New subdivision developments

[waterloowarrior]

stonebridge phase 10 north

[waterloowarrior]

urban boundary expansion proposal (south orleans/notre dame des champs) - mattamy

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

urban boundary expansion proposal (south orleans/notre dame des champs) - mattamy

How about no?

How about we continue to build within our current limits, and be forced to increase prices and/or density within our suburbs in order to make room for our projected population, and therefore accomplish the objectives set out in our Master Plan?

How about we build taller condos and office towers downtown?

How about we build more condos and office towers in the first place?

How about we actually unlock parts of the greenbelt that are nothing more than farmland?

How about we kick the experimental farm out to the boonies and turn that into a fantastic urban park/urban community?



Have any thoughts like this crossed anyone's mind?

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

How about no?

How about we continue to build within our current limits, and be forced to increase prices and/or density within our suburbs in order to make room for our projected population, and therefore accomplish the objectives set out in our Master Plan?

How about we build taller condos and office towers downtown?

How about we build more condos and office towers in the first place?

How about we actually unlock parts of the greenbelt that are nothing more than farmland?

How about we kick the experimental farm out to the boonies and turn that into a fantastic urban park/urban community?

Have any thoughts like this crossed anyone's mind?

Couldn't agree more with you. Be at the open houses for the Official Plan to say those things and put them in writing.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

urban boundary expansion proposal (south orleans/notre dame des champs) - mattamy

This may be a dumb question but what is the point of having an urban growth boundary if it can be easily expanded all the time?

Given that it was established after much study of the city's future growth-related land needs... has the growth situation changed *that* much since it was implemented, to the point where opening it up again is absolutely necessary?

[Richard Eade]

Say what you might about extending the existing boundary being bad. I think that Mattamy has made a good case and if the City refuses, the OMB won't.

If we look at Mattamy's arguments, they simply point out that the City itself is building infrastructure to support growth is that area. It would actually be benefitial to have greater ridership on the new Cumberland Transitway, and thus would be better to develop the area in question.

It will, I'm afraid, come across as an arbitrary, unsupportable limitation and the City will be over ruled by the OMB.

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Say what you might about extending the existing boundary being bad. I think that Mattamy has made a good case and if the City refuses, the OMB won't.

If we look at Mattamy's arguments, they simply point out that the City itself is building infrastructure to support growth is that area. It would actually be benefitial to have greater ridership on the new Cumberland Transitway, and thus would be better to develop the area in question.

It will, I'm afraid, come across as an arbitrary, unsupportable limitation and the City will be over ruled by the OMB.

IIRC those appeals (urban boundary) are longer allowed because of recent legislation..

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Mille Sabords

Couldn't agree more with you. Be at the open houses for the Official Plan to say those things and put them in writing.

I would except that not only do I not own a car(die hard transit user/walker), but I'm in North Bay for college...

[highdensitysprawl]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

I would except that not only do I not own a car(die hard transit user/walker), but I'm in North Bay for college...

It can be put in writing and sent in to the City.

[eemy]

Originally Posted by Acajack

This may be a dumb question but what is the point of having an urban growth boundary if it can be easily expanded all the time?

Given that it was established after much study of the city's future growth-related land needs... has the growth situation changed *that* much since it was implemented, to the point where opening it up again is absolutely necessary?

Waterloowarrior is right, this particular case probably dates to before the recent legislation changes, but in the future, urban boundaries will only be able to be changed as part of an official plan review by the municipality every five years.

[waterloowarrior]

Dharma Developments' infill proposal in Stittsville ('Reverie')

This application is to permit a 5 storey mixed use building fronting on Stittsville Main Street, with retail on the ground floor, offices on the 2nd & 3rd floors and residential on the 4th & 5th floors. The rear of the property would be developed with six 3-storey buildings containing 36 stacked units on two private streets.



very cool for stittsville

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Sounds cool, but Dharma? That's just BEGGING for shit to happen...Lost Season six anyone?

[highdensitysprawl]

Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix

Sounds cool, but Dharma? That's just BEGGING for shit to happen...Lost Season six anyone?

Dharma is a fairly new builder in Stittsville who built the Powers Enclave TH development and are planning another development at Main/Orville.

I'm not sure if Shad has given this development his blessing and he'll probably have constituants ranting about traffic, density etc.

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Minto

Located in the east end, between Page and Renaud Road, TrailsEdge lies on 46 acres of land. A new place to call home, TrailsEdge will consist of beautiful townhomes located close to nature and convenient amenities. Please fill out the Priority Registration Form if you wish to be added to our priority list.

Looks like this is a partnership with Richcraft.
See here: http://www.richcraft.com/trailsedge.htm

[harls]

Old Chelsea referendum deadlocked over project

Municipality to request judicial recount

By Brendan Kennedy, The Ottawa Citizen

February 1, 2009

OTTAWA — The residents of Old Chelsea who would be affected by a proposed housing development in the Chelsea Creek area appear to be deadlocked over whether the development should go forward.

The unofficial results of a two-question referendum on the proposed development show residents evenly split for and against the development.

The two questions dealt with different zoning amendments needed to allow the development to go ahead. By voting in favour of the amendments, voters would be signalling their approval for the project.

Results were 40 in favour and 40 against for the first amendment, but, curiously, 39 in favour and 41 against for the second amendment.

The municipality is requesting a judicial recount of the votes and the official results will not be announced until Friday.

In order for the development to go forward, both amendments would have to be approved.

Eighty-six people were eligible to vote in the referendum, which was held in the Old Chelsea Town Hall. Only those people who owned property that directly bordered the proposed development site near Highway 5 and Old Chelsea Road were eligible to vote.

Sunday’s referendum is only the latest chapter in the highly controversial development proposal by the InHarmony development group.

In mid-November, it looked like InHarmony had gathered enough signatures of support from the affected residents to stall the referendum, but the municipality later declared that some of the signatures were invalid.

However, 33 people registered their opposition to the project, far above the 19 signatories required to trigger the council’s consideration of a resolution to hold the referendum.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

.

[waterloowarrior]

http://mattamyrichmond.com/

Mattamy is holding a Public Open House on Thursday, February 12th, 2009 to present the Land Use Concept Plan for Mattamy’s Lands, the results of Phases 1 & 2 of the Master Servicing Class EA and the findings of the Technical Studies.

[highdensitysprawl]

Originally Posted by bradnixon

Looks like this is a partnership with Richcraft.
See here: http://www.richcraft.com/trailsedge.htm

Why would Minto partner up with Richcraft...? I would have thought Minto have the firepower, deep pockets etc to not have to partner with another company.,

[waterloowarrior]

Anyone been near Citiplace (Colonnade Road) recently? Have any non-residential buildings been built?

[waterloowarrior]

Chelsea mayor opts for expansion

Vote unpopular with preservationists

BY LAURA PAYTON, THE OTTAWA CITIZENMARCH 10, 2009


CHELSEA — Chelsea mayor Jean Perras cast the deciding vote in favour of a controversial Chelsea Creek development proposal Monday in a move that could drastically expand the town’s population and change the way it grows.

Perras says Chelsea has a history of making environmentally friendly choices, and he’s choosing higher density to increase the number of homes for seniors, businesses and services for the community.

“We’ve permitted a little bit more density and with those criteria of environment and sustainable development, in the long-run, (it) will be very good for Chelsea,” he said.

Adversaries of the development fear allowing that kind of growth will turn their town into a suburb of Gatineau.

They collected enough signatures to force a referendum of nearby residents on local bylaws limiting subdivision population density and zoning, ending in a bizarre result with the re-zoning vote tied 40-40 and the population density amendment passing in a 41-39 vote. Perras held the deciding ballot.

Marc Shank of InHarmony Developments said the group is pleased that, after six years of planning, the development is going ahead.

“We will keep on working hard with community leaders and organizations to ensure our project fully integrates with Chelsea’s future vision,” he said in a written statement.

InHarmony’s proposal will build single- and multiple-family homes, and add commercial space on the land south of Old Chelsea Road, between Highway 5 and Boischatel Road. Shank says it would bring $800,000 a year in tax revenue for the town.

Opponents of the project complained to the director general of Quebec elections and a provincial ministry in charge of municipalities. Preservation Chelsea spokesman Geoff Bleich says the group is going to try to run a slate of candidates dedicated to keeping Chelsea rural in the November municipal election.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

[Cre47]

Proposed subdivision in the Greely area.

http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa...B-ARA-0001.htm