Today's letters: Ageism in the Ottawa election; protecting green space; that east-end bridge; and more

Saturday, Sept. 24: Ottawa's municipal election is heating up. So are the letters. You can write to us too, at letters@ottawacitizen.com

Will ageism mar Ottawa’s municipal vote?

The recent dismissal of Lisa LaFlamme from CTV sparked a national debate about ageism. In the municipal election, do candidates face the same bias? From the outset of his announcement that he was running for mayor, Bob Chiarelli’s age has received lots of questionable comments, such as “Go home and retire, Bob,” “Take your pension, Bob” and so on.

How can we be so critical about Ottawa politicians returning to the job? U.S. President Joe Biden is 79. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is 82. The job of American president has slightly more pressure than the job of Ottawa mayor, don’t you think?

Doug Thompson is running again for city council, a position he held years ago. Hazel McCallion served as mayor of Mississauga until age 93. Now 101, she recently accepted a three-year contract extension on the board of the Greater Toronto Airport Authority. People should be applauding the interest of seniors with experience. Instead we criticize.

Bob Chiarelli does 90 minutes of exercise every day. Is that a bad thing or is he considered a role model? I was hoping to be mayor one day, but at only 70 years of age, I need a few more years to get into my “prime.”

Baby boomers, be warned. Ottawa civic politics is no place for the “wise and experienced” with lots of grey matter.

Peter Harris, former Ottawa councillor

What does saving the greenbelt really mean?

Re: McKenney unveils pitch to turn greenbelt into a national urban park, Sept. 20.

The proposal by Ottawa mayoral candidate Catherine McKenney to protect the greenbelt by turning it into a park does not mention that Ottawa’s new Official Plan has other ideas for that space.

According to the new plan, in Section 4.11 paragraph 3, the city proposes that “Renewable energy generation facilities … will be permitted as a principal use within the following designations … Greenbelt Rural and Greenbelt facility.”

We already know some in Ottawa want to try to run a city of 1.1 million people on unreliable wind and solar power, and that the renewables proposal could mean more than 700 wind turbines in rural areas.

Did McKenney not read the Official Plan or the Energy Evolution Action Plan? A modern wind turbine is a 600-ft. tower that produces noise pollution and poses a critical risk to wildlife such as birds.

So, which is it? Park or power?

Jane Wilson, Chair, Ottawa Wind Concerns, North Gower

Right intent, wrong plan for the greenbelt

Kudos to Catherine McKenney for wanting to protect the greenbelt.

Alas, turning the greenbelt into an urban national park would be quite a challenge. First, it would run roughshod over all master plans since Jacques Gréber’s groundbreaking work, which proposed a unified vision for the national capital spanning both sides of the Ottawa River.

Second, it would gut the National Capital Act by handing greenbelt management over to Parks Canada and changing the capital’s boundaries and mandate through legislation. Bureaucratic resistance from the NCC would be fierce and parliamentary inertia would be a certainty. Moreover, I’m sure Parks Canada wouldn’t want to deal with endless feuds involving real estate developers and other interests greedily eyeing local green space. The National Parks Act would also have to be amended, to include the greenbelt and its boundaries.

In my view, the simplest solution would be to amend the National Capital Act so that the greenbelt is protected with the same criteria as a national urban park, i.e., by ensuring that environmental integrity is its management priority.

Finally, if the National Capital Act is to be amended, why not use the opportunity to protect Gatineau Park too, as proposed by Ed Broadbent, Catherine McKenney’s former boss? McKenney was his assistant when he wrote and introduced his legislative reform on capital, and I’ll bet McKenney knows more about the file than any of the other candidates.

Jean-Paul Murray, Chelsea

We need not expand Ottawa’s urban footprint

Re: Ottawa’s mayoral candidates talk about housing, but offer few solutions, Sept. 20.

Columnist Randall Denley writes that it is fanciful to think Ottawa’s housing demand over the next 25 years can be met without adding new land to the urban area.

The new Official Plan approved by council calls for the addition of 181,800 new dwellings in the urban area by 2046, split roughly half and half between intensification and greenfield development. This represents the status quo for intensification targets set by the city. The greenfield development in the plan includes 66,300 new dwellings on vacant greenfield lands already inside the urban area as a result of previous urban expansions. The remaining 23,300 new dwellings needed to meet the target can go in the existing built-up area. Split over 20 urban wards over 25 years, that would be only 46 new dwelling units per ward per year. Eminently realistic.

The building industry has been achieving and surpassing the city’s intensification targets for several years now, in wards such as Kitchissippi and Old Ottawa South. A small uptick in this activity across the whole urban area, eased by zoning permissions already in the works, would accommodate the projected growth in population and housing demand.

There is no need to expand our urban footprint into the rural area where agriculture, wetlands and forests are the best land use. This is the sane option in the context of the climate emergency.

Daniel Buckles, Ottawa

Horizon Ottawa gives us a voice

Re: Sutcliffe campaign files complaint about fundraising efforts of Horizon Ottawa, Sept. 15.

I am an ordinary citizen who has tried for years to have my voice heard regarding my city’s future and I decided to support Horizon Ottawa from its inception. Living in Ottawa since amalgamation, it is clear that developers have outsized power on big decisions that shape Ottawa’s priorities and quality of life. Many Ottawans share this view and in a democracy we have the right to organize and hold our leaders accountable.

We are tired of performative measures; we want a significant shift in priorities toward larger investments in green infrastructure, housing affordability, social justice and transparency. It is time to elect representatives who will make these issues a priority for the benefit of the majority of citizens and neighbourhoods.

Nancy Lawand, Ottawa

It’s taxing, reading all these books

Re: Finalists revealed for Ottawa Book Awards, Sept. 20.

Why, why, why is the city involved in this? Paying literary staff to review books and grant monetary rewards with our taxes?

I love reading but our tax dollars are not meant for this.

Brian Craig, Ottawa

SJAm Parkway: don’t rewrite history

Re: Protesters to march on SJAM parkway to change name, Sept. 19.

Does Albert Dumont really want Canada to rewrite its history? Many countries have been guilty of rewriting their history, but I hope Canada has no interest in joining Russia, China, North Korea and countless others that make it a common practice. Recognize the shortcomings of our predecessors, but do not pretend they do not exist.

I believe it most unlikely that a search of Hansard, in John A. Macdonald’s time and for decades later, would find any opposition to the residential school system. Macdonald was a statesman and much good was done under his watch, but he was a person of his time, brutally short-sighted when it came to Canada’s treatment of First Nations and quite without empathy for or understanding of them.

His fellow Canadians were the same, private and public. Does Dumont think we can obliterate Canadian history regarding First Nations — through to the 1990s — by removing street signs?

Ernest McArthur, Ottawa

OK, how about the Diefenbaker Parkway?

I agree that the name of the Sir John A. Macdonald Parkway should be changed. A possible new name to consider is the John Diefenbaker Parkway.

Diefenbaker took important steps in recognizing human rights in general: he appointed the first female cabinet minister, the first First Nations senator, and he gave all Indigenous Canadians the right to vote.

I disagree with Albert Dumont that we should not name anything after an individual. Using names of individuals is one way to remind us of our history. All humans, including John Diefenbaker, have flaws but they are the most interesting and expressive mammals we have.

Bruce Couchman, Ottawa

East-end bridge efforts are flawed

Re: Liberals should forget about building another bridge over the Ottawa River, Sept. 8.

I am very concerned with the relentless federal efforts to build a bridge on the east side of Ottawa for several reasons.

There is a lack of public consultation and transparency in the process.

There is no recent traffic study despite the move of several NDHQ directorates to Kanata, the impact of COVID on commuting, the construction of LRT Phase 2 and the fact that Kanata and Aylmer have grown significantly since the last traffic study. What if the bulk of the truck traffic is headed for Kanata? Does it make sense to build a bridge east of Ottawa?

The bridge will cost more than $2 billion at a time of massive budget deficits, national debt and rising interest rates. What will a new bridge ultimately cost since it will have to be financed at a rate likely to be four-plus per cent? I remember the days when mortgages were 18 per cent.

Two of the options presently considered would essentially destroy the small remaining eastern part of the greenbelt. Although we pride ourselves on it and are the envy of many world capitals, the greenbelt is constantly under pressure.

Given the Red Code of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, now is the time to increase the tree canopy and public transit instead of creating additional roads and bridges.

Pierre Leblanc, Orléans

Where’s the transparency on the east-end bridge?

Many residents in the east-end of Ottawa are questioning the federal push for a sixth bridge across the Ottawa River. It is almost impossible to get any information that would help one understand the process for deciding if a bridge is necessary and where it should be. This lack of transparency and communication is worrisome. Only because we read the Citizen did we learn about the geotechnical studies about to begin.

Where are the traffic and truck studies that support the need for another crossing in the east end? Much has changed since the last transportation studies were carried out well over a decade ago. There have been significant changes in commuting needs, working habits and public infrastructure on both sides of the river.

New traffic studies are planned to begin this fall and in the spring. Why is Public Services and Procurement Canada not waiting for these studies before it determines whether to proceed? How have the master transportation plans of Ottawa and Gatineau factored into PSPC’s assessment of commuting needs?

In 2013, after two years of study and $6 million, Kettle Island was once again identified as the best site for this bridge. Yet almost another $1 million is being spent on geotechnical studies to assess the appropriateness of three potential sites. Why, now, are the other corridors being considered when Kettle Island was the recommended site?

The impacts of an interprovincial bridge on east-end communities will be profound. Already at capacity, Highway 174 does not have capacity to accommodate more vehicles. The environmental impact on the east-end greenbelt area will also be significant.

There are serious question and concerns about the process. Considering recent public questions about this crossing, is it not time to go back to basics and determine if a bridge is really the best solution for today’s transportation challenges?

Alexa Brewer, Convent Glen/Orleans Woods Community Association, Interprovincial Crossing Committee, Orléans

Treatment of disabled in Canada is appalling

In the last two weeks, I have had disgraceful experiences trying to take my quadriplegic 35-year-old son to two separate venues. First was The Eagles concert at Canadian Tire Centre, where we had prepaid VIP parking only to be told on arrival that the lot was full. After unsuccessfully looking for a parking spot and half an hour into the show, we demanded a refund.

On the second occasion, I purchased two tickets to Kooza (Cirque du Soleil) on the website. One ticket was for a wheelchair spot (pictured in the seating chart); the other was for a companion ticket. Then I received a phone call informing me that the disabled/wheelchair ticket I purchased isn’t for a wheelchair but for an ambulatory person who is able to sit in a regular seat. I have now had to have those tickets reimbursed.

We returned to Canada three years ago after living overseas, two of them in South Africa. We have never had such appalling experiences, even in developing countries. Wake up to yourself, Canada!

Karen McGuigan, Westboro