Update: Water commission unanimously opposes Malahat detour in watershed
Punching an emergency Malahat detour route through Capital Regional District water-supply lands or park wilderness reserve is a non-starter, say some CRD directors.
Regional water-supply commissioners will debate a motion today introduced by Victoria Coun. Jeremy Loveday and Saanich Coun. Nathalie Chambers opposing any highway construction on water-supply-area lands.
It calls on water commission chair Rebecca Mersereau to write to the province advising that the commission has no interest in such development on water commission lands or in the drinking-water protection zone.
A similar motion from CRD environment and parks committee chair Ben Isitt opposing any highway construction in the CRD鈥檚 Sooke Hills Wilderness Park lands is expected to go to that committee next week. If successful, the motions essentially do an end-run around an in-camera decision made by the CRD board last week directing staff 鈥渢o form a working group with Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure staff to evaluate and report back on options for an emergency bypass route for the Malahat section of the Trans-sa国际传媒 Highway.鈥�
Loveday said his motion, which is submitted with the concurrence of eight other commissioners, is designed to protect Greater Victoria鈥檚 drinking water.
鈥淚t鈥檚 not directly counter to the CRD鈥檚 commitment to being part of a working group, as the CRD hasn鈥檛 taken a position to this point on any alternate route that could be through the CRD鈥檚 jurisdiction,鈥� he said. 鈥淭his would potentially shift the position of the CRD, as they will see that the water supply commission, which is tasked with keeping our water supply safe, would then be opposed to any construction of a highway or roadway through the water-supply area.鈥�
Isitt was unavailable for comment, but parks and environment committee vice-chair and View Royal Mayor David Screech confirmed a similar motion regarding the Sooke Hills Wilderness Reserve is in circulation. Screech agreed the two motions appear to be contrary to the board鈥檚 motion to work with the province on an alternative route. 鈥淢y personal preference is to let it play through and see what the working group comes up with in terms of recommendations and then make final decisions,鈥� Screech said.
The in-camera CRD decision didn鈥檛 specify the region would consider use of CRD lands, he said. 鈥淏ut it did direct staff to be part of a working group, so I think some directors are concerned that that is kind of saying we will consider these lands and they are trying to shut the door on it,鈥� Screech said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 not that I necessarily disagree with the sentiment, because at a gut level I do kind of agree that we don鈥檛 want to see roads built through our watershed and through our parkland, but I do think we have to go through the process and look at it.鈥�
Meanwhile, CRD chair Colin Plant is not convinced the water commission has the authority to directly lobby the province on behalf of the CRD. 鈥淚t鈥檚 my take on this motion that it鈥檚 not appropriate for the water commission to reach out to the government on this matter because that is the CRD鈥檚 in its highest form 鈥� the board [prerogative] 鈥� that would undertake that discussion.鈥�
Plant said he would rather see what comes out of the working group before shutting the door on any recommendations. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 wish to see us not even have the discussion because we already know the answer. I think that is not advisable. The board has said we will have that discussion with the province and we want to work with them,鈥� Plant said. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 want transportation to be done to us. I want transportation to be done with us.鈥�
Meanwhile, lobbying to stop any new road construction is gearing up, with more than a dozen people signed up to address the water commission on the issue today.
