RTC Properties was back before council on March 15 with a reduced height development plan that lacked clarity for council, so it was sent back for more tweaking.
“I know this seems like a delay in the process, but given our history in the last two years on some other very complicated and contentious bylaws, I think this is a good thing and I think it will move it forward in the way that works best,” Sechelt Mayor Bruce Milne said.
“I want this to be an example of how Sechelt can resolve difficult conflicts rather than an example of Gibsons – the George North.”
The RTC development was originally pitched as being 48 units in four different buildings varying in height from two to six storeys on Sechelt’s waterfront, just past the rocky outcrop where the waterfront walkway currently ends.
The public voiced displeasure at a public hearing for the plan on Jan. 11, where a petition with 251 signatures was presented to council, asking for the RTC proposal to be rejected.
The plan was changed slightly by the developer to reduce the height of the tallest building by one metre and shift the development’s placement farther back from the ocean. That modified plan was brought back to council in February but council didn’t feel the changes were enough.
On March 15 a third RTC plan came to council. This time the tallest building was capped at 13.5 metres (eight metres lower than was originally pitched) and a maximum building width was proposed of 45 metres, so the site wouldn’t be a solid massing of buildings once developed.
When district planner Aaron Thompson was introducing the new plan to council he noted the developers had given him some additional information that they were “willing to look at reducing the total number of units,” so council could consider making that amendment before moving the plan to another public hearing.
Coun. Doug Wright said he wasn’t comfortable “making changes on the fly” regarding the number of units in RTC and said that was reason enough to send the plan back to the developer for more clarity.
Coun. Darren Inkster also said he wanted more information on the ultimate look of the new buildings being proposed.
“Right away that’s a flag because we want to see what it looks like,” Inkster said.
“This is a really important piece of waterfront land and I think we need to take the time to get it right.”
When the motion was made to send the plan back for more work by the developer and staff, all were in favour.
Milne then offered council’s assistance in helping facilitate a public meeting between RTC and nearby residents, who have been opposed to the plan thus far but seemingly in favour of some development in the area, which is designated for high-density use in the official community plan.
“I just want to avoid this becoming something it’s not yet,” Milne said.
“Right now I see good intentions from everyone I talk to on all sides of this and I want to keep that as we move forward.”
All of council was in favour of offering the assistance and staff was asked to work out the details with the developer.
