Wateridge Village development [Hemlock Rd, Codd's Rd] | U/C

[OTownandDown]

The way this land is being divvied up with lax rules, resulting in these ridiculous blocks that will end up being a low-income ghetto in 15 years really points out the limitations of the real estate group at the City, the planning office, and all levels of government.

There's a difference between paying an architect $200k for a 'master plan' and implementing that plan. The planning gets dumbed down to the most basic level, and you end up with a group of separate development companies trying to profit as much as possible within the dumbed rules and their single blocks.

The City needs to actually get innovative when it comes to real estate and planning working 'as a team' with the public and developers. Other Cities have actually built Development Corporations with actors from every sector, and managed to design and build to a master plan. You set the parcels, you set their use and design limitations, and you stick to it. If the developer likes the idea for the parcel, they buy it and build. If they don't like what's proposed for that land, they move on.

In the end, it's the ultimate in socialism (or..communism? lol, I'm not sure), having the government design land, but if you have enough sectors on the larger committee setting the design, it sometimes works a bit better than a wide-open market for profiteers.

I'm mostly talking about Rive Gauche in Paris. WestSideAction did a good article about it and several other 'planned' european neighbourhoods a couple years ago.

[kwoldtimer]

I would have thought that the involvement of several developers was one of Wateridge's strong points.

It may be many things, and I find the aesthetic a bit austere, but "low income ghetto" it most certainly ain't.

[OTownandDown]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I would have thought that the involvement of several developers was one on Wateridge's strong points.

It may be many things, and I find the aesthetic a bit austere, but "low income ghetto" it most certainly ain't.

Nobody develops empty land into an out-of-the-way, super-dense, non-transparent (opaque) set of single-use residential buildings with the intention of it becoming a ghetto. It just happens naturally.

In 10 years these will transfer from owner-occupied into rentals for another 5-10, and from rentals into cheap rentals in the ensuing 5-10.

Mind you, I don't know that for sure, I'm just being pessimistic. You never know. I suppose the surrounding neighbourhoods have managed to keep it together over the years.

[BenYOW]

Aerial view of construction progress as of April 8, 2021:

[phil235]

Originally Posted by BenYOW

Aerial view of construction progress as of April 8, 2021:

Little Barrhaven takes shape!

[J.OT13]

Massive lost opportunity.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Massive lost opportunity.

Seriously. What they've done here is so gross. What they've squandered here is both offensive and heartbreaking. That much land, so close to the core and the water. And look what they did with it.

[lrt's friend]

Not really 'Little Barrhaven'. The real Barrhaven will be connected to rapid transit. This development will never be connected.

This project demonstrates that it is impossible to build a new 'urban' neighbourhood in the 21st century.

At least it will be close to the new Costco on Ogilvie. The new residents will be flooding there, by car of course.

[TransitZilla]

I think you are being too harsh. None of the blocks that are supposed to form the higher-density core of this neighbourhood have been built yet. Those blocks are supposed to be mixed-use as well, but there is a chicken-and-egg problem: you can't get commercial when you don't have any residents yet.

I have faith this will come together eventually, though it is taking longer than I would have hoped.

EDIT: The fist "core" block is in the works and it looks like the 1st building is sold out if Mattamy's website is to be believed: https://mattamyhomes.com/ontario/ott...dos-by-mattamy

[Jayday23]

agreed

[TransitZilla]

Originally Posted by Jayday23

Politicans in this city are so scared of zoning something as a traditional main street. Remember all the uproar about rezoning Bronson? If they actually wanted to hold these developers in check (they didn't), they would have had a guts to do it in at least one of the main roads in this place.

Hemlock is supposed to be the main street.

FWIW, the block at Hemlock/Codd's/Mikinak (e.g. Mattamy's 360 condos) has been redesigned from the original submission and they are now planning at-grade retail along all 4 frontages of the block.

https://devapps.ottawa.ca/en/applica...8-0086/details

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Not really 'Little Barrhaven'. The real Barrhaven will be connected to rapid transit. This development will never be connected.

This project demonstrates that it is impossible to build a new 'urban' neighbourhood in the 21st century.

Urban neighborhoods are built all over the world without rapid transit connections.

What they should've have built here is a lot of mid-rise, three storey towns and enough mixed use to substantially be a 15 min neighbourhood. Bus service would have been just fine then.

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Urban neighborhoods are built all over the world without rapid transit connections.

What they should've have built here is a lot of mid-rise, three storey towns and enough mixed use to substantially be a 15 min neighbourhood. Bus service would have been just fine then.

I agree with bradnixon. The vast majority of this site is planned to be between 3-story and high-rise residential (the whole red-shaded area of the site map) including a substantial area of mixed-use in the centre, but that's not what they started building first. I think you just need to give it some time. This is probably a 20-year project.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

I agree with bradnixon. The vast majority of this site is planned to be between 3-story and high-rise residential (the whole red-shaded area of the site map) including a substantial area of mixed-use in the centre, but that's not what they started building first. I think you just need to give it some time. This is probably a 20-year project.

I hope you’re right. Right now it feels like those semi-dense development in a field projects that you see at the edge of town, that are totally disconnected from anything around them. I have my doubts that this will ever be well-integrated into the city, either by foot or by transit.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

I agree with bradnixon. The vast majority of this site is planned to be between 3-story and high-rise residential (the whole red-shaded area of the site map) including a substantial area of mixed-use in the centre, but that's not what they started building first. I think you just need to give it some time. This is probably a 20-year project.

I'm suspicious of developers who put down all or most of their single family homes first. How long before they start pressuring the city for a break on zoning?

They could have built the denser bits first and had a whole community present, getting them a substantial premium on their single family homes later. Their choice to go with the towns first says a lot.

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I'm suspicious of developers who put down all or most of their single family homes first. How long before they start pressuring the city for a break on zoning?

They could have built the denser bits first and had a whole community present, getting them a substantial premium on their single family homes later. Their choice to go with the towns first says a lot.

This site isn't owned by a single developer. It's owned by Canada Lands, who are selling off blocks, with specific minimum residential densities, in a particular order. The developers are just building what they have agreed to build (for the most part) on the blocks they purchased. Mattamy, in fact, successfully increased the density on their second (and largest) parcel after realizing the demand for their smaller denser back-to-back stacked townhomes.

So you should be suspicious of Canada Lands' master plan, if you need to be suspicious of anything.

[rocketphish]

Here's a closeup view of Mattamy's Wateridge towns and stacked towns, from CLC's website. This certainly isn't my cup of tea, but it does seem pretty dense for low-mid rise.

And incidentally, they seem to be selling like hotcakes on the resale market:
https://www.redfin.ca/on/ottawa/533-...home/174771662
https://www.redfin.ca/on/ottawa/520-...home/174779918



https://www.clc-sic.ca/real-estate/wateridge-village

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

I'm suspicious of developers who put down all or most of their single family homes first. How long before they start pressuring the city for a break on zoning?

They could have built the denser bits first and had a whole community present, getting them a substantial premium on their single family homes later. Their choice to go with the towns first says a lot.

I'm not sure I follow. You think developers prefer SFH where they can build towns or apartments? Of course developers want to put as many units as they can to maximize profit. This site is already very dense for its location and access to transit.

It will be interesting to see what it looks like in 20 years. I think there is a high probability it becomes very much run down as those small town houses and apartments become lower priced rentals as they degrade. This is why communities fight to keep their neighbourhoods only SFH. Well and classism racism, but not only.

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

I'm not sure I follow. You think developers prefer SFH where they can build towns or apartments? Of course developers want to put as many units as they can to maximize profit. This site is already very dense for its location and access to transit.

It will be interesting to see what it looks like in 20 years. I think there is a high probability it becomes very much run down as those small town houses and apartments become lower priced rentals as they degrade. This is why communities fight to keep their neighbourhoods only SFH. Well and classism racism, but not only.

I will need to have a close look and have a walk around. It depends on build quality and the public amenities and the overall community design.

There is a tendency to cheap out on the details. I would hope for quality walkways and good landscaping including opportunities for individual home owners. If everything is pretty well paved over, there is a good chance of degradation over time.

[danduc]

Looks like Philadelphia Row house. Will be fun next snowstorm. Where do you blow the snow?