The Backpacker, built for Tourism or Transients?

Saturday, May 14, 2005 08:16 AM

Since hearing the province had bought the old Backpacker Motel and was set to turn it into a home for the homeless, the Millar Addition - Connaught Hill Concerned Citizens have been sounding the alarms bells, but say they‘ve been unable to get a straight answer from either City Hall or BC Housing. They are seeking a number of answers, the most pressing being how come BC Housing and the city now say they will hold meetings with the Motel’s neighbours. In the case of the city, that will come through a formal application for a rezoning application to change the official community plan. When asked why BC Housing had bought the property without first talking to the city, Ann Howard, Interior Office Regional Manager said that they had in fact talked. The City’s Director of Development Services, Bob Radloff disagrees. He says no one contacted him or any other person in his office about the property purchase although there has been conversation since the purchase. I asked Ann Howard who she communicated with at City Hall, she said she was going for lunch and would get back to me; it took her two days, but here’s the e-mail I received late Friday: Ms Howard says: “We are committed to public consultation beyond what is required through the city rezoning process. Besides the pubic hearing that is required by the city, we have assured citizens who have contacted us that they will be invited to attend neighborhood consultations before the rezoning, once we have selected a skilled service provider through a request for qualifications process.” She adds, “We could not hold these consultations unless we had purchased the property, we can’t have consultations about a property we don’t own. Purchasing the property was a required step in putting together a proposal for the local community.” Earlier on, Ms Howard mentions, “the purchase was a sound deal, regardless of whether we develop the property or decide to sell if the rezoning process is unsuccessful and or no other uses are deemed viable or acceptable to the local community.”

That being the case, the people of this city are being told that BC Housing has entered into the land speculation business and if they are, surely then they should be paying the same sort of taxes as the other land speculators in this city. But further perhaps BC Housing should speak to say for example any commercial realtor who will tell you that in most every single case if you’re buying land with the intention of getting it rezoned to accommodate your wishes, you do so with an “option to purchase”, that enables you to do every single item that Ann Howard refers to without spending the taxpayers money on land speculation, unless of course as long as BC land is in the mood they are prepared to offer money to the multitudes of property owners in this city who would be only too glad to sell their land and hope that, down the road, the province could receive rezoning approval.
Earlier on Friday I spoke to City Manager George Paul who said he did not speak to Ann Howard about the purchase of the Back Packer motel. He did add that while someone from city hall did speak to her, he didn’t know the substance of that discussion. The initial announcement on the proposal (unless I have missed some pages which I would like to be provided with) doesn’t mention the stringent policies that are now being alluded to. Meantime, here sit the residents of the area scratching their heads, the reply they received from Ann Howard talks of 30 “affordable, apartment style homes for people who need a range of support services to help break the cycle of homelessness”. She goes on to say in her letter, “I can assure you that you will be invited to attend the neighborhood consultations that will take place as part of our planning process and will occur prior to a rezoning application.” If you have already bought the land and have a plan in mind for 30 units, doesn’t a so called consultation process have little meaning? Can the residents of the area expect to receive a fair hearing? The bigger question however is, does the city have an agenda that is a not so official community plan that the homeless section of this city will be located in the Millar - Connaught area? Finally, if BC Housing is bent on providing shelter for the homeless, might I point them to a piece of property and vacant building on Westwood that is owned by the provincial government? It would fit the bill without the consultations or the money outlay that will be required. It will however not fulfill the need if there is a plan afoot to have all of the homeless situated in or near the down town core. If we are hoping to have more people living downtown, this clearly is a step in the right direction.

Previous Story - Next Story