Letter dated January 15, 2019 from D. Witzer, 25-1501 Glentana Road, Re: Rezoning Application - 1801 Admirals Road
Correspondence from a local resident detailing objections to the rezoning proposal, citing concerns over parking, traffic, alcohol licensing, and the loss of public gathering space.
It is not unreasonable to expect that most will arrive by automobile, seldom car-pooling, to arrive for community or private functions. There might be some pedestrian or transit users arriving but, for the most part, it is likely that the significant majority will arrive by car and need to park.
Other recent developments in the area demonstrate that inadequate on-site parking results in the reliance on street parking meant to support other public amenities. A specific example is the new retirement housing at the terminus of Gorge Road at Admirals. Visitors to the residents are now using all available stalls in the parking area intended for the Saanich Gorge Park and historic School House. In fact, on numerous occasions, the visitors double park within the confined area of the public parking and create an additional traffic hazard that impedes traffic flows near the Admirals intersection on Gorge Road.
Even if overflow parking were to be accepted at the Canadian Tire site, this would only serve to further impact upland residents adjacent to the Canadian Tire property both visually and as a disturbance potential. It should be noted that Canadian Tire, through their Development Permit and process, committed to prohibit overnight parking or use of their parking area other than for patrons’ use. Any such arrangement that relies on the Canadian Tire site for overflow parking would be contrary to previous Town and Canadian Tire commitments.
7) The proposal does not demonstrate controlled on-site parking.
There is no indication that the on-site parking lot configuration and access will ensure that overnight use is precluded, meaning that; lacking such restriction and control would invite the parking area to be used by campers and RV owners in the same way they already do at the Canadian Tire site, despite restriction being posted and in place on Canadian Tire property.
Overnight parking at the site should be prohibited, as it is with other parks in the region. Measures to control the access will also need to be in place to better guarantee that such activity cannot occur in our neighbourhood and that overnight parking opportunities are precluded effectively.
That the proposal includes the intent to license the premises creates additional problems if drivers who have consumed alcohol elect to park overnight, but that is more an issue with allowing the licensing of alcohol than it is the appropriate measure to prohibit overnight parking.
8) The proposal intends to obtain licensing to serve alcohol.
The influence of alcohol generally does not foster good behavior of those partaking in its consumption. Drinking alcohol is prohibited in most parks.
At establishments such as pubs, like the Four Mile, and at restaurants, there are measures in place and staff who are trained and responsible to curb over-consumption and misbehavior that might become disruptive in neighbourhoods where they are situated. This proposal does not appear to be one that is able to ensure such measures are established and remain in place. Moreover, the use as a licensed rental hall for such ‘festive’ celebrations as weddings would only encourage situations where such unwanted behavior would become likely.
The location of the site lends itself best to arrival and departure by way of automobile, combined with the access to and the serving of alcohol, essentially, the proposal promotes the introduction of driving under the influence of alcohol and into our community.
Visible policing in our area is not common, and I attribute that to resource limitations and the remoteness of our area being on the outskirts of their District jurisdiction. It recently took four full hours for the RCMP to arrive and attend to a call I reported of a crime-in-progress. In that time, the suspect had left the area and could not be apprehended. I suspect that similar calls regarding suspected drunk drivers might not be an effective position to rely on for controlling the consequence of allowing a licensed premises.
Clearly, the intent of licensing the premises to serve alcohol does not serve the community well and does not represent the family nature one might expect of a Cultural Center or Park designation. It bolsters only the use as a social house aligning more closely with a neighborhood pub and not necessarily a wanted neighbourhood attribute of those living in close proximity.
9) The site does not lend itself well for a ‘Community Centre’ use to serve View Royal residents.
Although there is merit to addressing the need for a Community Centre to serve View Royal, this site does not lend itself favorably to address the need in a functional or meaningful way.
The site is not centrally located to better serve residents but, rather, sits on the fringe edge of a remote area of the Town, encumbered by established Network road frontages and restrictive traffic configurations.
The 400+ residents of the Stratas and Cooperative Housing complexes on Glentana, for example, are equal shareholders and owners of their own Community Centre located on Glentana Road and would not necessarily benefit from a similar-type centre being located at this site. Similarly, residents in the area of Shoreline School might find arrangements to use the school facilities more appealing than to negotiate their way to park at the proposed site, thereby avoiding restrictive traffic configurations and awkward parking access.
The physical access by vehicle to the site is limited to right-in/ right-out. This is because of its immediate proximity to the traffic configurations at the new bridge and the traffic flow patterns of Admirals Road as a Network road. Although it is commendable that the parking does not impede the frontage of the property along Island Highway, which would share the same access restriction of right-in /right-out, vehicle access to this site appears to be better suited to others from outside of the Town than it is to View Royal residents.
10) Loss of public gathering space
On multiple occasions, and especially noted traditionally on Canada Day, the Craigflower Manor site is a focal meeting place for View Royal residents to gather in celebration. There is no other similar location in View Royal that shares the uniqueness of such a venue size to gather and attract community in a setting as beautiful and historic.
Development of this land, in any way, relinquishes or, at least, greatly compromises this valued attribute of our community and Town for decades.
In closing, I would like to thank you for your consideration of these points I have respectfully included in this letter to you.
I am unsure why there seems to have been very sparse public awareness or consultation but it would be appropriate for you to know that if I had not pursued, followed up, and specifically requested the information I received yesterday, I would not have been aware that such information was available or that the proposal was being introduced to Mayor and Council tonight. This is somewhat troublesome to me given my direct proximity to the subject lands.
I remain available to discuss these points further with you. Please feel welcome to contact me at my home.
David Witzer #25-1501 Glentana Road, View Royal, BC, V9A 7B2