Email from Diane & Russ Ridout re: View Royal Park-Tax Payers Money
Letter from long-time residents opposing the $100,000 funding for a bike park at View Royal Park, citing history of the land and noise concerns.
View Royal Park-Tax Payers Money
From: Diane & Russ Ridout
Sent: July-23-18 10:03 PM
To: Mayor And Council Email
Subject: View Royal Park-Tax Payers Money
Dear Mayor Screech and Council Members,
I recently received a notice in the mail regarding the bike park at our local View Royal Park, to fund in the amount of $100,000 for 2019.
I am not sure if you knew the history how the View Royal Park was acquired, the only largest green space of park land given from a developer.
Before View Royal was incorporated, my father in-law, Mike Ridout and other community members were on the planning and zoning committee back in the 1980’s, fought hard for the approval for the acquisition of open green space, with no team sports allowed for an open natural green space for all users to enjoy for the exchange for the development of Pheasant Lane. Hours and hours went into decisions and planning to acquire such a large piece of land and no developer today would give up such a parcel of land.
It is so disrespectful to take something so naturally green and decide to change/develop areas of the park, that so many long time residents fought hard for, for others to enjoy. The original playground was also funded by the developer.
During my 33 years as a tax payer of View Royal, I witness the development of highway 1 into a larger highway. The Ministry of Transportation, paid Wakefield Acoustics to do a noise monitoring assessment for the Helmcken Interchange stating that the Paddock Place existing noise level due to the traffic change, volume and speed (7lanes) would exceed the “normal 65 dBa criterion for noise mitigation. We were to have 220 metres long of roadside sound barrier wall along Highway 1, but (MOT) ran out of money and put in a replacement dirt barrier, which the Town made the Maclennan trail to connect to View Royal Park. Nobody from the town has considered the noise levels since this report was last done in the 1990’s and what the residents close to View Royal Park deal with. Nobody ever considered the residents in the area when the berm was developed to connect to the park and we lost the other park access when (MOT) sold off 2 highway right-of way lots in 2001.
In 2002, it was confirmed in email, that the town spent $590,000 dollars for 2.5 acres next to Knocken Hill Park, as well as another $250,000 dollars for parkland around Six Mile Road/Chico area. Why are we as taxpayers paying for improvements on a park that was given by the developers for the development of Pheasant Lane? Why are we not developing the other 2 parks, mentioned above, that the town paid for, to develop and use for bike parks, playgrounds, fitness stations, community gardens? The parkland that nobody has access to, off of the Six Mile Road, is protected and is considered(Nursery Hill Park) to provide a natural green space, the same what View Royal Park was, when it was approved and acquired?
I recently tried to take my grand daughter to the Atkins Road Park and couldn’t get a parking space early morning, due to riders using the park to park their cars to ride their bikes on the trail occupying parking up to 8 to 10 hours a day, mostly from other municipalities, and parking along the road was full. Tried the overflow parking lot at the corner of Six Mile Road, it was full. We have a beautiful rail trail for bikers and walkers near our road and the crossing of the trail was changed to a four way stop by the town without the residents having any say, while the crossing at Atkins Road, riders have to yield and cars have the right away. Many riders do not respect the stop sign and the car owners pay the insurance.
Online surveys for decisions made in neighbourhoods don’t respect the potential impacts of taxpayers, homeowners, including privacy, noise, or the green space in their area.
In closing, money that was to be held in trust by the municipality, including interest from the over charging of sewer taxes for the sewer user(extra payment) fees, was used for a capital expenditure on an area, that was not credited back to the taxpayers or were the taxpayers were informed or returned or spent fairly. I paid $420.46 dollars in total this year for sewer user fees, View Royal and CRD, more than the City of Victoria.
I look forward to your comments and appreciate your time in answering or correcting any of my information that I may not have correctly stated.
Diane Ridout
Resident of View Royal, 44 years.
Sent from my iPad