Attachment 27. Neighbourhood meeting minutes and correspondence
Records of a meeting between the architect and local residents to address concerns regarding design, safety, and parking.
From: Colleen Olague To: Eric Barker Cc: Mayor And Council Email; Jeff Chow; Ruslana Allen; Colleen Randle; Blair Spencer; Tenerelli; H TRAA; Subject: Meeting Between Architect and Residents re Townhouse Development Project - St. Giles at Trans Canada Highway - January 13/18 Date: January-17-18 9:17:41 AM Attachments: Minutes Trans Canada St. Gile Development.docx; ATT00001.htm
Dear Eric, attached are the minutes of our meeting between yourself and impacted residents regarding the above-noted development. We all agreed that it was a very informative and constructive exchange. On behalf of all of those present, I’d like to thank you for taking the time on a Saturday morning to come out and show us detailed images of the improved design plans, providing more information on the scope of this development, listening to our concerns and offering to respond to action items that arose.
We’d also like to express our appreciation to Council for giving us the opportunity to work with you directly and, with our combined efforts and cooperation, reach a favourable outcome not only for existing residents but for those home buyers looking for quality living, who choose this community as their new residence.
As agreed, all further communication to residents can be directed through me to share with those concerned. We look forward to further discussions and your response to suggestions and concerns raised.
Respectfully,
Colleen Olague
MINUTES
TOPIC: Meeting with Architect to Discuss Design and Structure of Proposed Townhouse Development at Trans Canada and St. Giles St. Development Permit No. 2017/03
DATE: Saturday, January 13, 2018
PLACE: 48 Camden Avenue, Victoria BC
ARCHITECT: Eric Barker, Architect Inc.
RESIDENT ATTENDEES:
- Shane Kemp
- Colleen Randle
- Blair Spencer
- Colleen Olague
- Ruslana Allen
- Jose Olague
- Santina Spencer
- Mia Traa
- Nikki Leung
- Wai Leung
- Hank Traa
RECORDER: Colleen Olague
PURPOSE OF MEETING:
The architect (Eric) was directed by the Town of View Royal Council at its December 12, 2017 meeting to work with residents impacted by the proposed development to find a more attractive design to better fit the community and to be in compliance with the Town’s Development Permit Guidelines for west coast design and character.
DISCUSSION:
Although the revised development proposal plan did not resemble any of the preferred design options that residents put forward for consideration, those present felt that Eric did adjust the design to meet the Town’s Development Permit Guidelines criteria by adding natural stone and wood accents to the construction materials and changing the colour pallet to warmer shades making it more attractive.
Many questions and concerns were still raised during the meeting to which Eric agreed to check into and get back to residents.
Residents thanked Eric for his time and look forward to his response to questions and concerns raised. Eric, representing the client, agreed to communicate through Colleen Olague, representing residents.
Following the meeting and Eric’s departure, residents discussed the revised plans and some of their original concerns that have made it very difficult to fully accept this development.
In the spirit of cooperation, residents agreed on the enhanced design plans with the hope that questions and concerns raised, in particular those around safety, parking and sidewalks, will be addressed through communication and a further meeting with Eric, the Town Engineer and residents, as he had offered. A vote was taken and, though not unanimous, the majority of residents agreed on moving forward and working with Eric to ensure the impact on residents will be minimized and that their input will be seriously considered.
ACTIONS:
Sidewalks – residents all agreed that the sidewalk should be constructed on the same side as the development, continue around the corner and along Camden to the Galloping Goose Trail parallel to the swale garden in front of the Olague residence and not on the Camden side of the Traa property. Residents voiced this concern not only for the purpose of safety but it makes more sense as the property on that side of the street has ample room for a sidewalk.
Parking – it was suggested that parking be permitted on only one side of St. Giles to ensure safe passage of vehicles.
Another suggestion related to parking and safety was to fill in the open ditch areas at 71 St. Giles.
Residents agree with Town Council’s suggestion at its December meeting to issue a covenant on use of garages in the development for vehicle parking only and not for storage purposes to keep owners’ vehicles off the street. Eric will investigate how this action could be implemented and enforced.
Residents expressed concern about construction worker parking during the building phase of the development in order to avoid the problems experienced by the community when the condominium project on Helmcken was underway. Eric is to confirm if worker parking will be provided in the early stages of the development.
Road width: Eric is to request a meeting with the Town’s Engineer and residents prior to commencement of construction to clarify the increased road width of St. Giles, street parking allocation and sidewalk placement.
Variances: clarification on the allowable ‘set back’ variance was requested by the landlord of 69 St. Giles as well as proof of building height with geodetic numbers as they relate to roof lines and the road. Eric is to provide details on height and variance modifications on St. Giles.
Views: concerns were expressed about the development obstructing views of St. Giles’ residents. Eric offered to provide photo images of actual views from impacted homes.
Gas: residents asked if a natural gas service would be installed in this development. If so, residents would be interested in getting on board. Eric will check to see if this service is proposed.
Cost and Size of Units: discussion ensued around the cost and size of the townhouses. Eric agreed to investigate and clarify the definition of “affordable” and report back to residents.
After Eric’s departure, some residents expressed concern that the enhancements to the design were sufficient for affordable housing; however, if these units are to be sold at market value, which was a possibility according to Eric, then they felt that more stone highlights should be added (e.g., to frame the garage and entrance areas), and use higher end materials to enrich the appearance and add value to these units.
All agreed that a development of this size with full exposure from the Trans Canada Highway should showcase the Town of View Royal’s vision and direction with respect to future housing projects.