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, 2167 Oak Bay Avenue, Oak Bay, B.C., on Monday, July 24, 2006.

 

PRESENT:

Mayor C. M. Causton, Chairman

Councillor H. Braithwaite

Councillor A. R. Cassidy

Councillor P. Copley

Councillor J. D. Herbert

Councillor N. B. Jensen

STAFF:

Municipal Administrator, W. E. Cochrane

Confidential Secretary, K. Green

Director of Building and Planning, N. Beattie

Municipal Treasurer, P. A. Walker

Director of Engineering Services, D. Marshall

 

Mayor Causton called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. 

 

MINUTES OF MEETING:

 

Council – June 26, 2006

 

MOVED by Councillor Cassidy

Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That the minutes of the Council meeting held on Monday June 26, 2006, be adopted.

 

CARRIED

 

Committee of the Whole – July 17, 2006

 

MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite

Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That the minutes of the Committee of the Whole meeting held on Monday, July 17, 2006, and the recommendations contained therein, be adopted.

 

CARRIED

 

By consensus, the order of the agenda was varied to allow Item No. 2006-221 to be dealt with out of sequence.

 

COMMUNICATIONS:

 

1.

2006-221

BISON PROPERTIES LTD., July 19, 2006

Re Oak Bay Beach Hotel (Bison Properties), Hotel Redevelopment Application:  Request to Schedule Special Meeting of Committee of the Whole

 

In response to the request to hold a Special Committee of the Whole meeting prior to the next regular meeting regarding the Oak Bay Beach Hotel (Bison Properties Ltd.) redevelopment application, it was noted that it would be difficult to arrange a special meeting given summer schedules.  There was agreement, however, that the Oak Bay Beach Hotel item should be dealt with as the first order of business at the August 14 Committee of the Whole meeting. 

 

MOVED by Councillor Jensen

Seconded by Councillor Copley, That Item No. 2006-221 be received.

 

CARRIED

 

2.

2006-213

CAPITAL REGIONAL DISTRICT, June 22, 2006

Re Request for Approval of Amendment to Liquid Waste Management Bylaw – Cost Sharing Method

 

(Dwayne Kalynchuk, General Manager, Environmental Services, and Malcolm Cowley, Senior Project Engineer, both of the Capital Regional District, in attendance for this item)

 

Mr. Cowley explained the purpose of CRD Bylaw No. 3319, which would amend the Regional District’s Liquid Waste Management Core Area and Western Communities Service Establishment Bylaw. 

 

In particular, Bylaw No. 3319 would make the following changes:

 

·          the schedules would be amended to show new and proposed infrastructure upgrades as set out in the Core Area Liquid Waste Management Plan;

 

·          the peak flow allocations to the respective partners for each facility would be revised to reflect updated flow measurements and more accurate hydraulic modeling;

 

·          the method of cost allocation for capital projects would be based on a new “design capacity benefit” concept, which recognized that a benefit to a partner in terms of available capacity could be conferred by an upstream improvement, such as the installation of a storage device, in addition to downstream capacity increases.

 

Mr. Cowley said that the improvements planned for the East Coast Interceptor and North East Trunk systems over the next 40 years, which were for the purpose of accommodating growth, replacing aging pipes and complying with provincial regulations regarding storm overflow frequency, had been estimated at a cost of $61.7 million in 2004 dollars.  Under a formula based on converted hospital assessments (as the East Coast Interceptor capital costs were currently shared), Oak Bay’s portion of the total upgrade cost would be 37.19%.  The design capacity benefit approach altered that portion to a composite figure of 22.54% for the package as a whole.  For individual projects within the total package, however, Oak Bay’s share could be higher or lower than that amount, depending on the calculated design capacity benefit in each case.

 

Speaking to the recalculation of peak flow allocations, Mr. Cowley said that the original engineering work in this regard, undertaken prior to the construction of the East Coast Interceptor trunk sewer in the early 1990s, had significantly underestimated Oak Bay’s flows at the Currie Road pump station.  Some of the projects planned or underway for the comprehensive upgrade program, such as the construction of a pump station at Trent Street in the City of Victoria to divert upstream flows directly to Clover Point, would assist in making additional capacity available in the East Coast Interceptor without actually increasing the size of that trunk sewer, or adding a second pipe.  An upstream storage facility planned for the Saanich portion of the system would have a similar effect.

 

Responding to questions from Council, Mr. Marshall, Oak Bay Director of Engineering Services, explained the initiatives being pursued by the Municipality to reduce stormwater inflow and infiltration into the sewage collection systems in the Uplands and in south Oak Bay.

 

MOVED by Councillor Jensen

Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That consent be given to the adoption of Capital Regional District Bylaw No. 3319 in accordance with Section 802 of the Local Government Act.

                                                                                                                        CARRIED

 

3.

2006-200

2006-214

2006-214-1

CAPITAL REGIONAL DISTRICT, June 19, 2006

CAPITAL REGIONAL DISTRICT, June 28, 2006

SAANICH FIRE DEPARTMENT, July 7, 2006

Re Request for Approval of Bylaw to Establish Regional Hazmat Incident Response Service

 

(Kelly Daniels, Executive Director, and Diana Lokken, Director of Finance and Corporate Services, both of the Capital Regional District, and Doug MacAulay, Fire Chief, District of Oak Bay, in attendance for this item)

 

Mr. Daniels explained that the purpose of Bylaw No. 3322 was to provide for a regional hazardous materials incident response capability.  Proposed in this regard was a five year contract with the District of Surrey for training and backup.

 

Ms. Lokken, responding to a question from Council, confirmed that there would be a cost for each deployment of Surrey personnel over and above the $50,000 annual retainer set out in the contract.  The proposed budget included a contribution to a reserve fund with the object of building up a contingency for this purpose.  Given the training component of the agreement, in any event, it was anticipated that some types of incidents could be handled locally, with this proportion of the total likely to increase over the life of the contract.

 

Fire Chief MacAulay clarified that for each incident, Surrey personnel would be on site only for the time required to deal with the initial emergency response and ensure public safety.  Any subsequent clean-up requirements would be the responsibility of the owner or transporter of the product, as the case may be.

 

MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite

Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That consent be given to the adoption of Capital Regional District Bylaw No. 3322 in accordance with Section 801.4 of the Local Government Act.

                                                                                                                        CARRIED

 

4.

2006-215

DREW HENDERSON, July 4, 2006

Re Request for Street Closure for Block Party on Cavendish Avenue – August 12, 2006

 

 

 

MOVED by Councillor Jensen

Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That permission be given for the closure of Cavendish Avenue between Beach Drive and Musgrave Street on Saturday, August 12, 2006, from 2:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., for the purpose of a neighbourhood block party.

CARRIED

 

5.

2006-216

2006-216-1

KRIS DARTNELL et al, July 12, 2006

MARGARET SPRINGER et al, July 13, 2006

Re Request for Street Closure for Block Party on Yale Street – August 27, 2006

 

Observing that the letter from Margaret Springer, on behalf of residents in the townhouse complex at the north east corner of Oak Bay Avenue and Yale Street, opposed the street closure due to past noise issues, Council noted that the event would not proceed past 8:00 p.m. 

 

MOVED by Councillor Herbert

Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That permission be given for the closure of Yale Street between the north side of Theatre Lane and the north end of the street on Sunday, August 27, 2006, from 3:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m., for the purpose of a neighbourhood block party.

CARRIED

 

6.

2006-217

SCOUTS CANADA, GREATER VICTORIA AREA, July 5, 2006

Re Tag Day Request

 

MOVED by Councillor Herbert

Seconded by Councillor Jensen, That permission be granted for the Greater Victoria Area branch of Scouts Canada to hold a Scouts Apple Day fund raising event on public streets in Oak Bay from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on Saturday, September 30, 2006.

 

CARRIED

 

7.

2006-218

OAK BAY CROQUET CLASSIC FESTIVAL, July 17, 2006

Re Application for Amendment to Previous Special Occasion Licence Approval – Windsor Park

 

MOVED by Councillor Jensen

Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That the approval granted on April 24, 2006, for a beer garden in connection with the “Oak Bay Croquet Classic” event scheduled to be held at Windsor Park on August 25 and 26, 2006, be amended to allow the serving of hard liquor, subject to the applicant obtaining the required approvals from the Liquor Control and Licensing Branch. 

CARRIED

 

8.

2006-219

2006-219-1

DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND PLANNING, July 11, 2006

ALFRED AND PAM BUTTERFIELD, July 21, 2006

Re Uplands Building Permit Application – 2997 Beach Drive

 

 

Councillor Cassidy reported that the subject property had been examined by the Uplands Building Permits Subcommittee, which, following its site visit, had been prepared to recommend approval of the plans for an addition to the dwelling at 2997 Beach Drive as submitted. 

 

Peter Ciceri, 3065 Surrey Road, said that his home was directly to the east of 2997 Beach Drive.  He said he understood the desire of the applicants to add living space above the existing roof line of their house, as the new building under construction to the south would significantly affect their views.  The proposed addition, however, would overlook his property and detract from the privacy of a bedroom balcony, to the point, he said, that he would consider applying for a permit to enclose it.

 

Mr. Ciceri noted that his property was encumbered by a restrictive covenant in favour of 2997 Beach Drive.  The covenant limited tree height, the purpose being to preserve views for the benefiting land.  If the proposed addition were to proceed, Mr. Ciceri said, he would like to have the opportunity to renegotiate the covenant, as he felt that he would be able to recapture lost privacy by allowing some of the trees to grow beyond the covenanted height limit.

 

Responding to a question from Council, Mr. Ciceri said that if the creation of second storey space was a given, he did not believe that there were any design changes the applicants could make in order to mitigate his loss of privacy in a significant way.

 

Keith Baker, KB Designs, speaking on behalf of the applicants, noted that the proposed addition was very modest in size, and that the current proposal represented a significant revision to the original plans, which the Advisory Design Panel had found wanting.  He said that the applicants had been sensitive to neighbourhood concerns, to the point that the proposed ceiling height of the new space was only 7.5 feet rather than the more standard 8 feet.  The exterior roof height, moreover, was also well below the maximum allowed under the Zoning Bylaw.

 

Wendy Brown, 2997 Beach Drive, Applicant, said that although she and her husband were not prepared to release or amend the covenant registered in favour of their property against 3065 Surrey Road, they were willing to be flexible in its enforcement.  She felt that it would be possible to arrive at an arrangement whereby selected trees could be allowed to grow higher than the covenanted limit, addressing Mr. Ciceri’s privacy concerns without impeding the views that the covenant was designed to protect.

 

MOVED by Councillor Herbert

Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That the plans for a second storey addition to the residence at 2997 Beach Drive, as described in the attachments to the memorandum from the Director of Building and Planning dated July 11, 2006, be approved as to siting and architectural design.

                                                                                                                        CARRIED

 

 

9.

2006-220

DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND PLANNING, July 11, 2006

Re Uplands Building Permit Application – 3385 Upper Terrace

 

 

MOVED by Councillor Herbert

Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That the plans for the construction of a detached garage and exterior alterations to the residence at 3385 Upper Terrace be approved as to siting and architectural design.

 

CARRIED

 

10.

2006-222

BARBARA PRENDERGAST, [undated]

Re Request for Street Closure for Block Party on Hamiota Street – August 7, 2006

 

MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite

Seconded by Councillor Jensen, That permission be given for the closure of Hamiota Street on Monday, August 7, 2006, from 3:45 p.m. to 7:30 p.m., for the purpose of a neighbourhood block party.

CARRIED

 

TABLED:

 

Development Variance Permit – 975 Beach Drive

 

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 Variance Permit in respect to Lot 7, Section 73, Victoria District, Plan 3310 (975 Beach Drive) that will vary the following section of the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended, to permit the construction of a new single family dwelling in accordance with the plans considered by Committee of the Whole on June 19, 2006:

 

Bylaw Section

Permitted

Requested

Variance

6.1.4.(2).(a) Minimum Front Lot Line Setback

10.66 m

7.62 m

3.04 m

 

CARRIED

 

The question on the main motion was then called.

 

CARRIED

 

Development Variance Permit – 3570 Beach Drive

 

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 in respect to Amended Lot 3 (DD65267I), Block 2, Section 31, Victoria District, Plan 1216A (3570 Beach Drive) that will vary the following section of the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended, to permit the construction of a new single family dwelling in accordance with the plans considered by Committee of the Whole on June 19, 2006:

 

Bylaw Section

Permitted

Requested

Variance

6.2.4 (10) Front Lot Line Setback

between 13.6 m and 16.6 m

19.2 m

2.6 m

 

CARRIED

 

The question on the main motion was then called.

 

CARRIED

 

Development Variance Permit – 2757 Dorset Road

 

MOVED by Councillor Herbert

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 Variance Permit in respect to Lot 4, Block 43, Section 31, Victoria District, Plan 8777 (2757 Dorset Road) that will vary the following sections of the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended, to permit renovations to the single family dwelling in accordance with the plans considered by Committee of the Whole on June 19, 2006:

 

Bylaw Section

Required

Requested

Variance

6.2.4 (2)(c) & Schedule “C” Minimum Interior Side Lot Line Setback

3.66 metres

3.05 metres

0.61 metres

6.2.4(2)(e) & Schedule “C” Minimum Total Side Lot Line Setbacks

8.53 metres

6.1 metres

2.43 metres

 

CARRIED

 

The question on the main motion was then called.

 

CARRIED

 

Development Variance Permit – 2741 Dorset Road

 

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 in respect to Lot 5, Block 43, Section 31, Victoria District, Plan 8777 (2741 Dorset Road) that will vary the following sections of the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended, to permit the construction of an accessory building on the property in accordance with the plans attached to the resolution considered by Oak Bay Municipal Council on June 26, 2006:

 

 

Bylaw Section

Required

Requested

Variance

6.2.4.(2).(b) Minimum Rear Lot Line Setback

1.52 m

0.61 m

0.91 m

6.2.4.(2).(c) & Schedule “C” Minimum Interior Side Lot Line Setback

3.0 m

0.61 m

2.39 m

 

and further, that approval be given for the siting and architectural design of the accessory building.

 

CARRIED

 

The question on the main motion was then called.

 

CARRIED

 

RESOLUTIONS:

 

Development Variance Permit – 925 Foul Bay Road

 

MOVED by Councillor Herbert

Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, 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 1˝ storey height limit on any residence constructed on the proposed Strata Lot D.

 

MOVED by Councillor Herbert

Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That the motion in respect of the development variance permit for 925 Foul Bay Road be tabled to allow notice to be given in accordance with the Local Government Act.

 

CARRIED

 

 

 

Development Variance Permit – 2169 Beaverbrooke Place

 

MOVED by Councillor Herbert

Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, 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 Lot Line Setback

 

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.

 

MOVED by Councillor Herbert

Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That the motion in respect of the development variance permit for 2169 Beaverbrooke Place be tabled to allow notice to be given in accordance with the Local Government Act.

 

CARRIED

 

Development Variance Permit – 2526 Eastdowne Road

 

MOVED by Councillor Herbert

Seconded by Councillor Copley, 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