HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Urban, Urban Design & Heritage Issues


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #121  
Old Posted May 12, 2019, 11:20 PM
DEWLine DEWLine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Ottawa-Gatineau
Posts: 337
I suspect that making sure that LPAT behaves just like the old OMB is absolutely intended to inflict punitive misery of several kinds upon both municipal governments and the people they represent. And this will not be confined to Ottawa and Toronto.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #122  
Old Posted Jul 17, 2019, 7:22 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,254
Capital Ward Councillor Shawn Menard Calls for the Break-Up of the Planning Committee
https://www.shawnmenard.ca/capital_ward_...r_the_break_up_of_the_planning_committee
by Shawn Menard

on July 15, 2019
For Immediate Release

Ottawa—In a report released on the planning and development process in the City of Ottawa, Capital Ward Councillor Shawn Menard calls for democratic reform to representation at City Hall. The primary recommendation is to split the Planning Committee in two, creating more representative decision-making.

This proposal is one of a number of recommendations in the report, alongside increasing transparency, employing a grassroots approach to development planning, by-law and legislative changes, a focus on the environment, and looking to other cities for best practices.

But it is the proposal to break-up the Planning Committee that would bring the greatest structural change to city governance, amplifying the democratic process within the city’s planning process.

“There is an obvious problem with the way this city reviews and approves development applications, often ignoring community design plans, and the thousands of hours of work attached to them. The method to appoint members to this committee is also a problem and is skewing decisions in communities across the city,” argues Menard.

Menard points out that there is precedent in the city for such a change. Currently, all development issues pertaining to rural wards are dealt with at the Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee. In addition, the Committee of Adjustment is broken into three panels—one for the urban wards, one for suburban wards and the third for rural wards.

“Government decisions are supposed to be made in the best interest of the people, and they should be made by representatives elected by those people most affected by the decisions. We don’t have that now,“ continued Menard.

“Breaking up the Planning Committee would be a straightforward way to bring a bit more democracy back to City Hall.”

The details of the proposal will be tabled as part of Council’s mid-term governance review.

Click here to download the report [PDF].
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #123  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2019, 5:24 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,518
How the ‘missing middle’ can create affordable infill housing in Ottawa
Architect Toon Dreessen breaks down the barriers to creating four and six-storey developments that integrate into existing communities

By: Toon Dreessen, OBJ
Published: Aug 30, 2019 7:09am EDT


We have a housing supply problem. One solution lies in the way we design, approve and construct infill homes.

We need more development within our urban core, especially on our traditional main streets. Think of Bank, Wellington West, Rideau, Montreal, Somerset, Gladstone and Stittsville Main Street. We need more people living and working in these areas to create the dense, walkable communities that make public transit viable and to capitalize on existing water, sewer and hydro services.

Most of these streets are zoned to permit six or eight-storey developments. This building scale is often referred to as the missing middle (#missingmiddle) and is faster to market: design to occupancy could be as little as one to two years, instead of five years or more for tall buildings.

This matters when we’re talking about housing affordability. As the Ontario Association of Architects noted in its 2018 Site Plan Study, larger buildings take longer to approve, adding to the cost of units – which is transferred to owners or tenants.

But planning approval – even for projects that are fully compliant with zoning bylaws and other requirements – takes nearly a year and costs hundreds of thousands of dollars for geotechnical studies, design studies, legal fees and other reports.

Once approved, landowners shell out hundreds of thousands of dollars in development charges and put up a letter of credit for site services and landscaping.

In short, unless you have very deep pockets, you could be out well over a million dollars before a shovel even hits the ground. That’s a huge cash flow problem especially for smaller landowners wanting to capitalize on the equity in their land, and forge a stronger community in the city’s core.

Snow studies and wood construction

Here are a couple of other barriers to constructing more “missing middle” housing.

If a new building is going to be taller than a neighbouring building, the developer has to show that the new construction won’t affect the amount of snow that accumulates on the existing building. The only way to do this is to study their roof and, if needed, reinforce it.

Most neighbours might be fine allowing someone to study their roof (especially if they get a new roof out of it) but if the neighbour refuses, the developer has to set the new building back at least five metres from the adjacent property. On an infill site 20 metres wide, this could amount to half the available lot area.

There’s also a huge leap in construction costs and complexities going from low-rise housing to four-to-eight-storey buildings that’s hard to recoup in sales or rental income.

For example, wood (as mass timber) can only be used in buildings of up to six storeys. And above three storeys, residential buildings require sprinklers.

But go a bit higher, and building codes see little difference between a seven and 70-storey building.

Developers quickly realize that the cost per unit doesn’t work at the scale of the “missing middle.” However, at 10 or 12 storeys, the project becomes financially viable again.

But since that exceeds the permissible height limits on traditional main streets, it is sure to result in a planning appeal or approval delay. To cover the inevitable legal costs and delays, the developer might submit a plan for a 12 or 15-storey building, leaving room for negotiation, tapering and other efforts to get approval in place. That further raises the ire of the community and pits the development industry against homeowners and community groups. Years drag by and no one wins.

So, what are the solutions?

Planning and design

The city needs to incentivize planning approvals for these desirable developments. If a site is compliant with zoning, planning and overall use, with only a very minor amount of variance (such as increasing height by less than five per cent with no additional storeys), the planning review should be a straightforward compliance check.

City officials should also guarantee planning approvals within three months to save developers tens of thousands of dollars in delays and carrying costs, as well as allow development charges to be paid prior to occupancy of the building; this frees up needed working capital, incentivizing smaller scale developers.

On the design side, we need to collectively advocate for building code changes to give architects flexibility on the scale and size of buildings to create a #missingmiddle to suit individual conditions: raise the threshold for what is considered a tall building to be more than eight storeys and look at evidence-based analysis for safety systems.

With new classifications, we could consider a balance of sprinkler systems, emergency power options (including batteries), fire separations and construction types to incentivize missing middle construction that keeps people safe and housed in affordable, well-built and sustainable buildings.

We can create the city we aspire to: walkable, moderately dense and sustainable with housing options that keep our communities vibrant. Small policy changes can have a huge impact on the sort of city we aspire to build.

Toon Dreessen is president of Ottawa-based Architects DCA and past-president of the Ontario Association of Architects. For a sample of Architects DCA’s projects, check out the firm’s portfolio at bit.ly/DCA-portfolio. Follow @ArchitectsDCA on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Instagram.

Video Link


https://obj.ca/article/toon-dreessen-Arc...-create-affordable-infill-housing-ottawa
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #124  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2019, 6:20 PM
CityTech CityTech is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,798
The city is about to start the R4 zoning review which may lead to a significant loosening of these rules and allow more missing middle development.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #125  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2019, 6:26 PM
Multi-modal Multi-modal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,154
Another thing that came up in the ottwatch.ca

The City is proposing to reduce the minimum % single family homes for new developments outside the greenbelt. From 45% of all new dwellings to 30%.

https://app01.ottawa.ca/postingplans/appDetails.jsf?lang=en&appId=__BMF6WK

Why do we even have a minimum? What a backwards policy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #126  
Old Posted Sep 3, 2019, 8:02 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 28,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Multi-modal View Post
Another thing that came up in the ottwatch.ca

The City is proposing to reduce the minimum % single family homes for new developments outside the greenbelt. From 45% of all new dwellings to 30%.

https://app01.ottawa.ca/postingplans/appDetails.jsf?lang=en&appId=__BMF6WK

Why do we even have a minimum? What a backwards policy.
Jeez. 30% should be the maximum.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #127  
Old Posted Sep 27, 2019, 1:03 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,518
City poised to jack up development application review fees by 20 per cent

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Updated: September 26, 2019


Builders are poised to pay 20 per cent more for municipal staff to review planning applications as the city tries to raise more money to satisfy new turnaround times ordered by the provincial government.

The planning department has already been struggling to meet the legislated timelines to review development applications. Then, the Ontario Progressive Conservative government brought in Bill 108, which passed in June, and dramatically cut the turnaround timelines.

The province previously gave municipalities 210 days to review official plan amendment applications. The time has been reduced to 120 days. The timeline for reviewing a zoning bylaw amendment application has gone from 150 days to 90 days.

The planning department says it needs more resources to meet the demand, so instead of tapping property taxpayers for the extra money to hire seven full-time staff, it will go to the development industry.

A developer proposing an amendment to the official plan currently pays the city $20,170 to review the application. A review of a major zoning bylaw amendment application costs $16,370. Those fees are proposed to increase to $24,043 and $19,513, respectively, starting in 2020.

The number of development applications filed at city hall have been climbing in recent years: 839 in 2016, 930 in 2017 and 939 in 2018. There were 555 applications filed at the halfway point of 2019.

The planning committee on Thursday unanimously endorsed staff’s plan to raise the application review fees to hire more staff.

The development industry hopes city hall gets better at clearing the applications.

Ted Phillips addressed the committee in representing the Greater Ottawa Home Builders’ Association. He said the industry for years has been waiting for the city to boost its resources to improve the review times for development applications. The city in the past has made promises to speed up the development review process.

“Guess what? They didn’t,” Phillips said, but he has faith in management’s new strategy to raise fees and hire more people.

The city intends to hire five engineers, a solicitor and a co-op student with the new revenue.

The extra money generated by fees is estimated at $1.8 million, with $750,000 of that being earmarked for new technology to manage applications.

Another industry rep warned that adding more costs to the development industry could impact economic activity.

“Our concern is development charges are getting high and we’re afraid it will negatively impact people’s decisions to build,” said Dean Karakasis, executive director of the Building Owners and Managers Association Ottawa, which represents the commercial real estate industry.

“When we talk about working together, which we have done really with the city over the years to attract business to Ottawa, one of the raw materials when it comes to a city like Ottawa is office space because it’s not an industrial town. It’s a white-collar town.”

In an interview earlier this week, Karakasis said the upfront costs to build new commercial space are eventually passed down to renters.

In the residential context, the development fees are passed on to homebuyers through the purchase price.

Builders also pay fees to the city to cover the municipal infrastructure and programs required to service new developments. The city comes up with those per-residential-unit and per-square-foot development charges after assessing future municipal projects.

Stephen Willis, the city’s general manager of planning, said he believes Ottawa’s development charges are some of the lowest in Ontario.

As for the development application fees, the city says it, too, is at the low end compared to other Ontario municipalities.

The city is also reviewing what indirect costs should inform development application fees. For now, staff have calculated the direct costs.

Council will be asked to approve the new development application fees on Oct. 9.

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-new...t-application-review-fees-by-20-per-cent
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #128  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2020, 12:32 PM
eltodesukane eltodesukane is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,144
The following quote is from the New York Times, but it applies here as well.

"To address the country’s monumental housing crisis and also become less automobile- and carbon-dependent,
America needs to densify its job-rich metro areas so that more people can afford to live there and walk, bike and take public transit to get to work and back."
"Housing shortages exacerbate home prices and homelessness and cause all sorts of other ripple effects on commute times, economic productivity, health and family life."

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/28/arts/density-housing-skyscraper-museum.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #129  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2020, 8:10 PM
passwordisnt123 passwordisnt123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Ottawa (Centretown)
Posts: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by eltodesukane View Post
The following quote is from the New York Times, but it applies here as well.

"To address the country’s monumental housing crisis and also become less automobile- and carbon-dependent,
America needs to densify its job-rich metro areas so that more people can afford to live there and walk, bike and take public transit to get to work and back."
"Housing shortages exacerbate home prices and homelessness and cause all sorts of other ripple effects on commute times, economic productivity, health and family life."

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/28/arts/density-housing-skyscraper-museum.html
That was a really good read. Thanks for sharing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #130  
Old Posted Mar 31, 2020, 4:47 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,518
How COVID-19 will change the design of our cities

By: Toon Dreessen
Published: Mar 31, 2020 12:24pm EDT


[This article is sponsored by Architects DCA]


It’s been a tough few weeks for all of us. Small businesses are struggling and our traditional, walkable main streets are void of the pedestrian traffic that independent stores depend on to stay afloat.

Some have closed outright, while others are taking steps to keep their doors open by offering take-out and delivery options for groceries, sandwiches and other necessities. Governments are offering support, at least to large businesses and individuals who suddenly find themselves out of work.

What has quickly become evident is that we’re not just looking at a short-term societal change, but rather a new way of thinking about how we approach the design of our cities.

With fewer motorists commuting to work, normally busy roads are largely empty. This starkly illustrates just how much of our city is devoted to cars and moving people quickly through the city from one place to another, without stopping to experience the sense of place we’re passing through. Given the lack of vehicle traffic, an online petition to open up the NCC’s parkways to cyclists is attracting attention. However, mobilizing forces to make this happen in a short time frame is likely tough.

Meanwhile, as we try to keep physical distance between us, we realize how narrow our sidewalks are. Picture how challenging it is to navigate narrow sidewalks at the best of times, let alone when they are covered in snow or ice. Now picture this as being an everyday occurrence if you are pushing a stroller or using a wheelchair.

Maybe it’s time to rethink equity in our built environment. What if we devoted more of our street space to cycling and walking? What if instead of “flex space” on Elgin or Queen streets, these spaces were dedicated for walking, separated cycling lanes and bike parking? Perhaps our planning goals should be to maintain physical distance while forging communities so that small businesses can thrive.

Over the years, our urban places have become denser – as they should. We need greater density to make transit efficient and promote the walkable and bikeable communities that we need to achieve our sustainability goals.

But what our current crisis is teaching us is what urbanists, architects and planners have been saying for years: Social spaces within the density matter. We need parks where we can create community and establish social cohesion while finding the soothing personal space we need as humans.

We need apartment buildings with space to live and work, have a family and find quiet space inside our homes if we can’t go outside. We need community anchors such as diners, coffee shops, libraries, local grocery stores and social spaces where we can connect with friends while taking time to reconnect with ourselves.

Let’s also think about what we need as a society. When our grocery stores run out of basics such as flour, milk, toilet paper or fresh food, we need to think about how our basic needs are met.

We should also use this moment to think about how we create our commercial buildings and workspaces. As offices move to flexible spaces with active workstations and desks for hotelling instead of fixed office cubicles, and we reduce the amount of space each person gets – packing more people into smaller spaces – are we prioritizing the spatial needs of people? Are we forcing office workers into ever-closer proximity because we think this will breed collaboration?

Many of our grocery stores are currently relying on lines of tape on the floor and sheets of plexiglass to keep customers away from cashiers. We’ve designed a hostile built environment. We treat people as units to be processed, kept at a distance and separated by harsh, sterile means that create a sense of unwelcome.

Is this a temporary reaction or the new normal? Consider how that “new normal” is still in place more than a year after the Toronto van attack with ugly and largely ineffectual precast Jersey barriers. If we’re to design for this new normal, let’s make the design uplifting and enhance our quality of life, not corral people into a dystopian future.

We can choose how we want to accept the new normal.

It’s time to think about our cities, our social spaces and how we support society’s most vulnerable people. It’s time to think about the equity we strive for and what we can do, as a city, to bring in a new era of respect and social cohesion as well as forging the communities we aspire to. Design matters.

Toon Dreessen is president of Ottawa-based Architects DCA and past-president of the Ontario Association of Architects. For a sample of Architects DCA’s projects, check out the firm’s portfolio at bit.ly/DCA-portfolio. Follow @ArchitectsDCA on Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Instagram.

https://www.obj.ca/article/sponsored-architects-dca-how-covid-19-will-change-design-our-cities
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #131  
Old Posted Apr 10, 2020, 4:12 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,518
City of Ottawa: Residential Fourth Density (R4) Zoning Review

April 2020: Revised Recommendations
https://ottawa.ca/en/city-hall/public-en...eview#april-2020-revised-recommendations


April 2020: Revised Proposed R4 Zoning Map
https://documents.ottawa.ca/sites/documents/files/schedulea_r4zoning_phase2_en.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #132  
Old Posted Jun 5, 2020, 9:48 PM
lrt's friend lrt's friend is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 12,747
I drove across Strandherd Road in Barrhaven this afternoon and it just shows us what a mess we are creating. It is nothing more than a traffic sewer with inadequate transit and cycling infrastructure. A whole new big box centre has opened with retail along the sidewalk, but access only from the parking lot behind. Useless! The fact that this new development has next to no transit re-enforces the lack of pedestrians. There is new high density residential development but it has been pushed away from rapid transit because of pre-existing big box stores and massive parking lots. Nice to see high density development but it should have been right next to a rapid transit station, not a 10 minute walk away with a traffic sewer, parking lots or loading docks in between.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #133  
Old Posted Sep 8, 2020, 12:52 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,518
Adding density to Ottawa neighbourhoods can be done gently
Addressing what planners call the “missing middle” helps us avoid more awful towers, which are totally not in character anywhere outside the downtown core.

Brigitte Pellerin
Publishing date: Sep 06, 2020 • Last Updated 1 day ago • 3 minute read


Among the topics flying under the radar in the great back-to-school shuffle (oh, hey, good luck!) are traffic pattern studies and R4 zoning reviews. The City of Ottawa has put the brakes on the former and is proceeding with the latter. I am pleased.

I know what you’re thinking. We really ought to frog-march planners and urbanists into a Communications 101 boot camp. R4, really?

But first, traffic. Periodically people who like spreadsheets study how you and I, plus our neighbours, get to where we’re going. It’s called an “origin-destination survey” because … see my previous paragraph. The point is to study how people move in our region and use that information to determine where we should put our transportation resources and on what: roads, paths, transit.

The last such study dates back to 2011 and it needs updating. But with the pandemic it makes sense to postpone the survey until such time as people start moving around like normal again. Which I’m hoping we don’t. We’ll be able to stop widening roads and build better, and better connected, active-transportation pathways for a lot less money. Win-win-win.

The zoning review is slightly more controversial, and it involves the search for Ottawa’s “missing middle” in housing.

The Residential Fourth Density (R4) Zoning Review report was recently made public and will be on the Sept. 10 planning committee agenda.

Staff recommend making modifications to zoning regulations in urban wards to permit the construction of medium-sized apartment buildings (eight to 12 units) on existing lots, in order to provide more options between detached family homes and humongous towers. The city calls this the missing middle. I prefer the term “gentle density.” Both essentially mean the same thing. We’re talking about adding the kind of two- or three-story buildings that make Montreal’s Plateau Mont-Royal or Outremont neighbourhoods so charming.

It also happens to be the kind of building that would help align our urban wards with the Five Big Moves already approved by Ottawa Council, that constitute the backbone of the new Official Plan. Nothing warms my heart like a city that does what it said it would, especially when what it said it would do makes so much sense.

City of Ottawa Planner Tim Moerman says there are two reasons we don’t currently have those buildings: minimum lot sizes have artificially limited where medium-sized apartment buildings can be built, and there’s a “four-unit cap in some R4 zones which limits the potential units for no compelling planning reasons.” The city has most helpfully produced a video, featuring a homeless dog and somewhat satanic cat, to explain the situation if too many mentions of R4s make your eyes water.

You know me; I think encouraging the construction of medium-sized apartment buildings on existing lots is a no-brainer. But apparently it’s not that simple. Coun. Jeff Leiper, who sits on the planning committee and whose Kitchissippi ward includes condo-central Westboro, says “there’s no consensus on it and it’s controversial.” Residents get the need to address the “missing middle,” he adds, but worry the city won’t support intensification “with the soft and hard infrastructure we need — parks, swimming pools, cycling infrastructure, traffic calming, etc.”

Another reason it’s controversial is residents sometimes fear infills will ruin the character and look of existing neighbourhoods. Not an unreasonable thing to worry about. But the point of addressing the “missing middle” is precisely to add density without adding more awful towers, which are totally not in character anywhere outside the downtown core.

To my surprise, the most enthusiastic support I heard was from Coun. Jan Harder. Her ward, in suburban Barrhaven, will not be affect by the current review but as chair of the planning committee she says “the report is something to be excited about because it could very well help with the affordable housing shortage in Ottawa.”

If we can manage to stop widening roads and add affordable housing in lovely mid-sized urban buildings, you’ll find me cheering, too. Go, Team Gentle Density!

Brigitte Pellerin is an Ottawa writer.

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/peller...cm/aa08b98e-6381-4b7f-bb9b-2ba20a4cb5da/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #134  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2020, 9:04 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,518
New rules could open the door to more low-rise apartments in established Ottawa communities

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Publishing date: Sep 10, 2020 • Last Updated 1 hour ago • 3 minute read


The complicated work of encouraging home construction, shoehorning small apartment complexes into Ottawa’s oldest neighbourhoods and satisfying neighbours who will live near those buildings played out during a city council planning committee meeting Thursday.

On the table was a proposal to tweak the zoning bylaw to support, while regulating, multi-unit buildings as residential developments in inner-urban communities.

It means those neighbourhoods — like Hintonburg, Sandy Hill, Overbrook, Carlington and others — are on notice that more infill, densified, residential buildings could pop up if council approves the bylaw changes, which the planning committee fully endorsed.

The policy review has been going on since 2016, ever since inner-urban communities started raising alarms about the proliferation of “bunkhouses,” referring to single units that have several bedrooms jammed into them, spiking the density on a single lot.

The bunkhouse issue is intricate because those rooming houses, often used by students around post-secondary institutions, provide homes to people who need them, but the buildings and properties weren’t intended to handle the density. The buildings have generated property standards and noise complaints from neighbours.

Meanwhile, Ottawa’s rental vacancy rate is extremely low, rent prices are increasing, city council has declared a housing and homelessness emergency and the push is on to crank up intensification in existing communities under a soon-to-be-updated official plan.

The city’s residential zones are classified by density, from R1 at the lowest density to R5 at the highest density. The proposal under scrutiny zeroes in on the R4 zone, which generally allows buildings up to four storeys.

The zone also includes some restrictions on the number of units on a lot. Under the new proposal, the city would increase those maximums.

Coun. Jan Harder, the chair of the planning committee, said there are 17,000 R4 lots inside the greenbelt, highlighting the intensification opportunities, but also the risks that come with altering the characteristics of old neighbourhoods.

At the centre of the conflict is the goal of filling the “missing middle” of housing options in Ottawa and making those multi-unit buildings fit in established areas.

While the city would like to see more family-orientated units in low-rise buildings to provide housing options, it has been difficult to get three-or-four-bedroom rental units built.

Many people who made deputations during the committee meeting pointed to this problem.

“We don’t want to see families driven out of the neighbourhoods because we’re only building studio (apartments) or one-bedroom apartments,” Marjolaine Provost of the Overbrook Community Association told the committee.

Provost also voiced a concern about the threat of overbuilding in neighbourhoods — pointing to a 3.5-storey, 34-unit apartment that’s replacing two homes on Columbus Avenue in Overbrook — and not seeing complementary community infrastructure, like sidewalks and recreation spaces. Overbrook wants the number of units in a building capped at 24, Provost said.

Sheila Perry, president of the Federation of Citizens’ Associations, said she’s “fearful” for neighbourhoods like Hintonburg that are packed with R4 zones.

“We don’t want to overload any one particular area,” Perry said.

Four members of the Hintonburg Community Association lined up in the deputation queue to criticize the city’s proposal, highlighting the lack of requirements for building design, amenity spaces and affordable housing.

Coun. Catherine McKenney, too, didn’t want people to make a false assumption that encouraging more rental units will generate affordable housing options.

The local homebuilding industry also had a lukewarm reaction to the proposed policy changes.

Murray Chown, a developer consultant representing the Greater Ottawa Home Builders Association, said members are willing to “wait and see how this plays out,” even if they have concerns.

Parking, and the fact that some apartment buildings won’t be allowed to provide parking spaces under the proposed policy, continues to be a hot topic.

If a tenant moves in and has a car, that car might be parked on the street, exacerbating parking pressures in a neighbourhood. The city wants to discourage car use and encourage public transit use, but as Chown observed, not all R4 properties eyed for low-rise apartments would necessarily be steps way from transit.

When it comes to Sandy Hill, which was one area affected by the bunkhouse problem, Coun. Mathieu Fleury lost an attempt to cap the number of apartment units to four on properties in parts of the neighbourhood, though he won support to restrict rooftop amenity space and enact requirements for storing garbage.

Council will consider the planning committee’s recommendation on Sept. 23.

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-new...cm/70150a36-67ab-4183-8bb8-4a11ddf95898/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #135  
Old Posted Oct 1, 2020, 10:13 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,518
City relieved to keep collecting developer fees for parks, libraries
Ontario's new regulations walk back many earlier proposals

Kate Porter · CBC News
Posted: Oct 01, 2020 4:37 PM ET | Last Updated: 2 hours ago


New provincial regulations have taken effect that dictate the fees the City of Ottawa can collect from developers to pay for city services, and they've turned out to be far less restrictive than municipalities originally feared.

When Bill 108 was first proposed at Queen's Park in spring 2019, aimed at cutting red tape for home builders, municipalities across Ontario spoke out.

They said they stood to lose access to millions of dollars for community benefits, if they were only allowed to collect money from developers for such things as roads and pipes, but not for the so-called "soft" services new developments require, such as libraries and parks.

But more than a year later, the Ontario government reversed many of the elements that municipalities had fought by way of a second wide-reaching bill, July's COVID-19 Economic Recovery Act. New regulations took effect Sept. 18.

"Bill 108 was confounding. It's almost as though the people who write these bills don't actually know anything about the 444 municipalities in Ontario," Rideau-Goulbourn Coun. Scott Moffatt remarked at Ottawa's agricultural and rural affairs committee Thursday, where councillors heard an update about the provincial changes.

"If they want to use COVID as a cover for amending Bill 108, so be it. But those changes needed to happen because they were detrimental to the operation of a municipality."

The final list of services for which municipalities are allowed to collect money through development charges has grown much longer than had been in the original Bill 108, explained Garett Schromm from the city's legal department.

Development charges can now go toward child care services, housing services, bylaw enforcement, libraries, public health, long-term care and running parks and recreation, he said, in addition to such things as transit, waste and policing.

The city will likely also replace its current practice of allowing developers taller buildings in exchange for money for affordable housing and community gardens, a tool known as Section 37. Instead, the planning department will come up with a new "community benefits" bylaw that the province states can only be applied to buildings at least five storeys tall and with at least 10 units.

Bill 108 had intended to scrap the city's ability to collect money from high-rise developments instead of requiring land be set aside for parks, and city staff were glad to see that reversed.

Finally, the regulations expand the powers of the Ontario's minister of municipal affairs to make orders related to zoning, a job that is usually the municipality's. Such orders have become more frequent in the GTA, but it's not clear what they will mean for Ottawa, said Schromm.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/arac-development-charges-bill-108-reversal-1.5746116
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #136  
Old Posted Nov 23, 2020, 10:55 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,518
When it comes to liveable neighbourhoods, there’s a wide divide in Canada’s cities
A block-by-block analysis of the amenities available in urban areas offers insights into creating more vibrant communities

Alex Bozikovic, Joe Castaldo and Danielle Webb, The Globe & Mail
Published 2 hours ago


For most Canadians, the world has shrunk. The COVID-19 pandemic has kept many people close to home. And it has made many wonder whether the small worlds of our neighbourhoods shouldn’t contain all we need for daily life. A notion recently popularized by Paris mayor Anne Hidalgo, known as the 15-minute city, holds that basic necessities should be within a short walk or cycle ride of home, reducing vehicle trips along with the emissions and inconvenience that go with them.

This is not a reality for most Canadians. The Globe has analyzed data on the country’s major metropolitan areas released earlier this year by Statistics Canada and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. The data measures proximity to amenities at the city-block level: How close residents within that area are to such things as a grocery store, pharmacy, school, and library.



A neighbourhood is considered “amenity dense” when a resident in that neighbourhood can walk to a grocery store, pharmacy and public transit stop within one kilometre; when there is a childcare facility, primary school and library within 1.5 kilometres; and when they can drive to a health facility within three kilometres and a place of employment in 10 kilometres. (These areas are highlighted in pink on our maps.)

Amenity-rich neighbourhoods are scarce in most of Canada’s cities; only 23.2 per cent of urban dwellers live in these types of areas. This suggests that creating a country of 15-minute cities will be challenging: it would likely mean bringing even more people into central Vancouver and Toronto and parts of Montreal, and making changes to the suburbs.



“Most Canadians live in the vast auto-oriented suburbs and exurbs, and those are difficult to retrofit,” says Queen’s University planning professor David Gordon. “Can [we] design places so that ownership of a car of isn’t required for citizenship?”

The Divided Cities



Toronto’s downtown areas are packed with amenities, but that changes the farther out you go. In the inner suburbs, such as Etobicoke and Scarborough, some neighbourhood blocks have few amenities even with relatively large populations of more than 1,000 people. These areas of the city are home to more racialized and low-income residents.

Lower-income neighbourhoods on the edges of the city are less likely to own vehicles, making access to amenities challenging. Research from Steven Farber at University of Toronto Scarborough shows such households participate in 0.6 activities per day compared to 1.1 for those who own vehicles. “Over a long period of time, that can have really significant consequences for health, quality of life, income and potential,” Dr. Farber says.

Some of the same trends are evident in Montreal. Affluent and gentrified areas are amenity-dense, while lower-income neighbourhoods, such as Pointe-Saint-Charles and LaSalle, are not. Looking at them on a map can obscure other challenges, though. Just because a city block is dense doesn’t mean residents can afford the available amenities. “I live here in Pointe-Claire, and there’s a Metro [grocery store] next door to me,” says Ahmed El-Geneidy, an urban planning professor at McGill University. “I cannot afford to shop there for my entire family.”

People view the amenities in their communities as a measure of how society values their worth, says Kofi Hope, co-founder of Monumental in Toronto, a consultancy focused on equitable recovery from COVID-19. “When you have folks feeling they have concrete evidence in front of them that their neighbourhoods, their lives, and their health are not as important as others, that’s how we end up with a really polarized and divided city.”

The Suburban Cities



Some cities are actually more like suburbs. They are sprawling and car-oriented, with few amenity-dense neighbourhoods. Only a minority of residents in Calgary, Edmonton, Saskatoon, Winnipeg and Ottawa live in amenity rich areas. The Prairie cities expanded as the car became king, and their expansive geography meant there was plenty of land to build on, which heavily influenced planning decisions. The notion is misguided, says Noel Keough, an associate professor in the Faculty of Environmental Design at the University of Calgary. “It actually implies we need more aggressive public policy to curtail sprawl,” he says.

Edmonton is aiming to improve walkability and accessibility partly through redeveloping older strip malls into mixed use areas. “Even if there’s no physical interventions, the spots could be animated with farmers markets or other activities so the community can have a local hub,” says Kalen Anderson, director of urban analysis for the City of Edmonton. Ms. Anderson is not anticipating residents will ditch their cars, but said the goal is to provide alternatives. “It’s about what the other options are, and whether people can walk, cycle or take transit to get what they need,” she says.

Last year, Ottawa released an official plan that includes establishing 15-minute neighbourhoods. That city encompasses a wide swath of geography, including a downtown, suburbs, and rural areas. “We want to tailor the policies of our plan to each individual area to focus on what’s missing,” says Alain Miguelez, Ottawa’s manager of policy planning.

The Jekyll-and-Hyde Cities



The smaller cities of Atlantic Canada each have a historic core full of amenity, says T.J. Maguire, an urban designer with Develop Nova Scotia, a crown corporation. In the core of Halifax, “it is possible to live without a car — which is rare in a small city,” he says. However, most people live car-centric lives. The Halifax region has large areas of car-oriented suburbs; this is true to a lesser degree in Saint John and St. John’s. This creates what Prof. Gordon calls a “Jekyll-and-Hyde quality.”

The good news is that each has some good bones. Their older cores have small lots and fine street grids, all laid out long before the car. “Humans gravitate toward a fine-grained experience of streets and buildings,” Maguire says. “We have those intact.” Stephen Kopp, a partner at Acre Architects in Saint John, says the city’s core has seen growing interest from developers and new residents, and is in many ways already a 15-minute city — though for now, it lacks a grocery store. “The city is working to fill in the gaps,” Mr. Kopp said. “And in a small city, one change can make a big difference.”

The Paradise City



Starting in the 1970s, Vancouver became the poster child for regeneration of a North American downtown, more than doubling the population of downtown and creating amenities such as cultural venues and schools along the way. “We’ve been talking about the 15-minute city for 25 years,” said Larry Beasley, the former co-chief planner of Vancouver.

In addition, significant areas of prewar neighbourhoods have a high degree of amenities. Mr. Beasley credits this to a mixture of the physical qualities of those older neighbourhoods — which are inherently more compact and more mixed than postwar suburbs — and some targeted interventions by city government to bring new development. The houses in those neighbourhoods are now deeply unaffordable, as Mr. Beasley acknowledges, but he notes the city’s policies to encourage small-scale infill development. “We have found ways to bring in new people, with targeted intensification spread across the city,” he said.
The Road to a Better City

Even after the pandemic, the rubric of the 15-minute city will still be relevant. “It allows for healthier living, and reinforces social connections,” said Cheryll Case, principal of CP Planning. And it could contribute to a more equitable way of building cities. So how can it be achieved on a large scale? “Right now, the real challenge is suburban places,’ said Mr. Beasley, the former Vancouver planner. He advocates for density — largely new housing — to be gathered into clusters along with a mix of retail and workplaces. This will require “strong vision, and also detailed set of policies and procedures that will make it a reality.”

Ms. Case suggested that changes to urban neighbourhoods are an important part of the solution. She suggests replacing some houses with low-rise and mid-rise apartments, which would suit today’s smaller families and allow more households to enjoy existing amenities. “In some cases, we’re talking about creating something entirely new,” she says, “and in others it’s about returning the life to a neighbourhood that used to be there.”

Graphics by Danielle Webb and Murat Yükselir
Follow Alex Bozikovic and Joe Castaldo, on Twitter @alexbozikovic @Joe_Castaldo


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/a...-neighbourhoods-theres-a-wide-divide-in/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #137  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2020, 4:21 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is online now
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 28,570
Thanks for posting! I took the liberty to post it in the Maps and Graphics thread on the Canada forum. A few reactions already so far.

Interesting that they use the entire Montreal island instead of Montreal proper, though it would likely be a challenge to only include the disjointed mess that is Montreal proper.

I do wonder how pre-amalgamation Ottawa, Toronto and Montreal would do in this analysis.

No surprise that pre-WWII Ottawa does great. In my experience, even mid-century suburban areas, up to the 80s we're also fairly well laid out for that 15 minute neighbourhood feel. The era of the strip malls provided your grocery store and pharmacy, with a few smaller independent shops in between. They often included a generous sidewalk in front of the strip mall and a few nearby apartment blocks or at least higher density housing. I'm thinking about Touraine in Gatineau (60s) and Fallingbrook in Orleans (80s).

It's the age of the big box store that completely destroyed the idea of community oriented development, with nothing but huge chain stores spread-out in massive parking lots along extra wide highways like Innes or Terry Fox.

My Touraine and Fallingbrook examples with their strip malls are more walkable than denser big box store Le Plateau in Gatineau in my experience.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #138  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2020, 6:51 PM
Tesladom Tesladom is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2019
Posts: 579
Useless comparison since Toronto and Vancouver are the cities proper, while Ottawa and worse Halifax encompass not only the urban-suburban regions, but also swaths of rural lands as well.
You would need to use Golden Horseshoe or Lower Mainland to Compare against geographic behemoths like Ottawa or HRM

or conversely Inner Greenbelt Ottawa vs Toronto or city of Vancouver
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #139  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2020, 8:16 PM
vtecyo vtecyo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 328
It looks like we're not doing much worse than average if we just compare the urban/suburban areas to other cities.

**rant activated**
However - I was shocked (or maybe just really irritated) when I took a closer look at South Barrhaven / Half Moon Bay on Google maps. It's definitely not one of the areas I'd call a 15 minute neighbourhood - and it's practically brand new.

From what I can see there are no retail locations where you can buy anything in an area of 2 KM x 2 KM south of the Jock River - and this a new area being developed right now - the mind boggles... I guess the golf course would technically have a bit of retail... so it's not completely barren.

Google has some placemarks for what look like home businesses - but nothing else... From what I can see on the city zoning maps there's no property zoned for retail in the whole area... lol.

It's not too bad if you live at the north end - the Loblaws in the town centre is about 1km up Greenbank Road (so maybe a 15 minute walk). However - if you live any farther south it could be up to a 4km walk one way...

The street grid is nicely layed out - actual thought appears to have been made to make it walkable in straight lines - and there is bus service - but that doesn't quite make up for the distances involved.

What lead the city to do this !?
https://www.google.com/maps/@45.2484966,-75.7303709,3362m/data=!3m1!1e3

Even a bit of land set aside in the middle of the community would have been nice - even if no-one wanted to build a strip mall right away - at least there would be the possibility of it. I suppose they could rezone some empty land down by Barnsdale road... eventually.

**rant deactivated**

Oh well...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #140  
Old Posted Nov 24, 2020, 8:19 PM
TransitZilla TransitZilla is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by vtecyo View Post
It looks like we're not doing much worse than average if we just compare the urban/suburban areas to other cities.

**rant activated**
However - I was shocked (or maybe just really irritated) when I took a closer look at South Barrhaven / Half Moon Bay on Google maps. It's definitely not one of the areas I'd call a 15 minute neighbourhood - and it's practically brand new.

From what I can see there are no retail locations where you can buy anything in an area of 2 KM x 2 KM south of the Jock River - and this a new area being developed right now - the mind boggles... I guess the golf course would technically have a bit of retail... so it's not completely barren.

Google has some placemarks for what look like home businesses - but nothing else... From what I can see on the city zoning maps there's no property zoned for retail in the whole area... lol.

It's not too bad if you live at the north end - the Loblaws in the town centre is about 1km up Greenbank Road (so maybe a 15 minute walk). However - if you live any farther south it could be up to a 4km walk one way...

The street grid is nicely layed out - actual thought appears to have been made to make it walkable in straight lines - and there is bus service - but that doesn't quite make up for the distances involved.

What lead the city to do this !?
https://www.google.com/maps/@45.2484966,-75.7303709,3362m/data=!3m1!1e3

Even a bit of land set aside in the middle of the community would have been nice - even if no-one wanted to build a strip mall right away - at least there would be the possibility of it. I suppose they could rezone some empty land down by Barnsdale road... eventually.

**rant deactivated**

Oh well...
You're not wrong, but the plan is for the retail centre to be at the corner of Cambrian and the "New" Greenbank- which has not yet been built.

There is a current site plan application for a grocery store: https://devapps.ottawa.ca/en/applications/__B92VW8/details

EDIT: Here's the CDP. It looks like it called for "Neighborhood commercial" (i.e. small strip mall) at Cambrian & Old Greenbank, but residential was built instead. They should have left a spot at Cambrian & Longfields as well.

https://ottawa.ca/en/barrhaven-south-community-design-plan

Last edited by TransitZilla; Nov 24, 2020 at 9:26 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Ontario > Ottawa-Gatineau > Urban, Urban Design & Heritage Issues
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:38 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.