The Editor,
Re. “First, they came for Coronation Park…” (Letters, The Tri-City News, April 28).
The letter from Jill McIntosh raised some interesting points regarding orphaned lots and the right of residents to stay in place and not be forced out by developers.
As a past developer now happily retired, I look at the issue a little differently. The Coronation Park plan envisions high density to support the city centre amenities and the Evergreen Extension. I don’t think anyone would disagree with that philosophy.
A single lot cannot realistically be developed on its own even at the high densities proposed, so no developer will be permitted to leave such a lot “orphaned.” Two or more contiguous lots could be developed into apartments and, therefore, if a developer can illustrate how this might happen, they would be permitted to leave them. Ms. McIntosh incorrectly surmises that it is the same developer who would have to incorporate these lots into their proposed development. Not true — a completely different developer will come along when those two or more homeowners are ready to sell and propose a new development.
The whole question of orphaned lots and rights of homeowners to prevent a development from proceeding is an interesting philosophical and moral discussion. Any OCP amendment to increase density in a neighbourhood creates a large windfall profit to the homeowners (tax free if it is their principal residence). To what extent should one homeowner have the right to deny many the opportunity to realize that profit? I don’t have the answer but I think the city policy strikes a good balance.
Steve Kurrein, Port Moody
