1. ZONING - 594 RIDEAU STREET AND
165 CHARLOTTE STREET ZONAGE - 594, RUE RIDEAU ET 165, RUE CHARLOTTE |
Committee recommendation
(This application
is not subject to Bill 51)
That Council approve an amendment to the former City of Ottawa Zoning
By-law to change the Neighbourhood Linear Commercial CN7 F(2.0) zone applying
to 594 Rideau Street and 165 Charlotte Street as shown on Document 1, to a new
Neighbourhood linear Commercial CN11[xxx]H(24.5) -h zone establishing new exception
provisions, a new height limit and to establish a holding designation, all as
detailed in Document 2.
Recommandation du Comité
(Cette demande n’est pas
assujettie au projet de loi 51)
Que le Conseil approuve une modification au Règlement de zonage de l’ancienne Ville d’Ottawa, de
manière à faire passer le zonage du 594, rue Rideau et du 165, rue Charlotte,
illustrés dans le Document 1, de Rue commerçante de quartier CN7 F(2.0) à une
nouvelle zone de Rue commerçante de quartier CN11[xxx]H(24.5) – h, établissant de nouvelles dispositions
d’exception, une nouvelle limite de hauteur et une nouvelle désignation
d’aménagement différé, tel qu’exposé en détail dans le Document 2.
Documentation
1.
Deputy
City Manager's report Planning,
Transit and the Environment dated
5 January 2007 (ACS2007-PTE-APR-0036).
2. Extract
of Draft Minutes, 24 April 2007.
Report to/Rapport au :
Planning and Environment Committee
Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement
and Council / et au Conseil
January 5, 2007 / le 5 janvier 2007
Submitted by/Soumis par : Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager/Directrice
municipale adjointe,
Planning Transit and the Environment / Urbanisme,
Transport en commun et Environnement
Contact Person/Personne
Ressource : Grant Lindsay, Manager / Gestionnaire, Development Approvals /
Approbation des demandes d'aménagement
(613)
580-2424, 13242 Grant.Lindsay@ottawa.ca
SUBJECT: |
|
|
|
OBJET: |
REPORT RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve
an amendment to the former City of Ottawa Zoning By-law to change the
Neighbourhood Linear Commercial CN7 F(2.0) zone applying to 594 Rideau Street
and 165 Charlotte Street as shown on Document 1, to a new Neighbourhood linear
Commercial CN11[xxx]H(24.5)
-h zone establishing new exception provisions, a new height limit and to
establish a holding designation, all as detailed in Document 2.
RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement
recommande au Conseil d’approuver une modification au Règlement
de zonage de l’ancienne Ville d’Ottawa, de manière à faire passer le zonage du
594, rue Rideau et du 165, rue Charlotte, illustrés dans le Document 1, de Rue
commerçante de quartier CN7 F(2.0) à une nouvelle zone de Rue commerçante de
quartier CN11[xxx]H(24.5)
– h, établissant de nouvelles dispositions d’exception, une nouvelle limite de
hauteur et une nouvelle désignation d’aménagement différé, tel qu’exposé en
détail dans le Document 2.
BACKGROUND
The subject properties consist of 594 Rideau Street and 165 Charlotte Street, and are located at the southeast corner of Rideau Street and Charlotte Street. Mixed-use buildings of one to two and a half storeys currently occupy the 1524 square metre property. Abutting the property to the south, at the corner of Charlotte Street and Besserer Street is a three-storey apartment building, and east of the apartment building are three-storey townhouses. Adjacent to the east of the site is a one-storey retail strip mall. North, across Rideau Street is a four-storey heritage residential building known as the “Wallis House”. Further east on the north side of Rideau Street is a seven-storey apartment building, while to the northwest is a 14-storey apartment building. West, across Charlotte Street is a five-storey building containing laboratory, office and retail uses.
The applicant wishes to develop an eight-storey, mixed commercial and residential building and requires a Zoning By-law amendment pertaining to building height and density. The proposed building facilitated by the rezoning consists of a six-storey main section with two additional stories recessed back on all sides except a full-height rounded corner addressing the intersection of Rideau and Charlotte streets. The building proposal has a strong street orientation.
The subject property was recently rezoned from CN7 F(2.0) to CN11[916] F(3.0), Neighbourhood Linear Commercial Zone. The Council Approved Zoning By-law amendment stems from the recommendations of the “Uptown Rideau, Community Design Plan” approved by Council in January 2005. This Zoning By-law amendment is under appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). The CN Zone allows uses such as bank, day care, restaurant and retail store. The CN7 sub-zone has requirements related to provisions and amenities for residential uses, and the location of parking. The F(2.0) limits the floor space to two times the lot area. The CN11 sub-zone establishes restrictions and locational requirements for certain uses and setback and building height requirements. The “[916]” exception sets dwelling unit amenity requirements. The F(3.0) limits the floor space index to three times the lot area. The maximum building height is 19.0 metres.
The applicant wishes to develop an eight-storey mixed residential and commercial building with underground parking. The area of the proposed building is approximately 6791 square metres, with the top two floors of the building recessed. The proposed uses (commercial and dwelling units) are permitted on this site under both CN sub-zones; however, the current building design proposal requires an increase to the maximum floor space and height limits. The applicant is requesting increases in the maximum floor space index from 3.0 to 4.25 and the height from 19 to 27 metres. The recommended zoning amendment reflects all of the provisions of the Council approved CN11[916] F(3.0) zone appealed to the OMB, modified to accommodate an eight storey building.
DISCUSSION
1. Primary
Plan
The Official Plan (OP) designates the property
as Traditional Main Street, which applies to both sides of Rideau Street from
King Edward Avenue to the Rideau River.
The Strategic Directions objective for Mainstreet areas is that they
should develop as a mix of uses including housing, employment and
shopping. Mainstreets are to be one of
the primary locations for intensification. When a related Zoning By-law
amendment is required to permit intensification, the proposed development is to
be evaluated in terms of scale, design and compatibility in accordance with the
provisions for Compatibility and Design in Section 2.5.1, which is discussed below. Provided the overall intent of the OP is
upheld, intensification and infill development is to be supported at locations
within 600 metres of a future rapid transit station. Rideau Street is designated as a Future Rapid Transit Corridor
and Transit Priority Corridor. The
recommended rezoning is in keeping with these policies of the Strategic
Approach.
The policies for compatibility of Section 2.5.1 set out Design Objectives and Principles pertaining to compatibility. Annex 3 to the OP provides an evocative Design Framework intended as a catalyst for the pursuit and consideration of a wide range of planning and design alternatives that will foster implementation of the Design Objectives and Principles. The proposed development associated with the recommended rezoning is consistent with the intent of many aspects of the Design Objectives and Principles and responds to the Design Framework as discussed below based on summaries of applicable elements of the objectives:
The related development proposal will help facilitate wayfinding by facilitating a more notable building at an important intersection of an arterial and a collector road; building and site access will be clear and directly to the street; parking access will be from the collector road rather than the Rideau Street arterial thus protecting a continuous pedestrian route along Rideau Street; the development will increase the potential to provide the safety and security benefits of “eyes on the street”; and a mix of uses will help create a complementary activity pattern along a transit route.
The policies of subsection 4.4 Water and
Wastewater Servicing, require adequate services for new development. The property is adequately served by water
and sanitary sewer facilities to support the level of redevelopment fostered by
the recommended rezoning. However,
existing storm sewer facilities serving the property are not adequate to
support the redevelopment. Improvements
to the storm sewers serving the area are anticipated to be undertaken in
2012. The “h” provisions of the
proposed rezoning restrict the implementation of the new zoning until such time
as the required storm sewer improvements have been satisfactorily
completed.
Subsection 4.6 Cultural Heritage Resources
requires consideration of the compatibility of the proposal with adjacent
heritage resources in the review of Zoning By-law amendment applications. Directly across Rideau Street to the north
is a designated heritage building and adjacent to the south is a structure on
the City’s Heritage Reference List. The
related development will respect the massing and width of the designated
heritage building across Rideau Street, will be in keeping with the set back
pattern and building orientation along the street, will cause minimal shadowing
on heritage properties, and will have underground parking thus having minimal impact
on the adjacent heritage resources.
Section 4.11 Compatibility, provides further
compatibility policy for the review of development applications involving an
increase in height or density. Factors
to be considered include traffic impact, vehicular access, parking, building
height and mass, community patterns, outdoor amenity provisions, loading areas,
sunlight, and supporting neighbourhood services.
2. Sandy
Hill Secondary Plan
The land use policies of the Sandy Hill
Secondary Plan for Mainstreet Mixed-Uses are applicable to the subject
lands. These policies are as follows:
The recommended
rezoning will foster a development consistent with the intent of these
policies. New residential units and
continued commercial development will contribute to a vibrant mainstreet.
The proposed eight
storeys is considered a mid-rise building, and the set back of the upper two
stories provides for a transition to the lower existing residential buildings to the south. The
commercial development and streetscape improvements proposed at grade level
will help promote a pedestrian friendly sidewalk environment.
Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan
The Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan (URCDP)
was adopted as Council policy in January 2005 (but is not part of the OP) and
is part of the policy basis of the current CN11[916] F(3.0) zoning. The URCDP stresses the need
for development that is compatible and complementary to the needs of the
adjacent residential neighbourhoods with a mix of uses stimulating a vibrant
pedestrian environment. The URCDP
recommends a maximum building height for the subject property of three to six
storeys to accommodate mid-rise buildings. The Design Planning Principles of
the plan pertaining to appropriate building height, in sub-section 4.2.2, cite
the need to consider pedestrian comfort in relation to building size, not
causing the alienation of upper floor residents from ground level sidewalks,
protection of sunlight to sidewalks, reflecting the dense urban fabric along
the street and the proximity to downtown, and complementing the built heritage
of the area. Sub-section 4.2.3 of the
URCDP indicates that minor variations can be considered without modification of
the plan, and in sub-section 4.2.13 that the quality of a project design may
justify the minor relaxation of the height and setback provisions of the plan.
The development concept associated with the
rezoning does addresses the factors dealing with the pedestrian environment and
sunlight, provides for amenity spaces oriented to the street for future
residents, is appropriate given the density in the area and the proximity to
downtown, and is complementary to nearby heritage buildings. The proposed development facilitated by the
proposed rezoning is considered to be in keeping with the intent of the URCDP,
and the recommended holding provision requires approval of the project design
through the site plan control process prior to lifting the holding provision.
Summary
Overall, the recommended rezoning to
accommodate the proposed development is considered to be in keeping with the
intent of the OP policies for Traditional Mainstreets, the compatibility
policies of Section 2.5.1, policies of water and wastewater servicing, policies
of subsection 4.4, heritage policies of subsection 4.6. and the compatibility
factors of sub-section 4.11 and is considered to be in keeping with the policy
directions of the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan and the directions for development
set out in the Rideau Street Community Design Plan.
CONSULTATION
Notice of this application was carried out in accordance with the City's Public Notification and Consultation Policy. Information signs were posted on-site indicating the nature of the application. The Ward Councillor is aware of this application and the staff recommendation. A summary and discussion of the responses to the public notification is included in Document 4.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
The application was not processed by the "On
Time Decision Date" established for the processing of Zoning By-law
amendments due to the complexity of the issues associated with servicing,
access and project design.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 Location Map
Document 2 Details
of Recommended zoning
Document 3 Conceptual
Building Design
Document 4 Consultation Details
Corporate Services Department, City Clerk’s
Branch, Secretariat Services to notify the owner, Richcraft Group of Companies, 201 - 2280 St. Laurent
Boulevard, Ottawa, K1G 4K1, applicant, Roderick Lahey Architect Inc., 200-1501 Carling
Avenue, Ottawa, K1Z 7M1, OttawaScene.com,
174 Colonnade Road, Unit #33, Ottawa, ON
K2E 7J5,
Ghislain Lamarche, Program Manager, Assessment, Financial Services Branch (Mail
Code: 26-76) of City Council’s
decision.
Planning, Transit and the Environment
Department to prepare the implementing by-law, forward to Legal Services Branch
and undertake the statutory notification.
Corporate Services Department, Legal Services
Branch to forward the implementing by-law to City Council.
DETAILS OF RECOMMENDED ZONING DOCUMENT
2
The lands shown on Document 1 are to be rezoned to CN[xxx]H(24.5)-h.
The subject lands fall
within an area with Council approved zoning as CN11[916]F(3.0) that is
currently under appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board. The implementing by-law for the recommended
zoning amendment must address the status of By-law No. 2005-24, by excluding
the said lands from By-law No. 2005-24.
The holding designation as described in clause 1(9)(e) of
By-law No. 93-98 can only be lifted upon the satisfying of the following
requirements:
1. The combined sewer system serving the site has been improved or replaced to the extent necessary to facilitate the increased sewers capacity requirements that would be generated by development of the property in accordance with the full potential of the provisions of the amended zoning, and
2. A site plan control application has been approved, including architectural elevations, for a mixed use development on the property;
The following exceptions will apply to the new CN[xxx] H(24.5) -h
zone for the property shown on Document 1:
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
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.
3. That
an apartment building and a high rise apartment building, with a maximum height
of eight storeys, and a townhouse building be permitted on the property.
4. 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.
5. That
all ground floor uses abutting Rideau Street provide a direct pedestrian access
off Rideau Street.
6. That
the ground floor building façade abutting Rideau Street contain a minimum 50%
windows and doors.
7. That
the height of the ground floor be a minimum one metre higher than the floors
above it, except for the top floor.
8. There
shall be a minimum front yard setback of 1.0 metre, except a minimum setback of
3 metres shall be applied above 6-storeys.
9. That
the maximum front yard setback shall be 2.0 metres, 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12.
For
properties that abut a residential zone other than an R6 Zone, an added 3 metre
rear yard setback shall apply above the sixth storey where the maximum building
height is more than 16 metres.
13.
An
added 3 metre interior side yard setback shall apply above the sixth storey
where the maximum building height is more than 16 metres.
14. That
the minimum width of a landscaped area does not apply to the front yard
abutting Rideau Street.
15. That subsection 299, relating to density restrictions, shall
not apply.
16. A driveway may be situated equally or in part on two abutting properties that abut Rideau Street.
17. A
parking area may have access to a public street through another lot.
18. 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.
19. That dwelling units may occupy a maximum of 45% of the ground floor level, provided that no dwelling unit on the ground floor level is located within 9.5 metres of Rideau Street.
20. That amenity area must be provided for each dwelling unit at the rate of 18.5 square metres per dwelling unit, one half of which must be provided as uncovered outdoor amenity area.
CONSULTATION DETAILS DOCUMENT
4
NOTIFICATION AND CONSULTATION
PROCESS
Notification and public consultation
was undertaken in accordance with the Public Notification and Public
Consultation Policy approved by City Council for Zoning By-law
amendments.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Carleton Condominium Corporation # 586
At the request of the Carleton Condominium Corporation # 586, a meeting was held by the Ward Councillor to discuss the application.
General Public
The following is a summary of the comments received from the general public regarding the proposed rezoning and the staff responses:
1. Comment: Any new development on the south side of Rideau Street must fit with the existing commercial and residential “landscape”, the heritage character of the area, and especially adjacent Besserer Street. The “spiky” protrusions over the door and the green rounded front glass of the related building proposal are out of character; a stone or concrete element over the door more in keeping with the architectural features of Wallis House would be preferred. It would be a shame to lose the unique chicken restaurant on the site to be replaced by a condominium; the restaurant is part of the special ambiance of Sandy Hill.
Response: The development proposal will be reviewed through a future site plan control application, and as per the holding provisions of the recommended rezoning, the provisions of the amendment will not come into effect until such time as the related site plan, including building design drawings, have been approved by the City. The related proposed building is considered to be in keeping with the commercial, residential and heritage characteristics in the neighbourhood, and will not preclude a restaurant use on the site.
2. Comment: There are already a number of ugly apartments in the area and another nine stories will only compound the traffic, noise and garbage issues, while reducing the sunlight penetration to the streets. A five-storey building is acceptable, but nine is not.
Response: The recommended rezoning is for an eight-storey building with the upper two stories setback. The effects of the added development potential resulting from the rezoning on traffic and noise are considered minimal, while garbage storage will be required to meet City standards through the site plan approval process. There will be a minor increase to the loss of sunlight on the adjacent streets, especially close to the winter solstice.
3. Comment: The Rideau Street Redevelopment Working Group, consisting of the residential and business representatives spent a lot of time working toward the consensus that a six-storey height limit was appropriate and the right scale for this part of the street and this effort, which ended with the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan, should not be compromised, which would also draw into question the whole value of community consultation. The existing six-storey height limit mitigates the negative impact of higher density and buildings on the adjacent low-rise, low-density community and any change marginalizes the property rights of abutting residents. A building on this site should not exceed the height of the Wallis House heritage building across Rideau Street to the north.
Response: The recommendations of the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan contemplates variations from a six-storey height limit in sections 4.2.3 and particularly 4.2.13 in response to good design; the holding provisions of the recommended rezoning require approval of a related site plan, including building design drawings, prior to the rezoning coming into full affect. The rezoning will not impact the property rights of abutting residents. The proposal is considered to be compatible with Wallis House to the north.
4. Comment: A meeting should be held with immediate neighbours to discuss this proposal.
Response: Councillor Georges Bédard held a meeting with most of the adjacent neighbours in January 2006.
5. Comment: The developer has not provided a justification as to why it is not viable to build under the current zoning other than the chance to make more money.
Response: The financial aspirations of applicants are not a land use planning consideration, nor germane to the evaluation of a rezoning application.
6. Comment: The vehicular access from Charlotte Street planned for the related building proposal will not work due to existing traffic congestion along Charlotte Street north from the Rideau Street intersection, which already makes access from Besserer Street in both directions impossible during rush hour; vehicular access to Rideau Street should be considered as an alternative. The separation distance used in the traffic report for the proposed Charlotte access to the Rideau street intersection seems incorrect. The potential use of Rideau Street for mass transit should be recognized in the related traffic impact study. The traffic impact study should be corrected or re-assessed pertaining to: the Rideau/Charlotte intersection configuration and the related signalization sequences, on-street parking provisions, off-street parking conditions on adjacent properties, and local street turning and directional regulations.
Response: The traffic impact study for the related development has been amended to address the public comments. The access to Charlotte Street will be considered in more detail through a related site plan control application, but will be limited to right-in and right-out only and is considered the most appropriate location given the Mainstreet and Transit Priority Corridor designations along Rideau Street.
7. Comment: The applicants do not have rightful ownership of the 594 Rideau Street portion of the site.
Response: Any challenge to historic property ownership rights or transactions is a civil matter.
COUNCILLOR’S COMMENTS
Councillor Georges Bédard is aware of the application, organized a meeting with adjacent residents and has formally requested that delegated approval authority be withdrawn from staff for the future related Site Plan Control application.
Response
Staff attended the meeting with adjacent residents and will submit any related site plan applications to Planning and Environment Committee for a decision, unless delegated approval authority is reinstated.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMMENTS
Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee (LACAC)
LACAC provided the following comment:
“The
Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee (LACAC), which is
mandated to advise City Council on matters relating to Ottawa's Heritage
(pursuant to the Ontario Heritage Act), specifically on issues of built
heritage, including cultural heritage landscapes, reviewed the noted
application and submits the following:
As this proposed application does not conform to the principles set out in the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan, LACAC recommends the City of Ottawa not permit the rezoning both in terms of the proposed FSI and increased building height. Under the current zoning, the present FSI is 3.0. The application is to revise this to 4.25 and to increase the building height from 18 to 27 meters. LACAC believes that the principles of the Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan must be respected, specifically the following clauses.
4.2 Built Form
Consistent Height to Frame the
Street
4.2.3
The maximum building heights
selected as a best fit for Uptown Rideau are mid-rise, 5-6-storey heights. The
reduced height to 5 storeys reflects the narrowing of the existing right-of-way
from west to east. Except for minor variations, applications that are received
by the City to modify the height provisions shall not be considered without
modifying this Plan.
4.2.11
For corner lots that front on Rideau
Street, building setbacks shall be established: i) that provide space for
corner patios or plazas; ii) that allow the corner building to act as a buffer
between Rideau Street and the quieter side streets; iii) that provide
transitional sidewalk widths that link wide and narrow sidewalks in a seamless
fashion; and iv) to define an interesting and logical edge to the sidewalks
along the street.
Neighbourhood Transition
4.2.17
For intensification to be
successful, future development in the Uptown Rideau area must respect the
character of the surrounding residential community. Building heights should
generally be required to step down, as a transition, from the higher building
heights along Rideau Street to the lower building heights on the adjoining
residential streets
4.2.18
Transition building heights apply to
properties on the south side of Rideau Street between Chapel Street and the
Cummings Bridge and to any other properties where higher buildings abut
residential lots with lower maximum building heights. In such cases, a 3.0 m
setback shall be applied above four storeys, where the maximum height is
6-storeys and after three, where the maximum height is 5-storeys. The lower
storeys shall be setback 7.5 m when the property faces the rear yard of the
abutting residential lot and 3.0 m when it faces a front/side yard.”
Response
The recommended rezoning provides
for an increase in height of 24.5 metres rather than the originally requested
27 metres, to allow for an eight-storey building rather than nine storeys. The performance standards included in the
rezoning preclude the need to impose a maximum Floor Space Index (FSI). The Uptown Rideau Community Design Plan (URCDP) stresses the need for
development that is compatible and complementary to the needs of the adjacent
residential neighbourhoods with a mix of uses stimulating a vibrant pedestrian
environment. The URCDP recommends a
maximum building height for the subject property of three to six storeys to
accommodate mid-rise buildings.
The Design Planning Principles of the plan
pertaining to appropriate building height, in sub-section 4.2.2, cite the need
to consider pedestrian comfort in relation to building size, not causing the
alienation of upper floor residents from ground level sidewalks, protection of
sunlight to sidewalks, reflecting the dense urban fabric along the street and
the proximity to downtown, and complementing the built heritage of the
area. Sub-section 4.2.3 of the URCDP
indicates that minor variations can be considered without modification of the
plan, and in sub-section 4.2.13, that the quality of a project design may
justify the minor relaxation of the height and set back provisions of the plan.
The development concept associated with the rezoning
does addresses the factors dealing with the pedestrian environment and
sunlight, provides for amenity spaces oriented to the street for future
residents, is appropriate given the density in the area and the proximity to
downtown, and is complementary to nearby heritage buildings.
The rezoning does require stepping back the upper two
floors of the building, but at a greater high considered to be in keeping with
the important corner location and the height of nearby existing buildings; this
is considered to be a minor relaxation of the plan provisions. The proposed development facilitated by the
proposed rezoning is considered to be in keeping with the intent of the URCDP,
and the recommended holding provision requires approval of the project design
through the site plan control process prior to lifting the holding provision.
ZONING - 594 RIDEAU STREET AND 165 CHARLOTTE STREET
ZONAGE - 594, RUE RIDEAU ET 165, RUE CHARLOTTE
ACS2007-PTE-APR-0036
Deferred from 27 March 2007/Remis du 27 mars
2007 RIDEAU-VANIER (12)
Messrs Grant Lindsay, John Smit and Doug Bridgewater, Planner, appeared before the committee on this item. Mr. Bridgewater gave a detailed presentation on the proposed zoning amendment for this property at the southeast corner of Rideau Street and Charlotte Street. He advised there are currently one to two and one half storey mixed use buildings on this site, and that the proposal calls for a building with a maximum height of 24.5 metres (8 storeys), the additional two storeys with upper setbacks. Mr. Bridgewater also highlighted the fact that a "h" Holding provision is being established. It relates to storm sewer capacity being increased and approval of the site plan and architectural elevations prior to the zoning being approved. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation on this item is on file with the City Clerk.
The Ward Councillor, Georges Bédard, asked whether the proposed building represents a distinctive architectural concept or whether the Committee was being asked to approve zoning changes based on speculation. The Councillor also wanted to know whether there would be an increase in public space as part of this project. Mr. Bridgewater clarified that the holding provision will ensure the City is satisfied with all aspects of the plan before it approves the zoning. Commenting on the public space aspect, Mr. Lindsay indicated this could be explored as part of the site plan process. Councillor Bédard about how the massing and style of the proposed building would complement the surrounding buildings. Mr. Lindsay stated that, because of its location at the intersection of two prominent streets, and the fact that there is a mix of building types in the area, a six storey building with two additional storeys set back could be accommodated at this location
The following
individuals spoke in opposition to the proposal:
· Mr. Martin Laplante, a resident of Besserer Street;
· Mr. Peter Rinfret a resident of Besserer Street;
· Mr. Jon Legg a resident of Besserer Street;
· Mrs. Judy Rinfret a resident of Besserer Street
· Mrs. Margaret Mitchell a resident of Besserer Street
· Mr. Roland Blassnig, residing at Wallis House, Rideau Street.
The following
is a summary of the comments made by those opposing the application.
· The Community Design Plan (CDP) approved by Council calls for a maximum building height of 6 storeys;
· The value of the CDP process was questioned: it was felt the proposal makes a mockery of the Uptown Rideau Development Plan that took three years to complete;
· There is no way to accommodate the increased traffic this building will generate without traffic going through adjoining neighbourhood streets such as Besserer and Daly;
· A maquette of the proposed building was used to demonstrate that the density of the proposed building is approximately double that of a six-storey building;
· Concerns were expressed about the invasion of privacy on the second level decks of some of the houses on Besserer Street;
· The extra two floors will affect the sunlight on Besserer Street and on Wallis House, a property across the street on Rideau Street;
· With this proposal, staff are breaking faith with Council and with the population in Sandy Hill;
· The application is premature since the Architect has stated that the property would not be developed before 2012;
· The outcomes of the Light Rail Corridor study for the Rideau Street / Montreal Road Corridor are unknown;
· The building plans could change overnight;
· The traffic study was not adequate and the City should do another one;
· The possibility of access from Wurtemburg Street should be examined;
· The building design is not compatible with that of Wallis House.
Mr. Legg also
submitted a two hundred and twenty four (224) name petition in opposition to
the project. This document is held on
file with the City Clerk.
Appearing in support of the proposal were Mr. Richard Harrison, President of Development, Richcraft Homes, Mr. Alan Cohen, Solicitor, Mr. Rod Lahey, Architect and Mr. Ted Fobert, FoTenn Consultants.
Mr. Cohen clarified that the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments for the Uptown Rideau Development Plan were still before the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). He also stated that a traffic study was not needed since there must be one hundred units before this becomes a requirement. He posited that traffic problems would be minimal, in light of the fact that Council is encouraging the use of public transit in the Rideau Street/Montreal Road corridor. Mr. Cohen also pointed out that the holding designation was introduced as a means to control the site plan after the zoning amendment is approved.
Mr. Fobert pointed out that Official Plan policies permit increased heights where compatible at a gateway location or on a corner lot. Rideau Street is a Traditional Mainstreet and a transit priority corridor, both of which support approving the zoning amendment.
Mr. Fobert also highlighted intensification policies that call for as much growth as can be supported within the urban boundary to minimize growth where the infrastructure is not in place. He spoke about the traffic study being peer reviewed and no problems having been found. A full shadow study that was done illustrates that the difference in impact between a six and an eight-storey building is negligible: there will be no shadowing on Wallis House. With regard to the CDP, Mr. Fobert posited it had not engaged the entire community and not followed the rigour required for such studies.
In reply to a question from Councillor Doucet, Mr. Cohen said it was regrettable that the intensification process had become so adversarial and he found personal attacks on City staff disturbing. As to the Councillor's query about how to represent everyone's interests, Mr. Cohen pointed out that each CDP and OPA must be dealt with on its own merits and he stressed the importance of not being tied down for all time by the outcomes of those processes.
The following
correspondence, held on file with the City Clerk, and requesting that the
report recommendation be rejected, was circulated to the Committee:
· Letter dated April 16/07 from Matt and Catherine Armstrong, of 540 Besserer;
·
Letter dated April 19/07 from David Patchell and Heather Urrutia, residents at 531 Besserer Street;
· letter dated April 23 /07 from Stephen and Sandra Hartman, of 542 Besserer Street.
· e-mail dated April 23/07 from Paul Martineau of 543 Besserer Street;
· e-mail dated April 17/07 from Veronica Vaillancourt of 377 Daly Avenue.
Chair Hume then declared closed the public hearing portion of the debate.
Councillor Bédard put forward the view that approving the proposed application sends the message that the community design process is useless. He went on to say that the community had accepted and respected the decision taken at the time of the Uptown Rideau Development Plan process to limit the height of buildings to six storeys.. Councillor Bédard pointed out there are many CDP processes going on in his ward, and these demand public participation. He wondered how these would develop if the public is getting the message that the process is irrelevant. He asked that the Committee and Council be consistent in its decision-making.
Councillor Doucet stated that there were many aspects of the proposed building to be admired and he congratulated the Architect for his design. He said that, while he did not want to take a dogmatic position at all times, he wanted to be sensitive to the residents' concerns and to local conditions. The Councillor pointed out that intensification is happening in neighbourhoods such as Sandy Hill, Centretown and the Glebe that are already dense, and his perception was that residents of those areas want to see a human scale to intensification. For this reason, he felt he could not support the project.
Chair Peter Hume spoke about the fact that great cities such as Paris (France) have six storey buildings and he said the question was whether Council should adopt this principle or another one that achieves the best urban design. He stated that this application encapsulated this debate, and that this was something that would need to be discussed as part of the upcoming Official Plan review.
The Committee then considered the report recommendation. Councillor Doucet called for the vote to be recorded.
That the Planning and Environment Committee
recommend Council approve an amendment to the former City of Ottawa Zoning
By-law to change the Neighbourhood Linear Commercial CN7 F(2.0) zone applying
to 594 Rideau Street and 165 Charlotte Street as shown on Document 1, to a new
Neighbourhood linear Commercial CN11[xxx]H(24.5) -h zone establishing new
exception provisions, a new height limit and to establish a holding
designation, all as detailed in Document 2.
CARRIED
YEAS (6): M.
Bellemare, S. Desroches, J. Harder, G. Hunter, B. Monette, P. Hume
NAYS (3): C.
Doucet, P. Feltmate, S. Qadri