6. BRUYÈRE CONTINUING CARE – PRIVATE ACCESS FROM ORLÉANS BOULEVARD

VOIE D’ACCÈS PRIVÉE À L’ÉTABLISSEMENT DE SOINS CONTINUS BRUYÈRE À

PARTIR DU BOULEVARD ORLÉANS

Committee recommendation

That Council approve that private access from Orléans Boulevard is needed at the Bruyère Continuing Care Centre, and that such private roadway be required to cross the unnamed ravine at a location approved by all relevant agencies, at the City’s cost.

RECOMMANDATION DU COMITÉ

Que le Conseil approuve la construction, aux frais de la Ville, d’une voie d’accès privée à l’établissement de Soins continus Bruyère à partir du boulevard Orléans pour traverser le ravin non nommé à un endroit approuvé par tous les organismes pertinents.

DOCUMENTATION

1. Councillor Bob Monette’s report, Ward 1, Orléans dated 17 May 2010 (ACS2010-CCS-PEC-0016).

2. Extract of Draft Minutes, 25 May 2010.

Report to / Rapport au:

Planning and Environment Committee

Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’environnement

and Council / et au Conseil

17 May 2010 / le 17 mai 2010

Submitted by / Soumis par: Conseiller / Councillor Bob Monette

Contact / Personne-ressource : Councillor B. Monette

(613) 580-2471, Bob.Monette@ottawa.ca

Orléans (1)

File. No. ACS2010-CCS-PEC-0016

SUBJECT: BRUYÈRE CONTINUING CARE – PRIVATE ACCESS FROM ORLÉANS BOULEVARD

OBJET: MOTION – VOIE D’ACCÈS PRIVÉE À L’ÉTABLISSEMENT DE SOINS CONTINUS BRUYÈRE À PARTIR DU BOULEVARD ORLÉANS

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend to Council that a private access from Orléans Boulevard is needed at the Bruyère Continuing Care Centre, and that such private roadway be required to cross the unnamed ravine at a location approved by all relevant agencies, at the City’s cost.

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité de l’urbanisme et de l’environnement recommande au Conseil de construire, aux frais de la Ville, une voie d’accès privée à l’établissement de Soins continus Bruyère à partir du boulevard Orléans pour traverser le ravin non nommé à un endroit approuvé par tous les organismes pertinents.

BACKGROUND

On 5 May 2010, the aforementioned Notice of Motion was submitted at the Transportation Committee. It was later determined that the report should more appropriately be dealt with by the Planning and Environment Committee. The full Motion is attached as Document 1 to this report.

The Bruyère Continuing Care Centre has submitted a site plan application for an expansion to their existing facility and the development of senior's housing on lands located on Hiawatha Park Road. There is potential for further development which will require access from the north end of Orléans Boulevard.

DISCUSSION

Orléans Boulevard north of Jeanne D'arc Boulevard is classified as a collector road and Orléans Boulevard south of Jeanne D'arc Boulevard is classified as a major collector in the City's Official Plan. It is more desirable to encourage traffic to access the Bruyère Continuing Care Center from a collector road, rather than from a local road. Residents have expressed concern regarding the potential increase in traffic as a result of the proposed development on St. Louis Drive and Hiawatha Park Road, both classified as local roads.

Furthermore, a Flood Plain Hazard overlay (Section 58 of Zoning By-law, By-law 2008-250, as amended) constrains the potential location of development and also potential road crossings on the subject lands. It is therefore desirable to provide a private access to the Centre via Orléans Boulevard.

Planning and Growth Management Comments

Planning and Growth Management Department is not fundamentally opposed to an access from Orleans Boulevard. Such an access is generally in keeping with the intents of the Provincial Policy Statement and Official Plan as it relates to site design and vehicular access to a development.

Section 41(7)(a)(3) of the Planning Act allows, as a condition of site plan approval, the municipality to require the owner to provide, to the satisfaction of the municipality and at no cost to the municipality, access driveways.

An access from Orleans Boulevard would be a private road and, as such, should be privately funded. Objective 3 of the City Strategic Plan- Sustainable Finances Priority states that ‘New development in the City should be self-financing. The costs of new development should not be subsidized by existing taxpayers.” The City has no funding source for such a project.

It should be noted that a private access from Orleans Boulevard would have to cross the creek in order to service the development. This would be very costly and would first require a number of approvals and permits. The granting of these is not guaranteed. In addition, construction will be constrained by the location of the Flood Plain Hazard overlay in the Zoning By-law as Section 58 specifically prohibits development within this overlay. Section 69 of the Zoning By-law also prohibits structures within 30m of the normal high-water mark of a waterbody or 15m to the top of bank, whichever is greater. A crossing would also have to be supported by a proper slope stability assessment.

At this time, no City funding is available in the assistance of this project, either in the design or construction. Preliminary estimates provided by the applicant are in the magnitude of $4.5M.

Given the residents’ concerns with respect to the existing situation, the City is investigating improvements to Hiawatha Park Road that may alleviate the vehicular/pedestrian/cyclist conflicts particularly in the area of the culvert on Hiawatha Park Road.

CONSULTATION

This item will be advertised in the local daily newspapers as part of the Public Meeting Advertisement on the Friday preceding the Planning and Environment Committee meeting.

LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

There is no legal obligation upon the City to provide financial assistance for the construction of the access road. There are however no legal/risk management implications related to this report.

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no rural implications.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The construction costs and funding of a private roadway to provide access to the Bruyère Continuing Care Centre from Orleans Boulevard was not identified in the City's 2010 capital budget. Should Committee and Council approve the report recommendation, debt financing of $4.5 million would be required based on the preliminary cost estimates provided in the report.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 – Notice of Motion submitted at Transportation Committee on May 5, 2010

Document 2 – Location Map and Zoning Key Plan for 879 Hiawatha Park Road

DISPOSITION

Planning and Growth Management Department staff will implement Council’s decision through appropriate conditions for site plan approval and inclusion in a Site Plan Control Agreement. Site plan approval will not be granted until the drawings and reports are revised to show a site access as directed by Council, and only if requisite permits are achievable.

Document 1

City Council and Standing Committee Motion Conseil et comités permanents Motion


Moved by/ Motion de:	Councillor Bloess (on behalf of Councillor Monette

RE:	BRUYÈRE CONTINUING CARE – PRIVATE ACCESS FROM ORLÉANS BOULEVARD

WHEREAS Bruyère Continuing Care has submitted a site plan application for an expansion to their existing facility and the development of senior's housing on lands located on Hiawatha Park Road; and

WHEREAS there is potential for further development which will require access from the north end of Orléans Boulevard; and

WHEREAS Orléans Boulevard north of Jeanne D'arc Boulevard is classified as a collector road and Orléans Boulevard south of Jeanne D'arc Boulevard is classified as a major collector in the City's Official Plan; and

WHEREAS it is more desirable to encourage traffic to access the Bruyère Continuing Care Center from a collector road, rather than from a local road; and

WHEREAS residents have expressed concern regarding the potential increase in traffic as a result of the proposed development on St. Louis Drive and Hiawatha Park Road, both classified as local roads, and

WHEREAS it is recognized that a Flood Plain Hazard overlay (Section 58 of Zoning By-law, By-law 2008-250, as amended) constrains the potential location of development and also potential road crossings on the subject lands;

THEREFORE be it resolved that a private access from Orléans Boulevard is needed, and that such private roadway be required to cross the unnamed ravine at a location approved by all relevant agencies, at the City’s cost.

Document 2

Location Map and Zoning Key Plan for 879 Hiawatha Park Road

A petition was also submitted on 25 May 2010 by John La Fave, containing 172 signatures from residents of St. Louis Drive, Ravine Way and Hiawatha Park Road, in support of Councillor Monette’s motion. A copy is held on file with the City Clerk.

Committee began consideration of the item by hearing presentations from the following public delegations:

Joe Duquette, 15-year resident of St. Louis Drive, spoke in support of the motion. He expressed four reasons why Committee should support the motion, which are summarized as follows:

· An extension of Orléans Boulevard is needed to reduce an excessive traffic influx associated with Bruyère Continuing Care’s planned expansion of the Saint-Louis Residence and construction of three new seniors’ apartments on Hiawatha Park Road.

· St. Louis Drive and Hiawatha Park Road were not designed to support the present traffic load, and the situation stands to worsen. The proposed motion would go towards solving long-standing traffic problems that have yet to be satisfactorily rectified.

· If the extension is approved, the resulting lower traffic load to St. Louis Drive and Hiawatha Park Road would substantially reduce the expected traffic vibration damage to nearby homes, especially during the construction period. This issue has been a continuing problem, as all homes on both streets are built on a deep clay base. The Ward Councillor’s office has received a report prepared by residents on both indicating, with approximately 25 per cent of homeowners detailing recurring damage they have experienced in their homes associated with traffic vibrations.

· The road extension would provide an alternate access egress route to the residents and the apartment complex, for use in case of emergency if the presently proposed single is blocked for any reason.

· Hiawatha Park Road, the sole access route to the project, has insufficient ancillary infrastructure to support the project. The road contains no amenities, no sidewalks, crumbling sides, and is dangerous for users.

In conclusion, Mr. Duquette emphasized that any improvements to Hiawatha Park Road would not solve the traffic problems on Saint-Louis Drive, and proposed that the extension as proposed by councillor Monette was the only real solution. He indicated that the presentations by subsequent delegations would further support the points raised.

Dennis Smulski, resident of St. Louis Drive for over 25 years, spoke in support of the motion. He began by expressing his support for the Bruyère proposal, suggesting it was a worthwhile project, but one that should be done correctly. In his presentation, Mr. Smulski provided background information on the residence, the surrounding roads, and traffic concerns that had emerged in the area. His specific points are summarized as follows:

· The site plan submitted by Bruyère only calls for one access into the residence, which is also the sole access to Roslyn Avenue and the five attached finger roads.

· When Saint-Louis Drive was designed and built in 1982 it was built to support approximately 194 homes, and since then the expansion of the surrounding road network and neighbourhood has resulted in many additional homes required to use the road, and this will continue.

· The original plan was to temporarily permit bus travel to utilize St. Louis Drive pending completion of the Airport Eastern Parkway. In 1974 the former regional government official plan for the extension of the Eastern Parkway included an exit onto Orléans Boulevard, with a road spanning the ravine into the residence.

· When in 1996 the plan for the development of the Eastern Parkway was dropped from the official plan, and the City of Gloucester embarked on a program to dispose of the parcels it was holding in Hiawatha Park. However, no consideration was given to revamp the existing infrastructure now that the parkway was no longer going to be built

· He expressed concern with the single entrance/exit off Hiawatha Park Road and the possibility of it being blocked in an emergency situation. While the City’s Deputy Fire Chief has stated that the present single entrance/exit is not in violation of the applicable codes, he has indicated that the Ottawa Fire Service would support the request for secondary means of access into the area as it is preferable to have a secondary road in an emergency situation.

· At the recent public meeting, Bruyère stated they would use a gravel access road where possible for the construction of the three apartments. He suggested all construction traffic use this route to protect homes from the additional vibration cracks and added traffic stress.

In conclusion, he encouraged Committee to support the motion.

Renée Payette, resident of Ravine Way, spoke in support of the motion. Specifically, she proposed that the current proposed single access to the new facility via Hiawatha Park Road was in violation of many provincial and municipal policies, including the provincial Planning Act, and the City’s Official Plan. She raised the following points:

· The proposed Bruyère village would be the showcase for continuing care and a model for future villages for healthy aging in Ontario.

· For purposes of comparison, she noted that the 19-acre Orléans town centre currently under development was located on a four lane collector road with multiple accesses, while the proposed 27-acre retirement village would have only one local access road.

· She reviewed examples of similar seniors’ villages in other cities, noting they are all situated on major collector roads.

· She suggested that using Hiawatha Park Road as the only access road to the

· Specifically, she suggested the road did not comply with the policy of connecting buildings in spaces through a network of roads and sidewalks that are accessible to all people with physical or sensory disabilities, as stipulated in Section 2 of the OP.

· She suggested the lack of sidewalks was not in compliance with the Planning Act, which states sidewalks must be provided along transit routes; nor was it in compliance with the OP, which states large areas must be easy to get to and travel through by foot, by bicycle, transit, car and in this case, wheelchair. The lack of sidewalks also violates the City’s sidewalk policy and the sidewalk technical design guidelines.

· She noted that the City’s road corridor road planning and design guidelines include establishing a vision for the road that is well matched to its plan function. She noted one of the functions of the proposed facility was the teaching, promoting and advocating healthy aging and offering services to all of the seniors in Orléans, and proposed the use of Hiawatha Park Drive as the sole entrance did not fulfill this function.

· She suggested the plan violated Section 3 of the Planning Act, which says that the necessary infrastructure and public service facilities are or will be available to meet current and projected needs, and support the protection and safety in the community.

· She further suggested having Hiawatha as the sole vehicular access in violated Section Four of OP, which states development that has the potential to generate a significant amount of vehicular traffic should be oriented on streets other than the local streets whenever the opportunity exists.

· With respect to the local streets, she noted Hiawatha could only be accessed by two local roads - Ravine Way and St. Louis Drive. Ravine Way is narrow due to the calming measures installed by the City due to traffic volume and speed concerns, and has no sidewalks. Saint-Louis Drive, the primary route for all emergency vehicles, and traffic accessing village, has several traffic concerns, a transit and heavy pedestrian and cycling traffic.

· She suggested the current plan violated Sections three and four of the OP, which provide that uses servicing wider parts of the City will be located at the edge of neighbourhoods on roads where the needs of the land uses can be easily met and impacts controlled, and that the development with the potential to generate significant amounts of vehicular traffic should be located on arterial or major collector road. She suggested those OP policies supported the rationale for the motion to extend Orléans Boulevard, the major collector road adjacent to the property.

In conclusion, she suggested that the current planned access did not represent vision that the City of Ottawa wanted to project in showcasing the new Bruyère facility.

J.P. Chartrand, resident of St. Louis Drive since 1996, spoke in support of the motion. He noted that, as a self-employed consultant with a home-based office, he was in a good position to observe traffic levels on the street. He began by indicating his support for the project proposed by Bruyère Continuing Care. His presentation centred on the issue of traffic volume and traffic flow patterns on the surrounding streets. Detailed traffic frequency tables and other supporting documentation were submitted and circulated to Committee. The following summarizes the points raised in his presentation:

· He challenged the assertion put forward by one of the traffic studies that mean traffic volume on Saint-Louis and Hiawatha was very low, and would increase after the village expansion by only one vehicle per minute during peak times.

· He noted that, as an adjunct research professor in the department of sociology and anthropology at Carleton University, he had some professional backgrounds about the use of means and quantitative research.

· He challenged the traffic counts included in the Delcan study, which were done on as part of the application process to undertake the development. Delcan’s one hour traffic count at the intersection of Saint-Louis and Hiawatha at a peak time between 3:30 and 4:30, reported a mean traffic volume of 1.68 vehicles per minutes. The report then estimates that the extension of the village would raise the mean value to just over 2 vehicles per minutes.

· He explained that since then, other traffic counts have been done, including a number of informal counts done by himself and another resident, and a formal city traffic study on April 12. He indicated that the informal counts and the City count showed that peak time traffic volume to be considerably higher than what Delcan had reported, up to 164 vehicles per hour during one peak period, 26 vehicles per hour more than what Delcan predicted we would get as total traffic volume after the expansion of the village. Traffic counts undertaken by the City, and informal counts undertaken by himself and another resident, indicate different results.

· While the mean traffic flows of both studies suggest that traffic volume is typically very low, he suggested that, based on observation of how traffic actually flows on the street, mean vehicle per minute statistics did not truly represent actual traffic flow patterns. He noted traffic is uneven and highly clustered, with periods of very low traffic volume and periods of high traffic volume. He suggested that during off-peak periods, the clustering of traffic was not as intense, and periods of higher traffic volume are much shorter. In peak times clustering is a lot more intense and much longer lasting.

· He stated, based on videos recorded of traffic volume at the intersection of Hiawatha and Saint-Louis Drive, that the range in actual traffic volume between peak and off peak time varied from zero vehicles per minute up to 11 vehicles per minute, with the mean vehicle per minute varying significantly from 1.8 to 5.3 vehicles per minute during peak time.

· He suggested the additional traffic that would be caused by the village expansion would be just as clustered as the present traffic flow, which would exacerbate the present safety concerns of neighbourhood residents and make our streets undesirable places to live.

In conclusion, he proposed that extending Orléans Boulevard as outlined in the motion would prevent high traffic intensity from increasing even further and might even alleviate some existing traffic clustering by redirecting traffic away from Saint-Louis Drive.

John La Fave, 20-year resident of Saint-Louis Drive, spoke in support of the motion. His presentation spoke to the issues of the community, residents, street safety, traffic volume, vibrations, and the lack of infrastructure. He raised the following points:

· There are concerns with the traffic that would be generated and the site plan that directs all traffic onto Hiawatha Park Road, accessed by St. Louis Drive.

· He suggested that had Saint-Louis Drive been designated as a transit route and constructed to a transit route standard, and had residents’ concerns and proposals put forward in the early 1990s been addressed, the issue would not exist.

· On the issue of vibration damage, he noted the houses in the area were built on leda clay, and referenced papers included in his written submissions from the NRC and Natural Resources Canada with respect to the issue of leda clay disturbances and traffic induced vibration’s impact on houses.

· He provided an overview of a comparison that had been done of the excavation load for a home on Roslyn Avenue, with that anticipated for the proposed village expansion. He noted the excavation of the home had resulted in the removal of thirty eight truckloads of soil. He anticipated that, based on the footprint of the expansion, there would be 1193 truckloads of soil removed, representing or 2386 transits. Detailed data was provided in the written submission.

· He maintained that the site plan did not provide the necessary road structure for a massive expansion in development.

· He echoed the concerns of the previous delegations with respect to there being a single proposed access for emergency vehicles, which could be blocked by accident or incident. He proposed that the extension of Orléans Boulevard would provide an alternate route for fire and emergency vehicles to the residence and the residential community north of the ravine.

· He proposed that a second access road would also help reduce the excessive traffic volume on nearby residential streets and allow improvements to Hiawatha Park Road, such as provision of sidewalks or bike paths, without isolating and putting at risk the occupants of St. Louis Residence and the residential community north of the ravine.

In conclusion, Mr. La Fave reiterated his support for the Bruyère project and the need for a worthy access road to reach it, emphasizing that the project should be done, and should be done right

The five preceding presenters, Mr. Duquette, Mr. Smulski, Ms. Payette, Mr. Chartrand and Mr. La Fave, provided a detailed joint submission, supporting documentation and a PowerPoint presentation. Copies of this submission were circulated to members of Committee and copies are held on file with the City Clerk.

In response to questions from vice-chair Feltmate with regards to the requirement for an environmental assessment, Karin Smadella, Program Manager, Development Review Process (Suburban East) explained that, because the proposed access would be part of a private site, it could be dealt with through the Planning Act. She explained that whatever design was undertaken for an access from Orléans Boulevard would be part of Bruyère’s Site Plan submission, and they would require supporting studies if they were crossing the ravine and attempting to enter into the floodplain overlay.

Jeffrey Dale, resident of Ravine Way, spoke in support of Councillor Monette’s motion and in support of the proposed program by Bruyère Continuing Care. He suggested the project would be a very important piece of economic development project for the east end of Ottawa. With respect to the traffic issues raised by the other delegations, he proposed that the traffic problems of the area had been known for years. He suggested traffic was reaching the facility via roads that were not designed or able to handle transit, commercial traffic or patterns of the shift workers accessing the site. He noted that the report indicated a bridge would be required, at an incredible cost; however, he noted it was a very small ravine and had had other crossings by culverts. He suggested there was an opportunity to address the traffic issues in the community by using a culvert system to extend over Orléans Boulevard.

Councillor Doucet expressed his sympathy for the concerns of the residents, drawing a parallel to the immense traffic impacts that would be caused by the proposed development of Lansdowne Park in his ward.

Liliane Delaquis-Boisjoli, resident of St. Louis Drive, spoke in opposition to the proposed motion. She expressed concern with the potential impacts that crossing the ravine would have, as it was so close to a protected area containing many plants, animals, birds and other wildlife. She predicted that if the ravine was crossed in order to alleviate the traffic, it would have the affect of allowing drug dealers to access the other side near the bicycle path, and she expressed concern that the bicycles and pedestrians would have share the same route as cars.

The delegation noted that she had lived on St. Louis drive for many years and had never seen any damage or movement due to traffic vibration. She acknowledged that the road, where many trucks pass, was not very nice, but suggested that this was the case for many other nearby roads. She agreed that there were problems with Hiawatha Park Road, but suggested that many of the seniors accessing the new facility via the entrance on Hiawatha would do so by transit rather than by car. In conclusion, Ms. Delaquis-Boisjoli recommended that the access to the facility could be better served by Hiawatha Park Road than an extension of Orléans Boulevard. She further noted that the proposed extension would be very expensive, and the taxpayers would be paying for it. In response to questions from Councillor Doucet, Ms. Delaquis-Boisjoli expressed her agreement with the previous delegations that the present road was too narrow, and perhaps it could be repaired and expanded. However, this should be done instead of creating a new access route.

Daniel Levac spoke on behalf of Bruyère Continuing Care. He noted that Bruyère was in the business of running hospitals and long term care homes, and was entering business of affordable housing and assisted living in response to a need identified by the United Way and the City of Ottawa in the Affordable Housing for Seniors Framework. He emphasised that the village model proposed for the site would allow seniors to age in place, have healthy and secure lifestyles, and have access to affordable assisted living.

Mr. Levac noted that Bruyère Continuing Care was a non-profit institution and a tenant on the lands in question, and not a private developer. As such, he maintained that the project could not absorb infrastructure costs such as bridges and roads and still meet the objectives of affordability and feasibility, emphasizing they would not proceed with the project if it resulted in rents that were beyond the means of the identified group. He highlighted that we Bruyère had secured a $5.4 million grant from the Federal and Ontario Affordable Housing Program, received pursuant to a tendering process by the City of Ottawa, and one of the conditions of that grant was that constructions must start by August 14. He confirmed that the project would not be feasible without the grant.

In conclusion, he expressed that Bruyère Continuing Care supported the motion, but could not add to the cost of the project. In response to questions from Councillor Feltmate, Mr. Levac confirmed that, not only does Bruyère lack the capital funds to build a private access road to Orléans, they also lack the operating funds within the rent structure to maintain the road. He noted that the current site development submitted to the City plan proposed the use of the existing streets. The traffic study conducted showed that there was no requirement for additional access, as the traffic impact to the streets would be negligible.

Jean Bartowiak, President and CEO of Bruyère Continuing Care, spoke in support of their proposed expansion. He noted that, for the first time, the facility would be able to be part of the community, rather than segregated from the neighbourhood, and expressed a desire to maintain happy relations with the neighbours. He expressed support for any decision Committee and Council made that would support the project as part of the neighbourhood and support the ability of residents in Orléans to age in place. He hoped the City would support any means to ensure the project would go forward in a timely manner, to meet a need in the community.

Marc Thibault, Orleans Chamber of Commerce, was registered to speak, but departed prior to consideration of the item. Vice-chair Feltmate read his comments into the record, and they are held on file with the City Clerk. His comments indicated his support for the expansion of the Bruyère facility, suggested the project had numerous advantages to the community of Orléans, and that the transportation issues could be resolved.

Bruce Wittet, resident of St. Louis Drive, also registered to speak, but departed prior to consideration of the item. His detailed written comments were circulated and are held on file with the City Clerk.

Having concluded all public delegations, Vice-chair Feltmate turned the recommendations over to Committee for additional questions to staff, discussion and debate.

In response to questions from Councillor Monette, Planning and Growth Management staff provided the following additional information:

· The $4.5 million dollar cost estimate for the construction of the bridge link to the facility was a figure provided to staff by Bruyère

· There are many unknowns, and the costing of all potential options for accessing the site from Orléans Boulevard would be hard to estimate.

· If the motion were to be approved by Committee, it would rise for consideration by City Council at its meeting of 9 June 2010.

· If the motion were supported by Council, it would require a major redesign of Bruyére’s submission, given that the primary access would now be from Orléans Boulevard. This could significantly affect timelines for approval

· If the proposed access would cross the ravine, there is potential that a rezoning would be requires as they would impact the floodplain overlay area. This would also have a significant impact on timelines.

· While staff is not familiar with the construction staging for the proposed plan, Bruyère has submitted a site plan for all the buildings. As such, the timing of the groundbreaking would likely be affected even if they do not build the whole project right away.

· As to whether they could proceed with the first three buildings without delay, and access the site from a different angle such as via the crossway, staff indicated they would need to determine how the access from Orléans Boulevard would impact the different phases of construction, which is difficult to do given they had not yet seen the details of such a proposal.

· As to whether there would be the ability to provide the link in such a way that would not impact the timing of the groundbreaking, it was suggested that the only way this could happen was if Bruyère separated that portion of the site plan and asked for approval for just the three units; however, this was difficult to determine without them demonstrating how they would leave options open where the crossing could take place, and may still impact the deadline.

Councillor Monette emphasized that, if Committee approved the motion, staff should provide further details on the feasibility and impacts of proceeding with the motion at the June 9Council Meeting. He suggested there was probably be a way of doing the extension that would cost much less than $4.5 million, such as the option proposed at a recent public meeting to approach the access from a different angle, by going over the crossway. He maintained there was a need to have an analysis of whether this could be done.

In response to further questions from Councillor Feltmate with respect to the need for environmental assessment, Ms. Smadella confirmed that if they were to complete the access as a private road or change what they were currently proposing, Bruyère would be required to complete a full range of supporting studies, environmental or otherwise, if they were going to cross a ravine or any environmentally sensitive areas; however, as a private road it would not be subject to the municipal class EA process. She confirmed that this would likely be a lengthy process. As to how a potential private road would be maintained, Ms. Smadella explained that, as a private road on private lands, it would generally be paid for by the owners. She pointed out that the Council-approved Strategic Plan specifically states that new development in the City shall be self-financing.

Councillor Hunter suggested that if Council approved Councillor Monette’s motion and provided Bruyère with a road at a cost of $4.5 million to the taxpayers, this could slow their site plan approval process enough that they would lose the window of opportunity to obtain their infrastructure stimulus funding. Ms. Smadella agreed that this was a fair assessment.

In his concluding remarks, Councillor Monette stated that he needed to have analysis done in order for Council to make a decision. He expressed the opinion that Bruyère would be able to build the access road by building towards the crossway, and thus not affect when they would be shovel ready; however, he wished to have staff’s interpretation of that and a legal opinion.

The Councillor suggested that, while the road would technically be a private road, it would be serving a very public institution. He expressed his complete support for the Bruyère centre and did not want to jeopardize their project, which would be one of a kind and a model for the rest of Canada for how seniors can age gracefully. He reiterated the concerns of the residents and agreed that St. Louis Drive was not an adequate road to support this kind of traffic. He believed the concerns of the residents with respect to the impacts of construction vehicles, buses and other traffic. He noted the Orléans Boulevard issue went back decades, and suggested it should have been done decades ago. He also indicated that he would continue to work towards upgrading Hiawatha Park Road, echoing the concerns of the delegations with respect to emergency access and service issues.

The Councillor emphasized that he was not asking Bruyère to pay for the road, nor was he necessarily asking Committee to support a $4.5 million project, reiterating that he felt it could be competed for much cheaper than that. In conclusion, he encouraged Committee to support the motion so that it would rise to Council on June 9, and allow Council to make an informed decision with all the information in front of it.

Committee then considered Councillor Monette’s recommendation.

That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend to Council that a private access from Orléans Boulevard is needed at the Bruyère Continuing Care Centre, and that such private roadway be required to cross the unnamed ravine at a location approved by all relevant agencies, at the City’s cost.

CARRIED

YEAS (4): Councillors M. Bellemare, C. Doucet, B. Monette, S. Qadri

NAYS (3): Councillors P. Feltmate, D. Holmes, G. Hunter