Department of Community
& Development Services
Telephone (905) 468-3266
Facsimile (905) 468-0301

1593 Four Mile Creek Road
P.O. Box 100
Virgil, Ontario
L0S 1T0
Submitted on:
September 26, 2019
Report:CDS-19-032
Report To:Community & Development Advisory Committee
Subject:Setbacks for Garages

1. RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that:
1.1 Council receive report CDS-19-032 providing options for regulating the location of garages in respect to residential dwellings; and

1.2 Council direct Staff to initiate a Zoning By-law Amendment to regulate the location of garages in relation to the front face of residential dwellings. 2. PURPOSE / PROPOSAL
The purpose of this report is to provide Council with options to regulate the location of garages in relation to the front face of residential dwellings.

3. BACKGROUND
On August 15, 2019, Council passed the following recommendation concerning the location of garages:
On September 5, 2019, Staff provided an Information Report to Council detailing the current Zoning By-law provisions, reflecting changes implemented by Council in a 2016 amendment. A copy of the Report is included as Appendix A.

4. DISCUSSION / ANALYSIS
As Council is aware, this matter is being considered as a result of members of the public expressing specific concern with the Established Residential (ER) Zone setback provisions requiring additions (that include garages) to be located behind the front of existing buildings.

In preparing this report, Staff have identified the following issues that are encountered with Official Plan policies and Zoning By-law provisions more generally:

1. Terms used in policies and provisions related to garage setback requirements vary across the Official Plan and Zoning By-law.

2. Terms used in policies and provisions are not consistent and not uniformly defined, leading to a lack of clarity and defensibility with respect to interpretation.

3. Some zones contain provisions for garage setbacks, while others do not.

4. Approaches used in the construction of dwellings and garages may be perceived as circumventing the intent of the required setbacks.

4.1 Town of Niagara-on-the-Lake Official Plan, as amended
The Town's Official Plan contains a number of policies addressing the location of garages in relation to the front façade of residential dwellings. Unfortunately, the policies do not reflect a consistent use of terminology and definitions.

The following policies, highlight the different terminology (shown in bold below) relating to the location of garages and additions in respect to the dwelling façade:

Section 6.32.1 Special Policy Area A-1 (Queenston) states: 4.1.4 Building additions and secondary structures shall be a natural extension of the original structure's character, with rooflines no higher than the original structure, and have a complementary relationship to the original structure. They should generally be located behind the front façade of the original structure, except in the case of porches or bay windows, which may extend beyond the existing front façade

4.1.7 Garages shall be located behind the principal building façade, and in general towards the rear of the lot. However front car garages are permitted subject to the provisions of this Plan.

13.2.3 The development of residential front yard garages is not encouraged, but is permitted for single family units provided that the front car garage is setback 1.5m behind the principal building, does not exceed 50% of the width of the principal building, and the garage is a maximum of 6.0m in width. Section 6.32.7 Special Policy Area A-8 (Dock Area) states:

3.1.5 (c) Front car garages in residential areas shall be set back 1.0m from the building face.

3.3 (d) A front yard garage shall be permitted for single detached units abutting the water’s edge provided that the front car garage is setback 1.5m behind the principal building, does not exceed 50% of the width of the principal building, and the garage is a maximum of 6.0m in width. The Urban Design Policies of Section 6A for Intensification and Greenfield Development respectively, state:

and
Cannery Park 9.3.6.3 Low Density Residential policies require:

The Official Plan provides the following definitions of terms used above:

and

The Official Plan does not contain definitions for ‘front face’ or ‘building façade’.

4.2 Village of St. Davids Urban Design Guidelines, 2005

The Village of St. Davids Urban Design Guidelines contain the following statements: 4.3 Zoning By-law No. 4316-09, as amended
Similar to the Official Plan, Staff have identified that the Town’s Zoning By-law No. 4316-09 (herein referred to as the “Zoning By-law”) utilizes different terminology (shown in bold below) with respect to the location of garages in relation to residential dwellings.

Subsection 7.1.2(b) of the Established Residential (ER) Zone and subsection 7.2.A.2(b) of the Established Residential 3 (ER3) Zone in the Old Town Community Zoning District both require a 7.5 metre front yard setback and that:
Subsection 8.1.2(h) of the Established Residential (ER1) Zone in the Queenston Community Zoning District requires:
Subsection 9.1.2(g) of the Residential (R1) Zone in the St. Davids Community Zoning District contains the following wording:

While the Zoning By-law does provide definitions for ‘building face’ and ‘main building’, there is no definition of ‘front face’.

Staff also note that many zones do not provide a specific provision regulating the location of garages. For example, the Established Residential 2 (ER2), Residential 1 (R1) and Residential 2 (R2) Zones in the Old Town Community Zoning District and Established Residential 2 (ER2) Zone in the Queenston Community Zoning District do not contain any provision for garage setbacks relative to the residential dwelling.

4.3 Options

Option 1 - Amendment to General Provisions of the Zoning By-law

One of the challenges with respect to garage setback requirements is that there is differing terminology used between the Official Plan, Secondary Plans, Urban Design Guidelines and Zoning By-law. The use of standardized terms and definitions would ensure clarity and provide a uniform approach to garage setbacks in relation to dwellings.

Consideration could be given to establishing a standard provision for garage setbacks that would apply to all residential development in all urban areas. This provision would require all new development (new dwellings or additions to existing) to conform with a pre-determined garage setback regardless of geographic location or dwelling type (single, semi, townhouse, etc).

To achieve this result, the following provision could be added to Section 6 – General Provisions of Zoning By-law 4316-09:
The following definition would need to be added to “Section 5 – Definitions” of the Zoning By-law:

“Dwelling Main Façade” shall mean the ground floor façade of the habitable (non-garage) portion of the dwelling, oriented to the street.

In order to implement this provision, each Zone would be amended to delete current references to garage location and refer to the General Provision.

Introducing a provision of this nature would allow existing non-complying uses to continue as is. However, any alteration to such uses would be required to comply with this provision or to seek relief through Minor Variance or Zoning By-law Amendment.

Option 2 - Amendment to individual zoning categories

Recognizing that the location of garages in relation to the front face of residential dwellings may not raise Council’s concern across the whole of the Town, Council could choose to amend individual Zones as deemed appropriate. As an example, Council may choose to amend the residential zones of some, but not all, of the urban areas. This option would allow Council to focus on the individual streetscape character of urban areas or neighbourhoods to determine which would be best served by garage setback provisions.

Consider, for instance, the ER2 (Chautauqua Community) Zone in the Old Town Community Zoning District. The Chautauqua Community has a unique pattern of development that has resulted in relatively small, irregularly shaped lots. As such, introducing a standard provision as proposed in Option 1 may result in unanticipated changes to the character of the streetscape and unintended challenges for development and redevelopment.

If this option is selected, it would be necessary for Council to identify the areas in which the location of garages require specific address. Each zone would require an amendment to include the following provision:
The following definition would need to be added to “Section 5 – Definitions” of the Zoning By-law:

“Dwelling Main Façade” shall mean the ground floor façade of the habitable (non-garage) portion of the dwelling, oriented to the street.

Option 3 - Make no changes

This option would propose no change to Official Plan policies or Zoning By-law provisions. This option provides no relief to the current concern and would leave the matter of inconsistency unaddressed.

5. STRATEGIC PLAN
Not applicable.

6. OPTIONS
Not applicable.

7. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no financial implications anticipated to result from Council’s consideration of this report. Any costs associated with processing of general amendments would be accommodated within the approved 2019 Budget.

8. COMMUNICATIONS
Should Council choose to pursue amendments, notice would be provided through the Town’s social media accounts in addition to the legislated requirements of the Planning Act.

9. CONCLUSION
Staff are of the opinion that an amendment to the Zoning By-law is required to more clearly demonstrate Council’s intention to regulate the location of garages in relation to the front face of residential dwellings. To this end, Staff recommend that Council direct Staff to initiate a Zoning By-law Amendment.



Respectfully submitted,

Denise Horne, MA, Diploma Heritage Conservation
Planner II

Craig Larmour, MCIP, RPP Sheldon Randall
Director, Community Chief Administrative Officer (I)
& Development Services


ATTACHMENTS



First Capital of Upper Canada - 1792