VERNON - City officials continue to spar over the use of a green space near Marshall Fields as an off-leash dog park. Residents have been using the area, which runs alongside Marshall Fields by the Lakers Clubhouse, to let their dogs run off leash for years, but now the City of Vernon is now tightening up the rules, and that doesn’t sit well with Coun. Scott Anderson.“What I’m concerned about is the people who have walked their dogs there for eons, because dogs need to be off leash,” Anderson says. “This is one of the nicest dog parks we’ve got here.”Greater Vernon has five designated fenced off-leash dog parks in addition to a number of other on-leash only parks, including Marshall Fields. City staff told council allowing off leash dogs at the site threatens the spadefoot toad that inhabits the creek, but Anderson insists that argument is moot because of possible airport expansion plans to reroute the creek or pave over it.“Clearly that is going to affect the frogs much more than anything any dog could ever do, even hoards of dogs,” Anderson says.He’s heard somewhere in the neighbourhood of 200 people use the area to let their dogs off leash and expects an uproar if the city starts enforcing on-leash restrictions.“I’ve got a whole whack of people who are ramping up to be quite vociferous about this,” Anderson says.Anderson opposed a new Parks Master Plan at a public meeting Sept. 28 on the basis that it calls for the area to be on-leash only — a move that left at least one fellow councillor visibly frustrated. Coun. Juliette Cunningham felt the issue shouldn’t ‘unravel the parks plan’ but rather be dealt with separately by the city and regional district. She pointed out the topic was debated at length during council’s last meeting.“I’m not going to sit here for another hour and discuss dogs (going) off leash, that’s what we did last time. I’m not going to do that this time,” she said.
Coun. Bob Spiers also opposed the Parks Master Plan, but for a different reason; the one per cent tax it calls for over the next ten years for park improvements.“The Parks Master Plan has merit but I still want to see the financial implication,” Spiers said.The plan was ultimately accepted, with Spiers and Anderson the only councillors who voted against it.
-------------
Don Quixote Note:
My Concern is that the revised estimated shortfall on this 13.1 million 10 year plan is stated to be $3.9 million. The shortfall is determined to be only 3.9 million after allowing for items such as outside contribution of $1.1 million, $1 million from parkland dedication and $7.1 million from DCC's. While this is a shortfall that is better than the $5.4 million shown to the public in the original DRAFT plan this will only be the actual shortfall if DCC funds can be used beyond the $3.2 million for property acquisition. If only property acquisition can be funded from DCC's then there is an additional $3.9 million shortfall. (Total $7.8 million)
The projected taxes required could go from an estimated 1.2% to 2.4%. (Each year for 10 years).
The final estimates should be incorporated in the Master Parks Plan (P.92-231) before placing it into the OCP (After a public hearing)
---------------------------
 |
| Difference between Total $$$ figures is rounding |
http://www.cscd.gov.bc.ca/lgd/intergov_relations/library/DCC_Best_Practice_Guide_2005.pdf (p.42 & 43)
Parkland Acquisition and Improvement Projects While section 933 (2) (b) of the Local Government Act generally mentions “providing” and “improving” parkland, sections 935 (3) (b) and 936 provide some clarification to the conditions that make parkland acquisition and improvements eligible for a parkland DCC program. Regarding parkland acquisition, the land must have: • a location and character acceptable to local government; and, • a market value that is at least equal to the amount of the charge (section 936 (2)). Regarding parkland improvements, works are limited to: • fencing; • landscaping; • drainage and irrigation; • trails; • restrooms; • changing rooms; • playground equipment; and, • playing field equipment (section 935 (3) (b) (ii)).
When compiling a parkland acquisition DCC program, DCCs should not be used to make up past deficiencies in parkland. For example, DCC funds should not be used to acquire parkland in an older area of the municipality which is not experiencing new development. In the case where a parkland deficiency exists, parkland acquisition funding must come from general revenue or means other than DCCs.
No comments:
Post a Comment