Regarding new zoning change on 255 Taylor Road

[LANDM]

Only a sheep stomach filled with grains and cräp would know the answer to that......

[Catri]

You absolutely should campaign against this development if you feel strongly that it doesn't belong there. I live in Springvalley as well and admit that I've been using your street on my shortcut to Costco since it opened so am fairly familiar with it...also part of the traffic problem, sorry. I have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, it's close to the highway and to commercial areas and it kind of makes sense that those blocks closest to 33 will be redeveloped in higher density. On the other hand, it's sort of right on the edge of that and it will definitely impact the neighbourhood in terms of traffic. You may at least get them to put in adequate parking if you take your concerns to council.

Street parking and poor plowing have made an awful lot of streets in our area single lane this winter, that's not just you.

[LANDM]

That’s is the absolute purpose of a public hearing.

[Bsuds]

Street parking and poor plowing have made an awful lot of streets in our area single lane this winter, that's not just you.

This is prevalent all over Kelowna.

[Scrobins94]

I love Kelowna and am really happy to live here. What right do I have to deprive others from moving here and enjoying it too?

[haggis_8]

LANDM.........you truly ARE a bully. How dare you stoop so low as to mock my heritage.
I thought this was a platform to voice one's opinions?

[haggis_8]

Just to clarify: Yes, I have a problem with our local councillors (at least the majority).
Yes, I have a problem with the development on Taylor Road
and No, I do not have a problem with our city's growth......it is the "speed of light" rate that
it's growing at that I have a problem with.

[Catsumi]

I haven't a dog in this fight (live in beautiful, only slightly-ripped Vernon) but didn't Okatoks, Alberta, shut off newcomers as infrastructure, housing and job availability just wasn't there? They may have changed their policy since I heard about this, maybe 10 years ago?

When I visited there it seemed to be a well thought out beautiful town (a decade past).

[LANDM]

I haven't a dog in this fight (live in beautiful, only slightly-ripped Vernon) but didn't Okatoks, Alberta, shut off newcomers as infrastructure, housing and job availability just wasn't there? They may have changed their policy since I heard about this, maybe 10 years ago?

When I visited there it seemed to be a well thought out beautiful town (a decade past).

Or was that Canmore?

[LANDM]

LANDM.........you truly ARE a bully. How dare you stoop so low as to mock my heritage.
I thought this was a platform to voice one's opinions?

And I was trying to assist you with that...not sure why you think that is bullying or mocking your heritage. But, if you say that you want to stop anyone from coming here and you are complaining about things and who makes decisions without actually taking part.......maybe you should not be surprised if that is pointed out as being a bit silly.

Bully...yeah, right.

[Catsumi]

I haven't a dog in this fight (live in beautiful, only slightly-ripped Vernon) but didn't Okatoks, Alberta, shut off newcomers as infrastructure, housing and job availability just wasn't there? They may have changed their policy since I heard about this, maybe 10 years ago?

When I visited there it seemed to be a well thought out beautiful town (a decade past).

Or was that Canmore?

Just googled and by golly, what a sharp memory I have.

Yes, Okotoks in 2002 limited newcomers due to shortage of water, sewer, etc. I would post link but ipad doesn't comply. Maybe you can do it for me? Please and thanks.

[dirtybiker]

Yes, Okotoks in 2002 limited newcomers due to shortage of water, sewer, etc. .

There are also some Cities in the USA than did not stop people from building but,
would not hook up services, as they were/are maxed out.
If someone sold for whatever reason, only then would the bidding
process open to purchase the rights to services.

No supporting link.

Don't believe me ? Look it up.



This particular development proposal will likely have zero affect on me.
I just struggle with the concept of buying property that does not carry the zoning for
what one wants to do.

Why not just buy property that already carries the zoning for ones intended purpose ?

Why bother with zoning in the first place ?

Seems if one has the funds, one gets what they want anyhow.

I want to buy up 25 houses in the Clement area for my pig farm operation.

[LANDM]

Just googled and by golly, what a sharp memory I have.

Yes, Okotoks in 2002 limited newcomers due to shortage of water, sewer, etc. I would post link but ipad doesn't comply. Maybe you can do it for me? Please and thanks.

Cool. Didn’t know that but I don’t know that area well. I think Canmore has or had some sort of restrictions too, from what I was told.
Limiting development because of restrictions on servicing is common and actually happens in our valley.

Limiting it because we are notionally "full" because a sheep stomach full of grain and crãp says they just don’t want anyone else here is an entirely different matter.

[TMBOkanagan]

Yes, Okotoks in 2002 limited newcomers due to shortage of water, sewer, etc. .

There are also some Cities in the USA than did not stop people from building but,
would not hook up services, as they were/are maxed out.
If someone sold for whatever reason, only then would the bidding
process open to purchase the rights to services.

No supporting link.

Don't believe me ? Look it up.



This particular development proposal will likely have zero affect on me.
I just struggle with the concept of buying property that does not carry the zoning for
what one wants to do.

Why not just buy property that already carries the zoning for ones intended purpose ?

Why bother with zoning in the first place ?

Seems if one has the funds, one gets what they want anyhow.

I want to buy up 25 houses in the Clement area for my pig farm operation.

Very few properties are already zoned for development - and if they are, they are already developed. There is an Officially Community Plan that dictates the future land use for each property (ie what zone they COULD be as the City grows). So, rezoning to one of these zones that is dictated by the Future Land Use is exactly what is expected.

[LANDM]

And, in fact, this property is designated MRL in the OCP as follows:

Multiple Unit Residential (Low Density) (MRL)
Townhouses, garden apartments, apartments, buildings containing three or more residential units. Complementary uses (i.e. care centres, minor public services/utilities, and neighbourhood parks), that are integral components of urban neighbourhoods would also be permitted. Building densities would be consistent with the provisions of the RM1 – Four-plex Housing, RM2 – Low Density Row Housing, or RM3 – Low Density Multiple Housing zones of the Zoning Bylaw and may include CD Comprehensive Development zoning for similar densities or land uses.
Where multiple unit residential (low density) uses fall within character areas (see Map 5.8 - Urban Design DP Area Designation), rezoning will not be permitted if such results in building heights greater than 2 1⁄2 storeys (regardless of density). Front yard setbacks should remain consistent with the established street pattern to ensure that neighbourhood character is maintained.

One can’t really be surprised at this use when the future land use is designated clearly as such for all to see.