I am resubmitting my comments. I highlight that this project may have never proceeded to this point, if the full value of this beautiful section of the waterway were properly considered. It seems more clear, after reviewing the Project Description that the project team did not include any waterway plan in their review that outlines how it is used and the value it has to the community. This explains why there seems to be an organizational blind spot in this process, one that does not properly recognize the value of the unspoiled waterfront to our community. The high value of this area to the community is evidenced by the NCC River House, the investments in its renovation and the redevelopment of rue Jacques-Cartier, and the Sir Georges Etienne-Cartier Plan that the community prizes this area that the Federal government now wants to destroy with a bridge. As Mark Carney argues in Value(s), public infrastructure decisions should account for community values that are not easily measured through conventional economic or transportation analyses. Similarly, urban planning writers such as Jane Jacobs emphasized that successful places are shaped by the people who use them and by the social, cultural, and recreational functions they serve. The value of the NCC River House cannot be measured solely as a building. Its significance derives from its relationship to the river, its views, its natural surroundings, and its role as a gathering place.

My other concern is how Indigenous people are being consulted. It seems that Urban Indigenous people are not being consulted at all in a Project Advisory Group on par with neighbourhood associations or other locals. Also, the project team needs to reconsider how its consultation with Indigenous communities is designed, as they don't want to interfere with the primary rights holders, KZA and AOPFN.  If this is to be a national capital project, they need to confirm whether this is to reflect the values of all Canadians and Indigenous people.