Skip to content

Miramar meeting draws interest

Procedural error in 2013 prompted a zoning amendment necessary for the second phase of the Bosa project to proceed
36360whiterockbosameeting2
Residents packed the gallery at White Rock Community Centre as the city presented details of the zoning amendment necessary for the second phase of Bosa's Miramar Village to move ahead.

An animated crowd of more than 100 people moved through the gallery room of the White Rock Community Centre Wednesday evening for a public information meeting on the second phase of the Bosa Miramar Village project.

Many were residents of the first two Miramar buildings who were interested in the shape and form of the second phase.

This would include both a 17-storey and a 14-storey tower on the property, current site of the Hillcrest Mall. The mixed-use development would include space for a grocery store and other ground-floor commercial units, as well as a main public plaza area.

The only members of council present were Coun. Helen Fathers, current land use and planning committee chair, and Coun. David Chesney.

Some residents expressed surprise and dismay that it was not a formal presentation, but rather an easel-board display of plans with an opportunity to ask questions of planning manager Carl Isaak and planner Chris MacBeath.

As MacBeath explained to one resident, this is customary city practice for such an information meeting – particularly as this one was being held as a preliminary to a text amendment to the current zoning bylaw, rather than a presentation by Bosa.

When the development application was updated in 2013, residents were told, a 2006 plan for the second phase was erroneously attached, rather than Bosa’s revised plan from 2011 – necessitating the current amendment.

Miramar residents expressed concerns that the 2011 plan, while narrowing the proposed buildings slightly, also increases the number of units in the new buildings (to 248 from 202), and moves them 37 feet closer to the existing buildings.

“I’d be thrilled if it stayed at the 2006 plan,” said resident Stacey Wilson, whose family owns four units in the existing buildings.

She said they have a number of issues with the developer that don’t inspire confidence.

“I feel like when we went into the Bosa sales centre in 2006 it was like going into a car dealership,” she said. “It was like we were offered so many things for this year’s model, but when it was delivered it was altered.

“It’s the principle of it. Bosa hasn’t answered our letters – it feels like they’ve abandoned our city.”

Local resident and frequent council critic Garry Wolgemuth asked Isaak, MacBeath and acting director of planning and development services Greg St. Louis why the second phase is not subject to the same procedural strictures as other phased developments.

He was told, however, that while it is a second phase of the project, the terms were not formalized in the original approval in 2007.

“There is not a phased development agreement with the city,” MacBeath said.

Fathers said she expects a report on the amendment to come before the land use and planning committee on Jan. 30, and that it could come to the regular council meeting that evening for a vote.

“There are changes coming forward to the plan and it will be up to council what it decides (at that point),” she said. “We have the opportunity to waive a public hearing if it is decided the changes aren’t significant.”

Fathers said she recognizes that a lot of city residents spoke against the entire project when it was first approved.

She recalled that the city had to pay $40,000 to provide a loading zone for the existing buildings that had been left out of the plan.

“That was an error that Bosa made and the city had to pick up the cost,” she added.

“I think the majority of people thought the second phase wasn’t going to happen, because of market conditions,” she said, noting that a number of Hillcrest merchants spent money on renovations of their stores.

“They’ve been given 18 months soft notice (of demolition and construction) but they’re not very sure what’s going to happen. We’ll have to see if this design gets the amendment.”