The three options.
map created by Kevin Best
After a week of public consultations, residents in the east end are feeling less than comfortable with the process involved with finding a location for the interprovincial bridge.
The series of public consultations occurred only days after Steve Taylor from Roche-Genivar, the project consultants, held a public group meeting on June 7 concerning the Phase 2B environmental assessment for the interprovincial bridge. That assessment will determine the ideal place for the bridge that will connect Quebec to Ontario from among three candidate sites: Kettle Island, Gatineau Airport/McLaurin Bay or Lower Duck Island.
The bid for Phase 2B was awarded to the same consulting firm, Roche-Genivar, that led the previous Phase 1 consultations. Despite these consultations, however, many in the public feel their voices have yet to be heard by the National Capital Commission.
“It felt as though we were starting all over again,” said Alex Macklin, a Rockcliffe Park resident, about the June 14 Corridor 5 consultation he attended.
Corridor 5, also known to east end residents as Kettle Island, seems to be the option the NCC is most interested in said Macklin.
Manor Park resident Christophe Credico, who attended a June 18 consultation, agreed with Macklin.
“I did not feel I had the opportunity to express all of my concerns,” said Credico, who is also the new chairman of the Manor Park Community Association’s bridge committee.
To the consultants’ credit, Credico said they promised the meetings were not the only way in which they will collect information.
“I feel there is still opportunity to get our opinions in,” Credico added.
Credico got involved in the bridge debate shortly after moving his family from Toronto to Ottawa. He said he chose Manor Park because of the large amounts of green space, fresh air and proximity to downtown. He also said walking down to the Ottawa River and looking out over Kettle Island with his two children is one of the highlights of his home life.
Credico is hoping the Manor Park community will express their concerns through online surveys and the community association is planning to invite the consultants to a meeting in the near future.
“My overarching worry is that a lot of this is just going through the motions,” he said.
One of his concerns from the June 18 session was that the questions posed at the session all cast the bridge proposals in a positive light.
He found questions concerning the long-term growth of the region, such as how the bridge will enhance economic growth and promote sustainable growth, were designed to receive positive responses.
“I worry that when the consultants look back and present their findings, which include pictures of people looking happy discussing economic benefits – they will think everything went perfect.”
Rockcliffe Park resident Lori Assheton-Smith is new to the interprovincial bridge debate, but took part in the Corridor 5 consultation on June 14.
“It strikes me as really unfortunate that the process by its nature pits communities against communities, rather than bringing residents of the region together as a whole to work on sustainable long-term solutions to the region’s transportation and conservation objectives,” Assheton-Smith said.
She said she wants to believe in the process, but is already having her doubts.
“The consultation process this week only served to further isolate potentially affected communities from each other,” Ashton-Smith said. “The corridors were each the subject of separate consultations on consecutive nights and each respective corridor consultation was held simultaneously in Ottawa and Gatineau, making it impossible to share thoughts, views and concerns with other affected residents on the other side of the river.”
She felt the meetings have left communities fighting when they should be working together.
When contacted, Taylor, Roche-Genivar’s lead consultant for Phase 2B of the NCC study he felt the consultations went very well with a great turnout.
“The events were all at capacity and I believe we hit out target markets,” Taylor said.
Assheton-Smith, however, doesn’t necessarily agree.
“The bottom line is that there are certain elements that make a public consultation meaningful and give it legitimacy and integrity: transparency, inclusiveness, notice, clarity of mandate and objectives, reasonable timelines to prepare and participate, accessibility and the sense that participants have a real ability to influence decisions (outcomes must not be pre-determined),” she said. “At this point, I would say that the Phase 2B consultations are sadly lacking in almost all of these respects.”