OSWATCH Meeting Minutes – Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Attendees: Graham Deline, Anna Cuylits, Winnie Pietrykowski, Mary Martel Cantelon, Kathy Krywicki
Approval of the Agenda
Passed as amended
Approval of October Minutes
Old Ottawa South Community Association
Now disbanded committee that monitored planning & development issues within the neighbourhood
Attendees: Graham Deline, Anna Cuylits, Winnie Pietrykowski, Mary Martel Cantelon, Kathy Krywicki
Approval of the Agenda
Passed as amended
Approval of October Minutes
Attendees: Mary Martel-Cantelon, Graham Deline, Anna Cuylits, Winnie Pietrykowski, Don Westwood, Brian Tansey, Lydia Oak, Linda Hancock
Regrets: Kathy Krywicki, Gwen Gall, John Engleland
Approval of the Agenda
Agenda approved and passed, item 2 amended to read Approval of June minutes
Approval of June minutes
Business Arising from June Meeting
Winnie updated the group on the traffic survey, the results of which are now being analyzed.
Main Street Reconstruction
Gary’s suggestion that he write a letter to the city supporting a T-intersection rather than a roundabout at the intersection of Main and Riverdale was discussed and carried unanimously.
Action flowing from city council meeting on infill
Several OSWatch members attended the meeting held at the Glebe Community Centre on June 27th and reported on the workshops.
Colonel By Drive rezoning and heritage overlay protection, with “transition clause” allowing the development of 3 properties for which building permits are in process will go to City Council for final approval on July 17, 2013.
Bank Street redevelopment and the challenges facing it were discussed.
In cases of infill or over-development in which the removal of mature trees is involved, residents should be aware of a recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice of May 17, 2013. The “Hartley vs. Scharper” decision defines tree ownership regarding root systems shared between properties.
Accomplished tasks for 2012-2013, direction setting for 2013-2014
Linda Hancock, OSCA president spoke of the OSCA survey results. The board learned from the survey that most important for stakeholders were the issues that OSWatch was dealing with, infill, traffic, over-development, zoning. The board now realizes that it needs to be more involved in and more responsive to OSWatch activities.
Discussion centred on the relationship between OSCA and OSWatch, possible future changes for improved results and more support for OSWatch activities.
OSCA survey results will be integrated by mid-November and there will be changes to OSCA committees at that time. Suggestions were made for possibly reformulating OSWatch into OSCA focused committees on infill, traffic and parking, development and planning, Bank Street redevelopment. OSWatch will continue for the present time, but may be reconstituted once the board changes its terms of reference and reviews its bylaws. Linda Hancock could not confirm the details of engagement but affirmed that the strategic planning process will be open, transparent and inclusive. For instance, Linda thought it likely that members or delegates of OSWatch and other operating committees would be invited to participate in the strategic planning process this fall.
Brian suggested that OSWatch be present at the NCC meeting regarding digital advertising signs and he volunteered to participate in the meeting.
Motion was carried and passed.
Attendees: Mary Martel-Cantelon, Graham Deline, Kathy Krywicki, Winnie Pietrykowski, Brian Tansey, Lori Pope, René Luijkenaar, Marthe Monaghan, Anna Cuylits, Janine Debanné
a). OOS Traffic survey Update
Winnie presented the history of the traffic survey and was pleased to report, that as of today 240 participants have responded.
b). FCA AGM June 3, 2013
Anna reported that, in his presentation, guest speaker, Dennis Jacobs, stressed the importance of a legally sound Official Plan, because the legality of zoning bylaws and Community Design Plans depend on this. If a development needs to be contested at the OMB, the only valid criteria will be the specifications of policies in the Official Plan. If these are vague, legal counsel will argue an interpretation of this in the defence against the contesting party. OMB appeals are too costly for most individuals and communities.
Dennis Jacobs advised communities to limit the number of zoning issues it wants to fight and develop good working relationship with the local councilor, individuals in the planning department and the press.
Located in OOE
René Luijkenaar and Marthe Monahgan presented their concerns and were looking for feedback to enhance their arguments.
Janine Debanné presented the out of proportion impact of the conversion on neighbours as it relates to shadowing and mass. She, a group of architects and city planner, Steve Gauthier, have reviewed the current zoning and conversion process and are looking for possible solutions. Janine, and some other architects, will be participating in the upcoming City workshops that are dealing with Phase II Infill Guidelines, The focus will be on height, mass, shadowing, side- and back setbacks.
d) Colonel By zoning Study
Kathy referred to the extensive reports http://webcast.ottawa.ca/plan/All_Image%20Referencing_Zoning%20Bylaw%20Amendment%20Application_Image%20Reference_D02-02-13-0038%20DRAFT%20REPORT%20-%20Colonel%20By%20Zoning%20Review1.PDF
It was moved by consensus that OSWatch recommends that “OSCA writes a letter to the City of
Winnie reported that the committee used to meet as one group, but is now meeting in sub-groups, e.g. a cycling group a.o.
Adjourned to the next meeting.
Mary has resigned as co-chair and was thanked for her accomplishments. Nobody has stepped forward to replace Mary.
As co-chair, Mary received all the copies of submissions to the Committee of Adjustment. From now on these notifications will be re-addressed to OSCA office.
There was discussion about restructuring OSWatch, and it was decided to defer further discussion and conclusion to the next meeting
It was decided that a meeting on July 9 is needed to discuss:
a) Further need for action re. the Official Plan Review process
b) Restructuring of OSWatch
Meeting adjourned at 9pm.
OSWatch Meeting Minutes – May 14, 2013
Mary Martel-Cantelon, Gary Shechtman, Winnie Pietrykowski, Ian Smith, Anna Cuylits, Kathy Krywicki.
Regrets:Don Westwood, Lydia Oak, Graham Deline, John Engeland, Gwen Gall, Brian Tansey, Lori Pope.
1. Approval of the agenda
Added new items under Other Business:
- 276 Sunnyside
- OSCAR articles.
Agenda passed as amended.
2. Approval of the April minutes
3. Business Arising from April meeting
a) FCA Update
Anna provided an update on issues for next FCA meeting. FCA AGM is June 3 at City Hall. Guest speaker is Dennis Jacob. Anna also suggested that it would be preferable if one alternate FCA representative would be an OSWatch member, in case she is unable to attend a meeting.
b) Omnibus Zoning Bylaw Amendment
Mary reviewed the response from the City regarding clarification on two items in the Omnibus Zoning Bylaw amendment. No further action anticipated by OSWatch.
a) Infill Conversions
167 Aylmer Avenue - Mary and Graham attempted to arrange a meeting between the developer and residents, but were unable to get agreement on a meeting date. OSWatch subsequently decided not to proceed with organizing the meeting. The neighbours held a meeting with the developer on May 13.
126 Hopewell Avenue – Mary had discussions with one of the neighbours of 126 Hopewell, and suggested they should arrange a meeting with the developer and the councillor. OSWatch members had questioned whether the existing burned-out house would meet the requirements for “conversion” if it didn’t have a roof, however further investigation indicated that the roof was intact.
b) Stage 2 Infill Study
A number of OSWatch members and other residents have submitted input to the City on examples of bad infill in OOS.
Anna reported there has been a challenge in Divisional Court regarding some aspects of the recent OMB ruling related to the Infill Guidelines. The court hearing is scheduled for July 3 2013.
Stage 1 and 2 Infill Guidelines are currently proceeding separately. By September 2013 both stages will be integrated in draft policy proposals for the Official Plan review, according to a letter from the City's General Manager of Planning to the OOS Community Association
c) Colonel By Drive Zoning Review
Kathy reviewed the results from a meeting with residents on May 8 (see Attachment A).
d) 1125 Colonel By Drive
Mary circulated a Site Plan Control submission from Carlton University for a new parking lot at 1125 Colonel By Drive. OSWatch will not take any action, since the site is on the Carleton campus.
5. Riverdale Traffic Management Study
Gary reviewed the results of the Open House on May 1st for the Riverdale Traffic Study. Approximately 60 people attended the Open House. City staff presented proposals for Riverdale traffic and bike routes, and requested feedback and further suggestions from residents. City Staff will refine the proposals based on feedback from residents, and will hold a second public meeting in the fall of 2013.
6. OOS Traffic Survey
Winnie reviewed the activities for the OOS traffic survey. An open house was held on May 9th with approximately 30 attendees. A draft survey has been completed and sent to an editorial committee for feedback. The survey is expected to be released on May 23 via an article in Between The Bridges.
7. Lansdowne Transportation Advisory Committee
Mary previously circulated meeting notes from the LTAC meeting on April 25 (see Attachment B).
8. Other Business
a) Next Year
Mary advised that she will be stepping down as co-chair after the next OSWatch meeting, and encouraged others to consider acting as co-chair.
b) 276 Sunnyside Zoning
City Staff has issued a report and recommendations for the rezoning of 276 Sunnyside to allow a daycare. The Planning Committee will make a decision on the rezoning application on May 28.
c) OSCAR Articles
Mary noted the OOS community has become more engaged in zoning and traffic issues. Articles on traffic and zoning comprised a major portion of the recent OSCAR issue.
Next OSWatch meeting will be Tuesday June 4 at 7:15 PM at the Firehall.
Attachment A – Colonel By Zoning Review
Wednesday, May 8, 2013, 6:30-8:30 pm
Sunnyside Library, 1049 Bank Street
Question: What is the practical impact of non-conforming rights?
Response: It affects an owner’s ability to rebuild if a building is lost, or to change its use; can produce administrative headaches when it’s time to sell.
Comment: There haven’t been studies of the specific impact on property values of Heritage Overlays (HO), but Heritage Conservation Districts have been found to increase property values in the affected areas.
Question: If a HO prevents people from replacing existing buildings with taller ones, why are we looking at reducing the height limit?
Response: Having multiple strategies to preserve the streetscape increases the level of scrutiny on infill development and ensures that there is a strong argument for any variance that is granted. In addition, a HO does not cover development on severed lots, where no building existed before.
Comment: Use of a building is less of a concern than its scale and volume.
Comment: From a resident of a smaller house, concern about HO for two reasons. First, it limits the size of a possible addition on a small home, or a reconstruction of this home to be more liveable; turns renovation from a right into an obligation to seek permission. Second, it might impede the introduction of new architectural styles.
Response: “Character” of a building is not necessarily related to architectural style, but in design elements and the way the building interacts with its neighbours and with the street. An HO, therefore, need not “freeze” the architectural evolution of the street.
Comment: Presence of attached garages in new infill reduces neighbours’ interaction on the street. In favour of HO for its potential to preserve community interaction.
Comment: Several owners of smaller homes are in favour of HO despite potential restrictions on their own ability to renovate.
Comment: Concern from residents of 992 Colonel By and 2 Seneca about effect of new rear-yard limit on their lots, because the neighbouring lots, which influence their rear setbacks, are irregular.
Response: Consultants will need to check the effect of the proposed limit on these lots and ensure it doesn’t produce unreasonable restrictions for these properties.
Question: What are next steps? Do we all need to agree on the recommendations?
Response: Next step is Planning Committee June 25. Residents are encouraged to register to speak there, and to send comments to consultants for inclusion in staff report. Both of these actions will influence Planning Committee’s decision.
Observation: There appeared to be general support for the 3 recommendations proposed by the consultants: 1) lower the building height limit to 9 metres; 2) restrict rear yard development on lots deeper than 40 metres; 3) pursue the Heritage Overlay provision in the Zoning Bylaw.
Next Steps and Action Items:
Consultants and City staff to prepare report to Planning Committee incorporating residents’ comments.
Planning Committee to consider the staff report on June 25. Residents are invited to speak.
City Council to follow on July 17, 2013.
Attachment B - LTAC Meeting
Lansdowne Transportation Advisory Committee
(OSEG members present at this meeting)
Main entrance to Lansdowne closed
Status quo for next 3 months
Concrete pour concern (last Fri started at 3 am! Awoke nearby residents )
David C has asked to have situation reviewed, ie Is it necessary to start this early? Expected time was much longer than the pour actually took; avoiding traffic problems by starting early
Dust problem in that area of Bank Street --- Phil to talk to Marko(?) about what could be done
Feedback from City staff re: GCA Traffic Committee’s Report: John Smit
1) Car use on Residential Streets
Aggressive TDM program – target date is June
Fifth & Clegg footbridge – budget approval for design (in near future) with construction 2014-2015
Directional signs for Lansdowne (on 417, etc)
Monitoring program –identifying what are the changes in traffic activity, making focus possible
TDM – shortest route is Queensway @ Catherine, south along Bank Street
Signage on QED
Improvement of intersection of Isabella & Elgin
2) Safe Cycling
Concept only: corridors identified for safe cycling with key connectors for a safe system of bicycle lanes (which means removal of on-street parking)
Mainly E-W routes : Glebe, First, Fifth(W only), Holmwood (E only)
At least 2 years for construction of lanes with plan ready by end of 2013 – still developing network (for next LTAC mtg, J. Smit to have clarification on timeline)
3) Traffic Flow & Pedestrian/Traffic Safety
Signs “your speed is...”
Enforcement of speeding/traffic violation: request to Ottawa Police
Installation of STOP signs
“No Trucks” signs
Subject to Monitoring (not recommended in advance of Lansdowne opening):
Close Holmwood Ave
No stopping on Holmwood between Bank & O’Connor
Raised intersections along Fifth
Speed bumps on Holmwood W of Bank
Not Recommended (potential to create more problems than are solved):
No push buttons on Bank Street (discussion later moved this item to “Short term”)
Stop sign @ Holmwood & Adelaide
Install 3 way stop @ Holmwood & Torrington
Clearer signage on dead-end streets
Change speed bumps on Holmwood to a wider variety
4) Preserving Parking for Local Residents:
Online system for parking permits
Subject to Monitoring:
Considerations by Events Management ---
Higher snow removal service for mid to large events;
Improved service levels for residential parking enforcement
Improved resident, visitor & guest parking
(Discussion re: free parking @ Lansdowne versus on streets close by ended with David C suggesting that monitoring and being ready to make changes is the way forward)
Improve snow clearing of key streets in the Glebe (again, later discussion of this issue moved this to “subject to monitoring”
Allow 2 hr paid street parking on Bank @ Glebe Centre and Lord Lansdowne
Develop parking solution for Lord L & Glebe Centre employees
Residential parking only (GCA actually requested guest parking)
Provide detailed response to GCA Glebe Traffic Plan Update in May
Continued dialogue between residents & City
Continued development of comprehensive monitoring program
Initiation of monitoring program when Lansdowne operational
Shared program ( City, TDM co-ordinator, OSEG & NCC) not yet established
Brian (GCA): necessary for co-operation & dialogue between NCC & City re: various issues, ie shuttle buses & routes
At next meeting on May 23, step back and look at revision to draft recommendations – keep on sending him suggestions for this revision!
Glebe resident: expressed concern that residents’ concerns are being referred to monitoring and/or declared “not feasible” .
Mary Martel-Cantelon, Graham Deline, Gary Shechtman, Winnie Pietrykowski, Lori Pope, Michael Lynch (guest), Dorothy Rogers (guest).
Regrets: Kathy Krywicki, Don Westwood, Lydia Oak, John Engeland, Anna Cuylits, Gwen Gall, Brian Tansey
Absent: Ian Smith
1. Approval of the agenda
Item 6 (FCA Report) and item 7 (Official Plan) were deferred to next meeting since Don and Anna were not available.
Item 4d added on infill at 43 Willard.
Agenda passed as amended.
2. Approval of the March minutes
3. Business Arising from March 5th
a) OSCA Board meeting debriefing
Graham advised that the OSCA Board approved the OSWatch motion requesting that the City incorporate Infill Guidelines into the zoning bylaw.
b) OOS traffic study
Winnie wrote an article for the April OSCAR explaining the need for a traffic survey for OOS. The OSCA Board passed a motion supporting the OSWatch initiative for an OOS traffic survey. Winnie is coordinating the OOS traffic survey, and will be circulating the draft survey to OSWatch for feedback. Winnie expects to have the survey completed by May.
a) Infill Guideline decision at OMB
Mary circulated an article from the Ottawa Citizen describing the results of an OMB decision regarding a challenge to the City’s authority to incorporate concepts from the Infill Guidelines into the zoning bylaw. The OMB ruled that the City had the authority to make the changes to the zoning bylaw. Planning Committee chair Peter Hume indicated that the zoning changes would likely be in place in 2014.
b) 167 Aylmer Avenue - Conversion to 4 unit apartment
A delegation of local residents presented their concerns about this project at the OSCA Board meeting in March. The OSCA Board will send a letter to the Mayor to voice concerns about this infill project.
c) City-wide Omnibus Zoning By-Law Amendments
Mary circulated a letter from the City describing a number of proposed minor amendments to the zoning bylaw. Mary will seek clarification on two of the proposed amendments (building height measurements for dormers, and parking restrictions for duplexes) to determine if they will impact OOS.
d) 43 Willard Avenue – New Infill
A Committee of Adjustment hearing has been scheduled to review the proposal to demolish the existing house at 43 Willlard Avenue and replace it with two new dwellings. Graham advised that OSWatch has previously met with the developer and neighbours, and the developer’s proposal has been well accepted. No further action is anticipated by OSWatch.
5. Colonel By Drive Re-Zoning
Michael Lynch and Dorothy Rogers were invited by OSWatch to discuss their activities related to the re-zoning of Colonel By Drive. Michael described the history of activities. A group of local residents decided to take action when developers started demolishing a number of older homes along Colonel By Drive, to be replaced with large multi-unit dwellings. The residents undertook a number of initiatives to protect this area from further inappropriate infill, including working with the Ottawa Built Heritage Advisory Committee, and lobbying the Chair of the Planning Committee. The Planning Committee subsequently established a SWAT team to address the situation on Colonel By Drive. The residents worked with a consultant hired by the City to develop recommendations for zoning changes on Colonel By Drive. The recommendations will be presented to City Planning Staff in April. If the recommendations are accepted, they will require approval by the Planning Committee in order to change the zoning on Colonel By Drive.
6. FCA report
Deferred to next meeting
7. Official Plan
Deferred to next meeting
8. Lansdowne Traffic Advisory Committee
Winnie reviewed the highlight report from the March 28 LTAC meeting, which was previously distributed to OSWatch members (see Attachment A). Final recommendations from LTAC are expected in May. Winnie is coordinating a traffic survey for OOS, which will feed into the LTAC recommendations. The OOS survey will be based on the survey template that was developed for the Glebe traffic survey.
9. Riverdale Traffic Management Study
The City is planning an Open House for the Riverdale Traffic Management Study to be held on May 1 at the Sunnyside Library. Gary and Winnie will be meeting with City Staff on April 15 to review the City’s plan for the Open House.
10. Other Business
a) Main Street Reconstruction
John Engeland previously circulated a report to OSWatch members on the March meeting of the Main Street Reconstruction Working Group (see Attachment B).
b) McIlraith Bridge Rehabilitation
Mary circulated a letter from the Engineering firm responsible for the McIlraith Bridge rehabilitation, requesting feedback on the proposed design. Feedback from OSWatch is already being provided through participation in the Main Street Reconstruction Working Group.
Next OSWatch meeting will be Tuesday May 7 at 7:15 PM at the Firehall.
Attachment A – LTAC Meeting Highlights
Lansdowne Transportation Advisory Committee (LTAC)
Thursday, March 28, 2013
Richmond Room, City Hall
Extended construction hours:
The issue of extended cement-pouring hours at Lansdowne, announced Wednesday March 27th was brought to the attention of the committee. It was deemed a construction issue, not one related to traffic until the rep from Holmwood Residents asked that a time schedule of the cement pours be released so that impact on traffic concerns could be assessed.
Glebe Community Association (GCA) traffic survey:
Brian Mitchell, from the GCA Traffic Committee presented Highlights of the Glebe Traffic Plan changes proposed by residents to cope with the redevelopment of Lansdowne.
On Tuesday March 26 the GCA adopted the recommendations with some minor changes.
This survey was 4 months in the making and is proposed as an update to the Traffic Plan approved by the GCA in 2002 and approved by the City in 2004 (with modifications). City staff participated in certain aspects of this recent survey.
The presentation was subtitled “Preparing for Success.” Over 1000 residents participated & although the community resisted the redevelopment of Lansdowne, now that it is approved and construction is well under way the community is committed to making it work. With these latest recommendations residents are hoping to preserve the fabric of their community.
This survey is different from the macro planning that the City is engaged in; it focuses on the day-to-day impact that increased traffic and parking will have on the Glebe. It fills a gap that no planning to date covers.
The consultation process was guided by a 12-member-committee, with regular updates in the Glebe Report, two workshops identifying issues and brainstorming, plus an online survey (with a 30% response rate). The Glebe Business Assoc. participated and door-to-door surveys were conducted. There was a special workshop on bike lanes.
In the end there were 45 recommendations. At LTAC Brian focused on 20 high priority requests, 18 at the City level, 2 at NCC.
Central to the traffic recommendations is the use of arterial routes to deliver people to Lansdowne and to encourage more cyclist and pedestrian traffic.
Brian Mitchell’s presentation also addressed budget: there is none. Twenty-seven recommendations will have 0 or nominal cost, many are quick and easy, recommendations need to be organized in terms of priority. Many recommendations include improved signage and suggest policy changes, including encouraging retailers to offer delivery to encourage cyclist & pedestrian traffic.
Brian Mitchell emphasized that for success, we need to have some of the recommendations in place before Lansdowne is finished.
The highest cost is the pedestrian & cyclist bridge at Clegg & 5th Avenue.
The Presentation was well-received by LTAC members. Excellent & thorough micro review of traffic & parking issues in the Glebe with reasonable proposals that are not too expensive and that reflect a significant proportion of Glebe residents.
For Presentation purposes, Brian used Annex A of the larger report with the Summary of All Proposed Measures on the back.
Presentation of Draft Recommendations by Councillor Chernushenko
David will be introducing the Draft Recommendations as an agenda item for next month’s meeting of LTAC. We are expected to have read the LTAC draft recommendations and the Glebe Traffic recommendations and come with feedback, suggestions how the Glebe recommendations might be integrated (either into the body of LTAC or as an Annex), including any changes or additions.
Also, in April, David would like to explore in detail specific bus & shuttle routes that have been proposed to move large crowds to & from Lansdowne.
At LTAC’s meeting at the end of May it is expected that the recommendations will be finalized and a process discussed for further public consultation.
NEXT LTAC Meeting is April 25th.
OSEG will be invited to attend.
Attachment B – Main Street Reconstruction Working Group Meeting
In terms of the meeting, the point was made that to get the Main Street project back on schedule it would be necessary for the working group to meet very frequently in the next few weeks. The following series of meetings was set up: April 10 & 24; May 8 & 24; and June 5. Progress to be made at these meetings will ensure that the next public open house can be held on June 5th to reveal the final preferred design for the Main Street renewal, and that tendering for the projects will be under way by the dates planned. I want to note that due to absences or prior engagements, if requested, I would only be able to attend the May meetings.
Now, in terms of last night's meeting content: five options were reviewed with the outcomes being:
The consultants indicated that a mix and match of options 4 and 5 were what would be prepared for the next meeting on April 10. They indicated that this meeting would be the most important one since it would focus on the final preferred redesign to be completed for the June 5 public open house. Hence it will be most important for OOS to have someone present at this meeting.
During the discussions, a good deal of time was devoted to OOE presentations advocating for undergounding the hydro lines for an extensive part of the north end of Main. Our councillor felt that there was likely not enough of a strong argument for covering the extra cost of burying the hydro service. How much the extra cost would be was at issue in the discussions. More importantly, there was some contention about whether the Main Street bridge should be reduced to two lanes given the preference to redesign Main as a two lane road. During this discussion, the issue of northbound traffic jamming up on Main Street bridge was raised. There was also discussion concerning the linkages from the bridge to the pedestrian/cycling routes along both the north and south sides of the Rideau River below the bridge. The working group was content with the proposal for ramps up to the bridge on the north side of the river, but less content with the lack of pedestrian access via stairs down from the bridge to the path on the south side of the river. The sticking point seemed to be that such stairs would not enable wheelchair access. The only alternative offered on the south side of the river was better pathway links over the extensive open grass between the Rideau River and the ramps that take traffic and pedestrians up from the south-west side of Riverside Drive to Smyth Road.
I brought up concerns about whether or not the volume of traffic on Main Street (and potentially the Smyth Road bridge) could be accommodated in two lanes, given the volume of through traffic trying to access residential neighbourhoods in deep southeast Ottawa (to/from which the city did not provide adequate transportation) and that the development of the Oblate lands will be bringing a very large number of additional residents to the area. Alta Vista was cited as a successful two lane road carrying similar volumes of traffic as Main Street. Moreover, our councillor argues that better cycling facilities and increased public transit will result in people switching transportation modes. However, all existing hard evidence points to modal switch being one of the hardest things to accomplish in any city. Our councillor also felt that the Oblate lands development was likely to attract a lot of residents who will not have cars. Again, I think that some of this may be too optimistic thinking on the part of a well-intentioned green advocate; there is little evidence that this is occurring in all but the most downtown highrise areas in the largest and most densely-populated cities served by the most highly-developed transit systems. And, another thing, the population is ageing and older people tend to place even more reliance on cars. I am certainly not against improving Main Street for pedestrians and cyclists as I think it is in serious need of such improvements.
However, I would like to be convinced that a redesigned two lane road will be sufficient to serve our local area and that we will not find congestion prevents us from reaching our homes or that non-local motorists frustrated with Main Street traffic jams start circulating through our local side streets. In this regard, I asked about plans for the Main/Riverdale intersection. At present the intersection will be shown in plans to have traffic signals but an overlay will be prepared to show how it would look with a traffic circle. If the two lane Main Street option is a go, then there is plenty of space for a well-designed, very functional Main/Riverdale traffic circle which would both keep traffic flowing, and reduce pollution from traffic stopped at lights. I also brought up the issue of Rideau River Drive/Brighton Avenue being found by southbound Main Street motorists as a shortcut across to Bank Street, avoiding traffic calming measures already instituted on Riverdale. This latter issue was recognized by the meeting facilitators.
Attendees: Graham Deline and Mary Martel-Cantelon (Co-Chairs), Anna Cuylits, Winnie Pietrykowski, John Engeland, Don Westwood
Regrets: Kathy Krywicki, Lydia Oak, Lori Pope, Brian Tansey, Gary Shechtman, Gwen Gall
Absent: Ian Smith
Attendees: Graham Deline, Anna Cuylits, Winnie Pietrykowski, John Engeland, Kathy Krywicki, Don Westwood, Brian Tansey, Ian Smith
Regrets: Mary Martel-Cantelon, Lori Pope, Gwen Gall, Lydia Oak, Gary Shectman, Steve Konkle
Absent: Matt Sanger, Greg Reilly
Resignation: John Callan, Mathanna Subbaiah
1. Approval of the Agenda
Points 4 & 5 discussed before 3. Passed as amended
Brian Tansey (motioned) Don Westwood (seconded)
2. Approval of the January Minutes
Brian Tansey (motioned) Don Westwood (seconded)
3. Business Arising from January 8th
(a) OOE’s proposed overlay to City e-MAP re setbacks—this item is a point of information with respect to the City of Ottawa’s e-map facility and a suggested upgrade that might improve the residents’ understanding of future lot development.
Action: John Engeland will write an article for OSCAR advising residents of the existing e-maps and how they might be useful to improving our understanding of development & infill in our community.
(b) D. Jacobs, front yard parking: Mary Martel-Cantelon’s report was circulated by e-mail prior to the meeting (see Attachment A). No further discussion.
4. OSWatch Meeting Process
This item which was formerly number 3 on the agenda was introduced by Graham Deline.
Written reports/minutes to meetings attended on behalf of OSWatch are circulated by e-mail to OSWatch members before the monthly meetings in order to provide relevant background information, encourage clarification online and thus facilitate more meaningful discussion during OSWatch meetings. Enhancing this process is ongoing.
Discussion included the following actions and recommendations:
Action: To encourage continuity of thought & evolution of process, it was proposed that after three “no shows” (with no regrets) the committee member’s name will be struck from the members’ list. This keeps the list current and puts an emphasis on active participation. Motion proposed by Don Westwood and seconded by Winnie Pietrykowski.
Action: Winnie will update October 2012 strategic plan to align names of OSWatch committee members with specific actions/activities.
Recommendations: The Chair must exercise its power to delegate and/or to clarify delegation. Individual OSWatch members are committed to actions/initiatives and are expected to provide status reports/updates. As well, subcommittees need to be clearly identified and there needs to be flexibility with respect to their creation. OSWatch agreed that some subcommittees may be convened because a single initiative demands it or special expertise and resources are required. OSWatch recognizes that these subcommittees do not have to be composed of full-time committee members. The emphasis of OSWatch meetings is not the meeting itself but rather the subject matter that requires a community-based response/action. Community engagement is paramount.
Don Westwood volunteered to head a recruiting committee to seek expertise and human resources within OOS to support actions that OSWatch has already committed itself to.
Graham Deline will approach OSCA Board to enquire about filling vacant positions on the Board. Perhaps there is room for another OSWatch member. The issue of reporting to OSCA in a timely manner prompted this inquiry.
5. Infill/Zoning: 315 Riverdale Avenue Update
Graham Deline facilitated two meetings with residents bordering this approved development by Jakub Ulak. On January 28th, Mr. Ulak presented a third design for this address, one that is more in character with existing neighbourhood heights and building structures, advising that with residents’ and OSWatch’s written support he will change the preceding plan that already has Committee of Adjustment approval but is less in character with the surrounding homes. After Mr. Ulak’s departure, residents decided to meet the following week, February 4, after further consultation with a planner hired by two residents who are immediately affected by the length of the building which is 80 feet long.
Graham advised Mr. Ulak that although residents were largely pleased with his latest proposal, they and OSWatch would need more detailed plans before providing letters of support. Residents are reluctant to engage unless design plans are more detailed and business decisions are put in writing. A previous development on River Road has left residents wary of this developer’s intentions.
6. Progress Report of FCA’s initiatives re Official Plan Review
A report (by Anna & Don) of January 10 & 22 was circulated by e-mail prior to the meeting (see Attachment B).
7. Review of the launch (January 29) of Official Plan Review (OPR)
The current meeting schedule for the Community Panel was circulated prior to the meeting (see Attachment C).
Action: Anna and Don will explore and propose ways to brainstorm with residents different issues raised by the Official Plan Review. They will talk to Linda Hancock and work to ensure that results from the current OOS survey are integrated into proposals for the OPR.
8. Community Design Plan (CDP) process & discussion
A considerable amount of time was spent on this topic: the scope & nature of a CDP, background & history within OOS & OSCA, its usefulness as an instrument of change when what seems to be most pressing is the inadequacy of current zoning by-laws.
The CDP is not community-driven. It is a city-driven process and is used to guide long- term growth & development. It is often initiated within a community when a large piece of property is slated for development and its multidimensional impact needs to be explored (i.e. the Oblate Monastery at St. Paul’s University on Main Street).
The City may undertake concept plans, zoning studies or community design plans to translate the principles and policies of the Official Plan to community scale. The City works with the community, landowners, local businesses, school boards and other interested parties on community design plans.
The Official Plan identifies the priority areas for the completion of community design plans and all community design plans must conform to the City’s Official Plan.
Given this understanding of a CDP, where is OSWatch’s time best spent? On the next round of zoning guidelines, the Offical Plan Review, a CDP, further pursuit of the Hintonburg Community Associations petition to the City, or a combination of all above.
There was no resolution on this topic. There seemed to be, however, consensus that the discussion added to a better understanding of what a CDP is and allowed some airtime to think through the possibilities and their outcomes. Prior to this discussion Don Westwood circulated by email some background material highlighting previous CDP discussions & decisions by OSWatch and the City (see Attachment D).
9. Lansdowne Traffic Advisory Committee (LTAC)
Highlights from the meeting of January 24th were circulated prior to the meeting (see Attachment E). Winnie drew OSWatch’s attention to the following comments included in her report:
“Spring is around the corner and with it the commencement of larger scale construction (this means more trucks, traffic slowdowns, and more dangerous encounters). I would like to follow up on strategic planning components with LTAC for greater use of public transit. I think it would be worthwhile to meet with Rick Zarzosa, Program Manager Transit Flow & Reliability, and David Chernushenko’s office to discuss strategic marketing incentives combined with trial runs to encourage public transit during peak shopping periods with pilot efforts commencing sooner rather than later.
Also, I want to suggest that LTAC rotate its monthly meetings to on-site locations. Yes, that means meeting one Thursday or more at the FireHall from 8:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. I would like to organize a walkabout for LTAC that begins at the FireHall, heads west to Hopewell School, north on Bank to Southminster Church, across Alymer to the Library, south to Sunnyside & Bank and back to the FireHall. I will research profiles for each of the locations: daily usage by numbers and age groups, where traffic guards are currently located, school routes, types of programming at the FireHall, number of school buses to & from Hopewell, and number of intercampus buses from Carleton to Ottawa U and the hospital campuses, etc.
On-site meetings have not been approved by LTAC but I have checked with Christy Savage at the FireHall and she thinks that it is manageable and that the FireHall’s schedule could allow for it.”
10. OSCAR Articles
OSWatch members continue to write articles in OSCAR concerning a variety of topics and the general consensus was to continue with this.
11. Other Business
(a) Bronson Operational and Safety Review Updates
Report circulated prior to the meeting (see Attachment F).
(b) List of community resource people for OSWatch & subcommittees
There are approximately 10 in total. These were left with Graham & Mary to archive for possible use down the road.
(c) OSWatch Priorities
See item 4.
Next OSWATCH meeting will be Tuesday, March 5, 2013 at 7:15pm at the Firehall.
Attendees: Dennis Jacobs (Momentum), Stephen Pope (OOE), Paul Goodkey (OOE), Brendan McCoy (OOS), Mary Martel-Cantelon (OOS)
D. Jacobs is a private consultant hired by the City to prepare a planning rationale in support of David Chernuskenko’s motion for amendment to the By-law at Planning Committee last spring (this motion went to City Council on May 9, 2012) Recommendation at that time by Council was:
a. That the City Clerk and Solicitor be directed to seek to retain a professional planning opinion with respect to the means by which front-yard parking would only be permitted in lots with a minimum of 5.6 meters in the mature neighbourhoods of Capital Ward (namely Old Ottawa South, Old Ottawa East and the Glebe);
Therefore, study is being done to determine opinion re: D. Chernuskenko’s motion (Capital Ward only).
Background info for OOS:
OSCA passed a motion re: Infill Study at April 2012 meeting (see Minutes for 2012-04-17 under #8) that there be no front yard parking for lots less than 5.6 meters wide. This motion followed Brendan’s presentation in 2011 (?) to Planning Committee on development of 3 units on Hopewell Avenue (with narrow lots).
Issues surrounding front yard parking:
1) appearance of car at front;
2) creation of hard surfaces at front of lot;
3) parked car at front “overhanging” and blocking sidewalk;
4) with no space between garage entrance ways) not possible to have on street parking --- on street parking spaces considered important by residents & businesses;
5) no requirement for parking spaces for lots of less than 5.6 meters (5.6 m to 7.6 m lots do not have the same problem as they are wide enough to allow for parking).
Discussion re: development industry which would object to an amendment (already made jurisdictional appeal re: Infill Guidelines passed by City Council!).
Industry’s position would be that lots with no front yard parking create difficult design problems.
Buildings “on stilts” with 1st floor being only a narrow corridor;
Carriageway to parking in back yard;
Parking off laneway in back;
Zoning changes required, ie R1 to R3 or other.
Character of our neighbourhoods and landscaping compromised by front yard parking;
“Cookie-cutter” style houses being built right to lot lines;
Time is coming/future with lots with no parking provided at all and residents using Virtucars and/or public transit;
On street parking is considered by City staff as a cheap traffic calming device.
OSCA supports motion. D Jacobs to seek opinion of the Glebe residents.
There are two reports:
Examples of desired changes included:
· effective community input - there has not been enough in the recent past, but for the first time two members of FCA have been appointed to one of the three committees about to review Official Plan for the City;
· urban design – especially as it responds to and prepares for the seasonal nature of Ottawa (with an equal emphasis on indoor and outdoor spaces), and with a priority given to mixed use, and transit centres;
· adherence to the Official Plan – which is up for renewal by 2014;
· growth forecasts – employment lands should be priorized for future economic growth, and not re-zoned for other purposes without compelling reasons;
· intensification – this should be accomplished through a low-rise approach (without high-rise/tall buildings), consistent with the existing character of Ottawa;
· sustainable transportation – with specified carrying capacity rather than unlimited growth;
· Community Design Plans should be citizen-created and monitored, facilitated by the City, and guided by community representatives elected by the community;
· Infrastructure – this must be planned as an integral system and before development rather than afterwards.
(for more information and additional topics, see the www.fca-fac.ca website).
The guest speaker was Ken Gray, former reporter with The Ottawa Citizen, currently operating a number of blogs: bulldogottawa.com, bulldogcanadian.com, and bulldogbusiness.com.
The main focus of the meeting was a report on the progress of the FCA’s Planning and Zoning Committee, regarding their input into the current revision of the Official Plan via their two FCA representatives on the Community Panel. This in effect meant updating the representatives from the various community associations at this meeting on the issues discussed at the Jan 10th Workshop, and that these concerns had been brought to the attention of the City. Further information will be forthcoming on the FCA website.
The current meeting schedule for the Community Panel was and is as follows:
Meeting 1, November 2012: Kick Off meeting, with sponsors
Meeting 2, January 2013: Receipt of information on preliminary proposals for the Official Plan
Meeting 3, March 2013: Receipt of more information on preliminary infrastructure needs and feedback on OP preliminary proposals
Meeting 4, June 2013: Review a draft of the OP and transportation schedules
Meeting 5, September 2013: A Sponsors, Development Industry and Community Panel to discuss the status of plans, and a legislative calendar
Meeting 6, October 2013: Review of final draft IMP, TMP, OPP and OCP
Meeting 7, October 2013: With Sponsors, review outstanding issues prior to approval by Committee and Council
Meeting 8, January 2014: Recognition event for Panels
More specific information of FCA’s concerns regarding the Official Plan can again be found on the FCA website www.fca-fac.ca
An important concern for our community is identifying what Old Ottawa South needs to address and change in the current Official Plan. What is the best way to brainstorm issues like intensification with our community members?
Considering the above Meeting Schedule, we need to discuss this within the next few months. Members of the FCA panel have made themselves available to help us with this.
In addition, Jay Baltz, of the Hintonburg Community Association, referred to the need for individual community associations to follow-up on the four points presented by the them to the press and the public, as suggested in further correspondence by the signatories of the Hintonburg petition.
February 27, 2013: will be the next FCA General Meeting, to be held at Tanglewood Park Community Centre.
With much thanks to Kathy Krywicki, I have unearthed some very relevant information, which has enhanced my increased frustration that none of the recent history of our application has been passed on to the current membership of OSWatch. Please bear with me as I unravel the history of OOS plea for a Community Design Plan (CPD), as I now see it.
I will quote first directly from an article written for the ‘Between the Bridges’ web publication by Brendan McCoy on Tuesday, 07 September 2010 entitled:
After expressing the “dismay local residents were feeling about a number of recent residential redevelopments and infill developments” the representatives of OSWatch “emphasized the community’s strong wish to have a Community Design Plan (CDP), and pointed out that we were on the record two years ago with this position”.
The two planners went on to say “we ‘did not want a CDP’. They explained that they saw a CDP as being for areas of very substantial new and intensified development based often on rezoning, such as in greenfields, or a main street where there could be high-rise development”.
OSWatch then went on to say that “the advice we received was contrary to that we have been receiving from the Councillor’s office for the last few years and OSWatch will need to follow this up. Do we continue to pursue a CDP despite this advice? If we don’t do a CDP is there another process to obtain the longer term community plan that there is clearly community interest in. OSWatch has already begun to look at these issues.”
All this was back in 2010.
A subsequent meeting was held by OSWatch with the City on 04 May 2011 with City staff, and this was again reported as an OSWatch Committee report in the ‘Between the Bridges’ bulletin by Brendan McCoy, under the heading:
After much discussion of the Lansdowne Park situation, the report went on to point out the following:
“OSWatch spoke against the Site Plan for 71 Hopewell at Planning Committee twice. We objected to the proposed site plan on the basis that the garage fronted design was not in keeping with the streetscape of Hopewell Avenue and was a violation of the City’s own infill guidelines. We were not successful and the development went ahead. However City Staff agreed with us and as a result of this and other developments going ahead despite violating the infill guidelines, an infill study was undertaken by City Staff. We have been active in engaging with City Staff at each stage of the study. Next month community groups will be meeting with representatives of the development industry in a meeting arranged by City Staff. The interest of the developers may be a sign that this study has the potential to make real changes. OSWatch is hopeful this study may lead to modest but real changes in infill design and regulation”
I for one have not seen any meaningful results from this study, and as far as I can recall, none of this hard work by the previous OSWatch committee was even mentioned, and how it should be followed up, when the new OSWatch Committee first convened last May/June. For instance, where is the record of further meetings with representatives of the development community, if any?
The report goes on to point out that: “For a number of years OSWatch has pursued a Community Development Plan (CDP) for Old Ottawa South. We have suspended our quest of a CDP at this time and are focusing our energy on the infill study. City Staff have been very negative about the idea of a CDP for the neighbourhood, as they argue that a CDP is for land that is expected to see substantially intensified development such as the Oblate Lands in Old Ottawa East.
Bank St., the only area where such development is expected in Old Ottawa South, already had the Urban Design and Zoning Study, a sort of mini CDP in 2003. Residential infill such as we are seeing, City Staff argue, is covered by regular zoning and infill guidelines.”
We are all only too aware of how ineffective these guidelines are. They have been and continue to be ignored by developers, because they have no ‘teeth’ within the current byelaws or zoning regulations, and are not part of the criteria for granting permits.
As a final point in this report, Brendan goes on to point out: “OSWatch has worked to strengthen communications with the community. There have been a number of articles in the OSCAR on events and issues over the last year. Thanks to a small group of volunteers, in particular the OSCA Web Editor Gwen Gall, the OSWatch web page looks great and is full of information. The OSWatch meeting agendas and minutes are available on the website. OSWatch has also made use of the OSCA website to inform the community of its activities, and have been able to engage members of the community in discussions of infill and other issues via the website comments and forums. Check the website at www.oldottawasouth.ca the OSWatch page is available as a “Quick Link” from the OSCA front page”.
Since I have been a member of OSWatch (less than 8 months), none of this background information has been made available to new members, or even those of long standing, as far as I can ascertain.
I am not laying the blame on anyone; I am simply pointing out the woeful situation where so little seems to be passed on from one incarnation of OSWatch to the next.
If I do nothing better than to ensure that whatever we achieve during the next few months is passed on to those that come after us, then I will feel that we have at least achieved something. Please see all this in that modest light.
Thursday, January 24, 2013
Colonel By Room, City Hall
Business arising from previous meeting (November 22,2012):
· McCormick Rankin Update
· Construction traffic update
· GCA update from December meeting
· Parking update from Mary Gracie
· Cycling plan update from staff
McCormick Rankin Update
· John Smit, City of Ottawa spoke to this item
· McCormick Rankin is the private firm originally hired by the City to provide traffic planning for Lansdowne development. Their contract ended in early Fall and they are being rehired to provide a more detailed framework for monitoring traffic
· Smit provided examples of the scope of their contract: expand on base conditions & what is yet to be done, identify further data collection needs, identify gaps, get a better handle on the 67s games & traffic management for these kind of special events, identify shuttle lots, advice on parking integration, cycling routes, intersection traffic for vehicles and pedestrians, etc.
· First draft is expected in April
· David Chernushenko asked that LTAC be provided with a copy of the contract description with McCormick Rankin
Construction Traffic Update
· Existing barriers expected until March
· Pedestrian prohibition on West side of bridge
· No left turn from Wilton on to Bank
· Will look into collecting more data on bridge while one way traffic barriers are in place
Glebe Community Association (GCA) Update
In response to the City’s Parking Study presented in October, the GCA has conducted its own residents’ survey to traffic in the Glebe. It met with residents in December and in January and will present its findings to LTAC in March. I will circulate hard copies of both the City’s and the Glebe’s summary of responses Tuesday, February 5th. As expected, the response collected by GCA is more detailed. The City’s Parking Study did not include the Lansdowne development initiative and provided for 18 new households not the 280 anticipated with condominium development at Lansdowne. Even though its target growth was low-balled, parking in several areas of the Glebe was identified as critical or over acceptable thresholds.
Parking Update from Mary Gracie, City of Ottawa
· A copy will be circulated Tuesday, February 5th. This Update is in response to a projected growth of 28 households, not the 280 being built at Lansdowne.
· David C. advised that there will be an open house to discuss the proposed garage on 170 Second Avenue. This parking lot proposal dates back to 2010, before Lansdowne.
Cycling plan update from staff
· City of Ottawa Cycling Plan launched January 29th with a feedback deadline of November 2013.
National Capital Commission Presentation
· Representatives spoke to NCC pedestrian crossing document dated 2011
· Identifies potential safe & strategic crossings
· 15 identified on Colonel By
· Clegg & 5th Avenue considered priorities
· Brian Mitchell (GCA) asked that in light of Lansdowne development crosswalks at Bridge (Wilton, QE Driveway) be reassessed.
Next Meeting February 28th
· This meeting will identify progress to date and make recommendations for moving the agenda forward.
I’ve already spoken to Natalie Mezey and David Chernushenko about some of my concerns as we head towards Spring and the commencement of larger scale construction. I mentioned in my last highlights to LTAC that I would like to follow up on strategic planning components for greater use of public transit. I think it would be worthwhile to meet with Rick Zarzosa, Program Manager Transit Flow & Reliability, and David Chernushenko’s office to discuss strategic marketing incentives combined with trial runs to encourage public transit during peak shopping periods with pilot efforts sooner rather than later.
Also, I want to suggest that LTAC rotate its monthly meetings to on-site locations. Yes, that means meeting one Thursday or more at the FireHall from 8:00 a.m. – 9:30 a.m. I would like to organize a walkabout for LTAC that begins at the FireHall, heads west to Hopewell School, north on Bank to Southminster Church, across Alymer to the Library, south to Sunnyside & Bank and back to the FireHall. I will research profiles for each of the locations: daily usage by numbers and age groups, where traffic guards are currently located, school routes, kind of programming at the FireHall, number of school buses to & from Hopewell, and number of intercampus buses from Carleton to Ottawa U, etc.
On-site meetings have not been approved by LTAC but I have checked with Christy Savage at the FireHall and she thinks that it is manageable and that the FireHall’s schedule could allow for it. First question Christy asked was where will they park? My response was simple. According to the City’s most recent parking study there are no parking issues in OOS. So, that being said we both agreed that parking was not an issue.
January 31, 2013
FYI - the attached are the various plans under consideration.
Attendees: Mary Martel – Cantelon (co-chair), Kathy Krywicki, John Engeland, Brian Tansey, Don Westwood, Steve Konkle, Makayla Munnings, Neil Priel, Karen Wolfe, Curt Labond