Opposition to Proposed Southglen Bridge

The undisturbed 'A' Quality habitat in southeast Winnipeg was first named 'Bois des Esprits' by SOS Board Member, Jim Gyselinck. The pristine forest along the Seine River had been home to the earliest settlers of St. Vital, the Métis. Immediately the name was adopted when referring to the almost 100 acres of riparian forest. Unfortunately for the Bois des Esprits, this forest which had survived human development for two hundred years, time was about to catch up.

The Province of Manitoba and Ladco Co. embarked on a joint venture to develop a residential subdivision near the forest called Royalwood. These beautiful homes would compete with the booming residential developments that were springing up beyond the perimeter.

Save Our Seine realizes that conflict between the environment and urban development is a fact of life when a City is built along riverbanks. To have the city grow and still protect the habitat and ecosystem is therefore the major challenge for any stewardship group.

SOS's Goals, Role and Vision are quite clear what SOS's duty is when it comes to development such as the Royalwood subdivision:

THE ROLE OF SOS
2. To act as critic/advocate

Based on the information gained from ongoing monitoring, we see it as our duty to critically assess the impact of any events or proposals that may affect the river and its adjacent environment. We would then provide our opinion and input to support those proposals that are beneficial to the natural environment of the Seine. We would also act as a resource to assist in modifying those proposals deemed inappropriate or harmful to the Seine River environment."

The Royalwood subdivision itself is of no significant concern to SOS as it pertains to the Greenway's health. The proposed Royalwood subdivision 'Phase II' called for a second crossing of the Seine River at Southglen Blvd. As instructed by the City of Winnipeg the bridge would be built and paid for entirely by the developer, Grandin Park Developments (Ladco and the Province).

The crossing at Southglen Blvd. would be a 4-lane, culvert style vehicle bridge. This would have to cut through 'A' Quality habitat. This second crossing would be only 500 meters north of another 4-lane bridge crossing planned at Warde Ave.

In the City sponsored and award winning Seine River Greenway Study (2000), the Seine River Task Force (City officials and the community) stated that, "Future vehicular bridges across the Seine have been planned for the Southglen Blvd. extension as well as the Ward Avenue extension. Because of their relative proximity it is anticipated that only one will be required."

As part of the Seine River Greenway Study, the City also produced four 'sub' studies. One, on the habitat along the riverbanks, ranked their quality by degree of disturbance. When discussing the many bridge crossings of the Seine River Greenway, the following statement was made.

"The Perimeter Highway, Creek Bend, [Southglen,] John Bruce Road, Bishop Grandin, Fermor Avenue, Marion, and Provencher all effectively fragment the river corridor and impact on the movement of plants and animals along the river corridor. If a riparian corridor is going to function effectively as a conduit for the movement of wildlife and plants these fragmenting features must be minimized." - A. Cowan, Environmental Coordinator. An Assessment of Vegetation and Wildlife Habitat Quality for the Seine River Parkway, 1995

From SOS's point of view the proposed bridge crossing at Southglen needed to be studied and the environmental impacts fully understood. The bridge crossing and the access road would require the clearing of acres of 'A' Quality riparian habitat and re-channeling of the river by 40 meters! The road and bridge would penetrate and divide the forest fragmenting the habitat and allow stresses to penetrate deeper into the forest habitat on either side. This would create new 'edge' habitat.

"That the City shall 'lead by example,' by ensuring that construction adjacent the Seine River is environmentally appropriate and sensitive to the Principles developed within this study" - Recommendation #5 in the Seine River Greenway Study

It should be noted that SOS has always agreed that the crossing at Warde is necessary and is at a location of low habitat quality ranking.
Furthermore the need for a second crossing relied upon the City's traffic calculations from the early 1980's. For such a drastic environmental impact to be considered, an absolute need must be determined to justify a second crossing. This could only be supported by an up to date study.
SOS has always enjoyed support and good communication with elected officials in all levels of government. These channels with the City were opened and SOS's concerns about the possibly superfluous crossing were made.

"As subdivision and development proceed south of John Bruce Road along both sides of the river, developers should be encouraged or required to establish the Seine River Trail and complementary park and riverbank enhancement as a part of their Development Agreement.[..]"
- Seine River Greenway Study

Since development is inevitable, the protection of the forest became a priority for SOS.

The City would automatically acquire the river-bottom forest or the 'flood plain' (33 acres) through municipal By-laws and another 7 acres through normal 'dedication' or donation from the developer. Approximately 40 acres of forest remain to be rescued from development.

"That the City of Winnipeg will continue to actively encourage and partner with community groups and stakeholders such as the Save Our Seine River Environment Inc. (S.O.S.), in order to promote and implement the Seine River Greenway." - Recommendation #7 in the Seine River Greenway Study

The City was pressed by SOS to acquire the whole forest as a 'Natural' City Park. Apart from 'funding' there was no argument. Armed with a stack of the City's own studies which acclaim the forest as "virtually undisturbed" and invaluable, the city began looking for a way to secure the lands from Grandin Park Developments.

"In the end, our society will be defined not only by what we create, but by what we refuse to destroy." - Nature Conservancy's John Sawhill

SOS understands the importance of the Bois des Esprit forest to the Seine River Corridor. As the largest undisturbed tract of forest along any river, anywhere in the City, this prized forest must be protected. SOS views this area as the heart and lungs of the Greenway. Each precious acre is coveted and contributes to the Riparian Habitat. It is the 'gateway' for wildlife to enter and exit the urban Greenway from the rural environment.

For the Greenway to survive it must be cherished by the community and remain part of their culture. The Greenway is a unique resource that exemplifies the natural local environment, the culture and history of St. Boniface, Winnipeg, Manitoba and Western Canada, provides educational opportunities and exciting recreational activities. It is Priceless.

This amenity must not be denied to citizens by not allowing visits. Visits must be managed through public education and awareness in order to reduce and eliminate possible harm to the ecosystem. The Natural Urban Environment must not be destroyed. As SOS Member for over ten years, Marcel Ritchot warns, "We must not love it to death."

This incredibly valuable forest must be made into a park and protected as such from complete development. SOS embarked on an initiative to design a park that could manage the demands of it with out being harmed.

THE ROLE OF SOS
3.To be an instigator of projects - (initiate projects to be carried out by others)

As an extension of our role as critic/advocate, SOS will, as the need arises, alert governments and/or the public concerning actions that should be taken to preserve, protect and enhance the natural Seine River Environment. e.g. SOS alerted the Provincial government concerning the seriousness of the damage to the Seine River siphon under the floodway. This helped to instigate the project to repair the siphon.

With support from then St. Boniface Member of Parliament, Ron Duhamel, SOS entered a partnership with the Riel Development Corporation. The goal was to design a natural park amenity that would successfully manage anticipated visits to the future park, yet still act as a resource to all citizens. Funding for the study was provided by Western Economic Diversification (WED).

The expertise required to design such a park came from Gaboury Prefontain Perry Architectes (GPP). This group had designed the Forks and the Royal Canadian Mint, to name only two of their projects.

As a result the Bois des Esprits Concept Plan was a plan to balance managed visits to the forest with the least amount of harm to the natural areas. The Concept Plan was presented in early 2001.

The plan called for an interpretive centre and offered three locations for the facility. The recommended and preferred location is the Riel Mill Site across the river from the Bois des Esprits. The site is vacant but once had a water powered grist mill built by Louis Riel (Senior). This site is ideal for interpreting local history and nature. Washroom facilities and a cafe and bakery based on the historic 'mill' theme would be provided.

It was estimated that over 75% of the visitors would be the residents of the condos, apartments and houses (and future developments like Royalwood Phase II) along the Seine River. Visits to the park would be encouraged by foot, bike, canoe, ski or other means. Transit is very accessible and existing parking is ample.

Existing trails currently in use would be covered in biodegradable wood chips. This would reduce impacts like soil compaction. Trails that lead to or approach sensitive habitat areas would be closed off. No new trails would be needed.

Removable canoe docks would be used to permit zero-impact canoing. Docks would eliminate damage to the riverbanks while make safe 'drop-offs' and 'put-ins' for paddlers of all abilities.

Royalwood Phase I's popular asphalt trail would be extended to the south and would border the natural forested areas. Picnic sites would be along these outer areas away from sensitive areas.

A pedestrian foot bridge was proposed at Southglen Blvd. The bridge and trail surface would be asphalt. It is a fundamental principle to make the park accessible to all citizens. Mobility challenged citizens (wheel chair, very young or elderly) require a smooth surface to move about safely.

This exciting plan was adopted by the City of Winnipeg and the developers. SOS began discussions with the developer about alternatives to the proposed Southglen Bridge.

BOIS DES ESPRITS, CLEARCUT BY BULLDOZERS!

Illustration by Mark Wolke

On April 1st, 2002 (Easter Monday), to the shock of the Community and to SOS, the developer began clearing the forest for the yet to be approved bridge crossing! Bulldozers were piling hundred-year old oak trees into huge piles leaving the scarred earth. Alerted by local residents, SOS members raced to the scene to stop the devastation. In vain they stood in front of the bulldozers. The heavy equipment operators ignored the pleas of SOS and cleared a swath of Mature Bur-Oak forest and that had existed for centuries.

The public outcry was tremendous. SOS hosted a meeting at the Morrow Gospel Church (755 St. Anne's Rd) on April 24th. Outraged by the clearcut, about 600 angry citizens attended. SOS presented the Bois des Esprits Park Plan and the alternatives for the bridge crossing, asking the question is the bridge necessary in the first place? Citizens filled out over 400 survey sheets over 99% agreeing that the whole forest should be saved and the bridge not built at Southglen Blvd. - only 500 meters away from another bridge that would be built at Warde Ave.

For weeks the media covered the controversy and the City listened.

In June 2002, the City Council of Winnipeg supported a motion to commit $1 Million dollars specifically to purchase the remaining 40+ acres, and challenge the community to raise the shortfall. SOS was mentioned by name and encouraged to approach the community and the Province of Manitoba (Ladco's partner in the development) for funding which the City would match dollar for dollar up to $600,000.

Regarding the proposed Southglen Bridge issue, the City also allocated $50,000 to conduct an,"[..]independent study of the long term traffic and environmental impacts[..]"

A Steering Committee comprised of the head of Property Planning and Development, the City Naturalist, Environmental Coordinator, Forester, and members form other departments like Transportation were gathered to form the committee. The developer (Ladco) and SOS were invited to sit on the committee. SOS accepted and Ladco declined.

The Committee engaged an independent consultant Earth-Tech to study the issues regarding the bridge.

The study began in September 2002, and it was expected to have the results of the environmental impacts and conclusions for the Riel Community Committee Meeting in October. Due to delays and setbacks the Riel Community Committee and the presentation by the consultant had to be delayed until December 17th 2002. This urgency was a to permit the developer to begin construction immediately after the approval at the meeting.

SOS was very disappointed that the study would not be able to cover the "longterm environmental impacts" as had been instructed by City Council. The reasons given were that there was "neither time nor resources" to adequately address environmental issues related to the crossing. Vital environmental concerns like fragmentation, proximity of bridges, habitat stresses, riparian habitat, wildlife and other serious issues like Métis heritage or the proposed park plan, would not be considered.

On Nov. 27th, 2002 the Consultant hosted a Public Open House to obtain the public opinion and preferences. It was clear that the majority of the citizens preferred a crossing at Warde only. It was also clear that the bridge must not be a 'culvert' style bridge that reduced the connectivity, threatened wildlife and would not permit hikers or paddlers to pass underneath.

SOS was very pleased to learn that the consultant had determined one crossing at Warde would accommodate the projected traffic volumes! This was based on peak traffic times, after complete residential development in twenty years. This finding is did not factor in Transit usage since it was expected that Royalwood residents would not use transit.

Despite this, the consultant suggested that for 'neighbourhood connectivity' and emergency vehicle access, a second crossing would be recommended.

An SOS Board Member and former Captain with the City of Winnipeg Fire Department did not agree that an additional access was required. When a representative from the Fire department was invited to the Committee, he agreed with SOS that a second crossing was not needed. SOS had always suggested that the John Bruce Road Bridge could also be used for emergency vehicle access if necessary.

SOS approached Dr. David van Vliet with the Department of City Planning, Faculty of Architecture at the University of Manitoba. He explained in a letter to the Committee Chair issues he had with the consultant's Public Presentation and Open House and the study in general. Professor van Vliet also listed 10 other neighbourhoods in Winnipeg that do not benefit from additional points of entry like Royalwood Phase II would experience with a second vehicle access point. Here are some comments from the letter...

About the Open House...

"[..] It is my understanding that findings of the Royalwood Access Assessment Study by Earth Tech (Canada) Inc. as presented at the public open house Nov 27 indicates that a bridge over the Seine at Southglen will not contribute significantly to improved traffic conditions. With the environmental impacts, a crossing at Southglen is highly undesirable, proceeding with this proposal as presented would constitute very poor planning and engineering practice.[..]

The presentation appeared to perpetuate the predominant mystique of empirical traffic capacity analysis driving development decisions. The presentation is consistent with the tendency in Canadian urban development practice to give undue emphasis of attention to access in a partial view of what constitutes 'good neighbourhood planning principles'. This constrained attention is one explanatory factor that has contributed to the highly auto reliant nature of contemporary residential communities. Traffic engineers want to strive to what they assume to be ideal access conditions. Obviously certain sites are limited in their capacity due to local geographic conditions, in this case a meandering river and forest to the west and rail line corridor to the east. Expecting road access and level of service should to be near equal all over is simply unrealistic. I expect the residents of Royalwood II will make trade-offs in their perception of the area's advantages being near a forest amenity and having quiet streets relative to an additional minute or two of travel time.[..]

About the Southglen Bridge...

"Obviously a road fragments the forest. The point made that this crossing is 'located near the south limit of Class "A" vegetation" is no justification for extensive alteration to this. Doing so is only to consider the classification of sensitive lands as without merit or implication, and to continue the decades of planning tradition regarding the Seine that incremental disturbance and conversion of lands has been acceptable. This option would be only to continue the careless planning and development approach that has been characteristic of dealing with the area thus far. The remnant that constitutes the existing forest should be kept intact. The findings acknowledge that extensive alterations of the river channel would be required. The extent and impact of this does not appear to be fairly or adequately communicated. "Study to mitigate channel re-alignment for fisheries" is hardly reassuring.[..]"

At the Riel Community Committee Meeting on Dec. 17th 2002, the proposed Royalwood Phase II subdivision was presented and the community was able to make presentations to the Councillors of the Riel Community, Councillors, Angus, Steeves and Vandal.

The Traffic study which considered very limited environmental issues was presented but ignored the comments from the Professor of City Planning, Fire Department and SOS Board Members.

Delegations for the developer appeared and stated that if the development did not proceed at once, there would be a housing shortage. Some argued that without the bridge at Southglen, Shorehill Dr. would become a speedway for cars to cut from Bishop Grandin Blvd. to Warde Ave.

Opponents were required to wait for their chance to speak to the panel. Many had to leave after several hours. The ones that did present expressed concern about the environment, the weak argument in support of it and questioned the need of the Southglen Bridge at all.

Sadly at the end of the six hour meeting the vote was made and all three councillors voted to support the Royalwood Phase II project and the proposed bridge crossing at Southglen Blvd. Despite all the unconvincing arguments for a Southglen Bridge and evidence presented in opposition Save Our Seine could not even get a delay for the facts to be determined.

It appears that the factors that swayed the Committee's decision had been decided years ago...

i) The lands for the Southglen Bridge would not need to be purchased or expropriated by the City,
ii) The developer would bear the full cost of the bridge,
iii) The subdivision need not be delayed,
iv) And that the City now has more than a decade before it will need to build the bridge at Warde (at the City's expense).

In the end, the grave environmental concerns raised by a group of volunteers, without conclusions from an "independent study of the longterm [..] environmental impacts" to back them, could not compete against the professional organization of the home building industry, legal experts, hired engineers and supporters of the developer.

The Councillors made the only decision they could. Unfortunately the Seine River Environment had no influence on their decision at all.

Oddly, Ladco Co., an original supporter of the Concept Park Plan, suddenly attacked the Plan as a 'threat' to the forest! A few weeks earlier, the developer claimed that the forest would be better off by clearing acres of grade 'A' quality habitat and re-channeling a river for a road and a bridge than a Natural City Park! This tactic was very effective and caused confusion for the public. This distracted SOS in effectively opposing the Bridge location.

Now that the subdivision and the bridge are approved and SOS no longer threatens to delay the development, Ladco's once vocal opposition has vanished as quickly as it appeared.

While the Southglen Bridge will further fragment the forest and reduce the habitat quality of the remaining natural areas SOS feels it has achieved a small success. Although it was not able to get the decision makers to reverse a decision decided years ago, the developer's bridge at Southglen will now be a span-type bridge (not a culvert)which will permit paddlers and hikers and possibly some wildlife to pass. The Bridge will only have two vehicle lanes, not four.

The Bois des Esprits Park Plan as designed by GPP, is no longer possible. The Southglen Bridge and Shorehill Dr. cut through the original concept plan. A new study will be required with the future bridge in mind. The principles used in the original park plan, to protect as much of the natural area as possible, will serve as guidelines for future park designs.

Save Our Seine - although reeling from the disappointing decision of Councillors Angus, Steeves and Vandal, and the huge expenditure of volunteer time and energy - will carry on with its many other projects and try to fulfill its ambitious Goals, Roles and Vision for the Seine River Environment.

Back to Projects


Back to Main