CONFIRMATION
OF MINUTES
Ratification dU
procÈs-verbaL
Minutes 23 and Confidential Minutes 6 of the Planning
and Environment Committee meeting of Tuesday, 18 December 2007 were confirmed.
STATEMENT REQUIRED FOR ZONING
APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED FOR POST JANUARY 1, 2007
DÉCLARATION POUR LES DEMANDES DE MODIFICATION DE ZONAGE PRÉSENTÉES APRÈS
LE 1ER JANVIER 2007
Chair Peter Hume read a
statement relative to the Zoning By-law amendments listed as items 2 and 3 on
the Agenda. He advised that only those
who made oral submissions at today’s meeting or written submissions before the
amendments are adopted could appeal these matters to the Ontario Municipal
Board. In addition, applicants may
appeal the matter to the Ontario Municipal Board if Council does not adopt an
amendment within 120 days of receipt of the application.
PUBLIC WORKS AND
SERVICES
TRAVAUX
PUBLics
Water and
Wastewater Services
Services de l’eau potable et des eaux usées
1. Proactive
Lead Service replacement Program
programme Proactif de remplacement de conduites en plomb
ACS2008-PWS-WWS-0001 City-Wide / À
l’échelle de la Ville
Michel Chevalier, Manager of
Customer Services and Operations Support, provided a PowerPoint presentation,
which is held on file with the City Clerk.
Jean-Guy Albert, Program Manager of Inspection, Public Health; Ian
Douglas, Process Engineer for Water Quality; Tammy Rose, Manager of Drinking
Water Services; and Dixon Weir, Director of Water and Wastewater Services
accompanied him.
Mr. Weir advised that Ottawa
programs are recognized as pro-active measures and best management
practices. Mr. Hewitt added that Mr.
Weir was invited to the Large City Department Heads meeting to present Ottawa’s
activities and approach because a number of other cities across Ontario were
very interested in duplicating Ottawa’s good results.
In response to questions from
Councillor Cullen, staff provided the following information:
·
The
lead service replacement program overall budget was estimated at $1M and
approximately 16,000 households would qualify for this program.
·
In
combination with the ongoing water main rehabilitation program, lead services
would be eliminated within a 15 to 17 year period.
·
The
brochure that advises households to flush their systems every morning will be
distributed annually.
·
The
program does notinclude schools because larger diameter pipes that are not
manufactured from lead service those buildings.
·
The
City does assist school boards through the Medical Officer of Health and by
providing technical expertise, including water sampling.
·
The
Ministry of Education imposed a requirement for all schools to flush their
systems as a precautionary approach.
Following this exchange, the
Committee directed staff to monitor schools in the areas identified for
potential lead services. If it is
deemed lead pipes service them, they will be put on the highest priority in terms
of the City’s service replacement program.
Councillor Cullen questioned
whether the $2,400 represented a financial barrier for homeowners. Mr. Chevalier explained that the tax
deferral incentive is clearly set out in the brochure and agreement.
Responding to questions from
Councillor Holmes, Mr. Chevalier indicated only 85 of the 150 replacements
occurred in 2007 due to program start up.
Projects were prioritized favouring families with young children and
pregnant women. He remarked funding in
the capital program would allow for 150 replacements per year in addition to
the 2007 carry over.
In response to questions from
Councillor Holmes, Mr. Douglas provided information on a number of mechanisms
to control appropriate PH levels. With
respect to exposure to lead, he specified that the lead service line is the
primary contributor but brass fixtures and copper pipe constructed with leaded
sodder are also factors. Mr. Weir
indicated that no formal requirement exists to test bottled water for
lead. As part of a recent direction to
the Green Team, staff will investigate water fountains in City facilities in
terms of their on-going maintenance and introduction.
With respect to the rural area,
Mr. Douglas explained that calcium build up in pipes mitigates some exposure to
lead. Mr. Albert added that the City
provides information and programs to homeowners who have wells on their
property asking them to test on a regular basis for bacteria and other health
related problems.
In reply to a question from
Councillor Desroches with respect to the urgency of the issue, Mr. Weir
responded that Drinking Water Services was formerly a regional responsibility
and measures date back to 1932. Mr.
Marc explained that a local improvement charge would not apply because such a
levy is only permitted for initial installation of services and this is a
replacement program.
Responding to further questions
from Councillor Desroches regarding in-house management of the program, Mr.
Weir mentioned that contractor expertise was utilised for installation and
construction, but staff are responsible for overall coordination, including
dealings with homeowners. Mr. Weir
pointed out that the 2008 water rate budget totals $200M and this program,
which was a previous pilot project, complements and supplements existing
programs.
In response to questions from
Councillor Hunter, Mr. Chevalier clarified the projected costs for an
accelerated program. To achieve total
replacement by 2010, 16,000 services would be replaced $30M per year, resulting
in average increases of $3.40 per year on the water bill for all ratepayers.
Councillor Hunter remarked Ottawa
is doing pretty well as compared to other municipalities, noting jurisdictions
have very different standards. Mr.
Douglas advised that if infants, children and adults consume water with 10
micrograms per litre or less, there is no contribution to the blood lead
concentration. Councillor Hunter
remarked that there would be a tremendous amount of push back from the
ratepayers of Ottawa against this program if the City were to propose a rate
increase.
In reply to a question from
Councillor Doucet regarding changes in water treatment since 1947, Mr. Douglas
pointed out the City benefits from high PH levels and corrosion control
measures. Mr. Weir added that the City
has an extensive water quality sampling program that has existed for many
years.
Councillor Feltmate remarked it is
probably not possible to proceed with an accelerated program over three years
due to the required work for 16,000 homes and other projects throughout the
city.
Megan McGarrity, Environmental
Advisory Committee (EAC) urged Committee and Council to proceed with an accelerated program,
touching on the level of chronic exposure to lead, which is critical to
infants, children and pregnant women.
She mentioned the list of preventable measures that can be taken in the
interim to mitigate or reduce lead exposure.
EAC believed that 16 years is far too long for the replacement of the
municipal portion of lead services and strongly supported the continuation of
the program, suggesting the program cap be removed. She identified two key issues, notably education and
affordability. EAC suggested the City expand
the education tools and asked Committee and Council to find the necessary funds
to accelerate and complete by 2010 the elimination of lead services.
Councillor Cullen thanked EAC for
bringing this issue to the forefront and commended staff for not only engaging
in the pilot project, but also recommending that it become a permanent
feature. He urged Committee to endorse
the program and to direct staff to bring forward for the 2009 capital program a
project to eliminate lead pipe services within the City of Ottawa by a
reasonable timeframe.
That the Planning and
Environment Committee recommend Council approve the continuance of:
a) The Proactive Lead Service
Replacement program into 2008 with $1 million in funding sourced fron the Water
Fund and associated FTEs all of which are subject to the 2008 Rate Budget;
b) The program in subsequent
years to enable replacement of lead water services for property owners, giving
priority to homes with children 6 years of age and under and expectant mothers;
and
c) A public information
outreach program.
CARRIED
Following the vote, Councillor
Cullen stated he was appalled the Committee did not act to accelerate the
program, noting lead is an important public health issue. Chair Hume asked the Councillor to withdraw
his comments, noting he stretched the indulgence he received from the Chair.
PLanning,
TranSIT and thE EnVIRONMENT
urbanisme, transport en commun et environNement
PLANNING
URBANISME
2. ZONING - 1445 MERIVALE ROAD
ZONAGE
- 1445, CHEMIN MERIVALE
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0009 Knoxdale-Merivale (9)
(This application is subject
to Bill 51)
The following written correspondence was
received and is held on file with the City Clerk:
·
Documents
prepared by the Fisher Heights Skyline Orchard Park Community Working Group
(Summary of Public Meeting, Concerns and Objections, Transportation Issues, and
Community Views and Concerns)
·
Letter
dated November 12, 2007 signed by the owners of 15 single addresses from the
local community
Geraldine Johnston, Planner II, provided a
detailed PowerPoint presentation, which is held on file with the City
Clerk. Karen Currie, Manager of
Development Approvals East/South accompanied her and Mike Wildman, Manager of
Infrastructure Approvals was present to respond to questions.
Councillor Hunter pointed out this area is
designated Arterial Mainstreet and covered by the Merivale Secondary Plan
(MSP), which calls for a seven metre street side zone for snow storage (two
metres), a walkway (two metres) and landscaping (three metres).
Ms. Currie specified that the submitted Site
Plan showed a 2.5 metre set back along Burris Lane in addition to the area
provided in the road allowance from the curb.
She added this matter would be examined during Site Plan review. Ms.
Johnston explained that an access point would be provided from that roadway and
the abutting wall would not be blank.
Councillor Hunter emphasized the MSP speaks to
landowners working together to provide internal linkages between separate
parking and service facilities. As an
example, he cited the reduction of 16 access points to 8 on the west side of
Merivale Road at Clyde Avenue. The MSP
also states that changes to the transportation system resulting from
development should minimise the potential for cut-through traffic in adjacent
neighbourhoods. Further, opportunities
to reduce the number of site driveway connections and improve pedestrian and
vehicular interconnection should be investigated.
Mr. Wildman confirmed a traffic study was
undertaken for the area. Planning staff
conferred with Traffic and Parking Operations (TPO) and determined there has
been a steady decline in cut-through traffic in the area, which has been
monitored over the past 10 years, dropping by 20 per cent. He observed this drop is attributable to the
circuitous road network, which is not a straight grid pattern. The existing traffic numbers are indicative
of neighbourhood traffic. The traffic
analysis indicates cut-through traffic would not increase significantly, but
local residents would utilise the new facility. He confirmed the analysis is part anecdotal based on empirical numbers
from traffic counts rationalised by TPO and the applicant’s consultant. Mr. Wildman confirmed the City’s
Transportation Impact Assessment Guidelines require that the applicant submit a
Community Traffic Study, which looks at the functionality of the local road
network and its ability to accommodate traffic generated by this type of
development. Detailed design issues are
dealt with at Site Plan and the proponent has gone beyond what is normally
required for zoning. The existing
zoning would generate three times more traffic, as compared to the zoning
proposed.
Responding to a question from Councillor
Desroches, Ms. Johnston confirmed the proposed building height is less than
what is currently permitted under the by-law.
Councillor Feltmate occupied the Chair.
Cathleen Schmidt, a local resident and mother of two daughters,
voiced opposition to the proposal, noting the negative impacts of the proposed
use. She specified traffic and
pedestrian safety concerns due to the lack of sidewalks on neighbouring
streets. Ms. Schmidt pointed out many
young families are choosing to locate in this area.
Terrence Bell, past president of the
Skyline-Orchard Park Community Association, commented that the Community would be adversely
impacted and affected should the application be approved. He touched on sole access and egress to the
site on Burris Lane, urging instead that it be given from Merivale Road, as
called for in the MSP. Mr. Bell also
spoke of shared access with adjacent businesses and increased cut-through
traffic. He noted that for many years
City and Regional Councillors have relied heavily on staff recommendations
before taking into consideration the views and concerns of all stakeholders.
In response to a question from Councillor
Bellemare, Mr. Bell did not support dual access, as it would be detrimental to
the residents due to the size and stacking potential on Burris Lane. The Community in recent years asked for
restrictive turns, which exist currently on Meadowlands Drive, but there is no such
restriction on Burris Lane to stop cut-through traffic.
Ken Cox, the first of five speakers from the Fisher
Heights Skyline Orchard Park Community Working Group, addressed Community
concerns with the application. He noted
250 individuals attended the October 15, 2007 public meeting and a working
group was formed, composed of 16 members, to ensure the views of the Community
were known. Mr. Cox voiced the position
that the present zoning serves both the interests of the applicant and the
Community, suggesting the Planning department did not give due consideration to
the views and concerns of the Community.
Further, he said the main opposition related to access to the site via
Burris Lane. Mr. Cox’s email dated
January 6, 2008 to Ms. Johnston is held on file with the City Clerk.
Councillor Monette asked whether a business
office would be a more appropriate use.
Mr. Cox responded the Community does not object to the current zoning,
as the traffic studies show the number of cars would be approximately the
same. The main concern centres around
access and egress on Burris Lane.
Building height is not a concern due to set back requirements.
Responding to a question from Councillor
Holmes, Ms. Johnston clarified the set back provision aims to protect adjacent
residential areas by setting back the building 1.4 times the height.
Bob McCaw focused his remarks on traffic/transportation
issues, notably the grave concern of residents regarding the entrance and exit
on Burris Lane, rather than Merivale Road.
No other business in the vicinity funnels traffic onto adjacent
streets. It also ignores the Merivale
Secondary Plan, which mandates commercial properties to utilize singular or
shared access points onto Merivale Road.
Mr. McCaw noted Burris Lane is only 70 metres in length and leads to the
community of low-rise and medium-rise apartments, townhouses, semi-detached and
single homes. He suggested if a safety
concern exists currently, it should be addresses accordingly. He also referenced Delcan’s study, questioning
assertions that residents would only represent a small portion of the clientele
and only local residents would use Burris Lane to enter the residential
area. He stated through-traffic is an
existing problem, which will be compounded, noting four recent traffic measures
that were instituted to address it. He
also mentioned current traffic volumes on Burris Lane and stacking at the
intersection at peak times.
Councillor Hume resumed the Chair.
In reply to a question from Councillor Holmes
with regard to controlling in and out traffic, Mr. Wildman explained detailed
discussion with regard to access would be conducted at Site Plan and the zoning
application focuses on whether the road network could tolerate the proposed
use.
He confirmed right-in and right-out options
were given consideration; however, the staff consensus was to move the entrance
to Burris Lane due to the proximity to the intersection and Official Plan
policies, which seek to minimise accesses on arterial roads.
Sheila Granger outlined five problems with regard to the
zoning:
·
The
application disregards existing policies that promote consolidation of small
lots.
·
The
final use of the property is not determined.
She characterised the rezoning application as speculative.
·
The
application, if approved, would add to the reliance on the automobile.
·
With
respect to the residential lots on Eleanor Drive, abutting this site, the
proposal encroaches on the established residential neighbourhood. The current zoning takes into consideration
the current mixed-use designation in the Merivale Secondary Plan.
·
The
developer has not worked with other landholders to develop the property as a
harmonious mix of residential housing, business offices and retail stores.
Terrence Lonergan commented on the process as it relates to
Community input and participation. He
noted a petition signed by 80 residents was submitted in August 2007 and more
than 250 individuals attended a public meeting on October 15, 2007. The working group has contributed more than 100
volunteer hours, prepared three technical briefs and a summary of the public meeting, wrote to councillors and met
with five of them. He suggested
community concerns and actions were not properly or adequately reflected in the
departmental report, which does not critique or scrutinise the work of FoTenn
or Delcan on behalf of the applicant.
He detailed three misrepresentations in the report dealing with an
independent study to verify the assumptions made by Delcan, concerns related to
through-traffic, and increased traffic on Burris Lane over the last 10 years.
L. Paul Dumbrille, who also submitted written comments (held on
file with the City Clerk), pointed out that the Community is not hostile to
business or local enterprise. It is
hoped Merivale Road will experience rapid and sustainable development. He called on Committee to reject the
application in order that Merivale Road can develop into the functional and
pleasant mid-town axis that Ottawa needs and deserves. He reiterated points raised by previous
speakers, notably the most detestable feature of this application is that all
traffic to the site would enter and exit on Burris Lane. He also looked forward to the establishment
of a Business Improvement Association for Merivale that can plan and work with
the Community.
Written submissions from all five speakers
representing the working group are held on file with the City Clerk.
Iris Lonergan suggested the working group’s submissions have
not been given due consideration. She
commented that the owner purchased the property aware that it was zoned for
office uses, noting she researched the area prior to purchasing her home two
years ago. She stated zoning
requirements must be respected. Mrs.
Lonergan added that trough-traffic has increased incrementally and noted the
absence of sidewalks on adjacent local streets.
She urged Committee and Council to take into
account the concerns and safety of nearby residents, by not allowing
residential streets to be a dumping ground for cars in an effort to spare
Merivale Road. She emphasized
cut-through traffic will be a major issue.
Councillor Hunter congratulated the working
group for their excellent briefs and presentations.
In reply to a question from Councillor Hunter,
Mrs. Lonergan confirmed access on Burris Lane is a major concern and would be
compacted by a fast food or convenience store use. Ms. Johnston confirmed the permitted uses under the new zone and
the drive thru restriction.
Mr. Lonergan once again came forward explaining
that a technical document was prepared addressing the future Arterial
Mainstreet designation for Merivale Road, noting strict regulations apply. With respect to height, an 11-meter building
could be constructed. The Community
would be comfortable with sub zone 4 or 5, which restrict the uses that are
acceptable to the adjacent residential neighbourhood. In all cases, the entrance and exit of a business that serves
Merivale Road should remain on that street.
Responding to further questions from Councillor
Hunter, Mr. Lonergan reiterated the concern related more to the flow of cars,
rather than the type of use. The Delcan
report showed very little difference between a convenience store and fast-food
operation in terms of generated traffic.
Mrs. Lonergan added some residents abutting the site do not support a
restaurant use due to food smells. She
also discussed possible impact on sewers.
Councillor Hunter noted many emails were received on the food smell
issue, noting the large number of restaurants in the area.
Michael Casey, Arnon, was present to address the
application and was accompanied by Brian Casagrande, FoTenn Consultants, and
Ms. Newgard, Delcan. He put forward
the following arguments:
·
A
drive thru was removed in response to community feedback at the public meeting
and subsequent to discussions with the ward councillor.
·
Arnon
owns 83 per cent of street frontage on Burris Lane and he questioned the
assertions presented by previous delegations with respect to cut-through
traffic.
·
With
regard to land assembly, Arnon owned the land for 20 years and attempted to
purchase additional parcels held by a particular individual with expectations
as to the value of the property. He
addressed recent acquisitions, noting there is no opportunity for assembly.
·
Joint
accesses only work if property lines are at 90 degrees to the street, as
opposed to the 45-degree angle in the current situation. The MSP does not obligate joint access,
stating instead that it is preferable.
In this case, joint access is not possible given the configuration of
the land holdings.
·
City
staff clearly indicated access should not be on Merivale Road, due to the close
proximity to the traffic signals that control the intersection at Merivale
Road/Burris Lane. The entrance is much
safer on Burris Lane.
·
The
proposed uses would be permitted in the new Comprehensive Zoning By-law
designation for this area and is less than what be permitted.
Mr. Casagrande focused on the Official Plan and
Secondary Plan, which are the most critical evaluative tools for a zoning
amendment. The proposal is consistent
with the Arterial Mainstreet designation, which is a reflection of what
currently exists on Merivale Road. The
concept plan as proposed shows a number of aspects that also support Official
Plan policies and vision with respect to buffering, articulation to the street,
and so on. With respect to the MSP, the
proposal conforms to the permitted uses.
He opined policies with regard to joint access are misrepresented, as
the objective is to protect major roads, such as Merivale Road. He suggested an entrance on Merivale Road
would encourage cut-through traffic, rather than alleviate it.
In response to a question from Councillor
Hunter, Mr. Casey advised that if the zoning is approved he could begin marketing
the site for a potential occupant, including retail, restaurant and other
permitted uses. He confirmed he would
not construct an office building, because the site is too small. Ms. Johnston confirmed the permitted uses in
the proposed zone, as compared to the current zone, which is more
permissive. With respect to access on
Merivale Road, Mr. Casey suggested the MSP seeks to minimise access points on
Merivale Road and both staff and the applicant believe the entrance should be
located on Burris Lane.
Councillor Monette asked the applicant if he
would accept locating the entrance on Merivale Road. Mr. Casey reiterated his earlier comments, but noted he would
respect what is imposed. Councillor
Hunter announced he would address the entrance.
Ms. Newgard explained the entrance, if located
on Merivale Road, would be 50 metres from the intersection, which is unsafe in
terms of stacking and visibility for turning.
Councillor Holmes suggested Toronto’s
guidelines for greening parking lots should be utilised at this location. She noted it would not reduce the number of
parking spots. Chair Hume explained
that through an inquiry at this Committee, staff is looking at the guidelines
in terms of implementation.
Councillor Holmes commented on the application,
noting it is a down zone, which she usually does not support. She compared this proposal with some in her
ward with respect to community compatibility and concern. She remarked intensification must not only
occur downtown.
Councillor Monette congratulated the community
for their efforts, commenting that the local community must be respected.
Councillor Hunter addressed his motion, in
rebuttal to Councillor Holmes’ assertion that this proposal represented down
zoning. He noted a greater number of uses
would be permitted and building height is constrained by set back requirements.
That the Planning
and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former
City of Nepean Zoning By-law to change the zoning of 1445 Merivale Road
from CO – Commercial Office Block 8 to a MMU – Merivale Mixed Use Exception
Zone as shown in Document 1 and as detailed in Document 4.
CARRIED, with G.
Hunter dissenting.
Moved by G. Hunter:
Whereas access and egress for 1445 Merivale Road via Burris
Lane is a major concern for the surrounding community.
THEREFORE Be it resolved that should the application for
rezoning be approved staff be directed to consider a site plan with access and
egress on Merivale Road.
AND THAT if such access is considered not desirable that it be
subject to a report to the Transportation Committee.
CARRIED
3. ZONING - 2000 VALIN STREET
ZONAGE - 2000, RUE VALIN
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0015 Cumberland (19)
(This application is subject to Bill 51)
An
opposition letter, dated July 23, 2007 from Robert Butler, was received
and is held on file with the City Clerk.
Cheryl
McWilliams, Planner II, provided an overview of the departmental report through
a PowerPoint presentation, which is held on file with the City Clerk. Karen Currie, Manager of Development
Approvals East/South, accompanied her.
Councillor
Desroches noted that one of the Official Plan White Papers discussed employment
nodes in the East end and asked staff to comment on how this proposal
contributed to the goal of increasing employment opportunities in Orléans.
Ms. Currie
advised that the designation of employment lands had been a significant issue
in Orléans since the nineteen seventies.
She explained this small commercial site was not designated as
employment lands, observing that substantial retail space had been added,
totalling over one million square feet.
She indicated development of employment lands must occur in the
long-term, noting office and industrial uses, especially in business parks,
were underdeveloped.
Sean
Crossan, President of the Cardinal Creek Community Association, spoke in
opposition to the proposal, touching on points detailed in a written submission
dated December 30, 2007, which is held on file with the City Clerk. He urged Councillors to get the planning
fundamentals right, noting documents in support of the application are no
longer relevant, out of date and no longer reflect the significant growth and
development that has taken place in Orléans.
For instance, current traffic volumes on Trim Road surpassed the targets
set out in the 1998-1999 Environmental Assessment. He noted the number of residents in the immediate area totalled
12,000 to 13,000, which exceeded the projection of 9,300 for this period. He added considerable residential development
would continue in the next few years.
Mr. Crossan advanced that no reports have been conducted recently to
look at commercial or institutional development and employment lands in
Orléans. A number of sites have been
converted from commercial to residential in recent years. He pointed out that the 2006 Vacant Urban Residential Land Survey
concluded that Orléans has a supply of vacant serviced residential land for the
next 14.9 years (15 years), which shows that there is an oversupply of
residential land in the current Orléans market. He
recommended maintaining the commercial zone to ensure a proper balance of uses
in the area. He touched on specific
Official Plan policies that would be achieved by doing so.
Councillor
Hunter asked whether the nearby Sobeys was open 24 hours a day. He noted such hours of operation discouraged
local small commercial operators. He
reminded the delegation that the commercial zoning could allow for the
construction and operation of a fast food establishment, which could have a
greater impact on the Community.
Mr.
Crossan specified commercial uses in the surrounding area, touching on the need
for a variety of commercial uses in Orléans and the immediate area. As an example, he noted an adjacent strip
mall had reached 90 per cent capacity and construction was not yet completed.
Henry
Skalski, an adjacent homeowner on Scully Way, stated he purchased
the property knowing commercial uses would be instituted on the subject
site. He indicated the two issues of
most concern to him were the set back from his rear property line and the
building height. He expected the height
to be lower or the same height as the townhomes on Scully Way. He reiterated his support for maintaining
commercial zoning on the subject site.
Mr. Skalski explained that he canvassed the 30 homes of the 48 units in
the area, 28 of which supported commercial uses for the site.
In
response to a question from Chair Hume, Mr. Skalski acknowledged he could
accept townhomes on the site if they were the same height or lower and
sufficiently set back from his rear property line. He reiterated the community’s desire and need for commercial
uses.
Pierrette
Woods, Co-Chair of the Innes Rezoning and Development Group, spoke in
opposition to the proposal. Her main
points were as follows:
·
This site would impact on the development of the
Orléans Industrial Park (OIP).
·
The Official Plan White Paper, titled The Balance of
Jobs and Housing in Orléans, stated the number of jobs per household was
stagnant at approximately 0.5 for the past 15 years, as opposed to the Official
Plan objective of 1.3 jobs per household.
·
The south side of Orléans experienced an explosion
of residential development over the last 10 years. The Orléans Industrial Park Community Strategy identified the
need to attract a large government department in the OIP as the highest
priority.
·
The addition of further residential development
would exacerbate growing transportation problems.
·
A residential zone was neither desirable nor
appropriate for this site. The request
was not minor in nature and would have vast implications for the Community.
·
Local commercial amenities, as permitted under the
current zone, were needed.
·
Guiding Principles, as set out in the Official Plan
under Sections 1.3 and 1.6, must be considered and addressed.
A written
submission dated January 6, 2008 was received and is held on file with the City
Clerk.
Janet
Bradley and Doug Hardie, on behalf of Claridge Homes, presented arguments in
support of the application, noting the following:
·
The current zoning for the property allowed a
fast-food restaurant, which would have a far greater impact on the Community in
terms of traffic, noise, light proliferation, and snow/garbage removal.
·
Of the adjacent property owners, only one appeared
at today’s meeting.
·
An Official Plan Amendment in 1990 designated these
lands as residential but the amalgamated City’s new Official Plan designated it
as General Urban, which allowed for residential uses. The new Comprehensive Zoning By-law would also permit the
requested use.
·
The proposal called for a greater set back than was
required in the current zone. The
height of the proposed buildings was similar to the abutting townhomes.
·
The applicant had reduced the scale of the
development by reducing the number of units from 96 to 84 and repositioning the
three buildings immediately adjacent to the abutting townhomes.
·
A number of studies were submitted in support of the
application, notably showing that the road network could accommodate traffic.
·
Built form represented 38 per cent of the area
abutting the townhomes with greenspace accounting for 68 per cent. A significant tree buffer was also proposed.
Councillor Monette suggested Mr. Hardie presented mostly site plan
elements, which were currently not before the Committee. He noted over 100 individuals attended a
Community meeting where attendees unanimously objected to the proposal. He asked whether the applicant had considered
townhomes as an alternative.
Ms. Bradley responded by submitting that the proposal was fair,
represented a legitimate land use for the area and responded to Official Plan
policies. She reiterated that Claridge
acted on community concerns by re-orienting buildings abutting the townhomes
and reducing the number of units.
In response to questions from Councillor Qadri with respect to the height
of the proposed units, Mr. Hardie confirmed a height of 10.9 metres from grade
to the mid-point of the roof. Ms.
Bradley suggested shadowing would be greater should a commercial building be
constructed to the maximum height of 9.2 metres, as the set back would be
reduced. Mr. Hardie reiterated the
Shadow Study showed little impact due to the larger set back.
Councillor Monette presented a motion to reject the application for a
residential zone.
Councillor Jellett spoke of the community opposition to the proposal and
the need to address the job to household ratio in Orléans. He suggested the best use of the property
would be commercial.
Councillor Monette addressed his motion, touching on the need for jobs in
the area. Councillor Bellemare spoke in
support of the motion, discussing a commercial use in
his ward that was rezoned to residential, which is now being reconsidered.
Moved by B. Monette:
WHEREAS the proposed development is incompatible
with the surrounding neighbourhood in terms of the proposed land use, height,
density and setback;
AND WHEREAS the general urban designation
permits commercial development and such commercial development is the
appropriate use for this site;
AND WHEREAS residents living in the surrounding
area were always aware that this site allows future community commercial
development would be located on this site;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Planning and
Environment Committee recommend Council reject an amendment to the former
Cumberland Zoning By-law to change the zoning of 2000 Valin Street from CNN -
Commercial Convenience Neighbourhood to R5A - X'X', Residential Apartments -
Low Density - Exception 'X' as shown in Document 1 and as detailed in Document
2, for the following reasons:
1) By applying sections
2-5.1 and 4.11 of the official plan and the principles of good land use
planning, the proposed development is incompatible with the surrounding
neighbourhood in terms of the proposed land use, height, density and setbacks;
2) The general urban
designation permits commercial development and such commercial development is
the appropriate use for this site;
3) Commercial development
on the site will reduce the need of residents of the area to travel to purchase
day to day needs.
CARRIED
YEAS (7): M.
Bellemare, S. Desroches, C. Doucet, G. Hunter, B. Monette, S. Qadri, P.
Feltmate
NAYS (1): P.
Hume
Chair Hume advised that the matter would rise to
Council on January 9, 2008.
4. VACANT URBAN RESIDENTIAL LAND SURVEY,
2006 UPDATE
ENQUÊTE SUR LES TERRAINS
RÉSIDENTIELS VACANTS EN MILIEU URBAIN, MISE À JOUR DE 2006
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0010 CITY-WIDE/À L’ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
Ted Phillips,
Ottawa-Carleton Home Builders Association, requested that this
matter be deferred for two meetings.
John Moser, City
Planner and Director of Planning, indicated he did not object to the deferral
but suggested it should also apply to the Results of the 2006 Employment
Survey.
That the Planning and
Environment Committee receive this report for information.
DEFERRED
To
February 12, 2008
5. RESULTS
OF THE 2006 EMPLOYMENT SURVEY
RÉSULTATS DE
L’ENQUÊTE SUR L’EMPLOI DE 2006
ACS2007-PTE-POL-0071 CITY-WIDE/À L’ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
That the Agriculture and
Rural Affairs Committee and the Planning and Environment Committee receive this
report for information.
DEFERRED
To
February 12, 2008
BUILDING SERVICES
services du bÂtiment
6. SIGN MINOR VARIANCE -
515 INDUSTRIAL AVENUE
DÉROGATION MINEURE AU RÈGLEMENT SUR LES ENSEIGNES -
515, AVENUE INDUSTRIAL
ACS2008-PTE-BLD-0006 Alta
Vista (18)
That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend
Council approve a Minor Variance to Sign By-law 2005-439, to allow for the
installation of a directional information ground sign with an area of 24 square
metres and a height of 9.0 metres.
CARRIED
7. SIGN MINOR VARIANCE - 1650 CARLING
AVENUE
DÉROGATION MINEURE AU RÈGLEMENT SUR
LES ENSEIGNES –
1650, AVENUE CARLING
ACS2008-PTE-BLD-0009 Kitchissippi
(15)
Ron Clarke, Delcan, on behalf of Canadian Tire, was present in
support of the recommendation.
That the Planning and Environment Committee
recommend Council approve to vary the sign area provision of Sign By-law
2005-439 to permit a four square metre increase in the maximum permitted ground
sign face area for a sign to be located adjacent to Clyde Avenue.
CARRIED
8. STREET NAME CHANGE -
3090 CEDARVIEW ROAD
CHANGEMENT DE NOM DE RUE – 3090, CHEMIN CEDARVIEW
ACS2007-PTE-BLD-0003 Barrhaven (3)
William D.
Buchanan, DCR Phoenix, agreed to a deferral of this item until the
January 22, 2008 meeting, as requested by Councillor Harder.
That the Planning and
Environment Committee recommend Council enact a by-law to change the street
name Limeridge Circle to Anjana Circle.
DEFERRED
To
January 22,
2008
Economic and Environmental Sustainability
viabilité économique et de la durabilité de l’environnement
9. LEADERSHIP
IN ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN (LEED) PROMOTION PILOT PROGRAM
PROGRAMME PILOTE DE PROMOTION DU SYSTÈME
LEADERSHIP EN MATIÈRE D'ÉNERGIE ET D'ENVIRONNEMENT (LEED)
ACS2008-PTE-ECO-0005 city-wide/À l’Échelle de la ville
The following correspondence was received and is held in file with the
City Clerk:
·
Letter of support dated January 7, 2008 from
the Canada Green Building Council
·
Motion of support from the Environmental
Advisory Committee from its meeting of November 8, 2007
David Miller, Planner III, and Carol Christensen, Manager of
Environmental Sustainability, were present to respond to questions. A PowerPoint presentation was also
circulated and is held on file with the City Clerk.
Pauline Rochefort, president of the Canadian Wood Council, referenced concerns previously noted in an email to the Deputy City
Manager of Planning, Transit and the Environment, dated January 7, 2008 (held
on file with the City Clerk).
Specifically, Ms. Rochefort asked that the report not be adopted in
order to consider other options, stating the following:
·
LEED only endorses wood certified by the
Forest Stewardship Council (FSC), one of three certification bodies.
·
LEED does not require third party
certification of alternative building materials.
·
Wood is the number one building material in
residential construction in Ontario and Canada and its use is growing in
non-residential construction.
·
Canada’s Athena Institute explained how the
CO2 absorbed by growing forests results in wood products from a life cycle
approach having a very friendly environmental footprint.
·
Other jurisdictions, such as California, have
recently backed away from LEED-only policies or programs.
·
A continuous improvement approach to green
building policies must be enacted to allow consideration of future innovation
and advancements.
·
The City of Ottawa should insist on the use of
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) in any building rating system encouraged by the
City for evaluating environmental performance.
·
The pilot must be inclusive and incorporate
the voice of Ontario Wood WORKS in support of the City’s green building
promotion program.
·
For residential construction, the City of
Ottawa should continue to encourage all existing Ontario programs, such as
R2000 and Energy Star.
In response to questions from Councillor Wilkinson, Ms. Rochefort
confirmed LEED allocates points if a minimum of 50 per cent of wood products is
certified in accordance with FSC principles and criteria. She said the majority of Canadian wood
products found in home improvement stores or used in residential construction
are certified. The majority of Canadian
wood products are certified according to the Sustainable Forestry Management
Standard, which is not recognized by LEED.
Ms. Rochefort emphasised the industry would like to see the City of
Ottawa encourage the use of all wood certification systems.
Mr. Miller responded that the materials component of building rating
systems was the biggest challenge. He
noted staff was aware of discussions between the wood industry and the Canada
Green Building Council regarding certification. He emphasised the objective of the pilot project is to begin
promotion of greener buildings. LEED
was chosen, as it is a building rating system that has the greatest market
penetration in Ottawa. Issues raised by
Ms. Rochefort would be looked in the course of the pilot.
Councillor Desroches touched on the lack of partners in the funding of
this project. Mr. Miller stated the
first step was to receive 2008 budget approval. Now that municipal funding is in place, partners will be
identified and approached for financial and in-kind contributions.
Staff was directed to pursue a partnership with Hydro Ottawa, which has
promoted energy conservation. Chair
Hume confirmed he and Councillor Harder, as members of the Hydro Ottawa Board
of Directors, would bring this matter forward as well.
Responding to questions from Councillor Wilkinson with regard to other
potential certification programs and concerns related to the cost of
certification, Mr. Miller advised the objective is to achieve green buildings
and a third party certification is essential.
He added individual technologies could be pursued.
Councillor Wilkinson indicated two significant municipal buildings would
be constructed in her ward in the next year or so and should be covered under
this type of initiative.
Mr. Miller clarified this pilot deals specifically with private development,
but municipal buildings fall within the City’s Green Building Policy. In response to a question from Councillor
Doucet, Mr. Miller advised the project is targeted to new construction.
That Planning and Environment Committee recommend that Council approve
the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) promotion pilot
program.
CARRIED, with G. Hunter dissenting.
10. City of Ottawa Support for Portrait Gallery of
Canada
APPUI DE LA VILLE D’OTTAWA AU MUSÉE
DU PORTRAIT DU CANADA
ACS2008-PTE-ECO-0007 city-wide/À l’Échelle de la ville
Moved by P.
Feltmate:
That the
Planning and Environment Committee consider this report pursuant to Section 84
(3) of the Procedure By-law.
CARRIED, with G.
Hunter dissenting.
Rob MacKay,
Director of Economic and Environmental Sustainability, provided a PowerPoint
presentation (held on file with the City Clerk) outlining background
information on the Request for Proposals, milestone dates, site opportunities,
proposed financial incentives, and estimated economic impact. Dave Powers, Consultant, Economic
Development, Ian Duff, Manager of Economic Development, and Dave Donaldson,
Real Estate Officer, Business Transformation Services, accompanied him.
In response to
questions from Councillor Holmes, Mr. MacKay confirmed meetings occurred with
three developers and a fourth may be interested. Councillor Holmes stated the City and developers should also
encourage the participation of the Community and noted the important role of
the Friends of the Portrait Gallery.
Chair Hume confirmed third party and broad community support was a key
component of the evaluation criteria.
Councillor
Desroches suggested the National Capital Commission and the City of Gatineau
were also key partners. Chair Hume
confirmed he wrote to the NCC Chairman and a meeting would be taking
place. Councillor Desroches also noted
the increased operation costs ($2.5 million), should the Portrait Gallery be
constructed outside the Nation’s Capital.
Councillor
Wilkinson suggested assistance should be sought from notable individuals to
assist with the bid process and concurred with the importance of involving the
City of Gatineau. Mr. MacKay indicated
some important partners were already onside, including OCRI, Ottawa Tourism and
the Ottawa-Gatineau Hotel Association.
Jerry Gray,
Dwayne Wright and Marni Coppa from Friends of the Portrait Gallery, spoke in support of keeping the
Portrait Gallery in the Nation’s Capital.
A briefing note was received on January 8, 2008 and is held on file with
the City Clerk. They made the following
points:
·
A
joint proposal to include the Gatineau facility would be supported.
·
Time
was an issue and partners must work together.
·
Ottawa
played an important role as the Capital, housing many National institutions
that explain and explore Canada’s identity and history.
·
As
the Capital, Ottawa benefited from much tourism activity, which would be
positive for the Portrait Gallery, especially with respect to student groups.
·
Other
international examples were cited, noting location was an important
consideration with respect to attendance and visitors.
·
Although
most members of Friends of the Portrait Gallery resided in Ottawa, some resided
in other parts of the county.
·
The
tourism industry’s assistance was key.
Jean Bruce,
member of the Arts, Heritage and Culture Advisory Committee, expressed support for the
report, offering the assistance of the AHCAC as this initiative moved
forward. She suggested involving
residents and municipalities outside the Nation’s Capital such as Kingston and
Montréal, who visited Ottawa for exhibitions and cultural institutions. She requested a presentation on this matter
at the next meeting of the AHCAC, scheduled for January 17, 2008.
Chair Hume stated
Mr. MacKay would ensure a presentation was made at the next meeting of the
AHCAC.
Councillor Doucet
thanked Ms. Bruce for her intervention and volunteer work on the AHCAC. He raised concerns with the process and
pitting municipalities against each other.
Ms. Bruce suggested the bid should be inclusive with the possibility of
a traveling exhibition throughout the country with a permanent home in
Ottawa. Councillor Doucet noted the
Federal Government recently slashed the federal museum budget for transportation
of artifacts and items.
Councillor Hunter
suggested a website might be a suitable way to share portraits with Canadians
and that nine Portrait Galleries across the country might be more
appropriate. Ms. Bruce stated a similar
website was already in existence, touching on the need for such an institution. Further to an additional question, she
indicated the portrait of Lord Durham should be included.
Jeffrey Dale,
OCRI, expressed
his organization’s support and pledged to work with the business community and
private sector in order to bring the Portrait Gallery to Ottawa. A written submission was received and is
held on file with the City Clerk.
Mauril Bélanger,
Member of Parliament for Ottawa-Vanier, stated his support for the localization of
the Portrait Gallery in the National Capital Region, expressing discomfort with
the process set out by the Conservative government. He remarked the previous site, across from Parliament Hill, was
ideal and he questioned if the process was rigged. He suggested the policy framework behind the process was flawed
and lacking. He urged the City of
Ottawa to work with the City of Gatineau, the NCC and Members of Parliament
representing the National Capital Region.
He declared that concerns he had received would be brought to the
attention of the Prime Minister and responsible Ministers.
Councillor Doucet
reiterated his views with respect to the process, suggesting it contributed to
downloading.
Councillor Monette
thanked the honorable member for attending the meeting and lending his
support. He suggested Ottawa would be
successful in its bid if all political stripes were involved. Chair Hume confirmed Mayor O’Brien would
play an active role in bringing all parties together.
Paul Dewar,
Member of Parliament for Ottawa-Centre, registered to speak in support of the
report but was unable to address Committee due to the length of the meeting.
Dick Brown,
Ottawa-Gatineau Hotel Association, also attended and submitted written comments in support. The comments focused on the Dedicated
Destination Marketing Fee and two studies undertaken, with one focusing on the
main attractors for Ottawa tourism. Two
of the four pillars included Ottawa as the seat of the federal Government and
home of Canada’s great National Cultural institutions. A copy of the written remarks is held on
file with the City Clerk.
Councillor Doucet
lead off debate by stating that he could not support the recommendations due to
his concerns with respect to the process.
Councillor Hunter
congratulated staff on the report and the incentives proposed. Despite his skepticism with the need for a
Portrait Gallery, he stated support for the process, as it would determine if
private sector support was possible.
Councillor Feltmate
indicated it was time for leaders to step up for Ottawa and its important role
as the Nation’s Capital with respect to national institutions. She also thanked the delegations for their
time and support.
Staff were directed
to provided members with documentation on the Request for Proposals and provide
a copy to Councillor Bellemare of Canada’s Capital Core
Area Sector Plan.
Councillors
Bellemare, Monette, Wilkinson and Holmes also spoke in support, echoing earlier
comments with respect to community involvement and standing up for the Nation’s
Capital. Concerns were also raised with
regard to the process and minor corrections to the recommendations were
suggested.
Chair Hume thanked
Mr. MacKay and his group for their work on this matter. He called on the community and City Council
to put pressure on local Members of Parliament to stand up for Ottawa. He said national institutions and government
departments should be housed in the Nation’s Capital and Ottawa must act, as
would other cities that must defend their respective industries.
That Council:
1. Request that the Mayor
send a letter to the Federal Government and local Members of Parliament
indicating the following:
a. That the National Capital
Region (NCR), in accordance with its role as Canada’s Capital, remain as the
national and international showcase of Canada and, therefore the host to, and
the steward of, Canada’s key National Institutions, such as the Portrait
Gallery of Ottawa.
b. That the
Portrait Gallery of Canada be retained in an appropriate gallery space
in Ottawa in accordance with Canada’s Capital Core Area Sector Plan and in
accordance with its contribution to Ottawa’s standing as a treasury of the
nation’s heritage and a meeting place for all Canadians.
c. That
Federally owned downtown Ottawa sites and buildings be eligible to compete
under the Terms of Reference for a new Portrait Gallery of Canada in the
context of a public private partnership.
d. That the
Federal Government extend its Request for Proposal (RFP) deadline to May 31,
2008 to allow a full range of competitive public private partnership proposals
to be submitted including those that involve federally owned sites and
buildings.
2. Support Developers
in their bid proposals for retaining the Portrait Gallery of Canada in a new
building in Ottawa by exempting the payment of municipal development charges
specific to the gross floor area of the National Portrait Gallery of Canada, to
an upset limit of $431,200, in accordance with Section 7, Clause (U) of the
City’s Development Charge By-law.
3. Direct Corporate
Communications of the Business Transformation Services Department to
prepare a public service announcement concerning the Portrait Gallery of Canada
and to urge citizens to contact their Member of Parliament and demonstrate
support for local proposals that would keep this valued national institution in
Ottawa.
4. Should time
constraints to the private sector submission deadline preclude getting to
Council in time, delegate authority to the Corporate Services and Economic
Development Committee and/or the Planning and Environment Committee to approve
other feasible measures of City support, should they arise prior to the April
16, 2008 submission deadline, to ensure a competitive bid for the Portrait
Gallery of Canada.
CARRIED as amended,
with C. Doucet dissenting.
ADDITIONAL ITEM
POINT SUPPLÉMENTAIRE
Moved by P. Feltmate:
That the Planning and
Environment Committee consider this item pursuant to Section 84 (3) of the
Procedure By-law.
CARRIED
Councillor Bédard provided some background
information with respect to this site, which will now be utilised as retail
space. He noted the office use on the
second floor was longstanding, dating back to the previous occupant, la Caisse
Populaire.
Grant Lindsay, Manager of Planning Approvals
Central/West indicated staff did not object to the motion without commenting on
the request for a reduction in the amount.
Moved by C. Doucet:
WHEREAS the owner of 291-297
Dalhousie Street has applied for a building permit on November 2, 2007 in order
to accommodate future tenants for new retail units;
AND WHEREAS the owner cannot
be issued a building permit until a Cash-in-Lieu of Parking application for the
use of an existing second floor office is approved;
AND WHEREAS the Planning
Department supports this application but requires a payment of $33,659 dollars
for three parking spaces for the office’s use and one for the use of an
existing restaurant;
AND WHEREAS the second floor
was always used as office space accessory to the former bank without having a
need for parking and it was determined that the only existing parking space
established for the restaurant is obstructive to pedestrians exiting from the
rear of the building;
AND WHEREAS it is Council’s
wish to encourage retail use for this building;
WHEREAS requesting the owner
to pay $33,659 dollars in order to continue the use of parking that was
accessory to a previous business may seem unwarranted;
WHEREAS it is urgent that
this item be dealt with in order to permit the existing office and restaurant
use to continue and for the authorization of the building permit application
for the new retail space;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT this
application by Rick Kemp, on behalf of Anthony Morello, be APPROVED subject to
the following conditions:
1. That
an agreement be entered into with the Registered Owner of 291-297 Dalhousie
Street, exempting the owner from providing (4) parking spaces which agreement
shall provide as follows:
a) The payment shall be in the amount of $4 dollars;
b) The Cash-in-Lieu of Parking is limited to three (3) parking spaces
to be used for office use and one (1) parking space to be used for restaurant
use;
c) The Cash-in-Lieu of Parking cannot be used for a bar.
2. That
the agreement be entered into to the satisfaction of the Director of Legal
Services and that full payment be received upon execution of the Agreement.
3. That
the approval be considered null and void if the provisions of Conditions b and
c above have not been fulfilled within six months of the date of approval.
CARRIED
INFORMATION
PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED
INFORMATION
DISTRIBUÉE AUPARAVANT
A. Technical Briefing: Occurrence of Lead in Drinking Water and City of
Ottawa Test Results.
Directive TECHNIQUE: Présence de plomb dans l’eau
potable et résultats des analyses de la Ville d’Ottawa
ACS2008-PWS-WWS-0003 city-wide/À l’Échelle de la ville
RECEIVED
ADJOURNMENT
LEVÉE
DE LA SÉANCE
The meeting
adjourned at 5 p.m.
Committee Coordinator Chair
