City Council - February 12, 2024 - Minutes - City of Richmond, BC

R 24 /3-10 It was moved and seconded ( 1 ) That Richmond Official Community Plan Bylaw 7100, Amendment Bylaw 10523 to amend Section 2.33 map entitled “Pedestrian Environment Map (2031)”, Section 2.5.1 map entitled “A Base for Building a Living Landscape Map”, Section 2.6 map entitled “Base Level Parks & Open Space Map (2031)”, subsection 2.6.3(c) map entitled “Pedestrian Linkages Map”, subsection 3.1.3(c) (Pedestrian Linkages) map entitled “Designated Green Link & Linear Park Location Map”, and Section 3.3.2 Special Precinct 2.0 plan entitled “Special Precinct Character Areas & Major Park and Public Open Space Plan”, to move the North-South “Minor Green Link” east of Cooney Road identified in the OCP Lansdowne Village (City Centre), to along the west side of Kwantlen Street, be introduced and given first reading; ( 2 ) That Bylaw 10523, having been considered in conjunction with: · the City’s Financial Plan and Capital Program; · the Greater Vancouver Regional District Solid Waste and Liquid Waste Management Plans; is hereby found to be consistent with said program and plans, in accordance with Section 477(3)(a) of the Local Government Act; ( 3 ) That Bylaw 10523, having been considered in accordance with OCP Bylaw Preparation Consultation Policy 5043, is hereby found not to require further consultation; and ( 4 ) That Richmond Zoning Bylaw 8500, Amendment Bylaw 10511 to create the “Residential/Limited Commercial (ZMU55) – Lansdowne Village (City Centre)” zone, and to rezone a portion of 5300 No.3 Road from “Auto-Oriented Commercial (CA)” to “Residential/Limited Commercial (ZMU55) – Lansdowne Village (City Centre)” zone, be introduced and given first reading, subject to the revised Rezoning considerations included as Attachment 1 to the memo from the Director of Development dated February 9, 2024. The question on the motion was not called as discussion ensued regarding (i) community use and benefits from the development, (ii) the form and character of the proposed development, (iii) the OCP and City Centre Area Plan, and (iv) the need for more housing and family-friendly units. The question on the motion was then called and it was CARRIED with Cllrs. Day, Gillanders, and Wolfe opposed.

非商业公共资料研究与事实报道；仅展示核对事实所需的已评估摘录及本站中文说明。版权归原作者或发布机构；不表示来源机构认可本站。原文、来源及使用条款见链接。 来源使用条款 ↗