Two files are presented
A. Rockland Neighbourhood Letter to the City regarding the Proposal:
ROCKLAND NEIGHBOURHOOD ASSOCIATION
P.O. Box 5276, Station B, www.rockland.bc.ca
Victoria, B.C.
V8R 6N2
March 9, 2005
Mayor and Council
City of Victoria
#1 Centennial Square
Victoria, BC V8W 1P6
Dear Mayor and Council;
Re. Proposed development at 1322 Rockland Avenue
The Rockland Neighbourhood Association hosted a public meeting on Thursday, February 24, 2005 to view and discuss a rezoning proposal for the property located at 1322 Rockland Avenue. Over 120 persons, 75% of whom were residents of Rockland, attended the meeting. On behalf of the owner Wei Tu, the architect, Hywel Jones, gave a brief history of the buildings and the proposed development, then responded to questions from the audience. After the presentation, attendees were invited to provide comments, either verbally, by email or by letter to the Association.
The proposal was for a heritage restoration of the existing heritage house as a single-family residence, restoration of the coach house as a single-family residence, and a townhouse/apartment infill with 46 new units.
The presentation was conceptual in nature, and did not provide actual dimensions. It is not clear if the proposal represented the final plans. An increase in the density had been added to the proposal recently, and had not been discussed with the Land Use Committee prior to the meeting.
The following issues were identified:
Opposed to the project:
1. Apartments: The apartment complex is contrary to the Rockland
Neighbourhood Plan, specifically: "1.7 No expansion is warranted
of the existing apartment or commercial zoned areas in Rockland."
2. Front Yard Siting: The potential obstruction of views of the house by the six townhouse development is contrary to the Rockland Neighbourhood Plan, specifically "2.1.12 The low density townhousing provisions of the R1-A zoning should be revised to prevent the loss of views towards large houses by requiring side or rear yard siting only".
This is also contrary to the constitution of the Rockland Neighbourhood Association which states: " 2c. The purpose of the Society is to prevent the loss of views of large houses from the streets by requiring side or rear yard siting only". The siting of the proposed townhouses may be such that the view of the house remains unimpaired but this should be assured in any final plan.
3. Density: Many speakers voiced concern about the density of the project. The proposed apartment has a higher Floor Space Ratio (F.S.R.) of 0.9:1 than the currently allowed F.S.R. of 0.6. Because of its size and density, this proposal is incompatible with the surrounding area.
4. Mass: Also of concern was the proposed mass of the apartment building that would produce a long curtain of building along the western boundary, as well as concern about the apartment complex extending so far south. No buildings should be located further south than a horizontal line along the front of the main house.
5. Main House: The proposal to separate the house and the coach house on small lots raises the question of the long-term viability of the house and the coach house. The placing of visitor parking so close to the main house would detract from the needed envelope of privacy for the house and would take away the 'estate character' which has been such a characteristic of this property. Safeguards would be needed to ensure the integrity of the main house.
6. Parking: There appears to be inadequate surface parking for guests and persons with disabilities.
7. Community Benefit: There is nothing in this proposal which would be of benefit to the community.
8. Precedent: Concerns that this would be a precedent that would have the potential to irrevocably change the character of Rockland.
9. Fairness: It is important that the same rules apply to everyone, that the rules are predictable and that there is an "equal playing field". If this proposal were approved, it would lead to uncertainty with respect to rules and fair treatment.
10. Traffic and Infrastructure: There was concern about increased traffic, especially along Royal Terrace and Manor Road. The use of Rockland Avenue as a "greenways" would also be reduced. Infrastructure would have to be upgraded to serve the new development, with attending costs and inconvenience.
11. Blasting: The amount of blasting required to create underground parking was of concern.
12. Loss of Trees: Two large Garry oaks within the building footprint would be removed.
In favour of the proposal:
1. Responsiveness: The owner undertook extensive consultations (127
meetings) with the neighbours and made a number of changes in response
to those consultations.
2. Heritage Preservation: Many saw this proposal as a way to preserve and restore the old mansion house, which has been deteriorating for several years.
3. Attractive: On the assumption that some development is inevitable on the property, this proposal is superior to earlier proposals.
4. Certainty: Residents would like to see a resolution to the uncertainty surrounding this property and end divisiveness among the neighbours.
5. Increased housing: Many people would like the opportunity to purchase homes in Rockland.
Summary
This proposal states that a goal is the restoration of the original
house and the maintenance of as much of the landscaped property as possible.
The increased density is a trade-off in order to achieve this goal.
The plan appears to be fundamentally flawed as these goals are not guaranteed.
In fact, the small amount of property surrounding the main house negates
the possibility of maintaining its value.
Recommendation
The Board of Directors of the Rockland Neighbourhood Association recommends
that the following four priorities be a key consideration in the approval
of any proposed development for this property:
1. restore the original house because of its heritage value,
2. ensure long-term viability of the restored house,
3. maintain the 'estate' character of the property, and
4. protect the land by approving the smallest footprint possible.
We appreciate the opportunity to provide these comments on the proposed development of 1322 Rockland Avenue.
Yours truly,
Linda Foubister
President
Rockland Neighbourhood Association
Cc: Wei Tu, 1322 Rockland Avenue
City of Victoria Planning Department
B. This is the proposal that has been developed by the owner for this property.
