New subdivision developments

[roger1818]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

So what you're saying is, we need MORE setbacks?

I don't mind some set-backs for residential.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4136...8192?entry=ttu

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4141...8192?entry=ttu

But we also a lot of useless set-backs with buildings that have street level retail.

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4061...8192?entry=ttu

https://www.google.com/maps/@45.3969...8192?entry=ttu

Setbacks can be done well, but also very poorly like that last example.

Agreed. I think this one works well also, and has potential for patios.

https://maps.app.goo.gl/CNEoYqG7TCbDZLSE6

[Ottawacurious]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

https://devapps.ottawa.ca/en/applica...0-0034/details

Just realized the proposed french school would be going front center in the above photo (below right to the low stack rise, and below left to the taller towers). This is right where they have the treed park. Looks better to have trees than a big school there with the marketing?

I appreciate in this project that all the mixed use and condos will have underground parking.

[BlackRedGold]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Since when do they build tract housing in Ottawa? In the west end?

So far, it's been towers in the central area and Orleans, along with Plateau style condos in Orleans. Don't remember them ever building a house in Ottawa.

About 20 years ago they were building (shitty) houses in Barrhaven.

[rocketphish]

City's appeal of Kanata golf course redevelopment dismissed
ClubLink wants to build about 1,500 homes on the Kanata Golf and Country Club

CBC News
Posted: Jan 21, 2025 12:26 PM EST | Last Updated: 2 hours ago

ClubLink's push to replace the Kanata Golf and Country Club with 1,480 housing units has passed another legal challenge.

The proposal has prompted a maelstrom of local opposition for years, including a failed attempt by the City of Ottawa to argue its case before the Supreme Court.

Some people who live in the hundreds of homes bordering the course have said they worry the area cannot handle this kind of sharp intensification especially when it comes to stormwater management.

The city did win a court challenge in 2021, but an Ontario Superior Court ruling reversed that decision in favour of owner ClubLink, finding the corporation shouldn't be "saddled with a perpetual obligation" to run a golf course.

On Tuesday, the Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the city's appeal of the pro-ClubLink decision.

Central to the debate is a 1981 agreement to protect "open space."

The pre-amalgamation City of Kanata entered into a series of agreements with former owner Campeau Corporation in the 1980s, which laid out rules to incorporate a golf course to align with rules dictating that 40 per cent remain open space.

ClubLink, which owns and operates about 30 golf clubs across Ontario and Quebec, bought the property in 1997. When it announced the development in 2018, the company said golf courses were struggling to exist in Ottawa's oversaturated market because of rising maintenance costs.

Its proposal includes a mix of detached and semi-detached homes, townhouses and apartments, plus parks and open space.
Original deal has run out

The City of Ottawa launched the appeal, which was heard in November 2024. The Kanata Greenspace Protection Coalition acted as an intervenor.

The city argued the previous judge was wrong and ClubLink must continue operating a golf course there. The coalition argued even if it's not a golf course, the 40 per cent rule remains valid.

The appeal panel of three judges wrote in its decision that part of the intent of the agreement in 1981 was to "ensure a pathway for the evolution of the use of the golf course lands," and said precedent dictates the bargain struck back then has run out. The panel declared the 1981 agreement void.

Tuesday's dismissal points to a 2022 Ontario Land Tribunal decision that found the redevelopment is good land use planing, is compatible with the neighbourhood and will still leave about one-third of the property for open spaces such as parks and woods.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...egal-1.7436999

[Ottawacurious]

I wonder how many millions the golf course/land value happens to be.

[rocketphish]

City of Ottawa to seek appeal of golf course redevelopment court ruling
ClubLink, owner of the Kanata Golf and Country Club, wants to shut down the golf operation and build 4,800 housing units on that land.

Staff Reporter, Ottawa Citizen
Published Feb 05, 2025 • Last updated 49 minutes ago • 2 minute read

The City of Ottawa is going to take another, final swing at thwarting redevelopment of the Kanata Golf and Country Club.

A memo to the mayor and councillors from interim city solicitor Stuart Huxley on Wednesday said an application to seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada would be filed by mid-March.

“It is expected that a decision on the city’s leave application could be made during 2025,” Huxley’s memo said. “If the court grants the city leave to appeal, an appeal process would then be triggered. If leave to appeal were to be denied, that would end this litigation and the (Ontario) Court of Appeal’s recent decision declaring the contract provisions void would stand.

“I will update members of council as to the outcome of the city’s application for leave to appeal.”

In a decision on Jan. 21, the Court of Appeal for Ontario upheld a lower-court ruling that declared invalid those provisions in a contract between the original owners of the golf course and the former City of Kanata — which became part of Ottawa in 2001 amalgamation — requiring preservation of 40 per cent of the golf course lands as open space.

“Municipalities must be able to make long-term decisions through agreements with confidence that they will be binding to allow for long term policy and planning objectives to endure. Allowing the current ruling to stand could have far reaching consequences for municipal governance, contract enforcement, and public trust in these decision-making and implementation processes,” Huxley wrote.

ClubLink, owner of the Kanata Golf and Country Club since 1996, announced plans to redevelop in 2018, contending that golf clubs were struggling to stay competitive due to the high number of courses in the National Capital Region.

Its development plan calls for 1,480 housing units, including townhouses, apartments, detached and semi-detached homes, setting aside 32 per cent of the site for parks, woods and open spaces.

Legal action began after the city’s planning committee rejected the development proposal in 2020.

A decision in the city’s favour was overturned by the Court of Appeal for Ontario, and the Supreme Court of Canada rejected the municipality’s application for leave to appeal again, sending the matter back to Superior Court. Three days of hearings in September 2022 led to an October 2023 ruling that ClubLink shouldn’t be “saddled with a perpetual obligation” to operate a golf facility.

The Ontario appeal court judges panel said its decision on Jan. 21, 2025, was in keeping with a 2022 ruling by the Ontario Land Tribunal suggesting the ClubLink proposal represented good neighbourhood planning.

Opponents of the project argue the site can’t withstand so much concentrated development. Their chief concerns involve stormwater management and fears that water will end up in basements. Currently, excessive rain drains onto the golf course.

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/city-...-redevelopment

[Ottawacurious]

Application # D02-02-19-0090 (Closed for Comments)
Application Status : Post Approval
Date Received : 2019-08-02
Addresses: 1020 MARCH, 1070 MARCH
Ward : Ward 4 - Cathy Curry
Application : Zoning By-law Amendment
Review Status : By-law Passed - In Appeal Period
Status Date : 2025-02-27
Description : The City of Ottawa has received a concurrent Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment application to develop a 728-unit mixed-use subdivision comprised of 297 detached dwellings, 315 townhomes, 116 back-to-back townhomes, two commercial mixed-use blocks, a future school block and various park and open space blocks.

New layout of the subdivision in January:

https://webcast.ottawa.ca/plan/All_I...02-19-0090.PDF

[rocketphish]

Supreme Court won't hear Ottawa's appeal in Kanata golf course case
City sought to block massive housing development; greenspace coalition 'deeply disappointed'

Arthur White-Crummey · CBC News
Posted: Sep 18, 2025 10:35 AM EDT | Last Updated: 1 hour ago

The Supreme Court won't hear the City of Ottawa's appeal in a long-running case over a proposed housing development on the Kanata Golf and Country Club.

The decision will allow property owner ClubLink to proceed with a plan to build 1,480 housing units on the site, despite a 1981 legal agreement requiring the property owner to protect open space.

A lower court declared key provisions of the agreement void and unenforceable.

The case has been winding its way through the courts for years. The city sought to block the development and won a court challenge in 2021, only to see the Ontario Superior Court reverse that decision in favour of ClubLink.

<more>

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...case-1.7637029

[urbanforest]

Pretty wild that the City went to court to stop housing from being built in the middle of a housing crisis. WTAF.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by urbanforest

Pretty wild that the City went to court to stop housing from being built in the middle of a housing crisis. WTAF.

Not the first nor the last, they were taken to court over housing, anything from Lpat/OLT to a few years ago they were taxing ccoc housing

https://gowlingwlg.com/en-ca/news/fi...wlg-helps-ccoc

Surprisingly no one on council had really discussed this it the very real issues it causes for city policy..... As the judgement went only apply to ccoc.....

[skyscraperaccount]

Originally Posted by urbanforest

Pretty wild that the City went to court to stop housing from being built in the middle of a housing crisis. WTAF.

The city should not expect legal agreements it (City of Kanata in this case) makes with developers to be honoured? These residents bought with the explicit government backed agreement that there would be 40% greenspace, if the city can't back and defend such an agreement (as seems to be the case), what compensation should be due to those residents? Every house in Kanata lakes can now or soon be a 4plex right? There is your 'density' while preserving greenspace that was agreed to by the city in this area.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by skyscraperaccount

The city should not expect legal agreements it (City of Kanata in this case) makes with developers to be honoured? These residents bought with the explicit government backed agreement that there would be 40% greenspace, if the city can't back and defend such an agreement (as seems to be the case), what compensation should be due to those residents? Every house in Kanata lakes can now or soon be a 4plex right? There is your 'density' while preserving greenspace that was agreed to by the city in this area.

The agreement was found void because precedent doesn't allow for in perpetuity agreements, something the city would have known at the time that agreement was signed.

Also, there will still be greenspace and instead of it being private property that greenspace will now be open to the public year round.

Anyways, it looks like the city is going to b be an asshole here and slow play everything about this dev so this wing be the last time it's in court closing the city thousands to fight much needed housing.

So any comp locals are "looking" for can be found in the cost to fight housing.

[Richard Eade]

I think that the judge probably made an error in the decision to nullify the agreement.

I agree that it should not be possible to lock some-one (or entity) into doing something in perpetuity WITHOUT AN OUT – which is, I believe, what the judge based the ruling on. However, in this case, there was an alternative. The owner could have returned the land to the City for the same price that it paid to get that land. I believe that the agreement, from what I remember reading, had the City sell the land to the golf club on the condition that it remain a golf course – and that if it could no longer be so, that the land would be returned to the City at the same purchase price. (Again, this is what I remember hearing or reading. I await to be corrected.)

So, yes, IF Clublink was being forced to keep the land and run it as a golf course, then I would agree that the agreement was forcing a certain condition in perpetuity. However, my understanding is that the agreement had a mechanism for Clublink to rid itself of the golf course requirement of the agreement.

Thus, I think that the judge erred in the decision, based on that.

However, it is possible that the judge also viewed the option of returning the land to the City as one that inflicted undue hardship on Clublink, since the selling price would be many-times less than the expected profit were the land to be developed into housing. Thus, the judge might have viewed the option to return the land as not a viable option – eliminating it as the ‘out’ and leaving Clublink the only option of running a golf course in perpetuity.

If that is the case, then, again, I think that the judge erred. The original signatory of the agreement (Campeau, I believe) understood that there would be no profit from the real estate if it was returned to the City. Clublink would have been aware of that condition in the agreement when it bought the golf course. If that clause was not acceptable to Clublink, then it would not have purchased the golf course. Thus, in buying the golf course, Clublink agreed to the clause that effectively prevented it from profiting from the conversion of the golf course into anything else. Clearly, Clublink knew at purchase time that, if it was no longer going to run a golf course on the land, that land would need to be returned to the City.

That the City’s hired lawyers could not make a convincing case for those arguments leaves me to believe that the City didn’t have the best lawyers.

Has anyone actually read the agreement and judges ruling? Are there links available?

[rocketphish]

Premier sides with Ottawa mayor in golf course housing dispute
Doug Ford stood by Mark Sutcliffe as mayor vows to obstruct a development in Kanata

Arthur White-Crummey · CBC News
Posted: Sep 22, 2025 5:09 PM EDT | Last Updated: 2 hours ago

Ontario's premier is backing Ottawa Mayor Mark Sutcliffe in the ongoing battle over a housing development on the Kanata Golf and Country Club.

The city took the golf course's owner to court to stop it from building 1,480 houses there, citing a 44-year-old contract that required the land to remain as open space.

But courts found in favour of the owner, ClubLink, and the Supreme Court declined to hear a final appeal last week, putting an end to litigation in the case.

Asked about the case on Monday, Premier Doug Ford initially said the city and ClubLink should try to come to a resolution.

"I agree with the Supreme Court," he said. "They have to work things out. That's what they need to do, between the developer and the municipality."

But Sutcliffe has said the city will use every tool at its disposal to block the development, which neighbours have warned could cause flooding.

He said the city will deny easements needed for construction to move forward. The easements give the city the right to use the land for such purposes as stormwater drainage. The project would require eight changes to those easements, and the city maintains it can simply refuse to grant them.

Asked specifically about Sutcliffe's position, Ford gave the mayor his support.

"I always like working together, but that's the mayor. This is his city," Ford said. "I support the mayor and he knows what the people feel.

"If they don't want it, they shouldn't do it," he added. "And if the mayor wants to put up roadblocks, God bless him. Good for him. He's protecting his community."

The provincial government has numerous powers over development, including the use of ministerial zoning orders, which can override city planning decisions.

Yet the Ontario Land Tribunal, a provincial body that hears planning appeals, stated in 2022 that the ClubLink development represents good planning, is in the public interest and should be approved.

It also put numerous conditions on the project, however, including some that relate to easements.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...pute-1.7640550

[rocketphish]

If Sutcliffe cares about his housing plan, he'll end Clublink fight
The Supreme Court rejection gave Ottawa's mayor an excellent political off-ramp. Instead, he promised the planning version of guerrilla warfare.

By Randall Denley, Ottawa Citizen
Published Sep 24, 2025 | Last updated 10 hours ago

It has always been hard to understand why it’s so important for Ottawa to stop the redevelopment of a suburban golf course in Kanata North, particularly as councillors continue to push for more housing.

The city has been fighting the Kanata Golf and Country Club redevelopment plan, proposed by course owner Clublink and its development partners Minto and Richcraft, since 2019. The city’s efforts to stop the proposal have failed in Ontario Superior Court, at the Ontario Land Tribunal and at the Ontario Court of Appeal.

Last week, unsurprisingly, the Supreme Court of Canada, declined to hear a city appeal of the lower court ruling.

The city had hoped that a court would rule that a 1981 agreement between the original developer and the former city of Kanata to retain the golf course “in perpetuity” would be interpreted in its favour, providing a way to stop a development that’s highly unpopular with its neighbours.

With the city’s legal options now exhausted, Mayor Mark Sutcliffe has promised the planning version of guerrilla warfare. The city will deny access to roads, sewers and water pipes required for development to go ahead. It will also attempt to enlist the National Capital Commission in this noble cause.

It’s easy to understand why Kanata residents who live near the golf course would oppose a plan to put 1,500 homes on the site, even though it would retain 33 per cent of the overall space as publicly accessible parkland. People paid a premium for property that backed on a golf course and were told that it would always be there.

The city certainly put up a fight, spending an undisclosed number of taxpayers’ dollars in the process. The Supreme Court rejection gave Sutcliffe an excellent political off-ramp from a vexatious issue that he inherited from the previous council.

Instead, the normally politically astute mayor vowed to continue the golf course fight. It’s a choice that will please a few people in Kanata, but it undermines Sutcliffe’s own housing plan, just announced. An opponent might easily say, “Sure, the mayor favours more housing, unless it will damage people’s view of a private golf course.”

The mayor and Kanata North councillor Cathy Curry argue that the real reason for rejecting the redevelopment proposal is that the area doesn’t have the stormwater capacity to handle the development and there is no feasible technical solution. The developers obviously disagree.

It’s difficult, if not impossible, to separate any technical concerns from the politics of this issue. If the planning arguments against the development were so strong, why did the city work so hard to stop the plan in court?

If the plan is a slam dunk failure on stormwater grounds, why is the mayor promising to block it by not granting the usual easements that development relies on?

Sutcliffe’s comments create the impression that the city is simply dead set against the development and not at all open to working out a solution. That’s not the kind of argument that does well at the Ontario Land Tribunal, where this matter could end up, again. Once there, it will be easy for the proponents to argue that the city refused to give its plan a fair hearing. They’ll be right, too.

Premier Doug Ford compounded the confusion when he was in Ottawa this week, coming down firmly on both sides of the issue. In the morning, he said the city and the developer should work something out. In the afternoon, he said, “If they don’t want it, they shouldn’t do it and if the mayor wants to put up roadblocks, God bless him. Good for him. He’s protecting his community.”

That’s certainly a noteworthy comment for all Ontario municipalities that are under constant provincial pressure to enable more housing.

It’s time for the rest of council to get involved with this golf course issue and demand some solid answers about why the city has spent so much effort and money to block one development.

Randall Denley is an Ottawa journalist and author. Contact him at [email protected]

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/cl...golf-sutcliffe

[Ottawacurious]

Perhaps old news: 560 hazeldean (currently a golf practice driving range) being submitted for new subdivision.
https://devapps.ottawa.ca/en/applica...5-0014/details
The links weren't opening so couldn't provide more details. Its over 9 hectares.

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by Ottawacurious

Perhaps old news: 560 hazeldean (currently a golf practice driving range) being submitted for new subdivision.
https://devapps.ottawa.ca/en/applica...5-0014/details
The links weren't opening so couldn't provide more details. Its over 9 hectares.

Housing subdivision proposed for golf driving range in Ottawa’s west end

By Josh Pringle, CTV News
Updated: October 09, 2025 at 9:45AM EDT | Published: October 09, 2025 at 9:08AM EDT



Housing could soon replace the driving range at the Kevin Haime Golf Centre in Ottawa’s west end.

A development application has been filed with the City of Ottawa, proposing to build a new subdivision at 560 Hazeldean Road with 98 homes and a residential/mixed-use block.

The plan, submitted by Novatech and Double Deck Regional Inc., proposes building 50 single detached homes and 48 units in a townhouse block, with a future apartment block fronting Hazeldean Road.

“Double Deck Regional Inc. is proposing to redevelop the Subject Site with a low-rise residential subdivision on the southern portion of the property, whereas the northern portion will be a residential/mixed-use development,” says the planning rationale and scoped urban design brief filed with the city in August.

“A separate Site Plan Control application will be filed for the residential/mixed-use development block identified as Block 52 on the Draft Plan of Subdivision when the proposed details are known.”

The report says there will be a multi-use pathway as part of the new subdivision.

“The proposed development will include a future open space area and pathways that will connect to the existing community and future multi-use pathway abutting the Carp River corridor,” says a report by Novatech.

“The multi-use pathway will provide a linear passive and recreational connection for future residents to the surrounding community.”

According to the report, a Zoning Bylaw Amendment application is required to rezone the site to permit future residential and non-residential land uses as well as the open space area along the Carp River.

“The range and mix of housing options and densities will contribute to the overall housing typologies and forms for the Stittsville community,” Novatech said.

The report says the proposed development will include a “network of newly created private roadways that provides for an efficient layout” and connects to Hazeldean Road, Energy Street and Bliss Crescent.

The 8.74 hectares of property is currently the Kevin Haime Golf Centre, which includes two buildings and a driving range. The report notes the former City of Kanata approved a site plan control and zoning bylaw amendment applications to permit the development of an instructional driving range facility at the site.

Stittsville Coun. Glen Gower declined to comment, telling CTV News Ottawa on Thursday that the application has just been published and he hasn’t had an “opportunity to review what is being proposed.”

According to the website, the Kevin Haime Golf School has 21 covered and heated hitting stations, 34 open-air hitting areas and a two-acre short game complex.

This is the second proposed development on a golfing facility in Ottawa’s west end.

Clublink has proposed a housing develop on the Kanata Golf and Country Club in the Kanata Lakes neighbourhood.

Last month, the Supreme Court of Canada announced it would not hear an application from the City of Ottawa to appeal the Ontario Court of Appeal’s ruling that declared a 1981 agreement to keep 40 per cent of the property as green space as “inoperative.”

Clublink and its developers, Minto Communities and Richcraft Homes, have proposed building approximately 1,500 homes on the property.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/ottawa/articl...awas-west-end/

[Ottawacurious]

Clublink / kanata golf course to be permanently closed after this weekend as it prepares for development.

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by Ottawacurious

Clublink / kanata golf course to be permanently closed after this weekend as it prepares for development.

Kanata Golf and Country Club set to close ahead of redevelopment

By Adam Beauchemin, CTV News
Updated: November 01, 2025 at 6:36PM EDT | Published: October 31, 2025 at 3:20PM EDT

The Kanata Golf and Country Club will be closing for good this weekend as its owners move to build a housing development on the property.

In an email to club members obtained by CTV News Ottawa, owner ClubLink said this will be the golf course’s final season.

“Recently, the Supreme Court of Canada declined to hear the City of Ottawa’s appeal in the legal case concerning the redevelopment of the Kanata Golf and Country Club lands,” ClubLink wrote.

“As a result of this decision, we can now confirm that the 2025 golf season is the final season of operation for Kanata Golf and Country Club.”

The last day for golfing at the Kanata Golf and Country Club will be Sunday, Nov. 2.

<more>

https://www.ctvnews.ca/ottawa/articl...redevelopment/

[Richard Eade]

I would like to see a frequent north-south autonomous electric vehicle track running through the new development, connecting Terry Fox Station with the Kanata North Business Park. And it needs to be accessible from all directions via MUP links.

One idea would follow the fuchsia line in the following diagram:



This one would make use of existing infrastructure, like the Kanata Foot Bridge and the underpass of Kanata Ave. The line would be mostly at grade and the autonomous vehicle would be responsible for safely moving, including watching for pedestrians/cyclists/etc. on and crossing the roadway, and crossing any traffic roadways at controlled and uncontrolled intersections.

Another option is the red line, but it would need an expensive structure to manage the elevation difference from Campeau to the Centrum Mall.

An autonomous line adds a new dedicated transit corridor that doesn’t meander around trying to pick up everyone from in front of their house. It would be fairly direct, with good pedestrian and cycling access. People would come to the transit, instead of trying to do it the other way around. (Yes, I would say to expropriate a few properties to create pathways. That is the price of connectivity. And that will help lift the value of the surrounding homes; helping counter some of the drop from losing the golf course.)

I expect that a service like this would be used by commuters and those going to Centrum Mall to shop. There is a lot of ‘local’ car traffic now because local transit is not very good. In that regard, this autonomous line would be a frequent service. This will make it useful. It could even be extended through the future Earl Grey underpass to the Tanger Outlet Mall. – Oh, wait, that underpass is being built for CARS. The one for TRANSIT – right beside it – isn’t being built. So ridiculous. Well, maybe the Autonomous Vehicle can run in mixed traffic along Roland Michener and Earl Grey to continue west.

I believe that there is a By-Law that states that all public transit within the city must be run by OC Transpo. However, I do not think that this new service should be under OC Transpo. These would be small, electric autonomous vehicles, allowing for minimum road structure (potentially even single lane with short passing lanes) – while I fear that OC Transpo would want to run full-sized buses along a wide Transitway, with four lanes at stops. Also, if it was under OC Transpo, I suspect that the unions would insist on having ‘safety operators’, which would drastically increase the operating cost – meaning that it would be much less frequent, and subject to other cuts.

City Council would need to make changes to its Public Transit By-Laws to exempt this service. Or, perhaps it could be classified as a Private Shuttle. If Council created a new class of service, such as ‘Private Shuttles’, it might anger the transit unions less – although I think that there will be huge push-back from them anyway.

Could such a line be funded by the Kanata North Business Park, the Centrum Mall, and, if extended, the Tanger Outlet Mall? Could ClubLink be required to create the corridor? (It would be a huge benefit to them, after all.)