Dear Editor:
I am, as yet, undecided on the iCasa project. The proposal has considerable appeal for several reasons but there are a number of questions yet to be answered.
The impact on the fish hatchery, the red zone designation and possible traffic issues are my main concerns at this point.
However, there is one ongoing and oft repeated objection being levelled against this development that I find bothersome. What gives anyone the right to decide where seniors choose to live?
Council does have the right to decide which developments proceed, but individuals have no right to tell seniors what area of the city they can or should live in.
I am a senior. Do I not have the right to choose where I live just as anyone else does?
If I want to live near the downtown core to take advantage of easy access to amenities then I will do so. If I choose to live in a rural or semi-rural area (which I do) to enjoy the peace and tranquillity that setting often provides, then I will do so. I will choose where I wish to live set by my own personal preferences, needs and abilities, just as anyone else does.
Seniors fully understand the impact of living near the city centre and the lifestyle that offers as well the implications of living rural or semi-rural. They will take those factors into consideration when making their decision on where to locate just as others do.
I have heard and read numerous comments that this project, and seniors housing generally, should always be located near the downtown core. In an ideal world all new housing of any type would be built near the town centre but we do not live in an ideal world.
The developers of this project have made a proposal for that particular site and it must be considered on that basis.
Suggesting this proposal is an inappropriate development for seniors based on its location is little more than ageism. We seniors have the right to choose where we live as much as any other age group.
Buzz Smith
Summerland
