|
3. ZONING – 337 SUNNYSIDE AVENUE ZONAGE –
337, AVENUE SUNNYSIDE |
Committee
recommendation
That Council
approve an amendment to Zoning By‑law 2008-250 to change the zoning of
337 Sunnyside Avenue from Residential Third Density Subzone Q (R3Q[487]) to
Residential Fourth Density, Subzone V, Exception [xxxx] (R4V[xxxx]), as shown
in Document 1 and detailed in Document 2.
Recommandation DU Comité
Que le Conseil approuve
une modification du Règlement de
zonage 2008-250 qui ferait passer le zonage au 337 de l'avenue Sunnyside de
« zone résidentielle de densité 3, sous-zone Q » (R3Q[487]) à
« zone résidentielle de densité 4, sous-zone V, avec exception
[xxxx] » (R4V[xxxx]), tel que le montre le document 1 et que le fait voir
en détail le document 2.
Documentation
1.
Deputy City
Manager's report, Planning and Infrastructure, dated 15 March 2012 (ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0083).
2. Extract of Draft Minutes, Planning Committee meeting of 10
April 2012.
Report to/Rapport au:
Comité
de l'urbanisme
and Council / et au Conseil
15 March
2012 / le 15 mars 2012
Submitted by/Soumis par : Nancy
Schepers, Deputy City Manager/Directrice municipale adjointe, Planning and Infrastructure/Urbanisme et
Infrastructure
Contact Person/Personne-ressource: John Smit,
Manager/Gestionnaire, Development Review - Urban Services/Examen des projets
d'aménagement-Services urbains
Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et Gestion de
la croissance
(613) 580-2424, 13866
John.Smit@ottawa.ca
|
SUBJECT: |
|
|
|
|
|
OBJET : |
REPORT RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Committee
recommend Council approve an amendment to Zoning By‑law 2008-250 to
change the zoning of 337 Sunnyside Avenue from Residential Third Density
Subzone Q (R3Q[487]) to Residential Fourth Density, Subzone V, Exception [xxxx]
(R4V[xxxx]), as shown in Document 1 and detailed in Document 2.
RECOMMANDATION
DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité de l'urbanisme recommande au
Conseil d'adopter une modification du Règlement de zonage 2008-250 qui ferait
passer le zonage au 337 de l'avenue Sunnyside de « zone résidentielle de
densité 3, sous-zone Q » (R3Q[487]) à « zone résidentielle de densité
4, sous-zone V, avec exception [xxxx] » (R4V[xxxx]), tel que le montre le
document 1 et que le fait voir en détail le document 2.
BACKGROUND
The site is located at 337
Sunnyside Avenue, on the north side of Sunnyside Avenue between Grosvenor
Avenue to the west and Bank Street to the east, and is 457 square metres in area.
The site is a residential through-lot with
frontage on both Sunnyside Avenue and Woodbine Place and is currently occupied
by a detached dwelling. The site is surrounded
by low- to medium‑density residential uses ranging from single detached
dwellings to low-rise apartment buildings to the east along the Bank Street
traditional mainstreet. Additionally, there is a retirement home one block to
the north on Aylmer Avenue, an elementary school on the south side of Sunnyside
to the east of the site, and a place of worship on the corner of Sunnyside and
Grosvenor Avenues to the west.
Proposed Development
The proposed development on the site involves
the demolition of the existing detached dwelling and development of a
three-storey six-unit low-rise apartment building with underground parking for
seven vehicles. Vehicular access to the underground parking garage is to be provided
from Sunnyside Avenue with pedestrian entrances provided from both Sunnyside
Avenue and Woodbine Place. Additionally, a rooftop patio is proposed as a
component of this development.
Purpose of Zoning Amendment
The purpose of the proposed Zoning By-law
Amendment is to facilitate the development of the proposed low-rise apartment
building on the site.
Existing Zoning
The existing zoning of the property is Residential Third Density, Subzone Q, Exception 487. The R3Q zone permits a mix of residential building forms including detached, multi-attached dwellings and converted dwellings; however, Exception 487 prohibits planned unit development. Furthermore, the R3 zone does not permit low-rise apartment buildings.
Details of Proposed Zoning
While converted dwellings containing a maximum
of four units are permitted within the current R3Q zone, the applicant felt
that redeveloping the site in its entirety would allow for better integration
with the surrounding neighbourhood by enabling vehicular access to be relocated
from Woodbine Place to Sunnyside Avenue and providing a parking garage with a
space for each dwelling unit.
Since the proposed low-rise apartment building
is not a permitted use within the R3Q zone, an amendment to the Zoning By-law
has been requested. Specifically, an amendment has been requested to rezone the
site to Residential Fourth Density, Subzone V (R4V) with site-specific
performance standards to reduce interior side yard setbacks, reduce the
required amount of landscaping on site, permit hard landscaping to be located
in the front yard, reduce the required driveway width, and permit increased
projections into yards. Additionally, in keeping with existing Exception 487, it
is proposed that planned unit development uses not be permitted in the proposed
R4V[xxxx] zoning for the site.
DISCUSSION
Planning Act and Provincial Policy Statement
Within Section 2 of the Planning Act, the provision of orderly and safe communities and the appropriate location of growth and development, among others, are identified as matters of provincial interest. Furthermore, the Planning Act requires that all planning decisions made by a municipality are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). As the guiding policy document for land use within the province, policies for the development of liveable communities and efficient use of land and resources are identified within the PPS.
The Department is of the opinion that the proposed Zoning
By-law amendment is consistent with the matters of provincial interest as
outlined in the Planning Act and the
Provincial Policy Statement, which promotes efficient land use and development
patterns to support strong, liveable and healthy communities. The proposal is
an appropriate use of land that makes use of existing infrastructure and serves
to increase housing options within the community.
Official Plan
The site is designated as General Urban Area within the Official Plan. This land use designation permits the development of a range and choice of housing types in combination with conveniently located service, cultural and institutional uses to facilitate the development of complete and sustainable communities. The proposed Zoning By-law amendment responds to the policies for the General Urban Area by allowing for the redevelopment of an existing residential property within an established neighbourhood. The site is located within walking distance of the services and amenities provided along the Bank Street traditional mainstreet, as well as transit routes and local institutional uses.
The General Urban Area designation requires that development have
regard for the compatibility criteria found in Section 2.5.1 of the Official
Plan. This section sets broad design objectives on how the City will influence the
evolution of the built environment. These objectives are focused on
enhancing the sense of community and maintaining places with their own distinct
identity; providing quality public and private spaces through development;
creating places that are safe, accessible and are easy to get to and move
through; ensuring that new development respects the character of existing
areas; and creating places that can adapt easily and evolve over time. Design
principles further describe how each of the design objectives may be achieved.
The proposed
development achieves the design principles of complementary massing,
encouraging a continuity of street frontages, and a more compact urban form by
maintaining similar setbacks of the dwellings to the west along the Sunnyside
Avenue and Woodbine Place street frontages, and continuing the three-storey
pattern from the west. The proposed development also provides a more compact
urban form through the redevelopment of a residential through-lot currently containing
a single detached dwelling.
In conjunction with the compatibility
criteria found in Section 2.5.1 of the Official Plan, development applications must
also be reviewed and evaluated in the context of Section 4.11. The following is
an analysis of the applicable criteria in Section 4.11 of the Official Plan, as
well as the City’s Urban Design Guidelines.
Height, Massing and Neighbourhood Context
New development is to have regard to the area context, massing and height of adjacent buildings. The surrounding residential neighbourhood is characterized by a mixture of low-density residential development ranging from two- to three-storey single-detached, duplex and multiple‑attached dwelling units. The proposed Zoning By-law amendment is in keeping with the existing policy and neighbourhood context for height and massing by providing a built form that is similar to what is currently permitted for the highest density use within the current zoning (multiple-attached dwellings). Specifically, the zoning regulations under the existing R3Q zone for multiple-attached dwellings that are to be maintained within the proposed R4V[xxxx] zone include a minimum front yard setback of 3 metres; a maximum height of 11 metres; a minimum interior side yard of 1.2 metres (proposed on east side); permitted projections of balconies and cornices into front yards; and permitted projections of rooftop patios and stairwells above the maximum permitted height.
Vehicular Access and Parking
The proposed development will maintain vehicular access from Sunnyside Avenue, which is an existing collector road and addresses the criteria to orient access and egress to reduce the impact of noise and maintain safety. Additionally, the parking garage will provide parking for seven vehicles, which exceeds the minimum requirement of three spaces and will allow each of the dwelling units to have one dedicated parking space as well as an additional space for visitor parking or units with more than one vehicle.
Outdoor Amenity Areas
Outdoor amenity areas for the proposed development are provided via balconies and a rooftop patio. Privacy to adjacent properties is maintained as balconies face the street frontages and the rooftop patio has been located in the middle of the roof with a solid rail to restrict views and noise. Existing fencing along the interior side yards is to be maintained.
Sunlight
New development should minimize shadowing on
adjacent properties through the siting of the building or other design
measures. A shadow study submitted by the applicant shows that the impact is
minimal during the spring, summer and fall seasons, with the property directly
east of the site most affected during the winter season.
Urban Design
Guidelines for Low-Medium Density Infill Housing
The proposed Zoning
By-law amendment and development have been reviewed in context of the above
Council approved design guidelines. Based on this review, staff have concluded
that the proposed development has addressed the planning principles and design
objectives. This has been achieved by providing a landscaped area and main
pedestrian entranceway off of Sunnyside Avenue that blends with the surrounding
context, enhancing the pedestrian environment along Woodbine Place by removing
vehicular access from this street frontage, and maintaining compatible building
setbacks on both street frontages. The impact of traffic and a new vehicular
access on Sunnyside Avenue is mitigated by minimizing the driveway width and
providing sufficient parking for all units within the parking garage. The grade
increase from west to east along Sunnyside Avenue allows for an appropriate and
compatible transition from the existing three-storey building on the west to
the two-storey building to the east of the site. Finally, architectural details
and materials serve to provide differentiation along both main façades while also serving to complement materials currently used within the
neighbourhood.
Conclusion
Staff are
satisfied that the proposed change of 337 Sunnyside Avenue is consistent with
the policies of the Planning Act,
Provincial Policy Statement and the Official Plan. Therefore, the
requested Zoning By-law amendment is recommended for approval.
Concurrent Application
A Site Plan Control application (file number D07-12-11-0213) is being reviewed concurrently for the development as described herein.
RURAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no rural implications associated with this report.
CONSULTATION
Notice of this application was carried out in accordance with the City’s Public Notification and Consultation Policy. Responses from residents and the Community Association indicated concerns with the neighbourhood context, height, rooftop patio, traffic and setbacks.
Further details and responses to responses are available in Document 3.
COMMENTS BY THE WARD COUNCILLOR(S)
Councillor Chernushenko is aware of the application.
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
Should this matter be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, it is anticipated that a three day hearing would result. In the event the recommendation is adopted, the hearing could be conducted within staff resources. If the application is refused, reasons must be provided. An outside planner would need to be retained at an estimated cost of $25,000 to $30,000.
RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
There are no direct risk management implications associated with this report.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
ACCESSIBILITY IMPACT
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPLICATIONS
There are no environmental implications associated with this report.
TECHNOLOGY IMPLICATIONS
There are no direct technical implications associated with this report.
CITY STRATEGIC PLAN
This report impacts the following priorities within the City’s Strategic Plan:
- Long-Term Sustainability Goals: Housing
- GP3 Make sustainable choices
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 resolving issues identified during the circulation period.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 Location Map
Document 2 Details of Recommended Zoning
Document 3 Consultation Details
Document 4 Concept Plans
Document 5 Proposed Site Plan
DISPOSITION
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
DETAILS OF RECOMMENDED ZONING DOCUMENT 2
Proposed
Changes to the Comprehensive Zoning By-law
1.
Rezone
the property as shown on Document 1 from R3Q[487] to R4V[xxxx].
2.
Add an
exception to Section 239, for the property including the following:
a)
In
Column II, the text R4V[xxxx];
b)
In Column IV, the text “planned unit
development”; and
c)
In
Column V; the text:
·
Minimum interior
side yard setback of 1.2 metres on the east side of the property
·
Minimum
interior side yard setback of 0.41 metres on the west side of the property
·
A
cornice may project no closer than 0.149 metres from the west lot line
·
A
cornice may project 0.61 m into a required front yard setback
·
26% of
the lot area must be provided as landscaped area
·
Section
109(11)(a) does not apply
·
Minimum
driveway aisle width of 3.05 metres
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.
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION COMMENTS
I am writing to you to convey the comments of OSWatch concerning the
proposed rezoning of 337 Sunnyside Avenue. OSWatch is the planning and
development committee of the Old Ottawa South Community Association, OSCA.
There are a number of planning and technical concerns that have been
raised by neighbours which, in OSWatch’s view, must be dealt with by City Staff
before any decision is made on the proposed re-zoning. These
concerns include clarifying both: a) the required setbacks from the utility
pole on Woodbine, and b) the required setbacks from all other neighbouring
properties. In general OSCA expects the proposed development to respect all
existing R3 side and front yard setbacks on the lot, and also and the R3 height
limit of 11 Meters.
OSWatch and the OSCA Board has been on the record for some time that it
feels strongly that spot zoning is an inappropriate planning tool to be used in
dealing with the issue of intensification in neighbourhoods in the urban core
such as Old Ottawa South. Rather, if there are to be changes to the zoning it
should be done as part of a CDP. We would again ask for a CDP to be implemented
in Old Ottawa South covering both the Main Street (Bank) and the adjacent
residential areas. We also wish to repeat our concern to Planning Committee and
City Planning Staff that the height, massing and setbacks of residential infill
as presently allowed is not in keeping with the community character.
In the case of 337 Sunnyside we are prepared to refrain from formally
objecting to the proposed re-zoning conditional on the roof top patio being
removed from the design and site plan. A roof top patio is contrary to the
character of the neighbourhood, it is invasive to the neighbouring properties’
privacy and is a potential source of noise. We suggest if the developer wants
more amenity space that the size of the building be reduced and the space be
created on the ground, a type of amenity space which is in keeping with the
neighbourhood character.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
1.
Neighbourhood Context:
Concerns and comments as follows:
a) Compatibility of the proposed building with that of local vocabulary is questionable.
b) There are no examples of monolithic apartment structures of such massing or proximity to the street situated between and around other smaller residential buildings in the neighbourhood.
c) The proposed building is in stark contrast with the surrounding buildings in its general appearance, coupled with its looming and imposing presence.
d) Privacy and noise concerns as the proposed paved walkway going from Sunnyside Avenue to Woodbine Place is feared to attract an inordinate amount or undesired pedestrian traffic, which would either be trying to access the proposed building or take a “shortcut” between these two streets.
e) The proposed plans do not fit with the neighbourhood and go against City of Ottawa's own guidelines.
f) It is out of character with the surrounding structures which are all single or semi-detached structures.
g) We are not opposed to the development of this property but within the existing zoning. A two storey building would be a better fit with the community and especially the neighbouring dwellings along Woodbine.
h) Building an underground parking garage is not acceptable in this neighbourhood. In this neighbourhood garages are located either at the back of the property or there are no garages.
i) Six units is too dense and would create additional traffic and noise as well as create a visual eyesore along both Sunnyside and Woodbine Place.
j) Propose that the building should have 4 apartments rather than 6.
k) From a neighbourhood perspective, the proposed plans are too large and would not fit into the low density residential area. All houses on similar size lots in the area have a maximum of 3 to 4 units.
l) The proposal is suggesting making an apartment building in an area of well established residential homes. This will not been seen as an enhancement to the community especially for those whom may be considering selling their home.
m) The proposed balconies on both the north and south side of the building remove privacy to the neighbours in the area, this is not just one deck, but many, and then, to add to that, another larger deck is proposed.
n) Do not support creating multiple apartments in what is currently a single family home. If the project were to be a free hold condominium, it would be preferable.
o) Too massive for the property in footprint.
p) The proposed plan does not provide a transition regarding the built form since the massing, character and setbacks proposed are quite different than that of surrounding properties.
q) The balconies project too close to the streets on both Woodbine and Sunnyside and make the structure seem even larger.
r) The garage will have the effect of visually adding another half storey.
s) I am in support of the development as:
· it has only one driveway;
· in other development options, the side yard setbacks could be as little as 2 feet and this proposal has greater side yard setbacks;
· the same number and size of dwelling units could be achieved without the zoning change;
· two duplexes could be built, which could then be converted to triplexes, and all 6 units with a condominium title;
· condominium property ownership of the 6 individual units is beneficial to the social fabric of the neighbourhood, as opposed to more rental units;
· underground parking keeps all the cars out of sight and limits the amount of cars per unit to one;
· six unit buildings are a manageable size and are consistent with the neighbourhood – duplexes and triplexes on 25' lots are abundant, and these are the same density as the proposal.
Response to Neighbourhood Context Concerns:
The current zoning on the site
permits the development of multi-attached dwellings, which is a higher density
than is currently on the site. The proposed development of a low-rise apartment
building maintains a number of the current zoning provisions for multi-attached
dwellings, including front yard setback, maximum height limit, side yard
setback along the east side, and provision of a rooftop patio. The proposed
development has also been modified to provide smaller balconies along Sunnyside
Avenue, reduce the impact of the rooftop stairwell, and create a larger front
entranceway along Sunnyside Avenue to be more in keeping with the surrounding
context.
2.
Traffic and Parking:
Concerns and comments as follows:
a) Increased resident and visitor traffic and lack of available on-street parking for this increased traffic.
b) Concerns if Woodbine Place is used for access or parking for the development. Also concerns that this is a 90 degree turn (Woodbine/Barton) and is difficult to navigate.
c) Increased traffic flow right in front of a school, with children being dropped off and picked up.
d) Having underground parking very close to a school constitutes a safety issue.
e) Increased traffic from development in conjunction with expected increase of vehicular traffic flow from the Lansdowne Park redevelopment and existing traffic from Shoppers and their parking lot.
f) The efforts made to confine the parking area entrance to a single opening on Sunnyside are appreciated and it has been noted that, as has been done on Ralph Street, it is possible to have a single garage access in a townhouse model.
Response to Traffic and Parking Concerns:
Pursuant to the Zoning By-law, the
required number of parking spaces is three spaces for the proposed six units.
As Sunnyside Avenue is a collector road, the City is supportive of providing
access from Sunnyside Avenue to a parking garage that provides more parking
spaces than are required. Additionally, as the proposed number of parking spaces
is seven, one additional space will be available for residents who have more
than one vehicle or for visitor parking.
The City is confident that the
addition of six units along an existing collector road will not increase
traffic or cause new safety concerns.
3.
Green Space and Landscaping:
Concerns and comments as follows:
a) Work on the property will damage the root system of the tree in the back corner of 335 Sunnyside Avenue, possibly killing the tree.
b) The removal of the small trees and shrubbery that line the eastern perimeter of the subject site will remove a privacy screen and what would amount to a vegetation buffer between the neighbour at 335 Sunnyside and the subject site.
c) The shadowing on affected neighbours has a significant impact on their recreational activities, such as gardening, which will be negatively impacted due to the lack of sunlight reaching the rear yards and their associated flower beds.
d) Shadowing to neighbouring properties will negatively impact the microclimate of surrounding properties, especially during winter months due to increased energy demands caused by loss of natural light as well as solar heat.
e) The limited space available for trees or plant could not really be called landscaping.
f) The property at the south end of Barton holds a place of prominence at the end of this short street and could with proper sizing and landscape make a significant contribution to the streetscape.
Response to Green Space and Landscaping Concerns:
As part of the Site Plan Control process, tree protection measures will be required for impacted trees on adjacent properties. Also through this process, the landscaping of the site will be finalized, which proposes to include planters with shrubs and one tree along the Sunnyside Avenue frontage.
4.
Height:
Concerns and comments as follows:
a) Limits sunlight available for neighbouring backyards, as it is too large, too high and extends to the edges of property lines.
b) The structure required to provide rooftop access adds additional height to the building and creates a further screen from sunlight for adjacent properties to the east.
c) Overbuilding and overshadowing over adjacent properties due to its height and proximity to neighbouring properties will create visual intrusion from occupant’s windows and balconies that overlook gardens and patios, thereby undermining privacy and heightening feelings of vulnerability due to ‘overexposure’.
d) Will impose on light and privacy of the surrounding structures.
e) Too massive for the property in height.
Response to Height Concerns:
The current zoning on the site permits a height of 11 metres, which is maintained by the proposed zoning. Additionally, pursuant to the Zoning By-law, maximum height limits do not apply to rooftop stairwells.
5.
Rooftop Patio:
Concerns and comments as follows:
a) Noise due to residents using the patio.
b) Noise due to six roof-top air condition units.
c) Privacy to adjacent properties.
d) Feel that it is unnecessary as all units have balconies.
e) Feel that it is not in keeping with the architectural features of the neighbourhood.
Response to Rooftop Patio Concerns:
The Zoning By-law currently permits rooftop patios in all residential zones.
6.
Zoning Provisions/Requirements:
Concerns and comments as follows:
a)
The subject site
cannot be considered a “through-lot” as a portion of it abuts the rear yard of
46 Euclid Avenue to the North and therefore, must be considered to have a front
yard on Sunnyside Avenue and a rear yard on Woodbine Place.
b)
Misleading information
was provided about previous variances granted that are no longer applicable as
a building permit was not issued.
c)
Consideration for
required clearance for existing pole-mounted Ottawa Hydro power lines on the
North end of the property has not been shown in the plans in regards to
setbacks.
d)
Spot zoning of
properties and setting a precedent for other locations in the community of Old
Ottawa South.
e)
Before approving
structures such as this, prefer if the community had the chance to proceed with
the Community Design Plan to ensure that all residents’ viewpoints are
considered before approving development.
f)
The existing zoning of
the site does not permit the proposed development of a low-rise apartment
building, therefore, the City should enforce its own bylaws and not permit the
building of this apartment building.
g)
Highest and best use
of a property should take into consideration the existing zoning or
perhaps return to a lesser density. The present property is
underutilized, yet the proposed amendment and subsequent apartment building
swings the pendulum too far to the other side of the spectrum.
h)
An R3 zoning already
provides for various development options that would be considered appropriate
for the subject site and consistent with the City of Ottawa’s Official Plan
which promotes both infilling and intensification, as well as various other
guidelines and policies that are at play.
i)
The proposed zoning
change to R4 is inconsistent with the zoning of the neighbourhood which
consists almost entirely of R3 or lower zoning densities. There are only two
small areas with an R4 zoning. These locations are quite different from the
subject site of 337
Sunnyside Avenue, which is surrounded on all sides by R3 zoning and is neither
on a corner lot nor beside a commercial area.
Response to Zoning Provisions and Requirements Concerns:
The City has confirmed that the site
is considered as a through-lot and, thus, has frontage along both Sunnyside
Avenue and Woodbine Place. The City has also clarified with the variance
process with the applicant and has confirmed that the previously approved
variances are no longer applicable as a building permit was not obtained within
the required one-year timeframe. Additionally, the applicant has confirmed with
Hydro Ottawa that the utility poles are for secondary power only, therefore, a
5 metre setback is not required.
7.
Other Comments:
Concerns and comments as follows:
a) Due to the age of the foundation of neighbouring 335 Sunnyside Avenue and the foundation type (rubble), there is significant concern about the impact that excavation and construction in such close proximity will have on the structural integrity of this proximal building.
b)
If this project goes
ahead, there needs to be a provision put in place to ensure that any large
construction vehicles were required to access the property from Sunnyside,
rather than from Woodbine Place.
c)
Drainage is a concern
for immediate neighbours.
d)
There is already an
overcrowding of new developments in this area.
e)
The building proposal
contravenes the City of Ottawa infill housing design guidelines.
f)
The applicant has not
met the onus of demonstrating why he should be granted the exception measure of
having the subject site rezoned to R4, especially in light of all the
surrounding zoning which is R3 and the significant negative impact on
neighbouring properties.
Response to Other Concerns:
Details regarding excavation and
construction access are finalized through the building permit process and
drainage is reviewed through the Site Plan Control process.
CONCEPT PLANS DOCUMENT
4
Proposed Woodbine Place Elevation
Proposed Sunnyside Avenue Elevation
Proposed Sunnyside Avenue Rendering
PROPOSED SITE PLAN DOCUMENT
5
