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: |
Councillor
H. Braithwaite Councillor
A. R. Cassidy Councillor
P. Copley Councillor
F. Carson Councillor
J. D. Herbert Councillor
N. B. Jensen |
|
STAFF: |
Municipal
Administrator, W. E. Cochrane Municipal
Clerk, L. Hilton Confidential
Secretary, K. Green Director
of Building and Planning, N. Beattie Municipal
Treasurer, P. A. Walker Director
of Engineering Services, D. |
AGENDA:
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor
Copley, That the agenda be amended with respect to the addition of Communication
Item Nos. 2006-193-4, 2006-185-3, 2006-197-1, 2006-201, 2006-202 and Bylaw No.
4322.
CARRIED
MINUTES
OF MEETING:
Council – June 12, 2006
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That the minutes
of the Council meeting held on Monday June 12, 2006, be adopted.
CARRIED
Special Council – June 19, 2006
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Jensen, That the minutes
of the Special Council meeting held on Monday June 19, 2006, be adopted.
CARRIED
Committee of the Whole – June 19, 2006
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Copley, That the minutes
of the Committee of the Whole meeting held on Monday, June 19, 2006, and the
recommendations contained therein, be adopted.
CARRIED
By consensus, the order of the agenda was
varied.
COMMUNICATIONS:
|
1. |
2006-196 |
AMBROSIO MARKET AND DELI, June 21, 2006 Re Request for Encroachment – |
The Director of Building
and Planning offered a brief description of the proposed awning extension,
saying that the existing awning would have arms installed that would extend an
additional 18 inches horizontally from which a mesh rolled screen would then
drop 1.07 metres (3.5 feet) down for the purpose of protecting the produce
offered for sale from the afternoon sun.
With respect to the
potential interference with pedestrian traffic, it was noted that the drop
screen would be far enough away from the building to enable pedestrian traffic to
walk on the inside of the screen.
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Copley,
That approval be given for an encroachment at
CARRIED
|
2. |
2006-191 |
DISTRICT OF |
The Municipal
Administrator provided an overview of the 2005 Annual Report, which, as required
by the Community Charter, has been presented annually for the past three
years. Mr. Cochrane noted that the
departmental reports have taken on a more quantitative quality, including the
use of statistics in this regard.
Mr. Cochrane noted that
the report is available for review at the Municipal Hall or on the Municipal
Website.
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That the Annual
Report 2005 be received.
CARRIED
|
3. |
2006-192 |
DISTRICT OF OAK BAY AUDIT FINDINGS REPORT
(December 31, 2005) |
(Randy Decksheimer of KPMG Chartered
Accountants, in attendance for this item.)
Randy Decksheimer addressed Council,
saying that the 2005 audit is complete, and that, in KPMG’s opinion, the
financial statements present fairly the financial position of the Municipality
as at December 31, 2005.
Mr. Decksheimer
responded to questions from members of Council with respect to various aspects
of the municipal audit findings report.
There was discussion
regarding changes in accounting standards, and in this regard, it was pointed
out by Mr. Decksheimer that Council should be aware that statements made in the
community and at Council meetings may create liabilities that require
recognition in the financial statements even though a motion is not passed or
an agreement signed.
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor
Jensen, That the District of Oak Bay Audit Findings Report be received.
CARRIED
|
4. |
2006-164 2006-193 2006-193-1 2006-193-2 2006-193-3 2006-193-4 |
MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATOR, May 24, 2006 CAPITAL REGIONAL DISTRICT, June 13, 2006 JUNE AND MICHAEL STEPHEN, June 21, 2006 E. ACHESON AND D.M. PICKARD, June 21, 2006 VICTORIA ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES LTD., June 23, 2006 Re Animal Control Services |
Attention was drawn to
the proposal for the provision of animal control services from Victoria Animal
Control Services (VACS), and the Municipal Administrator responded to a
question from Council noting that although Capital Regional District’s (CRD)
proposal is inclusive of legal costs associated with enforcing the regulations,
the VACS proposal is not. He further
noted that to date, in his time with
MOVED by Councillor
Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor
Braithwaite, That notice be given to the Capital Regional District to the
effect that the Municipality will not be renewing the current animal control
contract beyond December 31, 2006; and that the
Councillor Jensen
observed that although the VACS contract proposal offered some cost savings on
its face, his preference would be to continue with the CRD animal control
service, which was broader in that it included coverage for more complex types
of legal proceedings which could arise from time to time.
The question was then
called.
CARRIED
(Councillor Jensen against the motion)
|
5. |
2006-182 |
DIRECTOR
OF BUILDING AND PLANNING, June 6, 2006 Re |
Will Peerboom, Victoria
Design Ltd.,
was in attendance on behalf of the applicants as requested by Committee of the
Whole at its meeting of June 19, 2006.
Mr. Peerboom noted the Advisory Design Panel reviewed the original
design, and after its suggestions were implemented, the Advisory Design Panel
recommended its approval.
There was discussion
regarding the proposed design, and while it was recognized that the dimensions
of the proposed new residential dwelling conform to the regulations of the
Municipality, it was the majority view of Council that the proposed building
was not in keeping with the streetscape of the neighbourhood.
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite,
That the proposed plans for the construction of a new residential dwelling at
CARRIED
(
|
6. |
2006-194 2006-185 2006-185-1 2006-185-2 2006-185-3 |
MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATOR, June 21, 2006 DIRECTOR
OF BUILDING AND PLANNING, June 13, 2006 JANE
PATTERSON, [undated] SUE
AND GEOFF VICKERS et al, June 9,
2006 IRENE
ASFAR, June 26, 2006 Re |
Councillor Cassidy advised that he would be unable
to participate in the discussion of the Uplands
building permit and development variance permit application at
It was noted that at the
previous Committee of the Whole meeting staff were asked to prepare a report
with respect to Council’s options for dealing with the Uplands Building Permit
application for 3045 Uplands Road, following the issuance of a stop work order
due to the construction work not being in accordance with the previously
approved plans, and the subsequent request for approval of the revised plans.
Irene Asfar, 3045
Uplands Road,
spoke to her letter included in the agenda regarding the events that let to the
construction not in accordance with the approved plans. Ms. Asfar answered various questions from
members of Council regarding the renovations to her home, saying that she felt
the “new” design was actually more appropriate in terms of fitting in with the
neighbourhood, although she was sorry that the proper process had not been
followed. Ms. Asfar requested that in
order to keep the contractor and the neighbours satisfied, she was seeking
approval, without delay, of the revised plans.
Attention was drawn to
the memorandum from the Municipal Administrator which compared the previously
approved plans with the revised plans that were part way through the
construction process, and outlined Council’s options for dealing with the application
for approval of the revised plans.
It was noted that the applicants
went before the Advisory Design Panel to present the revised plans, with no
changes to the previously approved variances.
However, the Advisory Design Panel only provided comments on the new
design, and did not provide a recommendation with respect to approval.
Mr. Cochrane summarized
the three options that could be considered:
1)
That
Council respond to the new application on its own merit and ask the Advisory
Design Panel for its recommendation;
2)
That
Council reject the application for approval of the revised plans with
construction to comply with the plans as previously approved or new plans would
need to be designed; and
3)
That
Council start anew the development variance permit notification process if it
is satisfied there is enough merit in the revised design.
Responding to questions
from Council, The Director of Building and Planning noted that double permit
fees would apply to any new building permit issued.
There was discussion
regarding the revised plans, and concerns were expressed that the garage looked
out of keeping with the rest of the house.
It was the view of Council that, in accordance with its role, the
Advisory Design Panel should be requested to make a recommendation on the
application.
It was noted that two
building permits had been issued for the work at
It was recommended that
a copy of the minutes reflecting this item be provide to the Advisory Design
Panel.
MOVED by Councillor
Carson
Seconded by Councillor
Herbert, That the revised building plans for
CARRIED
|
7. |
2006-195 |
G. ROGER POWELL, April 25, 2005 (received June
14, 2006) Re Request to Occupy Portion of the Municipal
Hall Front Lawn – July 8, 2006 |
Speaking to his letter, Mr.
Powell gave an overview of his request to hold a fundraising event for Cops
for Cancer on the front lawn of the Municipal Hall, noting that all donations
from the refreshments and food would be given over to Cops for Cancer.
MOVED by Councillor Carson
Seconded by Councillor Jensen,
That permission be granted to the Silver Spurs Evangelistic Ministries to
occupy a portion of the front lawn at the Oak Bay Municipal Hall adjacent to 2167 Oak Bay Avenue, on July 8,
2006, from 11 o’clock a.m. to 3 o’clock p.m. for the purpose of staging a
fundraising event, subject to the Silver Spurs Evangelistic Ministries’
indemnifying the Municipality from any liability arising from the occupancy and
providing evidence of insurability in this regard, as well as being responsible
for any expenses incurred by the Municipality in connection with the occupancy.
CARRIED
|
8. |
2006-197 2006-197-1 |
DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND PLANNING, June 20, 2006 PHILIP H. WHITE et al, March
21, 2006 Re Application for Official Community Plan Amendment, Zoning Bylaw
Amendment, Development Permit – Royal Victoria Yacht Club – |
Acting
Don Thain, 3475 Ripon
Road, Chair, Moorage Expansion Special Committee, Royal Victoria Yacht Club, gave an overview of the
history and membership of the Royal Victoria Yacht Club (RVYC) and its need to
accommodate its continuing growth.
Speaking to the submission
to Council, Mr. Thain noted that this is the first of the three government
levels to be approached regarding the proposed breakwater and moorage facility
expansion for the Yacht Club into
Mr. Thain advised that the
expansion proposal includes an additional 60 berths and an extension of the
breakwater in order to protect those berths.
It was noted that the breakwater, depending on the wind and wave
measurements, may extend from the existing rubble breakwater or a floating
breakwater used as the main dock may be considered. The size of the berths would accommodate 35
foot to 50 foot boats.
The action taken by the Yacht
Club to date, said Mr. Thain, has been to conduct information and consultation
meetings with the neighbourhood followed by an information mail-out. Members’ meetings were also organized, he
said, noting a 96% approval of the proposed project.
Ramsay Murray, was in attendance on
behalf of the Royal Victoria Yacht Club, noting that the “standard design”
proposed breakwater will be well built.
In response to a question regarding how it can be assured that the
extension would not have a negative impact further up
In response to a
question from Council, Mr. Thain noted that approximately 15 of the anchored
boats in the bay would be displaced with the proposed moorage and breakwater
extension.
There was further
discussion regarding the proposed project and its implications on the
surrounding area, and concerns were noted regarding the extension further into
the bay. Responding to questions, Mr.
Thain advised that no further expansions would be requested because more
parking would need to be created in that scenario.
There was consensus to
receive public input at this point, and it was noted that there will be other
opportunities should the proposal go forward.
Philip White, 3525 Beach
Drive,
speaking to his letter contained in the agenda, and noting that he was a one
time member of the Royal Victoria Yacht Club, said that the immediate
neighbours were invited to attend an information evening where the Yacht Club
stated its expansion plans. Although he
was unable to attend the meeting, Mr. White said he was able to obtain a
detailed explanation of the plan and expressed his and his neighbours’
opposition to the proposal saying their lines of sight will be affected, as will
the value of their real estate. Further,
said Mr. White, he sees the proposal as private use of public property.
Ewa Lupin, 777 Mountjoy
Avenue,
expressed her concerns that by expanding the moorage in the bay, the anchored
boats in the bay would be displaced, posing a hardship on those boat owners as
they may not be able to afford the cost of moorage at the Yacht Club. In addition, Ms. Lupin asked what rights a
private organization has to this part of the bay.
In response, Mr.
Thain noted that the anchored boats were in the bay because of the
protection the Royal Victoria Yacht Club’s breakwater offers and possibly
because there are no vacant berths available at the existing dock.
Shelley Mohr, 3160
Humber Road,
expressed concern regarding the impact the enlarged moorage and breakwater
would have on the environment. As well,
Ms. Mohr felt there would be potential for increased traffic and noise in the
neighbourhood should the proposed project go through.
There was further
discussion regarding the proposal and its impact on neighbouring properties,
and Mr. Thain indicated that concerns with respect to parking were voiced by neighbours,
noting that the Yacht Club would work towards ameliorating those concerns.
Responding to questions
from Council, Mr. Cochrane said that if the application was to go forward, an
amendment to the Official Community Plan would be required, noting that no
significant expansion of the Yacht Club is currently contemplated in the
Official Community Plan. He went on to say
that in response to Mr. White’s comments about the bay being a park, while it
does have “park like” characteristics, it is zoned Sea Zone for public
recreation use.
With respect to any
engineering considerations related to the proposed construction, it was noted
that the federal government would be involved in this aspect, as would
It was noted that
environmental impact assessment information may be desired by the Committee at
some point should the application proceed.
In reviewing the plans,
a member of Council requested that a BC Land Surveyors’ Plan be submitted that
shows the proposed development in the context of the surrounding properties,
including those in nearby Saanich just past the
MOVED by Councillor
Herbert
Seconded by Councillor
Cassidy, That the application for an Official Community
Plan Amendment, Zoning Bylaw Amendment and Development Permit for the Royal
Victoria Yacht Club located at
CARRIED
|
9. |
2006-198 |
JENNIFER ROY, June 15, 2006 Re Request for Street Closure for Block Party
on |
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor
Braithwaite, That permission be given for the closure of
CARRIED
|
10. |
2006-199 |
June 8, 2006 Re Request for Grant – |
Council members noted
that because the District of Oak Bay pays fees to the Union of British Columbia
Municipalities annually, it may not be necessary to provide additional funding
for special projects such as the Union of British Columbia Municipalities Local
Government Leadership Academy.
While there was some
support for contributing to the program, it was the majority view not to
provide funding at this time.
MOVED by Councillor
Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Carson,
That Item No. 2006-199 be received.
CARRIED
(Councillor Jensen against the motion)
|
11. |
2006-200 |
CAPITAL REGIONAL DISTRICT, June 19, 2006 Re CRD Bylaw 3322 - Hazardous Materials Incident Response Service
Establishment Bylaw, No. 1, 2006 |
Council expressed its
concern with giving consent to the adoption of the proposed Capital Regional
District bylaw as attached to the agenda package for the implementation of a hazardous
materials incident response (Hazmat) service, noting that further information
on the breakdown of the budget was needed.
It was agreed that staff
would obtain the requested information to be brought back with the proposed
Bylaw at the next meeting of Council.
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Copley,
That the request for support for CRD
Bylaw 3322, Capital Regional District Hazardous Materials Incident Response
Service Establishment Bylaw No. 1, 2006, be deferred.
CARRIED
|
12. |
2006-201 |
Re Request for Tag Days |
MOVED by Councillor
Herbert
Seconded by Councillor
Braithwaite, That approval be given to the Oak Bay Volunteer Services Society
to hold tag days throughout
CARRIED
|
13. |
2006-202 |
MUNICIPAL TREASURER, June 26, 2006 Re Request for Permission to Reproduce Photograph of |
MOVED by Councillor
Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor
Braithwaite, That the request for permission to
reproduce a photograph of a former Oak Bay Reeve be approved, subject to the District
of Oak Bay being credited for the photograph in Mr. John Newth’s publication.
CARRIED
NEW BUSINESS/REPORTS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES:
2006 Centennial Committee
Councillor Herbert
provided an update on the 2006 Centennial Committee’s upcoming events, noting
that the organization of Oak Bay’s 100th birthday party, which is to
be held July 2nd at Windsor Park from approximately 1:30 p.m. to
10:00 p.m., is well in hand and will include old style games (i.e. sack races),
a variety of music, a very large birthday cake, and topping off the day with
fireworks. All donations will go toward
The Oak Bay Centennial Book
Launch was a success, and the book was very well received.
Provincial
Capital Commission
Councillor Cassidy drew
attention to the grand opening of the BC Experience at the Provincial Capital
Commission’s former
RESOLUTIONS:
MOVED by
Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, 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 |
between 13.6 m and
16.6 m |
19.2 m |
2.6 m |
MOVED by
Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor
Cassidy, That the resolution in respect to the Development Variance Permit for 3570
Beach Drive be tabled to enable notice to be given in accordance with the Local Government Act.
CARRIED
Development
Variance Permit –
MOVED by Councillor
Cassidy
Seconded by
Councillor Herbert, 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 |
3.66 metres |
3.05 metres |
0.61 metres |
|
6.2.4(2)(e)
& Schedule “C” Minimum Total Side |
8.53 metres |
6.1 metres |
2.43 metres |
MOVED by Councillor
Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy,
That the resolution in respect to the Development Variance Permit for 2757
Dorset Road be tabled to enable notice to be given in accordance with the Local Government Act.
CARRIED
Development Permit –
MOVED by Councillor
Cassidy
Seconded by
Councillor Herbert, That the Director of Building and Planning be authorized to
issue a Development Permit in respect to Lot 1, Section 2, Victoria District,
Plan 11985 (2333 Beach Drive) to permit the renovation of the 26 suite
apartment building in accordance with the plans considered by Committee of the
Whole on June 19, 2006, at such time as security in the amount of 2.5% of the
value of the development, as determined by the Director of Building and
Planning, has been received and a collateral agreement with respect to the
security deposit has been executed.
CARRIED
Development Variance Permit –
MOVED by Councillor
Cassidy
Seconded by
Councillor Herbert, 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: