Plans collapse for expensive 14-storey Port Moody seniors facility

A developer aiming to build an upscale 14-storey seniors housing facility had their application collapse at Port Moody council.

In rare unanimous agreement, council rejected Avenir Senior Living’s proposal on Tuesday, Oct .10 for not even attempting to address concerns voiced by staff, public input and council feedback.

Mayor Meghan Lahti said she was ‘torn” because she would like to see the project come to fruition, adding if even small changes had been made she would have been more inclined to advance it.

“I just cannot get past the fact that we provided very clear direction, and none of it was followed,” Lahti said.

Located on the 2500-block of St. George Street next to the Kyle Centre, the developer was hoping to rezone 41,000 square feet of low-density properties to allow for the highrise facility.

Its density would far exceed any existing or proposed development project in Port Moody, according to staff.

A total of 194 residential units were proposed, typically costing around $5,000 a month for rent, care and service, according to the developer.

The tower would hold 46 privately owned condominium units, while the five-storey podium would contain 100 full-service independent/assisted living rental units, and 48 community care/memory care units.

While acknowledging the need for supportive seniors housing in the community, staff were not in favour of advancing the proposal, instead recommending reducing its scale or finding another location.

Staff said the public were largely unsupportive, the density is inconsistent with the official community plan, and a parkade design would cause disruptions to a designated neighbourhood bikeway.

Avenir also wanted council to push the project forward immediately to a public hearing, hoping for a vote on the first two readings.

They also requested community amenity contributions and density bonusing to be waived for the project.

Jason Craik, principal of Avenir Senior Living, said meetings with city staff over two years ago left them with the impression that their proposal would work in the community.

“We have seen multiple general managers of planning, unfortunately, come and go. And we’ve run out of time. We don’t have any time. So we’re looking forward to some final direction,” Craik said.

He said the site “checks all the boxes,” and the company can’t afford to compete with condo developers looking at other locations in Port Moody.

But council was unwilling to let the Avenir’s application be pushed through in its current form.

Each councillor noted that none or very few of the changes had been made to the project since council provided early input in July.

Coun. Diana Dilworth objected to Avenir’s expectation for the city to rush the project and waive developer fees, noting a formal application was only submitted in April.

“I think we recognize that that’s something that doesn’t traditionally happen here at this table,” Dilworth said. “I’m sorry that the applicant has some options that are expiring potentially, but that’s not a criteria that city council uses when they are processing development applications.”

Coun. Kyla Knowles agreed, stating she saw no reason why the application should “skip ahead.”

Although she praised the company’s other projects, and agreed current economic conditions are causing challenges, she found it frustrating that issues voiced by the advisory design panel, land use committee, council and staff were not addressed.

“Every one of those groups was very clear about their discomfort with the tower height for this location,” Knowles said. “Allowing this application to proceed . . . I think would set a poor precedent.”

Couns. Amy Lubik and Haven Lurbiecki both said the project does nothing to address the housing gaps identified in the city’s housing needs assessment, which specifically calls for seniors housing for low and middle income earners.

“In my mind, this is a really expensive place, and I can’t support it when it doesn’t – even (by) a small number – meet the needs of our housing needs assessment,” Lubik said. 

Lurbiecki added the city has no completed plans yet for the neighbourhood, and council is in the midst of an OCP review.

“It just wouldn’t be responsible for us to move forward with such a deviation without specific plans for that area,” Lurbiecki said. “If proponents would like things to go quicker and smoother, we have an OCP. If you follow it, it probably would.”