City staff responses have been incorporated in the letter in blue bold italic font. February 6, 2017

Transcription

1 City staff responses have been incorporated in the letter in blue bold italic font. February 6, 2017 February 2, 2017 Dear Mayor Watson, We thank you for agreeing to meet with representatives of the New Edinburgh Community Alliance to discuss our community s concerns regarding the impact of the CSST Project. We understand senior officials associated with the project may be present and we think that is likely to be helpful. Attached in Appendix A is a summary of the key issues of concern to our community. This includes concerns communicated to you in our letter of December 24, plus supplementary issues endorsed by NECA s Board of Directors on January 17. We propose three agenda items for our talk. 1) Relocation of the primary extraction site from Stanley Park. We believe Council took its decision to approve the design of the CSST project in 2013 with incomplete information, both in terms of the engineering aspects of the project and the health/safety risks posed to residents of New Edinburgh. We also believe the City has behaved in a manner inconsistent with the spirit of its strategy on public engagement that was issued by Council in While the City has considered locations elsewhere that would pose far less disruption to nearby residents and would not expose those residents to the same health and safety risks being shouldered by New Edinburgh, it appears to have based its decision on cost and engineering considerations rather than the well-being of its citizens. We request the opportunity to brief Council on information the community has uncovered that appears to be missing from the 2013 decision. You have been cited in the media as opposing the relocation of the main extraction site from Stanley Park, apparently on the basis of the additional costs involved combined with the view that New Edinburgh should bear its fair share of the burden of the project. It is our hope that you will be open to reconsidering this position in light of the information we bring forward on the health, safety and environmental impact of the construction and trucking activity in this neighbourhood. This impact is considerably more than a fair share by any reasonable measure, and we trust that in the interests of real fairness, you ll consider our position with an open mind. CITY RESPONSE: The City s recommendation is outlined in a memo to Council dated December 22, It is noted that this is not the only site that will be impacted by the construction of the CSST. Of the estimated 30-month construction period, the peak trucking volume (4-8 trucks per hour) will occur over a 10-month period. It is noted that even during this peak period, the number of trucks per hour will be lower than the number of buses currently traveling through the community (6-12 buses per hour depending on the time of day). 2) Mitigation and remediation. Appendix A lists issues related to implementation, some dealing with mitigation of the Project s damaging effects and risks, and others dealing with remediation of the community s environment and infrastructure as the project winds down. We realize it will not be feasible to discuss all these matters at our meeting. We will be discussing this list with community members over the weekend and will communicate with your office immediately thereafter to let you know which issues we would anticipate securing

2 responses on on Monday afternoon. CITY RESPONSE: Comments are provided in Appendix A. The details requested by the community are developed by the Contractor who determines the means and methods of implementing the Tendered Design Specifications. Because of the length of construction, the means and methods are determined via a phased approached as construction progresses so that the plans do not become outdated prior to construction mobilization. The intent is to keep the community informed of this information throughout the construction process. Damage - Vibration limits are in place to prevent damage to structures, including heritage structures. If there were to be damage to adjacent property caused as a result of the contractor s actions in constructing the project, the contractor is ultimately liable for this damage. - Pre-construction surveys are undertaken in order to document pre-construction conditions in the event damages should occur; the survey allows for the establishment of baseline condition from which the damage can be documented/demonstrated Negative effects to health, safety and well being - As with other construction projects in the City, these types of impacts are considered and mitigated through existing regulations, City by-laws, best practices, and requirements specified in the construction contract documents. - Noise o Noise monitoring, control and mitigation measures commensurate with City bylaws and industry normal standard of care. o The Contractor determines means and methods based on regulations and this standard of care. - Health and Safety o The Contractor is responsible to follow industry norms and is responsible for public safety during execution of their work (for example, can t do blasting and have something fly out of their work zone, need to ensure truck/public traffic is safe. This is a project that employs standard construction methods and does not create excessive, unnecessary and disproportionate harm to people and property. - The option of underground storage was evaluated and selected through an extensive Environmental Assessment (EA) process. - The EA looked at a number of alternatives, potential impacts and mitigation measures. - The mitigation measures have been further developed during the design and have been incorporated into the contract. 3) Addressing accountability and communication issues. There will need to be follow up negotiations after this meeting. At present, community members believe that many questions they raise seem to disappear into a void. Some are addressed, some are not. Responses often take a long time. They are often incomplete. Typically it is unclear who is responsible and when or if -- the community can expect answers. This fosters distrust, frustration and anger among residents not helpful for City and not helpful for the community. We are requesting your agreement to establish a non-legal Community Mitigation Protocol between the City and our association to help address these problems. Both Councillors Nussbaum and Chernushenko have encouraged us to pursue this request. Appendix B provides details. We hope you will agree to sign this yourself as an indication of your commitment to addressing the concerns of our community and minimizing the negative impacts of the project on our lives and our well-being. 2

3 CITY RESPONSE: City staff has been responsive to concerns expressed by members of the community. It is recognized that at times similar questions have been submitted many times, in many different forms and by many people. We agree that having a clearer communication protocol between the Community and the City will help to improve the timely flow of factual information. Attached is a draft Community Engagement Strategy that outlines how the City will be keeping the community informed throughout the duration of the project. We look forward to discussing these matters with you at 4pm on Monday, February 6. Yours truly, Tim Plumptre President, New Edinburgh Community Alliance 3

4 Appendix A Summary of issues of current concern to the community (February 1, 2017) (Note: the community has developed an extensive listing of many relevant questions and concerns. The following headings group them by major issue areas.) THE TOP ISSUE CAUSING ANGER AND CONCERN TO RESIDENTS: RELOCATE THE PRIMARY EXTRACTION SITE FOR THE E-W TUNNEL FROM STANLEY PARK * * * * * * Other issues related to mitigation and remediation Health and Safety concerns of the community 1. The City to immediately conduct an independent study to identify environmental and human health mitigation measures for this project. 2. This study should specifically address the impact of the project on the health, safety and quality of life of the vulnerable elderly residents of Governor s Walk Retirement Residence. CITY RESPONSE: A human health and ecological risk assessment (HHERA) is not typically done for construction projects. HHERA studies evaluate risk based on established guidelines and the risk is typically based on lifetime exposure. Construction is temporary and the means and methods are consistent with typical construction practices. A HHERA was undertaken for Stanley Park by the NCC several years ago. This was in response to the contaminated soil in the park. Measures were implemented to reduce the risk to the community. Noise reduction/ management 1. Contractor s noise management/mitigation plan to be provided to the community. CITY RESPONSE: The contractor is preparing a noise control plan. This plan will be shared with the community when it becomes available. 2. Ongoing monitoring of noise and air pollution and realtime sharing of results with the community CITY RESPONSE: The Contractor will be undertaking monitoring that is consistent with the type of construction activity. Noise monitoring information will be shared with the community, but this information will not be in real time. Air pollution monitoring will not be undertaken as it is not required for the type of construction activity. 3. Cessation of construction activity and trucking on weekends 4

5 CITY RESPONSE: When tunneling operations begin in 2018, it will be a 24/7 operation and requires the removal of muck from the site. The City has already restricted the contractor from hauling at night. 4. Noise barriers /solid hoarding to surround the main site to reduce sound and dust emissions CITY RESPONSE: The requirement whether noise barriers are required will be presented in the Noise Control and Mitigation Plan provided by the contractor. This will be shared with the community. There are already provisions in the contract for dust control. These include measures such as the application of water for suppression of dust and truck cleaning stations, which are more effective than solid hoarding. 5. Agreement on what constitutes acceptable maximum limits on noise, on measures to mitigate noise; agreement on what actions will be taken by whom if noise maximums are being exceeded. CITY RESPONSE: The project is proceeding in accordance with the City s Noise By-Law. A Noise Control and Mitigation Plan will be provided by the contractor and will be shared with the community. 6. Advance notice to residents if there is a limited period in which noise levels may be excessive (exceeding dbl, as per existing bylaw). CITY RESPONSE: It is noted that there are no noise limits in the City s Noise By-law for construction projects. The City will provide ongoing notification of upcoming activities that could result in increased noise levels, but will not provide estimated noise levels as this is dependent on too many factors. The Noise Control Plan will provide more details on activities that could result in higher noise levels. 7. Hours of work at Queen Victoria/River Lane site to be limited to 7am to 5pm. CITY RESPONSE: The City s Noise By-law permits construction work between 7am and 10pm Monday to Friday, 7am to 10pm on Saturday and 9am to 5pm on Sunday. It is noted that the contractor has stated that at the present time the plan is only to work 7am to 7pm during week. 8. A noise demonstration by the City at sites 5b and 5c so that residents can assess the degree of disruption and disturbance they can anticipate and allow them to determine if they will be able to stay in their homes. CITY RESPONSE: The City has investigated this option and no protocol for this process exists. Therefore, there is no way to ensure that a noise demonstration would be accurate; it could be very misleading. Similar construction activities are taking place at Site 10 (Kent Street and Highway 417) and staff would be pleased to organize a site visit with interested community members. 9. A regularly updated Project Calendar/construction sequencing plan, on line, documenting the phases of work and when major activities such as tree removal, installation of noise barriers, blasting, increased trucking, etc. are expected to occur. CITY RESPONSE: Updated project information is available at Ottawa.ca/CSST. In addition, residents looking for additional information on the CSST project can access: Regularly distributed e-newsletter with updates on construction activities, impacts, and progress. Residents can sign up to receive updates automatically at Ottawa.ca/esubscriptions. address CSST@ottawa.ca (link sends ) for inquiries 5

6 Additional information is provided in the attached Community Engagement Strategy. 10. Agreement on how community members should be notified in advance of important upcoming events such as community forums, information sessions, community consultations, etc. CITY RESPONSE: Refer to attached Community Engagement Strategy. 11. Solid hoarding along the margin of the playground in Stanley Park. CITY RESPONSE: This request will be reviewed. Solid hoarding can create hidden spaces that need to be reviewed from a safety and security perspective. Traffic Management and Trucking 1. A city-organized forum for discussion of alternative trucking routes, with background information on the pros and cons of each, including an assessment of health, safety and vibration impacts of each alternative route. CITY RESPONSE: Agreed. A Public Open House is being organized for February 22 nd to present the trucking route options and seek community input. 2. An agreed protocol for street cleaning during different phases / seasons of the project CITY RESPONSE: These are standard requirements and are included in the contract. This will be monitored during construction. 3. A one-on-one briefing where community members can meet truck drivers to establish relations and express concerns with respect to the safety of elderly persons and children, and to make them aware of key locations such a schools, retirement residences. CITY RESPONSE: The Contractor has a legislated obligation for the safety of the construction site. While one-on-one briefings are not practical, the City could coordinate a meeting with the contractor management. 4. Agreement on speed limits on trucking routes; rigorous monitoring and rigid enforcement of those limits along the entire route, with penalties for trucks that do not observe them. CITY RESPONSE: Speed limits outside of the designated construction areas are set by the City and enforced by Ottawa Police Services. Vehicle and equipment operators (i.e. truck drivers) are required to adhere to them. 5. Agreement on new traffic calming measures as necessary, such as speed bumps. CITY RESPONSE: There will be traffic control measures for coming into and out of the site (stop control, flag person, etc). Once vehicles are on the road they are required to adhere to all requirements of the highway traffic act. Traffic calming measures, such as speed humps, are not recommended as these may themselves contribute to additional noise and vibrations. 6. Prohibition of on-street parking by construction workers. CITY RESPONSE: The Contractor will determine the appropriate method for getting their workers to/from the construction sites. The City can t prevent the use of public parking, but contractors will have to adhere to all municipal parking restrictions. Individuals will be responsible for any infractions. City staff will work with By-law Services if these are not being adhered to. 6

7 7. Enhanced parking restrictions on any eventual trucking route; rigorous enforcement. CITY RESPONSE: The project team will work with traffic and by-law staff to review this request. However, employing parking restrictions would open the street which could potentially increase cut-through traffic and traffic speeds (not related to construction activities). 8. Rumble strips to shake dirt and dust off trucks before they move through the community, washing station for truck wheels. CITY RESPONSE: As previously noted, the contract requires dust mitigation measures, including the application of water for control dust and the provision of truck washing stations. 9. Zero tolerance on idling for trucks, penalties for truck drivers that do idle. CITY RESPONSE: The contractor must abide by the City s Idling and Noise By-Laws. 10. Agreed protocol with respect to the removal of toxic soil on site. CITY RESPONSE: The City is aware of the presence of contaminated material on the site and the contract includes provisions to ensure these are handled in an appropriate manner. Protocols will need to respect provincial and municipal regulations. The Contractor is required to develop a Soil and Rock Waste Management Plan that can be shared as needed. 11. Trucking hours restricted to 7am to 5pm. CITY RESPONSE: As previously noted, the City s Noise By-law permits construction work between 7am and 10pm Monday to Friday, 7am to 10pm on Saturday and 9am to 5pm on Sunday. The contractor has stated that at the present time the plan is only to work 7am to 7pm during week. Reducing the working hours will not only increase the cost to the project but also extend the period of construction. It is worth noting that buses run through the neighbourhood from 5am to 10pm at generally a higher frequency than is expected as a result of construction activity. 12. Dust covers on all trucks CITY RESPONSE: Trucks will full loads are required to use their covers. 13. Agreement on communication channels and availability of staff to handle calls related to infractions of traffic-related (or other) regulations. CITY RESPONSE: All enforcement of regulations is up to the enforcement officers of the appropriate agency. Residents can convey their concerns to the Field Ambassador, 311 and the CSST inbox at CSST@ottawa.ca. Issues will be raised with the contractor. Contract administration staff will also be on site to assist in this regard. Community compensation Provision of adequate funding/options for residents for financial losses or costs arising from the project s impact (e.g. temporary relocation, protection of property while vacant, protection of household assets vulnerable to construction vibrations, business losses, reduced property values due to construction, health expenses related to harm caused by construction activity.) CITY RESPONSE: Based on the City s Legal Opinion, with respect to the Municipal Act, there are a number of sections which grant rights to Municipalities and exempt them from liability with respect 7

8 to public utilities. The City of Ottawa would not be liable for carrying out the construction of the CSST based on nuisance or business interruption or any similar type of civil claim. If a property is found to have been damaged as a result of the construction activities, then the contractor would be liable. Damage to buildings, other infrastructure 1. Completion by March 30 of a special examination of all buildings officially designated as heritage contributors in the New Edinburgh Heritage Conservation District plan. Results of this examination to be made available to NECA and individually to all relevant property owners. CITY RESPONSE: If any heritage contributing buildings are inside the construction zone of influence, City will document the condition via a Pre-Construction Survey. 2. Review of the condition of the Field House in Stanley Park; renovation / repair of the building due to wear and tear from heavy vehicle traffic and dust. CITY RESPONSE: The City will determine if the Field House is inside the construction zone of influence. If so, a pre-construction survey will be undertaken. 3. Agreement on plans to resurface/ repair roads following completion of Project. CITY RESPONSE: Reinstatement of roads, parklands and private property that is damaged by the project to pre-construction conditions or better is part of the contract and will be completed by the Contractor. 4. Taking advantage of heavy construction machinery in the Park and disruption of the Park, agreement on measures to construct a berm in the northern section of the Park to protect residences from flooding from the Rideau River. CITY RESPONSE: This would require further review since appropriate approvals by the NCC and the RVCA are not in place. In addition, construction of a berm would interfere with the construction staging area and would need to be undertaken as a separate project. 5. Taking of pre-project videos of all buildings within a defined perimeter of the digging sites and trucking routes; copies of each video to be made available to each property owner in this perimeter prior to the start of construction. A second set of videos to be taken upon conclusion of the project and shared with property owners to permit comparisons of preand post-project conditions of each structure. CITY RESPONSE: Videos have already been collected at the homes identified within a specified perimeter of the staging areas and tunnel alignments. Collection of video from houses along truck routes is not required as these are City roads designed to carry traffic. Post construction surveys will also be undertaken as required. Videos will be shared upon request. 6. Preparation of plans with respect to the restoration and improvement of the Park, parking areas and riverbank upon completion of the project. Consultations with community, agreement on plans (modified as necessary); implementation. CITY RESPONSE: Reinstatement of the parkland and other areas that are damaged by the project to pre-construction conditions or better is part of the contract and will be completed by the Contractor. The park landscaping and reinstatement plan has been approved by the NCC and City s Cultural, Recreation and Facilities Department, which are the agencies that administer these lands. The City is open to consider additional reasonable improvements to the park in consultation with the community and the approval agencies. This could be done as part of the CSST or as a separate project. 8

9 Appendix B Toward a Community Mitigation Protocol Between the City of Ottawa and the New Edinburgh Community Alliance Why a Protocol? Since 2013, the City of Ottawa has been developing a major infrastructure initiative, the Combined Sewer Storage Tunnel (CSST) Project. The purpose of the project is to improve the environmental management of wastewater in the City and thereby contribute to the health of the Ottawa River. This project is moving into implementation in early The New Edinburgh Community Alliance (NECA) endorses the overall goals of this project and supports the City s effort to improve its environmental stewardship. However, the project is giving rise to serious concerns among residents of New Edinburgh. There are many communication problems associated with the Project. Although our Councillor and his staff work hard to act as intermediaries on some matters, there is no framework or set of principles that define how the communication process is supposed to work or what the community can reasonably expect. On issues of current concern and other likely to arise in future, the community is looking to the City or its representatives to take a range of decisions that will eliminate, reduce or mitigate damaging impacts of the Project. It is also seeking commitments with regard to the remediation or rehabilitation of buildings, roads, parklands and other community or private assets where damage may occur as a result of the Project. A protocol would constitute a good-faith, non-legal agreement providing a framework for the conduct of negotiations. Drawing on the existing City policy on consultation, it would confirm principles that would guide City staff as well as contractors, who may not be aware of the City s policy, in discussions with the community. It would set in place a three-level framework that defined who was responsible for what, how discussions should take place, and who should be involved. The advantage of this protocol from the City s viewpoint would be that it would provide staff and contractors with a clearer understanding of how to relate to the community. In addition it may help to diminish some of the anger and frustration the community, and perhaps reduce criticism of the City, of which there has been a great deal in recent months. Signing the Protocol If the City is agreeable to the concept of this protocol, we would undertaken to prepare a draft for the City s consideration and the Mayor s signature. We request that the Mayor establish a target no later than date for signing by both parties. Principles In 2015, City Council published its official on Public Engagement Strategy. In line with this Strategy, with respect to the CSST Project, this protocol would commit the City and its contractors to a decision-making process that is inclusive, meaningful, accountable, and responsive to the public s perspectives and needs. (p. 4) It would also commit the City or its representatives to abide by these Guiding Principles (derived from the City s Strategy): Accountability Inclusiveness and responsiveness Openness and transparency; informative. Provide clear, relevant and complete information in plain language throughout the process. Timeliness 9

10 Cooperation: building positive, respectful, and cooperative relationships with residents and community partners. With a protocol in place, if major problems arose in respect of the Project, it would be clear to whom our community should address its concerns. The pathway for sorting out those concerns would be better understood. Over time, records of discussions related to issues of concern would provide a running record of what issues had been raised, and what action was taken. Roles the City The protocol would designate individuals at three levels of accountability: Protocol Director: At the most senior level would be the Protocol Director the individual designated by the Mayor to oversee the City staff relationship with our Association, and with overall responsibility to ensure that the City s principles and guidelines are being respected in interactions with the community. Operational Manager: At an intermediate level, the City would designate the Operational Manager the individual with day-to-day responsibility for supervising project implementation, and who would have the responsibility to negotiate details of the mitigation arrangements and other agreements with the NECA board or its representatives in line with the principles in the protocol. The Operational Manager would be the normal point of contact for community members, unless it was felt that the process was moving too slowly or other problems were emerging. In this event, the issue would be raised to the level of the Protocol Director for resolution. Project Manager: On the front lines, the City would designate an individual who would serve as a Project Monitor. This person would be the first-level contact for community members when they observe that the contractor or subs are not observing certain agreements. This person s job would be to help resolve issues promptly; he or she would have a direct line to the relevant department of the city such as bylaw enforcement or environmental management, and also to the contractor s Project Manager. The individual would be available promptly by phone and at all hours of the day or evening. At present, we understand the City or Stantec may have appointed a person who would be a kind of community liaison person. This individual was appointed without consultation with our community. Requests to her to clarify her title, job description and accountability have not been answered for over a week. If this individual is supposed to be serving the role we have in mind, this is a very disappointing start, and it illustrates why a protocol is needed. Role of NECA There may be issues raised by NECA on behalf of the community to which the City is unwilling to agree. If this occurs, NECA reserves its democratic right to continue to advocate responsibly for its objectives. However on matters where agreement can be reached or is in prospect, NECA would undertake to negotiate with the City in a manner that was respectful, timely and collaborative, and it would agree to be bound by the same principles as the City. Role of the Councillor and his Staff The Councillor would continue, as he has to date, to facilitate interaction with NECA and other members of the community, and to help organize forums and other events to share information broadly with the community or solicit community input. Subject to his other priorities, he would take part in discussions of all significant issues involving the City and community representatives, and in particular in discussions requiring the involvement of the Protocol Director. If there seemed to be important problems developing with regard to how the protocol was working, he would be available to raise those problems with the Mayor or with top levels of municipal administration. 10