Planning Committee MINUTES 36 Tuesday, 12 June 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, K. Hobbs, A. Hubley, B. Monette, S. Qadri and M. Taylor Absent: R. Chiarelli DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST No declarations of interest were filed. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Minutes 35 of the Planning Committee meeting of 22 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 Amendments listed as Items 1 to 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 27 June 2012 (13 June for items 1 and 2), , failing which, the Ontario Municipal Board might dismiss all or part of the appeals. In addition, it was noted that applicants could appeal these 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. REMARKS As a courtesy to Councillor Chernushenko (Ward Councillor, Capital Ward), who could not stay, and with the Committee’s concurrence, Agenda Item 7, Lansdowne Signage and Way-finding Plan, was considered as the first item of business following the Consent Agenda. PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE 1. ZONING - 2810 CEDARVIEW ROAD ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0133 BARRHAVEN (3) REPORT RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the City of Ottawa Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of 2810 Cedarview Road from DR - Development Reserve to R3Z, Residential Third Density Subzone Z and O1, Parks and Open Space Zone, as shown in Document 1. CARRIED Council will be asked to waive the notice required under the City’s Procedural By-Law (By-Law 2006-462) to consider this matter at its meeting of 13 June 2012. 2. ZONING - 645 LONGFIELDS DRIVE AND 35 HIGHBURY PARK DRIVE ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0130 BARRHAVEN (3) REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS: That Planning Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of: 1. 645 Longfields Drive by amending existing Exception 1644, shown as Area A in Document 1, and rezoning the remainder of the property from Residential Third Density Subzone Z Exception [665] to Residential Third Density Subzone Y Exception [1644] and from Residential Third Density Subzone Z Exception [665] to Residential Third Density Subzone G Exception [1639]; and; 2. 35 Highbury Park Drive from Development Reserve (DR) to Minor Institutional Subzone B (l1B); all of which is shown in Document 1 and detailed in Document 2. CARRIED Mr. Pierre Dufresne, Tartan Land Consultants, was present in support of the report recommendations, but did not speak. Council will be asked to waive the notice required under the City’s Procedural By-Law (By-Law 2006-462) to consider this matter at its meeting of 13 June 2012. 3. ZONING - 99, 101, 105 AND 107 PARKDALE AVENUE ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0113 KITCHISSIPPI (15) REPORT RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 to change the zoning of 99, 101, 105 and 107 Parkdale Avenue from Residential Fifth Density, Subzone B, Maximum building height of 37 metres, R5B H(37), to a new Residential Fifth Density Subzone B, Exception, Schedule YYY Zone with a holding symbol, R5B[xxxx] Syyy-h, as shown in Document 1 and detailed in Documents 2 and 3. The following delegations spoke in opposition to the report recommendation, not as much to the issues of increased density and intensification, as to the proposed height and scale of the building, in comparison to the existing built form of the surrounding Mechanicsville neighbourhood: * Mr. Michael Andrecheck*; * Mr. Jack Threader*; * Ms. Christine Burke*; * Ms. Margaret Bell*; * Mr. Reginald Boyles*; * Mrs. Constance Brook; * Ms. Nicole Andrecheck*; and * Ms. Paula Tissot*. The following delegations spoke in support of the report recommendation, mainly to the issue of the proposed building’s built form as an example of good planning, as the current zoning allowed for a design that could fill the entire lot, diminish visibility and enhance shadows for the surrounding neighbourhood: * Ms. Mary Jarvis (Urbandale Construction) and Mr. Barry Hobin (Barry Hobin Architects), and; * Messrs. Lee Jablonski and Tim Chadder, J.L. Richards & Associates Ltd. Written submissions were received from all those marked above with an asterisk ( * ), with additional comments provided by: * Ms. Linda Hoad*, on behalf of the Hintonburg Community Association (in opposition); * Mr. Michael and Ms. Marlene Carlon* (in opposition), including, as signatories by request: Ms. Aline Bethune, Ms. Margaret Simpson, and Ms. Paula De Pauli (all in opposition). A message was also received by telephone from Ms. Jean Dukacz, another area resident, requesting that the zoning remain unchanged. [ * All individuals marked with an asterisk either provided their comments in writing or by email; such comments are held on file with the City Clerk. ] Committee spent approximately two hours on this item, which included hearing from public delegations, receiving information from staff for purposes of clarification, and discussion. Following Committee discussion, the Chair pointed out that zoning was a tool that was used to implement the City’s Official Plan, which allowed for intensification in the City’s mixed-use centres, and that Community Design Plans (CDP’s), were not a means to achieving the end of preserving status quo in zoning matters. He also noted that the proposed design offered a better use of built form than that allowed under the current zoning, and furthermore, respected the designs of neighbouring buildings. The recommendation was then put to Committee and was CARRIED without amendment. 4. ZONING - 2020 DORIMA STREET ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0101 CUMBERLAND (19) REPORT RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the Zoning By-law No. 2008-250 to change the zoning of 2020 Dorima Street from R1HH[714] – Residential First Density Zone, Subzone HH, Exception 714 to R4A[XXXX] – Residential Fourth Density Zone, Subzone A, Exception [XXXX] as shown on Document 1 and as detailed in Document 2. The following individuals / groups had indicated via fax, their wish to address the Committee in opposition to the report recommendation, but did not attend: * Kamal Eisa and Gihan Zakki; * Samir Agayri and Magda Eisa, and; * Mikhael S. Wingate. This item was originally held to allow the parties, who had earlier indicated their wish to speak in opposition to the report recommendation, sufficient time to arrive. As none were present by the time this item was considered, it was CARRIED without debate or amendment. Ms. Kathleen Willis, Kathleen Willis Consulting, on behalf of Longwood Homes, was present in support of the recommendation, but did not speak. 5. FRONT-ENDING AGREEMENT FOR REGATTA PARK IN HALF MOON BAY, AMPERSAND PARKETTE IN AMPERSAND SOUTH NEPEAN TOWN CENTRE, ENTRY PARK MAHOGANY AND SPRING POND PARK MAHOGANY ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0149 BARRHAVEN (3) RIDEAU-GOULBOURN (21) REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS: That Planning Committee recommends that Council: 1. Approve in accordance with the City Park and Trail Front-End Policy, to authorize the expenditure of $ 909,322, plus applicable taxes, for reimbursement of design and construction costs for Regatta Park, Ampersand Parkette, Entry Park and Spring Pond Park as detailed in this report. 2. Authorize the City to enter into a Front-ending agreement with Mattamy (Half Moon Bay) Limited to enable the design and construction of Regatta Park at Egret Way Block 111 on 4M-1443 and Block 124 on 4M-1451 in the Half Moon Bay Community in accordance with the Council approved Park and Trail Front-ending Policy in Document 1 and the Front-ending Agreement Principles set out in Document 2 to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Infrastructure and the City Clerk and Solicitor; 3. Authorize the City to enter into a Front-ending agreement with Minto Communities Inc. to enable the design and construction of Ampersand Parkette (Block 124) located in Ampersand Community, South Nepean Town Centre in accordance with the Council approved Park and Trail Frontending Policy in Document 1 and the Front-ending Agreement Principles set out in Document 2 to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Infrastructure and the City Clerk and Solicitor; 4. Authorize the City to enter into a Front-ending agreement with Minto Communities, Inc. to enable the design and construction of Entry Park (Block 198) located in the Mahogany Manotick Community in accordance with the Council approved Park and Trail Front-ending Policy in Document 1 and the Front-ending Agreement Principles set out in Document 2 to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Infrastructure and the City Clerk and Solicitor; and 5. Authorize the City to enter into a Front-ending agreement with Minto Communities, Inc. to enable the design and construction of Spring Pond Parkette (Blocks 208 and including Open Space Block 207) located in the Mahogany Manotick Community in accordance with the Council approved Park and Trail Front-ending Policy in Document 1 and the Front-ending Agreement Principles set out in Document 2 to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Manager, Planning and Infrastructure and the City Clerk and Solicitor. CARRIED Ms. Sue Johns and Mr. Marcel Dénommé, on behalf of Minto, were present in support of the report recommendations, but did not speak. 6. RESULTS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT GUIDELINES REVIEW ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0074 CITY-WIDE REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Agriculture and Rural Affairs and Planning Committees recommend Council: 1. Approve the revisions to the Environmental Impact Statement Guidelines, as shown in Document 1; 2. Approve the addition of a new condition of draft approval, as shown in Document 2, to the City’s standard menu of conditions for draft approval of subdivisions; 3. Delegate authority to the General Manager, Planning and Growth Management, to approve any future minor revisions required to provide additional clarity or to ensure that the Environmental Impact Statement Guidelines are kept current and correct with respect to the City’s Official Plan policies, provincial requirements, technical information and best practices for mitigation measures; and 4. Refer the addition of a budget pressure for a second Environmental Planner for consideration in the 2013 budget process. The Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee considered this item at its meeting of 31 May 2012 and CARRIED the above recommendations with no amendment. The Planning Committee CARRIED this item, with Councillor R. Bloess dissenting on Recommendation No. 4. CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE 7. LANSDOWNE SIGNAGE AND WAY-FINDING PLAN ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0155 CITY-WIDE REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS: That the Planning Committee: 1. Approve the Lansdowne Signage and Way-finding Plan attached as Document 1; and 2. Direct the General Manager, Planning and Growth Management to determine the requirements to give legislative effect to the Lansdowne Signage and Way-Finding Plan and report back to Planning Committee and Council. The following delegation spoke in opposition to the report recommendation, as the Community Association believed the information provided was incomplete: * Mr. Robert Brocklebank*, on behalf of the Glebe Community Association. [ * All individuals marked with an asterisk either provided their comments in writing or by email; such comments are held on file with the City Clerk. ] Mr. John Smit, Manager, Development Review (Urban Services Branch), PGM, was present to respond to questions. The Committee spent approximately 45 minutes on this item, which included the receipt of information for purposes of clarification, and discussion by the Committee. Ward Councillor Chernushenko noted that he and Councillor Hume, as members of the Lansdowne Design Review Panel (LDRP), had earlier asked questions and had been satisfied that the neighbourhood would be protected from the impact of the signage, and that the work to be undertaken at Lansdowne Park would be of the highest quality. Councillor Harder introduced the following Motion to incorporate a technical amendment to Appendix 2 of Document 1: MOTION NO PLC 36/1 Moved by Councillor J. Harder: That Document 1, Appendix 2 of the above-noted report be replaced with the REVISED Appendix 2 which extends the Stadium Zone to include the area behind Buildings I and K, showing the latest proposed footprint areas for Buildings I and K so that the intent is clear and will allow the new Scoreboard, should it be approved in the west location by the Lansdowne Design Review Panel (LDRP), and; That no further notice be provided pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act. The report recommendation was then put to Committee and was CARRIED, as amended by Motion NO PLC 36/1. That the Planning Committee recommend Council: 1. Approve the revised Lansdowne Signage and Way-finding Plan attached as Document 1; as amended by the following: a) That Document 1, Appendix 2 of the above-noted report be replaced with the REVISED Appendix 2 which extends the Stadium Zone to include the area behind Buildings I and K, showing the latest proposed footprint areas for Buildings I and K so that the intent is clear and will allow the new Scoreboard, should it be approved in the west location by the Lansdowne Design Review Panel (LDRP); b) That no further notice be provided pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act, and; 2. Direct the General Manager, Planning and Growth Management to determine the requirements to give legislative effect to the Lansdowne Signage and Way-Finding Plan and report back to Planning Committee and Council. 8. QUARTERLY PERFORMANCE REPORT TO COUNCIL, Q1: JANUARY 1 – MARCH 31, 2012 ACS2012-CMR-PLC-0013 CITY-WIDE REPORT RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Committee receive this report for further review and discussion of the service areas’ performance results, as outlined in document 1. RECEIVED COUNCILLORS’ ITEMS COUNCILLOR J. HARDER 9. ONASSA SPRINGS GATEWAY FEATURE ACS2012-CMR-PLC-0004 BARRHAVEN (3) REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS: That Planning Committee recommend that Council: 1. Approve that this gateway feature be exempted from the size limitations for primary neighbourhood features, the funding formula for the maintenance of gateway features, and the restrictions on design elements including mechanical, water, and electrical components as set out in the City of Ottawa’s Gateway Feature Design Guidelines; and 2. Subject to the approval of Recommendation 1, require the applicant to enter into a Maintenance and Liability agreement with the City to assume ongoing maintenance and liability obligations with respect to the portion of the gateway feature that is to be on City lands. CARRIED Mr. Miguel Tremblay, on behalf of FoTenn Consultants, was present in support of the report recommendations, but did not speak. COUNCILLOR K. HOBBS 10. EXEMPTION FROM THE DEMOLITION CONTROL BY-LAW FOR THE BUILDINGS LOCATED AT 99-107 PARKDALE ACS2012-CMR-PLC-0011 KITCHISSIPPI (15) REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS: That Planning Committee recommend Council approve that 99-107 Parkdale Avenue be exempted from the requirements set out in the Demolition Control By-law in order to enable the demolition of the buildings to its foundation subject to the following conditions: 1. The Owner ensures the property is graded, sodded or seeded, fenced and maintained to the standards set out in the Property Standards By-law pending development; 2. The property is not used or occupied for any other interim use, except for the construction and occupancy of an on-site sales office and accessory parking; 3. The Owner obtains all the required planning approvals within 2 years of June 12, 2012; the building permit is submitted within three years of June 12, 2012 and construction substantially completed within five years of June 12, 2012. 4. Subject to the approval of Recommendations 1 to 3, and prior to issuance of a demolition permit, that the Owner enter into an agreement with the City, to be registered on title to the lands, to ensure compliance with the above-noted conditions. CARRIED COUNCILLOR M. FLEURY 11. EXEMPTION FROM THE DEMOLITION CONTROL BY-LAW FOR THE BUILDING LOCATED AT 206 HENDERSON STREET ACS2012-CMR-PLC-0014 RIDEAU-VANIER (12) REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS: That Planning Committee recommend Council approve that 206 Henderson be exempted from the requirements set out in the Demolition Control By-law in order to enable the demolition of the buildings to its foundation subject to the following conditions: 1. The Owner ensures, pending development, the property is not used or occupied for any other interim use other than a staging area for construction at 727 King Edward Ave. and is graded, sodded or seeded, and maintained to the standards set out in the Property Standards By-law; 2. The Owner ensures that the existing street trees are protected before, after and during demolition; and 3. Subject to the approval of Recommendations 1 and 2, within 30 days of the issuance of a demolition permit, the Owner must enter into an agreement with the City, to be registered on title to the lands, to ensure compliance with the above-noted conditions with said agreement to include a provision that if conditions in Recommendations 1 and 2 are not met, the City will perform the necessary works and the owner will pay the City for the cost of these works. CARRIED Mr. Ron Clarke, Delcan Corporation, on behalf of the Applicant, was present in support of the report recommendations, but did not speak. Council will be asked to waive the notice required under the City’s Procedural By-Law (By-Law 2006-462) to consider this matter at its meeting of 13 June 2012. NOTICE OF MOTION (FOR CONSIDERATION AT SUBSEQUENT MEETING) Councillor K. Hobbes introduced the following Notice of Motion (for consideration at the Planning Committee meeting of 26 June 2012): REDUCTION IN CASH-IN-LIEU OF PARKING FEE FOR 401 RICHMOND ROAD WHEREAS the Staff Delegated Authority report has approved the payment in lieu of providing one parking space at 401 Richmond Road, for a one-storey retail building; AND WHEREAS the amount of money required to be paid for the parking space is five-thousand seven-hundred, fifty-one dollars and ninty-two cents ($5,751.92); AND WHEREAS the property owner is undergoing substantial improvements to the façade and public facilities of the building, including new accessible public washrooms; and is partnering with the City in the creation of new public space in the City right-of-way adjacent to the site; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT since the property owner has made a positive addition to the street, the amount of money to be paid for the cash-in-lieu of parking space be reduced from five-thousand seven-hundred and fifty-one dollars and ninty-two cents ($5,751.92) to one ($1) dollar. INQUIRY Chair Hume submitted the following Inquiry (PLC 04-12): FEASIBILITY OF IMPLEMENTING THE ECOLOGY OTTAWA PROPOSAL WITH RESPECT TO FUNDING OF HOUSING UPGRADES “Can staff review the submission by Ecology Ottawa with respect to funding of housing upgrades and advise the Committee on the feasibility of implementing the Ecology Ottawa proposal?” ADJOURNMENT The Committee adjourned the meeting at 12:05 p.m. Original signed by Original signed by C. Zwierzchowski Councillor P. Hume Committee Coordinator Chair Note: 1. Except where otherwise indicated, reports requiring Council consideration will be presented to Council on 27 June 2012 in Planning Committee Report 32A. 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 36 12 JUNE 2012 12