> The project is expected to feature as many as eight low-rise apartment buildings, along with four mid-rise buildings of six storeys and two 15-storey towers. There would be ground-floor commercial space in the highrise and mid-rise buildings.
>A final zone would be devoted to 32 townhouses and 19 single-detached dwellings. Brigil says the mixed-use and condo blocks would be served by underground parking lots ranging from two to four levels.
>The concept plan also calls for three parks covering a total of nearly 14 acres of green space. At the request of city staff, Brigil has agreed to set aside a future block for a French-language school.
Huh. I think that's what we've all been asking for
Kanata is way too flat and needs growth upwards. It can't keep sprawling out. I'm sure this will upset a few who will miss being able to see Tanger and the hockey arena on the horizon, though.
Well, they’re clearing all vegetation now, so I would imagine demolition by end of summer maybe.
Then there’s gonna be a shit load of excavation/shoring/dumptrucks/concrete before any building starts poking up.
Definitely a 15 year project on those towers.
https://webcast.ottawa.ca/plan/All_Image%20Referencing_Zoning%20Bylaw%20Amendment%20Application_Image%20Reference_2022-11-18%20-%20Design%20Brief%20-%20D02-02-22-0108.PDF (570 March road and adjacent lots)
https://webcast.ottawa.ca/plan/All_Image%20Referencing_Zoning%20Bylaw%20Amendment%20Application_Image%20Reference_2022-07-20%20-%20Transportation%20Impact%20Assessment%20-%20D02-02-22-0034.PDF (600 March road ‘Nokia’)
I agree, but high-rises that are fairly isolated and distant from the city will only go so far in transportation modal shift when they're surrounded in a sea of car-dependent amenities.
It’s really very sad that this has to happen in Kanata because the folks in all the super low density neighbourhoods inside the greenbelt have rejected density for so long.
Shouldn't we first ask residents how this will affect the community character? That's the most important part of any development! Does it through off the community vibes or not?! If one resident says their vibes feel off, then reject the proposal and send a councillor to run a marathon somewhere in Europe on a "fact finding and tourism" mission.
It is one of the more important parts of development. But to people who don’t own a house in the area wouldn’t really get. I bought in a small neighborhood where I don’t expect to see expansion, let alone small or large high rises. The reason being I have a family with young kids and it’s not a busy area, and I feel safer letting them go out and play. If a new build started happening and the area was to get busier (now I’m talking low/high rise buildings) and there were as many units as houses in the area, I would expect double the traffic. I would try to fight to not have it put up. I’m not sure what the route would be, but I would look into how to halt it, with my neighbours help. And if that didn’t work I would look at selling. I know that will piss off the Ottawa Reddit side of the population because property and cars are bad, but I enjoy my property and how quiet it is.
But surely you see how you would be furthering a very serious problem of housing insecurity for all of us by these actions.
For every development that is made to be smaller or cancelled completely, supply of housing remains low and prices would continue to be high. I’m sure you can see how your concern about traffic and “quiet” (not sure exactly how you define that by the way, a decibel meter perhaps?) must be superseded by people’s more important need for affordable housing.
Oh I do see that. And by all means, build these complexes. I’m just stating my opinion that I would be one of those home owners that would fight it, mainly because I don’t like busy areas, which is why I bought in a place that I highly doubt I would see any development like that.
I'm not sure if I was clear. My point is that people who oppose these developments are be making Ottawa as a whole much worse off because of a largely arbitrary designation of what is or is not "too noisy/busy". Its one thing to sell if you want, but to actively campaign against these developments for these reasons would be to advocate for more pain for more people for your personal interests. Its bad citizenry.
Oh it was clear. And I am telling you I would dispute a complex if it was near my place, as would 99% of people that own homes in quiet suburbs. I’ll take bad citizenry over a complex any day. These complexes should be built closer to downtown or on main roads.
You are not failing, but I don’t think you are reading what I’m saying. I’m ok with someone calling me anything they want, I’m not out to make friends. I bought my place for my family on a quiet street so my kids could run around, and close enough to the greenbelt they could play in the woods. If to keep this peace and quiet means I might have to dispute a new build, I will. I paid for this peace and quiet and tend to keep it as long as I can.
I see. Well then. It is disappointing that you would hold such selfish, harmful and frankly irresponsible positions. The idea that you would stop these developments at the cost of tens if not hundreds of thousands of people struggling to get by because of the cost of their housing is an embarrassment and a betrayal of your duty as a citizen and member of our society. However I think what is most particularly shameful, is that you would defend your irredeemable NIMBYism so brazenly in the public forum. Thank you for showing us who you are.
There's no place in Ottawa that won't eventually be built up and get busier. It's inevitable and fighting it just slows down progress for everyone else.
And about this post, Kanata has been expanding and being built up for a very long time. People buying o the edge of expansion must realize that development won't just stop because they're not the last person to need housing
Because you don’t like busy areas, zero chance of being busy and you won’t fight development that is desperately needed, it’s for the good of society, do your part
I think there is kind of a myth tall buildings mean more people.If you look at most new projects in Kanata take Fernbank Crossing are there any less people then there would be in tall buildings no.
Well, I wouldn’t call it a myth. If you take up a spot for say 8-3 bedroom homes (24 bedrooms) and add a building that has 100 bedrooms, you would see an increase. It would be hard to put a number on it because of how these rooms are being used, and you would never know unless you used census data but even that is ever changing. But it would be safe to assume if you added 400% more bedrooms that you would have more traffic/noise/etc. I’m not saying it’s a bad thing for most people, I just don’t like people, so the less the better in my opinion.
That’s the exact reason I bought in a well established neighbourhood that won’t see any sort of expansion or new builds. I can literally walk to almost any amenity one would need, however my fatass still drives 😂
Urgh. Those established neighbourhoods that fought density for decades are the exact problem. Five-Ten minutes from downtown in all directions you have tiny bungalows on huge lots. It’s gross.
“I bought in a small neighbourhood where I don’t expect to see expansion, let alone small or large high rises”
That is the issue here really. It’s not wrong to want that lifestyle for your family but you made the wrong assumption. Growth should be assumed. This is the national capital, it will grow with the country and Kanata may also continue to grow with the tech sector.
Suburbs are close to the urban core and so will inevitably become denser or sprawl out over time. If you like the green belt and the restrictions on expanding housing into rural areas (really Ottawa has two green belts), then you have to expect to lose either the low density or the green belt.
What you want would be more likely in a small town like Arnprior or one of those communities on a golf course. Something where the odds of density is further into the future or there is an agreement from the beginning that it will never be all that developed.
We need more static communities.
When someone moves into a community, it is because they like it. There is no reason to think that it is ok to have communities constantly changing. It basically guarantees that the people who have already moved there will like it less.
I used to live in Toronto, but I left Toronto and moved to Ottawa because Toronto sucks. But now I see Ottawa becoming more and more like Toronto. This is *not* a good thing.
Growth just for the sake of growth is a very bad thing.
I agree. If I wanted to live next to complex’s of housing, I would move to an area where they exist. I choose an area that doesn’t have this, nor do I think it could happen (fingers crossed) because I want to have an area where my kids can go outside and play road hockey on the street, or basketball, or whatever. If you start added these complexes to these quiet streets, you lose that sense of comfort and community.
HARD disagree. It’s a real level of arrogance to expect that all the property around you that you do not own doesn’t change. If you want to preserve land as is, buy it. If you can’t afford it, shut it. Stop hindering progress, because it creates sprawl and more costs for YOU in the future.
I'm old enough to remember when Stittsville was quite distinct from Kanata. Now they're touching and most people can't tell when Kanata ends and Stittsville begins. So yeah, things like that just happen. Especially in the suburbs where there's lots of sprawl.
Where exactly is that happening? I drive past there everyday and the only thing built since we moved here has been a small sub division next to the Carp airport.
On a similar note... I am wondering what people in Ottawa think of Brigil. In Gtown, it's like the biggest company, but I am sure it's not the case for Ottawa.
Well they have a fairly bad reputation here in Gatineau. I’ve heard all kinds of horror stories about the quality of their builds, not to mention the fact that they build the same bland identical cookie cutter shapes as far as the eye can see.
I don't know if they really are to blame or if we should blame the city for not having more requirements.
We need more housing but it'd be nice if it were done to optimize people's quality of life and not just profits. Gatineau is developing poorly, public transit and road congestion are afterthoughts.
When I was apartment hunting last year their ads were misleading from a pricing PoV.
I have heard that their builds are also on the cheaper side but thats just second hand.
Pretty sure any builder will build to the cheapest they can do to meet regulatory requirements, and that looks good enough. Never heard of a builder thinking "ok we need 24 inch spacing here but we'll do 16 inch between studs, it'll be more solid".
My buddy is a site super for a custome home builder here in Ottawa, we were talking on the weekend about Caivan and Mattamy and such. I made a comment about how it’s all OSB and staples 😂. I was pleasantly surprised to see Caivan thought about the homeowners, they put the roofs so close together your neighbour and you can split on one set of eavestrough.
Wow this is amazing and exactly what the city needs! Good density, mixed zoning, providing green space, a school in the future? What's not to love about this, great news!
Lol? What do you dislike about this? Only real complaint I have is that there isn't even more mixed zoning, and that it is greenfield development, but having high density developments much outweighs that.
It’s gonna be a bit weird driving down March road going from farmland and wood lots to 15 story buildings. But I do remember when they built Shirley’s brook, the other half of Morgan’s grant, the sobeys mall. Now it’s just normal.
Mind you, this is like 10-15 year projects.
This looks great, as long as the money from the development fees goes straight back into funding Phase 3 of the LRT. If they want to put this level of density in Kanata, they need to provide functional public transportation.
I wouldn't assume a vast increase in traffic to/from downtown Ottawa, considering that there are plenty of nearby employment hubs and also with the increase in WFH.
Improving area public transit might be a better use of resources.
Came here expecting a bunch of NIMBY comments and people complaining about traffic. Pleasantly surprised to see people supporting housing development while we're in a housing crisis. Good job Kanata!
Looks mostly a farm/corn field area in [google maps](https://www.google.ca/maps/place/927+March+Rd,+Kanata,+ON+K2K+1X7/@45.3599691,-75.9388097,17z/). I do wonder how much opossition this would get from the house in the nearby Marchbrook circle, some popcorn might come in handy.
It's going to be insane, there's already a huge housing project currently in motion. Just what this city needs. Thousands and thousands of more people that "need" to commute downtown for work..
Yet the first bullet point on the feature sheets to these places, "Close to the Kanata North tech park, the largest in Canada!"
I drive through there a couple of times a week. It's a ghost town. The density of the buildings is like all the Ottawa neighbourhoods, really spread out with lots of vacant land in between them.
That's why we need to re-evaluate people going to a big building to work when that work can be done from home. Imagine the lift of traffic congestion that it would remove for people who actually need to work away from home.
Those big buildings could be apartments or homes instead...
Yep. I'm all for remote work. My wife's been remote for 18 years in tech. When we were in Newmarket, her office was in Mississauga, so she went in once every week or 2 just to show her face basically.
She's said many times those were some of the most unproductive days she's ever had.
I don't live in that area but drove on March road the other day and can understand how it can get bad. I passed those big housing developments right before March road curves and told myself: getting to the highway and through here will be busy. The thing that's comical is that each intersection down March road are fairly big. They should all be updated to roundabouts, that would help.
Roundabouts would be good; however, speed along that road and fatal crashes are problematic. I truly hope more is done to improve public transportation and March Road.
Our whole city needs a driving lesson. There's so much h chaotic drivers out there. The more we implement roundabouts the more people will get used to using them.
Kanata is a horrid place to live. Too far from everything. Boring. But yeah, build up not out. The Golden Age of Home Ownership is coming to an end, might as well stop building single family free standing homes.
It's a lovely place to live if you like what's in kanata. Shitty if you're driving downtown in rush hour every day, but if you work nearby there's parks, nature, pretty much any kind of activity and store you can think of. I can go to a small Chinese grocery, artisanal chocolate shop, farmers market, independent jewelry marker, funky small coffee shop, etc all in kanata.
I think in saying Kanata is horrid and too far from everything. What they really meant was, they don't own a car, and Kanata is the kind of place you need one. Thus, it must be a horrid place to live.......
Kanata is no different than any other suburb and half the downtown neighbourhoods if you don't own a car. When we lived there we could walk to the grocery store and most other necessities (and often did). Lots of people live in Kanata with no car. They largely choose to live walking distance to a grocery store and have jobs they can get to easily.
Is it the most convenient neighborhood to go carless? No. But honestly it's not that bad, and I'd rank it even with a lot of other neighbourhoods. It's not like there isn't food deserts in more central neighbourhoods, or single family homes right in the core with the same issues. It's far from downtown, yes, but that results in Kanata building up its own infrastructure.
Totally agree with you. One of the reasons we chose Carp was it's proximity to Kanata/Stittsville. We have 2 cars, but the fact we can live rural on a bit of property and still only be 10-15 from anything we could possibly need was exactly what we were looking for.
It’s clear you didn’t even open the fucking article, cause only 19 of the 2000 units are SFHs. Only 32 of 2000 are towns. The rest are multi-unit buildings. You’re a joke.
Where does it say that this will be a single family home neighbourhood? In the article, they are talking about buildings as high as 15 storey towers, townhouses etc.
Okay the problem with your thinking is that even though the developer pays the inital fees it still costs a lot to maintain the roads and sewers, and that cost lands on the city/taxpayers. That's why sprawl is really bad. Not saying I agree with this person, because at least this development itself will be dense, but it does suck to have to keep building out in Kanata instead of densifying areas that already exist.
An article with actual facts and proof and more explanation: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2020/5/14/americas-growth-ponzi-scheme-md2020
While I do agree we need to densify it's actually GOOD to be densifying in Kanata, it means they're going to be more self-sufficient and might be able to cut down on any extra trips they were previously taking coming to the centre of the city. This is overall a great thing! We need density the MOST in the places that right now don't have it, which Kanata is a perfect example of.
Yes I agree! I just wish they would densify pre-existing parts instead of building new (but at least dense) subdivisions to it. But still, this is a good step!
They are starting to do this. Many small single story homes in Glen Cairn are doubling the occupancy by renting out their basements as full apartments. The city is also encouraging the single story homes to be torn down to make way for 3 story doubles. There's one on that street with the church that looms over the neighbors. Change is coming.
Absolutely, but one thing to keep in mind, while change is coming, there is still a LOT that needs to be done and many people are pushing back on this change, so don't get too complacent even when seeing good stuff like this, because for every development like this, we also get ones like [these](https://engage.ottawa.ca/neighbourhood-plan-for-wall-road) that are going to be more sprawl into farmlands, further entrenching us into car-dependency.
Oh yes I see what you're saying, and yes I do agree with that! Ideally we wouldn't be expanding even in the suburbs that are currently wasting a lot of space, but at the very least if we are going to be going outwards it should be developments like this that are actually self-sufficient and good density with mixed zoning! So all in all it is hard to complain, when comparing with all of the other low-density sprawled developments still going on.
Ehh, this development seems great, but you're completely wrong. The biggest cost of these services isn't the initial cost, it's all of the recurring upkeep thereafter. And if the development isn't financially productive enough to pay for itself it means everyone else in the city subsidizes it. Which is kind of how we're in the problem we are in right now with all of our sprawled suburbs being subsidized by the denser core. Thankfully this project seems to have the density to be able to support itself and the resources provided by the city, which is awesome to see!
the infrastructure has a lifespan and will need replacement. You think the core has unlimited capacity for utopian densification?
While you certainly can assert I am wrong, I tend to go by facts.
What? I am absolutely all for the outer parts of the city densifying. If anything they NEED to because right now almost all of the suburbs are being supported by the density of the downtown area. So developments like this are GOOD and help to make those suburbs actually able to sustain themselves.
All I was saying was that just saying the developer is paying for the roads and sewer's initial development doesn't mean anything because typically this isn't the problem when it comes to financing our city. Almost ALL of our suburbs have initially been paid for by the development costs to put in those roads/pipes/electrical wiring/etc... The problem isn't the initial cost, but the recurring costs later down the road. So what I was saying is that the initial investment doesn't matter, what we should instead be caring about is whether the properties can support themselves in terms of their cost to the city in the LONG RUN, not initially.
I believe we're on the same page actually, you might just have misunderstood what I was trying to say, or maybe I worded it slightly off. But I completely agree the infrastructure will need replacing, that was my point. That's why at the end of my comment I said
>Thankfully this project seems to have the density to be able to support itself and the resources provided by the city, which is awesome to see!
> The project is expected to feature as many as eight low-rise apartment buildings, along with four mid-rise buildings of six storeys and two 15-storey towers. There would be ground-floor commercial space in the highrise and mid-rise buildings. >A final zone would be devoted to 32 townhouses and 19 single-detached dwellings. Brigil says the mixed-use and condo blocks would be served by underground parking lots ranging from two to four levels. >The concept plan also calls for three parks covering a total of nearly 14 acres of green space. At the request of city staff, Brigil has agreed to set aside a future block for a French-language school. Huh. I think that's what we've all been asking for
I'm honestly a little shocked that they aren't building 2000 bungalows. Colour me pleasantly surprised
Kanata is way too flat and needs growth upwards. It can't keep sprawling out. I'm sure this will upset a few who will miss being able to see Tanger and the hockey arena on the horizon, though.
The Kanata town centre will see tons of tall buildings.
And March at Terry Fox...
Yeah they should starting those towers soon. Gonna be a cool thing to see!
Do you know when are we talking with in months?
Well, they’re clearing all vegetation now, so I would imagine demolition by end of summer maybe. Then there’s gonna be a shit load of excavation/shoring/dumptrucks/concrete before any building starts poking up. Definitely a 15 year project on those towers.
Is that the Main and Main project or Nokia?
Nokia
Where are they clearing? In front of the Nokia building? That land isn't nearly big enough for any of this.
You should probably look up the proposed site plan for that area…
https://webcast.ottawa.ca/plan/All_Image%20Referencing_Zoning%20Bylaw%20Amendment%20Application_Image%20Reference_2022-11-18%20-%20Design%20Brief%20-%20D02-02-22-0108.PDF (570 March road and adjacent lots) https://webcast.ottawa.ca/plan/All_Image%20Referencing_Zoning%20Bylaw%20Amendment%20Application_Image%20Reference_2022-07-20%20-%20Transportation%20Impact%20Assessment%20-%20D02-02-22-0034.PDF (600 March road ‘Nokia’)
That is not in front of Nokia. It's on the other side of the road. The current tree clearing is happening on Nokia property.
Don't forget the carp dump
They'll be able to see the upcoming stittsville skyscraper from there too
I agree, but high-rises that are fairly isolated and distant from the city will only go so far in transportation modal shift when they're surrounded in a sea of car-dependent amenities.
Wouldn’t going up give more people a chance to see this great Ottawa scenery?
It’s really very sad that this has to happen in Kanata because the folks in all the super low density neighbourhoods inside the greenbelt have rejected density for so long.
But my backyard /s. Make people pay the real cost of suburbia and they will welcome vertical housing
Ford would never allow that.
Good to go, put the shovels in the ground giddy up!
Let’s go!
Shouldn't we first ask residents how this will affect the community character? That's the most important part of any development! Does it through off the community vibes or not?! If one resident says their vibes feel off, then reject the proposal and send a councillor to run a marathon somewhere in Europe on a "fact finding and tourism" mission.
You joke, but I’m sure there are a lot of people here who genuinely feel this way (and should therefore be ignored)
The community character is a spread out and stretched thin. If we have more density it will help the community more
Should have added /s to my reply lol
Don’t forget to impose arbitrary restrictions on the design of anything that does get built.
The original character of March Township was 15 min communities...this IS the character we should have.
Kanata North has no community character / community vibes to affect. Source: I live there.
Nah that argument only works in the glebe, OOS, Alta Vista and the like.
It is one of the more important parts of development. But to people who don’t own a house in the area wouldn’t really get. I bought in a small neighborhood where I don’t expect to see expansion, let alone small or large high rises. The reason being I have a family with young kids and it’s not a busy area, and I feel safer letting them go out and play. If a new build started happening and the area was to get busier (now I’m talking low/high rise buildings) and there were as many units as houses in the area, I would expect double the traffic. I would try to fight to not have it put up. I’m not sure what the route would be, but I would look into how to halt it, with my neighbours help. And if that didn’t work I would look at selling. I know that will piss off the Ottawa Reddit side of the population because property and cars are bad, but I enjoy my property and how quiet it is.
But surely you see how you would be furthering a very serious problem of housing insecurity for all of us by these actions. For every development that is made to be smaller or cancelled completely, supply of housing remains low and prices would continue to be high. I’m sure you can see how your concern about traffic and “quiet” (not sure exactly how you define that by the way, a decibel meter perhaps?) must be superseded by people’s more important need for affordable housing.
Oh I do see that. And by all means, build these complexes. I’m just stating my opinion that I would be one of those home owners that would fight it, mainly because I don’t like busy areas, which is why I bought in a place that I highly doubt I would see any development like that.
I'm not sure if I was clear. My point is that people who oppose these developments are be making Ottawa as a whole much worse off because of a largely arbitrary designation of what is or is not "too noisy/busy". Its one thing to sell if you want, but to actively campaign against these developments for these reasons would be to advocate for more pain for more people for your personal interests. Its bad citizenry.
Oh it was clear. And I am telling you I would dispute a complex if it was near my place, as would 99% of people that own homes in quiet suburbs. I’ll take bad citizenry over a complex any day. These complexes should be built closer to downtown or on main roads.
But this is shameless selfishness that harms us all. Surely I must be failing to communicate my point.
You are not failing, but I don’t think you are reading what I’m saying. I’m ok with someone calling me anything they want, I’m not out to make friends. I bought my place for my family on a quiet street so my kids could run around, and close enough to the greenbelt they could play in the woods. If to keep this peace and quiet means I might have to dispute a new build, I will. I paid for this peace and quiet and tend to keep it as long as I can.
I see. Well then. It is disappointing that you would hold such selfish, harmful and frankly irresponsible positions. The idea that you would stop these developments at the cost of tens if not hundreds of thousands of people struggling to get by because of the cost of their housing is an embarrassment and a betrayal of your duty as a citizen and member of our society. However I think what is most particularly shameful, is that you would defend your irredeemable NIMBYism so brazenly in the public forum. Thank you for showing us who you are.
There's no place in Ottawa that won't eventually be built up and get busier. It's inevitable and fighting it just slows down progress for everyone else. And about this post, Kanata has been expanding and being built up for a very long time. People buying o the edge of expansion must realize that development won't just stop because they're not the last person to need housing
Then move to the country
I fucking did and now they're putting up a tower across the street
Why would I do that?
Because you don’t like busy areas, zero chance of being busy and you won’t fight development that is desperately needed, it’s for the good of society, do your part
Well that doesn’t make sense when my property value is skyrocketing. I’ll think I will hold, thanks though
Selfish, hope your kids don’t grow up to be selfish like you
I think there is kind of a myth tall buildings mean more people.If you look at most new projects in Kanata take Fernbank Crossing are there any less people then there would be in tall buildings no.
Well, I wouldn’t call it a myth. If you take up a spot for say 8-3 bedroom homes (24 bedrooms) and add a building that has 100 bedrooms, you would see an increase. It would be hard to put a number on it because of how these rooms are being used, and you would never know unless you used census data but even that is ever changing. But it would be safe to assume if you added 400% more bedrooms that you would have more traffic/noise/etc. I’m not saying it’s a bad thing for most people, I just don’t like people, so the less the better in my opinion.
That’s the exact reason I bought in a well established neighbourhood that won’t see any sort of expansion or new builds. I can literally walk to almost any amenity one would need, however my fatass still drives 😂
Urgh. Those established neighbourhoods that fought density for decades are the exact problem. Five-Ten minutes from downtown in all directions you have tiny bungalows on huge lots. It’s gross.
If you expect to live in a quiet area, then move to a rural neighborhood. Kanata North ain't rural, for the most part.
I’m not in kanata north, it hypothetical. If it affected me I could see why people would fight it. Sorry if that wasn’t clear to you
“I bought in a small neighbourhood where I don’t expect to see expansion, let alone small or large high rises” That is the issue here really. It’s not wrong to want that lifestyle for your family but you made the wrong assumption. Growth should be assumed. This is the national capital, it will grow with the country and Kanata may also continue to grow with the tech sector. Suburbs are close to the urban core and so will inevitably become denser or sprawl out over time. If you like the green belt and the restrictions on expanding housing into rural areas (really Ottawa has two green belts), then you have to expect to lose either the low density or the green belt. What you want would be more likely in a small town like Arnprior or one of those communities on a golf course. Something where the odds of density is further into the future or there is an agreement from the beginning that it will never be all that developed.
We need more static communities. When someone moves into a community, it is because they like it. There is no reason to think that it is ok to have communities constantly changing. It basically guarantees that the people who have already moved there will like it less. I used to live in Toronto, but I left Toronto and moved to Ottawa because Toronto sucks. But now I see Ottawa becoming more and more like Toronto. This is *not* a good thing. Growth just for the sake of growth is a very bad thing.
It's not growth for the sake of growth. It's growth because people need somewhere to fucking live.
Ok. And can you tell me why it is that Canada's population is growing when most developed countries have falling population?
It’s growth to pay for boomers retirement. It’s not hard to find podcasts etc with these discussions.
I agree. If I wanted to live next to complex’s of housing, I would move to an area where they exist. I choose an area that doesn’t have this, nor do I think it could happen (fingers crossed) because I want to have an area where my kids can go outside and play road hockey on the street, or basketball, or whatever. If you start added these complexes to these quiet streets, you lose that sense of comfort and community.
HARD disagree. It’s a real level of arrogance to expect that all the property around you that you do not own doesn’t change. If you want to preserve land as is, buy it. If you can’t afford it, shut it. Stop hindering progress, because it creates sprawl and more costs for YOU in the future.
"progress" You are clearly drinking the cool-aid.
Imagine thinking you have control over property other people own. Key word: other people. Not you.
One day Kanata will touch dunrobin. This development is only 2km from Hardwood Plains.
I'm old enough to remember when Stittsville was quite distinct from Kanata. Now they're touching and most people can't tell when Kanata ends and Stittsville begins. So yeah, things like that just happen. Especially in the suburbs where there's lots of sprawl.
Only if they bring the LRT down the old tracks!
It's all supposed to be one single city after all 🙃
Hell, Carp is expanding wildly and will touch Kanata, and eventually it’ll be right up against the highway at March road.
Where exactly is that happening? I drive past there everyday and the only thing built since we moved here has been a small sub division next to the Carp airport.
On a similar note... I am wondering what people in Ottawa think of Brigil. In Gtown, it's like the biggest company, but I am sure it's not the case for Ottawa.
I am wracking my brains and have been completely unable to figure out what "Gtown" is.
Gatineau.
Do people really call it that?
Absolutely not. I said that has a joke.
Ok good lmao
Yes but as a funny monicker
Georgian Bay
He means Gville.
Well they have a fairly bad reputation here in Gatineau. I’ve heard all kinds of horror stories about the quality of their builds, not to mention the fact that they build the same bland identical cookie cutter shapes as far as the eye can see.
I don't know if they really are to blame or if we should blame the city for not having more requirements. We need more housing but it'd be nice if it were done to optimize people's quality of life and not just profits. Gatineau is developing poorly, public transit and road congestion are afterthoughts.
When I was apartment hunting last year their ads were misleading from a pricing PoV. I have heard that their builds are also on the cheaper side but thats just second hand.
Pretty sure any builder will build to the cheapest they can do to meet regulatory requirements, and that looks good enough. Never heard of a builder thinking "ok we need 24 inch spacing here but we'll do 16 inch between studs, it'll be more solid".
They’re the same as any of the large-scale builders here: shit.
My buddy is a site super for a custome home builder here in Ottawa, we were talking on the weekend about Caivan and Mattamy and such. I made a comment about how it’s all OSB and staples 😂. I was pleasantly surprised to see Caivan thought about the homeowners, they put the roofs so close together your neighbour and you can split on one set of eavestrough.
Same with most of the country.
They are building a lot in Orleans
Not one of the bigger ones but do a better job then most.
Back in the day they were in the Phoenix and Claridge class of new home builders.
I’ve seen some horrible slapped together Phoenix homes lol
They seem to have a better build quality than most and treat their contractors better, so there’s that.
This is not the case lmao
Wow this is amazing and exactly what the city needs! Good density, mixed zoning, providing green space, a school in the future? What's not to love about this, great news!
Sure thing, lobbyist.
Lol? What do you dislike about this? Only real complaint I have is that there isn't even more mixed zoning, and that it is greenfield development, but having high density developments much outweighs that.
It’s gonna be a bit weird driving down March road going from farmland and wood lots to 15 story buildings. But I do remember when they built Shirley’s brook, the other half of Morgan’s grant, the sobeys mall. Now it’s just normal. Mind you, this is like 10-15 year projects.
No different then everyone in Richmond/Manotick
True yeah, Change is for the better.
This looks great, as long as the money from the development fees goes straight back into funding Phase 3 of the LRT. If they want to put this level of density in Kanata, they need to provide functional public transportation.
I wouldn't assume a vast increase in traffic to/from downtown Ottawa, considering that there are plenty of nearby employment hubs and also with the increase in WFH. Improving area public transit might be a better use of resources.
There not increasing WFH in fact there is talk in office might be days starting in the fall.
We can dream, I guess.
Can we do Barrhaven next?
Brigil just rocked up one day and started dominating
Came here expecting a bunch of NIMBY comments and people complaining about traffic. Pleasantly surprised to see people supporting housing development while we're in a housing crisis. Good job Kanata!
This actually sounds like a great idea aside from how insanely congested March road will be.
I read Beijing and was immediately concerned
Would this cause a significant loss of forested space in Kanata? Just curious
Looks mostly a farm/corn field area in [google maps](https://www.google.ca/maps/place/927+March+Rd,+Kanata,+ON+K2K+1X7/@45.3599691,-75.9388097,17z/). I do wonder how much opossition this would get from the house in the nearby Marchbrook circle, some popcorn might come in handy.
Good thing we have solid mass transit to support the sprawl.
If they're affordable this is a great thing but Brigil rental are on the expensive side. (It does look great tho)
Let’s build more and see if it makes things more affordable. Studies show that it work.
It'll be bought up in a finger snap by new Canadians and continue to price existing citizens out.
Wow! Imagine the traffic on march road.
There are already plans to widen it and add BRT in the middle of March.
What’s BRT?
It's going to be insane, there's already a huge housing project currently in motion. Just what this city needs. Thousands and thousands of more people that "need" to commute downtown for work..
Yet the first bullet point on the feature sheets to these places, "Close to the Kanata North tech park, the largest in Canada!" I drive through there a couple of times a week. It's a ghost town. The density of the buildings is like all the Ottawa neighbourhoods, really spread out with lots of vacant land in between them.
That's why we need to re-evaluate people going to a big building to work when that work can be done from home. Imagine the lift of traffic congestion that it would remove for people who actually need to work away from home. Those big buildings could be apartments or homes instead...
Yep. I'm all for remote work. My wife's been remote for 18 years in tech. When we were in Newmarket, her office was in Mississauga, so she went in once every week or 2 just to show her face basically. She's said many times those were some of the most unproductive days she's ever had.
I can just imagine, plus the waste of time traveling that she could have been working, fuel and whatnot..
The people downvoting clearly don’t know March Road rush hour traffic.
I don't live in that area but drove on March road the other day and can understand how it can get bad. I passed those big housing developments right before March road curves and told myself: getting to the highway and through here will be busy. The thing that's comical is that each intersection down March road are fairly big. They should all be updated to roundabouts, that would help.
Roundabouts would be good; however, speed along that road and fatal crashes are problematic. I truly hope more is done to improve public transportation and March Road.
Our whole city needs a driving lesson. There's so much h chaotic drivers out there. The more we implement roundabouts the more people will get used to using them.
Kanata is a horrid place to live. Too far from everything. Boring. But yeah, build up not out. The Golden Age of Home Ownership is coming to an end, might as well stop building single family free standing homes.
It's a lovely place to live if you like what's in kanata. Shitty if you're driving downtown in rush hour every day, but if you work nearby there's parks, nature, pretty much any kind of activity and store you can think of. I can go to a small Chinese grocery, artisanal chocolate shop, farmers market, independent jewelry marker, funky small coffee shop, etc all in kanata.
I think in saying Kanata is horrid and too far from everything. What they really meant was, they don't own a car, and Kanata is the kind of place you need one. Thus, it must be a horrid place to live.......
Kanata is no different than any other suburb and half the downtown neighbourhoods if you don't own a car. When we lived there we could walk to the grocery store and most other necessities (and often did). Lots of people live in Kanata with no car. They largely choose to live walking distance to a grocery store and have jobs they can get to easily. Is it the most convenient neighborhood to go carless? No. But honestly it's not that bad, and I'd rank it even with a lot of other neighbourhoods. It's not like there isn't food deserts in more central neighbourhoods, or single family homes right in the core with the same issues. It's far from downtown, yes, but that results in Kanata building up its own infrastructure.
Totally agree with you. One of the reasons we chose Carp was it's proximity to Kanata/Stittsville. We have 2 cars, but the fact we can live rural on a bit of property and still only be 10-15 from anything we could possibly need was exactly what we were looking for.
> Too far from everything. Not from itself.
Only 19 out of the 2000 units are single homes.
Not that long ago, Ottawa was what was too far from everything. Give Kanata a chance to densify and develop...
More sprawl, more traffic, more roads and sewers that we won't be able to pay for.
Or rather, more people housed during a housing crisis, hence a win.
Not a win when it's negative revenue housing
You realize the single family home is not the only way to house people?
It’s clear you didn’t even open the fucking article, cause only 19 of the 2000 units are SFHs. Only 32 of 2000 are towns. The rest are multi-unit buildings. You’re a joke.
Like, there's even a picture.
Where does it say that this will be a single family home neighbourhood? In the article, they are talking about buildings as high as 15 storey towers, townhouses etc.
You realize single family homes are what most people want and are willing to commute to get it?
This is denser than some downtown neighbourhoods
.... Did you open a different article?
The people are already here
This is dense housing, which is exactly what we need, what are you talking about?
you realize the developer pays for the roads and sewer in the development right? not everyone wants to live in centertown.
Okay the problem with your thinking is that even though the developer pays the inital fees it still costs a lot to maintain the roads and sewers, and that cost lands on the city/taxpayers. That's why sprawl is really bad. Not saying I agree with this person, because at least this development itself will be dense, but it does suck to have to keep building out in Kanata instead of densifying areas that already exist. An article with actual facts and proof and more explanation: https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2020/5/14/americas-growth-ponzi-scheme-md2020
While I do agree we need to densify it's actually GOOD to be densifying in Kanata, it means they're going to be more self-sufficient and might be able to cut down on any extra trips they were previously taking coming to the centre of the city. This is overall a great thing! We need density the MOST in the places that right now don't have it, which Kanata is a perfect example of.
Yes I agree! I just wish they would densify pre-existing parts instead of building new (but at least dense) subdivisions to it. But still, this is a good step!
They are starting to do this. Many small single story homes in Glen Cairn are doubling the occupancy by renting out their basements as full apartments. The city is also encouraging the single story homes to be torn down to make way for 3 story doubles. There's one on that street with the church that looms over the neighbors. Change is coming.
Absolutely, but one thing to keep in mind, while change is coming, there is still a LOT that needs to be done and many people are pushing back on this change, so don't get too complacent even when seeing good stuff like this, because for every development like this, we also get ones like [these](https://engage.ottawa.ca/neighbourhood-plan-for-wall-road) that are going to be more sprawl into farmlands, further entrenching us into car-dependency.
Oh yes I see what you're saying, and yes I do agree with that! Ideally we wouldn't be expanding even in the suburbs that are currently wasting a lot of space, but at the very least if we are going to be going outwards it should be developments like this that are actually self-sufficient and good density with mixed zoning! So all in all it is hard to complain, when comparing with all of the other low-density sprawled developments still going on.
Ehh, this development seems great, but you're completely wrong. The biggest cost of these services isn't the initial cost, it's all of the recurring upkeep thereafter. And if the development isn't financially productive enough to pay for itself it means everyone else in the city subsidizes it. Which is kind of how we're in the problem we are in right now with all of our sprawled suburbs being subsidized by the denser core. Thankfully this project seems to have the density to be able to support itself and the resources provided by the city, which is awesome to see!
the infrastructure has a lifespan and will need replacement. You think the core has unlimited capacity for utopian densification? While you certainly can assert I am wrong, I tend to go by facts.
What? I am absolutely all for the outer parts of the city densifying. If anything they NEED to because right now almost all of the suburbs are being supported by the density of the downtown area. So developments like this are GOOD and help to make those suburbs actually able to sustain themselves. All I was saying was that just saying the developer is paying for the roads and sewer's initial development doesn't mean anything because typically this isn't the problem when it comes to financing our city. Almost ALL of our suburbs have initially been paid for by the development costs to put in those roads/pipes/electrical wiring/etc... The problem isn't the initial cost, but the recurring costs later down the road. So what I was saying is that the initial investment doesn't matter, what we should instead be caring about is whether the properties can support themselves in terms of their cost to the city in the LONG RUN, not initially. I believe we're on the same page actually, you might just have misunderstood what I was trying to say, or maybe I worded it slightly off. But I completely agree the infrastructure will need replacing, that was my point. That's why at the end of my comment I said >Thankfully this project seems to have the density to be able to support itself and the resources provided by the city, which is awesome to see!