Agenda Index City of Vancouver

POLICY REPORT
URBAN STRUCTURE

TO:

Vancouver City Council

FROM:

General Manager of Engineering Services and
the Director of CityPlans

SUBJECT:

Referral to Public Hearing of Amendments to the RS-1/1S, RS-1A, RS-1B, RS-2, RS-3/3A, RS-4, RS-5/5S, and RS-6 Zoning Schedules to Limit Impervious Surface

 

RECOMMENDATION

POLICY

In recent years, Council has undertaken changes to the Charter and numerous by-law amendments to govern private property impermeable material site coverage to reduce stormwater runoff into the sewer system and to encourage the retention of green space.

PURPOSE

This report seeks Council's approval to refer to Public Hearing, amendments to the Zoning and Development By-Law to include impermeability restrictions in RS-1 and RS-1S (RS-1/1S), RS-1A, RS-1B, RS-2, RS-3, RS-3A (RS-3/3A) and RS-4 zoned areas, and recommends amendments to the current RS-5 and RS-5S (RS-5/5S) and RS-6 district schedules to give the Director of Planning discretion to relax the 60 percent impermeability limit on sites with new development. This report also provides an update on other initiatives to reduce stormwater runoff.

BACKGROUND

· In 1982, Council approved changes to the First Shaughnessy District schedule to encourage the retention of green space to control stormwater runoff. Sites that increased impervious area had to provide stormwater storage.

· In 1987, Council approved a revision to the Plumbing By-Law which allowed the City to require on-site storm water storage, and restrict flows into the sewer system in other areas with sewer capacity concerns.

· In 1988, revisions to the RS-1 zoning reduced allowable site coverage and provided encouragement for the provision of green space in the rear yard.

· In 1993 the City obtained Charter authority to regulate landscaping and impervious areas on private property. New RS-5 zoning which encouraged landscaping was also enacted for a portion of South Shaugnessy.

· On September 27, 1994, in response to a report on summer storm flooding, Council asked staff to report back with recommendations for private property "green space" regulations that address aesthetic and infrastructure issues.

· In 1995, Council approved the new RS-6 zone which, in addition to providing design regulations and site landscaping guidelines over new homes, limited impervious areas to 60 percent of the total site area. Subsequently, similar amendments were made to the RS-5 and RS-5S district schedules, also generally limiting impermeable site areas to 60 percent.

· The RS interim zoning process has seen several additional neighbourhoods (formerlyRS-1 or RS-1S) adopt the RS-5/5S or RS-6 zoning schedules.

· On December 9, 1997, Council asked staff to review and report back on the expansion of private property impermeability controls to further address aesthetic and infrastructure issues.

DISCUSSION

1. Impermeability Restrictions

During the last few decades, there has been an increasing trend on residential private property towards reduced green space and increased impermeable surfaces (paved and built up areas that do not allow water to infiltrate into the underlying soils). A rising number of new homes have entirely paved lots. This has resulted in numerous complaints from adjacent property owners facing increased surface water runoff onto their lots and the loss of green space in their neighbourhoods.

There are many benefits of regulating private property impermeable areas:

Many neighbourhoods (as shown in Appendix B - on file in City Clerk's Office) have zoning that either regulates stormwater runoff or that limits the area of impermeable materials to 60 percent of the site. Past Council reports have noted that to gain measurable benefits of reduced stormwater runoff, impermeability controls should eventually be applied to all RS zones.

Therefore, staff recommend that impermeability controls be included as amendments to all the RS schedules (RS-1/1S, RS-1A, RS-1B, RS-2, RS-3/3A, and RS-4), subject to approval at Public Hearing. A maximum sixty percent impermeable site coverage has proven in other zones to be a reasonable figure for average lot sizes in RS areas as it allows 40 percent building (house, garage, etc.) coverage and a reasonable amount of paving for walkways,patios etc. Appendix A shows the proposed amendments to the District Schedules.

The proposed amendments will give the Director of Planning discretion to relax the impermeability limit in cases where enforcement would result in undue hardship. Appendix A also contains the guidelines that the Director of Planning will use to guide decisions on applicant requests for relaxations in maximum impermeable material site coverage. As the existing RS-5/5S and RS-6 district schedules currently do not contain this relaxation clause, staff also recommend amendments to these district schedules to ensure consistency in the implementation and enforcement of impermeability regulations in all RS zones.

2. Stormwater Management

In 1998, Engineering Services formed an interdepartmental Stormwater Steering Committee to develop comprehensive policy on stormwater management. Through this committee, measures were implemented to reduce stormwater runoff on public property, including installing percolating catch basins and reviewing the City's lane paving process. Other initiatives include promoting stormwater infiltration on private property through roof leader disconnection, the use of perforated sumps to provide increased stormwater infiltration on-site, and public education programs. This committee also recommended that impermeability controls be applied to all RS zones.

Public Process

Staff recommend that prior to the Public Hearing, two public information meetings be held to explain the issues and the proposed amendments to residents and other stakeholders.
Council should also be aware of the following:

· The City, as part of the Liquid Waste Management Plan (LWMP), participated in two public open houses on stormwater and wastewater issues. During these open houses, staff outlined plans to regulate impervious areas in RS neighbourhoods, and received only positive responses.

· The City Plan Community Visions consultation process and the RS-1/1S Interim Zoning Program, thus far, have shown that residents are generally in favour of increased green space. In the Council approved Dunbar and Kensington-Cedar Cottage Community Visions, residents noted that new houses and other new developments should contribute to greening for appearance and environmental reasons. Significant portions of new house sites should be free of paving and development, to allow for planting and natural water drainage.

· To date, the impermeable coverage controls in RS-5/5S and RS-6 zones have not presented significant problems for applicants or staff.

COMMENTS FROM THE DIRECTOR OF EMERGENCY AND RISK MANAGEMENT

The storms and resulting floods which have occurred over recent years resulted from unusually intense rainfall episodes - far beyond what the City could reasonably design for. To the extent that restrictions on impervious surface coverage will alleviate potential flooding, the Director of Risk and Emergency Management supports the recommendations in this report.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

As previously noted, regulating the maximum site coverage by impermeable materials and thereby encouraging green space could positively affect the City's microclimate air quality, urban acoustics and groundwater levels. Reducing the volume and rate of stormwater runoff could reduce combined sewer overflows and improve the quality of stormwater runoff.

SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Reducing the negative problems associated with increased paving would provide positive environmental benefits to residents and property owners. However, some property owners may feel that impermeability controls are an infringement on their property rights. Given the extent of excessive site paving in some areas of the city, it is clear that some residents prefer more paved yard area for parking, maintenance and recreational reasons.

Although the proposed regulations do not impose unreasonably on parking and access, there may be cases where enforcement would result in unnecessary hardship. In these instances, the Director of Planning may relax the requirements and allow applicants to construct on-site storm water retention systems or use stormwater infiltration techniques to reduce runoff. However, on-site systems may not be feasible or practical on all sites and would have to be reviewed on a site-by-site basis.

PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS

Our experience to date with impermeability controls in RS-5 and RS-6 zones shows that additional staff resources will likely not be required when these regulations are extended to all RS zoned areas.

The proposed introduction of the impermeable materials regulations to all of the RS zones will add approximately 15 minutes to each permit check; however, current reduced permit levels may allow Permits and Licenses staff to manage these additional items without any new staff at this time. Should permitting activity increase or return to levels seen a few years ago, a request for additional staff positions may be necessary. The new regulations will also have an impact on inspection activity and enforcement resources. As with most newregulations, the impact on staff time would be more significant at first but may be reduced in time.

Staff in Permits and Licenses, Property Use, Planning, Development Services, the Board of Variance, and Engineering Services will monitor the effects of the new regulations over the next 18 months and, if necessary, report back to Council should the demands on staff related to these extended RS zone impermeable materials site coverage regulations be excessive.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

If Council recommends that the proposed amendments be referred to Public Hearing, with two public information meetings, there will be an incremental increase in staff time and other costs. This could be covered by existing departmental budgets.

Costs include:
Facilities Rental: $ 500
Graphics $1,000
Overtime $1,500
Public Information Material $2,000
Newspaper Notices $2,500

CONCLUSIONS

Staff recommend changes to the RS-1/1S, RS-1A, RS-1B, RS-2, RS-3/3A and RS-4 district schedules to restrict the maximum site coverage by impermeable materials to 60 percent. If these changes are approved, all RS zoning districts in the City would have impermeability controls. The proposed revisions would be referred to Public Hearing after staff conduct two public information meetings. These amendments, by encouraging `green space', would positively affect the city's microclimate and air quality, decrease flooding potential, and reduce combined sewer overflows.

- - - - -

APPENDIX A

Proposed Amendments to the ZONING & Development By-law;
RS-1, RS-1S, RS-1A, RS-1B, RS-2, RS-3, RS-3A, RS-4, RS-5, RS-5S,
RS-6 District Schedules

1) To the RS-1 and RS-1S Districts Schedule, revise and add sections:

2) To the RS-1A District Schedule, revise and add sections:

3) To the RS-1B District Schedule, revise and add sections:

4) To the RS-2 District Schedule, revise and add sections:

5) To the RS-3 and RS-3A Districts Schedule, revise and add sections:

4.8.5 For the purposes of Section 4.8.4, the following materials shall be considered impermeable: the projected area of the outside of the outermost walls of all buildings, including carports, covered porches and entries; asphalt; concrete; brick; stone; and wood.

4.8.6 Notwithstanding section 4.8.5, gravel, river rock less than 5 cm in size, wood chips, bark mulch, and other materials which, in the opinion of the Director of Planning, have fully permeable characteristics when in place installed on grade with no associated layer of impermeable material (such as plastic sheeting) that would impede the movement of water directly into the soil below, may be excluded from the area of impermeable materials.

5.3 The Director of Planning may relax Section 4.8.4 for buildings existing prior to (date of enactment) to a maximum of 70 percent impermeable materials site coverage provided that:

5.4 The Director of Planning may relax the of section 4.8.4 may relax the requirements of section 4.8.5 where, due to the peculiarities of the site or special circumstances related to the use of the site, literal enforcement would result in unnecessary hardship, provided that:

6) To the RS-4 District Schedule, revise and add sections:

4.8 Site Coverage and Impermeability

4.8.5 The area of impermeable materials, including building coverage, shall not exceed 60 percent of the total site area except that where developed secondary vehicular access to a site is not available, the Director of Planning may exclude from the area of impermeable materials an amount not exceeding:

4.8.6 For the purposes of Section 4.8.5, the following materials shall be considered impermeable: the projected area of the outside of the outermost walls of all buildings, including carports, covered porches and entries; asphalt; concrete; brick; stone; and wood.

4.8.7 Notwithstanding section 4.8.6, gravel, river rock less than 5 cm in size, wood chips, bark mulch, and other materials which, in the opinion of the Director ofPlanning, have fully permeable characteristics when in place installed on grade with no associated layer of impermeable material (such as plastic sheeting) that would impede the movement of water directly into the soil below, are excluded from the area of impermeable materials.

5.1 The Director of Planning may relax Section 4.8.5 for buildings existing prior to (date of enactment) to a maximum of 70 percent impermeable materials site coverage provided that:

5.2 The Director of Planning may relax the requirements of section 4.8.5 where, due to the peculiarities of the site or special circumstances related to the use of the site, literal enforcement would result in unnecessary hardship, provided that:

7) To the RS-5 and RS-5S Districts Schedule, revise and add sections:

4.8 Site Coverage and Impermeability

4.8.6 Notwithstanding section 4.8.5, gravel, river rock less than 5 cm in size, wood chips, bark mulch, and other materials which, in the opinion of the Director of Planning, have fully permeable characteristics when in place installed on grade with no associated layer of impermeable material (such as plastic sheeting) that would impede the movement of water directly into the soil below, may be excluded from the area of impermeable materials.

5.5 The Director of Planning may relax the requirements of section 4.8.4 where, due to the peculiarities of the site or special circumstances related to the use of the site, literal enforcement would result in unnecessary hardship, provided that:

8) To the RS-6 District Schedule, add sections:

4.8.6 Notwithstanding section 4.8.5, gravel, river rock less than 5 cm in size, wood chips, bark mulch, and other materials which, in the opinion of the Director of Planning, have fully permeable characteristics when in place installed on grade with no associated layer of impermeable material (such as plastic sheeting) that would impede the movement of water directly into the soil below, may be excluded from the area of impermeable materials.

5.5.4 The Director of Planning may relax the requirements of section 4.8.4 where, due to the peculiarities of the site or special circumstances related to the use of the site, literal enforcement would result in unnecessary hardship, provided that:

Standard Guideline Heading $.50

RS Zones Impermeable Materials Site Coverage Guidelines
For RS-1, RS-1S, RS-1A, RS-1B, RS-2, RS-3, RS-3A, RS-4, RS-5, RS-5S, and RS-6 Zones
Adopted by Council (date)

1. Application and Intent

These guidelines are to be used in conjunction with the RS-1/1S, RS-1A, RS-1B, RS-2, RS-3/3A, RS-4, RS-5/5S, and RS-6 District Schedules of the Zoning and Development By-Law to guide decisions by the Director of Planning on applicant requests for relaxations of the regulations in Section 4.8 regarding maximum impermeable materials site coverage. These regulations address concerns regarding the engineering impacts of excessive site paving (basement and site flooding, sewer over flow, demand on sewage treatment facilities, lowering of ground water table, etc.). In the RS-3/3A, RS-5/5S, and RS-6 zones, they further the intent of the related design guidelines on site landscaping which address loss of urban vegetation and related negative impacts on urban air quality, urban acoustics, and neighborhood character.

While it is expected that the majority of all applications will comply with the District Schedule Section 4.8, Sections 4.8 and 5 of these RS-zones provides criteria for two types of relaxations:

· relaxations which may be considered for applications proposing renovation/additions to buildings and site improvements existing prior to the adoption of these impermeable materials regulations; and
· relaxations for cases where the regulation would result in site specific hardship.

There may also be some cases where a request for both types of relaxations may be considered concurrently.

2. Relaxations for Pre-Adoption Date Buildings

Typically, when an existing building is "legally non-conforming" ( meaning it does not conform to a new zoning regulation but was legal under the zoning in effect at the time of its construction), the Director of Planning will generally permit the non-conformity to continue to exist related to a renovation or addition application as long as the proposed new construction does not worsen the non-conformity. Most often, these non-conformities relate to yard setbacks with which immediate neighbours most effected have lived for years.

However, in the case of impermeability regulations, the issue of excess storm water runoff is one which effects the broader neighbourhood and the City as a whole. Therefore, the extent to which the Director of Planning will allow non-conformity to the 60% maximum impermeable materials site coverage is dealt with explicitly in the District Schedule Section 4.8 (which allows relaxation to 70% coverage) and the Section 5 relaxation clause. The following guidelines assist in the interpretation of these relaxation sections.

a) For any building and site development existing prior to the adoption of the impermeability regulations, the Director of Planning may consider a relaxation above the 60% site coverage limit. This is in order to allow some flexibility for additions and renovations. However, the proposed percent of impermeable materials site coverage cannot be greater than what already exists on the site. The proportion of the total percent used by buildings versus other impermeable materials may be altered, noting the related maximum building coverage regulations in Section 4.8.

b) For renovation/additions, there is a limit of 70% on this relaxation of the normal 60% maximum. This means that when the existing buildings and other impermeable materials site coverage are already over 70%, the Director of Planning cannot approve a development application. However, if the total coverage is reduced to 70% or less, the Director of Planning may consider approval under this relaxation clause.

(3) Relaxations for Use or Site Related Hardships

For new development seeking greater than 60% impermeable materials site coverage or for renovation/addition applications seeking more than 70% coverage, the Director of Planning may consider relaxation of the regulations:

a) On lots less than 9.7 m (32') wide and/or less than 300m2 (3200 sf), where a development requires in excess of two parking spaces to comply with the minimum requirements of the Parking By-Law ; and

b) For certain uses, where because of the special nature of the use, there is a demonstrated need for increased paved or otherwise impermeable surface area.

(4) Advice of the City Engineer

In considering relaxations, the Director of Planning will seek the advice of the City Engineerregarding:

(5) Landscaping

The Director of Planning may impose as a condition of relaxation design development to achieve a reasonable balance between areas of impermeable materials site coverage (paving, etc. and the landscape planting provided on the remaining portions of the site giving consideration to:

(ii) The existing landscape character of surrounding sites.

NOTE: For buildings listed on the Vancouver Heritage Registry, Section 3.2.5 of the Zoning and Development By-law gives the Director of Planning relaxation powers which may be applicable for development applications seeking impermeable materials site coverage relaxations.

(6) Submission Requirements

Applicants seeking relaxation of impermeable materials site coverage regulations may be asked for the following information in addition to the site plan required for a Development Permit Application which shows information including all proposed/existing buildings and areas of impermeable materials:

a) samples and/or manufacturer's specification of proposed impermeable materials and construction assemblies;
b) graphic overlays of the site plan showing areas of impermeable materials and related area calculations;
c) a site plan showing the proposed landscaping to be carried out including the common and botanical name, quantity, size, and locations of all plant materials (existing, retained, and/or proposed), paved areas, and other significant landscape and site features;
d) design drawings prepared by a registered professional for an on-site storm waterretention system as may be required by the City Engineer;
e) photos of the subject site and the sites and buildings around the subject site; and
f) other materials as may be required to assess the technical, aesthetic, and/or environmental impacts of the impermeable materials site cover.

* * * * *

ag000404.htm

Comments or questions? You can send us email.
[City Homepage] [Get In Touch]

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver