Report to Council Re: Development Variance Permit - 17A Jedburgh
Planner's report recommending the denial of a Development Variance Permit for 17A Jedburgh Road due to concerns regarding traffic, parking, and density in a panhandle subdivision.
Report to Council Re: Development Variance Permit Meeting Date: March 17 2015
The lot's subdivision does not require a 10% frontage exemption as the portion of the lot which is the panhandle access is common property. All lots created have sufficient frontage on the common access roadway.
Issues
The question to be put towards Council is that of the appropriateness of the variance to the common access roadway in relation to the creation of the lots and the issues caused by subdividing the property into seven bare land strata lots.
Access
Technically the property has frontage on both Jedburgh Rd and Bishan Pl, but the Bishan Place access is hindered by a significant rock outcropping. Staff is of the opinion that the existing Jedburgh access is sufficiently wide as to be the preferred access to the property. The access is immediately adjacent to another lot panhandle access to the east, and to three detached R-1B residences to the west. The properties on both sides of the access will be impacted by the additional traffic generated by the development.
Staff's concern with the Jedburgh Rd access is that the increased traffic from 7 lots and up to 7 suites will mean that the access is much more heavily used than it is now. The applicant has not supplied opinion from the neighbours to alleviate this concern, nor provided a plan to do so. Staff notes that a fence of more than 1.2 metres would not be permitted along the access strip on the subject property.
The applicant has not submitted a geotechnical statement regarding the treatment of the site and the impacts on neighbouring properties should the Bishan Place access option be considered. Staff believes that the Bishan Place access, while technically possible, requires a very large amount of blasting and associated rock/soil movement and will be very disruptive to the neighbourhood; particularly adjacent homes on Bishan Place.
Emergency Vehicle Access
The Fire Department is satisfied with the access and turnaround space provided with the attached plan.
Tree Retention
A Tree Retention Report has been submitted with the application. The report outlines the species, health, structure and tolerance of the trees on the site, along with comments recommendations for each. The plan supplied with the report indicates the locations of the trees which have potential to be retained, and the other trees which will likely or definitely need removing. The report also provides proposed protective fencing design and procedure for minimizing construction impact on retained trees.
As an update to the Committee of the Whole Report, the applicant has submitted an additional information letter regarding the state of the trees on the site.
Tree Protection Covenant Area
A portion of the property is proposed to be registered as a covenant area to protect retained trees.
Parking
A no-parking covenant will need to be registered against portions of the strata common property for the purpose of maintaining access for Fire and Emergency Medical Services. 6 metres is the minimum acceptable right-of-way for these services, which correlates with much of the width of the common access provided.
As an update to the Committee of the Whole Report, the updated draft plan of subdivision has added two private visitor parking spots to the proposed common property. Staff does not believe that an additional two parking spots would sufficiently impact the parking concerns on the site.
DISCUSSION
In recommending that Council not approve the Development Variance Permit, staff notes that the information submitted for Council was not as comprehensive as staff suggested to the applicant following the Committee of the Whole meeting. Staff fears that the impact on neighbouring properties has not been sufficiently addressed, that neighbours have not been sufficiently consulted and that their opinions are not currently articulated. Staff's issue with the application is that there are simply too many lots with too little proposed to mitigate the impacts to the neighbouring properties use and enjoyment that they expect from an R-1B zoning.
ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATION
If Council wishes to entertain an approval for the variance, staff suggests the following as consideration:
- That the variance be conditional for less lots (staff suggests three additional lots, or 4 lots total) in the proposed subdivision.
- That a covenant restricting the accessory use of secondary suite be considered for the properties to minimize traffic and parking concerns.
- That a supportive traffic impact and parking assessment from a professional engineer be submitted as a condition of the subdivision.
RECOMMENDATION
THAT Development Variance Permit 2015/02 not be approved by Council.
SUBMITTED BY: J. Davison MCIP RPP, Planner
REVIEWED BY: L. Chase MCIP RPP, Director of Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
- Subject Property Map
- Subject Property Orthophoto
- Draft Plan of Subdivision – Wey Meyenburg Land Surveying Inc
- Alternate Draft Plan of Subdivision (Bishan Access)
- Updated Statement from Arborist – Talbot Mackenzie & Associates
- Tree Retention Plan – Talbot Mackenzie & Associates
- Photos of historical tree blowdown on site – Applicant
Document Images
(3)
