That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve and adopt an amendment to the Official Plan [Volume 2A, Sandy Hill Secondary Plan] to redesignate 85 Range Road from Low Profile to Site Specific High Profile, as detailed in Document 2.
RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT
Que le Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’environnement recommande au Conseil d’approuver et d’adopter une modification au Plan official [Volume 2A, Plan secondaire de la Côte-de-Sable] afin de changer la désignation du 85, chemin Range de profil bas à profil élevé spécifique au site, comme il est expliqué en détail dans le document 2.
The subject property located at 85 Range Road has an area of 9,200 square metres and a frontage of 127.8 metres. Currently a 10-storey residential building (Sandringham Apartments) is on the northern third of the site with 100 units; surface parking occupies the remainder of the site. There are four Embassies located in the existing building. To the east is the Rideau River and to the north is Strathcona Park. To the south and west is a low density neighbourhood mostly consisting of single detached houses on small lots.
The Owner of the property has applied to the City under Site Plan Control to construct a second 10-storey (approximately 30 metres) building on the southern portion of the site. This application has been appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board along with an appeal on a Zoning Amendment initiated by the City to limit building heights on the property to 14.5 metres.
Since the construction of the building in 1957, the zoning and Official Plan policies have been changed periodically. The following bullets summarize changes prior to amalgamation.
• 1957 – building constructed, height about 30 metres, built FSI (Floor Space Index) about 1.4
• 1964 – AZ-64 established R7 apartment residential zone, with 2.5 FSI and no height limit
• 1976 – adoption of Sandy Hill Secondary Plan, as Low Profile Residential Area designation
• 1983 – zoning changed to R5 apartment zone, with 1.0 FSI and 10.7-metre height limit
• 1984 – Z-2K keeps R5 low density residential zone, height and FSI limit remain
• 1998 – former Ottawa Zoning By-law zoned lands R6 – High Rise Apartment zone and removed the 10.7-metre height limit in recognition of existing high rise building, but retained maximum 1.0 FSI
After amalgamation, the new City of Ottawa developed a new Official Plan in 2003 and a new Comprehensive Zoning By-law in 2008. The subject property's designation in the Official Plan is General Urban. The previous Secondary Plan for Sandy Hill was adopted as part of this plan without changes, and the designation of the site remained as Low Profile Residential. Both the Official Plan and Secondary Plan provided no description for a “Low Profile Residential Area”, nor were there specific policies related to this designation in the Secondary Plan. As part of the five-year review of the 2003 Official Plan, Council approved OPA#76, which describes “Low Profile Residential” as four storeys or less.
Intensification has been a priority for Council, and Policy 22.214.171.124 of the Official Plan promotes intensification in the General Urban Area designation in a number of situations, including on lands used as parking lots. Recent changes through OPA #76 identify sites zoned for high-rise apartments as appropriate for additional intensification with mid-high rise buildings. However, in this case, Low Profile designation in the Secondary Plan does not reflect the site's full intensification potential and does not acknowledge the appropriateness of high-rise buildings as a way to achieve intensification on a scale that fits the site.
Council approved a new Comprehensive Zoning By-law in June 2008, which harmonized the 36 Zoning By-laws of the former municipalities. As part of the zoning strategies to implement intensification policies though the Zoning By-law, staff identified mid-high rise residential (R5) zones throughout the city where development could occur. Where there was an FSI and no height limit, the FSI was removed and either the height of any existing building was applied (if above 18 metres), or 18 metres was applied. In the case where there was both an FSI and height limit, the FSI was eliminated and the height retained. Further, the floor space index was removed to promote opportunities for intensification by allowing the development of additional units on existing mid-high rise apartment sites, either through additional mid-high rise apartment dwellings, or through addition of low rise dwellings (multiple attached or stacked dwellings) on those sites, provided that other performance standards, including the 30 per cent landscaped open space requirement were met. Many of the existing apartment sites were developed with large surface parking lots, and eliminating the floor space index was intended to encourage the relocation of parking underground, with new dwelling units located on the surface. This was in line with Policy 2.2.3d) of the 2003 Official Plan in cases of encouraging the redevelopment of parking lots.
The property at 85 Range Road was zoned R6 High Rise Apartment Zone in the former City of Ottawa Zoning By-law 93-98, which became the R5 zone permitting mid-high rise apartment dwellings in By-law 2008-250. Since there was no height limit but a 1.0 FSI under the former Ottawa zoning, this property was captured in the grouping of lands with all other properties intended for mid-high rise apartments with no height limit, and so the FSI was eliminated and a 30-metre height limit, reflecting existing building height, was applied. Given that there was no height limit under the former Ottawa Zoning By-law 93-98, it was not readily apparent that there might be an issue with a Secondary Plan designation involving height limits at the time that the drafts of the Comprehensive Zoning By-law were being prepared, making the changes to the R5 zones.
The Secondary Plan’s “Low Profile” designation; however, was brought to staff’s attention in late 2009. This designation was assessed as incongruous with the Comprehensive Zoning By-law’s elimination of the floor space index and imposition of a 30‑metre height limit, reflecting the height of the existing building, over the entire property. As a result, as part of the regular anomaly resolution process, this issue was brought forward to Planning and Environment Committee in November 2009 for correction, so that the zoning would more accurately reflect the Official Plan designation. While the 30-metre height limit was retained where the existing building is located, a 14.5-metre height limit was established on the southern portion of the property, where the parking lot is located. This was appealed by the owner to the Ontario Municipal Board.
The Owner, through the pre-consultation process, had originally proposed to staff the construction of a second building on this site, of 10- to 14-storeys. Since these events, the Owner and staff have strived to negotiate a settlement. In anticipation of an agreement, staff have initiated this application to amend the Secondary Plan for Sandy Hill to redesignate this property to High Profile residential, with site specific provisions. This would be in keeping with the existing building on the site and would reflect staff’s intent and the consensus terms of settlement, to limit development to a building with nine storeys of residential units, with indoor/outdoor amenity spaces on the tenth storey.
Staff have considered how best to achieve the goals of the 2003 Official Plan, which supports intensification, and still respect the neighbourhood and the 1976 Secondary Plan. As mentioned above, the site is conducive to intensification in that the existing building covers only the northern third of the property. In addition, because the existing high-rise occupies the northern portion of the property, any shadowing impact from a new 10-storey building to its south will be limited to the property itself, with minimal lateral shadows. The Official Plan promotes development in such situations where there are parking lots, where the land could be better utilized to provide additional units and states in Section 4.11 that taller building may be considered at locations characterized by the existence of other tall buildings. This site is also located on the edge of the community and next to a large park. The size of the property would allow for transitional design elements to make future development more compatible with the low profile buildings to the south and west. The City has adopted design guidelines for high-rise buildings and residential infill and the Official Plan requires intensification of land uses to be developed in accordance with the criteria set out in Section 2.5.1, Compatibility and Community Design. These criteria and guidelines will be employed by staff while negotiating a settlement of the appeal to the Site Plan Control application.
The Owner reduced the number of residential floors from their original application. They are now proposing nine storeys with dwelling units, and a tenth floor containing the mechanical rooms and indoor amenity spaces. Staff will amend the text in the Secondary Plan for Sandy Hill to limit the High Profile Residential designation on this site to a maximum of 10 storeys and that the tenth storey shall only be used for amenity rooms and mechanical equipment.
Staff support the amendment to the Secondary Plan which will permit up to nine storeys of residential units with one additional floor of amenity space and recommends changing the designation from Low Profile to a site specific High Profile residential on this site.
At the time of this report, the Community Association has approved a revised motion for the City to proceed with the amendment to the Sandy Hill Secondary Plan/Official Plan for 85 Range Road. Any other comments received prior to Planning and Environment Committee will be outlined during the presentation.
COMMENTS BY THE WARD COUNCILLOR(S)
The Ward Councillor is aware of this application.
Adoption of the amendment will resolve the major issues associated with this matter. Discussions will continue with respect to site plan issues of landscaping and access/egress.
This Official Plan Amendment will meet Objective One, which states that the City is to manage growth and create sustainable communities by ensuring that new growth is integrated seamlessly with established communities.
There are no direct financial implications associated with this report.
APPLICATION PROCESS TIMELINE STATUS
City Clerk and Solicitor Department, Legislative Services to notify the owner, applicant, OttawaScene.com, 174 Colonnade Road, Unit #33, Ottawa, ON K2E 7J5, Ghislain Lamarche, Program Manager, Assessment, Financial Services Branch (Mail Code: 26-76) of City Council’s decision.
Legal Services to forward the implementing by-law to City Council
PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT DOCUMENT 2
Purpose ……………………………………………………………………………. 1
Location …………………………………………………………………………… 1
Basis ……………………………………………………………………………….. 1
Introduction ……………………………………………………………………….… 2
Details of the Amendment ……………………………………………………….…. 2
Implementation and Interpretation …………………………………………………. 2
Schedule A of Amendment XX – Official Plan for the City of Ottawa…………….. 3
PART A – THE PREAMBLE
PART A – THE PREAMBLE introduces the actual amendment but does not constitute part of Amendment No. XX to the Official Plan for the City of Ottawa.
PART B – THE AMENDMENT constitutes Amendment XX to the Official Plan for the City of Ottawa.
The amendment will change the designation in the Secondary Plan of the subject property from Low Profile to site specific High Profile residential.
The subject property, 85 Range Road, is located on the east side of Range Road at the terminus of Templeton Street.
There is an existing 10-storey residential building on the site with a large surface parking area on the southern portion of the site. The Owner is proposing a second tower on the site, consisting of 10-storeys and underground parking. An amendment is required so that the Secondary Plan reflects the existing building and proposed development.
The site is conducive to intensification in that the existing building covers only the northern third of the property. In addition, because the existing high-rise occupies the northern portion of the property, any shadowing impact from a new mid-rise building to its south will be limited to the property itself, with minimal lateral shadows. The Official Plan promotes development in such situations where there are parking lots, where the land could be better utilized to provide additional units, and the Official Plan states in Section 4.11 that taller building may be considered at locations characterized by the existence of other tall buildings. This site is also located on the edge of the community and next to a large park. The size of the property would allow for transitional design elements to make the future development more compatible with the low profile buildings to the south and west. The City has adopted design guidelines for high-rise buildings and residential infill and the Official Plan requires intensification of land uses to be developed in accordance with the criteria set out in Section 2.5.1, Compatibility and Community Design. These criteria and guidelines will be employed by staff while negotiating a settlement of the appeal to the Site Plan Control application.
PART B – THE AMENDMENT
All of this part of this document entitled Part B – The Amendment consisting of the following text and the attached Schedule(s) constitutes Amendment No. XX adopted by City Council to the Official Plan for the City of Ottawa.
The following changes are hereby made to the Official Plan for the City of Ottawa:
2.1 Volume 2A, Secondary Plan for Sandy Hill, Section 5.3.2 a) is amended by adding the following clause:
v. For the lands known municipally as 85 Range Road, designated as High Profile on Schedule J, the maximum building height is 10 storeys with no further structural projections, and the tenth storey shall only be used for amenity space and mechanical equipment.
2.2 Schedule J of Volume 2A, Secondary Plan for Sandy Hill is amended as shown on Attachment 1.
3. Implementation and Interpretation
Implementation and interpretation of this Amendment shall be in accordance with the policies of the Official Plan for the City of Ottawa