Home  Directors |  Meeting Minutes Membership |  Projects  BBQ |  Neighbourhood Plan |  About Us |  Businesses   | Contact Us 

  

"Future of Carr's Landing"

CARR'S LANDING

SECTOR PLANNING WORKSHOPS

 

MINUTES OF THE CARR'S LANDING SECTOR PLANNING

WORKSHOP #2 (Charloise, Angus, Jersey, Commonage, Barkley)

 

                                                               DATE:         October 16, 2003

                                                                TIME:         7:00 PM – 9:30 PM

                                                      LOCATION:        Camp Arbuckle

 

         IN ATTENDANCE: Joanne Devries- Facilitator          

         Chuck Price                                                      Frits Bakker                 

         Stan Brynjolfson                                                Larry Foster                                                                 

         Lance Marshall                                                 Frank Toplak

         Margaret  Price                                                 Flo                                            Mark Decker (absent)

 

PUBLIC IN ATTENDANCE:  ~     16

 

RECORDING SECRETARY:  Liisa Cook, Platinum Personnel

 

 

1.      CALL TO ORDER          7:05pm  Joanne Devries, Meeting Facilitator.

JoAnne lives in Lake Country but not in the Carrs Landing area.

Joanne introduced the Sector Planning members and asked that when the public in attendance begin giving their comments that they first give their name and speak clearly, as these meetings are being recorded as accurately as possible.

 

2.      REVIEW OF AGENDA   Joanne reviewed how the meeting would be conducted. A member of each focus group: Parks & Recreation, Environment, Infrastructure and Land-Use will give a presentation with open discussion time following. The handout was available for everyone to use for jotting down notes as the presentations are underway. A Comment Form was handed out for attendees to fill out with any further comments and handed back to Joanne at the end of the workshop.

 

The process began with the strategic plan and a simple questionnaire went out to the Carrs Landing residents. The Planning Hierarchy includes: 1)The Strategic Plan, 2) Official Community Plan, 3) Sector Plan, 4) Neighbourhood Plan, 5) Zoning Bylaw, and 6) Supporting Plans/Bylaws.

 

SECTOR PLANNING OBJECTIVES

·         Meet statutory requirements as an amendment to the OCP and be based on the policies of the existing OCP

·         Reflect broad community involvement and support.

·         Be easy to read, understand and use on a daily basis at Municipal Hall

·         Have policies that are fiscally responsible, technically feasible and legally enforceable.

·         Be completed on time and within budget.

·         Have the endorsement of Council and DLC staff.

 

The Carr’s Landing Sector Plan: Process and Timeline is at about the half way point of this process. The next step after the four Sector Planning Workshops is to gather the information about the issues and components and present these issues to the Council and the public.  A draft Sector Plan will be prepared for review from December 2003 / March 2004. Following will be another Community Survey, conducted in March 2004, which will be much more detailed and more specific than the first survey conducted in 2002.  The draft Sector Plan will be presented to the public at an Open House in March of 2004. April 2004 the draft Sector Plan will be revised to reflect the public input at the Open House and will be fine-tuned until the public can condone the plan. May 2004 a revised draft of the Sector Plan will be presented to Council and they will work together with the DLC staff to fine-tune the Sector Plan. Finally in June 2004 the proposed Sector Plan will be presented at a Public Hearing.

 

Joanne congratulated all the people involved with this process and their commitment to this plan

 

CONSULTATION MODEL

·         “Complete” and “progressive” consultation

-“ Complete” consultation includes opportunities for qualitative and quantitative input and review

o        Qualitative processes (focus groups and open houses) identify broad-based issues through discussions with small groups of people.

o        Quantitative processes (mail-in surveys) validate information gathered during qualitative processes.

-“Progressive” consultation uses the broad-based information gathered during qualitative process to craft more specific and meaningful questions for quantitative review.

 

CONSULTATION TOOLS     

1.             Community survey #1

2.             Ongoing focus groups

3.             Neighbourhood workshops

4.             Community survey #2

5.             First Nations liaison

6.             Open House

7.             Public Hearing

 

COMMUNITY SURVEY #1

         1) What do you like about your community?

a)      Rural and natural

b)      Quiet and peaceful

c)      Neighbourly and friendly

d)      Scenic beauty

e)      Close to amenities

f)       Wildlife

g)      Lake

h)      Low density/open and spacious

 

         2) What existing land uses, services or issues presently concern you?

a)      Roads, CLR deterioration, road ends

b)      Lack of planned development, development proposals

c)      High-density growth.

d)      Water quality, safety

e)      Environmental damage

f)       Lack of water

g)      Safety of CLR, speed

 

         3) What types of new land uses, activities or services would you like to see in your community?

a)      Recreation, green space, walk/bike

b)      Low-density, rural

c)      CL village store, restaurant, rec centre

d)      Public lakeshore access

e)      Roads

f)       Leave same

g)      Community-directed planning

 

         4) How would you like to see your community look in 10 years and grow for your children and

  grandchildren?

a)      Low-density, rural, family residences

b)      Recreation, greenspace, walks, bikes

c)      Leave same

d)      Roads

e)      Public lakeshore access

f)       Community-directed planning

g)      CL village store, restaurant, community centre

h)      Environmental protection

 

CARR’S LANDING RESIDENTS WANT:

Ø      Rural and natural area

Ø      Low-density development

Ø      Community-directed planning

Ø      Expanded amenities

Ø      Green space with associated recreational opportunities

Ø      Quality water

Ø      Good roads

Ø      Lakeshore access

 

KEY SECTOR PLANNING ISSUES Focus groups developed for these four issues

§         Parks & Recreation

§         Environment

§         Infrastructure

§         Land-Use

 

CONSULTATION TOOL #3

·         Focus Groups

                  - Who participates in the focus groups?

                  - Community volunteers

·         How often do they meet?

                  - Once monthly

·         What are the objectives of the focus groups?

                  - To gather information about community issues

                  - To gather residents’ input about the issues

                  - To prioritize the issues and make recommendations to Council

 

Joanne showed an Issue Analysis Worksheet and reviewed it to show how detailed the process is. A sound plan is based on complete knowledge.

 

3.       PARKS & RECREATION PRESENTATION BY STAN BRYNJOLFSON

Mark is the Chair of the Parks & Recreation focus group.

-     Areas/issues of study identified by survey, information gathering, and focus group members

      -           Parks and facilities

      -           Road end/foreshore access development

      -           Boat launches

      -           Trails and parklands

 

1.       Parks & Facilities

- Existing facilities and how they are used

- Improvements for existing facilities

- Future requirements

- Location of future parks

 

 

2.       Road-end Development

- What are “road ends”?

- Preserve and maintain in the public trust

- Inventory road ends

- Categorize the inventory as to park development potential

- Link road ends to triail system

 

3.       Boat Launches

- Why is this an issue unto itself?

- Analyze the need for additional boat launch facilities

- Survey locations for suitability

- Evaluate potential sites for positive and negative impacts

- Make recommendations

 

4.       Parklands & Trails

- Where should trail corridors be established?

- How do we acquire property for trail corridors?

- Linking trails

- Multiple benefits of trail of parkland corridors

- Develop and integrated plan

 

4.       ENVIRONMENT PRESENTED BY STAN BRYNJOLFSON  

- Areas/issues of study identified by survey, information gathering, and focus group members

-           Lakeshore preservation/access

-           Wildlife conservation and corridors

-           Rural/urban mix

-           Wildland/urban interface fire hazard

-           Other

 

1.       Lakeshore Preservation/access

- Obstruction of foreshore to wildlife by docks, fences, walls, and human activity

- Water quality degradation from runoff and septic waste leaching into the lake.

- Impact of water craft (especially power boats) on wildlife and lakeside residents

- Light pollution from increased shoreline development (dock lighting, etc.)

 

2.       Wildlife conservation and corridors

- Preserve/restore habitat and access to lakeshore

- Obstruction of wildlife corridors by agricultural and residential fencing

- Pesticide use

- Gull sanctuary

- Preserve/restore shoreline ecosystems

- Minimize “roadkill”

 

3.       Rural/urban mix

- Coexistence of agriculture/urban areas

- Agricultural Land Reserve/Right to Farm Act

- Pesticide use and other farm operations

- Air quality

- Fencing

- Noxious weed control

 

4.       Wildland/urban interface fire hazard

- Recent extreme example of Okanagan Mountain Park Fire

- Combustibility of building materials

- Design and layout of development

- control of vegetative fuels which surround structures and developments

- Fires can spread both ways

 

5.      OTHER ISSUES

-    Jurisdictional conflicts (OCP vs. provincial legislation (Right to Farm Act, Noxious Weed Control Act, Pesticide Control Act. etc.)

-    Regional, provincial and federal government policies may impinge

 

6.      SUMMARY FOR DISCUSSION

There are eight topics to cover:

-    PARKS AND RECREATION

     - Parks and facilities

     - Road-end development

     - Boat launches

     - Parklands and trails

-    ENVIRONMENT

     - Lakeshore preservation/access

     - Wildlife conservation/corridors

     - Rural/urban mix

     - Wildland/urban interface fire hazard

 

7.      DISCUSSION PARAMeTERS

Participation should be:

     - Balanced

     - Respectful

     - Positive

     - Forward-thinking

     - Concise

     - Creative

We are here to come up with positive solutions for the community as a whole. This forum is not the place to come and air your complaints. There are a lot of people and a limited amount of time so following the discussion parameters will ensure that everyone will have a chance to be heard. Everyone was asked to stick to the topic as noted in the Summary for Discussion. This brainstorming session can be a very creative time, some ideas may not seem feasible at the time but may triger thoughts on other subjects for discussion.

 

8.      DISCUSSION TIME – Topics of Parks & Recreation and Environment

PARKS AND RECREATION open for discussion from the floor.

Noreen: Neighbour asking why we have to fence our parks? How are we assessing for developing our parks? Why are we looking at developing new parks?

Frits asked which parks are being fenced? Answer: North side coral beach is being fenced.

Stan asked: Who are they being fenced by? Answer: the district is fencing them. They put fence in to designate private land from public.

 

Joanne: Any comments about fencing and parks?

Jacquie Labuhn: Almost mandatory to have fencing to keep the distinction of private and public properties.

 

Question: Are there any other alternatives to fencing such as a wooden fence as apposed to chain link fence?

Klien: Take into consideration lakeshore, there is no real designation. Feel that chain link fencing is a good idea because it is more cost effective.

Stan: Four foot high fencing does not stop the deer but does separate property.

 

Joanne: People who have larger properties are not as concerned about public parks as apposed to people in like the Coral beach area.

 

Jacquie: Personally prefers the smaller parks such as at Coral Beach. Has been to Kopje park many times but finds it is severely underused. Is it because it’s not so accessible or people don’t know about it. What about a boat launch there?

Wendy: Agrees that Kopje park is a beautiful unused park, but is not necessarily a good location for  a boat launch.

Fritz: Kopje Park is a Regional Park, run by CORD. So for any development to take place there is under another jurisdiction to deal with. Kopje Park has no beach. Kids do not want to go there, no dock or swim float. Must approach another district

Bill: Jurisdictional issues are very much to the point. Boat launch located there would be very dangerous to the marine life. Kopje is not a large park. Two different areas for park development. We have very little foreshore access to the lake. Public use long term needs to be addressed. The small places we have today will not be good for future.

Need to think about large-scale parkland in the uplands today for the future. We need to concentrate on this.

Truly unique use of environmental issues. Otherwise we will see other large-scale development in future. Uplands preservation. Large-scale meaning large land mass. Larger continuous land areas should be protected, as parks- erosion of values will occur if not done. This development would include trails.

Alain Klien: Drastic lack of trails in the whole of BC as a whole. England has common land all over the place to use and respect as well. Here we sell our parcels of land and do not allow for access between parcels. There are hazards that can occur with these trails such as litter, fire, kids, etc. Would like to see more accessibility in trail form to use. Cannot use because of private land.

 

Joanne: This will impact your area because of more traffic and people in your area, how do you feel about that?

 

Alain: Can we acquire land that the wildlife uses on a regular basis and see if we can access them? Buy/purchase them and use them also as public trails. Mix them together to become public/wildlife trails.

 

Joanne: any other thoughts about that

 

Chuck: You have referred to UK are they fenced.

Alain: They are called common land.

Wendy: Farmers do allow access to their fields, with respect. You avoid the cattle. You can actually walk the length of England through properties etc. They have walked up here and trespassed to see what was there. They had a beautiful view of Kalmalka lake. Worth it even if they would have got shot! A barbed wire was breached to do this.

Chuck: Are the trails marked in the UK? Answer: Yes they are marked with signs marked “foot path”. Kissing Gates, keep animals in and people can walk through.  Legal easements. You can drive along and see the foot path signs and they are clearly marked.

 

Joanne: Any other comments about Parks & Recreation?

 

Bill: Point of linkage on parks & trails. Been to seminars, commonplace for us to develop a park in one corner and another corner with no linkage to each. But for larger viability we need the separation. We put up trails but they go nowhere. Then there comes a time when these trails do not get used. They need to go from there to somewhere or a capacity for return, so that these trails are happily and readily used. Our topography makes this a bit difficult. Think in terms of linkage and returns, usage increases as loops and networking occurs.

Kim Kinswater: We don’t know too many people so we don’t know where to begin to walk. Where are these trails I don’t know where these maps are?

Chuck: If there are some trails they need to be better posted. Without trespassing we don’t have access.

How do we determine which land is available for hiking and what is restricted? We would appreciate mapping the public/private areas and where trails are permitted.

Joanne: Walk committee may be able to expand their map to include crown land.

Stan: Trespassing signs are not necessarily there to keep you out but just to keep things legal.  Grew up in Fraser Valley. Country people don’t mind if you walk through as long as you closed the gate. City people have different boundaries.

 

 

 

 

 

ENVIRONMENTAL discussion

 

Kim: One of the things I’ve had discussions with people along the lake, feel they need streetlights; stargazing is not good if we have lighting. Light pollution is a factor. Yard Lights. From where we live we see ugly lights some all night long. Future plans include soccer fields, which include halogen lights. Perhaps if lights were shaded in some way it would help.  It may be a security issue but perhaps using some sort of softer light or directional lighting, we enjoy our view of the lake and the lights would not infringe on us. In the future we feel it can get worse. We moved out here because of the beauty and the rural living and our first night on our deck we had the obtrusive lighting.

Bill: Returning to the survey, “rural and natural”, lighting is not rural or natural. Lighting affects wildlife as well as humans. Light pollution is a foremost concern for people involved with birding and long term health of bird population. It is a very good time to address that .

Bill: People can adjust their lighting.

 

Joanne: What about other wildlife issues.

 

Bill: Wildlife require safe access to the water.

Stan: There are specific times of day when they are at risk; dawn & dusk. Perhaps signage would be helpful.

:They seem to be crossing the road at anytime. Deer population is on the increase.

Kim: When hunting season hits there are more deer travelling. They do travel at mid night, dawn & dusk. By trying to avoid deer the people passing from behind are risking killing deer. Perhaps signage would bring peoples awareness up a bit. We’re trying to keep what we have.

 

Joanne: wildlife corridors what about them

 

More signage required warning of deer crossing.  Will the people read them?  Deer need safe exit from fenced orchards.

Stan: There is a concern that the orchards are too large. What can we do? Can the municipality require that there be breaks in the fencing more often?  Seems that the prime time when their trees are at risk is when the trees are very young. Do we need huge fenced off orchards for years when a few years are enough? If you’re paying the bills then they’ll be open.

Alain: What about proper corridors? Such as on the Connector.

Stan: Would this just create a funnel and be designated in one area?

Alain: Noting 3-4 km of roads with fencing and  no access for wildlife to get through.

Chuck: Do we need to consider putting a wildlife underpass or overpass in?

 

Joanne: Air quality needs to be touched on.

 

Alain: Seems to be a tremendous amount of spraying going on. They say it’s not toxic but we believe that it does have an effect. Not just to humans but animals, etc.

Fires at home in a country like this I don’t consider that to be pollution. Don’t think that we get too many comments on slash burning. Stopping fireplace burning is what I’d like to see.

Jacquie: Burning was never allowed where they came from chipping was the norm.

Lance: Agricultural community, consistent burning of prunings. People tend to mow them in. Part that’s tougher is new orchards where you get the big stumps, this is an expensive option burning being the cheaper option. It will become a lesser problem with the new types of trees. Last meeting did bring up that the smoke from residential came up as a big problem.

 

Joanne: Is there a standard that will come into effect?

 

Barbara: Efficiency stoves certainly on track. Outdoor burning is still not allowed here at this time.

 

Kim: Getting people trying to change from burning will be a challenge, air tight stoves are a good option.

 

Bill: Agree with Lance that much of the air quality issue from burning is from residential use. That of course increases with increased density. While at this moment to have people convert to catalytic stoves may not be well received, we’re going to have to address that issue now which is better than later

 

Airtight emissions remarkably light in comparison with traditional stove heat. Higher density will result in higher smoke emissions. We need to consider long-term effects.

 

9.      BREAK 8:30pm – 8:40pm

 

 

10.  INFRASTRUCTURE PRESENTATION BY FRITS

-     Areas/issues of study identified by survey, information gathering, and focus group members.

      - Potable Water

                  - Standard of operations for entire area

                  - Acquire systems/maintenance and operations by DLC

                  - Link systems

                  - Ensure fireflow standards are met

                  - Ensure long-term supply                     

      - Sewer Systems

                  - Ensure quality standards of existing systems

                  - Stay abreast of new developments in industry

                  - Promote additional satellite systems

                  - Maintain system density policy

      - Stormwater Drainage

                  - Need for drainage master plan

                  - Developers and private builders responsible for own drainage requirements

                  - Where possible, create holding ponds

      - Roads

                  - Ensure current transportation policy meets needs for community

                  - Improve CLR in areas of dangerous curfves and narrow sections

                  - Bypass may be desired but costs may be prohibitive

                  - Access for emergency personnel

 

      - Waste Removal

                  - Continue removal of solid waste to Glenmore Landfill site

                  - Promote recycling/composting

                  - Be vigilant in discouraging local (illegal) dumping

      - Emergency Services

                  - Fire department – standards and vigilance in reducing wildland/urban interfacing risks

                  - Policing requirements

                  - Ambulance service

                  - Local bylaw enforcement requirements and standards

      - Other Issues

                  - Education

                  - Public Transportation

                  - Social Services

                  - Any other ????

 

 

11.  LAND USE PRESENTATION BY CHUCK                  

-     Areas/issues of study identified by survey, information gathering and focus group members.

                  - Rural/natural character

                  - Planned development that reflects community’s wants and needs

                  - Expanded community amenities

 

LAND-USE ZONES

-     For the Coral Beach, Terrace View, and Juniper Cove areas, zoning is based on Central Okanagan Regional District zoning and includes RU ALR, RU1, RU2, RU3, RU4, RU5, R1

 

ZONE RELATIONSHIPS

Graphic was displayed on overhead projector

 

PERMITTED LAND USE

-     Examples of Permitted RU ALR RU1 AND RU2 uses:

      - Hog, beef and mink operations

      - Poultry farms intensive green houses

      - Wineries, commercial stables

      - Portable shake and sawmills

      - Orchards, vineyards, grazing

-     The rezoning of RU ALR land is very difficult

 

PERMITTED LAND USE

-     RU 3, RU 4, RU 5 AND R 1 zones are designated as country residential

-     Agricultural activities are permitted in these zones

-     Some restrictions

      - Those of “offensive nature”

-     It is possible to change the zoning of these areas

 

LAND USE ISSUES

-     Most concerns revolve around increased residential densities

      -BUT

-     Existing permitted uses can have the same effect

 

NO SUBDIVISION OR CHANGE IN LAND USE           

-     Could result in intensive agricultural development on the large land tracts

      - Which may have high environmental and infrastructure impact

                  - 6-acre greenhouse

                  - Feed lot

                  - Gravel pit

-     Does not mean that everything will stay as it is now!

 

DEVELOPMENT DECREE

-     For higher residential density development to take place the existing lots may have to be rezoned

-     But the OCP states that any lot smaller than 1 ha (2.5 acres) must have a water and sewer utility

-     Council has taken the stand that the cost of these utilities must be borne by the users of that utility

 

THE FUTURE

-     Consider these statements

      - There will be future applications for development

      - Does residential development mean a major change in community look?

      - Current agricultural zoning does not necessarily mean open space populated by deer, gophers and grapes

      - Would you like to have a water and sewer utility?

      - 30% of the population in this neighborhood is 55 years and older so where do you want to live in 10 years?

      - Would you like a store, a pub, or other facility?

 

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS

Graphics displayed on overhead projector.

      - Gated community

      - Lower density townhouses

      - Seniors facility

      - type of development layout options

      - waterfront developments

                  - pub

                  - Townhomes

                  - Lakefront condos

 

NOW IS THE TIME

We’ve got to start thinking about this. We are in a position to develop the community in the way that we want.

 

OUR CHALLENGE & OPPORTUNITY

-     Is to decide the future of our community

-     Provide direction to the DLC for our community

-     Be creative!

Our sector plan provides direction

 

I THINK WE CAN

-     Maintain rural/natural character

-     Ensure planned development that reflects community’s wants and needs

-     Explore the potential for expanded community amenities

-     By working together and exploring the options!!!

 

12.  INFRASTRUCTURE OPEN FOR DISCUSSION

Joanne: At the end of this meeting I would like you to think about the one thing that you are really passionate about for your community. If you could stand in front of council and say one thing, what would you like council to hear?

 

Issues with water!

Stan: Are people aware that next Tuesday night there is a meeting to discuss the Barkley Road water situation.

 

Barabara: Associated engineering will be there as well as district

 

Larry: noted that everyone here is on the Eastern side of Barkley, no one from the Charloise has attended this evening.

Chuck: no one here from the Charloise area

Lance: There are a lot of property owners up top who don’t have adequate water. There are no approved cisterns for that area. They will not get a building permit.

Barbara: People that are up there are bringing in their water.

:Does local health dept have input?

Bill: Barkley Road has capacity to be developed into a serviced area with fire flow and it is one of the key areas in terms of fire interface. We have to think more broadly than just cost. Have to think of public safety. The expansion on Barkley Road could have tremendous impact. We’ve been extremely lucky in this area to be able to get onto things quickly and put them out. We‘ve done it by the grace of God. Were quick we’ve done everything we can. Dealing with a stretch up there that is so rough and so dry. Ten minute turn over waiting for water is not ok. Fire anywhere along there could wipe us all out completely.

Marilyn: You have to look broader and ahead, but every time we’ve gotten that close, if you just put into Barkley Road, but it won’t help you because your too high, down, up. If they don’t have hydrants down here what have we got for fire fighting needs up here? Had a fire this summer my husband was on it first, could have been in big trouble. We are told that we are too high up.

 

Joanne: What do you see as a solution?

 

Marilyn: District has not taken a look at anything; people who make the decisions don’t live here, they live in Victoria. Lake Country engineers say that they’re too high up. Where is the five-year plan for reservoir?  Five-year plan is not a plan; it has been fifteen years already. They have to do something now. Okanagan Mtn. Park Fire should be a huge wake up call. We need a reservoir site to bring the fire-fighting standard up.

 

Fritz: question: Would you be willing to consider a local tax levy in order to buy out the local utility owner/operation. Subsequently to be operated by the district.

Does this mean improvement to what is available now. DLC buy it and improve fire flow utilities.

Lance: It’s not the owner of the utility that put money into it. Lake pine utility, they weren’t funded by owners. The owner is not willing to separate from it.

Bill: People have no want to spend more money.

Lance: I would vote no. Not that he doesn’t agree with the concept of it. Eastside utility, I’m paying for it already why would I want to pay twice.

:Four years ago investigated water utility . Has to be some logic to what’s being paid.

Frits: Some money will have to be paid to gain ownership of that utility.

Kim: No one has taken this issue and dealt with it. When we started investigating it we knew more about it than any of the provincial people.

Barbara: Meeting Tuesday night will give a lot of information. From the study, 140 on eastside utility. It will cost $1,075,000 to bring water to the Barkley road area. It’s a private utility. Sign petition and agree to be a specific area. When a private utility expands it has to include fire flow. Provincial grants don’t go to private utilities.

 

Joanne: Lots of issues we have to move on. People should attend that meeting re water utility

Any comments about Carrs Landing road?

 

Lance: Perception of the group re Carrs Landing road. Is it under utilized, over utilized… heard different views. Is it considered a dangerous road, is it over used?

:Doesn’t seem overused to me. Have to be cautious when you drive.

:Problems with Carrs Landing road will be improved with trail system improvement

Lance: Further development would be acceptable to have. Will it put unnecessary burden on the road?

:Carrs Landing Road is the only paved road, most of the people use, this increases the amount of traffic on it. If Barkley was paved would this take the traffic off of Carrs Landing Road.

:Paved on Barkley would improve traffic on Carrs Landing Road

Bill: Push through to Pow road is vital. Residential usage is a lovely winding country road, beautiful cycling route. Should be resurfaced. Large-scale construction would change that. It could do with some shoulders. That’s not the answer to getting more cyclists.

Chuck: Surprised that so many think that Barkley Road should be paved!

:People on Barkley want it to be paved.

 

LAND USE CHUCK PRICE

Can I get a copy of the slides that were presented?

 

Discussion:

Joanne: Given what you’ve seen how do you feel about development in your area?

 

Kim: Introducing more people into the community, how are you going to integrate them in?  Where are most of these homes going to be located? Looking to the future, what types of housing, where are they going to go?

Joanne: Two types, infill, rezoning, and clusters. Take a property and divide. Rezoning.

Lance: People tend to view development. ALR land what’s allowable? Greenhouses could be introduced. A feedlot could go in. Infill development. Rural development homes. There are some existing allowable land uses that may impact the residents that are here.

Chuck: Rural resource area could introduce a gravel pit.

Lance: These are allowable resources that may be allowed to go in. We have to think of and expand things a bit as to what is allowable. Different types of industrial business, such as something that provides a product that we would like, ie: what about a business that produces canoes. That sounds nice, but if you said boat building such as use of plastics. We have to think of these things.

 

What would you be prepared to live with, in regard to home based business’?

 

Alain: Should stay within the regulation of the size of the properties.

Do you support subdivision with 2.5 acre lots as a minimum?

There are lot sizes that are less than this acreage.

Marylyn: Are some things going to change as a result of the big fire? No reserve of water to deal with, how is it going to impact a new business?

Barbara: There are people on Barkley that board horses.

Noreen: How many infill lots from Oceola to Vernon. (80 within  Carrs Landing)

 

Joanne: Show of hands for support in residential areas lot sizes maintained at min 2 acres. 6 hands up

Even though infrastructure prices would be higher you still support?  Yes

Bill: Certain infrastructure has to happen. Development of better local safety measures has to happen. Development of better more linked and efficiently run water systems has to happen. Price cannot stop us from having it happen. Some people are told that development will reduce costs. This is fiction.

Chuck: How do we go about selling that Idea as above?

Bill: In some cases it comes from the province.

Wendy: Water is most import thing (every one agrees) lack of water everywhere. I think every one would pay for that

 

Joanne: Water metering who agrees? Paid by usage by each household. Majority voted YES

Lance: Orchardists will also be metered. Winfield is metered

 

Joanne: Agricultural land usage what sorts of operations would you invite?

:Vineyards

Chuck: Would you agree with big greenhouses in the ALR area, big lights?

:If it improves roads that’s ok.

:Not a lot of agricultural can go on without the water

Lance: Cottage industries OK. Those which do not compromise the environment and maintain the rural residential feel.

 

Joanne: Any support for local convenience store. Majority YES

Where should it be located?

Mary: Commonage Rd Carrs Landing Rd. for store with good access.

Lance: We had a proposal in Whiskey Cove. A seasonal thing might work well here. In general might have to be part of a development

Ok Centre has their store, museum post office

Needs to fit in with the environment rural aspect. Dance Hall, Community Hall.

Bill: Every purchase is a road trip. There is some sensibility in creating a dance hall, community centre. Without having to go to Winfield or Vernon

Where would we put that?

Lance: A piece of publicly owned land at Terrace and Carrs Landing Rd. not considered expensive land. Expansion of the fire hall is a possibility.

Bill: Fire hall is on too small a lot. Would compromise the fire response.

Chuck: Using commonage road as access to Vernon is a usual choice by most at meeting, however road condition dictates which vehicle will be used.

Bill: Bicycles, if it is possible to consider using pathways using human power. Having a store would be a good idea.

 

Joanne: thank you so much for your participation. Take some time to fill out the comment form

Now consider, if you could boil down your passion for this area what would you like to see?

 

Bill: prefer to see emphasis overall on preservation of health as a window onto the various discussion points. Health of ourselves and individuals collectively

 

Kim: Water important. Roads around here really need to have a lot of attention. Rides motorcycle, people speed on the road. We are Barkley road residents. Roads important.

 

Marylyn: Water, bring fire flows up to standard.

 

Alain: Rural aspect kept as is. Careful on how we improve the rural aspects.

 

Jacquie: Water pressure, water. (no pressure to shower)

 

Wendy: Water. Roads are of equal importance. Both roads improved.

 

Jackie: Water, fire flow. Primary importance

 

Cindy: Water, and wildlife corridors and fencing issues. Too many fences, where are the deer going to go?

 

Joanne C.: Speeding is problem, including tailgating and passing. The better the roads are more speed will be involved.

 

Joanne: Is there a police presence here?

Not much.

 

Debbie & Mike: Roads need second access, Barkley. Bring the community together more by building a community hall. Development has to be done very carefully.

 

Mark: Water is issue, everything will fall in place if water addressed. For bigger development, water is key issue can’t expand without it.

 

Ed: same as wife Debbie

 

Joanne C.: Development does not make taxes lessen. Development has ruined it.

Planning has to be done very carefully. Have to be very careful.

 

Lance: Keep in mind that this is why we are doing this. We would love to see more people get involved. This is the only time known that community is involved with their own future.

 

Joanne: interested in participating in any focus groups please contact them.

Open house will show what we are proposing to introduce to council.

 

Thank you for coming. Thoughts well recorded and considered

 

Web site www.carrslanding.org.

 

13.  NEXT WORKSHOP

 

Date:          October 22, 2003

Time:          7pm

Location:     Camp Arbuckle

 

14.  ADJOURNMENT

 

Meeting be adjourned at 10:15pm