The Planning Department has been standardizing zoning provisions such as maximum lot coverage, maximum building height, minimum front yard depth and minimum rear yard depth across several RD1 and RD2 zoning districts, to allow development that makes more efficient use of the lot area and that creates a consistent built form. Some side yard width provisions have also been standardized, usually to a minimum width of 1.20 m, however, variations in required side yard widths persist. The request to reduce the minimum side yard width from 1.80 m to 1.20 m will have no adverse impact on the proposed development or adjacent uses and represents an efficient use of land.

Five parking spaces are proposed in the rear yard with access via an open north-south alley. Section 24.26.5 prohibits front yard parking for a double duplex dwelling or a multiple dwelling. The applicant is proposing to utilize the existing driveway on California to provide two front yard parking spaces. Provision c) in the site specific exception permit a maximum of two front yard parking spaces and that the front yard paving provisions apply for a double duplex or multiple dwelling. Provision d) clarifies that the Parking Area provisions in Section 25 do not apply to the front yard parking spaces.

The development as proposed is subject to site plan control. Any specific design issues or requirements from municipal departments or external agencies will be considered during site plan control.

Risk Analysis:

N/A

Financial Matters:

N/A

Consultations:

Comments received from municipal departments and external agencies are attached as Appendix E. Specific requirements will be handled during site plan approval.

Public Notice: Statutory notice was advertised in the Windsor Star, a local daily newspaper. A courtesy notice was mailed to property owners and residents within 120m of the subject parcel.

Planner’s Opinion:

Planner’s Opinion: The Planning Act requires that a decision of Council in respect of the exercise of any authority that affects a planning matter, “shall be consistent with” Provincial Policy Statement 2020. The requested zoning amendment has been evaluated for consistency with the Provincial Policy Statement 2020 and conformity with the policies of the City of Windsor Official Plan.

Based on the information presented in this report, it is my opinion that an amendment to Zoning By-law 8600 to rezone the subject parcel from Residential District 1.3 (RD1.3) to Residential District 2.2 (RD2.2) and adding a site specific exception for a reduction in minimum lot width and minimum side yard width and to permit front yard parking to allow the proposed double duplex dwelling is consistent with the PPS 2020, is in conformity with the City of Windsor Official Plan, and constitutes good planning.