SUPPORTS ITEM NO. 3
P&E COMMITTEE AGENDA
APRIL 18, 1996
POLICY REPORT
DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING
Date: April 1, 1996
Dept. File No. MG
TO: Standing Committee on Planning and Environment
FROM: The Director of Central Area Planning and the Director of Land
Use and Development, in consultation with the Director of
Cultural Affairs, the Director of Legal Services, and the
Director of Permits and Licenses.
SUBJECT: Report Back - Increasing Permitted Density to accommodate
Mezzanines in Artist Studio Buildings and Zoning Amendments
for Double Counting Floor Space Ratio in C-3A
RECOMMENDATIONS
A. THAT as a condition of development permit approval, covenants
be placed on the title of artist studios with double height
spaces where there is potentially insufficient residual FSR to
accommodate mezzanines and double counting has not been
applied, the purpose of the covenant being to not only
forewarn the applicant that a development and building permit
is required (as at present), but to more clearly forewarn of
inadequate residual FSR to allow for mezzanines.
B. THAT the Director of Land Use and Development be instructed to
make application to amend the Zoning and Development By-law
generally in accordance with Appendix 'A' to provide for
double counting FSR in the C-3A District Schedule;
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.
COUNCIL POLICY
The Building By-law permits the construction of a mezzanine in a double
height space, with the requirement that 60% of the lower floor area not
be covered by the mezzanine.
On March 28, 1995, Council directed staff to:
- draft zoning amendments for the IC-3 District to double count
floor space for double height spaces for the calculation of
floor space ratio (FSR).
- discontinue the covenant regarding the installation of a
mezzanine for future buildings with double height ceilings, in
cases where double counting is applied.
- retain existing covenants regarding the installation of a
mezzanine for existing buildings with double height ceilings.
- permit the development of double height ceilings but encourage,
through guidelines, structural elements, sprinkler coverage,
- 2 -
electric services and other elements to support future
mezzanines.
- process permits for proposed mezzanines through joint
development and building permits to decrease approval time.
SUMMARY
Council requested that staff report back on ways of permitting
additional density to accommodate mezzanines in artist 'live/work'
studio developments already built to the maximum permitted density.
There are two buildings which lack residual FSR for the addition of
mezzanines - 1850 Lorne Street and 330 East 1st Avenue, both in the IC-3
District (Brewery Creek). (see Appendix 'C' for a summary of projects).
Staff suggest three options that could be collectively pursued by the
owners of a development:
1. owners purchase Heritage Bonus Density (e.g., B.C. Hydro or former
Central Library Bonus Density) and transfer this to their site;
2. density increase with 'no strings attached' (i.e., no requirement
for an on-site facility that addresses City objectives or other
public benefit); or
3. density increase conditional upon the provision of an on-site
facility that addresses City objectives.
The City's legal staff have advised that a rezoning initiated by the
City to facilitate an increase in density on these sites would be open
to legal challenge. For this reason, the owners will have to choose
which option they wish to pursue and initiate the necessary rezoning and
permit applications or other actions (e.g., Board of Variance appeal).
Staff recommend that double counting FSR for double height spaces be
extended to the C-3A District, as proposed for the IC-3 District. The
IC-3 zoning amendments have been presented in a separate report for
referral to public hearing.
Staff also propose that covenants be placed on the title of properties
where double counting has not been applied and there is insufficient
residual floor space ratio (FSR) to accommodate the addition of
mezzanines in all double height spaces. This will notify potential
purchasers that there may be insufficient density to permit a mezzanine.
With double counting provisions applying in the C-3A and IC-3 District
Schedules in future, staff expect that such situations will be few in
number.
The contents of this report were discussed with the owners of studios in
1850 Lorne Street and 330 East 1st Avenue. There was interest expressed
in pursuing Board of Variance appeals and the transfer of heritage bonus
density.
PURPOSE
This report outlines:
- options for increasing a site's permitted density to accommodate
mezzanines in existing developments;
- an approach for notifying purchasers of units with double height
ceilings and potentially insufficient residual floor space ratio
to accommodate mezzanines; and
- recommendations for zoning amendments to introduce double
- 3 -
counting of double height spaces in the C-3A District.
BACKGROUND
A mezzanine is a partial storey constructed in a double height space.
Typically, because of Building By-law limitations, the mezzanine covers
no more than 40% of the lower floor area. The term "mezzanine" is
usually associated with commercial or institutional buildings; in
residential buildings, the term "loft" is commonly used. In this
report, the term 'double height' space is used to mean a space that has
a floor-to-floor height that is equivalent to at least two conventional
storeys.
There are two newly constructed artist 'live/work' studio developments
in the Brewery Creek Enclave (IC-3) with the potential for mezzanines,
but not enough residual floor space ratio (FSR) to permit the approval
of additional floor space to accommodate their installation in approved
double height spaces. A post occupancy inspection of artist 'live/work'
studios has identified a number of mezzanines installed in double height
spaces, without permit approvals in the IC-3 District.
On March 28, 1995, Council resolved:
THAT Policy 7, as contained in Appendix 'A' of the Policy Report
dated February 9, 1995, be deferred pending a report back on the
feasibility of providing the increased density to accommodate
mezzanines in existing Artist Live/Work buildings through a
rezoning initiated by the Director of Planning or by other means.
The deferred policy (Policy 7) identified two ways for increasing FSR to
accommodate mezzanines: heritage density transfers and density bonuses
for secured low-cost, rental housing or non-profit cultural facilities.
Furthermore, Council resolved:
THAT staff be requested to report back on how prospective
purchasers of units in existing artist 'live/work' buildings could
be better warned with respect to the issue of mezzanines and
residual FSR.
Council also resolved that double height spaces should be double counted
for the purpose of FSR calculation in the IC-3 District to ensure that
there is sufficient residual FSR to accommodate future mezzanines.
On March 8, 1995, the Board of Variance allowed an appeal granting 5,638
square feet of additional floor space to accommodate mezzanines at 330
East 1st Avenue. Staff supported the appeal because the calculation of
FSR for the building's development application had initially indicated a
permitted density similar to that proposed by the appellant. Prior to
issuance of the permit, a miscalculation of FSR was identified by staff,
resulting in a lower permitted residual density.
On April 27, 1995 at a public hearing, Council approved a rezoning of
272 East 4th Avenue that increased the site's density to accommodate
mezzanines. Council's approval was subject to the condition that the
applicant convey a low cost rental studio to the City, as a 'quid pro
quo' for the density increase.
On August 9, 1995, the Board of Variance ruled in favour of an appellant
seeking a 678 square foot increase in floor space (an increase from 2.83
FSR to 3.10 FSR) to accommodate mezzanines for an artist studio
development at 1850 Lorne Street. The appellant noted that the
forthcoming artist studio zoning amendments proposed FSR exclusions
(e.g., amenity space) that would be approximately equivalent to the
variance in FSR being requested. Staff did not support this appeal
- 4 -
because it presupposed Council's approval of the forthcoming zoning
amendments.
These forthcoming zoning amendments will allow for the exclusion of
storage, amenity rooms and other similar facilities from the calculation
of FSR. If approved, they will likely provide residual FSR to
accommodate mezzanines equivalent to an average of 10% of the permitted
density in the IC-3 District. This would be sufficient to provide some
additional density for the development at 330 East 1st Avenue. However,
owners of studios in this development and 1850 Lorne Street are
interested in more additional FSR for mezzanines.
Staff estimate that the developments will require up to the following
additional FSR to accommodate a full sized loft in each of the 'double
height' studios: 330 East 1st Avenue - 0.6 FSR; and 1850 Lorne Street -
0.6 FSR.
DISCUSSION
Increasing On-site Density to Accommodate Mezzanines
In considering this issue, Planning staff believe the following issues
need to be considered:
- equity for development applicants;
- the public benefit of density increases;
- flexibility for owners (e.g., allowing for individual loft
applications);
- implications for density increases in other districts;
- implications of extending the "Transfer of Density Policy" to
include the IC-3 District.
Staff have evaluated the following options for increasing the permitted
density to accommodate mezzanines in existing or approved developments:
1. Owners Purchase Heritage Bonus Density (e.g., B.C. Hydro or former
Central Library Bonus Density) and transfer this to their site;
2. Density Increase with 'no strings attached' (i.e., no requirement
for an on-site facility that addresses City objectives or other
public benefit); and
3. Density Increase conditional upon the provision of an on-site
facility that addresses City objectives (i.e., as required for 272
East 4th Avenue).
A detailed explanation and evaluation of the 3 Options is in Appendix B.
In response to Council's March 28, 1995 resolution, legal staff were
asked to consider whether the Director of Land Use and Development can
facilitate the necessary increases in density by initiating the required
rezoning applications once owners have arranged to purchase heritage
bonus density or offered the City an on-site facility that meets City
objectives. Legal staff concluded that the Director of Land and
Development can only initiate the rezoning of a site in cases where
there is clearly a significant and extensive public benefit. A rezoning
of a site initiated by the City in any other situation would be open to
legal challenge.
Legal staff also indicated that Council and staff cannot advise the
owners that they should pursue any one of the three options. For this
reason, this report advises the owners what options are available to
them.
- 5 -
Regarding Option 1, staff suggest that when processing a rezoning
application to provide residual FSR to accommodate mezzanines that the
proposed FSR double counting provisions for the IC-3 District should not
apply in the calculation. This will benefit the applicants by reducing
the amount of heritage bonus density that must be transferred or the
extent of the requirement for an on-site facility imposed as a condition
of a rezoning. Option 1 will not only remedy the deficiencies in
residual FSR but also provide a corresponding public benefit in terms of
supporting the City's heritage objectives. However, it will require the
studio owners to work together on a rezoning application and to pay the
fee (approximately $10,000).
Option 2 has the following advantages: it is less costly and less
difficult for studio owners to obtain an increase in permitted floor
space for their building. Should they pursue Board of Variance appeals,
owners can do so individually rather than working as a group. However,
it will set a precedent for similarly increasing density in other
Districts and circumstances (i.e. rewards exploitation of by-law
provisions). There is also no clear public benefit associated with this
option. In similar Board of Variance appeals, staff have advised the
Board that they do not support the proposed density increase.
Regarding Option 3, the proposed text amendments of the IC-3 District
Schedule (in a companion report on Artist Studios) will allow for an
increase in density without a rezoning application by the owners. This
option does provide a clear public benefit (ie. the on-site public
facility). However, it will require that the owners work together on the
purchase of a unit for the facility.
Comments from Owners
Staff met with owners of studios in the two buildings and discussed the
options available to them. The owners expressed interest in pursuing
Board of Variance appeals and one individual, the purchase of heritage
bonus density.
Covenants - Notifying Owners
The City has required covenants on title to advise prospective owners
that a development permit is required for a mezzanine and thereby
discourage the installation of unapproved and potentially unsafe
mezzanines where there is insufficient residual FSR for future
mezzanines. As a condition of development permit approval, covenants
have been placed on the title of units with double height ceilings, that
do not yet have mezzanines. The covenants advise owners that a
development permit must be approved prior to installing a mezzanine.
This advises potential purchasers of existing units.
Council has directed staff to discontinue this practice for future
development proposals where double counting is applied in the initial
FSR calculation since there will then be sufficient floor space residual
for future mezzanines. Staff suggest that a covenant, as required in
the past, be placed on the title of properties where double counting has
not been applied (i.e., in districts other than IC-3) as a condition of
the development application. The covenants should, however, be amended
to also explicitly advise owners that there may be insufficient FSR to
accommodate a mezzanine.
Double Counting in the C-3A District
Staff recommend that double counting of double height spaces be extended
to the C-3A District, as is currently proposed for the IC-3 District.
Similar to the IC-3 District and the Downtown District, there is a very
loose fit in the C-3A District between the envelope, as determined by
setbacks and the permitted height, and the mass of the building at
- 6 -
maximum FSR assuming standard floor-to-ceiling heights of 2.45 m-3.7 m
(8 ft.-12 ft.). This is appropriate in the C-3A District because it
allows for a variety of building types and heights depending on the
context of the site. The C-3A District applies to such diverse locations
as Central Broadway, Granville Street between West 4th and West 16th,
and part of West 8th Avenue in Fairview Slopes and the Burrard Slopes.
The C-3A Guidelines call for high rise development in some locations
and, low rise development elsewhere.
A C-3A development at 1529 West 6th Avenue, currently under
construction, deleted mezzanines on two double height floors to ensure
the building would meet the FSR limits of the zoning when the building
was under final development permit review this past summer. The current
zoning did not allow for Planning staff to require that there be
adequate residual FSR to provide for the provision of mezzanines. For
this reason, staff have concluded that it would be prudent to consider
extending double counting to double height floor spaces in C-3A, at the
same time that Council considers a similar proposal for the IC-3
District Schedule. The developer has now purchased an abutting site to
provide residual FSR for mezzanines in all double height spaces.
The proposed double counting provision will apply to residential uses
and artist studios when the floor-to-ceiling height exceeds 3.7 m (12
ft.). The recommended C-3A text amendment is attached in Appendix A.
The double counting provision is worded similarly to that proposed for
the IC-3 District Schedule.
Although the C-3A District Schedule includes considerable discretion in
height and FSR, the context of development proposals is not so complex
as commonly occurs in the Downtown District (DD). While double counting
is a more explicit and limiting approach, it is recommended for C-3A but
may not be recommended for the DD because of different circumstances in
the DD.
CONCLUSION
Two artist 'live/work' studio developments have been built with double
height spaces but lacking sufficient residual FSR to accommodate the
addition of mezzanines. Last year, Council indicated an interest in how
the City could assist the owners of studios lacking sufficient density
to install a mezzanine. Although legal staff have advised that the
Director of Land Use and Development cannot facilitate the increases in
density by making the necessary rezoning applications, this report does
include other options that the owners can pursue. In the interest of
minimizing the number of future developments that will lack sufficient
residual FSR, the report recommends the referral to public hearing of a
text amendment for of the C-3A District Schedule that will introduce
double counting for double height spaces. Covenants are also recommended
to notify purchasers of future projects that a development may have
insufficient FSR for the addition of mezzanines.
* * * * *
APPENDIX A
Text Amendment
C-3A District Schedule
- amend section 4.7.2 of the C-3A District Schedule as follows
(new text is in italics):
- 7 -
"4.7.2 The following shall be included in the computation of floor
space ratio:
(a) all floors of all buildings including accessory buildings,
both above and below ground level, to be measured to the
extreme outer limits of the building.
(b) in the case of dwelling uses, Artist Studios - Class A and
Artist Studio - Class B, where the distance from a floor to
the floor above or where there is no floor above to the top
of the roof rafters or deck exceeds 3.7 m, an additional
amount equal to the area of the floor area below the excess
height except the additional amount shall not be counted in
the case of undeveloped floor areas beneath roof elements
which the Director of Planning considers to be for
decorative purposes and to which there is no means of
access other than a hatch, residential lobbies and
mechanical penthouses."
APPENDIX B
PAGE 1 OF 3
Option 1
Purchase Heritage Bonus Density (e.g. from B.C. Hydro or Former Library
Bonus Density) Necessary to Provide Floor Space Increase Required
Process:
- owners arrange to purchase heritage bonus density, subject
to rezoning.
- the owners file a rezoning application for their site and
building to permit transfer of this additional FSR.
- Council amends, for this special case the "Transfer of
Density Policy for Heritage" to permit transfers from the
Downtown District, West End and Central Broadway to the IC-
3 District.
- subsequent to rezoning approval, individual owners may make
permit applications, as and when mezzanines desired.
- density for the purpose of calculating the required amount
of residual FSR would assume that the site's permitted FSR
is 3.0 rather than 2.5 as proposed in the forthcoming IC-3
zoning amendments.
Pros
- provides a public benefit.
- heritage bonus density is readily available for purchase
and transfer
Cons
- establishes a precedent for transferring density to
industrial-commercial Districts.
- requires a group of owners to act together to purchase
heritage bonus density and make applications.
- preparing rezoning application will be expensive for
property owners ($10 000 or more for rezoning fee).
APPENDIX B
PAGE 2 OF 3
Option 2
Density Increases Without a Requirement for a Public Benefit
Process:
- 8 -
- the owners initiate rezoning of their site and building to
permit a higher density to accommodate the addition of
mezzanines.
- owners subsequently make permit applications, as and when
mezzanines desired.
- As an alternative to rezoning, density could be increased
through successful appeals to the Board of Variance.
Pros
- less cost to owners (i.e. only rezoning application fee).
- individuals can initiate Board of Variance appeals rather
than acting as a group.
Cons
- inequitable to other property owners and developers who
have 'played by the rules' (e.g. rezoning of 272 East 4th
Avenue).
- no public benefit such as a non-profit cultural amenity or
low cost rental studios.
- sets precedent for similarly increasing density in other
Districts and circumstances (i.e., rewards exploitation of
by-law provisions).
- in similar circumstances, staff have not supported density
increases without a requirement for a public benefit.
Option 3
Density Bonus and the provision of an on-site facility (e.g. low cost
rental studio or non-profit cultural facility) reflecting City
Objectives (Proposed Policy 7 Per Council Report on Mezzanine Dated
February 9, 1995).
Process:
- City initiates text amendment of the IC-3 District Schedule
to permit the relaxation of FSR (floor space ratio) to
accommodate the addition of mezzanines in cases where a
public exaction such as affordable rental unit(s) or a non-
profit cultural facility is provided.
- subsequent to text amendment approval, owners submit
development and building permit applications.
- A real estate analysis by staff determines the 'value' of
the increased density and ensures the rental unit(s) or
cultural facility has an equivalent 'value'.
- The owners convey to the City the rental unit(s) or space
for cultural facility.
- density for the purpose of bonus computation would assume
that the site's permitted FSR is 3.0 rather than 2.5 as
proposed in the forthcoming IC-3 zoning amendments.
APPENDIX B
PAGE 3 OF 3
Pros
- provides a public benefit in exchange for an increase in
FSR beyond the maximum of 3.0 currently permitted.
Cons
- requires a group of owners to act together to purchase a
studio(s) for either rental or cultural facility and make
applications.
- requires more City staff time to negotiate legal agreements
- 9 -
for securing the facility
.
- preparing rezoning application will be expensive for property owners
( $ 1 0 0 0 0 o r m o r e f o r r e z o n i n g f e e ) .
APPENDIX 'C'
Page 1 of 1
Projects Requiring Residual FSR for Mezzanines
Projects Activity Status
330 East 1st Avenue -Board of Variance -requires an additional
(IC-3) (March 8, 1995) 0.3 (approx) FSR to
approved 5,638 square provide full sized
feet of additional lofts for all double
floor space height studios
-staff supported the
appeal because staff
had miscalculated FSR
and prior to issuance
of permit, reduced the
permitted floor space
by 5,638 square feet
272 East 4th Avenue -Council approved -no further action
(IC-3) (April 27, 1995) a required
rezoning to increase
the site's density to
accommodate mezzanines
1850 Lorne Street -Board of Variance -requires an additional
(IC-3) (August 9, 1995) 0.3 (approx.) FSR to
approved 678 square provide full sized
feet to accommodate lofts for all double
mezzanines height studios
-this floor space is
equivalent to the
amount that would be
excluded under the
forthcoming artist
studio zoning
amendments
1529 West 6th -developer purchased -no further action
(C-3A) abutting property to required
provide residual FSR
for mezzanines