Attachment 10: Applicant Letter regarding Guidelines Responses

Staff Report - Development Permit Guidelines:

a. Art Wall or Ornamental Feature as Secondary Entrance

The developer would prefer not to have an art wall facing the surface parking as suggested in the staff report. To address this wall, windows into the Bike Storage Room have been added to break up the wall and add interest. The windows sills are placed at +/- 5 feet above the adjacent sidewalk to make it difficult for someone to break into the Bike Room and the glass will be tempered which has a much higher impact strength than annealed glass and will further discourage theft. The windows will improve the Bike Room by providing natural light to the interior space. As wall mounted bike racks were originally located on that wall, the bike room layout has been revised. The new layout has a higher percentage of floor bike stalls than wall bike stalls which is desirable from a ease of use point of view. In order to achieve a greater ratio of floor stalls, the number of stalls has been reduced to 1 stall per residential unit which conforms to the Zoning Bylaw.

b. Blank Wall Along the West Elevation Parking Level

Although the Committee of the Whole didn’t seem overly concerned about this wall as it won’t be easily seen from the street, there was a concern about the potential for graffiti. To address this, rather than add cladding, which could still invite graffiti, additional shrubs and small trees have been added adjacent to the wall and between the exit path and the building. This will discourage graffiti as any tagging won’t be easily seen and soften the edge of the building to the neighbouring property.

c. Surface Parking Material

It is not proposed to have permeable material in the surface parking as previous projects with permeable paving have shown the material is not as successful at providing the amount of permeability over time as claimed by the material suppliers. The surface parking will be drained into the stormwater management system and treated to the extent required by View Royal bylaws.

d. Adaptable Design Standards

Adaptable design standards beyond the most recent BC Building Code (BCBC) or View Royal bylaws are not proposed for this development. The current BCBC significantly improved on accessibility requirements and as the project was initially designed for rezoning to a previous edition of the BCBC a thorough review has been undertaken to ensure all current accessibility requirements have been met. For instance, this resulted in wider interior corridors and more consideration of access to the amenity garden. In addition, the original design had a single elevator and a second elevator has been added which goes beyond the current code requirements.

e. Lighting Details

f. Light Standard Luminaries

Site lighting will be designed to be ‘dark skies’ friendly with sufficient lighting for safety. Light standard luminaries will be no more that 40,000 lumens and mounted on poles no more that 5m high. The lighting design will be further developed during the construction documents phase for the Building Permit application, once an electrical consultant has been retained. A note confirming the above View Royal requirements has been added to the architectural drawings to ensure the proper coordination will occur.

g. Screening of Rooftop Mechanical Units

Screening has been added to enclose the rooftop mechanical units. The developer is willing to put in the requested screening although it’s worth noting that unless the property to the west is developed with a high building close to the property line adjoining this property, the rooftop units will not be seen.

h. Physical Colour and Material Sample Board

Provided with this letter and revised drawings

Staff Report – Zoning:

i. Fence and Retaining Wall Height Near West Fire Exit

The design intent for this stair is to provide an egress path to the street from the parkade exit and to follow the finished grade as close as possible. Due to the steep slope of the existing grade, the retaining wall will not be significantly high and at it’s most extreme less than 1.0m from adjacent grade at the ground floor units deck. The south elevation is deceptive in the regard to the perceived height of this wall as a significant portion of the stair is beyond the south face of the building.

j. Cross Slope of Surface Parking Along the Main Driveway

Cross slope is 4.6% and noted on revised drawings.

Staff Report – Other:

k. Underground Detention Tanks

The civil consultant, Josh Bartley of Islander Engineering, has confirmed the underground detention tanks have been sized to handle all the necessary runoff as noted in the Preliminary Design Brief by Islander submitted with the DP application documents and in coordination of the proposed building design. Refer to the section “Rainwater” within the Islander Preliminary Design Brief.

l. Detention Tanks Capable of Supporting Loads

Islander has also confirmed the detention tanks will be designed to support all the necessary loading of the surface parking including fire truck access.

m. Fence Locations indicated on Landscape Drawings

All proposed fencing is shown on the landscape plans in the original submission. No other fencing is proposed.

n. Storm Water Management Plan

The full Storm Water Management Plan will be provided at the time of the application for Building Permit. Storm water management has been developed in principle, as per the Preliminary Design Brief by Islander and the civil drawings submitted with the DP application. Islander is fully aware of the View Royal requirements for stormwater management and the final design will comply. Producing a full report will take approximately 2 to 3 weeks and may need to be adjusted once more information is determined about the permeability of the soils, which won’t be determined until soils are removed for the soil remediation and a Geotech report is complete. Until the soils are verified for some potential drainage capabilities, the detention tanks are designed for the capacity to handle the entire site as necessary.

Committee of the Whole Meeting:

Upper Blank Walls on the South Elevation Where the Building Steps

Windows have been added on the west and east sides of the high blank walls facing south. As there is a bedroom on the south east corner of the wall in question and that wall is the only practical location to place a bed, the windows have been placed high enough to avoid a conflict with a headboard. The window on the other side is into an exit stair which should encourage residents to use the stairs rather than take the elevator.

Views from the Hospital and Highway

Additional views of the 3D model from the north side of the site have been added to the drawings as requested.

Ceraclad

More information regarding the Ceraclad cladding material was requested in the Committee of the Whole meeting. This material is an upgrade to painted Hardi products which is the most common cladding material in the region for new multifamily projects. It requires little to no maintenance, won’t require any recoating or repainting for decades, has an anti-graffiti coating making is easy to remove any tagging, has texture to the face which adds another layer to the aesthetics of the building, and has a sophisticated rainscreen attachment system. Fasteners are by a hidden clip system resulting in no exposed fasteners and no need to add trim to cover fasteners. The finish is a UV resistant ceramic coating rather than paint and is factory applied with a warranty against fading. The material is manufactured in Japan where it is a common building cladding material. Attached is an Exterior Cladding Comparison Table provided by Ceraclad and further information can be found at www.ceraclad.com .

We trust the above meets with your approval, sufficiently clarifies any questions or concerns and we look forward to presenting the proposed design to Council.

Regards, VDA Architecture Limited

Kevin Klippenstein, Architect AIBC, AAA, MRAIC