[caption id="" align="alignnone" width="598" caption="Crane looming over Byron: are there more to come?"][/caption] Editor's note: the following article is cross-posted from Spacing Ottawa contributor Chris Henschel's personal blog, Bestboro, Best Wellington My wife Allegra and I wrote a series of posts for SpacingOttawa.ca that chronicled our involvment in a condo development on Richmond Road, behind our house. The project ended up falling through, but the experience of working with the developer was largely positive. Though I believe that the City's height restrictions are too liberal (especially for the north side of a 'traditional mainstreet'), the developer was more or less happy to stay within City bylaws, with minor variances. He was also a nice guy and was listening to what people were saying: we didn't like parking at the back, so he put it all underground; we didn't want an access off a dead-end sidestreet, so he proposed moving it to Wellington. Economic concerns doomed the project. Residents were relieved. But our ongoing experience with the redevelopment of the Soeurs de la Visitation Convent currently being proposed by Ashcroft Homes inspires a more sober perspective: what might happen behind us if this style of developer comes knocking. Ashcroft's proposal for the Convent site doubles the permitted density and height prescribed in the City's Official Plan and Secondary Plan. It crowds and overbears the historic convent building. It cuts a private access road through the Byron Linear Park. It has no useful public space and it threatens to gridlock traffic on Richmond Road (the City's figures show that the proposal would push the neighbourhood to within a breath of its 2031 density targets). The residents on surrounding streets that were invited to pre-consultations on the proposal see no trace of their input. The developer has filed with the Ontario Superior Court to quash a recommendation for heritage designation of the whole property that could strengthen the City's hand when reviewing the plan.

This is the latest in a multi-part series that follows environmentalists Chris Henschel and Allegra Newman as they share their first-hand experiences dealing with an intensification project directly affecting their own residence near Island Park Drive. Everyone in the neighbourhood received a letter from Ottawa's Committee of Adjustment this week to inform us that the Committee would be ruling on the developer's application for three variances on February 3. I went with a neighbour to check out the plans. The plans confirm that the developer is now proposing vehicular access from Wellington Street (instead of our dead-end side street) and only underground parking (removing the need for an above-ground parking lot that would create all sorts of nuisance for us). Good news! Except it seems the City may not yet be onside. The local councilor Christine Leadman has expressed support for a Wellington Street access, but the City staff may not agree. We've been told there will be a meeting with the developer this week to discuss this issue and that the City will likely request an adjournment of the Committee of Adjustment's hearing on the proposed variances as they consider the plans.

[caption id="attachment_1643" align="alignnone" width="557" caption="Detail from "City of Ottawa Urban Design Guidelines for Development Along Traditional Mainstreets""][/caption] This is the fifth of a multi-part series that will follow environmentalists Chris Henschel and Allegra Newman as they share their first-hand experiences dealing with an intensification project directly affecting their own residence near Island Park Drive. This week gave birth to both rumours and official documentation of Springcress's plan for the condo. One of our neighbours heard some good news in a phone call to the City about the developer's parking plans; I'm still trying to confirm this before writing publicly about it. The Developer also made a formal application for variance for the building. He is seeking three variances (italics added for explanation): • To increase the building height limit from 18m to 22m above average grade (from 6 stories maximum to 7 stories maximum; • To reduce the required front yard set-back from 2m, above 15m in height, to 0.5m (reducing the depth of the 'step-back' designed to reduce the 'canyon effect' of large buildings); • To reduce the required corner side yard set-back from 3m to a height of 15m and 5 m above, to 0m (no setback from property line on the west side).

This is the first of a multi-part series that will follow environmentalists Chris Henschel and Allegra Newman as they share their first-hand experiences dealing with an intensification project directly affecting their own residence near Island Park Drive. I live with my wife and baby daughter in West Wellington. We got rid of our car when we moved into the our house last year and we love to walk to all that this wonderful neighbourhood has to offer. Neighbourhoods like this are being encouraged in Ottawa through planning guidelines aimed at creating ‘traditional mainstreets,’ which the City defines as: mainstreets developed primarily before 1945. They generally present a tightly knit urban fabric, with buildings that are often small-scale, with narrow frontages and set close to and addressing the street. This results in a strong pedestrian orientation and transitfriendly environment. Land uses are often mixed, with commercial uses at the street level and residential uses on the upper levels. [http://ottawa.ca/residents/planning/design_plan_guidelines/completed/traditional_mainstreets/traditional_mainstreets_en.pdf] Development and intensification are integral parts of creating traditional mainstreets, and we support this. This support in principle is now being challenged in practice. We live directly behind 1451 Wellington Street, the corner lot at Island Park Drive - current home to Pro-Shine car wash and subject to a condo development proposal by Springcress Properties. The proposal for the condo presents a list of concerns for us: a winter-long shadow on our house; increased traffic and a parking entrance off our dead-end street; a proposed parking lot and underground garage along our backyard; and, a loss of privacy for our home described by all visitors as a piece of country in the city.