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.
——————–
Loading ...