Interprovincial bridge crossing discussion

[eemy]

I think the fact that Ottawa has very little manufacturing makes it far more difficult to justify expansion for rail freight in the Ottawa area.

[c_speed3108]

Trucks to remain on King Edward after new bridge built

Last Updated: Friday, September 5, 2008 | 10:06 AM ET
CBC News

Thousands of trucks will likely continue to clog King Edward Avenue in downtown Ottawa even after a new interprovincial bridge is built at Kettle Island in the city's east end, says the National Capital Commission.

The NCC announced the proposed location Thursday for the new bridge across the Ottawa River between Ottawa and Gatineau, following a study of 10 potential routes over more than a year and a half.

Steve Taylor, project manager for the bridge study said one of the goals of the study was to find an alternative route for trucking because right now there are only two:

* The MacDonald-Cartier bridge, which feeds traffic to and from King Edward Avenue and is the most direct route between Highway 417, which is part of the Trans-Canada Highway in Ontario, and the Quebec side of the region.
* The Chaudière Bridge, just west of downtown near the Canadian War Museum.

But Taylor said by 2031, after the Kettle Island bridge is built, there will still be an estimated 2,500 trucks using the MacDonald-Cartier bridge and King Edward Avenue daily — about the same number that use it now.

However, due to the expected increase in truck traffic over the next two decades, another 1,700 trucks, including most of the city's tractor-trailers, will probably cross the Kettle Island bridge each day, Taylor estimated.

Innes Ward Coun. Rainer Bloess said people are mistaken if they believe King Edward will no longer be used as a truck route once the Kettle Island Bridge is built.

"That is not what they are recommending."

He added that in the future, city councils in Ottawa and Gatineau could opt to ban truck traffic from the MacDonald-Cartier bridge.

However, he suggested it would be best to wait until the Kettle Island Bridge is built before considering that.

.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Kitchissippi

Except that the consultants already picked Kettle Island from the options.

Kettle Island and the Duck Islands are pretty neat places if you ever get a chance to get to them. They are riddled with blind channels full of turtles and fish, sheltered from the river's current.

Interestingly enough, Kettle Island was the scene of quite a bit of human activity in the early part of the 20th century. I have heard that there might have been cottages there at one point.

What I do know is that it was once the site of a miniature amusement park called Parc Belle Isle, with a restaurant, vaudeville theatre, and fun rides of some sort.

Not sure if there are any vestiges of this left on Kettle Island today.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Deez

The WB split can already be a crawl in the AM...what's going to happen when you throw in X-thousand Gatineau commuters eager to shave off 5 minutes from their commute? In my mind, this is the biggest reason why Kettle Island is the wrong choice...it offers far too much convenience for Gatinois who are looking for a new way to get downtown. .

This is the bogeyman on this file. I did a quick distance calculation and from the Montée Paiement exit of the 50, going down Paiement to the new bridge, then down Rockcliffe Parkway, Aviation Parkway, through the split and then down the 417 to downtown Ottawa is close to 25 km. Staying on the 50, then taking the 5 down to the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge is around 15 km.

Plus, although busy, the 50-5 route has no stoplights. The so-called short cut across the new bridge is as busy (if not busier at the split and along the 417), plus has stoplights all along Montée Paiement (at least 8 at the moment if my memory serves me right), plus stoplights on the parkway at Montreal Road and Ogilvie Road.

As I mentioned previously, those Gatineau residents who work in east end Ottawa will commute via the new bridge (they’re already using Macdonald-Cartier/St. Patrick/Vanier Pkwy to get to work now, BTW), that’s for sure. But almost no one from Gatineau will be jockeying for space with people from Orleans, Cumberland and Rockland heading downtown on the 174-417.

[Kitchissippi]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

all the info, including maps (confirms that kettle island is the recommended route)
http://www.ncrcrossings.ca/en/public...ion_no._4.html

the new 'split' looks interesting.... (figure 3)

I find it inconceivable that there was absolutely no consideration for public transit in this concept — the route goes from the Transitway to the Rapibus ROW!

[Dado]

Originally Posted by c_speed3108

.

I think that sums it up very well.


What I can't stand about all this is the circular buck-passing that's gone on between the various studies. Basically, the City of Ottawa's own studies on King Edward say that improvements to the general environment of King Edward will have to wait for the outcome of the bridges study while the bridges study basically says that it will be up to the City of Ottawa to improve King Edward and that diverting truck traffic from King Edward is not the primary purpose of the bridges study.

If you don't mind getting your blood boiling (I'm talking to you, Mille Sabords...), go read this from July 2002:

http://www.ottawa.ca/calendar/ottawa...P-INF-0016.htm

Take, for example, these gems from near the end of the above report:

GENERAL ISSUES

The following is a summary of the most significant issues raised during the study process and how they were responded to.

Truck Traffic: Many area residents expressed concern about the volume and effects of truck traffic on this corridor and want it removed.

Addressing interprovincial truck traffic is not within this Study's mandate. Until an alternative bridge crossing of the Ottawa River and truck route is provided, King Edward Avenue will have to accommodate trucks.

Traffic Volume: Many area residents expressed concern about traffic volume and the effect of all traffic in this corridor and want both the traffic and the number of lanes reduced.

Vehicle reduction would only be accomplished through significant modal split changes or the provision of a new interprovincial bridge. Investigation of improved interprovincial transit and of new interprovincial bridges are not within this Study's mandate. All existing bridge corridor's primary intersections are currently operating at, or over capacity. Until a new corridor is provided there is no place for displaced traffic to go if King Edward Avenue were reduced to four lanes. The Recommended Design for the Renewal of King Edward Avenue can easily be converted from six lanes to four lanes with minimum cost and without affecting the integrity of the recommended plan.

Except, of course, the study that was commissioned allegedly to address interprovincial truck traffic decided that it was going to focus on traffic growth and not existing traffic. Similarly, it didn't consider interprovincial transit either, because, yes, you guessed it, that will be handled by yet another study, which has conveniently started well after STO worked up their Rapibus project that rejected using rail on the grounds that - yes, you guessed it - there was no interprovincial transit study allowing for rail transit into downtown Ottawa.

The above report also considered ~$250M tunnelling options (as of 2002, so inflate a bit) to improve King Edward but these were rejected as being too costly, yet now we're looking at a $400-500M bridge that won't even achieve what a tunnel would achieve.

[nerox3]

I think if there was a 10 dollar charge for trucks to use the current bridges a fair amount of the truck traffic would disappear by simple changes in behavior. Once there is an alternate truck route that doesn't go through the downtown the effect of a small toll would be even mre dramatic in reducing the truck impacts on the core. Was a toll ever considered as a way of reducing truck traffic?

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

all the info, including maps (confirms that kettle island is the recommended route)
http://www.ncrcrossings.ca/en/public...ion_no._4.html

the new 'split' looks interesting.... (figure 3)

I am a bit surprised by figure 2, which seems to show a proposed routing just to the west of the current roadway from the river until it joins the Aviation Parkway at Hemlock. I wonder why they wouldn't just use the existing roads? I see that it also seems to incorporate an exit westbound onto Hemlock - if anything is going to send Manor Park ballistic, it will be the prospect of big increases in traffic on Hemlock/Beechwood.

[Deez]

Originally Posted by Acajack

This is the bogeyman on this file. I did a quick distance calculation and from the Montée Paiement exit of the 50, going down Paiement to the new bridge, then down Rockcliffe Parkway, Aviation Parkway, through the split and then down the 417 to downtown Ottawa is close to 25 km. Staying on the 50, then taking the 5 down to the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge is around 15 km.

Plus, although busy, the 50-5 route has no stoplights. The so-called short cut across the new bridge is as busy (if not busier at the split and along the 417), plus has stoplights all along Montée Paiement (at least 8 at the moment if my memory serves me right), plus stoplights on the parkway at Montreal Road and Ogilvie Road.

As I mentioned previously, those Gatineau residents who work in east end Ottawa will commute via the new bridge (they’re already using Macdonald-Cartier/St. Patrick/Vanier Pkwy to get to work now, BTW), that’s for sure. But almost no one from Gatineau will be jockeying for space with people from Orleans, Cumberland and Rockland heading downtown on the 174-417.

I'll concede that going down all the way to the 417 would be an unlikely route for drivers from Gatineau to take to reach downtown, but there are a few problems with your assumptions.

- Assuming trips are coming from the 50/Montee Paiement interchange is pretty unreasonable considering that everything north of the 50 is off-limits to development.

- Trip-makers would still be free to use Montreal Rd. or Ogilvie to reach their destinations downtown, which would significantly cut down on distance.

- Workers along the Heron/Baseline "strip" of government sprawl would also likely use the new bridge due to much more convenient access to the Vanier Parkway/Riverside Dr.

I did two of my own distance calcs.

First, assuming workers are travelling from the fringe of Gatineau suburbia (the eastern terminus of La Verendrye) to downtown gives 19km via Labrosse, A50, Montcalm and the Chaudiere Bridge and 16km via La Verendrye, Montee Paiement, Aviation, Montreal, and Rideau. Granted traffic on Montreal is an issue, but Chaudiere Bridge isn't a walk in the park either.

If you assume trips are coming from downtown Gatineau, the trip is 12km via Maloney, Montee Paiement and over the bridge and 10km via Maloney, A50 and Chaudiere. So basically anything east of Montee Paiement ends up being shorter over existing bridges if you're heading downtown.

[Acajack]

- Assuming trips are coming from the 50/Montee Paiement interchange is pretty unreasonable considering that everything north of the 50 is off-limits to development.

True, but everyone in the densely-populated area of Gatineau south of the 50 and points east uses the highway to get into the city. Think of all the areas off Paiment, Labrosse, Lorrain, Aéroport and then Masson-Angers and Buckingham. As well, the development freeze north of the 50 only applies to Gatineau territory. There is lots of development (Ottawans would call it Greeley-style I guess) taking place north of the 50 once you get into municipalities like Cantley, Val-des-Monts and L'Ange-Gardien. I believe Cantley may be the fastest-growing municipality in the Ottawa-Gatineau metro area.

- Trip-makers would still be free to use Montreal Rd. or Ogilvie to reach their destinations downtown, which would significantly cut down on distance.

There are 67,573 stoplights along these routes and 67,573 little old ladies living nearby pushing their buttons to cross the street. Not exactly an interesting alternative to a freeway like the 50, even if it is congested.

- Workers along the Heron/Baseline "strip" of government sprawl would also likely use the new bridge due to much more convenient access to the Vanier Parkway/Riverside Dr.

I will agree with you that this new routing might make sense for people working in these areas.

I did two of my own distance calcs.

First, assuming workers are travelling from the fringe of Gatineau suburbia (the eastern terminus of La Verendrye) to downtown gives 19km via Labrosse, A50, Montcalm and the Chaudiere Bridge and 16km via La Verendrye, Montee Paiement, Aviation, Montreal, and Rideau. Granted traffic on Montreal is an issue, but Chaudiere Bridge isn't a walk in the park either.

Pretty much no one in the eastern parts of Gatineau (say, east of the Gatineau River) who works in the downtown core of Ottawa takes the Chaudière across the river. It’s too big a hassle on Montcalm and Taché and you end up west of downtown Ottawa anyway. Chaudière commuters from Gatineau are mostly people going to NRCan on Booth or Tunney’s Pasture, or to jobs in the inner west end.

The downtown-bound take either Macdonald-Cartier off the 5 or take Maisonneuve off the 50 and then cross the Portage.

If you assume trips are coming from downtown Gatineau, the trip is 12km via Maloney, Montee Paiement and over the bridge and 10km via Maloney, A50 and Chaudiere. So basically anything east of Montee Paiement ends up being shorter over existing bridges if you're heading downtown.

Is this proving my point or yours? I am not being snarky, I just don’t understand.

On the whole, I think people here might be overestimating how bad everyday traffic really is on the 50. Except for maybe 10 or 15 days a year, there is no congestion westbound in the AM until the LaVérendrye exit. Now, consider that LaVérendrye is exit number 141. The exit for the 5 near the Casino is number 135, so it’s about 6 km away. Exit 135 of the 50 is also exit number 2 of Autoroute 5, which means at that point you’re only about 2 km away from the provincial boundary in the middle of the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge, and for all intents and purposes already at your destination or very close to it.

So although this 10-km stretch can be slow, it’s not really worth it to make a big detour to avoid it, especially if the detour is twice as long and when the detour area could be every bit as busy if not busier as the one you left behind.

[Deez]

Originally Posted by Acajack

There are 67,573 stoplights along these routes and 67,573 little old ladies living nearby pushing their buttons to cross the street. Not exactly an interesting alternative to a freeway like the 50, even if it is congested.

True enough, but there are government offices in those corridors...CSIS, McArthur & River, DND, etc.

Pretty much no one in the eastern parts of Gatineau (say, east of the Gatineau River) who works in the downtown core of Ottawa takes the Chaudière across the river. It’s too big a hassle on Montcalm and Taché and you end up west of downtown Ottawa anyway. Chaudière commuters from Gatineau are mostly people going to NRCan on Booth or Tunney’s Pasture, or to jobs in the inner west end.

The downtown-bound take either Macdonald-Cartier off the 5 or take Maisonneuve off the 50 and then cross the Portage.

Is this not roughly the same distance though?

Is this proving my point or yours? I am not being snarky, I just don’t understand.

Yours...I was just presenting all the distance calcs that I came up with.

On the whole, I think people here might be overestimating how bad everyday traffic really is on the 50. Except for maybe 10 or 15 days a year, there is no congestion westbound in the AM until the LaVérendrye exit. Now, consider that LaVérendrye is exit number 141. The exit for the 5 near the Casino is number 135, so it’s about 6 km away. Exit 135 of the 50 is also exit number 2 of Autoroute 5, which means at that point you’re only about 2 km away from the provincial boundary in the middle of the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge, and for all intents and purposes already at your destination or very close to it.

So although this 10-km stretch can be slow, it’s not really worth it to make a big detour to avoid it, especially if the detour is twice as long and when the detour area could be every bit as busy if not busier as the one you left behind.

This will likely not be the case 25 years from now when this bridge is actually built. Gatineau is a very high growth area and you're likely to see the effects of that growth on the 50 and 5 relatively soon.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by Deez

This will likely not be the case 25 years from now when this bridge is actually built. Gatineau is a very high growth area and you're likely to see the effects of that growth on the 50 and 5 relatively soon.

You may indeed be right. However long-term transportation planning related to population projections is tricky guesswork. Just look at the City of Ottawa’s population projections from five or ten years ago and see how the forecast was found to be quite a ways off the mark (too high).

Also consider the impact of an aging population which will definitely have way more retirees (if the doom and gloom is right, pretty much everyone in Quebec will be retired within 25 years!), and also the impact of telework and other new technological and work-related developments.

Many transportation planners actually foresee that peak period traffic will become less intense in the future, but that there will be more people on the roads at all times of the day, though never with the same intensity as the rush hours of yore.

[harls]

Letter by Fred Ryan in today's citizen...

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/...554e68eba4&p=1

No bridge? There's a positive side
Fred Ryan, Citizen Special
Published: Thursday, September 11, 2008

When the National Capital Commission announced Sept. 4 that there would be no bridge linking west Ottawa to Aylmer and lower Pontiac, many Aylmerites felt they just had a brick shatter the front window with a clear message attached: take the truck traffic, and stay away.

It's an accurate perception. Ottawa wants only to rid itself of big rigs in its downtown, but as messages go, this is only one of several wrapped around the NCC's brick. The starkness of the announcement woke West Quebecers, who have been expecting a west-end bridge since the early '60s. Gatineau knew the benefits of more bridges; now the task is to see the benefits of no bridge.

A bridge is more than an engineering and environmental challenge, more than a span in the air. Bridges are links, joining two neighbourhoods, two cities, two provinces, two countries, and, across the Bosporus, for example, two continents. A bridge is also a clasp, two brotherly peoples reaching across the divide. Or a bridge can be a different grasp, an imperialist, colonialist, exploitive grasp, a grab.

It is this last view of a bridge which might motivate Gatineau Mayor Marc Bureau's curious disinterest in the question of a new bridge, and it is most certainly this negative view of a bridge that encourages the Gatineau MP Richard Nadeau to say he'd rather the money be spent on Autoroute 50 to Montreal. Perhaps Nadeau expects commuters to head out from the Gatineau suburbs every day toward Montreal.

Modern colonialism, says Nadeau's theory, means the metropolis sucking the wealth, the arts, the everyday culture out of the regions and suburbs surrounding it, that metropolis accumulates the wealth to build entertainment and cultural hotspots. Add a Quebec dimension to this, where Quebec's language and culture are what's being sucked away, replaced by a hostile language and culture, and there you have grounds for distrust of anything that strengthens links, trade, and mobility such as a bridge. The mayor of Gatineau, to be fair, seems more concerned about increased air pollution, than cultural dilution.

The assurance that no bridge is crossing Britannia towards Aylmer forces everyone to acknowledge that those Britannia residents, with their NIMBY attitudes which are so easy to criticize, are, in fact, right. They have a right to their lives, however they define it, as much as commuters have a right to drive their smelly cars and buses wherever they wish.

This assurance of no bridge also opens the question of what will be done with the millions saved by not building a bridge. That may be a funny way of looking at it, but had the bridge been built, we would be asking if that was a wise use of $200 million. Wouldn't it be smarter to use the money to move jobs over to Quebec and attain Trudeau's 75:25 federal job ratio? Or wiser to use the millions to aid businesses start or expand and thus create jobs in Gatineau so people don't have drive across any hypothetical bridges?

Isn't it wiser to move jobs one time rather than move thousands of people every day of the week, year after year?

Won't this promise of no western bridge be a reassurance to those who already feel urban sprawl is out of control in Gatineau? A new bridge would stimulate more home building, eating up the last of the fields and green spaces of Aylmer. Gatineau's remarkable Boucher Forest would fall to market pressures. With the bridges grouped in central Gatineau, including the only new bridge the NCC will apparently support, across Kettle Island onto the Aviation Parkway, the pressure will be on developers to densify, to infill, and to build skywards within the city's core. A dense core is the place where people and wealth exist in volumes large enough to support a local culture.

And will all this discussion of bridges lead us into pondering the dominance of the automobile in our society? Will it stimulate us to consider not only the pollution and the sheer cost of using and repairing so many cars, but lead us also to consider if we have to be a society always on wheels, always backing up somewhere, pulling in somewhere else, and always driving by ourselves, our windows rolled up, our own music playing, as if we are each the only person in the world?

Fred Ryan is the publisher of the Bulletin d'Aylmer, the West Quebec Post, and the Pontiac Journal.

© The Ottawa Citizen 2008

[eemy]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Also consider the impact of an aging population which will definitely have way more retirees (if the doom and gloom is right, pretty much everyone in Quebec will be retired within 25 years!), and also the impact of telework and other new technological and work-related developments.

Many transportation planners actually foresee that peak period traffic will become less intense in the future, but that there will be more people on the roads at all times of the day, though never with the same intensity as the rush hours of yore.

I'm not sure telecommuting is going to catch on anymore in the future than it already has (which is to say, not really all that much). That said, I do think the trend toward more flexible work structures will have an impact and broaden the peak hours over more of the day. We already see that happening.

[waterloowarrior]

http://ottawa.ca/residents/public_co...ations_en.html

King Edward Avenue
Based solely on traffic analysis and even with the construction of a new Interprovincial crossing in the east, a 6-lane King Edward continues to be required to satisfy existing and future travel demand. This recommendation is subject to further review through the King Edward Avenue Lane Reduction Impact Study that will consider the impact of traffic on surrounding communities

[waterloowarrior]

Hundreds of angry residents tell consultants 'no' to proposed bridge at Kettle Island

Maria Cook
The Ottawa Citizen

Thursday, September 25, 2008

OTTAWA - An angry crowd of about 700 people last night greeted consultants trying to explain the choice of Kettle Island for a new interprovincial bridge on the east side of the city with a resounding "No."

There were cries of "What about the people?" when consultant Steve Taylor was making his presentation at a public meeting at Lansdowne Park. When Mr. Taylor said the selection committee was unbiased, someone shouted "bull----" and the audience, many wearing buttons and carrying signs that said "Kettle Island -- No," burst into applause.

"There is no magical solution to find a corridor that has no effects," he said, to loud boos and "nos!" "It's a good location."

Two weeks ago, the NCC announced that Kettle Island was the recommended site out of 10 studied by consultants Roche-NCE.

The group analysed 10 possible routes using a mathematical model. When it came time to announce the choice, all potential crossings on the west side of the city were ruled out.

"Our members have been very polite ... to date," Jane Brammer, head of a coalition of 15 community associations, said.

"We've submitted comments and community position papers," Ms. Brammer said. "We've been expecting and hoping for reasonable analyses and decision. But now we think we've been bamboozled." She received thunderous applause for her remarks.

She said the objectives of a bridge project are not addressed: to remove trucks from downtown, and to direct regional traffic to a regional ring-road system.

"We're told these objectives weren't even part of the consultants' mandate. Our coalition members are outraged. We demand that established neighbourhoods be protected from intrusion by highways and bridges."

The audience shouted and clapped when Rideau-Rockcliffe Councillor Jacques Legendre loudly insisted on speaking when the moderator tried to cut him off. Person after person approached him to donate their two minutes so he could continue.

"We have to build a bridge in a place where it will serve society best. The value system of those assigning weights to various criteria must be called into question. How is it possible in 2008 for a study to consider that habitat for fish is more important than habitat for people?

"Waterfowl are judged to be 10 times more important than Montfort's diagnostic capabilities. This is too serious a matter to be entrusted to the technocrats."

He received a standing ovation from the audience while some members of the selection committee sitting at reserved tables on the side smiled.

Ottawa-Vanier MP Mauril Bélanger and MPP Madeleine Meilleur spoke out against the site as well.

"We're concerned that the selection criteria were biased to come out with the result they came out with," said Ronald Burrows, a retired scientist who has lived in Manor Park for 45 years. "I don't think they gave sufficient weight to existing settlements."

Patrick Glémaud, the Tory candidate in Ottawa-Vanier, said yesterday fighting the Kettle Island bridge has been a priority for him since the first day of his election campaign.

He also said the NCC should have presented several options for the bridge and then let politicians -- and the public -- consider the choices.

"You always prepare two to three options, and you let people decide the one they want," Mr. Glémaud said.

Bill McCarten, a 58-year-old consultant who lives in Manor Park, said he is familiar with the weighting system. "The spirit is that ultimate stakeholders, residents, be included on the committee. In this case, we don't have that. There's little weighting of the residents who will pay the costs in taxes."

People cried "Shame!" when Judy Lishman, head of the bridge committee of the Manor Park community association, said that, according to the consultants, the corridor was 100-per-cent safe for the transport of hazardous materials near a hospital and 100,000 residents.

"Look around the room," she said. "This is the just the beginning of our opposition. Make no mistake. We will win this fight. We've done it twice in the past."

Keeping a low profile were Carole and Tony Yantha, who have just bought a condo facing Petrie Island. They want the bridge at Kettle Island because a bridge at Petrie Island means "I would have a bridge in front of my window," Mrs. Yantha said.

Her husband said Kettle Island is "the ideal place. The Aviation Parkway takes you right to the river. You don't have to build a new road, just widen it. It would reach Montée Paiement (in Gatineau) where they've just widened the road. It's perfect."

The Kettle Island route would be approached via Highway 50 and Montée Paiement on the Quebec side, link with the Aviation Parkway in Ottawa, then loop into the Queensway at "the Split," where the highway meets Highway 174.

Area resident Natalie Belovic said many people are concerned about political influence in the decision.

"Could the city staff on the selection committee ignore the fact that city council supported Kettle Island?" she asked. "MP John Baird took a lot of credit for avoiding a west-end bridge."

Mr. Taylor said "no political intervention took place."

- - -

Read more about the Kettle Island bridge affair

ottawacitizen.com/See Editor's Picks

© The Ottawa Citizen 2008

[clynnog]

Originally Posted by waterloowarrior

OTTAWA - An angry crowd of about 700 people last night greeted consultants trying to explain the choice of Kettle Island for a new interprovincial bridge on the east side of the city with a resounding "No."

There were cries of "What about the people?" when consultant Steve Taylor was making his presentation at a public meeting at Lansdowne Park. When Mr. Taylor said the selection committee was unbiased, someone shouted "bull----" and the audience, many wearing buttons and carrying signs that said "Kettle Island -- No," burst into applause.

"There is no magical solution to find a corridor that has no effects," he said, to loud boos and "nos!" "It's a good location."

I think I can speak for many people on this board, that the transportation consultant who presented at this meeting had a thankless job. His statement about no magical solution is spot on, but in an atmosphere like that the mob with pitchforks weren't wanting to listen to reason.

[Mille Sabords]

I wouldn't mind organizing an angry mob of residents living on or near King Edward and living with dangerous goods and all the other goodies under their noses every day. How about a road blockade? They did that in Paris in '68 and a few other times, methinks it could apply here as well...

[lrt's friend]

It is so sad that people are only looking at their own self interests, instead of what is best for the city as a whole. We live in a growing city and we need to allow the city's transportation system to continue to work. Thousands of people have faced road widenings in their neighbourhoods and have been forced to accept the results. We are again facing paralysis on this matter, with some community assocition or another objecting to pretty well all possible bridge crossing locations. We have had suggestions that the bridge be pushed all the way out to Cumberland, where it will feed into a two lane road and be of very limited value. We are all helping overall traffic conditions if we allow people to get to their destinations on the shortest and fastest routes. The Kettle Island route provides direct connections to both the Queensway and the 417, something that cannot be accomplished by any of the other possible bridge locations. It will use an existing boulevard that will likely suffice with some moderate improvements. It also provides the most direct access to many east end employment areas. We talk about the patients at the Montfont Hospital but what about the staff, which in many cases are travelling from Gatineau. For the most part, the Aviation Parkway corridor is wider than the Queensway corridor and there will be all kinds of ways to mediate noice and it is not necessary to destroy the park landscape. I also believe it is not necessary to turn this route into 100 kph expressway and if we invest in the design of the bridge, it could actually become a highlight of neighbouring communities.

[Acajack]

Seems like a classic case of NIMBYism mixed in with perhaps some latent anti-Quebec sentiment. Sorry to bring this up but it seems like road projects and widenings that are Ontario-to-Ontario (eg Hwy. 7 from Carleton Place, Queensway widening across Ottawa) generate far less opposition... Think of the opposition to the third lane on the Champlain Bridge.