Re Kettle Island Bridge, didn't a transportation study a few years ago conclude that it (or any East end bridge) would not eliminate heavy trucks trundling through Rideau/Waller, only reduce it?
"+ In 2023, 72% of interprovincial truck trips crossed via the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge and the King Edward–Rideau–Waller–Nicholas (KERWN) corridor, despite 67% of these trips originating or ending outside the downtown area. (Source: NCC & PSPC, Truck Travel Data Collection, June 2024)
+ About 75% of heavy trucks start or finish their trips east of the river on both sides, meaning the proposed new link could significantly reduce unnecessary transits through downtown Ottawa. (Source: NCC, 2013 Studies and 2019-2024 updates; NCC, Truck Travel Data Collection, June 2024)
+ By facilitating more efficient freight transport, the eastern bridge would promote economic growth while reducing reliance on the KERWN corridor—ensuring smoother traffic flow for heavy trucks without disrupting the central areas of the National Capital. (Source: NCC & PSPC, Economic Analyses in 2019-2024 Interprovincial Studies)"
Notice the absence of "eliminate." Only un-designation of King Edward/Rideau/Waller as a truck route would accomplish that. This same source says that this is what the TMP proposes, once a new link is built.
My other concern with a Kettle Island bridge is the impact on Montfort Hospital. Anti-vibration measures would have to be taken to avoid making sensitive medical instruments inoperable. Whatever that takes should be part of the project's cost.
Re urban boundary review, I think you missed the point that as part of the settlement, the City is now going to do the work that they earlier tasked the developers to do in support of their applications. This is work that staff normally undertook in preparation for the so-called comprehensive reviews. It's a significant enlargement of the workload of planning staff. Essentially they now have to be forever prepared to assess urban boundary enlargement applications.
Kudos to Joanne for strongly protesting the lack of transparency on all this. I couldn't find the Kate Porter story - help!
Re Kettle Island Bridge, didn't a transportation study a few years ago conclude that it (or any East end bridge) would not eliminate heavy trucks trundling through Rideau/Waller, only reduce it?
Searching for <-ai would a kettle island IP bridge eliminate heavy trucks from the downtown>, I find <https://www.canada.ca/en/public-services-procurement/news/2025/01/an-interprovincial-link-expected-for-over-100-years-in-the-national-capital-region.html> which includes these points:
"+ In 2023, 72% of interprovincial truck trips crossed via the Macdonald-Cartier Bridge and the King Edward–Rideau–Waller–Nicholas (KERWN) corridor, despite 67% of these trips originating or ending outside the downtown area. (Source: NCC & PSPC, Truck Travel Data Collection, June 2024)
+ About 75% of heavy trucks start or finish their trips east of the river on both sides, meaning the proposed new link could significantly reduce unnecessary transits through downtown Ottawa. (Source: NCC, 2013 Studies and 2019-2024 updates; NCC, Truck Travel Data Collection, June 2024)
+ By facilitating more efficient freight transport, the eastern bridge would promote economic growth while reducing reliance on the KERWN corridor—ensuring smoother traffic flow for heavy trucks without disrupting the central areas of the National Capital. (Source: NCC & PSPC, Economic Analyses in 2019-2024 Interprovincial Studies)"
Notice the absence of "eliminate." Only un-designation of King Edward/Rideau/Waller as a truck route would accomplish that. This same source says that this is what the TMP proposes, once a new link is built.
My other concern with a Kettle Island bridge is the impact on Montfort Hospital. Anti-vibration measures would have to be taken to avoid making sensitive medical instruments inoperable. Whatever that takes should be part of the project's cost.
Re urban boundary review, I think you missed the point that as part of the settlement, the City is now going to do the work that they earlier tasked the developers to do in support of their applications. This is work that staff normally undertook in preparation for the so-called comprehensive reviews. It's a significant enlargement of the workload of planning staff. Essentially they now have to be forever prepared to assess urban boundary enlargement applications.
Kudos to Joanne for strongly protesting the lack of transparency on all this. I couldn't find the Kate Porter story - help!