Sparks rezone is bad news

(Re: Controversial rezone granted to Sparks St. landowner, published online July 23.)

Dear Sir:

(Re: Controversial rezone granted to Sparks St. landowner, published online July 23.) Twenty to one against the idea. No clear plan in place, only vague outlines of multiple possible potential dwellings of varied, and undecided as of yet, styles and sizes. But to be SURE it has a “green” heating option! Geo-thermal! And it’s actually GOOD for the creek! THAT we heard. Over and over and over.

But oddly without any details or plans either shown or discussed. The possible cost of, the as yet unknown number of, buildings were clearly alluded to being not cheap to build thus, I have to assume here, better than other possible greener structures.

Fears of future property apathy, by the “one” might result in additional flooding of neighbouring properties, was barely, and unclearly addressed. It was noted that these dwellings will require a 1000+ gallon reservoir, to use the AMAZING (!) geo-thermal potential, to be constructed. Where this might be placed wasn’t addressed and did little to quell flooding/erosion fears.

Nothing good or even necessary for Terrace was shown to be planned, unless you count the possible minor PR of having a couple geo-thermal rentals.

We have plenty of R3 zones undeveloped in Terrace already, and the validity of this type (whatever type it is) of geo-thermal is vague to say the least, as is the benefits to this particular neighbourhood of Terrace.

There was nobody present in the crowd that was for the zone changes. Twenty people, rescheduled their lives to be at this meeting (the bulk of them had been to two meetings) to show there dislike/distrust for the zoning change. One guy for it, not ironically, the one who proposed the vague idea of a plan (actually he brought someone with him who was also for the plan, his possible contractor).

Every neighbour to the proposed site arrived to participate in the democratic process. And what happened? The vote to change the zone was passed. Really? Twenty to one? This isn’t a NIMBY issue; this is clearly a bureaucratic/democratic issue. And even if this is a NIMBY [Not In My Back Yard] issue, so what? Doesn’t the voice of 20 citizens of Terrace speak louder than 1? Doesn’t the opinion of wage earners, homemakers, civil servants, taxpayers and voting Terracites matter to the process? I am seriously disillusioned. Our 20 cares and desires for Terraces future development obviously count less than one possible, vaguely green, concept to this council. But I do know that my vote will matter, and I also know for whom I’ll not vote already.

So, I guess at least, there is that to look forward to.

Keith PiperTerrace, B.C.