|
2.
ZONING - 240 WEST RIDGE DRIVE ZONAGE - 240, PROMENADE WEST RIDGE |
Committee recommendation
(This application is subject
to Bill 51
That Council approve an amendment to the former Township
of Goulbourn Zoning By-law to change the zoning of 240 West Ridge Drive from I
(Institutional Zone) to R4-X (Special Residential Type 4 Zone) as shown in Document 1 and as
detailed in Document 2.
Recommandation du Comité
(Cette demande est
assujettie au Règlement 51)
Que le Conseil municipal approuve
une modification au Règlement de zonage de l’ancien Canton de Goulbourn afin de
changer la désignation de zonage du 240, promenade West Ridge de I (zone
institutionnelle) à R4-X (zone résidentielle spéciale 4), tel qu’il est indiqué
dans le document 1 et expliqué en détail dans le document 2.
Documentation
1.
Deputy
City Manager's report Planning, Transit
and the Environment dated 13 September 2007 (ACS2007-PTE-APR-0159).
2.
Extract
of Draft Minutes, 9 October 2007.
Report to/Rapport au :
Planning and Environment Committee
Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement
and Council / et au Conseil
13 September 2007 / le 13 septembre 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 recommend Council approve an amendment to the former Township of Goulbourn Zoning By-law to change the zoning of 240 West Ridge Drive from I (Institutional Zone) to R4-X (Special Residential Type 4 Zone) as shown in Document 1 and 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’ancien Canton de Goulbourn afin de changer la désignation de zonage du 240,
promenade West Ridge de I (zone institutionnelle) à R4-X (zone résidentielle
spéciale 4), tel qu’il est indiqué dans le document 1 et expliqué en détail
dans le document 2.
BACKGROUND
The
site subject to this Zoning By-law amendment, 240 West Ridge Drive, is located
on the west side of West Ridge Drive, south of Abbott Street and the Poole
Creek corridor.
The
1.1-hectare site is currently undeveloped.
Although the site was once covered with some light vegetation, the site
recently has been cleared to perform grading for site development.
The
site is surrounded to the south by a City park, to the east by existing
low-density residential development, to the north by a City-owned woodlot and a
wetland, and to the west by a future residential subdivision.
A
Plan of Subdivision for the subject site and the surrounding lands was draft
approved by the Ontario Municipal Board in January 1999 and registered in
December 2000. The subject site was
requested to be designated for a school site by the Ottawa-Carleton Catholic
School Board and this was included as a condition of approval of the Plan of
Subdivision and zoned accordingly. The
School Board has seven years to exercise the option to purchase the site, at
which point the landowner would be free to pursue other development on the
lands. The School Board has provided a
letter indicating they no longer have plans for a school on this site, and
therefore are releasing their option on the lands.
Purpose of
Zoning Amendment
The purpose of this Zoning By-law amendment application is to change the zoning on the site to permit a mix of single-detached, semi-detached, and townhouse dwellings.
The existing zoning is I (Institutional Zone). This zone permits a range of institutional uses such as a school, retirement home, private club, place of worship, and a day nursery.
The proposed zoning is R4-X (Special Residential Type 4 Zone). This zone will permit semi-detached and street townhouse dwellings at a maximum density of 40 units per hectare. The special exception is intended to permit single-detached dwellings as an additional use, as well as to restrict townhouse dwellings from facing West Ridge Drive.
Concept Plan
A concept plan was submitted with the application to show the maximum development potential of the site based on the proposed R4-X zoning (Document 3). The applicant does not intend to develop the site at this time, and likewise, this concept plan is intended for discussion purposes. The initial concept plan showed 72 townhouse dwelling units on the site. After community concerns were identified at a public information session, the applicant provided a revised concept plan showing 63 dwelling units consisting of a mix of single-detached and townhouse dwellings. The proposed zoning has been revised to reflect the changes to the concept plan. A future plan of subdivision application will be required to create the development lots and a public street, as well as to consider specific site issues.
DISCUSSION
Planning
Act and Provincial Policy Statement
Section
2 of the Planning Act indicates that planning authorities shall have
regard to matters of provincial interest, which includes: the adequate
provision of a full range of housing; the appropriate location of growth and
development; and the promotion of development that is designed to be
sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians.
The provincial interest is outlined more specifically
in the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), and all planning decisions, including
rezonings, must be consistent with these policies. The PPS includes policies stating that settlement areas shall be
the focus of growth and their vitality and regeneration shall be promoted. In addition, land use patterns within
settlement areas shall be based on densities and a mix of land uses which
efficiently use land and resources, are appropriate for efficient use, a range
of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment. Furthermore, the PPS indicates that planning
authorities shall provide for an appropriate range of housing types and
densities to meet projected requirements of current and future residents.
The proposed Zoning By-law amendment represents
intensification within the urban settlement area, and is considered an
appropriate site because of its proximity to existing services. The proposed rezoning makes efficient use of
existing urban land and infrastructure.
The proposed rezoning provides a mix of housing types and densities. The site is supportive of public transit and
pedestrians, and the proposed rezoning allows development of the land that is
considered sustainable. As such, the
proposed Zoning By-law amendment is consistent with the policies in the
Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statement.
Official Plan
General Urban Area
The site is designated as General Urban Area on
Schedule “B” of the Official Plan. This
designation permits a full range and choice of housing types to meet the needs
of all ages, incomes and life circumstances, in combination with conveniently
located employment, retail, service, cultural, leisure,entertainment and
institutional uses.
According to Section 2.2.3 of the Official Plan, the
City supports intensification and infill throughout the urban area. The General Urban Area designation has
several criteria relating to residential intensification. It must: recognize the importance of new
development relating to existing community character so that it enhances and
builds upon desirable established patterns and built form; apply the
compatibility policies; consider its contribution to providing a balance of
housing types and tenures to provide a full range of housing; and assess
ground-oriented mulitple housing forms as one means of intensifying within
established low-rise residential communities.
Compatibility
The Official Plan requires that developments providing
infill and intensification be compatible with their surroundings. This means that the new development must fit
well with, and respect the pre-established character of the existing
community. This can include building
form, setbacks, height, proportions, distance between buildings, and building
location.
The subject site is surrounded to the east by existing
single-detached dwellings across West Ridge Drive, and to the west by
yet-to-be-constructed single-detached dwellings. This application proposes to permit single-detached,
semi-detached, and townhouse dwellings. Townhouses are considered to be
compatible with single-detached dwellings in that they have similar qualities
with respect to their building height, setbacks, form, massing, pattern, and
character.
The proposed zoning will restrict townhouse dwellings
from facing onto West Ridge Drive. West
Ridge Drive provides a transition between the existing single-detached
dwellings on the east side of the street, and the subject site on the west side
of the street. However, the community
expressed concern about the potential visual impact of townhouse dwellings if
they were to be permitted to face onto West Ridge Drive. The applicant agreed that townhouse
dwellings could be restricted from fronting onto West Ridge Drive to address
the community concerns.
In addition, restrictions have been added to the proposed
zoning requiring that single and semi-detached dwellings must face the
street. This is intended to facilitate
connection between the existing community and the future residential dwellings
on the subject site, which will achieve greater compatibility.
The proposed zoning provides for a range of densities
and types of housing, which will contribute to providing housing choices for
the surrounding community to meet a variety of needs. In addition, the proposed zoning is considered compatible with surrounding
uses and building forms. Thus, the
proposal is in conformity with the Official Plan.
Transportation
Schedule “E” of the Official Plan identifies West
Ridge Drive as a collector road. This
type of road is intended to serve neighbourhood travel to and from major
collector or arterial roads and provide direct access to lands adjacent to
it.
A
Transportation Brief was submitted with the application to address anticipated
concerns with changes to transportation patterns. It indicates that anticipated traffic from the proposed use would
be less than that expected to be generated by the currently permitted school
use. This study was reviewed by staff
and is acceptable to the City.
Servicing/Infrastructure
A
servicing study was submitted with the application to investigate if the
existing services in the area can accommodate the proposed development. This study was reviewed by staff and is
acceptable to the City.
Other
Issues
Other site-specific considerations such as access,
site layout, landscaping, and fencing will be address through a future Plan of
Subdivision and/or Site Plan Control application.
Summary
The proposed Zoning By-law amendment from I
(Institutional) to R4-X (Special Residential Type 4) provides compatible
intensification within the urban area.
The proposal makes use of existing services, and is supportive of
transit and pedestrian use. The
proposed zoning provides for a range of densities and types of housing, which
contributes to the variety of housing options in the City. Specific zoning provisions have been
included to address community concerns and to facilitate compatibility. In light of the above, the proposal is
consistent with Provincial policy, and conforms to the policies of the Official
Plan. Staff recommend approval of this
Zoning By‑law amendment.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS
The
site is adjacent to a City-owned open space, and near the Upper Poole Creek
wetland, which is a Provincially Significant Wetland. An Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS) was submitted and approved as part of the original
subdivision approval in 2000. The
impacts of potential site development were reviewed at that time, and resulted
in the creation of an open space “buffer” area between the site and the
neighbouring wetland. An addendum to
the EIS was provided as part of the current Zoning By-law amendment application
to reflect any changes since 2000, as well as to consider the uses proposed by
this Zoning By-law amendment application.
The addendum indicated that residential development is considered to
have less potential impact on the natural area than a school, and the
recommendations from the initial EIS still apply. Mitigation measures are suggested which would be implemented
during a future Plan of Subdivision and/or Site Plan Control application.
The
Mississippi Valley Conservation Authority has reviewed the EIS addendum and has
concurred with the findings and recommendations.
CONSULTATION
Notice of this application was carried out in accordance with the City's Public Notification and Consultation Policy. The Ward Councillor is aware of this application and the staff recommendation. Details of the consultation process can be seen in Document 3.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
APPLICATION PROCESS
TIMELINE STATUS
The application was not processed by the "On
Time Decision Date" established for the processing of Zoning By-law
amendments because of attempts to resolve issues with site design between the
community and the applicant.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 Location
Map
Document 2 Details
of Recommended Zoning
Document 3 Concept Plan
Document 4 Consultation Details
DISPOSITION
City Clerk’s Branch, Council and Committee
Services to notify the owner, Frank Argue, 6434 Flewellyn Road, Ottawa, ON K2S 1B6, applicant, Brian Casagrande, FoTenn Consultants, 223 McLeod
Street, Ottawa, ON K2P 4Y6, 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.
Legal Services Branch to forward the
implementing by-law to City Council.
LOCATION MAP DOCUMENT
1
DETAILS OF RECOMMENDED ZONING DOCUMENT
2
1. Schedule “A”, Map 2 of By-law Number 40-99 of the former Township of Goulbourn is amended changing the zoning of the lands known municipally as 240 West Ridge Drive, and shown on Document 1, from I (Institutional Zone) to R4-X (Special Residential Type 4 Zone).
2. Add a new special zone to subsection 8(3) of By-law Number 40-99 of the former Township of Goulbourn including the following permitted uses and zone provisions:
(i) Uses permitted:
RESIDENTIAL USES:
· DWELLING, SINGLE DETACHED
· DWELLING, SEMI-DETACHED
· DWELLING, STREET TOWNHOUSE
NON-RESIDENTIAL USES:
· None
(ii)
Zone Provisions:
(A) YARD, FRONT: (minimum) 4.5 metres
(B) YARD, EXTERIOR SIDE: (minimum) 4.5 metres
(C) For any DWELLING, SINGLE DETACHED, or DWELLING, SEMI-DETACHED that abuts West Ridge Drive, a YARD, FRONT, or YARD, EXTERIOR SIDE must abut West Ridge Drive, and a YARD, REAR shall not abut West Ridge Drive.
(D) For any DWELLING, STREET TOWNHOUSE that abuts West Ridge Drive, only a YARD, EXTERIOR SIDE may abut West Ridge Drive, and a YARD, FRONT or YARD, REAR shall not abut West Ridge Drive.
(E) For a DWELLING, SINGLE DETACHED, the following additional provisions apply:
i. LOT AREA: (minimum) 360 square metres
ii. LOT FRONTAGE: (minimum) 12 metres
iii. YARD, INTERIOR SIDE: (minimum) 1 metre
CONCEPT PLAN DOCUMENT
3
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. One public meeting was also held in the
community.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Approximately 23 members of the public submitted comments. The issues are summarized below along with staff responses.
Comment:
Only single-detached homes should be permitted because that is what the residents bought into. There were no plans for any townhouses when the original subdivision was created. Townhouses are too dense for this area.
Response:
It is recognized that communities can change over time in light of evolving circumstances, and the potential impacts of these changes are reviewed through the Zoning By-law amendment process. As a means of efficiently using existing services and infrastructure, the Official Plan considers all types and densities of housing as a means of infill, with particular attention to ground-oriented forms such as townhouses. The Discussion section of this report contains greater detail with respect to the compatibility of the proposed uses.
Comment:
If townhouses are going to be allowed, they should not be able to face West Ridge Drive, as the existing development in the area contains only single-detached homes facing West Ridge Drive.
Response:
The concept plan and proposed zoning have been revised to prohibit townhouses from fronting onto West Ridge Drive.
Comment:
A portion of the site should be dedicated as parkland and added to the adjacent park.
Response:
Parkland dedication was provided as part of the original subdivision approval. Any further needs for parkland dedication will be considered during a future subdivision application.
Comment:
There are safety concerns with having any driveways onto West Ridge Drive.
Response:
West Ridge Drive is a collector street and, as such, adjacent properties are permitted to have direct access to it. Any specific access safety concerns will be addressed through the future subdivision approval process.
PUBLIC MEETING COMMENTS
Approximately 30 members of the public attended the public meeting held on 22 May 2007 at the Pretty Street Community Centre. The issues are summarized below along with staff responses.
Comment:
The area could be used as a parking lot for the adjacent Trans-Canada Trailhead.
Response:
The City’s Parks and Recreation Branch considered a proposal for a parking lot for the Trans-Canada Trail on an adjacent site several years ago, however, this proposal was abandoned due to community concerns about traffic, crime, and safety.
Comment:
There are fears that there is not enough servicing capacity in the area for the amount of new homes proposed. Water pressure and Hydro capacity are of specific concern.
Response:
A servicing study was submitted with the application to examine if the existing infrastructure in the area can accommodate the proposed development. City staff has reviewed this study and have concurred with the findings that there is enough capacity to handle the proposed development. Hydro Ottawa was notified of the proposal and have not indicated any concerns. Detailed engineering and servicing information will be required during a future plan of subdivision application.
Comment:
The site has been cleared of trees in advance of approvals for this development.
Response:
This site as well as the surrounding areas are included within subdivisions that were previously approved by the City. As a result of grading issues, the site needs to be filled considerably before any site development can occur, which means that existing tree cover cannot be retained.
Comment:
The R1 (Residential Type 1) zone only allows single-detached dwellings. Residents bought into single-detached neighbourhood. Why is the R1 zone not appropriate for this site?
Response:
The application submitted by the applicant requests permission for single-detached, semi-detached, and townhouse dwellings. The Official Plan considers all types and densities of housing as a means of infill, with specific emphasis on ground-oriented forms, such as townhouses.
Comment:
The land should be kept as institutional so other schools or institutional uses can locate there.
Response:
Other school boards were approached at the time of the
original subdivision approval, and expressed no requirement for a site in the
area. Although the Official Plan does
not have policies which specifically seek to maintain institutionally zoned
land, each rezoning request must consider how a proposal acheives the intent of
the applicable Official Plan policies.
Comment:
Some of this land should be given to the City as a park because the school would have had recreational facilities for the community.
Response:
This concern has been addressed in the responses provided above.
Comment:
There are safety concerns from increased traffic and the presence of driveways on West Ridge Drive.
Response:
These concerns have been addressed in the responses provided above.
Comment:
Restrict townhouses from facing West Ridge Drive.
Response:
This concern has been addressed in the responses provided above.
COUNCILLOR’S COMMENTS
The Councillor’s office submitted comments prior to the public meeting. They are summarized below along with staff responses.
Comment:
Community
Compatibility
- With minor modification to the existing plan, the site could accommodate single-family homes that are more in keeping with the existing development.
- Residents bought homes in a single-family neighbourhood.
- Density of dwellings within the area will be a strain on existing infrastructure, such as schools and parks.
- The community has suggested that this land become an extension to the existing park.
Response:
These concerns have been addressed in the responses provided above.
Comment:
Insufficient
Parkland
- This proposal will result in a loss of parkland, as the school site would have provided playgrounds and sports field that could be used by the community.
- The Deer Run parks cannot accommodate the increased population this development would provide.
Response:
Although the proposed school, if developed, could have provided additional recreational facilities for the community, it would not be considered as “parkland”, and there would be no guarantee that the site would be available for public use. Parks and Recreation Branch indicated no concerns about the capacity of parkland in the community.
Comment:
Traffic & Parking
- Numbers of units will increase traffic on West Ridge and will cause increased parking concerns.
- Street parking for use of the park and the Trans Canada Trail and the OC Transpo bus stop makes this a very active and hazardous location at certain times of the day.
- The townhomes fronting onto West Ridge Drive will add to the traffic issues experienced.
Response:
These concerns have been addressed in the responses provided above.
Comment:
Property Values
- The construction of town homes is not at the same value of the current housing and will reduce property values and will result in financial impacts to the current homeowners.
- Property values would have benefited or retained current/future value if the zoning of the school project had remained as originally anticipated.
- Any amendment if accepted should only respect the
current zoning for residential construction already present within the
area.
Response:
Review of a Zoning By-law amendment application does not directly consider property values per se, however, impacts on the surrounding community that may in turn affect property values are considered. There is no evidence that a mix of unit types negatively impacts property values.
The remainder of these concerns have been addressed in the responses provided above.
Comment:
There is concern with water pressure and electricity capacity in Stittsville.
Response:
These concerns have been addressed in the responses provided above.
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION COMMENTS
Stittsville Village Association:
29 May 2007 Comments:
Although we understand the City of Ottawa’s intensification policies, there is also an obligation on the part of developers and planners to ensure that such developments are compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood in type, appearance, social impact, etc. In this particular case, we believe that to re-zone this property to allow for the construction of multiple dwellings (townhouses) in the middle of a developing subdivision of single-family homes is completely inappropriate. Although the proposed zoning of R4-X would supposedly allow for a “range” of dwellings to include singles and semi-detached dwellings as well as townhouses, there would be no control over which class of home a future builder may choose to construct. Consequently, we would urge that the rezoning be limited to an R1 designation in keeping with the existing Deer Run development.
In addition to the very legitimate concerns of residents who have moved into what everyone believed would be a fully single-home, large lot, development, a major issue is the traffic impact that a townhouse development would have on the community. Despite what planners and traffic engineers seem to believe, the size of a house does not necessarily relate to the numbers of cars attached to it, and 72 townhouse units as shown in the concept plan for this property could generate a large amount of traffic with the associated safety, noise, and parking problems. West Ridge Drive is becoming a major collector road and once completed and linked up with Stittsville Main Street it is likely to be a de facto western by-pass for north-south traffic wishing to avoid the congestion of Main Street. In that respect, and to avoid any anticipated safety issues, we would therefore suggest that the development on the property in question be restricted to a certain number of single homes in accordance with the appropriate zoning.
Accordingly, for the above reasons, we would ask that serious consideration be given to limiting the proposed re-zoning to an R1 designation.
14 July 2007 comments:
The SVA has reviewed the revised concept plan and
firmly believes that our original comments as put forward in our letter of May
29th still stand. The proposal to replace the townhouses fronting on
West Ridge Drive with eight single-family homes is not much of a compromise,
given that the townhouse proposal for that part of the property was probably a
non-starter in the first place. The reduction in the overall number of units
from 72 to 63 would provide only a marginal reduction in the traffic impact and
the associated safety problems.
We also must emphasize our objection to the practice of re-zoning property to allow for the construction of multiple dwellings in the middle of a developing subdivision of single-family homes. Planning for mixed housing should be designed into the original subdivision/site plans, but to change the rules halfway through the development of a community into which residents have moved expecting a fully single home, large lot development is neither fair nor appropriate.
For these reasons and those of May 29th, we again ask that the proposed zoning be restricted to an R1 designation.
Response:
These concerns have been addressed in the responses provided above.