Spiller Road Development

[fluffy]

There seems to a lot of traffic in the letters department from people speaking out against the proposed residential development of a piece of the Naramata Bench immediately north of the Campbell Mountain Landfill. Personally, I don't see much of a downside to this proposal. The only open land left for development within city limits is above existing developments along the eastern borders, much of that with more difficult geography. Is this more of a growth/no-growth issue or is it just NIMBYism from nearby residents?

[soupy]

There seems to a lot of traffic in the letters department from people speaking out against the proposed residential development of a piece of the Naramata Bench immediately north of the Campbell Mountain Landfill. Personally, I don't see much of a downside to this proposal. The only open land left for development within city limits is above existing developments along the eastern borders, much of that with more difficult geography. Is this more of a growth/no-growth issue or is it just NIMBYism from nearby residents?

I think it is a combo of NIMBY people, and others who are against development if it doesn't provide "affordable housing".

There is a demand for housing, lets start building some IMO.

[trailblazer60]

I think this development has a number of issues/concerns. The fact the development will create a satellite community amidst an important wildlife area. increased traffic on an already very busy and narrow Spiller road , extensive upgrades to utilities which include sewer installation(traffic disruption), the discharge of collected roadway runoff directly into Strutt Creek, and yes... NIMBY. Any increase in the supply of housing is a good thing. Its just unfortunate it will not be more affordable.
And how long before the residents begin complaining about the smells coming from the landfill. It will be interesting to see the political fallout from all this no matter what camp you are in

[XT225]

I think this development has a number of issues/concerns. The fact the development will create a satellite community amidst an important wildlife area. increased traffic on an already very busy and narrow Spiller road , extensive upgrades to utilities which include sewer installation(traffic disruption), the discharge of collected roadway runoff directly into Strutt Creek, and yes... NIMBY. Any increase in the supply of housing is a good thing. Its just unfortunate it will not be more affordable.
And how long before the residents begin complaining about the smells coming from the landfill. It will be interesting to see the political fallout from all this no matter what camp you are in

I agree that these homes may not be affordable by most Pentictonite standards. I bet the main buyers would be from the coast or Alberta. Was there not talk of a feeder road (or the main road in/out) coming off Naramata Road, as well as the dump road? Now it appears that the only access will be from Spiller Road; is that correct? I wouldn't want to drive that road too often; too many vehicles now, garbage trucks, etc etc. The smell from the landfill may also be an issue in the future for these rather well off residents who might buy up there. I am not for or against it; just making some comments. Won't affect me, unless there is a traffic jam when I am heading up to the dump with a load.

[seewood]

I agree that these homes may not be affordable by most Pentictonite standards. I bet the main buyers would be from the coast or Alberta. Was there not talk of a feeder road (or the main road in/out) coming off Naramata Road, as well as the dump road? Now it appears that the only access will be from Spiller Road; is that correct? I wouldn't want to drive that road too often; too many vehicles now, garbage trucks, etc etc. The smell from the landfill may also be an issue in the future for these rather well off residents who might buy up there. I am not for or against it; just making some comments. Won't affect me, unless there is a traffic jam when I am heading up to the dump with a load.

No they would not be affordable by most employees from Penticton. Just the amount of infrastructure development, ground sculpting ( scar) required would not allow anything remotely affordable.
Yes, the original proposal had a round-a-bout on Naramata road near Little Engine winery going through the once nice orchard now piles of sand, as the main access was going to switchback down and enter Naramata road there. New proposal has main access down spiller/dump road.
If approved as proposed, the traffic tie up at the Spiller/ Naramata road junction could be trying during business hours or during Penticton's rush minute if any new homeowners do work in Penticton.
I have been in a lineup starting at Haven Hill waiting to turn left onto Government, this could make things worse, not better. And no, using a bike for shopping in Penticton to bring your groceries, drywall, liquor, dog food back home and up the hill is not an option...

Why is it developers purchase a piece of property that is not zoned for what they have in mind to build, apply for rezoning to maximize profits after spending tens of thousands in planning, get shot down by public opinion and the jurisdictions council and then apply for another rezoning? What don't they get? I thought they were smart business people.

Mind you, that property I believe had a area zoned for mobile homes. Pretty nice views from up there.

[JagXKR]

I have one problem with the entire project and that is the roads in and out. As previously stated the Haven Hill Government intersection can be trying at times. Add all the new properties and it will not get better. All the other routes have difficult times and they will not get better, they will get worse. Until the road network is upgraded nothing should be approved.

[twobits]

I have one problem with the entire project and that is the roads in and out. As previously stated the Haven Hill Government intersection can be trying at times. Add all the new properties and it will not get better. All the other routes have difficult times and they will not get better, they will get worse. Until the road network is upgraded nothing should be approved.

The whole thing is wrong. It is out of character as a natural transition from urban to rural. The road network and associated infrastructure is completely missing. You can't just drop a satellite community like this proposal where ever it is cheap and convenient for the developer.
There are plenty of lands available in the valley view, east Wiltse, and upper Carmi that are obviously better from both proximity to existing servicing and natural continuity of expansion as well as transportation corridors.
Not many folks go to the landfill but I would encourage everyone to just make the drive and they will quickly realize this proposed development is just friggen stupid.

[bluboy]

I would like to know Strutt Creek is underground in that area. If so will you be building houses on top of Strutt Creek. If houses are built over an underground creek area will the houses not have a problem in a few years?

[alanjh595]

I would like to know Strutt Creek is underground in that area. If so will you be building houses on top of Strutt Creek. If houses are built over an underground creek area will the houses not have a problem in a few years?

Why would it become a problem in a few years? That aquifer has been there for centuries. The developer would have to have a geological study done before any building permit would be issued.

[JagXKR]

Why would it become a problem in a few years? That aquifer has been there for centuries. The developer would have to have a geological study done before any building permit would be issued.

You have way way more trust that the developer will do everything correctly. With the lack of proper staffing for inspectors the chance of a developer taking shortcuts is a definite possibility. I would argue almost a complete certainty.
But I'm biased against developers. They are profiteers with no regard to developing a community in the community's best interest. Just making as much money as possible with the least expense possible. Shortcuts a plenty.
Again my opinion, biased as it is.

[alanjh595]

Why would it become a problem in a few years? That aquifer has been there for centuries. The developer would have to have a geological study done before any building permit would be issued.

You have way way more trust that the developer will do everything correctly. With the lack of proper staffing for inspectors the chance of a developer taking shortcuts is a definite possibility. I would argue almost a complete certainty.
But I'm biased against developers. They are profiteers with no regard to developing a community in the community's best interest. Just making as much money as possible with the least expense possible. Shortcuts a plenty.
Again my opinion, biased as it is.

The city is going to have to issue the building permit before the developer can build. There are so many potential possibilities and variations that are available.
The city is very aware of all the aquafers in the entire Okanagan valley.

Your personal biases and opinions are just that, yours.

[JagXKR]

Your personal biases and opinions are just that, yours.

Well thank you for the acknowledgement. Although I know there are many that share them.
I've seen the results of "city inspections" and "city permits". Not as all encompassing as a taxpayer would hope. Much is left to the developer.
As for this specific development, I have a big fat NO for my opinion. Far too many issues, as have been stated previously in this thread. With my biggest being transportation and traffic considerations.
Just greedy developers wanting money WITHOUT considering the community.

[seewood]

https://gis.penticton.ca/parcel-viewer/

this shows the two lots that make up the proposal I believe.

[twobits]

Well thank you for the acknowledgement. Although I know there are many that share them.
I've seen the results of "city inspections" and "city permits". Not as all encompassing as a taxpayer would hope. Much is left to the developer.
As for this specific development, I have a big fat NO for my opinion. Far too many issues, as have been stated previously in this thread. With my biggest being transportation and traffic considerations.
Just greedy developers wanting money WITHOUT considering the community.

I do not share the same opinion of all developers as being money grubbing opportunists. Too many are and they are the ones that tick me off too. On this specific topic, the developer is Canadian Horizons. Same one that cluster eff'ed the Sendero Canyon development with probable inadequate engineering hires as well as inadequate service and utilities contractor that led to the failure of a large diameter water main to burst and delay the entire project for a cpl years while they battled in court as to how and whom the proportioned costs of repair and mitigation should be allocated. My understanding is that the multi million correction and remediation was split equally between Canadian Horizons, the lead engineering company and the utilities contractor. I believe that to be correct but am not 100% certain of the final judgment.
Back to the lands in this topic.....they were also purchased by Canadian Horizons.....which is for those that do not know, a privately held company that solicits investors for investment opportunities to the general public in real estate developments.
I am not going to trash Canadian Horizons for their method of operations but what really irks me about their (local at least) method of investment seems to be buy the outlying properties that are designated as future residential with the bankroll to challenge and apply for much higher density of housing than what was envisioned when the community plan was established.
And in fairness, a community plan is just a guidance brochure and is a living document. But IMHO, companies like Canadian Horizons seem to, rather than look for properties appropriately zoned already for their "property" vision.....instead look for the low hanging fruit residential identified lands, purchase them, and then spent all sorts of cash on pretty concept plans and stories of public trails etc. while the goal is maximizing density with a cookie cutter option of five floor plans with different roof profile so only every 6th house will look identical.

[seewood]

And in fairness, a community plan is just a guidance brochure and is a living document. But IMHO, companies like Canadian Horizons seem to, rather than look for properties appropriately zoned already for their "property" vision.....instead look for the low hanging fruit residential identified lands, purchase them, and then spent all sorts of cash on pretty concept plans and stories of public trails etc. while the goal is maximizing density with a cookie cutter option of five floor plans with different roof profile so only every 6th house will look identical.

Nailed it

No different, different developer, as the one on lakeshore that wants to build a 8 room townhouse block on a property that is way undersized as per Penticton's standards for setbacks. So what does Penticton do, approve the variances and an 8 unit townhouse will be built...against neighbors and Penticton's wishes.
Spiller road as TB's mentions is done the same way.

I thought Spiller already had a zoning? So why is Penticton even considering changing it? Other than they think of increased tax rolls that are actually lost leader.