Asked by another person in town: since the new park walkway extension was first put in and then torn out again and moved, because it didnt meet requirements of fisheries and/or environment authorities - what did that cost? How far from the river does council envision the riverside walkway statutory right of way extending into peoples yards, given their recent experience in the park? The Official Commun Plan policy describes this as an informal walkway but is anything like the park plan paths: 1.5 m wide (about 5 ft) gravel path plus the separation required from the river? Plus, I sure wouldnt want a public path across my property unless it is fenced off. By the time you do all that, are you really going to claim that this is all still your land? as Lisa Dafoe explained in her response to the question? Does anyone with riverfront land think that if this was ever done on your property its value would stay the same? Now Council is picking on the first poor landowner, beside the bridge near Parke St., to be the one where they hold fast to this unfeasible idea. Im going to ask him to put up some pylons suggesting where this will all reach, based on how far the park path is from the river. This policy may be great for totally new developments and therefore I would look at restricting it to that, definitely not to places with existing developed residences and businesses. The environmental set-back is necessary for other properties if their current buildings are moved, but not the loss of property and privacy (and therefore property value) to public walking traffic. These folks, including me, should have been more specifically consulted beforehand.
Posted on: Sat, 08 Nov 2014 18:35:56 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015