Conflict between downtown development and preserving heritage sites may be resolved Monday when the city releases a revised vision of its plan to revitalize the downtown core.
The city’s local architectural conservation advisory committee had expressed concern that a revision of the city’s Official Plan does not include adequate protection for heritage sites that will be affected by development and intensification targets.
The Official Plan, which is modified every five years, reflects the city’s hope that placing more people in central Ottawa will fuel businesses and consolidate infrastructure and services, thus avoiding negative effects of urban sprawl. It is referred to as intensification within the Official Plan.
In a memo to city staff, the committee pointed out that numerous heritage buildings are located within the proposed areas of growth and called for the Ontario Heritage Act to be respected within the Official Plan.
“The [committee] very strongly urges that the OP [Official Plan] policies on intensification and HCD [Heritage Conservation District] guidelines be compatible and consistent, rather than contradictory,” the memo said.
City staff responded to the committee’s concerns with a memo saying improvements can be made to the text of the plan and “that there should be a balance between the goals of intensification and heritage conservation.”
However, committee chair Jay Baltz said he expects the new draft will not include the level of detail the committee proposed.
“I wouldn’t put too much stock in a memo that says they would address it,” said Baltz.
Centretown is one of Ottawa’s heritage conservation districts under the Ontario Heritage Act.
According to city planner Jack Ferguson, the “issue is not one of heritage trumping intensification, or vice-versa, but of taking all policies of the plan into account and making a reasoned decision. Intensification can still occur within Heritage Conservation Districts.”
The Committee asked for a policy that would require protection of heritage sites from nearby developments.
“[The committee is] not contesting intensification as a general policy to reduce urban sprawl. They’re saying that in instances where there’s a designated heritage conservation building or district, they should […] recognize that maximum intensification objectives of the heritage part of the plan can’t be met, so maybe there’s instances where those maximum intensification requirements have to be relaxed,” said Herb Stovel, a Canadian Studies Professor at Carleton University.
Developers in the city may feel that they are working in the interest of council when they put forth proposals to work with real estate in the centre of town, but often do not consider the city’s commitment to heritage values, said Stovel.
A more appropriate tactic would be for the city to point appropriate places to exercise intensification policy to developers. If they do not resolve the issue now, council will enter into an exhaustive routine of the community fighting for heritage sites on a case-by-case basis, said Stovel.