Dear Editor:
I read with vested interest the Feb. 9 article DNV Path Leads to Kirkstone Road Proposal.
As a local resident whose family members utilize the peaceful park trail in question almost daily, I resent the implications by district councillors that rezoning even one square metre of the protected parkland (proposed Bylaw 8308, 2018) would be of benefit to any park users. I particularly take issue with Coun. Muri’s belief that the change would not “impact the spirit of the park.” Converting a graveled pathway used by pedestrians and bikers into a concrete vehicle road irrefutably impacts the “spirit of the park,” madam councillor.
For a fact, the reallocation of park space to roadway is one mandatory element of Mosaic Homes’ application to redevelop Emery Village, currently occupied by 61 families. Mosaic proposes a monstrosity of 408 units that will include two-12-storey buildings (to the tree line of the eastern side of Kirkstone Park) and no less than three other buildings, of five-storeys or greater, increasing an already high density area by another 347 households.
Make no mistake: removing Kirkstone’s Park dedication (Bylaw 7108, 1999) will destroy mature trees and tender ecosystems and will make any sidewalk attached to a roadway dangerous to the scores of seniors and families in the area. Increased traffic from the overdeveloped Lynn Valley mall vicinity will use this road to bypass 27th Street in an effort to shortcut to Mountain Highway. A couple of years ago, with the construction of Polygon’s Canyon Springs, district chose to eliminate infrastructure – one full northbound lane on Mountain Highway – in favour of a dedicated turning lane for Canyon Springs access. When are we citizens of the District of North Vancouver going to stand up for our rights as residents and object to district council catering to every whim of development companies at the cost of our quality of life??!!
The eight-page agenda report to council of Jan. 29 states: “The part of the road coming from the Emery Village development will be dedicated as highway by way of subdivision if and when council adopts the rezoning bylaw.” No reference, Coun. Lisa Muri, to “enhancing Kirkstone Park” or simply “changing the name of a piece of road from park to road” Coun. Robin Hicks. It is in fact tearing away a piece of well-used, natural trail nestled along the border of Kirkstone Park, exposing it and dedicating it to the purpose of “highway.”
The district spent several years, beginning in 2009, consulting many stakeholders, user groups, and advisory committees to formulate a 102 page study Parks and Open Spaces Strategic Development Plan (POSSDP) in November 2012. Section 3.2 of the document provides an analysis of district park trends, stating that “a growing interest in walking, hiking and enjoying the outdoors brings a demand for expanded greenways, trails and bikeways to support personal and environmental health.” One of the goals (POSSDP 4.3) in the aforementioned plan includes the need to: “Maintain and expand an accessible, safe and diverse ‘trail and greenway system’ to …encourage alternative modes of transportation, conserve ecological integrity and support an active lifestyle.” Another of the goals states the DNV must “proactively manage park assets and infrastructure to support active living and healthy environments for future generations.” Rezoning any portion of a park in favour of vehicle use is contradictory to these goals and indeed to the entire POSSDP. Of interest was the section on demographic trends (POSSDP 3.1), which suggests that, in 2012, 36 per cent of the district’s greenhouse gas emissions came from the transportation sector and that, with increasing population, significant attention must be paid to maintaining, if not increasing, greenways and trails to provide pathways for environmentally sound alternate transportation.
The Parks and Recreation Master Plan of 1991 had the foresight to include the formation of the park dedication bylaw, which was considered the highest form of protection of parkland under the Community Charter. In 2002 council went further when they created new park zones (POSSDP 5.1.2) …” to provide more refined controls over permitted uses and development within parks and open space in urban areas.” These efforts, recommendations, and laws created by past councils seem to be all for naught, when big development dresses up and comes to town.
Unequivocally, district council is pandering to big money – to the big ticket developer – with this alternate approval process for the removal of an almost two decades-long Kirkstone Park dedication.
Don’t let development companies have easy access to changing our district neighbourhoods. Every District of North Vancouver resident should sign their objection on the electoral response form by 4 p.m. March 12 at https://www.dnv.org/our-government/alternative-approval-process.
Six thousand objections are needed for the residents – the true stakeholders – to justly have their say in a referendum.
Stand up for green space and parkland, lest your neighbourhood park be the next one compromised to accommodate more condominiums – more cement jungles – and less recreational area!
With concern.
Kelly Bond
North Vancouver
What are your thoughts? Send us a letter via email by clicking here or post a comment below.
