Re: “Plan to redevelop old motel site too dense, Pettigrew says,” Feb. 22.
I strongly support the opposition Councillor Steven Pettigrew has voiced to the redevelopment proposal for 8205 King George Blvd.
Does the applicant have a plan to assist the mostly elderly people on low income whom the project would displace and who probably would have to look for accommodation far away?
In being the sole council member to vote against the proposed development, Pettigrew bravely stated, “I will not be responsible for these peoples’ misfortune,” and “This is not a community-building environment.”
The newspaper story states that, “as part of the densification project, the applicant has committed to provide a ‘community benefit’ to the city of $93,600.”
This smells like an attempted bribe!
Further along the newspaper report continues, “To allay the concern that the city parks department has expressed about the pressure this project will place on existing parks, recreation, and cultural facilities, the applicant has agreed to provide the Parks Department with $145,600.”
The same nasty smell!
Seriously, how can money allay pressure that the influx of people would put on the resources of the area? To allay the pressure of more people, the city needs more space for parks and recreation, not densification.
What has happened to the rest of the members of the Safe Surrey Coalition who were voted onto council office last fall, partly on the platform of curbing densification and development because the infrastructure – roads, parks schools, etc. – was already overstressed?
Many Surrey residents are frustrated that, for far too long, progress has been measured by economic factors that support the growth model (quantity) rather than by the quality of life (a safe community where people care for each other and for the environment).
John Payne, Surrey