WHEREAS this report has direct implications on Ward 13 - Rideau-Rockcliffe, as referenced in the Ward Councillor Comment section of the staff report; and
WHEREAS the Ward Councillor Comment section was inadvertently omitted from the report before it was circulated; and
WHEREAS the Background section of the report incorrectly referenced a survey as coming from the Councillor’s office rather than from the City.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the staff report be revised to add the text under the Ward Councillor Comment Section; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the staff report be revised as follows:
“The results of a Councillor City survey indicated 52 per cent of respondents oppose the sidewalks, 40 per cent are in support, and eight per cent did not express an opinion.” A Councillor-led survey showed higher opposition to the sidewalks, particularly on the affected streets.
Councillor Comments:
I am unable to provide concurrence for the sidewalk component of this integrated renewal project and respectfully oppose the staff recommendation to proceed with sidewalk construction at this time.
As outlined in correspondence with City staff and confirmed by the Office of the City Clerk, the Solicitor, the General Manager of Infrastructure and Water Services, and the General Manager of Planning, Development and Building Services, my decision to defer sidewalk installation beyond Summer 2026 effectively removed the Ward Councillor concurrence required to proceed with this aspect of the project under delegated authority. Section 40 of Schedule I of the Delegated Authority By-law requires Ward Councillor concurrence for road modifications to proceed under delegated authority. Since staff continue to recommend sidewalks, and I do not concur with proceeding at this time, and this matter appropriately rises to the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee and Council for decision in accordance with the Road Modification Approval process.
I understood from staff that deferral would allow time for the comprehensive transportation study that Manor Park requires given the significant changes affecting the community. In April 2025 my office was presented with three options: proceed with sidewalks, bring a motion to remove, or defer sidewalks while further planning and review is conducted. I confirmed my preference for deferral with the understanding this was within policy and would provide the necessary time for proper analysis. Staff initially agreed to this approach. However, staff subsequently removed deferral as an option because they did not want to proceed with comprehensive study. Staff have clarified that deferral in their understanding meant only shifting the sidewalk from Fall 2025 to Summer 2026 to allow for additional consultation or information, not the neighbourhood-level holistic transportation planning that is required. Any deferral beyond Summer 2026 for whatever reason would remove the sidewalks from this capital project and require a future sidewalk project to be approved by Council. Given staff's unwillingness to undertake the necessary comprehensive transportation analysis and the contract timelines, staff brought this matter to Committee and Council for decision.
While I strongly support the City's policies promoting active transportation, accessibility, and Vision Zero principles, I believe that the specific circumstances affecting Manor Park represent an exceptional case that should warrant reconsideration of how the City's Integrated Renewal Policy is applied in areas undergoing significant transformation. We must acknowledge that current policy frameworks do not adequately account for situations where holistic transportation planning considerations require comprehensive analysis that cannot be completed within standard project timelines.
Manor Park is experiencing an unprecedented convergence of major transportation and land-use changes that will fundamentally alter pedestrian patterns and mobility needs throughout the community. These interconnected changes include the future re-opening of Hemlock Road to Wateridge Village, which will introduce a major new traffic corridor, a potential full reconstruction of Beechwood Avenue that could transform our traditional main street into a central active transportation spine, proposed intersection redesigns at Eastbourne, Braemar, and Ava that may include a traffic circle, and implementation of the Manor Park Secondary Plan, which will guide future land-use decisions and shift traffic and pedestrian patterns considerably. The cumulative impact of these changes should warrant a more flexible policy approach that allows for comprehensive planning before infrastructure commitments are made.
Additionally, the internal streets of Manor Park function primarily as low-volume, local access roads with limited connectivity between major corridors and, as a result, do not experience the same level of through-traffic pressures; in contrast, current and anticipated traffic increases are concentrated along key arterial and collector corridors, including Hemlock Road, St. Laurent Boulevard, Sandridge Road and Birch Avenue, where higher traffic volumes and speeds create a greater need for targeted, pedestrian-focused design and permanent traffic calming measures.
The Manor Park Official Plan Amendment approved in 2021 introduced dramatic increases in density across 35 acres, including high-rise buildings up to 30 stories. This level of intensification will generate substantial additional vehicle traffic, pedestrian activity, and cycling demand that will interact with the proposed infrastructure renewal areas in complex ways. During consideration of the Official Plan Amendment, both my office and the Manor Park Community Association specifically recommended that the City undertake comprehensive, holistic transportation planning for the community to address the complex interactions between intensification, existing infrastructure, and planned transportation changes. Despite these clear recommendations made in 2021, this essential holistic transportation planning exercise has not been undertaken by City staff. This gap in planning should warrant policy flexibility to defer infrastructure decisions until proper analysis can be completed.
The absence of this holistic planning framework means that infrastructure investments, including sidewalks in this instance, risk being implemented in isolation without proper consideration of their integration with the community's transformed transportation landscape. Specific traffic studies are required, including comprehensive vehicle traffic analysis and projections accounting for intensification impacts, ground-level pedestrian and cycling assessment in the context of future demand, cumulative impact assessment of multiple concurrent transportation changes, and adjacent neighbourhood impact studies for streets affected by proximity to intensive development. The implementation of the Manor Park Secondary Plan represents a master planning exercise that will effectively determine how development in Manor Park over the next 20 to 50 years will occur. Within this long-term planning context, implementing sidewalks without understanding the full scope of future traffic patterns risks creating infrastructure that may be inadequate, inappropriately located, or require costly future modifications to accommodate the community's transformed transportation needs. These circumstances should warrant policy provisions that allow for deferral pending comprehensive analysis.
My office conducted an extensive eight-month consultation process that included two public information sessions, community surveys, ongoing resident feedback, and additional consultation sessions. This represents significantly more engagement than the typical single public information session for integrated renewal projects. Based on community survey data from 338 respondents, there is substantial opposition to sidewalk installation in the proposed area. Only 71 respondents (21%) expressed support while 267 respondents (79%) opposed the installation. Opposition was particularly concentrated on directly affected streets: Kilbarry Crescent received 50 responses, all opposed, Arundel Avenue received 34 responses with 31 opposed, and Farnham Crescent, Eastbourne Avenue, and Braemar Street showed unanimous or near-unanimous opposition. While community preference alone may not justify deferral under current policy, the combination of strong community opposition and the genuine need for comprehensive transportation planning should warrant policy flexibility in this exceptional circumstance.
I acknowledge the accessibility concerns raised in the staff report. My office heard from residents with mobility challenges on both sides of this issue. Some residents noted that the current infrastructure forces wheelchair users into dangerous situations and that winters are particularly challenging for people with mobility issues. Others with mobility challenges expressed preference for no sidewalks due to technical requirements of specific mobility equipment or difficulty navigating sidewalks due to sensory processing challenges. These competing accessibility needs further underscore the importance of comprehensive transportation planning that can properly assess and address the full range of community mobility requirements. The existence of conflicting accessibility perspectives should warrant a more deliberative policy approach that allows time for thorough analysis.
I support proceeding with the critical underground infrastructure work (sewers, watermains, roadways, and curbs) as scheduled. Curbs will be installed as required for proper drainage, road protection, and infrastructure longevity. However, sidewalk implementation should be deferred and revisited as part of the comprehensive transportation analysis that must be conducted to ensure coordinated planning given the multiple changes affecting Manor Park's transportation landscape. This deferral represents responsible stewardship of public infrastructure investments by ensuring that sidewalk decisions are made with full knowledge of how they will integrate with the community's evolving transportation network. The cost of implementing sidewalks as part of this $13.9 million project (approximately $180,000) will be removed from the project scope.
I respectfully request that Council defer the sidewalk component of this project and direct staff to undertake the comprehensive transportation planning that should have been completed following approval of the Manor Park Secondary Plan in 2021. This case demonstrates that current policy frameworks should be reconsidered to allow for greater flexibility when communities face exceptional circumstances involving multiple concurrent transportation changes and significant intensification that require comprehensive analysis before infrastructure decisions are finalized.