[Cre47]

I've posted this there, rather then on the Transit threads, because it's a more on an election promise only.


Take LRT project out of city's hands: Watson
Last Updated: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 | 1:48 PM ET Comments27Recommend12
CBC News
The proposed 12.5-kilometre light transit rail line would run from Tunney's Pasture, just west of downtown, to Blair station in the east, and includes a 3.2-kilometre transit tunnel under downtown Ottawa.The proposed 12.5-kilometre light transit rail line would run from Tunney's Pasture, just west of downtown, to Blair station in the east, and includes a 3.2-kilometre transit tunnel under downtown Ottawa. (City of Ottawa)

Mayoral candidate Jim Watson said he wants to take management of Ottawa's light rail tunnel plan away from the city, and put it in the hands of the province and an independent private-sector board.

Watson said he has no plans to put the brakes on the city's $2.1 billion east-west light rail tunnel plan, but said leaving it in the hands of council and city staff will lead to cost overruns and delays.

"With the recent track record at the city of cost overruns and bloating budgets, we need to make sure this project is approached differently, with less meddling and with tighter management," said Watson in a statement on Wednesday.

Watson said Infrastructure Ontario should handle the request for proposal process for the contracts associated with the project, while a private sector board of management made up people with experience in transit, construction, finance and project amangement would oversee actual construction.

"We simply can't afford to have Council micromanaging this project,” said Watson.

“Frankly, we can't afford to have officials micromanage this project either. We can't afford to have our planning staff and senior management engrossed in a massive project to the exclusion of everything else this city needs for nearly a decade."

Watson also said the city should create a transit commission, made up in part by members of the public with experience with transit issues, including transit riders.

Mayor Larry O'Brien said that while Watson appeared to giving his support for the light rail project, he questioned how solid that support was given past statements in which Watson has questioned the viability and scope of the plan.

"Jim Watson is for a tunnel and against a tunnel. He is for buses and for trains. He said the plan was unaffordable, and now he says it's achievable," O'Brien said in a statement. "My support for this plan has never wavered."

While Watson's campaign focused on transit Wednesday, rival candidate and current Capital Ward councillor Clive Doucet released his plans for aiding small businesses and farmers, saying the city should do more to build a thriving local economy.

Doucet said too much much emphasis is put on the city's high tech sector, and small businesses are often ignored. He said he wants to create an Economic Development Group at the city to focus on helping create new small businesses.

Doucet also said he wants to see more farmers markets in the city so people can shop for locally grown food and said the city should have its own food terminal so that local growers don't have to ship their product to Toronto.

[Admiral Nelson]

Yay? He's probably going to win, so I'm pleased to see he isn't planning on pressing the reset button again.

[gjhall]

Agreed. I was withholding any active support (donations, volunteering, lawn sign placement, etc.) for this reassuring.

I'll take careful planning and implementation of the existing rail (and bus, oy vey) plan over Doucet's non-plan, Haydon's retro buses and O'Brien's ring road to nowhere thank you very much.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Well, my support certainly seems to be going to Jim Watson this election. However, if he carries through on his promises remains to be seen and knowing politicians, I'm not holding my breath...

If he manages to accomplish his plans for the city, I think Ottawa will ultimately be better for it.

[Kitchissippi]

Mr Shape-shifter Watson suddenly regurgitating concepts that have been around for a while does not gain my respect. Where was he when he had the position to influence things on the provincial level and the city was floating the idea of Infrastructure Ontario helping out? He was cutting down the LRT project with inane comments about security and affordability. Sometimes I feel like bitch-slapping that man until something genuine and definitive comes out of him, but my hand might just come across thin air. I want to vote for a person, not an avatar.

[Ottawan]

Mr Shape-shifter Watson suddenly regurgitating concepts that have been around for a while does not gain my respect. Where was he when he had the position to influence things on the provincial level and the city was floating the idea of Infrastructure Ontario helping out? He was cutting down the LRT project with inane comments about security and affordability. Sometimes I feel like bitch-slapping that man until something genuine and definitive comes out of him, but my hand might just come across thin air. I want to vote for a person, not an avatar.

Well put.

This just proves that Watson's mushy politician instincts are still working - I may now hold my nose and vote for him because I finally believe he might do the least harm to the city, but it won't be a pleasant experience.

[adam-machiavelli]

My council reform proposal is featured in the latest edition of Spacing: Ottawa.

[Cre47]

I know I see in the list of candidates that the participation of three incumbents are unsure but this article confirms Brooks is running again in Rideau-Goulbourn. The Wikipedia page does show Bellemare and Bedard as candidates in their respective wards.

http://ottawa.ctv.ca/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100921/OTT_Speed_Bumps_100921/20100921/?hub=OttawaHome

This link confirms Bedard is running

http://www.ottawasun.com/news/election/wards/2010/09/16/15373661.html?cid=MARK-MSUN9-SMedia_Ottawasun-EN20090113NB1

And this confirms Bellemare (well you got the entire list)

http://www.ottawa.ca/city_hall/elections/nominations/index_en.html

[Dado]

:previous:

All accounted for then. Final list:

Running for re-election on Council (19)
Running for Mayor (2)
Not running (3)

Mayor Larry O-Brien
Councillor Georges Bédard
Councillor Michel Bellemare
Councillor Rainer Bloess
Councillor Glenn Brooks
Councillor Rick Chiarelli
Councillor Alex Cullen
Councillor Diane Deans
Councillor Steve Desroches
Councillor Clive Doucet
Councillor Eli El-Chantiry
Councillor Peggy Feltmate
Councillor Jan Harder
Councillor Diane Holmes
Councillor Peter Hume
Councillor Gord Hunter
Councillor Rob Jellett
Councillor Christine Leadman
Councillor Jacques Legendre
Councillor Maria McRae
Councillor Bob Monette
Councillor Shad Qadri
Councillor Doug Thompson
Councillor Marianne Wilkinson


At a minimum we have a turnover of 4/24 members of Council.

[Proof Sheet]

At a minimum we have a turnover of 4/24 members of Council.

Personally, I can't see any of the remaining 20 not getting re-elected..believe me I think that some new blood would be great for Ottawa, but unfortunately, most people who vote go by name recognition. Many of the Councillors who are in office now are in cruise control mode in terms of new ideas etc, but they will likely get in again.

The only one I think he may not get re-elected would be Cullen.

[Proof Sheet]

At a minimum we have a turnover of 4/24 members of Council.

Personally, I can't see any of the remaining 20 not getting re-elected..believe me I think that some new blood would be great for Ottawa, but unfortunately, most people who vote go by name recognition. Many of the Councillors who are in office now are in cruise control mode in terms of new ideas etc, but they will likely get in again.

The only one who with an outside chance may not get re-elected would be Cullen.

[Ottawan]

Personally, I can't see any of the remaining 20 not getting re-elected..believe me I think that some new blood would be great for Ottawa, but unfortunately, most people who vote go by name recognition. Many of the Councillors who are in office now are in cruise control mode in terms of new ideas etc, but they will likely get in again.

The only one who with an outside chance may not get re-elected would be Cullen.

I agree. However, while I'm entirely in favour of new blood, and not very happy with most of our current council, the one benefit seems to be that our current LRT and Lansdowne plans are probably secure.

That said, I now finally find myself able to endorse a candidate for my ward, Kitchissippi: Katherine Hobbs. While I was initially turned off her by an article in the Kitchissippi Times, upon further research the NIMBY-like comments printed there were in fact taken out of context. Ms. Hobbs seems to take a reasonable stance on development - overall she seems in favour of intensification, with the caveat that the local infrastructure can support it. She is in favour of the current LRT plan (which Leadman is not), and in particular makes it clear that she will fight for LRT to reach and serve the core of Kitchissippi, even if a different Western route (read: Carling) is chosen. Ms. Hobbs has actual business experience, which council could benefit from (Leadman by contrast claims business expertise from her time working for the Westboro BIA - a position usually filled by political hacks).

The last four years have made it clear that Leadman is not working for Kitchissippi, but merely trying to become yet another career councillor by playing to NIMBYs in a big way, and anyone else that can secure her position. She has no vision for the ward, let alone the city. I think that Ms. Hobbs, while perhaps not perfect, would be an improvement. You can find out more the same way I did, by visiting: http://katherinehobbs.ca/

Let me reiterate: Ms. Hobbs is not my ideal candidate, but she is miles and miles ahead of Ms. Leadman. If you are a resident of Kitchissippi, vote for her.

[Dado]

Little more than a month left and I still don't know who to vote for in Kitchissippi. Here we go in alphabetical order.

The website of Katherine Hobbs (http://www.katherinehobbs.ca/), who got things off to a bad start by putting up a picture of the old City Hall, is nearly devoid of any significant detail on what she stands for. There's some talk of it being "critical that Kitchissippi not be bypassed by planned light rail routes" and that light rail "will allow visitors to visit our shops, restaurants, parks, beaches and cultural venues without bringing their car" so I assume she's actually in favour of using the West Transitway route to bring light rail further west, which is good for Westboro. It doesn't say whether she supports the tunnel, though I have read it elsewhere that she does. The thing is, it's kind of hard to be both in favour of bringing light rail west sooner AND being in favour of the tunnel since we don't have the cash for both. For someone from a business background, that kind of lack of realism is disappointing.

I also have to question whether she has been paying attention to events in the last five years given this position on development: Through a series of moderated town hall sessions, we can create comprehensive plans to guide City staff and developers. We will work together so that our neighbourhoods grow the way we envision them. Didn't we already do that? Isn't the problem that the plan thus created isn't actually being respected? I'm not sure how more town hall sessions is going to change anything. Are developers going to suddenly start respecting the results this time?

The page finishes off with the usual platitudes about value-for-money.


Incumbent Christine Leadman's personal website (http://christineleadman.ca/) consists of a single jpeg image with a few bullet points and not a single link to anything. Not terribly impressive. The Kitchissippi Ward website (http://www.kitchissippiward.com/) is full of stuff about what she has been doing but of course doesn't have anything regarding her election platform. I do know she supports an LRT alignment down Carling but what she supports downtown I have no idea since she has voted against both the DOTT as well as against a motion to add studying a surface option as part of the DOTT study. That motion lost by one vote.

Leadman has been at the forefront of the opposition to the convent proposal, which at least shows she's supporting the content of the Community Development Plan she helped create. I think the CDP was a bit restrictive on this site, but I also think these things should be defended because otherwise they turn into pointless exercises and just lead to more community cynicism. Ashcroft is at fault for overpaying for the property and all they've done is unnecessarily given Leadman an issue to run with.


Last up is Daniel Stinger (http://votedanielstringer.ca/). Unlike Ms. Hobbs, he actually has a dedicated "Issues" page, but its content is even thinner than Ms. Hobbs' mainpage when it comes to discussing them. Nevertheless, here we learn that "core to Mr. Stringers campaign will be the idea of keeping traffic and taxes down in a greener Ottawa". There is some chatter about it being "especially important is [to] protect our community from the drive through traffic from people who live to the west and work to the east of us" and that "the Ottawa River, our park lands, the Byron strip, all need to be preserved". I'll take that to mean he's opposed to light rail serving Westboro, since the various routing options west of Westboro have to use one or both of the Byron strip and the Ottawa River corridors. I guess his commitment to a "greener Ottawa" doesn't include a greener Westboro and Ottawa River Parkway corridor by way of removing buses from them, since no LRT in Westboro = continuation of BRT on the Parkway. Anyone who believes for a moment that routing LRT onto Carling will remove buses from the Parkway and the Scott Street trench is living in a fantasy world. At a minimum all buses from Kanata would continue to use that route at least as far as Tunney's Pasture, and, given that the powers-that-be want to build a combined LRT+BRT facility between Baseline and Lincoln Fields, it could possibly be even more than that.

Apparently, "Daniels [sic] Roots in Kitchissippi" and "Community Service" count as "issues". His "Working Co-operatively" link is where he has placed a few more positions on issues. I do like his position on water quality though: "reclaim our rivers with more primary storm sewage treatment to improve swimming at Westboro and other beaches". Pinecrest Creek and the other stormwater sewer outlets upstream of Westboro Beach certainly need some kind of primary treatment, probably in the form of constructed wetlands built out into the river. Nowhere can I find a position on the tunnel, nor on the convent issue.


Good grief. These three have had months to get their websites up to snuff and stamp out some positions on something. I might haven given Leadman a bit of slack for a minimalist website given that she's been busy but a website featuring all of a single jpeg and no links to anything just doesn't cut it. It doesn't even have the address of her re-election office for crying out loud and to use the provided email address I would have to type it in (never a good way of organizing things). So, all in all, a pretty uninspiring set of choices. I kind of wish I was in Capital Ward, where it would be a pretty easy choice for David Chernushenko.

[rodionx]

Well, I won't do a run down of the candidates in Somerset ward, since Diane Holmes is going to win again. In fact, she's going to get significantly more votes than that of all her opponents combined. That's not even a bold prediction. She always gets more than 60%.

The thing is, in a lefty urban ward like this, the only person who could challenge Diane Holmes would be someone who had pretty much identical opinions. In situations like that, the incumbent has a distinct advantage. That's probably why there is so little turnover in Councillors generally.

One of her opponents has a nice website, though. He's so web savvy that I bet if I mention it here, he'll show up. Here it is... http://www.donfex.ca/

[O-Town Hockey]

Why do people like Holmes so much? I, for one, will be voting for anyone but. There needs to be a more visible oponent so that I know who to vote for in order to have Holmes ousted.

[McC]

Thanks Kitchissippi, sounds like you got the same impression from Hobbs as I did. And after 4 years being represented by Leadman, I still don't have a clue what she stands for given that anytime she says anything on issues like transit and intensification she always seems to contradict herself halfway through ("more people, but not here, to use more, better and cleaner transit options, but not these ones here," etc.). So frustrating!

[Don Fex]

Thanks for the mention RODIONX. and as you predicted i did indeed find my way here. The key to beating diane is engaging young people and getting them out to vote , 50% of the ward is between the ages of 18-39 thats a lot of voting power. diane did get 60 percent in the last election yes, but that was only 6000 votes, only half the registered voters actually voted and thats not to mention the other 14000 adults that live in the ward that are not on the list. People have to remember its there city they should go vote, even if you are not on the list you can still vote if you have proper i.d

oh and O-TOWN please check out the website I think i am definitely a strong alternative choice to our incumbent. You are right visibility is hard when you are not the incumbent. (would you like to help with that, request a lawn sign)

http://www.donfex.ca/don-fex/request-a-sign.html

[eternallyme]

Why do people like Holmes so much? I, for one, will be voting for anyone but. There needs to be a more visible oponent so that I know who to vote for in order to have Holmes ousted.

The reason is simple: central Ottawa is very liberal politically. That is why the NDP are very strong in that region as well. It is also why the rural areas would vote for Tea Party conservatives if the option appears on their ballots.

[lrt's friend]

Well oh well, what did I see today? Some people erecting Larry O'Brien signs at Bank and Hunt Club. Is the 'no sign' strategy backfiring? Is the O'Brien campaign team panicking?

[rodionx]

O'Brien really should be putting up signs. Where is he, anyway? Jim Watson seems beatable to me - he's running mostly on name recognition. Pop that balloon and he's just a vaguely creepy functionary. O'Brien just needs to a) show up and b) find a unifying idea. Something that people can grasp the way they grasped 'zero means zero.' Something less stupid than ring road.

[m0nkyman]

Something less stupid than ring road
now that's a low bar to reach.

[Cre47]

The mayor's $2 to 5+ billion road plan and all its traffic plan



O'Brien unveils traffic plan

Mayor wants new highway, rail links and bridge for Ottawa

By SUSAN SHERRING, City Hall Columnist

Last Updated: September 26, 2010 11:24pm


Ottawa needs roads and bridges just as much as it needs light rail, said Mayor Larry O'Brien as he unveiled his traffic plan Sunday.

Could a Hwy. 418 be the next big road built in the city?

It might be if Mayor Larry O’Brien wins his bid for re-election.

Trains, roads and automobiles are all going to be part of our future, and the city needs to look to the future when planning for them, O’Brien said on Sunday as he unveiled a five-point traffic management plan to the Sun.

“I think there were a group of people who thought the car was going to go the way of the dodo bird. In fact, it’s the combustion engine that will eventually go the way of the dodo bird,” O’Brien said in talking about the newest plank in his campaign for re-election.

He said with technology changing — and the increased use of electric cars — the city has to adapt to that new technology.

And with his light-rail transit plan moving forward, O’Brien said roads and cars can’t be ignored.

On the top of his list is what’s being dubbed by his campaign staff as “Hwy. 418” — a ring road in the 400 highway series.

O’Brien says he’s not suggesting a ring road will be built over the next four years, but that the planning needs to begin.

“(Hwy. 418) is something some of our guys have nicknamed it. I’m certainly going to work with the province, with (local provincial cabinet minister) Bob Chiarelli. It would be another in the 400 series roads. We’ve got the 401, the 416, the 417.

“Ultimately it will require us to work with the province, but right now, we’re just focusing on the planning portion of it, and make sure over the next term we get it in our Official Plan, that the planning for this road is in our long term planning. That in itself would be work well done. Once it’s in the plan, then ultimately, we would need the funding.

“We’ll take it when the funding is ready,” he said.

The ring road, supported by both O’Brien and former Regional chair Andy Haydon, used to be in the city’s official plan, but was eventually taken out.

“It’s unfortunate,” O’Brien said, adding where the ring road should go would be left up to the “traffic experts.”

And while the oft-talked about interprovincial bridge it out of the city’s jurisdiction, O’Brien said council has endorsed the Kettle Island option — and he plans to step up the lobbying for that bridge in order to reduce the heavy traffic on King Edward Ave.

He’s also included improving ParaTranspo. O’Brien believes the city can work with the taxi industry to improve service for its users. He said he’s not talking about getting rid of Para Transpo.

“I’ve heard the delivery of the service is very good, but the complaint I hear very often is that there’s not enough of it. It’s not as convenient as it should be, and after talking to people in taxi industry, I think we can provide more service by integrating the taxi industry,” O’Brien said.

In his traffic plan, O’Brien also wants to ask the province to allow motorcycles to use high-occupancy lanes, a small move, he says, but one which could make a real difference.

“It’ll be safer for motorcycles and they’re considered a very environmentally friendly way to travel,” he said. “The motorcycle people have been asking for it.”

O’Brien is also returning to some of the recommendations of David Collenette’s transportation task force, looking for all levels of government to “implement a high-speed rail link between Montreal-Ottawa and Toronto, and to establish better commuter train service to areas around Ottawa.”

The mayor also reiterated his call for the creation of an OC Transpo Commission in his five-point plan.

O’Brien said improving the city’s transit system is the best way to encourage economic development.

“We can use it to drive our standard of living and prosperity,” O’Brien said.

[Cre47]

O’Brien can’t have roads and transit, Watson argues

Mayoral candidates join debate focused on environment

By Kate Jaimet, The Ottawa Citizen September 26, 2010 Comments (6)


OTTAWA — Ottawa should plan a major new ring-road and work with friendly developers to build massive suburban developments, Mayor Larry O’Brien said Sunday at a debate focused on environmental issues.

“In a city that’s half the size of PEI, quite frankly it’s important that we keep our personal vehicles. I’ll be recommending that we get into the planning stages for a ring road,” O’Brien said. “(We should) go into significantly larger planning exercises — 15,000, 16,000 acres of development with one major partner. … I think business can be our friend here and I think business can solve some of our problems.”

But his rival Jim Watson slammed the ideas, saying the city should focus on building public transit and stopping urban sprawl.

“You have Mr. O’Brien who’s all about roads, who wants to build a ring road through the Greenbelt and push the urban boundary farther and farther. That’s not what the people of this city want,” Watson said. “There is no reason to expand the urban boundary.”

And Clive Doucet went further, saying councillors should sever their financial ties with developers and build up a bank of city-owned conservation lands.

“I think there’s a fundamental conflict of interest between taking money from a developer on a campaign and having to vote on a motion at council where they (the developer) are going to lose money,” Doucet said.

“I would start a land banking system where we can have the capacity to actually protect our wetlands. The developer owns everything (at present). We don’t own anything.”

The debate, hosted by Ecology Ottawa in conjunction with a number of community and environmental groups, drew a standing-room-only crowd of about 200 people to Saint Paul University on Main Street.

Public transit emerged as a major issue over the course of the evening.

O’Brien touted his $2.1 billion plan for light rail, including a downtown tunnel.

But Andy Haydon, former regional chair and onetime Nepean mayor, argued in favour keeping the bus transit system and adding a downtown bus tunnel, which he said would cost less than half the price.

Meanwhile Doucet argued that any tunnel was a waste of time and money and would bring no new riders.

Instead, Doucet promised a surface-rail system that would see commuter trains running east-west along Carling to Kanata and along Innes Road to Orléans, as well as north-south lines linking Barrhaven to the downtown.

“I will do it in four years. I will change the city after the end of four years. Trust me,” Doucet said to applause from the crowd.

Watson, who supports the current council’s light rail plan, nevertheless used it as an opportunity to take a jab at O’Brien, saying it was contradictory for the mayor to both support the expensive transit initiative, and plan a massive new ring road.

On the issue of energy efficiency, Watson said Hydro Ottawa should do more to develop alternative energy sources, building on its existing project to erect a solar farm on the site of an old landfill at Trail Road. He said the city should also offer incentives to homeowners to install alternative energy technologies, taking advantage of the preferential tariffs for green energy offered by Dalton McGuinty’s provincial government, where until recently Watson served in cabinet.

However, his rivals took jabs at Watson for the provincial energy regime. Alluding to Watson’s recent promise to freeze rental fees for arenas, O’Brien said one of the reasons the costs have increased is because of McGuinty’s green energy regime. Candidate Mike Maguire said the rising prices due to green energy incentives also jeopardize the local food supply.

“The cost of energy since this green-energy madness has gone into effect at the provincial level is killing farms,” Maguire said.

Among the other issues discussed were conservation lands, on which Watson said he agreed with Doucet that the city should create a fund to buy environmental lands.

Watson said in an interview after the debate that the fund would be a percentage of the budgetary surplus each year, to be determined by council.

O’Brien said the city already has a fund to acquire land for various purposes. He added in an interview after the debate that he plans to vote against a motion at council on Oct 5 to buy ecologically sensitive lands in the South March Highlands — which could cost between $14 million and $22 million — in order to save them from development.

On the issue of cycling, Doucet said the city should create segregated lanes for cyclists while O’Brien said the new LRT tunnel will take buses off the road and create opportunities for dedicated cycling lanes. Watson said he will soon release a platform on cycling, and spoke of the need for more education on biking safety.
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

[Dado]

O’Brien can’t have roads and transit, Watson argues

Mayoral candidates join debate focused on environment

By Kate Jaimet, The Ottawa Citizen September 26, 2010 Comments (6)


OTTAWA — Ottawa should plan a major new ring-road and work with friendly developers to build massive suburban developments, Mayor Larry O’Brien said Sunday at a debate focused on environmental issues.

“In a city that’s half the size of PEI, quite frankly it’s important that we keep our personal vehicles. I’ll be recommending that we get into the planning stages for a ring road,” O’Brien said. “(We should) go into significantly larger planning exercises — 15,000, 16,000 acres of development with one major partner. … I think business can be our friend here and I think business can solve some of our problems.”

I wonder if O'Brien has any idea how big 15-16,000 acres is. That works out to an area some 8 km square. It took me awhile to identify a tract of land that big. This is probably a bit off, but an example of such an area would be all the farmland between Kanata and Stittsville south to Richmond and the Jock River and east to Highway 416. For an urban comparison, it corresponds to the area defined by the Champlain Bridge in the west heading south on Island Park/Fisher/Prince of Wales to the CN Beachburg subdivision, east across the river along the tracks to Conroy Rd, north through Alta Vista to the Rideau River at Hurdman and continuing north to the Ottawa River. It's probably about the size of all of Hull and Gatineau.

At a fairly modest density of 10 units per acre, this would amount to some 160,000 units and a population approaching 400,000. Granted, not all of it would be residential but not all of the housing would be typical detached, semi-detached and townhouses either.

Essentially this would be to plan satellite "cities", and I'm using the plural with some reluctance because we could probably only plan one of these things. Just where to put it so that it is freeway and railway served while being readily served with water without eating up large tracts of farmland is a good question.


I think the general idea of planning growth on a larger scale with some degree of focus is a good one, but it needs to be scaled back to something no more than about 4000 acres and a population of about 100,000 (that's still 4 km square). Either way, planning on these sorts of scales would involve denying speculator/developers in most parts of the suburban fringe the "right" to have their land included in the urban boundary while focusing growth all in one spot. That is basically the core of the problem, because the developer and sprawl-friendly OMB would likely approve continued outward growth in all directions. So this simply could not be done without some provincial involvement, although I think many of the general powers required already exist in legislation (e.g. the Places to Grow Act); they just have to be invoked by the Province. The role of the NCC in all this would have to be considered too.

[reidjr]

More drama in city elections.
________________________-

Tidbits from the election trail for Sept. 29.

n An election and contentious City Hall business are together too much for some incumbents to handle.

Somerset Coun. Diane Holmes on Tuesday took issue with staff trying to “slam things through” the planning and environment committee at the end of the term.

“I don’t think it’s good for the public,” Holmes said.

A packed committee room applauded, but Alta Vista Coun. Peter Hume, who chairs the committee, threatened to clear the room if there was another outburst of emotion from the audience.

Most people were there to speak on the proposed redevelopment of the Westboro property formerly belonging to Les Soeurs de la Visitation.

Capital Coun. Clive Doucet, who’s running for mayor, agreed with Holmes.

“We’re in a middle of an election. It’s tough to consider this right now,” Doucet said.

Orleans Coun. Bob Monette, who’s seeking re-election, scoffed at the complaints.

“We’re elected to work. We’re not elected to campaign,” Monette said.

n If the kids are going out to play and you’re not invited, what do you do?

Go to court, if you’re one mayoral candidate.

Robert Gauthier has filed a statement of claim in Ottawa court accusing the organizers of an upcoming debate of ruining his reputation because they didn’t invite him.

The event in question is Debate 2.0, which will encourage people to send in questions to the candidates and participate using social media. The Oct. 5 debate, which is being held at the National Arts Centre, is also being televised on Rogers.

Gauthier claims leaving him out of the event infringes on his right to participate in the political process and his right of expression. He also alleges that leaving him out implies he doesn’t have the qualifications to be mayor.

The claim says leaving Gauthier out ruined his “personal and professional reputation.” Gauthier is asking for “redress, apology and compensation to be determined by a jury.”

Included in a list of defendants are the Institute on Governance, Rogers, NAC, a local blogger, and Sheila Copps, who’s moderating the debate.

The allegations have not been tested in court.

According to the advertisement for Debate 2.0, the invited candidates are Mayor Larry O’Brien, Jim Watson and Clive Doucet.

— Jon Willing

[waterloowarrior]

Hmm the planning act has a four month timeline for zoning (120 days). This application is already overdue to extensive design review and revisions.

[Proof Sheet]

Hmm the planning act has a four month timeline for zoning (120 days). This application is already overdue to extensive design review and revisions.

You are expecting rational thinking in the lead up to a municipal election in which the incumbents jobs are dependent on appearing to be doing something which in this case means stalling the project.

This is akin to residents who don't want public meetings in the summer as they are all away.

[Lakche]

O'Brien's promise to bring build a Ring Road around Ottawa and make it a new 400-series highway is not something new.

In fact, the MTO already has planned to begin a study to determine if one should be built. They had this planned since 2008.

Labeled as "Highway Ottawa - Bypass corridor study", it shows up on the Southern Highway Program (SHP) 2008 Future Projects document.

Found here:

http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/pubs/highway-construction/southern-highway-2008/partS.shtml

Theres an image you can click on to zoom in and it identifies it as "Ottawa Bypass corridor study"

Whether we vote for O'Brien or not, a study is still going to happen.

[lrt's friend]

You may recall that there used to be signs on Highway 417 at Vars indicating that this was the location of a future Ottawa Bypass highway. These signs have disappeared indicating that it has fallen off the priority list with the Ontario government.

[eternallyme]

If a ring road is really going to reduce traffic on the Queensway, it needs to be within the urban core. Perhaps Hunt Club Road upgraded to a freeway, combined with other connections? An outer ring road will do little to reduce congestion given the relatively low traffic counts on the highways out of the city (15,000 to 25,000 cars per day - all of which are fully free-flowing for 4-lane freeways, with most of the traffic on all those routes likely heading to or from Ottawa). There is no real congestion on Highway 416, 417 west of 7 or 417 east of Anderson Road, and once upgraded, Highway 7 will be operating good as well. (174 east is a different animal as that is municipal, which is stupid IMO)

[Uhuniau]

Thanks Kitchissippi, sounds like you got the same impression from Hobbs as I did. And after 4 years being represented by Leadman, I still don't have a clue what she stands for given that anytime she says anything on issues like transit and intensification she always seems to contradict herself halfway through ("more people, but not here, to use more, better and cleaner transit options, but not these ones here," etc.). So frustrating!

Exhibit A: Hickory Street! (http://www.ottawasun.com/news/ottawa/2010/03/17/13266436.html)

The damn project is virtually on top of the O-Train Carling station, but nope, still not good enough for Miss Nimby.

[lrt's friend]

Even Clive Doucet now has a large sign at Bank and Hunt Club.

[Cre47]

Watson now has a 2 to 1 lead over O'Brien and this is from a Conservative pollster too (not that it really matters much). Vote splitting from the right wing doesn't make any difference apparently on whether it would be Watson or O'Brien who will win because of Watson's big lead. Though, the 30% undecided (though most will probably not vote) and 396 respondents might be reasons not to jump for joy immediately for those who absolutely want Luthor out.

Nevertheless, O'Brien has lost it lately during the campaign with his ring road project, the large increase of the city payroll (notice the near 20% increase in city employees despite his pledge for a hiring freeze and various cuts within City Hall and salary freeze) and other BS (oh his zero means zero nonsense again).

Note that with about 25% of the population being francophone, he already loses a very large voting group since his incapability of speaking French and will be a large part of his defeat since Watson speaks fluently both languages.

I'm sure the hosts at CFRA will be in a bad mood tomorrow morning looking at those numbers anyways.

New poll shows Watson in the lead
Mayoral candidates Jim Watson and Larry O'Brien both held campaign rallies in the capital, Wednesday, Sept. 8, 2010.

Updated: Mon Oct. 04 2010 10:51:16 AM

ctvottawa.ca

A new poll released Monday morning shows Ottawa mayoral candidate Jim Watson leading the race for Mayor.

The poll conducted by Ottawa-based, Holinshed Research Group, shows Watson has the support of 36-percent of respondents.

Mayor Larry O'Brien is trailing at 17 per cent.

The poll shows Andy Haydon has the support of 8 per cent of respondents and 6 per cent for Clive Doucet.

The survey also found 30 per cent of people still don't know who they will vote for.

More than half of the respondents say Mayor Larry O'Brien has done a poor job.

In total, 396 residents were polled. The survey is considered accurate 19 times out of 20.

Ottawa votes October 25th.

Tune into CTV Ottawa News October 18th at 6pm for "Your Vote: The Race for Mayor" a live Mayoral Debate.

[hhunter]

Exhibit A: Hickory Street! (http://www.ottawasun.com/news/ottawa/2010/03/17/13266436.html)

The damn project is virtually on top of the O-Train Carling station, but nope, still not good enough for Miss Nimby.


I see what you're saying (I live in this neighbourhood and would like to see considerable re-development), but I think you're missing some nuance here.

You can be pro-intensification, and particularly transit-oriented development, without turning a blind eye to the details of a project. In other words, Councillor Leadman can certainly support intensification while still having the responsibility to ensure that this massive development boom remains within the realm of what is appropriate for the community. It's not so black and white: pro- or anti-development. Afterall, what was approved was still a twenty story tower. No one was saying nothing should be built. Plus, between 125 Hickory, 855 Carling, 100 Champagne, and the re-development of the humane society site, we're literally seeing the addition of hundreds and hundreds of residents on one block. We're re-shaping a neighbourhood - why leave it up to developers?

That said, I think the Sister's site on Richmond may be a better example of nimby-ism in Kitchissippi. Five stories there is appalling to some, whereas 20 (down from 24) was an appropriate compromise for Hickory. Interesting! I wonder if the differing income-levels of these two neighbourhoods is affecting outcomes?

[Uhuniau]

Plus, between 125 Hickory, 855 Carling, 100 Champagne, and the re-development of the humane society site, we're literally seeing the addition of hundreds and hundreds of residents on one block.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

We're re-shaping a neighbourhood - why leave it up to developers?

Largely because I think the developers have better views of what the city can and should be than the reactionary nattering nimby brigades who populate the community associations throughout the older neighbourhoods.

That said, I think the Sister's site on Richmond may be a better example of nimby-ism in Kitchissippi.

Not necessarily; while not overly sympathetic to the nimbies in that case, either, they do have a better argument than the Leadman anti-Hickory crusade. If the type of development proposed for the brownfield Hickory site isn't "appropriate", then there is nowhere in Ottawa where it's appropriate.

Five stories there is appalling to some, whereas 20 (down from 24) was an appropriate compromise for Hickory. Interesting! I wonder if the differing income-levels of these two neighbourhoods is affecting outcomes?

How do they differ?

[lrt's friend]

Largely because I think the developers have better views of what the city can and should be than the reactionary nattering nimby brigades who populate the community associations throughout the older neighbourhoods.

I wouldn't give developers control over design of our communities. They are there to maximize profit. We see time and again projects that exceed what is permitted by zoning. There needs to be checks and balances. I do agree that Nimbys can be ridiculous in their arguments against projects.

[Uhuniau]

I wouldn't give developers control over design of our communities.

Neither would I. But I sure a hell wouldn't give it to the various chapters of NIMBY International in this sad small little town.

They are there to maximize profit.

Am I supposed to be scandalized by that? Coz I'm not.

We see time and again projects that exceed what is permitted by zoning.

And? Zoning is crap anyway.

I do agree that Nimbys can be ridiculous in their arguments against projects.

Can be? It's pretty well a given.

[reidjr]

Well clive now wants to get rid of the omb.While some of the things the omb does i do not agree with but if we did not have it wow nothing every would get done and ottawa would be in very bad shape.

[m0nkyman]

Other provinces get by without an OMB equivalent. Without it, cities wouldn't just say not to everything knowing that the OMB will approve it anyway. They would have to be more responsible. Not a bad thing.

[reidjr]

Other provinces get by without an OMB equivalent. Without it, cities wouldn't just say not to everything knowing that the OMB will approve it anyway. They would have to be more responsible. Not a bad thing.

The main probleams is ottawa has some council that seem to be aginst any devlopment.I doubt they would be more responsible if anything it would be worse just look at the projects that should have got the ok but went to omb.

[Ottawan]

Other provinces get by without an OMB equivalent. Without it, cities wouldn't just say not to everything knowing that the OMB will approve it anyway. They would have to be more responsible. Not a bad thing.

Possibly. But there would still be a right to challenge an improper administrative decision of Council regarding development - and if there was no OMB, this would go directly to a court. So while the initial decisions might be more responsible, when there is a wrongful decision we would be going right away to a more drawn out and costly process with a less specialized body.

[c_speed3108]

The interesting thing to me is that for all the anti-OMB talk I can't really think of any development that the OMB has approved where I would say, after all is said and done and things are built, that the sky has fallen.

Most things seem to work out just fine. The only possible complaints are more on the philosophical side, rather than the practical.

[Cre47]

O'Brien once again making a big snafu today. Though it's not really on a major topic for us in this forum and actually wasn't a major campaign issue at all.

http://www.ottawasun.com/news/ottawa/2010/10/06/15598611.html

[Dado]

:previous:

That's nothing. Andy Haydon's self-immolation is now complete:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/municipal-election/west+side+truck+route+part+Haydon+vision+Ottawa/3634256/story.html

... building a new dam across the Ottawa River at the Deschênes Rapids with the rock from his bus tunnel and running a road across it...

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Jim Watson could tap dance naked down Laurier Ave. and STILL manage to win this election. That's how laughably bad his opposition is.

[reidjr]

Jim Watson could tap dance naked down Laurier Ave. and STILL manage to win this election. That's how laughably bad his opposition is.

What i don't get it watson like him or hate him has some very good ideas.Larry as much as i respect him he just does not seem interested in brining his a game for what ever reason.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

What i don't get it watson like him or hate him has some very good ideas.Larry as much as i respect him he just does not seem interested in brining his a game for what ever reason.

Watson comes across as false to me, but he's clearly the best candidate running right now. He's said and done some things as an MPP that I didn't necessarily like or found somewhat stupid or meddlesome, but I'll probably vote for him just because he's done the job before and seems to have done it well.

[reidjr]

Watson comes across as false to me, but he's clearly the best candidate running right now. He's said and done some things as an MPP that I didn't necessarily like or found somewhat stupid or meddlesome, but I'll probably vote for him just because he's done the job before and seems to have done it well.

Out of all of them i think he is the only one that can get the job done.I have never voted for a liberal before so this will be a first for me.

[Ottawan]

Watson comes across as false to me, but he's clearly the best candidate running right now. He's said and done some things as an MPP that I didn't necessarily like or found somewhat stupid or meddlesome, but I'll probably vote for him just because he's done the job before and seems to have done it well.

I agree exactly with this statement, if you change "seems to have done it well" to "seems to have done not horribly".

Also, let's remember that the job Watson did before is nothing like the current mayoral position. He was Mayor of the City of Ottawa in its last term of existance (ie, when everyone knew it was irrelevant, and that the regional chair (Bob Chiarelli) had the power). The City had a population around 300,000 compared to today's amalgamated population of 900,000. Running on 'experience' for Watson is actually more false than for Larry.

That said, O'Brien's Gaffes as Mayor have been compounded by his inability to sound at all reasonable or to be a thinking human being on the campaign trail. So Watson remains the best of the poor lot.

And reidjr, don't worry about voting 'Liberal' - Watson has no convictions of any kind. He isn't truly a Liberal, he's a Marshmallow.

[Cre47]

O'Brien: I'll cut 1,000 city jobs

But rival points out municipal employment has ballooned under mayor's watch

By SUSAN SHERRING, Ottawa Sun

Mayor Larry O’Brien says he’ll cut 1,000 jobs from the city’s bureaucracy if re-elected.

O’Brien made the commitment on Thursday morning’s mayoral debate organized by TV station A-Channel's morning show.

O’Brien said the best way to reduce sick leave - which costs the city about $28 million a year - is to reduce staff and those who remain more work. This isn’t the first time O’Brien has talked about reducing the size of the city’s bureaucracy - now at around 17,000 to 18,000 depending on the season.

He made a pledge to reduce employees during the last campaign and throughout much of his first term. But documents recently revealed the number of employees at Ottawa City Hall has grown, with salaries and benefits now costing the city more than $1.2 billion per year.

Over the last four years, the city's payroll has expanded by 16%.

Since 2006, more employees were hired than fired, with 2,500 new employees joining the city's payroll.

O’Brien blamed the increases on his city councillors.

“Each of those employees cost about $100,000 a year. I’m going to cut between 1.5% to 2% of the (bureaucracy). That’s a significant portion of being able to get to my target of zero," O'Brien said. “There may be some things that will come up over the next four years. I don’t have a crystal ball. But I will get as close to zero as humanly possible."

Mayoral candidate Jim Watson has called for a hiring freeze, except for emergency workers.

“You go on about a massive purging of city hall. Under your term, we’ve seen a 16% increase in staff. That’s 1,180 employees come in on your watch,” Watson said.

Capital Coun. Clive Doucet and Andy Haydon also participated in the debate.

[Cre47]

Not sure if it is mentionned on English media but Le Droit has an article shows some Watson idea for the 150th Anniversary of the Confederation.

It includes a new Museum of Science and Techonology at Lebreton Flats (on of the two best locations with E.B Eddy), a "Museum of Canada (or probably Museum of Canada not sure) at the former Train Station downtown or the former US embassy on Wellington as well as an outdoor Senators game and the return of the Grey Cup.

[lrt's friend]

I didn't watch the debate on A channel this morning but I heard some snippets.

Why does Larry continue to insult people? Calling Andy Haydon 'past his best before date' is a personal slight. This is continuation of a pattern. He seems to insult everybody at one time or another. Whether it is his fellow councillors, city staff, union members and now his election opponents. I don't like this kind of behaviour. What amazed me was the number of radio callers who justified Larry's comment, and many were seniors themselves.

Then in another comment, he clearly wants to pick a fight with all city unions. How can this possibly be productive, no matter how you feel about unions? It is possible to be tough with unions without making it clear in advance that you want a showdown with them.

I have never been impressed with O'Brien and his ongoing behaviour just reinforces my initial opinion of him in 2006. Who I will vote for is still unclear but it won't be O'Brien? I find Watson so wishy-washy but he may lead us in the right direction with a consensus on council. I don't like Doucet's Glebe-centric view on Lansdowne. I really want to see LRT in Ottawa (although I hate the current plan) but Haydon's bus tunnel at least improves our Transitway system almost certainly at less cost. Maguire doesn't seem to have any vision for improving transit downtown while implementing a lower cost city-wide rail plan.

I may need to hold my nose while voting. Nobody really stands out.

[lrt's friend]

Here is some video links to the debate

http://www.youtube.com/user/AMorningVideo#p/u/2/fZCfqxE6WQ4

http://www.youtube.com/user/AMorningVideo#p/u/1/gneQeq27JXQ

In the first video, Clive Doucet makes my major LRT concern perfectly clear, No new service, no new revenue.

[Dado]

I watched the debate the other night from the NAC on Rogers with Sheila Copps as moderator.

At the end was one of these "stupid" questions that actually turned out to be quite revealing of O'Brien's character.

The four of them were asked what superhero character or superpower they would most like to be/have.

Doucet answered Spiderman. Watson answered the power to heal (*gag* but nonetheless the kind of safe answer one expects from Watson). Haydon had the good sense to say "can't top that" and O'Brien finished off by saying he would want to have the power to make other people stop talking/be quiet (or words to that effect).

I'll bet his handlers, and poor Jasmine McDonnell, were wishing they had just that power over O'Brien at that moment.

This kind of thing is in line with O'Brien's slight to Haydon and, indeed, his entire "action over politics" theme. It's a fundamentally anti-democratic view of the world. O'Brien basically wants to be elected mayor-dictator.


I'm sort of leaning to Doucet just to get his numbers above Haydon's. I think it would be a sad day for someone with an antiquated vision of the city like Haydon to poll higher than someone with a more urban vision of the city like Doucet. Doucet is virtually alone in having at least some sense in what makes a city livable.

In the longer term, I really hope David Chernuschenko gets elected in Capital ward. I could well see him being mayoral material in one or two terms' time because he has that sense of what makes a city livable but he's also aware of practicalities while being articulate as well. And I really don't want to see the city's NIMBY-in-chief, Bob Brocklebank, get onto council, either.

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

I'm probably going to vote Watson since he's the least bad one of the entire lot. As For David Chernushenko, he should've been the Green Party leader. He would've been better than Elizabeth May.

[waterloowarrior]

Mayor O'Brien has proposed cutting 1000 jobs at City Hall, singling out the Planning and Growth Management department

“For example, I believe that our Planning and Growth Management team can get the job done with 400 staff, rather than the 439 staff they have today. Everyone in the modern economy has to strive for efficiencies; there should be no exemption at City Hall.”

http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/greaterottawa/archive/2010/10/07/o-brien-1-0.aspx

should be a nice morale boost for 110

[Proof Sheet]

Mayor O'Brien has proposed cutting 1000 jobs at City Hall, singling out the Planning and Growth Management department



http://communities.canada.com/ottawacitizen/blogs/greaterottawa/archive/2010/10/07/o-brien-1-0.aspx

should be a nice morale boost for 110

As a person who is at 110 about once or twice a week, (and usually in the Planning Dep't), my impression is that the atmosphere between mayor/councillors and staff is caustic. Both groups have no respect for the other.

Having said all that, when I'm waiting for meetings in the Planning Dep't, often times people there for the 1st time are often amazed at all the people in the Pl'g Dep't (courtesy of the staff directory phone book) and their comments are usually along the lines of 'what do all these people do here'. etc. In driving through the City I see public notification signs with staff members names on them that I have no idea who they are...I'm not aware of many staff members leaving or retiring which makes me think that there has been hiring going on.

My problems are not with individual staff members...it is the system which is so byzantine in its operation with little sharing of information. Many homeowners,builders, developers, commercial operators etc could file a site plan application on their own, but they hire planning consultants to filter all of the crap from the owner.

The mistake would be to cut back on the policy end of things...that is where the corporate knowledge is and the long term thinking....some of the development application processing (especially non-controversial items) could be handled by contract staff or outside consultants (with no conflict of interest). Unfortunately, for thinkers like O'Brien policy planners do not represent cost recovery from incoming application fees.

[rodionx]

:previous:

That's nothing. Andy Haydon's self-immolation is now complete:

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/municipal-election/west+side+truck+route+part+Haydon+vision+Ottawa/3634256/story.html

... building a new dam across the Ottawa River at the Deschênes Rapids with the rock from his bus tunnel and running a road across it...

His platform has taken a turn toward the pharaonic... He will tame rivers. He will build mighty roads. He will claim the surrounding lands and principalities as a second greenbelt, larger than the first.

We'll find out for sure next week, when he reveals his plans for the homeless. It may involve dragging stones to Deschenes rapids.

[adam-machiavelli]

I think a second Greenbelt would be a good idea if as a compromise, lands along transit corridors in the existing Greenbelt that are suitable for urban development are developed. I don't think there should be any new development west of Stittville, south of Barrhaven, and east of Orleans. An urban growth boundary won't stop sprawl. Only a greenbelt like the one around Toronto will stop sprawl.

As for who I'm voting for for mayor, my answer is Clive Doucet. I'd made up my mind quite a while ago.

[reidjr]

I think a second Greenbelt would be a good idea if as a compromise, lands along transit corridors in the existing Greenbelt that are suitable for urban development are developed. I don't think there should be any new development west of Stittville, south of Barrhaven, and east of Orleans. An urban growth boundary won't stop sprawl. Only a greenbelt like the one around Toronto will stop sprawl.

As for who I'm voting for for mayor, my answer is Clive Doucet. I'd made up my mind quite a while ago.

The probleam is not all but some aginst devlopment want canada to bring there population up to 130 million if that happens ottawa's population would be around 7 million so we need devlopment if we go that route.

[adam-machiavelli]

1. Global human population is expected to peak sometime in the next 30 to 40 years. So we may be developing new sprawl that won't be necessary shortly after.

2. If Canada is compelled to accept hundreds of millions of climate change refugees then I suspect most of those people will be resettled in small and medium sized existing and new cities because there comes a point when cities grow too big to function efficiently. So Ottawa won't grow to 7 million anytime soon. But if it does, we can re-evaluate the insane possibility of settling people on some of Canada's most fertile land.

[reidjr]

1. Global human population is expected to peak sometime in the next 30 to 40 years. So we may be developing new sprawl that won't be necessary shortly after.

2. If Canada is compelled to accept hundreds of millions of climate change refugees then I suspect most of those people will be resettled in small and medium sized existing and new cities because there comes a point when cities grow too big to function efficiently. So Ottawa won't grow to 7 million anytime soon. But if it does, we can re-evaluate the insane possibility of settling people on some of Canada's most fertile land.

But thats the thing new canadians go to toronto and vancouver the most then montreal then ottawa.Ottawa may not get to 7 million but we could have alot of population growth in the next few years.I don't agree with sprawl i was in barrheaven yesterday and its sick how much its growing.

[eternallyme]

Development freezes would raise property values so much that it would become so unaffordable to buy a house for most families. It would be a huge boon to outlying municipalities who would see massive growth.

[waterloowarrior]

Having said all that, when I'm waiting for meetings in the Planning Dep't, often times people there for the 1st time are often amazed at all the people in the Pl'g Dep't (courtesy of the staff directory phone book) and their comments are usually along the lines of 'what do all these people do here'. etc. In driving through the City I see public notification signs with staff members names on them that I have no idea who they are...I'm not aware of many staff members leaving or retiring which makes me think that there has been hiring going on.

My problems are not with individual staff members...it is the system which is so byzantine in its operation with little sharing of information. Many homeowners,builders, developers, commercial operators etc could file a site plan application on their own, but they hire planning consultants to filter all of the crap from the owner.

The mistake would be to cut back on the policy end of things...that is where the corporate knowledge is and the long term thinking....some of the development application processing (especially non-controversial items) could be handled by contract staff or outside consultants (with no conflict of interest). Unfortunately, for thinkers like O'Brien policy planners do not represent cost recovery from incoming application fees.

With 439 employees, they could at least hire a receptionist ;) To be fair with all the reorganization it's much more than just planners there though... and I believe they are working on a number of ways to improve that process.

I don't know how cost-effective outsourcing the development application processing would be in larger municipalities... it makes sense in the rural context but dunno about the city. IIRC there was a proposal to do that for Barrhaven though (for engineering).

The great thing about a larger organization like the City of Ottawa is that larger pool of resources, long-term thinking, and corporate knowledge you mention. Kind of like if you work for the province you have access to the resources of MNR, MOE etc. This is especially beneficial for rural areas which may not have had access to those resources except through consultants.

[reidjr]

Jane scarf the one that was kicked off then stage last week is now taking the case to the human rights court.

[DubberDom]

Development freezes would raise property values so much that it would become so unaffordable to buy a house for most families. It would be a huge boon to outlying municipalities who would see massive growth.

Absolutely.

While Global population growth rates may slow down, Canada should continue increasing throughout the rest of the 21st century through immigration.

I don't necessarily buy into population growth reversing in 30 years, unless religious fundamentalism is defeated. People in the Islamic World will continue to procreate faster, unless there is a fundamental shift in that religion

[Dado]

:previous:

You and eternallyme have completely missed where that discussion was heading, and I suspect it stopped because it's not really anything to do with a thread on Ottawa's municipal election.

They were not discussing some minor change to our immigration policy, they were discussing the extremely remote possibility of the federal government instituting a population increase policy that would see the population increased by millions each year.

Under that kind of policy environment, the current planning and growth framework of the provinces and their municipal children would have to be overhauled. As a country, we simply could not allow the few remaining fertile lands surrounding our major cities to be developed all the while the need for agricultural products increased because of the massively increased population.

Outward growth in cities, towns and villages alike that lie in arable lands would have to be heavily curtailed. The idiotic beggar-thy-neighbour pro-sprawl policies that rural municipalities are allowed to engage in vis-à-vis their urban neighbours would have to end. While Canada is a big country, the one thing we don't have a lot of is fertile arable land and that is also the one thing we seem intent on getting rid of. Population growth and development would have to be focused elsewhere, for instance into the Canadian Shield where plenty of water exists but not much in the way of arable land. We would be talking about urbanizing regions of the Canadian landscape that have barely seen urbanization; literally carving cities out of the wilderness and turning current 'remote' cities like North Bay and Sudbury into metropolises with populations numbering in the millions.

In many ways, the worst thing we could do would be to incrementally increase immigration because that doesn't provide the catalyst to start thinking about and how to address the long term consequences of our current growth patterns.

At any rate, all of this belongs in another forum.

[lrt's friend]

A massive change in our immigration policy could destablize the country. Our ability to integrate a massive increase in non-European immigrants is questionable and could import foreign religious and ethnic strife in an uncontrollable manner. Canada could easily cease being a Christian English speaking country and our political system could be overturned by a completely new ethnic majority.

[Ottawan]

A massive change in our immigration policy could destablize the country. Our ability to integrate a massive increase in non-European immigrants is questionable and could import foreign religious and ethnic strife in an uncontrollable manner. Canada could easily cease being a Christian English speaking country and our political system could be overturned by a completely new ethnic majority.

I'm not sure where to even begin with this statement. Firstly, I highly doubt most Canadians see the concept of our country as being "English" or "Christian" as central to our national identity. We are far from being either at the moment, and I don't see any need to fear this fact. Our ethnic composition has been in constant flux*** and a new ethnic composition (I highly doubt any specific group will ever be able to form the majority) is not something that needs to spark xenophobic fears. Certainly history has shown it would not overturn our political system.

Secondly, there is a big difference between importing foreign political and religious opinions, something which undoubtedly occurs with immigration (although is softened with each subsequent generation) and having these conflicts & opinions rise to the level of "ethnic strife in an uncontrollable manner".

Thirdly, I do not see how importing "non-European" immigrants increases the chance of such strife and negatively affects our identity or their ability to integrate. Some of the least integrated immigrants in Canada (for example Mennonites) are of European origin. Some of the largest conflicts come from immigrants from European countries such as Bosnia (to say nothing of conflict in earlier times due to Irish migrants). The vast majority of English-speaking Canadians of European origin are not originally from English-speaking countries.

Fourthly, it is EXTREMELY unlikely that immigration will be increased to the level of millions. However, were such to occur, with the proper resources and policies, I'm sure it could be accomodated in a responsible and sustainable manner. We have a huge country, a developed economy, developed cultural sensibilities, a court system capable of arbitrating disputes and a government that is, for all of its flaws, actually quite capable.

I think ideally our immigration levels should be increased, not to millions a year, but to a constant level of 1% of our population (that would mean an increase from the mid-200,000 level to the mid 300,000s, and a subsequent increase each year to keep pace with the size of the population). This level of immigration would be less than Canada has experienced for much of its history. It would allow our economy to continue to grow, lessen the risks of labour shortages, and increase our comparative global importance.



***Originally the ethnic majority was Native, then French Canadian, but after that there has been no clear majority. Next came Loyalists (Of Germanic and British origin largely). Then came immigrants from the British isles, including Ireland (note, the Irish were not considered 'white' immigrants in the mid-1800s when they first came and threatened to 'overwhelm' the supposed ethnic majority). This was followed by small numbers of Jewish, Indian, Japanese and Chinese migrants at the turn of the century, and even more frighteningly, millions of Italians (yes, this was seen as a horrible threat). Following WWII, Canadians were afraid that refugees from central and eastern Europe would upset our nation's makeup. It has been since the late '60s that ethnicity has been eliminated from immigration considerations, and this has produced generations of non-European but very loyal Canadians, despite ongoing fears about anyone considered an 'other' coming to this nation of former 'others'.

[reidjr]

I'm not sure where to even begin with this statement. Firstly, I highly doubt most Canadians see the concept of our country as being "English" or "Christian" as central to our national identity. We are far from being either at the moment, and I don't see any need to fear this fact.

Secondly, there is a big difference between importing foreign political and religious opinions, something which undoubtedly occurs with immigration (although is softened with each subsequent generation) and having these conflicts & opinions rise to the level of "ethnic strife in an uncontrollable manner".

Thirdly, I do not see how importing "non-European" immigrants increases the chance of such strife and negatively affects our identity or their ability to integrate. Some of the least integrated immigrants in Canada (for example Mennonites) are of European origin. Some of the largest conflicts come from immigrants from European countries such as Bosnia (to say nothing of conflict in earlier times due to Irish migrants). The vast majority of English-speaking Canadians of European origin are not originally from English-speaking countries.

Fourthly, it is EXTREMELY unlikely that immigration will be increased to the level of millions. However, were such to occur, with the proper resources and policies, I'm sure it could be accomodated in a responsible and sustainable manner. We have a huge country, a developed economy, developed cultural sensibilities, a court system capable of arbitrating disputes and a government that is, for all of its flaws, actually quite capable.

I think ideally our immigration levels should be increased, not to millions a year, but to a constant level of 1% of our population (that would mean an increase from the mid-200,000 level to the mid 300,000s, and a subsequent increase each year to keep pace with the size of the population). This level of immigration would be less than Canada has experienced for much of its history. It would allow our economy to continue to grow, lessen the risks of labour shortages, and increase our comparative global importance.

Part of the probleam is our social programs are over welmed part due to immergration part to other reasons.We have many many canadian with out work now we should be working to get them back to work for those who can before we look at brining many people in to work.We have to stop the abuse of welfare and ei there have people say they refuse to work for less then $50 a hour so they stay on ei.Now with that said and we get our social programs under control we then open the doors again but we don't just say come in your free to go what we do is people that get the ok we don't import no need to we go case by case and the one approved are taken to places like regina and they placed on a farm and they have to work.

[lrt's friend]

My point related to a desire to quickly increase the population to over 100 million. This would mean annual immigration in the millions. In this regard, I do believe that bringing in massive immigration from third world countries would be very problematic and would completely change the identity of this country in a short time period to something that could easily be undesireable. Regarding ethnic and religious strife, all you have to do is look at western European countries where immigrants have often been less successfully integrated. Serious problems arise when immigrant populations do not quickly find adequate employment.

[Dado]

:previous:

Well that was predictable...


But basically I agree. Bringing in large numbers of non-westernized immigrants in quantities that would raise the population to multiples of the current population would almost certainly break the country.

[Ice Hockey 87]

Watson, O'Brien trade shots over suburb proposal
By Kate Jaimet, The Ottawa Citizen October 12, 2010 6:04 PM Comments (6)



OTTAWA — Mayoral candidate Jim Watson came out swinging Tuesday against incumbent Larry O’Brien’s proposal to work with a single developer to build a new, 60 square-kilometer suburb. But O’Brien struck back with a press release calling Watson a short-sighted naysayer who would cripple Ottawa’s growth.

“We’re going to have a tough enough time finding resources to fund (light rail) transit out to Orléans and Kanata, which should be a priority, and he’s proposing a new satellite city that would drain virtually all of our capital dollars into providing services to unserviced land,” Watson said in an interview after a speech at the Soloway Jewish Community Centre Tuesday.

Watson also criticized O’Brien’s proposal during the speech, and in a detailed press release Tuesday morning.

O’Brien was not available for an interview Tuesday to defend his proposal, said his campaign spokesperson Jasmine MacDonnell. She said he would release his urban planning platform on Saturday.

The campaign team instead issued a press release criticizing Watson’s stance.

“This is typical of what we’ve come to expect from Watson. His thoughts start with ‘no’ and go downhill from there,” the press release quoted O’Brien as saying. “His response to any big-picture thinking is to evoke fear among residents and throw out grossly exaggerated numbers.”

O’Brien suggested the idea of building a massive new suburb at a debate held by the environmental group Ecology Ottawa on Oct. 3. He said the city should “go into significantly larger planning exercises — 15,000, 16,000 acres of development with one major partner.” That translates into a single suburb of 60 to 64 square kilometers, or roughly the total developed urban land area of Kanata, Stittsville and Barrhaven combined.

“At the Ecology Ottawa debate he talked about a “friendly developer” which sent alarm bells off. What has he been up to, who has he been speaking to, and is this going to pass the fairness test?” Watson said in an interview with the Citizen.

“I don’t think it’s fair to the small builders (and) I’m not sure how you would even control that. If a number of people own the land, I don’t think it’s the role of the city to go and pick their favourite developer.”

In a press release, Watson said that services in new communities such as water and sewer are usually financed 40 per cent by new homeowners and 60 per cent by existing taxpayers. He calculated that O’Brien’s proposed new suburb could contain 140,000 homes, costing taxpayers $12,500 per home in services for a total of $1 billion “before the community is even built.”

O’Brien’s press release called that a “fabrication,” but did not offer an estimate of the cost of building a 60-square kilometer community.

Watson said he believes in holding the line on the urban boundary, and supports intensification in existing neighbourhoods. In developments where increased density becomes a controversial issue, such as the redevelopment of Les Soeurs de la Visitation property in Westboro, he said the mayor should become actively involved “to work on a fair and equitable compromise.”

But in his press release, O’Brien attacked Watson’s position.

“When Jim Watson staunchly supports the status quo, what he’s really saying is that those residents living in the core should get ready for high-rises in their neighbourhoods, and that those in the suburbs should accept being treated like second-class citizens,” the press release states.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen


Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/ottawa/Watson+Brien+trade+shots+over+suburb+proposal/3660262/story.html#ixzz12C5Dl2f9

[lrt's friend]

I find it strangely ironic that O'Brien supports the development of a humungous new suburb yet he was the one who pulled the plug on LRT that would have facilitated growth of the southern community. Exactly how would he provide transportation to such a new suburb? Build a 12 lane expressway into Ottawa?

All we need is a study that recommends that it be placed outside of Ottawa's boundaries.

[Ice Hockey 87]

I find it strangely ironic that O'Brien supports the development of a humungous new suburb yet he was the one who pulled the plug on LRT that would have facilitated growth of the southern community. Exactly how would he provide transportation to such a new suburb? Build a 12 lane expressway into Ottawa?


I think Larry OBrien cancelled the LRT, because he wanted the suburbs to be car oriented from the beginning. The 400 highway series ring road he unveiled a couple weeks ago would probably serve the suburbs. I dont think Ottawa can afford to add additional 60 square-kilometers of low-density housing. That kind of urban sprawl would damage the city's efforts towards creating a more sustainable city.

[reidjr]

I think Larry OBrien cancelled the LRT, because he wanted the suburbs to be car oriented from the beginning. The 400 highway series ring road he unveiled a couple weeks ago would probably serve the suburbs. I dont think Ottawa can afford to add additional 60 square-kilometers of low-density housing. That kind of urban sprawl would damage the city's efforts towards creating a more sustainable city.

Its going to be this area or some where they need to devlope more houseing some where.

[DubberDom]

All we need is a study that recommends that it be placed outside of Ottawa's boundaries.

I keep on saying this!!! Either allow for growth and development inside Ottawa, or else you are simply driving growth to outlying communities. The 416, new Hwy 7, 417 east and west and likely soon the 174 offer 4 lanes of grade separated transit directly into Ottawa from Rockland, Limoges, Embrun, Kemptville, Carleton Place, Arnprior etc... They are more than happy to welcome new residents, and transportation costs are a relative non-issue.

Don't forget Gatineau!!

Most everybody on this board supports intensification, but when a proposal comes forward like "Les soeurs de la visitation", you are all up in arms... make up your mind!

[lrt's friend]

I want to relate my visits to Raleigh North Carolina. It is the state capital plus a high tech centre. Not so different from Ottawa. They are well in progress of building their second ring road. What has happened is relentless low density sprawl around their ring roads and employment has moved with the residents and equally low density. The massive high tech research triangle is actually mid way between Raleigh and an adjacent city. The downtown area is more or less dead. This is not helped by the fact that you cannot build more road capacity into the city. So everything new gets built around the periphery in a way that can't be served effectively by transit. In fact, beyond the central parts of the city, there is no transit. Traffic keeps getting worse since there are no alternatives. Because the city has no focus, they throw up their arms because they can't figure out how to start building rapid transit and make it effective.

So proceed with great caution in building ring roads. This will completely change how our city functions. It will change residential and employment patterns from the central parts of the city to the ring road corridor, just as the Queensway created Orleans and Kanata.

[eternallyme]

I want to relate my visits to Raleigh North Carolina. It is the state capital plus a high tech centre. Not so different from Ottawa. They are well in progress of building their second ring road. What has happened is relentless low density sprawl around their ring roads and employment has moved with the residents and equally low density. The massive high tech research triangle is actually mid way between Raleigh and an adjacent city. The downtown area is more or less dead. This is not helped by the fact that you cannot build more road capacity into the city. So everything new gets built around the periphery in a way that can't be served effectively by transit. In fact, beyond the central parts of the city, there is no transit. Traffic keeps getting worse since there are no alternatives. Because the city has no focus, they throw up their arms because they can't figure out how to start building rapid transit and make it effective.

So proceed with great caution in building ring roads. This will completely change how our city functions. It will change residential and employment patterns from the central parts of the city to the ring road corridor, just as the Queensway created Orleans and Kanata.

If the outermost ring road is built, it would likely result in major development in the outlying villages more than anywhere. After all, at first, the traffic would be hardly noticeable on it.

If there was an ideal place for a ring road, it would be at the immediate edge of the existing inner area, without intruding on the Greenbelt. A suburb-connecting ring road would also work, although it would create development pressure in the southeast and southwest corners.

[eternallyme]

All the talk about "more sustainable city" can quickly backfire. What that does is raises housing values greatly, which makes it much cheaper to commute from outlying areas. How are 40-60 km a direction commutes the ideal solution?

[gjhall]

All the talk about "more sustainable city" can quickly backfire. What that does is raises housing values greatly, which makes it much cheaper to commute from outlying areas. How are 40-60 km a direction commutes the ideal solution?

It wouldn't do that as much if NIMBYs allowed development to happen efficiently within the urban boundary that is in line with the Official Plan. Prices only go up when there is less development than required, the location of it is largely irrelevant from an affordability perspective.

[Dado]

I keep on saying this!!! Either allow for growth and development inside Ottawa, or else you are simply driving growth to outlying communities. The 416, new Hwy 7, 417 east and west and likely soon the 174 offer 4 lanes of grade separated transit directly into Ottawa from Rockland, Limoges, Embrun, Kemptville, Carleton Place, Arnprior etc... They are more than happy to welcome new residents, and transportation costs are a relative non-issue.

And how big are all these places combined? They're so far out you have to be nuts to want to live out there and commute daily, and increasing energy prices will lessen this problem even further. You're making a mountain out of a molehill.


Don't forget Gatineau!!


Now that's an actual problem.


Most everybody on this board supports intensification, but when a proposal comes forward like "Les soeurs de la visitation", you are all up in arms... make up your mind!

In fairness to my fellow forumers, they aren't all up in arms.

And anyway, I would remind you that going from 0 storeys to 6 storeys is still intensification, especially considering that that site was never really expected to be redeveloped any time soon (if ever) so any intensification that occurs there is gravy compared to what had been expected.

The far bigger problem than occasional alleged NIMBYs objecting to exceeding height limits is the continuation of segregated land uses with their attendant seas of asphalt parking lots in new subdivisions.

[eternallyme]

And how big are all these places combined? They're so far out you have to be nuts to want to live out there and commute daily, and increasing energy prices will lessen this problem even further. You're making a mountain out of a molehill.



Now that's an actual problem.



In fairness to my fellow forumers, they aren't all up in arms.

And anyway, I would remind you that going from 0 storeys to 6 storeys is still intensification, especially considering that that site was never really expected to be redeveloped any time soon (if ever) so any intensification that occurs there is gravy compared to what had been expected.

The far bigger problem than occasional alleged NIMBYs objecting to exceeding height limits is the continuation of segregated land uses with their attendant seas of asphalt parking lots in new subdivisions.

Combined, all the outer commuter areas outside the City of Ottawa (the smaller towns and rural areas either directly adjacent to or mostly within 60 km of downtown Ottawa) have a population of about 125,000. Many of those people commute to Ottawa daily, which is in most cases 40 to 60 km.

[eternallyme]

And how big are all these places combined? They're so far out you have to be nuts to want to live out there and commute daily, and increasing energy prices will lessen this problem even further. You're making a mountain out of a molehill.



Now that's an actual problem.



In fairness to my fellow forumers, they aren't all up in arms.

And anyway, I would remind you that going from 0 storeys to 6 storeys is still intensification, especially considering that that site was never really expected to be redeveloped any time soon (if ever) so any intensification that occurs there is gravy compared to what had been expected.

The far bigger problem than occasional alleged NIMBYs objecting to exceeding height limits is the continuation of segregated land uses with their attendant seas of asphalt parking lots in new subdivisions.

Combined, all the outer commuter areas outside the City of Ottawa (in Ontario, directly adjacent to the City of Ottawa or mostly within 60 km of downtown Ottawa) have a population of about 125,000. Many of those people commute to Ottawa daily, which is an average of 40 to 60 km.

[lrt's friend]

Well, CFRA nation loves O'Brien's ring road. This could be the winning platform. Great for those commuting from Vars to a job in Kanata. Great for diverting most of the trucks out of downtown Ottawa. Great for reducing congestion downtown.

Yeah, let's encourage longer and longer commutes. Yes, let's divert development from the city to the fringe. Yes, all the trucks from Gatineau will use the ring road. I guess we are back to planning both an east end and west end bridge.

Just wait until reality sets in as far as where the road and bridges will be placed. Just wait for all rural villagers start to realize that their communities explode into cities.

Do people not have a brain to think on their own?

At one point this morning, I wondered if O'Brien was planting callers agreeing with his vision of the future of Ottawa, Houston or Atlanta north.

[adam-machiavelli]

It's a good thing then that the ring road's most hardcore supporters aren't eligible to vote in Ottawa.

For the record, I would support a ring road ONLY if the Queensway is entirely dismantled and turned into an urban boulevard with intersections and roundabouts instead of interchanges, and a speed limit of 60 km/h.

[Dado]

Combined, all the outer commuter areas outside the City of Ottawa (in Ontario, directly adjacent to the City of Ottawa or mostly within 60 km of downtown Ottawa) have a population of about 125,000. Many of those people commute to Ottawa daily, which is an average of 40 to 60 km.

Really? Many of them? How many is many?

I would be very surprised if more than a quarter are actually commuting to Ottawa daily.

Once you exclude children and retirees and stay-at-home parents, that figure is knocked down considerably. Then you have to subtract all those who are in the labour force but who work locally, or at least outside Ottawa.

This table (http://www.lanarkcommuters.ca/LanarkCommuters.html) shows the state of affairs for Lanark County as of the 2001 census. At that time, approximately 8000 people commuted from all of Lanark County to Ottawa, with Carleton Place and Almonte (Mississippi Mills) accounting for well over half of it. A decade later it could be 10,000.

Now consider that of all the surrounding counties, Lanark is the one with the biggest commuter/bedroom community - Carleton Place - and is also home to one of the largest of the rest - Almonte (Rockland and Embrun are larger, Arnprior population-wise but it's less of a bedroom community too). You can be generous with your assumptions and you still won't get more than 40,000 people commuting into Ottawa from the surrounding counties. Moreover, that's total commuting, much of which will be 'historic' based on people whose families have lived in these places for generations; the annual additions in the form of unrooted people (i.e. those with no prior familial connections compared to those who are "moving back home") moving to these places will be minuscule compared to Ottawa's own growth.

The notion that there is some great threat to Ottawa not realizing growth that will be hived off to outlying communities is just fearmongering on the part of developers who want the City to expand the urban boundary faster and permit lower density development.

[Dado]

It's a good thing then that the ring road's most hardcore supporters aren't eligible to vote in Ottawa.

For the record, I would support a ring road ONLY if the Queensway is entirely dismantled and turned into an urban boulevard with intersections and roundabouts instead of interchanges, and a speed limit of 60 km/h.

:D

Just ensure that the ring road has precious few interchanges: one at Hwy 7/417, one with Hwy 416, one with an extension of the Airport Parkway for airport access and one final one with Hwy 417. The sprawl-inducing characteristics of this ring road would be minimal without a bunch of interchanges with arterial roads.

[Richard Eade]

...For the record, I would support a ring road ONLY if the Queensway is entirely dismantled and turned into an urban boulevard with intersections and roundabouts instead of interchanges, and a speed limit of 60 km/h.
Why?

Do you want to increase the city's GHG emissions? I don't know about you, but I use a lot less fuel driving from Bayshore to St. Laurent via the Queensway than I would traveling on Baseline. If you want to add intersections and lower the speed limit to 60 Km/h along the Queensway, then it will be similar to Baseline.

Do you want to throttle the economy of the city? Just for a moment, think about how much value in goods and services travels along the 417 in a day. Now remove half of that from our local economy and see how things look.

Do you want to make residential neighbourhoods unlivable due to excessive traffic? You are not going to reduce the amount of traffic by more than a few percent by removing the Queensway so all that traffic will need to find other routes to cross the city. The result will be huge increases in 'cut-through' traffic in residential communities.

Do you think there should be a road between Carleton Place and Ottawa? Between Prescott and Ottawa? Between Richmond and Manotick? With each of our suburbs growing to the size of a small community, why would you not want to add connectivity between them? Are you simply against ALL asphalt connections? What are your realistic alternatives?

[Richard Eade]

:D

Just ensure that the ring road has precious few interchanges: one at Hwy 7/417, one with Hwy 416, one with an extension of the Airport Parkway for airport access and one final one with Hwy 417. The sprawl-inducing characteristics of this ring road would be minimal without a bunch of interchanges with arterial roads.
Sounds fine to me. There would be a west connection to 417/7 for access to Stittsville/Kanata; one at the 416 for assecc to Barrhaven; one at an extended Airport Parkway to access Riverside South and the airport. Allowing people coming in from the west or east to head directly for their neighbourhood destination without having to travel the Queens way makes sense to me.

Having the connection to the 416 allows trucks from the south to move either west or east without going all the way north to the 417.

[adam-machiavelli]

Mr Eade, you have just won the prize for most perverse use of the carbon footprint to argue in favour of more freeways. The difference in emissions between a private car traveling at 60 or 100 km/h is small in the greater scheme of things. GHG emissions would actually be reduced because more gridlock would lead more people to get in the habit of taking transit and travel shorter distances to meet their various needs. This would reduce the demand for big-box style retail and increase demand for many, smaller retail outlets with smaller distances between each. Also, I've seen the early work on Ottawa's 100 year plan and it calls for a gradual transition of the Queensway from auto-oriented expressway to multi-modal regional transport corridor. Just sayin'.

Everyone must be made aware of the following fact: To cap global warming at 2 degrees in 50 years, humanity must reduce its carbon emissions to 10% of today's levels by 2050. If we continue our current rate of consumption growth, global temperatures will rise more than 5 degrees in 50 years. Failure to meet severe emissions reductions will leave most of our planet uninhabitable for humans. Building another freeway will only accelerate this process.

[reidjr]

Mr Eade, you have just won the prize for most perverse use of the carbon footprint to argue in favour of more freeways. The difference in emissions between a private car traveling at 60 or 100 km/h is small in the greater scheme of things. GHG emissions would actually be reduced because more gridlock would lead more people to get in the habit of taking transit and travel shorter distances to meet their various needs. This would reduce the demand for big-box style retail and increase demand for many, smaller retail outlets with smaller distances between each. Also, I've seen the early work on Ottawa's 100 year plan and it calls for a gradual transition of the Queensway from auto-oriented expressway to multi-modal regional transport corridor. Just sayin'.

Everyone must be made aware of the following fact: To cap global warming at 2 degrees in 50 years, humanity must reduce its carbon emissions to 10% of today's levels by 2050. If we continue our current rate of consumption growth, global temperatures will rise more than 5 degrees in 50 years. Failure to meet severe emissions reductions will leave most of our planet uninhabitable for humans. Building another freeway will only accelerate this process.

If anything is see it increasing more of a demand for box stores.People go to super stores partly because they can get everything there.

[eternallyme]

It's a good thing then that the ring road's most hardcore supporters aren't eligible to vote in Ottawa.

For the record, I would support a ring road ONLY if the Queensway is entirely dismantled and turned into an urban boulevard with intersections and roundabouts instead of interchanges, and a speed limit of 60 km/h.

That would be the ultimate in traffic breakdown in Ottawa. It would be impossible to carry 180,000 cars daily with such. That is what the Queensway averages through downtown. Good luck moving everyone to rapid transit as well.

BTW, I don't even believe in the science of climate change, forget the doom-and-gloom scenarios some have suggested.

[adam-machiavelli]

That would be the ultimate in traffic breakdown in Ottawa. It would be impossible to carry 180,000 cars daily with such. That is what the Queensway averages through downtown. Good luck moving everyone to rapid transit as well.

BTW, I don't even believe in the science of climate change, forget the doom-and-gloom scenarios some have suggested.

I didn't say get rid of the Queensway, I said turn it into an urban boulevard. Once commercial traffic not destined for Ottawa is rerouted around the city anyway, the Queensway actually loses its current necessity and becomes just another concrete surface that could be more efficiently used by low-emission mass transit as opposed to high-emission, high waste atomized transit.

Also, regarding your skepticism of climate change, I admire your asinine ability to side with the 50% of journalists, as opposed to 90% of scientists who agree that climate change exists. Good on ya! Real mature.

[Cre47]

Just a bit of more details on the satellite city/suburb. Although with the current poll numbers (and the Robocall story which CBC reported tonight won't help), expect this idea to die rapidly unless Jimmy flip-flops.

Edit: Here's the CBC link on the Robocalls. I cannot post every O'Brien gaffe because there are way too many. And by the way sign that the city of Toronto is still not ready for supporting Reform/Alliance/Conservative politicians, Rob Ford's big lead a couple of weeks ago in their mayoral race has vanished very rapidly and is actually trailing, plus apparently I've heard about a defamation lawsuit against him. Note this guy like Larry seems to like being involved in controversies as well. That would quite the collapse if he loses, and I'm sure John Tory will be grumbling on his show.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/10/14/ott-obrien-phone-ads.html


Mayor Larry O'Brien wants to expand the city's urban boundary, possibly creating a new satellite community in south Ottawa.

Updated: Thu Oct. 14 2010 6:06:48 PM

ctvottawa.ca

An empty field in south Ottawa could soon become the city's next 'Kanata' if Mayor Larry O'Brien gets the chance to expand the city past the urban boundary.

"In order to afford that I think we should get 10 to 12 to 14 developers together -- however many it takes. Identify the area, get them to put enough money up front," O'Brien told CTV Ottawa on Thursday.

O'Brien's vision to build a new satellite community over the next few decades is relatively new, and it has many people wondering where the idea came from.

CTV Ottawa has learned developer Walton International holds land in the city's southwest end and wants the urban boundary to expand.

The company also has ties to some of O'Brien's allies, including the mayor's former chief of staff, Walter Robinson.

"I do not discuss my client list," Robinson told CTV Ottawa on Thursday. "I have not lobbied for Walton since the spring."

Another former O'Brien chief of staff said although he's given the company advice, he's never formally lobbied for the developer.

"I have not lobbied for Walton, but have given them advice on how City Hall works," Eric Lamoureux said. "I work with Walton on background."

O'Brien told CTV Ottawa that Walton International isn't the only company he's talked to about expanding the urban boundary.

"I've talked to every major landowner. I've talked to Minto; I've talked to Richcraft; I've talked to Walton because they have 3,000-acres in the City of Ottawa."

O'Brien adds his friendships and former staff members aren't relevant to his plan to expand the city. Rather, he said a good idea is a good idea regardless of who it comes from -- even it they are people who are close to him.

"Even if they are people who are close to me. And even if they are people who are not close to me," he said.

O'Brien's main rival says an important part of the mayor's job is attracting people to invest -- but there's a proper way to do that.

"Mayors will always have discussions with people who want to invest with the city -- there's nothing wrong with that," said Jim Watson.

"But I find it very bizarre when the mayor says he wants to have discussions with one friendly developer."

Residents will cast their ballots on Oct. 25.

With a report from CTV Ottawa's John Hua

[Richard Eade]

Mr Eade, you have just won the prize for most perverse use of the carbon footprint to argue in favour of more freeways. The difference in emissions between a private car traveling at 60 or 100 km/h is small in the greater scheme of things. GHG emissions would actually be reduced because more gridlock would lead more people to get in the habit of taking transit and travel shorter distances to meet their various needs. This would reduce the demand for big-box style retail and increase demand for many, smaller retail outlets with smaller distances between each. Also, I've seen the early work on Ottawa's 100 year plan and it calls for a gradual transition of the Queensway from auto-oriented expressway to multi-modal regional transport corridor. Just sayin'.

Everyone must be made aware of the following fact: To cap global warming at 2 degrees in 50 years, humanity must reduce its carbon emissions to 10% of today's levels by 2050. If we continue our current rate of consumption growth, global temperatures will rise more than 5 degrees in 50 years. Failure to meet severe emissions reductions will leave most of our planet uninhabitable for humans. Building another freeway will only accelerate this process.
Well, I’m afraid I can’t agree with some of your statements, and I think you have changed your reference for some of the points. For example, your original statement was that you would be adding intersections to the 60 Km/h roadway that the Queensway was to become; however, in your rebuttal, you ignore the intersections and seem to be referring to free-flowing cars at 60 Km/h and at 100 Km/h. I will go back to my original assertion that I use less fuel traveling along a highway from point A to B than I do along a ‘City’ road – one with intersections – for the same distance.

Let’s say that I have a 2004 Chevrolet Impala. This vehicle was rated the most fuel efficient vehicle in its class in 2004, but it still uses 11.0 litres per 100 Km in the city; which is roughly what it would be using as it drove along your new 60 Km/h ‘City’ street. In contrast, it uses ‘only’ 6.7 litres per 100 Km on the highway. Now, just for fun, let’s ‘drive’ from Richmond Road to St. Laurent along the Queensway alignment; a distance of about 16.5 Km. At Highway speed I would use about 1.1 litres of fuel; if this were a ‘City’ road, I would burn 1.8 litres of fuel. Further, if I drove back and forth for the 250 work days in the year, I would burn approximately 350 more litres of fuel every year after you converted the highway to a city road. Sounds like a great way to NOT reduce GHGs.

If I drove a 2004 Cavalier, the fuel consumption would be 6.0 L/100Km on the highway and 9.4 L/100Km for the city road so I would be using 1.5 litres along your road, instead of 1.0 litres along the Queensway; so just burning an extra 250 litres every year. A great way to save the world.

I’ll take the prize you are offering, but I am not entirely arguing FOR more highways. I think there are some places where it makes sense to move people and their vehicles in the most efficient manner possible and places where there should be interference. I simply don’t make blanket judgments that all highways are bad and the cause of the ruination of the world.

Also, I think your time-frame is way out if you think that causing more gridlock is going to ‘chase’ people onto transit in the short term. You are talking about the need to reduce GHGs by 2050, but in order to do that there would need to be drastic changes to the public transit system in Ottawa before then. With the current plan in place, there will be a huge expenditure which will effectively rob us of any chance to really expand the transit network before well after 2031. Without expanding the network, there will not be much of a hope of providing service to those you are hoping will leave their cars in favour of public transit. Unless, of course, you have magic and can tap your cane on the floor three times and change the entire infrastructure and attitude of the city.

I am amused by your description for the gradual change of the Queensway. You say that this is Ottawa’s 100 year plan to change the provincially owned freeway. Well, the City can ask, but the Province can say “No.” The province has already made commitments to widen the 417 through much of Ottawa, providing more capacity for cars and trucks. The Province has recently been more open to adding HOV lanes and allowing Bus lanes along the sides, but this is probably about as much of a “multi-modal regional transport corridor” as you will get. It is VERY unlikely that there will be pedestrian and/or cycling facilities added along the 417. The idea of adding rail lines along the 417 has been thrashed out time and time again, and every time so far it has come out as a poor idea; there just isn’t the potential ridership along that corridor to make it worthwhile. That leaves more bus lanes along the 417, which can potentially happen, but probably on a more temporary basis and outside of the central part of the city; since the 417 does not go downtown.

An example of this would be adding extra lanes to the eastern 174/417 so that buses can still get downtown during the conversion of the Transitway to rail. Once the conversion was completed, the bus-lanes would be surrendered back to the Province to be used for general traffic. There would be no need to have bus lanes along the 174/417 corridor if the train ran along beside it. In the west end, the situation would be similar since there are already plans for a (rail-convertible) Transitway to parallel the 417 out through Kanata.

Perhaps the plan is to add buses onto the 417, mixed in with the general traffic. That would make it a bit more multi-modal, but would result in unreliable bus service during the peak periods.

Where can we see this early work on Ottawa's 100 year plan?

I was going to let it go, but it is so blatant that it irks me:Failure to meet severe emissions reductions will leave most of our planet uninhabitable for humans.Do you honestly believe this or is it just something you are transcribing from the back of a pamphlet some-one handed you on the street?

Think for a minute about all of the places on the planet that man currently inhabits, everywhere from the high north to the deep south; and then think of the temperature ranges that exist in the world. Do you really think that even a 5 degree difference is going to make “most of our planet uninhabitable for humans”? In the years when the Thames River froze, did all the Brits leave? Did the ancients who used to pick grapes on Greenland all die of heat-stroke? Humans are remarkably adaptable animals and have been able to make their homes in some of the least hospitable areas on the planet’s surface, and, for short periods, even in space. To make such a rash statement as the above is just plain thought-less. Should humans do more to help keep the environment clean – absolutely! – but making claims like the above doesn’t help.

[eternallyme]

I will agree that putting all the future development eggs in one basket is a bad idea. I would personally build smaller villages clustered along transportation corridors (by planning and building commuter rail and taking advantage of existing highways) and leave the distant areas rural. Such would involve design plans that require approval, with a clear central area (usually around the commuter rail station), but no hard density targets. Instead of having one giant new suburb, I would have 20 much smaller areas on the five main highway corridors and five existing and abandoned rail corridors with solid potential (some of them overlap).

Conventiently enough, three of the five main highways out of Ottawa (417W, 417E and 7) have a potential rail corridor available nearby, and a fourth (416) has two corridors in close range available, which allow for multimodal access.

[lrt's friend]

With the current plan in place, there will be a huge expenditure which will effectively rob us of any chance to really expand the transit network before well after 2031. Without expanding the network, there will not be much of a hope of providing service to those you are hoping will leave their cars in favour of public transit.

For someone who has been much more involved than the rest of us, this is not a ringing endorsement.

What concerns me the most is the future price of gas. If the price spikes sometime in the next 20 years, we are not going to be prepared for the demand for transit since we will have blown billions on Transitway conversion rather than expanding the transit network. No other city spends transit capital funds in this manner. All you have to do is look at the plans of almost every other Canadian city including Gatineau. Capital transit funding is used for expansion.

I have mixed feelings about a ring road as it could seriously draw development away from the city inside the Greenbelt and create a more car dependant city. On the other hand, if Ottawa continues to grow, some sort of ring road may be necessary in order to facilitate efficient transporation throughout the city. Despite its faults, I would never convert the Queensway into a standard boulevard. This is a vital transportation link across the central part of the city. Without fast access, this would just accelerate business leaving the central city for a more accessible ring road corridor. There are numerous examples of this happening in the United States, leaving the central city hollowed out.

O'Brien's idea of a super sattelite city leaves me worried. The latest information worries me further as I am getting the impression that this super suburb will fill in the area between Barrhaven and Kanata, an area that may be difficult to provide adequate transportation connections to the city. Some may argue that a single large suburb may be most efficient to service but will we not experience the 'Scotiabank Place' syndrome? Just like roads are taxed to the limit on game nights, will not a single huge suburb in a distant corner of the city not tax every city service going to that location to the limit as well? At some point the Queensway cannot be expanded any further and I think we are at that point through the central part of the city. I would take the opposite approach and develop in all directions at a slower pace so that less pressure is put on our infrastructure in any particular part of the city.

[eternallyme]

For someone who has been much more involved than the rest of us, this is not a ringing endorsement.

What concerns me the most is the future price of gas. If the price spikes sometime in the next 20 years, we are not going to be prepared for the demand for transit since we will have blown billions on Transitway conversion rather than expanding the transit network. No other city spends transit capital funds in this manner. All you have to do is look at the plans of almost every other Canadian city including Gatineau. Capital transit funding is used for expansion.

I have mixed feelings about a ring road as it could seriously draw development away from the city inside the Greenbelt and create a more car dependant city. On the other hand, if Ottawa continues to grow, some sort of ring road may be necessary in order to facilitate efficient transporation throughout the city. Despite its faults, I would never convert the Queensway into a standard boulevard. This is a vital transportation link across the central part of the city. Without fast access, this would just accelerate business leaving the central city for a more accessible ring road corridor. There are numerous examples of this happening in the United States, leaving the central city hollowed out.

O'Brien's idea of a super sattelite city leaves me worried. The latest information worries me further as I am getting the impression that this super suburb will fill in the area between Barrhaven and Kanata, an area that may be difficult to provide adequate transportation connections to the city. Some may argue that a single large suburb may be most efficient to service but will we not experience the 'Scotiabank Place' syndrome? Just like roads are taxed to the limit on game nights, will not a single huge suburb in a distant corner of the city not tax every city service going to that location to the limit as well? At some point the Queensway cannot be expanded any further and I think we are at that point through the central part of the city. I would take the opposite approach and develop in all directions at a slower pace so that less pressure is put on our infrastructure in any particular part of the city.

Your slower all directions approach is similar to mine, except in clustered villages as opposed to piercing on the end of the current urbanized area.

In the central city, there is no room to expand the Queensway (from Bayshore to the 417/174 split). It is unlikely it will need to be expanded in the future anyway, since growth in traffic there is fairly slow and increasingly bi-directional as jobs continue to expand in the suburbs (many live downtown and work in the suburbs).

As for the potential ring road, I would build it primarily by upgrading existing corridors instead of new corridors - even if they are well inside the developed area. The distant ring road would only be necessary IMO if traffic counts on all the routes around Ottawa were well over 40,000. None are even close to that right now, they are all between 15,000 and 25,000 for the most part, which is Level of Service B or C on a 4-lane freeway (desirable) or LOS F on a 2-lane highway (well beyond capacity).

[DubberDom]

And how big are all these places combined? They're so far out you have to be nuts to want to live out there and commute daily, and increasing energy prices will lessen this problem even further. You're making a mountain out of a molehill.

You are absolutely wrong. Come into Cumberland one morning and see the headlights lined up as far as the eye can see along 174. Where are they coming from??? Clarence-Rockland... where are they going to?? Ottawa.

Edit: From 2008 city data - RR174 2 lane section to Rockland "The traffic record indicates that the Average Daily Volume (AADT) is close to 19,000 vehicles"

Get off the whole fake notion that gas prices will make this type of commute less common, the amount of time to travel from Rockland to Downtown Ottawa is 25 minutes (off peak). I live in Cumberland and it took me 14 minutes from my house to go to Ottawa U for my hockey game on Wednesday... 14 minutes!!! With new vehicle efficiencies coming up, this will neutralize gas price increase effects.

My good friend recently moved to a new development in Limoges, I initially laughed at him, but the reality is that his rush hour commute time is 15 minutes less that from Trim road-Orleans area, simply because there is no traffic on 417 after the split. If Larry wants a new bedroom community to be planned, I would go off Anderson Rd/Leitrim Rd area

And if you think people who work in this city actually live here, take a straw poll at your office.

Here's mine: out of 12 people (Carling/Kirkwood area)
4 live within the urban boundary (only one is inside Greenbelt, 2 Kanata, one Orleans)
4 from Gatineau (2 Aylmer, 2 Gatineau)
2 Rockland
1 Carleton Place
1 Cumberland

None take public transit, Rockland duo car pool


O'Brien is correct is saying that we need to plan for a ring road... he's not advocating building it tomorrow, but if we don't have a plan today, then we'll be pooched in 20 years