Back again: Illegal RV Parks on ALR

[Triple 6]

removed.

[Ken7]

I'm thinking this guy is pretty cocky he claims to have made 16k profit from 09 to 2015 or 16 and yet in that time I have personally watched a large steel shop get built there an addition put on his home a wine tasting building get built and landscaped and hes driving a new lifted duramax no wonder he needs to keep being a slum lord

IF I was him I'd keep my lips sealed. Do you think the TAX man might not just flag him here next go around. I bet he is audited and should be.

As for AG land, I look at it a little different. IF a land can be used to supplement seasonal income, why not as long as it is temporary and does not destroy the land as it could be farmed later why should it be my concern? I used to park my boat on AG land and the neighbor complained. End of story, we all had to move. Sadly today with youth not wanting to farm, what is a old farmer going to do other then be forced to sell in on parcel. Not always that easy at today's land prices.

[Triple 6]

removed.

[WalterWhite]

I'm thinking this guy is pretty cocky he claims to have made 16k profit from 09 to 2015 or 16 and yet in that time I have personally watched a large steel shop get built there an addition put on his home a wine tasting building get built and landscaped and hes driving a new lifted duramax no wonder he needs to keep being a slum lord

IF I was him I'd keep my lips sealed. Do you think the TAX man might not just flag him here next go around. I bet he is audited and should be.

As for AG land, I look at it a little different. IF a land can be used to supplement seasonal income, why not as long as it is temporary and does not destroy the land as it could be farmed later why should it be my concern? I used to park my boat on AG land and the neighbor complained. End of story, we all had to move. Sadly today with youth not wanting to farm, what is a old farmer going to do other then be forced to sell in on parcel. Not always that easy at today's land prices.

All of which is fine, and was possible before he flouted the law, and was personally responsible for the knee-jerk reaction by council to any and all other applications for agri-tourism RV parks. Council imposed restrictions of current parks to only be able to operate from April until November (which I personally still disagree with, but is another topic).

[Symbonite]

Get rid of the rvs what this town needs on the ALR is a pig farm

[GordonH]

Get rid of the rvs what this town needs on the ALR is a pig farm

With weekly spreading of pig manure on the farms fields, it's sure to bring tears to the eyes of CoK residents. lol, hey its smell of money.

[Calvin r Kuipers]

This is my first time on a forum, I usually don't have time for this stuff, But I was informed that people are talking about me.The RV park is nothing but simple economics, $3000 per month. Who doesn't want an extra $3000 per month? About what I drive are you green with envy? It's not new it's just well cared for.

There is more work to an RV park than most think. As per wanting this section for non agg use that is what the bylaw officer for the ALC recommended I do. I did what I could to stay in business for as long as possible. It's over now.

If there were complaints to the by-law in Kelowna they never informed me of that.

[Queen K]

Hi, I am one who was pulling for you.

Presently there is a war on the poor or marginal and what were you doing? Providing a place for those with RVs to live. Heck, maybe they aren't poor at all, but can't afford the $1300/month to rent a basement suite either, or dont' want to blow all their income on a house at $1600 and UP/month. Maybe some of them were able to put together a downpayment by paying you for an RV spot. I don't know. But as far as I'm concerned men like you were providing a solution to someone.

Thank you for trying.

[LTD]

I have no problem with you making 36000 a year off it as long as you have no problem giving up your farm status for it

[LTD]

you can see why he's upset 36k a year tax free gone poof that's gotta suck

[artistwithaflare]

Anyone living(casual, part or full time) in their RV should be given the opportunity to park it.
Lets not forget this is 'Home' for many people out there. A safe place to be, verses homelessness.
Wal Mart allows RV's to park but a home owner can't?

Time to revise or issue a new bylaw.
RV's are here to stay!
so, I applaud anyone who parks their unit downtown!
$1.25 for a few hrs might be one solution to this problem.

feel free to report said comments & they'll be looked after.

[WalterWhite]

You reap what you sow Cal. Had you followed proper permit applications and abided by the rules and due process that everyone else does, maybe you not only wouldn't have found yourself in this predicament - you also wouldn't have caused such negative views of the agri-tourism aspect of having RV parks on agricultural properties resulting in the current guidelines set out by CoK having to be as restrictive as they are. As stated earlier - you're the one bad apple that spoiled things for everyone else - congratulations.

Anyone defending this as putting the screws to someone that's just trying to help the less fortunate with somewhere to hang their hat, has no idea of the full picture and circumstances that have devolved into this property creating a rural slum. Keep towing the line on your current course of choice Cal, and many will happily await the day the CoK levies some serious penalties against you, that frankly are long overdue.

[Scrobins94]

Of course it would get voted down, it's not in Rutland. Cheers to City Council.

[khutchi]

.The RV park is nothing but simple economics, $3000 per month. Who doesn't want an extra $3000 per month?

Me. if it comes at the cost of a black eye on agri-tourism for my community and the death of the A1t that took a crowbar to convince city staff to even try out... you can keep the $36000/year. Not worth it.

I do regret this forum became nasty though, my intention was only to shed light on how bogged down bylaw and the ALC is with illegal non-farm use and open up discussion on it. Not to invite people to criticize your lifestyle and what truck you drive. That's deplorable.

[WalterWhite]

Of course it would get voted down, it's not in Rutland. Cheers to City Council.

Thanks for contributing an uninformed and completely irrelevant comment. Has absolutely nothing to do with "where" it's located - and everything to do with following existing guidelines and permit processes - or in this particular case, the lack thereof.