46203
44515

City annexation of Upper Wiltse

City annexation of Upper Wiltse

Postby twobits » Oct 2nd, 2017, 4:47 pm

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-story--21-.htm

I am surprised at the letters to the Editor in our local rag opposing this annexation of land into the City. 150 acres to be added to Provincial Parkland....forever protected......with only 180 homes to be built on a smaller portion outside of that protected area.
I can't figure these people out! One side of their mouth speaks to the availability of housing and affordability, yet when someone proposes an increase in inventory of housing that suppresses prices, they come up with arguments about bus routes and carbon footprints. They have all got to believe we should all live in converted shipping containers and ride a bike rather than a car.
And this is all privately owned land, not crown land!!
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
twobits
Guru
 
Posts: 5842
Likes: 476 posts
Liked in: 2090 posts
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 8:44 am
Location: GPS says Dead Elbow Utah. Think I'm lost

Re: City annexation of Upper Wiltse

Postby CTF » Oct 3rd, 2017, 2:58 pm

My only concern, and it may not be a valid one, is liability.

Crown Lands have Provincial legislation so that you cannot sue the crown for an injury. It was not clear to me if the City was giving this land back to the crown (that would negate my liability concern) or is dedicating it as municipal park lands (that would carry a liability concern).

Otherwise I am generally in favour.
CTF
Fledgling
 
Posts: 127
Likes: 7 posts
Liked in: 21 posts
Joined: Sep 21st, 2012, 10:58 am

Re: City annexation of Upper Wiltse

Postby twobits » Oct 3rd, 2017, 7:20 pm

CTF wrote:My only concern, and it may not be a valid one, is liability.

Crown Lands have Provincial legislation so that you cannot sue the crown for an injury. It was not clear to me if the City was giving this land back to the crown (that would negate my liability concern) or is dedicating it as municipal park lands (that would carry a liability concern).

Otherwise I am generally in favour.


It is to be added to Provincial Parkland.....an extension of the existing Provincial Parkland. The City will have no liability. Liability is just one of the false news stories thrown out by people opposed in hopes that no one will call BS.
How is Penticton to grow economically if the Eastern hillsides are not incorporated into the City? With lakes on either end and PIB reserve to the West, it is the only land available.
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

The problem with the gene pool is that there is no lifeguard.
twobits
Guru
 
Posts: 5842
Likes: 476 posts
Liked in: 2090 posts
Joined: Nov 25th, 2010, 8:44 am
Location: GPS says Dead Elbow Utah. Think I'm lost


Return to South Okanagan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests