MINUTES (DRAFT)

 

GCA Board Meeting

Tuesday, September 28, 2021

7:00 – 9:00 p.m.

 

Chair: Laura Smith, President

Secretary and timekeeper: Janet Mayhew

 

Board members present: Laura Smith, June Creelman, John Crump, Janet Mayhew, Ahmed Ibrahim, Elspeth Tory, Angus McCabe, Anthony Carricato, Della Wilkinson, William Price, Deborah Long, Elizabeth Ballard, Jianna Rinaldi, Carmen Sanchez, Carolyn Mackenzie, Dan Chook-Reid, Sue Stefko, Rochelle Handelman, Vaughn Guy, Brenda Perras, Colette Downie, Sarah Viehbeck, Jide Afolabi, Bob Brockleback, Christina Honeywell-Dobin, Andrew Marquis, Carol McLeod, Silvia Grandi

 

Others present: Walter Hendelmen, Shauna Guilfoyle, Diane McIntyre, Jocelyn Comtois, Judy Wilson, Jonathan McLeod, Sarah Nolan, Nick Chesterley, Shawn Menard, Louise Aronoff, Jane Bower, Olivia Craft

 

Welcome and approval of agenda and minutes

 

Laura Smith and June Creelman opened the meeting with an Indigenous land acknowledgement and welcomed everyone to the first meeting of the season.

 

The agenda was reviewed and there were additions made by Carolyn Mackenzie and Elizabeth Ballard to the motion regarding the Official Plan.

 

Elspeth presented a motion to approve the agenda and John seconded the motion. Agenda was approved.

 

The minutes from June 22 and September 7 were provided to Board members. No additional comments or suggested changes were submitted. Della moved to approve the minutes for June 22 and the motion was seconded by Anthony. Minutes were approved. Angus moved to approve the minutes from September 7 and the motion was seconded by June. Minutes were approved.

 

Report from the Councillor

 

Shawn Menard provided an update on the following items:

  • Civic Hospital development: discussion taking place Friday, October 1st between the Planning Committee and the Heritage Committee where he will get a vote. He is supportive of the new hospital but has concerns about the current design. Too many trees to be torn down, issues with transportation, LRT not connected to the site, should not build 4-storey parking. His office is currently working with the City staff on motions. Heritage Committee to meet with the Planning Committee first and then main discussion to take place on the master site plan.
  • Pretoria Avenue redesign: work will be done to improve the underground infrastructure. Speed limit to be 30 km/h. Display boards will be posted this week and residents are encouraged to provide feedback.
  • 774 Bronson: Shawn indicated that the current plan is a diversion from the original proposal as the lot was sold to a different developer. Concerns have been raised about the height of the development, architectural concerns, relationship to the street and current neighbourhood. Shawn believes there will be an opportunity to provide another submission following a walk-through with the new developers.
  • Fourth Avenue Schools Traffic Calming Study: consultation taking place now to assess safety of Fourth Avenue between Percy and Lyon. Information about the consultation will also be shared in the newsletter and on social media. Current proposal is to implement two speed humps and a raised crosswalk. 
  • Traffic calming measures: discussion about Renfrew, Percy, Holmwood and potential speed reduction measures. Additional traffic calming measures are being considered for Fifth Avenue. Crossing guards have been requested in additional locations and efforts are being made to hire more people.
  • Official Plan: the plan will be reviewed on October 14, 2021. Consultation taking place September 29th by the City. There may be an opportunity to bring forward motions to edit the Official Plan.
  • Bank Street Height and Character Study: this needs to come soon and should move forward with the Official Plan.
  • Firehall Park: work is underway to finalize the procurement documents. The park will be getting a full gazebo with a slanted roof. Work was planned for this fall but may be delayed until the spring.
  • Lansdowne: staff are working with Council on the plans for Lansdowne. It is expected to be completed by the end of the year or early next year. The group will reconvene in December of January to discuss the consultation in advance of Council.
  • Bank Street bridge: construction is planned for next spring and will take a few months. New designs will be edited following the consultation.
  • Parks Master Plan: Shawn thanked the Parks Committee for their work. The individual plans will be updated and care will need to be taken on how they roll out.

 

Questions for the Councillor:

  • John asked about progress on First Avenue between Bank and O’Connor. Shawn indicated that individual markers were removed and the bike lane will be segregated further with flex posts. Left turns from First Avenue to Bronson will be stopped. Additional suggestions on how to slow traffic are welcome.
  • Dan Chook-Reid added that Fifth Avenue near Bronson does not feel safe for cyclists with the zig zagging of the flex posts. May need a single file sign for traffic and cyclists.

 

Committee updates, motions, Q&A:

 

Motion 1: Proposed amendments to Official Plan (in the form of proposed motions for consideration by the City’s Planning Committee on October 14)

 

WHEREAS the City has produced a revised version of the Official Plan (OP),

 

WHEREAS the GCA Planning Committee has a number of priority concerns regarding revised development policies and anticipates that additional priority motions related to the environment, parks and greenspace, housing, equity issues, to name a few, will also be supported by the GCA,

 

WHEREAS it is assumed that at this “late date” (with two weeks before the OP is considered for approval), that feedback/proposed revisions are best made in the form of motions that can be considered by Councillor Menard (as well as any other Councillors who may be so inclined) for potential tabling at committee,

 

BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED THAT the GCA support the following motions:

 

GENERAL MOTION to CITY

 

  • Remove highly subjective language related to built form that will create conflict and destroy trust

 

WHEREAS language such as “Generally up to 9 storeys” along Mainstreet Corridors (Bank and Bronson), and “generally,…in a maximum height range of 4-6 storeys” along Minor Corridors (Sunnyside Ave in Old Ottawa South)and, “maximum heights will be subject to appropriate height transitions and stepbacks” is highly subjective 

 

AND WHEREAS Council has in the past favoured more generous interpretations of such language, and/or stated that such policy language “ties their hands”, compelling a more generous interpretation that does not necessarily support other OP policies

 

And WHEREAS use of such subjective language will only continue a pattern of conflict between industry and communities that destroys trust with the City and industry stakeholders

 

  • Amend references to “generally” in relation to built form (i.e. height) through deletion
  • Amend references to “appropriate” and replace with measurable/quantifiable/objective criteria

 

CITY MOTION 1: Retain existing building heights on Neighbourhood streets, and a maximum of 6 storeys on Main Street Corridors with less than 30 m ROW

 

WHEREAS, the Official Plan should enable intensification through permitting of new building typologies rather than increasing building heights and significantly changing neighbourhood fabric. Keep 2.5 storey neighbourhoods at 2.5 storeys and 3.5 storey neighbourhoods at 3.5 storeys. 

 

And WHEREAS, future walking shopping destinations within neighbourhoods (ie. local, ground floor commercial) should be allowed to be a half storey taller than permitted residential

 

And WHEREAS, building heights on major corridors should be limited to 6 storeys or no higher than the right of way unless specified in a Local Plan. 

 

And WHEREAS, the OP Evolving Overlay Policy should permit increased density but not at the expense of neighbourhood fabric or by risking a neighbourhood’s ability to absorb density, and WHEREAS, Council should therefore not be compelled to be supportive of applications for low-rise (i.e. 4 storey) buildings within 150 meters to either side of Mainstreet Corridors, as additional height should only be permitted through a Local Plan to ensure that neighbourhood social and recreational services can be upgraded to support. 

 

Amend Table 7, OP Ref. 5.2.4 (1) and 5.3.4 (1) and 5.4.5 (1)

DELETE, 

“Low-rise: no minimum and generally, zoning will permit at least 3 storeys but no more than 4 storeys”

 

REPLACE WITH, 

”Lowrise:  No minimum, zoning will permit a maximum of 2 ½ or 3 ½ storeys, depending upon predominant existing height, except in locations otherwise designated by Local Plans, where an additional ½ storey may be permitted to accommodate buildings in future walking shopping destinations within neighbourhoods.

 

Amend Section 5.2.4 (1) c

DELETE 

“Provides for a low-rise built form, by requiring in Zoning a minimum built height of 2 storeys while permitting a built height as of right, Transect wide, of 3 storeys to allow for higher-density low-rise residential development;”

 

REPLACE WITH, 

“Provides for a low-rise build form, by requiring in Zoning a minimum of built height of 2 storeys while permitting a built height, as of right, on neighbourhood streets within a Transect, of 2 ½ storeys on streets that are predominantly 2 ½ storeys, and 3 ½ storeys on streets that are predominantly 3 ½ storeys.

 

ADD, 

“Allow, as of right, built height of 3 or 4 storeys on lots on neighbourhood streets identified through a Local Plan as a Local Commercial Destinations, half a storey higher than surrounding residential streets.

 

{Note: “Local Commercial Destinations” are defined as commercial retail/services usages that primarily serve the local neighbourhood/community, and do not require permanent on-site parking as they are in walkable locations.}

 

Amend Section 5.2.3, 2) 

DELETE,  

  1. b) On sites that front on segments of streets whose right-of-way is narrower than 30 metres, generally up to 9 storeys except where a secondary plan or area-specific policy specifies different heights; and
  2. c) In all cases, 

(i) The wall heights directly adjacent to a street, and the heights of the podiums of High-rise buildings, where permitted, shall be proportionate to the width of the abutting right of way, and consistent with the objectives in the urban design section on Mid-rise and High-rise built form in Subsection 4.6.6, Policies 8) and 9); and

(ii) The height of such buildings may be limited further on lots too small to accommodate an appropriate height transition.

3) Along Minor Corridors, permitted building heights are as follows, subject to appropriate height transitions and stepbacks: Generally, not less than 2 storeys and in the maximum height range between 4 to 6 storeys, except where a secondary plan or area-specific policy specifies different heights;

   

REPLACE WITH, 

  1. b) On sites that front on segments of streets whose right-of-way is narrower than 30 metres, a maximum of 6 storeys except where a Local Plan specifies different heights; and
  2. c) In all cases, 

    (i) The wall heights directly adjacent to a street, and the heights of the podiums of High-rise buildings, where permitted, shall be no greater than the width of the abutting right of way, and consistent with the objectives in the urban design section on Mid-rise and High-rise built form in Subsection 4.6.6, Policies 8) and 9); and

    (ii) The height of such buildings may be limited further on lots too small to accommodate an appropriate height transition.

3) Along Minor Corridors, permitted building heights are as follows, subject to appropriate height transitions and stepbacks: Generally, not less than 2 storeys and a maximum height of 4 storeys, except where a Local Plan specifies different heights;

 

Amend Section 5.6.1.1., 3)

DELETE in entirety: a) The City will be supportive of applications for low-rise intensification that seek to move beyond the development standards of the underlying zone where the proposal demonstrates that the development achieves objectives of the applicable transect with regards to density, built form and site design in keeping with the intent of Sections 3 and 5 of this Plan;

 

CITY MOTION 2: Commit to visual and numerical modeling to support Local Plans, Community Improvement Plans, New Zoning By-laws

 

WHEREAS, the City should be leveraging modeling as modern analytical tools to simulate and project intensification,

 

AND WHEREAS modeling can help test and visualize ways to ensure our neighbourhood plans are robust and achievable, and that proposed regulatory changes will allow us to meet all our housing and environmental targets.,

 

AND WHEREAS modeling can provide a numerical projection of anticipated new housing (resulting from proposed regulations) including projections of unit sizes/ types/tenures, small business development at walking distance from homes, active vs car-centric lifestyles, resulting emissions reductions, tree canopy, net City costs or savings, and comparisons with targets,

 

AND WHEREAS 3D visualizations can illustrate the implications of proposed built form, and support community engagement.

 

Amend Section 11: Implementation, Section 11.3

ADD, 5) 

“This plan requires that Community Improvement Plans, Local Plans, and a New Zoning By-law will be supported by:

 

  • Numerical modeling of anticipated infill housing created as a result of proposed zoning, including projections regarding unit sizes/types/tenures, and
  • 3 dimensional/visualizations of modeled results, to understand the implications of proposed built form on adjacent properties, communities, and the city as a whole.

 

CITY MOTION 3: Commit to Local Plans to guide New Zoning

 

WHEREAS, we need simple, collaborative, neighbourhood-level planning workshops to guide new zoning, 

 

AND WHEREAS the people affected are best positioned to establish desirable forms and features for missing middle multi-unit infill housing, to build support for neighbourhood transition, and to identify or locate new walkable shopping destinations and other key transitional features, 

 

AND WHEREAS, we need simple, collaborative, neighbourhood-level planning workshops to guide municipal investments and upgrades in neighbourhoods. Intensification can be balanced with costed plans for upgrades to soft infrastructure and amenities (trees and greenspace/ walking/ biking pathways, recreational facilities, etc.) so that our neighbourhoods are complete, functioning communities,

 

Amend Section 11: Implementation, Section 11.3

ADD/NEW: 

5) The City shall commit to undertaking agile, neighbourhood-level planning processes that include a broad range of stakeholders, given the priority objective of creating and maintaining strong 15 minute neighbourhoods.  

 

Local Plans shall be drafted, following neighbourhood workshops in which residents identify:

  • ideal locations for future shopping walking destinations (“Local Commercial Destinations”),
  • ideal locations for new parkettes, park upgrades and benches,
  • ideal programs/uses for park upgrades/acquisitions,
  • preferred tree planting,
  • shortfalls to neighbourhood walkability, bikeability and overall completeness.

 

Community workshops used to gather information for the Local Plan, will be grounded in this Official Plan’s direction for intensification, walkability, equity and increased tree canopy.

Local Plans will document the feedback provided by residents during the workshop. They will be simple and figurative but will account for modeled and projected patterns of infill and assign generally preferred locations for municipal upgrades required to match population growth.

 

Local Plans will be used to;

  • guide zoning that locates residential vs local commercial uses in neighbourhoods, 
  • provide input for infrastructure upgrade planning, 
  • provide input for municipal upgrades to recreation and social facilities,
  • provide input for parks planning and for tree planting.

 

The motion was presented by Carolyn and seconded by Elizabeth. Motion carried.

 

Additional motions related to the Official Plan:

 

Motion: Endorsement of POP positions related to the new Official Plan

 

WHEREAS the People’ Official Plan (POP) is comprised of a broad coalition of stakeholders deeply invested in review, feedback and policy development related to the new Official Plan, with particular focus on climate change and housing

 

AND WHEREAS the POP developed has a series of one pager position papers (8) that have been prepared in response to the revised draft of the Official Plan that are well-considered and worthy of support.

 

THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT,

 

The GCA publicly supports the POP initiative through endorsement of the 8 position papers (i.e. general communications, feedback to the City and other interested parties, etc.).

 

The motion was presented by Carolyn and seconded by Della. Motion carried.

 

Motion: Reducing the size of park eligible for CIL funding in the Official Plan

Whereas the Draft OP states a preference for establishing parks rather than accepting cash-in-lieu of parkland, but the stipulated minimum park size required by new development is 0.04 ha, or 400 m2 

4.4.4.2) All development, regardless of use, shall meet all of the following criteria to the satisfaction of the City:

4.4.4.2) b) Prioritize land for parks on-site over cash-in-lieu of parkland. Cash-in-lieu of parkland shall only be accepted when land or location is not suitable. The land to be conveyed shall:

  1. be a minimum of 400 m2

 

Whereas an area 400 m2 (4,305 ft2 or 100’x43’) is larger than many residential lots in the relevant transects; and

Whereas in Map 2 (p. 37) of the Draft Parks and Recreation Facilities Master Plan identifies IU/DC transects as park-deficient compared to city standards; and

Whereas the IU/DC are designated for regeneration/intensification which will put increasing pressure on the park-deficiency in these areas; and

Whereas even a 100 m2 or 200 m2 corner parkette with a tree, benches and planting would provide significant relief at the edge of an infill development; and

Whereas it is desirable to amend the Draft Parks and Recreation Facilities Master Plan (p 163 ff) to include such micro-parks in its Park Classification Typology

MOTION on CILP

Change the OP to read:

4.4.4.2) All development, regardless of use, shall meet all of the following criteria to the satisfaction of the City:

4.4.4.2) b) Prioritize land for parks on-site over cash-in-lieu of parkland. Cash-in-lieu of parkland shall only be accepted when land or location is not suitable. The land to be conveyed shall:

  1. be a minimum of 100 m2

 

The motion was presented by Elizabeth and seconded by John. Motion carried.

 

Other motions:

 

Motion 2: to approve $250 spending of GCA funds by e-vote

 

Whereas the GCA directors’ manual specifies that major financial decisions should be discussed at Board meetings, not made between meetings,

 

And whereas smaller, unexpected financial needs can arise between meetings,

 

Be it resolved that the Board can decide to spend up to $250 using an e-vote between meetings.

 

The motion was presented by June and seconded by Carol. Motion carried.

 

Motion 3: to support the Fourth Avenue Schools Traffic Calming Plan

 

Whereas the City of Ottawa has drafted a conceptual traffic calming plan for Fourth Avenue between Percy Street and Lyon Street South between Corpus Christi and Mutchmor elementary schools,

Whereas the joint traffic committee established by Mutchmor and Corpus Christi parents, principals, and our city councilor support the proposed changes to Fourth Avenue,

Whereas active transportation to school has a net benefit to our community and our environment,

BE IT RESOLVED that the GCA supports the initiative to add two speed humps and a raised crosswalk on Fourth Avenue between Percy Street and Lyon Street; that the addition of this infrastructure will reduce vehicular speeds and promote safety for vulnerable users – especially elementary students –  in our community.

 

Discussion: Board members discussed whether to provide feedback on behalf of the GCA now, or wait until the consultation has closed. It was agreed that the motion would be put forward in advance of the consultation closing date of October 18, 2021 and would be amended with this additional wording:

This support is conditional on no significant issues or concerns being raised by neighbouring residents during the feedback stage of the proposal.

The motion was presented by Elspeth and seconded by Silvia. Motion carried.

 

Motion 4: to oppose zoning request for 774 Bronson – 557 Cambridge Avenue

Whereas, this re-zoning application grossly ignores current zoning, the existing area and establishes a precedent for future development that will irrevocably, permanently, and dramatically change the dynamic of the Glebe, Dow’s Lake, and Glebe Annex neighbourhoods,

Whereas, this re-zoning application, if approved, would set a precedent for future development on Carling Avenue and Bronson Avenue throughout the Glebe, Dow’s Lake and Glebe Annex communities.

Whereas a development that conforms with existing zoning that seeks intensification in a manner that transitions more appropriately to surrounding and established low-rise residential properties would be appropriate,

 Be it resolved that the GCA:

  •         Oppose the Zoning By-Law Amendment Proposal and proposed development at 770-774 Bronson/557 Cambridge Avenue that would see the construction of a high rise building at the corner of Bronson and Carling and set a precedent for further high rise construction through the area generally referred as the “Glebe” which would create deleterious effects associated with the massive increase in density including but not limited to building height, traffic, lack of supporting infrastructure, shadow impacts throughout the area including the Glebe High School field, and a lack of amenities which support the principles of walkability and livability in Ottawa’s Official Plan.
  •         That the position taken is supportive of the Dows’ Lake Residents’ Association whose members are also Glebe Community Association members.

Be it resolved that the GCA continue to work collaboratively with the City of Ottawa, the developer, and residents toward resolving any other outstanding issues relating to the proposal.

Be it further resolved that the GCA match the financial commitment ($5000) of the DLRA in this development proposal in consideration of the fact that the proposed development will have a direct and permanent impact on the Glebe, Dow’s Lake and Glebe Annex areas.

Discussion: Laura suggested that the motion be dealt with in two parts. Due to the GCA’s budget principles, the financial part of the motion ($5,000 ask) will be voted on in October. 

Board members discussed some friendly amendments to the motion: adding potential negative impacts on nearby heritage buildings as one of the considerations, and then adding ‘If the development proceeds’ to the “be it resolved” clause about working collaboratively with the City and developer. 

The motion was presented by Carmen and seconded by Carolyn. Motion carried.

Items for discussion:

  • GCA Budget:

Ahmed Ibrahim presented the draft budget for Board members to review. It is similar to last year’s budget, with a slight increase in the expected revenue for memberships.

The budget will be voted on at the October meeting.

  • Code of Conduct:

Laura presented the draft code of conduct and asked for feedback. Board members were supportive of this document to be used as a guide for the GCA in its meetings and communications.

The Code of Conduct will be voted on at the October meeting.

President’s Report:

Laura provided updates on the following topics:

  • The Sept. 16th all candidates’ debate for the federal election: she thanked all who participated in organizing the event. Over 350 people registered and plans are in place to organize another debate for the provincial election in June 2022.
  • Windows initiative: she referred board members to an update from John Humphries, included in the agenda for the meeting, on the work that was done to replace 11 selected windows in the GCC with new highly energy efficient windows and to undertake air sealing work. Laura shared positive feedback from the City on the work that was completed.
  • Meeting with the Councillor: Laura met with Shawn Menard on Sept. 28th and they discussed the city budget. Laura encouraged Board members to start thinking about what we might want to see in the budget, including both small and large projects. Laura will send an email to the Board asking for suggestions.
  • GCA in-person social gathering: Laura asked Board members if anyone would be interested in a social gathering. She plans to send a follow-up email to organize this.

Issues from the Community:

  • Hospital development:
Diane McIntyre shared with the board her concerns about the development of the new Ottawa Hospital Civic Campus on Central Experimental Farm and NCC land.

Laura Smith had sent a letter on behalf of the GCA to the mayor and city officials outlining the GCA’s position, but Diane noted the importance of having as many voices as possible on a variety of issues including traffic impacts, especially in combination with other planned developments (such as the proposed tower at Bronson & Carling), related pedestrian and cyclist safety, access to green space for people who live in downtown communities, and climate change as it relates to health and city goals with respect to increased tree canopy. She encouraged people to speak up from all GCA committees.

Adjournment 

Della put forward the motion to adjourn which was seconded by Bob. Motion carried. Meeting was adjourned.