Cedar Street development raises concerns at council

Mission councillors raise issues with home lot sizes. traffic and other aspects of the proposal

A proposed housing development on Cedar Street will go to a public hearing, despite some concerns from council.

On Monday afternoon, Mission council debated a rezoning application from Civic Consultants, who want to create a 12-lot subdivision at 8504 and 8522 Cedar St.

The subject site is approximately 1.85 acres in size and is located in the Cedar Valley Comprehensive Development Plan area on Cedar Street, south of Egglestone Avenue.

According to a staff report, the two properties are currently developed, each with a single-family dwelling and various accessory buildings. The existing structures are to be demolished with the new development.

The proposed development will not allow for any form of secondary dwelling unit, including secondary suites.

While council has agreed to go to public hearing to allow neighbouring property owners to have a say, many raised their own concerns about the plan, including the size of the proposed homes.

“I was kind of shocked to see 3,000-square-foot lots,” said Mayor Randy Hawes, adding that they are very small for the size of homes proposed.

“Why were they not considered for 4,000-square-foot lots?” he asked.

Coun. Jim Hinds asked staff if there would be a restrictive covenant in place to ensure no secondary suites would be permitted, while Coun. Danny Plecas had concerns regarding traffic speed and congestion.

“The concern I have is the whole concept of traffic safety. People pulling out on a major artery, a two-lane highway, there’s a chance of more traffic accidents there,” said Plecas.

Coun. Jenny Stevens also commented on the lot sizes, saying the plan isn’t acceptable.

“Twice I’ve heard the phrase used that this is designed to benefit the developer’s plans. I’m sorry, I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, we are sitting at this table with the responsibility of planning a livable community, not to fulfill the wishes of developers.”

Stevens added that she would not vote for what the developer needs.

She agreed that they should make a reasonable profit on developing that land but wants to ensure they are not “actually building future slums.”

“This sort of overcrowding is, frankly, ridiculous.”

The public can voice its opinion, positive or negative, at the public hearing scheduled for Nov. 6.

Just Posted

Most Read