ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Date: December 8, 1995
Dept. File No.: HB
TO: Vancouver City Council
FROM: Director of Community Planning
SUBJECT: Possible Withholding Action for 6883 Angus Drive -
South Shaughnessy/Granville Single-Family Zoning Review
Study Area
CONSIDERATION
A. THAT based upon the discussion in this report and in
accordance with Council's instruction of November 7, 1995, to
refer portions of South Shaughnessy/Granville to Public
Hearing, Council, in accordance with the provisions of Section
570(1) of the Vancouver Charter, withhold the Combined
Development and Building Application for the proposed
development at 6883 Angus Drive for a 30-day period, expiring
January 5, 1996, and for a further 60-day period, expiring
March 5, 1996, for a total of 90 days from the date of
submission, pursuant to Section 570(2) of the Vancouver
Charter on the understanding:
(1) that if, further information is received from the
applicant and it is determined the application complies
with the RS-1 zoning and generally complies with the
proposed RS-6 zoning and guidelines, the Director of
Planning will issue the permit; or
(2) that if, further information is received from the
applicant and it is determined the application does not
comply with the RS-1 zoning and does not generally comply
with the proposed RS-6 zoning and guidelines, the nature
and extent of the conflict will be reported to Council
for Council's consideration of whether to:
(a) withhold the permit issuance for the full 60- day
period;
(b) instruct staff to process the application in the
normal manner under the RS-1 zoning; or
(c) whether to impose conditions on the permit issuance
that would bring it into conformity or partial
conformity with the proposed RS-6 zoning and
guidelines.
OR B. THAT Council instruct staff
to process the Combined
Development and Building
Application for the
proposed development at
6883 Angus Drive in the
normal manner, under the
RS-1 zoning.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services submits A and B for
CONSIDERATION; however, given that Consideration A offers the
opportunity for Council to reconsider directing staff to issue the
application under the existing zoning following the receipt of
further information, RECOMMENDS A for approval.
COUNCIL POLICY
On November 7, 1995, Council referred draft RS-6 zoning to Public
Hearing for the RS-1 West portion of the South Shaughnessy/ Granville
Single-Family Zoning Review Study Area. Council also instructed the
Director of Planning to report development applications for possible
withholding action pursuant to Section 570 of the Vancouver Charter.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this report is to put forward for consideration the
withholding of a development application for 6883 Angus Drive received
on December 6, 1995, for 30 days and for a possible further 60 days
depending on the applicant's response.
BACKGROUND
On November 7, 1995, Council referred draft RS-6 zoning to Public
Hearing for the RS-1 West portion of the South Shaughnessy/ Granville
Single-Family Zoning Review Area. The Public Hearing has been scheduled
for January 18, 1996.
At that time, Council also instructed staff to report any development
applications to Council for possible withholding action pursuant to
Section 570 of the Vancouver Charter. This section enables Council to
withhold permits for 30 days for assessment and, following a subsequent
report, a further 60 days pending conclusion of a proposed rezoning, or
to impose conditions on the granting of a development permit which
Council determines to be in the public interest.
The purpose of withholding action is to prevent development applications
which are at variance or in conflict with a proposed zoning from being
processed until the proposed zoning has been considered at a Public
Hearing. However, given that the proposed zoning has not been adopted
by Council, the application must also conform with the existing zoning
in order to be approved.In the event Council withholds issuance of a
permit and the rezoning is ultimately refused, or approved to the extent
that the permit withheld would comply, the City is liable for damages
suffered by the owner.
To date, staff have received four applications for Combined Building and
Development Permits and expect to receive more applications prior to the
Public Hearing. The applications have been reported separately to allow
Council to deal with each differently, if it wishes, and to enable
Council to refer any of the reports to the Standing Committee on
Planning and the Environment, should delegations wish to address
Council.
PROPOSED NEW DEVELOPMENT
Staff have received an application to construct a new single-family
dwelling at 6883 Angus Drive, submitted December 6, 1995. The site
survey is dated October 14, 1995, which indicates the applicant intended
to redevelop prior to Council's referral of the proposed RS-6 zoning to
Public Hearing.
Staff have assessed the application against provisions in the existing
RS-1 zoning and the proposed RS-6 zoning. With respect to RS-1, only a
few very minor clarifications are necessary for the application to
conform with the zoning.
With respect to the proposed RS-6 zoning and guidelines, the application
currently does not comply because it is incomplete. Because of the time
restrictions involved in the withholding process (the limit of 30 days
from the date of application to report to Council), staff have not been
able to obtain the necessary information and bring about the changes
required so that the application conforms with both the RS-1 zoning and
proposed RS-6 zoning and guidelines. To date, insufficient information
has been provided on certain design elements, the total site coverage of
impermeable materials and landscaping. Under the draft RS-6 zoning and
guidelines, a site plan showing the area of impermeable materials must
be provided to determine if the total site coverage is within the
maximum 60 percent of the total site area. A landscape plan is also
required by all applicants requesting an above-grade floor space ratio
greater than 0.16 plus 130 m› (1,400 sq. ft.). The applicant is
requesting a floor space ratio of 0.20 plus 130 m› (1,400 sq. ft.).
However, where information has been provided, the application generally
complies with the proposed RS-6 zoning, except for minor changes needed
to bring the height, sideyards and garage size into conformity with the
proposed RS-6 zoning. It is likely that with the receipt of additional
information and the required changes being made that the application
could be processed under RS-6.
The 30-day withholding action is to provide time for assessment of a
development application so that Council can determine if it wishes to
withhold permit issuance for a further 60-day period. The development
application for 6883 Angus Drive cannot be determined to be in
compliance with the landscaping, site permeability and some design
requirements because insufficient information has been provided and
there is no way of determining if the proposed RS-6 requirements are met
and the degree of conflict with the proposed RS-6 zoning. If, upon
receipt of further information from the applicant, it is established
that the proposed development complies with the RS-1 zoning and
generally complies with the proposed RS-6 zoning and guidelines, a
development permit will be issued by the Director of Planning. If it
does not generally comply with both the RS-1 zoning and the proposed RS-
6 zoning and guidelines, the nature and extent of the conflict will be
reported so Council can determine whether the permit should be withheld
for the full 60-day period, issued under the RS-1 zoning or issued with
conditions that bring the application into full or partial conformity
with the proposed RS-6 zoning and guidelines. The applicant has been
advised of the possible withholding action and understands the approach.
Alternatively, Council could instruct staff to proceed with the
application under the existing RS-1 District Schedule with no reference
to the proposed RS-6 zoning.
CONCLUSION
Withholding of the development application for 6883 Angus Drive allows
time for the submission and review of further information to bring the
application into compliance with the objectives of the proposed RS-6.
Alternatively, the application could proceed immediately under the
existing RS-1 zoning.
* * *