PLANNING COMMITTEE 1 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

1. OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENTS – 4401 FALLOWFIELD ROAD

MODIFICATIONS AU PLAN OFFICIEL ET AU RÈGLEMENT DE ZONAGE – 4401, CHEMIN FALLOWFIELD

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AS AMENDED

That Council approve:

1. An amendment to the Secondary Plan for South Nepean Urban Areas 9 and 10, as detailed in Document 2, to allow a business park development consisting of three to 12-storey buildings at 4401 Fallowfield Road;

2. An amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 for 4401 Fallowfield Road to allow a business park development consisting of three to 12- storey buildings, as detailed in Document 3;

3. That a covenant be registered on title of all lands located at 4401 Fallowfield Road to require the completion of a transportation impact assessment for all future site plans to examine transportation issues, including but not limited to, the total trip generation from the subdivision, and all future transportation impact assessments shall consider a 15% alternative transportation model split maximum, including transit, walking and cycling; and

4. That there be no further notice pursuant to Section 34 (17) of the Planning Act.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 2 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

RECOMMANDATION DU COMITÉ

Que le Conseil approuve :

1. Une modification au Plan secondaire des secteurs urbains 9 et 10 de Nepean-Sud, tel qu’exposé en détail dans le document 2, afin de permettre l’aménagement d’un parc d’affaires constitué d’immeubles de trois à douze étages au 4401, chemin Fallowfield;

2. Une modification au Règlement de zonage 2008-250 et visant le 4401, chemin Fallowfield, afin de permettre l’aménagement d’un parc d’affaires constitué d’immeubles de trois à douze étages, tel qu’exposé en détail dans le document 3;

3. Qu’un engagement soit inscrit au titre foncier des terrains situés au 4401, chemin Fallowfield de manière à ce qu’une évaluation des répercussions sur les transports soit requise pour tous les futurs plans d’implantation afin d’évaluer les répercussions sur les transports, notamment les déplacements générés par le lotissement; et que toutes les évaluations des répercussions sur les transports à venir considèrent une répartition des modes de transport écologiques maximale de 15 %, modes qui comprennent notamment le transport en commun, la marche et le vélo; et

4. Qu’aucun nouvel avis ne soit donné en vertu du paragraphe 34(17) de la Loi sur l’aménagement du territoire.

DOCUMENTATION / DOCUMENTATION

1. Acting Deputy City Manager’s Report, Planning and Infrastructure, dated 12 May 2015 (ACS2015-PAI-PGM-0059).

PLANNING COMMITTEE 3 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Rapport du Directeur municipal adjoint par intérim, Urbanisme et infrastructure, daté le 12 mai 2015 (ACS2015-PAI-PGM-0059).

2. Extract of Draft Minute, 26 May 2015.

Extrait de l’ébauche du procès-verbal, le 26 mai 2015.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 4 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Report to Rapport au:

Planning Committee / Comité de l'urbanisme May 26, 2015 / 26 mai 2015

and Council / et au Conseil June 10, 2015 / 10 juin 2015

Submitted on May 12, 2015 Soumis le 12 mai 2015

Submitted by Soumis par: John L. Moser, Acting Deputy City Manager / Directeur municipal adjoint par intérim, Planning and Infrastructure / Urbanisme et Infrastructure

Contact Person / Personne ressource: Lee Ann Snedden, Acting Chief / Chef par intérim, Development Review Services / Services d’Examen des projets d'aménagement, Planning and Growth Management / Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance (613) 580-2424, 25779, Leeann.Snedden@.ca

Report Author / Auteur du rapport: Lily Xu, Planner / Urbaniste, Develop ment Review Suburban Services Unit / Unité examen des demandes d’aménagement services suburbains (613) 580-2424, 27505, [email protected]

Ward: (3) File Number: ACS2015-PAI-PGM-0059

SUBJECT: Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments – 4401 Fallowfield Road

OBJET: Modifications au Plan officiel et au Règlement de zonage – 4401, chemin Fallowfield

PLANNING COMMITTEE 5 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

That Planning Committee recommend Council approve:

1. An amendment to the Secondary Plan for South Nepean Urban Areas 9 and 10, as detailed in Document 2, to allow a business park development consisting of three to 12-storey buildings at 4401 Fallowfield Road; and

2. An amendment to Zoning By-law 2008-250 for 4401 Fallowfield Road to allow a business park development consisting of three to 12-storey buildings, as detailed in Document 3.

RECOMMANDATIONS DU RAPPORT

Que le Comité de l’urbanisme recommande au Conseil d’approuver ce qui suit :

1. Une modification au Plan secondaire des secteurs urbains 9 et 10 de Nepean-Sud, tel qu’exposé en détail dans le document 2, afin de permettre l’aménagement d’un parc d’affaires constitué d’immeubles de trois à douze étages au 4401, chemin Fallowfield;

2. Une modification au Règlement de zonage 2008-250 et visant le 4401, chemin Fallowfield, afin de permettre l’aménagement d’un parc d’affaires constitué d’immeubles de trois à douze étages, tel qu’exposé en détail dans le document 3.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Assumption and Analysis

The proposal is for a business park development of three to 12-storey buildings within the Prestige Business Parks designation adjacent to Highway 416 in Barrhaven. The site is abutting two rural residential communities to the north.

Site specific amendments to the applicable Secondary Plan and Zoning By-law are being proposed including increasing the permitted building height from three storeys to up to 12 storeys, reducing the minimum lot area from 1.0 hectare to 0.4 hectare, increasing the maximum lot coverage from 40 per cent to 55 per cent, and adding additionally permitted uses.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 6 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Staff support the requested changes because the proposed building heights and new uses are consistent with the applicable Official Plan policies. The requested reduction of the minimum lot size and increase of lot coverage are reasonable to improve the feasibility of the development land. A 9-metre wide landscape area is recommended adjacent to the existing homes to provide a buffer between the development and the rural residential area. A thorough review was conducted of the Community Transportation Study and concludes that through necessary road modifications the surrounding streets will be able to accommodate the proposed development.

Opposition to the proposal was originally received from the adjacent rural communities due to concerns related to density, height, the landscape buffer and traffic. An agreement was finally reached between the applicant and the adjacent Orchard Estate Community Association on the location of the landscape buffer.

Financial Implications

There is no direct financial implication associated with this report.

Public Consultation/Input

Public consultation of these applications was carried out in accordance with the City’s Public Notification and Consultation Policy. Two adjacent rural communities, Orchard Estate Community Association and Cedarview Community Association, expressed concerns related to the density, height, landscape buffer, and traffic, as detailed in Document 5.

RÉSUMÉ

Hypothèse et analyse

Ce projet concerne l’aménagement d’un parc d’affaires constitué d’immeubles de trois à douze étages dans le parc commercial de gamme supérieure adjacent à l’autoroute 416 à Barrhaven. Cet emplacement jouxte deux collectivités résidentielles rurales au nord.

Des modifications propres à l’emplacement sont proposées dans le plan secondaire et le règlement de zonage correspondants : accroissement de trois à douze étages de la hauteur de bâtiment autorisée; réduction de 1,0 à 0,4 hectare de la superficie de lot minimale; accroissement de 40 à 55 pour cent de la surface construite maximale; ajout d’utilisations autorisées.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 7 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Le personnel appuie les modifications demandées, parce que les hauteurs de bâtiments et les nouvelles utilisations proposées sont conformes aux politiques pertinentes du Plan officiel. La réduction de la superficie de lot minimale et l’augmentation de la surface construite demandées sont raisonnables afin d’accroître la faisabilité de l’aménagement. Une zone paysagée de neuf mètres de largeur est recommandée près des résidences existantes, afin d’assurer une zone tampon entre l’aménagement et la zone résidentielle rurale. On a procédé à un examen approfondi de l’étude sur les transports communautaires, qui a permis de conclure que, moyennant les modifications nécessaires à la chaussée, les rues avoisinantes pourront absorber la circulation engendrée par l’aménagement proposé.

Des oppositions ont été manifestées initialement par les collectivités rurales adjacentes, en raison de préoccupations liées à la densité, à la hauteur, à la zone tampon paysagée et à la circulation. Le requérant et l’association communautaire voisine d’Orchard Estate ont fini par conclure une entente sur l’emplacement de la zone tampon paysagée.

Répercussions financières Aucune répercussion financière directe n’est associée au présent rapport.

Consultation publique / commentaires

La consultation publique portant sur ces demandes a été réalisée conformément à la politique de la Ville sur les avis publics et la consultation. Deux collectivités rurales adjacentes, représentées par l’Orchard Estate Community Association et la Cederview Community Association, ont exprimé des préoccupations liées à la densité, à la hauteur, à la zone tampon paysagée et à la circulation, tel qu’exposé dans le document

BACKGROUND

Learn more about Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments

For all the supporting documents related to this application visit the Development Application Search Tool.

Site location

4401 Fallowfield Road.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 8 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Owner:

Michael Boucher, DCR Phoenix and Andridge Capital Corporation

Applicant:

Miguel Tremblay, FoTenn Consultants Inc.

Description of site and surroundings

The property is bounded by O'Keefe Court to the north and Fallowfield Road to the east and south. Highway 416 abuts the site to the west.

The vacant land measures 11 hectares. Surrounding the site to the north are vacant rural industrial lands, a municipal park, and two country estate lot communities located in the General Rural Area. To the south of Fallowfield Road is the recently approved business park and commercial development known as the CitiGate 416 Corporate Campus. To the southeast are recently developed residential subdivisions. The O’Keefe municipal drain bisects the site into western and eastern portions.

Summary of requested Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments

The applicant is proposing a business park subdivision consisting of 12 development blocks of three to 12 storeys. The following site specific amendments to the Secondary Plan of South Nepepan Urban Areas 9 and 10 are being requested:

 To change the maximum building height for the property from three storeys to three, four, six, nine and 12 storeys, as shown in Document 2;

 To change the minimum lot area from 1.0 hectare to 0.4 hectare; and

 To change the maximum lot coverage from 40 per cent to 55 per cent.

The following site specific amendments to the Zoning By-law are also being requested:

 To allow additionally permitted uses, including broadcasting station, drive-through facility (associated with a bank or bank machine only), production studio, service and repair shop, training centre, convenience store (within a complex only), post office (within a complex only);

PLANNING COMMITTEE 9 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

 To change the height limits to be consistent with the proposed changes to the Secondary Plan; and

 To change the minimum lot area from 10,000 square metres to 4,047 square metres to be consistent with the proposed changes to the Secondary Plan.

Brief history of proposal

In 2006, an Official Plan Amendment application was submitted for the property to allow residential development. The proposed residential development was inconsistent with the Official Plan and Provincial Policy Statement, therefore, staff did not support it and the applicant withdrew the application.

In 2010, Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications were submitted for the same property to permit a warehouse. The proposal was not supported by staff due to the concern related to heavy trucks and the proposal was abandoned. Later, the applications were revised to include employment uses and a place of worship. The applications were placed on hold pending resolutions of technical issues.

In 2013, a new Official Plan amendment, Zoning By-law amendment, and Plan of Subdivision applications were submitted for a business park and a place of worship. The applicant later revised the proposal by removing the place of worship use from the proposal. These latest Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications are the subject of this report.

In 2014, Council approved a City initiated Official Plan amendment (OPA 135) to correct an administrative error and to re-insert the policy limiting the minimum lot area to 1.0 hectare and the maximum lot coverage to 40 per cent for the property.

DISCUSSION

Public consultation

Public consultation of this application was carried out in accordance with the City’s Public Notification and Consultation Policy for developments. A total of 95 comments were received during the public consultation process. Most of the comments received expressed opposition towards the proposal due to concerns related to density, height, the landscape buffer, and traffic.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 10 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

A public meeting for the associated plan of subdivision was held on January 21, 2014, at Cedarhill Golf and Country Club, 56 Cedarhill Drive. Approximately 80 people attended the public meeting. An information session was held on March 25, 2015 at Councillor Harder’s Ward Office in Barrhaven. Four representatives from the community attended the session.

For this proposal’s consultation details, see Document 5 of this report.

Provincial Policy Statement

The Provincial Policy Statement (2014) (PPS) requires planning authorities provide for an appropriate mix and range of employment, including industrial, commercial and institutional uses, to meet long-term needs. The PPS expects municipalities to maintain a range and choice of suitable sites for employment uses that support a wide range of economic activities. Municipalities are authorized to establish more specific policies within their official plans that are consistent with the policies contained within the PPS.

Official Plan designations

Official Plan

The complete applications were received before December 11, 2013 on which day Council approved Official Plan Amendment 150. Therefore, the applications are processed based on the Official Plan as amended by Official Plan Amendment 76.

The property is designated Employment Area under the Official Plan. The Employment Area designation typically provides large parcel sizes, reflective of user needs for employment activities and road access, with the ability to accommodate at least 2,000 jobs within the designation. The Official Plan designates at least one Employment Area in each urban community outside the . The 416 Employment Lands, including the subject property and the CitiGate development to the south, is one of the designated Employment Areas for South Nepean.

Secondary Plan

The Secondary Plan for the South Nepean Urban Areas 9 and 10 provides a land use, development and servicing strategy for the area located in the western part of South Nepean, and intends for 7,000 jobs within the business park areas. The Secondary Plan identifies 185 hectares of lands located adjacent to the east of Highway 416 as Extensive Employment Areas, which are divided into two categories: Prestige Business

PLANNING COMMITTEE 11 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Park to allow clean industrial and office uses and Business Park to allow conventional industrial uses. The property is within the Prestige Business Park category.

The Secondary Plan specifies that within the Prestige Business Park designation, permitted uses shall include office and clean industrial, meaning research and development facilities, advanced technology industries and services, light manufacturing and production facilities, office, banks and financial services, private and commercial schools, hotel, and convention centre. The Secondary Plan currently allows a minimum lot size of 1.0 hectare, maximum lot coverage of 40 per cent, and maximum building height of 11 metres on the subject property.

Zoning By-law

The existing zoning of the subject property is Business Park Industrial Zone Exception 1219, with a height limit of 11 metres and a holding provision (IP[1219]H(11)-h). The permitted primary uses include: day care, hotel, light industrial uses, medical facility, office, place of assembly, research and development centre, and technology industry. Additional uses such as restaurant, personal service business, and recreational and athletic facility are also allowed, provided they are of a small scale and are ancillary in nature. All uses are prohibited until the holding provision is lifted. This will not occur until the following have been approved by the City: a transportation impact study, a servicing and associated funding agreement, a master concept plan, and a draft plan of subdivision.

Planning rationale

Building height

The Secondary Plan currently limits the height to a low building profile of 10.7 metres or three storeys. It further allows high and medium building profiles of 12 storeys and nine storeys for the CitiGate development in the immediate south-east corner of the highway and along the highway.

More flexibility in building profile is being proposed as shown in Document 6. A maximum building height of 12 storeys is being proposed for the easternmost Block 1 and nine storeys for the adjacent Block 3. Blocks 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16 will remain limited to the original low building profile of three storeys. A maximum building height of six storeys is proposed for Blocks 2, 7 and 17, and four storeys for Blocks 9 and 10.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 12 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Official Plan Policy 4.11.8 states that high-rise buildings may be considered on lands including Employment Areas that are principally prestige business parks. Policy 4.11.9 further states that high-rise buildings may also be considered where a secondary plan identifies locations suitable for the creation of a community focus on a strategic corner lot or at a gateway location. The Secondary Plan sets clear direction to identify the road corridor from Highway 416 to as an important gateway into South Nepean. The easternmost Block 1 is the first block adjacent to the highway interchange therefore is a potential location for a high-rise building as contemplated by the Official Plan policies.

Official Plan Policies 4.11 and 12 address issues of compatibility and integration with surrounding land uses by ensuring that an effective transition in built form is provided between areas of different development profiles.

The proposed building profiles will form a gradual transition from 12 to three storeys with the highest building being located the furthermost from the nearby residential area. Nine and six storey buildings will form a transition between the high and low built form areas, as shown in Document 6.

For Block 10, which is located adjacent to the O’Keefe Court-Fallowfield Road intersection and directly opposite from the access to the rural residential community to the north, staff recommend a maximum building height of three storeys for the first 50 metres from O’Keefe Court, to be consistent with Blocks 11, 12, 13, 14 and 16. The proponent agrees to this recommendation.

Land use

The applicant requests more land uses to be permitted under the zoning, including broadcasting station, production studio, service and repair shop and training centre. Those uses are consistent with the intent of the Prestige Business Park and are considered appropriate.

Drive-through facility, convenience store and post office are commercial in nature and will be limited through zoning details to ensure that they will be ancillary to the primary employment uses. Specifically, drive-through facility will be permitted only when it is associated with a financial facility; convenience store and post office will be permitted only within a large complex containing one or more office or light industrial uses.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 13 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Lot size and coverage

The Secondary Plan originally contained a policy requiring that all lands designated Prestige Business Park have a large lot area minimum of 1.0 hectare and a lot coverage maximum of 40 per cent, with a high proportion of landscaping. This policy was removed for the properties to the south of Fallowfield Road to facilitate the CitiGate 416 Corporate Campus development.

The applicant is seeking a reduction in the minimum lot size from 1.0 hectare to 0.4 hectares. The reduced minimum lot area will not preclude the opportunity to consolidate two or more lots to accommodate a larger building, but will provide opportunity for smaller tenants and improve the flexibility of the development to accommodate a range of uses. The City’s Economic Development and Innovation Department and the Barrhaven Business Improvement Area were consulted on the requested change and no objection was received.

The applicant is also seeking increased lot coverage from 40 per cent to 55 per cent. Under the City of Ottawa Zoning By-law, the parent Business Park Zone (IP) currently permits 55 per cent lot coverage. The requested change to the maximum lot coverage specification in the Secondary Plan will be consistent with the Zoning By-law and will not compromise the overall vision for the Prestige Business Park.

Council’s previous motion and landscape buffer

On April 27, 2005, City Council approved four motions to allow a gas station to be located at the northwest corner of Strandherd Drive-Fallowfield Road intersection, which is immediately adjacent to the subject property to the south. The third motion states:

“WHEREAS, the Orchard Estates Community has expressed a concern with the respect to the noise, lighting, and traffic generated by the development of the Fallowfield Business Campus;

“BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Planning and Environment Committee recognize the importance of providing a landscaped berm of upwards to 30 feet to serve as a buffer, and/or screening between the community and the balance of the business park lands and direct the Planning and Growth Management Department to establish this concept as part of future site plan control approvals, and uphold the Prestige Business Park Zoning for the balance of the business park lands.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 14 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

“AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City examine the dedication of all or a portion of O’Keefe Court and the adjacent bike path property from Foxtail west to Lytle Park to the Orchard Estates Common property as a function of the site plan applications for the business park lands that abut O’Keefe Court.”

The Official Plan requires that when evaluating the appropriateness of a development adjacent to an established community, the prevailing patterns in the immediate area and the rear and side yard setbacks and landscaped open space of adjacent residential properties shall be considered.

The adjacent community area to the north is designated as General Rural Area under the Official Plan. It is zoned Rural Residential Subzone 4, which requires a minimum rear yard setback of 15 metres. A landscaped berm of 30 feet (9.14 metres) wide, as required in the previous Council’s motion, will serve as a green buffer between the rural community and the proposed business park development which is proposed to be of a higher density. The landscaped berm will help mitigate future potential impacts from the development such as light pollution and noise and, therefore, will help improve the compatibility of the proposed development.

Staff recommends and the applicant agrees to provide a 9-metre landscape buffer on the north side of O’Keefe Court. The applicant further agrees to be responsible for all related design and construction works, which will be implemented through the draft approval of the associated plan of subdivision application.

With regard to the request under the motion to close all or a portion of O’Keefe Court, staff examined the possibilities of dedicating the road and the adjacent bike path to the Orchard Estates Common property. Staff determined that closing O’Keefe Court would not be practicable due to the fact that the site at 4401 Fallowfield Road has only one right-in/right-out access from Fallowfield Road and an additional access with full movements is necessary for the feasibility of the development. The road access is also needed by the adjacent properties to the northwest.

Traffic

A Community Transportation Study prepared by a professional transportation engineer has been submitted to the City to accompany the applications. The Transportation Study concludes that the proposed development will generate approximately 739 trips in the AM peak hour and 670 trips in the PM peak hour. The ultimate development will require future roadway modifications at various intersections.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 15 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

The Transportation Study also concludes that at ultimate built out, the intersection at Fallowfield Road and Strandherd Drive is expected to operate below City standards, however, the O’Keefe Court-Fallowfield Road intersection and all other intersections will operate at an acceptable level of service. The failing of the Fallowfield Road-Strandherd Drive intersection is caused by the background traffic that will be generated by the surrounding developments, including the CitiGate Corporate Campus to the south. The study recommends that both the Fallowfield Road four-lane widening and the Strandherd Drive six-lane widening projects be reviewed for inclusion in the affordable network plan for the next Transportation Master Plan update to improve the operation level at the intersection.

To address concerns raised from the nearby Orchard Estate Community about short- cutting, the study recommends that the City investigate traffic calming measures through the City Area Traffic Management process. If short-cutting is shown to be an issue, options include converting Foxtail Avenue into a cul-de-sac, providing a median to prevent left-turns in and out of Foxtail Avenue, or imposing turning restrictions.

Staff have completed a thorough review of the Community Transportation Study and agrees with the methodology applied and recommendations provided. Staff also agree that the failure at the Fallowfield Road-Strandherd Drive intersection is caused by the background traffic regardless whether or not the subject property will be developed. The Fallowfield Road-Strandherd Drive intersection is not the immediate access point to the site. Therefore, the failure at the Fallowfield Road-Strandherd Drive intersection should not be considered as a determining factor of whether or not the subject development should proceed.

In order to ensure traffic generation from the development will be carefully monitored, staff recommends a transportation impact study (TIS) or a transportation impact assessment (TIA) for all future site plans be prepared to examine transportation issues. The requirement will be implemented through the review and approval of the associated plan of subdivision and future site plan control applications.

Summary

The proposed building heights are consistent with the applicable Official Plan policies; the requested uses comply with the intent of the Prestige Business Park policies; the requested reduction of the minimum lot size and increase of lot coverage are reasonable to improve the feasibility of the lands; and a 9-metre wide landscape buffer

PLANNING COMMITTEE 16 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015 is recommended to improve the compatibility of the development. A thorough review was conducted of the Community Transportation Study and concludes that through necessary road modifications the surrounding streets will be able to accommodate the proposed development.

RURAL IMPLICATIONS

The report recommends development of up to 12 storeys adjacent to an area that is currently designated General Rural Area.

COMMENTS BY THE WARD COUNCILLOR

Councillor Harder provided the following comment:

“This file and site has been active for over 10 years and over the years there have been many changes with the Official Plan, the Rideau Valley Conservation Authority and with the larger development Citigate being approved but in truth there has been little change with this application.

One change we have seen is a reduction in height from 6 and 4 storeys to 3 storeys along O’Keefe Court which is across the street from the southern border of the Orchard Estates community. The community has been steadfast in their support of Prestige Business Park designation.

Regarding the Transportation Impact Study (TIS); City policy states the TIS has to be done with a 20 per cent modal split even though I believe that this is not realistic for this area. It is not realistic because there is no OC Transpo route, no plans for a route, no plans to improve Fallowfield Road in the 2031 horizon and therefore no real opportunity for employees to consider cycling or walking in any numbers that would reflect such a modal split. Fallowfield Road is a rural cross-section including ditches. Therefore, I request that a covenant on title shall be registered on all lands to require a transportation impact study (TIS) be conducted for all future site plans to examine transportation issues, including but not limited to, the total trip generation from the subdivision. It would be realistic therefore to say that TISs shall consider a 15 per cent alternative transportation model split, including transit, walking and cycling, regardless that the Community Transportation Study for the subdivision(IBI, 2015) uses a 20 per cent alternative transportation model split.

Regarding the Landscape Buffer for the Orchard Estates Community; fortunately we have been successful in negotiating a way to place the berm on the north side of

PLANNING COMMITTEE 17 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

O’Keefe Court which was the long supported by the community association of Orchard Estates.

LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

Should the recommendations be adopted and the matter be appealed to the Municipal Board, it is anticipated that a hearing of up to one weeks duration would result. It is expected that such hearing could be conducted within staff resources.

In the event that the applications are refused, reasons must be provided. In the event of an appeal, an external planner and, depending on the reasons for refusal, a transportation planner would need to be retained by the City.

RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS

There are no risk implications.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Potential financial implications are outlined within the above Legal Implications. In the event that external planners are retained, funds are not available within existing resources and the expense would impact Planning and Growth Management’s operating status.

ACCESSIBILITY IMPACTS

Design considerations with respect to accessibility are generally addressed through the Site Plan Control review process and are not a key consideration related to an Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS

There are no direct environmental implications.

TERM OF COUNCIL PRIORITIES

The recommendations in this report address the following 2010-2014 Term of Council Priority:

EP3 – Support growth of local economy.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 18 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

APPLICATION PROCESS TIMELINE STATUS

This application was not processed by the On Time Decision Date established for the processing of Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment applications due to the additional time required to address transportation issues.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Document 1 Location Map

Document 2 Proposed Official Plan Amendment

Document 3 Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment

Document 4 Zoning Map

Document 5 Consultation Details

Document 6 Concept Plan

Document 7 Overview Data Sheet

CONCLUSION

Staff recommends the approval of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments, as detailed in Documents 2 and 3.

DISPOSITION

City Clerk and Solicitor Department, Legislative Services, to notify the owner, applicant, Scott Templeton, Program Manager, Assessment, Financial Services Branch (Mail Code: 26-76) of City Council’s decision.

Planning and Growth Management Department to prepare the implementing by-laws, forward to Legal Services and undertake the statutory notification.

Legal Services to forward the implementing by-laws to City Council.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 19 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Document 1 – Location Map

For an interactive Zoning map of Ottawa visit geoOttawa

The property is bounded by O'Keefe Court to the north and Fallowfield Road to the east and south. Highway 416 abuts the site to the west.

.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 20 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Document 2 – Details of Recommended Official Plan Amendment

Official Plan Amendment No. XXX

To the Official Plan for the

City of Ottawa

PLANNING COMMITTEE 21 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

INDEX

PART A – THE PREAMBLE does not constitute part of the Amendment.

i. Purpose

ii. Location

iii. Basis

PART B – THE AMENDMENT consisting of the following text constitutes Amendment No. XXX to the Official Plan for the City of Ottawa

1. Introduction

2. Details of the Amendment

3. Schedules to Amendment XXX – Official Plan for the City of Ottawa

PART C – IMPLEMENTATION AND INTERPRETATION

PLANNING COMMITTEE 22 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

PART A – THE PREAMBLE i. Purpose

The purpose of the Official Plan amendment is to amend the Secondary Plan for the South Nepean Urban Areas 9 and 10.

This amendment will modify the Secondary Plan’s specifications for the property at 4401 Fallowfield Road, including changing the maximum building height for the property from three storeys to three, four, six, nine and 12 storeys; to change the minimum lot area from 1.0 hectare to 0.4 hectare, and to change the maximum lot coverage from 40 per cent to 55 per cent. ii. Location

The property is bounded by O'Keefe Court to the north and Fallowfield Road to the east and south. Highway 416 abuts the site to the west. iii. Basis

The property is designated Employment Area in the Official Plan, and is adjacent to the General Rural Area to the north. The Secondary Plan for the South Nepean Urban Areas 9 and 10 designates the land Prestige Business Park to allow office and clean industrial uses.

More flexibility in building heights is being proposed. A maximum building height of 12 storeys is being proposed for the easternmost block and nine storeys for the adjacent block. Most blocks abutting O’Keefe Court will remain the original low building profile of three storeys, and the rest blocks are proposed for four and six storeys.

The Official Plan states that high-rise buildings may be considered on lands including Employment Areas that are principally prestige business parks. It further states that high-rise buildings may also be considered where a secondary plan identifies locations suitable for the creation of a community focus on a strategic corner lot or at a gateway location.

The Secondary Plan sets clear direction to identify the road corridor from Highway 416 to Strandherd Drive as an important gateway into South Nepean. The easternmost block is a potential location for a high-rise building under the Official Plan policies.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 23 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

The proposed building profile will form a gradual transition from 12 to three storeys with the highest building being located the furthermost from the nearby residential area. Nine and six storey buildings will form a transition between the high and low built form areas.

The Secondary Plan originally contains a policy requiring that all Prestige Business Park designation shall have a minimum lot area of 1.0 ha and lot coverage maximum of 40 per cent.

The applicant is seeking a reduction in the minimum lot size from 1.0 hectare to 0.4 hectare. The reduced minimum lot area will not preclude the opportunity to consolidate two or more lots to accommodate a larger building, provides opportunity for smaller tenants, and improves the flexibility of the development to accommodate a range of uses.

The applicant is also seeking increased lot coverage from 40 per cent to 55 per cent. Under the City of Ottawa Zoning By-law, the parent Business Park zone (IP) currently permits 55 per cent lot coverage. The requested maximum lot coverage change to the Secondary Plan will be consistent with the Zoning By-law and will not compromise the overall vision for the Prestige Business Park.

A Community Transportation Study has been reviewed. The study demonstrates that through necessary road modifications the surrounding streets will be able to accommodate the proposed development and density.

In summary, the proposed building heights are consistent with the applicable Official Plan policies; the reduced minimum lot size and increased maximum lot coverage are reasonable to improve the flexibility and development potential of the employment land. A thorough review was conducted of the Community Transportation Study and concludes that through necessary road modifications the surrounding road infrastructure will be able to accommodate the traffic generated from the proposed development.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 24 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

PART B – THE AMENDMENT

1. Introduction

All of the parts in this document entitled Part B – The Amendment, consisting of the following Text and Schedules, constitute Amendment No. XXX to the Official Plan for the City of Ottawa Volume 2A – Secondary Plans, South Nepean Urban Areas 9 and 10.

2. Details of the Amendment

Volume 2A – Secondary Plan for the South Nepean Urban Areas 9 and 10 of the Official Plan for the City of Ottawa is hereby amended as set out below and in the attached schedules:

2.1 In Section 2.2.5.1 – Prestige Business Park by replacing policy 5 with:

“For lands at 4401 Fallowfield Road, lot areas shall typically be large with a minimum area of 0.4 ha and lot coverage maximum of 55 per cent.”

2.2 In Section 3.2 Urban Design Guidelines by replacing

“For areas as shown on Schedule C, maximum building heights shall be as follows” with:

“For areas as shown on Schedule C and C1, maximum building heights shall be as follows”.

2.3 In the same section by replacing

“Development to the north of Fallowfield Road and south of O’Keefe Court: low (up to three storeys/11 metres)” with:

“Development to the north of Fallowfield Road and south of O’Keefe Court: low to high (up to twelve storeys/48 metres).”

2.4 Amend Schedule C of the Secondary Plan as set at in Schedule 1 to this amendment.

2.5 Add Schedule C1 to the Secondary Plan as set in Schedule 2 to this amendment.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 25 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Schedule 1 to Amendment XXX – Official Plan of the City of Ottawa

PLANNING COMMITTEE 26 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Schedule 2 to Amendment XXX – Official Plan of the City of Ottawa

PLANNING COMMITTEE 27 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

PART C - IMPLEMENTATION AND INTERPRETATION

Implementation and Interpretation of this Amendment shall be made having regard to all applicable policies set out in Volume 1 – Primary Plan of the Official Plan for the City of Ottawa.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 28 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Document 3 – Details of Recommended Zoning

Proposed changes to the Zoning By-law no. 2008-250 for 4401 Fallowfield Road:

⁻ That the lands known municipally as 4401 Fallowfield Road, shown as Areas A to E, be rezoned as follows:

Area A from IP[1219]H(11)-h to IP[xxxx]H(48)-h

Area B from IP[1219]H(11)-h to IP[xxxx]H(36)-h

Area C from IP[1219]H(11)-h to IP[xxxx]H(24)-h

Area D from IP[1219]H(11)-h to IP[xxxx]H(16)-h

Area E from IP[1219]H(11)-h to IP[xxxx]H(12)-h

Area F from IP[1219]H(11)-h to O1

⁻ Add new exceptions to Section 239, Urban Exceptions, with provisions similar in effect to the following:

I II Exception Provisions

Exceptio Applicable III IV V n Zone Number Additional Land Uses Prohibited Provisions Land Uses Permitted

XXXX IP[xxxx]H(12)- ⁻ all uses in ⁻ minimum lot area of 4,047 h subsection 205(1) square metres IP[xxxx]H(16)- except: h ⁻ drive-through facility is only IP[xxxx]H(24)- ⁻ broadcasting permitted when associated h station with a bank or bank IP[xxxx]H(36)- machine ⁻ day care h ⁻ convenience store, full IP[xxxx]H(48)- ⁻ drive-through service restaurant, take out h facility restaurant, personal service business, post ⁻ hotel office and recreational and ⁻ light industrial athletic facility are permitted only within a

PLANNING COMMITTEE 29 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

uses large complex containing a hotel, light industrial use, ⁻ medical facility medical facility, office, place of assembly, ⁻ office production studio, research ⁻ place of assembly and development centre, technology industry, ⁻ production studio training centre, or bank. ⁻ research and ⁻ all permitted uses not to development apply until the ‘h’ symbol centre has been removed ⁻ service and repair ⁻ the ‘h’ symbol will not be shop removed until the following have been submitted to ⁻ technology and approved by the City: industry ⁻ a transportation impact ⁻ training centre study all uses in ⁻ a servicing study and an subsection 205(2) associated funding except: agreement bank ⁻ a master concept plan and ⁻ bank machine a draft plan of subdivision ⁻ convenience store ⁻ instructional facility ⁻ personal service business- post office ⁻ recreational and athletic facility ⁻ restaurant, full service ⁻ restaurant, take out

PLANNING COMMITTEE 30 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Document 4 – Zoning Map

PLANNING COMMITTEE 31 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Document 5 – Consultation Details

Notification and Consultation Process

Public consultation of these applications was carried out in accordance with the City’s Public Notification and Consultation Policy for Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments. A total of 95 comments were received during the public consultation process. Most comments were expressing oppositions towards the proposal due to the concerns related to density, height, landscape buffer, and traffic.

A public meeting for the associated plan of subdivision was held on January 21, 2014, at Cedarhill Golf and Country Club, 56 Cedarhill Drive. Approximately 80 people attended the meeting. An information session was held on March 25, 2015 at Councillor Harder’s Ward Office in Barrhaven. Four representatives from the community attended the session.

Public Comments and Responses

Public Comments and Responses

1. The proposed increasing building height is more than four times the current height restriction. Buildings of this height are incompatible with the density of development reasonable for this parcel of land. There is no precedent for buildings of this height in the entire Barrhaven community and it does not respect the idea of transition from rural to business use. The proposed high rise and high density development are not suitable directly adjacent to our community.

Response:

As explained in this report, the Official Plan encourages high density and high profile development on lands including Employment Areas that are principally prestige business parks. It allows high-rise buildings on a strategic corner lot or at a gateway location. The subject property meets these criteria. Staff are satisfied that proper transition from high-profile buildings to medium- and low-profile buildings are provided.

2. Excessive traffic due to insufficient access to Fallowfield and Strandherd Roads for such high traffic volumes will create a very unsafe environment within this residential area.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 32 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Response:

Staff are satisfied that the surrounding roads will be able to accommodate the proposed development. Pedestrian and cyclist going to the Lytle Park and residential area will be along the pathway along the north side of O’Keefe Court to avoid potential conflict with vehicular.

3. The development will generate so much traffic and as a result many of the cars and trucks will be using our community as a short-cut.

Response:

Staff are satisfied that the surrounding roads will be able to accommodate the proposed development. Should short-cutting become a concern, traffic control measures may be implemented at the Foxtail-O’Keefe intersection to mitigate the impacts.

4. Such building heights would affect the quality of life, enjoyment and privacy of our estate lots.

Response:

Proper transition from high to medium and low profile buildings is provided. Along the O’Keefe Court where it faces the community directly, a landscape buffer including a berm of 9 metres (30 feet) is recommended and buildings are limited to three storeys.

5. A development of this nature will result in a dramatic reduction of property values.

Response:

The proposed land use and form in general are permitted under the Official Plan therefore the applicant has the right to develop the site. The Official Plan does not contain policies regarding protecting property values but contains policies to promote the quality of life and compatibility of development. As discussed in this report, the compatibility of the development will be achieved through providing a building height transition, limiting buildings to three storeys where facing the community, and requiring a landscape buffer.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 33 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

6. Such development will result in significant light pollution to the neighborhood.

Response:

Light pollution is normally an issue to be examined at the site plan control stage. Staff recommends a landscape buffer including a berm of 9 metres (30 feet) along the residential side, which will help mitigate the potential light pollution.

7. Such development will cause significant noise disturbing our life.

Response:

Noise impacts will be further reviewed at the site plan control stage when specific users are known. Mitigation measures will be required if needed through the site plan review.

8. The land shall establish other uses for example a swimming pool or hockey rink to where it is the industrial part of the land.

Response:

Recreational and athletic facilities are permitted within a large complex containing a hotel, light industrial use, medical office, office, place of assembly, production studio, research and development centre, technology industry, training centre, or bank.

9. The development will destroy the existing beauty of the area, will put unnecessary environmental stress on the area, will create a danger and increase the level of contamination to the residents.

Response:

A landscaped berm as recommended by staff will serve as a green buffer between the rural area and the proposed business park development. The landscaped berm will help mitigate future potential impacts from the development such as light pollution and noise, and therefore will help improve the compatibility of the proposed development.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 34 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

10. We would like to remind the City of the motion supporting provisions for a transition zone from the rural nature of our community to the business park agreed to when the service station at the corner of Strandherd and Fallowfield was approved a few years ago. They included a berm to preserve privacy of residents in the abutting area, restrictions on traffic through O’Keefe and our community, and a promise to firmly uphold the permitted uses compatible with the notion of Prestigious Business Park.

Response:

Staff recommendations take into the consideration of the previous motion. The proposed new uses are considered consistent with the overall vision for the Prestigious Business Park.

11. Development such as “drive-through facility”, “service and repair shop”, “convenience store” or “place of worship” (which is not necessarily a church) are not in line with the Prestigious Business Park zoning.

Response:

Drive-through facility will be permitted only for a bank. Service and repair shop is meant for repair shops such as for appliances and computers which is consistent with the Prestigious Business Park intent. Place of worship has been removed from the proposed uses.

12. Decreasing the minimum lot size by almost 60 per cent from 10,000 square metres to 4,047 square metres creates a high density and associated traffic cannot be safely supported with access only to Fallowfield so close to the already busy Strandherd intersection.

Response:

The reduced minimum lot area will not preclude the opportunity to consolidate two or more lots to accommodate a larger building, but to provide opportunity for smaller tenants and to improve the flexibility of the development to suit for a range of uses. Staff has reviewed the Community Transportation Study and are satisfied with the conclusions.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 35 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Community Organization Comments and Responses:

Barrhaven business Improvement Area (BIA) Comments:

 Place of worship – The total employment brought in by this use would only be 10 to 20 employees. At this time we do not feel that there is any planning or business case to support this amendment. We also do not have enough information regarding the size of parcel that this user would require and how much of the total footprint of developable employment land this would consume.

 Drive-thru is commercial in nature; we do not support this; service and repair shop is acceptable not for automotive but for other items, i.e. computer, so it is actually compatible with employment uses; convenience store- only as a supporting use to service an employment building, not a stand alone convenience store as this is purely retail-commercial.

Response:

 Place of worship has been removed from the final list of requested new uses.

 Drive-through uses are only permitted when associated with a bank; service and repair is not for automobiles; convenience store is only permitted when located within a large complex.

Orchard Estate Community Association Comments:

 Our community is primarily concerned with preserving the Prestigious Business park designation to attract high-end jobs to Barrhaven, with implementing an appropriate transition zone from our rural community to the business park, and with the potential impact of traffic on our quality of life and the safety of our residents and their children.

 The Transportation Study has utilized unrealistic development scenarios, unsupported by current expert market research, which results in flawed conclusions and erroneous worst case scenarios. The use of 20 per cent model split is unrealistic. O’Keefe Court will become an arterial road. 330,000 square feet of development at 4497 O’Keefe court are not included in the Transportation Study. Some of the surrounding intersections will operate under the standards due to the development.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 36 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

 OECA does not support adding “broadcasting station, drive-through facility, service and repair shop” to the permitted primary uses or “convenience store” to the permitted secondary uses. These uses are not consistent with the concept of Prestigious Business Park and already supported in the much larger business park south of Strandherd. Our community would also be prepared to consider a mixed use development proposal as outlined in this document. We would be willing to collaborate on its development.

 We would respectfully request that a landscape berm on the north side of O’Keefe be incorporated into the design.

Response:

 Compatibility with the surrounding rural community is considered and as a result a 9-metre buffer is recommended along the residential property line abutting O’Keefe Court as consistent with the previous Council’s motion.

 Staff has completed a thorough review of the Community Transportation Study. Staff agrees with the methodology applied and recommendations provided.

 Broadcasting station is considered consistent with the prestige business park over all intent; drive-through facility is only permitted when associated with a bank; service and repair is not for auto mobiles, but is for appliances and computers; convenience store is only permitted when located within a large complex.

 Staff recommends a 9-metre landscape buffer on the north side of O’Keefe Court.

Cedarhill Community Association Comments

 The Cedarhill Community Association would like to register its concurrence with the position taken by the Orchard Estates Community Association regarding this application.

 Further, the Cedarhill Community Association is concerned about the increased traffic that will result on Cedarview Road north as a result of this and other development applications in the same area (Tartan and 4225 Strandherd being two examples). This is a cumulative impact of all the proposed developments

PLANNING COMMITTEE 37 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

which the city has failed to consider on an aggregate basis in terms of the negative safety and noise impacts from traffic generated on our community.

Response:

 Please see responses to the comments from Orchard Estates Community Association.

 The Community Transportation Study concludes that in the future at the full build out of the site and surrounding areas, a southbound right-turn lane will be required at the Fallowfield Road-Cedarview Road intersection. The required road modification will be implemented through the review and approval of the associated plan of subdivision process. Specific timing of the required road modification works will be determined through the transportation studies for the subsequent site plans.

PLANNING COMMITTEE 38 COMITÉ DE L’URBANISME REPORT 8 RAPPORT 8 10 JUNE 2015 LE 10 JUIN 2015

Document 6 – Proposed Concept Plan