Agenda Index City of Vancouver

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

TO:

Standing Committee on Planning and Environment

FROM:

Subdivision Approving Officer

SUBJECT:

Proposed Amendment to Subdivision By-law No. 5208 -
Reclassification of Property at 5680 Lancaster Street

 

RECOMMENDATION

GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS

COUNCIL POLICY

Council Policy regarding amendments to the subdivision categories in the RS-1, RS-1S, RS-3, RS-3A, RS-5, RS-5S and RS-6 Zoning Districts is reflected in the Manager's Report as approved by Council on October 28, 1987. As well as establishing seven parcel size categories for subdivision in the RS-1 District, the report provided for possible future changes in the categories in cases where property owners seek to reclassify their parcel category either up or down, to facilitate or prevent subdivision.

PURPOSE

This report addresses a proposal to reclassify the property at 5680 Lancaster Street from Category C to Category A for the purpose of subdivision in accordance with the minimum parcel size requirements of Schedule A, Table 1, of the Subdivision By-law.

BACKGROUND

On January 19, 1988, Council enacted an amended Schedule A to the Subdivision By-law by introducing seven categories of minimum parcel width and area to govern the subdivision of lands zoned RS-1. Subsequently, lands zoned RS-1S, RS-3, RS-3A, RS-5, RS-5S and RS-6 have been included as well. All lands in these zoning districts are classified on a block-by-block basis, as shown on 279 sectional maps which are on file with the City Clerk and which form part of Schedule A.

As shown in Appendix A, the parcel which is the subject of this reclassification request is classified as Category C, which prescribes a minimum width of 15.240 m (50.00 ft.) and a minimum area of 464.515 m² (5,000.00 sq. ft.) for each parcel created by subdivision. There is, therefore, no opportunity for the subject parcel to be subdivided, as the parcels to be created would not meet the minimum width or area requirements. In other zoning districts, the Subdivision By-law does afford the Approving Officer some discretion to relax these minimum standards, but this discretion was deliberately not provided for when the categories were established for the RS-zoned lands in 1987.

This application for reclassification has been submitted by the property owner of the subject parcel. As noted above, it is the owner's intention to subdivide the site if the proposed reclassification of the site to Category A (minimum width of 9.144 m (30.00 ft.) and minimum area of 278.709 m² (3,000.00 sq. ft.) is approved.

The property owner has submitted this reclassification proposal because Lot G is the largest remaining parcel in the blockface, and because there are no opportunities to combine with an adjacent parcel and re-subdivide, in accordance with the Category C minimum requirements.

RESULTS OF NEIGHBOURHOOD NOTIFICATION

Eighteen property owners, excluding the applicant, were notified in writing of this reclassification request. Two owners responded. One was in favour of the proposal, and the other was opposed. Neither provided comments to staff. A map showing the location of the respondents is available for Council to review.

SIMILAR RECLASSIFICATION APPROVALS

In June, 1989, Council approved an application for reclassification of two properties on West 23rd Avenue and West 24th Avenue, respectively. As shown in Appendix B.1, the approval of this reclassification resulted in the two larger parcels being reclassified from Category C to Category A. Staff did not support this reclassification in view of opposition from neighbours, and the concern that the reclassification of these properties would set a precedent for future reclassification requests.

As shown in Appendix B.2, Council approved a reclassification application for a parcel at the northeast corner of Macdonald Street and West 34th Avenue, in July, 1994. Staff supported this application despite objections from some neighbouring owners, as the ensuing subdivision of that parcel would be consistent with the existing subdivision pattern of smaller parcels created by previously subdividing large corner parcels in the surrounding blocks. A similar reclassification application on West 26th Avenue was approved by Council in 1997, as shown in Appendix B.3.

HISTORY OF SUBDIVISION

The subdivision pattern established by Plan 1758 in 1907 created mostly 50 ft.-wide parcels on both the east and the west side of Lancaster Street. At that time, the block extended further to the south and there were two 50 ft.-wide parcels (Lots 39 and Lot 40) adjacent to Lot 38, which was a 50 ft.-wide parcel. In 1964, East 41st Avenue was widened to 100 ft. and the majority of Lot 40 became road. The remainder of Lot 40 was then consolidated with Lot 39 to form the larger subject parcel, Lot G. Larger consolidated parcels were also created from the widening of East 41st Avenue directly to the east and west of Lot G, and were subsequently subdivided, in 1984, and 1986, respectively, prior to the establishment of property size categories by Council.

ANALYSIS

Category C was selected for this block to reflect the existing pattern of predominately larger parcels in this blockface. The two 33 ft.-wide parcels at the north of the blockface, as well as those that front onto School Avenue are in Category A.

Currently Lot G is approximately 23% larger in width and 27% larger in area than the 50 ft.-wide parcels in the Category C portion of the blockface. Should this reclassification be approved and the property subsequently be subdivided, the parcels created would be approximately 32.90 ft. in width, which is 34% smaller than the 50 ft.-wide parcels and an area of approximately 4,207.41 sq. ft., which is 31% smaller than the area of the 50 ft-wide parcels.

The subdivisions of the two former larger parcels directly to the east and west of the subject parcel have created a pattern of smaller parcels abutting East 41st Avenue, and should this reclassification be approved, subsequent subdivision of the site would create parcels consistent with this pattern.

CONCLUSION

Staff are recommending approval of this application, based on the precedent established in previous reclassifications of similar parcels; and, the two similar properties immediately to the east and west of the subject parcel, created by the widening of East 41st Avenue, have been subdivided; and further, the subdivision of this site would be consistent with that pattern.

Note from Clerk: Appendices A and B (site maps) are not available in electronic form - on file in the Office of the City Clerk.

* * * * *

pe010920.htm

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

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver