Jump to content

      












Photo

[Langford] South Skirt Mountain | 2,800 homes | Under construction


  • Please log in to reply
139 replies to this topic

#21 VicDuck

VicDuck

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 409 posts

Posted 19 June 2009 - 10:42 PM

I hope VIC FAN wins this and stops this disgusting development.

#22 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 66,126 posts

Posted 08 November 2009 - 07:06 PM

An annual broom clearing event has been halted by Langford and a threat of arrest has been issued by a lawyer representing Klara Kramer, a landowner who had previously given verbal permission to the group of individuals preparing to clear an invasive species from her property.

Threat of arrests halts annual invasive species removal on Skirt Mountain
By Steven Hurdle, VibrantVictoria.ca
http://vibrantvictoria.ca/?p=1338

The “Kramer Lands” are on the south-east side of Skirt Mountain in Langford. Ms. Clara Kramer has owned them, largely undeveloped, for decades, but they have become newsworthy in recent years. It was the “Kramer Lands” that was the last parcel the City of Langford needed permission to enter to be able to begin construction of the Spencer
Road Interchange, ultimately leading to the eviction of a civil disobedience tree sit in the path of the interchange. Skirt Mountain, for its part, has gained region-wide notoriety as the mountain hosting Bear Mountain Resort at its top, and the massive South Skirt Mountain development on its south face.

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


#23 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,596 posts

Posted 20 March 2010 - 06:53 PM

Skirt Mountain rezoning case heads to court
Times Colonist March 20, 2010
http://www.timescolo...l#ixzz0imA6PVlN

Forest Action Network director Zoe Blunt is alleging the City of Langford abused public process during a public hearing in February 2009 when Mayor Stew Young interrupted and engaged in debate with speakers.

Public pressure saw the municipality hold a second hearing into the rezoning March 16 when Young was out of town. Final reading to the bylaw was given in June.



#24 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 21 March 2010 - 09:00 AM

^But they used to say the exact same thing about the Carmanah/Clayoquot protesters until the government and the forest companies admitted the protesters were right, even if their methods were illegal. So I'm withholding judgement this time around.
"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

#25 jklymak

jklymak
  • Member
  • 3,514 posts

Posted 21 March 2010 - 09:05 AM

^^ So your view is that they are just cynically opposing cutting down forest stands for their own fame and not for any altruistic motive.

How would you prefer they oppose projects like this? Or are you suggesting they have no right to oppose it?

#26 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 21 March 2010 - 09:13 AM

Forest Action Network director Zoe Blunt is alleging the City of Langford abused public process during a public hearing in February 2009 when Mayor Stew Young interrupted and engaged in debate with speakers.

Public pressure saw the municipality hold a second hearing into the rezoning March 16 when Young was out of town. Final reading to the bylaw was given in June.

Although I admit I don't know why the second public hearing didn't fix the definitely flawed first meeting Stew Young screwed up.
"Beaver, ahoy!""The bridge is like a magnet, attracting both pedestrians and over 30,000 vehicles daily who enjoy the views of Victoria's harbour. The skyline may change, but "Big Blue" as some call it, will always be there."
-City of Victoria website, 2009

#27 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 17,336 posts

Posted 21 March 2010 - 10:43 AM

That`s the trouble with groups like the Forest Action Network,they love to spend money that other people donate to their cause,these groups love the attention the media shows them,the news sometimes travels world wide, other environmentally friendly people read about it jump on the band wagon and presto what a recipe to build on.The donations start rolling in and the select one spokes person gets their picture on the front page,they must love it what a total waste of time for the BC Supreme Court.
But then again the one spokesperson will get their 30 seconds of fame on the media web.


You don't have any evidence to support your claim that the Forest Action Network is spending money on this action that was donated for other purposes. As a matter of fact, I read elsewhere that the UVIC environmental law society was donating resources for this challenge.

If the claim had no merit then the BC Supreme Court would not hear it.

How about we assign blame where blame is due. If Langford council had managed to keep their mouths shut and allow a proper public hearing then this would never have happened and they would probably be building on Skirt by now.

#28 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 17,336 posts

Posted 21 March 2010 - 10:45 AM

Although I admit I don't know why the second public hearing didn't fix the definitely flawed first meeting Stew Young screwed up.


Zoe claims that council behaviour in the first public hearing discouraged participation in the second. The courts will have to decide the merits of that claim.

#29 Maverick

Maverick
  • Member
  • 129 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 04:46 AM

Like I said what a total waste of time and money for the BC Supreme Court.As far as the U Vic Law Society is concerned, where does their money come from?Donated resources come on now.In my opinion the uvic environmental law society is just a breeding ground for people like the director making this challenge in the supreme court of BC.As far as the claim having no merit what a joke give me a break.Assign blame,if you were the mayor sitting up front and had to sit and listen to time and again from the same one or two persons,you would do exactly what the mayor does.You can not let someone with a background such as the director making this challenge, tell you the mayor that was elected by the people how to run a municipality and how to do his job to the best of his ability and what is best for the people of this surrounding community.One only has to look at the background of this director to see what she is all about.Anyone has aright to oppose anything one only has to look at her motives and background.

#30 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,596 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 07:23 AM

Like I said what a total waste of time and money for the BC Supreme Court.As far as the U Vic Law Society is concerned, where does their money come from?Donated resources come on now.In my opinion the uvic environmental law society is just a breeding ground for people like the director making this challenge in the supreme court of BC.As far as the claim having no merit what a joke give me a break.Assign blame,if you were the mayor sitting up front and had to sit and listen to time and again from the same one or two persons,you would do exactly what the mayor does.You can not let someone with a background such as the director making this challenge, tell you the mayor that was elected by the people how to run a municipality and how to do his job to the best of his ability and what is best for the people of this surrounding community.One only has to look at the background of this director to see what she is all about.Anyone has aright to oppose anything one only has to look at her motives and background.

Goes back to the "We know what's best for you." attitude.
And are we simply to blindly trust elected officials? Not ever question council?

#31 Rob Randall

Rob Randall

    BIG TEXAS FORUMER

  • Member
  • 16,310 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 08:11 AM

if you were the mayor sitting up front and had to sit and listen to time and again from the same one or two persons,you would do exactly what the mayor does.You can not let someone with a background such as the director making this challenge, tell you the mayor that was elected by the people how to run a municipality and how to do his job to the best of his ability and what is best for the people of this surrounding community.


I've been to quite a few Victoria Council meetings and let me tell you, at nearly every one, a well-known contrarian or two will get up and speak on virtually any issue. Despite being a minority of one, Council listens respectfully. Langfordites should come out here some time and see how the big kids do it.

“I mean I just don’t understand the big Texas part, like maybe he’s from Texas? I want to know the back story.”


#32 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 17,336 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 03:46 PM

Blame who you want but the fact of the matter is that by the time everything is said and done, developers will have been delayed at least 1 year and perhaps 2 years on this project. That cost money and if I were the developer community I would be asking myself whether Stew is becoming a liability.

#33 mysage

mysage
  • Member
  • 515 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 03:49 PM

I've been to quite a few Victoria Council meetings and let me tell you, at nearly every one, a well-known contrarian or two will get up and speak on virtually any issue. Despite being a minority of one, Council listens respectfully. Langfordites should come out here some time and see how the big kids do it.


Really? Are those the same "big kids" that took years and years to build a marginally successful arena project, the same" big kids" that have been petitioned to a standstill on their deteriorating bridge, the same "big kids" that don't have enough backbone to deal with their graffiti problem etc etc.

I think that you might have them mixed up. The big kids are out here in the Western Communities -the rest are just holding office and hoping that nothing too serious happens on their watch.

#34 Guest_Marcat_*

Guest_Marcat_*
  • Guests

Posted 22 March 2010 - 04:30 PM

If I hear Victoria City Council referred to as the "big kids" again I'm going to bang my head into the wall and if I hear the Western Communities Council's referred to as the "big kids" again I'm gunna double bang my head into the wall.

I will give mysage ONE point, his synopsis of the Victoria City Council is bang on the spot. They are too scared to do anything. But calling Langford Council the "big kids" I hardly think so. Langford Council is the rudest, most respectfulness bunch of "polished" hillbillies." If you want to see how the "BIG KIDS" get stuff done, take a gander at a council meeting in Vancouver or Surrey, they actually get business taken care of in a somewhat expedient manner without cussing out members of the public and dragging their toes like a bunch of old tea grannies scared to step on anyone's toes.

Bear Mountain AND Skirt Mountain are becoming a prime example on how NOT to take care of business and how NOT to run a municipal Council. Thanks to the complete mismanagement and bow down to Len Barrie the Langford Council is left holding a rather embarrassing can of worms from the overpass to nowhere to a litany of other misdeeds and kerfuffles that Bear Mounain has caused because Langford Council, led by the infamous Stew Young were doe eyed to the great promises of Len Barrie and his cronies.

As for the ridiculous claims by Zoe Blunt, Maverick does actually have a good point, its a waste of damn money. Stew Young did engaged with opponents of the project, fine, he shouldn't have, ok. BUT if a majority of people are so opposed to this project in any other situation Stew Young's actions SHOULD have emboldened the response of the public and marched en mass on further re-zoning related meetings but it did not. This whole action is a despicable waste of time and money where resources could be better used on job creation instead of pipe dreams of a few.

#35 Maverick

Maverick
  • Member
  • 129 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 05:47 PM

If I hear Victoria City Council referred to as the "big kids" again I'm going to bang my head into the wall and if I hear the Western Communities Council's referred to as the "big kids" again I'm gunna double bang my head into the wall.

I will give mysage ONE point, his synopsis of the Victoria City Council is bang on the spot. They are too scared to do anything. But calling Langford Council the "big kids" I hardly think so. Langford Council is the rudest, most respectfulness bunch of "polished" hillbillies." If you want to see how the "BIG KIDS" get stuff done, take a gander at a council meeting in Vancouver or Surrey, they actually get business taken care of in a somewhat expedient manner without cussing out members of the public and dragging their toes like a bunch of old tea grannies scared to step on anyone's toes.

Bear Mountain AND Skirt Mountain are becoming a prime example on how NOT to take care of business and how NOT to run a municipal Council. Thanks to the complete mismanagement and bow down to Len Barrie the Langford Council is left holding a rather embarrassing can of worms from the overpass to nowhere to a litany of other misdeeds and kerfuffles that Bear Mounain has caused because Langford Council, led by the infamous Stew Young were doe eyed to the great promises of Len Barrie and his cronies.

As for the ridiculous claims by Zoe Blunt, Maverick does actually have a good point, its a waste of damn money. Stew Young did engaged with opponents of the project, fine, he shouldn't have, ok. BUT if a majority of people are so opposed to this project in any other situation Stew Young's actions SHOULD have emboldened the response of the public and marched en mass on further re-zoning related meetings but it did not. This whole action is a despicable waste of time and money where resources could be better used on job creation instead of pipe dreams of a few.


A despicable waste of money is putting it mildly,one only has to go back to the tree sit and look at what Vic FAN has cost the taxpayers to get them out of the trees.Stu should engage with the opponents of the project and he should put them in their place.People get sick and tired of groups like FAN telling people how to run their lives.Some projects do not go as well as one would hope sometimes but in the end it will get done.When you look back on some things we can all think of better ways to go about doing things,but please we cannot bow down to a bunch of environmental activists that want to tell us how to develop our communities.

#36 mysage

mysage
  • Member
  • 515 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 05:48 PM

I am a loss to how, after all this time, the highway interchange is still looked at as a Len Barrie/Bear Mountain issue.

Len Barrie is a beneficiary, without doubt but let's not forget that the South Skirt Mountain development group, plus the Westhills development group plus a myriad of other smaller developers also benefit greatly form his road work . I would argue that they benefit far more than Len Barrie benefits. This enables Bear Mountain to increase their build out perhaps but they can get along without it. They already have built two golf courses a hotel over thousand homes etc etc.The South Skirt developers need it to build out anything at all.

If Westhills had been first in the development of the Westshore they would be the principle target for all of this anti this and anti that rhetoric. In reality it was en Barrie so he gets the shots

Further to this - so what if they benefit? Unless the government (you and I) pony up the money to build the thousands of homes that will be required in the coming decades it will fall upon the private sector. I would rather the governments assist the private sector than to take on the greater risk and costs of building the those 10,000+/- homes.

#37 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 17,336 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 07:01 PM

I am a loss to how, after all this time, the highway interchange is still looked at as a Len Barrie/Bear Mountain issue.


It is a Len Barrie issue insofaras it was his signature on the documents agreeing to repay the $29M borrowed by the City of Langford. Maybe he was dumb to do that and he should have waited for Westhill and/or Skirt to sign up as well, but I seem to recall it was in his interest to get the road built as he was in the process of selling part of the mountain to a Quigg and that was a condition of the sale!

No doubt that Langford is now trying to get Skirt and Westhills involved and no doubt Stew wanted to steamroll the process for Skirt to try and recover the funds that Barrie can't repay, but that wasn't the original deal no matter how many times people say it was.

#38 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 10,855 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 07:08 PM

. Langford Council is the rudest, most respectfulness bunch of "polished" hillbillies." .


So are they rude or respectful? One of those adjectives isn't correct.:P
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#39 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 10,855 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 07:12 PM

,but please we cannot bow down to a bunch of environmental activists that want to tell us how to develop our communities.


You left out the word NOT between "to" and "develop".:rolleyes:

Agree totally. There is never a shortage of individuals who want to tell you how to spend your money to do things they want.
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#40 Maverick

Maverick
  • Member
  • 129 posts

Posted 22 March 2010 - 07:24 PM

Thank You

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