Letter from Patti Germann re: Playground for kids in Nursery Hill

RE: Agenda item H. Sharma VIS6081, Playground for kids in Nursery Hill

Dear Mayor and Council,

I live in the Aspen condominiums on Nursery Hill Drive across the street from Gary Oak Meadows Park. I signed a petition put forward by Mr. Sharma which seeks to gather support for building an off-leash dog area in this park and a natural playground for kids. I signed the petition because it was promoted as being good for the children of the neighbourhood. Upon further reflection, I asked Mr. Sharma to remove my name from the petition when I began to think that it would be better for the kids of the neighbourhood if this natural space is not developed and if it remains just as it is.

“Access to nature” is a key reason why Victoria was chosen as the most liveable city in Canada.

I have not failed to notice the difference between development practice in View Royal and other municipalities. The town of View Royal has outdone other municipalities in protecting natural space and ensuring that natural space is a part of new developments. The vision held by former councils to preserve wild spaces is what makes our home on Nursery Hill Drive beautiful and interesting to all ages. I’m hoping that the current council attach the same value to the wildlife, the trees, the plants that would be disrupted and destroyed on Nursery Hill if the plan for a dog park and playground goes ahead. My goal here is to point out the important relationship between the animals, the vegetation, and the well-being of kids.

Playing in natural spaces is good for kids.

Living next to a natural space is of potentially greater interest to children than a developed space. Having the opportunity to play in and explore an area of woods such as Gary Oak Meadows is great resource. I would like to see municipal councils invest in providing information on the ways families can enjoy the natural spaces in our neighbourhoods. It would be valuable to hire a naturalist to develop a mini guide to “playing in the forest” which would suggest activities, games, explorations for infants and upwards. We mustn’t be afraid to take our young children exploring, picnicking, playing in natural environments. Such a space fosters creativity, curiosity and perhaps even a sense of stewardship among the young who like Dr. Seuss’s Lorax will one day “speak for the trees”.

Modeling to kids the preservation of a green corridor requires vision.

Preserving this natural space is in line with the “green corridor” idea of maintaining a green belt in urban planning, interconnected areas of natural habitat that allow for a variety of plant and animals species to continue to exist. Fencing off a part of this area is detrimental to the wildlife and plant life currently there. The introduction of new elements, the fence, the base which playground structures will sit upon, will be a disturbance to the trees, shrubs, flowers, and the multitude of little creatures that live there. In this era of climate change and growing awareness of the importance of green space the decision to protect this space from any kind of development should not be a hard decision for the council to make. The decision made about Gary Meadows Park will reflect a philosophy regarding nature and affect the legacy left to the kids of the community. This decision to forestall development will send kids a clear message: this natural space deserves protecting; with its abundance of plants and animals it is a fun and interesting place for kids just as it is. It may be a “natural playground” being proposed but it is none-the-less a development that will mess with the natural habitat.

A “natural” playground does not replace nature itself.

I worked as an early childhood educator. I have been involved in committees that created natural playgrounds. The idea of natural playgrounds came about to change the type of playgrounds already in existence on school grounds and in public parks which were previously developed. I can assure you that destroying nature to create a natural playground is contrary to the goals of the movement. More than just introducing natural materials into pre-existing playgrounds, early childhood educators think about the bigger question of how to have children and families experience and engage with real nature in wild spaces – just like the one we have here on Nursery Hill Drive. Some of us have had the chance as children to know how much fun wild spaces are. My own daughter and her friends chose my neighbour’s wild unkept front yard in which to play preferring it to structures expressly built for them.

We already have access to a playground two blocks away.

There is a great playground near Nursery Hill Drive, two blocks away just off Chilco Road. (And within that park an off-leash dog enclosure was in the planning two years ago?) I have a view of Nursery Hill Drive and Chilco Road. I see many young families walking to the Chilco Park playground at various times of day, during all seasons – kids of all ages, some in strollers, - with parents, caregivers, sometimes with grandparents, sometimes accompanied by a dog. It’s a three-minute walk – an accessible distance for most. This is what I did too when my daughter was young, we walked six blocks to a developed playground, using a stroller, our feet, or her bike. The fact that the playground was a few streets away did not deter us. Being in opposition to this petition does not mean Nursery Hill kids won’t have access to a developed playground.

In keeping the park wild there is much to be gained for the kids of Nursery Hill and beyond.

We are fortunate to have a natural undeveloped bit of land right on our doorstep, to observe, to explore and to play in. I’ve met young families that walk down Chilco Road from the Thetis Vale to Nursery Hill Drive for the very reason of finding an accessible natural space which they don’t have in Thetis Vale (The paths in Robyn Hill Park, just beyond the Chico Park playground are not as stroller friendly). For a walk in the woods, they come up to Gary Oak Meadows Park. Being in favour of this development means kids will lose a natural play space.

Leave it natural.

The kids deserve a natural space to be invited into. Let them meet the bugs and rabbits and mice and birds. Some young children are fascinated by these creatures. Let the children “develop” and rearrange the park, move sticks around, build their own little forts with the sticks and fallen leaves. Out of this kind of interest and play arise the future engineers, scientists, artists and with the help of parental guidance, future citizens with knowledge and respect for nature and for its fragility. Using available apps parents can help kids identify species by their sounds, their nests, their scats, their colourings.

I would happily enter this little patch of woods with my future grandchild, should I be so lucky to have one. I would be ready to explain why we protected and preserved it so that they too can have a memory of playing in a wild space. Or, should they prefer the developed playground down Chilco road with its big open field, it is equally accessible to me and these future grandkids. So, I say for the children’s sake, for their interest and creativity, for their fun, for their knowledge of the natural world don’t develop this land! Let the kids play in it and explore it just as it is.

Sincerely,

Patti Germann

PS. Aspen residents have the option to build a play structure on our own land.

The backyard of the Aspen condominiums consists of manicured lawn and a large patch of tilled soil. I’d be happy to assist Mr. Sharma and his supporters in getting a play structure approved, designed, and installed by our Strata Council at the Aspen.