PLANNING RATIONALE 216 Cathcart Street Minor Rezoning Application Prepared for: Mr. Enrique (Tito) Jurado 50 Delaware Avenue Ottawa, ON K2P 0Z3 Prepared by: Lloyd Phillips & Associates Ltd. File: 1109 November 20, 2012
Contents 1 INTRODUCTION... 3 2 SITE AND NEIGHBOURHOOD CONTEXT... 5 2.1 Site... 5 2.2 Neighbourhood Context... 7 3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT... 10 4 PLANNING POLICY REVIEW... 14 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement 2005 (PPS)... 14 4.2 City of Ottawa Official Plan... 15 4.2.1 Urban Design Guidelines for Low-Medium Density Residential Infill... 17 4.2.2 Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District Study... 18 4.3 City of Ottawa Zoning By-law... 19 4.3.1 Zoning By-law Provisions vs. Proposed Development... 20 5 PROPOSED MINOR ZONING AMENDMENT... 22 6 RATIONALE FOR AMENDMENT... 23 6.1 Planning Considerations... 23 6.2 Site Servicing Study... 23 6.3 Stormwater Management Brief... 23 6.4 Geotechnical Report... 23 6.5 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA)... 23 7 CONCLUSION... 25 Planning Rationale Page 2 of 25
1 INTRODUCTION Mr. Shan Cappuccino is the owner of the property located at 216 Cathcart Street. This property is located in the Lowertown West neighborhood, between King Edward Avenue and Dalhousie Street. The site is located within the Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District. The owner has been seeking to redevelop the back portion of the property to better serve family needs and to support inner urban intensification. An existing detached house, that has heritage status, is located on the front part of the property, facing Cathcart Street. Numerous proposals and revisions have been looked at. A final version of the proposed redevelopment has been decided upon. Due to some site constraints and heritage considerations there are some zoning issues that are caused by the new proposed development. For this reason, a minor rezoning application is required. Lloyd Phillips & Associates Ltd., has been retained by Mr. E. Jurado to prepare the Planning Rationale for this rezoning application. The proposed minor zoning amendment will be to add an exception to the current R4S zone. The exception will include the following provisions: 1. Minimum Lot Area: 400 m2 2. Maximum Building Height: 13 m 3. Minimum Front Yard Setback: As existing 4. Minimum Rear Yard Setback: 4.6 m 5. Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback: 0.6 m 6. Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback: 1.2 (beside park) 7. Minimum Width of Private Way: 3.8 m 8. Minimum Setback of any wall of a residential use building to a private way: 0 m 9. Minimum setback for any garage or carport entrance from a private way: 0 m Prior to a rezoning application, the proposal required approval from the Ottawa Built Heritage Advisory Committee because the property is located in the Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District under Part V of the Heritage Act. The project was presented to the City Council on July 11, 2012, the application was approved. Planning Rationale Page 3 of 25
216 Cathcart Street 216 Cathcart Street Planning Rationale Page 4 of 25
2 SITE AND NEIGHBOURHOOD CONTEXT 2.1 Site The site is located in the Lowertown West neighbourhood, on the south side of Cathcart Street, between King Edward Avenue and Dalhousie Street. The lot at 216 Cathcart Street is long and narrow. There is a single two-storey, peaked roof dwelling currently located on the site with white siding. The existing dwelling is part of the Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District, designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. This building was constructed sometime between 1869 and 1872. The site has 33 ft. (10 m) of frontage and a depth of 131.50 ft. (40 m). The total area of the site is 4,339.50 sq. ft. (403.153 sq. meters). The site is located in Ward 12 Rideau-Vanier. The legal description is PLAN 42482 E PT LOT 25;CATHCART S, PIN 042170110. There are a few deciduous trees on the property and a number of mature trees that are on the park side of the fence, bordering the east property line of the lot. The tree in the front of the house has raised some concerns in relation to the roots encroaching into the foundation of the existing dwelling. There is currently a fence along the east, south and west sides of the property. There is also a small shed in the backyard located south of the driveway. Planning Rationale Page 5 of 25
The following are some images taken of the site from May of 2011. Planning Rationale Page 6 of 25
2.2 Neighbourhood Context The Lowertown West area is bordered by King Edward Avenue on the east and north, Sussex Drive on the west, and St. Patrick Street on the south. The ByWard Market is south west of this neighbourhood. Lowertown West is Ottawa s oldest residential area according to the Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District Study (LWHCDS). The gable style dwelling at 216 Cathcart is common in this area. It has been altered over the years, but the shape has remained the same, with the exclusion of the porch. An excerpt of the LWHCDS is presented below as an accurate description of the historical character of the area: Lowertown West comprises the oldest area of residential settlement in the City of Ottawa. The area was the civilian centre of Ottawa from the British survey of the townsite in 1826 until the turn of the twentieth century. From about 1890 to the mid-1970s growth occurred in other areas of the city at the expense of Lowertown and much of the urban fabric east of King Edward and north of Boteler was demolished during urban renewal. Urban renewal commenced with zoning changes in the 1950s and demolitions throughout the 1960s and 1970s. It also requires awareness that many of the incremental alterations which have occurred to the earlier buildings reflect later historical and social trends which contribute to the historical record of the neighbourhood. The site is bordered by Cumberland park on the south east side, a town-house development on the west that is owned by the City of Ottawa, which continues through the back to Bruyère Street, and a two-storey, red-brick residential building on the east. The park contains a number of trees that screen a large portion of the east property line. The majority of the buildings in area are two storeys with porches and second storey balconies. Much of the adjacent development is more recent than the existing dwelling at 216 Cathcart. The building directly east of the site, is a two-storey townhouse residential red brick building with an addition in the back. To the west is a three storey building (two storey with garage space on the ground floor) that becomes four storeys halfway south through the block and extends to Bruyère Street. The site is within walking distance to the ByWard Market and has easy access to a number of nearby transit routes. Planning Rationale Page 7 of 25 View of south side of Cathcart Street
216 Cathcart Street View of south side of Cathcart Street Planning Rationale Page 8 of 25
Planning Rationale Page 9 of 25
3 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposal is to construct a two-unit, three-storey addition in the rear of the property. The extension to the back of the existing building will be removed. The new building will have two sections; the first will step up from the original house, be flat-roofed, and will then step-up to a gable-roof style. The first section is to be 9.3 m the second section will be 12.88 m at the peak. The three-storey building will be setback from the street by 19 m and is to be separated from the existing house by a carport. There will be a total of three units on the site in two buildings. The shape, layout and size of the building are largely determined by internal design to accommodate wheelchairs and provide for greater accessibility for the future resident. Mr. Jurado intends to occupy one unit, and the second unit is intended for his mother. The design and site orientation have been sensitively planned to be minimally intrusive, and to respect the heritage character, while meeting the project goals of providing an architecturally interesting infill project that can accommodate wheelchair accessibility. For zoning purposes the proposal is to be viewed as a Planned Unit Development containing two buildings with a connecting projection. The new development will incorporate modern architecture with the use of stucco, metal and vegetated screened walls. The colouring, grey and white will reflect the scheme of the existing heritage dwelling on site. The mass of the building will be broken up by the various materials, colours, and physical features such as windows, and balconies. The view from the park is currently that of the City owned townhouse development. The proposed development will be the new view from Cumberland Park, and with its architectural detail and landscaping features will be an improvement. The following presents the Concept Plan and Elevations. These were prepared by CS Architect, A Hendy, and T. Jurado.
Planning Rationale Page 13 of 25
4 PLANNING POLICY REVIEW The following is an overview of the planning policy that relates to this proposed development and the required minor rezoning. This section will review the Provincial Policy Statement, the City of Ottawa Official Plan, the Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District Study, and the City of Ottawa Zoning By-law. 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement 2005 (PPS) Section 1.1 of the PPS sets out the policies for managing and directing land use in order to achieve efficient development and land use patterns. The principle of this policy is to create communities that are healthy, liveable and safe. The sustenance of healthy, liveable and safe communities is achieved through promotion of efficient development that is financially supportive to the municipalities and province, through the accommodation of a range and mix of uses and residential types. This policy emphasizes the need to avoid land use patterns that may cause environmental or public health problems, or that is an inefficient and uneconomical expansion of the settlement area. There is a need to improve accessibility and to ensure that development is cost-effective and can support a variety of future needs, both of the City and the public. The proposed development on Cathcart Street represents a unification of modern architecture and historical character in an intensification development situated in the downtown core of Ottawa. The development is efficient as it takes advantage of an underutilized residential lot and utilizes existing infrastructure. Intensification projects in the downtown core help to improve the needs of both the province and the municipality by supporting available services, and creating additional units in an already built-up area. Section 1.1.2 in the PPS states that sufficient land shall be made available through intensification and redevelopment.. to accommodate a range and mix of housing.. to meet projected needs. The proposal is consistent with this direction. The PPS is broken up in to policies for specific planning areas. Section 1.1.3 deals with Settlement Areas this applies to the site at 216 Cathcart Street. The second policy of this section sets out the basis for how land use patterns should establish. They should have a density and mix of uses that efficiently uses land and resources; are appropriate for and efficiently use infrastructure and public service facilities; avoid the need for unjustified expansion; to minimize negative impacts to air quality and climate change; and finally to allow for a range of uses and opportunities. The proposed intensification development is an efficient use of land and resources. It also provides variety in housing forms in this older residential area of Ottawa. It renews the housing stock while maintaining consistency with the heritage character of the area. Planning Rationale Page 14 of 25
The remaining policies for Settlement Areas are focused on the provision of opportunities by the municipality for intensification and redevelopment, as long as public health and safety is maintained. The proposal is consistent with these provisions. Section 1.4, Housing, states that there should be a range of housing types and densities to meet projected needs. Furthermore those municipalities have a responsibility to ensure that there is a sufficient amount of housing to meet projected needs over a 10 year span. This is to be accomplished through promoting opportunities for intensification. Section 2.6.3 in the PPS states that "development and site alteration may be permitted on adjacent lands to protected heritage property where the proposed development and site alteration has been evaluated and it has been demonstrated that the heritage attributes of the protected heritage property will be conserved". The proposal is consistent with this policy. The proposed zoning amendment is consistent with the PPS. 4.2 City of Ottawa Official Plan The City of Ottawa Official Plan (OP) designates this property as General Urban Area. The General Urban Area designation permits a variety of uses: commercial, residential, retail etc The Lowertown West area is predominately residential and the proposal supports this land use character. Policy 3 within Section 3.6.1, General Urban Area, states that the City, when considering a proposal for residential intensification, will: recognize the importance of new development relating to the existing community character so that it enhances and builds upon desirable established patterns and built form; consider its contribution to the maintenance and achievement of a balance of housing types and tenures to provide a full range of housing for a variety of demographics, and to assess ground-oriented multiple housing form as one means of intensifying within low-rise residential communities. The proposed infill development at 216 Cathcart is contributing to new development within an older neighbourhood, while still maintaining the heritage building that is currently onsite. It will add to the variety of housing types and designs that are currently present and is considered to be a groundoriented multiple housing form which is identified as a means of intensification. CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES Section 4.6 of the City of Ottawa Official Plan reviews the importance of cultural heritage and includes the means to preserve this. One of the main policies is that approval must be attained in order to alter any building or property identified under Part IV for the Ontario Heritage Act. The client has already made an application to OBHAC (Ontario Built Heritage Advisory Committee) for a Heritage Alteration Permit; this has since been approved and permit issued. As part of this application for a minor rezoning, the Cultural Heritage Impact Statement report has been provided. Planning Rationale Page 15 of 25
URBAN DESIGN AND COMPATIBILITY (SECTION 4.11) The Urban Design and Compatibility section of the Official Plan sets out the policies for ensuring that developments are desirable and compatible for the site and the existing neighbourhood. The first policy indicates that development applications must be reviewed against all applicable planning policies that are applicable for the site, including any Community Design Plans, Urban Design Guidelines, and the Design Objectives. This proposal has reviewed the Cultural Heritage policies and has attained the appropriate level of approval from this perspective. The proposal, through this report, has reviewed the Provincial Policy Statement, the Design Objectives, Urban Design Guidelines for Low-Medium Density Residential Infill, and finally the Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District Study. The review of these policies satisfied Section 4.11 (1) of the OP. Policy 2 of Section 4.11 indicated that the proposal will be evaluated on the basis of certain criteria, this are reviewed below in detail. 1) Traffic: The proposed addition to the rear of 216 Cathcart will be accessed by the current driveway to the east end of the frontage on Cathcart. The driveway extends to the break between the existing building and the proposed building where a two-car carport is located. Continuing down the driveway is the location of the third carport, located between the proposed building and the park on the adjacent property. 2) Vehicular Access: The vehicular access is provided via an existing driveway on the east side of the frontage on Cathcart. This driveway will provide access for three vehicle parking spaces. The access is 3.81 m wide which is more than a sufficient width for a total of three parking spaces. 3) Parking Requirements: The site is located within Area B of Schedule 1 of the Zoning By-law. As the proposal is to be recognized as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) the parking requirements applicable are as per each dwelling type. There are two dwelling types on site, a single-detached dwelling and a duplex dwelling. The single-detached requires 1 parking spaces, the duplex dwelling requires 0.5 spaces per unit. Therefore a total of 2 parking spaces are required for this development, there are three spaces being provided. 4) Outdoor Amenity Areas: For the new proposed building, balconies are being provided as private amenity areas. Furthermore there is a park located directly across the street on Cathcart and another park located adjacent to the property on the east. While the shared amenity space onsite is mainly the 5 m rear yard, the nearby parks will provide more than sufficient amenity space. 5) Loading Areas, Service Areas, and Outdoor Storage: There are no loading, service or outdoor storage areas. Planning Rationale Page 16 of 25
6) Lighting: The potential for light spillage is mitigated by the minimal amount of windows and light that would penetrate into the adjacent residential property on the west. To the east is a park and is a non-sensitive light use. It should be noted that the windows facing the parking will provide eyes to the park for added security. 7) Noise and Air Quality: There will be no affects related to noise or air quality as this residential use is not a disturbing or noxious use. 8) Sunlight: The proposed new duplex building will be three storeys, with the heights ranging from 9.3 m in the first section and 12.88 m in the second section at the peak. The adjacent development to the west is three storeys facing Cathcart and four storeys facing Bruyère Street. Any effects of shadowing will be insignificant. 9) Microclimate: The development will be designed to minimize any effects related to wind, snow drift, and temperature on adjacent properties. 10) Supporting Neighbourhood Services: The site is located in a very urbanized location and is well served by neighbourhood services. This site is not needed for those purposes. 4.2.1 Urban Design Guidelines for Low-Medium Density Residential Infill The Urban Design Guidelines for Low-Medium Density Residential Infill set out principles for the development of infill projects. The design guidelines relating to Building Form state that the new development should face and animate the street, reflect the existing pattern of development in terms of height, front, rear and side yard setbacks, recognize local lot sizes, including lot width, scale and proportions, and to orient buildings so that their amenity spaces do not require sound attenuation walls. The existing site has a heritage building that faces Cathcart Street, the proposed building will also face the street but it is set behind the existing heritage building in order to act as a modern backdrop. The proposed infill development is to be located in the back portion of the existing lot which is currently vacant. It is surrounded other new and older developments that will create a tight-knit, fine-grained urban fabric. Within the building design guidelines, the key goals are to create visual interest, provide safe and enjoyable amenity spaces, and ensuring there are no negative impacts to adjacent uses or residents. In the section discussing Building Deign one of the guidelines is to ensure that there is an appropriate amount of light, view and privacy. This is recommended to be done through site orientation and location of windows. The proposed building is oriented towards the street, with the entrance off-set from the rear of the existing heritage building. There are minimal windows provided on the west elevation facing the adjacent 3/4 storey residential development, and a variety of windows and balconies facing the park area which creates an eyes-on-the-street component and supports neighbourhood safety. On the west elevation, facing the adjacent residential, there is also proposed to be a green wall, which will minimize the impact of the infill development. By reducing the amount of windows and providing a green wall, the guideline 3.1.10 to respect any outdoor amenity areas of adjacent residences is also met. Planning Rationale Page 17 of 25
Guidelines under Section 3.2 discuss massing and height and indicate that there should be a transition between building heights and measures to ensure that there is sufficient light and privacy. The adjacent building to the west transitions from three storeys to four storeys and the building to the east is two storeys. The proposed three storey building is compatible with the surrounding scale of development. The majority of properties within this area have minimal side yard and front yard setbacks, and the properties on the east side of Cumberland Street have reduced rear yard setbacks as well. This finegrained pattern of development is consistent with the heritage character of the area. The existing site at 216 Cathcart is minimally developed in comparison to other nearby properties. Furthermore, in keeping with Section 3.2, there will be some shadowing on the neighbouring property to the west during the morning hours of March and June, but by noon and 3:00 PM, including the morning hours in December, the shadowing is reversed, and the subject site is actually affected by shadows coming from the three and four storey development on the west. The impact on the park is comparable to the impact on the park by the adjacent property. Section 3.3 Building Faces, indicates that infill buildings should be designed with quality materials and to create visual interest. The proposed development contains many architectural features, textures, and varying dimensions to ensure that the building has a lot of life and interest. Section 4 discourages the use of parking spaces in the front of a building and dominance of any garage feature. The proposed infill development locates the parking between the two buildings, and towards the back, on the east side of the proposed building. This is consistent with Section 4. Section 5 discusses Heritage Building alterations and additions, some of these guidelines are to complement the existing building, use materials and finishes that enhance or harmonize with the character of the development in the area. This section presents guidelines to make new development physically and visually compatible with the area, to make it distinguishable, and to protect and re-use site elements. The guidelines further deal with new additions that can act as a frame for the existing heritage elements. The proposed infill project provides a variety of contrasting, darker materials that harmonize with the two adjacent buildings, but contrast with the existing heritage building on the site. This design sets up the proposed building to act as a frame for the existing heritage building and also makes it distinguishable. The proposed development is consistent with the Design Guidelines for Low-Medium Density Infill Housing. 4.2.2 Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District Study The Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District Study (LWHCDS) was prepared in 1993. It provides an overview of the historical character of the area, its background and the changes it has seen over time. Planning Rationale Page 18 of 25
The LWHCDS indicates that while the heritage of the area is to be preserved, it should also provide variety of different architectural forms and be representative of different building time periods. The first guideline discusses Building Patterns and indicates that new buildings or additions should maintain the building front yard setback and to maintain the overall general height of the buildings established by the existing neighbourhood. The proposed development is an addition located behind the existing heritage building and for that reason the front yard setback is maintained and the height at three storeys is comparable to the mix of heights in the area that range from 1, 1 and a half, 2, 3 and even 4 on the adjacent development. Other guidelines also contain recommendations for street scape design. The proposed development will include the reconstruction of a porch similar to the one that used to exist at this property. There is a tree currently on the property but it will likely need to be removed because it has caused some damage to the existing dwelling. Section 7.5.5 reviews the Guidelines for Infill Buildings, and it recommends that infill buildings must respect the scale, set-backs, architectural design and materials of neighbouring buildings. It also recommends that contemporary design should contribute to and enhance the continuing architectural evolution of the district. The proposed infill building is designed to complement the existing development. It will act as a modern backdrop for the existing white sided peaked roof building by using sharper angles and a variety of darker natural materials that will set off the white in a complimentary way and also blend nicely with the two darker materials of the buildings on either side of this site. The proposed infill development is consistent with the LWHCDS. 4.3 City of Ottawa Zoning By-law The property is zoned R4S Residential Fourth Density, subzone S. The purpose of this residential zone is presented as follows: (1) allow a wide mix of residential building forms ranging from detached to low rise apartment dwellings, in some cases limited to four units, and in no case more than four storeys, in areas designated as General Urban Area in the Official Plan; (2) allow a number of other residential uses to provide additional housing choices within the fourth density residential areas; (3) permit ancillary uses to the principal residential use to allow residents to work at home; (4) regulate development in a manner is compatible with existing land use patterns so that the mixed building form, residential character of a neighbourhood is maintained or enhanced: and (5) permit different development standards, identified in the Z subzone, primarily for areas designated as Developing Communities, which promote efficient land use and compact form while showcasing newer design approaches. Planning Rationale Page 19 of 25
This zone permits a variety of dwelling units, including a three-unit dwelling, and also permits a Planned Unit Development. The following sets out the specific provisions of the Subzone S: 4.3.1 Zoning By-law Provisions vs. Proposed Development This section sets out where the proposal is consistent with the current zoning by-law and it also identifies the changes that are requested as part of the minor rezoning application. Zoning By-law Provision Proposed Development Difference Dwelling Type n/a Planned Unit Development n/a Minimum Lot Width n/a 10.1 m n/a Minimum Lot Area 1400 m2 403.2 m2 996.8 m2 Maximum Building Height 11 m 12.9 m (to peak) 2 m Minimum Front Yard Setback 3 m As per existing n/a Minimum Rear Yard Setback 7.5 m 4.6 m 2.9 m Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback 2.5 m 1.8 m beside park 0.6 m 1.2 m 1.9 m 0.6 m Planning Rationale Page 20 of 25
As the proposal is to be considered a Planned Unit Development with a connecting projection, the PUD provisions apply. They are reviewed below: I ZONING MECHANISM (1) Minimum width of private way 6 metres (2) Minimum setback for any wall of a residential use building to a private way (3) Minimum setback for any garage or carport entrance from a private way (By-law 2012-33) (4) Minimum separation area between buildings within a planned unit development (a) where the height of abutting buildings within the PUD is less than or equal to 14.5 metres (b) all other cases II PROVISION Notwithstanding any front yard setback requirement associated with any zone or subzone, the minimum setback for any wall of a residential use building to a private way is 1.8 metres 5.2 metres 1.2 metres 3 metres (5) Parking In addition to providing parking pursuant to Section 100 of this by-law, parking within a planned unit development may be located anywhere within the development, whether or not the development parcels within the planned unit development are severed. (6) Parking Required visitor parking may be provided as parallel parking on a private way, provided the private way has a minimum width of 8.5 metres. This Planned Unit Development contains a driveway to access the two carport spaces. This driveway is 3.8 m at the narrowest section. The driveway serves access to three vehicle spaces, a two car carport and one other surface parking space. The 6 m private way provision is suitable for two-way travel and this access is intended to be one-way due to the small number of vehicles that will use it. There is a required distance of 1.2 metres between buildings existing within a PUD. The two buildings (proposed and existing) are separated by a 6 m, two-car width carport and therefore meet this provision. Planning Rationale Page 21 of 25
5 PROPOSED MINOR ZONING AMENDMENT The proposed development for the purpose of zoning is to be viewed as a Planned Unit Development containing an existing one-unit building and a proposed two-unit, three-storey building. During the preconsultation process, it was confirmed that the proposed development, for the purposes of zoning, would be considered to be a Planned Unit Development containing two separate buildings that will have a connecting projection between them. The proposed minor zoning amendment will be to add an exception to the current R4S zone. The exception will include the following provisions: 10. Minimum Lot Area: 400 m2 11. Maximum Building Height: 13 m 12. Minimum Front Yard Setback: As existing 13. Minimum Rear Yard Setback: 4.6 m 14. Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback: 0.6 m 15. Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback: 1.2 m (beside park) 16. Minimum Width of Private Way: 3.8 m 17. Minimum Setback of any wall of a residential use building to a private way: 0 m 18. Minimum setback for any garage or carport entrance from a private way: 0 m The proposed amendments to the zoning by-law are tailored specifically for the proposed addition at 216 Cathcart. Planning Rationale Page 22 of 25
6 RATIONALE FOR AMENDMENT 6.1 Planning Considerations The proposed infill development has been carefully and sensitively designed to respect the heritage character of the existing building on site and the overall character of the surrounding area. The scale, form, massing and materials of the proposed infill development also respect and are compatible with the adjacent residential development and the City's park. The proposed zoning amendments are technical on nature and are intended to enable the proposed infill development. Their effect and impacts do not depart from the general intent of the R4 zone requirements. The proposed zoning amendments are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statements and confirm to the Official Plan. The proposed development, as enabled by the proposed zoning amendments, demonstrates compliance with the City guidelines for Low-Medium Density Residential Infill developments and the guidelines of the Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District. 6.2 Site Servicing Study A Servicing Brief was prepared by D.B. Gray Engineering Inc., dated July 20, 2012. The report concludes that the proposed water connection is adequately sized to serve the development but that boundary conditions are required to determine adequate water supply for fire-fighting and to determine if there is adequate water pressure. The sanitary service is adequate for the proposed development. 6.3 Stormwater Management Brief The Stormwater Management Brief was prepared by D.B. Gray Engineering Inc., dated July 20, 2012. The stormwater release rate for the 100 year storm event was calculated at 5.16 l/s which is 7% greater than the desired release rate but is the practical achievable rate. The five-year storm event is calculated at a release rate of 2.88 l/s and 34% less than the maximum permitted release rate. The flow for the five year storm event will be adequately handled by the storm sewer. 6.4 Geotechnical Report A Geotechnical Report was prepared by Exp. dated October 11, 2012. This report identified the subsurface conditions which are asphalt, granular materials, and sand and gravel fill. The fill is underlain by silty clay. The report concluded that the geotechnical conditions are suitable for the proposed development. 6.5 Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was conducted by EXP Services Inc., dated November 13, 2012. The report concludes that there are no areas of potential environmental concern. The report comments that due to the age of the existing building, that there may be some regulated materials, such as asbestos, lead, mercury, or PCB. The report recommends a substance survey be conducted prior to any Planning Rationale Page 23 of 25
renovations or demolition. It should be noted that the existing building is to remain with the exception of the existing addition at the rear. A Phase II ESA is not recommended. Planning Rationale Page 24 of 25
7 CONCLUSION The proposed infill development takes advantage of a lot in Lowertown West that is currently underdeveloped in comparison to the general context of the neighbourhood. The neighbourhood contains a various mixture of older, historical buildings and newer modern infill projects. The site is bordered by a red brick, two-storey townhouse style development, and a three and four storey residential development on the west. The existing house is a small two-storey, peaked roof, white sided house. The proposed development will be situated behind the existing heritage building, and will act as a frame to complement the existing building and contain colours and textures that will be compatible with the surrounding area. The proposed infill development is considered to be highly compatible with the existing heritage character of the building on the site and the general area. The proposed development has received a Heritage Alteration Permit and from this review, is consistent with the policies and intentions of the City of Ottawa Official Plan, the Design Guidelines for Low- Medium Density Infill Housing, the guidelines of the Lowertown West Heritage Conservation District Study, and is consistent with the purpose and intent of the proposed Zoning By-law. The proposed minor rezoning amendment is required to permit the proposed infill project. The proposal is considered to be good planning and the minor rezoning amendment is recommended for approval. Lloyd Phillips & Associates Ltd. Christine Cholette, MCIP RPP LEED GA Planning Rationale Page 25 of 25