Draft Zoning Bylaws Explained
The October Vistas newspaper is out and a story on page 4 is a MUST read for everyone looking to understand the never-ending changes to the Official Plan/Draft Zoning Bylaws and just how ‘shocked’ the authors of the piece are about the changes being proposed that will have a serious impact on our residential neighbourhoods.
Below are some paragraphs from the full-page piece written by Garry Lindberg, Judy Koorecky, John Langstone and Michel Haddad who sit on the Planning and Transportation Committee of the Ala Vista Community Association.
The piece does a great job translating what has been a very difficult issue to follow/understand, and the information provided underscores just how major the changes being proposed are and how they will impact our neighbourhoods (and also raises serious questions about the validity of some of the targets cited to defend the changes).
And the authors are calling on everyone to get involved by sending comments to the City and attending upcoming Draft Zoning Bylaw meetings.
This newsletter excerpt is courtesy of the city-wide community group Your Applewood Acres (And Beyond) Neighbours
For You:
Spitting Vitriol From The Bike Zealots
The Gospel According To Denley: MULVIHILL
Bookmark The Bulldog, click here
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
– The Bulldog – News Feed Enter 
As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words. First off, the picture on page 4 is reminiscent of the Pixar movie “Up” (I wonder if the person living in the single family dwelling sounds like Ed Asner). The picture brings to mind other problems with the intensification plan as it stands. The Bulldog and its commenters speak of the negative impact of intensification on the value of existing single family dwellings and while that’s certainly true, from what I see in the picture, I wouldn’t want to live in any of the surrounding buildings primarily because of the lack of privacy for “anyone” in the area. Who wants to live in an apartment that has lots of windows which would have to covered with drapes and blinds at all times just to gain some privacy? What would the impact be on someone’s mental health? What kind of creatures would we become? Also, most people looking to get into home ownership start small, eg a town home, then move to something bigger, eg. a small single family dwelling, then onto their dream home or at least a larger home with a yard to putter in. In the scenario pictured on page 4 where exactly do steps 2 and 3 take place? Outside the city when the purpose of intensification is to cut back on urban sprawl? We can only hope the plan hasn’t been cast in stone yet.
sisco, one person’s utopia is another person’s dystopia. That city planners and councillors do not understand this is a statement of and by itself.
2 things – first of all the city used to make communities, not housing. In Kanata we are facing around 8,000 kids in a highly dense area with zero new sports fields or recreation, and a number of these developments have little or no parking, which means there is nothing for these kids to do – the parent’s can’t take them to church/temple/mosque for services or even to scouts/guides. They will just “hang out”. The city needs to make communities – not just increase density. I blame Leiper for this as the Planning leader. 2ndly – I asked the planners about the 15 minute neighbourhoods – there are no restrictions on what will be going into these strip malls – most likely vape shops and Quickies – at least you can pick up beer there. These romantic ideas the planners are floating about cafes and restaurants are total BS – they have no control what will go into these strip malls.