Dear Editor,
Many people have weighed in regarding the pros and cons of a swimming pool in Barrhead. There are some that are firmly against it but it seems to me that most people are in support. There are those who are cautious about the costs of the pool. They have understandable worries and concerns. While the Making Waves group is actively trying to create understanding about the pool, the Plan Forward group is actively trying to make sure the public doesn’t bear a financial burden.
I’ve been impressed with Making Waves and their efforts to help people understand the decisions that have been made about the pool. For instance, they tell us that despite its name, a ‘Lazy River’ is a value added feature in a pool that increases the use of the facility. We may have thought that a lazy river is just used for gently floating along in an inner tube and if that was all, it would seem a bit decadent, but it actually has a long list of other uses, some of which include physical therapy and fitness training. Exercising in the current of the river is great for the elderly and for young people. It is an option for anyone with joint issues and or other issues of mobility and a means by which they can maintain muscle tone with less stress to joints. Imagine our young hockey players, dancers and figure skaters jogging against the current as they train their bodies for competition. This is just one aspect of the thoughtful and intelligent design of the proposed facility.
I’m also impressed that the designers had the foresight to consider a pool that will be accessible to people of all ages who have mobility issues. I think of how our schools have embraced diversity and how kids consider inclusion a natural and obvious condition of their world. In our schools you see kids with mobility equipment (wheelchairs or walkers etc) joining their friends by the locker at break or going outside and playing on universally designed play structures at recess. And yet some adults in our community consider accessibility features like the large hot tub and the sloped entries as unnecessary add ons. To me, these are features of purposeful and thoughtful design.
I’m Ok with the Plan Forward group expressing concerns about the costs of the pool and the costs to the taxpayer. It is indeed important to be informed. Unfortunately they are highlighting just one piece of the complex characteristics of home ownership. Yes, our taxes will go up. The last number I read was they expect an increase of just under $60 per year per $100,000 home. One can scan the realtor ads in the Leader to get a sense of what homes in Barrhead are currently worth. $200 to $300 thousand is quite normal. That means an extra tax expense of $120 to $180 annually.
Another aspect that is not mentioned however, is the effect an aquatic facility can have on property value. There are a couple of possibilities. One is a market where the amenities and community services are limited and people have no desire to buy. When a market has little appeal and limited potential for growth, the direct result is that property values remain stagnant, or worse, they decline. A decline in value of 1% on a $250,000 property is $2,500. This is what an average homeowner stands to lose.
If the opposite were true, and the market were attractive to homebuyers, then property values increase. Any realtor will confirm that it is not unusual for an attractive market to see property value increases of 4-7%. On the $250,000 property that translates into $10,000 to $17,500 per year. That more than nullifies the impact of the anticipated property tax increase. A desirable and attractive aquatic facility can have a huge impact on the value of your property and mine. I admire the intelligent, thoughtful and universally accessible design that has been developed for this aquatic center. It’s the right design for all ages of people in our community. To a prospective homeowner, a facility of this nature is evidence of the vibrancy of the community and can be a huge factor in the decision to invest in a home and life in this community. To existing property owners, it means a relatively small increase in taxes and a huge increase in property equity, which translates into personal wealth. For these reasons I will be casting a YES vote in the plebiscite thus October. I encourage others to do the same.
Mark Thiesen
