Report Template

3. GREELY COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN - OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT

PLAN DE CONCEPTION COMMUNAUTAIRE DE GREELY - MODIFICATION DU PLAN OFFICIEL

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AS AMENDED

A. That Council:

1. Approve the Community Design Plan for the Village of Greely as detailed in Document 6 (separate cover), as amended by the following:

a. Revise all schedules, appendices and associated text within the Greely Community Design Plan to reflect the decision of the Ontario Municipal Board decision of November 1, 2004.

b. Revise the first sentence of Policy (3)(b) to read:

“A 15-metre setback from the high-water make along both sides of the tributary of Shields Creek, in Concession IV, Lots 6 and 7, must be dedicated to the City as public open space as part of the subdivision approval.”

c. Remove Policy (5) of Section 7.2 in its entirety.

d. Revise the last sentence in the “Permitted Uses” description of Section 4.2 to read:

“Given the hydrogeological conditions within Greely, described in Section 3 of this CDP, it is anticipated that lot sizes will be 0.2 hectares (0.5 acres) in size or greater.”

e. Revise the second sentence of Section 8.1 to read:

“Many elements on the schedules of this CDP are conceptual, including the specific pattern and location of new collector and local roads; the specific size, configuration, and location of community and neighbourhood parks; and the specific boundaries of land use designations.”

f. Revise Policy (3) of Section 6.4 to read:

“Proposed subdivisions that are adjacent to the village boundary consider the local road connections identified on Schedule C during the development review process, and are subject to the requirements of a Traffic Impact Study.”

g. Add Policy (8) to Section 4.2 that reads:

“Semi-detached and townhouse dwellings are permitted to be concentrated within part of the lands in Concession IV, Lot 8, based on a connection to the approved, ultimately city-owned and operated, communal water supply and sanitary sewer systems for the Shadow Ridge Estates subdivision, which is described in Section 3.4. In the event that studies required during the subdivision approval process indicate that such a connection to this system is not workable and/or economically viable, only low density residential uses will be permitted.”

h. Remove Policies (2) and (3) of Section 3.3 in their entirety.

i. Revise Policy (1) of Section 3.3 to read:

“All development will give consideration to the recommendations of the Shields Creek Subwatershed Study, as they apply.”

2. Adopt Official Plan Amendment No. X to the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa, as detailed in Document 3, to remove the existing Greely Village Plan and to add the new Greely Community Design Plan.

3. Adopt Official Plan Amendment No. XX to the Official Plan of the former Township of Osgoode, as detailed in Document 3, to remove the policies and schedule as they relate to Village of Greely.

4. Direct Staff to bring forward at a later meeting of the Planning and Environment Committee a zoning by-law amendment, as detailed in Document 4, that implements in part the recommendations of the Greely Community Design Plan.

5. Support a change in the Village of Greely boundary on Schedule A of the Ottawa Official Plan (2003) to include the lands subject to the Ontario Municipal Board Order dated Novmber 1, 2004.

6. Direct staff to communicate this position to the Ontario Municipal Board at its pre-hearing on June 6, 2005

B. WHEREAS road linkages, road connections and walkway connections are developed as part of Traffic-Impact Studies, and;

WHEREAS the Greely Community Design Plan indicates a wide variety of possible road linkages and road connections, and walkway connections throughout the Village, and;

WHEREAS these indicators may prejudge any future Traffic Impact Study;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT these indicators (arrows) be removed from the Greely Community Design Plan.

And that no further notice be provided pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act.

RECOMMANDATIONS Modifiées du COMITÉ

A. Que le Conseil :

1. approuve le Plan de conception communautaire pour le village de Greely, tel qu’exposé en détail dans le Document 6 (sous pli séparé), modifié comme suit :

a. Réviser toutes les annexes, tous les appendices et les textes connexes du Plan de conception communautaire pour le village de Greely de manière à ce qu’ils reflètent la décision rendue le 1^er novembre 2004 par la Commission des affaires municipales de l’Ontario.

b. Réviser la première phrase de la politique (3)(b) comme suit :

« Une marge de recul de 15 mètres depuis la ligne des hautes eaux, le long des deux rives du tributaire du ruisseau Shields, dans la concession IV, lots 6 et 7, doit être réservée à la Ville comme un espace vert public dans le cadre de l’approbation du plan de lotissement. »

c. Retrancher entièrement la politique (5) de l’article 7.2.

d. Réviser la dernière phrase de la description des « Utilisations permises », sous l’article 4.2, comme suit :

« Compte tenu des conditions hydrogéologiques propres à Greely, décrites sous l’article 3 de ce PCC, on prévoit que les lots auront une superficie de 0,2 hectare (0,5 acre) ou plus. »

j. Réviser la deuxième phrase de l’article 8.1 comme suit :

« Bon nombre des éléments figurant dans les annexes de ce PCC sont d’ordre conceptuel, y compris le modèle et l’emplacement du nouvel égout collecteur et des nouveaux chemins; la taille précise, la configuration et l’emplacement des parcs de communautés et de quartiers; ainsi que les limites précises des zones d’affectation du sol. »

k. Réviser la politique (3), sous l’article 6.4, comme suit :

« Les lotissements proposés, qui sont adjacents à la limite du village tiennent compte des raccordements routiers locaux décrits à l’annexe C à l’étape du processus d’examen du projet d’aménagement et doivent faire l’objet d’une Étude des répercussions sur la circulation. »

l. Ajouter la politique (8) à l’article 4.2 comme suit :

« Des maisons jumelées et des maisons en rangées pourront être concentrées à l’intérieur d’une zone de la concession IV, lot 8, sous réserve de leur raccordement aux réseaux d’adduction et d’égouts sanitaires collectifs approuvés et, éventuellement, exploités et détenus par la Ville, pour le lotissement de Shadow Ridge Estates, et décrits sous l’article 3.4. Si les études exigées dans le cadre du processus d’approbation du plan de lotissement révèlent que le raccordement à de tels réseaux n’est pas faisable et/ou économiquement viable, seul l’aménagement résidentiel de faible densité sera autorisé. »

m. Retrancher entièrement les politiques (2) et (3) de l’Article 3.3.

n. Réviser la politique (1) de l’article 3.3 comme sui :

« Tous les projets d’aménagement tiendront compte des recommandations formulées dans l’Étude du sous-bassin hydrographique du ruisseau Shields, le cas échéant. »

2. adopte la modification n^o X au Plan officiel (2003) de la Ville d'Ottawa, telle qu'exposée en détail dans le Document 3, afin d'en supprimer le Plan actuel du village de Greely et d'y ajouter le nouveau Plan de conception communautaire de Greely;

3. adopte la modification n^o XX au Plan officiel de l'ancien canton d'Osgoode, telle qu'exposée en détail dans le Document 3, afin d'en supprimer les politiques et l'annexe se rapportant au village de Greely;

4. donne instruction au personnel de présenter, à l'occasion d'une réunion ultérieure du Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement, une modification au règlement municipal de zonage, telle qu'exposée en détail dans le Document 4, en vue de mettre en œuvre en partie les recommandations du Plan de conception communautaire de Greely;

5. avalise une modification des limites du village de Greely figurant à l’annexe A du Plan officiel de la Ville d’Ottawa (2003), de manière à y inclure les terres visées par l’ordonnance émise le 1^er novembre 2004 par la Commission des affaires municipales de l’Ontario;

6. donne instruction au personnel de faire part de cette position à la Commission des affaires municipales de l’Ontario lors de l’audience préliminaire prévue le 6 juin 2005;

B. ATTENDU QUE les liens et raccordements routiers et les raccordements piétonniers sont conçus dans le cadre des études des répercussions sur la circulation;

ATTENDU QUE le Plan de conception communautaire pour le village de Greely indique de nombreuses possibilités de liens et raccordements routiers et de raccordements piétonniers d’un bout à l’autre du village;

ATTENDU QUE ces indicateurs peuvent donner à préjuger des résultats de toute étude future des répercussions sur la circulation;

PAR CONSÉQUENT, IL EST RÉSOLU QUE ces indicateurs (flèches) soient éliminés du Plan de conception communautaire pour le village de Greely.

Et qu’aucun autre avis ne soit donné aux termes du paragraphe 34 (17) de la Loi sur l’aménagement du territoire.

Documentation

1. Deputy City Manager, Planning and Growth Management report dated 18 November 2004 (ACS2004-DEV-POL-0038).

2. Extract of Draft Minutes, 8 February 2005.

Report to/Rapport au :

Planning and Environment Committee

Comité de l'urbanisme et de l’environnement

and Council / et au Conseil

18 November 2004 / le 18 novembre 2004

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

Planning and Growth Management / Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance

Contact Person/Personne ressource : Richard Kilstrom, Manager/Gestionnaire, Community Planning and Design Division/Conception communautaire

Planning, Environment and Infrastructure Policy/Politique d'urbanisme, d'environnement et d'infrastructure

(613) 580-2424 x,22653, richard.kilstrom@ottawa.ca

Osgoode (20)

Ref N°: ACS2004-DEV-POL-0038

SUBJECT:

GREELY COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN - Official Plan

Amendment

OBJET :

PLAN DE CONCEPTION COMMUNAUTAIRE DE GREELY - MODIFICATION DU PLAN OFFICIEL

REPORT RECOMMENDATION

That Planning and Environment Committee recommend that Council:

1. Approve the Community Design Plan for the Village of Greely as detailed in Document 6 (separate cover).

3. Adopt Official Plan Amendment No. XX to the Official Plan of the former Township of Osgoode, as detailed in Document 3, to remove the policies and schedule as they relate to Village of Greely.

RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT

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

1. d'approuver le Plan de conception communautaire pour le village de Greely, tel qu'exposé en détail dans le Document 6 (sous pli séparé);

2. d'adopter la modification no X au Plan officiel (2003) de la Ville d'Ottawa, telle qu'exposée en détail dans le Document 3, afin d'y supprimer le Plan actuel du village de Greely et d'y ajouter le nouveau Plan de conception communautaire de Greely;

3. d'adopter la modification no XX au Plan officiel de l'ancien canton d'Osgoode, telle qu'exposée en détail dans le Document 3, afin d'y supprimer les politiques et l'annexe se rapportant au village de Greely;

4. de demander au personnel de présenter, à l'occasion d'une réunion ultérieure du Comité de l'urbanisme et de l'environnement, une modification au règlement municipal de zonage, telle qu'exposée en détail dans le Document 4, en vue de mettre en œuvre en partie les recommandations du Plan de conception communautaire de Greely.

BACKGROUND

Located in the former Township of Osgoode, Greely is the largest rural village in Ottawa in terms of land area with approximately 1,050 hectares of land within its boundaries and the third largest in terms of population with approximately 4,150 people (Document 1). Historically Greely was two separate villages from a planning perspective: Greely, centered along Parkway Road west of Highway 31, and Greely West, centered along Parkway Road and Stagecoach Road. Several boundary expansions throughout the 1980s and 1990s combined the two villages by adding the lands in-between and surrounding the villages. Presently approximately 55% of the land with Greely's boundaries is developed, the vast majority of which is for single detached dwellings.

Greely has been the fastest growing rural village in Ottawa over the last thirty years, attributable primarily to its proximity to the City's urban areas combined with the draw of its rural atmosphere. Based on the supply of land designated Residential and current development trends, approximately 1,900 new dwelling units could potentially be constructed in Greely. This represents a potential doubling of the current total number of dwelling units in Greely.

A host of planning issues make Greely atypical of other rural villages in Ottawa. These issues include the Greely's boundary evolution and the large areas of vacant land within the centre of the village; the absence of a "main street" containing a concentration of commercial and service uses; the presence of several rural estate developments adjacent to the village's boundary; the presence of an industrial park in the centre of the village; and residents identifying more with individual subdivisions than the community as a whole.

The Planning and Growth Management Department initiated the Greely Land Use and Design Study (Greely LUDS) in February 2003 to address these issues by developing a comprehensive land use vision and plan. FoTenn Consultants Inc. was retained by the City to undertake the Greely LUDS, the process and timeline of which is detailed in Document 2. The Study's final report in May 2004 included four main components: key principles for future growth and development; a village land use plan and land use policies; village core design recommendations; and suggested tools for implementation.

The Council-adopted Official Plan states that City Council will approve community design plans as land use policy plans to replace the existing village plans in Volume 2C of the Official Plan. The Planning and Growth Management Department prepared a Greely Community Design Plan (Greely CDP) based on the recommendations of the Greely LUDS. The proposed Official Plan Amendments would remove the policies and schedules in the Council-adopted Official Plan and Official Plan of the former Township of Osgoode as they relate to Greely and would add the Greely Community Design Plan to the Council-adopted Official Plan.

DISCUSSION

The Planning and Growth Management Department prepared the Greely CDP based on the recommendations of the Greely LUDS' final report. These recommendations were revised and enhanced where necessary to fit them into the policy framework of a Community Design Plan and to account for new information that became available after completion of the final report. The Greely CDP, distributed under separate cover, is comprised of the following seven components:

(1) Community Vision

This section highlights the public consultation process of the Greely LUDS and discusses the vision statement developed by participants at the visioning workshop. Five key principles were developed from the vision statement and the directions of the Official Plan and were the foundation when developing the recommended land use plan. The five development principles are:

Principle 1: Open Space and Recreation - develop a greenspace system that integrates all recreational and environmental areas of the Village.

Principle 2: Linkages - provide an interconnected system of walkways, trails and roads to connect different areas of the Village.

Principle 3: Sustainability - ensure that all future development does not adversely impact the Village's water resources.

Principle 4: Diversity and Community Character - provide a range of housing types and commercial opportunities while maintaining the rural atmosphere.

Principle 5: Mobility - provide an interconnected transportation system maintaining and enhancing accessibility.

(2) Growth Management Strategy

This section identifies how all future growth and development in Greely will be accommodated in order to promote the sustainable development of the Village. This section is comprised of three subsections:

Village Boundary:

Describes how Greely's village boundary will be evaluated in the future and how development applications adjacent to the boundary will be reviewed.

Environmental Protection:

Describes the subwatershed study, the drainage study and the hydrogeological characterization study undertaken concurrently with the Greely LUDS. The Greely CDP incorporates these studies' recommendations wherever possible.

Servicing:

Identifies that all future development in Greely will be serviced by individual private water supply and sanitary sewer systems, with the exception of subdivisions with previous approvals for communal systems.

(3) Land Use Plan

This section describes the land use plan that will guide Greely's future development. There are nine land use designations within the Greely CDP, five of which are existing designations with the majority of existing policies intact and four of which are new designations which reflect the recommendations of the Subwatershed Study or the direction of the Official Plan. The designations are:

1. Residential

2. Village Core

3. Shopping Centre Commercial

4. Highway Commercial

5. Industrial

6. Open Space

7. Provincially Significant Wetland

8. Ecological Feature

9. Ecolological Function

(4) Village Core Plan

This section provides design guidelines that promote the development of a unique identity for Greely's Village Core. The design guidelines are meant to be a guide to development within Greely's Core during the development review process and are divided into four themes.

Built Form Guidelines:

Promote a built form that promotes a variety of uses and variety of forms in the Core, gives the Core a distinct identity, and that works well with the streetscape.

Streetscape Guidelines:

Promote streetscapes in the Core that are safe and allow ease of movement for pedestrians, are linked to surrounding neighbourhoods, and creates an intimate and visually appealing public atmosphere.

Gateway and Edge Guidelines:

Promote key gateway and edges in the Core that are visually appealing and provide a positive image of Greely.

Key Development Site Guidelines:

Provide further, site-specific direction to three presently vacant sites within the Core that offer an excellent opportunity for showcasing the guidelines.

(5) Road Network

This section describes Greely's road network, which is intended to accommodate all transportation types while keeping safety and accessibility in mind. The road network plan shows all existing arterial, collector and local roads together with the conceptual future collector, conceptual future local road patterns, and future road connections to areas adjacent to the village boundary. The policies for the road network plan include right-of-way requirements, sidewalk requirements, and connection requirements for lands adjacent to the village boundary.

(6) Greenspace Network

This section provides the strategy for Greely's greenspace network, which includes existing parks, future parks, walkways and trails, and environmental areas. Greenspace in Greely is to be well-distributed, accessible, interconnected and varied in type and function. The greenspace network plan shows all existing parks together with conceptual future park locations and identified environmental areas. The policies for the greenspace system describe methods of acquisition of future parkland, general requirements for future parks, consideration for public walkways, study requirements for environmental areas, considerations for public walkways and trails, and connection requirements for lands adjacent to the village boundary.

(7) Implementation Strategy

This section identifies the strategy for implementing the Greely CDP by establishing how the plan will be interpreted, implemented and monitored. For interpretation, the elements of this Plan are flexible as long the general intent of the Plan’s policies is maintained. For implementation, the specific action steps to be accomplished and participants involved are identified. For monitoring, the timing and criteria for evaluating the CDP in the future following approval are identified.

The proposed Official Plan Amendments, detailed in Document 3, would be the first action step for implementing the Greely CDP. Official Plan Amendment No.X will remove the Greely Village Plan from Volume 2C of the Council-adopted Official Plan and will add the Greely CDP to Annex 5 in Volume 1 of the Council-adopted Official Plan; Official Plan Amendment No.XX would remove the policies and schedule from the Official Plan of the former Township of Osgoode as they relate to Greely.

Additionally, staff are seeking Council's direction, following approval of the CDP, to bring forward a zoning by-amendment to implement the recommendations of the Greely CDP regarding reductions to the physical size of the Village Core to provide a clearer focus and to limit potential land use conflicts. The Zoning By-law Amendment would rezone 95 properties from Village Community (V) to Residential (R), to match the zoning on the existing established residential neighbourhoods surrounding the Core. A draft version of this zoning by-law amendment is detailed in Document 4.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

Three other studies for Greely and the surrounding area were undertaken concurrently with the Greely LUDS: the Shields Creek Subwatershed Study, the Greely/Shields Creek Stormwater and Drainage Study, and the Greely Hydrogeological Characterization Study. Wherever possible the recommendations of these three studies have been incorporated into the Greely CDP, which include:

- Creek corridors for Shields Creek and its tributaries;

- Drainage guidelines;

- Requirements for hydrogeological and terrain analysis evaluations;

- Two new designations to protect an interior woodland habitat; and

- Riparian plantings along Shields Creek within Andy Shields Park.

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

The study area of the Greely LUDS and Greely CDP only includes the lands within the current village boundary, as defined by Schedule A of the Official Plan. An expansion of the village boundary for Greely was not considered through the Greely LUDS given the current adequate supply of developable residential lands within Greely. The surrounding rural areas adjacent to the village boundary were considered in terms of road and trail connections. Additionally, the rural area surrounding the Village of Greely was considered during the Subwatershed Study, which studied the lands within the village together with the surrounding area.

The Ontario Municipal Board issued a partial order on November 1, 2004 concerning an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and Subdivision Approval regarding lands within the "hole in the donut", the lands within the "centre" of the Village but outside of the village boundary. The order was partial in that the Official Plan Amendment to include the lands within the boundary was allowed, but time was given for the parties to finalize the subdivision details prior to approval. Once these details are finalized, the subdivision will be added to the Greely CDP schedules by staff.

CONSULTATION

A Steering Committee was initiated at the beginning of the Greely LUDS with representatives from the Approvals Branch and the Policy Branch of the Planning and Growth Management Department and representatives from the South Nation Conservation Authority. Five Steering Committee meetings were held throughout the study's duration to collect input from the representatives.

As per the direction of the Official Plan, the Greely LUDS employed an open and collaborative process for public consultation, as detailed in Document 2. Four public consultation sessions were held to gain input and feedback from the public: three sessions with the general public and one session with landowners owning large areas of undeveloped land. These four session are described below.

The first session on April 15, 2003 was a facilitated workshop with the purpose of establishing a vision and set of development principles based on the values expressed by the public. Approximately 150 people attended the workshop.

The second session on June 11, 2003 was a meeting to present the two land use concept plan alternatives to all landowners who own large parcels of undeveloped land. Approximately 35 people attended the meeting, including landowners, their agents and City staff. The feedback received at this meeting revised the alternative land use concept plans prior to their presentation at the public session on June 26, 2003.

The third session on June 26, 2003 was an open house held jointly with the Shields Creek Subwatershed Study with the purpose of presenting and receiving feedback on the two land use concept alternatives and the Shield’s Creek Subwatershed draft management strategy. Approximately 50 people attended the open house.

The fourth session on March 11, 2004 was an open house held jointly with the Shields Creek Subwatershed Study, with the purpose of presenting the draft recommended land use plan and supporting policies and the Shield’s Creek Subwatershed management recommendations and implementation strategy. Approximately 60 people attended the open house.

Residents and landowners were notified of the public sessions and updated on the Study’s progress through a combination of notices in community newspapers, flyer mail outs, invitations through the Study’s mailing list, and notices on the City’s public consultation website. Copies of the draft report and final report for the Greely LUDS and the draft report of the Greely Community Design Plan have been held for public review at the Greely Public Library throughout the process.

Several comments from the public were submitted throughout the process. A summary of the common comments and how the CDP addresses them is provided in Document 5.

Councillor Thompson has been involved throughout both the Greely LUDS and Greely CDP processes.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

N/A

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 Village of Greely Location Map

Document 2 Greely LUDS timeline

Document 3 Proposed Official Plan Amendments

Document 4 Draft Zoning By-law Amendment

Document 5 Summary of Public Comments

Document 6 Greely Community Design Plan (under separate cover and on file with the City Clerk)

DISPOSITION

1. The Planning and Growth Management Department will issue the Notice of Decision within the 20 day appeal period for Ottawa Official Plan Amendments X and XX.

2. The Planning and Growth Management Department will revise Annex 5 to the Official Plan to indicate that Greely is subject to a Community Design Plan, replacing the reference to a Village Plan.

STUDY AREA MAP Document 1

GREELY LUDS – PROCESS AND TIMELINE Document 2

#	Step	Date
1	Preparation of detailed work program and work schedule	February 2003
2	Steering Committee meeting #1 – study initiation	February 20, 2003
3	Compilation, review and analysis of background information	February – March 2003
4	Steering Committee meeting #2 – review of background information and workshop preparation	March 18, 2003
5	Workshop – Visioning and development principles	April 15, 2003
6	Preparation of “existing conditions report”	May 2003
7	Steering Committee meeting #3 – review of “existing conditions report” and initiation of concept plan alternatives	May 2, 2003
8	Steering Committee meeting #4 – review of concept plan alternatives and open house preparation	June 5, 2003
9	Landowner meeting – review of alternative concept plans	June 11, 2003
10	Open House #1 – review of alternative concept plans	June 26, 2003
-	Study put on hold pending the completion of the Greely Groundwater Modelling study	July – December 2003
11	Preparation of draft report	January – February 2004
12	Steering Committee meeting #5 – review of draft report	February 25, 2004
13	Open House #2 – review of preferred concept plan and draft report	March 11, 2004
14	Preparation of preferred concept plan final report	March – April 2004
15	Submission of final preferred report	May 2004

Official Plan Amendments Document 3

1. OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. ___ TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN FOR THE FORMER TOWNSHIP OF OSGOODE.

2. OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. ___ TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN (2003) OF THE CITY OF OTTAWA.

PART A - THE PREAMBLE

1.0 Purpose

The purpose of the Amendment is to adopt the Greely Community Design Plan which will be the new policy plan directing future land use planning decisions in the Village of Greely. The Amendment removes the policies and schedule as they relate to Greely in the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa and the Official Plan for the former Township of Osgoode, and adds the Greely Community Design Plan to the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa and the Official Plan.

2.0 Location

The Amendment affects all of the land within the Village of Greely, as defined on Schedule A of the Official Plan.

3.0 Basis

The City of Ottawa initiated the Greely Land Use and Design Study in February 2003 with the objective of developing a comprehensive and coordinated land use and design vision for the Village of Greely. The Study was necessitated by several land use planning issues in Greely, such as the potential for the village’s population to double in the next twenty years; the continuation of rural estate development surrounding the Village; the continual development of unconnected residential subdivisions within the Village; and the lack of an established “main street”.

The Land Use and Design Study final report, which was completed in May 2004, recommended development principles to be considered during the development review process; more detailed land use policy direction for existing land use designations; new land use designations and policies for the environmental areas identified by the Shield’s Creek Subwatershed Study; design suggestions for the community core; and suggested tools for implementation.

The Official Plan (Section 2.5.7) states that Council will approve community design plans as policy documents to guide future development, replacing village plans that existed prior to the formation of the new City of Ottawa and that are currently held in Volume 2C of the Official Plan. City staff prepared a Greely CDP, based on the recommendations of the Greely Land Use and Design Study, which will replace the existing Greely Village Plan.

PART B - THE AMENDMENT

1.0 Introduction

All of this part of this document entitled Part B - The Amendment, consisting of the following text, constitutes Amendment No. ___ to the Official Plan of the former Township of Osgoode and constitutes Amendment No. ___ to the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa.

2.0 Details

The following changes are hereby made to the Official Plan for the former Township of Osgoode:

(1) Map 2 of Schedule A is removed;

(2) “(Map 2 to Map 7)” in the first paragraph of Section 3.17.5 is changed to “(Map 3 to Map 7)”.

(3) The third and fourth sentences of Section 2.2.5 are removed;

(4) The last sentence of the fifth paragraph of Section 3.17.5 is removed;

(5) Section 3.12.1.6 is removed in its entirety;

(6) The second sentence of Section 3.12.3.1 is removed;

(7) Section 4.1.4 is removed in its entirety;

(8) Section 4.2 is removed in its entirety;

(9) Section 4.7.4 is removed in its entirety;

(10) Section 4.10.4 is removed in its entirety;

(11) Section 4.11.4 is removed in its entirety; and

(12) Section 4.12.4 is removed in its entirety.

The following changes are hereby made to Volume 1 of the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa:

(1) The legend reference and corresponding colour on Annex 5 for the Village of Greely is changed from “Village Plan” to “Community Design Plan”.

The following changes are hereby made to Volume 2C of the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa:

(1) Map 2 of Schedule A is removed;

(2) “(Map 2 to Map 7)” in the first paragraph of Section 3.17.5 is changed to “(Map 3 to Map 7)”.

(3) “Greely” in the title of the section for the former Township of Osgoode Village Plans is removed so that it reads “Kenmore, Marionville, Metcalfe, Osgoode, Vernon”;

(4) The last sentence of the fifth paragraph of Section 3.17.5 is removed;

(5) Section 4.1.4 is removed in its entirety;

(6) Section 4.2 is removed in its entirety;

(7) Section 4.7.4 is removed in its entirety;

(8) Section 4.10.4 is removed in its entirety;

(9) Section 4.11.4 is removed in its entirety; and

(10) Section 4.12.4 is removed in its entirety.

3.0 Implementation

The implementation of these Amendments shall be in accordance with the respective policies of the Official Plan for the former Township of Osgoode and the Official Plan (2003) of the City of Ottawa.

Details of Draft Zoning By-law Amendment Document 4

Explanatory Note:

By-law Number _____ amends Zoning By-law 2003-230, the zoning by-law of the former Township of Osgoode, in order to implement the recommendations of the Greely Community Design Plan. This change results from the recommendations of the Greely Community Design Plan to reduce the physical size of the existing Village Core designation in order to limit any potential future land use conflicts within the surrounding established residential areas and to provide a clearer focus for the Core.

The Amendment affects properties within the existing Village Core, the location and municipal addresses of which are identified in Document 1. The Amendment changes the zoning on all of these properties from Village Community (V) to Residential (R), to reflect the zoning in the surrounding established residential areas.

Details of Zoning Amendment:

The zoning amendment will change the zoning of the 95 properties shown on Document 1 from Village Community (V) to Residential (R).

The first part of By-law Number _____ affects the municipal addresses listed in the below table, by changing their zoning from Village Community (V) to Residential (R).

1.	6126 Bank Street	33.	1504 Mayrene Crescent	65.	7228 Philnor Street
2.	7019 Cosgrove Avenue	34.	1505 Mayrene Crescent	66.	7234 Philnor Street
3.	7065 Cosgrove Avenue	35.	1509 Mayrene Crescent	67.	7235 Philnor Street
4.	1368 Cuthbert Way	36.	1513 Mayrene Crescent	68.	7240 Philnor Street
5.	1371 Cuthbert Way	37.	1517 Mayrene Crescent	69.	7246 Philnor Street
6.	1376 Cuthbert Way	38.	1521 Mayrene Crescent	70.	7249 Philnor Street
7.	1384 Cuthbert Way	39.	1422 Meadow Drive	71.	7250 Philnor Street
8.	1385 Cuthbert Way	40.	1434 Meadow Drive	72.	7038 Shields Drive
9.	1366 D’Arcy Street	41.	1438 Meadow Drive	73.	7048 Shields Drive
10.	1367 D’Arcy Street	42.	1442 Meadow Drive	74.	7051Shields Drive
11.	1374 D’Arcy Street	43.	1456 Meadow Drive	75.	7052 Shields Drive
12.	1375 D’Arcy Street	44.	1460 Meadow Drive	76.	7055 Shields Drive
13.	1422 Good Street	45.	1464 Meadow Drive	77.	7062 Shields Drive
14.	1432 Good Street	46.	1476 Meadow Drive	78.	7063Shields Drive
15.	1440 Good Street	47.	1480 Meadow Drive	79.	7070 Shields Drive
16.	1389 Johnston Drive	48.	1484 Meadow Drive	80.	7071 Shields Drive
17.	1400 Johnston Drive	49.	1494 Meadow Drive	81.	7078 Shields Drive
18.	1369 Keswick Drive	50.	1498 Meadow Drive	82.	7079 Shields Drive
19.	1372 Keswick Drive	51.	1502 Meadow Drive	83.	7086 Shields Drive
20.	1375 Keswick Drive	52.	1508 Meadow Drive	84.	7094 Shields Drive
21.	1380 Keswick Drive	53.	7186 Philnor Street	85.	7097 Shields Drive
22.	1383 Keswick Drive	54.	7192 Philnor Street	86.	7102 Shields Drive
23.	1391 Keswick Drive	55.	7196 Philnor Street	87.	7110 Shields Drive
24.	1477 Mayrene Crescent	56.	7197 Philnor Street	88.	7111 Shields Drive
25.	1481 Mayrene Crescent	57.	7200 Philnor Street	89.	7118 Shields Drive
26.	1485 Mayrene Crescent	58.	7203 Philnor Street	90.	7119 Shields Drive
27.	1489 Mayrene Crescent	59.	7204 Philnor Street	91.	7124 Shields Drive
28.	1492 Mayrene Crescent	60.	7207 Philnor Street	92.	7125 Shields Drive
29.	1493 Mayrene Crescent	61.	7210 Philnor Street	93.	7130 Shields Drive
30.	1497 Mayrene Crescent	62.	7211 Philnor Street	94.	1423 Terry Street
31.	1498 Mayrene Crescent	63.	7216 Philnor Street	95.	1429 Terry Street
32.	1501 Mayrene Crescent	64.	7222 Philnor Street

Summary of Public Comments Document 5

Comment: Bigger lots sizes are consistent with existing development pattern and the country atmosphere

Response: All lot sizes for new residential subdivisions will be determined by the hydrogeological evaluations that are required as part of the development review process. It is anticipated by staff lot sizes for new residential subdivisions will be required to be greater than 0.2 hectares (0.5 acres) as a result of these hydrogeological evaluations.

Comment: Development should be based on private, individual water and septic systems and not central or communal systems

Response: The Greely CDP’s land use plan is based on all future development being serviced by private, individual water supply and sanitary sewer systems, with the exception of Shadow Ridge Estates, a subdivision that has a previous approval for a communal water supply and sanitary sewer system.

Comment: There should not be road access to Misty Morning Drive or Lakeshore Drive from abutting, currently undeveloped properties

Response: The Council-adopted Official Plan promotes a modified grid network of roads for new subdivisions, in order to enable accessibility and permeability of movement. This was incorporated into the road network of the Greely LUDS, which was reviewed by the consulting team and City staff and was deemed to be adequate and appropriate. While the local road network plan in the Greely CDP is conceptual and is flexible to site-specific features and conditions during the subdivision review process, the general intent of the overall road network such as key road connections and permeability must be adhered to. Development applications for these abutting developments will be reviewed during the subdivision review process, which will again include considerations for traffic impacts.

Comment: Provide for a more defined central focus for the village with good connections to residential areas

Response: The Village Core Plan in the Greely CDP provides more detailed direction for Greely’s village core, through design guidelines that address building form, streetscapes, gateways and edges, and key development sites. The Village Core designation was reduced in the Greely CDP, from that of the previous Greely Village Plan, to provide a clearer focus along the Core’s main streets while lessening any potential land use conflicts in the surrounding established residential neighbourhoods.

Comment: The environmental impact of development must be recognized

Response: The City has undertaken several studies regarding the natural systems, drainage systems and groundwater systems in Greely and the surrounding areas between 2002 and 2004. The Greely CDP has included the recommendations of these studies, wherever possible, such as the preservation of significant ecological areas through the land use plan or the protection of the groundwater resources through hydrogeological evaluations during the development approval process.

Comment: Commercial activity at the Mitch Owens Drive and Albion Road intersection best serves the community

Response: The intersection of Mitch Owens Drive and Albion Road is currently outside of the village boundary. This intersection is presently oriented to the passing vehicular traffic with very limited retail commercial uses. This conforms to the intentions of the Greely CDP which intends to focus retail commercial uses within the existing Village Core while directing automobile-related uses to such intersections.

Comment: No higher density housing should be allowed in Greely

Response: The Council-adopted Official Plan intends that villages should contain a “wide range of housing form to meet the needs of the Village’s population”. The Greely CDP recognizes that Greely is and will continue to develop as a community of primarily low-density housing. The Greely CDP does permit two-unit and ground oriented multi-unit dwellings, and apartment units within the Village Core, and two-unit and ground oriented multi-unit dwellings on a limited basis in the Residential designation, subject to a list of conditions. All multiple unit development is constrained by hydrogeological conditions within Greely, as highlighted in the responses above regarding lot sizes and servicing.

Comment: Parkway Road is dangerous and should be improved

Response: The Greely CDP suggests in the Implementation Strategy in Section 8, that the current “rural cross-section” for Parkway Road, and other main streets in Greely, be reviewed and possibly switched to a “village cross-section” that is more pedestrian and cyclist friendly.

Comment: Development must take into consideration the preservation of existing ponds and lakes in existing developments

Response: These considerations will be part of the development review process for adjacent properties to ensure the preservation of existing ponds and lakes.

Comment: Private parks and private trails in the Sunset Lakes neighbourhood are shown incorrectly on the Greenspace Network Plan

Response: To eliminate any confusion, no linkages, public or private, have been shown on the Greenspace Network Plan in the Sunset Lakes neighbourhood. The private parks within the Sunset Lakes neighbourhood are clearly identified as “Private Open Space” on the Greenspace Network Plan.

Comment: Certain roads within Greely have been incorrectly designated as collector roads

Response: The Greely LUDS took direction regarding the road network from Schedule H of the Official Plan. As part of the new Official Plan process, a common set of criteria was applied to all roads in the City to develop a single road hierarchy classification system. The roads in question, meeting these criteria, were designated as collector roads. Essentially, these roads are local roads that perform collector function within the local neighbourhood. The Official Plan does permit the redesignation of collector roads as part of a Community Design Plan process without Amendment. To reduce any confusion, given that these roads in question were designed with a local road standard (20.0 metre R.O.W.), these roads have been changed back to a local roads classification.

GREELY COMMUNITY DESIGN PLAN - OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT

PLAN DE CONCEPTION COMMUNAUTAIRE DE GREELY - MODIFICATION DU PLAN OFFICIEL

ACS2004-DEV-pol-0038

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

The Committee agreed with a suggestion from Chair Peter Hume, further to a staff request, to deal with Items 3 and 21 concurrently.

Ms. Susan Murphy, Planner, Environmental Management Division, presented the report on Item 21, Shields Creek Subwatershed Plan. She described the four Phases of the study, the management strategy being recommended and the public consultation process that included a Steering Committee and a series of open houses for interested community members. A copy of Ms. Murphy’s PowerPoint presentation is on file with the Coordinator.

Ms. Pamela Sweet, FoTenn Consultants Inc, provided information on the Greely Land Use and Design Study (LUDS). She noted that the Vision that Greely residents want to maintain is that of a village setting, with increased opportunities to improve on what they believe is missing. The vision has been refined to the following five principles:

· Open space and recreation – integration of all recreational and environmental areas of the Village;

· Linkages – the provision of walkways, trails, roads to connect different parts of the Village;

· Sustainability – ensuring that all future development does not negatively impact water resources;

· Diversity and community character – requirement for a range of housing types and commercial opportunities while maintaining and enhancing accessibility;

· Mobility – need for an interconnected transportation system maintaining and enhancing accessibility.

Mr. Kevin Muir, Planner, Community Planning and Design Division, provided additional information related to the land use plan that will guide Greely’s future development and he fleshed out the amendments to the former Ottawa and Osgoode Official Plans. Mr. Muir focused the Committee’s attention on a number of minor amendments to the Community Design Plan for the Village of Greely, resulting from an Ontario Municipal Board approval of November 1, 2004.

The Committee then heard from the following delegations:

Andrew Wilson, Sunset Lakes Owner’s Association, said the community has specific concerns regarding Schedule C, Village Road Network Plan and the proposed linkages shown by way of “arrows”. The community makes significant use of a recreation area that is less than 200 meters from where proposed linkages exist and there are concerns with vehicle traffic, including significant truck traffic on Mitch Owens Road. The Association has suggested that traffic flow out of a proposed subdivision to the south, in an east-west direction and believe a safer access route would be west to Stagecoach in a northerly direction, or east to Old Prescott, since these roads are designed to accommodate heavy traffic. Mr. Wilson felt that retaining the linkage, which City staff feel is necessary, is prejudging something that requires further study.

At this point, Councillor Herb Kreling presented a Motion on behalf of the ward Councillor, Doug Thompson, calling for the indicator “arrows” to be removed from the Greely Community Design Plan.

Mr. Graham Fawcett, a resident of Greely West Community felt that the study area was too exclusionary and limited in scope. By way of example, he cited the exclusion of a large wrecking yard almost in the centre of the village, calling it a serious flaw to exclude this facility from any hydro-geological studies. Also excluded is a large tire recycling facility, which is of so much concern to Ottawa Fire Services that it has in place an evacuation plan for the entire area. Mr. Fawcett also felt that excluding the retirement community of Albion Sun Vista and its 225 residents made no sense. He expressed the hope that the definition and the scope of the study could be enlarged to address his concerns.

Mr. Gordon McCormick, a resident of Shadow Ridge community, suggested there needed to be a traffic impact study within the Greely Development Plan, especially as it impacts on two developments planned for the west side of Old Prescott Road near Parkway. He also felt the Plan should contain a statement about whether or not mass transit services would be brought to the area. A copy of his written submission is on file with the Coordinator.

Mr. Jack Cadieux is the owner of the east part of Lot 8, Concession IV, Greely, approximately 155 acres bordering on Shadow Ridge Estates, and on the Quinn Farm to the north. He expressed concern about the consultation around the Greely Community Design Plan, pointing out that, even if this is a direct outgrowth of the Greely LUDS, there are some important differences. He also referred to the fact that he was not informed about the Committee’s discussion on a communal well on a property to the south of his holdings and that he had only two working days to prepare his comments in response to the extensive amendments to the Osgoode and Ottawa Official Plans. He requested that the Committee place a rider on the approval of these amendments until such time as he and his counsel can review them to see how he will be impacted.

In his written submission, Mr. Cadieux presents the findings of an analysis he did of communities in Ontario with populations of between eight and ten thousand residents and what they had by way of municipal water and wastewater systems. He felt very strongly that the Greely Design Plan should address at what point the City envisions municipal water or wastewater systems being required because of the size and the population of the Village. He also alluded to Schedule 1 of Osgoode Official Plan X, which stipulated that a significant extent of residential area slated for medium and high density residential development would be based on communal water and wastewater systems for Shadow Ridge Estates. He concluded by asking that reference be made to his holdings any time the Shadow Ridge Estates are mentioned and also that it be stated that references to collector and local roads are conceptual in nature and subject to change.

Dave Krajaefski, representing Landriault Construction, noted that the company has an interest in the approval of the Greely Community Design Plan (CDP) and support the report recommendations. The CDP provides for the southerly extension of Lakes Park Drive, across the proposed Landriault subdivision, to connect ultimately to Old Prescott Road and Schedule C provides for the connection of the Landriault subdivision to Lakes Park Drive. Mr. Krajaefski called the proposed extension of Lakes Park Drive absolutely essential to the Landriault development and to the properties immediately to the north. Without this connection, future residents would be living on a dead end road with only on way in and out to the south to Old Prescott Road. He expressed the view that to limit public road access to only one street, when a second access is the width of a one-foot reserve away, was not good land use planning. The principle of serving the public interest extends beyond the limit of the Landriault subdivision. The adjacent subdivision to the north, Sunset Lakes, places Lakes Park Drive as a registered and open road allowance adjacent to the Landriault property. It should be noted that the former Township of Osgoode also recognized the importance of the provision of a future connection. For all these reasons, Landriault Construction supports the staff recommendations and the Greely Development Plan.

Paul Webber, expressed strong support for the amendments presented by staff early in the presentation, as well as the position outlined by the Sunset Lakes Community Association about using the subdivision process and the traffic impact studies to determine whether or not to open roads. Mr. Webber noted that, while he supports the Shields Creek Watershed Study, there are concerns about process but these are being addressed by staff. Speaking to the status of the CDP, Mr. Webber said the section of the Official Plan that defines community design has been repealed and is being replaced by another section that also has no approval. Staff have indicated that the Greely Design Plan is not a planning document therefore it cannot be appealed, nor is it a policy that the OMB would consider itself bound to follow: on this basis, it can be supported. Mr. Webber emphasized that the Official Plan issue must be resolved, so everyone understands what a community design plan is.

Tim Chadder, representing Mr. Gordon, the owner of 200 acres at the centre of the village, said that, based on the amendments that staff have introduced, he concurred with the overall approach in the development of Greely.

At this point, Chair Hume closed the public meeting and returned the matter to Committee.

The Committee first considered the following technical amendment to Item 21, on a Motion from Councillor A. Cullen:

That the Planning and Environment Committee recommend Council approve, in principle, the Shields Creek Subwatershed Study, Final Report 2, as amended by the following:

WHEREAS comments were received regarding the Shields Creek Subwatershed Study following the printing of the final report for the Planning and Environment Committee;

AND WHEREAS resolution of these comments is possible through minor amendment to the final report that is in keeping with the intent of the Subwatershed Plan;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Guidelines for Site Specific Hydrogeological Studies contained within Appendix O of the Shields Creek Subwatershed Study Final Report and corresponding text (page 5-6) be removed.

CARRIED as amended

Chair Hume then called for approval of the amendments put forward by City staff:

WHEREAS comments were received regarding the Greely Community Design Plan following the printing of the document for the Planning and Environment Committee;

AND WHEREAS resolution of these comments is possible through minor amendments to the Community Design Plan that are in keeping with the intent of the Plan;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Recommendation 1 be revised to read:

3. Approve the Community Design Plan for the Village of Greely as detailed in Document 6 (separate cover), as amended by the following changes:

a. Revise all schedules, appendices and associated text within the Greely Community Design Plan to reflect the decision of the Ontario Municipal Board decision of November 1, 2004.

b. Revise the first sentence of Policy (3)(b) to read:

c. Remove Policy (5) of Section 7.2 in its entirety.

d. Revise the last sentence in the “Permitted Uses” description of Section 4.2 to read:

“Given the hydrogeological conditions within Greely, described in Section 3 of this CDP, it is anticipated that lot sizes will be 0.2 hectares (0.5 acres) in size or greater.”

e. Revise the second sentence of Section 8.1 to read:

f. Revise Poli\icy (3) of Section 6.4 to read:

g. Add Policy (8) to Section 4.2 that reads:

h. Remove Policies (2) and (3) of Section 3.3 in their entirety.

i. Revise Policy (1) of Section 3.3 to read:

“All development will give consideration to the recommendations of the Shields Creek Subwatershed Study, as they apply.”

AND THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that new Recommendations 5 and 6 be added, which read:

5. Support a change in the Village of Greely boundary on Schedule A of the Ottawa Official Plan (2003) to include the lands subject to the Ontario Municipal Board Order dated Novmber 1, 2004.

6. Direct staff to communicate this position to the Ontario Municipal Board at its pre-hearing on June 6, 2005

CARRIED, as amended

The Committee then approved the report recommendations, with Recommendation 1 as amended by the foregoing, and the addition of Recommendations 5 and 6.

3. Adopt Official Plan Amendment No. XX to the Official Plan of the former Township of Osgoode, as detailed in Document 3, to remove the policies and schedule as they relate to Village of Greely.

And that no further notice be provided pursuant to Section 34(17) of the Planning Act.

CARRIED as amended

Speaking to the Motion presented by Councillor Kreling, Councillor Doug Thompson praised staff for their accessibility and flexibility. He noted that the study has been going on for two years, and that he has held additional consultations as well as hearing from the community with suggestions for amendments. Greely is a fast-growing community, with a number of significant developments still to come forward: the village has a good mix of housing. Councillor Thompson asked for the Committee’s support in removing from the plan the “arrows” that show roadway and walkway linkages. He expressed the belief that, even though this is a concept plan, inherent in the “arrows” is the concept of pre-judging the best way for traffic to flow. The Cycling Advisory Committee also wantsto be involved in developing bike paths: these, along with roadways, are all intertwined. The Councillor did not believe he was derailing the development of Greely by removing the arrows showing the proposed linkages. He stressed that the large majority of residents, business people, builders and developers favour the development, and their concerns about identifying linkages through traffic impact studies need to be addressed.

The Director, Planning, Environment and Infrastructure Policy, Mr. Dennis Jacobs, said he could agree that the removal of the arrows would not derail the plan, but he expressed the belief it does remove from the plan, a graphic representation of the comments made about the need to ensure connections between the various parts of the community to be studied as development occurs. He added that the historical development pattern in Greely has been disconnected and he stressed the importance of the principle that new development be integrated from the point of view of transportation as well as pedestrian and cycling access throughout the community.

Moved by Councillor H. Kreling

WHEREAS road linkages, road connections and walkway connections are developed as part of Traffic-Impact Studies, and;

WHEREAS the Greely Community Design Plan indicates a wide variety of possible road linkages and road connections, and walkway connections throughout the Village, and;

WHEREAS these indicators may prejudge any future Traffic Impact Study;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT these indicators (arrows) be removed from the Greely Community Design Plan.

CARRIED with Councillors A. Cullen, D. Holmes, P. Hume dissenting

RECOMMANDATIONS Modifiées du COMITÉ

STUDY AREA MAP Document 1

Date

Official Plan Amendments Document 3

PART B - THE AMENDMENT

Details of Draft Zoning By-law Amendment Document 4

Summary of Public Comments Document 5