Last September, city council approved a recommendation by the soon-to-retire general manager of planning and development, Brian Jackson, to create the first heritage conservation area in First Shaughnessy.

At the time, Mayor Gregor Robertson declared with pride that this would prevent the demolition of historic homes in the area bounded by Arbutus and Oak Streets, and West 16th and King Edward avenues.

But things haven't gone so smoothly since them.

Owners of many of the 315 homes built in the area before 1940 claimed that the move wiped out about $3 billion worth of equity by making them less marketable to buyers. And they launched a petition in court to have the decision overturned.

This morning at Vancouver city council, a staff report has come forward to address some issues raised in the court case.

It's written by the acting director of planning, Jane Pickering.

That's the same Jane Pickering who swore an affidavit in the court case declaring that the city believes that its bylaws creating the heritage conservation area "are valid and lawful".

"City staff has decided to recommend to Council that it consider implementing certain amendments to the September 29 By-laws in significant part in response to the issues raised in the petition," Pickering stated in the December affidavit. "As such, the contemplated amendments will have a direct and material relevance to many or all of the issues that are raised in the petition."

She noted in the affidavit that a report would be presented to council for its consideration today (January 19).

"If Council agrees with staff's recommendation and wishes to implement the amendments, it will first have to refer the proposed draft amending the By-laws to a public hearing in accordance with section 562 of the [Vancouver] Charter," Pickering stated in the affidavit.

The report to council follows through on that, recommending that a series of amendments to the Heritage Conservation Area Official Development Plan By-law go to a public hearing.

It calls for, among other measures:

• removing references to the director of planning regarding exemptions from heritage-alteration permit requirements;

• removing references to Parks Canada's standards and guidelines for the conservation of historic places in Canada;

• adding three properties to the list of protected heritage properties that were overlooked in the first iteration;

• describing the process for demolition or for removal from the protected heritage property list when there is no longer "sufficient heritage character";

• allowing vehicles to be parked below finished grade in a principal residence in limited circumstances.

The report states that listing "real property" as heritage is overly broad and, in fact, the bylaw should confine the heritage designation to "buildings, structures, lands or features listed under the column with the heading 'protected heritage property' ".

The report also notes that churches were "inadvertently omitted" from the First Shaughnessy Heritage Conservation Area and should be added.

In addition, the report states: "There is an error in the wording of the building depth regulation and an amendment is necessary to ensure that this section is consistent with the building depth regulation in other district schedules."