Correspondence from Sue Henry regarding 1449 Burnside Rd W (Eagle Nest)

To View Royal Mayor and Council

We were impressed with Mayor and Council’s wisdom in rejecting the development proposal and rezoning application for 1449 Burnside Road. As stated at the Committee of the Whole by the Mayor and Council, the developer has not decreased the density, in fact it has increased it, and the design does not lend itself to a welcoming and attractive gateway corridor to View Royal. The four-building development design which includes an 8 story building on the north side of the development adjacent to Saanich ALR farmland is not appropriate as a rural/urban interface. This massive over height 8 story building, with its invasive “block house” design, is not consistent with the rural area, and would have a negative impact on the neighbouring Saanich, View Royal and Hidden Oaks town house residents.

The density of this development and including this 8 story building would require an OCP amendment. The View Royal OCP was developed with much forethought and vision; therefore, to open the OCP up for amendment in order to provide for a higher density to allow the developer to increase his profits does not seem like the correct thing for the Mayor and Council to do. Allowing this OCP amendment would then open the doors to other higher density development applications wanting to increase density, including adding excessive height to their proposed developments. As previously stated, when the OCP was developed it considered the designated density as appropriate for this area.

We respect the View Royal planning department’s professionalism, knowledge of Council/local government procedures and for recognizing the necessity for maintaining a consistent and fair application process. As stated by the planning staff, the practice is all applicants have two opportunities to present versions of the application. Recognizing that applicants would be given an opportunity to resubmit a second version to revise their development plan to meet Council’s direction. However, when asked by Mayor Screech if the applicant had consulted with planning staff when revising his plan, the applicant responded that he had not. Planning staff also indicated that a revised plan would also require new reports such as traffic, geological and engineering reports. Therefore, the logical next step would be to have the applicant submit a new application.

In consideration of the Committee of the Whole’s decision to vote for the View Royal planning department’s choice of Option 3 (i.e. reject the current application), we urge Council to continue to agree with your staff’s recommendation and reject the current development plan and require the submission of a new application.

Sincerely,

Sue and Steve Henry 3906 Holland Avenue Victoria, BC