6 May 2024 Council meeting Housing

Increasing Housing Options and Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing

Motion

That Council direct Staff to bring forward the draft Zoning Amendment Bylaw and draft Building Amendment Bylaw to implement the Increasing Housing Options initiatives and Provincial Small- Scale Multi-Unit Housing legislation.

Minutes, page 8

Sources

Agenda itemCity agenda, whole meeting

Staff reportPage 1

Purpose

To provide an overview of recommended changes for implementation of the Increasing Housing Options initiatives and Provincial Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing legislation, and to seek Council direction to bring forward amendment bylaws.

Staff report, page 1

Staff recommendation

That Council direct Staff to bring forward the draft Zoning Amendment Bylaw and draft Building Amendment Bylaw to implement the Increasing Housing Options initiatives and Provincial Small-Scale Multi-Unit Housing legislation.

Staff report, page 1

DocumentsStaff report about Housing, Land Use & Urban Form

Questions and answers

Councillor Erin Hemmens
Yes

asked

Councillor Hemmonds, please. Thank you, Your Worship, and thank you for the presentation. Something you just said about firefighting flows, if those aren't adequate, it will have to be addressed by the proponent at the time of development. What does that mean that a developer will have to put in bigger pipes so we have greater

City staff answered

Yes, through the Chair, that's a very good question. Yeah, so it doesn't necessarily mean that there would be off-site requirements. What we would require is to be satisfied that the available fire flows, sorry, the required fire flows for that development, we do have those fire flows available at the nearest fire hydrant. So there could be different ways that that could be addressed. I would suggest the worst case scenario would be off-site upgrades, but in reality there consider the building stage, planning of the building, whether it's greater distance between from the property line or even I think there's some design solutions with firewalls in the buildings to try and help reduce the required fire flows for that development. So it just would have to be some extra thought put into how you come up with those plans and we are producing mapping that will show fire hydrants where we do believe there are insufficient fire flows

J. Holm

answeredDirector, Planning and Development

result of Mr. Sims discussion with you? Mr. Holmes? Sure, Mr. Sims was just generously offering his support as he always does but it was addressing any of the engineering questions we've been working closely with his team on much of this as well. I was just going to mention, follow up, and add to what Mr. Horne mentioned and highlighted in the report. There are some proposed amendments to the city's building by-law as well that would try and address some of the items that Councillor Hemmonds raised through the building permit process.

Councillor Sheryl Armstrong
Yes

asked

Thank you. Just a question on water, actually. So when we're... It's more for the new infill know we know a lot of our pipes are older we just had another burst pipe again the other day who's gonna be responsible if the pipes that they're taking it aren't large enough to take on that is that gonna be on the developers there gonna be a partnership between the city and the developer to fix aging

Bill Sims

answeredGeneral Manager, Engineering and Public Works

infrastructure mr. Sam please your worship just briefly I'm sorry I'm having a hard time hearing in the with the echo where I'm sitting but I question was around upgrading old pipes in the case of developers. In this particular case, it's the asset management side of things that are older pipes are already in the plan. This change to the zoning is not anticipated to result in any larger pipes as a result of it's really based on fire flows is how pipes are sized so it should not increase or require an increase as Mr. Horne mentioned one of the options if a developer needs to increase fire flows for their specific property would be to do off-site upgrades but that would be probably a last resort that would make it not very economic. So you're pretty

followed up

Confident that our aging infrastructure can handle new development in the other areas?

City staff answered

In this particular case, I am.

Councillor Ian Thorpe
Yes

asked

Thank you, Your Worship. You made this point earlier, but I think it bears repeating and I just want staff to confirm because any of our viewers or listeners, I hope, recognize that these are significant and major changes upcoming to our community. And what the city is doing is in response to being told we have to meet provincial legislation. Is that a fair statement, Mr. Holm?

J. Holm

answeredDirector, Planning and Development

Yes, that is correct, through Your Worship to Councillor Thorpe. Although, to clarify, too, the city was in the process of looking at increasing housing options initiatives coming out of city plan. that would have been the official community plan review that would have done more, and Mr. Horn spoke to that a little bit, more of a targeted contextual update to infill housing options. What the province has required is that municipalities greater than 10,000, 5,000, greater than population of 5,000, thank you Mr. Horn, allow for, before June 30th of this year, allow all properties greater than 280 square metres to be permitted to have up to four dwelling units. So we can't restrict to less than four dwelling units on properties larger than 280 square meters, which I've got the numbers in the report, but that category is 22,000, roughly 22,000 properties in the city, as well as some others. So total over 23,500 properties in the city, by estimate, are being rezoned as a result of the provincial requirements, and that is a requirement of the province that was adopted at the end of last year are required to be implemented by June 30th of this year. Happy to clarify further if required.

followed up

I just think it's important that the public understands that we're being pushed down this path. And I totally understand that the city was looking already at strategies for increasing density, and I'm fine with that. I'm not comfortable with some of these changes that are being pushed upon us, but I also recognize that staff have been searching hard for reasonable ways to comply with the legislation, but at the same time giving our neighbourhoods some option and some discretion of the type of housing that's allowed. One question, if I may, Your Worship, and I don't know if staff can answer this, but I'm not familiar in detail with the provincial legislation, but we've heard referenced the effects on infrastructure, demands on water, fire services, parking, which will be a huge issue, I suspect. Does the provincial legislation in any way recognize or address those potential ramifications?

J. Holm

answeredDirector, Planning and Development

Through your worship to Councillor Thorpe, I'll try and address that. But there were other provincial bills that attempted to address some of the impacts through, for instance, changes to development cost charge allowances, what we can charge development cost charges for, as well as amenity cost charge, which is a replacement to sort of the community amenity contribution. So we can look at charging for properties through development for amenities. As well, we do have the ability, and Mr. Sims can speak to in greater detail, but we have had and we do have the ability to plan and upgrade infrastructure to meet needs in the community, obviously. So there are provisions in the provincial legislation that do allow to support and address this growth. Obviously it's going to change, I think it'll be a little bit more incremental in many areas than some areas we may see where there's older housing stock, larger lots. We may see more of this type of infill development in many areas, especially areas with newer homes. It may not be because we have allowed secondary suites for decades here in addition to suites and in accessory dwelling units in many cases. So it is definitely a shift and it is not to downplay it. I mean, this is the biggest change in local government land use approvals and sort of the patterns of community growth at the neighbourhood level in decades. For sure, it's impactful. But I do think it will be incremental and over time. There will, of course, as Councillor Thorpe pointed out, there will be concerns around parking for sure, impacts on some of the service delivery, solid waste pickup, things like that. There will be complaints, there will be concerns that aren't addressed in the legislation. For instance, cul-de-sacs, there's no ability for local governments to limit the development that might take place on a cul-de-sac. and obviously, you know, sanitation, solid waste pickup on a cul-de-sac is already challenging at some points. Those types of things, snow removal obviously will be more challenges as more people are parking on streets, but I think it will be over time and incremental in many areas and definitely you know it's marking a change in direction and course in how the city develops, but it does also align largely with city plan policies. a little less contextual and more indiscriminate than what the infill project that staff had been informing Council on in December. Hopefully that helps. Thanks.

followed up

Yes, thank you very much. I really appreciate your answer and I appreciate staff's hard work on this file. I guess when any time there is fairly rapid change, I'm always leery of unintended consequences. But I think we're doing our best to handle this as best we can, considering that, as I say, we're being forced down this road. So we do the best we can. Thank you for your efforts.