When I was taking classes in Urban Planning, I was given a project to do where we were given a blank piece of land and were told to develop it. Interestingly enough, when I did a stint at Municipal Affairs, I actually did some assessments on a sub-division that was the model for the tract of land I was given in the project.
While trying to be very creative I put the road along the edge of the ravine, with a walking area on the ravine edge. My instructor looked at the draft, liked what I had done but told me to start again. He told me he was marking this project as a developer would have it done. Done in a way that maximized the potential return from the tract of land. Scrap one draft and moved on to doing the standard “make it profitable”. When I did the assessment on the sub-division, it looked exactly like my finished project. So much for doing what looks good for the community.
Speaking of which, does Mattamy have a thing for substandard land. I’ve heard of people selling the proverbial swamp land in Florida but it seems that Mattamy buys sub-standard land (i.e. swamp), does a little earth moving and then builds on it. You can imagine the future problems – flooding, excess settling and bugs.
Appears that a Gail Moorhouse down Cambridge way pointed out that they had a mosquito problem in a certain sub-division built by Mattamy on the edge of a swamp – The Portuguese Swamp. This from the Cambridge Citizen.
“In 1989 the Portuguese Swamp was cited as a reason that a new subdivision should not be allowed to proceed… This objection was noted but did not stop the construction of the Mattamy Townline subdivision which started in 2002.”
So, Mattamy was told they shouldn’t build on or near the swamp but they did. Now do you see how they can sell cheaper. They buy cheap land on or near swamp land and then build on this unsavoury property and keep the costs down to make sure they can undersell their competition. Kind of like Ford or GM buying cheap steel to save but the consumer ends up with rust.
She brings up a good point. Have Mattamy pay to correct the mosquito problem either directly or through development fees. Maybe they should have put a warning on their sales brochures that the area was susceptible to mosquitos and possible diseases (West Nile anyone).
Is this a one of? Bracebridge had the flooding basements and in Ottawa, they built illegal berms. In Ottawa they also tried to sell houses that were on land susceptible to flooding. And lets not forget the Milton scam – construction on toxic waste.
Ah yes, good old Mattamy. Build the dream with the built-in horror story.
.
.
.
http://condron.us/index.php?i=6
condron.us
Oakville Homes 