Gordon Head residents concerned about the impact of a residential project coming to Tyndall Avenue failed Tuesday night to persuade Saanich council to send it back for a redesign, but they might claim a small victory for having drawn lots of attention to the traffic issues in the neighbourhood.
Saanich council unanimously approved a 58-unit residential project at 4201 Tyndall Ave., but in laying out their reasons for approving the project, each councillor said Saanich needs to address traffic problems in the area.
“There’s no doubt that Tyndall has to be looked at,” said Coun. Judy Brownoff. She noted staff have already said the street is on the list of those to be upgraded by Saanich’s engineering department.
Brownoff said after hearing from several residents about the volume and speed of traffic along Tyndall, it might be prudent to consider raised crosswalks that force vehicles to slow down as they cut through the area. Brownoff, like her colleagues, said most of the concerns raised about the new residential project had to do with parking and traffic, issues that already existed in the area.
Coun. Susan Brice said the traffic problem “obviously exists now with that lot being empty, so the traffic issue is one that’s an existing issue and has to be dealt with.”
Saanich staff said Tyndall is in line for upgrades that will include sidewalks and traffic-calming measures that should be in place before 2030 as part of the district’s active transportation plan.
Several residents said the 58-unit residential project would exacerbate the traffic problem, as it adds density to the neighbourhood and has only 53 surface parking spots. Some referred to the death of a 62-year-old woman hit by a vehicle while in the crosswalk on Tyndall Avenue near Kenmore Road in 2019.
Coun. Colin Plant said the benefits of the project far outweigh the concerns.
“I think this is the type of housing we need and that the trade-offs that have been discussed regarding the environment, the trade-off regarding transportation and traffic versus a lot that essentially is sitting empty, it is beneficial for us to approve this,” he said.
Plant said council’s decision goes against the wishes of staff, who had recommended the project be rejected.
Staff noted district policy suggests underground parking is required for projects of that size, while more setback was needed from public space. Staff also pointed out that policy dictates the project needed design changes to better reflect the character of the neighbourhood and mitigate the impact on adjacent properties.
Plant pointed out that is why council is elected. “If all we ever did was follow policy and never applied what we think is the community’s desire, then there really wouldn’t be a need for council,” he said.
Brice called it an exciting development. “It’s a convergence of good things coming together,” she said, noting it takes a lot that was once a United Church and changes it to a multi-unit housing project. “Along with that, we’ve got a proponent who has worked in this community and has shown that they are good for their word, and that counts. And on top of that, it’s a plan which is talking about 58 new, first-time homeowners. The convergence of those three things to me is something that excites me.”
The 58-unit project is a joint enterprise of Cadillac Developments and Tri-Eagle Development. It will include three residential apartment buildings with 34 micro suites and 22 stacked townhouses in three separated townhouse blocks. There would also be a common amenity building housing two units.
The residential buildings are expected to be three storeys and the common amenity building would be two storeys. The 34 micro suites — the developer calls them boutique units — are about 350 square feet. They are being targeted at first-time buyers and students at a price expected to be in the $325,000 range.
“We were absolutely thrilled to have the support of council,” said Travis Lee of Tri-Eagle. “We had designed this project on council’s leadership for asking the industry to provide missing-middle housing. Even though the staff policies wouldn’t support it, council was very clear in that this was the right project at the right time.”
Lee said he understands the concern about traffic in the area, but noted many of the people likely to buy into the project will not have vehicles. He also defended the lack of underground parking, saying the added cost would take some units out of what he calls an obtainable price point.
“The key to making this more affordable, from our point of view, is to remove underground parking. The true cost to build an underground stall is anywhere from $85,000 to $100,000 per stall — that means $600 a month on a mortgage payment. By going to surface parking, we relieve the homeowner of that obligation on their purchase.”
Lee said they hope to start work on the site in the spring and the first buildings will be ready by the end of 2024.
>>> To comment on this article, write a letter to the editor: [email protected]
