Upload
peter-markhauser
View
32
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
A Dream future for Chelsea Village | Diversity of lodging which respect our Village heritage and character but answer the current needs of our residents.
Citation preview
Un rêve pour l'avenir de Chelsea Village
A Dream Future For The Chelsea Village
“ A greater diversity of lodging is needed for”
Young Families
Persons Living alone
The elderly
“ New developments should respect the existing heritage and
character without excluding the possibility for creativity in de-
sign “
“ An area recommended for increased housing
diversity is the lands owned by Innovation Chelsea”
Allow cluster developments where development densities re-
spect overall density allocations
Zone 2: Chelsea Village The Residents' village
Village Appropriate density
Mixed use
Public park space
Accommodations
Range of housing options including seniors housing
Pedestrian and Cycling friendly
Architectural quality and heritage preservation
Traffic control at intersection
What do the residents of
Chelsea want ??
Help to create this dream neighbourhood
Contribuer à améliorer le quartier et la
communaté
Provide more affordable housing solutions to enhance the
socio-economic diversity of our community
Fournir des solutions de logement abordable pour améliorer la
la diversité socio-économique dans notre communauté
MISSION STATEMENTS:
2010: A Feasibility Study for a multi-faceted neighborhood
We were almost there:
Findings of study as summarized
in Chelsea Master Plan:
“Proposed mix of residential and commercial uses as
well as a heritage market and green spaces that are
compatible with the express vision for the central area
of Chelsea”
“Answers to may requests from the citizens in
the visioning exercise , mainly by including a
large public space and market place.”
“Another area recommended for increased
housing diversity is the on the lands owned by
Innovation Chelsea.”
MTQ report designates most of the
train station land as unbuildable.
Rain storm puts the train indefinitely
on hold.
Chelsea Village stands to lose one of its’
most important future economic en-
gines if the steam train doe not run
again.
The community potentially loses an im-
portant land mass for the development
of much needed housing solutions.
The community stands to lose a mini-
mum of $400,000 per year in tax reve-
nue due to unbuildable land
UNBUILDABLE
UNBUILDABLE
Land Expropriated
for sewage and
water systems
UNBUILDABLE
( min: 40 housing units) UNBUILDABLE
(min 80 housing units)
Unbuildable
2011: Adversity Strikes!
Ski/Bike Chalet Inspiration
Heritage market
Open air train platform
performance stage
New Bus Station
A Park and Gathering place
Refurbishment of existing
buildings
2014: Out of adversity come new community oriented ideas: A gathering place for Chelsea residents.
A refurbished streetscape based community oriented shops and services
A diversity of housing solutions
A Public transportation hub
A walkable neighborhood
A gateway to our much loved ski trail
Covered train platform
performance stage
Community Gardens Community Gardens
New commercial buildings
Existing buildings
Diverse affordable housing solutions:
A few examples…But we can do better
Example of the “the look and feel” of our
new homes
Setbacks from existing buildings
to provide harmony of scale
Ground level
accessibility
walking paths to local
services and amenities
Design integrity on all
four elevations
Architectural detailing and
features to break up expansive
elevations
Elevations Cascading down
to single-family home scale.
Landscaping close to
building to reduce
perception of size.
Underground Parking to
Reduce impact of cars on the site.
Architectural Details to suit the community
and the neighborhood
Walking paths to
Freshmart and other local
services and amenities Train track ski trail at the
back door. New Bus Station
Train Track Walking
Trail???, or….
Putting it all together:
Affordability, Walkability, Accessibility, Livability, Diversity
Community Gardens
Community Gardens
Gateway to a refurbished steam train or
Recreational trail
New commercial buildings
Existing buildings
Floor plans for a
multitude of housing needs
Housing solutions for a broad spectrum
of our community
In harmony with the neighborhood.
Community
Gardens
Apple
Orchards
Unbuildable
Land
In harmony with the surrounding community
Local “Economic Engines” supporting the
neighborhood.
Past
Gilmour Mills
Highway 105: entry point to Chelsea—lost to
Highway 5.
Original commuter train
Harky’s garage
Steam train and proposed station development.
—lost to land instability.
Present
Freshmart
CLSC building and its’ businesses
Small businesses: Restaurants, Freshmart,
Hardware store, Auto repair businesses
Local Population.
Future
Synergy provided by an influx of new resi-
dents and new businesses into the area will-
provide a significant economic engine for
the future of our neighbourhood
A considerable improvement of the
local economy will be required if
this dream is to become reality
(It’s happening in Old Chelsea
Why not here? )
A Dream Future for the Chelsea Village
Chelsea Village
The Gateway to Chelsea and the Gatineau Hills
Economic Engines supporting the neighborhood : Past, present, and future
BUILDING AND DEVELOPMENT DETAILS
Site Survey Topographical
PARKING:
Underground:114
Exterior: 22
Total: 136
A zoning change requested to in-
crease the density of zone 202 in
order to make up for the density lost
in adjacent un-buildable zones
Zoning and Land Stability
Sustainability
Social Environmental Economic Diverse housing options to ensure
an ongoing diversity of our socio
economic fabric
Housing options to enable multi-
generations of families to continue
to live in the community.
Planning and design, including the
creation of a vibrant “Main Street”
which promotes opportunities for
social casual interaction between
residents.
(85 Applicants for 12 lodging units in the
Farm Point senior home would seem to indi-
cate that we have gone beyond the point of
sustainability)
Walkable, village environment
with close proximity to public
transit.
Concentration of density from
unbuildable to buildable lands
allows for additional parkland
Goods and services and recrea-
tional opportunities with walka-
ble distance
Multi-unit, low-rise residential
format tends towards fewer cars
per household.
Transfer of housing units from unbuild-
able to buildable land retains the eco-
nomic value of Municipal taxation base.
The economic engine of residential
housing supports the provision of new
goods and services for the local popula-
tion , which in turn supports general in-
vestment and beautification of the vil-
lage, including the creation a financially
viable main street environment.
(Old Chelsea ‘s economic engines include the
Park and the Spa, which support the provision of
services to primarily tourists, which in turn pro-
vide the economic incentive for beatification and
improvement of the neighborhood.)
Samples of Community Reaction
Concerns
“ Community Performance Stage will be a huge disturbance”
“ What types of people will live there?”
“ The size and scale of the project will be a detriment to the community. “40 homes is OK 120 is two much”
“ I would prefer that it was not so close to our house but I understand the need for this type of housing.”
“ If I had my way nothing would be built at all. It would be best as a field - exactly as it is.”
Support
“ I’m getting older and I want to stay in the community. ” “ Your project will give me that option”
“ Vinyl Village in Wakefield is a great place to live despite what people say about the look and feel.”
“ I’m taking a huge chance on this neighborhood and I think that your plans will improve the neighborhood
and thereby improve my chances of success”
“Community Gardens would be an amazing addition to the community “
“ Could I buy One Dad? “ I want to stay in this community “
Housing diversity is needed to support the socio economic diversity of our community
Housing density will provide an economic engine to support improvments to the
neighborhood
Community planning documents define the needs and provide a guide
If it is truly good for the community, then the community will return its support .
Conclusions
APPENDIX
Affordability: There has been considerable confusion over the term “affordable”. Without picking up a dictionary let me take a shot at this: “Affordable” : If we were to analyze the social economic spectrum of our community we could determine the profile of the “average” Chelsea resident , and from that we could establish what is both affordable and acceptable to that person. Then, if we were able to build a housing option whereby the “average” unit was both affordable and acceptable to the average Chelsea resident , then I think we will have accomplished our commitment to building affordable housing for this particular community. Of course this does not preclude us from building housing options on both sides of the “average” including homes that are both afforda-ble and acceptable to people of much lesser, and greater, means than the "average" person. The studio suitable for the young single guy for example, or the 4 bedroom penthouse unit , with all the frills for that crazy investment banker that we’ve come to love over the years. To do otherwise would not only be discriminatory to the “un–average” but it would also remove the flavor of diversity from the community. The term “acceptable” used in this assessment is important in the following the sense: I could build a housing unit which would be both affordable and acceptable in Calcutta India , which would certainly be affordable to a Chelsea resident but clearly would not be acceptable. Similarly I could build a housing unit in Chelsea that would be both affordable and acceptable to an average Chelsea resi-dent, which would certainly be affordable to a resident of Rockliffe Park but would probably not be acceptable. This is where size comes in to the equation. People the world over accept a reduction in house size in order to live in an affordable living space in a given location. That is why you have micro apartments in Tokyo japan, That is why the “Smart House” development is being proposed in Ot-tawa, That is why a massive micro chalet condo is being proposed for Mont Tremblant. More importantly that is why I am proposing a building format which will allow me to offer small units which will be both affordable and acceptable to people who want to live in Chel-sea, including but limited to our Children and our seniors , and people who just can’t afford to anything else in Chelsea. Of course there are options other than my proposal. Four-plexes, eight-plexes, etc, etc, but this particular options allows me to offer units to the largest possible spectrum of our community in balanced way, which is in itself a definition of community is it not?
So there you go, that’s my best shot at “affordable” and that is what we are endeavoring to do with this project. In fact, we would like to
go a bit further by building the average unit a bit under average, in terms of affordability , because we think that over the past few
years average has gotten a bit too rich - and I think that average Chelsea resident might agree with us on that point.
Traffic
Density Placement Comparisons
120 houses on 1/4 acre lots spread over 30 120 condominium apartments
“ A greater diversity of lodging is needed espe-
cially for”
Young Families
Persons Living alone
The elderly
“ New developments should respect the existing
heritage and character without excluding the possi-
bility for creativity in design “
“ An area recommended for increased housing
diversity is the lands owned by Innovation Chelsea”
Allow cluster developments where development
densities respect overall density allocations
Zone 2: Chelsea Village
The Residents' village
Village Appropriate density
Mixed use
Public park space
Accommodations
Range of housing options including sen-
iors housing
Pedestrian and Cycling friendly
Architectural quality and heritage preser-
vation
Traffic control at intersection
What do the residents of
Chelsea want ??
The scope of the visioning process was
very large, and it did not arrive at con-
sensus on a more detailed level. In par-
ticular, densities for the various zones
remain at a conceptual level rather than
recommend specific numbers or ranges.
The results of the visioning process in-
vite further work to move from a broad
vision to more specific directions.
More detailed work would examine fea-
sibility from a sustainable development
perspective, including economic, social
and environmental considerations not
only for the study area, but for the larger
municipality.
Most Chelsea residents see the future of
their historic villages grounded in their
past as small rural villages, and are not
looking for radical changes to this small,
rural village character.
Residential and commercial development
must be of a sufficient density for a walk-
able village.
This is a living Document which has and will continue to be revised over time
as conditions change—as evidenced by the updates to date
Update #7 incorporated the landslide risk mapping. This appendix should, ide-
ally, have also included mitigation measures for reclaiming lost housing densi-
ty, such as the ability to cluster between zones in the affected areas.
While some may view the lost density as a benefit or an opportunity to retain
natural green space, others see it as a lost opportunity to build divers housing
in an important central village land mass.
Options for smaller multiple , smaller, buildings
Why show this when I
have already provided
this information to the
public—especially when
it is from Brigil
SKIING SKATING AND BIKE CHALET
Markhauser
Land Markhauser
Land Markhauser unbuildable Land
Markhauser
Unbuildbable Land
Major/Meredith
Unbuildable land
Markhauser Buildable
Land
Major Meredith
Unbuildable land
New municipal road
with water and sewer
pipes ready to be tapped
accessed for future
development
New Bus Station