DOCSLIB.ORG

Horseshoe Bay Local Area Plan: Phase 3 Transcript

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Horseshoe Bay Local Area Plan: Phase 3 Transcript Horseshoe Bay Local Area Plan: Phase 3 Public Engagement Transcript | August 2020 Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION & OVERVIEW ............................................................................... 1 2. OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT ................................................................................ 1 I. Advisory Roundtable ......................................................................................................................... 1 Meeting #5 – Meeting Notes ................................................................................................................ 1 Meeting #6 – Meeting Notes ................................................................................................................ 5 II. RefineHSB Survey ............................................................................................................................. 10 A. Comments in response to survey question #1: Bay Street ......................................................... 10 B. Comments in response to survey question #2: Eastern Village Entrance by BC Ferries ............ 16 C. Comments in response to survey question #3: Southern Village Arrival on Bruce and Royal ... 22 D. Comments in response to survey question #4: New Townhome Areas ..................................... 26 E. Comments in response to survey question #5: New Townhome Areas ..................................... 32 F. Comments in response to survey question #6: Multiplex Area .................................................. 36 G. Comments in response to survey question #7: Cottage & Small Home Infill Area..................... 40 H. Comments in response to survey question #8: Enhancing Spaces in Between Buildings .......... 46 I. Comments in response to survey question #9: Place‐making & Street Life ............................... 50 J. Comments in response to survey question #10: Connectivity & Mobility ................................. 56 K. Comments in response to survey question #11: Further Comments ......................................... 62 *The feedback contained in this document was provided by respondents as part of the Horseshoe Bay Local Area Plan consultation process. Portions of these records have been redacted in accordance with section 22 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act in order to protect the personal information of the respondents who provided feedback. 1. INTRODUCTION & OVERVIEW The District of West Vancouver is preparing a Local Area Plan (LAP) for Horseshoe Bay in accordance with Council’s direction on March 11, 2019 and an approved Terms of Reference. This report provides a full transcript of all input and comments received during Phase 3 – Foundation, of the LAP for Horseshoe Bay. 2. OUTREACH & ENGAGEMENT I. Advisory Roundtable The members of the Horseshoe Bay LAP Advisory Roundtable include Andre Berard, Andy Krawczyk, Barbara McMillan, Benjamin Nelson, Chris Adshead, David Weiser, Geoff Jopson, Holly Kemp, Joanne McKenna, Karen Harrison, Karen Kallweit Graham, Kim Whittall, Megan Sewell, Robert McCullough, and Susie Alexander. The Advisory Roundtable held two meetings during Phase 3 (having also held two meetings in Phase 2). The first meeting of Phase 3 was held on March 10, 2020 with the second scheduled for January 21, 2020. The meeting notes are as follows. Meeting #5 – Meeting Notes 1. Staff welcomed Advisory Roundtable members, provided a presentation on process to date and introduced guest consultants from Urban Forum Associates. 2. Planning and Design Workshop: Urban Forum Associates provided an introduction of the work to date, explanation of draft materials presented (e.g., draft land use map and proof of concepts), and the general protocol and objective of the workshop (e.g., open dialogue, review of various housing forms on generic sites and design options and consideration of siting, footprint, etc., rather than actual building design). Discussion on mixed-use commercial village area: Mixed-use will most likely be commercial retail-at-grade with residential uses from second floor upwards (can sometimes have second floor offices but generally less common and desirable). Considerations for 5-6 storeys on Keith between Bay and Bruce: o There are trade-offs to situate a grocery store on this side of the village. o The advantage would be less view impacts with 5-6 storey building. o Concerns about traffic conflicts with “back-of-house”, loading and parkade access functions with creating a more “active” lane on Little Bay. o Need to address the realities of servicing and parking access for development (i.e., new businesses and buildings need service and parking access just as existing buildings do). The current challenges won’t necessary go away, but we can shift the balance of uses to prioritize pedestrian functions in the lane. 1 o Design guideline can require additional building set-back to widen the lane (as shown on the draft proof of concept) to accommodate separated pedestrian space and improved public realm in the lane through redevelopment. o Could the lane be changed to one-way only? o What about putting the grocery store at the current Bay Market location (SW Bruce & Royal corner)? . Height distribution is key, 5-6 storey is less acceptable in the centre of the village. Not a large enough site for grocery. Being close to the ferry can help attract a grocery store (example: Sewell’s was unable to attract a grocery store as it was far from the potential ferry demand). o The future grocery store is likely a modest grocery store (i.e., not a Superstore), like a boutique grocery, which seems to be more desired for the community. Considerations for 5-6 storey on Bay & Royal key corner site: o Design rationale for 5-6 storey here is to break up massing on Bay St by varying height; however, there is likely greater sensitivity on view impacts. o Select sites for 5-6 storey is likely the only way to get things like 2nd floor office and rental. o Suggestion to place 5-6 storey on the both east and west ends of Bay St instead of the middle to reduce view impacts. o An east-west transect along Bay St and a north-east transect along Royal Ave can help illustrate what the height changes could look like. Considerations for 3.5-4 storey mixed-use on a typical 2-lot mixed-use commercial (example: NW Bruce & Royal): o Enabling new development in this intersection is key to providing active retail and residential uses that could frame and make the village square successful and not feel abandoned. o Shaping the top fourth floor (e.g., step-back and different rooflines) helps reduce massing. o Upper storey step-backs can also provide for balcony spaces that activate the building. o Design guidelines that require buildings to relate, but not be identical, to neighbouring properties could help add character to the village without compromising neighbourly feel. o Do commercial retail uses (CRUs) on street-level require higher ceiling heights? From a design perspective, a larger CRU typically require higher ceiling height (14 ft vs 10 ft) to be workable. Live-work options for ground-level units can be enabled through “choice of use” to give flexibility for property owners to respond to market demands (i.e., property owner can choose to make ground-level live-work, or CRU, or residential, depending on market demand at the time of redevelopment through the 20 year lifetime of the LAP). 2 Discussion on row/townhouse area: Row/townhouses can be in varying height forms (2 to 3-storey stacked), with shared party walls, and could either be parallel to fronting street or perpendicular (on a deeper lot). Parking for townhouses is typically surface at-grade but underground parking is possible with higher density (>1.2 FAR). Does this mean all duplexes will be gone in the row/townhouse zoned area? The reality is that the density considered is marginal; market absorption is expected to be low and slow over the lifetime of the plan. Townhouse form requires 2-lot assembly (100 feet frontages). o 5 unit option at 0.8 FAR: existing duplex + basement exemption is already at about 0.75 FAR, 0.8 FAR townhouse option unlikely to be economically unviable. o 10 unit option at 1.2 FAR with stacked townhouse/courtyard townhouse design with relaxed setback could allow for underground parking. o 10 unit perpendicular option with surface park and relaxed setbacks is more ideal on sites along Royal Ave (i.e., “eyes on Royal”). o 8 unit option (larger units) at 1.2 FAR underground parking could enable up to 2 stalls per unit: . Should be planning for less cars – keep 1 stall per unit. Younger generations are less and less car inclined. Don’t set parking maximums but regulate through minimum (i.e., if developer feels that they need more parking to market the units, that becomes their choice and costs). Height: o Same massing and height along the street is less preferred. o Bruce St should be 3.5/4 storey at higher density so the residential side doesn’t “sink” into the topography and transitions better from the mixed-use zone. Potential for 2 level above 2 level stacked townhomes (total . 3.5-4 storeys with a portion of top storey stepped-back to create varying rooflines). 3.5-4 storeys also provide more options for live-work and/or lock-off suites on the bottom. o Enable up to 2.5/3 storeys for Douglas St to transition to the multiplex area. What advantages do townhomes have over duplexes? o Greater housing diversity and options, which have been identified as a key community desire and long term
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Order in Council 463/1944
    483. Approved and ordered this 29th day of March , A.D. 19244 At the Executive Council Chamber, Victoria, Lieutenant-Gouer, or. PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Pearson in the Chair. Mr. Ansconth Mr. Carson Mr. Perry Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. To His Honour • The Lieutenant.Governor in Council: The undersigned has the honour to report:• THAT by notice published in the B. C. Gazette and other papers, there was offered to public competition a five year charter to maintain and operate a ferry service across queen Charlotte Channel between a point on the east shore of Howe Sound between Atkinson Point and the north boundary of the Corporation of the District of West Vancouver and a point on the east coast of Bowen Island between Hood Point and Cowan Point. THAT the Minister of Public Works reports as a result of such notice that a tender was received from the Senate Transportation Company Limited of Vancouver, B.C. , dated February 24th, 1944, and recommends that said tender be accepted. AND TO RECOMMEND THAT under the authority of the"lerries Ant", R.S.B.C. 1936, Chapter 96 and amending Acts, a charter or license for the said ferry be granted to the said Sannie Transportation Company Limited giving them the exclusive right to operate the said ferry for a period of five years from the first day of April, 1944, upon the terms and conditions set out in the said tender from the Sannie Transportation Company Limited and the conditions of tender attached thereto (a copy of which tender and conditions are attached hereto) and subject to the provisions of the "Ferries Ant" and amending Acts, and the regulations made from time to time pursuant thrift°.
    [Show full text]
  • Sheldon Stoilen BC Ferries Commissioner PO
    Sheldon Stoilen BC Ferries Commissioner P.O. Box 9279 Victoria, British Columbia, V8W 9J7 June 30th, 2019 RE: Report on the Preliminary Price Cap Decision for the Fifth Performance Term Dear Mr Stoilen, Thank you for inviting comment on the BC Ferrries Commissioner preliminary price cap decision and accompanying report. On behalf of the Bowen Island Ferry Advisory Committee, I would like to submit the following feedback: We understand the premise for the ferry fare to increase by 2.3% annually beginning April 1, 2020 and ending March 31, 2024—an increase at or slightly above the rate of inflation. Maintaining consistent affordable ferry fares is important to ferry dependent communities such as Bowen Island while recognizing the financial realities needed to maintain service levels that meets the overall needs of ferry dependent communities. The Bowen FAC shares the BC Ferries Commissioner concern, as highlighted in the PT5 Preliminary Price Cap report, about future upward pressure on price caps beyond PT5 due to planned large-scale capital expenditures. As a community significantly impacted by the aging infrastructure at Horseshoe Bay Terminal, and the lack of an indoor waiting room at Snug Cove, we support these infrastructure projects proceeding in a timely manner. We also support the report’s consideration of alternative delivery models for future ferry service as a means for lowering costs, and would like to offer for consideration a Bowen Island passenger-only service, integrated with public transportation. We also encourage BC Ferries to partner with senior governments to secure additional funding for large scale infrastructure projects such as the planned $250 million Horseshoe Bay terminal redevelopment.
    [Show full text]
  • Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability Assessment 2018
    Hazard, Risk and Vulnerability Assessment 2018 DRAFT Photo by Jason Wilde Contents SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1 Hazard Risk and Vulnerability Assessment Overview ............................................................................ 2 Scope & Methodology.......................................................................................................................................... 2 Risk Assessment ..................................................................................................................................................... 4 Overview of Hazards ............................................................................................................................................ 5 BOWEN ISLAND MUNICIPALITY OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................9 SECTION 2: VULNERABILITY ........................................................................................................................................... 10 Social Vulnerability .............................................................................................................................................. 10 Language Groups ............................................................................................................................................................... 10 Age Groups ...........................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Revised Park Concept
    parkscanada.gc.ca Revised Park Concept for the assessment of national park reserve lands on Bowen Island August 25, 2011 REVISED PARK CONCEPT August 25, 2011 ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT The creation of a draft park concept is a key step in the feasibility assessment process. This document is a revised version of the Preliminary Park Concept presented on February 26, 2011. It builds on identified concerns, suggestions and ideas to better illustrate what national park reserve lands could look like on Bowen Island. This Revised Park Concept looks different from the preliminary concept. Some of the changes are cosmetic, as some sections were combined to reduce repetition, while others have been moved to create better flow. Other changes are more fundamental, with revised text or new content added. To help indicate where significant additions and revisions have occurred, we have used colours and text boxes. Green indicates new or revised content, either in the section title or in a text box. Light green text boxes provide further information or illustrate examples of how things work in practice. Grey is used to highlight a sample of the comments that we received. Also new in this revised concept are tables which examine how particular issues are considered during the establishment process, from assessing feasibility to management planning. CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................... 1 revised Feasibility Assessment: A Step in the Establishment Process ..........................
    [Show full text]
  • Microsoft Outlook
    Independent Transit Services Factsheet Context Approval The South Coast British Columbia Transportation The Act allows TransLink to apply terms and Authority (SCBCTA) Act includes provisions for addressing conditions prior to a service commencing operation. independent transit services (ITS). The legislation applies These may include: to any bus or rail transportation provided within the • the right to re-evaluate the ITS in the future; region by anyone other than TransLink or its subsidiaries or contractors. The TransLink Board must approve an ITS • requiring a change to the service plan; to operate, including any terms or conditions. • a defi ned notifi cation and reporting process; • conditions for negotiating use of TransLink Process infrastructure and branding; TransLink’s process for addressing a potential ITS follows • other conditions as deemed necessary. three main steps: I. defi ning if a service is an ITS; An ITS will not be authorized to operate unless all terms and conditions are met. II. application of evaluation criteria to inform recommendations; and III. TransLink Board approval or denial, including terms and conditions required for an approved service to operate. The role of independent transit services Approved independent transit services can Evaluation be considered complementary to the regional transportation system, provided they do not reduce As outlined in the Act, TransLink may grant approval to the fi nancial viability or effectiveness of TransLink. establish or operate an ITS if: 1. the ITS does not reduce the effectiveness of the regional transportation system, and 2. the ITS does not reduce the fi nancial viability of the Contact Us regional transportation system.
    [Show full text]
  • Regional Destination Development Strategy
    VANCOUVER, COAST & MOUNTAINS REGIONAL DESTINATION DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY 2019–2029 HOPE DESTINATION BC REPRESENTATIVES Photo: Hubert Kang Jody Young MANAGER, VANCOUVER, COAST & MOUNTAINS AND INDUSTRY PROGRAMS Jonathan Heerema SENIOR PROJECT ADVISOR, DESTINATION DEVELOPMENT [email protected] INDIGENOUS TOURISM ASSOCIATION OF BC 604 921 1070 [email protected] MINISTRY OF TOURISM, ARTS AND CULTURE Amber Mattock SENIOR DIRECTOR 250 356 1489 [email protected] TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................1 4. A DISTINCTIVE DIRECTION ..........................................24 4.1 Vision II. ACRONYMS ...........................................................................5 4.2 Goals 1. FOREWORD AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................. 7 4.3 Guiding principles 4.4 Development themes 2. INTRODUCING THE STRATEGY .......................................9 A Focus on the Supply and Visitor Experience 5. VANCOUVER, COAST & MOUNTAINS STRATEGIC PRIORITIES ...................................................26 Program Vision and Goals 5.1 Development Theme 1 Purpose 5.2 Development Theme 2 Methodology 5.3 Development Theme 3 Alignment 5.4 Development Theme 4 3. VANCOUVER, COAST 5.5 Development Theme 5 & MOUNTAINS OVERVIEW ............................................. 14 3.1 Introduce the region 6. IMPLEMENTATION FRAMEWORK ................................35 3.2 Map of Vancouver, Coast & Mountains 7. MEASURING AND MONITORING SUCCESS .............36 3.3 Visitor Markets 3.4 Summary
    [Show full text]
  • Public Comments on Preliminary Price Cap Decision for Next
    Public Comments on Preliminary Price Cap Decision for Next Performance Term June 30, 2019 # Date Comments 1 10-April-19 Hello there, I moved to Sandspit BC on Haida Qwaii in June of 2018. In my time here I have gotten to know a lot of the locals very well and a topic that comes up very often is the ferry and most of all how the reduced schedule of the Kwuna has negatively impacted the economy of Sandspit. Please bring back the pre 2014 ferry schedule, I would love to see this small beautiful town thrive. Thank you 2 11-April-19 Hello, I am a resident of the Sunshine Coast, having moved here about two and a half years ago from Surrey seeking a better quality of life for my family. While real estate is lower priced, the cost of living here on the Sunshine Coast is definitely higher (food etc). I urge you to consider keeping ferry fares as affordable as possible. It is like a highway system, and with gas prices as high as they are, higher ferry fares is a kind of double whammy for residents of the Sunshine Coast. All of my family (parents, siblings, nieces, nephews) live in the Fraser Valley and it is cost-prohibitive to visit them much already. 3 10-May-19 Is it possible to incorporate an island residents rate , to be compensated by tourist rates ? 4 13-June-19 If the media reports are true and the cost of renos for the above vessel exceeded the $50M cap for capital expenditures by 36%, why was there no section 55(2) application for the increased capital cost of the project? Thanks in advance.
    [Show full text]
  • 7.2 Marine Transportation
    Environmental Assessment Certificate Application Environmental Impact Statement AGGREGATE PROJECT Volume 2 7.2 Marine Transportation 7.2.1 Introduction This section of the Environmental Assessment Certificate (EAC) Application/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) (hereafter referred to as the EA.) has been prepared by Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder). It addresses the effects of the Proposed BURNCO Aggregate Project (hereafter referred to as the ‘Project’) identified in the construction, operation, reclamation and closure phases on valued components (VCs) related to Marine Transport. Consideration has been given to mitigation measures proposed to mitigate any identified effects to acceptable levels and any residual effects have been characterized. Additionally, consideration has also been given to cumulative effects of other reasonable foreseeable future projects in combination with the residual effects of the Proposed Project. Marine navigation and vessel wake have been selected as VCs as Project-related activities may interact with the public’s right to navigate within Howe Sound. The construction and operation of Project-related marine infrastructure (e.g., load out jetty) may interfere with navigation and could affect the public’s right to navigate or add a hazard to navigation. In addition, Project-related barging and water taxi traffic may interfere with navigation by vessels transporting cargo or passengers, fishing and recreational vessels. Navigable waters are defined as “any body of water capable of being navigated by any type of floating vessel for the purpose of transportation, recreation or commerce” (Transport Canada 2014a). This section has considered the potential of the Project to disrupt the movement of commercial and non-commercial marine traffic in navigable waters and also the associated wake effects of Project vessels.
    [Show full text]
  • Feedback and Engagement Report
    Feedback and Engagement Report Quarter ended September 30, 2018 (Q2 Fiscal 2019) Part A: Customer Initiated Feedback Q2 Fiscal 2019 Customer Initiated Feedback Comment Summary BC Ferries receives customer-initiated feedback through letters, emails, phone calls, tweets, Facebook posts and the online feedback form. Feedback tracked consists of a comment and an associated rating Distribution of Total Comments by assigned either by the customer through the online feedback form, or by Rating BC Ferries on feedback received through other channels. Total Comments = 4,265 (% rounded) During Q2 Fiscal 2019, 7.83 million customers travelled with BC Ferries, as compared to 7.81 million in Q2 Fiscal 2018. During this period: • A total of 4,265 comments were received, compared to 3,808 for 45% the same period in the prior year, an increase of 12% 1,925 • The average time to respond to customers was 23.2 days due to 32% the increase in feedback, traffic volumes and service recovery 1,373 required specifically for the northern routes, compared to 10.6 days for Q2 Fiscal 2018 • Positive feedback made up 9% of all customer comments 12% received, compared to 12% for Q2 Fiscal 2018 7% 498 312 2% 2% • The top five complaints represented 40% (1,725) of all comments 93 64 received, compared to 47.5% (1,139) for the top five in Q2 Fiscal 2018 Excellent Good OK Poor Bad No Rating Comments in this analysis exclude General comments and comments for which no rating is provided: Compliments Complaints • 265 General comments received were made up of community issues (133), company information (98) and environment (34) • 64 additional comments were provided with no rating There were 3,936 comments used for further analysis as they were 3 specific to a route or region.
    [Show full text]
  • Apodaca Mp.Pdf
    South Coast Region Parks and Outdoor Recreation Division Ministry of Lands, Parks and Housing APODACA PROVINCIAL PARK MASTER PLAN November, 1983 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE PART I: SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND A. PLAN SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................................. 1 B. REGIONAL AND PROVINCIAL CONTEXT .................................................................................................... 2 C. RESOURCES ........................................................................................................................................................... 4 1. Natural Resources .............................................................................................................................................. 4 2. Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................................................. 8 3. Visual Resources ...............................................................................................................................................10 4. Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................ 10 D. LAND TENURES, OCCUPANCY RIGHTS AND JURISDICTIONS ............................................................. 14 1. Leases and Use Permits ....................................................................................................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • Чаграк Н. І. COUNTRY STUDIES the United Kingdom of Great Britain
    Чаграк Н. І. COUNTRY STUDIES The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland The USA Canada Australia New Zealand Навчальний посібник для студентів вищих навчальних закладів Івано-Франківськ Гостинець 2010 1 УДК 811.111 ББК 81.2. Англ. Ч 12 Рецензенти: Ткачівський В.В. кандидат філологічних наук, доцент Петрик Т.В. кандидат філологічних наук, доцент Чаграк Н. І. Ч 12 Country Studies. Посібник для студентів вищих навчальних закладів. – Івано-Франківськ: Гостинець, 2010. – 158с. Посібник призначений для студентів фахових факультетів вищих навчальних закладів України за спеціальностями «Туризм», «Готельно-ресторанна справа», а також усіх, хто зацікавлений вивченням англомовних країн. Посібник містить інформацію країнознавчого, лінгвістичного, туристичного характеру, висвітлюючи різні аспекти сучасного життя і туристичний потенціал Великобританії, США, Канади, Австралії та Нової Зеландії. Затверджено до друку Вченою радою Інституту туризму Прикарпатського національного університету імені Василя Стефаника (Протокол № 1 від 27 серпня 2010 р.) 2 CONTENTS ПЕРЕДМОВА THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CANADA AUSTRALIA NEW ZEALAND SOURCE MATERIAL 3 ПЕРЕДМОВА Навчальний посібник з лінгвокраїнознавства є одним з перших, що розглядає англомовні країни в аспекті туризмознавства і розрахований для студентів фахових факультетів вищих навчальних закладів України за спеціальностями «Туризм», «Готельно- ресторанна справа». Посібник містить інформацію країнознавчого, лінгвістичного, туристичного характеру, висвітлюючи різні аспекти сучасного життя і туристичний потенціал Великобританії, США, Канади, Австралії та Нової Зеландії. Книга складається з 5 розділів, побудованих за єдиною структурою, до якої входять такі підрозділи, як короткі відомості з географії та демографії, економічного розвитку країни, характеристика систем державного управління, освіти, здоров’я, інформація про культуру, мови і національну кухню. Значну частину кожного розділу присвячено туристичному потенціалові країни.
    [Show full text]
  • Bowen Island Community School
    Bowen Island Community School Artisan Square Deep Bay Snug Cove Retail & Services Ferry Terminal Village Square MEDIUM DENSITY DEVELOPMENT SITE BOWEN ISLAND, BC Partnership. Performance. FOR SALE Medium Density Mixed-Use Development Site on Bowen Island Within Walking Distance to Snug Cove and the Ferry Terminal Rob Greer*, Principal Michael Emmott, Vice President 604.647.5084 604.647.1335 [email protected] [email protected] * Robert Greer Personal Real Estate Corporation BOWEN ISLAND “AREA 1” DEVELOPMENT SITE BOWEN ISLAND, BC Property Summary Opportunity Legal Description Avison Young is pleased to present the opportunity to acquire a prime LOT 1 DISTRICT LOT 490 GROUP 1 NEW medium density mixed-use development site on Bowen Island – one WESTMINSTER DISTRICT PLAN EPP68283PID of Vancouver’s premier locations for secondary residences and vacation properties. The subject site has a gross site area of 32,181 sf and a potential PID gross buildable area of 26,909 sf (as per the CD19- Area 1 zoning). 030-090-318 Site Size Location 32,181 sf The subject property consists of a 32,181 sf plot of land, ideally situated just a short walk from Snug Cove, Bowen Island’s ferry terminal and marina, Zoning with ferries linking Bowen Island to the mainland (20 minute journey). The Comprehensive Development Zone 19 (CD subject property neighbours the Bowen Island Community School and is 19 – Area 1) adjacent to “Village Square” (24,000 sf retail centre), providing convenient access to retail and services for residents of this property. Gross Buildable Area Residential Density 23,680 sf Commercial Density 3,229 sf Total Density 26,909 sf Financing BOWEN ISLAND Clear Title TRUNK ROAD Asking Price SENIOR ROAD Contact Listing Agents SUBJECT PROPERTY Subject Property SNUG COVE RETAIL DEEP BAY FERRY TERMINAL Views Across Howe Sound Snug Cove Marina Development Potential The land is zoned Comprehensive Development Zone 19 (CD 19 – Area 1).
    [Show full text]