Downtown Core Area Plan Design Guidelines


Thank you for taking the time to share your feedback on the draft updated Downtown Core Area Design Guidelines.

Feedback on Proposed Official Community Plan Amendments

The City is now seeking feedback on a proposed amendment to the Official Community Plan (OCP) to implement the updated Downtown Core Area Plan (DCAP) design guidelines.

The OCP amendment bylaw will revise references from the Downtown Core Area Plan (2011) to Downtown Core Area Plan (2021) and the applicable design guidelines for each affected Development Permit Area (DPA) and Heritage Conservation Area (HCA).

Since the proposed Downtown Core Area Plan (2021) has been updated to consolidate all design guidelines into four individual appendices, the proposed Official Community Plan amendment seeks to replace the current references of specific (individual) design guidelines with references to the applicable design guideline appendices.

This approach will improve user-friendliness and better supports the ability to maintain the Downtown Core Area Plan guidelines and the Official Community Plan.

The table below identifies the affected Development Permit Areas and Heritage Conservation Areas and the proposed design guidelines (appendices) that would apply. Each appendix is contained in the proposed Downtown Core Area Plan 2021.

Development Permit AreaProposed Design Guidelines from Downtown Core Area Plan (2021)
DPA 1 (HC): Core Historic
  • Appendix 1: Public Outward View Guidelines
  • Appendix 2: Public External View Guidelines
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 2 (HC): Core Business
  • Appendix 1: Public Outward View Guidelines
  • Appendix 2: Public External View Guidelines
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 3 (HC): Core Mixed-Use Residential
  • Appendix 1: Public Outward View Guidelines
  • Appendix 2: Public External View Guidelines
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 7A: Corridors
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 7B (HC): Corridors Heritage
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 9 (HC): Inner Harbour
  • Appendix 1: Public Outward View Guidelines
  • Appendix 2: Public External View Guidelines
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 10A: Rock Bay
  • Appendix 1: Public Outward View Guidelines
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 10B (HC): Rock Bay Heritage
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 14: Cathedral Hill Precinct
  • Appendix 1: Public Outward View Guidelines
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines


The following map also identifies the geographic location of the affected development permit areas and heritage conservation areas in relation to the boundary of the Downtown Core Area:

Provide Input

Please direct any comments or questions regarding the proposed OCP Amendment Bylaw by Thursday December 23, 2021 to:

Robert Batallas, Senior Planner

email: rbatallas@victoria.ca

All comments received on the related Official Community Plan amendment bylaw will be shared with Council along with the proposed bylaw. Implementation of the proposed Downtown Core Area Plan design guidelines requires the Official Community Plan amendment bylaw to be approved by Council following a statutory public hearing.


Project Background

Draft Updated DCAP Design Guidelines

The draft Design Guidelines aim to provide clear direction for designers, architects and property owners who are actively planning or considering a new building, retrofit or addition to an existing building within the Downtown Core Area of the City of Victoria.

The guidelines are an important evaluation tool for City staff and Council when reviewing new development applications to ensure that a proposed development is a ‘good fit’ within the downtown, demonstrates an appropriate design response and enhances the surrounding context and public realm.

The guidelines focus on how buildings interact with streets and open spaces to create comfortable, human-scaled, pedestrian-oriented and memorable public spaces.

Key proposed draft updates to the guidelines include:

  • An emphasis on building design that supports comfortable, active and attractive streetscapes, open spaces and pedestrian environments.
  • Design guidance for the incorporation of private, shared and publicly-accessible outdoor spaces within new developments.
  • Strengthened guidelines to support context-sensitive design for buildings adjacent to heritage buildings and within the Inner Harbour area.
  • Improved design guidance for tall buildings to better support sunlight access to public spaces, comfortable building separation, attractive building forms and overall liveability
  • Revised language to provide clear statements of design intent to support innovative and creative design responses to unique sites and conditions to achieve the urban design vision and goals for the downtown.


How We Got Here
The Downtown Core Area Plan (DCAP) was originally approved in October 2011 and has provided guidance on matters related to growth and development within the Downtown Core Area, including policies and guidelines to support the review and evaluation of development permits, rezoning applications and improvements to the public realm.

One of the key goals outlined in the DCAP is to ensure its success by undertaking periodic monitoring, review and updating of the plan, as well as to maintain alignment with other related City policies, plans and regulations. The proposed DCAP update will help to ensure that the plan remains current and effective and continues to respond to ongoing feedback from the users of the plan such as community, the development industry, and Council.

When Will We Be Seeking Public Input?
Early engagement included a working group of stakeholders who provided input between January 2020 and March 2021. Their input informed the Draft Updated DCAP Design Guidelines.

This spring we asked for broader community input on the Draft Updated DCAP Design Guidelines. The survey was open until May 7, 2021 and is now closed.

This input will help inform the proposed DCAP Design Guidelines that will be presented to Council later this year, along with related amendments to the Official Community Plan. At this point, staff will seek direction to consider the Design Guidelines and OCP at a public hearing.

If approved by Council following a public hearing, the updated guidelines will be incorporated into the Downtown Core Area and will take affect within specific development permit areas and heritage conservation areas that are identified in the OCP.

What is the Level of Public Participation?
The work to update the Design Guideline started at the Involve level with the Working group and Consult for the community input phase. For information about the IAP2 Spectrum of Engagement, please see the City of Victoria Engagement Framework.


Thank you for taking the time to share your feedback on the draft updated Downtown Core Area Design Guidelines.

Feedback on Proposed Official Community Plan Amendments

The City is now seeking feedback on a proposed amendment to the Official Community Plan (OCP) to implement the updated Downtown Core Area Plan (DCAP) design guidelines.

The OCP amendment bylaw will revise references from the Downtown Core Area Plan (2011) to Downtown Core Area Plan (2021) and the applicable design guidelines for each affected Development Permit Area (DPA) and Heritage Conservation Area (HCA).

Since the proposed Downtown Core Area Plan (2021) has been updated to consolidate all design guidelines into four individual appendices, the proposed Official Community Plan amendment seeks to replace the current references of specific (individual) design guidelines with references to the applicable design guideline appendices.

This approach will improve user-friendliness and better supports the ability to maintain the Downtown Core Area Plan guidelines and the Official Community Plan.

The table below identifies the affected Development Permit Areas and Heritage Conservation Areas and the proposed design guidelines (appendices) that would apply. Each appendix is contained in the proposed Downtown Core Area Plan 2021.

Development Permit AreaProposed Design Guidelines from Downtown Core Area Plan (2021)
DPA 1 (HC): Core Historic
  • Appendix 1: Public Outward View Guidelines
  • Appendix 2: Public External View Guidelines
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 2 (HC): Core Business
  • Appendix 1: Public Outward View Guidelines
  • Appendix 2: Public External View Guidelines
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 3 (HC): Core Mixed-Use Residential
  • Appendix 1: Public Outward View Guidelines
  • Appendix 2: Public External View Guidelines
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 7A: Corridors
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 7B (HC): Corridors Heritage
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 9 (HC): Inner Harbour
  • Appendix 1: Public Outward View Guidelines
  • Appendix 2: Public External View Guidelines
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 10A: Rock Bay
  • Appendix 1: Public Outward View Guidelines
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 10B (HC): Rock Bay Heritage
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines

DPA 14: Cathedral Hill Precinct
  • Appendix 1: Public Outward View Guidelines
  • Appendix 3: Sidewalk Width Guidelines
  • Appendix 4: Building Design Guidelines


The following map also identifies the geographic location of the affected development permit areas and heritage conservation areas in relation to the boundary of the Downtown Core Area:

Provide Input

Please direct any comments or questions regarding the proposed OCP Amendment Bylaw by Thursday December 23, 2021 to:

Robert Batallas, Senior Planner

email: rbatallas@victoria.ca

All comments received on the related Official Community Plan amendment bylaw will be shared with Council along with the proposed bylaw. Implementation of the proposed Downtown Core Area Plan design guidelines requires the Official Community Plan amendment bylaw to be approved by Council following a statutory public hearing.


Project Background

Draft Updated DCAP Design Guidelines

The draft Design Guidelines aim to provide clear direction for designers, architects and property owners who are actively planning or considering a new building, retrofit or addition to an existing building within the Downtown Core Area of the City of Victoria.

The guidelines are an important evaluation tool for City staff and Council when reviewing new development applications to ensure that a proposed development is a ‘good fit’ within the downtown, demonstrates an appropriate design response and enhances the surrounding context and public realm.

The guidelines focus on how buildings interact with streets and open spaces to create comfortable, human-scaled, pedestrian-oriented and memorable public spaces.

Key proposed draft updates to the guidelines include:

  • An emphasis on building design that supports comfortable, active and attractive streetscapes, open spaces and pedestrian environments.
  • Design guidance for the incorporation of private, shared and publicly-accessible outdoor spaces within new developments.
  • Strengthened guidelines to support context-sensitive design for buildings adjacent to heritage buildings and within the Inner Harbour area.
  • Improved design guidance for tall buildings to better support sunlight access to public spaces, comfortable building separation, attractive building forms and overall liveability
  • Revised language to provide clear statements of design intent to support innovative and creative design responses to unique sites and conditions to achieve the urban design vision and goals for the downtown.


How We Got Here
The Downtown Core Area Plan (DCAP) was originally approved in October 2011 and has provided guidance on matters related to growth and development within the Downtown Core Area, including policies and guidelines to support the review and evaluation of development permits, rezoning applications and improvements to the public realm.

One of the key goals outlined in the DCAP is to ensure its success by undertaking periodic monitoring, review and updating of the plan, as well as to maintain alignment with other related City policies, plans and regulations. The proposed DCAP update will help to ensure that the plan remains current and effective and continues to respond to ongoing feedback from the users of the plan such as community, the development industry, and Council.

When Will We Be Seeking Public Input?
Early engagement included a working group of stakeholders who provided input between January 2020 and March 2021. Their input informed the Draft Updated DCAP Design Guidelines.

This spring we asked for broader community input on the Draft Updated DCAP Design Guidelines. The survey was open until May 7, 2021 and is now closed.

This input will help inform the proposed DCAP Design Guidelines that will be presented to Council later this year, along with related amendments to the Official Community Plan. At this point, staff will seek direction to consider the Design Guidelines and OCP at a public hearing.

If approved by Council following a public hearing, the updated guidelines will be incorporated into the Downtown Core Area and will take affect within specific development permit areas and heritage conservation areas that are identified in the OCP.

What is the Level of Public Participation?
The work to update the Design Guideline started at the Involve level with the Working group and Consult for the community input phase. For information about the IAP2 Spectrum of Engagement, please see the City of Victoria Engagement Framework.

CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

  • I’m assuming these proposals are supported by the downtown businesses? Including the DVBA?

    Stu asked almost 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question regarding support from the local business community.  City staff did reach out directly to both the DVBA and the Chamber of Commerce to make them aware of the project and to invite their members and networks to provide feedback through the Have Your Say web page.  We have been receiving a steady stream of feedback from a wide range of stakeholders such as downtown businesses, residents, property owners, visitors, heritage organizations, and the development industry.  

    In general we have received approximately 70% of support for each of the questions in the survey.  This is extremely promising in consideration of the wide range of stakeholders and their varying perspectives on the future of the downtown.

  • There needs to be an overhaul of the development approval process, because currently, only low risk, high density boxes are financially feasible. A less risky process for developers would allow less 'conventional' proposals like non-market, missing middle, and net-zero housing, all of which we need over anything else. I propose a system, where high quality buildings are designed in collaboration with the city and residents, and developers can pay for the designs. Either an independent or city architect would work on such designs. These buildings wouldn't need zoning or council approval because they're designed internally with our needs in mind. The lower risk could replace the conventional external proposals with only best practice construction, where benefit is number 1, instead of small profits.

    Finn K asked almost 3 years ago

    Thank you for your comments related to the development process.  The current engagement is related to design guidelines for the exterior ‘form and character’ of new buildings on private property.  However, the City is also currently exploring the introduction of new zoning regulations to support the development of missing middle housing forms across the city.  A key outcome of this project is a more efficient application and review process that would be predicated on pre zoning land to allow missing middle building forms as permitted uses.  Additional information on the Missing middle project is available here:  Missing Middle Housing | Have Your Say (victoria.ca) The City will be doing further engagement on the Missing Middle this summer.

  • This proposed revised DCAP "guideline" in sections is very prescriptive for the built form of projects, however the wording indicates much of the guideline is "to be considered" or to be implemented "where possible". How does this wording provide any surety for developers or designers and how will it prevent projects from being subjectively evaluated for conformance to the guidelines? Would some of these elements not better be served in revisions to zoning documents which are requirements?

    Weirdbeard asked almost 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question related to the interpretation of the guidelines.  Based on our extensive consultation with key project stakeholders including community associations, development industry and a variety of design professionals staff received strong feedback to avoid the use of ‘should’ or ‘must’ in the guidelines as these terms are often subjective and may preclude other positive design solutions.  Instead, each section of the guidelines includes an Intent Statement that clearly explains the desired outcome.  Each related guideline is then presented as a declarative statement.  Our project stakeholders have acknowledged that these changes will provide improved clarity and reduced subjectivity, while also allowing for consideration of other creative design solutions.

    A more detailed explanation of the structure and implementation of the guidelines is included in Section 1 (Introduction) of the document.  Subsection 1.2 (How to Use the Guidelines).  

    In terms of the difference between design guidelines and zoning regulations, please note the following: 

    Zoning regulations differ from guidelines as they are ‘regulatory’ and approved by a bylaw.  Therefore, only Council has the ability to approve a change to zoning regulations.  In addition, the provincial Local Government Act (LGA) requires a rezoning process and public hearing where changes are proposed to the range of permitted uses or density.  The rest of the zoning regulations can be considered directly by Council as a ‘variance’ and do not require a rezoning process. 

    Design Guidelines are not approved by a bylaw and they are generally applied through the evaluation and review of a development permit to ensure that the ‘form and character’ of a proposed development provides a ‘good fit’.  The City’s Official Community Plan identifies areas of the city that are designated as Development Permit Areas(External link) as well as the types of development that are subject to specific design guidelines.  Design guidelines generally address the exterior form and character of a building including its mass or bulk, relationship to a street and exterior finishing.  This means that design guidelines do not address aspects that are dealt with through zoning such as height and density.

    However, the draft guidelines have introduced a new approach with side and rear setbacks for tall buildings that currently contained in Zoning Bylaw 2018.  Therefore, the implementation of the design guidelines will also include amendments to Zoning Bylaw 2018 to ensure that the required setbacks in the zoning bylaw and design guidelines align with each other.  

    If you have any additional questions, please let us know.

  • Having lived in a number of cities internationally, I note that some seem to experience a wind-tunnel effect on densified urban streets and others seem to benefit from diverting influences that ensure a good airflow without creating wind tunnels. How is Victoria approaching this issue relative to experience of people at street level and the goal of place-making?

    OaklandsResident asked about 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question related to wind tunnel effects from buildings.  The impact of wind tunnels is an important consideration for larger scale buildings in the downtown. While the current draft includes some consideration of wind tunneling effects (see guideline 6.2 (c) ), and the current Downtown Core Area Plan includes some guidance in this regard with chapter 6 – Urban Design (see 6.44 – 6.45), we will be including additional guidelines related to mitigation of wind tunnel effects based on your feedback, including a requirement for demonstrating mitigation of wind tunnel effects.

  • I notice that neither the proposed design guidelines nor the Downtown Public Realm Plan include guidelines with respect to public views outward from within downtown and public views of downtown, as included in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 of the existing DCAP. Will these appendices remain in the DCAP or are they proposed to be removed? If they are proposed to be removed, this would represent a significant policy shift, as the question of views and skyline form are not covered elsewhere.

    ExPlanner asked about 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question related to the existing view corridor directions from the Downtown Core Area Plan.  Yes, the existing view corridor and skyline policies contained on pages 58-63 of the Downtown Core Area Plan will be retained in the plan as well as Appendix 1 and Appendix 2.

  • Victoria is known for being a charming city. Part of this charm are the colourful, historical buildings in the downtown area. This charm has been lost in the lower part of Fort Street where there is virtually no setbacks and human space. How does this plan preserve the unique, historical buildings along lower Yates (for example) while achieving increased housing density in the Downtown Core?

    LorneT asked almost 3 years ago

    Thank you for your comments and questions related to balancing new development with heritage preservation.  The draft guidelines apply to the ‘form and character’ of new buildings and additions.  This means that they address the general mass, bulk, location, and exterior treatment of buildings.  The guidelines do not alter zoning regulations such as building height or density.  The issue of ‘tight’ setbacks between buildings was one of the most common issues identified through our initial consultation with the community and other stakeholders including heritage organizations.  In response, the draft guidelines have introduced significantly increased side and rear setbacks for tall commercial and residential buildings.  The various setbacks are contained in Section 6 (Tall Buildings).  In addition, Section 2 of the guidelines contain several design strategies to ensure that new buildings have a positive relationship with the public street and provide a pedestrian scaled public realm that is attractive, inviting, and comfortable.  These strategies will help to retain the rich pedestrian scaled qualities that are evident on Fort Street and Yates Street.  

    The draft guidelines have also introduced a new section (see Section 5.) to address the relationship between new buildings and adjacent heritage buildings, as well as to provide direction for additions to heritage buildings.  

    Please note however, that these guidelines do not relate to the preservation of existing heritage buildings.  The preservation and rehabilitation of heritage buildings is addressed through the City’s Heritage Program that includes separate policies and regulations.  A full description of the Heritage Program is available here.  The heritage land use policies for the Downtown Core Area are also contained in chapter 7 of the Downtown Core Area Plan that was approved by Council in 2011.  

    If you have any more specific questions related to heritage planning, please feel free to contact the City’s Heritage Planning staff at communityplanning@victoria.ca 

  • Several decades ago we visited a village in East Anglia that was over a 1,000 years old. It had been a major center when wool was the major source of wealth in England. This changed 800 years ago and the village had changed little from that point on. We had the good fortune to have a local, well informed resident give us a personal tour of the village pointing out all the buildings that were 500-1.000 years old and explaining how they had been renovated during that extended period. She spent considerable time discussing how the National Trust tried to pick and chose what renovations should be retained and which should be reversed; a huge conundrum with all the years of renovation and reconstruction. Victoria is just entering into a similar quandary, though far less complex due to our youth as a gathering place. What to retain and what to discard? Should we revert to the Indigenous structures which dominated for millennia? Should we strip (or reinforce) the city's century old love affair with the personal automobile or leapfrog over to the Middle Age rabbit warrens that were dedicated to foot traffic? Some European cities have responded with mixed models since they have had many centuries of experimentation with what works. Since we now profess to make decisions using a decision model based on representative democracy influenced to a small degree by public input, radical change is generally frowned upon until after it has been built and tested. In other words, the City has become very 'risk adverse'. Victoria slept for 50 years after WWII and we now benefit from that as did that little village in East Anglia (which has still not reawaken). I would suggest that the City needs to look into the next century and decide what it wants to be after the current influx of wealth and people ends again. Affordability will turn Victoria into an economically gated community. You only need to drive around to see that this has happened twice already in Victoria's brief history. I would suggest that we citizens of Victoria stop looking at the trees (i.e. zoning/construction details) and spend some time planning for the forest (i.e. what will be here in 100-500 years from now). Myself, I see Victoria could easily become an educational center like Oxford, Cambridge, Heidelberg, Padua, Kiev, etc. Many seem to want us to emulate Miami or Palm Springs. Without some thought as to our best future, we will stumble forward to ?????????? . Maybe whatever happens is what is really the best outcome. Of course that implies that adjusting the deck chairs is what we need to focus on, but I would then ask, "Why do we bother and why spend some many resources managing the details!". Is it all about make-work and public pacification? Jim Knock

    Jim Knock asked about 3 years ago

    Thank you very much for providing your detailed observations.  The current engagement is related to design guidelines related to the exterior ‘form and character’ of new buildings on private property rather than a citywide vision.  

    The overall vision for Victoria is detailed in the City’s Official Community Plan (OCP) that was approved by Council in 2012 following an extensive, multi-year public engagement process.  The OCP is a 30-year plan that provides direction for growth and change in the community.  City Council, staff, and citizens refer to the plan for guidance on decisions such as where to locate housing and businesses, transportation priorities, and how the community will respond to climate change.

    Victoria's OCP focuses on vibrant, walkable villages and town centres while maintaining the downtown core as the heart of the region. It recognizes the unique neighbourhood character and sense of place of different parts of the city and emphasizes sustainable transportation such as walking, cycling, and transit.  

    We are currently working to update our OCP, in large part to align it with other recent City-wide plans.  You can learn more about this process at engage.victoria.ca. 

  • With the increased population downtown there needs to be more public community spaces such as daycares, pre-schools, teen drop-in centres, senior social spaces, medical services etc.. Given the shortage of City owned property downtown, how is the City planning on ensuring these spaces get included in future developments? I do not believe the taxpayer should be required to bear the cost for the creation of these spaces when the developer will be reaping the financial benefits of the new buildings; especially when the developers seem to be getting approved for all the variances they ask for to increase density on their land.

    GailA asked almost 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question regarding community amenities.  The current engagement is related to design guidelines related to the exterior ‘form and character’ of new buildings on private property rather than on land use policies for community amenities.  However, the provision of community amenities is a more complex matter that is guided through land use policies from the Official Community Plan, neighbourhood plans and Council approved amenity policies.  

    In accordance with the provincial Local Government Act, the City can seek or negotiate for the provision of community amenities when a project is subject to a density bonus system (such as the system described in the Downtown Core Are Plan), or a rezoning process to seek additional uses or increase the allowed density.  This process is generally predicated on requiring the applicant to submit an economic analysis to determine the potential increase to land value that may result from the proposed development.  In return, the City can require the provision of a specified community amenity that is equivalent to 75% of the increased value.  

    Currently the City is seeking the provision of affordable housing as a desired citywide amenity as outlined in the Inclusionary Housing and Community Amenity Policy that was adopted by Council in June 2019.  

    In addition, the acquisition of park space as a community amenity is primarily funded through municipal taxes as part of the City’s Financial Plan.  New development is also subject to Development Cost Charges that are collected by municipalities to help offset the cost for the provision of infrastructure related to population growth including park space.  

    Therefore, the City does have a variety of policies and regulatory tools that are currently used to seek the provision of community amenities to support the needs of a growing population and to support the objectives of the Official Community Plan.  

    If you have any additional questions, please let us know.

     

     

  • How will the design guidelines enable sunlight to hit the streets given councils ability to support rezoning applications reducing setback, increasing heights for rental density that do not encourage sunny streets.

    RMJ46 asked about 3 years ago

    Thank you for submitting your question related to sunlight access.  The evaluation of new buildings in the downtown core area generally considers the existing or proposed zoning regulations as well as the applicable design guidelines.  The zoning bylaw identifies what is permitted on a parcel of land with respect to:

    • Permitted uses (e.g. residential, commercial, retail, office, etc.)
    • Density - Maximum (Floor Space Ratio)
    • Building Height – Maximum 
    • Setbacks - Minimum for side and rear yards
    • Motor vehicle and bicycle parking – Minimum 

     

    Zoning regulations differ from guidelines as they are ‘regulatory’ and approved by a bylaw.  Therefore only Council has the ability to approve a change to zoning regulations.  In addition, the provincial Local Government Act (LGA) requires a rezoning process and public hearing where changes are proposed to the range of permitted uses or density.  The rest of the zoning regulations can be considered directly by Council as a ‘variance’ and do not require a rezoning process. 

    Design Guidelines are not approved by a bylaw and they are generally applied through the evaluation and review of a development permit to ensure that the ‘form and character’ of a proposed development provides a ‘good fit’.  The City’s Official Community Plan identifies areas of the city that are designated as Development Permit Areas as well as the types of development that are subject to specific design guidelines.  Design guidelines generally address the exterior form and character of a building including its mass or bulk, relationship to a street and exterior finishing.  This means that design guidelines do not address aspects that are dealt with through zoning such as height and density.

    The draft Downtown Core Area design guidelines do address the importance of sunlight access on public sidewalks through detailed criteria that seeks to achieve a minimum of at least 4 hours of sunlight access on a minimum of 60% of the length of an adjacent public sidewalk.  The guidelines also require an applicant to provide a sun shadow study that demonstrates how they are achieving this criteria.  The guidelines have also introduced a revised building form that includes a taller and more slender tower above a building base.  This type of building form provides greater flexibility to ensure that the placement of the building supports enhanced sunlight access.  For further information please refer to section 6.1 of the draft guidelines (Form, Scale and Orientation: Sunlight Access and Sky View).  

    It is intended that the updated guidelines will provide improved direction and objectives for developers, staff and Council.  However, as noted earlier, Council is responsible for providing final approval for most new developments in the downtown.  Therefore, Council is tasked with considering how a new development addresses and responds to a variety of City wide objectives such as quality design, sustainability goals, housing affordability, transportation impacts, etc.  

    Hopefully this information helps to answer your question.  If you would like to discuss further please feel free to contact Robert Batallas, Senior Planner rbatallas@victoria.ca

     

  • There is an increasing need for park space in the downtown area given increased population. How will this need be incorporated into guidelines? How will guidelines be enforced given that every development seeks exemptions. Guidelines are meaningless if you don't follow them.

    LindaC asked about 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question regarding park space.  The proposed design guidelines apply to private property and they do include provisions for the development of privately owned park space (POPS) as a means of providing attractive and functional spaces for an increasing downtown population.  Please see section 3.2 of the draft guidelines for a description of the various types of POPs.   However, as you have identified, these are guidelines rather than regulations therefore they need to be looked at on a site by site basis to evaluate the ability for a property owner to provide a POP and the feasibility based on location and context.  

    Please note that the guidelines do not address the provision of City owned public park space as that is addressed through the City’s Parks and Open Spaces Master Plan.  In addition, the acquisition of park space is primarily funded through municipal taxes as part of the City’s Financial Plan.  New development is also subject to Development Cost Charges that are collected by municipalities to help offset the cost for the provision of infrastructure related to population growth including park space.  If you have more questions about parks acquisitions you can email parks@victoria.ca.  Thank you for your questions.

Page last updated: 13 Dec 2023, 10:06 AM