Editor, The Record:
As a new taxpaying Cedar Valley resident, I am passionate about my new hometown and want it to be the best possible place in which to live.
What measures are in place to ensure that development in the Cedar Valley area will be keeping with the harmonization of the surrounding area when you allow developers to clear cut everything? A two-tree replacement policy per lot is woefully inadequate. Look at the recently stripped parcels of land on Cedar by Egglestone and further east along Egglestone — there’s not a single piece of habitat, vegetation or tree left in place.
I moved from Surrey to Mission because I was attracted by Mission’s laid-back, quiet charm, its rich, beautiful backdrops of landscape and greenery, and it was far removed from the hustle and bustle of city life. Now, it seems that the council and planning department are set to turn this beautiful part of Mission into a high-density Coquitlam hillside you see when driving over the Port Mann Bridge. What an eyesore.
Shouldn’t planning be working with developers to ensure that environmental impacts are minimized and protected rather than completely stripped bare? Is this the legacy we are leaving for future Mission generations?
Interestingly, the Dec. 22 edition of The Mission Record contained an article about the downtown area suffering from the lack of development and that more needs to be done. Seems to me that council and staff are focusing their efforts on the wrong part of town.
Rather than have acres of high-density developments in Cedar Valley, how about marketing it to wealthy folks who would love to have big land estates which would not necessitate the massive chopping of trees and, thus, preserve more habitat.
High-density townhome/condo development would be more viable in the downtown core which needs an influx of downtown residents who would be more apt to frequent the many restaurants, shops and amenities in walking distance and encourages downtown business growth.
D. McCulloch
Mission