Trent Ignores Profs' Development Concerns And Recommendations
Notice 
from four Trent professors stating the location of a proposed soccer complex is unsuitable has been ignored by Trent and the City of Peterborough. "Apart from the issue of annexing nature area lands for development purposes, we are concerned about the potentially serious health hazard posed to soccer players, both adults and children by the West Nile virus that may be spread by infected mosquitos living in adjacent wetlands." they said in letters to City council and Trent administrators.
The professors were supportive of the concept of soccer fields located on Trent property but noted numerous safety, financial, and environmental concerns associated with the proposed location. They identified a viable alternative site consistent with the university's "extensive Green Buffer Zone promoted for the Endowment Lands by the Officeforurbanism consultants hired [by Trent] to propose income generating uses on these lands."
A city staff report indicated Trent rejected the alternate site as "not an acceptable location", but did so with little reasoning other than suggesting that the alternate location would "likely be in the alignment of the future Ring Road". However, a cursory analysis reveals the location proposed by the professors will in no fashion whatsoever affect the future ring road (if indeed it is ever built).
At a time when Peterborough taxpayers are facing a 10.5% tax increase, the largest in 13 years, City councillors approved spending another $110,000 to draw up designs for the soccer complex. City councillors also approved the project "in principle", with an estimated price tag of $5.5 million. The soccer complex development at Trent is yet another example of the now infamous absence of transparency and accountability rampant in the management of Ontario universities and requires further investigation.
Critical to the understanding of the Trent administration's commercial and other development plans is an understanding of the Trent University Nature Areas, what they are and how they are managed. Importantly, the Nature areas have unquestionably been used for teaching and research purposes and therefore Senate is the governing body that must ultimately approve developments that impact the nature areas, not the administration.
The Nature Areas Committee (NAC) was an advisory committee to Senate, as noted in the professors' letter. However, around 2001 the NAC was demoted to become an advisory committee to the vice-president of the administration. In effect the administration has ceased control of a Senate committee, reducing its status to "advisory" and rendering, at minimum, the appearance that the committee and its decisions are simply "rubber stamps" to the whims of the current administration.
If we want accurate details on the Nature Areas we must turn to those academics who have institutional and historical knowledge of the Trent Nature Areas, and not simply rely upon the pronouncements of the administration, however glossy and neatly packaged. The professors who authored the letters to the City and the Trent administration are perhaps the most knowledgeable authorities regarding the Nature Areas. In fact, two of those professors are authors of the draft Stewardship Plan for the Trent University Nature Areas, a document comprising some 350 pages of research and analysis. We encourage contributions to OurTrent's documentation archive these and other knowledgeable individuals in an effort to improve public understanding of the Trent Nature Areas such that we might better understand the impact of proposed developments upon the Nature Areas.
In an earlier OurTrent article (Will the DNA Cluster deal with City impact the Trent Nature Areas?) we note that it does not appear Senate has been consulted at any point in the deal between Trent and the City which include the DNA cluster and the sports field development. The absence of Senate involvement and/or Senate approval of such a deal could present significant legal issues. If the board were to strike a deal with the City that had the effect of altering or eliminating a natural laboratory used for research and teaching purposes without Senate approval, including the alteration of nature area boundaries and definitions, legal challenges similar to Kulchyski v. Trent University could be launched. Not only would this could be very expensive, it could quite likely succeed in favour of Senate. The results could invalidate the current administration's development plans. Given status of the NAC, any approvals it might offer are arguably suspect and are not representative of Senate.
City staff incorrectly interpreted the professors' letter as focusing primarily upon the location lying in the Nature Areas of the university. In their letter the professors noted numerous problems with the proposed location of the soccer field complex at the north-east corner of Pioneer Road and the 9th Line of Duro including traffic safety, proximity to mosquito breeding grounds (swamps on two adjacent sides), the potential health threat of West Nile virus, ground water problems, distance to services such as water and sewer, etc. They identified an alternative area just north-east of Otonabee College and roughly defined as fields 33, 35, 36 and 37 in Appendix E, Figure 2 of the draft Stewardship Plan for the University Nature Areas.
At any rate, City Report CSRS05-011 - Design of New Soccer Complex indicates Trent has rejected professors' alternate site with little reasoning other than it "would very likely be in the alignment of the future Ring Road and is therefore not an acceptable location." From a review of the maps that appears not to be the case.
A review of Appendix E shows where fields 33, 35, 36 and 37 are located. We have taken a map from the Trent master plan for the endowment lands and circled the approximate location of the alternate site. A review of that map clearly shows the alternate site does not impact upon the proposed Ring Road at all. We are not certain why Trent and/or City staff have concluded it does and we welcome clarification from them.
We at OurTrent reiterate our recommendation that Trent University administrators produce a clear and concise map of development plans that can be overlaid on top of a map of the campus and Trent Nature Areas as described in the draft Trent University Nature Areas Stewardship Plan. (also available here with all chapters conveniently in one in zip file (26MB)). With such a map the impact of development on the nature areas may be more easily understood and effectively evaluated. The absence of such reference material is in itself suspect, particularly given the amount of money Trent is investing in to the production of glossy promotional material in support of "income generating" schemes.
With respect to the location of the sports complex as proposed by the University, the City report also indicates the "Nature Area Advisory Committee agreed that the sports field development was a suitable purpose provided conditions be included in the land lease with the city that mitigated light pollution and provided appropriate buffers around the area." Notwithstanding the above commentary on decisions of the NAC we have not been able to find minutes or the agenda for this meeting on the Trent web site. OurTrent would welcome documentation submitted from the Trent administration or its NAC with respect to the NAC's terms of reference and the minutes of the referenced meeting.
The City report does not address the other recommendations from the professors. Among those is the potential public health issue of West Nile virus that might be important to consider when locating a soccer field complex adjacent to mosquito breeding grounds such as the swamp and wetlands bordering the proposed location. Perhaps Trent and City officials believe active soccer players can out run clouds of mosquitos while spectators, young and old, will be encouraged to fitness by doing the same?
Finally, residents of Peterborough are facing a whopping 10.5% tax increase, the largest in 13 years. This is on top of property assessments having risen an average of 20% this year. According to the Peterborough Examiner finance chairman councillor Paul Rexe has reported the tax increase is necessary because council had contributed to the problem by “pre-approving” $4.9 million in spending prior to upcoming budget talks. Ironically Rexe was in favour of pre-approving a $2 million cash contribution ($500,000/year for four years) to Trent's DNA cluster project even though the project has no business plan.
References:
- Soccer fields at Trent University and potential West Nile Virus threat
E-mail from Trent University Professors to Peterborough City Council, Trent University administrators and others
October 25, 2005 - Soccer field complex plan has legs...for now
Peterborough This Week - November 18, 2005 - SOCCER AND TAXES: A time to say no
City council can't deflect all responsibility for spending
Peterborough Examiner - November 17, 2005 - City invests $110,000 in soccer-field study
Peterborough This Week - November 2, 2005 - Report CSRS05-011 - Design of New Soccer Complex
City Staff Report - November 7, 2005 - Stewardship Plan for the Trent University Nature Areas (draft)
All chapters in one zip file
| Soccer fields at Trent University and potential West Nile Virus threat E-mail from Trent University Professors to Peterborough City Council, Trent University administrators and others October 25, 2005 and subsequently on November 14, 2005 Dear Mayor Sutherland and City Councilors, This memo comes from Professors Brunger, (Department of Geography), Professor Emeritus T. Hutchinson (Department of Environmental & Resource Studies), Professor Emeritus R. Jones (Department of Biology) and Professor Emeritus J. Marsh (Department of Geography) Trent University. We heartily commend and support a partnership between the City of Peterborough and Trent University to use University Endowment Lands for community soccer fields. However, the lands currently proposed for annexation to be soccer fields are in a nature area, the Wildlife Sanctuary Nature Area (WSNA) that has been a nature area since the late 1960's. The WSNA, bounded by University Road, Pioneer Road and the 9th Line, with minor exceptions, was given official status as a nature area, along with other lands on the Symons Campus, by resolution of the Board of Governors in March 1990 and by the University Senate. Apart from the issue of annexing nature area lands for development purposes, we are concerned about the potentially serious health hazard posed to soccer players, both adults and children by the West Nile virus that may be spread by infected mosquitos living in adjacent wetlands. The abundant mosquitos may also be a significant nuisance factor for both players and spectators.. We believe that there is a more suitable site north of Pioneer Road for soccer fields in the "Green Buffers and Corridors" zone proposed by consultants hired by the Administration and Board of Governors to suggest income generating uses for Endowment Lands. Furthermore, the consultants recommend that Athletic Fields are a possible use in the "Green Buffers and Corridors". The "Green Buffers and Corridors" lands we propose for soccer fields are eminently suitable and do not pose the environmental concerns and hazards that we bring to your attention below. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES AT THE CURRENTLY PROPOSED SOCCER FIELD SITE IN THE WILDLIFE SANCTUARY NATURE AREA (WSNA) There are significant environmental hazards and issues connected with the WSNA land suggested for annexation as soccer fields. A major hazard comes from the fact that the east and south sides, and maybe the west side too, of the proposed soccer fields are bounded by extensive wetlands (marsh and swamp) that flood during May, June and July. In some years, standing water persists all summer in the swampland and sometimes surface water is present year-round. We can attest by experience that the protection provided by insect repellant is required to venture into these wetlands in spring and summer to keep the hordes of mosquitos (part of the wildlife) at bay. Mosquitos are particularly active during spring and summer evenings, when many soccer will be played. Hence the possibility of a significant health hazard from West Nile virus infection to the public and soccer players, both children and adults alike, from infected mosquitos. Also to be considered is the potential nuisance impact of mosquitos seeking a blood meal on players and spectators. There is also the issue of a high water table beneath much of the land adjacent to the wetlands and so potential contamination of ground water by permanent septic facilities to be built on this property. Run-off from any proposed gravel parking lot may potentially contaminate ground water and cause direct contamination of wetlands by overland flow that may result from severe downpours. Presumably the City also supports the Federal Government initiative to reduce carbon emissions to the atmosphere to assist with the reduction of global warming (the 1 ton challenge) but locating soccer fields far out in the WSNA means increasing emissions to the atmosphere by the many minivans, cars and buses traveling to these soccer fields. The roads to the soccer fields are hazardous, involving driving up blind hills with concomitant danger of serious accidents to minivans and buses carrying children and adults at these hill tops, particularly when people are late and rushing to get to the soccer fields. AN ALTERNATIVE SITE FOR THE LOCATION OF SOCCER FIELDS ON THE UNIVERSITY ENDOWMENT LANDS A site that is eminently suitable for soccer fields and one that does not pose the environmental problems mentioned for the Wildlife Sanctuary Nature Area site exists to the north and north-east of the new DNA building on the Symons Campus. This site, is located, by and large, in fields 33,36,35,37 (see the draft Stewardship Plan for the University Nature Areas, Appendix E, Figure 2 on page 293 - www.trentu.ca/biology/tna) in the extensive Green Buffer Zone promoted for the Endowment Lands by the Officeforurbanism consultants hired to propose income generating uses on these lands. Furthermore, our proposed use of these lands for soccer fields fits perfectly with proposed uses designated by the consultants for "Green Buffers and Corridors", namely use of such lands for Athletic Fields. ADVANTAGES OF LOCATING SOCCER FIELDS AT THE PROPOSED SITE IN THE "GREEN BUFFERS AND CORRIDORS" ON THE UNIVERSITY ENDOWMENT LANDS
The four of us have been closely associated with the University Nature Areas as members of the Nature Areas Committee (NAC), since 1990 when the NAC was created by Senate as an advisory committee, but before the NAC was demoted around 2001 to sub-committee status, reporting ultimately to the Vice- President Administration. Professor Marsh has over 20 years of experience dealing with University Nature Area issues; Professor Jones over 15 years, Professor Hutchinson over 10 years and Professor Brunger 5 Years. Professors Hutchinson and Jones are Plant Ecologists with considerable environmental and field experience. Professor Marsh is a Recreational Geographer and Professor Brunger is an Urban Geographer. Professor Jones and Marsh are co-authors, along with Professor M. Fox, of the draft Stewardship Plan for the University Nature Areas (see www.trentu.ca/biology/tna) or, as a short cut, use the search engine GOOGLE and type in "Nature Areas" OurTrent Editor's note: text has been slightly reformatted for readability. |
| Soccer field complex plan has legs...for now Peterborough This Week - November 18, 2005 By Mike Lacey While city councillors have given the go-ahead to draw up designs for a soccer complex in the Peterborough's north end, there remains doubt that the $5.4 million complex will ever be built. The proposal has split councillors, some arguing the City can't consider such an expenditure now that they are facing significant budget restraints while others say a design study is needed in order to access provincial or federal funding for the project. City councillors approved spending $110,000 to have designs drawn up for the soccer complex at Trent University. A final decision on whether to go ahead with the proposal will be made next spring. The complex would be built on 21 acres of land at the corner of Pioneer Road and the Ninth Line of Douro. The preliminary plan calls for eight micro-sized soccer fields, three mini-soccer fields and three full-sized fields, a field house, and 300-vehicle parking lot. Although it's estimated to cost almost $5.4 million, that would be spread out over nine years and local soccer leagues would contribute $750,000 towards the project. Winston Ernst, president of Peterborough Youth Soccer Club, says more soccer fields are sorely needed in the community. As it stands, soccer leagues across Peterborough have frozen their membership at 2001 levels due to a lack of fields to play on. "We could easily use nine new fields right now," he told councillors Tuesday night. "We regard this project as a necessary infrastructure project." But Coun. Terry Guiel said the complex poses not only a one-time financial hit but there's also the ongoing expense to keep the fields in good condition. "This is a luxury item," he added. But others, including Coun. Jack Doris, said the lack of soccer fields is more of a concern. Soccer is an inexpensive sport that is accessible to all children, he explained. With the rise in obesity amongst children, that should lead councillors to consider providing more soccer fields as a priority, he said. But retired professor Roger Jones told councillors prior that he and a few other of his colleagues believe the site to a be a poor choice, mainly because it is surrounded by wetlands and is part of Trent's natural habitat. He feels a site further north is better suited for the proposed complex. Peterborough director of community services Ken Doherty said Trent officials want to keep the land Mr. Jones mentioned as an alternative because they have other plans for it. |
SOCCER AND TAXES: A time to say no If city council does raise taxes by 10.5 per cent next year, homeowners will have seen their property taxes go up an average of nearly eight per cent a year from 2003 to 2006. Ask most councillors why taxes have to go up by more than triple the rate of inflation every year for four years and the answer will be the same: provincial downloading. But while the province is guilty of passing along costs to municipalities, that is not the whole story. Another significant factor was on display at council Tuesday night. To set the scene, councillors were giving final consideration to a detailed pre-budget report that laid out spending and revenue projections. The report stated that without a 10.5 per cent average tax increase there won't be enough money to meet the city's obligations. During earlier discussion at the committee level, Coun. Paul Rexe, chairman of finance and one of the authors of the report, told councillors they had contributed to the problem by “pre-approving” $4.9 million in spending prior to upcoming budget talks. Rexe's point was that by approving projects in advance without taking into account their effect on overall spending, big tax hikes were virtually guaranteed. He emphasized it by referring to another such project that was up for approval this week, a $5.5 million soccer complex. Don't vote on this now, Rexe said. Wait until the budget debate. Council decided not to listen to him. On Tuesday councillors committed $110,000 for a design study of the soccer complex, and approved the entire project “in principle” prior to budget talks. In fact, the project is virtually a done deal. Taxpayers will be on the hook for all but $750,000 that has been promised by local soccer groups. A staff report mentioned possible provincial and/or federal funding, but none exists at the moment and a payment schedule for the 10-year project has city taxpayers putting up $4.6 million. Rexe's point about making big financial commitments in isolation is well taken. It would also have been nice to hear some hard questions from council. There is no operating agreement with Trent University, which is supplying the land. How much will it cost to cut the grass and maintain the complex, and who will pay? How will low income families get their children their? Is the need for soccer fields really going to continue to grow, given that both local school boards project declining enrolments over the next decade? And more fundamentally, how can the city continue to approve even good and worthy projects if they are going to fuel double-digit tax increases? Consider what council has done during the past four years to contribute to higher costs:
Now the soccer complex looms, as does a proposed $13 million expansion of the Peterborough Centennial Museum and Archives. Good arguments can be made for each of those expenditures. But not every good project is necessary – or affordable. The city has to build roads, upgrade sewers and provide police and fire protection. Beyond those sorts of basic services, council has an obligation to live within taxpayers' means. For the past four years that hasn't been happening. |
| City invests $110,000 in soccer-field study Peterborough This Week - November 2, 2005 By Mike Lacey The shortage of soccer fields in Peterborough took one step towards ending Monday night. City councillors approved spending $110,000 to have designs drawn up for a potential soccer complex at Trent University. The final decision on whether to go ahead with the proposal will be made at budget time in the spring. The complex would be built on 21 acres of land at the corner of Pioneer Road and the Ninth Line of Douro. The preliminary plan calls for building eight micro soccer fields, three mini soccer fields and three full-sized fields; a fieldhouse; and 300-car parking lot. It's estimated to cost almost $5.4 million, although that would be spread out over nine years and the local soccer leagues would contribute $750,000 towards the project. Soccer is booming across Peterborough and there is now a lack of soccer fields in the city. The club must keep its numbers to 2001 levels. Councillor Terry Guiel spoke out against the proposed complex and said the City is under too tight fiscal constraints to undertake such a plan. "We have invested a great deal of time and money into sports," he said. "While other areas like arts and culture have starved." Starved is perhaps the wrong word to describe funding for arts and culture in Peterborough. The City spent more than $3 million in 2005 on arts and culture, including operating funding for the library and Art Gallery of Peterborough. Coun. Shirley Eggleton, chair of the board of parks and recreation, noted that this complex will be built out over time and as needed. The need within the soccer community is there, she added. Other councillors, such as Coun. Paul Rexe, supported going ahead with the design drawings but were not sure about support for the project when budget time rolls around. "I'm certainly not supporting any project that doesn't have contributions from the federal and provincial governments," he added. The proposal began earlier this year when the City signed a memorandum of understanding with Trent University over funding for the DNA Cluster project. Part of that agreement had Trent provide land to develop soccer fields. |
