Jump to content

      












Photo

Inner Harbour of Victoria


  • Please log in to reply
177 replies to this topic

#41 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 5,036 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 06 October 2008 - 01:51 PM

Some industries do better with access to water. In general all bulk goods or commodities do much better when there is access to a port. The scrap metal place is a good example of a good use of the location, but given the changing nature of the neighbourhood, how will it survive?

The bulk commodity thing works both ways - we have needs in this region for some bulk commodities and could have more industry if there was access to the water.

As an example, and yes not a strong one at the moment, there is no reason we could not have a speciality sawmill on the inner harbour. Logs are regularly brought down the coast and up the Fraser to numerous specialty mills in the lower mainland. That could be us here expect for the lack of waterfront industrial lands that are not taxed through the roof.

Is it in the interests of this region not have any industrial activity? I do not think so.

As it stands, I suspect that within in 10 years of Dockside Green being in place, there will be a strong movement from the residents to get limitations on Point Hope Shipyard.

#42 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 16,307 posts

Posted 06 October 2008 - 02:14 PM

Is a specialty sawmill a different sort of sawmill than what was on the Selkirk before it was redeveloped?



Located on a former brownfield site, the owners of Selkirk originally bought the land with the intention of continuing its traditional use as an industrial site. Their plans changed when they received a proposal from architect Franc D'Ambrosio and his associates who had recognized the site's potential for a unique mixed-use community. Understanding D'Ambrosio's vision, developers worked with the architects to put forth a vision of Selkirk as a community that could provide a social hub for the city's fragmented northern neighbourhoods as well as to reconnect and restore the section of the Gorge waterfront that had been cut off from the public for many years through industrial uses that produced significant environmental damage.


Picture from http://www.canadiana...12006&PC==

In the 1960s, much of this waterway shared one characteristic of many British Columbian coastal cities. Its polluted water was wedged between equally toxic industrial lands even as the city's small industrial job population of 5,000 was shrinking.


As major environmental clean-up of the once toxic gorge and Selkirk Waters proceeded and new proposals to develop residential units bloomed around the harbour, concern shifted to protecting its working function. "By the 1990s," states the Greater Victoria Harbour Authority (GVHA), "there was a growing awareness...that unless the booming development of condominiums along the waterfront was controlled, it would have a serious impact on future 'working harbour' activities." This led to the establishment of the Harbour Advisory Committee in 1996.


http://www.building....sue=10012007=

#43 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 16,307 posts

Posted 06 October 2008 - 02:24 PM

...I suspect that within in 10 years of Dockside Green being in place, there will be a strong movement from the residents to get limitations on Point Hope Shipyard.


You're probably right. A lot of people who move to Victoria (or who move into downtown from other areas of Victoria) just aren't prepared for it. They immediately make it their mission in life to try to change the city to suit their misconceptions.

I suggest officialdom in Victoria should stop fostering misconceptions. But it's probably too late for that tact to have much impact.

#44 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 5,036 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 06 October 2008 - 02:45 PM

To me a specialty sawmill is one that deals with a smaller volume of timber but produces a higher end specialty product for the market. As an example is a reman plant I know of in Lillooet that made finger jointed 2x2s for motor homes and garage doors. Other examples are the cedar mills along the Fraser. So yes, this is something different than classic 2x4 sawmill.

Industry does bring pollution and environmental risks, but in my mind these risks are acceptable in the context of most bulk commodities because of the reduced transportation costs.

I suspect that we simply will have to accept the fact that over time there will be no industrial uses of the Victoria harbour. I think that is shortsighted and will lead to a community disconnected from how goods come into existence and the loss of ever more blue collar jobs.

#45 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 16,307 posts

Posted 06 October 2008 - 03:20 PM

You're probably right again, but it would be neat if we could be innovative about how we mix tourism, residential development, and industry in close proximity together.

That scrap heap over by the Selkirk there used to bug the heck out of me, I'll admit it. But now that I'm older and more mellow, I find myself wondering why it just couldn't be made to look less offensive while otherwise remaining exactly as it is.

As for noise concerns, I think any new condo, office, or hotel complex in the vicinity of the harbour should have to satisfy some predefined soundproofing criteria right out of the box (when the windows are shut, of course).

#46 Ms. B. Havin

Ms. B. Havin
  • Member
  • 5,052 posts

Posted 06 October 2008 - 08:28 PM

Project for Public Spaces makes some arguments in favor of strictly limiting residential components in waterfront land use. Not sure I agree with all of their points, but reading point #2 on this page reminded me of the brouhaha around late-night eateries, blah-blah-blah, etc.:

Great waterfronts are not dominated by residential development. Why? Because the best waterfronts are full of people day and night. They are the sites of festivals, markets, fireworks displays, concerts, spontaneous celebrations and other high-energy gatherings. A high concentration of residential development undermines the diversity of waterfront use by creating pressure to prevent nighttime activity from flourishing.


When you buy a game, you buy the rules. Play happens in the space between the rules.

#47 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 16,307 posts

Posted 06 October 2008 - 08:41 PM

A high concentration of residential development undermines the diversity of waterfront use by creating pressure to prevent nighttime activity from flourishing.


Curiously, much of downtown Victoria has little in the way of residential development, and yet there's pressure to prevent nighttime activity from flourishing (pressure from the police department and city hall).

#48 mat

mat
  • Member
  • 2,070 posts

Posted 06 October 2008 - 09:36 PM

It is hard in this thread not to make the case for a Granville Island concept - there is a geographical/demographic relevance to False Creek and the Inner Harbour, and the planning changes that started back in the late 1970's in Vancouver.

Granville Island is a daily use, mixed commercial zone surrounded by high density development, but can never be used as a 'crowd' point for large events. Vancouver has other close downtown areas for that.

There are areas on both sides of the inner harbour that could be kept small industrial, with markets, studios etc. and act as a focal community point, as well as promoting tourism (Granville Island is #2 after Stanley Park in Vancouver global awareness)

- one point on this. The Cement works on Granville Island have never been a real issue with residents.

Float Planes - regarding complaints on noise. Coal Harbour has the most frequent sea-plane schedule in the world. Are the local Vancouver residents complaining? (NO). Regular flights come right over our house in Gordon Head, but we, and our neighbours often wave to the pilots and get a 'wing wave' (passengers reaching for sick bags!). The 1450 Harbour Air flight lets me know my son is about to arrive from school - love it!

#49 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 06 October 2008 - 10:55 PM

Float Planes - regarding complaints on noise. Coal Harbour has the most frequent sea-plane schedule in the world. Are the local Vancouver residents complaining? (NO). Regular flights come right over our house in Gordon Head, but we, and our neighbours often wave to the pilots and get a 'wing wave' (passengers reaching for sick bags!). The 1450 Harbour Air flight lets me know my son is about to arrive from school - love it!


I was thinking about this today. Is somehow Coal Harbour father away from residential than our harbour? I guess it is a bit, but it is awful close to the Pan Pacific etc.

Hmmm here is a bit of a complaint:

http://www.straight....s-oppose-planes

Shoal Point residents seem happy enough:

http://shoalpointcom...craft_noise.htm

#50 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,166 posts

Posted 07 October 2008 - 06:31 AM

SPANC that is a funny acronym. TEE-HEE

#51 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 16,307 posts

Posted 07 October 2008 - 09:53 AM

Folks in Vancouver also complain royally about the floatplanes, yes.

Coal Harbour resident Doug McClelland, who lives on a houseboat, doesn't want to put up with another three years of floatplanes firing up their engines at 6:30 a.m.

Reaching for earplugs and trying to get back to sleep has been the wine agent's daily routine since the floatplane terminal moved three years ago to its temporary location at 1075 West Waterfront Road. By 7 a.m., the planes are taxiing for takeoff...

"There's a plane taking off or landing every five minutes on weekdays," McClelland said. "The fumes come up where residents are and they can't even use their balconies. When they clean the buildings, the water turns black from the soot."

He met up with the Georgia Straight one Sunday at the Harbour Green Park, which sits across from the terminal, and at times the sound of the engines drowned his voice out. Depending on the wind's direction, the smell of aviation fuel was noticeable at the children's water playground, a major feature of the park.

"We have nothing against these planes," McClelland said. "They're a part of the harbour, but they're also causing an impact on the residents."

http://www.straight....s-oppose-planes



Comments in opposition included:
Thought the float planes would have to move on the expiry of the three year term regardless of whether they had a place to move to or not.

  • The float planes operate 14 hours a day, 365 days a year with much noise and air pollution.
  • No single authority to complain to in order resolve issues with the operators.
  • Would like to see the number of take offs and landings remain at the present level.
  • Operators need to define operational hours with nothing before 7:00 AM.
  • Concern that promises continue to be broken by the operators with no consequences.
  • Rowers from the Coal Harbour Rowing Club get deluged with particulate matter when the planes are landing or taking off.
  • No contact person at City Hall.
  • Is a float plane operation in the downtown part of Coal Harbour necessary? Are there other alternatives?
  • During maintenance the applicant’s employees play loud music on their radios.
  • Could a west bound approach be used as there is not as much noise?
  • Development of the Convention Centre along with new marinas is cutting off the rowing channel that has existed since 1887.
  • Can’t open windows or use decks and balconies when the planes land or take off because of the noise and air pollution.
  • Don’t want the planes to leave but they could become better neighbours.
  • How big can the area get before it becomes too congested or too dangerous?
  • If the float planes had been included in the expansion of the Convention Centre we would not be here.
  • Would the Board consider the application for 1 year with a possibility of an extension for a maximum of 3 years?
  • Ask the float plane operators to give a plan for reducing their pollution and noise.
  • Has there been an environmental impact study?
  • Would like to see no engine noise after 8:00 PM. Recently they have gone as late as 8:45 PM.
  • Would like to see the operators consider scheduling the last flight a little bit earlier to keep in line with 8:00 PM.

http://www.city.vanc...nutes/jul16.htm


People in other areas of the city also complain about planes flying overhead, as they do on the Saanich Peninsula and other areas of Victoria that aren't in close proximity to the floatplane terminals:

I have lived in the Kitsilano area for more than 30 years and have seen a marked increase in the number of floatplanes flying the north-south route from Coal Harbour to Vancouver International Airport.

In talking to hundreds of residents about this, one of the biggest complaints has been the amount of noise generated by these floatplanes and the unwillingness of Transport Canada to do anything.

Sixty flights a day over the same area, subjecting residents to an unwarranted amount of noise, is too much.

I agree that moving next to a freeway and then complaining about the traffic is ridiculous, but this is about sustained noise that long-term residents of certain Vancouver neighbourhoods have had to put up with for too long.

Should 18 hours of flights every day over the same area be considered an acceptable part of city living?

http://www.lestwarog...ticle-1515.html

#52 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 16,307 posts

Posted 07 October 2008 - 10:03 AM

The funny thing about that Kitsilano comment is that the noise from airliners going to and from the airport can be very obvious even in Kitsilano/Point Grey. The airliners fly right overhead and if the conditions are right, airport traffic can sound like thunder. The floatplanes are like mosquitoes buzzing around by comparison.

#53 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 13,166 posts

Posted 07 October 2008 - 02:07 PM

...marked increase in the number of floatplanes flying the north-south route from Coal Harbour to Vancouver International Airport.


I am sure this is a very profitable routing. Makes you wonder why they bothered with the Canada Line to YVR.

#54 Bernard

Bernard
  • Member
  • 5,036 posts
  • LocationVictoria BC

Posted 07 October 2008 - 03:00 PM

I note that the people in Vancouver are talking about 14 hours a day. This is only possible a few months of the year. Flights have to be conducted with enough time to have daylight where you are landing.

Most of the year the flights do not occur much beyond business hours. They do not start early enough at any time of the year to have an impact on sleep unless you sleep during the day.

I live under the flight path here in Victoria for the flights in some wind conditions. They fly low enough that they feel close. They do not make that much sound when they are in the air.

Once again, what are people thinking when they move to a working habour? There is no need to have housing on the waterfront, there is a lot of need to have industrial lands on the waterfront.

#55 mat

mat
  • Member
  • 2,070 posts

Posted 07 October 2008 - 07:23 PM

I am sure this is a very profitable routing. Makes you wonder why they bothered with the Canada Line to YVR.


Lovely call on a badly stated argument - living in Kits (I grew up there - and will be back this weekend for Thanksgiving weekend with the Family), the aircraft noise is nothing compared to traffic, neighbours, garbage trucks - the normal everyday experience of high density city living.

The float plane complainers need to come up with a positive, realistic alternative to the current harbour usage situation - rather than just sit back and gripe.

#56 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 9,776 posts

Posted 07 October 2008 - 07:46 PM

We are known for having exceptionally skilled traffic control overseeing the safe arrival and leavings by both sea and air.



Just FYI - there is no air traffic control exercised in the harbour. There is a Flight Service Station that provides weather and other pertinent information to the pilots but they are operating on their own judgement.

Should traffic levels increase significantly or there are some incidents/accidents NavCanada would then make a decision as to whether an air traffic control facility was required such as in Vancouver harbour.
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#57 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 16,307 posts

Posted 07 October 2008 - 08:58 PM

...living in Kits (I grew up there - and will be back this weekend for Thanksgiving weekend with the Family), the aircraft noise is nothing compared to traffic, neighbours, garbage trucks...


Indeed. The B-line bus is far and away the biggest noise issue in that part of town. Why somebody would single out the floatplanes, I have no idea.

#58 jaylow

jaylow
  • Member
  • 188 posts

Posted 08 October 2008 - 09:00 AM

There is an article in Focus Magazine this month called "Inner Harbour Racket"
It mentions that there is a Friends of victoria harbour group, with there spokesperson being someone who has lived on the songhees for 13 years.
Interesting read.

#59 Sue Woods

Sue Woods
  • Member
  • 621 posts

Posted 08 October 2008 - 04:43 PM

Just FYI - there is no air traffic control exercised in the harbour. There is a Flight Service Station that provides weather and other pertinent information to the pilots but they are operating on their own judgement.


Are you certain. If so, I stand corrected.

I based my info an a radio show I did featuring the history of our Harbours Ferries. When the issue came up about how all the air/sea traffic was managed, I was told it was tightly and well controlled by a central body. I guess I just assumed it fell under the Harbour Master's jurisdiction.

Always good to learn more tho'.

Cheers, Sue

#60 Joseph

Joseph
  • Member
  • 80 posts

Posted 08 October 2008 - 05:37 PM

A friend of mine is training to be a commercial pilot, and I know that air traffic control is fairly careful when it comes to flying in/around the inner harbour. Doesn't mean they have full responsibility, but it's not like a free-for-all flight zone either.

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