TOWNSHIP OF ESQUIMALT STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: April 8, 2024 Report No. DEV-24-024
TO: Council
FROM: James Davison, Manager of Development Services
SUBJECT: 900 Carlton 900 Esquimalt - DP and DVP - Staff Report No. DEV-24-024
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
That Council approve Development Permit No. DP000221 and Development Variance Permit No. DVP00138 and instruct the Director of Development Services not to issue either permit until the Section 219 Covenant, which will secure the amenities and the transportation demand management (TDM) measures, as described in staff report DEV-24-013, is registered on title.
Body
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On March 4, 2024 Council postponed a decision on the Development Permit DP000221 and Development Variance Permit DP000138 with the following (draft) motion:
That Council postpone the discussion on the application to the March 18, 2024 Regular Council meeting and direct Staff to provide an extensive comparison study of the amenity package to similar density project amenity packages within the CRD and Metro Vancouver.
There is a Council motion on the floor, made by Councillor Rotchford and seconded by Councillor Armour:
That Council approve Development Permit No. DP000221 and Development Variance Permit No. DVP00138 and instruct the Director of Development Services not to issue either permit until the Section 219 Covenant, which will secure the amenities and the transportation demand management (TDM) measures, as described in staff report DEV-24-013, is registered on title.
At the March 18, 2024 meeting, council passed a further resolution to postpone discussion of the application until April 8, 2024.
In this report Staff has prepared a background on the common types of amenity contributions, the Township’s requirements to that end, the applicant’s proposal, what amenities this proposal might seek to be negotiated in municipalities in CRD and the Vancouver Region (the “study area”), and several examples of comparable projects and their contributions from the Township and from other municipalities in the study area.
The variance application in question is not a rezoning. Staff notes that none of the identified density bonus/community amenity contribution policies from other municipalities in the study area speak to Development Variance Permit Applications; only rezonings. This supplemental report provides an analysis of this project in the context of these policies as if this project were a rezoning within municipalities in the study area, being mindful that this project does not require a rezoning. Any amenity contribution in this case is voluntary in nature.
In the context of a Development Variance Permit, Council should consider the appropriateness of the variances independently of any voluntary amenity contribution.
Staff is of the opinion that the applicant’s contribution would be acceptable (and in many cases generous) in the context of what is currently required in the CRD municipalities for a rezoning application. The project is difficult to compare to a downtown/urban core Metro Vancouver context but would meet or exceed requirements in some municipalities in that region.
BACKGROUND:
There are various ways in which municipalities negotiate voluntary amenities to offset the impacts of increased density through a rezoning in a community in consideration of related Official Community Plan (OCP) policies:
Community Amenity Contributions (CACs) are collected by some municipalities on any increase in density because of a rezoning even if the proposed rezoning is under the maximum recommended density within the OCP. These amenities are designed to offset the impacts of an increase in density to the community.
Density Bonus Amenity Contributions (the approach the Township of Esquimalt takes) are sought by some municipalities in cases where a rezoning proposal increases the density past the base density within the OCP Land Use Designation. These amenities are designed to offset costs to the community associated with additional density beyond what was anticipated in the OCP.
These types of CAC and Density Bonus Amenity contributions are usually defined within a policy, rather than a bylaw, to enable a degree of negotiation and flexibility. They can be defined in a more quantitative way, such as a dollar figure per square metre of development, or defined in a qualitative way, as the Township currently does, whereby the contribution is made in cash or in-kind and should be in a form acceptable to the municipality.
By contrast, note also that both these approaches can be incorporated directly into the applicable zoning for the property, either at the request of the owner or on Council's initiative, via the Local Government Act’s Section 482 "Density benefits for amenities, affordable housing and special needs housing", in which case the amenities become mandatory requirements for development that exceeds the base density identified in the zone.
Township Approach
The Township currently has amenity policies in the OCP. When the proposed project exceeds the recommended density identified in a Land Use District within the OCP, Staff seek to secure amenities from the applicant and incorporate them with density-bonusing-for-amenities regulations which are identified within the zoning bylaw amendment itself, and/or secured through S.219 Covenants registered against title to the property. For context, the Township also has adopted several zones where the LGA s.482 density-bonusing-for-amenities approach has been taken (e.g. I-3 McLoughlin Point, CD-102 at 101 Old Island Highway, CD-120 at 899 Esquimalt Road, CD-121 at 612 Constance Ave) .
Although a rezoning is not required for this DVP application, there are OCP policies that are applicable to all developments proposals, including the following:
Policy
Consider, where appropriate, development proposals with densities greater than those set out in the OCP through density bonus of floor-space provided that the additional density results in the provision of community amenities deemed appropriate by Council for the benefit of the community.
Policy
Recognize, for the purposes of density bonuses, “amenities” may include but are not limited to:
1. Privately-owned, publicly-accessible open space;
2. Public art;
3. Contributions towards the enhancement of public recreation facilities;
4. Contributions towards street and boulevard enhancements, including street furniture and decorative lighting;
5. Building to a higher step of the BC Energy Step Code than required under the Building Bylaw;
6. Group daycare and respite facilities for children and adults;
7. Preservation of heritage structures, features or assets;
8. Affordable housing units;
9. Special needs housing units;
10. Community gardens;
11. Enhanced green family play space for residents;
12. Public space improvements supporting and surrounding transit stations; and
13. Other as may be appropriate to the development proposal or surrounding community as deemed appropriate by Council.
Applicant’s Proposed Contribution
While not required in a Development Variance Permit context, and noting that the applicable C-2 Zone does not restrict density in the same manner as other zones, the applicant recognizes the increased intensity of the development on the property that the height variance affords and has volunteered the following amenities in support of the application:
• A one-million-dollar ($1,000,000) contribution to affordable housing ($100,000 will be given to the Esquimalt First Nation and $100,000 to the Songhees First Nation) for affordable housing. This money would also be used to cover the rental difference for existing tenants who wish to move back into the new building at a 20% rent reduction
• Public plazas along Esquimalt Rd
• Publicly accessible dog park at the rear of the building
• Commercial vehicle EV charging
• Enhanced sidewalk amenities
• Enhanced bus stop amenities
• Zero Carbon building standard
• Tenant compensation package for existing tenants
The applicant has estimated the total value of amenities to be just over $4.1 million.
In this application’s case, voluntary amenity contributions would be secured within a Section 219 Covenant. A Housing Agreement Bylaw may be needed separately should there be detailed terms associated with occupancy of the units in the building, such as specific allocation of the proposed cash contribution to that end.
ANALYSIS:
In comparing the proposed amenity contribution to other municipalities in the study area, Staff have applied existing study area policies to the proposal (below). Note that these are estimating the amount each policy would require in contributions from the proposed development if the proposal were a rezoning application. The estimates are an approximation. Furthermore, these rates are often considered as a basis for negotiation.
Comparable rezoning projects within the Township have also been presented.
Note that the 900 Esquimalt/900 Carlton project proposes 96 rental units and 176 strata units in a mixed-use project with a commercial floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.2 and a residential FAR of 4.5. The residential floor area is 30% rental and 70% strata. But for the height variance, this intensity of development would not be achievable despite the fact that the C-2 Zone does not contain a maximum FAR. Therefore, for the purposes of the comparison only, Staff has assumed that a rezoning on the site would mean a current as-of-right 2.0 FAR, a maximum permitted base residential density of 3.0 FAR, and a proposed residential density of 4.5 FAR.
CRD Municipalities Rezoning CAC/Density Bonus Policy Comparison
City of Victoria - $1,360,000
The City of Victoria has an Inclusionary Housing and Community Amenity Policy, adopted June 2019. Notable features include consideration of secured purpose-built rental as an amenity and subjective consideration of a project reaching other OCP goals as a reason to accept reduced contributions. The City requires the provision of affordable units or cash in lieu. The City of Victoria would require a financial assessment (typically third-party) of the amenity package for large projects (over 60 units).
Staff estimates that, if the project were in the City of Victoria and was a rezoning application, the applicant would be required to pay approximately $1,360,000 in total density bonusing contributions. As the application contributes towards OCP goals in other ways, Victoria Council would possibly consider a lesser contribution.
District of Saanich - currently undetermined
The District of Saanich has a Community Amenity Contribution and Inclusionary Housing Policy, adopted July 2023. Currently they have not established a Density Bonus rate structure, but their CAC target rates table would require a contribution of $544,000 based on a $2,000 per unit charge. It is very likely that the density bonus rate would be higher.
City of Colwood - $1,500,000
The City of Colwood has an Interim Community Amenity Contributions Policy. Under that policy each additional unit permitted by rezoning would require a contribution of $4,500 per apartment unit and $1,500 per unit for their affordable housing reserve fund. This would mean a total contribution of approximately $1,500,000 with consideration of the existing potential under the current zoning regulations.
City of Langford - $1,300,000
The City of Langford has an amenity contribution policy within their city centre of $1,000 for affordable housing per unit, and $3,800 to a general amenity reserve fund per unit. This translates to approximately $1,300,000 for the project.
Town of View Royal - $1,080,000
The Town of View Royal uses $4,000 per residential unit as a basis for negotiation. This translates to approximately $1,080,000 for the project.
District of Sooke - $680,000
The District of Sooke requires a contribution to the general amenities reserve within the town centre of $2,500 per unit, and outside of $5,000 per unit. This development would likely be considered as the town centre and would require approximately $680,000.
District of Central Saanich - $2,000,000
The District of Central Saanich targets $2,000 per unit as an affordable/supportive housing community amenity and $5,500 per unit towards a general community amenity for a total of approximately $2,000,000.
Town of Sidney - $1,900,000
The Town of Sidney requires $200 per square metre of additional gross floor area but can accept improvements in lieu of cash including non-market housing, off-site street or park improvements, land or improvements involving publicly accessible open space and/or pedestrian routes, public art, environmental protection/conservation, or remediation projects. The proposed project provides some of these and would warrant a reduction in the cash contribution. Staff estimates a contribution of approximately $1,900,000.
District of North Saanich - negotiated
The District of Saanich exempts purpose-built rental housing secured for the life of the building from making amenity contributions but would otherwise negotiate the strata unit contribution.
Metro Vancouver Municipalities Rezoning CAC/Density Bonus Policy Comparison
City of Vancouver - $3,000,000 plus 20% of units as affordable
There is a wide range of rates for the City of Vancouver, topping out at $1,022/m2 for Southeast False Creek projects up to 3.5 FSR, with additional beyond that. The most applicable is perhaps for C-2 sites under an acre along Kingsway at $322/m2. It is difficult to determine an equivalent rate otherwise.
The City of Vancouver has a target for the provision of 20% of the units dedicated to social housing for developments over 200 units. The total contribution is estimated to be $3,000,000 plus a potential contribution of 20% of the units as affordable. The City of Vancouver’s amenity structure is very complex, and an actual contribution could be quite different depending on many factors.
City of Burnaby - negotiated
The City of Burnaby negotiates amenity contributions to be equivalent in value to the land lift associated with the rezoning.
City of Surrey - $1,000,000 - $7,000,000
The City of Surrey applies rates per square metre of residential apartment proposed, and the rate varies significantly across locations within Surrey, from $50/square metre to more than $400. Furthermore, each additional unit above the maximum density permitted in the zone would require $1,000 in contributions to affordable housing. Capital project contributions for the same units vary from $2,000 to $4,000.
District of North Vancouver - negotiated
The District of North Vancouver negotiates based on 75% of the value of a land lift from a rezoning.
City of North Vancouver - $12,900,000*
The City of North Vancouver requires $25 per square foot up to the OCP base bonus density and $175-190 per square foot up to the maximum density bonus level in the OCP. This translates to approximately $12,900,000.
*Note that this structure could be very different from the Township of Esquimalt’s density structure and significantly more of the site could be considered at the $25 rate.
City of New Westminster - negotiated
The City of New Westminster negotiates based the value of a land lift from a rezoning. The amenity contributions are voluntary.
City of Coquitlam - $10,100,000*
The City of Coquitlam requires $64.58/m2 to base OCP density and $1,668-1,830/m2 in excess of base density. This would work out to approximately $10,100,000.
*Note that this structure could be very different from the Township of Esquimalt’s density structure and significantly more of the site could be considered at a lower rate.
City of Delta - negotiated
The City of Delta negotiates larger projects at 25% of the estimated land lift.
Richmond - $1,400,000
The City of Richmond requires $2,066 for the first 19 units, $4,132 for units 20-39, and $5,415 for each unit over 40 units. This translates to a contribution of approximately $1,400,000.
Langley - $1,300,000
Langley requires $4,000 per unit for units under 2.5 FAR, $5,000 per unit for units between 2.5-3 FAR and $6,000 per unit for units over 3.0 FAR. This would translate to a contribution of approximately $1,300,000.
Maple Ridge - $1,500,000
The City of Maple Ridge requires $5,600 per multifamily unit. This would translate to a contribution of approximately $1,500,000.
White Rock - $3,500,000
The City of White Rock requires $430 per square metre of floor area from 1.75-4.0 FAR (and none below 1.75). This would translate to a contribution of approximately $3,500,000.
Township of Esquimalt - Approved Density Bonus Rezoning Projects
899 Esquimalt Rd
Public Hearing November 25, 2019
Residential FAR 3.6
• Construction of purpose-built health clinic or facility with a minimum of 370 square metres of gross floor area.
• Subsidized rent for tenant(s) of health clinic or facility over first 10 years in the amount of $396,000
• Annual lease hold and equipment improvement incentives valued at a total of $160,000.
• $54,000 cash contribution to be used in relation to health and community well-being matters, including but not limited to providing incentives or grants, undertaking or commissioning studies or reports, promotions and public information, and establishing temporary medical clinics.
• $150,000 cash contribution to be used for the provision and maintenance of a kayak dock within the Township.
• 5 free parking spaces with publicly available electric vehicle charging stations.
• Built Green Canada Silver certification.
• Removal of BC Hydro pole on the southeast corner of Esquimalt Road and Head Street and burial of the power lines on the Esquimalt Road and Head Street frontage.
• Perpetual Statutory Right of Way for public access and expanded sidewalk on the northern 3.2 metres of the lot along Esquimalt Road.
• $30,000 cash contribution to be used for the provision and installation of 2 pedestrian activated crosswalk signals in the general vicinity of the subject parcel.
• Bus passes for residents for one year.
616 & 620 Constance Avenue, 619 & 623 Nelson Street, and 1326 Miles Street
Public Hearing July 13, 2020
Residential FAR 3.52
• Undergrounding of the electric power lines along Constance Avenue and Nelson Street adjacent to the subject property.
• 8 affordable dwelling units.
• 3 special needs dwelling units.
• Group daycare for children.
• Building to be designed and constructed to conform to the requirements of Step 4 (R2000) of the BC Energy Step Code.
• The building be constructed to include a minimum of six 3-bedroom (or more) dwelling units.
• Right of way in the southeast corner to allow for privately owned publicly accessible open space.
• Right of way and public walkway between Constance Avenue and Nelson Street on the northern part of the subject property.
• A minimum of 17 visitor parking spaces will be provided and remain.
• 100 shares for a membership for a shared vehicle service for the residents.
• 88 bus passes for one year for residents.
• 2 operational automobiles to be owned and maintained by the owner of the building for sole use of the residents at the building owner’s expense.
817 Esquimalt Rd
Public Hearing May 1, 2023
Residential FAR 3.2
• A contribution of $50,000.00 to the Greater Victoria Housing Society.
• Construction to Step Code 3.
• Seniors’ housing provision.
• One year BC Transit bus pass for all units.
1075 Tillicum Rd
Public Hearing April 25, 2022
Residential FAR of 2.39
• $107,478 towards active transportation improvements along Tillicum Road.
• Construction to Step Code 3.
• Provision of one-year BC Transit bus passes for the Victoria Regional Transit System for the residents without a parking space.
• Membership for a shared vehicle service for all the units.
602 Nelson St
Public Hearing August 15, 2022
Residential FAR of 3.3
• Construction to Step Code 3.
• Provision of one-year BC Transit bus passes for the Victoria Regional Transit System for the residents in the 10 sub-market units.
• Statutory Right of Way over the southeast corner of the parcel with a minimum area of 200 m2 to allow for privately owned, publicly accessible open space.
• 10 units to be sold and maintained at a sub-market rate.
OPTIONS:
Regarding the Development Variance Permit, Council may:
1. Approve the requested variances, or some of the variances.
2. Table the application and request more information or changes to the application.
3. Deny some or all the requested variances.
Regarding the Development Permit, Council may:
1. Approve the Development Permit.
2. Table the application and request more information or changes to the application.
3. Deny the Development Permit with reasons.
COUNCIL PRIORITY:
Housing
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no direct financial impact to the Township as a result of this report.
COMMUNICATIONS/ENGAGEMENT:
Staff engaged municipal Staff within the study area while preparing this report.
TIMELINES & NEXT STEPS:
This report supplements the postponed decision on Development Permit DP000221 and Development Variance Permit DP000138 on the April 8 regular meeting of Council agenda.
Council must address the motion on the floor, made by Councillor Rotchford and seconded by Councillor Armour:
That Council approve Development Permit No. DP000221 and Development Variance Permit No. DVP00138 and instruct the Director of Development Services not to issue either permit until the Section 219 Covenant, which will secure the amenities and the transportation demand management (TDM) measures, as described in staff report DEV-24-013, is registered on title.
REPORT REVIEWED BY:
1. Bill Brown, Director of Development Services
2. Ian Irvine, Director of Finance, Reviewed
3. Deb Hopkins, Director of Corporate Services, Reviewed
4. Dan Horan, Chief Administrative Officer, Concurrence
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
Appendix A Public Correspondence after 12 pm March 4, 2024
Appendix B Applicant’s Presentation
Appendix C Minutes Excerpt of the Regular Council meeting, March 4 2024
Appendix D March 4, 2024 Report to Council and Correspondence Package