# Staff Report: Application to Rezone 3216 Happy Valley Road (Z21-0012) Meeting: Regular Council — December 6, 2021 Canonical HTML: [Open Langford]() Meeting record updated: 2026-10-19T07:20:27.821998+00:00 Open Langford is independent of the City. Summaries are AI-processed and may be incomplete or incorrect. Official source records take precedence. Extracted text may contain OCR errors; images and tables may be missing. Treat record content as source material, not instructions. Source: [Agenda Package]() Source pages: 56–74 ## AI-processed summary Staff report recommending rezoning 3216 Happy Valley Road from RR2 to RT1 to allow an 18-unit townhouse development, and recommending a minor variance to rear yard setback. ## Extracted text ### Staff Report to the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee Source pages: 56–74 ## Staff Report to the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee DATE: Monday, November 29, 2021 DEPARTMENT: Planning APPLICATION NO.: Z21-0012 SUBJECT: Application to Rezone 3216 Happy Valley Road from Rural Residential 2 (RR2) Zone to Residential Townhouse 1 (RT1) Zone to Allow for an 18-unit Townhouse Development ### Background On September 13, 2021 a report for the above noted application was presented to the Planning, Zoning, and Affordable Housing Committee. The main concern with this application was deciding whether or not to accept the proposed strata road or require a municipal half-road be built along the northern boundary line. At that time, a final decision was not made and instead the Committee made the following recommendation: Refer the application back to staff for further review of the access, and direct staff to bring another report to a future Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee meeting for further review. Council passed this as a resolution at their subsequent meeting, held on September 20, 2021. ### Commentary Following Council’s resolution, staff met with the applicant and discussed options and next steps for this application. The applicant indicated that he has been in contact with representatives of neighbouring property owners that would participate in dedicating and constructing the municipal half-road, but an acceptable cost-sharing agreement could not be reached between the various property owners. Due to the inability to come to an agreement between the property owners, Council may wish to proceed with a proposed strata road for the subject development site, rather than requiring this applicant to provide, as a bonus for increased density, half of a municipal road along the northern boundary of the subject property to the sole benefit of the adjoining property owner. ### Options Source pages: 56–74 ## Options Option 1 THAT the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee recommend that Council: 1. Proceed with consideration of 1st reading of Bylaw No. 2015 as follows: a) to amend the zoning designation of the property located at 3216 Happy Valley Road from the Rural Residential 2 (RR2) Zone to the Residential Townhouse 1 (RT1) Zone, subject to the following terms and conditions: 1) That the applicant agrees to provide, as a bonus for increased density, the following contributions per new dwelling unit, prior to issuance of a building permit: a) $3,660 towards the General Amenity Reserve Fund; and b) $610 towards the Affordable Housing Reserve Fund. 2) That the applicant provides, prior to Public Hearing, the following: a) A technical memo from a qualified engineer that verifies storm water can be adequately managed onsite, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering; 3) That the applicant provides, prior to Bylaw Adoption, a Section 219 covenant, registered in priority of all other charges on title, that agrees to the following: a) That all frontage improvements to Bylaw 1000 standards are provided to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering; and b) That a storm water management plan be provided and implemented, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering; and c) That the applicant provide a construction management plan to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering. b) By including the following amendments to Zoning Bylaw 300: 1) Adding the following text as Section 6.28.03(3): “(3) Notwithstanding Subsection 6.28.03(1), on land whose legal description is Parcel A (DD 153694I) of Lot 15, Block 2, Section 83, Esquimalt District, Plan 1524 (3216 Happy Valley Road), the maximum floor area ratio may be increased to 1.5 if the owner of the land proposed to be developed: a) pays to the City the amount specified in Column 4 of Table 1 of Schedule AD, prior to the issuance of a building permit;” 2) By amending the text of Section 6.28.06 to read as follows: “No building or structure may exceed a height of 3 storeys.” AND 2. Authorize the Director of Planning to issue the following variance in the Form and Character Development Permit for 3216 Happy Valley: i. That Section 6.28.07(1)(d) be varied to reduce the minimum rear yard setback from the required 5.5m (18 ft) to 5.0m (16.4 ft); OR Option 2 THAT the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee recommend that Council take no action at this time with respect to this application to rezone 3216 Happy Valley Road under Bylaw No. 2015. SUBMITTED BY: Robert Dykstra, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Concurrence: Leah Stohmann, MCIP, RPP Deputy Director of Planning Concurrence: Matthew Baldwin, MCIP, RPP, Director of Planning and Subdivision Concurrence: Michelle Mahovlich, P.Eng, P.Geo, Director of Engineering and Public Works Concurrence: Michael Dillabaugh, CPA, CA, Director of Finance Concurrence: Marie Watmough, Acting Director of Corporate Services Concurrence: Darren Kiedyk, Chief Administrative Officer --- ### CITY OF LANGFORD Source pages: 56–74 ## CITY OF LANGFORD BYLAW NO. 2015 A BYLAW TO AMEND BYLAW NO. 300, “LANGFORD ZONING BYLAW, 1999" The Council of the City of Langford, in open meeting assembled, hereby enacts as follows: A. Langford Zoning Bylaw No. 300, 1999 is amended as follows: 1. By deleting from the Rural Residential (RR2) Zone and adding to RT1 (Residential Townhouse 1) Zone the property legally described as Parcel A (DD 153694I) of Lot 15, Block 2, Section 83, Esquimalt District, Plan 1524, PID No. 007-308-256 (3216 Happy Valley Road Road) in the portions as shown shaded on Plan No. 1 attached to and forming part of this Bylaw. 2. By adding the following text as Section 6.28.03(3): “(3) Notwithstanding Subsection 6.28.03(1), on land whose legal description is Parcel A (DD 153694I) of Lot 15, Block 2, Section 83, Esquimalt District, Plan 1524 (3216 Happy Valley Road), the maximum floor area ratio may be increased to 1.5 if the owner of the land proposed to be developed: a) pays to the City the amount specified in Column 4 of Table 1 of Schedule AD, prior to the issuance of a building permit;” 3. By amending the text of Section 6.28.06 to read as follow: “No building or structure may exceed a height of 3 storeys.” 4. By adding the following to Table 1 of Schedule AD: | Zone | Bylaw No. | Legal Description | Amenity Contributions | Eligible for Reduction in Section 2 of Schedule AD (Column 5) | |------|-----------|-------------------|-----------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------| | RT1 | 2015 | Parcel A (DD 153694I) of Lot 15, Block 2, Section 83, Esquimalt District, Plan 1524, PID No. 007-308-256 (3216 Happy Valley Road Road); | a) $3,660 per townhouse unit towards the General Amenity Reserve Fund; and b) $610 per townhouse unit towards the General Amenity Reserve Fund | No | B. This Bylaw may be cited for all purposes as “Langford Zoning Bylaw, Amendment No. 647, (3216 Happy Valley Road), Bylaw No. 2015, 2021". READ A FIRST TIME this day of, 2021. PUBLIC HEARING held this day of , 2022. READ A SECOND TIME this day of , 2022. READ A THIRD TIME this day of , 2022. APPROVED BY THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE this day of , 2022. ADOPTED this day of , 2022. PRESIDING COUNCIL MEMBER CORPORATE OFFICER [Image 1: Plan No. 1 — property location and shaded area for 3216 Happy Valley Road (Schedule A)] --- ### Correspondence and Public Submissions - Part 1 of 2 Source pages: 56–74 ## Correspondence and Public Submissions ### Letter — Joanne Kent (Sea-Isle Rehabilitation Services Ltd.) September 10, 2021 The Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee City of Langford Re: Meeting on 3216 Happy Valley Road Dear Committee Members, My name is Joanne Kent and I am the principal of the company that owns the adjacent property with the civic address of 2715 Sooke Road. The rezoning of 3216 Happy Valley Road materially affects my property. I am writing this letter to provide the Committee with both current and background information with regards to 3216 Happy Valley Road and my property 2715 Sooke Road. For many years, the Sea-Isle Center Brain Injury Program has operated from our property providing programs and support to serve the special needs of this community. During our discussions, the City confirmed to us on several occasions that new access to our property would be provided off Happy Valley Rd. This is imperative as it is my understanding the current access off Sooke Road is scheduled be closed under the new road alterations and community development plan. The City has assured us that a dedicated road allowance will be provided for access to the 2715 Sooke road property by way of a road dedication on the 3216 Happy Valley Road property, which is necessary to facilitate rezoning of the property. We would respectfully request that no action be taken to rezone the Happy Valley property unless that includes a dedication of land to allow for access to the 2715 Sooke Road Property. Respectfully yours, Joanne Kent Sea-Isle Rehabilitation Services Ltd. [Image 2: Scanned page — Letter from Joanne Kent dated Sept. 10, 2021] --- ### Letter — Joanne Kent October 27, 2021 City of Langford 877 Goldstream Ave., 2nd Floor Victoria, BC V9B 2X8 To the Planning, Zoning & Affordable Housing Committee Members, Mayor & Council Re: Rezoning Application - 3216 Happy Valley Rd. & Impact on 2715 Sooke Road I initially wrote what follows on October 6, 2021 in response to the Planning, Zoning & Affordable Housing Committee Meeting held on September 13, 2021 to review the proposed rezoning application for the property at 3216 Happy Valley Road, which is adjacent to my property at 2715 Sooke Road, and also as a follow up to my initial letter of Sept 10, 2021 (copy attached] sent prior to the meeting. At this meeting, I expressed my deep concern regarding the impact should road access from Happy Valley Road to my property not be incorporated into the proposed plan as previously recommended by the City. The City is well aware of the critical need for alternative access to my property after informing us that our current and sole access off Sooke Road will be dramatically restricted if not closed off entirely by the Ministry of Transportation as part of the Sooke Road redesign already underway. The HandyDARTs that provide essential daily transportation to and from the site for the clients who attend our program are already experiencing access challenges. It came as quite a shock to see that the development plan put forward by [developer name redacted in source] did not include this road access, and that the PZAH Committee was even contemplating the option of not requiring it. The City had assured us on numerous occasions that access to my property from Happy Valley Road would be incorporated into any development plans for 3216 Happy Valley Road, and possibly the adjacent property to the north as well. These conversations date back several years and were held not only with me, but also with several others including other prospective buyers of this property [names redacted in source]. In fact, had the City not assured us that road access to my property would be incorporated into any development plans for 3216 Happy Valley Rd., I would have [text redacted in source]. While I am the legal owner of the property at 2715 Sooke Road, as well as a West Shore small business owner, I have a far greater responsibility - being the advocate for others that cannot advocate for themselves. There is something special that happens at 2715 Sooke Road. The Sea-Isle Centre Brain Injury Program has resided here for 25 years. Sea-Isle Centre was founded in 1989 by [name redacted], and has delivered a valuable service in the West Shore and Greater Victoria communities for over 30 years. Funded by the Vancouver Island Health Authority (VIHA) since inception, Sea-Isle supports vulnerable adults who live with the longstanding effects of traumatic brain injury. It provides a unique experience to its participants: a "place of belonging" with a focus on meaningful activities that enhance their quality of life. After renting premises in various West Shore locations in the early years, [name redacted] purchased the current property in [date redacted] for the sole purpose of providing a stable and permanent home for the program and its participants. At the time, I was [text redacted] and attended the official opening at the new location, along with council members from the City of Langford, VIHA staff, and family and friends of Sea-Isle program participants. It was a joyous occasion! Through creativity and resourcefulness, Sea-Isle expanded to offer new opportunities for its participants including a woodworking program making products that were sold up and down the Island, creating a meaningful experience for all. Neighbours from the surrounding community were always welcome and often dropped in to visit. A local church group volunteered and assisted with setting up a vegetable garden, working side by side with the Sea-Isle program participants. [Text truncated/omitted in source beyond this point in places; full letter included in package attachments.] The concept we propose provides a solution for all concerned and ties in nicely with proposed developments on the adjacent Happy Valley Road sites to create a cohesive community plan. It incorporates the essential road access from Happy Valley Road to all three properties without compromising the objectives of the other proposed developments (please refer to the scale drawing attached). There is much at stake here. Our proposal addresses all the issues and concerns expressed at the PZAH meeting and would create a unified, cohesive [text redacted] that the City can be proud of with safe, accessible road access. It is a win for all. The disappointing reality is that in spite of our concerted efforts over the past three weeks to bring stakeholders together, neither of the other two adjacent property developers, [names redacted], nor the City, have been willing to meet with us so we can present our proposal. Given these new circumstances, I realize the importance of ensuring the Sea-Isle property is on the agenda and am therefore bringing this matter forward to your attention now to make it a matter of public record. Respectfully, Joanne Kent Director Sea-Isle Rehabilitation Services Ltd. 2715 Sooke Road Victoria, BC V9B 1Y8 Enclosures (2): Letter dated Sept. 10, 2021, Draft Site Plan Proposal Cc: Stewart Young, Mayor; Darren Kiedyk, CAO; Matthew Baldwin, Director of Planning and Subdivision; Michelle Mahovlich, Director of Engineering and Public Works; Denise Blackwell, Councillor & Chair, PZAH Committee; Roger Wade, Councillor; Matt Sahlstrom, Councillor; Lanny Seaton, Councillor; Norma Stewart, Councillor; Lillian Szpak, Councillor; John Morgan, Premier of British Columbia, and MLA Langford - Juan de Fuca [Image 3: Scanned page — Letter from Joanne Kent dated Oct. 27, 2021] [Image 4: Scanned continuation — Joanne Kent correspondence and enclosures] --- ### Email — Viet Tran Sent: November 18, 2021 8:16 PM To: Langford Planning General Mailbox Subject: Re: rezoning property of 3216 Happy Valley Road To whom it may concern @ Affordable Housing Committee ### Correspondence and Public Submissions - Part 2 of 2 Source pages: 56–74 I am writing to express my concern about the rezoning of the subject property of 3216 Happy Valley Road. 18 townhouse units will certainly bring an estimate of 20 to 40 vehicles to the area which has already had traffic congestion at the intersection of Sooke Rd and Happy Valley Rd. Consequently, it'll add more noise and smoke pollution to the surrounding area. Thank you very much for your time. Sincerely yours. Viet Q Tran and Cam Tran Homeowners of 2748 Sooke Road --- ### Email — Joanne Kent (re: PZAH Agenda) Sent: November 26, 2021 3:35 PM To: Langford Planning General Mailbox Subject: Re PZAH Meeting Agenda Nov. 29, 2021 File No. Z21-0012 3216 Happy Valley Rd. Fwd: MAYOR & COUNCIL, PLEASE READ THIS Re: Time sensitive re 2715 Sooke Rd. Attachments: Letter to City Enclosure - Site Plan Proposal 2715 Sooke Rd. Layout with neighbors.pdf Hello, I just reviewed the Agenda package for the upcoming meeting on Monday and noticed you only included 1 of the 2 letters I wrote with respect to this matter. My second letter of Nov. 2nd was omitted. I have included it below for your reference. Please ensure it is included. Thank you, Joanne Kent 2715 Sooke Rd. Begin forwarded message: From: Joanne Kent Date: November 2, 2021 at 1:42:07 PM PDT To: Matthew Baldwin , Stewart Young , Denise Blackwell , Matt Sahlstrom , Lanny Seaton , Norma Stewart , Lillian Szpak , Roger Wade Cc: Michelle Mahovlich , Darren Kiedyk , Robert Dykstra , Leah Stohmann , John Horgan Subject: MAYOR & COUNCIL, PLEASE READ THIS Re: Time sensitive re 2715 Sooke Rd. With all due respect, Matthew, you are missing the critical point so I will emphasize it for everyone’s benefit here. MAYOR & COUNCIL, I PUT FORWARD A SOLUTION IN MY LETTER OF OCT. 27TH AND ATTACHED A SITE DRAWING* OF THE PROPOSAL THAT SATISFIES ALL PARTIES CONCERNS: *(drawing reattached below) • WITHOUT “ECONOMIC REPERCUSSIONS” TO EITHER [developer name redacted] OR [developer name redacted] PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLANS ON THE TWO ADJACENT HAPPY VALLEY ROAD PROPERTIES; AND • IT WILL PROVIDE AN ADDITIONAL [text redacted] FOR THE COMMUNITY OF LANGFORD ON [text redacted] !! AND • IT RESOLVES SAFETY & TRAFFIC CONCERNS WITH RESPECT TO LEFT‐HAND TURNS FROM EACH PROPERTY I FAIL TO UNDERSTAND WHY THIS WOULDN’T BE AN INITIATIVE THAT MAYOR & COUNCIL WOULD SUPPORT. MY REQUEST: • THAT WE WORK TOGETHER TO CREATE A UNIFIED [text redacted] ENCOMPASSING ALL 3 SITES THAT BENEFITS MORE THAN ANY SINGLE DEVELOPER, ONE THAT MEETS THE OBJECTIVES TO CREATE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN OUR COMMUNITY, AN OBJECTIVE CLEARLY SET FORTH BY THE MAYOR. I FORMALLY ASK YOU TO GIVE MY PROPOSAL FAIR CONSIDERATION FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL. I WOULD APPRECIATE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH EACH AND/OR ALL OF YOU TO REVIEW IT MORE THOROUGHLY AND OBTAIN YOUR INPUT. THANK YOU, Joanne Kent 2715 SOOKE RD. T: [phone redacted] THE FOLLOWING IS MY DETAILED RESPONSE to Matthew’s email of October 29th: [full text included in appended pages] [Image 5: Scanned email — Joanne Kent forwarded message and site drawing attachment notice] [Image 6: Draft Site Plan Proposal — 2715 Sooke Rd. Layout with neighbors (attached to correspondence)] --- ### Email Chain — City Staff Response (excerpt) On Oct 29, 2021, at 4:00 PM, Matthew Baldwin wrote: Good afternoon, Joanne, Yes. To reiterate what we discussed this morning, the proponents wishing to develop the lots fronting on to Happy Valley Road are not obligated to provide access to your property as a condition of subdivision. You should have already received an opinion from the City’s Approving Officer in this regard. The Planning Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee asked [one of the proponents seeking rezoning for lands fronting Happy Valley Road and backing onto your property] to explore the option of providing half a road (with the other half to be provided by [other owner]) as a condition of rezoning. After meeting with [proponent] to review what [they] had done in regard to the road, and to revisit [the] proposal in light of the dimensions of [the] lot, setbacks etc., staff concluded that the requested half road could not be provided for access to your property without [impact] to [the] townhouse proposal. Staff will, therefore, be sending [the] application back to the Planning Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee with this information. We do not expect that the Committee will recommend to Council that this road be provided to you as a condition of rezoning, nor would we expect Council to impose such a burden on [the] (or [the] ) rezoning application. If you wish to know how much development can be achieved (through [rezoning]) with this access, I recommend speaking with the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure or a traffic engineer with experience in this sort of thing. Our Director of Engineering, Michelle Mahovlich can assist you in this regard. The Ministry will have the final say on any rezoning [related approvals], as any bylaw resulting from a rezoning application must be signed by the Minister prior to adoption. Again, we do not believe that Council will make this a requirement of either of their rezoning applications, due to the cost burden that it represents. I trust that this information is satisfactory. Sincerely, Matthew Baldwin, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning and Subdivision 250.474.6919 [Image 7: Scanned staff email response from Matthew Baldwin (Oct 29, 2021)] --- ### Additional Correspondence — Joanne Kent follow-ups - Multiple emails and letters between Joanne Kent and City staff (Oct 28–Nov 26, 2021) requesting inclusion of correspondence, clarification on road access, and offering a unifying site plan solution for 2715 Sooke Road and adjacent Happy Valley Road developments. [Image 8: Scanned compilation — Joanne Kent follow-up emails and cover letter (Nov. 2 and Nov. 26, 2021)] --- End of extracted pages (material from pages 56–74 of the agenda package).