Ottawa's Official Plan Update

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Says the guy who wants LRT to the burbs. Yes, let's build more transit unfriendly neighbourhoods. This city is going to really choking on traffic in a decade if this sprawl keeps up. It's worse than the GTA when put in context of Ottawa's population.

The burbs are already there. Increasing the transit modal share in those areas is better than providing 🞵🞵🞵🞵 transit that will incentivize heavier car use. Providing high order transit to those areas isn't the problem IMO, it's the zoning and level of sprawl that is permitted to continue.

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by Proof Sheet

https://bulldogottawa.com/new-official-plan-is-a-rotten-document/

Reading this would make you never want to get out of bed.

Funny how he has nothing to say about all the councilors on the planning committee taking donations from developers.. but yes, planners are the problem

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

Funny how he has nothing to say about all the councilors on the planning committee taking donations from developers.. but yes, planners are the problem

You mean the ones that normally follow/vote along with what planning recommends.

And he has words in other articles that like yourself implies (comparison) that their bought and paid for and if not for that they wouldn't be voting for those infills/apartments. Its the perfect sound bite anti-development rhetoric for a city with a supply issue....

Mind you neither Moffat not Gower have developer cash, just a sewer cleaner and a farm family trying to build on there land.

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

You mean the ones that normally follow/vote along with what planning recommends.

Except for that last big vote for urban expansion..

Edit: To be clear, I'm of the opinion that developer donations influence officials to favour sprawl, not intensification, which I think was evident in the last urban expansion vote where councilors voted against planners' recommendations. I'm not in anyway endorsing this 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵's opinion.

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by passwordisnt123

He's so awful. I feel like this city would be a lot better off if we realized he has nothing of value to offer and stopped paying attention him altogether.

Can we not link to his website going forward? Or, if we must, maybe link to it via the waybackmachine so we don't give the site any traffic hits?

Guilty as charged. I included it as I knew it would generate some comments on this forum. The Bulldog doesn't like the skyscraper fanboys on this forum. Based on his comments, I think there are a lot of like minded people in neighbourhoods ripe for some tin can triplex buildings.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

Except for that last big vote for urban expansion..

Edit: To be clear, I'm of the opinion that developer donations influence officials to favour sprawl, not intensification, which I think was evident in the last urban expansion vote where councilors voted against planners' recommendations. I'm not in anyway endorsing this 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵's opinion.

You mean the urban boundary expansion that two guys who didn't take developer funding also voted for, that was the planners recommended path forward 60%.... Or Tewin that screwed over alot of devs...

I don't want an urban boundary expansion or Tewin to move forward but I'm not going to pretend that position is the actual real world majority.

As for that real position of the majority, one only has to look at the massive amount of pushback to the proposed plan of 60%. pushback against the proposed density targets from both organizations and CA who have long called for 100% infill. Some being goaded along by implications of illicite activity be councillors, or pandered to by others for not having enough time to properly review....

>"People were very concerned about developers coming, buying up every available property and then developing them into multi-unit buildings. The character of the community would be destroyed."

https://capitalcurrent.ca/a-15-minute-ne...ity-because-of-intensification-concerns/

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-new...-plans-for-neighbourhood-intensification

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

You mean the urban boundary expansion that two guys who didn't take developer funding also voted for, that was the planners recommended path forward 60%.... Or Tewin that screwed over alot of devs...

I don't want an urban boundary expansion or Tewin to move forward but I'm not going to pretend that position is the actual real world majority.

Well for one, Taggart is still one of the major devs providing donations the last time I checked, and they benefited greatly from the Tewin decision. Harder, the chair of the committee, is a known beneficiary of Taggart donations and fundraisers.

Regardless of whether you or me think the donations actually had a major influence on the decision, developer donations present a huge conflict of interest and should be treated as such.

As for Tewin, obviously donations weren't the sole motivation for the planning committee's decision, as you seem to think I'm implying. I think one also has to consider the optics of politicians "contributing" to reconciliation efforts and the political capital that comes with that.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

If the city was letting the city develop on is own then the city wouldn't be implementing zoning controls like Houston or Tokyo. Controls that currently stop or obstruct apartments in certain neighborhoods, something grey doesn't want..

Sometimes I wish planners would give them exactly what they want with their hypocrisy. You want no controls? Sure.

[waterloowarrior]

FAQ
https://engage.ottawa.ca/the-new-official-plan/news_feed/1new-official-plan-faq

Timeline

Engagement Next Steps for the New Official Plan
https://engage.ottawa.ca/the-new-officia...ent-next-steps-for-the-new-official-plan
27 Apr 2021
There has been an unprecedented level of public engagement on the draft New Official Plan, with over 100,000 resident engagements so far.

Comments on the draft New Official Plan were seeking clarification and suggesting different ideas. The highest concentration of comments focused on a few specific areas.

The next step in our consultation will be to provide residents an interim As We Heard It report highlighting these areas of concentrated public interest and outlining how such input has led to changes in the proposed policies.

The interim As We Heard It report will be posted to this webpage later this spring.

In the coming months, staff will continue to receive and incorporate public input. Public consultation on the draft New Official Plan continues and will include:

Spring - Public presentation and online engagements on the interim As We Heart It report providing the opportunity to submit questions and additional feedback.
Summer – Online engagement on updated draft New Official Plan policies.
Late Summer – Public Open House on the full updated draft New Official Plan.
Fall - Statutory Public Meeting at the joint Planning and Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee. Residents can register to present to Committee on these dates.

[rocketphish]

Neighbourhoods await changes to key city-building plan
Ottawa is writing a new official plan from scratch for the first time since 2003

Kate Porter · CBC News
Posted: May 12, 2021 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 3 hours ago



The City of Ottawa is rewriting parts of its city-building blueprint after a deluge of feedback from residents concerned their neighbourhoods could be made unrecognizable in the decades to come.

The official plan is one of the most important legal documents that elected officials are called upon to approve. It has long-lasting implications for what is built where. Council is set to vote this fall on the first new official plan for this city in two decades.

But a long, complicated first draft led an unprecedented number of people to write the city. Many feared older neighbourhoods would see four times more housing units, and houses on busier streets would make way for rows of six-storey buildings.

A coalition of community groups called the People's Official Plan fully supports compact city building as a way to curb greenhouse gas emissions and build vibrant neighbourhoods. But it worries this official plan could fail if city staff and politicians can't make the case for how and where to create the 15-minute neighbourhoods they want.

"Right now, it's just this dark cloud saying, 'We shall intensify somewhere between Britannia and Beacon Hill,'" said Paul Johanis .

City staff are poised to pull back on a few especially contentious points. The city recently posted two dozen pages of answers to residents' questions, and will soon release another report about what they heard.

Coun. Jean Cloutier said the draft was neither final nor perfect.

"There are a lot things in there that need to change," he said.

His residents in Alta Vista, Ottawa's original suburb, were especially disquieted and vocal. Some 500 attended a video meeting in March, wanting to know more about how neighbourhoods will transform.

"People are raising concerns because they don't understand what's going to happen," said Pauline Comeau, who spent weeks trying to figure out technical official plan documents. She said she wishes the city had communicated more broadly — she delivered hundreds of pamphlets to neighbours to point them to the city's information.

Council approved goals a year ago to house half of its growing population by intensifying existing neighbourhoods. According to the draft plan, a vast area from Britannia in the west to Blair Road in the east will be considered "inner urban."

In some of those areas, the city stated 80 units per hectare would be required — Alta Vista averages about 20 homes per hectare — and if a property owner rebuilt, they would have to put four units on the lot.

City staff declined an interview, but Cloutier said that density mandate will now become a target, and people will be allowed to rebuild a single-family home. The city is listening, he said.

"Since then we've pulled up our socks as the city and done a little bit better," said Cloutier.

Concerns came from many other quarters. Seven community associations including such demographically diverse neighbourhoods as Vanier and Rockcliffe Park wrote to the city for the first time as one voice.

That area east of downtown said the city needs neighbourhood-level plans that consider the community centres and trees that fill social as well as physical needs. They said the city shouldn't underestimate the unknown impacts the pandemic will have on where people will live and work

The Council on Aging of Ottawa sees good things in the draft plan but worries it falls short on planning for accessibility, especially during winter. The city needs to encourage housing options so older adults can downsize in their own communities instead of being forced to move to multi-unit buildings planned around transit stations, they said.

"I think we're a little bit of an afterthought," said Miriam Fry, a volunteer chair.

Many are eager to see changes to the final official plan, which is due mid-summer. Johanis said the document needs more time, but credits city staff for doing their best given council's decision to approve it before the 2022 election.

Cloutier said he still believes Ottawa has the right vision for how to grow, while maintaining the character of its neighbourhoods, and said residents can expect to have more say before a vote in September.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/city-ottawa-draft-official-plan-community-reaction-1.6018065

[rocketphish]

Ottawa's new Official Plan won't squeeze out single-family dwellings
Intensification is part of the city's future. But we need to make sure there are appropriate places for all age groups and household types, including in multi-unit buildings.

Jan Harder, Eli El-Chantiry
Publishing date: Jun 11, 2021 • 3 minutes ago • 3 minute read

What will Ottawa look like 25 years from now? That’s the question our city planners have been grappling with for years as they’ve worked on a new Official Plan to help guide Ottawa’s growth over the next quarter-century. Ottawa Council is on track to adopt that new plan later this year.

There will be more opportunities to provide feedback before then, but the level of public interest so far has been incredible. As chairs of the city’s planning committee and agriculture and rural affairs committee, we’ve found it rewarding to be involved in the back and forth with more than 100,000 residents interested in discussing the proposed policies for the new Official Plan over the last three years. We rarely see this kind of engagement in municipal matters.

Given how complex such a guiding document needs to be, it’s understandable that some residents have anxiety about what it will mean for the neighbourhoods we all call home. We know, for example, that many expressed concerns about urban expansion and the balanced urban growth plan that Council adopted. Some still have concerns about the approved intensification target that, by 2046, aims to locate 60 per cent of new homes in existing communities, slowing the pace of urban expansion. It has led to the assumption that our single-family homes will all be replaced by low and mid-rise apartments.

That couldn’t be further from the truth.

Under the new plan, residents will still have every right to replace their single-family home with another one if they want. While we’ll need to add about 49,000 new family-sized dwellings through intensification, that’s going to be a very gradual change over 25 years — and it will be spread across the entire city. There are currently more than 178,000 eligible lots. And even when taller buildings and apartments are permitted in an existing neighbourhood, those new buildings would still need to be sensitive to the surrounding community and road network.

Some residents have told us they’re concerned about what types of housing will be permitted in existing neighbourhoods. Keep in mind that more than one-quarter of Ottawa’s households have two or more kids, so where single-family homes are replaced with multi-unit buildings, some of those will need to include larger units. We need to make sure there are appropriate places for all age groups and household types.

That said, households of individuals and childless couples make up 55 per cent of the city, but right now, bachelor or one-bedroom units only make up 15 per cent of supply, with 21 per cent of housing being two-bedroom units. The new Official Plan needs to encourage a more appropriate mix of units for our population — including in existing communities. This will be key to keeping our city affordable.

There’s a strong emphasis on neighbourhoods in the new Official Plan. While we need the housing stock in our communities to evolve and diversify, that change needs to be gradual. And just as important, it needs to be sensitive to context — the housing and character already in place.

That’s one of the reasons rules about intensification will only be dealt with as the city develops a new zoning by-law — to give staff more time to work with residents and community associations. The zoning by-law is the document that implements the vision of the new Official Plan, and staff will take several years to work through it, ensuring plenty of time to develop customized approaches for all of Ottawa’s neighbourhoods.

Visit ottawa.ca/newoto learn more about draft new Official Plan policies, or to read the As We Heard It report that has detail about the feedback received to date and how it is informing and evolving those policies.

Jan Harder is chair of the city’s planning committee and councillor for Barrhaven ward. Eli El-Chantiry is chair of the agriculture and rural affairs committee and councillor for West Carleton-March ward.

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/harder...wont-squeeze-out-single-family-dwellings

[J.OT13]

Under the new plan, residents will still have every right to replace their single-family home with another one if they want.

They will? That was one of the best parts of the plan (was it ever the plan?) It put a stop to cheap and wasteful McMansions that did in fact ruin neighbourhood character. I'm all for keeping the modest brick home or add density.

[rocketphish]

City staff adjust official plan after intensification worries
Blueprint for urban growth now has intensification targets instead of requirements

Kate Porter · CBC News
Posted: Jun 11, 2021 9:33 AM ET | Last Updated: 3 hours ago

After concerns flooded into city hall from Ottawa residents worried their neighbourhoods would be transformed by infill development and multi-unit buildings, city staff have pulled back on some of the most contentious proposals in their draft official plan.

"We heard you," said Alain Miguelez, the urban planner leading the creation of the new official plan, who continues to meet weekly with multiple community groups.

On Thursday, the city made public a long-awaited report on the unprecedented feedback it received on the draft blueprint for how Ottawa should grow through to 2046.

One of the biggest issues for residents was a single table found among hundreds of pages that stated how many units per hectare would be required in the future.

Residents in Alta Vista, for instance, were alarmed to see their neighbourhood might be expected to have four times more homes, and that they wouldn't be permitted to rebuild a single detached home on their properties. Those requirements have now been dropped.

"We started out with something very coarse and ... it sounded too aggressive to people," explained Miguelez.

He described urban density as a Rubik's Cube, with many ways to achieve a desired number of people per hectare. Ottawa has a goal, set by city council after great debate in 2020, to house more than half its growing population through intensification and the rest by expanding its suburbs.

Now, staff will replace contentious neighbourhood density requirements in the official plan with a target range. To offset that move, the maximum height of highrises will rise to 40 storeys and taller buildings will be permitted at transit hubs.

"We can make our math work, but it's more sensitive to what we were hearing about not going too far, too fast in some areas," said Steve Willis, the general manager of planning, infrastructure and economic development.

City staff have also redrawn the map for what is considered Ottawa's "inner urban" area to capture areas built before 1950. Alta Vista and some areas south of the Central Experimental Farm will be shifted to "outer urban."

Gone is some jargon that many people found confusing. The word "regeneration" will return to "intensification" and the "transforming overlay" that tagged some areas as especially ripe for rapid change will be removed.

On the whole, Willis and Miguelez said people supported the city's goals to create neighbourhoods where amenities are within a 15-minute walk, to rely more on transit and cycling than personal vehicles, and to encourage more types of housing beyond single-family homes or apartments in tall buildings.

Despite the changes, concerns remain.

Many community groups wholly agree that intensification is the environmentally responsible way for the city to grow, but say certain areas will still be under much greater pressure than others.

Nelson Coyle explained Carlington area residents understand the need for tall buildings along Carling Avenue, but will keep fighting to try to prevent Fisher Avenue being designated a "minor corridor." They fear old forest could be lost if the street were widened for six-storey buildings or shops.

"That's a big deal for us — over 200 signatures on a petition," said Coyle.

The final version of the official plan could be released by chapter, as staff finish each one over the summer. It all leads to an important three-day meeting and vote by the two committees responsible for city planning scheduled to begin Sept. 13.

In the meantime, the city will hold a series of meetings by geographic area in the coming weeks:

• June 22 at 6:30 p.m. — Rural.
• June 23 at 5:30 p.m. — Suburban.
• June 23 at 7 p.m. — Outer Urban.
• June 24th 6:30 p.m. — Downtown.
• June 28th 6:30 p.m. — Inner Urban.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ottawa-official-plan-adjustments-after-feedback-1.6060929

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

They will? That was one of the best parts of the plan (was it ever the plan?) It put a stop to cheap and wasteful McMansions that did in fact ruin neighbourhood character. I'm all for keeping the modest brick home or add density.

Mississauga on the Rideau. Like I said earlier.

At least they finally have the option to sell to somebody building a duplex or triplex.

[rocketphish]

The city's Official Plan carries critical flaws

Randall Denley
Publishing date: Jun 15, 2021 • 9 hours ago • 3 minute read

In response to a flood of public dissatisfaction, City of Ottawa urban planners have tweaked their vision of the city’s future, but their conciliatory words fail to address the two underlying issues that made the first version of the new Official Plan so objectionable.

The first is the planners’ over-reliance on intensification. They believe that 60 per cent of the city’s growth over the next 25 years can be contained within existing urban boundaries. It’s that thinking that prompted planners to suggest that Alta Vista could handle four times as many homes. That neighbourhood and some others near the core have now been spared this demand and the requirement to meet unrealistic intensification numbers has been softened by calling it a “target.”

The city hasn’t backed off the 60 per cent intensification requirement, a number approved by your far-sighted city councillors. If Alta Vista and other older neighbourhoods aren’t going to be as jammed with new housing, where will that housing go? The planners do say that high-rises will be allowed at 40 storeys instead of a mere 30, but they have also explicitly said they don’t want a city that features mostly high rises and single family homes.

Density has become a harder sell because of the pandemic, which highlighted how little open space is available to downtown condo dwellers. Working from home also encouraged demand for suburban and rural housing. The planners have chosen to ignore these trends completely.

If people are sceptical about being exempted from over-intensification, they have a right to be. Reducing intensification in some areas implies it will be increased in others. Either that or the real plan is to continue ambitious intensification in older neighbourhoods, but play down the impact for now. The latter would certainly appeal to councillors, some of whom would have to kiss their seats goodbye in the next election if they are stuck defending a plan that’s blatantly unpopular.

The second critical flaw of this Official Plan is its stunning ambition to potentially remake every street in the city. Provincial rules require the city to estimate future population growth and work out the mix of housing types required to meet that growth, but not to go into the neighbourhood-by-neighbourhood detail this plan offers.

The city planners and councillors of 2021 believe they can and should remake Ottawa to conform to their world view. The city they imagine gives priority to pedestrians, cyclists and transit. Cars won’t be banned, just discouraged. Increased density means that all of the services you need for daily living will be within a 15-minute walk from your home, planners hope.

It’s a curiously old idea packaged to seem new and exciting. When people used to walk out to shops on main streets, it was because they didn’t have cars. When car ownership became nearly universal, people turned to shopping malls, then to big box centres, and now to online shopping. City planners and councillors imagine the past can be recreated in the future, even though their vision is out of sync with the ways people actually shop and retailers prefer to sell.

While we were told earlier this year that the Official Plan offers a dynamic, city-changing approach, the current spin is that the change will be gradual, no big deal, you won’t notice a thing. In fact, the Official Plan is a highly prescriptive document that goes well beyond the usual scope of such plans. If passed, it will give city government a level of control over private property Ottawans have never seen.

The Official Plan rests on the idea that urban planning is what makes a city better and more exciting, rather than the choices made by the hundreds of thousands of people who live here. It’s an arrogant approach, scarcely lessened by fiddling with some of the details.

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

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/denley-the-citys-official-plan-carries-critical-flaws

[OCCheetos]

The Official Plan rests on the idea that urban planning is what makes a city better and more exciting, rather than the choices made by the hundreds of thousands of people who live here.

If this is really the opinion that will end up dominating in the next election, I don't think I'm going to second guess any thoughts of moving away.

[Truenorth00]

Wife and I are determined not to live here beyond our working lives. Mostly because we see no hope for this city to truly become urban and interesting. It's more likely to become a sprawling suburban mess than become something pleasant. And politics really does seem to be heading that way.

[silvergate]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

[B]The city's Official Plan carries critical flaws

[/url]

The titles he didn't use:

• My understanding of complex systems carries critical flaws
• My sense of irony is my critical flaw
• I need to drive to Walmart, you choosing to live on the coast in a low-lying country prone to flooding from hurricanes increasing in power due to global warming is your own critical flaw, my decisions have no impact on that

To those saying they are leaving, the reason Ottawa is the way it is is because half the fun people leave - consider staying plz

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by OCCheetos

If this is really the opinion that will end up dominating in the next election, I don't think I'm going to second guess any thoughts of moving away.

It's Denley.

Longtime columnist, frequent election runner-up.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by silvergate

The titles he didn't use:

• My understanding of complex systems carries critical flaws
• My sense of irony is my critical flaw
• I need to drive to Walmart, you choosing to live on the coast in a low-lying country prone to flooding from hurricanes increasing in power due to global warming is your own critical flaw, my decisions have no impact on that

To those saying they are leaving, the reason Ottawa is the way it is is because half the fun people leave - consider staying plz

Yeah, I don't think Randall understands what zoning is or who exactly implements it, but in a note his opinion seems to be bug standard for this city.

Even so called progressives can't get behind the density of most European cities and instead tie themselves to NA standards of what a main Street looks like. 4 stories high with Street parking it front. Then have the audacity to state the urban core should be kept low, or that having buildings touching is sacrilegious....

As for leaving or staying my job well never be urban, so kemptville or Almonte or Winchester or the land in between is just fine with me. Aslong as it's not NA suburban where I'm tied to my car for everything and anything. Barhaven/Orleans/Kanata/most of Nepean and the outer rim of old Ottawa.