OK...I still have some skin in the game. Not as much as I used to. Sold some for a gain...sold some for a loss. Life goes on. Here is what I have found out...it is lengthy but I will outline the positives AND negatives at the bottom.
C. Kittlitz and C. Walker provided an overview of proposed Bylaw 1304/13 – amendment to the Land Use Bylaw 819/96 to list “Railway Track Extension” as a site specific discretionary use and reviewed the Briefing Note provided to Council in their Agenda Package.
Mayor Flynn asked if there were any comments from anybody in attendance.
K. Shaw asked how many adjacent landowners were notified.
C. Walker indicated that he would have to confirm but to the best of his knowledge, landowners within a quarter section of either side of the proposed development as well as north along Range Road 234 were notified by letter.
Darren Young, Senior Planner with ISL Engineering and Land Services reviewed his presentation material. A copy of this material was provided to the legislative officer.
Councillor Kaup asked if the construction of the rail spur would increase rail traffic.
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 26, 2013 PAGE 339
Frank Bobowik, General Manager, On-Track Railway Services advised that the additional track would not attract any more business. Their own railcars would be utilizing this track as well as others who own railcars.
Mayor Flynn asked if there are any unforeseen issues such as noise.
Mr. Young advised that this is the first stage in a multi-stage project for On-Track. At this stage it is only one extension. Down the road there is interest in pursuing additional parallel tracks along the rail spur. So, there will be another process for neighboring landowners to bring forward comments.
Mayor Flynn suggested that it is a good idea to keep the public informed. An open house may be a good option.
Councillor Shaw asked if a hump yard were part of future plans.
Mr. Young advised that it wasn’t.
Councillor Caron advised that he supports this proposal. He met with the proponents and understands them to be very dedicated to working with adjacent landowners.
Councillor Evans asked if stormwater issues would affect this development.
Mr. Young advised that they are aware of the drainage issues on the existing site. At the development permit stage, the County will require that they submit a drainage plan to address on-site drainage. This is part of the process which will alleviate drainage issues on this site.
T. Flynn recognized that drainage is an important issue in this area and it will have to be addressed.
T. Flynn asked if there were any further comments from anybody in attendance.
N. Best advised that there had been no correspondence received regarding this proposed bylaw.
J. Kaup indicated that this will improve drainage on that site.
Mayor Flynn closed the public hearing at 11:00 a.m.
OK...so we have ISL in attendance and they have a proposal. This would make GESI's PR about using them legit - IF, everything is on the up and up, I would like to think that it is GESI's proposal. The fact that On track is trying to add a new spur leads me to believe that it is for the Waste to Energy plant. Now, the negatives - I really have a hard time believing that GESI can pull this off since the funding is non existent. So...are they trying to get permits - by all accounts - yes. Is ISL Engineering involved - by all accounts - yes. Is On track trying to secure changing property zoning by laws etc - by all accounts - yes. Does GESI have the money to pull this off- by all account - NO. If they do - I hope it works out for all those still involved heavily.
To you doubters - hey guys...I see your points and not sure what to believe at this point.
