4. ZONING - 3775 CARP ROAD, 458 DONALD B. MUNRO DRIVE AND 107 FALLDOWN LANE

ZONAGE - 3775, CHEMIN CARP, 458, PROMENADE DONALD B. MUNRO ET 107, RUELLE FALLDOWN

Committee Recommendations

(This application is subject to Bill 51)

That Council:

1. Approve an amendment to the City of Ottawa Zoning By-law No. 2008-250 to change the zoning of 3775 Carp Road, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive and 107 Falldown Lane shown in Document 1 from VM (Village Mixed Use Zone) to VM SXX (Village Mixed Use Zone with a Schedule) to permit an increase in building height and allow for a reduction in the rear yard setback as detailed in Documents 4 and 5.

2. Approve a site-specific amendment to the Village of Carp Community Design Plan as detailed in Document 6 for lands located at 3775 Carp Road, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive and 107 Falldown Lane to permit an increase in height for a senior residential care facility/retirement home only.

RecommandationS du Comité

(Cette demande est assujettie au Règlement 51)

Que le Conseil :

1. approuve une modification au Règlement de zonage n^o 2008-250 de la Ville d’Ottawa visant à faire passer la désignation de zonage des propriétés situées au 3775, chemin Carp, au 458, promenade Donald-B.-Munro et au 107, ruelle Falldown, et illustrées au document 1, de VM (zone d’utilisations polyvalentes de village) à VM SXX (zone d’utilisations polyvalentes de village avec annexe), de façon à permettre une augmentation de la hauteur autorisée des immeubles et une diminution du retrait de cour arrière, comme le précisent les documents 4 et 5.

2. approuve la modification particulière au Plan de conception communautaire du Village de Carp décrite au document 6 relativement aux terrains situés au 3775, chemin Carp, au 458, promenade Donald-B.-Munro et au 107, ruelle Falldown, de façon à permettre une augmentation de la hauteur autorisée pour un foyer d’accueil spécialisé ou une maisons de retraite pour aînés seulement.

Documentation

1. Deputy City Manager's report Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability dated 12 May 2009 (ACS2009-ICS-PLA-0033).

2. Extract of Draft Minutes, 26 March 2009.

Report to/Rapport au :

Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee

Comité d'agriculture et des questions rurales

and Council / et au Conseil

12 May 2009 / le 12 mai 2009

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

Directrice municipale adjointe,

Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability/

Services d’infrastructure et Viabilité des collectivités

Contact Person/Personne-ressource : Derrick Moodie, Manager/Gestionnaire, Development Review-Rural services/Examen des projets d'aménagement-Services ruraux,

Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance

(613) 580-2424, 15134 Derrick.Moodie@ottawa.ca

West Carleton-March (5)

Ref N°: ACS2009-ICS-PLA-0033

SUBJECT:	ZONING - 3775 Carp Road, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive and 107 Falldown Lane (FILE NO. D02-02-08-0084)

OBJET :	ZONAGE - 3775, chemin carp, 458, promenade donald b. munro et 107, ruelle falldown

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

That the recommend Council:

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité de recommande au Conseil

1. D’approuver une modification au Règlement de zonage n^o 2008-250 de la Ville d’Ottawa visant à faire passer la désignation de zonage des propriétés situées au 3775, chemin Carp, au 458, promenade Donald-B.-Munro et au 107, ruelle Falldown, et illustrées au document 1, de VM (zone d’utilisations polyvalentes de village) à VM SXX (zone d’utilisations polyvalentes de village avec annexe), de façon à permettre une augmentation de la hauteur autorisée des immeubles et une diminution du retrait de cour arrière, comme le précisent les documents 4 et 5.

2. D’approuver la modification particulière au Plan de conception communautaire du Village de Carp décrite au document 6 relativement aux terrains situés au 3775, chemin Carp, au 458, promenade Donald-B.-Munro et au 107, ruelle Falldown, de façon à permettre une augmentation de la hauteur autorisée pour un foyer d’accueil spécialisé ou une maisons de retraite pour aînés seulement.

BACKGROUND

The site is comprised of three individual properties known as 458 Donald B. Munro Drive, 3775 Carp Road and 107 Falldown Lane, all of which are located within the Village of Carp (see Document 1). All three properties will be merged into one parcel of land for the purpose of the proposed development. The total site area is 0.72 hectares in size. A Zoning By-law amendment has been submitted to permit the building of a Senior Residential Care Facility/Retirement Home and two other mixed-use buildings. The proposed development requires an amendment to the Zoning By-law to address the proposed height of the central structure.

The property at 3775 Carp Road is occupied by two buildings; a single detached dwelling commonly referred to as the Rectory and an accessory garage. The property at 107 Falldown Lane is occupied by one single detached dwelling (White House) and an adjoining underground garage. The property at 458 Donald B. Munro is vacant.

The proposal will provide for an eight storey (25 meters) 100-unit Senior Residential Care Facility/Retirement Home and Hair Salon/Spa. The existing buildings on site will be converted to three residential units and an office. A new building fronting on Carp Road will contain a commercial (possible restaurant) mix with residential above the ground floor (see Document 2).

On May 22, 2008 City staff met with the owner and his consultants to discuss the proposed retirement residence. At this meeting, a draft site plan was presented and reviewed in terms of the goals of the approved Village of Carp Community Design Plan (CDP) and the current Zoning By-law. While detailed plans for the building would have to be developed and approved through the Site Plan Control process, the proponent did outline the necessary resident accommodation and building height required in order that the venture be economically viable.

There was concurrence that such a use would be a valuable asset to the Village and the community at large, however the proposed height of the building was an issue. It was noted to the developer that the CDP established the allowable maximum height in the Village.

A revision to the CDP in conjunction with a Zoning By-law amendment would be required. It was suggested that the owner meet with the Ward Councillor and discuss the possibility of a community information session to present his proposal. Aside from any concerns City staff would have with design and height the Community would have to embrace not only the use but, the height and density proposed.

An information meeting was held by the Ward Councillor on June 18, 2008. As a result of the Community meeting, the owner filed a Zoning By-law amendment on July 15, 2008.

Purpose of Zoning Amendment

At the time that this application was submitted the proposal affected both the former Township of West Carleton and the draft City of Ottawa Zoning By-law. On October 23, 2008 the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) issued a decision permitting the unchallenged provisions of the City of Ottawa Comprehensive Zoning By-law to come into force. Effective immediately, those provisions not subject to appeal are in force retroactive to the date of enactment, being June 25, 2008. The new Zoning By-law provisions applied to 377 Carp Road, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive and 107 Falldown Lane are in affect.

This is an application to make an amendment to the zone provisions of the VM-Village Mixed-Use Zone to permit an increase of height and a reduction in the rear yard setback in order to facilitate the development of the proposed Senior Residential Care Facility/Retirement Home. An amendment to the Village of Carp CDP is also required.

Existing Zoning

The property is zoned VM-Village Mixed-Use Zone pursuant to the City of Ottawa Zoning By‑law. A wide variety of commercial, leisure, institutional and residential uses are permitted.

Proposed Zoning

The application proposes to amend the zone provisions of the VM-Village Mixed-Use Zone to permit and increase in the building height from the 11 metres to 25 metres and to reduce the rear yard setback to 0.0 metres (along Donald B. Munro Drive).

Amendment to the Village Community Design Plan

The CDP for the Village of Carp was approved by City Council on July 14, 2004 as a policy document, to guide the long-term growth and development of Carp. It provides guidelines for the day-to-day decision-making on land use planning, such as subdivision, zoning and site plan applications, and it sets the community’s priorities for the future. Where a significant change to the land use policies set out in Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Community Design Plan is requested an amendment to the Community Design Plan, must be approved by Council.

Unlike an amendment to the Official Plan, amending the CDP can be undertaken through the Zoning By‑law amendment process.

Currently Section 4.4.5. Protecting and Enhancing the Village Core-Compact Building Form states:

5. Maintain the low profile of buildings in the Village Core by setting a maximum building height of 3 storeys;

An amendment to this Section is required to bring into conformity with the proposed increase in height (see Document 6).

DISCUSSION

Official Plan

The subject site is designated as Village in the Official Plan (OP). The Official Plan states, growth within the rural area, which historically has accommodated about 10 per cent of the City’s population, will be focused on Villages, as designated on Schedule A. Focusing growth in Villages provides residents with better access to community facilities and services, particularly for seniors and youth. While homes will continue to be built in the rural area on new lots created by severance or plan of subdivision in accordance with the policies of this plan, and on existing lots of record, the shift towards Village development means that the open space character of the rural area will be maintained. At the same time, fewer conflicts will arise between residential uses and rural businesses such as farms, mineral extraction and industrial processing. Rural communities will continue to grow, to house and employ their young people within a strong rural economy, and to support a widening range of community services, churches, schools and businesses.

Village of Carp Community Design Plan

In July 2004 City Council approved a Community Design Plan (CDP) for the Village of Carp. This policy document guides the long-term growth and development of Carp. It provides guidelines for the day-to-day decision–making on land use planning and sets the community’s priorities for the future. One of the challenges identified during the CDP process was the lack of affordable housing in the Village, particularly for seniors and young people. Providing opportunities for senior’s accommodation to meet the needs of the aging population was identified as a priority during the CDP consultation process. Policies contained in the CDP promote such accommodations on sites near supporting facilities, for example the medical centre, and close to services and activities in the Village. More specifically as detailed in Section 3.3.2 (Residential – Multi –Unit) of the Carp CDP and as shown on Schedule A the area reserved for multi-unit residential provides areas for low-rise apartment buildings and ground-oriented multi-unit dwellings. These areas are located close to the Village Core, the medical centre or the seniors’ residence, and close to services and activities in the Village.

There are sites within the Village that would be attractive locations for seniors’ accommodation, particularly the ones near the medical centre. Section 3.3.2 further states that in Multi–Unit areas as identified on Schedule A of the Carp CDP, the height of the low-rise apartment buildings shall not exceed three storeys.

In addition to the residential multi-unit area possibilities, there is also opportunity to locate residential accommodations in the Village Core, provided the residential use is combined with a commercial component (Carp CDP Section 3.2. 3. and .4). The height provisions for the Village Core are detailed in Section 4.4 of the Carp CDP and state:

Maintain the low profile of buildings in the Village Core by setting a maximum building height of 3 storeys. The height provisions in the City’s Zoning By-law VM-Village Mixed-Use Zone provides for a maximum of 11 metres.

City of Ottawa Village Design Guidelines (Draft)

Aside from the policies of the OP and CDP, draft Design Guidelines for the Development of Villages was prepared by the City and circulated to the Community stakeholders for comment. Objectives have been drafted to give direction to growth and preserve Villages and their traditional functions. These objectives are:

· To promote development that acknowledges the unique traditions, culture, history and familiar character that defines Villages.

· To promote development that reinforces the quality and diversity of heritage buildings.

· Guidelines for Villages

· To promote development that strengthens Village cores as the focus of where people live, work, play and gather.

· To maintain and promote relatively low-density and small-scale development.

· To promote development that enhances the existing links between villages and nature, water, clean air and the countryside.

The document also recognizes that Villages have their own planning and development issues, specific to their community pressures, needs and values. These guidelines, although general, provide direction in addressing common design challenges faced by rural communities.

Rural villages have varying infrastructure capabilities and networks. The variation between villages makes them unique, but may also pose a challenge when applying these guidelines. The extent of infrastructure networks, quality of natural resources and pace of development will direct how, when and where growth occurs in villages. The application of these guidelines may have different practical results for each community; however, the guidelines represent sound

planning principles and should be used to achieve best practices in design.

With the fifth anniversary of the Carp CDP approaching, it is clear that the community remains behind the vision and goals that were identified when the objectives for this community were being developed. The Village Core was identified as a place where people could live, work and play. The Core will be the primary focus of Carp’s economic activity, and the foundation of its local economy. The Village’s retail uses are to be concentrated in the Village Core to aid in ensuring this area continues to function as the community’s meeting place.

Commercial, recreational, and institutional uses will be the predominant uses with residential uses being encouraged as part of a mixed-use development. The concept is to permit a compatible mix of uses, including a wide range of community-serving commercial uses as well as residential and public uses on properties within the Village Core. The proposal, as detailed in the Background section of this report address the mix of uses envisioned and provides for unique opportunity to ensure that the village core not only continues, but expands its influence as the foundation of the local economy and community meeting place.

During the consultation process to development the Village of Carp CDP the community expressed a strong desire for a seniors facility inside the Village boundary. Aside from identifying possible locations within the Village for a seniors’ facility, the CDP did not specify on what terms such a facility would be acceptable. For example, the level of care provided or the critical mass required to operate a care facility were not examined as part of the CDP process.

There are currently 15 seniors care facilities in the City’s rural area. According to City records these facilities appear to be single care providers and do not offer a full range from independent living to long term care under one roof. The facilities range in size from eight units to 118 and can be found in Villages and the General Rural Areas.

What is being proposed is somewhat unique for a rural village in terms of levels of care offered. This, coupled with site constraints, has had impact on the size and configuration of the structure proposed.

Staff understand that the number of units proposed is critical to the financial viability of this project. The result in trying to balance the preservation of the existing buildings (Rectory and White House) on site and to provide sufficient units to ensure its financial viability has triggered a smaller building footprint and a much higher building than anticipated by the CDP. The retirement residence will be built into the natural slope of the property. With the use of the natural vegetation and architectural treatment the impact will be considerably lessened from the Carp Road elevation. That said, there will be an impact on the Donald B. Munro side of this development. There is a 8.8 metre difference between the existing grade of Carp Road and Donald B. Munro Drive. The proposed building height as it relates to the Carp Road and Donald B. Munro Drive elevations can be seen in Document 3.

Careful consideration has been given to all aspects of this development in terms of the existing and draft policies for Villages in Ottawa. The community has expressed their wishes through an information meeting, many telephone calls and petitions. There is no doubt that such a proposal will have an impact on the Community and the character of the Village. Few villages enjoy the municipal servicing capabilities of the Village of Carp.

In simple terms, a balance must be sought between maintaining a village character and allowing for opportunities to develop in community. The provision of accommodation for an underserved senior population in a manner that is economically viable for the proponent is difficult to achieve in a traditional village.

The positive impacts that come with increased residential development in the village should additionally be taken into account. Not only will the residents support and contribute to village life, but the development provides long-term employment opportunities in the community.

The intent of the CDP was to ensure that new development was compatible with rest of the village core. The proposed height of the main structure does conflict with the CDP policy reference for a maximum of three storeys. The intent of the three-storey height limit was to ensure that new development would not overpower the existing buildings in the village core.

In summary, this is unique site in the village core and is considered as an exception to the three-storey maximum. The topography as well as the vegetation allow for the building to blend into the surroundings and not dominate, which is the objective of the CDP and what the three-storey limit was meant to achieve. As shown in Document 3 site elevations as provided by the applicant show a cross section across Carp Road identifying the relation to the barn at the Carp Fairgrounds, the dominant feature in the community.

In weighing all of the noted considerations, it has been determined that, on balance, the increase in the permitted height is acceptable. Staff recommend approval of the Zoning By‑law amendment and a site-specific amendment to the CDP.

Heritage Considerations:

The building located at 3775 Carp Road, commonly referred to as the Rectory is listed as a building with heritage interest in the City of Ottawa Reference List of Heritage Buildings catalogue. It is the intent of the owner to restore and convert the existing structure into two residential units.

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

The proposal is consistent with the documents which guide the development of the Village of Carp albeit the height of the central structure is greater than anticipated. The height will have an impact at one elevation but site slope and building design will minimize the impact from other aspects. The proposed mixed-use development will not only support and contribute to village life but the development should provide long-term employment opportunities in the community.

CONSULTATION

Notice of this application was carried out in accordance with the City's Public Notification and Consultation Policy. The Ward Councillor is aware of this application and the staff recommendation.

As noted previously in this report, at the request of the applicant, the Councillor’s office held a public information meeting on June 18, 2008. Attendance at this meeting was estimated at 100 plus and from all accounts the general reaction was very positive for the proposed use, however some questions were raised as to the height of the central structure.

Further to the information meeting and circulation the City also received petitions in support and against in addition to numerous written comments that are summarized in Document 7. It is clear by the comments received that a large percentage of the community and it’s surrounds support the proposal as currently designed, for Seniors Residential Care Facility/Retirement Home and accompanying uses.

LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS:

Were Council to adopt the recommendation and the matter appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board, it is estimated that the hearing would be three days in duration and could be conducted using staff resources. Should Council refuse the application and the matter is appealed to the Board, the hearing would likely last five days. An outside planner would need to be retained with the estimated cost being $25,000 to $40,000.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

N/A

APPLICATION PROCESS TIMELINE STATUS

The application was not processed by the "On Time Decision Date" established for the processing of Zoning By-law amendments due to a request for additional time by the proponent.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 Location Map

Document 2 Site Plan

Document 3 Building Elevations

Document 4 Details of Recommended Zoning

Document 5 Zoning By-law Schedule

Document 6 Details of the Amendment

Document 7 Consultation Details

DISPOSITION

City Clerk and Legal Services Branch, Legislative Services to notify the owner, Gregory Leblanc and Sally L. Storey, 1963 Old Carp Road Carp, Ontario, K0A 1L0, applicant, Novatech Engineering Consultants 200-240 Michael Cowpland Drive Ottawa, Ontario, K2M 1P6, 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.

Planning and Growth Management Department to prepare the implementing by-law, forward to Legal Services and undertake the statutory notification.

Legal Services to forward the implementing by-law to City Council.

LOCATION MAP DOCUMENT 1

SITE PLAN DOCUMENT 2

HEIGHT ELEVATIONS DOCUMENT 3

DETAILS OF RECOMMENDED ZONING DOCUMENT 4

Proposed Changes to the Comprehensive Zoning By-law No.2008-250

The properties known as 3775 Carp Road, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive and 107 Falldown Lane, shown on Document 1, will be rezoned from VM to VM SXX.

Document 5 will be added to Part 17 as Schedule XX and will set out the maximum permitted building heights for 3775 Carp Road, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive and 107 Falldown Lane, and reduce the minimum rear yard setback to 0.0 metres.

ZONING BY-LAW SCHEDULE DOCUMENT 5

DETAILS OF AMENDMENT DOCUMENT 6

The following changes are hereby made to the Village of Carp Community Design Plan:

Section 4.4.5. The Village Core, Compact Building Form is amended to add the following new subsection:

5.i. For lands located at 3775 Carp Road, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive and 107 Falldown Lane, as per the Zoning By-law, permit an increase in building height to a maximum of 25 metres for a Seniors Care Facility only.

CONSULTATION DETAILS DOCUMENT 7

NOTIFICATION AND CONSULTATION PROCESS

Notification and public consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Public Notification and Public Consultation Policy approved by City Council for Zoning By-law amendments. In addition, prior to the submission of the Zoning By-law Amendment a Community Information Meeting was held on June 18, 2008 at the Dining Hall, Carp Agricultural Fairgrounds, 3790 Carp Road.

PUBLIC COMMENTS

Petitions

A petition submitted by the owner with 574 names in support was received November 7, 2008

We, the undersigned, would like to register our support for the proposed Retirement Residence to be built at the Carp Road/Falldown Lane/Donald B. Munro, Carp, Ontario. We have seen the architectural renderings and believe the scale and height of the proposed building is suitable for the location and in keeping with the character of its surroundings. Furthermore, we look forward to the presence of elderly residents in the core of the village and to new street-side shops. We ask, without reservation, that the City of Ottawa support the zoning by-law amendment necessary for this building project.

A petition submitted by the Carp Residents’ Association with 92 against received August 28, 2008.

We the undersigned would like to acknowledge the proposal made by Greg Leblanc for an assisted-living residence on Donald B. Munro in Carp. While we applaud the idea of an assisted-living facility in the village, we think the proposed design featuring an 8-storey building is inappropriate for a rural village. We respectfully ask Mr. Leblanc to come forward with a design that meets the village height restriction of 3-storeys. We also ask that the City of Ottawa support our wishes by adhering to the Village of Carp Community Design Plan.

Letters and emails received in support

Comment:

We flat out are desperate for a Seniors Centre in Carp, in West Carleton. Our Seniors have to go to Kanata, or Arnprior, or Stittsville for housing, for services. A centre in Carp would mean a unique set of services in a central area for West Carleton. As a volunteer and the upcoming Vice Chair for the City of Ottawa Seniors Advisory Committee, I see what is offered in other areas of the City and what is not presently offered anywhere in West Carleton. As a resident of rural West Carleton, RR#3 Carp, with a 90 year old mother-in-law, I see first-hand the needs of Seniors.

As a retiree, I see what I shall all too soon need. To allow someone to hold up this project, because of the height of the facility, because of some aesthetic dissatisfaction with the facade of the facility, is just not to be tolerated.

Please help us to make sure that the plans for the Carp Seniors facility go ahead, for our Seniors. Seniors of West Carleton should be second class to others in City of Ottawa no more.

Comment:

I have lived in Carp my entire life. I have operated by business for the last 30 years in and around the Carp area. My daughter is about to take over this business and continue working in and around the area. My granddaughter is about to finish college and I hope that she too will work in and around the Carp area. In order for my family to prosper in the Carp area we need to grow the opportunities within the village. Several comments have been made that there is too much focus being put on the outskirts and that all the old town core is being abandoned. This project is promoting use of the downtown core of our village, where in other towns their core has been left abandoned. I attended the public information meeting in June and strongly feel as though the proposed retirement residence and additional shops would be ideal for my family as well as the entire community. With regards to the minor zoning amendment that is necessary to accommodate for the height of the proposed residence building, I feel as though this should be approved and perhaps reviewed for further development as well. Years ago there were several buildings that were taller than the current zoning requirements. I think that the proposed building suits the site exceptionally well and will blend into the landscape beautifully. In closing, I would like to say that I feel as though the village of Carp and surrounding community are extremely fortunate that Greg Leblanc and Sallie Storey are living here. They have already considerably

improved one entrance into the village with Huntley Station. They have demonstrated that they are happy being a part of this community and have the much needed vision and drive to improve it for all of us. For that I am grateful and strongly support this project as it was presented in June.

Comment:

I have been made aware of the fact that a petition has been sent to you indicating a group opposed to the proposed plan to construct a Senior's residence in Carp. The petition seems to be from a group called the Carp Residents. I do not believe this group represents the Carp residents however I am in the process of obtaining signatures of Carp residents who are in support of the plan.

Comment:

As a long time businessman and resident in the Carp area, I would like to express my support the above-referenced zoning application. I speak for the Carson Group, Carp’s largest employer (250 people) and represent a corporation owning a half dozen properties on the Carp Rd in the Village of Carp. These businesses and properties are within a block of the proposed development.

I have been concerned about the deteriorating state of the core of the village for some time. We have more and more families living here, but fewer shops and services in the heart of the village. I am so pleased to support this project and hope that other shops and services will follow. Furthermore, we have an aging population. I think that village life should support the full spectrum of life, from beginning to end. I’m thrilled that we will soon have a retirement residence right in the centre of town.

I support the proposed design. It’s a wonderful use of the escarpment and will provide a lovely view for the residents. The steep slope lends itself beautifully to the proposed building. Carp is ready for some change, particularly in the core. It seems enlightened to me to want to put a building of substance, that sits on a steep hill, on a smallish footprint and to preserve trees. Shielding the parking from street view by having it underground and tucked between buildings is so much nicer than many facilities where the approach is often dominated by parking. I truly believe that a low profile building, that covers the whole width of the property, would be visually disagreeable and disrespectful to the terrain. My compliments to the architect.

I’ve heard that a few people consider the design unsuitable because the main building is taller than 3-storeys. I might have felt the same way had I not seen the proposed design. It really suits the location. I think that Carp is really at a crossroads. One of the reasons that I love this project is that it is bold while being completely compatible with village life. It speaks to so much that makes sense. It invites the elderly into the core. It brings a mixed use to the centre of town and some intensification to our village. This is a boost that the village needs. I hope this is the start of some real investment in the core.

In closing, I would like to say that I, unequivocally, support the application submitted to the City of Ottawa for a minor zoning amendment at 107 Fall down Lane, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive, 3775 Carp Road. This project will be a very welcome addition to the Village of Carp. This project (including the height of the buildings) is, in my opinion, entirely well suited to the site and poses no threat to the village character or heritage.

Comment:

Upon my retirement in 1991 in Vancouver after a career in banking, my wife who is a Registered Nurse, and I returned to my roots in Carp, to enjoy our retirement. Recently, we were pleased to join with over 500 other Carp residents, to enthusiastically sign the counter-petition in support of the Retirement Residence and Shops proposed by Sallie Storey and Greg LeBlanc. Both Sallie and Greg are well respected members of this community and their passion to improve the Village and its welfare, is well known. More than 50 years ago, Carp was a vibrant Village but since then the downtown core has been on a gradual decline. In supporting this local initiative, we are well aware the proponents have already dedicated many hours to its planning and design, meetings with the community and in making presentations to the City of Ottawa Planning Department.

While growing up in a large family on a farm in the Carp area during the 1940's, I can recall very vividly looking forward to our parents taking us to the Village on a Saturday evening when most farmers and their families, came to town to do their weekly grocery shopping and to visit with each other.

How times have changed - downtown Carp at that time was a bustling community consisting of 3 Grocery Stores, 3 restaurants, a General Motors and a Chrysler Dealership, a blacksmith shop, a shoe repair business, a Bank, a dentist, 2 medical doctors, a farm co-op and a flour mill.

Since the installation of water and sewers about 10 years ago, the Village has grown significantly as many new residential properties have been built, mostly on the periphery. Simultaneously, its downtown core has continued to deteriorate. We have more and more families living here but fewer shops and services now in the heart of the Village. We need more activity in the downtown core to serve an aging population and this proposed Retirement Residence with all its amenities, especially the specialty shops, etc., appears to be the answer.

Downtown Carp must be revived. The proposed location and design of this Retirement Residence is ideal, with a nice view of the escarpment. It is apparent too the architect has put a considerable amount of thought into the project's design. It makes sense on so many levels; it is nestled against the hill and is framed by trees. Shielding the parking from street view by having it underground and tucked between buildings is so much nicer than many facilities where the approach is often dominated by parking. Stepping back from the main building from Carp Road and having shops in front of it, is inviting.

It is our understanding a minor zoning amendment is required to accommodate the height of the building. Because of its location on the side of a hill, the height fits in well on both the upper and lower level, with the surroundings. I'm delighted to see that the proposed design calls for height over width, for the preservation of trees and for the little white house on the hill to remain. Over time Villages change, and for this reason I feel the requested amendment is justified. Then too, it is understandable the project must also be financially viable. This will be accomplished by having a higher building than current zoning laws permit, thus accommodating more tenants.

Carp is not immune to the effects of sprawl nor has the Village had any major development in its core in a very long time. Greg is a respected Vice-President with one of Canada's premier financial institutions and has the capabilities, assisted by Sallie, to conclude a project of this magnitude. We are pleased to unequivocally support the application submitted to the City of Ottawa for a minor zoning amendment at 107 Fall down Lane, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive, 3775 Carp Road. This project (including the height of the buildings) is, in our opinion, entirely well suited to the site and poses no threat to the Village character or heritage Thanks so much for your consideration.

Comment:

I have lived in the village of Carp since 1960 and prior to that grew up on a farm on Old Coach Road. My husband And I have lived in the village since 1964. We are excited about the proposed Retirement Complex and support it 100%. It would mean a lot to us, if in the future, we could remain in our own community. We belong to St. Paul’s United Church, Carp, and I take an active role in groups within the church and the community. Both my husband and I began our teaching careers in Carp and now hope to spend our retirement years, at home, in the village. . Hopefully, in the new retirement complex. The proposed design, making use of the escarpment and its height, will provide a lovely view for residents and the additional shops will add a new dimension to the core of the village.

There will be easy access to churches, the best Farmer’s Market anywhere, best county fair in the Valley and the opportunity to participate in the many other activities that take place in the Fair Grounds. The proposed design shows vision by having the parking shielded from street view, some underground and some tucked between buildings. Fantastic!

Carp is not the same as it was when I was a child. It was a vibrant and active place with two grocery stores, two car dealerships and three gas stations. It is our opinion that the proposed new complex will bring back some of the vibrancy that was here those many years ago and will provide those who wish to remain in the village, the opportunity to do so.

Comment:

This letter is written with regard to the Village of Carp - Proposed Retirement Residence Complex Zoning Amendment Application # D02-02-08-0084 being proposed by Mr. Greg LeBlanc for Carp. I have seen the concept drawings and am familiar with the site, and to my eyes, the complex appears to be very attractive in this location. I understand that the height exceeds certain guidelines, but it would appear that every effort has been made to design the structures so that architectural harmony with the surrounding village would be achieved.

Having lived and worked in Carp for 35 years, I am familiar with the village and many of its’ values. In too many instances, residents of Carp and its’ surrounding rural population have had to move into Kanaka or Ottawa because of a lack of a local retirement facility. These people leave behind friends, family and a unique physical and social environment that they have known most or all of their lives. A local retirement home would be a very welcome addition, and would go a long way in preventing the loss of aging or disabled citizens from our midst.

I also believe that the proper construction for a retirement home would be multi-storied. I have looked after many residents in River-park Place, a retirement home in Nepean. The multi-storied nature not only allows efficient land use, but also some stratification of care within the building, for example, with the more disabled residents being closer the elevator, convalescing patients nearer to the nursing area, and a secure floor reserved for patients with dementia. Often, patients with an advanced illness can live in the same space or at least, the same building, as their less disabled spouse.

For the above reasons, I would very much support an exception being made to the height guidelines in this case. The architecture fits well, and the service is a very necessary one.

Comment:

I would like to convey to you that the majority of permanent residents in the Carp area fully support, the proposed project as described above. This view is particularly strong amongst those like myself who have lived in the Carp area for over 50 years. We have seen a sleepy rural village evolve into a bedroom community at the doorstep of Kanaka. The demographics in this area have changed dramatically from a small and older population primarily occupied in agriculture to one which is rapidly growing including a commensurate growth in retirees. Fortunately for us, the City of Ottawa has looked ahead as it were and brought in seriously needed infrastructure to Carp.

A group of skilled medical professionals created a village clinic of the highest standards. Several years ago Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, of which I was the Senior Vice President, enabled the small retirement home to be built in the village. We had no idea at the time of the rapid growth, demographic mix or social demands that the area would face in a relatively short time.

The numbers of elderly citizens as well as the "about to be senior citizens" in the area has risen sharply in proportion to our population. The proposed Residence Retirement Residence Complex is not only an excellent addition to the village but essential for an expanding community of elders. From a design perspective it is well suited to the community, which does not yet have a physical focal point other than the outbuildings at our fair grounds.

The eight-story height of the complex is ideal as it lends itself to a more consolidated use of space in the core of the village. As a planner, industrial designer and one who was very much involved in enabling retirement residences to be built across Canada, I’m delighted to see such a well- planned facility proposed for the village of Carp. I hope that you will share this enthusiasm and support our initiative.

Comment:

I am a long time resident of the Village of Carp and am thrilled to express my support for this project. In 1999, 1 moved back into the area after living in the Brantford area for 15 years and was sad to see the village core so diminished, while seeing such a huge expansion of development of single-family homes. After watching Brantford's downtown core become a ghost town with the majority of the storefronts on the main street boarded up, I can see that without an injection of well-thought-out investment that the same thing is already happening here.

I am very encouraged that a local resident is spearheading this initiative. Over the years, Greg LeBlanc has emerged as a dedicated ambassador for improvement in our community and has enhanced the village with many of his privately funded projects. After listening to the needs of the community, he has come up with an outstanding project that supports a vision of Carp as a vibrant community with an attractive and active downtown core. The hillside location is calling out for a landmark and, since there is such a growing need for accommodations for seniors, what could be more perfect!

I find that the design of the main building is brilliant in its' use of the hillside for underground, as well as out-of-view, parking and its overall plan to keep the integrity of the surrounding buildings and trees, I do not have an issue with the height of the retirement residence and think it will be a welcome focal point in the village. In fact, I like that the building "stands tall' and evokes a sense of pride. The small storefronts that are planned on Carp Road will enhance the small town feeling and also soften the front facade. Its' location will be perfect for the residents with churches and the Farmers Market on one side and all other practical amenities of the other side. I believe that Carp could actually become a 'model" community for a sustainable and locally driven economy. The fact that its design is using a small footprint shows progressive insight by the architect.

Quite unlike other proposed village developments in the Ottawa area, I know that this plan is overwhelmingly supported by the village community, as well as by residents in the surrounding rural areas. I strongly support the above-referenced zoning application. This project needs to happen!

Comment:

I am a resident and business owner of West Carleton Physiotherapy, located in the West Carleton Medical/ Dental office in the Village of Carp. I am in full support of the application submitted to the City of Ottawa for a minor zoning amendment at 107 Fall down Lane, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive, 3775 Carp Road.

I have been a physiotherapist here for 18 years and am pleased to support a project, which brings the elderly into the centre of the village as well as more business into the village of Carp. I truly hope that other shops and services will follow and that there is continued investment in the downtown core.

I commend the decision to provide for parking underground (which, I know, is very expensive) as well as having spaces between the shops and the retirement residence. I would like to mention that I am delighted that this project is being driven locally. This is a boost that the village needs and I look forward to more bustle in the centre of town.

In closing, I would like to say that I, unequivocally, support the application submitted to the City of Ottawa for a minor zoning amendment at 107 Fall down Lane, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive, 3775 Carp Road. This project will be a very welcome addition to the Village of Corp. This project (including the height of the buildings) is, in my opinion, entirely well suited to the site and poses no threat to the village character or heritage. Please call if you hove any questions or I can help in any way.

Comment:

I am writing to support the request for the above-noted zoning amendment. My wife Louise, and our four grown children who have lived in Carp all their lives, also support this proposal. We moved to Carp twenty-five years ago. For several years I was a member of the Board of Directors of the Huntley Community Association, and Louise and I were among the founding members of the Carp Farmer's Market, We intend to remain here, but have often remarked on the shortage of appropriate housing for both young and retired people. Most new houses are large single-family homes.

I was out of town when the public meeting was held earlier this year, but Louise attended and came away very enthusiastic, as did, apparently, most of those in the audience. In discussions with our neighbours, the vast majority of who have been supportive of the project as currently planned, the main concern was the "thin edge of the wedge" argument. I expect that the limitations of our water and sewer services alone would prevent the wholesale development of high-rise towers, Regardless, those of us who chose to live in this village and cherish our quality of life here would not stand by if attempts were made to turn Carp into another high density suburb.

We have studied the architectural drawings of the proposed retirement home and, frankly, usually describe it as beautiful. It would add some class to what can only be described, no matter how much one may love Carp, as a pretty uninspiring "downtown" core area.

I look forward to new small scale retail shopping, a river front park, artists studios and, yes, rail travel to Ottawa in the not too distant future. The retirement residence would provide a major stimulus while at the same time establishing a high standard for new development. We strongly support the request for a zoning amendment.

Comment:

I am a Carp resident and the caretaker of an elderly parent whom is presently living with us. It's my impression that, too often, the elderly are compelled to move away from the communities in which they live because of a lack of seniors' housing. It's wonderful that this retirement residence is being built in the centre of Carp across from churches, the fairgrounds, the bakery, the pharmacy, and ambulance. I'm thrilled that these residents are being invited to stay in the community and can be active participants in village life.

I believe that the design of the building is absolutely stunning and will add a lot character to our center core. It's a wonderful use of the escarpment and will provide a lovely view for the residents. I think that an exception to the rule on the height restrictions should be made because It would-be a shame to sacrifice trees, the white house or any other part of the property for a lower profile. The whole complex is really well thought out and I commend the architect.

This project will be a very welcome addition to the Village of Carp. I am thrilled to support this application submitted to the City of Ottawa for a minor zoning amendment at 107 Falldown Lane, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive, 3775 Carp Road.

Comment:

I am writing this letter to express my overwhelming support for this exciting project. Our family has long time roots in rural Carp and like many people in West Carleton, we have always considered the village to be a central point for social and practical needs. Our three children have all attended the school in Carp and all of our medical needs have been supported by the local clinic. However, despite the fact that the residential areas have expanded, the core has noticeably declined and is crying out for a facelift. This venture is exactly what the village needs!

Another exciting spin-off is that this project will create many new jobs for our younger generation. The new shops, the maintenance requirements, the kitchen staff needed to run the complex will provide many part- time jobs for our youth. Carp is a wonderful place to live with a really good community spirit. We love the idea that all generations are going to benefit by this landmark.

As for the design, there is no denying, it is a tall building, but It's location and use of the hillside seem to be perfect for the site. The height allows for the maximum use of space with the smallest footprint. The amenities are all a stone's throw away from the main building. It could not be more perfect. We have to learn to embrace change and this beautiful building will be a welcome addition to the core.

I can picture it in my mind's eye already it is disappointing that the small handful of people that are opposed to this development may jeopardize the most positive thing to happen In Carp in a very long time. We strongly support the minor zoning amendment at 107 Falldown Lane, 458 Donald S. Munro Drive, 3775 Carp Read needed for this development to proceed. With the addition of this Seniors Residence, the village core will be completely revitalized and many new opportunities for investment in our community will become a reality.

Comment:

I am a long-time resident and business owner of McNeely's Outdoor Power Equipment in Carp. We are a family owned and operated business started by my parents in the early 1980's. Our property is located at 469 Donald B, Munro Drive which directly across from the proposed site for the new Retirement Residence and new shops. We are writing you to express our support for the above referenced zoning application. Being raised in Carp and being a business owner I can appreciate the new development that the downtown core needs. I feel that the design of the building is suitable to the terrain it is to be put on.

The height of the building will only lend its self to the view of the Carp River and the surrounding area. Carp is a beautiful village and this building will only add to it. I can picture many senior citizens looking out their windows and remembering times of their youth in Carp. The parking was thought out in great detail. Having parking above and below ground will only enhance the overall look to the building. Kudos to the architect!

Having Greg Leblanc involved in this project is a win -win situation for all involved. He is driven enough to want to keep the downtown core of Carp alive. His passion for the village is among the most elite. He continues to act in the best interest of the village and the community surrounding it.

Having the designed change 4ue to the fact of height requirement would be a shame in my eyes. Why sacrifice tree and the white house on the property if it is not necessary? The way the design is what suits the land profile. Life in Carp has changed drastically since I was a child growing up here. There are many more houses and more land development than ever. I have two small children of my own and I feel that the future of them having a full life here in Carp is dependent on the steady growth of the village. Someday I hope that I will be senior citizen in Carp and will be able to look out my window and think of days gone past. I think that the new Retirement Residence is just the place to do it. I have seen so many senior's ripped from their homes and taking to other towns to live out their last days, where they may not know a sole. I personally wouldn't like that to happen to me, so I can only imagine that some of the senior population would like to stay in Carp if the opportunity was to exist.

In closing I would like to express again my, support for the application submitted to the City of Ottawa for minor zoning amendment at 107 Falldown Lane, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive, and 3775 Carp Road. This project will be a very welcome addition to the Village of Carp. This project (including the height of the buildings) is, in my opinion, entirely well suited to the site and poses no threat to the village character or heritage.

Comment:

We are business operators, as well residents along with our two children, at 108 Falldown Lane in the Village of Carp.

We are writing to you today to let you know that we support the above-referenced application for a retirement residence, as well as some shops with overhead apartments. It's just what the village needs.

We have lived in Carp since 2004. We're told that Donald B Munro was once the Trans-Canada highway and that the village was a bustling place with lots of amenities, Today, however, there is a real need for some investment in the core.

While Carp is a wonderful place to live with a good community spirit, village life is increasingly defined by new., large, single family- dwellings on the fringe of the village without any growth in commercial or retail activity in town. For village life to thrive, we really need a boost, with a measured amount of intensification, in the heart of the village. Having elderly residents in an elegant new building and some new shops right across the street from us will be a very welcome addition.

We would also like to convey that we are unconcerned about the height of the retirement residence. We think the design is compatible with the location and almost certainly preferable to a lower building that we don't think would impart the same refinement.

As you might expect, we hear a lot of comment about this proposed development. The nature of our business, as well as our location, invites conversation on topics of interest to Carp residents. Among our clientele, there are certainly a couple of vocal opponents of this initiative. We'd have to say however, that the vast majority are enthusiastic and supportive.

Comment:

We are writing to you today to let you know that we support the proposed retirement residence complex. We live across the street at 104 Falldown Lane.

We understand that there is a small group asking for a different design. It would be undesirable, in our opinion, to favour a design that would sacrifice trees or the white house to accommodate a lower profile. We actually think that a lower and wider building would be much less attractive for us to view from across the street than the taller building nestled into the hill. Besides which, we really like the proposed design. We think the height is elegant and suits the location. We are also really pleased with the way the parking is being handled, half underground, half out of sight of Carp Road and Donald B Munro.

In closing, we would like to say that we support the application submitted to the City of Ottawa for a minor zoning amendment at 107 Falldown Lane, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive, 3775 Carp Road.

Comment:

I grew up in the village of Carp during the 40's and 50's when the village was a thriving community. In the last few years it has gradually deteriorated to the present sorry mess.

I attended a meeting at the Agricultural hall last spring to discuss the plan for a retirement residence in the centre of the village and left feeling that, at last, somebody cared enough to not only think of the needs of the older residents but to come up with a plan that would beautify the centre of the village as well.

I could not believe it when I heard that a few people could stop, I hope temporarily, this much needed building! As a 70 year-old widow, I am looking at giving up my large family home in the country and moving into the village where I will be close to my church, library, doctors and shopping. Greg LeBlanc's plans fit my needs exactly.

There are several older citizens like me, both in the village and surrounding areas, who don't want to have to move to Kanata or Stittsville and leave their friends and community activities simply because they can no longer keep up their homes. I visited one lady this week who moved to a retirement home in Kanata on Tuesday, because at 91, she couldn't wait any longer for accommodations in her home village of Carp. That is shameful!

When we have the opportunity to have someone of Greg LeBlanc's calibre with a plan for what seniors and the village need, why are we hesitating? Why are we listening to a few people over the wishes of the more than 500 who signed a petition to go ahead with a desperately needed facility? When this retirement residence is completed, there will be a waiting list of people anxious to move in so they can stay in familiar surroundings near their friends and relatives.

My husband was on the last Huntley Township Council before the township's amalgamation as part of the region of Ottawa-Carleton. This council built the outdoor rink building and the medical centre and hired the Drs. Bruce and Dr. Cripps to staff the medical centre, The medical centre has grown to a facility unrivalled in any village, let alone a larger centre. The outdoor rink building is still well used. Both of these undertakings showed foresight - an ability to look ahead at present and future needs of the community to keep it viable and help it grow. Where is that foresight now? We are past the stage where we need a retirement residence in the community. We have lost to residences and seniors buildings in other towns, too many of the people who have contributed to the continuity of things like Carp Fair, the Community Center, the volunteer fire department, the arena and churches to name just a few organizations. It's as if we are saying to older people, "Once you are not considered useful, get out of town!"

Its time to look at what Carp could and should become. To do this, we need someone like Greg LeBlanc who genuinely cares about Carp and its future. I support the application submitted to the City of Ottawa for a minor zoning amendment at 107 Falldown Lane, 458 Donald B. Munro Drive, 3775 Carp Road. This project (including the height of the buildings) is, entirely well suited to the. site and will fit in very well with the village character and heritage.

Letters and emails against

Comment:

Mr. Chantiry, I have always been a supporter of yours, however I am worried that you are losing touch with the community. At first I did not think there would be any way that the plans resented for an eight story building could become a reality in our rural village but now I am worried and must speak out. An eight storey building in the middle of a small rural village? Please stand out against this. I read the article in the local paper this weekend with interest and am shocked. How is it possible that our Councillor and planner believe that a small compromise needs to be made to an eight story building to make it ok? If ever there were a case of ‘right project, wrong location’, this would be it. Why are you not telling Mr. Leblanc that he needs to have a project with three floors and reassure your people this is what you are doing? Are you afraid to speak out against developers? Sad. I took the time to review the village plan prepared by the city and community in great detail since Mr. Leblanc says his project is what was intended from the village plan.

How? It is clear in this that senior housing is wanted, but every emphasis is for affordable housing, and outside of the core. Has Mr. Leblanc provided something that says it will be affordable housing, or only affordable to the wealthy? With grandeur of the proposal, I am worried. Do people who support it know they might never be able to afford to live there? It is clear in Appendix A of the village plan that the area for multi-residential is not the core of the community. Institutional zones are also not in the core. Even with this, there is a maximum of 3 stories in village plan. Good plan, wrong place. While I applaud the idea of up to 50 new local employment positions, is there enough resource in our community to fill the need of specialized medical care positions or will we have to find others who will drive and park in Carp? Without any public transportation, is there enough parking for 100 apartments and employees when our streets are already busy with church, market, fair, ice cream store? Good plan, wrong place. Mr. Leblanc says there will be retail space for over half a dozen new businesses. Carp has retail space that has been for lease for years right in the core, and another one has just closed. What research is there that shows a need for this many new retail spaces?

Where is the case that says that a population increase of 100 seniors and employees and visitors will be enough to double the local retail spaces? Are we creating more empty shops with ‘for lease’ signs in the windows? I don’t want a ghost town of empty shops. If this were an outside company bringing forward the proposal, the community would speak loud and clear but because it is a plan created by a local hero it gets a different level of support from the councillor. Sad. I hope that the city recognizes the conflict of interest with Mr. Leblanc for discussions about coordination of design standards with BIA. It is a conflict that he is on the BIA at the same time he has a project. I believe that that only compromise you could accept in good conscience is to allow for a multi-residential building in the core, as long as it is in keeping with the height restriction that the village plan has said it will accept. This is still a compromise since it allows multi-residential in the heart of the community. A building of 8 stories will dwarf all other buildings in the area. No number of pretty pictures could have a reasonable person see differently. Mr. Chantiry and Mr. Ostafichuk, please answer the following questions which I plan to circulate, along with this letter to the community.

How do you see this proposal keeps with the community village plan? You have both said to newspaper you want to see compromise. What is your idea of a compromise? To our mayor and other councillors, do you believe this is a right thing to do?

Comment:

This message is to express my concerns regarding the zoning amendment request made to allow the building of a large retirement complex on Donald B. Munro in the Carp village. My view is that the building height requested isn't compatible with the Carp CDP and would be a real eye sore in the core of the village. I attended the meeting where the project was presented and, like many other attendees, was less than impressed by the proposed plan. While I understand the need for accommodations for the elderliness and support such initiatives, I don't believe such a large complex directly in the core of the village is compatible with the historical character the CDP describes. This building would really stand out compared to it's surrounding. When I acquired a heritage home in Carp more than 3 years ago, my understanding from the CDP was that preserving the heritage and historical/village character of Carp was a top priority and something to be cultivated for the future. I don't believe this retirement complex project as currently presented is in-line with this vision. I also signed the petition which was presented to Mr. Leblanc to indicate our concerns about this project.

Comment:

I am writing to advise you of my concerns with regard to Mr. Leblanc's development proposal. While I fully support his plans for a retirement residence - it's a great idea and will make a significant contribution to the village - I am opposed to the height of the planned building.

The height of the building is inconsistent the Carp Community Design Plan (CDP) that the village agreed upon about four years ago. In the CDP, the village made it clear that maintenance/enhancement of the village look and atmosphere was its priority in any future development - and limited building height to 3 stories. In addition, this proposal - if approved - would establish a precedent for future development. Faced with future applications for buildings the same height or even higher, the city - and not the future developer - would effectively have the legal (and virtually insurmountable) burden of justifying why such an application could NOT proceed.

Therefore, this building will not only stick out like a highly visible sore thumb and fracture the look of the village but also establish the precedent that will result in its transformation into yet another ugly suburb.

This isn’t the only feasible design for that site. There are alternative design approaches that could be followed by Mr. Leblanc that will allow him to achieve his development objectives and still demonstrate respect for the CDP and the village.

Comment:

I am taking the liberty of sending you a document generated by your own department which I just received. I am not attempting to be cheeky by doing so but rather request that you consider the information contained in it as regards to the eight story building being proposed for the core of the Village of Carp. I appreciate that the document is only a draft but I suggest it is a pretty good set of guidelines which nowhere proposes out of scale construction. In fact it encourages precisely the opposite.

On page seven of the guidelines there are two illustrations one of the Octagonal Barn at the Carp Fairgrounds (Figure 16) and the other of the Memorial Hall at the crossroads of Donald B. Munro and the Carp Road (Figure 14). Were the LaBlanc Group's proposal to construct an eight story building approved, the Octagonal Barn would cease to be the tallest structure in the Village of Carp, in direct contradiction to Guideline 15: To preserve and enhance historic resources. If an eight story building were to be approved the roof of the structure would be clearly visible over the trees behind the Memorial Hall in Figure 14 in direct contradiction of Guideline 14: To identify, preserve and revitalize community vistas. I must also draw your attention to Guidelines 23 and 24 which speak to the incongruous nature of a tall building which will overshadow both Carp's community churches in the village setting. May I point out to you that the Chateau Laurier towers eight stories above Wellington Street.

I simply can not over emphasizes the importance of the signal which will be sent to all developers in the Carp area by your Department standing its ground and turning down the LaBlanc proposal. I know that this will require considerable internal fortitude from yourself and from your management but, as these guidelines produced by your own department clearly enunciate, it is what must be done.

Comment:

I am a resident of the Village of Carp who, along with many others, was involved in the consultation which created the Carp Village Plan. You will be aware that properties owned by Mr. Greg LaBlanc located near the centre of the Village are the subject of a request for a change of zoning to permit Mr. LaBlanc to construct an institutional building.

I want to support Mr. LaBlanc's proposal and to indicate to you that we have found his open and consultative approach to providing Village residents with information regarding his plans to be exemplary. Many of us support his vision of a revitalized Village core and applaud his efforts. I also want to strongly object to any but the most rigid interpretation of building height restrictions ensconced in the Carp Village Plan.

Your colleague, Mr. Myles Mahon, presided over the consultation and development of the Carp Village Plan and will be able to confirm that the original intent of this height limitation was to avoid precisely the sort of construction being proposed. The discussion which resulted in this requirement concerned the impact of unusually large buildings and institutional developments which compromise the character of a village by disrupting the appearance of small holdings fronting the street.

Interestingly, Mr. LaBlanc's architectural firm has understood and cleverly respected this aspect of streetscape design where the proposed development fronts the Carp Road while grievously violating it with an eight story facade facing Donald B. Munro Drive. Whilst I fully appreciate the design challenges offered by such a sloping site the requirement was put in place specifically to ensure that inordinately tall buildings would be prevented within the Village boundaries. This is to safeguard the character of the place and to secure the ongoing importance of the Designated Heritage Building on which the restriction is based, The Carp Agricultural Fair's Octagonal Barn.

This is, I believe, the first zoning test to which the Carp Village Plan has been put. It is worth noting that the Carp Village Plan has recently been used by Council to trigger an Environmental Assessment for Carp Village and, as such, represents an instrument of considerable power. It is imperative that your office ensure a sensitive interpretation which enables Mr. LaBlanc to realize his project yet powerfully defends the spirit and intention of the height restriction underscoring the value of the Carp Village Plan itself. Residents do not want an eight story building anywhere in Carp.

Comment:

Although we do not live in the village, Carp is our village. It is where we go to pick up our mail, a quart of milk, visit the library, shop at the Farmers Market etc.

Today when we were picking up a prescription at the West Carleton pharmacy in Carp, we looked across the street and tried to imagine what it would look like if we were staring at an eight-story building.

The thought of such a large edifice in the centre of the village was unimaginable and we would like to go on the record as not supporting this eight story structure (even though we do support its intended purpose).

No matter which way we enter Carp, whether it is by Donald B. Monroe Drive or by the Carp Stittsville road we pass a beautifully crafted sign that says "This way to the Historic Village of Carp". How can there be an eight story building in the heart of a historic village like Carp?

Comment:

On a recent visit to Carp I had occasion to find myself informed of a current proposal to allow a 7 or 8 story building to be plunked down in the middle of Carp. A joke surely, I thought. Alas, apparently not so.

As one that used to work close to Carp, I am well-aware of the nature of the Town, its very well-developed "small-town" character and the quiet yet satisfying feeling in and around the main intersection. Particularly in summer, and of course during the very popular fall fair, the town is a delightful place to wander around.

I understand that the proposed hi-rise is to be built behind the Memorial Hall, over which it would tower and dominate the skyline.

I am very surprised to hear that your staff would even be considering such a proposal given how it is entirely at odds with the existing small-scale and historic environment of Carp.

Is there not a document sir, that guides "development" for the small towns within the City of Ottawa? In looking it up on the web, I have found just such a document, the Design Guidelines for Villages within the City of Ottawa, and at the bottom of page 2 it declares: "...the guidelines represent sound planning principles and should be used to achieve best practices in design". I presume your staff is required to follow these guidelines?

On page 1 I read that the first objective of this Official Plan is to "promote development that preserves the unique traditions, culture, history and familiar character that defines villages". (my italics). Truly sir, I just cannot see how an eight story building in the heart of Carp is going to meet this very good, first objective. I would be very interested in hearing your reasoning towards how it is that you see this tall building fitting in to the "familiar character" of the existing town. The obvious questions I would ask you are: Why allow, and why the need for a tower when everything else in the town is low rise? Why not propose a low-rise structure on the edge of town where there is lots of open land?

In light of the existing Official Plan, I hope that you will reconsider, and stop this project in its tracks. Allowing a building permit for such an out-of-character "diminishment" to the town, could, after all, prove to be very difficult indeed.

Comment:

I am writing to express my concern about a proposed 8-storey building in the rural village of Carp. I don't think this is appropriate for a village such as Carp to develop in this manner. Looking at the City of Ottawa as a whole, I think that development should be focused instead within the greenbelt and the villages should maintain their rural character. I believe this is the most sustainable approach overall. It does not make sense to build high density in areas outside the greenbelt where infrastructure is limited.

Comment:

I am writing to you today regarding the application to alter the max. height and rear yard setbacks on this property in Carp village. I cannot believe that this development application is even being considered by the City in light of our existing village plan and I must urge you to put a stop to it.

As one of the participants in the development of The Village of Carp's Community Design Plan, I know that the plan clearly states that there is to be a 3 story height restriction on buildings within our village boundary. The proposed design not only exceeds that restriction but ludicrously and insultingly so. There is only one weekend during the year that we permit any building or structure erected to exceed the height of our octagonal barn and that is Carp Fair weekend. On that one weekend, people driving toward the village can see the lit ferris-wheel looming up out of the trees to announce that the fair is in town. If this development plan goes ahead as proposed, people approaching Carp will ALWAYS see this one large building looming up out of the trees, announcing to all that the City failed us.

By not adhering to our design document you will only perpetuate the already too firmly held belief that the City doesn't consult with its rural residents and that when it does, it somehow always disregards our wishes.

In A Pattern Language, in the section regarding towns, there is a very lengthy discussion regarding heights of buildings. It reads in part:

At three or four stories, one can still walk comfortably down the street, and from a window you can still feel part of the street scene: you can see details in the street-the people, their faces, foliage, shops. From three stories you can yell out, and catch the attention of someone below. Above four stories these connections break down. The visual detail is lost; people speak of the scene below as if it were a game, from which they are completely detached. The connection to the ground and to the fabric of the town becomes tenuous; the building becomes a world of its own: with its own elevators and cafeterias.

This is exactly what we fear will happen in our village, overly tall buildings destroying the connections between us, creating a mini city where people are "completely detached" from village life. But that does not mean that the idea that another seniors residence being built is not an exciting one.

The one seniors residence we already have has given us a wonderful group of citizens for the village. They walk the streets, they stop and chat, they patronize all the village stores and amenities, they are an integral part of the life of the village. What would be terrible would be to see another group of seniors set apart and kept captive in a huge bunker of a building, self contained and intentionally distant from the village while at the same time sitting right in our midst.

It seems impossible to me that there isn't a way to have this project go ahead while respecting the development restraints set out in our Village Plan. I urge you to exercise your good judgement here and find another way forward that will respect the 3 story height limitation.

Comment:

The document addresses inconsistencies between the proposed building scheme and the existing zoning requirements by altering the requirements so as to permit a 'mixed-use development'. The purpose of this is to ensure that the maximum number of rental accommodations can be obtained while permitting a commercial patio along the Carp Road. It is this patio and several small associated commercial spaces coupled with a very large medium rise building which form the basis of the claim to providing 'mixed-use'. This is achieved by reducing the floor area to lot ratio by more than 50% from 14,850 down to 7,162 while simultaneously removing previously required side and back yard setbacks and suggesting that there is no need for privacy yards. The need for parking at a ratio of one space for every eight seats is also found to be unnecessary despite the lack of public transit in the Village and the significant increase in density being proposed.

That the current parking requirements pertaining to lots with more than one use actually exceed the total area available for the entire project is taken as demonstrated proof that the project should be exempt from the provision rather than an indication that the proposal should be altered. It is clear that the proponents know the rules but will this ensure that permitting the proposal to go forward will create a community amenity?

Both developers and planners recognize that when such an increase in density is undertaken it needs to be accompanied by significant efforts to mitigate the impact on the neighbourhood. This is a neighbourhood already heavily impacted by two non-conforming zoning usages, a truck repair depot and a junk yard. The junk yard is within 500 meters of the site and the noise pollution from the truck depot is constant as repairs are undertaken throughout the night. The neighbourhood will bear the impact of increased parking on the street, difficulty in winter ploughing, the impact on intermittent street parking for the summer weekends of the Carp Farmers Market and events at the Carp Fairground, increased delivery truck traffic, garbage pick-up, back-up horns and associated noise, increased light pollution (which receives a mention) and a host of other unintended impacts. It is a well recognized planning principal that the impact of increased density may be ameliorated to some degree by increased shared amenities none of which, other than the previously mentioned patio, are detailed in the current proposal. It is left to the imagination as to weather recycling garbage and loading will be accomplished through the underground garage or will become added stress factors on the surroundings.

Worse, the proposed multi-unit building is turned in on itself. No aspect of the structure offers any invitation to pedestrian traffic and the impact is rather more that of an exclusive hotel, excluding the surrounding village, rather than a welcoming community amenity. Indeed, this is precisely the design intention; to project a fortress like secure and self-contained presence which provides all its own amenities to its residents. It is suggested to have work-out rooms and a lap pool, dining facilities, and indoor parking. Nowhere is there a garden, external sculpture, benches or paths through the property. Absolutely nothing indicates that the designer of the multi-unit building was aware of its location.

The building sets up a particularly unfriendly relationship with those using Donald B. Munro Drive, Carp's main shopping street, and serves to disassociate the occupants from the community. This is not how small rural villages are supposed to work. We want to encourage dialogue between the building's residents and the Village at large. The property is the single most important site currently available for development in the community and it is imperative that this development provides a highly sensitive solution.

Commentary refers to the existing tall coniferous trees, which are expected to ''allow for smooth transition in height and will allow the main building to blend in with the landscape''. That the fifty or so trees on the property are now nearing maturity and are primarily composed of short lived Red Pine, prone to catastrophic failure in ice storms and planted much too close together to survive very long into the future, actually says more about the need for vegetative cover to camouflage the excessive height of the structure than it does about the value of the plant material.

A number of these trees can be expected to be sacrificed for parking and the resulting open stand will hasten both sun burning and wind damage.

The document goes on to say that ''The proposed development is consistent with the pattern of the surrounding community and respects the outdoor amenity area of adjacent residential units. Any adverse effects from loading areas and potential storage areas will be mitigated by on site screening, landscaping etc. Nothing could be further from the truth. The existing amenity space, primarily the yard associated with the former Rectory, is intended to become a driveway entered from a hill where at present there is only a single-family home.

Additional parking is to be provided in the area which previously represented the dooryard of a second single family home. Both of these amenities will be destroyed and in return the community will be provided with 'site screening'. No amenities are being offered the community only the potential of activity spaces with no actual commitment in the document.

Similarly, no actual commitment to either greening or energy efficiency are outlined although energy efficiency is mentioned. We are told that, ''the proposed buildings have been designed to take advantage of the local features to achieve energy conservation. Numerous windows will provide natural light and heat while floors built into the slope will provide a naturally cool environment in hot weather.'' This is simply glib. If the building is designed to provide energy efficient operation in both heating and cooling modes then surely those design features can be explained somewhat more completely.

Planning is not something, which can be approached with a cavalier attitude. It is not the entrepreneurial vitality of the LeBlanc Group, which is at fault here. The problem rests squarely on the professional service providers who have developed this response on their behalf. These professionals actually believe that City Planning will go along with this proposal without subjecting it to the litmus test demanded by the Community Design Plan process or common sense. This represents a cynicism contemptuous of the entire process itself. It simply is not good enough to excuse grossly inappropriate building heights by referring to the softening of form provided by a handful of trees nearing the end of their useful life. It is not acceptable to design a property, which provides no identifiable amenity to the community outside of a patio, which will provide some unspecified service. It is not possible to claim that a building will be energy efficient without providing sufficient information to indicate how that is to be achieved.

The size of this building project is not proposed as a response to thoughtful consideration of the Village of Carp or the building site but rather to the commercial profitability of the enterprise which will occupy the facility. Indeed, it seems as though this building form has been chosen as a result of previous experience in the construction of profitable Residential Care Facilities which underscores any reluctance to consider alternative layouts more suitable to the location. Until the City of Ottawa Planning Department clearly identifies the need for a higher level of response from the professional community serving developers in making these proposals nothing is going to change. If, conversely, the requirement for more detailed and thoughtful submissions is clearly telegraphed to the development community we can reasonably expect significant improvement to the final product. We fully expect this proposal to be turned down on the basis of its contravention of the Community Design Plan for Carp Village.

Having recently participated in the Choosing Our Future Foresight Workshop and Design Charrette with a number of City of Ottawa and City of Gatineau planning staff it is clear to me that he desire to ensure sensitive design responses and good development is a very real concern for them. Carp also needs the vitality of entrepreneurs like the LeBlanc's. Surely, a more rigorous revisiting of this proposal can do nothing but improve the final product.

SUMMARY OF PUBLIC INPUT

In essence, the comments that do not support the building focus on the height and density of the development being inconsistent with the village character. Many, despite these comments, have no issue or support the use.

As well as height and density, there are concerns that speak to site plan control detail such as adequacy of parking; especially with no public transit or little private taxi support for the future residents. Other comments have been raised landscaping and setbacks; particularly the impact to the Donald B. Munro setback. The concept plans submitted in support of the application indicate required parking can be satisfied. Landscape details will be addressed through the site plan process.

COUNCILLOR’S COMMENTS

No comments were received.

COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION COMMENTS

Carp Residents Association

I don't expect members of council to review the attached document but ask you to note that I find it completely discouraging that valuable time and energy is used to review development proposals that clearly do not follow the intent of the City's documented planning strategy. How does an 8-storey building in a rural village (35 kilometres from downtown) get through the gate for consideration?

I am commenting to this development application on behalf of the Carp Residents Association. This group was created in the late 80s to deal with development issues in the village of Carp. Development proposals have been monitored since that time by a few members. However, since the pace of development has increased significantly the residual members felt it was important to poll the community on this particular proposal.

A petition was circulated within the village boundaries of Carp. Given the time of year, it was very difficult to canvass as many people were out of town or away from home, including the canvassers. However, approximately 100 residents agreed with the following statement.

We respectfully ask Mr. Leblanc to come forward with a design that meets the village height restriction of 3-storeys. We also ask that the City of Ottawa support our wishes by adhering to the Village of Carp Community Design Plan.

It should be pointed out that Mr. Leblanc was one of the community members providing input to the Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp (CDP) and should therefore be very familiar with its contents.

The Carp Residents Association strongly supports the idea of an assist-living facility within the village of Carp. However, we would like it to reflect the rural character of the village and blend into the existing styles and shapes of buildings.

Specific comments:

1. The proposal should fall under VM - Village Mixed-Use Zone but believe the development is not in keeping with the intent of the new comprehensive zoning bylaw. Specifically,

(2) reinforce the historical character of the Village core areas and main streets by promoting small-scale, street-oriented building form;

(4) regulate development in a manner that adopts existing land use patterns so that the unique village character is maintained.

However, it is hard to see how the 8-storey building included in this development application can be considered small scale and street oriented. Or, how the proposed development adopts existing land use patterns when the existing buildings in the village of Carp are limited to one and two storeys.

The comprehensive zoning by-law provides a further definition of small scale by limiting the number of residents in a group home, retirement home or a residential care facility to a maximum of 10. This limit applies to all rural zoning types. Clearly the proposed development for a facility to house more than 100 residents is not in keeping with the intent of the bylaws.

2. The references to the West Carleton Zoning By-law are not required as the Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp (CDP) “replaces the Official Plan for Carp that was adopted by the former Township of West Carleton in 1992. The 1992 Official Plan was based on a servicing capacity of 700 dwelling units and as a result it did not plan for the eventual full servicing and development of all of the lands located within the current village boundary. This Plan provides for full servicing and development of all of the lands within the village boundary. It is a comprehensive land use plan that provides direction for how Carp will develop over the next 20 years.”

3. Various sections in the CDP mirror the intention of the comprehensive zoning by-law and should be used to review this development application. Specifically,

4.3 Design clues for the village core

Compact built form, meaning buildings relatively close together, will help to frame the streetscape and create a sense of activity to give the core a sense of place, distinct from the rest of the village. The objective is to replicate traditional patterns of the older village development to maintain the village character.

The CDP further defines Compact Building Form in section 4.4 where it states:

4.4.4 The minimum building height shall be 2 storeys;

4.4.5 Maintain the low profile of buildings in the Village Core by setting a maximum building height of 3 storeys;

4. The provisions for parking appear to be inadequate and should be reviewed very carefully as it is not clear which provision of the comprehensive zoning by-law or the CDP for Carp should be applied. There is no public transportation in the village (or the whole of Ward 5 for that matter as the residents voted against funding public transportation) and taxi service is limited. The proposed development includes 35 parking spaces, but is expected to house over 100 residents, plus staff and includes a restaurant and retail space each of which has different requirements. The developer has committed to only one floor of assisted-living space, so the remaining floors may in fact be considered apartments in which case at least 1 space per unit is required plus allowances for staff.

There is no space for on street parking on Donald B. Munro. Falldown Lane has a very steep slope and is a no parking zone. Carp Road does have space for on street parking, but it is currently shared by a dental practice, two churches, the Saturday Farmers Market, a medical practice and a seasonal ice cream store. Diagonal parking is not recommended given the traffic volume on Carp Road.

5. The minimum setbacks for corner lots in the comprehensive zoning by-law should be respected as the properties front on to an arterial and a collector. It is important to maximize sightlines on to these already busy and physically challenging intersections.

6. Reducing the rear yard set back (on Donald B. Munro) to 3 metres would be consistent with the CDP provision to preserve a “pedestrian friendly atmosphere” Reducing it to 0.0 metres as request in the proposal would not.

7. The proposed development is in the well-head protection zone for the village of Carp and its potential impact should be evaluated and any restrictions required to protect the village’s source of water should be part of development application review.

8. Should the planning department wish to approve this application for an 8-storey building, the proper process for amending the CDP should be followed - including public consultation in the community. The CDP is only 4 years old and the results of the petition we circulated indicated a significant proportion of residents still feel the height limit is important. Residents support the idea of an assisted-living facility, respect Mr. Leblanc for his other valuable contributions to the community but ask if he could come forward with a design that respects the CDP.

Section 8.1 of the CDP sets out a method for amendments to the Community Design Plan should the planning review fail to respect the guidelines set out in the CDP.

The Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp has been approved by City Council, as a policy document, to guide the long-term growth and development of Carp. It provides guidelines for the day-to-day decision-making on land use planning, such as subdivision, zoning and site plan applications, and it sets the community's priorities for the future. An amendment to the Community Design Plan requires approval by Council. The CDP further sets out that “significant changes to the land use policies set out in Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Community Design Plan will require approval by Council.”

9. The comprehensive zoning by-law also states that the maximum density for a retirement home is 25 units per hectare. Does this apply for the VM zoning?

10. Finally, this application should only be considered by the Agricultural and Rural Affairs Committee at a meeting in Ward 5 to ensure all parties wishing to comment have an opportunity to do so.

Response

There is no question the proposed Seniors Residential Care Facility/Retirement Home exceeds the height limit and will impact the Donald B. Munro frontage. In order to fulfill other important objectives and policies of the Community Design Plan, the owner is proposing a smaller building footprint on the main structure in order to preserve some of the existing buildings, one which has a heritage value. The small scale, street oriented building form will be provided on the Carp Road frontage through a conversion of the old Rectory and the addition of new a two-floor mixed use building. All the existing village character (existing buildings) on site, for the most part will be maintained.

With respect to the comment that by the number of residents in a group home, retirement home or a residential care facility are limited to a maximum of 10. There is no limit imposed on the maximum number of residents for a Retirement Home or Residential Care Facility in either the definitions or in the VM – Village Mixed-Use Zone in By-law 2008-250. The VM1 Sub zone imposes a limit of 10 dwellings per Group Home or Retirement Home, Converted. The property is in the parent VM Zone and the proposed use is not a Retirement, Converted and is not subject to this restriction. The limit does not apply to all rural zones.

Question 2 states references to the Zoning By-law are not required as the Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp (CDP) “replaces the Official Plan for Carp that was adopted by the former Township of West Carleton in 1992.

An Official Plan and Zoning By-law are two different planning tools however are intimately tied to one another. Official Plans are policy documents. A zoning by-law is only one of many tools used to implement the objectives and policies of the Official Plan and other planning guidelines of the City. An Official Plan is not a land use control intended to specifically regulate zoning provisions such as height in this case.

The Zoning By-law, under Section 34 of the Planning Act specifically includes the power to regulate height. The application before the City is requesting to amend the provisions of the By-law and the Village of Carp CDP.

With respect to the provisions for parking, it appears that the number of parking spaces proposed complies with the parking requirements of the Comprehensive Zoning. It is noted that the main building on the site is designed solely as a Retirement Home/Residential Care Facility and not an Apartment. There are no “provisions” in the Carp CDP for parking. Section 4.7 of the Carp CDP outlines the objectives and policies that guide parking design only.

No request has been made to amend the Zoning By-law to change the setbacks for corner lots. The minimum corner side yard setback for the VM Zone is three metres and the maximum is 4.5 metres. All new proposed buildings are located mid-block or adjacent to an interior lot line. As determined by the City the subject property’s front yard would be along Carp Road, the exterior side yard would be along Falldown Lane, and that the rear yard would be along Donald B. Munro Drive.

The main structure mixed-use component enjoys a 0.0-metre rear yard setback as per the Zoning By-law. The request to reduce the rear yard setback is a cautionary measure so as to bring into conformity the existing buildings on site (White House and underground garage).

The proposed development is in the well-head protection zone of the Village of Carp. As per policies of the Official Plan and the Village of Carp CDP the City is charged with the review of all development applications as it pertains to the impact on groundwater resources. This area has not been identified as a source of contamination and further, the proposed uses identified for this site are not considered as potential sources of contamination.

City staff recognize that along with the request to amend the Zoning By-law, an amendment to the Village of Carp CDP will also be required. The CDP for the Village of Carp was approved by City Council, as a policy document, to guide the long-term growth and development of Carp. It provides guidelines for the day-to-day decision-making on land use planning, such as subdivision, zoning and site plan applications, and it sets the community’s priorities for the future.

Where a significant change to the land use policies set out in Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Community Design Plan is requested an amendment to the Community Design Plan, must be approved by Council. Unlike an amendment to the Official Plan, amending the CDP can be undertaken through the Zoning By-law amendment process. The public meeting for the Zoning By-law amendment will also serve as the public meeting for the amendment to the CDP.

Finally, there is no maximum density applied to a Retirement Home or Residential Care Facility in the 2003 Ottawa Official Plan, Carp CDP, or the Comprehensive Zoning By-law (VM) Village Mixed Use Zone.