HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #681  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2021, 1:32 PM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,254
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #682  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2021, 1:45 PM
Proof Sheet Proof Sheet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
Some light reading
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #683  
Old Posted Sep 29, 2021, 6:25 PM
Nowhere Nowhere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 228
I'm wondering if the Kanata North BRT will ever happen. It's now obvious that remote working will stay widespread in the IT sector post-covid and the city decided to not extend the urban boundary in Kanata North. Also, most office buildings in the area would be poorly served by the BRT, since you would have to walk 500m-1km through windswept parking lots to reach them.

A major redevelopment of the area would be needed to make the Kanata North BRT worth building.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #684  
Old Posted Sep 30, 2021, 2:55 AM
Catenary Catenary is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nowhere View Post
I'm wondering if the Kanata North BRT will ever happen. It's now obvious that remote working will stay widespread in the IT sector post-covid and the city decided to not extend the urban boundary in Kanata North. Also, most office buildings in the area would be poorly served by the BRT, since you would have to walk 500m-1km through windswept parking lots to reach them.

A major redevelopment of the area would be needed to make the Kanata North BRT worth building.
Most of the office space in that area does belong to one landlord, so if a major redevelopment were to be needed they're in a good position to execute on it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #685  
Old Posted Oct 4, 2021, 12:41 PM
Proof Sheet Proof Sheet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,985
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #686  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2021, 3:36 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,254
Shout out to everyone streaming this in the background tomorrow
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #687  
Old Posted Oct 14, 2021, 3:41 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,254
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Proof Sheet View Post
Great to finally see someone countering all the negativity out there.

Quote:
What Ottawa does for the climate means nothing. It doesn’t set an example because big foreign countries don’t care about Canada, let alone Ottawa.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #688  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2021, 12:25 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,254
Sounds like they will try to get through the delegations tomorrow and address motions on Monday
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #689  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2021, 2:49 AM
Proof Sheet Proof Sheet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
Sounds like they will try to get through the delegations tomorrow and address motions on Monday
Didn't follow it all but were there any delegations from the big boy developers/consulting consortiums? Or are they on Friday. Is there a schedule anywhere of who is a delegation?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #690  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2021, 3:29 AM
passwordisnt123 passwordisnt123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Ottawa (Centretown)
Posts: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by waterloowarrior View Post
Great to finally see someone countering all the negativity out there.
That's maybe the dumbest, most fallacious argument that gets trotted out in order to justify doing nothing. Not exactly surprising coming from Bulldog though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #691  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2021, 10:43 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,254
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proof Sheet View Post
Didn't follow it all but were there any delegations from the big boy developers/consulting consortiums? Or are they on Friday. Is there a schedule anywhere of who is a delegation?
Started with Tewin... I was tuning in and out but seemed to be mostly community associations after that. Something like 40/92 delegations completed so far. I know of a couple private sector types that haven't gone yet, so they must be all today.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #692  
Old Posted Oct 15, 2021, 1:41 PM
Proof Sheet Proof Sheet is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,985
Quote:
Originally Posted by passwordisnt123 View Post
That's maybe the dumbest, most fallacious argument that gets trotted out in order to justify doing nothing. Not exactly surprising coming from Bulldog though.
Just to be clear I was being sarcastic in my original post on the matter. Bulldog comes off as very corny at times. See the link below.

https://bulldogottawa.com/why-jeff-leiper-loves-auto-racing-top-10-list/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #693  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2021, 1:32 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 28,818
Menard motion that was "carried".

Quote:
Kate Porter @KatePorterCBC
11m

Menard now on development and natural heritage systems. Move to go back to the word to "exclude" development, rather than what was going to be a late-change to "avoid" such natural areas.

E.g. of such areas in dashed areas of this map.

Carried. #ottnews

https://twitter.com/KatePorterCBC?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #694  
Old Posted Oct 19, 2021, 1:27 AM
waterloowarrior's Avatar
waterloowarrior waterloowarrior is offline
National Capital Region
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 9,254
Approved by Planning Committee and headed to Council on October 27, then final approval by the Province.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #695  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2021, 2:20 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,577
Is this Ottawa's future as well?

Quote:
The hard reality of increased density in Toronto

Shane Dingman, Real Estate Reporter
The Globe and Mail
Published October 20, 2021 | Updated 2 hours ago




As housing prices continue to rise in Canada’s big cities the debate on how to tackle affordability often boils down to where, how and when to build more homes in existing neighbourhoods.

At the macro level, there are election promises from federal and provincial governments that claim to “say yes” to building millions of new homes. But on the micro level, it’s not hard to find examples of bitter fights over the status quo in most cities.

An application by Haven Developments to take two single-family homes in Toronto’s Deer Park neighbourhood and convert them into a 12-unit condo building highlights all the legal and political forces that wage war over building even a single new apartment in Canada’s largest city.

“We’re replacing two households with 12, and this is a very large piece of land for two homes,” said architect Roland Rom Colthoff, of RAW Design, who is doing the plans for the proposal for 101-103 Heath St. “We started working on this in 2018; we’re three years into the process and it is still nowhere. I have much larger buildings that sailed through approvals. And you wonder why we have a housing crisis.”

The project is typical missing middle typology: neither a six- to 12 storey mid-rise, nor a single-family dwelling. It is three-storeys tall with a parking garage and it’s in a neighbourhood that has other apartment buildings of the same scale literally across the street. All that is required to build is some minor variance approvals from Toronto’s Committee of Adjustment (COA) on setbacks and a solution for some mature trees that straddle the neighbouring lots.

The project came up for a vote at Toronto’s Committee of Adjustment in July, but a decision was deferred until December. Toronto-St. Paul’s Councillor Josh Matlow does not have a vote on the COA and will not have a vote at council on the development because unlike the typical high-rise building the project does not require by-law changes to go ahead. Nevertheless, he says he did urge the committee to defer a decision in order to arrange for a community meeting between Haven and the neighbours in hopes of forging a dialogue on compromise.

“All the neighbours around the site are objecting to the project, it really does intrude into their properties,” said Cathie MacDonald, the president of the Deer Park Residents Group, and herself an architect and former city planner. At issue is the building’s depth, and nearness to the backyards of multi-million-dollar homes on Deer Park Crescent. The concerns of privacy have led to suggestions that all the second floor windows be frosted glass, that they be smaller, and that there be no walkways along the fence-line (for fear of noise from partying). So far, the attempts at dialogue do not seem to have worked. “We saw some new drawings and it didn’t seem to be changed much. … I think as far as I know it’s all opposition. I haven’t heard of anybody saying they support it,” Ms. MacDonald said.

Haven was last in the news in 2019, when it cancelled a 140-unit condominium project at 625 Sheppard Ave. known as Six25BV. In that instance delays contributed to the project’s failure, as pre-construction prices charged in 2016 were no longer economically viable by 2019.

Paolo Abate, Haven’s chief executive, said he has had nothing but constructive communications with city planning, but blames the politics of NIMBYism on the delays on this new, much smaller, project.

“Housing of this nature should not take the same timeline for a condo that’s 200-units plus,” Mr. Abate said.

Jordan M. Teperman, executive vice-president and general counsel of Haven, said Haven has collected a dozen examples of COA applications with the same sort of height and setback for single-family monster homes that were approved without delay. That said, he acknowledges these apartments will be luxury ownership units in the area, and are not designed to be a piece of the affordability puzzle.

“There’s some people who are going to want to look at this, and say this is an example of the bigger discussion in our city … to turn it into an existential discussion around the missing middle,” Mr. Matlow said. But he rejects that framing, and said he simply had concerns about Haven’s willingness to listen to the community.

“Muliti-family is absolutely not the issue, apartment buildings are permitted in the area,” said Ms. MacDonald, who noted her own grandmother had lived in one of the rental apartments on Heath that are the same size and scale as the proposed Haven building. What changed, she said, is that when those low-rise apartment buildings were constructed in the 1950s there was no restrictive zoning. “They are non-conforming now,” she said. Essentially, the city’s by-laws wouldn’t allow the mixed-income neighbourhood to be built today.

The question of what kind of change the city is willing to accept is a hot topic after recent city hall debates punted on widely studied pro-housing proposals such as legalizing and regulating rooming houses city-wide.

“If it’s simply an argument made by somebody that there can never be any change, that’s not reasonable. What I do not accept, is that only a supply of new housing is going to be the antidote to solving the affordable housing crisis,” said Mr. Matlow, who points to the boom in high-rise condo-construction that has not lowered prices, and at the same time a lack of affordable-by-design and subsidized housing construction in recent decades. “What I’m convinced of is the status quo is not sustainable.”

Mr. Matlow, who according to recent report by Acorn Canada is among the Toronto councillors who have accepted the least amount of money in political donations from the development industry, says he’s waiting to see the study on the missing middle from Toronto chief planner Gregg Lintern before he comes down on whether single-family zoning areas of the city – the two-thirds of the residential land referred to as the Yellowbelt – need to be rezoned to allow for more types of duplexes, triplexes or multi-storey apartments like on Heath.

However, if the example of Haven’s plan on Heath is any guide, even dramatic by-law reforms may not be enough to turn on the taps of new housing construction. The COA vote in December is by no means the end of the road for opponents.

“I fully anticipate they are going to appeal,” Mr. Colthoff said of the Deer Park residents. “They’ve got deep pockets they are upset.”

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/real-estate/article-the-hard-reality-of-increased-density/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #696  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2021, 1:08 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 28,818
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketphish View Post
Is this Ottawa's future as well?
I feel like this would be approved in Ottawa in a heart beat, with no debate. If anything, a developer here would tear down the old house as well propose 8 floors and get the green light because the O-Train is a "short 20 minute walk away".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #697  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2021, 4:59 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,577
Official plan heading to council with no consensus that it's the right blueprint for a growing capital
Council will vote on the final draft of the official plan after spending three years crafting policies, consulting the public and projecting housing demand to plot development through 2046.

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Publishing date: Oct 26, 2021 • 6 hours ago • 4 minute read


A new official plan will be in front of city council for final approval Wednesday with no consensus that it’s a good home-building or environmental-protection blueprint to serve Ottawa for the next 25 years.

Communities worry intensification projects won’t be sensitive to their characters. Environmental advocates warn the city about the harms that come with urban sprawl. Developers don’t believe new policies will help the city build enough homes for a growing population.

No one is claiming victory, so it might be easy for politicians to simply assume that the city has found the sweet spot.

But conflict in land-use planning will undoubtedly continue.

Council will vote on the final draft of the official plan after spending three years crafting policies, consulting the public and projecting housing demand to plot development through 2046. The city must accommodate 402,150 more people (compared to the 2018 population) and make room for 194,800 new homes.

More than half of the new homes would need to be built through intensification projects, while the city would add 1,281 hectares of development land to the urban boundary.

The roots of the conflict are largely in two areas: where the city allows new homes to be built and how those decisions could transform existing communities when it comes to permitting tall, dense development.

Tewin, a rural-east development project proposed by the Algonquins of Ontario and Taggart Investments, has been one of the most high-profile controversies when it comes to appropriately locating not only new homes, but a new community.

Some competing issues in the draft official plan are hard to reconcile. For example, the city wants to increase intensification in established neighbourhoods while protecting, and even growing, the tree canopy of those areas.

Alex Cullen, president of the Federation of Citizens Associations (FCA), said member organizations want the city to closely monitor the impact of the official plan policies at a hyper-local level so that planning staff understand changes happening to neighbourhoods.

“If a neighbourhood gets overloaded, then it gets lost,” Cullen said. “If you’re looking at tree canopy, it’s a citywide target, so something may be happening in a community where they lose trees and it doesn’t quite show up in the city assessment of how they’re reaching their targets.”

Cullen said he doesn’t expect major changes to the draft official plan during the council meeting since the heavy lifting happened during a joint planning and agriculture and rural affairs committee meeting.

“Coming out of planning committee, there were gains, and we like the gains,” Cullen said, but many groups believe the changes fail to go far enough.

Community groups advocating under the name People’s Official Plan, of which FCA is a supporter, said the final draft version of the official plan isn’t palatable on several levels.

Carolyn Mackenzie, the planning chair for the Glebe Community Association and a member of the city’s planning advisory committee, said there needs to be more “agile tools for local planning,” with residents and developers working together on solutions.

“I think it is clear to those of us in the community that spending all of this time in conflict is not going to help us intensify,” Mackenzie said.

Rosaline Hill, an architect who founded Walkable Ottawa, said increasing maximum building heights to four storeys in neighbourhoods isn’t the right approach. The city needs to find intensification solutions that are acceptable to residents, Hill said.

“That actually is possible within the height limits we have now,” Hill said.

Paul Johanis, chair of the Greenspace Alliance of Canada’s Capital, criticized the city’s intent to concentrate intensification at hubs and along road corridors, creating “urban canyons.”

Neighbourhood-level intensification initially pursued by the city drew scorn from communities. Johanis said it was a better approach, but poorly communicated.

Residential developers remain skeptical about the city’s intensification targets when residents are nervous about changing the character of their neighbourhoods.

Jason Burggraaf, executive director of the Greater Ottawa Home Builders’ Association, said developers don’t believe that the city will hit the aggressive target for residential intensification, especially with a significant change endorsed during the joint committee meeting.

Burggraaf said the joint committee approved reducing maximum building heights along minor corridors to four storeys, down from from six storeys, without much talk about where the density would be shifted.

“It’s taking away potentially thousands of units that were plugged into the (official plan) and now they were summarily taken away,” Burggraaf said. “Where are those units going to be realized? The after-effect really hasn’t been talked about. Those units are now gone from minor corridors. Where are they going to go? Are they going to go to major (corridors)? We’re going to have more taller buildings, which people have said they don’t want.”

The policies in the new official plan could contribute to rising housing prices and prevent intensification, Burggraaf said.

[email protected]
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-new...he-right-blueprint-for-a-growing-capital
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #698  
Old Posted Oct 26, 2021, 7:50 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by rocketphish View Post
[B]Official plan heading to council with no consensus that it's the right blueprint for a growing capital
Council will vote on the final draft of the official plan after spending three years crafting policies, consulting the public and projecting housing demand to plot development through 2046.
Another article that could have been written by a bot.
__________________
___
Enjoy my taxes, Orleans (and Kanata?).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #699  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2021, 11:53 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,577
Algonquin grand chief tells council to take Tewin off the table in today's official plan vote
Coun. Riley Brockington to table a motion removing Tewin, citing cost and other concerns

Kate Porter · CBC News
Posted: Oct 27, 2021 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 4 hours ago


The acting grand chief of a tribal council of seven Algonquin First Nation communities has written Ottawa city council members asking them to take the Tewin suburb off the table when they vote on a new official plan Wednesday, saying it could be "a very costly mistake on many fronts."

While he doesn't reference reconciliation, Coun. Riley Brockington is expected to table a motion to do exactly that, setting the stage for council to vote again on whether the proposal by the Algonquins of Ontario and developer Taggart should still go ahead.

Eight months ago, council attracted similar condemnation from Algonquin leaders when a joint committee decided, followed two weeks later by city council, to allow 445 hectares inside the urban boundary for development in the name of reconciliation with the Algonquins of Ontario (AOO), an organization that is negotiating a land claim and includes the Algonquins of Pikwakanagan First Nation.

That land in the rural south east near Highway 417 and Anderson Road had received poor scores from city staff because it was located far from existing infrastructure and required years more of study.

Chiefs of Algonquin communities in Quebec said then, as now, that they do not recognize the provincial border, nor the AOO organization itself, pointing to how many of its members' ancestry is being challenged.

They opposed council's political move in February, saying they didn't see it as reconciliation at all. Their position hasn't changed.

Chief Wendy Jocko of Pikwakanagan in Ontario attended a city committee in recent weeks, to urge councillors to support the Algonquins of Ontario's Tewin proposal to build a whole new compact and transit-oriented community for thousands of residents — saying it would allow the group "to participate more fully in the socioeconomic fabric of Canada."

On the eve of Wednesday's vote, acting grand chief of the Algonquin Anishinabe Nation Tribal Council, Savanna McGregor, has written all council members to say they cannot make an informed decision without consulting its chiefs, too.

"We want to make it abundantly clear that just because a land owner whose realty corporation is partly owned by one Algonquin First Nation and self-identified Algonquin people, does not qualify as an act of reconciliation with the Algonquin Anishinabe Nation. It is a business transaction, plain and simple," she wrote.

CBC News has reported the Algonquins of Ontario Realty Corporation bought nearly 1,600 hectares from the Ontario government in January 2020 for nearly $17 million with financial help from its development partner Taggart Group, which owns the most land to be admitted inside the urban boundary.
Cultural protocol 'in jeopardy'

McGregor pointed to how the chiefs are working with the City of Ottawa on a cultural civic protocol to define how they're consulted on projects that could affect them.

"Therefore, the city should have known better and should have reached out to the Algonquin Anishinabe Nation when this project first began, especially when you are boasting this project as an act of reconciliation," wrote McGregor.

That protocol is now "in jeopardy because of the lack of disrespect and understanding of our Algonquin Anishinabe Nation," she continued.

The motion Brockington plans to table, seconded by Coun. Rawlson King, does not mention reconciliation but speaks only to the outstanding concerns and risks raised by community groups, residents and some councillors about the costs of taking infrastructure to a whole new suburb far from existing services, especially when the City of Ottawa has declared a climate emergency.

He points to how the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, whose minister must give his final approval of the official plan after it passes council, had questioned whether Tewin lands were located in a cost-effective location that met provincial planning policies.

Brockington's motion seeks to remove Tewin entirely, and re-insert 175 hectares of lands in South March that were originally recommended to be brought inside the urban boundary.

McGregor, too, calls on council to heed its staff's original advice.

"This is not reconciliation. You have not taken the proper steps to consult us. You are not making an informed decision. The only useful information you have is from your staff who have evaluated the lands and have scored it low. We urge you to reconsider all factors because this could be a very costly mistake on many fronts."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/tewin-grand-chief-tribal-council-letter-1.6226349
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #700  
Old Posted Oct 27, 2021, 11:55 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Greater Ottawa
Posts: 14,577
Why you should care about today's official plan vote
One of the biggest items of the term hits Ottawa city council today

Kate Porter · CBC News
Posted: Oct 27, 2021 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 4 hours ago


If you haven't gone through the maps in the City of Ottawa's draft new official plan, looking at areas shaded in purple and roads in thick and thin lines, perhaps you should.

They'll give you a glimpse of areas expected to be redeveloped in the future, so you'll be less surprised when several multi-storey buildings you never imagined in your neighbourhood get building permits.

The official plan being voted on at today's city council meeting will set out how Ottawa grows for the next 25 years. It's not an update — this city-building document has been written from scratch for the first time in a generation, and it aims to aggressively build up existing areas, especially those closer to downtown, to keep from spreading farther out.

More than two years of intense staff work and committee debate have led us here. The city set an overarching goal: to make Ottawa the most livable mid-size city in North America by creating neighbourhoods where residents are a 15-minute walk from groceries, schools and transit.

The plan has been tweaked a couple of times, including through dozens of motions at committee last week. More changes could be made at council.

Some dedicated residents have followed every twist and turn of these past two years and offered their own detailed suggestions.

Angela Keller-Herzog, a member of what she called a "loose-knit alliance" of groups known as the People's Official Plan, summed up their feelings this week. After all this time and work, she said the City of Ottawa's new official plan "falls short of meeting its own ambition" — and their expectations.

Much comes down to intensification — building more units in a compact space — and how to do it.

Environmentally minded residents support compact living. They want fewer people driving, and would like to end urban sprawl altogether. Their ideal would see smaller-scale buildings where families can live in a large apartment and people can grow old in their neighbourhoods.

But what's found in the maps and documents about Ottawa's future has scared them.

Residents from the City View neighbourhood west of Merivale Road, for instance, spoke up during the three-day committee meeting, which ran nearly 30 hours and heard from 96 well-informed public delegations.

They see dots on the map for bus rapid transit stations all along Baseline Road, where nothing like that currently exists. The area is slated for taller buildings, but residents say that shouldn't come before transit upgrades have a construction date.

Such development along corridors could leave Ottawa looking more like a city of "urban canyons" instead of "urban villages," said Paul Johanis, a member of the Greenspace Alliance of Canada's Capital who has closely watched the official plan unfold.

And with all this construction, possibly the biggest concern for many residents is losing trees.

The city has set a target of 40 per cent tree canopy citywide, but that doesn't ensure a neighbourhood has shade, they say. Only last week did community advocates get traction for sub-targets for tree canopy — something to be dealt with over the next two years.

City staff say change will be gradual and incremental, but many delegations have doubts. They pointed to language in the new official plan they expect developers could exploit.

The Greater Ottawa Home Builders' Association, on the other hand, finds the official plan lacking for a different reason. It argues the city has set its intensification sights too high, and won't have enough housing supply for the growing population.

That could harm home buyers, some said, and city policies could drive house prices even further out of reach.

At committee, Claridge Homes executive Neil Malhotra predicted conflicts among communities and developers will continue. He suggested how to avoid them: give each area an intensification target and let them figure out how to absorb new residents.

The People's Official Plan members agree. Planning needs to happen at the neighbourhood level, they say, and every area needs to take on population, not just older areas already under pressure like Westboro.

"We cannot plan at 30,000 feet and expect communities and developers not to end up in conflict," said Carolyn Mackenzie, a planner and member of the Glebe Community Association.

"We can't leave all this loose language in the official plan and expect us not to end up in an ongoing conflict."

Given all the focus on intensification as the counterbalance to expanding suburbia, the future Tewin community "sticks out like a sore thumb," as one public delegation put it this month.

Today's vote could cement a controversial decision from last winter, when council expanded the urban boundary to include 445 hectares in the rural southeast in the name of reconciliation and economic development for the Algonquins of Ontario (AOO).

You'll find Tewin on yet another map, shown in orange on lands mostly owned by the AOO and its developer partner Taggart Group. Their vision is to create a new sustainable community for thousands of people based on "Algonquin place making."

Many Algonquin leaders still strongly object to the AOO and their plans, however. Savanna McGregor, the acting grand chief of the Algonquin Anishinabe Nation Tribal Council, wrote the mayor and all councillors yesterday, telling them to take Tewin off the table.

She said they had not been properly consulted, and Tewin "could be a very costly mistake on many fronts."

A new suburb will require water, sewers, roads, transit, community centres and garbage collection, far from existing infrastructure.

City staff have begun writing a memorandum of understanding so Taggart and the AOO pay for certain infrastructure, but the People's Official Plan wants an independent analysis of the liability the city could face — and say council can't just turn the negotiation over to staff today if infrastructure could end up costing billions of dollars.

"This one risk stands out above all the others," said Keller-Herzog.

Councillors Riley Brockington and Rawlson King agree there is simply too little information of both the costs and the climate change impacts of growing that direction, and plan to table a motion to do as the Algonquin chiefs have asked and remove Tewin. They would re-insert lands in South March for future expansion.

It's been a long road already, and today won't be the end of it. The provincial minister for municipalities, Steve Clark, has to give the final OK on the new official plan.

Then comes a giant, detailed zoning exercise, and councillors already plan to turn to it — tomorrow.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/official-plan-council-setup-vote-1.6225461
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 6:15 AM.

     

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