REQUEST FOR DECISION
DATE: September 7, 2018 Report No. DEV-18-068
TO: Laurie Hurst, Chief Administrative Officer
FROM: Karen Hay, Planner and Bill Brown, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT:
Title
Rezoning Application - 1109 Lyall Street
End
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
That Council resolves that Bylaw No. 2940 [Appendix A], which would amend Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050, by changing the zoning designation of 1109 Lyall Street [PID 006-001-009, Amended Lot 3 (DD 148436I), Section 11, Esquimalt District, Plan 4729] from RD-3 [Two Family/ Single Family Residential] to CD No. 111 [Comprehensive Development District No. 111], be considered for first and second reading; and
That Council authorizes the Corporate Officer to schedule a public hearing for Zoning Bylaw 1992, No. 2050, Amendment Bylaw No. 2940, and to advertise for same in the local newspaper.
Body
RELEVANT POLICY:
Local Government Act
Official Community Plan Bylaw, 2018, No. 2922
Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050
Development Application Procedures and Fees Bylaw, No. 2791, 2012
STRATEGIC RELEVANCE:
This Request for Decision does not directly relate to a specific strategic objective.
BACKGROUND:
Appendix A: Bylaw No. 2940 - Bylaw to Amend Zoning Bylaw 1992, No. 2050
Appendix B: Maps, Air Photo, RD-3 zone
Appendix C: Site Plan and Architectural Drawings
Appendix D: Applicant’s Letters and Green Building Checklist
Appendix E: Applicant’s Public Consultation Results
Purpose of the Application
The applicant is requesting a change in zoning from Two Family/Single Family Residential [RD-3] to a Comprehensive Development District, to create a strata development where the existing single family dwelling is retained and a new two-unit dwelling (duplex) is added to the property.
This site is located within Development Permit Area No. 3 - “Enhanced Design Control Residential”. Should the rezoning application be approved, the applicant would need to obtain a Development Permit respecting the character of the development, including landscaping, form, exterior design and finish of the proposed residential building in the future. The site is also subject to Development Permit Areas: No. 1 “Natural Environment”; No. 7 “Energy Conservation and Greenhouse Gas Reduction”; and No. 8 “Water Conservation”.
At this time, consideration of this application should focus on the proposed: land use, siting, height, mass, density, lot coverage, usable open space, parking, fit with the neighbourhood, and consistency with the overall direction contained within the Official Community Plan.
Context
Applicant: Kim Colpman, Large and Co.
Owner: Datatech Developments Inc., Inc. No. BC0060270
Designer: Zebra Design
Property Size: Metric: 949 m2 Imperial: 10215 ft2
Existing Land Use: Single Family Residential
Surrounding Land Uses:
North: Single Family Residential
South: Single Family Residential
West: Two Family Residential
East: Single Family Residential and Two Family Residential
Existing Zoning: Two Family Residential [RD-3]
Proposed Zoning: CD [Comprehensive Development District]
Existing OCP Designation: Low Density Residential [No change proposed]
Official Community Plan [OCP]
This proposal is consistent with the ‘Present’ and the ‘Proposed’ Land Use Designations applied to the subject property, “Low Density Residential”.
The following policies were considered in evaluating this development application:
Section 5 Housing & Residential Land Use contains policies that are intended to ensure that concerns such as tree protection, parking, traffic, noise, effects on neighbouring properties, and neighbourhood character are addressed.
• Policy: Support the inclusion of secondary suites within present and proposed low density residential land use designated areas.
• Policy: Support the inclusion of detached accessory dwelling units on appropriate low density residential land use designated areas where only one principal dwelling unit exists.
• Policy: Support the development of a variety of housing types and designs to meet the anticipated housing needs of residents. This may include non-market and market housing options that are designed to accommodate young and multi-generational families, the local workforce, as well as middle and high income households.
Section 5.2 Low Density Residential Redevelopment contains policies that support development that improves and enhances the appearance and livability of neighbourhoods and the community as a whole.
• Policy: Proposed redevelopment or infill within present low density residential land use designated areas should be built to high quality design and landscaping standards and respond sensitively to existing neighbourhood amenities.
• Policy: Consider the inclusion of secondary suites in infill developments where it is demonstrated that neighbourhood impacts can be mitigated.
As the Development Permit is not being considered at this time it would be inappropriate to address many of the DP guidelines. Staff believes the following DPA No. 3 Guidelines are especially relevant to the discussion of zoning issues (height, density, massing, proposed unit sizes, siting, setbacks, lot coverage, useable open space, parking, how the building relates to adjacent and surrounding sites):
20.5 Guidelines - Duplex Housing
1. The fronts of the buildings should be designed to create the appearance of smaller structures either by staggering the dwelling units or visually breaking up the façade with architectural detailing while still maintaining a complementary streetscape.
2. Innovative and creative site-specific two-unit dwellings are encouraged where usable open space is maintained either on the ground (yard) or as rooftop gardens. Setbacks to the street may be reduced to maximize property use.
3. Front to back duplexes are generally discouraged unless they can be designed to eliminate negative impacts to the immediate neighbours such as shading of gardens, overlook of outdoor amenity areas and violation of privacy.
4. Side by side, up and down, or staggered unit configurations are preferred as these result in a greater number of units facing the street, less disruption of privacy, and a more equitable division of outdoor amenity areas between the two dwelling units.
6. Rooflines of new development should relate in height, shape and pitch to existing residential buildings in the immediate area. For corner sites, the building design should avoid having large unbroken sloped roof areas facing the street.
8. Buildings should be designed to minimize visual intrusion on to the privacy of surrounding homes. Some overlook of adjoining yards and neighbouring decks may be unavoidable; however, additional privacy should be achieved by insetting balconies, decks and patios into the building or by screening them with latticework or landscaping. Windows should be spaced so that they do not align directly with those of other buildings.
9. The height and massing of new two-unit dwellings should be designed to minimize the casting of shadows on to the private outdoor space of adjacent residential dwellings.
11. The provision of private open space should be part of an overall site development and landscape plan and should take into consideration general site circulation patterns (including parking), existing landscape features, sun access, privacy and usability.
12. Retention and protection of trees and the natural habitat is encouraged where possible.
13. Parking areas, garages and driveways should appear as a minor component of the site when viewed from the street. The building of curving access roads and driveways helps to avoid views from the street of large expanses of paving. The use of shared driveways is encouraged.
18. For new or converted two unit dwellings, garages and parking areas are encouraged to be located in the rear yard. Shared driveways are preferred to access the rear yard.
20.6 Guidelines - Single-unit Infill Housing
20.6.1 Relationship to Existing Houses
1. Where an existing single-unit residence is to be retained and a second residence placed on the parcel, the existing dwelling is to be upgraded and made to be complementary with the new construction.
2. Where two or more new separate dwellings are situated on a parcel or within a comprehensive development zone, the buildings shall be designed as part of a comprehensive scheme with all buildings being finished in complementary materials and incorporating complimentary architectural details.
3. Where new infill single houses are proposed, the design of the new houses should be complementary in scale, size, exterior finishes, rooflines, and colours to the predominant styles of housing in the neighbourhood. It is important to ensure that the new construction fits with the overall scale and character of existing houses. The intent of this guideline is not to encourage the replication or imitation of surrounding buildings but rather the design of structures that complement the streetscape.
20.6.2 Massing
1. New structures should be designed so that the overall massing is in keeping with other single-unit residences in the immediate area. New structures for lots other than corner or double frontage lots should be limited to one and one half storeys.
2. New structures, which are two storeys in height, should be designed so that the second storey is partially concealed within the slope of the roof to minimize the height of the building. The use of dormers set into the roof is preferred to a flat roof or a peaked roof set over the second storey.
The property is also included in the following OCP Development Permit Areas: Development Permit Area No. 1 - Natural Environment, Development Permit Area No. 7 - Energy Conservation and Greenhouse Gas Reduction, Development Permit Area No. 8 - Water Conservation. Many of these guidelines would be addressed at the Development Permit stage but the following are relevant to the discussion of zoning and parking areas, including in particular the siting of proposed buildings.
OCP Section 18 Development Permit Area No. 1 - Natural Environment
18.5.2 Natural Features - Natural features and areas to be preserved, protected, restored, and enhanced where feasible:
1. Retain existing healthy native trees, vegetation, rock outcrops and soil wherever possible.
4. Narrower manoeuvering aisles, fewer and smaller parking spaces can be considered where natural areas are being conserved.
18.5.5 Drainage and Erosion - Measures to control drainage and shoreline erosion. Where it is reasonable:
1. Preserve, restore and enhance treed areas. Trees are the most effective form of absorbent landscaping due to their extensive root zones and their ability to both absorb water from the soil and intercept precipitation on leaves, needles and branches. Consider that native conifers are well adapted to local wet winters.
2. Reduce the impact of surges in stormwater on shorelines by designing on-site stormwater retention systems to contain the first 3 centimetres [1.25 inches] of precipitation on site, per precipitation event; and incorporating rainwater collection systems into roof design and landscaping.
4. Maximize the ratio of planted and pervious surfaces to unplanted surfaces, and design paved areas to direct water towards vegetated areas, to help reduce surface run off. Where paved surfaces are needed, intersperse with drought resistant vegetation and trees, to help absorb stormwater, provide shade and reduce the local heat island effect.
OCP Section 24 - Development Permit Area No. 7 - Energy Conservation and Greenhouse Gas Reduction
24.5.1 Siting of buildings and structures. Where it is feasible:
1. Orient buildings to take advantage of site specific climate conditions, in terms of solar access and wind flow; design massing and solar orientation for optimum passive performance.
2. Build new developments compactly, considering the solar penetration and passive performance provided for neighbouring sites, and avoid shading adjacent usable outdoor open spaces.
4. Provide space for pleasant pedestrian pathways between buildings.
5. Strategically site buildings to sustain and increase the community’s urban forest tree canopy cover.
6. Provide space for significant landscaping including varying heights of trees, shrubs and ground covers.
24.5.2 Form and exterior design of buildings and structures. Where it is feasible:
1. Orient larger roof surfaces to the south for potential use of solar panels or photo-voltaic roofing.
2. Use roof designs that reduce heat transfer into neighbouring buildings, helping reduce the local heat island effect and the need for cooling of buildings in warmer months.
8. Add rooftop patios and gardens, particularly food producing gardens, as they can contribute to local resilience, livability, and reduction in greenhouse gas production by reducing food transportation costs.
24.5.3 Landscaping - Where it is feasible:
2. Choose open space and landscaping over dedicating space to the parking and manoeuvering of private motor vehicles.
3. Conserve native trees, shrubs and soils, thereby saving the cost of importing materials and preserving already sequestered carbon dioxide.
24.5.5 Special Features
4. Reuse of existing buildings and building materials is encouraged.
OCP Section 25 - Development Permit Area No. 8 - Water Conservation
25.5.3 Landscaping - Retaining Stormwater on Site (absorbent landscaping) Where it is feasible:
1. Preserve and restore treed areas. Trees are the most effective form of absorbent landscaping due to their extensive root zones and their ability to both absorb water from the soil and intercept precipitation on leaves, needles and branches. Consider that native conifers are well adapted to local wet winters.
3. Avoid disturbing, compacting and removing areas of natural soil, as these are naturally absorbent areas.
Zoning
In keeping with other single unit and two unit infill projects, the proposed Comprehensive Development District zone would contain the following uses: single family residential, two family residential, home occupation, and urban hens. A covenant could be registered against the title of the property limiting the development to only three [3] dwelling units.
F.A.R., Lot Coverage, Siting and Setbacks: The following chart compares the setbacks, lot coverage and floor area ratio of this proposal with the requirements of the RD-3 [Two Family /Single Family Residential Zone]:
Floor Area Ratio [FAR] measures the size of a building (or for all buildings on a lot) as a ratio of the size of the lot on which a building(s) sit. The proposed FAR at just over 0.50 exceeds the 0.35 permitted in the RD-3 zone by 43%. Many of the single unit infill developments in Esquimalt have been built with a FAR close to the 0.35. The lot size at 949 m2 in area would provide for 316 m2 (3401 ft2) of lot area per dwelling unit.
The existing house is a well maintained home dating back to 1939 but has not been identified as have significant heritage value or character, and is not on either Esquimalt’s heritage register or inventory list. The applicant has proposed to keep this house in its present location. The size and location of the proposed two family dwelling behind this existing home raises concerns. The depth of this lot at 39.59 metres (129.89 feet) provides little room between the existing home and the proposed duplex (3.98 metres). The location of the new building is concerning, for its potential impact on neighbouring outdoor amenity areas and their perception on privacy.
The building massing of the second storey of the proposed two-family dwelling is identical to the first storey and has the potential to dwarf the existing house. A reduction to the mass of the second storey would be more consistent with the proportions and patterns of neighbouring residential buildings.
While the proposal would create much needed family housing near schools, recreation facilities, commercial areas, and employment centers, the siting of the buildings, with little outdoor amenity space provided for the existing home, and a driveway adjacent to the backstairs raises concerns for the future livability of this development.
Parking and Manoeuvering
Parking Bylaw 1992, No. 2011 requires one parking space per dwelling unit, and in residential zones the parking spaces shall be located no closer to the front lot line than the front face of the principal building. The site plan indicates that two parking spaces would be situated in front of the front face of the principal building, for the use of the residents of the single family house; and that each of the duplex units would have one parking space located behind the single family house. A variance for the location of the two parking spaces would be required, and could be incorporated within the new zone.
There is little room for manoeuvering of vehicles on this site and the majority would have to back onto Lyall Street to exit the site.
Comments from Other Departments
The plans for this proposal were circulated to other departments and the following comments were received:
Community Safety Services (Building Inspection): Project will be subject to review for current BC Building Code and municipal bylaw compliance at the time of a Building Permit application.
Engineering Services: Engineering staff have completed a preliminary evaluation of Works and Services that would be required for the proposed development. According to Subdivision and Development Control Bylaw, 1997, No. 2175, including all schedules, the developer may be required to provide all works and services up to the road centre line. Staff confirms that the design appears achievable on the site and that appropriate works and services are available in the immediate area. The applicant is responsible for retaining the services of a qualified professional for the design and construction supervision of all works and services, including construction costs, engineering fees, administrative costs and contingency allowance, as indicated in Bylaw 2175. Additional comments provided when detailed engineering drawings submitted.
Parks Services: Tree protection fencing will need to be erected at the dripline for all trees, including the boulevard tree and possibly the neighbour’s trees. Tree cutting permits are required for all trees that may be removed.
Fire Services: No concerns with this proposal.
Recommendation from the Advisory Planning Commission [APC]
This application was considered at the regular meeting of the APC held on April 17, 2018. The majority of APC members were not supportive of the application expressing concerns with the mass of the proposed building and that the current design is not sensitive enough to the character of the neighbourhood and the existing house. Members liked that the existing house would be retained.
The APC made the following recommendation:
The application for rezoning, authorizing a new two-family dwelling (duplex) to be constructed behind the existing single family dwelling, sited in accordance with the BCLS Site Plan prepared by Alan Powell, Powell & Associates, BC Land Surveyors, stamped “Received February 26, 2018”; and incorporating the height and massing consistent with the architectural plans prepared by Gerry Troesch Residential Design, stamped “Received February 16, 2018” detailing the development proposed to be located at 1109 Lyall Street [PID 006-001-009, Amended Lot 3 (DD 148436I), Section 11, Esquimalt District, Plan 4729] be forwarded to Council with a recommendation by the Esquimalt Advisory Planning Commission to deny; as the massing of the proposed building is not a good fit for the neighbourhood.
Note: In response to comments from the APC, the applicant hired a new design firm, and made some changes to the appearance of the building but did not change the size or massing significantly. The applicant indicated to staff that they did not wish to return the application to the APC for further consideration.
ISSUES:
1. Rationale for Selected Option
At the Regular Council meeting of August 27, 2018 Council instructed staff that they wished to have the amending bylaw prepared for consideration by Council.
While the proposal would provide much needed housing in close proximity to schools, recreation facilities, and commercial areas, staff still have concerns with the size and massing of the proposed building, the proximity of the new building to the existing building, the implications for the potential livability of the development and the manoeuvering of vehicles on the site.
2. Organizational Implications
This Request for Decision has no further significant organizational implications.
3. Financial Implications
There are no significant financial implications with having Council consider the application before them.
4. Sustainability & Environmental Implications
The proposal before Council would result in a denser urban environment which is generally associated with reduced greenhouse gas emissions. The livability of a development and the neighbourhood contributes to the social and economic sustainability of the community.
5. Communication & Engagement
As this is a rezoning application, should it proceed to a Public Hearing, notice would be mailed to tenants and owners of properties within 100 m (328 ft) of the subject property. A sign indicating that the property is under consideration for a change in zoning has been placed on the Lyall Street frontage of the property and would be updated to reflect the date, time and location of the Public Hearing. Additionally, notice of the Public Hearing would be placed in two editions of the Victoria News.
Applicant neighbourhood meeting submission - [Appendix E]
The applicant has indicated that they canvased the neighbourhood, and that they held a public meeting on June 15, 2018 in order to comply with the public consultation procedures of Development Application Procedures and Fees Bylaw, 2012, No. 2791.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Council read Bylaw No. 2940 a first and second time, and direct staff to schedule a Public Hearing.
2. Council postpose consideration of Bylaw No. 2940 pending receipt of additional information.