Topic: Copper Ridge Development Area Master Plan
Name: Keith Lay (Active Trails Whitehorse Association)
Date: March 19, 2024
In the Public Input Session Report for the Master Plan, the term passive recreation is used on page two.
However, the Administrative Report fails to define what the City of Whitehorse considers to be passive recreation. For years, ATWA has tried (without success) to get the City to place a definition of the term in any plan, policy, and bylaw where the term is used.
There are numerous definitions of passive recreation to which one can refer. However, all either imply or directly state that passive recreation does not involve motorized recreational activities, and that it results in minimal environmental impact. (See https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/passive-recreation and scroll down).
In the document entitled, Land Use Master Plan, the term passive recreation is used in the section entitled, 4.2.2. Greenbelt on page 37.
Here it says (in part) that, "The objective of the Greenbelt (GB) area is to provide for a natural green space for active and passive recreation . . .” The terms active and passive recreation are also used together in Section 4.2.9 of the plan.
However, the plan gives no clear indication as to the difference between the two terms.
We need a clear definition of what the City actually means when it uses the term active recreation and the term passive recreation, and those definitions should be included in the Land Use Master Plan document. The definitions should emphasize that both active and passive forms of recreation do not include motorized activities at any time of the year.
The City of Whitehorse already defines active transportation as “Any form of human-powered travel, such as walking, cycling, skateboarding, cross-country skiing and more.” (2020 Trail Plan/Glossary) Logically, it would follow that active recreation must also refer to human-powered activities. Neither active transportation or active recreation involve motorized activities*.
In the plan under 4.2 Greenspace Area (p. 35) there are several references to both non-motorized multi-use paved trails and non-motorized universally accessible designed paths,” but again there is no explanation as to what these terms actually mean as far as use is involved.
The 2020 Trail Plan says an accessible trail is one that provides “safe . . . options for all to walk, cycle or wheel on the trails” [and that such trails] “will be increasingly important to support older adults, families with young children and those with mobility constraints.” (See page 2 of 2020 Trail Plan.) Such trails are by definition closed to motorized use, otherwise they could not be considered as accessible trails.
If these non-motorized universally accessible designed paths are to be accessible as per the City’s definition of same, then these paths must be non-motorized for the entire year.
Past experience tells us that whenever the City uses the term non-motorized multi-use trail in neighbourhood trail development plans, it means that the trail will be open to snowmobile use in the winter, as the 2012 Snowmobile Bylaw trumps the 2020 Trail Plan’s definition of the term.
Please do not fool citizens by giving them the impression that both a non-motorized universally accessible trail and a non-motorized multi-use trail will automatically be off-limits to snowmobile use in winter.
If we are to have truly non-motorized multi-use paved trails and truly non-motorized universally accessible designed paths in the Copper Ridge Development Area, then all those trails/paths will have to be included in the Excluded Trails section of the Snowmobile Bylaw. This will require an amendment to the existing Snowmobile Bylaw.
Of course, common sense would suggest an amendment to the Snowmobile Bylaw to restrict snowmobile use to motorized multiple use trails that are designated and designed for motorized use, would negate the necessity to include the types of trails mentioned above in the Excluded Trails section of the Snowmobile Bylaw.
However, to date City Council has not proved receptive to this solution, a solution that would do much to reduce the confusion that lies around trail use in the City of Whitehorse, so the only alternative is to include said trails in the Excluded Trails section of the Snowmobile Bylaw. This will necessitate an amendment to the Snowmobile Bylaw.
Hopefully, administration will recommend that this be done.
In Summary:
a) Include definitions in the Copper Ridge Development Area Master Plan for the following terms: passive recreation, active recreation, active transportation, non-motorized universally accessible trail, and non-motorized multiple use trail.
Please note that definitions of active transportation, non-motorized multiple use trail, and accessible trails (p. 2) are found in the 2020 Trail Plan. The public was given the impression that those definitions would be honoured by the City of Whitehorse even if it meant that bylaw changes would be required.
Four years ago, Councillor Boyd told citizens that “administration confirmed that a top priority [would be] to identify the policies and bylaws that need to be updated” to reflect the intentions of the 2020 Trail Plan. (City Council meeting of Dec. 7, 2020) Unfortunately, although ATWA has mentioned this several times to both City Council and administration since 2020, nothing has been done.
b) Recommend the inclusion of all non-motorized multi-use trails and all non-motorized universally accessible paths mentioned in the Master Plan, into the Excluded Trails section of the Snowmobile Bylaw, or (more logically) change the Snowmobile Bylaw to restrict snowmobile use to designed and designated motorized multiple-use trails.
Thank you for allowing us to make a submission on the Copper Ridge Development Area Master Plan.
Keith Lay (ATWA)
687-8500
https://www.activetwa.org
* Under the E-Bike Regulation Bylaw all three classes of e-bikes are not considered as being a motor vehicle. This includes Adaptive Mountain Bikes. (aMTBs)
Name: Keith Lay (Active Trails Whitehorse Association)
Date: March 19, 2024
In the Public Input Session Report for the Master Plan, the term passive recreation is used on page two.
However, the Administrative Report fails to define what the City of Whitehorse considers to be passive recreation. For years, ATWA has tried (without success) to get the City to place a definition of the term in any plan, policy, and bylaw where the term is used.
There are numerous definitions of passive recreation to which one can refer. However, all either imply or directly state that passive recreation does not involve motorized recreational activities, and that it results in minimal environmental impact. (See https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/passive-recreation and scroll down).
In the document entitled, Land Use Master Plan, the term passive recreation is used in the section entitled, 4.2.2. Greenbelt on page 37.
Here it says (in part) that, "The objective of the Greenbelt (GB) area is to provide for a natural green space for active and passive recreation . . .” The terms active and passive recreation are also used together in Section 4.2.9 of the plan.
However, the plan gives no clear indication as to the difference between the two terms.
We need a clear definition of what the City actually means when it uses the term active recreation and the term passive recreation, and those definitions should be included in the Land Use Master Plan document. The definitions should emphasize that both active and passive forms of recreation do not include motorized activities at any time of the year.
The City of Whitehorse already defines active transportation as “Any form of human-powered travel, such as walking, cycling, skateboarding, cross-country skiing and more.” (2020 Trail Plan/Glossary) Logically, it would follow that active recreation must also refer to human-powered activities. Neither active transportation or active recreation involve motorized activities*.
In the plan under 4.2 Greenspace Area (p. 35) there are several references to both non-motorized multi-use paved trails and non-motorized universally accessible designed paths,” but again there is no explanation as to what these terms actually mean as far as use is involved.
The 2020 Trail Plan says an accessible trail is one that provides “safe . . . options for all to walk, cycle or wheel on the trails” [and that such trails] “will be increasingly important to support older adults, families with young children and those with mobility constraints.” (See page 2 of 2020 Trail Plan.) Such trails are by definition closed to motorized use, otherwise they could not be considered as accessible trails.
If these non-motorized universally accessible designed paths are to be accessible as per the City’s definition of same, then these paths must be non-motorized for the entire year.
Past experience tells us that whenever the City uses the term non-motorized multi-use trail in neighbourhood trail development plans, it means that the trail will be open to snowmobile use in the winter, as the 2012 Snowmobile Bylaw trumps the 2020 Trail Plan’s definition of the term.
Please do not fool citizens by giving them the impression that both a non-motorized universally accessible trail and a non-motorized multi-use trail will automatically be off-limits to snowmobile use in winter.
If we are to have truly non-motorized multi-use paved trails and truly non-motorized universally accessible designed paths in the Copper Ridge Development Area, then all those trails/paths will have to be included in the Excluded Trails section of the Snowmobile Bylaw. This will require an amendment to the existing Snowmobile Bylaw.
Of course, common sense would suggest an amendment to the Snowmobile Bylaw to restrict snowmobile use to motorized multiple use trails that are designated and designed for motorized use, would negate the necessity to include the types of trails mentioned above in the Excluded Trails section of the Snowmobile Bylaw.
However, to date City Council has not proved receptive to this solution, a solution that would do much to reduce the confusion that lies around trail use in the City of Whitehorse, so the only alternative is to include said trails in the Excluded Trails section of the Snowmobile Bylaw. This will necessitate an amendment to the Snowmobile Bylaw.
Hopefully, administration will recommend that this be done.
In Summary:
a) Include definitions in the Copper Ridge Development Area Master Plan for the following terms: passive recreation, active recreation, active transportation, non-motorized universally accessible trail, and non-motorized multiple use trail.
Please note that definitions of active transportation, non-motorized multiple use trail, and accessible trails (p. 2) are found in the 2020 Trail Plan. The public was given the impression that those definitions would be honoured by the City of Whitehorse even if it meant that bylaw changes would be required.
Four years ago, Councillor Boyd told citizens that “administration confirmed that a top priority [would be] to identify the policies and bylaws that need to be updated” to reflect the intentions of the 2020 Trail Plan. (City Council meeting of Dec. 7, 2020) Unfortunately, although ATWA has mentioned this several times to both City Council and administration since 2020, nothing has been done.
b) Recommend the inclusion of all non-motorized multi-use trails and all non-motorized universally accessible paths mentioned in the Master Plan, into the Excluded Trails section of the Snowmobile Bylaw, or (more logically) change the Snowmobile Bylaw to restrict snowmobile use to designed and designated motorized multiple-use trails.
Thank you for allowing us to make a submission on the Copper Ridge Development Area Master Plan.
Keith Lay (ATWA)
687-8500
https://www.activetwa.org
* Under the E-Bike Regulation Bylaw all three classes of e-bikes are not considered as being a motor vehicle. This includes Adaptive Mountain Bikes. (aMTBs)