Angst is building over an effort to “downzone” a second neighbourhood near Kwomais Point in Ocean Park.
Opponents of the proposed change – which would reduce the allowed square footage and height of any new development – say it will be unfair to existing residents who want to sell or rebuild, as well as to potential new residents, who would be restricted.
And, it would do little to save trees or character of the neighbourhood, the reason for rezoning that’s been touted by proponents, adds Barb Kotzer.
“It’s a big, huge stick trying to hit a specific problem, and in the meantime, it has huge ramifications,” Kotzer, a 16-year resident of the area, told Peace Arch News Wednesday, citing jeopardized views and a reduction in property values of $100,000 to $150,000.
“This does nothing to address (tree and neighbourhood-character preservation).
“It’s going too far. It’s getting to the point of ridiculous that it’s getting this far.”
The City of Surrey is in the midst of neighbourhood consultation after receiving a petition last July requesting the area – between 128 and 130 Streets and from 13 to 14A Avenues – be rezoned ‘comprehensive development’ (CD) from ‘single family residential’ (RF).
The change would reduce the maximum square footage and height of any new develop- ment on the 5,000-square-foot lots, restricting size to 2,600 square feet and height to 26.5 feet – changes Kotzer noted will not impact lot coverage but will prevent property owners from building the same size home as their neighbours.
According to information sent to residents by the city as part of a survey, the petition was supported by 57 per cent (105) of 184 lot owners within the defined zone.
Downzoning proponent Nicole Nelson said the process was launched with the best interests of the neighbourhood in mind, with those in support hoping to pre- vent more “monster” houses from being built and thereby reduce builders’ arguments around a need to remove more trees.
She acknowledged it will take more than downzoning to preserve trees, but said she was told by city staff that downzoning is the first step.
She credited downzoning of a nearby neighbourhood with preventing three lots from being clearcut.
“It makes the city acutely aware of our desire to save trees,” she said. “Is the city still responsible for improving our tree bylaw? Yes.
“It’s a big picture that I’m not sure everybody sees.”
Noting she’s been told downzoning would boost property values, Nelson said there is “a slew of people waiting in the wings” to start on a tree committee once it’s in place. She applauded downzoning opponents for taking a stand, but noted it is coming “very late in the game.”
“I completely understand their views, I really do, and I respect them wholeheartedly... We still feel (downzoning’s) the best way to go.”
Kotzer said she’s been told the city’s final decision will be largely based on the survey that’s underway, and she encouraged anyone who has not read the information and answered the questions to do so as soon as possible.
Residents have until Feb. 15 to return completed surveys, after which staff will tabulate the results and report them to coun- cil with a recommendation on whether or not to proceed with the downzoning.
If council supports downzoning, the bylaw would go to public hearing before a decision is finalized.