POLICY REPORT
DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING

TO:

Vancouver City Council

FROM:

Director of City Plans in Consultation with the Director of Development Services and the Director of Legal Services

SUBJECT:

Report Back on Changes to the Zoning and Development By-law To Support Enhanced Accessibility Provisions of the Vancouver Building By-law

 

CONSIDERATION

RECOMMENDATION

GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS

COUNCIL POLICY

· Council Policy related to the building requirements for persons with disabilities is established in Section 3.8 of the 1999 Vancouver Building By-law (VBBL). For multiple unit residential buildings, an accessible route is required:

· In May 2002, Council approved amendments to the VBBL aimed at improving access to all residential units, common areas and washrooms in all newly constructed multiple unit apartment type buildings with more than three units, an elevator, and a shared public corridor.

PURPOSE AND SUMMARY

In May 2002, Council supported the principle of enhanced accessibility and approved amendments to the Vancouver Building By-Law (VBBL) aimed at improving access to residential units. In response to development industry concerns, Council directed staff to report back on changes to the Zoning and Development By-law to provide a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) exclusion to support the revised Building By-law requirement for a visitable washroom. As the options to implement an FSR exclusion were explored, a number of issues arose and are discussed in this report.

Should Council wish to consider an FSR exclusion, Consideration "A" should be referred to Public Hearing.

Further, Recommendation "B" is a housekeeping amendment put forward to improve consistency between the Zoning and Development By-law and the way in which the FSR exclusion for residential storage space is administered.

BACKGROUND

a) Background
Over the last decade, the City has sought to enhance accessibility for residential uses. The goal has been to foster independent access to, and use of, housing by a wider range of people than current housing design permits. To that end, Council approved a number of changes to the VBBL in May 2002. These changes are aimed at improving access to all residential units, common areas and washrooms in all newly constructed multiple unit apartment type buildings with more than three units, an elevator and a shared public corridor. Some changes had no effect on floor space, such as providing reinforcement in washroom walls and easy to grasp door knobs and faucets; these changes have been implemented.

Changes with floor space implications, such as the visitable washroom, will be implemented in August 15,2003 and will apply to all projects applying for a Building Permit after that date. While there are a number of changes with floor space implications, the provision of one visitable washroom appears to be the most challenging to achieve. The requirement is for a 750mm (2'6") wide X 1200mm (4') long clear space in front of the toilet and sink in one washroom on the entry level of the unit. This will enable a person in a wheelchair to enter the washroom, close the door, use the facilities, and back out. While meeting this requirement does not result in a fully accessible washroom, it provides for increased privacy and is key to enhancing accessibility in residential units.

Many washrooms currently meet the750mm (2'6") width dimension, but generally lack about 300mm (1') in length. A review of dwelling unit plans showed that providing for this would require an increase in washroom size of about 0.3m² - 0.8m² (3 - 9 sq.ft.), slightly less than the 1.0m² exclusion noted in Consideration "A".

Development industry representatives advised that it is difficult to dedicate the additional square footage to the washroom in units under 70 m² in size (750sq.ft.). They noted that this requirement would result in using more of the limited floor space of small units in the washroom rather than in living areas. Or, it would result in making units somewhat larger and hence somewhat less affordable. In this latter case, development industry representatives note that project economics would also be impacted. The 1.0m² exclusion noted in Consideration "A" represents 1.4% of a 70m²(750 sq.ft.) unit.

b) Residential Storage Space Exclusion

The residential storage space exclusion was originally intended to encourage the provision of "in-unit" storage space for the storage of bulky personal items, such as recreation equipment, luggage, strollers, tires, etc. It does not include closet space. The 3.7m² (40 sq.ft.) per unit exemption was established on the basis of a 3% norm -- this amount of unit floor area generally being considered an appropriate amount for storage needs. To ensure usability, the storage space must have a minimum dimension of 1.2m (3.9ft.) in all directions. Most district schedules permit storage space that is provided below grade to be excluded from FSR, with no limits.

DISCUSSION

Prior to beginning the discussion of possible FSR exclusion options, it should be noted that the enhanced accessibility requirements are in place and form part of the current Building By-law. Requirements with no floor space implications are in effect now, and those with floor space implications will become effective on August 15, 2003. Regardless of the outcome of the amendments discussed in this report, applicants will be required to meet those requirements when applying for a Building Permit.

To support the requirement for a visitable washroom and acknowledge the concerns raised by the development industry, staff developed three FSR exclusion options. These options were discussed with representatives of the development industry and the disabled community. However, broader staff discussions revealed concerns with this approach.

Development Services staff note that minimum life safety, livability and accessibility requirements are established in various by-laws without "compensation", because they have compelling public importance and are seen as fundamental to quality of life for those using the buildings. Examples include exiting, minimum dwelling unit size, sprinklering, and elevator requirements for buildings over four storeys.

By comparison, building design attributes or amenities with less compelling public importance (i.e., desirable but not mandatory) have more commonly been "bonused" through extra FSR or an FSR exclusion, as a means of encouraging but not requiring their inclusion. A troublesome precedent will be established if mandatory requirements may only be introduced if accompanied by an FSR bonus or exclusion.

Further, using any form of FSR exclusion to compensate for the impacts of a newly introduced regulation will add to staff plan checking and processing time, as well as add another potential source of staff/applicant disagreement, as evidenced in similar existing regulations.

On the basis of the foregoing, staff recommend that the visitable washroom requirement, as well as other enhanced accessibility provisions that have floor space implications, be implemented without an FSR exclusion. While this does not respond to industry concerns regarding the loss of usable floor space, it is consistent with the current practice of not bonussing mandatory requirements. It also involves little additional development permit processing time or added complexity.

However, should Council wish to consider an FSR exclusion to support the VBBL requirement for a visitable washroom, staff recommend Option 1 of the three options below, as striking the best balance between addressing staff and industry concerns.

Option 1 - Decrease the residential storage space exclusion to 2.7m² (from 3.7m²) and add a new 1.0m² exclusion for the provision of the visitable washroom.

This option has a number of advantages:

There are also three disadvantages:

Option 2 - Provide flexibility in the use of the existing 3.7m² residential storage space exclusion, to allow for excluding up to 1.0m² for the provision of one visitable washroom.

In this option, the total exclusion would remain unchanged at 3.7m², and applicants would have the choice to make their storage space somewhat smaller and use the residual to help meet the visitable washroom requirement, as needed.

This option has the following advantages:

Its disadvantages are:

Option 3 - Increase the allowable FSR by 1.0m²/unit

While this option addresses industry concerns regarding the loss of usable floor space, it has a number of disadvantages:

On the basis of the foregoing advantages and disadvantages, staff conclude that if Council wishes to refer an FSR exclusion approach to Public Hearing, Option 1 strikes the best balance in addressing industry, staff, and potential neighbourhood concerns.

Implementation

If Council refers Consideration "A" to Public Hearing and subsequently approves it, the proposed amendments would be made to all district schedules that currently have an exclusion for residential storage space. These are the medium and high-density district schedules that were identified when the residential storage space exclusion was first approved, and include all Multiple Dwelling and commercial district schedules, and HA-3(Yaletown). The change would also be made to the Downtown (DD), the Downtown Eastside/Oppenheimer (DEOD), the Southeast Granville Slopes (SEGS) Official Development Plans, as they contain clauses dealing with the residential storage space exclusion, and all existing CD-1 By-laws with this exclusion. Further, the Administrative Bulletin would be amended to reflect the reduced maximum exclusion of 2.7m².

In addition, staff submit Recommendation "B", a housekeeping amendment to improve clarity and consistency with the way the residential storage space provision is being administered. The amendment involves a wording change to be clear that the maximum exclusion can be 3.7m² or less only where the actual storage space provided is 3.7m² or less. Where more storage space is provided, none is excludable. The concern being addressed is the provision of large "storage" spaces that may be converted to other uses on occupancy, such as a den. If Council approves the reduced exclusion of 2.7m², the housekeeping amendment would reflect that change.

The draft zoning by-law amendments are outlined in Appendices A and B.

COMMENTS OF THE SPECIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON DISABILITY ISSUES

The Special Advisory Committee on Disability Issues (SACDI) was sent a copy of this report and provided the following comments:

The amendments to the Vancouver Building By-law are crucial to the inclusion in all aspects of society of each and every citizen, regardless of ability. Thus, it is imperative that there be full support of these modifications.

After reviewing the options, SACDI is endorsing Option 1 (Consideration "A") as the preferred choice. Although all three options could potentially fulfill the criteria for providing a floor space ratio exclusion, Option 1 allows for the least problematic administration process. This would greatly facilitate the implementation of the accessibility enhancements, thus providing a far superior option. SACDI fully endorses and has no difficulties with the recommendation of Option 1.

COMMENTS OF THE URBAN DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE (UDI)

The UDI was also sent a copy of this report and will send their comments to Council by letter.

CONCLUSION

This report seeks Council direction regarding whether to provide an FSR exclusion to support the forthcoming Building By-law requirement for a visitable washroom. While the development industry supports an FSR exclusion, staff have concerns related to policy and permit processing time and complexity. Should Council wish to consider an FSR exclusion, Consideration "A" should be referred to Public Hearing for a full discussion of the proposal for a 1.0m² FSR exclusion for the visitable washroom and reduced in-unit residential storage space. This reflects the preferred way to acknowledge industry concerns yet minimize the impact on permit processing time.

Recommendation "B" is a housekeeping amendment put forward to improve consistency between the Zoning and Development By-law and the way in which the FSR exclusion for residential storage space is administered.

- - - - -

APPENDIX A
Page 1 of 2

PROPOSED AMENDMENTS

1) Delete the wording in the following sections:

and replace with wording that reflects the following concept:

For the purposes of providing residential storage space at or above grade, the maximum exclusion per dwelling unit shall be 2.7m². If the area of the storage space is no greater than 2.7m², the actual area of the storage space may be excluded.

In section 4.7.3 of the FC-1 District Schedule, delete the word "lockers" from clause (d) and add, as 4.7.3 (g), a clause with wording that reflects the concept noted above.

In section 4.7.3 of the HA-3 District Schedule, add as 4.7.3 (g), a clause with wording that reflects the concept noted above.

In section 6.3.3 of the SEGS ODP, delete the word "lockers" from clause (b), and add, as 6.3.3 (h), a clause with wording that reflects the concept noted above.

In all CD-1 By-laws that currently include an exclusion for residential storage space, the existing wording would be replaced with wording that reflects the concept noted above.

2) Add wording that reflects the following concept in the following sections:

Where a visitable washroom as defined and required by the Building By-law is provided, up to 1.0m²/dwelling unit may be excluded from the computation of floor space ratio.

APPENDIX 1
Page 2 of 2

Also add it to all the CD-1 By-laws noted in 1 above.

APPENDIX B
Page 1 of 1

PROPOSED HOUSEKEEPING AMENDMENTS

1) Delete the wording in the following sections:

and replace with wording that reflects the following concept:

For the purposes of providing residential storage space at or above grade, the maximum exclusion per dwelling unit shall be 3.7m²*. If the area of the storage space is no greater than 3.7m²*, the actual area of the storage space may be excluded.

ag20030513.htm

In section 4.7.3 of the FC-1 District Schedule, delete the word "lockers" from clause (d) and add, as 4.7.3 (g), a clause with wording that reflects the concept noted above.

In section 4.7.3 of the HA-3 District Schedule, add as 4.7.3 (g) a clause with wording that reflects the concept noted above.

In section 6.3.3 of the SEGS ODP, delete the word "lockers" from clause (b), and add, as 6.3.3 (h), a clause with wording that reflects the concept noted above.

In all CD-1 By-laws that currently include an exclusion for residential storage space, the existing wording would be replaced with wording that reflects the concept noted above.

* or 2.7m², if Council approves the Consideration item.

ag20030513.htm

* * * * *

ag20030513.htm

Comments or questions? Send us e-mail at info@city.vancouver.bc.ca
© 2002 City of Vancouver