 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
This can’t happen!
The proposed Covered Bridge Pit poses serious threats to tourism, culture & heritage of the area, safety, and water supply & quality. If a massive pit can be approved in an area as significant and sensitive as this, is there anywhere a pit is not acceptable?
Impact on tourism
Cultural / Heritage Impacts
Safety
Risk to water
List of objections
Impact on tourism and the “brands” of Woolwich and Waterloo: The Covered Bridge is an icon of the culture, heritage and agricultural / small settlement image that attracts tourists and new residents to the area – AND keeps the Mennonites in this area. A massive gravel pit, with all of its inherent noise, pollution, scarring of the land, safety issues and traffic… located just 180 metres from the historic bridge… would destroy that image, experience and attraction forever.
Cultural / Heritage Impacts: “Preserving Our Past…” The Kissing Bridge is a national historic site – the only site so designated in Woolwich Township. There is a recommendation pending to designate the valley around West Montrose as a Cultural Heritage Landscape. The cultural and heritage significance of “The Covered Bridge Experience” transcends thirteen decades and seven generations, and a large part of the appeal of West Montrose and the surrounding area is its unspoiled link to our past. Many buildings around West Montrose – the general store, church, old schoolhouse, and several homes and farmsteads are historically significant. The key elements of “The Covered Bridge Experience” link to Woolwich’s heritage as a community based on farming, the river and - of course - the bridge.
Safety: “Protecting Our Future…” Many critical safety issues are not addressed by this proposal. The conveyor may spook horses and cause them to bolt in front of haul trucks. Increased truck traffic along roads used by pedestrians, buggies and school buses – especially when considered cumulatively with existing traffic and other proposed pits – is a major concern. The interaction of hundreds of slow-to-stop gravel trucks with horses and buggies along the road through the pit has not been addressed. And locating the entrance to the pit within metres of a Mennonite school is totally inappropriate. Children walk along the shoulder of this road to school, in dark clothing and often in darkness. One day we may hear news of a horrific – perhaps fatal - accident at this very spot.
Risk to water quality and supply: Capital paving proposes a below-water-table excavation, and also lowering of the water table. This type of excavation can impact water quality and supply to users within sixteen kilometres of the site. The proposal claims that, if local wells are affected (contaminated or cut off) “alternatives are available”. Although West Montrose residents enjoy excellent water, municipal wells in the area are already inadequate – water is trucked in to supplement the supply. Risking the current supply is irresponsible and unacceptable.
Objections: Concerns and objections submitted to Capital Paving and the Ministry of Natural Resources include, but are not limited to:
| 1 - 10 | 11 - 20 | 21 - 31 | 31 - 40 | 41 - 50 | 51 - 60 | 61 - 70 | 71 - 80 | 81 - 90 | 91 - 93 |
