Comments on North Vancouver Politics.com: First Community Garden: District of North Vancouve...

Regretably no matter HOW low taxes are kept (and I...

2009-07-24T23:24:41.854-07:00

Regretably no matter HOW low taxes are kept (and I agree with my good friend Eric from Blueridge that tax increases in the 4-5% range cannot in any reasonable way be considered "sustainable") you can expect to see tax increases from Metro Vancouver, the GV Water District and Translink ALL at least twice the rate of inflation in nearly every single one of the next 10 years.

I'm sympathetic when it comes to water and to sewage as these costs are definitely predictable but I'm totally UN-sympathetic with Translink for the following reasons:

(a) they support the current property assessment based levy which causes North Vancouver ratepayers to pay far more than their share of the what the levy would be on a per capita basis,

(b) I frankly don't see the fiscal responsibility I expect to see from Translink - I am NOT saying I think the DNV finance department is doing a fabulous unbelievabily great job but there's no question in my mind that they at least are TRYING to keep their pencils sharp unlike Translink who however much they take they want / need more

(c) we've not seen federal or provincial governments stepping up to transit funding

(d) I am deeply suspicious when Translink wants to get involved in the urban planning process

On community gardens I say again that while I'm not opposed to the concept it needs to be primarily grass roots driven and NOT top down from the District (or City) of North Vancouver.

A reduction in taxes would make them more popular....

2009-07-22T11:18:06.571-07:00

A reduction in taxes would make them more popular.

If they got Transit working on the North Shore, wo...

2009-07-20T20:23:02.720-07:00

If they got Transit working on the North Shore, would that not make them look good? I can't think of anything else that would make them look so good.

Not a chance. The mayor and councillors only go fo...

2009-07-20T19:12:33.613-07:00

Not a chance. The mayor and councillors only go for things that make them look good in the public’s image.

The lack of accountability coupled with the absence of mechanisms to measure successes or failures will always result in the taxpayers money being misdirected and wasted.

If our City councillors and mayor were truly inter...

2009-07-20T14:08:24.614-07:00

If our City councillors and mayor were truly interested in green alternatives, they would be pushing Translink for service to the North Shore that offers a true alternative to the automobile. Make transit convenient. Make the service so good that using a car is not a viable choice. Council, Mayor, are you listening?

A city talks the talk about going green but is it ...

2009-07-20T09:42:50.459-07:00

A city talks the talk about going green but is it all lip service? Where does all the funding for the LEC come from? Why are the solar panels on top of the library being covered?

I think that the mayor and councillors are tricking the public by giving the false perception that they are implementing green cost effective alternatives. Does the city have the expertise within, capable of researching, implementing, and maintaining cost effective green solutions? Until the true costs of the LEC and an honest assessment of the solar panels are released I think not.

I'm not against community gardens either but every...

2009-07-16T16:36:18.776-07:00

I'm not against community gardens either but every project has a price tag and not all price tags are worth it.

Mike Little's "don't give dollars, give land and water hookups" makes sense to me since right now DNV doesn't have the dollars but definitely has the land and water.

This is something that SHOULD be 'grass roots' or 'from the ground up' rather than 'top down' from municipal government. (Apologies for the outrageous puns but you know what I mean!)

Heywood, Clark and Perrault did not vote against a...

2009-07-16T12:29:13.198-07:00

Heywood, Clark and Perrault did not vote against a community garden; they voted against spending $85,000.00 to create one. If the NVD can support a community garden with a $15,000 one-time grant, those three City councillors questioning the cost makes sense. There's no doubt that the 2nd Street Community garden is beautiful. The gardeners are doing a super job, and there is a long waiting list for plots. No doubt, the Queen Mary CG will also be a great success.

Still, it is reasonable to ask, especially when revenues are down, where community gardens rank in the long list of deserving projects?

Are you serious? Someone actually voted against a ...

2009-07-16T09:18:41.194-07:00

Are you serious? Someone actually voted against a community garden? LOL. Someone must have been having a very bad day...

On Dec. 8, 2003 NVC Council approved the provision...

2009-07-15T19:19:16.824-07:00

On Dec. 8, 2003 NVC Council approved the provision of $85,000.00 to fund the Community Garden on Second Street. Fearnley, Mussatto, Keating and Sharp voted in favour; Perrault, Clark and Heywood voted against.

The main problem is the cost. Personally I don't ...

2009-07-15T14:40:54.360-07:00

The main problem is the cost.

Personally I don't think the City or District should be providing anything except land and perhaps a water connection or two.

The bottom line is that if DNV gives $2000 to the Rec Commission for new exercise equipment the new treadmill, weights, etc. will be used by hundreds of people per month.

A $2000 grant for a community garden plot (which is what they're suggesting a single plot takes to outfit) serves maybe one or two people.

I have no problem with the concept but given how many people use the exercise equipment vs. how many use a plot this is a tough one to support.

Sorry folks, but I >DON'T< think this should be driven primarily by City or District Councils - if it's to support grass-root efforts (no pun intended) then great but public resources are simply not great enough to meet all desires.

Thank you for that enlightening statement, Anon 5:...

2009-07-14T20:21:17.414-07:00

Thank you for that enlightening statement, Anon 5:26. In case you hadn't noticed, we have density. Low, medium and high. Right here in CNV. The idea is to place the various levels of density where it makes sense and where it will do the most good.

Density belongs in Surrey, not the CNV.

2009-07-14T17:26:42.339-07:00

Density belongs in Surrey, not the CNV.

Monster project defines the Bewicke scenario. Had ...

2009-07-14T11:34:20.846-07:00

Monster project defines the Bewicke scenario. Had it been "smart" density defined as liveable - not each 50ft lot with a fullsize duplex, AND a single family home, AND five parking spaces - there would not have been opposition. This was purely greed on the part of developers. A project providing family accommodation (smaller units) maybe rowhouses would have made sense. The argument was NOT against density purely, it was the type of density and the "gift" of the density to the group with NO community benefit.

Monster project? It was the density of a garden a...

2009-07-14T07:38:44.291-07:00

Monster project? It was the density of a garden apartment for crying out loud! On a street with other garden apartments! It's got nothing to do with party affiliations, it's about placing the density where it belongs. Namely, adjacent commercial and transit corridors.

Yeah, I used to live right near there. A monster ...

2009-07-14T05:12:26.142-07:00

Yeah, I used to live right near there.

A monster project like that doesn't belong in the CNV. The creative manipulation of the law landed the City in court. It clearly and legally lost a vote but staff made up some "Yes Minister" interpretation that said a vote wasn't really legally binding since it disagreed with what they wanted.

I was also at most of the Council meetings on this and your words are like the NDP three who based their argument on the logic that if you tripled the people and parking spots but the magic of "ecodensity" would not triple the the green house gases emitted.

This falsehood continues in many projects pushed by the new NDP three. If you triple the people but achieve less per person GHG effect, it doesn't actually reduce GHG.

Have you seen the area of Bewicke in question? Ri...

2009-07-13T20:36:41.107-07:00

Have you seen the area of Bewicke in question? Right off Marine and adjacent commercial and light industrial, not to mention transit. It's where the proposed density belongs!

Your typification of "fear tactics" is really lett...

2009-07-13T15:52:50.917-07:00

Your typification of "fear tactics" is really letting people know what the developers, the city politicians and the staff are up to. If residents come together to stop a project that the "elite" group know is best for us yahoos, then that's what is best for us. Democracy rules.

It makes sense to you to fill the transit and commercial corridors with high rises until by your anon words "a change is warranted". That is when you filled the rest with as high as you can get away with. Then you come for the rest of the city. Little examples of what was tried (and the CNV is in court about) in Bewicke will be the norm of what was called residential area. Little condos units replace all family homes.

Take a look at Richmond. Condos have replaced single family houses, far more density than the duplex zoo come are pushing for here.

should that have read: "quantity six plots, each o...

2009-07-13T13:00:36.333-07:00

should that have read: "quantity six plots, each of them to be one foot high" ??

Those who want a vibrant city with a self-sufficie...

2009-07-13T10:47:46.027-07:00

Those who want a vibrant city with a self-sufficient business and residential core are wrong? We're not talking about a city of high rises, but placing density where it makes the most sense, George. That is, commercial and transit corridors. Leave the rest to lower densities until a change is warranted. Your fear tactics are old and tiresome.

Calgary is not 5 sq miles. It's a fact that someda...

2009-07-13T08:04:34.785-07:00

Calgary is not 5 sq miles. It's a fact that someday we will run out of land and new development will stop. The only question is when we stop, how far we have will degraded our standard living that results?

Those who want the short term cash at the expense of the our future is wrong.

So George, you would continue the unsustainable an...

2009-07-12T20:18:48.429-07:00

So George, you would continue the unsustainable and expensive practice of low density (read detached single-family homes)? Look where that is getting Calgary.

In the EU virtually all area of public domain, inc...

2009-07-12T19:46:55.367-07:00

In the EU virtually all area of public domain, including areas under power lines are made available for public growing plots.

They are made available through public agencies and administered to ensure all available land is grown, seeded and weeded to best local practices.

It gives apartment dwellers a chance to experience the simple pleasure of growing and eating ( or cutting flowers) that which they might / would not be able to experience otherwise.

We should import this practice to both the north shore and all parts of the lower mainland.

David Dixon

Just because there are towers already is not reaso...

2009-07-12T14:11:46.432-07:00

Just because there are towers already is not reason to build more.

George, there are already towers in our city. The...

2009-07-12T07:46:29.505-07:00

George, there are already towers in our city. The OCP defines areas for further tower development. You're too late if you want to keep towers out of the city. The trick is to restrict their locations, so as not to interfere with lower density areas. The Lonsdale corridor is one of those locations.