Expressway Implementation Committee
June 10/04 Report
Meeting called to order at 7:10 pm. Adjourned at 9:15 pm

Present:

Councillors

• D.Braden (chair)
• M.Pearson
• T.Whitehead
• P.Bruckler
• D.Mitchell
• S.Merulla
• C.Collins

Media

• none

Staff

• Chris Murray (project mgr. RHVP)
• Mike Marini
• D.Cole
• Garry Moore
• Nicole Swerhun (LURA communications)

Many citizens

Note: this meeting was not taped, so a transcript will not be available. Following is a summary with quotable quotes and observations of the author.

Chairman, Dave Braden opened the meeting stating that this meeting is based on the issue of noise as it pertains to citizens in close proximity to the construction site of the Red Hill Valley Expressway

•  he acknowledged the 3 delegations who were registered to speak and added that others would be able to speak if they wished and time allowed

•  he noted that John Ellis would speak on behalf of a neighbourhood organization

•  if time allowed, they may be able to deal with other related topics; he stressed that he felt it was important to be as "inclusive" as possible

•  part of the agenda would be to decide on a date for the next meeting

•  he would try to keep the meeting length to 2 hours

Approval of minutes from previous meeting moved by C.Collins, seconded by D.Mitchell - CARRIED

•  Power Point presentation by Chris Murray which gave some background to the noise issue, location of properties impacted, summary of results of the consultation process, alternatives and recommendations. Presentation included colour slides of some of the backyards of the properties affected (ie. Those whose yards would be in the sightline of the new road)

•  Nicole Swerhun of LURA Communications presented the "noise Wall Meeting Summary Report. She worked on this project as the "Neutral Community Facilitator" and attended and reported on the citizen meetings. Copies of the report were distributed.

She discussed the process and outlined the key issues that were raised.

In her summary of results, it was interesting to note that "many property owners indicated that they may prefer to live with the noise than give up their view and experience of the valley." She also had a fairly extensive list of options to the noise wall suggested by the citizen participants.

Feedback from the residents stated that anger and confusion of these residents was not addressed. Residents were very critical of the information obtained from the City and wanted to ensure that ALL perspectives on the issues were taken into account.

Next steps are to obtain feedback from tonight's meeting and residents will meet with city noise experts.

•  Chris Murray rejected each option suggested by the residents. "The alternatives do not mitigate noise for the rear yard outdoor living areas." Apparently, the noise level must be decreased by 3 decibels and the only option to accomplish this is with a noise wall at the rim of the valley, NOT beside the road.

•  Recommendation: Staff to write a report to Public Works seeking permission to offer non-barrier alternatives to residents. They will review all suggested alternatives and their cost. They will look into the process/feasibility of property acquisition as an alternative (ie. willing buyer/willing seller scenario)

Questions from Councillors:

C.Collins : concerned with insurance claims - "are there opportunities to set up a process to deal with residents' insurance claims?"

"To what extent is the Public Health department involved?"

C.Murray: the construction firms are well-versed in dealing with insurance/liability issues and the designs have been adjusted to deal with health issues of standing water, flooding, etc.

C.Collins : Will this be monitored ?

C.Murray : There is budget for monitoring storm water and wetlands.

C.Collins : concerned with timing of alternative initiatives - feels they should expedite initiatives with noise mitigation NOW and deal with construction timelines

C.Murray : we are bound by the committee/council cycle - should start ASAP in the next cycle which is June-July - need to move as quickly as possible

C.Collins : "This is a time-sensitive issue. There is merit to expedite the process and go ahead with landscaping plans in the summer months. I would like to "walk this on" ASAP at Public Works. I don't want to wait until July or August when everyone is on vacation"

P.Bruckler : "Is there a requirement from MTO for noise mitigation?"

C.Murray : MTO has a retrofit programme for the QEW. Noise levels from Greenhill to Barton are currently 45 to 58 decibels; the benchmark is 55. The expressway will increase sound levels to 58 to 72 decibels.

S.Merulla : concerned with compensation for residents - "Are people aware of their options? Will they get cash? How can they take part in the process?"

C.Murray : can offer more than a wall, there are other recourses - "We will make it clear what the process is and what options exist and how residents can pursue them"

S.Merulla : "What about the odour issue?"

C.Murray : " There was a report on the projected emissions, done by CANTOX for health concerns. The report is available on our website."

S.Merulla : "At the Rennie St. Landfill, odour became an issue, plus travelling particulate matter in the excavation"

C.Murray : landfill will not be trucked through residential areas. It will be taken along the CN rail embankment and the industrial area to highways 20 and QEW.

S.Merulla : "I think we should STOP work immediately if a health issue ensues. Do you agree?"

C.Murray : "Yes"

C.Collins : noted that some streets were omitted in the presentation and wants them included in the report

C.Murray : "Properties on the list are from the City assessment report".

C.Collins : wants the door left open to help people live with this situation through landscaping, etc. - other areas in the valley should be looked at for future eligibility - we should get this in writing

DELEGATIONS

•  Leslie Lemiach: lives on Potruff Rd. S., backing onto the Valley

See full text of her presentation.

•  note of interest: pointed out that report from David Pengelly, well-known Hamilton scientist and expert on air quality was totally disregarded by the City

•  Chris Murray stated that the City's report was generated by CANTOX; Mr. Pengelly's report was disregarded because "he never worked for the City!"

•  Giselle Williams : lives on Potruff Rd. S. - is in favour of the road

See full text of presentation. Her opinion was that the road has been designed for the users of the road; the view from the road is more important than the view from peoples' homes

•  Ed Orzel : lives next to the valley on Garvey Ct., off Potruff Rd. - did not use notes

Main points: felt that initial PR from city was not good and followed the "divide and conquer" principle (gave following examples) - not everyone was told when meetings were

•  City presented the options as "wall or no wall"

•  Citizens took over from the facilitator and ran their own meetings

Stated PR came together in the last 2 weeks since Chad Collins became directly involved

Stated "you can buy an expert's opinion to say anything" - "citizens must challenge the expert to consider and see all sides of the issue

States residents were told at the first meeting there would be "NO WALLS IN THE RAVINE, ONLY ON PROPERTIES"

He reminded the audience that lawsuits are available and he doesn't believe that their property values have not decreased

•  John Ellis, spoke on behalf of the neighbourhood association

Main points:

• the association is concerned with the process with the City over the noise issue
• there should be ONE meeting where EVERYONE hears the SAME THING about the issue and options
• at the noise meetings, the options presented by the City were WALLS vs NO WALLS - City should look at the whole neighbourhood and go to each property
• the report should be reflective of individuals' situations
• residents have been mislead about actual noise levels - ambient noise rises exponentially; for each increase of 3 decibels there is a DOUBLING of the noise level!
• Not all areas were covered by the meetings; noise impacts for 6 blocks each way (he spoke from experience from living that far away from the Linc)
• It is not up to Council, but for CITIZENS to choose the options they can live with; the City at large must compensate those who have lost; ALL those affected must be looked at and compensation offered
• Delay construction to adequately put up barriers with the correct options
• The City must present traffic restrictions to the neighbourhoods NOW!
• If a large number of residents want to sell their homes, the City should be responsible for buying those properties
• "Those who benefit (road users) should compensate those who are adversely affected"

C.Collins : suggested that presenters come to Public Works to present the same issues AND schedule another meeting for those who can't attend during the day.

C.Murray : stated that staff would send letters to all residents with the meeting time and the procedure for registering to speak - they will increase the catchment area for the next resident meeting.

D.Braden : everyone needs to know the parameters of noise levels ("NOISE 101"). Staff needs to deal with the cost, timing and available alternatives for the noise issue.

Meeting adjourned at 9:15pm.