NOTICE OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF OAK BAY TO BE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, OAK BAY MUNICIPAL HALL, 2167 OAK BAY AVENUE, VICTORIA, BC, ON MONDAY JANUARY 22, 2018. ADJOURNMENT TO IN CAMERA AT 6:00 PM AND REGULAR BUSINESS AT 7:00 PM.
WE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE LAND ON WHICH WE GATHER IS THE TRADITIONAL TERRITORY OF THE COAST AND STRAITS SALISH PEOPLES. SPECIFICALLY WE RECOGNIZE THE LEKWUNGEN SPEAKING PEOPLE, KNOWN TODAY AS THE SONGHEES AND ESQUIMALT NATIONS, AND THAT THEIR HISTORIC CONNECTIONS TO THESE LANDS CONTINUE TO THIS DAY.
PLEASE NOTE: VIDEO RECORDINGS OF MEETINGS ARE STREAMED LIVE AND ARCHIVED ON THE MUNICIPAL WEBSITE
AMENDED AGENDA (See Item No. 6)
ADJOURNMENT TO IN CAMERA:
1. Motion to Adjourn to In Camera
Moved by: Seconded by:
That: 1. in accordance with sections 90(1)(a), the open portion of the meeting of Council will be adjourned to discuss: personal information about identifiable individuals who hold or are being considered for a position as an officer, employee or agent of the municipality or another position appointed by the municipality. 2. The open portion of the meeting reconvene at 7:00 PM
OPEN PORTION OF THE MEETING TO RECONVENE AT 7:00 PM:
MINUTES AND REPORTS:
2. Council January 8, 2018
3. Committee of the Whole January 15, 2018
Page 1 of 172 MAYOR'S REMARKS:
4. Mayor's Remarks Mayor's Remarks Procedure Sheet
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PERIOD:
5. This is an opportunity for members of the public in attendance at the meeting to address Council regarding topics that directly impact the District of Oak Bay.
Please join us at the podium and: • State your name, municipality of residence and the topic of your remarks; • Print your name and municipality of residence on the speakers’ sheet; • Keep your remarks brief, not exceeding 3 minutes; and • Address all comments through the Chair.
Speakers should note that video recordings of Council meetings are streamed live and archived on the municipal website. A total time of twenty (20) minutes is allotted by the Procedure Bylaw for the entire public participation period during a Council meeting. Public Participation Procedure Sheet
COMMUNICATIONS:
6. Capital Regional District Transportation Service Establishment Bylaw 4093, 2018 Addenda - Presentation - CRD - Regional Transportation Service, Received January 19, 2018 Note - Director of Corporate Services - CRD Bylaw No. 4093 Corresp. - Council Support for Bylaw 4093 - CRD, Jan. 12, 2018 Rpt. Attach 1 - Frequently Asked Questions Bylaw 4093, Jan. 2018 Capital Regional District Transportation Service Establishment Bylaw No. 4093, 2018
7. Request for Early Capital Approval - Replacement of Condenser Report - Director of Financial Services, Jan. 22, 2018
8. Municipal Reserve Funds Report Report - Director of Financial Services, Jan. 22, 2018
Page 2 of 172
9. Heritage Revitalization Agreement (HRA00004) and Heritage Designation (HAD00008)- 638 / 644 Beach Drive Report - Acting Director of Building and Planning, Jan. 16, 2018 Bylaw No. 4697, 638 and 644 Beach Drive Heritage Designation Bylaw, 2018 Bylaw No. 4698, 638 and 644 Beach Drive Heritage Revitalization Agreement Authorization Bylaw, 2018 Bylaw No. 4698, Schedule 'A' - Heritage Revitalization Agreement Bylaw No. 4698, Schedule 1 - Plan of Subdivision Bylaw No. 4698, Schedule 2 - Conservation Plan Bylaw No. 4698, Appendix A - Research Summary Bylaw No. 4698, Appendix B - Drawings Bylaw No. 4698, Schedule 3 - Plans and Drawings Bylaw No. 4698, Schedule 4 - Confirmation of Commitment Bylaw No. 4698, Schedule 5 - Certificate of Compliance Bylaw No. 4698, Schedule 6 - Variances to the District of Oak Bay Zoning Bylaw No. 3531, 1986
10. Building and Planning Department Monthly Report of Active Land Use Applications
Report - Acting Director of Building and Planning, Jan. 12, 2018
11. Oak Bay Advisory Planning Commission Minutes Note - Deputy Director of Corporate Services - APC Minutes - Oct. 3, 2017 Minutes, APC, October 3, 2017
12. Oak Bay Heritage Commission 2017 Annual Report Note - Deputy Director of Corporate Services - Referral of Oak Bay Heritage Commission 2017 Annual Report Report - Oak Bay Heritage Commission Chair, Received Dec. 2017
13. Oak Bay Heritage Commission Minutes Note - Deputy Director of Corporate Services - HComm Minutes - Nov. 14, 2017 and Dec. 12, 2017 Minutes, Heritage Commission, November 14, 2017 Minutes, Heritage Commision, December 12, 2017
Page 3 of 172 CORRESPONDENCE - UPCOMING AGENDA ITEM(S):
14. No new correspondence to be received at this time
NEW BUSINESS/REPORTS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES:
15. New Business & Verbal Reports • New Business • Report on the Capital Regional District • Other Verbal Reports
RESOLUTIONS:
17. 2018 BC Mayors' Caucus Resolution Notice - Attendance at the BC Mayor's Caucus
18. 2018 Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities Convention Resolution Notice - Attendance at the Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities Convention 2018
BYLAWS:
19. Bylaw Memorandum Bylaw Memorandum - Deputy Director of Corporate Services, Jan. 18, 2018
20. For First and Second Reading and Setting of a Public Hearing Date Zoning Bylaw Amendment Bylaw No. 3531.102, 2018 Plans - ZON - 687 697 St Patrick Street, Oct. 19, 2017 Report - Acting Director of Building and Planning, Jan. 2, 2018 Rpt. Attach. 2 - Parking Review, Watt Consulting, Oct. 16, 2017 Rpt. Attach. 3 - Arborist Report, May. 10, 2017 Rpt. Attach. 4 - Draft Zoning Amendment Bylaw
ADJOURNMENT:
21. Motion to Adjourn
Page 4 of 172 MINUTES of the meeting of the MUNICIPAL COUNCIL of The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay, held in the Council Chambers, Oak Bay Municipal Hall, 2167 Oak Bay Avenue, Victoria, B.C., on Monday January 8, 2018 at 7:00 PM.
We acknowledge that the land on which we gather is the traditional territory of the Coast and Straits Salish Peoples. Specifically we recognize the Lekwungen speaking people, known today as the Songhees and Esquimalt Nations, and that their historic connections to these lands continue to this day.
PRESENT: Mayor N. Jensen, Chair Councillor H. Braithwaite Councillor T. Croft Councillor M. Kirby Councillor K. Murdoch Councillor T. Ney Councillor E. Zhelka
STAFF: Chief Administrative Officer, H. Koning Director of Corporate Services, W. Jones Director of Financial Services, D. Carter Acting Director of Building and Planning, D. Jensen Director of Engineering Services, D. Horan
CALL TO ORDER:
1. Motion to amend agenda
MOVED and seconded: That the agenda be amended to bring forward Item 8, Greater Victoria Public Library 2018 Final Budget and 2018 – 2022 Five Year Financial Plan for consideration in advance of the Minutes and Reports Section and to include consideration of a resolution to issue DVP00031 as Item No. 14, as circulated on the amended agenda.
CARRIED
COMMUNICATIONS:
2. Greater Victoria Public Library 2018 Final Budget and 2018 - 2022 Five Year Financial Plan Note - Deputy Director of Corporate Services - Greater Victoria Public Library - Budget 2018 Presentation - 2018 Library Budget - GVPL, Jan. 8, 2018 Corresp. - 2018 Budget and Five Year Financial Plan - GVPL, Oct. 31, 2017 Corresp. - 2018 Final Budget and 2018 - 2022 Five Year Financial Plan - GVPL, Received Oct. 31, 2017
R. Martin, Board Chair and M. Sawa, CEO of the Greater Victoria Public Library appeared to present the Library’s 2018 budget and 2018 – 2022 Five Year Financial Plan.
1
Page 5 of 172 District of Oak Bay Council Meeting Monday, January 8, 2018
MOVED and seconded: That Oak Bay’s share of the 2018 operating budget for the Greater Victoria Public Library in the amount of $1,166,022.00 be approved.
CARRIED
MINUTES AND REPORTS:
3. Council September 11, 2017 September 18, 2017
Special Council December 11, 2017 December 18, 2017
Committee of the Whole September 18, 2017 December 11, 2017
Public Hearing September11, 2017
MOVED and seconded: That the minutes of the Council meetings held September 11 and 18, 2017; Special Council Meetings held December 11 and 18, 2017; Committee of the Whole Meetings held September 18 and December 11, 2017; and Public Hearing held September 11, 2017 be adopted.
CARRIED
MAYOR’S REMARKS
4. Mayor Jensen expressed the community’s great sorrow resulting from the tragic deaths of two young girls on December 25, 2017. He expressed Council’s appreciation for the community’s support for the family and he thanked the many people who assisted in organizing the candle light vigil.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PERIOD:
5 The following person addressed Council during the Public Participation Period:
K. Jordan, Oak Bay, thanked Council for its role in organizing the December 31, 2017 candle light vigil.
2
Page 6 of 172 District of Oak Bay Council Meeting Monday, January 8, 2018
COMMUNICATIONS:
6. Request for Early Capital Approval - Fireman's Park Retaining Wall & Dugout Replacement Report – Director Parks, Recreation & Culture, Jan. 8, 2018
MOVED and seconded: That early approval of $47,000, with $17,000 of those funds to come from Carnarvon Minor Baseball, be granted to allow for replacement of the retaining wall and dugouts at the lower diamond at Fireman's Park.
CARRIED
7. Heritage Foundation Grant Report - Director of Financial Services, Jan. 8, 2018
MOVED and seconded: That Council direct staff to process the Victoria Foundation cheque for $1,298.00, and in turn issue a grant to the Oak Bay Heritage Foundation for the same amount, indicating that it is to be used towards its Endowment Fund.
CARRIED
8. Public Works Goods and Services Tender Awards Report - Deputy Director of Financial Services, Jan. 8, 2018
MOVED and seconded: That Council award the tenders as follows: PW01-2018 - Backhoe Rental Tender - Northridge Excavating Ltd, based on low bid; PW02-2018 - Gravel Supply Tender - Lehigh Materials, based on low bid; PW03-2018 - Ready Mix Concrete Tender - Trio Ready Mix, based on low bid; and PW04-2018 - Tandem Truck Rental Tender - Lopeter Trucking Ltd, based on low bid..
CARRIED
3
Page 7 of 172 District of Oak Bay Council Meeting Monday, January 8, 2018
NEW BUSINESS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES
9. Bowker Creek 100 Year Plan Councillor Kirby reported that as liaison to School District No. 61 she has encouraged the School District to endorse and participate in the Bowker Creek 100 Year Plan.
Public Engagement Task Force
MOVED and seconded: That the following persons be appointed to the Public Engagement Task Force: Councillor Ney (Chair) Councillor Kirby Councillor Zhelka Jan Mears Andrew Appleton Naomi Pope Esther Paterson
MOTION AMENDED
MOVED and seconded: That the previous motion be amended by adding “and upon Council agreement that further members may appointed to the Task Force:”
CARRIED
Councillor Braithwaite registered opposition.
MOVED and seconded: That the following persons be appointed to the Public Engagement Task Force: Councillor Ney (Chair) Councillor Kirby Councillor Zhelka Jan Mears Andrew Appleton Naomi Pope Esther Paterson
and that and upon Council agreement that further members may appointed to the Task Force.
MOTION TABLED
MOVED and seconded: That the previous motion be tabled indefinitely.
CARRIED
The Director of Corporate Services advised that the Mayor has the authority to establish the Task Force and appoint its members.
4
Page 8 of 172 District of Oak Bay Council Meeting Monday, January 8, 2018
Verbal Reports
The Mayor reported that it appears that an agreement had been reached on the CRD Regional Growth Strategy and that the revised strategy will come back before Council for consideration.
Councillor Braithwaite reminded Council that the “YES Awards” are coming up in May and she hoped that all members of Council would be able to attend.
Councillor Zhelka thanked his Council colleagues for their patience during his recent absence.
Councillor Murdoch said that given recent assessment changes that Council should be aware of potential increases to the District’s CRD costs.
ADDENDA:
10. Development Variance Permit Application (DVP00031) - 1605 York Place Resolution Notice - 1605 York Place Report - Acting Director of Building and Planning, December 5, 2017 Rpt. Attach. Draft Development Variance Permit (DVP00031) - 1605 York Place Development Variance Permit Application Notice - DVP00031 - 1605 York Place Feb. COW Memorandum - Manager of Planning, Feb. 14, 2017 Jan. COW Report - Manager of Planning, Jan. 10, 2017 Plans - ZON DVP -1605 York Pl, Sept 20, 2016 Corresp. - Received Apr. 18, 2016 - Feb. 20, 2017
MOVED and seconded: That the Acting Director of Building and Planning be authorized to issue Development Variance Permit DVP00031 with respect to 1605 York Place, as appended to the Council agenda of January 8, 2018.
No members of the public rose to speak on this item.
CARRIED
5
Page 9 of 172 District of Oak Bay Council Meeting Monday, January 8, 2018
ADJOURNMENT:
11. Motion to Adjourn.
MOVED and seconded: That the meeting be adjourned.
CARRIED
The meeting adjourned at 8:04 PM.
Certified Correct:
Mayor Director of Corporate Services
6
Page 10 of 172 MINUTES of a regular meeting of COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE of the Municipal Council of The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay, held in the Council Chambers, Oak Bay Municipal Hall, 2167 Oak Bay Avenue, Victoria, B.C., on Monday January 15, 2018 at 7:00 PM.
We acknowledge that the land on which we gather is the traditional territory of the Coast and Straits Salish Peoples. Specifically we recognize the Lekwungen speaking people, known today as the Songhees and Esquimalt Nations, and that their historic connections to these lands continue to this day.
PRESENT: Councillor M. Kirby, Chair Mayor N. Jensen Councillor H. Braithwaite Councillor T. Croft Councillor K. Murdoch Councillor T. Ney Councillor E. W. Zhelka
STAFF: Chief Administrative Officer, H. Koning Deputy Director of Corporate Services, M. Jones Acting Director of Building and Planning, D. Jensen Director of Engineering Services, D. Horan
MOVED and seconded: That agenda item no. 10, Oak Bay United Church Affordable Housing Proposed Development - 2095 Granite Street, be brought forward for consideration as the next item in the meeting.
DEFEATED Mayor Jensen and Councillors Braithwaite, Croft, Kirby, Murdoch, Ney
PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURE ITEM(S):
The Director of Parks, Recreation and Culture, R. Herman and the Chair of the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission, M. Holding in attendance for this section of the meeting.
1. Parks Recreation and Culture Commission Minutes Note - Deputy Director of Corporate Services - PR&CComm Minutes, Dec. 6, 2017 and Jan. 3, 2018 Minutes - PR&CComm - Jan. 3, 2018 Rpt. Attach. 1 - Program, Parks and Physical Plant Report, Dec. 2017 Corresp. Bike Thefts - Smeltzer, Dec. 28, 2017 Minutes - PR&CComm - Dec 6, 2017 Rpt. Attach. 1 - Program, Parks and Physical Plant Report, Nov. 2017
MOVED and seconded: That the minutes of the meetings of the Oak Bay Parks Recreation and Culture Commission held December 6, 2017 and January 3, 2018, and the recommendations contained therein, be adopted.
CARRIED
1
Page 11 of 172 District of Oak Bay Committee of the Whole Monday, January 15, 2018
2. Donation of Public Art "Bodhi Frog" Report - Director of Parks, Recreation and Culture, Jan. 15, 2018
MOVED and seconded: That it be recommended that Council accept the donation of the Bodhi Frog and include the art work in the permanent Public Art collection of the municipality.
CARRIED
3. Purchase of Public Art "The Hunt" Report - Director of Parks, Recreation and Culture, Jan. 15, 2018
MOVED and seconded: That it be recommended that Council purchase The Hunt with funds from the Public Art Fund.
CARRIED
Mr. Herman and Mr. Holding then left the meeting and did not return.
ENGINEERING SERVICES ITEM(S):
4. Change Request - Limited Time Parking - 1280 Newport Avenue Report - Director of Engineering Services, Jan. 8, 2018
No members of the public rose to speak.
MOVED and seconded: That it be recommended to Council that staff bring forward a Traffic Control Order to change one of the parking spaces in the parking bay at 1280 Newport Avenue to 2-hour parking, 9:00am to 5:00pm, Monday to Saturday.
CARRIED
5. Request for Second Driveway - 2067 Crescent Road Report - Director of Engineering Services, Jan. 9, 2018 Plans - Proposed Driveway - 2067 Crescent Road, Oct. 4, 2017
No members of the public rose to speak.
MOVED and seconded: That it be recommended to Council that the application for a second driveway at 2067 Crescent Road be approved.
CARRIED
Mr. Horan then left the meeting and did not return.
2
Page 12 of 172 District of Oak Bay Committee of the Whole Monday, January 15, 2018
LAND USE APPLICATIONS:
6. Architectural Siting and Design (ADP00084) - 2391 Lansdowne Road Report - Acting Director of Building and planning, January 4, 2018 Plans - ADP - 2391 Lansdowne, Jan. 9, 2018
No members of the public rose to speak.
MOVED and seconded: That it be recommended to Council that the proposal to construct a principal building at 2391 Lansdowne Road, as outlined in the January 4, 2018 report for ADP00084, be approved as to architectural design and siting.
CARRIED
7. Development Variance Permit Application (DVP00068) Uplands Siting and Design (ADP00073) - 3245 Beach Drive Report - Acting Director of Building and Planning, Jan. 3, 2018 Plans - DVP ADP - 3245 Beach, Jan. 3, 2018 Rpt. Attach. 2 - Arborist Memo, Aug. 17, 2017 Rpt. Attach. 3 - Draft Development Variance Permit DVP00068
James Sultanum, Oak Bay resident, asked if the intent of the proposal is to use the accessory building for other purposes than a garage. He also asked for clarification if the proposal includes adding wiring and plumbing for a kitchen. He concluded his remarks by asking if the District requires a declaration that homeowners will not use an accessory building for anything other than their intended use.
In response to Mr. Sultanum, Ms. Jensen noted that there is plumbing proposed for the accessory building to accommodate a two-piece bathroom and that the design is for storage use. She noted that the District does not require any declarations regarding the use of accessory buildings.
MOVED and seconded: That: a) it be recommended to Council that the application to construct an addition to the existing detached garage at 3245 Beach Drive be approved as to architectural design and siting subject to approval of DVP00068; and b) notification be given of Council's consideration of DVP00068.
CARRIED
8. Development Variance Permit Application (DVP00073) Uplands Sitting and Design (ADP00080) - 3065 Uplands Road Report - Acting Director of Building and Planning, Jan. 4, 2018 Plans - DVP ADP - 3065 Uplands Road, Nov. 1, 2017 Rpt. Attach. 2 - Arborist Memo, Nov. 24, 2017 Rpt. Attach. 3 - Draft Development Variance Permit DVP00073
No members of the public rose to speak.
3
Page 13 of 172 District of Oak Bay Committee of the Whole Monday, January 15, 2018
MOVED and seconded: That a) it be recommended to Council that the application to undertake alterations to an existing accessory building at 3065 Uplands Road be approved as to Architectural Siting and Design; and that b) notification be given of Council's consideration of DVP00073.
CARRIED
9. Zoning Amendment (ZON00029) - 687 / 697 St. Patrick Street Report - Acting Director of Building and Planning, Jan. 2, 2018 Plans - ZON - 687 697 St Patrick Street, Oct. 19, 2017 Rpt. Attach. 2 - Parking Review, Watt Consulting, Oct. 16, 2017 Rpt. Attach. 3 - Arborist Report, May. 10, 2017 Rpt. Attach. 4 - Draft Zoning Amendment Bylaw
James Sultanum, Oak Bay resident, commented that the proposed addition of service use seems very broad. He asked if service use is defined in the bylaw and if there are any conditions associated with the application of the term. He asked what the impact would be if a different type of business was opened on the site.
In response to Mr. Sultanum, Ms. Jensen confirmed that service use is already defined in the Zoning Bylaw and that an future business on the site would need to meet the requirements and conditions for the zone.
MOVED and seconded: That it be recommended to Council to consider the application to allow Service Business Use for the property at 687 / 697 St Patrick Street and consider a draft bylaw to include Service Business Use within the Local Commercial Use (C-1) zone.
CARRIED
10. Oak Bay United Church Affordable Housing Proposed Development - 2095 Granite Street Report - Acting Director of Building and Planning, Jan. 5, 2018 Rpt. Attach. 1 - Corresp. - Oak Bay United Church, Dec. 10, 2017 Addenda - Corresp. Oak Bay Affordable Housing Proposed Development - Jan. 11, 2018 to Jan. 15, 2018 Addenda - Corresp. - Applicant - Oak Bay Affordable Housing Proposed Devlopment - Thomas, Jan. 14, 2018
A recess was called and the meeting reconvened at 7:50 PM.
Kim Fowler, representing the Oak Bay United Church, made a presentation to the Committee commenting that the Church is requesting that staff be authorized to enter into a discussion on ways the proposal could be expedited, as a pilot project for affordable housing proposals. Ms. Fowler noted that this is a practice throughout Canada and that affordable housing is a particular concern in this region.
Members of the Committee asked for details on what methods for expediting the proposal were being requested. In response, Ms. Fowler commented that if there is a significant delay in
4
Page 14 of 172 District of Oak Bay Committee of the Whole Monday, January 15, 2018 application processing time, “front of line service would” be an option to consider. She noted that dedicated staff through a “concierge” service has also been used in other jurisdictions. More intensive staff involvement in a proposal, she said, can be of benefit to the District as well. She commented that there would not be a compromise in the public consultation process.
Turning to the question of a timeframe for the proposal, Ms. Fowler responded that there is no existing timeframe, but that the length of the process will impact the project costs and will in turn impact affordability. She stated the BC Housing has given project approval, but clarified that they have not given funding approval to date and noted that BC Housing has asked the Church to consider how best to expedite the process. Regarding project costs, Ms. Fowler stated that the charges for the lien against the property and increases in construction costs are both concerns.
In response to questions on the consultation process, Ms. Fowler commented that they have been engaging near neighbours during November and December and are looking to engage the wider community. The request to expedite the process was not discussed at the consultation sessions she said, as they did not yet have confirmation if it would be included on an agenda.
In concluding her remarks, Ms. Fowler stated that the Church is looking to ensure that if technical issues arising during the application process that these issues are addressed in an expedited approach, but confirmed that they are not requesting that any existing application requirements be changed.
MOVED and seconded: That it be recommended to Council that the report of the Acting Director of Building and Planning dated January 5, 2018 and the correspondence attached to agenda item no. 10 be received for information.
C. Hobson, Oak Bay resident, drew attention to C. Thomas correspondence on the agenda on behalf of the application. Mr. Hobson expressed concern regarding some of the comments in this correspondence which he felt were inappropriate regarding the residents. He then commented on what he determined to be discrepancies in responses to the public during the Church’s consultation process when compared to minutes from the Church’s website, highlighting specifically the role of United BC Church Conference Property Resource Team and the question of whether the proposal was starting from a “blank piece of paper”. He questioned why scenarios developed for the funding process were not provided previously and stated that they are now available and that the Committee should review them on the Church’s website.
D. Butler, Oak Bay resident, commented that it is important to note that the residents of the area are not opposed to affordable housing and that there is a need for an increased diversity of housing types in the Municipality. She drew attention to the difference in population size and in resources between the District of Oak Bay and both the City of Victoria and the District of Saanich, with particular emphasis on the planning staff. She commented that establishing a separate process for not-for-profit developments could establish a precedent that could become an issue. She commented that the consultation process to date with the neighbourhood has not been adequate and that the proponents should be encouraged to enhance their public engagement with both the immediate residents and the wider community.
As the final speaker, Ms. Fowler commented that the intention of the Church representative this evening was not to discuss the consultation process but rather to consider if a discussion could begin with staff on a pilot project for an expedited process, given the support for affordable
5
Page 15 of 172 District of Oak Bay Committee of the Whole Monday, January 15, 2018
housing in the Official Community Plan and the need for same in the region. She noted that the public consultation process is at the initial stages and that it will be ongoing.
The question was then called.
CARRIED
ADJOURNMENT:
11. Motion to Adjourn
MOVED and seconded: That the meeting be adjourned.
CARRIED
The meeting adjourned at 8:47 PM.
Certified Correct:
Chair Deputy Director of Corporate Services
6
Page 16 of 172 MAYOR’S REMARKS
This section of the meeting is allotted for the Chair to address topics of interest, as determined by the Mayor (or Acting Mayor).
Page 17 of 172 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PERIOD
This is an opportunity for members of the public in attendance at the meeting to address Council regarding topics that directly impact the District of Oak Bay, as determined by the Chair.
Speakers will be asked to:
• State their name and print their name on the speakers’ sheet; • Not exceed 3 minutes; and • Address all comments through the Chair.
A total time of twenty (20) minutes is allotted by the Procedure Bylaw for the entire public participation period during a Council meeting, so speakers are asked to keep their comments brief where possible to allow all interested speakers to participate.
Speakers should note that video recordings of Council meetings are streamed live and archived on the municipal website.
Page 18 of 172 Page 19 of 172 Transportation Service Page 20 of 172 Where are we now?
• Oak Bay Council provided a motion of support for the establishment of a regional transportation service through the Capital Regional District on November 14, 2016 Page 21 of 172 • Initial Bylaw was amended to reflect municipal and EA feedback - lowered requisition.
• Bylaw received third reading by CRD Board on January 10, 2018
• CRD Board directed that municipalities be contacted to obtain indication of support before determining final elector approval process Current Situation
Reality 1:
Oak Bay residents rely on the entire regional network to get
Page 22 of 172 where they need to go, not just roads within Oak Bay Page 23 of 172
JOFEA Current Situation
Reality 2:
Oak Bay currently has no formal way to advocate for or
Page 24 of 172 contri bute to transportation improvements outside of Oak Bay's boundaries that would benefit Oak Bay residents
No service = No say outside municipal boundaries Current Situation
Reality 3:
Some transportation programs cannot be delivered at
Page 25 of 172 municipal scale (would not be functional or would cost too much) Current Situation
Reality 4:
Many external funders are looking for REGIONAL rather
Page 26 of 172 municipality-specific projects and programs - Proposed Solution
Transportation Service The power of LEVERAGE! Page 27 of 172
DESIRED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM Proposed Solution
Consolidate existing CRD transportation functions - no new fu nding required. (regional trails and regiona l planni.ng) Page 28 of 172
Expand service to include priorities identified in the Regional Transportation Plan e.g. Programming, Travel Demand Management, web-based transporta tion platforms. Can only be expanded by Board direction and additional funds. - Requ ires Boa rd approval even after Service established Concerns
It will cost too much ... • Maximum requisition set at an additional $1 million Page 29 of 172 • Any new funding requests need to be approved by the CRD ·committee and Board process
• Working together creates opportunities to reduce current costs through increased senior government contributions
• Without a service, we will lose out on grants that require a regional response
• Increasing the maximum requisition could only be done with a bylaw amendment Concerns
We won't have enough of a say ... Municipal matters will continue to be dealt with locally Scope of service can be limited to whatever there is comfort with Page 30 of 172 Governance model can be created to respond to concerns and tweaked as needed In Summary
Moving forward
Page 31 of 172 • Bylaw 4093 has received three readings by the CRD Board
• The focus is now on choosing the prefer.red option for Approval of the Electors as required under the Local Government Act
• Provincial -legislation stipulates that Elec_tor Approval must be received before forwarding the bylaw to the Inspector of Municipalities for approval Proposed Solution
How do we make it happen? Page 32 of 172
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Show support for the Provide feedback & Approve Elector establishment of a recommendations Approval Option transportation service to the CRD Board Request for Support · Page 33 of 172 Page 34 of 172
EXPLANATORY NOTE FROM THE DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES
RE: Capital Regional District Transportation Service Establishment Bylaw 4093, 2018
This note is in reference to the correspondence from the Capital Regional District regarding CRD Bylaw No. 4093, Capital Regional District Transportation Service Establishment Bylaw No. 4093, 2018.
At the meeting on November 14, 2016, Oak Bay Council considered correspondence from the CRD regarding the proposal for the establishment of a Regional Transportation Service and the following resolution was adopted:
That Oak Bay Council support the establishment of a regional transportation service through the Capital Regional District.
At this time, the CRD is requesting feedback on the proposed bylaw and an indication of whether Council would be supportive of the proposal, prior to determining a formal approval process.
CRD Regional and Strategic Planning staff are in attendance to provide a presentation to Council on the proposed bylaw and respond to questions.
If Council is prepared to provide support as requested, the following resolution would be appropriate:
That support be given to proposed Capital Regional District Transportation Service Establishment Bylaw No. 4093, 2018 and that staff provide correspondence to that effect to the CRD.
If Council is not prepared to provide such support, the following resolution would be appropriate:
That the correspondence from the Capital Regional District regarding CRD Bylaw No. 4093 be received.
Page 35 of 172 Executive Services T: 250 .360.3000 Cf2D 625 Fisgard Street F: 250.360.3076 Making a difference ... together Victoria, BC V8W 2S6 www.crd .bc.ca
January 12, 2018
File: 0400-50
Dear Municipal Colleagues:
RE: COUNCIL SUPPORT FOR BYLAW 4093
As you know, transportation is a growing issue in our communities. Residents are fed up with congestion and limited transportation choices and are calling on government to take action.
While much is being done by municipalities, the region and the Province, in the absence of a unified and coordinated approach, significant issues remain unaddressed, actions remain untaken, and funding remains unavailable. It is clear that the status quo is not fully addressing matters and frustration is mounting. We have an opportunity to do something about that.
In 2011 , the Board agreed that the CRD would move to take on a significant transportation role, including requisitioning for capital projects and pursuing a role in transit. Changes in grant funding allocations and provincial approaches subsequently rendered those roles less feasible. In response to th ese changes, in 2016 the CRD Board unanimously directed staff to draft a Transportation Service Bylaw reflecting the new landscape. The draft was reviewed with municipalities and electoral areas and adjusted in response to their feedback. The bylaw resulting from that feedback was given third reading on January 10, 2018. The Board is now seeking your Council's support for the revised bylaw (Bylaw 4093).
Bylaw 4093 -encompasses transportation services not being undertaken at a regional scale by either municipalities or the Province. The services included are those that can be most cost effectively delivered at a regional scale - namely data collection, programming and lobbying for funding of regional priorities.
Service enhancements require adoption of Bylaw 4093. The proposed bylaw provides for municipal requisitioning to cover the costs of expanded services. Any increases beyond current spending ($1.5 million) would have to be approved by a majority of the Board. Any increases beyond the requisition cap of $2.5 million would have to be approved by a majority of the Board and 2/3 of municipal Councils or whatever approval process was used to adopt the bylaw.
A Transportation Service would give the region a voice and a presence with senior governments that we do not currently have. This voice need not replace any other strategies for advocating solutions, such as greater membership on Victoria Regional Transit Commission, individual municipal lobbying etc., but would rather complement oth er initiatives and enhance the profile of the region's needs - including those in your municipality.
Our regional voice and im pact becomes most powerful if ALL municipalities and EAs are part of the new Service . We will only be able to address the region's transportation challenges if we are ALL part of th e solution.
Page 36 of 172 Municipal Colleagues - January 12, 2018 Council Support for Bylaw 4093 2
For the benefit of your municipality, your constituents and the region as a whole, I hope that you will join with others to move the region forward by supporting adoption of Bylaw 4093.
Sincerely, ~~
Steve Price Board Chair, Capital Regional District cc: Patrick Robins, CAO, Central Saanich Ian Howat, CAO, Colwood Laurie Hurst, CAO, Esquimalt Loranne Hilton, CAO, Highlands Darren Kiedyk, CAO, Langford Lisa Urlacher, CAO, Metchosin Rob Buchan, CAO, North Saanich Helen Koning, CAO, Oak Bay Paul Thorkelsson, CAO, Saanich Randy Humble, CAO, Sidney Teresa Sullivan, CAO, Sooke Jocelyn Jenkyns, A/CAO, Victoria Robert Lapham, CAO, Capital Regional District Capital Regional District Board Members
Page 37 of 172 CJ2D Frequently Asked Questions Making a difference ... together
Capital Regional District I January 2018
Cap ital Reg ional Distri ct Transporta ti on Se rvice Es tab li shm ent By law 40 93, 201 8
Wh at is Bylaw 4093?
"Capital Regional District Transportation Service Establishment Bylaw No. 4093, 2018" provides for the establishment of a regional transportation service in the Capital Region District. It identifies the scope of the service, its boundaries and a maximum requisition.
What is the scope of the bylaw?
The service ma y include the provision of:
• Transportation policy, plans, surveys and studies;
• Transportation data collection, monitoring, anal ysis and reporting;
• Transportation modelling;
• Transportation web based and multi-media platforms;
• Active tran sportation programming, planning and promotion;
• Transportation demand management programming, planning and promotion;
• Partnerships for data, anal ysis, planning, programming and policy;
• Transportation grant submissions.
Management of the ·Lochside, Galloping Goose and E&N Regional Trails - including trails planning, operations and maintenance, capita l planning and management of land tenure.
The focus of the above efforts would be on the network and initiati ves id entified in the Regional Transportation Plan.
Page 38 of 172 Frequently Asked Questions Making a difference ... together Regional Transportation Service Establishment B._:y~la~w_.--
Capital Regional District I January 2018
What about transit?
There is no scope to take on a regional transit role in the bylaw. The Victoria Regional Transit Commission and BC Transit remain the regional bodies for transit governance and operations. CRD staff will work closel y with staff from BC Transit to meet regional transportation priorities.
Why is this bylaw being introduced?
The establishment of a regional transportation service has been identified as a Board priority. Its creation was identified in the Regional Transportation Plan (207 4) as the best means to advance the actions identified in the plan . A need for such a service was also identified in the CRD Transportation Service Feasibility Study.
Why have a regional transportation service?
Transportation within the region is the responsibility of many different jurisdictions and a multi-modal approach at a regional scale has not been a priority. Residents and businesses have consistentl y asked that a regional lens be placed on transportation, recognising that transportation does not respect jurisdictional boundaries.
Certain projects and programs such as data collection, travel demand management and transportation plans can be best done at a regional scale. A new service would assist in identifying through data anal ysis and outreach the region 's most significant transportation priorities. This could then be used as the framework for grant applications to higher levels of government. Providing the region with one united voice as opposed to man y competing voices is likely to have beneficial outcomes in terms of access to such grants. Granting agencies are increasingly looking for hard data to back up funding requests.
Why is it so important that all local governments and Electoral Areas within the CRD participate in the regional transportation service?
Residents, business people and visitors to the CRD travel across many jurisdictions in their everyday pursuits. Many are una ware that they are doing this . The volumes of inter-municipal tra vel are likely to grow even more in future years as certain parts of the region expand .
Page 39 of 172 CJ2D Frequently Asked Questions Making a difference ... together
Capital Regional District I January 2018
Any benefits gained from the service wo uld likely be advantageous for all residents of the region. Certain programs can be most effectively deli ve red using a full regional lens. For example freight studies that include only certain municipalities and EA's wo uld likely not capture the full impact of freight move ment.
Identifying regional transportation priorities and speaking as one united vo ice on transportation as opposed to many smaller competing vo ices is likel y to get more tra ct ion with higher leve ls of gove rnment.
Financial Imp li cations
What will this service cost us?
There wo uld be no additional costs on establishment of the se rvice. The service would simply allow for the budgets associated with transportation-related functions of two CRD divisions to be consolidated. The existing · budget for the transportation functions of Regional Parks and Regional and Strategic Planning is approximately $1 ,500,000. This amount includes operations and maintenance of the Galloping Goose, Lochside and EErN trails .
The byla w identifies a ma ximum requis ition for the service of $2,500,000 based on feedback recei ve d from municipal council and electoral area outreach . Having a higher ma ximum requisition than the current consolidated budget does not mean that there will be any additional immediate costs associated wi th th e service. Additional costs would be incurred on ly as new functions within the scope of the service we re introduced over time. No additional costs could be approved without recei ving wo rk plans and budget approva ls through the CRD Committee and Board pro cesses.
What's stopping the CRD simply increasing the maximum requisition or expanding the scope of the service?
The CRD Board ca nnot simply increase the maxi mum requisition or expand the scope of service. Any changes to the maximum requisition or service scope wo uld require a byla w amendment. Amendment of an establishing _ byla w is covered under s. 349 of the LG A and states that the amendment may be done with the same requirements of adoption OR with the consent of 2/3rds of participants. It does not differentiate betwee n amendments affecting scope or requisition.
Page 40 of 172 CJ2.D· Frequently Asked Questions Making a difference ... together Regional Transportation Service Establishment B~y~la~w_.--
Capital Regional District I January 2018
CR D Boa rd, Muni cip al and Electoral Area Input in to th e By law
When did the discussion about establishing this service start?
The process to wards establishment of a regional transportation service commenced in 2011 . However discussions related to a regional position and greater voice in transportation have been ongoing at the CRD Board since the late 1990's.
Have councils and Electoral Areas had input into the bylaw?
Yes . All councils and Electoral Area Directors were provided with the opportunity to meet with staff and/or CRD Board members to discuss the purpose and content of the byla w through an outreach program in late 2016.
What feedback was received from the Municipalities and EA's?
There was general agreement that the status quo was not working to meet the changing multi-modal transportation needs of the region .
The most prominent concerns of a new service related to:
A) Cost impli cations
Concerns over co st implications were addressed by decreasing the ma ximum requisition level from $1 0 . million to $2 .5 million .
B) Impact on the recreational and park value of the regional trails sys tem
Staff assured councils and EA directors that the regional trails will retain their recreational function and that the linear park values of the trails would be respected . The byla w was drafted to included wording to this effect.
Page 41 of 172 Cf2.D Frequently Asked Questions Making a difference ... together
Capital Regional District I January 2018
C) Potential loss of local jurisdictional authority
Staff informed councils and EAs that local control would not be impacted by the introduction of a new service and that a regional transportation service would build upon the work being done at a local level.
D) The proposed governance structure for any new service
Staff further clarified that no decisions regarding governance structure for the regional transportation service had been made. Governance structure is distinct from the bylaw and as such does not need to be identified in the bylaw itself. The final governance structure will be approved by the CRD at a later date if a new service is approved.
Was council and Electoral Area feedback reflected in the Bylaw 4093?
Yes . The draft bylaw was amended to reflect comments and feedback that was heard during the outreach period . In particular the maximum requisition was lowered from $1 Omillion dollars to $2.5 million.
Reg ional Trail s
What will happen with the regional trails under the service?
Management of the three main regional trails would be transferred from regional parks to the transportation service. The public would see little or no difference in day-to-day operations of the trails system.
Pedestrians, users on wheel s and horse riders would continue to be provi9ed for and the linear parklands wou ld be maintained and respected. The rural and wilderness nature of the trails would also be respected.
The Regional Trails Management Plan would continue to be the guiding document for the regional trails system . Data on trail usage mode splits would be gathered and ana lysed to inform future decisions and grant app li cations. Having the trails system under a transportation se rvice would provide for the ability to appl y for grants for transportation projects which may not be poss ible under the current service stru cture.
Page 42 of 172 CAPITAL REGIONAL DISTRICT BYLAW NO. 4093 ************************************************************************************************************* A BYLAW TO ESTABLISH A SERVICE AREA WITHIN THE CAPITAL REGIONAL DISTRICT FOR THE PURPOSE OF A REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICE *************************************************************************************************************
WHEREAS under section 332 of the Local Government Act a regional district may, by bylaw, establish and operate any service the Board considers necessary or desirable for all or part of the regional district;
AND WHEREAS the Board of the Capital Regional District wishes to establish a service to address transportation needs within the Region.
AND WHEREAS the approval of the electors in the Participating Areas has been obtained under Part 1O, Division 4 of the Local Government Act;
AND WHEREAS the approval of the Inspector of Municipalities has been obtained under section 342(1) (a) of the Local Government Act;
NOW THEREFORE the Board of the Capital Regional District in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:
1. Services The service being established and operated is the Capital Regional District Transportation Service (the "Transportation Service") for the purpose of providing policy, planning, programming, administration and information management services in relation to transportation as follows:
(A) The service may include the provision of: i. Transportation policy, plans, surveys and studies; ii. Transportation data collection, monitoring, analysil5 and reporting; iii. Transportation modelling; iv. Transportation web based and multi-media platforms; v. Active transportation programming, planning and promotion; vi. Transportation demand management programming, planning and promotion; vii. Partnerships for data, analysis, planning, programming and policy; viii. Transportation grant submissions.
(B) Management of those Regional Trails listed in Schedule A ("designated regional trails" - including trails planning, operations and maintenance, capital planning and management of land tenure;
(C) Subsection (B) is not intended to alter or affect the dedication as regional trail of any designated regional trail nor to impair the use of the designated regional trails for the purpose of public recreation and enjoyment and ancillary nature conservation.
2. Boundaries The boundaries of the "Transportation Service" are the boundaries of the Capital Regional District.
3. Participating Areas District of Central Saanich, City of Colwood, Township of Esquimalt, District of Highlands, Juan de Fuca Electoral Area, City of Langford, District of Metchosin, District of North Saanich, District of Oak Bay, District of Saanich, Salt Spring Island Electoral Area, Town of Sidney, District of Sooke, Southern Gulf Islands Electoral Area, City of Victoria, Town of View Royal
Page 43 of 172 4. Cost Recovery As provided in section 378 of the Local Government Act, the annual cost of providing the Transportation Service shall be recovered by one or more of the following: (a) property value taxes imposed in accordance with Division 3 of Part 11 of the Local Government Act; (b) fees and charges imposed under section 397 of the Local Government Act; ( c) revenues raised by other means authorized by the Local Government Act or another Act; (d) revenues received by way of agreement, enterprise, gift, grant or otherwise.
5. Maximum Requisition In accordance with section 339(1) (e) of the Local Government Act, the maximum amount that may be requisitioned for the cost of the Transportation Service is the greater of: (a) two and a half million dollars ($2,500,000); or (b) an amount equal to the amount that could be raised by a property value tax rate of $0.02548 per one thousand dollars ($1,000) applied to the net taxable value of land and improvements in the Service Area.
6. Citation This Bylaw may be cited as the Bylaw No. 4093 "Capital Regional District Transportation Service Establishment Bylaw No. 4093, 2018".
READ A FIRST TIME THIS 8 day of November 2017
READ A SECOND TIME THIS 8 day of November 2017
READ A THIRD TIME THIS 8 day of November 2017
THIRD READING RESCINDED 10 day of January 2018 AND REREAD THIS
RECEIVED ALTERNATIVE APPROVAL UNDER SECTION 345 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACTTHIS day of 2018
APPROVED BY THE INSPECTOR OF MUNICIPALITIES THIS day of 2018
ADOPTED THIS day of 2018
Chair Corporate Officer
FILED WITH THE INSPECTOR OF MUNICIPALITIES THIS day of 2018
Page 44 of 172 Schedule A Designated Regional Trails
E & N Rail Trail - Humpback Connector Galloping Goose Regional Trail Lochside Regional Trail
., Map 1 I Regional Trails " CI2.D
- lUCh)dcieqlotwlfJ.Jif - --·lh;'Ql()nJl!,r,.tll(l 90UlldM')'
- 1~R..ll lt.i1l-(oniplclo. •-ftttlkaillt.11l ru1111ff"~ OltlH ...v\::Prutl'<.lt'dAIM __ ,...,,,...., ::s:J ~~~~%r.~~~1r~ ,...,..., P.;0, nn1Nolloo"""' ltf'IN/~1'!,llll mp;,,WJ 1rt.l'IUQi.ler9~Wlm..lelanflQJl'IUl ...,, h{;flUl1"'11111NllihZllfl{QU)m,llle.N _ ___,.111-..lorcp...,ltlol-io:r•~-'-~•--"'*'Mit,!ll ftcrup tir.ar.,I""-. Nnuip llMllllrrloffl;llllan U.CIDWIJ"" .. Mllt ,_ Wlf~.t- • I,._. Nlfll!-·-IIM-_,thlm.ip•lntMUtlohG111!1C.,_ffllht.:oi!ll3flleCNfttillllllt'ha!D- ct:/lllf H,JrO Slfillr \.._ I flratt:,.IIOA: IJTM"/0Hf10tt t~0 61 Page 45 of 172 REPORT TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Debbie Carter, Director of Financial Services DATE: January 22, 2018 RE: Request for Early Capital Approval - Replacement of Condenser EXECUTIVE SUMMARY It has been determined that the arena condenser is failing and in need of immediate replacement. This item was included in the Parks, Recreation, and Culture ten year financial plan, however it has deteriorated more rapidly than anticipated. Staff are recommending this item receive early budget approval of $82,000 to be funded from the Capital Works Reserve in order to replace the condenser before it fails completely. BACKGROUND In the latter part of 2017 it was determined that the arena condenser was failing and required replacement as quickly as possible. The replacement of this equipment was included in the ten year capital plan, however it deteriorated more rapidly than anticipated, necessitating an emergency replacement. In the 2017 budget there were sufficient funds to absorb this emergency cost. However, due to the lead time required to have the condenser built and delivered, the 2017 year has closed and we are now in 2018 with a new budget that did not anticipate this expenditure. ANALYSIS Staff feel this is a high priority capital project as any further delay would increase the risk of the current condenser failing completely. To date we have managed to keep the condenser operational due to ongoing repairs which result in added costs. Prior to this issue arising in 2017, staff were projecting better than expected results from the Parks, Recreation, and Culture net actuals to budget. Therefore it was anticipated this extraordinary cost could be absorbed within the 2017 budget. We are now in the 2018 budget year and staff propose funding the new condenser at a cost of $82,000 from the Capital Works Reserve. As this was not included in the 2018 budget initially, it will require Council approval for this budget to be funded from the Capital Works Reserve, and early approval. STRATEGIC IMPACT This project is directly related to Council's objective to Develop, Maintain & Protect Our Infrastructure. Request for Early Capital Approval - Replacement of Condenser Page 1 of 2 January 17, 2018 Page 46 of 172 OPTIONS 1. Provide budget authorization and early approval for $82,000, funded from the Capital Works Reserve to replace the arena condenser. 2. Do not provide approval at this time, and consider the request during the Estimates meetings in April 2018. FINANCIAL IMPACT The expected cost of this project is $82,000 and can be funded from the Capital Works Reserve. Council is being asked to provide early approval due to the urgent need for replacement. This item will be included in the 2018 financial plan. RECOMMENDATION THAT Council provide budget authorization and early approval for $82,000, funded from the Capital Works Reserve to replace the arena condenser. Debbie Carter, Director of Financial Services I concur with the recommendation of the Director of Financial Services. Helen Koning, ~hief Administrative Officer Request for Early Capital Approval - Replacement of Condenser Page 2 of 2 January 17, 2018 Page 47 of 172 REPORT TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Debbie Carter, Director of Financial Services DATE: January 22, 2018 RE: Municipal Reserve Funds EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In January 2017 a summary report of the major municipal reserve fund balances was presented to Council, along with a recommendation that a draft policy be prepared and considered at a future meeting. Since that time, research of other municipal reserve funds and associated polices has been conducted, as well as a review of various consultant reports. The body of this report provides an update on the status of the District of Oak Bay major reserve funds. It is anticipated that a draft policy be brought before a Committee of the Whole meeting for discussion prior to consideration of Estimates in 2018. BACKGROUND Reserves provide the Municipality with options for responding to unexpected issues and a buffer for large fluctuations in revenue requirements. There are two types of reserve funds held by the Municipality; statutory reserve funds and non-statutory reserve funds. The statutory reserves have been created through bylaws, in accordance with the provincial legislation that governs municipalities. The non-statutory reserves have been created in order to manage the Municipality's finances, ensuring that appropriate amounts are being set aside for known future requirements. These would include for example, funds held in trust for specific purposes (restricted funds), and projects that have been approved by Council and not yet completed and therefore, the funds need to be carried forward for future years. ANALYSIS The following is a summary of the major municipal reserve fund balances, both statutory and non statutory, held by the Municipality. The balances shown are as at December 20, 2017 as the year end 2017 figures have not yet been finalized. Adjustments have been made for 2017 expected funding requirements from, or transfers to, the reserves as previously approved by Council. Further review and reconciliation will occur through the financial year end process. Municipal Reserve Funds Page 1 of 6 January 17, 2018 Page 48 of 172 Statutory Reserve Funds ~ Heritage Reserve Fund (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $2, 161,536) The principal of the Heritage Reserve Fund represents the net profit from the Municipality's development of the Wessex Close subdivision in 1980-81. Over and above the statutory requirement that monies in the fund be expended only for the purpose of capital projects, the bylaw establishing the Heritage Reserve Fund provides further that with the exception of interest, no monies may be appropriated from the Fund "save those required for the purpose of land development projects and other capital investments designed to augment the net present value of the principal." ~ Land Sale Reserve Fund (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $33,209) The Land Sale Reserve Fund was established pursuant to the statutory requirement that all proceeds from the sale of municipal land be placed to the credit of a special fund as opposed to being treated as current revenue. There are no bylaw restrictions on the use of monies in the Fund beyond the statutory requirement limiting appropriations to the funding of capital projects. In the past, monies in the Land Sale Reserve Fund have been "invested" in the Municipality's own projects. For example, money from the Fund has been loaned to the Parks and Recreation Commission, which, in turn, has included the repayment of interest and principal in its operating budget over the term of the loan. In 2016 $1,702,133 was used to purchase 1538 Monterey Avenue. ~ Capital Works Reserve Fund (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $19,924,164) The Capital Works Reserve Fund was established by bylaw in 1993. The primary purpose of the Fund is to provide a means of financing major repairs to or replacement of physical assets without the need for spikes in the tax rate, interruption of the underground infrastructure renewal program, layoffs, or a combination of all three. The Capital Works Reserve Fund is segregated into a number of sub-accounts, which are directed for specific purposes. Included in these sub-accounts is $9.4 million that has been set aside over the years for the Uplands sewer project. Of this amount, approximately $6.8 million is from gas tax money. There are a number of specifically budgeted transfers to the Fund in the municipal operating budget for each year. The equity in the Fund has also been built up from general revenue surplus, plus interest earned over the years. ~ Village Parking Reserve Fund (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $913,246) Under the Parking Facilities Bylaw, developers in many situations have the option of paying cash in lieu of providing the required number of off-street parking spaces. Municipal Reserve Funds Page 2 of 6 January 17, 2018 Page 49 of 172 Monies paid pursuant to the Parking Facilities Bylaw must be credited to a statutory reserve fund, and originally could only be used for the provision of off-street parking. Provincial legislation now allows these funds to be transferred to the Alternative Transportation Infrastructure Reserve Fund. :» Alternative Transportation Infrastructure Reserve Fund (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $14,036) The Alternative Transportation Infrastructure Reserve Fund was established in 2008 for the provision of transportation infrastructure that supports walking, bicycling, public transit or other alternative forms of transportation. To date, this fund has been used towards the cost of installing bus shelters. :» Park Land Acquisition Reserve Fund (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $275,396) Under the Local Government Act, an owner of land being subdivided into three or more lots must either provide park land or pay cash in lieu. Such payments must be credited to a statutory reserve fund. At present, such funds may only be used for the purpose of acquiring new park lands, although from time to time there has been talk of amending the Actto broaden the allowable uses to include the upgrading of existing parks. :» Fire Machinery and Equipment Fund (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $934,863) The Fire Machinery and Equipment Depreciation Reserve Fund was established to fund the replacement of existing vehicles and equipment (i.e., it would not be used to augment the existing fleet). With the exception of a transfer from general revenue surplus which occurred in 2000, this Fund is being built up through annual contributions from the operating budget. Council approved the replacement of Battalion 1 at a cost of $152,663. The reserve fund has been adjusted to reflect this in 2017. The next major purchase is anticipated to take place in 2019, when Engine #11 will be replaced at an anticipated cost of $753,000. :» Machinery and Equipment Fund (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $1,099,894) The Machinery and Equipment Depreciation Reserve Fund was established to provide for the systematic replacement of vehicles in the Equipment Pool without the need for tax spikes from one year to the next. The Fund is built up through year-end transfers of the net earnings on the entire fleet - i.e., the total of all Equipment Pool charges minus the vehicle operating and maintenance costs. The latter includes the wages of the three full-time mechanics. Non-Statutory Reserve Funds :» Tod House Trust (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $236,980) The Tod House trust was established to fund repairs to the historic residence at 2564 Heron Street, which used to be jointly owned by the Municipality and the Province. In 2008 the Province gave its share to Oak Bay, but only "for so long as the land is used for the specific purpose of Municipal Reserve Funds Page 3 of 6 January 17, 2018 Page 50 of 172 managing the Tod House Heritage Site". Correspondence with the Province suggests that if the property use were to change, the District will pay to the Province 50% of the market value of the property at the time that its use changed. The Trust is built up from the net rental revenue. ~ Legacy Trust (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $372,485) The Legacy Trust consists of various bequests to the Municipality for specific purposes - e.g., improvements to the Seniors' Activity portion of the Monterey Centre. ~ Third Party Liability Reserve (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $375,000) This is an insurance reserve created in recognition of the high deductible amount per occurrence under the Municipal Insurance Association (MIA) policy, and also in consideration of the exposure that arises through the exclusions contained within the policy. ~ Bike Lanes (Balance@ December 20, 2017: $152,527) Bike lane money that was budgeted in previous years but not spent has been set aside in this reserve for future use. ~ Major Crime Investigations (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $185,895) In 2012 we began to reserve funds by way of an annual transfer from the Police Department budget into this reserve in case of old crimes that may be reopened. If this were to occur, our contract with the District of Saanich for investigative support for serious crimes would not cover the costs because the original crime occurred before we entered into the contract. Starting in 2017 this portion of the contract with Saanich has ended, and therefore the annual transfer has been budgeted to go from $20,000 to $80,000 in order to offset the prohibitive costs we would incur should a major crime occur. ~ Legal Cost Reserves (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $190,000) There are two legal reserve accounts; police ($40,000) and general ($150,000). The money in these two reserves has been set aside for any unexpected legal costs which may occur. The Municipality's annual legal budget is small and this reserve was set up to offset any significant one-time costs that may be incurred. ~ Climate Action (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $121,165) This reserve was set up to meet the requirements of the Climate Action Revenue Incentive Program, whereby we are setting money aside for future projects rather than purchasing carbon offsets. ~ General Government Projects (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $291,781) Funds have been set aside for various studies and projects which will be required in the near future. Examples include continuing reviews of facilities, election expenses, housing strategy, replacement of budget software, asset management and replacement of the Public Works Yard fencing. Municipal Reserve Funds Page 4 of 6 January 17, 2018 Page 51 of 172 ~ Fire Retirement Reserve (Balance @ December 20, 2017: $118,218) This reserve has been built up through regular annual contributions in the Fire Department operating budget. It covers retirement costs which arise out of the retirement pay provisions of the collective agreement with the International Association of Fire Fighters. ~ Police Retirement Reserve (Balance@ December 20, 2017: $76,664) This reserve to fund the payment of retirement costs is not at the same level as the corresponding Fire Department reserve because Police Department retirement costs in the past were budgeted largely on a pay-as-you-go basis, and we are now building it up with annual transfers. The previous "Municipal Reserve Funds" report brought forward to Council in January 2017 recommended that a policy be drafted for consideration at a future meeting. Since that last report to Council, research of other municipal reserve funds and associated polices has been conducted, as well as a review of various consulting reports addressing the same. There are many differences across municipalities in terms of the number of reserves, recommended funding levels, and policies or procedures guiding the contributions to and use of reserve funds. While the District of Oak Bay has been diligent in ensuring funds are set aside to help mitigate current or future risk, there remain no clear Council guidelines in place other than for the statutory reserves which were established by bylaw. A policy such as this would include guidelines for the distribution of municipal surpluses and frequency of required reserve fund reporting (eg. annually or semi-annually). It is anticipated that a draft policy be brought before a Committee of the Whole meeting for discussion prior to consideration of Estimates in 2018. STRATEGIC IMPACT One of Council's Strategic Plan objectives is to ''focus on being well managed and well governed to serve our residents". The reserve fund review is a first step toward ensuring the proper reserves are in place to meet future financial obligations. Prudent administration of reserves contributes to sound financial management. OPTIONS 1. That the report be received for information. 2. That the report not be received for information. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no current financial impact. RECOMMENDATION 1. That the report be received for information. Municipal Reserve Funds Page 5 of 6 January 17, 2018 Page 52 of 172 Respectfully submitted, Debbie Carter, Director of Financial Services I concur with the recommendation of the Director of Financial Services. Helen Koning, Chief Administrative Officer Municipal Reserve Funds Page 6 of 6 January 17, 2018 Page 53 of 172 DISTRICT OF OAK~BAY REPORT TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Deborah Jensen, Acting Director of Building and Planning DATE: January 16, 2018 RE: Heritage Revitalization Agreement (HRA00004) Heritage Designation (HAD00008) 638 I 644 Beach Drive Lots 11 and 12, Block 7, Section 73, Victoria District, Plan 992 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The District of Oak Bay is in receipt of an application for a heritage revitalization agreement for 644 Beach Drive. The development proposes four single family lots and restoration of the heritage home on one of the lots, in its existing location. Council consideration of this Heritage Revitalization Agreement does not guarantee final subdivision approval. It does represent a required step toward subdivision consideration, but the subdivision Approving Officer niust also review the proposal in context of other site characteristics, public interest, and servicing requirements. The Committee of the Whole considered this proposal on September 18, 2017 and directed staff to prepare a heritage revitalization bylaw and a heritage designation bylaw. These bylaws have now been prepared and are presented for Council consideration. BACKGROUND The District of Oak Bay has received a heritage revitalization agreement application proposing four single family residential lots and restoration of the heritage home at 644 Beach Drive. Council consideration of this _Heritage Revitalization Agreement does not guarantee final subdivision approval. It does represent a required step toward subdivision consideration, but the subdivision Approving Officer must also review the proposal in context of other site characteristics, public interest, and servicing requirements. HRA00004 / HAD00008 - 638 / 644 Beach Drive Page 1 of 3 February 16, 2018 Page 54 of 172 The proposed development was reviewed by the Committee of the Whole at their September 18, 2017 meeting, and the Committee directed staff to prepare a heritage revitalization bylaw and a heritage· designation bylaw. Staff have subsequently been working with the applicant to ensure agreement with the content set out in the heritage revitalization agreement bylaw and heritage designation bylaw, prior to Council's consideration of 1st and 2nd readings of the bylaws. The applicant has requested some modifications to the initial proposal presented to Council. Specifically, the applicant is proposing two additional variances to accommodate renovation of the existing dwelling, one for the front entry stairs, and one for a patio to the side of the home. The difference between the original application and proposed revisions are as noted below: Proposed Lot 1 Zoning Bylaw Section(s) Required Requested Amended Request Schedule A Minimum Lot Width 21.34 m (70 ft) 4.33 m (14 ft) .no chang~ Proposed Lot 2 Zoning Bylaw Section(s) Required Requested Amended Request Schedule A Minimum Lot Width 21.34 m (70 ft) 9.47 m (31 ft) no change 6.4.4.(2)(a) Front Lot Line Setback North Side - Attached Garage 7.62 m (25 ft) 1.60 m ( 5 ft) no change South Side - Existing Dwelling 7.62 m (25 ft) 6.90 m (23 ft) no change South Side - Front Entry Stairs 6.42 m (21 ft) 6.23 m (20 ft) new Patio 7.62 m (25 ft) 6.06 m (20 ft) new 6.4.4.(3)(a) Building Height 7.32 m (24 ft) 7.92 m (26 ft) no change 6.4.4.(3)(b) Occupiable Height 4.57 m (15 ft) 5.76 m (19 ft) no change ANALYSIS There are no significant changes to the overall development of the site, as presented to the Committee of the Whole in September 2017. The proposed amendments do not impact the proposed use or density of the site, and these additional two variances for the stairwell and the patio area assist with the overall design and renovations to the existing dwelling. The proposed renovations to the home have been reviewed by the heritage consultant, Donald Luxton & Associates, for consistency with the heritage of the home. STRATEGIC IMPACT No strategic impact is anticipated to arise in relation to the options described in this report. HRA00004 / HAD00008 - 638 / 644 Beach Drive Page 2 of 3 February 16, 2018 Page 55 of 172 OPTIONS 1. That Council: a) give 1st and 2nd reading to 638 and 644 Beach Drive Heritage Revitalization Agreement Bylaw No. 4698 to enter into a heritage revitalization agreement as part of the proposal to develop four single family residential lots at 638 and 644 Beach Drive; b) give 1st and 2nd reading to 638 and 644 Beach Drive Heritage Designation Bylaw No. 4697 to designate the existing home at 638 and 644 Beach Drive as a protected municipal heritage site and place the home on the Oak Bay Community Heritage Register; and c) set a public hearing on Bylaw No. 4698 and Bylaw No. 4697, to be held at the Oak Bay Municipal Hall on February 13, 2018 at 6:00 pm in Council Chambers and that notice be given in accordance with the Local Government Act. 2. That Council deny the applications. FINANCIAL IMPACT No financial impact beyond the existing budget is anticipated to arise in relation to the options described in this report. RECOMMENDATION That Council: a) give 1st and 2nd reading to 638 and 644 Beach Drive Heritage Revitalization Agreement Bylaw No. 4698 to enter into a heritage revitalization agreement as part of the proposal to develop four single family residential lots at 638 and 644 Beach Drive; b) give 1st and 2nd reading to 638 and 644 Beach Drive Heritage Designation Bylaw No. 4697 to designate the existing home at 638 and 644 Beach Drive as a protected municipal heritage site and place the home on the Oak Bay Community Heritage Register; and c) set a public hearing on Bylaw No. 4698 and Bylaw No. 4697, to be held at the Oak Bay Municipal Hall on February 13, 2018 at 6:00 pm in Council Chambers and that notice be given in accordance with the Local Government Act. I concu with he recommendation of the Acting Director_ of Building and Planning. Helen Konin~Administrative Officer A TTACHMENT(S) Attachment 1 - Plans - HRA / HAD - 638 and 644 Beach Drive, January 2018 Attachment 2 - Rpt Attach 2 - Heritage Revitalization Agreement Bylaw No. 4698 Attachment 3 - Rpt Attach 3 - Heritage Designation Bylaw No. 4697 HRA00004 I HAD00008 - 638 I 644 Beach Drive Page 3 of 3 February 16, 2018 Page 56 of 172 THE CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF OAK BAY BYLAW NO. 4697 A Bylaw to Designate 638 and 644 Beach Drive as a Protected Municipal Heritage Site The Municipal Council of The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows: 1. The residential building being constructed in or about 1927 along with all subsequent additions and exterior alterations thereto but excluding the attached garage (hereinafter called “the building”), situated on a portion of that parcel or tract of land lying and being in the District of Oak Bay in the Province of British Columbia, and more particularly known and described as Lots 11 and 12, Block 7, Section 73, Victoria District, Plan 992; PID 007 937 008 and 007 937 024 and as shown on Schedule A, is hereby designated as protected pursuant to Section 611 of the Local Government Act. 2. Except as authorized by a heritage alteration permit issued by the Municipal Council pursuant to Part 15 of the Local Government Act, no person shall: a) alter the exterior of the building; b) make a structural change to the building; c) alter, remove or take an action that would damage an interior feature or fixture of the building identified in Schedule B attached hereto; d) move the building; or e) alter, excavate or build on the land protected by this Bylaw. 3. This Bylaw may be cited as the “638 and 644 Beach Drive Heritage Designation Bylaw, 2018.” READ a first and second time by the Municipal Council on PUBLIC HEARING held on READ a third time by the Municipal Council on ADOPTED AND FINALLY PASSED by the Municipal Council on Mayor Director of Corporate Services Sealed with the Seal of The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay. File: HRA00004 / HAD00008 Address 638 and 644 Beach Drive Page 57 of 172 Bylaw No. 4697 SCHEDULE A Designate as a Protected Municipal Heritage Site Location Plan Heritage Designation HRA00004 / HAD00008 638 and 644 Beach Drive Page 2 of 3 Page 58 of 172 Bylaw No. 4697 SCHEDULE B – AFFIXED INTERIOR FEATURES OR FIXTURES Interior Location Description of Feature Feature 1. Living Room Fireplace and Surround (2) 2. Den Living Room Fireplace Den Fireplace Main Level Disappearing Wall Living Area (in its entirety) Page 3 of 3 Page 59 of 172 THE CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF OAK BAY BYLAW NO. 4698 A Bylaw to Authorize a Heritage Revitalization Agreement for 638 and 644 Beach Drive The Municipal Council of The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows: 1. The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay is authorized to enter into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement with Rebecca Miller for the property known as Lot 11, Block 7, Section 73, Victoria District, Plan 992; PID 007-937-008 and Lot 12, Block 7, Section 73, Victoria District, Plan 992; PID 007-937-024 substantially in the form attached to this Bylaw as Schedule A, 2. The Mayor and the Director of Corporate Services are authorized to do all things and acts necessary to execute the said Heritage Revitalization Agreement and to affix the seal of the District of Oak Bay thereto. 3. This Bylaw may be cited as the “638 and 644 Beach Drive Heritage Revitalization Agreement Authorization Bylaw, 2018.” READ a first and second time by the Municipal Council on PUBLIC HEARING held on READ a third time by the Municipal Council on ADOPTED AND FINALLY PASSED by the Municipal Council on Mayor Director of Corporate Services Sealed with the Seal of The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay. File: HRA00004 / HAD00008 Address 638 and 644 Beach Drive Page 60 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 SCHEDULE ‘A’ To Heritage Revitalization Agreement Bylaw No. 4698 HERITAGE REVITALIZATION AGREEMENT (Pursuant to section 610 of the Local Government Act) 638 / 644 Beach Drive THIS AGREEMENT made the day of , 2018. BETWEEN: Rebecca Sarah MacDonald Miller 754 Mountjoy Avenue Victoria, BC V8S 4K9 (the “Owner”) OF THE FIRST PART AND: The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay 2167 Oak Bay Avenue Victoria, BC V8R 1G2 (the “District”) OF THE SECOND PART A. A local government may, by bylaw, enter into a heritage revitalization agreement with the owner of heritage property pursuant to section 610 of the Local Government Act: B. The Owner is the registered owner of those parcels of land, lying and being in the District of Oak Bay, in the Province of British Columbia, and more particularly known and described as: Legal Description: Lot 11, Block 7, Section 73, Victoria District, Plan 992 Parcel Identifier: 007-937-008 Legal Description: Lot 12, Block 7, Section 73, Victoria District, Plan 992 Parcel Identifier: 007-937-024 Civic Address: 638 / 644 Beach Drive (the “Lands”) C. Situated on the Lands is a dwelling constructed in or about 1927 (the “Heritage Building”), and for the purpose of conservation of the heritage value and heritage character of the Lands, the Owner and the District have agreed to enter into this Agreement, setting out the terms and conditions of continuing protection for the heritage value and heritage character of the Lands; 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 61 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 D. The Owner and the District agree that the Lands have heritage value, and desire to conserve the heritage value and heritage character of the Lands; E. The Owner wishes to subdivide the Lands into four parcels (the “Subdivision”), labelled as Lot 1 (“Lot 1”), Lot 2 (“Lot 2”), Lot 3 (“Lot 3”) and Lot 4 (“Lot 4”) on a plan of proposed subdivision prepared by Powell & Associates, British Columbia Land Surveyor, dated November 24, 2017, attached as Schedule “1” hereto (the “Plan”); F. The Owner wishes to retain the Heritage Building on Lot 2 and continue to use the Heritage Building as a single family residence, and to construct a new residential dwelling on each of Lot 1, Lot 3 and Lot 4; G. Section 610 of the Local Government Act authorizes a local government to enter into a Heritage Revitalization Agreement with the owner of heritage property, and to allow variations of, and supplements to, the provisions of a bylaw or permit issued under Part 14 or Part 15 of the Local Government Act; H. The District’s Official Community Plan states that the District may consider the use of a Heritage Revitalization Agreement “to protect and conserve heritage property”; I. The Lands are zoned RS-2 (One Family Residential Use); and J. The Owner and the District wish to preserve the Heritage Building and to provide for its preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and maintenance in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, and have voluntarily agreed to enter into this Heritage Revitalization Agreement setting out the terms and conditions by which the heritage value of the Heritage Building is to be preserved and protected, in return for specified variances to District bylaws. NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSES that in consideration of the mutual promises exchanged in this Agreement and for other good and valuable consideration (the receipt and sufficiency of which both parties acknowledge), the Owner and the District each covenant with the other pursuant to section 610 of the Local Government Act, as follows: 1.0 DEFINITIONS 1.1. In this Agreement, the following words have the following meanings: “Owner” includes a person who acquires an interest in the Lands and is thereby bound by this Agreement, as referred to in sections. “preservation”, “rehabilitation”, “restoration” and “maintenance” have the meanings defined in the Standards and Guidelines. “Standards and Guidelines” means the Parks Canada Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada (2010). 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 62 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 2.0 REDEVELOPMENT OF THE LANDS 2.1. The Owner covenants and agrees with the District that it shall develop the Lands strictly in accordance with the terms of the Agreement, and as required under the terms of any permits or approvals issued by the District respecting the development of or construction upon the Lands. 3.0 NO INTERFERENCE WITH OR DEROGATION FROM AUTHORITY OF SUBDIVISION APPROVING OFFICER 3.1. This Agreement represents a necessary but not sufficient step towards approval of the Subdivision and in no way fetters the exercise of the judgement or authority of the District Approving Officer (the “Approving Officer”) under the Land Title Act, and in particular but without limiting the generality of the foregoing does not exempt the Owner in whole or in part from off site serving requirements and costs, or any other requirements imposed by the Approving Officer or the District as part of the subdivision review and approval process. 4.0 OBLIGATION OF OWNER TO RESTORE AND CONSERVE HERITAGE BUILDING 4.1. The parties agree that the Heritage Building has heritage value deserving of protection and conservation, and the Owner specifically agrees that the Heritage Building shall not be demolished in whole or in part, moved or removed, structurally altered, altered as to its façade or any other exterior element, or added to, except in accordance with the Heritage Conservation Plan prepared by Donald Luxton and Associates, Inc., completed December 2017 and attached hereto as Schedule “2” (the “Conservation Plan”) and the approved architectural drawings, plans and specifications prepared by Zebra Design, completed January 2018 and attached hereto as Schedule “3” (the “Plans”). 4.2. The Owner covenants and agrees that it shall preserve, rehabilitate, restore and maintain the Heritage Building in accordance with the Conservation Plan and the Plans (the “Work”). 4.3. Prior to commencement of the Work and the Code Upgrades, as defined in section 11.1, the Owner shall obtain from the District all necessary permits and licences, including where necessary, and without limitation, a heritage alteration permit. 4.4. The Work and the Code Upgrades shall be completed at the Owner’s sole expense in accordance with the Conservation Plan, and in accordance with generally accepted engineering, architectural, and heritage conservation practices. If any conflict or ambiguity arises in the interpretation of the Conservation Plan, the parties agree that the conflict or ambiguity shall be resolved in accordance with the Standards and Guidelines. 4.5. The Owner shall, at the Owner’s sole expense, engage a member of the Architectural Institute of British Columbia or the Association of Professional Engineers and Geoscientists of British Columbia with membership in the BCAHP or CAHP (the “Registered Professional”) to oversee the Work and to perform the duties of the Registered Professional as set out in this Agreement. 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 63 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 4.6. The Owner shall: a) prior to commencement of the Work, provide to the District an executed and sealed Confirmation of Commitment in the form attached hereto as Schedule “4”; b) erect on the Lands and keep erected throughout the course of the Work a sign of sufficient size and visibility to effectively notify contractors and tradespersons entering on the Lands that the Work involves protected heritage property and is being carried out for heritage conservation purposes; c) obtain the District’s advance approval for any changes to the Work, including any amended permits that may be required. 4.7. The Registered Professional shall: a) Upon substantial completion of the Work, provide to the District an executed and sealed Certification of Compliance in the form attached hereto as Schedule “5”; and b) Notify the District within one business day if the Registered Professional’s engagement by the Owner is terminated for any reason. 5.0 TIMING OF WORK 5.1. The Owner shall commence and complete all actions required for completion of the Work and the Code Upgrades, as set out in the Conservation Plan and in this Agreement, within 18 months following adoption of Bylaw 4698 authorizing this Agreement. 6.0 HERITAGE DESIGNATION 6.1. The Owner hereby irrevocably consents and agrees to the designation of the Heritage Building as a protected heritage property in accordance with section 611 of the Local Government Act, and pursuant to 638 and 644 Beach Drive Heritage Revitalization Agreement Bylaw No. 4698, and releases the District from any obligation to compensate the Owner in any form for any reduction in the market value of the Lands or any portion of the Lands that may result from the designation. 7.0 CONFORMITY WITH DISTRICT BYLAWS 7.1. Except with respect to a provision of a bylaw that is expressly varied by this Agreement, and only to the extent of the authorized variance(s), nothing contained or implied herein shall prejudice or affect the rights and powers of the District in the exercise of its functions under any public or private statutes, bylaws, orders and regulations, all of which may be fully and effectively exercised in relation to the Lands as if this Agreement had not been executed and delivered by the parties, and in particular but without limiting the generality of the foregoing nothing in this Agreement varies, waives or derogates from any provision of Bylaw No. 4247, Building and Plumbing Bylaw, 2005, as amended, as it applies to the Lands, the Heritage Building and the Work and Code Upgrades described in this Agreement and in the Conservation Plan. 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 64 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 8.0 APPLICATION OF THIS AGREEMENT 8.1. Unless otherwise stated, the terms and conditions of this Agreement respecting the preservation, rehabilitatation, restoration and maintainenance of the Heritage Building apply only to the structure and exterior of the Heritage Building, including, without limitation, the foundation, walls, roof, and all exterior doors, windows and architectural ornamentation. 8.2. Notwithstanding section 8.1, the following interior elements must be restored and maintained in accordance with the Conservation Plan and Plans attached as Schedules “2” and “3”: a) interior disappearing wall; and b) interior fireplaces and surrounds located in the living room and den. 9.0 SPECIAL PERMIT REQUIRED FOR ALTERATIONS 9.1. None of the types of actions, Work, additions or alterations listed in this Agreement or in the Conservation Plan shall be taken, commenced or carried out with respect to the Heritage Building unless the District has first issued a heritage alteration permit (or other lawful instrument of approval for a building protected by way of Heritage Revitalization Agreement) authorizing the same in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Local Government Act, which permit or approval the District, subject to the said statutory provisions, may issue or withhold in its discretion. 10.0 BYLAW VARIANCES 10.1. The District of Oak Bay Zoning Bylaw No. 3531, 1986, as amended is varied to the extent required to eliminate the non compliance with such provisions that would otherwise preclude approval of the Subdivision, and all of the definitions and regulations set out in the Zoning Bylaw shall apply to the Lands except to the extent that they are specifically varied as set out in Schedule “6”. 11.0 CODE COMPLIANCE UPGRADES 11.1. In addition to the work required by any applicable enactment, the Conservation Plan and pursuant to this Agreement, the alteration and restoration of the Heritage Building must include completion of the following a) Upgrading the entire Heritage Building to comply substantially with all applicable requirements of the British Columbia Building Code and British Columbia Fire Code as required by the Director of Building and Planning; b) Installation of anchorage of the entire structure of the Heritage Building to the foundation as shown on plans prepared and sealed by a professional structural engineer and for which a permit has been obtained from the District. (collectively, the “Code Upgrades”) 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 65 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 12.0 NO SEPARATE SALE OF LOT 2 CREATED BY SUBDIVISION 12.1. The Owner covenants and agrees not to transfer separately the parcel created by the subdivision plan on which the Heritage Building is located, being Lot 2 as shown on Schedule A, until the Owner has complied with the requirements of this Agreement for the preservation, restoration, and rehabilitation of the Heritage Building. 12.2. The District shall execute and deliver to the Owner a discharge of the agreement described in section 12.1. above, on the request of the Owner if the Owner has complied with the requirements of this Agreement for the preservation, restoration and rehabilitation of the Heritage Building and has provided the Certificate of Compliance in respect of the Heritage Building. 13.0 AGREEMENT TERMINATES IF SUBDIVISION NOT APPROVED 13.1. This Agreement shall immediately terminate and cease to have any force or effect if the Subdivision has not been approved under the Land Title Act within two (2) years after the date hereof, in which case all of the statutory and common law relative to the pre-existing nonconforming use of the Heritage Building and the Lands shall apply. Despite the foregoing, the consent and agreement of the Owner under section 6.1 of this Agreement shall survive the termination of this Agreement under this section 13.1, in the event the District has by then adopted a heritage designation bylaw for the Heritage Building. 14.0 BUILDING MAINTENANCE STANDARDS 14.1. At all times following substantial completion of the Work and pursuant to the Conservation Plan and Plans, the Owner shall: a) maintain the exterior of the Heritage Building so as to prevent deterioration due to weather, rot or insects; b) keep the exterior of the Heritage Building free from loose, rotted or broken materials and objects; c) keep all siding, window frames, railings, decks, stairs and other wood or metal materials on the exterior of the Heritage Building neatly finished and effectively protected from the elements by paint or stain; d) maintain all cornices, belt courses, corbels, trim, wall facings, and similar architectural features of the Heritage Building in good repair and safe condition; e) maintain all roofs, including facia boards, soffits, cornices and flashings, of the Heritage Building in a water tight condition; f) maintain all fences, barriers and retaining walls in good repair and in sound structural condition; and g) keep the Lot free from rubbish and debris, including any vehicle, trailer, boat or other object that is in a wrecked or derelict condition. 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 66 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 15.0 DAMAGE OR DESTRUCTION BY FIRE OR OTHER PERILS 15.1. In the event that the Heritage Building is damaged or destroyed to the extent of less than or equal to 75% of its value above its foundations, as determined by the Director of Building and Planning for the District, the Owner shall unless otherwise permitted in writing by the District, repair or reconstruct the Heritage Building in a manner consistent with the Conservation Plan, the Plans, and the Standards and Guidelines, subject to the issuance by the District of a heritage alteration permit or other lawful instrument of approval for buildings protected by way of Heritage Revitalization Agreement (the “Repair/Reconstruction Approval”), following which the Owner shall forthwith commence the repairs or reconstruction. 15.2. Where section 15.1 applies, the Owner shall apply for the Repair/Reconstruction Approval within a reasonable period of time after the occurrence of the damage or destruction and shall complete the repairs and reconstruction of the Heritage Building within one year of the District’s issuance of the Repair/Reconstruction Approval. 15.3. In the event that the Heritage Building is damaged or destroyed to the extent of more than 75% of its value above its foundations, as determined by the Director of Building and Planning for the District, the Owner shall construct a replica, using contemporary material if necessary, of the Heritage Building that complies in all respects with the Conservation Plan set out in Schedule 2 and with the District of Oak Bay Zoning Bylaw No. 3531, 1986, as varied by this agreement, after having obtained a heritage alteration permit and any other necessary permits and licenses (the “Replica Construction Approval”) and concurrently with deposit of the subdivision plan, the Owner shall deposit in the Land Title Office a covenant under s. 219 of the Land Title Act in favour of the District, in terms that are acceptable to the District, by which the Owner covenants and agrees to construct a replica in accordance with section 15.3. 15.4. Where section 15.3 applies, the Owner shall apply for the Replica Construction Approval within a reasonable period of time after the occurrence of the damage or destruction, and shall complete the construction of the replica within one year of the District’s issuance of the Replica Construction Approval. 15.5. Where the owner disagrees with a determination by the Director of Building and Planning for the District under sections 15.1 or 15.3: a) the Owner may at their cost and within 30 days of receipt of written notice of such determination submit to the District a written appraisal of the extent of damage above the foundation prepared by an insurance adjuster retained by the carrier of the current property insurance policy for the Heritage Building and licensed to practice in British Columbia under the Financial Institutions Act. b) The District shall witin 30 days of receipt of the appraisal prepared by the said insurance adjuster notify the Owner in writing as to whether or not it accepts the findings of the appraisal. c) In the event that the District notifies the Owner that it does not accept the findings of the appraisal, the matter of the extent of the damage above the foundation wall shall be determined by binding arbitration by a single arbitrator under the Arbitration Act. 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 67 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 16.0 AGREEMENT TO RESTRICT DEVELOPMENT OF LOT 2 16.1. Lot 2 shall not be built upon or excavated except in accordance with this Agreement. 16.2. Following completion of the Works in accordance with this Agreement, the Owner shall not alter the heritage character or the exterior appearance of the Heritage Building or the interior appearance of the fireplace and surround and disappearing wall, except as permitted by a heritage alteration permit issued by the District. 17.0 SECURITY FOR COMPLETION OF WORKS TO THE HERITAGE BUILDING 17.1. The Owner agrees to provide security to the District for the Owner’s obligation to complete the Works in accordance with this Agreement, to be provided no later than seven (7) days prior to submission for registration of the subdivision plan in the form of an irrevocable letter of credit or cash, to ensure that works are carried out in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Security Deposit Amount: $284,837.50 17.2. Following completion of the Works in accordance with this Agreement, and upon submission of the Certificate of Compliance for the Heritage Building, the District will release the security deposit. 18.0 NOTICE TO BE REGISTERED IN LAND TITLE OFFICE 18.1. Notice of this Agreement will be registered in the Land Title Office by the District at the cost of the Owner in accordance with the Local Government Act, and this Agreement is binding on the parties to this Agreement as well as all persons who acquire an interest in the Lands after registration of this Notice. 19.0 NOTICE OF DEFAULT 19.1. In the event that the Owner is in breach of or in default with respect to any term of this Agreement, the District may: a) by registered mail; or b) by hand delivery, to the address of the Owner as shown on the most recent revised assessment roll within the meaning of the Assessment Act, give the Owner written notice of the breach or default and the Owner shall remedy the same within thirty (30) days of the date of receipt of the notice, or within such longer time as the District may in its discretion specify in the notice or in writing upon subsequent application by the Owner. If the Owner fails or neglects to remedy the breach or default, without derogating from the ability of the District to seek and obtain from a court an order for specific performance, or from any other contract enforcement option, the District may by bylaw cancel this Agreement and the Owner shall for all purposes, including the satisfaction of any requirement set out in the Local Government Act, be deemed to have consented to such cancellation and shall ensure that all use and density of use of Lot 2 and the Heritage Building shall thenceforth be in accordance with the Zoning Bylaw and all other applicable bylaws of the District. 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 68 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 19.2. A notice under section 19.1 shall be deemed to have been received by the Owner 72 hours after the time of mailing or, if hand delivered, upon the date of delivery. 20.0 PROPERTY INSURANCE 20.1. The Owner agrees to maintain at all times for the Heritage Building, at full replacement value, insurance against all risks of physical loss or damage from all insurable perils including but not limited to fire, earthquake, water escape and flooding. 21.0 NO WAIVER UNLESS EXPRESSLY AGREED 21.1. Except as specifically agreed in writing, no action or failure to act by the District shall constitute a waiver of any right or duty afforded it under this Agreement, nor shall any such action or failure to act constitute an approval, waiver or acquiescence in or of any breach or default hereunder. 22.0 ENFORCEMENT BY DISTRICT 22.1. The parties agree that the enforcement of this Agreement shall be entirely within the discretion of the District and that the execution and registration of this Agreement shall not be interpreted as creating any duty on the part of the District to the Owner or to any other person to enforce any provision or the breach of any provision of this Agreement. 22.2. The Owner acknowledges that it is an offence under Section 621(1)(c) of the Local Government Act to alter the Lands or the Heritage Building in contravation of this Agreement, punishable by a fine of up to $50,000.00 or imprisonment for a term of up to two (2) years, or both. 22.3. The Owner acknowledges that it is an offence under Section 621(1)(b) of the Local Government Act to fail to comply with the requirements and conditions of any heritage alteration permit issued to the Owner pursuant to this Agreement and Section 617 of the Local Government Act, punishable in the manner described in the preceding section. 22.4. The Owner acknowledges that, if the Owner alters the Lands or the Heritage Building in contravention of this Agreement, the District may apply to the BC Supreme Court for: a) An order that the Owner restore the Lands or the Heritage Building to their condition before the contravention; b) An order that the Owner undertake compensatory conservation work on the Lands or the Heritage Building; c) An order requiring the Owner to take other measures specified by the Court to ameliorate the effects of the contravention; and d) An order authorizing the District to perform any and all such work at the expense of the Owner. 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 69 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 23.0 INDEMNIFICATION AND RELEASE 23.1. The Owner hereby releases, absolves and forever discharges the District, its officers and employees, from any and all claims, causes of action, actions, suits, proceedings and demands of any nature whatsoever which the Owner has or may have for any loss, damage, death or injury sustained by the Owner, arising directly or indirectly out of this Agreement. 23.2. The Owner shall indemnify and save harmless the District, its officers and employees, from and against all claims, causes of action, actions, suits, proceedings and demands of any nature whatsoever and by whomever made, brought or prosecuted, directly or indirectly arising out of or related to, occasioned by or attributed to a breach of any provision of this Agreement to be performed by the Owner, her agents or contractors. 24.0 NO PARTNERSHIP OR JOINT VENTURE 24.1. The parties agree that nothing contained herein creates a relation betrween the parties of partnership, joint venture or agency. 25.0 PERSONAL LIABILITY LIMITED TO PERIOD OF OWNERSHIP 25.1. The Owner covenants and agrees that for them, their heirs, administrators, executors, successors and assigns, that they will at all times perform and observe the requirements and restrictions hereinbefore set out and that they shall be binding on the Owner as personal covenants only during the period of their ownership of any interest in the Land. 26.0 GENERAL 26.1. Time shall be of the essence of this agreement. 26.2. The Owner shall execute and deliver or cause to be executed and delivered all such further agreements, documents and instruments and to do and perform or cause to be done and performed all such acts and things as may be required in the opinion of the District, acting reasonably, to give full effect to the intent of this Agreement. 26.3. This Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the District and its successors, trustees and assigns, and this Agreement shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the Owner and successors, trustees and permitted assigns and all parties claiming through them, and this Agreement shall charge and run with the Lands and enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the owners from time to time of the Lands and their respective heirs, executors, administrators, trustuees an successors and all parties claiming through them. 26.4. It is mutually understood and agreed between the parties that neither the Owner nor the District has made any representations, covenants, warranties, promises or agreements expressed or implied, other than those expressly contained in this Agreement. 26.5. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder, provided the invalid portion is not found by the court to be an integral part thereof, shall continue in full force and effect and be construed as if the Agreement had been executed without the invalid portion. 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 70 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 26.6. Wherever the expressions “Owner” and “District”, and the masculine gender, are used herein, the same shall be construed to mean the plural, feminine or body corporate or politic where the context or the parties so require, and the rest of the sentence shall be construed as if the grammatical and terminological changes thereby rendered necessary had been made. 26.7. Any bylaw or statute referred to herein is a reference to a bylaw or statute of the District or the Province of British Columbia, respectively, as amended, revised, consolidated or replaced from time to time. 26.8. The paragraph or section headings contained in this Agreement are for convenience only and do not purport to define, limit, or extend the scope or intent of the language of the paragraphs to which they pertain. 26.9. This Agreement when executed will set forth the entire agreement and understanding of the parties as at the date it is made. 26.10. No remedy under this Agreement is to be deemed exclusive but will, where possible, be cumulative with all other remedies at law or in equity. 26.11. Each of the parties will do, execute, and deliver, or cause to be done, executed, and delivered all such further acts, documents and things as may be reasonably required from time to time to give effect to this Agreement. 26.12. This Agreement is to be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws applicable in the Province of British Columbia. 26.13. This Agreement may be amended from time to time upon terms and conditions mutually acceptable to the District and the Owner only if the amendments are in writing and executed by the parties hereto, and only if the amendments are authorized by bylaw of the district. 27.0 PRIORITY 27.1. First West Credit Union, the registered holder of a charge by way of Mortgage and Assignment of Rents against the Lands and registered under Nos. CA6003459 and CA6003460 respectively (the “Charge”) in the Land Title Office at Victoria, British Columbia, for and in consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar paid by the District to the said Chargeholder (the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged), agrees with the District that upon filing of a Notice with the Land Title Office that the Lands are subject to this Agreement, pursuant to section 610(11) of the Local Government Act, this Agreement shall be an encumbrance upon the Lands in priority to the said charge in the same manner and to the same effect as if it had been dated and registered prior to the said Charge. 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 71 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day, month and year first above written. SIGNED BY THE OWNERS, ) In the presence of: ) ) ) ) Rebecca Sarah MacDonald Miller Witness (Signature) ) ) ) Witness (Signature) ) ) ) Occupation of Witness ) ) ) Address of Witness ) ) ) The Corporate Seal of THE CORPORATION ) OF THE DISTRICT OF OAK BAY was hereunto ) Affixed in the presence of: ) ) ) Mayor ) ) ) Director, Corporate Services ) ) ) ) FIRST WEST CREDIT UNION ) (as to priority agreement) By its authorized signatories: ) ) ) Print Name: ) ) ) Signature: ) ) 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 72 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 SCHEDULE 1 – PLAN OF SUBDIVISION (Prepared by Powell & Associates, November 24, 2017) 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 73 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 SCHEDULE 2 – CONSERVATION PLAN (36 pages) (Prepared by Donald Luxton & Associates Inc, December 2017) 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 74 of 172 BOYD RESIDENCE 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN DECEMBER 2017 Page 75 of 172 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION...... 1 2. HISTORIC CONTEXT...... 2 3. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE...... 8 4. CONSERVATION GUIDELINES 4.1 Standards & Guidelines...... 9 4.2 Conservation References...... 10 4.3 General Conservation Strategy...... 11 4.4 Sustainability Strategy...... 11 4.5 Alternate Compliance...... 12 4.5 Site Protection & Stabilization...... 13 5. CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Site...... 14 5.2 Form, Scale, & Massing...... 15 5.3 Foundation...... 15 5.4 Exterior Wood-Frame Walls...... 18 5.4.1 Stucco Cladding...... 19 5.5 Fenestration...... 20 5.5.1 Windows & Trims...... 20 5.5.2 Doors & Trims...... 21 5.6 Roof ...... 22 5.6.1 Chimney...... 23 5.7 Exterior Colour Schedule...... 23 5.8 Interior...... 24 6. MAINTENANCE PLAN 6.1 Maintenance Guidelines...... 25 6.2 Permitting...... 25 6.3 Routine, Cyclical & Non-Destructive Cleaning...... 25 6.4 Repairs & Replacement of Deteriorated Materials...... 26 6.5 Inspections...... 26 6.6 Information File...... 26 6.7 Exterior Maintenance...... 27 APPENDIX A: RESEARCH SUMMARY...... 30 APPENDIX B: DRAWINGS...... 31 DONALD LUXTON AND ASSOCIATES INC 1030 - 470 GRANVILLE STREET VANCOUVER BC V6C 1V5 [email protected] 604 688 1216 www.donaldluxton.com Page 76 of 172 Above: Archival photo of the Gardiner and Grace Boyd House, circa 1970 (Hallmark Society Archives). Opposite Page: Historic front facade (south elevation)of Boyd Residence at 644 Beach Drive. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 77 of 172 1.0 INTRODUCTION HISTORIC NAME: Boyd Residence CIVIC ADDRESS: 644 Beach Drive, Oak Bay, BC ORIGINAL OWNERS: Gardiner Custer Boyd ORIGINAL ARCHITECT: Samuel Maclure DATE OF CONSTRUCTION: 1927 The Boyd Residence, located at 644 Beach Drive This Conservation Plan is based on Parks Canada’s in Oak Bay, is a significant surviving work by Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation prolific local architect, Samuel Maclure. Designed of Historic Places in Canada. It outlines the just a short time before his death, it is an excellent preservation, restoration, and rehabilitation that will example of the Georgian Revival style that Maclure occur as part of the proposed development. adopted for many residential commissions during the interwar period. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 1 Page 78 of 172 2.0 HISTORIC CONTEXT 2.1 ORIGINAL OWNER: GARDINER 2.2 G.S. BOYD HOUSE CUSTER BOYD (Excerpt by Leonard K. Eaton, from The Architecture of Samuel Maclure) Gardiner Custer Boyd (known as Cust) was born on September 21, 1885 in Bobcaygeon, Ontario This house is a good example of Maclure’s to Mossom Martin Boyd (1855-1914) and Lillian late “Georgian” phase, a manner which deGrassi (1857-1942). He was educated at the also occurs in a great many other prestigious Trinity College School in Port Hope, commissions of the nineteen-twenties. The Ontario with university education at Oxford. The client was Mr. G. S. Boyd, a successful Boyd family was known for their lumber holdings lumberman with extensive interests in the in Ontario and across the county. Cust married Lake Cowichan area. He decided to move Grace Edith Henderson (1894-1987) in Toronto on to Victoria to further the education of his December 15, 1915. The following year, Cust and four children, and the house may be seen his brother Laurence were sent to British Columbia as primarily a family centred structure. to run the Cowichan Lumber Company. The family Unlike the important houses of the pre- moved from Lake Cowichan to Victoria so that their war years, this dwelling did not provide children could have a quality education. for an elaborate social programme, and The G.S. Boyd House, sliding partition. Plate 10 (Photo from “The Architecture of Samuel Maclure”) BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 2 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 79 of 172 HISTORIC CONTEXT it is noticeable that the staircase, though separated the dining room and living room ample in proportions, has none of the flair from the front hall by two walls which and dynamism of the earlier period. The divide horizontally into three sections of exterior of the house is done in the rough patterned wood panelling. These sections cast stucco which was a favourite with are interlocking and are suspended from Maclure in these years, and it has very a hidden storage space in the ceiling by much the same box-like quality which we heavy weights so that one person may associate with eighteenth-century English raise and lower them very easily. When architecture. The windows appear as holes the dividers are stowed away, it is almost punched in a solid surface. impossible to tell their location. Similarly when they are lowered, they blend so In actual fact the exterior disguises the well with the panelling on the other spatial concept of the interior. The owner walls they are undetectable except under wanted the ground floor to be opened extremely close inspection. Maclure used up into one great room by some kind of heavy structural elements to prevent the movable partition, and Maclure solved ceiling from sagging and thus successfully this problem with real brilliance. He overcame the heaviness which open beams would have caused. Additional architectural finesse was displayed in the treatment of the front hall and stairwell. With the partitions in place, the front hall seems long and narrow so that the general effect is one of constriction. When they are raised, the spaciousness is revealed. The wood detailing is perhaps overly refined, and the forecfully carved head around the fireplace thereby gain in effect. 2.3 ORIGINAL ARCHITECT: SAMUEL MACLURE (Excerpt by Jim Wolf, from Building the West: The Early Architects of British Columbia, pages 151-155) All his life Sam found an absorbing interest in the beauties and natural surroundings of British Columbia, and to the very end he retained in his charming water colour sketches an unfailingly accurate perception of the colouring and arrangement of things around him. Ross Lort, RAIC Journal, April, 1958, p.114. The G.S. Boyd House, stairway. Plate 11 (Photo from “The Architecture of Samuel Maclure”) BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 3 Page 80 of 172 HISTORIC CONTEXT The life and work of Samuel Maclure were Completed in 1893, its design was influenced by inextricably connected with British Columbia’s the work of American architects, H.H. Richardson early history and prominent residents, and his and Louis Sullivan, and was recognized at the time name is legendary. Several of his buildings are for its inspired and vigorous execution. This success among the best known and loved in the province. boosted his reputation, which grew among wealthy The architectural achievements of this native son and influential clients. One noteworthy residential have been chronicled in many books and articles commission was Ruhebuhne, built 1895-97 for that attempt to define his fascinating career. One of prominent politician and financier, A.C. Flumerfelt, the most remarkable aspects of Samuel Maclure’s which was Tudor Revival in style and designed on success was that his training was more practical than an extravagant scale. Maclure’s residential style had formal. In 1887 he began working as an architect in become increasingly American in spirit following his partnership with the young building contractor and return from a tour of the largest of its eastern cities architect Charles Henry Clow in New Westminster. in 1897. During this period Maclure also became They received many local commissions for residences as the City’s population grew because of its connection to the Canadian Pacific Railway in 1886. The firm relied extensively on pattern books for inspiration to create their Queen Anne-styled residences. However, their design talent evolved through experience and was rewarded with two of the city’s largest commissions, the Royal Columbian Hospital, and the YMCA Block. In a competition to design the City’s Library, Clow & Maclure’s design submission won first prize; however, they lost the commission to rival George W. Grant, despite an aggressive battle by their fellow architects to reverse the decision based on improper competition procedures. In 1891 Maclure started a new partnership with Richard P. Sharp, a talented and experienced English architect. Together they excelled at designing residences based primarily on the Victorian British Arts and Crafts style. They lavished attention on their functional and beautiful interiors, utilizing B.C. native woods extensively. In this brief period Maclure clearly learned much from Sharp, developing a signature style that would carry him successfully through his early career. Maclure’s relocation from New Westminster’s failing economy to more stable Victoria in 1892, and the establishment of his solo practice, began auspiciously with a commission to design the Temple Building for Robert Ward and Company. Portrait of Sam Maclure. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 4 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 81 of 172 HISTORIC CONTEXT an admirer of the work of Frank Lloyd Wright, with In this commission it is widely surmised that whom he later corresponded. Maclure’s style was Rattenbury was responsible for the design. However, widely recognized as artistically unique. It garnered Maclure’s signature style was seen throughout the a national audience in 1899 when a number of his beautiful interior and its decorations – on which he buildings were featured in the Canadian Architect collaborated with artist James Bloomfield – which & Builder. paid homage to British Columbia’s natural flora and the art of its Aboriginal people in wall murals and As the economy improved at the turn of the century, stained glass. Maclure’s talent was put to the test with larger and more prominent commissions garnered from Through these landmark residential projects wealthy Victoria society. He also designed smaller Maclure’s fame spread, and in 1900 he took on homes similar to the new bungalow home he built a young English assistant, Cecil Croker Fox. Born for his own family on Superior Street, 1899. It was in Falmouth, England in 1879, Fox had attended featured in the Victoria Tourist Association leaflet Malvern School, and then moved to London where and copied in the widely distributed magazine, he was a student of the famous Victorian architect, Beautiful Homes of America. This resulted in a Alfred Waterhouse. Fox entered the very select large number of local commissions and inquiries practice of C.F.A. Voysey (1857-1941), a gifted from as far east as Buffalo, New York. The “Maclure architect and one of the leading proponents of Bungalow” was not to be confused with the popular the British Arts and Crafts movement. Yet in spite California Bungalow house form, of which Maclure of his work being popular and well-publicized he was an outspoken critic. He felt it simply did not fit only employed two or three draftsmen at a time, into British Columbia’s rugged landscape. and Fox would have worked under Voysey’s close supervision. Fox spent two years under Voysey, During this time Maclure recognized the opportunity until in 1898, accompanied by his father, he left for additional commissions in Vancouver, as it began England for Victoria. Fox joined Maclure’s office to eclipse Victoria as the province’s metropolis. and soon the two men had established a common He established a brief partnership with J.E. Parr in architectural aesthetic and working relationship. 1897 and then joined fellow Victoria architect, C.J. Maclure’s architectural skills were in great demand Soule, in an office from 1898-99. It is yet unclear not only in Victoria, where he lived, but also in the what commissions were undertaken by these Lower Mainland, and in 1905 he had so much work two partnerships. Soule was involved, perhaps on hand that he opened a Vancouver office with Fox in a supervisory role, in Maclure’s design for the as his partner-in-charge. Strathcona Lodge at Shawnigan Lake in 1900. Maclure was clearly on his own by 1900, when he Maclure’s greatest achievement came in 1907 with received a plum commission to design Gabriola, a the commission to design Hatley Park, for which grand sandstone mansion for sugar baron, Benjamin he was solely responsible. This palatial estate Tingley Rogers, on Davie Street in Vancouver’s West residence for James and Laura Dunsmuir was said End. The completion of this landmark structure at the time to be the finest home in Canada. In this provided Maclure with widespread press coverage mammoth project Maclure was assisted by English and elevated his reputation throughout the province. draftsman, Douglas James. He was also funded by the Dunsmuirs to travel to Europe, to locate and Maclure’s prominence and skill in residential design purchase furnishings and to satisfy his long held led to his appointment by the provincial government dream to see its art and architecture. The completion for the design of the new Lieutenant-Governor’s of Hatley Park coincided with professional tragedy home, with F.M. Rattenbury as supervising architect. when the Five Sisters Block in Victoria was destroyed BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 5 Page 82 of 172 HISTORIC CONTEXT by fire in 1910, eliminating his valued studio, library which became one of his trademarks. His hobby of and historically valuable record of commissions. gardening also became part of his practice as he expertly drew many landscape designs, including Maclure’s chosen idiom of the medieval half- several elements of the famous Butchart Gardens in timbered Arts and Crafts home received much Central Saanich. attention as the style of choice for the elite of both Vancouver and Victoria. Despite trying “time after The booming economy of 1911-13 and the creation time to break away from” the Tudor idiom and of new residential districts such as the Uplands in experimenting with rough cedar siding and stucco, Victoria and Vancouver’s Shaughnessy Heights Maclure was typecast, and clients continued to created an unprecedented growth in the construction demand his half-timbered house. Fox’s experience of homes for wealthy British Columbians. Maclure and knowledge, however, helped infuse Maclure’s & Fox were at the height of their success and work with a more modern English style, and brought influence, and between 1909-15 the Vancouver an entirely new aspect to the character of their office alone received almost sixty commissions, designs. Perhaps the change was best described in including several country clubs, two private schools Canadian Architect & Builder in 1908, describing and a host of large residences. Two adjacent the Victoria residence of Alexis Martin designed by residences facing The Crescent in Shaughnessy Maclure: “The blending of English taste with that Heights demonstrate Maclure & Fox stylistic range, which is characteristic of the architecture of our own the Dockrill Residence, 1910, with its emphatic Pacific Coast has an effect of quiet sumptuousness, half-timbering, and the Walter C. Nichol Residence, combined with straight-forward utility.” Fox not only 1912-13, more evocative of the British Arts and brought the Voysey aesthetic to the partnership, but Crafts movement. Fox also left his particular stamp also knowledge of the best English architectural on the Huntting House in Shaughnessy Heights, supply firms, giving their designs an elegant 1911-13, by creating a design with unmistakable refinement rarely seen in British Columbia. Voyseyan elements: an extraordinarily low front double gable effect with rows of casement windows Maclure also did his best to improve the stamped out of the rough stucco facade – not only development of artists and crafts people in British Voysey trademarks but an imitation of the great Columbia by supporting the fledgling Vancouver architect’s own home, The Orchard, at Chorley Arts and Crafts Society, established in 1900, and Wood, Hertfordshire, England, built 1900. founding with other artists the Victoria-based Island Arts and Crafts Society in 1909. Early in his career Maclure’s reputation and client base spread beyond Maclure had developed an intimate knowledge of British Columbia in this prewar period. Both national the use of local woods and stone and of the ability and international design periodicals profiled his of local firms to manufacture, install and finish the designs. From his connections with wealthy patrons finest cedar, fir and maple interior fittings tohis came other non-residential commissions, such as own designs. He also cultivated local talent such the Vancouver Golf Club in Coquitlam, and private as wood carver, George S. Gibson to create interior schools in Vancouver that emulated Maclure’s decorations, inspired from the native landscape in residential design aesthetic. Commercial projects the best Arts and Crafts tradition. Maclure’s artistic were rare but included elegant buildings such as the development became focused on interior layout $100,000 B.C. Electric Railway Company station and the decoration of his designs which became in New Westminster, designed with Fox in 1909, ever more refined. He achieved extraordinary and the Jones Building of Victoria, 1912. Now at spatial arrangements in many residences by the height of his success, Maclure regarded his incorporating double-height, galleried central halls, appointment as one of the assessors to determine the BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 6 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 83 of 172 HISTORIC CONTEXT winner in the 1912 University of B.C. competition cremated and the ashes spread at his childhood one of the highest compliments of his career. home at Matsqui Prairie by his brother, Charles, and Ross Lort. Daisy Maclure hoped to continue her The 1913 recession and the outbreak of the First husband’s practice by reopening the Victoria office World War brought significant change to Maclure’s with architect Wallace Deffett in charge and Ross practice. The Vancouver office closed in 1915 when Lort heading up a new Vancouver office. However, Cecil Fox returned to England to enlist, serving as a this attempt failed due to the lack of family finances lieutenant with the 12th Battalion of the East Surrey and the Great Depression. As a result the firm’s Regiment. Tragically, he was killed in action in drawings were transferred to Lort, who knew their France on September l5, 1916. After the war Ross value and ensured their survival. Through these Lort, a long time Maclure apprentice and draftsman, records and many surviving buildings the artistic was made a full partner, and the Vancouver office genius of Maclure is revealed as a true legacy of came under his direction from 1920-23. An example architectural achievement. of the firm’s work at this time is an Arts and Crafts bungalow for C.B. McAllister on Connaught Drive in Shaughnessy, 1920, designed at a much more modest scale than the great prewar projects. During the 1920s Maclure maintained a busy practice in Victoria where from time to time he collaborated with other architects. His designs followed a national trend towards smaller and more economical residences, reflecting the reality that most families now lived without servants. A change in popular tastes finally let Maclure experiment with the symmetrical and classical Georgian Revival style, and the English Cottage style, featuring roughcast stucco exteriors. However, his Tudor Revival designs remained popular. The pleasure of designing yet another elaborate residence eventually came Maclure’s way in 1924. This was to be a summer home, called Miraloma, at Sidney, on Vancouver Island, for Lieutenant- Governor Walter C. Nichol, for whom Maclure & Fox had previously designed a grand Shaughnessy mansion. This unusual commission, completed in 1926, brought out all his artistic ability. Described as “an extremely powerful statement in wood,” the house was entirely clad in undressed Douglas Fir, creating a completely unique rustic exterior. When Maclure died in 1929, the City of Victoria mourned the passing of one of their most remarkable citizens and a great Canadian artist. His body was BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 7 Page 84 of 172 3.0 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE BOYD RESIDENCE, 644 BEACH DRIVE historic place is an excellent example from his post- (Prepared by Edwards Heritage Consulting, Victoria, BC – war phase, when those who could afford to hire February 2017) architects to design their homes wanted simpler, more compact structures. Maclure used technology Description of the Historic Place to deal with the need for open spaces in a smaller 644 Beach Drive is a two-storey residence sited on building. In this home, he designed a disappearing a rocky ledge overlooking the Oak Bay waterfront. wall, which was suspended from a hidden space in Built in 1927, it represents the late 1920s trend the ceiling by heavy weights. One, two, or all three away from large multi-room mansions to smaller, sections could be lowered to create a division in the more modest seven or eight room dwellings. main living space. There are also unique carvings The disappearing wall in the main living space on the fireplace surrounds. demonstrates Maclure’s fascination with new technology. Maclure designed alterations in 1933 644 Beach Drive has value due to its original and John di Castri made further alterations in 1959. owner and his connection to early logging in British Columbia. Gardiner Cust Boyd (known as Cust) Heritage Value of the Historic Place was born on September 21, 1885 in Bobcaygeon, 644 Beach Drive is valued as a good example of Ontario to Mossom Martin Boyd (1855-1914) and a Georgian Revival residence. Revivals of previous Lillian deGrassi (1857-1942). He was educated at architectural styles were prominent in the early the prestigious Trinity College School in Port Hope, twentieth-century as property owners sought to Ontario with university education at Oxford. The allude to the stability and glory of a former age. Boyd family was known for their lumber holdings In Victoria, this style can be seen on residential in Ontario and across the county. Cust married buildings ranging from small cottages to large Grace Edith Henderson (1894-1987) in Toronto on opulent houses. Originally this style arose during December 15, 1915. The following year, Cust and the reign of the four King Georges, and was filtered his brother Laurence were sent to British Columbia through three American regions, before making to run the Cowichan Lumber Company. The family its way to the Pacific Coast. In British Columbia, moved from Lake Cowichan to Victoria so that their Georgian Revival homes are generally two-storeys children could have a quality education. in height and rectangular in footprint, featuring rigid symmetry, based on well-defined geometric Character-Defining Elements proportions and order. The heritage character of 644 Beach Drive is defined by the following elements: The heritage value of 644 Beach Drive lies in its • location overlooking the Oak Bay waterfront association with architect Samuel Maclure (1860- on Beach Drive; 1929). Born in New Westminster, BC, he became • views of the waterfront from the residence; the foremost domestic architect in British Columbia • siting on a rock base; from 1890 to 1920 and established a building style • characteristics of the Georgian Revival that gave Victoria and parts of Vancouver a distinctive including wood frame construction, brick Canadian West Coast flavour. His works influenced chimneys, roughcast stucco exterior, a generation of British Columbia architects and symmetrical design with windows on either Maclure’s influence on BC building design was so side of entrance, restrained ornament; pervasive that into the 1940s government buildings • unique interior features including the and schools throughout the province continued to disappearing wall and the carved heads on the emulate his early commissions. Maclure utilized fireplaces; many stylistic influences and could adapt his • connection with Samuel Maclure; use of indigenous materials with versatility. This • connection with the pioneer Boyd family. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 8 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 85 of 172 4.0 CONSERVATION GUIDELINES 4.1 STANDARDS AND GUIDELINES STANDARDS The Boyd Residence is a significant historical Standards relating to all Conservation Projects resource in Oak Bay. The Parks Canada’s Standards & 1. Conserve the heritage value of a historic place. Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Do not remove, replace, or substantially alter Canada is the source used to assess the appropriate its intact or repairable character-defining level of conservation and intervention. Under the elements. Do not move a part of a historic Standards & Guidelines, the work proposed for the place if its current location is a character- Boyd Residence includes aspects of preservation, defining element. rehabilitation and restoration. 2. Conserve changes to a historic place, which over time, have become character-defining Preservation: the action or process of elements in their own right. protecting, maintaining, and/or stabilizing 3. Conserve heritage value by adopting an the existing materials, form, and integrity approach calling for minimal intervention. of a historic place or of an individual 4. Recognize each historic place as a physical component, while protecting its heritage record of its time, place and use. Do not create value. a false sense of historical development by adding elements from other historic places or Restoration: the action or process of other properties or by combining features of accurately revealing, recovering or the same property that never coexisted. representing the state of a historic place or 5. Find a use for a historic place that requires of an individual component, as it appeared minimal or no change to its character defining at a particular period in its history, while elements. protecting its heritage value. 6. Protect and, if necessary, stabilize a historic place until any subsequent intervention Rehabilitation: the action or process is undertaken. Protect and preserve of making possible a continuing or archaeological resources in place. Where there compatible contemporary use of a historic is potential for disturbance of archaeological place or an individual component, through resources, take mitigation measures to limit repair, alterations, and/or additions, while damage and loss of information. protecting its heritage value. 7. Evaluate the existing condition of character- defining element to determine the appropriate Interventions to the Boyd Residence should be intervention needed. Use the gentlest means based upon the Standards outlined in the Standards possible for any intervention. Respect heritage & Guidelines, which are conservation principles value when undertaking an intervention. of best practice. The following General Standards 8. Maintain character-defining elements on should be followed when carrying out any work to an ongoing basis. Repair character-defining an historic property. element by reinforcing the materials using recognized conservation methods. Replace in kind any extensively deteriorated or missing parts of character-defining elements, where there are surviving prototypes. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 9 Page 86 of 172 CONSERVATION GUIDELINES 9. Make any intervention needed to preserve 4.2 CONSERVATION REFERENCES character-defining elements physically and visually compatible with the historic place and The proposed work entails the preservation, identifiable upon close inspection. Document restoration, and rehabilitation of the exterior of any intervention for future reference. the Boyd Residence. The following conservation resources should be referred to: Additional Standards relating to Rehabilitation 10. Repair rather than replace character-defining Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of elements. Where character-defining elements Historic Places in Canada, Parks Canada, 2010. are too severely deteriorated to repair, and http://www.historicplaces.ca/en/pages/standards- where sufficient physical evidence exists, normes/document.aspx replace them with new elements that match the forms, materials and detailing of sound National Park Service, Technical Preservation versions of the same elements. Where there is Services. Preservation Briefs: insufficient physical evidence, make the form, material and detailing of the new elements Preservation Brief 1: Assessing Cleaning and compatible with the character of the historic Water-Repellent Treatments for Historic Masonry place. Buildings. 11. Conserve the heritage value and character- http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/1- defining elements when creating any new cleaning-water-repellent.htm additions to a historic place and any related new construction. Make the new work Preservation Brief 6: Dangers of Abrasive Cleaning physically and visually compatible with, to Historic Buildings. subordinate to and distinguishable from the http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/6- historic place. dangers-abrasive-cleaning.htm 12. Create any new additions or related new construction so that the essential form and Preservation Brief 9: The Repair of Historic Wooden integrity of a historic place will not be Windows. impaired if the new work is removed in the http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/briefs/9- future. wooden-windows.htm Additional Standards relating to Restoration Preservation Brief 10: Exterior Paint Problems on 13. Repair rather than replace character-defining Historic Woodwork. elements from the restoration period. Where http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ character-defining elements are too severely briefs/10-paint-problems.htm deteriorated to repair and where sufficient physical evidence exists, replace them with Preservation Brief 14: New Exterior Additions to new elements that match the forms, materials Historic Buildings: Preservation Concerns. and detailing of sound versions of the same http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ elements. briefs/14-exterior-additions.htm 14. Replace missing features from the restoration period with new features whose forms, materials and detailing are based on sufficient physical, documentary and/or oral evidence. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 10 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 87 of 172 CONSERVATION GUIDELINES Preservation Brief 18: Rehabilitating Interiors in • Design for the new work may be contemporary Historic Buildings – Identifying Character-Defining or may reference design motifs from the Elements. historic place. In either case, it should be http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ compatible in terms of mass, materials, briefs/18-rehabilitating-interiors.htm relationship of solids to voids, and colour, yet be distinguishable from the historic place. Preservation Brief 22: The Preservation and Repair • The new additions should be physically and of Historic Stucco. visually compatible with, subordinate to and http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ distinguishable from the preserved historic briefs/22-stucco.htm façade. Preservation Brief 37: Appropriate Methods of An addition should be subordinate to the historic Reducing Lead-Paint Hazards in Historic Housing. place. This is best understood to mean that the http://www.nps.gov/tps/how-to-preserve/ addition must not detract from the historic place briefs/37-lead-paint-hazards.htm or impair its heritage value. Subordination is not a question of size; a small, ill-conceived addition could adversely affect an historic place more than a 4.3 GENERAL CONSERVATION large, well-designed addition. STRATEGY Additions or new construction should be visually The primary intent is to preserve the existing historic compatible with, yet distinguishable from, the structure, while undertaking a rehabilitation that historic place. To accomplish this, an appropriate will upgrade its structure and services to increase balance must be struck between mere imitation its functionality for residential uses. As part of the of the existing form and pointed contrast, thus scope of work, character-defining elements will be complementing the historic place in a manner that preserved, while missing or deteriorated elements respects its heritage value. will be restored. The proposed additions conform to these standards, Proposed Redevelopment Scheme as their structure fits within the character of the The development scheme for this property has been original house, while remaining distinguishable prepared by Zebra Design Group, which include from the main house by not directly mimicking any additions of new garage with roof deck to the side details. and rear corner of the heritage asset, as well as new dormers to the existing roofline. 4.4 SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGY Due to the proposed addition to the historic building, all new visible construction will be considered Heritage conservation and sustainable development a modern addition to the historic structure. The can go hand in hand with the mutual effort of all Standards & Guidelines list recommendations for stakeholders. In a practical context, the conservation new additions to historic places. The proposed and re-use of historic and existing structures design scheme should follow these principles: contributes to environmental sustainability by reducing solid waste disposal, saving embodied • Designing a new addition in a manner that energy, and conserving historic materials that are draws a clear distinction between what is often less consumptive of energy than many new historic and what is new. replacement materials. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 11 Page 88 of 172 CONSERVATION GUIDELINES In 2016, the Federal Provincial Territorial Ministers of the difficulty of evaluating the impact of Culture & Heritage in Canada (FPTMCHC) published every scenario and the realities of projects a document entitled, Building Resilience: Practical where buildings may contain inherently Guidelines for the Retrofit and Rehabilitation of sustainable elements but limited or no Buildings in Canada that is “intended to establish heritage value. All interventions must be a common pan-Canadian ‘how-to’ approach for evaluated based on their unique context, practitioners, professionals, building owners, and on a case-by-case basis, by experts operators alike.” equipped with the necessary knowledge and experience to ensure a balanced The following is an excerpt from the introduction of consideration of heritage value and the document: sustainable rehabilitation measures. [Building Resilience] is intended to Building Resilience can be read as a stand- serve as a “sustainable building toolkit” alone document, but it may also further that will enhance understanding of illustrate and build on the sustainability the environmental benefits of heritage considerations in the Standards and conservation and of the strong Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic interrelationship between natural and Places in Canada. built heritage conservation. Intended as a useful set of best practices, the guidelines in Building Resilience can be applied 4.5 ALTERNATE COMPLIANCE to existing and traditionally constructed buildings as well as formally recognized The Boyd Residence may eligible for heritage heritage places. variances that will enable a higher degree of heritage conservation and retention of original These guidelines are primarily aimed at material, including considerations available under assisting designers, owners, and builders in the following municipal legislation. providing existing buildings with increased levels of sustainability while protecting 4.5.1 BRITISH COLUMBIA BUILDING CODE character-defining elements and, thus, their heritage value. The guidelines are Building Code upgrading ensures life safety and also intended for a broader audience of long-term protection for historic resources. It is architects, building developers, owners, important to consider heritage buildings on a case- custodians and managers, contractors, by-case basis, as the blanket application of Code crafts and trades people, energy requirements do not recognize the individual advisers and sustainability specialists, requirements and inherent strengths of each engineers, heritage professionals, and building. Over the past few years, a number of officials responsible for built heritage equivalencies have been developed and adopted and the existing built environment at all in the British Columbia Building Code that enable jurisdictional levels. more sensitive and appropriate heritage building upgrades. For example, the use of sprinklers in a Building Resilience is not meant to heritage structure helps to satisfy fire separation provide case-specific advice. It is and exiting requirements. Table A-1.1.1.1., found in intended to provide guidance with some Appendix A of the Code, outlines the “Alternative measure of flexibility, acknowledging Compliance Methods for Heritage Buildings.” BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 12 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 89 of 172 CONSERVATION GUIDELINES Given that Code compliance is such a significant 4.6 SITE PROTECTION & STABILIZATION factor in the conservation of heritage buildings, the most important consideration is to provide viable It is the responsibility of the owner to ensure the heritage economic methods of achieving building upgrades. resource is protected from damage at all times. At any In addition to the equivalencies offered under the time that the building is left vacant, it should be secured current Code, the City can also accept the report of against unauthorized access or damage through the a Building Code Engineer as to acceptable levels of use of appropriate fencing and security measures. code performance. Additional measures to be taken include: 4.5.2 ENERGY EFFICIENCY ACT • Are smoke and fire detectors in working order? • Are wall openings boarded up and exterior The provincial Energy Efficiency Act (Energy doors securely fastened once the building is Efficiency Standards Regulation) was amended in vacant? 2009 to exempt buildings protected through heritage • Have the following been removed from the designation or listed on a community heritage interior: trash, hazardous materials such as register from compliance with the regulations. inflammable liquids, poisons, and paints and Energy Efficiency standards therefore do not apply to canned goods that could freeze and burst? windows, glazing products, door slabs or products installed in heritage buildings. This means that The building should be protected from movement exemptions can be allowed to energy upgrading and other damage at all times during construction measures that would destroy heritage character- work. defining elements such as original windows and doors. These provisions do not preclude that heritage buildings must be made more energy efficient, but they do allow a more sensitive approach of alternate compliance to individual situations and a higher degree of retained integrity. Increased energy performance can be provided through non-intrusive methods of alternate compliance, such as improved insulation and mechanical systems. Please refer to the Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada for further detail about “Energy Efficiency Considerations.” BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 13 Page 90 of 172 5.0 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS An initial condition review of the Boyd Residence 5.1 SITE was carried out during a site visit in March 2017, and was limited to visual observation of the The Boyd Residence is characterized by its original exterior of the building. The recommendations for siting on a rock base, overlooking the Oak Bay the preservation and rehabilitation of the historic waterfront at 644 Beach Drive. The property site façades are based on the site review and archival features mature landscaping that acts as privacy and documents that provide valuable information about noise barrier along Beach Drive, with a meandering, the original appearance of the historic building. paved driveway providing access to the historic house above the hill. The following chapter describes the materials, physical condition and recommended conservation As part of the redevelopment scheme, the original strategy for the Boyd Residence based on Parks location of the heritage asset will be preserved, while Canada Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation some of the mature landscaping will be removed to of Historic Places in Canada. accommodate three new detached infill buildings to the front and rear of the property site. Reference Section 4.6: Site Protection for further information. NEWPORT AVENUE BOYD RESIDENCE BEACH DRIVE BEACH DRIVE RADCLIFFE LANE Aerial view showing location of Boyd Residence at 644 Beach Drive. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 14 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 91 of 172 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS Conservation Strategy: Rehabilitation The proposed redevelopment scheme includes • Preserve the original location of the building. the rehabilitation of the overall form, scale, and All rehabilitation work should occur within the massing of the heritage asset. This includes the property lines. removal of the enclosed, main entrance vestibule, and rehabilitation of the garage and deck at the northeast side and rear corner of the historic house. 5.2 FORM, SCALE & MASSING Any new additions should be sympathetic to, and distinguishable from, the historic character of the The Boyd Residence features a residential form, Boyd Residence. scale, and massing, that is characterized by its: rectangular plan; two-storey height; hipped-roof Conservation Strategy: Rehabilitation structure with two brick chimneys; and symmetrical • Preserve the original overall form, scale and design with the main entrance door flanked by massing of the building. a pair of bay windows on the ground floor. Later • Retain the historic front façade oriented along sympathetic rehabilitation were subsequently done Beach Drive. to the building, including the addition of a main entrance vestibule, and extensions to the northeast side and rear corner of the house. 5.3 FOUNDATION The initial review of the exterior foundation walls of the Boyd Residence indicate that they are in good condition. Further investigation is recommended to LATER determine its structural integrity. Careful attention ADDITION should be executed to ensure the existing foundation walls above grade, particularly the front façade, are not damaged during rehabilitation work. Conservation Strategy: Preservation • Existing foundations should be preserved, if possible. • If new foundations are proposed, concrete is a ORIGINAL suitable material. New material should match HOUSE original in appearance, as viewed from the exterior. • Foundations should be reviewed by a Structural Engineer. Once condition is assessed, conservation recommendations can LATER be finalized. ADDITION • To ensure the prolonged preservation of the new foundations, all landscaping should be separated from the foundations at grade by a course of gravel or decorative stones, which help prevent splash back and assist drainage. New vegetation may assist in concealing the newly exposed foundations, if desired. Diagram showing original rectangular footprint of the Boyd Resi- dence on property site, including later addition on the northeast side and rear corner (dashed). Note meandering driveway to the historic house from Beach Drive to the south. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 15 Page 92 of 172 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS Archival photo of the Gardiner and Grace Boyd House, circa 1970 (Hallmark Society Archives). Existing condition of historic front facade (south elevation) of Boyd Residence, facing Beach Drive. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 16 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 93 of 172 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS Side elevation of the Boyd Residence to the west, showing roof and brick chimney stack, and rear projecting bay and extension at the backgound. Partial northwest corner of the Boyd Residence, showing original wood windows and doors, dormer, and later exterior chimney in the background. Note rock outcrop to the left (north) of the house. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 17 Page 94 of 172 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 5.4 EXTERIOR WOOD-FRAME WALLS • Preserve the original wood-frame structure of the historic building. The Boyd Residence features original wood- • Design structural or seismic upgrades so as to frame construction in Georgian Revival style of minimize the impact to the character-defining domestic architecture, characterized by restrained elements. ornamentation. The original, exterior wood-frame • Utilize Alternate Compliance Methods walls feature painted, stucco cladding in rough outlined in the BCBC for fire and spatial finish on all elevations. The exterior wood-frame separations including installation of sprinklers walls are character-defining elements of the historic where possible. house, and should be preserved and rehabilitated, • Any existing trim should be preserved, and as required. new material that is visually physically compatible with the original should be Conservation Strategy: Preservation reinstated when original fabric is missing. • Due to the integrity of wood frame structure, Combed and/or textured lumber is not the exterior walls should be preserved through acceptable. Hardi-plank or other cementitious retention and in-situ repair work. boards are not acceptable. Partial northeast corner of the Boyd Residence, showing later extension to the side (east) and rear elevations that will be demolished and replaced as part of the proposed rehabilitation scheme. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 18 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 95 of 172 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS 5.4.1 STUCCO CLADDING The original, exterior wood-frame walls of the Boyd Residence is clad with stucco render in rough finish. Based on visual observation from the ground level, the stucco has been finished with paint in sympathetic colour within the past 50 years, and the cladding generally appears to be in fair condition. Localized areas of the stucco cladding in all elevations show varying degrees of deterioration, as evident by discolouration, staining, cracking, missing materials, unsympathetic parging, and biological growth. Further investigation is recommeded in areas where heavy deterioration is noted, particularly around windows and door openings, and soffit under roof overhang, which may indicate water ingress and moisture retention. The stucco cladding of the Boyd Residence is a character-defining element that should be preserved, and repaired as required. Conservation Strategy: Preservation & Investigation • The exterior stucco cladding may require extensive cleaning on all elevations. Cleaning should be done in the gentlest means possible, ideally with low-pressure water and scrub brushes. Harsh chemical cleaners or any abrasive cleaning methods should be avoided to ensure stucco is not damaged. • Small hairline cracks are often not a serious concern, and should be sealed with a thin slurry coat before moisture gets a change to penetrate the cracks and make them worse. The slurry coat should consist of the same ingredients found in the topcoat of the stucco. All repair work should be finished with a coat of paint, consistent with the paint schedule. • Caulking compounds should not be used for patching hairline cracks, and are an unsuitable repair method. The physical and aesthetic characteristics of caulking compounds are incompatible with stucco, and will weather differently and attract more dirt. Typical deteriorating condition of existing stucco cladding in localized areas: soffit at roof overhang (top); above dormer window (middle); window lintel-to-jamb corner (bottom). BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 19 Page 96 of 172 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS • Larger cracks should be cut out, and prepared for more extensive repair. A professional plasterer may be required if the stucco requires extensive repair work. All existing holes or openings should be patched. Likewise, all openings resulting from the removal of original windows should be patched. All patch work and repairs should be made with a visually and physically compatible stucco material. • All repair methods should be carried out in an inconspicuous sample location, to ensure all repairs are compatible with the historic stucco. 5.5 FENESTRATION Windows, doors and storefronts are among the most conspicuous feature of any building. In addition to their function — providing light, views, fresh air and access to the building — their arrangement and design is fundamental to the building’s appearance and heritage value. Each element of fenestration is, in itself, a complex assembly whose function and operation must be considered as part of its conservation. – Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. 5.5.1 WINDOWS & TRIMS The Boyd Residence features a variety of original window openings, with extant, original, exterior wood windows assemblies in all elevations, including original, exterior storm windows. In general, surviving original, exterior wood window sashes appear to be in fair condition, with visible signs of deterioration. A number of extant, storm wood windows were noted, and appear to be in poor condition. Further investigation by contractor skilled in heritage restoration is required to confirm the final conservation approach. Photos showing typical condition of different surviving original wood window configurations at rear and side elevations. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 20 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 97 of 172 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS Conservation Strategy: Rehabilitation • Inspect for condition and complete detailed inventory to determine extent of recommended rehabilitation or replacement. • New windows may be double-glazed in a matching muntin pattern. • Prime and repaint as required in appropriate colour, based on colour schedule devised by Heritage Consultant. 5.5.2 DOORS & TRIMS The Boyd Residence features a number of original door openings, and surviving original, exterior wood doors with glazed-inset panelling. The main entrance door is characterized by a pair of slim sidelights, while some of the secondary entrances include multi-light transom windows. No original hardware was noted in any of the surviving original wood doors. The main entrance vestibule is a later addition, and the existing door will be removed. Photos showing typical condition of different surviving original Photos showing typical condition of different surviving original wood window configurations at the historic front facade (south wood door configurations at side elevations to the west (above, elevation). Note tripartite window at second floor level with left) and the east (above, right). operable double-hung wood window with multi-light upper sash, and operable storm window sash. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 21 Page 98 of 172 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS In general, the existing wood doors appear to be in good condition, with signs of deterioration caused by natural weathering. These elements contribute to the historic character of the house, and should be rehabilitated or replicated as required. Conservation Strategy: Rehabilitation • Retain the door openings in their original locations, and rehabilitate or replicate all original doors. The existing exterior door of the main entrance vestibule may be removed. • New doors should be visually compatible with the historic character of the building. 5.6 ROOF The Boyd Residence features an original wood- frame roof structure that is characterized by hipped- roof configuration with asphalt shingles, including one original interior, brick chimney stack, and another later exterior chimney stack clad in more modest rough-cast stucco render. In general, the roof appears to be in good condition, with minor signs of deterioration caused by natural weathering. The original hipped-roof structure is a character-defining element of the historic house that should be preserved and repaired, as necessary. As part of the proposed rehabilitation scheme, additional dormers will be added to the existing, original roof structure. New, replacement shingles may be installed for roofing to match original in appearance, and should be reviewed by the Heritage Consultant prior to installation. Conservation Recommendation: Rehabilitation • Preserve the roof structure in its current configuration, as expressed by its hipped roof configuration. • If required, roofing membrane and cladding system may be rehabilitated. Cedar shingles are the preferred material, but duroid shingles are also acceptable. Photos showing typical condition of exterior wood door at main entry vestibule (top) to be removed, and original main entrance door with pair of sidelights inside (bottom). BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 22 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 99 of 172 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS • Retain the original bargeboards and fascia 5.6.1 CHIMNEY boards, as well as the soffit any exposed roof elements. The Boyd Residence features an original interior • Design and install adequate rainwater disposal chimney clad in brick masonry units, as well as a system and ensure proper drainage from the later exterior chimney clad in rough-cast stucco site is maintained. Aluminum in appropriate render. Both chimneys will be retained and colours is acceptable. Paint or provide preserved as part of the proposed redevelopment specification of drainage system elements scheme. according to colour schedule devised by Heritage Consultant. Conservation Recommendation: Rehabilitation • Preserve the chimney in its original configuration, if possible. • Chimney may require structural stabilization. • Investigate condition of brickwork. Brickwork may require repointing. If required, brickwork may be repointed and cleaned using a natural bristle brush and mild rinse detergent. 5.7 EXTERIOR COLOUR SCHEDULE Part of the conservation process is to finish the building in historically appropriate paint colours. The original colours were determined through onsite sampling. The stucco was originally unpainted, and therefore a mortar grey colour. The only other Photos showing existing condition of surviving original, interior brick chimney stack (left), and later, exterior chimney stack with original applied colour was an Ivory colour on rendered stucco cladding (right). all painted surfaces. The stucco was subsequently painted. ORIGINAL COLOUR TABLE: BOYD RESIDENCE, 644 BEACH DRIVE Element Colour* Code Sample Finish Wood Window Frames & Sashes, Oxford Ivory VC-01 High Gloss Wood Trims Stucco Rendering Haddington Grey VC-15 Flat * Paint colours come from Benjamin Moore’s Historical Vancouver True Colours ** Final colour scheme to be developed with the project team. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 23 Page 100 of 172 CONSERVATION RECOMMENDATIONS An appropriate final colour scheme will be Conservation Strategy: Preservation & developed in conjunction with the project team. Rehabilitation • Preserve the original interior character-defining Conservation Strategy: Investigation elements where possible, particularly the • Determine an appropriate historic colour fireplace surrounds, disappearing wall at the scheme for exterior painted finishes. main living space. • Investigate the exiting condition of the original interior character-defining elements, and repair 5.8 INTERIOR in-kind as necessary. “Interior features can include elements such as interior walls, floors and ceilings, mouldings, staircases, fireplace mantels, faucets, sinks, built-in cabinets, light fixtures, hardware, radiators, mail chutes, telephone booths and elevators. Because their heritage value resides not only in their physical characteristics, but also in their location in the historic building, it is important to protect them from removal. This is particularly true of doors, banisters, church pews, fireplace mantels, sinks and light fixtures, which are often replaced instead of being upgraded. Reuse in their original location not only protects their heritage value, but is also a more sustainable approach to conserving these artefacts.” Standards & Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada The Boyd Residence features unique interior features designed by the architect, Samuel Maclure. Some of the interior character-defining elements of the heritage asset include the unique carvings on the fireplace surrounds, and the disappearing wall suspended by heavy weights from a hidden space in the ceiling at the main living space. These interior elements contribute to the historic character of the heritage asset, and should be preserved and repaired, as necessary. The interior of the house was inacessible during the initial site visit, and further investigation is required to determine their existing condition. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 24 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 101 of 172 6.0 MAINTENANCE PLAN A Maintenance Plan should be adopted by the The assumption that newly renovated buildings property owner, who is responsible for the long- become immune to deterioration and require term protection of the heritage features of the Boyd less maintenance is a falsehood. Rather, newly Residence. The Maintenance Plan should include renovated buildings require heightened vigilance to provisions for: spot errors in construction where previous problems • Copies of the Maintenance Plan and this had not occurred, and where deterioration may gain Conservation Report to be incorporated into a foothold. the terms of reference for the management and maintenance contract for the building; Routine maintenance keeps water out of the • Cyclical maintenance procedures to be building, which is the single most damaging element adopted as outlined below; to a heritage building. Maintenance also prevents • Record drawings and photos of the building damage by sun, wind, snow, frost and all weather; to be kept by the management / maintenance prevents damage by insects and vermin; and contractor; and aids in protecting all parts of the building against • Records of all maintenance procedures to be deterioration. The effort and expense expended on kept by the owner. an aggressive maintenance will not only lead to a higher degree of preservation, but also over time A thorough maintenance plan will ensure the potentially save large amount of money otherwise integrity of the Boyd Residence is preserved. If required for later repairs. existing materials are regularly maintained and deterioration is significantly reduced or prevented, the integrity of materials and workmanship of the 6.2 PERMITTING building will be protected. Proper maintenance is the most cost effective method of extending the life Repair activities, such as simple in-kind repair of of a building, and preserving its character-defining materials, or repainting in the same colour, should elements. The survival of historic buildings in good be exempt from requiring city permits. Other more condition is primarily due to regular upkeep and the intensive activities will require the issuance of a preservation of historic materials. Heritage Alteration Permit. 6.1 MAINTENANCE GUIDELINES 6.3 ROUTINE, CYCLICAL AND NON- DESTRUCTIVE CLEANING A maintenance schedule should be formulated that adheres to the Standards & Guidelines for Following the Standards & Guidelines for the the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. As Conservation of Historic Places in Canada, be defined by theStandards & Guidelines, maintenance mindful of the principle that recommends “using is defined as: the gentlest means possible”. Any cleaning Routine, cyclical, non-destructive actions procedures should be undertaken on a routine basis necessary to slow the deterioration and should be undertaken with non-destructive of a historic place. It entails periodic methods. Cleaning should be limited to the exterior inspection; routine, cyclical, non- material such as concrete and stucco wall surfaces destructive cleaning; minor repair and and wood elements such as storefront frames. All of refinishing operations; replacement of these elements are usually easily cleaned, simply damaged or deteriorated materials that are with a soft, natural bristle brush, without water, to impractical to save. remove dirt and other material. If a more intensive BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 25 Page 102 of 172 MAINTENANCE PLAN cleaning is required, this can be accomplished From this inspection, an inspection report should with warm water, mild detergent and a soft bristle be compiled that will include notes, sketches and brush. High-pressure washing, sandblasting or other observations. It is helpful for the inspector to have abrasive cleaning should not be undertaken under copies of the building’s elevation drawings on which any circumstances. to mark areas of concern such as cracks, staining and rot. These observations can then be included in the report. The report need not be overly complicated 6.4 REPAIRS AND REPLACEMENT OF or formal, but must be thorough, clear and concise. DETERIORATED MATERIALS Issues of concern, taken from the report should then be entered in a log book so that corrective action Interventions such as repairs and replacements can be documented and tracked. Major issues of must conform to the Standards & Guidelines for concern should be extracted from the report by the the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada. property manager. The building’s character-defining elements – characteristics of the building that contribute to its An appropriate schedule for regular, periodic heritage value (and identified in the Statement of inspections would be twice a year, preferably Significance) such as materials, form, configuration, during spring and fall. The spring inspection should etc. - must be conserved, referencing the following be more rigorous since in spring moisture-related principles to guide interventions: deterioration is most visible, and because needed • An approach of minimal intervention must be work, such as painting, can be completed during adopted - where intervention is carried out it the good weather in summer. The fall inspection will be by the least intrusive and most gentle should focus on seasonal issues such as weather- means possible. sealants, mechanical (heating) systems and drainage • Repair rather than replace character-defining issues. Comprehensive inspections should occur at elements. five-year periods, comparing records from previous • Repair character-defining elements using inspections and the original work, particularly in recognized conservation methods. monitoring structural movement and durability of • Replace ‘in kind’ extensively deteriorated or utilities. Inspections should also occur after major missing parts of character-defining elements. storms. • Make interventions physically and visually compatible with the historic place. 6.6 INFORMATION FILE 6.5 INSPECTIONS The building should have its own information file where an inspection report can be filed. This file Inspections are a key element in the maintenance should also contain the log book that itemizes plan, and should be carried out by a qualified problems and corrective action. Additionally, this person or firm, preferably with experience in the file should contain building plans, building permits, assessment of heritage buildings. These inspections heritage reports, photographs and other relevant should be conducted on a regular and timely documentation so that a complete understanding of schedule. The inspection should address all aspects the building and its evolution is readily available, of the building including exterior, interior and which will aid in determining appropriate site conditions. It makes good sense to inspect a interventions when needed. building in wet weather, as well as in dry, in order to see how water runs off – or through – a building. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 26 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 103 of 172 MAINTENANCE PLAN The file should also contain a list outlining the 6.7 EXTERIOR MAINTENANCE finishes and materials used, and information detailing where they are available (store, supplier). Water, in all its forms and sources (rain, snow, frost, The building owner should keep on hand a stock of rising ground water, leaking pipes, back-splash, spare materials for minor repairs. etc.) is the single most damaging element to historic buildings. 6.6.1 LOG BOOK The most common place for water to enter a The maintenance log book is an important building is through the roof. Keeping roofs repaired maintenance tool that should be kept to record or renewed is the most cost-effective maintenance all maintenance activities, recurring problems option. Evidence of a small interior leak should and building observations and will assist in the be viewed as a warning for a much larger and overall maintenance planning of the building. worrisome water damage problem elsewhere and Routine maintenance work should be noted in the should be fixed immediately. maintenance log to keep track of past and plan future activities. All items noted on the maintenance 6.7.1 INSPECTION CHECKLIST log should indicate the date, problem, type of repair, location and all other observations and information The following checklist considers a wide range of pertaining to each specific maintenance activity. potential problems specific to the Boyd Residence, such as water/moisture penetration, material Each log should include the full list of recommended deterioration and structural deterioration. This does maintenance and inspection areas noted in this not include interior inspections. Maintenance Plan, to ensure a record of all activities is maintained. A full record of these activities will EXTERIOR INSPECTION help in planning future repairs and provide valuable building information for all parties involved in the Site Inspection: overall maintenance and operation of the building, ☐☐ Is the lot well drained? Is there pooling of and will provide essential information for long term water? programming and determining of future budgets. ☐☐ Does water drain away from foundation? It will also serve as a reminded to amend the maintenance and inspection activities should new Foundation issues be discovered or previous recommendations ☐☐ Paint peeling? Cracking? prove inaccurate. ☐☐ Moisture: Is rising damp present? ☐☐ Is there back splashing from ground to struc- The log book will also indicate unexpectedly ture? repeated repairs, which may help in solving more ☐☐ Is any moisture problem general or local? serious problems that may arise in the historic ☐☐ Is damp proof course present? building. The log book is a living document that will ☐☐ Are there shrinkage cracks in the foundation? require constant adding to, and should be kept in ☐☐ Are there movement cracks in the foundation? the information file along with other documentation ☐☐ Is crack monitoring required? noted in section 6.6 Information File. ☐☐ Is uneven foundation settlement evident? BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 27 Page 104 of 172 MAINTENANCE PLAN Masonry ☐☐ Is there condensation or water damage to the ☐☐ Are moisture problems present? (Rising damp, paint? rain penetration, condensation, water run-off ☐☐ Are the sashes easy to operate? If hinged, do from roof, sills, or ledges?) they swing freely? ☐☐ Are there cracks due to shrinking and expan- ☐☐ Is the frame free from distortion? sion? ☐☐ Do sills show weathering or deterioration? ☐☐ Are there cracks due to structural movement? ☐☐ Is the caulking between the frame and the ☐☐ Are there unexplained cracks? cladding in good condition? ☐☐ Do cracks require continued monitoring? ☐☐ Are there stains present? Rust, copper, organic, Doors paints, oils / tars? Cause? ☐☐ Do the doors create a good seal when closed? ☐☐ Does the surface need cleaning? ☐☐ Are the hinges sprung? In need of lubrication? ☐☐ Do locks and latches work freely? Wood Elements ☐☐ If glazed, is the glass in good condition? Does ☐☐ Are there moisture problems present? (Rising the putty need repair? damp, rain penetration, condensation moisture ☐☐ Are door frames wicking up water? Where? from plants, water run-off from roof, sills, or Why? ledges?) ☐☐ Are door frames caulked at the cladding? Is the ☐☐ Is wood in direct contact with the ground? caulking in good condition? ☐☐ Is there insect attack present? Where and prob- ☐☐ What is the condition of the sill? able source? ☐☐ Is there fungal attack present? Where and Gutters and Downspouts probable source? ☐☐ Are downspouts leaking? Clogged? Are there ☐☐ Are there any other forms of biological attack? holes or corrosion? (Water against structure) (Moss, birds, etc.) Where and probable source? ☐☐ Are downspouts complete without any missing ☐☐ Is any wood surface damaged from UV radia- sections? Are they properly connected? tion? (bleached surface, loose surface fibres) ☐☐ Is the water being effectively carried away ☐☐ Is any wood warped, cupped or twisted? from the downspout by a drainage system? ☐☐ Is any wood split? Are there loose knots? ☐☐ Do downspouts drain completely away? ☐☐ Is there any staining of wood elements? Source? Roof ☐☐ Are there water blockage points? Condition of Exterior Painted Materials ☐☐ Is the leading edge of the roof wet? ☐☐ Paint shows: blistering, sagging or wrinkling, ☐☐ Is there evidence of biological attack? (Fungus, alligatoring, peeling. Cause? moss, birds, insects) ☐☐ Paint has the following stains: rust, bleeding ☐☐ Are flashings well seated? knots, mildew, etc. Cause? ☐☐ Does the soffit show any signs of water dam- ☐☐ Paint cleanliness, especially at air vents? age? Insect or bird infestation? ☐☐ Is there rubbish buildup on the roof? Windows ☐☐ Is there glass cracked or missing? ☐☐ If the glazing is puttied has it gone brittle and cracked? Fallen out? Painted to shed water? ☐☐ If the glass is secured by beading, are the beads in good condition? BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 28 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 105 of 172 MAINTENANCE PLAN 6.7.2 MAINTENANCE PROGRAMME Ten-Year Cycle • Check condition of roof every ten years after last replacement. INSPECTION CYCLE: Twenty-Year Cycle Daily • Confirm condition of roof and estimate effective • Observations noted during cleaning (cracks; lifespan. Replace when required. damp, dripping pipes; malfunctioning hardware; etc.) to be noted in log book or Major Maintenance Work (as required) building file. • Thorough repainting, downspout and drain replacement; replacement of deteriorated Semi-annually building materials; etc. • Semi-annual inspection and report with special focus on seasonal issues. • Thorough cleaning of drainage system to cope with winter rains and summer storms • Check condition of weather sealants (Fall). • Clean the exterior using a soft bristle broom/ brush. Annually (Spring) • Inspect concrete for cracks, deterioration. • Inspect metal elements, especially in areas that may trap water. • Inspect windows for paint and glazing compound failure, corrosion and wood decay and proper operation. • Complete annual inspection and report. • Clean out of all perimeter drains and rainwater systems. • Touch up worn paint on the building’s exterior. • Check for plant, insect or animal infestation. • Routine cleaning, as required. Five-Year Cycle • A full inspection report should be undertaken every five years comparing records from previous inspections and the original work, particularly monitoring structural movement and durability of utilities. • Repaint windows every five to fifteen years. BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 29 Page 106 of 172 APPENDIX A: RESEARCH SUMMARY ARCHITECTURAL PLANS: • Architectural Plans of Samuel Maclure, University of Victoria Special Collections: UVIC AP244-246 - Title: Plan of proposed alterations and additions to house in Beach Drive, Oak Bay for Lawrence C. Boyd Esq. Location: 644 Beach Drive, Oak Bay. File Drawing nos. AP244-AP246 Architect: Samuel Maclure Client: Lawrence C. Boyd Title: Plan of proposed alterations and additions to house in Beach Drive, Oak Bay for Lawrence C. Boyd Esq. Location: 644 Beach Drive, Oak Bay Date: [1927] 3 drawings: pencil on paper; 41 x 55 cm Preliminary sketches showing plans only. Additions and alterations to a house with attic (the number of floors is not clear). On the first floor a cloak room and toilet are added off the vestibule. A bedroom and bathroom are added to the attic, and two bedrooms are framed in the existing space. One plan reads “G.C. Boyd” (i.e. Gardiner C. Boyd). PUBLISHED REFERENCES • Bingham, Janet. Samuel Maclure Architect. Horsdal & Schubart, 1985. • Eaton, Leonard K. The Architecture of Samuel Maclure. Victoria, The Art Gallery of Greater Victoria, 1971 • Luxton, Donald. Building the West: The Early Architects of British Columbia. Vancouver, Talonbooks, 2nd ed., 2007. • Stark, Stuart. More than Just Bricks and Boards: Oak Bay’s Heritage Buildings. Oak Bay, 1986, page 71. ARCHIVES • Oak Bay Archives. • Hallmark Heritage Society Archives. • British Columbia Archives: Vital Events. ONLINE SOURCES • British Columbia City Directories online at Vancouver Public Library http://www.vpl.ca/bccd/index.php • Family trees and vital statistics on ancestry.ca. • Dictionary of Canadian Biography http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/boyd_mossom_martin_14E.html • Boyd Family Fonds, Trent University Archives http://www2.trentu.ca/library/archives/88-011.htm • Boyd, Mossom Martin – Volume XIV (19=811-1920) Dictionary of Canadian Biography http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/boyd_mossom_martin_14E.html BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC 30 CONSERVATION PLAN | DECEMBER 2017 Page 107 of 172 DIX %/AWJNGS BOYD RESIDENCE: 644 BEACH DRIVE, OAK BAY, BC CONSERVAT!ON PLAN I DECEMBER2017 ‘I31 Page 108 of 172 m:m.oam Ems ém ,E\mO qnum-__Nm _ , dun? . A mu, . . . ?wm 32%.» RE. 3 >3. E mam« mumxmo.m>_._n104mm 3% m><._.M0m, .V. ..2» .3» 4;: up»: ~59; Mauu 4:wd"Inu £3om-.>u_m um<»mn__m Q .2..§a 9 ,_ 3?.-. >»_m n_w_€Lz0mu_ Q m?amu _S§. m3 3. .m.-u Sn»: 5_ua»zam»-—m_ Moon ‘ J »E.m_am~«._v 3:6 $51. r mcuu umdmim .3 :73. ?at 1» 11:91.7/Io:-ax gwamorwo ...m.m_M . 40 u-ma mu W/.J,.M 82 >3 mrmhn . ,9Jm...E moo: ukr ,n.u _I :93 ~VM.,.7m|.uoPm. ‘ % ilnuv r rvulu moo; ?uummmmm u 5 z?wt, _ mat? in; ELK b.m~(..w. _._9Eon vu:.m .,:__xmyo u_._:.:O «sen E09. :12? :5! .3 v:$M . .3 3. Wm? imam ,. . E. L mnimxu _mn.<1w»m.xm «Y4 ‘ W M )m.. an , _nG0; _ . nmnnmvmW , ‘ , _9: 9: Q 300... >5 mymon , A .Bi«}. , , , mzuucm‘ .1 ?e: .§5 Sxkrm w._wz..m .5 rm? Ymzl .6, Ooxkrm 1.59. llxuwnn_t man: Ed .h.I||||..I||r.>In[;., xé? ?at! ,, nu 117; ‘ x #3 DUhBtQKk§ wzwooum._m..1m xi" ‘J E....&k‘412 .59. A, :1 mumxuon:uz,__ 4.. E8. Page 109 of 172 , m:m.0.mm3mQ xmu. :\mO AnmmI ..m‘m>mm§» %:_§§§% mamv_mO .m>_LD104mm .V._v® m> 9 £=om-.>um nm<»mu_m AV Page 110 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 SCHEDULE 3 — PLANS AND DRAWINGS (Page 1 of 3) (Prepared by Zebra Des Ign, January 2018) m:w.oom6.3 Fun 530 .33 éumun: N SUM 3._u.0om FMS uu?f. amm _L\9 «Sf uuumuuamum? Sum mo>.um.m.:o > «mmmxeo >9 m4_E.mn_ :.< 2o_nLn_$_mmN Ex? Sm.» ..U 3. N» mm4om.EmwFm . _.mMm mz9.S.>m._m . o.m¥m m./.<.E V.00.I 079 . onxm . 1.7.5 .z<._m mtm 0 im Ew: oz: J : YT Vnr ?mnu?un . 2.31../u.wu n i . wéjm? Syd: in mnnouuf ... ; 3 » rfiulbvaholutu oi. .7u.?.m _:.7. San. , 2:31.65/.. .1; N ._.O._ 4 ..w.... mmmomoum ._—| -— --— 4:4 A .— .— zeta»; ._:. u 99.} 35%.» zoiaua i .9.91 El»? 59. I4) 53. yr: K3,. at. $2 13.: 7.»! 91 33 .13. n....(».3o i aufni/mmd : 5 « .1uuQe ::.n. uni.» n1 ~0|V..F4..i»u(rwia>d _h..9us Km E» ii H; 55. .26! .8! 31»! VIHIL ?uunbn N2 «mo. <».<91 .X»: mm _ m$uu?GE mF04 _,..: rN .?.n..6~ , . ( :33 385:. mzdu xo?m 33 <53 _, utmx n a 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018.docx Page 111 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 SCHEDULE 3 — PLANS AND DRAWINGS (Page 2 of 3) (Prepared by Zebra Design, January 2018) .n.0.um «emu. Sum -__wm N. " ?xmo aumm one .. «OMS .E . W«mm un?t .3 F“...B swmJ: msm W m>( pmoksmz 3: .:u_.\T_..QDL I mumv_m0 .u>_._u_..o 98.1. E 3u:-.>»_m n_m \ , . /.//. 1uZ.— \\ ,...nm.Ew:Jm.a\5..u_ \ i sU.6D.2Bu<..w 1 Kev, rww >u,u3 K33 :3»... Ovvwm iin 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018.docx Page 112 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 SCHEDULE 3 — PLANS AND DRAWINGS (Page 3 of 3) (Prepared by Zebra Design, January 2018) m:n.o¢m aom? aim .- Q i , vlménm «emu. 6: 0 ?mn?m?a02.3.5 02 :3) do 4.: Exom am.» mumV60 .m>_.5 .._o «.3 1. nuEJ7u.::d E3 écbb?n YE. 9\m0 ZS: (MI MQK n_m$m..mm £:om-.>u_m um<\?n_.m 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018.docx Page 113 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 SCHEDULE 4 CONFIRMATION OF COMMITMENT I, Rebecca Sarah MacDonald Miller, of 754 Mountjoy Avenue, Victoria, BC, V8S 4K9, do solemnly declare that: 1. I make this declaration to the best of my personal knowledge. 2. This declaration is made pursuant to the District of Oak Bay Bylaw No. 4698, 2018, in relation to the land legally described as: Legal Description: Lots 11 and 12, Block 7, Section 73, Victoria District, Plan 992 Parcel Identifier: 007-937-008; 007-937-024 Civic Address: 638 / 644 Beach Drive 3. I have applied to subdivide my land and restore the Boyd residence. 4. I will conduct all work in compliance with the report prepared by Donald Luxton and Associates Inc., dated December 2017. 5. I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing it to be true and knowing that it is the same force and effect as if made under oath and pursuant to the Canada Evidence Act. SWORN BEFORE ME AT Victoria, British Columbia, in the Province of British Columbia, this day of , 2018. ) ) ) Rebecca Sarah MacDonald Miller ) ) Commissioner for Taking Affidavits for ) Signature: British Columbia ) 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 114 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 SCHEDULE 5 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE I, Donald Luxton, Heritage Consultant, certify that Rebecca Sarah MacDonald Miller, as declared in the Confirmation of Commitment, has complied with all work required to restore the Boyd Residence, as outlined the my Conservation Plan dated December 2017. This declaration is made pursuant to the District of Oak Bay Bylaw No. 4698, 2018, in relation to the land legally described as: Legal Description: Lots 11 and 12, Block 7, Section 73, Victoria District, Plan 992 Parcel Identifier: 007-937-008; 007-937-024 Civic Address: 638 / 644 Beach Drive I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing it to be true and knowing that it is the same force and effect as if made under oath and pursuant to the Canada Evidence Act. SWORN BEFORE ME AT Victoria, British Columbia, in the Province of British Columbia, this day of , 20 . ) ) ) Donald Luxton, Heritage Consultant ) ) Commissioner for Taking Affidavits for ) Signature: British Columbia ) 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 115 of 172 Bylaw No. 4698 SCHEDULE 6 – VARIANCES TO DISTRICT OF OAK BAY ZONING BYLAW NO. 3531, 1986 Lot Size Where the RS-2 zone applies to the property at 638 / 644 Beach Drive with a minimum lot size of 2226 m2, minimum lot sizes are as set out for an RS-4 zone: Lots Parcel Size Lot 1 953 m2 Lot 2 1195 m2 Lot 3 1052 m2 Lot 4 972 m2 Variances Where the RS-2 zone applies to the property at 638 / 644 Beach Drive, variances are as set out for an RS-4 zone, reflecting lot size: Proposed Lot 1 Zoning Bylaw Section(s) Variance Schedule A Lot Width Lot width is varied from 21.34 metres to 4.33 metres. Proposed Lot 2 Zoning Bylaw Section(s) Variance Schedule A Lot Width Lot width is varied from 21.34 metres to 9.47 metres. 6.4.4.(2)(a) Front Lot Line Setback a) Minimum front lot line setback for north side of lot is varied from 7.62 metres to 1.60 metres for the attached garage. b) Minimum front lot line setback for south side of lot is varied from 7.62 metres to 6.90 metres for the heritage building. c) Minimum front lot line setback for south side of lot is varied from 6.42 metres to 6.23 metres for the heritage building front entry stairs. d) Minimum front lot line setback is varied from 7.62 metres to 6.06 metres for the westerly patio. 6.4.4.(3)(a) Building Height Maximum building height for the heritage building varied from 7.32 metres to 7.92 metres. 6.4.4.(3)(b) Occupiable Height Maximum occupiable height for the heritage building varied from 4.57 metres to 5.76 metres. 4698 644 beach heritage revitalization agreement bylaw 2018 Page 116 of 172 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Deborah Jensen, Acting Director of Building and Planning DATE: January 12, 2018 RE: Building and Planning Department Monthly Report of Active Land Use Applications In an ongoing effort to enhance communications and track workload, the Building and Planning Department is undertaking monthly reporting of active land use applications under review by the department. Attached is a summary of the active land use applications under review by the Building and Planning Department, for the period ending December 31, 2017. The following codes are used to categorize the type of applications received by the Department: ADP Uplands Siting and Design / Other Siting and Design Applications BP Building Permit / House Move / Demolition Permit Applications BOV Board of Variance Application COV Covenant Amendment Application DP Development Permit Application DVP Development Variance Permit Application HAD Heritage Register / Designation Addition Application HAP Heritage Alteration Permit Application HRA Heritage Revitalization Agreement Application OCP Official Community Plan Amendment Application SUB Subdivision Applications ZON Zoning Amendment Application Please note that no new Official Community Plan or zoning amendment applications were received during the month of December. Deborah Jensen, Acting Director of Building and Planning Building and Planning Department – Active Land Use Applications Page 1 of 1 January 12, 2018 Page 117 of 172 Active Planning Applications - To Dec 31, 2017 Permit # Civic Address Application Date Folder Type ADP00072 NORFOLK RD 3150 6/15/2017 ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL ADP00073 BEACH DR 3245 8/1/2017 ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL ADP00076 KING GEORGE TERR 237 9/13/2017 ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL ADP00077 KING GEORGE TERR 237 9/13/2017 ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL ADP00078 KING GEORGE TERR 237 9/13/2017 ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL ADP00079 KING GEORGE TERR 237 9/13/2017 ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL ADP00080 UPLANDS RD 3065 11/1/2017 ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL ADP00082 BEACH DR 3235 11/20/2017 ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL ADP00083 BEACH DR 2745 12/12/2017 ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL ADP00084 LANSDOWNE RD 2391 12/15/2017 ADVISORY DESIGN PANEL DP000008 RIPON RD 3475 12/9/2015 DEVELOPMENT PERMIT DP000016 MONTEREY AVE 1529 3/10/2017 DEVELOPMENT PERMIT DVP00031 YORK PL 1605 1/5/2016 DVP DVP00049 ST PATRICK ST 1043 7/21/2016 DVP DVP00060 ISLAND RD 592 3/2/2017 DVP DVP00063 ISLAND RD 599 4/24/2017 DVP DVP00068 BEACH DR 3245 8/1/2017 DVP DVP00073 UPLANDS RD 3065 11/2/2017 DVP DVP00074 OAK BAY AVE 2314 11/15/2017 DVP HAD00003 CAVENDISH AVE 2608 1/19/2017 HERITAGE REGISTER ADDITION HAD00004 YORK PL 1605 2/16/2017 HERITAGE REGISTER ADDITION HAD00005 BEACH DR 1526 7/27/2017 HERITAGE REGISTER ADDITION HAD00006 OLIVER ST 1208 12/22/2017 HERITAGE REGISTER ADDITION HAP00006 RUNNYMEDE AVE 2031 11/13/2015 HERITAGE ALTERATION PERMIT HRA00002 RUNNYMEDE AVE 2031 5/11/2016 HERITAGE REVITALIZATION AGRMNT HRA00003 FOUL BAY RD 960 10/31/2016 HERITAGE REVITALIZATION AGRMNT HRA00004 BEACH DR 644 4/24/2017 HERITAGE REVITALIZATION AGRMNT OCP00003 MONTEREY AVE 1529 3/10/2017 OCP AMENDMENT SUB00010 KING GEORGE TERR 19 3/17/2016 SUBDIVISION SUB00012 MAQUINNA ST 45 11/28/2016 SUBDIVISION SUB00013 CRESCENT RD 1918 11/30/2016 SUBDIVISION SUB00014 KING GEORGE TERR 237 1/16/2017 SUBDIVISION SUB00015 YORK PL 1605 1/31/2017 SUBDIVISION SUB00016 BEACH DR 644 4/24/2017 SUBDIVISION SUB00017 CADBORO BAY RD 3096 5/23/2017 SUBDIVISION SUB00018 RUNNYMEDE AVE 2031 10/11/2017 SUBDIVISION SUB00019 YORK PL 1561 10/30/2017 SUBDIVISION ZON00021 ISLAND RD 592 2/10/2016 ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT ZON00027 MONTEREY AVE 1529 3/10/2017 ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT ZON00029 ST PATRICK ST 687 5/2/2017 ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT ZON00030 YORK PL 1561 10/30/2017 ZONING BYLAW AMENDMENT Active Planning Applications - 41 Page 118 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP010617 HENDERSON RD 3053 10/26/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG SHED BP009041 EXETER RD 3145 5/11/2016 ACCSSRY BLDG SHED BP010474 MIDLAND RD 3355 9/6/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG OTHER BP009820 LINCOLN RD 2755 2/7/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG OTHER BP010511 LINCOLN RD 2438 9/19/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG OTHER BP010686 EASTDOWNE RD 2625 9/18/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG OTHER BP009798 DEWDNEY AVE 2740 2/2/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG OTHER BP010161 CRESCENT RD 1934 5/19/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG OTHER BP009773 CARDIFF PL 3510 1/24/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG OTHER BP009840 YALE ST 1632 2/15/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010042 UPLANDS RD 3125 4/13/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP009757 ST PATRICK ST 1359 1/20/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010574 NEWPORT AVE 386 10/13/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010484 MONTEREY AVE 1388 9/11/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010085 MID-DOWNE RD 2324 4/25/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010736 LINCOLN RD 2608 12/7/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP009863 LANSDOWNE RD 2700 2/21/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010582 LANSDOWNE RD 2695 10/16/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010168 KING GEORGE TERR 19 5/23/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010190 HAMPSHIRE RD 953 5/29/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010611 HAMPSHIRE RD 1611 10/24/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010290 ELGIN RD 1599 7/4/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010100 DUNLEVY ST 2328 4/27/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010735 DEAL ST 1072 12/7/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010697 BRIGHTON AVE 2233 11/22/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010318 BEACH DR 390 7/12/2017 ACCSSRY BLDG GARAGE BP010516 ESPLANADE 2570 9/20/2017 ACCSSRY STRUCTURE PERGOLA BP010483 CADBORO BAY RD 2075 9/11/2017 ACCSSRY STRUCTURE OTHER BP008241 FINNERTY RD 3800 8/18/2015 COMM PERMIT INST-RENO BP009619 FINNERTY RD 3800 11/15/2016 COMM PERMIT INST-RENO BP009992 FINNERTY RD 3800 3/28/2017 COMM PERMIT INST-RENO BP010662 FINNERTY RD 3800 11/10/2017 COMM PERMIT INST-RENO BP010266 MUSGRAVE ST 2290 6/21/2017 COMM PERMIT INST-NEW BP010223 BEACH DR 1701 6/7/2017 COMM PERMIT INST-NEW BP010435 CURRIE RD 2619 8/23/2017 COMM PERMIT INST-ADD BP010304 OAK BAY AVE 2239 7/7/2017 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP010628 OAK BAY AVE 2187 210 9/25/2017 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP010419 OAK BAY AVE 2187 107 8/16/2017 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP010552 OAK BAY AVE 2154 10/2/2017 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP010428 OAK BAY AVE 2000 8/21/2017 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP004712 MONTEREY AVE 1703 11/17/2011 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP008084 FINNERTY RD 3800 6/26/2015 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP008236 FINNERTY RD 3800 8/17/2015 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO Page 119 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP009452 FINNERTY RD 3800 9/19/2016 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP010141 FINNERTY RD 3800 5/15/2017 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP010541 FINNERTY RD 3800 9/26/2017 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP009699 ELGIN RD 1787 12/20/2016 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP010269 CADBORO BAY RD 2075 6/23/2017 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP009698 BEE ST 1968 12/20/2016 COMM PERMIT COM-RENO BP009829 FINNERTY RD 3800 2/9/2017 COMM PERMIT COM-NEW BP010231 BOWKER AVE 2285 6/9/2017 COMM PERMIT COM/RES-NW BP010261 BOWKER AVE 2285 6/21/2017 COMM PERMIT COM/RES-NW BP010666 WOOTTON CRES 2507 11/15/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010680 WINDSOR RD 2434 11/17/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010465 WINDSOR RD 2396 8/30/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP009894 WINDSOR RD 2264 3/2/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010287 TRANSIT RD 931 7/4/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010398 TARN PL 3140 8/9/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010649 PROSPECT PL 1564 11/6/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010637 NEWPORT AVE 822 11/2/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010592 NEWPORT AVE 386 10/19/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010151 MONTEREY AVE 436 5/17/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010425 MIDLAND RD 3165 8/17/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP009572 MID-DOWNE RD 2324 10/27/2016 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010448 LINKLEAS AVE 782 8/25/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010447 HAMPSHIRE RD 1611 8/25/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010296 GREATFORD PL 1908 7/6/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010493 DEWDNEY AVE 2777 9/13/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010744 CRESCENT RD 1984 12/13/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010218 CADBORO BAY RD 2276 6/7/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010217 CADBORO BAY RD 2258 6/6/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010698 BRIGHTON AVE 2233 11/22/2017 DEMO PERMIT RES DWELL BP010635 UPLANDS RD 3200 11/1/2017 DEMO PERMIT PARTIAL BP010756 ST PATRICK ST 1463 12/20/2017 DEMO PERMIT FOUNDATION BP010315 KING GEORGE TERR 237 7/11/2017 DEMO PERMIT FOUNDATION BP010220 BOWKER AVE 2247 6/7/2017 DEMO PERMIT FOUNDATION BP010216 CADBORO BAY RD 2296 6/6/2017 DEMO PERMIT COMMERCIAL BP010397 NORFOLK RD 3150 8/8/2017 DEMO PERMIT ACCESSORY BP009763 KING GEORGE TERR 383 1/24/2017 HOUSE MOVE RES DWELL BP010314 KING GEORGE TERR 237 7/11/2017 HOUSE MOVE RES DWELL BP010587 CADBORO BAY RD 2276 10/19/2017 HOUSE MOVE RES DWELL BP010409 CADBORO BAY RD 2268 8/14/2017 HOUSE MOVE RES DWELL BP010588 CADBORO BAY RD 2258 10/19/2017 HOUSE MOVE RES DWELL BP010410 BOWKER AVE 2247 8/14/2017 HOUSE MOVE RES DWELL BP010591 VICTORIA AVE 777 10/19/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010319 TRANSIT RD 910 7/12/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010515 TRANSIT RD 545 9/20/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE Page 120 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP009660 ST PATRICK ST 919 12/2/2016 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP009851 ST PATRICK ST 1400 2/20/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010323 RUTLAND RD 2990 7/14/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010097 OLIVER ST 485 4/27/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010653 NORFOLK RD 3315 11/7/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010104 NEWPORT AVE 832 4/28/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010440 MIDLAND RD 3175 8/24/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010002 MCNEILL AVE 2468 3/30/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP009801 MARGATE AVE 2555 2/2/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010557 MARGATE AVE 2526 10/5/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010514 LORNE TERR 2034 9/20/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP009304 LINKLEAS AVE 671 8/3/2016 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP009747 LANSDOWNE RD 2525 1/19/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010113 LANSDOWNE RD 2149 5/3/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010499 ISLAND RD 880 9/18/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP009307 HEWLETT PL 1260 8/3/2016 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010013 HAMPSHIRE RD 1654 4/4/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010700 DENISON RD 398 11/23/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP009596 CENTRAL AVE 2166 11/7/2016 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010007 CAVENDISH AVE 2519 3/31/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP009076 CARNARVON ST 2090 5/19/2016 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010299 BOWKER PL 1931 7/6/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010241 BOWKER PL 1857 6/14/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP009924 BEACH DR 532 3/9/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010233 BEACH DR 2677 6/9/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP009418 BEACH DR 110 9/12/2016 IRRIGATION PERMIT PRIVATE BP010311 WOODHOUSE RD 2206 7/11/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PP & MUN BP010162 MUSGRAVE ST 2621 5/23/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PP & MUN BP010750 MOWAT ST 2413 12/18/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PP & MUN BP010536 MCNEILL AVE 2160 9/25/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PP & MUN BP009967 LINCOLN RD 2714 3/21/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PP & MUN BP009288 HAMPSHIRE RD 901 7/28/2016 IRRIGATION PERMIT PP & MUN BP009870 DUFFERIN AVE 2588 2/23/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PP & MUN BP010418 CADBORO BAY RD 2716 8/16/2017 IRRIGATION PERMIT PP & MUN BP010645 OAK BAY AVE 2314 11/3/2017 MULT-RESID RENO BP010723 OAK BAY AVE 2314 12/4/2017 MULT-RESID RENO BP010630 OAK BAY AVE 2125 402 10/31/2017 MULT-RESID RENO BP009655 OAK BAY AVE 2119 208 12/1/2016 MULT-RESID RENO BP010513 GRANITE ST 2124 9/19/2017 MULT-RESID RENO BP010360 FOUL BAY RD 921 7/25/2017 MULT-RESID RENO BP010754 CEDAR HILL X RD 2345 134 12/19/2017 MULT-RESID RENO BP010550 BEACH DR 1450 107 9/29/2017 MULT-RESID RENO BP009756 BEACH DR 1370 406 1/20/2017 MULT-RESID RENO Page 121 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP010549 BEACH DR 1370 310 9/29/2017 MULT-RESID RENO BP010099 BEACH DR 1370 101 4/27/2017 MULT-RESID RENO BP010214 BEACH DR 1370 6/6/2017 MULT-RESID RENO BP009734 ESTEVAN AVE 2280 1/12/2017 MULT-RESID NEW BP010080 HAMPSHIRE RD 1566 4/24/2017 RENEWAL PERMIT RENO BP010473 CHAUCER ST 2014 9/5/2017 RENEWAL PERMIT RENO BP010222 BEACH DR 498 6/7/2017 RENEWAL PERMIT RENO BP010608 BEACH DR 3050 10/24/2017 RENEWAL PERMIT RENO BP010694 SOMASS DR 2773 11/22/2017 RENEWAL PERMIT NEW BP010477 YALE ST 1667 9/7/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010684 YALE ST 1657 11/17/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010749 WOODLAWN CRES 2280 12/15/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010659 WOODBURN AVE 3430 11/10/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010303 WOODBURN AVE 3128 7/6/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010679 WINDSOR RD 2434 11/17/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009612 WINDSOR RD 2237 11/14/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010497 WILMOT PL 1542 9/15/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008990 WESTDOWNE RD 3051 9/27/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010331 WESTDOWNE RD 3015 7/17/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009536 WESTDOWNE RD 2994 10/18/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009769 WESTDOWNE RD 2962 1/24/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009697 WESTDOWNE RD 2939 12/19/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009704 WESSEX CLOSE 3188 12/21/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009028 VICTORIA AVE 441 5/9/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009862 VICTORIA AVE 1311 2/21/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008724 VICTORIA AVE 1067 2/12/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008509 UPPER TERRACE RD 3520 11/13/2015 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010615 UPLANDS RD 3200 10/25/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009822 UPLANDS RD 3125 2/7/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010041 UPLANDS RD 3125 4/13/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009987 UNIVERSITY WOODS 3325 3/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009934 TRANSIT RD 577 3/10/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010747 TRANSIT RD 1064 12/14/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010752 TOPP AVE 2675 12/19/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009677 THORPE PL 2750 12/8/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010722 THOMPSON AVE 2800 12/4/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010650 SUNSET AVE 388 11/6/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010432 SUNSET AVE 362 8/23/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010087 ST PATRICK ST 919 4/26/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010532 ST PATRICK ST 824 9/22/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009649 ST PATRICK ST 637 11/29/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008809 ST PATRICK ST 1400 3/9/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010472 ST DENIS ST 1265 9/5/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010412 ST DAVID ST 1238 8/15/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO Page 122 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP010699 ST ANN ST 1920 11/23/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009737 RUTLAND RD 2985 1/13/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008721 RUNNYMEDE PL 960 2/12/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010264 RUNNYMEDE PL 931 6/21/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010106 RUNNYMEDE AVE 2027 4/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009136 ROSLYN RD 1214 6/7/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010309 ROSLYN RD 1165 7/11/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009573 ROSLYN RD 1075 10/28/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010713 QUIMPER ST 2153 11/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009678 PRINCE ANDREW PL 150 12/8/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009398 PLYMOUTH RD 3449 9/6/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010018 PENZANCE RD 2120 4/6/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010377 PATTULLO PL 957 8/1/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010316 PATTULLO PL 953 7/12/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009332 PACIFIC AVE 2325 8/10/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009577 OLIVER ST 813 10/31/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009722 OLIVER ST 733 1/10/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010602 OLIVER ST 652 10/23/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009750 OLIVER ST 640 1/19/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010146 OLIVER ST 543 5/16/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010164 OLIVER ST 1313 5/23/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010678 OLIVER ST 1078 11/16/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010748 OAKDOWNE RD 2984 12/15/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009906 OAK BAY AVE 2390 3/6/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010729 NOTTINGHAM RD 2420 12/5/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009786 NORFOLK RD 3315 1/30/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010429 NEWTON ST 2111 8/21/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009578 NEWPORT AVE 724 10/31/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010470 NEWPORT AVE 546 9/5/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010523 NEWPORT AVE 416 9/21/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009755 NEWPORT AVE 1106 1/20/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009880 NEIL ST 2275 2/27/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010544 NEIL ST 2181 9/27/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010491 NEIL ST 2117 9/12/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009996 MUSGRAVE ST 2789 3/29/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010281 MUSGRAVE ST 2180 6/29/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010338 MONTEREY AVE 976 7/18/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010629 MONTEREY AVE 936 10/31/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009625 MONTEREY AVE 626 11/18/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009435 MONTEREY AVE 487 9/15/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010115 MONTEREY AVE 458 5/3/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010739 MONTEREY AVE 1241 12/11/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009692 MONTEREY AVE 1199 12/15/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO Page 123 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP008863 MONTEREY AVE 1033 3/29/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010388 MITCHELL ST 1444 8/3/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009781 MIDLAND RD 3150 1/26/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010212 MCNEILL AVE 2492 6/6/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010343 MCNEILL AVE 2492 7/19/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010731 MCNEILL AVE 2241 12/6/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010589 MCNEILL AVE 2189 10/19/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010052 MCNEILL AVE 2081 4/18/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008733 MCNEILL AVE 2071 2/15/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009509 MARNE ST 2066 10/6/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009988 MARGATE AVE 2631 3/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010561 MARGATE AVE 2555 10/6/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010350 LORNE TERR 2090 7/20/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010687 LINKLEAS AVE 957 11/20/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010510 LINCOLN RD 2438 9/19/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009911 LINCOLN RD 2326 3/7/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010156 LARKDOWNE RD 3026 5/19/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010638 LANSDOWNE RD 2475 11/3/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009811 LAFAYETTE ST 2167 2/6/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010035 KING GEORGE TERR 46 4/11/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009795 KING GEORGE TERR 310 1/31/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010704 KING GEORGE TERR 190 11/24/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010167 KING GEORGE TERR 19 5/23/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009127 KENDAL AVE 2032 6/3/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009614 KELSEY PL 3558 3/7/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010340 ISLAND RD 599 7/19/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009907 INGLEWOOD TERR 622 3/7/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010683 HEWLETT PL 1218 11/17/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009921 HENDERSON RD 3492 3/9/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010490 HENDERSON RD 3481 9/12/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010407 HENDERSON RD 3332 8/14/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010356 HENDERSON RD 3306 7/24/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010714 HENDERSON RD 3283 11/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009741 HENDERSON RD 3182 1/13/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010009 HENDERSON RD 2943 4/3/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010328 HAMPSHIRE RD 989 7/17/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009994 HAMPSHIRE RD 1868 3/29/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010671 HAMPSHIRE RD 1647 11/15/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010121 HAMPSHIRE RD 1566 5/8/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010014 HAMPSHIRE RD 1367 4/4/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008825 HAMPSHIRE RD 1016 3/15/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010001 HAMIOTA ST 2387 3/30/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010667 HAMIOTA ST 2371 11/15/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO Page 124 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP006951 HAMIOTA ST 2359 6/16/2014 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009869 GREATFORD PL 1890 2/23/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008780 GREATFORD PL 1860 3/2/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010479 GRANITE ST 2171 9/8/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010320 GOLDSMITH ST 2065 7/12/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008162 FOUL BAY RD 2989 7/23/2015 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010529 FOUL BAY RD 2989 9/21/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009295 FOUL BAY RD 2741 7/29/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010058 FOUL BAY RD 2727 4/19/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010401 FOUL BAY RD 1897 8/10/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010402 FOUL BAY RD 1897 8/10/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009955 FLORENCE ST 2465 3/17/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010236 FALKLAND RD 515 6/12/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009184 EXETER RD 3250 6/22/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009627 EXETER RD 3200 11/21/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009889 EXETER RD 3200 2/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009271 EXETER RD 3110 7/22/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010205 ESTEVAN AVE 2710 6/2/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010600 ESTEVAN AVE 2260 10/23/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010674 ESPLANADE 2580 11/16/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008792 EPWORTH ST 2257 3/7/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010737 ELGIN RD 1742 12/7/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010603 EASTDOWNE RD 2959 10/23/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009591 EASTDOWNE RD 2958 11/7/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010509 EASTDOWNE RD 2936 9/19/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009385 EASTDOWNE RD 2684 8/31/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009779 EASTDOWNE RD 2656 1/26/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010506 EASTDOWNE RD 2625 9/18/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009900 EASTDOWNE RD 2535 3/3/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010036 EASTDOWNE RD 2516 4/11/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009929 EASTDOWNE RD 2505 3/9/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008860 DUNLEVY ST 2664 3/29/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010724 DUNLEVY ST 2305 12/4/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010392 DRYFE ST 2458 8/4/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008332 DRYFE ST 2414 9/21/2015 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009254 DEWDNEY AVE 2741 7/15/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010386 DEVON RD 3061 8/3/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008570 DENISON RD 247 12/7/2015 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009161 DENISON RD 235 6/15/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010495 DENISON RD 199 9/14/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010450 DENISON RD 170 8/25/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010426 DEAL ST 1072 8/18/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010422 DALHOUSIE ST 2654 8/17/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO Page 125 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP010546 DALHOUSIE ST 2399 9/27/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010120 DALHOUSIE ST 2386 5/8/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010061 DALHOUSIE ST 2215 4/20/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010568 CURRIE RD 2651 10/12/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010413 CRESCENT RD 1933 8/15/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010715 CRANMORE RD 2615 11/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009847 CRANMORE RD 2295 2/17/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010594 CRANMORE RD 2192 10/20/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010620 COOKMAN ST 2363 10/26/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010469 CENTRAL AVE 2433 9/1/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009761 CENTRAL AVE 2125 1/23/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010399 CENTRAL AVE 2080 8/9/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010050 CAVENDISH AVE 2631 4/18/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009587 CARRICK ST 2052 11/3/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009705 CARNARVON ST 2072 12/23/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010712 CARNARVON ST 2030 11/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010452 CARDIFF PL 3523 8/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010260 CADBORO BAY RD 3615 6/20/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010324 CADBORO BAY RD 3050 7/14/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010101 CADBORO BAY RD 2590 4/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010092 BYNG ST 965 4/26/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010454 BYNG ST 657 8/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010357 BURDICK AVE 2856 7/24/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010185 BURDICK AVE 2817 5/29/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010021 BURDICK AVE 2741 4/7/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010766 BURDICK AVE 2648 12/22/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010138 BURDICK AVE 2624 5/12/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009650 BRIGHTON AVE 2002 11/30/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009336 BOWKER PL 1857 8/11/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008591 BOWKER AVE 2636 12/16/2015 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009925 BOWKER AVE 2566 3/9/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010372 BOWKER AVE 2334 7/27/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010757 BEACH DR 644 12/20/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010681 BEACH DR 57 11/17/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP008640 BEACH DR 494 1/12/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009500 BEACH DR 430 10/4/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010593 BEACH DR 3200 10/19/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009172 BEACH DR 2535 6/20/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010627 BEACH DR 242 10/31/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010767 BEACH DR 242 12/22/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009990 BEACH DR 1960 3/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010245 BEACH DR 1832 6/15/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010622 BEACH DR 178 10/27/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO Page 126 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP008897 BARKLEY TERR 127 4/11/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010364 ARMSTRONG AVE 1773 7/26/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010053 ARMSTRONG AVE 1743 4/18/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010374 ALLENBY ST 2151 7/28/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009824 ALLENBY ST 2131 2/8/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP009592 ALLENBY ST 2118 11/7/2016 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010312 ALLENBY ST 2081 7/11/2017 SFD PERMIT RENO BP010280 YORK PL 1561 6/29/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009839 YALE ST 1632 2/15/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009838 YALE ST 1624 2/15/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009837 YALE ST 1616 2/15/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010665 WOOTTON CRES 2507 11/15/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP008496 WOODBURN AVE 3271 11/10/2015 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009270 WOODBURN AVE 3231 7/21/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010464 WINDSOR RD 2396 8/30/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009556 WEALD RD 3280 10/25/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010158 VICTORIA AVE 1218 5/19/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010533 TRANSIT RD 931 9/22/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010577 TARN PL 3140 10/13/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010619 TARN PL 3140 10/26/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010352 SUNNY LANE 207 7/21/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009132 SOUTHDOWNE RD 3085 6/6/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP008360 SOMASS DR 2773 9/30/2015 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009941 SHERRINGHAM PL 3155 3/13/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010442 PROSPECT PL 1564 8/25/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010195 PLUMER ST 2488 5/30/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP008602 NORFOLK RD 3290 12/21/2015 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010636 NEWPORT AVE 822 11/2/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010575 NEWPORT AVE 386 10/13/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010751 NEWPORT AVE 386 12/19/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010263 NEWPORT AVE 1047 6/21/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010198 NEIL ST 2151 5/31/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010206 NEIL ST 2075 6/2/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010204 NEIL ST 2065 6/2/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009476 MOWAT ST 2413 9/26/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010404 MONTEREY AVE 436 8/11/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009099 MONTEREY AVE 1660 5/27/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP007404 MIDLAND RD 3355 11/13/2014 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010521 MIDLAND RD 3165 9/20/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009570 MID-DOWNE RD 2324 10/27/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009872 LULIE ST 1930 2/23/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010486 LINKLEAS AVE 782 9/11/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009819 LINCOLN RD 2755 2/7/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW Page 127 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP009975 LINCOLN RD 2677 3/23/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009861 LANSDOWNE RD 2700 2/21/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010431 LANSDOWNE RD 2695 8/22/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009813 KING GEORGE TERR 383 2/7/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010765 KING GEORGE TERR 237 12/21/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010107 HEWLETT PL 1205 5/2/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP008706 HAMPSHIRE RD 577 2/5/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010556 HAMPSHIRE RD 1611 10/2/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009804 HAMPSHIRE RD 1044 2/2/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010349 HAMIOTA ST 2418 7/20/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010297 GREATFORD PL 1908 7/6/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009282 ESPLANADE 2064 7/26/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010326 EDGECLIFFE PL 2045 7/14/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009897 DUNLEVY ST 2328 3/2/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009617 DUNLEVY ST 2325 11/15/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010047 DUFFERIN AVE 2828 4/18/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010048 DUFFERIN AVE 2822 4/18/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010572 DEWDNEY AVE 2777 10/12/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010215 DALHOUSIE ST 2368 6/6/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP008894 CRESCENT RD 2067 4/8/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009733 CRESCENT RD 2049 1/12/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010040 CRESCENT RD 1984 4/12/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010745 CRESCENT RD 1984 11/16/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010571 CENTRAL AVE 2515 10/12/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009739 CENTRAL AVE 2424 1/13/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010201 CARNARVON ST 2042 6/2/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009524 CARDIFF PL 3510 10/12/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009013 CARDIFF PL 3389 5/5/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010728 CADBORO BAY RD 2345 12/5/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009857 BURDICK AVE 2816 2/20/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010696 BRIGHTON AVE 2233 11/22/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP010142 BEACH DR 390 5/15/2017 SFD PERMIT NEW BP008769 BEACH DR 2677 2/26/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009093 BEACH DR 1231 5/26/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP009624 AVONDALE RD 2069 11/17/2016 SFD PERMIT NEW BP008041 MIDLAND RD 3355 6/17/2015 PLUMBING PERMIT BP008688 UPPER TERRACE RD 3520 2/1/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP008750 HERON ST 2627 2/19/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP008826 INGLEWOOD TERR 614 3/15/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP008861 HAMPSHIRE RD 2064 3/29/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP008865 WOODBURN AVE 3128 9/27/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP008872 BOWKER AVE 2566 9/27/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP008910 RUNNYMEDE PL 960 4/14/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT Page 128 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP008920 SOMASS DR 2773 4/18/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009112 LINCOLN RD 2355 5/31/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009131 WOODBURN AVE 3271 6/6/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009164 MEADOW PL 2024 6/16/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009167 DUNLEVY ST 2664 6/17/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009177 DENISON RD 247 6/21/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009202 GREATFORD PL 1860 6/29/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009217 NORFOLK RD 3215 7/6/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009225 HAMPSHIRE RD 1566 7/7/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009274 EXETER RD 3250 7/25/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009276 WOOTTON CRES 2513 7/25/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009319 BARKLEY TERR 127 8/4/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009320 VICTORIA AVE 441 8/4/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009333 PACIFIC AVE 2325 8/10/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009348 TRANSIT RD 976 8/16/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009390 DEWDNEY AVE 2741 9/1/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009411 DENISON RD 235 9/9/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009421 NORFOLK RD 3290 9/13/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009448 HENDERSON RD 3034 9/19/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009451 WOODBURN AVE 3271 9/19/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009460 FOUL BAY RD 1703 9/21/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009461 ALLENBY ST 2126 9/21/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009499 ST PATRICK ST 1400 10/4/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009561 ROSARIO ST 2378 10/26/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009584 TRANSIT RD 1018 11/3/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009585 FOUL BAY RD 2741 11/3/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009593 ALLENBY ST 2118 11/7/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009597 SOUTHDOWNE RD 3085 11/7/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009599 SOUTHDOWNE RD 3085 11/9/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009615 BEAVERBROOKE ST 2179 11/15/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009632 CADBORO BAY RD 2080 11/22/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009635 BEACH DR 2535 11/23/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009654 FOUL BAY RD 2741 12/1/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009663 CARDIFF PL 3511 12/5/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009673 BEACH DR 1231 12/7/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009681 CARDIFF PL 3389 12/12/2016 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009723 OLIVER ST 733 1/10/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009724 PLYMOUTH RD 3449 1/10/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009725 FINNERTY RD 3800 1/11/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009738 CRESCENT RD 2067 1/13/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009762 CENTRAL AVE 2125 1/23/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009766 NEWPORT AVE 898 1/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009775 DENISON RD 247 1/25/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT Page 129 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP009777 PRINCE ANDREW PL 150 1/25/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009785 WINDSOR RD 2237 1/30/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009787 BEACH DR 430 1/30/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009810 MONTEREY AVE 1660 2/6/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009815 GOODWIN ST 1148 501 2/7/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009834 GOODWIN ST 1148 501 2/14/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009850 FINNERTY RD 3800 2/17/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009853 WEALD RD 3280 2/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009858 DOVER RD 2711 2/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009868 EASTDOWNE RD 2684 2/23/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009882 CAVENDISH AVE 2742 2/28/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009885 HENDERSON RD 3540 2/28/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009896 AVONDALE RD 2069 3/2/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009915 CADBORO BAY RD 2446 3/8/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009923 CARRICK ST 2052 3/9/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009942 KING GEORGE TERR 310 3/13/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009943 ST PATRICK ST 637 3/13/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009946 EXETER RD 3200 3/14/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009957 MONTEREY AVE 626 3/17/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009958 MOWAT ST 2413 3/17/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009965 DEWDNEY AVE 2740 3/21/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009971 WESTDOWNE RD 2939 3/22/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009980 OLIVER ST 813 3/27/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP009981 LINKLEAS AVE 943 3/27/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010020 BURDICK AVE 2741 4/7/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010023 HAMPSHIRE RD 1868 4/7/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010024 TRANSIT RD 600 4/7/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010028 ST PATRICK ST 1050 4/10/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010029 FAIR ST 2165 4/10/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010039 CRESCENT RD 2049 4/12/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010064 NEWPORT AVE 724 4/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010068 FOUL BAY RD 2989 4/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010069 LINCOLN RD 2755 4/21/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010075 THORPE PL 2750 4/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010102 NORFOLK RD 3315 4/28/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010108 CRANMORE RD 2295 4/28/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010110 NEWPORT AVE 1106 5/1/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010119 RUTLAND RD 2985 5/4/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010125 BEACH DR 1370 406 5/9/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010126 UNIVERSITY WOODS 3325 5/9/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010134 BEACH DR 1960 5/12/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010136 CARDIFF PL 3510 5/12/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010137 CENTRAL AVE 2424 5/12/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010139 ST PATRICK ST 637 5/15/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT Page 130 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP010143 WOODBURN AVE 3231 5/16/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010150 CRANMORE RD 2378 5/17/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010155 MIDLAND RD 3150 5/19/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010165 VICTORIA AVE 666 5/23/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010166 TRANSIT RD 577 5/23/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010170 ESTEVAN AVE 2280 5/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010171 ESTEVAN AVE 2290 5/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010172 CADBORO BAY RD 3096 5/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010175 NEIL ST 2151 5/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010179 LINCOLN RD 2677 5/25/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010184 HENDERSON RD 2943 5/26/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010200 WESTDOWNE RD 2962 6/1/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010207 ESTEVAN AVE 2710 6/2/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010225 MID-DOWNE RD 2324 6/7/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010235 HAMPSHIRE RD 1868 6/12/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010246 BEACH DR 1832 6/15/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010251 BEACH DR 2650 6/16/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010254 HAMPSHIRE RD 1852 6/19/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010258 DEVON RD 3060 6/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010272 ROSLYN RD 1075 6/27/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010273 HAMPSHIRE RD 1367 6/27/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010274 MID-DOWNE RD 2324 6/27/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010282 LANSDOWNE RD 2700 6/29/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010294 BURDICK AVE 2817 7/5/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010302 BURDICK AVE 2624 7/6/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010334 BEACH DR 1370 101 7/17/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010336 BYNG ST 965 7/18/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010337 HAMPSHIRE RD 1044 7/18/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010342 MCNEILL AVE 2492 7/19/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010346 BURDICK AVE 2816 7/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010347 MONTEREY AVE 458 7/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010348 CADBORO BAY RD 2590 7/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010354 CRESCENT RD 1933 7/21/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010362 MCNEILL AVE 2492 7/26/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010373 DENISON RD 235 7/27/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010375 LULIE ST 1930 7/31/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010378 UPLANDS RD 3125 8/1/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010384 BEACH DR 390 8/2/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010387 NOTTINGHAM RD 2538 8/3/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010415 FINNERTY RD 3800 8/15/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010420 OLIVER ST 640 8/17/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010423 MARGATE AVE 2631 8/17/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010424 NEIL ST 2275 8/17/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT Page 131 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP010449 ST PATRICK ST 919 8/25/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010451 FALKLAND RD 515 8/28/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010471 NEWPORT AVE 546 9/5/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010480 ALLENBY ST 2090 9/8/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010487 SHERRINGHAM PL 3155 9/11/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010488 CARNARVON ST 2042 9/11/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010489 EASTDOWNE RD 2684 9/12/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010494 BURDICK AVE 2856 9/14/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010501 YALE ST 1616 9/18/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010502 YALE ST 1624 9/18/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010503 MILTON ST 2029 9/18/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010504 NEWTON ST 2111 9/18/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010508 KING GEORGE TERR 383 9/19/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010512 WESTDOWNE RD 3107 9/19/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010517 DOVER RD 2764 9/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010518 MUSGRAVE ST 2180 9/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010519 DENISON RD 235 9/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010525 HAMPSHIRE RD 1566 9/21/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010527 OLIVER ST 543 9/21/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010538 NEIL ST 2075 9/25/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010553 MID-DOWNE RD 2334 10/2/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010554 EPWORTH ST 2210 10/2/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010559 VICTORIA AVE 1218 10/5/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010562 FINNERTY RD 3800 10/6/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010564 DUNLEVY ST 2328 10/10/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010565 NEWPORT AVE 1047 10/10/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010590 EASTDOWNE RD 2600 10/19/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010599 OAK BAY AVE 2000 10/23/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010605 RIPON RD 3475 10/23/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010609 OAK BAY AVE 2187 107 10/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010610 LAFAYETTE ST 2167 10/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010612 DEWDNEY AVE 2741 10/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010613 PLUMER ST 2488 10/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010614 HEWLETT PL 1205 10/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010616 NEIL ST 2065 10/26/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010618 DRYFE ST 2458 10/26/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010621 EPWORTH ST 2257 10/26/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010624 WESTDOWNE RD 3015 10/30/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010626 ALLENBY ST 2151 10/31/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010632 FOUL BAY RD 2741 10/31/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010639 FINNERTY RD 3800 11/3/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010648 ARMSTRONG AVE 1773 11/6/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010651 ST DAVID ST 1238 11/6/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT Page 132 of 172 Active Building Permits - To December 31, 2017 File No. Civic Address Application Date Folder Type Report Code BP010656 DEVON RD 3061 11/8/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010657 LANSDOWNE RD 2695 11/9/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010670 DUNLEVY ST 2325 11/15/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010672 EASTDOWNE RD 2516 11/15/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010676 LINCOLN RD 2438 11/16/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010677 OAK BAY AVE 2187 107 11/16/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010689 WESTDOWNE RD 3051 11/21/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010695 GRANITE ST 2171 11/22/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010702 GOLDSMITH ST 2065 11/23/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010703 DEAL ST 1072 11/23/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010706 SUNSET AVE 362 11/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010709 YALE ST 1667 11/24/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010716 LINCOLN RD 2326 11/28/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010717 ELGIN RD 1742 11/28/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010721 CENTRAL AVE 2080 12/1/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010725 DUFFERIN AVE 2828 12/4/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010726 DUFFERIN AVE 2822 12/4/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010730 CADBORO BAY RD 2345 12/5/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010740 ALLENBY ST 2081 12/11/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010741 ST PATRICK ST 523 12/12/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010743 DALHOUSIE ST 2368 12/12/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010753 MONTEREY AVE 436 12/19/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010755 CEDAR HILL X RD 2345 134 12/19/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010758 NEWPORT AVE 416 12/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010759 RUNNYMEDE AVE 2027 12/20/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010760 OAK BAY AVE 2125 402 12/21/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT BP010763 COOKMAN ST 2363 12/21/2017 PLUMBING PERMIT Active Building Permits - 633 Page 133 of 172 EXPLANATORY NOTE FROM THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES RE: Advisory Planning Commission Minutes – October 3, 2017 This note is in reference to Advisory Planning Commission minutes for the meeting held October 3, 2017 (see attached). These minutes are provided to Council to receive them for information. Any recommendations in the minutes which require action from Council will have already been addressed when individual applications proceed to Committee of the Whole. Page 134 of 172 MINUTES OAK BAY ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3 2017 AT 5:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS, MUNICIPAL HALL, 2167 OAK BAY AVENUE MEMBERS PRESENT MEMBERS ABSENT Andrew Appleton Kristina Leach Tim Taddy Rus Collins Michael Low Pam Copley Patrick Frey Virginia Holden Kris Nichols STAFF PRESENT Deborah Jensen, Acting Director, Building and Planning Krista Mitchell, Building and Planning Clerk 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:02 pm. 2. Adoption of Minutes It was moved and seconded that the Minutes from July 4, 2017 be adopted. The motion was carried. None opposed. 3. Approval of Agenda and Late Items The agenda was approved as presented with the addition of items under Information Items. 4. New Business a. DVP00067 – 2677 Lincoln Road To facilitate an addition to an existing single family home. R. Collins recused himself from the meeting at 5:05 pm, citing conflict of interest. D. Jensen gave a brief overview of the application. Some of the comments were: A new house is under construction, and the owners would like to construct below grade stairs leading down to the basement, which requires variances to the interior side lot line setback and the total side lot lines setback. A variance is requested to increase maximum paved surface within the front yard. The municipal arborist has noted some damage to cedar tree roots on the neighbouring property, but no long term damage is expected. D. Yamamoto and L. Horvat, applicants, presented the proposal. Some of the comments were: Below grade stairs were not previously considered a structure and prevented from being within the side yard, and the retaining wall should be treated as an exterior landscaping feature, not part of the house. A front yard paved surface variance would avoid removing a plum tree in the boulevard. District of Oak Bay| 2017 10 03 apc minutes Page 135 of 172 APC Minutes Page 2 October 3, 2017 D. Jensen noted that, historically below grade stairs were not addressed in the Zoning Bylaw, but the Council appointed Floor Area Review Committee (FAR) determined a rationale was needed to address safe passage from the front to rear yard, and to consider negative consequences for ground stability. Commission Comments Commission members commented that removing the hardscape at the side of the house would decrease the overall amount of paving in the front yard, that established setbacks should be respected, and that the intent of the FAR committee was to reduce the number of development variance permit applications and stairways and decks were discussed in detail. D. Yamamoto stated that he was unsure if the neighbours to the south on Lincoln Road had been consulted about the proposed changes to the stairwell. In summary, Commission members noted the following comments: New homes should not need variances and reconfiguring existing homes is more challenging. There is a need to address gentle densification and address affordable housing, and the exterior access could potentially be a suite in the future. The variance for the front yard paving is acceptable, but not the below grade stairwell. It was moved and seconded to recommend that Council deny DVP00067. The motion was carried. K. Leach opposed. R. Collins returned to the meeting at 5:33 pm. b. DVP000069 – 2042 Carnarvon Street To facilitate an addition to a single family home. D. Jensen gave a brief overview of the application, noting that the application is to construct a below grade stairwell adjacent to a new single family home that is under construction, which would require variances to the total side lot setbacks but not individual side yard setbacks. M. Whitney and A. Grewal, applicants, and J. Singh, owner, presented the proposal. Some of the comments were: The applicant decided to construct the home knowing that a variance would be needed to construct the stairwell, which was not part of the building permit. Have written support from the adjacent, easterly neighbours who would be affected by the proposed stairwell. D. Jensen noted the Zoning Bylaw was amended in October 2015 to address below grade stairwells. District of Oak Bay| 2017 10 03 apc minutes Page 136 of 172 APC Minutes Page 3 October 3, 2017 Commission Comments Commission members commented that the proposed variance does not affect anyone in a negative way, that the building is partially constructed, and that the neighbours have been consulted are in support. Members also noted that this is a request for one variance, not multiple variances, and that only the total side lot lines is not being met. Some Commission members advised they were not in support of the application as there needs to be consistency and a fairness of approach with applications. D. Jensen confirmed the building permit for the house was issued, and that the applicants were made aware Council would make a determination of whether to allow the variance. It was moved and seconded to recommend that Council approve DVP000069. The motion carried. K. Nichols and A. Appleton opposed. c. DVP00071 – 1743 Armstrong Avenue To facilitate a renovation to an existing single family home. R. Collins recused himself from the meeting at 5:53 pm, citing conflict of interest. D. Jensen gave a brief overview of the application. Some of the comments were: The applicant is proposing to convert an existing attached garage in order to increase living space for a growing family in a 1948 built home The applicant is requesting two variances to the parking bylaw, to remove the requirement for one covered parking space, and to permit one on site parking space. Difficult to site a second parking space, and would result in loss of vegetation. D. Yamamoto, applicant, presented the proposal. Some of the comments were: Entrance to the basement impedes siting a second parking space in the rear yard. The owners would like to keep the cost of the project minimal and are not proposing any changes to the existing building envelope. Commission Comments Commission members confirmed that one car could be parked in the driveway, and a second vehicle could be parked in the boulevard off of the main roadway. Members also commented that maintaining existing housing stock is preferable to removing the house and making it even less affordable. A Commission member commented that the Parking Bylaw is inconsistent with the OCP vision and policies. It was moved and seconded to recommend that Council approve DVP00071. The motion was carried. None opposed. District of Oak Bay| 2017 10 03 apc minutes Page 137 of 172 APC Minutes Page 4 October 3, 2017 d. DVP00072 – 1984 Crescent Road To facilitate construction of a single family home. D. Jensen gave a brief overview of the application. Some of the comments were: Council granted variances for the original house in February 2017 and a building permit was subsequently issued, but the municipality then discovered the house had been demolished with no approved permit. The applicant’s engineer advised there were structural foundation problems and recommended removing the house. Applicant wishes to rebuild the home in its original siting and style with the same variances that were approved in February; however, additional variances are needed as more than 75% of the original structure was removed, therefore losing its legal nonconforming status, including the contextual setback and side lot line setback. D. Yamamoto, applicant, presented the proposal. Some of the comments were: Removal and replacement of the concrete walls will improve and extend life expectancy of the house, but the overall building envelope has not been altered. Removal of the house was not in consultation with Zebra Design, who originally produced the building plans. Commission Comments Commission members confirmed that the original home was not on the Oak Bay Community Heritage Register nor protected by bylaw, and commented that the failure to get a demolition permit could have implications for the municipality and was a grievous action by the builder. Commission members also commented that the new home should conform to the Zoning Bylaw, that a large number of variances are being requested, and that the design has been slightly modified from its original design. D. Yamamoto, applicant, advised the contextual setback variance is needed due to siting of existing homes on either side of the property, and that bringing the home forward would be difficult due to steep grades. D. Jensen confirmed the site is very steep and that a new house sited on the property would, at minimum, need a variance to the height. She also noted surrounding neighbours have given support for the rebuilding of the home in the same design and location that was previously approved by Council. Commission members noted their dismay with the demolition of a character home without a demolition permit. It was moved and seconded to recommend that Council deny DVP00072, based on the evidence that all best efforts have not been made to reduce or eliminate variances required for a new structure. The motion was carried. G. Holden opposed. R. Collins returned to the meeting District of Oak Bay| 2017 10 03 apc minutes Page 138 of 172 APC Minutes Page 5 October 3, 2017 5. Information Items a. Heritage Conservation Area Working Group – APC Participation Patrick Frey was appointed. b. Checklist A Commission member discussed the need for a standardized checklist, noting that the Procedures Manual does contain a checklist. P. Copley and M. Low will review. c. In-House Information Sessions The Chairperson advised the suggestions put forward for in house information sessions will be recirculated, suggesting further discussion on community amenity contributions and development cost charges was a topic of interest. D. Jensen noted that a consultant will be making a presentation to Council at a future meeting regarding amenity contributions and development cost charges. The Chairperson circulated a Green Shores for Homes brochure. d. APC Term Expirations D. Jensen advised the membership terms for A. Appleton, V. Holden, K. Nichols, K. Leach, and T. Taddy will be expiring December 31, 2017. 6 Next Meeting The next regular meeting of the APC is scheduled for Tuesday, November 7, 2017. 7 Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:48 pm. District of Oak Bay| 2017 10 03 apc minutes Page 139 of 172 EXPLANATORY NOTE FROM THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES RE: Referral of the Oak Bay Heritage Commission 2017 Annual Report The Oak Bay Heritage Commission 2017 Annual Report is being presented to Council in accordance with the current Terms of Reference for the Oak Bay Heritage Commission. Council typically receives the reports of this nature for information. Should the Council wish to follow the usual process, the following motion would be appropriate: “That the 2017 Oak Bay Heritage Commission Annual Report be received.” Page 140 of 172 OAK BAY HERITAGE COMMISSION 2017 ANNUAL REPORT Prepared by Cairine Green, Chair The Oak Bay Heritage Commission had another busy year in 2017 because of a group of dedicated volunteers who initiated, promoted and supported a range of community and municipal heritage activities. These involved Council referrals, consulting with staff, public education, information-sharing and making key recommendations to Municipal Council decision-making on heritage land use. The Commission was pleased to see a major community-driven proposal take further shape, Oak Bay’s first Heritage Conservation Area (HCA) proposal for the Prospect Place neighbourhood. A municipally-led working group has formalized the proposal, chaired by Council Liaison to Heritage, Councilor Kevin Murdoch. The Commission is represented by member Heather Cochran. This group has an ambitious agenda and hopes to complete its work by early Spring 2018, with a target of May or June 2018 when it is hoped that the neighbourhood is designated as Oak Bay’s first HCA. The Commission’s Sub-Committees continued to focus their work around significant heritage events, projects and initiatives that provide a positive framework for public engagement. The Commission also embarked on a major planning and review session in October which remains “a work in progress,” with Part 2 to be continued in early 2018. This review will include the 2013 Heritage Strategic Plan, to be assessed to determine what can be implemented in 2018, followed by updates to the Plan. A small working group of three volunteers (Robert Taylor, Cora Smith and Heather Cochran) have agreed to undertake this work and return to the Commission with their results, before late spring if possible. Staff changes in the Building and Planning Department included the departure of Director Roy Thomassen, the addition of Planning Technician Graeme Buffett and promotion of Manager of Planning Deborah Jensen to Acting Director. Administrative Assistant Krista Mitchell continued to provide excellent administrative support to Commission meetings and in the fall, offered to process all correspondence on our behalf so that outgoing materials are completed on Municipal letterhead and remain consistent with municipal Corporate Services’ standards. Krista’s offer of support will enhance the work of the Commission, again raising our profile related to heritage conservation in Oak Bay. We appreciate the participation of Department staff because without them, we could not move forward. Therefore, as goals for 2018, we want to strengthen staff relationships and improve communication between staff and Commission volunteers, reinforcing the fact that “we are all in this together.” Page 141 of 172 The Commission also thanks Councillor Kevin Murdoch for his continued support as Council Liaison. Education Committee – Marg Palmer, Chair Working with the Oak Bay Heritage Foundation and the Business Improvement Association (BIA), the Committee again managed and staffed a booth at the Summer Night Markets’ series and introduced to the public a new display banner featuring designated homes. Involvement in this venue has continued to boost the community profile of Oak Bay Heritage and demonstrates the synergy that exists when the Committee works with other community organizations. We thank the BIA for their continued support. The Committee organized four lectures as part of Oak Bay Heritage’s annual lecture series --- in March with speakers Michael Arneja, Torsten Ely and Maximillian Huxley, on Heritage Renovation and Green Tips; in September with speaker Yvonne Van Ruskenveld, on More Than Homebodies – The Women of Oak Bay; in October with speaker Stuart Stark, on Exhibition Dreams – The History of Oak Bay’s Most Amazing Building; and, in November with speaker Kate Humble, on Coming Home – Architects, Design and the First World War. In August, at Oak Bay’s annual artists’ event, the Bowker Creek Brush-Up, sub-committee members hosted a booth provided by the Hallmark Society. The Committee also worked together with the Community Association of Oak Bay (CAOB) to host in April a public discussion on the proposed Prospect Place Heritage Conservation Area. In November, similar collaboration occurred with CAOB and the Heritage Foundation at a public presentation by Larry McCann, on the proposal to designate the Uplands as a National Historic site. Once again, these public events were often “standing room only,” reflecting the strength of working partnerships. An Oak Bay Heritage Facebook page was created to increase our ability to publicize lectures and to reach the public through social media. Community Heritage Register Committee (Registration and Designation) – Joan Heagle, Chair Heritage Conservation Areas are another heritage planning tool designed to protect clusters of homes and spaces in a specific area or neighbourhood. As previously mentioned, the Prospect Place HCA proposal is promising for Oak Bay, and sub-committee member Pat Wilson has continued as liaison to this neighbourhood group. The Committee will continue to play a vital role in 2018, in tracking and content development for the Community Heritage Register, demonstrating the need for additional heritage planning expertise as a staffing priority for the Building and Planning Department. Without this professional resource, it will be a daunting challenge for the Committee to make expanding and 2 Page 142 of 172 updating the Register a major priority in 2018. Volunteer capacity and energy are always considerations when it comes to workload and in this regard, discussions with Acting Director Deborah Jensen are ongoing. Council had asked the Heritage Commission to provide input and recommendations on a June 2016 motion related to Oak Bay’s Community Heritage Register and how it might be expanded. Much of 2017, therefore, was dedicated to the ongoing status of the Register and to strategies that would not only expand the Register but also educate homeowners about the advantages of registration and designation. In fact, eighty letters were sent to Oak Bay homeowners asking them to consider designating their homes. There were a number of homes registered or designated that included 1329 St. Patrick St; 2018 Meadow Place; 2608 Cavendish; and 2390 Oak Bay Ave. As well, there are Heritage Revitalization Agreements under consideration by the Building and Planning Department. A new heritage brochure was finally completed and printed for distribution, a key promotional tool to educate and inform the community about Oak Bay Heritage. 2017 Oak Bay Council Referrals: SUMMARY OF LAND USE APPLICATIONS CONSIDERED BY THE OAK BAY HERITAGE COMMISSION File Address Summary Heritage Recommendation Council Decision ZON00020/ 1605 York Place To consider an addition to the Heritage Register Jan 10, 2017 Approve Dec 11, 2017 Approve DVP00031 as part of a rezoning application. Feb 14, 2017 DVP00058 3125 Uplands Road To consider renovations to the existing home Mar 14, 2017 Approve Apr 10, 2017 Approve and construct a new detached garage. Apr 6, 2017 HAD00002 2390 Oak Bay Avenue To consider adding the home to the Heritage Mar 14, 2017 Approve May 8, 2017 Approve Register. BP010072 2809 Burdick Avenue To consider the addition of a conservatory at the Jun 13, 2017 Approve Jun 26, 2017 Approve rear of the existing home. DVP00063 599 Island Road To consider renovations to the existing home. Jun 13, 2017 Approve Jul 17, 2017 Approve1 Jul 11, 2017 HAP00009 2408 San Carlos Place To consider increased paved surface in the front Jun 13, 2017 Approve Jul 10, 2017 Approve yard. HAD00003 2608 Cavendish Avenue To consider designating the property and Jun 13, 2017 Approve Jul 10, 2017 Approve placing the home on the Heritage Register HRA00003 960 Foul Bay Road To consider heritage designation of the existing Jul 11, 2017 Approve home and a single family development. Jul 18, 2017 HRA00004 644 Beach Drive To consider heritage designation of the existing Jul 11, 2017 Approve home and a single family development. 1 Building Alterations Only 3 Page 143 of 172 Tourism Committee – Marion Cumming, Liaison Commission member Marion Cumming continued to fill this role throughout 2017 and did a good job of keeping both the Commission and the Tourism Committee informed about events and activities of mutual interest. At the 2017 Oak Bay Heritage Christmas gathering, Marion arranged for gifts and recognition of two Oak Bay residents who worked to bring greater exposure to Oak Bay’s history and heritage. The Heritage Commission will continue with the liaison position and monitor how it can enhance support for heritage and tourism. Looking Ahead to 2018 Again, to restate, without active volunteers and their dedication, creative energy and commitment to the Oak Bay Heritage Commission, the successful delivery of 2017 activities and projects would not have been as successful. Our volunteers remain at the heart of the work and to reiterate from last year’s annual report, “effective volunteer recruitment and retention remain key to building and maintaining the strength and capacity of the Oak Bay Heritage Commission”. 2017 Oak Bay Heritage Commission volunteers were: Marg Palmer, Joan Heagle, Bronwyn Taylor, Robert Taylor, Marion Cumming, Susan Ross, Monica Walter, Jane Hall, Heather Cochran and Cora Smith. The only departure was Marg Palmer, whose term has expired. Marg is big loss to the Commission; she has been an inspiration to the Education Committee and a walking encyclopedia on Oak Bay Heritage and history. While Marg will be greatly missed, we wish her well in her next iteration. The good news is that, at the time of writing this report, Pat Wilson has been re-appointed to the Heritage Commission. 2017 was another challenging year for Oak Bay as the pace and extent of re-development in our community remained active. As a result, the Oak Bay Heritage Commission will continue its efforts to seek a greater role in land use decision-making and housing policy, where appropriate. In 2016, the Heritage Commission recommended the following action items in its annual report. They are again being included in this 2017 report, given that work on these remains largely outstanding and should be part of the Commission work plan in 2018: The Heritage Commission recommends that the terminology “mandatory vs. voluntary” be eliminated from any further references to the Community Heritage Register. The District of Oak Bay considers exploring a contractual agreement with the City of Victoria or other municipality with specific heritage planning expertise, to assist Oak Bay to systematically update its heritage policies and practices and align them with provincial legislation. 4 Page 144 of 172 The District of Oak Bay ensures that a “heritage lens” be applied to such initiatives as the municipality’s urban forest strategy and infill housing strategy, and that if appropriate, the Heritage Commission be requested to provide formal comments to the consultation process as this work moves ahead. The District of Oak Bay considers Heritage Conservation Areas as effective planning tools for land use, consistent with existing provisions in the 2014 Official Community Plan, to protect and enhance community heritage values in established neighbourhoods. The District of Oak Bay completes the existing photography project and updating of materials on community values/Statements of Significance, related to the Community Heritage Register. Recommendations on additional action items from the 2016 Oak Bay Heritage Commission Annual Report remain relevant for 2017 and 2018 that include: Review and update the 2013 Heritage Strategic Plan and provide advice to staff and Council as to how this plan can be better integrated into the 2014 OCP implementation process and land use planning in general. Identify where and how the work of the Commission, through closer collaboration with staff, can be more relevant and meaningful heritage conservation and to the work of the Advisory Planning Commission and Advisory Design Panel. Update and expand the Community Heritage Register in consultation with Oak Bay staff and a heritage planning consultant (should one be appointed). The Commission believes that this work is still vital to its role as a strong voice for the conservation and preservation of Oak Bay’s unique heritage, history and culture. The Commission also believes that a proactive approach to short and long-term heritage planning and conservation by Mayor and Council, staff and Commission volunteers working together, is essential to protecting the community’s heritage assets most valued by residents. 5 Page 145 of 172 Acknowledgements: On behalf of the Heritage Commission, sincere appreciation is extended to: Marg Palmer, outgoing long-term Heritage Commission volunteer. Her leadership and work as Chair of the Education Sub-Committee was invaluable and a hallmark in the community. Pat Wilson for her ongoing work as liaison between the Registration/Designation Sub- Committee and the key proponents of the Prospect Place Heritage Conservation Area. Heather Cochran for her willingness to serve as Commission representative on the Heritage Conservation Area working group established by the municipality. To all of our Commission volunteers, thank you for your support and commitment during 2017 and I look forward to working with all of you again in 2018. It has been a privilege to serve as your Commission Chair over the past year 2017. Respectfully Submitted, Oak Bay Heritage Commission December 2017 6 Page 146 of 172 EXPLANATORY NOTE FROM THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE SERVICES RE: Heritage Commission Minutes – November 14, 2017 and December 12, 2017 This note is in reference to the Heritage Commission minutes for the meetings held November 14, 2017 and December 12, 2017(see attached). Council typically receives the minutes for information. To take action on any comments in the minutes from the Commission, Council would need to make a separate motion to that effect. Page 147 of 172 MINUTES OAK BAY HERITAGE COMMISSION TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2017 AT 5:00 PM DOWNSTAIRS MEETING ROOM, MUNICIPAL HALL, 2167 OAK BAY AVENUE MEMBERS PRESENT Heather Cochran Susan Ross Marion Cumming Cora Smith Cairine Green Robert Taylor Jane Hall Councillor Kevin Murdoch Joan Heagle MEMBERS ABSENT Margaret Palmer Monica Walter Bronwyn Taylor STAFF PRESENT Deborah Jensen, Acting Director Building and Planning Krista Mitchell, Building / Planning Clerk OTHERS PRESENT Members of the Public: 0 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:03 pm. 2. Approval of Agenda and Late Items The agenda was approved as amended. 3. Adoption of Minutes It was moved and seconded that the minutes from October 10, 2017 be adopted as amended. The motion was carried. None opposed. 4. Correspondence The Chairperson gave a brief summary of correspondence that was received. Commission volunteers needed to review the Heritage Plan, to be discussed in January. BC Heritage survey results will be sent out by email. A Commission member asked for an update on the Tod house asset management plan. Oak Bay Archives is looking for ideas for 2018 Heritage Week, with the theme of Heritage Stands the Test of Time. Oak Bay Community Association has cancelled their planned awards. No applications have been received for 785 Island Road. District of Oak Bay| 2017 11 14 heritage minutes Page 148 of 172 Heritage Commission Minutes Page 2 November 14, 2017 5. Information Item a) Heritage Conservation Area Working Group Update H. Cochran reported that the working group has met three times to put together a work plan, and are working on a request for qualifications for a consultant. 6. Report of Subcommittees/Other a) Council Liaison None. b) Education (S. Ross) A fall lecture was held on October 18 with speaker Stuart Stark, who discussed the exhibition building, and was well attended by over 100 people. A fall lecture is being held November 15 with speaker Kate Humble, who will talk about Coming Home: Architects, Design, and the First World War. A spring lecture is being held March 7 with speaker Kevin Murdoch. The Community Association of Oak Bay hosted a table at the Royal Victoria Yacht Club on November 6 to present materials on Uplands and the proposal for recognition as a national historic site. A book launch will be held at 2:00 pm on December 15 at the Monterey Library for a book launch for author Stuart Stark for The BC Agricultural Association Exhibition Building at the Willows. A Commission member will follow up with a Heritage Foundation member to explore putting on an educational workshop with developers and realtors. c) Tourism M. Cumming advised that a final version of the Oak Bay Historical Walking Tour map is close to being completed, which will be cost shared with Oak Bay Tourism and the Heritage Foundation, and advised Michael de Palma will be presented a gift for supplying the materials and labour to build the Trafalgar Park cairn. d) Community Register/Designation J. Heagle reported that the subcommittee sent approximately 60 letters to homeowners that are currently on the Community Heritage Register encouraging them to consider designation of their homes, and that the subcommittee will also be sending out approximately 200 letters to homeowners that are listed in Stuart Stark’s book More Than Just Bricks and Boards. J. Heagle also commented that staff are working on the statement of significance for 1526 Beach Drive, that the Yacht Club is interested in designating their building, and requested information on the demolition of 1984 Crescent Road. The Chairperson advised that any outgoing correspondence should be sent through staff on Oak Bay letterhead. D. Jensen confirmed that 1984 Crescent Road was not on the Community Heritage Register or heritage designated, and was demolished without a demolition permit. She noted the engineer advised the house foundation was unsound, and Council has approved new construction, essentially the same house plan, on the site. District of Oak Bay| 2017 11 14 heritage minutes Page 149 of 172 Heritage Commission Minutes Page 3 November 14, 2017 Commission members commented they would like an education session with Lui Carvello, as well as a checklist for designating internal features of a home, and inquired about fencing at Patio Court. D. Jensen confirmed the Lost Souls letter was mailed last week, noting that correspondence should be sent to staff, and advised that the heritage revitalization agreement for Patio Court does not prohibit fencing. She also commented that both staff and Commission members will jointly write statements of significance. e) Planning and Development D. Jensen advised that an architect has had preliminary discussions with staff regarding a heritage revitalization agreement for 785 Island Road, which is why a notation is made on the real estate listing, and that the heritage revitalization agreement application for 960 Foul Bay Road has been revised from 5 lots to 4 lots to allow for more green space. 7. New Business a. Heritage Commission – Annual Workplan (cont’d) The Chairperson advised that the annual workplan session will be continued in January 2018. 8. Next Meeting The next regular meeting of the Heritage Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, December 12, 2017 in the Council Chambers of Municipal Hall. 9. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 6:21 pm. District of Oak Bay| 2017 11 14 heritage minutes Page 150 of 172 MINUTES OAK BAY HERITAGE COMMISSION TUESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2017 AT 5:00 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS, MUNICIPAL HALL, 2167 OAK BAY AVENUE MEMBERS PRESENT Heather Cochran Margaret Palmer Marion Cumming Susan Ross Cairine Green Cora Smith Jane Hall Robert Taylor Joan Heagle Councillor Kevin Murdoch MEMBERS ABSENT Monica Walter STAFF PRESENT Deborah Jensen, Acting Director Building and Planning OTHERS PRESENT Members of the Public: 1 1. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 5:00 pm. 2. Approval of Agenda and Late Items The agenda was approved as presented. 3. Correspondence None. 4. Information Items a) Heritage Conservation Area Working Group – Update H. Cochrane advised the Working Group has been discussing potential boundaries for the conservation area, with a presentation from Michael Prince contributing to this discussion. b) Planning Updates D. Jensen provided an update on some planning applications, noting the following: A revised site layout for 960 Foul Bay Road was presented to Committee of the Whole, and a heritage revitalization agreement will now be considered by Council. No new information is available for 785 Island Road, other than it is for sale. A demolition application for 2264 Windsor Road has expired, and the property is under new ownership. District of Oak Bay| 2017 12 12 heritage minutes Page 151 of 172 Heritage Commission Minutes Page 2 December 12, 2017 The Building Bylaw sets out a tiered fee structure for demolitions, and where work is in contravention of the Bylaw, the fees are doubled. Commission members noted they would like to see 785 Island Road protected for heritage where it was once owned by an author; and commented that three homes will be built at 2264 Windsor Road, but the new owner has stated he will build houses consistent with the streetscape, will construct a plaque, and artifacts found in the basement will be provided to Oak Bay Archives. Commission members commented that building fines seem low, that the fee structure should be reviewed while recognizing that fees need to be reasonable, and a process is needed for penalties where a heritage designated home might be demolished. 5. Old Business a) Heritage Commission – Annual Work Plan (cont’d) Heritage Plan - Review Process Commission members discussed the Commission’s mandate to develop and maintain the Heritage Plan, and setting up a subcommittee to review the Heritage Plan, who will meet in January. Members also noted the need for clarification regarding the ‘lead’ on specific action items, and who that would be, and requested the Heritage Plan be a standing item on the Commission agenda. Statement of Significance Review Process D. Jensen clarified that additions to the Heritage Register go through a formal application process that would initially be reviewed by staff, including collection of documentation on the history of the site and initial preparation of a statement of significance. She also clarified that the final preparation of the statement of significance would be joint between staff and the registration subcommittee, including a site visit and revisions to the statement. Budget – Lectures / Administration Commission members questioned whether the budget line item for lectures in the Commission budget could be moved back to the Heritage Foundation as the current structure is causing duplication of effort. R. Taylor left the meeting at 5:47 pm. D. Jensen noted that expenditures submitted by Commission members should be approved by the Commission, which also applies to a current request for mailing and stationary supplies. J. Heagle confirmed 56 letters were sent to owners asking them to designate their homes. It was moved and seconded that the expenditure incurred for correspondence sent to heritage registered properties encouraging designation be approved. The motion was carried. None opposed. District of Oak Bay| 2017 12 12 heritage minutes Page 152 of 172 Heritage Commission Minutes Page 3 December 12, 2017 The Chair advised District administrative staff will provide clerical support and send out all future correspondence sent on behalf of the Commission and noted the formality will provide additional authority. Newsletters Commission members requested funding for copies of newsletters produced by the Heritage Foundations at approximately $1.00 per sheet, noting the four page colour newsletters are produced three times per year, and will submit a formal request. Commission members also commented the District should consider tax incentives for heritage preservation as a method for building the heritage toolkit. Councillor Murdoch noted policies need to be reviewed, with evidence showing that they work, but also need to consider cost of building upgrades. The Chairperson advised she is working on the annual report, and comments from the Commission should be sent to her to they can be incorporated into the report. 6. Next Meeting The next regular meeting of the Heritage Commission is scheduled for Tuesday, January 9, 2018 in the Council Chambers of Municipal Hall. 7. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 6:04 pm. District of Oak Bay| 2017 12 12 heritage minutes Page 153 of 172 RESOLUTION OF THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF OAK BAY FOR THE COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2018 Attendance at the BC Mayors' Caucus That Council approve the attendance of Mayor Jensen, at the 2018 BC Mayors' Caucus, to be held in Squamish, BC, March 14 to16, 2018, and the payment of expenses necessarily incurred by him. Page 154 of 172 RESOLUTION OF THE MUNICIPAL COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF OAK BAY FOR THE COUNCIL MEETING OF JANUARY 22, 2018 Attendance at the Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities Convention That Council approve the attendance of Oak Bay Council Members, at the 2018 Association of Vancouver Island and Coastal Communities Convention, to be held in Victoria, BC, April 7 to 9, 2018, and the payment of expenses necessarily incurred by them. Page 155 of 172 DISTRICT OF OAK-'*BAY MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Maura Jones, Deputy Director of Corporate Services DATE: January 18, 2018 RE: Bylaw Memorandum-Bylaw Nos. 3531.102, 2018, 4697, 4698 For First and Second Reading, and Setting of a Public Hearing Date Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 3531.102, 2018 Bylaw 3531.102, 2018 was considered at the Committee of the Whole meeting on January 15, 2018. If adopted this bylaw would amend the Local Commercial Use (C-1) zone in order to permit Service Business Use, at the property legally described as 687 I 697 St. Patrick Street (Lot 1, Block 2, Section 22, Victoria District, Plan 1916). The existing building would continue to be used for allowable uses. The proposed amendment, if approved would result in a text amendment to the Local Commercial (C-1) zone to include Service Business Use. Previously in the Agenda you will have considered Bylaw 4697 and 4698 with regards to the proposed development of four single family residential lots, and the restoration of the heritage home at 644 Beach Drive in its existing location, and its designation. A public hearing for Bylaw No. 3531.102, 2018 could also be accommodated on February 13, 2018 at 6:00 PM through the following resolution. "That a public hearing on Bylaw No. 3531.102, 2018 be held in the CouncilChambers at Oak Bay Municipal Hall, 2167 Oak Bay Avenue, Victoria BC, on February 13 at 6:00 PM, and that notice be given in accordance with the Local GovernmentAct." ATTACHMENT($) Subject: Bylaw Nos. 3531.102,2018, 4697, 4698 Date: January 18, 2018 Page 156 of 172 Bylaw No. 3531.102, 2018, Zoning Bylaw Amendment Bylaw, 2018 Report - Acting Director of Building and Planning, Jan. 2, 2018 Subject: Bylaw Nos. 3531.102,2018, 4697, 4698 Date: January 18, 2018 Page 157 of 172 THE CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF OAK BAY BYLAW NO. 3531.102 A Bylaw to amend the Zoning Bylaw, 1986 The Municipal Council of The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay, in open meeting assembled, enacts that Bylaw No. 3531, being the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended, is further amended as follows: 1. By adding the following as Paragraph 9.1.1.(4) to the Local Commercial Use (C-1) zone: 9.1.1.(4) Service business use This Bylaw may be cited as the Zoning Bylaw Amendment Bylaw No. 3531.102, 2018. READ a first and second time by the Municipal Council on PUBLIC HEARING held on READ a third time by the Municipal Council on ADOPTED AND FINALLY PASSED by the Municipal Council on Mayor Director of Corporate Services Sealed with the Seal of The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay. File: ZON00029 Address: 687 / 697 St Patrick Street Page 158 of 172 Cenhal Avenue Page 159 of 172 697 S}. Pairitk Shea} Xmk- 1:100 lll? - April17, Z01? MAINFl00R PLAN BASEMENIPLAN Shul I -:6I mu Am - HUI Iwmlm rim Am - 55.6vuuuomIexlmlluEmu) sulc » Izl?ll Xulr - Mon Hree} ; 697 5*. Pahitk S}. Pahick Shea} Avenue {RIMSONKINGMPIE (ACERPUIANOIDES"CRIMSONKING") NIORNAYMP1! (ACERPUMNOIDES) 1 —l— ca Q) A Page 160 of 172 —l— \/\ X 5.: I— -0- O Q. —I— vs 697 SI’' Pa +r ECk S+r e e + TREECANOPYCMCUIMION - M A" Scale N0110 SCALE _ 0;} 19,2017 EXISIN (mo? 1 of I aoweuRAINme EIJI PANIEUIAIA) WE BIRCH(anuu PEN NO MINE(AEERINAIANOIDES) UNMSONNINEMINE(MEN PUIANOIDES"CRIMSONNINE") IOMI ”””“”N PERCENIAEECOVERAGEOFIREECANOPY 697 Si. Pa+Hck Sireei DISTR ICT OF OAK~BAY REPORT TO: Committee of the Whole FROM: Deborah Jensen, Acting Director of Building and Planning DATE: January 2, 2018 RE: Zoning Amendment (ZON00029) - 687 / 697 St. Patrick Street Lot 1, Block 2, Section 22, Victoria District, Plan 1916 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The District of Oak Bay is in receipt of a zoning amendment application to permit Service Business Use at 687 / 697 St. Patrick Street, the Central Stores Building. The proposal would result in a text amendment to the Local Commercial (C-1) zone to include Service Business Use. Staff have reviewed the proposed development in respect of Official Community Plan policies, other District policies and requirements, and context with the surrounding neighbourhood. Based upon the overall results of this review, staff support the proposed development. BACKGROUND ;::1 8 The District of Oak Bay has "'/ ;:; ~l cc 788 I 777 776 81 "' i3 I received a rezoning application I ~ _j J 7ol 766 to permit Service Business Use -I 757767 764 At--- 7~ 755 -I at 687 / 697 St. Patrick Street, I 742 I I I 7J5 I I 1N~~ the Central Stores Building. The I 743 [ 742 I I ,48 7 733 736 737 7 rezoning application consists of I ~ ~ __1 730 --,._ 723 I ~I~N 724 a text amendment to allow m~ 7 13 I 710 713 Service Business Use within the I - 712 ~~1 Local Commercial (C-1) zone. Central Avenue 1 0 _ [ ·r.., 2325 I -d 597 '- .. I "' ,. 61 J 688 1 The subject property is located at ' ig ~ m/ ~ ~ ~ i ~ rr ~ ~ i:J 678 68, the corner of Central Avenue and .;I~~~ J 0 H ZON00029 - 687 I 697 St. Patrick Street Page 1 of 5 January 2, 2018 Page 161 of 172 The characteristics of the subject site are as follows: Subject Property Current OCP Designation Corner Commercial Current Zone Local Commercial (C-1) Zone Proposed Zone Text Amendment Applicable to Existing C~1 Zone Current Use Vacant Commercial I Occupied Residential Proposed Use Add Service Business Use Location Southeast Corner of Central Avenue and St. Patrick Street Official Community Plan The subject area is designated Corner Commercial by the Official Community Plan (OCP). This designation applies to various commercial nodes located on street corners across the District. Properties designated Corner Commercial are located at the corners of Central Avenue and St. Patrick Street, Eastdowne Road and Fair Street, Currie Road and Newport Avenue, McNeil! Avenue and Roslyn Road, and Eastdowne Road and Dalhousie Street. These areas are intended to provide residents with variety stores, cafes, garden stores, and related uses. These areas play an important role as local gathering places in the community. Proposed Development and Rezoning The applicant proposes a zoning 733 0 733 ANALYSIS The Official Community Plan (OCP) Corner Commercial land use designation sets a vision for the subject site as a mixed use property with ground level commercial activities, such as shops and cafes, with residential uses or offices above. Corner Commercial areas are located within ZON00029 - 687 I 697 St. Patrick Street Page 2 of 5 January 2, 2018 Page 162 of 172 Established Neighbourhoods and are important social meeting places and hubs that serve both neighbourhood residents as well as the broader community. The addition of Service Business Use would allow for personal services and office use, with some exceptions. The proposed uses would not result in any changes to existing buildings or infrastructure, but may contribute to and satisfy OCP policies by promoting economic development while retaining the existing building. However, the addition of Service Business Use to the zone would also allow for street level offices while the OCP indicates a preference for offices that are located above street level. The Central Stores building was constructed in 1946 on what was known as Casey's Corner, across from Casey's Confectionery. The building was occupied as Central Stores from 1947 to 1964, and as the Central Food Market from 1965. More recently, the building has been home to a hair salon. Information available as to the specific history of the site is limited. The Local Commercial Use (C-1) zone is specific to the subject property only. No other properties in the District of Oak Bay have this zoning. The property at 713 St Patrick Street (formerly Casey's Market) was rezoned from C-1 to C-2 in 2002 in order to include a Deli Use and provide seating for the consumption of food and beverages. The C-1 zone allows for a limited range of commercial uses including the retail sale and storage of groceries, meat, fish, bakery goods and sundry household and garden items, as well as barbers, hairdressers and beauty shops. A text amendment to add Service Business Use to the C-1 zone would not impact other lands within the municipality. The Parking Facilities Bylaw does not specifically identify parking requirements for commercial uses within the C-1 zone; however those calculations would be based on other similar uses within another zone. If the parking rate applicable to Service Business Use were· applied to the subject site, seven commercial parking spaces would be required. The applicant has requested the addition of Service Business Use without adding on site parking. Given the historical use of the building, introduction of an architectural firm would not trigger recalculations of required parking. The existing conditions of the site would make it difficult to add parking without altering the current building's footprint. Commercial uses of the property would continue to be entirely dependent on municipal on street parking. ZON00029 - 687 I 697 St. Patrick Street Page 3 of 5 January 2, 2018 Page 163 of 172 A parking study prepared for the application utilizes observations of current on street parking conditions, parking demand data, and a comparison of rates established by parking bylaws in the capital region. Observations of on street parking conditions found that there were approximately 60 on street parking spaces in proximity to the subject site. On weekdays approximately 25% of these sites were occupied, while on weeknights 40% were occupied. Service Business Use typically functions during weekdays when residential parking demand is lower. The study generally concludes the addition of Service Business Use would result in an expected overall increase of up to one additional vehicle. There is no commercial parking available on the subject property and any additional parking would be dependent on the on street supply. Staff note that the addition of Service Business Use to the C-1 zone would also serve to restrict the uses of the site as compared to rezoning to the C-2 zone applied to adjacent properties, where additional uses would include restaurant use and financial institution use that would trigger additional parking requirements. No changes are proposed to the exterior of the building at this time, and the District arborist has indicated there will be no impacno the existing trees. Overall, the tree canopy cover will exceed that target of 30% within commercial areas. Section 4.1.2 of the OCP outlines criteria for where community amenity contributions should be considered, including scale of a proposed development and increases in population. While community amenity contributions are often associated with increases in density as with the Oak Bay OCP, it is not uncommon for amenity contributions to be associated with commercial projects. The applicant proposes to provide funding in the amount of $5,000 dollars for bike route development and maintenance. Public Input The applicant has indicated the immediately adjacent residents were consulted regarding additional uses being permitted on the site, with no significant concerns raised through those discussions. The required rezoning signage has also been posted on the subject property since May 2017 and the District has received two general inquiries regarding the proposed project. Advisory Planning Commission The Advisory Planning Commission reviewed the proposed development at their meeting of December 5, 2017 and confirmed that the addition of Service Business Use would allow for uses such as personal services and office use, including architectural and medical offices, but excluding financial institutions, veterinary clinics, coin operated laundries and dry cleaners. Commission members also commented that the request was reasonable but did have concerns with respect to parking should a future use require additional parking than what is currently provided for similar activities. The Commission recommended that Council consider approving zoning amendment application ZON00029 to allow Service Business Use within the Local Commercial Use (C-1) zone for the property at 687 / 697 St Patrick Street. STRATEGIC IMPACT No strategic impact is anticipated to arise in relation to the options described in this report. ZON00029 - 687 / 697 St. Patrick Street Page 4 of 5 January 2, 2018 Page 164 of 172 OPTIONS 1. That it be recommended to Council to consider the application to allow SeNice Business Use for the property at 687 / 697 St Patrick Street and consider a draft bylaw to include SeNice Business Use within the Local Commercial Use (C-1) zone. This option would move the application forward for consideration of 1st and 2nd readings as well as a public hearing to hear community input. 2. That the application be referred back to staff to continue negotiations on the proposed development. Referring the application back to staff would provide an opportunity to continue discussions with the applicant on any areas of concern that Council identifies. Pending the results of those discussions, the application would then come back to Council for consideration as noted in Option 1 above. 3. That it be recommended to Council that the application be denied. Should Council choose this option, no reapplication could occur for a period of six (6) months from the date of Council's decision unless Council resolves to consider a new application after a three (3) month period, as per the Land Use Procedures and Fees Bylaw, 2015. FINANCIAL IMPACT No financial impact beyond the existing budget is anticipated to arise in relation to the options described in this report. RECOMMENDATION That it be recommended to Council to consider the application to allow SeNice Business Use for the property at 687 / 697 St Patrick Street and consider a draft bylaw to include Service Business Use within the Local Commercial Use (C-1) zone. nsen, Acting Director of Building and Planning I concur with the recommendation of the Acting Director of Building and Planning. , Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT($) Attachment 1 - Plans - ZON - 687 / 697 St Patrick St, Oct 19, 2017 Attachment 2 - Rpt Attach 2 - Parking Review, Watt, Oct 16, 2017 Attachment 3 - Rpt Attach 3 - Arborist Report, May 1O, 2017 Attachment 4 - Rpt Attach 4 - Draft Zoning Amendment Bylaw ZON00029 - 687 I 697 St. Patrick Street Page 5 of 5 January 2, 2018 Page 165 of 172 #201-791 Goldstream Avenue Victoria, BC V9B 2X5 T 250.388.9877 F 250.388.9879 E. [email protected] wattconsultinggroup.com District of Oak Bay October 16 2017 2167 Oak Bay Avenue Our File: 2262.B01 Victoria BC V8R 1G2 Attention: Deborah Jensen, Acting Director, Building + Planning Department RE: 697 ST PATRICK STREET PARKING REVIEW Watt Consulting Group (“WATT”) was retained by Novus Properties (“Novus”) to review parking conditions for the 697 St Patrick Street site in the District of Oak Bay. The subject site is zoned C1 – Local Commercial Use which allows for general retail, barber / hairdresser uses, and one-family residential uses1. The applicant is proposing a change in zoning to allow for Service Business Use which is not permitted under the C1 zone. The purpose of this review is to compare the parking characteristics of the proposed use (i.e., professional office) and retail uses to determine if allowing office uses will contribute added parking demand over what would be expected from uses permitted under current zoning. 1. PARKING REQUIREMENT 1.1 DISTRICT BYLAW The District of Oak Bay’s minimum parking supply rates are expressed as a function of a property’s zoning designation (not by the specific land use, as in most other communities). A minimum parking supply requirement is specified only for the residential uses in the C-1 zone – there is no requirement for parking for the retail or barber / hairdresser uses2. 1.2 BYLAW COMPARISON Minimum parking supply rates were collated for general retail and professional office uses3 for all other communities in the Capital Region. See Table 1. The comparison demonstrates that in all cases the minimum parking supply rates for professional office uses are less than or equal to the rates for retail uses. In some communities (i.e., Victoria, Saanich, Langford, Colwood) the minimum parking supply rate for professional office uses is approximately half the required rate for retail uses. 1 Zoning Bylaw 3531, Part 9.1.1 – Principal Uses Permitted: One-family residential use; Retail sale and storage of groceries, meat, fish, bakery goods and sundry household and garden items; Barbers, hairdressers and beauty shops. Available online at: www.oakbay.ca/municipal-hall/bylaws 2 Parking Facilities Bylaw 3540, Schedule A, Part A.1. Available online at: www.oakbay.ca/municipal-hall/bylaws 3 Most applicable land use classification was selected where terminology differs ENGINEERING. GEOMATICS. TRANSPORTATION Page 166 of 172 Attention: Deborah Jensen, Acting Director, Building + Planning Dept October 16 2017 RE: 697 St Patrick Street Parking Review Page 2 TABLE 1. MINIMUM PARKING SUPPLY RATES IN COMMUNITIES IN CAPITAL REGION Minimum Parking Supply Rate (unit of floor area per parking space) Retail Professional Difference Office Central Saanich, District of 1 per 22m2 1 per 28m2 -21% Colwood, City of 1 per 13.3m2 1 per 30m2 -56% Esquimalt, Township of 1 per 25m2 1 per 30m2 -17% Highlands, District of 1 per 20m2 1 per 45m2 -56% Langford, City of 1 per 20m2 1 per 35m2 -43% Metchosin, District of 1 per 15m2 + 1 per 25m2 -40% North Saanich, District of 1 per 15m2 1 per 28m2 -46% Saanich, District of 1 per 14m2 1 per 25m2 -44% Sidney, Town of 1 per 40m2 1 per 40m2 -- Sooke, District of 1 per 30m2 1 per 30m2 -- Victoria, City of 1 per 37.5m2 1 per 65m2 -43% View Royal, Town of 1 per 20m2 1 per 25m2 -20% Average -39% 2. PARKING DEMAND 2.1 AVERAGE PARKING DEMAND DATA Expected parking demand among professional office and general retail uses is considered below based on average peak period parking demand data, as follows: 1. The Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Parking Generation (4th Edition) handbook contains parking demand data and observations from sites across North America. The handbook identifies average peak period parking demand to be 2.84 vehicles per 1,000 sqft for office uses4 and 2.74 vehicles per 1,000 sqft for retail uses5. 2. A comprehensive review of the City of Victoria’s off-street parking requirements (“Schedule C”) is currently being undertaken6. As part of the review, a series of observations were completed that concluded average peak period parking demand to be one vehicle per 76m2 for retail uses and one vehicle per 56m2 for office uses. 4 “Office Building”, land use 701, based on 176 study sites 5 The ITE handbook does not contain parking demand data for “general retail” uses. The rate presented is the average peak demand rate among three representative land uses – Apparel Store (876), Convenience Market (851), Liquor Store (859). 6 More information on the City of Victoria’s review of off-street parking requirement is available online at: www.victoria.ca/EN/main/residents/planning-development/off-street-parking-review.html ENGINEERING. GEOMATICS. TRANSPORTATION Page 167 of 172 Attention: Deborah Jensen, Acting Director, Building + Planning Dept October 16 2017 RE: 697 St Patrick Street Parking Review Page 3 3. A comprehensive review of parking regulations in Kitchener, ON7 concludes average peak period parking demand (weekday, suburban sites) to be 2.32 vehicles per 100m2 for retail uses and 2.62 vehicles per 100m2 for office uses. The average peak period parking demand rates established through the three data sources presented above suggests that peak parking demand among office uses is approximately 15-20% greater than retail uses. Applied to the subject site, the expectation is that zero to one additional vehicle will seek parking due to professional office uses. 2.2 PARKING DEMAND, BY TENANT The tenant types that the processional office use would allow for have relatively consistent parking demand patterns, typically with 80-90% of parking demand attributed to employees and clients / customers visiting on an infrequent basis. It is understood that the prospective tenant is a small design firm with four or five employees, only one which currently commutes by vehicle8. Conversely, parking demand among retail uses varies greatly as a larger proportion of parking demand is attributed to customers whose parking demand characteristics (quantity, time-of-day) are less predictable than employee characteristics. A grocery store or similar tenant (bakery, butcher) – permitted under current zoning – is expected to have a 25-50% higher parking demand than general retail uses9, which significantly exceeds what is reasonably be expected with professional office uses. Similarly, the City of Victoria’s draft off-street parking regulations10 propose minimum parking supply rates for grocery store uses that are as high as double the rate for retail uses. The proposal to allow for professional office uses excludes medical or dental office uses. This is an important distinction as these office types commonly have a higher minimum parking supply requirement and experience higher parking demand than other professional office uses. 7 Paradigm Transportation Solutions, Review of Off-Street Parking & Loading Regulations – City of Kitchener. Available online at: www.kitchener.ca/en/insidecityhall/resources/PLAN_CROZBY_Off-Street_Parking__Loading_ Study_Report_August_26_2015_MERGED.pdf 8 Confirmed in discussion with prospective tenant 9 Institute of Transportation Engineers, Parking Generation (4th Edition), 2010 10 The City of Victoria’s draft off-street parking regulations were presented to the Committee of the Whole on October 5th 2017, and are available online as part of the City’s Committee agenda package - https://victoria.civicweb.net/filepro/documents/96211?expanded=96214,118136&preview=133871 ENGINEERING. GEOMATICS. TRANSPORTATION Page 168 of 172 Attention: Deborah Jensen, Acting Director, Building + Planning Dept October 16 2017 RE: 697 St Patrick Street Parking Review Page 4 2.3 PARKING DEMAND, BY TIME-OF-DAY Parking demand trends vary between retail and professional office uses. On weekdays, office uses approach peak parking demand from 9:00am to 4:00pm, whereas retail uses approach peak parking demand from 11:00am to as late as 8:00pm, depending on the tenant. See Figure 1. On weekends, office uses generally experience no parking demand, whereas retail uses may experience similar parking demand as a weekday. FIGURE 1. PARKING DEMAND TIME-OF-DAY FACTORS, WEEKDAY11 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Office Employee Office Visitor Retail Customer Retail Employee 3. ON-STREET PARKING CONDITIONS On-street parking observations found that the 60 on-street parking spaces closest the subject site were approximately 25% occupied (44 unoccupied) during the weekday daytime observation and approximately 40% occupied (35 unoccupied) during the weekday evening observation12. Two conclusions can be drawn from the observations, as follows: 1. The area experiences low on-street parking utilization and there is capacity to accommodate additional vehicles without negatively impacting the ability for existing residential or commercial land uses to access available on-street parking; and 2. Peak utilization is experienced in the evening (and presumably weekend) and is associated with residents and residential visitors. Parking demand associated with office uses would be experienced weekday daytime when on-street utilization is lowest, and would reduce parking demand associated with retail uses that would occur weekday evening and/or weekend when on-street parking utilization is higher. 11 Time-of-day factors from the Urban Land Institute’s Shared Parking, Second Edition (2005), Table 2-5. 12 Observations were completed on Monday, September 11th 2017 at 2:30pm (“weekday daytime”) and Tuesday, September 19th 2017 at 10:30pm (“weekday evening”) ENGINEERING. GEOMATICS. TRANSPORTATION Page 169 of 172 Attention: Deborah Jensen, Acting Director, Building + Planning Dept October 16 2017 RE: 697 St Patrick Street Parking Review Page 5 3. SUMMARY 3.1 CONCLUSIONS • In all municipalities in the Capital Region the minimum parking supply rates for professional office uses are less than or equal to the rates for retail uses. In some municipalities the minimum parking supply rate for professional office uses is approximately half the retail rate. • Parking demand associated with professional office uses is expected to be 15-20% higher than general retail uses based on average parking demand data. The expectation is that will result in zero or one additional vehicle at the subject site. • Any additional parked vehicles associated with professional office uses would be during the weekday daytime when neighbourhood parking utilization is lowest, whereas uses under current zoning may experience parking demand in the weekday early evening and weekend when neighbourhood parking utilization is higher. • Professional office uses experience less variation in parking demand as compared to uses permitted under the existing zone, and therefore offers a greater level of certainty that future parking demand will not negatively impact neighbourhood parking conditions. 3.2 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that parking conditions associated with professional office uses will not be materially different than under current zoning and, therefore, that the District allow for professional office uses on the subject site. - - - - - Please contact the undersigned with any questions related to this review. Sincerely, WATT CONSULTING GROUP Dan Casey, MCIP RPP Senior Transportation Planner ENGINEERING. GEOMATICS. TRANSPORTATION Page 170 of 172 Memo To: Deborah Jensen, Building and Planning From: Chris Paul, Municipal Arborist Date: May 10, 2017 Subject: 697 St Patrick There are no protected trees on the property and no boulevard trees. There are two smaller trees near the building, a Koelreuteria toward St Patrick and a weeping Birch in the north east corner of the property. There are two Norway maples in the back yard. All four trees have been included in the canopy cover calculation. All of these trees should have fencing around the drip lines to prevent renovation materials from being leaned against them. The proposed canopy cover for this lot as calculated by the developer is 200 meters squared. This calculation was made with all the trees being given a value of 50 square meters. The Birch and the Koelreuteria will both remain smaller than that at around 25 m2, however the two maples are both likely to reach 75 to 100 m2. These numbers would still have them achieve 200 to 250 square meters. On the 511 square meter lot this would give them a canopy cover percentage of 30-49%. Page 171 of 172 THE CORPORATION OF THE DISTRICT OF OAK BAY BYLAW NO. 3531.xxx A Bylaw to amend the Zoning Bylaw, 1986 The Municipal Council of The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay, in open meeting assembled, enacts that Bylaw No. 3531, being the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended, is further amended as follows: 1. By adding the following as Paragraph 9.1.1.(4) to the Local Commercial Use (C-1) zone: 9.1.1.(4) Service business use This Bylaw may be cited as the Zoning Bylaw Amendment Bylaw No. 3531.xxx, 2018. READ a first and second time by the Municipal Council on PUBLIC HEARING held on READ a third time by the Municipal Council on ADOPTED AND FINALLY PASSED by the Municipal Council on Mayor Director of Corporate Services Sealed with the Seal of The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay. File: ZON00029 Address: 687 / 697 St Patrick Street Page 172 of 172