Attachment 4. Letter from D. Witzer, March 27, 2017

Re: Application 2016/06 – 105, 106, 107 and 108 Glentana Road

I write knowing that as Mayor and Council you each take development in View Royal seriously by dedicating your time and experience when reviewing and considering development proposals. I also know that my letter will be afforded similar care of attention.

As with many residents in the Glentana community, I have long-anticipated an eventual re-development of the aging and somewhat neglected single family homes near Glentana’s intersection with Admirals Road.

I have now had an opportunity to view a copy of the developer’s proposal by way of the Town of View Royal Planning & Development Report document dated February 7th, received by Mayor and Council at the February 14th meeting.

The proposed rezoning is a significant departure from the current four single family dwelling configuration, and an aggressive departure from other mixed residential Co-operatives and Strata developments that comprise the established Glentana Road community and adjoining Strata at 108 Aldersmith Place. The developer describes that this proposal acts as a ‘transition’ between the townhousing and commercial uses on Admirals Road. However; there are no other such transition examples in the vicinity, making this somewhat unique and out of character.

Notwithstanding a desire of any investing developer to expect favorable rezoning consideration of a reasonable and suitable density increase of these four subject properties; this particular proposal exceeds any reasonable sense of acceptable density increase and scope for the Glentana Road community while, at the same time, seeks approval of variances to reduce off-street parking requirements and relies on the removal of boulevard and hedge trees in order to support their building and site proposal. In short; at every measure, the proposal only seems to leverage potential improvements to profitability.

The building is massive; an unprecedented 4 and 5 storey structure featuring a rooftop recreational-use area above the 4th storey. It is institutional in appearance with cladding and design treatments that are not in-keeping with other surrounding residential structure building schemes. Its appearance is more characteristic of a Railyards development phase at Bay Street and Tyee.

The proposal offers no design attributes that complement the entrance to Glentana Road community. In fact, where the recent developments of both Canadian Tire and Rexall worked to protect or plant boulevard trees to improve beautification and residential experience, this development proposes to remove established boulevard trees as a means to incorporate convenient short-term parking for their visitors. The report identifies that such a measure would also ‘provide some traffic calming while improving the pedestrian experience’, to which I strongly disagree.

I feel compelled to remind you that View Royal has invested in proven examples of beautification and traffic calming through Town projects of roadside landscaping and planting boulevard trees. Recent developments fronting Glentana Road were required to complete roadside beautification and boulevard tree planting. These examples are effective at traffic calming, pedestrian experience and community pride. I urge Mayor and Council to protect and ensure the continuance of these attributes along the proposed development frontage.

Additionally, the report suggests it is likely that the removal of the mature cedar hedge planted on the unconstructed road right-of-way along the west end of the property will occur. This should not be allowed as this hedge offers Strata units at 1500 Glentana Road screening from any potential development of the subject properties. It is reasonable to conclude that screening was the original intent and purpose of the planting. Adjacent and local residents should expect the protection of this hedge be required and included in any design proposal of the subject property.

The developer attributes that the slope of existing topography equates to a lower ‘effective height’ of the proposed building. The developer also offers to ‘mitigate the height of the building’ by developing a stepped building form, stating that such measures ‘reduce the apparent size and scale of the building’. In reality; acceptable scope and building size is exceeded, not mitigated in any way. The maximum total number of storeys for the subject property should be consistent with the other residential properties of the Glentana Road community and the Strata at 108 Aldersmith.

It is evident that the applicant uses creative language to distract from the inappropriate size of the building. Similarly, and contrary to the proposed intent to remove them, boulevard trees are depicted in key renderings; a technique employed to hide the scale and size of the proposed building, concealing the majority of the 5 storey structure. In a 3D rendering, the graphic depicts an open front lawn area along the Glentana Road frontage, appearing nearly equal to 2/3 the width of the proposed building footprint. These renderings do not accurately reflect the true proposed design and are likely offered to comfort or persuade the reader by suggesting the appearance of the building structure discretely integrates with existing or planned street side beautification, thereby reducing noticeable change and visual impact.

A likely objective of the 4 storey height is also to take advantage of the potential Gorge Waterway views from the property. This would command higher revenue for rentals. At the same time, the intended rooftop recreation area above the 4th storey invites the likelihood of summertime parties and gatherings, amplified music, social ruckus and disturbance. No other building in the Glentana Road community has a similar rooftop feature. Any such rooftop proposal invites unwanted noise and disturbance that will not be concealed and will carry throughout a neighbourhood which is relaxingly quiet after the business day.

Through proposed density, the developer intends to maximize the number of rental units with the majority, being 2 bedroom rentals, each offering a total of 875 square feet. Single bedroom units offer a total of 665 square feet. The applicants submission expresses that, ‘The building will introduce a mix of reasonably sized....and priced strata suites’. The developer’s perception of ‘reasonable’ in so far as size is very different from my own. I would describe these units to be modest or small in size, at best. It is unclear what commitment the developer intends to support reasonable pricing but I would suspect any rental units would be priced to maximize profit in a very expensive market that has a reputation of having extremely low vacancy rates.

The developer’s suggestion that their project could only help deal with the rush hour dockyard traffic has no basis other than assumption. If the developer is implying that the proximity of their building will draw a large number of dockyard workers as renters, I can example that the 63 unit residential complex at 1501 Glentana Road where I live has never once in 37 years had more than three units occupied at any one time by employees of Dockyard and Naden. Currently, there is only one. The proposal features onsite efforts to accommodate cyclists but, even at that; the traffic volume sustained in the area during dockyard rush hour would have no measurable relief as an outcome influenced by this development.

I trust that Mayor and Council will endorse the benefits of retaining the boulevard trees and hedge screen, enforce compliance with established off-street parking requirements and expect a building structure design that is better suited and in-keeping with the existing Glentana Road community size, scope, storey height and appearance. I also trust that mayor and council will view any rooftop recreation feature as an undesirable disruptive imposition to the surrounding residences.

I respectfully urge you not to support the Developer’s proposal as submitted.

Thank you,

David Witzer #25-1501 Glentana Road, View Royal, BC, V9A 7B2