[ad_1]
(Central Nervous System): Official Press Release The Planning Department has not disclosed to the public the route chosen by the Cayman Islands government for the controversial extension of the East-West Trunk Road. This suggests that the B3 route chosen by Cabinet is the least damaging to the environment, even though an environmental impact assessment indicated otherwise.
The Canadian government’s decision to choose the more expensive and less environmentally friendly of two candidate routes appears to be an effort to support the dredging plans being discussed in the Breakers area to develop a new cargo port and more comprehensive development in the eastern region and inland areas.
The route puts nearly 50 hectares of important pristine ecological habitat at risk and poses a major threat to the Central Mangrove Wetlands. Despite this, planning officials have tried to portray the route as “the best balance between infrastructure development and environmental management” because it would reduce emissions by reducing traffic congestion.
The EIA report clearly states that this route will cause far more damage to the environment than the B2 route, while local environmentalists agree that the B2 route poses the least threat to the environment if the route must go ahead. However, the Cayman government is rarely influenced by the opinions of the green movement and, by law, can ignore any recommendations given in an EIA report.
In the press release, officials claimed that Cabinet selected Route B3 as the preferred route after a “meticulous evaluation process” in which all routes were carefully considered and subjected to “rigorous data-driven analysis that highlighted their strong alignment with the Cayman Islands’ long-term infrastructure vision.”
Route B4 was initially rejected due to its significant environmental, social and historical impacts. Further studies carried out between September 2023 and April 2024 resulted in route B1 being eliminated, primarily due to its high environmental impact (affecting land owned by the National Trust) and high cost.
That leaves options B2 and B3, which the ministry says scored the same in a cost-benefit analysis (CBA). The B3 route was chosen because it fits the “original long-term communiqué plan” and what it calls “strategic infrastructure objectives and future growth.”
CNS also understands that the controversial proposal to build a freight port at Brecks, currently under discussion, was a fundamental reason for choosing this route. If it goes ahead, it would facilitate the development of that project, as well as further commercial and industrial development associated with the terminal by the private sector.
The government also claims that the route will have minimal impact on National Trust-owned land and less impact on parrot habitat than the B2 route. The route is also described as providing “more favourable conditions for construction, reducing potential challenges and costs during the development phase, and ensuring a smoother and more efficient project delivery”.
Despite the B3 route being about half a kilometre longer than the B2 route, the ministry claims that the B3 route will produce lower greenhouse gas emissions per trip compared to the B2 route. “This important finding overturns the notion that shorter routes are inherently greener and highlights the environmental advantages of the B3 route,” the government said in a highly misleading statement.
Local activists, including the group Sustainable Cayman, have spent a great deal of time and effort studying the routes, only to claim otherwise. They point out that the route could severely damage key wetlands and would cut through one of the largest continuous mangrove wetlands in the area. On top of that, the main concern about the route is that it has the potential to allow developers to penetrate deeper into currently inaccessible habitats that are vital to Grand Cayman’s natural habitat as a whole.
Sustainable Cayman had urged government to seriously consider the findings of the Environmental Assessment Committee. Instead, CIG chose a “higher risk route of secondary development in an area where deforestation risk is already high.”
Sustainable Cayman Islands insists the route is a mistake and continues to support the B2 route.
The decision to choose the B3 route and continue with the road to Frank Bay follows the government’s failure to implement a modern public transport system and its failure to address the implementation of Private School Bus SystemThis is despite the fact that a private member’s motion on the issue was accepted more than a year ago.
The government has done nothing to promote carpooling, discourage single-occupancy car commuting, or introduce any programs to help ease traffic congestion.
It has given little thought to decentralizing government offices, taking a broader, more flexible approach to civil servants’ starting and ending times, using technology to allow more people to work from home more often, or encouraging the same ideas in the private sector.
“The selection of Line B3 for the East-West Link project demonstrates our unwavering commitment to developing sustainable and efficient infrastructure. This choice reflects a careful balance between development, cost-effectiveness and environmental responsibility. Line B3 not only meets our strategic objectives, but also ensures that important natural resources are protected for future generations,” Planning Minister Jay Ebanks said in a news release.
[ad_2]
Source link
