TOWNSHIP OF ESQUIMALT STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: July 13, 2026 Report No. EPW-26-010
TO: Council
FROM: Braylon Lumb, Project Coordinator and Joel Clary, Director of Engineering & Public Works
SUBJECT: Development Variance Permit Application - 646 Head Street
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
That Council deny Development Variance Permit No. DVP00186 for 646 Head Street for an additional driveway access for a proposed Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing development for the reasons outlined in Staff Report No. EPW-26-010.
Body
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The purpose of this report is to consider a Development Variance Permit for three driveways instead of the permitted two driveways at the proposed Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing development at 646 Head Street. Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No. 3128 allows for one driveway per road frontage. Staff do not support additional driveways due to impacts on pedestrians and street parking availability.
BACKGROUND:
The property at 646 Head Street is proposed to be developed as a four-unit Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing development, consisting of two duplex buildings. The subject property is located on a corner lot at the intersection of Head Street and Bryden Court and is directly adjacent to École Victor-Brodeur.
The proposed development complies with all applicable zoning regulations, including those related to setbacks, height, site coverage, and parking requirements. However, a Development Variance Permit is required to permit three driveways where a maximum of two driveways is permitted under Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No. 3128. This bylaw establishes the Township's requirements for development related works and services and adopts Master Municipal Construction Documents (MMCD) standards and guidelines for the design and construction of municipal infrastructure.
According to clause 6.14.2 of the MMCD Design Guidelines, properties within Urban Residential Zones are permitted:
• One driveway per road frontage
• Second driveway permitted for corner lot if driveway not an arterial or collector road
• Where a residential lot abuts roads of different classifications, the principal driveway should access the road of the lower classification.
The proposed development includes one driveway on Head Street and two driveways on Bryden Court. The submitted site and servicing drawings illustrate the proposed driveway configuration, including the location of the requested additional driveway access.
Chronology
• April 24, 2026 - Application received
• June 16, 2026 - Advisory Planning Commission
Advisory Planning Commission Recommendations:
This application was considered at the regular meeting of the Advisory Planning Commission held on June 16, 2026.
The Advisory Planning Commission resolved that the application be forwarded to Council with a recommendation of approval, as it is an improvement to the overall neighbourhood context.
ANALYSIS:
The MMCD Design Guidelines identify that urban residential properties should generally be limited to one driveway per road frontage, while also recognizing that “upon demonstrated need, the local authority may approve more than one access.” For the proposed development at 646 Head Street, this discretion has already been exercised to support a driveway on Head Street, which is classified as a Collector Road, where the MMCD Design Guidelines discourage additional driveway access on higher classification roads for corner lots. The addition of the third driveway (second on Bryden Court) is not consistent with staff’s current approach to limiting driveway access in order to reduce curb cuts and support pedestrian safety.
Staff recognize that there are previously approved developments where driveway configurations exceed the provisions of the MMCD Design Guidelines. Prior to the adoption of MMCD standards through the January 2024 update to the Subdivision and Development Bylaw No. 3128, driveway access was generally limited; however, exceptions to this were permitted in certain circumstances at staff discretion. Since 2024, staff have applied a more consistent approach to managing driveway access in alignment with the MMCD Design Guidelines.
The number and distribution of driveway crossings has a direct effect on the public realm and pedestrian experience. Each additional driveway crossing reduces available boulevard frontage and introduces an additional vehicle crossing point across the public sidewalk. Fewer driveway accesses preserve more uninterrupted frontage and support pedestrian continuity along the street.
The Township’s Active Transportation Network Plan (2022) identifies improving pedestrian comfort and safety and reducing conflicts between vehicles and vulnerable road users as key transportation objectives. Minimizing driveway crossings, where feasible, supports these objectives by reducing potential conflict points and maintaining a more continuous streetscape.
In addition to impacts on pedestrians, an additional driveway removes an on-street parking space in favour of off-street parking as parking is not permitted in front of or within one metre of a driveway.
For these reasons, staff do not support the requested variance for a third driveway.
OPTIONS:
1. That Council deny Development Variance Permit No. DVP00186 for 646 Head Street for an additional driveway access for a proposed Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing development for the reasons outlined in Staff Report No. EPW-26-010.
2. That Council approve Development Variance Permit No. DVP00186 for 646 Head Street for an additional driveway access for a proposed Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing development as outline din Staff Report No. EPW-26-10.
3. That Council approve, subject to conditions, Development Variance Permit No. DVP00186 for 646 Head Street for an additional driveway access for a proposed Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing development.
COUNCIL PRIORITY:
Housing
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There are no significant financial impacts.
COMMUNICATIONS/ENGAGEMENT:
For the Development Variance Permit application, notices were mailed to owners and tenants of properties within 50 metres (164 ft) of the subject property on June 30, 2026.
TIMELINES & NEXT STEPS:
Should Council approve Development Permit No. DVP00186, the applicant can construct the project with three driveways.
REPORT REVIEWED BY:
1. James Davison, Manager of Planning, Reviewed
2. Bill Brown, Director of Development Services, Reviewed
3. Ian Irvine, Director of Finance, Reviewed
4. Deb Hopkins, Director of Corporate Services, Reviewed
5. Dan Horan, Chief Administrative Officer, Concurrence
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS:
List all items attached to the Staff Report
1. Appendix A - Aerial Map
2. Appendix B - Applicant Letter
3. Appendix C - Site Plan & Driveway Layout
4. Appendix D - Subdivision and Development Servicing Bylaw No. 3128 Excerpts
5. Appendix E - MMCD Driveway Access Management Guidelines
6. Appendix F - Applicant Presentation