Delta council recently approved another bylaw change aimed at adjusting to the province’s new housing rules.
The amendment introduces Temporary Use Permit (TUP) and Transit-Oriented Area (TOA) parking regulations into Delta's zoning bylaw.
Last fall, the B.C. government introduced amendments to the Local Government Act through Bill 47, the Housing Statutes (Transit-Oriented Areas) Amendment Act, establishing that local governments are required to permit a minimum level of density and height, as well as restricted from requiring residential parking, around a certain radius from transit stations.
The City of Surrey contains a TOA at the Scottsdale Exchange, but the radius measurement of that TOA also includes portions of North Delta.
The City of Delta was required to amend its parking requirements in the zoning bylaw because a local government is prohibited from requiring a specific number of parking spaces for residents or visitors within TOAs. Accessible parking and parking for non-residential uses can still be required.
The changes do not prevent new developments in TOAs from providing parking at their discretion.
One proposed development in North Delta that falls 400 metres within in Scottdale Exchange TOA is the Scott Road and 75A Avenue Six Storey Apartment Project.
The proposal for the corner lot would see 285 new condos in a sprawling six-storey complex.
The application also includes 293 residential parking spaces and 29 visitor parking spaces.
The city notes that although an Official Community Plan (OCP) amendment is required, under the new provincial legislation developments at the location under a certain floor space ratio and height of eight storeys cannot be denied by council on the basis of density or height.
A previous application to build a project at the location, which would have included 155 condo units in two, six-storey buildings as well as 10 townhouse units in two, three-storey buildings, was approved by council two years ago.
However, following the introduction by the province of new housing legislation, that approved application was cancelled by the proponents and a revised proposal submitted.
Prior to that proposal, a previous high-rise proposal at the site was defeated in a vote by council following a public hearing.
