3. COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN, OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENTS AND ZONING AMENDMENT FOR UPTOWN RIDEAU (Rideau Street between King Edward Avenue and the Rideau River)

PLAN DE CONCEPTION COMMUNAUTAIRE, MODIFICATIONS DES PLANS officiel ET MODIFICATION DE ZONAGE DE LA RUE RIDEAU EST (LA RUE RIDEAU ENTRE L'AVENUE KING EDWARD ET LA RIVIÈRE RIDEAU)

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED

That Council:

1. Approve the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan as detailed in Document 7 with the following change:

Replace Figure 12 in Document 7 with Figure 12a as contained in Document 8.

2. Approve the changes to Section 8.0 Appendix - Sandy Hill as contained in Volume III to the Official Plan for the former City of Ottawa, as detailed in Document 2, subject to the following amendment:

That the following change be made in Number 3:

That the word “east” be changed to “west” and the word “west” be changed to “east” in the paragraph under the section entitled “Mainstreet Mixed Use”.

3. Approve the modifications to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan as contained in Volume II to the Official Plan for the former City of Ottawa, as detailed in Document 3.

4. Approve the modifications to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan as contained in Volume 2A to the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa as detailed in Document 3.

5. Approve the amendments to the former City of Ottawa Zoning By-law, as detailed in Document 4, for the area shown in Document 5.

And that no further notice be provided pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act.

RECOMMANDATIONS modifiées du COMITÉ

Que le Conseil :

1. approuve le Plan de conception communautaire de la rue Rideau Est tel qu'il est détaillé dans le Document 7 avec les modifications suivantes :

remplacer la Figure 12 par la Figure 12a telle qu’elle apparaît dans le Document 8.

2. approuve les modifications à la section 8 de l’Annexe - Côte-de-Sable, telle qu’elle apparaît dans le Volume III du Plan officiel de l'ancienne Ville d'Ottawa, telles qu’elles sont détaillées dans le Document 2, sous réserve des modifications suivantes :

Que la modification suivante soit apportée au Document 2, numéro 3 :

Que le mot « est » soit remplacé par le mot « ouest » et que le mot « ouest » soit remplacé par le mot « est  » dans le paragraphe figurant sous la rubrique « Rue principale – Utilisation polyvalente ».

3. approuve les modifications au Plan secondaire de la Côte-de-Sable, tel qu’il apparaît dans le Volume II du Plan officiel de l'ancienne Ville d'Ottawa, telles qu’elles sont détaillées dans le Document 3.

4. approuve les modifications au Plan secondaire de la Côte-de-Sable, tel qu’il apparaît dans le Volume 2A du Plan officiel de la Ville d'Ottawa (2003), telles qu’elles sont détaillées dans le Document 3.

5. approuve les modifications apportées au Règlement municipal sur le zonage de l'ancienne Ville d'Ottawa, telles qu’elles sont détaillées dans le Document 4 pour le secteur indiqué dans le Document 5, sous réserve des modifications ci-après :

Et qu’aucun autre avis ne soit donné aux termes du paragraphe 34 (17) de la Loi sur l’aménagement du territoire.

Documentation

1. Deputy City Manager, Planning and Growth Management report dated 23 November 2004 (ACS2004-DEV-POL-0046).

2. Extract of Draft Minutes, 14 December 2004.

Report to/Rapport au :

Planning and Environment Committee

Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement

and Council / et au Conseil

23 November 2004 / le 23 novembre 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 : Richard Kilstrom, Manager

Planning, Environment and Infrastructure Policy/Politique d'urbanisme, d'environnement et d'infrastructure

(613) 580-2424 x13850, Richard.Kilstrom@ottawa.ca

Rideau -Vanier (12)

Ref N°: ACS2004-DEV-POL-0046

SUBJECT:	COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN, OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENTS AND ZONING AMENDMENT FOR UPTOWN RIDEAU (Rideau Street between King Edward Avenue and the Rideau River)
OBJET :	PLAN DE CONCEPTION COMMUNAUTAIRE, MODIFICATIONS DES PLANS officiel ET MODIFICATION DE ZONAGE DE LA RUE RIDEAU EST (LA RUE RIDEAU ENTRE L'AVENUE KING EDWARD ET LA RIVIÈRE RIDEAU)

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council:

1. Approve the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan as detailed in Document 7 with the following change:

Replace Figure 12 in Document 7 with Figure 12a as contained in Document 8.

2. Approve the changes to Section 8.0 Appendix - Sandy Hill as contained in Volume III to the Official Plan for the former City of Ottawa, as detailed in Document 2.

3. Approve the modifications to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan as contained in Volume II to the Official Plan for the former City of Ottawa, as detailed in Document 3.

4. Approve the modifications to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan as contained in Volume 2A to the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa as detailed in Document 3.

5. Approve the amendments to the former City of Ottawa Zoning By-law, as detailed in Document 4, for the area shown in Document 5.

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement recommande au Conseil :

1. d'approuver le Plan de conception communautaire de la rue Rideau Est tel qu'il est détaillé dans le Document 7 avec les modifications suivantes :

remplacer la Figure 12 par la Figure 12a telle qu’elle apparaît dans le Document 8.

2. d'approuver les modifications à la section 8 de l’Annexe - Côte-de-Sable, telle qu’elle apparaît dans le Volume III du Plan officiel de l'ancienne Ville d'Ottawa, telles qu’elles sont détaillées dans le Document 2.

3. d'approuver les modifications au Plan secondaire de la Côte-de-Sable, tel qu’il apparaît dans le Volume II du Plan officiel de l'ancienne Ville d'Ottawa, telles qu’elles sont détaillées dans le Document 3.

4. d'approuver les modifications au Plan secondaire de la Côte-de-Sable, tel qu’il apparaît dans le Volume 2A du Plan officiel de la Ville d'Ottawa (2003), telles qu’elles sont détaillées dans le Document 3.

5. d'approuver les modifications apportées au Règlement municipal sur le zonage de l'ancienne Ville d'Ottawa, telles qu’elles sont détaillées dans le Document 4 pour le secteur indiqué dans le Document 5.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Assumptions and Analysis:

The recommendations contained in this report are:

a) to adopt the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan with staff modifications related to building height as proposed in the Plan;

b) to approve the amendments to the Official Plan Appendix to reflect the new vision for the street as a Mainstreet and the proposed heights for the residential portions of the street;

c) to approve the amendments to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan to reflect the new vision for the street as a Mainstreet; and

d) to approve the amendments to the Zoning By-law with modifications to implement the land use and built form directions of the Community Design Plan.

The Official Plan policies state that mainstreets are “important areas for the preparation of community design plans…[which]…will be approved by City Council and implemented through the zoning by-law and design guidelines.” The Official Plan states that community design plans will identify:

· The boundaries of the mainstreet designation;

· The nature and type of uses that should be permitted;

· Area specific design guidelines and requirements related to access and parking;

· Methods of achieving good design;

· Opportunities to design attractive corners and gateways;

· Appropriate massing, scale, height and siting of buildings;

· Appropriate scale transitions to adjacent areas;

· Locations suited to being nodes of activity or landmarks; and

· Streetscape improvements to make the area attractive to residents and businesses.

The recommendations contained in the report are consistent with the policies contained in both the former and new Official Plan.

Financial Implications:

The Community Design Plan anticipates a substantial Capital investment by the City at a later date towards the beautification the street and the removal of hydro poles.

Public Consultation/Input:

The Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan is a community initiative that has involved landowners, business people and local residents. There has been extensive public involvement in the process and there is broad public support for the Plan as submitted. Building height has been an issue throughout the process and remains an issue for some. Most of the surrounding community supports the heights as submitted with some wanting lower height and others wanting higher building heights. Localized increases to building heights are proposed by staff based on the policy directions contained in the new Official Plan.

RÉSUMÉ

HYPOTHÈSES ET ANALYSE :

Les recommandations du présent rapport sont :

1. d'adopter le Plan de conception communautaire de la rue Rideau Est avec les modifications du personnel de la Ville en ce qui a trait à la hauteur des édifices telle que proposée dans le Plan;

2. d’approuver les modifications à l'Annexe du Plan officiel afin de refléter la nouvelle vision pour la rue en tant que rue principale et les hauteurs proposées en ce qui concerne les parties résidentielles de la rue;

3. d'approuver les modifications au Plan secondaire de la Côte-de-sable afin de refléter la nouvelle vision pour la rue en tant que rue principale;

4. d'approuver les modifications apportées au Règlement municipal sur le zonage avec les changements afin de mettre en vigueur les directives du Plan de conception communautaire touchant l'utilisation des sols et la forme des édifices.

Les politiques du Plan officiel stipulent que les rues principales « constituent des secteurs prioritaires dans le cadre de l'établissement des plans de conception communautaire… [qui]…seront adoptés par le Conseil municipal et seront mis en vigueur en utilisant le règlement de zonage et les lignes directrices de conception. » Le Plan officiel indique que les plans de conception communautaire détermineront :

· les limites exactes de l'aire désignée en tant que rue principale;

· la nature et le type des utilisations qui devraient être permises;

· les lignes directrices particulières pour le secteur et les exigences en ce qui a trait à l'accès et au stationnement;

· les méthodes permettant d'obtenir une bonne conception;

· les possibilités de conception de coins de rues et de voies ayant un aspect agréable;

· la masse, l'échelle, la hauteur et l'orientation appropriées des édifices;

· les transitions d'échelle appropriées aux secteurs avoisinants;

· les emplacements convenables en vue d’établir un centre d'activité ou point central de référence pour le secteur avoisinant; et

· des améliorations au paysage de rue en vue de rendre le secteur plus attrayant aux résidents et aux entreprises.

Les recommandations formulées dans le présent rapport sont conformes aux politiques de l’ancien et du nouveau Plan officiel de la Ville.

RÉPERCUSSIONS FINANCIÈRES :

Le Plan de conception communautaire de la rue Rideau Est prévoit des dépenses d’investissement substantielles de la Ville à une date ultérieure visant l’embellissement de la rue et l'enlèvement des poteaux électriques.

CONSULTATION PUBLIQUE/COMMENTAIRES :

Le Plan de conception communautaire de la rue Rideau Est est une initiative communautaire qui intéressait les propriétaires, les entreprises et les résidents locaux. De nombreux membres du public ont pris part au processus qui, en grande partie, appuient le Plan tel que soumis. La hauteur des édifices était un point de discussion durant le processus et le reste pour certains. La majorité de la communauté avoisinante appuie les hauteurs telles que soumises, certains membres préférant une plusfaible hauteur, d’autres une hauteru plus élevée. Le personnel de la Ville a proposé des augmentations localisées de la hauteur des édifices en se basant sur les directives de la politique du nouveau Plan officiel.

BACKGROUND

[U1]

The Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan was prepared by the Rideau Street Redevelopment Working Group (RSRWG). This group of local volunteers and professionals was formed in 2001 in response to a growing dissatisfaction with both the appearance and function of Rideau Street, between King Edward Avenue and the Cummings Bridge. The RSRWG has collaborated with local businesses, local residents and community organizations in the preparation of this Plan. See Document 6 for details on the public consultation activities.

With the City's commitment to various Official Plan directions for the development of Mainstreets (a mix of uses, pedestrian orientation, design quality, intensification, development compatibility and public improvement), there was a need to find an appropriate set of urban design, zoning and land use measures to apply these principles in detail. The Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan and the Official Plan/Zoning amendments contained in this report, are the result of this effort.

To firm up the vision for the street, this Plan builds on the February 2000 Rideau Street Design Charette, endorsed by the Ottawa Regional Society of Architects, and sponsored by the Downtown Rideau BIA, the Ottawa Citizen, and various professional groups and individual companies.

DISCUSSION

Recommendation 1 - The Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan

The Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan is a road map to the respectful transformation of Rideau Street into a successful and vibrant mainstreet. The Plan recognizes the existing conditions and a lack-of-identity along the street and that, with time, there is potential for Rideau Street to become one of Ottawa’s best mainstreets. The Plan lays out a vision based on this potential that is tailored to the Mainstreet directions as outlined in the new Official Plan and other RSRWG directions as summarized below:

a) Create a pedestrian-friendly street that includes wide sidewalks, pedestrian lighting, street furniture, sidewalk patio’s, trees/landscape improvements and pedestrian-focus areas;

b) Remove the hydro poles;

c) Use new buildings to establish a street character based on: a consistent, human-scale height, architectural excellence, building continuity and variety along the street;

d) Ensure that new buildings respect the surrounding community through heritage conservation and neighbourhood transition;

e) Permit mixed uses that serve the surrounding neighbourhoods and encourage residential uses above the ground floor;

f) Create a consistent pavement width (no wider than necessary) to provide for integrated vehicular movement;

g) Encourage a light rail transit system that serves the local community; and

h) Develop two special projects, the Cummings Island Bike Project and the McDonald Gardens Project.

All of the proposed changes presented in the Community Design Plan were crafted with good design in mind to achieve appropriate mainstreet, human-scale building faces, wide sidewalks, the infilling of unsightly gaps, lots of windows at street level and direct connections to the sidewalk. These all serve to affect the public realm in a positive way. To make well-designed, sustainable mainstreets where people want to live, guidance needs to be provided where all issues related to the quality of place, and the priority of the pedestrian, have been addressed. The object is to secure what is important in design while encouraging creativity and innovation in the architecture of buildings. The opportunity comes at the site plan approval process to work with proponents, ideally at the pre-consultation stage, to refine the urban design aspects, and to the extent possible, the architectural details through the review of the proposal.

Key Issues

Removing the Hydro Poles:

This was the number one priority for the Rideau Street Redevelopment Working Group (RSRWG) as a way to upgrade the street. It was considered as the most important element in the development of residential apartments above the ground floor of new buildings and the construction of wide pedestrian sidewalks that would function as the recreational spaces for residents along the street.

Staff agrees with the RSRWG that removing the hydro poles is an important part of revitalizing Rideau Street. Although it is recognized that removing the hydro poles is a costly proposition, the actual costs to bury the wires may be lower than anticipated due to the presence of existing underground infrastructure able to accommodate the wires.

Light Rail

The inclusion of future rail transit along Rideau Street in the Transportation Master Plan occurred half way through the preparation of the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan. The light rail concept has been referred to in the Community Design Plan because the Community Design Plan is viewed as a comprehensive design-led document and because the implementation of light rail was seen as a way to accelerate improvements to the street.

It was clear from the October 12, 2004 community meeting that the previous draft of the Community Design Plan did not reflect the views of the public nor the Rideau Street Redevelopment Working Group. There were strong opinions expressed that the light rail system should function like a streetcar and make many stops along Rideau Street. The new Plan, as contained in Document 7, reflects these opinions as suggestions for the future, starting in Section 4.4.16. Although staff do not necessarily agree with all of these suggestions, some may be useful criteria in the evaluation of future light rail options.

Building Height

The RSRWG felt that the existing direction for building height contained in the Official Plan of the former City of Ottawa, including the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan, is no longer appropriate for Rideau Street because:

a) The existing built form on the north side of the street is inconsistent and many buildings are not at a scale that is friendly to the pedestrian;

b) The "Major Commercial" designation on the south side of the street is an outdated designation, introduced in the 1970's when uses were separated, and streets like Rideau were considered as edges to residential communities where all the non-residential uses, not suited to the community, should go; and

c) The two different approaches to planning the north versus the south side of the street do not help in efforts to develop a consistent human-scale character as described in the new Community Design Plan.

In the Official Plan for the former City of Ottawa, this portion of Rideau Street is designated as a "Neighbourhood Linear Commercial Area", where development is intended to be at a pedestrian scale. On the north side, specific built-form provisions in the Official Plan guide developments to take their cues from existing surrounding heights that range from one to 22 storeys. The land on the south side of Rideau Street, which is part of the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan, is designated as "Major Commercial" in that Plan from King Edward Avenue to Wurtemburg Street, and as "Medium Profile Residential" from Wurtemburg to the Cummings Bridge. For "Major Commercial" the maximum established heights are up to 12 storeys and for "Medium Profile Residential", up to 6 storeys (based on information contained in the Appendix to the Official Plan).

The RSRWG settled on mid-rise building heights as part of an overall strategy to revitalize the street. The mid-rise buildings were intended to provide an interesting and active foreground to a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly street; and, to put some of the existing, out-of-scale buildings in the visual background. The explored options included permitting eight storeys instead of six along the street and permitting eight or more storeys at nodes and at gateway sites. The RSRWG eventually concluded that buildings higher than six storeys risked the pedestrian-friendly nature as planned, however the desire for consistency did not preclude variable heights based on good architecture, but still at a human-scale.

From staff's perspective, the focus on built form should be on the quality of the first few storeys and on making sure they are well designed, detailed and interesting and that they relate to the pedestrian on the sidewalk and to the surrounding environment. The Community Design Plan as proposed says all the right things about the street environment, except to say that the focus or interest may extend beyond the ground floor to also include the first few floors above. What is above the first few floors, from a design point of view, however, is felt by staff to be less influential to the image and vitality of the street.

In order to implement intensification, Official Plan policies direct that higher heights along a Mainstreet should be identified at nodes and at landmark locations that are able to accommodate more residents. The Official Plan also states that Community Design Plans are one of the principal planning documents to identify places with potential for intensification. Rideau Street, being a designated Mainstreet and located close to Downtown, is clearly a street that provides such opportunities.

That being said, it is recognized that there are limits of acceptability to building height and that the public and the surrounding community is most interested in identifying those limits.

Within this context, the following recommendations and observations are made:

1. The Southeast Corner of King Edward and Rideau Street

The intersection of King Edward Avenue and Rideau Street is recognized as a node of activity that should be considered for further intensification mainly because of its location at the crossroads of these two important and wide streets. There are already two buildings at the intersection that are higher (18 and 12 storeys) than the planned heights as proposed in the Community Design Plan. It is recommended that the maximum building height for the corner parcels of land on the south side of the street be increased to 12 storeys as shown in Figure 12a in Document 8, to match the height of the Confederation Building on the north side of the street. While affecting the Plan, adding a higher building at the third corner does not compromise its qualitative aspects. Being on the edge of the Uptown Rideau area, there is sufficient land to accommodate a building that, at one end, is compatible with the King Edward node and, at the other end, has stepped down to the surrounding planned heights.

It is further suggested that an added two-metre building setback be established after the 6th storey along Rideau Street for all buildings that are higher than six storeys. This would ensure that the mid-rise portion of the building reflects the same patterns as are proposed along the rest of Rideau Street.

2. The Northeast Corner of King Edward and Rideau Street

Further to the above, the Confederation Building at the northeast corner of King Edward and Rideau Street is also at the King Edward node and the property has a zoning height limit of 37 metres that is equivalent to 12 storeys. It is therefore recommended that the existing height of the Confederation Building be recognized in the Plan.

3. The Southeast Corner of Charlotte and Rideau Street

The parcels of land at the southeast corner of Charlotte and Rideau Street (582-592 Rideau) have an existing building height of 18 m in the Zoning By-law, equivalent to 6-storeys. An offer to purchase has recently been received to develop most of these parcels based on the existing zoning provisions and a representative of the Owner has discussed a proposed development with staff. It is therefore recommended that the building height be increased for these properties from the five storeys proposed in the CDP to six since the added storey is a minor change to the planned height and will permit the existing zoning height to remain.

It is recommended that the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan be approved and that Figure 12 be replaced by Figure 12a as contained in Document 8, which modifies the building heights as described above.

Recommendation 2 - Changes to the Appendix of the Official Plan for the former City of Ottawa

Although the Appendix of the Official Plan for the former City of Ottawa is not considered part of the Official Plan, the information contained in it has been used as background in the review of development applications. Two changes are proposed to bring the Appendix up-to-date and to eliminate potential conflicts with the provisions of the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan. It should be noted that the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa does not contain such an Appendix.

First, a new Mainstreet Mixed Use designation will be added and described in general terms to reflect the directions contained in the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan. Second, in relation to the Medium Profile Residential Area, the building height limit of 60’ should be changed to 50’, for the properties east of 592 Rideau Street, to reflect the Plan's desired maximum building height of 5-storeys.

It is recommended that the changes to the Appendix to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan be approved as contained in Document 2.

Recommendations 3 and 4 - Modifications to the Official Plans - Sandy Hill Secondary Plan

To consider the Community Design Plan as the guiding land use document for the Uptown Rideau area, it is necessary to modify the commercial designation for the south side of Rideau Street as contained in the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan. The "Major Commercial" designation in the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan applies between King Edward Avenue and Wurtemburg Street. It is a designation that is inconsistent with the land use and built form provisions in the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan. A new "Mainstreet Mixed Use" designation is proposed for the area.

Otherwise, the Community Design Plan conforms to Volume 1 of the new Official Plan and to the “Primary” Official Plan for the former City of Ottawa. The new Plan designates this portion of Rideau Street as a "Mainstreet" and the former Plan designates it as a "Neighbourhood Linear Commercial Area".

It is recommended that the changes to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan in the new and former Official Plans for the City of Ottawa be approved as contained in Document 3.

Recommendation 5 – Modifications to the Zoning By-law

The following zoning changes for the area shown in Document 5, as detailed in Document 4, are recommended for approval to provide a consistent CN Zone for the Uptown Rideau area and to implement many of the built form and design provisions of the Community Design Plan, including those discussed in Recommendation 1:

a) A new Neighbourhood Commercial (CN) Zone is proposed for both sides of the street;

b) Minor changes to the list of permitted land uses at-grade are proposed to promote greater compatibility with the surrounding street (more vibrant and commercial along Rideau Street and more residential along the other streets) and above-grade, to encourage more residential by requiring half of the floor space for larger projects to contain residential space;

c) Built form and building façade provisions are proposed to implement good design including: direct pedestrian links between buildings and the sidewalk; a requirement that 50% of front facades be windows and doors; a higher ceiling height for the ground floor than the floors above; a 1 metre setback, where required, to provide space for a widened sidewalk; and a maximum building setback of 2 metres to ensure new buildings are built close to the street;

d) Minor increase in height from 18 to 19 m to provide ground floor elevations that are higher than the floors above;

e) A neighbourhood transition building setback of 3 metres is proposed after three or four floors where the building abuts a low profile residential neighbourhood;

f) A minimum building height equivalent to three storeys is proposed;

g) On three properties, building heights are increased to 19 metres;

h) Building heights are increased from 18 metres to 37 metres at the southeast corner of the King Edward node;

i) For Rideau Street properties higher than 6 storeys, an added 2 metre building setback shall be applied above 6 storeys.

j) On the south side of Rideau Street east of 594 Rideau Street, building heights are decreased to 16 metres to reflect the narrower right-of-way of Rideau Street;

k) The property on the north side of Rideau Street, east of Wurtemburg Street (including 215 Wurtemburg Street and 641-655 Rideau Street) is to be rezoned from Residential to Neighbourhood Commercial with an apartment continuing to be a permitted use.

The various floor space index (FSI) standards that currently apply along Rideau Street reflect an alternate and often different standard of development than the maximum building heights would allow. This dual control mechanism, whereby both building height and floor space index are controlled through zoning, has the effect of reducing building heights if the floor space index is greater than what can realistically be built at six storeys; or conversely, allows buildings up to six storeys but with more space around the building as the floor plate is reduced. It is proposed that FSI control continue, but that the standards be brought closer to the building height standards based on what can realistically and typically be built along the street. It is therefore suggested that the proposed floor space index (FSI) standards be generally increased as follows: to 3.5 for the properties, a) on the north side of Rideau Street, and b) on the south side from King Edward Avenue to Chapel Street; to 3.0 on the south side between Chapel and Charlotte Street (because the depth of the CN Zone is less than the depth where the 3.5 applies); and to 2.5 on the south side of Rideau Street from 596 Rideau Street (just east of the former Cajan Attic property) to the Cummings Bridge (because the desired building height is less than the other areas). These new numbers are reflected in Document 4. Site specific FSI standards that are higher than the proposed standards, will not be changed.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

The recommendations contained in this report support the strategy of intensification contained within the new Official Plan, that have environmental implications relative to a more efficient use of land already serviced by existing infrastructure. This translates to more intense building forms replacing vacant and under-built sites within the City, taking advantage of existing amenities and services.

CONSULTATION

A summary of the public notification and consultation, including the comments received, are detailed in the attached Document 6.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The Community Design Plan anticipates a substantial Capital investment by the City at a later date towards the beautification of the street and the removal of hydro poles.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

[U2]

Document 1 Location Map

Document 2 Changes to the Appendix of the Official Plan for the Former City of Ottawa

Document 3 Official Plan Amendments

Document 4 Zoning Amendments

Document 5 Zoning Map

Document 6 Consultation Details

Document 7 Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan (English and French copies on file with City Clerk and distributed separately)

Document 8 Revised Figure 12a

DISPOSITION

Corporate Services Department, Legal Services Branch, to forward implementing by-laws to City Council.

Planning and Growth Management Department, Planning and Infrastructure Approvals Branch to:

1. prepare implementing Official Plan and Zoning By-laws;

2. notify persons who made oral or written submissions at the Planning and Environemnt Committee meeting and all persons and public bodies who requested to be notified of the adoption of the Official Plan Amendment and the passage of the Zoning By-law; and to advertise the passage of the Zoning By-law Amendment.

LOCATION MAP Document 1

CHANGES TO OFFICIAL PLAN Appendix Document 2

PROPOSED CHANGE TO APPENDIX - SECTION 8.0, TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN FOR THE FORMER CITY OF OTTAWA

1. After the sub-heading “Categories of Residential Land Use”, on page 2, under Residential Land Uses, in a), add the following as the last paragraph under “ii) Medium Profile”:

“For the Medium Profile Residential Area designation that abuts Rideau Street, a 50’ height limit applies for the properties east of 594 Rideau Street.”

2. On page 5, under Commercial Land Use, in b) Major Commercial, remove the first two paragraphs.

3. On page 4, immediately before Institutional Land Use, add the following section:

“Mainstreet Mixed Use

This area is the southern side of the Uptown Rideau mainstreet that extends from King Edward Avenue in the east, to the Cummings Bridge in the west. It serves Sandy Hill, Lowertown East and a larger market area. It is intended that Uptown Rideau be transformed into a vibrant and charming community mainstreet based on mid-rise buildings, a mix of uses, pedestrian-friendly sidewalks, high quality architecture, a fully integrated roadway for transit, pedestrians, cyclists and motorists, and a transition strategy to blend the built form along the mainstreet with the surrounding lower profile neighbourhoods.”

Official Plan AMENDMENTS Document 3

1. OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. ___ TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN FOR THE FORMER CITY OF OTTAWA.

2. OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. ___ TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN (2003) OF THE CITY OF OTTAWA.

INDEX

Page

THE STATEMENT OF COMPONENTS i)

PART A - THE PREAMBLE

1.0 Purpose 1

2.0 Location 1

3.0 Basis 1

PART B - THE AMENDMENT

1.0 Introduction 2

2.0 Details 2

3.0 Implementation 3

THE STATEMENT OF COMPONENTS

Part A - The Preamble introduces but does not constitue part of these Amendments.

Part B - The Amendments, consisting of text and the attached map (designated Schedule "A"), constitute individual amendments to the listed Official Plans below:

Amendment No. ___ to the Official Plan for the former City of Ottawa

Amendment No. ___ to the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa.

PART A - THE PREAMBLE

1.0 Purpose

The purpose of this Amendment is to adopt a new policy framework for the south side of Rideau Street that is consistent with the framework as established in the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan. The modifications in this Amendment are intended to establish an overall context for Rideau Street by incorporating a new Mainstreet Mixed Use designation into policy. It will also be providing the necessary policy support for the implementation of development and public initiatives to improve the physical environment of Rideau Street; and introducing transition policies designed to enhance the relationship between Rideau Street and the surrounding residential community. The proposed modifications apply only to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan.

2.0 Location

The lands affected by this Amendment generally front on the south side of Rideau Street between King Edward Avenue and the Rideau River.

3.0 Basis

This Amendment is consistent with the General Urban policies of the former Regional Official Plan. The Neighbourhood Linear Commercial Area policies in the Official Plan of the former City of Ottawa and the Mainstreet policies in the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa support for the continued development of Rideau Street as a mixed-use pedestrian-friendly street. The proposed amendments to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan, which is found in both the Official Plan for the former City of Ottawa and the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa, provide further planning guidance on Rideau Street. The Major Commercial designation that applies to the main portion of the south side of Rideau Street will be amended to a new Mainstreet Mixed Use designation with general policies that reflect the community vision and the design planning principles as detailed in the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan.

PART B - THE AMENDMENT

1.0 Introduction

All of this part of this document entitled Part B - The Amendment, consisting of the following text and the attached map designated Schedule "A", constitutes Amendment No. ___ to the Official Plan of the former City of Ottawa and constitutes Amendment No. ___ to the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa.

2.0 Details

The following changes are hereby made both to:

i) Volume II of the Official Plan of the former City of Ottawa; and

ii) Volume 2A of the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa.

2.1 New Land Use Designation:

That Schedule "J" - Sandy Hill Land Use in the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan is hereby amended by deleting the "Major Commercial" designation as it applies to the lands identified on Schedule "A" to this Amendment, and substituting therefore the new designation "Mainstreet Mixed Use" designation, as shown on Schedule "A" to this Amendment.

2.2 New General Policy

That Subsection 5.3.1.d) Policies - General of the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan is hereby amended by deleting, "(e.g., the Rideau Street commercial district" and replacing it with "(e.g., the mainstreet mixed uses area along Rideau Street".

2.3 New Land Use Category

That the following new Subsection 5.3.2.e) - Mainstreet Mixed Use category is hereby added after Subsection 5.3.2.d) to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan:

“5.3.2. e) Mainstreet Mixed-Uses

i) To transform Uptown Rideau into a vibrant and charming community mainstreet.

ii) To permit mid-rise buildings and a mix of land uses.

iii) To provide a transition strategy between the mainstreet and the surrounding lower profile neighbourhoods.

iv) To provide high quality architecture, pedestrian-friendly sidewalks and a fully integrated roadway for transit, pedestrians, cyclists and motorists.”

2.4 New Land Use Category added to Schedule J

That a new "Mainstreet Mixed Use Areas" and a new colour associated with it be added to the Legend in Schedule J to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan.

3.0 Implementation

The implementation of these Amendments shall be in accordance with the respective policies of the Official Plan of the former City of Ottawa and the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa.

SCHEDULE A

AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE FORMER CITY OF OTTAWA, Volume II (Sandy Hill Secondary Plan) and OFFICIAL PLAN (2003) OF THE CITY OF OTTAWA, Volume 2A (Sandy Hill Secondary Plan).

Zoning AMENDMENTS Document 4

Details of the Proposed Zoning Changes

That a new CN subzone be created to provide for the following modifications to the CN zone:

1. That the following permitted uses be required to be located above the ground floor: a parking garage, a utility installation, a shelter, where the first two would also be permitted below the ground floor.

2. That the following shall be the only permitted uses on the ground floor of a building that directly abuts Beausoleil, Besserer and Tormey Streets: a dwelling unit, a retirement home, an artist studio, and a bed and breakfast establishment. This shall be applied to a minimum of the first 6 metres of building depth where the building directly abuts one of the above streets.

3. That a parking lot and parking spaces must be located at least 4.5 metres from a property line that abuts Beausoleil, Besserer and Tormey Streets.

4. That 50 percent of the gross floor area over 2,000 m2 must be used for the following residential uses where a development exceeds 2,000 m2: dwelling units, retirement home, converted retirement home, rooming house, converted rooming house, or special needs house.

5. That an apartment building and a high rise apartment building, with a maximum height of six storeys, and a townhouse building be permitted on the properties between Charlotte Street and the Rideau River and on the properties that abut Besserer, Beausoleil and Tormey Streets. Despite the above, the maximum height for a high rise apartment building shall be five storeys for 596-610 Rideau Street (south side).

6. For the purpose of determining the front yard setback, a lot that abuts Rideau Street is to be treated as though it fronts on Rideau Street.

7. That all ground floor uses abutting Rideau Street provide a direct pedestrian access off Rideau Street.

8. That the ground floor building façade abutting Rideau Street contain a minimum 50% windows and doors.

9. That the height of the ground floor be a minimum one metre higher than the floors above it.

10. For properties that abut Rideau Street, the front yard setback shall be:

a) a minimum one metre between Augusta Street and Cummings Bridge;

b) no minimum between King Edward Avenue and Augusta Street; and

c) a setback of 2 metres shall be applied above 6-storeys that has the effect of stepping the upper floors further back from Rideau Street than the lower floors.

11. For properties that do not abut Rideau Street, the minimum front yard setback shall be 3 metres.

12. For properties that abut Rideau Street, that the maximum front yard setback shall be two metres between Augusta Street and Cummings Bridge; and one metre between King Edward Avenue and Augusta Street, except for the accommodation of an outdoor patio located at the corner of a corner lot, for which the maximum front yard setback may be 4 metres along the frontage of a restaurant use only, for a length along the frontage that is no greater than 6 metres. The maximum setback shall not apply after 3-storeys.

13. For properties that abut Rideau Street, that the minimum corner side yard setback shall be 1.0 m and the maximum shall be 4.0 m. except that a 3.0 metre minimum and a 6.0 metre maximum setback shall be applied to the property at 292 Rideau Street.

14. That the minimum rear yard setback shall be 7.5 metres where it abuts a rear yard in a residential zone except an R6 Zone; and 3 metres in all other cases.

15. That the maximum building height shall be 19 metres, except:

a) On the south side of Rideau Street from 596 Rideau Street to Wurtemburg Street, where it shall be 16 metres;

b) At 303, 292, 306, 308, 312 and 314 Rideau Street, where it shall be 37 metres; and c) At 560 Rideau Street, where it shall be according to the heights in Schedule 251.

16. For properties that abut a residential zone other than an R6 Zone, an added 3 metre rear yard setback shall be applied: above the fourth storey where the maximum building height is more than 16 metres; and above the third storey, where the maximum is 16 metres or less.

17. That the minimum building height shall be 10 metres except for the following properties that contain a building of heritage interest where a minimum of 5 metres shall apply:

506 Rideau Street

508 Rideau Street

510 Rideau Street

541 Rideau Street

487 Rideau Street

377 Rideau Street

511 Rideau Street

589 Rideau Street

323 Rideau Street

362 Rideau Street

364 Rideau Street

366 Rideau Street

390 Rideau Street

418 Rideau Street

18. That the minimum width of a landscaped area does not apply to the front yard abutting Rideau Street.

19. That subsection 299, relating to density restrictions, shall not apply.

20. That the requirements of Sections 315 to 318, relating to amenity area, shall be included in the new CN subzone where they currently apply for the properties on the south side of Rideau Street.

21. A driveway may be situated equally or in part on two abutting properties that abut Rideau Street.

22. A parking area may have access to a public street through another lot.

23. That a minimum driveway width be reduced to 3 metres for parking lots with less than 20 spaces and 6 metres for parking lots with 20 spaces or more.

24. For the properties currently zoned as shown in the left column below, that the F ( ) suffix be changed as shown in the right column:

BEFORE CHANGE AFTER CHANGE

CN F (2.5) F (3.5)

CN F (3.0) F (3.5)

CN F (4.25) F (4.25)

CN F (5.0) F (5.0)

CN [502] F (1.25) SCH. 42 F (3.5)

CN [536] F (1.75) SCH. 108 F (1.75)

CN [536] F (2.8) SCH. 108 F (3.5)

CN F (1.0) H (10.7) F (2.5)

CN3 F (3.0) F (3.5)

CN3 [584] F (3.0) H (37.0) F (3.5)

CN7 F (2.0) F (3.5) - west of Chapel Street

" F (3.0) - Chapel to Charlotte Street

" F (2.5) - east of Charlotte Street

CN7 [522] F (1.52) H (10.7) F (3.0)

CN7 [876] F (4.25) SCH. 251 F (4.25)

R6B [167] F (2.5) F (3.5)

25. That the requirements contained in Exceptions 167, 502, 536, 584 and 876 shall continue to apply.

26. The requirements contained in items 9, 10 and 15 above shall not apply to the property on the south side of Rideau Street, known municipally as 560 Rideau Street.

27. For the property at the southeast corner of Rideau Street and Augusta Street, known municipally as 490 Rideau Street, the requirements of Exception 522 shall continue to apply except for the reference to a maximum 10.7 m building height which shall be removed.

28. The requirements contained in items 4, 9 and 12 shall not apply to the property at the northeast corner of Rideau Street and King Edward Avenue, known municipally as 303 Rideau Street.

That the I1 Zone be modified as follows:

1. That the suffix “F (3.5) H (19.0) shall be added to the I1 Zone at the northeast corner of Rideau Street and Chapel Street, known municipally as 151 Chapel Street.

2. That the height of the ground floor be one metre higher than the floors above it.

3. That the minimum building height shall be 10 metres.

That the R6A Zone be modified as follows:

1. That the suffix H (18.3) shall be replaced by suffix H (16) for the properties on the south side of Rideau Street, known municipally as 630–644 Rideau Street and 223, 225 and 227 Wurtemburg Street, subzone R6A [87] H (18.3).

2. That the height of the ground floor be one metre higher than the floors above it.

3. That an added 3 metre rear yard setback shall be applied above the third storey.

ZONING MAP Document 5

Consultation Details Document 6

Following a February, 2000 Design Charrette, a group of interested people led by Lena Creedy, former Councillor Madelaine Meilleur and Councillor Georges Bédard decided to form the Rideau Street Redevelopment Working Group (RSRWG). Those invited to participate were: merchants along Rideau Street, residents of the surrounding neighbourhoods, design and planning professionals, City staff and various interest groups. The Group held its first meeting in September 2001. At the subsequent meeting, the following sub-groups were formed: Architecture (led by Rhys Phillips); Streetscaping and Lighting (led by Donald Morse); Transportation (led by Jonathan Freedman) and Education (led by Lena Creedy).

Between 2001 and 2004, the Group undertook the following forms of consultation and notification:

Door-to-door or phone notification to property owners/tenants along Rideau Street.

E-mail notices to the Downtown Rideau BIA, the ByWard Market BIA, the King Edward Task Force, developers/investors/architects, and to residents of Sandy Hill and Lowertown East.

Displays at various RSRWG meetings and at one meeting of the Ottawa Little Theatre.

Information provided at Action Sandy Hill annual general meetings for 2002, 2003, 2004.

Uptown Rideau Design Plan information available at various times on the following websites: Action Sandy Hill; Councillor Georges Bédard; and the Rideau Branch Public Library.

Various articles and notices in “Image”, the Sandy Hill community newspaper.

The RSRWG sponsored the following specific events:

1. Walking Tour along Rideau Street

Date: Fall, 2001

2. Saturday “Walk-on-Rideau” consultation and RSRWG display boards located at the Rideau Loblaws

Date: Fall, 2002

3. Regular meetings of the RSRWG every three months open to the public to discuss issues and the progress of the Plan.

4. Public Meeting to launch the draft Uptown Rideau Design Plan

Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2003

Participation: 38

5. RSRWG Meeting on the draft Uptown Rideau Design Plan

Date: February 17, 2004

Participants: 18

6. Community Meeting to present the final draft Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan

Date: October 12, 2004

Participation: Approximately 30

Summary of Comments received following the October 12, 2004 community meeting:

Multiple responses:

The Plan and its vision are good (5);

The light rail system should serve the local community like a streetcar (4);

More flexible building heights are needed (one said 9/12 storeys as a minimum, two said that if it is necessary to specify a height, one preferred 8 storeys, the other 6 storeys) (3);

The 6-storey building height as proposed is good (2);

Lower building heights are needed (one said 3 storeys on the south side of Rideau Street between Wurtemburg Street and the Cummings Bridge; the other said 4 storeys on the north side of Rideau Street) (2); and

Detailed zoning changes are needed (2).

Single responses:

Problems with the Capital City Mission;

Night time safety is an issue;

Make McDonald Garden Park a poop and scoop park;

Design guidelines are needed;

Make Rideau Street like Bank Street in the Glebe;

Improve the Pizza Pizza site;

Keep traffic flow moving; and

The vision is fundamentally flawed. Sandy Hill has hijacked the process.

Action Sandy Hill (ASH) Comments

Here are some detailed suggestions for the zoning changes for Rideau Street.

a) different subzones for the North and South sides of Rideau street might allow for small differences that come from the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan.

b) Keep the indoor/outdoor amenity area provisions from CN7. These come directly from the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan. The Volume 3 appendix specifies a minimum of 300 square feet of recreation area per apartment unit.

c) Keep the 50% floor space residential requirement above 20,000 square feet that is in the current CN7 subzone.

d) Where is the front upper storey setback in the zoning?

e) Maximum front yard setback: There are all sorts of cases where this is the best place to put some open space or patio or public art or where compatibility with existing heritage buildings requires it. What happens when someone wants to renovate one of the existing old houses? What about the current practice of negotiated informal right-of-way widening without a conveyance? I suggest we simply ban some front yard uses such as parking, and let economics take care of minimizing the front yard setback.

f) Can we put facade requirements on side walls being treated as front walls when a heritage building next door has a larger front setback in the zoning? It’s a question; I don’t know if we can.

g) Parking requirements for lots retaining buildings of heritage interest. We need to more narrowly define “lot”, “retaining” and “heritage interest”. This is all done by using heritage overlays.

h) Where are the heritage overlays? Note: I spoke with Georges Bédard about adding the missing heritage overlay for the Rideau Library, which is protected under the Act. I assume there is one currently in place for Wallis House.

i) Residential only in first 6 metres abutting Tormey, Beausoleil, and Besserer. Does this mean no surface parking? Is this first 6 metres of the lot or of the building?

j) CN7[522] F(1.52) H(10.7) I presume that there was a house there once and this was a deal to allow a demolition. I agree we should respect that deal.

k) Wallis House zoning. This was a deal worked out with give and take to preserve the character of the lot and protect the heritage building. Let’s respect that deal on all the lots involved and keep it as is for height and density.

l) CN7[876] F(4.25) SCH.251. I see no reason not to apply the height and setback provisions of the new CN subzone here. The OMB decision on height was based on OP provisions that are being amended. Let’s make a consistent policy recommendation and let council worry about the politics. In fairness, keep the schedule with the amenity area and ground floor residential use changes; that was an explicit decision by the OMB not to apply those OP provisions to this lot.

m) R6A, R6B at the corner of Beausoleil and Chapel Streets. I disagree with adding commercial uses. In fact, I think it should be zoned R5 and 12 metres high, not CN, in order to rehabilitate the street and the area around the schools. The lots are too small to be effective as CN and in any case with 6 metres residential abutting Beausoleil, CN would be silly.

n) Keep the I1 zoning at Chapel Street. We always oppose changes away from I1 zoning. A certain amount of institutional zoning is required in this part of town. Most such changes are irreversible and many institutions like schools and day care centres are unable to find space near where the demand is. Demand hasn’t gone down and supply hasn’t gone up. The new OP in my reading discourages such conversions in general, and I don’t think council believes this should ever be done without a specific proposal. Keep the I1 zoning. Change the yards, but otherwise leave as is.

o) L3 zoning. Wouldn’t now be a good time to remove the [87] from this zoning? Why would we put an embassy in the park?

p) ASH wants to keep FSI in the zoning. This allows the possibility of more sensible infill since the value of smaller lots of land is less affected by land assembly, demolition of heritage houses and large-scale projects. The figures below are based on what can be achieved with intermediate-sized lots that conform to the plan, with lot coverage rounded down by a few percent to take into account common current site plan practices. This also allows a bit of room for things like the recommended upper storey front setback, lofts, interesting architectural treatments, additional landscaping or public art, and access to on-site parking. To really make it work we should knock another quarter or half point off the FSI, but this is meant as a compromise to start a conversation between the developer and the architect by ruling out the worst possible building designs as of right. The figures I am proposing are already above my personal level of comfort. Feel free to adjust them downward.

West of Chapel

North of Rideau 4.25

South of Rideau 3.75

Chapel to Charlotte

North of Rideau 3.50

South of Rideau 3.00

East of Charlotte

North of Rideau 3.00

South of Rideau 2.50

Most of the south of Rideau is currently FSI 2.0, stepping down to 1.5 and 1.0 towards the river. We propose increasing density between 50-100% in most cases. We make it explicit that we are asking for a significant upzoning. Most of the north of Rideau is currently FSI 3.0 (with some exceptions), stepping down to 2.5. We propose increasing density about 25%. To put it in context, it took reduced setbacks and two additional storeys for Rideau Gardens to reach 4.0 FSI, and the Constitution building at the corner of King Edward is 3.0 FSI. (12Oct04)

Specific Comments from Individuals

1. I am very proud to be able to attend your meetings at Rideau Gardens. I hope that everyone concerned on Rideau Street planning for the future will approve your well-prepared plans for Rideau to revitalize the street and buildings along side. I hope also that Rideau Street will become more secure, especially for women at night. Listening to comments made by women from Rideau Gardens, around 8 p.m., they were harassed by a drunkard who followed them to the entrance of Rideau Gardens. To ensure security we should have walking police. (05Oct04)

2. In response to your request for input, I would urge City Planners to recognize that the zoning requirements along Rideau Street must encourage, or at least make it feasible, for new development. This area sorely needs private sector investment to replace a number of existing run-down buildings and vacant lots, but this investment will occur only if it is commercially viable. Otherwise, the investment will take place elsewhere. It is no coincidence that virtually every new building that has been constructed, or proposed, along Rideau Street within the past 5 years, has required a height or density variance in order to be viable. We believe that individual projects should be considered on their own merits rather than applying an arbitrary height restriction. If there must be a height guideline, it should be at least 8 stories on both sides of Rideau Street from King Edward to the river. (06Oct04)

3. There ought to be no reason why this section of Uptown Rideau Street should not become the “high street” of Sandy Hill and Lowertown – but there is. ZONING as it exists allows the City of Ottawa to dump all sorts of undesirable enterprises onto Rideau Street. Within a two block area of my shop there currently exist pawn shops, sex video shops, the Capital City Mission, a cheque-cashing service…etc. All of these enterprises lower the tone of the street substantially. Until the zoning is changed, Rideau Street will not improve. In particular, the Capital City Mission has negatively affected the surrounding businesses. People who visit the Mission block the sidewalk, litter the street with coffee cups, half eaten sandwiches, stain the sidewalk with jettisoned coffee and often urinate in the laneways between our shops. It is really quite intolerable. (06Oct04)

4. I recommend building height restriction on Rideau North to 4 floors. (11Oct04)

5. I would like to see the plans for McDonald Garden Park. Will it be fenced? Landscaped? Tormey and Cobourg streets are all very busy streets. Can it be deemed an off-leash dog park? It is almost two different parks as it exists now. (12Oct04)

6. Light rail rapid transit with only two stops suggests quite clearly that forces other than those investing in the neighbourhood see Rideau Street as a corridor out of town, not a quality, human-friendly “mainstreet”. Dedicated track for a multi-stop train might make sense. Thanks for the introduction. (12Oct04)

7. Institute design guidelines and criteria for the Uptown Rideau area that inform the project approval process. Design guidelines should extend beyond the street level to upper floors; should be consistent with the historic character of the street, evidenced in only a few places. (12Oct04)

8. Planifier des commerces aux rez-de-chaussées des immeubles pour donner le Rideau Uptown un caractère commercial comme le Glebe/Bank si le trafic (voitures, train, parking) le permet!! Des choix à faire? Priorité à l’aménagement du croisement Rideau/King Edward. Sortir d’autres scénarios à long terme qui ne mettent pas tout le poids du développement local sur une seule rue. (12Oct04)

9. I don’t think light rail will help create community – on the contrary. Re: front lot parking – Pizza Pizza has just been through major renovations without any neighbourhood consultation. They still do not take care of their garbage, clients block Nelson Street and loud music out front on some Sunday mornings with amps. Hardly an example yet an immunity to concerns. (12Oct04)

10. We totally disagree that any:

a) Property east of Charlotte should exceed 10.7 m;

b) Streetscaping (addition of trees) does not work;

c) Traffic volume, traffic speed with no parking cannot support business;

d) No support for changing residential block;

e) Totally against increasing plaza height (10.7 m);

f) Tiered setback of residential properties has been reduced in this draft and should be restored;

g) No bicycle path for eastbound on Rideau;

h) All 5 properties east of Wurtenburg on the south side have heritage/architectural value and it is noted in Figure 8 on page 9;

i) No loading areas for new buildings such as 560 Rideau will bring Rideau Street traffic to a crawl; and

j) Does the RSRWG endorse this study? Whatever level of support should be noted. (12Oct04)

11. As someone who has owned and operated a business on Rideau Street for more than 24 years, I have a strong interest in seeing this area of downtown Ottawa thrive. In recent years there have been noticeable improvements – some new development; the street is generally safer; and there has been an increase in pedestrian traffic. However, there is still a lot of room for improvement, with a number of old, run-down buildings needing to be renovated or replaced and other improvements needed to the streetscape. In order to attract new development and for Rideau Street to achieve its potential, I recommend that the City consider a more creative approach to the Community Design Plan and zoning variances. Essentially, the Design Plan should set out objectives in terms of the mix of residential/commercial development and the “look and feel” of the streetscape. With these objectives in place, the City should then be prepared to negotiate building height and density limits based upon the degree to which any proposed development satisfies the objectives of the plan. If it is necessary to establish an initial guideline for built height, I would recommend six storeys, however, there should be the flexibility to permit larger structures if they will enhance Rideau Street and satisfy other aspects of the design Plan. (12Oct04)

12. I just wanted to send you my comments from Wednesday's Public Meeting. To start I would like to say that I am very encouraged by the effort put forth to table improvements for the Upper Rideau area. It was also encouraging to see the inclusion of professionals on the team developing the plan.The only issue I would like to mention in detail is the light rail. Although I am strongly behind improving the public transportation system, given your timeline in this proposal, the likelihood of an extensive and comprehensive rail system being developed in that time is slim. Due to that fact, a small section of light rail in our area would likely do more harm than good without a larger system connecting to it. Perhaps it would be best left out of the development until a larger system was in place. Please add me to the list of residents to be notified of meetings, decisions etc. If there is any way that I may help this proposal please let me know. I look forward to hearing more about this plan. Thank you. (15Oct04)

13. I attended the Public Consultation for the above-proposed project on Tuesday October 12. I would like to add my voice in support of the vision for the community, as outlined in the Plan. Specifically, I endorse the following principles contained therein:

a) buried utility wires (remove hydro poles);

b) gateway entry to McDonald Park (maintain dog-park, please);

c) establishing a light-rail corridor;

d) introducing public art along the the street;

e) removing empty spaces along the street front; and,

f) encouraging pedestrian-friendly, diversified and interesting eye-level store-fronts.

I do wish to express some concern, however, with the focus on preserving our building heritage. Too often this principle is cited to preserve any and all old buildings. There must be a reasonable approach to conservation principles so that a minimal number of unique older structures are preserved, while dynamic newer projects are encouraged for the area. Recall; today's heritage building was once a modern project. Let's not stifle progress in the interest of preserving a particular moment in time, unless the building in question is of some unique (i.e. to be found nowhere else in the city) value to the neighbourhood and its residents. Thank you for the opportunity to comment and congratulations on the good work you are doing on our behalf. Your efforts are appreciated. (15Oct04)

14. As a property owner one block away from Uptown Rideau, I am very happy with the Community Design Plan. It sets the stage for this street to finally develop in a manner that will truly embody its role as a neighbourhood mainstreet. I specifically agree with the following aspects of the plan:

a) Seeking to develop an incrementally more disciplined built form: Uptown Rideau should be targeted as a specific effort to achieve quality urban design within the height envelope stated in 4.2.3 (6 and 5 storeys).

b) A minimum height of 3 storeys is reasonable and desirable for the reasons mentioned in the section on built form, namely, to intensify the urban area inside the existing urban boundary and to establish a more consistent street wall and homogenous urban form to frame the street.

c) The ground floor should be more prominent (the word "generally" may be somewhat too permissive), and I would say more specifically, the ground floor should have greater ceiling height than the storeys above it. It may be interesting in the future to try to establish a uniform cornice line at the first storey level of (for example) a mandatory 5 metres.

d) Completely agree with a maximum front setback. May wish to add that under no circumstances will surface parking be permitted to locate between the building and the sidewalk.

e) It may be worthwhile to encourage new buildings to be designed so that access to rear parking be built into new development as part of the structure, with other uses (residential etc.) above - the archway access concept.

f) Agree completely that tighter built corners are appropriate on this street to help reduce traffic speed and provide a more fine-grained development pattern.

g) I would suggest saying "utility uses in a building shall not abut a street."

h) Consider reducing the width of Cobourg Street, which is extremely wide as it reaches Rideau. Thanks for the opportunity to comment. (15Oct04)

15. We like the overall thrust of the Design Plan. However, we have no confidence in the current Council to support the Plan. Its approval of high-rise developments demonstrates that Council is fully in the “Bigger is Beautiful” camp regardless of the wishes of Ottawa residents. (18Oct04)

16. On reviewing the map showing the exisiting and planned zoning changes for King Edward Avenue to Cummings Bridge I note that the south side of Besserer St. from Nelson to Chapel is zoned as R6A with a allowable height of 18.3 metres. Why should the existing 2 and 3-story residential buildings in this zone, which are of generally high quality, be subject to demolition to be replaced by 6-story apartment buildings? If this happens behind our home at 205 Daly Ave. we will lose a large and significant amount of light and view of the sky at the rear of our dwelling. It seems to me that the existing structures on this section of Besserer provide the best kind of transition outlined in section 4.2.17 of the 10/6/04 draft Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan. Can this zoning be changed? (20Oct04)

17. Let me make clear the true origin of this plan. A small subcommittee of the group, representing only members of Action Sandy Hill (ASH) was struck with the mandate to look at some small streetscape issues, and primarily the gateways at either end of the street. At their own initiative, and in response to their perception that the proposals for new residential dwellings were at a density that was contrary to the wishes of ASH, they expanded their mandate to include this document. At all meetings on this report, the report was rejected and critiqued by myself representing the Rideau Street BIA, and all other business owners who have direct ownership and stake in the street. All our objections have been totally ignored and therefore this document can no longer be viewed as a document of the Working group, but should be viewed as a proposal put forward by ASH to promote their view of their agenda. I chaired the subcommittee on Transportation, and assure you that the views in the plan are contrary to the work of my committee and its report back to the group, which was accepted. ASH’s agenda was twofold: Downsize the street at any cost. At one of the meetings, when I proposed that they change the height restrictions to more properly reflect what City staff and the OMB were proposing (9-12 storeys as a minimum) and use the opportunity to create a unique matrix of density and height in return for better buildings, it was stated that this was a “zero-sum game” and therefore they had to keep to such a low density. We were told consistently of Helsinki. This comparison is bogus. Firstly the slide we were shown showed ten storey buildings. Secondly, if we want to live like Helsinki this means we must move to erase all the low density housing from the Rideau River on the east to the O-Train in the west, and replace it with European, Helsinki style 9-10 storey buildings. This is obviously not the wish of ASH, and is not the recommendation of Urban Strategies. However, to retain the low-density areas like Sandy Hill and create the densities necessary for a vibrant downtown Urban Strategies recommended using our major streets such as Rideau for increased density. When asked why block density on Rideau Street as the sun shadows would fall to the north on high density buildings, the authors of the plan had no answer. The second part of the agenda was to stop and hinder the east west flow of automobile traffic from all traffic coming over the Cummings Bridge, and convert this part of Rideau into a local-only street with only public transit flowing. This part of the agenda is totally contrary to the views of my subcommittee, and opposed vocally by the local merchants who will pay the price of this idea. I therefore submit that the report is fundamentally flawed, flowing from a flawed process of authorship. It should be returned to the Working Group for a more realistic and reflective report, one that will reflect the views of all parties, as well as not be in direct conflict with the new City Official Plan, the existing rights of owners and the good work done by Urban Strategies.

Detailed Comments

1.1 Community Collaboration

There was community collaboration. However this document is the views of ASH only, and does not reflect the views of the group.

Business Interests

To this list must be added significant residential density to provide new shoppers able to support the local businesses.

2.1 Neighbourhoods and Land Uses

This proves that Rideau Street is in a unique position to accept significant height without casting shadows on Sandy Hill.

3.1 Community Vision Statement

There is no consensus on this vision. There is no business support for the vision of down-zoning from the existing City and OMB approved heights of 12-9 stories, to 4-6 storeys. ASH knows well that this vision is another way of saying we don’t accept the new Official Plan, and we prefer the stagnant present reality to change. ASH knows that given the restrictions they put in this plan the last thing they will see is “outstanding and award-winning examples of architecture”. As well there was consensus at the group level that we need to find a consolidated bus route through the street, in order to lower the amount of buses. As to light rail it was rejected until the City proved it would remove the need for buses and would be at grade level, and not a Calgary, grade separated system as stated by City Staff. As to cyclists, there was no discussion or support to adding cyclists to an already overburdened right of way.

4.1.2 Mainstreet Character

ASH knows that their wish as stated in 4.1.2 for buildings will not happen with their height restrictions. As well, this conflicts with Figure 10, condition 4 “The mainstreet should have a sufficiently dense concentration of people who live nearby”.

4.2.1 Consistent Height to Frame the Street

Paris and Helsinki work exactly as stated – they have a uniform height. As we have decided to protect the low density in Sandy Hill, we have to find another model to allow for the blended density to meet the density of Helsinki and Paris. It is not correct to cherry-pick only the height portion and not the density. I note as well that the picture shows a 7 storey building.

4.2.3 This building height is not accepted. Figure 12 clearly shows that what is being recommended is a down-zoning: one that has no basis in current city planning or supported by the OMB.

4.2.5 This is not a correct statement and questions where you start counting. Based on the current zoning approved by the City, taken to the OMB by ASH and reaffirmed by the OMB, you are removing significant density. It is not fair to say that because the existing stock is low we shall perpetuate this and fool ourselves into thinking that we are increasing density.

4.2.6 This statement is again incorrect. This is an attempt to roll back the Official Plan.

4.2.8 Continuous Stream of Buildings

One of the major complaints of Urban Strategies, and of all Ottawa residents, is that the downtown core is boring as buildings are lot line to lot line. Now we have ASH promoting what all have rejected and trying to say that this is exciting.

4.2.12 Design Excellence

Yes we were preoccupied with getting better buildings. ASH knows that their proposal and its limitations, downzonings and restrictions will not in any way achieve this goal.

4.2.13 This is the challenge I put to the drafters of this document. They have failed to meet it and instead refer this to committee of adjustment. The logic fails me as ASH consistently objects to what they term “spot zoning” but here recommend perpetuating it?

4.2.16 Heritage Conservation

More language for further removal of redevelopment potential, with no corresponding solution for lost density.

4.2.17 Neighbourhood Transition

Stepping back, more down-zoning. No logic to this as the shadows go the other way.

4.2.19 As to existing stock this is bogus as the shadows go the other way. As to new buildings, they are being capped at such a low level and built so closely, that the opposite is achieved.

4.3.1 Intensification

This does not find a balance. This down-zones the street. Please note that Figure 18 is an 8 storey building.

4.3.3 Mixed Uses

These are more restrictions with no proof that this is viable.

4.3.6 These new commercial and institutional usages were never discussed. They seem to conflict with the plan. They won’t work in the densities.

4.3.7 Affordable Housing

The City has yet to finalize how it could reconcile this wish with the market realities. Until it concludes its discussions with the Homebuilders Association it would be premature to include further restrictions here as they could impede the set goals of this report. As well these proposals only seem to create very expensive 400 ft2 spaces. Would ASH support the building of housing for these income percentiles in Sandy Hill?

4.4.3 The Paved Roadway

The group reached consensus that light rail would only be supported if buses could be removed and if they were at grade.

4.4.4 Bicycles have a designated route and should not be added to the already hard to manage right of way.

4.4.5 Bicycles

This was not the recommendation of the transportation subcommittee as it will hamper the flow of traffic.

4.4.10 On-Street Parking and Loading

This was totally rejected by the transportation subcommittee. This is a goal of ASH only to remove cars from the street and part of their goal to stop east west traffic on a major artery.

4.4.15 Right-of-Way Protection

This is more down-zoning.

4.4.16 Light Rail

Please see previous comments on light rail.

4.5.1 A Wide Sidewalk

Wide sidewalks are there to service people. As this plan removes the people where is the proof or study that these sidewalk widths are needed and that the vision is sound? As this plan removes the density, and only allows local tiny stores, who will be on the sidewalks?

4.5.4 Who will pay for granite sidewalks?

4.5.8 Pedestrian Lighting

The City has gained experience in street lighting including in the Downtown Rideau BIA. This experience should be reflected here.

Response to Comments

In light of the feedback received from the public consultation, a number of changes have been made to the draft Community Design Plan, the Official Plan amendments and the zoning amendments. These changes have either been approved by the Rideau Street Redevelopment Working Group or are considered minor or technical in nature.

REVISED FIGURE 12a Document 8

COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN, OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENTS AND ZONING AMENDMENT FOR UPTOWN RIDEAU (Rideau Street between King Edward Avenue and the Rideau River)

PLAN DE CONCEPTION COMMUNAUTAIRE, MODIFICATIONS DES PLANS officiel ET MODIFICATION DE ZONAGE DE LA RUE RIDEAU EST (LA RUE RIDEAU ENTRE L'AVENUE KING EDWARD ET LA RIVIÈRE RIDEAU)

ACS2004-DEV-POL-0046 RIDEAU-VANIER (12)

Chair Hume began by reading a statement required under the Planning Act, which advised that anyone who intended to appeal this proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), must either voice their objections at the public meeting, or submit their comments in writing prior to the amendment being adopted by City Council. Failure to do so could result in refusal/dismissal of the appeal by the OMB.

N. Lathrop, J. Moser, Dennis Jacobs, Director, Planning, Environment and Infrastructure Policy, Grant Lindsay, Manager, Development Approvals, L. Morrison, T. Marc, Françoise Jessop, Richard Kilstrom and Don Morse, Planner, appeared before the Committee with respect to departmental report dated 23 November 2004. Mr. Jacobs provided an introduction of the Community Design Plan (CDP), followed by a comprehensive PowerPoint presentation by Mr. Morse, a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk.

The Committee heard from the following delegations:

Martin Laplante, Action Sandy Hill (ASH), provided a detailed presentation in support that was circulated and is held on file with the City Clerk. The main points of the presentation are noted below:

· The ‘Rideau Street Visioning Committee’, an initiative of the Uptown Rideau Merchants Association, put together a document entitled ‘A Vision for Rideau Street East’. In 1997 City Council accepted the document and directed staff to use it as a guide for further development on Rideau. A Design Charrette took place in 2000 that resulted in 5 distinct but remarkably similar visions for Rideau, with a dense, regionally oriented area west of King Edward and a 3-5 storey locally oriented area to the east. This Charrette was the basis for founding the Uptown Rideau Redevelopment Working Group (URRWG) in 2001, which included all Uptown Rideau merchants, landowners and community stakeholders as well as many of Ottawa’s design community.

· At the end of a number of meetings and public consultations the City made a number of unilateral changes that resulted in the final document. He asked PEC to reject the proposed change to Fig. 12 that arose after the public consultation took place.

· It is important to underline the draft plan does not represent the ASH position. On height, the ASH position supported 4 storeys on the south side and 6 on the north. It is also not the position of all landowners. However, it does represent the best consensus that could be achieved with give and take.

· This plan allows significant upzoning to nearly all landowners along Rideau. In the 60s and 70s the zoning did allow greater heights with large setbacks resulting in a form that is not pedestrian, retail or neighbourhood friendly. In the 80s and 90s this changed to a friendlier form with less height and setback and exactly the same gross floor area. This plan further refines the proposed main street form, with large increases in density and more leasable floor space than could have been achieved with high towers.

· He viewed the objections from Jonathan Freedman and agreed with those that related to transportation. They are constrained by the OP, in terms of height and transportation.

· In conclusion, the plan is a milestone in the development of the community and there will continue to be great challenges ahead and obstacles to overcome.

Mr. Laplante responded to questions posed by Committee members, with the main points summarized below.

· ASH was one voice among many in the group of stakeholders.

· This is as much intensification as this area can absorb. Immediately behind the area is considerable low density single-family housing with families and children residing therein. Whenever there is a threat of a large building behind them, these families move elsewhere. In the overall plan for the City, apartment dwellers, whether in this area or elsewhere, occupy the same amount of space and transportation resource, but families utilize more resources when they reside elsewhere. If the City adds additional density, the overall amount of sprawl will increase.

· The Plan is the best consensus that could be achieved. ASH supports the plan.

Jonathan Freedman, CEO, Equity Realty Group, sat on the Rideau Street Group representing the Rideau Street BIA, which stretches from the Chateau Laurier to the west side of King Edward. His full comments are outline in the report as comment 17 (Document 6), which indicate he was unhappy with the process and does not feel the final report was reflective of the diversity of opinion. Comments additional and in support of those contained in the report are summarized below:

· It is not a consensus report. The street has been dormant for sometime and is finally seeing some action both east and west of King Edward.

· PEC has approved a proposal east of King Edward, at 9 storeys, which reflected the necessary densification to meet OP goals.

· Peggy Ducharme, Executive Director of the Rideau Street BIA, submitted a letter that far more eloquently illustrates how this Plan is in conflict with OP Policies.

· Does this Secondary Plan offer proper protection for Sandy Hill and adjacent residential areas? He averred it will do absolutely the opposite. The main forces behind the 6-storey height limit consistently refer to a Helsinki-like density. They were shown slides of 10 storeys in Helsinki, but the point of Helsinki is that everything is at a uniform dense European apartment building-type density. If the City caps density on Rideau, the density required in the downtown core will spread into residential areas. Higher density should be accommodated on Rideau, which will provide better protection for ASH.

· When looking at planning issues, the main concern is usually sunlight and as shadows will be cast to the north, they will not impact Sandy Hill.

· He was stunned the report recommended moving back to a lot line to lot line construction, which is said to have been the downfall of the commercial core by some critics; it leaves no room for anything at ground level.

· On transportation – the Rideau BIA fought for years to return cars to Rideau and cannot support a report that recommends removing cars from the east end of Rideau.

· There is an ongoing future debate on how to accommodate light rail on Rideau. The BIA sent the Executive Director to Houston to view a good example of light rail; from the BIAs perspective putting light rail on Rideau would be conditional on the removal of buses. This plan calls for buses to remain, with light rail added and cars to disappear; and, on top of this to add bicycles, which will certainly result in a fatality.

· The street needs cars, both to support the ground storey businesses the report calls for and for the residents to access the new residential.

Mr. Freedman asked PEC to refer this issue back to staff to allow for a process that will properly consult all landowners, explaining the impact and importance of a Secondary Plan and to hear the differing views and hopefully return with an improved report.

In response to a question from Councillor Bédard on transportation, Mr. Freedman clarified it was very much a function of what light rail will look like and replace. If it is similar to the Calgary, grade-separated system, which has devastated 7^th Street in Calgary, it was not supported. Houston has apparently been very successful and that is why Ms. Ducharme traveled to Houston. Mr. Freedman added that the buses currently on Rideau are collector (not express) buses. The BIA would like to replace one form (buses) with a much cleaner form, which could be a different type of rapid transit, but the “devil” will be in the design, not in the concept.

Lena Creedy, Chair, Education, RSRWG, provided a written submission that was circulated and is held on file with the City Clerk. The main points are noted below:

· RSRWG held open meetings for over 3 years with Rideau merchants, residents, design and planning professionals, City staff and various interest groups.

· The Plan represents a summary of expectations designed to contribute towards the beautification and revitalization of an important and historical street.

· Support and cooperation from City officials, landowners, investors, business people and the community at large is needed to implement the CDP, including the removal of hydro poles, inclusion of future rail transit, compatible buildings and pedestrian friendly sites.

· Success depends on an atmosphere of trust, and the RSRWG therefore encouraged open communication among the stakeholders for the benefit and health of the community.

Councillor Bédard publicly commented on the importance of Ms. Creedy’s contribution in ensuring that all players continued with the process over so many years and complemented her on the work well done.

Adam Thompson, Richcraft, Alan Cohen, Congregation of Beth-Shalom, and Ted Fobert, FoTenn Consultants, for the Richcraft Group of Companies. Mr. Cohen was present on behalf of 2 clients. One is Richcraft Group of Companies, which has an interest in 3 properties on Rideau. He was also present on behalf of Congregation Beth-Shalom related to the northeast corner of Rideau and Chapel. He was regrettably speaking in opposition to the report. The process was flawed. This was initiated as an ASH matter and not all that a CDP is supposed to be. There are no Terms of Reference and no one in the community he communicated with was aware this was leading to an OPA and Zoning By-Law Amendment. Nine months ago PEC approved a 9-storey building on the corner of Rideau and Cobourg as ideal zoning for that site. It was appealed to the OMB where that appeal was dismissed. The seniors’ residence on the corner of Rideau and Friel, north side, beside the public library also came before PEC at 6-storeys plus 2 stories on top, next to a heritage building and unanimously supported. Mr. Cohen referred to the application before PEC today for rezoning to allow 32 units, supported by staff, and the comments made relative to the sanctity of secondary plans. There is a modest item in the subject report about removing the 120 foot reference on Rideau. When the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan came forward in 1976, there was an inclination to preserve as much of the low density within the heart of the community as possible, with 7 Heritage Conservation Districts in the area. How were they to achieve the necessary densities? The answer was simple – use Rideau and put 120 feet on Rideau, which would achieve the required density. Now, the CDP is subtly removing the 120 feet, placing 3, 4, 5 or 6 storeys thereon and supposing the rest of the Plan will continue to function. That will destroy the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan.

Ted Fobert stated both the old and new OP share the same objectives for intensification – along arterial roads, on vacant or underutilized sites, built at moderate to high densities. Both Plans, including the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan, seek to reduce the pressure on established lower profile residential areas by accommodating denser housing development on the edge of the neighbourhood along the arterial roads. He quoted from the Sandy Hill Secondary Policy Plan, which was recently approved as part of the CAOP. In keeping with those objectives, the Sandy Hill Plan identifies Rideau as being an area of maximum redevelopment. The plan talks about the south side of Rideau as being areas of major future population increase. The existing condition on Rideau, between King Edward and the Rideau River is one of an eclectic mix of built forms, architectural styles and densities. There are a variety of building heights along Rideau ranging from one storey to 22 storeys; a mixture of building profiles along the entire length, at least one medium profile, or high profile (10 storeys or more) building fronts onto every block along Rideau. The Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan (URCDP) proposes a fundamental change to this long standing premise of the Sandy Hill Plan. The URCDP presents a vision for the corridor’s built form, focused primarily on building height and design. The objectives as set out in the CAOP for CDPs, which are collaborative community building processes, are to ensure that processes surrounding planning decisions are inclusive, creative and result in community plans that implement CAOP policies. CDPs, in his opinion, fail to engage the broader community. The URCDP fails to identify how it implements the broad objectives of the CAOP, which includes the Sandy Hill Plan. It fails to consider the required components of a CDP as set out in Section 257 of the CAOP. It was therefore his opinion that in spite of all the hard work and he agreed with many of the sentiments and proposals in the report, it fails to meet the basic requirements of the CAOP for a CDP. The staff report should be deferred to allow the plan to be reassessed under the guidance or tutelage of an advisory committee made up of staff from all disciplines, as with other CDPs, landowners and the broader public, in a process that is evaluated using the same rigor that applies to every other Secondary Planning process that must be undertaken.

Adam Thompson pointed out Richcraft owns 2 properties within the boundaries and one on the edge, on Besserer. One building was appealed to and approved at the OMB. During that process and before the matter was before PEC, through his consultant, Rod Lahey, he was invited to one RSRWG meeting, which he gladly accepted and attended one further meeting. Although he declared an interest in attending future meetings, he was not so notified although there were exchanges of e-mails. Some of the recommendations and other aspects in the report should be reviewed further and dealt with. When he did receive a later copy of the draft, it was essentially the same document produced in 2003 and before PEC today. That has lead him to believe that, although there were comments, very few were included in the document; and, those involved in drafting it simply held to their views. One specific example is that Richcraft is the recent owner of the property at the southeast corner of Rideau and Charlotte. It is disconcerting that staff has said it has met with Richcraft and that they had agreed to the 6 storeys. That has not taken place. Richcraft would like to propose a building that goes beyond the scope of the existing zoning and the subject report. Richcraft is not looking for anything drastic and realizes that approaching the Rideau River heights should be decreased, but none of that has been taken into consideration, despite what is contained in the report. It is surprising the notification for the community meeting held on 12 October was through a chain of e-mails that obviously did not reach Richcraft’s office. The report should go back to the community; proper notification should take place and a Technical Advisory Committee formed to allow this plan to receive the proper planning process it deserves. Richcraft is not against the plan in its entirety and agrees with many of the aspects. Richcraft is already working with Hydro Ottawa, the City (PWS) to commence the process of removing Hydro poles.

Mr. Cohen concluded by stating that for a CDP to have legitimacy it must undergo the full process outlined in the CAOP and that is simply what they are asking.

Stan Levine, on behalf of David Smith, Nate’s Delicatessen and The Place Next Door Steakhouse on Rideau Street. Mr. Levine pointed out the Smith property comprises the largest part of the block between King Edward, Nelson, Rideau and Besserer. Mr. Smith provided a written submission dated 13 December 2004 that was circulated and is held on file with the City Clerk. The Smiths have been an institution on Rideau for 45 years and at a point of considering the future use of their property and other businesses. It was quite by accident that David Smith learned relatively recently of the Study. He was not invited to participate, which would have seemed appropriate since the property comprises 1.25 acres. The site is presently acknowledged as a site for major development. The Smith family would have been opposed to the 6-storey limit originally envisaged for the site. The recent recommendation of 12 storeys for the intersection of Rideau and King Edward would be acceptable, subject to concerns regarding setbacks and appropriate techniques for limiting development. There is some confusion as to whether the entire Smith property is included in the proposed 12-storey limit. In conclusion, on behalf of the Smith family he asked that PEC defer consideration of their particular block to allow them the opportunity to consult with staff and clarify exactly what is intended for this significant location

As a result of the presentation Councillor Bédard posed questions to Mr. Levine and the main points are summarized below.

· Although the zoning is proposed to be increased to 37m from a height of 18m, ½ a block away another building sits at 22 storeys; across the street is 12 storeys, 1½ blocks away 2 buildings are planned for 25 storeys. King Edward and Rideau is a major intersection and there is an opportunity to develop something appropriate.

· Mr. Smith did attend a meeting in October when the plan was disclosed and subsequently expressed his concern and dismay quite colourfully. They should have been consulted in a more direct manner.

David Jeanes, Transport 2000, supported the report, but wanted to make comments about light rail, which will complement this plan and should not become a barrier to pedestrians. It should have frequent stops since it should animate the street (shopping and residential activity). It should not be visually intrusive and with present technology will not be, even with overhead wires, which will not be as visually intrusive as the existing telegraph wires. There will be some issues; for example, such as limiting left turns at minor streets which can be dealt with without creating major problems. He agreed it should completely replace bus service on most of the street when implemented. He pointed that at the time of the detailed planning phases there are many good examples to follow; Toronto has recently undergone a huge planning exercise on a street with similarities (St. Claire Avenue West), which after countless public meetings, submissions and great controversy, received overwhelming support at Toronto City Council. Mr. Jeanes emphasized that Toronto does not have wheelchair accessible street cars, which is a very substantial difference that Ottawa will have to deal with. Mr. Freedman mentioned Houston, which does have wheelchair accessible street cars operating on its main street and he supported all his remarks; it works extremely well and the City can learn from the Houston experience. Mr. Freedman was concerned about Calgary, which has a transit mall and is burdened with a 20 year old, very high floor light rail technology, which Ottawa would not be using any more than Ottawa would be using the Toronto street cars which are not accessible. He was very optimistic and there is ample opportunity to plan it correctly.

Michael Barnes is a property owner on Besserer Street and has lived in the area for 12 years. He attended a number of meetings and contrary to what was heard from some recent presenters, information was made available. There is a local newspaper that has covered this item for a period of time. If anything, he found the staff proposal to be too accommodating to excessive development. The “Where Will We Live” report states the City has decades of supply of apartment space, but is tight on family housing. That is a concern. A balance is needed and not more proposals similar to the last Richcraft Development that shot a hole through any semblance of what Rideau needs to be. On the north side there are some significant towers; on the south side it is an amazingly uniform streetscape. The exceptions are one 4 storey and one 5 storey, with the remainder low rise. If Rideau is to be compatible with the residential properties that back onto it, the compatibility has to be looked at from what is currently being experienced. If the City continues to have these one off developments that are appealed through a very expensive OMB process, then obviously individual citizens will be disadvantaged. What is truly important is that families can live in single-family homes, duplexes, etc. along Besserer and prospective purchasers can research the zoning and purchase carefully with confidence. The plan is reasonable and has been changed from the earlier draft. In fact, there were step backs for buildings above a certain height. There has been reasonable accommodation and the section that narrows down from Augusta east, is a narrower street than west Rideau and the section from Charlotte to the Cummings Bridge is residential, except for one mini-mall. Once that mini-mall is removed, there will not be any parking and future commercial development will be limited. As well, the Besserer Street Park is located at the easterly end of Rideau. He posited 5 or 6 storeys may be excessive and, contrary to what has been suggested, it is very difficult for such a building not to cast a shadow. What is truly important is that the narrow lot widths along Besserer (33 feet) sandwiches lots together; it is not so much that light is lost to the east and west, it is already lost. What blocks houses from the north is significant. The study reflects and seeks to protect the fabric of the community, which is needed. To send it back will continue the eclectic vision of development that is no longer needed along Rideau.

The Committee also received the following correspondence that was circulated and is held on file with the City Clerk.

· From Robert J. Spreckley outlining suggestions.

· E-mail dated 13 December 2004, from Peggy Ducharme, Executive Director, Rideau BIA, outlining specific concerns.

Chair Hume closed the Public Meeting and the matter returned to Committee.

Staff responded to questions posed by Committee members, with the main points summarized below.

· There are increases in intensification in some places, but generally the principles being carried forward are the result of discussions with the community. This was a collaborative community designing exercise which is also addressed in the CAOP. Staff undertook a process that brought together various parts and participated in same, with recommendations proposed before this report came to Committee that reflected staff issues with the final product and PEC has heard the community is not happy with those. Staff does not perceive the proposal before PEC as making fundamental changes to what staff recognized as the community context established in previous planning documents. It provides the balance between what is needed to achieve intensification and the desires of the community to mitigate same.

· The Plan expresses a desire to bury the Hydro lines and that is expressed in a variety of documents. Staff does look to opportunities to do so, but it is an expensive proposition and would only be undertaken; i.e. in the case of the one particular property, on the basis that the developer contributes. The rebuilding of Rideau in the future when introducing other forms of public transit along that street will provide other opportunities to satisfy a community character issue.

· The Richcraft property will continue to enjoy the existing zoning for the 9-storey building previously approved. In relation to the other property, it is proposed they undergo the test of this plan. The community did want a firm cap on height, but there is a provision for minor variance to the provisions and the guidance is contained in the Plan. That would allow for an amendment to the Schedule.

· The guidance in the plan is based on the existing buildings at the corner of King Edward and Rideau. Across is a hotel at 20 storeys and on the north side is the Confederation Building, if one were to extrapolate the edges of those buildings onto this site, that is the definition of what staff opined would be a good urban design principle to base at that corner node. If Nate’s owns more than that property, the expectation would be that for a portion of the building it would be 12 storeys, but it would step down to the 6 storeys that would continue along the street further along the property, which is not uncommon.

· This is not a CDP, but a process that was initiated locally by the community that staff was asked to participate in and did. Where staff initiates a CDP, a consultant is generally engaged or staff engages in a different process, which is a more broader-based analysis. This was considered a minor amendment to an existing Secondary Plan with associated amendments to the OP and Zoning By-Law.

· This is the first collaborative planning process, which is contained in the CAOP that talks about developing a plan from a community based organization, the City has undertaken. As such, staff is, in effect, building a process as it proceeds. Perhaps the process could have been improved upon and there could have been more formal notifications. At the latter stage staff attempted to address that by broadening the notice and making it more formal, but at the end of the day a process was followed and residents were engaged, not only the residential and the existing community organization that commenced this, but others were involved in this process and opportunities provided. An adequate process was followed that could quite readily be defended if the City were challenged.

Councillor Bédard maintained the community has been involved in this process since 2000 with massive consultation. That community involves not only ASH, which was instrumental in commencing the process, but it took on a life of its own and the commercial element joined and created a separate body and ASH was a representative. There were many information outlets; material distributed, meetings with individuals/merchants/ owners, etc. Richcraft was very involved in a spot zoning on Rideau and certainly knew what was happening. What is before PEC is a Plan that respects the CAOP that gives a new flavour to Rideau, which is extremely important. It does not satisfy everyone; it does increase the height limits on Rideau Street, it does increase density and it is recognized by the community, whose approach initially was to reduce same because the new dynamic of Rideau has changed since the 1970’s when the Secondary Plan was approvedIt is a high density residential neighbourhood with a considerable population and it is recognized that Rideau is integral to that community. Rideau, from King Edward to Sussex/Chateau Laurier is a completely different environment. That is why the community did not raise any objection to the 2 towers (25-storeys) at Rideau and Cumberland. It is a compromise, although not perfect, but it is a balance and the result of consensus and a package that he was willing to support since it would ensure a good future for Rideau and encouraged the Committee to support same.

Moved by Councillor G. Bédard:

That the following change be made to Document 2, number 3:

That the word “east” be changed to “west” and the word “west” be changed to “east” in the paragraph under the section entitled “Mainstreet Mixed Use”.

And that no further notice be provide pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act.

CARRIED

The Committee approved the departmental recommendations as amended.

That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council:

1. Approve the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan as detailed in Document 7 with the following change:

Replace Figure 12 in Document 7 with Figure 12a as contained in Document 8.

2. Approve the changes to Section 8.0 Appendix - Sandy Hill as contained in Volume III to the Official Plan for the former City of Ottawa, as detailed in Document 2, subject to the following amendment:

That the following change be made in Number 3:

That the word “east” be changed to “west” and the word “west” be changed to “east” in the paragraph under the section entitled “Mainstreet Mixed Use”.

3. Approve the modifications to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan as contained in Volume II to the Official Plan for the former City of Ottawa, as detailed in Document 3.

4. Approve the modifications to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan as contained in Volume 2A to the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa as detailed in Document 3.

5. Approve the amendments to the former City of Ottawa Zoning By-law, as detailed in Document 4, for the area shown in Document 5.

And that no further notice be provided pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act.

CARRIED as amended with Councillor G. Hunter dissenting on 15 b), Document 4, Zoning Amendments, and Chair P. Hume dissenting on Document 6.

---

[U1]Site Location and Description (which should include description of site i.e., flat, featureless, no vegetation, grade and drainage, adjacent to…)

[U2]Include the documents that are applicable to this report