City deferral on bridge recommendation angers residents

"I was in shock, to be honest," says Tim Tierney, president of the Beacon Hill North Community Association, of the city’s decision to hold off on making a recommendation to the National Capital Commission. "This is the third study that's came back and said Kettle Island makes sense."

Jane Brammer, of the Rothwell Heights Property Owners’ Association and Community Action for Reasonable Analyses and Decisions, calls council’s move "completely inappropriate. I didn't agree with that decision at all. It really muddied the issue; it delays things."

Months of push and pull on the bridge question and the technically-preferred Kettle Island location was hit with another twist last week, as both Ontario and Quebec called for further analysis of the three highest-ranked corridors in the NCC's first-phase environmental assessment.

With Kettle Island and two Lower Duck Island sites now at the forefront, Mayor Larry O'Brien ruled Wednesday, Jan. 28 the move "constituted new information" and rendered moot a vote to reconsider the locations near Lower Duck, to be included in the study's second phase.

While the issue – including four new motions tabled in the wake of the mayor’s decision – is expected to be dealt with in coming weeks, last week’s decision once again defers project movement by the NCC, which is also seeking endorsements from the City of Gatineau and both provincial governments.

The Beacon Hill North Community Association has been "inundated" with worried phone calls and e-mails in recent days, continues Tierney, as the group's standing committee on the bridge issue works overtime. "People are really concerned now," he says. "No one expected this."

The provinces' rulings on the interprovincial crossing issue did not constitute new information, adds Brammer, with both positions very similar to the city's. The move bypasses constructive dialogue and only serves to further pit one community against another, she explains, undermining all residents.

Regardless, both the Quebec and Ontario governments indicating a need to investigate other corridors helps validate what area community groups have been saying, Brammer continues. "There's broader interest in another look," she suggests, instead of "blindly" following study operators' recommendations. "(It shows) huge interest and intent."

Looking ahead, Brammer says she hopes "cooler heads will prevail, and that community building and long-range planning vision will take over.”

Meanwhile further east, community groups are considering a new approach to better publicize resident concerns.

Plans, Tierney says, include becoming more vocal and encouraging all residents – not just community association pesidents – to raise their concerns. “We've taken the quiet approach before ... (but) it appears the squeaky wheel gets the grease," he continues.

Attempting to clear the air of misinformation and in-fighting between communities is another hope for the near future, continues Brammer. “(The bridge is) going to go somewhere, so we need to work together. Let's get on the same page." A public discussion about the bridge issue is being held at the Theatre at 255 Centrum Blvd., Monday, Feb. 9 at 7 p.m.