News Update

Major Inaccuracies Mar West Carleton Review article of July 2, 2004 Issue.

4^th July, 2004

By Allan Joyner

  In an otherwise much appreciated article by Ashley Kulp of the West Carleton Review, a number of serious inaccuracies were evident.

  The article mentioned that many local residents were lobbying for a site change.   In fact there are two distinct streams of the lobbying effort.   The first, led mainly by Martha Webber, calls for a complete halt to the project.   This would be very unusual but it has precedent in Ontario municipalities and could be undertaken if the political will was evident.   Other projects with draft plans of approval have been stopped at later stages of the process.    There are a great many factors about this project that would seem to make it a candidate.   These range from the serious environmental issues to the unusual history of this development.

  The second stream acknowledges the fact that the project obtained a draft plan of approval from the former township back in 1991 and that ending a project with draft approval is very difficult.   This second stream of the lobbying has the intention of ensuring that every environmental regulation that can be applied to this project is indeed applied in the strictest possible way.   This should force the developer to make major modifications to his plan.   Read the Carp Ridge development section of this site for lots more information on this.

  Another paragraph states that Allan Joyner had "discovered a new study".   In preparing the content for the website we have had the full extent of the project explained to us and new (to us) information includes detail on the fact that the process now includes additional studies that are described on this site.

  Mr. Joyner is quoted as saying that his "well surrounds the ridge on three sides. It's 75 feet and I have surface water" it continues.   Mr. Joyner was referring not to his own well (which is approximately two kilometres away and some 285 feet deep) but to a neighbour's well.   That person's property is surrounded on three sides by the development lands and indeed they are on a shallow well that would be the first to be contaminated in the event there were problems on the new lots.   It's hard to imagine that even average levels of fertilizing and weed killing on some 30 lots would not have an effect on that neighbour's water quality.

  The article also mentioned that members of the committee were uncomfortable discussing the position of the local councilor Eli El-Chantiri on this issue. We felt it was important that the members of committee be aware of his position and we stand by that point.   Therefore we related comments he made to us that outlined his opposition to intervening in the process at this point and his support for the rights of the developer.    The Carp Ridge Society sent Mr. El-Chantiri a report of that exchange the following morning so that he would be aware of its contents. We welcomed any clarification or correction he wished to make.   We have not had a reply so we must assume he was in agreement.

  The last major point that is confusing and incorrect is where Ms. Kulp refers to the fact that any councilor could take this matter to higher authorities with the city to obtain an information meeting.   As described here in the website, The local councilor Eli El-Chantiri has offered to arrange an information meeting once the studies that developer has been asked to produce have been supplied to the city and commented on by the Mississippi Valley Conservation authority.   This would not be a public input meeting.  It would allow the planners from the city to inform residents of the results of the review and most probably be far to late to have any opportunity for concerned citizen's effective input.

  The point of this part of the conversation was that if residents illustrate that there are major problems with how the project is proceeding, that any member of council, not just the local representative, can bring a appropriate motion on the project to any relevant committee.  

  Its worth noting that a decision of Ottawa City council has dropped the old practice of keeping detailed records of committee proceedings from being prepared so Ms. Kulp had not ability to refer to transcripts of the meeting.

  We hope this clears up any confusion resulting from the article.

-30-

more updates...