Tax revenue versus protests
Right now, operating in our society, are very influential and unaccountable activists and lobby groups who appear to oppose almost all development along energy and industrial lines [“Climate march,” September 19].
However, there is almost a Newtonian principle at work that for every activist success there is a consequence of less potential tax revenue. This is not a value judgment, just a statement of cause and effect. And they have lost sight of these consequences.
If we can use Powell River as a paradigm for our greater society then the priorities of the public purse have to be reassessed.
We in Powell River see the changing economy before our eyes. Over the years we have lost approximately 1,500 taxpaying jobs at Catalyst Paper Corporation’s Powell River mill. What is replacing this loss of revenue?
The choice is simple. Accept the consequences of blocking development and lower your expectations of government funding, or encourage development and expect better government services. You can’t have both.
Ted Cooper
Massett Court
Zoning alert
City of Powell River Council is attempting to change bylaws and zoning. Changes would open the way for high buildings on Powell River’s waterfront [“Planning department turnovers affect waterfront development,” July 9].
The first high building council is pushing for has been proposed by Quay West Development. It is non-compliant with our official community plan (OCP) and zoning. Residents lose ocean views if it is built. People purchased homes for views under zoning bylaws and OCP objectives that were worded to protect these views.
The property in question is located adjacent to the seawalk and fronts on Marine Avenue across from 4404 Marine, next to the Imperial oil properties (oil tanks). The Marine Inn, immediately north, is legally nonconforming.
The proposed building is five storeys, three storeys above Marine—basically the height of the hydro pole. We see no other five-storey buildings in Powell River.
Councillors, except Maggie Hathaway, voted in favour of changing bylaws and zoning and allowing multiple variances in order to accommodate the developers. The city planner strongly advised against approving the building.
To accommodate the development council needs to:
• Change density requirements in the RM3 and MX zones to allow more units in the building (Public Hearing, 6 pm Thursday, October 2, city hall);
• Change zoning for the Marine/Willingdon Avenue DP3 area from W1 (Waterfront 1) to MX. The proposed Quay West building would still be non-compliant. Public hearing not yet announced;
• Allow variances, beyond that of MX zoning, for height, rear and side yard setbacks and parking;
• Ignore OCP objectives which state: 9.3: “this area of Westview is characterized by a mixture of small commercial retail, commercial office, and commercial service uses, restaurants and low-rise residential uses;” 9.3.1 the objectives for this area are to among other things, “minimize any potential negative impacts upon neighbouring or nearby residential properties.” This is not being done. Instead, city council makes plans totally disregarding above views.
Public hearings must be held. If you do not want high buildings on the waterfront; if you believe a current council should not override the OCP, it is important to attend hearings to voice your opinion.
Alene Noris and Rolf Widmer
on behalf of concerned Lower Westview Residents
Speed concern
I live on Westview Speedway. This quiet, residential street has, over the past few years, deteriorated into a high speed freeway [“Ratepayers outline Cranberry traffic hazards,” July 2].
The crosswalk between Hammond and Gerrard streets is completely ignored by drivers. School has started and many children use that crosswalk to get to school. There is no crossing guard and we fully expect a tragedy one day.
Repeated requests for police presence to curb the speeders and monitor the crosswalk on school days have been ignored. City hall pretended some interest in traffic calming measures but of course, nothing was done.
Westview Avenue is not the only road where speeders are allowed unchecked and unmonitored. The current urban limit of 50 kilometres per hour is too fast. Change the limit to 30 kilometres per hour and slow down before more pets and someone's child is killed.
Gillian MacGregor
Westview Avenue
Library checkout
Finally (maybe), a decision on the new Powell River Public Library and it was unanimous except for City of Powell River Councillor Maggie Hathaway and city clerk Marie Claxton who seemed as confused as I am [“Question will be on civic ballot,” September 24].
After so much dithering and hand-wringing about taxpayers and unnecessary costs and spoiling a gravel pit with a library in a place that used to have an arena but is now pristine parkland, I must now make a snap referendum decision on a brand new place that I didn’t even know was being considered.
The architect must have drawn the thing up overnight. The cost is hardly worth mentioning. What’s three million and change over 30 years?
It all came together with two or three phone calls by the mayor. I’ve been around the block too many times to be railroaded like this.
There is less than a month to get out all the details we citizens need to make an informed choice on a binding referendum.
Lanny Marentette
Manson Avenue
Conflict at work?
Should City of Powell River Mayor Dave Formosa influence city policy on an issue which he has a pecuniary interest [“Council looks to expand liquor licence,” October 1]?
On September 26, 2014, the mayor was caught within a Vancouver Sun story: “Liquor licences being sold in anticipation of new rules.”
Formosa was paraphrased saying the new liquor laws would “help to thin out some of the liquor outlets in his city...” Help who? We know that he holds many retail liquor licences.
As the BC Liberal government grants large grocery outlets beer and wine licences, current private liquor stores worry over lost market share. The government will restrict saturation of supply within a specific area and encourage selling and moving licences from existing liquor stores to grocery chains.
The Sun’s story revealed that a bidding war is under way:
Ads are already popping up… with one offer—for the Red Lion Pub and Liquor Store in Powell River—suggesting liquor licences are up to $550,000 now and will eventually be worth more than the advertised $899,999 purchase price of the property.”
Enter the mayor, owner of a grocery store down the street:
“In a rural town, if you’re the only game and you’re not making a ton of money and you’re offered $600,000, it’s like winning a lottery. I’m sure we’ll see a lot of them moved.”
Can the mayor profit from “thinning” liquor licences? What is he thinking? His recent comments place him in a grey area. In the Community Charter, the act that regulates municipal government, Section 103 is specific: it prohibits a mayor from using his office to attempt to influence a decision of any body. Did not Formosa as mayor use his influence and publicly lobby to “thin” the playing field of competitors?
Holding public office is not an investment portfolio. Elected officials must put the public ahead of private interests. The best way to handle conflicts of interest is to avoid them entirely. Let’s hope the mayor has already placed his holdings in Trust.
Guy Gentner
Stittle Road
