7.                   ZONING – 1626 Old Prescott Road


ZONAGE - 1626, chemin old prescott





That Council approve an amendment to the Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of a portion of 1626 Old Prescott Road from Development Reserve Subzone 1 (DR1) to Village Residential First Density Subzone D (V1D) as shown in Document 1.





Que le Conseil approuve une modification au Règlement de zonage 2008-250 en vue de faire passer le zonage d’une partie du 1626, chemin Old Prescott de zone d’aménagement futur, sous-zone 1 (DR1) à zone résidentielle de village de densité 1, sous-zone D (V1D), tel qu’illustré dans le document 1.




















1.         Deputy City Manager’s Report, Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability, dated 5 August 2011 (ACS2011-ICS-PGM-0155).


2.         Extract of Draft Minutes, 1 September 2011.


Report to/Rapport au :


Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee

Comité de l'agriculture et des affaires rurales


and Council / et au Conseil


05 August 2011 / le 05 août 2011


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 : Derrick Moodie, Manager/Gestionnaire, Development Review-Rural Services/Examen des projets d'aménagement-Services ruraux, Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance

(613) 580-2424, 15134  Derrick.Moodie@ottawa.ca



Osgoode (19)

Ref N°: ACS2011-ICS-PGM-0155




ZONING – 1626 Old Prescott Road (FILE NO. D02-02-11-0028)




ZONAGE - 1626, chemin old prescott





That the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of a portion of 1626 Old Prescott Road from Development Reserve Subzone 1 (DR1) to Village Residential First Density Subzone D (V1D) as shown in Document 1.





Que le Comité de l’agriculture et des affaires rurales recommande au Conseil d’approuver une modification au Règlement de zonage 2008-250 en vue de faire passer le zonage d’une partie du 1626, chemin Old Prescott de zone d’aménagement futur, sous-zone 1 (DR1) à zone résidentielle de village de densité 1, sous-zone D (V1D), tel qu’illustré dans le document 1.





The subject property is 18.6 hectares and is bounded by existing residential subdivisions to the north (Stanley Park) and west (Lakeland Estates) and by a pond under private ownership (Lakeland Estates) as well as a draft approved plan of subdivision (Shadowridge Estates) to the south.  To the east of the proposed development are lands under the same ownership, which extend east to Old Prescott Road.  These lands consist of an area of approximately 40.71 hectares which will be developed under separate application in the future and as described in the Village of Greely Community Design Plan.


Lakeland Meadows Subdivision is addressed as 1626 Old Prescott Road and the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee authorized draft approval of the subdivision at the March 3, 2011 meeting.  As a condition of approval, the lands will need to be rezoned as they are currently zoned Development Reserve Subzone 1.  The subdivision draft approval - as approved by the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee - contains conditions requiring certain lots to remain zoned Development Reserve until such time as it is demonstrated that there is no threat to the nearby municipal drinking water supply and requiring setbacks to the adjacent waterbody. The draft approval of the subdivision has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board by neighbours.


The subdivision proposes 39 lots for single detached dwellings serviced by private wells and septic systems, a single block for a future road extension, and a road system that includes portions of three streets.  The subdivision has been designed to orient five lots (Lots 1-5) onto the east side of Lakeshore Drive, of those five lots; Lots 4 and 5 could either front onto or flank that street.


Proposed Zoning


The requested zoning is Village Residential First Density Subzone D (V1D).  The proposed zoning would rezone some of the lots within the proposed plan of subdivision to V1D and the balance would remain DR1.




Official Plan and Greely Community Design Plan


The subject application has been examined pursuant to the provisions of the Official Plan, the Village of Greely Community Design Plan, the Planning Act and the Clean Water Act.


The Official Plan designates the site as “Village”.  The intensity and distribution of land uses are to be determined in the context of the Community Design Plan (CDP) for the Village of Greely.  These lands are designated “Residential” in the CDP.  The development is in conformity with the Official Plan and the Village of Greely Community Design Plan. 




The CDP anticipated lot sizes in the “Residential” areas to be 0.2 hectares in size or greater.  The applicant has submitted a hydrogeological and terrain analysis study, which supports the draft plan of subdivision, as initially proposed as 40 lots on 18.7 hectares of land.  Staff, in conjunction with the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority and the South Nation Conservation Authority concur that the proposed lot sizes are acceptable. 


Drinking Water Source Protection


Under the Ontario Clean Water Act, local source water regions have been directed to prepare Drinking Water Source Protection Plans. The subject site lies within the Raisin-South Nation Source Water Protection Region.  The first step in the process was to prepare assessment reports to identify protection areas for the various municipal sources of water including wells and intakes on rivers.  The draft assessment report is complete and with the Ministry of the Environment for approval.  The next step in the process is to prepare a Drinking Water Source Protection Plan which is being initiated and is to be completed within the next year.


In consideration of the Clean Water Act and in anticipation of the Drinking Water Source Protection Plans being completed in August of 2012, implementation of zoning restrictions with respect to the threat posed by the septic systems within the Wellhead Vulnerability Area scoring 10, is appropriate.  In this case, the draft approval conditions for the subdivision specify that ‘Lots 11 through 14 and Lots 29 and 30 lie within the Wellhead Protection Area B of the Shadowridge Municipal Well and shall remain zoned Development Reserve until such time as it can be demonstrated the prescribed risks are negated’.


Roads and Traffic


The Traffic Assessment determined that the proposed subdivision would have a minor impact on the operation of traffic along Stagecoach Road and the intersections of Lakeshore Drive (north and south) and Stagecoach Road.  No roadway modifications were necessary as a result of the proposed development.  Staff reviewed the report and concur with the study’s conclusions.


Setbacks to Water


There is a private lake or pond immediately to the south of the subject development.  In order to help ensure the water quality of the pond setbacks for development formed a condition for the

The subdivision draft approval contains the following condition:


‘ The Owner acknowledges and agrees that the zoning by-law provisions will require a minimum 15 metre “no touch” setback from the top of bank and/or a 30 metre “no development” setback from the high-water mark, whichever is greater, from pond immediately south and lying within Block 31, Plan 4M-500. This shall apply to Lot 1 and Lots 20 through 23 on the draft plan.’ 


The standard requirement within the Zoning By-law is a 30 metre setback from the waterbody. Additional zoning requirements are not necessary and ensuring a no-touch area can be done through the subdivision approval process.


Details of Zoning


The subdivisions lands would be zoned V1D which has a minimum lot size of 2700 sq m with a 30 m minimum lot width and a 7 metre minimum front yard.  The proposed lots fronting onto Lakeshore Drive are greater than 4000 square metres and have a range of lot width from 44 to 60 metres.  Lots internal to the subdivision tend to be slightly smaller in area and width.


Lakeland Estates, immediately adjacent to the subject lands is zoned Rural Residential Subzone 4 (RR4) with a minimum lot area of 4000 sq m, minimum lot width of 30 metres and a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 m.  The actual lots on Lakeshore Drive in the vicinity of the proposal range in size from 4000 to 6000 square metres with lot widths from 40 to 80 metres. Typical actual front yard setbacks range from about 15 to 25 metres from the street lot line to the homes.


The V1D zone is the village residential subzone that is the most similar with respect to lot area, width and front yard setback to the RR4 zone of the abutting properties on Lakeshore Drive.  The proposed zone will allow the new development along Lakeshore Drive to respect the existing streetscape and development.


The lots internal to the subdivision, while tending to be somewhat smaller than those proposed along Lakeshore Drive still are close to double the size of the village residential lots immediately to the north.  Those lots on Scottanne Street are zoned V1I and V1I[632r] – with minimum areas of 1390 and 2000 square metres, minimum frontages of 30 metres, and front yard setbacks of 7.5 metres.  The lots on Scottanne Street and those in the future subdivision would back onto each other and maintenance of a consistent streetscape is therefore not an issue that needs to be considered.


Lots 11 through 14 and Lots 29 and 30 will remain zoned Development Reserve Subzone 1 as required by the draft approval condition.


Concurrent Application


The subdivision draft approval has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board.  No hearing date has been identified at this time.




This proposed zoning is in keeping with the policies of the Official Plan and the Village of Greely Community Design Plan and respects the intent of the Clean Water Act.  Leaving the lots, that lie within the Wellhead Protection Area and could pose a threat to the municipal well, zoned Development Reserve Subzone 1 respects the Clean Water Act.  The proposed zoning is generally in keeping and compatible with the zone for the residential properties on Lakeshore Drive and those on the abutting village subdivision.




Approval of this zoning application for the draft plan of subdivision is consistent with the Greely Village Community Design Plan.




Notice of this application was carried out in accordance with the City's Public Notification and Consultation Policy.  Details of the responses to the circulation can be found in Document 2.




The Ward Councillor is aware of this application.




There are no legal implications associated with this report.




There are no risk management implications associated with this report.




The draft Plan of Subdivision has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, and if the appeal is successful, modifications to zoning will be required. Should this Application for Re‑Zoning be appealed to the Board, it is expected that these issues can be dealt with during the three days anticipated for the appeal to deal with the draft Plan of Subdivision.




Any outstanding environmental issues will be dealt with through the subdivision approval process. These would include details of landscaping, grading and drainage, as well as stormwater management.








The proposed development and planning applications align with the City Strategic Plan in that the rural village is preserved and the limits of existing hard services are respected.




This application was processed by the "On Time Decision Date" established for the processing of Zoning By-law amendment applications.




Document 1    Location Map

Document 2    Consultation Details




City Clerk and Solicitor Department, Legislative Services to notify the owner, applicant, OttawaScene Canada Signs, 1565 Chatelain Avenue, Ottawa, ON  K1Z 8B5, 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

CONSULTATION DETAILS                                                                              DOCUMENT 2




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 for the zoning application.



Public comments were received on the circulation of the zoning application to owners within 120 metres of the subject lands and registered Community Associations within the area. Two objections were filed with the following comments:



A summary of the comments received is outlined below, along with responses.


Comment:     Lakeshore Drive is not to current road standards and construction traffic will damage the road as well as presenting safety, noise and dust concerns.

Response:     Construction traffic is to access off of Old Prescott Road, save for the construction of the three to five homes fronting onto Lakeshore Drive.


Comment:     Traffic will increase and be a safety concern for residents on Lakeshore Drive. The developer needs to find other access roads.

Response:     The 39 lot development road design and road speeds have not warranted specific traffic safety concerns. 

                     In the long term, with the complete build out of all lands under the applicant’s ownership, it is anticipated that much of the internal traffic will use the north south collector or head easterly to Old Prescott Road.


Comment:     Concern was expressed about the complete development of the Owner’s lands and why we were not requiring him to file the application for all the lands as we did with Quinn Farm.

Response:     Quinn Farms was required because they were proposing undersized lots and needed to look at ground water impacts comprehensively.  This development involves a more standard form of village residential lot size.  In addition, they did file a concept for the balance of their lands that is all in keeping with the lotting and road pattern identified within the Community Design Plan for Greely.


Comment:     The developer should be required to prepare detailed assessment of the impact on the Shadowridge well now. 

Response:     As noted Quinn Farm were proposing a different size lot than the traditional septic systems would allow and that was why more details were required for the draft approval of that development.  In this case the Hydrogeologic Report was based on traditional septic systems and proposed lot sizes exceeding those in Quinn Farm.  The lots lying within the Wellhead Protection Area posing a significant potential threat from the septic systems on those lots will not be zoned until the owner/developer can demonstrate there is no impact on the Shadowridge well.


Comment:     The developer should be required to provide detailed engineering and design at this time, for roads, and grading and drainage as there are current issues with basement flooding, park damage and degradation to the private lakes.

Response:     Preliminary stormwater management reports have been reviewed and accepted by the City and South Nation Conservation Authority, and is in compliance with the Shields Creek Watershed Study which established criteria for looking at stormwater for development in Greely and area.  The draft approval contains conditions requiring that the detailed engineering be completed prior to final approval and registration of the subdivision. 


Comment:     The developer should start the development on the Old Prescott Road frontage as was done with other adjacent developments to facilitate orderly development.

Response:     Through this concession development has happened historically more so off of Stagecoach Road and only more recently has it started off of Old Prescott Road.  In this case, the developer is proposing slightly larger than standard lots to blend in with Lakeland Estates.  Smaller more standard lots are conceptually proposed for the more easterly portion of the property and potentially even smaller lots if they can arrange connection to the Shadowridge communal water and sewage systems. The lot fabric is in keeping with the adjacent developments.


Comment:     The developers in the area should be obligated to construct the north south collector road before the development is constructed.

Response:     The completion of the north south road is outside of this application and is dependent on the phasing of not only this applicant’s additional lands for development but also the lands of the owners to the north and south. We cannot force one developer to construct all portions of that road when they have alternative access.  The construction would occur as part of the development and could not predate it. No concerns with safety have been identified through the traffic study and construction traffic will be using another access.  We will be assessing the need for the collector with each application for development filed.  This includes the extension of draft approval and each phase of registration for Shadowridge as well as any subsequent planning application for the balance of this owner’s lands.


Comment:     Lakeshore Drive was designed and constructed to an older standard and therefore cannot accommodate any additional development.

Response:     The majority of the lots as well as the street were created through two plans of subdivision and the two portions of Lakeshore Drive were designed and constructed to the Osgoode Township standard for public roads of the day. They were also dedicated to the Township as public streets.  The standards are now changed. The conditions of approval require the developer to use a construction access off of Old Prescott Road through the balance of the owner’s lands.


Comment:     The lakes in Lakeland Estate could be polluted from this development

Response:     The conditions for final approval require that a 30 metre buffer is maintained with no development, which will include a 15 metres no-touch buffer for any portions of the properties that lie within 15 metres of the more easterly lake. Any drainage will be directed away from the lakes.


Comment:     Adjacent owners indicated they will not support the creation of any road connection to Lakeshore Drive. Other developments have recently been approved without connections – that is the way Greely should be developing to allow these small neighbourhoods within it.

Response:     The Greely Village Community Design Plan specifically identifies a road connection from Lakeshore Drive to the subject lands.  Connections are needed to facilitate traffic (vehicles, pedestrians and bicycles) flow, service deliver for mail, garbage, road maintenance and school busing.  There is some flexibility to change connections.  For example most recently Quinn Farms was draft approved with two of the three road connections envisioned in the CDP with the connection remaining solely for a pathway connection.


Comment:     The City should be requiring the 5% parkland be dedicated for this subdivision to provide for the subdivision as the cash-in-lieu payment is not required for the nearby developed parks.

Response:     The Community Design Plan identifies the location of parks for the developing part of Greely.  In this case there is to be parkland at the south end of Quinn Farm which will be extended southward into the balance of this owner’s land when that proposal proceeds.  Any balance of parkland owing or paid would be used towards developing this and other new or underdeveloped parks.


Comment:     The V1D zone could be supported for the lots on Lakeshore if there were no road connection.

Response:     The road connection is identified in the CDP and was supported by Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee when the draft plan was brought forward for approval.


Comment:     The lots fronting onto Lakeshore should be at least 0.8 hectares in size – the same as the balance of the lots on Lakeshore Drive.

Response:     In fact, not all the lots are 0.8 hectares along Lakeshore Drive but range in size from about 0.4 through 0.8 hectares. The Community Design Plan contemplates residential lots size of approximately 0.2 hectares or greater. Minimum rural residential lots sizes are 0.8 hectares.  All the proposed lots in the new subdivision exceed the .2 ha and are closer to .4.  All lots along Lakeshore Drive exceed .4 ha in size.


Comment:     The City should refuse any potentially higher density development on the balance of the owner’s lands as it is not support at all by the community, neighbours or Councillor.

Response:     The Community Design Plan contemplates the possibility of the higher density if connected to services and is a Council approved document.  Until that document is amended to remove that possibility of connection to communal services and allowing for higher density than minimum .2 ha residential lots and thereby, essentially removing development potential from these lands, the City cannot limit that possibility.


No comments have been received to date.

            ZONING - 1626 Old Prescott Road

ZONAGE - 1626, chemin old prescott

ACS2011-ICS-PGM-0137                                                           WEST CARLETON-MARCH (5)


(This application is subject to the provisions of Bill 51.)




That the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of a portion of 1626 Old Prescott Road from Development Reserve Subzone 1 (DR1) to Village Residential First Density Subzone D (V1D) as shown in Document 1.


Ms. Cheryl McWilliams, Planner, Development Review, Rural Services Branch (West), Planning and Growth Management (PGM), Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability (ISCS), spoke to a PowerPoint slide presentation which served to provide the Committee with an overview of the staff report.  A copy of the presentation is held on file with the City Clerk.


The following delegations spoke to express their opposition to the report recommendation:


·         Mr. Andrew Ralph*, and;

·         Mr. Gerry Davy.


The following delegation spoke in support of the recommendation:


·         Mr. Paul Webber, Bell Baker LLP.


*    Presentation(s)/submission(s) held on file with the City Clerk.


Following Committee discussion, the report recommendation was put to Committee and CARRIED on a division of 3 YEAS to 1 NAY as follows:


            YEAS (3):       S. Blais, E. El-Chantiry, S. Moffatt

            NAYS (1):      D. Thompson