PRESENTATION OF THE DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STUDY OF FUTURE INTERPROVINCIAL CROSSINGS IN THE NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION

PRÉSENTATION DU CADRE DE RÉFÉRENCE PRÉLIMINAIRE CONCERNANT L’ÉTUDE D’ÉVALUATION ENVIRONNEMENTALE DE FUTURS PASSAGES INTERPROVINCIAUX DANS LA RÉGION DE LA CAPITALE NATIONALE

Verbal Presentation / Présentation Orale

 

At the request of Chair McRae, Nancy Schepers, Deputy City Manager, Planning, Transit and the Environment noted that the presentation being received is on a very important study in the region.  She also noted that the Study is being led by a Steering Committee under the funding partnership of the National Capital Commission (NCC), the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO), and the ministère des Transports du Québec (MTQ).  She further noted that a Study Team consisting of the funding partners and the cities of Ottawa and Gatineau is guiding the Study.

 

Ms. Schepers then welcome and introduced the following representatives of the Team present at the meeting:

·        Vivi Chi from the Planning, Transit and the Environment Department, City of Ottawa.

·        François Lapointe from the National Capital Commission.

·        Steve Taylor, Project Manager from National Capital Engineering, and

·        Raynald Ledoux from Roche, Consultant Team, undertaking the work and giving the Presentation.

 

Ms. Schepers reminded Committee of the importance Council placed on this Study in terms of the Official Plan, and Council’s commitment to work with these partners to find a corridor, as well to protect all corridors in the interim until one has been selected.  She believes that, as this roles out and corridors are selected, this would provide an opportunity for Committee and Council to have a clear vision for the Official Plan and the Transportation Master Plan.

 

Mr. Taylor started his presentation by giving a very brief overview of the Study, and advised that this is the first point of a long road ahead.  He then gave an overview of some of the issues, the goals and the work program.  He spoke on the public consultation and the terms of reference, which were provided to the public for review and comments.  Copy of the detailed presentation is on file with the City Clerk.

 

Councillor Cullen introduced the following motions, copy of which were provided to all members:

 

1.      Prince of Wales Bridge at Lemieux Island

Whereas the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study states that, the five downtown bridges are at congestion during peak hours as the raison d’être for an interprovincial river crossing study;

Whereas the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study declares that solutions to resolve this congestion must be found outside the downtown core, through crossings in suburban areas;

Whereas there exists the Prince of Wales Bridge at Lemieux Island – a rail bridge that is in close proximity to the O-Train and the Transitway in Ottawa, and connects to rail infrastructure in Gatineau;

Therefore the City of Ottawa recommend that the terms of reference of the Interprovincial Crossing EA Study be amended to include examination of utilizing the Prince of Wales Bridge for public transit purposes in order to mitigate downtown river crossings congestion.

 

2.   Interprovincial Public Transit Connections in west-end Ottawa & Gatineau

Whereas the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study is proposing to examine 3 west-end river crossings for either a 50 year or a 20 year planning horizon;

Whereas there is currently very little interprovincial transit service linking the west end of Ottawa and Gatineau crossing the Champlain Bridge;

Whereas the objective of both the City of Ottawa and the City of Gatineau Official Plans is to attain a 30% transit share of all transportation trips;

Therefore the City of Ottawa recommend that the terms of reference of the Interprovincial Crossing EA Study be amended to ensure consideration of possible future west-end river crossings be dependent on the successful development of interprovincial transit connections consistent with the City of Ottawa and the City of Gatineau transit modal share targets.

 

3.   Confirmation of the status of the Britannia-Deschênes Corridor

Whereas the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study’s draft terms of reference is proposing that the Britannia-Deschênes corridor not be carried forward as part of the preliminary list of candidate corridors to be examined in this Study, based in part on disruption to established communities, environmental considerations, and technical difficulties accessing the Queensway;

Whereas the previous 1994 JACPAT Study also rejected the Britannia-Deschênes corridor for a river crossing for similar reasons;

Therefore the City of Ottawa support the recommendation of the Interprovincial Crossing EA Study of NOT carrying forward the Britannia-Deschênes corridor as part of this Study.

 

4.   Lac Deschênes: Boul. des Allumeteries-Holly Acres Rd./416/417 and

      Lac Deschênes: Boul. des Allumetieres-Moodie Dr./417 Corridors

Whereas the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study identifies 2 potential corridors which cross Lac Deschênes to (1) Holly Acres Road/416/417, and (2) Moodie Drive/417;

Whereas there are significant factors regarding crossing Lac Deschênes that warrant rejecting these corridors from future consideration, i.e.:

a.   low to negative benefit/cost analysis based on low population served and time travel saved for west-end Ottawa and Gatineau;

b.   the cost of bridges/tunnels spanning 3 to 4 kilometers across Lac Deschênes;

c.   the cheaper alternative of developing interprovincial transit connections across the Champlain Bridge (where very little exists now);

d.   the impact of a bridge structure crossing Lac Deschênes on river flows and flood levels as they affect communities located on the Ottawa River floodplain (i.e. Crystal Bay, Crystal Beach, Belltown, Britannia);

e.   the disruption of  a bridge structure on the established communities of Crystal Bay and Crystal Beach-Lakeview;

f.    the disruption of a bridge structure on sailing activities on Lac Deschênes;

g.   the disruption of a bridge structure crossing Lac Deschênes on such important community amenities as Andrew Haydon Park and the National Capital Greenbelt;

Therefore the City of Ottawa recommend that the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study NOT carry forward crossings of Lac Deschênes as part of this Study.

 

In response to questions from Councillor Cullen, Mr. Taylor provided the following clarifications:

·        The 2006 Census data would be used for population suggestions.

·        The supporting documents indicate clearly that all of the existing six downtown bridges, including the Prince of Wales Bridge would be looked at for potential transit, freight, and other modes improvements or efficiencies.

·        In the draft terms of reference, there is a preliminary recommendation to carry forward the transit objective and to meet the City of Ottawa and the City of Gatineau’s Official Plan objectives of 30% transit modal split target.  This will be part of the evaluation process and it may be looking at opportunities to achieve transit utilization on a new crossing location whether it is in the east or the west.  There is a commitment and is part of the work program that the terms of reference will be looking at transit; and achieving the 30% transit modal split objective is a priority.

·        MTO and MTQ are part of the Study Team and investigating measures to improve interprovincial transit connections in the west end would be part of the project.

·        The EA will provide clearance for the project, which could, or not, include tolls - a decision as part of the implementation and part of the Phase II work.  The initial assessment is that irrespective of tolls, the issue of dealing with heavy truck movements is not likely to be influenced significantly by tolls.  To solve the issue of heavy trucks is part of the problem.  Tolls may have an impact on demand for vehicular traffic but right now the team is set up to look for environmental clearance for a location and then tolls can be part of a secondary consideration.  This would be part of the implementation of the project on a new location or all the existing locations and would not be precluded from the EA Study.

 

In response to questions from Councillor Legendre, Mr. Taylor provided the following clarifications:

·        The Traffic/Economic Analysis of the Fourth Oval of Slide 6, and the Second Stage Coarse Screening based on Benefit/Cost Comparison of the Third Bullet of Slide 7 Road refer to a cost benefit analysis for each of the corridors.

·        Mr. Taylor confirmed that he was the Project Manager with TSH for the study that came out in 1999.  Councillor Legendre congratulated him on an excellent report.

·        Preliminary Short List of Crossing Corridors under Slide 10 – Corridors, without the red checkmarks, have been discarded by preliminary assessments.  However, they would be up for discussion because the terms of reference is only a draft document that was put out to the public for suggestions.

·        The JACPAT Report has no status because there was no EA Study.

·        Every reasonable alternative was put on the list in order not to pre-judge the outcome of the early stages of the process and to have a sequential evolution of these decisions.

 

In response to questions from Councillor Bloess, Mr. Taylor provided the following clarifications:

·        A review of all JACPAT background material was undertaken and will be validated as part of the EA Study.

·        One of the reasons this Consultant Team was chosen to take on this project is that they are very strong in their technical evaluations.  They will be doing a very traceable, detailed technical evaluation that will be tied to measurable differences between the corridors.  They will make it more defendable when coming to the conclusion of ranking and prioritization of the corridors.  Some of the criteria might be the same but their expectation is that they will start out with a much longer list and end up with a larger number of criteria than used previously.

·        Their primary objective is two-fold; it is both the movements of trucks and people.

·        It is wrong to focus on the exact numbers for employment or population because looking back in 50 years, the population would not matter, but looking at long-term investments in infrastructure would be as they will be there for centuries.

·        Ideas such as converting a lane (contra-flow lanes) for trucks and transit needs on MacDonald-Cartier Bridge and Champlain Bridge would be taken into consideration.

·        Improvements to existing crossings would be looked at and documented.

 

In response to questions from Councillor Bédard, the Consultant Team and Deputy City Manager Schepers provided the following clarifications:

·        Phase 1 of this project, which is being presented to Committee today, would be completed in September 2008.

·        Phase 2 will be done at the completion of the EA.  It will look at the very fine details of the corridor locations and technology.  This will likely take another two years following the Phase 1 step.

·        In approximately four years, the NCC will have clearance to proceed with this project.

·        JACPAT was an administrative study with no real link to the political arena, which is partly why it has no status right now.

·        It is critical that the two cities and the various levels of government start to work together right now.

·        This study is not only a consulting piece of work; it is a political administrative undertaking.

·        A solution will be found to take the pressure off of the downtown and to address heavy truck traffic on Rideau Street and King Edward Avenue.

·        There are currently two truck routes; King Edward is being used more because of weight restrictions on the other route.

 

In response to questions from Councillor Jellett, the Consultant Team and City Staff provided the following clarifications:

·        Comments on the terms of reference received throughout the month of July will be taken into consideration despite the original deadline of July 6th and the extension.

·        City Staff is currently conducting a survey of southbound commercial vehicle traffic having completed the northbound traffic.

·        The final decision on the bridge location will be made in 2008 after a third round of public consultation.

·        The issue of effects on property value is not being considered right now.  Only the public sector aspects are currently being considered in the first screening.

·        Both roadway, such as completing Highway 50, and rail connections for trucks will be looked at to get the trucks off King Edward and out of the downtown core.

·        The benefit to building an interprovincial crossing/bridge and providing new links in the system would provide greater efficiency.

 

Councillor Wilkinson then introduced the following Motion:

 

Moved by Councillor M. Wilkinson:

 

WHEREAS one of the western areas to be studied for an interprovincial bridge is at Riddell Drive; and

 

WHEREAS at this crossing the Kanata Sailing Club has been given the use of the road allowance by the river for the past 30 years; and

 

WHEREAS adjacent to the road allowance is a wild life reserve and the Y Camp on the Ottawa River; and

 

WHEREAS the width of the river at that location would require a very long, expensive bridge; and

 

WHEREAS the bridge would hinder sailing use of the river, particularly the tall sailing ship used for youth programs; and

 

WHEREAS this location is a long way from any urban development and the 417, and the road networks by the time traffic reaches March Road there is no road capacity left;

 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Riddell Drive location be removed from the Terms of Reference as a possible bridge location and the study consider other options, including a tunnel, if any need is identified in the western part of the City of Ottawa.

 

                                                                                                CARRIED

 

Councillor Wilkinson wanted to know why the Britannia Bridge was taken out of the Study and why a large natural wildlife reserve area is being looked at.

 

Mr. Taylor explained that this corridor would go on the peripheral of that area.  He noted that none of the eight corridors would have any effect.  The effects, the performance, and the costs are going to be measured before prioritizing them and brought back.

 

The connection at the Ottawa River Parkway and the Queensway has been considered, and the preliminary recommendation is to not carry forward with this corridor because it has significant social and environmental effects, and does not provide as much of the criteria as some of the other crossings.  The attributes of the Ottawa River Parkway between the Queensway would require the interchange roadway between there and Woodroffe Avenue be closed.  It would also require the re-routing of traffic from Woodroffe Avenue to the new interchange to which this corridor would have to connect to and in doing so it would bring traffic through a residential area.

 

The Committee then heard from the following delegations:

 

David Agnew, Britannia/Lincoln Heights, expressed concern about building big bridges for far less traffic than any other places he has visited, and failed to understand the cost benefits.  In creating a west-end river crossing, he feels that it would be awful to disrupt woods with very special characteristics along the area; a pond where turtles return every spring to migrate, species of owls that are not seen elsewhere in the City, and the only stand of bamboo trees in the City.  He noted that this is a sensitive environmental area, which is located near the water supply area.

 

Andrew Love, Crystal Beach Lakeview Community Association, stated that his community is an under serviced community and looks at Andrew Haydon Park and Lac Deschênes as a very much needed gateway, not only for them but for the entire west end.  He expressed concern about building a bridge to accommodate trucks in the west end.  He questioned the reason for building a bridge with a size capable of handling trucks and cars in the west end, and does not believe that this would accommodate future growth.  He noted that his community is not against intelligent planning for future growth, but where the future growth is going to be needs to be looked at, and he hopes that the consultant report will bring that out.  In closing, he asked Committee to join with their Member of Parliament and their Member of Provincial Legislature, who have both come out very strongly against any corridor through LacDeschênes, and urged Committee to support Councillor Cullen’s Motion.

 

Parham Montahan, Lincoln Heights, was pleased to see that an objective professional process for coming to a decision is being used.  He was encouraged that there would be an open transparent objective process.  With regards to traffic congestion patterns in general and more particularly focussing on commercial and truck traffic congestion, it seems to him to make very little sense to create a bridge in the west end.  Instead, he suggested looking at the existing solutions that would allow the increase of commuter traffic between Aylmer and downtown.  He believes that in planning for the future, there should be consideration to create a plan; to create incentives for people to live in a way that would minimize pollution and ecological damage, but not to create huge capacity to travel long distances in single car rides between one place to another.  He expressed concern about costs, social disruptions and environmental issues.  In closing, he was encouraged by the consultants talking about looking at a solution for centuries.  He urged them to do the right thing because economics are important and environmental issues are part of economics.

 

Wendy Hough-Eyamie, President, Britannia Village Community Association, before presenting her comments took the opportunity to thank Councillor Cullen for the work he is doing on behalf of the Ward on this project.  She noted the Councillor sending e-mail at 11:37 p.m. after spending several hours in a meeting at City Hall.  The Community Association were most impressed and pleased, and she thanked the Councillor for his help in this matter.  She advised the Britannia/Deschênes Corridor has been identified in previous interprovincial bridge studies as a possible location for a west-end river crossing.  She is not surprised to see it again on the long list of possible corridor locations for the present environmental assessment.  She stated this crossing is however completely an unattainable option for a variety of reasons.  Citing the terms of reference and supporting documentation for the present environmental assessment as well as the 1994 JACPAT Study, these reasons include the difficulty connecting this corridor to the Queensway.  She pointed out that the Ontario Ministry of Transportation has confirmed that such a connection is not feasible because it would require the closure the Woodroffe/Queensway Interchange and would not accommodate truck traffic, which is a criterion of the present EA.  She noted that in the 1994 JACPAT Study, this corridor failed a cost benefit analysis.  She believes that construction of a bridge at the Britannia/Deschênes Corridor would have a significant impact on the Britannia Water Filtration Plant, one of the only two in this City.  She also believes that it would have massive detrimental effects on the natural features such as Mud Lake and Pinecrest Creek.  Notwithstanding these issues, there are also issues with regard to ice flow and water levels as many of the villages along that stretch of the river are already living on the 100-year flood plain of the river.  She further noted that research has already been conducted on the feasibility of this corridor.  She said the window of opportunity on this corridor closed decades ago and should not be brought back on to the table for further consideration at this time as it would be a waste of taxpayers dollars.

 

For the benefit of the delegation, Councillor Cullen flagged that he will be proposing a Motion to remove the Britannia/Deschênes Corridor for the technical reasons she brought to the attention of the Committee.

 

Barry Spratt stated that he was lending his support to the Britannia/Deschênes Corridor not being considered.  He lives in a community that is a very close neighbour and is concerned about the effect on his community and the Ambleside Community, an area that has a high number of seniors and is the one of the few places where they can get on a bus and go.  He noted that this area is very dear to some people because it is close to a park where they can take the public transit to get to it.  He expressed concern about increasing traffic through the area where seniors are already having difficulty with the present amount of traffic.

 

John Vines, Britannia Yacht Club, and Chair of the Property and Tax Committee, advised that the Yacht Club resides on the Deschênes Rapids, which is a unique environmental and recreational area.  From the Yacht Club’s standpoint, he said that any surface crossing of the bridge, or the river may be an environmental disaster not only socially for the people who use the river on a consistent basis, but also for the riverbanks and for all the other things that go along with it.  He asked that the study consider the impact of any surface crossing across the river.  He also asked for a proper in depth study of what the social impact and what the environmental impact would be to ensure that in the event that a bridge is built, it would allow 60-70 feet clearance for the recreational sailors to be able to continue their sport which they have been doing for over 100 years.

 

David Jeanes, Transport 2000, relinquished his opportunity to speak at the request of Chair McRae due to time constraint, however submitted his comments in writing, copy of which is on file with the City Clerk.  He supports moving forward on this study.  He was pleased that Transport 2000 was invited to be part of the Technical Advisory Committee.  He noted that he also participated in the JACPAT and the TSH Study consultations, and the OMB hearing.  He feels that it is unfortunate that the Interprovincial Transit Study is not being done in parallel.  He is glad to see a late change to the Terms of Reference to carry forward the Transit alternative.  He welcomes the intent to look at optimizing use of the six existing central crossings, including transit, freight, and pathway use of the Prince of Wales Railway Bridge, and potential transit improvements on existing or new bridges.  He suggested that interprovincial trucking must be addressed in this study, not least because of commitments made to the community along King Edward Avenue, and the major challenges for realizing the City’s downtown urban design plan that the trucks create along Rideau, Waller and Nicholas Streets.  However, he believes this planning can only be done with knowledge of the origin-destination patterns for trucks, and the survey just conducted must be made part of the public discussion.

 

The Committee also received the following correspondence, copy of which is on file with the City Clerk:

·        Memorandum dated 15 June 2007 from Councillor Alex Cullen, Bay Ward, Re. Interprovincial Crossing Environmental Assessment Study Draft Terms of Reference Presentation to June 20/07 Transportation Committee.

·        E-Mail received on 20 June 2007 from Natasha A. Thiessen, President, Crystal Bay Community Association.

·        E-Mail received on 20 June 2007 from Diane Ashby-Noël.

 

Having heard all the delegations, the Committee adjourned to resume the Joint Transportation Committee and Transit Committee Meeting, which were scheduled for 11:30 a.m., and the Transit Committee Meeting scheduled for 1:30 p.m.

 

As per Section 8(1 c) of the Rules of Procedure, during the Transit Committee Meeting, the Transportation Committee agreed to extend the meeting past 7:00 p.m. by the following vote:

 

YEAS (5):        R. Bloess, M. Wilkinson, A. Cullen, C. Leadman, M. McRae

NAYS (2):       J. Legendre, C. Doucet

 

The Committee reconvened at 8:10 p.m. following the Transit Committee meeting.

 

In response to Councillor Cullen’s question, Mr. Taylor confirmed that, at a preliminary screening, Britannia/Deschênes Corridor was dropped from the list of potential river crossings because it does not accommodate a large volume of trucks on the Ontario side of the crossing.  The connection at Highway 417 is not feasible because of the close proximity of Woodroffe Avenue and there is not enough space for the interchange.  He also confirmed that the study also identifies that approximately 63 homes would have to be expropriated, therefore disrupting a residential area, and the Woodroffe/Queensway Interchange closed in order to accommodate linking the corridor to the Queensway.  Mr. Taylor also confirmed that there would be another screening of potential corridors.  Councillor Cullen wanted this clarification due to a motion that he was going to bring forward later on in the meeting.

 

After further discussion, the Committee then considered the following motions:

 

Moved by Councillor A. Cullen:

 

Whereas the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study states that the 5 downtown bridges are at congestion during peak hours as the raison d’être for an interprovincial river crossing study;

 

Whereas the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study declares that solutions to resolve this congestion must be found outside the downtown core, through crossings in suburban areas;

 

Whereas there exists the Prince of Wales Bridge at Lemieux Island – a rail bridge that is in close proximity to the O-Train and the Transitway in Ottawa, and connects to rail infrastructure in Gatineau;

 

Therefore the City of Ottawa recommend that the terms of reference of the Interprovincial Crossing EA Study be amended to include examination of utilizing the Prince of Wales Bridge for public transit purposes in order to mitigate downtown river crossings congestion.

 

                                                                                                Carried

 

Moved by Councillor A. Cullen:

 

Whereas the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study is proposing to examine 3 west-end river crossings for either a 50 year or a 20 year planning horizon;

 

Whereas there is currently very little interprovincial transit service linking the west end of Ottawa and Gatineau crossing the Champlain Bridge;

 

Whereas the objective of both the City of Ottawa and the City of Gatineau Official Plans is to attain a 30% transit share of all transportation trips;

 

Therefore the City of Ottawa recommend that the terms of reference of the Interprovincial Crossing EA Study be amended to ensure consideration of possible future west-end river crossings be dependent on the successful development of interprovincial transit connections consistent with the City of Ottawa and the City of Gatineau transit modal share targets.

 

                                                                                                Carried

 

Moved by Councillor Cullen

 

Whereas the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study’s draft terms of reference is proposing that the Britannia-Deschênes corridor not be carried forward as part of the preliminary list of candidate corridors to be examined in this Study, based in part on disruption to established communities, environmental considerations, and technical difficulties accessing the Queensway;

 

Whereas the previous 1994 JACPAT Study also rejected the Britannia-Deschênes corridor for a river crossing for similar reasons;

 

Therefore the City of Ottawa support the recommendation of the Interprovincial Crossing EA Study of NOT carrying forward the Britannia-Deschênes Corridor as part of this Study.

 

                                                                                                Carried

 

Moved by Councillor A. Cullen:

 

Whereas the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study identifies 2 potential corridors which cross Lac Deschênes to (1) Holly Acres Road/416/417, and (2) Moodie Drive/417;

 

Whereas there are significant factors regarding crossing Lac Deschênes that warrant rejecting these corridors from future consideration, i.e.:

a.                  low to negative benefit/cost analysis based on low population served and time travel saved for west-end Ottawa and Gatineau;

b.                  the cost of bridges/tunnels spanning 3 to 4 kilometers across Lac Deschênes;

c.                   the cheaper alternative of developing interprovincial transit connections across the Champlain Bridge (where very little exists now);

d.                  the impact of a bridge structure crossing Lac Deschênes on river flows and flood levels as they affect communities located on the Ottawa River floodplain (i.e. Crystal Bay, Crystal Beach, Belltown, Britannia);

e.                  the disruption of  a bridge structure on the established communities of Crystal Bay and Crystal Beach-Lakeview;

f.                    the disruption of a bridge structure on sailing activities on Lac Deschênes;

g.                  the disruption of a bridge structure crossing Lac Deschênes on such important community amenities as Andrew Haydon Park and the National Capital Greenbelt;

Therefore the City of Ottawa recommend that the Interprovincial Crossings EA Study NOT carry forward crossings of Lac Deschênes as part of this Study.

 

                                                                                                Carried

 

Moved by Councillor M. Wilkinson:

 

WHEREAS one of the western areas to be studied for an interprovincial bridge is at Riddell Drive; and

 

WHEREAS at this crossing the Kanata Sailing Club has been given the use of the road allowance by the river for the past 30 years; and

 

WHEREAS adjacent to the road allowance is a wild life reserve and the Y Camp on the Ottawa River; and

 

WHEREAS the width of the river at that location would require a very long, expensive bridge; and

 

WHEREAS the bridge would hinder sailing use of the river, particularly the tall sailing ship used for youth programs; and

 

WHEREAS this location is a long way from any urban development and the 417, and the road networks by the time traffic reaches March Road there is no road capacity left;

 

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Riddell Drive location be removed from the Terms of Reference as a possible bridge location and the study consider other options, including a tunnel, if any need is identified in the western part of the City of Ottawa.

 

                                                                                                CARRIED


 

Moved by Councillor R. Bloess:

 

Whereas JACPAT, in 1994, recommended that the next Ontario-Quebec interprovincial crossing should be located at Kettle Island, and

 

Whereas the east end of the City of Ottawa has seen a dramatic increase in population and residential development in recent years, and

 

Whereas this growth has resulted in a significant demand and need for additional parkland and recreational facilities in the east-end, and

 

Whereas Petrie Island is one of the few natural beaches and untouched wetlands within the municipality of Ottawa, and

 

Whereas the City of Ottawa had invested considerable funds in recent years to develop Petrie Island as a year-round family recreation area to include picnic areas, walking trails, washrooms, change rooms and a canteen, and

 

Whereas statistics indicate a remarkable increase in the popularity of Petrie Island in recent years as a public recreation destination, and

 

Whereas the necessary corridor on the Quebec side has been protected in the Gatineau Official Plan,

 

Be it resolved that the City of Ottawa recommend that the Terms of Reference of the Interprovincial Crossing EA Study be amended so as to reflect the City of Ottawa’s position that, if there is to be an east-end bridge crossing, it be located at Kettle Island.

 

                                                                                                CARRIED

 

The Committee agreed that the aforementioned motions be forwarded to City Council for its consideration at its meeting of 27 June 2007.  (Ref. ACS2007-CCS-TRC-0008).

 

 

 

a)         de recevoir le Rapport annuel de 2006 du Comité consultatif sur les routes et le cyclisme, tel que décrit dans le Document 1; et

 

b)         d’approuver les objectifs qui sont présentés dans le Plan de travail 2007, tel que décrit dans le Document 2.

 

            RECEIVED & CARRIED