3. URBAN DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR GREENFIELD NEIGHBOURHOODS AND TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENTS GUIDELINES

LIGNES DIRECTRICES SUR L'AMÉNAGEMENT URBAIN DES NOUVEAUX QUARTIERS
ET LIGNES DIRECTRICES SUR L'AMÉNAGEMENT AXÉ SUR LE TRANSPORT EN COMMUN

Committee recommendationS

That Council:

1. Approve the Urban Design Guidelines for Greenfield Neighbourhoods;

2. Approve the Transit-Oriented Development Guidelines.

RecommandationS du Comité

Que le Conseil municipal :

1. approuve les Lignes directrices sur l'aménagement urbain des nouveaux quartiers;

2. approuve les Lignes directrices sur l'aménagement axé sur le transport en commun.

Documentation

1. Deputy City Manager's report Planning, Transit and the Environment dated 17 August 2007 (ACS2007-PTE-POL-0053).

2. Extract of Draft Minutes, 11 September 2007 follows the French version of the report.

Report to/Rapport au :

Planning and Environment Committee

Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement

and Council/et au Conseil

17 August, 2007 / le 17 août 2007

Submitted by/Soumis par : Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager/

Directrice municipale adjointe

Planning, Transit and the Environment /

Urbanisme, Transport en commun et Environnement

Contact Person/Personne ressource : Richard Kilstrom, Manager/Gestionnaire, Community Planning and Design/Aménagement et conception communautaire, Planning Branch/

Direction de l’urbanisme

(613) 580-2424 x22653, Richard.Kilstrom@ottawa.ca

City-wide / Ensemble de la ville

Ref N°: ACS2007-PTE-POL-0053

SUBJECT:	Urban Design Guidelines for Greenfield Neighbourhoods and Transit-Oriented Developments Guidelines
OBJET	LIGNES DIRECTRICES SUR L'AMÉNAGEMENT URBAIN DES NOUVEAUX QUARTIERS ET LIGNES DIRECTRICES SUR L'AMÉNAGEMENT AXÉ SUR LE TRANSPORT EN COMMUN

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

That Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council :

1. Approve the Urban Design Guidelines for Greenfield Neighbourhoods;

2. Approve the Transit-Oriented Development Guidelines.

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement recommande au Conseil :

1. d'approuver les Lignes directrices sur l'aménagement urbain des nouveaux quartiers;

2. d'approuver les Lignes directrices sur l'aménagement axé sur le transport en commun.

BACKGROUND

The Urban Design Guidelines for Greenfield Neighbourhoods and Transit-Oriented Development Guidelines have been prepared to guide architects, planners, development proponents, community groups, City staff and interested parties engaged in the development review process for greenfield neighbourhoods and for development at transit stations across the City. The direction to undertake these guidelines and consultation process was established in an October 24, 2006 report to Planning and Environment Committee (report number ACS2006-PGM-POL-0075).

The City’s Official Plan places high importance on the quality of the built environment and on enhancing the identity and attractiveness of the city and its neighbourhoods. It also promotes transit-supportive development particularly around rapid transit stations. The Official Plan emphasizes achieving quality design throughout the city by integrating urban design, land use planning, and transportation planning to enhance the liveability of communities. A key strategy in the Official Plan is Ottawa by Design (Section 2.5.1), which identifies land use and design guidelines as one of several means to guide the creation of quality development.

When approved, these guidelines will become part of a suite of already approved land use and design guidelines that are used during the review of development proposals. These include guidelines for Traditional Main Streets; Arterial Main Streets; Large-Format Retail; Drive-Through Facilities; Gas Stations and Infill Housing.

Similar to the other previously approved guidelines, the Urban Design Guidelines for Greenfield Neighbourhoods and Transit-Oriented Development Guidelines will be stand-alone documents approved by City Council that provide more specific direction than the broader objectives found in the Official Plan.

DISCUSSION

These guidelines are intended to serve three functions:

(1) To provide direction to the development review process for areas without an approved Secondary Plan or Community Design Plan;

(2) To complement any design considerations in approved Community Design Plans or Secondary Plans; and

(3) To assist the preparation of future Community Design Plans or Secondary Plans, and inform the updating of the Official Plan, the Transportation Master Plan, Zoning-By Laws and Development Charges By-Laws.

The result will be improved consistency in the development review process for greenfield neighbourhoods and for development at transit stations across the city as there will be more awareness of the City’s interest and expectations early in the development review process. This will help to more consistently achieve the development of enhanced liveable and sustainable communities in accordance with the direction of the Official Plan.

These guidelines are organised around key headings that highlight themes that are of interest to the City and that are typically raised during the discussion of a development proposal.

They are intended to be simple, brief and illustrated so that they can be an easy reference for a wide audience. As such, the documents have a consistent structure and format, to ensure that similar ideas and themes are addressed in a consistent manner. The basic document structure includes the following components: Introduction; Purpose and Application; Official Plan Direction; Context and Challenges; Design Guidelines, and references to Other Available Guidelines.

Greenfield Neighbourhoods

"Greenfield Neighbourhood" in the context of these design guidelines generally refers to a larger area of land that is planned from the outset. A neighbourhood could range from a subdivision with fewer than 50 residential dwellings within an existing urban neighbourhood, or it could be several neighbourhoods with over 1000 dwellings that form part of a larger area of new development.

The guidelines are written to address two types of greenfield neighbourhoods within the city, each with their own unique challenges. These are:

(1) Greenfield neighbourhoods located in designated Urban Areas beyond the Greenbelt. These large, usually undeveloped, areas of land offer significant opportunity for innovative practices to achieve the Official Plan’s direction for liveable communities, but they face issues of scale, phasing, compatibility as well as sensitivity to environmental carrying capacity and natural and cultural features.

(2) Greenfield neighbourhoods located among existing neighbourhoods, within the Greenbelt. These sites are generally smaller in size than those beyond the Greenbelt but offer the same opportunity for meeting the Official Plan’s objectives. However, given that they are typically located in the midst of existing neighbourhoods, issues of connections, transition and compatibility are often at the forefront.

The objectives of the Urban Design Guidelines for Greenfield Neighbourhoods are:

· To protect and integrate the site’s inherent environmental, topographic, and cultural features;

· To create a comfortable pedestrian and cycling environment and attractive streetscapes;

· To ensure compatibility and links between different land uses in the neighbourhood, and with adjacent neighbourhoods;

· To encourage transit-oriented development;

· To establish a system of parks and greenspaces that are plentiful, accessible and connected to each other.

To implement these objectives, the Urban Design Guidelines for Greenfield Neighbourhoods provide specific guidance when:

· Structuring the layout of the neighbourhood;

· Designing streets and streetscapes;

· Designing residential sites and buildings;

· Designing non-residential sites and buildings (e.g., community facilities, school and commercial buildings);

· Designing greenspaces; and

· Locating and designing utilities and amenities.

Transit-Oriented Development

Transit-Oriented Development is a mix of high-density transit-supportive land uses located within an easy walk of a rapid transit stop or station that are oriented and designed to facilitate transit use.

Transit-supportive land uses encourage transit use and transportation network efficiency as they:

· Establish high residential and/or employee densities

· Create travel outside of the morning / evening peak-traffic period

· Promote reverse-flow travel

· Attract and generate pedestrian traffic

· Provide extended hours of activity

Examples include, but are not limited to: townhouses; apartments; child care facilities; hotels; recreational and cultural facilities; medical clinics; affordable housing; restaurants; libraries; fitness clubs; movie theatres; call centres; offices; high schools and post secondary institutions.

The intent is to apply the Transit-Oriented Development Guidelines throughout the city for all development within a 600 metre walking distance of a rapid transit stop or station, in conjunction with the policies of the Official Plan and all other applicable regulations (i.e. Zoning By-law, Private Approach By-law, Signs By-Law). Enhanced cycling facilities and cycling infrastructure will be considered within a 1500 metre cycling distance. These guidelines will also give direction to development in areas served by high-quality transit (frequent service, numerous routes, extended hours of service, but not necessarily rapid with a dedicated right-of-way).

Implementation of the Guidelines

These guidelines primarily provide design direction where a specific area plan, such as a Community Design Plan or Secondary Plan, has not been completed. While the intent is not to address all of the details of individual properties, they do provide very specific guidance regarding the interface between adjacent sites and between site development and public space and infrastructure.

These guidelines also complement policies and design guidelines for areas where a specific area plan has been completed, but they will defer to the area plan where its policies or guidelines are more specific. The Official Plan and all other applicable regulations (Zoning By-Law, Private Approach By-Law, Encroachment By-law, etc.) and requirements will also take precedence over these topic-specific guidelines. In turn, the guidelines will also provide direction that will inform the update of these plans, policies and regulations.

Although the guidelines will not have status under the Planning Act, they will become Council policy. City staff will use these guidelines as an important basis for discussion of development applications with development proponents. The guidelines could be considered a “benchmark” when evaluating a development proposal but not as a simple “checklist” nor will their application be “absolute”. Each project, site and context is unique. The guidelines provide context for discussion and are not a substitute for detailed site-specific planning, design and engineering solutions.

As part of the implementation, these guidelines will be:

· Circulated to staff involved in the review of development proposals;

· Provided to development proponents through the development application process;

· Available on the City’s website.

· Consulted during future updates of the Official Plan, Zoning By-Law, Development Charges By-Law and other related policies and regulations.

All participants in the consultation process, who provided contact information, will also be notified of Council’s endorsement of the guidelines.

CITY STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS

The guidelines will further several City Strategic Directions during the development review process for greenfield neighbourhoods and for development at transit stations. The strategic directions include:

E. Sustainable Healthy and Active City

9. Require walking, transit and cycling oriented communities and employment centres.

F. Planning and Growth Management

1. Become leading edge in community and urban design including housing for those in the city living on low incomes and residents at large.

2. Respect the existing urban fabric, neighbourhood form and the limits of hard services so that new growth is integrated seamlessly with established communities.

CONSULTATION

The consultation process for both the Urban Design Guidelines for Greenfield Neighbourhoods and Transit-Oriented Development Guidelines was coordinated together. The objective was to draw upon the consistent Ottawa by Design format, scope and approach and to allow those with an interest in both of these documents to participate in one process. Consultation followed a similar approach established for the citywide urban design guidelines that were approved by City Council in May 2006.

An objective of the consultation process was to engage a wide range of professionals, development proponents, community interest groups and citizens, and to create opportunities to receive detailed feedback that would help in the refinement of the design guidelines.

Consultation approaches included:

· Web-based information and draft documents on www.ottawa.ca

· A community open house and discussion session on May 17, 2007

· Correspondence with Advisory Committees

· Briefing various liaison committees

· Direct discussion through e-mails and phone conversations with interested parties

Notification and Feedback:

· Newspaper announcements in the Citizen and Le Droit of the availability of the draft documents and the May 17, 2007 public open house

· City website notices with links to the draft guidelines and feedback information

Along with more general notification through the newspaper announcements and on the City of Ottawa Website various agencies and groups were contacted directly and notified that the guidelines were available for review and that an open house would be held. They included:

· Advisory Committees including: Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee; Forest and Greenspace Advisory Committee; Environmental Advisory Committee; Pedestrian and Transit Advisory Committee; Roads and Cycling Committee; Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee; Accessibility Advisory Committee; Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee, and Downtown Urban Design Peer Review Panel;

· Members of City Council were sent copies of notifications and circulations to Advisory Committee and external agencies;

· Agencies normally contacted as part of the Official Plan Amendment, Site Plan and Subdivision circulation process, including utility companies, school boards, conservation authorities, and the National Capital Commission;

· Utility company and engineering liaison committees; Development industry liaison Committees;

· Community organizations and business interest groups identified as having an interest in transportation and planning issues and are included in the City of Ottawa Contact List;

· Professional organizations including Engineers, Architects, Landscape Architects and Planners;

In general, the comments received were positive and identified areas were the guidelines could be modified to improve clarity. To address the comments many of the guidelines were refined, and new ones were added; the introductory sections were rewritten to be clearer, and new photos and figure were added.

Written feedback received from the Forest and Greenspace Advisory Committee, Accessibility Advisory Committee, and the Ottawa Catholic School Board are attached as Documents 3, 4 and 5, respectfully.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Funds are available in account 903263, Ottawa By Design for the preparation of the final documents.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 Urban Design Guidelines for Greenfield Neighbourhoods (distributed separately and on file with the City Clerk)

Document 2 Transit-Oriented Development Guidelines (distributed under separate cover and on file with the City Clerk)

Document 3 Summary of Public Comments and Responses

These documents are available in English only. The City of Ottawa will translate Documents 1 and 2 once they have been approved by City Council. The City of Ottawa may translate Document 3 or parts thereof on request. Requests for translation should be forwarded to Nelson Edwards at Nelson.Edwards@ottawa.ca or (613) 580-2424, ext. 21290 or to the French Language Services Division at DSF-FLSD@ottawa.ca or (613) 580-2424, ext. 21536.

DISPOSITION

Following Council endorsement, the Planning, Transit and the Environment Department will:

· Post the approved guidelines on the City’s website;

· Organise the distribution of the guidelines to Client Services Centres, and to all interested parties, including other appropriate City departments and branches;

· Provide the guideline documents to the appropriate City Departments and Divisions to use as a reference when undertaking updates to policies and regulations such as Official Plan, Zoning-By Law, Development Charges By-Law, etc.

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS AND RESPONSES DOCUMENT 3

This comment and response summary is based on the May 2007 draft guideline documents circulated as part of the technical and public consultation process.

Transit-Oriented Development Guidelines

Comments received from individuals who attended the May 17^th public open house were mainly positive and in support of the guidelines, however, it was noted that the City should develop an overall strategy to promote a mix of infill commercial, high-rise office and residential developments adjacent to transit stops that cater to different socio-economic backgrounds. It was also noted that several transit stops are “wastelands” and “dead-zones” which make people feel unsafe but if the City encourages transit-supportive uses such as gyms, pubs, schools, and concert halls that are designed and orientated towards transit stations, more people would use transit and this in turn would help to make people feel safer. Way finding signage that directs people to transit and promotional material that identifies walking routes to transit was noted as lacking. Cycling infrastructure and bike lanes that lead directly to transit was also emphasised as important. In response to these comments, the TOD guidelines were updated to include “affordable housing and a range of income levels” as transit-supportive; the mix of transit-supportive land use examples was expanded; and several new cycling specific guidelines were added.

In addition to the comments received from the public open house, various organizations, agencies and advisory committees provided feedback through written correspondences (Table 1). Specifically, the Ottawa Catholic School Board has “no objections concerning the Guidelines for Transit-Oriented Development and agrees with the concept that high schools are an example of a transit-supportive land use.” Bell Canada suggested adding a new guideline to “consider opportunities to cluster or group utilities to minimize visual impact on the streetscape”, which has been incorporated as Guideline 55. The Accessibility Advisory Committee provided comments with respect to a photo illustrating an accessibility issue, which resulted in the removal of the illustration and the rewording of Guideline 41. The Ottawa Forestry and Greenspace Advisory Committee suggested the addition of a “Kiss and Ride” component for all Park and Rides and major transit stations. Although a very good idea, the main focus of the TOD Guidelines is on influencing private property development rather than transit station design, however, Guideline 37 deals with motor vehicle drop-off and pick-up zones and Guideline 45 deals with TOD opportunities for Park and Ride stations. The Ottawa Forestry and Greenspace Advisory Committee also suggested grassing-over underground parking garages in the rear yards of multiple unit dwellings, which has been incorporated in Guideline 47.

Table 1: Transit-Oriented Development Guidelines Comments

(Advisory Committees, Public Agencies and Utility Companies)

Ottawa Forest and Greenspace Advisory Committee	1. Incorporate a “Kiss and Ride” component to all Park and Rides and major Transit Stations to facilitate dropping off bus riders and to minimize the potential for dangerous collisions. The “Kiss and Ride” should be convenient to use and appropriately situated for dropoffs and consist of a turnaround for cars. 2. Guideline 45: where grades permit, multiple unit dwellings may have underground garages whereby rear yards are situated over the garage. The backyard is a grassed area. (Photo available at Bois-Frans, St. Laurent, North of Montréal, Québec.
Accessibility Advisory Committee Comments	My overriding reaction to both drafts was that accessibility for people who use wheelchairs or mobility devices and people with sensory impairments is not explicitly spelled out and called for in many instances. I think that it is always better to overstate the case rather than risk that readers miss subtle or implicit comments. Both drafts should make specific reference to accessibility standards such as the CSA (B651-04) "Accessible design for the built environment" when providing guidelines related to the design of such things as circulation routes for pedestrians. Failing to take these standards into consideration has huge implications for people who do not walk or cannot see. In this regard it would also be helpful for the photos and illustrations to include people in wheelchairs or who are blind navigating sidewalks, pathways etc. Presenting these images reminds the reader that not all "pedestrians" are walking or able to read printed signs. Ironically I came across photos such as Figure 37 on page 14 of the Land Use and Design Guidelines for Transit Oriented Development which is intended to illustrate a "direct and safe pedestrian" linkage from a parking lot to a transit station and in fact is an excellent example of a "barrier" preventing access for someone using a wheelchair.
Bell Canada	Bell Canada (Bell) has a strong interest in keeping abreast of the location, pattern and timing of urban growth so that we can efficiently and cost-effectively plan and coordinate our network expansions. Since urban design guidelines often direct how telecommunications infrastructure will be placed, Bell is keenly interested in how the implementation of urban design affects our operations. It is our understanding that the City of Ottawa has produced draft Land Use and Urban Design Guidelines for Transit Oriented Development. Accordingly, we offer the following comments for your consideration in preparing the ‘final’ version of the Guidelines: Streetscape & Environment, Guideline 52 This section provides a number of guidelines related to signage, streetscape elements and utilities. Guideline 52 seeks to minimize the effects of garbage receptacles and utilities by enclosing them within buildings or screening them from public view. We support this guideline; however we suggest an additional guideline related to clustering of utility equipment. The suggested wording of this guideline is as follows: Consider opportunities to cluster or group utilities to minimize visual impact on the streetscape. The policy wording we have suggested in this letter is typical of the language that Bell Canada has requested in the preparation of planning documents in various Ontario municipalities.

Urban Design Guidelines for Greenfield Neighbourhoods

Comments received during the public consultation were positive and identified areas were the guidelines could be modified to improve clarity. To address the comments, many of the guidelines were refined, and new ones were added; the introductory sections were rewritten to be clearer, and new photos and figure were added.

The Accessibility Advisory Committee observed that the guidelines: “should make specific reference to accessibility standards such as the CSA (B651-04) Accessible design for the built environment”. They also noted: “it would also be helpful for the photos and illustrations to include people in wheelchairs or who are blind navigating sidewalks, pathways etc. Presenting these images reminds the reader that not all "pedestrians" are walking or able to read printed signs.” As a result, reference to the CSA standards were added to the text and illustrations of a diversity sidewalk and pathway users and means of mobility were also added.

Comments from the Ottawa Forestry and Greenspace Advisory Committee focused on clarity and refinements to many of the guidelines and figure captions. Some of the comments were focused at policy and requirements, and management and maintenance. Although each of these aspects informs the guidelines they should not be addressed in guidelines to be used during the review of development proposals. Guidelines cannot be more restrictive that policy but can highlight solution that fulfill requirements or polices. The key to good design is good management and maintenance and various divisions in the City are working together to address issues and find solutions so that the design elements in new neighbourhoods can be implemented and sustained. Comments that could not be addressed in the guidelines were forwarded to other staff members to consider in the development of their projects such as the review of the Official Plan review and reviews of operation and maintenance standards.

Various agencies such as the Ottawa Catholic School Board wanted to make sure that the language of the guidelines were more precise and that the numerical measures provided in the guidelines expressed a sense of scale or order of magnitude and not absolute numbers. The measures and units in the guidelines are intended to provide a sense of scale or size. The text was modified to reflect their request and the entire document was reviewed based on the same principle. Other guidelines were enhanced so that the rationale was clearer.

Bell Canada endorsed the guidelines and their suggestion to add a new guideline to “consider opportunities to cluster or group utilities to minimize visual impact on the streetscape” was included.

Comments received from individuals in the land development industry sought clarity in the application and use of the guidelines and expressed concern that attempts to fulfill all the guidelines such as single loaded roads or extensive road frontage for public lands would result in inefficient development and difficulties development densities. To address these comments, the text in the introduction was revised to provide greater clarity and refined so it did not imply that all guidelines were of equal weight and must be met at one. Site characteristics, and specific situations related to the development and mix of land uses is key in considering the emphasis given to various guidelines.

The full text of comments received from advisory committees, public agencies and utility companies are listed in Table 2

Table 2: Greenfield Neighbourhoods Comments (Advisory Committees, Public Agencies and Utility Companies)
Accessibility Advisory Committee Comments	My overriding reaction to both drafts was that accessibility for people who use wheelchairs or mobility devices and people with sensory impairments is not explicitly spelled out and called for in many instances. I think that it is always better to overstate the case rather than risk that readers miss subtle or implicit comments. Both drafts should make specific reference to accessibility standards such as the CSA (B651-04) "Accessible design for the built environment" when providing guidelines related to the design of such things as circulation routes for pedestrians. Failing to take these standards into consideration has huge implications for people who do not walk or cannot see. In this regard it would also be helpful for the photos and illustrations to include people in wheelchairs or who are blind navigating sidewalks, pathways etc. Presenting these images reminds the reader that not all "pedestrians" are walking or able to read printed signs. Ironically I came across photos such as Figure 37 on page 14 of the Land Use and Design Guidelines for Transit Oriented Development which is intended to illustrate a "direct and safe pedestrian" linkage from a parking lot to a transit station and in fact is an excellent example of a "barrier" preventing access for someone using a wheelchair.
Ottawa Forest and Greenspace Advisory Committee	Definition 1. Would developments smaller than 50 residential dwellings be subject to these guidelines? We would hope that at least some of them, especially in relation to trees and greenspace could apply. 2. The statement is made that these guidelines would apply in cases where a community design plan has not been completed. Would it not be preferable to indicate that these guidelines will inform the community design process and ultimate CDP? There is much here that should be required in a CDP 3. Would these guidelines not also apply to Brownfield redevelopment as well? That is implied but not explicitly stated. Objectives No comment 1. Structuring Layout There is growing interest in the creation of Community Gardens in the urban area. I attended the workshops and consultations on the Escarpment Design Plan (Slater-Albert-Laurier-Queen-Bronson-to Kent area) and the strong support for the retention of the existing community garden led to its incorporation into the final design document. So, I would recommend that Community Gardens be built into these guidelines. Whether they should be a part of a community park is a question that should be addressed. They should probably not be located next to sensitive woodlots as there might be a problem with disposal of garden refuse in the woods, leading to the introduction of invasive alien species. Guideline 1 Good that topography is to be considered. Can the statement be made stronger so that topography must be retained? Guideline 3 In cases where the woodlot is ecologically sensitive, is it a good idea to place an active park adjacent to it? That may encourage intrusion and subsequent damage to the features that the City is trying to protect. Guideline 5 Change “trees may need to be physically…” to “trees must be physically…”. Create a 10 metre buffer zone to permanently protect roots and future growth. Advocate minimal disruption to the grading so that no negative impacts jeopardize the survival of the existing trees. In Figure 5b, add the word “existing” as follows: Rows of existing trees can be … Guideline 6 Good to incorporate topographic contours. How can this be made a requirement with a development culture that seeks to minimize costs by flattening the landscape prior to construction? Guideline 8 Good to preserve trees, hedgerows. Need to established a minimum distance between such features and the foundation of a residence/building and then specify that preservation in the post-construction phase is paramount. Guideline 15 Co-locating 3-4 storey buildings on the four sides of a tower helps to provide a visual distance. 2. Street Design When the engineering designs for streets are being created, insist that there be a “tree trench” – an underground corridor for tree roots and utilities are not permitted to intrude into the trenches. If the near future, it may be desirable to incorporate tree watering systems into these trenches as a way of ensuring the trees’ survival in periods of drought and landowners’ reluctance to pay to water a city tree. It is time for the city to move to planting only species native to the Ottawa area and, to ensure their survival, plant them properly and reduce the amount of salt used in winter. Guideline 25 If “gateways” to communities are to flourish, then the city must accept the responsibility for watering and fertilizing at appropriate intervals. Other essential and timely tree care is also a given but, at the moment, unfunded. Guideline 27 Street monocultures can lead to problems such as disease. It is better to vary the species composition. This also creates a more interesting streetscape. Note the principle espoused in guideline 35 in relation to building materials – the same applies to trees and shrubs. 3. Residential building and Site Design Guideline 30 Trees and shrubs planted along stormwater management ponds should be species native to Ottawa and capable of surviving periodic flooding and periods of drought. Guideline 42 Good to locate parking at the rear and place trees at the front. This is good design and, even more importantly, good ecologically as it provide shade for pedestrians. However, the rear yards where children might plan should also have trees. 5. Greenspaces Use native trees and shrubs and change city practices that lead to their demise (excessive winter salt, careless lawn-mowing and whipper-snippers that cut the tree bark at base. Guideline 56 There is a problem of grammar with the explanation for figure 56a Guideline 57 Good statement re buffers but there may be a need for a definitive buffer width that is more than just extending to the drip line and it needs to be implemented and enforced in the post-construction phase. Guideline 58 Need to establish at the outset who pays for the periodic refurbishing of trails and laying down more stone dust etc. 6. Utilities and Amenities Guideline 63 Create “tree trenches” – utility-free zones along streets that serve only the trees and their roots.
Ottawa Catholic School Board	Although the Board has no objection concerning the “Guidelines for Transit-Oriented Development” and agrees with the concept that high schools are an example of a transit-supportive land use, we do have concerns and suggestions regarding certain statements within the “Urban Design Guidelines for Greenfield Neighbourhoods”. Guideline 3, Page 5: Recently the City of Ottawa has elected to erect fences between several newly constructed schools and City-owned parks. It is the Board’s opinion that this activity hinders the ability to connect parks with other open space areas such as school play fields. We are also curious as to what type of situations would detract from the intended function of parkland if it were co-located with community facilities such as recreation centres and schools. Guideline 16, Page 11 – Elementary Schools The construction of an elementary school facility is very different from designing residential or commercial spaces. Specific issues such as separating bus lanes from parking lots and ensuring that parking lots are separated from play areas must be considered. The placement of play areas, daycare facilities, drop off areas, controlled access points to the school, traffic and pedestrian safety issues in addition to having over 500 young and enthusiastic children on site all pose distinct design challenges. As a result, we have some concerns regarding the inclusion of design guidelines for schools within the document. We request that the statement that “elementary school sites have two entirely open road frontages, one of which faces a collector street” be removed from the document or be rephrased to state that it is suggested that an elementary site contain frontage on two roads. It should further be noted that each of the four school boards in the Ottawa area have different school site requirements. Generally, our elementary schools require a site size of between 6.0 to 7.0 acres (2.4-2.8 hectares) but this may vary depending on the final location, configuration and design of the school. As a result, we request that any reference to elementary school site size be removed. Guideline 17, Page 12: Similar to the construction of an elementary school, the design of a high school poses its own set of unique challenges. Each area school board also has it’s own design and grade structure criteria. For instance our Board operates combined Intermediate / high schools for Grades 7-12 and therefore we generally require a minimum of 18 to 20 acres (7.3 and 8.1 hectares) not the 5.0 hectares (12 acres) stated in the document. We therefore request that any reference to secondary school site size be removed. Guideline 26, Page 16: The Board supports the construction of sidewalks on both sides of streets that serve key destinations such as schools. Guideline #47, Page 28 Although this section does not specifically include schools, it does state that community buildings and non-residential buildings should be located close to the street edge. The Board has had several negative experiences lately with regard to similar guidelines that have encouraged schools to locate at the street edge. It is our opinion that the configuration of the actual property and possible joint development plans should be the factors that ultimately determine the location of the building.
Bell Canada	Bell Canada (Bell) has a strong interest in keeping abreast of the location, pattern and timing of urban growth so that we can efficiently and cost-effectively plan and coordinate our network expansions. Since urban design guidelines often direct how telecommunications infrastructure will be placed, Bell is keenly interested in how the implementation of urban design affects our operations. It is our understanding that the City of Ottawa has produced draft Urban Design Guidelines for Greenfield Neighbourhoods. Accordingly, we offer the following comments for your consideration in preparing the ‘final’ version of the Guidelines: Street design, Guideline 21: Guideline 21 directs that the most appropriate zoning setback and road right-of-way width should be selected to provide sufficient space for all elements in the front yard, including utilities. We appreciate that the City has provided direction to accommodate utility services in the right-of-way, and we are supportive of this guideline. Street design, Guideline 27: Guideline 27 relates to the placement of street trees within the right-of-way. We appreciate that consideration has been given to coordinating the placement of street trees with the location of amenities and utilities in the right-of-way, and we are supportive of this guideline. Residential building and site design, Guideline 45: This guideline establishes a preference for shared driveways to access residential properties in order to “maximize the area for trees, utilities, on-street parking, and snow storage, and to minimize the physical disruption of sidewalks along the street.” Bell Canada appreciates the City’s consideration of utilities, and is supportive of this guideline. Utilities and amenities, Guideline 63: Guideline 63 seeks to minimize the visual effects of above-grade utilities by locating them “away from intersections, day lighting triangles or key view lines” and to “screen utilities through unique design or landscaping.” We support this guideline; however we also suggest an additional guideline related to the clustering of utility equipment. The suggested wording of this guideline is as follows: Consider opportunities to cluster or group utilities to minimize visual impact on the streetscape. The policy wording we have suggested in this letter is typical of the language that Bell Canada has requested in the preparation of planning documents in various Ontario municipalities.