42. MINUTES of a PUBLIC HEARING held in Council Chambers, 7 Victoria Street West, Kamloops, BC, on Tuesday, March 6, 2018, at 7:00 pm.

Transcription

1 42. MINUTES of a PUBLIC HEARING held in Council Chambers, 7 Victoria Street West, Kamloops, BC, on Tuesday, March 6, 2018, at 7:00 pm. PRESENT: Mayor Christian, Councillors Cavers, Dhaliwal, Dudy, Lange, Sinclair, Singh, and Walsh. Councillor Wallace absent; personal reasons. Deputy Corporate Officer Nichols; Development, Engineering, and Sustainability Director Kwiatkowski; Planning and Development Manager/Approving Officer Martin; Planning and Development Supervisor Beach; Planner Bentley; and Legislative Assistant Anderson. Mayor Christian read the rules of procedure for this evening s Public Hearing. The Notice of this Public Hearing was advertised as follows: on the Notice Board at City Hall and on the City of Kamloops website on Friday, February 23, 2018 in the Kamloops This Week newspaper on Wednesday, February 28, 2018, and Friday, March 2, 2018 by sending out or otherwise mailing statutory notices to the owners and occupiers of surrounding properties on Thursday, February 22, 2018 Correspondence and/or petitions received in response to advertising for the applications on tonight s agenda were circulated to Council. 1. Rezoning Application No. REZ Schubert Road (Bylaw No ) The Deputy Corporate Officer advised that one piece of correspondence was received opposing this application from: Maureen and Patrick Landals, 3240 Schubert Road One piece of correspondence was received expressing concerns regarding this application from: Guy and Liz Harrison, 3280 Schubert Road As per the report dated January 17, 2018, prepared by the Development and Engineering Services Department, the Planning and Development Supervisor advised that the purpose of this application is to rezone the subject property from RT-2 (Two Family Residential-2) to RS-1 (Single Family Residential-1), and to issue a Development Variance Permit to reduce the minimum lot street frontage required in the RS-1 zone from 15 m to 6 m to facilitate a panhandle subdivision.

2 43. Page 2 The Development and Engineering Department supports the proposed rezoning application as the proposed development complies with the land use policies outlined in KAMPLAN and the Westsyde Neighbourhood Plan. There were no submissions, and no further correspondence was received with regard to this application. This portion of the Public Hearing closed at 7:03 pm. 2. Rezoning Application No. REZ St. Paul Street West (Bylaw No ) The Deputy Corporate Officer advised that one piece of correspondence was received supporting this application from: Erin Adams and Philippe Schlesser, 31 St. Paul Street West As per the report dated February 14, 2018, prepared by the Development and Engineering Services Department, the Planning and Development Supervisor advised that the purpose of this application is to rezone the subject property from RS-1 (Single Family Residential-1) to RS-1S (Single Family Residential - Suite) to permit a new single-family dwelling with a secondary suite. The Development and Engineering Department supports the proposed amendment and rezoning as they comply with the land use policies outlined in KAMPLAN and the zoning requirements of the RS-1S zone. Jean Fitzpatrick: 49 St. Paul Street West: Opposed to the application, feels the neighbourhood has already experienced a lot of change, and believes the current densification is sufficient. Advised this section of the neighbourhood has a narrow lane with no on-street parking and feels the proposed application will lead to an extra demand for parking. Does not feel that the proposed plan for a two-storey house fits with the character of the neighbourhood. Tom Calne, Applicant: Advised he has owned the subject property for 12 years and would like to move back into the neighbourhood. Advised he consulted the neighbours and learned that several residences already have suites. Does not feel that the roof line will negatively affect the neighbourhood. On question, advised the proposed development is a Dutch colonial-style house.

3 44. Page 3 There were no further submissions, and no further correspondence was received with regard to this application. This portion of the Public Hearing closed at 7:10 pm. 3. Rezoning Application No. REZ McGill Road (Bylaw No ) Councillor Singh declared a conflict of interest with regard to a family member living adjacent to the subject property. (Councillor Singh left Council Chambers at 7:10 pm.) The Deputy Corporate Officer advised that 70 pieces of correspondence were received opposing this application from: Jonni-Lynn Hildebrand-Yeomans, Jonni s Styling Salon, McGill Road Mahendra (Raj) Somaya and Rama Somaya, McGill Road Susanne Cross Robert and Joanne Fennell, 1033 McMurdo Drive Nanette Lewis, 1888 Sedgewick Drive Debbie Krebs DJ Krebs, 650 Harrington Road Inga Thomson Hilton, 842 Dominion Street Denise Cleveland, 1963 Monteith Drive Julie MacInnes Kevin Prouse, Pine Street Kimberly Everard Avril Rublee, 2744 Thompson Drive Danielle McClurg and James McClurg, 1408 Todd Road Linda Soles, Braeview Place Keenan Moon, Tranquille Road Kathleen Gienow, 1219 Belair Drive Bonnie Brown Christine Gregory, th Street Dan and Denise Douglas, 868 Nicola Street Megan Rawson Marylyne M. House, 777 Arbutus Street Marlene Verhage, 1739 Gallon Avenue, Lumby BC Gisela Gardiner, 147 Castle Towers Drive Trudy Johnston, 2516 Sandalwood Drive Wendy Nielsen, 2549 Crestline Place Patricia Gremaud, 85 Hudson`s Bay Trail Patti Basden, Pine Street Raven Ritcey, 2112 Garymede Drive Kathleen and Mike Pagdin, 3969 Lemky Road, Pritchard Neville Petherick, 1198 Linthorpe Road Ona McDonald, 777 Springridge Place Christine Currie, 237 Sunhill Court Doris Galbraith, 1024 Fernie Road

4 45. Page 4 Cindy Darwin, 746 Franklin Road Carmen Babic, 1993 Skeena Drive Anne Magdelenich Allan Shoemaker, 2048 Skeena Drive Sandy Wallin, Lethbridge Avenue Tina Hollinger, 341 Hollyburn Drive Angela Rigby, 248 Chestnut Avenue Irene Kastner, 6720 Upper Louis Creek Road, Heffley Creek, BC Terry Lynds, 5370 Morris Place Monna Manhas, 970 Heatherton Court Connie Smith, Hudson Bay Trail David Tombe, 1266 Pine Grove Rd Don Gienow, 1219 Blair Drive Leigh Hilton, 1084 Nicola Street Debbie Wargovcsik, 736 Bissette Road Bonnie Brown, second letter, Coldwater Drive Wendy McLean, Front Street Marjolaine Seguin Donna Buckley, 618 Stoneridge Lane Deborah Diane Blair, th Street Maryanne Bower, 1760 Sunshine Place Kathleen Feschuk, 2620 Sandpiper Drive Linda Coutts, 466 Fortune Drive Elaine Hodder Patricia McCann, Oakdale Way Michelle, Luciano, and Matteo Carnovale, 495 Hollyburn Drive Fabienne Cateron, 4355 Furiak Road Win McClure, McGill Road Paige Latin, Hugh Allan Drive Laurie Tosh, 8268 Forbes Street, Mission, BC Aura Carriere, 545 Marriott Road Donna Slater, 745 Columbia Street Trista Forman, Battle Street Janet Riley Cody Brandon, McGill Road Debra Alain, 685 Bermer Place One piece of correspondence was received expressing concerns regarding this application from: Commercial Owner, 755 McGill Road As per the report dated January 29, 2018, prepared by the Development and Engineering Services Department, the Planner advised that the purpose of this application is to amend the CD-2 (McGill Road/Summit Drive Comprehensive Development Zone Two) zone to increase the maximum number of units and to reduce the minimum commercial permitted area in order to allow the conversion of five commercial units to residential units.

5 46. Page 5 The Planner informed Council that stop work orders have been issued for work to convert some of the commercial units to residential, which began without proper Building Permits or completion of the rezoning application process. Development and Engineering Services staff do not object to the principle of converting commercial units to residential use; however, the owner and applicant disagree with staff as to whether adoption of the rezoning application should be conditional on the registration of a parking easement/covenant. Building Permits were issued for construction of the neighbouring properties to the west (Landmark One and Landmark Two, 795 and 775 McGill Road) under the condition that a parking covenant/easement would be registered on the titles of Landmark Place and/or Landmark Centre (755 McGill Road) properties, since Landmark One and Landmark Two were deficient in parking by a combined total of 36 stalls. However, this parking covenant/easement was never registered. Representatives of the Landmark One and Landmark Two strata association have requested that the City address the parking deficiency within the Landmark Place and/or Landmark Centre developments. In turn, staff have repeatedly requested that the owner/developer register the necessary parking covenant/easement; however, the owner/developer has refused. As this rezoning application is the final opportunity for the City to leverage any kind of parking covenant/easement, staff have indicated that they only support the application under the condition that a covenant/easement be registered allowing Landmark One and Landmark Two access to the surplus stalls on the subject property (11 stalls). The Planner further advised that after a recent on-site survey, it was determined there is only a 14 stall deficiency to be addressed by the parking covenant/easement. Ramesh Patil, Landmark One and Two Strata President: Advised he is the owner of two businesses in Landmark One, the U District Liquor Store and the former Lucky s Lounge. Advised that 350 parking stalls were planned for in 2007; when work on Landmark Two began in 2011, it was announced it would be under a separate strata. Free access parking was promised and Landmark Centre s parkade was to have one floor of public parking. Advised the lounge was closed due to parking concerns. Stated that in 2015, the developer advised he was willing to work with the property owners to address parking concerns; however, owners became aware that the developer was going to sell the parkade and there may only be 10 public parking stalls available. Does not support the application and feels that the City has failed the owners of Landmark One and Two in regard to parking on this site.

6 47. Page 6 Submitted an application to the City in November 2017 for six parking stalls from the developer and six parking stalls from the neighbouring cemetery property that would help alleviate parking concerns in the area. Believes that according to the architectural drawings from 2006, the development is deficient 20 parking stalls. Barb Blumenauer, McGill Road: Advised she is a Landmark Two commercial tenant where she operates a medical practice. Prior to purchasing the property, was assured by the developer that all parking in the development would be accessible to all tenants and that her patients would be able to park in the parkade; however, underground parking is not accessible to the public as a key fob is required to enter. Advised her patients have difficulty finding parking and some have had accidents in the parking lot. Believes the commercial units are not selling because of the parking issues and advised that in her experience, the developer has not addressed parking problems brought to his attention. On question, advised she is a rheumatologist and sees between nine and 30 patients per day. Advised she has registered complaints with WorkSafeBC, the City s Bylaw Services, and the City s Building Inspectors. Advised her practice has been affected in a negative way. Rob Embury, 249 Sun Hill Court: Advised he purchased a unit in Landmark Two for his son. Visitors and care givers are constantly being ticketed for parking for over two hours, sometimes paying three or four parking tickets in a day. Opposes the application until the parking issues are corrected for Landmark One and Two. Barry Duncan, McGill Road, Landmark One: Prior to purchasing his unit, was told the parking was patrolled by Impark to stop students from Thompson Rivers University (TRU) from parking in the complex. Was told to display a tenant visitor parking placard to park longer than two hours; however, his guests regularly receive parking tickets despite displaying the placards. Advised there is no overnight parking for guests. Initially was able to lease parking spots from Impark for $30 per month. Feels overflow parking could be accommodated on-site by removing the dead shrubs at the rear of the development and installing parallel parking stalls.

7 48. Page 7 Darrell and Jonni Yeomans, McGill Road: Advised they are currently the only commercial owner in Landmark Place. Were led to believe, by the developer and realtor, that there would be outside access to their unit; however, their customers have to use an intercom system to gain access, which is negatively affecting their business and does not allow for street traffic. Advised they paid $20,000 for an underground parking stall and were led to believe that the 49 stalls in the underground parking would be a combination of leased stalls and public stalls. They have been unable to lease an additional two parking stalls. Believes the other commercial units in Landmark Place that are the subject of the rezoning application have already been converted to residential units. Believes there are only 123 parking stalls on the subject property and the City s Rezoning Application No. REZ00635 report is incorrect listing 125 parking stalls. As the development is built on land that was previously a landfill, believes there may be issues with regard to residential units on the ground floor. Understands the City is supporting the application in an effort to gain some control over the parking issues. Win McClure, McGill Road: Moved to Kamloops in 2015 and purchased a unit in Landmark Two. When purchasing the unit, was told a visitors parking placard would be provided for residents. In June 2015 was involved in a motor vehicle accident within the development. There is no designated visitor parking. Some of her guests have parked at TRU, which is $5 per day during the week and free on weekends. Advised there is a constant flow of traffic, including residents, business deliveries, taxis, emergency vehicles, and pedestrians travelling through the development to access the Summit Shopping Centre. Believes that people drive very fast in the Landmark Place and Landmark Centre developments and that there are major flaws in the design of traffic flow for this complex. Opposed to the application because she feels the developer has not honoured agreements. Barb Blumenauer, Second Time: Understands that individual parking spaces have been sold more than once due to administration errors.

8 49. Page 8 Preety Desai, McGill Road: Advised she is a commercial business owner and the only periodontist in Kamloops and has family members who also own a residential unit in this development. Advised she has written statements from patients who have left her practice because of the parking issue in this development. On question, advised she has met the developer at strata meetings and annual general meetings, but nothing has been resolved. Mike Culos, Applicant/Developer: Believes that incorrect information has been distributed by the media and does not agree with the Development, Engineering, and Sustainability Director s comments in a recent news article regarding current and former City staff actions. Confirmed that no parking has been sold to TRU staff or students. Offered a history of Culos development in Kamloops beginning in Advised the Landmark development started in 2007 and has experienced challenges due to economic conditions. Applied to rezone the commercial units to residential because of current market conditions for commercial properties and advised there are still commercial units for sale in Landmark One and Two. Believes there is only a perceived parking problem in the development and when the construction is complete, the parking will be sufficient. On question, advised he referenced a Kamloops This Week article in an effort to dispel rumours. On question, advised that not having visitor parking is a strata issue and that the strata councils have full authorization to decide on parking issues. Does not feel that the security intercom system is a deterrent for a commercial business. On question regarding opposition to the parking covenant proposed by City staff, advised the strata councils need to work together and could organize a board of governance to deal with the parking issues. Does not want to be pressed into a covenant but advised that alternative parking arrangements could be negotiated. On question, advised the conversion work on the commercial units was stopped after the Stop Work Orders were issued and the associated fines have been paid.

9 50. Page 9 Jonni Yeomans, Second Time: Advised she appeared before Council in 2017 to rezone her Landmark Place unit for Liquor Licensing, which represented a $10,000 investment in her business. Believes the developer has made significant contributions to Kamloops in terms of development, but also believes that the City has been very generous to the developer. With regard to parking, feels the handpicking of parking stalls in the parkade is creating a negative environment for the residential and commercial community in this development. Barb Blumenauer, Third Time: Advised that in her opinion, commercial tenants would be interested in this development if some of the concerns regarding parking were addressed. There were no further submissions, and no further correspondence was received with regard to this application. This portion of the Public Hearing closed at 8:41 pm. There being no further business, this Public Hearing adjourned at 8:41 pm.