Dear Editor:
Re: City hall moves forward with plan The Record, July 18.
I, too, along with everyone I speak to, am concerned not only with the office tower on top of the civic centre, but also the latest alternative approval process for borrowing $59 million.
Instead of using municipal revenues of $33 million already approved in the five-year capital program for facility, road maintenance and park development, it will be used to help fund the office tower and hence, the need to borrow $59 million to cover those initiatives, along with $26 million for the civic centre and the necessary interim financing.
It seems to me we are borrowing money from Peter to pay Paul. But let confusing financing, be as it may.
My main concern regarding the office tower is that, according to the Metro Vancouver Office Market Report as of 2011, we have, in this city, a total of 151,726 square feet of vacant office space, or about 10 per cent.
The largest amount encompasses three full floors in the Royal Bank, at about 30,000 square feet, along with Royal City Centre, with 75,000 square feet.
Further to this, there are now three new mixed-use developments offering office space, not the least of which is Uptown Property Group's Queen's Park West at Sixth Avenue and 6th Street, the same company that pulled out of the city's joint effort.
All of these will offer Class A office space which, we are told, is in short supply. But, in fact, there is already more than 61,000 square feet of vacancy in Class A office space in New Westminster, according to the Market Report.
On this office tower and civic centre, everything is premised on the optimistic supposition of what is projected will happen. Will our office tower add to the already high vacancy rate?
What if the world economic crisis continues or gets worse, as many economists, along with the Bank of Canada, are now predicting?
I agree with Chuck Puchmayr that there are too many uncertainties to take such a gamble.
As for the timing, I have to agree with the comments of many others in the paper who have expressed concern.
To have an alternative approval process during the summer months, where more than 4,500 or the 10 per cent of the residents have to sign a negative response to this $59 million loan is, in my opinion, unacceptable and manipulative.
With due respect, mayor and council, where is the public process or input on this bylaw (tax increase)?
How much debt are we already carrying in this city and why not have a referendum on such a large financial commitment?
I intend to sign in opposition to this loan bylaw and I hope enough others do to bring about a referendum.
Bill Zander, New Westminster
