This site is in beta — data may be incomplete and features are still being added.
Advisory Committee/Documents/CHRISTIE POINT COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Appendix

CHRISTIE POINT COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT PLAN

April 25, 2017Pages 48–10513 sections

Detailed redevelopment proposal document by D'AMBROSIO architecture + urbanism for the Christie Point site.

1. CALL TO ORDER
December 12, 2016Proposed $200 million investmentEstimated 2,000 person-years of employmentFSR reduced from 1.5 (OCP max) to 1.15Building count reduced to 473 units

Christie Point Comprehensive Development Plan

Appendix A to accompany rezoning application

Prepared for realstar by D’AMBROSIO architecture + urbanism in collaboration with TownSquare Planning Inc. December 12, 2016

Graphic representation of the Christie Point peninsula
Graphic representation of the Christie Point peninsula
Page 48–105

Table of Contents

  • Executive Summary: II
  • 1 Introduction: 1
  • 2 Community and Planning Context: 2
  • 3 Project Intent and Planning Principles: 4
  • 4 Community Engagement & Iterative Plan Development: 7
  • 5 Site Analysis: 11
    • 5.1 Historical Setting, Traditional Use and Archaeological Value
    • 5.2 Natural Environmental Value
    • 5.3 Mature Trees
    • 5.4 Sea Level Rise
    • 5.5 Layered Site Analysis
  • 6 Christie Point Redevelopment Concept: 21
    • 6.1 Site Plan and Development Data
    • 6.2 Landscape Plan
    • 6.3 Architecture
    • 6.4 View, Noise and Light Impact Analysis
    • 6.5 Shadow Impact Analysis
    • 6.6 Transportation and Traffic Impact Analysis
    • 6.7 Infrastructure and Servicing
  • 7 Rental Housing and Affordability: 49
  • 8 Community Benefits: 51
  • 9 Phasing Plan: 53
  • 10 Project Timeline: 54

Appendix A: Full Size Drawings

  • A0.1 Cover Sheet
  • A1.0 Site Context
  • A2.0 Proposed Plans
  • A2.1 Plan Overlays & Project Data
  • A3.0 Proposed Rendered Views
  • A4.0 Proposed Site Sections
  • L1.0 Landscape Masterplan
  • Site Survey Page 1 of 3
  • Site Survey Page 2 of 3
  • Site Survey Page 3 of 3

Appendix B: Community Engagement Summary

Appendix C: Technical Reports

  • Geotechnical and Sea Level Rise Report (Ryzuk Geotechnical)
  • Arborist Review (Talbot and Associates)
  • Archaeological Overview Assessment Report (Terra Archaeology)
  • Conceptual Servicing Report (McElhanney)
  • Environmental Overview Assessment (Swell Environmental)
  • Transportation Impact Assessment (Bunt & Associates)
Page 48–105

Executive Summary

Christie Point is a unique property located within the setting of Portage Inlet in the Town of View Royal. Long-anticipated as a future redevelopment site, Realstar Management is proud to be bringing forward an application to amend the Zoning By-law that now applies to the site, that will retain rental housing as the long-term use of the site. Renewing and increasing the supply of dedicated rental housing in View Royal offers a number of community benefits and secures the site as a landmark location for rental accommodations within an urban, natural setting.

Accompanying this Zoning By-Law Amendment application is a detailed appendix which outlines the methodology and results of development feasibility analysis and site design studies that were undertaken to determine the appropriate capacity of the site and the potential architectural form for redevelopment. While this application to amend the current zoning criteria for the site is based on an indicative design scenario, no actual development can occur without the due process of design and the issuance by the Town of View Royal of a Development Permit for each building and commensurate portion of the property.

Background and Context

Realstar acquired the 15.8-acre Christie Point Apartments property in 2014 and began exploration of redevelopment options in early 2016. Comprehensive site redevelopment is now being proposed to replace the existing 161 units, originally constructed in 1963, and to increase the supply of purpose-built rental housing with an additional 312 new units – resulting in a total of 473 rental housing units in View Royal.

Commitment to Housing and Support for Tenants

Supporting current residents through the redevelopment process is a priority. Realstar has committed to the following assistance package:

  • Realstar will give residents a minimum of 6-months’ notice that they will have to move.
  • In addition to payment of one month’s rent required by the BC RTA, Realstar will provide a moving allowance or moving services.
  • Assistance with packing for residents with physical disabilities and no other able-bodied adults in the household.
  • Realstar will pay for disconnecting and reconnecting cable, internet, telephone.
  • Realstar will pay for mail forwarding for up to 6 months.
  • Realstar will give Christie Point residents first right to rent apartments in the new development.

Community Engagement and Refinement of Plan

Refinement of the concept plan through community review and feedback has resulted in building heights being reduced from a maximum of 9-storeys to a maximum of 6-storeys. The number of units has been reduced from 520 to 473. At 1.15 Floor Space Ratio (FSR), the proposal is well below the maximum anticipated density of 1.5 FSR of the View Royal OCP.

Panoramic photo of Christie Point Today, Looking East
Panoramic photo of Christie Point Today, Looking East

Community Benefits

Realstar is pleased to propose a comprehensive community amenity package, which represents over $20.2 million in net benefit to Town of View Royal.

  • Creation of 312 units of net new rental housing
  • Replacement of 161 rental homes
  • Public access to enhanced landscaped site and trails
  • Implementation of Green Shores environmental program as a pilot project
  • LEED certification or equivalent for all new buildings
  • $200,000 in Shoreline Drive improvements, including new sidewalk and street lights
  • $500,000 for intersection at Shoreline and Island Hwy and re-laning
  • Commitment to a $200 million development investment in View Royal
  • Creation of 2,000 person-years of employment
  • Generation of $4.5 million in Development Charges to View Royal
  • Generation of $1.6 million in Building Permit Fees to View Royal
  • Generation of $1.8 million in annual property tax revenue for View Royal
  • Contribution of $1.0 million towards the Capital Regional District’s Regional Housing Trust Fund
Page 48–105

1.0 Introduction

Christie Point Apartments is a 15.8-acre rental housing site located in the Town of View Royal. The buildings were originally constructed in 1963 and provide 161 two- and three-bedroom market rental units. Realstar acquired the Christie Point property in the spring of 2014. In the spring of 2016, Realstar initiated a study to explore the redevelopment potential with the intent to replace and increase the amount of rental housing.

Regional map showing Christie Point in relation to View Royal, Colwood, and Victoria
Regional map showing Christie Point in relation to View Royal, Colwood, and Victoria
Page 48–105

2.0 Community and Planning Context

The Christie Point site is located within the Craigflower Neighbourhood of the Town of View Royal. Christie Point is a narrow peninsula of land extending into Portage Inlet. The site is within walking distance of the shops and services at Admirals Walk.

Excerpt from the View Royal Zoning Map
Excerpt from the View Royal Zoning Map
Aerial map showing walking distances from the site center
Aerial map showing walking distances from the site center

Policy LU8.4 Christie Point Encourage any future redevelopment at Christie Point to include a mix of medium density residential and park uses. Development at this location should be carefully reviewed to ensure that environmentally sensitive areas are protected, potential sea-level rise issues are addressed, and safe and efficient road access from the Island Highway is maintained. [Excerpt, View Royal Official Community Plan]

The property is currently zoned RM-1 Ground Oriented Multiple-Unit Residential, which allows up to 0.7 Floor Space Ratio (FSR) and a maximum height of 7.5 metres. The site is designated in the View Royal Official Community Plan (OCP) for Mixed-Residential use, which envisions buildings up to 3-4 storeys and densities up to 1.5 FSR for apartments.

The site is within three Development Permit Areas:

  • Form and Character Development Permit Area: Mixed Residential
  • Environmental Protection and Natural Hazards Development Permit Area: Natural Watercourse and Shoreline Areas
  • Environmental Protection and Natural Hazards Development Permit Area: Sensitive Terrestrial Ecosystems
Excerpt from View Royal Official Community Plan Map
Excerpt from View Royal Official Community Plan Map
Page 48–105

3.0 Project Intent and Planning Principles

  1. Respect the Natural and Cultural Environment: Cluster buildings to respect shoreline habitat areas and mature trees.
  2. Rebuild on Previously Disturbed Sites: Site new buildings on existing building footprints and paved areas; expand 'up' rather than 'out'.
  3. Renew and Expand Availability of Rental Housing in View Royal: Provide an increased amount and mix of housing types.
  4. Establish a Vernacular Design: Utilize durable materials and consider views to and from surrounding neighborhoods.
  5. Support Multi-Modal Transportation: Promote walking, cycling, and transit access.
  6. Provide Places for Relaxation and Recreation: Create open spaces for resident and visitor use.
  7. Respond to Tenant Needs: Plan for existing and future residents through phased redevelopment.
  8. Create a Viable and Sustainable Plan: Achieve an economically viable plan for sustainable redevelopment at approximately 1.15 FSR.
Photo of mature forest on site
Photo of mature forest on site
Photo of a modern residential interior
Photo of a modern residential interior
Diagram showing proposed building footprints over previously disturbed areas
Diagram showing proposed building footprints over previously disturbed areas
Architectural rendering of proposed building integration
Architectural rendering of proposed building integration
Photo of cyclists and pedestrians in an urban setting
Photo of cyclists and pedestrians in an urban setting
Photo of a wood-frame building under construction
Photo of a wood-frame building under construction

Rental Market Data

Realstar has indicated that rental rates for the new buildings will likely be higher than current ones, but current rents are already at or above market rates for the region. The property experiences an annual unit turnover of approximately 30%.

Christie Point Rental Rate Range

Unit Type Average Rent Minimum Rent Maximum Rent
2BR $1,192 $923 $1,350
3BR + TH3 $1,583 $1,247 $1,850
Page 48–105

4.0 Community Engagement & Iterative Plan Development

Realstar began exploration in May 2016 and hosted a first tenant meeting in July 2016 with approximately 70 attendees. A newsletter was distributed in September 2016 followed by a second meeting attended by 80 residents.

Excerpt from September 2016 Christie Point Newsletter
Excerpt from September 2016 Christie Point Newsletter
Photo of the Christie Point Community Gardens sign
Photo of the Christie Point Community Gardens sign

Engagement also included local indigenous governments (Songhees Nation and Esquimalt Nation), municipal government, and community stakeholders.

Logos of community stakeholders including GWI, PIPS, PISCES, Shoreline Middle School, and Nations
Logos of community stakeholders including GWI, PIPS, PISCES, Shoreline Middle School, and Nations
Photo of the Neighbourhood Open House held on September 22, 2016
Photo of the Neighbourhood Open House held on September 22, 2016

Engagement Timeline

  • 1963: 15.8 acre Christie Point Peninsula developed with 5 apartment buildings and 4 townhouse blocks.
  • 2014: Property acquired by Realstar Management.
  • Spring 2016: Assembly of Consultant Team.
  • Spring / Summer 2016: Site Analysis, Conceptual Design, Stakeholder Identification, Tenant/Stakeholder Meetings.
  • Summer / Fall 2016: Neighbourhood Open House, Preliminary Information Presentation to Council, Design Refinement.
  • Fall / Winter 2016: Rezoning Application Submission, Ongoing Engagement.
Community engagement timeline diagram
Community engagement timeline diagram

Evolution of Building Form

Rendering of Design as Presented at Community Open House (Sept 22, 2016) - 4 to 9 storeys at 1.25 FSR
Rendering of Design as Presented at Community Open House (Sept 22, 2016) - 4 to 9 storeys at 1.25 FSR
Rendering of Design as Presented at Committee of the Whole (Nov 8, 2016) - 4 to 6 storeys at 1.25 FSR
Rendering of Design as Presented at Committee of the Whole (Nov 8, 2016) - 4 to 6 storeys at 1.25 FSR
Rendering of Design as Proposed for Rezoning (Dec 2016) - 4 to 6 storeys at 1.15 FSR
Rendering of Design as Proposed for Rezoning (Dec 2016) - 4 to 6 storeys at 1.15 FSR
Page 48–105

5.0 Site Analysis

5.1 Historical Setting and Archaeological Value

The area was originally occupied by the Lekwammen (Songhees and Esquimalt First Nations). Christie Point may have been named after John Christie, an owner of the Craigflower Farm in the 1930s.

Historical photo: View NW to Craigflower Farm, circa 1855
Historical photo: View NW to Craigflower Farm, circa 1855
1926 air photo of Christie Point
1926 air photo of Christie Point
1967 air photo of Christie Point showing current building layout
1967 air photo of Christie Point showing current building layout

Terra Archaeology identified four archaeological sites on the property (DcRu-103, DcRu-104, DcRu-105, and DcRu-106).

Map of archaeological site locations [Red
Map of archaeological site locations [Red
in relation to proposed buildings [yellow]]

5.2 Natural Environmental Value

Swell Environmental Consulting identified that the site is situated adjacent to the Craigflower Creek and Colquitz River estuaries. The terrestrial vegetation is primarily second-growth Douglas-fir, arbutus, and Garry oak.

Map of Vegetation Types
Map of Vegetation Types
Map of Bird and Wildlife Features
Map of Bird and Wildlife Features
Map of Existing Areas of Concern
Map of Existing Areas of Concern
Map of Environmental Recommendations
Map of Environmental Recommendations

The project is pursuing opportunities with the Green Shores program to become a pilot project for coastal development.

Green Shores Principles:

  1. Preserve or Restore physical processes.
  2. Maintain or Enhance habitat function.
  3. Prevent or Reduce pollutants.
  4. Avoid or Reduce cumulative impacts.
Green Shores Credits and Ratings Guide table
Green Shores Credits and Ratings Guide table

5.3 Mature Trees

Existing tall tree stands are up to 20 to 27 metres high, equivalent to buildings of 5 to 8 storeys.

Photo comparing existing tree heights to hypothetical building storey heights
Photo comparing existing tree heights to hypothetical building storey heights

5.4 Sea Level Rise

Ryzuk Geotechnical recommended a minimum flood construction level (FCL) of +3.3 m geodetic. The design team has adopted a minimal FCL of 3.5m for all habitable floor areas.

Precedent example of flood-protected parking
Precedent example of flood-protected parking

Flood Construction Level Calculations

Parameter Height (m) Notes
Highest recorded tide (HHWLT) 1.0 (geodetic datum) Portage Inlet
Total Storm Surge 1.0 0.81 m residual + 25% for storm intensity
Estimated wave effect 0.3 Limited due to sheltered Inlet
Uplift -0.1 1.2 mm/year for 75 years
Sea Level Rise (SLR) 0.8 Assuming 75 year building lifespan
Free Board Factor 0.3
FLOOD CONSTRUCTION LEVEL (geodetic) +3.3
Table of FCL Calculations
Table of FCL Calculations

5.5 Layered Site Analysis

Existing Aerial View
Existing Aerial View
Topographic Contour Gradient
Topographic Contour Gradient
Site Areas Above 3.5m Geodetic Elevation
Site Areas Above 3.5m Geodetic Elevation
Vegetation Constraints
Vegetation Constraints
Wildlife Constraints
Wildlife Constraints
Shoreline Constraints
Shoreline Constraints
15m Setback for Natural Watercourse DP Area
15m Setback for Natural Watercourse DP Area
Locations of Known Archaeological Significance
Locations of Known Archaeological Significance
Page 48–105

6.0 Christie Point Redevelopment Concept

The plan proposes 8 buildings with 473 rental units at a density of 1.15 FSR.

Density and Height Comparison (at 1.50 FSR)

  • 2 Storeys: Almost all of the site would need to be covered in buildings.
  • 4 Storeys: Approximately 15 buildings required, covering large portions of the site.
  • 6 Storeys: Demonstrates improved preservation of open spaces.

[Images 48-53: Diagrams and renderings comparing building footprints at 2, 4, and 6 storeys]

Housing Density Scale

The proposed density of 75 units per hectare falls in the range of attached row housing and multi-storey walkup residences.

Housing Density Scale chart from UBC Design Centre for Sustainability
Housing Density Scale chart from UBC Design Centre for Sustainability

6.1 Site Plan and Development Data

Existing Site Plan
Existing Site Plan
Proposed Site Plan with building labels A through G
Proposed Site Plan with building labels A through G
Bird’s Eye View of Proposed Redevelopment, Looking Northwest
Bird’s Eye View of Proposed Redevelopment, Looking Northwest

Proposed Plan Data

Building # Residential Storeys # Units Approx Floor Area Assigned Parking (Concealed) Building Height Above Grade Assigned Parking (At Grade) Visitor Parking Bike Parking (Class 1) Bike Parking (Class 2)
A 2-6 76 125,000 s.f. 64 26.0m 11 85 12
B 3-6 61 102,000 s.f. 70 24.0m 9 65 6
C 6 60 100,000 s.f. 70 24.5m 9 65 6
D1 3-6 64 108,000 s.f. 64 24.5m 10 70 6
D2 3-6 64 108,000 s.f. 64 24.5m 10 70 6
E 6 60 100,000 s.f. 60 26.0m 9 65 6
F 4 50 79,000 s.f. 48 26.0m 8 55 6
G 4 38 59,000 s.f. 20 18.0m 6 45 6
TOTALS 473 781,000 s.f. 460 62 72 520 54

Site Data Summary

Metric Existing (RM-1 Zone) Proposed (Mixed Residential)
Site Area 6.3 ha [15.58 ac] 6.3 ha [15.58 ac]
Floor Space Ratio 0.6 (base) 1.15
Lot Coverage (max) 40% NO CHANGE
Building Height (max) 7.5m 26.0m
Parking Ratio 1.25 spaces per unit

6.2 Landscape Plan

The plan focuses on GreenShores principles, removing invasive species (English Ivy), and planting native or adaptive species.

6.3 Architecture

[Images 68-72: Proposed Site Sections A through E showing building profiles and grades]

[Images 73-76: Rendered views from Portage Inlet Linear Park, Seabird Park, E&N Rail Trail, and Craigflower Bridge]

6.4 View, Noise and Light Impact Analysis

A study analyzed luminant area percentages of local buildings, typically ranging from 13-15%, to model night views.

[Images 77-86: Photos and light analysis diagrams of existing regional buildings] [Images 87-90: Rendered night views from Portage Inlet Linear Park, Seabird Park, E&N Rail Trail, and Craigflower Bridge]

6.5 Shadow Impact Analysis

[Images 91-96: Comparative shadow studies for Existing vs. Proposed buildings at Equinox, Summer Solstice, and Winter Solstice]

6.6 Transportation and Traffic Impact Analysis

Vehicle Trip Generation Rates - Observed Versus ITE Rates (for 161 Units)

Source In Out Total Trips
ITE 221 (Low-Rise) 59 34 93
ITE 223 (Mid-Rise) 37 26 63
ITE 230 (Condo/TH) 57 27 84
Observed 32 13 45

Parking supply is proposed at 593 spaces (522 resident, 71 visitor), resulting in 1.25 spaces per unit. Bicycle parking includes 520 Class 1 spaces and 54 Class 2 spaces.

6.7 Infrastructure and Servicing

Page 48–105

7.0 Rental Housing and Affordability

The project addresses several OCP Housing policies:

  • HS1.1 Range of Housing Types: Includes ground-oriented units for family housing.
  • HS1.2 Age in Place: Buildings designed with contemporary accessibility features.
  • HS1.3/HS1.4 Trust Fund/Contributions: $1.0 million contribution to the CRD Regional Housing Trust Fund.
  • HS1.6 Loss of Rental Housing: Commitment to a tenant assistance package exceeding RTA requirements.
  • HS1.10 Affordability Through Design: Use of wood-frame construction up to 6 storeys.
Page 48–105

8.0 Community Benefits

Venn diagram of Social, Economic, and Environmental Benefits
Venn diagram of Social, Economic, and Environmental Benefits
Bird's Eye rendering of the proposed development
Bird's Eye rendering of the proposed development
Page 48–105

9.0 Phasing Plan

The team explored potential for construction in multiple phases to allow some residents to relocate within the complex. John Knappett of Knappett Projects Inc. confirmed the feasibility of this approach.

[Images 103-104: Maps showing current and proposed site phasing zones]

Page 48–105

10.0 Project Timeline

Approvals Process Chart from May 2016 to Spring 2017
Approvals Process Chart from May 2016 to Spring 2017
Page 48–105
Extracted from: 2017 04 25 Joint Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda - Agenda - Pdf