Official Plan Update

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

links work...

possible areas to expand urban boundary

I think that image tells it all. Look at all the open space already inside the urban boundary! I realize that much of the open space shown here is Greenbelt land, but by no means is all of it Greenbelt. There is still plenty of space inside the boundary.

[waterloowarrior]

Inside Greenbelt: pay more, cost less

Official plan study tallies taxes versus services in sprawling city

BY JAKE RUPERT, THE OTTAWA CITIZENFEBRUARY 3, 2009


Ottawa households inside the Greenbelt pay about $1,000 more in property taxes than they receive in services, according to a study done for the city.

The study by Hemson Consulting, which is part of the municipality's update of the official land-use plan, found that, on average, residents living outside the Greenbelt pay less in taxes than it costs to provide them the services they get, a result that prompted one urban councillor to say the continued construction of single-family dwellings in the suburbs needs to stop.

Yet, because of a provincial policy requiring a steady supply of open residential land, the plan still calls for 850 more hectares of undeveloped land, mostly owned by large builders, to become subdivisions, and pushes an expansion of rural villages.

John Hughes of Hemson Consulting said the calculations take into account different service levels provided in different parts of the city and the things people are taxed for, or not, depending on where they live. They are "high-level" and can't be applied precisely to all areas, but give "a big picture of the costs" for various types of development in the city, he said.

The study is intended to help elected officials decide where to direct growth over the next 22 years.

These decisions will be made by city council over the coming months after public input.

The official plan calls for increasing population and employment densities in existing parts of the city, mostly inside the Greenbelt, and limited new development in suburban and rural areas.

Promoting intensification is partly in recognition of the cost to the city of development outside the Greenbelt, but it's also aimed at turning the city into a more compact, environmentally sustainable municipality built around public transit as the dominant form of transportation over private vehicles and an expanding road system. That's the goal of the city's planning department, and it was validated by a panel of international experts last year.

The land-use plan is meant to work with the city's new mass-transit plan by focusing residential growth and jobs along future light-rail lines, and especially around future transit stations inside the Greenbelt.

Somerset Councillor Diane Holmes, whose downtown ward residents pay a disproportionately high tax bill compared to the services they consume, says the city has no choice but to reach its planning goals.

"What we have been doing in the suburbs and the rural areas is not financially sustainable, and it has to stop. Downtown areas are subsidizing suburban and rural areas, and it's largely because those areas are dominated by single-family homes.

"Although many people will want a single detached home, we can't keep building them any more because it makes no financial sense, and people need to realize this. We can't afford the American dream of a single detached home for everybody. These areas need apartments, townhouses, and other, denser buildings."

Osgoode Councillor Doug Thompson says the municipality needs to recognize where, and how, people want to live. He said growth in rural areas, like the one he represents, has benefits to the city as a whole that are not included in the study of who pays for and receives what.

He said he's not disputing the study results, but he's going to look at them in depth and add his own analysis. He added that he thinks whether to grow in suburban and rural areas at all will be the main debate as city council deals with the plan in the coming weeks.

"That's going to be the big argument. Why do we want growth in these areas when it is more expensive? Myself and the other rural councillors will have to put forward a good argument for continued rural growth."

In all, 850 hectares is about twice the size of the Central Experimental Farm, or three times the size of the Nepean National Equestrian Park.

The city is still studying precisely which parcels could be opened to development, but has identified several likely locations:

- Kanata north of Klondike Road

- Between Kanata and Stittsville

- South Barrhaven

- Leitrim

- Southern and Eastern Orléans

Alta Vista Councillor Peter Hume, who chairs council's planning committee, said the study will help shape debate on the plan, but he said when it comes to setting aside at least some room for subdivisions, the city's hands are tied.

He said a provincial planning policy requires municipalities to set aside a portion of land for single-family homes, and the 850-hectare expansion of Ottawa's urban-growth boundary is the "bare minimum" the city needs to add in this review. He said in 2003 the city set aside too little land and ended up losing an expensive Ontario Municipal Board case that saw a developer win the right to develop a large tract of land.

(Representatives of Ottawa's local development industry are already on record saying the 850-hectare expansion of the urban boundary is not enough to keep up with demand for suburban housing.)

Mr. Hume said the gap between what residents pay inside the Greenbelt and what they get is a growing concern as property values in the core rise faster than the average across the city, meaning the gap gets bigger.

"It absolutely concerns us, and that's why we are trying to focus the growth inside the Greenbelt," he said. "But in some fundamental ways, we have to follow provincial policy even though the financial argument for the city is not good because if we don't, it ends up costing us again."

The revised land-use plan also includes new policies to ensure that intensification in existing areas is compatible with the surrounding community, and protection of wetlands.

"The official plan is the blueprint for shaping the city's future from the communities we live in to our transit service to where people will work," said Mayor Larry O'Brien. "We strongly encourage residents to attend the upcoming open house information sessions and provide their feedback."

- - -

Inside Versus Outside

Location Pays in Tax gets in Services

Urban inside the Greenbelt $3,434 $2,398

Urban outside the Greenbelt $3,323 $3,393

Rural, inside villages $3,227 $3,729

Rural, outside villages $3,467 $3,628

- - -

How to Have Your Say

Two open houses have been scheduled to present the proposed changes to residents. The first open house, focusing on rural policies, is at Confederation High School on Feb. 19. The second open house, scheduled for city hall on Feb. 24, will centre on urban policies.

On March 31, anybody can make formal submissions to city council's planning and environment committee at a meeting scheduled for the council chamber at city hall at 9:30 a.m. City council will deal with the plan some time after that.

Once council signs off, it will be submitted to Ontario's minister of municipal affairs and housing for approval, which is expected before the end of 2009.

Mayor Larry O'Brien said anybody who wants a hand in determining the future of the city should make their voice heard.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

[waterloowarrior]

Province set to help curb urban sprawl, McGuinty says

City’s plan to set aside 850 hectares for new development raises concerns

BY LEE GREENBERG, THE OTTAWA CITIZENFEBRUARY 4, 2009 9:01 AM


TORONTO — The province is willing to help the City of Ottawa curb sprawl, especially if Ontario laws are getting in the way of that goal, Premier Dalton McGuinty said Tuesday.

“If there are specific concerns there, we would be only too pleased to look at those,” Mr. McGuinty said, following the release Monday of the city’s proposed changes to its official land-use plan.

The plan looks 22 years ahead and is reviewed every five.

As part of the land-use planning process, the city intends to set aside 850 hectares for new development. Construction on the land is expected to consist of a number of single-family homes in low-density subdivisions.

At the same time, the municipality is attempting to boost population density as a means of stemming sprawl and improving the efficiency of the public-transit system. Several provisions in the plan, and an associated transportation plan that emphasizes light rail, aim to promote intensification in areas that have already been developed. Some councillors, however, have said an 850-hectare expansion of the city’s growth boundaries will undermine that end.

But Councillor Peter Hume, the chair of the planning committee, said Monday that space for low-density projects is required by the “provincial policy statement,” a declaration under Ontario’s Planning Act that sets the ground rules for local land-use plans.

When Ottawa set aside too little land for the same purpose in 2003, it ended up having to modify its plan after an expensive hearing before the Ontario Municipal Board.

Mr. McGuinty says if the province is getting in the way, he’d like to know about it, “especially if you’re telling me that somehow we have something perverse in there that doesn’t allow (Ottawa) to do the kind of things that are good for the environment.”

He wouldn’t say, however, whether the province would consider a tailor-made policy for Ottawa, as it has for southern Ontario municipalities surrounding Toronto. Those regional plans set minimum density targets.

“We’re more than prepared to talk to folks at the city, but I’m not sure where their concerns are in that regard,” Mr. McGuinty said.

Barry Wellar, an urban-planning expert and adjunct professor at the University of Ottawa, says city officials shouldn’t look elsewhere for help. He says local politicians and planners suffer from a lack of imagination.

“The city’s not being forced to do anything. That’s just a crock,” Mr. Wellar said in a telephone interview. “The province is not going to stand in the way of the City of Ottawa having an intelligent approach to combining land use with transportation. The province is neither that perverse nor is it that stupid.”

Mr. Wellar says the city’s current approach treats development and public transit with two separate plans. He says the municipality should integrate those two plans as it moves forward.

Other experts agree.

André Sorensen, a professor at the University of Toronto, says the city doesn’t have to banish suburban development to become more densely populated.

“You can’t entirely change the trajectory of how cities get developed,” Mr. Sorensen said in an interview. “What we want to do is shift to a higher and higher percentage of new housing units being built as intensification.”

The key challenge facing municipal planners and developers is how to develop high-density, mixed-use town centres in subdivisions, Mr. Sorensen says.

Ottawa’s planning history is a checkered one.

The city’s Greenbelt was created in the 1950s as a means to contain growth.

Municipal officials, however, allowed development to simply leapfrog the protected land, leading to costly infrastructure expenditures and long commutes.

Workers in the Ottawa-Gatineau region travel an average 8.1 kilometres each way, the sixth-longest commutes in the country. Four of the top five are municipalities are in the Golden Horseshoe, while Calgarians have the fifth-longest commutes.

[waterloowarrior]

the way part the PPS is worded doesnt' explicitly require a long term supply of low density homes, it puts redevelopment first. But it requires a range of housing types, and the projected residents requirements as seen in the land budget would still require a lot of SF homes, which sort of waters down that 'if necessary' bit

1.4.1 To provide for an appropriate range of housing types and densities required to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional market area identified in policy 1.4.3, planning authorities shall:

• maintain at all times the ability to accommodate residential growth for a minimum of 10 years through residential intensification and redevelopment and, if necessary, lands which are designated and available for residential development; and
• maintain at all times where new development is to occur, land with servicing capacity sufficient to provide at least a 3 year supply of residential units available through lands suitably zoned to facilitate residential intensification and redevelopment, and land in draft approved and registered plans.

1.4.3 Planning authorities shall provide for an appropriate range of housing types and densities to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional market area by:

establishing and implementing minimum targets for the provision of housing which is affordable to low and moderate income households. However, where planning is conducted by an upper-tier municipality, the upper-tier municipality in consultation with the lower-tier municipalities may identify a higher target(s) which shall represent the minimum target(s) for these lower-tier municipalities;
permitting and facilitating:
1. all forms of housing required to meet the social, health and well-being requirements of current and future residents, including special needs requirements; and
2. all forms of residential intensification and redevelopment in accordance with policy 1.1.3.3;
directing the development of new housing towards locations where appropriate levels of infrastructure and public service facilities are or will be available to support current and projected needs;
promoting densities for new housing which efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure and public service facilities, and support the use of alternative transportation modes and public transit in areas where it exists or is to be developed; and
establishing development standards for residential intensification, redevelopment and new residential development which minimize the cost of housing and facilitate compact form, while maintaining appropriate levels of public health and safety.

[highdensitysprawl]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Province set to help curb urban sprawl, McGuinty says

Barry Wellar, an urban-planning expert and adjunct professor at the University of Ottawa, says city officials shouldn’t look elsewhere for help.

With the greatest respect to Barry Wellar has he ever worked outside of academia and has he ever been anything other than grumpy, cynical or suspicious of anything that the private sector has created in terms of housing. To me, he is the ultimate back seat driver.

As well, isn't on the candidate sites in Stittsville already in the urban boundary based on the mapping...the site that is the furthest to the NE in Stittsville.

[waterloowarrior]

ok here's the background from what I can tell

The areas just east of Stittsville are outside the current urban boundary but were included in the Fernbank CDP study (phase 3 and 4 of Fernbank). They are adjacent to the Del-Brookfield/Westpark lands (big OMB case). The Del-Brookfield/Westpark lands (phase 1 and two of Fernbank) are part of the current OPA for Fernbank CDP implementation (future urban area, but the other lands are not.





5a is Richcraft (partially?), Monarch owns the Westpark lands, Brookfield = Toronto developer, Del = ?? (land development company?), Tartan and Cardel own some land too

[waterloowarrior]

from Today's disposition...


DIRECTION TO STAFF:

Planning staff to provide the interpretation of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and explain its constraints regarding urban boundary expansion.




also, here's the proposed OPA (scroll near the bottom for changes since the previous version)

[waterloowarrior]

here's another map of the current urban designations. The future urban area has an OPA

[waterloowarrior]

Stopping suburbs is no solution


BY RANDALL DENLEY, THE OTTAWA CITIZENFEBRUARY 5, 2009


Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty will have his chance to be the man who stopped suburban sprawl in Ottawa. McGuinty expressed concern and apparent surprise earlier this week about the way that his government's planning rules encourage the continuous expansion of the suburbs.

Councillor Peter Hume, chairman of city council's planning committee, is jumping on that opportunity. Hume said yesterday that he will ask for a written exemption from those rules, so councillors can stop the sprawl without fearing repercussions at the Ontario Municipal Board. He wants an answer by the end of March.

When McGuinty looks into this further, he will discover that the provincial Planning Act virtually guarantees suburban sprawl. McGuinty wondered if there was "something perverse" in the rules that is preventing Ottawa councillors from doing the best thing for the environment. What's in play isn't some unanticipated glitch, it's the very premise of the Planning Act.

That act compels municipalities to approve a minimum supply of residential growth land and that growth land must be able to accommodate a mix of single-family homes, townhouses and apartments. As the residential land fills up, the city has to add more even if it doesn't want to.

The province's new target of 40 per cent of growth being accommodated through intensification sounds good, but turn it around and the province is really saying that 60 per cent of the growth has to go somewhere else. In Ottawa, that means the suburbs.

That said, city council could choose to delay the approval of more suburban growth land.

The province's rules say there must be at least a 10-year supply of residential building land.

At the end of 2007, there were 2,550 hectares of vacant urban land within the city's existing boundaries, enough to meet demand for about 20 years. City staff's proposal to add another 850 hectares would add three-and-a-half years' capacity at anticipated rates of building.

While the provincial rules speak of a land supply that would last up to 20 years, they only compel the city to provide for 10.

If councillors were to let the land supply shrink, however, they would open themselves to OMB appeals by developers arguing that there was insufficient land to meet the demand for single-family homes, which are typically built in the suburbs.

The city has already lost one major OMB appeal on the point. That's why Hume is asking for an exemption from the policy and protection from the OMB.

Stopping suburban expansion sounds like a popular thing to do, but would it really make sense?

As the city continues to grow, new residents will obviously need some place to live. About 36 per cent of growth is being absorbed in the existing urban area now and the city is aiming to boost that number to 44 per cent, to achieve the overall 40-per-cent average over the life of the plan. Not all of that will occur inside the Greenbelt, but a lot of it will. How many new people do we think we can accommodate in the existing built-up area? Not everyone, surely.

If McGuinty were to let councillors ignore the requirement to provide more suburban housing land, it would only be a temporary holiday from reality. Unless population growth stops altogether, it's difficult to imagine a scenario in which no suburban expansion is necessary. One could argue that we should all be doing our bit to make the city dense by living in apartment buildings or townhouses. As long as people have free choice and money, though, it's not going to happen. It's certainly not something government should dictate.

City staff argue that it makes sense to keep the housing plan in sync with their other plans to expand roads, sewers and transit. All those have 20-year horizons. Without knowing where the housing would go, it would obviously be difficult to plan services.

It's easy to adopt the idea that the suburbs of today are evil wasters of land, while the suburbs of yesterday are good because they are closer to the core. The Glebe, Westboro and Alta Vista were on the fringes in their day and no doubt some pretty fine land was sacrificed to their construction.

There is nothing wrong with building new neighbourhoods. It's how we build them that matters. The city is taking a good step by increasing the minimum suburban density by 10 per cent. At the same time, it is encouraging more density inside the Greenbelt and planning to use light rail to make urban living more attractive. It's a plan that balances the desire for a denser, more urban city with the need for suburban expansion to handle a big portion of our growth.

If politicians want to choke off the suburban part of the plan, they had better have a compelling alternative.

Contact Randall Denley at 613-596-3756 or by e-mail, rdenley@thecitizen.canwest.com

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

[waterloowarrior]

latest city report with areas recommended for expansion
http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa...0Amendment.htm

[waterloowarrior]

Planners propose gradual increase in urban redevelopment

Huge, fast shift from single-family homes ‘not realistic,’ experts say
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Pl...997/story.html

BY PATRICK DARE, THE OTTAWA CITIZENMARCH 24, 2009 11:02 PM


OTTAWA-Ottawa’s planners are proposing a gradual increase in the amount of urban redevelopment in the city because they say a wholesale move from single-family homes in the suburbs is not realistic.

The planners say the city will become a somewhat more densely developed community between now and 2031. Today, 36 per cent of new housing in the urban area is “intensification” development, which means building new housing in established neighbourhoods.

That more environmentally-friendly style of development is a priority for both the city and the provincial government because it uses less land and makes cities more capable of supporting services such as public transit.

But the city’s goal in its current official plan discussions is only to raise the “intensification” development to an average of 40 per cent of new housing over the next two decades. The city is also proposing to add about 850 hectares of land to the urban area for development. Almost all of the single-family detached homes will be built in the suburbs outside the Greenbelt, the city says.

At a briefing session Tuesday, Councillor Jacques Legendre asked whether the city was being aggressive enough about making development more sustainable.

Planner Lesley Paterson said it is “not realistic” to expect a huge shift in development from single-family homes in the suburbs to apartments. She said if the city were to simply hold the line on the urban boundary, and not allow any expansion, developers would almost certainly wage a successful fight at the Ontario Municipal Board.

Paterson and planner Alain Miguelez said the demand for housing that uses less land is growing as the population ages and people want to be in neighbourhoods with good services. They hope that Ottawa will be at 44 per cent of new housing in the urban area being redevelopment of neighbourhoods by 2031.

Miguelez said those targets may be surpassed if the city strongly supports intensification and the public likes the more high density housing offered. He said the key to this more dense style of urban development will be the city’s new public transit system, featuring light-rail commuter trains, a tunnel downtown and an expanded bus system. The city is awaiting approval from the provincial government on its new transit plan.

He noted that the greater the number of residents living and working along the transit route, the better the quality of transit that can be supported.

A public meeting on the official plan proposals will be held on March 31 at 9:30 a.m. in council chambers at City Hall.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

[highdensitysprawl]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

Planners propose gradual increase in urban redevelopment

Paterson and planner Alain Miguelez said the demand for housing that uses less land is growing as the population ages and people want to be in neighbourhoods with good services. They hope that Ottawa will be at 44 per cent of new housing in the urban area being redevelopment of neighbourhoods by 2031.

Miguelez said those targets may be surpassed if the city strongly supports intensification and the public likes the more high density housing offered. He said the key to this more dense style of urban development will be the city’s new public transit system, featuring light-rail commuter trains, a tunnel downtown and an expanded bus system. The city is awaiting approval from the provincial government on its new transit plan.

Wow this Miguelez guy seems to know his stuff

[harls]

Originally Posted by Denley

As the city continues to grow, new residents will obviously need some place to live.

No mention of people hopping across the river? Surely this must work into the equation.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by highdensitysprawl

Wow this Miguelez guy seems to know his stuff

And he's never seen a microphone he didn't like!

[waterloowarrior]

Anti-sprawl plan is doomed social engineering, builders' group says


see the updated article below

[Jamaican-Phoenix]

Pardon my language, but what a crock of shit. We have a tonne of room in this city.

[waterloowarrior]

for a comparison... 2000 hectares is about the size of Alta Vista Ward or Orleans Ward... or twice the size of Capital Ward.

[eternallyme]

What do the people want though? I don't agree with forcing high density down throats if they don't want it. Doing that would just create leapfrog sprawl in surrounding counties.

[waterloowarrior]

on the other side


Ecology Ottawa Takes on Urban Sprawl

By KENNETH_GRAY 03-31-2009 COMMENTS(2) THE BULLDOG

Filed under: City of Ottawa, Ottawa City Council, Greenbelt, urban sprawl, Ecology Ottawa
Ecology Ottawa is showing the same kind of concern about expanding the urban boundary that a number of planning critics have pointed out.

The ongoing review of the City of Ottawa official plan calls for limited expansion of the urban boundary for development. The urban boundary is a line around built-up areas of the city beyond which development cannot occur. It is meant to encourage dense development within the urban area while keeping rural areas rural.

The revised official plan would contribute to sprawl, the volunteer organization said in a release.

“To say that this plan is one step forward and two steps back would be an understatement,” said Trevor Haché, a member of Ecology Ottawa in the release. “What city planners have proposed — and councillors seem set to endorse — is the second largest expansion of Ottawa’s urban boundary in the last two decades. The climate crisis demands swift movement in the opposite direction.”

“The ever-expanding, car-dependent suburbs of the 20th century have no place in a carbon constrained future,” said Matthew Paterson, a University of Ottawa professor and volunteer for Ecology Ottawa in the release. “Political leadership is required to ensure our city makes a clean break away from the failed planning of the past, which saw the leapfrogging of the Greenbelt and increasing vehicle-related smog and greenhouse gas emissions.”

Ecology Ottawa is expected to make a presentation to the city planning and environment and agricultural and rural affairs committee this afternoon. The revised official plan is expected to be approved in May.


here's their presentation

[waterloowarrior]

City's proposed land-use plan pleases no one

Builders want more suburban land, others demand higher density in core

BY JAKE RUPERT, THE OTTAWA CITIZENMARCH 31, 2009 11:26 PM
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/City+pr...606/story.html

Ottawa's proposed new land-use plan, which calls for more density and less sprawl in the coming decades, took a beating from all sides Tuesday as members of the public, community groups and business interests made submissions to elected officials on a city committee.

The official land-use plan was developed in conjunction with the city’s new rapid-transit network. The idea is to build a more compact city built around public transit that will see more use of existing infrastructure, which would save the municipal government money and cut the city’s environmental impact.

Still, the plan calls for 800 hectares of vacant land connected to existing suburbs to be designated for new single-family homes, along with higher population and employment densities everywhere, especially inside the Greenbelt, to limit sprawl.

City staff say that during the development of the plan, which governs what can be built where, they tried to balance several interests. But if they were looking for consensus, they didn’t get it Tuesday, and city council will now have to sort out what to do when final debates on the plan take place later this year.

In their submissions, the local homebuilders’ association said the plan represents an unprecedented exercise in social engineering doomed to failure that needs to be rethought to give them more green fields to develop into single-family homes.

Christina Heydorn of Malone Given Parsons Ltd., speaking on behalf of the association, said the density targets in the plan can’t be reached for a number of reasons.

These included a submission that there simply isn’t enough land in existing areas to build the residential and commercial structures needed to meet the density targets.

The city plan is for 40 per cent of all new construction to happen in existing areas, mainly within the greenbelt, by 2031. The current rate is 26 per cent.

Heydorn said a continued 26-per-cent target is more realistic and the plan to limit suburban sprawl to 800 hectares needs to be reconsidered.

She said because the city will grow and people and jobs can’t be accommodated in existing areas, the city needs to expand the urban boundary by more than 2,000 hectares.

More than 65 groups, businesses and individuals signed up to speak to the committee. City planning staff are to provide responses to each submission. This information is to be available in early May when the committee is scheduled to debate motions to change the plan. Final council debates on the plan come after that.

Many presenters argued that the city should set even higher density targets, allow less or no land for suburban expansion, and rethink its growth projections.

Several of these groups and individuals noted Montreal is geographically smaller than the part of Ottawa inside the Greenbelt, but has a million more people living in it. They also noted a recent city study shows the municipality spends more providing city services like snowplowing, garbage collection, road maintenance, sewers and water to each residence in the suburbs than it collects in property taxes. On the flip side, the city charges about $1,000 more per year to each residence inside the Greenbelt than the people who live in them consume in city services.

“To say that this plan is one step forward and two steps back would be an understatement,” said Trevor Haché of Ecology Ottawa.

Haché urged the city to allow no suburban expansion. But planning committee chair Peter Hume said provincial policy guidelines require some land be put aside for this purpose, and that municipal leaders didn’t want a repeat of the 2003 decision to not allow any suburban expansion, which ended in the city’s losing an expensive legal battle.

Still, Dr. Judy Makin made an impassioned plea for the city to limit sprawl. She said she’s worries that the developers’ lobbying campaign will be too much for councillors to withstand, and urged elected officials to effect the changes contained in the heart of the plan that are supposed to result in a more financially and environmentally sustainable city.

“It’s time for clear thinking,” she said. “It’s time to draw a line in the sand, and stop what we’ve been doing.”

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen