Cypress Village / Rodgers Creek “Rezoning”

This Post is Re-printed from West Vancouver Community Stakeholders Association-
Massive 7 tower Rodgers Creek project – Public Rezoning Hearing – Nov 19 – 7pm
British Pacific Properties proposes nearly 700 for-sale condos and 250 rental units to bring total development to nearly 1,000 units (2,000+ people). Scant details include:Seven Towers up to 16 storeys including two 12-storey rental Towers. No details on parking for estimated 2,000+ cars.How many residents will use proposed private bus service to Park Royal?For higher density, DWV proposes BPP pay $7 million Community Amenity Contribution.$2 million of CAC reportedly to be used to build / lighting for trails in the development.And DWV is reportedly to own a rental tower.Think of Traffic Congestion on 22nd and 15th Streets, Taylor Way and Lions Gate Bridge by additional 2,000+ residents. What is Council doing about this #1 issue identified by residents?

Higher Density: 67% of West Van residents polled in recent Angus Reid survey were opposed to increasing our population by building more high-density apartment buildings and condos.

DWV’s Climate Emergency: Council already approved the tree clear-cutting (photo below) and 5 Creeks big pipe project to support this project. Concrete is a major contributor to GHG.

CACs in perspective: Carolanne Reynolds notes that this is more than twice the number of units in the two Park Royal towers currently being built. Park Royal offered $21 million in CACs for their development, BPP is offering $7 million. DWV staff refuses to provide their CAC calculations. 

If this massive project‘s density, traffic congestion and CAC calculation concerns you,please email mayorandcouncil@westvancouver.ca. Public input after Nov 19 will not be accepted. 

Arts Facility Plan

Please click the link below to see the October 1st update to the Arts Facility Planning document

http://adrawestvan.ca/files/2019/10/Arts-Facilities-Planning-Update-October-1_-2019-3.pdf

****************************************************

Here is a recap of the AFAC Meeting with WVD held (16th Oct.) by Judy Chalmers of ADRA :

Site Identification


The sites that were identified were on the list ONLY because they are District owned properties.  There would be criteria that would need to be met so they were on the list because they were considered but some would not be an option

The criteria that the committee members evaluated each site on ( a scale of 1-5) were:


-Connectivity with Arts and Culture Community
-Placemaking / Destination Ability
-Functional Appropriateness
-Pedestrian/Vehicle/Public Transit Access
-Economic Connectivity
-Future Flexibility
-Parking and Loading
-Neighbourhood Enhancement
-Sustainability
-Alignment with District’s Planning and Policy
-Development Timing
-Development Complexity
-Financial Efficiency

At the next meeting ( October 30 ) Cornerstone Consultants will present  and review the site analysis findings.

The District owned sites are:

  • Ambleside Field H
  • Ambleside Tennis Courts
  • 3 sites adjacent to the Ferry Building
  • Music Box and Silk Purse
  • John Lawson Park parking lot
  • Lawn Bowling site
  • S.A. C
  • Art Museum
  • Lots adjacent (east) of the fire hall
  • Library Parking Lot
  • Gordon House
  • Dundarave Park

    Keep in mind theses are ONLY IDENTIFIED as they are District owned properties, and may NOT even be considered as options due to MANY factors! For example: a site would be considered but has not been discussed, or is not an option…using the Library and Lawn Bowling, Dundarave Park as examples. There will also be private property options identified at a later date.

    Site size analysis was presented for the two options ( 1 or 2 buildings ) which was:
  • 1 storey with surface parking
  • 1 storey with underground parking
  • 2 storeys with surface parking
  • 2 storeys with underground parking

    Future AFAC meeting timeline
  • October 30 – review site analysis findings to draft a report
  • November 13 – review draft report        – develop community workshop material
  • November 20 – Community Workshop with stakeholders
    At this workshop the top 3 sites would be presented with massing models, land values, and cost to build.  At the public Q&A I asked if it would  be possible for an estimated build time-frame also.
    A possible date for presentation to Council would be end of January.

    With regards to Klee Wyck:  there is a Sub Committee to determine the short term and long term plans for that site.

JOIN US

FINAL DATA: ADRA MEETING Feb. 21, 2018

FINAL DATA:  ADRA MEETING

FEBRUARY 21, 2018

 

FINAL DATA FROM ADRA MEETING – FEBRUARY 21

The draft OCP was released on Feb 13th and the public has been given until March 16th to provide their input.

The Planning department is holding information sessions with individuals and board/directors of groups (up until March 2), but not with groups themselves.

ADRA felt it was critical to gather member feedback in order to provide their comments & questions to staff by March 1st, so a meeting for Feb. 21 was quickly arranged.

We were disappointed Planning Department would not attend and speak to our group about the draft OCP, or that no summary document or chart of changes (from old OCP to new draft) was available from the district.

In the absence of this, ADRA volunteers prepared a worksheet with questions based on issues commonly raised by members.  To the best of our ability (and where they existed) we provided references in the 53-page draft document.

Meeting attendees were dispersed to table groups to conduct short discussions on each question before recording their comments on their individual worksheets.

Worksheets were gathered at the end of the evening with some attendees opting to provide their comments later by email.

A total of 67 people registered for this meeting (include 4 from Chamber of Commerce), and 57 attended.

Given the snowy weather, the short notice and a gold-medal hockey game it can be surmised that there is significant community interest in the draft OCP.

From these we received a total of 49 responses.

38 of the respondents identified as ADRA members.

11 of the respondents were not ADRA members or did not identify.

41 identified as living in West Vancouver and 7 identified as working in West Vancouver

Supplementing this data are two further documents: One summarizing participant comments, the other participant questions.

  1.  Does this draft OCP provide adequate measures to support and

 retain small independent shops and services in our villages?

 (Reference page 33, item 2.3.18.)

YESNODon’t Know/ UnsureNot an Issue for MeNot Answered
ADRA MEMBERS

3%

32 

84%

11%

3%

OTHERS

27%

45%

18%

9%

TOTAL

8%

37 

76%

12%

4%

  1. Will provision of more diverse housing, including mixed

 residential/commercial, help support and retain small, independent shops and services
in our villages?

YESNODon’t Know. UnsureNot an Issue for MeNot Answered
ADRA MEMBERS

21%

20 

53%

24%

3%

OTHERS

55%

9%

36%

TOTAL14 

29%

21 

43%

13 

27%

2%

 Traffic congestion (current and projected) is not addressed in

 the draft OCP (pages 35-36).  Should this be addressed in the draft?

 YESNODon’t Know/ UnsureNot an Issue for meNot answered
ADRAMEMBERS34 

90%

5%

5%

 

 

OTHERS

82%

18%

TOTAL43 

88%

4%

4%

4%

  1. MONSTER HOMES:  Does this draft OCP provide adequate

 measures to prevent the construction of “monster” homes?
 (Reference page 16, items 2.1.8 to 2.1.11.)

 YESNODon’t Know/ UnsureNot an Issue for meNot answered
ADRAMEMBERS

3%

34 

89%

5%

3%

OTHERS

18%

55%

18%

9%

TOTAL

6%

40 

82%

8%

4%

  1.  Does this draft OCP provide adequate measures to protect the

 unique character and heritage of Ambleside and Dundarave commercial centres?  (Reference pg. 15, item 2.1.5; pg 19, item 2.1.14, page 20, item 2.1.19; page 31-33, items 2.3.1, 2.3.4, 2.3.6 – 2.3.21.)

 YESNODon’t Know/ UnsureNot an Issue for meNot answered
ADRAMEMBERS

3%

28 

74%

8%

16%

OTHERS

18%

55%

9%

9%

9%

TOTAL

6%

34 

69%

8%

2%

14%

  1. The draft OCP touches on quality of life in broad terms (reference

 page 5, 1.3; page 49, 2.9.7), but does not address protection of specific quality of life factors which affect the livability and enjoyment of your home, such as protection of privacy, views, view corridors and sunlight.  Should the draft address these specific quality of life factors?

 YESNODon’t Know/ UnsureNot an Issue for meNot answered
ADRAMEMBERS32 

84%

11%

5%

OTHERS

45%

27%

18%

9%

TOTAL37 

76%

6%

12%

6%

  1. The draft OCP refers to evolving housing needs and a priority to

 house young families and seniors (page 7, last paragraph and page 14, 15, & 19, 20), but does not demonstrate how specific percentages (page 14) and numerical targets for new housing units (Section A, page15-30) will achieve this, how this will be measured or how expectations compare to existing policies

Do you wish to see these (or other) details in the draft OCP?

 YESNODon’t Know/ UnsureNot an Issue for meNot answered
ADRAMEMBERS27 

71%

5%

11%

3%

11%

OTHERS

36%

36%

9%

18%

TOTAL31 

63%

12%

10%

2%

12%

  1. The draft OCP contains specific numerical targets for new rental housing or special needs housing will be attained.  The expectation is this will be articulated in yet to be drafted Local Area Plans.  Should details on how much rental and/or special needs housing and how such housing will be attained, be included in this draft OCP?

 

 YESNODon’t Know/ UnsureNot an Issue for meNot answered
ADRAMEMBERS25 

66%

5%

13%

16%

OTHERS

36%

27%

9%

27%

TOTAL29 

59%

10%

12%

18%

  1.  CLARITY / CERTAINTY: Does the draft OCP provide a satisfactory degree of clarity and certainty about what may be built and where? (Section A, pages 15-30.)
 YESNODon’t Know/ UnsureNot an Issue for meNot answered
ADRAMEMBERS29 

76%

16%

8%

OTHERS

27%

64%

10%

TOTAL

6%

36 

73%

12%

8%

  1. TIME FRAME: Is the time frame (Feb 13 – March 16) adequate for

 the public to digest and provide comment on the draft OCP?

 

 YESNODon’t Know/ UnsureNot an Issue for meNot answered
ADRAMEMBERS

5%

34 

89%

5%

OTHERS

45%

45%

10%

TOTAL

14%

39 

80%

6%

ARTICLES OF INTEREST

ARTICLES OF INTEREST  (Click on link)

Article discusses the influence of development and transportation on neighbourhoods
The Cost of of Corridors

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/elizabeth-murphy-vancouver-council-continues-visions-crisis-management-of-development

P.E.I. has similar housing issues
Charlottetown Grapples with Housing Crisis (National Post, July 2, 2019 p. NP5)

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/charlottetowns-housing-crisis

Article suggests housing strategy is based on faulty assumptions
Growth Targets Don’t Add Up (Vancouver Sun, June 8, 2019 p. H2)

Elizabeth Murphy: Vancouver growth targets don’t add up

A timely article which discusses the disconnect between growth and affordability.
City’s High Housing Growth Rate Makes Homes Less Affordable.  (Vancouver Sun, September 1, 2018)

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/elizabeth-murphy-citys-high-housing-growth-rate-making-homes-less-affordable

Livability Must Not be Forgotten in the Civic Debates About Housing (Vancouver Sun, September 19, 2018 p. A1-A2)

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/daphne-bramham-its-time-to-start-asking-tough-questions-of-civic-candidates

Growth and Affordability  (Vancouver Sun,  Sept 15, 2018, p. B2)

Article discusses the disconnect between growth and affordability. 

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/elizabeth-murphy-citys-high-housing-growth-rate-making-homes-less-affordable

Vancouver City Hall is slamming through destructive new zoning without giving citizens a say  Vancouver Sun, September 14, 2018

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/elizabeth-murphy-vancouver-city-hall-is-slamming-through-destructive-new-zoning-without-giving-citizens-a-say

Growth and Affordability  (Vancouver Sun, 15, Sep 2018, PageB2)

Article discusses the disconnect between growth and affordability. 

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/elizabeth-murphy-citys-high-housing-growth-rate-making-homes-less-affordable

Vancouver City Hall is slamming through destructive new zoning without giving citizens a say Vancouver Sun, September 14, 2018

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/elizabeth-murphy-vancouver-city-hall-is-slamming-through-destructive-new-zoning-without-giving-citizens-a-say

Rebellion in the Neighbouhood  (Global Canadian Feb 19, 2018)

https://www.theglobalcanadian.com/2138-2/

******