Whitmore, Cline, Sherman Infrastructure Renewal a Q&A

Whitmore/Cline/Sherman Infrastructure Renewal: a Q&A

Much of Nepean’s infrastructure, including roads, sewer pipes, and drinking water lines, was built in the 1950s and 60s. As it gets older, the City routinely checks the condition of the sewer and water pipes and makes plans to replace them.

When that work is planned, the City also redesigns the road itself, since it has to be ripped up anyway. City policy is that, wherever possible, the new road must be built to a slower speed limit (30 km/h for residential neighbourhoods), with sidewalks.

Recently, I’ve received several questions from residents along Whitmore, Cline, and Sherman about these policies and the upcoming infrastructure renewal project. I thought it might be helpful to offer a Q&A to help set the facts straight:

Q: Why is the City building sidewalks and implementing traffic calming?

A: The City of Ottawa adopted a Complete Streets Policy in 2013 and began implementing it in 2015. The policy says that streets must be looked at as more than just a thoroughfare for cars, but have to include, where possible, sidewalks, bike lanes, and transit connections.

Complete Streets policies are common in cities across Canada, including Toronto, Edmonton, Vancouver, Montreal, Halifax, and many other cities, as well as over 500 jurisdictions across the United States, because they improve safety and have positive outcomes for health, economy, and the environment.

You can read more about Complete Streets at the following links:
https://ottawa.ca/en/planning-development-and-construction/community-design/design-and-planning-guidelines/completed-guidelines/complete-streets-ottawa#section-9034dd2f-8c5a-4070-bc59-c43a6c39a913

Paving The Way Forward: The Safety Implications of Complete Streets – The Canadian Association of Road Safety Professionals (CARSP)

Microsoft Word - RDIMS-#4737085-v2-COMPLETE_STREETS_ISSUE_PAPER_-_PRETRANSL…

 

Q: How many trees will be removed?

A: According to the City’s Forestry experts, no trees will be removed for this project. Some of the traffic calming bulb-outs that residents will see in the design are there to protect existing mature trees and also double as traffic calming features. Removing the bulb-outs may threaten the root structure of some of these trees, given their proximity to the curb.

 

Q: How much of private property will be removed?

A: No private property will be affected by this project. There will be work done in the City’s Right of Way, which varies site by site. To take a look at specific parcels, please see the project website at Presentation - Whitmore, Cline and Sherman integrated road, sewer and watermain renewal (CP987). A minimum standard of 3m in each lane will be maintained in each direction, and in many places the road will remain much wider than that.

 

Q: How much driveway space will be removed?

A: According to the Project Manager, some driveways will see no significant difference in length, whereas others where the road alignment shifts in addition to the sidewalk may result in a loss of up to 2.5 m of City-owned Right-of-Way. Residents are encouraged to review the presentation materials on the project website to observe proposed roadway realignment in front of their specific properties.

 

Q: What will happen to property values if sidewalks are built?

A: The integrated renewal project is being completed so that the watermain, sanitary and sewer lines have restored integrity for providing a level of service to your home. Flood, erosion of the road, and sanitary/ sewer backups are all possible with failing infrastructure which would definitely be of significant concern for insurance and property value

The sidewalk piece is ancillary to the main project and is not part of the City’s calculation for infrastructure, but my office did some research. We were able to find a strong relationship between walkability and increased property values. According to several studies, sidewalks and the “walkability score” for neighbourhoods will increase property values about 1 per cent.
https://transloc.com/blog/sidewalks-necessary-often-ignored/

https://cobylefko.medium.com/why-you-should-care-about-sidewalks-a8c10a38d0c3

https://keflatwork.com/blog/sidewalks-add-value-community/

5 Neighborhood Amenities That Increase Your Home’s Value

 

Q: Councillor Johnson lives in the neighbourhood. Was it her decision to build sidewalks?

A: No. This project was planned by the City based on the need to replace the sewer and water infrastructure beneath the street.

At the November 27, 2025 meeting of the Public Works and Infrastructure Committee, I asked staff how these decisions are made and what role Councillors have in determining the priorities. Here’s what we were told by Sue Johns, Director, Asset Management Services, in the Infrastructure & Water Services Department:

Laine: Can someone please comment as to how streets are selected for integrated renewal projects and whether councillors are at all part of that decision-making?

Sue Johns: The prioritization processes across all of the investment recommendations that we evaluate a long list of or several criteria that are technically based, condition assessments of the assets, so of the pipes that are within the road, feedback from our operations teams about how often they're attending and what kind of things are working or not working well, the amount of traffic in the case of roads, the whether there's a sidewalk or not, what the adjacent land use is, what the pedestrian traffic is.

There's quite a list of criteria that form these giant spreadsheets that we evaluate.

Even when all of that data is considered, there's a risk assessment that takes place, a prioritization in the prioritization process, as well as a coordination.

Frankly speaking, the integrated projects are usually driven by the pipe needs. It's the underground needs. It's the condition of those pipes that are driving an integrated project. It is our biggest single program within the renewal budget.

I would have to say, I would think it's like many of other, our recommendations to council is, it's technically based. And so we'd be very happy to expand on how we make these decisions.

And I will tell you that this is one of the programs that is very difficult to prioritize because it has multiple funding sources and each of those funding envelopes have to balance out within all of the other needs and we still have to make sure that we're getting our higher risk and higher priority investments in front of you for consideration.

You can watch the video at https://youtu.be/G-5VwGslVW0

 

Q: Why is the City spending money on sidewalks and traffic calming when there are other priorities?

A: Because the underlying infrastructure must be replaced, the road has to be completely torn up. The large majority of the budget for this project will go toward that work. Including sidewalks and traffic calming measures when the road has to be rebuilt anyway does not substantially change the overall budget, and is currently estimated at under 2% of integrated renewal projects. This means the project costs taxpayers significantly less by taking advantage of an existing construction project to make concurrent investments for various users of the road.


Q: Did another councillor block the sidewalk project in his ward?

A: No. The Councillor for the Manor Park neighbourhood asked the City to reconsider the timing of sidewalks on one street as part of his larger Transportation projects. However, because the Complete Streets policy is part of the Transportation Master Plan that Council adopted; and because the budget for the project was adopted by Council, one Councillor is unable to overturn policies set by all of Council. We are expecting a report on the matter in January, but the expectation is that the sidewalk project in that neighbourhood will be going ahead and staff continue to develop the project.

 

Q: Will the City coordinate with the NCC to get a paved pathway all the way from Cline to the Experimental Park pathway without a missing paved section?

A: While this segment of NCC pathway is not within the scope of the project, the City has engaged the NCC for comments and determine if funding may be made available to undertake the work. The City anticipates having further details as part of the next public information session in Spring 2026.

 

Q: Who will pay for this project?

A: This project has budgeted through the City's Infrastructure budget and will come out of city-wide revenues. There will be no additional cost to residents of Cline, Whitmore, or Sherman.

Latest posts

As the City moves toward adopting a new Zoning By-law in early 2026, alongside two ongoing secondary plans in College Ward for 2026-27, and several infill and larger developments always ongoing, I often hear from residents with concerns about density, parks, parking, school capacity, shadows, transportation, property standards, and property values. Many residents also share they are excited by the new opportunities and growth these changes could bring. 

Given how much has changed in recent years, I wanted to take a moment to walk through the evolving planning landscape — both locally and provincially — and explain how these changes shape development in Ottawa. 

At a recent community event, it was suggested that my background in affordable housing presented a “conflict of interest” with my role as your City Councillor. Since a conflict of interest is defined by the Municipal Act as a financial interest in a particular matter – that is, that I will personally benefit from decision-making on housing issues – this doesn’t quite add up.

I think the suggestion was that as someone who cares about the skyrocketing number of people who are forced to choose between housing costs and savings, or food, or other financial priorities, I’m compromised in my ability to advocate for current residents. I can only respond that I think people who need affordable housing are personal support workers, hairstylists, students, seniors and others who live in our communities today. I think it’s our kids and our grandparents.

I don’t agree that representing their interests, as well as the interests of those fortunate enough to be doing better, is in any way a conflict of interest. It’s hard, but that’s the job.

As disappointed as I was in the comment, it gives me an opportunity to reflect on my background and the values I bring to my work as your Councillor. I ran openly on my background in affordable housing as an asset to the role, and I think it might be useful to share how I believe my background makes me – and will continue to help me – be a better City Councillor.

City councillors this week debated a plan to give developers a break from having to pay for community improvements alongside the housing they build.

I introduced motions for a more measured approach: one that better shares the costs of keeping up with intensification between developers and taxpayers; and to hold a carefully planned review of whether giving a break to developers actually meets our housing goals, and to make sure the impacts are fair across the city.

I am pleased to say that my colleagues unanimously supported my approach.

No doubt about it: new homebuilding in the city has slowed. Ottawa developers argue that by giving them a pass on the 4 per cent of land value they put towards local community projects, we will see more shovels in the ground faster.

That might be true, or it might not. But we need to consider the implications of foregone benefits charges and what will happen if those aren’t forthcoming. I’d argue that giving developers a break from investing in community benefits will impact some communities more than others.

In neighbourhoods like College Ward, there are a lot of modest homes built in the 1960s on large, well-treed lots. The streets are wide without sidewalks or streetlighting. Density – the number of homes per hectare – is low.

These are homes that were built for young, growing families who have largely now grown up and left, with streets designed from another time. As empty-nesters move on, their neighbourhoods are in transition. Our older suburbs inside the Greenbelt are prime for development and new residents expect modern infrastructure and services.

I like to call our neighbourhood and the ones like it – inside the Greenbelt but not downtown – the “Delta” communities because they are going to see the most change in the coming years. Although communities across the city will change, wards like College, and parts of Gloucester, Riverside, Nepean, and others, will change the most dramatically. In time, albeit over several decades, these neighbourhoods will look very different from how they were planned. It is an anxious time for many families in established communities.

We need infill, and these neighbourhoods can handle the increased density. But more people create more pressure on community services and spaces. We need to build new recreation facilities and upgrade the ones we have. We need pedestrian crosswalks, sidewalks, and street lighting to make our roads safer for the influx of kids. Newer suburban neighbourhoods have been built with a higher standard, while the pipes and other infrastructure in downtown are so old, the city has no choice but to replace them and upgrade the roads and sidewalks at the same time.

Neighbourhoods like City View and Lynwood, for example, have no sidewalks, no streetlights, are designed with wide roads for fast speeds, and have few parks or no parks! But when we welcome such a dramatic change in our neighbourhoods, from 4 storeys to 32 storeys, would you not agree that services must improve to match the new population?

The question before us this week was: who should pay to ensure services keep up with growth in established neighbourhoods? Should it be the residents of new homes to whom developers pass municipal charges? Or should it be you and me, the existing taxpayers?

We need more housing, but we also need to balance the increased density with quality of life for both the existing residents and the incoming ones. Benefits charges are a fair and reasonable approach to doing that. Providing developers with a holiday will put the burden on everyone’s tax bill.

There isn’t enough analysis of the recommendation being put to Council to convince me and others that axing benefits charges will actually result in more homes being built. Or how much the average taxpayer will need to pay to upgrade the needed facilities in those existing neighbourhoods. My concern is that by stripping developers of the obligation to invest in community improvements, we pit the Official Plan’s vision of the ‘most livable midsized city in North America’ against the Task Force’s vision of making ‘Ottawa the most housing-friendly city in Canada’. We need both.

See the CBC article

Share this post

Take action

Upcoming Events

Sign up for updates