What's your feedback in regards to the proposed development of Old Second Line?

Application #: D07-16-18-0008

Description: Proposed development of 49 two-storey townhouses on private streets.

Good afternoon Laurel,

Thank you for your work on this application. I been out canvassing the surrounding streets and neighbourhood and would like to share the concerns raised by many local residents during our discussions.

1. "The applicant is proposing to rezone the lands to Residential Third Density Subzone Z (R3Z) with a site-specific exception to permit the proposed townhouse development. The exception to the R3 zone is proposed to deal with the By-law provisions related to frontage on a public street and associated lot lines, as the proposed is to include private streets, as well as corner side yard setbacks for three internal blocks which have a proposed setback of 2.15 metres whereas the R3Z zone requires 3 metres."

This exception should not be granted. Local residents have shared with me that they, as do I, strongly disagree with spot rezonings and exceptions which create uncertainty for our community and the homeowners in this area. In particular allowing for an exemption for the setbacks as requested will unduly impact the surrounding neighbours and result in the removal of the existing tree canopy. Preserving trees around the parameter of this development (at a minimum) should be a priority. The City should not allow for the rezoning and exception to happen and should stand by the current zoning requirements which residents rely on.

2. Many residents who live on private roads in Kanata North have expressed frustration to me regarding their tax bills and the level of service that they receive. In particular those living on private roads pay for maintenance fees of the roads, sidewalks, landscaping and snow removal (among other costs) to the property manager for the development. Their City Property tax bill does not adjust for these costs, despite the City not providing them these services that other residents receive who live on City roads. I question why this scenario exists and why the City of Ottawa continues to allow for the development of private roads, and creating this unfair taxation scenario.

3. The current plan for the private roads at a width of seven metres with driveways sufficient for one car and only two visitor parking spots should not be accepted. Given the density, two visitor spots is not sufficient and parking on the private streets will not be an option. Further parking on Old Second Line will only add to the congestion and will end up spilling over to the neighbouring residential streets. The required number of visitor parking spots must be increased at a minimum, and the width of the streets should be revisited to ensure adequate parking within the development.

4. The density planned for this development has far reaching environmental concerns and the submitted tree preservation study highlights that this property will be clear cut. It appears no effort is being made to save existing trees where possible. Development should strive to strike a balance between growth and protecting and preserving our environment.

5.The proposed density of the development means there will be no green or public space for future residents. This will not live up to the standard of quality of life that residents should expect from a community in Kanata. A place where kids and families can safely play and enjoy the outdoors. The developer should be required to include public green space for the residents.

 

Sincerely,

Jenna Sudds

Candidate for City Coucillor - Kanata North
And concerned resident
613 703-5707
Jenna@JennaSudds.ca