|
September
2003
Newsletter
Public
Consultation — Hamilton Style
The
expressway project has been debated for a long time, although
the City has refused to discuss the cost, need or alternatives
since 1985. Reports have been kept secret for years and
promised written responses to submissions as far back as
1998 have never appeared. It's gone to the extent that the
City spent $4.5 million to prevent its citizens from bringing
their concerns before an independent federal environmental
panel. The pattern has continued this summer in the Greenhill
Avenue neighbourhood where the City intends to build 10
foot high noise walls one to two feet from the property
lines of more than 50 homes along Brookstream and Harrisford.
Because
these walls are so close to the edge of City property, it
appears certain that they will directly affect the adjacent
private properties, especially during the process of construction.
At minimum there will be drainage issues, and the movement
of heavy equipment may damage backyard structures, in-ground
swimming pools, and even home foundations. Noise impacts
may also require double-glazing on windows or other compensation
to homeowners. One homeowner is desperately trying to get
a swimming pool finished while necessary equipment can still
obtain access to his backyard.
A
handful of homes received a letter in early July offering
them a choice of extending their fence to the noise wall
or not. Nothing else! The rest of the neighbourhood was
mailed a flyer on August 1 or 5 (construction was supposed
to start on August 5, and didn't only because protestors
blocked it). The flyer said there would be consultations
"in June and July" but that was obviously pretty
useless when the notification didn't come out until August.
The
fence extension scheme offered by the City generates its
own set of problems. At present homeowners can walk out
their back gate. Gates are not allowed in noise walls. If
the existing back gate is the only exit from the backyard,
homeowners are effectively denied any way out the back of
their home in an emergency such as a fire. Even if a homeowner
says no to the offer of extending their fence, agreement
by two neighbours would effectively block escape routes
for others. In addition, with a noise wall less than two
feet from the fence, it will be impossible for some people
to get out even if they do have a back gate.
This
entire situation is grossly unfair to residents, irrespective
of whether they support or oppose the Red Hill Creek Expressway.
The City seems to not care, or to be in such a rush to start
construction of the road that they haven't bothered to think
about the consequences. This is further evidenced by the
conditions of the injunction demanded by the City (and granted
on September 12).
It bans all persons from being within 3 metres (10 feet)
of the designated construction zone. This "no-go zone"
includes large parts of the backyards of properties along
Brookstream and Harrisford, including parts of swimming
pools, tool sheds, gardens and other private properties.
Violating a court injunction can result in very heavy penalties
including months in jail and large fines.
It
would appear that the City hadn't thought very much about
the implications of its "no-go zone". For example,
the construction boundary at the end of Albright Road is
right up against the road leading to the school parking
lot. Anyone driving into the parking lot will have to be
within 10 feet of this boundary and therefore in violation
of the court injunction. A similar situation prevails at
the Greenhill Avenue dead-end.
Some
of these issues might have been resolved if the City had
conducted a proper consultation with the directly affected
neighbourhood. It chose not to do so. Friends met with City
officials on July 30 and asked for a one-month neighbourhood
consultation. We were turned down cold. Since the temporary
injunction was obtained, City officials won't even respond
to phone calls from affected homeowners.
|
