| Author |
Topic |
 opinionated-stove huggin'-fleece wearin'-arse burnin' hill virgin
Here
Canada
4642 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2012 : 12:50 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by tricouni
I never said anything about Vancouverites calling all the shots. What I object to is people saying that Vancouverites should have no say in such decisions (which is what someone at Britannia said the other night). I've wandered through more of that Squamish back-country than at least 95% of the people in that meeting: doesn't my opinion count, just like that of the real estate agent who moved there two years ago?
I think that you have the right to have your opinion heard and considered as an individual. I don't believe that this matter should be decided purely by numbers. |
|
|
Vancouver
88 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2012 : 3:20 PM
|
quote:
I think that you have the right to have your opinion heard and considered as an individual. I don't believe that this matter should be decided purely by numbers.
But the decision will be decided by the numbers: by a majority vote in the Victoria legislature. West Vancouver/Sea to Sky riding (18,000 votes cast last election, and it contains Squamish and the proposed gondola site) gets one vote, same as every other member, whether they be from Vancouver or Chilliwack-Hope or Skeena (8500 votes cast).
I don't know the figures, but I believe most people in the West Van/Sea-to-Sky riding live in West Van, not Britannia and north. Fair or not, that's how it is.
I don't speak for anyone else, just myself. |
Edited by - tricouni on 04/21/2012 4:29 PM |
|
|
North Vancouver, BC
Canada
1263 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2012 : 4:40 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by tricouni
[quote][i]
By your logic, and without turning this into a flame war or trying to sidetrack things, I (Vancouver resident) should have no say in the Enbridge pipeline, or any other development outside greater Vancouver. Sorry, I don't buy it.
I wonder what you would do if some group in the Peace river region decided that a major freeway should go through your housing development? "Would you not say something to the effect of "Hey it's my land and you don't live here so, but out?" I think most of us have the idea that parks and pristine lands should be preserved however the majority of vancouverites are not hikers , kayakers, or bird watchers and having a bit of park somewhere in someone elses backyard removed is not going to make much of an impact on thier lives.
Last time I was at Golden ears park it was civilized, which is not anywhere close to what it was many years ago. People wanted it civilized with showers and flush toilets, and they got it. Personally I do not ski, so if all the north shore mountains got rid of ski slopes and planted trees on them I would prefer that. But wait those are parks too? Where were we when the decision was made to put in chairlifts and concession stands and the lowest of the lows , pay parking? Someone other than you and I made a decision based on economical benefits to the north shore. I guess there are economical benefits to Squamish too. |
|
|
521 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2012 : 5:25 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by brucew
quote:
Originally posted by tricouni
[quote][i]
By your logic, and without turning this into a flame war or trying to sidetrack things, I (Vancouver resident) should have no say in the Enbridge pipeline, or any other development outside greater Vancouver. Sorry, I don't buy it.
I wonder what you would do if some group in the Peace river region decided that a major freeway should go through your housing development? "Would you not say something to the effect of "Hey it's my land and you don't live here so, but out?" I think most of us have the idea that parks and pristine lands should be preserved however the majority of vancouverites are not hikers , kayakers, or bird watchers and having a bit of park somewhere in someone elses backyard removed is not going to make much of an impact on thier lives.
Last time I was at Golden ears park it was civilized, which is not anywhere close to what it was many years ago. People wanted it civilized with showers and flush toilets, and they got it. Personally I do not ski, so if all the north shore mountains got rid of ski slopes and planted trees on them I would prefer that. But wait those are parks too? Where were we when the decision was made to put in chairlifts and concession stands and the lowest of the lows , pay parking? Someone other than you and I made a decision based on economical benefits to the north shore. I guess there are economical benefits to Squamish too.
You obviously haven't heard of the "Golden Rule"?
http://mscyprah.new.newsvine.com/_news/2012/03/02/10561013-we-live-by-the-golden-rule-those-who-have-the-gold-make-the-rules-how-true-is-that-poll
Those with the gold, make the rules! Sad reality. |
Edited by - path finder on 04/22/2012 07:37 AM |
|
|
Vancouver
88 Posts |
Posted - 04/21/2012 : 8:52 PM
|
quote:
Last time I was at Golden ears park it was civilized, which is not anywhere close to what it was many years ago. People wanted it civilized with showers and flush toilets, and they got it. Personally I do not ski, so if all the north shore mountains got rid of ski slopes and planted trees on them I would prefer that. But wait those are parks too? Where were we when the decision was made to put in chairlifts and concession stands and the lowest of the lows , pay parking? Someone other than you and I made a decision based on economical benefits to the north shore. I guess there are economical benefits to Squamish too.
First rope tow at Hollyburn was 1943 or so; the chairlift was built in 1951. The park was not established until 1975.
At Mt Seymour, the first ski lease was granted in 1930. The park wasn't established until 1936.
Grouse never was a park, still isn't. Much private land, so they can develop as they want.
Yes, there would perhaps be economic benefits to Squamish from the gondola proposal. The proponents are talking about 30 to 80 jobs over 10 years (most probably at minimum wage). All I want is transparency in the process, which so far has not been forthcoming from the provincial government.
Quite a few of our biggest provincial parks have come about because of the push by people from the lower mainland. That's how the Stein was preserved as a park. Same with Ts'ilos Provincial Park in the Chilcotin, where there was quite a bit of opposition from many of the locals. Tatshenshini Prov Park was established after pressure from river rafters, kayakers, environmental groups, Vancouver and out-of-country, much to the dismay of the big mining companies that had mineral rights to the area. If you don't like the idea of those parks, that's fine: lobby against them next time a park is proposed, especially if it's in your back yard.
|
Edited by - tricouni on 04/21/2012 8:53 PM |
|
|
North Vancouver, BC
Canada
1263 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2012 : 08:46 AM
|
tricouni, I wish you would quit confusing this issue with facts.
I always find more interesting stuff on this forum about my back yard than anywhere else. |
|
|
Vancouver, BC
Canada
1422 Posts |
Posted - 04/22/2012 : 09:23 AM
|
Manning Park was created in 1941. I don't know when the ski hill was built, but probably not before 1949 when the highway opened. And the Cypress / Seymour ski areas have seen many expansions since they were made into parks. All these were done without deleting land from the park.
Sky chair (1987)
Midway chair (1990)
Cypress tube park lift (1998)
Raven Ridge chair (2007)
(http://cypressmountain.com/historical-timeline-cypress-mountain)
|
Edited by - scottN on 04/22/2012 09:23 AM |
|
|
Vancouver, BC
Canada
1 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2012 : 11:44 AM
|
I have been hiking and climbing in the Stawamus Chief and Shannon Falls Parks since 1990. I contributed to the effort by the Land Conservancy to purchase the gravel pit in 2004 and I’m very disappointed that the developers and various levels of government are circumventing the covenant placed on that land, where the proposed base of the gondola would be.
My reasons for opposing this proposal are that the gondola and its’ construction would damage a long swath of protected land, negatively impact hiking trails, detract from the experience of climbing and hiking in the two provincial parks and would spur ecological degradation of the terminal lands as a greatly increased number of people travel in the higher elevation regions. Add a restaurant and toilets into the terminal zone and the waste management issues grow exponentially.
The Stawamus Chief and Shannon Falls Parks are well-established, with hundreds of thousands of annual user-days already, and make a huge contribution to the culture and economy of the area. They should be kept intact for future generations to enjoy. This area has outstanding natural, scenic and recreational values. The priority should be protecting those values. I often take my young children to enjoy these parks. Let’s protects them, as they currently are, for tomorrow’s outdoor enthusiasts.
If the project proceeds, and fails, who will clean up the mess that will likely be left behind? What financial guarantees would the developers provide? Think of the awful precedent set by removing protected park land to allow a commercial, mechanized development to intrude on previously protected natural lands.
I have written to Premier Clark to express my opinion. I encourage others who value the natural beauty of these parks and the opportunity to recreate free of mechanized infrastructure that they provide, to exercise your democracy and soon.
Steve
Vancouver
|
|
|
Richmond, BC
Canada
2440 Posts |
Posted - 04/24/2012 : 12:34 PM
|
"pave paradise and put up a parking lot" mentality
Passive acceptance of change is a very odd peculiarity in Society. It's the one part of the equation which allows for changes to occur whether we like it or not, while a minority are saying enough is enough. If you don't want it, you stand up and be counted. If you don't do anything, your non-voice benefits the other side.
We are looking at the possibility of a political transition in 2013. Most importantly, what would not be good is a repeat of the Brohm ridge developement whereby there is derelict infrastructure and contaminants sitting around for years as a result of the project failure. Public and electorate need to press for a decision on this particular project and submission of appropriate reasons for/against for same. Is it on or Is it off?
BTW the above is not a reflection of my personal political views or a reflection about the actions of a specific political party. My concern is for the outcome on the environment if decision making goes wrong and we've got a very visible cut line scar over the next two decades. Call it risk mitigation in the early stages.
Notwithstanding any potential for litigation, I think enviroment&lands should hold off on any more permits and decisions untill after the election in order to consider the position of the incoming government. Probably why completion date is expected to be just by election time.
Unfortunately (And I don't like to think this way)but this project sounds like a foregone conclusion. I'll work hard at being a little more positive about it.
On the humerous side, I wonder if there will be a "Habrich Grind" to compliment it |
|
|
North Vancouver, BC
Canada
1606 Posts |
|
322 Posts |
Posted - 05/08/2012 : 10:27 AM
|
So with Cabinet approval of the park amendment, the Squamish Gondola is now basically a done deal.
In the immortal words of Johnny Cash: "You've got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em."
Democracy has spoken, I guess.
|
|
|
|
opinionated-stove huggin'-fleece wearin'-arse burnin' hill virgin
Here
Canada
4642 Posts |
Posted - 05/08/2012 : 5:05 PM
|
| With heavy government involvement, it's more about shining a spotlight on Christy Crunch so she can gloat about "job creation" than it is about what the people of Squamish really want. Seems to be her personal agenda...selling BC so that she can take credit for jobs. I kinda thought support for the project was too mixed to go ahead but it was clear that the government was going to rubber stamp the project no matter what. |
|
|
|
Fast hikin, carrot chompin, always grinnin, gear scatterin recipient of the Theta Lake manouver
Burnaby
2041 Posts |
Posted - 05/08/2012 : 6:51 PM
|
| If the deal is done, which could be the case, then why not bargain for a deal that could benefit the backcountry users. Better to get something than nothing. |
|
|
Vancouver
1820 Posts |
Posted - 05/08/2012 : 9:26 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hiker Boy
...selling BC so that she can take credit for jobs.
When you listen to these people, be aware they use the word "jobs" as code for "pillage the commons for private profit". |
|
|
322 Posts |
Posted - 05/08/2012 : 11:39 PM
|
Well, I didn't see Christy at the public meeting in Britannia Beach- most of the people there were ordinary folk from the local area, as well as Vancouver.
Significantly, the ordinary people- I would say 75% of them- supported the Gondola idea. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Squamish Gondola Proposal
