Minutes of a Public Hearing held Monday, December 16, 1996, at 7:00 p.m. in the Matsqui Centennial Auditorium

Transcription

1 Minutes of a Public Hearing held Monday, December 16, 1996, at 7:00 p.m. in the Matsqui Centennial Auditorium Council Present: Chairman - Mayor G. Ferguson; Councillors - E. Fast, S. Gibson, M. Gill, W. Lee, G. Peary, P. Ross, and C. Wiebe Staff Present: City Manager - H. Cochran; City Clerk - T.O. Strong; Director of Development Services; Manager, Current Development - G. Boyle; and Committee Clerk - T. Harder Staff Present for a Portion of the Meeting: Manager of Engineering Services - J. Duckworth; Director of Finance - D. Bottri11; Purchasing Manager - K. Fletcher; Director of Parks and Recreation - K. Yates; and Deputy Fire Chief, Administration - R. Lawrie Media Present: 85 Radio MAX, The News, and Rogers Cablesystems Public Present: 25 + The Chairman called the hearing to order, and outlined the procedures to be followed. 1. By-law No , Zoning Amendment No. 39 ( /R96-20) The Manager, Current Development, introduced By-law No , cited as "Zoning By-law, 1996, Amendment By-law No. 39". If approved, the applicant, Abbotsford Christian School, proposes to develop a single-family residential subdivision for the (RS3) portion of the site. The (P3) southern portion of the site would be consolidated with the Abbotsford Christian School site. G. Presunka, 4001 Old Clayburn Road, on behalf of the Strata Council for Cedarsprings Estates, submitted correspondence dated December 16, 1996, which is attached to, and forms part of, these minutes. The residents did not oppose the rezoning, but were requested by the City to approve the sale of excess water detention capacity for use by the Abbotsford Christian School. Concerns were expressed regarding costs associated with the detention pond, the actual capacity of the holding pond, the possibility of exceeding 100- and 200-year flood levels, and the cost and advisability of side hill storm water detention versus flat land at the school site. It was noted that Abbotsford Christian School had declined an offer to be included in the project in 1991, as it would be less expensive for it to provide its own storm water detention by utilizing the school's playground.

2 Minutes of a Public Hearing held Monday, December 16, 1996, at 7:00 p.m. in the Matsqui Centennial Auditorium Page 2 L. Coughlan, 3958 Paradise Place, west of the subject property, submitted a letter dated December 16, 1996, which is attached to, and forms part of, these minutes. He did not oppose the rezoning, but had concerns regarding the water run-off from the Abbotsford Christian School grounds onto his property. The school installed a ditch on its property to manage the run-off, and Mr. Coughlan requested that an agreement be reached to either maintain the ditch or to replace it with a system of underground catchbasins on the school property. G. Vallance, 4001 Old Clayburn Road, requested that trees and shrubs be planted along the rear of the properties which will face Cedarsprings Estates, and that the mature trees on the northeast corner of the proposed development be preserved. T. Windt, Central Fraser Valley Engineering, on behalf of the applicant, indicated that there is surplus capacity in Cedarsprings storm detention pond, which is owned by the City and is available on a first-come first-serve basis. He assured that the measures taken to alleviate flooding problems affecting properties along Paradise Place were being incorporated into the Abbotsford Christian School's development plans. There were no further comments or questions. 2. By-law No , O.C.P. Amendment No.8 ( CP-D8) Property in the block Blueridge Drive was the subject of an Official Community Plan amendment. The Manager, Current Development, explained that By-law No , cited as "Official Community Plan, 1996, Amendment By-law No.8", would designate a portion of the site from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential to permit the subject lands to be zoned for multi-family residential to a maximum density of 25 units per hectare. There were no comments or questions. 3. By-law No , Z.A. No. 43 ( /R96-23) The Manager, Current Development, explained the intent of By-law No , cited as "Zoning By-law, 1996, Amendment By-law No. 43". Property owned by Silver Maple Farms at block Blueridge Drive would be rezoned from One Unit Country Residential Zone (RR3) and Parks, Open Space and Schools Zone (P2) to One Unit Urban Residential Zone (RS3) and Multi-unit Residential RM25 Zone (RM25). The rezoning would permit the development of residential lots on the (RS3) portion of the site and townhouse units for the (RM25) portion.

3 Minutes of a Public Hearing held Monday, December 16, 1996, at 7:00 p.m. in the Matsqui Centennial Auditorium Page 3 A letter dated December 16, 1996, from P. Andres, Mayne Avenue, was read into the record. The letter is attached to, and forms part of, these minutes. Mr. Andres was concerned about the clearcutting of slopes in light of mud slides in the residential area on Mayne A venue. He also doubted the effectiveness of the berm, which was built by the developer to prevent flooding of the Mayne A venue properties. A long range plan to build a permanent storm drain down the hillside was also questioned. L. Hooge, Mayne Avenue, noted the history of mud slides on the escarpment behind his home, and expressed concerns about the stability of the hill during and following the installation of permanent sanitary and storm sewers. He said that measures to alleviate problems with mud slides onto properties along Mayne Avenue, which included installation of a swale, a ditch, and a berm, were ineffective. The installation of Big 0 drainage pipes rectified t~e problem, but Mr. Hooge requested assurance that the hill would be permanently stabilized after the installation of services. There were no further comments or questions. 4. By-law No , L.U.c. No , Amendment By-law, 1996 ( / R96-37) The property owned by R. Wilton at 2038 Eldorado Place was the subject of By-law No , cited as "Land Use Contract No , Amendment By-law, 1996". If approved, Land Use Contract No would be amended to permit an Accessory Secondary Suite Residential use on the site. A letter dated December 11, 1996, from D. and M. Goos, 2050 Eldorado Place, was read into the record. The letter is attached to, and forms part of, these minutes. Concern was expressed regarding inadequate parking on Eldorado Place, and the suggestion was made that the City consider zoning entire neighbourhoods for secondary suites, rather than accepting individual applications. R. Wilton, owner of the subject property, advised that off-street parking is provided for the secondary suite in his house. He indicated that he had purchased the house specifically because it contained a secondary suite, and indicated a willingness to comply with City regulations. There were no further comments or questions.

4 Minutes of a Public Hearing held Monday, December 16, 1996, at 7:00 p.m. in the Matsqui Centennial Auditorium Page 4 5. By-law No , L.U.C. No , Amendment By-law, 1996 ( / R96-39) The Manager, Current Development, explained the purpose of By-law No , cited as "Land Use Contract No , Amendment By-law, 1996". Land Use Contract No would be amended to permit an Accessory Secondary Suite Residential use on the P. Brown property at 2793 St. Moritz Way. There were no comments or questions. 6. By-law No , L.U.C. No. 255, Amendment By-law, 1996 ( / R9643) By-law No , cited as "Land Use Contract No. 255, Amendment By-law, 1996, was introduced by the Manager, Current Development. If approved, an Accessory Secondary Suite Residential use would be permitted on the G. and R. Thandi property at 3768 Gladwin Road. There were no comments or questions. 7. By-law No , L.U.C. No. 52, Amendment By-law, 1996 ( / R9643) The Manager, Current Development, explained the purpose of By-law No , cited as "Land Use Contract No. 52, Amendment By-law, 1996". The by-law proposes to permit an Accessory Secondary Suite Residential use on the A. and F. Tartaglia property at Charlotte Avenue. F. Tartaglia, owner of the subject property, indicated that the property was purchased specifically because it contained a secondary suite. H. Munro, Charlotte Avenue, expressed concerns regarding additional suites in the area, and associated problems with more traffic and people. There were no further comments or questions.

5 Minutes of a Public Hearing held Monday, December 16, 1996, at 7:00 p.m. in the Matsqui Centennial Auditorium Page 5 8. By-law No , Z.A. No. 40 ( /R96-45) The Manager, Current Development, introduced By-law No , cited as "Abbotsford Zoning By-law, 1996, Amendment By-law No. 40". If approved, the text of Abbotsford Zoning By-law, 1996, would be amended by adding the Service Commercial Zone (C6), which will provide for the development of commercial uses catering primarily to vehic1e-oriented customers. There were no comments or questions. 9. By-law No , Z.A. No. 41 ( /R96-44) The purpose of By-law No , "Zoning Amendment By-law, 1996, Amendment By-law No. 41", is to rezone property at 2743 Emerson Street from Automall Commercial Zone (CAM) to Service Commercial Zone (CS6). The applicant, Georgian Properties Ltd., proposes to develop the site for service commercial uses. There were no comments or questions. 10. By-law No , Z.A. No. 42 ( /R96-47) By-law No , cited as "Zoning By-law, 1996, Amendment By-law No. 42", was presented by the Manager, Current Development. If approved, Abbotsford Zoning By-law, 1996, would be amended by deleting the existing Cabaret and Neighbourhood Pub Zone (CCP) and replacing it with two new, separate zones: Cabaret Zone (CCP); and Neighbourhood Pub Zone (CNP). As a consequence of this text amendment, Industrial Way will be rezoned to Neighbourhood Pub Zone (CNP). A. Beck, owner of the Frosty Mug Pub located at Industrial Way, believed that the amendment would limit the use of his property. Mr. Beck requested that the site be "grandfathered", so that the property's original flexibility in use could be retained. D. Davies, owner of the Highwayman Pub, and P. Esposito, owner of King's Crossing Pub, spoke in support of A. Beck's request. There were no further comments or questions.

6 Minutes of a Public Hearing held Monday, December 16, 1996, at 7:00 p.m. in the Matsqui Centennial Auditorium Page Termination Moved by Councillor Peary, seconded by Councillor Wiebe, that the Public Hearing terminate. (7:42 p.m.) CARRIED. Certified Correct: ~ Recordmg Secretary P.S. Additional correspondence dated December 20, 1996, from D. and M. Goos, was received, withdrawing objections to By-law No , cited as "Land Use Contract No , Amendment By-law, 1996". Correspondence attached to, and forming part of, these minutes includes: By-law No G. Presunka, Chairperson, Cedarsprings Country Estates, 4001 Old Clayburn Road, Abbotsford, B.C..2 L. Coughlan, 3958 Paradise Place, Abbotsford, B.C. By-law No P. Andres, Mayne Avenue, Abbotsford, B.C. By-law No D. and M. Goos, 2050 Eldorado Place, Abbotsford, B.C.

7 December 16,1996 City of Abbotsford South Fraser Way, Abbotsford, B.C. V2T 1W7 Re: Concerns as expressed by: Public Hearing File \R96-20 December 16, 1996 The Council Strata Corporation LMS 221 Cedarsprings Country Estates 4001 Old Clayburn Road Abbotsford, B.C. 1. We have no objection in principal to the development of the subdivision and support the concept of the development. 2. As you are aware we have been requested to approve the sale of excess water detention capacity by the City of Abbotsford to be used by Abbotsford Christian School Society for this project. While we will not dually withhold our approval we do have some concerns. These concerns are outlined below. a. We believe there to be a possible conflict of interest in this project as the Manager of Transportation and Drainage Mr. Art Kastelein is also a member of the board for the Abbotsford Christian School Society. However if our information is inaccurate then please disregard this paragraph as it forms no part of this presentation regarding our concerns. b. We have concerns as to just what is the extra capacity of the detention pond. We've been led to believe that their were two levels of design, that is a 100 year flood level and a 200 year flood level. In the brief life of Cedarsprings we have exceeded the 100 year flood level on atleast three occasions. We are concerned that the parameters that were used for this project in 1991 are no longer valid. c. The original design could have been done to incorporate this property. In fact it is our understanding that offers were made to the Abbotsford Christian School Society to be included in this project in 1991, but they had deemed it to be less expensive for them to provide their own storm water detention by utilizing their playground. d. In the end Noort Developments, the City, and Bateman Properties funded this project. The design and intentions of the parties were all clearly laid out for the properties involved. It would appear in reviewing the agreement between the parties all shared rather equally in the costs. e. Although the Noort property is still to develop all their land, we are concerned with regard to the following technical questions;

8 The cost and advisability of side hill storm water detention versus flat land at the school site. 2. The use of storm water detention tanks to hold back the rush of storm water and the associated silt. We are aware that we get most of that storm water now, however it is by seepage and does take time to reach the holding area. 3. The changes in storm water detention requirements for developments versus what was designed in What capacity does the holding pond have based on the new requirements. Is there excess capacity to sell? 4. If our information is correct in that the current requirements for storm water detention are more strict than in 1991, will Noort Developments be willing to give up a equal portion of their property draining into this holding pond? 5. As previously mentioned we have exceeded the 100 year flood level on several occasions in the past three years. The addition of this property will surely make this a common occurrence. We realize that this pond was built for this purpose, however as property tax payers we question why we should be subjected to this level of flooding on a continuous bases. As well as our portion of costs as occurred by the City in cleaning the extra silt from the pond. 6. This pond was constructed under the regulations that were in place in 1991 and we would not expect to add additional water with existence of current requirements. 7. The cost to Abbotsford Christian School Society in comparison to the cost to the original parties. Anything less would be a determent to all City of Abbotsford property tax payers. Respectively submitted by the Council of Cedarsprings, LMS 221, representing 159 homes in the City of Abbotsford.

9 ' , December 16, 1996 Les & Carol Coughlan 3958 Paradise Place Abbotsford, BC Dear Honorable Mayor Ferguson & Council Members; c We are submitting this letter to express our concerns with the proposed development of a parcel of land at the 3900 block of Old Clayburn Road ( By-law Proposal ). We recently built our home on lot 7 behind the proposed new subdivision. During construction we encountered great difficulty with water run off from the school grounds behind us. At one point last summer so much water poured off the school property during a flood rain tllat several yards of mud washed into our basement and the entire excavation next door was filled up with at least twelve inches of water. I have enclosed several photos of water run off from late this past summer showing how water collects and enters the Paradise Place subdivision. At the present time there has been a drainage ditch installed on the subject lands (school property) to manage the run-off. This ditch was constructed at the cost of ourselves and two neighbors, and allowed to be built by a gentleman's agreement with the school committee. We had no choice whether or not to have the ditch constructed because of the fear of costly damages from imminent flooding during winter rain storms. The existing ditch seems to handle the situation very well and our only concern now is that a formal agreement be reached that the ditch is to be maintained forever or replaced with a system of underground catch basins on the school property. Trusting that you will have the above situation thoroughly investigated, we thank you in advance.., p Yours truly, LES COUGHLAN c, r

10 DEC :14 FROM MCC B.C. SUPP. CARE. SERU. TO 8531'334 P December 16, 1 ~ Shirley Kowalchuk Abbotsford City Mall Fax.: a53-193~ Dear Ms. Kowal~huk RE: ZONING PROPOSAL R96-23 I am a resident ~ Mayne Avenue, Abbotsford, and have maintained an interest in the developm,nt of the property above our place on Townline Hill. To date, a significant area of lafld has been clearcut including a portion that includes part of the slope of the hill immeqiately above our place. Drainage catchment basins have been built and drain conduit have been put in place to take water from the basins to a detention pond at the bottqm of the hill, located inside of Maclure park. Before entering the pond, this water coming down from the development area in question, passes through a depression immediately behind our house and it is held in that depression by a btkm built by the dev~loper. It then drains into the pond via seepage and 8i9-0 pipe. I have two conc~ms. The first has to do with allowing for clearcutting of slope even after it has been ltwjce demonstrated that excessive rainfall has caused mud slides into the residential ariea at the end of Mayne Avenue. The slope is very unstable and should have remained untouched. Secondly, I have little faith in the water management pl~n r~latgd to drainage from the basins built at the top of the hill. The ~m built to ke~p the water from flooding the Mayne Avenue properties is hardly a convincing col1struction, and the long-range plan to build a permanent storm drain down the hill wilt: have further serious environmental consequences to an already unstable hillsid~ I am not oppo~ to development of the property in question. It is a necessary development for:the area. However, I do not beheve the concerns I have raised have been properly aqdressed. SinCe~IY /). n.q~~~ Peter R. Andres

11 R. Danziger, Director of Development Services City of Abbotsford RECEIVED DEC City ot Aoootstord Dennis & Marilyn Goos 2050 Eldorado Place Abbotsford, B. C. V2S5K4 December 11, 1996 Re: Land Use Contract No Amendment By-Law No For submission to the Public Hearing of December My husband and I own the residence located on Lot 130, next door but one to the property that is the subject of the proposed amendment. Whilst we have no objections to regulated secondary suites in general, we are concerned about this particular proposal and wish to register our objections to it being approved. The residence located at has changed hands quite a few times since we moved to this street in the mid eighties. During that time, it has often had renters in the basement. Invariably the vehicles belonging to the renters and their visitors have been parked across the street, right on the narrowest part of the cul~de-sac and right on the comer before the cul~de~sac circle. At one point, one renter owned a large truck with a large utility trailer, which would be parked on this comer blocking vision in both directions for drivers and making navigation between the truck and vehicles on the both sides of the road very difficult. With vehicles parked on both sides of the cul-de-sac, it is a dangerous situation for anyone driving through the narrow gap, being unable to see what is coming down the hill towards them. The parking at the residence under consideration would not handle the volume of vehicles that would inevitably occur should the basement area become an apartment - it has not done so in the past. We have a large number of young children living in this cul-de-sac who will play, as children do, on the street. The inadequate parking provided with the houses on this cul-de-sac means a lot of vehicles are parked on the street. Any driver has to take great care in entering or leaving the cul-de-sac to keep a vigilant eye out for young children and toddlers darting out between parked cars onto the street. Just for this safety reason alone, we believe that approval should not be granted for a secondary suite until entirely adequate parking facilities are made for off street parking. We, personally, spent a fair amount of money on building a second driveway so that none of our vehicles would have to be parked on the road. Often, our access to these driveways is blocked by cars that belong to visitors of our neighbours, there being nowhere for them to park except across one or both of our driveways.

12 Our second objection to the proposal is that we feel that a piecemeal approach to permitting secondary suites, approval being granted on a house by house basis, is unfair to a neighbourhood and is very divisive for neighbours. This type of Land Use should be done on a street by street, block by block, proposal. Either all of a neighbourhood is zoned for secondary suites or not at all. If Eldorado Place was completely zoned for secondary suites, the traffic problems alone would be a disaster for everyone who lives here. We have vehicles parked lengthwise across the circle of the cul-de-sac now as the driveways are too small for some of the residence's vehicles - which means snow ploughs can't plough our street on snowy days and backing out of your driveway is a real concern, with the little children playing around and behind these parked vehicles. If you approve this application, then applications for other residences are going to be presented. Eldorado Place just can't handle them with its narrow road and small turning circle, plus the narrow width of many of the front lots. We are sure that there is at least one house on this street that is being rented out on both floors, this residence has at least four or five vehicles parked in front of it on any given day. This is just too much traffic and a major safety problem for all of us who live here. In the interests of safety we would ask that this application be turned down. We would also ask that the council look at possibly changing the policy so that neighbourhoods, instead of individual houses, are zoned for secondary suites. This would prevent the problems of neighbours being put into the awkward situation of having to argue against something that another neighbour wants or needs. It would also ensure that the area would be reviewed for suitability and safety: street width, parking facilities, noise problems, etc. Thank you. Dennis Goos 2

13 Dennis & Marilyn Goos 2050 Eldorado Place Abbotsford~ B.C. V2S5K4 Mayor G. Ferguson December 20, 1996 R. Danziger. Director of Development Services City of Abbotsford Re: Land Use Contract No Amendment By-Law No Sent via fax #: With reference to the letter of December 11, 1996 from my husband and myself for submission to the Public Hearing regarding the above rezoning application, please be advised that we wish to withdraw our objections to this rezoning. As the owner of the above residence is apparently very upset by our objections, we do not want to be involved in any way in the decision making about this rezoning. The neighbour/owner who is applying for the rezoning was polite and reasonable when he spoke with my husband about this matter. However, should the council refuse the rezoning it may possibly cause ill feelings towards us. Would you please advise all council members and anyone else involved in the decision making process on this application that we have withdrawn our objections. I would appreciate it if you would advise the owner of the residence that we have withdrawn our objections so that he knows that any decision made by the council will not be affected by anything that we have said. Thank you. Marilyn Goos 1