General Update/Rumour thread [Urban Ottawa]

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by MountainView

They might as well name the park "Temporary Park" - similar to what they did in Barrhaven before Kennevale was extended to Strandherd; there they had "Temporary Road".

Sunny day, sweepin' the clouds away
On my way to find some 'up' to spark!
Can you tell me how to get
How to get to Temporary Park?
How to get to Temporary Park?

[citizen j]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Sunny day, sweepin' the clouds away
On my way to find some 'up' to spark!
Can you tell me how to get
How to get to Temporary Park?
How to get to Temporary Park?

You're a perverse genius.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by Chris-R

RE: St. Partrick's

That's what I thought at first, then I saw what the students actually did on the occasion and I realized that ASH was right for one of the first times. Of course, obnoxiously loud parties was one of the reasons I left Sandy Hill in the first place, so I may be biased.

Fair. But if the article was about just that, an unfortunate incident, that would be one thing. Instead it was a call to arms about a neighbourhood on the brink, which it certainly is not.

Further, Sandy Hill is priced based on the inconveniences that come with life in a mixed community of families, young professionals and many students. Without the UofO the neighbourhood could well be a much more expensive and out of reach enclave. On the other hand, it could have declined more severely in the last few decades and be a bit of a dump. It's hard to say.

[LeadingEdgeBoomer]

Originally Posted by Chris-R
RE: St. Partrick's

That's what I thought at first, then I saw what the students actually did on the occasion and I realized that ASH was right for one of the first times. Of course, obnoxiously loud parties was one of the reasons I left Sandy Hill in the first place, so I may be biased.

Fair. But if the article was about just that, an unfortunate incident, that would be one thing. Instead it was a call to arms about a neighbourhood on the brink, which it certainly is not

These student ghettos are always potentially a problem and there will always be some partying.
Hopefully it never gets to the level of what happened this St Patty's Day at the Fanshawe College ghetto in London Ont. Or the infamous annual Aberdeen St. Party in Kingston that caused Queen's to discontinue their annual fall Homecoming weekend a couple of years ago. Sandy Hill is tame in comparison.
I wonder how many residents of SH make money renting to these partying students? Of course many of the landlords may be absentee ones who do not live in the area.

[Chris-R]

Originally Posted by gjhall

Fair. But if the article was about just that, an unfortunate incident, that would be one thing. Instead it was a call to arms about a neighbourhood on the brink, which it certainly is not.

Further, Sandy Hill is priced based on the inconveniences that come with life in a mixed community of families, young professionals and many students. Without the UofO the neighbourhood could well be a much more expensive and out of reach enclave. On the other hand, it could have declined more severely in the last few decades and be a bit of a dump. It's hard to say.

Fair enough as well. It's not really a dump, and many of the really student-soaked parts are pretty obvious and easy to avoid. When you walk down to where the shenanigans were on St. Patty's it's pretty clear that there are likely plenty of students there. The property values are, as you say, checkered and it's largely on that basis.

My problem in Sandy Hill was more a matter of picking the wrong building. It was a small one, but with no soundproofing (it was old) and six of the ten units having students, four of which were regularly loud. It's not different from Vanier in that respect. Everything can be peachy-keen on your street, but wind up in the wrong triplex or sixplex, and it could be miserable.

Originally Posted by LeadingEdgeBoomer

These student ghettos are always potentially a problem and there will always be some partying.
Hopefully it never gets to the level of what happened this St Patty's Day at the Fanshawe College ghetto in London Ont. Or the infamous annual Aberdeen St. Party in Kingston that caused Queen's to discontinue their annual fall Homecoming weekend a couple of years ago. Sandy Hill is tame in comparison.
I wonder how many residents of SH make money renting to these partying students? Of course many of the landlords may be absentee ones who do not live in the area.

It is definitely tame in comparison. Of course, if you're stuck in the middle of it with no desire to participate, comparisons wouldn't matter on the immediate. Nevertheless, fair enough. There are significantly worse examples elsewhere.

Between my wife and I, we've rented in Sandy Hill three times and only once was the landlord living in the neighbourhood. That's hardly a representative sample, however, and I do suspect that there are more than a few whose incomes are supplemented with rents.

[LeadingEdgeBoomer]

Further to the Sandy Hill noise problems--there are those who want to make the landlords responsible rather than the tenants.

City proposes changes to noise bylaw

Jonathan McGill 1310 news Apr 17, 2012 07:19:58 AM

OTTAWA - The City is proposing changes to its noise bylaw which could see tenants and landlords slapped with a fine if the noise bylaw is broken. The Ottawa Citizen reports that under the current regulations, bylaw officers issue fines to individuals who they suspect are being noisy and not anyone else.

The city thinks making changes to the regulations could result in a quieter city, a more effective way of responding to complaints, and an easier way of keeping track of those who continuously break the noise bylaw.

The neighbourhood of Sandy Hill is responsible for thousands of noise complaints per year, and Coun. Mathieu Fleury whose ward incorporates Sandy Hill, said it is hard for bylaw officers to determine the exact individuals causing the noise violations. He added that issuing a fine to the landlord or leaseholder would make that person responsible for the whole group and could lessen the frequency of loud parties.

Moreover, the new changes would allow bylaw officers to respond to the party, determine if it violated the noise bylaw, and return the next day with the fine.

Fines for being noisy can range from $305 to $5000 and can be caused from loud music, ringing bells, blowing horns, to loud yelling which disturbs the neighbourhood.

A public meeting will be held on Apr. 24, from 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. in council chambers at City Hall to determine if changes to the legislation will be made.

Personally I tell my younger neighbours--no loud parties, unless I am invited :

Sadly they never do, as old decrpit neighbours do not seem to fit in to their plans.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by LeadingEdgeBoomer

Further to the Sandy Hill noise problems--there are those who want to make the landlords responsible rather than the tenants.

City proposes changes to noise bylaw



Personally I tell my younger neighbours--no loud parties, unless I am invited :

Sadly they never do, as old decrpit neighbours do not seem to fit in to their plans.

Ok, well, here's why this is unfair and won't work.

1) As the City won't tell violators who made the complaint, it is entirely possible that the quiet tenant in your building made the complaint, and if the City finds it difficult ON SITE to determine where the violation is coming form, how is the landlord to be able to do the next day? As such, the fine will be a new added cost that will either push up rents or be absorbed by the landlord. That hardly seems fair to anyone. Remember, many landlords are families and retired people who aren't making big profits on these properties. And fundamentally, what does the landlord have to do with the noise?

2) There is no provision in the Residential Tenancies Act to allow the landlord to evict the tenant or pass on the cost to the tenant, so much as I'm aware, so how is the landlord to correct the situation?

Update: Read the Citizen story the 1310 News piece cites, and it seems it would be only for landlords living in the building. I have an email into the Councillor for some explanation.

[S-Man]

Cue Diane Holmes, the Civic Hospital Community Association and the Preston Street Anti-BIA, there's a new tallest planned:

http://ottawa.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CT...tm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[AuxTown]

Originally Posted by S-Man

Cue Diane Holmes, the Civic Hospital Community Association and the Preston Street Anti-BIA, there's a new tallest planned:

http://ottawa.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CT...tm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Wow! Now that is an interesting proposal. That and SOHO Italia could be game-changers for our little city!

[harls]

What is being built on Riverside Dr just south of Hog's Back.. anyone know? Looks like some mid-rise condos.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by harls

What is being built on Riverside Dr just south of Hog's Back.. anyone know? Looks like some mid-rise condos.

Expansion of St Pat's Home.

http://www.stpats.ca/NewBuilding/Publish/images/web/index.html

[amanfromnowhere]

Does anyone have an idea what's going up at Carling Ave and North side of Queensway? They are builing steel frame of 6 (at least) storey...

[Ottawan]

Originally Posted by amanfromnowhere

Does anyone have an idea what's going up at Carling Ave and North side of Queensway? They are builing steel frame of 6 (at least) storey...

Dymon self-storage, Carling location: http://www.dymonselfstorage.com/1554-carling-avenue-ottawa.html

The link says it is coming "Winter 2011", but it's not finished yet - I'm pretty sure that's what you are referring to.

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by Ottawan

Dymon self-storage, Carling location: http://www.dymonselfstorage.com/1554-carling-avenue-ottawa.html

The link says it is coming "Winter 2011", but it's not finished yet - I'm pretty sure that's what you are referring to.

Storage Wars Ottawa here we come..yuuuuupppppp

[Ottawan]

For the past year or so, there have been frequent prognostications about an apparently imminent economic downturn facing Ottawa. However, ever since the 2012 budget was released, with some detail of the extent of upcoming federal service cuts, I think we have actually seen an uptick in (ambitious) development proposals in this City.

Is Ottawa really heading for bad times, or just a transition period?

[McC]

Originally Posted by Ottawan

For the past year or so, there have been frequent prognostications about an apparently imminent economic downturn facing Ottawa. However, ever since the 2012 budget was released, with some detail of the extent of upcoming federal service cuts, I think we have actually seen an uptick in (ambitious) development proposals in this City.

Is Ottawa really heading for bad times, or just a transition period?

In past downturns, new real estate construction has always overshot, and it is the worst indicator for what's to come (unless, perhaps, you can track the disparity between the forecast outlooks of developers' vs other sectors of the economy, and when it gets widest, get ready for a POP!).

The extent of the actual public sector layoffs won't really be known until later in the summer (it takes a while to select the actual surplus people, then to figure who can be accommodated into empty positions freed up by retirements or people leaving to do something else, etc., etc.). So I would expect that the impacts of the layoffs on the region's economy won't begin to manifest until later in the fall, or maybe not till next year.

In the meantime, past downturns suggest that new real estate construction and proposals will far overshoot the downward-adjusting demand, and if there is a serious downturn in our economy (or even a good hiccup -- a temporary blip before people transition to other lucrative opportunities like opening waffle stands, kayak adventures and gourmet cupcake shops*), I suspect that we'll likely be left with more than a few fenced-in vacant lots and holes in the ground with their happy-active-yuppy aspirational lifestyle photos fading slowly off of the "Coming Soon" signs, and maybe a few half-built skeletons left "on hold" for a few years.

All that said, it's important to bear in mind that Claridge is talking about the 2016-range for their big Somerset and Preston St proposals, and I haven't heard anything about them moving on their Barbarellas site in ages... so maybe they're factoring for 2-3 years of uncertainty and a return to business as usual after that. They could be right, and they'll make a fortune if they are; or they could be wrong, and be bankrupt in a couple of years. Either way, I'm glad to be happy in our home for the next 5 years.

*"value-added"!

[K-133]

Originally Posted by McC

In past downturns, new real estate construction has always overshot, and it is the worst indicator for what's to come (unless, perhaps, you can track the disparity between the forecast outlooks of developers' vs other sectors of the economy, and when it gets widest, get ready for a POP!).

The extent of the actual public sector layoffs won't really be known until later in the summer (it takes a while to select the actual surplus people, then to figure who can be accommodated into empty positions freed up by retirements or people leaving to do something else, etc., etc.). So I would expect that the impacts of the layoffs on the region's economy won't begin to manifest until later in the fall, or maybe not till next year.

In the meantime, past downturns suggest that new real estate construction and proposals will far overshoot the downward-adjusting demand, and if there is a serious downturn in our economy (or even a good hiccup -- a temporary blip before people transition to other lucrative opportunities like opening waffle stands, kayak adventures and gourmet cupcake shops*), I suspect that we'll likely be left with more than a few fenced-in vacant lots and holes in the ground with their happy-active-yuppy aspirational lifestyle photos fading slowly off of the "Coming Soon" signs, and maybe a few half-built skeletons left "on hold" for a few years.

All that said, it's important to bear in mind that Claridge is talking about the 2016-range for their big Somerset and Preston St proposals, and I haven't heard anything about them moving on their Barbarellas site in ages... so maybe they're factoring for 2-3 years of uncertainty and a return to business as usual after that. They could be right, and they'll make a fortune if they are; or they could be wrong, and be bankrupt in a couple of years. Either way, I'm glad to be happy in our home for the next 5 years.

*"value-added"!

you have some reasonable arguments. Do you have some data on past downturns and how they have impacted new developments in Ottawa?

[jaydog0212]

Originally Posted by McC

In past downturns, new real estate construction has always overshot, and it is the worst indicator for what's to come (unless, perhaps, you can track the disparity between the forecast outlooks of developers' vs other sectors of the economy, and when it gets widest, get ready for a POP!).

The extent of the actual public sector layoffs won't really be known until later in the summer (it takes a while to select the actual surplus people, then to figure who can be accommodated into empty positions freed up by retirements or people leaving to do something else, etc., etc.). So I would expect that the impacts of the layoffs on the region's economy won't begin to manifest until later in the fall, or maybe not till next year.

In the meantime, past downturns suggest that new real estate construction and proposals will far overshoot the downward-adjusting demand, and if there is a serious downturn in our economy (or even a good hiccup -- a temporary blip before people transition to other lucrative opportunities like opening waffle stands, kayak adventures and gourmet cupcake shops*), I suspect that we'll likely be left with more than a few fenced-in vacant lots and holes in the ground with their happy-active-yuppy aspirational lifestyle photos fading slowly off of the "Coming Soon" signs, and maybe a few half-built skeletons left "on hold" for a few years.

All that said, it's important to bear in mind that Claridge is talking about the 2016-range for their big Somerset and Preston St proposals, and I haven't heard anything about them moving on their Barbarellas site in ages... so maybe they're factoring for 2-3 years of uncertainty and a return to business as usual after that. They could be right, and they'll make a fortune if they are; or they could be wrong, and be bankrupt in a couple of years. Either way, I'm glad to be happy in our home for the next 5 years.

*"value-added"!

Do you think current projects uc now could be halted?

[McC]

Originally Posted by jaydog0212

Do you think current projects uc now could be halted?

I suppose that Tribeca Phase II and CP IV could get stopped if things go south in a hurry; but more likely to be impacted would be the Gloucester-Nepean towers, and any others of that sort, buildings that are approved but not yet started. Put another way, I'd be a little worried if I was invested in anything scheduled to start construction in 2013. I'm not predicting that things will get that bad, but I am arguing that real estate is a terrible predictor of whether things will get bad, and that if it does get bad, there will be a number of new construction projects that will get caught "not seeing it coming" when the bottom falls out. (and the idea that home building could "drive the economy" -- or likewise, that people leaving the public service to start selling boutique goods and services could do the same -- is economic mumbo jumbo)

[phil235]

Originally Posted by McC

The extent of the actual public sector layoffs won't really be known until later in the summer (it takes a while to select the actual surplus people, then to figure who can be accommodated into empty positions freed up by retirements or people leaving to do something else, etc., etc.). So I would expect that the impacts of the layoffs on the region's economy won't begin to manifest until later in the fall, or maybe not till next year.

In the meantime, past downturns suggest that new real estate construction and proposals will far overshoot the downward-adjusting demand, and if there is a serious downturn in our economy (or even a good hiccup -- a temporary blip before people transition to other lucrative opportunities like opening waffle stands, kayak adventures and gourmet cupcake shops*)
...
*"value-added"!

So are you saying it's not a good time to act on my dream of owning a waffle shop?

As for the impact of the cuts, I think that most of the impact of the uncertainty has already been felt in terms of purchasing decisions that have been put off by the thousands of people who weren't quite sure whether they would have jobs at the end of the year. The next impact will be further down the road, as even those cut will have periods of working notice followed by severance packages a year or more from now, and some of those people will be in a position to use the severance money for big purchases.

So I'd see a general downward trend in the local economy due to the magnitude of the cuts, but in the interim there might be some surprising impacts on purchases of new homes and other big ticket items.