Ward 06 — Matthew Duchense

Our Grade — Red

Mathew is, in a word, inconsistent. While many of his overarching policy statements seem to align with the goals of our organization, his plan to accomplish those goals is decidedly at odds with ours. Mathew is staunchly anti-developer and would likely serve as a barrier to building and density by way of endless consultation.

Mathew responded in our survey that he would INCREASE parking minimums and is content to continue with car-dependent development and sprawl. This is reinforced in his campaign platform which prominently touts Mathew’s desire for building more roads and making them bigger and wider.

Survey Response

Q1: Do you support reforms that would make our zoning policies more simple, permissive, with an explicit goal of fixing our housing shortage, creating 15 minute walkable neighbourhoods, and building missing middle housing city-wide?

Yes we need to make zoning simpler with goal to create transit oriented, walkable (15 mins max), sustainable and senior oriented communities.

Q2: Do you support a target of 100,000 new homes in Ottawa in the next 10 years? This is the number that leading housing economists agree we need to build in order to restore housing affordability in our city. Our current Official Plan target is just 75,000 — far short of where we need to be.

I don’t think we should be pressured to build faster with less regulations as we are seeing happen all around us Making sure resident voices are heard and that all new development makes sense for existing residents.

Q3: Do you agree we need to fix public consultations so that more voices are heard, and so they consider the benefits of projects to the people who will live in new homes — not just existing homeowners?
Yes I definitely agree we need to be more transparent with new home constructions. Involving the public in the process is key in getting our voices back and not letting the builders dictate what is best for us.

Q4: Do you support ending mandatory parking minimums for new developments so that builders can decide if they want to build transit-friendly communities around transit stations?

We need to mandate builders to build more parking in homes and stop pretending people are not car dependent. It’s outrageous and leading to very uncomfortable neighbourhoods. Until we have a reliable established transit system we have to get real about who has access to transit, because it’s not the people of Stittsville.

Q5: Do you support a win-win inclusionary zoning plan that asks developers to include affordable housing in their developments, in exchange for lower fees, faster approvals, or more density?

I want to make sure everything we approve is in line with what we want to see as a community. Nothing will be fast tracked that does not make sense for existing residents of Stittsville. I am for inclusionary zoning where it makes sense in the community, close to transit.

Q6: Will you ask the next Mayor and Council to invest in building deeply affordable housing in your ward and take a leadership role in reducing waitlists and repair backlogs for social housing across the city?

We will do what makes sense for residents of Stittsville and I will be holding a lot of public consultations to establish priorities of residents in regard to type of housing and where and how we want to see growth in our ward.

Q7: Do you support ending exclusionary R1 zoning rules that keep renters, students, and working class families out of neighbourhoods in the name of “protecting neighbourhood character”?

We have a lot of master planning to get going on in Stittsville that goes beyond this blanket statement re R1 – but I have heard a lot about this at the doors and I will make sure to push types of homes that makes sense for us all in Stittsville and our changing demographics, prioritizing senior oriented neighbourhoods, walkable, mixed use and transit oriented.


Join Our Discord