round 2 - province of manitoba - province du...

Round 2

November 30, 2010 ESLW Transportation Network Study 020254 Second Stakeholder Engagement on Preferred Route Networks

APPENDIX 6

COMMUNITY MEETING NOTES

Round 2 Community Engagement 1 Little Grand Rapids

ESLW: COMMUNITY MEETING WEEK 1 of ROUND 2: LITTLE GRAND RAPIDS FIRST NATION

DATE OF MEETING: MONDAY, MAY 31, 2010

PROJECT TEAM: SNC-Lavalin (SNC): Tim Stevens, Phoebe Cheung, and Heather Ashbourne. J.D. Mollard and Associates: David Boschman. East Side Road Authority (ESRA): Graeme Hayward. Community Liaison: Dan Highway.

LEADERSHIP MEETING: A leadership meeting was organized; however, a meeting did not occur as the leadership attended a separate meeting in Winnipeg.

MEETING SETTING: The meeting was held in the Little Grand Rapid’s Band Hall. The open-house layout consisted of maps taped to the walls of three Northern Sector options (C, H and I) and one Southern/Central Sector route option. A PowerPoint presentation was made by Tim Stevens for general information on the project, followed by a general discussion and viewing of the maps. Lunch was provided before the PowerPoint presentation. The general meeting finished at about 4:15 pm.

ATTENDANCE: There were approximately 19 community members in attendance. Study team members spoke to their individual roles and disciplines. The presentation was followed by questions from the floor.

Meeting Comment LeadershipMeeting

� A leadership meeting was organized; however, a meeting did not occur as the leadership attended separate meetings in Winnipeg.

CommunityMeeting

� During the presentation, a community member asked the Project Team if the presentation could focus on the southern connection to Little Grand Rapids. The community member was primarily concerned about when Little Grand Rapids would receive a road. A Project Team member responded to this comment by moving the discussion of the project to the Southern network option.

� A community member asked about the network option connection to Poplar River First Nation. The community member was concerned about potential road blocks from Poplar River First Nation and inquired about what the most inexpensive connection would be for Poplar River (either north or south). The community member inquired about how the government could give priority to construct the first portion of the all-season road to Berens River First Nation, when Berens River First Nation is a community that already has access to the south (ie. Winnipeg for goods and services etc.) via Lake Winnipeg.

� A community member asked the Project Team about why Little Grand Rapids First Nation was not included in the “package deal” with Berens River First Nation and Bloodvein First Nation to be the first recipients of an all-season road. The community member also asked the Project Team if they thought that this was the result of his leadership not lobbying sufficiently in comparison to the other communities. During the presentation, the community member made the following comments: o The community member inquired about Little Grand Rapids


receiving road access before the Island Lake region. Later on during the presentation the same community member inquired about the time frame for the construction of a road from the PR 304 extension to his community.

� A community member asked who has the authority to make the final decision as to what the preferred network option will be. The community member stated that Berens River First Nation was recently granted $11.2 million for training, etc.

� A meeting participant asked what the Project Team meant by the word “impact”. He stated that in his opinion, the road would bring many benefits over impacts. He stated that there would be many health care benefits and a decrease in cost of living (specifically in food costs). During the presentation, the community member informed the Project Team that: o There used to be a company named Abitibi that said they would

construct a road to Little Grand Rapids in exchange for the community’s forestry rights. He asked why it takes the government so long to construct a road to Little Grand Rapids, when this company said they would be able to construct a road to Little Grand Rapids in seven years. He also asked if the Project Team thought that part of the reason for Little Grand Rapids not being one of the first recipients of a road was because his leadership was not supporting or backing the community’s desire to have a road.

o There has not been any wild rice cultivation in the last twenty years. o His community was not involved in any discussions surrounding the

creation of Atikaki Provincial Park. o There is a sand ridge running east to west, similar to the sand ridge

that the Oxford House winter road was constructed upon, that should be considered as a southern network option. He stated that this ridge was the main crossing causing an influx of deer into the area.

� A community member inquired about whom the previous owner was of the Tembec logging road.

� A meeting attendee informed the Project Team that there is a significant abundance of wildlife surrounding the area where the Southern network option forks to Little Grand Rapids First Nation and Pauingassi First Nation. He stated that this area should be protected.

� A community member asked if there needs to be a consensus (100%) between all community members before the road can be constructed.

� A community member asked how Pigeon River Co. was formed. � A community member mentioned she had heard about a road that was

being built from Bissett to Sasaginnigak Lake. GroupDiscussion inResponseto Survey

� On the question as to whether an all-season road from Little Grand Rapids should go first to Pauingassi or towards Berens River, i.e. connect to the proposed road from Berens River to Bloodvein, the responses were unanimous on going first towards Berens River/Bloodvein. If the construction could possibly start from both ends, i.e. east and west, it would generate work in the community. A concern raised during this discussion was the possibility of the road being blockaded at Bloodvein, as had happened previously with the winter


road.� Further to the question about the location of the proposed all-season

road from Little Grand Rapids west, roughly following the existing winter road to Round Lake, there were several responses and suggestions. These responses include: o One was to run the road south west through Atikaki Provincial Park

more directly towards Bloodvein or PR 304. A member of the Project Team responded that these locations had been considered but were longer and more costly to build than going directly west. They crossed challenging terrain as well as Atikaki Provincial Park, a protected area. It was indicated by a community member that the community had little opportunity for input back when the province established the park. No Indian development is allowed in the park.

o Another suggestion was to locate the route on a sand ridge that runs west north west directly towards Berens River.

o One person said that the location of the SNC proposed route just west of Little Grand Rapids runs through a wildlife area where hunting is undertaken. “Could the route be relocated to the south to avoid this area?”

o A community member said the northern location was proposed to minimize the length of new road construction and water crossings, and also to tee-in to the proposed north-south connection between Little Grand Rapids and Pauingassi.

o Another community member said that a more southern location could cross the water, using an island as a stepping stone. A Project Team member noted that this more southern option would likely require bringing Pauingassi traffic through Little Grand Rapids.

o A community member said that since there are strong ties between the two communities (Pauingassi was established about 15 years ago by families from Little Grand Rapids), there is no likelihood of this being an issue.

o One suggestion outside of the immediate area of interest, made by a community member, was to extend a new road east from PR 304 into Ontario, through Woodland Caribou Park towards Red Lake, to link up with the Ontario highway system.

Round 2 Community Engagement 1 Pauingassi

ESLW: COMMUNITY MEETING WEEK 1 of ROUND 2: PAUINGASSI FIRST NATION

DATE OF MEETING: TUESDAY, JUNE 1, 2010

PROJECT TEAM: SNC-Lavalin (SNC): Tim Stevens, Phoebe Cheung, and Heather Ashbourne. J.D. Mollard and Associates: David Boschman. East Side Road Authority (ESRA): Graeme Hayward. Community Liaison: Dan Highway.

LEADERSHIP MEETING: The leadership meeting was held with Moses Owens (councillor), Tim Stevens and Graeme Hayward in an office at the Band Office.

MEETING SETTING: The community meeting / open-house was held at the Band Hall and commenced at around noon. Maps posted in the meeting venue included four refined route network options (three in the Northern and one in the Southern/Central Sector of the Study Area). Before the PowerPoint presentation commenced, the Community Coordinator provided opening comments regarding the project in English and Ojibway. Following the opening comments, Dan Highway introduced the Project Team. The PowerPoint presentation given by Tim Stevens included the three refined east-west network options in the Northern Sector of the Study Area (C, H and I), as well as an option for connecting Poplar River to Berens River. However, the focus was on SNC’s north-south option within the Southern Sector of the Study Area for connecting Pauingassi to Little Grand Rapids and its airport, as well as the east-west option for connecting Pauingassi and Little Grand Rapids to the proposed PR 304 to Berens River all-season road.

An overview was also given of potential future north-south connections within the Central and Southern Sectors of the Study Area i.e. between Options C, H or I and Poplar River or Berens River. Questions were asked by meeting attendees during the presentation and the Community Coordinator translated. A general question and answer period followed the presentation. Lunch was provided after the presentation, followed by a question and answer period. The general meeting finished at about 2:30 pm, followed by some one-on-one discussions. Comment sheets were provided to all meeting attendees and some were left with the Community Coordinator.

ATTENDANCE: There were approximately 20 community members in attendance. Meeting attendees did not provide a job title, role in the community or contact information.

Meeting Comment LeadershipMeeting

� A councillor said that because the winter road season had been short this year, fuel had been brought in by the road, but no building supplies were brought in. Lumber supplies were flown in by Twin Otter floatplane from Little Grand Rapids after Spring break up. Medical evacuations from Pauingassi by night to the airport at Little Grand Rapids are hazardous, involving transit of the river, its shoals and rapids, in pitch darkness. He said there is a possible winter road route to Berens River going directly west from Pauingassi. They would like to adjust the existing winter road south to Little Grand Rapids to bring it closer to the


airport. Providing an airport at Pauingassi versus building an all-season road to Little Grand Rapids Airport was also discussed. The councillor said that it takes 2-3 hours to travel to Bloodvein on the winter road, depending on the roughness of the road.

CommunityMeeting / Open-House

� Before the community meeting started, in response to a community member’s question with respect to why traditional land use areas were not shown on the maps, the community coordinator provided the Project Team with a copy of a draft Protected Area map. Within a protected area, trap lines can be protected, with logging and outside fishing proscribed. The community member said he liked the Project Team’s proposal for an all-season route to Little Grand Rapids, with a connection from the approximate midway point westerly to the Bloodvein/Berens River Road.

� The community coordinator asked the Project Team if the government is using two million dollars to construct the PR 304 to Berens River First Nation all-season road. A Project Team member clarified this amount by stating that currently, the provincial government has committed $93 million for the entire East Side Transportation Initiative (ESTI). The Project Team member also informed meeting participants that ESRA has also signed community benefits agreements with various communities to provide training and employment during road construction. Additional comments made throughout the meeting included: o The community coordinator inquired about how his community can

access similar benefits as the communities that have entered into agreements with ESRA. A Project Team member stated that he was unsure as to whether Pauingassi’s leadership had begun discussions with ESRA concerning an agreement.

o The community coordinator asked how many years it will take to complete the road to Berens River First Nation. Graeme Hayward stated that the road to Berens River was scheduled to be completed by 2014; but, this date could be extended depending on various factors.

o The community coordinator informed the Project Team that the community wants to ensure that there are opportunities provided to community members during construction. The community wants the same training and employment benefits of other neighbouring communities. He explained that currently, the community pays a high cost of living, specifically in food costs. He also expressed the community’s desire to protect the natural environment during road construction to limit disturbance. Specific concerns were wildlife, berries, animal habitat and medicinal plants that elders collect for traditional medicine. He concluded by informing the Project Team that he and the community were not against having an all-season road.

o The community coordinator asked the meeting participants what they thought about receiving a hovercraft as a short term solution before a road is constructed to the community. A male elder responded by stating that he simply hopes that the road becomes a reality for their community. The elder said there have been many discussions concerning the construction of the road for many years and nothing has happened. In response to the hovercraft question,


a community member informed the Project Team that a private hovercraft was brought to the community by one of the construction crew members when Pauingassi’s school was being constructed a few years ago. As a result of this discussion, a Project Team member provided a description to meeting participants of what a hovercraft is and how it functions.

� A community member asked how long the all-season road would take to construct. A description of a typical environmental approval and construction process was provided by the Project Team. Generic timelines were provided from the point of having a defined project to completion of construction. It was explained that there are several uncertainties that come into play when working in remote northern environments that would have to be taken into account.

� A community member asked about how the road can be constructed to Pauingassi with all of the rock that surrounds the community. A Project Team member responded to the community member by stating that while constructing a road on bedrock is very expensive, the abundance of rock within the area is preferred over large areas of swamp and muskeg as it provides a solid foundation and can be used to supply material for road construction. He also said that rock can be removed via blasting; however, blasting is very expensive.

� A member of the Project Team asked the community coordinator to ask meeting participants what they believed the social impacts of the road to be, as well as any concerns that they may have. The coordinator responded that the community is aware of both positive and negative social impacts; however, they are aware that they, as a community, would be responsible for mitigating these effects.

� A member of the Project Team asked a youth what he thought of the road. The youth stated that there would be both positive and negative consequences of the road.

GeneralDiscussion inResponseto Survey

� A member of the Project Team asked meeting participants if they thought that improved dock facilities would be beneficial as a short term solution to reduce problems associated with travel to Little Grand Rapids and beyond. General travel to Pauingassi after breakup occurs via boat from Little Grand Rapids or by float plane.

� A member of the Project Team also asked meeting participants about the proposed airstrip to be constructed in the community. The Project Team member then asked if the community would support the construction of a road from Pauingassi to the airport at Little Grand Rapids, and then at a later date, the connection to the southern network option. This would then avoid the construction of the airstrip in Pauingassi. The community coordinator informed the Project Team that the community did not want the Project Team to confuse the fact that the community wants an all-weather road. The community does not simply want a short term road to the airport and then the government to give up on the idea to construct an all-season road to connect to PR 304. The coordinator wanted to ensure that the Project Team knew that short term solutions would not be accepted as sufficient for the long term by the community, neither should the government disregard long term plans for an all-season road.


� Returning to a previous discussion on a hovercraft, a community member asked when a hovercraft could potentially come to the community. Tim Stevens responded by stating that SNC-Lavalin will make a recommendation to ESRA regarding short term (such as a hovercraft) and long term transportation options; however, SNC-Lavalin is only a consultant and ESRA will make the final decision as to which recommendation they will pursue. Another Project Team member also stated that ESRA wants to provide safe and reliable transportation for all communities on the east side. From the recommendations that SNC-Lavalin provides to ESRA, and if there is strong community support, ESRA will make decisions and will prioritize according to this. It was clarified to community members that before a hovercraft could come to Pauingassi, a study would have to first be completed considering the feasibility of hovercraft operations along the river, suitable docking locations, capital and operating costs, etc.

� A community member asked how much a hovercraft would cost. � The community coordinator informed the Project Team that the

community has many priorities, such as: 1) Short term improvements such as a hovercraft; 2) Bridges over small creeks for the winter road (on future all-season

road location); 3) All-season road from Pauingassi to Little Grand Rapids, Airport;

and4) All-season road to Bloodvein/Berens River Road.

� A community member suggested the second rapids north of Little Grand Rapids could be bypassed by extending an existing gravel road north by 1 km or so, across a creek, to a new docking site.

Meeting Notice


APPENDIX 2b

COMMUNITY POSTER

CCCOOOMMMMMMUUUNNNIIITTTYYY OOOPPPEEENNN HHHOOOUUUSSSEEEEAST SIDE LARGE AREA TRANSPORTATION

NETWORK STUDY

The East Side Road Authority (ESRA) and its project consultant, SNC Lavalin, are hosting a series

of Community Open Houses to share information on East Side Large Area Transportation Network

Study (LATNS).

The study is examining a number of potential routes for a future all-season road in the east side of

Lake Winnipeg. It is scheduled to be completed later this year and will recommend a proposed all-

season road route in the region.

In the spring of 2009, the first round of community open houses were held throughout the region to

introduce the study and to receive feedback from local residents. The upcoming open houses are an

opportunity for east side residents to be updated and to provide further input into the study.

The public is encouraged to come out and share their views on this important project at the

following community open house:

WHERE:

WHEN:

For more information on the East Side Transportation Initiative, please visit

www.eastsideroadauthority.mb.ca or contact the East Side Road Authority at 945-4900 or

toll free 1-866-356-6355.


APPENDIX 2a

RADIO ADVERTISEMENT

RADIO SPOT TEXT EAST SIDE ROAD AUTHORITY Monday, May 24 – Friday, June 11 0:60 SECONDS THE EAST SIDE ROAD AUTHORITY, AND ITS PROJECT CONSULTANTS SNC LAVALIN, IS HOSTING COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSES TO UPDATE LOCAL RESIDENTS ON ROUTE OPTIONS BEING CONSIDERED FOR AN ALL-SEASON ROAD ON THE EAST SIDE OF LAKE WINNIPEG. RESIDENTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO COME OUT AND SHARE THEIR VIEWS ON THE PROPOSED ROUTES. THE OPEN HOUSES ARE SCHEDULED AS FOLLOWS:

• Monday, May 31 in Little Grand Rapids • Tuesday, June 1 in Pauingassi

• Wednesday, June 2 in Poplar River • Thursday, June 3 in Wasagamack • Friday, June 4 in St. Theresa Point • Monday, June 7 in Garden Hill and later in Island Lake

• Tuesday, June 8 in Red Sucker Lake • Wednesday, June 9 in God's Lake Narrows • Thursday, June 10 in God's River • Friday, June 11 in Oxford House

• Saturday, June 12 in Cross Lake

FOR MORE INFORMATION VISIT EASTSIDEROADAUTHORITY DOT MB DOT CA, OR CALL 1-866-356-63-55.

Presentation


APPENDIX 5

POWERPOINT PRESENTATION

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION INITIATIVE

Round 2 Community Meetings – May/June 2010

2

WELCOME!WELCOME!Biin dig gain Biin dig gain Tansi Tansi WachiyaWachiya

SNC-Lavalin Inc. would like to welcome you and thank you for attending this meeting.

Following the Round 1 meetings last year, we are here to update you on the following 2 studies:

1. PR 304 to Berens River All-season Road Environmental Impact Assessment

2. East Side Large Area Transportation Network Study

3

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION INITIATIVE(East Side Road Authority)

Provide a system of all-season roads which will meet the needs of local communities, provide opportunities for social and economic development and be environmentally responsive and respectful of First Nations and Metis traditional activities, culture and land values.

We are here today to listen to your comments about the project.

The Initiative will:

East Side Large Area Transportation Network Study(SNC-Lavalin)

All-season transportation network system Study designed to connect all communities on the East Side of Lake Winnipeg

PR 304 to Berens River All-Season RoadEnvironmental Impact Assessment

(SNC-Lavalin/AECOM)

Completion of an Environmental Impact Assessment to allow for construction to begin in Fall 2010

4

PR 304 to Berens RiverPR 304 to Berens RiverASR Environmental ASR Environmental Impact AssessmentImpact Assessment

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) filed with Manitoba Conservation on Nov 5, 2009

Includes extension of existing Rice River Road from Manigotagan to Bloodvein and new all-season road (ASR) from Bloodvein to Berens Rivers

Key Highlights of EIA:

Route selection: 80% of preferred ASR follows existing Rice River Road and winter road alignment

Protection of caribou habitat

Protection of moose and other wildlife

Fisheries and water protection

Pending environmental approval, construction will begin later this year.

5

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYEAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYSchedule

Sept 2008

Summer 2009

Fall 2010

Spring 2010

Task 1: Baseline Information and Potential Routes Determined

Task 4: Second Round of Community Meetings and Public Engagement (Spring/Summer 2010)

Task 6: Final Reporting on the Recommended Route Network (Fall 2010)

We Are Here Now!

Task 2: First Round of Community Meetings and Public Engagement

Task 3: Detailed Definition, Refinement and Evaluation of Route Network Options; Input from Communities & TEK Surveys, Identification of Preferred Routes

Task 5: Transportation Development Plan for Preferred All-Season Road Route Network (Summer 2010)

Fall/Winter2009/2010

Summer 2010

COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT: COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT: EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYEAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Round 1 Public meetings were held in the communities on the east side to introduce the East Side Large Area Transportation Network Study.

A Public Open House was held in Winnipeg for input from public and other stakeholders

Input was requested on the route network options, as well as any issues or opportunities associated with the project.

Traditional Knowledge studies are being conducted on the east side to better understand potential implications of the project on community culture and traditional way of life.

Round 1 Meeting – Oxford House FN

6

7

East-West vs. North-South Connection

Based on technical and environmental considerations, TEK Studies, as well as community feedback during the Round 1 meetings, network options were classified into east-west and north-south connections

Members from Oxford Lake and Gods Lake Cree communities expressed preference for east-west connection to PTH 6 and Thompson (via Cross Lake or Norway House)

Members from Island Lake and Red Sucker Lake OjiCree communitiesexpressed desire for both east-west and north-south connection

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYEAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Seven preliminary options were refined to four (Options C, D, H and I), then short-listed to three (Option C, H and I) for detailed evaluation.

Current understanding: East-west connection to receive priority due to the following reasons:

Shorter length of road construction and travel distance to Thompson (via PTH 6) than to Winnipeg (via PR 304)

Less probable impact to natural environment and proposed UNESCO World Heritage Site

North-south connection for Island Lake and Red Sucker Lake communitiescould be staged as longer term initiative

8

To facilitate evaluation of network options, inter-community connections were made common in short-listed route options

Inter-community Connections

9


Option C Option C –– Northern communities connect to Norway House via southerly alignment from Island Lake

10


Option H Option H –– More direct routing between Norway House or Cross Lake and More direct routing between Norway House or Cross Lake and inland communitiesinland communities

11


Option I Option I –– Southerly routing between Norway House and the inland Island LakSoutherly routing between Norway House and the inland Island Lake e communities, with a branch connection to Oxford House and Gods communities, with a branch connection to Oxford House and Gods Lake/River CommunitiesLake/River Communities

12

MULTIPLE ACCOUNT EVALUATION: MULTIPLE ACCOUNT EVALUATION: SHORTSHORT--LISTED NORTHERN SECTOR LISTED NORTHERN SECTOR

OPTIONSOPTIONS

13

MULTIPLE ACCOUNT EVALUATIONMULTIPLE ACCOUNT EVALUATION

Financial

Construction Length and Cost

Customer Service

Community Travel Distance

Average Travel Time

Social/Community

Access to Social Services (Health/Education)

Traditional Culture and Land Use

Heritage Resources

Reserve Land, Treaty Land Entitlement (TLE) and Northern Flood Agreement (NFA) Lands

Five Evaluation Accounts

Natural Environment

Areas of Special Interest (ASI)

Potential Caribou Winter Habitat

Watercourse Crossings

Boreal Forest: New Disturbance

Wetlands: New Disturbance

Regional and Local Economy

Mineral Development

Commercial Fishing

Forestry

Tourism

Commercial/Retail & Transportation Services

Southern Connection Potential

658 km616 km599 km593 kmTotal Length

$1, 455$1,341$1,352$1,340Construction

Cost ($ million, 2010 Dollars)

HbHa

104 km (18%)

0 km

201 km (34%)

288 km (49%)

Option CGeneralized Terrain Rating

Option H Option I

Good Terrain 232 km (39%) 201 km (33%) 283 km (43%)

Fair Terrain 259 km (43%) 307 km (50%) 202 km (31%)

Poor to Fair Terrain 0 km 0 km 69 km (10%)

Poor Terrain 108 km (18%) 108 km (17%) 104 km (16%)

14

Financial Account


*Construction costs are preliminary, including 20% contingency, excluding engineering, project management and other agency costs; Option C, Option Ha and I costs include the proposed Sea Falls Bridge ($48.5 million).

15

Community Travel DistanceMeasures effectiveness of route option to connect each community to PTH 6 and Thompson via PR 373/374

= Community population X travel distance to PR 373/374

Average Travel Time = Total community travel distance

Average travel speed on ASR (80 km/hr) X Total community population

Customer Service Account


3.80 (Hb)

4.093.76 (Ha)4.43Average travel time to PR 373/PR 374 (hrs)

4.91 million(Hb)

5.29 million4.86 million(Ha)

5.72 millionAverage travel distance to PR 373/PR 374 (person-km)

Customer Service

Option IOption HOption CEvaluation CriteriaEvaluation Account

16

Access to Social Services (Health/Education)

ASR improves access to regional facilities in Thompson, and provides greater opportunity to develop local/regional centres on the east side in future

Option C provides shortest travel distance between the Oxford Lake/Gods Lake and Island Lake/Red Sucker Lake communities, allowing for easier access to social services within local east side area

Social/Community Account


Traditional Culture and Land Use

Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) surveys* provide valuable input to traditional activities

Trapping/Hunting

Berry-picking

Special gathering areas

Burial/Spiritual areas, etc

Based on TEK analysis to date, all options rated equally under this criteria

*Note: TEK data will be kept confidential and returned to the communities once study is completed.

17

Heritage Resources

Features and archaeological sites identified along Hayes Heritage River system

Potential impacts by Option H could be mitigated by locating route outside of 200 m buffer zone

Social/Community Account (cont’d)


18

Social/Community Account (cont’d)

Reserve Lands, Treaty Land Entitlement (TLE) and Northern Flood Agreement (NFA) Areas

ASR route options would, in general, not involve road development within reserve lands (responsibility of INAC or local first nation)

TLE and NFA: route adjustments can likely be made to avoid/minimize impacts, except in area around Kanuchuan Falls in Option C

19

Natural Environment Account



Assessment based on area of disturbance of rare and unique landforms within ASIs

Options I and C intersect two rare landforms in Knight Lake ASI

Option H intersects one rare landform in Molson Lake ASI

20

Areas of Special Interest (ASI) Landform Occurrence

21

Natural Environment Account (cont’d)

Potential Caribou Winter Habitat

Evaluate risk of impacts on caribou range due to disturbance or increased hunting as a result of ASR

Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) model was used due to lack of actual habitat use information in study area

Evaluate potential of area to support woodland caribou in winter(November to March)

Based on HSI analysis, western portion of Option I intersects more medium and high value potential habitat, followed by Options C and H


22

Woodland Caribou Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) Modelling: Preliminary Results


Watercourse CrossingsEvaluate risk of potential environmental impacts on medium and major watercourse crossingsOptions C and I have less impacts than Option H; Option I covers more wetland, but with fewer crossings

23


Option H Option C

Option Ha

Option Hb

Option I

Number of Major crossings >30 m 11 10 10 9

Number of medium crossings >5 m, <30 m 29 46 46 35

Total Number of Medium and Major Crossing 40 56 56 44

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYBiophysical Characteristics – Land Cover Mapping

24

Boreal Forest/Wetlands: New Disturbance

Evaluate extent of intrusion into previously undisturbed boreal forest and wetlands

Boreal forests identified as tall shrub, combined conifers, broadleaf dense and mixed wood dense landcover types

Wetlands identified as treed, shrub or herb landcover types

Assuming 100 m corridor width:

Option I has slightly more impacts (new disturbance) on boreal forest, followed by Options H and C

Option I has more impacts (new disturbance) on wetlands, followed by Options C and Option H

25



26

Regional and Local Economy

MULTIPLE ACCOUNT MULTIPLE ACCOUNT EVALUATIONEVALUATION

Mineral Development

Access to area will be improved

No active mines today; areas of high mineral potential (greenstone belts) in northern sector

Option H main trunk route is closer to known deposits in northern sector of east side area

27

Regional and Local Economy (cont’d)


Commercial Fishing

Recent commercial fishing activities in Island, Gods, Red Sucker and Oxford Lakes; recent quantities unreported

ASR is expected to increase commercial fishing viability in local area

Option H provides most direct connection between fishing communities and rest of province

Forestry

Currently no forestry license in study area; historic small-scale commercial logging exists near Island Lake and Molson Lake

ASR is expected to provide broader access to usable timber for local markets as well as potential export to the south

28



Commercial/Retail and Transportation Services

ASR is expected to increase economic activities in other sectors, thus contributing to existing and future commercial/retail business

Some shift from air to road, but overall positive impacts as more road transportation services will be provided locally

Road maintenance

Snow removal services

Passenger and freight transport services

Support services (vehicle maintenance, fuel sales, traveller amenities such as food and accommodation)

29



Tourism

ASR is expected to benefit local tourism industry, particularly destination fishing, hunting lodges and guiding activities

Highest incremental benefits in summer since no roads exist today

Existing fly-in lodges may be negatively impacted

Future Southern Connection Potential

Options are evaluated based on future direct connection to the south

Options C and I east-west trunk route located much closer to the south, thus shorter construction length, lower cost and less disturbance to boreal forest in future phase

30

Summary of Route Option Evaluation

(Northern Sector)

Evaluation Account

Evaluation Criteria Option C Option H Option I

Construction Length and Cost ($ million in 2010 Dollars)

Access to Social Services Traditional Culture and Land Use

Heritage ResourcesReserve Lands, TLE and NFA lands


Potential Caribou Winter HabitatMedium to Major Watercourse CrossingsBoreal Forest: New DisturbanceWetlands: New Disturbance

Mineral DevelopmentCommercial FishingForestryCommercial/Retail & Transportation ServicesTourismFuture Southern Connection Potential

Natural Environment

Economy

Intersects two rare landforms in Knight Lake ASI; intersects more medium and high value potential caribou habitat; relatively more impacts on boreal forest and wetlands

East-west trunk route located much closer to the south, thus shorter construction length, lower cost and less disturbance to boreal forest in future phase

East-west trunk route located much closer to the south, thus shorter construction length, lower cost and less disturbance to boreal forest in future phase

Main trunk route closer to known deposits in northern sector of east side area; most direct connection between fishing communities and rest of province

Average travel distance and travel time

Financial

Social / Community

Customer Service

Shortest length and lowest construction cost

Slightly longer length than Option C; most number of medium and major water crossings

Longest length and highest construction cost

Shortest average travel distance and time to PTH 6 and Thompson

Longest average travel distance and time to PTH 6 and Thompson; Most direct connection between Cree and OjiCree communities

More direct connection for Island Lake communities to Norway House, but longer travel for Oxford Lake/Gods Lake communities to Thompson

Most direct connection to regional facilities in Thompson; Hayes River impacts could be minimized by route refinement

Intersects one rare landform in Molson Lake ASI; more impacts on medium and major water crossings

Easiest access between Cree and OjiCree communities to social services within local east side area; TLE impacts cannot be avoided near Kanuchuan FallsIntersects two rare landforms in Knight Lake ASI

More direct connection for Island Lake communities to Norway House, but longer travel for Oxford Lake/Gods Lake communities to Thompson

Potential Option J Potential Option J –– Hybrid Option of H and I, providing direct connection for all NoHybrid Option of H and I, providing direct connection for all Northern rthern Sector communities west to Norway House, Cross Lake and PTH 6 (TSector communities west to Norway House, Cross Lake and PTH 6 (Thompson/Winnipeg)hompson/Winnipeg)

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDY

31

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Advantages:

Good terrain between Oxford House and Anderson* located over till and eskers, along existing winter road corridor

Good terrain between St Theresa Point/Wasagamack and Feather Rapids (near Pelican Lake), located over moraine and near existing private winter road corridor

Segment between Anderson and PR 373 (near Sea Falls) located near existing winter road corridor; route alignment north or south of Hayes River and south of Echimamish River; can be buffered to avoid impacts on Heritage River corridor

Avoids muskeg and potential caribou habitat south of Molson Lake and is generally located on firm soils

Provides reasonably direct connection for all Northern Sector communities west to Norway House, Cross Lake and PTH 6 (Thompson/Winnipeg)

Total route length of 648 km (10 km shorter than Option I); cost likely comparable to Option I

Disadvantages:

Results in lengthy travel distances between Cree and OjiCree communities

Will require a new bridge over the Nelson River near Sea Falls (as do most other options except Sub-Option Hb)

* Anderson near Hayes River west of Robinson Lake

Potential New Option J

32

33

SOUTHERN/CENTRAL COMMUNITIESSOUTHERN/CENTRAL COMMUNITIESANDAND

NORTHNORTH--SOUTH INTERCONNECTION SOUTH INTERCONNECTION OPTIONSOPTIONS

34

SOUTHERN/CENTRAL SOUTHERN/CENTRAL COMMUNITIESCOMMUNITIES

Southern communities to be connected:

Poplar River

Pauingassi

Little Grand Rapids

Feedback from Poplar River has been mixed for connection south to Berens River or north to Norway House

Pauingassi and Little Grand Rapids have expressed interest to connect via east-west route to proposed ASR (PR 304-Berens River)

35

SOUTHERN/CENTRAL COMMUNITIESSOUTHERN/CENTRAL COMMUNITIESConnection Options Connection Options

Construction Costs and Water Crossings

ASR from Poplar River to Berens River

$253 million (93 km)

Total 21 water crossings: 6 major, 3 medium; and 12 minor

Key Crossings -Leaf River, 3 Poplar River Tributaries, Okeyakkoteinewin Creek, and the Poplar River

ASR from Poplar River to Norway House

Work in progress

36

Social-economic and Environmental Considerations

ASR from Poplar River to Berens River

Route option avoids major wetlands southeast of Poplar River

Route option follows Poplar River Valley – in area actively used for traditional activities

No NFA or TLE areas in vicinity of the route option

No mineral resource or wild rice harvesting affected by route option

20 km north of the Poplar River Community in Integrated Wood Supply Area

10-15 km section of the route option within the Berens River Core Sub Range for Atikaki-Berens Caribou Herd, but caribou tagging indicates minimal conflict

ASR from Poplar River to Norway House

work in progress

Potential important caribou habitat

Potential terrain constraints

SOUTHERN/CENTRAL COMMUNITIESSOUTHERN/CENTRAL COMMUNITIESConnection Options (contConnection Options (cont’’d)d)

37

SOUTHERN/CENTRAL COMMUNITIESSOUTHERN/CENTRAL COMMUNITIESConnection Options Connection Options

Construction Costs and Water CrossingsASR from Pauingassi/Little Grand Rapids to Proposed ASR between Berens River and Bloodvein

$407 million (131 km)*

Total 53 water crossings: 7 major, 16 medium; and 30 minor

Key Crossings: 2 Pigeon River tributaries, Pigeon River, Goose Creek, Kanamaypenekai Creek, Berens River, and 2 unnamed creeks

Proposed route avoids impact to Atikaki Provincial Park

*Notes:

1. Two sub-options exist in the segment connecting Pauingassi and Little Grand Rapids within the Little Grand Rapids FN: Sub-option 1 is shorter (by about 4 km), but requires a wider crossing (42 m) of Root Lake. Cost and total segment length shown here refer to Sub-option 1, the lower cost option.

2. Sub-options 1 and 2 are road segments on reserve land; while the road length and cost are included above, the road segments are considered as local community roads, to be developed by INAC or First Nations.

38

Social-economic and Environmental Considerations

ASR from Pauingassi/Little Grand Rapids to Berens River/Bloodvein

Route option follows existing winter road to Round Lake

Entire route option generally exhibits poor terrain for construction suitability

Traditional land Uses concentrated on the Pauingassi – Little Grand Connector

Routing avoids Atikaki Provincial Park, but within Proposed Pimachiowin Aki World Heritage Site

Western portion of route option within Integrated Wood Supply Area (Tembec – Forest Management Unit)

Routing passes through Round Lake Sub-range of the Atikaki-Berens Caribou Range, but avoids tagged concentrations of caribou

No known mineral resource or wild rice harvesting affected by route option

SOUTHERN/CENTRAL COMMUNITIESSOUTHERN/CENTRAL COMMUNITIESConnection Options (contConnection Options (cont’’d)d)

39

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDY EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Potential Future NorthPotential Future North--South InterconnectionsSouth Interconnections

Network evaluation is first focused on identifying preferred east-west route system in Northern Sector

Once preferred east-west route system is identified, potential north-south interconnection system could be defined at a future date

North-south interconnection options have been identified based on terrain, direct travel distance and logical connection points between northern and southern communities

40

Option H

NorthNorth--South South Interconnections Interconnections (Potential Future (Potential Future Phase)Phase)

41

Options C and I

NorthNorth--South South Interconnections Interconnections (Potential Future (Potential Future Phase)Phase)

42


Next Steps: Where Do We Go from Here?

Confirm inter-community connections within communities of common language zones

Confirm preferred east-west trunk route(s) in Northern Sector

Confirm preferred routes in Southern/Central Sectors (for PoplarRiver, Pauingassi and Little Grand Rapids)

Evaluate and determine potential north-south interconnection based on preferred route systems in Northern and Southern/Central Sectors

Follow-up review with government agencies

Prepare Transportation Development Plan (staging and scheduling)for preferred all-season road network

Final Documentation (including Final Newsletter to stakeholders and communities)

Large Area Transportation Network Study – completed by end of 2010

43


Thank YouMiigwech Kinanâskomitinawaw

44

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDY EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Back-up Slides

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYEAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYBiophysical Characteristics Biophysical Characteristics –– Land Cover UnitsLand Cover Units

51

Option H (hectares)

Landcover Units

Option C (hectares)

Option Ha

Option Ha

Option I (hectares)

Shadow 38 0 0 38 Water 91 117 116 85 Exposed Land 132 131 139 133 Shrub-tall 1,118 1,119 1,484 1,447 Wetland treed 85 77 79 95 Wetland shrub 1,191 1,054 1,079 1,335 Wetland herb 94 62 59 95 Coniferous dense

1,856 1,828 1,760 1,905

Coniferous open

794 1,039 936 915

Coniferous sparse

429 372 364 426

Broadleaf dense

63 111 64 65

Mixedwoods dense

33 64 46 28

52

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYEAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYTravel Distance Between Communities: Option CTravel Distance Between Communities: Option C

Average Travel Distance to PR373/PR374 Intersection = 366 km(calculated from all communities excluding Cross Lake and Norway House)

Cros

s Lak

e

Gard

en H

ill

Gods

Lak

e Na

rrows

Gods

Rive

r

Norw

ay H

ouse

Oxfo

rd H

ouse

Red

Suck

er L

ake

St. T

here

sa P

oint

Was

agam

ack

Inte

rsec

tion

of P

R

373

and

PR 3

74

Cross Lake 396 443 481 110 457 425 314 305 37Garden Hill 396 145 183 316 159 119 117 98 359Gods Lake Narrows 443 145 89 363 66 174 164 145 406Gods River 481 183 89 401 98 212 201 182 444Norway House 110 316 363 401 377 345 234 224 73Oxford House 457 159 66 98 377 188 178 159 420Red Sucker Lake 425 119 174 212 345 188 146 127 388St. Theresa Point 314 117 164 201 234 178 146 26 278Wasagamack 305 98 145 182 224 159 127 26 268Intersection of PR 373 and PR374 37 359 406 444 73 420 388 278 268

53

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYEAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYTravel Distance Between Communities: Option HaTravel Distance Between Communities: Option Ha

Cros

s La

ke

Gar

den

Hill

God

s La

ke N

arro

wsG

ods

Rive

r

Norw

ay H

ouse

Oxf

ord

Hous

eRe

d Su

cker

Lak

eSt

. The

resa

Poin

tW

asag

amac

kIn

ters

ectio

n of

PR

373

and

PR 3

74


Average Travel distance to Norway House = 252km

Average Travel distance to Intersection of PR 373 and PR 374 = 248kmAverage Travel Distance to PR373/PR374 Intersection = 303 km(calculated from all communities excluding Cross Lake and Norway House)

54

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYEAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYTravel Distance Between Communities: Option HbTravel Distance Between Communities: Option Hb

Cros

s La

ke

Gar

den

Hill

God

s La

ke N

arro

wsG

ods

Rive

r

Norw

ay H

ouse

Oxf

ord

Hous

eRe

d Su

cker

Lak

eSt

. The

resa

Poin

tW

asag

amac

kIn

ters

ectio

n of

PR

373

and

PR 3

74


Average Travel distance to Norway House = 314km

Average Travel distance to Intersection of PR 373 and PR 374 = 250kmAverage Travel Distance to PR373/PR374 Intersection = 306 km(calculated from all communities excluding Cross Lake and Norway House)

55

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYEAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYTravel Distance Between Communities: Option ITravel Distance Between Communities: Option I


Cros

s La

ke

Gar

den

Hill

God

s La

ke N

arro

wsG

ods

Rive

r

Norw

ay H

ouse

Oxf

ord

Hous

eRe

d Su

cker

Lak

eSt

. The

resa

Poi

ntW

asag

amac

kIn

ters

ectio

n of

PR

373

and

PR 3

74


56

EAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYEAST SIDE TRANSPORTATION STUDYTravel Distance Between Communities: Option JTravel Distance Between Communities: Option J


Cros

s La

ke

Gar

den

Hill

God

s La

ke N

arro

wsG

ods

Rive

r

Norw

ay H

ouse

Oxf

ord

Hous

eRe

d Su

cker

Lak

eSt

. The

resa

Poi

ntW

asag

amac

kIn

ters

ectio

n of

PR

373

and

PR 3

74


round 2 - province of manitoba - province du...

Documents