| |
Formal
request for explanation
on matter of city-wide importance
remains
unanswered after 26 days
Subject: FORMAL REQUEST FOR EXPLANATION
Importance: High
All addressees
The Richmond Village Association transmitted this request twenty six (26)
days ago. Thus far we have received no acknowledgement of receipt, and
certainly nothing that could be considered a response.
If someone would be so kind as to indicate when we can expect this request
to be actioned, we would be grateful.
R.A. Harvey Snyder, P.Eng.
Vice President
Richmond Village Association
720-0664
----- Forwarded by Harvey Snyder/DMR/CA on 05/05/2004 10:11 AM -----
Fron: Harvey Snyder
Sent: 04/09/2004 02:06 PM
To: Bob.Chiarelli@ottawa.ca, Glenn.Brooks@ottawa.ca, Herb.Kreling@ottawa.ca,
Jan.Harder@ottawa.ca,Gord.Hunter@ottawa.ca, Eli.El-Chantiry@ottawa.ca,
Doug.Thompson@ottawa.ca,Maria.Mcrae@ottawa.ca, Jacques.Legendre@ottawa.ca,
Rainer.Bloess@ottawa.ca,Rob.Jellett@ottawa.ca, Peter.Hume@ottawa.ca,
Rick.Chiarelli@ottawa.ca,Clive.Doucet@ottawa.ca, Georges.Bedard@ottawa.ca,
Michel.Bellemare@ottawa.ca,Diane.Holmes@ottawa.ca, Peggy.Feltmate@ottawa.ca,
Shawn.Little@ottawa.ca,Alex.Cullen@ottawa.ca, Diane.Deans@ottawa.ca,
Janet.Stavinga@ottawa.ca,kent.kirkpatrick@ottawa.ca
cc: Don & Tracey Flanders, Bruce Webster, Douglas Longmire, Glendon R
Trebble, Judy Wagdin, Bill Walters, Jill deBoer,
lois.corbett@ene.gov.on.ca
Subject: FORMAL REQUEST FOR EXPLANATION
Council Decisions Regarding Trail Road and Munster
Mayor and Council
Please find enclosed two previous correspondences sent to you privately,
that is, not in my capacity as an officer of the Richmond Village
Association. These messages pretty well capture the essence of the
Association's concern on behalf of our community, yet they have not to date
received a single response from outside the ranks of concerned citizens.
For that reason, this correspondence is to be treated as a formal request
for an explanation of your actions regarding the subject projects; the
Trail Road leachate management project and the Munster pumping station and
forcemain project.
Neither of these projects is a 'ward issue'. Both potentially impact on
neighboring communities and wards as well as the city as a whole in that
they may burden the city's wastewater collection system and ROPEC. It is
evident that the municipal engineers don't consider this work as
constrained to particular wards because at a meeting on January 16, 2004
they recommended that the PLC for the Trail Road project that is associated
with councillor Harder's ward include councillor Stavinga, not only as a
member, but also as part of a public participants selection panel.
Considering the foregoing, we would appreciate not seeing the ward issue
argument appear in your anticipated response.
Both of these projects potentially involve transporting toxic waste (either
chemical or organic) through major communities. One community at risk,
Stonebridge, has a municipal water system (a closed, pipe distribution
system that falls under the city's responsibility). The other community at
risk, Richmond (and many homes along the route between Munster and
Richmond), is served by the local shallow aquifer which is wide open and
infinitely more vulnerable, with the point of delivery being at the private
wells on up to 1200 properties in the community and its environs. The city
has no responsibility for these wells in the event of contamination or
dewatering of the aquifer.
Residents of both communities rose up and strongly objected to the municipal
engineers' preferred pipeline solution - recognizing that onsite treatment
would not just mitigate - it would completely avoid the threat to the
health of residents. Stonebridge residents were 'heard' and the
environmental assessment was opened for reassessment. Richmond residents
have protested loudly for months upon months, but we have been ignored by
all but a few councillors (our councillor not being one of the few) and
treated with disdain and arrogance by city staff.
We, the people of Richmond and environs, respectfully request that you
provide a detailed written explanation with respect to why the Stonebridge
Class EA was reopened on the basis of expressions of concern by the
residents, while Richmond residents, despite long and vocal objection
including both verbal and written communications, have been completely
ignored by council as a corporate entity despite our requests to reverse
your decision and either recognize the majority conclusion of two out of
three major studies, or at least give us a new hearing, as you have done
for Stonebridge.
R.A. Harvey Snyder, P.Eng.
Vice President,
Richmond Village Association
Home 613-838-3572
Cell 613-720-0664
Attachment #1
Mayor and Councillors - "Alarm Bells"
In order to sell you on approving the forcemain solution for Munster,
Richard Hewitt presented and defended a staff report in which the
operational life-cycle for the system was extended out to 90 years. By
citing lower O&M cost for the last 25 or 30 years than for the first 60 to
65 years, he managed to make the cost difference between pipeline and
on-site something of a wash. That apparently convinced you to vote for the
forcemain in spite of, and with disregard for the vehement objections of
the more than 5000 residents in Richmond with very legitimate health
concerns.
Yet these same engineers led by Richard Hewitt seem quite happy to accept
the far more rational life cycle figure of 20 years for the reopened Class
EA being conducted for the long term management of the Trail Road leachate
and contaminated groundwater situation. An EA that you, as a body, reopened
because of public concerns expressed by the residents in close proximity.
Stonebridge residents complain, you reopen. Richmond residents object, you
ignore, and Mr. Hewitt's people rush to start the work before the ice is
off the Jock River.
There is something wrong with this picture. Are there no alarm bells going
off in your heads?
Attachment #2
Mayor and Councillors - "Sanity Check"
Seven thousand people living in 1200 homes in Richmond and along the route
from Munster Hamlet draw their water from the local aquifer from their
private, shallow wells. This water source is wide open and vulnerable to
lethal contamination. Yet you, as a body actually approved a plan that
pumps under pressure, the sewage from Munster Hamlet's 400 homes directly
through the water supply that Richmond residents drink from. Sewage made up
of fecal material, urine, bathwater, dishwater, blood - anything the
residents of Munster choose to rinse down the sink or flush down the
toilet.
You made this decisions, knowing that there were other options - routing
the forcemain to Stittsville were the water supply is enclosed in pipes and
the responsibility of the city to maintain, or constructing a tertiary
treatment on-site plant that has been proven over and over across this
continent.
Think about it. Could you have chosen a worse solution? What you have done
is not only irrational, it is simply and fundamentally wrong. For the rest
of you - would you have done that to a community in your ward? For Janet,
you should be deeply ashamed for this assault on the well being of our
community.
Background Links:
|
|