Developer greed, hardship for neighbours
Re: “If not at 902 Foul Bay Road, then where?” commentary, Jan. 28.
I used to read Oak Bay News’ letters and chuckle at grumpy old men who opposed the erection of new houses near them. I would righteously point my finger at them and go, man, those NIMBYs! I’ve always loved the idea of a healthy, inclusive and diverse city.
Fast forward a few years later, when the demolition derby began in earnest. You can’t enjoy your deck with friends on a summer day for all the noise, though you might have given that up already when the house next door got the variance on height, and you lost your privacy.
Intersections have become hazardous because of the non-ending construction vehicles, lining up the narrow streets.
After heavy rains, drainage company vehicles take up all the street parking for weeks afterwards. The heavy rains aren’t new, the intense flooding is.
I’m not a geological engineer, but I do know density on Vancouver Island, which is a rock, should be approached with care. My readings say those trees and the green spaces matter a lot.
Young families need homes. But a million-dollar, family-unfriendly townhouse with strata fees in Gonzales does not fit the bill for most of them.
That townhouse will appeal to wealthy retirees. It is ironic that real-estate and developer lobbies would have us believe they’ll save us from classism.
The greed and attendant classism belong squarely with many developers, and not with residents who end up with the hardship justified under false pretences.
Solange Meilleur
Victoria
On affordability, zoning plays a big part
Re: “If not at 902 Foul Bay Rd., then where?” commentary, Jan. 28.
Trevor Walker’s points on the lack of affordability in Oak Bay are on the money, and extend very much to Victoria, where I live with my family.
I would like to add that the default single-family zoning through most of these neighbourhoods in Greater Victoria greatly exacerbates unaffordability.
Zoning regulations as they currently stand protect the property values of a small group of people over the welfare of the many.
They also, ironically for those protesting the loss of two trees, significantly increase habitat destruction overall by increasing sprawl.
Zoning rules and parking minimums have also been used historically to keep “undesirables” out of the neighbourhood.
Other jurisdictions including Vancouver, Portland and Sacramento have recognized that default zoning for low-density housing like duplexes/triplexes with relaxed parking requirements is the key to what’s called “missing middle” housing, where those of us with families who can’t afford a million-dollar house would love to live in.
It’s time for our councils to consider the needs of the many over the property wealth of a few.
Bharat Chandramouli
Victoria
Get new neighbours and new trees, too
Re: “If not at 902 Foul Bay Road, then where?” commentary, Jan. 28.
Thank you Trevor Walker for your eloquent and direct reply to our NIMBY neighbours!
I agree that trees are wonderful parts of our community — and so are people. We can have both new neighbours and new trees!
Graham Dragushan
Victoria
When will we start to honour heritage trees?
Re: “If not at 902 Foul Bay Rd., then where?” commentary, Jan. 28.
Trevor Walker’s thoughtful commentary regarding the development proposed for 902 Foul Bay Rd. makes the wrong point. Neighbours are rightly concerned at a plan that removes native Garry oak, arbutus, Douglas fir and Western red cedar along with the heritage copper beech.
To be retained are a few Garry oak and the invasive holly and English hawthorne.
Townhouses that fit this unique lot’s diverse established geography could be more welcome.
The question ought to be: “When will Victoria truly honour its heritage trees, if not here?”
Sandra Johnstone
Victoria
Indigenous plan would bring value
Re: “If not at 902 Foul Bay Rd., then where?” commentary, Jan. 28.
The commentary about the development proposal at 902 Foul Bay Rd. includes a pre-colonial and settler colonial history of the land.
But contrary to the goal suggested by acknowledging the pre-colonial history of the place, the comments continue to perpetuate a western-centric viewpoint.
The writer packages up two introduced 100-year-old copper beech trees along with urban animals living in their home territory into colonial privilege, stating: “I will miss the deer that rest beneath them.”
This is ironic considering the black-tailed deer are indigenous to the area and continue to have their habitat squeezed by a settler constructed landscape.
Additionally, demonizing trees that were planted by settler colonists disregards the life of each tree.
Walker is incorrect in his assertion that we can have increased density and development and maintain a healthy ecosystem for non-humans.
The coronavirus crisis shows how the recklessness with which people treat the natural world can backfire badly.
It is also disingenuous to imply this townhome project will be “affordable” when most units range at $800,000.
Rather than hearing from settlers, developers, and local governments about themes that continue to commodify nature and create a new age of colonialism, I’d be more interested in reading about an Indigenous Land Management Plan for the region.
Carolynne Rykhlo
Victoria
A chance for change is an opportunity
Re: “If not at 902 Foul Bay Rd., then where?” commentary, Jan. 28.
How refreshing to read something that is not an Us vs Them. He offers perspective on change; a reminder that two trees are not a forest or ecosystem unto themselves; that a diversity of housing options are desperately needed, and that a sense of community is important.
Plus he offers some options for planting that would attract other species.
Let’s look at this as an opportunity, rather than a crisis of removing two trees.
Heather MacAndrew
Victoria
Column was reckless and divisive
Re: “Ill-considered virus response hurting our economy,” Jan. 27, and “Why we published Gwyn Morgan’s column,” Jan. 29.
In the spirit of the “diversity of thought” cherished by Dave Obee, I respectfully disagree with his decision to publish Gwyn Morgan’s column. In my opinion, Morgan’s reckless and divisive views will do more harm than good and should never have seen the light of day.
First of all, we are at war with a deadly enemy that has taken 2,196,944 lives worldwide. The focus of every media source should be providing information to citizens that will help them stay safe and alive.
We have seen the collateral damage when foreigners bring COVID-19 — and its variants — into other countries. Morgan’s advice to “take that winter vacation” is brazenly irresponsible, encouraging people to put their own health and lives in danger along with that of everyone else around them.
Even the prospect of one person being emboldened enough by Morgan’s words to put themselves and others in harm’s way should have been sufficient to not run the column.
Secondly, in my view, intolerance should never be given an audience in the Times Colonist.
Morgan lambastes an amorphous and vague group of jobless CERB recipients, accusing them of cheating the system — with no evidence or proof of his allegations.
He callously advises readers to “shun” them, as if they were modern-day lepers.
At a time when we need to support and help each other, Morgan encourages us to be cruel.
Divisive rhetoric, pitting one person against another, does not belong in any newspaper. Especially now.
Doreen Marion Gee
Victoria
COVID lessons apply to climate
Measures to mitigate COVID-19 have had little effect in sickness and death where they have been sparingly applied.
The exponentially spreading variants have hindered vaccination numbers, or vaccine modifications, keeping up with mutations, which are expected to increase along with the virus.
Wearing masks, social distancing, extensive hygiene with total lockdowns are our only hope of containing the disease until, or if, vaccinations can catch up.
Only where strict measures were enforced, have infections been kept to a minimum.
There are important similarities in the case of climate change. We didn’t pay attention early to what we were told about the dangers of climate change, many decades ago.
When some did, the measures taken were small. We would not inconvenience ourselves until others did first, nor admit our part in the harm, in spite of increasing frequency and intensity of climate change disasters.
We still don’t, though one calamity causes cascades of consequences much as is the case with the exponential spread of the pandemic.
The differences are even scarier. COVID sickness is more easily and immediately understood than problems that affect people further afield, in the fields and oceans and shielded from immediate impact in our privileged corner of the world.
Here consumer options abound. Plus, the connections however real are less forcefully experienced than delayed non-covid hospital treatments or distant relatives being sequestered or hospitalized. A serious personal climate threat isn’t so obvious.
We’re doing less about a problem with not even a theoretical herd immunity level.
Glynne Evans
Saanich
SEND US YOUR LETTERS
• Email letters to: [email protected]
• Mail: Letters to the editor, Times Colonist, 201-655 Tyee Rd., Victoria, B.C. V9A 6X5
• Submissions should be no more than 250 words; subject to editing for length and clarity. Provide your contact information; it will not be published. Avoid sending your letter as an email attachment.
