Jump to content

      













Photo

[Johnson Street Bridge REPLACEMENT] Funding discussion


  • Please log in to reply
1517 replies to this topic

#21 North Shore

North Shore
  • Member
  • 1,655 posts

Posted 06 August 2009 - 09:56 AM

Darn, all of this exciting stuff going on while I'm away for the summer and can't hear it, or do anything to help! Count me in after ~ September 10th...
Say, what's that mountain goat doing up here in the mist?

#22 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 04:46 AM

Is the borrowing on the agenda? I don't see it unless it's under "J" with no description...

http://www.victoria....g090827_cnc.pdf

#23 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 07:36 AM

So the decision to borrow this staggering amount of money is hidden on the agenda behind a vague term "Civic Expenditures Bylaw"?

That's it?

So much for transparency in this new regime...
"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

#24 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 09:40 AM

It gets stranger....Well, I called to City Hall for clarification, I was told it's a "late item" so it has not been placed yet on the agenda that is online. I asked if I could pick up a revised agenda late this afternoon, and was told that it would not likely be available until meeting time. :confused: Come on....

#25 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 09:45 AM

^Late item...:rolleyes:

Like they didn't know this was going to happen Monday...
"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

#26 Bob Fugger

Bob Fugger

    Chief Factor

  • Member
  • 2,981 posts
  • LocationSouth Central CSV

Posted 27 August 2009 - 10:31 AM

^Late item...:rolleyes:

Like they didn't know this was going to happen Monday...


I remember once meeting a couple of guys from Ottawa in Barcelona. They were driving around Europe and since I was trying to get to Tuscany to meet with family, they agreed to let me hop in a split the expenses. We were on the road for two entire days during an unusually hot Holy Week in March and the two motels we encountered in France were so foul, that neither of us thought we would be getting any cleaner using them. And we were all recycling clothes at that point. You probably couldn't imagine what kind of stink that three unshowered, mid-20 year old men stuck in a small Puegeot for three sweltering days driving from Barcelona to Lucca makes.

I tell you, we didn't stink half as much as this ****ing bridge replacement con game.

#27 mat

mat
  • Member
  • 2,070 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 10:52 AM

In June council agreed in principle to the following - which was supposed to be clarified as policy in July. I am still trying to get confirmation from the City.

Anyone at tonight's council meeting who feels strongly about communication, transparency and public consultation as it refers to the Johnson Street Bridge may wish to raise some of these points.


From Council minutes June 11

MOTION
Considering the current OCP review process, council’s stated commitment to public engagement [emphasis mine] and the positive reputation of the IAP2 ( the International Association for Public Participation):

Let it be resolved that Council confirms its commitment to the Core Values for the Practice of Public Participation that were established by the International Association for Public Participation, and as they are stated below:


Core Values for the Practice of Public Participation
1. Public participation is based on the belief that those who are affected by a decision have a right to be involved in the decision-making process.

2. Public participation includes the promise that the public’s contribution will influence the decision.

3. Public participation promotes sustainable decisions by recognizing and communicating the needs and interests of all participants, including decision makers.

4. Public participation seeks out and facilitates the involvement of those potentially affected by or interested in a decision.

5. Public participation seeks input from participants in designing how they participate.

6. Public participation provides participants with the information they need to participate in a meaningful way.

7. Public participation communicates to participants how their input affected the decision.



In order to build on the thoughtfully developed OCP review and accompanying Neighbourhood Planning Program process that City staff have drafted for Council’s consideration; act on Council’s prior and appropriate commitment to endorse the Core Values for the Practice of Public Participation, and; capitalize on the purpose of the Core Values[1], thereby building important trust and collaboration among all key stakeholders;
Let it be resolved that Council direct staff to include in the next scheduled report (currently expected July 2009) the following:

1. A brief summary and assessment of the input provided by the public to-date.

2. Comments on how the OCP review process can consider (and document) the input of the public consistent with the Core Values for the Practice of Public Participation.

3. Options related to how the review process may include a more robust level of public participation where the community drives the process that is guided by knowledgeable staff and consultants.

4. A recommended strategy to engage a broad spectrum of public participants in a meaningful and timely process

5. Options related to the immediate development of an OCP Task Force to ensure frontend stakeholder involvement in the OCP review process.

6. The expected date that the above information will be available on the City’s website <http://www.victoria....cp.shtml#input> for public consideration, as well as options related to the direct notifications of all stakeholders at predetermined points and on an as needed basis.
[1] Purpose of the Core Values for the Practice of Public Participation according to the International Association for Public Participation <http://www.iap2.org> : to help make better decisions which reflect the interests and concerns of potentially affected people and entities.



#28 Barra

Barra
  • Member
  • 592 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 11:48 AM

Given the amount of $ that needs to be borrowed and the subsequent cost to taxpayers, I support the counter petition.

I am not necessarily against replacing the bridge, as it would provide an opportunity to adress the dangerous and awkward road configuration and also provide a safer way for bicycles to get through that area. But those issues could possibly be adressed by upgrading the current bridge and re-routing the road - it would still be expensive, as re-routing the road might mean buying back some of the Dockside Green property, but that might need to be done in either case.

The problem for the city is that they have a very narrow window (of time) for accessing federal funds, but that is their problem. I think it is worth gauging public opinion on this and the petition could be worded in a way that would require the city to provide disclosure of the costs related to the "retain and re-route" option vs. the "remove and replace" option, and asking people to sign if they favour the "retain and re-route" option.
Pieta VanDyke

#29 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 01:14 PM

The outcome of the petition is pointless because the very act of delaying construction pending the result destroys the funding timeline, correct?
"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

#30 Caramia

Caramia
  • Member
  • 3,835 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 01:18 PM

According to Ross's presentation last night, we should know about the funding before the final draft of the bylaw.
Nowadays most people die of a sort of creeping common sense, and discover when it is too late that the only things one never regrets are one's mistakes.
Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900), The Picture of Dorian Gray, 1891

#31 Holden West

Holden West

    Va va voom!

  • Member
  • 9,058 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 01:32 PM

^Good God, I would hope so. Heh, this is like dropping off a suitcase of money at The Brick and saying, send me some furniture sometime...
"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

#32 Barra

Barra
  • Member
  • 592 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 01:38 PM

Except that we don't have a bag of money and we are hoping to get at other money - i.e. federal and provincial money - and those bags don't open very often.

Having said that - the radio today reported that the city has received federal (I think) funding to dredge toxic materials from the floor of the Inner Harbour near/at Rock Bay. Work that needs to be done, IMO.
Pieta VanDyke

#33 Caramia

Caramia
  • Member
  • 3,835 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 01:41 PM

That's great news! Getting the last contamination out of that harbour is critical.

If the bridge goes through, the Northern alignment will cause an abutment to go up against contaminated soil, which will have to also be remediated. That cost was included in the $63 million price tag.
Nowadays most people die of a sort of creeping common sense, and discover when it is too late that the only things one never regrets are one's mistakes.
Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900), The Picture of Dorian Gray, 1891

#34 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 01:45 PM

The outcome of the petition is pointless because the very act of delaying construction pending the result destroys the funding timeline, correct?


I think most of us agree that we would likely only embrace the counter-petition if the upper government funding does not come through.

If we helped with a counter-petition with $42M forthcoming, it would likely look as if we were trying to block $42M, rather than trying to be fiscally responsible with the city's share of the costs.

#35 Jacques Cadé

Jacques Cadé
  • Member
  • 622 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 02:05 PM

If the bridge goes through, the Northern alignment will cause an abutment to go up against contaminated soil, which will have to also be remediated. That cost was included in the $63 million price tag.


Wait a second. We also have to remediate contaminated soil? I see "soil investigation" (supposedly done in July) on the May 21 PowerPoint schedule, but not any time for remediation. Caramia, have the results from that investigation come in?

BTW, for those interested in referenda/counter-petitions, take a gander at today's news from Cranbrook:
http://www.dailytown...ed-to-city-hall

#36 Caramia

Caramia
  • Member
  • 3,835 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 03:08 PM

No idea if they have come in or not. However, if the bridge does end up abutting onto contaminated soil, then yes, we would need to clean it up. We should be cleaning it up regardless. This is no longer an industrial wasteland. People are living and recreating in these areas.
Nowadays most people die of a sort of creeping common sense, and discover when it is too late that the only things one never regrets are one's mistakes.
Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900), The Picture of Dorian Gray, 1891

#37 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 13,864 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 03:29 PM

...we didn't stink half as much as this ****ing bridge replacement con game.


So what's the real deal here? Why do they want to replace it?

#38 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 10,321 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 04:19 PM

So what's the real deal here? Why do they want to replace it?


Follow the money. A lot of people stand to make big bucks if the work goes ahead and crazy bucks once things start to fall behind and we rush the process to meet the completion deadline.

Even if we get Federal funding it is still going to cost taxpayers at least $20M+. This for a bridge that 9 years ago the "experts" of the time claimed would last for decades.

#39 D.L.

D.L.
  • Member
  • 7,786 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 04:59 PM

The city should not be borrowing money to replace the bridge. If the city knew the bridge needed to be replaced then it should have budgeted a certain amount of money every year to be put into a savings account and then used the money to pay for the bridge replacement when the time came.

#40 Phil McAvity

Phil McAvity
  • Member
  • 1,238 posts

Posted 27 August 2009 - 05:41 PM

I'd love to know how a 150 foot bridge costs $63 million when we got a whole new downtown arena for less than half that just a few years ago. I can't imagine how anyone could even find an estimate that high.
In chains by Keynes

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.
 



1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


To advertise on VibrantVictoria, call us at 250-884-0589.