12. COMPREHENSIVE ZONING BY-LAW 2008-250: ANOMALIES AND changes TO RESOLVE APPEALS (SEVENTH REPORT)

RÈGLEMENT GÉNÉRAL DE ZONAGE 2008-250 : ANOMALIES ET modifications POUR RÉGLER LES CAS EN APPEL (SEPTIÈME RAPPORT)

Committee recommendation

(This matter is subject to Bill 51)

That Council approve the amendments recommended in Column 3 of Document 1, to resolve appeals to Zoning By-law 2008-250.

Recommandation DU Comité

(Cette question est assujettie au Règlement 51)

Que le Conseil approuve les modifications recommandées dans la Colonne 3 du document 1 afin de régler les cas en appel au Règlement de zonage 2008-250.

Documentation

1. Deputy City Manager’s report, Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability dated 11 August 2009 (ACS2009-ICS-PGM-0124).

Report to/Rapport au :

Planning and Environment Committee

Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement

and Council / et au Conseil

11 August 2009 / le 11 aout 2009

Submitted by/Soumis par : Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager

Directrice municipale adjointe

Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability

Services d’infrastructure et Viabilité des collectivités

Contact Person/Personne-ressource : Richard Kilstrom, Manager/Gestionnaire, Policy Development and Urban Design/Élaboration de la politique et conception urbaine, Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance

(613) 580-2424 x 22653, Richard.Kilstrom@ottawa.ca

City Wide/à l'échelle de la Ville

Ref N°: ACS2009-ICS-PGM-0124

SUBJECT:	COMPREHENSIVE ZONING BY-LAW 2008-250: ANOMALIES AND changes TO RESOLVE APPEALS (SEVENTH REPORT)

OBJET :	RÈGLEMENT GÉNÉRAL DE ZONAGE 2008-250 : ANOMALIES ET modifications POUR RÉGLER LES CAS EN APPEL (SEPTIÈME RAPPORT)

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

That Planning and Environment Committee recommend that Council approve the amendments recommended in Column 3 of Document 1, to resolve appeals to Zoning By-law 2008-250.

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’environnement recommande au Conseil d’approuver les modifications recommandées dans la Colonne 3 du document 1 afin de régler les cas en appel au Règlement de zonage 2008-250.

BACKGROUND

On June 25, 2008 City Council adopted the new Comprehensive Zoning By-law 2008-250 which affects all properties within Ottawa. By-law 2008-250 replaces the 36 Zoning By-laws of the former municipalities that were amalgamated in 2001. Since the adoption of the Zoning By-law, staff has been identifying anomalies that require correction, and reports to correct the anomalies are being forwarded to Committee and Council on a regular basis. This report details recommended amendments to correct a number of the identified anomalies.

DISCUSSION

The four anomalies and one change that are the subject of this report are associated with appeals to the Comprehensive Zoning By-law and were identified through that appeals process. These changes will result in the resolution of a number of appeals to the Comprehensive Zoning By-law 2008-250, in anticipation of the pre-hearing before the Ontario Municipal Board scheduled for September 4, 2009. Document 1 provides staff recommendations to Planning and Environment Committee on the anomalies, and includes details of the recommended amendments in Column 3 of Document 1. Document 2 contains the maps showing the location of zoning map corrections.

The amendments are primarily intended to correct mapping and text reference errors in the implementation of Council-approved changes that were not accurately reflected in the Comprehensive Zoning By-law.

CONSULTATION

Notice of the public meeting to deal with these anomalies and changes was provided in The Citizen and Le Droit, with a listing of the addresses and provisions subject to correction. As well, interested parties have been notified by individual mail.

LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

The changes addressed this report are items of a routine nature. There are no Legal/Risk Management implications.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

N/A

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 List of Anomalies and Modifications to Zoning By-law 2008-250 for consideration by Planning and Environment Committee

Document 2 Location Maps

DISPOSITION

Planning and Growth Management Department to prepare the implementing by-law and forward it to Legal Services who will then forward the by-law to City Council.

LIST OF CHANGES TO ZONING BY-LAW 2008-250 FOR CONSIDER-

ATION BY PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE DOCUMENT 1

Item No.	Objective of Amendment	Proposed Amendment
1. 8181 Campeau Drive (Canadian Tire Real Estate Ltd.) Appeal #63 Ward 4	The new zoning (IL7[410]-h) does not accurately reflect the former Kanata zoning for the existing Canadian Tire store. The restrictions on retail uses in the IL7 Zone should not apply to this use.	-Rezone the subject lands from IL7[410]-h to IL7[410] as shown on Document 2. -Amend Column IV of Exception [410] by deleting the "-h". -Amend Column V of Exception [410] to revise the last provision to delete the words "for retail store" -Amend Column V of Exception [410] by inserting the following text immediately before the words "-minimum front yard setback": 1. For the purposes of this exception, retail store is as defined in clause 204(7)(a) and also includes the sale of automobile parts and accessories 2. Clauses 203 (2)(a), (b) and (c) and subsection 203(4) do not apply to the uses permitted in section 203(2). 3. Clause 204(7)(d)(i) does not apply 4. For the purposes of clauses 204 (7)(j) and (k), retail store is as outlined in subclause 204(7)(d)(ii)
2. 34 Edgewater Street 16867912 Ontario Inc. (RJ Motors) Appeal #57 Ward 23	This site was subject to a recent site specific zoning amendment (By-law 2008-18) which expanded the range of permitted automotive related uses, and no no size limits.The new IG2[1539] zoning of the site has carried over the new uses, however the general provisions in the industrial zones which limits the size of ancillary commercial uses to 300m² applies. The existing building is 610m² in size which should be recognized given the intent of By-law 2008-18 was to allow an ancillary use of that size.	Amend Column V of Exception [1539] to state that “uses listed in Column III, Additional Land Uses Permitted are limited to a maximum gross floor area of 610m²”
3. Section 110 (College Square Properties Inc. and The TDL Group Corp.) Appeals #36 and 54 City wide	Clarify what constitutes the “full perimeter of the parking lot” so that the amount of parking lot landscaping required can be more easily and accurately determined.	Section 54, Definitions, “Parking Lot” be amended to add the words “which includes the parking spaces, aisles and driveways but excludes the interior landscaped islands and medians, the perimeter landscaped buffer to a lot line or building,” after the words “four or more motor vehicles,”. Section 54, Definitions, “Landscape Buffer” be amended to insert the words :inside and” immediately following the word “located”. Section 110(1)(a) be amended to state as follows “a landscaped buffer must be provided between the perimeter of the parking lot and a lot line in accordance with Table 110. A driveway may cross the landscaped buffer, and” Section 110(1)(b) be amended to replace the words “in the form of” with the words “including various”. Table 110 be amended to replace the word “in” to “of” in the title of the table.
4. 499 Terry Fox Drive (Signature Centre Ltd.) Appeal #19 Ward 4	A zoning by-law amendment enacted in 2004 inadverdantly resulted in some uses on this property becoming legal non-conforming. By-law 2008-250 carried these errors through in the new zoning for the property.	Amend Column IV, Land Uses Prohibited, of Exception [221] by deleting, - restaurant, full service - restaurant, take out Amend Column IV, Land Uses Prohibited, of Exception [221] by adding the following uses to the list of land uses that follows the words, “all uses except”, -convenience store -drive-through facility -instructional facility -restaurant -service and repair shop -small batch brewery The resulting list of land uses should continue to be in alphabetical order. As Column IV, Land Uses Prohibited, states that all uses are prohibited except for those uses listed, adding the above uses will have the effect of permitting them.

Item No.

Objective of Amendment

Proposed Amendment

1. 8181 Campeau Drive

(Canadian Tire Real Estate Ltd.) Appeal #63

Ward 4

The new zoning (IL7[410]-h) does not accurately reflect the former Kanata zoning for the existing Canadian Tire store. The restrictions on retail uses in the IL7 Zone should not apply to this use.

-Rezone the subject lands from IL7[410]-h to IL7[410] as shown on Document 2.

-Amend Column IV of Exception [410] by deleting the "-h".

-Amend Column V of Exception [410] to revise the last provision to delete the words "for retail store"

-Amend Column V of Exception [410] by inserting the following text immediately before the words "-minimum front yard setback":

1. For the purposes of this exception, retail store is as defined in clause 204(7)(a) and also includes the sale of automobile parts and accessories

2. Clauses 203 (2)(a), (b) and (c) and subsection 203(4) do not apply to the uses permitted in section 203(2).

3. Clause 204(7)(d)(i) does not apply

4. For the purposes of clauses 204 (7)(j) and (k), retail store is as outlined in subclause 204(7)(d)(ii)

2. 34 Edgewater Street

16867912 Ontario Inc. (RJ Motors) Appeal #57

Ward 23

This site was subject to a recent site specific zoning amendment (By-law 2008-18) which expanded the range of permitted automotive related uses, and no no size limits.The new IG2[1539] zoning of the site has carried over the new uses, however the general provisions in the industrial zones which limits the size of ancillary commercial uses to 300m² applies. The existing building is 610m² in size which should be recognized given the intent of By-law 2008-18 was to allow an ancillary use of that size.

Amend Column V of Exception [1539] to state that “uses listed in Column III, Additional Land Uses Permitted are limited to a maximum gross floor area of 610m²”

3. Section 110 (College Square Properties Inc. and The TDL Group Corp.) Appeals #36 and 54

City wide

Clarify what constitutes the “full perimeter of the parking lot” so that the amount of parking lot landscaping required can be more easily and accurately determined.

Section 54, Definitions, “Parking Lot” be amended to add the words “which includes the parking spaces, aisles and driveways but excludes the interior landscaped islands and medians, the perimeter landscaped buffer to a lot line or building,” after the words “four or more motor vehicles,”.

Section 54, Definitions, “Landscape Buffer” be amended to insert the words :inside and” immediately following the word “located”.

Section 110(1)(a) be amended to state as follows “a landscaped buffer must be provided between the perimeter of the parking lot and a lot line in accordance with Table 110. A driveway may cross the landscaped buffer, and”

Section 110(1)(b) be amended to replace the words “in the form of” with the words “including various”.

Table 110 be amended to replace the word “in” to “of” in the title of the table.

4. 499 Terry Fox Drive

(Signature Centre Ltd.) Appeal #19

Ward 4

A zoning by-law amendment enacted in 2004 inadverdantly resulted in some uses on this property becoming legal non-conforming. By-law 2008-250 carried these errors through in the new zoning for the property.

Amend Column IV, Land Uses Prohibited, of Exception [221] by deleting,

- restaurant, full service
- restaurant, take out

Amend Column IV, Land Uses Prohibited, of Exception [221] by adding the following uses to the list of land uses that follows the words, “all uses except”,

-convenience store

-drive-through facility

-instructional facility

-restaurant

-service and repair shop

-small batch brewery

The resulting list of land uses should continue to be in alphabetical order.

As Column IV, Land Uses Prohibited, states that all uses are prohibited except for those uses listed, adding the above uses will have the effect of permitting them.

5. 915 and 940 Klondike Road

(Kanata Research Park and HB&GB Investments Ltd.)

Appeals #2, 67 and 76

Ward 4

In 2000, the affected lands were redesignated from rural to the urban designations of Business Park (former Regional Municipality Official Plan) and Industrial (former City of Kanata Official Plan).

The City of Ottawa Official Plan carried forward the land use intent by designating the lands to Enterprise Area.

The zoning for the lands, however, was never changed in former Kanata, and was zoned ER –Estate Residential. The Zoning By-law 2008-250 zoned the sites DR-Development Reserve, because the corresponding former Estate Residential zone is intended for the rural area and these lands are in the urban area. Furthermore the DR zone implies that the lands will eventually develop.. The DR zoning was appealed.

Because of the Enterprise Area designation, it is recommended that the lands be zoned IP8 – Business Park Industrial Zone, to reflect the longstanding land use intent for the affected lands and to apply a consistent zoning in accordance with abutting lands zoned IP8.

Two different exception zones will detail the conditions under which the holding zone symbolized by the –h suffix, will be removed. In the case of 915 Klondike Road, the existence of the Council-approved Urban Natural Feature #4 - Klondike Woods requires that an Environmental Impact Statement be completed to determine the environment value of the site.

Affecting both 915 and 940 Klondike Road, would be a requirement that the holding zone may only be removed following public consultation during the site plan control application process

Amend the Zoning Map for 915 and 940 Klondike Road to rezone both of the lands from DR to IP8[xxx]H(15)-h and from DR to IP8[xxx]H(15)-h as shown on Document 2.

Create two new exceptions in Section 239. In the case of 940 Klondike Road, the exception, Column V should read:

“ the holding zone may only be removed following public consultation during the site plan control application process for the first proposal for the lands.”

In the case of 915 Klondike Road, the exception, Column V, should read:

“the holding zone may only be removed following:

i) public consultation during the site plan control application process for the first proposal for the lands; and

ii) submission of an Environmental Impact Statement to determine the environmental value of the site, applying the Urban Natural Areas of Environment Evaluaation Study evaluation criteria at the time of development review.”

Add the reference to the applicable zones in Column II of each of the two exception zones.

Report to/Rapport au :

SUBJECT:

OBJET :

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

BACKGROUND

DISCUSSION

CONSULTATION

LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

DISPOSITION