I do not support this tent, as I fear for the safety of the community and I can no longer use the park and ride
S
Salman
1 year ago
I live 200 meters to the Greenbank and Highbury shelter and I am against it in all the way. It will creat nuisance and will jeopardize the safety of me home and our community.
It is a good idea to build the tents nearby the parliament hill.
A
Anonymous
1 year ago
Here is why I have an objection to the proposed creation of this tent city. At the present, this is pitched as a lodging solution for asylum seekers. Although there is an urgent need for humane solutions to address this housing issue, I believe that this particular approach is rushed and lacks a thorough assessment of its potential impacts on our community.
This addition of a densely populated center, 150 seems to be the cited number, will require municipal resources such as water supply, waste management and emergency services. This density of asylum seekers will very likely require dedicated and focused social services. Some may be suffering previous critical trauma experiences and issues. Housing 150 residents is the equivalent of creating a block of 30 single family house units (assuming 5 member household in each house). And don’t forget, the tent city will require a staff of administrators, a staff of social service agents and an administration building to attend to the tent city itself.
It would be prudent that an impact assessment is conducted and presented to the community before any decisions are finalized. This assessment should not only analyze the immediate effects but also outline the way forward to integrate asylum seekers into the community, that promote their well-being and ability to contribute positively to our community. Supporting migrant individuals arriving into a new environment would be prudent at many levels.
And not to be ignored, the potential for increased criminal activities and threats to established neighborhoods adequately must also be addressed? The tent city has the potential to negatively impact local residents. Concerns regarding neighborhood security, property values, and increased costs for homeowners—including higher insurance premiums—are legitimate and deserve careful consideration. The prospect of diminished investment support from financial institutions for local homeowners and businesses would be a major
T
Tina M
1 year ago
It's way too close to my house.
K
Kalidas Subedi
1 year ago
I strongly oppose the proposal.
S
Sandra Brown
1 year ago
No thank you.
Z
Zhuo ling liang
1 year ago
Say No To Tents, Say Yes To Homes
K
Kevin Olson
1 year ago
No!
A
Anonymous
1 year ago
I say no to the sprung shelter!
A
Anonymous
1 year ago
Barrhaven is one of the places that is free from the homeless & it's a great community here. They can go somewhere else & you can think of other solutions. They shouldn't come into our suburb.
No tent!
Unnecessary!
No tent
I do not support this tent, as I fear for the safety of the community and I can no longer use the park and ride
I live 200 meters to the Greenbank and Highbury shelter and I am against it in all the way. It will creat nuisance and will jeopardize the safety of me home and our community.
You are destroying the area with this.
Please no asylum tent in Barrhaven
Stop importing refugee
[email protected]
No Tent
Stop receiving refugees.
It is a good idea to build the tents nearby the parliament hill.
Here is why I have an objection to the proposed creation of this tent city. At the present, this is pitched as a lodging solution for asylum seekers. Although there is an urgent need for humane solutions to address this housing issue, I believe that this particular approach is rushed and lacks a thorough assessment of its potential impacts on our community. This addition of a densely populated center, 150 seems to be the cited number, will require municipal resources such as water supply, waste management and emergency services. This density of asylum seekers will very likely require dedicated and focused social services. Some may be suffering previous critical trauma experiences and issues. Housing 150 residents is the equivalent of creating a block of 30 single family house units (assuming 5 member household in each house). And don’t forget, the tent city will require a staff of administrators, a staff of social service agents and an administration building to attend to the tent city itself. It would be prudent that an impact assessment is conducted and presented to the community before any decisions are finalized. This assessment should not only analyze the immediate effects but also outline the way forward to integrate asylum seekers into the community, that promote their well-being and ability to contribute positively to our community. Supporting migrant individuals arriving into a new environment would be prudent at many levels. And not to be ignored, the potential for increased criminal activities and threats to established neighborhoods adequately must also be addressed? The tent city has the potential to negatively impact local residents. Concerns regarding neighborhood security, property values, and increased costs for homeowners—including higher insurance premiums—are legitimate and deserve careful consideration. The prospect of diminished investment support from financial institutions for local homeowners and businesses would be a major
It's way too close to my house.
I strongly oppose the proposal.
No thank you.
Say No To Tents, Say Yes To Homes
No!
I say no to the sprung shelter!
Barrhaven is one of the places that is free from the homeless & it's a great community here. They can go somewhere else & you can think of other solutions. They shouldn't come into our suburb.