Letter to the Editor, published April 22, 2010
The Richmond Community Development Plan (CDP) process has been seriously flawed from the outset - driven by Mattamy Homes, with the full support of city of Ottawa Councillor Glenn Brooks, who was elected to represent his constituents, not developers.
The linkage of the CDP to an environmental assessment is a gross misuse of the process.
The concept of a Community Design Plan is a very good and necessary one but only if it is properly set in motion, following a few critical tenets. To succeed, a CDP MUST be driven and controlled by the community, MUST have no set time limits for completion, MUST include land use, transportation, building styles and types of housing, densities, heritage environment, employment opportunities, resource management, water, storm water and waste water management, schools, recreation and social structures and MUST be free to explore new technologies for all of the above.
The Steering Committee was, almost to a person, selected by Councillor Brooks and many good people were included, some reluctantly. About 20 representatives of the community started out as members, complete with a chair and two vice-chairs. Among the members, there were many potential developers, almost all of whom declared a conflict of interest and became non-voting participants.
No voting procedure was ever set up but the committee has never voted on any substantive matters anyway. The membership has declined so dramatically, there is rarely anything close to a quorum. Where have all the steering committee members gone? They have left in frustration, as has a key vice-chair, who felt unable to continue in an official capacity on the committee.
The City of Ottawa said no money was available to manage the CDP process. Thus, the partnership with Mattamy was born, with the developer offering to bear the brunt of the cost.
Mattamy then included the environmental assessment (EA) it requires in order to develop a huge tract of land within Richmond into the CDP process. At this point, the CDP effectively became a tool for the developer, with the actual CDP process becoming a secondary priority, at best.
Mattamy spent considerable time, effort and money to show what the village could look like if enough lipstick and paint were applied but no one offered to explain exactly who would pay. Many open forums were conducted to show what our village could look like, but in the present economy, these visions, though extremely appealing, are entirely unrealistic.
Mattamy, not the Richmond CDP servicing subcommittee, has declared, through its consultants, that the entire village may eventually be serviced with potable water drawn from a deep aquifer beneath the village and stored somewhat below grade - a change from the original plan, made without any consultation.
This avoids the extension of standard city services and potential violation of the city's Official Plan.
Mattamy has chosen the cheapest solution for waste-water, going against the expressed wishes of village residents.
The public's interests have been ignored throughout all phases of this blasphemous CDP-MEA process. The two processes should NEVER have been mixed and funding should NEVER have been provided by a developer.
Bruce Webster
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Richmond residents --like Manotick residents, earlier – are being rough handled by overzealous developers who seem to have little regard for historic village lifestyle and values.
ReplyDeleteWhen elected officials, who are entrusted to defend the values of their constituents and to oversee orderly village build-out that follows proper protocols and procedures, are basically folding in with the developers, residents' problems are suddenly compounded.
If our trusted officials appear to accept such improper short cuts and flawed procedures as necessary byproducts to their attaining a greatly enhanced voter base, then perhaps this October 25th is the time we villagers must hit the re-set button.
As we have seen in many past cases of overly extended tenures in the city, being too long in a position often raises risks of unwholesome alliances forming between elected officials and developers. That may, or may not, be the case here.
ReplyDeleteHowever, after more than 30 years of sitting on his ‘Municipal Royal Throne’, I believe it’s time to transfer the incumbent’s tired-looking crown to someone, like Bruce Webster, who has new energy and ideas, has served well as a volunteer in the community, has led the Rural Council of Ottawa Carleton, has served on the two Rural Summits, and has worthy civic experience as a volunteer on city Standing Committees.
As a Bridge player who can attest to the negative effects of stale thinking, or losing one’s edge, or by overstaying one’s welcome, I believe it is long past time for the incumbent, (who has not declared, as of this date), to judiciously and considerately step aside.
To apply a Bridge term, albeit irreverently: What I increasingly sense we need here is a “Royal Flush”.
DC,
Manotick