I have walked through the park and followed the path of the new line several times. If someone could show me a better, cost-effective solution, I would back it in a minute. Unfortunately, as usual, it is more about complaining than it is about reality for most of the nay-sayers. Give us a solution that makes sense, something based in economic reality and most people here will listen.
If you are just complaining about your playground being temporarily disturbed, I really dont care.
Take a look at the map. It really is not that much of a difference. Why don't you give us some better reasons why going through a park would the better route.
Its not always about saving some money.
If it was then why not cut through every park.
Honestly, what ever happens , happens. They are either going to go through the park or some people might try to convince them to go around it.
I just thought that it would be nice if they went the other route.
"your playground being temporarily disturbed" ??? It will take 80 years before it restored.
Everything is man made. Stanley park, Mt. Benson, Its all been logged and replanted.
Having to deal with A**HOLES like yourself is really what living in this wonderful city is about.
Well since some people are concerned about the cost difference, let's find out what the difference is. If it's $80K or $800K, I'd be happy to spend between $1 and $10 per family member to save the park. That's right, sharing the cost among the 80,000 people who live in Nanaimo would be affordable on an individual level. If the occasional cheap prick won't part with an extra 5, 10, or 20 dollars to use the alternate route, I'm sure there are a few people that would be willing to pay double or triple their share. I would, it's worth it to me.
Anyway, it seems like most people on this forum support an alternate route despite the higher financial cost. Good on you all. Clearly you value more than just money. You value wise, long-term, urban planning that future generations will appreciate.
To borrow a line from the credit unions: "When it's just about the money, people know."
You seem to be incapable of rational discussion and this is way below the standards of this forum.
As usual, I will withdraw from this as it has become a pointless waste of my time.
This is a little disturbing. That's a beautiful park.
Something that I always notice about people who have, is that they don't appreciate it and end up wasting it. And what we have in this part of the world is NATURE, but if you're one of those people who thinks "Pshaw, there's lots more out there..." I guess you haven't travelled much or even looked into it. I spent four years in Japan where a park like Colliery Dam (which isn't that big by Canadian standards) was bigger than almost any in a big city except a couple, and even those were half concrete, buildings and concession stands. Most parks in Japan are smaller than your average lot for a house and consist of a bench or two a tree or two and some fine gravel. (no grass) The deluxe ones have room for things like swings and slides.
Ok, Japan is the extreme, but it's not just there. I haven't been to been to even a quarter of the countries out there, but all the places I've been it's the same thing. Natural places are disappearing like mad, and most of the time there's little reason for it other than to make or save a couple of bucks. But here's the thing, unless we live in times of great duress, there are alternatives that aren't a big deal when you consider how long it will take to replace the money versus how long it will take to replace the nature. Obviously as the world's population approaches 7 billion the need to cut down green areas will increase, which makes them even more precious. We center our lives around money, but we tend to forget what we want to get with it. Beyond basic needs, we tend to want to get something that brings us pleasure. But... I would say that colliery dam is something that gives a lot of people pleasure.
When I am looking at selling a house in that part of town, the ones that are close to the dam always grab my eye because I know that a lot of people would love to live next to a nice park like that. Hell, you can even swim there in the summer. (Though, I think you're not supposed to... )
I noticed those trees when walking through there last week, and I thought it might mean they were getting cut down, but I had some trouble believing that they would do that. Guess I expected too much from the people making the decisions.
Coast Realty Nanaimo
Although there's no lifeguard on duty, it's perfectly alright to go for a swim in either if the ponds in Colliery Dam park...the city even put in the float for the kids to swinm to in the lower pool....btw, I was perusing a Harewood history book at the library (for the 1967 centennial, I believe) and it has some cool pics of the park back in the sixties showing a caretaker's cabin and a kids beach, located across the pond from the dam on the lower pool.
Where the pavement ends"
None of the posters who do not want to have their personal (paid for by the taxpayer) playground disturbed have come up with a single alternative that makes any kind of financial sense. Every person on this particular forum has said that they will listen to any alternative that is reasonable. Any one at all.
Outside of the posturing and name calling, the silence from that side has been deafening.
However, I wonder if there are people getting all worked up for nothing. They know they're in a sensitive area, and know they want to do the job with as little damage as possible... realistically, the path through the park would probably disrupt/damage very little, and in the end, it will still be a park. It's not like they're leveling it to put in a concrete jungle.
I wonder if the path through the park is going that direction for any reasons other than saving money?