Q&As from East Hants Gateway Opportunity Public Meeting  (March 2009)

Below you will find answers to more than 60 questions that were raised by the community at the East Hants Gateway Opportunity public meeting held on March 19, 2009. We have made every effort to answer your questions accurately. In some cases, specific answers won’t be possible until we get into the community design process. 

General

1. Who suggested the idea of an inland port in Milford Station?

A study done by MariNova for the Halifax Regional Municipality in January 2006 looked at possible sites for an inland port in and near HRM. That study suggested that Milford Station would be a good location for an inland port.

The Municipality of East Hants then hired the Chris Lowe Group /Prime Focus LLC to look more closely at the possibility, and that study concluded that Milford Station would be an ideal location for an inland port.

The inland port opportunity exists because there is a growing need among international exporters for safe, stable, efficient and convenient options to ship their exports to markets all over the world.

2. Do you have federal and provincial support for this project?

We have met with representatives of the federal and provincial governments. They have expressed interest in the project, but there are no commitments of financial support at this point. Presentations are being made to both levels of government, and a funding application is going forward to the Atlantic Gateway Fund for infrastructure and other costs.

3. Does CN support the proposed facility?

We have met with representatives of CN and they are taking a wait-and-see approach. They have not expressed any opposition to the project. Once we can demonstrate that it will increase their container business, we expect that they will be supportive.

4. Who else supports this initiative?

It was clear from the public meeting that there is some support in the community and there are others with questions and concerns. We are still in the process of informing the community, various levels of government, business organizations and potential partners and investors about this opportunity.

5. Who will decide if this project goes forward? Will there be a plebiscite in the next municipal election?

By May 1st, 2010, Municipal Council will receive a report on the results of the assessment process. This will include results of the feasibility and social impact studies, feedback from the community, and other relevant information.

Municipal Council will review and discuss the report and vote to determine whether or not the project will move onto the next phase. It would be up to Municipal Council to determine if a plebiscite is appropriate in this situation.

6. What is the process (including phases and timing) for moving the project forward?

The first phase is an assessment of the opportunity. We are still in this first phase, which includes meetings with the community and the newly formed Community Advisory Committee. It will also include studies to look at feasibility and social impact. This phase will end with a decision by Municipal Council to either move into the second phase, or end the project. 

The second phase includes designing the facility, determining land compensation packages and a community benefits package, and purchasing required lands.

The third phase includes the construction of access roads and facilities for the inland port. During this phase, jobs would be primarily related to construction.

The fourth and final stage would include the development (if approved) of the spin-off activity in the logistics park.

In terms of timing, the assessment phase will take about a year. We expect that it may take a few years to develop interest from private sector partners and to complete the design process. Once approved, it typically takes about one year to construct a facility of this type, including access roads. The business park component of the project could begin once the inland port facility is complete, and it would likely grow over several years.

Costs

7. Who would pay for the facility?

A request is being submitted to the Atlantic Gateway Fund. If this is approved, the funding would be used for infrastructure to enable the development of the facility. The private sector would pay to build and operate the facility.

8. Would upgrades to the rail lines be required? If so, who would pay for that?

The main line of the railway would have to be moved a short distance. This would be paid for by the private sector.

9. How much has the municipality spent on exploring this opportunity so far? What have you spent on consultants and studies? What other costs are you expecting?

As of March 31, 2009, $69,507.12 has been invested in exploring this opportunity.   Consulting fees have been paid in the amount of $62,211.66.  Council has approved a business plan and a projected budget of $131,000 for the 2009/10 fiscal year.

10. Has any outside funding been committed to this initiative yet?

About $20,000 was committed under federal programs (CISP) for 2009/10. Another $20,000 has been committed for 2009/10 under ICCI.

Feasibility

11. How is the feasibility of this project affected by the Strait terminal opening in 2010 and Halterm/Ceres operating under capacity?

An inland port in Milford Station would complement the Port of Halifax and would not affect or be integrated with the terminal in the Strait area.

The purpose of an inland port is to provide an area where shipping clients can take part in value-added activities before sending their products to market. For example, the business park could include a manufacturing plant where parts are sent and assembled, or facilities where painting or packaging is done before the product is shipped to its destination. This doesn’t currently exist in Nova Scotia so it would provide the Port of Halifax with something new to offer new and existing shipping customers.

12. Can the project go forward without CN support?

The project can not go forward without the support of CN because it requires the use of their rail lines. CN has not expressed any opposition to the project. Once we can demonstrate that it will increase their container business, we expect that they will be supportive.

13. What is the longevity of the project?

These types of facilities tend to be long-term contributors to the community. They are designed to meet the changing needs of exporters over a long period of time.

Job creation

14. How many jobs could this create in each phase?

If the project is approved, there will be construction jobs when the inland port facility is built, and throughout the development of the logistics park. The inland port facility is likely to be highly automated, and would likely only require about 20 employees. We expect that the project would create significant long term job opportunities in the final phase, when spin-off activity is established in the logistics park.

The number and type of jobs that could be created through the value-added activities will depend on the number, size and types of businesses that choose to come to the logistics park.

15. Would there be any guarantee of local employment?

The individual businesses would determine who they hire and what skills they need. It isn’t possible to guarantee local employment, but a community benefits package could include training opportunities for community members to ensure that they can compete for jobs.

16. Would they all be union jobs?

It is too soon to know if jobs created through this project would be unionized or not. That is not up to the municipality. If the inland port facility or a spin off business has unionized staff, that does not mean that those positions wouldn’t be open to local residents.

17. What education level would be required for these jobs?

These jobs would require a range of skill sets, but based on our discussions with managers of similar facilities in the United States, we expect that most would likely require a high school or technical school education.

18. Would there be training opportunities for locals?

Projects of this type often result in a package of benefits provided to the community by the developers. This package can include things like training programs, continuing education, and scholarships for residents as well as additional services or funding for infrastructure. Community benefits packages are usually developed based on the needs and priorities of the community that are identified in the community engagement process.

Impact on lifestyle

19. Will this lead to loss of rural lifestyle? What will be done to compensate for the change in lifestyle (larger community size, less agricultural land, loss of good deer hunting area)?

A social impact assessment will be part of the report that will be presented to Council in Spring 2010.

We all appreciate the rural lifestyle that we enjoy here in East Hants. Change can be a very difficult thing, but it can also provide opportunities. A community benefits package can be designed with the community to include items that will allow residents to get more enjoyment from their community. For instance, infrastructure funding could be used for sidewalks or other services, and training opportunities and scholarships could allow young people to receive better educational and job opportunities closer to home.  Community benefits packages are commonly provided by developers, based on the priorities that are identified by the community.

20. How will the views be protected?

Industrial design and development is much different today than it was even 10 years ago. Through the design process we will use techniques that ensure that views are protected. 

21. How will the municipality address issues of increased traffic and school crowding due to increased population?

The assessments will look at the potential impact on traffic, schools and other services. As with any development, there are development requirements that have to be met at the municipal and provincial level.  If the requirements can’t be met, the project will not be approved.

Impact on homes

22. What is the size of the footprint for each phase? How many homes will be expropriated for each phase?

The map and information that was presented at the public information session (and in the map on the Municipality of East Hants website) is still just a concept. We won’t know how much land would be required for the inland port facility until we move into the design phase. The design of the facility will determine how many homes are affected. We haven’t begun the design phase so we don’t know that at this point. However, modern design and building standards will be used to minimize the amount of land required and provide adequate buffers for surrounding land users.

23. What would be the compensation plan for those directly affected? Indirectly affected?

A Community Advisory Committee was set up following the public meeting, and we will be asking this group to consider and provide input on, among other things, reasonable criteria for property owners who should receive compensation if the project is approved.

24.  For those who would need to move, would moving and relocation costs be covered as well?

This is something that we will ask the Community Advisory Committee to consider and provide input on as part of compensation considerations.

25. What about community members who don’t meet the criteria but who wouldn’t want to live in the community anymore if the facility goes forward?

If a resident doesn’t meet the criteria but chooses to leave the community, it would be considered a personal decision. Only homeowners who meet the criteria would receive compensation. 

26. Would this project increase property values?

Traditionally with this type of development, property values will increase. Specific cases may vary but decreasing property value resulting from the development would likely be considered in the development of compensation criteria.

27.  Would compensation rates be based on fair market value before or after development?

Compensation rates are usually based on the expected value of the land rather than on the current value for residential lands.

Agricultural land use

28. What would be the impact on agriculture in the community?

This project would have both positive and negative implications for agriculture in the community.

On the positive side, there is potential for the development of grain handling at the inland port which would offer new opportunities for producers to access imported feed grains or other farm inputs (i.e. fertilizer) from now non-accessible sources. It may also be possible to bring some land back into production that is not currently active. On the negative side, with the current concept there will be some loss of agricultural land.   

29. What happens if the facility and roads cutoff access to agricultural lands?

Access roads and considerations for additional travel for equipment or livestock movement will need to be considered in the design process, and possibly in the development of compensation criteria. The addition of access roads is common place when new roads or highways are developed.

30. Does this open rezoning opportunities for other farm land?

This does not open rezoning opportunities for other farmland. If this project is approved, it will be because it has been judged to be in society’s best interest. There are many examples of projects of this nature moving forward. For instance, portions of the Hwy. 101 twinning project are located on prime agricultural land.

Pollution

31. What would be done to address light pollution from the 24/7 operation?

Light pollution can be controlled through the design of the facility and lighting. The type and design of lumiers used, the placement and height of the light stands and other factors can control the amount of light that is dispersed. Controls can also be put in place to limit the hours of operation.

32. What would be done to address noise pollution?

Sound buffers and other design elements can be used to limit noise, and controls can be put in place to limit hours of operation.

33. What would be the affect of increased light, noise, etc. on livestock and wildlife?

The social and environmental impact assessments will consider these questions along with many other factors.

34.  What would be done to address water pollution, toxic waste spills or chemical spills? How will the community and the river be protected?

An environmental impact assessment is required by the Department of Environment before any project of this type can go forward. If there are specific risks, they will need to be addressed in the design phase before the project can go forward. HASMAT standards and environmental standards require that new facilities be designed to contain any spills on site.

A dedicated emergency access road would be included in the design to ensure that emergency response teams can respond quickly to any situation. 

Traffic

35. Would the interchange be built before construction begins?

Yes. The interchange would be built first to divert construction traffic from local roads.

36. Would the new road only be for trucks?

No. The new road connecting to the highway would be for general use. 

37.  What are the projections for traffic increases in the community (including traffic from employees)?

The province requires a traffic impact study as part of the approval process for any new development of this kind. Until the study is completed, we won’t know the impact on traffic from employees or new community members. Truck traffic will enter from the highway using the interchange, so truck traffic on local roads should remain unchanged, or may be reduced. 

38.  How many more trains per day could be expected in this type of facility? Would this lead to more waits at traffic crossing?

It is too soon to know for sure, but we would expect that the additional containers could be fit into the existing train schedule (ie. more containers on the same number of trains).

39. How would plans for the Lantz interchange be affected by this proposed interchange?

That decision would have to be made by the Department of Transportation and Infrastructure Renewal, but we wouldn’t expect it to affect the Lantz interchange.

40.  Would land be required for an overpass? If so, would this affect John Hiltz Lane?

Land requirements for an overpass are 500 ft. for a 100-series highway and 1000 ft. for an interchange. It would not affect John Hiltz Lane.

Security

41.  What would be done to protect against the kind of criminal activity that is commonly found in ports?

New ports use current employee screening standards to ensure that any staff hired for the facility have been carefully screened. All facility operations would adhere to international standards for security.

Also, the types of containers that would come to Milford Station would mainly be those going to the logistics park for value-added activities (painting, manufacturing, etc.). The risk would generally be quite low with these types of containers and businesses.

42.  Would fire, police and other health and safety services (including Hazmat) be increased to address increased risk? If so, who would pay for it?

This type of facility doesn’t present different or greater risks than most types of industry in the province. It would be required to meet the same provincial safety standards as any large employer. It is unlikely that additional public services would be required based on the level of risk. However, the province does require larger employers to provide various types of safety and emergency training for employees.  If additional HASMAT or other safety training is required for emergency responders in the community, costs for that training could be incorporated into a community benefits package.

43.  How would the community be protected against dangerous contents in the containers? Domestic and international shipping regulations exist that require shippers to meet certain standards, and screening procedures monitor the contents of containers. A dedicated highway route will keep the containers on the highway or interchange, or at the inland port facility so they will not be in the broader community.

The types of containers that would come to Milford Station would be mainly those going to the logistics park for value-added activities (painting, manufacturing, etc.). The risk would generally be quite low with these types of containers and businesses.

Services

44.  Where would services for the facility come from? Would capacity be added for water and sewage treatment in the community?

The services may be constructed on site or may require an extension of municipal services.

Map

45. Why are there multiple versions of the map dated 2006, 2007 and 2009?

The concept is evolving and will continue to evolve with input from the community.

46. What would be the location of the emergency access road?

That would be determined during the design process.

47. Could the tracks be moved back to change the footprint and affect less properties?

The design of the facility is open for discussion. We expect that through the community engagement process, the concept will continue to evolve.

48.  What about the marginal scrub land north of Nine Mile River? Could that be an option?

That location is an option for the spinoff development, but the rail lines can’t be relocated there because of grade elevation differences.

Construction

49.  When would construction for each phase be expected to begin and how long would it last?

At this point, we don’t know when construction would begin. Council will decide whether to approve the project after they receive the final report in May 2010. If the project is approved, it will take some time to negotiate and finalize contracts with the inland port developer, complete any remaining assessments, confirm investors for the spinoff development, etc. This could take a few years.

Once construction begins, it would likely take a year to complete the inland port facility. The spin off activity would likely continue to develop over a number of years.

50. What would the construction schedule be? Could anything be done to limit nighttime/weekend construction?

The construction schedule can’t be determined at this point. The terms and conditions of the construction (such as work hours) can be set out in the tender package.

51. Would blasting be required? Could anything be done to limit nighttime/weekend blasting?

A geotechnical assessment would be required to determine the geology of the land. This would indicate whether blasting is required. The terms and conditions of the construction (such as limits on blasting times, etc.) can be set out in the tender package.

Further studies

52.  Will this require further studies (feasibility, social impact, ecological, archeological)? If so, who will pay for these studies?

The municipality plans to conduct feasibility and social impact studies on this project. In addition, the province requires a number of studies before a development of this type can be approved, including ecological and archeological studies. These site specific studies would be paid for by the developer.

Other

53. How would this project impact the Integrated Community Sustainability Plan?

This project would be designed to be consistent with the Integrated Community Sustainability Plan.

54. Why were the studies only shared with the community two weeks before the public meeting? Were the studies public before that?

The first study was conducted for HRM by MariNova and we had very little involvement with it. It was released and posted on the HRM website.

A decision was made to not post the study conducted for the Municipality of East Hants by the Chris Lowe Group or release it to the media until Council approved the motion to further explore the opportunity. Given the technical nature of the document, we felt that it was important for the community to have some context around the opportunity and an opportunity to ask questions.

55. Who would own the facility? The facility would be privately owned and operated.

56.  Would this project provide any benefit to National Gypsum? What about gypsum mineral rights?

We expect that National Gypsum would benefit from the direct link to Hwy. 102. We haven’t heard any concerns at this point about gypsum rights.

57.  Why does the MariNova study say that the facility will require 600 acres? If more land is required, where would it be?

The MariNova study was commissioned for HRM, so we had very little involvement with it. We have reviewed it, but we don’t know where the estimate of 600 acres comes from, and whether or not it includes potential lands for spin-off developments.

Until the design is complete, we don’t know the size of the footprint yet for the inland port. However, modern design and building standards will be used to minimize the amount of land required and provide adequate buffers for surrounding land users.

We would be looking at undeveloped land for the logistics park but we won’t know how much would be required until we get to the design phase and have a better sense of how many and what types of business we might attract for spinoff activity. 

58. Why isn’t Debert being considered instead of Milford Station?

Milford Station is the closest location to the Port of Halifax that is suitable for this type of facility. 

59.  Does the area councilor have a conflict of interest based on the land he owns in the area? When did he purchase the land? When did he learn about the project?

We have consulted with lawyers and have been told that Councilor Versteeg is not in a conflict of interest situation. He purchased his land prior to becoming a councilor, and as a private citizen he had no knowledge of the potential development opportunity in the area.

To ensure that a conflict of interest doesn’t arise, Councilor Versteeg will step out of any meetings involving discussions or decisions on compensation for landowners.

60. Why didn’t the meeting organizers have all of the answers ready for the public meeting?

We didn’t want to assume that we knew what the community was thinking and feeling so we held the public information session to get feedback from the community on the concept, to gather questions and concerns from the community, and to set up a Community Advisory Committee.