|
|
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS
That Council:
1. Approve the application for new construction on the vacant lot at 340 McLeod Street, in accordance with the plans submitted by Natalie Hughes, FoTenn Consultants Inc. received on March 31, 2010 and reactivated on August 12, 2010.
2. Issue the Heritage Permit with a two-year expiry date from the date of issuance.
3. Delegate authority for minor design changes to the General Manager of the Planning and Growth Management Department.
(Note: Approval to Alter this property under the Ontario Heritage Act must not be construed to meet the requirements for the issuance of a building permit.)
(Note: The statutory 90-day timeline for consideration of this application under the Ontario Heritage Act was extended with the agreement of the City and applicant until October 31, 2010)
RECOMMANDATIONS DU COMITÉ
Que le Conseil :
1. approuve la demande de construction d’une nouvelle structure sur le lot vacant sis au 340, rue McLeod, en conformité avec les plans soumis par Natalie Hughes de FoTenn Consultants Inc., reçus le 31 mars 2010 et réactivés le 12 août 2010.
2. émette un permis de construction en zone patrimoniale valide pour deux ans à partir de la date d’émission.
3. délègue au directeur général du Service de l'urbanisme et de la gestion de la croissance l’autorité nécessaire pour approuver tout changement mineur au design de l’ouvrage.
(Nota : Le délai réglementaire de 90 jours d’examen de cette demande, exigé en vertu de la Loi sur le patrimoine de l’Ontario, prendra fin le 31 octobre 2010.)
Nota : L’approbation de la demande de modification aux termes de la Loi sur le patrimoine de l’Ontario ne signifie pas pour autant qu’elle satisfait aux conditions de délivrance d’un permis de construction.
Documentation
1. Deputy City Manager's report Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability dated 19 August 2010 (ACS2010-ICS-PGM-0165).
2. OBHAC Extract of Draft Minutes of 16 September 2010
3. PEC extract of draft Minutes of 4 October 2010
Report to/Rapport au :
Ottawa Built Heritage Advisory Committee
Comité consultatif sur le patrimoine bâti d’Ottawa
and / et
Planning and Environment Committee
Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement
and Council / et au Conseil
19 August 2010/ le 19 aout 2010
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, Acting Manager/Gestionnaire intérimaire, Development Review-Urban Services/Examen des projets d'aménagement-Services urbains, Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance
(613) 580-2424, 22379 Richard.Kilstrom@ottawa.ca
REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Ottawa Built Heritage Advisory Committee recommend that Planning and Environment Committee recommend that Council:
1. Approve the application for new construction on the vacant lot at 340 McLeod Street, in accordance with the plans submitted by Natalie Hughes, FoTenn Consultants Inc. received on March 31, 2010 and reactivated on August 12, 2010.
2. Issue the Heritage Permit with a two-year expiry date from the date of issuance.
3. Delegate authority for minor design changes to the General Manager of the Planning and Growth Management Department.
(Note: Approval to Alter this property under the Ontario Heritage Act must not be construed to meet the requirements for the issuance of a building permit.)
(Note: The statutory 90-day timeline for consideration of this application under the Ontario Heritage Act was extended with the agreement of the City and applicant until October 31, 2010)
RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité consultatif sur le patrimoine bâti d’Ottawa recommande au Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’environnement de recommander à son tour au Conseil :
1. D’approuver la demande de construction d’une nouvelle structure sur le lot vacant sis au 340, rue McLeod, en conformité avec les plans soumis par Natalie Hughes de FoTenn Consultants Inc., reçus le 31 mars 2010 et réactivés le 12 août 2010.
2. D’émettre un permis de construction en zone patrimoniale valide pour deux ans à partir de la date d’émission.
3. De déléguer au directeur général du Service de l'urbanisme et de la gestion de la croissance l’autorité nécessaire pour approuver tout changement mineur au design de l’ouvrage.
(Nota : Le délai réglementaire de 90 jours d’examen de cette demande, exigé en vertu de la Loi sur le patrimoine de l’Ontario, prendra fin le 31 octobre 2010.)
Nota : L’approbation de la demande de modification aux termes de la Loi sur le patrimoine de l’Ontario ne signifie pas pour autant qu’elle satisfait aux conditions de délivrance d’un permis de construir
BACKGROUND
This report has been prepared because the Ontario Heritage Act requires that City Council approve all new construction on vacant lots in a heritage conservation district. An application has been received for a new nine-storey condominium apartment building with retail at grade on the vacant lands at 340 McLeod Street, corner of Bank and McLeod Streets that have served as a surface parking lot since 1964. The subject property is located in the Centretown Heritage Conservation District, created in 1997 (see Location Map, Document 1, Aerial Views, Document 2 and Street View, Document 3).
The Centretown Heritage Conservation District was designated in 1997 for its cultural heritage value as an “early residential suburb and as the temporary and permanent home of many of those who have governed and shaped the nation.” The Statement of Heritage Character (Document 4) notes that Centretown is a primarily residential area that has experienced periods of redevelopment throughout its history particularly with the introduction of low-rise apartment buildings immediately prior to the First World War, and the development of numerous large high-rise buildings in the more recent past.
A Site Plan Control Application and a Zoning By-law amendment for this project are currently in process. The application for the Zoning By-law amendment will be considered by Planning and Environment Committee and City Council concurrently with the application for new construction that is the subject of this submission.
DISCUSSION
The subject property is a large vacant lot that has been used for surface parking for the adjacent medical building since 1964. The property has been purchased by the developer who is building Central I, a retail/ condominium project incorporating the façade of the Metropolitan Bible Chapel, across McLeod Street to the north. The developer is proposing a similar project for this site, with retail at grade and residential above. The building will be an “L”-shaped structure above the ground floor, and will be nine storeys (28.7 metres) in height, with the two top storeys set back from the Bank and McLeod Street façades. At grade, the front façade will be located close to the property line, and will be divided into five bays by simple brick piers separated by glass panels to echo the traditional pattern of storefronts along Bank Street. The upper, residential portion of the project will also be articulated to break up the mass of the façade; the southerly portion will feature balconies and the extension of the red brick piers, while the north will be a glass box. The pattern of red brick piers will be repeated on the McLeod Street and south façades, and the south façade will overlook a terrace/ courtyard. The expression of the building will be contemporary in character and be similar in inspiration to Central 1 across McLeod Street (for elevations, see Document 5).
Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy (DOUDS)
The subject property is located within the area subject to the Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy and is therefore required to be reviewed by the Downtown Urban Design Review Panel. The comments provided by the review panel are to be considered by OBHAC in making its recommendation to Planning and Environment Committee and Council. The comments of the review panel are included in Document 6.
Early in the design process, the applicant was requested to modify the front façade to reflect the Guidelines in the heritage district plan. The current plans reflect this modification.
Recommendation 1
The Centretown Heritage Conservation District Study contains Guidelines, approved by Council, for the management of change in the Heritage Conservation District. The basic principle informing the Guidelines for new construction is:
All infill should be of contemporary design, distinguishable as being of its own time. However, it must be sympathetic to the heritage character of the area, and designed to enhance these existing properties, rather than calling attention to itself.
The Guidelines also include recommendations regarding infill development. The Bank Street corridor guidelines state:
2. Bank Street corridor:
1.1 The form of new buildings should reflect the character of the existing streetscape. The buildings should be two, three or four storeys in height, located tight to the sidewalk, with ground floor retail and commercial or residential uses on upper floors. In most cases, the buildings should cover the entire width of the lot to re-establish a continuous commercial frontage.
1.2 Ground floor facades should be transparent and three-dimensional, with large glass areas, recessed entrances, and articulated transoms. Signage should maintain existing patterns of horizontal banding. Projecting cornices can be used to emphasize the separation between ground floor and upper floors.
1.3 Upper floor facades should be more opaque, with smaller openings in a simple rhythm. The facade should be terminated by a substantial cornice or parapet detail at roof level. For buildings on corner lots, consideration should be given to the use of a turret or other device to acknowledge the corner presence.
1.4 Materials, colours and detailing should ensure continuity in the streetscape. Iron, glass and stone are traditional materials for ground level use, and brick with wood or decorative metal trim for upper floor use. These or comparable materials should be used. Colours should be rich and lighting should be vibrant but discreet, highlighting any three-dimensional detailing of the facade.
The project, as proposed, is consistent with some, but not all, of the above Guidelines. It is located tight to the sidewalk, has retail at grade and residential above, its ground floor is transparent with large glassed areas and features horizontal banding, there is a corner feature and the materials (brick and glass) are consistent with others in the District. The project, however, at nine storeys, is higher than recommended for the Bank Street corridor, it does not feature cornices, and the treatment of the upper residential floors does not feature “smaller openings.”
The Guidelines also stress the importance of eliminating vacant lots, particularly those used for parking, because of the negative effects such lots have on streetscape continuity and neighbourhood character. The Guidelines point out that “Large parking lots are also without precedent, and call attention to destruction of the built fabric of the district” (section VII.4.11) and “Many of them [surface parking lots] are visual eyesores and detract significantly from the continuity of the streetscape” (Sections VII.5.7) Finally, Section VII.5.5 says:
5. Because of the relatively high number of demolitions, many streetscapes are now interrupted by vacant lots. It is important to encourage infill development, and to promote design which is sympathetic to existing building types and which re-establishes streetscape continuity.
Although it is acknowledged that the proposed building is not consistent with all of the Guidelines, staff believes that the elimination of an unsightly surface parking lot facing Bank Street, the District’s main street, and the re-establishment of streetscape continuity in a manner consistent with the Guidelines, outweigh other concerns and will strengthen the Heritage Conservation District. Furthermore, this section of the district is mixed, featuring a gas station, a new sports store and a new condominium, thus there is little immediate historic context for the building to address. For these reasons, the Department supports the proposed development.
Cultural Heritage Impact Statement
The Official Plan requires that a Cultural Heritage Impact Statement (CHIS) be prepared by a heritage professional for projects of this type. CHISs are intended to provide another professional heritage opinion on projects in addition to that of staff. Staff reviews the CHIS and its findings, but forms their opinions independently.
The CHIS prepared for this project (see Document 7 for an extract, entire document on file and available from City Clerk) analysed the project in terms of the policy planning framework for the District and the Centretown Guidelines. In terms of the Guidelines, the document concluded that:
The proposed mixed-use commercial and residential design proposal, by virtue of its massing, streetscape revitalization and harmony with an earlier phase incorporating a heritage façade and re-establishment of the Bank Street commercial corridor for this section of Bank Street, is in general conformity with the requirements of the Centretown Heritage Conservation District Study. The design proposal offers positive impacts on the Bank Street commercial precinct, and the immediate environs of the subject property.
Recommendation 2
The Ontario Heritage Act does not provide any timelines for the expiry of heritage permits. A two-year expiry date is recommended to ensure that projects are completed in a timely fashion and according to the approved heritage permits.
Recommendation 3
Occasionally, minor changes to a building emerge during the working drawing phase. This recommendation is included to allow the Planning and Growth Management Department to approve these changes.
RURAL IMPLICATIONS
N/A
CONSULTATION
Adjacent property owners have been notified by letter of the application and the dates of the Ottawa Built Heritage Advisory Committee and Planning and Environment Committee meetings.
The Centretown Citizens Community Association has been informed of the project. Heritage Ottawa is aware of the project
COMMENTS BY THE WARD COUNCILLOR(S)
The Ward Councillor, Diane Holmes, is aware of the application.
LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS:
There are no legal/risk management implications associated with this report.
CITY STRATEGIC PLAN
F1 Become leading edge in community and urban design including housing creation for those in the city living on low incomes and residents at large.
F2 Respect the existing urban fabric, neighbourhood and the limits of existing hard services, so that new growth is integrated seamlessly with established communities.
TECHNICAL IMPLICATIONS
N/A
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no direct financial implications associated with this report.
APPLICATION PROCESS TIMELINE STATUS
This application was completed within the extended time period agreed upon by the City and applicant under the Ontario Heritage Act that now expires on October 31, 2010.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 Location Map
Document 2 Aerial Views
Document 3 Street View
Document 4 Statement of Cultural Heritage Value
Document 5 Elevations
Document 6 Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Study Comments
Document 7 Extract from Cultural Heritage Impact Statement
DISPOSITION
City Clerk and Solicitor Department, Legislative Services to notify the property owner and the Ontario Heritage Trust (10 Adelaide Street East, 3rd Floor, Toronto, Ontario, M5C 1J3) of Council’s decision.
Context showing immediate vicinity,
including gas station, 1960s buildings, sports shop, site of new development to
the north.
DESIGN REVIEW PANEL August 10, 2010
Panel: David Leinster
Bob Webster
Robert Matthews
City Staff:
Kalle Hakala
Alain Miguelez
Applicant/Consultant/Architect:
Natalie Hughes
Deni Poletti
David Wex
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION
The panel had the following comments regarding the proposal:
· Additional street trees along Bank Street should be investigated
· Burying the Hydro lines along Bank Street is a positive
· Patios on McLeod for commercial uses is encouraged
· The south wall is bland and uninviting. It should be enriched with greater articulation, etc. as it will be seen from Bank Street south.
· Please confirm the planting material on south “green” wall. Additional detail for the hard and soft landscaping is required.
· The detail of the canopies and signage for retail uses should be specified.
· The grand scale (2-storey) height of ground floor is a positive.
4. Assessment of Site Alteration Impacts
Assessment of site alteration impacts is made both by measuring the impact of the proposed new development on the significance and heritage attributes of the designated District defined in the Centretown Heritage Conservation District Study within the framework of the applicable
conservation principles for infill designed in the Study document and within the Ontario Heritage
Tool Kit manuals.
The key recommendation of the study for infill development is retention of the dominant
commercial character of Bank Street, via contemporary design that is sympathetic to heritage
character. Taking the above, together with the other points made in Section 2 above
(Identification of the Significance and Heritage Attributes of the Cultural Heritage Resource), the following impacts of the proposed development at Bank and McLeod Street may be noted:
The proposed development has the following negative impacts:
• The design does not respect the guideline for two to four storey height for infill in keeping
with the prevalent massing of heritage resources within the District,
• The upper floors are not ‘opaque with smaller openings in a simple rhythm’, but rather
form a consistent, homogenous contemporary expression of generous glazing at all levels,
• Cornices or parapet caps at roof level are not employed, leaving a more planar
appearance, and
• There is little distinction of ground floor from upper stories via cornices, signage band or
horizontal banding.
The proposed development has the following positive impacts:
• The design infills a long-standing, dilapidated surface parking lot and re-establishes a
commercial mixed use vocabulary along Bank Street.
• Although the design does not respect the four-storey height limit, the stepped back massing
and L-shaped plan serves to lessen the impact on the streetscape. Additionally, the design
is in keeping with, and is lower than, an already approved phase of the development
across the street to the north. These two buildings will serve to define a hard edge along
the eastern side of Bank Street.
• The design is tight to the sidewalk along Bank Street corridor, while still maintaining softer
landscaped edges and residential entrances along McLeod Street. The traffic-calming road
bulb-outs and City street landscaping will enhance this area and the transitions.
• The contemporary design is consistent with other four storey and taller residential
developments within the block and surrounding area and is of much higher design caliber.
• The contemporary infill within the surrounding heritage District is not beside nor does it
face any heritage properties and therefore does not overwhelm adjacent heritage character.
• Although there are no intermediate cornices in the traditional sense, there is an
intermediate projecting ‘shelf’ that allows a successful differentiation between the twostorey
retail level and the residential levels above. The setback of the north half of the
façade creates a distinction between the retails level and upper levels.
• The retail floor space facing Bank Street is ‘porous’ to the street, consistent with more
• All building servicing is located away from the primary pedestrian facades, and
• There is very limited shadow impact to existing heritage residential properties, and impacts
to commercial properties are moderated by distance and are only in effect for very limited
periods of the day.
|
Ottawa built heritage Advisory Committee Draft Minutes extract 45 16 september 2010 |
|
Comité consultatif sur le patrimoine bâti d’ottawa ébauche de l’extrait du Procès-verbal 45 le 16 septembre 2010 |
|
|
|
|
APPLICATION FOR New construction in the centretown heritage conservation district at 340 mcleod street
DEMANDE EN VUE DE LA CONSTRUCTION D'UNE NOUVELLE STRUCTURE AU 340, RUE MCLEOD, DANS LE DISTRICT DE CONSERVATION DU PATRIMOINE AU CENTRE-VILLE
ACS2010-ICS-PGM-0165 Capital (14)
Richard Kilstrom, Acting Manager, Development Review-Urban Services provided an overview of the aforementioned report. The subject property is a large vacant lot that has been used for surface parking for the adjacent medical building since 1964. The property has been purchased by the developer who is building Central I, a retail/ condominium project incorporating the façade of the Metropolitan Bible Chapel, across McLeod Street to the north. The developer is proposing a similar project for this site, a nine-storey condominium apartment building with retail at grade and residential above. The two top storeys will be set back from the Bank and McLeod Street façades. The expression of the building, Central II, will be contemporary in character and will be similar in inspiration to Central I. A Site Plan Control Application and a Zoning By-law amendment for this project are currently in process and will be considered by the Planning and Environment Committee and City Council concurrently with the application for new construction.
Mr. Kilstrom explained that staff is supportive of the application because although the proposed building is not consistent with all of the Guidelines of the Centretown Heritage Conservation District Study, staff believes that the elimination of an unsightly surface parking lot facing Bank Street, the District’s main street, and the re-establishment of streetscape continuity in a manner consistent with the Guidelines, outweigh other concerns and will strengthen the Heritage Conservation District. Furthermore, this section of the district is mixed and there is little immediate historic context for the building to address.
Brian Casagrande, FoTenn Cosultants accompanied by Earl Mark, Core Architects and Robert Martin, Robertson Martin Architects provided additional details on the application, including elevation drawings and perspectives, site context, policy/regulatory context, status of the process, etcetera.
In the absence of a clear site plan or model to examine, some members expressed considerable concerns with respect to: the height of the proposed building, suggesting it may be setting a precedent; the sightlines; the significant mass of the two buildings so close together; and, the sidewalk allowance on Bank, suggesting the setback should be greater.
Other members felt that it makes a positive contribution to re-establishing the spirit of that particular area and noted Mr. Mark’s affirmation that many of the suggestions of the Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy (DOUDS) have been incorporated into the proposal.
Moved by Pierre Maheu:
That the Ottawa Built Heritage Advisory Committee recommend that Planning and Environment Committee recommend that Council:
1. Approve the application for new construction on the vacant lot at 340 McLeod Street, in accordance with the plans submitted by Natalie Hughes, FoTenn Consultants Inc. received on March 31, 2010 and reactivated on August 12, 2010.
2. Issue the Heritage Permit with a two-year expiry date from the date of issuance.
3. Delegate authority for minor design changes to the General Manager of the Planning and Growth Management Department.
(Note: Approval to Alter this property under the Ontario Heritage Act must not be construed to meet the requirements for the issuance of a building permit.)
(Note: The statutory 90-day timeline for consideration of this application under the Ontario Heritage Act was extended with the agreement of the City and applicant until October 31, 2010.)
CARRIED
YEAS (4):E. Eagen, A. Fyfe, P. Maheu, S. Whamond
NAYS (3):V. Sahni, E. Zdansky, C. Mulholland
Action : The OBHAC’s Review Sub-committee will review the site plan and zoning amendment request when circulated and will provide comment on the setback and sightlines if deemed necessary.
|
EXTRACT OF draft Minutes 82 4 october 2010 |
|
extrait de l’Ébauche Du ProcÈs-verbal 82 LE 4 octobre 2010 |
ACS2010-ICS-PGM-0165 SOMERSET (14)
David Gladstone spoke with respect to this item, and the related re-zoning application for the site. He generally felt the respect for the various policies in the staff report was notable. He suggested there should be a link between the objectives of this project and the Mid-Centretown Community Design Plan (CDP.) He also would have preferred to have a staff presentation on the record given it was a fairly significant and central site.
Nathalie Hughes was present representing the applicant in support of the application.
Committee then approved the report recommendations as presented.
That the Ottawa Built Heritage Advisory Committee recommend that Planning and Environment Committee recommend that Council:
1. Approve the application for new construction on the vacant lot at 340 McLeod Street, in accordance with the plans submitted by Natalie Hughes, FoTenn Consultants Inc. received on March 31, 2010 and reactivated on August 12, 2010.
2. Issue the Heritage Permit with a two-year expiry date from the date of issuance.
3. Delegate authority for minor design changes to the General Manager of the Planning and Growth Management Department.
(Note: Approval to Alter this property under the Ontario Heritage Act must not be construed to meet the requirements for the issuance of a building permit.)
(Note: The statutory 90-day timeline for consideration of this application under the Ontario Heritage Act was extended with the agreement of the City and applicant until October 31, 2010)
CARRIED