REQUEST FOR DECISION
MEETING DATE: October 21, 2025 Report No. APC-25-025
TO: Advisory Planning Commission
FROM: Kirsten Dafoe, Planner II and Bill Brown, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT: Development Variance Permit Application - 950-952 Lampson Place
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
That the Advisory Planning Commission recommends to Council to approve or deny the Development Variance Permit application to authorize a proposed reduced rear setback at 950-952 Lampson Place, with the variance outlined in the “Purpose of Application” section of staff report no. APC-25-025, including reasons for the recommendation.
Body
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The applicant proposes to construct a SSMFH development of 4 dwelling units within 2 principal building under the RSM-2 zone for the property located at 950-952 Lampson Place. Three dwelling units are located in the existing principal building, and the fourth unit is proposed to be located in an existing accessory building converted to contain the use.
To allow the building siting for the proposed Small-Scale Multi-Family Housing development, a variance to the Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050 is required, as outlined in the “Purpose of Application” section of this staff report. The variance requested is to reduce the required rear setback. This variance is to authorize the conversion of the existing accessory building to a principal building containing one dwelling unit.
If the development variance permit DVP00175 is approved, staff could then proceed with the delegated approval process for the associated development permit.
BACKGROUND:
Relevant Policy:
Official Community Plan Bylaw, 2018, No. 2922
Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050
Parking Bylaw, 2025, No. 3089
Development Application Procedures and Fees Bylaw, 2012, No. 2791
Advisory Planning Commission Bylaw, 2012, No. 2792
Local Government Act
Purpose of Application:
The applicant proposes to construct a SSMFH development of 4 dwelling units within 2 principal building under the RSM-2 zone. Three dwelling units are proposed to be located in the existing principal building, while the fourth unit is proposed to be located in an existing accessory building converted to contain the use. To allow the proposed building siting for the conversion of the existing accessory building at 950-952 Lampson Place, the applicant is requesting the following variance:
• Section 40.2(7)(a)(iv) - Principal Building Rear Setback: to reduce the minimum required Rear Setback from 4.5m to 1.39m. This is a variance of 3.11m.
If the development variance permit DVP00175 is approved, staff could then proceed with the delegated approval process for the associated development permit.
Application Timeline:
October 10, 2025 - Application submitted
Context:
Applicant: Dr. Omar Ahmad (Macahmad Holdings Ltd.)
Owner: Macahmad Holdings Ltd., Inc. No. BC0785525
Lot Area: 1,456m2
OCP Present Land Use Designation: Low Density Residential
OCP Proposed Land Use Designation: Low Density Residential
Existing Land Use: Two-Family Residential
Surrounding Land Uses:
North: Single Family Residential
South: Single Family Residential, Multiple Family Residential
East: Single Family Residential, Multiple Family Residential
West: Single Family Residential
Zone Designation: Two Family Residential [RD-1] and Small-Scale Multi-Family Housing Zone (Medium Lot) [RSM-2]
Small-Scale Multi-Family Housing (SSMFH):
Section 30.10 of Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050 states that “Lots shown as ‘SSMFH Lots’ on Schedule A.2 Small-Scale Multi-Family Housing (SSMFH) Zoning Overlay Map” that are “between 280 square metres and 4,050 square metres used or intended to be used as SSMFH Dwellings are subject to the [RSM-2] regulations.” The RSM-2 zone allows up to four (4) SSMFH Dwellings per parcel, which is the number that the applicant proposes.
Schedule C of Development Application Procedures and Fees Bylaw, 2012, No. 2791 (Delegation of Development Permit Powers) identifies that Council delegates to the Director of Development Services the authority to issue development permits for “all residential development, in any building form, up to and including six (6) units on a fee simple parcel.”
Referral Comments:
The proposed development was to Building Inspection, Engineering Services, Fire, and Parks. At the time of writing, no comments have been received.
ANALYSIS:
OCP Analysis:
The proposed development is generally consistent with the Official Community Plan’s Proposed Land Use Designation of Low Density Residential. The proposed development consists of four dwelling units within two buildings.
Section 5.2 Low Density Residential Redevelopment states an objective to strive for redevelopment and infill development that improves and enhances the appearance and livability of neighbourhoods and the community as a whole. Supporting policies in this section applicable to the proposed development include:
• 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.
Part 17 Development Permit Areas provides guidelines that will be considered by staff for the development permit applications associated with the proposed SSMFH development. Development permits for SSMFH development are subject to delegated approval by staff.
Zoning Analysis:
Lot Coverage, Height, and Setbacks: except with respect to the variance requested for rear setback as outlined in this report, the proposed development is consistent with the Zoning Bylaw’s RSM-2 zone provisions. The RSM-2 zone does not set out a maximum floor area ratio (FAR).
The location of the parcel at the end of a cul-de-sac results in an unusual configuration of five lot lines. Staff have determined that the southeast lot line (abutting the existing accessory building) is the rear lot line for 950-952 Lampson Place due to the Zoning Bylaw’s definition of a rear lot line as “the lot line opposite to and most distant from the front lot line.” In this case the southeast lot is 0.31m closer to the front lot line when compared to northeast lot line.
Because the existing accessory building is sited 1.39m from the rear lot line, it is noted to be nonconforming to the current 1.5m accessory building rear setback requirement. By converting the accessory building to a principal building containing a dwelling unit, the required rear setback increases from 1.5m to 4.5m. In their rationale letter [Appendix B], the applicant notes that the southeast lot line abutting the accessory building borders a driveway and parking area for a neighbouring apartment complex. Staff also note that the building is existing and of modest size and is largely screened from view across the southeast property line by mature vegetation that is proposed to be retained.
Parking Analysis:
The proposal provides sufficient parking for all dwelling units, including for the unit in the accessory building to be converted for the use, with six parking spaces exceeding the minimum of two parking spaces set out in the parking bylaw. Dimensions of parking spaces and maneuvering areas are shown to meet the requirements set out in the Parking Bylaw.
OPTIONS:
1. That the Advisory Planning Commission recommends to Council to approve the Development Variance Permit application to reduce the required rear setback at 950-952 Lampson Place, with the variance outlined in the “Purpose of Application” section of staff report no. APC-25-025, including reasons for the recommendation.
2. That the Advisory Planning Commission recommends to Council to approve with conditions the Development Variance Permit application to reduce the required rear setback at 950-952 Lampson Place, with the variance outlined in the “Purpose of Application” section of staff report no. APC-25-025, including reasons for the recommendation.
3. That the Advisory Planning Commission recommends to Council to deny the Development Variance Permit application to reduce the required rear setback at 950-952 Lampson Place, with the variance outlined in the “Purpose of Application” section of staff report no. APC-25-025, including reasons for the recommendation.
COUNCIL PRIORITY:
Housing
REPORT REVIEWED BY:
1. James Davison, Manager of Planning, Reviewed
2. Bill Brown, Director of Development Services, Reviewed
3. Victoria McKean, Committee Coordinator, Concurrence
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
1. Appendix A - Aerial Map
2. Appendix B - Applicant’s Variance Rationale Letter
3. Appendix C - Survey Plan
4. Appendix D - Building Plans
5. Appendix E - Site Photographs (Landscaping)