Silverdale housing criticized
The Province
A massive housing development in Silverdale came under fire from environmentalists, farmland supporters and residents at a District of Mission public hearing last night.
The project proposed by Genstar and Madison development corporations would see 6,424 units, including 5,000 houses, built in an environmentally sensitive and mostly rural area over the next 20 years.
Dozens of speakers criticized the five-phase project that would bring 30,000 people to live in Silverdale.
The first phase of the project consists of 1,650 units.
"We are opposed to it because there hasn't been an appropriate environmental impact assessment, which would indicate what will happen to the abundant wildlife, including five endangered species at risk that live on the site," Mission resident Tracy Lyster, spokeswoman for Citizens Against Urban Sprawl Society, told Mayor James Atebe and council members before a standing-room-only crowd of several hundred people at the Best Western Lodge.
The Western Canada Wilderness Committee is also opposed to the "environmentally destructive housing development" that could destroy salmon habitat and risk contaminating freshwater sources.
Lyster said the District of Mission has been "bullying" Environment Ministry scientists who oppose the development.
"The ministry scientists have stated publicly in their letters that their concerns have been disregarded, ignored and their questions for clarification unanswered by the District of Mission," said Lyster.
Marvin Rosenau, a former senior provincial fisheries biologist, has said building houses on Silvermere Lake would endanger a vital salmon ecosystem.
Rosenau was removed from his position after criticizing the development.
Last night's meeting was to consider a change in zoning bylaws for what the District of Mission calls a phased development agreement -- a 20-year contract between the district and the developers that would guarantee the developers zoning in exchange for amenities.
On Sept. 29, Genstar and Madison wrote to council saying the agreement should be reworked to soften the financial impact on the developers.
Said Lyster: "So I ask the question, why are we at a public hearing to go over an agreement when the applicants themselves aren't agreeing to it?"
© The Vancouver Province 2008
