Recommendation: That, on the
recommendation of the Managing Director, Planning and City Planner, the
following actions be taken with respect to the application of Western
University relating to the property located at1836 Richmond Street:
a) the
proposed by-law, as appended to the staff report dated April 8, 2014, BE
INTRODUCED at the Municipal Council meeting to be held on April 15, 2014, to
amend
Zoning By-law No. Z.-1, (in conformity with the Official Plan), to change the
zoning of the subject property FROM an Urban Reserve (UR2) Zone TO a Holding
Residential R5/Residential R7/Residential R8 Special Provision
(h-4•h-5•h-18•h-54•h-55•h-79•h-89•R5-7(*)/R7(*)/R8-4(*)) Zone, an Open Space
Special Provision (OS5(*)), an Open Space Special Provision (OS5(**)) Zone
and an Urban Reserve Special Provision (UR2(*)) Zone;
b) the Site Plan Approval Authority
BE REQUESTED to consider the following issues through the site plan process:
i)
a
concept plan for the entire site, including urban design guidelines and
principles as per the Placemaking Guidelines, to ensure that the property is
developed in a logical and comprehensive fashion;
ii)
locating
buildings close to, and oriented towards, Richmond Street to create an active
street edge and contribute to the character of the future transit node at
Richmond Street and Fanshawe Park Road West;
iii)
locating
taller buildings adjacent to Richmond Street rather than internal to the site,
to enclose the street and create a transition in height through the site;
iv)
using
a combination of setback, built form, building orientation and height for
buildings at the north-west corner of the site to provide a sensitive
transition from the existing residential development to the north to the new
development on the subject site;
v)
locating
parking underground or in the side or rear yards of proposed buildings and
away from Richmond Street or any other future street frontages, to screen the
parking and provide active uses at the street edge. Where this is not
possible, screen any parking that is visible from a public street with
enhanced landscaping such as shrubs and/or low landscape walls;
vi)
including
convenient, safe and direct pedestrian connections from the public sidewalk
to the building entrances, through the site and between buildings to
facilitate pedestrian movement to and through the site;
vii)
retaining
the necessary topography and design the site to protect and enhance
unobstructed view(s) of the Downtown skyline in order to create amenity for
all future residents of the property;
viii)
incorporating
Gibbon’s Lodge and any other historic features identified through the
statement of cultural heritage value and interest for the property in a
functional and meaningful way into the new development;
ix)
incorporating
trees identified in the required tree retention plan into the landscaping
plans for new development in order to retain some of the existing vegetation;
and,
x)
preparing
and implement to the satisfaction of the Managing Director of Environmental
and Engineering Services and City Engineer, the recommendations of a
hydrogeological and geotechnical report;
c) the request to amend Zoning
By-law No. Z.-1 to change the zoning of the subject property FROM an Urban
Reserve (UR2) Zone TO a Residential R5/Residential R7/Residential R8 Special
Provision (R5-7(_)/R7(_)/R8-4(_) Zone, a Holding Residential R5/Residential
R7/Residential R8 Special Provision (h-__*R5-7(_)/R7(_)/R8-4(_) Zone, an Open
Space Special Provision (OS5(_)) Zone and an Open Space Special Provision
(OS5(_)) Zone, BE REFUSED for the following reasons:
i) on
the development lands, consideration of a 0.0 metre building setback from the
ecological buffer is premature until a more detailed Environmental Impact
Study is prepared by the developer, which is based on detailed development
plans and includes recommendations and conclusions accepted by the City
addressing building setbacks;
ii) on
the development lands, it is appropriate to include a reduced front yard
setback, (not requested by the applicant), in order to facilitate the
placement of buildings close to the street in support of urban design
principles;
iii) on
the development lands, it is appropriate to include holding provisions, (not
requested by the applicant), to ensure that detailed geotechnical studies,
public site plan approval, archaeological assessment, noise, traffic impact,
tree preservation, storm/drainage and stormwater servicing are addressed
prior to development, at the site plan approval stage;
iv) on
the maximum ecological buffer, an alternative is recommended to the requested
Residential Zones with a holding provision requiring the completion of an EIS
which reviews detailed development plans and refines the exact boundaries of
the Maximum Ecological Buffer. The recommended Urban Reserve Special
Provision (UR2(*)) Zone provides impartiality on the ultimate outcome of a
more detailed Environmental Impact Study, and provides an explanation of the
expectations to be met before Residential and/or Open Space Zones are applied
to the area to delineate the development limit;
v) it
is appropriate to extend the minimum ecological buffer through the existing
developed area on the property to prevent future development or site
alteration in the area intended to protect the Environmentally Significant
Area and Provincially Significant Wetland;
vi) it
is appropriate to extend the maximum ecological buffer to the area between
the minimum ecological buffer and the existing dwelling to prevent future
development or site alteration in the area until the final development limit
is determined; and,
vii) it
is appropriate to include a limited range of non-residential uses, not
requested by the applicant, as permitted uses within the existing buildings
which have heritage significance, in order to facilitate their conservation;
d) the Civic Administration BE
DIRECTED to work with the London Advisory Committee on Heritage and the Owner
to prepare a statement of cultural heritage value and interest for the property
at 1836 Richmond Street;
it being
noted that the Planning and Environment Committee reviewed and received a
communication, dated April 3, 2014, from S. Jarrett,
Legal Counsel, Western University, with respect to this matter;
it being pointed out that at the public
participation meeting associated with this matter, the individuals indicated
on the attached public participation meeting record made oral
submissions in connection therewith. (2014-D14)
|