Kevin Jones, Planner, provided an overview of the application to include a “fish hatchery” as a permitted use in the Public Service (P1) zone and include a definition of fish hatchery in the definition section of the zoning bylaw.

Councillor Royer opened the floor for comment or questions from the public.

There were no comments or questions from the public.

Kevin Jones provided an overview of the application that would allow for a 21-unit townhouse development at 909-911 Clarke Road.

Dale Staples, Integra Architecture, provided an overview of the planned development, including photos of how the site currently looks and drawings of how the site will look if the development is approved.

Councillor Royer opened the floor for comments and questions from the public.

Jerry Spanier, Port Moody, commented that he is looking forward to having this development in the neighbourhood. Mr. Spanier asked about possible other land uses that could be implemented in a CD60 zone.

Kevin Jones, Planner, explained that the proposed amendment would not result in any other uses for this property.

Naomi Lane, Port Moody, commented that she is not opposed to the development. Ms. Lane asked for clarification of the start date and duration of construction, and expressed concern about old growth trees in the area, the height of the fencing, whether there would be rental units, and noise from the construction.

Marc Allaire, Texor Homes, explained that construction would likely begin early in 2015 and take approximately one year to complete. Mr. Allaire noted that the fencing would be approximately 6 feet high and that all units in the proposed complex would be for sale.

Kevin Jones explained that the noise bylaw permits construction work between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Monday through Saturday.

Peter Bolhuis, Port Moody, commented that the proposed townhouses are going to be too close to the property line shared with the back of his property. Mr. Bolhuis expressed concern about privacy, noting that he would like to see at least another two metres of setback from the property line. He noted that he would like to see a landscaping plan for the area along the property line that ensures more privacy for the neighbours.

Councillor Royer asked for comments and questions from members of the committee.

Councillor Rosemary Small expressed concern about the low number of people that attended the community information sessions about the development and about safety with regard to the exit onto Clarke Road. Councillor Small asked about the trees that will be planted along the rear of the property.

Marc Allaire explained that the proposed location of the exit was studied and the currently proposed exit is the safest option. Mr. Allaire noted that the trees will be 6-7 feet high when they are planted, but will obviously grow taller over time.

Robert Starcevich asked about the possibility of rentals being allowed in the strata complex once units are sold. Mr. Starcevich expressed concern about the safety of the entry/exit on Clarke Road, suggesting that perhaps the Transportation Committee should look at safety in the area.

Marc Allaire explained that the strata would likely allow rentals by individual owners, but that won’t be known until the strata council is formed. Mr. Allaire explained that removal of the retaining wall along Clarke Road will increase visibility along that section of the road, which should result in some safety improvement.

Councillor Glumac asked about typical setbacks on multi-family properties and expressed concern about the setbacks in this development, noting that he would like to see the comments from the Advisory Design Panel in this regard.

Kevin Jones explained that the typical rear yard setback for townhouses is four metres. He noted that the application has already been through the Advisory Design Panel as part of the OCP amendment process and that those comments would be included in the report that will go to Council for this application.

Robert Charbonneau expressed concern about traffic safety in this area with 21 new families living in this complex.

Kevin Jones explained that the Engineering Department had requested the right in-right out traffic flow plan, but suggested that perhaps it could be looked at further.

Councillor Elliott commented that there was a previous application further along Clarke Road and asked how many units are in that complex compared to this application.

Staff explained that there are eight units in that particular development, noting that the property size is smaller than the current application.

Mayor Clay asked about slope stability planning on the site and about geotechnical studies done on the property.

Mark Allaire explained that geotechnical studies were done, but there were no significant concerns uncovered.

Mary De Paoli explained that the next step in the process for this application would be forwarding it to Council with recommendations from the Land Use Committee and comments from the Advisory Design Panel. She noted that Council would look at the application for the first two readings, and then may forward it to a Public Hearing for further public comment.

Alanna McDonagh, Planner, provided an overview of the application that would allow for the construction of a duplex at 2118 St. George Street.

Oscar Woodman, Oscar Woodman Design, provided an summary of the process undertaken so far in this application, noting that they met with the Advisory Design Panel and held a community information session, noting that all comments received so far have been positive.

Councillor Royer opened the floor for comments and questions from the public.

Peter Dasnieres, Port Moody, asked about the height of the building from the basement floor to the top of the roof, whether the future buyers of the building would be informed that there may be buildings constructed across the street up to six storeys in height, and whether this property is located in the flood area.

Alanna McDonagh explained that the height of the main building is proposed to be 28.84 feet (8.79 metres).

Mary De Paoli explained that if a prospective buyer were to come into the Planning Department to ask about OCP regulations in the area, they would be informed of the possibility of 6-storey structures. Ms. De Paoli noted that the property is not in the flood area.

Councillor Royer asked for comments and questions from the committee.

Councillor Glumac commented that he will not support this proposal because of the large size of the building.

Councillor Elliott asked if there are any other existing duplexes in the area and, if so, why staff have previously supported other duplexes but do not support this application.

Alanna McDonagh explained that there are other duplexes in the area.

Mary De Paoli commented that the existing duplexes have been there for a long time and noted that in the past there hasn’t been much policy with regard to duplexes in the OCP.

Mayor Clay asked how the process would have been different if the applicant had applied for a subdivision in order to build two houses instead of a duplex on the lot, about regulations regarding basement suites and whether building plans that include plumbing and electrical wiring for a secondary suite would be supported.

Mary De Paoli explained that a subdivision would require rezoning to allow for a smaller lot size. Ms. De Paoli noted that, at this time, secondary suites are not permitted in duplexes and that plans would not be approved if they included secondary suites.

Councillor Small asked about the size of the building proposed in this application in comparison to the large home located two lots down the street.

Mr. Woodman explained that the buildings are approximately the same size.

Robert Starcevich commented that this proposal could turn out to be a monster home and possibly increase density with illegal suites.

Mr. Woodman explained that it is also possible that someone could install a home studio in the basement rather than a secondary suite.

Councillor Royer expressed concern about the size of the building and asked if consideration had been given to construction of a laneway home instead.

Mr. Woodman explained that a laneway home had not been considered and noted that the design of this building is such that it is sensitive to the surrounding area.

Councillor Glumac commented that this building is no different from a monster home and noted that Council is trying to promote the concept of laneway housing in this area.

Robert Charbonneau expressed concern and asked for clarification about the possibility of allowing two accessory structures on the site.

Mary De Paoli explained that, in terms of land use, the focus was on the OCP policy. Ms. De Paoli noted that there is consideration n the draft Zoning Bylaw under development to allow for two accessory buildings, but the land use policy will not be changing. She confirmed that a Development Variance Permit would be required at this time to allow for two accessory structures to be built on the site, and the DVP would be considered separately by Council as part of this application.