Dear Editor:
The Summerlanders for Sensible Development website, states “Its purpose is to encourage development in a way that is harmonious in which people and environment are treated in equal consideration as money.”
Yes, you read it right, a direct quote.
Let’s examine this more closely.
They say they “encourage development.”
I scoured their website and could not find a single development that they have encouraged. In fact, the only proposal that they discuss on the site is the Banks Crescent development, a project they adamantly oppose.
They say “environments… are treated in the same consideration as money.”
They argue the proposed site is agricultural land and should be preserved as such. In fact, the land has long been designated as medium density residential and the only issue for debate is whether council will increase the zoning designation to high density.
This land will be developed at some point, the only question is how.
Building a long term care facility with a dense housing footprint including the more efficient use of infrastructure (power, water, and sewer ……. and yes, even the local roads) is, in fact, the most efficient and sensible way to use development money.
The reality is they are not interested in preserving the land. They are interested in preserving their view of the landscape.
They say “people……are treated in equal consideration as money.”
The 2016 Canada Census for Summerland indicated the population over 65 years old was almost 3,700 persons. The census also indicates about another 1,200 Summerland residents are aged 60 to 65.
Summerland has only about 400 long term senior health care beds.
This all indicates the community is trending towards an impending health care crisis. With this as a backdrop, they suggest the fish, which generate millions of dollars, should take precedence over senior’s long term health care. How are all these seniors being “treated in equal consideration as money?”
Perhaps the only people that they are referring to are themselves.
They also suggest they are “sensible” and present the argument to council that the decision to approve this application is a binary one, either the fish hatchery or no development at all.
There is no view that both the hatchery and the development can coexist even though all the engineering studies suggest otherwise. How can such a position be viewed as “sensible”?
The Lark development proposal is probably one of the best sensible and sustainable developments Summerland will ever see. While using assets safely and efficiently, it also creates a number of significant social and economic benefits for the community, another hallmark of a sensible development.
It is time to call a spade a shovel.
NIMBYs, your form of boutique sensibility, that is, hiding behind the skirt of political correctness to promote a selfish agenda is both factually bankrupt and disingenuous. You have put your self-interest above the social and economic interests of the community.
You are, collectively, a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
Richard Gallant
Summerland