Orleans East - Cardinal Village

[DubberDom]

Proposed Tamarack Development East of Trim Road in Orleans

http://cumberlandvillage.ca/sites/cu...nalvillage.pdf

[eternallyme]

Now we are talking leapfrogging there.

There are quite a few issues with that area:

1) Traffic is sure to be an issue, short of widening Old Montreal Road. The terrain makes it VERY difficult to add a connection to 174 without a steep gradient, which would be a safety issue.

2) It would be very difficult to service by transit. There is only one way in (Old Montreal Road) and it would force the creation of a spur route, which would have little in the way of ridership potential.

3) It doesn't seem to fit the rural nature of the land. Unless we start talking 1/2 to 2 acre lots, it seems so out of place east of Cardinal Creek.

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by DubberDom

Proposed Tamarack Development East of Trim Road in Orleans

http://cumberlandvillage.ca/sites/cu...nalvillage.pdf

I'm sure that some of the anti-sprawl posters on this forum will blow a gasket reading this.

[waterloowarrior]

Can't see the City approving this in today's climate... especially since they can reject change to urban boundary with no appeal rights for the applicant. The next five year review should begin soon though

[Proof Sheet]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Can't see the City approving this in today's climate... especially since they can reject change to urban boundary with no appeal rights for the applicant. The next five year review should begin soon though

Agreed...I can't see this application ticking any boxes.

[gjhall]

The OMB was clear that the City's grading criteria for new lands to be added to expand the urban boundary was sound, so any attempt to argue they were incorrectly graded will fall on deaf ears, me thinks.

[DubberDom]

Originally Posted by gjhall

The OMB was clear that the City's grading criteria for new lands to be added to expand the urban boundary was sound, so any attempt to argue they were incorrectly graded will fall on deaf ears, me thinks.

Absolutely, and this project will move forward because idiot Councillors like Stephen Blais want to go ahead. There is absolutely no local support for this project.

Furthermore, they are about to start an Environmental Assessment to review options to either expand or divert the current 174 east of Trim to Rockland

see http://roadtorockland.com/

If they go ahead with this project prior to completing the EA, this will essentially mean that there is no "alternative" option to redirect traffic from the 2-lane 174, and making into 4 lanes is the only option

[Dado]

Originally Posted by DubberDom

Absolutely, and this project will move forward because idiot Councillors like Stephen Blais want to go ahead. There is absolutely no local support for this project.

Furthermore, they are about to start an Environmental Assessment to review options to either expand or divert the current 174 east of Trim to Rockland

see http://roadtorockland.com/

If they go ahead with this project prior to completing the EA, this will essentially mean that there is no "alternative" option to redirect traffic from the 2-lane 174, and making into 4 lanes is the only option

From the stupid question department:

Let's assume that City Council agrees to the EA statement of work (Transportation Committee already has) and then further assume that at some point after that date City Council also gives the go ahead to this suburb project*.

Would not then the County of Prescott-Russell be in a position to take the City of Ottawa to the OMB? After all, one of the more legitimate reasons the OMB exists at all is to deal with inter-municipal issues.


*My understanding is that at this point in time, the developers are petitioning to have their land added to the urban boundary rather than proposing an actual fully planned community; subdivision planning would still remain to be done, including set asides for road allowances, a process that would probably take a few years... so even if this land somehow got added to the urban boundary, there would be plenty of time and opportunity to secure the land for any possible road corridor.

That makes my earlier question somewhat redundant, but taken together I think we can safely conclude that one way or another this urban boundary extension proposal will not have any real bearing on the 174/17 EA study.

And given all the foregoing, the developers should probably just give it up at this point in time since they are just wasting everyone's time. I would guess that the results of a completed EA study (which includes not just where the road will go, but also the East Transitway) would in fact increase the likelihood of their lands being added to the urban boundary the next time around.

[S-Man]

Don't like Stephen Blais - he's a weak councillor who thinks banning smoking outdoors will be his greatest achievement. No doubt that "health" initiative will end up costing the city and its residents.

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by Dado

From the stupid question department:

Let's assume that City Council agrees to the EA statement of work (Transportation Committee already has) and then further assume that at some point after that date City Council also gives the go ahead to this suburb project*.

Would not then the County of Prescott-Russell be in a position to take the City of Ottawa to the OMB? After all, one of the more legitimate reasons the OMB exists at all is to deal with inter-municipal issues.

It does happen (not very often)... usually related to infrastructure capacity or undesired development near municipal boundaries.

[waterloowarrior]

let the planning begin... added as an urban expansion study area as part of the OP OMB process
from a June 2012 open house
http://www.stephenblais.ca/pdf/cardi...openhouse1.pdf

http://www.plancardinalcreekvillage.ca/

[DubberDom]

Relevant information is posted here:
http://www.plancardinalcreekvillage.ca/openhouse3.php

Disppointed that they fail to address a realignment of 174, they should return the waterfront to a more natural condition and divert 174 south-east from east of Trim.

There is currently an EA underway evaluating such options, this will essentially block the EA and make it pointless.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by DubberDom

Relevant information is posted here:
http://www.plancardinalcreekvillage.ca/openhouse3.php

Disppointed that they fail to address a realignment of 174, they should return the waterfront to a more natural condition and divert 174 south-east from east of Trim.

There is currently an EA underway evaluating such options, this will essentially block the EA and make it pointless.

In general I agree with you, but technically speaking if the EA comes up with something else that conflicts then it would prevail.

But ya, this goes to show how weak our planning processes are. We've got private sector developers doing much of our "planning" and then on top of that we continue to carry out major transportation and land use planning separately anyway.

And arguably this goes back to the time when the Province was in charge, too. Building Hwy 17 along the shoreline was probably never a good idea anyway - by and large it looks like they made use of the former railway right of way when they should have opted for an alignment further south to begin with. The railway RoW should have been kept in reserve for future rail/rec path use. Former Cumberland Township obviously didn't help either by filling the place up with exurban estates without leaving any land corridors.

At any rate, if this plan goes ahead unchallenged/acknowledged by the EA, then they will have essentially boxed themselves in to some kind of shoreline abomination of a road with one-way frontage streets and the like. The only other thing I can think of is a bypass based on extending the Blackburn Hamlet bypass (I think it will be Brian Coburn Boulevard), but that road is not being designed as an expressway but rather a standard arterial.

[rocketphish]

I just looked at the maps of the various options, and it astounds me to see how much land is being set aside for Elementary Schools. Does a new development of this size really need 5 new schools?

[DEWLine]

How much population are they currently expecting?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by rocketphish

I just looked at the maps of the various options, and it astounds me to see how much land is being set aside for Elementary Schools. Does a new development of this size really need 5 new schools?

Well, the Ontario school system with English public, English Catholic, French public and French Catholic schools pretty much guarantees any decent-sized community (that has lots of francophones like Orleans) will have at least four separate elementary schools.

[waterloowarrior]

They are hoping to bring this to Council in Jan 2013 but the Road to Rockland EA won't be done til 2015.

Here is the development application page btw.
http://app01.ottawa.ca/postingplans/...appId=__81M476

They are recommending widening the 174 to six lanes in this area.

Originally Posted by Dado

In general I agree with you, but technically speaking if the EA comes up with something else that conflicts then it would prevail.

But ya, this goes to show how weak our planning processes are. We've got private sector developers doing much of our "planning" and then on top of that we continue to carry out major transportation and land use planning separately anyway.

The planning process for this development is also going through an EA using an Integrated Planning Act and Environmental Assessment Act Process.
http://www.cumberlandvillage.ca/site...ngjune2012.pdf

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by DubberDom

Relevant information is posted here:
http://www.plancardinalcreekvillage.ca/openhouse3.php

Disppointed that they fail to address a realignment of 174, they should return the waterfront to a more natural condition and divert 174 south-east from east of Trim.

There is currently an EA underway evaluating such options, this will essentially block the EA and make it pointless.

It would be extremely difficult to realign the 174 along the current waterfront routing as well. Maybe extending and upgrading Innes Road to Rockland is a better solution instead.

Planning for transit is also difficult since connecting a rapid transit corridor is a challenge here.

[eternallyme]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Well, the Ontario school system with English public, English Catholic, French public and French Catholic schools pretty much guarantees any decent-sized community (that has lots of francophones like Orleans) will have at least four separate elementary schools.

They should have one of each plus space for a private school. It can be assumed the population of the area would be close to 50% Francophone. Most likely the French Catholic would be the largest school, and a high school would also be needed for that group.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

They are hoping to bring this to Council in Jan 2013 but the Road to Rockland EA won't be done til 2015.

Here is the development application page btw.
http://app01.ottawa.ca/postingplans/...appId=__81M476

They are recommending widening the 174 to six lanes in this area.

And of course there is no recommendation to extend the East Transitway beyond the Trim P&R into this community. Oh no no no.

I suppose we should count our lucky stars there's an old railway RoW in use as a hydro corridor available for us.

The planning process for this development is also going through an EA using an Integrated Planning Act and Environmental Assessment Act Process.
http://www.cumberlandvillage.ca/site...ngjune2012.pdf

Well that should be fun... not that we don't already have instances of conflicting EAs in this city already (I'm looking at you, Queensway and West Transitway at March Road).