Home    Search        Go  
GNWT Department of Transportation
Ingraham Trail Consultations
       Login
Quick Links 
Resources

Poster on Highway 4 realignment.
Summary of Highway 4 realignment options, benefits, and challenges.
 
Comments Favouring Corridor 1 
(From 1-888-711-0321) Corridor 1 makes the most sense; it just seems the best idea.

(By e-mail) Corridor 1 is by far the best solution for Yellowknife’s current and future needs.  It provides a tremendous opportunity to improve the facilities and increase capacity at Fred Henne Park, as well as accessing much needed land for development and recreation.  But Fred Henne Park is a sacred cow and too politically hot for anyone to see past the relocation of a few campsites.
The suggestion that Corridor 3 will be least expensive with engineering and environmental challenges needs reevaluation.

more
 
Comments Favouring Corridor 2 

(By e-mail) In looking at the information presented on your web-site, Corridor 2 appears to be the best option as it has the fewest considerations, leaves Fred Henne intact, and does not have the challenges of working with the Giant mine site.

(By e-mail) After reviewing the 3 options outlined for the Ingraham Trail improvement I believe the second option provides the best opportunity for future development without compromising Fred Henne Park, traffic flow at Old Airport Road (already congested) and clean-up at Giant mine.  Cost is also a major factor that is reduced by the second option route and worker/public safety.

more

 
Comments Favouring Corridor 3 

(By 1-888-711-0321) Corridor 3 is my choice because it has so many benefits: least expensive, can be made into a really nice road, don't have to affect Fred Henne, don't have to make a new bridge.  It's just the best option.

(By 1-888-711-0321) Use Corridor 3. It's less expensive and it allows people to see where the gold was mined. Don't by-pass Giant.

more

 
General Comments 
(By e-mail) How can the public make an informed decision if the engineering and environmental assessments have not been done? (DoT responds: DoT will make a decision on which corridor will be employed based on the results of public and stakeholder consultations, environmental studies, and engineering assessments, all of which are ongoing.)

(By e-mail) The whole of Yellowknife is built over underground tunnels (and many other cities have similar underground workings). Have you got studies to prove that this is of any concern? It could be an advantage depending on your choice of a road way (if you are innovative).

more
 
Comments Opposing A Route That Would Impact Fred Henne Park 

(By e-mail) Corridor 2 or 3 make the most sense. In no way should the road go through the campground, when we are having shortfalls currently in the level of services we can provide to tourists currently.  This would also go through some sensitive habitats, and nature trails.

(By e-mail) It would be irresponsible to utilize Corridor #1 without first having in place an alternative campground facility to replace Fred Henne Park (with) an iron clad guarantee that ... you would not infringe upon park boundaries. The consequences of proceeding with this route without having a suitable replacement for the campground from a tourism perspective can only be viewed as disastrous.... (If it happens) warning signs should be placed at our border advising all traffic that we no longer have suitable camping space or facilities in the North Slave region. In other words, turn tourists away! How this option could even be considered without replacement is beyond belief. I would urge your department to seek out statistics for park usage over the past number of years prior to even contemplating such a route. The park is utilized by a great many local campers as well as 'rubber tire traffic' from southern areas. Do we in all honesty wish to eliminate the opportunity for people, local or tourist, to enjoy this area?

(From 1-888-711-0321) Don't disrupt Fred Henne Park! I am a heavy user of Fred Henne, and as a camper I wouldn't want it to be disrupted. I can get a lot of people to back me up on this.  Please make your decision so that it won't affect Fred Henne.

(By e-mail) I am notably opposed to any impact on the Fred Henne Territorial Park by the upcoming road work on the Ingraham Trail. As a citizen of Yellowknife, I frequently use the beach, camp-ground, boat launch and picnic areas of this beautiful spot that adds to the tourism and recreational value of Yellowknife. I particularly enjoy the maturity of the forest, providing large trees and privacy between the camp sites and the fire pit areas. I enjoy the vast number of activities including swimming, a playground for my children, hiking paths, fire-pits (in all seasons) and boating activities. Further, this is all within biking distance of my home. I certainly do not know of another area, including the Folk on The Rocks site, that combines such natural features with such a broad number of activities at such a close proximity to town. Disruption to the Fred Henne Territorial Park will, without a doubt, have a negative impact on my family's recreation.

(By e-mail) Firstly, in no way at all should Long Lake or Fred Henne Park be considered....not even an option to consider.

(By e-mail) The main issue is to relocate the road to allow for freezing and stabilization of the arsenic pits for the Giant Mine Clean Up. My concerns are that Fred Henne park not be disturbed and if anything enhanced to provide more recreation for Yellowknifers and Tourists alike. Straightening the road to make it safer makes sense; modify corridor one so it does not interfere with Fred Henne and its future development. If the road could provide better access to the park and surrounding area even better. Many Yellowknifers and Tourists use the Ingraham Trail all year round; special attention to maintaining a safe and navigable road is critical. Going out to Reid Lake during road construction last year was an adventure most would prefer not to repeat. Please ensure that during construction the road does not turn into a cart track.

(By e-mail) It was with great disappointment that we read the options for the highway realignment.  We strongly oppose the option of Corridor 1.  We did not believe this could truly be an option and in fact thought someone must have had his or her information incorrect.  We were flabbergasted to hear that in fact it was an option.  How can putting a highway through an existing campground even be considered?  There already is a lack of campsites for locals and tourists and there was talk to build a new one.  How can we consider deleting or diminishing a beautiful, functional multi recreational area?  Even if only part of the campground is lost it would have great negative impact on summer campers, boaters, beach users, and winter dog walkers.  It would decrease the quality of life of locals. We understand that the Ingraham Trail is the gateway to the mines and fully support the mining industry’s contribution to our economy.  We also understand the importance of cleaning up Giant Mine but we cannot and will not support any option that takes away beautiful multi use parkland.  Many communities strive to have such a multi recreational area in their backyard and here we are talking about destroying it.  We need to realize what a gem it is.

(From the public meeting) - City Councillor: The one concern that I had is the problem with Fred Henne Park. I wonder, if Corridor 1 is selected, if there are opportunities to expand the park to provide more spots.

(Public meeting comment form) - (You need) to mitigate impact of Fred Henne Park and consider some alterations or augmentation of the park with additional camping facilities. Would suggest this be integrated into the realignment project.

 
             Webmaster Copyright Disclaimer Privacy