COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE REPORT - MIXED RESIDENTIAL FORM AND CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 9 ERSKINE LANE

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Committee receive the report from the Community Planner entitled “Mixed Residential Form and Character Development Permit 9 Erskine Lane” and dated April 7, 2021 for information.

CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER’S COMMENTS

I concur with the recommendation.

DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES’ COMMENTS

I concur with the recommendation.

DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING’S COMMENTS

I concur with the recommendation.

PURPOSE OF REPORT

The purpose of this report is to introduce the Mixed Residential Form and Character Development Permit application for 9 Erskine Lane to Committee.

BACKGROUND

The property was rezoned to CD-25 Erskine Lane Residential in January of 2021. A Development Agreement and Housing Agreement were part of that rezoning to secure the following:

• $1,176,000 in Community Amenity Contributions
• Construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Watkiss and Erskine Lane
• 100% purpose-built rental
• 10% of the units are Affordable Housing Units (maximum $74,150 household income for units under two bedrooms and maximum $113,040 household income for two or more bedrooms)
• Level 2 charging pre-wiring for every parking space, plus five parking spaces per building with installed wired conduit Level 2 charging stations
• 12 monthly transit passes for one occupant of each dwelling unit
• One carshare vehicle (and parking space) and one bikeshare bicycle per building for at least two years

The applicant has also expressed interest in assisting the resurfacing of the informal pathway connecting Erskine Lane to Hospital Way (a CRD Water right-of-way) which also crosses 2 Hospital Way to the east.

PROJECT INFORMATION

The application has not changed in any significant way since the rezoning application. Additional information or changes include:

• The façade designs for the building have changed very slightly, mainly to the areas of wood cladding
• More specific site detail in the drawings has been provided
• Planting plan within the landscape plan
• Detailed building height information is included
• A complete summary of how the proposal addresses the Mixed Residential Form and Character Guidelines has been provided by the applicant
• Variances for height of two of the four buildings (0.73m and 1.43m for buildings A and D, respectively, from the 15.5m permitted)
• Variances to height of retaining walls, tentatively from 1.2m to 1.8m
• Cash in Lieu of parking and/or variances to parking spaces from 436 to 324 spaces provided

The applicant has submitted the following information in support of their application:

1. Letter to Council (with DP guidelines statement) – applicant – February 23, 2021
2. Architectural Plans and Elevations – Thuja architecture and design – March 2021
3. Materials and Renderings – Thuja architecture and design – March 2021
4. Landscape Plan – Lazzarin Svisdahl Landscape Architects – May 10, 2020
5. Average Grade and Height Calculations – GeoVerra – April 1, 2021

SITE DATA SUMMARY

The applicant refers to the northern portion of the hooked property as Lot A and the southern portion as Lot B. The applicant has not yet determined if the site will be subdivided. Staff are following up on this issue.

*Note that the site coverage figure does not include landscaping – only building coverage.

Unit Mix

The proposal is currently for four rental buildings over the two hooked lots with 336 units in the following configuration:

• 16 studio units
• 160 one-bedroom units
• 120 two-bedroom units
• 40 three-bedroom units

ISSUES AND ANALYSIS

Design Character

The design is of the ‘west coast contemporary’ style identified in the Mixed Residential Form and Character guidelines. The architectural style is very similar to that of recent developments in the community along Watkiss Way, at Eagle Creek Village and the proposed at 7 Erskine Lane. The four buildings are virtually identical in design and layout. The proposed materials are dark, natural tones of slate, cedar, concrete, grey and asphalt shingle roofing. The applicant has provided renderings within the plans, both without trees and with trees.

The strong butterfly roof lines on each building are drawn down into the façade and break the face of the building up into less imposing quadrants. It is a very strong design. The varied façade materials create visual interest, and the darker top floor softens the height of the building.

Decks and windows address all open spaces and accesses on the property and provide ‘eyes on the street’ for residents and visitors.

Garbage and recycling are located centrally and appropriately screened, with a space for each lot and a dedicated loading space adjacent.

Siting, Height and Massing

The buildings are pulled back from Erskine Lane and do not present a long façade anywhere close to the road or to the townhouses across the street. As is illustrated in the design discussion, the façade is broken up extremely effectively with strong roof line elements extending into the façade. Much of the mass of the buildings will be softened by the retained trees on the site and the angled nature of the buildings relative to each other creates visual interest.

The proposed siting, height and massing has not changed since the rezoning proposal, but there remains a small disparity in the finished grade compared to the surveyor’s calculated grade (as attached). The site slopes, falling away from Watkiss Way, and the buildings at the top and the bottom of the slope are calculated as slightly over-height in relation to the calculated average grade.

*Variance Required

Building A and Building B are proposed at the same finished grade elevation of 29 metres, building C and Building D are likewise proposed at a finished grade elevation of 18.11 metres.

When the applicant agreed to the 15.5m building height there was an anticipation that the butterfly roof would be measured to mid-point of roof, when in fact it is measured to top of roof.

The most affected property regarding adjacent buildings will be 7 Erskine Lane, and staff will work with the applicant to illustrate the relative building heights between the two sites.

Retaining Wall Heights

To support the buildings there are some stacked boulder retaining walls on-site which will measure between 1.3 and 1.8 metres in height. Anything over 1.2m will require a variance; staff will work with the applicant to determine the exact heights of these retaining walls on-site in advance of bringing the file back to Council.

Landscaping and Tree Retention

The applicant has retained trees on the site where possible. The applicant is proposing that 40% of the current tree coverage will be retained and is proposing to plant 178 additional trees on site as per the landscaping plan. This is less than the 250 stated at time of rezoning; the Landscape Architect has indicated that the 178 trees is the most that can be planted on site to maintain tree health and to avoid planting in existing natural areas. The site will be heavily treed regardless, and the site has a good mix of natural and active open space with included dog runs, a play structure, a section of open lawn for informal gathering and play, small walking path loop, herb garden, and covered bicycle parking.

Parking

The applicant has provided the bulk of the parking in underground stalls, with 100% of the proposed vehicle parking on-site having Level 2 charging outlets, and 100% of the proposed secured bicycle parking with Level 1 charging outlets.

There are proposed 6 surface parking spaces for Buildings A and B and 12 surface parking spaces for Buildings C and D. Buildings A and B do not have a proposed accessible parking stall; staff would prefer one, and ideally one per building.

The applicant requires 436 parking spaces and is proposing to supply 324. The applicant may use cash in lieu of parking provisions in the zoning bylaw for up to 15% of the required parking (65 spaces) but would still need a variance of 47 spaces. While the applicant did include this amount of parking on the drawings for the rezoning, it is not a zoning regulation and it is only required that the site be able to support sufficient parking. Due to the potential for unit configuration changes after rezoning parking is not set at rezoning.

A parking variance is not uncommon for purpose-built rental buildings with an affordability component. Staff is supportive of this in the context of affordability. That said, Council can require a parking study to reach a level of confidence with the parking supplied.

Lighting

A lighting plan has not been provided but the applicant’s provided guidelines state LED lighting with a focus on ‘dark skies friendly’ design. Staff will request a lighting plan in advance of the application coming forward to Council.

Access, Circulation

The site is well designed with short-run driveways to the underground parking, easy pedestrian access and surface parking to serve the buildings. The entrances to the buildings face the central parking and common areas with safety and visibility in mind. As mentioned with the parking discussion, staff would prefer that there were a better balance between the surface parking and accessible parking between Lot A and Lot B. Staff will work with the applicant in that regard.

Stormwater Management

A Stormwater Management Plan must be submitted to the Town’s Engineering Department for review and acceptance prior to the issuance of the Development Permit, as some onsite landscaping elements may contribute to the site’s SWM. The plan must address all drainage entering and exiting the proposed development to maintain post development flows to predevelopment levels and to incorporate water quality treatment provisions to meet the performance targets specified in the Town’s Storm Water Regulation Bylaw. The proposed stormwater management must attempt to mimic or recreate the natural, pre-development balance or mix of interception, evapotranspiration, infiltration, and runoff on the development site.

Road Dedication

A strip of property must be dedicated to the Town to achieve the required 18 m wide road right-of-way on Erskine Lane. The width and location of this strip of land is detailed in the attached Servicing Requirements.

Variances

• Variances for height of two of the four buildings (0.73m and 1.43m for buildings A and D, respectively, from the 15.5m permitted)
• Variances to height of retaining walls, tentatively from 1.2m to 1.8m
• Cash in lieu of parking (up to 65 spaces) and/or variances to parking spaces from 436 to 324 spaces

CONCLUSION AND NEXT STEPS

Staff is supportive of the application.

Staff will continue to work with the applicant to refine some information provided, including:

1. Ways to potentially reduce requested variances
2. A lighting plan for the site focusing on dark skies friendly design.
3. More even distribution of surface parking between Lot A and Lot B.
4. An illustration of the relative building heights between the subject site and the adjacent proposed at 7 Erskine Lane.
5. Determine if the site is to be subdivided. If it is, the proposed subdivision needs to be included as part of the consideration of the Development Permit.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Committee receive the report from the Community Planner entitled “Mixed Residential Form and Character Development Permit 9 Erskine Lane” and dated April 7, 2021 for information.

SUBMITTED BY: J. Davison, MCIP RPP, Planner

REVIEWED BY: L. Chase, MCIP RPP, Director of Development Services

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Subject Property Map
2. Subject Property Orthophoto
3. Letter to Council (with DP guidelines statement) – applicant – February 23, 2021
4. Architectural Plans and Elevations – Thuja architecture and design – March 2021
5. Materials and Renderings – Thuja architecture and design – March 2021
6. Landscape Plan – Lazzarin Svisdahl Landscape Architects – May 10, 2020
7. Average Grade and Height Calculations – GeoVerra – April 1, 2021
8. Development Permit Guidelines analysis - staff