Re: Hanlon alterations:
This letter is in response to the January 14th meeting at the Holiday Inn and subsequent Tribune article relating to the Hanlon changes.
To be perfectly candid, the City of Guelph, the MTO and Stantec should be embarrassed.
How is it, that a group of inexperienced citizens lacking the extensive resources of the supposed experts from the MTO or Stantec, was able to identify so many gaps in reasoning, and across such a large scope of issues?
It is difficult to fathom that we, the public, are truly getting value for the enormous dollars paid, given the failure to consider the numerous relevant concerns presented. It certainly brings into question, the accuracy or validity of any analysis performed to date.
Given Guelph’s last debacle with the Wellington Street interchange in which an entire access point was missed through design reviews, one would reasonably expect far more attention to detail this time around. If results presented by the community are indeed valid, the groups have obviously failed again.
Though, if the concerns in the meeting were in fact considered, then Stantec has failed in to communicate the rationale for its recommendations, failed to keep the community involved and failed to be forthright in the decision-making process.
Whichever is true, there seem to be several sizeable, unlikely errors from powerful ‘expert’ organizations, there to serve public interest. Errors of this magnitude naturally bring to mind questions of either competency or quite possibly, true intentions. It is not difficult to understand why some people would believe that the path forward is actually predetermined and these ‘open’ discussions are merely a ploy to pacify the public into believing that they have some say in their collective future.
Liz Sandals comments presented in the Tribune would certainly suggest this.
Her appalling lack of interest in the matter echoed throughout the article. Her comments had an undertone of, "Look, why should I get involved? Except for a few tweaks, this thing is going forward as planned. I really don’t want to waste my time with this when the big dogs have already made their plans."
While I can’t imagine that was Ms Sandal’s intention, as would not serve public image, it was hard not hear a message of self interest drowning out her constituents’ concerns.
If in fact, this entire affair is a public relations show, and the puppet masters have made their plans, I would assume they have also had the forethought to include the next several steps. Of most concern, is in dealing with those families forced to move when the present qualities of the area are destroyed.
This loss of neighbourhood quality is not due to ‘natural’ growth; from a nearby housing development for example. This is a specific, intentional redirection of traffic, and destruction of the current environmental setting through monstrous constructions.
As part of the City’s and MTO’s planning strategy, I would expect that a compensation proposal also be presented - one that is fair, in which homeowners are compensated the difference in the actual selling price of the property, relative to the typical appreciation of homes in comparable Guelph neighbourhoods over the period of ownership.
As unfortunate as this is entire scenario is, the small-minded thinking of those responsible, from local through national levels, will ultimately drive this forward I both fear and expect.
Growth and change are inevitable and necessary aspects of life, and are often required for improving life. However, population growth as a means to a better life is a self perpetuating misconception, serving only feed itself as more growth is needed to maintain the current standard. I have to wonder - through the now popular, almost trendy rash of environmental concerns and carbon-footprint headlines, if that underlying factor will ever be considered.
Regards,
Aaron Leybourne, P. Eng.
18 Wagoner’s Trail