Hickory Street Right-of-Way Re-instatement

(I also submitted this via email)
For context, I live in Little Italy and use a bicycle as my means to get around (not for recreation). I use this bridge and stretch of road regularly when I’m heading west, to donate blood or visit Lee Valley for example. It can link cyclists to the Experimental Farm Pathway via Old Irving Pl. to cross Carling to Maple Dr.

I support the proposed raised continuous sidewalk across Hickory. These are a significantly safer design, and rightly signal that the space is for pedestrians who have priority, and that cars are guests who must wait their turn.

The patio seems like a nice idea. I could see people hanging out there, as there are some large residential buildings immediately north.

My main question is why do motorists need access to this stretch of road at all? Why not put bollards or another modal filter on the east side of the Hickory/Champagne intersection and disallow car traffic entirely? Of course there are modal filter options that still allow for occasional service vehicle access - that is often an objection to making streets car-free, and it is invariably misguided. (An example would be a ‘bus trap’, which allows only the passage of wide wheelbase vehicles, like the fire trucks mentioned here. But there are plenty of others. The Netherlands has quite a few.) I am curious to know which drivers are expected to need (not just want but need) access to this one dead-end-for-cars block with no driveway access and no parking. All they would be able to do is turn around and head back the other way. Removing all car traffic from this stretch would make it safer and more pleasant for everyone.

Removed by moderator.

I like this concept but am not understanding what access will be liked directly north of the concept? Is this all the condo property (Soho) and assume NO cars can come up against the north line?
I like the idea of trees BUT they need to be watered regularly. Grass, or shrubs or garden will not make it as we have seen at all the parks in the area and in that concrete waste-land it gets really hot so the shade should be appreciated. I do like the idea others have noted about, if possible, dedicated bike lanes vs walking lanes as so many pedestrians use this area.
Crossing Champagne at Hickory is dangerous right now as cars boot it along there and so much traffic with uber eats, deliveries and all the density which is fine - BUT we need to be able to safely cross over the street to access the paths and light rail/o-train. Whether that be a raised service or something as a simple stop sign won't cut it.
Thank you.

The proposed "pedestrian plaza" and associated path depicted in the design are a welcomed addition to the neighbourhood and will go a long way to contributing to the ongoing revitalization of our little corner of Little Italy. The following points should be addressed in some fashion:

1) the provision for "future vehicle access for future development" is a non-starter. What is being presented for consultation is purported to be a pedestrian (read a non-motorized vehicle) design. Presenting a design which surreptitiously incorporates a future vehicle ingress/egress is essentially asking the public to unknowingly approve a future parking lot access driveway in the form of a pedestrian path which, when vehicle traffic permits, may, perhaps, also accommodate pedestrian and bicycle traffic, occasionally....maybe. This is effectively planning and designing for vehicle/pedestrian mishaps/accidents and has the astringent aroma of an almost well executed sleight of hand. The future driveway provision contained in the current design is sufficient cause to oppose the design outright.

2) the design makes no provision for lighting. There is currently one light standard at east end of the path which is not illustrated in the design. This single light should remain and when it does, is insufficient to adequately provide necessary illumination for the full length of the path extending to the Champagne/Hickory intersection. The existing light is necessary and more lighting is necessary.

3) the current pedestrian path experiences water runoff, soil erosion and occasional washouts as a result of the elevation disparity between the current path surface and the surface of the adjacent parking lot. This makes sections of the pathway hazardous in the thawing-freezing cycles of winter and an outright mess during the intermittent puddling which occurs during rainy period of other seasons. This particularly evident on the east end of the path where the elevation drops approximately 2 feet from the parking lot effectively making the pathway a watershed for the north east end of the parking lot. The proposed design is deficient as it makes no provisions for some type of drainage system to remediate the run-off problem, an egregious oversight.

4) Champagne Ave residents have been witness to a significant increase in Champagne Ave traffic. The sharpest increase being from delivery and transportation service providers.  Some of these industrious people don't seem to have even the most rudimentary grasp of parking bylaws (or if they do, are more that willing and capable of ignoring them) making them quite adept at leaving their vehicle (more often than not … idling) wherever they deem convenient. It is reasonable to not only expect this quasi stock car/derby wild west behaviour (to which some of us are increasingly forced to be unwilling participants as we weave and bob our way to our parking garages) to continue, but to be exacerbate with the addition of the Soho 2 residential units. One can only imagine the irresistible allure of the freshly laid asphalt and the convenience of a barrier free path to these diligent, dedicated delivery people, most of who are hell bent to deliver a timely, steaming, piping hot caramel macchiato.  Suffice it to say that bollards (as per city of Ottawa standard details) mirroring those currently identified in the design for east end of the path are required at the Champagne entrance to prevent the inevitable invasion of unwanted vehicles. A problem which is already part of daily life on both the east and west sides of Champagne Ave stretching virtually the complete 100 block on most evenings.

5) On a related note, the Champagne/Hickory intersection is already a challenging place for pedestrians and cyclist to navigate during prime traffic hours. The ongoing Champagne Ave development will only make this traffic problem worse. The redesign and reconfiguration of the pathway is an opportune time to introduce effective Champagne/Hickory intersection traffic modulation measures. This opportunity should be exploited part and parcel to the path installation.

6) the sitting area is a welcomed feature. The challenge here is to ensure whatever is constructed/installed is of sufficient quality to withstand the test of time and regular usage....read ...do not replicate what has been installed (and since, promptly ignored by the city) in Tremblay Park.

7) if a sitting/eating area is being planned it would be foolhardy and irresponsible to neglect the installation of corresponding waste/recycling bins. And when these bins are installed, it would be quite a windfall for all concerned if they were subject to regular attention and maintenance.

8) the design identifies areas which are to include perennials or mulch beds, again, a nice, welcomed feature. The issue isn't the installation or aesthetics but their ongoing, long term maintenance. It is a typical bureaucratic/political blunder to approve a worthwhile capital expenditure and through a lack of foresight, common sense (or both) or lack of funding omit a corresponding allocation of operating and maintenance dollars. A short stroll down Champagne or the (relatively new) LRT trail will reveal the effects of this oversight and the resulting impact of neglect and irresponsible dog ownership to what was originally (and still could be) a proud piece of rehabilitated public property.

9) as the design does not include parking spaces for either the residents or the commercial/light industrial business expected to occupy the building, it is reasonable to assume that the north end of the existing parking lot directly adjacent to the path will become a go-to parking location for building visitors. As humans (much like cattle) have a proclivity to walk the shortest distance between two points, it is reasonable to expect the planned east-west strip of landscaping adjacent to the parking lot to, in very short order, be transformed from attractive perennials/ mulch beds to a trampled mess. It would be astute to proactively install or design some form of barrier (physical or otherwise) for the complete length of the south side beds to prevent this inevitably.

I don't see the necessity for the bollards, there's already p gates on the bridge. I note there is no lighting on the plan so the bollards end up being a hazard anyway. They seem to be a solution looking for a problem.

Will there be a line down the centre of the pavement to help walkers and bikers, etc, know which side to stick to, to help traffic flow? I like this plan a lot otherwise!!

Can you provide more detail on the planned Pedestrian Cross-Over (PXO) at the intersection of Hickory Street and Champagne Avenue please?

Thank you - M Connolley .

Hello Folks. It is such a good feeling to be able to comment in only a positive way. I love everything that you are planning here. I did notice that in one of the comments that the care and watering of the trees and plants is essential. Some years ago the city put in some sod, watered it once and it died. It is indeed hot and sunny there all day long. I am so grateful that you are putting in a crosswalk for pedestrians. It solves the 'I wonder if I will survive getting across Champagne problem'. One last suggestion: Maybe a spot for some kids to operate a lemonade stand during summer holidays would be nice. Could be profitable too. (Just kidding)

This is a great plan. Nothing negative to say at all. Creating a public space in this location is a huge improvement for the residents of the new highrises, and all existing residents of the neighbourhood.

This is such a good approach. Nothing negative to say at all.

It's great to see public space and a focus on non-motorized travel here. Strongly support!

For the public space, are the tables and chairs fixed? It would be good to consider making some tables accessible and child-friendly if so. It would also be nice to see some small fun elements (for climbing, jumping, etc.) for children included here.

I strongly support this plan for the creation of an enjoyable public space and a safe connection between Champagne Ave and the O-Train pedestrian bridge. I endorse the focus on non-motorized vehicles. Access by vehicles should be limited and carefully planned.

While I love the idea of having lots of trees planted, it is a very hot environment surrounded by concrete. Prevision must be made for the trees to be watered regular. Without this, they may not survive.

I will also mention that it is important that this be viewed entirely as public community space, rather than as an amenity for the adjacent Soho building.

Finally, I would suggest that there be a pedestrian cross walk across Champagne Avenue. The traffic on Champagne will increase as the two large buildings on the street open.

I agree with PMcKay on the continuous sidewalk with possibly an elevated sidewalk crossing also, giving the effect of a speed bump when crossing the sidewalk onto Hickory. Otherwise the plan looks great!

Great concept. Would like to see more delination at the intersection of Hickory and Champagne.
Possible solution could be to remove the curve in the sidewalk and have it go straight through to emphasize that it is a pedestrian area