Report to/Rapport au :
Planning and Environment Committee
Comité de l'urbanisme et de
l'environnement
17 December 2004/ le 17 décembre 2004
Submitted by/Soumis par: Ned
Lathrop, Deputy City Manager / Directeur municipal adjoint
Planning
and Growth Management / Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance
Contact Person/Personne ressource : Grant
Lindsay, Manager / Gestionnaire
Development Approvals / Approbation des demandes
d'aménagement
(613) 580-2424 x13242, Grant.Lindsay@ottawa.ca
|
SUBJECT: |
SITE PLAN CONTROL - 110 Central park
drive (FILE NO. D07-12-04-0219) |
|
|
|
|
OBJET : |
RÉGLEMENTATION
DU PLAN D'IMPLANTATION - 110, PROMENADE CENTRAL PARK |
REPORT RECOMMENDATION
That Planning and Environment Committee
APPROVE the revised Site Plan Control application for 110 Central Park Drive as
shown on the following plans:
1. “Site
Plan, 100 to 130 Central Park Drive Ottawa Ontario” prepared by M. David
Blakely Architect Inc., Drawing No. SP-17, dated September 2000, revised
November 25, 2004 and dated as received by the City of Ottawa December 15,
2004.
2. “Landscape
Plan, 100 to 130 Central Park Drive Ottawa Ontario” prepared by James B. Lennox
& Associates Inc. Landscape Architects, Drawing No. L-1, dated August 2004,
revised December 4, 2004 and dated as received by the City of Ottawa December
15, 2004.
3. "Site
Servicing Plan, Central Park Subdivision, Park Place Community, 110 Central
Park Drive" prepared by Trow Associates Inc., Drawing No. SP1, dated July
15, 2004, revised December 14, 2004 and dated as reviewed by Infrastructure
Approvals Division on December 15, 2004.
4. "Grading
Plan, Central Park Subdivision, Park Place Community, 110 Central Park
Drive", prepared by Trow Associates Inc., Drawing No. GP1, dated April 4,
2004, revised December 14, 2004 and dated as reviewed by Infrastructure
Approvals Division on December 15, 2004.
subject to the conditions contained in Document 6.
RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité de l'urbanisme et de
l'environnement APPROUVE la demande de réglementation du plan d'implantation
révisée concernant le 110, promenade Central Park, faisant l'objet des plans
suivants :
1. Plan
d’implantation, 100 à 130, promenade Central Park, Ottawa (Ontario), établi par
M. David Blakely Architect Inc., dessin no SP-17, daté de septembre 2000,
révisé le 25 novembre 2004 et reçu officiellement par la Ville d’Ottawa le 15
décembre 2004;
2. Plan
d’aménagement paysager, 100 à 130, promenade Central Park, Ottawa (Ontario),
établi par James B. Lennox & Associates Inc., architectes- paysagistes,
dessin no L-1, daté du mois d’août 2004, révisé le 4 décembre 2004 et reçu
officiellement par la Ville d’Ottawa le 15 décembre 2004;
3. Plan
de viabilisation, lotissement de Central Park, collectivité de Park Place, 110,
promenade Central Park, établi par Trow Associates Inc., dessin no SP1, daté du
15 juillet 2004, révisé le 14 décembre 2004 et examiné officiellement par la
Division de l’approbation des demandes d’infrastructure le 15 décembre 2004;
4. Plan
de nivellement, lotissement de Central Park, collectivité de Park Place, 110,
promenade Central Park, établi par Trow Associates Inc., dessin no GP1, daté du
4 avril 2004, révisé le 14 décembre 2004 et examiné officiellement par la
Division de l’approbation des demandes d’infrastructure le 15 décembre 2004;
sous réserve des conditions énoncées au document 6.
BACKGROUND
The subject property forms part of the larger
development area situated west of Merivale Road known as the 'Central Park'
subdivision. The subject property,
100-130 Central Park Drive, is located on the south and east sides of Central
Park Drive, between Whitestone Drive in the north and Scout Street in the
south. It is approximately 2.2 hectares
in size and it is irregular in shape. A
five-storey retirement residence and surface parking lot presently occupies the
northern portion of the property, whereas the balance of the lands are
vacant. Immediately to the east and
south of the subject lands are City-owned lands containing a soccer field, play
structures, and stormwater ponds.
Directly opposite to the subject lands on the north, west and south
sides of Central Park Drive are a mix of low-density residential dwellings
including singles, semis, and rowhouses.
Existing Site Plan
In July of 2001, the owner received approval of
a Site Plan Control application for the development of the subject lands. The approved development comprised a total
of three residential buildings and associated site works, namely: one
five-storey retirement building (112 units), one eight-storey highrise
apartment building (51 units), and one 10-storey highrise apartment building
(61 units). Parking, to be accommodated
on-site totaled 246 parking spaces comprising a mix of surface parking (134
parking spaces) and underground parking (112 parking spaces). The Site Plan Agreement between the owner
and the City included a clause stating that development was to proceed in
accordance with the approved plans, and having a maximum unit count of 224
units (as per the permitted maximum by the Zoning By-law). To date, the owner has only constructed one
of the three buildings, namely the five-storey retirement building situated
within the northeast portion of the site.
Proposed Development
The applicant has submitted to the City an
application for a revised Site Plan application proposing a total of four
residential buildings (one existing and three proposed) with a total of 224
units. This latest proposal for the
development of the property includes the construction of one additional
retirement building and the reduction in height (and corresponding number of
units) of the two previously approved high-rise apartment buildings. To increase the allowable units permitted by
the Zoning By-law and re-instate the height of the two apartment buildings that
have been reduced to three-storeys, will require that a rezoning application be
submitted. Such an application would be
subject to full public review and would require Council approval.
Concurrent Applications
There are no concurrent applications related to
this property. However, there was a
Part Lot Control application (File No. D07-08-04-0043) affecting the subject
lands which was processed recently whereby the owner obtained approval to
divide the property to create three parcels and to establish rights of
way/establish easements amongst the parcels, for financing purposes.
DISCUSSION
Staff-delegated approval has been withdrawn by the
Ward Councillor and this application is being presented to Planning and
Environment Committee.
The Council Approved Official Plan designates
the subject property as "General Urban Area" and the former City of
Ottawa Official Plan designates the property as "Residential
Area". The development proposal
conforms with the policies of the respective Official Plan documents.
The development proposal meets all provisions
of Zoning By-law 1998 of the former City of Ottawa. The zoning applying to the subject lands is 'R6F [690] H(28.0)
U(100)', a site specific residential zone which permits low, medium and high
density residential uses, including high-rise apartment buildings and retirement
homes. This zone contains specific
provisions in regard to setbacks for yards, establishing a maximum height
allowed of 28 metres, and establishing a maximum unit yield of 100 units per
hectare. Further, as more than one
building is proposed to be constructed within the subject lands it is
considered to be a 'Planned Unit Development' (PUD) and it is therefore subject
to provisions regarding separation between buildings and setbacks for
associated site works.
The owner proposes a continued phasing of the
development of the lands, the initial phase consisting of the construction of
one six-storey retirement building (14 rooming units and 85 dwelling units);
and a future phase consisting of the two three-storey apartment buildings (each
building having 11 units). As the
subject lands are 22,401.7 sq.m. in area, the maximum density allowed under the
by-law is 224 units. The 'unit' yield
for the subject lands remains unchanged, at 224 units.
For the development proposal, a total of 120
parking spaces are required. The total
parking proposed is 146 parking spaces.
Parking is accommodated on site and it is comprised of a mix of surface
parking (132 parking spaces) and underground parking (14 parking spaces). The underground parking is being accommodated
within the proposed six-storey retirement building.
In support of the application, the owner
submitted a letter summarizing the development proposals impact upon stormwater
management and traffic, and a separate noise study, all prepared in accordance
with the master studies and addendum that had been prepared for the Central
Park community. City staff have
reviewed the above and agree with the findings that the addition of the
retirement building and maintaining the same number of units on-site will have
a negligible impact.
The buildings as illustrated within the Site
Plan submission are situated as to 'ring' the property, located along Central
Park and the property lines abutting the City's park. Surface parking has been situated in a location that is primarily
'central' to the development.
Landscaping of the property area along the street edge is a mix of
coniferous and deciduous trees and shrubs.
Further, interspersed within the parking areas are landscaped
areas. Staff are of the opinion that the
revised site plan will result in a logical and orderly development of the
subject lands.
As a result of the circulation of the
development proposal to external agencies and Departments, comments on
technical issues were received. The
comments were forwarded to the applicant and revised plans were ultimately
submitted to respond to and address the technical issues. Minor changes to the site layout have
occurred from the original submission.
As a result of the review of the application, standard and special
conditions have been compiled and are included within Document 6.
CONSULTATION
Notice of this application was carried out in accordance with the City’s Public Notification and Consultation Policy. Information signs were posted on-site indicating the nature of the application. The Ward Councillor is aware of this application and the staff recommendation. No stated objections to the development proposal were received from the public, however a number of questions and comments were received.
The issues can be summarized as follows:
The comments that were received as a result of
the Public Notification pertain to density for the site and the community as a
whole, impacts of the proposal, parking, landscaping, access to parking,
height, and proposed floor plans and elevations.
Detailed responses to the
notification/circulation are provided in Document 7.
FINANCIAL
IMPLICATIONS
APPLICATION PROCESS TIMELINE STATUS
The application was not processed within the time
period specified for processing Site Plan Control applications where Delegation
of Authority to the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals Branch is
removed. The delay in the processing of
the application occurred due to an attempt between the City and the applicant
to resolve technical and zoning issues regarding the proposed development,
resulting in revisions to the site plan, landscape plan and engineering plans.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 2 Site
Plan
Document 3 Landscape
Plan
Document 4 Site
Servicing Plan
Document 5 Grading
Plan
Document 6 Conditions
of Site Plan Control Approval
DISPOSITION
Corporate Services Department, Legal Services Branch,
to prepare the amending Site Plan Control agreement.
Planning and Growth Management Department to
notify the owner (Ashcroft Homes Ltd., 18 Antares Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K2E
1A9), the applicant (Trow Associates Inc., 154 Colonnade Road South, Ottawa,
Ontario K2E 7J5), the architect (M. David Blakely Architect Inc., 210 Colonnade
Road South, Ottawa, Ontario K2E 7L5), All Signs, 8692 Russell Road, Navan,
ON K4B 1J1, and all interested parties
of Planning and Environment Committee’s decision.
LOCATION MAP Document
1
SITE PLAN Document
2
LANDSCAPE PLAN Document
3
SITE SERVICING PLAN Document 4
GRADING PLAN Document 5
CONDITIONS OF SITE PLAN CONTROL APPROVAL Document 6
Site Plan Agreement between the Owner and the City,
registered in the Land Titles Division of the Land Registry Office of Ottawa
-Carleton No. 4 on December 12, 2001 as Instrument No. OC26475 remains in
force, and is amended in accordance with the following:
Subject to the Owner(s) within
one year of this approval, entering into an amending Site Plan Agreement,
including all standard and special conditions, financial and otherwise, as
required by the City, and fulfilling the conditions to be satisfied prior to
the signing of the Agreement, failing which this approval shall lapse.
STANDARD CONDITIONS
1. Permits
The Owner(s) shall obtain such
permits as may be required from Municipal or Provincial authorities and shall
file copies thereof with the Director, Planning and Infrastructure Approvals
Branch.
2. Waste Reduction Workplan Summary
That prior to the issuance of a
building permit, the Owner(s) agrees to prepare and implement a Waste Reduction
Workplan Summary for the construction project as required by Ontario Regulation
102/94 of the Environmental Protection Act, and provide a copy to the Director,
Planning and Infrastructure Approvals.
3. Barrier Curbs
The Owner(s) agrees that the parking
areas (and entrances) shall have barrier curbs and shall be constructed as
approved by the Director, Planning and Infrastructure Approvals.
4. Water Supply for Fire Fighting
The Owner(s) shall provide
adequate water supply for fire fighting for every building. Water supplies may
be public water works system, automatic fire pumps, and pressure tanks for
gravity tanks.
5. Reinstatement of City Property
The Owner(s) shall reinstate at
its expense, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Infrastructure
Approvals, any property of the City, including, but not limited to, sidewalks
and curbs, boulevards, that are damaged as a result of the subject development.
6. Construction Fencing
The Owner(s) shall be required to
install construction fencing at its expense, in such a location as may be
determined by the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals.
7. Completion of Works
No building will be occupied on
the lands, nor will the Owner(s) convey title to any building until all requirements
with respect to completion of the Works as identified in this Agreement have
been carried out and received Approval by the Director, Infrastructure
Services, including the installation of municipal numbering provided in a
permanent location visible during both day and night and the installation of
any street name sign on relevant streets. Provided that notwithstanding the
non-completion of the foregoing Works, conveyance and/or occupancy of a lot or
structure may otherwise be permitted, if in the sole opinion of the Director,
Planning and Infrastructure Approvals, the aforesaid Works are proceeding
satisfactorily toward completion. The
Owner shall obtain the consent of the Director, Planning and Infrastructure
Approvals for such conveyance and/or occupancy in writing.
SPECIAL CONDITIONS
1. Contaminated Sites (for all Historic Land-Use Inventory)
The City will require all site
plans to be supported by an affidavit from the principal consultant indicating
that a Phase 1 ESA has been completed, where available information, including
the City’s Historical Land-Use Inventory, indicates a potential for
environmental contamination on the property. The City will require a Phase 2
ESA to be undertaken to support applications for sites where the Phase 1 ESA
reveals that the site may be contaminated. A Phase 2 ESA provides a sampling
and analysis of the property and delineates the presence of soil or groundwater
contamination at the site or confirms the absence of contamination at the site.
2. Noise Attenuation
The Owner(s) shall implement the
noise control of the approved study "Noise Impact Assessment Study Central
Park Subdivision Retirement Site, Bldg D 100 Central Park Drive City of Ottawa,
prepared by Trow Associates Inc., dated December 9, 2004". This includes implementing the conclusions
and recommendations and notices on title that will be included in all
Agreements of Purchase and Sale and or Lease Agreements as stated in Section
7.0 of the referenced report.
3. Sanitary Sewer Charge on Additional Sanitary Flow
The proposed development is
located within a sanitary collector area which has been assessed by the City to
be at capacity. The Owner(s) shall liaise with the City to identify extraneous
wet weather flow sources. Where flow removal cannot be achieved on site,
removal of extraneous flows will be conducted through a flow removal program.
The Owner(s) shall contribute
$4,772/l/s x [increase in avg. sanitary flow x 1.5 peaking factor +
infiltration (0.28 l/s/ha)] for additional sanitary flow generated by this
site.
4. Bell
Canada
The owner shall provide one or more conduit or
conduits of sufficient size from each unit to the room(s) in which the
telecommunication facilities are situated and one or more conduits from the
room(s) in which the telecommunication facilities are located to the street
line.
5. Canada Post
The owner shall install a lock
box assembly in the main vestibule of each building for mail delivery.
CONSULTATION DETAILS Document
7
NOTIFICATION AND CONSULTATION PROCESS
Notification and public
consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Public Notification and
Public Consultation Policy approved by City Council for Site Plan
Amendments.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
No public meetings were held in the community. As a result of the posting of the on-site sign, three requests from the public were received for additional information. Further, four comments were received from people providing comments and raising questions of the proposal and they are summarized below.
SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INPUT
1. With regard to Site Plan (SP-17), I would note that the plan calls for a total of 132 spaces above ground for the two apartment buildings (buildings B & C) and the existing seniors residence (building A). In addition there are to be 14 underground spaces in the proposed 110 Central Park Drive (building D). However, the site plan shows a ramp for an underground parking garage for buildings B & C. With above ground parking sufficient to meet the needs of buildings B & C already accounted for in the site plan, why is the ramp and underground parking for buildings B&C still on the plan? Would it be possible to substitute some of the above ground spaces for underground spaces in buildings B & C, to permit more green space and landscaping of the site?
Within the revised Site Plan, the ramp and the label 'underground
parking area' have been removed.
Further, the area still serves as a loading area for future buildings B
& C. As per the calculation table
on the Site Plan detailing the parking provided, the owner is not proposing
underground parking for buildings B & C.
The provision of parking exceeds the minimum by-law requirement.
2. I seem to recall that
two retirement residences were originally planned for that site. However, the revisions-history on the Site
Plan SP-17 shows that building D was added in 2003. Do you know when building D was removed from the original site
plan?
Response
Prior to the approval of the original Site Plan in 2001, an earlier
submission did include a second retirement building.
3. Could the zoning for the
section of the lot for buildings B & C be amended to limit their height to
3 stories? I recall that the original
plan for building A was a 3-storey structure, which was extended to 5
storeys. While I welcome the addition
of units oriented to seniors and the subsequent reduction in the other
buildings from 10 to 3 storeys, Ashcroft homes has a history of changing its
mind and requesting additions every few years. Hence, while the Site Plan lists two 3-storey buildings, what
restricts the builder from later moving them back to 6 and 10 storeys as
permitted by the zoning?
Response
The development proposal is proceeding in accordance with the approved
zoning. In the future, any changes to
the proposal that would have the effect of increasing the number of units
on-site would necessitate an application to amend the Zoning By-law. Such an application would be subject to full
public review and would require approval by Council.
4. We are concerned that
the new lower 3-storey twin towers might no longer remain luxury condos and
become something else or that the builder may later request another variance to
make them higher.
Response
The subject application pertains to a reduction in height and number of
units of the two high-rise buildings.
Any proposal to increase the height of the buildings to provide
additional units would require a zoning change as noted above.
5. How do I get more
information on the two 3-storey buildings, the proposed layout of the location
of the buildings, access and parking, etc.
Response
The owner has not submitted floor plans or elevations for the two
3-storey apartment buildings.
6. What are the reasons for
the proposed changes to the planned development pertaining to the files in
question?
Response
Staff are not aware of the owners reasons for changing their existing
approvals.
7. What is the proposed
maximum density of the Central Park development? What is the current density?
Response
The density limitations of 'Central Park' is based upon the approved
zoning and plans of subdivision. The
density established in the various zones were, in large part, supported by Master Studies (in particular the Traffic
Study), which demonstrated that the existing and proposed road network could
accommodate the proposed maximum unit yield.
The mixed densities that are allowed are in the order of approximately 2025
units.
8. What is the factor
limiting the capacity of development of Central Park?
Response
Site development factors as to how the proposed development can be
addressed, is accomplished through the Site Plan Control process. Zoning establishes limits on the capacity
for development. This has been
determined based on various factors including site layout, servicing
capacities, storm water management, traffic, and the characteristics of each
property.
9. How will the proposed
changes affect the over-all development?
Response
As noted above, the unit yield remains unchanged at 224 units. Also, as part of the submission of materials
filed by the owner in support of the development proposal, a letter on
stormwater and transportation issues was included, which indicated that the
proposal was in keeping with the studies that had been prepared for the area.
10. Why did the City notice
not indicate the deadline date for comments?
Response
The notice (including a key map, summary, comment sheet, plans) of the
Site Plan Application that was mailed to the community representative did
include a due date for comments. As per
City Council policy, the two signs posted on-site do not include a due date for
comments.
COUNCILLOR’S COMMENTS
Councillor McRae is aware of the application.
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION COMMENTS
Central Park Citizens Group and Carlington Community Association.