The ‘Mader’ model of the proposed Ajax mine (Daily News photo).
As predicted, the debate over the “dueling” Ajax models has begun in earnest. Poor KGHM is being raked by mine opponents for supposedly trying to make it hard to figure out from the model what the mine will actually look like in comparison to the built part of the city, and for supposedly trying to make it hard for the average working stiff to even get a look at the model.
I maintain that both models are useful. The Mader model is prettier and more realistic, but the KGHM version is worthwhile as well because of — not despite — its simplicity.
So instead of wasting a lot of words condemning or celebrating one or the other, let’s make the best use of them.
It will be interesting to hear the impressions of City council members, if they dare to actually express opinions. City CAO David Trawin tells me administration doesn’t intend to make any comments of its own about either model to council, nor to make any recommendations. Staff will leave it up to individual councillors to look for themselves, and up to council as a whole if it wants to have a discussion about them.
He hadn’t yet seen the KGHM model when I talked to him, but did offer the opinion that the Mader model is “pretty close,” though it will depend on what information was used to create it.
Meanwhile, both models will be making the rounds to various venues in the city so the public can have a look, so stay tuned.
