Dear Editor,
Fort Langley is a great place in which to live, raise a family, and watch as my grandchildren grow. I believe the current building restrictions have contributed to this.
I fear that significantly deviating from these restrictions is more likely to cause harm than good, and therefore I am opposed to the Coulter Berry development.
There are ways to deal with projects that do not comply with the rules. The process used was intended to allow council to deal expeditiously with relatively minor deviations. The deviations proposed are not minor, and should be dealt with differently, to ensure fairness to those who have developed within the rules and other property owners.
One Judge seems to agree with this view, so I think this to be a legitimate, not frivolous challenge.
From the amount of discussion being generated, you would think that it is some sort of grand public works project. It is not. It is a for-profit venture.
There is nothing wrong with earning a profit, but every such venture carries risk. Projects that deviate from existing rules attract more risk that others.
Presumably, the potential for profit justifies the risk.
Hopefully, the developer, as a prudent business person, has a viable Plan B, should a more profitable Plan A prove unfeasible.
The businesses in Fort Langley add to the enjoyment of living here, and we need to support them all.
The current controversy will end. Attempts to punish those who disagree seem likely to be counterproductive in the long run.
The building in question is said to incorporate many good features. It probably does, but it is too big.
If one building like this is good, two or three may be thought to be better. It is feared that allowing this process to start will be the beginning of the end of Fort Langley as we know it.
Do we not have more to lose than we have to gain? Why spoil a good thing? Why not leave well enough alone?
Mike McManus, Fort Langley