director's / manager's report (oral report)

May 9, 2016 Land Use and Planning Committee Agenda

Doc #867677

REGULAR MEETING OF THE

LAND USE AND PLANNING COMMITTEE

Notice is hereby given of the following Land Use and Planning Committee:

May 9, 2016 at 12:00 p.m.

Committee Room 2, City Hall

AGENDA

Call to order.

ADDITIONS / DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA

MOTION to amend the Land Use and Planning Committee agenda.

ADOPTION OF MINUTES

1. Adoption of April 18, 2016 Minutes

PRESENTATIONS

2. No Items

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

3. No Items

REPORTS FOR ACTION

4. 1209 Hamilton Street: Proposed Rezoning to Allow 20 Child Care Spaces -

Consideration of Bylaw for First and Second Readings

5. 612 - 618 Brantford Street - Update

DIRECTOR’S / MANAGER’S REPORT (Oral Report)

6.

May 9, 2016 Land Use and Planning Committee Agenda

Doc #867677

NEW BUSINESS

7. No Items

CORRESPONDENCE

8. No Items

ADJOURNMENT

R E P O R T Development Services

To: Land Use and Planning Committee Date: 5/9/2016

From: Beverly Grieve

Director of Development Services

File: REZ00119

Item #: 37/2016

Subject: 1209 Hamilton Street: Proposed Rezoning to Allow 20 Child Care

Spaces – Consideration of Bylaw for First and Second Readings

RECOMMENDATION

THAT the Land Use and Planning Committee recommend that Council consider

Zoning Amendment Bylaw 7832, 2016 for First and Second Reading and forward the

bylaw to Public Hearing.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A rezoning application has been received in order to allow conversion of an existing duplex

building at 1209 Hamilton Street for use as a licensed child care facility with up to 20 spaces.

The duplex building is located behind and on the same lot as the Heritage Hall (formerly

known as the Carpenters Hall) at 718 Twelfth Street. The applicant proposes to rezone the

portion of the property which includes the duplex.

The existing zoning is Community Commercial Districts (C-2A) and Neighbourhood

Residential Duplex Districts (RT-1A) and the proposed zoning is Comprehensive

Development District (1209 Hamilton Street) (CD-66).

Consultation on the application included informing the Moody Park Residents’ Association; a presentation to the West End Residents’ Association; an applicant led public open house; and a presentation to the Advisory Planning Commission.

4

City of New Westminster May 9, 2016 2

Agenda Item 37/2016

1. PROPOSAL

The applicant proposes to rezone a portion of the subject site in order to convert an existing

duplex building into a licensed child care facility with up to 20 spaces.

2. POLICY AND REGULATIONS

2.1 Official Community Plan Land Use Designation

The subject property is within two designations in the Official Community Plan (OCP). The

portion of the site which fronts Twelfth Street and which includes the Heritage Hall is

designated (CH) Commercial Historic. The rear portion of the site which includes the duplex

building is designated (RL) Residential - Low Density. The descriptions of these

designations are included below:

(CH) Commercial Historic Area: this area will include heritage buildings in a

commercial street. It is anticipated that pedestrian scale commercial uses will be at the

street level and commercial, office or residential uses above the ground level. Along

Columbia Street, this area will include entertainment uses such as theatres, restaurants,

bars and recreational facilities. Depending on the provision of public amenities, a density bonus may be considered.

(RL) Residential – Low Density: this area will contain low density residential uses

including single detached houses, houses with a secondary suite, duplexes, detached

townhouses, low density multi-family uses, churches and may contain small scale local

commercial uses such as home based businesses and corner stores.

The OCP also “encourages the provision of child care as an essential community-based

service” and states: “Parents need licensed child care choices closer to home and the City needs to facilitate alternatives in child care (e.g., supported and group child care initiatives).”

The proposed rezoning application conforms to policy statements and the Residential – Low

Density land use designation in the Official Community Plan.

2.2 New Westminster Child Care Strategy

The New Westminster Child Care Strategy, which was endorsed by Council in February

2009, recommends: “That child care operations of up 25 spaces (principal use) be considered in all residential areas subject to Council and public review of applications.” and that: “Approval would be the responsibility of City Council.”


Agenda Item 37/2016

2.3 Zoning Bylaw

The site is zoned Community Commercial Districts (C-2A) and Neighbourhood Residential

Duplex Districts (RT-1A). The portion of the site used by the Heritage Hall is zoned C-2A

and the portion of the site which the applicant proposes to rezone is currently zoned RT-1A. The different areas of zoning of the property are shown on the Site Context Map attached as

Appendix A.

The intent of the RT-1A District is to allow for two principal dwelling units on a single lot.

This District does also allow for the care of up to eight child care children within each unit as

an accessory use. The proposed use of 20 child care spaces as a principal use is not permitted

within this District and a rezoning is required.

2.4 Development Permit Area

The front portion of the site which includes the Heritage Hall is within the #1 Upper Twelfth

Street Commercial Development Permit Area. The rear of the site which includes the duplex

building is not within a Development Permit Area. As such, a Development Permit is not

required for the proposed development.

3. BACKGROUND

3.1 Site Characteristics and Context

The site is located on Twelfth Street and on the edge of the West End neighbourhood. To the

north, south and east of the site are properties used and zoned for commercial uses. To the

south is a vehicle fuel station adjacent to several single detached dwellings; to the north

across Kingston Street are one and two storey buildings with commercial at grade and

residential units above, as well as a duplex. Across Twelfth Street to the east is a vehicle

repair shop and a three-storey mixed use building.

To the west of the site are several lots zoned for duplex use but which are presently being

used for single detached dwellings.

The site slopes modestly from north to south and provides rear access from Kingston Street, which functions as a lane. The existing duplex building was constructed in 1921

3.2 Project Description

An application has been received to rezone a portion of the property at 718 Twelfth Street.

The subject property contains two existing buildings – the Heritage Hall which is a

commercial building that is used for various public assembly uses and which fronts on to


Agenda Item 37/2016

Twelfth Street and a duplex building (addressed as 1209 Hamilton Street) which fronts on to

Hamilton Street.

The applicant proposes to rezone the new site to allow a licensed child care facility with up

to 20 spaces. The proposal includes spaces for a maximum of 12 infants/toddlers (up to 30 months) and eight multi-age spaces. The existing duplex building would be retained with

minor renovations to accommodate the proposed use. A letter of intent from the applicant is

attached in Appendix B and the proposed architectural plans are attached in Appendix C and

Zoning Amendment Bylaw No 7832, 2016 is attached as Appendix D.

3.3 Project and Statistics

There are no changes to the proposed size, siting and height of the buildings on the site. The

site statistics are summarized in the table below.

Site Size 2,305 sq. m. (24,809 sq. ft.)

Twelfth St. Frontage 40.23 metres (132 feet)

Hamilton St. Frontage 57.31 metres (188 feet)

Floor Space Ratio

Commercial

Residential

Total

0.53 (Heritage Hall Building) 0.17 (Duplex Building / Proposed Child Care)

0.70

The amount of parking for the commercial building will not change. The amount of parking

for the proposed child care use meets Zoning Bylaw requirements.

4. DISCUSSION

4.1 Demand for Child Care

The City has recently completed a New Westminster Child Care Needs Assessment (Fall

2015). While there has been a significant increase in the number of child care spaces since

2008, there is still a severe shortage of infant/toddler spaces, which are more costly to

provide (1:4 staffing ratio) and more difficult to develop (i.e., higher indoor space needs and

subject to more stringent Building Code requirements). This proposal would see the

development of 12 infant/toddler child care spaces, which would comprise 60% of the total

proposed spaces.

4.2 Proposed Change in Use

The proposal represents a modest increase in the number of child care children that would be

permitted under the existing zoning. The existing zoning would allow eight child care


Agenda Item 37/2016

children within each of the two duplex units, provided they are operated in conjunction with

principal residential uses. As such, under the existing zoning, 16 child care children could be

accommodated on the site. The applicant has proposed to increase that number to 20 child

care children; however, the proposed use would be a principal use and would no longer be

required to be accessory to a residential use. The Comprehensive District (1209 Hamilton Street) (CD-66) is included within the Zoning Amendment Bylaw attached as Appendix D.

4.3 Drop-off and Pick-up for Child Care Children

The subject site offers several drop-off and pick-up locations:

Drop-offs and pick-ups could occur on Hamilton Street. This location would offer convenient access to the program space on the main floor, which would accommodate

the infant/toddler component.

Drop-offs and pick-ups could also occur at the rear of the site on Kingston Street. This location would offer convenient access to the program space on the upper floor, which

would accommodate the multi-age care component.

Any overflow of drop-offs and pick-ups could occur in the commercial pay parking area on Twelfth Street.

Most drop-offs and pick-ups occur over a few hours in the morning and a few hours in the

afternoon. This means that demand at any one time for parking spaces would be limited and

the available spaces on the street would likely be adequate to accommodate the demand. If it

is not, then the off-street parking provided at the rear of the site could be used or commercial

pay parking on Twelfth Street could be used. Demand is also expected to be lower as a result

of sibling arrangements.

4.4 Relationship to Development of the New Official Community Plan

One of the concepts which have been explored with the community through the Official

Community Plan update process is an increase in the depth of a low rise designation along both sides of Twelfth Street. The development of child care in this building could limit the

potential for this type of future development should this concept be included in the updated

Official Community Plan.

4.5 Tree Protection

The applicant has provided an arborist report and tree survey which has been reviewed by

the City Arborist. This report identifies three trees on site; all of which will be retained.


Agenda Item 37/2016

4.6 Consultation

Consultation on the application included informing the Moody Park Residents’ Association; a presentation to the West End Residents’ Association; an applicant led public open house; and a presentation to the Advisory Planning Commission. As a result of the consultation, one letter from a neighbour was received and a petition signed by 14 individuals representing

nine properties was also received. The letter and the petition are attached as Appendix E.

Some of the items identified in the letter and the petition are as follows:

1) Child Care Size

Some concern was expressed regarding the size of the child care operation. As noted in this

report, the existing duplex zoning allows for two principal residential units each of which

could contain eight child care spaces for a total of 16 child care spaces. The proposed

application is for 20 child care spaces which is a modest increase of four spaces. However,

these spaces would be permitted as a principal use (i.e. residential uses are not also required),

rather than an accessory use.

The proposed size of 20 child care spaces is less than what is recommended by the New

Westminster Child Care Strategy (i.e., 25 child care spaces for child cares in all residential areas).

Further, as a point of comparison, staff reviewed a similar child care with 25 spaces

operating since 2008 within a single detached residential neighbourhood and found that there

had been no complaints received.

2) Noise

Some concern was expressed about noise. Child care operations typically do not operate later

than 5:30 or 6:00 p.m. or on weekends and statutory holidays when residents usually make

use of their private outdoor spaces. Additionally, outdoor play times for child care children

typically occur for 45 minutes in the morning and for 45 minutes in the afternoon. As such,

this should help mitigate concerns related to noise.

3) Appearance within Streetscape

Some concern was expressed regarding the building fitting in with the existing streetscape

and neighbourhood. The applicant is not proposing to make any physical alterations to the

exterior of the building. As such, the building will retain its residential appearance and

continue to fit into the streetscape. Based on several discussions with neighbours, City staff

has communicated concerns about the maintenance of the building and grounds to the

applicant and the need to ensure that it adds to the ‘revitalization’ of the streetscape. The new owner and the applicant have been receptive to making such enhancements.


Agenda Item 37/2016

5. PROCESS

The following steps have been completed in the development review process:

Preliminary Report to Land Use Planning Committee Complete Feb 15, 2016

Report to Council from Land Use and Planning

Committee

Complete Mar 7, 2016

Notification to Moody Park Residents’ Association Complete Mar 19, 2016

Presentation to West End Residents’ Association Complete Mar 22, 2016

Applicant Led Open House Complete Apr 6, 2016

Advisory Planning Commission Presentation Complete Apr 19, 2016

Land Use Planning Committee Recommendation

to Council

This report May 9, 2016

Council Consideration of 1st and 2

nd Reading of Bylaw May 30, 2016

Public Hearing and Council Consideration of 3rd

Reading

June 20, 2016

Final Adoption

6. INTERDEPARTMENTAL LIASON

Staff from the Building Division, the Licensing and Integrated Services Division and the

Engineering Department have been consulted in the review of the proposed development.

7. OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION

The following options are presented for the Land Use Planning Committee’s consideration:

1. That the Land Use and Planning Committee recommend that Council consider Zoning

Amendment Bylaw 7832, 2016 for First and Second Reading and forward the bylaw

to Public Hearing on June 20, 2016.

2. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Staff recommends Option 1.


Agenda Item 37/2016

ATTACHMENTS

Appendix A - Site Context Map

Appendix B - Letter of Intent

Appendix C - Architectural Plans Appendix D - Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 7832, 2016

Appendix E - Correspondence Received

Appendix F - Draft Advisory Planning Commission Minutes

This report has been prepared by:

Mike Watson, Senior Planning Analyst

John Stark, Senior Social Planner

This report was reviewed by:

Jackie Teed, Manager of Planning

Beverly Grieve


Appendix A:

Site Context Map

Heritage Hall (Carpenter’s Hall) Commercial Zoning

Existing Duplex BuildingProposed

Comprehensive Zoning

Appendix B:

Letter of Intent

Alan Brown Architect 110-3 Ave New Westminster BC V3L 1L8 Ph(604)525-5259 Fx525-5290 [email protected]

ABA 1 of 1 Alan Brown architect aibc aaa cp - principal

Mike Watson | Planning Technician

City of New Westminster | Development Services, Planning

511 Royal Avenue, New Westminster, BC V3L 1H9

Letter of Intent – Rezoning , subdividing 1209 Hamilton, 728 – 12 st

Dear Sir:

On behalf of the Owner , I have attached documents for an application for rezoning, subdivision

and development permit for 1209 Hamilton st. The building at 1209 Hamilton is currently a residence

and will be renovated to suit the intended use as a Daycare facility. Please accept these documents and

begin the process, including issuing the application form and required fees.

The existing property bounds contain both a row of commercial suites & the Carpenters Hall

from 718 to 728 , as well as the house at 1209 Hamilton St. In preliminary discussions with the city of

New Westminster, we understand the goal is to subdivide the property to separate the 2 uses. The new

property at 1209 Hamilton will be given a zoning category more suitable for its intended use as a

daycare. It is presumed the commercial buildings at 728 – 12 st will retain their existing zoning on a lot

that now only contains the commercial uses.

The Owner intends to pursue safety upgrades in 728 , but has no current plan for any changes to

the use or area of the building.

The Owner intends to lease the building at 1209 Hamilton st to a daycare operator, Ms Vivien

Wong, who is involved in the renovations of this building to suit the intended operation. She has

provided a description of the intended programs. There are 2 programs to be provided:

1. The main floor will provide for up to 12 children in the infant and toddler category of aged 12

month to 36 month old children.

2. The second floor will provide a multi-age program for up to 8 children , aged 2.5 to 5 years.

I have provided a Letter of Authorization from the Owners, authorizing me to act on their

behalf. I will keep the owners informed of events and get their approvals for appropriate actions.

Please forward any further requirements to my attention , and I will coordinate with the Owners

and other relevant parties.

Yours truly,

Alan Brown architect aibc aaa cp

Appendix C:

Architectural Plans

Appendix D:

Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 7832, 2016

Doc #665082

CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF NEW WESTMINSTER

ZONING AMENDMENT BYLAW (1209 HAMILTON STREET)

NO. 7832, 2016

ADOPTED ________________

A Bylaw to Amend Zoning Bylaw No. 6680, 2001.

The Municipal Council of the City of New Westminster, in open meeting assembled, ENACTS

AS FOLLOWS:

1. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as “Zoning Amendment Bylaw (1209 Hamilton

Street) No. 7832, 2016”.

2. Zoning Bylaw No. 6680, 2001 is hereby amended as follows:

a) Section 1000 Comprehensive Development Districts of Zoning Bylaw 6680, 2001 is

hereby amended by inserting as section 1066 the Schedule attached to this Bylaw as

Schedule A.

b) That the portion(s) of certain parcels of land situated within the City of New

Westminster, British Columbia and which is outlined in bold in Schedule B attached to

this Bylaw and which is presently Neighbourhood Residential Duplex Dwelling Districts

(RT-1A) are hereby rezoned to Comprehensive Development District (1209 Hamilton

Street) (CD-66) and the Zoning Map annexed as Appendix “A” to Zoning Bylaw No.

6680, 2001 is hereby amended to record this rezoning.

GIVEN FIRST READING this ___________ day of __________________, 2016.

GIVEN SECOND READING this __________ day of __________________, 2016.

PUBLIC HEARING held this __________ day of __________________, 2016.

Bylaw No. 7832, 2016 2

Doc #857321

GIVEN THIRD READING this ___________ day of __________________, 2016.

ADOPTED and the Seal of the Corporation of the City of New Westminster affixed this

___________ day of __________________, 2016.

______________________________

MAYOR

______________________________

CITY CLERK

Bylaw No. 7832, 2016 3

Doc #857321

Schedule A to Bylaw 7832, 2016:

Comprehensive Development District (1209 Hamilton Street)

(CD-66)

Comprehensive Development District (1209 Hamilton Street) (CD-66)

2016 05 09 City of New Westminster Zoning Bylaw 1066-1

1066 Comprehensive Development District (1209 Hamilton Street) (CD-66)

1066 .1 The intent of this district is to allow a child care with not more than 20 child care spaces at 1209 Hamilton Street

Comprehensive Development District (1209 Hamilton Street) (CD-66) Regulations

1066 .2 Development of lots zoned CD-66 shall comply with the regulations and requirements of the Neighbourhood Residential Duplex Dwelling Districts (RT-1A) except:

(a) Child care shall be permitted as a principal use provided it does not provide more than 12 child care spaces for children 30 months of age or less and not more than eight spaces for children more than 30 months of age;

(b) Front setback shall be not less than 7.34 metres (24.1 feet); and (c) Western side setback shall not be less than 0.97 metres (3.2 feet);

Bylaw No. 7832, 2016 4

Doc #857321

Schedule B to Bylaw 7832, 2016:

Area of Rezoning

<Double-click here to enter title>

KELV

IN S

T

TH

IRTEEN

TH

ST

KIN

GSTO

N S

T

EIG

HTH

AVE

TW

ELFTH

ST

HA

MIL

TO

N S

T

HA

MIL

TO

N S

T

SEVEN

TH

AVE

HA

MIL

TO

N S

T

1214

1307

1305

724728

1302

1306

713

711

1214

1212

707

1221

121

7

1213

1211

1209

1207

120

5 7007101216

70

9

1206

1105

1107

11091117

1121

719

723

1202

640

6

34

73

4

1218

733

1214

727

719

718

1215

1210

712716

707

1

116

709

1214

1212

1217

1215

11231169

1208 81

2816

1213

1211

1209

1207

810

80080

4

1206

742

730

1188

1122

1114

1118

The Corporation of The City of New WestminsterInformation Technology - GIS Section

Date: March 23, 2016

1:1,500

© CopyrightThis drawing is provided as a convenience, for informationpurposes only. The City of New Westminster disclaims allresponsibility for accuracy or completeness of informationcontained in this drawing. All map information should beconfirmed in the field. Map information is derived fromsources with varying levels of accuracy and may havechanged since compiled. In no event will the City of NewWestminster be liable for any indirect, special, consequential

Westerly Portion of1209 Hamilton Street(718 Twelfth Street)

µ

Appendix E:

Correspondence Received

- J

April 15, 2016

City Hall New Westminster

cjo John Stark

51 1 Royal Ave

New Westminster, BC

To whom it may concern,

PLANNING DEPT.

RECEIVED Oate _APR 1 4 2016

:ROUTE

Original :ft")hn t opiea _ _ __ _

Action CoPY--

Jhfo. Copy ---

RE: Proposed Day Care at 1209 Hamilton Street, New Westminster, BC

I am writing this letter in order to express my displeasure with the proposed

day care plans. I am a 14 year resident of this 1200 block of Hamilton Street, have

been paying city taxes for 14 years too, and have spent the last 14 years trying to

restore my 1911 heritage house. All of my neighbors live in Heritage style houses

and all of them are trying to beautify the neighborhood and not detract from it. This

is a residential area and there is not one single house that is a business that I know

of and I have driven from lOth street, all the way down to about 18th street to

confirm this. I am deeply concerned about the proposed daycare. First of all, as is,

there is virtually NO PARKING for the residents of the 1200 block of Hamilton

Street to begin with. We are constantly trying to find a parking space in front of our

houses or across the street where the proposed daycare is located. The problem is,

that, people do not want to pay the city for parking on 12th street and then, people

park on the 1200 block of Hamilton Street, in front of our houses and they leave lots

of garbage too which the residents have to pick up and dispose of on a daily basis,

including liquor bottles, cans and upon occasion, drug paraphernalia. This day care

will generate Jots of traffic and they will be invariably parking in front of our houses,

taking up space that we use and need available so that we can unload groceries,

elderly passengers, furniture, renovations stuff like ladders, and cans of paint. I am

also concerned about the amount of litter on the street in which nobody picks up but

the residents. There is already a huge amount of traffic that flows into the Mohawk

gas station which is currently under renovations and when it is completed, there

will be an enormous increase in traffic, once again. This also needs to be taken into

account too. Furthermore, the Carpenter Hall is also a rental hall too and when

there are events going on there, the patrons also take all of our parking spots,

leaving the residents with no parking at all. There have been many times when I

have arrived home and have had no parking space for my car. Essentially, this area

is jam packed with parked cars and traffic already and we do not need, nor want

more which will inevitably increase the garbage flow too and noise. I wonder where

the parents will park when there is no parking space available and I would hate to

think that they would leave their cars running in the middle of the street and then

run in and out of the day care, to do drop off and pick up of their children, which is

very dangerous.

1

Each morning !leave for work, there is very little parking space, if any, to

begin with. Each night when I arrive home, there is little if any parking space. This

is the place I live and not a business that I frequent between set hours. This day care

owner is not going to be living in the proposed day care. I would like for Council to

note, that the owner already has two day cares, which she owns and which are

located in a strip-mall on 20th Street and not a residential area. Maybe the proposed

daycare operator should consider moving her day care proposal into the actual

Carpenter's Hall, which would be a more appropriate venue and could use the

renovations. Parents and staff could park in front, on the side, and in the already

existing parking lot that is located behind the Carpenter's Hall.

This proposed daycare is quite a large day care and they are seeking to have

spots for 20 children. This is a huge massive type factory of a day care and it is not a

small-scale operation. I would welcome several small home based businesses in the

New Westminster area that would provide daycare to about 3-8 children each, or

whatever the licensing allows, instead of this style of factory type day care.

Furthermore, there is already a day care type business at the corner of 13th street

and 7th avenue and they have been operating for years. There is also another day

care located about two blocks away, on 8th Avenue, close to 10th Street, by Moody

Park.

Of particular significance, there is also a very large dog that lives right next

door to the proposed day care, at 1215 Hamilton Street, New Westminster and this

could turn into a huge liability, if there was ever an incident between the dog and a

child at the day care. Dogs run loose and so do children. I wonder if council has

even considered this because if I were a parent, I would not allow my child to attend

a day care in which there was a large dog living next door to it, cause accidents do

happen and we have to think in terms of prevention and not acting on the offensive

when they do.

I also understand that the city has conducted a survey in which there is a need

for these types of day care spots. I would like to counter that notion that maybe

when the City of New Westminster finally decides to build a new high school, that

they could include in the plans, a day care which would be big enough to address the

day care needs of the residents. This way, the city could be preparing high school

students for child care careers, if they choose that form of career, also be helping the

residents of New Westminster, employing qualified residents of New Westminster

in a unionized environment, and also making a profit too from the day care which

could be used to better the wonderful city we live in. In summary, I am opposing the

Day Care proposal. Therefore, not in my front yard.

Yours truly,

2

4/6/2016

City ofNew Westminster,

In response to the application for rezoning of the property at 1209 Hamilton Street, please

find below the signatures of home owners on both the North and South side of the street

who are NQI in favour of a day care business on their quiet residential street. We have all

worked very hard to improve and maintain our houses and our property and build a

strong relationship with our neighbors, in an effort to improve property value and make

our neighborhood a quiet and safe one. We have achieved this and are strong!y..J!gi!i!!n

allowing a very public and potentially noisy business on our residential street.

Warm regards,

Jennifer Newton

1216 Hamilton Street

Print Name Address

ｾ＠( ) .!tJtvi {-ffZ /d._ I b '/ .

Jv'£wro.rJ

6w:r F--j:A.I( Ｔｾ＠Jvf Et-1/["L.U-

c/

I'! l\a-t ｾｷｲｮ＠ fi h ｯﾷｾ＠

ｬｾｬＩＮＮＮＮ｟＠ｾｆ＠

1\!l·: I< t 1.__. vs-ｾ｜ｴ｜｜｜｜ｻ｟ｶ＠ \'1\\) '\1\h\\'J

｜ｉｈｾ＠ \<.. 1 ｾａ＠ f\A II' {l/3 rrJJ\

｜ｶ｜Ｑｾ＠ \-Atr-leo \ I Z.l ｾ＠ｾ＠ --ｾｾｶ＠ ) ffrv&/ /11- 13

5/

\A . .t:? /J f) ·L· o. ［［ｺｾ＠ ·- &" d /If/£ tv. r.u. ＨＡｾｦＮＮＮ＠ｊＩ･ＭｾＡｇｉｉＯＱＯ｜ｊＮ＠Ｇｨｾｾ＠

ｾ＠ｉｙ｜ｯＮｾ＠ j(}..IY<f-£4 ｾＭ fi.VrJ ＨＭＭﾷｃｾｻ＠ 'ld

ＭｾｏｊＨＺｊ＠

ctL&t/ii ｾｦｨｊＴ＿Ｈ＠ｾＱＱｾ＠

( LA. l ﾷｾ＠ j ' r -s T /v . t-.J .

j;)/9-. f/mc!f!JIJ Sl \

/;{(() ｾ［Ａｬｯｷ＠I J I 2 ｲｾｊ＠ f-J OtA u __ r: (j. tv s7

I I

I

Appendix F:

Advisory Planning Commission Draft Minutes

4.1 1209 Hamilton St

Mike Watson, Senior Planning Analyst, summarized the report dated April 19,

2016 regarding an application that has been received to rezone 1209 Hamilton

Street from Neighbourhood Residential Duplex Dwelling Districts (RT-1A) to

Comprehensive Development District (1209 Hamilton Street) (CD-66) to allow up

to 20 child care spaces.

Mr. Watson advised that notification regarding the project was sent to the

following:

-the surrounding neighbourhood within 100 metres (336 notices);

-All Residents’ Associations;

-the Board of School Trustees;

-Superintendent of Schools; and

-the New Westminster Heritage Preservation Society

John Stark, Senior Social Planner, provided the following additional information:

The City has completed an assessment indicating that additional childcare

space for infant-toddler ages is required in New Westminster; The applicant currently operates a daycare on 20th

Street, but is looking for

a larger location to meet the needs for infant-toddler spaces; The applicant would not be making any additions or changes to the exterior

of the building; Six off street parking spaces would be implemented for the facility; The daycare would offer full day care, which could limit additional traffic

coming into and out of the facility to peak times only; Limited outdoor play times could alleviate neighbours’ concerns regarding

noise levels. It was further noted that the daycare would not be operational

on evenings, weekends and holidays; and, Concerns had been expressed by residents in the area regarding the upkeep

of the current site, which the applicant would work towards resolving.

Judith Copland, Resident, expressed concerns regarding additional traffic to the

narrow laneway behind the facility.

Mr. Stark advised that the volume of cars attending the site would be limited to

pick up and drop off times, and not on the weekends, when the back laneway can

host additional traffic due to events and organizational meetings at Heritage Hall

(located at 726 Twelfth Street).

.

.

Discussion ensued, and the Commission expressed support for the project, noting

that there is a need to support the advancement of available childcare in the City.

MOVED and SECONDED

THAT the application for the rezoning of 1209 Hamilton Street to allow up to 20

child care spaces be supported.

CARRIED.

All members of the Commission present voted in favour of the motion.



From: Beverly Grieve


File:

Item #: 38/2016

Subject: 612 - 618 Brantford Street – Update on Proposed Development

RECOMMENDATION

THAT the Land Use and Planning Committee provide comments to staff on the

direction being proposed as part of an ongoing development inquiry for the properties

at 612-618 Brantford Street.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

To address the comments raised by the Land Use and Planning Committee (LUPC) on

September 14, 2015 in regards to the retention of heritage homes on their property, the

applicants have now come in with a revised proposal which includes retention of the existing

1890 home on the site. Staff would like to obtain direction from the Land Use and Planning

Committee in regards to the proposed design concept, in particular the retention of the 1890

heritage home. Should this proposed concept be supported by the LUPC, the applicants

would then move forward with an OCP Amendment and Heritage Revitalization Agreement

application to facilitate the proposed development and would come back to the LUPC with a

refined design before proceeding with public consultation.

1. PROPOSAL

The applicants are proposing to amend the Official Community Plan (OCP) and enter into

Heritage Revitalization Agreement to allow for the construction of a six-storey, multi-family

building. As part of the HRA, they are planning to retain, restore, and protect through

designation, the existing 1890 house.

5


Agenda Item 38/2016

2. POLICY AND REGULATIONS

2.1 Official Community Plan

Commercial Historic Area (CH): This area will include heritage buildings in a commercial street. It is anticipated that pedestrian scale commercial uses will be at the street level and

commercial, office or residential uses above the ground level. Depending on the provision of

public amenities, a density bonus may be considered.

Commercial and Mixed Use Development Permit Area #2 Uptown: This Area is intended to

promote the Uptown as the professional centre of New Westminster, provide opportunities

for a range of pedestrian-oriented commercial uses, and promote residential use on the upper

floors.

The proposed development would not be consistent with the CH designation or the

Development Permit Area and would require an OCP amendment to allow for a different

land use designation and for appropriate guidelines.

2.2 Zoning Bylaw

Community Commercial Districts (High Rise) (C-3): The intent of this district is to allow for

large-site high-rise, commercial, and mixed use development including pedestrian-oriented

commercial businesses and multi-family residential. All residential units are required to be

located above the first storey at street level.

The applicant’s proposal for an all-residential building does not meet the requirements for

the C-3 zone and would trigger a rezoning application since they are proposing residential

units on the first storey without any commercial component.

2.3 Heritage

A Heritage Revitalization Agreement (HRA) is an effective tool to support heritage

conservation. In exchange for long-term legal protection and exterior restoration, zoning

relaxations specific to that site and that are non-precedent-setting are incentives for property owners. An HRA does not change the zoning of the property; rather it adds a new layer

which identifies how the underlying zoning is being changed.

2.4 Family-Friendly Housing

As per the Family-Friendly Housing Bylaw No. 7741, 2015, multi-unit apartment buildings

(strata) are required to have a minimum of 30% two-bedroom and three bedroom dwelling

units, of which 10% of the total dwelling units shall have three bedrooms or more. The

proponents have indicated that this will be met through the proposed design.


Agenda Item 38/2016

3. BACKGROUND

3.1 Previous LUPC Direction

At the September 14, 2015 LUPC meeting, the LUPC encouraged the applicants to proceed with a development application that retained both of the historic houses, either on site or

offer one or both up for relocation. They also encouraged that a Heritage Revitalization

Agreement be utilized as the means by which to achieve residential at-grade. A copy of the

September 14, 2015 Land Use and Planning Committee Report and Minutes have been

attached to this report (see Attachment 1).

3.2 Site Characteristics and Context

The subject properties are part of Bent Court, an area in Uptown that has retained its historic

characteristics, scale and sense of place, with a unique cluster of heritage buildings that were

mostly built between 1911 and 1936, with the oldest house dating to 1890.

The three properties in question face north onto Brantford Street and are the only buildings that front onto this street. The properties are directly across the street from a 110 unit, 21

storey multi-family building that was constructed in 1990. Adjacent to the properties on the

west, are two single family houses, one of which has a commercial use and one a residential

use. To the east are a surface parking lot and a gas station that fronts onto Sixth Street. To

the rear (south) of the properties are three single family dwellings, two of which have a

commercial use and one a residential use, and all of which front onto Bent Court. There is

rear lane access to only 618 Brantford Street.

4. DISCUSSION


The applicants are proposing to rezone the subject property to facilitate the development of a mid-rise, 42 unit residential building, which includes ground-oriented units with private

outdoor patios. The proposal includes the retention and restoration of the 1890 heritage

house. It would be relocated to the west edge of the property in order to provide a better

transition from and juxtaposition to the neighbouring single family dwellings to the west.

The house would be a 3 bedroom detached strata unit, with private rear yard and access

directly from the street.

The drawings provided within this report are preliminary in nature and will be further

reviewed by staff depending on the direction received from the LUPC. Staff and the

applicant would like to get direction from the LUPC before further time and resources are

invested on the project design. The project drawings are attached as Attachment 2.


Agenda Item 38/2016

4.2 Project Statistics

Site Information

Applicant/Owner: Alpha Beta Developments

Architect: Boldwing Continuum Architects

Addresses 612, 616, and 618 Brantford Street

Current Zoning Community Commercial Districts (High Rise) (C-3)

Proposed Zoning Comprehensive Development District

Current OCP Land Use

Designation

Commercial Historic Area (CH)

Proposed Land Use Designation Residential – Medium Density (RM)

Site Data Properties Combined (Existing):

Frontage: 183.40 ft. (45.40 m.)

Depth: 148.48 ft. (30.00 m.)

Area: 14,688.46 sq. ft. (1,364.60 sq. m.)

Road Dedication Requirement: 1,178 sq. ft. (109.44

sq. m)

Net Site Area: 13,510.46 sq. ft. (1255.16 sq. m.)

Proposed Site Coverage New Condominium Building – 49%

Heritage Home (to be retained) – 6%

Proposed Density (FSR) 2.97

Proposed Height 62.00 ft. (18.90 m.)

Proposed Setbacks Front (from centre line of street)

- 34.00 ft. (10.40 m.)

Rear

- 12.00 ft. (3.66 m.)

Side (West)

- 31.00 ft. (9.45 m.)

Side (East)

- 21.00 ft. (6.40 m.)

Proposed Parking 50 Residential Spaces and 7 Visitor Spaces

4.3 Heritage Value

The house at 612 Brantford Street was constructed in 1890, altered in 1913 and converted to a duplex in 1948. It retains its original massing and materials. It is likely that the original

siding remains underneath the stucco. The house at 618 Brantford Street was constructed in

1941and relocated from 611 Sixth Avenue to this site in 1952 (to make way for the library).

It is also a duplex and retains its original massing and materials. Both houses have heritage

value for their age and architectural design, with the historic value of the pre-1900 house


Agenda Item 38/2016

being particularly high for its age alone. There is an expectation in the community that the

City will make every effort to encourage and facilitate retention of pre-1900 buildings.

The applicant has provided plans outlining some of their ideas in regards to the retention and

restoration of the proposed home. This has been included as Attachment X. Their concept entails adding a new addition to the rear of the existing home with a modern design which

would provide for juxtaposition between the “old” and the “new”. The applicant has provided precedent images of what this could look like (see Attachment 4).

4.4 Urban Design

With the latest design concept, the proposed six storey multi-unit residential building will be

located on the east side of the property with the 1890 heritage home located on the west side

of the property. As indicated by the applicant in their Design Rationale (see Attachment 3),

this is intended to provide for a better massing transition from the existing single-family

(zoned C-3) to the south and west to the high-rise residential and low rise commercial

developments to the north and east.

The ground-oriented units within the proposed new multi-unit residential building have been

designed to include outdoor patio areas and there will be a ground-level common indoor and outdoor amenity area which will be located at the northwest corner of the building adjacent

to the existing heritage house. There will also be a common outdoor amenity area located at

the southwest corner of the site as well as rooftop amenity area.

The applicants have been in discussions with the City’s Engineering department and are proposing to provide a road dedication to increase the width of the Brantford Street as well

as to create additional on-street parking. The initial streetscape concept includes landscaped

bump-outs to allow additional landscaping and trees along the street as well as upgraded

sidewalk for pedestrians. As the proposal moves forward, the streetscape design will be

further developed.

4.5 Heritage Revitalization Agreement

Through the HRA, the applicant will be requesting that the building be a completely

residential building with no commercial at grade. The applicants are also proposing relaxations to required off-street parking, and rear yard setbacks. This entails the following:

Rear Yard Setbacks

Required under C-3 Zoning: 13.40 ft. (4.08 metres)

Proposed: 12.00 ft. (3.66 metres)

Off-Street Parking

Required: 66 spaces (57 residential and 9 visitor)

Proposed: 57 spaces (50 residential and 7 proposed)


Agenda Item 38/2016

5. OPTIONS

The following options are offered for consideration of the LUPC:

1) That the Land Use and Planning Committee provide comments to staff on the direction being proposed as part of an ongoing development inquiry for the properties

at 612-618 Brantford Street.

2) That the Land Use and Planning Committee provide staff with alternative feedback.

3) Other

Staff recommends Option 1.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1: September 14 2015 LUPC Report and Meeting Minutes

Attachment 2: Preliminary Project Drawings

Attachment 3: Design Rationale

Attachment 4: Design Concept for Heritage Home

This report has been prepared by:

Rupinder Basi, Senior Planner

Julie Schueck, Heritage Planner

Beverly Grieve


Attachment 1

September 14, 2015 Land Use and Planning

Committee Report and Meeting Minutes



From: Beverly Grieve Director of Development Services

File: DPU00055

Report #: 404/2015

Subject: 612-618 Brantford Street Development Inquiry

RECOMMENDATION

THAT the Land Use and Planning Committee provide comments to staff on the options noted in this report for moving forward on the development inquiry for the properties at 601-608 Brantford Street.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides preliminary information on a development inquiry for the properties located at 601-608 Brantford Street in the Bent Court area of the Brow of the Hill neighbourhood. Staff would like comments on how to proceed with this inquiry:

a) Should the applicants be encouraged to wait until the Official Community Planreview is complete, including discussion of a transfer of density program andheritage considerations for Bent Court;

b) Should the applicants be encouraged to proceed with a development applicationthat retains the two historic houses through a Heritage Revitalization Agreement(HRA), an Official Community Plan amendment and a Development Permitprocess; or

c) Should the applicants be encouraged to proceed with a development applicationutilizing a standard rezoning, Official Community Plan amendment andDevelopment Permit process, and which would result in the demolition of the twohistoric houses.

1. PROPOSAL

The applicants are proposing to amend the Official Community Plan (OCP) and rezone the consolidated properties to allow for the construction of a six-storey, multi-family

4

City of New Westminster September 14, 2015 2

Agenda Item 404/2015

building. As there is no legal protection on the historic houses located on the site, the likelihood is that they would be demolished. 2. POLICY AND REGULATIONS 2.1 Official Community Plan Commercial Historic Area (CH): This area will include heritage buildings in a commercial street. It is anticipated that pedestrian scale commercial uses will be at the street level and commercial, office or residential uses above the ground level. Depending on the provision of public amenities, a density bonus may be considered. Commercial and Mixed Use Development Permit Area #2 Uptown: This Area is intended to promote the Uptown as the professional centre of New Westminster, provide opportunities for a range of pedestrian-oriented commercial uses, and promote residential use on the upper floors. The proposed development would not be consistent with the CH designation or the Development Permit Area and would require an OCP amendment to allow for a different land use designation and for appropriate guidelines. 2.2 Zoning Bylaw Community Commercial Districts (High Rise) (C-3): The intent of this district is to allow for large-site high-rise, commercial, and mixed use development including pedestrian-oriented commercial businesses and multi-family residential. All residential units are required to be located above the first storey at street level. The applicant’s proposal for an all-residential building does not meet the requirements for the C-3 zone and would trigger a rezoning application since they are proposing residential units on the first storey without any commercial component. As outlined below, an all -residential building would be preferred over a mixed use building since the property is off of Sixth Street and would not have the required exposure for retail businesses. However, there are larger policy discussions that need to occur in regards to the OCP update, heritage considerations for Bent Court, and the heritage homes on the property that would be demolished under either development scenario. This will be discussed in further detail within subsequent sections of this report. 2.3 Heritage New Westminster’s existing Official Community Plan and the New Westminster Heritage Management Plan both identify the use of Heritage Conservation Areas as an effective tool for managing the City’s heritage resources and streetscapes and to lessen the loss of heritage building stock and neighbourhood character.



A Heritage Conservation Area (HCA) is a distinct district identified for heritage conservation purposes in the OCP, and established by a bylaw. An HCA may establish design controls and may create a list of specific properties within the area which receive formal protection. Exterior alterations or new construction for properties not on the schedule must conform to design guidelines. A Heritage Revitalization Agreement (HRA) is an effective tool to support heritage conservation. In exchange for long-term legal protection and exterior restoration, zoning relaxations specific to that site and that are non-precedent-setting are incentives for property owners. An HRA does not change the zoning of the property; rather it adds a new layer which identifies how the underlying zoning is being changed. 3. BACKGROUND 3.1 Site Characteristics and Context Bent Court is an area that has retained its historic characteristics, scale and sense of place, with a unique cluster of heritage buildings that were mostly built between 1911 and 1936, with the oldest house dating to 1890. The three properties in question face north onto Brantford Street and are the only buildings that front onto this street. The properties are directly across the street from a 110 unit, 21 storey multi-family building that was constructed in 1990. Adjacent to the properties on the west, are two single family houses, one of which has a commercial use and one a residential use. To the east are a surface parking lot and a gas station that fronts onto Sixth Street. To the rear (south) of the properties are three single family dwellings, two of which have a commercial use and one a residential use, and all of which front onto Bent Court. There is rear lane access to only 618 Brantford Street.


The applicants are proposing to rezone the subject property to facilitate the development of a mid-rise, 39 unit multiple residential building, which includes 10 ground-oriented townhouse units with private outdoor patios. Being located off of Sixth Street, the subject properties do not have the exposure required for commercial/retail uses, hence, the applicants would prefer an all-residential development as opposed to a mixed use development. The drawings provided within this report are very preliminary in nature and will be further reviewed by staff depending on the direction received from the LUPC. Staff and the applicant would like to get direction from the LUPC before further money and resources are invested on the project design. The project drawings are attached as Appendix “A”. It should also be noted that the applicants may move forward with a mixed use development proposal that stays within the existing C-3 zoning parameters. This would be their back-up option pending how the process unfolds in regards to an OCP amendment/rezoning application. Staff is more supportive of an all-residential development concept as opposed to a mixed use building that may have issues in regards



to viability of commercial uses and the potential for vacant storefronts. However, al l development applications may be premature until there is some more clarity from the OCP 2041 update in regards to the long-term vision of this area and the heritage considerations for Bent Court.

3.3 Project Statistics Site Information Applicant/Owner: Alpha Beta Developments Architect: Boldwing Continuum Architects Addresses 612, 616, and 618 Brantford Street Current Zoning Community Commercial Districts (High Rise) (C-3) Proposed Zoning Comprehensive Development District Current OCP Land Use Designation

Commercial Historic Area (CH)

Proposed Land Use Designation Residential – Medium Density (RM) Site Data Properties Combined (Existing):

Frontage: 183.40 ft. (45.40 m.) Depth: 148.48 ft. (30.00 m.) Area: 14,688.46 sq. ft. (1,364.60 sq. m.) Road Dedication Requirement: 1567.66 sq. ft. (145.64

sq. m) Net Site Area: 13,120.80 sq. ft. (1218.96 sq. m.)

Proposed Site Coverage Ground-Level (Townhouses) – 52.2% 3rd Storey and Above (Condo Apartments) – 44.0%

Proposed Density (FSR) 3.01 Proposed Height 74.00 ft. (22.56 m.) Proposed Setbacks Front

Proposed Parking 59 spaces as per Zoning Bylaw requirements 3.4 Previous Heritage Conservation Area Study On March 11, 2013, Council directed staff to proceed with a Heritage Conservation Area study on four small areas in four different neighbourhoods as an early part of the Official Community Plan review. A preliminary heritage analysis was carried out for the study areas and the most appropriate properties to list were identified. Residents of each potential Heritage Conservation Area were sent information letters and were invited to information meetings. The Community Heritage Commission, the relevant Residents’ Associations and the New Westminster Preservation Heritage Society were also consulted.



After the four HCA information meetings were held, (two of which were streamed live), a follow-up letter was sent to the property owners with a “yes/no/undecided” form and a stamped return envelope. The following table summarizes responses to the question of whether or not people wished to continue discussions with the City about a Heritage Conservation Area. Given that there was little support from the study areas, Council directed staff to conclude the study of HCAs in those particular areas. Study Area Number of

Properties Responses Received

Support Non-support

Undecided

Bent Court 19 13 (68%) 3 8 2 Brow of the Hill 14 10 (71%) 2 8 0 Queensborough 32 19 (60%) 3 14 2 Queen’s Park 34 11 (32%) 3 6 2 4. DISCUSSION

4.1 Heritage Bent Court has been identified as having historic character, as evidenced by its OCP land use designation. In the 1980s, nine properties were listed on the City’s Heritage Inventory; however, none are listed on the Heritage Register nor are any protected with heritage bylaws. There have been no Heritage Revitalization Agreements in this area. As noted above, the area was approached regarding a Heritage Conservation Area, but was not well received by the majority of property owners. The general reluctance of Bent Court property owners to agree to heritage protection for their properties is likely because the properties are zoned for higher density and commercial use. The property owners have benefitted from land that looks and feels like a single-family neighbourhood but that has land value potentially far beyond that in a single-family neighbourhood. Based on comments received during the HCA study, property owners intend to benefit from this zoning when they sell their holdings in the future. An effort was made at the writing of the 1998 OCP to encourage retention of the historic houses by allowing pedestrian scale commercial uses at street level and commercial, office or residential uses above. According to City records, five of the 18 houses (28%) currently have commercial uses. If the City were to create a Heritage Conservation Area, or some other form that protects the heritage buildings from demolition, there could reasonably be some form of incentive. As part of the OCP review, a transfer of density program could be discussed with the community. It would be important to determine the level of interest in such a program, where the unused density might go, the most effective mechanism and timing, and if this would really balance the loss of density in a heritage conservation scenario.



The key question regarding this application is whether or not the loss of two historic houses, one of which is a pre-1900 house, is acceptable as part of the applicant’s proposed development concept. 4.2 Heritage Value The house at 612 Brantford Street was constructed in 1890, altered in 1913 and converted to a duplex in 1948. Although in rough shape, it retains its original massing and materials. It is likely that the original siding remains underneath the stucco. The house at 618 Brantford Street was constructed in 1941and relocated from 611 Sixth Avenue to this site in 1952 (to make way for the library). It is also a duplex and retains its original massing and materials. Both houses have heritage value for their age and architectural design, with the historic value of the pre-1900 house being particularly high for its age alone. There is an expectation in the community that the City will make every effort to encourage and facilitate retention of pre-1900 buildings. 4.3 Urban Design

Staff have not undertaken a comprehensive urban design review given the larger question regarding the heritage character of the area and the long-term land use vision for the area that will be examined as part of the OCP update. The direction received from the LUPC will have a significant impact on how this project moves forward. Some preliminary urban design comments/considerations for the attached development concept include how can it best fit within the heritage context of the neighbourhood, the provision of adequate useable open space for residents, providing a greater setback along Brantford to allow for more functional patio spaces for the ground-oriented townhouse units, and having a more prominent building step back for upper portions of the building. Another important design aspect for new development will be to encourage a contemporary design that provides a good juxtaposition between the older heritage homes within the neighbourhood and the new buildings. Providing for a more sensitive transition between the high-rise to the north and the heritage houses along Bent Court and lower density residential uses along Seventh Street is also another important consideration for this project should it move forward.

4.4 Streetscape

Brantford Street is a narrow roadway which feels more like a lane than a street. While the applicant would be required to provide a dedication to widen Brantford Street, the roadway will still be fairly narrow and the ability to get additional dedication on the opposite side of Brantford Street is unlikely for the very long-term given the presence of the existing high-rise condominium building.

4.5 Traffic

The traffic impact of the proposed development will be further considered depending on how Council wishes staff to move forward with this proposal (in light of the heritage



considerations that are being outlined within this report). A traffic analysis would be required to assess the additional traffic that the proposed development would create along Brantford Street and other nearby roadways. A positive attribute of the subject site is that it is located within walking distance to commercial amenities, schools, parks, and transit (frequent bus route along Sixth Street). 4.6 Parking The proposed drawings, which are preliminary in nature, have a shortage of three parking spaces for the residential units. The applicant would need to address this shortage through providing the additional parking spaces or by pursuing a parking reduction through the provision of car share parking (subject to a car share provider providing a commitment letter) or paying cash-in-lieu for parking. 4.7 Sustainability Depending on how the LUPC wishes staff to proceed with this proposal, the applicant would be required to provide a sustainability report card. As part of the development process, staff would work with the applicant to examine opportunities for creating a more sustainable building design than what is currently being proposed. 5. PROCESS Should Council direct staff to move forward with this proposal as a development application that retains the heritage buildings, then the applicant would be required to follow an HRA and Development Permit process concurrently with the standard OCP amendment process. If the direction from Council is to proceed with a development application that does not retain the heritage buildings, the applicant would be required to follow the standard rezoning and Development Permit process concurrently with the standard OCP amendment process. The applicant already has the right to follow the Development Permit process if they wish to keep within the existing C-3 zoning parameters. Staff would provide a follow-up report to the LUPC on the required development process, as well as providing more refined drawing submission, based on the direction received from the LUPC and the development option that the applicant chooses to pursue. 6. OPTIONS The following options are available for moving forward with this proposal and staff seeks comments from the LUPC on moving forward with this development inquiry:

a) Encourage the applicant to wait until the Official Community Plan review is complete, including discussion of a transfer of density program and heritage considerations for Bent Court;



b) Explore opportunities for retaining the historic houses as part of a OCP amendment and HRA application;

c) Allow for the redevelopment of the site at this time as part of an OCP amendment and standard rezoning application; or

d) Other Staff recommends either option (a) or (b). ATTACHMENTS: Appendix A: Project Drawings

Rupinder Basi Senior Planner

Julie Schueck Heritage Planner

For Jackie Teed Manager of Planning

Approved for Presentation to Committee

Original Signed by:

Beverly Grieve Director of Development Services

Lisa Spitale Chief Administrative Officer

Appendix A

Project Drawings

ROAD DEDICAION

SCALE: DRAWN:DESIGN:A.B., S.B.

DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:

REVISION:ISSUED FOR:

DRAWING No:

SUPERSEDES PRINTS OF THIS DRAWING NUMBER WITH REVISION NUMBERSPREVIOUS TO

COPYRIGHT. ALL DESIGNS AND THE MODIFIED LIKENESS THEREOF ARE THE SOLE PROPERTY OF BOLDWING CONTINUUM ARCHITECTS INC. AND MAY NOT BE USED WHOLLY OR IN PART WITHOUT LICENCE BEING PURCHASED. COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT INCLUDES IDEAS GAINED AND CONVERSION THEREOF INTO ANY MATERIAL FORM. CANADA COPYRIGHT ACT R.S.C. 1970©

PROJECT No:

300 - 7337 137 Street, Surrey, BC V3W 1A4T: 604 594 4787E: [email protected]

CITY FILE NO:CLIENT:

1" = 30'-0"C:\Revit\2016\21409\21409.rvt

7/17/2015 1:54:38 PM

612 ,616 , 618 BRANTFORD STREETNEW WESTMINSTER BC

AC200

CONCEPT SITE PLANBRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT

ALPHA BETA DEVELOPMENTS LTD. BCAI21409DPU 00055

2015-01-16 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW

1" = 30'-0"CONCEPT SITE PLAN

NORTH

2015-05-15 ISSUED FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT2015-07-15 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW

KEYNOTES

No. DESCRIPTION

UP

UP

UP DN

DN

COLOUR LEGEND

RESIDENTIAL INDOOR COMMON AREAS

RESIDENTIAL UNITS

GARBAGE / RECYCLING AREAS

LOADING AREAS

OUTDOOR AMENITY AREAS

RESIDENTIAL UNITS

ROOF TERRACE

1AC500

2AC500

11'-1

"R

OAD

DED

ICA

TIO

N

3.38

m

31'-1

15/

8"

9.74

mEX

ISTI

NG

RO

AD

R.O

.W.

RAM

PD

OW

NTO

U/G

PKG

BRANTFORD STREET

ENTRANCE

LOBBY

CENTERLINE OF STREET

EXISTING PROPERTY LINENEW PROPERTY LINE

6'-0

"63

'-11

11/1

6"

148' - 3 7/8"45.21 m

SID

EYA

RD

SETB

ACK

(CO

MM

ERC

IAL)

STAIR #1

STAIR #2

18'-

0"5.

49m

18'-

013

/16"

5.51

m

REAR SETBACK(RESIDENTIAL)

MAILAREA

INDOORAMENITY

OUTDOOR AMENITY

18'-11 1/2"5.78 m

18'-11 1/2"5.78 m

31'-0 1/8"9.45 m

18'-11 1/2"5.78 m

18'-11 1/2"5.78 m

20'-8"6.30 m

37'-10 7/8"11.55 m

31'-0 1/8"9.45 m

58'-6 7/8"17.85 m

AIR INTAKE

AIR

EXH

AU

ST

GARBAGE /RECYCLING

TOWNHOUSEH-1 TOWNHOUSE

H-2

TOWNHOUSEH-2

TOWNHOUSEH-2

TOWNHOUSEH-3

TOWNHOUSEH-3

TOWNHOUSEH-3

TOWNHOUSEH-3

17'-7 1/4"5.36 m

27'-0

5/8 "

8.25

m

4"

0.10

m

6'-0

"

1.83

m

TOWNHOUSEH-4

TOWNHOUSEH-5

16'-8"5.08 m

4'-0"1.22 m

103

111100

110

109 108107

101 102

103

104106105

SID

EYA

RD

SETB

ACK(

RES

IDEN

TIAL

)

SID

EYA

RD

SETB

ACK(

RES

IDEN

TIAL

)

REAR SETBACK(RESIDENTIAL)

17'-7 1/4"SIDE SETBACK

5.36 m

17'-7 1/4"SIDE SETBACK

5.36 m

18'-0

"R

EAR

SETB

ACK

5.49

m

27'-0

5/8"

FRO

NT

SETB

AC

K

8.25

m

FRONT SETBACK (RESIDENTIAL


DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:



PROJECT No:



As indicatedC:\Revit\2016\21409\21409.rvt

7/17/2015 3:03:14 PM


AC300

GROUND LEVEL PLANBRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT


NORTH

KEYNOTES

No. DESCRIPTION

2015-06-11 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2015-06-22 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2015-06-23 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2015-06-24 ISSUED FOR CLIENT AND PLANNING REVIEW2015-07-15 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW

1/8" = 1'-0"GROUND FLOOR PLAN

UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL 190.67 m297' - 5 3/4"

GROUND FLOOR93.72 m307' - 5 3/4"

3RD99.84 m327' - 6 3/4"

4TH102.90 m337' - 7 1/4"

5TH105.96 m347' - 7 3/4"

ROOF LEVEL - DN114.51 m375' - 8 1/4"

T.O. PARAPET LEVEL115.12 m377' - 8 1/4"

6TH109.02 m357' - 8 1/4"

UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL 288.08 m288' - 11 3/4"

A B

LOFT111.77 m366' - 8 1/4"

8' -

6"10

' - 0

"20

' - 1

"10

' - 0

1/2

"10

' - 0

1/2

"10

' - 0

1/2

"9'

- 0"

9' -

0"2'

- 0"

68' -

2 1

/2"

2ND96.78 m

317' - 6 1/4"

20'-1

"

6.12

m

CD 1516

2ND96.78 m

317' - 6 1/4"


DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:



PROJECT No:



3/32" = 1'-0"C:\Revit\2016\21409\21409.rvt

7/17/2015 3:03:40 PM


AC500

BUILDING SECTIONSBRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT


3/32" = 1'-0"AC3001 CROSS SECTION - NORTH SOUTH

3/32" = 1'-0"AC3002 CROSS SECTION - WEST EAST

2015-05-15 ISSUED FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT2015-06-23 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2015-06-24 ISSUED FOR CLIENT AND PLANNING REVIEW


DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:



PROJECT No:



C:\Revit\2016\21409\21409.rvt

7/17/2015 3:04:06 PM


AC501

EAST & WEST AXOSBRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT

ALPHA BETA DEVELOPMENTS LTD. Author21409DPU 00055

EAST AXO (REAR FACING)

WEST AXO (STREET FACING)


DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:



PROJECT No:



C:\Revit\2016\21409\21409.rvt

7/17/2015 3:04:36 PM


AC801

STREET LEVEL PERSPECTIVEBRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT

ALPHA BETA DEVELOPMENTS LTD. Author21409DPU 00055

NORTH (STREET VIEW)

2015-06-24 ISSUED FOR CLIENT AND PLANNING REVIEW2015-07-15 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW

REGULAR MEETING OF THE

LAND USE AND PLANNING COMMITTEE

September 14, 2015 at 12:00 p.m.

Committee Room 2, City Hall

MINUTES

PRESENT:

Mayor Jonathan Coté

Councillor Patrick Johnstone

Councillor Chuck Puchmayr

GUESTS:

Councillor Jaimie McEvoy - Alternate Committee Member

Arthur Buse - Boldwing Continuum Architects Inc.

Cheryle Beaumont - Urban Academy

Deborah McKenzie - Urban Academy

Jennifer Thompson - Urban Academy

Pablo Yuste - Omicron

STAFF: Ms. Bev Grieve - Director of Development Services

Ms. Julie Schueck - Heritage Planner

Mr. Rupinder Basi - Senior Planner

Mr. Jim Hurst - Planner

Ms. Julia Dysktra - Planning Assistant

Ms. Lauren Blake - Committee Clerk

The meeting was called to order at 12:02 p.m.

ADDITIONS / DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA

There were no amendments to the agenda.

The Consent Agenda - members may adopt in one motion all recommendations appearing

on the Consent Agenda or, prior to the vote, request an item be removed from the

Consent Agenda for debate or discussion, voting in opposition to a recommendation, or

declaring a conflict of interest with an item.

September 14, 2015 Land Use and Planning Committee Minutes Page 1

Doc #753022

MOVED and SECONDED

THAT items 8 and 11 be removed from the Consent Agenda.

CARRIED.

All members of Council present voted in favour of the motion.

MOVED and SECONDED

THAT the remaining items on the Consent Agenda be approved.

CARRIED.

All members of Council present voted in favour of the motion.

ADOPTION OF MINUTES

1. No items.

PRESENTATIONS

2. No items.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

3. No Items

REPORTS FOR ACTION

4. Brantford Proposal (Bent Court Project)

Rezoning Application

Julie Schueck, Heritage Planner, and Rupinder Basi, Senior Planner, provided an

On-Table PowerPoint presentation summarizing the report dated September 14,

2015.

Arthur Buse, Boldwing Continuum Architects Inc., provided an On-Table

PowerPoint presentation outlining details of the project as summarized in the

report dated September 14, 2015. With respect to the historic homes currently

located at 612 and 618 Brantford Street, Mr. Buse advised that the applicant has

proposed to sell and contribute to the cost of relocating the homes, donate and

relocate the homes to the City, or provide a free architectural historical record of

both homes to the City.


Doc #753022

In response to questions from the Committee, Mr. Buse provided the following

information:

• The existing context and character of the neighbourhood would be

considered during the design process; • The proposed six story townhouse and condominium design could provide

a smooth transition from the high density buildings located along Sixth

Street to the lower density residential neighbourhood of Queen’s Park; • The top floor units as proposed would have a loft space which would

provide access to the rooftop; and, • The applicant would prefer to relocate the heritage homes from the

property.

In response to questions from the Committee, Bev Grieve, Director of

Development Services, Ms. Schueck and Mr. Basi provided the following

information:

• Staff did not propose live/work units for the project, as it was anticipated

that the units would not be successful in this location; • A Heritage Revitalization Agreement (HRA) could be implemented in

order to retain the heritage homes located on the existing site, however,

there would be engineering constraints and additional costs for the

applicant to consider; and, • The Engineering Department has requested a 11 foot wide street dedication

along Brantford Street to implement sidewalks and relocate existing

utilities underground.

Discussion ensued, and the Committee expressed support for the ground-oriented

and family-oriented aspects of the proposal. In addition, the Committee noted the

following comments:

• The proposal appears to complement the neighbourhood; • The relocation of the heritage homes and the implementation of commercial

space could provide economic development benefits to the community; • The heritage homes should be physically retained, although the homes may

not be required to remain at the current site; • It was suggested that the applicant could investigate integrating one or both

of the historic homes into the proposal; • The retention of historic homes in the area should be encouraged and

supported; and, • The proposed Engineering requirements for the road dedication may

constrain the project and could be reconsidered or revised.


Doc #753022

MOVED and SECONDED

THAT the applicants be encouraged to proceed with a development application

that retains the two historic houses, either on site or via the donation of the homes

to members of the public, through a Heritage Revitalization Agreement

(HRA), an Official Community Plan amendment and a Development

Permit process.

CARRIED.

All members of the Committee present voted in favour of the motion.

5. 101 Third Ave/228 Manitoba Street (Urban Academy)

Rezoning Application

a. Staff Report

Bev Grieve, Director of Development Services, and Rupinder Basi, Senior

Planner, provided an On-Table PowerPoint presentation outlining details of

the report dated September 14, 2015.

b. Applicant Presentation

Pablo Yuste, Omicron, provided an On-Table PowerPoint presentation

regarding outlining details of the project as summarized in the report dated

September 14, 2015.

In response to questions from the Committee, Cheryle Beaumont, Head of

School, Urban Academy, provided the following information:

• It is anticipated that future expansion would be achieved on a

secondary site located in close proximity to the Queen’s Park

location; • Urban Academy parents would be directed to utilize the portion of

Royal Avenue that is available for picking up and dropping off

students; • Urban Academy would support restrictive parking signage in

Queen’s Park for the benefit of residents; and, • To satisfy the Tenant Relocation Policy, the City has suggested that

Urban Academy provide a contribution to a new rental project, or to

the renovation of an existing affordable housing project.

Deborah McKenzie, Chair, Urban Academy Board of Directors, and

Jennifer Thompson, Member, Urban Academy Board of Directors, advised


Doc #753022

Attachment 2

Preliminary Project Drawings

ZONING HRA (Multi Residential Development)

REZONING to CD for 41 UNITS & 1 HERITAGE HOUSE PROPOSED

SITE AREA 14688.46 SF 1364.60 SQ.M.

ROAD R.O.W (DEDICATION) 1178 SF 109.44 SQ.M.

NET SITE AREA 13510.46 SF 1255.16 SQ.M.

SITE COERAGESITE COVERAGE (PROPOSED) Condo 49%

SITE COVERAGE (PROPOSED) Heritage House 6%

DENSITY (uph)UPA PROPOSED 42.0 Units or 135 UPH

FSR PROPOSED 2.97 C3 Zone ‐ 5.2 FSR allowed

HEIGHT

PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT 62.00 FT. 18.90 M. C3 Zone ‐ Height permitted ‐ 109Ft

SETBACKS (BASED ON C3 ZONING) FRONT 32

RESIDENTIAL (GROUND & SECOND FLOOR) 0.00 FT. 0.00 M. 34.13 FT. 10.40 M. from Center Line of Fronting StreetRESIDENTIAL ‐ ABOVE 2ND FLOOR 9.60 FT. 2.93 M. 34.00 FT. 10.36 M. from Center Line of Fronting StreetREAR

RESIDENTIAL (GROUND & SECOND FLOOR) 13.40 FT. 4.08 M. 12.00 FT. 3.61 M.

RESIDENTIAL ‐ ABOVE 2ND FLOOR 12.80 FT. 3.90 M. 12.00 FT. 3.66 M.

SIDE ‐ WEST

RESIDENTIAL (GROUND & SECOND FLOOR) 13.40 FT. 4.08 M. 31.00 FT. 9.45 M.


SIDE ‐ EASTRESIDENTIAL (GROUND & SECOND FLOOR) 13.40 FT. 4.08 M. 21.00 FT. 6.40 M.


UNIT TYPE UNIT SIZE FLOOR SQ FT 1 ST 2 ND 3 RD 4 TH 5 TH 6 TH ROOF TOTAL

UNIT TYPE B3, 3 BEDROOM 1007 1 1 1 1 1 1 6

UNIT TYPE B4, 2 BEDROOM 894 1 1 1 1 1 1 6

UNIT TYPE D1, 2 BEDROOM 923 0 1 1 1 1 1 5

UNIT TYPE D2, 2 BEDROOM 900 1 1 1 1 1 1 6

UNIT TYPE E, 1 BEDROOM / DEN 838 0 1 1 1 1 1 5

UNIT TYPE E1, 2 BEDROOM 845 1 0 0 0 0 0 1

UNIT TYPE F, 2 BEDROOM 790 0 0 1 1 1 1 4

UNIT TYPE F2, 2 BEDROOM 765 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

UNIT TYPE F1, 1 BEDROOM / DEN 645 1 0 0 0 0 0 1

UNIT TYPE G, 1 BEDROOM 621 1 1 1 1 1 1 6

HERITIAGE HOUSE, 3 BEDROOM 1500 1 0 0 0 0 0 1

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7 7 7 7 7 7 0 42 UNITS

SALEBLE FLOOR AREA SQ FT 6412 5948 5973 5973 5973 5973 0 36252 SQ FT 3367.92 SQ.M.

CIRCULATION / CORE SQ FT 972 607 582 582 582 582 3907 SQ FT 362.97 SQ.M.

RESIDENTIAL GROSS FLOOR AREA SQ FT 7384 6555 6555 6555 6555 6555 0 40159 SQ FT 3730.89 SQ.M.

NET TO GROSS RATIO 90.3%

INDOOR AMENITY AREA 527 0 227 754 SQ FT 70.05 SQ.M.

TOTAL FLOOR AREA 527 0 0 0 0 0 227 40913 SQ FT 3800.94 SQ.M.

AMENITY AREA REQUIRED 10% OF RESIDENTIAL GROSS FLOOR AREA 4016 SQ.FT 373.09 SQ.M.

AMENITY AREA PROVIDEDGROUND FLOOR (963 sq.ft. Public Amenity + 707 sq.ft. (half of the semi private ground floor units outdoor area) 1667 SQ.FT. 154.87 SQ.M.

ROOF 2350 SQ.FT. 218.32 SQ.M.

TOTAL AREA 4017 SQ.FT. 373.19 SQ.M.

REQUIRED PARKINGONE BEDROOM / JUNIOR 1.2 /UNIT 14.4 STALLS

TWO BEDROOM 1.4 /UNIT 32.2 STALLS

THREE BEDROOM 1.5 /UNIT 10.5 STALLS

VISITOR STALLS 0.2 /UNIT 8.4 STALLS

TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING 65.5 STALLS

PARKING PROVIDED

SMALL CAR STALLS (30% of Total Stalls) 25 STALLS 44%

H/C STALLS 2 STALLS

REGULAR SIZE STALLS 30 STALLS

TOTAL CARS PROVIDED 57.0 STALLS

BICYCLE PARKING ‐ REQUIREDBICYCLE PARKING ‐ SHORT TERM (RESIDENTIAL) 6 STALLS

BICYCLE PARKING ‐ LONG TERM (RESIDENTIAL) 1.25 PER DWELLING 53 STALLS

BICYCLE PARKING ‐ TOTAL 59 STALLS

BICYCLE STALL TYPES ‐ REQUIREDBICYCLE PARKING ‐ HORIZONTAL (MINIMUM 50%) 50% 29 STALLS

BICYCLE PARKING ‐ LOCKERS (MINIMUM 20%) 20% 12 STALLS

BICYCLE PARKING ‐ PROVIDED SHORT TERM BICYCLE PARKING ‐ RESIDENTIAL 6 STALLS

LONG TERM BICYCLE PARKING ‐ RESIDENTIAL 60 STALLS

BICYCLE PARKING ‐ TOTAL 66 STALLS

BICYCLE STALL TYPES ‐ PROVIDEDBICYCLE PARKING ‐ HORIZONTAL 18 STALLS

BICYCLE PARKING ‐ VERTICAL 30 STALLS

BICYCLE PARKING ‐ LOCKERS 12 STALLS

60 STALLS

OUTDOOR AMENITY AREA REQUIREMENTS

PARKING REQUIREMENTS

BICYCLE PARKING REQUIREMENTS

PROJECT STATISTICS (2016‐04‐26) Remarks

1.829m

Required Proposed

UNIT STATISTICS

INCLUDES 7 VISITOR

ROAD D

EDICATIO

N

SCALE: DRAWN:DESIGN:

A.B., S.B.

DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:

SUPERSEDES PRINTS OF THIS DRAWING NUMBER WITH REVISION NUMBERS

PREVIOUS TO


PROJECT No:

300 - 7337 137 Street, Surrey, BC V3W 1A4

T: 604 594 4787

E: [email protected]

CITY FILE NO:

CLIENT:

1" = 30'-0"

E:\REVIT 2016\21409.rvt

4/25/2016 4:16:32 PM

AC200

CONTEXT SITE PLANBRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT

ALPHA BETA DEVELOPMENTS LTD.BCAI21409

612, 616, 618 BRANTFORD STREET

NEW WESTMINSTER BC

DPU 00055

2015-01-16 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW

1" = 30'-0"

CONCEPT SITE PLANNORTH

2015-05-15 ISSUED FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT2015-07-15 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-13 REISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-26 LUPC SUBMISSION

KEYNOTES

No. DESCRIPTION

UP

1

AC500

2

AC500

AC401

3

AC4011

AC401 2

A

PH

1

2

9' -

10 1

/8"

3.0

0 m

9' -

10 1

/8"

3.0

0 m

8' -

0 1

/16"

PA

RK

ING

2.4

4 m

5' -

10 7

/8"

SID

EW

ALK

1.8

0 m

1' -

4 5

/32"

LA

ND

SC

AP

E B

LV

D.

0.4

1 m

12' -

0"

PR

OP

OS

ED

SE

TB

AC

K

3.6

6 m

CENTER LINE OF ROAD

EDGE OF NEW ROAD

EDGE OF ROAD - EXISTING ROADPAVEMENT +/-

148' - 6 5/8"

+/- 45.28 m

EXISTING CARRIAGE HOUSE

RA

MP

DO

WN

TO

U/G

PK

G

LETDOWN

22' - 7"

6.88 m

6' - 6 5/8"

2.00 m

22' - 11 19/32"

7.00 m

22' - 11 1/2"

7.00 m

22' - 11 19/32"

7.00 m

6' - 3 19/32"

1.92 m

24' - 2 3/4"

7.38 m

EXISTING SIDEWALK

GARBAGE /RECYCLING

RELOCATED TWO-STOREY PORTION OF

HERITAGE HOUSE

HERITAGE HOUSEOUTDOOR GREEN

SPACE

20' - 11 15/16"PROPOSED SETBACK

6.40 m

4' - 3 9/16"PROPOSED HERITAGE HOUSE SETBACK

1.31 m

34' -

1 3

/16"

CE

NT

ER

LIN

E O

F R

OA

D S

ET

BA

CK

10.3

9 m

AC400

1

24' - 3 7/16"

7.40 m

2' - 9"

0.84 m 20' - 9 21/32"

6.34 m

3' - 1 7/8"

0.96 m

NEW TWO-STOREY

ADDITION

COMMON OUTDOORAMENITY


D1

G

B3

ELEC

CORRIDOR

D2

B4

F1

AMENITY RM

MAIL

LOBBY

STAIR #1

STAIR #2

EXISTING PROPERTYLINE

FRONT SETBACK

EXISTING PROPERTYLINE

9' -

0"

2.7

4 m

70' -

0"

21.3

4 m

NEW PROPERTYLINE

96' - 0"

29.26 m

21' - 3 7/8"

6.50 m

9' - 9 29/32"

2.99 m

96' - 0"

29.26 m

AIR INTAKE

AIR EXHAUST

7' -

11 5

/16"

DE

DIC

AT

ION

2.4

2 m

PARKINGPARKING PARKING


A.B., S.B.

DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:


PREVIOUS TO


PROJECT No:


T: 604 594 4787


CITY FILE NO:

CLIENT:

1/8" = 1'-0"

E:\REVIT 2016\21409.rvt

4/25/2016 4:17:14 PM

AC201

CONCEPT SITE PLAN ADJUSTED ROAD

WIDTH, SIDEWALK, PARKING & LANDSCAPE

BLVD

BRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT



NEW WESTMINSTER BC

DPU 00055

1/8" = 1'-0"

SITE PLAN

KEYNOTES

No. DESCRIPTION

NORTH

2016-01-08 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW & COORDINATION2016-01-21 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-01-28 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-02-03 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-04-11 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-13 REISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-26 LUPC SUBMISSION

1ST FLOOR AREA SCHEDULE

Number TYPE SUITE TYPE AreaGROUND FLOOR

101 AMENITY Common 527 SF

102 E1 2 Bed Room 845 SF

103 D2 2 Bed Room 900 SF

104 B4 2 Bed Room 894 SF

105 B3 3 Bed Room 1,007 SF

106 G 1 Bed Room 621 SF

107 F1 1 Bed Room + Den 645 SF

108 CORE Common 972 SF

6,412 SF

1

AC500

2

AC500

AC401

3

APH

1

2

148' - 2 15/16"

45.18 m

AIR INTAKE

AIR EXHAUST

RA

MP

DO

WN

TO

U/G

PK

G

21' - 0 11/32"

6.41 m

21' - 3 29/32"

6.50 m

9' - 9 29/32"

2.99 m

96' - 0"

29.26 m

20' - 10 5/32"

6.35 m

GARBAGE /RECYCLING

96' - 0"

29.26 m

70' -

0"

21.3

4 m

96' - 0"

29.26 m

E1

G

B3

ELEC

48' - 0"

14.63 m

48' - 0"

14.63 m

CORRIDOR

STAIR #1

STAIR #2

D2

B4

F1

RELOCATED TWO-STOREY PORTION OF

HERITAGE HOUSE

HERITAGE HOUSEOUTDOOR GREEN

SPACE

NEW TWO-STOREY

ADDITION

AMENITY RM

MAIL

LOBBY

COMMON OUTDOORAMENITY SPACE


DN

DN


A.B., S.B.

DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:


PREVIOUS TO


PROJECT No:


T: 604 594 4787


CITY FILE NO:

CLIENT:

3/16" = 1'-0"

E:\REVIT 2016\21409.rvt

4/25/2016 4:18:08 PM

AC302

GROUND LEVEL PLANBRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT



NEW WESTMINSTER BC

DPU 00055

KEYNOTES

No. DESCRIPTION

2015-12-07 ISSUED FOR COORDINATION WITH CIVIL2016-01-08 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW &COORDINATION2016-01-21 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-02-03 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-03-09 ISSUED CLIENT REVIEW2016-03-11 ISSUED CLIENT REVIEW2016-03-16 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-04-11 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-13 REISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-26 LUPC SUBMISSION

3/16" = 1'-0"

GROUND LEVEL PLANNORTH

1ST FLOOR AREA SCHEDULE

Number TYPE SUITE TYPE AreaGROUND FLOOR

101 AMENITY Common 527 SF

102 E1 2 Bed Room 845 SF

103 D2 2 Bed Room 900 SF

104 B4 2 Bed Room 894 SF

105 B3 3 Bed Room 1,007 SF

106 G 1 Bed Room 621 SF

107 F1 1 Bed Room + Den 645 SF

108 CORE Common 972 SF

6,412 SF

A PH

1

2

4,016 SQ.FT. OF OUTDOOR AMENITY REQUIRED(10% OF GROSS FLOOR AREA)

(2,350 SQ.FT. PROVIDED AT THS ROOF LEVEL)963 + 704 SQ.FT. (HALF PRIVATE AMENITY) = 1,667

SQ.FT. PROVIDED AT GROUND LEVEL)

OUTDOOR AMENITY

EXERSICE ROOM

CORRIDOR

STAIR #1

STAIR #2

DN

DN


A.B., S.B.

DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:


PREVIOUS TO


PROJECT No:


T: 604 594 4787


CITY FILE NO:

CLIENT:

3/16" = 1'-0"

E:\REVIT 2016\21409.rvt

4/25/2016 4:18:30 PM

AC305

ROOF PLANBRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT



NEW WESTMINSTER BC

DPU 00055

NORTH

2015-06-24 ISSUED FOR CLIENT AND PLANNING REVIEW2015-07-15 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2015-07-15 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2015-10-15 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2015-11-24 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-01-21 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-03-10 ISSUED CLIENT REVIEW2016-03-16 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-04-11 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-13 REISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-26 LUPC SUBMISSION

KEYNOTES

No. DESCRIPTION

3/16" = 1'-0"

LOFT / ROOF LEVEL PLAN

ROOF FLOOR AREA SCHEDULE

Number TYPE Area701 CORE 392 SF

702 OUT DOOR AMENITY 2,351 SF

703 EXERCISE RM 227 SF

2,970 SF


A.B., S.B.

DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:


PREVIOUS TO


PROJECT No:


T: 604 594 4787


CITY FILE NO:

CLIENT:

1/8" = 1'-0"

E:\REVIT 2016\21409.rvt

4/25/2016 4:19:19 PM

AC400

EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSBRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT



NEW WESTMINSTER BC

DPU 00055

2015-05-15 ISSUED FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT2016-01-21 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-01-28 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-02-03 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-03-16 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-04-11 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-13 REISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-26 LUPC SUBMISSION

1/8" = 1'-0"

NORTH (STREET) WITH NEIGHBORHOOD

GROUND FLOOR

93.88 m

308' - 0 1/4"

3RD

100.59 m

330' - 0 1/4"

4TH

103.64 m

340' - 0 1/4"

5TH

106.69 m

350' - 0 1/4"

6TH

109.73 m

360' - 0 1/4"

PENTHOUSE

116.44 m

382' - 0 1/4"

ROOF

112.78 m

370' - 0 1/4"

2ND

97.54 m

320' - 0 1/4"

GROUND FLOOR

93.88 m

308' - 0 1/4"

3RD

100.59 m

330' - 0 1/4"

4TH

103.64 m

340' - 0 1/4"

5TH

106.69 m

350' - 0 1/4"

6TH

109.73 m

360' - 0 1/4"

PENTHOUSE

116.44 m

382' - 0 1/4"

ROOF

112.78 m

370' - 0 1/4"

2ND

97.54 m

320' - 0 1/4"

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

12' -

0"

3.6

6 m

12' -

0"

3.6

6 m


A.B., S.B.

DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:


PREVIOUS TO


PROJECT No:


T: 604 594 4787


CITY FILE NO:

CLIENT:

1/8" = 1'-0"

E:\REVIT 2016\21409.rvt

4/25/2016 4:20:20 PM

AC401

EXTERIOR ELEVATIONSBRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT



NEW WESTMINSTER BC

DPU 00055

2015-05-15 ISSUED FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT2016-01-21 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-01-28 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-02-03 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-03-16 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-04-11 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-13 REISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-26 LUPC SUBMISSION

1/8" = 1'-0"

EAST 1/8" = 1'-0"

WEST

1/8" = 1'-0"

SOUTH

UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL 1

90.66 m

297' - 5 1/4"

GROUND FLOOR

93.88 m

308' - 0 1/4"

3RD

100.59 m

330' - 0 1/4"

4TH

103.64 m

340' - 0 1/4"

5TH

106.69 m

350' - 0 1/4"

T.O. PARAPET

113.54 m

372' - 6 1/4"

6TH

109.73 m

360' - 0 1/4"

UNDERGROUND PARKING LEVEL 2

87.74 m

287' - 10 1/4"

PENTHOUSE

116.44 m

382' - 0 1/4"

A

PH

PH

ROOF

112.78 m

370' - 0 1/4"

9' -

7"

2.9

2 m

10' -

7"

3.2

3 m

12' -

0"

3.6

6 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

2' -

6"

0.7

6 m

2ND

97.54 m

320' - 0 1/4"

PA

PA

PB PC PD PE PF PG

PJ 22' -

0"

6.7

1 m

12

2' -

6"

0.7

6 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

10' -

0"

3.0

5 m

12' -

0"

3.6

6 m

10' -

7"

3.2

3 m

9' -

7"

2.9

2 m

64' -

6"

19.6

6 m


A.B., S.B.

DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:


PREVIOUS TO


PROJECT No:


T: 604 594 4787


CITY FILE NO:

CLIENT:

3/32" = 1'-0"

E:\REVIT 2016\21409.rvt

4/25/2016 4:20:34 PM

AC500

BUILDING SECTIONSBRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT



NEW WESTMINSTER BC

DPU 00055

3/32" = 1'-0"AC201

1 CROSS SECTION - WEST-EAST 3/32" = 1'-0"AC201

2 CROSS SECTION - SOUTH-NORTH

2015-05-15 ISSUED FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT2015-06-23 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2015-06-24 ISSUED FOR CLIENT AND PLANNING REVIEW2016-01-08 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW & COORDINATION2016-01-21 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-11 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-13 REISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-26 LUPC SUBMISSION


A.B., S.B.

DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:


PREVIOUS TO


PROJECT No:


T: 604 594 4787


CITY FILE NO:

CLIENT:

E:\REVIT 2016\21409.rvt

4/25/2016 4:22:14 PM

AC800

EAST & WEST AXOSBRANTFORD DEVELOPMENT



NEW WESTMINSTER BC

DPU 00055

EAST AXO (REAR FACING)

EXT - AXO (STREET FACING)

2016-01-08 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW & COORDINATION2016-01-21 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-01-28 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-02-03 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-03-09 ISSUED CLIENT REVIEW2016-03-11 ISSUED CLIENT REVIEW2016-03-16 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-04-11 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-13 REISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-26 LUPC SUBMISSION


A.B., S.B.

DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:


PREVIOUS TO


PROJECT No:


T: 604 594 4787


CITY FILE NO:

CLIENT:

E:\REVIT 2016\21409.rvt

4/25/2016 4:23:05 PM

AC801




NEW WESTMINSTER BC

DPU 00055

2015-05-15 ISSUED FOR DEVELOPMENT PERMIT2015-06-24 ISSUED FOR CLIENT AND PLANNING REVIEW2015-07-15 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-01-21 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-01-28 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-02-03 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-03-16 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-04-11 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-13 REISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-26 LUPC SUBMISSION

STREETVIEW


A.B., S.B.

DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:


PREVIOUS TO


PROJECT No:


T: 604 594 4787


CITY FILE NO:

CLIENT:

E:\REVIT 2016\21409.rvt

4/25/2016 4:31:02 PM

AC802




NEW WESTMINSTER BC

DPU 00055

2015-06-24 ISSUED FOR CLIENT AND PLANNING REVIEW2015-07-15 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-01-21 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-01-28 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-02-03 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-03-16 ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW2016-04-11 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-13 REISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-26 LUPC SUBMISSION

NORTHEAST STREET VIEW


A.B., S.B.

DRAWING:PROJECT:

FILE PATH:


DRAWING No:


PREVIOUS TO


PROJECT No:


T: 604 594 4787


CITY FILE NO:

CLIENT:

E:\REVIT 2016\21409.rvt

4/25/2016 4:32:02 PM

AC803


ALPHA BETA DEVELOPMENTS LTD.Author21409


NEW WESTMINSTER BC

DPU 00055

2016-04-11 ISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-13 REISSUED FOR PLANNING REVIEW2016-04-26 LUPC SUBMISSION

MAIN ENTRANCE AND OUTDOOR AMENITY

Attachment 3

Design Rationale

Attachment 4

Design Concept for Heritage

Home

BB

Q

UP

PO

RC

H

B R

A N

T F

O R

D S

T R

E E

T

EX

IS

TIN

G H

ER

IT

AG

E

BU

IL

DIN

G

MA

IN

57

0 S

F

TW

O S

TO

RE

Y A

DD

IT

IO

N

MA

IN

17

1 S

F

TO

TA

L A

RE

A

15

50

SF

27'-7" 22'-0" 7'-0"

SC

RE

EN

SCREEN

S H

A R

E D

G A

R D

E N

PL

AN

TIN

G/G

RA

SS

PLANTING/GRASS

6'-0"1'-10"

UP

EN

TR

Y

LIV

IN

G

DIN

IN

G

KIT

CH

EN

F

20'-8"

4'-0"

SCREEN

SCREENT

ER

RA

CE

PL

AN

TIN

G/G

RA

SS

12'-11"13'-6"

ST

AIR

N:

1"

R:

16 @

7 7

/8"

RU

N:

9 3

/4"

EX

IS

TIN

G

DO

OR

EX

IS

TIN

G

WIN

DO

W

NE

W

WIN

DO

W

7'-10"

B I R M I N G H A M & W O O D• 6 1 2 B R A N T F O R D S T R E E T •

NORTH 1

Proposed site plan for 612 Brantford Street

Existing house at 612 Brantford St.

B I R M I N G H A M & W O O D• 6 1 2 B R A N T F O R D S T R E E T • 2

UP

PORCH

B R A N T F O R D S T R E E T

EXISTING HERITAGE

BUILDING

MAIN 570 SF

TWO STOREY ADDITION

MAIN 171 SF

TOTAL AREA

1550 SF

27'-7"

SCREEN

PLANTING/GRASS

6'-0"

1'-10"

UP

ENTRY

LIVING

DINING

KITCHEN

F

20'-8"4'-0"

SC

RE

EN

SC

RE

EN

TERRACE

PLANTING/GRASS12'-11"

13'-6"

STAIR

N: 1"

R: 16 @ 7 7/8"

RUN: 9 3/4"

EXISTING

DOOR

EXISTING

WINDOW

NEW

WINDOW

7'-10"

DN

EXISTING HERITAGE

BUILDING

SECOND 570 SF

BEDROOMBATH

BEDROOM

BEDROOM

ENSUITEW/D

RELOCATED

WINDOW

EXISTING

WINDOW

NE

W

WIN

DO

W

NE

W

WIN

DO

W

5’ -1

" W

AL

L H

EIG

HT

5’ -1

" W

AL

L H

EIG

HT

5’ -1

" W

AL

L H

EIG

HT

5’ -1

" W

AL

L H

EIG

HT

TWO STOREY ADDITION

SECOND 238.5 SF

NORTH

Main floor plan for 612 Brantford St. Second floor plan

IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A VERY MODEST OLD HOUSE TO BECOMEAN ELEGANT, MODERN LIVING SPACE AND HOUSE FAMILIES

FOR ANOTHER HUNDRED YEARS.


Rotterdam

Norway

4

Seattle

B I R M I N G H A M & W O O D• 6 1 2 B R A N T F O R D S T R E E T •


France


England

director's / manager's report (oral report)

Documents