DocumentsStaff ReportApr 2, 2024Pages 15–18
Staff Report to Council - Bylaw 2082 (Omnibus 60) - September 6, 2022
Staff report (Sept 6, 2022) providing background and a revised set of proposed Omnibus amendments, recommending Council consider First Reading of a re-drafted Bylaw 2082 after consultation.
Key facts
- Report date: Tuesday, September 6, 2022
- Confirms prior committee recommendation and removal of two items (tandem parking limit and garage dimensions) for further research
- Option presented: give First Reading to Bylaw 2082 as re-drafted or do nothing
- No financial implications noted
Staff Report to Council - Bylaw 2082 (Omnibus 60) - September 6, 2022
t 250.478.7882
e administration@langford.ca
2nd Floor, 877 Goldstream Avenue
Langford, BC V9B 2X8
DATE:
Tuesday, September 6, 2022
DEPARTMENT:
Planning
APPLICATION NO.:
Bylaw 2082 - Zoning Amendment No 679, Omnibus 60
SUBJECT:
Various Housekeeping Items
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this report is to outline various proposed housekeeping amendments to Zoning Bylaw No. 300, which are proposed to fulfill previous Council resolutions as well as address issues that have been brought to staff’s attention.
BACKGROUND:
On June 13, 2022, the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee recommend that Council proceed with consideration of Bylaw No. 2082 and consult with the West Shore Developers Association prior to First Reading of the Bylaw.
Following consultation, staff have determined a need to further review two of the proposed changes in the Omnibus: 1) limiting tandem parking in townhouse units to a maximum of 30% of the development, and 2) specifying a minimum space dimension for residential parking garages. As a result, these items have been removed from the list of proposed amendments of Bylaw 2082.
Considering the above, Council may now wish to proceed with consideration of First Reading to Bylaw 2082, as re-drafted.
COMMENTARY:
Given the comprehensive nature of the Zoning Bylaw, it is common practice to identify housekeeping amendments in response to administrative or design issues, and to ensure the bylaw is functioning as intended. All proposed changes have been consolidated into the table below, including a brief rationale for each amendment. The changes proposed as part of revised Bylaw No. 2082 include the following items:
| Proposed Change | Rationale |
|---|---|
| Section 6.91(1)(a) – Comprehensive Development 2 – Hull’s Field (CD2) Zone is amended by adding the following as a permitted use: 1. Accessory Dormitories which may include a kitchenette. | This proposed change is designed to capture the short-term dormitories located at Athlete’s Housing. |
| Section 6.58.01(1) – City Centre Pedestrian CCP Zone would be amended by allowing the following as a permitted use 2. Apartments on the ground floor and/or second floor of a building, when located on a corner lot and facing on a secondary street, which may not include Peatt Rd, Claude Rd, Goldstream Ave, Bryn Maur, Veterans Memorial Parkway, or Jacklin Rd; | A corner lot faces two intersecting streets, with each side of a building facing one of the streets. Allowing additional residential uses along one side of the building would promote walk-up townhouse units with entrances at grade while still supporting commercial activity on adjacent commercial/pedestrian corridors. |
| Section 3.26.02 would be amended by adding Table 1 as section 3.26.02(10) and renumbering remaining sections accordingly 3. Refer to Bylaw 2082 for details. | The purpose of this amendment is to consolidate all daycare capacity exemptions from each zone into the same section of the Bylaw. |
| Section 6.22.03 – One-and Two-Family Residential (R2) Zone would be amended as follows: 4. The lot area for a two-family dwelling use may be less than 600 m2, but not less than 500 m2, provided that the lot width is not less than 17m. | This proposed amendment is expected to have minimal impact on the perceived character and scale of R2 neighbourhoods, particularly with the increased lot width, and may provide a lower-cost option for home ownership in lower density neighbourhoods. This would be an alternate option to the current two-family lot dimension requirements of 600 m2 with 15m lot width. |
| Section 3.02 - Prohibited Uses – the following would be prohibited in all zones 5. A landscape retaining wall visible from neighbouring properties or municipal roads, that is constructed of smooth concrete blocks and/or are of a natural concrete colour, ranging from white to grey. | The purpose of this amendment is to promote retaining walls with more attractive materials (e.g. stone masonry, bricks or sand-blasted concrete with interesting patterns or other suitable finish). |
| Section 1.01 – Definitions - would be amended by adding the following definition: 6. Landscape Retaining Wall - means a wall that retains any earthly material that prevents it from sliding, eroding, or moving. This wall shall not be constructed of any smooth concrete blocks nor be of any natural concrete colour, ranging from white to grey. | There are currently no retaining wall guidelines or definitions within Zoning Bylaw 300. This definition is required in order to distinguish retaining walls from other “structures”, which would trigger setback requirements. |
| Section 4.01.07 – Accessible Parking – would be amended to update accessible parking requirements: Accessible Parking: where more than 50 parking spaces are provided in a development, parking stalls for persons with disabilities shall be provided at a ratio of 1 for every 100 units or part thereof. Where accessible dwelling units are provided, one parking stall for persons with disabilities shall be provided for each sleeping unit required. |
Bylaw 300 currently does not have a ratio for accessible parking in residential developments, as the BC Building Code (“BCBC”) used to address this requirement. Staff are proposing to add the previous BCBC requirements to the Zoning Bylaw. |
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial implications for the proposed amendments.
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no legal implications for the proposed amendments.
OPTIONS:
Option 1
THAT Council give First Reading to Bylaw 2082, as drafted.
OR
Option 2
THAT Council do nothing at this time with respect to Bylaw 2082.
SUBMITTED BY:
David Sametz, MCIP, RPP, Long-Range Planner II
Concurrence:
- Leah Stohmann, MCIP, RPP, Deputy Director of Planning and Subdivision
- Donna Petrie, Senior Manager of Business Development and Events
- Will Ying-udomrat, Manager of Legislative Services
- Matthew Baldwin, MCIP, RPP, Director of Planning and Subdivision
- Michelle Mahovlich, P.Eng, P.Geo, Director of Engineering and Public Works
- Audrey Kryklywyj-Shortreid, Deputy Director of Finance
- Marie Watmough, Acting Director of Corporate Services
- Darren Kiedyk, Chief Administrative Office