Federal Government Services and Policies

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by phil235

Passport office was on the second floor I believe, on the Bank St. side. That office drove a lot of traffic to the building and likely supported the additional retail and services. It was so shortsighted to move it to a far less accessible suburban mall to save a few bucks. I bet the retail they lost would probably have covered a good portion of the difference in rent.

The clothing store is still Elisa G, on the Sparks St. side. They don't use their door to the outside, so there is only one entrance from Sparks. Rexall is subterranean and accessed from Kent. Most of the other retail is now storage, other than the Canadian Forces recruiting centre which adds more blank walls to one of the most prominent corners in the city.

It was a mistake, I agree. It was a convenient location for both thousands of Downtown workers and residents. I can't imagine it cost much since the Feds own the building (though operated by a private entity for some reason).

Ok, so the Elisa G that was on Queen (only know that because of Google Streetview) moved to the back. Wasn't sure what store that was.

I wish they gave control of the public facing parts of the building to the NCC so we can get street facing retail again. It would also be beneficial to return the Passport Office to serve the tens of thousands who live nearby.

While I'm wishing for things, I wish it plugged into Place de Ville's underground concourse, which was the plan when this building was being planned.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

I wish they gave control of the public facing parts of the building to the NCC so we can get street facing retail again. It would also be beneficial to return the Passport Office to serve the tens of thousands who live nearby.

While I'm wishing for things, I wish it plugged into Place de Ville's underground concourse, which was the plan when this building was being planned.

Yeah, the NCC or even the downtown BIA could help activate the frontages. Or cede the bottom level wholesale, other than the pharmacy and Appletree, to a broker and let them bring in a bunch of complementary food retailers to drive traffic. They wouldn't even need to do much in the way of capital improvements. The atrium is nice and interesting and a few cosmetic changes could make it into a food hall type area that would draw workers and locals even after hours. If that worked, you then have a bunch of empty or underused ground floor units that would become more attractive to tenants. It wouldn't take much to make it work and improve the revenue potential - just someone with an interest in improving the space and a profit motive to encourage them to act.

[FrostyMug]

I can readily agree that the space is under utilized and that there is a great deal of opportunity. However this comment:

Originally Posted by phil235

Passport office was on the second floor I believe, on the Bank St. side. That office drove a lot of traffic to the building and likely supported the additional retail and services. It was so shortsighted to move it to a far less accessible suburban mall to save a few bucks. I bet the retail they lost would probably have covered a good portion of the difference in rent.

just drives me insane. Why was it short sighted to move this out of downtown and out to the east end where there was no access or service? There's a Service Canada location in Gatineau just across the Alexandra bridge that can easily service downtown Ottawa residents. Why have two locations so close together? What makes "no sense" is having only three locations within the city of Ottawa to access passport and Service Canada facilities.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by FrostyMug

I can readily agree that the space is under utilized and that there is a great deal of opportunity. However this comment:



just drives me insane. Why was it short sighted to move this out of downtown and out to the east end where there was no access or service? There's a Service Canada location in Gatineau just across the Alexandra bridge that can easily service downtown Ottawa residents. Why have two locations so close together? What makes "no sense" is having only three locations within the city of Ottawa to access passport and Service Canada facilities.

Agree to disagree that a location in Gatineau is easily accessible to downtown residents (and the 100,000ish people that work there). I work right in the centre of downtown and it would either be a half hour plus walk or multiple buses to get there. It's essentially not doable on a lunch hour, whereas those 100,000 people can basically all walk to 240 Sparks.

Also, it's not just downtown residents who used that office. For anyone who relies on transit to get to the office, Gatineau is not even close to as accessible to Ottawa residents as is a location right on the LRT line. Downtown Ottawa is more accessible for a lot more people, which should be the goal when locating services to the public.

The replacement office, which is at Hog's Back, might be somewhat defensible if it had decent transit access, but it does not.

[J.OT13]

I have no issue with the suburban locations. They should have been in addition to the CD Howe location, which was/would be by far the most accessible.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

We don't count. Majority rules.

What sort of amenities would a town of 20k have? That’s basically what you can support with downtown residents.

[BlueJay]

Originally Posted by acottawa

What sort of amenities would a town of 20k have? That’s basically what you can support with downtown residents.

However, a town of 20K does not have 100K people working in that town.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by BlueJay

However, a town of 20K does not have 100K people working in that town.

Or 40,000 people within walking distance of that town. Or another 300,000 people a short LRT/bus ride from that town. Or another major city’s tourism industry centred in that town.

The attempts to downplay the importance of downtown to the city are baffling to me.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

It was a mistake, I agree. It was a convenient location for both thousands of Downtown workers and residents. I can't imagine it cost much since the Feds own the building (though operated by a private entity for some reason).

It was inconvenient for the minivan set in Barrhaven, which is why Baird moved it.

Me, I'd go to Hull and back to renew my passport.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by phil235

Or 40,000 people within walking distance of that town. Or another 300,000 people a short LRT/bus ride from that town. Or another major city’s tourism industry centred in that town.

The attempts to downplay the importance of downtown to the city are baffling to me.

The “central area” is 17k.

https://ottawa.ca/en/living-ottawa/stati...usehold-estimates/sub-area-year-end-2024

If you’re counting people who have to drive or take transit then there is no particular advantage to a downtown location.

[urbanforest]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The “central area” is 17k.

https://ottawa.ca/en/living-ottawa/stati...usehold-estimates/sub-area-year-end-2024

If you’re counting people who have to drive or take transit then there is no particular advantage to a downtown location.

That only goes as far south as Gloucester, which is practically spitting distance from Queen and Bank. I wonder what the daytime population of that area is.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by acottawa

The “central area” is 17k.

https://ottawa.ca/en/living-ottawa/stati...usehold-estimates/sub-area-year-end-2024

If you’re counting people who have to drive or take transit then there is no particular advantage to a downtown location.

Yes, “only”’ 17k live in the business district. But excluding the people who work there and those with easy walking or transit access when assessing the accessibility of a location makes zero sense.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by phil235

Yes, “only”’ 17k live in the business district. But excluding the people who work there and those with easy walking or transit access when assessing the accessibility of a location makes zero sense.

Those are the only for whom a downtown location is obviously more convenient (plus areas just outside of that boundary). If someone lives in Westboro for example, it is not obviously easier to get downtown then to another location in the suburbs. The objective is to try to maximize coverage for the city, not to cater to a tiny minority.

Downtown employees are a more viable target, but with the government’s office policies constantly changing, locating closer to home probably makes more sense.

Frankly I don’t think either of the locations are great. There are much more accessible locations.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Those are the only for whom a downtown location is obviously more convenient (plus areas just outside of that boundary). If someone lives in Westboro for example, it is not obviously easier to get downtown then to another location in the suburbs. The objective is to try to maximize coverage for the city, not to cater to a tiny minority.

Downtown employees are a more viable target, but with the government’s office policies constantly changing, locating closer to home probably makes more sense.

Frankly I don’t think either of the locations are great. There are much more accessible locations.

Where are these locations that are more accessible? Don’t forget to include those using transit.

I keep hearing that the central area is a “tiny minority”, excluding people who work there for some reason, but no one ever explains where the large majority lives. The Ottawa suburbs cover about 550 square km, so where exactly do more people live that we should be prioritizing? I honestly don’t get this type of argument.

[J.OT13]

Created a new thread since this conversation went beyond downtown revitalization.

This thread is a catch-all for anything Federal Government related that doesn't go into any of the other existing threads.

Originally Posted by acottawa

The “central area” is 17k.

https://ottawa.ca/en/living-ottawa/stati...usehold-estimates/sub-area-year-end-2024

If you’re counting people who have to drive or take transit then there is no particular advantage to a downtown location.

I wish that table included density, jobs and square kilometers.

Originally Posted by phil235

Where are these locations that are more accessible? Don’t forget to include those using transit.

I keep hearing that the central area is a “tiny minority”, excluding people who work there for some reason, but no one ever explains where the large majority lives. The Ottawa suburbs cover about 550 square km, so where exactly do more people live that we should be prioritizing? I honestly don’t get this type of argument.

It's strange to me how Downtown is not obviously the most convenient location for the greatest amount of people. Sure suburban locations are also important, but Downtown is accessible on foot by about 50k residents and 100k workers, and has the greatest accessibility by transit for probably close to about half a million who live walking distance from the O-Train or Transitway/Rapibus.

Place d'Orleans is accessible as well for anyone in the east end by car or on transit.

Merivale is likely the least accessible location. Better to have it at Bayshore or Barrhave on the Transitway.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

It's strange to me how Downtown is not obviously the most convenient location for the greatest amount of people. Sure suburban locations are also important, but Downtown is accessible on foot by about 50k residents and 100k workers, and has the greatest accessibility by transit for probably close to about half a million who live walking distance from the O-Train or Transitway/Rapibus.

Place d'Orleans is accessible as well for anyone in the east end by car or on transit.

Merivale is likely the least accessible location. Better to have it at Bayshore or Barrhave on the Transitway.

It's bizarre to me as well, as it really is obvious. The best location for the most people is going to be where the highest density of people live and work, and a place that is as central on the rapid transit network as possible. That's clearly downtown. No other specific location has been suggested in these discussions. It's the same reason that the Sens are planning to spend a billion dollars to move downtown - it's clearly more accessible to the greatest number of fans.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by phil235

It's bizarre to me as well, as it really is obvious. The best location for the most people is going to be where the highest density of people live and work, and a place that is as central on the rapid transit network as possible. That's clearly downtown. No other specific location has been suggested in these discussions. It's the same reason that the Sens are planning to spend a billion dollars to move downtown - it's clearly more accessible to the greatest number of fans.

There already is a passport location downtown in Hull.....

Plus alot of the passport functions can now be done online/through mail.

As for the location having the passport office that covers the entirety of rural Eastern Ontario and etc accessible by car makes sense. This is the whole regional trauma hospital argument all over again.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by phil235

Or 40,000 people within walking distance of that town. Or another 300,000 people a short LRT/bus ride from that town. Or another major city’s tourism industry centred in that town.

The attempts to downplay the importance of downtown to the city are baffling to me.

Ottawa has a bizarre cultural aversion to urbanity that manifests in many ways.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by Williamoforange

There already is a passport location downtown in Hull.....

Plus alot of the passport functions can now be done online/through mail.

As for the location having the passport office that covers the entirety of rural Eastern Ontario and etc accessible by car makes sense. This is the whole regional trauma hospital argument all over again.

As discussed above, downtown Hull isn't nearly as accessible for many reasons. And this is for functions done in person, so not sure what online or mail has to do with where it should be located. Also not sure why we would be prioritizing making the office as accessible as possible for rural residents at the expense of the biggest population centre in the region and particularly transit users who often don't have other options. It's not like downtown is inaccessible by car - it's still very central and at the heart of our road network. It just provides users with other transportation options.

I find it very odd that the biggest advocate for unfettered densification of the central core of the city is now advocating for moving services to the periphery.

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by phil235

As discussed above, downtown Hull isn't nearly as accessible for many reasons. And this is for functions done in person, so not sure what online or mail has to do with where it should be located. Also not sure why we would be prioritizing making the office as accessible as possible for rural residents at the expense of the biggest population centre in the region and particularly transit users who often don't have other options. It's not like downtown is inaccessible by car - it's still very central and at the heart of our road network. It just provides users with other transportation options.

I find it very odd that the biggest advocate for unfettered densification of the central core of the city is now advocating for moving services to the periphery.

If you if the service can be accessed online they're is less of a need for walk-in appointments, which is your reasoning for why it must be in the central core.

Second more people live & work outside of the central business district of Ottawa, as the service area for these buildings is far reaching. The next available one is Kingston or Montreal. (Rural ones such as arnprior, Smith falls & etc, only do 20 day mail)

Yes, I am for intensification because the services exist there to support more then the current population (nvm that property rights exist). So ignoring your hand waving away, there already exists an in person centre in Hull which is a 10 min walk from place du portage, with (for Ottawa at least) a significant number of buses that pass by ad well. Which is better service than the majority of the people in Ontario get.

Anyways, if you want to argue that a new passport office should be opened in Ottawa Central Business district go right ahead, but no we shouldn't be moving either the Ottawa WEST or EAST service centers, that serve the larger suburban, exurban & rural population of eastern Ontario.