Councillors have refused to expand the urban boundary in the Cedarhill area of Barrhaven to make way for a housing development which, staff says, conflicts with Ottawa’s long-term growth strategy.
The O’Keefe Court development proposal would have brought 72 hectares of farmland near Cedarview Road inside the urban boundary.
Mattamy Homes wants to build nearly 1,500 residential units up to six stories tall on the vacant land, which includes an abandoned quarry. The proposal was deemed “incomplete” when it was originally submitted, a decision that was appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal.
City staff presentation told the Planning and Housing Committee, the development would require municipal investments of at least $30 million to supply water and roughly $12 million to connect the area to sewer services. Staff said that the location lacks sufficient road and transit access and that there is ample land already available for development within the urban boundary.
Audrey Chapman, with the nearby Cedarhill Community Association, told the committee the proposal is “not appropriate for expansion,” because the site is surrounded by rural properties and lacks direct access to major roads.
Chapman said the taxpayers should not be expected to subsidize a development, she says, is unnecessary and costly, “especially when the city has more than enough appropriate plans already identified to be brought into the urban boundaries in the future.”
City staff have identified there is 25 years’ worth of available land in the urban boundary, far above the target of 15 years’ worth.
Miguel Tremblay, with the urban design and planning firm Fotenn, which applied for the boundary expansion, told the committee the city should not reject an opportunity to build housing when so much more is needed. He also said that the size of the development would make it attractive for expanding transit service.
“If Mattamy is allowed to develop 1,400 units or 1,500 units then there’s an obvious opportunity,” said Tremblay, pointing to the nearby business parks.
“There is ample opportunity to loop bus service in these business parks, into the commercial areas.”
“I have no doubt that this piece of land that we’re talking about will be developed someday, but that can happen in the future, once we’ve already filled in the land that’s available for development,” said Stittsville Coun. Glen Gower, defending his decision to support the city’s rejection of the boundary expansion.
City staff needed direction from the committee in preparation for the tribunal hearing, scheduled for June 2026. The decision by the planning committee will need to be confirmed by city council.
