Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCSD-13-084 - Residential Intensification - Infill Housing REPORT TO: Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee DATE OF MEETING: August 12, 2013 SUBMITTED BY: Alain Pinard, Director of Planning PREPARED BY: Alain Pinard, Director of Planning(x7319) Della Ross, Manager of Development Review(x7327) Brandon Sloan, Manager of Long Range & Policy Planning (x7648) WARD(S) INVOLVED: AllWards DATE OF REPORT: July 30, 2013 REPORT NO.: CSD-13-084 SUBJECT: RESIDENTIAL INTENSIFICATION -INFILL HOUSING RECOMMENDATION: That Report CSD-13-084 regarding residential intensification policies and regulations be received, and that the Planning Division continue with the course of action outlined in the section of this report. BACKGROUND: The impact of new housing in existing areas has been a major topic of conversation that has prompted numerous questions of staff at meetings of the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee and Council. This report provides some background to the issue and identifies actions (underway and proposed) that will help manage the construction of new housing in established neighbourhoods so that it is more context-appropriate. REPORT: Definitions New housing that increases the number of dwellings in an established community is commonly an existing building or an existing lot is used more intensively in accordance with existing policies and regulations. General Context In many cases, the City of Kitchener land use planning framework is dynamic and allows for some change to occur over time. In most areas of the city, a range of housing options is permitted and promoted, in order for people of different backgrounds to live and interact in the same place (i.e. heterogeneous and inclusive neighbourhoods). designations and zoning permissions are not rigidly defined so as to allow only what presently exists in a neighbourhood. 1 - 1 a variety of housing and development ideas that may change a lot, a building or a street. The majority are addressed without issues and many of these proposals are not even pursued. The ones that do proceed to the point of requiring a development application are often resolved with minimal impacts at the end of the process. Occasionally, there are residential developments in existing neighbourhoods that are challenging and stressful due to competing interests, potential litigation and a legislative framework that is daunting and unfamiliar to many residents. Recently, there have been a few high profile examples of infill housing where the landowner is utilizing the existing permissions to build different forms of housing than what primarily exists in anestablished area.This form of intensification, although less intensive, appears to be the most controversial because an approval of Kitchener Council is not required, and some members of the community are not comfortable with such changes.Kitchener is not unique in this regard. Many municipalities are grappling with this issue. Policy Context Provincial, Regional and City policy provide astrong mandate to accommodate our population growth through utilization of existing zoned lands and intensification first. nodes and corridors along with designations and zoning of other areas that allows a wide range of land uses and building/dwelling types is a leader in North America. It is only in the recent decade or so that most other municipalities are adding secondary dwelling units, a range of dwelling types along with added density and mixed use to their zoning. The core components (policies and regulations) have been in place since 1994. The framework was re-affirmed and refined with the approval of the Kitchener Growth Management Strategy (KGMS) in 2009. The benefits of intensifications have been widely reported and a few key points are as follows: By accommodating growth in built up areas, intensification maximizes existing infrastructure and reduces the need for municipalities to spend tax dollars building and maintaining new infrastructure to support continued urban sprawl. Intensification also reduces other negative impacts of urban sprawl such as gridlock and greenhouse gas emissions. The new population added by intensification can help keep existing schools and small businesses open and create the residential densities that are necessary to support a higher level of public transit. Infill housing is an important component of intensification and it is the cornerstone of most growth management initiatives, . Infill housing increases the range of housing choice and allows certain neighbourhoods to benefit from intensification where large scale redevelopment is inappropriate or not possible. Furthermore, Kitchener intensification targets cannot be achieved through new development in nodes and corridors alone. Although the nodes and corridors are expected to accommodate most future intensification, the approach for accommodating growth that is outlined in the KGMS and supporting documents includes and requires intensification through severances, duplexing, and the replacement of a dwelling with two or more dwellings. 1 - 2 Considerations Kitchener has operated under the principle of wanting to provide a variety of housing options within a subdivision or neighbourhood. Allowing for a variety of people with different backgrounds to live and share space is what makes many Kitchener neighbourhoods so vibrant. Homogeneous areas are not desirable and have been avoided in Kitchener. We need to allow for choice. Kitchener will continue to grow and we need to accommodate new residents who want to live in a variety of locations. Living in a new dwelling unit in an established neighbourhood can be highly desirable. Some infill nd in some cases will be appropriate. If infill development becomes significantly restricted it will reduce the geographic distribution of growth and force even more growth in a few concentrated areas, some of which may not have as many services or amenities in place compared to established neighbourhoods. Given the legislative framework and potential litigation, stopping infill housing outright is not an option. Eliminating uses that are currently permitted would be downzoning which invites appeals. Downzoning can usually be successfully defended if implementing or supported by policy. The current provincial, regional and municipal policy framework promotes intensification, the opposite of downzoning to eliminate infill housing. In fact, the Provincial Growth Plan mandates specific intensification targets which include the requirement to accommodate 40% of all new growth within the built-up area by 2015. However, this does not mean that all infill housing should be permitted at all cost. There are opportunities to refine our policies and regulatory framework in order to improve the quality of infill housing and to ensure that the scale of infill housing is appropriate for the location where it is taking place. When dealing with the topic of housing and new development in existing areas we have to be careful about differentiating between land use impacts and concern with the demographic profile of new residents. Theplanning framework in Ontario contains many tools for addressing land use impacts but any regulation that treats a particular user or user group unfairly invites a human rights challenge. It is important to note that no matter what land use policies and zoning regulations are in place, landowners still have a right to submit applications to seek changes to the type and scale of development that is permitted. These matters will continue to come before Committee and Council. The City cannot refuse to process a complete application and most planning matters can be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. Directions The following actions are currently underway as part of Planning Division-led initiatives which will provide further requirements with respect to how infill development is considered. These actions should be completed before any new related initiatives are considered. 1 - 3 Current Actions: 1. Continue to have the new Official Plan adopted as soon as possible in early 2014, which includes proposed polices that provide for consideration of compatibility for new infill housing (see Appendix A). 2. Amend the Zoning By-law through the interim update in Fall of 2013 to clarify and refine provisions that have been problematic with certain intensification projects (e.g. definition of FSR, method for calculating floor area and attic space, etc.) with the objective of preventing as-of-right permissions that are not context-appropriate. 3. Examine size and other requirements for creating lots for semi-detached dwellings and for allowing the duplexing of dwellings types that are not single detached dwellings. Any new requirements would require one or more amendments to the Zoning By-law. If time allows,this could be rolled into the Interim update of the Zoning By-law (in whole or in part) that is proceeding in the fall of 2013. Otherwise staff will report back with recommendations in early 2014 following the adoption of the new Official Plan. This Future/Proposed Actions: 1. Review all existing provisions of the Urban Design Manual that are related to residential infill / intensification and propose changes and addition if/where appropriate. It is proposed that this work commence in 2014 following the adoption of the new Official Plan. An end date will be established as part of the project workplan that will be developed in late 2013 or early 2014. 2. Investigate the feasibility of expanding the scope of site plan approval to include forms of development that are currently exempt from site plan approval. It is proposed that this work also commence in 2014. As with the previous item an end yet will be established at a later time. 3. Study/survey how other municipalities are managing intensification and develop a course of actions for implementing better practices that Kitchener is not using (2014 - 2015) 4. Explore the merits neighbourhood specific guidelines or requirements, possibly in conjunction with a neighbourhood strategy or a Station Area Plan arising from the PARTS project (2015 2019). ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN: The topic of this report is connected to the Community Priority Strategic Plan. 1 - 4 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There are no new capital budget implications as part of this report. Any additional study or actions beyond what is currently in have resource, timing and financial implications and will need to be considered as part of the departmental business planning process. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM - this report is an information update only at this time. Further action on this matter may require formal notice and engagement through the Planning Act to be supplemented with CONCLUSION: Despite many benefits, residential intensification is not always supported and sometimes there are major objections. Intensification represents a change and there is often resistance to change. Although stopping intensification is not an option, it is possible to refine some the policy framework and some of the regulations so that new housing in established neighbourhoods is more context-appropriate. This report outlines current and proposed actions to refine the policy and regulatory framework related to intensification, with an emphasis on intensification in the form of infilling. ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Michael May, Deputy CAO Community Services Department ATTACHMENTS: Excerpt of Some Proposed Policies in the New Official Plan 1 - 5 Excerpt of Proposed Policies in the New Official Plan Part C Section 3 Housing 4.C.1.7 The City may require a site plan, elevation drawings, landscaping plans and any other appropriate plans and/or studies, to support and demonstrate that a proposed development or redevelopment is compatible with respect to built form, architectural Existing Policy design, landscaping, screening and/or buffering. These requirements are intended to Part 2 1.1.5 address the relationship to adjacent residential development, to ensure compatibility Modified with the existing built form and the community character of the established neighbourhood and minimize adverse impacts. 4.C.1.8 Where a special zoning regulation(s) or minor variance(s) is/are requested, proposed or required to facilitate residential intensification or a redevelopment of lands, the overall impact of the special zoning regulation(s) or minor variance(s) will be Existing Policy reviewed but not limited to the following to ensure that: Part 2 1.6.2 Modified a) any new buildings and any additions and/or modifications to existing buildings are appropriate in massing and scale and are compatible with the built form and the community character of the established neighbourhood. b) where front yard setback reductions are proposed for new buildings in established neighbourhoods, the requested front yard setback should be similar to adjacent properties and supports and maintain the character of the streetscape and the neighbourhood. c) new additions and modifications to existing buildings are to be directed to the rear yard and are to be discouraged in the front yard and side yard abutting a street, except where it can be demonstrated that the addition and/or modification is compatible in scale, massing, design and character of adjacent properties and is in keeping with the character of the streetscape. d)new buildings, additions, modifications and conversions are sensitive to the exterior areas of adjacent properties and that the appropriate screening and/or buffering is provided to mitigate any adverse impacts, particularly with respect to privacy. e) the lands can function appropriately and not create unacceptable adverse impacts for adjacent properties by providing both an appropriate number of parking spaces and an appropriate landscaped/amenity area on the site. f) the impact of each special zoning regulation or variance will be reviewed prior to formulating a recommendation to ensure that a deficiency in the one zoning requirement does not compromise the site in achieving objectives of compatible and appropriate site and neighbourhood design and does not create further zoning deficiencies. 1 - 6 4.C.1.9 Residential intensification and/or redevelopment within existing neighbourhoods will be designed to respect existing character. A high degree of sensitivity to surrounding context is important in considering compatibility New Part C Section 11 Urban Design 11.C.1.31 The City will, through the Site Plan Control process, encourage the following: a) Provision of attractive building forms, facades and roof designs which are New compatible with surrounding buildings; b) infill development to complement existing buildings and contribute to neighbourhood character, particularly if located within close proximity of a recognized cultural heritage resource or Heritage Conservation District; c) minimization of adverse impacts on site, onto adjacent properties (particularly where sites are adjacent to sensitive land uses) and into the public realm through building design 1 - 7