CONFIRMATION
OF MINUTES
Ratification dU
procÈs-verbaL
Minutes 36 of the Planning and Environment Committee meeting of Tuesday,
8 July 2008 were confirmed.
CONFIRMED
STATEMENT REQUIRED UNDER THE
PLANNING ACT
Vice-Chair Peggy Feltmate
read a statement required under the Planning Act, which advises that
anyone who intends to appeal the proposed Zoning By-law Amendments listed as
Items 2, 3, 4 and 13 on today’s agenda must either voice their objections at
this public meeting or submit their comments in writing prior to the amendment
being adopted by City Council on 9 September 2008 (Items 2, 3 and 13)
and 28 August 2008 (Item 4). Failure to
do so may result in the Ontario Municipal Board dismissing all or part of the
appeals.
STATEMENT
REQUIRED FOR ZONING MATTERS SUBMITTED FOR POST JANUARY 1, 2007
DÉCLARATION POUR LES DEMANDES DE MODIFICATION DE ZONAGE PRÉSENTÉES
APRÈS LE 1ER JANVIER 2007
Vice-Chair Peggy Feltmate
read a statement relative to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments
listed as Items 8, 9 and 10, the Zoning By-law Amendments listed as Items 12,
14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 21, as well as the matters listed as Items 11 and 20
on the Agenda. She advised that only
those who made oral submissions at today’s meeting or written submissions
before the amendments are adopted could appeal these matters to the Ontario
Municipal Board. In addition,
applicants may appeal the matter to the Ontario Municipal Board if Council does
not adopt an amendment within 120 days for Zoning and 180 days for an Official
Plan Amendment of receipt of the application.
REFERRALS AND DEFERRALS
REPORTS ET RENVOIS
1. SOURCE
SEPARATED ORGANICS – EVALUATION, DIAPER DISPOSAL AND BI-WEEKLY COLLECTION
IMPLEMENTATION
TRI DES
MATIÈRES ORGANIQUES À LA SOURCE – ÉVALUATION, ÉLIMINATION DES COUCHES JETABLES
ET MISE EN PLACE DE LA COLLECTE TOUTES LES DEUX SEMAINES
ACS2008-CCS-PEC-0017 CITY WIDE/À L'ÉCHELLE DE
LA VILLE
Referred by Council on July 9, 2008 / Renvoi du Conseil du 9 juillet 2008
Email correspondence
from Robert Behrend, dated July 10, 2008, was received and is held on file with
the City Clerk.
Albert Shamess,
Director of Solid Waste Services, provided two PowerPoint presentations (held
on file with the City Clerk) that touched on collection issues and organic
waste management technologies.
Mr. Shamess, assisted by
Anne-Marie Fowler, Manager of Solid Waste Operations, responded to questions
from Councillors, clarifying the following:
·
Typically
it costs more to process Source Separated Organics (SSO) than what is recovered
in collection costs.
·
Council
previously approved the SSO program and the contract is in place. If the City wishes to pursue a better alternative
that becomes available, the contract contains a cancellation clause with a
financial penalty. The penalty is
significant if the contract is cancelled in the first 10 years because of
infrastructure development costs.
·
Flexibility
exists in the contract to look at other technologies with the contractor
(Orgaworld). The City will be working
with the contractor to evaluate the processes and procedures that are employed
at the facility for improvements.
·
With
respect to odors, a Certificate of Approval is required for air emissions from
the Ministry of the Environment. The
facility will include a comprehensive odor control system that involves
bio-filtration and scrubbing. Air
inside the building is collected and treated prior to discharge in order to remove
odors.
·
The
facility in Western Québec takes a mix of bio-solids and organics, which is not
the case in Ottawa because the mix of materials comes with a high risk of
failure. The technology employed is
significantly different and the odor control system in Ottawa will be more
complex, comprehensive and robust.
·
The
contract with Orgaworld requires the City’s approval prior to accepting any
other material, which must meet the same quality standards.
·
The
diaper program would include incontinence products. People would be required to apply and criteria would be
determined. The Region of Durham had
150-200 families participating in a similar program with lower than expected participation,
which declined over time.
·
One
private company that provided diaper recycling is currently in receivership.
·
Registration
for the diaper/incontinence program is a means to determine where to pick up
and to provide the supply of bags or tags needed for off week collection. Costs are estimated at $200,000, to be
recovered based on current per ton fees.
Diapers represent 1.5 to 2 per cent of the waste stream. The diapers would be collected similarly to
the current practice for leaf and yard waste.
·
Other
municipalities initiated pilot projects for clear bags. Similar pilot programs could be looked at
once the SSO program is implemented in Ottawa.
·
Degradable
paper bags that fit inside the green box can be purchased at several retail
outlets. In other municipalities,
entrepreneurs have started up receptacle cleaning services.
·
The
$2.7 million in collection savings (as a result of bi-weekly collection) is
offset by an overall increase in solid waste management due to the costs of the
SSO program. The cost of collection for
SSO is lower per ton as the material is heavier than residual waste.
·
The
current solid waste collection costs are $15 million for garbage and $15
million for recycling. The SSO program
will cost $8 million, but with a reduction in other collection costs, it would
represent a net impact of $2.5 million.
The net savings for bi-weekly collection is $1 million. (All figures are annual.)
·
The
contractors provided a different per ton price estimate depending on the
residual garbage pick up frequency. The
lower price option for all solid waste collection involves the implementation
of bi-weekly residual waste collection.
·
The
multi-residential sector will not be included in the original implementation of
the SSO program, but would be included in a second phase.
·
The
cost for waste diversion programs is part of the mill rate as a broad based
benefit to the community.
·
Research
was undertaken on the differences in diversion when comparing weekly and
bi-weekly residual waste collection.
Participation rates in areas with bi-weekly collection range from 75 to
90 per cent. Rates are higher when
programs are introduced and they have been in place for a longer period of
time.
·
The
Region of Durham is split and offers both collection options. Durham has found an additional 13 per cent
overall diversion with bi-weekly collection.
Durham is also building a mass burn incinerator for residual waste,
while continuing diversion programs.
·
On
an on-going basis, staff evaluates recycling programs to determine if a stable
long-term market exists for additional material. The Environmental Plastics Institute recently announced the
existence of a facility, which accepts Styrofoam. Transportation costs and the recovery rate will be analyzed to
determine the appropriateness of adding this and other items to the blue
box.
·
The
number of garbage bags permitted per week was reduced from five to three in
2006. This issue could be looked at as
part of the overall implementation of the SSO program over the next year.
·
Some
municipalities that introduced SSO with weekly residual garbage collection are
now investigating a move to bi-weekly collection. The oldest SSO programs were implemented 15 years ago in Nova
Scotia with bi-weekly residual waste collection.
·
Weekly
residual garbage collection would require additional educational and information
efforts, as bi-weekly collection allows for more of an incentive to participate
in the SSO program.
Councillor Holmes
indicated she would move a motion to proceed with bi-weekly residual collection
six months following implementation of the SSO program to avoid additional
costs and ensure participation. She
noted that the six months would provide a phase-in time for residents to
realize how little garbage will remain as a result of an organics program. She added the motion would also support the
creation of an inclusive program for diaper and incontinence pick-up for
families needing such a service.
Councillor Hunter
suggested the need for discussion on the funding of waste diversion programs
(mill versus service rate) and how revenues received by recycling are
shared. Mr. Shamess confirmed that
Council previously directed staff to address service to rural residents.
Councillor Hunter
stated he received three emails when this matter was in the news the previous
week. He suggested asking residents to
analyze their waste to determine what is left after materials are placed in the
green, blue and black boxes.
Councillor Hunter also
touched on the motion referred from Council with respect to the evaluation of
success. He questioned what would occur
if the program were deemed not to be successful. Councillor Hume clarified the differences between what is
proposed by staff, the motions referred by Council and new motions presented at
today’s meeting.
With respect to the
incontinence and diaper program, Councillor Wilkinson suggested staff also
investigate pick-up of certain items that require more frequent collection,
such as dialysis supplies. She also
said that environmental impacts are not expressly noted in the report with
respect to weekly versus bi-weekly residual garbage collection (e.g. CO2
reductions). She further pushed for the
promotion of cloth diapers to assist with diaper disposal issues.
Chair Hume noted that
the Province has announced funding for e-waste and expanded household special
waste. Mr. Shamess indicated pilot
program announcements would be forthcoming as part of evaluations for the 2009
Budget. With regard to household
special waste, he added the Province announced that the program would be fully
funded by producers.
Councillor Bellemare
raised concerns with the proposed diaper/incontinence program, notably the
inability to estimate the number of potential participating households and the
registration requirement. He stated the
proposal is overly bureaucratic and logistically challenging.
Councillor Harder
advised that she would be moving a motion to continue weekly residual garbage
collection until 2012. She reiterated
her support for the SSO program, noting she has confidence that the citizens of
Ottawa will adapt to the change. She
touched on the unknowns associated with the proposed diaper program and the
need for time to educate people to ensure buy-in. On the diaper issue, she added engagement of long-term care and
daycare providers is a necessity.
Councillor Monette
spoke in support of Councillor Harder’s motion, noting people are paying taxes
for garbage pick up and expect it on a weekly basis. He suggested the 2012 timeframe would allow sufficient
opportunity to ascertain if the program will work without penalizing residents
with a cut to garbage services.
Councillor Desroches
suspected the costs for the proposed diaper program were underestimated. He questioned the benefit of implementing
bi-weekly residual waste collection in spring 2010, as the start period will be
the most critical phase of this project for it to be successful. Mr. Shamess responded that the March target
is two months before leaf and yard pick up and the typical increase in the
volume of waste, which in majority is attributed to organic waste. With the introduction of the SSO collection
on a weekly basis, the level of service will essentially be the same for the
seasonal increase in waste.
Councillor Feltmate
touched on the environmental implications of weekly versus bi-weekly residual
garbage collection, as well as long-term costs associated with the requirement
for additional landfills or alternative expensive methods for dealing with
garbage. Mr. Shamess indicated the
implementation report, discussed in June 2008, made reference to the deferred
cost of assuming the long-term maintenance and liabilities associated with the
Trail Road Landfill. The report also
attempted to quantify the costs for the development of a new landfill.
Councillor Feltmate
also questioned how deferring implementation of bi-weekly residual garbage
collection would be beneficial to residents, as it will not reduce costs nor
encourage people to participate in the SSO program. She noted the citizens of Ottawa are intelligent and will adapt,
adding she receives numerous emails calling for the City to do more.
Mark Scharfe,
Ramsayville Community Association, raised concerns on the proposed location of the SSO processing site at
Rideau and Hawthorne Roads. The site is
adjacent to the three quarries that require Take Water permits from the
Province. He added the area, which is
serviced by wells, includes one of the biggest dairy operations in the City, as
well as grain elevators, an industrial park, the Meadows Golf Course,
greenhouses, farms and residential homes.
Mr. Scharfe explained the former City of Gloucester by-law directed that
no industrial use should be permitted that requires water in any processing
operation or that has as a bi-product water-borne waste requiring municipal
waste treatment. He stated this
prohibition was left out of the Comprehensive Zoning By-law.
Mr. Scharfe indicated
the proposed site could handle approximately 150 thousand tons specifically
reserved for the City’s organics program at a rate of $89 per ton. He explained that a few years back, he
placed cattle on the Duncan Farm at Hawthorne Road and lost one large animal to
“black leg”, which is caused by anthrax spores in the soil. He cautioned the Committee on the impact of
the proposed SSO processing site on human health through contamination of the
land. He also touched on drainage
issues in the area. In closing, he
reiterated opposition to the proposed processing facility.
Following the public
delegation, Councillor Holmes formally presented her motion. Councillor Hunter noted his opposition to
the program, but stated that bi-weekly residual garbage collection is the most
cost effective option for its implementation.
Councillor Doucet also
spoke in support of the Holmes’ motion, commenting on the previous political
delays in moving forward with a SSO program.
Councillor Hume said
citizens have adapted to changes in collection over the years with the
introduction of the blue and black box.
He noted it would be very difficult to site or fund an incinerator or
new landfill.
Moved by J. Harder:
That Planning and
Environment Committee reject garbage frequency change to bi-weekly at this
time;
That other
options to encourage SSO compliance be explored; and
That the City of
Ottawa maintain weekly residual waste collection until the end of the current
contracts (2012).
LOST
YEAS (5): M. Bellemare, S. Desroches, J. Harder,
B. Monette, S. Qadri
NAYS (5): C. Doucet, D. Holmes, G. Hunter, P.
Feltmate, P. Hume
Moved by D. Holmes:
That the City of
Ottawa move to bi-weekly residual waste collection within six months of SSO
Implementation (by March 2010);
That a separate
program for curbside collection of diapers be developed to compliment the
by-weekly residual garbage collection; and
That staff
develop a list of additional products and materials that could be added to the
supplemental program.
LOST
YEAS (5): C. Doucet, D. Holmes, G. Hunter, P.
Feltmate, P. Hume
NAYS (5): M. Bellemare, S.
Desroches, J. Harder, B. Monette, S. Qadri
The
Committee directed staff to prepare a policy report on how diversion and
garbage programs are funded and how revenues are shared.
2. ZONING - 74 STONEHAVEN DRIVE
ZONAGE - 74
PROMENADE STONEHAVEN
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0121 kanata south/sud (23)
Deferred on June 24, 2008 /Reporté le 24 juin 2008
(This application is not subject to Bill 51)
Most of
the correspondence related to this matter was also received on the zoning
application for 310 Stonehaven Drive and is referenced under Item 3. The following correspondence was received
with respect to 74 Stonehaven Drive:
·
Email
(August 14, 2008) in opposition from Kay Stephenson-Wrack
·
Email
(August 16, 2008) in opposition from Dorothy Scott
Mary
Jarvis, Urbandale Corporation, was present in support of the recommendations.
That the Planning and
Environment Committee recommend Council:
1. Approve an amendment to By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning
of 74 Stonehaven Drive from Residential Third Density, Sub Zone X Zone (R3X),
to Residential Third Density, Sub Zone X, Exception Zone (R3X [xxxx]) and
Residential Fourth Density, Sub Zone M, Exception Zone (R4M [xxxx]), as shown
in Document 1 and as detailed in Document 2.
2. Approve an amendment to the former City of Kanata Zoning
By-law to change the zoning of 74 Stonehaven Drive from Residential Type 3A
Zone, (R3A) to Residential Type 3A Exception Zone, (R3A-6), and Residential
Type 5A Exception Zone, (R5A-1), as shown in Document 1 and as detailed in
Document 2.
CARRIED
3. ZONING - 310 STONEHAVEN DRIVE
Deferred on June 24, 2008 /Reporté le 24 juin 2008
(This application is not subject to Bill 51)
Previously
received correspondence was referenced in Minutes 35 of June 24, 2008.
The
following documentation was received in opposition to the zoning applications
regarding 74 and 310 Stonehaven Drive:
·
Email
(August 10, 2008) from Roger Toutant
·
Email
(August 14, 2008) from Joan and John Pumphrey opposed to stacked townhomes
·
Email
(August 17, 2008) from J.P. Sangemino
·
Email
(August 18, 2008) from Leslie Norkum
The
following correspondence was received in support:
·
Email
(August 11, 2008) from John and Judi Murtough requesting a buffer
·
Email
(August 14, 2008) from Mark Thaw
·
Email
(August 15, 2008) from Nancy and Gabriel Hajal
·
Email
(August 18, 2008) from Tyler and Catherine Shaw
Kathy
Rygus, Planner II, gave a detailed overview of the departmental report with a
PowerPoint presentation, which is held on file with the City Clerk.
In
response to questions from Councillor Qadri, Ms. Rygus stated that Bridlewood
is comprised of approximately 20,000 residents with four westbound and one
eastbound points of entry to the community.
The Hope lands to the south will eventually become part of the
Bridlewood Community with a connection to Hope Side Road. There are no exits going north due to the
National Capital Commission (NCC) lands.
She confirmed four schools are located on Stonehaven Drive and the business
traffic from Michael Cowpland Drive and Terence Matthews Crescent in all likelihood
travels east on Hope Side Road rather than cut through the residential
community on Stonehaven Drive.
Councillor
Qadri, as a resident of the neighbourhood, commented on accessing Richmond Road
from Stonehaven Drive in the morning peek periods and issues with the
intersection’s configuration. He
suggested that if the zoning does move forward, development should only occur
once broad traffic problems have been addressed to ensure residents are not
inconvenienced further.
Responding
to questions from Councillor Holmes, Ms. Rygus advised that the Official Plan
does support a range of housing types.
This particular subdivision proposes exclusively single-family houses on
a range of lot sizes in keeping with the surrounding development. The narrowest lots are 10.5 metres, which is
the minimum under the R1T zone, which affects these lands and a number of
surrounding developments.
Don
Herweyer, Program Manager of Development Review West, added that the
application to the north has stacked townhouses with a mix of street towns and
townhouses throughout the community. He
commented that while this application is exclusively single-detached dwellings,
which may be partly due to the traffic situation, there is an overall mix
throughout the community. The proposed
road network uses the reduced approved cross-section for local streets,
resulting in a narrowing of the right-of-way.
Mr. Herweyer confirmed staff is attempting to implement a grid road
system for new communities; however this community was planned on a curvilinear
system a number of years ago and this is the last phase of development. In addition, all the collector roads will
have sidewalks on both sides.
Margaret
Kellaway, Bridlewood Community Association, voiced opposition to the proposed development
until such time as the pre-existing traffic issues on Stonehaven Drive are
resolved. She acknowledged that
Urbandale has been working with the Bridlewood Community; however traffic on
Stonehaven Drive is a major issue for the community. Two forums and an on-line survey have been set up and
participation was high. Ms. Kellaway
also expressed concern with the impact of school bus changes in the fall and
increased traffic due to the development of 74 Stonehaven Drive.
In reply
to questions from Councillor Feltmate on community input, Ms. Kellaway recalled
that a community safety meeting was held in January 2007 and traffic on
Stonehaven Drive came forward as one of the major issues for residents. Two hundred responses were received from the
on-line survey. In February 2008, a
forum was well attended and focused on traffic on Stonehaven Drive.
Councillor
Feltmate acknowledged the community association is not against the development,
as most residents live in Urbandale homes.
The issue remains Stonehaven Drive and people cannot understand how the
City can give permission to add more traffic on this street at this point in
time. She also touched on the decision
of the English separate school board to have more children walk to school,
noting two schools from that board are located along Stonehaven Drive.
Ms.
Kellaway observed more parents would be driving their children to school as a
result of the board decision on busing.
Mary
Jarvis, Urbandale Corporation was accompanied by Doug Kelly, Soloway Wright LLP and Stephanie
McNeely, Dillon Consulting Limited.
She declared that Bridlewood has been a successful community and is well
planned. Phase 6 is the final phase as
per the Kanata Official Plan. With
respect to the road pattern within the subdivision, Ms. Jarvis explained that
Stonemeadow Drive would connect to Bridlewood Drive to keep the traffic away
from the elementary school. It will
have sidewalks on both sides with numerous pathway connections to the rest of
Bridlewood.
Mr. Kelly
recounted that the original community plan was approved in the 1974 Kanata
Official Plan. It stopped north of the
Hope lands and another road was planned along the east side of the community. The former Region later removed it and the
Richmond Road corridor going north was also downgraded. He indicated that the environmental
assessment (EA) studies for Eagleson Road and Terry Fox Drive/Hope Side Road
are ongoing and are required to address overall traffic concerns in the area.
Ms.
McNeely explained that the draft subdivision conditions require four traffic
signals to distribute traffic more evenly.
Two of the traffic signals recommended are based on existing traffic
conditions and the other two would be required when more traffic is added
because of this site (one over the course of the year and the second at full
build out). She advised that the
traffic analysis did consider other future adjacent developments, including
background growth in traffic that would occur, as well traffic for both
Urbandale sites.
In
response to questions from the Chair, Ms. McNeely stated no capacity exists
currently at the Richmond Road and Stonehaven Drive intersection, given the
issues with the eastbound left turn from Stonehaven Drive in the morning peak
period. Recent traffic lane lengthening
was undertaken in the area and the Traffic and Parking Operations (TPO) branch
was looking at other measures that might be suitable. She estimated that traffic generated from the development would
travel in the following split: 40 per cent going west to Eagleson Road and 60
per cent (or approximately 100 vehicles in the morning peak) traveling east to
Richmond Road.
Ms. Jarvis
reiterated that traffic solutions must be implemented for all South Kanata, as
over 10,000 units were approved east of Eagleson Road. She emphasized that Crownridge Drive was
identified in the Kanata, Regional and current Official Plans for connection to
Hope Side Road. She opined that
delaying 100 or 200 units without solving the broader problem would serve no
one.
In
response to questions from Councillor Harder, the applicant confirmed the land
was bought from Cadillac Fairview in the early 1980s by Urbandale. Minto came in to Bridlewood by purchasing
the Macdonald lands and the Hope lands were added to Bridlewood in the late
1980s but were never developed. Mr.
Kelly also spoke of the Region’s decisions, influenced by the NCC, with regard
to Richmond Road and the current impact on traffic.
Councillor
Feltmate also drew the Committee’s attention to the West Hunt Club and Richmond
Road intersection. She added the NCC
will not allow the road to be widened and the police have advised that they
cannot do anything more to make the intersection safer.
In response to
questions from the ward councillor, Mr. Wildman advised that the intersection
at Richmond Road and West Hunt Club Road is critical and not performing. TPO has undertaken a global study, which is
expected to be complete by mid-fall.
One of the options is to have a centre lane with traffic directed north
in the morning and south in the evening, if it can be accommodated within the
existing cross-section of the roadway.
Regarding moving up funding for the Hope Side Hope EA, Mr. Wildman said
funding is shown in 2010 and 2014 for design and construction.
Councillor
Feltmate proposed that a holding zone be implemented to allow development to
occur when a transportation solution can be found and implemented. She said a compromise was explored with the
applicant but could not be achieved.
Ms. Jarvis
proposed the holding provision expire on January 1, 2010. It would give the City 18 months to find a
transportation solution for Kanata South.
Mr. Kelly explained that the applicant can apply to lift the holding
zone at any time, but would hold off if half the land could be developed
immediately. He added that 50 vehicle
trips would be generated in the morning peak period if half the units in Phase
6 were developed.
Mr. Marc advised
that the motion to apply a holding symbol could be defended on legal and
transportation grounds. If the motion
is approved, the applicant could accept the by-law, appeal on the basis of the
120-day rule or file a private appeal.
Councillor
Feltmate touched on the community feedback.
She asked for support to implement a holding zone to deal with the
on-going transportation issues and not further impact residents.
Moved by
P. Feltmate:
WHEREAS
the Official Plan identifies Stonehaven Drive as a Major Collector road,
intended to serve as a connection between an arterial road and collector roads,
and a Transportation Study was submitted with the subdivision and zoning
applications, addressing the introduction of traffic from the proposed
subdivision development into the overall transportation network of the existing
community;
AND
WHEREAS Stonehaven Drive is experiencing increased traffic at peak times of the
day, and the City has received comments from the community on existing
operational traffic concerns in Bridlewood that are in part related to the
proposed development, one of which is a constraint at the intersection of
Stonehaven Drive and Richmond Road and the Stonehaven Drive /Richmond Road
corridor;
AND
WHEREAS there are high-level studies being completed in the surrounding area to
analyze global traffic issues such as the Eagleson Road Environmental
Assessment and the Terry Fox Drive/Hope Side Road Extension Environmental
Assessment, and Traffic Operations staff have been reviewing the existing
internal community concerns;
AND
WHEREAS it is advisable that the transportation solution is identified and road
improvements are implemented to the City’s satisfaction to improve the
intersection of Stonehaven Drive and Richmond Road, and to alleviate traffic
congestion on Stonehaven Drive and Richmond Road prior to commencement of the
proposed development;
THEREFORE
BE IT RESOLVED THAT Planning and Environment Committee approve and implement
the following revisions to Staff Report ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0120:
1. That
“Recommendations 1 and 2” be deleted and replaced with the following:
1. Approve an amendment to By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of 310
Stonehaven Drive from Development Reserve Zone (DR), Institutional Zone (I1A)
and Parks and Open Space Zone (O1) to Residential First Density, Subzone T,
Exception xxxx, Holding Zone (R1T [xxxx]-h) as shown in Document 1 and detailed
in Document 2.
2. Approve
an amendment to the former City of Kanata Zoning By-law 168-94 to change the
zoning of 310 Stonehaven Drive from Holding Zone (H), Institutional Zone (I)
and Open Space Zone (OS1) to Holding Residential Type 1B Special Zone 6,
(HR1B-6), as shown in Document 1 and as detailed in Document 2.
2. Document 1 be
deleted and replaced with the attached new Document 1.
3. That the Details of
Recommended Zoning in “Document 2” be deleted and replaced with the following:
Proposed changes to
By-law 2008-250
1. The
lands shown as Area A on Document 1 zoned DR, Area B on Document 1 zoned I1A
and Area C on Document 1 zoned O1 under By-law 2008-250 will be rezoned to R1T
[xxxx]-h.
2. Section
239 of By-law 2008-250 is amended to add a new exception including the
following provisions:
On lands zoned R1T [xxxx] with a holding symbol, the ‘h’ symbol
denotes that the units may be constructed only after the removal of the ‘h’
symbol, which removal may only occur when the transportation solution is found
and implemented to the City’s satisfaction, that improves the intersection of
Stonehaven Drive and Richmond Road, and Stonehaven Drive/Richmond Road
Corridor.
Proposed changes to By-law No. 168-94 for the former City of Kanata
1. The lands shown as Area A on Document 1
zoned H, Area B on Document 1 zoned I1A and Area C on Document 1 zoned OS1 will
be rezoned to HR1B-6.
2. Subsection 6(3) is amended to add a new
special zone including the following provisions:
On lands zoned R1T [xxxx] with a holding symbol, the ‘h’ symbol
denotes that the units may be constructed only after the removal of the ‘h’
symbol, which removal may only occur when the transportation solution is found
and implemented to the City’s satisfaction, that improves the intersection of
Stonehaven Drive and Richmond Road, and Stonehaven Drive/Richmond Road
corridor.
CARRIED
Deferred on July 8, 2008 /Reporté le 8 juillet 2008
LOCAL ARCHITECTURAL CONSERVATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
COMITÉ CONSULTATIF SUR LA CONSERVATION DE
L’ARCHITECTURE LOCALE
7. APPLICATION
FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION IN THE CENTRETOWN HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT AT
152-170 ARGYLE AVENUE/424 METCALFE STREET
DEMANDE DE NOUVELLE CONSTRUCTION DANS LE DISTRICT DE CONSERVATION DU
PATRIMOINE DU CENTRE-VILLE AU 152-170, AVENUE ARGYLE/424, RUE METCALFE
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0147 somerset (14)
LACAC AND
PLANNING BRANCH RECOMMENDATIONS
That
Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council:
1. Approve the construction of a new
building at 152-170 Argyle Avenue/424 Metcalfe Street in the Centretown Heritage
Conservation District in accordance with the plans submitted by Barry J. Hobin
& Associates Architects Incorporated, as received on June 13, 2008 and
included as Documents 2 to 5; and
2. Delegate approval of any subsequent
design changes of a minor nature to the Director of the Planning Branch.
CARRIED
PLanning,
TranSIT and thE EnVIRONMENT
urbanisme, transport en commun et environNement
PLANNING
URBANISME
8. OFFICIAL PLAN - 2911
PRINCE OF WALES DRIVE
PLAN OFFICIEL - 2911, PROMENADE PRINCE OF WALES
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0138 Gloucester - South Nepean/ sud (22)
(This application is
subject to Bill 51)
Email correspondence was received from the following:
·
Barry King (August 14, 15 and 19 2008)
requesting deferral
·
AJ Preece (August 15 and 17, 2008)
·
C.R. Nixon (August 17 and 18, 2008)
The following public delegations supported the requested deferral: Andrew
Pritchard and Ann Tremblay, Ottawa MacDonald-Cartier International Airport
Authority, Albert Miller and C.R. Nixon.
Moved by S. Desroches:
That the Planning and Environment Committee defer consideration of this
matter until the next meeting.
CARRIED
That the Planning
and Environment Committee recommend Council refuse an amendment to the Official
Plan, to allow noise-sensitive land-uses within the Ottawa Airport Operating
Influence Zone (AOIZ), for 2911 Prince of Wales Drive.
DEFERRED to September 9
9. OFFICIAL
PLAN AND ZONING - 30 HIGHBURY PARK DRIVE
PLAN OFFICIEL ET ZONAGE - 30, PROMENADE HIGHBURY PARK
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0137 barrhaven
(3)
(This application is subject to Bill 51)
Email correspondence in support of the departmental recommendation was
received from Ted McNeil and is held on file with the City Clerk. Pierre Demers registered to speak in
support of the recommendations, but was not present.
Tim Chadder, J. L. Richards & Associates, spoke in support of the
application, noting the site is surrounded on three sides by major roadways and
a fire station. Car dealerships are
permitted in similar urban areas on Carling Avenue, Hunt Club Road, Bank Street
and Jeanne d’Arc Boulevard. He observed
staff supported those kinds of uses in the urban area in those contexts. He indicated that dealerships are not described
in the Official Plan; however, the Longfields Secondary Plan states commercial
retail is only allowed on existing or zoned sites in neighbourhoods 1, 2 and
3. The site is zoned development
reserve zone. Other retail stores are
permitted in the mixed-use designation and the proposed dealership would serve
the local community.
Mr. Chadder suggested Barrhaven is underserved by car dealerships,
noting a commercial study identified a clear need within the community. He opined the proposed use at this location
would be beneficial to the town centre, as it would take such a use away and
place it on its periphery. The users of
the service centre would make use of transit, as shown by other dealerships in
the south end. People could drop their
cars off and use transit to get to work.
He added that a traffic impact report demonstrated that this use would
represent a one per cent contribution to traffic, which is not a negative
impact. With respect to lighting, he
advised that studies show it would be appropriate to comply with the dark skies
policies that are now in place. While
this proposal does not contain a mix of uses, it is a single stand-alone use on
a very small parcel.
Councillor Harder spoke in support of the staff position, noting a
second dealership in Barrhaven is needed, just not at this location. Councillor Hunter also supported the staff
recommendations, noting this site could accommodate high-density housing.
That
the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council:
1. Refuse an amendment to the Official
Plan, to amend the designation applying to the property located at 30 Highbury
Park Drive to permit an automobile sales dealership and service establishment,
including accessory uses;
2. Refuse an amendment to Zoning By-law
2008-250, to change the zoning of 30 Highbury Park Drive to permit an
automobile sales dealership and service establishment, including accessory
uses; and
3. Refuse an amendment to the former City
of Nepean Zoning By-law, to change the zoning of 30 Highbury Park Drive to
permit an automobile sales dealership and service establishment, including
accessory uses.
CARRIED
10. OFFICIAL PLAN - 160
HEARST WAY, 280 AND 395 DIDSBURY ROAD, AND 488 AND 490 TERRY FOX DRIVE; AND
ZONING – 160 HEARST WAY
PLAN
OFFICIEL – 160, VOIE HEARST, 280 ET 395, CHEMIN DIDSBURY, ET 488 ET 490,
PROMENADE TERRY FOX; AINSI QUE DU ZONAGE – 160, VOIE HEARST
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0180 Kanata South/Sud
(23)
(This
application is subject to Bill 51)
The following email correspondence in opposition was received and is
held on file with the City Clerk:
·
Michelle Kobylka (Aug. 11 and July 28, 2008) · Madelaine Read (Aug. 14, 2008)
·
Elizabeth Lacina (August 15, 2008) · Paul Lanctot (August 15, 2008)
·
Sandra Lewis (August 15, 2008) · Ted Ohmayer (August 15, 2008)
·
Donna M. Oweis (August 15, 2008) · John Parrott (August 15, 2008)
·
Jean Hutcheon (August 18, 2008) · K and S Burgess (Aug. 19, 2008)
Kalle Hakala, Planner II, provided an overview of the departmental
report with a PowerPoint presentation, which is held on file with the City
Clerk.
The Arbour Glen Community Association,
represented by Jennifer Tessier, Valerie Wilkins, Robert H. Davyduck, Lauri
Smith and Maureen Taylor, spoke in opposition to the proposal and showed
photographs of the community. A
petition was submitted and the following concerns were highlighted:
·
Adequate parking will not be provided, as no
provisions have been made for hotel staff, trucks nor bus parking. Parking issues are evident with the existing
hotel and the project would further place burden on both the community and
community services. The applicant has
also stated that truck parking will be prohibited on the site.
·
Sections 2.5 and 4.11 of the Official Plan
state that the assessment on compatibility of new development will involve, not
only consideration of the built form, but also the operational characteristics,
such as traffic, access and parking.
·
In the last few years, the City of Ottawa has
lost approximately 35 per cent of urban employment lands to rezoning
applications. The proposed hotel would
offer minimal employment opportunity and would not qualify as an employment use
under the intentions of the Official and Secondary Plans. Only one staff member would be required at
night.
·
Planning Act
Amendments to Part V state that appeals to the Ontario Municipal Board are not
permitted when a municipality refuses to remove land from an area of employment
or neglects to make a decision on it within the timelines set out by the Act. Adding a hotel as a permitted use, would
effectively remove employment lands. No
other municipality in Ontario listed hotels as an employment use, as they do
not generate high levels of employment.
·
Section 3.6.5 of the Official Plan ensures,
over the long-term, sufficient areas of land are reserved primarily for places
of business and economic activity. Uses
that support this function consist predominantly of offices, manufacturing,
warehousing distribution, research and development facilities, as well as
utilities.
·
Although the light industrial zoning of this
land allows a variety of uses in certain employment areas, these uses must be
complimentary and serve the employees of the employment area and the public in
the immediate vicinity.
·
Under Section 2 of the Official Plan, the City
promises to meet the challenge of employment growth by supporting liveable
communities and healthy environment with growth directed to key locations with
a mix of housing, shopping, recreation and employment. The current business centre, between Campeau
Drive and the Queensway, is a much more suitable and sustainable location for a
hotel. A hotel is an existing permanent
use in the central business centre.
·
The Transportation Master Plan has several
recurring themes, such as minimizing costs, unnecessary travel and automobile
dependence; keeping neighbourhoods liveable; protecting public health and the
environment; and making efficient use of current infrastructures and
services.
·
Section 5.7.5.5 of the Secondary Plan states
that development on the north side of Hearst Way already includes a motel and
is intended to consist of low-rise buildings containing office and light
industrial or retail use.
·
The plan for light rail transit for Kanata
North located the first route on the north side of the Queensway corridor. A hotel located in the central business
centre would be situated closer to the station.
·
The current light industrial zoning prohibits
uses that are likely to generate noise, fumes, odours or other hazardous and
obnoxious materials. Noise, nuisance
and traffic issues have been a problem with the existing hotel.
·
A by-law officer recently stated that a turn
radius study was required on Hearst Way.
Excess overflow street parking is already a problem.
·
Most of the permitted uses under the current
zoning would have the greatest traffic impact during the day when most of the
residents are away from home, reducing the impact on the community.
·
Section 2.1 of the Official Plan provides that
wherever growth occurs, it will be managed to ensure Ottawa’s communities are
eminently liveable. The 3-meter front
setback is not adequate and puts the proposed hotel on the doorstep of many
homes on Hearst Way.
·
Concern exists with the potential instability
of the land. An independent
geotechnical study should be undertaken by the City.
·
The Provincial Policy Statement, Official Plan,
Secondary Plan and zoning must be respected.
·
Arnon Development is a long-standing and
responsible company in Ottawa and the Community is not opposed to development
of the site, however a hotel use is not appropriate.
In reply to questions from Committee, the delegation
confirmed the following:
·
The community would like to see a
professional-type building on the site (medical, office) that would result in
employment, daytime traffic, and the utilisation of existing services.
·
The current hotel is bringing in truckers and
school/sports groups resulting in traffic and overflow on-street parking.
·
Truck traffic from a printing plant would be
in-and-out and the plant would presumably have space for loading docks and
deliveries with scheduling.
·
The plans for the new hotel prohibit any
on-site parking of trucks. The hotel
would operate throughout the day, seven days a week.
·
Retail uses were recommended in the Secondary
Plan for the light industrial land north of Hearst Way with a gross floor area
not exceeding 10,000 square metres, building size ranging between 28,000 to
47,000 square metres with one building shall be limited to two tenants.
·
The existing Comfort Inn is working with the
Community Association but an agreement with Progeny Management Inc. for parking
will not be extended to any other commercial development.
In response to questions
from members, Mr. Hakala confirmed the following:
·
The new zoning by-law, for the most part,
implements exactly what was in the old by-law.
In a few cases, there are subtleties that changed some of the permitted
uses (e.g. warehousing.)
·
A self-storage facility is a restriction on the
permitted warehousing. The new by-law
allows warehousing, but limits it to materials made on site.
·
A printing plant is permitted in both the new
and old zoning by-law.
·
There is no proposal to change the height
allowance in the zone, which would
remain at 13.5 metres.
·
A hotel is not considered a retail use, but the
Secondary Plan does limit total retail in this entire low-density employment
area, which extends to the park and ride, to 10,000 square metres. The proposed hotel is approximately 3,000
square metres.
·
74 parking spaces are required (one per room),
eight of which must be accessible. The
applicant exceeds the required spaces by one.
Tim Marc, Senior Legal Counsel, did not recall an appeal of the
Comprehensive Zoning By-law on the permitted uses in the light industrial zone.
Councillor Feltmate thanked the Community Association for their detailed
presentation, noting some members attended the Planning Primer workshop. She noted the number of emails received from
the neighbouring community. She added
that this prime land has remained vacant for many years and the City of Kanata
intensively studied what should happen to the lands within the town centre on
both sides of the Queensway. The very
intensive employment was to be situated on the north side along with the rapid
transit station.
Councillor Wilkinson indicated she served on former Kanata Council when
this plan was developed. She emphasized
that comments from the community reflect that plan. She hypothesized that the site has not developed in the past
because the soil conditions are very bad.
Councillor Hunter commended the Community Association for its excellent
presentation.
Councillor Doucet said it was great to hear similar concerns from
suburban residents that he routinely hears from constituents. He concurred that the secondary plan should
be respected.
Rod MacLean, Vice-President of the Katimavik-Hazeldean Community
Association, read from a written submission, also on
file. He spoke of the development of
the Kanata Town Centre, contribution of the proposal to employment targets and
loss of employment lands, as well as the compatibility of the proposed hotel.
Mike Casey, Arnon, indicated he attended
community meetings regarding this matter and his company created the plan of
subdivision that developed the adjacent homes.
With respect to the problems with the existing hotel site, his company
offered two solutions at the public meeting.
They included designating Hearst Way as not being a truck route, and
secondly to eliminate on-street parking.
Touching on parking and traffic, he surmised those issues should be
dealt with at site plan.
Brian Casagrande, FoTenn, addressed planning
considerations, which included the following points:
· Public concerns are associated
with one particular use perceived to generate impacts with which the neighbourhood is not content.
· With the zoning and range of
uses permitted under the current by-law, whether it is industrial, warehouse,
retail or a medical office facility, each has similar or more excessive impacts
on the neighbourhood.
· The site plan will manage site
development in an appropriate way with respect to set backs, buffering, parking
and access.
· The proposal respects the
zoning height, parking requirements and set backs.
· The site is constrained
slightly by an unregistered sewer easement.
In response to questions, Mr. Casey and Mr. Casagrande provided the
following responses:
· A hotel would have less impact
than other uses permitted in the light industrial zone.
· It is within Council’s legal
discretion to declare a “no parking” or “no trucking” zone on a City
street. Trucks would only be allowed
for deliveries.
· Typical suburban solutions are
not necessarily appropriate in a town centre location. Solutions such as on-street parking permits
could be explored.
Councillor Wilkinson explained that the key intensive part of the town
centre is located north of the Queensway and the hotel should be located
there. Mr. Casagrande retorted that the
Official Plan does designate this area as part of the mixed-use centre and town
centre.
In response to questions from Councillor Holmes, staff explained that
the number of employees does not define the low-density employment area. Hours of operation are not described.
Councillor Holmes expressed support for the permitted additional use,
noting town centres are intended to be vibrant with a variety of uses.
Councillor Doucet said the area does not look like a town centre, but
indicated he would support the ward councillor. He noted his experience with hotels has been positive as he has
not faced the kinds of problems that are coming forward.
Councillor Feltmate noted that the town centre does provide different
designations with low-density employment on Hearst Way. She asked members to consider the arguments
and concerns put forth by the residents.
The Chair agreed to divide the vote to deal with the technical
corrections to surrounding land separate from the hotel proposal.
That
the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council:
1. Approve and adopt an amendment to the
Official Plan Volume 2B: Site Specific Policies for the Kanata Town Centre to
redesignate, as detailed in Document 2:
b. 280 Didsbury Road from LDE-1 (Low Density
Employment Special Policy Area 1) to LDE-2 (Low Density Employment Special
Policy Area 2); and
c. 488 and 490 Terry Fox Drive and 395 Didsbury
Road from LDE-1 (Low Density Employment Special Policy Area 1) to LDE-3 (Low
Density Employment Special Policy Area 3);
CARRIED
Moved by D. Holmes:
That
the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council:
1. Approve an amendment to the Official
Plan Volume 2B: Site Specific Policies for the Kanata Town Centre to
redesignate, as detailed in Document 2:
a. 160 Hearst Way from LDE (Low Density
Employment) to LDE-4 (Low Density Employment Special Policy Area 4);
2. Approve an amendment to Zoning By-law
2008-250 to change the zoning of 160 Hearst Way from IL1 (Light Industrial
Subzone 1) to IL1 [302] (Light Industrial Subzone 1 Exception 302), as shown in
Document 4 and detailed in Document 3; and
3. Approve an amendment to the former City
of Kanata Zoning By-law 142-93 to change the zoning of 160 Hearst Way from TC-4
(Town Centre-4) to TC-4c (Town Centre 4 Exception "c"), as shown in
Document 4 and as detailed in Document 3.
LOST
YEAS (4): M.
Bellemare, S. Desroches, D. Holmes, P. Hume
NAYS (6): C.
Doucet, J. Harder, G. Hunter, B. Monette, S. Qadri, P. Feltmate
Moved by P. Feltmate:
That
the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council:
1. Reject an amendment to the
Official Plan Volume 2B: Site Specific Policies for the Kanata Town Centre to
redesignate, as detailed in Document 2:
a. 160 Hearst Way from LDE (Low Density
Employment) to LDE-4 (Low Density Employment Special Policy Area 4);
2. Reject an amendment to Zoning
By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of 160 Hearst Way from IL1 (Light
Industrial Subzone 1) to IL1 [302] (Light Industrial Subzone 1 Exception 302),
as shown in Document 4 and detailed in Document 3; and
3. Reject an amendment to the
former City of Kanata Zoning By-law 142-93 to change the zoning of 160 Hearst
Way from TC-4 (Town Centre-4) to TC-4c (Town Centre 4 Exception "c"),
as shown in Document 4 and as detailed in Document 3.
CARRIED
YEAS (6): C.
Doucet, J. Harder, G. Hunter, B. Monette, S. Qadri, P. Feltmate
NAYS (4): M.
Bellemare, S. Desroches, D. Holmes, P. Hume
That
the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council:
1. Approve and adopt an amendment to the
Official Plan Volume 2B: Site Specific Policies for the Kanata Town Centre to
redesignate, as detailed in Document 2:
b. 280 Didsbury Road from LDE-1 (Low Density
Employment Special Policy Area 1) to LDE-2 (Low Density Employment Special
Policy Area 2); and
c. 488 and 490 Terry Fox Drive and 395 Didsbury
Road from LDE-1 (Low Density Employment Special Policy Area 1) to LDE-3 (Low
Density Employment Special Policy Area 3);
2. Reject an amendment to the Official
Plan Volume 2B: Site Specific Policies for the Kanata Town Centre to
redesignate, as detailed in Document 2:
a. 160 Hearst Way from LDE (Low Density
Employment) to LDE-4 (Low Density Employment Special Policy Area 4);
3. Reject an amendment to Zoning
By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of 160 Hearst Way from IL1 (Light
Industrial Subzone 1) to IL1 [302] (Light Industrial Subzone 1 Exception 302),
as shown in Document 4 and detailed in Document 3; and
4. Reject an amendment to the
former City of Kanata Zoning By-law 142-93 to change the zoning of 160 Hearst
Way from TC-4 (Town Centre-4) to TC-4c (Town Centre 4 Exception "c"),
as shown in Document 4 and as detailed in Document 3.
CARRIED
as amended
11. COMPREHENSIVE
ZONING BY-LAW 2008-250: ANOMALIES AND CORRECTIONS
That
Document 3 be amended by adding the address 265 West Hunt Club to the maps
list, and that the Location Map pertaining to the affected property be added to
Document 3; and
That Planning and
Environment Committee recommend that Council approve the amendments recommended
in Column 4 of Document 1, to correct anomalies in the recently-adopted Zoning
By-law 2008-250, as amended by the following:
a. That
Documents 1 and 3 be amended with respect to 2610 Glenfield Drive so that all
of the lands are zoned IL[1634] H(14);
b. That
Document 3 be amended by adding the address 265 West Hunt Club to the maps
list, and that the Location Map pertaining to the affected property be added to
Document 3.
c. That
Document 1 be amended by correcting the addresses in item 17 to indicate 3930,
3996, 4030 and 4042 Innes and that Document 3 be amended by deleting 3934 and
adding the addresses 3930, 3996, 4030 and 4042 Innes to the maps list and that
the Location Map pertaining to the affected properties replace the Location Map
for 3934 Innes Road.
d. That
Documents 1 and 3 be amended to rezone the property at 170 Booth Street to R5M
H(18).
CARRIED as amended
Moved by
D. Holmes:
WHEREAS it is the intent to
preserve the character of the Heritage Conservation District (HCD) of
Rockcliffe Park and to follow the intent of the Management Guidelines for the
district;
BE IT RESOLVED
THAT staff be instructed to conduct a review after a three year period to
determine the impact of the new definition of Gross Floor Area on the HCD; and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Rockcliffe Park Residents
Association be involved in the development of the Terms of Reference for this
review and be involved in the conduct of the review.
CARRIED
12. ZONING
- 1320 KLONDIKE ROAD
ZONAGE - 1320 CHEMIN KLONDIKE
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0178 KANATA NORTH/NORD (4)
(This application is subject to Bill 51)
Doug Smeathers, Minto, was
present in support of the application.
That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend
Council:
1. Approve
an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of 1320 Klondike
Road from Development Reserve Zone (DR) to Residential First Density Zone,
Subzone V – exception 738 (R1V [738]) and Residential Third Density Zone,
Subzone X, exception 1016 (R3X [1016]) as shown in Document 1 and detailed in
Document 2.
2. Approve
an amendment to the former Township of March By-law 552 to remove 1320 Klondike
Road from By-law 552, and
3. Approve
an amendment to the former City of Kanata Zoning By-law 161-93 to include 1320
Klondike Road and to zone the lands Residential Type 1B – exception 3 (R1B-3)
and Residential Type 3A – exception 3 (R3A-3) as shown in Document 1 and
detailed in Document 2.
4. Not
enact the implementing Zoning By-law until such time as draft Plan of
Subdivision Approval has been granted by the City.
CARRIED
13. ZONING
- 3150 SOLANDT ROAD
ZONAGE - 3150, RUE SOLANDT
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0181 Kanata North/nord (4)
(This application is not subject to Bill
51)
Adam Thompson, Novatech Engineering
Consultants Inc.,
was present in support of the application.
That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend
Council:
1. Approve
an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of 3150 Solandt
Road from General Industrial Zone, Subzone 6 (IG6) to General Industrial Zone
Subzone 6 - Holding (IG6[xxxx]-h) and Environmental Protection (EP), as shown
in Document 1 and detailed in Document 2; and
2. Approve
an amendment to the former City of Kanata Zoning By-law to change the zoning of
3150 Solandt Road from M2 (Industrial General) to M2S(xx)-h (Industrial General
-special exception - Holding) to permit all uses in the M2 Zone and to create a
new OS-1 (Open Space Type 1) as shown in Document 1 and detailed in Document 2.
CARRIED
14. ZONING
- 2322 TRIM ROAD
ZONAGE
- 2322, CHEMIN TRIM
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0159 Cumberland (19)
(This application is subject to Bill 51)
That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend
Council:
1. Approve
an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of 2322 Trim Road
from DR Development Reserve to R1XX, R1UU[xx] and R3Y[708] as shown in Document
1 and detailed in Document 2; and
2. Approve
an amendment to the former City of Cumberland Zoning By-law to change the
zoning of 2322 Trim Road from D-R Development Residential to R1G-Xx, R1F-Xx and
R3D-Xx as shown in Document 1 and detailed in Document 2.
CARRIED
15. ZONING
- PART OF 2233 MER BLEUE ROAD AND PART OF 2370 TENTH LINE ROAD
ZONAGE - PARTIE DU
2233, CHEMIN MER-BLEUE ET PARTIE DU 2370, CHEMIN TENTH LINE
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0160 Cumberland (19)
(This application is subject to Bill 51)
Melissa Dionne,
Tartan Land Consultants, was present requesting a minor amendment to the recommendations, to
which staff agreed.
Moved by P. Feltmate:
That Document 2 be
amended by adding the following under A.3:
Rear Yard Setback (minimum)
For one storey dwellings 6.0 metres
That Document 2 be
further amended by adding the following under B.1:
Despite Section 6.16(b), Rear Yard,
the minimum rear yard for one storey dwelling is 6.0 metres.
That pursuant to the Planning Act, subsection 34(17) no further notice
be given.
CARRIED
That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council:
1. Approve
an amendment to the City of Ottawa Zoning By-law to change the zoning of a part
of 2233 Mer Bleue Road from Residential Third Density, Subzone XX, Exception
1312, (R3XX[1312]) to Residential Third Density, Subzone XX, Exception xx,
(R3XX[xx]) as shown on Document 1 and as detailed in Document 2; and
2. Approve
an amendment to the former City of Cumberland Urban Zoning By-law to change the
zoning of part of 2233 Mer Bleue Road from Residential Mixed-Variable
Setbacks-Exception 2 (R3C-X2) to Residential Mixed-Variable Setbacks-Exception
X (R3C-Xx) as shown on Document 1 and as detailed in Document 2; and
3. Approve
an amendment to the former City of Cumberland Urban Zoning By-law to alter the
provisions of the Residential Mixed-Variable Setbacks-Exception 2 (R3C X2) zone
which applies to part of 2233 Mer Bleue Road and part of 2370 Tenth Line Road
as detailed in Document 2.
4. Approve
that
Document 2 be amended to permit a rear yard setback of 6.0 metres for one
storey dwellings.
CARRIED as amended
16. ZONING
- 2310 PAGÉ ROAD
ZONAGE
- 2310, CHEMIN PAGÉ
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0167 innes (2)
(This application is subject to Bill 51)
That the Planning and Environment Committee
recommend Council:
1. Approve an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the
zoning of 2310 Pagé Road from R1W – Residential First Density Zone, Subzone W
to LC[xxxx] – Local Commercial Zone Exception [xxxx], as shown in Document 1
and as detailed in Document 2.
2. Approve an amendment to the former City of Gloucester Zoning
By-law to change the zoning of 2310 Pagé Road from Rs 1 - Residential, Single
Dwelling Zone to Cn (EXX) - Commercial Neighbourhood (Exception XX) Zone, as
shown in Document 1 and as detailed in Document 2.
CARRIED
17. ZONING - 1751 RUSSELL ROAD AND 1740 ST.
LAURENT BOULEVARD
ZONAGE - 1751, CHEMIN
RUSSELL ET 1740, BOULEVARD ST LAURENT
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0169 Alta Vista (18)
(This application is
subject to Bill 51)
Sandy Shaffhauser, FoTenn Consultants, was present in support of the
recommendations.
That the Planning and
Environment Committee recommend Council:
1. Approve an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 to rezone the
property at 1740 St. Laurent Boulevard and 1751 Russell Road from AM (Arterial
Mainstreet) and AM1 (Arterial Mainstreet subzone) to AM[***] (Arterial
Mainstreet Exception Zone) as detailed in Document 2;
2. Approve an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 to rezone the
property at 1751 Russell Road from AM (Arterial Mainstreet) to R5B[***]
(Residential Fifth Density Exception subzone) as detailed in Document 2;
3. Approve an amendment to the former City of Ottawa Zoning
By-law to change the zoning of 1740 St. Laurent Boulevard from CD2 F(1.0)
(District Linear Commercial subzone) and CD4 F(1.0) (District Linear Commercial
subzone) to CD2[***] F(2.0) (District Linear Commercial Exception subzone) as
detailed in Document 2; and
4. Approve an amendment to the former City of Ottawa Zoning
By-law to change the zoning of 1751 Russell Road from CD2 F(1.0) (District
Linear Commercial subzone) to R6A[***] F(2.5) (High Rise Apartment Exception
subzone) as detailed in Document 2.
CARRIED with C. Doucet dissenting.
18. ZONING - 416, 418 AND PART OF 424 RICHMOND ROAD, PART OF 579 BYRON
AVENUE AND 414 ROOSEVELT AVENUE
ZONAGE - 416, 418 ET PARTIE DU
424, CHEMIN RICHMOND, PARTIE DU 579, AVENUE BYRON ET 414, AVENUE ROOSEVELT
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0168 kitchissippi (15)
(This application is
subject to Bill 51)
John Smit, Program Manager, Development Review,
provided a PowerPoint presentation (held on file with the City Clerk) that
touched on the rationale for recommending approval of the proposal.
In response to questions from Councillor Leadman,
Mr. Smit clarified that Official Plan (OP) Section 3.6.3, policy 8 regarding
mainstreets identifies five of the circumstances where increased building
heights will be considered.
With regards to whether or not the area traffic
management study was taken into consideration, Mike Wildman, Manager of
Infrastructure Approvals, explained that development application studies must
meet certain criteria, regardless of any other external study. In this case, the traffic study looked at
background traffic, projected growth through a five-year period and
intersection analysis. It identified
possible improvements to the level of service through the use of signal timing
adjustments.
Councillor Leadman pointed out that the
Byron/Roosevelt intersection was identified as high-risk with high collision
levels. Mr. Smit clarified that the
Phase II project is subject to site plan approval, which will look more at the
specific operational considerations.
Hillary and Liam Casey, residents of Westboro, voiced
their dismay that this item was being presented prior to the initial date of
September 9, 2008. Ms. Casey felt the
Planning Department had dismissed any opposing comments. She expected the commitment made to the
Committee of Adjustment for phase I, to reduce the height for phase II
building, would have figured more prominently into the report. Ms. Casey added that this building would not
be in keeping with the Community Design Plan (CDP) Section 4.22.
Mr. Casey commented on over intensification, saying
he would not oppose the project, if it were built somewhere else. The four to six-storey height prescribed in
the traditional mainstreet designation should be respected.
Wallace Beaton, Chair of the Westboro Community
Association (WCA), noted that the community was not opposed to
re-development of the site or the mixed-use nature of the proposal, however,
there was opposition with the building’s proposed height of 28 metres or 8
storeys and requested that a limit of 20 meters or 6 storeys be maintained
consistent with the COA decision on phase 1, as well as OP and CDP
designations. He raised concerns
related to traffic, particularly potential impacts on adjacent local streets,
challenging assumptions in the traffic impact analysis. The WCA believed that this proposal should
only receive final approval contingent on adequate traffic mitigation measures
being put in place. He raised concerns
with the elevation drawing for the south and east sides of the building and
questioned how a building of this scale can be brought forward for approval
before the committee has seen basic drawings of half of its exterior. He
commented on the delay in approving the CDP as an amendment to the OP. The WCA is increasingly frustrated and
concerned that this and other recent development proposals contravene the
spirit and the letter of the CDP.
Gary Ludington, member of the Public
Advisory Committee (PAC) for the Westboro Community Design Plan, spoke in
opposition, touching on the history of the Community Design Plan. He commented on various applications and
decisions since its adoption that have undermined the CDP (Golden Avenue
Committee of Adjustment application, 747 Richmond Road, 109/93 Richmond Road
and 300 Richmond Road). He advanced
that PAC members are questioning the purpose of their extensive efforts, when
community wishes are now being ignored.
He noted the CDP recommended a down zone for the site.
Chair Hume stated that the secondary plan would come
forward by the first meeting in October.
He explained that converting a CDP into a secondary plan is very
difficult and has never been done before.
Robert Brocklebank, Federation of Citizens
Associations of Ottawa-Carleton (FCA), read from a written
submission dated August 18, 2008, which is held on file with the City
Clerk. Mr. Brocklebank made the
following points in his presentation:
·
Criteria to allow greater building height should be explicitly noted in
the staff report.
·
The CDP should be more than a mere suggestion. It should help guide development and be
respected.
·
A simplistic interpretation of the OP and a disdain for decisions of
Council regarding Community Design Plans is evident on this application.
Barry Hobin, BJ Hobin & Associates Architects, noted the
following points in his presentation:
·
This project, situated on an extraordinary site that incorporates an
entire block and strategically fronts on Richmond Road, exemplifies the best
types of development with respect to traditional mainstreet.
·
An open park is strategically located on site to line up with access to
rapid transit.
·
The building is stepped back (50 feet at the eighth storey) in such a
way to minimize shadowing on the street.
The size of the site allows for a set back of the street edge creating
an urban landscape, which encourages street furniture, outdoor cafes and trees.
·
Public parking off Byron Avenue will assist with on-street parking and
be beneficial to retail users.
·
The height at the west end allows the creating of an open plaza and
greenspace. The remainder of the site basically remains at six storeys.
Ted Fobert, FoTenn Consultants,
explained that the height was evaluated in the same fashion as the
Exchange. The proposal allows for mixed
use, improves the pedestrian environment and is well served by transit. These aspects are covered in the CDP and the
primary plan must also be respected.
In response to questions from councillors, the
following information was provided:
·
With respect to wind tunnels, each one of these buildings has an offset
from the ground plane averting any wind coming from the northwest.
·
The OP allows increased height under certain criteria. In this case, a rigid six-storey limit as
called for in the CDP would prevent this type of thoughtful design.
·
A two to three-storey edge is provided with some density transferred
back onto the Byron side.
·
The commercial uses will be maintained on the ground floor.
Mr. Smit explained the technical amendment, which
will allow access to the proposed public parking.
Councillor Leadman commented positively on the design. She said the community has participated in
the development of the CDP and has certain expectations on how it will be used
as a tool. In terms of this
development, she reiterated the community is concerned with height. Certain traffic mitigation measures will be
looked at as part of the site plan.
Moved by P. Feltmate:
Whereas the block
bounded by Richmond Road, Golden Avenue, Byron Avenue, and Roosevelt Avenue is
proposed to be developed with a mixed use development that will comprise a two
building complex of 10 and eight stories with at grade commercial uses along
Richmond Road, upper floor residential units, a publicly accessible open
pedestrian streetscape connection along Golden Avenue between Richmond Road and
Byron Avenue, and below grade parking that will accommodate in addition to
required parking, up to 60 parking spaces that will be available for public use
with access from Byron Avenue;
And Whereas there
is a strip of parkland between the development site and Byron Avenue that is a
portion of the Byron Linear Park, a dedicated park corridor that follows the
alignment of the former Byron Tramway;
And Whereas the
Community and Protective Services Department has confirmed that this strip of
Byron Linear Park located along the north side of Byron between Golden and
Roosevelt Avenue does not function as a formal park, but rather as a landscaped
boulevard for Byron Avenue and will not object to a proposal to remove its
dedicated park status;
And Whereas the
presence of the subject strip of dedicated parkland precludes having vehicular
access provided from Byron Avenue as proposed to allow vehicular access to be
located where it will not diminish the development objectives to provide for a
fully animated pedestrian street environment along Richmond, Golden and
Roosevelt;
And Whereas the
proposed development, and the manner in which access is proposed is generally
consistent with the Unifying Vision, Overlying Objectives and Principles of the
Council Approved Westboro Community Design Plan;
And Whereas the
Owner is not able to secure a full building permit for Phase One of the
proposed development which has been approved given that the site, as proposed
to be developed, will not have vehicular access provided directly from a public
street without first securing a right to access over the subject strip of
parkland;
And Whereas the
removal of this strip of dedicated parkland from the City’s park inventory is
subject to the former City of Ottawa policy related to real property
transactions related to City owned parks;
And Whereas this policy requires that Council
approve with a minimum two-thirds majority in principle to remove lands from
the City’s park inventory and to seek public input on the proposal followed by
a further approval by Council with a two-thirds majority following the public
consultation to formally have such land removed from the City’s park inventory;
And Whereas this
process will take a minimum two months to conclude;
Therefore be it resolved that Report Ref ACS
2008-PTE-PLA-0168 dealing with a rezoning application for the property at 416,
418, and part of 424 Richmond Road, Part of 579 Byron Avenue and 414 Roosevelt
Avenue be amended as follows:
That the following additional Recommendations be added:
Recommendation 3:
That the strip of parkland currently designated and dedicated by by-law
that is located along the north side of Byron Avenue between Golden Avenue and
Roosevelt Avenue be declared potentially surplus as park and removed from the
City’s park inventory and formally dedicated by by-law as part of the Byron
Avenue right-of-way and that the Department of Planning, Transit and the
Environment undertake the formal public consultation as required by the Former
City of Ottawa policy regarding City-owned parkland and report back to
Committee and Council with recommendations related to removing the parkland
dedication applicable to the subject
property and re-dedicated as
part of the Byron Avenue right of way.
Recommendation 4:
That an interim License of Occupation be
granted to the owner of the property,
subject to the standard administration fee, to allow the owner to have legal
access to the subject property from Byron Avenue in order that a building
permit can be issued for Phase One, which interim License of Occupation shall
be in effect until such time as Council gives formal approval to having the
subject strip of parkland re-dedicated as part of the Byron Avenue right of
way, failing which the Owner shall secure a permanent easement at market value
in accordance with the Agreement of Purchase and Sale dated 16 June 2008
previously provided to the owner.
That pursuant to the Planning Act, subsection 34(17) no further notice
be given.
CARRIED
That the Planning
and Environment Committee recommend Council:
1. Approve an amendment to the Zoning
By-law 2008-250, to change the zoning of 416, 418 and Part of 424 Richmond
Road, Part of 579 Byron Avenue and 414 Roosevelt Avenue from Traditional
Mainstreet TM and TM[83] to a new Traditional Mainstreet TM zone as shown in
Document 1 and detailed in Documents 3 and 4.
2. Approve an amendment to the former City
of Ottawa Zoning By-law, to change the zoning of 416, 418 and part of 424
Richmond Road, Part of 579 Byron Avenue and 414 Roosevelt Avenue from
Neighbourhood Commercial CNF(2.0), CN[848]F(2.0), CN[498]F(2.0) and Leisure L2
to a new Neighbourhood Commercial CN exception Zone as shown in Document 2 and
as detailed in Documents 3 and 4.
3. That the strip of parkland currently
designated and dedicated by by-law that is located along the north side of
Byron Avenue between Golden Avenue and Roosevelt Avenue be declared potentially
surplus as park and removed from the City’s park inventory and formally
dedicated by by-law as part of the Byron Avenue right-of-way and that the
Department of Planning, Transit and the Environment undertake the formal public
consultation as required by the Former City of Ottawa policy regarding
City-owned parkland and report back to Committee and Council with
recommendations related to removing the parkland dedication applicable to the
subject property and re-dedicated as part of the Byron Avenue
right of way.
4. That
an interim License of Occupation be granted to the owner of the property,
subject to the standard administration fee, to allow the owner to have legal
access to the subject property from Byron Avenue in order that a building
permit can be issued for Phase One, which interim License of Occupation shall
be in effect until such time as Council gives formal approval to having the subject
strip of parkland re-dedicated as part of the Byron Avenue right of way,
failing which the Owner shall secure a permanent easement at market value in
accordance with the Agreement of Purchase and Sale dated 16 June 2008
previously provided to the owner.
CARRIED
as amended
19. ZONING
- 272 AND 274 BRADLEY AVENUE
ZONAGE - 272 ET 274, AVENUE BRADLEY
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0152 rideau-vanier
(12)
(This application is
subject to Bill 51)
Emma Blanchard, on
behalf of the Wabano Centre for Aboriginal Health, was present in support of the
recommendations and the technical amendment, which was supported by staff.
That the Details
of Recommended Zoning set out in Document 2 be modified for both the
Comprehensive Zoning By-law 2008-250 and the former Vanier Zoning By-law 2380
to clarify that an office use at 274 Bradley can occupy the entire building
limited to a total gross floor area of 200 square metres.
That pursuant to the
Planning Act, subsection 34(17) no further notice be given.
CARRIED
1. That the Planning and Environment
Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to By-law 2008-250 to:
a. Amend the R4E [1489] – Residential Fourth
Density Zone applying to 272 Bradley Avenue to add a further exception as
detailed in Document 2, and
b. Change the zoning of 274 Bradley Avenue from
R4E – Residential Fourth Density Zone to TM3[xxxx] H(42) – Traditional
Mainstreet Zone with exceptions, as shown in Document 1 and detailed in
Document 2.
2. That the Planning and Environment
Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former City of Vanier
Zoning By-law 2380, to:
a. Change the zoning of 272 Bradley Avenue from
R4 - Residential Mixed Zone to R4 - Residential Mixed Zone with exceptions to
permit day care centre, as shown in Document 1 and detailed in Document 2, and
b. Change the zoning of 274 Bradley Avenue from
R4 - Residential Mixed Zone to C2/C - Downtown Commercial Zone with exceptions
to permit office, as shown in Document 1 and detailed in Document 2.
3. That the Details of Recommended Zoning set out in
Document 2 be modified for both the Comprehensive Zoning By-law 2008-250 and
the former Vanier Zoning By-law 2380 to clarify that an office use at 274
Bradley can occupy the entire building limited to a total gross floor area of
200 square metres.
CARRIED
as amended
20. INTERIM
CONTROL STUDY OF BARS AND NIGHTCLUBS IN THE BY WARD MARKET AND RIDEAU STREET
AREA
ÉTUDE SUR LA
RESTRICTION PROVISOIRE CONCERNANT LES BARS ET LES BOÎTES DE NUIT DANS LE
SECTEUR DU MARCHÉ BY ET DE LA RUE RIDEAU
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0063 rideau-vanier (12)
(This
matter is subject to Bill 51)
Letters of support were received
from the ByWard Market Business Improvement Area (August 4, 2008) and Downtown
Rideau Board of Management (August 11, 2008).
They are held on file with the City Clerk.
That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend
Council:
1. Approve
an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 as outlined in Document 2;
2. Approve
an amendment to Zoning By-law 93-98 as outlined in Document 3; and
3. Repeal
Interim Control By-law 2006-373.
CARRIED
21. ZONING
- 24 CHESAPEAKE CRESCENT AND 164 MARAVISTA DRIVE
ZONAGE
- 24, CROISSANT CHESAPEAKE ET 164, PROMENADE MARAVISTA
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0150 barrhaven
(3)
(This application is
subject to Bill 51)
Jim Burghout, Claridge Homes, was
present in support of the zoning application.
That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve:
1. An
amendment to the City of Ottawa Zoning By-law to change the zoning of 24
Chesapeake Crescent and 164 Maravista Drive from Residential Third Density,
Subzone Z, (R3Z) to Residential Fifth Density, Subzone A (R5A), as shown in
Document 1 and detailed in Document 2.
2. An
amendment to the former Nepean Zoning By-law to change the zoning of 24
Chesapeake Crescent and 164 Maravista Drive from Residential Mixed Use (RMU) to
Institutional, Block X, (I BLK X) as shown on Document 1 and detailed in
Document 2.
CARRIED
22. FOSTER AND KENNEDY BURNETT STORMWATER
MANAGEMENT PONDS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND DESIGN FUNDING
ÉVALUATION ENVIRONNEMENTALE ET FINANCEMENT
DE LA CONCEPTION DES BASSINS DE GESTION DES EAUX PLUVIALES FOSTER ET
KENNEDY-BURNETT
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0151 BARRHAVEN
(3)
That Planning and Environment Committee recommend that
Council approve the allocation of funds to establish a new capital budget of
$700,000 from the reserve account 830248 for the completion of an Environmental
Assessment and Design of the Foster and the Kennedy Burnett stormwater
management ponds.
CARRIED
BUILDING CODE SERVICES
SERVICES DU CODE DU BÂTIMENT
23. 2007
ANNUAL REPORT ON BUILDING PERMIT FEES
RAPPORT ANNUEL DE 2007 SUR LES DROITS DE PERMIS DE CONSTRUCTION
ACS2008-PTE-BLD-0029 CITY WIDE/À L'ÉCHELLE DE
LA VILLE
That the Planning and the Environment Committee
recommend that Council receive the 2007 Annual Report on Building Permit Fees,
as outlined in Document 1.
CARRIED
24. SIGN BY-LAW MINOR VARIANCE - 411 NORTH
RIVER ROAD
DÉROGATION MINEURE AU
RÈGLEMENT SUR LES ENSEIGNES - 411, CHEMIN NORTH RIVER
ACS2008-PTE-BLD-0020 Rideau-Vanier (12)
That Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve
the application to vary Sign By-law 2005-439, to permit an externally
illuminated identification ground sign situated at 411 North River Road to be
installed with a height of 2.5 metres, instead of the required 2.0 metres.
CARRIED
25. SIGN BY-LAW MINOR VARIANCE - 2262 PRINCE
OF WALES DRIVE
DÉROGATION MINEURE AU RÈGLEMENT SUR
LES ENSEIGNES – 2262, PROMENADE PRINCE OF WALES
ACS2008-PTE-BLD-0026 Knoxdale-Merivale (9)
Marc Pavic was present in support of the recommendation.
That Planning and Environment
Committee recommend Council approve the application to vary Sign By-law
2005-439, to permit a non-illuminated identification ground sign situated at
2262 Prince of Wales Drive to be installed with an area of 1.28 square metres,
instead of the permitted 0.5 square metres, as shown on Document 2.
CARRIED
26. SIGN BY-LAW MINOR VARIANCE - 1490
YOUVILLE DRIVE
DÉROGATION
MINEURE AU RÈGLEMENT SUR LES ENSEIGNES – 1490, PROMENADE YOUVILLE
ACS2008-PTE-BLD-0023 Orléans
(1)
That Planning and Environment
Committee recommend Council approve the application to vary Sign By-law
2005-439, to permit an illuminated identification ground sign at 1490 Youville
Drive, with a message centre area of 3.3 square metres, to be installed with a
total area of 12 square metres and with a sign height of 5.1 metres.
CARRIED
ADDITIONAL ITEM
POINT SUPPLÉMENTAIRE
27. CASH-IN-LIEU
OF PARKING – 230 Dalhousie Street
MODIFICATION AU RÈGLEMENT FINANCIER DES EXIGENCES
RELATIVES AU STATIONNEMENT – 230, rue Dalhousie
Moved by B.
Monette:
That the Planning and Environment Committee
approve the addition of this item for consideration by the Committee at today’s
meeting, pursuant to Section 84(3) of the Procedure By-law.
CARRIED
Moved by B.
Monette:
Whereas Staff
have given approval under Delegated Approval Authority to allow the owner of
the property at 230 Dalhousie Street to provide a cash payment in the amount $8
430.00 in lieu of providing three parking spaces for a dental facility proposed
for one of the ground floor commercial spaces within the recently constructed
mixed use building located on the property;
And Whereas the
Cash-in-Lieu of Parking would not be required under the new City of Ottawa
zoning by-law as the space to be occupied will be less than 150 square meters
which under the new by-law does not require the provision of on-site parking;
And Whereas it is
considered a hardship to require the owner to pay the full amount of the
Cash-in-Lieu payable under the City’s Cash-in-Lieu of Parking solely as a
result of the new by-law not yet being in full force which results in the more
restrictive provisions of the former Ottawa By-law which does require parking
remaining in effect until the new by-law is in full force and effect;
And Whereas the
Owner is not able to wait until the new by-law is in full force and effect to
allow a dentist office to be established within the building;
Therefore be it
Resolved that the delegated approval given by staff to exempt the owner from
providing three parking spaces in lieu of making a cash-payment in the amount
of $8 430.00 (File D07-03-08-0612) be modified to require a payment in the
amount of one dollar per space for a total payment of three dollars with all
the other provisions and conditions set out in the staff approval continuing to
apply.
CARRIED
INFORMATION PREVIOUSLY
DISTRIBUTED
INFORMATION DISTRIBUÉE AUPARAVANT
A. On Time Review Status Report - May 14, 2008 to
August 18, 2008
Rapport
d'étape sur l’examen en temps voulu - du 14 mai 2008 au 18 août 2008
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0164-IPD CITY WIDE/À L'ÉCHELLE DE
LA VILLE
RECEIVED
B. Staff Attendance at
2008 Urban Parks Conference
Participation du personnel à la conférence
sur les parcs urbains
ACS2008-PTE-PLA-0188-IPD CITY WIDE/À
L'ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
RECEIVED
ADJOURNMENT
LEVÉE DE LA SÉANCE
The meeting
adjourned at 7 p.m.
Original signed by Original
signed by
Robert Tremblay Councillor
P. Hume
Committee Coordinator Chair
