3. ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT – 175 MAIN STREET (NORTH VILLAGE)
MODIFICATION AU RÈGLEMENT DE ZONAGE – 175, RUE MAIN «VILLAGE NORD»
That Council approve an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 for 175 Main Street to permit 13 single detached and 36 townhome dwellings, as detailed in Document 2.
RECOMMANDATION DU COMITÉ
Que le Conseil approuve une modification au Règlement de zonage 2008-250 visant le 175, rue Main, afin de permettre la construction de 13 habitations isolées et de 36 habitations en rangée, comme l’expose en détail le document 2.
DOCUMENTATION / DOCUMENTATION
1. Acting Director’s report, Planning Services, Planning, Infrastructure and Economic Development Department dated 15 February 2017 (ACS2017-PIE-PS-0017)
Rapport de la Directrice par intérim, Services de la planification, Service de planification, d'Infrastructure et de Développement économique daté le 15 février 2017 (ACS2017-PIE-PS-0017)
2. Extract of draft Minutes, Planning Committee, 28 February 2017.
Extrait de l’ébauche du procès-verbal, Comité de l’urbanisme, le 28 février 2017
3. Summary of Written and Oral Submissions, to be issued separately with the Council agenda for its meeting of 12 April 2017, as part of the Summary of Oral and Written Public Submissions for Items Subject to Bill 73 ‘Explanation Requirements’
Résumé des observations écrites et orales, à distribuer séparément avec l’ordre du jour de la réunion du 12 avril 2017 du Conseil, comme faisant partie du Résumé des observations orales et écrites du public sur les questions assujetties aux « exigences d’explication » aux termes de la Loi 73.
Planning Committee / Comité de l'urbanisme
February 28, 2017 / 28 février 2017
and Council / et au Conseil
March 8, 2017 / 8 mars 2017
Submitted on February 15, 2017
Soumis le 15 février 2017
Lee Ann Snedden,
Acting Director / Directrice par intérim,
Planning Services / Service de la planification
Planning, Infrastructure and Economic Development Department / Services de la planification, de l’infrastructure et du développement économique
Contact Person / Personne ressource:
Erin O’Connell, Planner II / Urbaniste II, Development Review Central / Examen des demandes d’aménagement centrale
(613) 580-2424, 27967, Erin.Oconnell@ottawa.ca
Ward: CAPITAL (17) / CAPITALE (17)
File Number: ACS2017-PIE-PS-0017
SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment – 175 Main Street (North Village)
OBJET: Modification au Règlement de zonage – 175, rue Main «Village Nord»
1. That Planning Committee recommend Council approve an amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 for 175 Main Street to permit 13 single detached and 36 townhome dwellings, as detailed in Document 2.
2. That Planning Committee approve the Consultation Details Section of this report be included as part of the ‘brief explanation’ in the Summary of Written and Oral Public Submissions, to be prepared by the City Clerk and Solicitor’s Office and submitted to Council in the report titled, “Summary of Oral and Written Public Submissions for Items Subject to Bill 73 ‘Explanation Requirements’ at the City Council Meeting of 8 March 2017 subject to submissions received between the publication of this report and the time of Council’s decision.
RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT
1. Que le Comité de l’urbanisme recommande au Conseil d’approuver une modification au Règlement de zonage 2008-250 visant le 175, rue Main, afin de permettre la construction de 13 habitations isolées et de 36 habitations en rangée, comme l’expose en détail le document 2.
2. Que le Comité de l’urbanisme donne son approbation à ce que la section du présent rapport consacrée aux détails de la consultation soit incluse en tant que « brève explication » dans le résumé des observations écrites et orales du public, qui sera rédigé par le Bureau du greffier municipal et de l’avocat général et soumis au Conseil dans le rapport intitulé « Résumé des observations orales et écrites du public sur les questions assujetties aux ‘exigences d'explication’ aux termes du projet de loi 73 », à la réunion du Conseil municipal prévue le 8 mars 2017 à la condition que les observations aient été reçues entre le moment de la publication du présent rapport et le moment de la décision du Conseil.
Assumption and Analysis
This Zoning By-law amendment application further divides a previously zoned area into five areas for additional exception provisions (R3Q [XXX1] to R3Q [XXX5] to resolve anomalies between the recently approved Zoning and the proposed development for the site to permit 36 townhome dwellings and 13 single detached dwellings as part of Greystone Village.
The proposed development includes a variety of dwelling types while still meeting density targets. Public access has and will be secured through the Plan of Subdivision, and public consultation occurred throughout the process.
A public consultation was held on September 27, 2016 at the Old Town Hall at 61 Main Street. Residents, representatives from the Old Ottawa East Community Association and the Ward Councillor’s office were present. Details of consultation can be found in Document 3.
Hypothèse et analyse
Cette demande de modification au Règlement de zonage vise à subdiviser un secteur déjà désigné par un zonage en cinq sous-secteurs assortis d’exceptions supplémentaires (R3Q [XXX1] à R3Q [XXX5] afin de résoudre des anomalies entre le zonage récemment approuvé et l’aménagement de 36 habitations en rangée et de 13 habitations isolées, proposé sur cet emplacement situé dans le village de Greystone.
L’aménagement proposé comprendrait divers types d’habitation, tout en permettant d’atteindre les objectifs de densité. L’accès public a été et sera prévu par le plan de lotissement, et les membres du public ont été consultés tout au long du processus.
Consultation publique / commentaires
Une consultation publique a été organisée le 27 septembre 2016 à l’ancien hôtel de ville, au 61, rue Main. Des résidents ainsi que des représentants de l’Association communautaire du Vieil Ottawa Est et du bureau du conseiller municipal du quartier étaient présents. Les détails de la consultation se trouvent dans le document 3.
Learn more about link to Development Application process - Zoning Amendment
For all the supporting documents related to this application visit the link to Development Application Search Tool.
175 Main Street
175 Main Street Regional Inc.
Novatech Engineers, Planners & Landscape Architects
Barry J. Hobin & Associates Architects Inc.
Description of site and surroundings
The site is within the new Greystone Village subdivision, specifically located on the east side of Main Street, south of Springhurst Avenue, west of the Rideau River, and north of Clegg Street, as shown in Document 1.
Currently, the 10,485 square metres site is vacant, with the exception of an existing twostorey laundry facility. The following land uses surround the site:
North: existing residential dwellings along Springhurst Avenue;
• East: the Rideau River and open space;
• South: proposed townhouses along Deschâtelets Avenue and the Deschâtelets Building;
• South-West: Saint Paul University; and
• West: residential and commercial uses along Main Street.
Summary of requested Zoning By-law amendment proposal
The site, Block 49 of Greystone Village, was part of a Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law amendment in 2015, which zoned the site Residential Third Density, Exception 2307 (R3Q). This Zoning By-law amendment application further divides the site into five areas for additional exception provisions (R3Q [XXX1] to R3Q [XXX5] to resolve anomalies between the recently approved Zoning and the propopsed development for the site.
The 36 townhouse dwellings will be located on the western portion of Block 49 of Greystone Village. The 13 single detached dwellings will be located on the eastern portion of Block 49. A portion of the dwellings will be located on Oblates Avenue, while a portion will be located on private roads which are accessed via Oblates Avenue, a public road internal to Greystone Village.
Brief history of proposal
Existing Zoning R3Q  was approved by Council December 9, 2015 as By-law 2015-361. Regional Homes was and is the owner of the lands in question and nothing is changing in terms of the zoning boundary between the R3 zone and the Open Space zone. While the zoning at that time in 2015 included provisions for townhouse dwellings, the concept plan has since been revised and further detailed including newly introduced single detached dwellings. The zoning enacted by Council did permit single detached dwellings, but did not include associated performance standards such as setbacks reflected in the current proposal.
A public consultation was held on September 27, 2016 at the Old Town Hall at 61 Main Street. Residents, representatives from the Old Ottawa East Community Association and the Ward Councillor’s office were present.
Concerns were expressed with relation to the location and space provided for the multiuse pathway, transition to existing residences on Springhurst Avenue, and tree retention.
For this proposal’s consultation details, see Document 3 of this report.
Official Plan designation
According to schedule B of the Official Plan, the property is designated as General Urban Area, which permits many types, tenures and densities of housing in combination with conveniently located commercial uses. These are provided in a manner that enhances and complements the desirable characteristics and ensures the long-term viability of existing communities.
Compatible development means development that is not necessarily the same as existing buildings but coexists without causing undue adverse impact. Relevant considerations from Section 2.5.1 Urban Design and Compatibility of the Official Plan include encouraging a continuity of street frontages, allowing built form to evolve through architectural style and innovation, accommodating the needs of a range of people of different incomes and lifestyles at various stages, and maximizing opportunities for sustainable transportation modes. Section 4.11 of the Official Plan – Urban Design and Compatibility, identifies relevant policies regarding scale, height, setbacks of adjacent properties, traffic, access, parking, outdoor amenity areas, service areas, sunlight and supporting neighbourhood services. The application has been reviewed under Official Plan Amendment 150, but does not rely specifically upon any of the amendments introduced by it.
Other applicable policies and guidelines
The Old Ottawa East Community Design Plan (CDP) and Old Ottawa East Secondary Plan are applicable to the site. The Secondary Plan references providing for a variety of residential building types, achieving compatibility with existing lower profile neighbourhoods bordering the site, and includes a minimum intensification target for the site combined with the adjacent site located at 141 Main Street of 1000 dwelling units.
While Urban Design Guidelines for Low-rise Infill Housing more typically apply to single lots than subdivisions, they have been reviewed in reference to the development, which exists in the midst of an existing residential community. Relevant guidelines speak to being a good fit into an existing neighbourhood, while also providing new housing designs that offer variety, quality and a sense of identity, emphasizing front doors rather than garages, including soft landscaping and less asphalt in front yards and ensuring development animates and faces the public street.
The proposed development satisfies the relevant policies and direction of the Official Plan, Community Design Plan, Secondary Plan and Urban Design Guidelines applicable to the site.
A 30-metre wide corridor is designated along the Rideau River adjacent to the site where public access has been secured through the Plan of Subdivision. Adjacent to the 30-metre corridor, and within the site, space will be dedicated as part of registration of this phase of the subdivision to accommodate a portion of the Rideau River Western Multi-Use Pathway.
The proposed development includes detached and townhome dwellings in accordance with the policy direction and as an appropriate transition between the existing low-rise community to the north and denser development anticipated to the south as part of Greystone Village. Further lot division and the location of a laneway to provide access to the rear of dwellings means the rear yard setback provisions vary in the zoning details. However, the practical closest distance between a proposed dwelling and the existing northern lot line of the site where it abuts the rear lot line of an adjacent existing dwelling is approximately 8.4 metres.
Vehicular access has been accommodated through rear laneways, freeing up the front yards of dwellings to accommodate landscaping and soft surfaces as well as reducing the number of curb cuts proposed on public streets and increasing the quality of the pedestrian environment for new public streets.
Provincial Policy Statement
Staff have reviewed this proposal and have determined that it is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2014.
There are no rural implications associated with this report.
COMMENTS BY THE WARD COUNCILLOR
Councillor Chernushenko provided the following comments:
“I have no comment relating to the zoning or set-backs as laid out in the provided proposal. I do appreciate Regional’s movement of the west property line in order to preserve some significant trees.
I do however wish to underline the need to apply appropriate restrictive covenants to lots 48 and 49 in the North Village when the subdivision agreement is being drafted. These covenants will need to address the manner in which the land in lots 48 and 49, which are partially located within the 10 metre block adjacent to the 30 metre corridor, are used. This should include fence type and height, landscaping, approved garden furnishings and the like. As these lots abut the entrance to the community from points north they need to blend seamlessly into their surroundings which will be mostly naturalized and restored vegetation.”
There are no legal implications associated with adopting the recommendations contained within the report. With respect to restrictive covenants, these may be appropriately considered during the subdivision development process, and refer to notices on title directing the utilization of certain features, including setback areas, landscaping and property appurtenances.
RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
There are no risk management implications association with the recommendation in this report.
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
The new buildings will be required to meet the accessibility criteria contained within the Ontario Building Code. The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act requirements for site design will also apply, and will be reviewed at the time of the registration of this phase of the Subdivision.
TERM OF COUNCIL PRIORITIES
This project addresses the following Term of Council Priority:
EP2 – Support Growth of local economy.
TM2 – Provide and promote infrastructure to support safe mobility choices.
APPLICATION PROCESS TIMELINE STATUS
This application was processed by the On Time Decision Date established for the processing of Zoning By-law amendment applications.
Document 1 Location Map/Zoning Key Plan
Document 2 Details of Recommended Zoning
Document 3 Consultation Process
Document 4 Site Plan
Document 5 Overview Data Sheet (previously distributed and held on file)
The proposed development includes a variety of dwelling types while still meeting density targets, public access has and will be secured through the Plan of Subdivision, and public consultation occurred throughout the process. In consideration of the applicable Official Plan Policies and compatibility of the use in the area, the Zoning Bylaw amendment is recommended for approval.
Office of the City Clerk and Solicitor, Legislative Services to notify the owner; applicant; Krista O’Brien, Deputy City Treasurer Revenue Branch, Corporate Services (Mail Code: 26-76) of City Council’s decision.
Zoning and Interpretations Unit, Planning Services to prepare the implementing by-laws and forward to Legal Services.
Legal Services to forward the implementing by-laws to City Council.
Circulation Services Unit, Planning Services to undertake the statutory notification.
Document 1 – Location Map/Zoning Key Plan
For an interactive Zoning map of Ottawa visit geoOttawa
Document 2 – Details of Recommended Zoning
The proposed change to the City of Ottawa Zoning By-law 2008-250 for 175 Main Street:
1. Rezone the lands shown in Document 1, Map 1 as follows:
a) Rezone area A from R3Q  to R3Q [XXX1]
b) Rezone area B from R3Q  to R3Q [XXX2]
c) Rezone area C from R3Q  to R3Q [XXX3]
d) Rezone area D from R3Q  to R3Q [XXX4]
e) Rezone area E from R3Q  to R3Q [XXX5]
i. (Area A) Add a new exception, R3Q [XXX1] to Section 239, Urban Exceptions, with provisions similar in effect to the following:
a) In Column II, add the text, “R3Q [XXX1]”;
b) In Column V, add the text:
• Despite anything to the contrary in this by-law, development of more than one residential use building on a lot is not considered a planned unit development.
• Sections 139 and 140 do not apply to the initial construction of a residential use building on the site, but do apply except where otherwise regulated in this exception to:
o a change in use from one type of residential use building to another permitted dwelling type;
o an addition to an existing residential use building that abuts the front yard or corner side yard; and,
o the incidental use of lands within the front, interior side and corner side yards, including the creation of a new driveway or parking space, associated with an existing residential use building.
• Minimum width of a private way is 3 metres.
• Minimum lot width is 4 metres.
• Minimum lot area is 75 square metres.
• Maximum building height is 11 metres.
• Minimum front yard setback is 2.0 metres.
• Minimum rear yard setback is 2.3 metres.
• Despite Section 59, a lot is considered to comply with Section 59 if it abuts a private way for a distance of at least 3 metres.
• Where a lot abuts a private way the front lot line is deemed to be that lot line furthest from, opposite and more or less parallel to the lot line abutting the private way.
• A roof top access is not permitted.
• Despite Section 109, where a walkway is located between two dwellings, the maximum permitted width is 2.4 metres.
• For the purposes of calculating the maximum permitted building height for the initial construction of a residential use building, the definition of grade in Section 54 is to be used.
• the maximum size and extent of the following permitted projections into all required yards is as follows:
o chimney, chimney box and fireplace box is 1 m, but not closer than 0.3 metre to a lot line;
o eaves, eave-troughs and gutters is 1 metre, and may project up to a front lot line and not closer than 0.15 metre to all other lot lines;
o ornamental elements such as sills, belt courses, cornices, parapets and pilasters is 1.5 metres, but not closer than 0.3 metres to a lot line;
o covered or uncovered balcony, porch, deck platform and verandah is 3 metres, and may project up to a front, rear, or corner side lot line and no closer than 0.15 metres to an interior side yard lot line; and
o open stairways, stoop, landing steps and ramps may project to a lot line.
i. (Area B) Add a new exception, R3Q [XXX2] to Section 239, Urban Exceptions, with provisions similar in effect to the following:
a) In Column II, add the text, “R3Q [XXX2]”;
• Sections 139 and 140 do not apply to the initial construction of a residential use building on the site, but do apply except where otherwise regulated in this exception to:
• Minimum front yard setback is 0.5 metres.
• Minimum rear yard setback is 0.8 metres.
• Minimum interior side yard setback is 1.0 metres.
• Where a lot abuts a private way the front lot line is deemed to be that lot line furthest from, opposite and more or less parallel to the lot line abutting the private way, and where more than one lot line abuts a private way, the front lot line is deemed to be that lot line furthest from, opposite and more or less parallel to the lot line abutting the private way and over which a driveway is located.
• The maximum size and extent of the following permitted projections into all required yards is as follows:
o ornamental elements such as sills, belt courses, cornices, parapets and pilasters is 1.5 metres, but not closer than 0.3 metre to a lot line;
i. (Area C) Add a new exception, R3Q [XXX3] to Section 239, Urban Exceptions, with provisions similar in effect to the following:
a) In Column II, add the text, “R3Q [XXX3]”;
• Minimum lot width is 7.0 metres.
• Minimum lot area is 145 square metres.
• Minimum rear yard setback is 2.5 metres.
• Minimum interior side yard setback is 0.2 metres for a distance of 5 metres. The minimum interior side yard setback for the remainder of the side yard is 0.6 metres.
o chimney, chimney box and fireplace box is 1 metre, but not closer than 0.3 metre to a lot line;
o ornamental elements such as sills, belt courses, cornices, parapets and pilasters is1.5 metres, but not closer than 0.3 metre to a lot line;
i. (Area D) Add a new exception, R3Q [XXX4] to Section 239, Urban Exceptions, with provisions similar in effect to the following:
a) In Column II, add the text, “R3Q [XXX4]”;
• Minimum lot width is 7.3 metres.
• Minimum rear yard setback is 0.3 metres.
• Where a lot abuts a private way the front lot line is deemed to be that lot line furthest from, opposite and more or less parallel to the lot line abutting the private way, and where more than one lot line abuts a private way, the front lot line is deemed to be that lot line furthest from, opposite and more or less parallel to the lot line abutting the private way and over which a driveway is located
o ornamental elements such as sills, belt courses, cornices, parapets and pilasters is 1.5 metres but not closer than 0.3 metre to a lot line;
i. (Area E) Add a new exception, R3Q [XXX5] to Section 239, Urban Exceptions, with provisions similar in effect to the following:
a) In Column II, add the text, “R3Q [XXX5]”;
• Minimum front yard setback is 2 metres.
• Minimum rear yard setback is 1.2 metres.
• Despite Section 59, a lot is considered to comply with Section 59 if it abuts a Multi-Use Pathway for a distance of at least 3 metres.
• The front lot line is deemed to be that lot line abutting the Multi-Use Pathway.
• Despite Section 142, a Coach House is not permitted.
o chimney, chimney box and fireplace box is 1 m, but not closer than 0.3 metres to a lot line;
o eaves, eave-troughs and gutters is 1 metre, and may project up to a front lot line and not closer than 0.15 metres to all other lot lines;
o ornamental elements such as sills, belt courses, cornices, parapets and pilasters is 1.5 metres but not closer than 0.3 metres to a lot line;
o covered or uncovered balcony, porch, deck platform and verandah is 3 metres, and may project up to a front, rear, or corner side lot line and no closer than 2 metres to an interior side yard lot line; and
Document 3 – Consultation Details
Notification and Consultation Process
Notification and public consultation was undertaken in accordance with the Public Notification and Public Consultation Policy approved by City Council for Zoning By-law amendments. One public meeting was also held in the community September 27, 2016 at the Old Town Hall at 61 Main Street. Residents, representatives from the Old Ottawa East Community Association and the Ward Councillor’s office were present.
Public Comments and Responses
1. Multi-Use Pathway (MUP)
• Concern that land taken for the MUP and buffer will not total 10 metres;
• Locating two singles in the north-east corner is contrary to what was envisaged in the Community Design Plan/Secondary Plan; and
• Concern that the two singles at the end will fence off their properties (units 48 and 49).
The department concurs that the MUP and its connections to adjacent public space are important. The Secondary Plan provision is “Provide a 10 metre wide block of land related to the development of the Oblate property extending along a western edge of the 30 metre setback from the river to accommodate a Multi-Use Pathway as designated in Schedule I of the Official Plan.”
Schedule I of the Official Plan defines a general location for where the MUP is to be located.
At the time that the Secondary Plan was approved, the Rideau River Western Pathway alignment had not been determined and 10 metres is sufficient to provide flexibility in location. Presently the Rideau River Western Pathway alignment has been defined, and 10 metres is not required to accommodate it. Furthermore, the property to accommodate the 10 metre MUP is owned by the applicant and is zoned for development. As such, the property owner has associated development rights for this land.
For the majority of Greystone Village, the MUP is contained within the right-of-way space west of the Open Space Corridor.
The City’s identified requirement is a 3 metre MUP and 1.5 metre clearance on either side for maintenance. The applicant has indicated intention to dedicate space for a 3 metres MUP and 3 metres of clearance on the west side. As one side of the MUP is adjacent to a 30 metre corridor where there will be an easement in place to permit City access and maintenance of the MUP, the City does not need additional space for the MUP to be maintained. The desire is to ensure enough room for the MUP to function adjacent to the 30-metre corridor. While reference has been made to the park and pathway development manual, which includes greater buffer space on either sides of a MUP, this manual is used as reference tool in guiding applications, but not a requirement in every case.
The recommended zoning details have been structured so that the front lot line of Units 48 and 49 is bordering the multi-use pathway. The fence by-law requires that fencing located in front yards may not be higher than 1 metre. The applicant is proposing a short decorative fence and/or landscaping treatment to delineate the property boundary between the multi-use pathway lands and private property. The fencing and/or landscaping details would be conditioned through the registration of this phase of the subdivision. The department feels that while the space dedicated to the public to accommodate the multi-use pathway does not total 10 metres, it is sufficient to meet the policy intent and to transition effectively to adjacent single family homes and Springhurst Park.
1. Transition to adjacent dwellings
• There should be more landscaping between the development and the existing homes;
• Consider privacy of homes on Springhurst Avenue;
• Concern with drainage from new development being directed onto existing homes;
• Concern with exposure to toxic dust;
• Clarify lighting plan for rear laneway;
• Concern with garbage trucks servicing the rear laneway; and
• Concern with potential future roof top access and terraces and impact on adjacent dwellings. Request that these be restricted through the zoning details.
The provision of a rear lane is consistent on the direction of the Greystone Village development which has focused on the public realm. The applicant has been meeting with adjacent homeowners to determine the best solution for fencing and landscaping along the property line, which will be formalized through the registration of this phase of the Plan of Subdivision. The fence will prevent snow piling within the rear yards of adjacent properties, provide a sufficiently opaque barrier for car lights, and provide mitigation for privacy concerns. Revisions have been made to the concept plan to shift the rear lane slightly to the south to accommodate efforts for tree protection.
Grading and drainage plans reviewed as part of the registration of the Plan of Subdivision will include curbs and catch basins and ensure water will not flow into the property of adjacent neighbours. The contractor will control dust if required by spraying or spreading water to moisten the fill material. The material being removed from the site is not hazardous. It is fill material contaminated with some metals and combustion products from demolition debris and ash, and is classified as solid non-hazardous waste. Dust control requirements are determined by ongoing observations by site personnel during the work, by representatives of both the contractor and Regional’s engineers who are on-site full time during the work.
Municipal waste collection will occur within the private lane as that is adjacent to driveways and provides clear access. Waste collection will occur between the hours of 7 a.m. and 6 p.m.
Roof top accesses have been prohibited through the attached zoning details.
1. Tree removal
• The tree removal plan indicates a debris fill line that doesn’t make sense near the Convent and is being used to justify the removal of two 100+ year old trees.
• The soil is not dangerous and should not justify the tree removal.
The tree removal plan will be reviewed as part of the plan of subdivision registration. Where there is an ability to retain existing trees, outside of work required for remediation and the development of the site, tree protection measures will be put in place.
Community Organization Comments and Responses
Old Ottawa East Community Association Comments
The Old Ottawa East Community Association (OOECA) wishes to note its disappointment that the 10 metre block of land related to the development of the Oblate property, extending along the western edge of the 30 metre setback from the river, to accommodate a Multi-Use Pathway (MUP) will not be reserved in its entirety as public space.
However, the OOECA will not object to the proposed incursion of two units (48 and 49) into this MUP block on the following understanding:
- there will be no fences or gates within the 10 metre block; and
- covenants or other legal restrictions will be incorporated in the ownership documents for these two units such that these restrictions will be maintained.
We would also like to acknowledge the willingness of the developer Regional and its agents to meet with us and consider alternatives and changes to the original plans to mitigate the incursions into the 10 metre block.
Since September 27, 2016, the applicant has met with adjacent homeowners to determine a solution for fencing and transition between the site and adjacent properties that will be implemented through the registration of the plan of subdivision. See the above response to concerns about the lands to accommodate the MUP.
Document 4 – Site Plan
8 MARCH 2017
COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME
LE 8 MARS 2017