Agenda Index City of Vancouver

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT

TO:

Standing Committee on Planning and Environment

FROM:

Director of Current Planning

SUBJECT:

Development Application - 4542 West 10th Avenue

 

CONSIDERATION

The Director of Current Planning submits the following for consideration:

GENERAL MANAGER’S COMMENTS

COUNCIL POLICY

At its meeting on June 2, 1998, Council instructed the Director of Planning to:

A. refer all proposed height relaxations under Sections 4.3(a) and (b) C-2 Residential Guidelines to Council for advice;

B. delete Section 4.3(c) of the C-2 Residential Guidelines permitting height relaxations over 16.8 m pending a full review of the C-2 zone;

C. amend the C-2 Residential Guidelines to add a general clause indicating that projects should have a very good architectural design and should use quality exterior materials and that projects should be referred to Urban Design Panel (UDP) for advice;

D. report back to Council before the summer break with a timetable, work program and resourcing to undertake a C-2 review; and

E. instruct staff that the Guidelines take precedence where there is a conflict between the District Schedule and the Guidelines.

SUMMARY

In accordance with Council’s instructions of June 2, 1998, this development application is being referred to Council for advice as the proposal requires a building height relaxation and also proposes floor space ratio (FSR) in excess of that recommended by the C-2 Residential Guidelines.

The proposed development is for the construction of a four-storey retail/residential building and will require a height relaxation from 12.2 m/40.0 ft. to 13.3 m/43.78 ft. (worse case condition) at the northeast portion of the building. The proposed building is of concrete construction which qualifies for consideration of a height relaxation. The applicant has also submitted a view analysis, in support of the height relaxation, which shows that the views from the adjacent single-family residences are not impacted by this proposed development. Staff support some of the relaxations but recommend design changes to reduce the proposed height. Staff therefore recommend compliance with the height regulation at the southwest portion of the building to respect the lower residential scale across the lane and a reduction of 0.24 m/0.78 ft. at the northeast portion of the building to provide a maximum building height of 13.1 m/43.0 ft.

The proposal has an FSR of 2.94, of which 2.50 is for residential uses; however, the Guidelines suggest that 2.0 FSR may be the maximum residential floor area achievable on a midblock site. However, much of the additional residential density can be attributed to the provision of residential at the first storey 248 m²/2,980.8 sq.ft. (0.31 FSR) as well as the project being designed around a central circulation courtyard of which 84.9 m²/913.8 sq.ft. (0.09 FSR) is covered walkways. Staff are therefore recommending that the residential FSR be reduced to 2.40, which accepts only the additional residential density as described above.

Given the generally good quality of the design and based on the foregoing, the Director of Planning is therefore inclined to support this application. However, before making a decision, this application is being referred to Council for advice.

PURPOSE

This report seeks Council's advice on a development application requesting permission to construct a four-storey building containing retail and residential, where the proposed building exceeds 12.2 m/40.0 ft. in height. Owner of Dvelopment: United Pacific Development (West 10th) Corporation.

DISCUSSION

The site is located in the midblock on the south side of 10th Avenue between Tolmie Street to the west and Sasamat Street to the east. The site and surrounding zoning are shown on the attached Appendix ‘A’.

The proposal involves the construction of a four-storey concrete building containing retail and two dwelling units on the first storey, and 17 dwelling units on the second to fourth storeys with one-and-a-half levels of underground parking having vehicular access from the rear lane.

Simplified plans, including a site plan and elevations of the proposal, have been included in Appendix ‘B’.

The proposed development has been assessed against the C-2 District Schedule and C-2 Residential Guidelines and generally meets the intent, with some exceptions. The most significant issues are discussed below.

Height

A height relaxation of 0.59 m/1.94 ft. to 1.15 m/3.78 ft. is requested for this proposed development. The site slopes down slightly from south to north, from 0.53 m/1.74 ft. (along the west property line) to 0.71 m/2.33 ft. (along the east property line) and slopes down from west to east, from 0.23 m/0.75 ft. (along the south [lane] property line) and 0.41 m/1.34 ft. (along the north [street] property line). These mild slopes contribute to the requested height relaxations required for the north portion of the building, 0.59 m/1.94 ft.at the northwest corner and 1.15 m/3.78 ft. at the northeast corner. The proposal is also slightly over height at the southwest corner of the building by 0.48 m/1.59 ft.

In accordance with the Guidelines, the maximum building height of 12.2 m/40.0 ft. may be marginally increased for concrete construction of the residential component or where the site slopes more than 1.5 m/4.92 ft. Increases will only be considered where it can be demonstrated that there is no increased overshadowing or reduction of views of surrounding neighbours. Consideration should also be given to street character, overall building bulk, open space and amenity.

This proposal is of concrete construction but has a slope of less than 1.5 m/4.92 ft. Further, in considering any height relaxations, the Director of Planning must also first consider the view and shadowing impacts of the proposed development upon neighbouring sites.

A view analysis (Appendix ‘C’) confirms that the increase in height along the north elevation has no impact on views from the single-family residences to the south. For the residences directly south of the site, staff recognize that their views of the mountains will be eliminated by the development. However, it should be noted that these views would be completely blocked by any building at an outright permitted building height of 12.2 m/40.0 ft. The height relaxation requested along the north property line will have little additional impact on views.

With respect to shadowing, since the development is on the north side of the lane, there are no shadowing impacts on the surrounding lower density residential properties to the south and the recommended height relaxation, to a maximum of 13.1 m/43.0 ft. measured to the top of the parapet along the front (north) facade, will have negligible impact on the commercial street.

Staff believe that the proposed height relaxations up to 0.9 m/3.0 ft. at the north side of the building are supportable given the slope of the site and the advantages of concrete construction.

However, staff recommend compliance with the height regulation at the southwest portion of the building to respect the lower residential scale across the lane and a reduction of 0.24 m/0.78 ft. at the northeast portion of the building to provide a maximum building height of 13.1 m/43.0 ft.

Floor Space Ratio

The development proposes a total FSR of 2.94 of which 2.50 is residential. Section 4.7 of the Guidelines indicates that the maximum allowable residential FSR of 2.5 will usually be available only for “all-residential” developments or where the building height exceeds four storeys. For mixed-use buildings, similar to this proposal, the Guidelines suggest that 1.8 to 2.2 FSR of residential floor space will generally be available on the three storeys above the first-storey, with a maximum of 2.0 FSR generally achievable on midblock sites.

The proposed building is located on a midblock site and in addition to residential uses on the upper three storeys has approximately 248 m²/2,980.8 sq.ft. (0.31 FSR) of residential floor area on the first-storey. Staff believe that residential uses at grade off the lane is a suitable use as it is across from a single-family district. The proposal is relatively dense for the site but an additional portion of the proposed density can be attributed to the project being designed around a central circulation courtyard. The covered circulation corridors in the courtyard are included in FSR and contribute an additional 84.9 m²/913.8 sq.ft. (0.09 FSR). Staff therefore believe that a careful reading of the Guidelines would suggest that a developer could expect a total FSR of 2.40 (2.0+0.09+0.31) with a maximum residential FSR of 2.09 for the upper three storeys only and an additional 0.31 for the first-storey. Staff are recommending that the residential FSR be reduced to this amount, and note that further design development to the courtyard and building mass at the lane, as discussed below, should achieve this reduction.

pe990923.htm

Building Mass

The proposal focuses slightly more building mass at the lane and does not strictly follow the Guidelines with respect to the stepping of the building mass at the rear. However, staff support the quality of the architectural design of the rear facade, and are recommending some further design refinements, which would reduce massing and the floor area. These refinements would also respond to the westerly neighbours’ concern on light access to the rear of their property.

Courtyard

The Guidelines state that the provision for sufficient daylight access is an important criteria in developments incorporating courtyards. To achieve the intent of the Guidelines, the courtyard configuration and building mass should maximize sun access to the courtyard level, including terracing of upper levels on the south side of the courtyard. Staff will be seekingimprovements to the design of the courtyard which will include expanding the opening at the fourth storey, particularly on the south side, to ensure adequate daylight access. These measures will also result in some further reduction in the floor area. In addition, staff are recommending that the design of the corridors be as light as possible to allow the further filtration of light down into the lower levels of the courtyard.

URBAN DESIGN PANEL

At its meeting on June 16, 1999, the Urban Design Panel unanimously supported the proposed development. Overall, the Panel found the architectural design and the materials to be of very high quality.

A copy of the UDP minutes are attached as Appendix ‘D’.

NOTIFICATION

As part of the review of this development application, 57 neighbouring property owners were notified of the proposal. In addition, a site sign was placed on the site. In response, Planning staff received seven letters of objection.

The objections include concerns with privacy, loss of view, overshadowing, compatibility with neighbourhood, density, building height, quality of materials and architectural expression. These concerns have been addressed by staff through recommended conditions of approval, taking into consideration the C-2 District Schedule and Guidelines, and advice from the Urban Design Panel.

CONCLUSION

The proposed development has been assessed against the C-2 District Schedule and C-2 Residential Guidelines, and responds to the stated objectives. Staff generally feel that this proposal is above average in terms of architectural design and detailing. The proposed building will have high quality materials, which includes brick and architectural concrete on both the street and lane facades. Staff support a residential FSR of 2.40 with a maximum residential FSR of 2.09 for the upper three storeys only and an additional FSR of 0.31 for the first-storey residential, subject to design development of the courtyard. Further, staff support a height relaxation at the front (north) of the building up to 0.90 m/3.0 ft. subject to the proposal complying with the permitted height of 12.2 m/40.0 ft. along the rear elevation.

Planning staff therefore support approval of this development application, subject to various conditions to be met prior to the issuance of the development permit. However, before making a decision on this application, the Director of Planning is seeking any advice which Council may wish to provide.

* * * * *

pe990923.htm

Comments or questions? You can send us email.
[City Homepage] [Get In Touch]

(c) 1998 City of Vancouver