Tuesday, February 19, 2019
Opinion Letters

I would like to express my disappointment in the actions of the current owners of the Carlisle Lane / Jaro Nursery development in clearing the property and in the Villages' approval of the development. I regret that we, as a Village, have not honored the principles of the past and soon to be new OCP to preserve and promote agriculture within the Village. The Jaro property presented a real opportunity to have an ECO village type of development that would contribute to our community economically and as a model of sustainable living.

The property in question had some incredible resources that with some attention and minimal cost could have been utilized - Hundreds of trees like Gary oaks and Sequoias could have been rescued and transplanted - perhaps within the Village. The existing border of of large second growth trees could be left standing with sufficient buffer zones to ensure safety. High density lower cost housing could be concentrated in the center of the property, providing a much needed alternative in housing styles. Land that is very suited for agriculture could have been preserved and utilized to provide an income and/or food supply for Cumberland residents.

I attended many of the meetings hosted by the current owners and developers and expressed these thoughts both verbally and in writing. As with many of us, I have a very busy life and am often not in Cumberland. My partner and I have both had to travel outside of Cumberland to work at certain times of the year so we did not actively pursue a campaign to oppose this development.

I do regret not doing so, seeing the results and the disruption of our neighborhood over the past 18 months. Although the Carlisle Lane owners have taken "appropriate steps" and due process to develop this property, there are still deficiencies and inefficiencies. My partner is very knowledgeable in regards to construction practices and we have watched in dismay as resources have been wasted and mismanaged as this property is cleared.

Opinion - Letters

Richard Drake writes...I have been a resident in the village of Cumberland for approximately 10 years. One of the reasons I came here was because of the inclusive nature of the last OCP, which was just wrapping up when I arrived.

The word got out around the province that Cumberland was not only an interesting place to live, but unlike many other places, cared about its heritage enough to be one of the few remaining intact historical towns/villages in BC. This was partly a function of what was contained in the OCP. In fact, out of the many young families who have been moving here, a number of them chose to come here, not because we had fantastic employment opportunities, but because we have a very good quality of life. For instance although many of us to drive, maybe too much, I can walk downtown, and get just about any thing I want from municipal services, businesses, entertainment, medical care, library, and just about anything else I might want.

I am very glad you included "Quality of Life" in one of the measurements of our new draft OCP. A livable community attracts people who want to contribute to where they live. A good quality of life goes hand-in-hand with a vibrant economic climate. There are minimal drains on social services, police etc. You could do well to draw on a significant work done through the Livable Communities organizations that came into being all over BC in the early 1990s. Mayor Ashley of Campbell River made a substantial contribution to this. Although this movement is long gone, we could study their conclusions, objectives, and those things that were implemented, without reinventing the wheel.

Opinion - Letters

Vera Moan writes regarding the tree protection and management bylaw No.947, 2012,on agenda June 11, 2012

Letter for the agenda at the council meeting on June 25, 2012

I do not support the proposed bylaw No.947 as it is discriminatory and adds costs to an all ready costly process of maintaining trees.

This bylaw exempts parcels of land less than 750 m. sq. How can land size be considered to be the determinating factor of who has to go through this ridiculous system of steps and added costs and added time and staff permission when someone with a smaller parcel (possibly with a bigger tree) can cut it down with no jumping through hoops and no added cost and no added time and whenever he wants?

Opinion - Letters

Vera Moan writes:

The new bylaw proposes to allow logging or forest related activities on land zoned for that purpose and also to allow industrial activities on land zoned for that purpose to commence at 6am until 8pm Monday to Saturday. Also allowed on Sunday from 9am to 6pm.

I believe the 6am is too early for loud and disruptive noises. Cumberland is a growing Village but the citizens of Cumberland should still be able to enjoy quiet mornings, 7am is early enough, 8am would be even better. Noise travels a long distance in the early morning.

Opinion - Letters

Open letter to Cumberland Village Council

Re: 2012 Budget decisions

On March 19th I had the pleasure of sitting in on Cumberland Council's budget process.  I was impressed by Council's efforts to keep our taxes down while covering anticipated expenses.  Reading of the hikes in other Valley jurisdictions I was even more impressed at the preliminary estimate of our Village taxes going up less than 1%.

This was due in part to your handling of a number of difficult decisions, some of those involving selective fee waivers and grants in aid.  The background information prepared by staff was thorough, showing real and potential revenue implications of thousands of dollars to the Village.

Opinion - Letters

More Articles...

Page 1 of 5