About Me
I am your neighbour, your acquaintance and perhaps even your friend. A 30-year veteran of Alta Vista, I am a father, son, fun uncle, not-so-fun uncle, very bad soccer coach, very bad hockey player, former backyard rink-maker, fixer-of-all-things-broken in the home.
Here is the contact list:
City of Ottawa julie.sarazin@ottawa.ca
Councillor Peter Hume peter.hume@ottawa.ca
Lloyd Phillips & Assoc. lloyd@lloydphillips.com
NoRezonePlayfair norezoneplayfair@gmail.com
Beautiful AltaVista beautifulaltavista @mcguintylaw.ca
I have seen the Alta Vista neighbourhood move into the 21st century and try to maintain its charm as a burrough close enough to the downtown core of Ottawa, yet far enough away to ensure the comforts of “the ‘burbs”. I am just one resident fighting the good fight & hoping to make a difference. Join me, would ya?
M. McAllister said,
April 29, 2008 @ 9:32 pm
I have been a resident of the Playfair Towers (l695 Playfair) since 1977 -31 years ago this coming August, and can assure you that this new development is an unbelievable disappointment to the many residents of both Playfair Towers.
The “fill in every last inch of space” mentality which appears to prevail at Ottawa City Hall will have gone too far if this “zoning by-law amendment proposal” is approved.
The proposed monster construction will make this beautiful part of Alta Vista look like a concentration camp. Not to mention the traffic congestion on Kilborn Avenue during peak hours.
Four (4) high rise buildings in a one-block area is more than anyone should expect and/or accept.
I suppose the mighty “tax” dollars derived from such a horrible idea is all that will matter at City Hall.
Everyone who cares MUST make their objections known to:
Julie Sarazin (julie.sarazin@ottawa.ca)
Peter Hume (peter.hume@ottawa.ca)
Playfair Residences (lloyd@lloydphillips.com)
Thank you for your concern.
Joan and Rae McMahon said,
May 5, 2008 @ 9:57 am
We are totally against the building of these new units on the Kilborn and Playfair Drive properties.
cepella said,
May 8, 2008 @ 6:09 pm
you have my wholehearted support. Please keep me posted.
richard berg said,
May 16, 2008 @ 3:26 pm
I do not support the plan for any new high rise on Playfair and Kilborne. I believe this will add to congestion in the streets and little value to the community. Additionally, there should be at least an environmental assessment before this project goes forward.
L Elliott-Doshen said,
June 11, 2008 @ 11:27 pm
The ‘Chaos theory’ of City Planning described in Patrick Dare’s Article, Wednesday, June 11, 2008, illustrates how confused and chaotic the City’s current ‘Planning Process’ appears to be.
Perhaps when considering a zoning application a sensible and doable approach would be to look at the entire community, its present composition(where it has space and where it does not) and its future needs….This should not be a novel approach to infilling!!!
However, such an approach appears to be in sharp contrast to the current chaotic time and labour consuming response to each application which irritates residents, property developers and city workers considerably, wastes a lot of time and does not seem to be very effective for anyone involved in the process.
For example in our larger neighbourhood we do have space for infilling and I would not have a problem with infilling, similar to the building of the 10 townhouses proposed in Rothwell Heights, on the South side of Kilborn, across from Grasshopper Hill and the playgrounds, beside all the new trees that have been planted.
There is room. It would be alovely building/living site. As an added bonus it would make it safer for residents to walk on Kilborn at night if there was housing on at least one side of Kilborn…across the street from ‘Grasshopper Hill’ and it would be good for both Pleasant Park and Featherston Schools to add to the Schools’ neighbourhood populations.
While on the other hand the present suggestion for more density on the North side of Kilborn/Playfair where it is already too dense is unacceptable and ill considered!
Planning proactively by looking at the entire community, it’s present composition and future needs and advising developers where infill is acceptable and will be considered favourably rather than the current ‘bits and pieces’ reactive approach would be a novel and sensible, never mind much less expensive use of human and other resources, a much preferred approach to our city’s need for infill building!!!
L. Elliott-Doshen
Dorset Drive