Councillors in Sechelt have deferred a decision on height variances and a development permit for West Porpoise Bay Estates because only four councillors were available for a vote on Aug. 1.
The developer, RTC Properties, has been trying to get approval for a height variance on the six new buildings it wants to construct on the site, and the development permit can’t be considered until the height question is decided.
The planning committee recommended in February that variances be granted to just two of the buildings, but that recommendation was defeated by council in March, prompting the developer to ask for a reconsideration.
Representatives of RTC were back before council Aug. 1 when a report on the height variance was due to come forward.
Chris Moradian outlined the history of the project, which RTC bought from an earlier developer after a foreclosure in 2016, including efforts to get approval for the new building from strata councils of the phases that had already been completed.
Moradian called it an abandoned project that included buildings left incomplete and unmaintained vacant lots that had become an eyesore.
“When we came to the table to take over this development, the owners of the strata and the neighbourhood and the District of Sechelt as a whole were all interested to see this project moving forward,” he said.
Moradian went on to say RTC’s plan for the property would have fewer negative impacts than the original plan for the site.
At earlier council meetings, a group of residents presented a petition opposing the height variance, and said the project would mean higher buildings, increased density and more traffic, block light and views and damage wildlife habitat.
Mayors are usually reluctant to say what their councils have been discussing behind closed doors, but Mayor Bruce Milne made a point of saying councillors spent time earlier that day reviewing issues around West Porpoise Bay Estates with the district’s lawyers.
Calling it “a very complex, messy file,” Milne said council has to confine itself to decisions on the planning and land-use issues and not disagreements between the developer and the strata owners on what they had or had not been promised.
“We can’t, for the developer, change the fact that this is the land they bought and it’s got R-4 zoning on it, and for the residents who purchased into the earlier phases, we can’t change your purchase decisions… We don’t know what your reasoning was when you signed various forms regarding the next phase of development,” Milne said.
“Council really does want to do what’s right for the community and we want to make sure that all councillors can weigh in on this,” he said. “We had a fairly lengthy discussion today about focusing, with our legal counsel, on just what the planning issues are and we’re not going to try to solve problems that are extraneous to that … that’s not our burden, let’s put it that way, and there’s enough of a burden in this decision.”
Councillors Darnelda Siegers and Mike Shanks were absent for the Aug. 1 meeting and Coun. Alice Lutes, who lives in the neighbourhood, had to recuse herself to avoid any conflict.
