Go Back   BuildingHomes.ca - Building your community! > Ontario > Ottawa

Ottawa For those in Ottawa, Kanata, Stittsville, Orleans, Nepean. Mattamy, Minto, Bridlewood, Cardel, Claridge, Braebury, Monarch, Barrhaven, Half Moon Bay, Fairwinds, Findlay Creek, Notting Hill, West Pointe, Stonebridge, Edinburgh Common, Uniform at Orchard-Stonebridge-Barrhaven and more!


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 2019-02-21, 08:20 AM
HMBTUX HMBTUX is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 276
Default Replacing Golf Courses with Housing

I'm interested to know what people think about this now that two prominent suburbs are gearing up for quite the battle trying to prevent builders from replacing golf courses with housing.

Stonebridge info here:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...ting-1.4992370

Kanata Lakes info here:

https://ottawacitizen.com/news/local...ried-residents

I'd be some kind of peeved if I had been sold on paying a premium to be part of,or even back onto,a golf course only to see this about-face a decade later. But is the combination of the Tiger Woods effect now subsiding and younger people choosing less expensive, more active sports, combined with soaring real estate prices making these developments only a matter of time? Or do the homeowners have recourse since they paid to be part of a golf course community?

It will be very interesting to see how this plays out...
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 2019-02-21, 08:45 AM
good2know's Avatar
good2know good2know is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 5,757
Default

I'm thinking that buried deep in Appendix xx of the Purchase sale agreement is a clause that the builder is not responsible for what happens in the future on land owned by others.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 2019-02-21, 08:54 AM
JCC JCC is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 141
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by good2know View Post
I'm thinking that buried deep in Appendix xx of the Purchase sale agreement is a clause that the builder is not responsible for what happens in the future on land owned by others.
I'm sure it's in every new home sale agreement... the number of people who I see buy houses on the grounds that they're backing on to an empty lot, then have that lot built on 10 years later...oh boy.

The developer can't control what's going to happen in 10 years. I mean, what if the golf course is not profitable, and they shut down - do you just leave the thing to decay and the grass to grow?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 2019-02-21, 09:02 AM
HMBTUX HMBTUX is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 276
Default

I don't disagree. But for those who paid an explicit premium, much like those who pay same for backing onto green space (different that just an empty lot that will inevitably be developed), it's a tough one. I think a business has to be reasonably ethical even if they have shareholders.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 2019-02-21, 09:10 AM
JCC JCC is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 141
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HMBTUX View Post
I don't disagree. But for those who paid an explicit premium, much like those who pay same for backing onto green space (different that just an empty lot that will inevitably be developed), it's a tough one. I think a business has to be reasonably ethical even if they have shareholders.
Is it the same developer that developed the original properties? If yes, there may be a precedent for a lawsuit, or for the developer to refund those lot premiums, in full, or in part.

If it's a different developer, nothing will happen. They have no obligation to these people that paid lot premiums.

Here's the trouble - if it becomes a legal case, and it's a different developer, that will set a precedent for future cases, and people coming saying "I bought a forest-facing lot, now you're cutting down the forest, you owe me money". It's looking at economics vs ethics.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 2019-02-21, 11:52 AM
reens09 reens09 is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 235
Default

i dont know for sure but i would bet that their legal teams included something in the PSA to cover this. their teams are well-paid and have been around for a long time.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 2019-02-21, 01:13 PM
suezuki650 suezuki650 is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Half Moon Bay
Posts: 403
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JCC View Post
Is it the same developer that developed the original properties? If yes, there may be a precedent for a lawsuit, or for the developer to refund those lot premiums, in full, or in part.
In most cases, they open subsets of the company for each new development and close it when that development is done. I don't know that you'd have recourse with the parent company.

At the very least there should be a time period where you'd be guaranteed what that premium was supposed to give you.
__________________
Half Moon Bay South
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 2019-02-22, 07:54 AM
OttawaC OttawaC is offline
Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Orleans
Posts: 41
Default

It is examples like these why I will never pay a premium to buy because of location. Backing onto anything means nothing in the future. Almost all lands can be developed. Even ocean views can have land added and developed.

It will be interesting to see how the City responds to these requests. My thoughts are the developments will go ahead eventually.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 2019-02-22, 08:34 AM
HMBTUX HMBTUX is offline
Senior Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Posts: 276
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by suezuki650 View Post
In most cases, they open subsets of the company for each new development and close it when that development is done. I don't know that you'd have recourse with the parent company.

At the very least there should be a time period where you'd be guaranteed what that premium was supposed to give you.
I agree with this. The builder can't make promises forever, but I think the people should have some protection for a reasonable period of time, a generation even. 25 ish years sort of thing. Just does not seem right that a builder could charge a lot premium of sometimes way north of 50K, then change the plans without compensating the buyers.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 2019-02-22, 08:39 AM
electricsky electricsky is offline
Member
Regular User
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 88
Default

I believe the houses backing onto the Kanata Lakes golf course were build between 1995-1998ish (someone correct me if I am wrong).

Does anyone know when the houses backing onto the Stonebridge golf courses were built?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
clublink, golf, kanata lakes, mattamy, minto

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Golf villa Big Al Burlington 8 2009-10-01 09:35 AM
Golf Tournament shani Milton 5 2005-05-30 11:21 AM
Golf Tournament shani Chit Chat 0 2005-05-10 12:33 PM
Golf tournament shani Milton 1 2005-05-10 12:32 PM
GOLF Dag Rummeda Milton 2 2004-02-17 05:02 PM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:06 PM.



Copyright © PHAND Corporation
This document may not be used elsewhere without the expressed written consent of PHAND Corporation.
*** There is no association between this website and any builder. ***

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.