Public Hearing

So good evening again, everyone.

And we're going to call the public hearing to order.

And for those watching at home, we do have a public hearing tonight for High Street, 110 High Street.

And then we have a council meeting afterwards.

So we'll do the public hearing first and then we'll segue right into the council meeting.

So I'll call the meeting to order and I'll start by the the the for people at home.

Um you can call in and there will be a segment in the public hearing for you to give us your input.

And so you're going to dial 778-402-9227.

And when prompted, enter conference ID 134-874-674-pound.

And I will then announce the last four digits of your phone number, ask you to mute the live webcast to avoid feedback, ask you to not use speakerphone to ensure sound quality, and ask that you unmute yourself by pressing star six.

And if you could give us your name and address for the record, and then you may give us the benefit of your views.

There is also a chat feature, which is just for the public hearing, not for the council meeting.

And the that feature is open now for your comments.

And again, we ask that you provide your name and address to begin your comments.

Members of council may, if they so wish, ask questions of you.

However, the main function of council members this evening is to listen to the views of the public.

It is not the function of council at this public hearing to debate the merits of the proposed bylaw with individual citizens.

During the course of a public hearing, people sometimes tend to become enthusiastic or emotional, regardless of how you favor or oppose any particular application or argument, please keep your phone on mute so everybody may clearly hear the person who has the floor.

All right.

So the purpose of the report tonight is to summarize the proposal for a zoning bylaw amendment, the bylaw number 1104 2022, and to recommend a covenant to secure community amenity contribution.

Next slide.

So background on the property.

Subject site is uh 1942 square meters.

Uh its proposal is to zone from an existing R1 zone, which is the detached residential large lot, to R2 duplex for the purpose of building a duplex.

The official community plan land use designation residential does support the proposed rezoning for the duplex.

Next slide, please.

So additional site context.

To the north is the District of Saanich.

To the east is a R1 and Knockan Hill Park, sorry.

And to the west and south is also R1 zoned land.

Next slide, please.

So since this application was brought forward to council on July 19th, 2022 for first and second reading, staff had recommended that an arborist report be provided for staff to take this to a public hearing.

Since then, the application now has an arborist report in support of the application.

And the additional change is actually to the site plan.

So the site plan is now showing that the proposed duplex and the accessory structure have shifted.

Next slide.

Away from the interior side lot line, and the duplex has become more perpendicular and parallel to the interior side lot line to the south.

Next slide.

As opposed to what was previously proposed, where the accessory structure was further to the side property lot line, and the duplex was at an angle on the property.

Next slide.

This is a rendering of what the proposal looks like.

And this is not just a note, a not what the proposed setting is for the property.

So this is based on the old uh old siding.

The intent here is just to show what the building materials would look like and how the property would be uh built out.

Next slide.

And this is another rendering from uh the end of High Street looking into the property.

And again, um the rendering is is for uh the old old setting.

Next slide, please.

So, with regards to the official community plan, the subject property is not within the development permit area.

The uh OCP guidelines, however, still must be met regarding density.

The subject property is within the neighborhood uh hospital neighborhood and is in close proximity to the northern gateway community corridor.

The OECP considers this to be a growth area and anticipates higher density, and finally, the OCP's land OCP's land use designation, which is residential, is consistent with the proposed zone.

Next slide, please.

With respect to the zoning bylaw, the proposal meets all density siting requirements.

However, additional consideration for the impermeable surface and the size of the accessory structure need to be confirmed with the applicant.

Next slide.

Next slide.

Thank you.

But the uh these items can be discussed at building permit and are not a concern for staff at this time for the uh the rezoning.

Um the updated drawings also have to be confirmed for miss uh missing uh height calculations, but based on what has been shown, um staff don't believe it to be overheight.

Next slide.

One thing that uh staff had uh asked for in order to go back to public for go for public hearing was uh an armor's report.

That arborist report has uh identified 14 on site trees, 12 of which are bylaw protected through the tree protection bylaw.

And the report also identifies that six off-site trees might be impacted by on-site works.

The report proposes that uh seven on-site trees be removed and they would be replaced at a ratio of two to one as per the tree protection bylaw.

And the location and replacement of those trees would be confirmed through a future tree permit, which would be prior to the issuance of building permit.

Next slide.

Community amenity contribution would be applicable for this application.

$4,000 per residential unit would be provided.

There are two residential units, so a total of $8,000 would be collected.

In addition, DCCs would be payable as per the bylaw.

Next slide, please.

Growth and higher density can be identified and supported by the OCP.

The subject property's land use designation is consistent with the proposed use and zoning.

And finally, the subject property is a single large lot which provides opportunity to increase density gently through infill.

So two recommendations.

Next slide.

The first that the report be uh received, and then second that a covenant be registered concurrent with fourth reading of the zoning bylaw.

For uh a community contribution.

Sorry.

Thank you.

Great.

Thanks, Jenny.

Questions for staff?

Councillor Manson.

Yeah, just for clarification.

So we've got one large lot.

Now could it be sub under the current zoning?

Is uh R1 in that area a thousand square feet or a thousand square meters, or because it's less than two thousand or uh if we go back to the uh the zoning uh breakdown, I believe that the property could be subdivided.

Um I do forget if I said it was uh 1400, but I believe that the the current zone requires 600 square meters per per lot.

So um we could we could go back to that slide to confirm.

We we had an application many, many years ago for the same property, and they they needed a variance to the frontage requirement in order to subdivide it.

Okay, and um that so that it didn't go through at that point in time, but the size of the I think the size of the lot is almost 20,000 square feet.

Right.

Yeah, yeah.

Yeah, and what I was concerned about was if it was a not so much concern, I just wanted clarification on it.

If they could subdivide and just have two single houses, but I gather the the frontage area, the frontage is the limitation, but size-wise, you could under the current zoning, you could put two houses on there if it wasn't for the limitations on the frontage.

Through your worship, correct.

Okay, thank you.

I'm not sure if your mic is maybe it just needs to be a bit closer to you.

Yeah.

Councillor Lemon.

Yeah, thank you.

Thank you, Sterling.

Um, the images here both say note rendering does not show new proposed location, etc.

Um, the second one is you know, kind of a real realistic view from the street.

What would how different would be would the proposed new pro well proposed location be from what I see here?

So the uh through your worship the intent of the the sighting um change was to largely um accommodate uh tree uh protection so that was informed by the Arborist report the actual change in the sighting of the building um is more just a shift uh slightly uh to be that the I guess the end of the building would be uh more um perpendicular or parallel to the frontage of the uh the high street the um we're not talking a huge uh a huge change it's it's a shift of probably uh a few feet not uh several meters got it good thank you councillor rogers yes uh a number of questions the uh accessory building what what's the intended use um i don't have that information um i'm not sure uh if i i believe it i i believe it might be parking but um i i have not confirmed that with all the we could ask the applicant that next when the applicant comes up okay um i guess maybe i'd be uh i just a question for you um with the traffic uh that's uh for the additional homes and uh the existing traffic for people that want to go to um um knocking hill park and 101 high street part of the park.

There's no way of being able to do a turnaround at this point i is does this um uh development uh allow some uh creative uses of roadways so that a turnaround could be built?

Uh through your worship.

I I'm not sure.

I understand.

Do you do you are you thinking a uh like road improvements?

Is that a roundabout?

Um or not a roundabout, but a cul-de-sac kind of cul-de-sac.

Um I don't know how much road uh we have there um to do something like that.

I might defer to our director of engineering if you can speak with him.

I'm clearling it to your worship.

Uh, we'll be looking at the the road improvement is that time and servicing agreement.

Okay.

Um, at that time we'll be engaging with emergency services, so uh the fire department to see if they're satisfied with the design, and that'll be figured out at uh the time and servicing agreement.

It it's certainly just following up on councillor rogers, it certainly seems to be one of the prime concerns because it's that the street really narrows at the top, and of course, it goes directly into a driveway of a house that's in Sanage.

Um, and then there's the entrance to Knockin Hill Park.

Um, and certainly the if I was talking to the the owners yesterday of the very last house, and they already have problems at time getting out of their driveway if anyone parks on the pavement.

So I think it is an issue, and I think it's if we've had letters about it.

So, is there any possibility, and maybe that's also for the applicant, that we could work on on putting some parking spaces there somehow.

Through your worship, uh, yes, based on the subdivision and servicing bylaw uh for a uh local road and urban setting on the cross section does dictate that uh street parking would be required uh it could be done really widely within the corridor.

Okay.

Great.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

Yeah, thanks.

Yeah, um appreciate the follow-up.

Uh do staff have any recommendations um or um because uh when I look at um uh the addresses there, number 100 and 102, uh those two properties to the south, uh, they will now have a driveway to the south of them and a driveway to the north of them.

And do staff have any recommendations to the applicant how he can improve the screening and privacy for uh those two properties.

Through your worship, I believe that the applicant is going to be putting up uh landscaping at time of rezoning.

That's not looked at at that level of detail.

One of the images that we did see, the renderings did show uh fencing uh along the property boundary uh and actually around the the entire per order.

Um that could be uh that could be something that uh does provide some screening and uh a bit of a buffer between the two properties.

Okay, good.

Uh and then thanks very much for staff and the applicant for providing the uh Arbors report.

Uh I was a little concerned with the wording of the Arbor's report.

Um uh if it wasn't maybe possible for retention, it was maybe possible, maybe suitable for survival or retention.

Um I'm hesitant and nervous when uh an arbitration says our trees, our municipal trees, the three of them, um that are well off the property, uh and they only get a designation of maybe possible to survive.

So we're running, are we running a uh um uh a risk that our municipal trees will be lost from this development?

There is a potential that they they could be damaged, but uh that would be uh secured through a tree permit.

So um that's something that our uh our staff would look at and uh work with the applicant um ideally we wouldn't want to lose any trees yeah yeah I mean if we're we're we're doing everyone a favor by improving increasing the density we also want to make sure that we've maintained the uh the canopy as well particularly our trees which brings me to the off site trees aren't those trees in Sainwich the through your worship the the the off site trees that were identified there were off site trees in uh in Saanich um the uh again the intent of the arborist report was to identify how those trees could be protected.

Um and the uh arborist report details that if uh um uh screening is put up, they should be uh they should be uh protected.

Um again that would be uh dealt with that in more detail at the time of tree permit.

Yeah.

My again my nervous is that the ARBA said it may be possible for retention again, 50 maybe less than a 50-50 chance.

So um and and I think it'd be uh really worthwhile to contact uh Sanich uh if we haven't done so already, since uh whether it'd be affecting the trees in their municipality.

Thank you.

Yep, everybody's good.

Thank you, Studio.

So next we go to comments from the applicant.

I think I saw the applicant here.

Welcome.

Good evening your worship and counselors.

My name is Nigel Banks.

I'm the designer of the proposed duplex.

And I tried to make some notes on some of the questions that were asked to the planner, but I'll try and touch on those.

The planner mentioned, and I just emphasize that we're this is very low density development in terms of what would be permitted on the site, both in terms of the site coverage and uh the required setbacks.

We're trying to stay well away from everything.

The relocation of the building, as suggested by the arborist, is such that it addresses some of the questions that were raised by adjacent property owners in terms of moving the building further away and ensuring that there's better protection for the trees that were close at the time.

We also would relocate the garage so that it's not in a flanking yard and is more located behind the building and thus be further away from the properties that uh that lie to the south.

We did discuss that with the planner prior to putting together this proposal.

And uh the discussion suggested that it would probably be a more reasonable solution to approach it from the duplex perspective rather than subdivision.

And then there's the issue of perimeters and panhandles and that sort of thing.

And we got the impression that that uh the the town is not really interested in creating panhandle lots, particularly when it pockets them in amongst uh uh existing buildings.

Um the uh the uh question of turnaround, um I'm not sure that the the plan clearly shows.

Currently, the driveway into one hand high street is located right at the very end of high street and being adjacent to that driveway that goes up to the house that's in Saanich.

We are removing that driveway and bringing it to the south property line.

Again, that was a suggestion from staff.

That's going to create one less access off of High Street at its at its extreme end.

But whether or not there is width there to create uh a turnaround, I should think there would be enough to create turnaround that would do for automobiles and light trucks, but I don't think we'd be able to maneuver a fire truck.

I know the fire department has some large equipment, and their concern is always that we accommodate that.

I don't think that's a likelihood.

The other thing I wanted to just touch on was the concern about the trees.

One of the reasons for having the arborist is to ensure that there's a protection plan in place for the trees that remain.

And certainly that would be the case if this proceeds and the arborist would be then uh brought into the team and be responsible for supervising excavation and any movement of material around the drip line or the critical root zones of the trees.

Um there was a couple of other things.

There was some correspondence, I believe, that was received by council, and I wanted just to touch on those things.

and Mrs.

Um was from uh Mr.

Burrow at 89 High Street, and their concern again was this parking and turnaround business.

Um they also seemed to have the impression that this was a duplex with a suite above the garages, and I just wanted to emphasize absolutely it's a duplex.

There's no suite above the garages.

Um, the uh there's two two car garages, one for each of the units, and in front of those garages, there's parking more, there's surface parking for two more vehicles, plus which for the traffic that's generated by this proposal there is uh the ability to turn around on site nobody will be backing out onto uh to the road um the other the other uh uh correspondence related to the the building itself and I appreciate the the uh the writer's uh Jacquie Jones Vickers' concern um my clients are involved in the construction industry and they looked very carefully at the building um it's of an age where and of of a construction that's probably extremely difficult to to save.

Plus the upgrades that would be required to bring it up to code as a new residence for both seismic and and thermal performance, insulation, that sort of thing, just make the retention pretty much impossible.

So that those are things that we can't do too much about.

The landscape plan which the planner uh didn't show but we did submit a landscape plan and it did illustrate a a U hedge placed along the salt property line and uh new fencing or repaired and upgraded fencing to the to the full perimeter.

And that was part of the uh pardon me, the original um submission.

So um uh I think that the council probably doesn't want you to go through the whole building again bit by bit.

So I'll leave it at that and be happy to answer any questions.

Councilor Rogers.

Well, I think it's good to have the assurance of a hedge along the uh south side.

How tall would that hedge be?

Well, I guess we're we'd be planting something that it's a normal you know, four to six foot height, and then it would be, of course, fill in until we get to the point where you get complaints from people about the hedge being too high.

I think you know the the issue is that if it's it's only a six foot, it may not be that beneficial to the neighbors.

So it's uh it's uh hopefully you'll consult with them and having a good size that will be able to uh provide that privacy.

I think that can be worked out with uh there seems to be good communications with my clients and the immediate neighbors.

So there's that line of communication, and uh also I guess the parks department might have something to contribute as well.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you, sir.

I think we'll move on to comments from the public.

So thank so for anyone at home, this would now be your chance to dial in.

The numbers are on the screen 778 402 9227.

And there's also the chat feature for anyone at home.

If you just want to make a comment or ask a question through the chat feature, you can do that, and it'll be read into the room for us and so is there anyone in the room who would like to speak to this sure come on up to the mic and if you don't mind just giving us your your name and address for the record please yes my name is Monica Johnston Stewart I am uh from 100 high street and so we are directly behind the developments of the applicant and um just wanted to um uh just clarify that um like I'm not able to see the the the move the moving of the garage from behind the fence so I just like to have a clear vision of that where that's going to go on the staff are you able to help with that with um let me just maybe mr i'm not sure that just on that on that rendering on on which rendering was it one that staff had or even the or even the plan is the applicant able to help with that with the i haven't got the uh the revised plan with me um finer did have the uh there the idea was that the garage was being located further north so that instead of being in the side yard, maybe adjacent to the fence, but it would be located in the rear yard, essentially towards the opposite side of the property.

And it's reduced in size as well.

Do we have that graphic again, staff, of that the lady's referring to?

Is it possible to put that up?

Okay.

I guess just trying to grab it now.

Thank you.

Yeah.

My husband and I just we just like to be in communication around that, just because it would like directly impacts us, and we have talked to the applicant about it.

So it's it it was um it's something that would be important to us.

Um yeah so that's that's that's right there so it's the garage in the in the top left corner that's right yeah because we are our house is very heated so yeah this directly um so yeah that is like right there in our backyard um also we asked um the applicant to put their fence up and then we also like to make sure sure we have the question.

Sure.

So my understanding then is that the garage has been shifted since these renderings.

Well, I don't think we know the exact answer to that other than a few feet.

Yeah.

Yeah, just I just can't tell.

Yeah.

It's being moved well up.

Okay, north.

I'm just I'm just finding that a bit unclear.

So is this the garage here now?

To your worship, that's that's correct.

Yes.

Yeah.

So that's in the middle of the backyard then.

So it has been moved quite a ways from the line compared to where it was.

We I I certainly understand your concerns about that, but I I think the the trick is for you to remain in communication with the applicant on that and work with them on that.

I mean, more than us.

Okay.

What we're really doing tonight is the is the land use aspect of it.

Right.

Um, but I know that our staff and the the applicant both would obviously have have been prepared to work with you and would continue to work with you on that.

Okay.

I I do have a garage question.

Sure.

Just who's the garage for?

Like which which unit or is it for both?

This just seems to be in the middle of the backyard, and I'm just I'm just curious how that works.

It's not a garage, it's an accessory building.

And one of the flashbacks would be available from the available both of the things for use as a workshop or studio or something like that, sort of.

Okay, thank you.

Um, we have shown a driveway to it initially because we thought that it would be usable as a as a workshop to material, but in locating the building further away, you don't want to page there as a most likely as a common space.

Thank you very much.

Okay, thank you.

That's it.

Great, thank you very much.

Is there staff?

Do we have any callers on the line for this?

Your worship, we have one caller, last four digits of the phone number, is four five nine three.

So regular numbers in there.

Quick caller with the last four digits, four or five nine three.

Were you wishing to speak to this matter?

The public hearing for high street four five nine three.

Your worship, I'm just listening tonight.

Okay, thank you.

Is there anyone else in the room who'd like to speak to it?

Yep.

Come on up to the mic.

Just a couple questions.

So with policing.

Your name and address for the record, please.

88 High Street.

I'm just a couple of system.

Yeah.

So just I know personally I've called the police a couple times with people parking up here.

So whatever turnarounds discussed, we need better lighting.

Because they tuck in by the park, it's pitch black.

Evil's gates, right there.

He's spanish.

He's a top.

Right now vehicles go up Columbus Park back into the existing driveway on this property.

So if you take that out, there's nothing.

You have to have something or no one's gonna turn around there.

Evil's already had his gate damage from people turning around.

So uh question would be that policing, just because we need the lights.

I mean it's it's pitch black up there at night.

So we we do I I get your comment, but we really do need to constrain this to a certain point to land use, right?

Lighting is a sensitive subject, and I know for a fact there's people on high street that do not want more lighting on I Street.

Um, so I think that's something that the the street would have to be in involved in.

Fair enough.

Um I just know we've already had setting up.

Yeah, I know why you said there's there's cameras everywhere there, yeah, because we've had issues.

So I know for me, it's the turnaround where the drive is, that's what everyone uses right now.

So I I've been there what 11 years.

So that would be one of my question flat.

Now they're if we duplex there, right across the street, about the same size property.

Keys 90 or pushing it.

Are we gonna get a duplex there?

And then that's it's it's I'm I'm all for fixing things up, more housing, but again, are we getting a new plan for the community?

Or is this just gonna be mishmash?

Because then there's fakima's down with a massive property.

So I think as residents, we just want to know like what's we see what's going down Helmcken.

It's it's very tidy, it's thought out.

We just don't want to see a street kind of puzzled together.

So that that is one comment for that regarding and it's not.

Um I know this is what we got from Anthony.

And above the garages, so I don't know if the architect could address this.

There's another, if you can go to the picture of that, the house.

Okay, what way let's address it?

So, first off, this does meet our official community plan, right?

We did hear that right up front, that it meets the the 2011 community plan.

Yeah, the Fakima's property is massive.

It's oh three acres.

So yeah, clearly someday that's yeah, going to be many residential lots.

I don't think there's any question about that.

I don't think any of the other individual lots on High Street come close to the size of this, this one in terms of square footage.

But at any rate, that would just be my my feedback on the points you made.

Okay.

What graphic were you looking for?

Well, this picture we were given for the house.

Well, I don't know that that's we haven't seen that picture in our presentation, have we?

Is that the one male?

Okay, so the one we have has extra structures above the garages.

I can give it to you here.

Well, I mean, we've heard the assurance that there's no extra suites.

That that is the one applied for that.

Okay, I just yeah, because we're just seeing a lot of stuff coming from the neighbors, so okay we've heard the assurance that there's no extra living quarters above the the garages okay yeah okay so in zoning in general do we allow uh suites and duplexes um no I don't think there'd be allowed to be any extra it's just the two suites yeah Jeff is is nodding and shaking his hand anyway so just it's just because as a duplex you're not allowed to speak so that's the two added support for your question.

Is there anyone else in the room who would like to speak to the high street matter?

Going once.

Going twice.

Okay, so I'm gonna close that off.

And staff, would do we have anyone on the chat feature?

Thank you, Mayor Screach.

There are no chat comments this evening.

Okay, thank you.

And no callers.

So I need a motion to worship no callers.

Yep.

Okay, thank you.

I need a motion to receive A, B, and C of correspondence.

Yep.

All in favor, opposed, that's carried, and then a motion to terminate.

Great.

Thank you, staff.

Thanks, everyone.