8. DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW PILOT PROJECT PROJET PILOTE D’EXAMEN DE LA CONCEPTION URBAINE DU
CENTRE-VILLE
|
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED
That Council:
1. Establish a Downtown Design Review Pilot Project utilizing
the authority provided by the former City of Ottawa Act RSO 1959, to require
Design Review and Approval as part of the Site Plan Approval process for all
new development and for additions to existing development within the area as
shown on Document 1 that is included within the Council Approved Downtown
Ottawa Urban Design Strategy by:
a. Adopting Document 2 as a policy framework for the Downtown
Design Review Pilot Project.
b. Enacting a By-law pursuant to the provisions of the former
City of Ottawa Act RSO 1959 as set out in Document 3.
c. Approving and Adopting an Amendment to the City of Ottawa
Official Plan as set out in Document 4.
2. Approve the integration of the Downtown Design Review Pilot
Project into the current Development Review Process utilizing a Peer Design
Review Panel as detailed in Document 5, subject to the following amendment:
That one architect position
on the Design Review Panel be drawn from architects specializing in
environmental design
3. Endorse the Design Review Considerations set out in Document
6 for the Downtown Design Review Pilot Project.
4. Approve the Terms of Reference detailed in Document 7 for
the Peer Design Review Panel.
5. Direct staff to request the Ontario Association of
Architects and the Ontario Association of Landscape Architects to assist in
establishing a Peer Design Review Panel comprising 10 design professionals
(seven architects and three landscape architects) for the Downtown Design
Review Pilot Project and that staff bring forward a report to have Council
appoint the Peer Design Review Panel (as amended in 2. above).
6. Launch the Downtown Design Review Pilot Project when:
a. A Monitoring Program in accordance with the Principles set
out in Document 8 has been developed by staff in consultation with the Peer
Design Review Panel and that the Monitoring Program be established by November
30, 2004; and
b. The Department's development approval processes has been
modified to incorporate the design review and approval process detailed in
Document 5 for the processing of development applications within the Downtown
Design Review Pilot Project area shown in Document 1 and that the modifications
to the review processes and necessary staff training be completed by December
31, 2004.
7.
That
the term “Design Review” be replaced by “Urban Design Review”.
8.
That
City projects (including the redevelopment of streets, sidewalks,
intersections, lighting, traffic signals and signage, hard and soft
landscaping, furniture, bus shelters, and below grade utilities which may
affect or allow the growth of street trees) within the study area be subject to
this pilot project.
9.
That
staff be directed to include the 4 elements noted below to be referred to the
Ottawa By Design Initiative:
a.
That
staff be directed to appoint an internal urban design champion to
evaluate and coordinate all related municipal activities to ensure that urban
design goals are being actively considered incorporated across all departments;
and,
b.
That
staff be directed to incorporate the use of quality-based selection (QBS)
and the recognition of design excellence into the selection and
evaluation criteria in City initiated requests for proposals; and,
c.
That
urban design excellence be recognized on an ongoing and public basis through
the initiation of an urban design awards program; and,
d.
That
streetscape funding be allocated and incorporated into municipal
transportation, transit and infrastructure projects.
Que le Conseil :
1. établit un projet pilote d’examen de la
conception urbaine du centre-ville en vertu des pouvoirs conférés par la Loi
sur la Ville d’Ottawa, L.R.O. 1959, afin d’exiger l’examen et l’approbation
de la conception urbaine dans le cadre du processus d’approbation des plans
d’implantation visant tous les nouveaux projets d’aménagement et tous les
ajouts aux aménagements existants à l’intérieur de la zone indiquée dans le
document 1 compris dans la Stratégie de conception urbaine du centre-ville
d’Ottawa, approuvée par le Conseil :
a. en adoptant le document 2 comme le
cadre stratégique du projet pilote d’examen de la conception urbaine du
centre-ville;
b. en adoptant un règlement municipal
conformément aux dispositions de la Loi sur la Ville d’Ottawa, L.R.O.
1959, tel qu'énoncé dans le document 3;
c. en approuvant et adoptant une
modification du Plan officiel de la Ville d’Ottawa, telle qu'énoncée dans le
document 4;
2. approuve l’intégration du projet pilote
d’examen de la conception urbaine du centre-ville au processus actuel d’examen
des projets d’aménagement en faisant appel à un groupe d’examen par les pairs,
tel que décrit dans le document 5, sous réserve de la modification
suivante :
Que l'un des architectes
siégeant au sein du groupe d'examen par les pairs soit un architecte spécialisé
en conception de l'environnement;
3. avalise les considérations d’examen
énoncées dans le document 6 pour le projet pilote d’examen de la conception
urbaine du centre-ville;
4. approuve le mandat du groupe d’examen
par les pairs, décrit dans le document 7;
5. donne instruction au personnel de
demander à l’Ordre des architectes de l’Ontario et à l’Association des
architectes-paysagistes de l’Ontario d’aider à former le groupe d’examen par
les pairs, qui comprendra 10 professionnels du design (dont sept architectes et
trois architectes-paysagistes), aux fins du projet pilote d’examen de la
conception urbaine du centre-ville, et de demander au personnel de présenter un
rapport afin que le Conseil nomme les membres du groupe d’examen par les pairs (sous
réserve de la modification prévue à l'alinéa 2 ci-haut);
6. procéde au lancement du projet pilote
d’examen de la conception urbaine du centre-ville :
a. lorsqu’un programme de surveillance
conforme aux principes énoncés dans le document 8 aura été élaboré par le
personnel, en collaboration avec le groupe d’examen par les pairs, ce programme
devant être en place d’ici au 30 novembre 2004;
b. lorsque le processus d’approbation des
projets d’aménagement du Service aura été modifié pour inclure le processus
d’examen et d’approbation de la conception urbaine décrit dans le document 5
pour le traitement des demandes d’aménagement à l’intérieur de la zone visée
par le projet pilote d’examen de la conception urbaine du centre-ville,
indiquée dans le document 1, les modifications du processus d’examen et la
formation nécessaire du personnel devant être réalisées d’ici au 31 décembre
2004;
7.
remplace l'expression « examen de la conception » par
« examen de la conception urbaine »;
8.
subordonne au projet pilote les projets d'aménagement de la Ville (y
compris le réaménagement des rues, des trottoirs, des intersections, de
l'éclairage et de signalisation routière, l'aménagement paysager au moyen de
matériaux inertes et végétaux, le mobilier urbain, les abribus et les
canalisations souterraines qui pourraient entraver ou promouvoir la croissance
des arbres le long des rues) à l'intérieur de la zone d'étude;
9.
donne instruction au personnel d'inclure les quatre éléments suivants,
qui constitueront l'Initiative de conception d'Ottawa :
a.
la nomination d'un « champion de conception urbaine » interne
qui sera chargé d'évaluer et de coordonner toutes les activités municipales
pertinentes pour faire en sorte que les objectifs de conception urbaine sont
activement examinés et intégrés dans l'ensemble des Services;
b.
l'adoption d'un mode de sélection axée sur la qualité et la
reconnaissance de l'excellence de conception parmi les critères de
sélection et d'évaluation relativement aux demandes de propositions lancées par
la Ville;
c.
la reconnaissance continuelle et publique de l'excellence en conception
urbaine par la création d'un programme de prix de conception urbaine;
d.
l'affectation d'un financement pour les paysages de rue aux
projets municipaux de transport, de transport en commun et d'infrastructure.
Documentation
1. Planning
and Growth Management Deputy City Manager’s report dated
23 August 2004 (ACS2004-DEV-APR-0149).
2.
Extract of Draft Minutes, 14 September 2004 will be
distributed prior to Council.
Report to/Rapport au :
Comité de l'urbanisme et de
l'environnement
and Council / et au Conseil
23 August 2004 / le 23 août 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 : Grant Lindsay,
Manager / Gestionnaire
Development Approvals / Approbation des
demandes d'aménagement
(613) 580-2424 x13242, Grant.Lindsay@ottawa.ca
|
SUBJECT: |
DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW PILOT PROJECT -
(FILE NO. D04-01-DOW) |
|
|
OBJET : |
PROJET PILOTE
D’EXAMEN DE LA CONCEPTION URBAINE DU CENTRE-VILLE – (DOSSIER NO D04-01-DOW) |
REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Planning and Environment
Committee recommend that Council:
1. Establish
a Downtown Design Review Pilot Project utilizing the authority provided by the
former City of Ottawa Act RSO 1959, to require Design Review and Approval as
part of the Site Plan Approval process for all new development and for
additions to existing development within the area as shown on Document 1 that
is included within the Council Approved Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy
by:
a. Adopting Document 2 as a policy framework for the Downtown
Design Review Pilot Project.
b. Enacting a By-law pursuant to the provisions of the former
City of Ottawa Act RSO 1959 as set out in Document 3.
c. Approving and Adopting an Amendment to the City of Ottawa
Official Plan as set out in Document 4.
2. Approve
the integration of the Downtown Design Review Pilot Project into the current
Development Review Process utilizing a Peer Design Review Panel as detailed in
Document 5.
3. Endorse
the Design Review Considerations set out in Document 6 for the Downtown Design
Review Pilot Project.
4. Approve
the Terms of Reference detailed in Document 7 for the Peer Design Review Panel.
5. Direct
staff to request the Ontario Association of Architects and the Ontario
Association of Landscape Architects to assist in establishing a Peer Design
Review Panel comprising 10 design professionals (seven architects and three
landscape architects) for the Downtown Design Review Pilot Project and that
staff bring forward a report to have Council appoint the Peer Design Review
Panel.
6. Launch
the Downtown Design Review Pilot Project when:
a. A Monitoring Program in accordance with the Principles set
out in Document 8 has been developed by staff in consultation with the Peer
Design Review Panel and that the Monitoring Program be established by November
30, 2004; and
b. The Department's development approval processes has been
modified to incorporate the design review and approval process detailed in Document
5 for the processing of development applications within the Downtown Design
Review Pilot Project area shown in Document 1 and that the modifications to the
review processes and necessary staff training be completed by December 31,
2004.
RECOMMANDATIONS DU
RAPPORT
Que le Comité
de l’urbanisme et de l’environnement recommande ce qui suit au Conseil :
1. D’établir
un projet pilote d’examen de la conception urbaine du centre-ville en vertu des
pouvoirs conférés par la Loi sur la Ville d’Ottawa, L.R.O. 1959, afin d’exiger
l’examen et l’approbation de la conception urbaine dans le cadre du processus
d’approbation des plans d’implantation visant tous les nouveaux projets
d’aménagement et tous les ajouts aux aménagements existants à l’intérieur de la
zone indiquée dans le document 1 compris dans la Stratégie de conception
urbaine du centre-ville d’Ottawa, approuvée par le Conseil :
a. en
adoptant le document 2 comme le cadre stratégique du projet pilote d’examen de
la conception urbaine du centre-ville;
b. en
adoptant un règlement municipal conformément aux dispositions de la Loi sur la
Ville d’Ottawa, L.R.O. 1959, tel que décrit dans le document 3;
c. en
approuvant et adoptant une modification au Plan officiel de la Ville d’Ottawa,
tel que décrit dans le document 4.
2. D’approuver
l’intégration du projet pilote d’examen de la conception urbaine du
centre-ville au processus actuel d’examen des projets d’aménagement en faisant
appel à un groupe d’examen par les pairs, tel que décrit dans le document 5.
3. D’avaliser
les considérations d’examen énoncées dans le document 6 pour le projet pilote
d’examen de la conception urbaine du centre-ville.
4. D’approuver
le mandat du groupe d’examen par les pairs, décrit dans le document 7.
5. De
donner instruction au personnel de demander à l’Ordre des architectes de
l’Ontario et à l’Association des architectes-paysagistes de l’Ontario d’aider à
former le groupe d’examen par les pairs, qui comprendra 10 professionnels du
design (dont sept architectes et trois architectes-paysagistes), aux fins du
projet pilote d’examen de la conception urbaine du centre-ville, et de demander
au personnel de soumettre un rapport afin que le Conseil nomme les membres du
groupe d’examen par les pairs.
6. De
procéder au lancement du projet pilote d’examen de la conception urbaine du
centre-ville :
a. lorsqu’un
programme de surveillance conforme aux principes énoncés dans le document 8
aura été élaboré par le personnel, en collaboration avec le groupe d’examen par
les pairs, en visant à ce que le programme de surveillance soit en place d’ici
au 30 novembre 2004; et
b. lorsque
le processus d’approbation des projets d’aménagement du service aura été
modifié pour inclure le processus d’examen et d’approbation de la conception urbaine
décrit dans le document 5 pour le traitement des demandes d’aménagement à
l’intérieur de la zone visée par le projet pilote d’examen de la conception
urbaine du centre-ville, indiquée dans le document 1, en veillant à ce que les
modifications au processus d’examen et la formation nécessaire du personnel
aient été réalisées d’ici au 31 décembre 2004.
City Council on March 10, 2004, directed the
Planning and Growth Management Department to develop, in consultation with
stakeholder groups, a Pilot Project for integrating design review and approval
into the current development review process for the downtown. This directive is the first step taken by
Council in the implementation of the Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy also
approved by Council on March 10th.
Towards developing the Pilot Project, two
workshop sessions (April 15 and April 29, 2004) were held to engage
representatives of stakeholder groups in discussions to determine a scoped
approach and process for the Pilot Project.
This submission sets out a series of recommendations that reflect the
determinations made through the two workshop sessions held to establish the
Downtown Design Review Pilot Project.
Recommendation One establishes the legislative framework
for the Pilot Project to require design approval for all new development within
the area included within the Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy. This framework includes a Council policy for
the Pilot Project, a Design By-law enacted pursuant to the former City of
Ottawa Act and an Official Plan Amendment (OPA) to define the downtown as a
design control area. Under this framework, all development within the downtown
as defined in the OPA will require design approval by the Director of Planning and
Infrastructure Approvals. Design
approval would only be granted after design drawings which will be required as
part of site plan applications for downtown projects have been reviewed and
accepted by a Peer Design Review Panel comprising 10 practicing design
professionals (seven architects and three landscape architects) appointed by
Council. Recommendation Four provides
for Council approval of Terms of Reference for the Peer Design Review Panel and
Recommendation Five seeks Council direction for staff to request the Ontario
Association of Architects and the Ontario Association of Landscape Architects
to undertake a recruitment process to select members from within their
respective associations to participate on the review panel.
Recommendation Two provides for the design
review and approval process for the Pilot Project to be seamlessly integrated
into the current site plan approval process and provides that applications
submitted for Zoning and/or Official Plan Amendments that relate to proposals for
new development where no accompanying site plan is filed will also be subject
to design review.
Recommendation 3 provides for Council
endorsement of the design review considerations to be used by the Peer Design
Review Panel to establish a consistent basis for undertaking its review of
downtown development projects in the context of the Downtown Design Strategy
and urban design policy directives of the Official Plan.
Finally, Recommendation Six provides for not
launching the Pilot Project until a monitoring program is developed and
required modifications to the development approval process to integrate design
review into the development review process are made and staff training is
provided, with timelines set out to have the Pilot Project launched in January
2005.
RÉSUMÉ
Le 10 mars 2004, le Conseil municipal a demandé au
Service de l’urbanisme et de la gestion de la croissance d’élaborer, en
collaboration avec les groupes d’intervenants, un projet pilote pour intégrer
l’examen et l’approbation de la conception urbaine au processus actuel d’examen
des projets d’aménagement visant le centre-ville. Cette directive constituait
la première démarche du Conseil en vue de la mise en œuvre de la Stratégie de
conception urbaine du centre-ville d’Ottawa, également approuvée le 10 mars
2004.
Dans la perspective de l’élaboration du
projet pilote, deux ateliers ont été organisés (les 15 et 29 avril 2004) afin
d’amorcer une discussion avec les représentants des groupes d’intervenants,
laquelle devait permettre de définir la méthode et le processus du projet
pilote. Ce rapport présente une série de recommandations reflétant les
décisions prises durant les deux ateliers tenus en vue de l’établissement du
projet pilote d’examen de la conception urbaine du centre-ville.
La première recommandation établit le
cadre législatif du projet pilote afin d’exiger l’approbation de la conception
pour tout nouvel aménagement à l’intérieur de la zone visée par la Stratégie de
conception urbaine du centre-ville d’Ottawa. Ce cadre législatif comprend une
politique du Conseil pour le projet pilote, l’adoption d’un règlement sur la
conception des aménagements, conforme à la Loi sur la Ville d’Ottawa, ainsi
qu’une modification au Plan officiel (MPO) définissant le centre-ville comme
une zone de contrôle de la conception urbaine. Aux termes de ce cadre
législatif, tous les projets d’aménagement prévus au centre-ville, tel que
défini dans la MPO, devront être approuvés par le directeur de l’approbation
des demandes d’aménagement et d’infrastructure. L’approbation ne sera accordée
qu’une fois que les plans de concepts, exigés comme partie intégrante des
demandes d’approbation de plans d’implantation visant des projets d’aménagement
au centre-ville, auront été examinés et acceptés par un groupe d’examen par les
pairs, formé de 10 professionnels du design (dont sept architectes et trois
architectes-paysagistes) et nommé par le Conseil. La quatrième recommandation
vise l’approbation par le Conseil du mandat du groupe d’examen par les pairs.
La cinquième recommandation vise à ce que le Conseil donne instruction au
personnel de demander à l’Ordre des architectes de l’Ontario et à l’Association
des architectes-paysagistes de l’Ontario d’entreprendre un processus de
recrutement afin de choisir, parmi leurs membres, les personnes qui les
représenteront au sein du groupe d’examen par les pairs.
La deuxième recommandation prévoit un
processus d’examen et d’approbation de la conception pour le projet pilote, qui
sera pleinement intégré au processus actuel d’approbation des plans
d’implantation. Cette recommandation prévoit également que les demandes visant
des modifications au zonage et/ou au Plan officiel liées à de nouveaux projets
d’aménagement pour lesquels aucun plan d’implantation n’a été déposé feront
aussi l’objet d’un examen de la conception.
La troisième recommandation prévoir
l’approbation par le Conseil des considérations de l’examen de la conception
auxquelles le groupe d’examen par les pairs fera appel pour assurer
l’application uniforme du processus d’examen visant les projets d’aménagement
au centre-ville, dans le contexte de la Stratégie de conception urbaine du
centre-ville d’Ottawa et des directives en matière de politiques de conception
urbaine énoncées dans le Plan officiel.
Enfin, la sixième recommandation prévoit
de ne procéder au lancement du projet pilote qu’une fois qu’un programme de
surveillance aura été établi; que les modifications requises au processus
d’approbation des projets d’aménagement auront été effectuées afin d’intégrer
l’examen de la conception au processus d’examen des projets d’aménagement; et
que le personnel aura suivi la formation pertinente, le tout dans la
perspective du lancement du projet pilote en janvier 2005.
BACKGROUND
The new Ottawa Official Plan has established policies
that encourage a dialogue on urban design with its many neighborhoods, the
development industry, professional associations and other interested
parties. Through this dialogue the City
intends to build a stronger culture of design and greater awareness of how
urban design can contribute to the quality of the City’s urban
environment.
On March 10, 2004 City Council approved the
“Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy”, one of the first design focused initiatives
emanating from the new Official Plan.
The Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy (Downtown Design Strategy) was
developed with extensive public involvement. The overarching aim of the
strategy is to improve the urban experience of the downtown through a series of
actions that enhance the quality of the public realm and urban environment
On March 10, 2004, Council also approved a
staff report directing the Planning and Growth Management Department to
develop, in consultation with stakeholders, a pilot project for integrating
design review into the development review process for the downtown. This
initiative is not unique to Ottawa.
Throughout North America and across Canada, many mid-size and larger
cities including Niagara Falls, Toronto, Markham, Montreal and Vancouver have
developed or are developing processes using design review panels as an element
of development review and approval processes.
DISCUSSION
This submission sets out a series of
recommendations to establish the Downtown Design Review Pilot Project. The
recommendations reflect determinations made through two workshop sessions held
with stakeholder groups (April 15, 2004 and April 29, 2004).
The Pilot Project is one initiative among others to implement the
Downtown Design Strategy. Other
initiatives will address City programs, requirements for land, and capital
projects. Through the Pilot Project, it
is expected that ongoing dialogue amongst stakeholders would continue towards
building a downtown design culture.
Development will be undertaken in a way that contributes to and enhances
the image and identity of the downtown through quality architecture, the
creation of vibrant streets and open spaces and a downtown that is pedestrian
friendly, safe and comfortable. The Pilot
Project will be monitored to also assist in determining a city-wide strategy
for integrating design review into the development review process as part of
the "Ottawa By Design" initiative that is also being undertaken by
the Planning and Growth Management Department.
Pilot Project Elements
The Downtown Design Review Pilot Project being recommended is comprised
of three key elements:
1. The
integration of design review and approval into the current development review
process dealing with matters of process, structure and operational issues.
2. The
considerations that will be used in assessing the design merits of development
proposals.
3. Monitoring of the Pilot Project to identify issues and concerns and initiate modifications to address these so the Pilot Project can evolve in a way that is responsive to needs and to assess how well the Pilot Project furthers the City's design objectives.
Recommendation 1 establishes the legislative
and operational framework for the Pilot Project which will utilize the
authority provided by the former City of Ottawa Act to require design review
and approval for all new development and additions to existing development
within the area that is included within the Downtown Design Strategy as shown
on Document 1. This design review and
approval will be integrated with the current site plan approval process.
As part of Recommendation 1, it is recommended
that Council adopt a policy framework for the Pilot Project. This policy framework will establish the
guiding principles for the Pilot Project, will provide direction for the
operation of the Peer Design Review Panel, specify the approval authority for
giving design approval, and will provide for adjustments to be made to the
Pilot Project where issues and concerns are identified through the monitoring
program. Document 2 sets out the
recommended policy framework on which the Pilot Project will be based.
Elements of this policy will be incorporated
into the Design By-law that is required under the former City of Ottawa Act and
into the Official Plan (OP) policies that will be incorporated into the new
OP. Both the Design By-law and OP
policies, in addition to establishing the framework required by the former City
of Ottawa Act for the Pilot Project, will serve as a framework for potential
expansion of design review to others areas of the city.
Pursuant to the provisions of the former City
of Ottawa Act, the municipality, is authorized to pass by-laws prohibiting the
construction or alteration of certain buildings or structures without first
having obtained approval for the plans and specifications of the exterior
design. Document 3 sets out a draft
by-law for enactment by Council to allow the City to exercise design review and
approval authority within the downtown.
Where the City proposes to exercise design
review and approval authority for lands not specifically identified in the
enabling legislation, these areas are to be specifically identified within the
Official Plan. The former City of
Ottawa Official Plan includes Schedule E, which includes all of the area to be
included within the Downtown Design Review Pilot Project as an area subject to
design review and approval. The one area not included is the University of
Ottawa, however, the University would be subject to design review and approval
under the former City of Ottawa Act.
To extend the authority of the Design By-law
(Document 3) to cover the area included in the Downtown Design Strategy, an
amendment to the new Official Plan is required. As part of Recommendation 1, it
is recommended that such an amendment by adopted, which will in effect carry
over the authority that now exists under the former City of Ottawa OP into the
new Ottawa OP. This amendment is
included in Document 4.
Extension of design review and approval to
other areas of the city would require future Official Plan Amendments to
designate additional design control areas in the new OP. The determination of potential expansion of
design review and approval to areas outside the downtown is one initiative that
may fall out of the "Ottawa By Design" initiative.
The Downtown Design Review Pilot Project will
occur within and as part of the current site plan approval process. Proponents of development where Zoning
By-law and/or Official Plan Amendments are being requested therefore will be
encouraged to submit a site plan application at the same time as these other
applications. Should a proponent not
wish to pursue obtaining site plan approval concurrently with a Zoning By-law
or Official Plan Amendment, design review will be undertaken for the
project. However, as set out in
Document 5, design approval would not be given until a formal site plan
application is submitted. Further, to
facilitate the design review, the proponent would be required to submit
materials required to undertake the design review. Final approval of the zoning change and/or Official Plan
Amendment (OPA) requested would be withheld until site plan control and design
approval has been obtained for the project.
The following highlights the manner in which
design review will be integrated with the development review process, focused
primarily on the site plan process, but also integration with zoning and OPA
processes where a site plan application has not been submitted for concurrent
processing.
Pre-consultation
As with the current development review process,
there will be considerable emphasis on
pre-consultation. The
pre-consultation however will be more structured so that all issues to be
considered will be identified. To
ensure that design issues will be considered early in a project's development,
staff will provide the proponent with the design review considerations that
would be used to assess the merits of the project.
Where a proponent has developed a specific
project design for pre-consultation, a member of the Peer Design Review Panel
will be requested to participate in the pre-consultation session. Through the
pre-consultation, specific requirements to facilitate the formal design review
will be communicated to the proponent.
These requirements would include design drawings (elevations,
context/streetscape renderings, perspective renderings), a design brief which
would include a self-assessment by the proponent of the proposed project based
on the design considerations that will be used to assess the design merits of
the project and could also include various environmental studies (sun/shade,
wind).
The pre-consultation described above augments the
current pre-consultation, which includes pre-consultation with the Ward
Councillor and Community Organizations.
Should a proponent not pre-consult, the processing of the application
will be delayed until a preliminary design review is undertaken by staff which
may also involve some input from the Peer Design Review Panel and to provide a
community "heads up" as required by the current development review
process.
Design Review
Formal design review of the project would be
undertaken by a Peer Design Review Panel.
Larger projects would be reviewed by a panel made up of three peer
design professionals whereas smaller projects would be reviewed by one panel
member. Staff would participate in the
review panel to provide information related to planning considerations,
infrastructure issues, etc., however, staff would not participate as a design
reviewer. The determination on the
number of panel members that will make-up the panel for a particular project
would be made by staff at the pre-consultation stage, or where a proponent has
not pre-consulted, staff would determine the panel make-up upon receipt of an
application.
The formal review of a project by the Peer
Design Review Panel will occur within the 28-day period during which an
application is circulated to technical agencies and the public for review and
comment. When an application is
submitted and once deemed complete, the Peer Design Review Panel will be
established. The panel members, as part
of the circulation would be provided the design drawings and design brief
submitted with the application and would prepare a report on their review. This report will then be provided to the
proponent and will be available to any interested party upon request. A review session to engage in dialogue on the
project design between the panel and the proponent would be set up by staff
within the 28 day review period and following completion of the review panel's
report. Through this session, the
proponent and review panel would work towards achieving agreement on the
project design and on modifications to be made to enhance the project's
response to the design objectives of the City.
Issue resolution
The issue resolution stage of the development
review process would provide for resolution of any outstanding design issues
identified by the panel. This could include a follow-up meeting between the
proponent and the panel towards obtaining final agreement on the project
design.
Design Approval
Once agreement between the proponent and the
panel is achieved with final design drawings developed, these final drawings
would be provided to the panel for its acceptance. Once accepted, the design plans would be approved by the Director
of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals along with approval of the site plan
and engineering plans under delegated approval authority. The Director would
not approve a site plan without having the design drawings accepted by the
Design Review Panel.
All of the current requirements related to
giving site plan approval under delegated approval authority including ensuring
that the site plan reflects orderly development of the site, that adequate
serving will be provided and obtaining concurrence from the Ward Councillor on
the conditions for Site Plan approval would continue to apply. However, because the Peer Design Review
Panel and the design review authority will be established pursuant to the
former City of Ottawa Act, Councillor concurrence prior to giving site plan
approval will only apply to the site plan and will not apply to the design
drawings. Rather, the design drawings
will be subject to approval by the Director only after the Peer Design Review
Panel has accepted the drawings.
Should the Peer Design Review Panel not accept
the design drawings submitted for approval by the Director of Planning and
Infrastructure Approvals, the design drawings and the related site plan will be
forwarded to the Planning and Environment Committee who will assume the
authority to approve the design drawings and site plan application. Where the Planning and Environment Committee
does not give its approval to either the design drawings or site plan, the
owner may refer the matter to the Ontario Municipal Board in accordance with
the provisions of the former City of Ottawa Act (for the design drawings) and
the Planning Act (for site plan applications).
Formal design approval by the Director of
Planning and Infrastructure Approvals will not be required where City Council
approval for an alteration or for new construction is required under the Ontario
Heritage Act, or where National Capital Commission (NCC) design approval is
required. In these cases, the Peer
Design Review Panel will review the project (through the heritage application
process for developments requiring heritage approval, and through the Site Plan
approval process where NCC design approval is required) and will provide
comments and/or recommendations through the Director to the Local Architectural
Conservation Authority Committee (where heritage approval is required) or the
NCC (where NCC design approval is required) for their consideration in making a
decision on the design of a project.
Agreement
To provide for commitment of the owner to
develop the project in accordance with the approved design drawings, the Site
Plan Control Agreement will be modified to include reference to the approved
design drawings.
Recommendation 2 provides for having the Design
Review Pilot Project integrated into the current development review process as
discussed above utilizing a Peer Design Review Panel to undertake the design
review of developments within the downtown.
Document 5 details the process and procedures for design review that
will achieve this integration and details the involvement of the Peer Design
Review Panel in the design review component of the process.
Central to ensuring that design review through
the Pilot Project will be objective and consistent in its application, is
defining the considerations that will be used for all projects to assess their
design merit. The considerations must address the manner in which a development
proposal achieves the City’s urban design objectives as set out in Downtown
Design Strategy and in the Official Plan and they must deal with matters
related to assessing how a development proposal relates to the public realm and
the image and identity of the downtown.
The considerations can and should address
architectural matters but only in so far as these impact or influence the
broader urban design principles expressed in the Downtown Design Strategy and
the Official Plan. As an example, broad
design principles related to issues of façade articulation and generalized
expressions related to types of material such as use of natural materials for
buildings within heritage areas may be addressed. Design details related to matters such as specific colors for
materials to be used, tint color for windows or stylistic details for cornices
are not to be addressed. The design considerations must focus on issues of
integration, compatibility, and project fit into the urban environment.
A two step approach for undertaking design
review for the Pilot Project is proposed as set out in Document 6. Step one focuses on the context of a
development project within the strategic framework of the Downtown Design
Strategy. Step two focuses on how well
a project fits into its urban context and how it will advance the design
objectives for the downtown that are expressed in the Official Plan.
The design review considerations serve two
purposes. They will be provided to
proponents so their projects will respond to the City's design objectives and
they will be used by the Peer Design Review Panel as a framework for the design
review of development proposals.
Recommendation 4
As part of the Design By-law and Official Plan
Amendment, Terms of Reference for the establishment and operation of a Design
Review Panel are to be approved by City Council. Document 7 sets out Terms of Reference for the Peer Design Review
Panel for the Pilot Project. The Terms
of Reference provides details on the following:
·
The make-up of
the members of the Peer Design Review Panel which for the Pilot Project will
comprise 10 design professionals (seven architects and three landscape
architects)
·
The process for
the selection and appointment of the panel members
·
The term for
members
·
The operation of
the Peer Design Review Panel and the manner in which the panel will undertake
the review of development proposals within the framework of the current
development review process
·
The
considerations that the panel must have in the design review of development
proposals
·
Requirements
related to declaring a conflict of interest, and
·
The amount of
honorarium that will be provided to panel members.
The Terms of Reference will guide the Peer
Design Review Panel in undertaking their responsibilities for reviewing and
giving acceptance to the design of projects.
Recommendation 5
The Terms of Reference for the Peer Design
Review Panel are included as Document 7.
The Terms of Reference provides for the Ontario Association of
Architects (OAA) and Ontario Association of Landscape Architects (OALA) to
solicit expressions of interest from among their members who are in good
standing with their respective associations and who have local practices or are
familiar with and work in the city and to make recommendations to the City on
members to be appointed to the Peer Design Review Panel. Recommendation 5 is
provided to obtain City Council direction for staff to request the OAA and OALA
to undertake this recruitment. The
actual appointment to the Design Review Panel would be made by City Council as
required by the former City of Ottawa Act and as set out in the draft Design
By-law included as Document 3.
Involving the OAA and OALA in the selection for
the design professionals to serve on the review panel serves to engage the
design industry directly in the establishment of the Pilot Project and ensures
that the panel will function as a true peer review panel as a result of panel
members being selected from within and by their peers through their
professional associations.
Recommendation 6
A key element of the Pilot Project will be
monitoring. The monitoring program is
required to provide for ongoing monitoring of the Pilot Project to determine
how well the design review process is working and allow modifications to be
made that will respond to issues and concerns as they are identified. The design review considerations in
particular will require monitoring on an ongoing basis to assess how well the
approach works in providing a consistent framework for assessing the design
merits of a project within the downtown.
If required, adjustments will need to be made to ensure that the Pilot
Project will be responsive to ensuring consistent review of development
projects within the downtown. The
monitoring program is also necessary to assess in a longer timeframe how well
the pilot project is contributing to advancing the City's urban design
objectives as expressed in Downtown Design Strategy and the Official Plan.
To ensure that the monitoring program will be
responsive to the needs of the program as summarized above and as detailed in
Document 8, it is important that the program be developed in consultation with
the Peer Design Review Panel once this panel is established. The Panel will
play a central role in the design review process and will therefore be a key
player in the monitoring.
Recommendation 6 provides for launching the Pilot Project only after the
monitoring program has been developed and provides for developing the
monitoring program in consultation with the Peer Design Review Panel. This will
ensure that all the requirements to ensure effective monitoring will be in
place before initiating any formal design review and approval of development
proposals within the downtown and that the monitoring program will be developed
in a way that will be integrated with the design review work of the panel.
Document 8 establishes the framework for
developing the monitoring program. It
sets out key elements that need to be incorporated into the monitoring program,
provides for having various stakeholder interests involved in the monitoring
program and identifies possible monitoring tools that could be utilized.
Recommendation 6 provides for the monitoring program to be developed in
accordance with the framework and principles expressed in Document 8 by
November 30, 2004.
Recommendation 6 also provides for having the
current development review processes modified to incorporate the design review
process detailed in Document 5 and to undertake staff training by the end of
2004 to allow for the launch of the Pilot Project in January 2005.
CONSULTATION
The development of the Downtown Design Review Pilot Project involved consultation with representatives from several stakeholder groups including the development industry, the design industry, property owners, business interests, community groups, and area residents through two workshop sessions held on April 15, 2004 and April 29, 2004. A copy of this report and notice of the Planning and Environment Committee meeting was provided to all those who participated in the workshops, and who through the process expressed interest in this project.
Details of the workshop sessions and the feedback provided by participants is summarized in Document 9.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
An honorarium of up to $400.00 will be provided to
each peer reviewer for each development project that the peer reviewer provides
design review for. It is expected that
each peer reviewer would be involved in reviewing on average three development
proposals a year representing a cost of approximately $12,000.00 annually.
Funds in this amount are available in the Department's purchased services budget
and will be included as a line item in future budgets.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 - Map
- Downtown Design Review Pilot Project Area
Document 2 - Policy Framework -
Downtown Design Review Pilot Project
Document 3 - Draft Design By-law
Document 4 - Proposed Amendment
to Council Approved Official Plan
Document 5 - Design Review
Process and Procedures
Document 6 - Design Review
Considerations
Document 7 - Peer Design Review
Panel - Terms of Reference
Document 8 - Monitoring Program
Document 9 - Consultation Details
Planning and Growth Management Department to
provide notice of the adoption of the proposed Official Plan Amendment and to
initiate the process to establish the Peer Design Review Panel and to develop
the Monitoring Program.
Department of Corporate Services, Legal Services Branch to forward the
Design By-law and by-law to adopt the Official Plan Amendment to City Council.
MAP – DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW PILOT PROJECT AREA Document
1
POLICY FRAMEWORK
- DOWNTOWN DESIGN REVIEW PILOT PROJECT Document
2
1.0 Context
The following establishes a policy framework on which the Downtown
Design Review Pilot Project will be based.
Elements of this policy will be implemented through the enactment of a
Design By-law pursuant to the provisions of the former City of Ottawa Act 1959
and through an amendment to the City of Ottawa Official Plan. While this policy framework is specific to
the Pilot Project, the Design By-law and Official Plan Amendment will satisfy
the requirements of the former City of Ottawa Act to allow for possible future
expansion of design review and approval to other areas of the city included
within the boundaries of the former City of Ottawa. This would however require an amendemnt to the Official Plan to
designate additional lands/areas as Design Control Areas.
2.0 Pilot Project Guiding
Principles
City Council adopts the following Guiding Principals for the Pilot
Project:
§
Provide for the seamless integration
of design review into the development review process.
§
Ensure that the design review process
will not conflict with existing design approval processes such as heritage
approvals for new construction.
§
Respect the timelines for the
processing of development applications.
§
Respect the role of stakeholders in
the exisiting development review process.
§
Respect existing legislation.
§
Operationalize within the current
Departmental structure and resources.
§
Provide for consistency in the review
process and establish a level playing field.
3.0 Design Approval
Authority
City Council pursuant to the former City of Ottawa Act, assigns
design approval authority to the Director of Planning and Infrastructure
Approvals and Council acknowledges the design expertise of the Peer Design
Review Panel and therefore requires that the Director only exercise design
approval authority following the review and acceptance by the Peer Design
Review Panel of the design drawings submitted as part of a site plan
application.
Where the Peer Design Review Panel does not give acceptance to
design drawings submitted for approval thereby preventing the Director of
Planning and Infrastructure from giving Site Plan approval, the authority to
approve the design drawings will be assumed by the Planning and Environment
Committee who will also assume the authority to give approval to the Site
Plan. Should the Planning and
Environment Committee not give approval to the design drawings or to the site
plan, the owner may refer the design drawings and/or the site plan to the
Ontario Municipal Board (OMB)and the decision of the OMB shall be final.
4.0 Peer Design Review Panel
City Council will appoint a Peer Design
Review Panel comprising seven architects and three landscape architects
selected by their respective Provincial Associations for the Pilot Project.
Acceptance of design drawings by the Peer Design Review Panel will be required
prior to the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals exercising
design approval authority.
The Peer Design Review Panel will function as an independent body in
accordance with Terms of Reference approved by City Council and will be
provided an honorarium as set out in the Terms of Reference. Support will be
provided to the Panel by the Planning and Growth Management Department in
organizing design review meetings, securing meeting rooms, and recording
minutes of project design review meetings.
5.0 Monitoring and Adjustments to the Pilot
Project
City Council authorizes the Deputy City
Manager, Planning and Growth Management to make adjustments to the Pilot
Project as may be determined through the monitoring program to ensure that the
Pilot Project remains responsive to its Guiding Principles.
1.0 Every
person proposing to erect or make alteration to any building or structure for
which Site Plan Control approval is required, any part of which faces a
designated Design Control Highway as established in the Official Plan, shall
obtain approval from the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals as
part of the site plan approval following acceptance by the Design Review Panel
of the plans and specifications (design drawings) of the proposed development,
addition or alteration prior to commencing the proposed construction or alteration.
2.0 No
person shall deviate from the plans and specifications of the exterior design
of the building or structure as reflected on the design drawings approved by
the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals except where revised
design drawings have been submitted and accepted by the Design Review Panel and
approved by the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals.
3.0 A
Design Review Panel shall be appointed by Council to review and give acceptance
to design drawings prior to approval of these drawings being given by the
Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals.
4.0 City
Council will approve detailed Terms of Reference for establishing the Design
Review Panel and for the operation of the Panel. The Terms of Reference will include the following:
§
The make-up of
the members of the Design Review Panel.
§
The process for
the selection and appointment of the
Panel members.
§
The term for
members.
§
The operation of
the Panel and the manner in which the Panel will undertake their review of
development proposals.
§
The
considerations that the Panel must have in the design review of development
proposals.
§
Requirements
related to declaring a conflict of interest.
§
The amount of
honorarium that will be provided to Panel members.
5.0 The
Design Review Panel shall conduct its business in accordance with the Terms of
Reference approved by City Council as required by Clause 4.0 above.
6.0 Any
approval by the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals of design
drawings for the erection or alteration of a building or structure shall lapse
in the same manner as the lapsing of the approval of the overall Site Plan.
7.0 Where
the Design Review Panel does not accept the design drawings for a project
thereby preventing the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals from
giving site plan approval, the approval authority for both the design drawings
and for the site plan application will be assumed by the Planning and
Environment Committee who will hold a public meeting where all interested
parties will be provided an opportunity to address the Committee on the design
drawings and the site plan application and the Committee will render a decision
on the design drawings and site plan application. Should the Planning and Environment Committee not approve the
design drawings, or the site plan, the owner may within 21 days of the
Committee's decision refer the site plan along with the design drawings to the
Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) and the decision of the OMB shall be final.
8.0 Notwithstanding any provisions of this
by-law, City Council shall, pursuant to the provisions of the Ontario Heritage
Act, have final approval of the plans and specifications of the exterior for
buildings and additions to buildings that have been designated under Part IV of
the Ontario Heritage Act or that are located within an area designated as a
Heritage Conservation District under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. In such cases, the approval of design
drawings as part of the site plan approval will not be required and the Design
Review Panel will participate in the review of the application submitted under
the Heritage Act and provide its comments to Local Architectural Conservation
Advisory Committee (LACAC) through the Director of Planning and Infrastructure
Approvals.
9.0 Notwithstanding any provisions of this
by-law, where National Capital Commission (NCC) Design Approval is required for
the erection or alteration of a building or structure, the Design Review Panel
will undertake its review of the project as set out in the Terms of Reference
referred to in Clause 4.0, however, the panel will not be required to give
acceptance to the design drawings.
Rather, the Panel will advise the NCC of its review findings and/or
provide recommendations through the Director of Planning and Infrastructure
Approvals. In such cases, approval of
design drawings by the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals as
part of the site plan approval will not be required.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT
TO COUNCIL APPROVED OFFICIAL PLAN Document
4
PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT
Official Plan
Amendment XX/Modifications du Plan directeur XX
To the
Official Plan of the City of Ottawa
Land use
Utilisation
du sol
_______________________________________________________________________
INDEX
________________________________________________________________________
The Statement
of Components
PART A - THE
PREAMBLE
Purpose
Location
Basis
PART B- THE
AMENDMENT
Introductory
Statement
Details of
the Amendment
PART C -
APPENDIX
Appendices
THE STATEMENT
OF COMPONENTS
PART A - THE
PREAMBLE, introduces the actual Amendment but does not constitute part of
Amendment No. XX to the City of Ottawa Official Plan.
PART B - THE
AMENDMENT, consisting of the following text and maps constitutes the actual
Amendment No. XX to the City of Ottawa Official Plan.
PART C - THE
APPENDIX, does not form part of the Amendment but is provided to clarify the
intent and to supply background information related to the Amendment.
PART A - THE
PREAMBLE
1.0 Purpose
The purpose
of the amendment is to designate all streets within the downtown as Design
Control Highways to enable City Council to utilize the authority provided by
the former City of Ottawa Act 1959 to require design approval for development
or alterations to existing buildings within the downtown where the proposed
development or alteration is subject to Site Plan approval.
2.0 Location
The lands
affected by the amendment incorporate those lands subject to the Downtown
Ottawa Urban Design Strategy approved by City Council on March 10, 2004. The affected lands are more specifically
identified on Schedule A attached to and forming part of this amendment.
3.0 Basis
3.1 Background
The new
Ottawa Official Plan has established policies that encourage a dialogue on
urban design with its many neighborhoods, the development industry,
professional associations and other interested parties. Through this dialogue the City intends to
build a stronger culture of design and greater awareness of how urban design
can contribute to the quality of the City’s urban environment.
On March 10,
2004 City Council approved the “Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy”, one of
the first design focused initiatives emanating from the new Official Plan. The Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy
(Downtown Design Strategy) was developed with extensive public involvement,
engaging a variety of stakeholder groups in a dialogue on design within the
downtown.
The strategy
establishes a framework for advancing the urban design objectives of the new
Official Plan for downtown. It has
created a shared vision of the downtown between the City, the National Capital
Commission (NCC), adjacent neighborhoods, business communities and potential
development partners. The strategy sets
out broad urban design guidelines and principles for the area as a whole and
for the various precincts that comprise the downtown to aid in defining an
urban quality threshold to provide guidance for site development applications,
public realm improvements, transportation and development initiatives. Finally, it provides an agreed strategy and
priorities for longer term civic investment.
The overarching aim of the strategy is to improve the urban experience
of the downtown through a series of actions that enhance the quality of the
public realm and urban environment.
At its March
10, 2004 meeting, Council also approved a staff report directing the Planning
and Growth Management Department to develop, in consultation with stakeholders,
a pilot project for integrating design review into the development review
process for the downtown. Through the
development of land, significant advancements are possible towards achieving
the vision of the downtown determined through the Downtown Design Strategy. The pilot project will be monitored to also
assist in determining a city wide strategy for integrating design review into
the development review process as part of the “Ottawa By Design” initiative
that is being undertaken by the Department.
It is
anticipated that the "Ottawa by Design" initiative will include
proposals to extend formalized design review and approval to other areas of the
city. Such areas would be limited to
the areas within the boundaries of the former City of Ottawa until legislative
changes are made that may allow for Municipalities to be more involved in
design review.
3.2 Context of Amendment
Pursuant to
the provisions of the former City of Ottawa Act, the municipality is authorized
to pass by-laws prohibiting the construction or alteration of any building or
structure that faces lands owned by the three levels of government or various
government agencies as specified in the legislation or that is located along a
highway with a width of at least 80 feet or any highway designated in the
Official Plan as a Design Control Highway without first having obtained
approval for the plans and specifications of the exterior design.
Where the
City proposes to exercise design approval authority for lands not specifically
identified in the enabling legislation, these areas are to be specifically
identified within the Official Plan.
The former City of Ottawa Official Plan includes Schedule E which
includes all of the area to be included within the Downtown Design Review Pilot
Project as an area subject to design
review and approval. The one area not included is the University of Ottawa,
however, the University would be subject to design review and approval under
the former City of Ottawa Act.
To extend the
authority that will be established with enactment of a Design By-law to cover
the area included within the Downtown Design Strategy in the context of the new
Official Plan requires an amendment to the new Official Plan. This amendment will in effect carry over the
authority that now exists under the former City of Ottawa Official Plan into
the new Plan to enable the City to exercise design approval authority for new
development and for additions or alterations to existing development within the
downtown following the repeal of the former City of Ottawa Official Plan.
Until broader
legislative changes as discussed in the background section are introduced by
the Province, there is an ability for the City of Ottawa, under the former City
of Ottawa Act, to exercise design review and approval authority. As noted, for lands not specifically
identified by the City of Ottawa Act, the City has the opportunity to include
such lands within the Official Plan as lands subject to design review and
approval. This amendment, while
specific to allowing for the application of design review and approval to the
downtown, will also enable expansion of areas where design review and approval
will be required. This would however
require further amendment to the Official Plan to designate any additional areas
as design review areas within the Official Plan.
PART B - THE
AMENDMENT
1.0 The Introductory Statement
All of this
part of the document entitled Part B - The Amendment, consisting of the
following text, and schedule included as Schedule A to this amendment
constitutes Amendment No. XX to the City of Ottawa Official Plan.
2.0 Details of Amendment
The City of
Ottawa Official Plan is hereby amended as follows:
2.1 Schedule
L – Design Control Areas attached hereto as Schedule "A" is added as
a new Schedule to the City of Ottawa Official Plan immediately following
Schedule K.
2.2 A
new section titled "5.2.6 Design
Review and Approval" as set out below is added to the Official Plan within
Section 5, Implementation immediately following Section 5.2.5.
5.2.6 Design Review and Approval
Policy
1. Those areas identified on Schedule L
are designated design control areas wherein all roads are designated as design
control highways.
2. A Design Review Panel shall be
established under the provisions of a by-law enacted pursuant to the former
City of Ottawa Act RSO 1959 and the Panel shall apply the provisions of this
by-law to buildings and structures, any part of which fronts onto a design
control highway. No new development or
alteration/addition to existing
development shall be constructed without first having obtained:
a. acceptance
of the design drawings for the development from the Design Review Panel, and
b. approval
of the accepted design drawings from the approval authority set out in the by-law.
3. The
Design Review Panel in its review of development proposals and prior to giving
its acceptance to the design for developments subject to design review and
approval shall ensure that the development is consistent with the urban design
framework established by any area design strategies approved by Council and
shall ensure that all relevant policies and objectives included in this Plan
that deal with design matters have been addressed.
4. The
Design Review Panel shall be constituted and shall conduct itself in accordance
with Terms of Reference approved by City Council.
5. Extension
to other areas of the city of design review and approval shall be undertaken
through amendment to Schedule L to include any other areas where design review
and approval shall apply as design control areas wherein all highways are
designated design control highways.
SCHEDULE
'A'
PART C - THE
APPENDIX
N/A
DESIGN REVIEW
PROCESS AND PROCEDURES Document
5
The design
review process will be integrated into the current development review
process. The following highlights the
specifics of the design review process within the current development review
process and therefore does not elaborate on other steps that are inherent in
the current process.
1. Pre-consultation
§
Proponent
initiates request for pre-consultation during the project planning stage
and forwards to staff the project
program, any preliminary design plans/studies or drawings prepared, and any
planning/technical studies completed as part of the proponents due diligence
process. This will identify issues and
considerations that will factor into the project planning to allow staff to
determine the make-up of the pre-consultation panel and to enable staff to
prepare for the pre-consultation session so that answers to questions and
direction to the proponent can be provided.
§
Where a proponent
has developed a project design prior to pre-consulting, a member of the Peer
Design Review Panel would be requested to participate in the formal
pre-consultation. The pre-consultation
session could be structured as one session involving planning and
infrastructure staff and staff from other Departments that may have an interest
in the project with a time set to discuss project design considerations when
the Peer Design Review Panel member would attend, or a specific design focused
pre-consultation session could be held with participation by planning staff and
a member of the Panel. This Panel
member would stay involved with the design review of the project following
application submission to ensure consistency through the review process.
§
Proponent would
be provided feedback on all aspects of the proposal, including the design
considerations that will factor into the assessment of the project from a
design perspective.
§
A follow-up
letter to the proponent highlighting the pre-consultation discussion(s) would
be prepared by staff including the requirement for a complete application.
§
A second
pre-consultation once the project is more fully developed may be requested to
finalize the project design prior to formal submission of an application. The same process as noted above would be
followed for the second pre-consultation session.
§
Staff will
determine the number of panel members, up to a maximum of three, that will be
established to undertake the peer review of the project.
NOTE: Failure to Pre-Consult
Pre-consultation is a voluntary step in the
development review process and because it occurs in advance of an application
submission, is not something that can be mandated. Similar to the current development review process where delay
occurs as a result of staff providing a community "heads up" where a
proponent has not pre-consulted with the community, failure to pre-consult with
staff on design matters will result in delaying the processing of a development
application until a preliminary review has been done to determine whether the
proposal responds sufficiently to technical, planning and design considerations
to proceed with the formal processing.
2. Application Submission
§
Submission
requirements for Site Plan, Zoning By-law and Official Plan Amendments to
facilitate the design review of development proposals would be determined
through the pre-consultation. As such,
not all of the materials noted below may be required for all projects. This will be dependent on the scale and
nature of a development.
o
Site Plan - For
all new construction and major redevelopment projects and for additions/site
plan revisions that can influence the public realm as set out in the Design
By-law:
o
Zoning By-law and
Official Plan Amendments - Only for zoning and Official Plan change requests to
accommodate new development and/or redevelopment:
3. Design Review
§
The Peer Design
Review Panel for a development project will comprise a maximum of three members
drawn from a pool of 10 practicing design professionals. The determination of
the number of panel members to undertake the design review would have been
determined at the time of pre-consultation, or if there was no
pre-consultation, will be determined upon receipt of an application.
§
The assigned
Planner will contact panel members that will make-up the review panel for a
project according to a rotating rooster and will confirm the ability of panel
members to undertake the design review ensuring that panel members do not have
a conflict of interest.
§
The assigned
Planner will provide the Peer Design Review Panel established to undertake the
project review all the materials submitted with the application to facilitate
design review and will schedule the design review session between the panel and
the proponent.
§
The panel will
prepare a Design Review Report following receipt of the design materials
submitted and will forward its Design Review Report to the assigned Planner
within two weeks of receipt of the review material and at least five days in
advance of the scheduled design review session.
§
The assigned
Planner will forward the Design Review Report to the proponent and would
confirm with the review panel and the proponent the time and location for the
review session.
§
The review
session would be scheduled within the 28-day circulation period.
§
The review
session would involve a formal discussion between the panel and the proponent
to assess and discuss the design aspects of the project with a view to achieve
agreement on the design features to be incorporated into the project. The assigned Planner would participate in
the review session but only to provide information on the project and on
planning issues/considerations that may influence design.
§
Where agreement
between the review panel and the proponent on the project design could not be
achieved through the Design Review meeting or where it is determined at the
Design Review meeting that design modifications need to be made and that these
modifications will require further review by the panel reviewing the project,
the panel may appoint one member, where the review panel comprise more than one
member, to participate in issue resolution related to design matters, or, the
panel may determine that a follow-up Design Review meeting is required between
the panel and the proponent.
§
The assigned
Planner will assume responsibility for preparing minutes of the Design Review
meeting and having these distributed to the panel and the proponent. The meeting minutes will document agreements
reached on the project design and design modifications requested by the review
panel that will require follow-up by the panel through the issue resolution
stage of the process. The minutes and
the panel's Design Review Report will be made available to any interested party
upon request.
4. Issue Resolution
§
A proponent's
response to outstanding design issues identified through the Design Review
meeting would be reviewed either by one member appointed by the panel (where
the panel comprises more than one member) or by the full panel (if the panel deems this most appropriate)
and the proponent and Peer Design Review Panel would work towards achieving
agreement on the final project design.
This follow-up review would be organized by the assigned Planner and
would occur within the first two weeks following the 28-day circulation period
5. Design Approval
§
Design approval
would be given by staff as part of a site plan approval under the authority of
the former City of Ottawa Act following acceptance by the Peer Design Review
Panel of the final design drawings. The Panel would note its acceptance on the final
design drawings submitted with a Site Plan application. If the review body has not accepted the
design drawings, site plan and design approval would not be given.
§
Design
considerations would factor into the review of Zoning By-law and Official Plan
Amendment (OPA) applications and would be subject to review by the Peer Design
Review Panel, but design approval would not be given as part of a zoning or OPA
approval. Where such applications are
submitted without a corresponding site plan, the implementing by-law would not
be enacted until site plan approval (including design approval) is obtained.
6. Appeal
§
Where agreement
on the project design can not be reached between the Peer Design Review Panel
and/or where the Peer Design Review Panel will not give acceptance to the
design drawings thereby preventing the Director of Planning and Infrastructure
Approval from giving site plan approval under delegated approval authority,
staff will bring forward the design drawings and the site plan to the Planning
and Environment Committee.
§
The Planning and
Environment Committee will hold a public meeting providing the applicant and
all interested parties an opportunity to make their views known to the
Committee and the Committee will assume the authority to either approve or not
approve the design drawings and/or the site plan application.
§
Where the
Planning and Environment Committee does not give approval to the design
drawings and or the site plan, the owner may within 21 days of the decision of
the Committee refer the design drawings and/or site plan application to the OMB
and the decision of the OMB shall be final.
7. Agreement
§
Once approval of
the design drawings has been given, the owner shall execute a design agreement which will be incorporated
within the site plan agreement.
§
The design
agreement will provide for the owner committing to construct the project in
accordance with the approved design plans
DESIGN REVIEW CONSIDERATIONS Document
6
This document
sets out a two step approach for undertaking design review for the pilot
project:
·
Step One focuses
on establishing the context of a development project within the strategic
framework of the Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy (Downtown Design
Strategy).
·
Step Two focuses
on a projects fit into its urban context and on how the project will advance
the design objectives for the downtown that are expressed in the Official Plan.
Attached to
the document will be an Appendix that includes key design policy directives of
the Official Plan that are applicable to the downtown to assist in the Step Two
of the review.
The design
review considerations serve two purposes:
1.0 Step One - Context within the Downtown
Ottawa Urban Design Strategy
Step One of
the approach sets out a structured series of considerations to ensure that the
review systematically assesses the project in the context of the overall design
strategy and area wide design principles articulated in the Downtown Ottawa
Urban Design Strategy. The considerations
under Step One are:
A. The Context for the Project Outlined in
the Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy
Locate
the project within one of the eight precincts identified in the Downtown Ottawa
Urban Design Strategy, review the project against the area wide strategies that
are set out that deal with strategic directions for the entire downtown and
determine the project’s ability to add to:
§
Streetscape
Infrastructure Program
§
Open Spaces and
Urban Forest Program
§
Pubic Art
§
A Winter
City
The location of the project within one of the
eight precincts will determine the focus for the remainder of the Step One
review relative to the design objectives and strategic directions set out in
the Downtown Design Strategy for the precinct wherein the project is located. The eight precincts are:
§
Downtown West
Precinct
§
Business Precinct
§
ByWard Market
Precinct
§
Retail, Arts and
Theatre Precinct
§
University
Precinct
§
Central Canal
Area Precinct
§
Centertown East
Precinct
§
Bank Street
Corridor
B. The Context of the Project Relative to the Precinct Design
Objectives and Strategies
Review
the project against the four levels of urban design consideration outlined for
the precinct the project is in as follows:
§
Level One -
General Description and Character of the Precinct
o
Is the project
within the general intent of the area?
§
Level Two - The
Key Strategic Directions for the precinct
o How does the project help to achieve the
strategic directions outlined that are aimed at improving the general quality
of the urban environment?
§
Level Three - The
General Precinct Strategies
o How does the project add to the precincts’
general goals for urban design?
§
Level Four -
Targeted Strategies
o
Is there a
specific project targeted for the site under the targeted strategies?
o
Can the proposed
development add or contribute to a specific project targeted for the precinct
under the targeted strategies?
2.0 Step
Two - General Design Considerations/Principals relative to Official Plan design
objectives
Step Two of
the review involves two levels of review related to project specific
considerations within four categories dealing with Open Space and Landscaping,
Site Plan Features, Building Design and Environmental Considerations. The first level sets out a series of
questions to assess how a project has been developed and how well a project
addresses key considerations associated with the category. The second level of review addresses more
project specific considerations to determine how well a project fits into its
urban context and how well it will advance the City’s urban design objectives
for the downtown.
The project
specific considerations reflect some of the key urban design policy directives
of the Official Plan and are drawn from the Official Plan. However, they are not all inclusive, and to
ensure that a development proposal fully responds to the urban design
objectives articulated in the Official Plan, reference must be made to the
various sections of the Plan dealing with urban design. To assist proponents of development and the
Peer Design Review Panel, key design considerations detailed in the Official
Plan that are applicable to the downtown have been extracted from the Plan and
will be attached as an Appendix to the design review considerations.
A. Open Space and Landscape
i Key
Questions
o
Has the project
site been outlined in the Downtown Design Strategy for the Urban Open Space
Programme (the Business Precinct and Centertown East Precinct) to review the
complete possibilities to add to this program using the project?
o
Has landscape
design been recognized as an important and integral part of the project at an
early enough stage?
o
Does the project
have a well thought out concept for the landscape of the site?
o
Is the landscape
plan integrated with the streetscape?
o
Has public art
been considered for the proposed project?
ii Specific
Open Space and Landscape Considerations
Open Space
Context
o
The project
should connect and enhance natural features and landscapes in the precinct and
make them accessible to everyone.
o
The project,
where possible, should define and create an edge to rivers, ravines,
escarpments and other natural features with public roads and preserve public
access points and views of the feature.
On-site Open
Space
o
The project
should provide public amenity spaces such as plazas, pocket parks, community
gardens and interim green spaces on vacant lands and private amenity space for
building occupants, such as green areas, rooftop gardens, pools, and gardens.
o
Open space
provided as part of a project should be designed with sufficient frontage to
the street and other public areas to provide for excellent access and
visibility from public spaces.
Site
Landscaping
o
The project
should design, install and maintain all landscape areas (hard and soft) so that
significant trees on the site are protected during construction and that all
trees and vegetation thrive and achieve full maturity.
o
The landscape
plan for the project should provide street trees, shrubs, floral displays and
other planting areas and/or hard surface areas in association with decorative
lighting and fencing and other quality site furniture on both public and
private lands. Such features should
work together to define pedestrian areas and to soften the impacts of parking
and development.
B. Site Plan Features
i Key
Questions
o
Does the project
make a positive contribution to the public realm as outlined by the Downtown
Ottawa Urban Design Strategy?
o
Is there evidence
that a sound site analysis has been undertaken in developing the site
design? Have important characteristics of
the site been accounted for and incorporated into the design?
o
Has the project
taken into account the challenges and opportunities presented by an historic
location or context?
o
Is there a clear
distinction between the public realm and the private realm?
o
Is there a good
relationship between the project and public transit?
o
Is the site a
good choice for the size and scale of the proposed development?
o
Does the project
propose more development than the site can handle?
o
Does the project
make sense in relation to immediate neighbours?
ii Specific
Site Plan Considerations
Parking and
Loading
o
Parking lots
should not be located between the street and the front façade of buildings that
face the street. Where this is the only possible location for parking, it is to
be extensively screened from the street with low shrubs, trees, decorative
walls and fences.
o
Parking areas
should be divided into smaller components with landscaping and tree planting to
provide shade.
o
Where parking is
provided above-grade within a structure, the exterior design of the
development, particularly the lower levels, should contribute to an enjoyable
street environment by creating visual interest through the use of architectural
detail, materials, and/or texture, and by respecting the character of nearby
buildings. Parking structures must not
be allowed to sterilize the street environment.
o
The interior
design of parking structures shall maximize safety and minimize potential crime
or vandalism through such measures as the provision of lighting plans including
the use of introducing natural daylight, visibility to exit doors and the
street and security features.
o
New buildings
should avoid the requirements for ramps to underground facilities and loading
to be located in the street, parallel and exposed to the street or across from
public open spaces. Entrances to
underground parking and loading should be behind doors and interior to the
massing of the project.
On-site
Connections
o
All buildings,
parking areas and pedestrian congregation areas should be linked together with
an on-site network of pedestrian pathways that connect to public sidewalks in
logical locations. The project should
take special care to provide linkages for pedestrians to transit stops.
o
Sidewalks and
crosswalks should be made of smooth, well-drained walking surfaces of
contrasting materials or treatments to differentiate the pedestrian areas from
vehicle areas and provide marked pedestrian crosswalks at intersections.
Safety
o
The site design
should consider the principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
to enhance personal security in the design, operation and maintenance of all
publicly accessible spaces. Design public spaces to avoid areas of entrapment
or isolation and preserve clear and unobstructed sight lines for persons
passing through. Has the project fully considered the value of “eyes on the
street “as a method of making urban places safe?
o
Sufficient
quality and intensity of outdoor lighting should be provided in spaces intended
for public use after dark to support the kinds of activities proposed for that
space.
Site/Building
Access
o
In favour of
creating an active and animated ground floor, the use of overpasses,
underpasses and tunnels should be discouraged over solutions at grade. Where they are permitted, a safe,
alternative route at grade is to be provided and the design of any overpass
must be reviewed against the impact to long views along streets and between
landmarks. Any overpass must also contribute to the continuity of building
façade along the street.
o
Elements such as
public entrances, display windows, canopies, and signage play a strong role in
the image of the streetscape and the placement of these elements along the
street should be carefully reviewed. All major entrances are best opening onto
a street or a street related publicly accessible open space.
o
The project
should achieve barrier-free access to public and publicly accessible places for
all citizens by considering the full range of human abilities and impairments
in the design of the built environment.
Street
Relationship
o
The project
should support the existing pattern of setbacks so that new buildings do not
substantially alter the street relationship.
In most cases in downtown it is beneficial to look at allowing for wider
sidewalks than the existing municipal right of way is able to provide.
C. Building Design
i Key Questions
o
Will the project
add to the architectural diversity and identity of Ottawa?
o
Are the materials
appropriate for the district or neighbourhood that the project is located in?
o
Is the design
responding to heritage features on site or in the immediate environs?
o
Does the building
contribute to the activity and image of the street on which it will be located?
o
Does the project
protect and enhance Ottawa's landmark places and institutions and views of
them?
o
Are the plans,
sections, elevations and other graphic material prepared for the project all
relating to each other and combining to make a complete design statement?
o
Are future phases
shown? Do future phases make sense?
ii Specific
Building Design Considerations
Relationship
to Public Realm/Street Environment
o
The project
should demonstrate excellence in architectural and urban design by creating
buildings that define the visual and spatial quality of downtown streets and
public spaces.
o
New buildings
must acknowledge and respond appropriately to the hierarchy and importance of
streets and help define the road corridor, intersections, parks and publicly
accessible open spaces.
o
The at-grade
portions of buildings must be pedestrian-friendly and directly accessible from
the street and from other adjacent buildings.
Building facades that face the street must be attractive, well-lit and
animated with such things as windows, doorways, awnings, signs, railings,
balconies and canopies. Blank walls must be avoided if they are visible from
the street or a public open space area.
o
Where the
predominant building scale along a main street is two storeys or more,
single-storey development should not be considered if it will degrade the
continuity of the existing street wall that forms the basis of the main street.
o
Building types
with garage doors and service elements that dominate the streetscape should be
avoided in new and infill development.
Built Form
and Architectural Expression
o
Buildings on
corners should address the corner as a building and not present a blank or
weakly fenestrated wall to the street.
o
Any project which
establishes a new height level into a neighbourhood must be considered a
landmark and be developed architecturally from all sides taking into
consideration the prominent views that will be interrupted, if any, and the
visibility of the project from distant viewing locations.
o
Integrate early
on in the design process, mechanical apparatuses and other site-servicing
requirements with the architecture and overall site design so as not to occupy
prominent visible locations. Mechanical
penthouses are best if integrated into the design of the building using the
same massing and materials as the main portion of the building.
o
Façade signage is
best integrated with the architectural features of the building.
o
Projects should
consider creative roofline treatments that enhance or complement the existing
skyline as part of the design for prominent tall buildings.
o
Generally the
ground floor and first three floors of a building is most appreciated at the
street level. Projects should consider the use of such podiums to bring a
pedestrian scale architecture to the lower street levels of a building.
o
The materials of
all buildings should be carefully reviewed to ensure compatibility with the
context of the neighbourhood and to confirm the materials make sense to the
type of building being proposed.
Neighbourhood
Context
o
Buildings should
be designed to maintain or enhance the architectural integrity of the
neighbourhood, the heritage value of downtown and decorative elements that are
present in the surrounding streetscape and open spaces.
o
The design should
demonstrate that new buildings and separation distances between buildings,
support setback distances that are appropriate to the street and block
structure in which they are located.
o
Where a building
is introducing a larger massing into a neighbourhood, the repeatability of that
form onto adjacent properties and the ultimate effect of that repeated form
along a street should be reviewed.
o
New buildings and
structures should be compatible in height with the surrounding buildings or
comparable with the heights established in Community Design Plans or the City’s
Zoning By-law. Variations in height are
most suited to prominent locations such as major streets and intersections.
o
The project
should be reviewed to make sure that transition of building heights between the
project and the adjacent properties provide for a good repeatable situation
that provides reasonable view protection and to reduce the jarring impact of
two adjacent out of scale buildings.
o
Where taller and
more massive buildings are contemplated for areas where there are smaller scale
lower profile buildings, various architectural techniques that break the
building mass and that present a lower profile street edge condition should be
used to fit the building into the existing pattern of development. These techniques
can include clearly defined podium elements that reflect elements of defining
architectural elements along the street and that are architecturally
articulated with upper floors setback from the front and side edges of the
podium.
Heritage
Considerations
o
The design of
projects should promote the imaginative re-use, not the demolition, of existing
buildings that are structurally sound. The project design should respect the
massing, profile and character of adjacent heritage buildings, approximate the
width of nearby heritage buildings when constructing new buildings facing the
street; consider the established setback pattern on the street and to orient
the building to the street in a similar fashion to existing heritage buildings.
The project should also have minimal impact on the heritage qualities of the
street as a public place in heritage areas.
D. Environmental Issues
i Key
Questions
o
Is it clear that
new development does not create adverse microclimatic conditions on the site or
on adjacent properties?
o
Has the project
undertaken measures to avoid undesirable wind conditions on the streets and
open spaces adjacent to the site?
o
Has the project
taken maximum advantage of solar orientation for open spaces and gathering
places?
ii Specific
Environmental Considerations
Sustainable
Design
o
Encourage
sustainable, yet creative, architectural designs that reduce energy consumption
and the costs of maintenance.
o
Mitigate impacts
from site-generated wind, noise, odours, traffic, dust and outdoor storage.
Natural Light
o
Minimize as much
as possible, shadowing of adjacent properties, particularly of outdoor amenity
areas.
o
Design buildings
to maximize the direct exposure to natural light in new residential units and
to minimize the reduction in exposure to natural light in surrounding
residential units.
Weather
Protection
o
Design buildings,
especially within high pedestrian volume areas to provide a continuity of
weather protection through the use of such things as awnings or canopies and
the provision of wind-sheltered and sunlight waiting and seating areas. Entrances to major public buildings, transit
stations and large commercial complexes should be weather protected.
o
Orient buildings
and situate planting to maximize the potential gains from solar energy and
exposure to light.
o
Shield outdoor
spaces from extreme effects of winter winds and summer sun through site design
measures such as placement of suitable plant species near buildings.
PEER DESIGN REVIEW PANEL - TERMS OF REFERENCE Document 7
The City of Ottawa has enacted a Design By-law
to require approval by the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals of
plans and specifications of the exterior design of buildings for all new
development and for additions to existing development within the downtown area
shown in Document 1 as part of the site plan approval process prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
The Director will exercise design approval
authority of the plans and specifications for a proposal after they have been
peer reviewed and accepted by the Peer Design Review Panel.
The Peer Design Review Panel comprised of a pool of 10 design
professionals appointed by City Council will be constituted to fulfill two peer
review functions as follows:
The Peer
Design Review Panel will be comprised of a pool of 10 design professionals as
follows:
§
Seven practicing
Architects with full qualifications to practice in the Province of Ontario and
who are members in good standing with the Ontario Association of Architects.
§
Three practicing
Landscape Architects with full qualifications to practice in the Province of
Ontario and who are members in good standing with the Ontario Association of
Landscape Architects.
The Ontario
Association of Architects (OAA) will be asked to solicit expressions of
interest from within its membership for qualified architects to serve as
members of the Peer Design Review Panel.
Members shall be in good standing.
The OAA will undertake a selection process to be determined by the
Association and shall forward to the Director of Planning and Infrastructure
Approvals the names of the seven members selected by the Association to serve
on the Panel. The Ontario Association
of Landscape Architects (OALA) will undertake the same process to select three
of its members to serve on the Panel.
Panel members
selected by the OAA and OALA should have practices in Ottawa or be familiar
with Ottawa through specific work completed in the city. This however does not preclude the selection
of a member whose practice or experience is not local, but who is determined by
the Association to be well qualified to serve on the panel provided the member
is available to participate in the review process as set out in these Terms of
Reference.
Upon receipt
of the names of the panel members selected by the OAA and OALA, the Director of
Planning and Infrastructure Approvals will forward the names to Planning and
Environment Committee and City Council for Council appointment of the selected
design professionals to serve on the Peer Design Review Panel for the City.
The duration
of appointment to the Peer Design Review Panel will coincide with the term of
the Pilot Project which will be a minimum two years. Should the term of the Pilot Project extend into a third year,
the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals will advise Council on
the method of extending the term of some or all of the members and refreshing
the panel to an efficient operation level.
The Director
of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals will also recommend any changes to the
process for appointment to the panel.
Members of
the Panel will serve as a pool of design professionals that will be drawn from
to undertake the peer review of specific projects.
For larger
projects, up to three members will be drawn from the pool to undertake the
design review of the project
For smaller
projects, one member of the panel would be drawn from the pool to undertake the
design review.
The
determination of the number of members to form a panel for the review of
specific projects will be determined by staff through the pre-consultation
process where the applicant pre-consults with staff prior to formal submission
of an application, or where there has been no pre-consultation, the
determination of the number of members to undertake the design review of a
project will be made by staff following receipt of the application.
Panel members
will be drawn from the pool on a rotating basis as development applications
that are subject to design review and approval are submitted. It is expected, based on application volumes
over the past two years that approximately 15 development applications will be
received over the course of one year that will be subject to design review and
approval. With these volumes, it is
expected that each panel member would be requested to participate in the design
review of two to three development proposals a year.
The assigned
Planner processing an application that will be subject to design review and
approval will coordinate the design review process.
The design
review process may be formally initiated during pre-consultation or following
formal receipt of an application
a) Initiation of Design Review at
Pre-consultation
Where proponents have developed a preliminary
project design for purposes of pre-consultation, staff will contact one member
of the Peer Design Review Panel to participate in the project pre-consultation
to provide preliminary comment and feedback to the proponent on design issues
and design considerations for the project.
A determination would also be made at this time of the number of panel
members to be involved in the formal design review following formal application
submission. The panel member
participating in the pre-consultation would continue to be involved in the
formal design review.
Where a proponent has not developed a
preliminary design for pre-consultation, the assigned Planner involved with the
pre-consultation will identify in general terms the design issues and
considerations that the proponent should respond to in developing the project
design. Should the proponent wish a
second pre-consultation following the design development of the project, a
member of the design review panel would be contacted to participate in the
second pre-consultation as above.
b) Application submission
i. No Pre-consultation.
Where a proponent has submitted an application
that is subject to design review and approval without pre-consulting, the
assigned Planner processing the application will withhold initiating the formal
processing until a preliminary design review of the proposal has been
undertaken. This preliminary design
review may include a member of the peer design review panel who in consultation
with staff would determine whether the proposal responds sufficiently to
technical, planning and design considerations to proceed to formal
processing.
ii. Following pre-consultation with
participation by a member of the Peer Design Review Panel
Once the formal application is submitted,
following pre-consultation, up to two additional panel members as may be
determined through the pre-consultation process would be contacted by the
assigned Planner to participate in the formal design review along with the one
panel member involved in the pre-consultation.
Generally, up to three panel members will comprise the formal panel for
larger projects with one panel member comprising the formal panel for smaller
projects.
iii. Following pre-consultation where there
was no Peer Design Review Panel participation or following application
submission where there was no pre-consultation
In these cases, the assigned Planner would
initiate the design review process for the project with the panel following
receipt of the formal application at which time, panel members would be
contacted to participate in the formal design review (up to three members for
larger projects and one for smaller projects as determined through the
pre-consultation process).
The formal
design review will be undertaken within the 28-day circulation period for a
development application and will be coordinated by the assigned Planner. Among the circulation packages to be
distributed to obtain feedback from various technical agencies and the public,
a package that includes all the design materials submitted with the application
will be prepared and will be forwarded to the panel members(s) contacted who will
undertake the review of the project.
Along with this package, a date for a Design Review meeting between the
panel and the proponent will be identified.
This meeting date will occur within the 28-day circulation period.
In
preparation for this meeting, the panel is expected to review the design
material submitted by the proponent and is to provide a written Design Review
Report detailing its comments and review to the assigned Planner five days
prior to the scheduled Design Review meeting.
Staff will in turn forward the panel's report to the proponent. The panel's report will be made available to
any interested party upon request.
Should the
Panel in its review of the design materials submitted with the application
determine that the proposed project design can be accepted without
modification, there will be no need for a Design Review meeting between the
Panel and the proponent. Staff would in
these cases process the site plan application and once the final plans for the
development are received, would forward the design drawings to the Panel for
its acceptance to allow the Director to give site plan approval under delegated
approval authority.
The Design
Review meeting between the panel and the proponent and his/her architect will
be loosely structured as set out below to engage in a dialogue on the projects
design and the contribution that the project is making or can make to achieving
the design objectives of the City as expressed in the Downtown Ottawa Urban
Design Strategy and the City's Official Plan.
The assigned
Planner will participate in the design review meeting to provide information
and/or clarification of planning and or engineering considerations that may
influence design considerations. Staff
will not participate in the design discussion, but will compile minutes of the
meeting for distribution to the panel and the proponent. The minutes of the meeting will also be made
available upon request to any interested party.
The panel at
the conclusion of the Design Review meeting, may, where the panel has suggested
a number of design modifications to a project, request the proponent to attend
a follow-up meeting to review any design changes made by the proponent. As well, the panel may delegate follow-up
review to one panel member where the review panel is comprised of more than one
member. The purpose of the follow-up
meeting is to review the design modifications made by the proponent to respond
to comments and suggestions made by the Panel and that the proponent agreed to
incorporate into the project design, and to obtain agreement between the Panel
and the proponent on the final project design.
The follow-up meeting will occur within the first two weeks following
the 28 day circulation period.
Once
agreement is reached between the panel and the proponent on the final project
design, final design drawings will be submitted to the assigned Planner who in
turn will provide the final drawings to the panel. The panel will note its acceptance on the final design drawings
which will then be provided along with the site plan and engineering plans to
the Director of Planning and Infrastructure Approvals for formal approval.
The panel in
its review of a development proposal will focus its review on the relationship
of the project to the design framework expressed in the Downtown Ottawa Urban
Design Strategy and on how a project responds to the urban design policies set
out in the Official Plan. To assist
proponents and the Panel in applying the design framework, a document setting
out the design review considerations for projects within the downtown has been
developed. The design review
considerations are not all encompassing, but rather are structured to
facilitate a discussion on the design issues that development within the
downtown needs to be responsive to towards improving the quality and image of
the downtown.
While it is
expected that the panel in its assessment of the design of a project will give
consideration to details such as colour and details of building fenestration
design as examples, the panel is not to base its acceptance of a design on such
details. Rather, the panel is to focus
on the relationship of a project to the public realm and the contribution that
a project does or does not make to achieving the City's urban design
objectives.
Each member
of the Panel has the duty, when contacted to participate on a review panel, to
advise of any conflict of interest with respect to the development application.
In this regard, the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act will apply and the panel
member shall decline the request to participate.
Panel members
will be provided an honorarium of $300.00 for each formal design review meeting
that the panel member attends. An
honorarium of $50.00 will be provided to a panel member participating in a
pre-consultation session prior to formal application submission and a $50.00
honorarium will be provided to each panel member participating in a follow up
meeting prior to the submission by a proponent of final design drawings. The maximum honorarium for a panel member
for any single project being reviewed is $400.00.
MONITORING PROGRAM PRINCIPLES Document
8
A monitoring
program for the Pilot Project will be developed jointly between staff and the
Peer Design Review Panel. The monitoring program must incorporate some
key elements to ensure that the monitoring will be useful both in making
adjustments to the Pilot Project and for assessing how well the Pilot Project
is able to contribute to achieving the City's design objectives for the
downtown.
The following
establishes the framework for developing the monitoring program. It sets out key elements that need to be
incorporated into the monitoring program, provides for having various
stakeholder interests involved in the monitoring program and identifies
possible monitoring tools that should be utilized.
A. Monitoring of the Design Review
Considerations
It is anticipated that the approach and
considerations developed to establish a framework for undertaking design review
of projects within the downtown will require adjustment over time as specific
areas of concern become evident. The
key questions that must be able to be answered through the monitoring of the
review considerations are:
§
Is the approach
included as part of the Pilot Project appropriate?
§
Is the approach
and considerations that will guide the review understood by proponents of
development?
§
Does the approach
and considerations provide a useable framework for the review panel in their
review of development proposals?
§
Does the approach
and considerations included provide for a consistent basis in the review of
development proposals?
B. Monitoring of the Review Process
The objective of the pilot project is to
provide for the integration of design review into the development review
process. Certain guiding principals
were developed to provide for seamless integration of the two processes, to
ensure that timelines would not be impacted as a result of design review, and
that the process would provide consistency in the design review process. How
well the pilot project responds to these guiding principles will have to be
monitored and where required, adjustments will have to be made.
C. Monitoring of the Results
The review process is focused on an interactive
design review where the proponent and the Peer Design Review Panel would work
towards achieving agreement on a project’s design. This for purposes of the
Pilot Project is seen as an effective way in which to build a downtown design
culture and work towards achieving the City's design objectives. The effectiveness of this approach will also
have to be monitored to determine whether this approach contributes positively
to the development of a downtown design culture, and whether it will be
effective in advancing the City's overall design objectives for the downtown as
expressed in Downtown Design Strategy and the Official Plan.
D. Monitoring Reference Group
To assist staff and the Peer Design Review
Panel with the actual monitoring of the Pilot Project, a reference group made
up of representatives of various stakeholder interests is to be established.
Terms of Reference for this group will be developed as part of the development
of the monitoring program by staff and the Peer Design Review Panel.
The reference group would comprise:
§
Staff
§
The Ward Councillors
§
The Peer Design
Review Panel
§
Development
proponents
§
Community members
The reference group would assist in identifying
aspects of the Pilot Project that are working well and areas where difficulties
and/or concerns exist.
E. Monitoring tools
It will be necessary for the monitoring program
to utilize various tools/techniques to ensure that all possible viewpoints will
be factored into the monitoring program.
Some possible tools that should be considered for inclusion as part of
the monitoring program include:
§
Questionnaires to
proponents
§
Annual community
meetings
§
Review Panel
de-brief sessions with staff and project designers (following project
approvals)
§ Annual reports to City Council
CONSULTATION DETAILS Document
9
NOTIFICATION AND CONSULTATION PROCESS
As directed by City Council at its meeting on March 10, 2004, the Downtown Design Review Pilot Project has been developed in consultation with representatives from a number of stakeholder groups. This consultation which included the development industry, the design industry, property owners, business interests, community groups and area residents was undertaken through two workshop sessions held on April 15, 2004 and April 29, 2004.
All those invited to attend the workshop sessions and any party expressing an interest in the Downtown Design Review Pilot Project have been provided a copy of this report and notice of the Planning and Environment Committee meeting where this report is being considered.
Approximately 80 people representing a cross section of the different stakeholder groups invited to participate in the April 15 workshop attended and participated in this workshop. Participants where engaged through eight facilitated breakout groups to help determine the design review considerations/criteria to be used in the review of development proposals within the downtown and to help determine the process for integrating design review into the development review process.
While each breakout group arrived at its own determinations related to the design review considerations/criteria and the process, there was some commonality amongst the groups in some of the determinations made.
The commonalities amongst the eight breakout groups related to the design review considerations/criteria did not relate as much to the determinations made, but rather to what was discussed or not discussed.
All the breakout groups focused on the design review criteria with little or no discussion amongst any of the groups on the two-step approach that was presented in the discussion paper/workbook that was prepared for the workshop. The intent of the two step approach was to ensure that the design review for downtown projects would address all relevant design principals and objectives expressed in the Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy and that opportunities for projects to advance specific strategic directions would be identified and assessed. This in part may be due to the newness of the Downtown Design Strategy document, its limited availability and varying levels of awareness amongst the workshop participants of the urban design principles, objectives and strategic directions set out in the document.
The discussion amongst the breakout groups varied considerably. Following are some of the key highlights of the discussion dealing with the design review criteria included within step two of the design review considerations.
In addition to
these broad comments/views, most groups also provided numerous suggestions to
modify criteria, add new criteria to address items that the groups felt should
be included in the review, or eliminate certain criteria.
Most groups
concluded that all projects, both larger scale and smaller scale should be
subject to design review. Some
suggestions were made that the level of review may vary depending on the scale
or potential for the project to make a significant contribution to the image
and identity of the downtown. Larger and more significant projects would be
subject to a higher level of design review by a peer design review group with
smaller projects subject to a lower level of design review possibly by one peer
design reviewer or by staff. Some
groups also suggested that the pilot project should focus on a smaller area
within the downtown.
All the breakout groups addressed the approval and review options for the design review process which are the two key elements of the process. Some groups also addressed options for other component parts of the process. The following highlights the determinations made amongst the groups related to the design review process.
Six of the eight groups determined that the design review process should conclude with a design approval, utilizing the authority provided by the former City of Ottawa Act. There was a split as to whether the approval should be given by staff as part of an integrated approval or by a design review body. Two groups felt that the design review should serve to inform the overall review process for an application, but that the design should not be approved though one group did make reference to “design approval”. The second group favoring a no design approval option determined that design approval may be something that could be considered later, after the pilot project has been operationalized and assessed.
All but one group determined that design review should be undertaken by a peer review group comprising practicing design professionals. Some groups felt that staff should also be included within the design review group either as active participants or to ensure that the peer design review group is provided information related to the project. One group felt that the design review function should by undertaken by staff.
Five groups addressed pre-consultation determining that integrated staff consultation should be followed for the design review pilot project. Two groups also felt that pre-consultation with a design review body would be beneficial in that the review group would be able to participate early in the project development to highlight the design considerations that will be used to assess the design merits of the project.
One group addressed this element of the design review process suggesting that the specific requirements be determined based on a project’s location and its scale.
Two groups addressed the design agreement component of the process and both felt that such an agreement should be integrated with a site plan agreement with one group noting that it should be used where more control may be required.
Three groups dealt with this component part of the process. Two groups favored the option where the design review area would be designated in the Official Plan to allow the legislative authority provided by the former City of Ottawa Act to be used with a comprehensive policy framework for the pilot project established through Council resolution. One group, that did not support giving design approval for projects felt that the option that only established a comprehensive policy framework for the pilot project through a Council resolution was most appropriate.
All those who participated in the April 15th workshop were invited to attend and participate in the April 29th workshop to assist in refining the design review considerations and to assist in refining the process for integrating design review into the development review process. Approximately 30 participants attended and participated in the April 29th workshop. Participants were divided into three break out groups comprising a cross section of stakeholder interests.
The commonalities determined as a result of the April 15th workshop served as the basis for the design review considerations and the process option presented and discussed at the April 29th workshop. In this regard, a document detailing a scoped approach and process for the pilot project was developed by staff and provided in advance of the April 29th workshop. Each of the three break out groups addressed the following which was presented in the document that served as the workshop discussion paper:
In general, all three groups agreed that a two step approach for reviewing the design merits of a project going from a more general assessment of a project in the context of the Downtown Ottawa Urban Design Strategy to more context and project specific design considerations expressed in the Official Plan was logical, appropriate and provided for a balanced review process. Each group none-the-less had some concerns with elements or details associated with specific aspects of the approach. These ranged from concerns that the design principles of the Downtown Design Strategy are too prescriptive, to a need for greater clarification on the link between the more general considerations and the more specific considerations and concern with complexity that some felt was inherent with the approach. Each group also put forward various suggestions to address the concerns raised. Overall, however, the three groups acknowledged a need to have some basis for reviewing projects from a design perspective and indicated acceptance to utilize the design review considerations presented subject to some fine-tuning with adjustments made as may be identified through a monitoring program.
There was consensus amongst all three groups that all projects subject to site plan review and approval should be subject to design review. There was however some concern raised about the relationship of the design review process as part of the site plan review with the design review process through Local Architectural Conservation Advisory Committee (LACAC) for development subject to heritage approvals or the National Capital Commission (NCC) design review process for development subject to federal land use and design approval. Certain suggestions were also provided to address this and some other concerns such as involving LACAC in pre-consultation, including heritage buildings and areas for a trial period, and setting up a control area where design review would not apply to assess the effectiveness of design review where it would be applicable.
As part of the Pilot Project, design approval would not be required where heritage approval or NCC design approval applies. Rather, projects subject to heritage or NCC design approval would only be subject to design review by the Peer Review Panel who would provide comments to the design approval bodies (LACAC and NCC).
The discussion amongst the three groups on the process of integrating design review into the site plan approval process did not focus on the process that was presented based on the commonalities determined through the April 15th workshop, but rather focused on issues/concerns that were not specifically addressed previously including public involvement in the review process and the need to ensure that the design review aspect of the overall development review would be open and transparent, appeals processes for design decisions, resolving differences of opinion, concerns regarding conflicts of interest and questions regarding remuneration for the design professionals that would be participating on the peer review panel. Many of these items have been addressed as part of the recommended Pilot Project.
All three groups agreed to the need to have a comprehensive monitoring program, as is being recommended, established prior to launching the Pilot Project. The monitoring would need to establish a process or basis to assess not only the effectiveness of the Pilot Project but also to allow for adjustments to be made where areas of concern are identified with elements of the Pilot Project.