LETTER: Expressing support for Hatzic Bench project

When a developer is prepared to develop property within the District of Mission I believe we as a community should work with them.

Re: Proposed McTaggart rezoning and subdivision applications.

I’m writing in support of the proposed rezoning and subdivision proposal by the developers on McTaggart Street.

The planning process with the District of Mission staff for this development proposal went through 32 revisions from the original proposal by this developer in order to address the concerns of the District of Mission staff, the neighbourhood and general public.

When a developer is prepared to develop property within the District of Mission and in accordance with the Official Community Plan, I believe we as a community  should work with them.

This developer is prepared to invest approximately $2 million in offsite sanitary sewer main infrastructure and $4.5 million in onsite infrastructures. With the possibility of failing septic fields in the area and/or along the sanitary corridor, this allows for the option of an alternative sanitary system.

In addition to this they are prepared volunteer and contribute approximately $150,000 towards the District of Mission Community Amenities Contribution Program, pay approximately $800,000 in development cost charges, pay approximately $250,000 in parkland program and pay approximately $375,000 for District of Mission administrative fees. None of the forgoing includes their land cost.

What Mr. Toor and Mr. Tiegen are proposing is not out of the ordinary for the Hatzic community. The same size lots have been developed on Tindall Terrace just west of Draper and also Riverbend Estates located on Coleman Street north of the Lougheed Highway.

Mr. Toor and I developed Rockridge Estates which caused a neighbourhood controversy but the council of the day saw their way to approving our application and the subdivision resulted in being a desirable location and has homes that exceed the median value of homes in the Hatzic area. To the best of my knowledge, none of these past developments created a detriment to the Hatzic neighbourhood in any way.

My experience is, that it is change that people object to, but decide to call it something else other than that. Petitions are circulated with incorrect information.

This happens to be the last large piece of land in the Hatzic area and its highest and best use is being proposed.

All of the Hatzic Bench area has been developed, a piece at a time, and I’m sure each application was met with some sort of opposition. If council declined every development proposal that met opposition, there would be a lot less people enjoying the Hatzic Bench community lifestyle.

 

KC McPherson

Mission