The Corporate Officer advised that 18 submissions had been received.
- Email dated December 6, 2023 from S. Carriere and D. Krieg
- Email dated December 6, 2023 from V. and M. Eccles
- Email dated December 6, 2023 from M. and A. Kerry
- Email dated December 7, 2023 from R. and R. Gibson
- Email dated December 7, 2023 from D. and C. Moore
- Email dated December 7, 2023 from L. and T. Bemister
- Email dated December 8, 2023 from H. and J. Barber
- Email dated December 9, 2023 from N. and H. Maclean
- Email dated December 10, 2023 from L. and A. Sartori
- Email dated December 10, 2023 from D. Riphagen
- Email dated December 10, 2023 from B. Lyons and P. Smith
- Email dated December 11, 2023 from M. Smith
- Email dated December 11, 2023 from B. Smith
- Email dated December 11, 2023 from The Royles
- Email dated December 11, 2023 from H. Haberstock and B. Burnell
- Email dated December 11, 2023 from R. and S. Baker
- Email dated December 11, 2023 from W. Uhl
- Email dated December 11, 2023 from M. Marback
The Mayor called for a first time for representation from the public who believed they were affected by "Tronson Road Rezoning Amendment Bylaw 5975, 2023" together with Public Input for Development Variance Permit 00563.
Robert Lynch
- Why are there so many unknowns in the proposal
- Admin. advised most of those are discussed during permit stages, the zoning sets the threshold for what is allowed.
Mark Budgen - Monashee Geomatics - representing the developer
- Seems to be some confusion of what is being proposed and what is allowed
- Staff recommended rezoning rather than varying lot width
- Current zone allows for 59 units with a double loaded road and maximum density
- Developer proposed to stay with neighbourhood character and eliminate double loaded road, reducing the number of lots to be developed
- Smallest proposed lot is 796 m², this is larger than smallest lot in existing development
- Clarification that 30% slope is not an engineering standard but rather comes from City of Vernon zoning bylaw
- Majority of Adventure Bay is currently built on slopes greater than 30%
- Design guidelines for what is proposed are in alignment with the current Adventure Bay area
- Change in zoning will result only in addition of 6 lots (29 to 35)
Scott Chatterton
- Disappointed that notifications were limited to newspaper for those residents outside 30 m radius
- feels lots are too steep to build
- Concern with stepping outside of design guidelines
- Concern with reduction in lot width
- Concern with setting precedent for future development
- Concern with servicing, particularly water
- Concern that with increased density the risk of wildfire will also increase
Admin. advised that Canadian Lakeview Estates is on a private water utility. The proposed development area would be serviced by Greater Vernon Water.
Shaun Hartzell
- Why are we changing from initial guidelines, is it so the developer can make more money?
Warner Uhl
- Found the information package to be confusing
- Concerned with service issues, not just water but also sewer issues
- Concern with setting precedent for future development
- Concern with ingress and egress
- Concern with safety of residents walking or biking on the road
John Watson
- Concern with lighting and would like to see City ensure that shades are pointing down
- Found the map in the paper to be unclear and therefore wasn't sure where the proposed area is located
Shaun Hartzell
- Read the rationale in the staff report, still don't understand.
- Will secondary suites be allowed in this development?
Scott Chatterton
- Does the BC provincial legislation regarding secondary suites supercede design guidelines. Admin. advised that this would require legal advice but municipalities can no longer restrict or prohibit secondary suites.
Pete Smith
- Concern with more traffic
- Upset with short notice of Public Hearing
- Concern with setting precedent for future development
Council inquired regarding how many homes were to be built in the original development plan. Admin. advised they will have to report back.
Council inquired regarding how fully developed is the area at this time. Admin. advised that based on zoning a large percentage in this phase has already been developed.
Warner Uhl
- What is the process and the stages for applications
Rod Baker
- Thank representative for clarifications
- Who is responsible for this development
- Main concern is what will happen to the feel of the community
- Don't see benefit to current residents to change zoning
- traffic will be a problem, don't know how to alleviate, can service road be further developed
Pete Smith
- Like to hear from those in the room who are in favor of this application
Heather Haberstock
- Who is responsible for paying for infrastructure to be put in for the lots. Admin. advised that whoever applies for the subdivision is responsible for trunk mains and services, individual lot services may be the developer or whoever is doing subdivision.
- Is there a plan for an additional road with this development. Admin. advised that no additional road is planned.
Graham Pask
- Concerned with additional traffic and impact on potential wildfire evacuation
Dan Keech
- Current residents are paying to maintain trails and boulevard, will this subdivision also be responsible for contributing to this.
- Mark Budgen - yes this development will be included within same recreational facilities use agreement along with same design guidelines and statutory building scheme applied.
Mark Budgen
- Provided clarity on sewer connections and water servicing and impact
Warner Uhl
- Have slope stabilization, geotechnical and archeological studies been completed.
- Mark Budgen - yes all have been done as part of the Adventure Bay development, more can be done at subdivision phase should the City request it.
The Mayor called for a second, third and final time for representation from the public who believed they were affected by "Tronson Road Rezoning Amendment Bylaw 5975, 2023" together with Public Input for Development Variance Permit 00563.