MINUTES of a regular meeting of COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 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, April 7, 2008 at 7:30 p.m.

PRESENT:	Mayor C. 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 Administrator, W. E. Cochrane Municipal Clerk, L. Hilton Confidential Secretary, K. Green Director of Building and Planning, N. Beattie Director of Engineer Services, D. Marshall

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

RECREATION SECTION: (Chairman- Councillor Carson)

1.

2008-97

OAK BAY PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION, April 2, 2008 Re Minutes of the Meeting

(Agnes Szilos, Director of Parks and Recreation, and Stephen Gorman, Chairman, Oak Bay Parks and Recreation Commission, in attendance for this item.)

MOVED by Councillor Jensen

Seconded by Councillor Copley, That the minutes of the meeting of the Oak Bay Parks and Recreation Commission held on Wednesday, April 2, 2008, and the recommendations contained therein, with the exception of the recommendations regarding the Monterey Centre Building Committee Report, the Bowker Creek Brush Up, and the St. Jean-Baptiste Day Celebration, be adopted.

Monterey Centre Building Committee

Drawing attention to the Monterey Centre Building Committee’s report, Councillor Carson noted that the Committee met over the past two years and has completed its report, which is attached to correspondence item no. 2008-97.

Stephen Gorman noted that the Commission supported the parking and landscaping proposals in the report, but could not support the proposed improvements to the front entry/lobby, interior modifications and installing an elevator due to the high cost estimates.

The Parks and Recreation Commission, it was noted, has recommended that a long-term, wider spectrum review of all the municipal facilities (Carnarvon, Henderson and Monterey) be undertaken through the establishment of a sub-committee for this purpose. In this regard, a member of the Committee indicated that this would be a huge undertaking that would most likely require the use of a consultant.

Agnes Szilos commented that the process envisioned could be compared to the Oak Bay Recreation Centre recent extensive upgrades. She suggested that terms of reference be devised to determine the priorities of the proposed sub-committee, should the concept be supported by the Committee of the Whole. Ms. Szilos also noted that the Commission hopes that through the proposed long term planning process, a number of possible “shelf ready” projects that could be undertaken when the opportunity arises will emerge.

There was further discussion regarding the proposed municipal facilities planning sub-committee, and while support was expressed by Committee members for its formation, it was agreed that the mandate of the proposed sub-committee would need to be clearly laid out in the terms of reference, which should first be drafted.

Councillor Carson thanked the Monterey Centre Building Committee for all its hard work and the comprehensive resulting report.

The question was then called.

CARRIED

MOVED by Councillor Jensen

Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That Oak Bay Parks and Recreation Commission draft Terms of Reference with respect to the proposed Municipal Facilities Planning Sub-Committee to be brought forward to Committee of the Whole for consideration.

CARRIED

Commercial Activity in Park - Bowker Creek Brush Up- Oak Bay Community Artists

MOVED by Councillor Jensen

Seconded by Councillor Copley, That it be recommended to Council that permission be granted to the Oak Bay Community Artists to hold the fourth annual Bowker Creek Brush Up along Bowker Creek between Oak Bay High School and Hampshire Road, on the north side of the creek, on Sunday, August 10, 2008, from 8:00 o’clock a.m. to 5:30 o’clock p.m. including the sales of goods and services in connection with the event, subject to the organization executing an agreement indemnifying the municipality from any claims arising out of the event and providing evidence of insurability in this regard.

CARRIED

Commercial Activity in Park – Willows Park – Victoria Francophone Society

Responding to a question from a member of the Committee, Stephen Gorman noted that the Victoria Francophone Society has again requested the use of Willows Park to host its St. Jean Baptiste Celebration in June and has requested permission to sell goods during the event which requires a decision from Council to allow commercial activity in a park.

It was agreed by members of the Committee that the celebration would be a benefit to the community, and fits the criteria for approval.

MOVED by Councillor Jensen

Seconded by Councillor Copley, That it be recommended to Council that approval be granted to the Victoria Francophone Society to occupy Willows Park on Saturday, June 21, 2008, for a St. Jean Baptiste Celebration, including the sale of non-alcoholic refreshments and other goods in connection with the event, subject to the organization executing an agreement indemnifying the municipality from any claims arising out of the event and providing evidence of insurability in this regard.

CARRIED

Agnes Szilos and Stephen Gorman left the meeting at 7:40 p.m.

LAND USE SECTION: (Chairman – Councillor Cassidy)

2.

2008-51 2008-98

DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND PLANNING, February 13, 2008 MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATOR, April 2, 2008 Re Estevan/Dunlevy Rezoning and Development Permit Application

(Frank D’Ambrosio and Terry Kopeck, D’Ambrosio architecture + urbanism, and Denis Rogers, BRCM Holdings Ltd., were in attendance for this item.)

At its February 25, 2008 meeting it was the consensus of Council that the proposed project at 2531 and 2541 Estevan Avenue was worthy of further discussion and it was referred to Committee of the Whole for further consideration.

Although he noted that the applicant had presented an in-depth presentation at a previous meeting, Councillor Cassidy asked Mr. D’Ambrosio to provide an overview of the project for the benefit of the residents attending the meeting.

Frank D’Ambrosio distributed updated plans, which he said incorporate some changes from those originally distributed to Council. Mr. D’Ambrosio made a slide presentation, providing an overview of the proposed construction of a new three storey plus mezzanine residential/commercial building at the corner of Estevan Avenue and Dunlevy Street.

Mr. D’Ambrosio described some of the changes made to the plans that include refining the live/work space to allow the recycling area to fit into the building and improving handicap access in the building.

In response to points raised in correspondence item no. 2008-98 with respect to the proposed rain garden on municipal property and maintenance responsibility issues, Mr. D’Ambrosio noted he could provide examples of agreements from other developments which ensure the maintenance of a rain garden on the adjacent public boulevard at the cost of the property owner in perpetuity.

Mr. D’Ambrosio also indicated that the proposed development has been registered with the Canadian Green Building Council and that he is confident that the development will achieve LEED-NC certification. However, he said, the required two parking stalls per residential unit parking regulations does not fall with in the criteria for certification, noting that 17 parking stalls are proposed, although 43 are required.

Further discussion ensued regarding the proposed number of parking spaces and what parking access and security is being considered. Responding to questions regarding whether or not a traffic/parking study had been undertaken, Mr. D’Ambrosio indicated that is was not felt to be necessary.

With respect to concerns about the fourth level single room mezzanine/belvedere, Mr. D’Ambrosio clarified that as well as being an extension of the owners living area it will also house the stairway and the elevator in the building, noting that he feels it fits the building and its gateway site, and in its proposed location is an important design feature.

Mr. D’Ambrosio said he was pleased to say that since the February 25, 2008 Council meeting they have received many positive comments and interest in the proposed project.

Attention was drawn to the existing walkway between the west boundary of the subject property and the neighbouring property and it was suggested by Mayor Causton that such alleys are assets to neighbourhoods, encouraging the applicant to investigate ways to retain it. In response, Mr. D’Ambrosio commented that reducing the width of the building to accommodate the alley by three feet would be catastrophic to the units, however, consideration could be given to reducing the width of the building by half of that.

Responding to a question regarding the number of residential units in the buildings now versus the number of units proposed for the re-development, Mr. Rogers said there would be eight residential units on the second floor, one of which would be a live/work unit, and four residential units on the third floor, with one of the units having access to the fourth floor mezzanine.

Questions arose as to whether the residential units would be rental units or strata titled. Mr. Rogers indicated that it would be very difficult to make the development viable with rental units.

The Chair invited public input at this time.

Eric Hildebrandt, 2405 Dunlevy Street, voiced his concern that area residents had not been contacted by the developer. Mr. Hildebrandt, read out his letter (submitted for public record), noting that he chose this community to raise his family because it offered a community plan that protects and preserves neighbourhoods such as the Estevan area and he urged the Committee to retain the C2 zoning.

Having a three storey building so close to the residential area, he said, will detract from the neighbourhood and reduce nearby resident’s privacy and property values. He also expressed his concern that the increased density would add to parking and traffic congestion on the residential streets.

In conclusion, Mr. Hildebrandt asked that there be further public opportunities to address this issue in the future.

Ken Bray, 2425 Dunlevy Street, was in attendance to express his concerns that a development of this size would require 43 parking spaces under the municipal parking regulations and the proposed plan allows for just 17 parking spaces and as it is now, Dunlevy Street is plagued by overflow parking. Mr. Bray felt that the proposed three new businesses would add a greater demand on parking needed by employees and customers and therefore the developer should provide sufficient underground parking.. It would be appropriate, said Mr. Bray, to have a traffic study done of the area.

Mr. Bray said it is unclear if the residential units will be rented, sublet or sold, noting he felt that they should be owner occupied.

Judy MacKay, 2400 Dunlevy Street, said she lives three doors down from the corner at Estevan and Dunlevy and just recently became aware of the proposed development when she saw the sign posted. Ms. MacKay said she became concerned that a three storey building may be built that would result in her loss of privacy.

Ruth Minshall, 2346 Dunlevy Street, said she is concerned about the volume of traffic, including along Muffin Lane to the school, and the safety of the many children living in this area. Ms. Minshall suggested that access to the proposed building should be from Musgrave not Dunlevy. Ms. Minshall noted that the parking is already an issue now with customers and commercial vehicle traffic.

Julianne McCaffrey, 2325 Dunlevy Street, expressed her concern that any added traffic and cars parking on both sides of the street would pose a safety issue for children in the area and as a reporter in the past, she has seen accidents with tragic results.

Susan Beach, 2369 Dunlevy Street, presented two letters written by children expressing their concern that extra traffic will be dangerous and they will not be able to continue playing hockey on the street. Ms. Beach commented that her family purposely moved to Dunlevy Street because it was not a busy area and, she added, Estevan Village should not be considered as an urban centre.

The most significant concern, she said, is the increased parking and traffic in and around the already busy intersection of Dunlevy and Estevan, and that if the development does not include enough underground parking it should not be allowed to go forward.

Eileen Barron, 2397 Musgrave Street, was in attendance to express her concern that residents will lose their backyard privacy with a third level of the building and feels that more focus should be placed on a third storey rather than the fourth level belvedere.

Paula Lee, 2355 Dunlevy Street, noted that her concerns are focused on traffic and parking, which are both issues already, and that the area would be overdeveloped by adding a three storey building. Ms. Lee said she bought in the area for its quiet neighbourhood and she is against the redevelopment.

Ben Parfitt, 2278 Dunlevy Street, said he has lived in the area for twelve years and wondered what the capacity of the Liscombe Manor building is and how many parking stalls are there. Mr. Parfitt also drew attention to the rezoning being requested for the proposed redevelopment and if the rezoning would be site specific or apply to all properties in the block.

Councillor Cassidy confirmed that rezoning would only apply to the property seeking rezoning during this application process, but should a new zone be created, other property owners would not be precluded from applying for the same zoning through their own rezoning application process.

Lesley Hildebrandt, 2405 Dunlevy Street, said that shifting from a two to a three story building is not contemplated in the Zoning Bylaw and it would clearly increase the density in the area and set a precedent for future developments. Ms. Hildebrandt wanted to ensure that residents are involved in the process of any development in the neighbourhood.

Following further discussion, various questions were raised and members of the Committee identified a range of additional information that would be helpful to assist the Committee in its review of the redevelopment proposal.

MOVED by Councillor Carson

Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That the applicant be requested to provide the following information in relation to the proposed redevelopment:

• Traffic generation and parking study by a Consulting Engineer with experience in traffic engineering;
• the feasibility of providing underground parking;
• comparison information regarding the Liscombe Manor (i.e. number of units, parking provided, square footage, etc.);
• analysis of options for mezzanine relocation;
• analysis of options for retention of walkthrough at west boundary;
• line of sight photographs from proposed upper storey to surrounding residential properties;
• comparison of existing number of units and square footage of residential and commercial areas with that proposed; and
• confirmation of ownership model for proposed residential units.

CARRIED

3.

2008-99 2008-99-1

DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND PLANNING, March 26, 2008 PHILIP HUGGETT, March 14, 2008 Re Development Variance Permit Application – 1605 Wilmot Place

It was noted that in order for the proposed addition to comply with the site coverage regulations the existing front deck would have to be reduced in size to off-set the proposed construction of the addition, therefore staying within the allowable maximum lot coverage.

MOVED by Councillor Carson

Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That a resolution authorizing the Director of Building and Planning to issue a development variance permit for 1605 Wilmot Place, as outlined in correspondence item no. 2008-99, be prepared and brought forward to Council for consideration.

CARRIED

4.

2008-100

DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND PLANNING, April 2, 2008 Re Development Variance Permit Application – 218 Beach Drive

It was the view of some Committee members that the proposed paved turnaround space seemed excessive and it was felt that the applicant should reconsider the space required, or provide a rationale for the extent of the requested variance.

It was noted that inasmuch as the applicant was not in attendance, additional information would have to come forward to the next meeting of the Committee.

A Committee member drew attention to the possible safety issue when accessing the driveway at this busy intersection, supporting the need for some sort of ability to turn around a vehicle on the property.

MOVED by Councillor Jensen

Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That the development variance permit application for 218 Beach Drive be deferred to a future Committee of the Whole meeting to allow the applicant to submit plans for a smaller turn around area or provide further information with respect to the necessity of the size of the proposed turn around area.

CARRIED

5.

2008-101

DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND PLANNING, April 2, 2008 Re Development Variance Permit Application – 2367 Pacific Avenue

Archie Willie, A. Willie Design, spoke on behalf of the homeowners, saying that the existing basement is under-height and cannot be developed as it is, and that they wish to accommodate their family of six by adding a bedroom and a bathroom to the upper floor and a mudroom and deck extension to the main floor. Mr. Willie confirmed that the proposed changes would not be visible from the street.

Following discussion, members of the Committee expressed the view that the request for additional floor area is consistent with the rationale for the Bylaw change to allow such variances, which was to encourage owners to restore or renovate rather than demolishing and rebuilding homes in Oak Bay.

MOVED by Councillor Jensen

Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That a resolution authorizing the Director of Building and Planning to issue a development variance permit for 2367 Pacific Avenue, as outlined in correspondence item no. 2008-101, be prepared and brought forward to the next meeting of Council for consideration.

CARRIED

6.

2008-102 2008-102-1 2008-102-2 2008-102-3 2008-102-4

DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND PLANNING, April 1, 2008 ARTHUR AND FRIEDA MOUNTAIN, April 2, 2008 JACK KRAHN AND BARBARA MOSSIE, April 3, 2008 GORDON AND BARBARA THOMSON, April 5, 2008 ABDULLAH and ZOHRA SIDDIQUI, March 31, 2008 Re Uplands Building Permit Application – 2835 Lincoln Road

Responding to a member of the Committee requesting that the applicant provide streetscape drawings or photographs in order to demonstrate the fit of the proposed construction of a second storey in the context of the adjacent houses, Grant Smith, (new homeowner as of May 2, 2008), 2835 Lincoln Road, said that with the distance and the amount of vegetation between the homes in the area, it would be difficult to show a comparison. He noted, however, that from the street front he felt that there would be little impact to the look of the neighbourhood in this regard. Mr. Smith noted that the house next door is approximately the same height as what he is proposing for his home and that the site coverage or footprint is unchanged. Mr. Smith said that he had presented photographs illustrating the proposed construction in relation to the surrounding properties to the Advisory Design Panel.

Mr. Smith said he felt that by creating a design that was different than the houses nearest his the proposed construction was in keeping with the Uplands Building Guidelines which is not to have identical looking buildings.

Pamela Robert, Interior Design, was in attendance to provide information with respect to the design and finishing in conjunction with the proposed second storey addition, noting the contemporary look of the home will include natural cedar trimming, which will contrast nicely with the charcoal gray stucco.

Attention was drawn to the landscaping plan and Mr. Smith provided a brief overview of the existing and proposed landscaping and confirmed that the perimeter landscaping would not be altered in any way. The view was expressed that additional drawings incorporating the proposed landscaping into the elevation drawings would assist in illustrating how the landscaping would blend with the new construction.

Gordon Thomson, 2820 Lincoln Road, said that although he can appreciate the need to increase the living space to accommodate the family, he felt that the proposed changes to the house are not in keeping with the traditional looking houses along the street and that he would like to see a more neighbourhood compatible plan brought forward.

Barbara Mossie, 2780 Lincoln Road, said that as a mother of four grown children she too can sympathize with the owner’s need for a larger home to accommodate the family, but feels that the design is out of character with the neighbourhood which consists mainly of 1950’s houses.

There was further discussion with respect to the application, and varying views and opinions were noted, although it was agreed that further information with respect to the neighbourhood context would be useful.

MOVED by Councillor Jensen

Seconded by Councillor Copley, That the Uplands Building Permit Application for 2835 Lincoln Road be deferred to a future Committee of the Whole meeting to allow the applicant time to bring forward photographs or drawings illustrating the fit of the proposed construction in the neighbourhood context, along with confirmation of the proposed roof material.

It was suggested that the applicant may wish to meet on site with the Uplands Building Permit Subcommittee to discuss the concerns expressed by members of the Committee.

The question was then called.

CARRIED

PUBLIC WORKS SECTION: (Chairman – Councillor Herbert)

7.

2008-103 2008-103-1 2008-77

DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING SERVICES, April 3, 2008 COLIN SMITH AND ROBERTA WEBER SMITH, March 31, 2008 DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING SERVICES, March 11, 2008 Re St. Ann Street and Cranmore Road Intersection

Colin Smith, 1773 St. Ann Street, referring to his letter included in the agenda, expressed his objection of a four-way stop at the intersection of St. Ann Street and Cranmore Road.

It was noted that a four-way stop was not part of the staff recommendation before Committee of the Whole, and that the comments received from both the Fire Department and the Police Department did not support a four-way stop either.

Responding to a question from a member of the Committee, the Director of Engineering Services noted that the existing intersection area would not allow for the construction of an appropriate sized traffic circle that could accommodate emergency vehicles, therefore, this would not be a recommended option.

MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite

Seconded by Councillor Copley, That it be recommended to Council that staff continue working with residents to reduce private and public vegetation to improve sightlines and monitor the intersection over the next six months, and if required, remove the redundant crosswalks as per Diagram #2, attached to correspondence item no. 2008-103.

A member of the Community drew attention to the plan and cost estimate provided by Engineering staff at a previous meeting with respect to the option of installing traffic islands at the intersection, noting that if the recommended course of action did not prove satisfactory over time, consideration could then be given to installing the traffic islands.

The question was then called.

CARRIED

8.

2008-104 2008-104-1

DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING SERVICES, April 3, 2008 PAMELA WHITE, March 27, 2008 Re Request for Financial Assistance for Fencing – 1718 Monteith Street (Adjacent to Fireman’s Park)

MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite

Seconded by Councillor Carson, That it be recommended to Council that the request for financial assistance for installation of a fence at 1718 Monteith Street adjacent to Fireman’s Park with funding to come from the Parks operating budget and as outlined in the memorandum (correspondence item no. 2008-104), subject to three cost estimates being obtained based on the municipality’s required specifications, be approved.

CARRIED

9.

2008-105 2008-105-1

DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING SERVICES, April 3, 2008 HUGH AND MICHELLE RUTHVEN, March 26, 2008 Re Boulevard Encroachment Application – 2320 Windsor Road

MOVED by Councillor Carson

Seconded by Councillor Copley, That it be recommended to Council that permission be granted for an encroachment onto the boulevard adjacent to 2320 Windsor Road in the form of existing landscaping, as shown on the sketch attached to correspondence item no. 2008-105-1, subject to the owners entering into a boulevard encroachment agreement on terms set by the Municipality.

CARRIED

10.

2008-106 2008-106-1

DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING SERVICES, April 3, 2008 MICHELE FRYER, February 24, 2008 Re Boulevard Encroachment Application – 810 Byng Street

Councillor Jensen indicated a conflict with respect to this item due to the applicant being a family friend and advised that he would be unable to participate in the discussion or vote on the matter. Councillor Jensen left the meeting at 10:44 p.m.

Michele Fryer, 810 Byng Street, was in attendance to note that although she can appreciate and accept the rationale for parts of the staff recommendation, she would like to request that a 2 metre gravel strip be permitted to remain on the boulevard to help alleviate the ongoing mud issue along Byng Street, and that permission be given to increase the driveway width by .8 metres to allow for enough parking for two vehicles, side by side, in the driveway.

Responding to questions, the Municipal Administrator advised that although an encroachment allowing gravel on the boulevard could be authorized, a variance to the Driveway Access Bylaw with respect to driveway width could not.

The problem with grass on the boulevard being destroyed and turned to mud was acknowledged, and it was felt that in the case at hand, the placement of some gravel on the boulevard was supportable.

MOVED by Councillor Copley

Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That it be recommended to Council that permission be granted for an encroachment onto the boulevard adjacent to 810 Byng Street in the form of landscaping and a 2 metre wide strip of gravel, as shown on the sketch attached to correspondence item no. 2008-106-1, subject to:

· only a single footpath up to 1.1 metre wide of either concrete or pavers being included in the scheme;

· the planting scheme being retained at a distance of not less than 2 metres from the road edge;

· the driveway being reduced to the width permitted under the Driveway Access Bylaw; and

· subject to the owners entering into a boulevard encroachment agreement on terms set by the Municipality.

CARRIED

ADJOURNMENT:

MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite

Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That the open portion of the meeting of Committee of the Whole be adjourned and that a closed session be convened to discuss the acquisition, disposition or expropriation of land or improvements as Council considers that disclosure might reasonably be expected to harm the interests of the Municipality and labour relations or employee negotiations.

CARRIED

The meeting adjourned at 10:56 p.m.

Certified Correct:

Municipal Clerk	Chairman, Recreation Section
Chairman, Land Use Section	Chairman, Public Works Section