Report to/Rapport au:

Planning and Development Committee /

Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’aménagement

and Council/et au Conseil

05 July 2002 / le 05 juillet 2002

Submitted by/Soumis par: Ned Lathrop, General Manager/Directeur général

Development Services Department / Services d’aménagement

Contact/Personne-ressource: Grant Lindsay, Manager, Development Approvals / Gestionnaire, Approbation des demandes d’aménagement

580-2424, 13242 – Grant.Lindsay@ottawa.ca

Ref N°: ACS2002-DEV-APR-0147

SUBJECT: ZONING – 149 KING GEORGE STREET

OBJET: ZONAGE – 149, RUE KING GEORGE

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

That the Planning and Development Committee recommend Council approve the application to amend the former City of Ottawa Zoning By-law to change the zoning of 149 King George Street from I1-Institutional to R3H Converted House zone as detailed in Document 2 and shown on Documents 3 and 4.

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’aménagement recommande au Conseil d’approuver la demande visant à modifier le Règlement municipal sur le zonage de l’ancienne Ville d’Ottawa de façon à faire passer le zonage du 149, rue King George de I1, Zone d’institutions, à R3H, Zone de maisons transformées, ainsi que le précise le document 2 et que l’illustrent les documents 3 et 4.

BACKGROUND

Context

The subject property is known as 149 King George Street and includes all of the block bound by Quill Street to the east, Glynn Street to the north, Vera Street to the west and King George Street to the south, except for the westerly two-thirds of the frontage along King George Street, which contains a mix of low profile dwellings. The applicant has requested the property be rezoned to an R3H zone with an exception to allow an apartment. The property is now occupied by the former Overbrook Public School building and grounds, and is zoned I1 Institutional Zone. The former school structure is situated on the east end of the property. The surrounding area is predominantly low-profile residential development, ranging from single bungalows to small walk-up apartment buildings. The areas adjacent to the north and northeast, and south and west are R3A and R3H Converted House/Townhouse zones respectively. The difference in the two zones is a variation in minimum lot area and lot width requirements. To the southeast across Quill Street is Overbrook Park and Community Centre in an L4 Major Leisure Area zone.

Existing Official Plans

The Official Plan of the former Region (ROP) designates the area as General Urban Area. Lands designated General Urban Area are to be used primarily for residential purposes, and for supportive shopping, service and community facilities. The Official Plan of the former City of Ottawa (OPCO) designates the property and most of the surrounding area as Residential Area. Lands designated Residential Area are intended to be predominantly residential with provision for a full range of dwelling types and uses compatible with the residential designation are also permitted. The Overbrook Park and Community Centre facility adjacent to the southeast is designated Major Leisure Area in the OPCO, which is intended to be used for leisure resources and may include a combination of open spaces and leisure facilities.

Existing Zoning

The existing I1 Institutional Zone is intended to accommodate a range of neighbourhood oriented emergency and institutional uses for lands designated Residential Area, while remaining convenient and compatible with the surrounding community. Uses permitted in the I1 zone include community centre, day care, park, recreation and athletic facility, retirement home, emergency services, and school.

Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment

The purpose of the proposed re-zoning to an R3H Converted House Zone with an exception, is to allow for conversion of the existing school building to apartments and for building townhouses on the former school grounds. The proposed R3H zone allows medium intensity residential uses including detached house, semi-detached house, and townhouse. The exception proposes to add apartment building as a permitted use, and to allow a maximum building height of 11.0 metres, rather than the 8.0 metre standard, to reflect the height of the existing school structure. Also minor reductions to minimum lot area and width, yard dimension, and landscape buffer requirements on specific areas of the property are proposed. Finally the exception would impose a minimum driveway length for townhouses on the westerly portion of the property.

DISCUSSION

Regional Official Plan Compliance

The proposed amendment is considered to be consistent with the objectives of Section 2.3 of the Regional Development Strategy of the ROP. The objectives call for taking advantage of existing infrastructure capacities, encouraging denser more compact and balanced development on lands designated for urban purposes, and increasing the proportion of new dwellings built inside the Greenbelt. The subject land, which is situated inside the Greenbelt and designated General Urban Area, is totally serviced and would facilitate a more compact form of development at a moderate density.

The ROP policies of Section 2.5 deal with development inside the Greenbelt and support zoning changes that respect the characteristics of existing communities and minimize significant impacts on adjacent residential areas. The proposed zoning, other than the exception, is the same, or very similar to the zoning of all the adjacent existing residential area. The amendment will provide for residential development types that are low profile, which is similar to much of the surrounding community, except for the existing school structure. The proposed re-zoning is therefore in keeping with the intent of the General Urban Area designation, and satisfies the intent of the policies of the ROP pertaining to residential development in the urban area.

Former Ottawa Official Plan Compliance

Primary Plan

The Municipal Development Strategy sets out Guiding Principles in the OPCO, which indicate that physically concentrated communities with sensitive increases in intensity are important for achieving the goal of environmentally sustainable urban development. The Objectives of the Housing Supply and Compatible Development, Section 3.6.1, of the OPCO speak of making efficient use of underutilized services through intensification measures to satisfy future housing demand. The proposed re-zoning will facilitate a minor but sensitive increase in the residential intensity of the undeveloped site using existing services and will help satisfy the demand for housing. The Objectives also encourage a variety and mix of housing types in all neighbourhoods and the provision of new, especially ground-oriented, housing in existing low-profile residential areas. The requested zoning will facilitate a proposed mixed development of apartments and ground-oriented townhouses in a low profile neighbourhood.

Section 3.6.2i) of the OPCO indicates that opportunities should be provided for moderate residential developments at locations adjacent to several existing community services or on vacant or underutilized sites adjacent to moderately intense development. Directly across Quill Street to the southeast is an existing community center and City park. The parcel is vacant and the adjacent lands are also zoned to permit developments of low and moderate intensity.

Factors for assessing the acceptability of moderate residential development proposals are set out in section 3.6.2j) of the OPCO. These factors include having adequate transportation and parking capacity, and access to minimize impact on local streets, and that adequate hard service capacity is, or will be available to accommodate the development. The development proposal associated with the proposed rezoning will have a minimal impact on local streets, will provide adequate parking and will be required to address sewer capacity concerns through conditions of site plan approval. Factors for assessing moderate residential development acceptability also advocate that transitions in building heights be gradual and that the development integrate with the existing built form patterns related to building height and mass, building setbacks and orientation, that outdoor amenity areas of new units respect the privacy of outdoor amenity areas of adjacent units, that shadowing on adjacent properties be minimized to the extent practicable, and that impacts on environmental quality be considered. The combination of permitted uses, performance standards and exception provisions of the proposed zoning help ensure the fulfillment of all. The proposed zoning amendment therefore, is considered to be in keeping with the intent of the OPCO.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

The applicant completed a Municipal Environmental Evaluation Process checklist and identified that the proposal could have an impact on soils and air quality and that mitigation is possible for the soil impact. Both issues will be addressed through the conditions of approval for the related site plan application.

CONSULTATION

The public was consulted by application notification signs being posted on the subject property and by the mailing of notices to community organizations serving the area. As well two public meetings were held to discuss the proposal with the community. There were 40 responses to the notification, which are described and addressed in Document 3.

The Ward Councillor is aware of this application and the staff recommendation.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

N/A

APPLICATION PROCESS TIMELINE STATUS

This application was not processed within the timeframe established for the processing of Zoning By-law Amendment applications to allow for meetings with community representatives and submission of the related Site Plan Control application.

ATTACHMENTS

Document 1 Explanatory Note

Document 2 Details of Recommended Zoning

Document 3 Location Map – Proposed Zoning

Document 4 Schedule - Proposed Zoning

Document 5 Consultation Details

DISPOSITION

City Clerk to notify the owners (Ottawa Board of Education, 133 Greenbank Road, Nepean, K2N 6L3, and agent Campanale Homes, 200 - 1187 Bank Street, Ottawa, K1S 3X7) and the Manager of Assessment, Corporate Services Department, of City Council’s decision.

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

Department of Development Services to prepare the implementing amendments to the Zoning By-law 1998 of the former City of Ottawa Zoning By-law;

EXPLANATORY NOTE Document 1

THE FOLLOWING IS AN EXPLANATORY NOTE TO BY-LAW NUMBER -2002

The subject property is known as 149 King George Street and includes all of the former Overbrook School property within the block bound by Quill Street to the east, Glynn Street to the north, Vera Street to the west and King George Street to the south. This block also contains a mix of low profile dwellings fronting the westerly portion of King George Street. The applicant has requested the property be rezoned to an R3H zone with an exception to allow an apartment. The former school structure is situated on the east end of the property. The surrounding area is predominantly low-profile residential development, ranging form single bungalows to small walk-up apartment buildings. The areas adjacent to the north and northeast, and south and west are R3A and R3H Converted House/Townhouse zones respectively. To the southeast across Quill Street is Overbrook Park and Community Centre in an L4 Major Leisure Area zone.

Current Zoning Designation

The existing I1 Institutional Zone is intended to accommodate a range of neighbourhood oriented emergency and institutional uses on lands designated Residential Area, while remaining convenient and compatible to the surrounding community. Uses permitted in the I1 zone include community centre, day care, park, recreation and athletic facility, retirement home, emergency services, and school.

Recommended Zoning Designation

The purpose of the proposed re-zoning to an R3H Converted House Zone, with an exception, is to allow for conversion of the existing school building to apartments and for building townhouses on the former school grounds. The proposed R3H zone allows for uses such as detached house, semi-detached house, and townhouse. The exception proposes to add apartment building as a permitted use, allow a maximum building height of 11.0 metres rather than the 8.0 metre standard, to reflect the height of the existing school structure, as well as to allow for minor reductions to minimum lot area and width, yard dimension, and landscape buffer requirements on specific areas of the property. The exception also imposes a minimum driveway length for townhouses on the westerly portion of the property.

DETAILS OF RECOMMENDED ZONING Document 2

R3H with a New Exception Zone

1. As shown on Document 3

2. The exception is that:

i) within area “A” of Schedule __

- the minimum lot width for a severed townhouse is 5.45 metres for a maximum of four townhouse dwelling units

- the minimum front yard is 5.5 metres

- the minimum lot area for a severed townhouse is 165 square metres for a maximum of four townhouse dwelling units

ii) within area “B” of Schedule __

- an apartment is a permitted use

- the maximum number of units in an apartment is 21

- the minimum required landscape buffer between a parking lot and a public street is 2.0 metres

- the minimum width of an interior side yard for an apartment is 4.5 metres

- maximum building height for an apartment is 11.0 metres

iii) within area “C” of Schedule __

- the minimum front yard for a severed townhouse is 4.5 metres

- the minimum driveway length leading to a required parking space for a severed townhouse is five metres

- the minimum rear yard for a severed townhouse is 4.5 metres

- the minimum lot area for a severed townhouse is 135.0 square metres

iv) within area “D” of Schedule __

- the minimum front yard is 5.5 metres

Location Map – Proposed Zoning Document 3

Schedule – Proposed Zoning Document 4

PUBLIC CONSULTATION DETAILS Document 5

There were no comments from community groups.

Comments of General Public

1. Comment: With the sale of the Overbrook School site it is recognized that some form of development is inevitable, and decent quality residential development that respects the character, quality and capacities of the predominantly single family home neighbourhood would be welcomed. There are other options in terms of density, layout, and type of development that could give the developer a profit while better addressing the concerns of existing residents.

Response: Agreed, redevelopment of the property with a residential project that is sensitive to the neighbourhood is appropriate. The density and type of development allowed in the proposed zoning is similar to that allowed under the existing zoning for the adjacent area. The related site plan application will deal with project layout.

2. Comment: The magnitude of the proposed density increase of 62 units, including 33 apartments in the old school building and 29 townhouses, is a concern. There should only be 20 townhouses. The proposed apartments will too small at only 750 square feet (69. 7 square metres) in area. A total of 16 “loft condos” would be acceptable. This is an older community designed to support a smaller number of residents. A block usually has 20 to 28 units, being 10 to 14 units back-to-back, and the proposed development would nearly triple that number. The R3H zone provides for enough density without any exemptions.

Response: The density of the development has been decreased by reducing the apartment proposal to 21 larger loft condominium units, 28 townhouses and one semi-detached dwelling. There were originally a minimum of 25 lots within the block fronting the north side of King George Street and at least 34 in the entire block that contains the subject property. The proposed exceptions to the standard R3H zone address the unique characteristics of the site allowing for the retention of the original Overbrook School building, while facilitating economical development.

3. Comment: The proposal, with many new washrooms and laundry facilities, could overload the dated sanitary and storm sewer systems serving the area. Vera Street has no sanitary or storm sewers and the storm sewers on King George Street and Glynn Avenue often overflow with heavy rains and at the peak of spring runoff. The ditch nearby along Vera Street doesn’t flow properly in the spring with the culvert under a driveway clogging up and causing a yard to fill with water at the laneway entrances. The new townhouses will channel storm water to the street increasing the load on storm sewers. Drainage from the units fronting Vera Street will exacerbate flooding problems at the corner of Vera Street and Glynn Avenue, on the southwest corner of the school site along Vera Street, and in the backyards of 109 – 117 King George Street. The City should consult area residents as part of a study to review sewer infrastructure in the area. The cost of required new sewer and water systems should not be charged to long time residents of the area who have already paid for these services.

Response: Any development on the property will be required to maintain maximum storm water runoff rates equal to existing levels. This requirement will be enforced through the related site plan approval, along with a requirement to contribute money towards upgrading the local system. As well, the City has an ongoing effort to improve the overall storm and sanitary sewer system serving the area as opportunities are presented through sewer maintenance by the City, and other development projects within the same service area. Any development along Vera Street will be required to either extend the existing City sewers or provide adequate shared private sewer connections to the city systems. The developer will be responsible for the costs of any new sewer and water works required to service the new development.

4. Comment: Increased traffic volume and congestion on local streets is a concern. The development will add 50 to 80 vehicles to the surrounding streets. More turns from Glynn Avenue and King George Street on to Quill Street, and from Vera Street to Donald Street and/or Queen Mary Street are a major safety issue. Vera Street is sub-standard and was only created through the expropriation of two lots in the 1960s; driveways onto this street will cause access problems. Four-way stops are needed for resident’s safety. Stop lights would be a good idea. There should be a stop sign at Queen Mary Street and Vera Street.

Response: The proposed development is projected to generate a minor increase in traffic on the adjacent streets, which is within the volume limits anticipated for local streets. The potential traffic generation from the development has been examined based on standard transportation engineering trip generation rates published by ITE. This examination indicates that the proposed development will generate approximately 30 two-way vehicle trips in the morning peak hour and 35 two-way vehicle trips in the afternoon peak hour. An elementary school (200 students) would generate approximately 60 two-way vehicle trips in the morning peak hour and 50 two-way vehicle trips in the afternoon peak (site peak) hour. On an average weekday, the proposed development will generate a total of approximately 330 two-way vehicle trips. An elementary school (not accounting for evening use) would generate a total of approximately 205 two-way vehicle trips on an average weekday. These additional weekday trips are not considered excessive, nor of concern as they are disbursed throughout the day. Following a review of the existing intersection controls on the streets abutting the proposed development, the existing traffic control devices were deemed to be appropriate for the projected traffic volumes, with no change to the levels-of-service expected. Due to concerns expressed by community members, a request has been made to monitor and reassess the operation of the subject intersections immediately following the occupancy of the townhouse portion of the proposed development. Should a need for modifications to the existing on-street parking regulations or intersection controls be identified, they can be made at that time.

5. Comment: The proposal will cause more overflow parking onto the streets from the residents and their visitors and will compromise emergency access. With the second community centre on Donald Street at Quill Street, and a church and a mosque, there is now more parking on area streets. There should be parking allowed on only one side of Vera Street and Glynn Avenue. Parking on Vera Street and Glynn Avenue is a major safety concern because they are very narrow. The City’s parking standards of 0.7 cars per unit is outdated with many households having more than one vehicle; the developer should reduce the number of units in the school building and provide enough parking spaces for visitors and residents, with one space per unit. At the initial public meeting the parking lot seemed undersized. More on-street parking will increase the problems for OC Transpo buses using Quill Street. Even with driveways, townhouse owners and their visitors will park on the streets.

Response: The development proposal for the property reflected in the related site plan application includes on-site parking capacity significantly exceeding the minimum parking requirements of the zoning by-law for residential units and visitors, including 22 spaces for a proposed 21 unit apartment building. The City’s minimum parking standard reflects Council policies expressed in the Official Plans of the former City of Ottawa and Region to diminish dependency on automobiles in favour of increased transit use. On-street parking demand patterns will change as a result of the proposal, but no compromise to emergency access, nor bus access is anticipated. There are currently no on-street parking restrictions on Vera Street and Glynn Avenue. On-street parking regulations are not controlled through the zoning by-law amendment process.

6. Comment: Pedestrian safety is a concern, especially for families with children and with no sidewalks along Glynn Avenue and Vera Street, which is a sub-standard street without curbs. Snow banks along streets in the winter will increase pedestrian safety problems. There should be sidewalks on one side of Glynn Avenue and Vera Street. Taxpayers should not have to pay for an investment in curbs along Vera Street. There are already problems of non-residents using Vera and Quill streets as parts of shortcuts connecting to Queen Mary Street, Donald Street, Coventry Road, and the Vanier Parkway.

Response: Pedestrian movement along the streets fronting the development will change to levels similar to the many other local streets throughout the city developed in a like manner, as opposed to the levels along streets serving a local school. The need for sidewalks along Glynn Avenue and Vera Street will be assessed through the related site plan approval process. If new or additional curbs are required as a result of the proposed development it will be determined through the related site plan application review and the cost of construction would be borne by the developer.

7. Comment: The mixture of proposed rental apartment units and freehold townhouse units in a predominantly resident owned neighbourhood is a concern; temporary residents don’t identify with the community, don’t exhibit pride of ownership, and put little social or physical investment into it. The rental units should not compromise the quality and character of the site as a whole and should fit in with the neighbourhood. There is no guarantee that the developer will rent the proposed apartments to seniors as he says, especially without elevators and wheelchair ramps. Transient renters may cause a target market conflict with the proposed freehold townhouses. Before rentals occur all the people should be screened by the RCMP or the Ottawa Police, because the neighbourhood is bad enough as it is. The older part of the school would be better suited to about 12 good quality condominiums; loft style condominiums would be the best use of the school. Overbrook is a community in transition towards a mixed income area and needs more housing to cater to middle to upper income families. There is no guarantee the developer won’t sell the school building after the townhouses are built. The proposed units will likely attract middle-income groups.

Response: Control of tenure is not within the legislative mandate of the planning and development approvals processes. The applicant has indicated that the revised development proposal now involves 21 loft style condominium apartments rather than the originally proposed rental units. Any property owner has a right to attempt to sell any individual parcel of land at any time, but there has been no indication from the applicant that he intends to sell the school structure.

8. Comment: The proposal will change the environment from peaceful to chaotic and unsafe.

Response: The environment evolving from the proposed development will be predominantly residential, and benefit from the increase of passive surveillance fostered by additional residents.

9. Comment: The new buildings should be the same models that already exist on the street, which would be better for the environment, especially for air space and trees. It would be a tragedy to lose all the mature trees on the site. The area is now almost exclusively single-family homes and this should be maintained with the new development; attention should be paid to the size and proportion of the existing single dwellings on the street. Half the area proposed for townhouses should be reserved for single homes. The development will have cookie cutter stamp out dwellings that all look the same. At the initial public meeting the townhouse elevations did not correspond with what was shown on the site plan and there were no drawings to show how the school building was to be renovated. The developer should build nice single two or three bedroom homes. This is not an apartment building area; please don’t allow high rises or commercial enterprises on the property. We will lose our privacy with the development of a multi-level apartment building by our back yard.

Response: The building types allowed by the proposed R3H zone with an exception are the same as those allowed in all the adjacent residential zones, which are R3A and R3H zones, except for the apartment which facilitates the retention of the existing school structure. The immediately adjacent area contains predominantly single dwellings of various different styles, but it also includes walk-up apartments, and duplex dwellings. The City has no current control over building design and the zoning performance standards that influence size will allow for dwelling sizes similar to the limits in the adjacent area. The related site plan control application will deal with trees on the property and will involve review of the relationship of site plan drawings to architectural drawings, including those of the school. Single detached dwellings are permitted in the proposed R3H with an exception zone and apartments are limited to the area of the existing school building while the proposed height limit restricts buildings to eight metres other than the 11 metre exception reflecting the existing height of the school structure. Visual buffering for privacy will be addressed through the related site plan application.

10. Comment: Concerns about renting verses ownership represent “snobbishness”.

Response: See response to number 7 above.

11. Comment: Changing the units proposed to face Vera Street such that they front on Glynn Avenue would solve numerous problems related to the substandard nature of the street.

Response: The orientation of units will be addressed through the related Site Plan application.

12. Comment: There must be a commitment form the developer and the City through the related Site Plan process to the intent, quality, and compatibility of both the townhouse and apartment aspects of the proposal as integral parts of the overall plan, with both parts being compatible with each other.

Response: A Site Plan Control approval application for the overall property has been submitted and is currently under review in terms of functional and design quality, including neighbourhood compatibility.

13. Comment: If the school building was to retain an institutional zoning the City could ensure that the it was developed as a proper seniors residence, which would be more acceptable to the community.

Response: A retirement home use is a permitted use amongst many others in the existing I1 Minor Institutional Zone, and the proposed R3H Converted House/Townhouse Zone with an exception allows a retirement home, converted accommodating a maximum of eight residents, amongst numerous other uses. The City cannot guarantee nor compel an owner to develop any form of “proper seniors residence” in either case.

14. Comment: We live in beautiful surroundings on Glynn Avenue, which is a respectable, quiet street and we don’t want our property values to go down. We are going to become surrounded by, garbage bins, numerous vehicles and parking lots and noise from such things as commercial HVAC equipment. The future condominium association and the developer should guarantee good private maintenance levels. The strong sense of community found in the neighbourhood will be adversely effected by the proposal. The area now has an ideal mix of older retired couples with deep roots in the community and younger families.

Response: No diminishing of surrounding property values is expected as a result of the proposed rezoning. The proposed zoning will allow for replacement of the institutional school-yard environment with a residential environment. The related development plans include one enclosed garbage storage facility for the apartments and one parking area using part of the former school parking area. Mitigation of noise sources will be addressed through the related site plan application. If a condominium is created the required association will have the same legal responsibility for maintenance of the condominium site as any other residential property owner in the City. A challenge to existing and future residents will be to maintain and expand the present sense of community. The proposed development of townhouses and apartments frequently accommodates a diversity of residents.

15. Comment: Why not sell off lots or buffer zones to existing residents to expand their back yards, and maybe build a small park for local children.

Response: The proposed rezoning does not preclude the owner from considering a series of severances and subsequent sale of the properties to adjacent homeowners, but it is highly unlikely given the planning and design complications, and the extremely limited potential for any economic viability in such a proposal. A large City park exists immediately across Quill Street to the southeast and parkland obligations for the development will likely take the form of cash in-lieu of land to be used for improvements to the existing park facilities.

16. Comment: How do we get this approval issued by Council and not Planning Committee?

Response: Planning and Development Committee makes recommendations to City Council regarding zoning by-law amendments, such as the subject application, and City Council makes the final approval or refusal decision.