P1
POLICY REPORT
DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING
Date: January 15, 1997
Dept. File No. FAS
C.C. File: 2601-1
TO: Vancouver City Council
FROM: Director of Land Use and Development, in consultation with the
City Manager and Director of Legal Services
SUBJECT: Development Approval - School Facilities
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the Director of Land Use and Development be instructed to make
application to amend Section 3.2.1 of the Zoning and Development
By-law to provide discretion to the Director of Planning in
considering development applications for the placement of portable
classrooms or development of new elementary or secondary school
buildings, generally as set out in Appendix A, and that this
application be referred to Public Hearing.
FURTHER THAT the Director of Legal Services be instructed to
prepare the necessary by-law for consideration at Public Hearing.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of
the foregoing.
CITY MANAGER S COMMENTS
The City Manager notes that this subject has been discussed
extensively at Committee and by staff. These discussions have
demonstrated the wisdom of Planning s position and the naivete of
the City Manager's position.
The City Manager RECOMMENDS approval of the above recommendation.
COUNCIL POLICY
There is no applicable Council Policy pertaining to this matter.
PURPOSE
This report recommends limited discretion be provided to the Director of
Planning when considering development applications for elementary or
secondary schools, where the proposed development will not comply with
specified by-law regulations.
BACKGROUND
When Council last met with the Vancouver School Board to discuss matters
of mutual concern, the City's zoning and related development approval
process was the subject of considerable discussion both with respect to
the placement of portable classrooms and the development of new
(replacement) schools. The City Manager agreed to review our existing
regulatory framework, in consultation with Planning and Law Department
staff.
Most schools - both public and private - exist in residential
neighbourhoods. In most instances, these schools exist on land zoned
either RS-1 or RS-1S. Regardless of the particular zoning, it has long
been recognized that the development regulations permit development in a
form that is consistent with the site's residential context but that
these regulations commonly frustrate school development.
This issue was most recently addressed in the late 1980s when Council
introduced a variety of amendments to the RS-1/1S Districts Schedule to
address the large house issue. It was acknowledged that the more
restrictive regulations would have unintended impacts on schools,
churches and other similar uses, necessitating by-law variances through
the Board of Variance.
Irrespective of the particular residential zoning, the Vancouver School
Board s increasing reliance on portable classrooms to accommodate
increased enrollment has necessitated more frequent appeals to the Board
of Variance for relief from zoning regulations.
DISCUSSION
The subject of special zoning for schools (and parks) was pursued in the
early 1980s but abandoned by Council for several reasons, not the least
of which was the inability to develop a single set of regulations that
would apply to the diversity of sites and building forms that currently
exist. An alternative approach, being the creation of an individual
CD-1 zone for each school (or park) site, has been further considered
but is not recommended due to both the resources required to create such
zoning and the questionable benefits that it will afford either the City
or development applicants.
Staff recommend two new by-law provisions that would provide some
administrative relief from increasingly restrictive zoning regulations
that apply to, but were not intended to principally respond to, the
needs of the Vancouver School Board. The proposed Clauses 3.2.1(e) and
(f) would expand upon the relaxation authority of the Director of
Planning. Clause (e) would provide discretionary relaxation of
specified by-law provisions when considering development applications
for the placement of portable classrooms on an elementary or secondary
school site. Clause (f) would provide discretion with respect to new
elementary or secondary school buildings, or alterations/additions to
existing school buildings. The proposed wording for these new
provisions is presented in Appendix A.
If the proposed amendments are enacted, the Vancouver School Board (as
well as private elementary or secondary schools) may seek and obtain
development application approvals that in most cases would presently
require successful appeal to the Board of Variance. Any approvals
granted pursuant to the new clauses would still be subject to
third-party appeal to the Board of Variance by an aggrieved
neighbour(s). Conversely, the Director of Planning s refusal to
favourably exercise the discretion provided by the new clauses would be
grounds for appeal by the development applicant to the Board of
Variance.
In essence, the increased discretion is expected to facilitate school
development by eliminating the Board of Variance appeal process only in
those cases where staff support an appeal to the Board of Variance to
allow relief from a by-law provision which currently only the Board can
provide, and where the granting of such relief is not of concern to
surrounding residents.
CONCLUSION
The recommended by-law amendments will not fully meet the needs of the
Vancouver School Board; these might only be met if the City were to
establish much more permissive zoning on school sites so as to enable
outright development approval. Given neighbourhood concerns with many
proposals submitted by the Vancouver School Board, this is not seen as
being in the City s interest. In addition, increasingly permissive
zoning applicable to Vancouver School Board properties would necessarily
be available also to private elementary and secondary schools insofar as
zoning cannot differentiate on the basis of ownership.
Although expected to be modest in impact, the proposed amendments to
Section 3.2.1 of the Zoning and Development By-law are recommended to
Council.
* * * * *
APPENDIX A
SECTION 3
ADMINISTRATION
3.2 Relaxation
3.2.1 The Director of Planning may relax the provisions of this By-law
where, due to conditions peculiar either to the site or to the
proposed development, literal enforcement would result in
unnecessary hardship in any of the following cases:
(a) alterations or additions to an existing building which lacks
minimum yards required by the appropriate district schedule.
Any relaxation in this case shall be with respect to yard
requirements only and in no case shall such yard
requirements be reduced to less than 60 percent of the
amount specified in the district schedule, or if applicable,
already relaxed by Section 11;
(b) erection of more than one principal building on one site or
structural alterations or additions to two or more principal
buildings existing on the same site and located in a C, M, I
or CD District;
(c) erection of more than one principal building on one site or
structural alterations or additions to two or more principal
buildings existing on the same site where such principal
buildings consist of multiple dwellings located within any R
district, subject to the arrangement of such principal
buildings being satisfactory to the Director of Planning;
(d) retention of more than one principal building on one site
where an application for a development permit has been made
but the permit cannot be issued because of a requirement to
consolidate or subdivide the site;
(e) the placement of one or more portable classrooms on an
elementary or secondary school site, where the existing or
proposed development exceeds permitted floor space ratio or
site coverage, or lacks minimum yards or setbacks, as
specified in the district schedule or Section 11; and
(f) erection of a new elementary or secondary school building,
or alterations or additions to an existing elementary or
secondary school building, where the existing or proposed
development exceeds permitted floor space ratio, or site
coverage, or lacks minimum yards or setbacks, as specified
in the district schedule or Section 11.