Ideas/Visions for Ottawa, Canada's Capital

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Winter carnivals are withering almost everywhere in Canada, even the cities and towns and rural areas that have more reliably wintery winters than Ottawa.

Depending on the pandemic situation in the coming winter, this could be an excuse to re-invent them as a way to get people doing activities outside, in a safe and social way, that helps with both commerce and pandemic mitigation.

If the bar and restaurant industry wants to make it through to a vaccine or whatever else will get us back to "normal", they have to be considering ways of winterizing their industry, and quick.

There are all good points, though on the topic of winter carnivals there are cities around the world whose winters aren't as cold or snowy as Ottawa's and still have winter festivals. A lot of them are melt-proofed or aren't even dependent on cold and snow at all. I think the future for Winterlude lies in a reorientation towards something of that nature.

In that, if it's cold, we're good. And if it's mild, we're good too.

I know that the government and organizers have been thinking about this already, but there doesn't appear to be much in the way of forward-looking changes thus far.

[ssiguy]

I do agree that Ottawa could {and should} build a major downtown plaza/square so the city has a true meeting place. They can be wonderful places that unite a city and and be a centre for the arts, culture, festivals, and events. As European cities clearly show, great downtown public square/plazas/parks can truly be "the heart" of a city.

I think it would do wonders for Ottawa and most of our cities where the vast majority of them have none.

[Catenary]

Originally Posted by JHikka

Agreed. Ottawa has a ton of parks and adding more of them won't make the city more 'exciting'. People don't move to cities for parks.

If I talk to someone about moving to Ottawa, parks almost always comes up. The impact of the canal and rivers and green space along them should not be understated.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Catenary

If I talk to someone about moving to Ottawa, parks almost always comes up. The impact of the canal and rivers and green space along them should not be understated.

Which is great and which means we don't need more parks. Ottawa's great in that is already has a good stable of greenspace but to think that adding more will create more desire for people to move here is probably wrong. Ottawa lacks fun indoor things to do, and part of this is due to the people who make up the majority of Ottawa's current population.

For me, if people are asking about moving to a city they're generally asking about job opportunities, affordability, and nearby amenities. Parks and greenspace may be in that conversation but it's hardly ever, if ever, the driving factor. Ottawa has enough greenspace as is.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

The two biggest "civic" parks in central Ottawa (not even counting the Parliamentary lawn) are Major's Hill and Confederation... both of which are comparable in size, if not larger than, urban places like Dorchester Square - Place du Canada in Montreal, or Nathan Phillips Square in Toronto.

If anything, larger-sized parks in a central setting only serve to deaden the urban fabric, especially considering that the main way of mitigating that effect - avoiding "vacuums" on the edges - is a subject of shock and horror in Ottawa.



Kingston's large park is comparable in size to the large ones in central Ottawa. Waterloo's has waterside functions that in Ottawa are served by the very precious and nationally-significant strips of grass along the canal and riverbanks.

A square or small park is nice but it supports limited activity. Downtown parks in Waterloo, Kingston, New York, Montreal, Vancouver, Moscow, support a range of activities - they don’t close for two weeks for the Jazz Festival.

[Aylmer]

Ottawa can do a much better job of improving our existing green spaces. All too often, they're tragically disconnected from their surroundings.

Think of Confederation: when you really think about it, it's severed on all sides by roads. Getting to the park means crossing at minimum 5 lanes of 50-70 km/h traffic. Even towards the canal, it has basically no waterfront edge - it just sorta peters out at the driveway with only a sad little ramp leading even near the canal. And forget about any links to the NAC.

Confederation Park could be so much more than it is now. Imagine an NAC entrance to the north crossing under Mackenzie King - In a post-covid world, the NAC could even use the park for outdoor concerts and performances. To the west, Elgin can be tamed to allow for easy crossing. To the south, Laurier can be tamed to allow Confederation, Marion Dewar, and Cartier Square to act as one single Central Park. To the east, remove the QED stub and allow the park to slope towards an waterfront edge along the canal.

Many of our parks and green spaces are like this. We'll find that we don't actually want for quantity - we're lacking quality. Thankfully, it's a lot easier to calm traffic on surrounding streets than it is to demolish a downtown block for a new park.

[lrt's friend]

Any city that has a lively downtown has made it easily accessible by public transit.

I remember visiting Gothenburg Sweden, not a huge city, but transit including regional trains all fed into downtown. The result was that downtown was full of people and full of business.

You can also look at cities like Toronto, Montreal and New York. Transit lines feed in from all over.

We kid ourselves in thinking that a single rail line will accomplish this. As long as we think one rail line is enough, business will continue to be drained to the bland suburbs and the auto culture will be the only way forward to support it.

If we want downtown to be the heart-throb of our city, we need to build the infrastructure to support it, and then build amenities downtown.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by FutureWickedCity

A few ideas..

More clubs/music venues for sure. Maybe some on the top floors of high rise ok buildings.

One thing I would love to see is a winter garden, a big indoor park with a greenhouse roof. The roof of Rideau Centre would be ideal. A place to escape the winter.

If DND fully withdraws from their downtown former HQ, I would love to see that site transformed into a huge public space akin to the RA center but with other amenities and possibly residential as well.

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Ottawa can do a much better job of improving our existing green spaces. All too often, they're tragically disconnected from their surroundings.

Think of Confederation: when you really think about it, it's severed on all sides by roads. Getting to the park means crossing at minimum 5 lanes of 50-70 km/h traffic. Even towards the canal, it has basically no waterfront edge - it just sorta peters out at the driveway with only a sad little ramp leading even near the canal. And forget about any links to the NAC.

Confederation Park could be so much more than it is now. Imagine an NAC entrance to the north crossing under Mackenzie King - In a post-covid world, the NAC could even use the park for outdoor concerts and performances. To the west, Elgin can be tamed to allow for easy crossing. To the south, Laurier can be tamed to allow Confederation, Marion Dewar, and Cartier Square to act as one single Central Park. To the east, remove the QED stub and allow the park to slope towards an waterfront edge along the canal.

Many of our parks and green spaces are like this. We'll find that we don't actually want for quantity - we're lacking quality. Thankfully, it's a lot easier to calm traffic on surrounding streets than it is to demolish a downtown block for a new park.

Re Confederation Square/Park, in my experience, traffic has been at 0km/h when I’ve crossed the street to get to either ....

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

I do agree that Ottawa could {and should} build a major downtown plaza/square so the city has a true meeting place.

Parliament Hill does this quite well. Work with the NCC to better integrate that space into the city's cultural life.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

Any city that has a lively downtown has made it easily accessible by public transit.

That's a byproduct of demand to access the core, not the cause of a lively downtown. Lively downtowns are usually a product of walkable cores with lots of amenities. Not just transit to get there.

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

We kid ourselves in thinking that a single rail line will accomplish this. As long as we think one rail line is enough, business will continue to be drained to the bland suburbs and the auto culture will be the only way forward to support it.

You could build a hundred rail lines to the downtown core and it won't make it more lively without giving people an actual reason to go downtown.

[kwoldtimer]

Why has Major's Hill Park meritted so little comment? Not large, but not exactly small either (12 acres), and, imo, one of Canada's most beaufiful urban parks, although it could do with a fountain. It's already well used and will be even better/larger, once the NCC links it to the refurbished Nepean Point. I would have said as well that it's about as central as one gets in this town.

By the way, it's a great time to go to the Tavern on the Hill - no crowds!

[lrt's friend]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Parliament Hill does this quite well. Work with the NCC to better integrate that space into the city's cultural life.



That's a byproduct of demand to access the core, not the cause of a lively downtown. Lively downtowns are usually a product of walkable cores with lots of amenities. Not just transit to get there.



You could build a hundred rail lines to the downtown core and it won't make it more lively without giving people an actual reason to go downtown.

The two go hand and hand. Private business will happily open new stores, clubs and restaurants if more people came downtown. It has to be easy to get there for people to come. A bit of a chicken and egg situation for sure, but without good transport, people cannot come. And I am not saying it has to be rail lines.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

The two go hand and hand. Private business will happily open new stores, clubs and restaurants if more people came downtown. It has to be easy to get there for people to come. A bit of a chicken and egg situation for sure, but without good transport, people cannot come. And I am not saying it has to be rail lines.

Name one city where the night life came after the transit, and it was totally bland before. I'd rather listen to the urban planners who regularly say that having active centres is largely a function of having residents in those centres. And Ottawa, is now doing substantially better on that front. Develop Lebreton Flats and Zibi and all the other developments on the core and businesses downtown won't need any suburbanite traffic to sustain them.

[acottawa]

I am not sure there are that many cities were where adults from distant suburbs come to the city centre for nightlife, restaurants, etc. Places that are vibrant tend to be vibrant with locals due to very high population densities (Paris, New York), vibrant with tourists/visitors (Rome, Amsterdam) or have a strong socializing with coworkers/clients after work culture (London, pretty much any city in East Asia).

Moscow comes to mind, but I think that is because the suburbs are so awful (at least relatively speaking.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Aylmer

Confederation Park could be so much more than it is now. Imagine an NAC entrance to the north crossing under Mackenzie King - In a post-covid world, the NAC could even use the park for outdoor concerts and performances. To the west, Elgin can be tamed to allow for easy crossing. To the south, Laurier can be tamed to allow Confederation, Marion Dewar, and Cartier Square to act as one single Central Park. To the east, remove the QED stub and allow the park to slope towards an waterfront edge along the canal.

That's something I've though of before. Adding an entrance to the NAC from under the bridge into Confederation Park would provide pedestrians a way to get around while avoiding streets. They could also integrate a restaurant under the bridge with a patio instead of having a temporary pop-up bistro every year. This would be a great way to animate the park. A small stage could be added for those outdoor performances you propose.

The NCC has an old plan to shut-down the west fork of Confederation Square, one that the STO seem to be promoting as part of their planned third station (should Wellington be chosen). That would give us an opportunity to narrow Elgin's car RoW for a more pedestrian and cyclist friendly environment.

I'm also a fan of the idea of removing Queen E. Drive north of Laurier, and dare I say, maybe all of it?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by acottawa

I am not sure there are that many cities were where adults from distant suburbs come to the city centre for nightlife, restaurants, etc. Places that are vibrant tend to be vibrant with locals due to very high population densities (Paris, New York), vibrant with tourists/visitors (Rome, Amsterdam) or have a strong socializing with coworkers/clients after work culture (London, pretty much any city in East Asia).

Moscow comes to mind, but I think that is because the suburbs are so awful (at least relatively speaking.

Exactly. lrt's friend is trying to co-opt the issue to push for more transit to the burbs. Zero evidence that this has livened up downtowns anywhere else. The liveliest cities are always the ones where lots of people live in the core. And where they mostly walk about the core. Ottawa is so-so on both counts.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Exactly. let's friend is trying to co-opt the issue to push for more transit to the burbs. Zero evidence that this has livened up downtowns anywhere else. The liveliest cities are always the ones where lots of people live in the core. And where they mostly walk about the core. Ottawa is so-so on both counts.

I'd argue that transit does make a difference. With a bus-based system, the downtown won't attract any suburbanites or even urban dwellers from outside of the downtown. However, with a rail-based system with decent frequencies, day and night, it makes it far easier for anyone to go (or stay after work) downtown for a good meal or a show before returning home.

The Confederation Line, despite its problems, did make a difference. We can see that just with the Trillium ridership's significant rise in Q4 2019. The STO tram also has the potential to increase patronage for Downtown Ottawa, Vieux-Hull and Aylmer. If we built a Bank subway, Downtown and Lansdowne would see a significant bump in annual visitors.

Montreal is a great example of how a robust urban subway system can make a city much livelier. If it wasn't for the Métro, people would mostly stick to their neighborhoods, but the system contributes to the flow of people all around the area. It also contributes from people saying they are from Montréal instead of that suburb next door.

Don't get me wrong, residential density is a far greater tool to liven up a city centre. Victoria is an excellent example of that. We just can't discredit the role of transit in a city with a large suburban population.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Don't get me wrong, residential density is a far greater tool to liven up a city centre.

Far more effective, far cheaper (to the taxpayer) and far more timely. In the time that it takes to get LRT to Stittsville, how many condos do you think can be built in the core?

Originally Posted by J.OT13

We just can't discredit the role of transit in a city with a large suburban population.

Yes we can. There's no real evidence that building rail transit to the burbs substantially increases foot traffic in the core. You're citing transit ridership numbers. That doesn't actually say much for actual increases in activity in the core. We don't know if those numbers reflect growth in trips to the core or simply change in modal share. We don't even know how much of that ridership is bound for the core or how those numbers have grown.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

If we built a Bank subway, Downtown and Lansdowne would see a significant bump in annual visitors.

Define "significant". A bump? Sure. I buy that. "Significant"? Debatable. Especially for the downtown core as a whole. Mostly, what you'd see is a diversion of riders from the Trillium Line and existing bus services. And whether that is worth $250-400M/km in construction costs is very much debatable.

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Montreal is a great example of how a robust urban subway system can make a city much livelier.

You are completely ignoring how much of Montreal lives in the city and the core. And that was there long before expansion of the Metro. Also, Montreal doesn't build subway lines out to subdivisions either. Neither do all those great cities people want to compare to.

There's a straight up correlation between how dense an area or city is and how lively it is. And the simple fact is that Ottawa is not very dense as a city. Its downtown core isn't dense for a city centre. And transit based sprawl wouldn't help any of this. More than helping to get downtown foot traffic, LRT to Stittsville would simply enable more people to live in Carp. Just look at what's happening in Rockland now.

[OTSkyline]

In my opinion, and it's been stated before, Ottawa has a lot of parks and green space, it's just most of them are empty and not animated. The canal, parliament lawn, Major Hill's Park, I love all of these areas but there is very little benches, tables, art, fountains, splash pads, basketball/tennis courts, etc.. There's nothing to make you want to go there or stay there too long (you need to sit on the grass or the curb to rest), it's not necessarily inviting.

I think out downtown is also not very dense in terms of population, the CBD is very office-focused and yes there's 1 or 2 condo towers going up every year but it will take years before there's a strong base of residents living in these areas year-round.

Finally, I also think it's a culture thing... I find a lot of Ottawa residents live in the suburbs and stay in the suburbs. Many rarely drive downtown or to central parks to spend an evening or afternoon on the weekend. Most seem to want to stay home and/or visit their local Boston Pizza on Innes instead. To some degree this is a North American thing (vs Europeans which are far more likely to visit city centers and even ... gasp... stay downtown an hour or two after work to have a drink with friends, then hop on the first 94 home as soon as they can). In that regards I find Montreal/Toronto are better at this.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Far more effective, far cheaper (to the taxpayer) and far more timely. In the time that it takes to get LRT to Stittsville, how many condos do you think can be built in the core?

Yes we can. There's no real evidence that building rail transit to the burbs substantially increases foot traffic in the core. You're citing transit ridership numbers. That doesn't actually say much for actual increases in activity in the core. We don't know if those numbers reflect growth in trips to the core or simply change in modal share. We don't even know how much of that ridership is bound for the core or how those numbers have grown.

Define "significant". A bump? Sure. I buy that. "Significant"? Debatable. Especially for the downtown core as a whole. Mostly, what you'd see is a diversion of riders from the Trillium Line and existing bus services. And whether that is worth $250-400M/km in construction costs is very much debatable.

You are completely ignoring how much of Montreal lives in the city and the core. And that was there long before expansion of the Metro. Also, Montreal doesn't build subway lines out to subdivisions either. Neither do all those great cities people want to compare to.

There's a straight up correlation between how dense an area or city is and how lively it is. And the simple fact is that Ottawa is not very dense as a city. Its downtown core isn't dense for a city centre. And transit based sprawl wouldn't help any of this. More than helping to get downtown foot traffic, LRT to Stittsville would simply enable more people to live in Carp. Just look at what's happening in Rockland now.

Not sure LRT's Friend or myself are advocating for more rail to the burbs. Stage 2 is a good project as it serves some dense areas and/or areas with plenty of TOD proposals (Carling, Gladstone along Trillium, Wellington West, Westboro, Ambleside, Lincoln Fields, Bayshore on Confederation). Bank Street and Rideau/Montreal are both much more worthwhile than Stittsville and Barrhaven. Centretown, Rideau and Vanier are the densest areas in Ottawa. The Glebe and old Ottawa South are also far denser than the suburbs.

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

In my opinion, and it's been stated before, Ottawa has a lot of parks and green space, it's just most of them are empty and not animated. The canal, parliament lawn, Major Hill's Park, I love all of these areas but there is very little benches, tables, art, fountains, splash pads, basketball/tennis courts, etc.. There's nothing to make you want to go there or stay there too long (you need to sit on the grass or the curb to rest), it's not necessarily inviting.

I think out downtown is also not very dense in terms of population, the CBD is very office-focused and yes there's 1 or 2 condo towers going up every year but it will take years before there's a strong base of residents living in these areas year-round.

Finally, I also think it's a culture thing... I find a lot of Ottawa residents live in the suburbs and stay in the suburbs. Many rarely drive downtown or to central parks to spend an evening or afternoon on the weekend. Most seem to want to stay home and/or visit their local Boston Pizza on Innes instead. To some degree this is a North American thing (vs Europeans which are far more likely to visit city centers and even ... gasp... stay downtown an hour or two after work to have a drink with friends, then hop on the first 94 home as soon as they can). In that regards I find Montreal/Toronto are better at this.

I agree our parks need more than just trees and grass. I'd love to see more water features, chess tables, food options, buskers (and not necessarily professional buskers with speakers and a licence).

Though the CBD isn't very dense, the areas surrounding the CBD are. Centretown, the Escarpment District, Rideau-ByWard. Our traditional main streets also have quite a lot of density with mid-rise residential buildings. Within the inner area alone (bounded by Trillium, Ottawa Rideau, Rideau River), we have around 24+ residential towers going up at the moment.

Part of the reason Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver are better at keeping people around after work is good transit. Same goes for Europe.

I'd say density is the most important part. We've been doing very well with this over the last two decades and getting even better at it now. Next is points of interest. We have a lot to offer, but we still have a lot of work to do. Next is transit. Stage 1 and 2 will help, Stage 3 not so much, which is why a shift to urban transit should be prioritized.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Part of the reason Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver are better at keeping people around after work is good transit. Same goes for Europe.

I think reliable, frequent transit is a big part of that. It's much easier to stay downtown later when you know that you can head down to the metro and get on a train in 5 minutes. An express bus network creates a big incentive to leave immediately. The other part is terrible commutes. At least when I worked in Toronto, suburbanites would regularly stay downtown late to avoid leaving in rush hour, either on transit or by car.

Montreal and to a lesser extent, Toronto, do a better job of getting good restaurants and entertainment venues directly in the business districts. Ottawa has more of an office monoculture, although that is starting to change with places like Queen St. Fare. We need more of that. Easy access to food and entertainment encourages people to stay, especially when it's -25 outside.