Introduction and project scope

10 months ago
CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

An introduction to the Detailed Impact Assessment, public and stakeholder consultation and background information. 

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Linkedin Email this link
Relates to Relates to
  • hillaby 10 months ago
    I think it should be 4 lanes to allow for future growth . Expansion from 2 lanes to four at a future date would require another another impact on the river ecosystem . Impact it once now and hopefully it won't have to be done for a long long time.
  • np 10 months ago
    Why would this project be proceeding when the city has declared a climate emergency?
    Hide Replies (4)
    • LorneCo 10 months ago
      Wouldn't this thinking apply to building anything new? Where do we draw the line to new development? I think we need to develop responsibly and that is what we are doing with the third crossing.
      Hide Replies (3)
      • np 10 months ago
        New roads bring more cars. Housing would be different.
        Hide Replies (2)
        • LorneCo 10 months ago
          Pretty well everyone that owns a home owns a car and last time I checked every house is on a street, I don't see your point.
          Hide reply (1)
          • laurapacifica 10 months ago
            The climate-harming assumption that individual car ownership is normal or necessary has to be challenged if we want our planet to continue to sustain life. We need infrastructure and city design that makes it easy to get around in other ways. We have already demonstrated that we can make it easy to take the bus. Building roads/bridges designed for individuals in cars encourages environmental destruction.
  • Doug Bird 10 months ago
    I was at the last meeting in regards to concept. I agree with the last person in that they should go with the 4 lanes. With the buildup of housing both east and west of the waterway, by the time this bridge is built and opened the requirement for 4 lanes will be required. There was a discussion of 3 lanes with the use of lane lights based on traffic flow. This is better than 2, but again will be outdated by the time the bridge is completed/opened.
    The causeway is aging (bridge) and closing lanes at important times for maintenance. This is also a retirement community and the need for medical availability is becoming more crucial.
    Hide reply (1)
    • laurapacifica 10 months ago
      With a climate emergency upon us (and acknowledged by our own City Council), we must organize our city such that individual car use is the LAST transportation option, not the first. As we develop infrastructure for increased use of public and active transit, and take a firm stand on not extending the existing urban boundary, we do not need a 4 lane bridge. I am highly concerned about the environmental impact of the bridge and its lengthy construction period. I am also concerned that we may be paying for it for decades to come.
  • RConWatch 10 months ago
    Most people would acknowledge another crossing is required. It should have been 4 lanes, but, two is a start and it needs to progress. Time is more money. The fact that it is the 7th crossing, not the third, within City of Kingston boundaries should not affect the project.
    Hide reply (1)
    • James Sherk 10 months ago
      I agree with the 4th lane idea. I remember in Ottawa to Quebec Bridge that controlled multi lanes so that lanes more available during strongest flow at rush hour in and out of Quebec on that bridge. For example 7 am 3 lanes into Quebec, one into ontario and opposite to that at 5pm. Normal 2 lanes in and out at other times of the day. I have been stuck in downtown in urgent matters when bridge is delaying things and it aint pretty.
  • LorneCo 10 months ago
    This bridge needs to be completed, the causeway is in dire need of replacement, I suspect that it will be able to be replaced once the third crossing is in place. These delays are just causing more expense just get on with it. The only access to a close hospital from the east end is available via the causeway and the 401. Time matters in a life or death scenario. In the end this bridge could lower the carbon foot print, there will be a proper bike lane that will attach to bike paths that will allow access to downtown and no more burning gas while sitting in traffic. Also shorter distance to shopping, this means that they don't have to build more commercial space on the east side.
  • cchiddle 10 months ago
    This project needs to move forward. We need the additional connection across the River for a variety of reasons. I have witnessed delays for emergency vehicles to cross from the East side to the mainland on several occasions.
    I am concerned about the lowering of the height of the Bridge.
  • Christine Hough 10 months ago
    I strongly support that the city keep moving this project forward and that a third crossing is completed. It is important for the public to see that thorough environmental assessment is completed and the process and results are open and transparent. There are concerns that the building of a third crossing will affect the natural habitat in the area and these concerns need to be addressed.
  • Vollick 11 months ago
    Keep it moving the more the delays the more its going to cost . Should have been build 20 years ago when it 25% of the cost it is now .
    Hide reply (1)
    • dmaynard 10 months ago
      Where does that number come from?
  • Cymru 11 months ago
    Totally agree that we need to keep moving. This isn't the first Environmental impact assessment to be completed over the last many years.