HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #701  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2021, 12:15 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,338
Ottawa's new official plan approved by city council
Plan covers next 25 years, aims to make Ottawa most livable mid-sized city in North America

Kate Porter · CBC News
Posted: Oct 27, 2021 3:17 PM ET | Last Updated: 2 hours ago




City council has given the green light to Ottawa's new official plan, the ambitious document that will guide development in the nation's capital for the next quarter-century.

The vote was 21-2 in favour of the overall plan Wednesday with Coun. Jeff Leiper and Coun. Rick Chiarelli providing the only votes against.

The map that showed where Ottawa would expand its urban boundary, including the area where the Algonquins of Ontario and developer Taggart plan to build a new suburb called Tewin, was voted on separately. It too was approved, in a 15-to-8 vote.

Coun. Riley Brockington had failed earlier in the council meeting to convince his colleagues to remove that rural area from future development. He was concerned taxpayers might end up on the hook for future infrastructure costs and said its distance from existing areas made for poor urban planning, given Ottawa has declared a climate emergency.

On Wednesday, though, Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson stated council strongly supported the official plan.

"I believe we've come up with a plan that will serve us very well for a generation or two," he said. "This was an important day in the city's history. We approved the official plan that is our guiding, principal book."

Watson praised the thousands of people who gave unprecedented feedback to the city over the past few years.

Those many community groups — who have dedicated long hours to understanding what the official plan will mean for the future of their neighbourhoods — collectively said this week the blueprint didn't meet their expectations and the city wasn't living up to its own ambition.

"You always have push and pull ... but the reality is that we're a growing city," said Watson, and he thanked staff for bringing together "disparate views."

The city-building document was written from scratch for the first time since amalgamation two decades ago, and it aims to aggressively build up existing areas, especially those closer to downtown. The calculation is that housing a growing population through intensification will lead to less expansion at the city's edges.

Its overarching goal is to make Ottawa the most livable mid-sized city in North America, creating neighbourhoods where residents are a 15-minute walk from groceries, schools and transit.

Critics, however, have expressed concerns the plan's lack of precise language could open the door to rapid intensification of neighbourhoods and a loss of urban tree cover.

Kitchissippi Coun. Jeff Leiper, who represents a part of Ottawa that has faced some of the greatest intensification, said he voted against the official plan because he is "cynical" it will help achieve a livable city.

Leiper expects some areas to take on a disproportionate share of intensification for developers to continue to "push the envelope," and doubts the city will pay for recreation facilities and parks.

Stittsville Coun. Glen Gower, who co-chairs the planning committee, said the city will have to find new ways to fund infrastructure and amenities as it takes its next steps to implement the official plan, as well as address those neighbourhood-level concerns.

The official plan now goes to the provincial municipal affairs minister for final approval.

Planning committee on Thursday will discuss a $7-million budget for staff to take on a comprehensive new zoning bylaw over the next three years in order to implement the new official plan.





https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...tawa-1.6227321
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #702  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2021, 12:17 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,338
Ottawa city council votes to keep Tewin lands inside urban boundary
Coun. Riley Brockington's motion to remove 445 hectares from development fails

Kate Porter · CBC News
Posted: Oct 27, 2021 2:43 PM ET | Last Updated: 5 hours ago


Ottawa city council has voted to keep the Tewin lands inside Ottawa's urban boundary, rejecting a move by one city councillor who argued creating an entire new suburb in the rural southeast end, with unknown costs for city infrastructure, does not make for sound urban planning.

During debate about the new official plan, Riley Brockington aimed to leave 445 hectares, mainly owned by the Algonquins of Ontario and their development partner Taggart Group, outside the urban boundary for future development. His motion failed in a 15-to-8 vote.

City council's choice to allow the Algonquins of Ontario to pursue a development near Highway 417 and Anderson Road has attracted criticism from several other Algonquin leaders, as recently as Tuesday. They have long rejected the Algonquins of Ontario as an organization, and said letting its realty corporation pursue a housing development does not constitute reconciliation with Indigenous people.

Algonquins of Ontario representatives, including Chief Wendy Jocko of Algonquins of Pikwakanagan First Nation, have said it is indeed a step toward reconciliation, and council members supported it last January as a gesture of such.

At council Wednesday, many councillors — including Brockington — focused the debate on urban planning policies, not reconciliation.

Councillors raised many questions about infrastructure costs. Those included how much it might cost to take 20 kilometres of pipes to the future Tewin area; how much extra it could cost to build libraries and police stations on poor-quality clay soils; and whether the city can hold developer Taggart and the Algonquins of Ontario to their promise to cover costs.

Some suggested re-inserting development lands north of Kanata would put future homes closer to existing city infrastructure and the high-tech employment district.

"We have seen in this city that growth does not pay for growth," said Brockington, saying he wanted to make a decision in the long-term interests of taxpayers and residents.

The general manager responsible for planning and infrastructure, Steve Willis, said staff would follow through on council's direction. Building at Tewin would be possible, but could be expensive, he said.

At the same time, removing those lands at this point could allow Ontario's minister of municipal affairs to call the final shots and decide for himself which lands Ottawa should bring inside its urban boundary. The city needs to expand by 1,281 hectares.

The area's councillor, Catherine Kitts, was among those who voted to let Tewin develop, noting the Amazon warehouse area could soon become an employment hub, and areas in south Orléans are just as far from light rail and also on poor soils. She did gain support for a motion that asked staff to update guidelines about approving developments on sensitive clays.

Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson did choose to stray from the planning focus when he mentioned relationships with Indigenous communities while urging council to vote down Brockington's motion and support the vision for Tewin.

"It is a little more than patronizing for any member of council to take the position that they know better than chief Wendy Jocko of the Algonquins of Pikwakanagan First Nation what is good for the future of her community," Watson said.

He has maintained support for the Tewin expansion, even after CBC News reported the Taggart family — not the Algonquins of Ontario — are the primary landowner. On Wednesday, he did not mention Taggart but spoke only of the Algonquins of Ontario's proposal.

Watson said the city does make land acknowledgements at public events, but it must go "beyond symbolism when it comes to our relations with our First Nations." The city would continue to work with all Indigenous communities about economic development opportunities, he said, but in the future.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...vote-1.6227069
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #703  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2021, 12:19 AM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,338
Tewin stays in new official plan endorsed by city council
Council's decision on the official plan, which will need approval by the province, can't be appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal.

Jon Willing, Ottawa Citizen
Publishing date: Oct 27, 2021 • 1 hour ago • 4 minute read


The controversial Tewin project in rural east Ottawa will be part of a new official plan that guides development in Canada’s capital for the next 25 years.

Fifteen of 23 council members on Wednesday opposed a motion from Coun. Riley Brockington to remove Tewin lands from the expanded development area in the official plan.

The Tewin vote happened before council overwhelmingly approved the new official plan, locking in a 1,281-hectare urban boundary expansion and an aggressive residential intensification target of 51 per cent, increasing to 60 per cent in the final five years of the plan ending in 2046.

It means more than half of all new homes will need to be built in existing communities. The city needs to make space for 194,800 new homes across Ottawa to accommodate a population increase of 402,150.

Tewin, a development partnership between the Algonquins of Ontario (AOO) and Taggart Investments, received the most attention on council’s last day of debate on the official plan. A 445-hectare satellite community, requiring a significant extension of city services, is poised to be established near Carlsbad Springs.

“Adding the Tewin lands to the urban boundary is not a sound planning decision,” Brockington said.

But Coun. Catherine Kitts, who represents the area of the future Tewin development, said it was a better option than distributing urban expansion lands in an area like south Orléans, which she said was seeing infrastructure overwhelmed by the rapid pace of development.

Kitts said Tewin was an attractive opportunity to build a community from a “blank slate.”

AOO has a membership of 10 communities negotiating a land claim with the provincial and federal governments. The Algonquins of Pikwakanagan is the only federally recognized First Nation in the membership.

Approving Tewin would be an act of indigenous reconciliation by the City of Ottawa, AOO has argued.

Algonquin First Nation communities located north of the Ottawa River have disputed the AOO’s position. The mayor and councillors were under pressure by the Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation Tribal Council to turn down the Tewin proposal.

Acting Grand Chief Savanna McGregor wrote to city council members on Tuesday, explaining that allowing the massive development wouldn’t be considered an act of indigenous reconciliation by all Algonquin people. The work to develop a civic protocol on consultations with Algonquins “is now in jeopardy because of the lack of disrespect and understanding of our Algonquin Anishinabe Nation,” McGregor wrote.

According to McGregor, “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.”

But Mayor Jim Watson was fully supportive of the AOO/Taggart partnership to build the satellite community, saying it would be “patronizing” for council to think it knows better than the AOO and Wendy Jocko, chief of the Alqonquins of Pikwakanagan First Nation.

“I support them. I support their vision,” Watson said.

City staff won’t know until there’s a master servicing study the cost of providing municipal services for Tewin lands.

Coun. Scott Moffatt, co-chair of council’s planning committee, said allowing Tewin was a good decision compared with cobbling together pieces of land around the suburban edges to accommodate new homes.

While Brockington called for re-inserting land near Kanata North into the urban boundary to offset some of the Tewin lands, he received pushback from a rural west colleague.

Coun. Eli El-Chantiry urged council to not approve new development land at the edges of Kanata North, citing challenges with servicing the area and the already busy March Road connecting his West Carleton-March ward with the city.

Council’s approval of the official plan ends a lengthy process of public consultations and committee meetings. Many residents have been particularly worried about how intensification will impact the character of their neighbourhoods.

Staff received council direction to come up with metrics for measuring the effect of intensification in communities, including the impact on tree canopies.

Council’s decision on the official plan, which will need approval by the province, can’t be appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal. When the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing signs off, the city can begin the multi-year work of writing a new zoning bylaw to make sure property-specific rules match the new official plan.

The final council authorization on the official plan happened in two votes, with a 15-8 vote on the urban expansion lands (including the Tewin lands) and a 21-2 vote on the rest of the plan.

Here’s how the 23 council votes landed.

On the urban expansion lands — In support: Jean Cloutier, Scott Moffatt, Glen Gower, Jan Harder, Laura Dudas, George Darouze, Eli El-Chantiry, Catherine Kitts, Tim Tierney, Keith Egli, Carol Anne Meehan, Riley Brockington, Matthew Luloff, Allan Hubley and Jim Watson. In opposition: Theresa Kavanagh, Jeff Leiper, Rick Chiarelli, Catherine McKenney, Diane Deans, Rawlson King, Shawn Menard and Matthew Fleury.

On the rest of the official plan — In opposition: Rick Chiarelli and Jeff Leiper. All other members were in support.

jwilling@postmedia.com
twitter.com/JonathanWilling

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...y-city-council
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #704  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2021, 6:46 AM
ponyboycurtis's Avatar
ponyboycurtis ponyboycurtis is offline
Cigritbutt enthusiast
 
Join Date: Apr 2021
Location: Blahttawa
Posts: 822
Re: Tewin lands....

I don't understand why we wouldn't put most of our focus on Riverside South in light on the new rail expansion that ends in a corn field.

Personally I really like the way Barrhaven has developed in comparison to Kanata(despite lack of a real employment center) and Orleans in particular.

Orleans is horribly linear and decentralized. Kanata's employment is skewed far to the north but it does have some semblance of a central area.

Barrhaven to me is the best planned overall in terms of layout and zoning and transit. Riverside south has the capability to mirror that across the river.

Ottawa does have a lack of major north/south connector roads though. Perhaps Tewin threads that needle ? I dunno.

Not happy to see this go through.

Improve transit to Findley Creek and build out RS and I think you have the same result without overly increasing sprawl.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #705  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2021, 1:00 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 24,024
My biggest strife against new suburbs is the lack of commercial within the residential areas in favour of "Smart" Centres. Orleans north of Innes, mostly built from the 60s up to the mid-90s has good access to decent strip malls that are not completely hostile to pedestrians. After that, it was all big box stores in giant parking lots on Innes, with no consideration for pedestrians or cyclists.

City always talks big on 15 minute neighbourhoods, but hasn't built a new one since the 90s.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #706  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2021, 1:16 PM
Ottawa Champ Ottawa Champ is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 102
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
City always talks big on 15 minute neighbourhoods, but hasn't built a new one since the 90s.
I'm curious to know the 15 minute neighbourhood that was built in the 90's? In my mind they haven't built one since the pre WWII but that depends on one's interpretation of a 15 min hood.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #707  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2021, 1:26 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 24,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ottawa Champ View Post
I'm curious to know the 15 minute neighbourhood that was built in the 90's? In my mind they haven't built one since the pre WWII but that depends on one's interpretation of a 15 min hood.
Not 15-minute like streetcar suburbs, but borderline 15 minutes where you can at least walk to the convenience store, grocery store, barber shop, pharmacy, pizza shop... Touraine in Gatineau, Convent Glen, Queenswood Heights and Fallingbrook in Orleans. They all have strip malls closer to the street, with relatively small parking lots and sidewalks within the residential areas that provide basic services. They are not models of urban development, but better than what we see today.

In new suburbs, there's zero commercial/retail. You HAVE TO drive to the "Smart" Centre for anything.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #708  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2021, 3:58 PM
Multi-modal Multi-modal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,138
A little rant I have to get off my chest

I really don't understand Councillor Leiper's position voting against the new Official Plan. You can read "why he voted against the new Official Plan" here:
http://kitchissippiward.ca/content/w...-official-plan

The second paragraph is a good summary:
Quote:
The Official Plan has as its goal to build the most liveable mid-size city in North America. It’s a perfectly laudable goal, but one that I believe will be impossible to achieve: not because we have the wrong Official Plan, but because I’m cynical that we can or will support it.
So, he believes its a good OP but that we won't follow through. He may be right, but why is that a reason to vote against the OP? Vote for or against the OP on its own merits, then vote for or against the zoning by-law and other follow-up initiatives if that is where your concerns lie.

He also notes:
Quote:
As Councillor Moffatt says, we can’t address population growth with only towers. Our low-rise neighbourhoods will have to change.
Yet, he brought forward two motions to reduce the as-of-right potential for low/mid-rise within the Official Plan:
  • Quote:
    That Sherbourne Avenue be removed from Schedule B2 as a Minor Corridor; and
  • Quote:
    [f. [m14.1] That Council direct Staff to modify the New Official
    Plan to remove the policies that allow for consideration of 5-
    or 6-storey buildings on Minor Corridors without an Official
    Plan Amendment process

And this is after the amount of as-of-right height was cut in the Neighbourhood areas from earlier drafts of the Official Plan.

I usually agree with Councillor Leiper, but on this vote I can't understand his rationale. If Councillor Leiper is worried about too much development occuring in towers, and he is also against sprawl and expanding the urban boundary, then he should stop removing opportunities for mid-rise and low-rise development in neighbourhoods and minor corridors.

One other thing - removing blanket policy statement allowing low-rise intensification and leaving it to a "neighbourhood by neighbourhood" "thoughtful" approach will only result in the well-off engaged neighbourhoods of the City fighting hard to protect their low-density areas, leaving the low income, less-engaged communities to accommodate more than their fair share of intensification. By removing these broad policies from the OP and arguing for a more nuanced approach, the end result will be more inequity and disparity in the way we plan Neighbourhoods.

/end rant
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #709  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2021, 5:07 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 24,024
I have to agree with you for the most part.

Quote:
The Official Plan has as its goal to build the most liveable mid-size city in North America. It’s a perfectly laudable goal, but one that I believe will be impossible to achieve: not because we have the wrong Official Plan, but because I’m cynical that we can or will support it.
By voting against, it's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Bit of an oxymoron.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #710  
Old Posted Oct 28, 2021, 6:51 PM
caveat.doctor's Avatar
caveat.doctor caveat.doctor is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Multi-modal View Post
I really don't understand Councillor Leiper's position voting against the new Official Plan. ...

So, he believes its a good OP but that we won't follow through. He may be right, but why is that a reason to vote against the OP? Vote for or against the OP on its own merits, then vote for or against the zoning by-law and other follow-up initiatives if that is where your concerns lie.
I agree with you. Usually I agree with Councillor Leiper's reasoning (and I appreciate him being upfront about his reasoning for most things) but this time I don't get it. There are good reasons to vote against it (e.g. Tewin) but I don't think unlikelihood of follow-through is one. You could say the same thing about the City's plans generally to address climate change, or reconciliation, etc. - there's good reason to doubt that the follow-through on any of these will be well-equipped or prioritised.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Multi-modal View Post
Yet, he brought forward two motions to reduce the as-of-right potential for low/mid-rise within the Official Plan:
And this is after the amount of as-of-right height was cut in the Neighbourhood areas from earlier drafts of the Official Plan.

I usually agree with Councillor Leiper, but on this vote I can't understand his rationale. If Councillor Leiper is worried about too much development occuring in towers, and he is also against sprawl and expanding the urban boundary, then he should stop removing opportunities for mid-rise and low-rise development in neighbourhoods and minor corridors.
I agree with you there too. I can totally see how our ward's residents wanted the motions above, but they do come across as hypocritical. Definitely see the pressures on him though.

Quote:
One other thing - removing blanket policy statement allowing low-rise intensification and leaving it to a "neighbourhood by neighbourhood" "thoughtful" approach will only result in the well-off engaged neighbourhoods of the City fighting hard to protect their low-density areas, leaving the low income, less-engaged communities to accommodate more than their fair share of intensification. By removing these broad policies from the OP and arguing for a more nuanced approach, the end result will be more inequity and disparity in the way we plan Neighbourhoods.
Agree. I think this is one of those situations where a blanket approach really does make sense and is necessary: citywide policy to increase density, to reduce parking requirements, etc. There is enough opportunity at the development approval level for local fighting to happen and interests to be balanced; but at the citywide level, we need to empower the necessary development in the first place.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #711  
Old Posted Oct 29, 2021, 7:19 PM
vtecyo vtecyo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 237
I don't think his stated objection is as much about the overall plan as it is about the amount of development in his ward.

There's been a lot of intensification in his area that residents have objected to - the towers along Scott street etc... Perhaps he shares those feelings, perhaps not - but he's representing their interests with his vote, even if the result is only symbolic.

The official plan can say areas all over the city are open to higher density - but there are just some places that developers and home buyers find more attractive than others. Kitchissippi ward is one of those places... there's not much a city counsellor can do about it.

Everyone is a bit of a NIMBY, it's just a matter of what's being built, and their tolerance for change.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #712  
Old Posted Oct 31, 2021, 4:21 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,484
It really sucks, when even the supposed progressive councillors resort to NIMBYism. If the Official Plan can't be achieved because of a lack of ambition, he must certainly ain't helping.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #713  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2021, 4:30 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 8,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
City always talks big on 15 minute neighbourhoods, but hasn't built a new one since the 90s.
I'd like to know which 90s-era neighbourhood qualifies.

And yes, the city's willingness to rubber-stamp "power centres" is contrary to almost every meaningless word that the planning department has crapped out in the past forty years.
__________________
___
Enjoy my taxes, Orleans (and Kanata?).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #714  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2021, 4:32 PM
Uhuniau Uhuniau is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 8,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by vtecyo View Post
The official plan can say areas all over the city are open to higher density - but there are just some places that developers and home buyers find more attractive than others. Kitchissippi ward is one of those places... there's not much a city counsellor can do about it.
They could stop pandering to NIMBYs. That would be a start.
__________________
___
Enjoy my taxes, Orleans (and Kanata?).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #715  
Old Posted Nov 1, 2021, 5:28 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 24,024
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhuniau View Post
I'd like to know which 90s-era neighbourhood qualifies.

And yes, the city's willingness to rubber-stamp "power centres" is contrary to almost every meaningless word that the planning department has crapped out in the past forty years.
The 90s marked the transition from local suburban strip malls to big-box stores along stroads that serve larger areas. There are few 90s era suburban developments that would qualify as these semi-15 minute neighborhoods, but they are around, Fallingbrook built between the mid-80s to mid-90s being one of them. But yeah, maybe 80s was the last time one of these neighbourhoods was built from scratch.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #716  
Old Posted Nov 2, 2021, 3:48 PM
passwordisnt123 passwordisnt123 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Ottawa (Centretown)
Posts: 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
It really sucks, when even the supposed progressive councillors resort to NIMBYism. If the Official Plan can't be achieved because of a lack of ambition, he must certainly ain't helping.
McKenney's pretty good in not succumbing to NIMBYism too often. I'd argue they're better on the NIMBY front than other progressive councillors.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #717  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2021, 12:41 PM
rocketphish's Avatar
rocketphish rocketphish is offline
Planet Ottawa and beyond
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 12,338
Kanata North is ready to become more than just big tech
Official plan calls for 2,000 residential units and more activity in the area dominated by offices

Matthew Kupfer · CBC News
Posted: Nov 10, 2021 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 4 hours ago




Kanata North's landscape is set for a transformation in the next two decades that could see its expansive parking lots replaced with a grid of streets populated by residential buildings and restaurants — and served by autonomous vehicle shuttles.

The technology park, which bills itself as Canada's largest, has been designated a "special economic district" in the City of Ottawa's latest official plan.

That status opens up zoning rules that had restricted what could be built in the area dominated by 1970s office towers — aiming to build a community that will attract talented workers, international investment and allow for experiments with the very technology that's being developed in the towers.

Jamie Petten, CEO of the Kanata North Business Association, said landowners and businesses want to meet the expectations of current employees and future recruits.

"The focus is on building a community that serves every range or generation of talent," she said.

"What we're missing most obviously is that next generation of early stage talent, those that are coming out of university and looking for that first start in their career."

Petten said they're looking for shorter commutes, places to build relationships and a life beyond their careers.

While 28,000 people work at the 540 companies in the tech park today, there are still 1,000 openings on its aggregate jobs board, according to the business association.

Petten said the new community includes the launch of satellite campuses of Carleton University and the University of Ottawa, as well as places where those students will be able to "live, work, play and learn."

Don Herweyer, the city's director of economic development and long-range planning, said staff recognized there was nowhere nearby for newly recruited tech workers to live and build their community, which led to the opening up oaf planning rules.

"That's pretty important for a lot of professionals starting their career, so a lot of them were living downtown pre-pandemic and commuting out to Kanata North and that affects these businesses' ability to attract talent," he said.

The plan includes 2,000 new residential units at the two transit hubs located along March Road, at Station Road and Terry Fox Drive. Planners expect that density will help provide the customer base for restaurants and shops on the lower levels of condo and apartment buildings.

"To make it more of a real 24-hour place to live, you need that core 1,000 [residential] units in each hub," Herweyer said.

There's already a proposal for a 30-storey apartment building attached to the Brookstreet Hotel that refers to the new special economic district in its application to the city.

Shauna Brail, a University of Toronto professor at the Institute for Management and Innovation, said this kind of loosening of planning rules and focus on intensification is part of a larger trend.

"It is not too late ever, I don't think, to make an effort to reformulate a plan for a district that's already a success," she said.

Toronto made its planning rules more flexible to transform the industrial King and Spadina area into a mixed-use and residential district that attracted thousands of residents, she said.

Brail said some of the elements for Kanata North's new plan line up closely with what Amazon was seeking when it scouted locations for its secondary headquarters. Ottawa was among many North American cities that bid, though Amazong chose New York and northern Virginia.

She noted, in particular, the access to highways, an international airport, proximity to universities and a walkable community.

Providing those amenities won't just require changes in building height, but turning sprawling parking lots into a denser grid of streets.

Herweyer said that change won't be immediate and it also won't be dictated out of the city's planning office. He said landowners and developers may incorporate private streets, sidewalks and pathways into their new projects.

"It's really place-making," he said. "Breaking down these large, massive sites and over time have a finer grid of streets and connections that will connect you to these destinations or transit, or the opportunities to meet or gather."

The recently-opened Hub 350 will be an economic focal point for one neighbourhood where investors and new recruits will interact, and the area around the Brookstreet Hotel presents another opportunity for event and entertainment spaces, Petten said.

She said the new streetscape will also serve as a 5G testing ground for local start-up companies, as well as established players in the park like Nokia, Ericsson and Ciena.

"There's strong interest in creating a walkable community here in the technology park. One that's connected and one that showcases all of the good work that happens here on a daily basis," Petten said.

A key part of that for Petten is establishing a connected autonomous vehicle pilot program within 18 months, with the goal of moving people within the technology park and eventually to and from the future Moodie LRT station.

Legget Drive has already been outfitted with sensors to help autonomous vehicles navigate the test track.

Brail, who teaches urban studies, said using autonomous vehicles and 5G to distinguish Kanata North "makes perfect sense" given the concentration of work that's already being done there.

She said autonomous vehicle testing will be important on a national scale, but warns combining it with intensification and more pedestrian activity could lead to conflict.

"You just as equally have a conflict with a non-autonomous vehicle, it's just that that's a conflict we know," she said.

The business association said both private and public investment is going to be needed to turn these grandiose concepts into reality.

"Partnerships are key. Ensuring that our existing group of companies here in the park, their executives and landowners and property developers have a strong voice in the future of of what this technology park looks like," Petten said.

Recently-elected Kanata-Carleton MP Jenna Sudds was part of shepherding this new planning regime through the City of Ottawa's official plan in her role as the city councillor for the area.

"For me it's about vibrancy," she said.

Sudds said the success of the policy will rest in whether the technology park keeps its buzz after the workday.

To help those changes along, the city is currently consulting on a "community planning permit" pilot project, set to roll out in 2023, that will simplify and speed up development applications.

Sudds, who was the founding executive director of the business association before being elected councillor, said the new policy will shift the focus from city hall to leadership from the business community and residents.

"This is no longer cookie-cutter policies that every other business park has, but it's an opportunity to go to our community ... to draft what those parameters now are. So the power has definitely shifted in the other direction," Sudds said.

Sudds said the federal government will have a role in funding research in the park, including for autonomous vehicle development.

Brail said the city's work isn't done with this plan and it will need both "champions and critics" as it attracts the investment needed for the transformation.

She cautions there can be growing pains as people move into the neighbourhood and find they have needs that weren't part of the initial plans.

"The goal is to be proactive, but you also have to be prepared to be reactive," Brail said.

"You need to prepare to do things at the last minute or after the fact."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...rict-1.6237564
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #718  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2021, 1:34 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 24,024
All sounds well and good, but will the landowners get on board? Reminds me somewhat of the excitement for a downtown underground city when a transit tunnel was discussed. Once the transit tunnel was approved, the excitement quickly faded and the underground pedestrian network never materialized.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #719  
Old Posted Nov 18, 2021, 3:38 PM
J.OT13's Avatar
J.OT13 J.OT13 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 24,024
Ottawa should take a page from Vancouver. Their plans for the Broadway corridor are well developed and do a great job dividing-up the density in order to have more people directly on the subway (30-40 floors), while preserving older areas such as main streets (4-6 floors).

I would have loved to see something like this in Ottawa, allowing for 30-40 floor towers on Scott and the north end of Richmond (between Bayview and Lincoln Fields) while limiting heights down Wellington West and Westboro to preserve that streetcar suburb mains street feel. Alas, Ottawa is fine bulldozing entire blocks of character, fine-grained retail frontage to replace them with generic walls of 9 to 12 floor condos.


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vanc...-november-2021
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #720  
Old Posted Nov 18, 2021, 6:22 PM
Williamoforange's Avatar
Williamoforange Williamoforange is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2020
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 633
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.OT13 View Post
Ottawa should take a page from Vancouver. Their plans for the Broadway corridor are well developed and do a great job dividing-up the density in order to have more people directly on the subway (30-40 floors), while preserving older areas such as main streets (4-6 floors).

I would have loved to see something like this in Ottawa, allowing for 30-40 floor towers on Scott and the north end of Richmond (between Bayview and Lincoln Fields) while limiting heights down Wellington West and Westboro to preserve that streetcar suburb mains street feel. Alas, Ottawa is fine bulldozing entire blocks of character, fine-grained retail frontage to replace them with generic walls of 9 to 12 floor condos.


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/vanc...-november-2021
"Existing low-density zoning, including areas currently dominated by single-family homes, will see new six-storey market rental buildings, and allowances for 12 to 18-storey towers with below-market rental homes in strategic locations."

They are also allowing 6 stories in the currently low-rise area, something Ottawa is not. Along with 12 stories in other locations inside the study boundary. A boundary if you extended it from the confed line would include well most of the kitchisippi ward. The local councillor couldn't even agree that Sherborne was a minor corridor. So if we comparing whos actually allowing more of what most Nimbys define as "character" to be destroyed it's not ottawa.

Lastly, Would you also take the test of the rezoning as well? Or just the part that protects what you like?
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 10:38 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.