January 17, 2011,

I am writing as I have had no communication with Mr. Watson's office

regarding the overwhelming evidence that was presented to the City in
August regarding the FACT that KNL's Archaeology study did NOT look for
pre-contact native artifacts.

It is incumbent on the City of Ottawa to demand a new study, and it has the
legal authority, and responsibility to do so. The NCC should be
immediately asked to do a full and comprehensive of the lands in question
and the entire Carp Ridge and no approval to grant clear cutting should
take place until this process has competed itself. We are dealing with a
forest and a region of National Historic and Cultural Significance. The City
of Ottawa has in its powers the ability to rightfully ask for this to be done. A
condition exists for new information to be an allowable reason to demand a
new study. You have this new information from one of Canada's leading
Archaeologists. The letter to the City in August (and presented to Tim Marc)
can be found here.
http://www.renaud.ca/public/Archaeology/2010-08-06-Archaeological
%20Assessment%20of%20KNL%20Study.pdf

Tim Marc of the City of Ottawa has had irrefutable evidence to question
KNL's study as KNL's study did not even look for pre-contact artifacts. Of
course they did not record any. They never looked nor was it incumbent to
discuss the fact that this IS and WAS a site for pre-contact artifiacts -
because they ignored looking. Even worse is the fact that two other sites
exist here and 16,204 artifacts were also found in a study on the same
latitude as the Beaver Pond and just a few hundred yards away confirming
that it would be completely irresponsible on the part of the City of Ottawa
to not ask for a new study to be performed by the NCC. The NCC could
actually then be afforded the opportunity to consider saving this land -
which will not be possible if this City does not exercise their
responsibility to have a new study performed.
KNL did not look for pre-contact artifacts. That is their error. To allow
it to knowingly destroy this forest is NOT their responsibility, but Mayor
Jim Watson's.

I will not get into our other concerns in which Guy Bourgan (Planning and
Growth Management Dept.) has not yet answered our questions with
respect to SWM and the piece approval of the SWM plan, and the
admission of Darlene Conway that water flow into the Beaver Pond will at
times back into Kizzel Pond which is not a Provincially Significant Wetland.
He has had a dozen questions presented numous times and has refused to
answer them as soon as we know he cannot or the answers would prove
our case. Who is telling him to ignore our questions from the summer time
or from the Fall?

As President of the Kanata Lakes Community Association, if cutting is

authorized, I will have no other choice than to bring this City to court for
failing to properly management this file, and I therefore respectfully
request that the City not approve clear cutting until the SWM plan for phase
9 is a study which stands on its own, and is not part of the already flawed
study which encompasses the Phase 7, 8 and 9. Why is it flawed?
Because it would drain water into a Provincially Significant Wetland. Ask
yourself why then can water be dumped into the Beaver Pond which is 10
feet from Kizzel, on the exact same level, with no stream or water fall
between it, and when it rains, water flows BACKWARDS into Kizzel? You
cannot cut up a SWM plan approval into phases for obvious reasons. The
SWM is either good or it is not. You cannot have PART OF IT GOOD. That
is illegal and I intend to defend that.

Norm Sterling has been provided the details of the Archaeological

concerns, and he has told me just today that he intends to ask for written
clarification why the City is standing by flawed Provincial approval, when
it is the CITY OF OTTAWA's responsibility to ask for a new Study based on
new information.

Steven J. Hulaj