MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2014

TOWN OF VIEW ROYAL

MINUTES OF A PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2014 VIEW ROYAL MUNICIPAL OFFICE - COUNCIL CHAMBERS

PRESENT WERE:

• Mayor Graham Hill
• Councillor Mattson
• Councillor Rast
• Councillor Rogers
• Councillor Screech

REGRETS:

PRESENT ALSO:

• K. Anema, Chief Administrative Officer
• S. Jones, Director of Corporate Administration
• J. Beauchamp, Director of Finance
• J. Davison, Planner
• E. Bolster, Deputy Municipal Clerk

43 members of the public 0 members of the press

1. CALL TO ORDER

Mayor Hill called the Public Hearing to order at 7:01 pm

2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

MOVED BY: Councillor Rast SECONDED: Councillor Screech

THAT the agenda be amended to include items 5(a)4(a);

AND THAT the agenda be approved as amended. CARRIED

3. PUBLIC HEARING

a) Statement of Public Hearing Procedure

Mayor Hill made a brief statement regarding the procedures for public hearings. He noted that following this public hearing, there is to be no contact with Council members in regard to Land Use Bylaw, 1990, No. 35, Amendment Bylaw No. 880, 2013 as, by legislation, no new information can be accepted from Council in regard to an application following a public hearing.

b) Statement of Publication of Public Hearing

The Planner advised that the notice which advertised this Public Hearing was posted on the Notice Board at the Municipal Office on January 13, 2014. The Notice was also advertised in two consecutive issues of a newspaper being the Goldstream Gazette on Wednesday, January 15, 2014, and Friday, January 17, 2014. A total of approximately 606 notices were mailed on January 10, 2014 to owners and residents of land located within a 400 metre radius of the subject property.

J. Basey, 2241 Brighton Avenue, raised a concern with in which he noted that Councillor Screech attended Nursery Hill Drive and spoke with the residents that were not in favour of the application. He requested that the information that Councillor Screech gathered be shared with the public and remainder of Council. Mayor Hill stated that a Councillor has the right to gather information that is appropriate prior to a public hearing.

4. REPORTS

4.1 STAFF REPORTS

a) Rezoning 2013/05 – 400, 404, 405, 409, 412, 413, 416, 417, 420, 424, 425, 428, 432, 433, 436, 400, 444 Nursery Hill Road

1. Report dated November 27, 2013 from the Planner

The Planner gave a PowerPoint presentation in regard to the application.

Council and staff discussed lot by lot zoning in a neighbourhood and the rationale as to why secondary suites were initially not allowed for these properties.

MOVED BY: Councillor Rogers SECONDED: Councillor Rast

THAT the report dated November 27, 2013 from the Planner titled “Rezoning 2013/05 – 400, 404, 405, 409, 412, 413, 416, 417, 420, 424, 425, 428, 432, 433, 436, 440, 444 Nursery Hill Road” be received. CARRIED

5. BYLAW FOR CONSIDERATION

a) Land Use Bylaw, 1990, No. 35, Amendment Bylaw No. 880, 2013 A Bylaw to Amend the Town of View Royal Land Use Bylaw with Respect to Creating the CD-9CS (Lakeside Village Low Density Suite Residential) Zone and with Respect to the Rezoning of 400, 404, 405, 409, 412, 413, 416, 417, 420, 424, 425, 428, 432, 433, 436, 440 and 444 Nursery Hill Drive

1. Comments from Municipal Staff The Planner gave a brief summary of the bylaw to Council.

2. Comments from Applicant J. Basey, 2241 Brighton Avenue, Principle, Bazink Solutions Inc., discussed the need for affordable housing; addressed the issue of parking concerns within Nursery Hill Drive; suites meeting floor area and parking requirements; covenants on title; ability for emergency vehicles to access Nursery Hill Drive; the existence of secondary suites at the time of purchase; the Strata Council’s towing contract with All-ways Towing for removal of offending vehicles; and the snow removal contract. He stated the hardship requirements have been covered and requested that Council grant the application.

Council and the applicant discussed parking issues and emergency vehicle access.

Councillor Screech noted that he attended the Nursery Hill Drive site in order to speak to the residents who were not in favour of this application as he felt their interests need to be represented. He noted that some of these residents indicated that there were parking issues; and that these residents do not have secondary suites in their homes and feel they have to pay for the consequences as they are the minority in the neighbourhood.

Mr. Basey noted that the towing contract that has been entered into with the Strata Council could be amended so that a resident could contact the towing company directly.

3. Comments from the Public

a) A. Tolsma, 400 Nursery Hill Drive, noted his support for the application and he purchased his home due to the fact there was a secondary suite in place for his family. He stated his property currently has five outdoor and two indoor parking spaces.

b) L. Dodd, 436 Nursery Hill Drive, stated his support of the application; noting his secondary suite was in existence when he purchased the home; and provides affordable rental housing and a mortgage helper.

c) S. Campbell, 2336 Bickerton Court, stated his support for the application as it provides affordable rental housing; revenue to the Town of View Royal; and increases property values.

d) R. Wolf, tenant, 444 Nursery Hill, stated she supports the application; enjoys the location; and there have been no parking issues that she is aware of.

e) H. Sharma, 409 Nursery Hill Drive, stated his suite was in existence when he purchased the home. He noted the strong sense of community in his neighbourhood; that the suite is a mortgage helper; the location is excellent; and requested that Council support the application.

f) L. Pakos, 336 Glenairlie Drive, stated that she has been paying for her legal secondary suite for six years and suggested that, should Council support this application, residents in this area pay a “catch-up fee”.

g) C. Kinnear, 440 Nursery Hill, stated his secondary suite was in existence when he purchased the home; and requested that Council support the application.

Council noted that the secondary suite bylaw has been in effect for six years and questioned whether the owners were aware that their secondary suites were not legal. Mr. Basey stated that the letter requesting the decommissioning of the secondary suites came as a surprise to the owners.

h) B. Conarroe, 433 Nursery Hill Drive, noted that her secondary suite provides a mortgage helper and should the suite be decommissioned, they will have to sell their home.

i) S. Galhon, 420 Nursery Hill, stated he purchased his home with the secondary suite in existence and that he is very selective about his tenants. He noted this is a great location for young families and requested that Council support the application.

j) G. Takhar, 413 Nursery Hill Drive, noted his mortgage was approved based on the rental income from the secondary suite and that the neighbourhood and community are great. He requested that Council support the application.

k) A. Taylor, tenant, 413 Nursery Hill Drive, noted she enjoys the location and requested that Council support the rezoning application.

l) C. Nel, 404 Nursery Hill Drive, requested that Council support this application. He noted that his home was purchased with the secondary suite in existence; the common objective in the neighbourhood is safety; there have never been problems with emergency vehicles accessing Nursery Hill Drive; and that parking issues have been dealt with.

m) Tenant (unknown name), 113 Thetis Vale Crescent, stated he supports the application as it provides affordable rental housing and is a great location.

n) L. Walsh, 420 Nursery Hill Drive, stated his support for the application and noted that it is a great community that provides affordable rental housing.