City planners are recommending council bring forward second reading of a bylaw which would rezone a property on 14th Avenue to allow a live-in suite, but only so the rezoning can be defeated. 

Acting planning manager Mike Ellis brought forward the recommendation at Monday's council meeting as part of a report on the public hearing held on the proposed rezoning of 37 -14th Ave. to allow the suite in the Restricted Residential-zoned property.

Owner High Calibre Contracting applied for the rezoning for the house it plans to build on the land, which was among a number of infill properties the city developed in Porter Creek in recent years.

The public hearing was held last week, with two residents of the area speaking out against the proposal.

Three written submissions also came to the city – two opposed and one in favour of the application.

Mike Henney and Cam Kos told council in separate presentations that the lot was zoned RR to address the public's concerns about the infill brought up just three years ago.

Voting in favour of that could cast aside any positive relationship that has grown between area residents and the city, they said.

The zoning has more restrictions – such as not allowing additional suites – than most single detached zones have.

As it was noted in Ellis' report to council: "As part of the 2011 infill project, concerns were raised regarding potential traffic impacts to the neighbourhood from increased density.

"At that time, a wide range of housing types, including single family, duplex and multi-family, were considered. To help address the public concerns, the city applied the RR zone to the four infill lots on 14th Ave., as this zone excludes duplexes and secondary suites, resulting in a lower density.”

Planners have pointed out zoning regulations can change over time and the city supports increased density.

However, Ellis also said, "It is important to provide members of the public who participate in planning processes, like infill, with some assurance that the city will uphold the decision made from that consultation.

"Approving this amendment may create mistrust during future infill projects, making it difficult to use this planning tool to promote density and provide housing.”

It was also argued that there are a number of lots in the new Whistle Bend subdivision that could accommodate suites, though as Ellis stated in his report, a property owner is within his or her rights to apply for zoning amendments such as this.

Changing the zoning could also take away the "individuality of the neighbourhood,” it was stated.

Planning officials, however, countered that wouldn't likely be the case with the same regulations on the lot that are already in the rest of the surrounding area.

"However, a case can be made that approving this amendment would create an inconsistency between the subject lot and the neighbouring RR properties (the other three infill lots) that are not permitted to construct suites,” Ellis went on.

"While zoning amendments are considered on a case-by-case basis, the existing conditions for the other RR-zoned infill lots are very similar and could be considered for a similar spot amendment, creating further neighbourhood concerns ....”

While some argued an extra suite would create more traffic issues, Ellis pointed out it is already relatively busy with traffic, given that Jack Hulland Elementary School and the Guild Hall are in the area.

"The addition of a suite is not likely to create a significant change to the traffic of the neighbourhood,” Ellis said in his report to council.

While most of the arguments that came to council opposed the rezoning, Ellis highlighted the arguments made in favour of it as well.

The benefits outlined in the written submission, he said, included meeting the city's goals of densification, increased revenue from taxes and utility charges, increased rental stock and quality, increased affordability for the homeowners through the additional rent and "a social benefit for elderly relatives.”

"The submission also stated that effects on the neighbourhood would be negligible, as RR lots are large enough to provide off-street parking and that houses are large enough to accommodate suites with little change in the building footprint,” Ellis said.

Ultimately, administration concluded the rezoning should not go ahead.

"Increasing density and promoting the creation of secondary suites throughout the city is an important initiative in the OCP but it is subject to detailed zoning process and consultation,” reads the report.

"Planning processes for both infill and changes to zoning rules for suites were carried out in recent years and did not result in changes to the RR zone.

"If council supports a change to the RR zone to allow living suites, it should be completed in a larger context. A citywide amendment for all RR zoned properties could be brought forward along with consultation with affected property owners and neighbourhood residents.”

That brought Coun. Dave Stockdale to wonder where the city planning department was considering an overall change to all RR zones to allow for suites.

As Ellis told council, unless it is something put forward by council, it's not being considered. Staff had looked at the possibility of bringing it forward as part of zoning changes, but ultimately decided against it, Ellis said.

"There's certainly pros and cons,” he said.

Coun. Jocelyn Curteanu was quick to argue against such a change.

She pointed out it's the only zone for single-detached homes which doesn't allow for suites. And that enables the city to have a zone with restrictions which address concerns such as those brought up during the infill process.

"I think we should try to preserve the RR zone as is,” Curteanu said.

Council will vote on whether to defeat the proposed rezoning next week.