TRANSCRIPT OF THE PUBLIC MEETING HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, CITY HALL, 141 WEST 14 th STREET, NORTH VANCOUVER, B.C., ON MONDAY, APRIL 16, 2012 AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS Mayor D.R. Mussatto Councillor D.H. Bell Councillor P.J. Bookham Councillor L.C. Buchanan Councillor R.C. Clark Councillor R.G. Heywood Councillor C.R. Keating ABSENT Nil STAFF MEMBERS R.H. White, Deputy City Manager R.G. Anderson City Clerk P. Lurbiecki, Assistant City Clerk I. Gordon, Director of Finance B. Themens, Deputy Director of Finance D. Pope, Acting City Engineer E. Adin, Deputy Director, Community Development T. Barber, Acting Deputy City Engineer L. Garber, Manager, Accounting Services C. Purvis, Planner II, Community Development B. Westmacott, Planner II, Community Development C. Wilkinson, Planner I, Community Development S. Wilks, Timekeeper Re: Public Meeting DVP & DP, 157 East 27 th Street The Public Meeting was called to order at 7:06 p.m. Mayor D.R. Mussatto Ms. Anderson! Ms. R.G. Anderson, City Clerk Yes, Your Worship, we are currently in the Public Meeting scheduled regarding Development Variance Permit 2011-00012 and Development Permit No. 2011-00013 for 157 East 27 th Street. Circulated, Your Worship, on table this evening were two email submissions. One from A. and L. Axelrod In support of the proposed coach house development and another one from Mr. B. Douglas who was in opposition to this Development Variance Permit and these are in addition to the two that were circulated with Council s Agenda package. Thank you very much for that. Is there a presentation by staff? Mr. Wilkinson, are you doing a staff presentation? Mr. C. Wilkinson, Planning Technician II, Community Development Yes.
Welcome! Thank you! Mr. C. Wilkinson Good evening, Your Worship, Member s of Council, the Public Meeting this evening pertains to a Development Variance Permit and a Development Permit for a Level-B Coach House at 157 East 27 th Street. The material sample board is located to my left, a small one on the far left that will supplement the applicant s presentation to follow my own. The subject site is located mid block on the south side of East 27 th Street between Lonsdale Avenue and St. George s Avenue. It s outlined on the overhead in red and you can notice that this is above the Upper Levels Highway which is on the lower portion of the slide. 157 East 27 th Street is zoned RS-1 (One Unit Residential) and is designated Level-1 Low Density in the Official Community Plan. Surrounding lots share this Level-1 Low Density designation in the OCP and are also zoned RS-1. Apartment buildings with a Level-1 Medium Density designation in the Official Community Plan front Lonsdale Avenue on the far western edge of the block. The subject site is approximately 5,866 square feet with a 51-foot frontage and a lot depth of approximately 117 feet typical of those single family lots on the block. Today on the lot is a one-storey plus basement house that was originally constructed in 1912. The application before you this evening does not proposed any alterations to this existing house. The Level-B Coach House proposes 639 square foot main floor with a 343 partial second storey for a total of 982 square feet or 0.17 times the lot area. This would all be accommodated within the 22 foot height envelope. While the proposed gross floor area is less than the 1,000 square foot maximum the floor area ratio at 0.17 times the lot area exceeds the recommended 0.15 FSR set out in the guidelines. This may be attributed to a lot depth that is less than what is typically found elsewhere throughout the City yielding a smaller lot size. When combined with the principle building the site gross floor area totals 1896 square feet or 0.32 FSR. This is 864 square feet less than the maximum permitted in the Zoning Bylaw. Outside the proposal recommends or proposes, sorry, two uncovered parking stalls that will be provided on tire strips west to the coach house surrounded by a permeable surface such as grass and the two parking stalls complies with the minimum parking standards set out in both the Zoning Bylaw and the Level-B Accessory Coach House Guidelines. That concludes my brief presentation, Your Worship. I ll now turn it over to the applicant and the owner who will make a brief presentation as well. City of North Vancouver Page 2
Thank you very much, Mr. Wilkinson. Welcome sir! If you wouldn t mind just coming down to the podium and if you wouldn t mind just giving us your name we d appreciate it and we ll get this cued up for you I guess if you ve got a little presentation for you. Mr. James Burton, Birmingham & Wood Architects Hello, my name is James Burton, Birmingham and Wood Architects. Welcome! I ll keep this fairly brief. I just wanted to open my remarks by saying this situation is exactly what the coach house form of development is really designed for which is to allow a family to build a compound on their property so this is for grandma at the back of the site. The daughter and the family are at the front house and so it allows the family to consolidate let s say, their living arrangements on one lot. It allows grandma a house size that she can live with and be near the grand children. In my view this is why we support coach houses for this very sort of living arrangement. I ll just be very brief about the site itself as you see there I think you ve gone through it but the streetscape is a modest collection of houses and the laneway house or the coach house at the rear is also in that modest idiom. The size is of a size that Grandma really does need after living in a major house and so while it is a little bit over it is under the 1,000 square foot mark and it s a modest house. It does allow for her to have a bedroom above the main living area so that she can have guests in on the main floor level and still have a sort of a private room on a floor above that. You can see that the footprint is modestly placed near the rear property line allowing for a decent yard between the two houses and so again it makes it very liveable for the family. If you want to have any questions answered about the floor plan itself I am here to offer those comments. You can see the elevations are of a modest gabled building that fits in well with the neighbourhood. Well thank you, for you presentation this evening. There may be questions I don t know so if there are we ll call upon you for that. Thank you. We did have a signup sheet for this Public Meeting earlier and I see was the one who did speak so I m going to assume that you don t want to come up and ask questions about it. So then I m going to go to members of the gallery who have any questions to ask or comments to make please just raise your hand and we ll have you come down and do so. Any questions to ask or comments to make just raise your hand. Once! Twice! Three times! Then I ll go to questions and comments from Member s of Council. Any questions from Members of Council with regards to this?! City of North Vancouver Page 3
Councillor P.J. Bookham Thank you, Your Worship. Through you to the architect if you don t mind answering a question? It is regarding the fact that this coach house does exceed the total development on the site is going to exceed what is allowable. It s not that the coach house is more than a 1,000 square feet, it s just that we have to consider what has already been developed there. Were you aware of that when you started to do the drawings? Yes. What we did as an architect normally does is we ask the client what spatial needs they have and the client was quite clear that it was important to have enough space on the ground floor to for her living including having visitors over including the children etc. and having a private space above that tucked under the roof and so we just worked with her on what space she could deal with, I mean she was used to a larger accommodation and this was pairing it down to what we and she believed she could live with. That s how the area came about. Well I can certainly understand, you know, you re working with a client and the client has certain wishes but as the professional you must be aware when you re at that stage when you re consulting how to balance what the City will allow within its guidelines and what your client wants so I guess I want to know why the whole building, which is an attractive building, could not have been shrunk so that we wouldn t be even having this discussion. Well, I think the other part of the equation was I know that the clients actually talked with their neighbours and their neighbours had no difficulty with slightly larger building there and on the strength of that with their support they came in with the size that they have come in with. Thank you. Were you in charge of the consultation with the neighbours? The circulating the list to get their responses? No, my role usually with neighbours is I always believe that neighbours need to talk with neighbours and I think that in this case my clients worked very closely and well with their neighbours talking about the nature of the development and I think that was the appropriate way to go about it. City of North Vancouver Page 4
Thank you. I agree with you about your comment about neighbours talking to neighbours and it s a good part of this policy. I guess my next question then would be for staff. I wondered whether or not, through you Your Worship, staff noticed that in the letter that was circulated to neighbours that the proposed coach house was described as exceeding the allowances by approximately 50 square feet but your own report suggests that it s just a little over 100 square feet I believe. Were you aware of that discrepancy? 102 square feet on page 3 of your report? Mr. Wilkinson! Mr. Wilkinson Through Your Worship to, the public input that I believe was requested was done so prior to the application and it is a process which is not required through the Level-B Coach House Guidelines. The point was noted understanding that there would be continual dialogue between the applicant and the neighbours. In addition to that the sign that would be posted up on the site as well as the notification from the City Clerk would have accurately described that so there was, yes, staff noted a difference but that difference was also noted throughout additional notification material. Through you Your Worship to staff, did you have any discussion suggesting to the architect and the client that they ought to consider slightly reducing the size of the coach house in order to make it comply with our policy? Mr. Wilkinson Through Your Worship to, ultimately the applicant applied for the coach house before you this evening. Staff would present to them the option or let them know that what they re proposing does exceed one of the components of the guidelines and they decided or elected to proceed with the option before you this evening noting that they would be requesting something beyond what the Coach House Guidelines do recommend. Thank you, Your Worship. Now this is also time for comments because it s not a Public Hearing? It is. Yes. City of North Vancouver Page 5
This is a nicely designed coach house and I am sure that the future occupant is going to be very happy there and in of itself it fits, you know, within the 1,000 square feet maximum but that s just one of the requirements that came out of our community consultation with respect to the permitted size that we do consider the size of the existing house and we did set limits on what the combined or what the total development on site could be so I tried to figure out when I noted the discrepancy between what was presented to the neighbours as the degree to which this coach house was going to exceed that allowable development potential I got thinking about well what s the difference between 50 square feet and then 102 square feet. So 102 square feet would be approximately a 10 by 10 room would it not? Mr. Wilkinson Your Worship to, yes 102 square feet would be, yes very close to 10 by 10. I mean that s a fairly significant space in terms of it s certainly significant in terms of the liveability and from the residents, you know, the occupants perspective I can see why that would be desirable but if we allow every development to exceed the allowable potential, you know, clearly there are benefits that are built in and values that are built in on that site. Now, my concern is not with this particular proposal. I hear that the neighbours seem to be quite happy to accept it within their neighbourhood but I don t want to negotiating new guidelines at the Council table. I think that we have give a great deal of thought and tried to find that balance that recognizes everybody s needs so I urge all applicants to work with those guidelines because I m not going to keep making concessions. Tonight I will allow this because of the amount of consultation that was done with the neighbours but I am very concerned about a pattern of creep that we have been seeing with the number of applications that have come before us and I think staff should be aware as well and should be spelling those out a little bit more firmly when people come to discuss their potential plans and really urge that they stay within the guidelines. Thank you. Councillor Bell! Councillor D.H. Bell Thank you Your Worship. Through you to the staff, Your Worship, would approval of this coach house at this size that s being suggested then restrict any future expansion or replacement of the main house? City of North Vancouver Page 6
Mr. Wilkinson! Councillor Bell Because I note that the house was from 1912 and I gather the basement it sounded like it was amended in 1960. Mr. Wilkinson Through Your Worship to Councillor Bell, there is residual floor area left on the lot. There are different floor area maximums set out in both the Zoning Bylaw and the Coach House Guidelines. One is for the total site; the gross floor area on the total site which is a combination of both the principle building as well as the coach house and the second is the size of the coach house. The proposal before you tonight is asking for a 982 square foot coach house which due to the smaller lot size is 0.17 FSR; however, when combined with the principle building the total site area has not been exceed. In fact, there are 860 square feet approximately of residual floor area still left on the house or on the site which could only be realized through a renovation or addition to the house alone. Councillor Bell Thank you Your Worship. Councillor Heywood! Councillor R.G. Heywood Thank you Your Worship. I just wanted to have the applicant address the one dissenting message we had which is the not understanding of very good neighbour consultation process, the neighbour most directly affected is the one immediately behind the subject property and if you could just tell us what accommodations were attempted and what the actual impact the applicant believes will be. Well we didn t have a chance to speak with this neighbour because this letter just came out today so it s a surprise to me and the applicant; however, I would note that the neighbour that is concerned is actually to the south of this development and so, for instance, they won t be shadowed by it and that usually is a far more greater imposition on a house as if a new development or a new building actually shadows your own. That would be more significant I would say. There is a very tall hedge that is actually referred to in the letter that is, I m guessing, it might almost be two-storeys high. There s an existing hedge there and the letter makes reference to the fact that he may not be able to cut down that hedge now. The fact is that there is quite a barrier there now between his house and this property. City of North Vancouver Page 7
Councillor Heywood Thank you. Just before we conclude the Public Meeting I just want to say a few words. It is questions and comments. I think this is an amazing addition to the neighbourhood. I think that the design is very well tastefully done. I want to applaud the applicant and the owners for working with the community and the neighbours. I think that this is an example of how to do these types of developments in the community and I think that s really to be admired. Speaking from a personal point of view, aging in the compound I think you mentioned it, I live in a compound, my mom and dad live next door to me and my brother and his wife and two kids they re next door to them and it s not for everybody but I can tell you it s the best thing that ever happened to our family and we can support each other when we need that support and, you know, the many nights that I get home if I need a quick meal or something I can sneak next door and there s always something in the fridge. So, I applaud the applicants in this design and the work you ve done and I think that people come to me and say how should we do it? I think this is another yet example of how we should do it within a neighbourhood so I m very happy to be supporting this. There will be some discussion, I think, once we do the notice of motion after but I want to say thank you. Councillor Keating! Councillor C.R. Keating I would motion to conclude the Public Meeting, Your Worship. And Councillor Buchanan! Councillor L.C. Buchanan Second! Any discussion? All those in favour? Opposed? Carried Unanimously! Moved by Councillor Keating, seconded by Councillor Buchanan THAT the Public Meeting conclude. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY City of North Vancouver Page 8
The meeting adjourned at 7:27 p.m. Certified a true and accurate transcript of the Public Meeting Signed By Robyn Anderson, City Clerk Signed on May 8, 2012 Date City of North Vancouver Page 9