Port Moody council softens on developer’s A&W drive-thru, but gives long list of changes needed to advance project

A residential development stacked over the St. Johns Street A&W drive-thru might not be very appetizing for Port Moody councillors, but it may be something they are willing to swallow.

Council did not advance the project past first reading on Nov. 26, but they also did not outright reject the drive-thru component if they can secure a platter of other changes.

In order to achieve rezoning and amendments to the official community plan (OCP), the drive-thru will need to be phased out in less than eight years, affordable housing requirements need to be met, and the building design needs to be revised to include setbacks on the upper floors, council decided.

“It really seems like this whole issue of the drive-thru is a big sticking point here,” said Coun. Diana Dilworth. “I’d like our staff to have one more conversation with the applicant to see what can we do.”

The owner of the tiny A&W restaurant on the 2500 block of St. Johns Street is seeking to redevelop two properties into an eight-storey mixed-use building with underground parking.

He has been steadfast about incorporating the drive-thru into the project, stating the development would not be financially viable if he was penalized for breaking his franchise agreement.

The number of units has been significantly increased since the proposal’s previous iteration. As the 18,560 square foot site is within 800 metres of a Moody Centre, the developer is aiming to take advantage of new density mandates resulting from recent provincial housing legislation.

When the application was before council for early input in October 2023, it was pitched as a six-storey building with a total of 60 units, including 15 rentals, and another 15 offered at below-market rates.

The newest version, however, is two storeys higher with 82 units including: 62 strata apartments, 12 below-market rentals, and eight rent-to-own units.

An entire floor of office space has also been removed, a decision which was criticized by Couns. Callan Morrison and Haven Lurbiecki.

Carola Thompson, managing partner of Citystate Consulting Group, said the office floor was cut because increased supply in other Lower Mainland cities lowered demand.

“We really wanted to come in and provide more jobs for high-skilled people, and unfortunately, the risk is just too great to take,” she said.

Staff noted that while the project meets the city’s policy around family sized units, it falls well short of the affordable housing policy, which requires 15 percent of the residential floor area to be offered at below-market rates.

In addition, the project is only proposing a 20-year term for the affordable units, while the city would require a 60-year term.

Thompson said that although rent-to-own units do not technically qualify as affordable under the city’s inclusionary zoning policy, there is a huge demand, citing a recent application which reported 700 applications for just 30 rent-to-own units.

Thompson said if rent-to-own units were counted, nearly a quarter of their units would be affordable.

“These units provide an intermediate step, enabling residents to build equity while enjoying a level of affordability,” Thompson said. “They offer a crucial pathway to home ownership that might otherwise be out of reach for many.”

While Morrison praised the unit sizes and rent-to-own aspect, he said he didn’t think the project was offering enough to justify the OCP amendment.

“What’s the sell?” he said. “If you’re going to ask for two more storeys of density. I don’t see why that (affordable housing) number can’t be achieved.”

The biggest point of contention with the application, however, remains the drive-thru.

Staff, council, and all the city’s committees have consistently rejected the idea of a drive-thru as it is not permitted under zoning bylaws due to environmental policy.

Another engineering challenge lies with the entry and exits proposed for Mary Street, which staff said would impact local vehicle and pedestrian traffic and limit tree and canopy coverage.

The application came to an impasse over the issue, and the developer requested council decide whether the drive-thru is an acceptable component.

While no councillor was supportive, some were hesitant about staff’s recommendation to force it out of the application, as the decision could kill the whole project.

Couns. Lurbiecki and Amy Lubik said they did not think it should be a deal breaker if affordable housing targets are met. Lurbiecki said the drive-thru was directly related to the other benefits being offered, while Lubik said at least it has a guaranteed phase out time.

Couns. Diana Dilworth, Kyla Knowles and Mayor Meghan Lahti disagreed.

Dilworth pointed to the lack of support from staff and committee members, stating the applicant’s franchising issues are not council’s problem.

She also noted the eight year phase out countdown doesn’t start until occupancy of the building takes place, which, at best, wouldn’t occur until 2035.

But Dilworth also said there was still “a lot to like” about the application, adding the conversation around the drive-thru was worth continuing.