The Minaret and the Proposed Mosque
On February 12, 2003 the Planning and Development Committee of the City of Ottawa recommended to the City Council an amendment to a former City of Nepean Zoning By-law. A motion was passed and a new By-Law No. 2003 – 4 was created.
The amendment included the following: “All standard provisions of the Institutional Zone shall apply except a maximum building height of 15m excluding the dome is allowed,” This by-law amendment was for a mosque to be constructed after and subject to “A Site Plan being approved.
The By-Law was enacted and passed on the 12th day of February, 2003 and was signed by the City Clerk and the Mayor.
I was most surprised to read the following in the By-Law, “Building Height (Maximum) 15 metres, excluding an ornamental dome, church spire, church belfry, cupola, or skylight.” From the words of the original motion, “excluding the dome”, we have new words: “excluding an ornamental dome, church spire, church belfry, cupola, or skylight.” These additional words beg several questions. Where did the additional 8 words come from? Under whose authority were the additions made? Why were the additions made? Do the additional words invalidate the By-Law? Just because the new By-Law was signed by the City Clerk and the Mayor, does that make it a “legal” document? It is believed that the By-Law must incorporate the actual wording of the motion that was past without words of afterthought being provided by some party or another.
A number of appeals were made to the Ontario Municipal Board early last year with the decision order issued on Oct. 7, 2003. The Board reviewed the many facts and statements made and in its judgment concluded as follows: “the Board will dismiss the appeals, however, issuance of the order will be withheld until it is advised that the Site Plan has been approved by the City. This member will remain seized in order to adjudicate any disputes arising out of the site plan particulars.”
It behooves the City to be careful and cautious in its deliberations and activities relating to the site plan approval, its process and timing and the “site plan particulars.” The City needs to disclose to the public how it intends to proceed, whether this is to be done in openness before the public or otherwise. This project must not be delayed because of some need to have an adjudication process put in motion because of any “disputes arising out of the site plan particulars.” The Council of the City has a moral obligation to the citizens of Ottawa do what is right, to do what is proper and not to seek an easy way out of a difficult task.
I recently learned that there will be “a dome that peaks at 21m above the finished grade.”
In addition, there will be minaret; the “top of the minaret is at 35m.”
Although a dome was included in the original recommendation and passed into the By-Law, no mention was made of the minaret in the recommendation or in the By-Law, and now, we learn that there will be a minaret with a height of 35 metres which will be 14 metres higher than the peak of the dome which will be 21metres.
How high is 35metres? For me it was difficult to realize so I reviewed the heights of a number of high-rise buildings in Ottawa from the one at 100 Hinchey Ave. which stands at 35 metres for 13 floors; another building at 33 metres had 12 floors. In Ottawa there are some 86 buildings that have 12 or 13 floors; among these are the Kanata Park Towers (Towers I and II), The Vanguard Building, Ambleside III, the Jean Talon Building, the Lord Elgin Hotel, the Bank of Canada Tower and among the many other buildings, the Public Service Alliance Building. I now have a much clearer idea of what 35 metres means.
Last summer I spent 7 weeks visiting Bosnia, Herzegovina, Croatia and Yugoslavia. I was impressed with the beauty of the land, mountains, villages, towns and cities and the Adriatic Sea with its many islands. I was also impressed with both the numbers and architectural beauty of the many mosques that I saw. I took many photographs of many ancient and beautiful mosques which will be used in future articles about the history of the lands and the peoples of the former Yugoslavia.
I would call all those mosques Houses of Worship. I honour and respect the people who attend services in these buildings. They have their religious convictions. The practicing of their religion should be respected in every way possible. Diversity of religious practices will continue to grace our land. The Muslim faith will expand as the Muslim religion is fastest growing in Canada. I believe we must accommodate the increase in the numbers of mosques that will be required. Canadians will continue to learn more about the diversity of religious practices and will share in the benefits of exposure to other cultures and beliefs.
Many residents of Nepean and in particular those who reside in the Bells Corners and Westcliffe Estates areas might not know where the new mosque is to be located. Its location will be on the triangular piece of land due south of the intersection of Moodie Drive and Richmond Road. The major entrance to the mosque property will be directly in front of the intersection of Seyton Drive and Richmond Road.
The major concerns that the residents close to the proposed site have had relate to the traffic and parking problems that have occurred because of the large number of vehicles that are used to transport people to the mosque. People to the west of the future mosque will be in the shadow of the mosque during the morning time when the sun is behind the mosque. Some property owners with properties backing directly on the mosque property with be in the shadow of the mosque, during the evening time while the sun is setting. Remembering, the shadow will be caused by the building with its main height of approximately 12m at the front of the building with the “dome that peaks at 21m above (the) finished grade.” In addition, the site plan drawing shows a “yard rear” set back of only 9 metres, between the building and the rear lot line of two of the houses. There is a possibility that the 11.4 meter height of the rear of the mosque’s main building will require a set back of approximately a full 16m which is 7m more than the 9m shown on the plan. (The formula used would be the factor of 1.4 x 11.4m = 15.96m).
At present it is not known as to when and how the City will approve the site plan prior to construction. A request has been made to the Mayor to provide information on the process and timing leading to the site plan approval. The big questions are what leadership will he provide, what guidance and direction will he give to the bureaucrats at City Hall to prevent any future disputes.
The amendment included the following: “All standard provisions of the Institutional Zone shall apply except a maximum building height of 15m excluding the dome is allowed,” This by-law amendment was for a mosque to be constructed after and subject to “A Site Plan being approved.
The By-Law was enacted and passed on the 12th day of February, 2003 and was signed by the City Clerk and the Mayor.
I was most surprised to read the following in the By-Law, “Building Height (Maximum) 15 metres, excluding an ornamental dome, church spire, church belfry, cupola, or skylight.” From the words of the original motion, “excluding the dome”, we have new words: “excluding an ornamental dome, church spire, church belfry, cupola, or skylight.” These additional words beg several questions. Where did the additional 8 words come from? Under whose authority were the additions made? Why were the additions made? Do the additional words invalidate the By-Law? Just because the new By-Law was signed by the City Clerk and the Mayor, does that make it a “legal” document? It is believed that the By-Law must incorporate the actual wording of the motion that was past without words of afterthought being provided by some party or another.
A number of appeals were made to the Ontario Municipal Board early last year with the decision order issued on Oct. 7, 2003. The Board reviewed the many facts and statements made and in its judgment concluded as follows: “the Board will dismiss the appeals, however, issuance of the order will be withheld until it is advised that the Site Plan has been approved by the City. This member will remain seized in order to adjudicate any disputes arising out of the site plan particulars.”
It behooves the City to be careful and cautious in its deliberations and activities relating to the site plan approval, its process and timing and the “site plan particulars.” The City needs to disclose to the public how it intends to proceed, whether this is to be done in openness before the public or otherwise. This project must not be delayed because of some need to have an adjudication process put in motion because of any “disputes arising out of the site plan particulars.” The Council of the City has a moral obligation to the citizens of Ottawa do what is right, to do what is proper and not to seek an easy way out of a difficult task.
I recently learned that there will be “a dome that peaks at 21m above the finished grade.”
In addition, there will be minaret; the “top of the minaret is at 35m.”
Although a dome was included in the original recommendation and passed into the By-Law, no mention was made of the minaret in the recommendation or in the By-Law, and now, we learn that there will be a minaret with a height of 35 metres which will be 14 metres higher than the peak of the dome which will be 21metres.
How high is 35metres? For me it was difficult to realize so I reviewed the heights of a number of high-rise buildings in Ottawa from the one at 100 Hinchey Ave. which stands at 35 metres for 13 floors; another building at 33 metres had 12 floors. In Ottawa there are some 86 buildings that have 12 or 13 floors; among these are the Kanata Park Towers (Towers I and II), The Vanguard Building, Ambleside III, the Jean Talon Building, the Lord Elgin Hotel, the Bank of Canada Tower and among the many other buildings, the Public Service Alliance Building. I now have a much clearer idea of what 35 metres means.
Last summer I spent 7 weeks visiting Bosnia, Herzegovina, Croatia and Yugoslavia. I was impressed with the beauty of the land, mountains, villages, towns and cities and the Adriatic Sea with its many islands. I was also impressed with both the numbers and architectural beauty of the many mosques that I saw. I took many photographs of many ancient and beautiful mosques which will be used in future articles about the history of the lands and the peoples of the former Yugoslavia.
I would call all those mosques Houses of Worship. I honour and respect the people who attend services in these buildings. They have their religious convictions. The practicing of their religion should be respected in every way possible. Diversity of religious practices will continue to grace our land. The Muslim faith will expand as the Muslim religion is fastest growing in Canada. I believe we must accommodate the increase in the numbers of mosques that will be required. Canadians will continue to learn more about the diversity of religious practices and will share in the benefits of exposure to other cultures and beliefs.
Many residents of Nepean and in particular those who reside in the Bells Corners and Westcliffe Estates areas might not know where the new mosque is to be located. Its location will be on the triangular piece of land due south of the intersection of Moodie Drive and Richmond Road. The major entrance to the mosque property will be directly in front of the intersection of Seyton Drive and Richmond Road.
The major concerns that the residents close to the proposed site have had relate to the traffic and parking problems that have occurred because of the large number of vehicles that are used to transport people to the mosque. People to the west of the future mosque will be in the shadow of the mosque during the morning time when the sun is behind the mosque. Some property owners with properties backing directly on the mosque property with be in the shadow of the mosque, during the evening time while the sun is setting. Remembering, the shadow will be caused by the building with its main height of approximately 12m at the front of the building with the “dome that peaks at 21m above (the) finished grade.” In addition, the site plan drawing shows a “yard rear” set back of only 9 metres, between the building and the rear lot line of two of the houses. There is a possibility that the 11.4 meter height of the rear of the mosque’s main building will require a set back of approximately a full 16m which is 7m more than the 9m shown on the plan. (The formula used would be the factor of 1.4 x 11.4m = 15.96m).
At present it is not known as to when and how the City will approve the site plan prior to construction. A request has been made to the Mayor to provide information on the process and timing leading to the site plan approval. The big questions are what leadership will he provide, what guidance and direction will he give to the bureaucrats at City Hall to prevent any future disputes.
posted by croweagle at
11:40 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home