POLICY REPORT

URBAN STRUCTURE

	Date: May 8, 1998
	Author/Local: PFrench/7041
	CC File No. 5302

TO: Standing Committee on Planning and Environment

FROM: Director of Community Planning

SUBJECT: C-2 Zoning

INFORMATION

The General Manager of Community Services submits this report for INFORMATION.

COUNCIL POLICY

Council's current policy is embodied in the C-2 District Schedule and the C-2 Residential Guidelines, which allow 3 to 4 storey all-commercial, or four storey mixed commercial/residential development.

SUMMARY

C-2 zoning applies to over 1,500 parcels throughout the City, mainly on arterial streets. Virtually all C-2 zoning abuts RS or RT zoning at the rear. C-2 and related zones contain capacity for about 26,000 housing units - over half the 47,000 unit zoning capacity that is available outside the Downtown peninsula.

The C-2 zoning currently permits 3 - 4 storey all-commercial development (outright use, no guidelines) and four storey mixed commercial/residential development. Residential uses are "conditional", and guidelines apply to the mixed use projects. Given the clear guidelines and many project approval precedents, it is not feasible to allow only "outright" uses, i.e., stop approving the conditional dwelling uses, as suggested by Council's April 7th motion. Council would need to amend the zoning to remove dwelling as a permitted use. Doing so would halt most development in the zone.

The District Schedule permits a high residential density, relative to its height and setback regulations. At the same time, the Guidelines call for bigger setbacks, and a lower residential density. The Guidelines also permit some relaxations for height, as described below. While staff feel they are currently successfully negotiating for Guidelines compliance, the discrepancy between the two makes the negotiation tough, and sends an unclear message to the real estate industry and the public.

While the C-2 zone is providing much-needed housing, there are increasing complaints from nearby residents about it, for various reasons, also outlined below. What is required is a full zoning review which looks at the issues, and that results in changes to the District Schedule and Guidelines. Staff anticipate reporting back on a work program, schedule and resources for such a review later this year, following completion of the Vision Pilot Program.

PURPOSE

This is a report back on an April 7, 1998 Council motion requesting "that staff provide a report back on C-2 zoning and ways to deal with developments on the basis of outright use only." On April 21st Councillor Clarke clarified that staff's report back "should consider whether or not the C-2 zoning provisions, including guidelines and relaxations, are suitable in locations where the zoning is applicable, given the adjacencies to other zoning areas, which in some cases are single family residential areas."

This report first describes C-2 zoning and how it works, with reference to Council's motion. It then outlines some of the issues that have arisen, noting the need for a full zoning review.

BACKGROUND

The current C-2 zoning evolved out of a very old zone. The first major change was in 1989, when Council removed a residential disincentive that the zoning had contained. This was in response to the housing crisis in the late 1980s, and Council's desire to find new housing capacity quickly, without requiring redevelopment of single family areas. In 1993, responding to livability problems with some project applications, Council adopted the C-2 Residential Guidelines, based on a consultant study. The Guidelines apply only to projects that include residential, and mainly address livability.

DISCUSSION

1.Current C-2 Zoning

C-2 zoning applies to over 1500 parcels throughout the City, mainly on arterial streets. Virtually all C-2 zoning abuts RS or RT zoning at the rear, and thus is backed by single family or duplex development. C-2 and related hybrid zones [C-2B, C-2C, C-2C1] contain capacity for about 26,000 housing units--over half the 47,000 unit capacity that is available outside the Downtown peninsula.

C-2 allows two main types of development: all-commercial, and mixed commercial/residential. [All-residential is permitted only in rare instances.] Staff estimate about 160 new projects have been completed since the zoning change in 1989, with about 2/3 of them mixed commercial/residential. Current development activity is summarized in Table 1 in Appendix A.

All Commercial Development: The C-2 District Schedule permits most common commercial uses outright, to the maximum density of 3.0 FSR. The maximum height is 12.2 m [40 ft.], with additional height permitted by relaxation. There is no stated limit to the relaxation, but there is a list of factors that must be considered. The rear and side setback requirements in the District Schedule are the same as described below for mixed commercial/residential development. There are no guidelines.

Few major all-commercial developments are being proposed. One example was the five-storey retail mall project at Knight and Kingsway, which was brought to Council's attention last year.

Mixed Commercial/Residential Development: For mixed commercial/residential development, the District Schedule is augmented by the C-2 Residential Guidelines. They address residential livability and relationship to neighbouring properties, but do not address architectural treatment [i.e., materials, style, etc.]. The following summarizes the zoning and guidelines provisions, with comments as to applicability of Council's April 7 motion. [Refer to Figure 1 in Appendix A.]

(a)Uses: Most commercial uses are outright. All dwelling uses are conditional, and guidelines apply to all projects that include them.

Council's April 7, 1998 motion refers to dealing with development "on the basis of outright uses only". Given that dwelling is a permitted conditional use, with guidelines for deciding approval and over 100 projects approved

since 1989, the City could not stop approving residential. Council could, if they wish, pursue a zoning amendment to remove "dwelling" as a permitted use, through the usual process including a Public Hearing.

In the case of C-2, this course of action would halt most development in the zone. This would reduce land values for property owners significantly, as well as limiting the number of new housing units coming on stream.

(b)Density: The overall maximum density is 3.0 FSR, including up to 2.5 FSR for dwelling use. These densities are in the District Schedule, and are permitted without requiring relaxation. However, the Guidelines note that the actual residential FSR reasonably obtainable on typical sites would range between 1.8 and 2.2 FSR. A quick review of statistics shows mixed use projects achieving in the range of 1.8 to 2.3 residential. Some have achieved the full 2.5, if they have been permitted an additional storey [see below].

(c)Height: There is a 12.2. m [40 ft.] height limit, to allow the intended four storeys. The Director of Planning may permit additional height, subject to the Guidelines which lay out the relaxations in three steps. All require assessment of view and shadowing impacts.

(i)Height may be relaxed by up to 1.6 m [5 ft.] for concrete construction and/or a sloping site [Guidelines clause 4.3 (a)].

This type of height relaxation is frequently requested to achieve the four storeys. Staff normally hold the applicant to the minimum that is feasible--they do not automatically support the full 1.6 m [5 ft.]. If this relaxation were not available from the Director of Planning, developers with sloping sites would likely appeal to the Board of Variance for height relaxations based on hardship.

(ii)Height may be further relaxed up to 16.8 m [55 ft.] for a 5th storey, if the site is exceptionally large, and if other benefits result. [Guidelines clause 4.3(b)].

This second stage height relaxation has been used rarely. An recent example is the approved development for the London Drugs site in Kerrisdale.

(iii)Height may be relaxed beyond 16.8 m [55 ft.] for sites that are adjacent to existing zoning that allows higher buildings, and where it "will not disrupt neighbourhood character". [Guideline clause 4.3(c)].

This provision effectively only applies to the Kerrisdale and West 10th Avenue shopping areas, which are adjacent to RM-3 zoning that allows both lowrise and highrise apartments. Mid-rise C-2 developments [6-7 storeys] have occurred in both these areas. The recently vacated IGA site at 41st and Vine would be able to be considered for this type of relaxation.

(d)Rear Setbacks: On the ground floor level, which is normally occupied by commercial with parking and loading, the development may come right to the lane. Above this, the District Schedule calls for 7.6 m [25 ft.] from the centre line of the lane, i.e., 4.5 m [15 ft.] from the normal rear property line. The Guidelines, however, seek additional setbacks beyond what the District Schedule requires. [See Figure 1 in Appendix A].

(e)Side Setbacks: In the case of sites directly abutting R-zoned sites, with no lane in between, the District Schedule requires a front yard 3.7 m by 3.7 m [12 ft. by 12 ft.] adjacent to the R property. It also requires a 10% side yard, but no less than .9 m [3 ft.] nor more than 1.5 m [5 ft]. Again, the Guidelines request more than the District Schedule: a bigger side setback at the upper floors, as well as some setback at the rear.

In summary, the current C-2 District Schedule allows a residential density high relative to its height and setback provisions. On the other hand, the Guidelines note that less density is actually achievable, and request bigger setbacks. This contradiction imposes a difficult negotiation between the staff and applicants, although staff report that in recent years they have usually been able to achieve compliance with the Guidelines.

2.Issues with C-2 Requiring Zoning Review

Since 1989, a significant amount of development has occurred in C-2 - over 1300 units up to the end of 1996. A consultant survey done for the Community Vision Programs in Dunbar and Kensington-Cedar Cottage shows most residents in the new housing are happy with their units. However, neighbours of the C-2 arterial strips are unhappy with various aspects of the zoning as has been evident in responses to a number of projects [e.g., Knight and Kingsway, 10th and Sasamat, several Dunbar and Kerrisdale projects.] This concern has been confirmed by the Vision Choices Surveys in both communities.

The issues with C-2 are complex, and solving them will require a full zoning review. Staff plan to report back to Council with a work program, schedule and resource needs later this year. Issues that were identified in Visioning include:

-impacts of massing on residential neighbours to the rear and/or side, especially on sites where there is no lane;

-bulky appearance and scale on the street, particularly with the fourth floor not being set back at the front;

-height relaxations to more than four storeys;

-quality of design, materials and construction;

-lower standards of setbacks and design for all-commercial development;

-traffic and parking issues;

-monotony of development format and housing type; and

-potential for multi-level internal retail malls.

Additional issues identified by staff include:

-possible excess commercial potential in the zone overall;

-lack of planning for the needs of new residents, including a substantial number of families with children in the east side projects; and

-similarity of C-2 and hybrid zones created in different eras and locations [i.e., C-2B, C-2C, C-2C1, C7/C8..] resulting in duplication.

Tackling these questions will involve looking at the uses, density and the building form. If significant changes to form are desired--major additional setbacks, or reduction of buildings to 3 storeys rather than 4 - the FSR will need to be reduced. This will impact the economics of the projects, property values and housing capacity. It is a city-wide zone, and poses city-wide challenges. On the other hand, some of the needs and solutions may be more local. A zoning review will require technical work, consultation with both residents and landowners whose properties are affected, and due legal process.

CONCLUSION

The C-2 District Schedule currently permits mainly 3 to 4-storey all-commercial development [outright, no guidelines] or 4-storey mixed commercial/residential development [residential conditional, guidelines apply]. Development occurring in the zone is what was anticipated when the zoning was revised in late 1989, and when guidelines were adopted in 1993.

While residential uses are "conditional", given the clear guidelines and many project approval precedents, it is not feasible to allow only "outright" uses as suggested by Council'sApril 7th motion.

Staff feel they are currently successfully negotiating for Guidelines compliance by projects. However, there are increasing complaints from nearby residents about C-2, for various reasons. What is required is a full zoning review which looks at the issues noted above, and that results in changes to the District Schedule and Guidelines. Staff anticipate reporting back on a work program, schedule and resources for such a review later this year, following completion of the Vision Pilot Program.

* * * * *

APPENDIX A

Table 1: Current C-2 Development Activity

STATUS	DUNBAR	KCC	REST OF CITY
In Process [DE application made]	2	2	5
Approved [DE approved or issued; no BP, or BP in process]	2	4	11
Under Construction [DE issued; BP issued; no occupancy permit yet]	1	0	6

Figure 1

* * * * *

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver