbeenmadenottodothathere.InmyviewthesiteistoolargeandthechangefromtheexistinglanduseandtheexistingzoningnottomentiongoingbeyondtheOCPmaximumwhichiswhat’sinfrontofusforallofthosefactors,thinkit’sfairtosaywewanttoseesomehousingaffordabilityhereandwhatformthattakesislefttotheapplicantworkingwithstaffwhetherareaffordableunits,affordablehomeownership,affordablerentalunits,whetherasizeablenumberofmarketrentalunits,whetherasubstantialcontributiontotheCity’saffordablehousingfund.There’sanumberofoptionsthatcouldbepursuedandIdon’tknowifcouncilhastobespecificinwhatformthattakes,ratherthanlettingstaffandtheapplicanthavethosediscussions.

LH:Okay,…we’veaproblemifwhatCouncilorIsittsaidiswhattheamendmentmeans.

CTJ:AndIguessthatonceagaintheconcernformeisthatwedirectstafftoworkwiththeapplicanttoincludehousingaffordability.ThenwillwegetanapplicationthatcomesbackthenthatsaysthatIcanofferyouthisthisandthatbutIwouldneedtoincreasemyheightanddensity.OrIhavetomakethe3bedroomsnowonly2bedrooms.Sodowelosesomethingelseinordertogainanotherportion?IguessIhaveconcernsaboutbeingthatspecificonwhatitmightendupbeingaskedfor.

LH:Unfortunatelywearestuckatanamendmenttoanamendment.Butthewordingthatwehaveheretoconsiderincludingortodirectstafftoworkwiththeapplicanttoincludehousingaffordabilityintotheprojecttomethatreadsonthatsiteandsomepeoplearesayingit’snotthatsitemaybeit’sacontributiontothehousingaffordabilitytrustfundetc.I’mstrugglingwiththisingeneralbecauseIfeellikethatyeswewanthousingaffordabilityandit’sreallyhardforthepublictounderstandourpublicpoliciesbecausetheyaresocomplicatedattimesbutIfeellikethisisabackdoorapproach.It’strue,Iactuallydon’tknowhowIamgoingtovotebuttherewasalandliftanalysisdone.Itstaysthereisnoextrainthis–anywaysIguessthisisthefirsttimewe’veseenthis–anyways…IamnotsurebutIamsurethatifwhatpeoplearesayingisaffordabilityissomewhereelseorinthetrustfundthenthe


wordingisn’tright.SoI’mnotsurewhattodowhatthatwhenwearestuckwithanamendmenttoanamendment.

86:23

JL:Soarewevotingrightnowonthetwoconsider…[interrupted]

LH:Correct!

JL:Okay[shrugsshoulders]

LH:Anyothercommentsonconsideringincluding?[motionmorehandsopposedthanforincludingincluding].Theamendmenttotheamendmentfails.Sonowweareactuallyaskingtheapplicanttoincludehousingaffordabilitybutweneedtobemorepreciseaboutwhatmemeanbecauseitmaynotmeanexactlywhatitsays.

BI:I’llmoveanamendmenteither‘onsite’orwithapaymentofcashinlieu.[notseconded]

LH:Doesanyonehaveabetterideaordowejustwanttoleaveitgeneral?Andmaybestaffcanclarify,iftheamendmentisnotamended,directstafftoworkwiththeapplicanttoincludehousingaffordabilityintotheproject,doyouinterpretthatasonthatsiteoraspartoftheprojectingeneral?

AM:GoingwiththatforwardwewouldinterpretthatasgoingforwardandintheeventtheapplicantthoughtthatwasnotpossiblewewouldreportbackinthenextCOWreportonewayortheother.

LH:Myquestionmaybewasn’tclear.Thewaythisreadstomeis:directstafftoworkwithapplicanttoincludehousingaffordabilityintotheprojectasinonthatsite.

AM:wewouldnotinterpretthattobetheonlywaytodothatwouldbetoprovideunitsonthatsite…[interrupted]

LH:Okay,excellent,great,thenwedon’tneedtodoanythingelsetothis.Okay,verygood.Furtherdiscussion?

JL:IdothinkweneedhousingatallpartsofthehousingecosystemandIthinkwedoneedmoreunitsatalllevelsofaffordabilityIjustthinkrightnowweareskewedtowardsonly,notonly,primarilybuildingunitsthataremoreexpensivethanmostofourresidentscanafford.SoIwanttogoonrecordsayingthatIdothinkthatwedoneedunitsatalllevelsofaffordabilityandah,prices.SoIamdisagreeingwithCouncilorIsittonthat.Soweneedtofigureouthowtomakethishousingboomaboomthateveryonebenefitsfrom.


LH:Yeah,thanks.Justonenoteagainaboutgoingbacktootherprogramsthatareunderway.Sothatwedon’tlosesightofthem,Ithinkthatlastyear’snewsthatwedohavethe$60Mdollarregionalhousingfirstprogramthatisgoingtobuild880unitsoverthenextfiveyearsoftrulyaffordablehousingrentalunitsstartingwithabuildingthatisunderwayorwillbeunderwaysoonwithunitsstartingat$375/month.Uhm,sojusttoremindusofthat.Iamgoingtosupportthis.IwasatagatheringofCEOsoftheChambersofcommerce–thechambercallstogetheranumberofCEOsfromacrosstheregionandthenumberoneissueraisedwasaffordablehousingfortheworkers.WedohaveaprojectcomingupnextthatproposesthefirsteveraffordablehomeownershipprojectinthecitysoIamlookingforwardtothatasit’sournextagendaitem.

Let’sseewhattheapplicantandstaffcancomeupwith.Therearecreativewaysandwearetalkingaboutwantingtomakethisalivablecityforworkingfamiliesandwedogetlotsofemailsandconcernsaboutthis.Sowewillseewhatcanhappenhereifthispassesanddoesn’ttieanyoneintoanythingbutitdoeshighlightthecrisisthatweareinintermsofthisbeingahealthyandlivablecity.Allthoseinfavourofthatamendment?[Lucasopposes]Anyfurtherdiscussion?

90:28

PM:Justaquestionthroughyoutostaff,Ijustwanttoconfirm,sincewearedealingwithaheritagecorridor,andaneighbourhoodthatisidentifiedforitsbuiltheritageaswell,Iamjustwondering,yourreportissignedoffbythelocalareaplannerandthedirectorofplanning,whatinputdidyoureceivefromtheheritageplanneronanapplicationlikethis?

AM:theapplicationwasreviewedbytheseniorplannerforheritageandthatisintegratedintothereportbalancingthevariousaspectsoftheproposalandthevariouspolicies.

PM:Sowhenreadingthereport,howwouldIidentifywhattheinputwasfromtheheritageplanner?It’snotinaseparatesection?It’swovenintothereport?

AM:Itiswovenintothereport,thatiscorrect.

PM:Isitpossible,ifthisissupportedanditcomesbacktous,thatweactuallyhavesomedirectinputfromtheheritageplannerindealingwiththeheritagecorridor?

AM:yes,ifcouncilwouldlikethat,wecanincludethat.

PM:thatwouldbeveryhelpfulbecausewhenitiswoveninitisreallyhardtodisseminateit.

LH:Excellent.Thankyouverymuch.Allofthoseinfavour?[Madoffopposes]


Tomovethisforwardstaffingwillworkwiththeapplicantandbringthisbacktous.I’mgoingtosuggesttakinga5minutebreakwhile…

Transcriptendedat92:00

april 6, 2017 cotw meeting victoria city...

Documents