Planning and Environment Committee Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement Minutes 9/ Procès-verbal 9 Tuesday, 13 April 2004 9:30 a.m. le mardi 13 avril 2004 9 h 30 Champlain Hall, 110 Laurier Avenue West Salle Champlain, 110, avenue Laurier ouest Present / Présent : Councillor / Conseiller P. Hume (Chair / Président) Councillor / Conseillère P. Feltmate (Vice-Chair / Vice-présidente) Councillors / Conseillers G. Bédard. M. Bellemare, A. Cullen, G. Hunter J. Harder, D. Holmes, H. Kreling DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST DÉCLARATIONS D'INTÉRÊT No declarations of interest were filed. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES RATIFICATION DES PROCÈS-VERBAUX Minutes 8 and Confidential Minutes 2 of the Planning and Environment Committee meeting held on Tuesday, 23 March 2004 were confirmed. At the outset of the Meeting Chair Hume began by reading a statement required under the Planning Act, which advised that anyone who intended to appeal the proposed Official Plan Amendments, Zoning By-law Amendments and Subdivision listed as Item 3- 20 to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), must either voice their objections at the public meeting, or submit their comments in writing prior to the amendment being adopted by City Council or the proposed subdivision is granted draft approval by the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals. Failure to do so could result in refusal/dismissal of the appeal by the OMB. REFERRALS/DEFERRALS RENVOIS/REPORTS 1. ZONING - 186 LYON STREET ZONAGE - 186, RUE LYON ACS2003-DEV-APR-0223 SOMERSET (14) Chair Hume noted that this Item was withdrawn 2. SITE PLAN CONTROL - 186 LYON STREET RÉGLEMENTATION DU PLAN D'IMPLANTATION - 186, RUE LYON - ACS2004-DEV-APR-0076 SOMERSET (14) Chair Hume noted that this Item was withdrawn PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SERVICES D'URBANISME ET D'AMÉNAGEMENT PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE APPROVALS BRANCH DIRECTION DE L'APPROBATION DES DEMANDES D'URBANISME ET D'INFRASTRUCTURE 3. OFFICIAL PLAN, ZONING AND SUBDIVISION - 800 CEDARVIEW ROAD PLAN OFFICIEL, ZONAGE ET LOTISSEMENT - 800, CHEMIN CEDARVIEW ACS2004-DEV-APR-0077 BELL-SOUTH NEPEAN (3) Prescott McDonald, Planner, Ned Lathrop, General Manager, Planning and Development Department (PDD), John Moser, Director, Development and Infrastructure Approvals, Karen Currie, Manager, Development Approvals, Larry Morrison, Manager, Infrastructure Approvals, and Tim Marc, Manager, Planning and Development Law, appeared before the Committee with respect to departmental report dated 30 January 2004. Subsequent to a comprehensive presentation by Mr. McDonald, staff responded to questions and the following summarizes the points: * According to the policies of the OP, the extension of water services outside the urban area is only permitted if there are existing problems within those areas. The proponent provided a hydrogeology analysis; lots are two acres in size and can accommodate the wells and septics, therefore there is no technical justification to expand the urban water service. The existing subdivisions (Cedarhill and Orchard Estates) are an anomaly, as a serviced area (not a village), outside the urban area. * In the event there are problems with wells, the City could outline, in a condition, its intent to proceed with a Local Improvement (LI), but the City could not make it mandatory. * Septic tank technology, including the types of beds that can be used, has improved considerably with the ability to treat on smaller tile fields and beds. Traditionally, there has been a balance between large lots and the ability for a septic tank to function. In some villages lot size was reduced to a minimum .5 acre at one time. But, that is now increasing to 3/4 acre, if not larger. There is an attempt to balance the area required to distribute the effluent vs. the amount of density. That also has to be balanced with terrain analysis issues where septic beds are put into suitable terrains vs. unsuitable terrains, which also can increase lot sizes. On balance, the minimum two acres with the technology available for septic tanks in the rural area would mean it would be sufficient; soils and hydrogeology reports support the use of septic systems in this area. The Committee heard from the following delegations: John W. Bienko referenced the Ottawa Environmental Strategy 20/20 Plan, which is a component of the City Growth Management Strategy. The proposed rezoning refutes every word of Goal #1. His presentation covered the main points of his letter dated 28 February 2004, which is held on file with the City Clerk. Additionally, Mr. Bienko submitted the following: The Draft Conditions of Sudivision Approval - Document 5 contains a number of warning clauses - 75, 76, 80, 88, 90, 91 - that were not in the original documentation and only emerged as a result of his submission. The warnings specifically identify the significant levels of risk to future residents, which are not acceptable to the health and quality of life of their community. In the latter part of the 20th Century, former Reeves and Mayors planned a wonderful, natural green space for the people, now PDD will replace this with a concrete jungle. During the first week of March the City dispatched a work crew, trucks and water pumpers to pump the swamp water dry for the developer. The bulldozer will de-forest and de-vegetate 50% of the 113 ha. of rural zoned lands causing irreparable harm to the biosphere, devastating existing rich habitat wetlands, coniferous and deciduous trees, streams and water courses, flora and fauna. Parkland and connecting paths between trail number 11 on the Cedarhill golf course and trails #1 and 5 on the Stoney Swamp, as designated by the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR), have been abandoned by the plan. Mr. Bienko presented the following motions: 1. Whereas FoTenn Consultants represent the owners and provide City planning services to the City, there is a definite conflict of interest; Therefore a forensic investigation is in order of all principals and parties connected to this re-zoning process, directly or indirectly. 2. Whereas the applicant has contravened several conservation and rural zone by-laws which have not been made known to the Committee as Councillors; Whereas the rezoning does not comply with the former City of Nepean By-law 39-81, 73-93 and the Ottawa 20/20 Environmental Strategy; Whereas the City of Ottawa Official Policy states any changes or development on these lands not detract from the predominant agricultural function of the rural area; Whereas there is extensive and irreversible risk to the conservation of rural lands and the health and quality of life of the residents, he submitted the rezoning must be denied. 3. If the rezoning is passed the City of Ottawa will file immediately an appeal to the OMB and the Federal Canadian Environmental Assessment Board on behalf of the residents of Cedarhill, Orchard Park and Lytle Avenue and pay the costs thereof in full. As a result of the assertions made during the presentation, Councillor Cullen received confirmation the application adhered to policies in both the former and new OP. Peter Foustanellas agreed with the comments made by Mr. Bienko. The area is complete with wildlife and birds that cannot be replaced. Christine Fex had two concerns as a resident of Lytle Avenue. Her well is on the south side of her property, which could have it back onto a septic system. Secondly, there is a small parcel that comes onto Lytle Avenue that she feared will be used as an access route resulting in considerable traffic on their dead end street. 20 children under the age of 10 benefit from the street being a dead end. As a result of the presentation, staff advised that a minimum distance would have to be respected between the well and septic system, which is spelled out in the terrain analysis and hydrogeology report. This has been reviewed and approved by the Conservation Authority (CA). That information could be provided to Ms. Fex. On the question of access to Lytle Avenue, Mr. McDonald advised there was no intention to have an access from Lytle Avenue to the subdivision. It would remain a dead end. Chair Hume also received confirmation the City would have to approve all roads in the subdivision and that any opening of a roadway would involve a public process. Councillor Harder advised that Ms. Fex' concerns were discussed throughout the one year process and Mr. Brunskill (from Lytle) has been engaged. Pam Mackay, Cedarhill Estates and Orchard Estates, and John Brunskill, Lytle Avenue. Ms. Mackay advised there were 200 one-acre country estate lots between the two subdivisions of Cedarhill Estates and Orchard Estates with 80% of the property owners participating in the community associations. Less than 10 individual property owners have raised any opposition to the application. One year ago there was an application to rezone a portion of this land commercial, which was felt to be detrimental to the rural neighbourhood and the community's ability to enjoy their property. The community believes the two-acre country estate lot proposal is more compatible. There was extensive consultation beginning with the first meeting in May 2003; the community associations have had an opportunity to make detailed comments and to review all the documents submitted in support of the application. In addition, the associations had their own experts conduct independent review of the environmental issues. The community is satisfied with the response and manner in which the application has been finalized. There are no major unresolved issues. Therefore, the community associations are recommending approval of the application. Mr. Brunskill added that Lytle Avenue encompasses 13 homes that have expressed slight individual concerns and there is no opposition to the application. Councillor Harder received confirmation the covenants that would be placed on the subdivision would match that in existence in the Cedarhill and Orchard Estates. These entail a minimum size home, protection of the open space character of the rural residential lots, etc. The number one concern was that the character of the area be protected and there be a seamless flow from one neighbourhood to the next. Ray Swanson had an individual concern, owning the property that backs onto one of the access roads. Presently he had a beautiful deer infested wood behind him and asked if there was an opportunity to reassign that road one lot to the west therefore allowing him to have a backyard as opposed to a road. In response, Councillor Harder commented that issue was addressed at length and the location was deemed to be the best after taking into consideration all the issues. Jane Bain did not oppose the development, but did have many of the same concerns raised by Mr. Bienko and Mr. Foustenallas. Ms. Bain was concerned with noise levels, specifically since the 416, and the increased traffic on Cedarview Road, which at one point was to have been a cow path. She did not agree with the access road coming into Cedarhill. It is currently very hard to egress Cedarhill and will be made that much more difficult with the increase in traffic. Councillor Harder explained in detail that although the issue was examined there is a restriction on the number of entrances that can access a road within a specific distance. Mr. McDonald advised that traffic along street #2 was considered to be minimal and offers alternative access into the subdivision should a portion of street #1 become blocked. There is also a second access that is non-vehicular in the vicinity of a City park that can access further into the subdivision should a street become blocked . Councillor Harder reported that p. 46 speaks to the noise issue. Miguel Tremblay, FoTenn Consultants, advised that the lot displayed by Mr. McDonald did provide some discomfort to the residents of Lytle Avenue and has been removed from the Plan of Subdivision altogether and is not subject to this application for that reason. It is a legal lot of record and may be sold at a later time and a house may be built on the property with possible setback variances. A noise study concluded that essentially driving by the 416 a ridge forms a noise barrier and the property tapers down and is at grade with the 416. The noise study recommended a berm or wall be installed. Typically trees do not provide the kind of noise buffer provided by an unobstructed/uninterrupted structure. The intent is to bring the noise decibel level down from 65 to 60 to 55, which is the MTO standard. In order for the applicant to register the subdivision the noise wall must be installed. In effect, residents of Cedarhill and Orchard Estates will benefit from a reduced noise level. A hydrogeological study and terrain analysis has concluded there is no interference or water quality or quantity issue. The former Regional OP (ROP) Policies allow the applicant to build 40 lots in Phase I. Following that, they must revisit their studies and confirm there continue to be no well or quality issues before Phase II (40 lots) can be registered. The development will not encroach on the Stoney Creek Swamp. The provincially significant wetland area will be preserved. The wetland boundary was confirmed by their consultant and reconfirmed by MNR and the Rideau Valley CA (RVCA). It will be conveyed to the City as part of their storm water improvements leaving the City as the guarantor of the wetland. There are additional covenants that protect the rear of these lots preventing any encroachment or clearing within those lots. Mr. Tremblay pointed out a waterway that flows from the existing quarry to the wetland, which will be partly under private ownership and the reason for the private covenants. These covenants will be registered on title, but are not part of the City's package since the City does not require private covenants. It is above and beyond that required, in part to provide a level of comfort to the adjacent subdivisions and for marketing purposes. Their target market is essentially similar to the residents of the existing subdivisions. With respect to the preservation of trees, fish habitat and open space, this is a two-acre lot subdivision with approximately 11% building coverage and by no means a concrete jungle. The streets are rural cross sections with ditches and limited lighting. The intent is to maintain and enhance a rural character, which defines this area. The Committee also received an e-mail dated 12 April 2004 from Kathryn Ascah, in opposition, which was circulated and is held on file with the City Clerk. Chair Hume closed the Public Meeting and the matter returned to Committee. In response to Councillor Holmes, Mr. McDonald explained there had been pumping by the golf course for watering in the past, with MNR permission, to lower the wetland area to the water level, which had been a previous practice. Under City ownership there would be more control as to the amount of water that could be taken from the wetland area. Councillor Harder explained that considerable time and effort was expended on this application and noted that Orchard Estates and Cedarhill Estates residents have worked diligently to maintain that rural designation. She trusted their stewardship and that of the RVCA, the MNR and everyone engaged in the application. Having said that, she moved the staff recommendation be approved. The Committee approved the recommendation. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend that Council: 1. Approve and adopt an amendment to the Official Plan of the former City of Nepean to redesignate 800 Cedarview Road from General Rural Area to Country Lot and Open Space, as detailed in Document 2. 2. Approve an amendment to the former City of Nepean Zoning By-law 73-92 to change the zoning of 800 Cedarview Road from RU, Rural Agricultural Zone, to RCL, Residential Country Lots Zone, and RCL Block "A", Residential Country Lots Zone, to permit development of detached family dwellings and to Con, Conservation Zone, and to Con, Conservation Zone Block "A", to enable the preservation of wetlands and wetland buffer that will also function as a flood control facility, as shown in Document 3 and detailed in Document 4. 3. Authorize the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals to grant draft plan approval to the proposed Plan of Subdivision pertaining to Part of Lots 22, 23, 24 and 25, Concession 4 (Rideau Front), Geographic Township of Nepean, formerly City of Nepean, now City of Ottawa, as shown on Document 5, subject to the conditions detailed in Document 5. CARRIED with Councillors D. Holmes and A. Cullen dissenting. 4. ZONING - 1717 BEARHILL ROAD ZONAGE - 1717, CHEMIN BEARHILL ACS2004-DEV-APR-0001 WEST-CARLETON (5) Timothy Chadder, representing the owner, was present in support of the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 24 February 2004 and the staff technical amendment. The Committee approved the recommendation as amended. Moved by Councillor J. Harder: 1. That the recommendation be amended to read as follows: "That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former Township of West Carleton Zoning By-law to change the zoning of 1717 Bearhill Road from "Open Space, Exception 10" (OS-10) to "Residential Country Lot, Exception 53" (RCL-53) and "Residential Country Lot, Exception 55" (RCL-55) to permit a residential country lot subdivision as detailed in Document 4." 2. That the text of the report be amended as follows: Under the heading "Proposed Zoning", the first paragraph be amended and replaced to read as follows: "The details of the proposed Zoning By-law amendment are attached as Document 4. The proposed Zoning By-law amendment would rezone the subject lands from "Open Space, Exception 10" (OS-10) to "Residential Country Lot, Exception 53" (RCL-53) and "Residential Country Lot, Exception 55" (RCL-55). The RCL-53 and RCL-55 zones would permit a fully-detached dwelling house and a home occupation. Minimum front building setbacks of 30 m and 20 m are proposed for the RCL-53 zone and RCL-55 zone, respectively. These setbacks are intended to address comments on the application provided by the developer of the Country Meadow Estates subdivision. Under the standard RCL zone provisions, the minimum rear building setback is 7.5 m for a main building and 1.0 m for an accessory building. Some of the tee boxes, fairways and greens for the golf course are located in proximity to the rear lot lines of the proposed subdivision. For example, one fairway is located approximately 40 m from three of the proposed lots. Staff are proposing a minimum 15.0 m rear building setback to increase the separation distance between the golf course and the residential buildings." 3. That the "EXPLANATORY NOTE Document 3" be amended as follows: Under the heading "Proposed Zoning", the first paragraph be amended and replaced with the following: "The proposed zoning would change the zoning designation from "Open Space, Exception 10" (OS-10) to "Residential Country Lot, Exception 53" (RCL-53) and "Residential Country Lot, Exception 55" (RCL-55). The RCL-53 and RCL-55 zones would permit one fully-detached dwelling house per lot. Site-specific zone provisions are proposed for the RCL-53 and RCL-55 zones." 4. That the "DETAILS OF RECOMMENDED ZONING Document 4" be amended as follows: That the text included under Item 1 be amended and replaced with the following: "1. Area A rezoned from OS-10 to RCL-53 All of the provisions of the standard RCL zone shall apply except the following: a) BUILDING SETBACK, FRONT (minimum): 30 metres b) BUILDING SETBACK, REAR (minimum): 15 metres c) DRIVEWAY SETBACK (minimum): 1.0 metre except when a shared driveway is located along a common lot line in which case no driveway setback is required" That the following text be added after Item 1: "2. Area B rezoned from OS-10 to RCL-55 All of the provisions of the standard RCL zone shall apply except for the following: a) BUILDING SETBACK, FRONT (minimum): 20 metres b) BUILDING SETBACK, REAR (minimum): 15 metres c) DRIVEWAY SETBACK (minimum): 1.0 metre except when a shared driveway is located along a common lot line in which case no driveway setback is required" 5. That "Schedule A to Draft Zoning By-law" be amended and replaced with the attached "Schedule A to Draft Zoning By-law". 6. That the "CONSULTATION DETAILS Document 5" be amended as follows: On page 89 under the heading "Response", that the second paragraph beginning with the sentence "The standard RCL zone provisions require a minimum 12 m front building setback" be deleted. 7. And that no further notice be provided pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act. CARRIED as amended with Councillor A. Cullen dissenting. 5. ZONING - 3131 STONERIDGE DRIVE ZONAGE - 3131, PROMENADE STONERIDGE ACS2004-DEV-APR-0051 WEST-CARLETON (5) The Committee approved the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 26 January 2004. The Committee received correspondence dated 10 March 2004 from K. W. Armitage, which is held on file with the City Clerk. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former West Carleton Zoning By-Law to change the zoning of 3131 Stoneridge Drive from Rural (RU) to Country Lot Residential (RCL) as detailed in Document 3. CARRIED 6. ZONING - 2006 AYLWIN ROAD ZONAGE - 2006, CHEMIN AYLWIN ACS2004-DEV-APR-0085 WEST-CARLETON (5) Allan A. Grunder (current owner), was present in support of the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 22 March 2004. The Committee approved the recommendation. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former West Carleton Zoning By-law to implement Council's direction to add the use "accessory dwelling house " to the existing CR-26 exception zone for 2006 Aylwin Road as shown in Document 1 and detailed in Document 3. CARRIED 7. ZONING - 3185 JOY'S ROAD ZONAGE - 3185, CHEMIN JOY'S ACS2004-DEV-APR-0080 GOULBOURN (6) Adrian Schouten, A & A Schouten, was present in support of the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 15 March 2004. The Committee approved the recommendation. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former Township of Goulbourn Zoning By-Law to change the zoning of 3185 Joy's Road from Agriculture Zone (A1) to Agriculture Special Zone 8 (A1-8) to permit a lot area of 18 hectares, and restrict any future residential use as detailed in Document 2. CARRIED 8. ZONING - 294 LIARD STREET ZONAGE - 294 RUE LIARD ACS2004-DEV-APR-0084 GOULBOURN (6) The Committee approved the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 22 March 2004. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former Township of Goulbourn Zoning By-Law, for a Temporary Use Bylaw to change the zoning of 294 Liard Street from Residential Zone, R1 to Residential Zone R1-x to permit a Garden Suite attached to the main dwelling, for a 10 year period as detailed in Document 3, subject to the following condition: That the owner enter into an agreement with the City of Ottawa as specified by Section 39(1.2) of the Planning Act , setting out that: i. the Garden Suite is to be occupied exclusively by the owner's parents; ii. the Garden Suite is to be removed at such time as it no longer required by the occupants, at any time prior to expiry of the 10 year period; and iii. the Garden Suite is to be removed at the end of the 10 year period, unless an extension has been requested and approved by City Council, prior to the expiry of the Temporary Use Bylaw. CARRIED 9. ZONING - 770 SILVER SEVEN ROAD ZONAGE - 770, RUE SILVER SEVEN ACS2004-DEV-APR-0014 KANATA (4) Roslyn Houser, Goodmans, was present in support of the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 8 March 2004. The Committee approved the recommendation. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former City of Kanata Zoning By-Law No. 138-93 to change the zoning of 770 Silver Seven Road from "Light Industrial, Mixed, Exception 2, Holding" (M1C-2H) to "Light Industrial, Mixed, Exception 7" (M1C-7) to permit a Large Retail Warehouse as detailed in Document 4. CARRIED (M. O'Rourke attended following approval of the item and was asked to submit his comments in opposition to the recommendation prior to the City Council meeting.) 10. ZONING - 500 TERRY FOX DRIVE ZONAGE - 500 PROMENADE TERRY FOX ACS2004-DEV-APR-0072 KANATA (4) Dave Krajaefski, Manager, Planning, Trow Associates Inc. and Lorena Toscani (Canadian Tire Corporation). Mr. Krajaefski requested the Committee to move the item forward to City Council on 14 April 2004 as the construction time lines will be compromised due to the problems scheduling this item on previous agendas. Moved by Councillor P. Feltmate: That the item proceed to City Council on 14 April 2004. CARRIED The Committee approved the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 10 March 2004 That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former City of Kanata Zoning By-Law to change the zoning of 500 Terry Fox Drive from M1C - 1H Light Industrial Mixed - Exception Holding, to M1C - 2 as a further exception to the M1C Light Industrial Mixed zone, to permit the development of an Automotive Service Centre and Accessory Restaurant as detailed in Document 3 and shown in Document 1. CARRIED 11. ZONING - 1150 OLD CARP ROAD ZONAGE - 1150 ANCIEN CHEMIN DE CARP ACS2004-DEV-APR-0083 KANATA (4) Rod Price, Minto Developments Inc., was present in support of the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 30 March 2004. The Committee approved the recommendation. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former City of Kanata Zoning By-Law No. 74-79 to repeal the zoning of a portion of 1150 Old Carp Road, and an amendment to the former City of Kanata Zoning By-law 161-93 to include these lands within By-law 161-93 and to zone them Residential Type 3A (R3A) as detailed in Document 1. CARRIED 12. ZONING - 3100 BANKFIELD ROAD ZONAGE - 3100, CHEMIN BANKFIELD ACS2004-DEV-APR-0087 BELL-SOUTH NEPEAN (3) Greg Winters, Novatech Engineering, was present in support of the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 30 March 2004. The Committee approved the recommendation. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former City of Nepean Zoning By-law to change the zoning of 3100 Bankfield Road from RU, Rural Agricultural to RIA Block "A", Residential Special Density (Special Permitted Uses and Provisions) and Re Block "A" Restrictive (Special Permitted Uses and Provisions) as detailed in Document 3. CARRIED 13. ZONING - GENERAL AMENDMENT TO THE FORMER CITY OF NEPEAN URBAN ZONING BY-LAW TO RESOLVE TECHNICAL ANOMALIES AND TO ADDRESS HOUSEKEEPING AMENDMENTS TO 19 CENTREPOINTE DRIVE AND 300 MOODIE DRIVE ZONAGE -MODIFICATION GÉNÉRALE AU RÈGLEMENT DE ZONAGE URBAIN DE L'ANCIENNE VILLE DE NEPEAN VISANT À RÉGLER DES ANOMALIES TECHNIQUES ET À APPORTER DES MODIFICATIONS À L'ENTRETIEN MÉNAGER DU 19, PROMENADE CENTREPOINTE ET DU 300, PROMENADE MOODIE BELL-SOUTH NEPEAN/BELL-NEPEAN SUD (3) BAY/BAIE (7), BASELINE (8) ACS2004-DEV-APR-0068 KNOXDALE-MERIVALE (9) The Committee approved the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 30 March 2004 That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve amendments to the former Nepean Urban Zoning By-Law to correct technical anomalies, and to approve a building separation of 40.0 metres between dwellings on the west side of Centrepointe Drive and any building on 19 Centrepointe Drive, and to zone 300 Moodie Drive MS Industrial Service, as detailed in Document 1 and shown on Documents 3 to 5. CARRIED 14. ZONING - 71 WOODROFFE AVENUE ZONAGE - 71, AVENUE WOODROFFE ACS2004-DEV-APR-0086 BAY/BAIE (7) Dan Marandola, was present in support of the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 30 March 2004. The Committee received an e-mail dated 12 April and correspondence dated 8 April 2004 from Beverley Binette, Development Officer, Woodroffe North Community Association, and David Madeley, which is held on file with the City Clerk. The purpose of the letter was to "record our concerns, improve the public record on this issue and formally record commitments made at a January 15th public meeting on the application." The Committee approved the recommendation. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former City of Ottawa Zoning By-law (1998) to add an exception to the R2A - Semi-Detached House Zone applying to 71 Woodroffe Avenue to allow a 'triplex house' as an additional permitted use with a parking requirement of two spaces as detailed in Document 3. CARRIED 15. ZONING - 2367 ROGER STEVENS DRIVE ZONAGE - 2367, PROMENADE ROGER STEVENS ACS2004-DEV-APR-0081 RIDEAU (21) The Committee approved the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 17 March 2004 That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former Township of Rideau Zoning By-Law to change the zoning of 2367 Roger Stevens Drive from Environmental Protection Zone (EP) to Village Residential Zone (RV) as detailed in Document 1. CARRIED 16. ZONING - 1002 KITOMAN CRESCENT ZONAGE - 1002, CROISSANT KITOMAN ACS2004-DEV-APR-0062 OSGOODE (20) The Committee approved the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 23 February 2004 That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former Township of Osgoode Zoning By-Law to change the zoning of 1002 Kitoman Crescent from C1[114], Commercial Use to R, Residential as detailed in Document 2. CARRIED 17. ZONING - 7116, 7122 BANK STREET AND 2517 SCRIVENS DRIVE ZONAGE - 7116, 7122, RUE BANK ET 2517, PROMENADE SCRIVENS ACS2004-DEV-APR-0075 OSGOODE (20) Simone Pharand advised that she agreed with recommendation 1 contained in departmental report dated 17 March 2004 and asked the Committee to defer recommendation 2 to allow her to consult with staff. Ms. Currie agreed with the deferral of recommendation 2. Moved by Councillor A. Cullen: That recommendation 2 be deferred to the first meeting in June (June 8) to allow Ms. Pharand to consult with staff; and, That recommendation 1 be amended as follows: Approve an amendment to the former Township of Osgoode Zoning By-law to change the zoning of 2517 Scrivens Drive from RU, Rural to CE, Country Estate, and to change the zoning of 7116 Bank Street from RU, Rural to RU[333], Rural Exception to permit parking of landscaping and snow equipment, as detailed in Document 2. CARRIED The Committee approved the recommendations as amended That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council: 1. Approve an amendment to the former Township of Osgoode Zoning By-Law to change the zoning of 2517 Scrivens Drive from RU, Rural to CE, Country Estate, Rural, Exception to permit parking of landscaping and snow equipment, and to change the zoning of 7116 Bank Street from RU, Rural to RU[333], Rural Exception as detailed in Document 2. CARRIED as amended 2. Refuse an amendment to the former Township of Osgoode Zoning By-law to change the zoning of 7122 Bank Street from RU, Rural to C1, Commercial General and C2, Highway Commercial. DEFERRED TO JUNE 8 18. ZONING - 2322 TENTH LINE ROAD ZONAGE - 2322, CHEMIN TENTH LINE ACS2004-DEV-APR-0056 CUMBERLAND (19) Dan Paquette, Paquette Planning Associates Ltd., was present in support of the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 27 February 2004. The Committee approved the recommendation. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former City of Cumberland Zoning By-Law, to change the zoning of 2322 Tenth Line Road from D-I, Development Industrial to CA1-X1, Commercial Automotive Exception 1, to permit additional uses as shown in Document 1 and detailed in Document 2. CARRIED 19. ZONING - 3883 NAVAN ROAD ZONAGE - 3883, CHEMIN NAVAN ACS2004-DEV-APR-0073 CUMBERLAND (19) The Committee approved the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 8 March 2004 That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former Cumberland Rural Zoning By-Law to change the zoning of 3883 Navan Road from R1 (Residential One) and GR (General Rural) to I (Institutional) to permit a place of worship and private school as shown in Document 1 and detailed in Document 2. CARRIED 20. ZONING - 835 TAYLOR CREEK DRIVE ZONAGE - 835, PROMENADE TAYLOR CREEK ACS2004-DEV-APR-0071 ORLÉANS (1) Julie Houle, Planner and Ms. Currie appeared before the Committee with respect to departmental report dated 26 February 2004. Subsequent to a presentation by Ms. Houle, staff responded to questions and the following summarizes the points: * Although there are many appeals to the OP, staff was not aware of any appeals that relate to the more general industrial business use component of the enterprise designation of the Plan. * Issues were raised by business owners located within the park, some of which were repeated by different individuals. * While staff is recommending approval, the Zoning By-Law will be structured so that it will not take effect until the OP and all its appeals have been resolved. That would permit the creation of a by-law that endorses the policies of the new OP. * The residential unit will be an apartment unit within the complex. This is permitted in other industrial zoning by-laws. It is certainly allowed within rural industrial parks and has been allowed where there is a home-based environment. Staff could not speak to an actual situation within the urban area. The Committeee heard from the following delegations: Richard Lortie, Ability Moving and Transfer Ltd., explained that Taylor Creek was designated as a high end business park, which entailed a premium. He was aware that five individuals opposed the rezoning for a self-storage unit. A special case should not be made at this time, particularly when the market is strong. He exampled: Diresko; Ability is adding 25,000, with a site plan submitted; Ketchum Manufacturing purchased land in the park and is planning to add 35,000 square feet, which will add a substantial number of jobs; Capital Auto Parts will add 25 employees to the area; an engineering firm is looking to build in the area. The proposed use permits entry into the area at all times of day. This park was designed to add employment into the community. The uses he previously outlined will generate essential business for existing restaurants and shopping malls. A self-storage unit will not generate any form of meaningful employment by hiring 2-3 individuals. Responding to questions from Councillor Bedard, Mr. Lortie explained the premium was paid to the municipality (Cumberland). He added that all tenants have adhered to the controls and regulations established for the park; e.g. split blocks, no illuminated signs, etc. to ensure the park is kept to a defined standard. Marty Koshman, applicant, Controlex Corporation, and David Mailing, David Mailing Architect Inc. Mr. Koshman posited that self-storage is a complimentary neighbourhood service to both residential and business users. Self-storage is created for individuals that need affordable storage space not available nor practical in their offices, homes or businesses; it is a service industry. The design will be in accordance with building and site development guidelines established for the Taylor Creek Business Park. The applicant is cognizant that it backs onto Highway 174 with the inherent traffic and will adhere to the appearance of the business park. They also contemplate a number of mini-offices within the complex, which will provide a start-up opportunity for individuals. He believed the park was created approximately 15-20 years ago and of the 28 lots available, 12 remain for sale. This has not been a high demand area for the industry envisioned at the time and he believed their proposal will fill a need within the existing community. Mr. Mailing explained that when first approached, he had the same image many have of self-storage, but that was not the intention of the applicant. Self-storage units are typically placed at the back of industrial parks and appear rudimentary, which is not the case in this instance. In numerous projects in the U.S., self-storage buildings have come into the community and attached a neighbourly face. The concept is to attract clients that are reluctant to enter a shabby neighbourhood for self-storage. They are using materials foreign to self-storage projects; e.g. stucco, brick, a lot of detail; and, paying close attention to the highway exposure to ensure it is not one long building. There is no outdoor storage or storage containers. It is completely enclosed and intended to be totally complimentary to the site. Mr. Mailing pointed out the second floor apartment unit, which the manager will occupy, and reported that a resident manager is common in the indusry. The unit is intended to blend into the business component of the development. Messrs. Koshman and Mailing responded to questions posed by members of the Committee. A number of points of clarification were made and are summarized as follows: * The executive office building is an integral part of the proposal, with the apartment directly above, and will be one of the first structures built. * The office building was anticipated to be the elevation along Taylor Creek Drive and the storage buildings would be across the other three exposures. * The office space consists of small areas that can be leased as individual offices or placed together as a suite. Along with the 5,000 square feet of office space there would be 45,000 square feet of storage area. Up to 20 offices are initially contemplated in the space resulting in approximately one person per office plus site staff. * Although typically storage facilities have a myriad of doors, the doors will be accessible from the inside since the proponent was attempting to contain the site completely and provide something quite appealing to the community and passersby. Mr. Mailing provided elevations of the proposal for ease of reference. Chair Hume closed the Public Meeting and the matter returned to Committee. Responding to questions from Committee, staff provided clarification as summarized below: * The Taylor Creek Business Park was developed by the former municipality of Cumberland and was envisaged as a premium business park. Specific premiums were not paid on individual lots, similar to say a homeowner who backed onto a ravine. The premium referred to was the nature in which the Park would be developed. Each lot was negotiated individually and the price reflected the market of the day for the respective zoning, which was more restrictive and did not foresee mini warehouses. * * The proposed development exceeds the design criteria, which were administrative in nature and not Council endorsed criteria. These were applied through the site plan approval process and the new City has continued to apply those standards. * A site plan is being processed and there is no reason to believe the design before Committee is not the product going forward. Responding to Councillor Bédard, Ms. Currie reiterated that the By-Law specified the zoning did not come into full force and effect until the new OP is in effect. If the Committee desired, staff could hold passing the By-Law pending Site Plan Approval. Mr. Koshman did not have any objection with holding the By-Law until site plan approval. Moved by Councillor G. Bédard: 1. That the Zoning By-Law Amendment not be forwarded to Council until such time as the Site Plan is approved. 2. That no further notice be provided pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act CARRIED The Committee approved the recommendation as amended. 1. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to the former City of Cumberland Zoning By-Law 1-84 to change the zoning of 835 Taylor Creek Drive from MR - Industrial Restricted Zone to MR-X4 Industrial Restricted Exception No. 4 to permit a mini-warehouse and public storage use, and a dwelling unit as detailed in Document 3. 2. That the Zoning By-Law Amendment not be forwarded to Council until such time as the Site Plan is approved. 3. That no further notice be provided pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act. CARRIED as amended 21. CASH-IN-LIEU OF PARKING - 950 BANK STREET RÈGLEMENT FINANCIER DES EXIGENCES DE STATIONNEMENT - 950, RUE BANK ACS2004-DEV-APR-0078 ALTA VISTA (18) Chair Hume noted Councillor Holmes was putting forward a Motion to reduce the amount to be paid for the cash-in-lieu of parking. Gordon Lorimer, Barry J. Hobin & Associates Architects Incorporated, and K. M. Dawn O'Leary, The Glebe Centre, were present and in support of the Motion to reduce the amount. Moved by Councillor D. Holmes: That the payment for the 8 parking spaces cash-in-lieu for the non-profit Long Term Care Facility at 950 Bank Street be $1.00 per space. CARRIED with Councillor G. Hunter dissenting. The Committee approved the departmental recommendation contained in report dated 30 March 2004 as amended. That the Planning and Environment Committee approve a Cash-in-Lieu of Parking application for eight parking spaces in the amount of $1 for the non-profit Long Term Care Facility being constructed at 950 Bank Street, subject to the following conditions: (a) The Applicant enter into a Cash-in-Lieu of Parking agreement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and that full payment be received upon execution of the agreement; (b) The approval be considered null and void if the provisions of condition a) have not been fulfilled within six months from the time of Committee approval. CARRIED as amened LOCAL ARCHITECTURAL CONSERVATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMITÉ CONSULATIF SUR LA CONSERVATION DE L'ARCHITECTURE LOCALE 22. DESIGNATION OF 273 WILBROD STREET UNDER PART IV OF THE ONTARIO HERITAGE ACT DÉSIGNATION DU 273, RUE WILBROD EN VERTU DE LA PARTIE IV DE LOI SUR LE PATRIMOINE DE L'ONTARIO ACS2004-DEV-APR-0074 RIDEAU-VANIER (12) The Committee approved the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 18 March 2004 That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve the designation of 273 Wilbrod Street under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act in accordance with the Statement of Reason for Designation, attached as Document 3. CARRIED OTTAWA FORESTS AND GREENSPACE ADVISORY COMMITTEE COMITÉ CONSULTATIF SUR LES FORÊTS ET LES ESPACES VERTS D'OTTAWA 23. STRATEGY FOR THE ACQUISITION OF COMMUNITY GREENSPACE UNDER PROVISIONS OF THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL ACT STRATÉGIE POUR L'ACQUISITION D'ESPACES VERTS COMMUNAUTAIRES AUX TERMES DES DISPOSITIONS DE LA LOI SUR LES MUNICIPALITÉS DE L'ONTARIO ACS2004-CCV-OFO-0002 CITY-WIDE Barbara Barr, Greenspace Alliance of Canada's Capital, and Joanna Dean, Chair, Ottawa Forests and Greenspace Advisory Committee (OFGAC), were present in support of the recommendation contained in the OFGAC report dated 9 February 2004. The Committee approved the recommendation. That the Planning and Environment Committee and Council: 1. Approve that the City of Ottawa Greenspace Acquisition Strategy include the use of special services levies and local improvement charges; 2. Direct staff to ensure that these tools are used in consultation with the Ottawa Forests and Greenspace Advisory Committee and in accordance with the principles and processes outlined in this report. CARRIED PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SERVICES D'URBANISME ET D'AMÉNAGEMENT PLANNING AND INFRASTRUCTURE APPROVALS BRANCH DIRECTION DE L'APPROBATION DES DEMANDES D'URBANISME ET D'INFRASTRUCTURE 24. ON TIME REVIEW INITIATIVE PROJET D'EXAMEN EN TEMPS VOULU ACS2004-DEV-APR-0055 CITY-WIDE Mr. Moser and Mr. Marc appeared before the Committee with respect to departmental report dated 9 March 2004. Subsequent to a comprehensive PowerPoint presentation by Mr. Moser, staff responded to questions posed by members of the Committee. A number of points of clarification were made and are summarized as follows: * P. 245 - Pre-Application Public Consultation does not negate the public participation process and does not guarantee Committee/Council approval, nor does it guarantee that delegated authority will be forthcoming. Staff consults on a daily basis with proponents; provides opinions; and, points them in the direction of policy, to the Ward Councillor, to the community associations. The meeting determines how the proposal fits in the planning context and informs the proponent of the process. The public process of the consultation takes place after the application is filed. A process is in place to provide a heads up to the Councillor once an application is received where no pre-consultation has taken place. If a process is introduced whereby there is a heads up to the Councillor once pre-consultation has taken place, then staff can inform the Councillor what is being looked for and if that information is not received the application will not proceed forward * P. 248* - Issue Resolution - Staff Memorandum or Committee Report Preparation -the department is no longer able to hold a series of meetings in a community to deal with an application. The reduced staff overtime (OT) funding ($43,000 - 2004) ($225,000 - 2003) curtails its ability to attend numerous meetings. The intent was to continue to attend public meetings, but staff will be unable to attend a series of meetings on one specific issue and will likely establish criteria. Staff would also look to the Ward Councillor to be selective in inviting staff to meetings and will attend where there is the greatest need. There was also the possibility to attend meetings during the day although that was not always the best scenario for the community. At times this may entail negotiation and/or more detailed discussion at Committee meetings and might prevent reports rising to Committee with consensus on a given issue. * In the past, staff attended meetings unrelated to a bone fide application and/or there was a lack of issues, which can no longer be sustained. If a need arises and staff cannot attend on OT, then a decision might be taken to have management staff attend. The possibility of flexible hours has been and will continue to be pursued. * The 98-day target from the receipt of a zoning application to a report before Committee has been met 50% of the time and staff is looking to improve that. If this process was in place today, there would be a one page report before Committee detailing the status of an application intended to be at Committee but which did not arrive on the Agenda. * Staff is endeavouring to place the onus on stakeholders to live within the timelines agreed to; e.g. the CA's Memorandum of Agreement spells out that a response is expected within 28 days or the City assumes the CA is satisfied. In essence, if a comment is received on the 33rd day it will be incorporated into the report, but if it is received on the 45th day when the report is signed off that information will come forward at Committee with a staff comment. The report speaks to accountability and allows the department to recognize there are circumstances that make it impossible for staff to meet its timelines. * Recommendation 2 does include consulting with community associations. * P. 250 - Site Plan Control - By-Law Amendment - A Letter of Undertaking is enforceable against the person who signed the letter, but unless there is a provision in a by-law elsewhere, the provisions in the Letter are not enforceable against subsequent owners. * Mr. Moser undertook to provide Councillor Holmes with additional information on the impact/affect on three door rows since these were contentious as infill developments. * Document 3 provides an indicator of what is required for the various types of applications. In this way, stakeholders know the rules of engagement and can respond accordingly. Staff is attempting to eliminate mystery and confusion from the process. * The process would continue to make allowances for the summer months. The Committee approved the recommendations. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend that Council: 1. Receive this report. RECEIVED 2. Direct the Planning and Development Department to consult with stakeholders on the proposed changes to the development review process. 3. Direct the Planning and Development Department to report back to the Planning and Environment Committee and Council by June 8, 2004 on the consultation with a detailed Action Plan on implementing changes to the development review process by June 30, 2004. CARRIED 25 ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD APPEALS APPELS À LA COMMISSION DES AFFAIRES MUNICIPALES DE L'ONTARIO ACS2004-DEV-APR-0061 CITY-WIDE The Committee approved the recommendation contained in departmental report dated 27 February 2004. That the Planning and Environment Committee receive this report for information. RECEIVED BUILDING SERVICES DIRECTION DES SERVICES DU BÂTIMENT 26. SIGNS BY-LAW MINOR VARIANCE - 2870 SHEFFIELD ROAD DÉROGATION MINEURE AU RÈGLEMENT MUNICIPAL SUR LES ENSEIGNES - 2870, CHEMIN SHEFFIELD ACS2004-DEV-BLD-0004 ALTA VISTA (18) Chair Hume noted there was a technical amendment related to the departmental recommendation contained in report dated 23 March 2004 agreed to by the applicant (as noted in e-mail dated 8 April 2004 from Randy Allen, National Accounts Manager, Ray Neon Signs Inc.) Moved by Councillor P. Feltmate: WHEREAS the staff report for this proposal recommends refusal in recommendation 1 and approval of a smaller sign in recommendation 2; And WHEREAS, following discussion with staff, the applicant has submitted a revised proposal, as attached, that is acceptable to the Department; And WHEREAS the applicant has requested that the revised submission be added to the report as Document 3, Revised Elevation; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that report reference number ACS2004-DEV-BLD-0004 be amended to add Document 3, as attached, and to revise Recommendation 2 as follows: That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve a Recommended Minor Variance to Signs By-law 36-2000, of the former City of Ottawa, to allow a wall sign built above the roof-line and to permit an increase in the maximum permitted sign face area to 35 square metres, as illustrated in Document 3, instead of the maximum permitted sign face area of 20 square metres. The Committee approved the recommendation as amended. That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council: 1. Refuse a Requested Minor Variance to Signs By-law 36-2000, of the former City of Ottawa, to legalize an existing wall sign built above the roof-line with a sign face area of 46 square metres instead of the maximum permitted sign face area of 20 square metres. 2. Approve a Recommended Minor Variance to Signs By-law 36-2000, of the former City of Ottawa, to allow a wall sign built above the roof-line and to permit an increase in the maximum permitted sign face area to 35 square metres, as illustrated in Document 3, instead of the maximum permitted sign face area of 20 square metres. CARRIED as amended with Councillor A. Cullen dissenting. INFORMATION PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED INFORMATION DISTRIBUÉ ANTÉRIEUREMENT A. ADVISORY COMMITTEE RESERVE APPOINTMENT - LOCAL ARCHITECTURAL CONSERVATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE NOMINATION D'UN MEMBRE SUPPLÉANT AU COMITÉ CONSULTATIF SUR LA CONSERVATION DE L'ARCHITECTURE LOCALE ACS2004-CRS-SEC-0026 RECEIVED B. REFERRAL MOTION - DOWNTOWN OTTAWA URBAN DESIGN STRATEGY 20/20 - PHASE 1 MOTION DE RENVOI - STRATÉGIE 20/20 D'ESTHÉTIQUE URBAINE POUR LE CENTREVILLE D'OTTAWA - ÉTAPE 1 ACS2004-POL-0019 RECEIVED INQUIRIES DEMANDES DES RENSEIGNMENTS Councillor / Conseillère D. Holmes VERBAL CONCURRENCE BY STAFF ON REQUESTS FOR RE-ZONINGS PRIOR TO PUBLIC CONSULTATION ADHÉSION VERBALE DU PERSONNEL CONCERNANT DES DEMANDES DE MODIFICATION DE ZONAGE AVANT LES CONSULTATIONS PUBLIQUES Councillor D. Holmes raised the following inquiry: I have been informed of two recent instances in which applicants were informed by city staff that their requests for re-zoning would receive Departmental support, prior to circulation of the applications. The applicants were then advised to ascertain if I would also agree in advance to their applications. These are the examples: 1. Somerset Street West - to rezone a property from R6 (Residential) to CN (Commercial). 2. Bank Street - to rezone a property from CN6 [3.0] to CN6 [5.0], to permit an 66% increased in GFA. Regardless of the possible merits of these two requests, I wish to clarify the procedures for issuing verbal approvals on re-zoning applications: 1. What is the policy on this procedure, and how long has it been an established practice? 2. Does this practice contravene the City of Ottawa's public consultation policy on planning matters? 3. Is the authority of City Council being abrogated by this procedure? OTHER BUSINESS AUTRE QUESTIONS APPEALS - OFFICIAL PLAN APPELS DU PLAN OFFICIEL D'OTTAWA Mr. Marc advised the Committee that the pre-hearing on the new OP has been scheduled for 22 - 28 June 2004. Further information would be provided to Committee and Council as it is forthcoming. He did not expect there would be one long hearing as in the 1988 OP, but it would be more in keeping with the 1997 OP with separate hearings on the various appeals. Mr. Marc did not anticipate the first hearing would be scheduled before January 2005. CONFIDENTIAL AGENDA 3 ORDRE DU JOUR CONFIDENTIEL 3 Moved by Councillor P. Feltmate: That the meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee move In Camera pursuant to Section 12(1) (b) personal matters about an identifiable individual, including staff, of the Procedure By-law, to consider Confidential Agenda 3. CARRIED ADJOURNMENT LEVÉE DE LA SÉANCE The Committee adjourned the meeting at 12:40 p.m. Original signed by Original signed by Lorenzina Ferrari Councillor P. Hume Committee Coordinator Chair PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES 9 13 APRIL 2004 24 COMITÉ DE L'URBANISME ET DE L'ENVIRONNEMENT PROCÈS-VERBAL 9 LE 13 AVRIL 2004 Notes: 1. Underlining indicates a new or amended recommendation approved by Committee. 2. Reports requiring Council consideration will be presented to Council on 28 April 2004 in Planning and Environment Committee Report 8B, with the exception of Item 10, which will rise to Council on 14 April 2004 in Planning and Environment Committee Report 8 Nota : 1. Le soulignement indique qu'il s'agit d'une nouvelle recommandation ou d'une recommandation modifiée approuvée par le Comité. 2. Les rapports nécessitant un examen par le Conseil municipal seront présentés au Conseil le 28 avril 2004 dans le rapport 8B du Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement, à l'exception de point 10 qui sera soumis au Conseil le 14 avril 2004 dans le rapport 8. 2.