Low cost housing development in Lakeshore Woods
Did you know that statistics have shown that low-cost housing
development reduces the values of houses around it?
Did you also know that this value reduction has a ripple effect outwards
from the development that can extend across whole sub-divisions?
Did you know that major arterial roads such as Great Lakes Boulevard off
no barrier to this ripple effect?
The Daniels Corporation are proposing just such a development right in
the middle of the Lakeshore Woods community. What can we do to persuade
them otherwise?
We can only stop the development completely by find some endangered
species of plant, moss or lichen growing in the woodlot, or proving that
it is a natural wetland, so this is unlikely.
We can however use the terms and the spirit in the Official Plan for
Oakville to persuade Daniels to propose a more aesthetically pleasing,
higher value, marginally larger medium density option to our Council
that they can approve under the terms of the official Plan.
Daniels has stated in informal meetings with the residents that they are
sympathetic to our worries. Let's put them to the test.
Daniels, if you really want us to love where we live, don't push for the
highest density under the rules, and produce the largest number of
cheaper properties, opt for a more pleasing, more environmentally and
community friendly development that produces a higher value, better
quality product. A product that you, the residents of Lakeshore woods
and Oakville in general can stand up and show the rest of the province
what can be done by negotiation rather than greed and meaningless public
relations exercises.
2 comments:
Your letter says:
Daniels, if you really want us to love where we live, don't push for the highest density under the rules, and produce the largest number of
cheaper properties, opt for a more pleasing, more environmentally and
community friendly development that produces a higher value, better
quality product.
This sentence clearly states that the residents do not want a high density development, but it does not specifically state what the residents would be happy with. The expression "environmentally and community friendly development" leaves a lot to the imagination and may be interpreted quite differently based on your presence in the community and your personal / commercial interests (i.e. potential investor, long term resident, developer, etc.). I would think that in order to convince the developers or the city we need to be clear on the kind of development / building that we, as residents, would approve of.
As a resident, what kind of development or building would you approve of?
Dear anonymous, I actually think that the original post does state what sort of development, if we have to have one at all, I would be interested in. One that is NOT high density, one that is not cheap, thus jeopardizing the value of the surrounding homes, and one that is aesthetcially matching to both the existing, albeit new developments around it, and with the environment it is going to sit in the middle of.
The crucial part of your comment is the word "we". This is not about what I think, or what you think, but what is the concensus, and sometimes this means compromise of what everyone in the community thinks. As a resident, I personally would be happy with no development at all. Unless some sort of endangered wildlife, or flora or fauna is found on the site, this is not likely to happen. So, bearing in mind that both presentations by Daniels has shown clear-cutting of the development plot, I would want maybe townhomes, that are at a higher density than those on the existing development, but at the lower end of that zoned for the area. I would like these town homes NOT to be stacked, but individual. These could be a 3 storey town home with underground parking, and a small yard, with a landscaped set-back. By the clever use of tansparent architecture, these town homes could even be made to look as though they are setached. A mews type of roadway system, and a standard road width bridge across to the main arterial roadway of Great Lakes Bouleveard, cordoning off the traffic from the interior of the Lakeshore woods development would complete my plan. Now what would your idea be?
Post a Comment