MINUTES of a regular meeting
of the MUNICIPAL COUNCIL of The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay, held in
the Council Chambers, Oak Bay Municipal Hall,
|
PRESENT: |
Mayor C. M. Causton, Chairman Councillor H. Braithwaite Councillor S. F. B. Carson Councillor A. R. Cassidy Councillor P. Copley Councillor J. D. Herbert Councillor N. B. Jensen |
|
STAFF: |
Municipal Clerk, L. Hilton Director of Building and Planning, N. Beattie Municipal Treasurer, P. A. Walker |
On behalf of Council, Mayor
Causton offered his condolences to Karen Green, Confidential Secretary, on the
passing of her mother.
Mayor Causton called the
meeting to order at
MINUTES OF MEETING:
Council –
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor
Braithwaite, That the minutes of the Council meeting held on
CARRIED
Committee of the Whole –
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Copley,
That the minutes of the Committee of the Whole meeting held on
CARRIED
COMMUNICATIONS:
|
1. |
2006-300 |
2006 CIBC RUN FOR THE CURE, Re Request for |
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That approval be given
for the closure of Cedar Hill Cross Road between Henderson Road and Gordon Head
Road, and the east side of Gordon Head Road from Cedar Hill Cross Road to the
municipal boundary with the District of Saanich, on Sunday, October 1, 2006 to
facilitate the staging of the 2006 CIBC Run for the Cure, subject to:
(a) The
event organizers indemnifying the Municipality from any liability in connection
with the event and providing evidence of insurability in this regard;
(b) Adherence
with the traffic management plan approved by the Oak Bay Police
Department;
and
(c) The
event organizers bearing any extraordinary costs incurred by the Municipality
in
connection
with the road closure.
CARRIED
|
2. |
2006-301 |
JANET KNIGHT, Re Request for
Street Closure for Block Party on |
Mayor Causton indicated that the applicant had
contacted the Municipality to request that the street closure for the proposed
block party be approved for
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That permission be
given for the closure of
CARRIED
|
3. |
2006-302 |
CATHERINE HOLMES, Re Request to
Make Application to Minister for Special Authority to Waive Late
Tax Payment Penalty |
Attention was drawn to the request from Catherine
Holmes for Council to make an application to the Province for permission to
waive the late tax payment penalty, given the serious health issues faced by
her husband that had prevented the property taxes on their property being paid.
Responding to questions from Council, the Municipal
Treasurer noted that while the circumstances were indeed unfortunate, they were
not that dissimilar to other situations where a penalty had been levied for
taxes unpaid by the due date, where it was felt a waiver was not
warranted. Staff at the Municipal Hall,
said Ms. Walker, are faced with numerous and somewhat similar situations each
year where penalties are imposed for unpaid taxes, cautioning Council that it
would be difficult to separate those cases from Ms. Holmes’ case.
After considering the facts of the request, it was the
view of Council that the circumstances of the case were sufficiently singular
and extenuating to warrant an application to the Minister for the required
authority to waive the penalty.
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Jensen, That, pursuant to
Section 315.3 of the Local Government Act,
an application be made to the Minister of Community Services for the authority
to waive the 10% tax penalty for late payment of 2006 property taxes for
CARRIED
|
4. |
2006-303 2006-303-1 |
ZEBRA DESIGN, MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATOR, Re Request for Change to Covenant – |
David Yamamoto, Zebra Designs, representing the owners of
Responding to questions from Council, the Director of
Building and Planning confirmed that the requested increase in floor area for
the upper floor would still meet the zoning regulations, and the other parties
to the covenant would also have to agree to the proposed changes.
Noting that the covenant also requires Council
approval of plans for the renovations and that
the plans for the renovation could be channelled through the Advisory
Design Panel for a recommendation to Council, it was the majority view of
Council that the Advisory Design Panel’s recommendation should be sought prior
to making a final decision on whether or not to approve the amendment to the
covenant.
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That the plans for
renovations to
CARRIED
(Councillor Carson against the motion)
|
5. |
2006-304 |
Re Request for Road Closures – Tour de Rock Event |
That the request for:
all in connection with the Oak Bay Business
Improvement Association’s Tour de Rock fundraising event, as laid out in
correspondence item 2006-304, be approved subject to:
a) The event organizers executing a letter of undertaking setting out
the terms and conditions under which the occupancy and road closure is
permitted, and providing evidence of insurability in this regard;
b) The event organizers adherence with a traffic management plan
approved by the Oak Bay Police Department; and
c) The event organizer assuming all responsibility for any and all
extraordinary costs incurred by the Municipality in connection with the event.
CARRIED
|
6. |
2006-305 2006-305-1 2006-305-2 2006-305-3 2006-305-4 |
NORMAN SPECTOR, LARRY JEFFERSON AND BARBARA TAYLOR, CARMEN F. BERTRAM, DOROTHY YOULDEN, JACQUELINE HORTON, GENESIS LAW GROUP, Re Development Variance Permit Application – |
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That
correspondence items 2006-305 through 2006-305-4, be received.
Responding to questions from Council, the Municipal
Clerk confirmed that the issue before Council at this time was the development
variance application with respect to the shape of the lots within the proposed
subdivision of the property.
The Director of Building and Planning, also responding
to questions, indicated that later on, through the subdivision approval process,
should the application proceed to that point, staff, along with the applicant,
would be looking into options to ensure traffic safety with respect to access
to the newly created lots.
Attention was drawn to the requirement by the
Subdivision Approving Officer for a covenant to restrict the height of any
residence constructed on the proposed Strata Lot D, as described in the
resolution appearing later in the agenda, and the point was made by a member of
Council that design controls on any new homes built on the new lots would also
be desirable.
The question was
then called.
CARRIED
|
7. |
2006-306 |
CHARLINE AND MARK HOOPER, Re Development Variance Permit Application – |
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That correspondence
item 2006-30 be received.
CARRIED
|
8. |
2006-307 2006-307-1 2006-307-2 2006-307-3 |
FRANCES PEPLER, ANDREW MOYER, MARION SPILLETTE, PETER BAZOWSKI, Re Development Permit with Variance Application – |
MOVED by
Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That correspondence
items 2006-307 through 2006-307-3, be received.
Responding to concerns raised by a member of Council
regarding the proposed variance and its departure from the sign regulations, it
was pointed out by another member that the proposed variance for a projecting
hanging sign would be preferable to other options available under the
regulations.
The question was then called.
CARRIED
(Councillor Herbert against the motion)
|
9. |
2006-308 |
IRENE SZLANKO, Re Development Variance Permit Application – |
Councillor Cassidy advised that he would be unable to
participate in the discussion on the development variance permit application
for
Councillor Cassidy
left the meeting at
MOVED by
Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Jensen, That correspondence
item 2006-308 be received.
Although it was acknowledged that the item before
Council was the development variance permit application, it was noted that the landscaping
plans, attached to the correspondence from the applicants, would be reviewed by
the Advisory Design Panel in the near future.
The Director of Building and Planning noted that
although the landscaping plans, including the proposed fence noted in the
Szlanko’s correspondence would be reviewed by the Advisory Design Panel,
Council does not have the power to approve or reject the proposed fencing under
the Uplands Regulations Bylaw.
It was noted by
The question was then called.
CARRIED
Councillor Cassidy returned to the meeting at 8:08
p.m.
|
10. |
2006-309 2006-309-1 2006-309-2 2006-309-3 |
ADELE CURTIS, TONY MARSHALL, MARGARET AND NEIL WALKER, OAK BAY GREEN COMMITTEE, Re Expanded Tree Protection Bylaw |
MOVED by
Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor
Braithwaite, That correspondence items 2006-310 through 2006-310-6 be received.
CARRIED
|
11. |
2006-310 2006-310-1 2006-310-2 2006-310-3 2006-310-4 2006-310-5 2006-310-6 |
MUNICIPAL CLERK, HINDA AVERY, ROSEMARY SHORT, G. G. MAYHEW, JOHN C. ADAMS, COOK ROBERTS, DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND PLANNING, BISON PROPERTIES, WALKER HOSPITALITY GROUP, Re Oak Bay Beach Hotel (Bison Properties Ltd.) – Application for Rezoning/Official Community Plan Amendment /Discharge of Land Use
Contract/ Development Permit |
Kevin Walker, Bison Properties Ltd., provided an overview of the information
contained in correspondence item 2006-310-6, noting that the materials address
the various questions and requests made by Committee of the Whole at its
meeting held August 14, 2006.
The photographs of The Pier project underway in the
Town of
Mr. Walker noted that a complete animation package
would be available for public viewing within the following week, with
additional public information meetings being held for that purpose.
There was discussion regarding the
public/administration main floor space comparison to other hotel developments,
and Mr. Walker explained the various areas that were and were note included in
those calculations.
The discussion turned to the “hotel residence” portion
of the development, and Mr. Walker answered questions from Council, indicating
that the actual floor space of the hotel residence may be variable early on in
the project, however, fixed floor areas for the hotel residences would be
implemented later on.
Mr. Walker went on to answer further questions from
Council with respect to the plans for the dock space, noting that the proposed
dock facility would provide two, thirty-six feet docks for mooring boats. The 40 foot connection between the two arms
of the dock, he said, would not be used for boats.
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That correspondence
items 2006-310 through 2006-310-6 be received.
CARRIED
The question of whether or not to hear from the public
at this point was raised, and there was agreement to permit anyone who so
wished to provide new comments regarding any aspect of the proposal.
John Adams, 130 Linden Avenue, representing a group of White Hall
Apartments residents (1120 Beach Drive), queried whether the proposed amendment
addressed the comments made by Councillor Carson at the August 14, 2006
Committee of the Whole meeting, noting that he thought the covenant wording was
very general, where it should be more specific with respect to access to the
waterfront.
Responding to Mr. Adams’ concerns regarding the
availability of the materials contained in the Council Agenda, the Municipal
Clerk noted that the information was all available at the Municipal Hall.
Councillor Carson indicated that the revised covenant
wording did address his concerns with respect to access to the foreshore.
Hinda Avery, Seaview Apartments, noted that she was unsure how the
concerns of the immediate neighbours would be addressed, and it was suggested
that the concerns she highlighted, such as safety and noise in the evenings and
lighting, among other things, would largely be addressed through good
management of the property.
Mr. Walker said that good management of the property,
including retaining the peace and quiet currently enjoyed on the hotel property
would be a priority for him as an Hotelier in order to be successful.
Responding to questions regarding the loss of views
for neighbouring properties, Mr. Walker reiterated that the computer generated
view studies expected to be complete in the near future would be of interest to
the hotel’s neighbours, and would be available for viewing.
The question was then called.
CARRIED
NEW BUSINESS:
Councillor Herbert provided an overview of upcoming
Centennial events, noting that a croquet tournament would be held at
Councillor
Herbert said that sales of the Centennial Book are brisk, noting that it is a
quality publication being enjoyed by many.
TABLED:
Development Variance Permit –
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor
Braithwaite, That the
following motion be lifted from the table:
That the Director of Building and Planning be authorized to issue a
development variance permit with respect to the proposed bare land strata
subdivision of 925 Foul Bay Road (Lot 1, Sections 23 and 68, Victoria District,
Plan 2600, except parts in Parcel A (DD 239888-I) and in Plan 10577),
which would vary the requirements of Section 3.6.3 of Bylaw No. 3531, Zoning
Bylaw, 1986, to allow the proposed Strata Lots C and D to
be created with a general shape different from the shape of the lots in the
immediate area,
substantially as shown on the sketch plan of the proposed bare land
strata subdivision prepared by Glen Mitchell Land Surveying Inc., as appended
to Committee of the Whole agenda item #2006-207, being a memorandum from the
Director of Building and Planning dated July 12, 2006, when and if the
Approving Officer grants preliminary approval to the proposed subdivision, and
upon the applicant satisfying all conditions of preliminary approval set out by
the Approving Officer including but not limited to the payment of all required
off-site servicing costs and the execution of a covenant in favour of the
Municipality which, in addition to any other restrictions required by the
Approving Officer pursuant to his application of the Bare
Land Strata Regulations, sets a 1½ storey height
limit on any residence constructed on the proposed Strata Lot D.
The discussion with respect to
the desirability of registering a design covenant against each of the newly
created lots was discussed, and Mr. Miller, Abstract Developments,
indicated that he would not be opposed to such a covenant.
The question on the main motion was then
called.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy,
That, should the subdivision of 925 Foul Bay Road be approved by the Approving Officer, a
restrictive covenant be registered against the additional lots to require
architectural design and siting approval of any new development.
CARRIED
Development Variance Permit –
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That the
following motion be lifted from the table:
That
the Director of Building and Planning be authorized to issue a Development
Variance Permit with respect to 2169 Beaverbrooke Place (Lot 14, Section 22,
Victoria District, Plan 1136), varying the following provisions of Bylaw No.
3531, being the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended, with respect to the setback of
a principal building:
|
Bylaw Section |
Required |
Requested |
Variance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5.4(2)(a) Minimum Front |
7.62
m |
5.90
m |
1.72
m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.6.5(1) Maximum Stair Projection
into Required Front Setback |
1.2
m |
4.85
m |
3.65
m |
to
accommodate the excavation of an existing basement and reconstruction of front
steps, as shown on the plans appended to Committee of the Whole agenda item
#2006-210, being a memorandum from the Director of Building and Planning dated
July 12, 2006.
CARRIED
The question on the main motion was then called.
CARRIED
Development Variance Permit –
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Copley, That the
following motion be lifted from the table:
That
the Director of Building and Planning be authorized to issue a Development
Variance Permit with respect to 2526 Eastdowne Road (Lot 5, Section 28,
Victoria District, Plan 8990), varying the following provision of Bylaw No.
3531, being the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended, with respect to the maximum permissible
paved portion of the front yard of a residential lot:
|
Bylaw Section |
Required |
Requested |
Variance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.15.1 Maximum Paved Portion of
Front Yard |
25% |
43%
|
18%
|
to
accommodate a vehicle turnaround area, as shown on the plans appended to Committee
of the Whole item #2006-211, being a memorandum from the Director of Building
and Planning dated July 12, 2006.
CARRIED
The question on the main motion was then called.
CARRIED
Development Permit –
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Jensen, That the
following motion be lifted from the table:
That
the Director of Building and Planning be authorized to issue a Development
Permit with respect to 2265 Oak Bay Avenue (Lot A, Sections 23 & 69,
Victoria District, Plan 31610), allowing exterior alterations to the building
located thereon in the form of the installation of a business sign as described
in Committee of the Whole agenda item #2006-208, being a memorandum from the
Director of Building and Planning dated July 11, 2006, and as more particularly
shown in the photographic representation attached thereto, and which in
addition would vary Section 15(1) of Bylaw No. 3946, Sign Bylaw, 1997, to
permit the said sign which is of a type that would not otherwise be permitted,
namely a hanging sign projecting out from the face of the building.
CARRIED
The question on the main motion was then called.
CARRIED
(Councillor Herbert against the motion)
Development Variance Permit –
Councillor Cassidy again advised
that he would be unable to participate in the discussion of the development
variance permit application for
Councillor Cassidy left the
meeting at 9:40 p.m.
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That the
following resolution be lifted from the table:
That
the Director of Building and Planning be authorized to issue a Development
Variance Permit with respect to 3045 Uplands Road (Lot 2, Section 31, Victoria
District, Plan 5615), varying the following provisions of Bylaw No. 3531, being
the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended, with respect to the setback of a principal
building:
|
Bylaw Section |
Required |
Requested |
Variance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.2.4(2)(c)
& Schedule “C” Minimum Interior Side |
3.96
m |
2.98
m |
0.98
m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.2.4(2)(e) & Schedule
“C” Minimum Total of Side |
9.75
m |
6.58
m |
3.17
m |
to
accommodate the renovation of a house and attached garage, as shown on the
plans appended to Committee of the Whole agenda item #2006-209, being a
memorandum from the Director of Building and Planning dated July 11, 2006.
CARRIED
There was discussion regarding the proposed variance
and the view was expressed that the proposed design gives undue emphasis to the
garage.
The Director of Building and Planning answered
questions from Council regarding the penalty to the owners for proceeding with
plans that were not approved, and Mr. Beattie noted that double permit fees
would be applied as per the building bylaw regulations.
Referring back to the previous discussion regarding
the proposed fence and landscaping, it was reiterated by members of Council
that it would be desirable to receive the comments from the Advisory Design Panel
on this aspect of the development prior to consideration of authorizing the
issuance of the Development Variance Permit.
Mr. Beattie again noted that under the Uplands
Regulations Bylaw, Council did not have the authority for design or siting
approval.
Irene Asfar, 3045 Uplands Road, noted that the proposed house design,
fence, and landscaping plans had all been circulated to her neighbours with the
opportunity to comment. None of her
neighbours, she said, made submissions.
It was pointed out that correspondence from neighbours
favouring the previously approved design had been received by Council at a
previous meeting.
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Copley, That the resolution
with respect to the development variance permit for
CARRIED
Councillor Cassidy returned to the meeting at 9:50
p.m.
RESOLUTIONS:
Bare Land Strata Subdivision of
MOVED by Councillor Jensen,
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That
Whereas:
A.
Pursuant to Section 941 of the Local
Government Act, the owner of land being subdivided so as to create 3 or
more additional lots must, at the owner’s option, either provide without
compensation park land of an amount and in a location acceptable to the
Municipal Council, or pay to the Municipality an amount equal to the value of
the land that may be required for park purposes;
B.
The agent for the owner of
C.
The amount of land that may be used for establishing the amount to be
paid pursuant to Recital B is not to exceed 5% of the land being proposed for
subdivision;
D.
The land value to be used for the purpose of calculating the amount to
be paid pursuant to Recital B is the average market value of all the land in
the subdivision at the date of preliminary approval, as though the land is
zoned to permit the proposed use and any works and services necessary to the
subdivision have not been installed;
E.
The value of the land proposed to be subdivided as assessed by the
Assessment Authority of British Columbia for 2006 is $981,000;
F.
The applicant has agreed to pay the amount of 0.05 x 981,000 = $49,050
pursuant to Section 941 of the Local
Government Act.
Therefore be it resolved that
the District of Oak Bay require payment in the amount of 5% of the value of the
parcel of land, described as Lot 1, Sections 23 and 68, Victoria District, Plan
2600, except parts in Parcel A (DD 239888-I) and in Plan 10577, which is
proposed to be subdivided, based on an agreed market value of $981,000 for the
said land; provided, however, that in the event preliminary approval of the
subdivision does not occur before December 31, 2006, the market value used for
the purpose of calculating the amount of the payment in lieu of park dedication
shall be the 2007 preliminary or final land value, whichever is applicable at
the time, as assessed by the Assessment Authority of British Columbia.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor
Braithwaite, That Council approve the payment of expenses for Mayor and Council
members’ attendance at the Union of British Columbia Municipalities (UBCM) 2006
Convention in
CARRIED
Development Variance Permit –
Municipal Hall Parking Lot
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That the Director of Building and Planning be authorized to issue a Development Variance Permit in respect