2 - Sunday, November 26 , 1689 - North Shore News LACE 7. TASK FORCE ON SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING DESIGN ISSUES THE MANDATE In 1987, the Council for the District of North Vancouver decided to review the single-family residential zoning regulations when it became apparent that there were numerous public concerns relating to development in existing and new neighbourhoods. These concerns involved “monster houses” on small tots; building setbacks that could rob neighbours of sunlight and privacy; clear- cutting trees in new developments to simplify construction; house heights blocking views, and out of scale construction with the existing 2 neighbourhood, fo name a few. In June 1987, the 13 member Task Force on Single-Family Housing Design Issues was struck to address those concems. it met at 7 a.m. in the District Hall monthly, on average, for more than two years. Council established Terms of Reference for the Task Force which induded: reviewing existing single- family housing bylaws; evaluating the present housing market; surveying the District’s housing policies; studying the effect of topography on house design and construction; reviewing the measurement of “height” and discussing the relation of lot area to residentiol floor area and to site coverage. In addition, the Task Force looked at the existing floor space ratio (FSR) and the option of utilizing different location and size regulations for different site circumstances. The problem ceated by trees surfaced often during discussions: clear-cutting by developers on treed properties on the one hand — view and shede obscuring trees on the other. The Task Force commissioned a brochure entitled “Trees, Concerns and Solutions” that was printed in conjunction with the District of West Vancouver. It was mailed to all households in the District and is now available at the Municipal Hall. THE TASK FORCE The Task Force members who served over the extended and detailed study period included Mayor Marilyn. Baker, Chairman; Alderman Craig Clark; then Aldesman Mary Segel; representatives from the Advisory Planning Commission: Bill Sievewright, Marwyn Thomas ond Alderman Rick Buchols; representatives from the Advisory Design Panel: The District of North Vancouver is a residential community of great natusal beauty with its mountain backdrop, treed slopes, ocean shoreline and “in scale” neighbourhoods. We treasuse and wont to protect these natural cssets but pressures are mounting as housing demand continues in an upward spiral. Community and individual concerns about new housing includes the changing face of established neighbourhoods as new, larger houses on small lots replace older homes, the size and bulk of infill housing that can block views and shade neighbouring gardens ond the clear-cutting of trees for new housing sites, to name a few. DISTR Some of the concerns regarding <\ house design have been addressed in the proposed bylaw revisions described on on this page. They will be the subject of a Public Hearing on December 11 and if adopted, become operative in January thereby Jak Redenback, Fred Russell, David Van Stolk and Peter Jones; real estate representative Pat Munroe; builder Mike Brody, Director of Development, Richard Plunkett; and Hope Burns of the Planning Department. All meetings and their minutes were open to the public. As well, public forunis were held to advise of the progress of the Task Force’s deliberations. The Hulbert Group architectural firm was then retained to undertake a detailed study of the issues identified by the Task Force. Their recommendations resulted in proposed bylaw amendments now before Council for consideration. CONSULTANT’S REPORT The Hulbert Group Consultants prepared a comprehensive report which was forwarded to Council and the two advisory bodies (APC and ADP) for discussion and review. Dreft recommendaticns and revisions to the Zoning Bylaw resulting from the report are elsewhere on this page. Here are some excerpts from the consultant’s report: “Respect the District’s nature. The District is a community of predominantly sloping terrain in a world of two dimensional plans and bylaws.” “Respect the marketplace. Some municipalities have growth, accommodation of their maturing population, etc., as low priorities, preferring to attempt to force the status quo on a dyncmic population. The District’s history makes it obvious that orderly development is encouraged, and changes to zoning controls should balance this development desire with the qualities which attract developers and residents to the District.” “It will be worthwhile for the District to monitor submissions over the next period to gain further data as to typical above-grade FSR (floor space ratio) with lot size. This will allow for eventual refinement of this formula if necessary, or its substantiation in the facs of potential future criticism.” shrinking floor space ratios, increasing setbacks, and lowering roof heights. An important aspect of these changes will be to maintain a “watching brisf” over fhe next year to moniter the effects of the legislation and to ensure that the desired controls and improvements in new housing are achieved. Additionally, recommendations on three further issues — subdivision standards, building schemes/design uidelines, and streetscape appearance — are being inalized by the Task Force. Throughout the process, the Task Force has introduced recommendations fo District Council for immediate action. Council had previously established absolute limits on house size in most single family zones. The Zoning Bylaw has also been amended to establish maximum house height from the lesser of finished or existing grade. The height of retaining walls has been further regulated and sideyard setbacks have been increased at the recoramendations of the Task Force. The bylaw changes now proposed are necessary to try and correct the identified problems. These DRAFT REGULATIONS 10 BYLAWS RELATIVE TO ‘HOUSES’ | 1. HEIGHT 2 A new definition and method of calculation will be applied to single-family buildings. These involve creating a parallel plane to the lot and determination points ct the property fines, allowing # maximum height of the building to be determined at the onset of the subdivision stage. Permitted height will be reduced to 24 feet from 30 fest with bonuses for sloping roofs.” : 2. FRONT AND REAR SETBACKS Council hes recently amended sideyard setbacks E to be c minimum of 4 feet and a total of 20% of lot width. To be consistent, front and rear setbacks proposed are a minimum of 25 feet, a combined setback of 50% of the lot depth but not less than 60 feet. 3. CORNER SETBACKS It is proposed that the sideyard flanking the street be 10% of lot width plus 10 feet, but that . the house need not be fess than 24 feet in width which allows for adequate living space. 4. FLOOR SPACE RATIO & The FSR (floor space ratio) is proposed to be i seduced from 0.55 to 0.35, plus 1,000 sq.ft. for lots greater than 5,000 sq.ft. in size. Moximum dwelling unit size remains for RS5, RS4 and RS3 7 zones — 2,500, 3,500 and 5,000 sq.ft. & respettively. The following statistics show how the B draft bylaw will reduce the permitted size of houses. (All measurements are in square feet) " ” Comparisen of Existing FSR , - with Proposed FS 6,000 (RS4) 7,200 (RS3) 12,000 (RS2) 14,000 (RS2) 20,000 (R52) na 3,960 6,600 7,700 11,600 changes are complex and they will further limit and regulate single family housing construction in our Municipality. The Public Hearing on these matters is an important part of the public process and we need your involvement and support. Council and staff will be there to answer your questions and hear your suggestions. And one fast note — a sincere and heartfelt “thank you” on behalf of all the District’s residents to the volunteer Task Force members. They met frequently and willingly over a two-year period to tackle this difficult problem — at the early hour of 7:00 a.m. before heading off to work. They have produced an invaluable inventory of background material on the issues which is the basis for the recommendations and present bylaw proposals. We hope to see you December 11 at the Public Hearing in the Municipo! Hall.