|
|
 |
|
Jan 22, 2003
January 22, 2003
Janet Stavinga,
Councillor Goulbourn Ward
City of Ottawa
110 Laurier Ave. West
Ottawa, ON K1P 1J1
Dear Janet:
Subject: Richmond Village Association Observations Upon and Position With Respect to the Munster Wastewater Facilities Re-evaluation
Reference: Munster Hamlet Wastewater Treatment Facility Re-evaluation of Alternatives Final Report dated December 16, 2002
If the recommendations of the referenced report are adhered to as presented, then there is no need for further concern on the part of the residents of Richmond. However, a recent editorial in the Stittsville News, a newsletter from the Munster Community Association, and the detail of the report itself create concerns that a forcemain pipeline through Richmond is potentially still under consideration for tendering.
The referenced report notwithstanding, the RVA believes that there is a credible health and environmental threat that would result from a forcemain option. The majority of the wells in Richmond are shallow in nature and thus susceptible to contamination, and loss of water in the aquifer which could result from the transfer of water from the Jock River watershed to that of the Ottawa. In addition there is the threat of physical disruption and contamination resulting from excavation and blasting.
R.V. Anderson took no cognizence of concerns for Richmond in conducting the re-evaluation, and we find that their treatment of the lack of available data is inconsistent from one case to another. For example, although no specific hydro-geological studies were carried out, the report concludes that the impact of water transfer from local watersheds would be minimal because of the use of deep communal wells in Munster. The extension of impact beyond the bounds of Munster Hamlet was not factored. Another example, this time with respect to on site treatment, was the report’s choice to downgrade an option because of the inherent lack of historical data regarding its discharge water quality. We see two sets of wanting data treated in two different ways such that it reduced the disparity in environmental impact between the treatment concepts.
Thus the RVA does not share the MCA's confidence that the only real difference between local and regional treatment is potentially cost, as the report concluded.
As previously stated, if the forcemain is eliminated from consideration, the RVA has no further concern. Given the current situation however, the RVA wishes to be provided timely reports on the deliberations and conclusions of city staff on this matter. Should the city choose to open the tendering process to include proposals for a regional (forcemain) solution as well as for local treatment, the RVA offers the following recommendations. In order to mitigate a politically charged and extraordinarily contentious situation, it is recommended that prior to public release, the Request for Proposal be reviewed by a committee that comprises city staff and one representative each, named by the following groups: the RVA, the MCA and the OMB appellants. The purpose of this would be to assure all interested parties that despite the disparate technology, all bidders will be responding to a common costing and contracting baseline. It is further recommended that the same committee, comprised of the same named people sit as the bid evaluation team.
In the interest of transparency of process, fairness and good community relations, we urge you to give serious consideration to these recommendations, should the circumstances warrant.
The foregoing is in no way an endorsement of the inclusion of a pipeline bid, nor is it an acceptance of a course of action contrary to the recommendations of the referenced report. However, if the city chooses to reject the report's recommendations, the RVA feels very strongly about active participation in the resulting process.
Sincerely,
(original signed by)
Ted Brown
President, RVA
CC. - Mayor Bob Chiarelli
Peter Hume, Chair Environmental Committee
Ottawa City Council
Bruce Thom, City Manager