Editor:
Islanders are paying for the mistakes of an uncaring government in whom false trust has been placed.
Plan B was hastily made and announced to thepublic at the end of 2011, a mere three weeks after the closing of submissions for the original three Gateway proposals.
It’s apparent now that three maps were overlooked:
1) Forestry – maps which tell density and type of trees would have determined the extent of forest, particularly in the Hemlock Grove area. Last December, the area could have been easily walked and evaluated. For a Stantec senior consultant at the Environmental Impact Assessment meeting in August to indicate that nobody knew the hemlocks were there shows many of us how shallow a job the companydid, though paid handsomely and, curiously, without a tender process. Little attention was paid to the springs and streams, as the first plan was to have Crawford’s Stream crossed not once but twice.
2) Topography — these maps show elevation, and from which one can infer waterflow. The current TCH wisely follows the crest of the hills, so water flows from each side. In Plan B, the “realignment” is set so water is going to have to run over the surface of the road in several places, and must be dealt with.
3) Soil/geology — this would show the bedrock they are surprised to have hit recently. In the Environmental Impact Assessment, Stantec even mentions bedrock "over an estimated 60%" of the surface in the Churchill area.
These maps were evidently shelved. How we wish Plan B was.
Due diligence was not done in the planning of Plan B. Three essential maps were overlooked in the government’s haste to push through a project that has been rife with “setbacks”, all easily foreseen, and all costing taxpayers additional dollars.
Minister Vessey, how much is Plan B over-budget?
Chris Ortenburger,
Bonshaw
