REQUEST FOR DECISION
DATE: August 15, 2018 Report No. DEV-18-038
TO: Laurie Hurst, Chief Administrative Officer
FROM: Alex Tang, Planner and Bill Brown, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT:
Title
Rezoning Application - 638 Constance Avenue, 640 Constance Avenue and 637 Nelson Street
End
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
1. That Council resolves that Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050, Amendment Bylaw No. 2927, attached to Staff Report DEV-18-038 as Appendix A, which would amend Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050 by changing the zoning designation of 638 Constance Avenue [PID 000-546-437, Lot B (DD 237133I), of Lots 79 and 89, Suburban Lot 44, Esquimalt District, Plan 2854], 640 Constance Avenue [PID 000-380-911, Amended Lot 88 (DD 208422I), of Suburban Lot 44, Esquimalt District, Plan 2854], and 637 Nelson Street [PID 006-386-466, Lot D (DD 367731-I), Suburban Lot 44, Esquimalt District, Plan 2854], all shown cross hatched on Schedule ‘A’ of Bylaw No. 2927, from RM-1 [Multiple Family Residential], to CD No. 110 [Comprehensive Development District No. 110] be considered for first and second reading; and
2. That Council authorizes the Corporate Officer to schedule a Public Hearing for Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 2927, mail notices and advertise for same in the local newspaper; and
3. That, as the applicant wishes to assure Council that uses and development will be restricted and amenities provided as identified in Staff Report DEV-18-038, the applicant has voluntarily agreed to register a Section 219 Covenant, and Council has accepted it as a condition of rezoning, on the title of 638 Constance Avenue [PID 000-546-437, Lot B (DD 237133I), of Lots 79 and 89, Suburban Lot 44, Esquimalt District, Plan 2854], 640 Constance Avenue [PID 000-380-911, Amended Lot 88 (DD 208422I), of Suburban Lot 44, Esquimalt District, Plan 2854], and 637 Nelson Street [PID 006-386-466, Lot D (DD 367731-I), Suburban Lot 44, Esquimalt District, Plan 2854] in favour of the Township of Esquimalt providing the lands shall not be subdivided, built upon or used (as appropriate to the requirement, as drafted by the Township’s solicitor at the applicant’s expense) in the absence of all of the following:
• Lot consolidation of 638 Constance Avenue [PID 000-546-437, Lot B (DD 237133I), of Lots 79 and 89, Suburban Lot 44, Esquimalt District, Plan 2854], 640 Constance Avenue [PID 000-380-911, Amended Lot 88 (DD 208422I), of Suburban Lot 44, Esquimalt District, Plan 2854], and 637 Nelson Street [PID 006-386-466, Lot D (DD 367731-I), Suburban Lot 44, Esquimalt District, Plan 2854] prior to development as the proposed CD No.110 Zone does not work unless the parcels are consolidated
• Seven visitor parking spaces will be provided and remain as illustrated in the parking plan, attached as Appendix C to Staff Report DEV-18-042
• $500 per unit car shares from Modo car share services
• 31 parking stalls wired for Level 2 (240V, AC plug with a dedicated 40 amp circuit) electric vehicle charging stations
Council direct staff and legal counsel for the Township to coordinate with the property owner to ensure a S.219 Covenant addressing the aforementioned issues is registered against the property title, in priority to all financial encumbrances, prior to returning Amendment Bylaw No. 2927 to Council for consideration of adoption.
Body
RELEVANT POLICY:
Official Community Plan Bylaw, 2018, No. 2922
Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No 2050
Parking Bylaw, 1992, No. 2011
Development Application Procedures and Fees Bylaw, 2012, No. 2791
Advisory Planning Commission Bylaw, 2012, No. 2792
Subdivision and Development Control Bylaw, 1997, No. 2175
Green Building Checklist
STRATEGIC RELEVANCE:
This Request for Decision does not directly relate to a specific strategic objective.
BACKGROUND:
Appendix A: Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050, Amendment Bylaw No. 2927
Appendix B: Subject Property Map, Aerial Map, OCP Policies
Appendix C: Architectural Drawings, Landscape Plan, and Surveyor’s Site Plan
Appendix D: Green Building Checklist
Appendix E: Applicant’s Letter
Appendix F: Parking Study
Appendix G: Developer’s Public Consultation Summary
Purpose of the Application
The applicant is requesting a change in zoning from the current RM-1 [Multiple Family Residential] zone to a Comprehensive Development District zone. This change is required to accommodate the proposed 6 storey, 77 unit, purpose-built rental, multiple family residential building including a 61 space parking garage.
Evaluation of this application should focus on issues relevant to zoning such as the appropriateness of the proposed height, density and massing, proposed unit sizes, siting, setbacks, lot coverage, usable open space, how the building relates to adjacent and surrounding sites and whether the proposed uses are appropriate and consistent with the overall direction contained within the Official Community Plan.
This site is located within Development Permit Area No. 6 - Multi-Unit Residential. Should the rezoning be approved, the form and character of the buildings and landscaping would be controlled by a Development Permit that would be considered by Council at a future date.
Context
Applicant: Praxis Architects Inc. [Heather Spinney]
Owner: Constance Apartments Inc., Inc.No. BC1128254
Property Size: Metric: 2840 m2 Imperial: 16427 ft2
Existing Land Use: Single Family Residential
Surrounding Land Uses:
North: Department of National Defence Lands
South: Single Family Residential
West: Multiple Family Residential [4 storeys] / Single Family Residential
East: Multiple Family Residential [4 storeys]
Existing OCP Designation: High Density Residential [No change required]
Existing Zoning: RM-1 [Low Density Townhouse Multiple Family Residential]
Proposed Zoning CD No. 110 [Comprehensive Development District No. 110]
Official Community Plan
The overall height and density of this proposal is consistent with the current Land Use Designation of ‘High Density Residential’ as that Land Use Designation accepts buildings up to twelve storeys with a Floor Area Ratio of up to 3.0. The proposed development consists of six storeys with a Floor Area Ratio of 1.60.
OCP Section 3.3 Housing and Community identifies land lying north of Esquimalt Road between Admirals and CFB Esquimalt as an area for residential densification.
OCP Section 5.3 Medium and High Density Residential Development states an objective to support compact, efficient medium density and high density residential development that integrates with existing proposed adjacent uses.
Supporting policies in this section consistent with the proposed development include:
• Encourage new medium density and high density residential development with high quality design standards for building and landscaping and which enhance existing neighbourhoods.
• Prioritize medium density and high density residential development in proposed land use designated areas that:
1. reduce single occupancy vehicle use;
2. support transit service;
3. are located within close proximity to employment centres; and
4. accommodate young families.
• Consider new high density residential development proposals with a Floor Area Ratio of up to 3.0 and up to 12 storeys in height, in areas designated on the “Proposed Land Use Designation Map.”
• A mix of dwelling unit sizes should be provided in medium density and high density residential land use designated areas in order to meet the varying housing needs of Esquimalt residents.
Section 5.4 of the Official Community Plan states an objective to encourage a range of housing by type, tenure and price so that people of all ages, household types, abilities and incomes have a diversity of housing choice in Esquimalt. The proposed development is consistent with the following policy in this section:
• Encourage the placement of new rental, affordable, special needs, and seniors housing in accordance with designated residential land use areas as they are integral components of inclusive neighbourhoods.
The applicant has agreed to ensure that all the units in this building are used as long-term residential rentals as it is a purpose-built rental. This will be ensured either through a Housing Agreement, Covenant registered on Title, or a combination of both.
Under Section 13.3.6 Passenger Vehicle Alternatives, the following policies are listed:
• Encourage the installation of electric vehicle charging infrastructure in all new multi-unit developments.
• Pursue the installation of electric vehicle charging capacity in new developments during the rezoning process.
• Encourage the inclusion of car share in new multi-unit residential developments.
The proposed development offers $500 per unit car shares from Modo car share services. In addition, 50 percent of the parking stalls will be wired for Level 2 (240V, AC plug with a dedicated 40 amp circuit) electric vehicle charging stations.
Within the DPA No. 6 Multi-Family Residential in the Official Community Plan, 23.5(6) states that underground parking will be provided for any multi-unit residential building exceeding four storeys.
As the Development Permit is not being considered at this time, it is inappropriate to address many of the guidelines with this following exception as it is relevant to zoning and parking issues. Consistent with this policy, the proposed six storey development contains one level of underground parking.
Zoning
Density, Lot Coverage, Setbacks, Height and Parking:
The following chart details the setbacks, lot coverage, floor area ratio and parking of this proposal. Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050 does not currently contain a zone that can accommodate this proposed development.
|
|
Proposed Comprehensive Development Zone [CD No. 110] |
|
Residential Units |
77 |
|
Floor Area Ratio |
1.60 |
|
Lot Coverage |
81% |
|
[at the parking level] |
|
|
Lot Coverage |
40% |
|
[at the First Storey] |
|
|
Setbacks |
|
|
• Front |
5.8 m |
|
• Rear |
6.4 m |
|
• Interior Side [North] |
5.0 m |
|
• Interior Side [South] |
7.0 m |
|
Building Height |
21 m [6 storeys] |
|
Off Street Parking |
61 spaces [0.79/unit] |
|
Usable Open Space |
850 m2 [30.0%] |
|
Bicycle Parking |
116 resident + 6 visitor |
Floor Area Ratio: The Floor Area Ratio of this proposal is 1.60, which is less than the maximum acceptable amount of 3.0 for lands designated High Density Residential in the Official Community Plan.
Lot Coverage: The lot coverage measures 81% at the parking level and 40% above the parking level.
Parking: Parking Bylaw, 1992, No. 2011 requires 1.3 parking spaces per unit be provided in multiple family developments, with not less than 1 in 4 spaces dedicated to Visitor Parking. Parking areas (i.e. parking lots and underground parking garages) are required to be constructed to meet the standards for manoeuvring aisle dimensions and associated parking stall dimensions detailed in Part 14, Table 2, of the Bylaw.
This development proposal incorporates 61 residential parking spaces within an underground parking structure including 7 visitor spaces and proposes a number of relaxations to Parking Bylaw requirements to achieve this number of spaces on one level of underground parking. The applicant has provided a parking study, prepared by Watt Consulting Group stamped “Received January 18, 2018”, detailing the effectiveness of this parking strategy.
The following relaxations to Parking Bylaw No. 2011 are proposed:
• Reduction of the number of required parking spaces from 1.3 spaces/unit to 0.79 spaces/unit [i.e. from 101 spaces to 61 spaces]
• Reduction of the number of required Visitor parking spaces from 1 in 4 spaces to 1 in 10 spaces
Comments from Other Departments
Community Safety Services:
Building to be constructed to the requirements of BC Building Code 2012 and Municipal Building Code Bylaw, 2002, No. 2538. Applicant must address all issues contained within the Township Development Protocol should application be approved. Plans will be reviewed for compliance with BC Building Code upon submission of a Building Permit application.
Engineering Services:
Engineering staff has completed a preliminary evaluation of Works and Services that would be required for the 77 unit multiple family residential building. Staff confirms that the design appears achievable on the site and that appropriate works and services are available in the immediate area. If approved, the development must be serviced with bylaw requirements including, but not limited to, new sewer and drain connections, underground power, telephone and cable services, and new road works up to the centre line of both Constance Avenue and Nelson Street.
Should the application be approved, additional comments will be provided when detailed engineering drawings are submitted as part of a Building Permit application.
Parks Services:
Parks Staff has completed a preliminary review of the proposed on-site and off-site landscaping and commented that the landscape plan looks appropriate. Should the application for rezoning be approved, a tree survey of the trees proposed for retention on the site will be required as part of the consideration of the Development Permit. Moreover, tree protection fencing must be put up at the dripline of all trees to be retained.
Fire Services:
Fire Services staff has completed a preliminary review of the proposal and recommends an upgrade of the water main along the full length of Constance Avenue.
Comments from the Design Review Committee [DRC]
This application was considered at the regular meeting of the Design Review Committee held on March 14, 2018.
Members generally liked the development but had concerns with the number of parking spaces. They also questioned the applicant on whether their community consultation meeting has been held. The applicant stated that it was held in early December, as it was held on December 11, 2017.
The Design Review Committee resolved unanimously that the application be forwarded to Council with a recommendation of approval as the proposed development fits in with the character of the neighbourhood and is also in keeping with the current guidelines within the Official Community Plan.
Comments from the Advisory Planning Commission [APC]
This application was considered at the regular meeting of the Advisory Planning Commission held on March 20, 2018.
Members liked the development for its purpose of providing rental housing in the Township. They had concerns that the market rentals could be changed to strata title in the future. Staff notes that a Housing Agreement is expected to be registered to ensure that the units remain as market rentals. Members also had concerns with parking and the impact on traffic flow. Furthermore, they would like to see larger rental units in the community.
The APC resolved that the application be forwarded to Council with a recommendation of approval as the proposal is a good fit for the existing neighbourhood and will increase rental accommodations for the community.
ISSUES:
1. Rationale for Selected Option
This application is consistent with the Land Use Designation of the subject property and the policy direction contained within the Official Community Plan for High Density Residential developments. This proposed development is an appropriate location for increased density as it is in close proximity to the CFB Esquimalt, one of the major employers in the Township. This proposed development will also increase the number of rental units to the Township’s housing supply. Moreover, both the Design Review Committee and the Advisory Planning Commission recommended approval of this application.
2. Organizational Implications
This Request for Decision has no organizational implications.
3. Financial Implications
This Request for Decision has no financial implications.
4. Sustainability & Environmental Implications
The applicant has completed the Esquimalt Green Building Checklist, detailing green features that will be considered for inclusion in the development should it be approved [Appendix D].
5. Communication & Engagement
As this is a rezoning application, notices have been mailed to tenants and owners of properties located within 100 metres (328 feet) of the subject property. Notice of the Public Hearing would be placed in two editions of the Victoria News. Furthermore, five signs indicating that the property is under consideration for a change in zoning have been in place on the Constance Avenue frontage and Nelson Street frontage since February 2018 and would be updated to show the date, time, and location of the Public Hearing.
As required by the Township’s Development Application Procedures and Fees Bylaw, 2012, No. 2791, the applicant delivered notices to properties within 100 metres of the subject property soliciting comments and inviting residents to attend a public open house. This meeting was held from 5pm to 7pm, December 11, 2017 at the Royal Canadian Legion, Esquimalt Dockyard Branch on 622 Admirals Road. Staff confirms that the applicant has provided the required submissions indicating that 17 people attended the meeting [Appendix G].
ALTERNATIVES:
1. That Council resolves that Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050, Amendment Bylaw No. 2927, attached to Staff Report DEV-18-038 as Appendix A, which would amend Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050 by changing the zoning designation of 638 Constance Avenue [PID 000-546-437, Lot B (DD 237133I), of Lots 79 and 89, Suburban Lot 44, Esquimalt District, Plan 2854], 640 Constance Avenue [PID 000-380-911, Amended Lot 88 (DD 208422I), of Suburban Lot 44, Esquimalt District, Plan 2854], and 637 Nelson Street [PID 006-386-466, Lot D (DD 367731-I), Suburban Lot 44, Esquimalt District, Plan 2854], all shown cross hatched on Schedule ‘A’ of Bylaw No. 2927, from RM-1 [Multiple Family Residential], to CD No. 110 [Comprehensive Development District No. 110], be considered for first and second reading; that Council authorizes the Corporate Officer to schedule a Public Hearing for Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 2927, mail notices and advertise for same in the local newspaper; and staff be directed to coordinate with the property owner to ensure a S.219 Covenant registered on the title of the subject properties, prior to returning Amendment Bylaw No. 2927 to Council for consideration of adoption.
2. Council postpone consideration of Bylaw No. 2927 pending receipt of additional information.
3. Council deny first and second reading of Bylaw No. 2927.