Email dated July 19, 2020 from Lorraine Liwiski, Subject: 9 Erskine Lane - development proposal
Email stating disagreement with the development's density and height, lamenting the expected loss of natural forest area.
9 Erskine Lane - development proposal
From: Lorraine Liwiski
Sent: Sunday, July 19, 2020 3:21 PM
To: Info Address info@viewroyal.ca
Subject: 9 Erskine Lane - development proposal
Dear Mayor and Council
I wish to convey my disagreement with the development proposal for the above property in it's entirety, particularly from one perspective.
While I would love for this beautiful, mature forested property , with rocky terrain, Garry Oaks, Douglas Fir and so on to remain as it is, rather than be looked upon as only real estate, depressingly I know it is not so. Forests and trees, though disappearing, are part of a climate action plan, and have many benefits, both environmentally , aesthetically and provide green space for humans to enjoy. I was deeply saddened to see a development/rezoning sign on this particular piece of urban forest, and hoped that a natural portion would be retained as part of the project.
From what I gleamed out of the reports, an environmental report stated the inventory, but not considered to be "saved" is how I interpreted it. Tree/forest loss will occur on this property, as it's fate is zoned to be "developed".
The development proposal of 372 units or so, is asking for a height greater than allowed to reduce its footprint, underground parking as well to reduce footprint, both of which appears to be desirable option. Initially the report states 59% of current natural property will be lost , but likely higher due to construction and walkways. What will be the final percentage?? Exactly how much, if any natural forest will remain?? Does not a development has to have a certain percentage to be green space or natural? It is also disconcerting that a total of 36 trees will be left, 128 or so taken down, property flattened, 256 or so trees planted. Will those trees be douglas fir, garry oak, spruce, cedar or arbutus? Or will they be non native deciduous trees and plants?
The pictures presented, to me show 4 large buildings, with no natural space by the looks of it, though man-made green space is there. It would be nice if the natural setting , particularly along Watkiss Way could be left, with the buildings behind it. Natural settings enhance a buildings desirability.
I believe, in all probability that the project will be approved as is, but I still have to ask if the project can be scaled down a bit or retain more forest , other than 36 trees?
I hope View Royal, now and in the future does not become paved over.:):)!! Watkiss Way has and will , really radically change. It was really beautiful.
Thank you for your time. Lorraine