Stop The Kettle Island Bridge

Further arguments for an alternate route: Lower Duck/Beauchamp

In a previous posting, we presented an alternate route. Let’s call it Option 6B – Lower Duck/Beauchamp.

Here are a few points to reinforce the validity and overall attractiveness of this option:

• Ottawa wants to prohibit trucks on King Edward/Rideau Streets. Gatineau wants to limit trucks on Montée Paiement in the Kettle Island corridor. The solution may be to build a bridge outside of the city cores and designate it as a truck route in an essentially vacant corridor on both sides of the river – Lower Duck/Beauchamp.
• On the Quebec side, the corridor follows a new route through green space that is mainly bush land and on the Ontario side follows the same route as the current Alternative 6, away from communities.
• This variation on Alternative 6 offers many of the traffic/transportation advantages that Alternative 5, Kettle Island, does but it reduces significantly the main opposition to Alternative 5 i.e. the serious impacts on institutions and on people living in the corridor. Kettle Island is the worst option for transit and according to the consultant encourages car use. This new corridor would provide good connection to planned transit facilities on both sides of the river.

View Larger Map

Share on Facebook

Message from Stephen Hazell, CEO of Sierra Club Canada‏

MPCA executives received the following note from Stephen Hazell, CEO of the Sierra Club Canada, as part of an ongoing dialogue with him about the bridge study.  This note adds some clarification to and adds further concern about the recent changes to the Environmental Assessment Act implemented by the federal government.
———–
Colleagues

Some of you may have seen yesterday’s Globe and Mail. For those who did not, here’s the link: www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20090321.ASSESS21/TPStory/

Here is a lengthier explanation of what I was getting at. It appears that John Baird and Jim Prentice have made the necessary changes to the Navigable Waters Protection Act (NWPA) and Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) regulations to allow them to eliminate any requirement for a federal environmental assessment of an Ottawa River bridge and related heavy truck route.

The changes to the NWPA (approved as part of the Budget Implementation Act) authorize the Minister of Transport to issue an order directing that a permit for any work that obstructs navigation (such as an Ottawa River bridge) is not required. If no permit is required under the NWPA, no federal environmental assessment under CEAA is required either. Under final regulations published in the Canada Gazette Part II last week (without any public notice) no federal environmental assessment is required for the proposed widening of a road if no more than two additional lanes are to be added, if the project is located within 300 metres of a transportation right-of-way and if laws and measures are in place to deal with environmentally sensitive areas (such as Kettle Island) located within 250 metres of the project.

Sounds like Kettle Island doesn’t it?

Stephen
———–

Share on Facebook

An alternate route?

There have been a number of references in recent weeks to the fact that there may exist better options beyond the top three alternatives presented by ROCHE-NCE.  Each of the current alternatives has flaws – some to greater extents than others.

If there are better options, what would they look like?  And will the terms of reference for Phase 2 of the study permit further exploration of potentially better options?

Below is one suggested alternate route, a variation on Corridor 6 (Lower Duck), that just may be a more balanced option that could potentially better represent the broader needs of the National Capital Region.

View Larger Map

Share on Facebook

Overhaul of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act

The federal government, as part of their attempt to stimulate the economy, has overhauled the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act.

From a Globe and Mail article on the topic:

On Thursday, the changes were revealed in the Canada Gazette. Effective immediately, and for the next two years, numerous types of projects will not require a federal environmental assessment in certain circumstances. They include construction and remodelling of community buildings, water treatment and distribution systems, transit, road construction and waste management projects.

“When you look at the exclusion list … [it's] big enough to run your rapid transit through. I mean, the loopholes [are] major opportunities for abuse,” Stephen Hazell, the executive director of Sierra Club Canada, said yesterday. “My reading of this … would allow [Ottawa MP] John Baird to authorize a bigger bridge over the Ottawa River and the highway up to it without any environmental assessment.”

The complete article can be found here:
Mar. 21, Globe and Mail: ‘Abuse’ foreseen in assessment exemptions

Given the sensitivity around the location of the bridge, this is cause for concern.  Although exactly how this regulation change will impact the next phase of the study is undetermined at this point.

What it does to is further murky the waters as to how exactly the NCC will proceed in the next phase of the study, reinforcing the importance of public consultation and transparency in determining the phase 2 terms of reference.

Will the NCC provide this public consultation and transparency around their process to define the terms of reference?  This is TBD, but it is important for the public to voice any concerns around this process before it is too late.

Share on Facebook

MPCA letter to the Premier of Ontario

The following letter was sent to Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario, by John Forsey, MPCA President. If you agree with the points raised in this letter, you are encouraged to reinforce these points with letters of your own to the NCC and to the Premier.
——————–

March 16, 2009

Hon. Dalton McGuinty, Premier
Legislative Building
Queen’s Park
Toronto ON M7A 1A1
Via e-mail: dmcguinty.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org

Dear Premier McGuinty:

Re: Ottawa River Interprovincial Crossings Study

The Manor Park Community Association (MPCA) has consistently taken the following position on this important file:

• The Kettle Island Corridor is unacceptable; and
• Another interprovincial crossing is needed, but must not cause the transfer of heavy commercial vehicles from one established neighbourhood to another.

MPCA would like to thank you and your government for your principled response to the Phase 1 Environmental Assessment (EA). This was instrumental in bringing about the recent decision of the NCC Board not to accept the recommendation of the consultant to proceed with a Phase 2 assessment of the Kettle Island Corridor alone. Nevertheless, our community is concerned that the Kettle Island option remains on the table, and we will continue to oppose it as a viable corridor.

The MPCA has serious concerns about the manner in which Phase 1 was conducted. We believe that some changes in priority and methodology are required at the outset of the next phase to result in a more transparent and productive process. The purpose of this letter is to urge you and your government to link Ontario funding for the next phase to meeting the following criteria:

• Independent analysis, ensured by hiring a different consultant in Phase 2;
• Meaningful public consultation, including opening the terms of reference to public comment;
• Terms of Reference that include:
  • Priority weighting of factors related to impact on communities, transit and economic development, as requested by your government;
  • The study of variations from the corridor alignments defined in Phase 1;
  • A requirement to take into account the results of the truck traffic and interprovincial transit studies;
  • The requirements of the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act in the harmonized EA; and
• An explicit requirement to solve the downtown core truck impasse.

Further detail on these points is contained in the Annex.

The Manor Park community intends to remain active on the interprovincial crossings file in the upcoming months. We look forward to working closely with the study team and the consultants toward a goal of finding a solution that does not harm communities and addresses the transportation needs of the National Capital Region for the 21st century—including public transit. We urge you and your government to support a Phase 2 assessment that will achieve this goal.

Yours sincerely,

John Forsey, P.Eng.
President

cc.
Hon. Madeleine Meilleur
Minister of Community and Social Services
Minister Responsible for Francophone Affairs
MPP Ottawa-Vanier
mmeilleur.mpp@liberal.ola.org

Hon. James J. Bradley
Minister of Transportation
jbradley.mpp@liberal.ola.org

Annex

Independent Analysis is Required
MPCA believes that there were a number of flaws in the manner in which the Phase 1 study was conducted, the most egregious of which was the disregard for the health, safety and well-being of residents in close proximity to the corridors under study. Despite extensive written and oral public comments, many concerns were never satisfactorily addressed. Our fear is that the same consultant, Roche-NCE, if engaged for the next phase, would simply confirm its Phase 1 conclusion. We urge the proponents of this study to seek an independent assessment for the next phase by hiring a different consultant. This would not only provide greater objectivity, but would also assure us that the commitment to protect the interests of existing communities is sincere.

Meaningful Public Consultation is Required
Given the paramount importance of the impact on existing communities, we request the participation, in all aspects of Phase 2, of representatives from communities that will be affected by the corridors under study. This would include providing input to staff in drafting the Terms of Reference and ongoing consultation throughout the process.

In particular, unlike what transpired in Phase 1, weightings for each assessment factor should be subject to public participation. If only special interests are represented in the weighting process, how will communities be protected? Citizens need to have input.

Terms of Reference are Critical
It is essential that the Terms of Reference for the next phase be carefully developed and open to public review and comment, prior to engaging the consultant.

As suggested by your government, the impact on existing communities, compatibility with public transit, and impact on economic development are all highly important criteria that need to be recognized in the Terms of Reference. These factors were not sufficiently weighted in the Phase 1 study. Priority needs to be given to the weighting of the factors related to impact on communities and public transit, as opposed to factors related to trucking and automobile commuter interests.

MPCA understands that a harmonized environmental assessment process to meet both federal and provincial requirements will be undertaken. We wish to ensure that the most stringent of the federal and provincial requirements is applied. We are particularly concerned about retaining full legislative protection of the social and human environment in the harmonized EA, which is assured only through participation of the provincial ministries of the environment.

The actual corridors to be evaluated should not be strictly limited to the alignments of corridors 5, 6, 7, as defined by the Phase 1 consultant. To do so would exclude possible variations of corridors 6 and 7, which could provide the optimal solution.

Results of the recently-initiated interprovincial transit study and the updated interprovincial truck traffic study mandated by the NCC Board need to be taken into account in evaluating the candidate corridors.

The Recommended Corridor Must Solve the Truck Route Impasse
The new crossing must be located so as to solve the truck (semi-trailer) route impasse. It must be selected to accommodate all the long-distance heavy transport vehicles that are today so problematic along the Rideau–King Edward corridor.

As matters stand, Ottawa City Council has passed a resolution, backed by the Ontario Municipal Board, to ban such trucks on the King Edward Corridor, as soon as a new crossing is opened. The Rideau Street BIA has threatened legal action if this does not occur. The City of Gatineau has accepted the Kettle Island Corridor option, but only if trucks can remain on the Macdonald-Cartier bridge and be prevented from using Montée Paiement. The Phase 1 report recommends continuing to permit some heavy truck traffic on the King Edward Corridor and the remainder on the Kettle Island Corridor—negatively impacting existing communities along both routes.

When presented with the impasse, Roche-NCE suggested that if all heavy trucks were to be prohibited from King Edward Avenue, many would choose to use the Chaudière Bridge instead of the new corridor. The approaches to the Chaudière Bridge from expressways on both sides of the Ottawa River are difficult and pass through the downtown cores of Ottawa and Gatineau. Furthermore, structural limitations have recently been discovered in the Chaudière Bridge. Hence, our view is that the Chaudière Bridge is unsuitable to absorb an increased proportion of the heavy vehicle load.

In short, the new corridor must have the capability to absorb virtually all the interprovincial heavy vehicle traffic.
——————–

Share on Facebook

Petition update from Mauril Bélanger

PRESS RELEASE
For immediate release

Presentation to the House of Commons of the latest petitions regarding future interprovincial crossings

OTTAWA, March 9, 2009 – The Honourable Mauril Bélanger, Member for Ottawa-Vanier, presented to the House of Commons today the rest of the petitions calling on the Government of Canada to require the National Capital Commission (NCC) to conduct a comprehensive study of a bridge linking Canotek Industrial Park to the Gatineau Airport. The MP has been presenting petitions since the end of November 2008, at nearly every sitting. Thousands of people have signed these petitions, on both sides of the river.

“I am delighted that the NCC’s Board of Directors unanimously adopted at a public meeting just over three weeks ago a resolution to proceed with Phase 2 of the environmental assessment of interprovincial crossings in the national capital region, specifically corridors 5 (Kettle Island), 6 (Lower Duck Island) and 7 (Gatineau Executive Airport – Canotek Industrial Park)”, stated Mr. Bélanger. “These petitions have apparently had a positive result and we can be very proud of this.”

On the Ontario side, the ideal corridor, in the opinion of Mr. Bélanger and many community members, should be west of the greenbelt and east of the R.O. Pickard water purification plant, close to the Canotek Industrial Park.

“I am glad that NCC has been made aware of my efforts, judging from its recent decision,” concluded the Member for Ottawa-Vanier.

Information:
Alexandre Mattard-Michaud
Office of the Honourable Mauril Bélanger, PC, MP
613-992-4766

Share on Facebook

NCC’s official Phase 1 submission to the Board of Directors

I just came across the official submission to the NCC Board of Directors, posted on the NCC Interprovincial Crossings website. This is the NCC’s official document of record of the history and current state of the project upon the completion of Phase 1, and was presented to the NCC Board on February 13, 2009 for approval.

As noted on the NCC web:

The Board of Directors members approved the following:

The recommendations contained in the January 5, 2009, Interprovincial Crossings EA Study – Summary Report, by Roche-NCE, with the following amendments:

• In addition to the consultant’s recommendation to assess in detail the Kettle Island crossing, the corridors at Lower Duck Island and Gatineau Airport/McLaurin Bay be included in Phase 2 of the study, subject to approval by the three funding partners.

• The Board also approved that the commercial vehicles planning study to review interprovincial crossings and the ability to meet forecast demand be started in parallel to the EA study.

This document summarizes Phase 1 results, stakeholder recommendations, funding, impacts and risks, next steps, and includes an appendix with official correspondence with and documentation from MTO, MTQ, City of Ottawa, and City of Gatineau.

Click here to access the full document.

It’s a worthy read.

Share on Facebook

Letter from Marie Lemay, CEO of the NCC

Below are excerpts from a letter from Marie Lemay, CEO of the NCC, recapping where the NCC is in the process and where they are going.

According to this letter, the consultant for Phase 2 will be selected by September 2009 and Phase 2 of the project is planned to be completed and approved by October 2013.

Based on this timeline, construction could, theoretically, begin any time after that, pending funding approvals and awarding of associated contracts.
——————-
…

The Interprovincial Crossing Environmental Assessment (EA) study is part of long-term transportation planning by the federal, provincial and municipal authorities in Canada’s Capital Region. This EA Study is lead jointly by the NCC, the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) and the ministère des Transports du Québec (MTQ), with technical support of the cities of Ottawa and Gatineau. ROCHE-NCE provided consulting expertise to the study partners during Phase 1 of the EA study, which has now been completed.

Phase 1 of the EA study recommended Kettle Island Corridor as the highest ranked and technically preferred location for a future interprovincial crossing. It also recommended carrying forward a number of important planning strategies.

The summary report, the technical studies and outcome of the public consultations of the final report on Phase 1 of the EA study were made public on January 5, 2009.

In order to proceed to Phase 2 and complete the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study in conformity with the Partnership Agreement between the governments of Canada, Quebec and Ontario, unanimity amongst NCC, MTO and MTQ, on the number and location of crossing corridor(s) and alignments is required. Our funding partners, MTO and MTQ, in a letter dated January 27, 2009, informed us of their interest in doing more detailed study of the first three ranking corridors instead of only the first ranking corridor.

On February 13, 2009, the NCC’s Board of Directors approved the recommendations contained in the January 5, 2009, Interprovincial Crossings EA Study – Summary Report, by Roche-NCE, with the following amendments:

• In addition to the consultant’s recommendation to assess in detail the Kettle Island crossing, the corridors at Lower Duck Island/Lorrain Boulevard, and Lower Duck Island/Gatineau Airport/McLaurin Bay be included in Phase 2 of the study, subject to approval by the three funding partners, NCC, the MTO and the MTQ.

• The Board also approved that the commercial vehicles planning study to review interprovincial crossings and the ability to meet forecast demand be started in parallel to the EA study.

The Board’s decision has been communicated to the MTO and MTQ in a letter asking that they confirm their commitment to provide additional funding, in order to proceed to Phase 2.

Phase 2 of the study will involve the following steps and targeted dates:

• Choosing and contracting consultant services, through a Request for Proposals process – completion by September 2009;
• Phase 2 of the Study – completion by July 2012; and
• Environmental approvals – completion by October 2013.

Phase 2 of the study will evaluate in more detail the environmental, social, economic, heritage and transportation effects of the corridors and propose mitigation measures to address these effects. The analysis, as per our partners’ request, will include impacts on communities, economic development and transit.

The NCC will continue to manage and administer the study in a collaborative effort between the three funding partners, the City of Ottawa and the Ville de Gatineau.

Once Phase 2 is initiated, we will invite all interested parties to actively participate in the consultation process. I encourage you to consult the NCC’s website at www.canadascapital.gc.ca for information regarding the Interprovincial Crossings Study.

Thank you for your interest in this important initiative.

Yours sincerely,

Marie Lemay, P.Eng., ing.
Chief Executive Officer

——————-

Share on Facebook

MPCA letter to Russell Mills, NCC Chair, re: next phase of the study

The following letter was sent last week by the MPCA to Russell Mills, NCC Chair, highlighting key factors that need to be considered as the next phase of the project is defined:
——————
MANOR PARK COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION
ASSOCIATION COMMUNAUTAIRE DE MANOR PARK

March 4, 2009

Mr. Russell Mills
Chairman of the Board
National Capital Commission
202-40 Elgin Street
Ottawa, Ontario, K1P1C7

Dear Mr. Mills:
Re: Interprovincial Crossings Study

While the position of the Manor Park Community Association (MPCA) has consistently been that a new Interprovincial crossing is necessary, we have serious concerns about the manner in which the Interprovincial Crossings Phase 1 Environmental Assessment was conducted. We therefore welcome and appreciate the decision of the NCC Board not to accept the consultant’s recommendation to proceed with a Phase 2 Assessment of the Kettle Island Corridor alone.

We believe that as the Commission enters the next phase of this important study, there are some
changes in priority and methodology that will result in a more transparent and acceptable process. The purpose of this letter is to seek information regarding the process for the next steps and to share our views with you prior to the start of the next phase.

Independent Analysis is Required

MPCA believes that there were a number of flaws in the manner in which the Phase 1 study was
conducted, the most egregious of which was the disregard for the health, safety and well-being of
residents in close proximity to the corridors under study. I will not present details here, but would refer you to the many hundreds of submissions made to Roche-NCE following PCS#4, and to the oral and written presentations made at the NCC AGM on Dec. 3, 2008.

We urge the NCC to seek an independent assessment for Phase 2 of the EA by hiring a different
consultant for the next phase. This would not only provide greater objectivity but would also assure us that the NCC is truly committed to protecting the interests of existing communities. Our concern is that the same consultant, if engaged for the next phase, would simply confirm its Phase 1 conclusion.

Canadian Environmental Assessment Act

The NCC Board has decided to carry three corridors forward into Phase 2 of the Environmental
Assessment. However, it is our understanding that under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (the “Act”), there is no opportunity in a screening study to compare alternative projects, but rather that the screening study requires that only one site-specific project be considered.

In light of this, how will Phase 2 proceed? Our technical committee, comprised of a number of engineers, has suggested that the next step in the Interprovincial Crossings study be a comparative analysis to compare the alternative corridors before selecting the site-specific project. This comparative analysis would of course need to be in sufficient detail to make a rational decision, but it would not require the design of intersections, structures, noise barriers, berms, etc. Following completion of this comparative analysis, the fully detailed screening study, as envisaged in the Act would proceed.

It is important that this matter is clarified so as to be part of the Terms of Reference for the next phase of the study.

Terms of Reference are Critical

It is essential that the Terms of Reference for the next phase be carefully developed and open to public review and comment, prior to engaging the consultant.

As noted above, the Terms of Reference need to reflect both the decision of the Board and the provisions of applicable legislation.

As suggested by the Province of Ontario, the impact on existing communities, compatibility with public transit, and impact on economic development are all highly important criteria that need to be recognized in the Terms of Reference. These factors were not sufficiently weighted in the Phase 1 study.

Results of the recently-initiated interprovincial transit study and updated interprovincial truck traffic studies need to be completed before evaluating the candidate corridors.

The actual corridors to be evaluated should not be strictly limited by the Terms of Reference to the
alignments of corridors 5, 6, 7, as defined by Roche-NCE. To do so would exclude possible variations for corridors 6 and 7 (including one proposed by MPCA’s Technical Committee and previously made available to the members of the NCC Board), which could provide the optimal solution.

Meaningful Public Consultation is Required

Given the paramount importance of the impact on existing communities, we urge the NCC to facilitate the participation, in all aspects of Phase 2, of representatives from communities that will be affected by the corridors under study.

This would include providing input to staff in drafting the Terms of Reference and ongoing consultation throughout the process.

In particular, unlike what transpired in Phase 1, weightings for each assessment factor should be subject to public participation. If only special interests are represented in the weighting process, how will communities be protected? Citizens need to have input.

The Recommended Corridor Must Solve the Truck Route Impasse

The new crossing must be located so as to solve the truck (semi-trailer) route impasse. It must be
selected to accommodate all the long-distance heavy transport vehicles that are today so problematic along the Rideau-King Edward corridor.

As matters stand, Ottawa City Council has passed a resolution, backed by the Ontario Municipal Board, to ban such trucks on the King Edward Corridor, as soon as a new crossing is opened. The Rideau Street BIA has threatened legal action if this does not occur. The City of Gatineau has accepted the Kettle Island Corridor option, but only if trucks can remain on the Macdonald-Cartier bridge and be prevented from using Montee Paiement. The Phase 1 report recommends continuing to permit some heavy truck traffic on the King Edward Corridor and the remainder on the Kettle Island Corridor—negatively impacting existing communities along both routes.

When presented with the impasse, Roche-NCE suggested that if all heavy trucks were to be prohibited from King Edward Avenue, many would choose to use the Chaudiere Bridge instead of the new corridor. The approaches to the Chaudiere Bridge from expressways on both sides of the Ottawa River are difficult and pass through the downtown cores of Ottawa and Gatineau. Furthermore, structural limitations have recently been discovered in the Chaudiere Bridge. Hence, our view is that the Chaudiere Bridge is unsuitable to absorb an increased proportion of the heavy vehicle load.

In short, the new corridor must have the capability to absorb virtually all the interprovincial heavy vehicle traffic.

The Manor Park Community intends to remain active on this file in the upcoming months. We look
forward to working closely with the consultants, the NCC staff and the Board, with a goal of finding a
solution that does not harm communities and meets the needs of the National Capital Region.

I would be grateful if you would distribute copies of this letter to members of the NCC Board.

Yours sincerely,

John Forsey, P.Eng.
President
cc. (soft copy only)
Hon. Mauril Belanger
Hon. Madeleine Meilleur
Coun. Jacques Legendre
——————

Share on Facebook