Planning and Economic Development Committee Comité de l urbanisme et de l expansion économique

Transcription

1 Planning and Economic Development Committee Comité de l urbanisme et de l expansion économique Agenda 14 Ordre du jour 14 Tuesday, August 29, :15 a.m. Le mardi 29 août h 15 Victoria Hall, First Level Bytown Pavilion, City Hall Salle Victoria, niveau 1 Pavillon Bytown, hôtel de ville

2 ii Confirmation of Minutes Ratification des procès-verbaux Minutes 14 (July 25, 2000) Procès-verbal 14 (Le 25 juillet 2000) Index Action Items Articles pour exécution 1. Zoning to 234 Sunnyside Avenue Zonage à 234, avenue Sunnyside Ref.: ACS2000-PW-PLN Zoning Piccadilly Avenue Zonage - 391, avenue Piccadilly Ref.: ACS2000-PW-PLN-0098 OT9 % Capital OT7 % Kitchissippi Site Plan Control Approval Queen Street Approbation du plan d emplacement rue Queen Ref.: ACS2000-PW-PLN-0095 OT6 % Somerset 4. Site Plan Control Approval Colonel By Drive Approbation du plan d emplacement promenade Colonel By Ref.: ACS2000-PW-PLN-0097 OT9 % Capital 5. Parking - Cash-in-lieu Gladstone Avenue Stationnement - Règlement financier , avenue Gladstone Ref.: ACS2000-PW-PLN-0100 OT6 % Somerset 6. Proposed Amendments to Signs By-law Modifications proposeés à l Arrêté municipal sur le signage Ref.: ACS2000-PW-PLN-0090 City Wide 7. Signs By-law Minor Variance Rideau Street Demande de dérogation mineure au Règlement municipal sur les enseignes - 275, rue Rideau Ref.: ACS2000-PW-PLN-0109 OT5 % Bruyère%Strathcona

3 iii 8. Signs By-law Minor Variance Albert Street Demande de dérogation mineure au Règlement municipal sur les enseignes - 250, rue Albert Ref.: ACS2000-PW-PLN-0110 OT6 % Somerset 9. Heritage Alteration - Chateau Laurier - 1 Rideau Street Transformation d un bâtiment historique - le Château Laurier - 1, rue Rideau Ref.: ACS2000-PW-PLN-0101 OT5 % Bruyère%Strathcona City Council Referral Renvoi du Conseil municipal 10. Exemption - Building Permit and Parkland Dedication Fees Montreal Road Dispense - Frais perçus aux fins de parc et de permis de construire - 840, chemin Montréal Ref.: CC2Z OT4 % Rideau 107 Members Reports - Enquiries Rapports des membres - demandes de renseignements Councillor/Conseillère Elisabeth Arnold, Chairperson/Présidente Councillor/Conseiller Shawn Little, Vice-Chairperson/Vice-président Councillor/Conseiller Stéphane Émard-Chabot Councillor/Conseiller Allan Higdon Councillor/Conseiller Ron Kolbus AML

4 1 August 8, 2000 Department of Urban Planning and Public Works Planning and Economic Development Committee / Comité de l urbanisme et de l expansion économique City Council / Conseil municipal 1. Zoning to 234 Sunnyside Avenue Zonage à 234, avenue Sunnyside Recommendation ACS2000-PW-PLN-0093 (File: OZP2000/021) Ward/Quartier OT9 % Capital Action/Exécution That an amendment to Zoning By-law, 1998, from I1 to R3J, as it applies to 230, 232 and 234 Sunnyside Avenue as shown on Document 2, to permit residential development, be APPROVED, as detailed in Document 3. August 9, 2000 (11:03a) Edward Robinson Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works DC:dc Contact: Denis Charron ext Financial Comment N/A. August 9, 2000 (1:16p) Approved by John S. Burke Chief Administrative Officer for BH:cds August 9, 2000 (8:24a) Marian Simulik Acting City Treasurer

5 2 Executive Report Reasons Behind Recommendation Background The subject property, which is presently vacant, is located just east of St. Margaret Mary's Church at Fairbairn Street and Sunnyside Avenue. Surrounding uses are mostly residential with the exception of the St. Margaret Mary's Church to the west. There is a severe grade difference between the front of the property, which faces onto Sunnyside Avenue, and the rear yard which abuts a City owned lane and other private properties. The developer has recently purchased the easternmost portion of the St. Margaret Mary's Church lands and would like the zoning changed to permit three townhouses with carports facing Sunnyside Avenue. A Site Plan Control application is also being processed concurrently but its approval is pending the approval of this zoning amendment. Official Plan The Region of Ottawa-Carleton's Official Plan designates the subject lands as "General Urban Area". The Planning and Development Approvals Department of the Region has informed us that they do not have any comments regarding the proposal. The City's Official Plan designates the subject property as "Residential Area". This designation permits a variety of residential and limited non-residential uses. To evaluate the appropriateness of residential intensification on vacant lands, reference is made to Policy which is used to evaluate minor residential development. These policies relate to the compatibility of the proposal with the surrounding neighbourhood. Compatibility Most of the surrounding lands are zoned R3J which permits detached houses, linkeddetached houses, semi-detached houses, duplex houses, triplex houses, converted houses, townhouses and linked-townhouses. The developer proposes to construct three townhouses and seeks a reduction to the side yard requirements from 1.2 metres to 0.65 metres for the side yard abutting the church property only. If an exception to reduce the side yard requirement is approved, the total distance between the church and the first proposed townhouse or any other permitted residential building would be 3.33 metres. The owners of the church are in agreement with the distance and have also indicated to the developer that a fence is not required between the subject and church properties.

6 3 In addition, to be consistent with the existing R3J[225] zoning in the surrounding area, exception [225] prohibits planned unit developments, and therefore it is recommended to prohibit the same in the new R3J exception zone. In this context, the proposal is appropriate and the Department recommends that Zoning Bylaw, 1998, be amended to an R3J zone with an exception to permit a reduced westerly side yard for the subject lands. Economic Impact Statement There will be no economic impact associated with this proposal. Consultation Four responses were received as a result of the posting of an on-site information sign and notification sent to the concerned community groups and area residents. All are opposing the proposal for reasons such as loss of green space, more traffic generation and fewer on-street parking spaces. Disposition Department of Urban Planning and Public Works to prepare and circulate the implementing by-law. Department of Corporate Services 1. Statutory Services Branch to notify the Region of Ottawa-Carleton, Development Approvals Division, Department of Planning and Development Approvals, the applicant and property owner [ROJO Construction Management, 7013 Nickerson Way, Greely, Ontario, K4P 1A3] of City Council s decision. 2. Office of the City Solicitor to forward the implementing by-law to City Council. List of Supporting Documentation Document 1 Document 2 Document 3 Document 4 Document 5 Explanatory Note Location Map Details of Recommendations Municipal Environmental Evaluation Process (MEEP) Checklist - (on file with City Clerk) Consultation Details

7 4 Part II - Supporting Documentation Document 1 EXPLANATORY NOTE TO BY-LAW NUMBER By-law Number amends Zoning By-law, 1998, the City's Comprehensive Zoning By-law. The amendment affects the zoning of the lands identified as 230, 232 and 234 Sunnyside Avenue, as shown shaded on the attached Location Map. This amendment is intended to permit a residential development. Current Zoning The current zoning of the subject property is I1, a Minor Institutional Zone that permits a range of neighbourhood-serving and institutional uses including community centre, day care, library, place of worship, recreational and athletic facility, retirement home and school. Proposed Zoning The standard R3 zone is a Converted House/Townhouse Zone which permits a wide range of low density residential uses, such as a converted house, detached house, duplex house, linked-townhouse, semi-detached house and a townhouse. These uses are also subject to minimum lot area and lot width requirements, as well as building height, floor space index, landscaped area and yard provisions. The proposed zoning amends Zoning By-law, 1998, by rezoning the I1 lands to a R3J exception zone. The R3J subzone permits all uses in the standard R3 zone but has regulations for minimum lot area in square metres and minimum lot width for the following specific uses: detached houses, linked-detached houses, semi-detached houses, duplex houses, triplex houses, converted houses, townhouses and linked-townhouses. An exception to the side yard requirements from 1.2 metres to 0.65 metres for the side yard abutting the church property and to prohibit planned unit development is proposed. For further information, please contact Mr. Denis Charron at extension

8 Location Map Document 2 5

9 6 DETAILS OF RECOMMENDATION Document 3 1. That the subject property, as shown on Document 2, be rezoned to R3J. 2. That an exception be included to read as follows: (a) (b) permit a westerly side yard of 0.65 metres prohibit planned unit development

10 CONSULTATION DETAILS Document 5 NOTIFICATION AND CONSULTATION PROCESS Notification and consultation procedures were carried out in accordance with the Early Notification Procedure P&D\PPP\N&C #1 approved by City Council for Zoning Amendments. APPLICATION PROCESS TIMELINE STATUS This application was received on May 18, 2000, and was subject to a project management timeline, as recommended by the A Better Way Task Force Report. A process chart establishing critical milestones was prepared. A Mandatory Information Exchange was not undertaken by staff since the proponent undertook Pre-consultation. This application was processed within the maximum 165 calendar day timeframe. INPUT FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS OR GOVERNMENT AGENCIES COUNCILLOR S COMMENTS Councillor Inez Berg is aware of the application. Community Four area residents are opposed and have provided the following comments as summarized: 1. Subject lands should be kept for recreational uses only. 2. The proposal will add to the traffic burden and eliminate on-street parking spaces on Sunnyside Avenue. 3. The proposal will degrade the esthetics of the street and have an impact on the value of our property. Response to comments 1. The subject site is a steep slope and would not meet the criteria for consideration as a City park. There are several parks and recreational pathways in the area (Rideau River and Canal). 2. The development would eliminate two on-street parking spaces but would not impact the traffic volume. 3. The proposal should improve the esthetics of the street and consequently increase the property values in the area. 7

11 8 This page intentionally left blank

12 9 August 8, 2000 Department of Urban Planning and Public Works Planning and Economic Development Committee / Comité de l urbanisme et de l expansion économique City Council / Conseil municipal 2. Zoning Piccadilly Avenue Zonage - 391, avenue Piccadilly ACS2000-PW-PLN-0098 (File: OZP2000/019) Ward/Quartier OT7 % Kitchissippi Action/Exécution Recommendation That the proposed amendment to the Zoning By-law, 1998, as it applies to 391 Piccadilly Avenue, be APPROVED from I1 to a R5A exception zone, as detailed in Document 2. August 9, 2000 (12:43p) Edward Robinson Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works DJ:dj Contact: Doug James ext August 9, 2000 (1:37p) Approved by John S. Burke Chief Administrative Officer Financial Comment N/A. for BH:cds August 9, 2000 (8:45a) Marian Simulik Acting City Treasurer

13 10 Executive Report Reasons Behind Recommendation Context The subject property is located on the east side of Piccadilly Avenue adjacent to St. George s Elementary School. On the site is a three-storey residential building. This building has been used as an ecclesiastical residence for 12 people for approximately the last 40 years. To the immediate north and south of the subject property is St. George s Elementary School. Further to the south is St. George s church while further to the north are two single family dwellings and commercial uses located along Richmond Road. Across the street are lowdensity residential dwellings consisting predominantly of single-detached dwellings. The applicant wishes to convert the ecclesiastical residence on the property to a rooming house with a maximum of 13 units. The rooming house is intended to be used exclusively for women. The applicant has also requested that should the rooming house cease to exist on the property, an apartment building for eight units also be permitted. The applicant is requesting a maximum of 13 rooming units and eight dwelling units respectively, as this is the number that could be placed within the existing building on the property for these two specific uses. The Department is recommending that this application be approved for the following reasons. Conformity With the Official Plan The subject property is designated Residential Area in the City s Official Plan. The Official Plan contains a chapter entitled Housing Development and Residential Areas. As part of this chapter, there is a Strategic Approach by which to guide the use of properties having the Residential Area designation. Strategic Approach states that existing housing stock should be conserved and renewed as an important element in meeting future housing needs. As well, the demolition and conversion to non-residential uses should be controlled. As this property and the building on the property has been used for residential purposes for approximately the last forty years, the rezoning of this site to residential will help facilitate the continued use of the property and its present building for residential purposes, thereby conforming with the Strategic Approach of the Official Plan. Policy a) of the Official Plan encourages the creation of housing types in residential areas that may result in the mix of tenure forms (owner-rental-cooperative, etc.) within a neighbourhood. As the majority of the homes in the area are owner occupied, approval of this application will allow for the use of the property as a rental accommodation, thereby fulfilling the intent of the Official Plan.

14 11 Compatibility With Surrounding Neighbourhood Approval of this rezoning will allow the property and the building to continue to be used for residential purposes at a density virtually identical to that which presently exists. Consequently, the proposed rezoning does not represent a significant increase in residential intensification in the neighbourhood. While the western side of Piccadilly Avenue, between Richmond Road and Byron Avenue is exclusively residential, the eastern side, where the subject property is located, is a mix of uses (institutional, residential and commercial). It is the Branch s contention that a rooming house is a compatible addition to the variety of uses found on the eastern side of the street. To help ensure an efficient use of the building, the Department is recommending that only a converted rooming house be permitted. Consequently, should the building on the subject property be demolished, a new purpose-built rooming house could not be constructed. There are no provisions in the Zoning By-law for a converted apartment building. However, in addition to limiting the number of units in the rooming house to 13, the Department is also recommending a maximum of eight dwelling units within a proposed apartment building. This will help ensure that should the building on the property be demolished and a new apartment building be constructed, it will not result in a more intense use of the site than what presently exists. In addition to limiting the number of units permitted for a converted rooming house and an apartment building, the Department is limiting the number of uses permitted in the proposed zoning. This is done taking into consideration the size of the subject site (910 square metres), uses found in the neighbourhood and what would be considered appropriate for the building on the property. In addition to the foregoing, there are not expected to be any concerns with parking and traffic. The amount of traffic associated with the proposed use in minimal and all parking required by the City s Zoning By-law can be provided on site. Much concern has been raised by the community over the personal characteristics of the people who are expected to live at this location. There is a concern that they will be a detriment to the existing community. In making its recommendation to Committee and Council, the Department must consider only planning issues, such as those presented in this submission. We cannot take into consideration who will be living at a property. Taking such issues into account would be people zoning, which is in contravention of the Planning Act. Economic Impact Statement There is no anticipated economic impact from this proposed rezoning.

15 12 Environmental Impact As the site is already developed, there is no anticipated Environmental Impact. Consultation Eighteen responses were received from the posting of the on-site sign. Sixteen were in opposition while two respondents wanted more information. The concerns of the respondents related to the type of people who would be living in the proposed rooming house and the anticipated social problems that would result. People also expressed a concern over the other types of residential uses allowed, in the originally proposed R5 residential zone. Disposition Department of Corporate Services, Statutory Services Branch to notify the property owner (Grey Sisters of the Immaculate Conception, 720 Mackay Street, Pembroke, Ontario, K8K 8J8) the agent (Centretown Affordable Housing Development Corporation, P.O. Box 2728 Stn. D., Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 5W8), the Corporate Finance Branch, Revenue Section, Assessment Control Supervisor and the Region of Ottawa Carleton, Plans Administration Division of City Council s decision. Office of the City Solicitor to forward the implementing By-law to City Council Department of Urban Planning and Public Works to prepare and circulate the implementing by-law. List of Supporting Documentation Document 1 Document 2 Document 3 Document 4 Document 5 Explanatory Note Details of Recommended Zoning Location Map Municipal Environmental Evaluation Process (MEEP) Checklist (on file with City Clerk) Compatibility With Public Participation

16 13 Part II - Supporting Documentation Document 1 THE FOLLOWING IS AN EXPLANATORY NOTE TO BY-LAW NUMBER -00 By-law Number amends Zoning By-law, 1998 the City s Comprehensive Zoning By-law The subject property is presently occupied by a two-and-a-half storey building containing an ecclesiastical residence. The applicants wish to purchase the subject property and have it converted to a rooming house with a maximum of 13 units. As well, should the subject property cease to be used as a rooming house in the future, the applicant has requested that an apartment with a maximum of eight dwelling units be included in the list of permitted uses. This would allow the continued use of the existing building on site. Current Zoning Designation The current zoning of the subject property is I1. This is a Minor Institutional zone specifically established for all minor institutions, of which an ecclesiastical residence is included. Other permitted uses include a place of worship, a community centre, a school, a museum and a library. However, a rooming house and an apartment building are not permitted. Proposed Zoning Designation The proposed zoning is an R5A exception zone. This is a residential subzone that allows a limited number of residential uses. The number of residential uses permitted by this zone are restricted by the exception. The only uses permitted are: A. apartment building containing a maximum of eight units B. bed and breakfast C. detached house D. diplomatic mission, official residence E. diplomatic mission, other residence

17 14 F. park G. retirement home, converted accommodating a maximum of thirteen dwelling units H. rooming house, converted containing a maximum of thirteen units The letter A in the proposed zoning indicates that the minimum lot width and area provisions for a detached house are 15 metres and 464 square metres respectively.

18 Details of Proposed Zoning Document 2 That the subject property as shown in Document 3 be rezoned from I1 to an R5a exception zone as follows: 1. Prohibit all uses except the following uses in an R5A Zone: a. apartment building b. bed and breakfast c. detached house d. diplomatic mission, official residence e. diplomatic mission, other residence f. park g. retirement home, converted h. rooming house 2. Restrict an apartment building to housing no more than eight dwelling units 3. Restrict retirement home, converted to accommodating a maximum of 13 residents, and 4. Restrict a rooming house, converted to housing no more than 13 rooming units. 15

19 16 Location Map Document 3

20 COMPATIBILITY WITH PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Document 5 NOTIFICATION AND CONSULTATION PROCESS Notification and consultation procedures were carried out in accordance with the Early Notification and consultation procedures P&D\PPP\N&C#1 approved by City Council for Zoning Amendments. Eighteen responses were received as a result of the posting of the on-site sign. Sixteen were opposed to the proposed development while two people wanted more information on the proposal. Reasons in opposition of the proposal, and a response to those reasons are presented below. A petition containing 56 signatures with the following preamble was also submitted: We the undersigned are in opposition of the re-zoning proposal for 391 Piccadilly Avenue. Ottawa, Ontario to allow this property to be used as a rooming house. APPLICATION PROCESS TIMELINE STATUS This application was received on May 3, 2000 and was subject to a project management timeline and early notification, as recommended by the "A Better Way Task Force Report". Early notification was undertaken by staff. A process chart establishing critical milestones was prepared and circulated as part of the technical and early notification process. This application is proceeding to Planning and Economic Development Committee in accordance with the timelines established in the Better Way Task Force. Reasons in Opposition to the Proposal We believe that a property on a quiet residential street, enveloped by a school grounds of an elementary school is a very inappropriate location for a rooming house. Response The Department has made its planning recommendation taking the surrounding land uses into consideration. 2. This property should become part of the school, it is already surrounded by a school on three sides. Response The Department must make a recommendation on the application submitted. We cannot speculate on prospective ownership of the property.

21 18 3. The proposed R5 zoning allows too much development for the existing community. This is a single-family home neighbourhood. Response The zoning recommended by the Department has eliminated a large number of uses typically found in the R5 zone. Only uses the Department believes can be accommodated by the existing building on the property and those considered appropriate to the adjacent community have been included. 4. This proposal is inappropriate. The safety and security of our young children must be of prime consideration for all of us. We must be aware of the personalities, situations and problems of the occupants and these types of dwellings. Response The Department cannot take into consideration, the personalities and characteristics of people who might be living in the proposed development. The recommendations to Council must be made on land use planning criteria only. 5. This proposal will devalue all the properties in the area. Response It is the Department s position that the proposed development will not negatively affect the property values of surrounding properties. 6. If this is approved, we will have people recovering from problems, in the middle of a school yard. Response It is the Department s position that the proposed residential zoning will allow forms of residential uses considered appropriate for the subject property and the surrounding land uses. 7. I am concerned about the amount of traffic this will bring to the neighbourhood. Response The proposed development is not expected to have a negative affect on the existing local traffic situation. As well, all parking anticipated by the Zoning By-law can be accommodated on site.

22 19 8. This property was transferred from the School Board to the Grey Sisters in 1949 with the expressed or implied understanding that it revert back to the school board when the Grey Sisters no longer needed the property. Response As mentioned, the Department must make a recommendation on the planning merits of the application, not on the ownership, or probable ownership of the property. 9. The rezoning of this property from minor institutional must be considered in the context of the surrounding properties zoned institutional. Response It is the Department s position that the proposed rezoning of the subject property does not need to be considered in relation to the adjacent institutional uses. For instance, the subject property is large enough to function as an individual property and not as part of the surrounding institutional lands. This is evidenced by the fact that the subject property has been functioning apart from the school as an ecclesiastical residence for at least the past 40 years. 10. This is contrary to the Key Principles of the Ottawa West Plan which anticipates that the use of this property should be for community purposes, when it ceases to be used for institutional purposes. Response It is the Department s position that the proposed development is in keeping with the Westboro Key Principles as it enhances the residential character of the neighbourhood and will only allow development that is compatible with the scale and structure existing within the neighbourhood. 11. The surrounding zoning permits some residential uses, such as a retirement home, for no more that eight residents. The proposal of 13 exceeds that acceptable density. Response It is the Department s position that allowing a 13 unit rooming house does not represent overdevelopment of the site. The building on the property is presently an ecclesiastical residence with 12 units. Consequently, the extent of the proposal is not out of keeping with the present use of the property.

23 Any form of spot zoning to a significantly different zone is not appropriate. Response Each rezoning, no matter what the size of the property, must be considered on its own merits. As stated in this submission, it is the Department s position that the proposed rezoning is appropriate. SUPPLEMENTAL NOTIFICATION A public meeting was also held on June 20, 2000, by the applicant and the Ward Councillor to discuss the proposal with local residents. Approximately thirty people from the community attended the meeting. The general views expressed by those in attendance was one of concern with the proposal. Their concerns and a response to their concerns are summarized as follows: 1. There was concern that the use of the property as a rooming house would attract the wrong kind of people to the neighbourhood and it was, therefore, not compatible with the surrounding residents or the adjacent school. Response The Department cannot make a recommendation to City Council on the appropriateness of a rooming house on a property, based on who will be living at that location. The Department s reasons for recommending approval of the rezoning are land use reasons, as presented in this submission. 2. Others did not mind the proposed use of the rooming home by the applicant, but were concerned that should the applicant leave, a less desirable rooming house would operate in its place. Response The Department cannot consider who will be operating the rooming house. A recommendation can only be made from the point of view of having the property used for residential purposes. 3. Some members of the community had concerns relating to other uses that were allowed by the requested zoning. They believed that the zoning requested would allow a wide range of uses not compatible with the surrounding community.

24 21 Response The Department notes that the surrounding zoning is R1G and R3G. These are residential zones that restrict the number of residential uses. The Department has recommended a zoning with a limited number of permitted uses. Those permitted are believed to be compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood. 4. Some people expressed a desire that if the property was to be used as a rooming house, the applicant should enter into a restrictive covenant stipulating that only Daybreak could operate the rooming house. Response The City has no authority to require the owner and the applicant to enter into a restrictive covenant on the property. This would be between the vendor and the purchaser of the property. Councillor's Comments Councillor Shawn Little has indicated that while he supports initiatives of Daybreak, he cannot support the proposed rezoning to allow a rooming house next to an elementary school, as expressed by concerns raised at the public meeting and the notification process for this application.

25 22 This page intentionally left blank

26 23 August 9, 2000 Department of Urban Planning and Public Works Planning and Economic Development Committee / Comité de l urbanisme et de l expansion économique ACS2000-PW-PLN-0095 (File: OSP ) Ward/Quartier OT6 % Somerset Action/Exécution 3. Site Plan Control Approval Queen Street Approbation du plan d emplacement rue Queen Recommendation That the Site Plan Control application (OSP ) be APPROVED as shown on the following plans and subject to the conditions contained in Document 1: 1. Site Plan - Place de Ville - Phase III Queen Street, Drawing Number A100, prepared by Brisbin Brook Beynon Architects, dated May 15, 2000, as revised to August 2, 2000, and dated as received by the City of Ottawa, August 2, Landscape Plan - Place de Ville - Phase III Queen Street, Drawing Number L1, prepared by Corush Sunderland Wright Landscape Architects, dated May 23, 2000, as revised to May 23, 2000, and dated as received by the City of Ottawa, May 25, August 10, 2000 (10:59a) Edward Robinson Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works CWL:cwl August 10, 2000 (1:18p) Approved by John S. Burke Chief Administrative Officer Contact: Charles Lanktree, RPP., OALA ext

27 24 Financial Comment Subject to Planning and Economic Development Committee approval, the required financial security will be retained by the City Treasurer until advised that all conditions have been met and the security is to be released. for BH:cds August 10, 2000 (9:22a) Marian Simulik Acting City Treasurer Executive Report Reasons Behind Recommendation This application for Site Plan Control pertains to the construction of two office towers, one 16 storeys facing Queen Street and one 20 storeys facing Kent Street, with associated underground parking garage and surface improvements. The site is a through-corner lot that fronts Queen Street on the north, Kent Street on the west, and Albert Street on the south. Olympia and York are the developers of these towers which will form an expansion of their holdings in the Place de Ville office complex. The site is square metres and is located in the Core of the Central Area as designated in the Official Plan. This site was the subject of a similar office development by another owner which was approved in Applications were made to the Committee of Adjustment to permit a reduction to the on-site parking requirement of 253 spaces which are proposed to be provided at the neighbouring Place de Ville garage; and to permit a reduction in the number of loading spaces required from five to two. The Committee of Adjustment granted the variances with conditions with respect to parking requirements and loading spaces. Consistent with the Committee of Adjustment s decision, these conditions appear in Part 3 of Document 1 of this approval. Tower E is proposed to be 16 storeys and has its main address on Queen Street. The two loading bays and parking garage ramp are also located on Queen Street. The close relationship of the loading bays with the garage ramp will require an exemption from the requirements of the Private Approach By-law A colonnade, providing weather protection to pedestrians, is created adjacent to the sidewalk around the perimeter of the block by the outside placement of the structural columns. A space between the buildings with planters and seating also provides a mid-block pedestrian link which expands to a plaza space on the south that is enclosed by the two office towers. The plaza includes a reflective pool with water jets and formal tree planting which provides a pedestrian amenity along the Albert Street transitway.

28 A wind and snow deposition study was conducted as a requirement of the review of this office complex in the Central Area. The results of this study indicate that both wind and snow deposition are mitigated by the placement of the new buildings relative to the existing site situation. This is primarily due to the infill of the existing void space in this block which provides shelter from the prevailing winds. Care has also been taken to ensure that snow and ice do not accumulate on pedestrian areas or create overhead safety hazards. Overall this development is considered to provide a positive contribution to the character of the Core precinct of the Central Area. Economic Impact Statement FISCAL/ECONOMIC IMPACT STATEMENT 280 Queen St Est Investment:$50,700,000 CITY COSTS: * Extraordinary Costs ** $0 $0 Admin & Services $9,388 $57,448 Inspection & Control $11,253 $68,859 Roadways, parking $107,104 $655,375 Garbage & Storm Sewer Maint. $9,896 $60,553 Social & Family Services $2,181 $13,346 Rec & Culture $21,113 $129,191 Planning & Development $8,526 $52,169 Sub-total $169,461 $1,036,941 CITY REVENUES: Property Tax $345,459 $2,113,883 Building Permit $0 $0 Tax from Indirect Impacts $201,618 $1,233,716 License/Permit $47,737 $292,106 Sub-total $594,814 $3,639,705 NET TO CITY $425,353 $2,602,765 EMPLOYMENT New Jobs (excl. construction) n/a 1600 Net New Jobs (construction) *** n/a 406 New Jobs (indirect/induced) n/a 710 Total n/a 2715 * Present value at a discount rate of 8.5% ** Includes: n/a *** After excess capacity has been absorbed Environmental Impact This application was circulated to the Environmental Advisory Committee, however, no comments were received in response. The Environmental Management Branch provided conditions which are included in the attachment. 25

29 26 Consultation Comments were received in response to the public notification of this application from the Centretown Citizen s Community Association and the Federation of Citizen s Associations. Disposition Department of Corporate Services 1. Statutory Services Branch to notify the owner (O&Y Properties Inc., 112 Kent Street, Tower B, Ottawa, Ontario K1P 5P2) and the agent (Brisbin Brook Beynon, 47 Clarence Street, Suite 400, Ottawa, Ontario K1N 9K1) and the Region of Ottawa- Carleton, Plans Administration Division, of Planning and Economic Development Committee s decision. 2. Office of the City Solicitor to prepare the required Site Plan Control Agreement. List of Supporting Documentation Document 1 Document 2 Document 3 Document 4 Document 5a Document 5b Document 6 Document 7 Conditions of Site Plan Control Approval Location Plan Site Plan Landscape Plan Building Elevations Building Elevations Municipal Environmental Evaluation Process Checklist (on file with the City Clerk) Consultation Details

30 27 Part II - Supporting Documentation Document 1 CONDITIONS, ACTIONS AND INFORMATION FOR SITE PLAN CONTROL APPROVAL PART I - CONDITIONS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE EXECUTION OF THE REQUIRED AGREEMENT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS 1. The Site Plan shall be amended to indicate that the grade of any part of a private approach, excluding the public sidewalks, shall: a) not be less than 2% b) not exceed 8%, and c) descend in the direction of the travelled portion of the road allowance, as per Private Approach By-law Number , as amended. (Contact Ray Fournier, , ext , Engineering Branch) 2. The Owner(s) shall obtain City Council approval of an exemption from the Private Approach By-law (By-law Number , as amended) requiring thirty feet (30') measured at the street line and curb line or edge of the roadway between the nearest limits of a private approach intended for two-way vehicular traffic and any other private approach to the same property. (Contact Ray Fournier, , ext , Engineering Branch) 3. The concrete pavers used as a decorative treatment as part of the Central Courtyard area that extend out onto the Queen and Albert Streets and the pavers at the entrance to the Tower E entrance must not encroach upon the sidewalks, however, if installed on the road allowance boulevards, Maintenance and Liability Agreements will have to be entered into. STC Landscape Elements Estimate by Landscape Architect The Owner(s) must provide a detailed itemized estimate prepared by a Landscape Architect, of the value of all required landscaping, in accordance with the Canadian Nurseries Association Standard, to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works. (Contact Charles Lanktree, , ext , Planning Branch)

31 28 STC Posting of Financial Securities for Landscape Elements The Owner(s) must post Security in the amount of 100% of the value of the landscape elements as identified in the detailed itemized estimate, including estimates for new landscape elements on private and municipal and/or regional property, which shall be retained in the custody of the City Treasurer, (no security will be taken for existing municipal and regional road allowance trees because they are already protected by the Trees By-law (By-law Number 55-93, as amended) and the Road Cut By-law (By-law Number as amended). For the purposes of this condition, Security means cash, certified cheque, or subject to the approval of the City Treasurer, bearer bonds of the Government of Canada (except Savings Bonds), Provincial bonds or provincial guaranteed bonds, or other municipal bonds provided that the interest coupons are attached to all bonds, or letters of credit, with an automatic renewal clause, issued by a chartered bank, credit unions and caisse populaires, trust companies or some other form of financial security (including Performance Bonds from institutions acceptable to the City Treasurer).(Contact Deborah Van Waard, , ext , Office of the City Solicitor) PART 2 - STANDARD CONDITIONS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE REQUIRED SITE PLAN CONTROL AGREEMENT OR AMENDING AGREEMENT STANDARD CONDITIONS STC Installation and Planting of Landscape Elements The Owner(s) shall install and plant all landscape elements in accordance with the Site Plan Control Approval, within one year from the date of occupancy, to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works. The landscape elements shall include but not be limited to, all vegetation and topographic treatment, walls, fences, hard and soft surface materials, lighting, site furniture, free-standing ground-supported signs, steps, lamps, and play equipment, information kiosks and bulletin boards and other ground cover and new tree(s) and shrubs located on the road allowance. STC Reinstatement of Damaged City Property, Including Sidewalks and Curbs The Owner(s) shall reinstate to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works, any property of the City or Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carleton, including sidewalks and curbs, that is damaged as a result of the subject development. This reinstatement shall be at the expense of the Owner(s). (Contact Bruce Coombe, , ext , Engineering Branch) STC Requirement for Maintenance and Liability Agreement The Owner(s) shall enter into a Maintenance and Liability Agreement with the City for the installation of decorative landscaping or interlocking pavers on City property. The costs of preparation and registration of the agreement shall be borne by the Owner(s). (Contact John Honshorst, , ext , Operations Branch)

32 STC Release of Site Plan Control Agreement for Non-residential or Mixed Use Developments The City may release the Owner(s) from any agreement required as a condition of this Site Plan Control Approval once all terms of the agreement have been completed but not earlier than five years after the date of release of all financial securities required as a condition of this Approval. The Owner(s) shall pay all costs associated with the application for and registration of release from this agreement. 29 PART 3 - STANDARD CONDITIONS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS 1. The Owner(s) draft and institute a Travel Demand Management Plan with an ongoing monitoring programme, all to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works. (Contact John Smit, , ext , Licensing, Transportation and Buildings Branch) 2. The Owner(s) set aside within the parking garage at the Place de Ville development, for the use of tenants at the subject 300 Queen Street development, 253 parking spaces. (Contact Charles Lanktree, , ext , Planning Branch) 3. The Owner(s) provide at the Place de Ville parking garage, for the use of the general public, 300 additional short-term spaces. (Contact Charles Lanktree, , ext , Planning Branch and Peter Bula, , ext , Licensing, Transportation and Buildings Branch) 4. The Owner(s) register an agreement on title to the properties that are subject to the shared parking agreement that reflects the above-mentioned conditions and will be binding on the subsequent owners to the freehold parcel on the north side of Queen Street and the leasehold parcel on the south side of Queen Street. (Contact Charles Lanktree, , ext , Planning Branch) 5. The Owner(s) provide a study of the operational requirements of the loading bays for the project at Queen Street. (Contact John Smit, , ext , Licensing, Transportation and Buildings Branch) 6. The Owner(s) acknowledge in writing that they will not request any future loading spaces within the abutting street rights-of-way. (Contact John Smit, , ext , Licensing, Transportation and Buildings Branch)

33 30 7. The Owner(s) prepare and implement, to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works, a plan of improvements to the existing Place de Ville garage complex relative to its lighting, signage, security and general appearance, so as to improve the garage s way-finding features and overall attraction to customers. (Contact Charles Lanktree, , ext , Planning Branch and Peter Bula, , ext , Licensing, Transportation and Buildings Branch) 8. In the event that the development is phased, the Owners(s) shall submit an interim surface treatment plan to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works. (Contact Charles Lanktree, , ext , Planning Branch) 9. Approval of Private Sewer Systems, Lot Grading and Drainage Plan(s) The Owner(s) must submit a plan(s) showing the private sewer systems and lot grading and drainage which indicates: a) the methods that surface water will be self-contained and directed to catch basins, storm sewers, swales and or ditches, and then conveyed to the public storm, combined sewer system or City ditches unless otherwise directed by the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works; b) that all sanitary wastes shall be collected and conveyed to a public sanitary or combined sewer; and c) that all private storm and sanitary sewers required to service the subject site are completely separated from each other and conveyed to the public storm, sanitary or combined sewer, except in the designated Combined Sewer Area; to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works. (Contact Bruce Coombe, , ext , Engineering Branch) 10. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Owner(s) must prepare a sediment and erosion control plan to the satisfaction of the Manager, Environmental Management Branch, appropriate to site conditions, prior to undertaking any site alterations (filling, grading, removal of vegetation, etc.) and during all phases of site preparation and construction in accordance with current Best Management Practices for Erosion and Sediment Control. (Contact Greg Montcalm, , ext , Environmental Management Branch) 11. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Owner(s) must prepare a Waste Audit Summary for the construction project as required by Ontario Regulation 102/94 of the Environmental Protection Act and provide a copy to the Manager, Environmental Management Branch. (Contact Greg Montcalm, , ext , Environmental Management Branch)

34 31 STANDARD CONDITIONS STC Signing of Site Plan Control Agreement or Amending Agreement The Owner(s) must sign a Site Plan Control Agreement or Amending Agreement including the conditions to be included in the agreement. When the Owner(s) fails to sign the required agreement and complete the conditions to be satisfied prior to the signing of the agreement within six (6) months of Site Plan Control Approval, the approval shall lapse. PART 4 - STANDARD CONDITIONS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF AND DURING CONSTRUCTION/DEVELOPMENT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS 1. Prior to the issuance of any occupancy permit, the Owner(s) shall require that the site servicing contractor perform field tests for quality control of all sanitary sewers. Specifically the leakage testing shall be completed in accordance with OPSS and The field tests shall be performed in the presence of a certified professional engineer who shall submit a certified copy of the tests results to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Branch. (Contact: Bruce Coombe, , ext , Engineering Branch) 2. The curb and sidewalk is to be continuous and depressed across the private approach in accordance with the Private Approach By-law (Contact: Ray Fournier, , ext , Engineering Branch) 3. That the Owner(s) must implement and monitor the approved erosion and sediment control plan during all phases of site preparation and construction to the satisfaction of the Manager, Environmental Management Branch. (Contact Greg Montcalm, , ext , Environmental Management Branch) 4. That the Owner(s) must implement waste reduction as outlined in the Waste Audit Summary as submitted to the Manager, Environmental Management Branch. (Contact Greg Montcalm, , ext , Environmental Management Branch) STC Approval of Work on Municipal Property or Easements The Owner(s) must receive written approval from the Director of Engineering prior to any work commencing on City or Regional property or easements. A description of the proposed work along with twenty-four (24) copies of the plan illustrating the work must be submitted and will be circulated to all underground utilities for their comments, prior to any approval. (Contact Larry Lalonde, , ext , Engineering Branch)

35 32 STC Approval for Construction Related to Private Approaches The Owner(s) must receive written approval from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works for any construction related to a private approach within the road allowance. (Contact: Ray Fournier, , ext , Engineering Branch) STC Notification of Construction or Alteration of Private Approach The Owner(s) must notify the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works in writing when the construction or alteration of any private approach servicing this development will commence. Lack of notification may result in the City requiring changes to the private approach at the expense of the Owner. (Contact: Ray Fournier, , ext , Engineering Branch) STC Construction Materials on Public Road Allowances The Owner(s) must ensure that: i) construction vehicles are to be loaded and driven in such a manner so that the contents will not fall, spill or be deposited on any road that has been given preliminary or final acceptance for use during construction; ii) all spills, dirt, mud, stone or other transported material from the road must be iii) removed at the end of each day; the road is cleaned immediately should this material pose a hazard to vehicles or pedestrians, and in the event of a dispute, the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works will be the judge of what constitutes a hazard. In the event the material is not removed as required, it may be removed by the City at the expense of the Owner(s). (Contact: John Honshorst, , ext , Operations Branch and Neil Dillon, , ext , Building Code Services Division) STC Pumping of Liquids Into Sewers During Construction The Owner(s) in accordance with the Sewer By-law (By-law Number , as amended), must obtain authorization from the Commissioner of Urban Planning and Public Works prior to the pumping of any liquid or liquid with sediment into sanitary, storm or combined sewers during construction. Failure to obtain authorization may result in the owner(s) having to bear the full cost of removing all sediment and debris downstream from the construction site. (Contact: Sewer Inspector, , Operations Branch) STC Inspection of Service Connections The Owner(s) in accordance with the Sewer By-law (By-law Number , as amended), must contact the Department of Urban Planning and Public Works, Sewer Operations Inspections staff, to view the connection of deep services to municipal sewer lines. Compliance regarding service connections can only be determined if this inspection has been carried out. (Contact: Sewer Inspector, , Operations Branch)