bylaws

West Bench: Traditionalists versus Industrialists

Just in case you think the stakes are low in an OCP review, I thought I should make everyone aware of an emerging controversy on the West Bench: Traditionalists versus Industrialists. Although both views are complex and serious, I can sketch them as follows:

Neighborhoods: 

Area F Official Community Plan Review

This thread is used to hold information about the 2017 Area F Official Community Plan review. The main RDOS site also has a section dedicated to the review: Area F OCP Review

The purpose of the thread on this site is to provide a more informal mechanism for sharing information, voicing concerns, and finding out what is going on.  For example, this site allows you to post comments (the main RDOS site does not).  You will see directly below this message a hierarchy of links to information (as it evolves and becomes available).

An OCP review is a long process.  Please let me know if you have any questions or comments as we go along.

OCP Review Citizens Committee

A Citizens Committee of approximately two dozen Area F residents has been created to help guide the OCP review process (recall the January call for applications).  The role of the committee is 

[...] as a community sounding board and as communication agents to talk to their neighbours and friends, etc.  We don’t expect them to go through policy by policy but to advise on the larger picture goals.

Members of the committee were selected to represent a cross-section of Area F residents in terms of:

  1. geographic location within the electoral area
  2. demographics (age, gender, etc.)

 

Motocross in Meadow Valley

Update 3 November: The RDOS has received a detailed legal review of this situation and has concluded that a motocross track DOES violate the RDOS's existing AG3 zoning bylaw.  The owner has been advised of this.

The RDOS has received numerous complaints about the construction of a motocross track on Agricultural Land Reserve farmland in Meadow Valley.

The RDOS generally has very limited control over what people do on their own land.  However, there are two existing bylaws that are relevant in this situation and a new bylaw that will be relevant in the future:

Neighborhoods: 

In praise of roosters

I received the following defense of roosters.  This is in regards to proposed changes to the "keeping livestock" bylaws for rural residential neighborhoods.
 


As a Backyard Chicken Farmer with 16 chickens – 1 rooster and 15 hens – who has completed extensive research in small flock farming and has years of experience in raising backyard chickens, I offer the following thoughts and adjustments to the Proposed Zoning Bylaw Regulations:

Parcel Size

  • Adjust #2 from 500m to 2500m to 500m to 2000m.
  • Adjust #3 from 2500m to 4000m to 2000m to 4000m.

 

This reduction from 2500m to 2000m would fall more in line with actual property sizes and be less limiting.

Fruit trees

All owners of fruit bearing trees or shrubs are responsible for controlling insect pests on their properties to prevent them from severely affecting nearby neighbors and professional growers.

To protect the commercial fruit industry in the South Okanagan and Similkameen, the RDOS has had Bylaws in place since 2001 that ensure better control of fruit tree pests. The Bylaw has recently been updated to include new species and emerging threats.

The Bylaw and related information on mitigation can be obtained at the RDOS office or on the main RDOS website.

September 2015 update on the horse problem

I have received many complaints in the last few weeks about the very large herd wandering the West Bench recently.  And, when looking at this site, I see that my last update on the horse problem was a year ago.  So what has happened in the past year?

On the surface not much.  But under the surface there has been some significant progress within the PIB to address this issue.

First some background: When talking to people (often upset people) about the horse issue, they inevitably point out that the RDOS or the PIB should "do something."   Fair enough.  But the problem, as I have pointed out in the past, is that it is not obvious to me what this "something" should be.  At bottom, the situation boils down to this:

Differing views on livestock ownership in rural areas

As this thread indicates, the RDOS is currently in the process (very slow process, admittedly) of updating "keeping of livestock" bylaws in Area F and elsewhere.  One of the issues we struggle with in regional districts is the "uniformity" of our bylaws: should the rules in all rural areas of the RDOS be the same?  In some ways uniformity would be tidier.  It would certainly simplify bylaw enforcement.  However, an argument can be made in favor of the idiosyncratic traditions and norms that emerge in neighborhoods over time.  RDOS planner Chris Garrish has provided a good example of this from a public consultation in Heritage Hills (east side of Skaha Lake) in Electoral Area D.  As you may know, Heritage Hills is a much newer neighborhood than the original West Bench.  Here is Chris's email to me:

Keeping livestock regulations: update 13 August 2014

I had a meeting on July 31, 2014, with a group of West Bench horse owners and Chris Garrish, the RDOS planner working on the livestock bylaw.

Three major issues were addressed during the meeting. I have outlined the issues below and noted my recommendation to Chris.  Of course, these are just my recommendations.  Staff will come up with another revision of the draft bylaw based on this meeting and other interactions with the public.

Issues: 
Neighborhoods: 

Pages