Jump to content

      














Photo

[Langford] South Skirt Mountain | 2,800 homes | Proposed


  • Please log in to reply
119 replies to this topic

#1 Jacques Cadé

Jacques Cadé
  • Member
  • 671 posts

Posted 28 January 2009 - 09:42 AM

Finally, some details about South Skirt in today's TC:

http://www.timescolo...5148/story.html

But Monday Magazine has the real dirt:

http://www.mondaymag...he-week65/news/

Environmental concerns aside, what kills me is that these new places are going to have better views, more sunlight, and easier highway access than the "$450-650K" lots down in the bowl of Bear Mountain. Len Barrie must be thrilled.

#2 amor de cosmos

amor de cosmos

    BUILD

  • Member
  • 4,934 posts

Posted 28 January 2009 - 10:28 AM

I think this South Skirt Mtn thing needs its own thread

#3 integracious

integracious
  • Member
  • 102 posts

Posted 28 January 2009 - 05:37 PM

I think this South Skirt Mtn thing needs its own thread

I think you are right. I have really appreciated the posts relating to Landford's rubber stamping staff and council approvals of all things "green and sustainable." Werethere actually any concessions on the developers to provide any affordable housing on the south skirt project? How close is this project to the proposed Employment centres currently applying for rezoning to the south east of this project?

#4 snub

snub

    Reflecting

  • Member
  • 422 posts

Posted 28 January 2009 - 07:31 PM

Article in the Goldstream Gazoo, with a little more info than the TC one.



http://www.bclocalne...s/38572059.html

#5 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 9,308 posts

Posted 28 January 2009 - 09:37 PM

Anyone have a map of the development area?
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#6 amor de cosmos

amor de cosmos

    BUILD

  • Member
  • 4,934 posts

Posted 29 January 2009 - 11:10 AM

it's a triangular area near the bear mtn interchange & slightly west of florence lake

#7 Jacques Cadé

Jacques Cadé
  • Member
  • 671 posts

Posted 04 February 2009 - 11:48 AM

Inside Langford has links to maps of the proposed South Skirt development area.

Inside Langford also reports that South Skirt came up at the council meeting Monday night, but nothing conculsive was decided:


This development was discussed in only the briefest of fashions. The Planning, Zoning, and Affordable Housing Committee recommendation was read into the record and staff asked to draft a bylaw, and one member of the public spoke (in opposition), and that was that. The anticipated bylaw didn’t appear, let alone a public hearing.

It will still have to come before two or three Council meetings before it could be approved, but the public hearing is going to be the public’s last opportunity to speak to the issue so that’s the important one.



#8 Jacques Cadé

Jacques Cadé
  • Member
  • 671 posts

Posted 22 February 2009 - 02:29 PM

The public hearing on Bylaw 1209 – the rezoning for the complete development of South Skirt Mountain – takes place this Monday night, February 23, at 7:00 p.m. Langford's city hall is at 877 Goldstream Avenue.

Inside Langford has a related article here, and one here, about an environmental impact study done for the development.

The study says the development will affect at-risk species in the area, including the northern pygmy owl, the sharp-tailed snake (one of the rarest snakes in B.C., with only eight known populations), and the Pacific water shrew. Not to worry, though: the development proposal includes an ecological education centre!

You can download the 119-page council info package here. It may be useful for future reference.

#9 Jacques Cadé

Jacques Cadé
  • Member
  • 671 posts

Posted 24 February 2009 - 08:57 AM

Here's the link to the TC's report on what happened last night. The public was there, but it sounds like Stew Young didn't give them much of a hearing:

http://www.timescolo...2469/story.html

#10 Guest_Marcat_*

Guest_Marcat_*
  • Guests

Posted 24 February 2009 - 09:42 AM

I personally love the comments in that article about how a bulk of the people at the don't want the development...that Stu was bullying the crowd etc...I simply have to respond, if a BULK of Langford residents don't want the continued developments such as Skirt Mountain and Bear Mountain, Westhills, etc, etc...then why the hell do you keep voting in the current Mayor and Council, election after election? If I was Stu I sure as hell would be sick of hearing the mumbo jumbo that the opponents of Development like to spout in that municipality and Developments associated with BM and Skirt...If the citizens of the municipalty hate the fact there is has been quite the econonmic boom in the community, increased population and fortunes of all that live in the area, they should vote him and his council out and vote in a few tie-dyed, tree huggers and watch the community drive itself back into the poor house and general hillbilly laughing stock of the region as it was back in the day.

I know I for one am sick and tired of hearing the native burial claims and historical "caves" and other drivel that seem to come from the anti-development crowd in Langford. If they were such important burial grounds, if they are so "historical" then why was it not an issue BEFORE the land was being developed and put before council for permits and zoning. No one cares, until someone wants to utilize the land for something, than the whole tie dye group is up in arms and uh oh...better watch out because they're going to chain themselves to the trees and stop the 100, 000lbs dozer from knocking it down to improve the lives of a VAST majority of people instead of the few that smoke too much dope, and forget the rest of the world grew up from tie-dye and hits of acid and decided to build and improve the world...

Maybe if we had a mayor and council with a little more stupid cowboy and brass balls we'd actually get some of the awesome proposals that have been put forth to the Victoria City Council in the last decade built instead of shelved and drawings gathering dust in a storage room...

I'm sure I'm becoming famous for my rants around here, but I'm just calling it like I see it...not how it "should be" or what "status quo" is...

#11 jklymak

jklymak
  • Member
  • 3,514 posts

Posted 24 February 2009 - 10:03 AM

^ Your rants seem rooted in the belief that any and all development is good. Do you really believe that?

Personally, I think one of the attractions of Victoria is the ability to get to beautiful wilderness in less than an hour. Allowing unchecked sprawl will destroy that.

#12 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 11,902 posts

Posted 24 February 2009 - 10:57 AM

Being progressive is one thing, but cutting off people and insulting them at a public hearing is another. If council was smart they would sit there, allow people to speak their minds, and then go on and do what they planned anyways. At least then they wouldn't be accused of being bullies.

#13 Guest_Marcat_*

Guest_Marcat_*
  • Guests

Posted 24 February 2009 - 12:03 PM

^ Your rants seem rooted in the belief that any and all development is good. Do you really believe that?

Personally, I think one of the attractions of Victoria is the ability to get to beautiful wilderness in less than an hour. Allowing unchecked sprawl will destroy that.


No, my rants are not rooted that ALL development is good. My rants are based on the fact a bunch of left wing fruit cakes run around this region at every development with hair brained claims to ever earthworm and bucketful of soil claiming its sacred, historic and those of us that develop it will forever burn in the fiery depths of hell. I've ranted on proposals and developments that have been shot down for miniscule, hairbrained, or pig headedness of individuals or small interest groups, not the greater good for all involved (aka the merchants, the construction companies and employees, the development firms, the municpal governments tax coffers etc etc). I'm sure there are those on this board that have reaped economic benefits of living and working in Langford, which would not have occured if it had not been for their ambitious thirst for development from commercial, industrial and residential. (I've noticed a few empty downtown related yards and business in the past year that have shifted operations to the Westshore...Steels, Steve Drane etc...)

I love Victoria for the ease at losing yourself in the Wilderness as well, but last time I checked you don't lose yourself into the wilderness of someone's private property, you utilize the many and numerous provincial and crd parks in the region. I have spent quite a bit of time at Goldstream over the years, but I'm pretty sure I don't go for a hike on Skirt Mountain, as it is private property. Stu has some solid points about some of these NIMBY's that showed up at the meeting, if you want to complain, perhaps we should start bulldozing down the nimbys home and returning it to its natural state, because I'm sure Florence Lake has just as much "sacred, and historical" artifacts in every shovel full of dirt...

Last time I checked (at least when I was at Dinner up at Jacks on the weekend, there is a fair amount of wilderness up there, its not uncontrolled urban sprawl, its controlled development with a LOT more enviromental safe guards than when half this region was originally built...

#14 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 4,371 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 24 February 2009 - 03:39 PM

Personally, I think one of the attractions of Victoria is the ability to get to beautiful wilderness in less than an hour. Allowing unchecked sprawl will destroy that.


I can not think of wilderness that close to Victoria. I can think of tree farms and some parks, but not much I would call wilderness. But then I am wilderness purest - no roads, no major human activities.

#15 pseudotsuga

pseudotsuga
  • Member
  • 287 posts

Posted 24 February 2009 - 04:53 PM

Used to go up Skirt mountain all the time. Those were some nice trials. <sigh>

#16 snub

snub

    Reflecting

  • Member
  • 422 posts

Posted 01 March 2009 - 08:41 PM

"Mayor impatient with enviromental advocates"


A couple of articles from the Goldstream Gazette:


http://www.bclocalne...s/40321983.html



http://www.bclocalne...s/40454678.html


There was also one in the T-C. Stu was complaining that the tree huggers didn't live in Langford, and therefore, had no right to complain. I hope Stu doesn't live in Colwood.

#17 snub

snub

    Reflecting

  • Member
  • 422 posts

Posted 20 March 2009 - 05:25 PM

Article in Monday Magazine regarding the council meeting on March 16th:



Posted By: Jason Youmans
03/18/2009 8:00 AM
Boring public hearing belies controversial Langford development

The March 16 public hearing on a proposed residential development for the south slope of Skirt Mountain must have been tough on acting mayor Denise Blackwell, hampered as she was from “exercising” her middle finger like she did one year ago when activists showed up at a Langford City Council meeting to share their concerns about construction of the Spencer Road Interchange.

Blackwell—sitting in the big chair for absent Mayor Stew Young—and the rest of council were on the best behaviour they could muster for the duration of the second attempt in two weeks to hear public opinion on a 2,800-unit condo and housing project being pitched by a trio of landowners for the hillside adjacent the TransCanada highway that encompasses 211 acres between Goldstream Park and Florence Lake.

The village, to be built over the next 15 to 20 years, has once again exposed the chasm between those who stand to reap the economic spin-off from Langford’s development lust and those loathe to see the region lose any more of its green space and the flora and fauna it supports.

Proceedings of the first public hearing February 23 were scrapped after opponents of the proposed development threatened legal action to overturn any bylaws passed on the basis of information gathered at the meeting, given Young’s, let’s say, prickly, reaction to dissenters in the crowd and comments he made to the media that seemed to indicate his predisposition toward the plan.

By Langford’s normally raucous standards, the second round, procedurally at least, had all the trappings of a legitimate public hearing, with what seemed to be an equal number of speakers taking the microphone on the pro and con sides of the debate, of course not without some measure of scoffs, chatter, and the occasional “Sit down, you . . .” when one of the dissenters ran over her five-minute window.

Those who spoke in favour of the plan—the brainchild of Focus Corporation’s Dale Douglas—cited job creation, growing the municipality’s housing stock and the ominous spectre of what could be built on the hillside under its current zoning. Those on the other side noted the Garry-oak stands and assorted other wildlife that would inevitably fall to the chainsaw, the re-routing of water courses already underway as road construction continues, and first nations cultural sites destined for desecration.

“This is re-configuration of an entire watershed,” noted Trish Glatthaar, speaking of the spring-fed creeks altered by the work on Bear Mountain Parkway and Echo Valley Drive.

It’s difficult to ignore that behind its big-box city facade, an old-boys club sensibility pervades Langford’s much-celebrated progress. This fact was not lost on area resident Beverley Bacon who addressed the crowd on behalf of TLTIL (The Last Tree In Langford) and pointed out that many of the individuals that submitted letters of support for the Skirt Mountain project seem to have something to gain by its construction.

Bacon’s point is well taken, in that a quick breeze through the agenda shows plenty of letters from folks who earn their keep through the building industry, or at the very least keeping that industry supplied—York Excavating, Aggressive Excavating, Victoria Contracting and Municipal Maintenance Contracting, Fountain Tire, two DFH realtors with listings throughout the West Shore, HR Exteriors and Lombard Pre-cast among them.

And while the acrimony that masquerades as dialogue in Langford was shelved for the duration of Monday night’s two- hour hearing, it could still be found in some of the written correspondences related to the development proposal.

In a letter to Langford city hall, project critic Karen Wonders wrote, among other things, that “The City of Langford continues its bankrupt policies of serving big business crooks like Len Barrie while it engages in acts of questionable legality.”

This was met with a return letter from Langford planning boss Matthew Baldwin, who fired back, “The reason for my concern is that I find the inaccuracies and bias in your letter (not to mention vitriol) so incredible that they betray an utter lack of rigor for even the most basic research that would have been necessary to ascertain the facts of this matter, or for that matter the veracity of your source materials.”

“I must inform you that I was tempted to forward your letter to the City’s legal counsel, as I found that the defamatory remarks at the close of your letter border on what might be successfully argued as libelous in a court of law,” Baldwin continued.

And so Langford will continue to steam ahead, with, or without, due consideration of what might be lost in the process.

West Shore Developers Association president Jim Hartshorne seemed downright offended Monday night that any in the crowd should question the motives of developers and the consultants they hire and their committment to fulfilling environmental and social obligations.

And who could question that assessment when we have, topping Skirt Mountain like a crown of fool’s gold, Len Barrie’s golf and luxury-living mecca, which, according to its website, “also works to create and preserve wildlife habitats in and around the golf course. A pond at the course’s 5th hole has been designated as an environmentally sensitive area and is protected for the Red-legged frog, an endangered species.”

With a commitment like that, who could ever doubt the promises made on the slopes of Skirt Mountain?

#18 AnonAnnie2

AnonAnnie2
  • Member
  • 151 posts

Posted 16 June 2009 - 07:37 AM

This was approved to go forward last night.

#19 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,490 posts

Posted 16 June 2009 - 09:01 AM

This was approved to go forward last night.


With no discussion in Mayor Stew Young's absence, council approved final reading of the bylaw.


#20 snub

snub

    Reflecting

  • Member
  • 422 posts

Posted 19 June 2009 - 08:55 PM

Quote from the article in the Goldstream Gazette:



Fourth reading for rezoning passed in the blink of an eye June 15, giving a green light to a plan that involves 2,819 residential units on 86.4 hectares, built over 15 to 20 years.






The whole article: http://www.bclocalne...s/48293457.html

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users