Photo by Whitehorse Star
Mayor Dan Curtis
City releases feedback on sustainability issues
A long-term waste diversion program,
A long-term waste diversion program, increased transit service and making active transportation a priority with improved trails and wider sidewalks are among the long list of ideas residents want to see covered in the planned update of the city’s sustainability plan.
On Thursday, the city released a summary document of the feedback it received for the update of the sustainability plan underway.
The plan was originally adopted in 2008. After six years, the city began the update “with goals and targets for the whole community, and a strategy for city action that will make sustainability even more central to what the city does.”
Mayor Dan Curtis said this morning the input helps “confirm we’re going in the right direction.”
He was pleased to see the high level of interest in sustainable transportation, pointing out the city has been and is continuing to work on improvements to the transit system including adding evening service through the week until 10:20 p.m. to ensure working individuals and students can finish their shifts and classes before catching the bus home.
“There’s always change in the wind,” he said of further improvements to the system.
He pointed out more high school students are opting for the city bus pass provided through the Department of Education over the conventional school bus system to help them to get to school as well as work and other activities.
Yukon College has also partnered with the city to offer bus passes to all full-time students.
While much of the focus was on transportation and, more specifically, transit, Curtis said he was pleased to see a range of suggestions come forward that could make the city more sustainable.
Work on the update got underway last year with consultations happening in the fall. The document released yesterday details the feedback the city gathered through a survey, meetings, workshops, stakeholder sessions, comment forms and other means of input.
A summary of the overall feedback ranking sustainability priorities shows that sustainable transportation; social equity including affordable housing and poverty reduction; as well as active living and access to recreation were the highest of priorities for those who participated in the input sessions.
Curtis said the call for affordable housing came as no surprise as the city hears time and time again of people who simply can’t afford the cost of housing. Some long-time Yukoners have left the city because they can’t find a place, he said.
“It really affects our economy,” the mayor said.
The city doesn’t technically have a mandate to deal with affordable housing, but Curtis noted his belief the city, territory and First Nations governments need to partner to come up with ways of dealing with the issue.
Meanwhile, zero waste; energy and greenhouse gas reduction; and a healthy local economy and food system were ranked as high priorities.
Medium priorities included environmental protection and enhancement; green infrastructure and buildings; and a strong downtown and livable neighbourhoods.
Finally, ranked as lower priorities for the sustainability front were vibrant local and First Nations arts, culture and heritage; safety and security; and a strong sense of community.
During the input effort, participants were asked to list the top three things they would do to make Whitehorse a more sustainable community, with many of the answers focusing on transportation.
The suggestion of a long-term waste diversion program with funding or support for the Raven Recycling Society received the most comments, at 37.
Numerous suggestions came forward on the transit service alone, including more frequency, extended routes, longer hours, Sunday service, smaller buses, heated bus shelters, incentives to encourage more transit use to places like the Canada Games Centre or airport and integration with the school bus system. It was also suggested the city look at moving to electric buses.
Increased transit service was one of the top suggestions with a total of 29 comments on that.
Making active transportation a priority was also among the top suggestions to come forward, with 27 comments on it, including enhancing and maintaining bike lanes; removing gravel from roadways and bike trails; improving trail connections; enhancing infrastructure for pedestrians; and widening sidewalks.
Car co-ops and ride share programs could also be encouraged along with the promotion of eco-driving campaigns, it was noted.
Waste reduction and management was also a major focus for many who submitted comments.
Along with the suggestion for a long-term waste diversion program, others focused on curbside recycling (the city is expected to begin such a program this year) and compost pick-up including for multi-family residences, zero-waste initiatives, bear-proof garbage bins, regulations around packaging as well as banning plastic bags among others.
The controversy over the use of liquified natural gas (LNG) also managed to make its way into the feedback, with four comments asking the city to “stop liquified natural gas projects and only purchase clean energy for (the) city.”
LNG has made headlines in the territory over the past year, with Yukon Energy starting construction on its LNG plant.
Meanwhile, a select committee of the legislature has been looking at whether hydraulic fracturing should be permitted in the territory, and is slated to file its report Jan. 19.
Comments on the city’s sustainability plan also noted support for banning hydraulic fracturing in the city; investing in renewable energy and alternative fuels; taxing and reducing the use of fossil fuels and other initiatives.
As it was noted in the city’s report, many of the suggestions were linked between a few categories.
“Participants often saw relationships between different themes,” it’s noted. “For example, recommendations for increased density also suggested that this would make areas more walkable and allow for more active transportation, which would, in turn, improve individuals’ health.”
After the draft plan comes out in the spring, another round of input sessions will be held as the final plan is put together to then come before council.
“At the end of the planning process, the community will have had significant input into the creation of the plan, be able to see their values reflected in the plan, believe in the city’s commitment to implement the plan and be inspired to take action themselves,” it’s stated in the feedback report.
Curtis noted his appreciation for all those who provided feedback, noting there were a lot of good suggestions that came forward.
The document is available on the city’s website at www.whitehorse.ca
Add your comments or reply via Twitter @whitehorsestar
In order to encourage thoughtful and responsible discussion, website comments will not be visible until a moderator approves them. Please add comments judiciously and refrain from maligning any individual or institution. Read about our user comment and privacy policies.
Your name and email address are required before your comment is posted. Otherwise, your comment will not be posted.
Comments (15)
Up 2 Down 0
Adele Sandrock on Jan 15, 2015 at 6:47 pm
@ Lost in the Yukon
I can tell you at least my comment in essence (sorry I don't remember every word anymore):
The City should let people choose what they want (Blue Bin Society/Recycling Station or Curbside Collection) as we have already enough expenses (includes taxes) to pay. In addition, the COW is not supposed to take business away from the Blue Bin Society as they collect everything. Council is again giving proof that they should do their homework and maybe look in other Provinces or Territories in order to see how they deal with Recycling.
The whole "Survey" was worded in a manner that people didn't really have the choice to say no, unless they see at the end, the itsy bitsy comment section.
Up 11 Down 0
Lost in the Yukon on Jan 15, 2015 at 3:47 pm
I want to know what the comments said! What percentage of Whitehorse residents support and want to pay for the "blue box" program ... what did they say in their comments? You can make surveys say whatever you want ... its all in how you ask the questions and this one was definitely not objective it was very slanted in one direction. And the reporting is anything but transparent.
Up 12 Down 0
Smurf on Jan 15, 2015 at 10:32 am
@ north_of_60: Very good points
But do you really think that anyone from the city will respond to this?
They'll hire more and more "experts" from down south with many great ideas. They might work in a big city with totally different infrastructure but not up here.
Our problem is that more and more people have to stand up at the council meetings and force them to change things (these comments here unfortunately won't change anything).
Not in the direction how they want it - no, how the citizens want it. At the end we're paying their wages!
Up 89 Down 1
north_of_60 on Jan 14, 2015 at 11:02 am
It's time for the CoW to stop wasting our tax dollars on frivolous, greenwashed 'feel-good' schemes, and take meaningful action.
Terminate the "Environmental Sustainability" department; find something useful for the staff to be employed at somewhere in the CoW bureaucracy.
Terminate the CoW-Blue-Box scheme.
Use those savings to accomplish the following:
Make our public recycling bins on Industrial Road open again. You work out the details, just make it happen.
Provide financial incentives to trucking companies to haul recycled materials back south at substantially reduced rates. Empty trucks head south every day; connect the dots. This will equitably benefit all recycling organizations.
Provide low interest loans or other financial assistance to the existing Blue Box pick-up services to improve their business.
Reduce 'salvaging permit' fees at the dump. Issue inexpensive daily permits at the gate house. Anyone salvaging must wear a hard hat, gloves, eye protection, safety vest and safety boots.
Accept all domestic residential garbage at the dump on weekends at no cost.
Continue removing garbage from our wilderness areas and encourage people to report garbage 'spills'.
Stop hiring unqualified southern 'experts' for government staff positions. They don't know how to do their job, so they spend our tax money on irrelevant studies by other southern 'experts'. Graduates from Yukon College should be filling those positions.
Stop sending our tax dollars to southern 'experts' for inappropriate, useless studies. Yukon College has been offering environmental management related courses for decades. Surely we have the necessary expertise here with staff, students and graduates of environmental programs at Yukon College. If we need studies, then make sure they're relevant to our unique situation, and spend that research money here in the community.
That's a start, Mayor and Council. What do you say?
Up 56 Down 0
Charles on Jan 13, 2015 at 10:23 pm
Did anyone seriously believe that COW would take any notice of the survey? They are going to impose the recycling program pick up whatever we say. Yes, recycling is important, but there are many other options to nailing residents with extra fees on their COW Utility bill. Time to move out of City limits; all these extra fees are going to make long timers, who have kept City alive, shove off because we can no longer afford to live here. Sustainable? Well it might be for COW and Ivory Tower.
Up 41 Down 2
mary laker on Jan 12, 2015 at 5:50 pm
I can't believe we even have a Sustainability Department at the COW. Pathetic. And they hire consultants to do anything resembling real work.
I'll tell you what Sustainable thing I'd like to see, close that department and leave the garbage collecting to the garbage department, and the bus system to the transit department. They can hire the consultants directly. This should cost less and therefore be sustainable.
Up 42 Down 3
north_of_60 on Jan 12, 2015 at 3:39 pm
"the suggestion of a long-term waste diversion program with funding or support for the Raven Recycling Society received the most comments, at 37. "
Our Mayor and Council appear to be ignoring that inconvenient truth.
They directed funding away from Raven to pay consultants that told them how to compete with private enterprise and jack up fees.
If all the funding wasted on the Sustainability Department was channeled to Raven instead, then we would once again have a viable recycling center in Whitehorse.
Up 25 Down 1
Sustainability plan on Jan 12, 2015 at 9:35 am
COW sustainability plan is not a sustainability plan. It is an social environmental plan. Sustainability plan includes how to lower cost of services and taxes. How to be more cost effective at delivering services. What service can be turned into a private sector business as part of economic development. Take services like transit and transportation and build them into one structure that includes parking, transit, let a park-ade be build down town by a private company. Does the transit sell bus passes like other areas?
Sustainability is about breaking down the public business of each unit of its operational into a needs and benefits analysis. What are the costs compared to the benefits? How many people are benefited? Is there a better way of supplying the services?
Up 15 Down 2
Social Environmental report Not a Sustainability plan -Wilf Carter on Jan 11, 2015 at 12:10 pm
The draft goals of the report does not deal with subject of sustainability for the COW! It is mostly about social environmental issues that lack meaning or purpose or direction. What does the following mean:
1 Sustainable transportation: is that Transit or downtown parking, parking costs, or proving people a reasonable cost effective transit system which was very poorly planned for the COW. Was there a reasons needs assessment completed so the COW has some idea of where to go.
2. Social equity: affordable housing and poverty reduction. Mayor and Council have no understanding of affordable housing or what it means or how to deal with it. How much poverty is there in the COW and what are the causes of poverty. It is not due to high levels of unemployment like other areas.
3. Active living and access to recreation: COW has some of the best recreation for a small city in Canada and wilderness around us so you can do what you want in this City.
4. Zero Waste: Great idea. How can you make that take place.
5. Energy and greenhouse gas reduction: Great idea again but lacks direction.
6. Healthy local economy and food system: Local economy has been healthy for the last 10 years. Food system is interesting and I'd like to see what that means!
7. Environment protection and enhancement: Green infrastructure and buildings, strong downtown and livable neighborhoods.
Not one of these goals are about sustaining anything.
I have worked on seven communities sustainable planning and this is not one of them.
Sustainability planning starts with what are the propriety services the community people want not a wish list by mayor and council members or special interest groups. Sustainability planning includes:
1. How are we going to pay for transit service and what level of investment does the in COW people want? Not just run buses that are empty and COW has to pay how much money to keep it going. The transit in the COW is not sustainable at all.
2. Affordable housing is a relative term for a general term of public funded housing. I have not seen what program/policy the COW has adopted on affordable housing. Yukon Housing has been doing affordable housing for many years and have done a good job at it. Read Yukon programs over the years that is all affordable housing.
3. You have to know the root cause of how many are in poverty before making any kind of plan or determine how to deal with it.
4. Zero waste at what cost and how do you do it. What is realistic? Recycle at source is the best solution and way more effective like some other regions have done. Create garbage bins at the homes where each category of garbage is packaged, not blue boxes by the home owner. But you need real waste management bins at source.
5. Energy/green house gas reduction. Mayor and Council stop purchasing gas driven cars. Put out incentives for people to change the energy use in their homes in the COW from fuel to electrical. Like YTG is doing on energy reduction investment which is about 50 years old but works.
6. I think the COW needs to think about the meaning of a healthy economy.
7. Environmental protection and enhancement, green infrastructure and buildings are medium why are you not listening and stop that major project? There is also a conflict with the statement of environmental protection energy and green house reduction.
Anyway get back to the drawing boards Mayor and Council and develop a true sustainability plan for the COW people which they want, that includes the following:
1. How to reduce taxes and fees.
2. How to make service delivery of the COW more cost effective.
3. How to make the economy stronger so the COW can raise more revenues so COW can afford to offer good services.
4. Set priorities that in are in line with what the COW people want.
5. Engage, empower and listen to the COW people who are consulted on what they want not what Mayor and Council think they want like this sustainability does not do.
Up 73 Down 3
Max Mack on Jan 10, 2015 at 12:54 pm
Participation in CoW's consultation exercise is generally futile if you have anything contrary to say. With "sustainability", CoW already has an agenda and a direction and will discount or ignore outright any feedback contrary to its stated goals.
Forgive the euphemism, but only citizens who are "on the bus" have any valid viewpoint as far as CoW is concerned.
Up 49 Down 3
Capital Planning is a major part of any sustainable planning on Jan 9, 2015 at 7:36 pm
Why was it not included in the sustainable mix of questions by the COW?
Up 32 Down 4
COW shows the actual data on what people want on Jan 9, 2015 at 7:33 pm
Please put on the COW web site how many voted for what in sustainability - or is this just another political game by the liberal controlled COW council.
Up 55 Down 4
Josey Wales on Jan 9, 2015 at 6:09 pm
More socialist engineering underway with its pal greenwashing.
The only thing resembling a spore of sustainability is the epic levels of stupid that comes outta that hall of entitlement.
Hey CoW Christmas is over turn off the lights you peppered this sty with.
What was the budget for new led bling this year...seems a tad much too me?
Up 93 Down 3
Bud McGee on Jan 9, 2015 at 5:00 pm
The problem with the City’s “public engagement” efforts are that they often get hijacked by people that either have a lot of spare time on their hands or are passionate about the issue. Most of the working general public struggle to combat gag reflexes when they hear of such things as “Sustainability Plans”. I also suspect that a large portion of the general public are suffering from what I like to call “consultation fatigue” and are cynical that this consultation is merely a puerile exercise in bureaucratic box-checking to justify a preordained policy direction.
The current crop of City administrators see themselves as enlightened renaissance scholars that feel they are more qualified to determine what is best for the average slack-jawed public rube (i.e. the voting public). They do not think that we are qualified to spend our own money. They think they are far more enlightened and educated to spend OUR hard-earned money, and thus continue to appropriate more of OUR money through taxes to spend on their self-perceived altruism.
Sustainability planning in today’s lexicon means TAX INCREASES. Normally, we would have a City Council that holds these administrators to task; however, our councillors are left-wingers that espouse tax and spend governance. Nobody is asking basic questions like why would we spend more on a transit system when most of the buses run vacant? Whitehorse needs to reflect inwardly and ask itself when enough is enough. Let people spend money on what they think is important and get the nanny state off our backs.
Up 68 Down 11
Yukoner on Jan 9, 2015 at 3:23 pm
Blah Blah Blah sustainability (JOKE)