Oh I think something stinks here...they don't have any money for teachers but they have money for a "VILLAGE"?
give ma a break ..I am so tired of the lies, or they sure seem like lies....It is bad enought that I have to help pay for that mess they are are calling a sports center....

I don't know if the university should be involved, but I ‘ve always thought that location across from the new Northern Sports Center is the best location for development in PG. A restaurant/pub overlooking the city on the crest would be a tourist attraction for its views IMO. The lucky owner would be hugely successful.

I have two concerns:

#1) We must set aside now a good well connected trail system with the best views as public greenbelt for what could be one of the best urban parks in the world in the future.

#2) Being a potential billion dollar viewscape free from the pollution of the bowl it should be treated as a sacred resource for the whole city when developed. I mean that view lines should be respected and taken advantage of to the fullest in zoning and planning, as well as being selective about who has the right project for the right location.

IE Parkland for the public with the best views, across the road from lower buildings possibly the business at street level concept (ie Pentiction), followed by higher up buildings (student apartments, retirement homes, condo's) up the slope maximizing positive viewscape development potential, while preserving the hill green belt.

If done right then in the future this location will be the center of Prince George development. I predict in 20 years this area may up root the downtown in urban potential.

This could be PG's last chance, if we blow this one we probably blew it IMO. Developing it entirely as residential would be a great way to sandbag the potential it could otherwise generate for the rest of the city if developed as an urban center.

They are trying to style the business model after UBC who makes a small fortune from all the housing on campus at UBC. They lease all the property out and many people have built very expensive properties on the lease and either live in them or rent them out.

At this time though I don't think the University owns that land across University Way and would have to purchase it.

Yet services to students have been cut and they want to now become a land developer. None of the recent University buildings have come in on budget, so please don't become a land developer !

They will have to move fast to get this done before they have to close the University for lack of interest. 3600 Full Time Equivilent Students and holding for 5 years with a population decrease looming in the near future, and a optomistic growth potential next year of 1 or 2 percent is hardly the basis to go further into debt. Maybe real estate is the answer as higher education seems to be not working so well.

How will this venture fit in with the supposed downtown condo's for University Students, the present development of land West of the University, the proposed development of the Fraser River Bench lands etc;.. Lots of proposed projects and very few people seems to me.

The city’s GIS mapping on their web page shows that the UNBC owns about 3 hectares in the crook of the road that joins Tyner with University Way. That would then be about 270 units they are looking at. Most of the UNBC property is on the other side of Tyner, with the First Nations to the south of that. It has the higher ground. The 3 hectare portion would not have much of a view with three to four storey buildings unless someone took down trees below them. Hopefully they will not eradicate trees, other than the pine which have been attacked, such as they did when they created the “University in the woods” .. NOT!!!!

As a “village” concept, picture something like a portion of a ski hill development at Sun Peaks, Whistler, etc. in your mind.

Of course, it would also be interesting to create a single “point” development – tower with the majority of the green space preserved, “underground parking which could daylight out at the downhill portion with rooftop being used for some commercial developments to service the entire campus. There is a natural waterway on the property which could then be conserved.

It should be a “green” development from my point of view – solar panels, even a wind turbine, also geothermal.

Lets say they lease the property to the strata corporation, get a developer to put up the money to build and sell it, then the 270 units plus some commercial rental space might have a current price of $25,000 attached to it for the land value. At say a 7% return, that would generate about $400,000 per annum and cost each unit owner $125 per month at the current rate. The fee could be adjusted on a regular basis based on assessed land value so that the present return would be protected against inflation as best as possible.

No risk to the University; an income stream; a development to enhance student life at the university. An incentive for others to build to the south of the development in a similar fashion (assuming that the UNBC development is an advanced concept rather than the same old mess we see everywhere – just look at the so called “SMART” housing going up south of DP Todd; the City should be ashamed!!) will also help.

As far as too many developments. Let me put it this way. It’s called choice! We have infill in the corridor between Vancouver and Victoria; we have the Fraser Bench for those who like the smell and noise of money; we have late comer Yuppieville housing on denuded hills across from Westgate shopping; we have treed subdivision of the 70’s generation at the end of Malaspina; we have trucker havens in various areas surrounding the City; and finally we have the Hart for those who enjoy extended winters.

So, a development for those who like to be close to their work or studies at UNBC or just like to be associated with the life of academe would be one additional choice.

BTW, I do not know where the 45 acres mentioned in the article is located with respect to the UNBC. It does not say that it is the UNBC that is doing the slope analysis or that it is happening just on the UNBC property. Perhaps the City's GIS map is not up to date.

Go to google earth and you get a good idea of where the ridge is and the views one can get. Also go to the city's GIS map on their site and turn on the contours layer to get an idea of the "slope analysis" yourself and see the UNBC property.

The property I am talking about above is to the south of the sports centre and University way. There is a portion of about 6 hectares of UNBC property shown on the east side of University way which is located to the north of the Shane Creek overpass.

There is a good sized portion of property behind the residences to the West which is in the order of 40 hectares, with the proposed extension of Tyner Blvd with Kueng Rd running just to the west of the residences. This location would make a lot of sense for residential. It closer to the UNBC buildings, adjacent to existing residential development, on an arterial, adjacent to “Forests for the World” (completely underdeveloped from its original concept) recreational area, etc. I am wondering if that is the area under review.

Final word .. the reason UBC is leasing its endowment lands is to get an income stream. Of course, the order of magnitude per acre there is likely 10 fold to that here, but if there is interest by a developer, it will be a postive "flow" of dollars nevertheless, especially if they build in future increases to gain vlaue increases should the City grow again sometime down the road.

I think this plan for a "village" at UNBC is a litte premature.

UNBC is facing major challenges at the present time, and I think the Board of Governors should be spending "all" of their time addressing these challenges.

What if one of the challenges is that the campus is a bit on the "remote" side? .... which it is. Laurentian in Thunder Bay suffers from that as well.

Like anything else, when there are few seats available, people will go anywhere there is space. When there are more seats than students, it become a "buyers' market" and students will reject those universities which have fewer amenities.

Although the following is from a survey in the UK, I think it is quite close to the results one would get with a similar survey in North America, Canada, and BC …..

TOP TEN FACTORS INFLUENCING UNIVERSITY DECISION
Current undergraduates
1. Quality of course
2. Quality of nightlife
3. Facilities at university
4. Look of location
5. Kudos of university
6. Quality of shopping
7. Close to home
8. Popular culture
9. Cost of living in area
10. History of the university
http://education.guardian.co.uk/virtualfairs/story/0,,1317729,00.html

Sorry, thatr should be Lakehead rather than Laurentian......

:-(

I don't think Mr. Lynch should be involved in this as he sits on the board and he himself is a real estate broker/owner at remax. Smacks of conflict of interest.

There may be none in legal terms, but it could look like there is. Thus, by definition, there is. You are right.

Hopefully no one sits on the Board who might want to buy a condo there.

;-)

'There is a portion of about 6 hectares of UNBC property shown on the east side of University way which is located to the north of the Shane Creek overpass.'

That would be my location for a university pub/restaurant. #2. Quality of nightlife... on Owls list.

A bit of an access problem by vehicle since the road is divided. One could actually design a nice building right into the hillside, making sure it does not slide down the hill :-) .... and park on the roof...

But it would be a great location for a pedestrian accessible facility via the lit walkway which already exists from the parking lot.

My choice would be a less complicated location - at the east end of the parking lot, developed in conjunction with the storm basin and intended (I believe) gardens area. I think that entire area needs some better quality landscape design with a more “natural” looking storm catchment than a rectangular ditch reminiscent of a quarry rather than a lagoon.

Build something to the north of that to give a some wind protection and allow the sun to heat up part of it and one creates a bit of a microclimate to extend the season a bit.

Now, as far as the location of the university golf course and club house goes……

Well, mr lynch could certainly buy a condo there, but i don't think he should be involved in the development of the property......he probably has the bucks to do so or maybe already owns some land there...you never know.....anyways...He owns all or part of remax here in PG and he also sits on the university board...conflict waiting to happen!!

I'm not so sure that would be a conflict of interest and might actually be an asset to the university as far as realestate development strategyic advice goes. I think Mr Lynch has enough morals to avoid a blatent conflict of interest, but I would suggest he take steps on his own to state where a conflict could arise, and the university on its part should be aware of any potential conflict to protect its interests. I think it can be done. Mr Lynch is a doer kind of person and we need some of them to help move foreward the good ideas when we can all reach a consensus on what we would like to do as a university and city.

That said I do not share the same P3 view that Mr Lynch does and that is one area where I would have concerns. IMO it is either a justified public esential infrastructure investment, or it is a private investment. The two do not mix.

yES, CHADERMANDO, but if it so happens that Mr. Lynch could profit personally from the exploitation/development of those lands while he sits on the board of directors at UNBC then he should not be involved..in fact he should step down. That's all I gotta say bout that!