Jan
28
By V. Adams
Background - The James Bay Parks & Green Spaces Case
The residents of James Bay should take time this year to reflect on their vision of James Bay 2010 and Beyond, what things really matter, how they value these things (whether it is parks and green spaces or other things near and dear to them), and what areas they are willing to accommodate change. Having assessed what people value, the next step would be to determine what priorities and actions may be necessary to improve the areas identified as needing attention, and then finding ways to integrate these changes into the overall plan of the community in areas such as infrastructure, transportation, education, housing, employment, and public services.
Last fall, the James Bay Neighborhood Association prepared a 12-page unsolicited position paper entitled, "James Bay Parks & Green Space 2009 Inventory & Assessment". The document was submitted directly to City Council members for their review their consideration and decision, rather than the normal protocol of submitting first to city staff for review.
One can only speculate as to why it was written at this time. Perhaps 1) the JBNA wished to influence decision-makers who were engaged in updating the Master Parks Plan for the City, 2) the JBNA wished to put forward the demands of residents regarding parks and green spaces prior to any city-initiated review and update of the 1993 James Bay Neighborhood Plan, or 3) the JBNA wished to prepare not only reports on Parks and the Victoria Harbour Airport, but also a "Quality of Life Survey", and various environmental health studies to bolster its demands to all levels of government for significant land use changes as well as the adoption of legal and regulatory frameworks to mitigate perceived negative impacts from certain Inner Harbour economic activities on James Bay residents..
While the JBNA Parks Committee is to be commended for providing residents with current information about community parks and green space "to stimulate discussion about the city's park systems and James Bay parks in particular", it is difficult to make comments and suggestions on a report that has not been made public and that has already been submitted to City Council prior to any discussion with JBNA members or with James Bay residents.
Perhaps if the JBNA Parks Committee had entered into dialogue with diverse community stakeholders such as apartment dwellers, cultural, recreational and sports user groups, First Nations representatives and even visitors to the neighborhood, it might have gathered additional relevant information, understood different community perspectives, and perhaps considered alternative ways and means to enhance parks and green spaces in the neighborhood.
It is unfortunate that the report does not acknowledge for example:
1) Community residents who recently rallied to retain public access to and redevelopment of Fisherman's Wharf Park (rather than designating it as an exclusive off-leash dog-walking area) or apartment dwellers and others who have created and maintained community allotment gardens on Montreal and Michigan Streets;
2) Community groups such as LifeCycles, GroundWorks, James Bay Community School, and James Bay New Horizons as well as business owners and private donors who have undertaken community mapping and environmental sustainability projects not to mention neighborhood beautification initiatives for more than three decades);
3) Organizations such as the Greater Victoria Harbour Authority and the Ogden Point Enhancement Society who have been instrumental in redeveloping green spaces and interpretive areas highlighting the history of the Inner Harbour as well as prominently featuring Aboriginal art work on the inner walls of the breakwater; and,
4) Coast Salish people who have resided in the harbour lands for centuries and are working tirelessly to honor their cultural and historical traditions especially their ancestors, some of whom lie buried beneath the landscape of James Bay.
If consideration had been given to a broader community of interests in James Bay, perhaps the authors of the report might have drawn different conclusions and made different recommendations for parks and green spaces in the new neighborhood plan.
Salient Points Raised in the Report on Parks & Public Art:
Without looking at the James Bay neighborhood in the context of a city-wide parks and green spaces as well as the historical development of the place, readers of this report are left with the conclusion that since the parks and green spaces are unequally distributed throughout the community that a solution must be found to address this inequity.
Having framed the key problem as inadequate green space and lack of accessibility to parks by all residents, the Report then offers a solution: acquisition of more land (funded by taxpayers) for parks and green spaces to meet the unserved needs of newcomers situated on the western periphery of the neighborhood.
The report acknowledges that "James Bay is a long-established residential area with high property values and more park land than some other neighborhoods; acquiring land to develop a new park or expand an existing park in our community will be difficult." It then recommends the city acquire potential surplus federal government property such as the Coast Guard base on Dallas Road and Transport Canada land at Laurel Point (provided the contaminated soil is removed). It also suggests additional parkland be developed by creating an elevated playing field and green space over the parking lot at the cruise ship terminal to mitigate "nuisances at Ogden Point". And lastly, it recommends a land exchange involving the GVHA and the City to provide accessibility to more parkland for high-value property owners living in the western part of the neighborhood.
To determine why and how these parks solutions were developed and in whose interests they serve, one might pose several questions. Would new land use acquisitions offer a way for civic officials to mitigate complaints by high-value shoreline property owners who are upset with nuisances they suggest originate from a working harbour? Is the recommendation for the purchase of additional green space likely to increase the value of existing high-end properties adjacent to the proposed new parklands (by effectively eliminating any potential competing land uses)? Or, is it possible that this land use option might actually increase potential tax revenues for the city?
While the report does not directly address the issue of "cooperative land use", it does question the City's right to lease public land to school boards and to impose limits on public access to those properties during weekdays and weekends. The JBNA however does not appear to have sought any consultation with either the school board or with local parent advisory committees to address this matter. Furthermore, it would seem that the JBNA has been unable to consult with residents in the vicinity of James Bay's two school parks to see what if any park amenities they need or want.
Although the JBNA suggests that the City should designate MacDonald Park as a city-wide, special purpose park (primarily because it is used by sports groups including those outside the neighborhood), it goes one step further -- to recommend changes in financing of city parks and green spaces that are likely to place a greater financial burden on cultural, recreational, and sports user groups.
The JBNA report recommends that, "adults [sports field users] should pay their full share of actual city costs to maintain the MacDonald Park fields and other fields they use in the city." Rather than paying six per cent of the park operating costs as they do now, the JBNA suggests that sports groups assume all costs associated with maintaining and operating parks they use. In the absence of consultation with local sports and recreational groups about this matter, is it possible that the JBNA's proposed 'user pay for parks solution' could open the door to privatization of public parks?
The JBNA Parks Report, while advocating for more park amenities for those with special needs, did not seek input from residents -- particularly seniors who comprise a significant proportion of the James Bay population and whose activity center is adjacent to the JBNA's proposed revitalization of Irving Park, "the vibrant heart of the community".
It is unfortunate that the JBNA Parks Committee did not engage residents in what parks and green spaces mean to them as gathering places or as places of solitude, as natural assets in which habitats can be preserved, or as places for outdoor recreation, culture and sports. Perhaps if they had done so, they might have learned what residents wanted whether it was outdoor fitness amenities, community/heritage gardens, interpretive areas, alternative green spaces in the form of rooftop gardens, hanging baskets, potted trees and shrubs along thoroughfares or perhaps other suggestions.
The report while focusing on parks and green spaces in James Bay also took the liberty of advancing the JBNA's position on and contribution to the City's new "public art policy". However, in the absence of views on public art sought from either JBNA members or from the general public, it is difficult to determine whose views and recommendations are presented and whether they accurately reflect the sentiments of the community at large.
While stating that "it is vital that James Bay residents be part of that public art selection process", it is not clear why the JBNA wished to raise the matter of public art in a report on parks and green spaces. One might speculate that perhaps the JBNA wishes to position itself as not only the official voice of James Bay residents but also the most "appropriate group... to evaluate the suitability of art, monuments, structures and other installations proposed for city parks or so placed as to impact a public park".
What the report did not indicate was whether the above recommendation was based on any need expressed by James Bay residents for a local body to evaluate, approve, or manage their creative cultural endeavors? Or rather, was this position being advanced to reflect the special needs of newcomers who are seeking ways to influence the future of the community perhaps at the expense of long-standing community-minded interests?
While the report states that "in the past, the City of Victoria has too often omitted or severely limited public consultation on important issues in James Bay", it is difficult to see how elected officials will evaluate the value of the JBNA report in the absence of consultation with JBNA members, residents, and members of the creative and recreational community needed to prepare an assessment of and recommendations for the development of parks and green spaces including public art.
The real question is should a city council expect a local organization with a mandate for neighborhood planning to demonstrate compliance with a governance structure that ensures transparency and accountability not to mention a consistent record of community consultation?
Food For Thought:
Citizens will be engaged this year in two significant planning initiatives that may have a profound impact on the future social, economic, and environmental sustainability of the capital city and its environs. The City of Victoria will engage citizens in revising its Official Community Plan, while the Greater Victoria Harbour Authority will engage citizens in preparing its first 20-year Land Use Master Plan.
Perhaps the James Bay Neighborhood Association will take time this year to reflect on 1) the need for discussion on matters of public interest, 2) the value of exploring issues in an open and candid manner while seeking common ground to resolve potential conflicting interests, and 3) the need to keep in mind the possible consequences of their recommendations for change and their impacts on both present and future generations.
The importance of public dialogue and debate cannot be underestimated. It lies at the foundation of any sustainable, healthy and vital community. And, it is a sign of our maturity and willingness to learn lessons from the past, a means of coming to terms with the present, and an effective way not only to find our bearings in uncertain times but also to navigate safely in uncharted waters to new destinations.
Nice to see this article printed in its entirety.