×

Warning message

The installed version of the browser you are using is outdated and no longer supported by Konveio. Please upgrade your browser to the latest release.

Draft Downtown Community Planning Permit By-law

Provide feedback on the draft by-law

We are looking for feedback on the following four sections, however you can leave comments throughout if you have feedback on other sections.  

  • Section 1.15 Facilities, services and matters for development in the Downtown Permit Area
  • Section 6.1 Residential Precincts (LDR, MDR, HDR)
  • Section 6.3 Downtown precincts (D1, D2, D3, DMTS)
  • Appendix D: Affordable Housing Thresholds and Cash-in-lieu of Affordable Dwelling Unit

Use the Guided Tour feature to jump to the sections we are looking for feedback in. To use the Guided Tour, toggle on the switch at the bottom of the document page from Full document to Guided Tour.

File name:

-

File size:

-

Title:

-

Author:

-

Subject:

-

Keywords:

-

Creation Date:

-

Modification Date:

-

Creator:

-

PDF Producer:

-

PDF Version:

-

Page Count:

-

Page Size:

-

Fast Web View:

-

Choose an option Alt text (alternative text) helps when people can’t see the image or when it doesn’t load.
Aim for 1-2 sentences that describe the subject, setting, or actions.
This is used for ornamental images, like borders or watermarks.
Preparing document for printing…
0%

Click anywhere in the document to add a comment. Select a bubble to view comments.

Document is loading Loading Glossary…

Guided Tour

Hide
Take a quick tour to see the most important parts of this document, and the key areas we are looking for feedback on.
Powered by Konveio

Comments

View all Cancel

Add comment


Question
Which are we to refer to? 6.1.2 or (Single-detached dwellings/multi-unit buildings; table 6.7), where are the LDR apartment requirements?
Suggestion
Please consider increasing maximum height of a fence located in the interior side yard to 2.5 meters to match the rear yard. This is in regard to the new maximum building height in LDR precincts of 4 stories.
Suggestion
Emergency shelters are restricted to D1-only which is the same as nightclubs and distilleries.

This is overly-restrictive on emergency shelters and sends the wrong message. They are not even discretionarily allowed in other city precincts but outright prohibited. Services for the most vulnerable people should be the most accessible.

At minimum, emergency shelters should be discretionarily allowed across all precincts and the ethical thing to do is permit them across all precincts.
Suggestion
Page 232: Parking minimums should be dropped altogether.
1. Any "free" parking units have their cost hidden in higher prices for housing, goods, and services.
1. Parking minimums result in an oversupply of parking which drives up development costs and rent.
2. It reduces density and makes downtowns less human-scaled and more sprawling.
3. It encourages driving downtown over walking, transit, and biking.

The correct downtown parking minumum is 0. This has been done successfully in Edmonton, Vancouver, Buffalo, London England, Paris France, etc.

Parking minimums are outdated, harmful, and need to be removed.
Suggestion
Protected views hinder density and urbanization, increase housing costs, and stifle housing supply growth. It is a NIMBY policy which trades the housing secure's enjoyment of minor aesthetic benefits for increased cost of living of the housing insecure. I suggest that protected views be dropped altogether.
Suggestion
With respect. If the city plans to establish a single low density zone, shouldn't the requirements meet the original minimums for RL.2? (9m frontage / 275m2 area). Why make them the RL.1 minimums?

Why make it harder for people to develop? A large majority of the homes in this new CPPS area don't have 15 meters of frontage to begin with, and silly enough the majority are already zoned RL.2.

I really hope i missed a piece of information because it seems to me the city is restricting growth and development more then promoting it.
Suggestion
Is there a way to ensure the units classified as 'affordable ', are not just loft style apartments but at least 1 or 2 bedrooms? A loft style would only benefit a small group of people. Recommend some wording to make this less discretionary
Question
Who enforces this? By law staff or will their be designated planning staff monitoring this to ensure the area are being used as intended?
Question
What would be the criteria for someone to qualify for one of the affordable units: rented or purchased? Is it income based or first come first serve system?
Question
With the plan for affordable units, what would be in place to stop people from buying at the affordable rate and then renting it out to someone else at market value?
Please review 'Appendix D - Affordable Housing Thresholds and Cash-in-lieu of Affordable Dwelling Unit' and provide your feedback
Please review 'Section 6.3 Downtown precincts (D1, D2, D3, DMTS)' and provide your feedback
Please review 'Section 6.1 Residential Precincts (LDR, MDR, HDR),' and provide your feedback
Please review 'Section 1.15 Facilities, services and matters for development in the Downtown Permit Area' and provide your feedback
Click on 'Appendix D - Affordable Housing Thresholds and Cash-in-lieu of Affordable Dwelling Unit' to jump to this section and leave your feedback!
Click on 'Section 6.3 Downtown precincts (D1, D2, D3, DMTS)' to jump to this section and leave your feedback!
Click on 'Section 6.1 Residential Precincts (LDR, MDR, HDR),' to jump to this section and leave your feedback!
Click on 'Section 1.15 Facilities, services and matters for development in the Downtown Permit Area' to jump to this section and leave your feedback!
Welcome to the Draft Community Planning Permit By-Law.

Click to add comments to share your feedback or questions.

Use the guided tour (available at the bottom of the page) to jump to the specific sections we are looking for feedback on, or scroll through to leave comments throughout the document.