POLICY REPORT
URBAN STRUCTURE
Date: October 3, 1995
Dept. File No.: RW
TO: Vancouver City Council
FROM: Director of Community Planning
SUBJECT: Monitoring of RT-3 Zoning and Guidelines
RECOMMENDATION
THAT the Director of Land Use and Development be instructed to make
application to amend the RT-3 District Schedule of the Zoning and
Development By-law, generally in accordance with Appendix A;
FURTHER THAT the Director of Legal Services be instructed to
prepare the necessary by-law;
AND FURTHER THAT the application and by-law be referred to a Public
Hearing together with the draft amendments to the RT-3 Guidelines
contained in Appendix B.
GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS
The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of
the foregoing.
COUNCIL POLICY
On June 25, 1992, City Council approved the "Strathcona Local Area
Planning Initiatives." As a consequence of that action, amendments to
the existing RT-3 District Schedule were enacted in November 1992,
following a Public Hearing.
PURPOSE AND SUMMARY
The report provides Council with the results of monitoring the RT-3
zoning and guidelines since their adoption in November 1992 and
recommends minor adjustments.
The monitoring process involved analysis of development activity in the
area since the enactment of changes to the RT-3 zoning, consultation
with representatives of the community, and discussions with staff
administering the zoning.
Based on the results of this analysis, staff have reached the following
conclusions:
- the rate of change in Strathcona and Kiwassa is relatively slow and
has remained constant;
- the changes to RT-3 have been generally successful in meeting their
stated objectives; and
- community opinion remains divided: some would like to see the
retention/conservation components of the zoning and other City
initiatives strengthened; others feel that the current regulations may
inhibit redevelopment in the area.
Following this analysis and based on the responses obtained during the
original planning program, staff are recommending only minor adjustments
to the RT-3 zoning and the guidelines at this time.
BACKGROUND
1. Local Area Planning Program
The Strathcona Local Area Planning Program began in October 1989 and was
completed in June 1992, with Council's adoption of a document entitled
"Strathcona Planning Initiatives" (SPI). The SPI contained numerous
planning recommendations, including modifications to the existing RT-3
zoning of the Strathcona and Kiwassa areas (see Figure 1 on following
page), as well as further work on the industrial lands along and
adjacent to Hastings Street. In addition, a social action plan and a
local area traffic management plan were adopted by City Council also in
June 1992.
Changes to the RT-3 District Schedule and new guidelines were approved
at a Public Hearing held in September 1992. The SPI also contained an
instruction that staff monitor and report back on the changes to the RT-
3 zoning. This report responds to that instruction.
DISCUSSION
1. RT-3 Objectives
The following is an extract from the document entitled "Strathcona
Planning Initiatives," in respect to the land use policies related to
the changes to RT-3:
"1.1 Sub-Areas 1 and 2: Old Strathcona/RT-3 and Kiwassa/RT-3
Reinforce the existing residential character and provide
opportunities for an incremental increase in density by
amending the existing RT-3 zoning district schedule and
approving Design Guidelines to:
provide incentives for the retention of existing buildings;
facilitate additions; and
provide for infill development and additional units in
multiple conversion dwellings."
Figure 1. Map Showing RT-3 Boundaries
The following summarizes the significant changes which were introduced
into the RT-3 District Schedule:
- the conversion of an existing building into two suites became the only
outright use;
- all other uses became conditional to provide for the application of
external design regulations and guidelines;
- one- and two-family dwellings at 0.60 FSR continued to be allowed on
any site, subject to design controls in the zoning schedule and the
guidelines;
- bonuses in the form of increased floor space ratio and unlimited
relaxation authority were added to provide incentives for the
retention and renovation of existing buildings;
- infill and artist studio uses were added as further incentive for the
retention of existing buildings;
- new guidelines were created, including a streetscape inventory which
more clearly identified those buildings and groupings of buildings
where retention would be focused;
- significant floor space ratio bonuses were added for infill
development and multiple dwellings providing affordable housing; and
- special provision was made for the reconstruction (replication) of
owner-occupied one- and two-family dwellings.
2. Monitoring of RT-3
The monitoring process entailed:
- reviewing development and building permit activities in the only
existing RT-3 areas of the city--Strathcona and Kiwassa;
- meetings with the Strathcona Residents' Association (SRA) and the
Strathcona Property Owners' and Tenants Association (SPOTA). A
separate meeting was also held for Kiwassa residents; and
- discussions with staff administering the zoning also took place.
3. Synopsis of Development Activity
Since adoption of amendments to the RT-3 District Schedule on November
3, 1992, 28 development and building permits have been issued in the 34
month period. Table 1 on the following page shows the nature of the
development activity during that period.
While the numbers themselves are small, the type of permit activity
indicates:
- development activity is generally slow throughout the area;
- a very moderate increase has occurred in respect to the number of new
developments;
- a moderate decrease has occurred in respect to the number of major
alterations;
- a significant increase has occurred in respect to minor alterations;
- overall there have been more alterations than new development; and
- the overall permit activity has increased only slightly.
Table 1: Development Activity
PRIOR TO NOVEMBER 1992
Major Minor
Time Period New Building Alterations, Alterations, Total
Additions Garages, etc. s
1988 2 3 0 5
1989 1 5 0 6
1990 1 5 3 9
1991 3 2 0 5
1992 2 3 3 8
AFTER NOVEMBER 1992
Remainder 1992 0 2 1 3
1993 2 0 3 5
1994 3 3 8 14
1995 4 4 10 18
(to Sept.)
Details of the individual development permits are contained in Appendix
C.
4. Analysis
The changes to RT-3 have been successful in achieving stated objectives,
particularly those aimed at preserving the overall and streetscape
character of the neighbourhood. Taking into account both major and
minor alterations, the development activity has been directed most to
the upgrading of existing buildings. The number of new buildings which
have been built is relatively small and the application of design
guidelines has led to better design than when most of these developments
were outright uses. Up to the point when the RT-3 changes came into
effect, the "Vancouver Special" dominated one- and two-family dwelling
construction in the area.
During this initial period, some minor difficulties have been
experienced with regulations and guidelines. With regard to the
district schedule, the variety of building situations in the area has
meant that a number of applications have required relaxations,
particularly in respect to front yards. As the district schedule
presently does not provide for flexibility, applications have required
referral to the Board of Variance for relief. As the zoning changes
were intended to recognize these unique characteristics of the area,
minor alterations outlined in Appendices A and B to overcome these
difficulties are recommended.
Minor amendments to the RT-3 guidelines are recommended in Appendix B.
For the most part, the proposed changes clarify the guideline text or
accompanying pictures.
COMMUNITY PERSPECTIVES
The changes recommended to the RT-3 zoning regulations and accompanying
guidelines address residents' comments on the performance of RT-3 in its
stated objectives. However, the Strathcona Residents' Association (SRA)
and the Strathcona Property Owners and Tenants Association (SPOTA) also
voiced other comments, articulated below for Council's information.
1. Strathcona Residents' Association (SRA)
A new residents association under the name SRA was a specific outcome of
the Strathcona Social Action Plan, to replace the Strathcona Citizens'
Planning Committee (SCPC) which worked with City staff on all aspects of
the local area planning program. The SRA has sponsored a three-year
"Strathcona Porch Project" (funded by the Montreal-based Bronfman
Foundation), in collaboration with Simon Fraser University and the
community. This project has seen the renovation of a dozen porches
since its start in 1993. A second program called the "Paint Project" is
just starting.
While generally satisfied with the overall achievements of the zoning
changes, the SRA would like to see the RT-3 strengthened in respect to
the preservation and conservation of existing buildings. New one- and
two-family dwellings up to 0.60 FSR are permitted on any site (although
subject to design control). The discretionary increase from 0.60 FSR to
0.75 FSR for new construction is only considered on sites that have
particularly small buildings (less than 0.30 FSR), newer buildings
(built after 1940) or non-character buildings. The SRA is concerned
that development pressures and the greater profit margins of duplexes
will promote the demolition of original houses, since two-family
dwellings at 0.60 FSR are permitted on any site. They would prefer to
see "new development on any site" limited to single-family dwellings.
One- and two-family dwellings at 0.60 FSR were outright uses before the
November 1992 changes. Planning staff are of the opinion that, as was
the case when RT-3 was revised, further efforts at forcing retention or
conservation of older buildings would not generally be supported in the
community at large. Comments from SPOTA (see #2, below) indicate only
general acceptance with the current level of regulation. Planning staff
note that an extensive door-to-door survey of a portion of Strathcona at
the time of the planning program indicated that the overwhelming
majority wished to retain neighbourhood character and scale, but most
did not want to require retention of all heritage or character
buildings. Staff were able to get agreement for design control of new
buildings and replication of owner-occupied one- and two-family
dwellings as an acceptable compromise between the range of views held in
the community.
While not intending to oppose this aspect of the zoning, the SRA will
ask Council for continued monitoring of duplex proposals in Strathcona,
so that if a demolition trend becomes evident, a request to amend the
by-law in the future can be made.
The SRA has also suggested that more buildings might be included on the
Heritage Register. Heritage Planning staff note that the Register is an
important tool in identifying buildings of value in Strathcona. A
number of Category "C" buildings were deleted from the Register by
Council in 1988. Through the Public Nomination process, additional
buildings can be considered for the Register, especially where owner
support is secured. If the community wishes to encourage voluntary
listing of individual buildings or groups of buildings, City staff would
respond as long as such buildings are worthy of being listed.
2. Strathcona Property Owners' and Tenants' Association (SPOTA)
SPOTA came into being in the early 1960s, succeeding in its effort to
terminate the Federal Government's Urban Renewal Program, which had
planned redevelopment of the entire neighbourhood. The Association then
successfully stopped a freeway proposed through the area. SPOTA
continued to be active into the 1980s by developing several hundred
housing units, including the Mau Dan Housing Co-op and scattered infill
projects throughout the neighbourhood.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s SPOTA saw much of its effort and
membership absorbed with the local area planning program. However, a
group of residents have gathered under the name SPOTA to express a
slightly different viewpoint from the SRA.
In meeting with staff, SPOTA expressed two general concerns. First,
whether there was any evidence to indicate that development interest was
restricted by the new zoning. As noted earlier, the development
activity has not changed significantly since the zoning change.
SPOTA's second concern regarded the hazard which many older buildings
might represent should a medium level earthquake strike Vancouver.
While this is not an issue zoning addresses per se, staff note that new
buildings and renovations would require buildings to conform to current
building codes which include seismic upgrading.
3. Kiwassa Residents
A meeting was arranged for residents of Kiwassa. The main concern about
recent development under the revised RT-3 was the overall poor quality
of finishes and materials used for the townhouse development at 681-687
Glen Drive. Unfortunately, quality control is a matter beyond either
the Zoning or Building By-laws. Other concerns to do with the delivery
of City services will be referred to the appropriate departments.
CONCLUSION
Planning staff are generally satisfied that the present structure and
operation of the revised RT-3 zoning and guidelines meet the intent as
approved by Council in 1992. Minor changes are proposed for
clarification, and staff recommend referral to Public Hearing.
While a greater emphasis on conservation or retention is desired by the
SRA, staff note that broad community support for this emphasis did not
exist at the time the new RT-3 was being developed. This still seems to
be the case, based on recent meetings with other representative groups
in the community. However, the community should be encouraged in any
effort to save more turn-of-the-century buildings through programs such
as the porch project and through voluntary heritage listing and
designation and use of heritage provisions of the Zoning and Development
By-law for those buildings on the Heritage Register.
* * * * *
General Mgr./Dept. Head: Report dated: October 3, 1995
Author: Rob Whitlock
Date: Phone: 7810 IRTS Number: CC95009
This report has been Concurring Departments
prepared in consultation
with the departments listed None
to the right, and they
concur with its contents.
RW/lj:WHI\018-4144.COV