2. ZONING - PART OF 123 HUNTMAR DRIVE

ZONAGE - PARTIE DU 123, PROMENADE HUNTMAR

Committee recommendation

(This matter is subject to Bill 51)

That Council approve an amendment to the Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning provisions of the Residential Third Density YY urban exception 1455 (R3YY[1455]) in effect over part of 123 Huntmar Drive, as shown on Document 1 and detailed in Document 2.

Recommandation DU Comité

Que le Conseil approuve une modification au Règlement de zonage 2008-250 afin de changer les dispositions de zonage de La Zone résidentielle de densité 3 YY avec l’exception urbaine 1455 (R3YY[1455]) en vigueur sur une partie du 123, promenade Huntmar, comme il est indiqué dans le Document 1 et expliqué en détail dans le Document 2.

Documentation

1. Deputy City Manager's report, Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability, dated 18 December 2009 (ACS2010-ICS-PGM-0006).

2. Extract of Draft Minutes, 12 January 2010.

Report to/Rapport au :

Planning and Environment Committee

Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement

and Council / et au Conseil

18 December 2009 / le 18 décembre 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 : Michael Wildman, Manager/Gestionnaire, Development Review-Suburban Services/Examen des projets d'aménagement-Services suburbains, Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance

(613) 580-2424, 27811 Mike.Wildman@ottawa.ca

Stittsville - Kanata West ( 6 )

Ref N°: ACS2010-ICS-PGM-0006

SUBJECT:	ZONING - Part of 123 Huntmar Drive (FILE NO. D02-02-09-0071)

OBJET :	ZONAGE - Partie Du 123, Promenade Huntmar

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning provisions of the Residential Third Density YY urban exception 1455 (R3YY[1455]) in effect over part of 123 Huntmar Drive, as shown on Document 1 and detailed in Document 2.

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’environment recommande au Conseil d’approuver une modification au Règlement de zonage 2008-250 afin de changer les dispositions de zonage de La Zone résidentielle de densité 3 YY avec l’exception urbaine 1455 (R3YY[1455]) en vigueur sur une partie du 123, promenade Huntmar, comme il est indiqué dans le Document 1 et expliqué en détail dans le Document 2.

BACKGROUND

The subject lands make up parts of 123 Huntmar Drive within the Stittsville-Kanata West Community, south of Highway 417, along Huntmar Road. The area is located northwest of the intersection of Maple Grove Road and Huntmar Road in the Fairwinds North development (see Document 1 for location). A residential dwelling and rural commercial office are located adjacent to the south side of the site along Maple Grove Road.

The lands are currently undeveloped, with the exception of a rural commercial office currently used by the owner. The lands are also subject to a draft-approved plan of subdivision consisting of residential blocks intended for the construction of street townhomes, semi-detached townhomes, street townhomes located on a rear-lane, and back-to-back dwellings. The first phase of the subdivision, adjacent to the area affected by this zoning amendment, has been constructed and is currently occupied. Also, a portion of the subject lands, Phase 2A of the subdivision, is currently subject to site plan approval application (D07-12-09-0081).

This zoning amendment is reflective of a series of minor variances that were granted for Phase 1 of the subdivision. However, the Committee of Adjustment granted approval requesting that future requests for similar variances from zoning requirements be made through a zoning amendment for the remaining phases of the subdivision. Respecting that request, the applicant has submitted a zoning amendment rather than seeking a series of minor variances. The minor variances recognized that where a parking reduction is provided for those smaller rear-lane townhomes not fronting onto a park or arterial road, there will be on-street parking available. Also, there will be two functional spaces provided within the garages and driveways of all other units.

In the former Township of Goulbourn Zoning By-law, a second parking space within the driveway was permitted to encroach into the road allowance. The first phase of this development was subject to that Goulbourn zoning standard. Consequently, the applicant is seeking to change this provision as the current Comprehensive Zoning By-law, now in effect, does not allow the second required parking space to encroach into the road allowance.

Purpose of the Zoning Amendment

The proposed amendment has three main purposes:

a) to permit a smaller rear-lane townhome product with a minimum lot frontage of 4.4 metres whereas the by-law requires 5.5 metres, and lot area of 81 square metres whereas the by-law requires 110 square metres;

b) to change the parking requirements to permit at least one space per dwelling unit for these smaller townhome units (described above) that do not front onto a park or arterial road; and,

c) to change the parking requirements to permit at least one space per dwelling unit to accommodate future phases within this townhome development, except for rear-lane townhouses fronting onto a park and arterial road – where the requirement would remain as two parking spaces in a rear-lane garage.

DISCUSSION

Official Plan

The lands are designed as Mixed Use-Town Centre and General Urban Area shown on Schedule “B” of the Official Plan. The General Urban Area and Mixed Use Town Centre designations are generally characterised by a broad variety of uses including a range of housing densities, employment, retail uses, services, industrial, cultural leisure, greenspace, entertainment and institutional uses.

Zoning

The site is zoned as a Residential Third Density Exception Zone (R3YY[1455]). The R3YY[1455] zone permits the construction of street townhomes, semi-detached townhomes, street townhomes located on a rear-lane, and back-to-back dwellings, at a minimum density of 29 units per net hectare. For rear-lane townhouses a minimum lot area of 110 square metres and a minimum lot width of 5.5 metres is required.

Table 101(a)(iii) of the Comprehensive Zoning By-law outlines that the minimum number of parking spaces in the R3 zone for Ward 6 on Schedule 5 (Stittsville-Kanata West) is two parking spaces.

Rationale for Recommended Approval of Zoning Changes

Rear-lane Townhouse Units

The applicant is seeking to provide a townhouse product with a reduced lot width and area. The applicant estimated that only about 13 units of this size would be provided in the future phases of the Fairwinds North Subdivision. The exact same size, area and parking reduction for this product has been developed in the previous phase of development through the granting of minor variances by the Committee of Adjustment.

The proposed smaller rear-lane townhouse units will provide a greater range and choice of housing types within the proposed development. The reduced lot width and reduced lot area will be applied to a limited number of units providing for a variation in the townhouse blocks. Additionally, the reduced unit’s width and area will not be noticeable from the street.

Parking

Generally, the standards for parking are regulated though the Ottawa Traffic and Parking By-law (2003-530) passed under the Municipal Act. The Planning Act does not grant authority to regulate areas within the road allowance through zoning. More specifically, section 34(1)(1) of the Planning Act states:

“Zoning by-laws may be passed by the councils of local municipalities:

Restricting use of land

1. For prohibiting the use of land, for or except for such purposes as may be set out in the by-law within the municipality or within any defined area or areas or abutting on any defined highway or part of a highway.” (Ontario Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990).” [emphasis added]

The Planning Act does provide a specific definition of a “highway”. However, a definition is provided under two other Acts: The Highway Traffic Act and the Municipal Act.

The Highway Traffic Act defines a highway as follows:

““highway” includes a common and public highway, street, avenue, parkway, driveway, square, place, bridge, viaduct or trestle, any part of which is intended for or used by the general public for the passage of vehicles and includes the area between the lateral property lines thereof; (“voie publique”)”

The above definition is also reflected in the City of Ottawa Traffic and Parking By-law. As well, the Municipal Act defines a highway as follows:

“highway” means a common and public highway and includes any bridge, trestle, viaduct or other structure forming part of the highway and, except as otherwise provided, includes a portion of a highway; (“voie publique”)”

Section 26(5) of the Municipal Act further clarifies that all road allowances, highways, streets and lanes shown on a registered plan of subdivision are considered to be highways. Further Section 27(1) of the Act grants powers to a municipality to pass by-laws in respect of a highway within its jurisdiction. Therefore, municipal highways are regulated through By-laws passed under the Municipal Act, not through Zoning By-laws under the Planning Act. The use and development of the street right-of-way itself is not regulated via zoning. Rather, zoning applies to lots or parcels of land adjacent to highways, and roads/highways are neither lots nor parcels of land. As such, the overriding authority rests with the Traffic and Parking By-law, pursuant to the Municipal Act, to set certain parking standards that would have the affect of protecting the highway and traffic, which may be passed under the Municipal Act with regard to road allowances.

Through the Traffic and Parking By-law, the City of Ottawa prohibits parking within 1.5 metres of the roadway and 0.5 metres of the sidewalk. The Comprehensive Zoning By-law establishes parking standards to be applied on affected lands, or "on-site" parking; but it may not establish "on-street parking rates", nor can it be required in a zoning by-law that some or all of the parking spaces may be located on the street - the amount of parking spaces required, and the location and size of those spaces must be met on-site, or the minor variance or cash-in-lieu of parking processes would be required. In the Comprehensive Zoning By-law, the Stittsville/Kanata West area has a requirement for two parking spaces per dwelling unit. While the first parking space is provided within the garage, the current minimum setbacks of 3.5 metres for an attached garage in the R3YY[1455] zone require that the second parking space encroach into the road allowance - reflecting the previous Goulbourn Zoning By-law. This permission was not carried forward into the Comprehensive Zoning By-law as it was outside of the jurisdiction of the Zoning By-law to do so, as described above.

While the applicant has requested a change to the two-parking space requirement, there will be functional room in the driveway for a second space, but regulated through the zoning setbacks and the Traffic and Parking By-law, rather than through zoning permissions to permit the space to extend into the road allowance. This meets with the intent of the site-specific requirement for two parking spaces for the Stittsville/Kanata West area.

A sidewalk is required on at least one side of the street within this subdivision. The R3YY[1455] zone requires a 6.0-metre front yard setback from a sidewalk to the garage. Given that the minimum parking space requirement of the Comprehensive Zoning By-law for this area is 5.5 metres by 2.7 metres, a second parking space of 6.0 metres in depth will be accommodated in the driveway. Therefore, units with a sidewalk across the front of the property will be unaffected by this amendment.

For detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings and multiple attached dwellings (i.e. townhouses) without a sidewalk across the front of the property, the current zoning requires a minimum front yard setback of 3.5 metres to an attached garage. Therefore, the driveway will be 3.5 metres from the road allowance. Given that a typical boulevard is approximately 4.0 metres within the 16.5-metre right-of-way for this subdivision, there is a total distance of 7.5 metres from the garage door to the street edge. As noted above, the Traffic and Parking By‑law prohibits parking within 1.5 metres of the street edge. However, that still leaves 2.5 metres of driveway within the public road boulevard, resulting in a 6.0-metre space in which to park a vehicle, which meets with the Traffic and Parking By-law standards. Therefore, units adjacent to a road without a side-walk across the front of the property can be accommodated by this amendment in terms of functional parking.

All units, except for those with a lot width of 4.4 metres, will functionally be unaffected by this amendment, having two spaces meeting all parking standards to accommodate a second vehicle. All rear lane units wider than 4.4 metres will have two spaces in the garage, and units with garages fronting onto a street will have at least one space in the garage and a second parking space within the driveway encroaching into the road allowance, as was permitted in the previous Goulbourn Zoning By-law. Also, for rear-lane townhouses not fronting onto a park or main arterial, on-street parking will be available along the public road in front of the property, as is the case in Phase 1 of the subdivision.

Conclusion

These smaller rear-lane townhouse units will carry forward an identical product already existing in the city, offer more flexibility to a purchaser and bring a more affordable product into the market. As such, staff support the reduction in the minimum lot size as it meets with the Official Plan policies and the general intent of the Comprehensive Zoning By-law provisions within this townhouse development.

Additionally, reducing the parking standard from two spaces to one space for this area, while maintaining the required setbacks in the zoning, still achieves the intent of the City’s parking standards for Stittsville by maintaining two functional parking spaces. Moreover, it will resolve the conflict between the parking provisions in the Stittsville-Kanata West area and the minimum required setbacks in the Comprehensive Zoning By-law for the Fairwinds North subdivision.

Based on the above, the Department has no objection the changes as proposed to the R3YY[1455] zone in the Comprehensive Zoning By-law.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

N/A

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

N/A

CONSULTATION

Notice of this application was carried out in accordance with the City's Public Notification and Consultation Policy. The City received two comments from members of the public regarding the limited parking within the subdivision pertaining to this application, as detailed in Document 3.

COMMENTS BY THE WARD COUNCILLOR(S)

A summary of the Councillor’s comments are provided in Document 3.

LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

There are no legal/risk management implications associated with this report.

CITY STRATEGIC PLAN

This Zoning By-law Amendment fulfills the following City Strategic Plan objective:

F1 Become a leading edge in community and urban design including housing creation for those living on low incomes and residents at large.

TECHNICAL IMPLICATIONS

N/A

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

N/A

APPLICATION PROCESS TIMELINE STATUS

The application was not processed by the "On Time Decision Date" established for the processing of Zoning By-law amendments due to the thorough internal review and consideration necessary to address concerns with regard to parking standards.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 Location Map

Document 2 Details of Recommended Zoning

Document 3 Consultation Details

DISPOSITION

City Clerk and Solicitor Department, Legislative Services to notify the owner, applicant, 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 and Growth Management to prepare the implementing by-law, forward to Legal Services and undertake the statutory notification.

Legal Services to forward the implementing by-law to City Council.

LOCATION MAP DOCUMENT 1

DETAILS OF RECOMMENDED ZONING DOCUMENT 2

Proposed Changes to the Comprehensive Zoning By-law

Part of 123 Huntmar Drive

Amend the Exception Zone R3YY[1455] to:

set a minimum lot width of 4.4 metres and lot area of 81 square metres for multiple attached dwellings on a rear-lane;
establish a parking standard of one space per dwelling unit except for multiple attached dwellings on a rear-lane where the lot abuts a public park or arterial road then the standard will be 2 spaces.

CONSULTATION DETAILS DOCUMENT 3

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. No public meetings were held in the community regarding this application.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

In total six public comment sheets were received: Three residents provided comments regarding the zoning application, while four residents indicated they wish to be notified of a public meeting and/or decision.

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INPUT

The public comments provided are represented and addressed below:

Comment:

“My main concern is parking for home owners and visitors. On Par-la-Ville Circle we have a person who often parks on the sidewalk. Mattamy does not have visitor parking - we need this. In the morning it is difficult to back out of driveways because of all the cars parked on the St. A number of townhomes are rented to a few people that all have a car. I moved from 2^nd Ave. Ottawa because of parking and now I have the same issue. No place for friends to park when they visit.”

Response:

This amendment will not significantly affect the parking situation as it seeks to maintain the standard that is already in place. As noted in the Discussion, limited on-street parking is also available. All other concerns pertain to violations to the Traffic and Parking By-law and are more appropriately addressed by the municipal parking authorities.

Comment:

“We already notice that street parking is at a premium in the existing development because of the high density. Where will visitors park? Maybe visitor parking is needed within this development if more houses are to be built on the same small pieces of land.”

Response:

This amendment seeks to maintain the standard that is currently in place. A limited amount of on-street parking is also available. The suggestion of providing visitor parking will be considered in the review of the future phases of this development.

Comment:

“We have absolutely no problems with this proposal. As new home owners ourselves, we certainly appreciated relaxed parking restrictions while moving in and in terms of the Zoning By-law Amendment - it does not affect us one way or the other.”

Response:

The existing parking restrictions are being maintained, but will be implemented through the appropriate legislative framework and by-laws.

COUNCILLOR’S COMMENTS

The Councillor indicated his support in principle for the amendment. As well, he indicated his support in that the zoning setbacks will ensure for a functional second parking space for the majority of the development, maintaining the existing standard and ensuring conformity with the Comprehensive Zoning By-law.

Concerns were raised with regard to illegal parking between rear-lane townhomes and on-street parking during winter months. The Councillor has suggested that a number of conditions be considered to deal with these items through the development planning process and that these be clearly outlined to future purchasers.

The Councillor noted that the amount of units would be maintained within the development and that any changes to the number of units would be subject to a new development approval. He further identified that the plan and size of each block limits the ability of the developer to institute changes.

The Councillor commented that there have been concerns expressed by the community regarding the difficulties with parking in the area. He outlined that while recognizing the need to develop smarter communities with a greater reliance on public transit, there is still need to ensure that the communities being built today, for the future, can sustain current lifestyle demands.