Haldi Matter To Peak Tonight
Monday, March 4, 2013 @ 4:32 AM
Prince George, B.C.- The amendments to the Official Community Plan (OCP) and the impact those amendments will have on all neighbourhoods in the City of Prince George, will be front and centre at tonight’s meeting of Prince George City Council.
At the core of the issue are amendments that, if approved, will clear the way for the development of a recovery centre for women in the Haldi Road neighbourhood. The majority of residents in that area are dead set against the amendments, and have filed a petition carrying more than 500 names , and submitted 28 letters, opposing the amendments.
Those who support the project and the OCP amendments have filed 51 letters of support.
With so much interest in the matter, Mayor Green had advised on Friday, that those making a presentation would be held to a five minute time limit. That didn’t sit well with the lawyer for the Haldi residents, who has advised the City the time restraint could be considered arbitrary and , in his opinion, would deny people the right to a reasonable amount of time to state their case. He advises limiting the time people have to speak to the matter could result in further court action.
The Council meet is slated to start at 6, with the public hearing on the agenda for 7 p.m.
Comments
City hall is pushing this hard. I too will be pushing hard for new city council when the time comes
Ah, but how many letters for it are just one line and a name. No address, no reasons why.
51 letters of support for the OCP plan change or for the need for a women’s treatment center. If they are not dealing with land use issues ie residential vs institutional then they should not be taken under consideration.
“but how many letters for it are just one line and a name …. no reasons why”
They are just keeping with the standard that Council has set. They do not give any reasons why this shoukd be doen, and there will be no reasons why given tonight either other than the speeches each of them will be giving.
Completely right lonesome sparrow.
They are many things wrong with the “arguments” put forth by Staff as well as L&M.
In one part they hang there hat on the fact that the school use was an institutional use. That is true, but a jail is also an institutional use. Sites for jails, for hopsitals, for elementary schools, for high schools, for universities, etc. ALL have different siting criterias.
Because this facility will havea secure fence around it with cameras and people will not be allowed to leave the premises unescorted this can actually be considered to be a “secure facility”. Who is being protected here, those under treatment or the neighbourhood or both. I do not think that question has ever been answered.
Then they pretend that this is a residence. Yes, people “live” there while they are under treatment. So do those who are infirm in a hospital. But whether the acute bed portiuon of a hospitl or the long term care facility at the hospital, neither is considered as a residence. The are temporary places to sleep and be housed out of the elements. It is not a “home”. Seniors residences are residential properties. This is not.
It is easy for proponents not living in the Haldi neighborhood to say it is a great idea for the treatment centre to go into Haldi, where they will not be affected. If the score is 51 to 28 how can equal weight be given to the letters from outside the neighborhood from those who are not affected.
Should those letters be considered at all if they do not deal with land use issues.
I still have a issue with the city referring to the building as an “vacant elementary school” in official City documents. This is not correct, the building is a vacant residential property and the zoning for the site reflects that. Have not seen any 4 bedroom 3 bath schools with living rooms, kitchens and fireplaces.
IMO this is just one more bit of deceit, trying to further cloud the issue as it might be slightly more palatable to convert a school than a private residence.
Would love to hear Roy Stewart’s opinion on this. One more reason to have the outcome overturned?
What is not mentioned are the notes that were handed in at the Vanway School public hearing that was suppose to address the OCP amendment. 47 were opposed to the changes of the OCP and 17 were supportive but again stressing the fact that this type of facility is needed in PG, not on the grounds of land use. Letters written that do not relate to land use IMO should not be taken into consideration. It will be interesting tonight to see how council will handle the “land use”
Is asking who is going to be making a lot of money if this goes through not politically correct or is it none of our business? Tsk. Tsk. Tsk. Names?
Given that pretty much everyone seems to accept the need for such a facility and the dispute is only as to whether it should be in this location, what are good alternative locations that are consistent with the OCP?
“What is not mentioned are the notes that were handed in at the Vanway School public hearing”
Not only that, but there does not appear to be a record of who said what at the microphone. The only thing I saw was written submissions which were handed in.
Tht could be another issue which could carry some weight should it have to go back to court.
“what are good alternative locations that are consistent with the OCP?”
What has not been made public is the fact that the Northern Recovery Centre has apparently signed a lease with the owners of the Haldi Rd school. So now you see why they are trying to push this through at any cost.
More city taxpayer money being wasted by Green and crew on something that should have been put to rest after the first go around in the courts.
When it is looked at it by all the residences it is not the women shelter that we are opposed too. It is the manner in which the city is allowing the women shelter to be installed in that neighbourhood. It needs to go thru a fair protocol system. It appears that the city desparately wants to close this pandora box.
Are the 51 letters supporting the women shelter or are they supporting the authority to change the OCP at will by council.
To He spoke: Nearly all of the letters support the Women Shelter in the social context, only a very few actually say anything about the Land Use and the OCP.
Littlebird, writes a lease is already signed….
Are you kidding me! The developers Fehr and Wood signed a lease agreement with the Centre. Would be interesting to know if it was signed before the first open house 2 years ago…..
No wonder they do not want to look at another site or talk to anyone else in the city…..If there is not a release clause they could be hooped for the rest of the lease for ever how long it is for.
If this was to be the case then no wonder it is being pushed through..
This appears more and more like others could be in conflict as well …..Smith and Green, major campaign contributions to running candidates, common names sitting and appointed to various other board etc.
A potential major problem for ther Haldi road residents is what happened with the Pheionix transition center a few years ago. (and not just the violent boyfriends and husbands) They needed more funding, so they started renting beds to various ministries which sounded sweet to thenm at the time I guess. Problem was they neglected to inform the neighbors that it had become a halfway house for some ladies having problems with drugs, prostitution, crim and violence. This led to some rather scary situations for the neighbors and their children. I’d say not in my backyard for this deal as well. Lotrs of room further out in the country.
A potential major problem for ther Haldi road residents is what happened with the Pheionix transition center a few years ago. (and not just the violent boyfriends and husbands) They needed more funding, so they started renting beds to various ministries which sounded sweet to thenm at the time I guess. Problem was they neglected to inform the neighbors that it had become a halfway house for some ladies having problems with drugs, prostitution, crim and violence. This led to some rather scary situations for the neighbors and their children. I’d say not in my backyard for this deal as well. Lotrs of room further out in the country.
This will be a big eye opener if this goes through⦠why have council that dictator mayor slimy Green does not give a crap about the people only big business and she knows she has slim chance of re-electionâ¦She will set up all her friends to make a pile of MONEY
Still out in Haldi this entire process is totally UN- sustainable you cant Haul that much water in, on roads that cant handle the volume 4 months a year
STILL
NO WATER
NO SEWER
NO PAVED ROAD
Impeach the Green
This council discussed me! How many of these councilors would except A drug treatment center next to their house? How would they feel if their property value plummeted over night? Yet these heartless dictators will do it to someone else. I support the Haldi Road residents That have worked hard and lived clean in a outskirts community to get away from the likes that need a recovery center. These people should not have someone else’s problem shoved down their throat!
billposer: Given that pretty much everyone seems to accept the need for such a facility and the dispute is only as to whether it should be in this location, what are good alternative locations that are consistent with the OCP?
I suggest do your research as the Haldi Road people have. Check with city hall and you will find a lot of places that are consistent with the OCP.
I suspect the lease was signed a long time ago and perhaps they cannot get out of it, so they have/had no intentions of looking elsewhere.
You would not need to be asking such a question if the city and the applicants had been doing their jobs properly the whole of the city would know….:)
In my view the Haldi residents were the ones to inform the rest of the city with the media and advertising coming out of their own pockets.
If this goes through tonight – the people of this city may need to look at the same options as the Haldi group…..
Billposser
Maybe the owners wo purchased this residential home should have looked into it before they purchased and certainly should not have allowed it to be leased until these questions were answered. Unless the owners/investors had some inside information as to what was allowed for zoning and if it was consistant with the OCP. Seems the city planners still don’t know what they’re doing.
My question about alternative locations was not argumentative as some people seem to have taken it to be. I am wondering what the alternatives are and whether there are a lot of them.
Comments for this article are closed.