Hey Guest,
Welcome, Join our awesome community where you can discuss on various topics
or Create an Account


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
General Sports and Recreation News
(06-09-2018, 11:43 AM)Pheidippides Wrote: Schlegel Urban Developments Corp is requesting a zoning change in their subdivision planned for the Fischer-Hallman/Plains/Huron area (page 163).

One of the proposals is for Privately Owned and Maintained Publicly Accessible (POMPA) Parks where the "park ownership and maintenance model for this subdivision where by parks may be retained in private ownership, maintained jointly by property owners through condominium corporations, and which would remain fully publicly accessible..."





I'm not sure what I think about this concept yet, but I can't put my finger on why just yet.

I guess statements like this make it feel as though we are going to start creating different classes of parks based on who can afford to live near them:
"They wish to create a series of enhanced parks and landscape features throughout the Becker Estates neighbourhood which will contain features that are beyond the capacity of City Operations to maintain in perpetuity."

I'm wondering why sort of development you could have that allows for the public to use it that has private ownership and private maintenance, paid for by a condo corp.

Open to the public as in 'paid' entrance?

My other thought though, it could be entirely public, but with the neighbours of park benefiting the most (hence private ownership/maintenance) and inability for the city to properly maintain the grounds in a TIMELY fashion. Not that the city couldn't maintain it, they can. However, the city can't provide services for 1 park, like more regular lawn maintenance, vs other parks. That is what I think of when I hear "perpetuity". Very few area's of the city are taken care of in such fashion, perhaps city hall, and the DTK core, but that's about it.
Reply
(06-16-2018, 01:22 PM)jeffster Wrote:
(06-09-2018, 11:43 AM)Pheidippides Wrote: Schlegel Urban Developments Corp is requesting a zoning change in their subdivision planned for the Fischer-Hallman/Plains/Huron area (page 163).

One of the proposals is for Privately Owned and Maintained Publicly Accessible (POMPA) Parks where the "park ownership and maintenance model for this subdivision where by parks may be retained in private ownership, maintained jointly by property owners through condominium corporations, and which would remain fully publicly accessible..."





I'm not sure what I think about this concept yet, but I can't put my finger on why just yet.

I guess statements like this make it feel as though we are going to start creating different classes of parks based on who can afford to live near them:
"They wish to create a series of enhanced parks and landscape features throughout the Becker Estates neighbourhood which will contain features that are beyond the capacity of City Operations to maintain in perpetuity."

I'm wondering why sort of development you could have that allows for the public to use it that has private ownership and private maintenance, paid for by a condo corp.

Open to the public as in 'paid' entrance?


My other thought though, it could be entirely public, but with the neighbours of park benefiting the most (hence private ownership/maintenance) and inability for the city to properly maintain the grounds in a TIMELY fashion. Not that the city couldn't maintain it, they can. However, the city can't provide services for 1 park, like more regular lawn maintenance, vs other parks. That is what I think of when I hear "perpetuity". Very few area's of the city are taken care of in such fashion, perhaps city hall, and the DTK core, but that's about it.

No.
Reply
Many of the Waterloo neighbourhoods inside the Columbia, Erbsville, Erb, Westmount block (plus another one near Fisher-Hallman and Glasgow) were built on this model. The private facilities usually included pools and tennis courts. The privately-maintained park space was the green space between the houses that typically included trails. In time, the City took over the maintenance of the park space (mowing, trees, and plowing) while the neighbourhood associations continue to maintain and operate the recreational facilities. In some cases, the City has also taken over the collection of association fees as part of the property tax collection.

In general, it was a very good model that provided a focus point for the neighbourhoods to congregate.
Reply
(05-05-2018, 10:36 PM)KevinL Wrote: I can't seem to find a source on what happened, but K-W United FC are not playing this season. Their twitter account remains active, so I doubt the organization has completely folded; I'm not sure what their future holds.

Well, I've discovered some info. It's very complicated politics around the league system and where the federation was expecting teams to go; London's team moved from the PDL to League 1 Ontario, a relatively new initiative, and KW was 'expected' to do the same. But the KW organization is very different from London in their goals and intentions, and that league would not suit them well. The federation's timeline on that ran out at the start of this year.

More here: http://www.northernstartingeleven.com/wh...united-fc/
My Twitter: @KevinLMaps
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links

              Advertise