Maura Jones
From: Oak Bay Council . Subject: RE: Regarding Cadboro Bay Rd/Bowker Ave redevelopment, discussion at Council 23 Jan
From: Samuel Mercer [mailto: Sent: January-20-17 4:55 PM To: Oak Bay Council
Dear Oak Bay Council,
Many thanks for your extensive time spent on 16 Jan in your Committee of the Whole to listen to local residents' feedback on the redevelopment of Cadboro Bay/Bowker. I wanted to share a few more thoughts on the proposed redevelopment to help you in your decisions in weighing various points of view.
Many of us on Bowker and in the immediate neighbourhood, as you heard, are now in support of the project based on the lengthy and multiple consultations and meetings we've had with Abstract and Cascadia Architects. Indeed an advantage of both companies being local and approachable is that, for example, some months ago when I popped unannounced into Cascadia, Peter Johannknecht kindly showed me the latest plans for the development and walked me through the recent changes at the time. I understand Peter is an Oak Bay resident, as is Mike Miller of Abstract, for example. And Abstract's Black and White redevelopment, also with Cascadia, at Fort and Cook is nearby both Cascadia's and Abstract's downtown offices. In this way, and with the retention of their ownership of the commercial spaces in Cadboro/Bowker, they "eat their own cooking" in the senses of (a) living and working nearby their developments, and (b) being aligned with local residents in being directly incentivised to find popular, economically vibrant commercial tenants.
Some opponents of the project voiced their opinion that more commercial units in the area are not needed. In response I would point out (a) as above, the developer retains the commercial incentive to find successful tenants, (b) the comer building is already commercial, (c) immediate local residents have already confirmed our specific desire for commercial which is incorporated in the plan, ( d) the OCP calls for a walkable (read: integrated local commercial) secondary village here.
Far from being overly enamoured with Abstract from the beginning, however, several of us immediately nearby residents were concerned about numerous aspects of the project in addition to the intersection safety, but these have been well addressed in my opinion. In fact an early neighbourhood session helped a great deal with this in which the nature of commercial offerings, building materials, and other gratifyingly tangible aspects were offered to the neighborhood and our feedback incorporated into subsequent plans you now see before you ( also having been improved by your design and planning committees).
As I mentioned during public comment on 16 Jan, while many of us in the immediate vicinity are near-obsessed with improving safety of what we view to be a broken, unfriendly and unsafe intersection, fully 100% of accountability and responsibility for that intersection cannot fairly, in my view, be placed at Abstract's feet. Abstract cautioned in early meetings that they would make best efforts to facilitate, and that they were incentivised to ensure a safe, walkable development, but that in the end the Municipality of Oak Bay was responsible for e.g. a traffic light. We accepted this as fair and logical. I feel the principle of a contribution of e.g. $50,000 as well as openness to design allowance for calming the intersection (through cafe design and outdoor seating, landscaping, narrowing, etc) is a positive contribution and I welcome it.
1 A recent letter to the editor in the Oak Bay news took issue with, among other things, the apparent negative impact of this development on safety of Willows and Oak Bay High students. I would argue the complete opposite: if anything I feel narrowing and e.g. a pedestrian-controlled light will not go far enough (I feel only a full traffic light, identical in reasoning to Bee-Street/Cadboro's light, will be sufficient). But at a minimum, I think the development will be a great positive to students as one main issue is simply getting people to slow down. I speak here as a parent of a Willows student, walking her to school regularly.
Margaret, the crossing guard at Willows on Cadboro, will I am sure gladly tell you upon request about her experiences of cars driving right through her crosswalk even as she is in the middle, displaying her sign. This is exacerbated by cars either coming at her out of Cadboro/Bowker at the physically encouraged high speed, or they are leaving the school zone and anticipating speeding up through the wide Cadboro/Bowker "NASCAR" curve before being forced to slow again at Oak Bay High.
History buffs will note that the right turn at Cadboro onto Bowker eastbound is arguably the oldest intersection in Oak Bay, or even Victoria, since one turned right off the road from the Fort onto Oak Bay Road (Bowker) to get to Oak Bay Farm (Tod, and later Bowker farms). The -1895 house opposite the corner redevelopment was apparently previously in the middle of the street but was moved in the 1920s to make this wide intersection. Arguably then it is vastly overdue for traffic control not only for pedestrians but the significant traffic turning right and left off Bowker north and southbound. However, we must surely intelligently address the blend of traffic engineering with Abstract's lot redevelopment. Again I think it is fair that they facilitate and contribute, but are not overly penalised for mere proximity to our traffic issue.
I hope this additional feedback is helpful. I strongly feel there is an element of opposition to this project which comes from residents further afield in Oak Bay, statutorily opposed to any and all development, especially a demonised "density". On the contrary I feel this project is reasonable, is in line with the surrounding multifamily apartment buildings and zoning (yet more attractive), and accommodates everything Oak Bay is trying to do in the OCP, with secondary villages, and with being a diverse and walkable community; not merely a hyper-Metchosin esque time capsule opposed to all development and determined to remain a stereotype of an enclave only for the rich and elderly.
All the best, and thank you for your time,
Samuel Mercer
2218 Bowker Ave
2 Maura Jones
From: Oak Bay Council Subject: RE: Submission: Negotiations for Cadboro/Bowker
-----Original Message---- From: Steve Bowker [mailto: Sent: January-21-17 12:34 PM To: Oak Bay Council
Dear Mayor in Council, District of Oak Bay, January 21, 2017 RE: Bargaining and Negotiations for Cadboro/Bowker (Submission for the January 23th Council Meeting)
You are now entering the negotiation and bargaining phase of the development application for the condo project at Cadboro/Condo. There is a lot to be negotiated and bargained for and the developer stated in one of their neighbourhood meetings that this phase may take up to a year while all of the details are worked out.
NOTE: Most other councils leave the final approval of the Zoning Bylaw until after all of the bargaining is completed. This because the Zoning Bylaw is the main leverage that a council has to ensure that the developer is bargaining in good faith.
For example, the latest condo development to be approved by Victoria Council for Cook Street Village stayed in the negotiation phase for almost two years, and only on December 8th 2106 was the Zoning Bylaw approved.
Follow this link to Victoria's Development Tracker website to see the full timeline and all associated docun:ients of the negotiations for Cook/Oliphant. https://tender.victoria.ca/tempestprod/ourcity/Prospero/Details.aspx?folderNumber=REZ00472 (or contact Charlotte Wain [email protected] 250-361-0340 if that folder becomes archived)
It would be wise to bookmark this link because that project is so very similar to the Cadboro/Bowker project in size and issues that it will present you with workable solutions to most of the issues that you, the planning office, and the developer will be pondering. The only major difference from a zoning perspective is that Cook/Oliphant is central to a busy shopping precinct, whereas Cadboro/Bowker is a buffer area where multi-family transitions to single family.
Yours truly, Stephen Bowker 2125 Quimper Street, Oak Bay,
1 Maura Jones
From: Oak Bay Council Subject: RE: Mayor in Council
From: Mary Douglas Hunt [mailto: Sent: January-21-17 3:53 PM To: Hazel Braithwaite
I want to draw your attention to the fact that on two separate and recent occasions I heard proponents for Abstract or Council members publicly declare that the Advisory Planning Commission recommended this Abstract condo development at the comer of Bowker Road and Cadboro Bay Road. That may be the case but they clearly did it under duress. I observed them suffering much angst regarding this decision and I was appalled to listen to Chair Copely and the Planner pushing them to make this happen, so the developer "Did not have to wait five or six weeks more for further discussion." Each Commission member emphatically requested that their statements be recorded in the mi:~mtes that you Council, need to see. Apparently these minutes take a month to be released. Not one of them was enthusiastic about this project. I suggest you talk to them.
There are many, many implications involved for all OakBay residents. These include: safety, taxation, infrastructure, and precedent setting, blasting and over deve1opment concerns.
As a comparison, staff initially recommended the Clive Apartment Development Proposal at Monterey and Oak Bay Avenue, be rejected by Council due to extensive massing and the many variances requested. However, after a yearlong process Council approved it on the basis of a covenant being agreed to, that would provide affordable, rental accommodation on a permanent basis. Council insisted and assured residents this would not set a precedent.
However this CadboroBay / Bowker development application has also requested extensive setbacks, and parking relaxations, and even more massing than the Clive requested and, has three times the number of units.
Some additional concerns are:
• The intersection has a history of traffic and safety problems; Bowker Avenue at this exact location had a major flooding in recent years. The Council Engineering Report stated the causes were the
1 aging infrastructure and very old valves on this and adjacent streets; • OakBay has only one water supply and if that is damaged or malfunctions has no back up system; • Neither the general community, the Administrations of nearby: Willows School, OakBayHigh School, or OakBay Lodge apparently have been notified; • OakBay Council has no Development Cost Charge schedules in place for developers to provide the Community with the appropriate level of impact funding, resulting from the impact of the development.
There are many other major concerns about this Project, not the least of which is the lack of information provided; consultation with the general Community by municipal staff and the fact the development has already been recommended by the Planning Department and the Chief Administrative Officer and Council's Advisory Planning Commission. The Commission was not provided any impact information.
I do not approve of this project as it stands. It appears that Abstract is more interested in how many people they can jam into this small area, rather than something tasteful, and more to size to further beautify Oak Bay. My question to you all is *Would you like this next to/across from your home?*
Sincerely,
Mary Douglas
2 Maura Jones
From: Oak Bay Council Subject: RE: Submission: Business Plan for Cadboro/Bowker
-----Original Message---- From: Steve Bowker [mailto: Sent: January-21-17 9:04 PM To: Oak Bay Council
Dear Mayor in Council, District of Oak Bay, January 21, 2017 RE: Missing Business Plan for Cadboro/Bowker (Submission for the January 23th Council Meeting)
Absent from the presentation by the developer of the Cadboro/Bowker condo project, was a Business Plan.
Developer/investors of such a large, costly, mixed use project would have a formal Business Plan. This is especially true of this location where businesses have failed in the past. Specific research and information from that plan should have been presented to the council as part of the presentation, because the information is just as important to Council as it is to the investors.
From that plan, council should request recent information about: 1) The marketing assumptions including demographics, and price comparisons per sq ft(m) for comparable types and classes of buildings. 2) Average absorption rates for residential and retail properties in adjacent neighborhoods 3) Average commercial rental rates compared to what rates can be expected by this project 4) Projections of customer volume needed to support the commercial space 5) Anticipated commercial leasing arrangements, and an alternative plan for the space if not successful
Such information from their Business Plan would provide research based insight into the economic, social, and environmental benefits of this project to our community.
Yours truly, Stephen Bowker
2125 Quimper St, Oak Bay, BC
1 Maura Jones
From: Oak Bay Council Subject: RE: The proposed development at Cadboro Bay Rd. and Bowker Ave. by Abstract
From: danalee goldthwaite [mailto: Sent: January-22-17 12:44 PM To: Oak Bay Council
To Oak Bay Council and Mayor:
I am writing to let you know that I completely agree with the comments that Bruce Filan made to you in writing after the Committee of the Whole meeting on Jan. 16, 2017. Development in Oak Bay ruining this municipality and there is no end in sight.
I'd like to emphasize that the wanton destruction of trees and green space (including established private gardens) in our village by the sea is aesthetically and morally reprehensible. It's also incompatible with maintaining the urban forest canopy that we hear so much about.
Case in point: Recent creation of the Fair Street subdivision in my neighbourhood entailed clear cutting two generously treed lots with a magnificent variety of tall species. The street scape is now hid~ous and the 4 monster houses (which are by no means "affordable") required destroying all of the green space. Now this area boasts a total of 10 replanted spindly trees not likely to ever reach 20 feet in height. I guess that means the developer adhered to the rules. Sigh.
I note that on the comer of Fort and Cook Streets Abstract has begun a development that is taking down 10 or 15 street trees. Street trees, for goodness sake! Why would Oak Bay want to encourage a developer who behaves this way even if he/she is allowed to?
How about if our charming village were to show some real leadership regarding development, just as it has done recently with deer management? The Vancouver area and many parts of greater Victoria talk about "green" but don't walk the walk. Technically green refers to chlorophyl and the process of photosynthesis that creates it. But in practice it has come to refer to money-- how to make big profits by destroying the natural environment and spinning the results. Could Oak Bay strive to be green the old fashioned, honest way?
Yours truly,
Danalee Goldthwaite, Oak Bay
1 Maura Jones
From: Oak Bay Council Subject: RE: Cadboro/Bowker (Submission for the January 23rd Council Meeting)
From: dylan dawson [mailto: Sent: January-22-17 8:22 PM To: Mayor Nils Jensen
Mayor in Council, Oak Bay;
As an Oak Bay resident and homeowner whose property (2268 Bowker Avenue) is directly adjacent to the proposed Abstract development, I am writing to voice my concerns, for inclusion in the January 23rd council ~~ .
My greatest concern is the size, specifically the height, setback, and the overall number of dwellings. At four stories, this development will be the only thing visible from the front of multiple homes in the neighbourhood; it will cast a shadow over the much of the front of our properties for many months of the year. The number of dwellings that will have windows directly facing these properties is a privacy concern, as is parking for the number of vehicles associated with those dwellings.
To summarize, I have a number of concerns, based on what I have learned from the Abstract design review at Oak Bay Rec. on January 11th. These are as follows:
• Height o Replacing a small footprint two story building with a large footprint four story building that is built to the property line will negatively impact the neighbouring properties and the neighbourhood.
• Number of dwellings o The number of windows facing adjacent properties is too large. o Access to the proposed 59 underground parking spaces, as well as visitor parking, will be from Bowker Avenue - significantly increasing the amount of traffic on this already busy road.
• Parking o The number of parking spaces required to support residents, visitors, and commercial customers is much too small. There is insufficient parking at present on local streets, especially on Bowker Avenue.
• Property line o Building a structure this large so close to the property line will create an imposing structure in a family neighbourhood, and make a large building seem much larger.
• Traffic and safety o The intersection of Cadboro Bay and Bowker is already a dangerous one. Parallel parking on Cadboro Bay road immediately following this intersection will be dangerous. o Much traffic, including all of the traffic for the 59 proposed parking spaces, will be routed down Bowker Avenue, compromising the safely of residents and their children.
1 o The proposed bike lane along Cadboro Bay Road will be ign~red in favour of Bowker Avenue. o This development will draw many pedestrians, including those from Oak Bay High School, toward an intersection that is already considered dangerous by many residents.
I suggest limiting the height to two stories and increasing the setback; this will adequately address the need to update this property while leaving the neighbouring properties and surrounding neighbourhood relatively undisturbed. Limiting the height to two stories will preserve the commercial spaces that visitors will be drawn to, while reducing the traffic, parking, privacy, and safety burdens presented from too many residential dwellings.
Thank you,
Dylan G. Dawson
....2268 Bowker Avenue
2 Maura Jones
From: Oak Bay Council . Subject: FW: Proposed Bowker Development
From: Luke Mills [mailto: Sent: January-22-17 10:44 PM To: Oak Bay Council
Dear Oak Bay Council,
I understand you are meeting on January 23 rd to discuss the proposed residential/commercial development at Bowker and Cadboro Bay. I live at 2973 Ashdowne Road and have resided in the Lansdowne slope area since 2002. As a resident of the area I am very excited for the proposed development and strongly urge council to consider its approval for the following reasons:
• Tasteful densification in Oak Bay is badly needed if we are to remain a vibrant community with a growing tax base;
• We need more options for Oak Bay residents wishing to downsize from single family homes;
• There is a dearth of quality commercial space in Oak Bay and I am excited for more local retail choices and the opportunity to spend my retail dollars in the immediate community;
• The proposed design looks very attractive and integrates contemporary urban design concepts into the neighbourhood while beautifying what is currently a staid streetscape;
• I like how the design envisions a pedestrian friendly environment.
Thank v.ou for reading. I look forward to the outcome.
Sincerely,
Luke
Luke Mills, BA, CIP, CRM, CAIB
1 Maura Jones
From: Oak Bay Council Subject: FW: Bowker development
From: Kelly, Heather A Sent: January-23-17 12:03 PM To: Oak Bay Council
Dear Mayor and Municipal Council,
I am writing to voice my concerns over the proposed Abstract Development project at Cadboro Bay Road and Bowker Avenue. I live on Bowker Avenue.
At first I supported this project. There already is a mixed use building at that corner and I figured this would improve on that. But then I heard about the proposed plans; the density, setbacks, parking solution, and proposed height all set off major red flags.
My main concern is in regards to the proposed front lot line setback and overall lot coverage.
The zoning bylaw requires the following minimum setbacks:
(i) Front lot line 10.70 m (35') (ii) Rear lot line 10.70 m (35') (iii) Interior side lot line 6.00 m (20') (iv) Exterior side lot line 10.70 m (35')
The lot coverage maximum is set at 30% in the zoning bylaws.
The current plan proposed by Abstract does not meet these basic zoning requirements. The proposed four storey bui.lding is just too large for the lot. I invite you to stand at the corner of Cadboro Bay Road and Bowker Avenue with an image of the proposed development. It's massive. It doesn't fit with the neighbourhood. It will cast a shadow on Bowker Ave.
A little further down the road towards Eastdown, there is a multi-unit apartment building. Because of the larger setback from the road this building doesn't tower over its neighbours. There are large trees out front and a large parking lot behind the building. This is an example of a building being built to suit the size of the property.
I've been having discussions of whether we should sell our home before they break ground because this thing might seriously affect not only our market value, but our privacy and enjoyment we get from our home. We love this neighbourhood. I have a child at Willows Elementary and this community meets so many of our needs. We don't want to move and we don't want a giant development towering over us.
Thank you for reading my letter and discussing this issue at tonight's council meeting.
1 Leona Frenette
1958 Hampshire Road
Victoria, BC - V8R ST8
January 23, 2017
Mayor and Council
Municipality of Oak Bay, British Columbia
Zoning Amendment Application {ZON00023) - Cadboro Bay Road, Bowker Avenue
I !iUpport the Abstract application for rezoning and development (ZON00023) at the corner of Cadboro Bay Road and Bowker Avenue. I believe that this is the right development for this location and encourage you to adopt staff's recommendations.
This applicant has met and dialogued with municipal staff, local residents (self included) over the course of the last year. They have been considerate and proactive to include as many neighbours that have shown interest including those not immediately impacted. They have addressed concerns and shown a willingness to adapt, modify and embrace recommendations from staff, the "design panel"and neighbours. Michelle Kirby was present at every meeting and it would have been very beneficial to have · other members of council present to see the process we went through.
Much discussion at the Committee of the Whole of January 16, 2017 was about setbacks and massing. I can well imagine what past residents and Council may have contemplated with the mixed residential commercial buildings (with no setbacks) built at Estevan and Dalhousie. These have blended beautifully and have become a significant part of the Estevan Village community.
I realize that this development may be seen as bold but it is in keeping with the vision of the Official Community Plan and has been positively embraced by the neighbourhood and endorsed by staff. It is my clear belief that this will create a revitalization in this often forgotten area will become a gathering place and provide much visual interest.
Please continue the dialogue with Abstract and consider this as an opportunity to make real and thoughtful safety and amenity improvements to the intersection.
You have the right developer for this project with a real commitment to building a sustainable project that meets the need for immediate community. This will lend much to enhancing the urban directions we must take to be an economically and socially responsible community.
Sincerely,
Leona Frenette Maura Jones
From: Oak Bay Council Subject: RE: Bowker Development - Resident feedback for consideration tonight
From: Fraser, Dylan [mailto: Sent: January-23-17 2:41 PM To: Oak Bay Council
Dear Council Members,
First, I want to say thank you for the opportunity to speak at last week's meeting regarding the proposed development on Bowker Avenue. It was a learning experience for myself and I greatly appreciated hearing the many perspectives of our community and council members. I wanted to provide a brief follow up to my comments in the meeting in hopes that they may be considered as part of tonight's meeting. I will aim to keep these concise and to the point as I know you have received a high volume of submissions with some being rather lengthy.
While I appreciate the involvement of any Oak Bay residents in the decisions made throughout our community, it is my sincerest hope that the residents living on the street and within the immediate area are given a strong voice in this process. It was evident from hearing the public speakers that the residents in the immediate vicinity have all been working collaboratively with Abstract over the past year and feel that they have responded well to our concerns and suggestions. From my interactions, I have not heard any negative feedback from anyone living on our block. Several citizens who did not live in the immediate vicinity chose to disregard our support as "anecdotal evidence" that should be replaced with pages upon pages of mundane data points. One gentleman went as far as to challenge the Official Community Plan entirely and suggested that us local residents can simply walk to Pure Vanilla or even to Greater Victoria (Fort/Foul Bay) should we feel the need. I hope that this will be dismissed and that that the anecdotes you heard from concerned parents who own houses on this block are considered. It is only a matter of time until there is a bad accident or pedestrian death at that intersection. While it is not the focus of this approval, it certainly appears that this development will lend itself to better protecting pedestrians at that corner. I see this as an opportunity for council to tackle two issues at once; creating a vibrant secondary village as planned and also slowing down traffic to better protect pedestrians.
Traffic seemed to be the most concerning topic for many of the folks who were not supportive of the process rather than focusing on the development itself. The general message I picked up from the comments was that it is simply not a safe corner due to high traffic usage and it is not suitable for the development. I disagree and really this goes back to the Official Community Plan which should be a separate top. This section of road is flanked by two school zones for Oak Bay High and Willows Elementary as well as a 40 km/hr zone outside of the Food Forum and Pure Vanilla location. It would be in our best interest to build something in this development location to align with the traffic speeds immediately before and after this section of road.
I also want to strongly reiterate that the design process has gone through several iterations and our feedback was actioned on. Abstract listened to our feedback of no commercial space facing Bowker. They also went back to the drawings to amend the entire top floor to give less of an imposing and "boxy" look that the other apartments nearby have. It is a challenging property to build on given the shape of the site. The residents on our block are happy with the design and feel it represents what we are looking for. I did appreciate the comments made by counsel that the commercial space comes right to the sidewalk but that aligns with the existing layout that we have. The key difference is we will have a beautifully designed building that will attract some interesting tenants. We want to have people slow down while walking by and look into windows, similar to Oak Bay Avenue and Estevan Village. We want to have more people around so that cars slow down and take care when passing through. This design lends itself to what the local residents are looking for in this space and while I
1 greatly appreciate the due diligence required entire_ly outside of my knowledge around bylaws, I hope that this will be considered as part of the process.
My greatest concern is that there are a handful of young families and residents, such as Andrea and I, whom have bought properties on this block in the past 5 years. We all purchased these homes knowing that there was an Official Community Plan in place that would look to restore and revitalize the corner of Cadboro Bay Road and Bowker Avenue. If we deny the Abstract Development proposal after over a year of working closely with the local residents, what message will we be sending to both the community and other developers? How long will it be before anyone else attempts to revitalize this corner?
In closing, we have a viable and well thought out solution in front of us that will both revitalize the corner and resolve a long standing pedestrian risk. I hope that we can continue the collaborative process and move forward with this development. I will continue to support and please let me know if there is anything further I can do to be of service to this process. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Best Regards,
Dylan and Andrea Fraser 2222 Bowker Avenue
Best Regards,
Dylan Fraser
2