Jump to content

      














Photo

Leigh Road Interchange and Bear Mountain Parkway


  • Please log in to reply
514 replies to this topic

#81 amor de cosmos

amor de cosmos

    BUILD

  • Member
  • 5,236 posts

Posted 16 February 2008 - 04:38 PM

It might not be neccessary in Feb 2008, but they're planning for a time when there will be at least 40,000 more people living in the area, either at Bear Mountain or Westhills.

Calling in RCMP cops from elsewhere to flood an area with only ~8 protesters seems like overkill to me. Has anyone ever seen Ingmar Lee? He doesn't look very dangerous. Maybe all that treeplanting has given him some "wiry strength" though.

#82 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 16 February 2008 - 06:09 PM

It might not be neccessary in Feb 2008, but they're planning for a time when there will be at least 40,000 more people living in the area, either at Bear Mountain or Westhills.

You mean like all the interchanges that we have in Victoria?
If some "visionaries" had had there way in the 60's we'd have a freeway running right through Victoria's core. There would be one ripping through Vic West and another splitting Beacon Hill in half.
Thank godness there were people out there that realised that these freeways and interchanges in the core WERE uneccessary and destructive, and thought of how they could work with what they already have and how they could use them to there advantage.

It's blows my mind how some people see our greatest asset on Southern Vancouver Island as so effing disposable.

#83 ressen

ressen
  • Member
  • 539 posts

Posted 16 February 2008 - 06:35 PM

We don't want development on ALR land. so whats the problem with building on otherwise unproductive mountain sides? Sure its nice to look at all the greenery etc. but if its nature that you crave then look no further than the edge of langford and go for a hike towards the South West. The new overpass will serve Sooke traffic going north as well as traffic going North East to the big box area. Millstream road is at capacity and no further development was permitted until an other access point was established; hence the rush.

#84 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 16 February 2008 - 07:49 PM

Unproductive to whom? Are we humans the only ones that are deserving of sources of food shelter and water? What you see as unproductive and valueless land, I see as just another piece of a vital chain that is integral, being removed because someone wasn't thinking far enough ahead. Because someone realized that great big parking lot of big box stores, needs another road leading to into it.
Call me a treehugger if you'd like, but I don't just consider greenery as something "nice to look at".
Where does it end? There will be another development thats road leading into it will reach capacity in the future and just an itty bitty piece of forest and mountainside will be removed to accommodate it, and so on and so on.
If you've read a few of my post you'll realize that I'm not some anti-establishment, anti-development type that wants to see everything preserved.
It just makes more sense to me to try and improve more on what Langford already has, which can be very scattered and sprawled in places. I like some of the things that I've seen lately in this front which I'm finding really progressive; but then you see another big box store and a sea of asphalt built and you almost feel as if you've traveled back in time.
Where is the vision? The imagination? You speak as if no other option exists, and yet we are bombarded with these alternatives everyday.
I don't necessarily see Spencer Road as this horrible environmental disaster. I see it as just another chapter in this continuing saga of urban sprawl justifying and creating more urban sprawl. This stretch of highway isn't just eating this little piece of "greenery", it is paving the way for more and more of the same in the future, over and over again.

#85 ressen

ressen
  • Member
  • 539 posts

Posted 16 February 2008 - 08:10 PM

Langford is surrounded by Metchosin, the Sea to Sea park, the water district and Goldstream Park. It would appear that except for some parks and agricultural land, that the rest will be filled by housing and commerce. One interesting aspect of the development on the west shore is the interspersing of industry/commercial and housing making for the potential possibility of being able to walk to work.

#86 gumgum

gumgum
  • Member
  • 7,069 posts

Posted 17 February 2008 - 09:23 AM

Protesters say they shut down interchange work
Times Colonist
Published: Sunday, February 17, 2008


Protesters say their presence led to the stoppage of work at the Bear Mountain Interchange early Saturday afternoon.

About 40 people gathered at the contentious site about noon, with some venturing onto the Trans-Canada Highway to make their point and others standing in the way of machinery. No arrests were made.

Three people were arrested at the site last week after police rousted a group that had been maintaining a protest camp in a wooded area between the highway and Leigh Road in Langford. The camp had been in place since last April.

Police cleared protesters from the Bear Mountain interchange site last week, but they returned on Saturday.

"We shut down all the machines and everyone went home," protester Zoe Blunt said of Saturday's activities. "By one o'clock there was nobody working."

A police spokesman said only that the protest caused no major problems or traffic snarls. Opponents of the $32-million interchange say it threatens Spencer's Pond, a cave and a forested area containing culturally modified trees. They have not said what they might do next.


© Times Colonist 2008

....

#87 UrbanRail

UrbanRail
  • Member
  • 2,114 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 17 February 2008 - 11:43 AM

Yep, its like a soap opera.

I doubt that Langford wanted this type of publicity. Its interesting, they are getting good publicity for their support of commuter rail and bad publicity for this interchange fiasco.

Its like a circus.

The RCMP went overboard and send in an army.
Langford says screw off to the protesters.
Victoria is questioning Langford over this interchange.
The protesters say screw off to Langford and then return after being removed a couple of days ago.

#88 jklymak

jklymak
  • Member
  • 3,514 posts

Posted 17 February 2008 - 05:35 PM

One interesting aspect of the development on the west shore is the interspersing of industry/commercial and housing making for the potential possibility of being able to walk to work.


If that is what they are trying to encourage, then why are they building an overpass to get people in and out of town by car?

I think the key word in the above is "potential" because I would be shocked if more than 10 people in Langford walk to work at the present time. Contrast to putting density downtown, where I would estimate, based on my building, that over half the people walk to work, and another significant fraction take the bus.

Langford may be sincere about wanting to build a sustainable urban environment out there, and perhaps for all the right reasons. However, I don't see how adding more highway infrastructure will help, and makes the "town center" concept seem insincere.

#89 Maverick

Maverick
  • Member
  • 129 posts

Posted 17 February 2008 - 08:00 PM

You seem a little bias, Maverick. Just the tone of your post makes me think you might be personally involved. Why, even people whom support this project could at least give the protesters some kudos for at least sticking to their beliefs by going as far as to sacrifice creature comforts to support their cause.
As far as Stu's "vision". Care to share with us how this interchange is forward thinking and revolutionary? - that is after all what I would define as having "vision".
To me, this interchange is counter-productive and destructive, not to mention completely unnecessary.


I am not personally involved with the interchange at all.I do take offence to a group of tree sitting protesters,some that wear balaclava's to get that revolutionary feel that makes them feel like they are important and that everyone will take notice of them. Get their 30 seconds of fame on TV and an article in the daily paper and plaster the clown show on all the so called activist sites that are on the internet. Hopefully it will make them look like heroes and some sort of warrior for the cause.This in turn will help them with more funding for their next adventure. Possibly we can see pictures of some banners hanging from the cranes at Bear Mountain,that would be grand.
Unfortunately in some peoples eyes they are seen as a bunch of activists that have nothing to offer to the City of Langford.
What will happen to the Millstream interchange and Veterans Memorial in time as Bear Mountain and the Highlands get built out? Will you be standing out there to take the heat from all the irate drivers on the road?There is no light rail to service those areas ,would be nice but it will not happen on that side of the highway.
Sooner than later there will be light rail in Langford and we can all live happily ever after!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Right Urban rail!
I don`t mean to be bias I just come across that way when some people really P*** me off!

The End

#90 Maverick

Maverick
  • Member
  • 129 posts

Posted 17 February 2008 - 08:13 PM

Protesters say they shut down interchange work
Times Colonist
Published: Sunday, February 17, 2008

Protesters say their presence led to the stoppage of work at the Bear Mountain Interchange early Saturday afternoon.

About 40 people gathered at the contentious site about noon, with some venturing onto the Trans-Canada Highway to make their point and others standing in the way of machinery. No arrests were made.

Three people were arrested at the site last week after police rousted a group that had been maintaining a protest camp in a wooded area between the highway and Leigh Road in Langford. The camp had been in place since last April.

Police cleared protesters from the Bear Mountain interchange site last week, but they returned on Saturday.

"We shut down all the machines and everyone went home," protester Zoe Blunt said of Saturday's activities. "By one o'clock there was nobody working."

A police spokesman said only that the protest caused no major problems or traffic snarls. Opponents of the $32-million interchange say it threatens Spencer's Pond, a cave and a forested area containing culturally modified trees. They have not said what they might do next.


© Times Colonist 2008

First of all how stupid can people get wandering onto a busy highway, hopefully they have some sort of disability insurance in case they get hit by a vehicle while standing in the middle of the Trans Canada Highway and can`t go to work the next day!They should be thrown into the drunk tank for a night.
Secondly if these people ever had a real job in their lifetime they would know that most companies only work till noon on a Saturday in the West Shore,so much for the grandstanding Zoe!!!!!!!
....

#91 Maverick

Maverick
  • Member
  • 129 posts

Posted 17 February 2008 - 08:56 PM

Just found this on Zoe Blunt`s website:Sounds like a call to arms,I guess our commute home from work is not going to be getting any faster in the days ahead!!!!!!!!!


A HUNDRED VOICES OF CONSCIENCE

Citizens scored a big victory in Langford today, re-occupying the site of the proposed Bear Mountain Interchange and forcing RCMP and “feller-bunchers” to retreat! Let us build on this victory by taking a new step…

Hundred Voices of Conscience
Call to Mass, Peaceful, Direct Action Against the Bear Mountain Development and Further Construction of the Interchange

This past week’s paramilitary-style police operation sanctioned by the City of Langford, to circumvent the growing legitimate public opposition to the Bear Mountain interchange, was a heavy-handed assault against land, local democracy and current, widespread ecological consciousness.

At a time of unprecedented ecological crisis, it is the moral obligation of the entire human community to take immediate action to prevent unnecessary harm and destruction to the natural world and all its inhabitants; and to reverse developments that systematically destroy the life-support systems of the earth for profit.

Hundred Voices of Conscience, inspired by the Gandhian tradition of mass civil resistance, is a call:

1. To gain the pledge of a minimum of 100 conscientious citizens who will peacefully, simultaneously and with dignity, incur the risk of arrest, to cross police lines surrounding the forest of the proposed Bear Mountain interchange;

2. To intervene between the land and earth-moving machinery;

3. And to act on our civic duty to prevent unnecessary harm to the delicate ecosystems around Spencer’s Pond and the Langford Lake caves; and to prevent further build-out of the Bear Mountain development on Spaet (Skirt) Mountain, shared traditional territories of Coast Salish peoples.

We seek solidarity with like-minded individuals willing to make a commitment to a community initiative of mass non-violent direct action at an undisclosed time and place. Legal training and support will be provided.

If you wish to be one of the Hundred Voices of Conscience, please sign the pledge and arrange to return it by emailing hundredvoice —at— gmail.com as soon as possible.

PLEDGE

I pledge to participate in the Hundred Voices of Conscience to peacefully take a stand of non-violent civil resistance to the unwise, destructive and unjust construction of the Bear Mountain Development and interchange.

By so doing, I agree to the Hundred Voices of Conscience Code of Conduct.

Hundred Voices of Conscience Code of Conduct

1. I refrain from any action that harms or damages nature or property.

2. I treat everyone I meet with friendliness and openness about my intentions and motivations for participating in this action.

3. I look after the safety of my fellow resisters.

4. I expect to be treated with dignity and respect — free from harassment, harm and injury by all who I encounter.

Name_____________________________

Date _____________________________

Phone_____________________________

Email_________________________

#92 Fergus

Fergus
  • Member
  • 21 posts

Posted 17 February 2008 - 09:10 PM

If that's the case, that shows just how in tune she is with her community.


I suppose that depends on whether you consider other municipalities "her community". I expect a councillor to understand all the issues pertinent to her municipality. I don't expect that applies to other municipalities -- though it's an admirable bonus if that proves to be the case.

Her party leader (C. Chandler is a Green Party member) participated in a well-publicized protest in downtown Victoria in November of 07 so one would expect a reasonable amount of information about the leader's involvement finding its way back to party members and especially those in publicly elected positions, no?


I'm not sure which Green Party you are referring to. Chandler was elected as a candidate for a municipal party. I believe it called itself Greater Victoria Green Party. That organization includes members of the provincial and federal parties, but it is not organizationally affiliated. It has a memorandum of understanding with the provincial party, but it has its own organization and develops its own campaigns and policies.

I don't have any personal knowledge about Chandler's involvement with politics at other levels of government. I have met her, but it was at the time of the last municipal election.

I think it's wrong to refer to a provincial or federal Green Party leader as her party leader. As far as I know the Victoria Greens don't have a leader per se.


Most everyone and their cousin who paid any attention to local news, as one would think a local councillor should, knew about this and has been aware of the Langford interchange protests to some degree. C. Chandler now claiming she has been completely oblivious to the project, in light of years of discussion, on-going protests and her own party's involvement, seems very unlikely.


Has she claimed this? None of my previous posts made that claim, if that's where you got the idea. I don't speak for her or her party in any event. I'm not even a member.

To use myself as an example, I did have some awareness that there was an issue in Langford, that it had an ecological dimension, and that there was a tree-sit. I did not understand that democracy was circumvented nor that there were significant questions about the financing. This is also news to a lot of Langford residents, so expecting politicians in other municipalities to be aware of all the aspects of the matter seems unreasonable.


I'm pretty sure Langford's taxpayers are not on the hook for paying back the money as the costs are shared between the province and developers.


They are on the hook in the event that the developers default. It could then become a provincial obligation only if Langford becomes insolvent itself.

#93 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 56,344 posts

Posted 17 February 2008 - 09:45 PM

Has she claimed this? None of my previous posts made that claim

I'm pretty sure that's what you meant and that's why I'm not impressed over the recent realization by Victoria's council that something is on the up and up out west:

...my understanding is that Chandler didn't know about this issue until recently.


-----------

I suppose that depends on whether you consider other municipalities "her community".

Lest we forget, Victoria's city council has urged developers to "take it out to Langford" on a number of occasions ;)

In all seriousness if C. Chandler (or any councillor in any muni, for that matter) isn't the least bit interested in the goings on of a neighbouring municipality because it's not her political turf then such an attitude illustrates the silo mentality of the region. In other words, that's bad for both you and I. Afterall we're one region that ought to be working towards a common goal (in fact, that's what we're doing here on VV, we're talking about issues that have an effect on us all regardless of our address). IMO, if constituents care about the goings on in other parts of the CRD then it's reasonable to expect councillors to do the same (and I am aware of several who are very much in tune with regional issues and have a solid grasp of how one municipality's decisions can affect others, but is that a rarity around here?).

For the record I supported both C. Chandler and Phillipe Lucas in '05.

They are on the hook in the event that the developers default. It could then become a provincial obligation only if Langford becomes insolvent itself.

That'd be horrific. I'm sure Langford's taxpayers currently in support of the interchange would quickly change their minds.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#94 Fergus

Fergus
  • Member
  • 21 posts

Posted 18 February 2008 - 10:46 AM

I'm pretty sure that's what you meant and that's why I'm not impressed over the recent realization by Victoria's council that something is on the up and up out west


What I meant is one thing. What she might claim is something entirely different. I'm merely trying to make that distinction clear. Nothing I said came directly from Chandler, who I haven't talked to in quite a long time.

You expect every councillor in the region to have encyclopedia knowledge of every aspect of every issue in every municipality. That'd be great, but I think it's unreasonable unless you also amalgamate the communities. As it stands now, I expect the residents of each municipality demand focus on the issues most important to them, and those will be the ones they feel affect them most.


In all seriousness if C. Chandler (or any councillor in any muni, for that matter) isn't the least bit interested in the goings on of a neighbouring municipality because it's not her political turf then such an attitude illustrates the silo mentality of the region.


I did not suggest that Victoria councillors aren't "the least bit interested." In fact, they clearly are interested as they put the item on the agenda recently. The appearance to me is that they didn't see a reason to get involved in the debate until they were made aware that the process is deeply flawed and represents a dangerous precedent.


Afterall we're one region that ought to be working towards a common goal (in fact, that's what we're doing here on VV, we're talking about issues that have an effect on us all regardless of our address).


I very much agree in principle, but the reality may never live up to our ideals. I think if we want our councillors to do more work, we should pay them more and allow them to focus more on municipal and regional government rather than making a living.


For the record I supported both C. Chandler and Phillipe Lucas in '05.


So did I, but the record I speak only for myself and not either of them. The implication seems to be that what I post is what Chandler claims, and that's completely untrue.

#95 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,123 posts

Posted 18 February 2008 - 11:27 AM

^ I disagree. Policticians SHOULD be aware of issues of interest to their constituents and unless you have been in a box for the last year or more you would know something about this issue. This is 15 kms from Victoria not the deforestation of the amazon.

#96 Caramia

Caramia
  • Member
  • 3,835 posts

Posted 18 February 2008 - 12:26 PM

I think I see the point you are making though. It sounds to me like what you are saying is that you feel like your words were misread to support an attack on Councilor Chandler. You are trying to make it clear that what Mike read wasn't what you meant. That's fair.

#97 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 56,344 posts

Posted 18 February 2008 - 03:06 PM

You serious? You think this is an attack on a councillor? Heaven forbid someone disagrees with or questions the motives behind a councillor's actions... ;)

Misinterpreting text-based messages is an unfortunate reality with text-based communication mediums. What I read made me believe Fergus had spoken with C. Chandler or knows someone who had. Perhaps it's just me, but the words "...my understanding is that Chandler didn't know about this issue until recently" very strongly imply a certain meaning.

Anyways, this is nitpicking. The issue is we have a councillor or an entire set of councillors who missed the boat on a major issue. That ain't good.

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#98 UrbanRail

UrbanRail
  • Member
  • 2,114 posts
  • LocationVictoria

Posted 18 February 2008 - 05:14 PM

I am not personally involved with the interchange at all.I do take offence to a group of tree sitting protesters,some that wear balaclava's to get that revolutionary feel that makes them feel like they are important and that everyone will take notice of them. Get their 30 seconds of fame on TV and an article in the daily paper and plaster the clown show on all the so called activist sites that are on the internet. Hopefully it will make them look like heroes and some sort of warrior for the cause.This in turn will help them with more funding for their next adventure. Possibly we can see pictures of some banners hanging from the cranes at Bear Mountain,that would be grand.
Unfortunately in some peoples eyes they are seen as a bunch of activists that have nothing to offer to the City of Langford.
What will happen to the Millstream interchange and Veterans Memorial in time as Bear Mountain and the Highlands get built out? Will you be standing out there to take the heat from all the irate drivers on the road?There is no light rail to service those areas ,would be nice but it will not happen on that side of the highway.
Sooner than later there will be light rail in Langford and we can all live happily ever after!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Right Urban rail!
I don`t mean to be bias I just come across that way when some people really P*** me off!

The End



Fortunately I have better things to do than to wave a banner along side the Veterans Memorial Parkway. :)

There is no light rail to service those areas ,would be nice but it will not happen on that side of the highway.



Obviously not, at least not any time soon. A rapid bus service along Veterans Memorial Parkway/Millstream Rd is very possible in a few years time. I am surprised that there is not a frequent bus service along there. :)

#99 ressen

ressen
  • Member
  • 539 posts

Posted 18 February 2008 - 07:45 PM

The road from Bare Mountain down to the overpass is mostly already there. Once completed there will be homes built all along the side of skirt mountain with views overlooking Langford lake and the West-Hills project on the other side. On the up side; the Langford trolley will be able to do a loop instead of backtracking.

#100 Fergus

Fergus
  • Member
  • 21 posts

Posted 19 February 2008 - 10:37 AM

What I read made me believe Fergus had spoken with C. Chandler or knows someone who had. Perhaps it's just me, but the words "...my understanding is that Chandler didn't know about this issue until recently" very strongly imply a certain meaning.


Yes, indeed, my statement was based on certain information, but in hindsight I regret that I overstepped it by making a statement that in truth I don't feel I can be confident about. In the end, I don't know what she knows, when she knew it, or how she chose her timing.

Those who contend that one cannot reasonably expect a resident of the region to be in total ignorance of the issue are right. But I do think there is a lot of ignorance around the process and it's lack of openness. That has of late become more of a focal point, and process was the theme of Victoria council's concern about the project.

I know only that issues about the process were raised with her before the council discussed it, so it's possible she was ignorant of that element. That may explain why the issue was not raised earlier. On the other hand, she may already have been aware of this element and chose her timing as she did for some other reason.

I apologize for confusing the issue.

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