To the editor:
Re: Springfield Road’s 25 acres of farmland to be used for 200,000 sq. ft. of commercial space and 500 condos.
We heard our city councillor, Andre Blanleil comment on the radio that the land in question is “no good for farming since there is no access.”
Where does he believe that the commercial access will come from? There will be another two or three new traffic lights installed on Springfield to make the commercial venture a go for the developer.
Who is this councillor who cannot see the farming potential of the 25 acres? We surely do not need another 200,000 sq. ft. of commercial property since there is enough shopping all the way from Winfield to the other side of Westbank.
The developer has left the property in weeds for the last 20 years to make it look as if it is not good for farming.
All the talk about moving the top soil to other farming land must mean that the soil is good enough for farming or they would not consider trucking it away.
One should not be anti-development and most Kelowna people are not—just not on the best farm land. There is plenty of land available that is not good enough for farming, it just isn’t sitting on Springfield. One comes to wonder who the councillors “work for” since Mohini Singh was the only one to vote against the removal of the farmland.
When a developer is due to spend millions on a development it is easy to see that “favours” could be doled out to anyone who may be pro-development, at whatever the cost. It just smells that way, doesn’t it?
Read the book On the Take With Brian Mulroney, to get the gist of the process.
Jorgen Hansen,
Kelowna
