Your participation: Phase 2A public consultation, March 30-31
Phase 2A of the Interprovincial Crossing Environmental Assessment is well under way. The main task in this phase is to develop the Study Design to be used in Phase 2B, during which the recommended corridor will be selected and the detailed Environmental Assessment completed.
In order to remove the threat of a Kettle Island Bridge and a heavy truck route through our communities, we need to pay attention to the Study Design and make our views known. For example, the Manor Park Community Association has stressed the following:
- Input from the public, and in particular from those who would be most affected by each corridor, must be given serious consideration
- The impact of a corridor and heavy truck route on established communities, and in particular on health and safety, should be of the utmost importance in the decision
- The goal should be to select the best location within the general confines of the three corridors carried forward, rather than the options being limited to the suggested routes as determined in the deeply flawed Phase 1.
Only one set of public consultations will take place during Phase 2A. Opponents of Kettle Island need to attend in large numbers.
Here are the details:
The communities of Ottawa and Gatineau are invited to review information boards, participate in discussions with Study experts at various ‘consultation kiosks’ that will be set-up on location, and provide comments on the draft Study Design report, anytime between 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. at the following locations:
Ottawa
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Ottawa City Hall – Jean Piggott Hall
110 Laurier Avenue West, Ottawa, ON
Gatineau
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m.
Maison du Citoyen – Agora
25, rue Laurier, Gatineau, QC
Please make your views known. Spread the word to your neighbours and friends.
Loading ...
March 27th, 2010 at 10:08 pm
The Orleans politicians are going all out again. You must take a look at commonsensecrossing.com, it is an very poor attempt at showing facts why kettle bridge is the right decision. They poorly attempt to say it is about green belt, then quickly shift opinion to congestion of traffic on the 174. Both are good reasons kettle island should not be chosen. They conveniently choose to ignore that a new ramp will unload Gatineau traffic ahead of Orleans residents going downtown to work. Their attempt at misleading the residents of Ottawa is morally corrupt.
April 23rd, 2010 at 1:20 pm
I take offense to the above comment. Morally corrupt? Please, let’s discuss this like adults.
Let’s talk traffic for the 100000 east end residents:
For an Orleans resident going into work – Merging Gatineau truck traffic into the 174 before the pinch point of the split worsens the East to downtown commute.
For an Orleans resident coming home – truck traffic going thru the split versus exiting to 417 south (as today), worsens the Eastern commute.
And, in both cases – the new cloverleaf messes up the bus lanes that currently provide the current poor excuse for mass transit to the eastern part of the city.
Add to that the Greenbelt corridors are so far from downtown that no downtown bound trucks will use them.
Can you point out where on the http://www.commonsensecrossings.com site does it say that Kettle Island is the “right” choice? We’re trying to stay above throwing rocks at our neighbors.
Thanks!
Pat Boule
May 1st, 2010 at 9:50 am
We’re at a critical crossroad in a flawed study. None of the three corridor options on the table is ideal. It’s time to find the common ground and work together. Two issues that unite us:
The study must give priority to finding the right solution to the real problem – the trucks;
The Ontario Government must opt back in as a study proponent and apply its provincial environmental legislation. Without this, there is no accountability in the process and no scrutiny until one corridor is chosen. Then it will be too late.
May 27th, 2010 at 5:06 pm
I take back my morally corrupt comment. I actually agree in preserving the greenbelt, but most won’t agree with what I really believe. At this point, I will say it anyway. No bridges for fossil fuel burning transportation. No 174 in the greenbelt. Replace it all with light rail. Goods can come in on rail. At that point we would only need minimal delivery systems outside of the rail system. That sounds sustainable. Thanks for letting the crazy man vent.
June 3rd, 2010 at 9:18 pm
Hey – we’re all in this Sustainable Solutions thing together