|
May 5 , 2004
REPLACING RED HILL VALLEY
Below you will find a news article by CATCH (Citizens at City Hall) followed by our comments.
Red Hill Valley replacement plans unveiled
by CATCH - May 2, 2004
The city is proposing to replace the parkland lost to the Red Hill Creek Expressway with 76 hectares of publicly-owned lands in upper Stoney Creek. An additional 9 hectares of private and school board lands may be added to the proposed circular strip of park that would link the escarpment with the Mount Albion Conservation Area, the Eramosa Karst lands and Valley Park on Paramount Drive.
No estimate of cost is provided, but the staff report says that "financial and legal implications do not appear to be an issue". It notes the planning has included local MPPs and that "initial discussions concerning the need for provincial lands to be provided at no cost were received favorably." Almost two-thirds of the required area is currently owned by the province.
The City-owned lands are almost all open space areas immediately adjacent to King's Forest Park as well a strip surrounded on four sides by the Mt. Albion Conservation Area. The report repeatedly stresses that "the private lands and school board lands are not essential to this strategy." Future management of the parkland may be delegated to the Hamilton Conservation Authority.
Red Hill Valley comprises over 300 hectares of lands. The strategy seeks to replace the 25% that is being cleared for the new expressway. The report says the city has worked since 1997 "to reduce the impact of the Red Hill Valley project on local environs" and that the "the one remaining concern is the loss of open space". There is no mention of compensation for the hundreds of homes in lower Hamilton directly affected by the expressway construction.
The report argues that the replacement plan "will create a fabulous open space system" of 240 hectares "in the most rapidly growing part of Hamilton , a parkland system on the doorsteps of thousands of homes."
Developer Aldo DeSantis recently announced the start of a 3200-home subdivision immediately south of the proposed park area. DeSantis said completion of the expressway "will be the lynchpin" to the 160-hectare subdivision. DeSantis notes that "almost everywhere else in Hamilton is pretty well out of land". A big box store complex dubbed Meadowlands East owned by Al Frisina is also planned for the area.
DeSantis purchased his lands from the provincial government in 1998 for $5600 an acre. They will be worth 30-50 times that amount by the time they are fully developed over the next decade. DeSantis and Frisina convinced regional council in 2000 to override the advice of their planning department and bring these rural lands inside the urban boundary so development could take place there.
The proposed loop of parkland would start at the escarpment and include Felkers Fall Conservation Area, the unoccupied flood plain on the east side of Davis Creek, and Valley Park , extending to Winterberry Drive . A block of provincially-owned land partly within the Karst zone, and small parcels of city and hydro lands would connect it to the Mount Albion Conservation area at Pritchard Road.
A recreational trail is proposed to link all the pieces together, although completion would require a crossing of the Lincoln Alexander Parkway near Arbour Road. Previous arguments for a pedestrian crossing in this area were repeatedly rejected by the former city and regional governments.
A proposal to "develop the strategy" between now and September is being presented tomorrow morning to council's Public Works committee. It says the concept was developed by " an informal committee of individuals from the Hamilton and District Chamber of Commerce, City of Hamilton and Hamilton Conservation Authority with input from the mayor's office and local MPPs."
The staff are recommending a 5-person committee be formed to guide the strategy development. It would include Mayor DiIanni and a city staffer, plus two representatives of the Conservation Authority and "one local Member of Provincial Parliament (and his/her alternate)". The affected lands fall within the constituencies of Stoney Creek MPP Jennifer Mossop and Hamilton Mountain MPP Marie Bountriganni.
The staff report, including a map, can be viewed at http://www.city.hamilton.on.ca/Clerk/agendas-minutes-reports/public-works/2004/May03/PW04051.pdf .
CATCH (Citizens at City Hall) monitors Hamilton councillors and provides detailed reports at www.environmenthamilton.org/CATCH . You can obtain their news updates free by emailing a request to CATCH@cogeco.ca.
Our comments:
- More parks, trails and wildlife habitat is a good thing, but it is dishonest to claim that it replaces the wanton destruction of other parks, trails and wildlife habitat. You can't replace the Red Hill Valley ecosystem. This is physically and ecologically impossible except perhaps by halting all construction activity in the valley, doing whatever possible to rehabilitate the damaged areas, and then waiting 100 years or more – and there's no guarantee even that will work.
- The scheme costs the City virtually nothing. The staff report stresses that there is virtually no cost since 90% of the lands are already publicly owned and currently operate as natural areas. For the other 10%, the report repeatedly stresses there is no need to include these lands in the scheme. The councillors say they can find $200 million for the expressway, but when it comes to "replacing" the destroyed areas, our tax money mysteriously dries up.
- Much of the "replacement" parkland is either already de facto parkland, or is land that can't be used for anything else. In the old terminology, it's called 'hazard lands' - escarpment lands and floodplains along Davis, Hannon and Red Hill Creeks. Some of it is also karst topography characterized by underground streams and subject to sinkholes and other hazards that make it unuseable for building subdivisions and big box stores.
- An investment in these parklands will directly benefit the same set of developers who are the biggest pushers for the expressway. If you read the ads for new subdivisions, they frequently focus on proximity to parkland, ravine lots, adjacent to recreational trails, etc as major selling points. Such ads were used to sell homes along the Red Hill Valley in years gone by. Now that those homes are built and sold, the developers could care less if those selling points are being destroyed. Today, they are selling homes further south on top of the escarpment. The City's scheme hands them another huge subsidy.
- The scheme is an admission by the City that compensation is required for the crimes they are committing in the Red Hill Valley. This opens the door for people living along the valley to seek compensation for the devaluation of their homes and properties, the deterioration in their health and living conditions, and the loss of the parkland adjacent to their homes.
- Perhaps the biggest lie here is that the replacement of open space is "the one remaining concern" about the impacts of the expressway. Will there be a "replacement" escarpment for the one about to be blasted? Will there be "replacement" air for what is now to be more heavily polluted? Will there be "replacement" sacred lands for those being violated? Will there be "replacement" peace and quiet for the noise pollution? Will there be "replacement" money for the millions plundered from the public treasury for the benefit of private corporations?
|
