NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING

Transcription

1 March 30, 2012 Dear Sir/Madam Re: NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING Low-Rise Infill Housing in Mature Neighbourhoods ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0097 This is to advise you that the above-noted matter will be considered by the City of Ottawa Planning Committee on Tuesday, April 10, The meeting will begin at 9:30 a.m. in the Andrew S. Haydon Hall, City Hall, 110 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa. You are welcome to attend the meeting and present your views. Attached is a copy of the report outlining the Departmental recommendation. The Committee will consider any written submissions in respect to this matter if provided to the Committee Co-ordinator of the Planning Committee at 110 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa, K1P 1J1 or by fax at or by at caitlin.salter-macdonald@ottawa.ca. If you wish to speak to the Committee or hear this item, please call Caitlin Salter-MacDonald at , extension by 4:00 p.m. on the day before the meeting to determine if a specific time has been set for this item to be considered. If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at the public meeting or make written submissions to the City of Ottawa before the proposed by-law is passed, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision of the Council of the City of Ottawa to the Ontario Municipal Board. If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at the public meeting, or make written submissions to the City of Ottawa before the proposed by-law is passed, the person or public body may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. For information on the item itself, please call the undersigned at , extension or by at selma.hassan@ottawa.ca. Yours truly, Original signed by Selma Hassan Planner Planning and Growth Management Department Attach. Shaping our future together Ensemble, formons notre avenir City of Ottawa Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability 110 Laurier Avenue West Ottawa, ON K1P 1J1 Tel : Fax : Ville d'ottawa Services d infrastructure et Viabilité des collectivités 110, avenue Laurier Ouest Ottawa, ON K1P 1J1 Tél : Fac :

2 Le 30 mars 2012 Objet : Madame, Monsieur, AVIS DE RÉUNION DU COMITÉ DE L URBANISME ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0097 Aménagements intercalaires de faible hauteur dans les quartiers bien établis La présente vise à vous informer que le Comité de l'urbanisme de la Ville d'ottawa étudiera l'article cité sous rubrique le mardi 10 avril La réunion commencera à 9 h 30 dans la salle Andrew-S.-Haydon, hôtel de ville, 110, avenue Laurier Ouest, Ottawa. Nous vous invitons à assister à la réunion et à présenter votre point de vue. Veuillez trouver ci-joint une copie du rapport comprenant la recommandation du Service. Le Comité étudiera les rapports écrits traitant de la question qui sont présentés à la coordinatrice du Comité de l urbanisme, 110, avenue Laurier Ouest, Ottawa, K1P 1J1, par télécopieur au ou par courrier électronique à caitlin.salter-macdonald@ottawa.ca. Quiconque souhaite faire une présentation au Comité ou entendre la question, est prié de communiquer avec Caitlin Salter-MacDonald au , poste 28136, à 16 h au plus tard, le jour précédant la réunion afin de savoir si l étude de cet article a été fixée à une heure précise. Si une personne ou un organisme public ne présente pas d'exposé oral à la réunion publique ou ne présente pas d'exposé écrit à la Ville d'ottawa avant l'adoption du règlement, la personne ou l organisme public ne pourra pas interjeter appel de la décision du Conseil de la Ville d Ottawa devant la Commission des affaires municipales de l'ontario. Si une personne ou un organisme public ne présente pas d'exposé oral à la réunion publique ou ne présente pas d'exposé écrit à la Ville d'ottawa avant l'adoption du règlement, la personne ou l organisme public ne pourra être joint en tant que partie à l audition de l appel devant la Commission des affaires municipales de l Ontario à moins que, de l avis de la Commission, il existe des motifs raisonnables de le faire. Pour obtenir des renseignements sur l article même, veuillez communiquer avec la personne soussignée, au , poste ou par couriel à selma.hassan@ottawa.ca. Veuillez agréer, Madame, Monsieur, l expression de mes sentiments les meilleurs. Original signé par Selma Hassan Urbaniste Service de l Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance p.j. Shaping our future together Ensemble, formons notre avenir City of Ottawa Infrastructure Services and Community Sustainability 110 Laurier Avenue West Ottawa,, ON K1P 1J1 Tel : Fax : Ville d'ottawa Services d infrastructure et Viabilité des collectivités 110, avenue Laurier Ouest Ottawa, ON K1P 1J1 Tél : Fac :

3 ITEM N O NUMÉRO DE L ARTICLE Request to speak form Fiche de demande d intervention Please complete the Request to Speak form and give to the Committee Coordinator at the beginning of the meeting or send it by Fax at Veuillez remplir la fiche de 'Demande d intervention' et la remettre à la coordonnatrice/au coordonnateur du Comité au début de la réunion ou l envoyer par Facsimile au (613) Committee and Meeting Date Comité et date de la réunion Subject/Objet Please indicate your position with respect Veuillez donner votre opinion sur la to the REPORT RECOMMENDATION: RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT : I agree I oppose Je suis d'accord Je suis en désaccord Name/Nom: Company, Agency or Community Organization (if applicable) Société, agence ou organisme communautaire (s'il y a lieu): Street and/or address, Postal Code and Telephone/Adresse municipale et/ou courriel, code postal et numéro de téléphone: Personal Information contained on this form is collected pursuant to s.75 (4) of By-Law No , and will be used as a record of, and possible follow up to, participation in this meeting. Questions about this collection should be directed to the Manager, Council and Committee Services, 110 Laurier Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario K1P 1J1. Telephone (613) , ext / Les renseignements personnels contenus dans le présent formulaire sont recueillis en vertu du p.75(4) du Règlement municipal , et seront utilisés à des fins de référence et de suivi éventuel à la participation à cette réunion. Toute question concernant cette collecte de renseignements doit être adressée au Gestionnaire des services au Conseil et aux Comités, 110, avenue Laurier Ouest, Ottawa (Ontario) K1P 1J1. Téléphone (613) , poste Request to Speak.doc

4 1 Report to/rapport au : Planning Committee Comité de l'urbanisme and Council / et au Conseil 21 March 2011 / le 21 mars 2011 Submitted by/soumis par : Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager, Directrice municipale adjointe, Planning and Infrastructure, Services d'urbanisme et d'infrastructure Contact Person/Personne-ressource : Richard Kilstrom, Manager/Gestionnaire, Policy Development and Urban Design/Élaboration de la politique et conception urbaine, Planning and Growth Management/Urbanisme et Gestion de la croissance Élaboration de la politique et conception urbaine (613) x22653, Richard.Kilstrom@ottawa.ca Rideau-Vanier (12), Rideau-Rockcliffe (13), Somerset (14), Kitchissippi (15), Capital (17) Ref N : ACS2012-PAI-PGM-0097 SUBJECT: OBJET : LOW-RISE INFILL HOUSING IN MATURE NEIGHBOURHOODS AMÉNAGEMENTS INTERCALAIRES DE FAIBLE HAUTEUR DANS LES QUARTIERS BIEN ÉTABLIS REPORT RECOMMENDATION That Planning Committee recommend Council approve: 1. An amendment to the Zoning By-law to include a new section which provides regulations for infill development as detailed in Document 2; 2. The Urban Design Guidelines for Low-Rise Infill Housing as detailed in Document 3; 3. The proposed changes to the City s submission requirements and procedures including procedures and fees for new planting, the Urban Tree Conservation Bylaw and the Drainage By-law as detailed in Document 4 and direct the appropriate branches to implement these changes within eight months of Council approval of this report; and 4. The addition of one Full-Time Employee for the Forestry Services Branch as a pressure to the draft 2013 budget, in order to ensure that the amendments to the Urban Tree Conservation By-law can be implemented;

5 2 RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT Que le Comité de l urbanisme recommande au Conseil : 1. approuve une modification au règlement de zonage afin d inclure un nouvel article qui fournit une réglementation quant aux aménagements intercalaires, comme il est expliqué en détail dans le document 2; 2. d approuver les Directives d esthétique urbaine pour les aménagements résidentiels intercalaires de faible hauteur document 3 ci-joint; 3. d approuver les modifications proposées aux exigences en matière de présentation des demandes d aménagement et aux procédures de la Ville - y compris les procédures et les coûts de la nouvelle plantation, au Règlement municipal sur la conservation des arbres urbains et au Règlement sur le drainage document 4 ci-joint et de demander aux services concernés d adopter ces modifications dans les huit mois suivant l approbation du présent rapport par le Conseil; et 4. Ajoute un employé à temps plein à la Direction des services forestiers comme pression du budget préliminaire de 2013 afin de veiller à ce que les modifications au Règlement sur la conservation des arbres urbains puissent être mises en œuvre. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Low-rise infill housing is continually being built and is seen as a beneficial addition to neighbourhoods as long as the infill is compatible and makes a positive contribution to the neighbourhood. In Ottawa there are increasing amounts of infill, in particular in Wards 12, 13, 14, 15 and 17, and, as certain neighbourhoods in these wards are seen as very desirable, infill in these areas is expected to continue. Although much of this is positive, there are certain negative building patterns that have reduced the compatibility of some infill in these wards. This report is being brought forward in order to propose changes to permissions and procedures related to infill housing that aim to increase the positive contributions and improve the overall compatibility of low-rise infill development. The proposed changes were developed following a long study period that included an extensive visual survey of new infill construction, analysis of the survey data, the creation and review of various options for change, and a comprehensive internal and external consultation process. A comprehensive stakeholder consultation process began in early The consultation process, documented fully later in this report, included: Four public meetings held in February 2011 and one in September meetings with industry and community stakeholders

6 3 Additional meetings with individuals and interest groups as requested throughout the process and ongoing correspondence with stakeholders The recommendations recognise the importance of low-rise infill housing. They also acknowledge that infill results in neighbourhood change and that this change must contribute positively to the neighbourhood and not erode the characteristics that make the neighbourhood liveable. The purpose of the recommendations is to enhance the nature of new low-rise residential development that is being built within stable residential neighbourhoods. To ensure that infill makes a more positive contribution to the character and quality of the neighbourhoods the recommendations include: Changes to the existing zoning by-law provisions (Document 2) as they relate to the construction of new, low-rise infill housing with the study area (see Document 1) Revisions to the City s current Urban Design Guidelines for Low-Rise Infill Housing (Document 3 - applicable within the urban area only) Changes to City submission requirements and procedures, the Urban Tree Conservation By-law and the Drainage By-law (Document 4 applicable within the urban area only) The recommendations are expected to: Improve the relationship between the front of house and the street, and promote more neighbourly frontages and uses at street level Improve the landscape and streetscape treatment so that new homes fit better in established neighbourhoods Increase the permeability of yards and front yard green potential Improve the implementation of the City s Urban Tree Conservation By-law Increase the amount of information that the City receives with infill applications so that it is possible to better evaluate the impact of proposed construction Ensure that infill lots are graded as per approved plans Improve internal communication and co-ordination related to infill applications within and amongst municipal departments Improve the clarity of the Urban Design Guidelines for Low-Rise Infill Housing Create opportunities for good infill to be recognized The recommendations will apply to Building Permit, Site Plan and Committee of Adjustment applications submitted after Council approval of the changes. The proposed changes related to improved implementation of the Urban Tree Conservation By-law (as outlined in Document 4) will require an additional staff resource. The remainder of the proposed changes have no financial implications for the City. Several follow up actions are being proposed, including an analysis of the impacts of zoning bylaw setback and height provisions on infill development, a determination of whether the zoning by-law changes should be applied to additional neighbourhoods outside the current study area, as well as a complete review and monitoring of the currently proposed changes (Recommendations 1 through 3 of this report).

7 4 RÉSUMÉ On assiste régulièrement à la mise en chantier d aménagements résidentiels intercalaires de faible hauteur. Ces aménagements sont réputés être un atout pour le voisinage, dans la mesure où ils sont compatibles et apportent une contribution positive aux quartiers dans lesquels ils sont bâtis. On compte de plus en plus d aménagements intercalaires à Ottawa, en particulier dans les quartiers 12, 13, 14, 15 et 17, et, comme ces quartiers sont très convoités pour leur convivialité, on projette d y poursuivre l érection d aménagements intercalaires. Bien qu on y trouve généralement des avantages, ces quartiers comportent des modèles de construction dont les effets négatifs réduisent la compatibilité de certains aménagements intercalaires. Le présent rapport propose de modifier les permissions et procédures reliées aux aménagements résidentiels intercalaires, dans un secteur donné, afin d accroître la contribution positive et d améliorer la compatibilité des aménagements intercalaires de faible hauteur. Les modifications sont proposées à la lumière d une longue période d étude qui comportait une vaste enquête visuelle des aménagements intercalaires nouvellement construits, l analyse des données de cette enquête, l élaboration et l examen de diverses solutions de modification et un processus de consultation interne et externe. Une consultation de tous les intervenants a été amorcée en Ce processus de consultation, dont les détails figurent plus loin dans le présent rapport, prévoyait : Cinq réunions publiques dont quatre ont été tenues en février 2011 et une en septembre 2011 Dix-sept réunions avec l industrie et la collectivité Des réunions supplémentaires, avec des personnes et des groupes d intérêt, dont la tenue s est avérée nécessaire durant le processus et une correspondance continue par courriel avec les divers intervenants Les recommandations font état de l importance des aménagements résidentiels intercalaires de faible hauteur. Elles reconnaissent aussi qu ils entraînent des changements dans le voisinage et que ces changements doivent apporter une contribution positive au voisinage et laisser intactes les caractéristiques qui favorisent la qualité de vie du milieu. L objet de ces recommandations est d améliorer la nature des nouveaux aménagements résidentiels intercalaires construits dans les quartiers résidentiels bien établis. Voici ce qui est recommandé pour faire en sorte que ces aménagements intercalaires contribuent au caractère et à la qualité des quartiers en question : Modification des dispositions actuelles du règlement sur le zonage (document 2) qui traitent de la construction de nouveaux aménagements résidentiels intercalaires de faible hauteur dans le secteur à l étude (document 1). Révision de la version actuelle des Directives d esthétique urbaine pour les aménagements résidentiels intercalaires de faible hauteur (document 3 - ne s applique qu au secteur urbain). Modification des exigences en matière de demande d aménagement et des procédures de la Ville, du Règlement municipal sur la conservation des arbres urbains et du Règlement sur le drainage (document 4 - ne s applique qu au secteur urbain).

8 5 Les recommandations visent à : Harmoniser les façades de maison avec les rues en vue de les rendre plus accueillantes. Améliorer l aménagement paysager et le paysage de rue afin que les nouvelles demeures s intègrent mieux dans le voisinage. Accroître la perméabilité des cours et le potentiel écologique des cours avant. Assurer une mise en application rigoureuse du Règlement municipal sur la conservation des arbres urbains. Exiger des demandes d aménagements intercalaires plus étoffées afin que la Ville soit en mesure d évaluer l impact de la construction proposée. Assurer que les terrains destinés aux aménagements intercalaires sont nivelés conformément aux plans approuvés. Améliorer la communication interne et la coordination entre les services municipaux qui traitent les demandes d aménagements intercalaires. Clarifier les Directives d esthétique urbaine pour les aménagements résidentiels intercalaires de faible hauteur. Rechercher des occasions de souligner les aménagements intercalaires réussis. Les recommandations s appliqueront aux demandes de permis de construire et de plan d implantation ainsi qu à celles soumises au Comité de dérogation une fois que le Conseil aura approuvé les modifications. Les propositions exigeant une mise en application plus étroite du Règlement municipal sur la conservation des arbres urbains (comme le stipule le document 4) nécessiteront des ressources humaines supplémentaires. Les autres modifications proposées n ont pas de répercussion financière sur les services de la Ville. Plusieurs mesures de suivi sont proposées, y compris une analyse des répercussions des dispositions du Règlement de zonage concernant les retraits et la hauteur des immeubles sur les aménagements intercalaires, une analyse de l opportunité d appliquer les modifications au Règlement de zonage à des quartiers situés à l extérieur du secteur visé par l étude, ainsi qu un examen complet et une surveillance des modifications projetées actuellement (recommandations 1 à 3 du présent rapport). BACKGROUND The Official Plan promotes intensification through a variety of ways, one of which is infill development in the urban area. The Official Plan notes that the stability and the character of established neighbourhoods is to be ensured, and that these neighbourhoods have the potential for smaller scale growth over time. While infill development will be different from the original homes, infill proposed within the interior of established stable neighbourhoods must be designed to complement and contribute to the area s pattern of built form, as well as its desirable landscape and streetscape characteristics. In the spring of 2010 a number of community associations and individual community members expressed concerns that recent, low-rise, infill housing projects in their neighbourhoods were incompatible with the character of the neighbourhood and were making a negative contribution to the community. To better understand the issues, staff assembled a list of building permits issued for infill detached, semi-detached, multiple attached dwellings and stacked dwellings between January 2005 and the end of June 2010 in Wards 12, 13, 14, 15 and 17. Many of the neighbourhoods in

9 6 these wards were developed pre-war, are stable and well established, have a distinctive character, and are seeing the largest amount of low-rise infill. During the summer of 2010, staff conducted a visual survey of over 400 properties on the list. The survey found that there are certain types and patterns of infill housing that appear to have a negative impact on the landscape and streetscape character of neighbourhoods. The detailed survey findings are available on the study web pages at ottawa.ca/infill. Based on the survey, staff began to work with other City Branches and Departments to explore possible solutions to address the identified issues. At the same time, following from the October 4, 2010 report to Planning Committee Status of Urban Infill Development: Design Guidelines and Zoning By-law ACS2010-ICS-PGM-0185, Planning and Growth Management staff was directed examine issues related to infill housing and report back to Committee. DISCUSSION The recommendations, as detailed below and in the attached documents, are proposed in order to: Address concerns over the impacts of infill housing and enhance the contribution of new construction to streetscapes and neighbourhoods. Improve the clarity of policy documents so that they may be applied more effectively Increase and improve the level of information given to the City, thereby facilitating the review of applications and providing the applicant with more clarity surrounding City expectations. Improve the internal co-ordination of information so that applications can be reviewed more effectively. Ensure that City assets in the right-of-way are identified and better protected. Address on-going concerns within this report s study area, and in neighbourhoods that fall outside the study area. Monitor and evaluate the impact of the proposed changes, and determine whether additional measures are necessary. Through the study process, numerous ways of addressing areas of concern were considered. Detailed information on the study web pages ottawa.ca/infill outlines a set of initial ideas that were considered by staff and put forward for public feedback at the February 2011 consultation sessions. The ideas were informed by best practices in other municipalities such as Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Toronto, Oakville and Mississauga. Based on a vetting of the ideas and options gathered from the February meetings, and on a process of internal consultation with the affected branches and departments, the initial set of ideas was refined into a second document that was released in early September 2011 and discussed at the September public meeting. The September consultation document is also available at ottawa.ca/infill. Based on participant feedback and through a process of internal consultation, the ideas were refined to those presented in Documents 2, 3 and 4. All of the changes to the permissions around infill construction are encompassed by recommendations 1, 2 and 3, and detailed in the associated Documents 2, 3 and 4 respectively. The rationale behind the changes proposed by recommendations 1, 2, and 3 is explained in the three following sections.

10 7 Recommendation 1 - Changes to the Zoning By-law within the Study area (Document 2) Through the study, there was recognition that certain undesirable infill conditions would not change if there are no changes to certain provisions in the Zoning By-law. As such, recommendation 1 suggests changes to the Zoning By-law to lots: within the R1, R2, R3 or R4 zones shown on the schedules in Documents 1 and 2; and, on which a new residential building containing a detached, semi-detached, linked-detached, duplex, three unit or multiple attached dwelling is constructed. Specific changes being recommended (and detailed in Document 2) include: A new definition of grade, based on the pre-alteration site grades, and a requirement to confirm that grade is built as approved. A limit on the height and square footage of rooftop projection used to access roof top patios. A calculation of front-yard setback based on the average of the adjacent homes. Permission for front-yard projections to be the average of those of the adjacent homes. Permission to build without offering on-site parking. Permission for front-yard parking (new infill only and with limits on hard surface area). Restrictions on hard surface area in the front-yard. Restrictions on the provision of front garages. As noted in the October 4, 2010 report to Planning Committee, applications for infill development typically fall into two categories: those where some form of planning review and public consultation is part of an application and those where no planning review occurs and the only application required is for a Building Permit. For applications where only a Building Permit is required, the applicable planning document is the Zoning By-law. Urban Design Guidelines are not applicable law and cannot be included in the technical review done by the Building Code Services Branch under the Building Code Act. Thus, the Zoning By-law is the sole tool to regulate built form for those applications that do not require Site Plan Control and/or Minor Variances. For applications that require Minor Variances or Site Plan Control Approval, the Zoning By-law and the City s Urban Design Guidelines can be applied during the review process. However, in cases where a proposed site plan is in complete conformity with the Zoning By-law, the legal opinion is that the as-of-right permission as conferred by the Zoning By-law would ultimately carry more weight before the Ontario Municipal Board than would the Design Guidelines. The Committee of Adjustment has regard to the Guidelines where applicable but the extent to which they may influence a decision can relate directly to the extent to which they are raised at the Hearing. Given the above, zoning is the proper tool to affect the desired changes to low-rise infill housing. Document 2 is the final product of extensive internal and external consultation processes, and outlines the proposed zoning changes. Endnotes in the Guidelines explain the intent behind the proposed changes and are included to facilitate and clarify future interpretation of the by-law provisions. The changes take an approach to zoning that is more contextual than the existing Zoning By-law provisions permit. The goal of this approach is to achieve future infill development that is more sensitive to the characteristics of the neighbourhood in which it is built. Staff will

11 8 monitor the results of the proposed changes to determine whether the resulting infill is making the desired positive contribution to neighbourhoods. This will include monitoring of the uptake on the no parking required provision and any resulting potential impacts on street parking. If deemed necessary, the Department will undertake a study of the on-street parking permit program within the study area, in order to determine if existing programs should be expanded or new ones instituted. As part of the examination of best practices, staff examined the standards of other jurisdictions. By way of an example, elements of the City of Toronto Zoning By-law , the City of Ottawa Zoning By-law , and the proposed zoning changes outlined in Document 2 are compared in Document 5. From Document 5, it is evident that the City of Ottawa s current and proposed regulations are more permissive than Toronto. Monitoring the impacts of the proposed changes will help to determine whether additional and more restrictive zoning changes are required, and/or if all forms of low-rise infill should be subject to Site Plan Control. Recommendation 2 - Changes to Urban Design Guidelines for Low-Rise Infill Housing (Document 3) Through the consultation it was clearly noted that, in many situations, the Urban Design Guidelines for Infill Housing hold no weight and/or cannot be applied. This is true of any application that only requires a Building Permit to proceed. The Guidelines may be applied through the Committee of Adjustment. However, it is only when an application goes through Site Plan Control that the Guidelines may be more judiciously applied. Given the limited weight of the Guidelines, this study did not focus on significant content changes. Instead, the Infill Design Guidelines have been revised in order to reduce the repetition in the document, clarify wording, improve the photo examples and reorganise the information within headings and under new ones. The Infill Design Guidelines have also been revised so that the text reflects the proposed zoning changes coming from the Infill Study. The new document Urban Design Guidelines for Low-Rise Infill Housing (Document 3) is applicable to all urban areas of the city and replaces the Urban Design Guidelines for Low-Medium Density Housing Update. Recommendation 3 - Changes to City submission requirements and procedures, the Urban Tree Conservation By-law and the Drainage By-law (Document 4) Document 4 outlines a series of changes to procedures and submission requirements aimed at improving internal co-ordination and communication, and positively impacting the infill process and final product. For instance, more detailed information in the submission packages will assist the City to more fully understand the development that is being proposed, and whether all by-law requirements are being met (e.g. zoning, private approach, and encroachment by-laws). Early internal coordination and review of the more detailed information may reduce the number of neighbour complaints that require staff time to investigate, as well as the incidence of By-law infractions that require later follow up, thereby saving the City time. Further, Document 4 also includes two initiatives aimed at promoting open consultation and sensitive design. Staff will create and provide an on-line consultation template for builders/developers. The template will outline a consultation process that builders/developers could follow in order to enhance communication about a project with the immediate neighbours and the neighbourhood. Staff will also create a Low-Rise Infill Housing Award category for the next cycle of the City s Urban Design Awards program.

12 9 An amendment to the Drainage By-law is also being proposed to require certification of final grade, which will help to address current problems where site grading is not installed as per approved plans and should reduce requirements for mid- and post-construction staff review and follow-up. The impact of infill development on trees is significant, and as such, Document 4 outlines new information requirements meant to improve the implementation of the current Urban tree Conservation By-law, which applies to all trees 50cm DBH and greater on the subject lot and on adjacent lots. It does not, however, suggest a change in the size of tree subject to the Urban Bylaw. To realize the changes outlined in Document 4, one additional FTE Forestry staff position is required and will be added as a 2013 budget pressure. Until the approval of the proposed position, the Urban Tree Conservation By-law will be implemented as it is currently. While previous drafts of the document released in September 2011 proposed more rigorous attention to the impacts of development on trees on adjacent lots - specifically, that on adjacent lots, trees 10 cm DBH (diameter at breast height) or greater be documented and subject to Forestry staff review - it was determined that the requirements of the Urban Tree Conservation By-law had to apply equally to all lots and all trees; meaning that a 10cm DBH standard could not apply on one lot while a 50cm DBH (currently the standard in the Urban Tree Conservation By-law) applied to the subject infill lot. Forestry Services indicated that they did not have the resources to expand the applicability of the Urban Tree Conservation By-law to trees that are less than 50cm DBH, and that an expansion of the applicability of the by-law would require a significant addition of staff resources. To ensure that new street trees are planted and properly maintained when new infill lots are created, Document 4 also outlines a new tree planting fee, to be charged to all building permit applications for each new single detached, semi-detached, duplex and triplex unit not subject to Site Plan Control or Plan of Subdivision. Forestry Services would oversee the administration of this new tree planting requirement to ensure that the appropriate species is selected, planted to optimum specifications, and properly maintained for two years. As such, this recommendation relieves developers of the requirement to enter into development agreements with the City, of the need to have planting specifications approved by Forestry Services, and of the two year maintenance responsibility. The changes outlined in Document 4 are applicable to all urban areas of the city, not only those within the boundaries of the Study of Low-Rise Infill Housing in Mature Neighbourhoods. As the Document 4 changes do not deal with questions of neighbourhood character, but rather with improved procedures, they can be applied without detailed neighbourhood studies. The changes will help to improve the residential infill process, and their benefits are seen as being important to all urban wards. PROPOSED FOLLOW UP TO THIS REPORT Within one year of approval of this report, staff will complete a study that looks at the zoning provisions related to building height and setbacks in the R1, R2, R3 and R4 zones in the study area. The study will determine if additional changes are required to improve the compatibility of new infill.

13 10 Within two years of approval of this report, staff will determine whether the Zoning By-law changes brought forward in this report should be applied, in whole or in part, to other areas of the city that are subject to increasing low-rise infill housing. Staff will monitor the changes resulting from recommendations 1, 2, and 3 and, within three years of approval of this report, undertake a complete review of the low-rise infill within the study area built under the new changes. RURAL IMPLICATION There are no rural implications. CONSULTATION A comprehensive stakeholder consultation process began in early The record of this process is presented below. A project information meeting for industry stakeholders was held in late January Invitations to this meeting were sent to builders, developers, architects and planning consultants involved in the construction of low-rise infill housing. The stakeholders were asked to circulate the invitation to industry colleagues who were not on the City s initial list. The January meeting was attended by 30 industry members. Resulting from the meeting, a group of ten individuals stepped forward to form an Industry Working Group to liaise with the City. In order to better represent their industry colleagues, the Working Group expanded to 16 members in September Over the course of this study, the City has held nine meetings and working sessions with the Industry Working Group. Four public meetings were held in February These were advertised via Public Service Announcements, through the City s website, as well as through communication with the affected Ward Councillors and community associations. The public meetings all followed the same format. Staff began by presenting a summary of the findings of the survey on infill housing and followed this with a range of possible ways to address negative current low-rise infill trends. Following the first meeting, all of the findings and possible solutions were posted to the project web pages and can be accessed at ottawa.ca/infill. The staff presentation was followed by a question and answer period, and then a working session where attendees were asked to provide feedback on the City s ideas, and to identify issues related to low-rise infill housing. The meeting attendance sheets were signed by over 250 people. In addition to the meeting working session, the City accepted input from stakeholders via , fax and letter up until March 16, A record of the significant level of participation and feedback was circulated to all attendees and also posted to the project web pages ottawa.ca/infill. In May of 2011, staff invited representatives from all of the registered community associations within the study area to a meeting in order to discuss the study. The purpose was to engage the community associations, and also to provide the associations with an opportunity to come together; ten community associations accepted the invitation. Over the course of this study, the City has held two working sessions with the representatives of the community associations that

14 11 elected to become involved in the study. Staff also met with the community associations individually upon request. Over the course of the study, there were two joint meetings between the Industry Working Group and the community association representatives. The purpose of these joint meetings was to have the two groups meet and better understand the issues that each is dealing with. A public meeting was held at City Hall in September This meeting was advertised in two local newspapers, on the project web site, through the ward councillors, and via to all public and industry stakeholders. Over 70 people signed the meeting attendance sheet. Staff presented a previously released draft of the proposed changes to infill construction within the study area. This was followed by a question and answer period where the public were able to address senior managers in attendance. Staff accepted comments on the proposed changes up until the end of September A summary of the participation and feedback was released to attendees and stakeholders in October. The information presented at the September meeting and a record of the feedback was posted to the project web pages and is available at ottawa.ca/infill. Following the September meeting and information release, staff held a number of internal and external meetings to further refine the proposed changes. The final proposed changes were released to the Industry Working Group and community association representatives for review in March Throughout the process of this study, staff accepted input from stakeholders and endeavoured to provide stakeholders with updates of the study progress. As noted above, staff met with the community associations individually upon request. Through these meetings important neighbourhood concerns were identified and this study has endeavoured to deal with them. However, due to its proximity to the University of Ottawa, Sandy Hill has particularly unique concerns specific to infill student housing. In the winter of 2012, Action Sandy Hill raised the issue of single infill houses being created to house large numbers of students (e.g. four apartments and upwards of 20 bedrooms per house). Within Sandy Hill, such houses have been created by working around the Site Plan Control process and therefore, questions such as parking and garbage storage were not addressed. As this situation appears to be unique to this area, and as the Infill Study does not address issues such as number of occupants or interior uses of buildings, properly addressing the Action Sandy Hill concerns would require additional study. Complete details of the public consultation are posted at ottawa.ca/infill. The document Record of Public Input, available on ottawa.ca/infill, outlines all of the information presented at the February 2011 meetings. It also includes a completed record of the public response to the information presented by the City and additionally identifies all of the other issues of concern raised by stakeholders at the sessions. Proposed changes (September 2011) identifies all of the changes to by-laws and procedures that the City presented at a September 2011 public meeting. The document Summary of Stakeholder Input (October 2011) outlines the stakeholder response to the City s September 2011 document and meeting.

15 12 COMMENTS BY THE WARD COUNCILLORS Councillor Chernushenko Capital Ward: I am fully in support of the excellent work and thoughtful recommendations contained in this report, which comes on the heels of extensive consultations, including with the public, community associations and developers. However, there is one recommendation that I feel is missing from this report, and which I may decide to address through a motion at Committee. I believe that it is appropriate and necessary to restrict front yard parking to lots with a minimum width of at least 5.6 metres. This would prevent excessive curb cuts (which eliminate the traffic calming effect of on-street parking) and would be an important measure for saving mature urban trees, preserving permeable and natural front yards and keeping cars out of front yards. Obviously, some larger and thornier problems also remain to be addressed (e.g. inappropriate building height, mass and scale) which will have to be dealt with in the not-too-distant future. Councillor Hobbs Kitchissippi Ward: I am in full support of this report, and am pleased to see it coming forward after almost two years of work on infill issues. The changes proposed to the Zoning By-Law and the Urban Design Guidelines will deliver more compatible development to our urban neighbourhoods right away. By making these changes part of the Zoning By-Law rather than just guidelines, this will ensure properties that do not require a minor variance or rezoning will also be more compatible. While some of the changes are not perfect, they do represent a balanced solution to a basket of problems that were not consistent across the city or even across my own ward. The direction to monitor the results of the changes and undertake a review within three years of Council approval is ideal as it will serve to provide a better guide for what further refinements should take place. I am especially thrilled with the improvements to the Urban Tree Conservation By-Law which will give the City the force it needs to save more mature trees that are one of the reason people are choosing to raise their families in mature neighbourhoods in the first place. This is why it is so important that we approve the budget for one FTE for the Forestry Services Branch. I would like to thank the entire Planning and Growth Management team that worked to help improve the way our urban wards intensify. Councillor Fleury is aware of this report. Councillor Clark is aware of this report. Councillor Holmes is aware of this report. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS The Planning Act requires that approval authorities such as the Council, staff through delegated authority, the Committee of Adjustment or the Ontario Municipal Board have regard for relevant policy documents such as design guidelines. Thus, such documents, while they are to be considered, are not binding and can only be applied if there is an application under the Planning Act. As discussed above, if all that is required is a Building Permit, the Chief Building Official does not have the legal ability to apply such documents. Therefore, to ensure that the principles

16 13 contained in design guidelines are applied where site plan, subdivision or Committee of Adjustment approval is not required, it is necessary to incorporate such principles into the Zoning By-law RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS No risks have been identified. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Recommendations 1 and 2: There are no direct financial implications. Recommendation 3: The proposed new tree planting fee revenues will fund tree planting costs. It is anticipated that there will be no net financial impact. Recommendation 4: The FTE, and associated funding, for the additional position in the Forestry Services branch will be brought forward as a budget pressure through the 2013 budget process. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS The new procedures related to the documentation of existing trees (see Document 4) are expected to improve the implementation of the Urban Tree Conservation By-Law, which will, in turn, support the City s urban forestry policies and percentage tree cover targets. ACCESSIBILITY IMPACTS There are no implications from an accessibility perspective. TECHNOLOGY IMPLICATIONS There are no direct technical implications associated with this report. CITY STRATEGIC PLAN This study supports the following priorities and objectives of the Strategic Plan. F1- Become leading edge in community and urban design including housing creation for those in the city living on low incomes and residents at large F2 Respect the existing urban fabric, neighbourhood form and the limits of existing hard services, so that new growth is integrated seamlessly with established communities SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION Document 1 Document 2 Document 3 Document 4 Document 5 Map of Study Area Zoning By-law changes, for R1, R2, R3 and R4 zones, within the study area Urban Design Guidelines for Low-Rise Infill Housing Changes to City submission requirements and procedures, the Urban Tree Conservation By-law and the Drainage By-law Comparison of City of Toronto Zoning By-law , the City of Ottawa ZBL , and Document 2

17 14 DISPOSITION Planning and Growth Management Department to undertake the follow-up implementation measures that are its responsibility: Legislative and Technical Services Unit to prepare the by-law adopting the Zoning By-law Amendments, forward to Legal Services, and undertake the statutory notification Notify persons who made oral or written submissions at Planning Committee and all persons and public bodies who requested to be notified of the amendments. Community Planning and Urban Design Unit to e-publish the Urban Design Guidelines for Low-Rise Infill Housing and notify all affected City departments Community Planning and Urban Design, assisted by other departments as required, to implement the actions and changes outlined in Document 4 Planning and Growth Management Department to undertake the following as a follow up to this report: Complete a study, within one year of Council approval of this report, of the zoning provisions related to building height and setbacks in the R1, R2, R3 and R4 zones in the study area, to determine if additional changes are required to improve the compatibility of new infill; Within two years, determine if the Zoning By-law changes brought forward in this report should be applied, in whole or in part, to other areas of the city that are subject to increasing low-rise infill housing; and Monitor the results of the changes resulting from recommendations 1, 2 and 3; and to, within three years of Council approval of this report, undertake a complete review of all infill within the study area built under the new changes. Public Works Department to undertake the follow-up implementation measures that are its responsibility: Forestry Services to prepare the by-law adopting the Urban Tree Conservation By-law Amendments, forward to Legal Services, and undertake any statutory notification Forestry Services to add one FTE as a budget pressure for Environmental Services Department to undertake the follow-up implementation measures that are its responsibility: Prepare the by-law adopting the Drainage By-law Amendments, forward to Legal Services, and undertake any necessary statutory notification. City Clerk and Solicitor s Department to forward all implementing by-laws to City Council.

18 15 DOCUMENT 1

19 16 ZONING BY-LAW CHANGES, FOR R1, R2, R3 and R4 ZONES, IN THE STUDY AREA DOCUMENT 2 General Provisions: Application (see endnote 1): These provisions apply only to a lot: o within the R1, R2, R3 or R4 zones shown on Schedule X (see diagram below); and, o on which a new residential use building containing a detached, semi-detached, linked-detached, duplex, three-unit or multiple attached dwelling is constructed Parking No parking space is required and Section 101 Minimum Parking Space Rates and Section 102 Minimum Visitor Parking Space Rates do not apply. Section 107 Aisle and Driveway Provisions and Section 109 Location of Parking, do not apply The door of an attached garage, that is at or below grade, may not face the front lot line unless otherwise permitted below (see endnote 2). A carport may not face the front lot line unless otherwise permitted below. Where the required lot width is less than 12m in width, the minimum combined parking/driveway/walkway width is 2.2 metres and the maximum width is 3.0 metres. Where the required lot width is 12m or greater, the maximum combined parking space/driveway/walkway width is 6m. All areas not covered with soft landscaping, such as driveways, parking spaces and walkways must be contiguous. A walkway within a front yard may be a maximum of 1.25m in width, where no driveway or front yard parking space is provided in the front yard (see endnote 3). On-site parking is not permitted for secondary dwelling units. If more than one parking space is provided on a lot, neither parking space may be located in the front yard.

20 17 Front yard parking A maximum of one front yard parking space is permitted per lot (see endnote 4). Where one front yard parking space is provided, no other parking space may be provided on the lot. The entire front yard parking space must be accommodated on the lot. The front yard parking space must be between 4.6 and 6m in length (see endnote 5). The parking space must abut one side property line. The maximum recess of the first floor from the front yard lot line is 6m. Despite the above: Where the rear lot line of a lot other than a corner lot abuts a public lane (as defined in the Zoning Bylaw) the parking space must be: o located in the rear yard; and, o accessed only by a driveway from the public lane Where the lot is a corner lot the parking space may only be: o o located in the rear yard or corner side yard; and accessed only by a driveway from the public street abutting the corner or rear lot line or from the public lane. Permitted projections into required yard setbacks The maximum permitted projection into the front yard is to be the average of the existing setback of the projections of the adjacent existing homes (one on either side) fronting on the same street. On a corner lot, the maximum permitted projection into the front yard is to be the average of the existing abutting property and the amount permitted by the zoning by-law under Table 65. Landscaping All areas of a required or provided front yard or corner side yard not occupied by a driveway, walkway, parking space, accessory building or accessory structure, or permitted projections, must be landscaped with soft landscaping, defined as per the zoning by-law soft landscaping consisting of vegetation such as trees, shrubs, hedges, ornamental plantings, grass and ground cover. Front yard setback (see endnote 6) The minimum required front yard setback is to be the average of the existing front yard setbacks of the adjacent existing homes (one on either side) fronting on the same street On a corner lot, the front yard setback is the average of the required setback of the underlying zone and the existing setback of the adjacent neighbour. Existing Average Grade (see endnote 7) Building height shall be measured as the vertical distance from existing average grade. Existing average grade shall be calculated prior to any site alterations and shall be used to determine permitted building height, as follows: On lots subject to these provisions grade is to be calculated as follows: o On an interior lot or through lot: The average of grade elevations taken at all the corners of the lot and two additional (2) grade elevations which are taken at the points of intersection of the street centerline and the projections of the side lot lines. (A) o On a corner lot: The average of grade elevations taken at all of the corners of the lot and four additional (4) grade elevations which are taken at the centerline of the streets on which the lot has frontage. two (2) grade elevations shall be taken at the points of intersection of the street centerline and the projections of the side lot lines. (A) One (1) grade elevation shall be taken at the points of intersection of the street centerline and the projection of the front lot line; (B) and, One (1) grade elevation shall be taken at the points of intersection of the street

21 18 centerline and the rear lot line (C).

22 19 Permitted Rooftop Projection Above Maximum Height Limit (see endnote 8) All permitted projections located on the roof must be set back a minimum of 1 m from the exterior perimeter of the roof (Note that projection does not have to be setback from a shared lot line between dwelling units in a semi, linked or multiple attached. Parapets of 20 in height or less and chimneys do not have to be set back from the exterior perimeter of the roof). Despite the provisions in Section 64 Permitted Projections about the Height Limit, all permitted projections above the permitted height limit: o must not exceed 3.0 metres in height (see endnote 9); and, o the combined area may not be greater than a total of 11 square metres. The eaves of the permitted projection may extend a maximum of 1 m beyond the exterior wall of the permitted projection. Accessibility None of the requirements in this section shall prevent the construction of a parking space, driveway, walkway or accessibility ramp in order to provide access for the physically disabled. Such paved areas and ramps shall be treated as though they meet the requirements of this by-law. Where the required minimum lot width is less than 7.6 metres: Parking No parking is required and the door of an attached garage may not face a front lot line A carport may not face a front lot line The parking space may be located in any yard Landscaping Any area of the front yard or corner side yard not used for a parking space, driveway, or permitted projection must be landscaped with soft landscaping Front Wall: A minimum of 30% of the area of the ground floor part of the front wall must consist of windows. A glass door does not count towards the calculation of 30%. The only doorway permitted in the front wall of a dwelling is an entrance door to the dwelling Where the required minimum lot width is 7.6 metres or greater: Parking Parking is not required A carport or the door of an attached garage may not face a front lot line, except in the case of: o a detached, semi-detached, linked-detached or multiple attached dwelling, if the width of the garage or carport measured at the widest point between its interior walls is equal to 50% or less of the width o of the front elevation of the principal dwelling unit; a three-unit dwelling or a duplex dwelling if the total width of the all garage or carports measured at the widest points between their interior walls is equal to 50% or less of the width of the entire building. Despite the maximum allowance of one parking space when located within the front yard, vehicles may be parked in the front yard when located on a driveway leading to a parking space. Garages and carports must be recessed a minimum of 1 m from the front wall of the dwelling. Landscaping Any area of the front yard or corner side yard not used for a parking space, driveway, or permitted projections must be landscaped with soft landscaping. Transition Provision: S.139 (X) (a) If a completed application for any one or more of : (i) Committee of Adjustment approval;

23 20 (ii) (iii) (iv) site plan control approval, including an extension of site plan control approval; payment in lieu of parking agreement; or part lot control approval. was received on or after February 1, 2011 and prior to April 25, 2012 the complete application, as well as any subsequent application listed in (i) to (iv) above submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit, are exempt from the provisions of Section 139 and will be processed in accordance with the zoning regulations and provisions in place prior to April 25, (b) For the purposes of clause 139 (X) (a), completed application means an application which would have been approved or granted on April 24, 2012 had it been processed or disposed of on that day. (c) Nothing in this by-law applies so as to continue the exemption provided by this subsection beyond the issuance of the approval upon which the exemption is founded; and in no case does the exemption continue beyond the repeal of this subsection. (d) Once the permit or approval resulting from the processing of the application noted in clause (a) has been granted, the provisions of this by-law in place on or after April 25, 2012 apply to the land in question. (e) Subsection 139 (X) is repealed two years from the date of enactment. Endnotes: (1) The identified area was the subject of a visual survey of infill housing in the summer of Many of the neighbourhoods were developed pre-war, are well established and have a distinctive character. They are also seeing the largest amount of low-rise infill within the City. To conduct the survey, the City assembled a list of building permits issued for low-rise residential infill between January 2005 and the end of June, This amounted to over 400 properties; these were visited and photographed. Although there is community interest in expanding the area of application, the City believes that prior to study of the infill patterns in the neighbourhoods, it is impossible to extend the area of application. (2) The majority of the neighbourhoods within the study area were developed without attached front garages or with front garages that take up a limited percentage of the total lot frontage. This means that the greater percentage of the frontage is devoted to built form that includes doors, windows, porches and stoops that create a positive relationship between the structure and the street; as compared to blank garage doors which have a poor interface with the street. This poor condition becomes exacerbated as lots become narrower and more constrained. Removal of a garage or carport in favour of other parking solutions is meant to encourage improvements to the interface between ground floor and street activity. By removing the garage or carport door, the potential exists to create street-facing, ground floor living space in its place. Note that a garage constructed on a corner side frontage, or detached and at the rear of the property is permitted to have doors facing the street. (3) This provision addresses the case where a driveway/ parking spot is at the side or rear and does not provide access to a front door. The intent behind the provision is to allow access to a front door but to ensure that the hard surface walkway is not wide enough to park on and to maintain a large percentage of soft surface area in the front yard. (4) The intention behind allowing front yard parking is to provide more options around how and where cars can be stored on a lot. In certain instances and in certain neighbourhoods, front yard parking is seen as more desirable than an attached garage or carport because, allowing for front yard parking can permit a building façade that is more in keeping with established character of the neighbourhoods in question. In comparison to driveway access to rear yard parking, front yard parking can reduce the amount of paved area on a lot and thereby provide more potential for contributions to surface water infiltration. Where the designer/builder selects to build the driveway/ parking spot/walkway using permeable surfaces, there will be further contributions to surface water infiltration. (5) In the Zoning By-law, the minimum length of a parking spot is 5.2 meters. The provision allows front yard parking spots from meters in length. The longer lengths are permitted so that situations where cars overhang the sidewalk or curb can be avoided. Where there is a narrow distance between the property line and curb or sidewalk, the length of the spot should be increased beyond the 5.2 meter minimum.

24 21 (6) There are neighbourhoods where the existing and dominant front yard setback depth is greater than what is permitted in the current Zoning By-law and where the by-law permissions are not reflective of the pattern and character of the neighbourhood. The intention of this provision is to take a contextual approach to establishing setback in order to ensure greater compatibility between the front yard setbacks of infill and existing homes, and to allow for projections such as porches that would also reflect established character. (7) The manipulation of site grading can lead to significant grade differences between the infill and surrounding lots. The overall building height should reflect the prevailing context of neighbouring buildings, with a maximum height limit identified in the applicable zoning by-law; the intention behind the new definition of grade is to ensure that this occurs on a more regular basis. The current definition of grade is ambiguous as it does not indicate where grade is to be measured or how many points must be included in the calculation. The new proposed definition is based on known and static points that can be measured and would not change based on the proposed placement of a building on a lot or with the shape of a building footprint. The new definition provides clarity with regards to the number of points required in the calculation and where these are to be taken. A calculation based on points on the property line should result in less chance of site alteration, and thus more chance that site grades will reflect adjacent lots. A calculation that includes points on the street centreline, should also ensure that the grade calculation is reflective of the immediate context. (8) Projections above the building height limit have the potential for adverse impacts of overlook and privacy, as well as access to sunlight. However, projections which provide access to a roof decks are permitted as of right in the Zoning By-law. Currently, the Zoning By-law does not specify the permitted area, the permitted height or a definition of what constitutes habitable space. The intent behind the new provisions is to add direction to what is permitted with regards to projections which provide access to roof decks. The provisions continue to permit projections but require that these focus on serving the intended function, which is to provide access, but not more. (9) Chimneys are exempt from the height limit.

25 22 DOCUMENT 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Ottawa by Design 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose and Objectives 1.2 The Official Plan 1.3 Intensification 1.4 When are Design Guidelines applied? 2.0 Streetscapes 3.0 Landscape 4.0 Building Design (Built Form) 4.1 Siting 4.2 Mass/Height 4.3 Architectural Style and Facades 5.0 Parking & Garages 6.0 Heritage Building Alterations/Additions 7.0 Service Elements 8.0 Infill on Narrow Lots 9.0 Glossary 10.0 Appendix: How Design Guidelines fit with the current Development Approval process

26 Introduction This is a series of design guidelines for infill housing to help fulfill some of the design strategies for Ottawa as outlined in the Official Plan. It is intended as a basic framework for the physical layout, massing, functioning and relationships of infill buildings to their neighbours. Infill housing is about the development of vacant lots or portions of vacant lots in established urban areas. A vacant lot may have been vacant historically, created by a severance, or result from demolition, fire and/or some other means. Infill optimizes the efficient use of serviced lands adjacent to existing infrastructure and transportation modes. Design guidelines are a working tool to help developers, designers, property owners, utility providers, community groups, builders, Council and City staff implement policies of the Official Plan and facilitate the approvals process by highlighting the desired type of development. Applicants are encouraged to use the guidelines to come up with ideas to further improve urban infill. Note that not all of the individual design guidelines listed in this document apply or are appropriate in every infill situation and thus, the guidelines are not to be used as a checklist in evaluating proposals. Well-designed residential infill projects can integrate harmoniously into a local landscape, improving and enriching a neighbourhood, and increasing the value of the infill development itself. Good design is critical to growing cities and essential for increasing densities appropriately. The keys to good infill are recognizing the scale and visual lot pattern of the desirable neighbourhoods that exist, and those planned for the future, and not permitting the car to dominate the public realm. Designing for the needs of pedestrians and cyclists, and integrating the car appropriately into a planned urban environment, improves the quality of the city streetscape and helps create liveable cities. Liveable communities consist of a balanced environment where pedestrians, cyclists and automobiles exist supportively together to create a sense of place and local identity. These guidelines target those attributes that can guide various stakeholders into achieving quality design for infill development with regard to: Public streetscapes Landscape Building design Parking and garages Heritage building alterations/additions Service elements 1.1 Purpose and Objectives In general, the aim of the guidelines is to help create infill development that will: Enhance streetscapes Support and extend established landscaping Be a more compact urban form to consume less land and natural resources Achieve a good fit into an existing neighbourhood, respecting its character, and its architectural and landscape heritage Provide new housing designs that offer variety, quality and a sense of identity Emphasize front doors and windows rather than garages Include more soft landscaping and less asphalt in front yards Create at grade living spaces that promote interaction with the street Incorporate environmental innovation and sustainability In so doing, these design guidelines highlight the important elements of building in a civic-minded spirit. Pursuing a comprehensive design strategy, entitled Ottawa by Design, these guidelines serve to fulfill the Official Plan s objectives in the area of community design. The Plan directs growth to established areas, to maximize the use of land that is already serviced, accessible and close to existing amenities. Intensifying empty lots with infill development will become a

27 24 more common occurrence, and good design will be the essential ingredient for achieving quality development at higher densities. The guidelines are intended to address the small-scale changes in a neighbourhood, but are also meant to deal with more substantive changes to achieve a good fit within an established context. Design direction is offered to assist people who are proposing change and also help those evaluating proposals through the development review process, to assess, promote, and achieve appropriate infill. In addition, neighbourhood residents and interested stakeholders can see what the expectations are for infill development, and thereby obtain a better understanding of how development proposals will be evaluated. To facilitate the approvals process, builders can get practical ideas and guidance on important design ingredients for building in established communities prior to starting the design of their project. 1.2 The Official Plan The Design Objectives of this Plan are qualitative statements of how the City wants to influence the built environment as the city matures and evolves. These Design Objectives are broadly stated, and are to be applied within all land use designations, either at city-wide level or on a site-specific basis. (Excerpt from the Official Plan) Design Objectives (Section of the Official Plan) To enhance the sense of community by creating and maintaining places with their own distinct identity To define quality public and private spaces through development To create places that are safe, accessible and are easy to get to, and move through To ensure that new development respects the character of existing areas To consider adaptability and diversity by creating places that can adapt and evolve easily over time and that are characterized by variety and choice. To understand and respect natural processes and features in development design To maximize energy-efficiency and promote sustainable design to reduce the resource consumption, energy use, and carbon footprint of the built environment. Figure 1: New development in an existing area combines both new and traditional materials in innovative ways. Urban Design and Compatibility (Section of the Official Plan) Community design generally deals with patterns and locations of land use, relative densities, street networks, and the allocation of community services and facilities. Urban design is more concerned with the details relating to how buildings, landscapes and adjacent public spaces look and function together. As the City grows and changes over time, design of these elements should work together to complement or enhance the unique aspects of a community s history, landscape and its culture. Encouraging good urban design and quality and innovative architecture can also stimulate the creation of lively community places with distinctive character that will attract people and investment to the City. The components of our communities where urban design plays a key role include:

28 25 Built form, including buildings, structures, bridges, signs, fences, fountains, statues and anything else that has been constructed, added or created on a piece of land; Open spaces, including streets, parks, plazas, courtyards, front yards, woodlots, natural areas and any other natural or green open areas that relate to the structure of the city; Infrastructure, including, sidewalks, bike paths, transit corridors, hydro lines, streetlights, parking lots or any other above- or below-grade infrastructure that impacts upon the design of the public realm. Introducing new development in existing areas that have developed over a long period of time requires a sensitive approach and a respect for a communities established characteristics. In general terms, compatible development means development that, although it is not necessarily the same as or similar to existing buildings in the vicinity, nonetheless enhances an established community and coexists with existing development without causing undue adverse impact on surrounding properties. It fits well within its physical context and works well among those functions that surround it. Generally speaking, the more a new development can incorporate the common characteristics of its setting in its design, the more compatible it will be. Nevertheless, a development can be designed to fit and work well in a certain existing context without being the same as the existing development. Urban Design and Compatibility (Section 4.11 of the Official Plan) At the scale of neighbourhoods or individual properties, issues such as noise, spillover of light, accommodation of parking and access, shadowing, and micro-climatic conditions are prominent considerations when assessing the relationships between new and existing development. Often, to arrive at compatibility of scale and use will demand a careful design response, one that appropriately addresses the impact generated by infill or intensification. Objective criteria that can be used to evaluate compatibility include: height, bulk or mass, scale relationship, and building/lot relationships, such as the distance or setback from the street, and the distance between buildings. An assessment of the compatibility of new development will involve not only consideration of built form, but also of operational characteristics, such as traffic, access, and parking. 1.3 Infill and Intensification Infill is development that occurs on a single lot, or a consolidated number of small lots, on sites that are vacant, undeveloped or where demolition occurs. Infill may also refer to the creation of the lot or lots. Infill development at higher densities, in relation to existing neighbours, requires good design to mitigate the potential impact of intensified building forms. Residential intensification means intensification of a property, building or area that results in a net increase in residential units or accommodation and includes: Redevelopment (the creation of new units, uses or lots on previously developed land in existing communities), including the redevelopment of Brownfield sites; The development of vacant or underutilised lots within previously developed areas; Infill development; The conversion or expansion of existing industrial, commercial, and institutional buildings for residential use; and The conversion or expansion of existing residential buildings to create new residential units or accommodation, including secondary dwelling units and rooming houses. The benefits of intensification (from CMHC S Healthy Housing 2005 ) are: More efficient use of existing infrastructure and community facilities Reduced expense on entirely new infrastructure and transit systems Lower energy requirements for transportation due to reduced automobile travel and more opportunities for public transport, walking and cycling Reduced commuting time and stress on the environment More compact development patterns protect greenspaces Reduced rate of encroachment on undeveloped areas

29 26 Reduced water collection costs in clustered and more dense development Lower water treatment costs with larger treatment plants serving more homes Mixed dwelling types encourage people to stay in the same community as their housing needs change 1.4 When are Design Guidelines applied? Design guidelines are a tool to help achieve the Official Plan s goals in the areas of design and compatibility; they help implement Official Plan policies with respect to the review of development applications for infill development. This design guideline document will be applied to all infill development affected by the Official Plan s General Urban designation including the following residential types: single detached, semi-detached, duplex, triples, townhouses and low-rise apartments. Please also refer to Section 8.0 of this document, which explains the legislative context under which the guidelines can be applied. The design guidelines that follow illustrate some of the important principles for design in the public realm. The photographs and sketches are intended to illustrate only a few of the multitude of solutions for successful infill development. Note that not all components of every photograph illustrate successful solutions. As new projects are constructed, some photographs may be replaced from time to time with photographs which better illustrate the guidelines in this document. The City s Design Guidelines are available at: ex.html 2.0 Streetscapes The public realm is made up of the public streets, sidewalks, boulevards, back lanes, street furniture, public utilities parks and open spaces. Civic life takes place in these outdoor spaces that make up the public realm. In addition, private front yards form the edge of the public realm. Both landowner and pedestrian benefit when the front yards of buildings serve as landscaped edges to the public sidewalk. New development should contribute to the character and legibility of public spaces, and new streets should form natural, logical extensions of the existing city street network. Cities are for people, and when the environment is designed with a respect for pedestrians and cyclists, the quality of the public realm improves. For healthy cities development must make public streetscapes attractive to pedestrians, with trees and planting a priority. Sustainable cities have beautiful large-canopied trees lining their sidewalks, providing natural cooling and shade in the summer. Where neighbourhoods have diverse building forms and a less-than-successful urban environment, infill buildings can fulfill the role of creating newer and more desirable standards which can enhance the streetscape. Design Guidelines 2.1 Contribute to an inviting, safe, and accessible streetscape by emphasizing the ground floor and street façade of infill buildings. Locate principal entries, windows, porches and key internal uses at street level.

30 27 Figure 2: Buildings, with active facades close to the sidewalk, frame the street to establish a human scale and connection to the public realm. 2.2 Reflect the desirable aspects of the established streetscape character. If the streetscape character and pattern is less desirable, with asphalt parking lots and few trees lining the street, build infill which contributes to a more desirable pedestrian character and landscape pattern. Figure 3: The infill building on the left reflects the style, mass and character of the existing building on the right. A soft landscape edge has been retained and new trees, which will contribute to the streetscape, have been planted. Figure 4: A sidewalk lined with trees is a pleasant pedestrian environment Figure 5: A row of street trees creates an attractive street edge.

31 Expand the network of public sidewalks, pathways and crosswalks, to enhance pedestrian safety. 2.4 Provide pedestrian-scale lighting that points downward in order to minimize light pollution and prevent spillage onto neighbouring properties. (Refer to the City s Standard Site Plan Agreement, Schedule C - City Standards and Specifications, under Condition 19 - Exterior Lighting) 2.5 Preserve and enhance any existing decorative paving on streets and sidewalks. 2.6 Design universally accessible walkways, from private entrances to public sidewalks. 2.7 Ensure that new streets, if private, look, feel, function and provide similar amenities as do public streets, including sidewalks and street trees. 3.0 Landscape Design guidelines Landscape the front yard and right-of-way to blend with the landscape pattern and materials of the surrounding homes. Where surrounding yards are predominantly soft surface, reflect this character Figure 6: The newly planted front yard of this infill home reflects the green front yards of the surrounding homes. 3.2 Where the soft surface boulevard in the right-of-way is limited, increase front yard setbacks to allow more room for tree planting. 3.3 Design buildings and parking solutions to retain established trees located in the right-of-way, on adjacent properties, and on the infill site. To ensure survival, trenching for services and foundations must take into account the extent of the tree s critical root zone. Replace trees with new ones if removal is justifiable.

32 29 Figures 7 and 8: These images show how trees can be retained when driveways and building footprints are sited carefully. 3.4 Provide street trees in continuous planting pits or in clusters to support healthy growth. Where the available soil volume and planting area is limited (less that 9m 2 per tree), use materials and planting techniques (e.g. permeable paving, Silva Cells or similar planting systems) that improve tree growth conditions and limit the impacts of soil compaction and road salt. 3.5 Plant trees, shrubs, and ground cover adjacent to the public street and sidewalk for an attractive sidewalk edge. Select hardy, salt-tolerant native plant material that can thrive in challenging urban conditions. (General information on native species can be found on the Ottawa Forest and Greenspace Advisory Committee s web pages Figure 9: Planted edges, on public or private land, enhance the public sidewalk and streetscape. 3.6 For energy conservation, plant deciduous trees to shade south and south-west windows from the summer sun. 3.7 Support sustainability and improve environmental performance by creating landscaped green roofs that are functional and have aesthetic value.

33 In order to enhance a sense of separation when infill is close to the street, use planting and/or low fencing to define the boundary between the public space of the street and the semi-public space of the front yard. 4.0 Building Design (Built Form) Infill development by its nature is contemporary construction within an historic context, a stylistic blending of new with existing. The existing context, character and pattern of an established neighbourhood can be recognized, while at the same time, allow for the evolution of architectural style and innovation in built form. Infill development should be a desirable addition to an existing neighbourhood. This does not mean imitating historical styles and fashions of another era, or conversely creating a total contrast in fabric or materials, but rather recognizing the established scale and pattern of the context and the grain of the neighbourhood. The goal of good infill development can be met within any architectural style. Residential infill should meet current building requirements and incorporate new technologies. Various architectural styles can be very compatible with existing structures and spaces. Through the use of quality materials and innovative design, contemporary architectural styles can revitalize a street. Built form rich in detail enhances public streets and spaces. Design Guidelines 4.1 Siting Ensure new infill faces and animates the public streets. Ground floors with principal entries, windows, porches and key internal uses at street level and facing onto the street, contribute to the animation, safety and security of the street Locate and build infill in a manner that reflects the existing or desirable planned neighbourhood pattern of development in terms of building height, elevation and the location of primary entrances, the elevation of the first floor, yard encroachments such as porches and stair projections, as well as front, rear, and side yard setbacks. Figure 10: This urban infill matches the setbacks of surrounding homes and preserves an established tree. The front door faces the street, the ground floor elevation matches that of the neighbours and the large first floor window contributes to an animated and safe street.

34 31 Figure 11: This suburban infill respects the scale, setback and materials of surrounding homes. The home takes advantage of a corner lot by locating the garage and driveway on the side façade In determining infill lot sizes, recognize local lot sizes including lot width, as well as the existing relationship between lot size, yard setbacks and the scale of homes; recognize also the provisions of the Zoning By-law and the Official Plan s intensification policies Orient buildings so that their amenity spaces do not require sound attenuation walls and that noise impacts are minimized. Design amenity areas such as second floor balconies and roof top decks to respect the privacy of the surrounding homes In cases where there is a uniform setback along a street, match this setback in order to fit into the neighbourhood pattern and create a continuous, legible edge to the public street. In cases where there is no uniform setback, locate the infill building at roughly the same distance from the property line as the buildings along the abutting lots Contribute to the amenity, safety and enjoyment of open spaces by offering living spaces that face them. Figure 12: Living spaces facing onto public pathways support the quality of an open space Avoid the arrangement of units where the front of one dwelling faces the back of another, unless the units in the back row have façades rich in detail, recessed garages and extensive landscaping.

35 32 Figures 13 and 14: These two rows of infill townhomes, built around an internal parking court, use extensive landscaping to enhance the development. Generous balconies predominate over recessed garages. Figure 15: The back row units, in the same development shown in Figures 13 and 14, offer attractive landscaping, enhanced front entrances, large balconies and recessed garages Determine appropriate side and rear separation distances between existing homes and new infill homes/ infill housing blocks to ensure appropriate light, view, and privacy. Consider how building height, site orientation and the location of windows affect views, access to direct sunlight and privacy.

36 33 Figure 16: An adequate separation distance between infill blocks, on this rear private lane, ensures sufficient light, view and privacy for residents. Richly detailed rear balconies and arbours define outdoor amenity areas, while complementary screening and planting increase privacy Maintain rear yard amenity space that is generally consistent with the pattern of the neighbouring homes. Do not break an existing neighbourhood pattern of green rear yards by reducing rear yard setbacks Permit varied front yard setbacks if this preserves and integrates existing natural features, such as mature trees or rock outcroppings, or if this is consistent with the cultural landscape of the neighbourhood. Note: some neighbourhoods enjoy consistent setbacks, others are characterized by irregular setbacks Respect the grades and characteristic first floor heights of the neighbourhood by not artificially raising or lowering grades Position infill to take advantage of solar heat and reflected light. Create a layout where internal and external spaces benefit from solar orientation. 4.2 Mass/Height Design infill in a manner that contributes to the quality of the streetscape, and that considers the impacts of scale and mass on the adjacent surrounding homes. Figure 17: The height, width, materials and landscape treatment of this infill echo the existing units on either side In cases where new buildings back on to lower-scale residential properties or public open space, set the building(s) so that it does not project into a 45 degree angular plane from the rear property line, in order to reduce the impact of the potential loss of sunlight or privacy on neighbouring properties. (A 45 degree angular plane is measured from a rear lot line and projects at a 45 degree angle toward the development.) For larger infill development, design within an appropriate angular plane, and provide a suitable buffer zone in order to protect a neighbour s access to adequate light, view and privacy.

37 34 Figure 18: Building within angular planes protects existing neighbour s privacy and access to sunlight Where the new development is higher than the existing buildings, create a transition in building heights through the harmonization and manipulation of mass. Add architectural features such as porches and bays, and use materials, colours and textures, to visually reduce the height and mass of the new building Locate roof projections, which provide access to decks and patios, so that height impacts are reduced To reduce the perceived height of the building, as contributed to by the parapet around a roof top use, consider materials such as frosted plexiglass which reduce height impacts and at the same time maintain a level of privacy If the new development is significantly larger than the existing adjacent buildings, create a transition in building widths by visually dividing the building into smaller sections that approximate the width of the neighbours, and by scaling down the height as it approaches the neighbours. 4.3 Architectural Style and Facades Design all sides of a building that face public streets and open spaces to a similar level of quality and detail. Avoid large blank walls that are visible from the street, other public spaces, or adjacent properties. Figure 19: The curved façade, echoed by the curved arbour, creates a unique corner treatment that adds interest to the public realm. The significant glazing contributes to community surveillance Design infill to be rich in detail and to enhance public streets and spaces, while also responding to the established patterns of the street and neighbourhood. To appropriately transition into an established neighbourhood, incorporate elements from the neighbourhood such as: Materials, patterns and colours used in wall treatments Cornice lines, form of the roofline and chimney details Size, shape, placement and number of doors and windows The pattern and location of projections, recesses, front porches, stoops, and balconies Figure 20: These townhouses pick up on the materials and colours of the existing residences while at the same time incorporating more modern design elements.

38 Provide primary building entrances that are inviting and visible from the street by: Using quality and eye-catching materials and features at the entry Adding architectural elements such as porches which promote street-oriented interaction Keeping front doors prominent and close to the ground to match the pattern of the doors on the street, and to minimize exterior stairs for accessibility, as well as to ease year-round maintenance Where the front door does not face the street, use architectural detailing, lighting and landscape design to clearly indicate the location and route to the front door. Figure 21: A covered porch articulates the front façade and highlights the entrance to this home Ensure that when one or more units are constructed on adjacent properties, they are compatible with each other and with the existing fabric on street. At the same time, design the infill units with distinguishing characteristics (e.g. different materials, colours, rooflines, windows and door treatments) so that they have distinct identities. Figures 22: This semi-detached home is designed so that the two units are compatible but not identical to each other Locate front doors at an elevation that reflects the dominant and desirable pattern of door heights in the neighbourhood. A first floor elevation that is the average of that of the surrounding homes,

39 36 allows for better compatibility with the neighbourhood pattern of doors, entries, porches and landscape Where they are in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood, add front yard projections, such as porches, bay windows and balconies, to enhance the façade of the infill and contribute to the sociability of the street. Figures 23 and 24: Front doors and windows close to grade offer an attractive edge to the public sidewalk. Lowering the elevation of the first floor reduces the need for stair projections thereby allowing for maximum soft surface front yard area Use the past to inform approaches to design; reinterpret local vernacular in a contemporary way. Figure 25: This semi-detached infill unites two different architectural styles. The renovated unit on the left is attached to the contemporary middle unit but reflects the form and character of the existing single-detached red brick home. The contemporary unit adopts the colours of the renovated unit to blend into the streetscape Harmonize with the traditional materials of the neighbourhood when in the context of a heritage streetscape.

40 Parking and Garages Create infill that supports the quality of the public streetscape and enriches the pedestrian experience. To preserve liveable city streets, a high quality built environment is as important a consideration as the need for parking and servicing. Buildings define the edges and richness of a public space. If a house presents only a garage door as its primary face on the public street, the result is a loss of a quality environment for the neighbourhood. A pedestrian s enjoyment of these city spaces diminishes if the pattern of blank garage faces repeats itself down the length of a city street. A garage must not dominate any façade facing a street, public space or other residential dwelling. Soft landscaping should prevail for its aesthetic and environmental value. The goal is to design safe and environmentally friendly communities with an appropriate interface between pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles. Design guidelines: 5.1 Limit the area occupied by driveways and parking spaces to allow for greater amounts of soft landscape in the front and rear yard. Reduce the width and length of driveways and parking spots, and use permeable pavers to minimize the visual and environmental impacts of hard surface areas. 5.2 Where driveways and walkways abut, use contrasting materials to distinguish and highlight the walkway to front door. Figure 26: The use of different paving materials distinguishes the parking surface from the walkway to the principal entry. 5.3 In order to minimize paved surface area and pedestrian/vehicular conflicts at the sidewalk, and to maximize room for soft landscaping and on-street parking, build shared underground parking that is contained within the site when multiple units are proposed. (Photo to be added) 5.4 In order to maximize the area of green front yard and to emphasize the dwelling façade, provide driveways to detached rear garages or parking areas, when these parking solutions are in keeping with the neighbourhood character.

41 38 Figure 27: This detached rear garage fits with the neighbourhood parking pattern and permits more front yard landscaping. 5.5 In neighbourhoods with open rear public lanes and on corner lots, provide parking in the rear with access from the lane or flanking street. Figures 28 and 29: A single shared access driveway for multiple units matches the neighbourhood pattern of parking at the back. A single vehicular access reduces vehicle/pedestrian conflict, allows for more soft landscaping in the front yard, and permits more on-street parking.

42 39 Figure 30: The design of this infill minimizes the impact of car storage by locating shared parking behind the development, internal to the site and accessed through a low entryway. 5.6 Where access to a garage is at the front, design infill so that the proportional relationship between the width of the garage and the width of the lot is similar to the pattern of the neighbourhood. For example, if front garages occupy 25% of the lot frontage of existing homes, reflect this characteristic in the proposed infill home. 5.8 Limit the number and width of access depressions (curb cuts), and share driveways in order to maintain as much on-street parking as possible. 5.9 Avoid sloped driveways to the basement garages of detached and semi-detached houses, to avoid creating a pit in the front yard and/or at the street edge Where front garages are permitted, recess garages behind the front façade and make windows, projecting balconies, living space and landscaping the dominant elements facing the public streetscape. Figure 31: The architectural detailing on this semi-detached residence highlights the structure and not the garage and covered parking spot. Each half is also architecturally distinctly different from the other Limit the width of front yard parking in order to retain the maximum amount of soft landscape area in the front yard In order to increase the amount of surface water infiltration, in particular on narrow lots where paved areas occupy a large percentage of the yard, use permeable paving for hard surface areas (e.g. parking spots, walkways, driveways). Turfblock, cobblestone, honeycomb block, and wheel strips, that are hard, stable and dust resistant, can all be used as alternatives to conventional paving.

43 40 Figure 32: Wheel strips provide a stable base for vehicles; an unpaved gravel driveway allows for increased infiltration. Figure 33: Turf block provides a stable base for parking while increasing on-site infiltration of surface water. 6.0 Heritage Building Alterations/Additions Revitalizing and adding on to existing buildings is a fundamental principle of city building. Older structures, with updated interiors, rejuvenated exteriors, new uses and added facilities, are good neighbours. As familiar landmarks in the community, they represent prudent development and conserve the environment through reduced landfill. Heritage buildings require special attention and are covered under their own legislation under the Ontario Heritage Act. Design guidelines: 6.1 Respect the municipal and provincial policies specifically related to additions and infill associated with heritage buildings and areas: City of Ottawa OP Sections: , and and the Provincial Policy Statement, 2.6 Cultural Heritage. (OP policy specifically ties into design guidelines that form part of heritage conservation district studies. Since many older residential parts of former Ottawa are part of designated heritage conservation districts, the district studies and the guidelines contained therein are relevant.) 6.2 Complement the character and style of the existing building as well as the attributes of the surrounding area. 6.3 Respect and conserve the heritage value when introducing a new addition to an historic building and/or place. 6.4 Use materials and finishes that are predominant in a neighbourhood with heritage character. Traditional materials and finishes, rather than simply the traditional building form, can be used as an effective mechanism to balance new with old. Select colours and materials that enhance, or harmonize with, the existing character of development in the area.

44 Make new development physically and visually compatible with, and distinguishable from, the historic place. Look for opportunities to be innovative and creative when blending new development with the existing context. 6.6 Enhance and maintain the amenity and continuity of a heritage streetscape. 6.7 Recognize the surrounding older architectural vocabulary and reference this in the scale, proportion and materials of the new infill. 6.8 Safeguard and protect views to adjacent or nearby valued older and/or landmark buildings and structures. 6.9 Protect and incorporate existing site features such as large trees, fencing, stone walls, stone paving, etc Design additions either secondary to, and framing the heritage showpiece; or design additions as visually separate and distinct from the heritage structure. Figure 34: The red brick infill addition, which is set back and to the right of this neighbourhood building, blends into the existing context through its compatible composition, materials and colours. Its placement on the site showcases the heritage building. 7.0 Service Elements Reduce the negative aesthetic impact on streets and open spaces of service elements such as utility boxes, garbage storage, loading docks, vehicle access and egress (such as ramps to parking), air conditioner compressors, utility meters and transformers. Services can be incorporated into the design of new development and screened from view so that they do not diminish the quality or safety of the public streetscape. (Photo to be added) Design guidelines: 7.1 Integrate and screen service elements (such as loading areas, garbage and recycling storage, utility meters, transformers, heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment) into the design of the building so that they are not visible from the street and/or adjacent public spaces. Conceal these elements using a variety of methods such as containment, hard and soft landscaping, and decorative screening, without unduly limiting access, safe operations and maintenance.

45 42 Figure 35: Service elements are integrated into the design of this home by making them visually less prominent. 7.2 Where there is no garage, store garbage, green bins and recycling bins in a rear shed, or in a small storage space that is within the dwelling unit but with outdoor access at the side or rear of the unit, or outdoors at the side of the house. Do not replace the storage function of a garage with a storage unit that is visible on the front façade of the home. 7.3 Ensure screening does not interfere with the safe movement of pedestrians and vehicles Locate ventilation out-takes so odours do not spill into public areas or private residential spaces Respect safety clearances and setbacks from overhead and underground services and utilities. 7.6 Group utility boxes to minimize their visual impact. Consider innovative methods of containing utility services on or within streetscape features such as gateways, lamp posts, transit shelters etc., when determining appropriate locations for large utility equipment and utility cluster sites. 8.0 Infill on Narrow Lots In some neighbourhoods, the lot widths permitted by the Zoning By-law are much narrower than existing lots and, as a result, it can be more difficult to achieve a compatible fit. This is particularly true for development on the narrowest lots (less than 6m in width) where many functions must be squeezed into a narrow area. Particular attention to design and context is required to ensure a compatible fit for infill on narrow lots. All the previous sections of this document apply to small lots; guidelines are given in this Section 8.0 to place particular emphasis on the issues surrounding narrow lots, and to re-emphasize certain guidelines. 8.1 Design houses where the principal living space is at grade and where ground floor doors and windows face the street and create possibilities for interaction with the neighbourhood. 8.2 Do not create a dwelling on stilts as a means to provide parking under the dwelling or access to rear parking. 8.3 Limit the width of driveways, parking spaces and walkways in the front yard in order to maximize the amount of soft surface area remaining in the front yard. 8.4 Locate hard surface areas so that the largest area of contiguous greenspace can be maintained. 8.5 Ensure that there is sufficient space to park a single vehicle without overhanging the sidewalk or curb. 8.6 Construct hard surface areas out of porous materials to increase on site surface water infiltration. 8.7 Where there are healthy existing trees, site driveways and parking spaces on the property in such a way that the trees can be retained.