Editor:
On Wednesday, March 7, I attended a meeting of the District of Sechelt council, because I was interested in hearing the discussion on the application by Sechelt Sustainable Community (SSC) for a zoning amendment for the proposed project on the former Silverback site.
As I understand it, this amendment involves a change from approved zoning, which allowed for the development of a golf course and 1,600 homes in the Tuwanek area, to a multi-faceted development including mixed housing, recreation, agriculture, retail, seniors’ housing, an international school, etc., to be developed over a 25-year period. All in all, this seems like an interesting addition to Sechelt, building on and consistent with the strengths of our community. And it seems a pretty exciting opportunity to cast our minds forward a full generation.
I was appalled to hear the report by planning staff. Total negativity. The PowerPoint presentation had four full pages of “Issues” and “Problems” – i.e., reasons why council should not approve the zoning amendment. Most of the issues raised were of the nature of matters that are addressed as a matter of course in subsequent approval stages over the many years of such a development, not at the concept stage.
Over many years in my career I have appeared frequently and have given testimony before councils in B.C., and the states of Washington, Alaska and Hawaii. I have rarely, if ever, seen a staff presentation so loaded with negativity as was on display on March 7. The staff laid out all the reasons why council should not approve.
It would have been nice to hear a discussion along the lines of this: Here is an interesting project. It has pluses and minuses as all projects do. Let’s see how we can work together, including full community input, over the coming years to make this successful for the investors and great for Sechelt. I heard only one member of the council, Darnelda Siegers, showing any openness to such an approach.
John Hansen, MSc, PEng, Halfmoon Bay
