DOCSLIB.ORG

Capital Urban Lands Plan and Parkways Policy Review

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Capital Urban Lands Plan and Parkways Policy Review Capital Urban Lands Plan and Parkways Policy Review Public Consultation Report 1 HIGHLIGHTS Highlights In March 2014, the National Capital Commission (NCC) held public consultations on the Capital Urban Lands Plan and Parkways Policy to hear what people had to say about our national capital’s urban lands and parkways. A few highlights from these consultations are as follows: • A Public Advisory Committee met to provide high-level input. • Two workshops were held with members of the public in Ottawa and Gatineau, attended by 100 participants. • The online questionnaire had over 600 respondents. • Over 1,400 comments were provided. • Six submissions were received from interest groups and community associations. • Fourteen email submissions were received from members of the public. Top 10 comments 1. Keep it green and add more green spaces. 2. Animate the space and have year-round activities. 3. Build facilities (washrooms, water fountains, boat launches, restaurants, and so on). 4. Work with communities. 5. Include heritage conservation. 6. Integrate federal employment areas with their surroundings. 7. Keep consulting — but in plain language! 8. Provide access to the waterfront. 9. Think of pedestrians and cyclists year-round. 10. Work with the cities. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Highlights ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 I. Capital Urban Lands Plan and the Parkways Policy Review ........................................................................ 5 II. Consultation Process .................................................................................................................................................... 6 III. Capital Urban Lands: Vision Statement ................................................................................................................ 7 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK .............................................................................................................................................. 7 INTEREST GROUP SUBMISSIONS ............................................................................................................................ 7 EMAILS FROM THE PUBLIC ....................................................................................................................................... 8 NCC RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................................................... 8 IV. Planning Concept: Roles and Goals.......................................................................................................................... 9 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK .............................................................................................................................................. 9 ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE FEEDBACK ................................................................................................................ 10 EMAILS FROM THE PUBLIC ..................................................................................................................................... 12 NCC RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................................................. 12 V. Capital Enhancement Efforts................................................................................................................................... 13 NCC RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................................................. 14 VI. Planning Concept: General Policies ....................................................................................................................... 14 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK ............................................................................................................................................ 14 ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE FEEDBACK ................................................................................................................ 14 INTEREST GROUP SUBMISSIONS .......................................................................................................................... 15 EMAILS FROM THE PUBLIC ..................................................................................................................................... 15 NCC RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................................................. 16 VII. Capital Realm ................................................................................................................................................................. 16 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK ............................................................................................................................................ 16 INTEREST GROUP SUBMISSIONS .......................................................................................................................... 17 NCC RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................................................. 17 VIII. Land Designations ....................................................................................................................................................... 17 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK ............................................................................................................................................ 18 ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE FEEDBACK ................................................................................................................ 18 EMAILS FROM THE PUBLIC ..................................................................................................................................... 22 NCC RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................................................. 22 IX. Parkways Policy: Vision ............................................................................................................................................ 22 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK ............................................................................................................................................ 23 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE FEEDBACK ................................................................................................................ 23 INTEREST GROUP SUBMISSIONS .......................................................................................................................... 25 EMAILS FROM THE PUBLIC ..................................................................................................................................... 25 NCC RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................................................. 26 X. Parkways Policy: Directions and Guidelines .................................................................................................... 26 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK ............................................................................................................................................ 27 INTEREST GROUP SUBMISSIONS .......................................................................................................................... 27 EMAILS FROM THE PUBLIC ..................................................................................................................................... 28 NCC RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................................................. 28 XI. Parkways Policy: Categories and Characteristics ............................................................................................ 28 WORKSHOP FEEDBACK............................................................................................................................................. 28 ONLINE QUESTIONNAIRE FEEDBACK ................................................................................................................ 29 INTEREST GROUP SUBMISSIONS .......................................................................................................................... 29 EMAILS FROM THE PUBLIC ..................................................................................................................................... 30 NCC RESPONSE ............................................................................................................................................................. 30 Next Steps ................................................................................................................................................................................. 31 Conclusion...................................................................................................................................................................................31 Appendix A: Public Advisory Committee Members............................................................................................32 Appendix B: Public Advisory Committee Meeting Notes, March 19, 2014 ............................................... 33 Date and Location .......................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Clemow-Monkland Driveway and Linden Terrace Heritage Conservation District Plan
    DRAFT DECEMBER 9, 2019 CLEMOW-MONKLAND DRIVEWAY AND LINDEN TERRACE HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT PLAN City of Ottawa Planning, Infrastructure and Economic Development ottawa.ca/clemow2 December 2019 CONTENTS Part A: HCD Overview ...............................................................................................................1 I. PURPOSE OF THE PLAN .............................................................................................................................1 II. HOW TO READ THE PLAN .........................................................................................................................2 1.0 Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................3 1.1 Rationale for Designation: Summary of Findings from the HCD Study .................................................................3 2.0 Policy Framework ..................................................................................................................................3 Ontario Heritage Act ............................................................................................................................................3 Provincial Policy Statement, 2014 ........................................................................................................................4 City of Ottawa Official Plan .................................................................................................................................4
    [Show full text]
  • Urban and Historic Context
    Architectural Rejuvenation Project URBAN AND HISTORIC CONTEXT Barry Padolsky Associates Inc., Architects, Urban Design and Heritage Consultants February 13, 2015 Aerial view of National Arts Centre (2010) TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction..................................................................................................................................2 Urban and Historic Context........................................................................................................2 . The Holt/Bennett Plan ................................................................................................................4 The Gréber Plan .........................................................................................................................6 The Parkin Plan ...........................................................................................................................8 Architecture and National Identity: the Centennial Projects .......................................................9 NAC: The Architectural Challenge ............................................................................................10 The Architectural Response .....................................................................................................13 Architectural Style: Polite “Brutalism” ......................................................................................16 Re-inventing “Brutalism”..........................................................................................................17 NCC Canada’s
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation Issues a Brief Overview of Transportation Issues Which Are of Potential Interest to Residents of Sandy Hill and Where to Go for More Information
    Transportation Issues A brief overview of transportation issues which are of potential interest to residents of Sandy Hill and where to go for more information. Comments or questions on any of the issue discussed below can be directed to [email protected] Action Sandy Hill participates as a member in the City Centre Coalition (CCC). The CCC consists of 13 different downtown citizen‟s groups and focuses on supporting community-oriented transportation planning that emphasizes walking, cycling, and transit. The CCC opposes road construction and expansion intended to accommodate peak-hour car demand particularly for projects within the greenbelt or which are intended to increase the peak hour capacity leading to the urban core. Such roads only induce environmentally and community-destructive car use. The CCC maintains a website which is an excellent resource for tracking ongoing transportation planning reports and activities in the City and providing a record of ongoing CCC activities. www.ccc-ottawa.ca John Verbaas – Jun 2012 B. Ottawa-wide Issues with Sandy Hill Implications New Ottawa River Crossing Study (East End Bridge) Inter-Provincial Transit Study Alta Vista Corridor (AVC) Queensway Expansion to 8 Lanes East of Kent Street Ottawa LRT Rapid Transit (Downtown Ottawa Transit Tunnel - DOTT) Lansdowne Park Re-development (Lansdowne Partnership Plan) Transportation Master Plan 2008 Rideau/Sussex/Colonel-By Intersection Enhancement Study Other Useful Links New Ottawa River Crossing Study (East End Bridge) The NCC together with the Ontario and Quebec Ministries of Transport have commissioned a series studies to determine the best possible location for a new crossing of the Ottawa River.
    [Show full text]
  • [email protected]; [email protected]
    April 20, 2016 VIA Email: [email protected]; [email protected] Dear Minister McKenna and Minister Joly, We write to you today to advocate for increased access to the Rideau Canal for canoers and kayakers in central Ottawa. Parks Canada currently provides docks at the downtown Ottawa locks, at the Hartwell Locks (near Carleton University), and at Dow’s Lake. We feel that the addition of docks between downtown and Dow’s Lake would greatly increase the accessibility of the canal in the summer. It would provide more opportunities for Ottawa residents and tourists to enjoy paddling through an urban centre and to make use of this UNESCO heritage site. In addition, by facilitating the use of non-motorized watercraft, environmentally-sustainable and healthy leisure activities would be promoted. We are interested in collaborating with Parks Canada and the National Capital Commission on a pilot project that would see two additional launching points for a summer - one on each side of the canal in the Glebe and Old Ottawa East. On the west (Glebe) side, we would recommend Patterson Creek or at Fifth Avenue (just south of the Canal Ritz restaurant). (This second location could also be useful for those wanting to visit the revitalized Lansdowne Park.) On the east (Old Ottawa East) side, we would recommend a dock at Clegg, Herridge or Hazel. There would be a floating dock in each location to facilitate safe boat launches. After the summer, we would recommend an evaluation of the project and consideration as to whether it would be possible to establish more launching points in future years.
    [Show full text]
  • Phase II: Clemow Estate Heritage Study: Area Analysis and Recommendations
    Phase II: Clemow Estate Heritage Study: area analysis and recommendations 1 Phase II Clemow Estate Heritage Conservation District Study – Area Analysis and Recommendations 1.0 Background In 2004, Ottawa’s City Council recommended undertaking a multi-phased Heritage Conservation Study of three areas of the Glebe surrounding Central Park. The intention was to provide an overall understanding of the history and cultural heritage character of the area and, to determine if a Heritage Conservation District would be an appropriate planning tool to recognize and protect the area by managing change over time. In 2011, the first phase of the study resulted in the designation of the Clemow Estate East Heritage Conservation District under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. For Phase II, Council’s original direction was to study the properties adjacent to Linden Terrace and Patterson Creek to the Rideau Canal. However, the research for Phase I indicated that the original Clemow Estate also included the western section of Clemow Avenue from Bronson Avenue to Bank Street. The research also showed that there was a historical and physical association between Clemow and Monkland Avenues, as part of Ottawa’s parkway and driveway network. Accordingly, the study area that was part of the original terms of reference was amended to include Monkland Avenue. 2.0 Description of the Study Area The Phase II study area includes three streets in the Glebe neighborhood: Clemow Avenue between Bronson Avenue and Bank Street, Monkland Avenue and Linden Terrace between O’Connor Street and the Rideau Canal. The area also includes Patterson Creek and its associated park land.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainability & Storm Water Management the Other Perspective Phasing Living Machine
    SUSTAINABILITY & STORM WATER MANAGEMENT FLOOD CONTROL MARSH PERMANENT POOL Example of a wetland in Jeifang park, Wuhan, China. Typical section of an extended detention wetland. The canal once penetrated into the site and the proposed wetland is created as a trace of this past. Wetlands are a man- made natural filtration system that can manage the surface water of a site. The water is sufficiently purified for healthy fish species and people can fish out of its final basin. Wetlands are known for their very diverse ecologies and can be used as a very effective educational tool as well as an integral element of the park experience. PHASING LIVING MACHINE Wastewater can be processed within a greenhouse Lansdowne park can be constructed over three main phases, each spaced apart in order to structure with vegetative technologies known as ‘Living secure financing over time. The park functions very well after Phase I and if the other phases Machines’ . The Living Machine would serve as a great were not to be constructed, it would still be a complete and successful project. option for the urban mixed use area north of the sta- dium. These systems mimic natural treatment processes, Phase I recreating a functional ecology within a system of plant- - The immediate need for Lansdowne’s Front-Lawn is to transform it from a parking lot to ed water tanks. Due to their visibility and the integra- a fully functional park. A clear continuity from the Rideau Canal, through the Parks Canada tion of various plant, crustacean and even fish species and NCC lands is achieved even without moving the Queen Elizabeth Driveway and con- into the treatment chain, the demonstration potential of structing the bridge.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Portraits Book
    HH Beechwood is proud to be The National Cemetery of Canada and a National Historic Site Life Celebrations ♦ Memorial Services ♦ Funerals ♦ Catered Receptions ♦ Cremations ♦ Urn & Casket Burials ♦ Monuments Beechwood operates on a not-for-profit basis and is not publicly funded. It is unique within the Ottawa community. In choosing Beechwood, many people take comfort in knowing that all funds are used for the maintenance, en- hancement and preservation of this National Historic Site. www.beechwoodottawa.ca 2017- v6 Published by Beechwood, Funeral, Cemetery & Cremation Services Ottawa, ON For all information requests please contact Beechwood, Funeral, Cemetery and Cremation Services 280 Beechwood Avenue, Ottawa ON K1L8A6 24 HOUR ASSISTANCE 613-741-9530 • Toll Free 866-990-9530 • FAX 613-741-8584 [email protected] The contents of this book may be used with the written permission of Beechwood, Funeral, Cemetery & Cremation Services www.beechwoodottawa.ca Owned by The Beechwood Cemetery Foundation and operated by The Beechwood Cemetery Company eechwood, established in 1873, is recognized as one of the most beautiful and historic cemeteries in Canada. It is the final resting place for over 75,000 Canadians from all walks of life, including im- portant politicians such as Governor General Ramon Hnatyshyn and Prime Minister Sir Robert Bor- den, Canadian Forces Veterans, War Dead, RCMP members and everyday Canadian heroes: our families and our loved ones. In late 1980s, Beechwood began producing a small booklet containing brief profiles for several dozen of the more significant and well-known individuals buried here. Since then, the cemetery has grown in national significance and importance, first by becoming the home of the National Military Cemetery of the Canadian Forces in 2001, being recognized as a National Historic Site in 2002 and finally by becoming the home of the RCMP National Memorial Cemetery in 2004.
    [Show full text]
  • No. 2020-P158 to Board of Directors Date 2020-10-06
    Public Submission No. 2020-P158 To Board of Directors For DECISION Date 2020-10-06 Subject/Title Capital Pathway Strategic Plan Summary • To obtain approval of the Board of Directors for the Capital Pathway Strategic Plan. Risk Summary • Limited funding and resources may impact the NCC’s ability to implement the Plan’s recommendations. Recommendation • That the Capital Pathway Strategic Plan be approved pursuant to Section 10 of the National Capital Act. • That the implementation of the Plan be delegated to the Capital Stewardship and Capital Planning Branches, in accordance with their respective mandates. • That applicable projects proposed to implement the Capital Pathway Strategic Plan be reviewed under Section 12 of the National Capital Act and obtain Federal Land Use Approval. Submitted by: Submitted by: Pierre Vaillancourt, A/Vice president, Capital Planning Anne Ménard, Vice president, Capital Stewardship__ Name Name ___________________________________________ __________________________________________ Signature Signature Submission: 2020-P158 Page 1 of 5 Public Submission 1. Strategic Priorities • 2020/21-2024/25 Corporate Plan: o Strategic Direction: Contribute to a thriving, connected and sustainable National Capital Region that inspires Canadians through the planning, development and improvement of the NCC’s assets. o Priority 4: Develop and communicate land use plans and provide timely and effective coordination of federal land use and design in the National Capital Region. • The Plan for Canada’s Capital (2017-2067) – Chapters 4 and 5. • Core Area Sector Plan (2005); Capital Urban Lands Plan (2015); Greenbelt Master Plan (2013); Gatineau Park Master Plan (2005 and forthcoming draft 2020); Ottawa River South Shore Riverfront Park Plan (2018); and Ottawa River North Shore Parklands Plan (2018).
    [Show full text]
  • Protected / Public
    Public document Submission No.: 2017-P06e To: Board of Directors For: DECISION Date : 2017-04-05/06 1. TITLE The Ottawa Hospital Land Use and Transaction Approvals (PSPC, AAFC, NCC) 2. PURPOSE OF THE SUBMISSION • To seek approval to transfer federal NILM land from National Capital Commission (NCC) and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) to Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC); • To permit PSPC to lease NILM land to The Ottawa Hospital (TOH) for a long term, for the purpose of constructing a new regional health facility. 3. AUTHORITY National Capital Act, Sections 12 and 12.1 4. RECOMMENDATIONS In order to advance the Federal Approval for the use and long term lease of National Interest Land Mass (NILM) located at the Sir John Carling site to The Ottawa Hospital (TOH): • That Federal transaction approval be granted for the transfer of National Capital Commission (NCC) and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) NILM lands to Public Services and Procurement Canada (PSPC); • That Federal Land Use and Transaction approval be granted to PSPC to enter into a long term ground lease with The Ottawa Hospital for the lands required for the new health facility, with conditions as identified in the federal approval document in Appendix 3, and; • That the signature of the Federal Land Use and Transaction Approval document in Appendix 3 be delegated to the Executive Director, Capital Planning Branch. 5. BACKGROUND Following the National Capital Commission’s 2016 site selection review process of federal lands within the urban area of the City of Ottawa, on December 2, 2016, the Minister of Canadian Heritage requested that federal government undertake the Submission: 2017-P06e Page 1 of 4 Public document Submission necessary preparations to make the Carling Avenue (East) site, commonly referred to as the Sir John Carling site, available as the future location of the new Civic Campus of The Ottawa Hospital (TOH).
    [Show full text]
  • Request for a Standing Offer Agreement (Rfso) Maintenance & Conservation of Ncc Cultural Assets National Capital Commission (Ncc) Tender File # Nr209
    REQUEST FOR A STANDING OFFER AGREEMENT (RFSO) MAINTENANCE & CONSERVATION OF NCC CULTURAL ASSETS NATIONAL CAPITAL COMMISSION (NCC) TENDER FILE # NR209 REQUEST FOR A STANDING OFFER (RFSO) ADDRESS ENQUIRIES TO: BID DEADLINE: Nathalie Rheault, Sr. Contract Officer [email protected] June 9, 2021 at 3:00pm EDT [email protected] RETURN TO: Submit your proposal, price, including this Subject line of e-mails must make cover page and return to: reference to the NCC tender number: Paper copy and faxes are no longer accepted. All bids NR209 Maintenance & Conservation of must be forwarded to this email address only. Non- compliance with this requirement will result in NCC Cultural Assets disqualification of your tender. Note: the email attachment size is set at a maximum of 150 MB. This page is to be dated, signed and returned with your proposal, thereby acknowledging having read, understood and accepted the Terms of Reference of this RFSO which includes all other attachments referred to herein. We hereby OFFER to sell and/or supply to the National Capital Commission upon the terms and conditions set out herein, the supplies and/or services listed above and on any attached sheets at the submitted price(s). Consultant’s Name & Address Print Name Signature Tel: Email(s): Date ADDENDUM ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: I/We __________________________________ acknowledge receipt of the following addendums and Bidder to enter the number of addendums have included for the requirement of it/them in my/our issued (i.e. #1, #2, etc.) if any. tendered price: 202-40 Elgin Street, Ottawa, Canada K1P 1C7 40, rue Elgin, pièce 202, Ottawa, Canada K1P 1C7 Page 1 of 7 REQUEST FOR A STANDING OFFER AGREEMENT (RFSO) MAINTENANCE & CONSERVATION OF NCC CULTURAL ASSETS NATIONAL CAPITAL COMMISSION (NCC) TENDER FILE # NR209 1.0 INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS 1.1 Submit your technical proposal and financial proposal to provide services for the National Capital Commission (referred to as the "Commission" or the "NCC"), as described in the attached Terms of Reference document.
    [Show full text]
  • Re-Envisioning the Sir George-Étienne Cartier Parkway: a Linear Park Plan
    Re-Envisioning The Sir George-Étienne Cartier Parkway: A Linear Park Plan School of Urban and Regional Planning Queen’s University The contents of this document do not necessarily represent the views and policies of the National Capital Commission. The contents represent solely the advice and views of the Queen’s University School of Urban and Regional Planning authors as part of the SURP 824 Project Course. ii Re-Envisioning The Sir George-Étienne Cartier Parkway: A Linear Park Plan By Sereen Aboukarr, Daniel Borrelli, Nikita Jariwala, Matthew Lauzon, Holly Newitt, Ranbir Singh, Arjan Soor, Simran Soor, Patricia Warren SURP 824 Project Course December 21st, 2020 School of Urban and Regional Planning Department of Geography and Planning Queen’s University iii Acknowledgements The project team would like to thank: Sylvie Lalonde and Patricia McCann-MacMillan for their expertise and guidance throughout the project, as well as their consistent encouragement. Andrew Sacret for engaging our team throughout the course of the project. The Capital Planning Branch at the National Capital Commission for providing resources, their expertise, and constructive feedback. Dr. David Gordon for his supervision, expertise, and mentorship over the course of the project. We would also like to acknowledge his constant support and coaching during the most pressing moments. Dr. Elizabeth Macdonald for joining us from UC Berkeley to attend our planning workshop and share her expertise in urban design with our team. Her advice and guidance on how to approach the design for this project was instrumental to the production of a successful project. The National Capital Commission for allowing the Queen’s School of Urban and Regional Planning, as well as our project team, the opportunity to participate in this project.
    [Show full text]
  • A Day in Ottawa"
    "A Day in Ottawa" Gecreëerd door : Cityseeker 20 Locaties in uw favorieten National War Memorial "Powerful War Monument" Fresh flowers often grace the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, an unnamed Canadian victim of the First World War. Towering above are 22 figures frozen in bronze as they rush forward into battle. Nurses, pilots, soldiers and sailors all represent tales of self-sacrifice and courage. Though prominently located in the busy downtown core, National War Memorial by Yatmandu becomes the center of attention every November 11 at 11a, when the country marks Remembrance Day in honor of the men and women who paid the ultimate price for freedom. www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/memorials/nati Wellington Street, Confederation Square, Ottawa ON onal-inventory-canadian-memorials/details/9429 Parliament Hill "The Seat of Power" Parliament Hill is the political heart of Canada. Situated on a bluff overlooking the Ottawa River, it is actually a collection of three turn-of-the- century Gothic structures known as the East Block, Centre Block and West Block. The West Block and East Block contain the offices of Members of Parliament. The House of Commons and the Senate are located in the by Hudation Centre Block, with its soaring Peace Tower. www.ottawatourism.ca/ottawa-insider/parliament-hill/ Wellington Street, Ottawa ON Peace Tower "Symbol of Nationhood" The Peace Tower dominates Parliament Hill, soaring over 90 meters (300 feet) high above Ottawa, while the Canadian flag unfurls gently over its topmost turret. A fine monument symbolic of the country's storied past, as well as a concrete tribute to lives lost in World War I, this Gothic Revival structure is iconic.
    [Show full text]