monday, january 9 th, 2017 @ 5:30 pmand~minutes... · date: january 9, 2017 department: planning...

CITY OF LANGFORD

PLANNING, ZONING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE

Monday, January 9th, 2017 @ 5:30 pm

Council Chambers AGENDA . CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA 3. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

a) Planning, Zoning & Affordable Housing Committee Meeting – November 28th, 2016 2 4. REPORTS

a) Application to Rezone 3370, 3344 Luxton Road and 2869 Sooke Road from RR2 (Rural Residential 2) Zone to Business Park 2A – Sooke Road West (BP2A) Zone to accommodate additional onsite uses

- Staff Report (Planning Z16-0024) 5 b) Application for Development Variance Permit to allow for a parking variance and rear yard

setback variance at 884 Attree Avenue - Staff Report (Planning DVP16-0020) 22 c) Planning Department – Five year Financial Plan for 2017-2021 - Staff Report (Planning) 28

5. ADJOURNMENT

Page 1 of 36

CITY OF LANGFORD

MINUTES OF THE PLANNING, ZONING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMMITTEE

Monday, November 28th, 2016 @ 5:30 pm

Council Chambers

PRESENT Councillors: D. Blackwell (Chair), L. Szpak (A/Vice Chair); Members: N. Stewart, S. Harvey and K. Sheldrake.

ATTENDING

M. Baldwin, Director of Planning and M. Mahovlich, Director of Engineering.

ABSENT

Member: A. Creuzot, M. Hall, and D. Horner. 1. CALL TO ORDER The Chair called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. 2. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA MOVED BY: N. STEWART SECONDED: K. SHELDRAKE

That the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee approve the Agenda as presented.

CARRIED. 3. ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES

a) Planning, Zoning & Affordable Housing Committee Meeting – November 14th, 2016 MOVED BY: N. STEWART SECONDED: S. HARVEY

That the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee approve the minutes of the meeting held on November 14th, 2016.

CARRIED.

of 36Page 2 of 36

Minutes of the PZAH Committee – November 28th, 2016 Page 2 of 3

4. REPORTS

a) Application to allow the sale of automobiles, recreational vehicles, trucks and boats on the property at 2668 Sooke Rd

- Staff Report (Planning TUP16-0004)

MOVED BY: K. SHELDRAKE SECONDED: S. HARVEY

That the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing recommend to Council: That Council reject this application for a Temporary Use Permit and give the owners 30 days to remove the temporary trailer from the site.

CARRIED.

b) Application for a Temporary Use Permit to allow a Construction Management Office with

Accessory Outdoor Storage at 976 Capella Dr - Staff Report (Planning TUP16-0005)

MOVED BY: K. SHELDRAKE SECONDED: S. HARVEY

That the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing recommend to Council: That Council: 1. Proceed with the consideration of this Temporary Use Permit for a construction management

office with accessory outdoor storage in the CD6 Zone at 976 Capella Drive for a period of three years, subject to the following terms and conditions:

i) That all areas of the site used for the outdoor storage of construction materials and equipment be screened by a solid 1.8 m (6.0 ft) high fence; and

ii) That the movement of construction materials and equipment on the site be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., or sunset, in accordance with City of Langford Bylaw No. 961 “A Bylaw to Provide for the Abatement and Control of Objectionable Noise in the Electoral Areas of the Capital Regional District”.

CARRIED.

of 36Page 3 of 36

Minutes of the PZAH Committee – November 28th, 2016 Page 3 of 3

c) Application to vary the interior side yard setback from 3m to 1.5m for Lot 5 and to exempt the 10% minimum frontage requirement for Lots 5 and 6 as part of the 6 lot subdivision at 892 Klahanie Dr

- Staff Report (Planning DVP16-0009) MOVED BY: S. HARVEY SECONDED: K. SHELDRAKE

That the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing recommend to Council: That Council: 1. Direct staff to proceed with consideration of the following variance for 892 Klahanie Drive:

a) That Section 6.17.06 (2) of Zoning Bylaw No. 300 be varied to permit the distance of a building or structure to be reduced from the required 3m to 1.5m for the interior side yard setback for Lot 5 as specifically shown on Appendix A.

2. Exempt Lots 5 and 6 as shown in Subdivision File No. SUB16-0018 from the 10% frontage requirement and direct the Approving Officer to accept the proposal at the time of subdivision.

CARRIED. d) Application to vary the distance of a building to the exterior side yard lot line from the

required 3.5m to 1.2m to allow for the construction of a one-family dwelling at 3416 Hazelwood Rd (soon to be addressed as 1003 Foxwood Pl)

- Staff Report (Planning DVP16-0016)

MOVED BY: N. STEWART SECONDED: COUNILLOR SZPAK

That the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing recommend to Council: That Council: 1. Direct staff to proceed with consideration of the following variance for 3416 Hazelwood Road:

a) That Section 6.27.06 (1)(c) of Zoning Bylaw No. 300 be varied to permit the distance of a building or structure to be reduced from the required 3.5m to 1.2m for the exterior side yard lot line for the one-family dwelling to be addressed as 1003 Foxwood Place.

CARRIED.

5. ADJOURNMENT

The Chair adjourned the meeting at 5:58 p.m. ________________ _________________ CHAIR CERTIFIED CORRECT (City Manager)

of 36Page 4 of 36

2nd Floor · 877 Goldstream Avenue · Langford, BC Canada · V9B 2X8 T · 250-478-7882 F · 250-478-7864

Staff Report to

Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee Date: January 9, 2017

Department: Planning

Application No.: Z16-0024 Subject: Application to Rezone 3370, 3344 Luxton Road and 2869 Sooke Road from RR2

(Rural Residential 2) Zone to Business Park 2A – Sooke Road West (BP2A) Zone to accommodate additional onsite uses

PURPOSE Mr. Richard Irwin has applied on behalf of 89 Chicken Ranch Ltd to rezone three properties located at 3370 Luxton Road, 3344 Luxton Road and 2896 Sooke Road from Rural Residential 2 (RR2) to Business Park 2A – Sooke Road West (BP2A) to permit additional uses and develop the site accordingly. BACKGROUND This application is made up of three separately titled parcels. The parcel addressed off of Sooke Road is currently used as a single family dwelling and the two parcels addressed on Luxton Road operate as a soil excavation and supply business. The three parcels have not submitted an application for development in recent years, however a temporary use permit (TUP14-0001) was applied for in 2014 for the removal of soil and excess material left over from previous re-grading of all three properties. A demolition permit (DEM13-001) was obtained to remove a shed on the parcel located at 3370 Luxton Road, and soil permits have been applied for at 3344 Luxton Road for the ongoing removal and deposition of soil at the site associated with the business at that address.

of 36Page 5 of 36

Subject: Z16-0024 Page 2 of 17

Table 1: Site Data

Applicant Richard Irwin of R. Irwin Consulting Ltd.

Owner 89 Chicken Ranch Ltd. Inc. No. 156957

Civic Address 3370 & 334 Luxton Road, 2869 Sooke Road

Legal Description

Lot 1, Sections 87 and 88, Metchosin District, Plan 18854 (3370 Luxton Road); Lot A, Section 87, Metchosin District, Plan 17666 (3344 Luxton Road); Amended Lot 1 (DD 319289-I) of Block B, Section 87, Metchosin District, Plan 1139 (2869 Sooke Road)

Size of Property 54,175 m2 or 5.41 ha

DP Areas 200 Year Flood Plain, Sensitive Habitat and Biodiversity, Riparian Area

Zoning

Existing: Rural Residential 4 Zone (RR4)

Proposed: Business Park 2A – Sooke Road West (BP2A)

OCP Designation Existing: Business and Light Industrial

Proposed: No Change

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA The area making up the subject site is approximately 54,175 m2 or 5.41 hectares of flat, cleared space situated on the corner of Sooke Road and Luxton Road. Currently this is the location of a single family dwelling (2869 Sooke Road) and an excavation and soil supply business (3344, 3370 Luxton Road). This location is somewhat of a transitionary area between the light industrial uses to west and the low density residential to the east. The area was predominantly used for small scale agricultural and industrial uses as well as residential uses before the incorporation of the City. The subject properties are flanked by rural residential uses with single family dwellings and small agriculture operations. These properties are accessed via Happy Valley Road but would share access to Luxton Road. This proximity to residential properties should influence the types of uses that are acceptable when considering this rezoning application. Furthermore Council should note that with sewer now extended to the homes along Happy Valley, there is potential for further subdivision on the east side of Luxton thus increasing the residential density in this area. When the adjacent parcel, at 2901 Sooke Road (Slegg Lumber Site), was rezoned from General Industrial (M2) to Business Park (BP2) (Z-00-08), rezoning conditions were heavily centered on future highway connectivity close to the site. At the time of rezoning it was the City’s prerogative to connect the western Langford communities using a new highway referred to as the Amy – Parkdale Connector. With the development of the community of Westhills, this access to Sooke Road was replaced by the West Shore Parkway. The following conditions were included as part of the approval to rezone 2901 Sooke Road: 1) That the applicant provide, prior to adoption, the road dedication required for the construction of

the Parkdale Road south of Sooke Road as required in the Official Community Plan; 2) That the applicant provide, prior to adoption, a right of way for a (City) of Langford Trail and cash in

lieu of the construction of the trail as require by the Trail Master Plan; 3) That the applicant provide, prior to adoption, any improvements identified in the traffic study , to

the to the satisfaction of Council an in accordance with Bylaw No. 500;

of 36Page 6 of 36


4) That the applicant provide, prior to adoption, a stormwater treatment pond, for the treatment of

stormwater runoff from the site, to the satisfaction of Council; 5) That a Section 219 covenant be registered on the property, prior to bylaw adoption, requiring the

following: a. Any access arrangement deemed to be a temporary, or an interim access, be removed

when full access via the intersection of Sook Road and Parkdale Road is provided, to the satisfaction of Council and in accordance with Bylaw No. 500, if needed;

b. Applicant to provide full frontage improvements and road construction of any portion of the Parkdale Road extension, south of Sooke Road that lies on those lands dedicated by the applicant as part of the application, and that these improvements be required when road dedication is provided by the adjacent property owner (2869 Sooke Road) if needed;

c. That the applicant provide, prior to bylaw adoption, a Section 219 covenant which requires the owner to join any future Sewer Specified Area that would reasonably be expected serve the subject property, and pay any fees associated with joining that new specified area.

Figure 1: 2901 Sooke Road Rezoning Showing Road Dedication at Parkdale Road and Sooke Road

of 36Page 7 of 36


In addressing the requirement for a road dedication, the applicant registered a covenant on the property that prohibited the use of a portion of the parcel once the highway area for the Amy -Parkdale Connector had been acquired by the District (City of Langford). The applicant was also to register a statutory right of way in favour of the (City) over that same portion of the parcel. Although the Amy – Parkdale Connector access was never realized, the West Shore Parkway extension has been developed to the west of the subject properties and access to Sooke Road and this connection is imperative to the development potential of this site. Therefore, Council may wish to request similar conditions which favour safe access to this site as part of this rezoning application. Table 2: Surrounding Land Uses

Zoning Use

North (2874 Sooke Road) Residential One – Two Family (R2)

Single Family Dwelling

East (3309, 3313 Luxton Road and 1067 Marwood Ave)

Residential One – Two Family (R2)

Single Family Dwelling

East (3321, 3325, 3343, 3359, 3367 Luxton Road)

Residential One – Two Family (R2); Rural Residential 2 (RR2);

Single Family Dwellings with Agricultural uses

East (3371 and 3379 Luxton Road)

Comprehensive District 14 (CD14)

Two Family Dwelling

South & West (2901 Sooke Road)

Business Park 2 – Sooke Road (BP2)

Lumber Retail Sales

of 36Page 8 of 36


COUNCIL POLICY

OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN The City of Langford’s Official Community Plan (OCP) Bylaw No.1200, designates these parcels as “Business or Light Industrial.” Areas within the Business Light Industrial designation support a range of business uses, parks, open areas, and spaces which support employees and users such as pedestrian connections and green corridors. Areas within this designation are also encouraged to contain transit stops in order to serve employees and patrons of the site.

Rezoning the subject properties to the BP2A Zone is consistent with this OCP designation, as the BP2A Zone offers additional opportunities for employment while providing additional service and business opportunities in Langford. However, the applicant also wishes to amend the BP2A Zone to allow Apartments to be built on the subject properties only. This aspect of the proposal is not supported by this OCP designation, as including apartments as a permitted use would compromise the ability of these lands to be developed in the intended manner. There would be a strong possibility that apartments and only apartments would be constructed on the subject properties, rather than one or more buildings that would create long-term employment opportunities and business services. If Council wishes to consider including apartments as a permitted use, an OCP amendment would be necessary. Currently, the OCP and South Langford Neighbourhood plan envision higher density residential development such as apartments to occur in the Sooke Road Revitalization Area (located along Sooke Rd between Jacklin Rd and Happy Valley Rd) portion of the South Langford area. The site borders an area designated as “Neighbourhood Area” to the east and an additional “Business and Light Industrial” area to the west. DEVELOPMENT PERMIT AREAS Portions of the subject properties are located within environmentally sensitive and hazardous development permit areas designated by Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 1200. These include a riparian area, a potential habitat and biodiversity area, as well as an area that is subject to the 200 year flood plain of Firehall Creek. These areas may affect the future placement of buildings and layout of the site. Subsequent development permits will be required in order to ensure conditions related to environmental protection and hazard mitigation are in place as part of any development.

of 36Page 9 of 36


COMMENTS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL The applicant is requesting a rezoning from the current Rural Residential 2 (RR2) Zoning in order to expand the development potential of the site. As the Business Park 2A (BP2A) Zone shares many similar uses to the proposal, a text amendment to the current BP2A Zone would permit, and restrict, particular uses on the subject sites in favour of creating a brand new business park zone. Given the location of the site, , the subject property is well situated to act as a buffer between nearby residential areas that are experiencing densification and the more intensive industrial uses to the west, along Sooke Road. The applicant has proposed that several site-specific uses be added as permitted uses for the subject properties that are not currently permitted in the BP2A Zone, such as retail businesses, apartments and school-related uses. As well, uses which are currently permitted in the BP2A Zone would be restricted or eliminated from the subject properties, including auto oriented uses and gravel processing plants. These uses are more appropriate in areas surrounded by a heavier industrial presence and in auto-centred zones. With respect to the request to include apartments as a permitted use, it has been noted that residential uses do not fit within the intent of the current “Business and Light Industrial” designation pursuant to the Official Community Plan (OCP). An amendment to the OCP will be required if Council wishes to consider permitting the apartment use as part of this rezoning application. Council may wish to provide direction with regards to whether they wish to support, or not support, this OCP amendment. If Council is not supportive of the OCP amendment, the application will proceed as a rezoning application that will not include apartments as a permitted use, and if Council is supportive of including apartments as a permitted use for the subject properties only, they may direct the applicant to apply for the necessary OCP amendment. As a key component of developing this site is based on safe access to and from the site itself, the Director of Engineering has requested that a Traffic Study be submitted prior to Public Hearing, to identify what improvements are necessary to support the site once developed. Council may wish to revisit the list of permitted uses being proposed when the Traffic Study has been submitted in order to determine whether the proposed uses are appropriate for the site. If any proposed uses are deemed inappropriate from a traffic perspective, Council could prohibit those uses in a Section 219 covenant registered on title prior to Bylaw Adoption, as zoning amendment bylaws may not be altered with respect to use or density after a Public Hearing.

of 36Page 10 of 36


Table 1 illustrates the uses being proposed for the subject area:

Permitted by RR4 Permitted by BP2A (Proposed Zoning)

Within that portion of the lands identified on the Business Park 2A – Sooke Road West Zone Map attached as Schedule SW

Accessory buildings and uses;

Agriculture;

Boarding kennel;

Breeding kennel;

Group day care;

Home occupation;

Intensive agriculture on lots of 4 ha (10 acres) or more in area;

One-family dwelling or two-family dwelling;

Secondary suite in a one-family dwelling;

Temporary construction and real estate marketing offices;

The keeping of not more than four boarders in a one-family dwelling; and

Accessory buildings, uses and unenclosed storage;

Animal hospitals and veterinary clinics in enclosed buildings;

Apartments

Car wash;

Carpentry shops;

Coffee shops;

Commercial nurseries and greenhouses;

Commercial bakeries;

Facilities for green energy and heat production;

Feed and seed supply;

Film production studios;

Financial institutions, including drive-thrus;

Food catering facilities;

Gasoline service station;

General industrial uses including truck terminal facilities, metal fibreglass or wood manufacturing or fabrication, wholesale, warehouse and storage buildings;

Group day care in accordance with Section 3.26.02;

Gymnasiums, health establishments and dance studios;

Light manufacturing and assembly in enclosed buildings, including but not limited to food and drink processing, computer technology service and manufacturing, electronics manufacturing, and green technology manufacturing;

Light industrial uses for offices and storage buildings for: machine shops, general contracting, electrical, air conditioning, plumbing, roofing, sheet metal, HVAC, paint, building, refrigeration, septic tank and sign contractors, which are not noxious or offensive by reason of permitting odours, dust, smoke, gas or noise;

Medical laboratories and services;

Mini-storage;

Offices;

Post Office;

Premises licensed pursuant to the Liqour Control and Licensing Act;

Printing, publishing and book binding;

Recycling depots;

Refund container return depots;

Rental of goods and equipment;

Repair of household furnishings;

of 36Page 11 of 36


Building siting and spatial regulations contained within the BP2A Zone are the same as what is being proposed by the rezoning application. As no development is being proposed at this time, no variances or building form characteristics are being considered. Subsequent development permits and/or development variance permit will be required when development is proposed.

Table 3: Proposal Data

Permitted by RR4 (Current Zoning)

Permitted by BP2A

(Proposed Zoning)

Proposed by Rezoning Application

Density (min. lot size) 4000 m2 (1 ac) 1000 m2 (0.25 ac)

*no changes to these zoning regulations are being proposed with this rezoning application.

Height 4 stories/ 15 m

Site Coverage 30% or 1000 m 60 %

Front Yard Setback 7.5 m 4.5 m of any lot line that abuts Sooke Road and

3 m of any other lot line that abuts a highway

Interior Side Yard Setback

3 m

Exterior Side Yard Setback

3 m

Rear Yard Setback 10 m

PEDESTRIAN, CYCLING AND MOTORIST NETWORK

There are two bus stops on Sooke Road which run east and west bound connecting the site to the rest of Langford and beyond to Sooke via public transportation. These are the 61 to Sooke, the 54 to Metchosin, the 64 to East Sooke and the 55 to Happy Valley. The 54 and 55 bus routes may also be caught on Marwood Avenue.

Restaurants, including drive-ins and drive-thrus;

Retail sales

Retail sale, rental and repair of tools and small equipment such as chain saws, hand and edge tools, lawn mowers, motorbikes, rotor tillers, and outboard motors;

Schools, including universities, colleges, business colleges and trade schools;

Scientific, medical or technological research facility;

Temporary construction and real estate marketing offices;

Wholesale and storage warehouse buildings; (not including the storage of motor vehicles)

of 36Page 12 of 36


Figure 2: BC Transit stops close to subject sites

Access to the site is a key component to the future viability of the development. The applicant has met with City of Langford Engineering department to discuss access and frontage improvements which will be necessary to safely access the site and the communities beyond. The Engineering Department is requesting improvements be completed subject to a Traffic Study and to the approval of the Ministry of Transportation in order to confirm that the minimum requirements needed for the safe operation of the redeveloped site are provided.

ROAD DEDICATION

As a condition of the rezoning application, Council may wish to obtain a road dedication from the 2869 Sooke Road property in order to re-align Marwood Avenue so it meets Sooke Road at a right angle. The exact location of this re-alignment will be determined based on sight lines, laning on Sooke Road and access to the subject site. Extending Marwood Avenue at this location may also necessitate the closure of Luxton Road at Sooke Road in order to encourage traffic flow to this new extension to Sooke Road. Council may wish to require that the applicant dedicate this portion of the property as road to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering subject to the requested Traffic Study and approval from the Ministry of Transportation, prior to Bylaw Adoption.

of 36Page 13 of 36


Figure 3: Proposed Road Extension of Marwood Avenue and Road Closure at Sooke Road and Luxton Road

FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS

The applicant will be required to provide frontage improvements along Sooke and Luxton Road to ensure safe site access and improve connectivity along this corridor. A road extension from Marwood Avenue to Sooke Road will connect residents along the Happy Valley corridor to Sooke Road and beyond to West Shore Parkway, therefore the placement of a signal light may be warranted and included in frontage improvements required as part of the conditions to rezone the property. As this requirement would be contingent on approval from the Ministry of Transportation, Council may wish it to be included in the Section 219 covenant to be registered prior to Bylaw Adoption and implemented as a requirement prior to subdivision or building permit issuance, whichever is first. Additional frontage improvements on Sooke Road may include a bike lane, a sidewalk to accommodate the uses proposed by this rezoning application, a paved shoulder, street lighting as per the City’s lighting policies, a boulevard contingent on City of Langford’s Parks Department’s specifications, and a left turn lane into the site. Frontage improvements on Luxton Road may include bike lanes, a middle turn lane if deemed necessary by the Ministry of Transportation for site access, road edge parking, a boulevard subject to the Parks Department’s specifications, and street lighting as per the Streetlight Policy in Bylaw 1000. Frontage improvements will be addressed through the required Traffic Study and more

of 36Page 14 of 36


improvements may be added. Council may wish that these improvements be subject to a Section 219 covenant and implemented prior to subdivision or building permit issuance, whichever is first. INFRASTRUCTURE

The applicant will be required to extend and connect to the existing sewer on Happy Valley Road as a condition of rezoning and in accordance with City of Langford Bylaw 1000. The applicant will also be required to pay the necessary costs and fees as authorized under CRD Bylaw No. 3889 for the supply and installation of water distribution system capable of meeting all domestic and fire flow requirements, designed in accordance with CRD specifications and standard drawings. FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS Rezoning the subject property to allow for commercial and industrial uses may increase the assessed value of the property, and this may increase municipal revenue. As the applicant will connect the development to municipal sewers and complete the required frontage improvements, the direct capital costs to the municipality associated with this development will be negligible. A summary of the amenity Development Cost Changes required pursuant to DCC Bylaw No. 26 are listed in Tables 4 below.

It should be noted that, since the applicant has not submitted any plans specifying or precluding any use or development type on the site, Table 4 lists the Development Cost Charges for all uses permitted on the site if Council is supportive of the proposed rezoning.

of 36Page 15 of 36


Table 4 – Development Cost Charges

Development Cost Charge

Total

Roads

Multi – Family $3,917 per unit

Commercial $47.39 per m2 gfa

Industrial $6.32 per m2 gfa

Institutional $63.18 per m2 gfa

Storm Drainage

Multi-Family $852 per unit

Commercial/Institutional $7.30 per m2 gfa

Industrial or Public Utility $40,575 per ha

Commercial/Recreational or Public Utility $7.30 <than 5% impervious surface per m2 gfa

Incremental Storage Improvement Fees (per 1000 ft2 of gfa)

Multi- Family $331.65 per unit

Commercial $140 per 1000 ft2 of floor area

Industrial $208 per 1000 ft2 of floor area

Institutional/Public Utility $430 per 1000 ft2 of floor area

CRD Water

Medium Density Multi-Family $2323.43 per unit

High Density Multi-Family $2323.43 per unit

Commercial $9.76 per m2 gfa

Industrial $5.29 per m2 gfa

Institutional $21.57 per m2 gfa

Institutional Residential $1,037.24/bed

Elementary or Middle School $129.42 per student based on capacity

Junior or Senior Secondary School / $175.09 per student based on capacity

School Site Acquisition

Medium Low Density (21 to 50 units/ha) $628 per unit

Medium Density (51 to 125 units/ha) $558 per unit

Medium High Density (126 to 200 units/ha) $488 per unit

High Density (>200 units/ha) $419 per unit

of 36Page 16 of 36


Furthermore, if Council wishes to pursue adding apartments as a permitted use for the subject properties, the following amenity contributions would be required in accordance with the Amenity Contribution Policy:

Table 5 – Amenity Contributions

Amenity Contribution Total

General Amenity Reserve Fund $3,660 per unit

Affordable Housing Reserve Fund $661 per unit

OPTIONS

Option 1 That the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee recommend that Council: 1. Direct staff to prepare a bylaw to amend the zoning designation of the property located at 3344

Luxton Road, 3370 Luxton Road, and 2869 Sooke Road from Rural Residential 2 (RR2) to Business Park 2A – Sooke Road West (BP2A) with the following text amendments, and subject to the following terms and conditions:

a) That the following uses be added to those permitted within the Business Park – Sooke Road West (BP2A) Zone on lands legally described as Lot 1, Sections 87 and 88, Metchosin District, Plan 18854 (3370 Luxton Road); Lot A, Section 87, Metchosin District, Plan 17666 (3344 Luxton Road); Amended Lot 1 (DD 319289-I) of Block B, Section 87, Metchosin District, Plan 1139 (2869 Sooke Road):

i. Schools; ii. Retail stores;

b) That the following uses be prohibited within the Business Park – Sooke Road West (BP2A)

Zone, on the lands legally described as Lot 1, Sections 87 and 88, Metchosin District, Plan 18854 (3370 Luxton Road); Lot A, Section 87, Metchosin District, Plan 17666 (3344 Luxton Road); Amended Lot 1 (DD 319289-I) of Block B, Section 87, Metchosin District, Plan 1139 (2869 Sooke Road):

i. Gravel and aggregate processing and sale; and ii. Retail sale, rental and repair of motorcycles, automobiles, trucks, boats,

recreational vehicles, manufactured homes, farm machinery, and small industrial equipment such as skid steer loaders and heavy industrial equipment and heavy trucks (ie. Greater than 2700 gf GVW) and parts and accessories thereof.

of 36Page 17 of 36


c) That the applicant provides, prior to Public Hearing, a Traffic Study to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering.

d) That the applicant provides, prior to Bylaw Adoption, a Section 219 covenant, registered

in priority of all other charges on title, that agrees to the following:

i. That the applicant will implement recommendations within the Traffic Study prior to subdivision or the issuance of a building permit, whichever is first;

ii. That as a condition of building permit, frontage improvements be provided to Subdivision and Servicing Bylaw No.1000 standards, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering;

iii. That any uses permitted in the BP2A Zone or proposed by this rezoning application that are deemed inappropriate from a traffic management perspective by the Traffic Study be prohibited on the subject properties, if applicable;

e) That the applicant provides the following, prior to Bylaw Adoption:

i. Road dedication to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering and to the

standards of Bylaw No. 1000.

OR Option 2

2. All conditions included in Option 1;

3. Direct staff to include apartments as a permitted use in the BP2A Zone on the subject properties only;

4. That the owner agrees to provide, as a bonus for increased density, the following contributions prior to the issuance of a Building Permit:

a) $3,660 per unit towards the General Amenity Reserve Fund; b) $661 per unit towards the Affordable Housing Reserve Fund;

5. Direct the applicant to apply to amend the Official Community Plan designation of the subject

property, and that this amendment be considered in conjunction with the zoning amendment.

Or Option 3

6. Reject this application for rezoning.

of 36Page 18 of 36


Submitted by: Lauren Morhart, MCIP, RPP Planner II

Concurrence: Matthew Baldwin, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning

Concurrence: Mike Leskiw, Parks and Recreation Manager

Concurrence: Michelle Mahovlich, P.Eng, P.Geo, Director of Engineering

Concurrence: Brent Molnar, Manager of Land Development

Concurrence: Steve Ternent, Director of Finance

Concurrence: Jim Bowden, Chief Administrative Officer

:lhm

of 36Page 19 of 36


Appendix A

of 36Page 20 of 36


Appendix B

of 36Page 21 of 36


Staff Report to

Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee Date: January 9, 2017


Application No.: DVP16-0020

Subject: Application for Development Variance Permit to allow for a parking variance and rear yard setback variance at 884 Attree Avenue

PURPOSE Doran Musgrove has applied on behalf of Raymond Yan for a development variance permit to allow a parking variance from 19 spaces to 18 spaces and a rear yard setback variance from 3m to 1.22m at 844 Attree Avenue. BACKGROUND PREVIOUS APPLICATIONS DVP05-0018 - In 2005, 884 Attree Avenue was included in a Development Variance permit that was issued to reduce the rear lot line setback to zero. The application included six different parcels along the northern side of Attree Avenue that received the variance. That being said, it appears at this time that only one property included in the approved DVP application (880 Attree Avenue) has utilized their rear lot line setback variance of zero since issuance. The issued DVP from 2005 that granted a zero meter rear lot line setback for 884 Attree Avenue is considered expired at this point. DP06-0019 – In 2006, a form and character Development Permit was applied for and issued to allow for the construction of a two-storey commercial building for Russ Hays Bike Shop on 884 Attree Avenue. The DP that was issued also included a variance that allowed for a reduction to the required parking from 19 parking stalls to 10 parking stalls. It appears that a parking study was conducted which included both 884 Attree Avenue and 880 Attree Avenue, where Aloyd Fitness is currently located. The parking study recommended that each property provide approximately 10 parking spaces each. At the time that the parking study was completed in 2005, 884 Attree was to be used as a bicycle shop and 880 Attree was occupied by Industrial Plastics, a specialty hardware store. The two-storey commercial building for Russ Hays Bike Shop was never actually built so this DP and the included variance are considered to be expired.

of 36Page 22 of 36

DVP16-0020 884 Attree Avenue

Page 2 of 6

Table 1: Site Data

Applicant Doran Musgrove

Owner Raymond Yan

Civic Address 884 Attree Avenue

Legal Description LOT D SECTION 73 ESQUIMALT DISTRICT PLAN VIP79240

Size of Property 1 054m2

DP Areas None

Zoning Designation C3 (District Commercial)

OCP Designation City Centre

SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA The subject property is currently left vacant and has a flat gravel surface. It is located on Attree Avenue which is a private road, surrounded by various other C3 zoned properties that are mostly used for retail or office space.

Table 2: Surrounding Land Uses

Zoning Use

North C3 (District Commercial) Office and Warehouse

East C3 (District Commercial) Retail

South C3 (District Commercial) Retail

West C3 (District Commercial) Office

COMMENTS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL

The applicant is proposing a rear yard setback variance to allow the proposed commercial building to be located 1.22 meters from the rear property line instead of the required 3 meters. This is likely being done in order to fit more parking spaces into the front portion of the lot. Council may want to take into consideration that the rear lot line for this property has already once been varied to zero meters, but that variance has now expired since no building was ever actually built. This variance should have very little effect on adjacent neighbours as the property directly to the east is utilizing the zero meter lot line and the rear of the subject property backs onto a parking lot for a commercial office building. The applicant is also proposing a parking variance to decrease the amount of parking to 18 spaces from the required 19 spaces. As mentioned above, a variance was granted in 2006 to reduce the required parking from 19 spaces to 10 spaces as it was supported by a parking study done at the time. Council may

of 36Page 23 of 36


Page 3 of 6

wish to take the past variance into consideration as the applicant is only asking to reduce the parking requirement by 1 space. Table 3: Proposal Data

Permitted by C3 (Current Zoning)

Proposed by DVP Application

Rear Yard Setback 3 m 1.22 m

Parking Requirement 19 spaces 18 spaces

The applicant will be required to meet FUS in regards to water supply. A calculation will be required at the time of a building permit. OPTIONS Option 1 That the Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee recommend that Council: 1. Direct staff to proceed with consideration of the following variances for 884 Attree Avenue:

a) That Section 6.41.06(1)(d) of Zoning Bylaw No. 300 be varied from the required 3 m rear lot

line setback to a rear lot line setback of 1.22 m; b) That Section 4.01.01 of Zoning Bylaw No. 300 be varied from the required 19 parking spaces

to 18 parking spaces; OR Option 2 2. Reject this application for development variance permit.

Submitted by: Julia Buckingham

Concurrence: Matthew Baldwin, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning





:jb

of 36Page 24 of 36


Page 4 of 6

Appendix A

of 36Page 25 of 36


Page 5 of 6

Appendix B

of 36Page 26 of 36


Page 6 of 6

Appendix C

of 36Page 27 of 36


Staff Report

to

Planning, Zoning and Affordable Housing Committee

Date: January 9, 2017


Subject: Draft Five Year Financial Plan for 2017/2021

PURPOSE The purpose of this report is to present to the Planning and Zoning Committee, for their consideration and approval in principle, the Five Year Financial Plan for 2017 through 2021. This report begins with a summary of department accomplishments from 2006 through 2016 and highlights the major accomplishments of this past year. The report then provides a summary of the financial targets for the next five years and an overview of Langford’s Planning Services and then summarizes key initiatives for 2017 and beyond. The Community Charter requires all municipalities in British Columbia to adopt, by bylaw, a five-year financial plan that includes all operating and capital expenditures in the municipality. Staff has prepared the attached budget for this five-year period. DEPARTMENTAL RESULTS AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS 1994-2016 The overall number of applications received by Langford increased from 150 in 2015 to 192 in 2016. The most significant increases were in Development Permits and Temporary Use Permits. The number of rezoning applications decreased by one file, but the Planning Department was kept busy with significant and complex rezoning applications for South Skirt Mountain, Bear Mountain, and the Mixed Use Employment 1 zone near the Leigh Road interchange. The table below gives a breakdown of application by type, and compares 2016 to previous years. Revenues from application fees were budgeted to be $380,900 in 2016. Actual revenues are expected to be approximately $506,572, or 133% of the budgeted amount. This is an increase of 134% over actual revenues from applications in 2015.

of 36Page 28 of 36

Subject: Draft Five Year Financial Plan for 2017/2021 Page 2 of 9

Applications Received to Date

ALR DP ADP DVP OCP SDP ASDP Strata TUP Zoning Total

1994 0 7 0 3 4 0 0 2 0 10 26

1995 3 14 1 9 6 0 0 0 0 15 48

1996 4 24 0 6 7 0 0 0 0 15 56

1997 1 22 0 12 16 0 0 0 0 28 79

1998 2 24 0 17 16 0 0 0 0 24 83

1999 2 24 1 11 11 0 0 0 0 19 68

2000 1 22 0 19 8 0 0 2 0 24 76

2001 0 34 9 21 12 0 0 0 1 23 100

2002 3 46 7 29 8 32 2 0 0 27 154

2003 3 60 13 40 12 28 0 0 0 22 178

2004 1 47 14 36 17 29 0 0 1 38 183

2005 1 61 21 38 16 51 0 0 1 31 220

2006 6 65 26 15 18 76 2 0 1 37 246

2007 0 71 15 29 23 74 3 0 0 48 263

2008 5 56 21 19 2 52 1 0 0 35 191

2009 2 39 14 20 2 53 1 0 1 26 158

2010 0 70 8 26 2 43 1 0 2 20 172

2011 0 62 0 37 1 40 0 0 6 32 178

2012 1 63 0 30 7 48 0 0 4 45 198

2013 0 49 0 27 2 39 0 0 3 20 140

2014 4 56 1 15 1 55 0 0 1 21 154

2015 2 55 13 18 2 29 0 0 3 28 150

2016 0 80 12 21 2 48 0 0 6 28 197

Total 41 1051 176 498 195 697 10 4 30 616 3318

Development Permits for the following new commercial floorspace were issued in 2016:

4397 West Shore Pkwy – 127m2 (1,367ft2) Car Wash;

724 & 732 Meaford Ave - 1378m2 (14,833 ft2) warehouse and office building;

1000 Henry Eng Pl – 380m2 (4090 ft2) addition to BC Transit;

950 Whirlaway Cres – 650m2 (7,000ft2) mixed use building;

3061 and 3067 Jacklin Road – 23,776 m2 (255,920 ft2) Belmont Market (Sobeys);

892 Goldstream Ave – 340m2 (3660 ft2) addition to Belmont Collision;

4391 West Shore Pkwy – 795m2 (8558 ft2) warehouse/office for AMJ Campbell Van Lines;

2793, 2787, 2781, 2775, 2769 Leigh Rd - 2730m2 (29,381ft2) warehousing;

2920 Amy Rd – 2,027m2 (21,819 ft2) for a storage/warehouse;

3030 Jacklin Rd – 424ft2 (4564 ft2) commercial floorspace in a mixed use building; TOTAL: 32,627 m2 (351,157 ft2)

of 36Page 29 of 36


Development Permits for the following new multi-family residential development were issued in 2016:

899 McCallum Road - 8 townhouse units;

2666 and 2670 Secretariat Way - 5 townhouse units;

679 Wagar - 7 townhouse units;

777 Hockley Avenue - 30 rental apartment units;

2662 Secretariat Way - 4 townhouse units;

2697 and 2701 Peatt Road - 81 rental apartment units;

2658 Secretariat Way - 4 townhouse units;

3030 Jacklin Road - 12 condominium apartment units;

3306, 3310, 3326 and 3328 Happy Valley Road - 39 townhouse units;

2691 Peatt Road - 6 rental apartment units;

3483 Happy Valley Road - 22 townhouse units;

950 Whirlaway Crescent - 45 apartment units; TOTAL: 89 townhouse units 174 apartment units

MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF 2016

Agriculture Land Reserve Applications: The Block Exclusion Application submitted by the City to the ALC in late 2015 was partially approved in June, 2016. This initial decision conditionally approved the release of several smaller parcels and the road right of way of developed roads. A short time later, the City received notification that the ALC Commission Chair referred this application to the Executive Committee of the ALC for reconsideration. The City has not received any update regarding the outcome of this reconsideration;

Affordable Housing: To date, forty (40) single-family affordable housing units and eight (8) affordable apartment units have been built and sold within Langford’s Affordable Housing Program. No new homes were added to the Program in 2016; however, one single-family dwelling was re-sold within the program.

The 36-unit M’akola Housing Society project which received a financial contribution as well as various amenity, application fee and DCC reductions last year is now complete and occupied.

Rental Housing: 2016 saw a continuation of applications to construct rental apartment applications. In addition to the 229 rental apartment units authorized by Development Permit in 2015 that are now either occupied or nearing occupancy, 174 rental apartment units were authorized by Development Permit in 2016. Approximately 764 new rental apartment units have been constructed, or are currently under construction, since 2011, the majority of which are in the City Centre.

AMENDMENTS TO THREE COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT ZONES: Staff received three applications in 2016 to amend complex comprehensive development zones: Bear Mountain, South Skirt Mountain and Langford Ridge (formerly known as District 49, and now zoned as a Mixed Use Employment zone). All three of these rezonings were completed within the calendar year. The rezoning of South Skirt Mountain and Bear Mountain were also the genesis of a new funding formula for the construction of

of 36Page 30 of 36


the south leg of the Bear Mountain Parkway to connect Bear Mountain and South Skirt Mountain to the Leigh Road interchange.

CENTRE MOUNTAIN MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY ADJUSTMENT: The District of Metchosin and the City of Langford are proposing to adjust their municipal boundary, reducing the area (generally known as Centre Mountain) with Metchosin’s boundary by approximately 150 ha (380 acres) and placing those lands within the City of Langford. This boundary adjustment proposal is also being supported and advanced by the Beecher Bay First Nation as part of their ongoing treaty settlement process with the Province. The lands that are to be included into the City of Langford from the District of Metchosin would be received into Langford with Rural Residential zoning equivalent to adjoining property that is already within the City of Langford. It is expected that the zoning of these lands (should the boundary adjustment occur) will consume considerable staff time in mid-late 2017.

Community Energy and Emissions Reduction Strategy: By signing BC’s Climate Action Charter, Langford has committed to become carbon neutral in its corporate operations by 2012, which involves measuring and reporting on the City’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions profile. In taking action to fulfill this requirement, Langford has signed onto the Province of British Columbia’s SmartTool, a web based carbon reporting tool which provides a standardized approach to calculating and reporting the City’s GHG emissions. In 2014 and 2015, staff continued working with the Carbon Measurement and Reporting team at Shared Services BC to establish a corporate GHG emissions inventory. This inventory documents fuel types (electricity, natural gas, propane, etc.) and measures GHG emissions produced by buildings, vehicle fleets, and the City’s contracted services to operate vehicles, equipment and machinery for roads and traffic operations and maintenance, and water maintenance. The inventory is still being developed, however this tool will allow Langford to measure corporate GHG emissions in an efficient, cost effective and consistent manner. In addition, it will provide staff and Council with the information and data it needs to make fiscally responsible decisions with respect to reducing GHG emissions at the corporate level while benefiting the community at large.

AFFORDABLE HOUSING: To date, forty (40) single-family affordable housing units and eight (8) affordable apartment units have been built and sold within Langford’s Affordable Housing Program. No new homes were added to the Program in 2016; however, one single-family dwelling was re-sold within the program.

The 36-unit M’akola Housing Society project which received a financial contribution as well as various amenity, application fee and DCC reductions last year is now complete and occupied.

Rental Housing: 2016 saw a continuation of applications to construct rental apartment applications. In addition to the 229 rental apartment units authorized by Development Permit in 2015 that are now either occupied or nearing occupancy, 129 rental apartment units were authorized by Development Permit in 2016 with a further 45 apartment units (Whirlaway Crescent) expected to also be rental. Approximately 764 new rental apartment units have been constructed, or are currently under construction, since 2011, the majority of which are in the City Centre.

of 36Page 31 of 36


2017- 2021 FINANCIAL TARGETS PLANNING SERVICES 2016 was another year of relative stability in the Planning Department. As noted in last year’s budget report, the departure of Kyle McStravick (December 2015) to Central Saanich left a vacancy at the Planner position. This position was filled by Lauren Morhart, who moved up from Planning Technician. The vacant Planning Technician position was then filled by Julia Buckingham, who had previously worked for the City as a co-op student and term position during a parental leave. In September of this year the Planning Department added an additional Planner, Sarah Herring, on a 10 month contract. The Planning Department now consists of administrative support (1), one Planning Technician, two Planners, a contract planner, the Deputy Director of Planning and the Director of Planning. In 2016 Planning Services are estimated to be $28,678 (3.9%) higher than the $736,700 that was budgeted. These additional costs are mostly in the additional salary of the contract planner position, with additional costs also occurring in public hearings and consultants (a one-time contract to study downtown traffic impact). Expenses relating to the Planning function as a whole (planning services, boards and commissions, economic development, community development and capital) are expected to be approximately 5% ($41,709) below budget by year end (2016). The proposed Five-Year Financial Plan for the Planning Services portion of the City of Langford’s budget for 2017 has been set at $939,600. This is a increase of $107,400 from the $829,200 that was budgeted in 2016, and includes a general 2% cost of living increase and the extension of the contract planner position that was added in 2016. PROJECT COST RECOVERIES Revenues from application fees increased annually between 2013 and 2015, while revenues from license fees have remained relatively unchanged. In 2016 revenues from fees and license fees increased by 45% (over 2015) to an estimated $525,572. This is approximately 31%, and $125,672 higher than what was budgeted for 2016. Some of this increase in revenues can be attributed to a 26.6% increase in the number of applications received, and some of this increase can be attributed to the cost-of-living adjustment that was made to the fee schedule, through an amendment to Bylaw No. 209 mid-2016. NET COST OF THE PLANNING FUNCTION The net cost of the planning function (the total cost of the planning function less costs recovered from application fees, grants and reserves) is projected to be approximately $141,582 (35%) lower than what was budgeted for in 2016. Although departmental costs (due primarily to increased staffing costs) exceeded budget, revenues from applications far exceeded expectations. The net cost of the planning function represents that portion of the Planning budget that is funded from general taxation. In last year’s financial plan, the net cost of the planning function for 2016 was projected to be 54.3% of the cost of Planning Services (net of Committees, Commissions and Economic Development). The actual net cost of the Planning Function for 2016 is estimated to be $258,818, or

of 36Page 32 of 36


approximately 34% of the cost of Planning Services (again, net of Committees, Commissions and Economic Development). For historic comparison, the net cost of the planning function was close to 52% of budget in 2014 and in 2013 this figure was closer to 60%. In 2012, general tax revenue funded approximately 30% of the Planning budget (the net cost of the planning function). It is anticipated that the number of planning applications (development permits and development

variance permits in particular) will continue at or above the pace set in 2016 as general economic

conditions and demand for housing are not likely to change suddenly through 2017. The City’s fee

schedule for planning applications was revised in 2016, with a one-time increase of 6.1%. It is now

Council’s policy that fees increase by the annual cost-of-living (2%) and staff intend to bring forward an

bylaw to amend the fee schedule by 2% once the 2017-2021 Five Year Financial Plan is adopted.

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS (KEY INITIATIVES FOR 2017) Community Development projects have been staged to spread the cost impact over a multi-year time frame. 1. Official Community Plan Review: As noted in last year’s five-year financial plan, June 2013 marked

the 5th Anniversary of the adoption of Langford's current Official Community Plan. Although there is no requirement in the Local Government Act for municipalities to undertake a periodic review of their OCP (it is a common misconception that OCPs must be reviewed every five years) it is still good practice to periodically review and refine (if necessary) this key document. This work can be completed as a departmental project, or with funds allocated for consulting, and therefore does not need to be separated out as its own budget item. Council budgeted $15,000 for the OCP review in 2016, and a preliminary review of the OCP has been accomplished in-house with no extraneous costs. Staff expect to bring forward proposed amendments in the form of an omnibus bylaw(s) in 2017 and Council may wish to continue to budget $15,000 as a contingency for legal or public consultation.

2. Zoning Bylaw No. 300 Update: The last time the City’s Zoning Bylaw was comprehensively rewritten

was in 1998 (adopted in February 1999). At that time, the new zoning bylaw was a replacement for a bylaw that the City had inherited from the CRD, and it was due for a comprehensive re-write at that time. Although Bylaw No. 300 has not been comprehensively updated since 1999, a number of significant changes have already been accomplished thru omnibus bylaw updates. Staff feels that an update of the Zoning Bylaw can continue in this manner, through the periodic introduction of omnibus bylaws and that this can be accomplished in-house and without need of an external consultant to prepare an entirely new bylaw. $15,000 has been included in the 2016 budget for this work. Of note, Council budgeted $30,000 for the Zoning Bylaw review in 2015 and of that approximately $2000 was spent, with most of that going toward a high level legal review.

3. Community Energy and Emissions Reduction: Although Langford's OCP embraces sustainable community development, Langford will likely have to continue to update policies and regulations to remain current with changing Provincial legislation in the realm of climate change, energy conservation and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

of 36Page 33 of 36


Council has budgeted $20,000 in each of the past three years to fund research, projects and policy updates relating to climate change, reducing carbon and greenhouse gas emissions, environmental protection, and reducing Langford's environmental footprint. To date, only a fraction of the money budgeted has been spent. Council should be aware that at some point in time, it may become necessary to buy carbon off-sets in order to meet greenhouse gas emission targets for the sum of the municipal operation. The City’s 2014 Carbon Neutral Progress Survey (published May 2015) noted a GHG Emissions balance of +947 tCO2e. At a cost of $25-$30 per ton, the municipality could expect to pay between $23,675 and $28,410 per year to purchase enough carbon offsets to achieve carbon neutral status for the municipal operation. Staff continue to look at operations to seek ways to reduce this number through local projects that offset corporate carbon emissions.

4. Beautification Grant Program: Langford has be budgeting funds since 2008 (when the City competed

in the Communities in Bloom program) for Beautification grants. In the past, monies have been granted to local organizations that wish to undertake beautification, enhancement or educational works that might be significant to the City as a whole. The draft 2015 budget for Planning and Development Services includes $20,000 for community beautification grants. Similarly budgeted money was not spent in 2013 or 2014 as suitable projects could not be found. Notwithstanding this, Council may wish to continue funding a beautification grant program, but transfer this from the Planning and Development Services budget to the Parks budget, so that the grant program may be managed under the direction of the Parks, Recreation, Culture and Beautification Committee.

5. 2016 Canada Census Data: 2016 was a Census year in Canada, and as the Federal Government reinstated the long-form census, it is anticipated that significant amounts of valuable statistical data will become available to Langford through 2017 and beyond. To date, the Planning Department has collated statistical data and published information about Langford in a “Community Profile”. This is a report that is relatively static (once it is prepared, it is only updated periodically due to staff time and cost constraints). The Community Profile is available both online and in a printed format. The Capital Regional District also augments this information through the Regional Information Services section of their website. Council may wish to now move away from the static, paper-based summary of statistical information found in the Community Profile and move towards the provision of information online that is more dynamic (information that is updated on a regular ongoing basis). Townfolio™ is a data collection, collation and presentation service that works in concert with the City’s website to provide and maintain up-to-date information about the City of Langford. Townfolio draws information from a wide variety of information sources, and presents this in an easy to use format online. It is the sort of information can be an invaluable tool for the community in terms of supporting economic development objectives. As an adjunct to the City website, the information provided by a service such as Townfolio would benefit not only prospective development but also the community at large. Having a service that collates and provides this information is also more efficient and cost effective that relying on staff to do this work from the side of their desk. A proposal has been provided to the City from Townfolio for

of 36Page 34 of 36


this service. The price would be $8397 + tax for a 3 year subscription. $10,000 has been budgeted for this as a key project in each of the next three years.

Other Key Initiatives

Affordable Housing: Continue to implement the Affordable Housing program as well as continue to explore opportunities to partner with developers wishing to create sustainable, affordable housing alternatives so that they may showcase new technologies and techniques that others might follow.

Downtown Beautification and Public Art: Staff will continue to look for opportunities to obtain contributions towards downtown beautification and public art.

CRD Regional Sustainability Strategy: Over the past several years, staff has been involved in the CRD’s process of updating the Regional Growth Strategy (RGS). This work is now nearing completion, and the CRD is expected to hold a Public Hearing in mid-2017 for the new RGS bylaw. Once the CRD’s bylaw has passed, the City will be required to respond with an updated Regional Context Statement within Langford’s Official Community Plan. A Regional Context Statement demonstrates how Langford’s existing plans, policies and goals support the goals, strategies and actions identified in the RGS.

KEY PROJECT RANKING

The Administration and Finance Committee has requested that each standing committee provide some guidance as to the priority it wishes to place on capital purchases, projects or new staffing requests. This is so that the Administration and Finance committee will be able to judge the relative priority of all projects when the overall budget is reviewed later in the spring. In this regard the following table has been produced.

Item Estimated

Cost Priority

Townfolio Web-Based Data Service $10,000

Zoning Bylaw Re-Write $15,000

Official Community Plan (OCP) review $15,000

Community Energy and Emissions Reduction $20,000

Film Commission Funding $2,500

It would be appreciated if the Planning and Zoning Committee could confirm or change the suggested priority for each of the noted items and add any other items that it wishes to identify a priority for.

of 36Page 35 of 36


OPTIONS Option 1 That the Planning and Zoning Committee recommend: That Council:

1. Approve in principle the Planning and Development Services Five Year Financial Plan as presented with the following priorities on projects:

Item Estimated

Cost Priority

Townfolio Web-Based Data Service $10,000

Zoning Bylaw Re-Write $15,000

Official Community Plan (OCP) review $15,000

Community Energy and Emissions Reduction $20,000

Film Commission Funding $2,500

2. Direct Staff to prepare a bylaw to amend the City’s Development Procedures Bylaw (Bylaw No.

209) to include a 2%, cost-of-living increase to planning related fees;

Option 2

3. Direct staff to prepare an alternate to the 2017-2021 financial plan for the Planning Department as presented;

Submitted: Matthew Baldwin, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning





:mgsb

of 36Page 36 of 36

monday, january 9 th, 2017 @ 5:30 pmand~minutes... · date: january 9, 2017 department: planning...

Documents