So... everyone's going to hate me for saying this, but I'm secretly pro-marina on this one. Here's why.
I'm assuming three things here: 1) somehow (and I've no idea how, because the harbour is already one of the busiest on the West Coast, and is a busy airport on top of it all) the developer and the Victoria Harbour authority have figured out how marine and air traffic will interact in that space, and there will still be room for planes to land, the Coho and other ships to sail, kayakers to kayak, and 100-foot-plus sized yachts to park. That seems clear from the EIA.
2) The developers have a business model they know will work, evidenced by the fact they've already bought some very pricey property adjacent to the water lot. They aren't just going to stop because they can't build in a particular spot.
3) Therefore, if we defeat this marina in the Inner Harbour, the developer will move it to Pedder Bay or Otter Point or Deep Cove or something, probably flipping the real estate they've already purchased for a profit, and getting cheaper land in a municipality that will whole-heartedly support the marina project.
You see, my point is that this marina is a side-effect of our beautiful destination of an island. Call it an Olympic bump if you want. The developer will proceed with the marina, and probably will find another place to put it if this falls through.
However, for once a developer is doing what we urban affairs nerds are asking for: contributing to density in the urban core. This is a major investment in infrastructure, albeit for the obscenely rich, adding to the density of our economy and population in the heart of the CRD. It adds vibrancy to the harbour, and a new form of economic activity there (services for ultra-rich yachters) that we haven't had before.
Environmentally, it will have less impact in the already less than pristine Inner Harbour than it would in a more idyllic setting like Sooke, and the impact of rich people driving their Hummers from their boat into town will be significantly reduced - not to mention the many others who would commute out to work at the marina.
So, hate me. I know my view is kinda unpopular. But, I stand by it - and no, I'm not in any way affiliated with the developers, the government, any sort of Liberal party hacks, or money in any way shape or form.
Your argument is somewhat flawed. This hardly contributes to density within the urban core. There are too few boats that can fit in the marina and the spots will most likely sit empty or the boats sitting idle within the marina. Therefore the marina could not possible hire too many people. The environmental effects (negative) are greater then not putting a marina in at all, and what happens if the marina is half built then sits unfinished for years before it can be finished - like the overpass at bear mountain . Unlikely maybe, but are any measures being taken to make sure this doesn't happen (I personally don't know). Why not make the marina specifically for sail boats or sailboats which ship products (a much more environmentally friendly way to ship products) plus massive sailboats would attract as many viewers if not more then million dollar yachts. The development will positively effect the lives of maybe a handful of people. Why not focus on development that can positively effect thousands and also has positive environmental effects. We must stop acting because "Something is less bad for the environment" - and start acting because "It is good for the environment"
Anonymous -- the same anonymous from the other comment?: welcome.
Short of actually giving more of an opinion at the moment, I will say that a) I agree with you and b) the first thing that I thought of when I heard 'density' and 'mega yacht marina' was Bear Mountain -- aka Bear Ghost Town.
We don't need more part-time people 'living' or owning property/space/moorings near the Inner Harbour. Victoria will only be vibrant and more livable with more Victorians living in Victoria.
Even if these 'ultra rich' were actually going to live full-time in Victoria. There'll be about a grand total of 100 of them (52 Yachts). I'm pretty sure we could find more effective ways to better our Inner Harbour, economy, and city than that.
Also, environmental assessments are often pretty -- I've never used this word before but it seems fitting -- bunk, as you can more or less set your own standards to pass. Not bad is better than less bad.
This is a very disheartening decision. This project provides an excellent opportunity to test the hypothetical and often very amorphous concept the "public interest" and examine how effectively our strucutres in Victoria, BC, and Canada have gauged the impacts of this mega-yacht project planning decisions.
For me the design and paradign that informs this project is fundamentally flawed and I would rather not even dignify these aspects of the project with any lengthy response. I have read countless arguments from Focus, Times Colonist other independent media that all undermine the developers flawed logic. This is a critical civic asset and space that should not be sacrificed for a handful of gas-guzzling baja bound white sharks sweating corona and expensive vodka.
Instead of talking design or project details I would rather talk about this project more generally. Our waterfront and access to it is one of the most critical components of our great city. We are a city known as being active, fit, and environmentally aware in relation to the rest of canada at least. How does this project fit into our long-term self concept as a city?
Alright back to the matter at hand, I mentioned something about public interest and process. This project has motivated significant citizen activism, community engagement, and political lobbying. Hundreds of folks and a variety of groups gathered last summer around the issue at a citizen organized event at Vic High with experts from all number of fields that inform such decisions speaking to the issue and challenging the project. More recently, hundreds of paddlers and citizens joined an environmental activism event at the actual site of the mega-yacht (which got the cover of the TC). All of these events have been citizen lead.
How can that be? How can a decision that impacts almost every citizen, anyone who uses the waterfront downtown not have major public input attached to it. I realize some of this is due to the minefield of permits needed for this project, but I would argue that it does not matter. The city at the least should take the lead on this and provide a forum for discussion. I have never seen so much public involvement on a downtown development decision in my short history of being in victoria. I think the level and quality of community organization in response to the event should be recognized as a significant event. An event that deserves consideration from the structures and decision makers whose responsibility it is to gauge the public interest and make equitable sound long-term decisions. How is it that Jane Jacobs can stop the most powerful city builder in the history of urban planning numerous times, yet when Victoria tries to make a statement and stop a development it falls on deaf ears from all levels of government.
Sorry not to respond earlier... and I was hoping more people would get in on the action.
I definitely agree with what you are saying. Excellent point(s).
Beyond the social, built environment, environmental, etc. factors to this issue, the fact that the marina moves forward in the face of and without a thought for this opposition is frustrating.
As with any major project or public initiative, we should be addressing the 'greater good'. As far as I can tell, the mega-yachts will not serve the greater good of the public in Victoria.
1) A lot of discussion about this site happens on facebook; so, I would recommend finding the site (link on the right sidebar) and me there.
2) I'm experimenting with non-sign-in commenting to encourage more discussion (the 2 minutes it takes to create a google/other account seems like too much trouble).
Being 'anonymous' is pretty lame, so at least make up a fake name to use.
6 comments:
So... everyone's going to hate me for saying this, but I'm secretly pro-marina on this one. Here's why.
I'm assuming three things here:
1) somehow (and I've no idea how, because the harbour is already one of the busiest on the West Coast, and is a busy airport on top of it all) the developer and the Victoria Harbour authority have figured out how marine and air traffic will interact in that space, and there will still be room for planes to land, the Coho and other ships to sail, kayakers to kayak, and 100-foot-plus sized yachts to park. That seems clear from the EIA.
2) The developers have a business model they know will work, evidenced by the fact they've already bought some very pricey property adjacent to the water lot. They aren't just going to stop because they can't build in a particular spot.
3) Therefore, if we defeat this marina in the Inner Harbour, the developer will move it to Pedder Bay or Otter Point or Deep Cove or something, probably flipping the real estate they've already purchased for a profit, and getting cheaper land in a municipality that will whole-heartedly support the marina project.
You see, my point is that this marina is a side-effect of our beautiful destination of an island. Call it an Olympic bump if you want. The developer will proceed with the marina, and probably will find another place to put it if this falls through.
However, for once a developer is doing what we urban affairs nerds are asking for: contributing to density in the urban core. This is a major investment in infrastructure, albeit for the obscenely rich, adding to the density of our economy and population in the heart of the CRD. It adds vibrancy to the harbour, and a new form of economic activity there (services for ultra-rich yachters) that we haven't had before.
Environmentally, it will have less impact in the already less than pristine Inner Harbour than it would in a more idyllic setting like Sooke, and the impact of rich people driving their Hummers from their boat into town will be significantly reduced - not to mention the many others who would commute out to work at the marina.
So, hate me. I know my view is kinda unpopular. But, I stand by it - and no, I'm not in any way affiliated with the developers, the government, any sort of Liberal party hacks, or money in any way shape or form.
Your argument is somewhat flawed. This hardly contributes to density within the urban core. There are too few boats that can fit in the marina and the spots will most likely sit empty or the boats sitting idle within the marina. Therefore the marina could not possible hire too many people.
The environmental effects (negative) are greater then not putting a marina in at all, and what happens if the marina is half built then sits unfinished for years before it can be finished - like the overpass at bear mountain . Unlikely maybe, but are any measures being taken to make sure this doesn't happen (I personally don't know).
Why not make the marina specifically for sail boats or sailboats which ship products (a much more environmentally friendly way to ship products) plus massive sailboats would attract as many viewers if not more then million dollar yachts.
The development will positively effect the lives of maybe a handful of people. Why not focus on development that can positively effect thousands and also has positive environmental effects.
We must stop acting because "Something is less bad for the environment" - and start acting because "It is good for the environment"
Anonymous -- the same anonymous from the other comment?: welcome.
Short of actually giving more of an opinion at the moment, I will say that a) I agree with you and b) the first thing that I thought of when I heard 'density' and 'mega yacht marina' was Bear Mountain -- aka Bear Ghost Town.
We don't need more part-time people 'living' or owning property/space/moorings near the Inner Harbour. Victoria will only be vibrant and more livable with more Victorians living in Victoria.
Even if these 'ultra rich' were actually going to live full-time in Victoria. There'll be about a grand total of 100 of them (52 Yachts). I'm pretty sure we could find more effective ways to better our Inner Harbour, economy, and city than that.
Also, environmental assessments are often pretty -- I've never used this word before but it seems fitting -- bunk, as you can more or less set your own standards to pass. Not bad is better than less bad.
This is a very disheartening decision. This project provides an excellent opportunity to test the hypothetical and often very amorphous concept the "public interest" and examine how effectively our strucutres in Victoria, BC, and Canada have gauged the impacts of this mega-yacht project planning decisions.
For me the design and paradign that informs this project is fundamentally flawed and I would rather not even dignify these aspects of the project with any lengthy response. I have read countless arguments from Focus, Times Colonist other independent media that all undermine the developers flawed logic. This is a critical civic asset and space that should not be sacrificed for a handful of gas-guzzling baja bound white sharks sweating corona and expensive vodka.
Instead of talking design or project details I would rather talk about this project more generally. Our waterfront and access to it is one of the most critical components of our great city. We are a city known as being active, fit, and environmentally aware in relation to the rest of canada at least. How does this project fit into our long-term self concept as a city?
Alright back to the matter at hand, I mentioned something about public interest and process. This project has motivated significant citizen activism, community engagement, and political lobbying. Hundreds of folks and a variety of groups gathered last summer around the issue at a citizen organized event at Vic High with experts from all number of fields that inform such decisions speaking to the issue and challenging the project. More recently, hundreds of paddlers and citizens joined an environmental activism event at the actual site of the mega-yacht (which got the cover of the TC). All of these events have been citizen lead.
How can that be? How can a decision that impacts almost every citizen, anyone who uses the waterfront downtown not have major public input attached to it. I realize some of this is due to the minefield of permits needed for this project, but I would argue that it does not matter. The city at the least should take the lead on this and provide a forum for discussion. I have never seen so much public involvement on a downtown development decision in my short history of being in victoria. I think the level and quality of community organization in response to the event should be recognized as a significant event. An event that deserves consideration from the structures and decision makers whose responsibility it is to gauge the public interest and make equitable sound long-term decisions. How is it that Jane Jacobs can stop the most powerful city builder in the history of urban planning numerous times, yet when Victoria tries to make a statement and stop a development it falls on deaf ears from all levels of government.
Hey Ross,
Thanks a lot for the thoughtful post.
Sorry not to respond earlier... and I was hoping more people would get in on the action.
I definitely agree with what you are saying. Excellent point(s).
Beyond the social, built environment, environmental, etc. factors to this issue, the fact that the marina moves forward in the face of and without a thought for this opposition is frustrating.
As with any major project or public initiative, we should be addressing the 'greater good'. As far as I can tell, the mega-yachts will not serve the greater good of the public in Victoria.
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/saanichnews/opinion/letters/92527169.html
Post a Comment
Two things:
1) A lot of discussion about this site happens on facebook; so, I would recommend finding the site (link on the right sidebar) and me there.
2) I'm experimenting with non-sign-in commenting to encourage more discussion (the 2 minutes it takes to create a google/other account seems like too much trouble).
Being 'anonymous' is pretty lame, so at least make up a fake name to use.