Planning Committee MINUTES 35 Tuesday, 22 May 2012, 9:30 a.m. Champlain Room, 110 Laurier Avenue West Present: Councillor P. Hume (Chair) Councillor J. Harder (Vice-Chair) Councillors S. Blais, R. Bloess, R. Chiarelli, K. Hobbs, A. Hubley, B. Monette, S. Qadri and M. Taylor DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST No declarations of interest were filed. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Minutes 34 of the Planning Committee meeting of 5 May 2012. CONFIRMED STATEMENT REQUIRED FOR PLANNING ACT FOR MATTERS SUBMITTED POST JANUARY 1, 2007 The Chair read a statement required under the Planning Act, which advised anyone intending to appeal the Zoning By-law listed as Items 3 and 4 on the agenda that they must either voice their objections at the public meeting or submit comments in writing prior to the Amendments being adopted by City Council on 13 June 2012, failing which, the Ontario Municipal Board might dismiss all or part of the appeals (this was rendered moot as pertains to item 3, as consideration of that item was deferred to the Planning Committee meeting of 26 June 2012). In addition, it was noted that applicants could appeal the matters to the Ontario Municipal Board if Council did not adopt amendments within 120 days for Zoning, or 180 days for an Official Plan Amendment, of receipt of the applications. COMMUNICATIONS Responses to Inquiries: PLC 03-12: Accessory Structures RECEIVED PRESENTATION 1. “QR” CODES FOR DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION SIGNS CITY-WIDE REPORT RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Committee receive this verbal presentation for information. Committee Chair Hume began by speaking of the May 2012 Planning Summit, at which he had referenced improvements in the efficiency of the planning process and accessibility of planning information. He then introduced Mr. Ian Vining, Program and Project Management Officer, Business Support and Evaluation Branch, Planning and Growth Management Department (PGM), who spoke to a brief PowerPoint slide presentation (held on file with the City Clerk) which served to help explain the features and functions of the City’s new QR (Quick Response) Code ‘smart phone’ application pilot project for development application signs. Following the overview, the Committee RECEIVED the presentation for information. POSTPONEMENTS AND DEFERRALS OTTAWA BUILT HERITAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2. DESIGNATION OF THE BETHANY HOPE CENTRE, 1140 WELLINGTON STREET WEST UNDER PART IV OF THE ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0042 KITCHISSIPPI (15) REPORT RECOMMENDATION: That Planning Committee recommend that Council issue a notice of intention to designate the Bethany Hope Centre, 1140 Wellington Street West as per the Statement of Cultural Heritage Value as detailed in Document 3. The Committee received a brief PowerPoint slide presentation (held on file with the City Clerk) from Ms. Lesley Collins, Planner, Heritage Services Unit, Development Review (Urban Services Branch), Planning and Growth Management Department (PGM), who spoke to the heritage attributes of the site and the reasons for the proposed designation. Mr. John Smit, Manager, Development Review (Urban Services Branch), PGM, was also present to respond to questions. The following delegations spoke in opposition to the report recommendation: * Mr. Michael Maidment, Area Director, Public Relations, Salvation Army; * Mr. Barry Padolsky, Architect (on behalf of the Salvation Army) Emailed correspondence was also received from: * Ms. Leslie Maitland, President, Heritage Ottawa* in support of the report recommendation. Messrs. Maidment and Padolsky requested a deferral to help arrive at a clearer understanding of the property’s development potential, expressing that, since it was the Salvation Army’s eventual intent to sell the property, the issuance of a notice of intention to designate it under the Ontario Heritage Act could affect the Salvation Army’s ability to obtain the property’s maximum value. Committee discussions centred on attempting to find a development envelope that would satisfy the proponent while allowing the City to designate and preserve the front yard, and resolve outstanding appeals. Councillor Hobbs lauded the Salvation Army for its longstanding community involvement, but said she would not support deferral. She then introduced the following Motion: MOTION NO PLC 35/1 Moved by Councillor K. Hobbs: That Planning and Legal staff be directed to initiate discussions with the Salvation Army to examine development opportunities for the site in the context of the CDP and heritage designation of the building and front lawn area and determine if modifications to the zoning for the site may be recommended that will provide clarity for any future development that may pursued and that could allow for the resolution of the appeal by the Salvation Army to the West Wellington OPA and zoning that resulted from the West Wellington CDP and that staff report back to Planning Committee at its regularly scheduled meeting on July 9, 2012, on the outcome of these discussions. CARRIED The report recommendation was then put to Committee and was CARRIED, as amended by Motion PLC 35/1. That the Planning Committee recommend Council: 1. Issue a notice of intention to designate the Bethany Hope Centre, 1140 Wellington Street West as per the Statement of Cultural Heritage Value as detailed in Document 3, and; 2. Direct Planning and Legal staff to initiate discussions with the Salvation Army to examine development opportunities for the site in the context of the CDP and heritage designation of the building and front lawn area and determine if modifications to the zoning for the site may be recommended that will provide clarity for any future development that may pursued and that could allow for the resolution of the appeal by the Salvation Army to the West Wellington OPA and zoning that resulted from the West Wellington CDP and that staff report back to Planning Committee at its regularly scheduled meeting on July 9, 2012, on the outcome of these discussions. CARRIED as amended PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT 3. ZONING - 96 NEPEAN STREET ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0120 SOMERSET (14) REPORT RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of 96 Nepean Street from Residential Fifth Density Subzone B, Exception 482, FSI 3.0 (R5B (482) F(3.0)) to Residential Fifth Density Zone, Subzone B, with a new exception, schedule and a holding provision (R5B-h[xxxx] Syyy –h) as detailed in Document 2 and 3 and as shown in Document 4. The Committee received a brief PowerPoint slide presentation (held on file with the City Clerk) from Ms. Melanie Knight, Planner, Inner Core Unit, Development Review, Urban Services Branch, Planning and Growth Management Department (PGM), who spoke to the heritage attributes of the site and the reasons for the proposed designation. Messrs Alain Miguelez, Program Manager, and John Smit, Manager, Development Review, Urban Services Branch, PGM were also present to respond to questions. The following delegations spoke in opposition to the report recommendation: * Ms. Debbie Bellinger, Nelligan O’Brien Payne, on behalf of 160 Elgin Portfolio Inc., the registered owner of Place Bell Canada, who expressed concerns over the ability of existing area infrastructure to accommodate the potential impacts of the proposed intensification, and that the development was being considered outside of the context of the Centretown Community Design Plan. Ms. Bellinger suggested deferring, to allow for an independent review of the studies, would be prudent. * Mr. Rob Dekker, Vice-President, Centretown Citizens’ Community Association and Co-Chair of its Planning and Development Committee*. Mr. Dekker spoke from a prepared statement summarizing the CCCA’s concerns with respect to this development. The following delegation spoke in support of the report recommendation: * Messrs. Miguel Tremblay, FoTenn Consultants Inc., and Nathan Godlovitch, Hanganu Architects, on behalf of Claridge Developments. Mr. Tremblay addressed the concerns expressed earlier, affirmed his confidence in the studies undertaken on behalf of the proponent, and noted staff’s concurrence. Somerset Ward Councillor D. Holmes participated in the Committee discussion, which centred on building height, appropriate set-backs, traffic studies and rights-of-way, intensification, increases in density and questions involving geotechnical and hydrogeological issues. As there were outstanding concerns about the accuracy and completeness of the studies undertaken and report information available, Committee opted to defer consideration of this matter to its meeting of 26 June, to allow staff the time to review the concerns raised, and to consider establishing a protocol to evaluate such applications to a standard that would lend greater assurance that such approvals were not causing greater problems. Deferral CARRIED on a division of seven yeas to three nays: MOTION NO PLC 35/2 Moved by Councillor J. Harder: That consideration of Planning Committee Agenda 35, Item 3, Zoning - 96 Nepean Street be deferred to the Planning Committee meeting of 26 June 2012. YEAS (7): R. Bloess, R. Chiarelli, B. Monette, S. Qadri, M. Taylor, J. Harder, P. Hume NAYS (3): S. Blais, K. Hobbs, A. Hubley 4. ZONING - 422 SLATER STREET ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0112 SOMERSET (14) REPORT RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of a part of 422 Slater Street shown on Document 1, from Minor Institutional (I1A) to a Minor Institutional exception zone with a schedule (I1A-[xxxx] SXXX) as detailed in Documents 2 and 3. Messrs. Doug James, Planner, Inner Core Unit, Development Review, Urban Services Branch, Planning and Growth Management Department (PGM) and Zlatko Krstulich, Transportation Planner, Strategic Planning Unit, Transportation Planning Branch, PGM, were present to respond to questions. The following delegation spoke in opposition to the report recommendation: * Ms. Janine Hutt, Chair, Bay/Bronson Residents’ Action Group for Fair Access to the Road*, expressed her group’s concerns regarding the effects on area residents of the City having relocated on-street paid parking spaces to Gloucester and Nepean Streets, to accommodate the East-West Segregated Bike Lane Pilot Project along Laurier Avenue West. Emailed correspondence was also received from: * Mr. Jordan Charbonneau, President, Centretown Citizens’ Community Association* in support of the conversion of 10 parking spaces at the former Ottawa Technical High School to public metered spaces (forwarded via the office of Ward Councillor D. Holmes). Discussions centred on the zoning schedule, widths of existing rights-of-way, clarification regarding why parking could no longer be accommodated as it had been prior to the redesign, and costs, financial arrangements and time frames for the lease with the school board. Following discussion, the report recommendation was put to Committee and CARRIED, on a division of five yeas to four nays: YEAS (5): R. Bloess, K. Hobbs, A. Hubley, B. Monette, P. Hume NAYS (4): S. Blais, S. Qadri, M. Taylor, J. Harder 5. AREA-SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT CHARGE - CONNECTION OF TWO EXISTING PORTIONS OF PROVENCE AVENUE ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0129 CUMBERLAND (19) REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS: That Planning Committee recommend that Council approve: 1. Debt financing and expenditure of $1,100,000 in 2012 for the construction of the Provence Avenue connection as described in this report; and 2. The Area-specific Development Charge Levy described in this report to repay the expenditure including all carrying costs. CARRIED Emailed correspondence was received from: * Mr. Bill Dorsey*, an area resident, in support of the report recommendation; * Ms. Caroline Riendeau, also in support of the recommendation. 6. IMPLEMENTATION OF PLANNING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT STRATEGIC BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY PLAN ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0126 CITY-WIDE REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Planning Committee recommends that Council: 1. Approve the establishment of a capital budget of $6.0 million for the Planning and Growth Management EPaL Solution, to be funded from the Building Code Capital Reserve, to implement Planning and Growth Management’s Strategic Business Technology Plan to enable efficiencies and service improvements within this term of Council; and; 2. Approve the transfer of $400,000 from the ePortal Services Building Permits capital account and $250,000 from the IT Building Inspection Tracking capital account to the new Planning and Growth Management EPaL Solution capital account. CARRIED 7. 2013 OFFICIAL PLAN AND INFRASTRUCTURE MASTERPLAN REVIEW - ISSUES REPORT ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0131 CITY-WIDE REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Planning Committee: 1. Recommend that Council approve the strategic directions identified by Planning and Growth Management as the basis for the work program for the 2013 review of the Official Plan; 2. Recommend that Council approve 2031 as the planning time horizon for the review of the Official Plan, Infrastructure Master Plan, and Transportation Master Plan, and update of the City’s Development Charges By-Law; and, 3. Receive the summary of participant comments from the discussion groups at the Planning Summit. The Committee received a brief PowerPoint slide presentation (held on file with the City Clerk) from Ms. Marica Clarke, Program Manager, Land Use and Natural Systems Unit, Policy Development and Urban Design Branch, Planning and Growth Management Department (PGM), which served to provide the Committee with an overview of the report. Mr. Bruce Finlay, Planner, Land Use and Natural Systems Unit, Policy Development and Urban Design Branch, PGM, was also present to respond to questions. Preliminary discussions centred on next steps, including a scope-of-work review for the Transportation Master Plan (TMP) by the Transportation Committee on 6 June, and a review for the Official Plan (OP) and Infrastructure Master Plan (IMP) by the Planning Committee at its meeting of 26 June. Chair Hume pointed out that this would outline the consultation framework, workplan, and draw together all related disparate elements to meet the requirements of a Section 26 comprehensive review under the Planning Act, and would include issues involving employment lands. Settlement areas will likely be addressed once staff receive the latest population projections, by the end of 2012. Councillor Harder questioned the need to adopt a planning horizon to 2031 at this point, rather than doing so at the Committee’s meeting of 26 June. Staff felt that making such a decision now would enable them to provide a more focused workplan on 26 June. Mr. John Moser, General Manager, PGM, added that doing so would also help align timeframes for the TMP. Other discussion topics included village boundary review, rural growth targets and available land supply. The following delegations spoke as noted regarding the report recommendation: * Mr. Doug Grant, Senior Planner, Delcan Corporation, on behalf of CLV Group Inc.*, spoke from a prepared statement to express CLV’s concerns with proposed Employment Area and Enterprise Area designations as part of the comprehensive OP review, certain employment-related policies, and long-term employment trends and land needs, suggesting that a comprehensive review be undertaken independent of any consideration to expand the urban boundary. * Messrs. Ted Phillips and Jack Stirling, on behalf of the Greater Ottawa Home Builders’ Association (GOHBA) requested deferral of a decision on the 2031 planning horizon timeframe (report recommendation No. 2) to allow for a meeting between members of Committee, senior staff and GOHBA to discuss their concerns on how the proposed planning horizon might impact the inter-related Master Plans, and that the timeframe itself might not be far-reaching enough to allow for better planning of the City’s future and matters related to its Development Charge By-Law and funding of infrastructure. Emailed correspondence was also received from: * Mr. Jason Pearman, Chair, Environmental Advisory Committee*, and * Mr. Patrick Quealey, Environmental Advisory Committee*, both generally in support of the report recommendations, but cautioning about development of environmentally sensitive lands in the vicinity of the Ottawa airport. * Ms. Joan Spice, Centretown Citizens’ Community Association (CCCA)* and CCCA representative to the Federation of Citizens’ Associations (FCA), who had expressed a wish to speak, but who had left by this point in the meeting. Following additional brief discussions, Chair Hume noted the Committee’s general consensus to move forward with Recommendations 1 and 3, and to defer consideration of the 2031 planning horizon time frame (Recommendation 2) to a report to be considered by the Committee at its meeting of 26 June, on the Terms of Reference for the upcoming studies. MOTION NO PLC 35/3 Moved by Councillor J. Harder: That Recommendation 2 be removed from the current report recommendations and return for consideration by the Committee at its meeting of 26 June 2012. CARRIED The report recommendation was then put to Committee and was CARRIED, as amended by Motion PLC 35/3: That the Planning Committee: 1. Recommend that Council approve the strategic directions identified by Planning and Growth Management as the basis for the work program for the 2013 review of the Official Plan; 2. Receive the summary of participant comments from the discussion groups at the Planning Summit. CARRIED as amended COUNCILLORS’ ITEMS COUNCILLOR K. HOBBS 8. AMENDMENT TO THE DEMOLITION CONTROL AGREEMENT FOR 389 WILMONT AVENUE ACS2012-CMR-PLC-0005 KITCHISSIPPI (15) REPORT RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Committee recommend Council direct the City Clerk and Solicitor Department to amend the Demolition Control agreement for 389 Wilmont Avenue to allow an access for construction vehicles to the Roosevelt Avenue site and an access for visitors to a sales centre to be located temporarily at 335 Roosevelt Avenue. CARRIED ADJOURNMENT The Committee adjourned the meeting at 12:45 p.m. Committee Coordinator Chair Note: 1. Except where otherwise indicated, reports requiring Council consideration will be presented to Council on 13 June 2012 in Planning Committee Report 31. 2. Copies of all correspondence, presentations and related reference material received and marked with an asterisk ( * ) are held on file with the City Clerk. PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES 35 22 MAY 2012 11