Dear Editor:
Re 'Lock-off' suites could be 265 square feet (The Record, April 23).
Regarding the proposed tower at 900 Carnarvon St., the project architect told council the developer wants to be in line with city policies, then goes on to imply they need the city to bend to the demands of the banker. So which is it? We know the bank won't bend. Will the city? From all the reports I've read, it doesn't look like it.
The architect also goes on to say young people are willing to live in smaller and smaller spaces. I would argue young people have no choice in this city, that they are subject to market forces (developer's profits, land costs), and that a starving person will eat what you give him.
The original plan was for a condo tower, which many residents are opposed to as well. With several other condo towers going up in the vicinity and with disappointing sales, the idea here seems to be "Put up whatever we can to turn a profit NOW." So they brainstormed and came up with a massive rental tower they can flip to an investor, say a pension fund, and walk away, leaving residents and the city with the uncertain outcome.
So the spin starts. In recent months we've been told there is a shortage of affordable rentals. Yet I've read of new, smaller affordable rental buildings opening and more on the horizon, even right at the Quay. Where did this sudden need come from to plunk down nearly 500 small units on this lot?
Despite coverage it's hard to get a bead on what's actually happening.
The narration from varying news sources gives a different impression on the developer's motives and what council is thinking.
Another report elsewhere indicated the developer has come nowhere near council's requirements and that the window for financing may be closed.
For those reasons, residents of New Westminster should have a chance to voice their opinion at a public hearing if a decision is made to move forward on ANY project there.
New West council wants an iconic structure at that corner. But iconic how? Iconic because it's a beautiful, useful landmark, or iconic because it's a rushed decision forced by an impatient developer and a banker wringing his hands?
The world won't end if council takes the time and doesn't rush while trying to decide the best use for this space. And it doesn't have to be a tower.
M. Styranka, New Westminster
