• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

2017-04-27 - Appendix B Round One Public Engagement Page 1 of 144 RECORD OF MEETING Project: City of Victoria Open Spaces Masterplan Time: 11:00am‐12:00pm ‐ mtg with Greater Victoria Green Team Date: 16 August 2016 Project No.: 1616 Present: Amanda Evans, Green Teams Nicola Windjack, LADR Distribution: Leigh Campbell Julie Potter Shannon Jamison Megan Turnock General discussion 1. Greater Victoria Green Team values biodiversity in the City’s parks and would like to see ecosystems highlighted and discussed more at a community level (similar to how food security is discussed). 2. Volunteers in Victoria feel underappreciated and often go to other municipalities to volunteer in parks instead of volunteering in Victoria. Three years ago, the City was better at collaborating with volunteers but a change in senior management resulted in less collaboration and open communication with volunteer groups. Green Teams would like the City to be more accessible for volunteers. 3. Main issues that are brought up as problems with Victoria parks are safety and cleanliness. 4. Feels that volunteers efforts should align with the City’s park management plans; increased collaboration needs to occur for this to happen. Parks and open spaces in city would benefit from City staff and volunteers working together. Would like to see increased opportunities for people of all ages to volunteer. 5. Parks should be increasingly naturalized with ecosystem restored 6. Volunteer programs in other municipalities (Saanich and Esquimalt specifically) can be looked at for examples of successful collaboration and open door policies. 7. Volunteer opportunities are important for healthy communities – it is therapeutic for many people including those with mental illnesses. 2017-04-27 - Appendix B Round One Public Engagement Page 2 of 144 Comments forwarded by Amanda: 1. Most valued in Park system: the opportunities for community engagement regarding improving our parks and green spaces. The support from City of Victoria for volunteers being able to help and contribute to the restoration of parks and green spaces. 2. Strength of Park system: The rare ecosystems found, diversity, accessibility, facilities (bathrooms), 3. Weakness in Park system: There is a lack of support for community and volunteer efforts in Victoria’s parks. Our experience so far has been a closed door policy on CoV’s end – we have sent multiple emails to organize community/volunteer opportunities that were not answered or answered with a simple “no”. The GVGT represents 1300 volunteers, any of which reside in Victoria and have been eager to help out in parks they visit, and parks they notice lots and lots of invasive plants invading into. Supporting volunteers and community opportunities in parks and green spaces is vital. It is important to acknowledge the high value of volunteer services and that is a very big weakness in Victoria’s parks. 4. Ideas for improvement: Strengthen relationships with groups like the GVGT that are doing good things to build community resiliency. CoV needs to get on board with developing their volunteer engagement strategy in their parks and by working with organizations like the GVGT, we can help them improve their community opportunities. 5. Missing opportunities/features: Support for current stewardship groups. Building ties with community groups and organizations who serve CoV’s residents. Connection between parks departments and residents – there seems to be a great divide / disconnection between the parks department and city of victoria residents. This is definitely felt especially when connecting to other municipal parks departments who seem to be more connected to the community and are accessible and welcoming. 6. Improved partnership between Green Team & City: Green Team must work with CoV to strengthen volunteer opps (City has to engage in this). Would be great if CoV approved GVGT to organize opps in parks and also to be able to work with current stewardship groups Green Team can help CoV value volunteer engagement in their parks. At moment CoV shows a lack of support for volunteers and their current volunteer stewardship groups. 7. Vision for 20 years ahead: Volunteer and stewardship engagement, increase biodiversity, reduce disturbances like invasive, non‐native plants. Outdoor education programs. Engagement with teachers and allow them to participate in outdoor, hands‐on opportunities that allow them to directly participate in the improvement of our parks and ecosystems. 8. Suggested criteria for City decision making regarding improvements to Parks and Open Spaces: Work with park stewardship groups and make sure they are part of sthe decision making process for volunteer engagement in parks. 2017-04-27 - Appendix B Round One Public Engagement Page 3 of 144 RECORD OF MEETING Project: City of Victoria Open Spaces Masterplan – Accessibility Focus Group Date: 8 August 2016 Project No.: 1616 Time: 4:00‐5:00pm Present: Paul Jones Linda Bartram Susan Gallagher Robin Bayley Steve Bertrand Chris Marks Jeremy Loveday, Councilor City of Victoria Brad Dellebuur, City of Victoria Chaz Whipp, City of Victoria Christopher Windjack, LADR (recorder) Bev Windjack, LADR (facilitator) Distribution: All above Leigh Campbell Julie Potter Shannon Jamieson Megan Turnock ITEM General Notes ¾ Some concern expressed that the Accessibility Focus group didn’t represent people with disabilities/challenges such as Alzheimer’s; Parkinson’s; MS; etc., or parents with children with challenges. Also need to remember people with severe allergies are challenged. ¾ Some concern expressed that the accessibility focus group was the last one considered, and should have been spoken to sooner. City staff noted that the accessibility focus group was marked as a stakeholder group from the beginning of the project ¾ Several participants noted that Victoria is a good place to live for people with disabilities: The climate is very good for those with mobility challenges The high retiree population has led to good infrastructure (in general) 2017-04-27 - Appendix B Round One Public Engagement Page 4 of 144 It is the best province in terms of wheelchair access to buildings, public spaces and parks 1. What parks and park amenities do you use? Which do you value the most? Accessibility ¾ Value both ease of access and the ability to get right up to amenities (e.g. touch the statue) ¾ Parks generally not well used by people with mobility challenges due to poor wayfinding, difficult circulation ¾ Parks can be a challenge for people with severe allergies Peace and tranquility ¾ Value the ability to go into green spaces and get away from crowds, which can often be problematic for people with disabilities ¾ Value undeveloped natural spaces Benches ¾ Overall the number of seating amenities and picnic tables needs to be increased ¾ They are few and far between, and usually only at entries and exits of walkable areas, not in the middle ¾ Should be put in more places than just beside walkways at the edges of areas ¾ Allow for gathering when grouped and facing each other ¾ Picnic tables need to accommodate wheelchairs – why not make all features universally accessible? 2. What parks and amenities would you like to use but don’t? Why not? Inner harbour ¾ People are not considerate in crowds, and there is not enough room for those with mobility difficulties ¾ People have proven to not follow rules, even when there are bylaws (see: Johnson St. Bridge plan, where cyclists have already stated they will not cross the street and change lanes to the other side in order to get across the bridge as will be required, but will instead illegally use the pedestrian sidewalk) Steps to the Inner harbour ¾ Curved staircases pose a problem ¾ Stair edges are poorly marked ¾ There is only one ramp down to the Inner Harbour, which means that wheelchair users are forced to backtrack to exit the space instead of being able to circulate through it Dallas Road ¾ Considered the pre‐eminent public space in Victoria by most user groups, but needs to be better shared by all those groups instead of being dominated by one or two 2017-04-27 - Appendix B Round One Public Engagement Page 5 of 144 ¾ Universal accessibility needs to be built in ¾ Offleash dogs interfere with guide dogs, people with low vision and people with dog allergies. ¾ Very poor signage and clarity regarding where dogs are allowed to be offleash ¾ A gated dog run with an exterior adjacent path could be a good alternative (see: West Vancouver dog runs) Bastion Square ¾ Steps are poorly marked ¾ Steps appear in the middle of the square, and it is challenging for people with low vision to find a ‘safe route’ down the stairs &/or across the square near the stairs ¾ There needs to be tactile signage and surface treatment to inform and guide people with vision challenges ¾ Ramps are unmarked and hard to find. Anything steeper than 1r:12h, even for a very short run, is extremely difficult to navigate in a chair Accessible labyrinth (suggested amenity; don’t have one to use!) ¾ Victoria has many labyrinths but none are universally accessible ¾ A design for one was developed with a landscape architect by members of this focus group, but no suitable location could be found for it so it was shelved. Linda Bartram can be contacted if there is interest in moving it forward Music gardens (suggested amenity; don’t have one to use!) ¾ Auditory experiences can be a great garden amenity for all people, including those with vision challenges ¾ See: Yo‐Yo Ma Garden in Toronto. Wonderful! Scent garden (suggested amenity; don’t have one to use!) 3. Are there other important green spaces in your community that people enjoy? What benefits do those have for your community? What kinds of activities do you do or would you like to do in those spaces? Beach access ¾ Beach access in Victoria is poor for those with mobility challenges, especially those in wheelchairs.

Load more

  144

Copy Link