It seems the pace of development has faltered somewhat recently and maybe it’s a good thing.
If it’s so, it will give overwhelmed SCRD planning staff, Area A Advisory Planning Committee members and the general public a chance to step back and take a look at what the past five years have brought to the community.
Those involved with the governance of development applications are just now beginning to see what impact their decisions have brought and it’s a good time to start asking some questions.
Has the record number of zoning bylaw changes and Official Community Plan amendments made this a better place to live?
What have we done to ensure the reason people want to come here in the first place is preserved?
With septic permits granted for properties previously thought undevelopable, are the lakes and ocean as clean as they were even 10 years ago?
If we could look past the short-term wealth associated with a building boom and try to stretch our vision into the future, it’s starting to look a little clearer.
Developers, who sometimes have no clear understanding of the history and culture of the area, are given licence to recreate it according to their designers’ specifications.
Right now there’s a surplus of lots and still a stack of development applications waiting for permission to change their zoning to "bring something beautiful" to Pender Harbour and Egmont.
More often than not, something beautiful involves condominiums and townhomes on the waterfront because that’s where the money is.
Director John Rees has said "Local government is not in the housing market, however, it can help with zoning possibilities to make these projects more achievable."
And it has. But I’m not convinced that the community is better served by encouraging high-end subdivisions
During winter, there’s very little glow escaping from the homes we’ve seen built in Daniel Point. High end subdivisions don’t seem to bring full-time residents — the kind who populate our schools and local volunteer boards.
When planners are faced with a barrage of applications for an extended period, it’s reasonable to assume long-term planning suffers.
A down turn offers a chance reassess, identify problems and formulate cohesive strategies. I’d like to suggest a new formula for assessing whether or not an application has merit.
Let’s call it the Winter Hydro Consumption threshold. If a developer can’t guarantee that a high percentage of the homes in the proposed development will be blazing with light all winter, then we don’t want it.
They say you can’t put a wall up but if our population swells to 10,000 in the summer yet remains 2,500 in the winter, then someone has failed.
-- Brian Lee
Why not make it the Total Hydro Consumption? If there's a high THC count, you'll have a strong local economy and happy citizens.
Posted by: Octagon | July 29, 2008 at 03:03 PM