Wasn't it around then that the whole "Mystic Vale" controversy was in full swing? My memory is hazy.I dont seem to remember a big uproar when UVic flattened most of it for student housing / commonwealth games accommodation.
Save Haro Woods initiative against sewage treatment site
#21
Posted 11 March 2010 - 01:59 PM
#22
Posted 11 March 2010 - 11:47 PM
#23
Posted 12 March 2010 - 06:49 AM
A treatment plant can and will most likely be much smaller than this entire site.
If this was being leveled for a housing development not only would this group not exist but most likely more of the forest would be taken away.
#24
Posted 12 March 2010 - 07:29 AM
Haro Woods stretches approximately 1km, fwiw.
I agree that Haro Woods is not a great spot for this plant and would like to see it maintained as is. However it was always zoned for residential and the crd paid $6million for it. Therefore to reclaim it someone's going to have to come up with at least $6 million plus go through the process of rezoning it. Not going to happen. For all that people claim its a nature sanctuary, it was never zoned that way.
Another good point.
Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.
#25
Posted 12 March 2010 - 08:06 AM
#26
Posted 12 March 2010 - 08:48 AM
It could also be purchased by local people. If 50 houses in the area took out a $100,000 second mortgage, there would be more than enough money to buy the lands. Let the local homeowners bear the cost.
In our society too often people want private lands to fulfill public functions but are unwilling to pay for it.
How would people feel if Saanich banned fences in all of Gordon Head and stated the public should be allowed to walk through the backyards of everyone living there?
In the overall park picture, Gordon Head is better served than most of the neighbourhoods in west Saanich when it comes to parks. But that is typical in most cities, the wealthier neighbourhoods get more parks.
The overall ecological value of Haro Woods is minimal. Greenspace in urban areas serves mainly as a public amenity as it has almost unmeasurable environmental impacts good or bad.
We need to keep in mind some perspective. In BC only 5% of lands are privately held. The majority of these are not developed. The total footprint in BC from the cities where we live is less than 2% of the province, it might be 1%, but I do not have an exact number. So to me this is not really of much importance at all.
#27
Posted 12 March 2010 - 09:33 AM
It could also be purchased by local people. If 50 houses in the area took out a $100,000 second mortgage, there would be more than enough money to buy the lands. Let the local homeowners bear the cost.
I wonder if an economic case could be made for this. If 100 people each paid $50k would their property value be worth $50k more by living by a park rather than a sewage plant?
I agree though. There is way too many people that expect private lands to act as parks, just because they have an appearance of a park. My parents have a summer home in the Gulf Islands and its especially bad there. It pretty common for someone to buy an empty lot, only to deal with an outrage when they plan on building a home on it, because when it was an empty 10 acre lot other people used it like it was a park and are now outraged that they will lose access.
#28
Posted 12 March 2010 - 03:03 PM
Here in Victoria we have the Panama Flats situation. The farmer wants to grow berry crops and Saanich wants him to allow his land to be flooded all winter. Saanich should buy him out if the floodplain issues are important to the local government. It is an unfair burden to place it on him to bear the costs.
As to the sewage thing, if not there, where else? There is no way we will be allowed to not treat the sewage, in the US all boats, from the smallest pleasure craft, are banned for dumping sewage. The US Coast Guard checks for holding tanks.
So if not Haro Woods, where else do you put the sewage treatment facility?
#29
Posted 12 March 2010 - 03:56 PM
How much coverage is expected for the treatment site?
Does anybody have any ideas on this? After looking at the footprints of the plants in Sidney and Bellingham I'd have to think this Saanich facility would cover at least 50% of the site.
#30
Posted 12 March 2010 - 04:17 PM
http://maps.google.c...351.18,,0,13.78
Is it just me or are there only three little "forests" left in the entire city core (south of Mt. Doug Park)? One is behind Tillicum Mall, one is south of Ring Road at UVic, and one is slated to be cut down to size for sewage treatment.
#31
Posted 12 March 2010 - 04:21 PM
The one that bothers me the most is people that treat farm lands as public lands or nature reserves. In my old hometown of Tsawwassen one farmer stopped access of dog walkers over his land, the people were some pissed off, but he had to deal with years of damage to crops and the constant depositing of dog in the fields.
Here in Victoria we have the Panama Flats situation. The farmer wants to grow berry crops and Saanich wants him to allow his land to be flooded all winter. Saanich should buy him out if the floodplain issues are important to the local government. It is an unfair burden to place it on him to bear the costs.
As to the sewage thing, if not there, where else? There is no way we will be allowed to not treat the sewage, in the US all boats, from the smallest pleasure craft, are banned for dumping sewage. The US Coast Guard checks for holding tanks.
So if not Haro Woods, where else do you put the sewage treatment facility?
I bet NIMBY gets the most votes.
#32
Posted 12 March 2010 - 04:59 PM
Remind me again, what exactly is this property used for? (besides overflow parking for the Times-Colonist Open):
...
I believe its a Uvic plant environment facility. They own it, its on their maps, although its not labeled on the web ones. I can't see Uvic ever letting it go. Even if they didn't use it now, they would want to keep it for the future. One could say land swap ... but I see that being detrimental as its would be easier for Uvic to do what it likes with a bare field than a forest due to the NIBMY factor.
#33
Posted 12 March 2010 - 07:52 PM
Remind me again, what exactly is this property used for? (besides overflow parking for the Times-Colonist Open):
http://maps.google.c...351.18,,0,13.78
Is it just me or are there only three little "forests" left in the entire city core (south of Mt. Doug Park)? One is behind Tillicum Mall, one is south of Ring Road at UVic, and one is slated to be cut down to size for sewage treatment.
I think you could argue that the north and east slopes of Mt. Tolmie are a bit of a sparse forest, as is the back of Government House.
Mt. Tolmie
Government House
Oh, and the Lovers Lane area of BHP.
#34
Posted 12 March 2010 - 08:36 PM
#35
Posted 12 March 2010 - 09:23 PM
I'm waffling on Beacon Hill Park.
#36
Posted 12 March 2010 - 09:33 PM
#37
Posted 12 March 2010 - 09:44 PM
Remind me again, what exactly is this property used for? (besides overflow parking for the Times-Colonist Open):
UVic allows it to be used as a dog park for now. In the last year thay have reduced the space available for dogs by about 30%. They do some plant studies on 1 part and the other is used to store soil for all the construction going on. I think they are planning on growing sod as well. Eventually it will be used for buildings.
The difference between this area and Haro is there are private properties backing on to it on 2 sides not to forget the townhouse complex across the road. Distance wise from 3 sides to the middle its 300-400 metres.....too close.
Why not the Uplands school property?
Or better still build a great big one out in the landds behind Prospect lake / Frances King Park area and be done with it.
The message that the politicians are getting is its unpopular not just for the location but why its needed in the first place. Lets hope some of them have the intestinal fortitude to listen.
#38
Posted 13 March 2010 - 10:17 AM
UVic allows it to be used as a dog park for now. In the last year thay have reduced the space available for dogs by about 30%. They do some plant studies on 1 part and the other is used to store soil for all the construction going on. I think they are planning on growing sod as well. Eventually it will be used for buildings.
The difference between this area and Haro is there are private properties backing on to it on 2 sides not to forget the townhouse complex across the road. Distance wise from 3 sides to the middle its 300-400 metres.....too close.
Why not the Uplands school property?
Or better still build a great big one out in the landds behind Prospect lake / Frances King Park area and be done with it.
The message that the politicians are getting is its unpopular not just for the location but why its needed in the first place. Lets hope some of them have the intestinal fortitude to listen.
Good luck on that! SD61 is impossible to deal with, utterly sclerotic. They have land and buildings up the yingang that could be used to benefit the community. Closed schools could be re-adapted to house the homeless. They are plumbed and wired, throw up some drywall partitions, put in some showers and there you are. They have a mammoth green space at Lansdowne School that could be halved and sold off or rented on a 99-year lease to meet some of their financial needs.
#39
Posted 13 March 2010 - 10:21 AM
Uplands school is in the wrong location
#40
Posted 14 March 2010 - 02:11 PM
join in the rally for a referendum on wednesday, march 17th at 2 pm on
steps of the leg take action now!
It has been suggested that taxpayers are entitled to vote on how their money is being spent.
If this project goes ahead there will be $0.00 available for health care, seniors, transit, housing or upgrades to infrastructure for the next 15 yrs
this co$tly deci$ion will affect every community.
Make up your own sign and show up on wednesday. Make your voice count -it's not to late. Lets send a loud and clear message to minister penner taxpayers are entitled to have a say in what will affect our families for decades to come.
See you there!
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