It's street sweeping time!
Street sweeping in our ward has been the source of some concerns since, on many of our roads, a high persistent volume of parked cars can mean the trucks need to visit and re-visit the street several times, and often overnight, to clean up completely. I'm happy to note that this year the City's "concentrated" program will be extended to parts of our ward.
Likely the most contentious development under consideration in our ward right now is the proposal for 398-406 Roosevelt Avenue - a six-storey mixed use building that would significantly change the face of that residential street. I've made no secret of my opposition to it with planners, the developer and residents. If approved, I believe it would set a new bar for what this Council is willing to accept by way of intensification in our ward, fundamentally changing the function of the residential streets in a broad geography from Island Park to Golden, and from Byron to the Transitway.
On April 24, Planning Committee will be asked to approve an omnibus motion of various technical amendments to different zonings around the City. Earlier this year, I noted that one of those would be to amend the zoning at 190 Richmond Rd. to account for the conflict in the zoning raised by the inclusion of a mezzanine level in the townhomes. After putting that in the newsletter for a couple of weeks, I'm not going to push back on that when it comes before us: it's not a change to the overall density or building envelope from what Council approved.
Municipalities aren’t a level of government defined in the Constitution Act. Cities are creations of the provinces. We don’t make laws; we make by-laws. We take our land use planning direction from Queen’s Park. We have the tax tools the Province gives us. Police are accountable to the provincial legislature, which is also where traffic laws are made. The very conduct of the Corporation of the City of Ottawa and its elected officials is governed by laws passed by the provincial government.
For the past couple of years, I've tried to create a video version of the weekly email newsletter (if you're not subscribed, sign up here.) It kind of fell off over the winter months, but I've been back with them for the past two issues. It takes almost a full day, usually on a weekend, for me to put these together, but I've heard that you enjoy them, find the context shots useful, and there are some accessbility/literacy benefits that make them worthwhile.
This week, I voted against the new contract proposed by the City to settle its outstanding litigation with Orgaworld. This morning, I’d like to provide a little explanation for my vote, which was controversial. I believe we had an alternative, outlined below.
The vote we took at Council on Wednesday was to approve a new contract negotiated between Orgaworld and the City. It settles all the outstanding litigation, which is good; legal fees on both sides have been mounting.
Back on Feb. 23, we posted a letter from provincial Minister of Environment Chris Ballard, declining the bump up of an environmental assessment on the 417 Carling Ave E-E onramp, thus paving the way for its closure. In the letter, Mr. Ballard stated the rationale for his decision could be found in the attached table. We received emails from those of you who noticed there was no attached table. We noticed that too, and after a few emails, the table was sent to us. The pdf is attached here.
March 2018
You are invited:
Tuesday, March 27, 2018
6:30 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Presentation at 7:00 p.m.- 7:30 p.m.
Fisher Park Summit Alternative School – Library (2nd floor)
250 Holland Avenue, Ottawa
Dear Resident,
Recently, I was taken to task online for supporting a building that has little parking on the grounds that some people need cars. The commenter wrote of my vote that it was “clearly a male ableist view that you are imposing. Women, immigrants & families need cars for more reasons than you can justify for your own life and purposes.”
This week, the 9-storey development for Scott Street was approved. The vote was unanimous, including with my support. This was a highly contentious proposal, and some residents are very upset that I voted in favour of it with my colleagues.
I want to take this opportunity to explain why I voted for this development, and how I considered the multiple comments on the proposal that I’ve heard for months. This post won’t change any minds, but I do strive to communicate how I approach the various votes I take, and to be transparent in my work here at City Hall.