ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

Date: June 21, 1999
Author/Local: AGuichon/6627
RTS No. 00717
CC File No. 5304

Council: July 20, 1999

TO:	Vancouver City Council
FROM:	Subdivision Approving Officer
SUBJECT:	Proposed Amendment to Subdivision By-law No. 5208 - Site Reclassification at 766 East 54th Avenue

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council approve the application to reclassify the property at 766 East 54th Avenue from Category `B' to Category `A' of Schedule A, Table 1, of Subdivision By-law No. 5208.

GENERAL MANAGER'S COMMENTS

The General Manager of Community Services RECOMMENDS approval of the foregoing.

COUNCIL POLICY

Council policy regarding amendments to the subdivision categories in the RS-1, RS-1S, RS-3, RS-3A, RS-5, RS-5S and RS-6 Zoning Districts is reflected in the Manager's Report as approved by Council on October 28, 1987. As well as establishing seven parcel size categories for subdivision in the RS-1 District, the report provided for possible future changes in the categories in cases where property owners seek to classify their parcel category either up or down, to facilitate or prevent subdivision.

PURPOSE

This report addresses a proposal to reclassify the property at 766 East 54th Avenue (Lot 1 of 7, Block 3, D.L. 659, Plan 20112) from Category `B' to Category `A' for the purpose of subdivision in accordance with the minimum parcel size requirements of Schedule A, Table 1, of the Subdivision By-law.

BACKGROUND

On January 19, 1988, Council enacted an amended Schedule A to the Subdivision By-law by introducing seven categories of minimum parcel width and area to govern the subdivision of lands zoned RS-1. Subsequently, lands zoned RS-1S, RS-3, RS-3A, RS-5, RS-5S and RS-6 have been included as well. All lands in these zoning districts are classified on a block-by-block basis, as shown on 279 sectional maps which are on file with the City Clerk and which form part of Schedule A.

As shown in Appendix A to this report, the subject parcel is contained in a block which is classified as Category `B', which prescribes a minimum width of 12.192 m (40.00 ft.) and minimum area of 334.451 m² (3,600.00 sq. ft.) for each parcel created by subdivision. The blocks immediately to the north are also classified as Category `B'. The blocks to the south are classified as Category `A', which prescribes a minimum width of 9.144 m (30.00 ft.) and a minimum area of 278.709 m² (3,000.00 sq. ft.) for each parcel created.

The subject parcel has an approximate width and area of 26.540 m (87.10 ft.) and 734.500 m² (7,906.30 sq. ft.), respectively. Under Category `B' the owner could apply to subdivide Lot 1 into two parcels which would meet or exceed the minimum standards. The approval of such a subdivision, however, would require the demolition of the existing dwelling due to its location on the site.

The property owner has submitted this reclassification proposal because she wishes to retain her home, which while not on the Vancouver Heritage Register, was constructed in 1927 and is a "character" home in the neighbourhood. The dwelling has been owned by members of the applicant's family since it was built. Should this reclassification be approved, the owner intends to apply to subdivide Lot 1 of 7 into a west parcel with a width of approximately 15.610 m (51.20 ft.), which would contain the existing dwelling, and an east parcel with a width of approximately 10.930 m (35.90 ft.), which would then be developed with a new one-family dwelling by other family members.

Although staff have not completed the detailed review of the implications for Zoning and Development By-law and Vancouver Building By-law compliance vis a vis the existing dwelling, which will be undertaken if this classification is approved, preliminary calculations indicate that the dwelling can be retained on the size and configuration of parcel that is contemplated. If the dwelling does not comply, some exterior alterations to the dwelling may be necessary or the proposed property line could be moved slightly to the east to create a larger side yard setback.

A sketch illustrating the proposed parcels and the approximate location of the existing dwelling is attached as Appendix B.

HISTORY OF SUBDIVISION

Block 3 was created by the registration of Plan 1311 in 1906. The block was initially characterized by very large parcels - approximately 26.600 m (87.00 ft.) wide, and 54.900 m (180.00 ft.) deep - fronting onto both East 54th and East 55th Avenues. Subsequent subdivisions in Block 3 over the years have created parcels of varying widths, ranging from 10.668 m (35.00 ft.) to 15.789 m (51.80 ft.), and have divided the double-fronting parcels in half, creating that pattern of a standard block without a lane, as seen today. Lot 1 of 7 was created by a subdivision plan which also created Lots 2 and 3, directly to the south, in 1984. Lot 7 was one of the originally double-fronting parcels.

NEIGHBOURHOOD NOTIFICATION

Twenty-one property owners in the immediate area, excluding the applicant, were notified in writing of this reclassification request. Four responses were received, all in support of the application. The major reason cited by the respondents for supporting the reclassification was the desire to see the applicant retain her character home in their neighbourhood. The location of the respondents is shown on Appendix A.

ASSESSMENT

Lot 1 of 7 is the largest single parcel remaining in the north half of Block 3 and as stated above, has the potential to subdivide under the current By-law standards, although demolition would be required. Should the reclassification be approved, and subdivision occur as contemplated, the west parcel would have a width which is 15% greater than the average parcel width in the blockface and the east parcel would have a width which is 17% less than the average parcel width in the blockface. The creation of such parcels would not be out of character with the established pattern of subdivision in this block, which is not pristine.

CONCLUSION

Approval of this proposal would allow the applicant to retain the existing dwelling, while still enabling subdivision into two parcels. The dwelling has been her family's home for seventy-two years and is apparently highly valued by her neighbours, as evidenced by their support of this application. The subdivision pattern in the subject block has resulted from many subdivision applications over the years and is not pristine. Further, the parcel that the applicant proposes to create would not be out of character with the varying pattern of subdivision in the blockface. For these reasons, the Subdivision Approving Officer recommends approval of this application to amend the Subdivision By-law.

* * * * *

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver