Ottawa planners want broader infill rules — and for a broader area
Matthew Pearson, Ottawa Citizen
Published on: May 22, 2015, Last Updated: May 22, 2015 1:51 PM EDT
Weeks after new rules to curb often controversial infill developments in Ottawa’s central neighbourhoods received a stamp of approval from the Ontario Municipal Board, the planning committee is set to consider further changes to the zoning bylaw that would apply to neighbourhoods outside the core.
The background
The Mature Neighbourhoods Bylaw, also known as Infill I, concerned itself with aspects of new residential development in established communities that are most visible from the street — things like front setbacks, parking location, balconies and other physical elements of the building itself.
The rules apply to Ottawa’s oldest neighbourhoods in inner-urban wards, including Rideau-Vanier (west of Rideau River), New Edinburgh, Somerset, Kitchissippi and Capital.
The bylaw was passed in 2012 and later appealed to the OMB. In 2013, the city was asked to reconsider some aspects of the bylaw. Council endorsed a revised and renamed bylaw a year later, which was approved by the OMB on May 4.
Infill II, the sequel
After work began on the first infill bylaw, council asked planning staff to conduct a followup study to consider other issues such as height, building bulk, rear and side setbacks, and various things that stick out of buildings (balconies, rooftop terraces, etc.).
The second phase of the study, which began in spring 2013, was expanded to include urban wards outside the core, including Bay, College, Knoxdale-Merivale, Gloucester-Southgate, Beacon Hill-Cyrville, Rideau-Vanier (east of Rideau River), River and Alta Vista.
Rockcliffe Park will be exempt from the Infill II regulations until the completion of its Heritage Conservation District Plan.
The recommendations
There are 11, relating to everything from the size of rear yards and the height of new buildings to the severing of some large corner lots and the limiting of rooftop terraces to reduce privacy issues.
Some aspects of the new bylaw will apply to neighbourhoods covered by the first study, but the streetscape character analysis — the thrust of Infill I that requires developers to look to what’s currently on a street for cues about what’s acceptable to build — will not apply to the expanded study areas outside the core, said John Smit, manager of policy development and urban design.
The recommendations are scheduled to come before the planning committee at 9:30 a.m. Tuesday.
Sticking points
Extensive discussions with developers and community associations have been productive. But Smit’s report to planning committee says some differences of opinion remain.
Proposed height reductions and increases in required rear-yard setbacks are a problem for some developers because they could have a negative effect on flexibility and creativity in design, said Murray Chown, a consultant with Novatech, who works with smaller infill builders.
The changes could see mean a loss of square footage and up to an entire floor in some buildings, and force developers to construct more boxlike buildings instead of something slightly more architecturally interesting.
Meanwhile, Alta Vista Coun. Jean Cloutier and several community associations in his ward are concerned about a new provision that would allow some large corner lots to be severed in order to put up two small houses where previously one house stood. Cloutier wants to ensure that design plans already in place for Alta Vista, Faircrest Heights and Riverview Park are respected if Infill II is approved.
And Somerset Coun. Catherine McKenney agrees with a community association in her downtown ward that some building heights should be reduced by more than what the new bylaw calls for. McKenney also says things sticking up from the roof, such as an enclosed stairway to access the roof, should be considered as part of the maximum building height.
What about the suburbs?
None of the proposed infill guidelines would apply to suburban wards, Smit says, because the pace of intensification in Barrhaven, Kanata and Orléans is not as demanding as it is inside the Greenbelt.
But down the road, a third study could look at infill in these areas of the city, he said.
mpearson@ottawacitizen.com
twitter.com/mpearson78
http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-...a-broader-area
Prev
Linear Mode
