Editor, The News:

Many of the comments spoken and printed recently regarding the Thornhill issue have gone beyond stating a preference or making a point. People who circulate a petition to raise awareness and gather support are not using Gestapo tactics. These people are in fact on the same side as the accuser in that they don’t want to see Jackson Farm made another subdivision. They just don’t want to trade their backyards to save it when there is a viable option.

When these people express concern about their fear of chainsaws and bulldozers, they are not fear-mongering.

That reminds me of a speaker at the OCP hearings who said Thornhill residents should welcome developers with their city water lest we die because of carcinogens in our wells. You may, of course, call that freedom of speech, and he did justify his ranting by saying he had consulted with his real estate agent.

Coun. Judy Dueck recently informed us that we should like developers because it is they who give us our parks.

I know it is typical for developers to set aside some green space at the behest of local government, but it is taxpayers who pay for the major amenities.

She also stated that without developers, people would not have jobs or homes.

The degree of bias of such statements is obvious, but the notion that you and I owe our vocations to the benevolence of land developers is incredulous and outrageous.

She also complained that she wasn’t getting enough respect.

To my way of thinking, respect is earned, not demanded.

We have councillors who are ignoring expert and expensive advice that we paid for.

They also disagree with some of the staff who do the research for them.

They seem to be at odds even with the wisdom and experience of Metro Vancouver.

And they don’t seem to be listening to the voters or the taxpayers who pay their salaries.

This attitude has generated a great deal of frustration.

I have no delusions about the cause of all this conflict because I know that some individuals, including local and outside speculators and developers, have already purchased land and thereby staked their claim in the Thornhill area, and there is much profit to be realized.

The problem is that there are some lovely acreages and homes not built by developers, but by people who value the environment and the lifestyle they have worked very hard to attain.

The high-profit margin, cookie-cutter-style subdivisions are not welcomed by all.

A property recently purchased on 264th Street has been stripped of timber and a 1,300-sq.-ft house is being built in a neighbourhood of much larger homes. If there is any doubt about the result of land speculation in the area, this is a good example.

I wish our pro-development councillors would take a reality break and come by and see for themselves what they are advocating.

I will close with a comment for those who have a “not my problem” point of view. The informed and experienced who have tried to dissuade council from pushing for the development of Thornhill have done so for a reason. The topography of the area will make access roads difficult and expensive to put in and the fact that much of the ridge is solid rock could require expensive blasting for sewer lines. Such necessary infrastructure is paid for by you, the taxpayer, not the developer.

Your backyard may not be affected by the destruction of ours, but you may be made to help pay for it.

Lachlan Duncan

Maple Ridge