Dear Editor,
Re: “Something’s in the air — again,” Eve Edmonds column, March 11 and “Replace lost business zoning,” Letters, March 11.
Your column was bold and absolutely correct. (I wonder if the bigger-than-expected volume Harvest Power is complaining about increases their profit? I suspect their payment is per volume/weight and not a flat fee)
They think they have us over a barrel with cancellation leaving us high and dry and therefore expecting approval of any of their conditions for questionable improvement. (I hope the contract by Metro Vancouver wasn’t so weak and short-sighted and that they can demand results or loss of contract)
We are dealing with too many weakly issued contracts to developers asking (demanding) modified conditions after the development is underway or completed (eg. Steveston waterfront).
Regarding the above noted letter, if E. Simm would attend council rezoning or zoning amendment applications, she would hear the developers admit that there is a bigger profit from residential unit development than from business units. (I have witnessed this conversation when a bold councillor questioned a developer)
The developers show up with architectural plans already designed and printed, deleting the zoning-required commercial units on the street level.
Unbelievably, their argument often convinces council to approve the elimination of commercial premises contrary to the city planners intent.
This then sets a precedent with total lack of close commerce for the residents.
A. Lerner
Richmond
