Lougheed Highway project moves forward; neighbourhood consultation now a one-way street

A proposed 331-unit market rental project pitched for Lougheed Highway, Edgar Avenue and Guilby Street garnered support – and elicited a little confusion – at a June 9 Coquitlam council meeting.

While neighbours heard from the city about the proposal, the city won’t be hearing from the neighbours, staff explained.

Coun. Teri Towner seemed nonplussed to learn that signs about the development were erected and a formal notice was sent to property owner within 100 metres of the property – but no comments came to the city.

“We’re just letting neighbours know?” Towner asked during the meeting.

The issue, explained the city’s general manager of planning Andrew Merrill, is that provincial legislation essentially scrapped public hearings but maintained the public notification requirement.

“We’re required, prior to first reading, to mail out letters to all property owners within a certain radius to notify them that this item is coming forward for first reading and they’re not allowed to comment,” Merrill explained.

“Seriously?” Towner asked. “What’s the point of letting neighbours know that this is happening if they can’t express support for it or outrage against it?”

“I believe it’s to allow them to be outraged earlier,” Mayor Richard Stewart quipped.

Noting the likely frustration some neighbours might feel, Stewart encouraged residents to: “email the premier, because it was his idea.”

The proposal, which spans eight lots, is set to include three six-storey buildings as well as childcare, much to the approval of Coun. Brent Asmundson.

As the city densifies, childcare facilities are of “vital importance,” he said.

The childcare centre is approximately 3,500 square feet – large enough to accommodate the 16 children estimated to live in the three buildings, according to a city staff report.

“We’ve heard from a lot of developers that they can’t make it work,” Asmundson said. “They can make it work. Let’s get them to make it work.”

There have been excuses from other developers that didn’t include childcare, stated Coun. Robert Mazzarolo.

“if you’re a developer of one of those larger [projects], this application here I think hurts your argument,” he said.

While Mazzarolo supported moving the project forward, he stipulated that he might vote against it in the future due to the emphasis on one-bedroom units.

The project is set to included 33 three-bedroom units, 61 two-bedroom units, and 237 one-bedroom units.

Mazzarolo encouraged staff and the applicant to: “come up with a more family-friendly unit mix.”

While the area is still largely a single-family neighbourhood, there are several proposed developments nearby, including a proposed 47-storey tower as well as 39 and 30 storey condo and rental towers.

If approved, the developer is set to pay the city approximately $9.27 million in development cost charges and community amenity contributions. Those estimates are considered preliminary.

A housing agreement bylaw needs to come forward for council’s approval before construction can begin.

The floor area ratio, which measures a project’s total floor space against its lot size, is 2.42.

Lot coverage is set to be 45 percent.

Including commercial and loading stalls, the project includes 378 parking spots and 432 spots for bicycles.