News report:
“A petition in favour of building a new outdoor sports complex and park on Aberdeen Road in Coldstream is gaining momentum. Bill Tarr, with the Outdoor Sports User Group, says they've looked at their membership and for example, 45 percent of all soccer players live in Coldstream, but there is only one full size field in the community. Tarr says groups need proper facilities, and there are problems with some fields, like Polson Park where coaches have to pick up syringes and glass before every football game. He says the Coldstream location is ideal and the best of the 12 to 14 locations the group looked at. Tarr says 500 people signed the on-line petition in the first day. You can sign at businesses around town or on-line at http://www.greatervernonsports.com/“ (Betty Selin, Standard Radio News http://www.thesunonline.ca/news/565/574834)
There are interesting, albeit questionable, reasons given by the Outdoor Sports User Group for the conversion of prime agricultural land into 15 assorted playing fields and four dog agility fields as well as parking for 1,000 cars. It is worth commenting on those arguments.
1. “The Coldstream location is ideal and the best of the 12 to 14 locations the group looked at.”
It may be that the Coldstream location is ideal for those playing fields, but it is also ideal for agriculture. As it is prime quality agricultural land it is zoned for that purpose in the Official Community Plan (OCP). Re-zoning would be a major departure from the OCP and would require the approval of the community as a whole (Coldstream, not Greater Vernon). Just as Vernon cannot convert the airport for playing fields without a major change in the Vernon OCP, Coldstream Council must also abide by our own OCP.
Furthermore, the land is under the jurisdiction of the Agricultural Land Commission and their mandate would suffer irreparable damage if they would allow the change of use of this prime piece of agricultural land. They just could not justify the change of use and would set a dangerous precedence.
2. “45 percent of all soccer players live in Coldstream, but there is only one full size field in the community”.
There is no requirement that all soccer players must use full sized, Coldstream area soccer fields for their sport. Coldstream is a full member of Greater Vernon Parks and Recreation and pay the same mill rate for financing the fields and other sport and recreation facilities as well as paying for the operation and maintenance of said facilities as those living in Vernon and the Regional District’s Area “B” and “C”. They have full rights to play on fields in Vernon. In fact, we just recently contributed to the construction of an indoor soccer facility in Vernon.
There are many hockey players in Coldstream who use ice rinks located in Vernon. Should we build an arena in Coldstream? In the late 1990,s the Greater Vernon Parks and Recreation Directors refused to support a proposed Multiplex to be constructed by a private contractor at his expense in Coldstream. This facility would have had two ice rinks with plenty of opportunity for use by all comers. Instead, we built a single ice sheet in Vernon at taxpayers expense ($15 million) and hired a private operator to operate it.
Most people in Coldstream shop in Vernon and support Vernon’s merchants and businesses. No one in Vernon complains that Coldstream should embark on constructing their own businesses to compete with those in Vernon.
If Coldstream really needed an additional full sized soccer field I am reasonably sure that we could find a piece of land for it without having to convert 120 acres of prime agricultural land.
It is preposterous to suggest that we could only resolve the shortages of playing fields, real or imaginary, by constructing all of them on a large piece of prime agricultural land in Coldstream.
Few people would oppose constructing playing fields but they must be on lands other than prime agriculture.
The mentality that the paying public is the enemy and must be kept in the dark must change. These plans were developed in-camera consulting only with vested interest groups and without informing the public. GVS Parks tried to have the ALC to have the use changed in May, 2006, apparently behind the backs of Coldstream residents. The plans were revealed only days before Coldstream Council was to vote on supporting the plan.
The project should have been discussed in open meetings from the initial conception with full disclosure to the public. We should follow the suggestion expressed in the Editorial of the Morning Star (August 24) referring to the Library/Civic Complex (replace the words “building” with “playing fields” and the “city” and “RCMP” with "GVSC taxpayer”):
“Collect information on usage, and potential usage, of a new building (playing fields). Determine exactly, to the penny, how much the building (playing fields) will cost taxpayers. Explain the benefits for the city and the RCMP (GVSC taxpayer) and lay out other options that have not been explored. All we ask is for the city (GVSC) to let us express our informed opinion, whether for, or against.”
“A petition in favour of building a new outdoor sports complex and park on Aberdeen Road in Coldstream is gaining momentum. Bill Tarr, with the Outdoor Sports User Group, says they've looked at their membership and for example, 45 percent of all soccer players live in Coldstream, but there is only one full size field in the community. Tarr says groups need proper facilities, and there are problems with some fields, like Polson Park where coaches have to pick up syringes and glass before every football game. He says the Coldstream location is ideal and the best of the 12 to 14 locations the group looked at. Tarr says 500 people signed the on-line petition in the first day. You can sign at businesses around town or on-line at http://www.greatervernonsports.com/“ (Betty Selin, Standard Radio News http://www.thesunonline.ca/news/565/574834)
There are interesting, albeit questionable, reasons given by the Outdoor Sports User Group for the conversion of prime agricultural land into 15 assorted playing fields and four dog agility fields as well as parking for 1,000 cars. It is worth commenting on those arguments.
1. “The Coldstream location is ideal and the best of the 12 to 14 locations the group looked at.”
It may be that the Coldstream location is ideal for those playing fields, but it is also ideal for agriculture. As it is prime quality agricultural land it is zoned for that purpose in the Official Community Plan (OCP). Re-zoning would be a major departure from the OCP and would require the approval of the community as a whole (Coldstream, not Greater Vernon). Just as Vernon cannot convert the airport for playing fields without a major change in the Vernon OCP, Coldstream Council must also abide by our own OCP.
Furthermore, the land is under the jurisdiction of the Agricultural Land Commission and their mandate would suffer irreparable damage if they would allow the change of use of this prime piece of agricultural land. They just could not justify the change of use and would set a dangerous precedence.
2. “45 percent of all soccer players live in Coldstream, but there is only one full size field in the community”.
There is no requirement that all soccer players must use full sized, Coldstream area soccer fields for their sport. Coldstream is a full member of Greater Vernon Parks and Recreation and pay the same mill rate for financing the fields and other sport and recreation facilities as well as paying for the operation and maintenance of said facilities as those living in Vernon and the Regional District’s Area “B” and “C”. They have full rights to play on fields in Vernon. In fact, we just recently contributed to the construction of an indoor soccer facility in Vernon.
There are many hockey players in Coldstream who use ice rinks located in Vernon. Should we build an arena in Coldstream? In the late 1990,s the Greater Vernon Parks and Recreation Directors refused to support a proposed Multiplex to be constructed by a private contractor at his expense in Coldstream. This facility would have had two ice rinks with plenty of opportunity for use by all comers. Instead, we built a single ice sheet in Vernon at taxpayers expense ($15 million) and hired a private operator to operate it.
Most people in Coldstream shop in Vernon and support Vernon’s merchants and businesses. No one in Vernon complains that Coldstream should embark on constructing their own businesses to compete with those in Vernon.
If Coldstream really needed an additional full sized soccer field I am reasonably sure that we could find a piece of land for it without having to convert 120 acres of prime agricultural land.
It is preposterous to suggest that we could only resolve the shortages of playing fields, real or imaginary, by constructing all of them on a large piece of prime agricultural land in Coldstream.
Few people would oppose constructing playing fields but they must be on lands other than prime agriculture.
The mentality that the paying public is the enemy and must be kept in the dark must change. These plans were developed in-camera consulting only with vested interest groups and without informing the public. GVS Parks tried to have the ALC to have the use changed in May, 2006, apparently behind the backs of Coldstream residents. The plans were revealed only days before Coldstream Council was to vote on supporting the plan.
The project should have been discussed in open meetings from the initial conception with full disclosure to the public. We should follow the suggestion expressed in the Editorial of the Morning Star (August 24) referring to the Library/Civic Complex (replace the words “building” with “playing fields” and the “city” and “RCMP” with "GVSC taxpayer”):
“Collect information on usage, and potential usage, of a new building (playing fields). Determine exactly, to the penny, how much the building (playing fields) will cost taxpayers. Explain the benefits for the city and the RCMP (GVSC taxpayer) and lay out other options that have not been explored. All we ask is for the city (GVSC) to let us express our informed opinion, whether for, or against.”
***********************
No comments:
Post a Comment