1.            VILLAGE OF CARP - COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN

 

VILLAGE DE CARP - PLAN DE CONCEPTION COMMUNAUTAIRE

 

 

 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED

 

That Council:

 

1.         Approve the Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp, subject to the following amendment:

 

That Schedule A be amended to change the designation of the properties located on Rivington Street from “Village Core” to “Residential – Ground Oriented Multi Unit”.

 

2.         Adopt Ottawa Official Plan Amendment xx to repeal the Village Plan for Carp that is in Volume 2C of the Official Plan.

 

3.         Adopt Amendment xx to the Official Plan of the former Township of West Carleton to delete Section 6(8)(g) and Schedule "B" as they relate to the Village of Carp.

 

 

RECOMMANDATIONs MODIFIéES DU COMITÉ

 

Que le Conseil :

 

1.         approuve le plan de conception communautaire du village de Carp, sous réserve des modifications suivantes :

 

Que l’annexe A soit modifiée afin de remplacer la désignation « Centre du village » des propriétés situées rue Rivington par la désignation « Résidentiel – Immeuble bas à logements multiples ».

 

2.         adopte la modification xx au Plan officiel d’Ottawa afin d’abroger le plan du village de Carp qui figure dans le volume 2C du Plan officiel;

 

3.         adopte la modification xx au Plan officiel de l’ancien Canton de West Carleton visant à supprimer l’alinéa 6(8)(g) et l’annexe B en ce qui concerne le village de Carp.

 

Documentation

 

1.                  Planning and Growth Management Deputy City Manager’s report dated 10 June 2004 (ACS2004-DEV-POL-0031).

 

2.                  Extract of Draft Minutes, 22 June 2004.


Report to/Rapport au :

 

Planning and Environment Committee

Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement

 

and Council / et au Conseil

 

10 June 2004 / le 10 juin 2004

 

Submitted by/Soumis par : Ned Lathrop, Deputy City Manager / Directeur municipal adjoint

Planning and Growth Management / Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance

 

Contact Person/Personne ressource : Richard Kilstrom, Manager / Gestionnaire

Community Design and Environment / Conception et milieu communautaire

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

 

West Carleton (5)

Ref N°: ACS2004-DEV-POL-0031

 

SUBJECT:

VILLAGE OF CARP - COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN

 

 

OBJET :

VILLAGE DE CARP – PLAN DE CONCEPTION COMMUNAUTAIRE

 

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

 

That Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council:

 

1.         Approve the Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp.

 

2.         Adopt Ottawa Official Plan Amendment xx to repeal the Village Plan for Carp that is in Volume 2C of the Official Plan.

 

3.         Adopt Amendment xx to the Official Plan of the former Township of West Carleton to delete Section 6(8)(g) and Schedule "B" as they relate to the Village of Carp

 

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

 

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

 

1.         d’approuver le plan de conception communautaire du village de Carp;

 

2.         d’adopter la modification xx au Plan officiel d’Ottawa afin d’abroger le plan du village de Carp qui figure dans le volume 2C du Plan officiel;

 

3.         d’adopter la modification xx au Plan officiel de l’ancien Canton de West Carleton visant à supprimer l’alinéa 6(8)(g) et l’annexe B en ce qui concerne le village de Carp.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The Official Plan for Carp that was adopted by the former Township of West Carleton in 1992 did not plan for the eventual full servicing and development of all of the lands located within the current village boundary.  Ottawa City Council has recognized the need for a plan to provide direction for how Carp will develop in the future and has made the completion of a Community Design Plan a priority.  Section 2.5.7 of the Official Plan contains the following policy:

"The Village of Carp and the Carp Road Corridor will be the subject of individual Community Design exercises, both of which are to be completed by the end of 2003. The results of these exercises will be used to determined the boundaries of the Rural Employment Area and the policies associated with it and the detailed land use designations for each of the areas that will be incorporated by separate amendments into the Official Plan." 

 

The Community Design Plan (CDP) for the Village of Carp is the result of a collaborative community effort.  The community worked with City staff to develop the vision for the future and to develop strategies for achieving the vision.  The Community Design Plan provides detailed policies to more closely align growth and change to the community’s expectations.

 

This CDP replaces the Official Plan 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.  As the CDP provides for the village to be fully serviced, a new comprehensive land use plan is required to direct future development within the village.

 

DISCUSSION

 

The village boundary for Carp was established in the former Township of West Carleton Official Plan in 1979.  When municipal sewer services were provided to the village, the Ministry of Environment who funded 75% of the project, established the sewer capacity at 700 dwelling units.  The existing capacity does not provide for development of all of the lands within the village boundary.  When the services were provided to Carp, the lands that were not allocated sewer capacity were designated as Temporary Open Space in the Official Plan until such time as sewer capacity was made available. 

 

There are currently 130 ha of land designated for residential purposes within the Village boundary.  Most of this land has been developed.  There are 52 ha of vacant land within the village that is currently designated Temporary Open Space until additional servicing capacity becomes available. 

 

In the workshops that were held during the development of this community design plan, participants felt that the village should be permitted to grow in the future and fully develop within the village boundary.  They indicated that they envisioned Carp as being a complete community that provides a range of housing opportunities for everyone in the village.  The need for affordable housing for families, seniors and young people was identified as a priority in the village.  Growth is also seen as important to encourage/support the development and enhancement of the village core.

 

In 2003 the population of Carp was estimated to be 1,350.  It is anticipated that with full development of all of the land within the village boundary the population of Carp has the potential to grow in the range of 3,000 to 4,200 people.  The Community Design Plan provides detailed policies to more closely align this growth and change to the community’s expectations.  The CDP has 9 components:

 

1.         The Vision for Carp

 

Contains the vision and the objectives for the plan that were developed in the community workshops.

 

2.         Managing Growth

 

Provides for the upgrading of servicing capacity to provide for the full development of the lands within the village boundary.

 

Contains policies for environmental protection with specific measures for improvements along the Carp River.

 

3.         Land Use

 

Provides a detailed land use plan and policies for how Carp will develop in the future.

 

Addresses the need for a mix of housing opportunities and identifies areas to be reserved for different residential dwelling types.

 

4.         Protecting and Enhancing the Village Core

 

Contains policies to promote the development/redevelopment in the village core.

 

Provides design guidelines for new development and recommends specific actions/programs to improve the village core.

 

5.         Road Network and Right-of-Way Protection

 

Allows for the reduction of the ROW protection to protect the heritage character of the Village Core.

 

6.         Attracting Visitors to Carp

 

Designates the lands adjacent to the Carp Fairgrounds to provide the opportunity for expansion.

 

Recommends that a local champion (organization) be identified to investigate the feasibility of creating a Heritage Park (agricultural museum).

 

Provides a plan for how the CFS Carp/Diefenbunker site will be developed in the future.

 

7.         Recreation and Open Space

 

Contains a strategy to provide for more recreation facilities to meet the needs of the community as it grows.

 

Identifies a pedestrian pathway system to provide pedestrian access to different parts of the village.

 

8.         Implementation

 

Requires that the performance of the CDP be monitored to assess if the actions proposed have been carried out and whether they have had the desired effect.

 

9.         Summary of Priorities and Responsibilities

 

Provides a summary of the actions, responsibilities and timing required to implement the Plan.

 

Official Plan Amendments

 

1.  New Official Plan

Section 2.5.7, Policy 8 of the Official Plan states that community design plans will be approved by Council as policy documents to guide future development.  Policy 9 states that Secondary Plans existing prior to the formation of the new City of Ottawa are included in Volume 2 and that over time community design plans will replace many of these secondary plans.  The secondary plan for the village of Carp is found in Volume 2C.  The Official Plan will be amended to delete the reference to Carp in the village plan for "Carp, Constance Bay, Dunrobin, Fitzroy Harbour, Galetta, Kinburn" in Volume 2C as the secondary plan will be superseded by the community design plan.  The Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp will be approved by City Council, as a policy document, to guide the long-term growth and development of Carp, based on the vision of the village that the residents of Carp hold.  It will provide guidelines for the day-to-day decision-making on land use planning, such as subdivision, zoning and site plan applications, and it sets out the community’s priorities for the future.

 

2.  West Carleton Official Plan

As the Ottawa Official Plan is under appeal, the Official Plan of the former Township of West Carleton is still in effect.  The Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp provides new policies to guide future growth in the village and it replaces the old policies in the Official Plan.  The West Carleton Official Plan will be amended to delete Section 6(8)(g) and Schedule "B" as they relate to the village of Carp.

 


DISCUSSION

 

How the Plan was Developed

 

The development of the Community Design Plan for Carp used a collaborative community building process that emphasized shared values and mutual obligation.  The objective was to make decisions that clearly respond to real issues and achieve community support through a bottom-up rather than top-down approach.  This philosophy had three components:

 

·                    collaboration – everyone works together to realize a common vision,

·                    community – comprising residents, community groups, landowners, tenants, businesses, developers and institutions,

·                    building – strengthening and improving.

 

Two workshops were held in the community at which participants worked in focus groups to develop a vision for Carp and to choose strategies to achieve the vision.  At the first workshop participants were asked to provide a vision for how they wanted the village of Carp to develop in the future.  At the second workshop participants were asked to fill out a workbook and answer questions to identify strategies to achieve their vision for Carp. 

 

A draft of the Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp was made available on the City of Ottawa web site and at the Carp Fairgrounds.  A flyer was sent to all landowners in the village advertising the Plan and community meeting to discuss the Community Design Plan.

 

Issues Raised During the Consultation

 

Twenty-seven people provided comments on the draft Plan.  Most of the comments received (20) raised concerns about the amount of population growth and the density being proposed for the village.  They do not feel that high and medium density residential, which provides for apartments and row houses, is appropriate in a rural village.  They indicated that they do not want Carp to become another Stittsville.  They want Carp to remain as a rural village.  The main issues are summarized below.

 

Comment - The amount of growth proposed is not appropriate.

 

Response - The draft Plan provided for a population of 3,500 to 5,100.  The population provided for in the Plan has been reduced to 3,000 to 4,200.  This was achieved by changing the amount of development that would be permitted on two large undeveloped sites in the village.  The 7 ha site at the entrance to the village on Donald B. Munroe Drive has been revised to allow only detached dwellings and duplex units and not apartments and multiple unit development and the 11 ha site south of the CFS Carp site now provides for more detached dwelling units.  These changes substantially reduce the amount of development provided for in the Plan.  However,  Plan continues to provide the opportunity for a range of housing types to address the original objectives.

 

The revised population provided for in the Plan is 3,000 to 4,200.  Since 1996 Carp has grown an average of 4.4% per year.  The Plan provides for the full development of Carp over a 20 year time horizon and a 4.4% rate of growth would project a population of 3,000 by 2024, consistent with what is provided for in the Plan.

 

Comment - High and Medium Density is not appropriate in the village.

 

Response - The name of the Residential designations have been changed to provide a better description of the types of development that is proposed for the designation. The purpose of the residential designations is to provide a range of dwelling units to meet the future housing needs in the village rather than focusing on density.  Lot sizes in the village will be consistent with those already established in the current zoning by-law. 

 

Residential - High Density has been changed to Residential - Multi-Unit.  This designation provides for apartments and ground oriented multiple unit development.

 

Residential - Medium Density has been changed to Residential - Ground Oriented Multi-Unit.  This designation provides for ground oriented multiple units, detached and duplex dwellings.

 

Residential Low Density has been changed to Residential - One and Two Unit Dwellings. This designation provides for detached and duplex dwellings.

 

Comment - Carp should not grow beyond 700 dwelling units, the current servicing capacity.

 

Response- When municipal sewer services were provided to the village, the Ministry of Environment funded 75% of the project, established the sewer capacity at 700 dwelling units.  The existing capacity does not provide for development of all of the lands within the village boundary. The lands that were not allocated sewer capacity were designated as Temporary Open Space in the West Carleton Official Plan until such time as sewer capacity was made available.  At the workshops 95% of participants felt that the village of Carp should develop and grow in the future.  Most residents felt that development should take place within the village boundaries on lands currently designed Temporary Open Space in the current Plan for Carp.  The Community Design Plan provides guidance for how all of the lands within the village boundary will be developed in the future.

 

Comment - The infrastructure - recreation facilities, schools, and infrastructure in the village cannot handle this amount of growth.

 

Response  - The infrastructure for Carp can accommodate or can be improved to accommodate the growth provided for in the Plan.  The Plan provides for sufficient recreation facilities - a new neighbourhood park is proposed at the southern end of the village.  The school board has indicated that there is sufficient space at Huntley Centennial School site to accommodate the growth anticipated by the Plan.  Water and sewer services for Carp will be upgraded to service the additional growth.

 


Comment - Do not want Carp to become another Stittsville.

 

Response - The amount of development that is contemplated is not comparable to Stittsville.  The current population of Stittsville is 15,000.  The Plan for Carp provides for a range of 3,000 to 4,200 people which is comparable to other villages in the City.  The villages of Constance Bay (2,610), Osgoode (2770), Greely (4,150), Richmond (4,160), and Manotick (5160) are comparable as they are currently at or above the population provided for the CDP for Carp.  In addition the densities for the  village of Carp are not (and will not be) as great those in the urban area of Stittsville.  The current zoning by-law (from the former Township of West Carleton) sets out the requirements for apartments, multi-unit and detached dwelling units that are appropriate for a rural village.  No significant change is proposed.  A policy has been added to the Community Design Plan (Section 3.3.1) to ensure that development in Carp will be on the basis of lot sizes appropriate for a village.

 

Comment - No to town houses and apartments.  Keep Carp as a rural village.

 

Response - In the workshops that were held during the development of this community design plan, participants indicated that they envisioned Carp as being a complete community that provides a range of housing opportunities for everyone in the village.  At the workshop apartments and row houses were seen as being appropriate by most participants.

 

The need for affordable housing for families, seniors and young people was identified as a priority in the village.  The Plan provides a range of housing types: apartment, townhouses and detached dwelling units to provide for the future housing needs of the community.  With the exception of the seniors home there are limited opportunities for accommodation for seniors. There are few opportunities for young people.  Apartment units exist in Carp but there currently only 20 units built.  Providing opportunities for seniors’ accommodation to meet the needs of the aging population was identified as a priority during the consultation process.  The three sites designated that permit apartments are attractive locations for seniors’ accommodation: they are near the medical centre, village core or adjacent to the existing seniors' home.  A policy has been added to the Plan stating that the City will promote these sites (Residential- Multiple Unit ) to the development community as opportunities for seniors' housing.  The designation provides the opportunity for this type of development. 

 

Comment - Maintain large lot sizes in the village.

 

Response - The larger lots in the village were created on the basis of private services, prior to 1992, before sewer and water services in the village were available.  As the village is serviced, new detached units will be on lot sizes provided for in the former West Carleton zoning by-law for serviced development.  

 

Comment - The Plan designated open space but does not identify a pedestrian network/pathway system for the village.  Much of the Open Space is not suited to pathways.

 

Response:  A schedule has been added (Schedule C) to delineate the pedestrian network which consists of pathways and sidewalks.

 

Comment - The Local Architectural Advisory Committee recommended that Section 4.8 - policy 2 be revised to delete the phrase "If it is found that these older buildings are not being retained or if new forms of development are found generally to be incompatible... then a process will be launched".

 

Response:  Policy 2 has been revised to state "The merits of applying more restrictive provisions using a Heritage District designation and establishing complementary zoning controls or other mechanisms in the Village Core may be considered in the future."

 

Comment - Add the Coop on Rivington Street to the Village Core.

Response - The site was designated Residential in the draft Plan.  This site has potential for redevelopment and has been added to the Village Core

 

Comment - The conceptual road link shown on Figure 2 is not appropriate for the main intersection - it is already a difficult intersection - it will add congestion.

 

Response - The conceptual road link to the Carp Road- Donald B. Munroe Drive intersection has been deleted.

 

Comment  - the traffic circle shown on Figure 2 at the intersection of Carp Road- Donald B. Munroe Drive is not appropriate- there is not enough space at the intersection and it will endanger the safety of pedestrians.

 

Response - The traffic circle has been deleted.

 

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

 

Recommendations from the Carp River Watershed/Subwatershed Study and the Village of Carp Environmental Management Plan to improve the Carp River will be implemented through the Community Design Plan. An Environmental Management Plan will be prepared for Carp Village to present revised stormwater management options to conform with the Carp River Watershed/Subwatershed Study.

 

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

 

The Community Design Plan provides for the eventual full servicing and development of all of the lands located within the current village boundary.  It is anticipated that with full development of all of the land within the village boundary the population of Carp has the potential to grow in the range of 3,000 to 4,200 people (the current population is 1,350).  The Community Design Plan provides detailed policies to align this growth and change to the community’s expectations.   

 

CONSULTATION

 

A collaborative community process was used to develop the Community Design Plan.  Two workshops were held with focus groups in the community to develop the vision and the strategies to achieve that vision.

 

A flyer was sent to all landowners in the Village:

 

a)         advising that a draft of the Community Design Plan was available for review, and

 

b)         extending an invitation to attend a community meeting to discuss the Plan.  The community meeting was held at the Carp Fairgrounds hall on April 14, 2004 with 60 people in attendance.  Everyone who attended the community meeting or provided comments on CDP has been advised of the Planning and Environment Committee meeting.

 

Twenty-seven submissions providing comments on the draft Community Design Plan were received.  The issues raised are discussed above.  Everyone that provided comments on the CDP has been advised of the Planning and Environment Committee meeting.

 

Councillor El-Chantiry is aware of the Community Design Plan Process.

 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

 

New development in Carp will be financed through development charges.  Based on preliminary estimates which have been compiled to consider the infrastructure related costs of growth anticipated in the Community Design Plan, it appears that the growth in Carp is affordable, similar to the current estimates for growth outside the Greenbelt. 

 

Some projects required to support growth may provide a benefit to existing residents.  Such benefits would be charged to the water/sewer reserve fund.

 

Financial recovery by-laws will be amended to account for the additional growth in Carp.  These must be in place by the end of 2005.

 

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

 

Document 1 -   Ottawa Official Plan Amendment XX

Document 2 - Official Plan Amendment xx to the West Carleton Official Plan

Document 3 -   Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp (Distributed separately and on file with the City Clerk)

 

DISPOSITION

 

1.         The Planning and Development Department will issue the Notice of Decision within the 20 day appeal period for Ottawa Official Plan Amendment XX and Amendment xx to the West Carleton Official Plan.

 

2.         The Planning and Development Department will revise Annex 5 to the Official Plan to indicate that the Village of Carp is subject to a Community Design Plan (replacing the reference to a Village Plan). 

 


                                                                                                                                        Document 1

 

AMENDMENT xx

OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE

CITY OF OTTAWA

 

 

 

PART A.  THE PREAMBLE

 

Purpose

The purpose of Amendment XX is to delete the reference to Carp in the village plan for "Carp, Constance Bay, Dunrobin, Fitzroy Harbour, Galetta, Kinburn" in Volume 2C as the secondary plan for Carp will be superseded by the community design plan. 

 

Basis

The Official Plan for Carp that was adopted by the former Township of West Carleton in 1992 did not plan for the eventual full servicing and development of all of the lands located within the current village boundary.  Ottawa City Council has recognized the need for a plan to provide direction for how Carp will develop in the future and has made the completion of a Community Design Plan a priority. 

 

The Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp 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.  The Community Design 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.

 

The Community Design Plan

Section 2.5.7, policy 8 of the Official Plan states that community design plans will be approved by Council as policy documents to guide future development.  Policy 9, states that secondary plans existing prior to the formation of the new City of Ottawa are included in Volume 2 and that over time community design plans will replace many of these secondary plans.  The secondary plan for the village of Carp is found in Volume 2C.  This amendment deletes the reference to Carp in the village plan for "Carp, Constance Bay, Dunrobin, Fitzroy Harbour, Galetta, Kinburn" in Volume 2C as the secondary plan for Carp will be superceded by the community design plan.  The Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp will be approved by City Council, as a policy document, to guide the long-term growth and development of Carp, based on the vision of the village that the residents of Carp hold.  It will provide guidelines for the day-to-day decision-making on land use planning, such as subdivision, zoning and site plan applications, and it sets out the community’s priorities for the future.

 


Section 2.5.7 policy 10 states:

"The Village of Carp and the Carp Road Corridor will be the subject of individual Community Design exercises, both of which are to be completed by the end of 2003.  The results of these exercises will be used to determined the boundaries of the Rural Employment Area and the policies associated with it and the detailed land use designations for each of the areas that will be incorporated by separate amendments into the Official Plan."

 

As the Community Design Plans for the Village of Carp and the Carp Road Corridor have been completed, this policy is no longer necessary and can be deleted from the Plan.

 

PART B. THE AMENDMENT

 

Volume 2C

Ottawa Official Plan Volume 2C “Village Plans for Carp, Constance Bay, Dunrobin, Fitzroy Harbour, Galetta, Kinburn” is amended by:

1.      Deleting the reference to Carp in the title so that it reads Constance Bay, Dunrobin, Fitzroy Harbour, Galetta. Kinburn.

2.      Section 6(8)(a) is amended by deleting the words          Carp    Schedule “B”

3.      Sections 6(8)(b), (c), (d) (e), (f) are amended by deleting the phrase “Village Schedules on Schedules “B” to “G” and replacing it with “Village Schedules on Schedules “C” to “G”’

4.      Schedule “B” (the land use plan) for Carp is deleted

5.      Section 6(8)(g) “The Village of Carp – Schedule B” is deleted

 

Section 2.5.7

  1. Section 2.5.7 is amended by deleting policy 10.

 

 


                                                                                                                                        Document 2

 

AMENDMENT xx

OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE

FORMER TOWNSHIP OF WEST CARLETON

 

PART A.  THE PREAMBLE

 

Purpose

The purpose of Amendment XX is to delete Section 6(8) (g) and Schedule “B” of the Official Plan of the former Township of West Carleton as the policies for the Village of Carp will be superseded by the Community Design Plan. 

 

Basis

The Official Plan for Carp that was adopted by the former Township of West Carleton in 1992 did not plan for the eventual full servicing and development of all of the lands located within the current village boundary.  Ottawa City Council has recognized the need for a plan to provide direction for how Carp will develop in the future and has made the completion of a Community Design Plan a priority. 

 

The Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp 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.  The Community Design 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.

 

The Community Design Plan

Section 2.5.7, policy 8 of the Ottawa Official Plan states that community design plans will be approved by Council as policy documents to guide future development.  Section 6(8) (g) and Schedule B of the West Carleton Official Plan relate to the Village of Carp and will be superceded by the community design plan.  The Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp will be approved by City Council, as a policy document, to guide the long-term growth and development of Carp, based on the vision of the village that the residents of Carp hold.  It will provide guidelines for the day-to-day decision-making on land use planning, such as subdivision, zoning and site plan applications, and it sets out the community’s priorities for the future.

 

PART B. THE AMENDMENT

 

The Official Plan of the former Township of West Carleton is amended as follows:

1.      Section 6(8)(a) is amended by deleting the words          Carp    Schedule “B”

2.      The first sentence of Sections 6(8)(b), (c), (d) (e), (f) are amended by deleting the phrase “on Schedules “B” to “G” of this Plan” and replacing it with “Village Schedules on Schedules “C” to “G” of this Plan”

3.      Schedule “B” (the land use plan) for Carp is deleted

4.      Section 6(8)(g) “The Village of Carp – Schedule B” is deleted


VILLAGE OF CARP - COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN

VILLAGE DE CARP - PLAN DE CONCEPTION COMMUNAUTAIRE

ACS2004-DEV-POL-0031                                                          west carleton (5)

 

Chair Hume began by reading a statement required under the Planning Act, which advised that anyone who intended to appeal this proposed Official Plan Amendment to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), must either voice their objections at the public meeting, or submit their comments in writing prior to the amendment being adopted by City Council. Failure to do so could result in refusal/dismissal of the appeal by the OMB.

 

Dennis Jacobs, Director, Planning, Environment and Infrastructure Policy, and Miles Mahon, Planner, appeared before the Committee with respect to departmental report dated 10 June 2004.  Mr. Mahon provided a comprehensive PowerPoint presentation, a copy of which is held on file with the City Clerk.

 

Councillor Eli El-Chantiry thanked staff for the work accomplished on the Village Plan and submitted an amendment to modify the Design Plan, which would assist the Committee.  Councillor Hunter agreed to move the Motion on his behalf.  Whereas the Planning and Environment Commiteee recommend that Council approve th Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp, subject to the following amendment:  That Schedule A be amended to change designation of the properties located on Rivington Street from “Village Core” to “Residential-Ground Oriented Multi Unit.  The Motion was presented at the outset to allow delgations to comment thereon.  Mr. Mahon explained there was no problem from a staff perspective.  The original plan proposed one and two unit residential, which was revised to village core after the community meeting, to capture the idea of encouraging redevelopment of the co-op.  The community opined a residential designation is more appropriate.  If the feed store is redeveloped, it would be for residential purposes, consistent with that contemplated in the plan.

 

The Committee heard from the following delegations:

 

Allan Joyner, Carp Ridge Society, provided a detailed written submission, which was circulated and is held on file with the City Clerk.  Mr. Joyner opined the process was stopped short of its goal.  Another communications initiative should be undertaken that would explain the potential changes to village residents and provide a last opportunity for input.  Village residents would not concur with the proposed density that would see a doubling of the population over 20 years.  The Motion brought forward this morning is appropriate.  It did not make sense to include the co-op store in the core designation area.

 

Murray Chown, Novatech Engineering on behalf of Len Payne, recognized the work accomplished by staff, which represented discussion that has taken place on this Community Design Plan (CDP).  The CDP document accurately represents these discussions.  In particular, he came away from the work shops and various meetings with a clear understanding there was a strong support to encourage development and redevelopment of the core of this Village to reach its potential.  There are two aspects to that.  One is to accommodate additional growth and the plan before Committee does that.  There are numerous barriers to growth in the Village in the existing West Carleton OP documents, which were incorporated into the City’s new OP.  The amendments before Committee will eliminate those barriers and he strongly supported that on behalf of a number of his clients who own property in the Village.  The second aspect, highlighted in the presentation, are the policies that would facilitate development and redevelopment in the core area and he does represent property owners in the core area as well.  He sought clarification with respect to the heritage properties in the Village core, found at p. 15 of the CDP.  He wanted to be clear this policy combined with Fig. 1 does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that every property shown on Fig. will necessarily be protected and asked for clarification that the intent is to provide a process for looking at opportunities to protect those buildings and, with that clarification, he would strongly recommend the Committee support the recommendations.

 

Following the presentation, Mr. Mahon clarified that Policy 1 states that built and natural features located in the village core that have historical significance to the community will be protected.  Future development should reflect or enhance the existing character of the core.  In terms of implementation of this policy, it will be primarily through zoning and at that point there will need to be a determination of what is significant.  Mr. Chown is correct that Figure 1 is a compilation of buildings of heritage interest, but there has been no determination on the methodology.

 

Hugh Urbach provided a written submission, in opposition, which was circulated and is held on file with the City Clerk.  Mr. Urbach addressed the west end of Rivington Street change and agreed with the proposed Motion.  Ideally that end of the street should remain single family, but residents realize there are two buildings that are presently core (funeral home and Carp Co-op).  Recognizing that, they agreed with the ground-level designation

 

Linda McCormick provided a written submission, in opposition, which was circulated and is held on file with the City Clerk.  She did agree with the Motion and Mr. Joyner’s suggestion that there be further consultation due to changes made.  There was opposition to the increased density.

 

In response to Councillor El-Chantiry on the pumping system, Mr. Mahon explained there were 430 houses on the system that was built to accommodate 760 households.

 

Gerald Augusta provided a written submission, in support, which was circulated and is held on file with the City Clerk.  He did, however, share Ms. McCormick’s views that there should be a broader scale planning exercise.

 


Bill Honeywell, Honeywell Investments, provided a written submission that was generally in support, which was circulated and is held on file with the City Clerk.  There was one concern.  Mr. Honeywell asked that access be provided from Langstaff to the lands to the rear, across the ravine.

 

Stan Carruthers, Team Member, Vision Committee, and Heritage Park of West Carleton, addressed the Committee in support of the Plan.  The Heritage Park of West-Carleton is an Ad Hoc Committee of historical societies, past Presidents of the Carp Fair, community centres, fire department and churches.  The Village of Carp has many older buildings and unfortunately when there were fires nothing was rebuilt, which gives the area the appearance of a disaster zone.  The Plan envisaged that anything rebuilt would enhance the Village similar to main street Manotick and Metcalfe.  However, with the Village, it was felt at the Planning and Visionary Committee, the number one topic was to contain the heritage look.  The heritage idea arose in 1992 when the City and Township of West-Carleton decided to join and one of the agreements discussed with the previous Council and Mayor was a location for the records from when the village was planned in the 1800’s.  That is how the Heritage Park came to be.  Also, the fairgrounds over these years provided considerable land for recreation, which squeezed their lands.  He referred to the areas in Metcalfe, Navan, Richmond, all of which are squeezed by development with no ability for growth.  He appreciated Mr. Honeywell’s concern for that one parcel; there is an unopened street beside Mamma’s and Papa’s Pizza that does have access from the Carp Road and the Donald B. Munro interchange.  They are trying to retain this land for future development.

 

The Committee also received correspondence (with a detailed submission in opposition) from Simon P. Thompson dated 15 June 2004, which was circulated and is held on file with the City Clerk.

 

Moved by Councillor G. Hunter:

 

Whereas the Planning and Environment Committee recommend that Council approve the Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp, subject to the following amendment:

 

That Schedule A be amended to change the designation of the properties located on Rivington Street from “Village Core” to “Residential – Ground Oriented Multi Unit”.

 

                                                                                                CARRIED

 

Responding to concerns raised with respect to the planning exercises in this area being treated separately, Mr. Jacobs advised that is not the case.  The exercises relate to very specific areas, but the planning itself has been done in coordination and the plans coming forward for the Airport, Carp Corridor, as well as Village of Carp, have been conducted in consultation with each.  Staff is clearly looking at the area as whole, but with separate plans.  With respect to the cost of growth, this would be covered by Development Charges (DC’s) and is included in the proposed Development Charge By-Law.  This is in support of the OP policy of concentrating development in developing areas such as villages.  Any revisions made today would come forward with respect to the OPA when it rises to Council without a need for further public meetings.

 

Councillor Hunter referred to the point by Mr. Honeywell on the need for a road to parallel the creek to Lanstaff to connect those two multi-unit residential areas.  Mr. Mahon responded that Schedule B depicts the road network and the collector/main roads.  New roads constructed through the development process will not require an amendment to the plan.  Responding further on the question of access to Lanstaff referred to by Messrs. Honeywell and Carruthers, Mr. Mahon explained that John street is not an open road and incorrectly shown on Schedule B.  The best means to access the property Mr. Honeywell referred to is from Langstaff and perhaps staff could meet with Mr. Honeywell and interested parties to revise the map before it rises to Council.

 

The Committee approveed the recommendations as amended.

 

That Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council:

 

1.         Approve the Community Design Plan for the Village of Carp, subject to the following amendment:

 

That Schedule A be amended to change the designation of the properties located on Rivington Street from “Village Core” to “Residential – Ground Oriented Multi Unit”.

 

2.         Adopt Ottawa Official Plan Amendment xx to repeal the Village Plan for Carp that is in Volume 2C of the Official Plan.

 

3.         Adopt Amendment xx to the Official Plan of the former Township of West Carleton to delete Section 6(8)(g) and Schedule "B" as they relate to the Village of Carp

 

                                                                                                            CARRIED as amended