Jim Garlick, Mayor 5 December 2015 jga rli [email protected] Coldstream Municipality 9901 Kalamalka Road Coldstream, B.C. V1B lL6

Reference: Parks Master Plan 2015

I write to you in reference to your recent Survey and the deterioration of horseback riding areas in the Coldstream.

I am a fourth generation resident of Coldstream and have been an owner/rider and have bred and raised horses in the Coldstream at 9015 Binns Rd. for 25 odd years, and have ridden the Valley since a young girl. I am a past member of Back Country Horsemen Okanagan. I have been away in Alberta for five or six years and returning to my residence and continuing riding I notice minor infringements and major changes in lack of open spaces for horseback riding. Gates on open areas have excluded horses making trails inaccessible to anything other than walking/dog traffic. As well horseback riding was not even included in the Survey.

As a young girl and member of the Vernon Riding Club we had access to all the surrounding hills and were able to ride from the center of Coldstream to the Commonage (west) and beyond or from the north side of the valley to the south to access for instance, Cosens Bay area. There was access to the east toward Lumby and Coldstream Ranch property.

Now that the Coldstream Ranch has 'closed it's gates', Middleton Mtn. is subdivided, Coldstream Valley Estates is subdivided, Kalamalka Lake/College Way is subdivided/paved/excluded and DND property, Kalavista, and Kidston/Kinloch areas are built up, we are limited to one only riding area at Cosen's Bay with only one access and very inadequate parking facilities. In addition and in general Coldstream public roads are narrower because of money spent to add 'bike' lanes (which further restricts riding because of a narrower margin of safety as well as a wider slippery surface), traffic is much heavier, and it has become impossible to ride from north to south of the valley because of Hwy 6 high speed traffic.

It has now become almost impossible to ride anywhere. So it leaves one needing to be rich enough to afford an expensive truck/trailer combo to 'drive' your horse to Cosen's Bay or out of the area.

Indeed my only area to ride in now is up the hill through Coldstream Valley Estates - it is a long way to travel all uphill to gain access to anything resembling quiet peaceful terrain to ride on. I used to ride out Binns Rd. to Grey Rd north and Pg 2 - go up the right-of-way at the end of Midland where the cul-de-sac was reachable. Now the right-of-way has been made inaccessible by a debris pile (garden waste material from adjacent house) about 3 feet high and wide right to the fence line. The fence has fallen over so there is four or five strands of barb-wire lying in the high grass ready to chop through my horse's tendons. There is also old rusted flume parts lying in the grass. One side of this right-of-way has a cement flume running down it.

At one time for safety's sake at the same location I got up on the bank and rode along the road right-of-way on Buchanan (north side) and got yelled at "what do you think you're doing?" Many people have planted and gardened the right-of way to the road side.

Half way up Cypress the new gate onto the Grey Ditch is now only a walk-through for people - horses cannot bend around a 30" and 26" wide walk-through gate.

Neither could a horse be ridden through the gate that was put further along between the subdivision and Coldstream Ranch on the Grey Ditch (now not at all accessible). Such an enormous shame the Grey Ditch was not saved throughout as a linear pathway.

Please see the two pictures attached which show the kind of gates used in the Lower Mainland for horses to access trails while preventing motorcycle/ATV usage. (Pictures courtesy Horse Council BC)

So the only option is to ride the road (speeding traffic/hard asphalt up and up to the higher subdivision which in time will all be bought up, landscaped, fenced - so will the access Crown land be lost?

Some years back we had access to the Grey Ditch north off Cypress under the hydro transmission line leading over the mountain. For a time it was a one foot access through 30" high concrete barrier (we rode around via private property.) (Horses are claustrophobic and do not do one foot wide spaces.) Now it's completely barricaded, the private property is built on and fenced off, therefore the trail is inaccessible to horses. This also is a public trail and really should be made accessible to horses - new kind of gate?

Same situation at the very top at Cypress Heights: it would be a place for one of these gates instead of trying to crawl through the mass of rocks placed in front of the trail.

Cosen's Bay is a beautiful place to ride but needs addressing. Many of my friends report getting blocked in at the parking lot because people have parked in front of Pg 3 - their truck/trailer. The parking lot is highly inadequate (too small) and there needs to be an arrangement with the Park to provide a separate staging area with pull-through parking for horse trailers away from children, dogs, bicycles, and hikers. Since this Park is now the only horseback riding area I would hope you agree that it is time to address this problem. Perhaps the parking lot at the other end of the Park past the Red Gate at Rattlesnake Point should be made available for horseback riders to park? A great deal of money has been spent for public parking; why could it not be made available for year round usage by horsemen?

And however nice the Park may be it is limited in space for riding - there are only so many trails and it is not a good mix with horses to have fast bikers rounding the bend in front of you and your horse.

One of my last rides was such: a fast riding biker came down the trail near the parking lot as my sister and I rode off from the parking lot. A rattlesnake in angry annoyance at the bike rider caused my sister's horse to nearly throw her... not exactly conducive to a peaceful day at the Park! Many of my friends will not ride at the Park because of the snakes.

In light of the new linear park along Kalamalka Lake I would suggest that Kekuli Park have facilities/parking established in the near future for access to that trail. It seems that huge investments are made for the general public in boat launches, camping spots, etc. for limited use in the summer but these areas could be accommodating year long use by horseback riders.

Larch Hills in Salmon Arm is a perfect example of multiple use: cross-country skiers use it in the winter and riders use the trails in the summer months. Back Country Horsemen and Horse Council BC partnered to provide corrals and horsemen travel in and can spend a few hours or several days riding the trails paying a nightly fee.

Tunkwa Lake out of Logan Lake is another example of this Park usage as is Lundbom out of Merritt.

In short, we horsemen in the Vernon area are dying for new trails finding we are being squeezed out of places to enjoy our horses. We maintain huge investments in farms, equipment, and labour to maintain our animals and keep to our chosen 'hobby,'

In fact I believe there were a couple of ladies who attended a Coldstream Council Meeting back just after Middleton Mountain was being developed and Coldstream Council promised in future there would be bridle paths to accommodate riders Pg 4- through all future subdivisions. I don't know the names of these ladies or a date but I'm sure Council meeting records recorded this.

I believe there is a legal provision which prevents the closure of trails/roads on public lands to horses and mules (Horse Council BC) and that it is time to address gjl areas of public recreation, not just bikers and hikers.

Yours truly,

Jacquelynne Wills

9015 Binns Rd, Coldstream, B.C. V1B 3B7

Copies: Horse Council BC, Rose Schroeder, VP Recreation, Outdoor Recreation Council of BC [email protected]

Okanagan Rail Trail Back Country Horsemen BC, Brian Wallace, Prov. President, [email protected] Back Country Horsemen, Okanagan Chapter, Scott Walker, scwalker1959@gmail .com Vernon Riding Club, Julia Bostock, [email protected] BC Parks

v.a'l'"o .... 10604 IVliddleton Drive Coldstream BC VIB2K6

email:

December 4,2015

District of Coldstream 2\like Reiley, Appro,ing Officer/ Director of Development Services

Dear l\1r Reiley,

I am \1I'TIting further to our meeting FTiday December 10] 5 regarding yom letter dated November 15. 2015, regarding Proposed Official Community Plan Update. I only receive the letter on Dec 3, 2015, $0 I appreciated the opportunity to meet and discus.s the proposed change to our property., about 'Nhich I had no prior kno\vledge.

I request that our property remain identified as designated in the current OCP as "Residential- Subject to £<\LC Approvar~ as discussed and agreed \vith yon, and as has been supported by the District of ColdStream Councils and past and present Approving Officer/Director of Developmental Services in past and current OCPs which were approved byALC.

\Ve discussed and agreed that '''Residential- Subject to ALe Approval" designation has been extensively considered by the District of Coldstream Councils and Planning Department over many years v{ith extensive consultation and confmned and designated, on previous and CllTem OCPs. TIle designation has been consistently supported by the District of Coldstrcam Planning Department and Councils. It has been confinued and identifjed in the OCPs, in their planning for the filture, for the contiguous Middleton 1v!ountain area~ \vith efficient access and use of sewer, water~ electricity, gas, cable, and phone infrastructure.

1 respectfully request that the property remain as designated in the previous OCP as "Residential­

Suhject to ALe Approval" a<; discu.<;sed \vith and ~mpported hy Mr Reiley, District of Coldstrearno Approving OfIicerl Director of Development Services.

Thank you for your kind consideration and ongoing support for this request

Yours truly,

Peter Pershin

cc Coldstream Councillors --­~ fro(jJ'os ecf Subn:itted by P. Pershin at . {)CP' December 78 2015 Public Hearing

\ '\

\ \ \ \ I

I I /'

\

~-::-:-::-:,:-=-=-:---

From: Bob Weatherill [mailto: Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 2:25 PM To: Jim Garlick Cc: Pat Cochrane; Doug Dirk; Richard Enns; Gyula Kiss; Peter McClean; Glen Taylor; Mike Reiley; 'Lillian Weatherill' Subject: Official Community Plan - Development Permit Areas

His Worship Mayor Jim Garlick and Honorable Council Members

As most of you are aware my wife and I own and farm approximately 112 acres (on 4 different titles) on Grieve drive off of Cousins Bay road. I grew up in the Coldstream on a small farm owned by our family on Coldstream Creek Road and my wife and I have owned and lived on this farm for over 25 years.

We have recently become aware of the proposed official community plan and agricultural land being included in development permit areas.

Unfortunately due to other commitments I have not been able to attend any ofthe public presentations.

I have however had two telephone conversations with Peter McClean and one with Glen Taylor, Pat Cochrane, Doug Dirk and Mike Reiley on the matter. I also had a visit with Mike Reiley the municipal office. I am also aware that Hans and Lily Senn and David and Annie Powter requested that their property be removed from the Development Permit Area and that their request was allowed.

I have been advised that the initiative for this is coming from municipal staff based on studies done by someone. At this time there does not seem to be a clear understanding of the reasons for this nor the short term or longer term implications on agricultural land and our land specifically as well as the implications to the farm use of our property.

With respect to our property we request that it (all 4 lots) be removed from the proposed Development Permit Area for the following reasons: 1. District of Coldstream existing zoning and by-laws govern anything we may propose to do on our property 2. Province of British Columbia Agricultural Land Commission rules govern any non-farm development we may propose to do on our property 3. Riparean rules govern anything we may propose to do along the creek

Since nobody has been able to give a satisfactory explanation for this imposition of a Development Permit Area on our farm property, orthe current, shorter and longer term implications on our ability to farm the land we formally request that it be excluded from the Development Permit area in the proposed Official Community Plan.

Respectfully submitted

Bob and Lillian Weatherill 9300 Grieve Drive Coldstream From: Richard Enns [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: December-OS-IS 10:32 AM To: Bob Weatherill Cc: Jim Garlick; Pat Cochrane; Doug Dirk; Gyula Kiss; Peter McClean; Glen Taylor; Mike Reiley; Lillian Weatherill Subject: Re: Official Community Plan - Development Permit Areas

Dear Bob,

Maybe I can respond to some of your questions and concerns. As you know, Anita and I also live on a farm and on the creek. We are impacted in the same way. We also have an active farm operation and many plans for the future for our land and for our farming operations.

Anita and I have lived in the Coldstream for 23 years. All our kids were born here. We also have a deep appreciation for Coldstream and its agricultural arid natural attributes ... as I know you do too.

Development permit areas affect our property directly. I do not see them as a barrier or as obstacles but rather as a means to inform owners in sensitive areas that special considerations apply to development.

Many new comers to Coldstream that want to build or develop (and your property will be in this category some day as will mine) do not have the historical knowledge and in some cases the sensitivity to do what makes sense or what can be done without damaging the creek or farm land for future generations. This already happened in areas were landfill has ended up in riparian areas. A development permit is really the only tool that a Municipal government has to inform owners and prevent irreversible mistakes. It is far from a perfect system. The background data in some cases will be excellent (for example slope stabilization or some species at risk) and in some cases it will be weak but it will be a sign post or a guide to something that mibht be important. We will have to work with the background data over time.

Peter Tassie took the extraordinary step of putting some of the creek lands on his property in a trust to protect them. Not everyone will feel comfortable or be enlightened enough to make that step. This is where our local government has a role to at least alert owners to the issues that they might otherwise have no information about.

The Senn and Powter properties do not border the creek and therefore are not as sensitive as your property and mine. Their properties were included because of their proximity to the park and sensitive species habitat but not as a primary property and only on the outside periphery of the zone. It made sense to not include them because the impact was so small. However, to make that analysis for every property at this stage of the OCP would be a big job. With time the areas and the issues will be more refined as more information becomes available. This is a step to protect the Coldstream not an attempt to make it worse. Development in Coldstream is on the cusp of some real future pressures. One need only look at rommunities like Kelowna, Pitt Meadows or Delta to see challenges faced by the communities if insufficient planning is done.

The OCP process is the opportunity to create awareness aboutthe issues. Not all properties on the creek are in the ALR. Riparian zones can also be negatively affected by agricultural activities. Development permit zones are an attempt to gather the knowledge from many different sources, some of which include, non government organizations, to put ittogether in one place. It could in the long run be the most effective and efficient way to deal with all of these many considerations.

I know we may not quite agree on these matters Bob but I hope this gives you some insight into my position.

Richard Enns

Sent from my iPad From: Bob Weatherill [mailto: Sent: Saturday, December OS, 20152:53 PM To: Richard Enns Cc: Jim Garlick; Pat Cochrane; Doug Dirk; Gyula Kiss; Peter McClean; Glen Taylor; Mike Reiley; 'Lillian Weatherill' Subject: RE: Official Community Plan - Development Permit Areas

Dear Richard

Thank you for your response to our e-mail to the District of Coldstream Mayor and Council and for taking the time to give us insight into your position. Your comments give us no comfort that the proposed Development Permit area will not adversely affect our ability to continue to operate our farm as we have in the past. There are too many unknowns and it is just an added unnecessary level of expensive bureaucracy to be borne by the farming community.

When Ilook at the map ofthe OCP proposed Development Permit area as noted on the Municipality's website for Monday evening's agenda it shows thatour property is included whereas your's is not. (the map is included right behind Dave and Anne Powter's letter to council). The printed map which Mike Reiley gave me yesterday also shows our property included in the proposed development permit area whereas yours is not. Your comment " ... development permit areas affect our property directly" is confusing given that our property is included in the proposed development permit area whereas yous is not. Each of our farm properties will be treated differently under the proposed new rules.

Once again we repeat our requestto council- would you please remove our property from theOCP proposed Development Permit area for the reasons as stated in our original e-mail.

We appreciate your sincere consideration of ourrequest.

Thank you

Bob and Lillian Weatherill -----Original Message----­ From: Richard Enns Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2015 4:40 PM To: Bob Weatherill; All Council; Trevor Seibel; Mike Reiley Subject: OCP

Dear Bob,

Thanks for the response. Sorry I am getting back to you late. I have been working outside between the raindrops.

We are actually in the development permit area for the riparian areas and our entire property is also flagged even though I know only part of the property is affected. I am concerned if you are not getting answers from staff about why your property is included because it is difficult to know what the impacts will be or how it will affect your operations. Platitudes are not helpful. However, at this stage of the OCP we are trying to flag properties that are already identified for one reason or another. So I expect there is more to the story.

Richard J. Enns Councillor, District of Coldstream

This communication is confidential. If you receive it in error please delete it and advise me by return email. Thank you. Irma Breitkreutz

From: R.E. Learmonth . ,.. Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2015 3:54 PM To: Info Subject: OCP comments

Please add the following the public input to the new OCP.

1/ It would be fair to ensure that large properties that have a component of land in the ALR retain the RU2 zone on the ALR portion.

2/ The sensitive slope criteria seems to be only that the land is steep. All of the bedrock and cliffs have been included as sensitive which they hardly are ..

3/ It would seem to be necessary to abandon the greenhouse gas initiative as the pellet plant supported by council has DOUBLED the greenhouse gas emissions in Coldstream. How can this be? -household natural gas is consumed 15% of the day only 5 months of the year. -pellet plant dryers operate 24-7-360 days / year. -this triples the gas consumption and greenhouse gas contribution in Coldstream -transportation in and out of the plant adds 10% to air loading As Coldstream Council supported this plant and the associated emissions at this site it would seem ludicrous to maintain a feel good greenhouse gas initiative. And to pass the responsibility of as "industrial" and therefore not for Council begs credibility as it is all one air shed.

Bob Learmonth

Coldstream II

I I

\ ..::'"\ rrJ « : -. i" \l{i !; r-~---\ i IJ;I ts UD I.~ U W ~ !:' 1 \ I", Ui UU '.;.",~.' 2 Q ''1'''''~H:: t5 "'~

,..,10Tr>·lnT nc en, ~-.\:"rrC'-""1 fJI,) ,i l"(/lI! d,l ---lULU"", j ";;di,iVI 11100 Coldstream Creek Road (Pearce)

10900 Coldstream Creek Road (White)

10802 Coldstream Creek Road (Bender) Inclusion of Lands South of the King Edward Irrigation Canal into the ALR(1999): An unjust Decision

My name is Dave Pearce and I am one of 3 landowners whose non-ALR properties (subject properties) were changed from country residential to inclusion into the ALR in a ruling by the ALC(agriculturalland commission) in 1999. These lands were part of of a larger group of 7 properties starting from the west, 11100 and ending at 10008A ,above the King Edward Canal which had little or no history of farming.These were the lands that the District was considering putting into the ALR during an OCP update. A meeting was called by the District in 1998 and the concerned property owners all spoke against the potential inclusion of these lands into the ALR stating among other things: Land was too steep (20-30%), rocky, rated class 6, Canada Land Registry, and soil(class 5-7) was not good for farming.

Landowners for 3 of the properties(111 00,10900,10802, the subject properties), were sent a letter from the District in 1999 stating that their land was now included in the ALR while the other 4 parcels to the east were excluded. There was no appeal or compensation for this now devalued land.

It is interesting to note that lands on the north side of the valley, specifically 7700-8700 Buchanan Road, which are similar rangelands as the subject properties and below the Grey Canal, were to be considered by the ALC to be included into the ALR but ended up being excluded when landowners formed a coalition, obtained legal advise, and fought the inclusion of their lands into the ALR. If you refer to the OCP, these lands are now slated for future residential housing.

History of the ALA LandlnciusionlExclusion

The ALC during a review with the District in the late 90's of land that would be protected farmland as part of the OCP update, decided to include large pieces of land in the ALR that in 1972 were not part of the ALR. They also wanted to consolidate the Coldstream Ranch so it's future would stay large scale farming.

During this time the District was supporting a proposal by Trintec Deveiopments to build a shopping mall on commercial property bordering hwy#6 .Trintec wanted the District to develop high to medium density residential lots on ALR land that was between Sarson/ Aberdeen/Middleton Drive roads in support of the shopping mall to make it more viable.

The District was in a hurry to exclude the Sarson/Aberdeen lands from the ALR so the commercial development and supporting residential housing could take place and made a submission to the ALC regarding these lands. It was OCP policy that Sarsons/ Aberdeen lands would be excluded from the ALR when other lands were included. The new OCP policy was as follows: 4.3. 19 Recognize that exclusion of land from the ALR in the area between Sarsons and Aberdeen roads and along Middleton Drive(east of Sarsons), would be done in conjunction with the inclusion of other lands within the ALR(Attachment 4)

This policy was suggested by Tony Pellet(a planner for the ALC), at a steering meeting held during the OCP update process. Clearly the exclusion of the Sarson/Aberdeen Lands were linked to the inclusion of lands into the ALR(subject properties).

So first the District has to include non ALR lands (subject properties), into the ALR before the ALC will grant the exclusion of flat valley bottom farm land, some of it to this day still orchard, so residential housing can begin. Presently the north section of this excluded land is fully developed with attached and detached housing, and the adjoining parcel to the south is slated for Multi Family development according to the OCP.

It should be noted that the commercial development that the District was backing forcing the inclusion of poor, steep sloped non-ALR land into the ALR (subject properties) balancing excellent, valley bottom present and former farm lands(Sarson/Aberdeen), excluded from the ALR(2000) has not proceeded.

Council has turned down a rezoning application from the developer(Trintec) in 2008 for medium to high density residential apartments and attached housing on the shopping mall lands they had previously removed from the ALR.

2006 Application to the ALe to Exclude lands Included in the ALR

In 2006, Born(111 00) and White(10900), made an application to the ALC for exclusion of these subject properties from the ALR, basically letting them revert back to their original designation(country residential). On May 8, 2006,the majority of council voted in favour of support for the application of ALR exclusion of the subject properties and to sent it to the ALC for adjudication. It should be noted that the District planning staff was not in favour.

On March 6, 2007, the ALC sent a letter to Born and White refusing to exclude their lands from the ALR stating" The inclusions of non-ALR lands into the ALR in 1998 were not proposed to somehow balance other exclusion proposals in the valley but rather to recognize that these non-ALR areas were suitable for farming"(please note #2 and #3)

1) Previously, we have already established a direct link between the District and the ALC balancing land development in Coldstream by excluding/including lands into the ALR.

2) Urban Systems Agricultural Land Review (June/2006) a) (6.1.4) Subject properties steep, north facing(20-30%), moderately to severely stoney, are class 5 unimproved and improved and are limited to perennial forage crops.

3) Class 6 farmland, Canada Land Inventory, (May 8, 2006 Coldstream Council meeting)

Rezoning for the Property located at 11200 Palfrey Drive East(Hora)

On February 27, 2012, council voted to rezone 11200 Palfrey Drive East from RU2 to R1. There is a preliminary plan to subdivide property into 5 strata lots as well as a lot where the existing house is situated.

Where the strata lots are to be surveyed was once horse pasture. This property is above the King Edward Canal and directly west of the parcels included in the ALR land swap of 1999.

It should be noted that during this Feb 27th meeting, council voted to drop the original plan of 6 strata title lots and a cui de sac, to 5 so to facilitate the continuation of Palfrey Drive East to the west boundary of Pearce(ALR land) so there would be future access to the 7 properties above the King Edward Canal.

Recent History of Correspondence with the District and the ALC

Dave and Pat Pearce, Pat White met with Mayor Garlick, planner Mike Reilly, Administrator Stamhuis, Oct.29, 2012 regarding the subject properties. Mayor Garlick said that because the District was in the process of reviewing the OCP, it would be better if we contacted the ALC and ask th~m what were their plans for the 7 properties above the Canal starting at 11100 and ending with 10008A. We contacted Martin Collins of the ALC Okanagan and he suggested that he doesn't have much to do with the application process so the first thing you should do is go back to the District and present the information that we have.

When I mentioned to Martin that there had been a zoning change to the property west of 11100 allowing a 5 lot strata title development, he said that would not affect an application in a positive way because there would be no future access. When I mentioned that Council had voted (Feb. 27,2012) to drop the lots from 6 to 5 to allow for the continuation of Palfrey Drive East to dead end at the west boundary of 11100 instead of a cui de sac for future access to the ALR lands to the east he said" Now that makes a statement" Conclusion

We the owners of the subject properties would like to submit that inclusion into the ALR was unjust because they have no history of agriculture beyond forage crops and a small attempt at tree farming, are valueless compensation for the exclusion of prime agricultural land during the 1999 land swap and they do not contribute to the purpose of the ALC, which is to preserve agricultural land. If the District and the ALC were really interested in preserving prime farm lands, the balance of the undeveloped Sarsons/ Aberdeen lands would be included into the ALR and the subject lands excluded with no net loss of lands out of the ALR.

The comments of Councillors Besso and Dirk sums up what Council and staff have agreed on and that is that there was an injustice done in 1999 to all the landowners involved in the inclusion of the three properties above the King Edward Canal into the ALR when they said,"1 am not in favour of releasing lands from the ALR but those lands probably shouldn't have been in the ALR to begin with."(Besso), "This does not fit the classic ALR circumstances". (Dirk) (Feb. 27, 2012 council meeting) ..

The three owners of the subject properties are asking the Council and District planning staff to change the zoning of the properties in the new OCP to revert back to the original designation of RU2 which is1he same as the 4 parcels to the east and support an application from the owners to the ALC for exclusion from the ALR. We, the owners, believe that in the long run, this will right the unjust decision made in 1999. F.iG.Tl: Graham Bender ~. ;'.~ub}G:~~: 1999 ALR Land Appropriation Goldstream Greek Road Lla¥.,'J: November 11,2015 at 3:23 PM To: Jim Garlick [email protected]

Hello Mayor Garlick,

Pat White sent me a copy of his e-mail to you regarding inclusion in the ALR of the top portion of three properties on Goldstream Greek Road. I own the property adjacent to Pat's (10802) which is one of the three affected.

I did not own the property in 1999. Nevertheless, I agree with Pat that the arbitrary inclusion of these three areas in the ALR with little notice and without recourse was an injustice. These areas comprise at best marginal agricultural land. They were apparently added to the ALR to compensate, at least in part, for removal of prime agricultural land for the purpose of residential and commercial development and to effect consolidation of Goldstream Ranch properties. The latter two objectives were not achieved. This seems like an inappropriate application of public policy which should be corrected to the extent that it can be. Pat's proposal that the properties be designated as future residential development areas in the new OGP is a reasonable step towards future resolution. In fact, removing these properties from the ALR to create residential land inventory would give access to a total of 7 large lots from the west end where streets and utilities now exist. This aligns with the municipalities objective to develop "infill" properties rather than opening new development areas.

I believe that Pat White and Dave and Pat Pearce have provided the relevant background material. The development of a new OGP is a singularly appropriate time to address this long outstanding issue.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter.

Regards, Graham Bender · S1!Jlbjecir: Re: Coldstream Municipality Official Community Review

Hello Mr White

~ Your email has been passed onto staff and all of council to be included in the feedback for the OCP : via this email for consideration. There will be public a hearing on the OCP scheduled as part of the process. This public hearing will be advertised if you would like to present further to council either in • person or in writing.

· Regards

Jim Garlick CeliNoicemaii (25~) 307-9490

Confidentiality Warning: This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), and are confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, conversion to hard copy, copying, circulation or other use of this message and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message · and any attachments from your system. ; Thank you.

On Nov 3,2015, at 12:16 PM, Pat White < wrote:

Dear Mr, Garlick, When we purchased our 11 acre property on Coldstream Creek Road in 1986; about 4 acres at the top of this property bordering Kalamalka Provincial Park was zoned "Country Residential". In 1998 or 1999 this ...... 4 acres of land was rezoned Agriculture and was placed into the Be Agricultural Land Reserve. At the time there were a number of none-agriculture zoned properties re-zoned to be included into the Agriculture land Reserve. The purpose of changing our land zoning was to allow a number of parcels of land on Sarsons Road and Aberdeen Road to be removed from the ALR to allow residential development. Records from the Coldstream District Municipality suggest that the exclusion of this land from the ALR would help the District in the following ways: =facilitate timely commercial development in Coldstream. - bring services closer to the Spicer block. -speed up consolidation of the Coldstream Ranch. ComnlerciaJ Deve~Optllent did not take place and ~ donlt believe consO~!dat10n of the Co~olstremll Ranch p~ace. fA ~O"ceC3}~ O[(lJ]QJ]~~GrG® ac;rG~u'U'eoJ r ~and W~'[ijl a grade of 18 or

;;5j Q(\[~ {:uU\(;), ~ ell R ;;JJQ: (LV D ~ U n ~ud'~nttQ: TIn . uu an~ 'J1(\Jl:R owners for exclusion from the ALR. > > 4) The 2006 application saw only 2 of the 3 landowners ,White/Born, apply for exclusion whereas there will be all three applying in the near future.( Pearce,White,Bender) > > 5) There has been a positive response from 6 out of 7 of the landowners of the parcels above the King Edward irrigation ditch regarding exclusion of subject properties from the ALR and future access from Palfrey Drive East. The one negative response was from an owner who does not live on the· property. > > 6) There is a fully developed home site on one of the subject properties(Pearce), making farming of the land improbable. > > 7) Goldstream has indicated that building new infrastructure for future subdivision is not the preferred option for residential housing. In filling if possible is desirable. The subject lands are in close proximity to the serviced areas to the west. > > 8) If access from Palfrey Drive East to the subject parcels and lands to the east was approved, there would be no need for access through ALR lands from Goldstream Greek Road, which currently is the case for access to the Pearce (11100) residence. > > 9) Gouncil. and planning staff have been make more aware of the injustice in the land swap of 1998 by all of the historical data which has been submitted to them in 2012. > > We believe that Goldstream council and planning staff should support the exclusion of the subject lands from the ALR and letting it revert back to the same zoning as it was before 2000 by recognizing it in the OGP which currently is being updated. As councillor Besso saidlThese lands probably shouldn1t have. been in the ALR in the first place. 1I > Councillor Dirk/This does not fit the classic ALR circumstance. 1I > > We would be happy to meet with you, council and planners if there is value in discussing this matter further. I believe w e have supplied the District all of the historical information that is required to answer most of your questions. > > This matter has gone on too long. You have all of the information to make the right decision. > > Dave and Pat Pearce > > > > > UU[!~!l\J ~ V~ilil Q.YIjV'V Y'U ~ y;'1l Y Vl,y VIbt!!.!:,1l00\l\.,P\A OJ:; ~!l[).Jlt."A.H!I "'=IJY'iYi'tl.:.'Il...

,D we are asking for fairness. Could this be considered before the final Official Community Plan is drafted? Thank you, Pat White 10900 Goldstream' Greek Road Telephone • "~",, J ~~.

Regards

Jim Garlick CellNoicemail (250) 307-9490

Confidentiality Warning: This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), and are confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, conversion to hard copy, copying, circulation or other use of this message and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Thank you.

> On Nov 9, 2015, at 11 :15 AM, dave pearce, wrote: > > Attn: Jim Garlick, Coldstream council and planning staff, > >Jim, > > When Dave and Pat Pearce, Pat White met with you, Mike and Stamhuis regarding the 3 lots above the King Edward Irrigation ditch, Oct. 29, 2012, ( subject lands), you said that because the District was in the middle of planning for the OCP, it would be better if we contacted Martin Collins of the ALC Okanagan and ask him what their future plans were for all of the 7 lots above the ditch starting at 11100 and ending with 1000SA. > > We had a conversation regarding exclusion of our parcels from the ALR with Martin in November 2012 and he said he has no authority the with application process and he said the first thing we should do is go back to the District (mayor,council ,planners) and present the information that we have. He also said that the ALC has become more conservative since Pat White/ Alex Born applied for exclusion from the ALR in 2006 and they seldom reverse their decisions unless the circumstances have changed. I think that everyone can agree that we have seen significant changes in the circumstances since 2006. > > 1) When I mentioned that there had been a zoning change to the property west of Pearce(11l00) allowing for a: 5 lot strata title development (Hora), he said that would not affect an application in a positive way because there would be no future access. When I mentioned that Council had voted (Feb 27/2012) to drop the lots from 6 to 5 to allow for a continuation of Palfrey Drive East instead of a cui de sac that would end at Pearces west property line for future access t6 these upper properties he said," Now that makes a statement." > > 2) Urban Systems published a study (2006) showing the subject lands to be marginal farming(class 5), 20-30% slope!, rocky soils, generally limited to forage crops only, information that White/Born did not have for their 2006 ALR exclusion application. > > 3) In a 2006 council vote (May 8 2006) regarding the application, it is noted that contrary to staffs recommendations, they supported an ALR exclusion application by the 2 property owners. I believe that after talking to council members and District staff recently, all would agree that there was a injustice done in the 2000 land swap which saw these 3 subject properties included in the ALR without consultation or compensation and all, including staff, would support an application by the ·..... Co •..".: dave pearce '·"·''''i:c;c;: ALR Land Swap( 11100,10800,lU802 Coldstream Creek Road) November 9,2015 at 11 :15 AM ;,;.; Jim Garlick [email protected]

Attn: Jim Garlick, Coldstream council and planning staff,

Jim,

When Dave and Pat Pearce, Pat White met with you, Mike and Stamhuis regarding the 3 rots above the King Edward Irrigation ditch, Oct. 29, 2012, ( subject lands), you said that because the District was in the middle of planning for the OCP, it would be better if we contacted Martin Collins of the ALC Okanagan and ask him what their future plans were for all of the 7 lots above the ditch starting at 11100 and ending with 10008A.

We had a conversation regarding exclusion of our parcels from the ALR with Martin in Novsmber 2012 and he said he has no authority the with application process and he said the first thing we should do is go back to the District(mayor,council ,planners) anci present the information that we have. He also said that the ALC has become more conservative since Fat White/ Alex Born applied for exclusion from the ALR in 2006 and they seldom reverse their decisions unless the circumstances have changed. I think that everyone can agree that we have seen significant changes in the circumstances since 2006.

1) When I mentioned thatthere had been a zoning change to the property west of Pearce(111 00) allowing for a 5 lot strata title development (Hora), he said that would not affect an application in a positive way because there would be riO future access. When I mentioned that Council had voted (Feb 27/2012) to drop the lots from 6 to 5 to allow for a continuation of Palfrey Drive East instead of a cui de sac that would end at Pearces west propertylirie for future access to these upper properties he said," Now that makes a statement."

2) Urban Systems published a study (2006) showing the subject lands to be marginal fa::rr.ing(ciass 5), 20-30% slope!, rocky soils, generally limited to forage crops only, information that White/Born did not have for their 2006 ALR e>:cii.1sibn application.

3) In a 2006 council vote (May 8 2006) regarding the application, it is noted that contrary to staffs recommendations, they supported an ALR exclusion application by the 2 property owners. I believe that after talking to council membsrs and District staff recently, all would agree that there was a injustice done in the 2000 land swap which saw these 3 subject properties incl·.!de1 in the ALR without consultation or compensation and all, including staff, would support an application by the owners for exc!lisic'!l "from the ALR.

4) The 2006 application saw only 2 of the 3 landowners ,White/Born, apply for exclusion\vilereas there will be all three applying in the near future.( Pearce,White,Bender)

5) There has been a positive response from 6 out of 7 of the landowners of the parcels

6) There is a fully developed home site on one of the subject properties(Pearce), makina filrming of the land improbable:

7) Coldstream has indicated that building new infrastructure for future subdivision is not tr':i preferred option for residential housing. In filling if possible is desirable. The subject lands are inclose proximity to the serviced areas to the·v,e·sl.

8) If access from Palfrey Drive East to the subject parcels and lands to the east wa~ appro'/ed·. th.ere would be no need for access through ALR lands from Coldstream Creek Road, which currently is the case for access to the Per.(ce (11100) residence . . I . .: .., 9) Council and planning staff have been make more aware of the injllstice in the land SV"'~':fl'6r1998 by all of the historical data which has been submitted to them in 2012.

We believe that Coldstream council and planning staff should support the exclusion of the subject lands from the ALR and letting it revert back to the same zoning as it was before 2000 by recognizing it in the OCP which currently is being updated. As councillor Besso said"These lands probably shouldn't have been in the ALR in the first place." Councillor Dirk,"This does not fit the classic ALR circumstance."

We would be happy to meet with you, council and planners if there is value in discussing :::is matter further. I believe w e have supplied the District all of the historical information that is required to answer most of your questions. ',',

This matter has gone on. too long. You have all of the information to make the right decisio;".

Dave and Pat Pearce Fmm: Pat White ;~ilibjq:,ct: Re: ALR Land Swap( 11100,10900,10802 Coldstream Creek Road) i)"ti-J: November 11, 2015 at 7:15 AM To: dave pearce

Hi Dave, I apologize but I don't remember Mike Reily providing us with an ALG response regarding future development land needs and ALR exclusions. Once you get this from Mike - then please update myself with a copy. Pat

From: dave pearce Date: Wednesday, November 11,2015 at 6:50 AM To: Heidi Reid < >, Marion & Graham Bender <_._,_-______? Subject: Fwd: ALR Land Swap( 11100,10900,10802 Coldstream Creek Road)

Pat,

What is the ALG response regarding future development land needs and ALR exclusions Jim is talking about?

Dave

------Forwarded message '------From: Jim Garlick .3am.ca> Date: Tuesday, 10 November 2015 Subject: ALR Land Swap( 11100,10900,10802 Goldstream Greek Road) To: dave pearce <: , Cc: All Council , Mike Reiley , Trevor Seibel <.TI3eioeL@ col

Hello Mr Pearce

Thank you for your email. I am forwarding your information to council and staff.

I would also like Mike Reily to provide you with the ALC's response, already provided to Pat White, regarding future development land needs and ALR exclusions.

A public hearing on the OGP will be held for additional input.

Regards

Jim Garlick CeliNoicemail (250) 307-9490

Confidentiality Warning: This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), and are confidential and may be privileged. If you are ~'oHt1e'intend~d -reGip!~nt, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, conversion to hard copy, copying, circulation or other use of this message and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message and any attachments from your system. Th;:mk \[nll North Okanagan Map I b,:,.h i~1 > 'C'c, ':<,', -" ;:c:,-, ',',', '" ,~. . 'r"c" lc . -"_'!" _OCt . ", 1''''''9

CkG(~~l. , --:------t

If . I", " '. ~:'~~ ... ,.. ., j ( ···-····..:(.;.~. ' i' 1 I

:II~-c---' .. I I,. I ' '\.'~"" ~-~· .".'\.. - I . .

I '~/;til • ~".,~",." 'C·L,~J,=o,;...,-,.:..,-,. , 1+f¥M'Oi';'

-~~~~~~~,,:,_,_1 l' 't " ..l.. 1~\"'Vv\~"n ~'___ ~ -- I ~~-~'~.~~~*~'N'~~~~~'~~H~~~'~'~~~~~~~~'"\. I j*fi'WA4:!!11 Nt: R1f=F?"=rm:zr~ /-:····'· '~ r; ?Q~.' 'J "\, , Vi ~ .'i. .,' :., J " 1 I,.,":J '''>f.,i' '/1"""",,,

""! F'n'llesfI - -, - ,.Talle;.,." r'-I'~~:fnl b I L 0~~ 0 1B1 362 This drawing has been produced by the City of Vernon's and the Regional District of North Okanagan's Geographic Information Systems. The data provided is derivec L-.. '.ll!' 'Iv p& J I Meters from a variety of sources with varying levels of accuracy. The City of Vernon and the Regional District of North Okanagan make no warranty or representation. expressec or implied, with the regard to the correctness, accuracy andfor reliability of the © Corporation of the City of Vernon & Regional District of North Okanagan 1: 7,134 information contained herein. .~

1 ./-.--.

Discussion Paper

Subject Properties

PID 012-376-736, Lot 29, Sect 14, TWP9 ODYP Plan 320 PID 004-817-729, Lot I, DL 57, ODYD Plan 37137 PID 004-817-737, Lot 2, DL 57, ODYD Plan 37137

Background

III 3 parcels not included in ALR in 1972

III 1996 - 99 the district did a major review of its OCP (in concert with the ALC) o The plan proposed exclusion of the Sarsons/ Aberdeen block and the Spicer block from the ALR for purposes of residential development and to support a commercial development on Hwy 6 (which was a prime objective of the district) o The OCP recognized that the exclusion of the Sarsons/ Aberdeen lands would require the inclusion of "other lands" in the ALR. o The exclusion of the Spicer block was contingent on a consolidation of small parcel titles on the Coldstream Ranch (which was a prime objective of the ALC).

III Initially the ALC viewed these exclusions /inclusions and consolidation of Coldstream Ranch titles as a single package.

III The ALC proceeded with the inclusion of "other lands". 1655 acres were included much of which waS steep slope higher elevation grazing land

III In Feb. 1999 owners of the three subject parcels on Coldstream Creek Road were advised that their non ALR lands totaling about 9 acres, had been included in the ALR. No exclusions were yet granted. 2

~,

III In April 2000 the district petitioned the ALC to treat the Spicer Block/Coldstream ranch consolidation as a stand alone package and to allow the exclusion of the Sarsonsl Aberdeen lands to proceed given that the "other lands" inclusions had already taken place. III In August 2000 the ALC allowed the exclusion of Sarsonsl Aberdeen lands.

The result of the OCP 1 ALC plan was that: III The Coldstream Ranch title consolidation did not occur. III The Spicer Block was not excluded III The commercial development on Hwy 6 did not occur. III The Sarsons/ Aberdeen lands were excluded from the ALR and partially developed for housing III Some 1600 acres of "other lands" were included in the ALR.

Two of the parcel owners requested in Feb. 2006 that their properties be excluded from the ALR. Coldstream Council submitted this proposal to the ALC for adjudication. The ALC denied the application.

The case for exclusion of the Subject parcels

III The inclusion of these parcels was clearly part of a comprehensive plan for the development of the district.

IIiIIII The parcels were a small isolated package included with· larger tracts to compensate for exclusion of the Sarsonsl Aberdeen block and Spicer block (which did not happen in the end). III Contiguous lands to the east and south the King Edward ditch were not included in the ALR although they have similar slopes and soil conditions. III The Sarsonsl Aberdeen land (50 acres) was prime valley bottom land suitable for agriculture. A portion is still a working orchard III The parcels included (9 acres) are steep north facing slopes with grades between 20 and 30% It is marginal agricultural land with class 5/6 soils and rock inclusions and outcroppings. III The parcels are all above the King Edward Irrigation Ditch and historically have never been used for agricultural (orcharding) purposes. 3

.--"\\

III The parcels are isolated by residential to the west, Kal park to the south and non ALR lands to the east. III The land owners were not consulted and were not given any opportunity to appeal III In the long term, exclusion of these parcels could ultimately allow residential zoning and development of an east Iwest strip of about 25 acres with access by extension of Palfrey Drive. This would offset the need for a similar area of high quality agricultural land as community growth occurs.

Conclusion

The owners submit that inclusion of these lands in the ALR was unjust because they have no history of agricultural use beyond forage crops and an attempt at tree farming; they are small isolated parcels; they were valueless compensation for the exclusion of prime agricultural land and they do not contribute to the purpose of the ALC, to preserve agricultural land.

,.--_. What are the long range plans of the ALe for the 3 subject parcels knowing that the lands to the west have been granted a zoning change(Rl) with plans for 5 strata-titled lots and the parcel to the immediate east(Pearce) has a fully developed homesite?

Although this matter waS considered by the ALC in 2006 and exclusion denied it is submitted that the full context of the request was not presented and that only 2 of the 3 property owners were applying for exclusion.

The owners of the three parcels are considering making application for exclusion from the ALR of these properties if there is a potential common view within the community, Council and ALC that in the long run this would benefit the balance of interests. ':

Inclusion Lands South of King Edward Irrigation Ditch Into The ALR (1999)

1. Introduction .-

This report will show how certain lands were included in the ALR(Agricultural Land Reserve) and other similar lands were excluded(1999) when the ALC (Agricultural Land Comrnission)and the District of Coldstream excluded the Sarsons/Aberdeen Lands amongst other lands from the ALR(2000).

2. History of the ALR land InclusionlExclusion

The ALC during a review with The District of Coldstream in the late 90' s of lands that should be protected farmland as part of the OCP update, decided to include large pieces of land in the ALR that in 1972 were not part of ALR. They also wanted to consolidate the Coldstream Ranch so it's future would stay large scale farming.

During this time the District was supporting a proposal by Trintec Developments to build a shopping mall on commercial property bordering Highway #6 and the District wanted to develop high and low density residential lots on the Sarsons/Aberdeen Lands that were part of the ALR in support of the shopping mall proposed by Trintec Developments to make the shopping mall more viable.

The District was in a hurry to exclude the Sarsonsl Aberdeen Lands from ALR and made a submission to the ALC that stated if you approve the exclusion of the Sarsons/Aberdeen Lands from the ALR, we will have the services closer to the Spicer block for development which will in tum speed up the consolidation of the Coldstream Ranch which was one of the key goals of the ALC.(Attachment 4) Development of the Spicer block was one of the financial incentives the ALC proposed to the Coldstream Ranch as a "carrot" for them to consolidate the "Ranch"

In their correspondence, (District and ALC). it was stated that inclusion ofnon-ALR lands into ALR was directly linked to the exclusion of the Sarsonsl Aberdeen Lands. This polin! was suggested bv Tonv Pellet(a planner (or the ALC) at a steering committee meeting held during the OCP update process. The ALC did not object to this policy when the OCP amendment was referred to them. (Attachment 4) 2.1 Lands Above King Edward Irrigation Ditch

There were 7 parcels of land starting at 11100 Coldstream Creek Road and running east that were above the old ii irrigation ditch that had no or little history of farming and are part of larger parcels to the north bordering Coldstreru\! Creek Road. These are the lands that the District was considering putting into the ALR. A meeting was called by thei! District in 1998 and the concerned land owners all spoke against the potential inclusion of these lands into the ALR I! stating among other things that the land was too steep(20-30%), rocky: rated class 6, Canada Land Inventory(' Director ofDevelopment Services, Council Meeting May 8, 2006), and the soil(class 5 -7) was not good for farming.I' t; Landowners on three of the parcels(11100,10900,10802) were sent a letter by the District in 1999 stating that their land was now included in the ALR while the other 4 parcels to the east were excluded. They were given no appeal.

**Lands on the north side of the valley, specifically 7700-8700 Buchanan Road, which are similar rangelands as 11100,10900 and 10802, were excluded from the ALR when landowners formed a coalition to fight the inclusion of their lands into the ALR.

2.2 Sarsons/Aberdeen Lands II Ii 'I h 11 " \1 These lands were excluded from the ALR August 23,2000, Resolution #383/2000 , by the ALC after !! lobbying from the District (Attachment 4). Development has continued on the north part of the excluded , i! land but other lands to Middleton Drive have not been developed and there is still a working orchard on part of the land excluded from the ALR.

The exclusion of the Spicer block and other related properties which were a financial incentive for the "Ranch" were not excluded from the ALR as the consolidation of the Coldstream Ranch did not go ahead.

2.3 Trintec Developments Shopping Centre

The commercial property that the District was backing for a shopping mall and has included poor, steep sloped non-ALR lands into the ALRbulandngexcellent valley bottom agricultural land(Sarsons/Aberdeen Lands), excluded from the ALR,(1998), has not been developed as yet.(2012).

: Council has turned down a rezoning application from Trintec in 2008.. for medium to high density residential apartments and attached housing. .

2.4 2006 Application to the ALC to Exclude Lands Placed in the ALR

106 2006, Born( 11100) and White(10900), 2 of the 3 parcels above the King Edward Irrigation Ditch that had ~,;en included in the ALR as part of a 1999 land swap for lands excluded from the ALR (Sarsons/Aberdeen), made application for exclusion of said parcels from the ALR to the ALe.

Born and White appealed to the District to support their application to the ALe for exclusion of lands above the Irrigation Ditch( 06-007-ALR). On May 8, 2006, council voted to support the application for ALR exclusion and send it to the ALe for adjudication. (#REG2006-0286).

The ALe sent a letter to Born and White on March 6,2007 refusing to exclude their lands from the ALR stating" The inclusions ofnon-ALR lands into the ALR in 1998 were not proposed to somehow balance other exclusion proposals in the valley but rather to recognize that these non- ALR areas were suitable for farming."

**Please refer to Attachment 4 in: regard to the link between the District and the ALC balancing; land development in Coldstream by excluding/including lands in/to the ALR.

2.5 Urban Systems Agricultural Land Review June/2006

A study commissioned by the District by Urban Systems June/2006 was obtained from councilor Besso in 2011 regarding the land that Born and White had applied for exclusion from the ALR in 2006 and w~s urned down. Some of the conclusions drawn from the report and from recent events: i

\. 1) Lands to the immediate East and West are not located in the ALR. (6.1.2)

2) Lands to the Immediate West have been approved for multi-residential strata title zoning by the District (February 27,2012).

3) Parcels are steep, north facing(20-30%), moderately to severely stony, are class 5 unimproved and are limited to perennial forage crops.(grazing cows) (6.1.4) .

4) Accommodating residential demand: connect the OCP designed Rural 2 parcels from the west to the Rural 2 parcels to the East which remain undeveloped due to lack of site access. (6.2.2)

5) "An exclusion or non-farm use in the subject parcels would not represent a significant intrusion into the ALR as it would create a cohesive ALR boundary between all agricultural land and OCP­ designated RU2 parcels in the area." (6.2.3)

6) If the property to the west is developed and Palfrey Drive East Road is constructed to the subject properties, District services would be in close proximity. (6.2.3)

7) The report indicates that ifresidential development was to proceed on the subject properties above the King Edward ditch, it would "remove transition exists between agricultural land in Coldstream Lake Provincial Park to south" (6.3) What the report did not address , was the fact that except for the farms in the Palfrey/Kidson area, as you head west from the subject properties, there is residential housing bordering the Park as far as Jade Beach.

2.6 Rezoning for the Property located at 11200 Palfrey Drive East

On February 27,2012, council voted to rezone 11200 Palfrey Drive East from RU2 to Residential Single Family(R.l). There is a preliminary plan to subdivide property into 5 strata lots as well as a lot where the existing house is situated.

Where the strata titled lots are to be surveyed was once horse pasture. This lot is above the King Edward ditch and directly west of the parcels which were included in the ALR land swap of 1999.

2.7 New Residential Construction On 11100 Coldstream Creek Road.

~, ,.t

As of October 2012, of the 3 parcels include in the ALR 1999, the only change is a large residential home and infrastructure constructed on 11100 Coldstream Creek Road. All improvements listed are on the parcel i.nc1uded in the ALR.1999 and above the King Edward ditch.

[" 1) House approximately 5000sqft. (. 2) Development foot print = 30,000sqft 3) Drive way 400 ft 4) 1 hydro transfonner and 1 hydro vault 5) A septic field and tanks 6) A large Geothennal field 7) 1 800 gallon cistern and submersible pump 8) Underground waterline, hydro line, cable, telecommunication lines 9) Area drainage line running into a large drainage field. 10) 900ft driveway accessing residence from Coldstream Creek Road.

3.. Conclusion

The 3 parcels that were included in the ALR in 1999 as part of a land swap with lands that were excluded from the ALR (Sarsons/Aberdeen Lands) should revert back to their former designation as was per the original OCP for the following reasons: 3.1 District and ALe Cooperated in Excluding/Including Lands into the ALR

The District wanted commercial property developed(Trintec) and the commercial development was contingent on local residential development(Sarsons/AberdeenLands) which were on prime valley bottom ALRland.

The ALC wanted to consolidate the Coldstream Ranch as part of their protection of prime agricultural land in Coldstream.

The ALe along with the Districts blessing, included certain parcels of poor hillside non-ALR land into the ALR while allowing other similar parcels to be excluded (parcels north ofBuchanan Road, 7700-8700) and balanced the exclusion of the SarsonslAberdeen Lands from the ALR by rubber stamping the application from the District to have these and other lands taken out of the ALR for development. The District made it clear that after this parcel was developed, services would be closer to the Spicer block, making it viable for deVelopment which was the financial incentive for the Coldstream Ranch to consolidate their ranchlands.(Attachment 4)

**The 3 subject parcels above the King Edward ditch, which have very low agricultural value (Urban Systems Report) and are bordered by non -ALR lands and a residential subdivision, were caught up in this swap ofsteep slope grazing land {or good valley bottom (arm lands.

To this date, the Coldstream Ranch did not consolidate their ranch and the commercial development that was supposed to go ahead has not proceeded. At this time I do not know if Trintec was given special treatment in the 80's and 90's to take the land they purchased out ofthe ALR but it also on prime ALR valley bottom land. Meanwhile, part of the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands which were supposed to (ollow the commercial development and were on good ALR farm land, have been developed into low and medium density residential housing when there were other non-ALR lands near the commercial property that could have been utilized for development.

Because of the inclusion of the 3 parcels into the ALR above the King Edward ditch in 1999, their potential value has dropped with no compensation for the landowners.

3.2 Poor Farming Potential

The ALe is protecting these hillside parcels for future farming even though: 1) Slopes are 20-30%

2) Rocky, class 6 (Canada Land Registry), difficult or dangerous for machine farming

3) The furthest west property(11100) has a fully developed home site comparable to the property to the .West(1l200) which has been recommended for residential housIng.

4) Land is limited to perennial forage crops. Class 5 unimproved and improved soil(grazing cattle, Urban Systems report) .

5) Surrounding land will never be consolidated into larger farms as the worth is measured in millions if you include the improvements. Agricultural production will never be financially viable in this specific area.

6) Farming production, according District of Coldstream, is becoming less financially viable every year. More people would like to live in the District but are not interested in farming the land.

3.3 District of Coldstream Recommendation

During the Born, White 2006 application to have the subject parcels excluded from the ALR, Coldstream Council was in favour of the application going to the ALC for adjudication.

Since that time during the rezoning request process by Gordon Hora(1120 Palfrey Drive East) in 2011-12, at the regular council meeting in Febuary 27,2012, it was agreed that an injustice had been done to the landowners of the subject parcels during the 1999 inclusion of the parcels into the ALR by the Agricultural Land Commission.

Councilor Besso stated" I'm not in favour of releasing lands from the ALR but those lands probably shouldn't have been in the ALR to begin with." Councilor Dirk adds" This does not fit the classic ALR circumstances. "

The fact that council required the extension of East Palfrey Drive to ALR lands to the east(111 00), is a good indication of their intent of sometime in the future, having options of continuing development along the hillside.

I think that all of the council were in agreement with the fact that there was a great injustice done to all of the landowners involved the the 1999 inclusion of the three parcels above the King Edward ditch into the ALR. !ElMl'ictaf DISTRICT DSTREAM •

FROM Irma Breitkreutz DATE October 5,2009 Executive Research Coordinator

SUBJECT EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONAL EXCLUSIONS OF LANDS iN THE ALR TO THE WEST AND SOUTH OF THE SPICER BLOCK

1. Purpose

To provide a report to Council regarding those lands south of the Trintec development and north of Middleton Drive that the Provincial Agricultural Land Commission (PALC) had at one time conditionally excluded from the ALR.

2. Origin

At their July 27, 2009 Regular Meeting, Council received the Coldstream Agricultural Plan and requested staff provide a report regarding the properties referenced above.

3, BackgroundlDiscussion

In'1998-1999 the Provincial Agricultural Land Commission conducted a review of agricultural capabifity within the District of Coldstream, which resulted in some properties being added to the ALR, while other properties were either excluded outright from the AlR or were excluded subject to fulfillment of specific conditions.

As noted at the bottom of page 1 in the PALe's letter of February 24, 1999 (Attachment 1) regarding exclusion of lands from the ALR:

8) The Commission has conditionally excluded those lands listed in Schedule 2 subject to a decision to exclude a portion of the Spicer B/ock*. It is anticipated that an exclusion application for a portion of the Spicer Block will be submitted In the near futureYJ The Commission has also modified its original proposal as it affects Lot 3, Plan 20619. Only that poriion west of Hunter Creek on Lot 3, Plan 20619 will be excluded from the ALR when a dec;sion is concluded on the Spicer Block. * A portion of Block A, Plan B4190, Plan 2420, Sec. 24, 25, Twp. 9, ODYD

This particular conditional exclusion was applicable to the properties shown shaded to the west and south of the Spicer Block on the PALe's map. Please note that the PALe's map is based on the mapping as at December '1972 when the ALR came into effect and therefore does not refled the subsequent subdivisions,

(1) The August 23, 2000 letter (sec Attachment 5) from the PALe to the District of Coldstream clarifies this conditiol'\al exclUSion, That letter serves to exclude the lands west of the Spicer Block unconditionally,

101 Members of Council Re Exclusions and Conditional Exclusions Page 2 of Lands in the ALR to the West and South of the Spicer Block October 5, 2009

Staff prepared a report to Council dated March 13, 2000 (Attachment 2), providing rationale in support of requesting the PALC to remove the conditional exclusion on the lands directly west of the Spicer Block.

This request- to the PALe was included in the District's letter dated April 13, 2000 (Attachment 3) and report attached thereto entitled Exclusion of Sarsons/Aberdeen lands (Attachment 4). II\'."~

The PALC reconsidered this conditional approval and by letter dated August 23, 2000 (Attachment 5) excluded the properties to the west of the Spicer Block.

However, the ten properties listed below to the south of the Spicer Block remain conditionally excluded subject to a decision to exclude a portion of the Spicer Block from the ALR. For ease of reference, those ten properties are highlighted in orange on the District's current ALR map (Attachment 6).

9301 Rendell Drive (the portion of this property west of Hunter Creek) 9401, 9405, 9505, 9601 and 9611 Rendell Drive 8905, 8909, 9003 and 9007 Aberdeen Road

4. Recommendation

THAT the report from the Executive Research Coordinator, dated October 5, 2009, regarding Exclusions and Conditional Exclusions of Lands in the ALR to the West and South of the Spicer Bloc\<, be received for information.

Respectfully submitted.

·~tU~~· 4?Af¥j? Irma Br.llkr."lz ~ Reviewed by Michael Stamhuis Executive Research Coordinator Chief Administrative Officer

Attachments

102 (~ CJ c.{1 0 ~ '2- Q Provincial Agricultural La~~2 133 - 49<10 Canada Way, Burnaby, B.c. V5i}'4K6 Telephone: (604) 660-7000 . Fax: (6q4)'660-7033

eply to the attention of Martin Collins' February 24, 1999 ;o' ':J _ <) ~9f\(\ , ,i~. \ .) Ii .. ~~ Greg BettS, Administrator n 'S: ,;'.,\J'" " \ 0'r en·,U1) DS""Or'j\l. , \ ,\tdil District of Coldstream D T 9901 Kalamalka :Rd. Coldstream, B.C. VIB lL6 \, Dear Mr. Betts:

Re: Proposed exClusion of lands from the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) in the District of CoIdstream ~ Our File: T-32389

The Commission has now had an opportunity to make a decision on its proposal to exclude land from the ALR in the District of Coldstream.

As a result of the public hearing and site visits in November 1998 the Commission has decided to amend its original proposal. The amendments are noted below,

Specifically, the following parcels are deleted from the proposal on the grounds that the lands are used for agricultural purposes.

1) The North %Sectlon 13, Twp. 6, ODYD, Except: Plans attached to DD 13998 and 13999 and Plan A14 (Kenneth Bellevue)

2) Lot 1, DL 57, ODYD, Plan 6678 except Plan 23141 (Donald Garlick)

The following blocks of land in A, BI and 0 have been excluded from the ALR subject to the fulfillment of specific conditions (explained below).

A) The Commission has conditionally excluded portions of the following three parcels from the ALR (owned by the Ministry of Forests and used as a seed orchard), subject to the review and approval of an acceptable road alignment plan (College Way extension, east ofKickvlillie Loop). Upon deposit of the fInal road right of way plans at the Land Title Office, the RfW and any remnant portions of the affected parcels lying south of the RfW will be excluded from the ALR.

Parts o/Lots 23,22, and the 37.5 Acres o/Lot 21 ..... shown on Plan A308, Sec. 22, Twp. 9, ODYD, Plan 455. excepting plans '" .... P.I.D., 012·316-644, 012-316-6#,-012-314-633 .... .;J./lt ' B) The Commission has conditionally excluded those lands listed in Schedule 2 subject to a decision to exclude a portion ofthe Spicer Block*. It is anticipated that an exclusion application for a portion of the Spicer Block will be submitted in the near future. The Commission has also modifIed its original proposal as it affects Lot 3, Plan 20619. Only that portion west of Hunter Creek on Lot 3, Plan 2061 ~ will be excluded from the ALR when a decision is concluded on the Spicer Block. *Aportion oJBfockA, Plan B4190, Plan 2420, Sec. 24,25, Twp. 9, ODYD 5ee mar .. . .1

Preserving Our Foodlands 103 District of Coldstream February 24, 1999 Page 2

C) In addition, the following properties north of Kalamalka Rd. and west ofthe Coldstream Public Works Yard have been conditionally excluded from the ALR subject to the submission of an acceptable (to the Commission) plan ofdevelopment for the town center and the consolidation of the remnant northern portions of the affected properties into a single parcel to be retained in the ALR.

Lot A, Section 24, Twp. 9, ODYD, Plan 33707 (Marzoff) Parcel A (DD 141092F), Sec. 24, Twp.9, ODYD, Plan 4123 - (McCormick) Lot C, Sec. 24, Twp. 9, ODYD, Plan 2544 - (Bauman) That Part ofLot 45, nvp.9, ODYD, Plan 2544 - (Samartino and Demetrick) Lot 1, Sec. 24, Ttvp. 9, ODYD, Plan 13576 (Nickel)

In light of the above changes, the Commission acting under Section 14(1) of the Agricultural Land Commission Act, by Resolution # 130/99 has excluded, either conditionally or outright, a total of approximately 130 ha from ALR on the grounds the lands have minimal agricultural potential due to existing non fann uses, parcelization and poor soils.

The lands excluded outright are listed and mapped in the attached Schedule 1.

/--\ The lands conditional1y excluded are listed in the attached Schedule 2 and shown in maps A &B.

Enclosed is a copy of the Certificate of Order certifying the exclusion, showing in detail the lands involved. By way of a copy of this letter and attached Certificate of Order the Commission is notifying the Land Title Office and Assessment Office of these changes so their records can be amended. In addition the Commission has notified each affected property owner about the ALR boundary changes.

The exclusion of the properties listed in the attached Schedule 1 from the ALR in no way relieves the owners or occupiers of the responsibility of adhering to all other legislation which may apply to the land. This includes zoning, subdivision, or other land use bylaws, and decisions of any authorities which have jurisdiction.

If you have any qUestions about this matter please contact Martin Collins at 604-660-7011, quoting file # T-32389.

Yours truly.

AGRICULTURAL LAND COMMISSION

pe~:.,~=) _ 6£-.- Alan Chambers, Chair

cc: Registrar of Land Titles, Kamloops Approving Officer, Ministry of Highways, Kamloops B.C. Assessment Authority, Vernon Coldstream Ranch, attention Ted Osborn Alan Pattison, Regional District of North Okanagan

Ene!.

MC/js 104 ' e ....1(} .;:; L I '1 ' .'\1 P , otoiA> \ • 64 't" ,v/ w.£·, _J"-'':!t! .. ~---=--~;""'-""""' •. --.,..,.. ,)' ii0 : .,.."..-.~" ,.;;;,; .•-<., , ~ t. 12~ i,:?,J&"

L, I

26 ''-'S P'Le.

i3 4\~" /

,41

tlt~'''h.·A. A I~ ," ;' -\ l C " I') 4':\(.0

PCI.,p.. P, 2~ 64\99

l' :::'!- ::,: ... 'j ,""!,.'

. ~. : ..

Fou-ow~ HVNnr~ <:/? E:6 I<.,

e'l'7e A ... p'T 'l 1'. '~.J Ill/I. J P1":16 '0+:.,

A i:> 4?>4~ I- ,,'! I ~ .1 ~ '+ " 2. 1..:0+3 1..04 .... <') I..~" ,4'tsU'1f; ~I 'I'.' ',' I '?­ ,.----....-t.! ._-- .. __ .,.- , 1..S1 5!O ~ 3

... II e \l~<) ~~l !I . I I I

File: T~32389 Map A Resolution #130199

Areas con~itionany approved [OK' exclusion under Section 14(1) of theALCA

105 .lli~tmt~ ~ DISTRICT OF COLDSTREAM O!nllisfttmtt MEMORANDUM

TO Members of Council I=ILE NO. . 041 0~20 6480-01 6:>iUJ-tJ3 FROM Greg Betts DATE March 13, 2000 Chief Administrative Officer

SUBJECT ALR EXCLUSION .. SARSONS ROAD, ABERDEEN ROAD, MIDDLETON DRIVE AND HIGHWAY 6

1. Purpose

To obtain CouncWs direction on whether to make further submission to the Agricultural land Commission (ALC), requesting they proceed with the above~ referenced conditional approval for exclusion from the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) .

.~. 2. Origin

In 1999, following, the District's major Official Community Plan (OCP) review, the ALC agreed in principle to exclude certain lands from the ALR. With respect to one of the subject areas, i.e., the lands bounded by Highway 6, $arsons Road, Aberdeen Road and Middleton Drive, Council asked the Commission to proceed with the final exclusion on its own merits. I have been asked by the ALC Planner to provide the rationale to support the District's request to proceed.

3, Background/Discussion

In 1996 the District initiated a Major Review of its OCP. The review was . focussed on a number of significant policy issues, including consideration of the Coldstream Ranch restructure, a matter which had been intentionally omitted from the earlier OCP review pending completion of the safe of the Ranch.

The District worked closely with the ALe in the general DCP review and specifically the potential restructure of Coldstream Ranch. The review, which included detailed discussions with the Ranch, resulted in recommendations for additional land exclusions as well as inclusions to the ALe.

The major exclusion areas given approval in principle by the ALe are crosshatched on the attached map and include the following:

@ the area bounded by Highway 6, Sarsons Road, Aberdeen Road and Middleton Drive ® \. the block of land at the east corner of Aberdeen Road and Rendell'. Drive

107 Members of Council Re ALR ExclusIon - Page2 Sarsons Road, Aberdeen Road, Middleton Drive and Highway 6 March 13, 2000

• lands abutting the north side of Kalamalka Road between Whetzel Drive and Aberdeen " the block of land on the southwest corner of the intersection of Ka[amalka Road and Goldstream Creek Road • subject to consolidation of bottom lands of Goldstream Ranch, the southerly portion of the Spicer block, owned by Goldstream Ranch

In the Ale's final evaluation they have indicated that in order for any of the propose.d exclusions to proceed beyond approval in principle, they must proceed concurrently with the Coldstream Ranch consolidation and restructure.

The District understood and accepted that the exclusion of any portion of the Spicer block (the 120-acre parcel owned by the Ranch at the southeast corner of Highway 6 and Aberdeen Road) was contingent on the consoHdation of the Ranch bottomlands, The District did not, however, understand, propose or suggest that other exclusions would be contingent on the Coldstream Ranch restructure proceeding. The District believed that a formal written commitment of the restructure plan would be sufficient to address the concerns of the ALC. The restructure plan is included in the District's OCP.

The timing and complexities involved in implementing the Ranch restructure are not, in the District's view, congruent with the issues and community needs related to the other proposed exclusion areas, particularly the area bound by Highway 6, Sarsons Road, Aberdeen Road and Middleton Drive.

The District believes the latter subject lands have a separate, and mare time­ sensitive, community interest for exclusion. These lands are adjacent to lands for which there is a commercial development proposal outstanding which has been supported in principle by Council.

The timely development. of these lands for commercial purposes is viewed as an important element of the District's long-term sustainability plan. The District, like most communities in B.C., is facing increasing challenges to provide the same or greater service in times of restraint, cutback in senior government assistance, and a public with little attitude for increased taxes.

By conventional measures, the District has a poor tax base in that 85% is levied from residential sources. Coldstream has limited industrial tax base and even less commercial to help shift some of the tax burden from residential uses and to keep farm tax rates dawn.

As a result, commercial development is important for the future of Coldstream. The exclusion of the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands from the ALR can help facilitate commercial development. The attached report sets out the justification for exclusion of the Sarsans/Aberdeen lands in terms of:

@ past steps taken to support agriculture 8 assurances made by {he District ~ timing issues o nthAr justifications 108 Members of Councll Re ALR Exclusion· Page 3 Sa(sons Road, Aberdeen Road, Middleton Drrve and Highway 6 Marcil 13, 2000

i 4. Conclusion/Recommendation

THAT the memorandum from the Chief Administrative Officer dated March 13, 2000, re ALR exclusion - Sarsons Road, Aberdeen Road, Middleton Drive and Highway 6. and the report attached thereto entitled Exclusion of Sarsonsf Aberdeen Lands. be received;

AND THAT authority be given to forward to the Agricultural Land Commission, the Exclusion of Sarsons/Aberdeen Lands report and rationale for the exclusion of the subject area from the Agricultural Land Reserve;

AND FURTHER THAT the Mayor and Chief Administrative Officer be authorized to make a presentation to the Agricultural Land Commission if required. d&rr , .. -----, Greg Betts

Attachments

"/~

106 109 . \ lusi Sarso rdeen

1. Introduction .

This report sets out the justification for exclusion of the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands from the Agricultural land Reserve (AlR).

The justifications are divided into the following sections;

@I Past steps taken to support agriculture • Assurances made by the District III Timing issues • Other justifications 2. Past Steps Taken to Support Agriculture

The District of Coldstream has taken significant steps to support agriculture in its Official Community Plan (OCP). The Agricultural land Commission (AlC) has also taken steps to include land in the Agricultural land Reserve. These steps were part of a package that would see, among other things, exclusion of the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands from the AlR.

2.1 OCP Policy

An OCP policy indicates that the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands would be excluded from the ALR when other lands were included. The new Official CommunIty Plan policy Is as follows:

4,3.19 Recognize that exclusion aflandfrom the Agricultural LandReserve in the area between Sarsons Road and Aberdeen Road, and along Middleton Drive (East 'oj Sarsons), would be done in conjunction with the inclusion of other lands within the Agricultural Land Reserve.

This policy was suggested by Tony Pellet (a planner with the Agricultural land CommiSSIon) at a steering committee meeting held during the OCP update process. The Agricultural land Commission did not object to this policy when the OCP amendment was ri::Jferred to them.

Clearly the exclusion of the SarsonslAberdeen lands were linked to inclusion of lands, and not consolidation of the Coldstream Ranch,

The OCP further supports this by clearly linking the consolidation of Coldstream Ranch lands to development of the Spicer block, with no mention of the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands, as set out in the following policy:

1 113 3.12.2 Designate part ojthe land known as the Spicer Block (located between Aberdeen Road and Highway 6, north ojRendell Drive) for residential and recreational use in order to compensate the Coldstream Ranch for the loss it will incur through the parcel consolidation.

The part of the Spicer block identified for residential development is shown in Figure 1.

2.2 lands Included in the ALR

Over 670 ha (1655 acres) of land have been included in the Agricultural Land Reserve since the OCP was adopted (more area was actually included, but the specific acreages for some parcels were not set out in the inclusion documents).

While more than 70 ha of land were excluded from the ALR, most of these lands have been used for non~agricultural purposes such as industrial uses, railway lands, works yards and other uses for many years. Furthermore, some of the areas had also been designated as residential in the Official Community Plan {with the Land Commission's acceptance) for many years.

The result is that large areas of land have been included in the ALR. yet the Sarsons/Aberdeen parcel has not been excluded. The exclusion has not occurred even though the OCP specifically tied the exclusion of the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands to the Inclusion of oth,er lands, and significant inclusions have already occurred.

2.3 Large Lot. Designation in the ALR

The previous OCP (and the one before that) had designated large areas of Coldstream ALR lands with a Country Residential designation. The Country Residential designatjon had a policy of allowing a 2 ha (about 5 acre) minimum parcel size. This designation created expectations for subdivision on agricultural lands. The new OCP created a large lot Rural 30(ALR) d(;;lslgnation that has a policy of having a 30 ha (about 74 acre) minimum parcel size. This helps support and maintain agriculture in the ALR.

The RuraI30(ALR) deSignation provides protection to 873 ha (2157 acres).

2.4 Large Lot Designation on Grazing Lands

The new OCP also changed the designation on grazing lands and some forested range lands to a Rural 30 deSignation. The previous oeps had designated these lands as Country Resid~ntial, with a 2 ha (5 acre) minimum parcel size. The Rural 30 " designation offers much better protection to tands that perform an important agrlcultural function and help support agriculture, even though these lands are not in the ALR.

The Rural 30 designation provides protection to 2012 ha (4,971 acres).

114 2 --'.~------~------, EA13TING OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN EXISTING OffiCIAL COMI1UNIn' PUj

INSTITUTIONAL

RECREATION COMMERCiAL

R ,,- .... , 3. Assurances by the District

The District of Coldstream has made assurances that no development will occur on the Spicer block until the Coldstream Ranch lands have been consolidated. A specific !i process has been set out in the OCP. The key policies are as follows:

3. 12.7 In order to facilitate the lot consolidation and density transfer, the District of Coldstream, the Goldstream Ranch, the Agricultural Land Commission, and other pariies involved will generally take the fol/owing steps:

1. Gonfirm the layout of the lots between Grey Road and Warren Road upon n being consolidated and resubdivided·into parcels approximately 30 hectares (74. 1 acres) in. area. ii 2. Conduct an appraisal of the loss in Jand value that the Goldstream Ranch ij ;1 would incur due to the consolidation and resubdivisfon. .,IiI, !!" 3. Refine the amount of land required for development at the Spicer Block in order to compensate the Coldstream Ranch for the loss it will incur due to consolidation and resubdivision.

4. Prepare the detailed concept plan for the development at the Spicer block.

5. Identify al/ the conditions and requirements to be in place when the consolidation and transfer proceeds; this may include covenants and statutory building schemes, development agreements, development permit area designation, and conditions for exclusion from the Agricultural Land Reserve ALR.

6. Conduct the legal survey of the consolidation and resubdiVision, except for final registration.

7. Obtain conditional exclusion of the required porlion of the Spicer Block from the ALR.

8. Survey off the required portion of the Spicer Block.

9. Proceed with the rezoning and development permit area designation on the Spicer Block.

10. If the rezoning and development permit area designation is successful, and at the same instant that they come into force, the following things should happen:

{.

5 01 the required portion of the Spicer Block should come out of the ALR; 01 the consolidation and resubdivision of the land between GrE)Y Road and Warren Road should be registered; • covenants and development agreements should come into force.

The process set out above is meant to act as a general guide, it is not intended to tie the parties involved to a strict procedure. Some ofthe steps may occur at diffE)rent pOints in thE) process, some steps may be combined with other steps.

The above policy shows how the consolidation can proceed without any mention or inVolvement of the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands. The OCP kept the policy limited to one land owner (the Coldstream Ranch) in order to avoid the complexities of initiating a transfer of development rights when several land owners are involved. 4. Timing Issues

4.1 Current Demand for Commercial

The potential commercial development of lands next to the highway and part of the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands needs to occur relatively quickly. The Sarsons/Aberdeen . lands are adjacent to lands where a commercial development has been supported in principle by Council. The consolidation of the Coldstream Ranch lands and the transfer of development to the Spicer block could take longer. As a result, the exclusion of the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands cannot wait until consolidation of the Ranch lands.

4.2 Development Can Speed Consolidation

A key timing point to consider is this: developing the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands can speed the consolidation of the Ranch lands and the development of the Spicer block. By developing the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands, services will be closer to the Spicer Block, making them easier to develop, as shown in Figure 2. This w[[\ help the ALC more quickly realize its goal of seeing the Coldstream Ranch lands consolidate.

4.3 Conclusion

In conclusion, exclusion of the SarsonsfAberdeen lands helps both the District and the Agricultural Land Commission in the following ways:

• facilitates timely commercial development in Coldstream. • brings services closer to the Spicer block. • speeds up consolidation of the Coldstream Ranch.

6 ,------.. rr=- .. rsr;·t")VI CE EXTEl\l SI ON S

r,. I /SARSONS ABERDEEN LANDS/--t- J4i\( ,'. .<:1 :MT _JJ1D-GLEWN_ T --- ~-

,-"J"

~j~!,~{'7i\!H?~S\., ... i'" " yg:\.I.t:.l~~{(·:·~~~,!.t·~.'::: SARSONS ABERDEEN LANDS MAKES IT "-.'./..1 !.~) i I.{\\(·,:,>~.:~~:/>: EASIER TO SERVICE THIS PART OF ~-----i\, ~:~,\-,l!.> :.r j !~.:if: ::-/~<: THE SPICER BLOCK, WHICH \<::::-::'y;~ .. ,::(.::,:.\).;)-:-):.. ' ACCELERATES COLDSTREAM RANCH /<> :( .. ,:-:.f:../<~/:.:;/", CONSOliDATION 'lj~:<:);;':::;~';~:~4)~~: 5~:j~L.-·~.. 7~:,.,.~:; .. -.~-r~:_'------''--·----'OR''''''C'''''HAR=-=-D-..---,---t:==' L I '" ;'>:~"" ::tI<~·:' i·~:·::::/:,:<,."~i~ fr~=P- I b-:-HtAWE&-21·Wwll RENjJEtml QRIYE II I I ., . --_ I I '/ -n iLlL \ II Til r 'l I f d------1 I I I

.~ ", I I \. .' , - (I

,. I r-;::" ., 1 I I ___ ~,<-::.. , ORCHARO •./ - I 'r'-'=-' 1 ~=----:--~~.. ~ " " I 1 ~/ ~~~::r==-~~ .: ... .; 5 \ I • ',.", I _.1-,~'O'RCHAA -~ . .'~-"-' r--- (. A'" ~.J\I ...ft'.:? ~-L __ .:;-~ ~ r---- Other Justifications

5.1 Commercial Better than Residential Next to Agriculture

Even though the OCP designates the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands as residential, the current demand for part of the site is for commercial uses. Commercial Use is often better than residential next to agriculture, due to the reduced potential for conflicts. As a result, commercial development may be better for agriculture than residential development in the future.

5.2 less Traffic on Aberdeen

Commercial development on the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands will facilitate the construction of a separate direct access from Highway 6. This will mean less of an increase in traffic along Aberdeen Road and less of a negative impact on agricultural traffic.

5.3 Aberdeen Road Acts as a Buffer

Aberdeen Road can act as an effective buffer between development on the Sarsonsl Aberdeen lands and continued agricultural use of most of the Spicer block. If additional buffering is required along the road, it can be integrated into the development of the SarsonsJAberdeen lands.

5.4 Spicer Block is the Best Place for Development on, Ranch Lands

Part of the Spicer block was identified as the best place to accommodate development on the Coldstream Ranch lands after seven other areas were investigated. Some of these areas had lower agricultural capability than the Spicer block. However, the other areas were rejected for a number of reasons. In many cases, the reason was that development would have a negative impact on the current agricultural operations of the Ranch. If the community and the Land Commission want to see consolidation of the Ranch lands, then the Spicer block is the best area to use in order to compensate the Ranch for its loss. Developing part of the Spicer block in return for consolidation will have the greatest net benefit to agriculture. S. Conclusion

In conclusion, the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands should be excluded from the ALR for the following reasons:

• The exclusion is supported in the Official Community Plan.

f!j The District has taken extensive measures to protect agriculture, providing better protection to over 7500 acres of land; and over 1600 acres were included in the ALR. ~ The District has provided assurances that part of the Spicer block will not be developed until consolidation occurs.

@ The timing is right for exclusion of the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands.

(J Other solid justifications exist for the exclusion, 8 .r-...". 2.5 Elimination of Small Holdings Designation

The previous OCP had a Small Holdings designation that applied to lands in the ALR. The Small Holding deSignation had a policy of allowing a 1 ha (about 2.5 acre) minimum parcel size. It was to act as a buffer between agricultural and residential uses. The Land Commission objected to this designation in the OCP that was adopted in 1993.

The new OCP eliminated the Small Holdings deSignation on 109 ha (269 acres).

2.6 Eliminated 'Possible Future Residential Area' in Binns Road Area

The previous OCP identified a «Possible Future Residential Area' in the Binns Road area, which is located in the ALR. This created expectations that this land would eventually be developed for residential use. This designation has been eliminated, thereby eliminating expectations of residential development based on the OCP and reinforcing this area for agricultural use over the long term.

The 'Possible Future Residential Area' designation was eliminated on 81 ha (200 acres) of land.

2.7 Summary of Past Steps Taken to Protect Agriculture

In summary, a number of steps have already been taken to protect agriculture:

CI The District tied exclusion of Sarsons/Aberdeen lands to inclusion of other lands. i

• Over 670 ha (1655 acres) have already been included into the ALR.

CI The District changed OCP designations to protect agriculture better:

Lands designated as Rural 30(ALR): 873 ha (2157 acres) Lands designated as Rural 30: 2012 ha (4971 acres) Elimination of Small Holdings 109 ha (269 acres) Elimination of Possible Future Residential: 81 ha (200 acres)

Total 3075 ha (7 598 acres)

In summary, 670 ha (1655 acres) were·included in the ALR. and the OCP provided better protection to 3075 ha (7598 acres) of land. Yet the Commission tied exclusion of about 20 ha (50 acres) to consolidation of the Coldstream Ranch lands, even though the OCP tied exclusion of these 20 ha to inclusion of other lands. Furthermore, the suggestion to tie the exclusion of Sarsons/Aberdeen lands to the inclusion of other lands, and not consolidation, was made by ALe staff and accepted by the Commission. The inclusions have already happened, so the exclusion of the Sarsons/Aberdeen lands shOUld proceed.

4 /---,

23 August 2000 Reply to the attention of Tony Pellett District of Coldstream 9901 Kalamalka Rd. Coldstream, B.C. VlB lL6

Attention: Greg Betts, Admin~strator

Re: Proposed exclusion of lands from the Agricultuml Land Reserve (ALR) in the District of Coldstream - Our File: T -32389 District letter of 13 April 2000 Following receipt of your letter of 13 April 2000 and the 23 May 2000 on-site meeting between the Commission and representatives of Cold stream Council (induding yourself), the Commission has now had an opportunity to make a decision on Council's request that Resolution #130/99 be reconsidered and the parcels listed below be now excluded from the Agricultural Land Reserve' (ALR) without the necessity of complying with the conditions imposed by Resolution #130/99. I Following a public hearing and site visits in November 1998, by Resolution #130199 the Commis­ sion conditionally excluded certain lands froin the ALR subject to a decision to exclude a portion .. ~. of Lot A ... Plan 2420 except Plan H14664 (the "Spicer Blockl» from the ALR, Your 13 April 2000 I letter and the attached metnorandum of 13 March 2000 compared the impact of timing options on . i\ II District infrastructure and commercial development planning. After review of the ne\vevidence Ii contained in the 13 March 2000 memorandum and gained from the 23 May 2000 meeting and on­ If site review, the Commission agrees with the District's position that lands lying west of the Spicer If Block should no longer be subject to the condition set by Resolution #130/99. Ii

By Resolution #383/2000, the Commission has now withdrawn from that conditional exclusion those parcels listed below, all of which lie west of the Spicer Block. No other lands subject to that condition are affected by Resolution #38312000 - in other words, affected lands lying south of the Spicer Block remain conditionally excluded from the ALR subject to a decision to exclude a pOltiol1 of the Spicer Block from the ALR.

In light of the above changes, the Commission acting under Section 14(1) ofthe Agl'icultul'al Land Commission Act, by Resolution #3 83/2000 has excluded the following lands from the ALR effective immediately: Aberdeen Road rlw lying west o/Lot A, Sections 24 and 25 ODYD, Plan 2420 except Plan Hl4664, Lot 3. Section 24, Township 9 GDYD, Plan 37306 except Plan 37428, Lot A, Section 24, Township 9 ODm, Plan 37428, Lot /, Section 24, Township 90DYD, Plan 37306, Lot !O5, Section 24, Township 9 ODYD, Plan 7 lOA except Parcel A (DD 124144F) shown on Plan B5950, Lot 2, Section 24, Township 9 GDYD, Plan 32479, Lot 1, Sections 24 and 25, Township 9 ODYD, Plan 32479, Lot J09, Sectio~ 25, Township 9 ODYD, Plan 710A and Lot JJ J, Section 25, Township 9 ODYD, Plan 7lOA, ... 2 District of Cold stream 23 August 2000 - Page 2

Enclosed is a copy of the Certificate of Order celtitying the exclusioll, with an attached drawing showing in detail the lands involved, By way of a copy of this letter and attached Certificate of Order, the Commission is notifying the Land Title Office of these changes so its records can be amended correctly, In addition the Commission is notifying the B.C. Assessment Authority and each directly affected property owner.

The exclusion from the ALR of the properties listed above in no way relieves the owners or occupiers of the responsibility of adhering to all other legislation which may apply to the land. This includes zoning, subdivision, or other land use bylaws, and decisions of any authorities which have jurisdiction.

In any correspondence with this office concerning the foregoing, please quote file # T-32389.

Yours truly,

LAND RESERVE COMMISSION

Per:

-~. Alan Chambers, Chair

cc: Registrar of Land Titles, Kamloops B.C. Assessment Authority, Vernon Ann Gaustin, 9502 Aberdeen Road, ,Coldstream BC VlB 2K9 Gregory George Fanning and Arleigh Fanning, 9574 Aberdeen Road, Coldstream Be VIB 2K9 Nick Paskiewich and Rose Marie Paskiewich, 9624 Aberdeen Road, Coldstream BC VlB 2K9 Bagry Bros, Orchards Ltd., 4110 15lh Avenue, Vernon BC V1T 8Rl Arthur and Elsa Keber, 9704 Aberdeen Road, Coldstream Be ViB 2K9 John William Ross and Anne Louise Ross, 9724 Aberdeen Road, Coldstreanl Be VlB 2K9 Albert Miller, and Katherine Miller executrix of will of Jacob Muller) deceased 9312 Pine Drive, Coldstream BC VlB 1H2 Ted Osborn P.Ag., Secretary, 'Coldstream' Ranch Ltd., , 8604 Highway 6, Coldstream BC VIB 3et Alan Pattison, Director of Development Services, Regional District of North Okanagan, 9848 Aberdeen Road, Coldstream Be VIB 2K9

Ene!.

TP/ )2389d3 ) \ /

• '\---r •//,/ ~/'~'V<1~f • ./I.. ~I "~~~~",

G PLAN 1i207

~ -.--r::-

"oJ .-r ",,,, //~.. ,~'> ". "

":. .=1= ..... District of _------_ Coldstream ...... Agricultural Land _. Review ~~\

6.0 SITE 3: PALfREY DRIVE EAST AREA

6.1 Overview

The subject parcels total 3.6 ha In size, and they are located to the east of Palfrey Drive East, to the south of Coldstream Creek Road and the King Edward ditch. The area in question does. contain site access at this time, and the subject parcels are located adjacent to Kalamalka Lake Provincial Park, to the south. The parcels are privately held.

. ~ .. ,,'

.-~\

N t

... J. . ,_____ . _.. _____ ,__ ._.. _ .. ,_,_ .. " ______" ___" •. ____ . ___ , __,,._. __ ..__ ,,I Figure 6.1 - Palfrey Drive East Area

,...-----'\

Page 28 1164.0091.011 June 2006 URB@;'NSYSTEMSo Agricultural Land Review

-"\ \

6 •.1. •.1. Existing Uses

As illustrated in Figures 6.2 and 6.3, the subject parcels currently contain pasture and forage fields, as well as a Christmas tree operation on one parcel. Surrounding land uses include the following:

To the north: Agricultural land and Coldstream Creek Road, beyond To the east: Pasture and forage fields (lands are designated RU2 in the OCP) To the south: Kalamalka lake Provincial Park To the west: RU2 parcel with a single detached home and pasture land, an~ 2JEJll~1 9~~ched residential neighbourhood, beyond .. 3T:K:[&_-,:r_rrL.~. ~u:J~'"Qrll'I.5I:o~J1tM~#j~~~N A,/dI2-1).:u£.U.

6.1.2 AiR Status

A$ ilJustrat~.inFig4r~ 6.4, thesg.bj~~t'\Pcm:el$"qt~;9Urr.~.I)~I¥Joq3t~c;t lNithira,tpeAgriculttJtalland . •Reserve,;,whiIe·ateas···ihimedJat~ty::ta .. 'th.~;:w:e~;"ahq,::e§st:i;lre"not .. ,lq~t~~ wlthin\the,'ALlt To the north of the property, there is a large mass of AlR land.,ClIlTentIY, tnere isane.xclusion 200h .---.. gPPUtation', that ha.s.·been sLibmitteddoi,'beMlfbf:tWOpropefty .'6wners!oll'the westem, portion of \ t8e:'$ite~ .Thi$~C!pplicd~fon·Wi:)ssuppo'rt:ed.b}iCb(jhdl ahd,it >isto be~enftd tneAgridjlt~ral land <;;9rnmiss;pn fQr.dlsGl!~sipp, ..

.;...... """ ... :.... U.l :.- ._...... r:r; "~j;'" ~'" ,...:... _ I·~~ .". ,l..).~. ... ~ ,_ ,9'"lI';IiIIoI: .. "" ' ~

.,11M. ..:.... (.-::<."""...... """,""",r f"-..J 't .. ·.- ...... +{ "1• ..J. 1fIII'/IIJ1I1#...... ""'W.. ~~~,~ .. I"~ L f'"(' - .,' .. ~\'."'.. 't., .. ~ r. - 14,. - 1 . ..."... .,.

:-:~-;:-;~­ --~" --\ --" Subject Parcels \. \ \ Boundary ~"

Page 30 1164.0091.01 I June 2006 SYSTE So ._ ...... 1.1 District of Coldstream Agricultural Land Review ,

6• .1.3 OCP Designation andZoning

The OCP designates the subject area as Agricultural, recognizing that the land is located within the Agricultural Land Reserve.

The subject parcels are currently zoned Rural Two, which requires a minimum parcel size of 2 hectares and allows a variety of uses ranging from single family dwellings to intensive agricultural use. Surrounding properties are also zoned Rural Two, regardless of ALR status or designation.

6.1.4 Topography

---'\

\ Subject Parcels Figure 6.5 - Site Contours (2 meter interval)

-,\

Page 31 1164.0091.011 June 2006 URBQlNSYSTEMS0 Agricultural Land Review

.~

6.2 Considerations for future AlR Status

6.2,1 Agricultural Capability

The subject parcels predominantly contain lands with an unimproved rating of Class 5, and an improved rating of Class 5, limited primarily by steep slopes and stoniness. The subject parcels ~re moderat~ly to severely stony, and they contain well 'or moderately well drained''5oil~. As a result, this land is generally iimit~dto theprocluetionofperehhialforage crops.

:~:=~::~~~. ~ .1.. ,2~;:~

./----...... '" ~;;;;;;~.~- .~ ..... ;;If'~ --~ ~-.~-.-. . ~ '-- ~.:'~" - .=:~.. ~-=.: -.. -... .::::=-~.:=~. - ... --.~~~::::.:.::;~ .. - ....

..'-'~-. -~----.-.- .' "'.~::~ .... ;;.:::::t~ii~.-~-~.~·-~··~··J ;JC:. ... --'''------.....:::- ~-~.- Figure 6.6 - Capability mapping (Agrologist's interpretation)

6.2.2 Demand for Non-Agricultural Uses

Any demand for residential development in the subject parcels would be created by the

landholders. Overall l country lot development in the subject area would not be of significant value to the municipality in terms of achieving more residential units to offset demand. III terms of accommodating residential demand; the· main value.of.:.develqpment-in the subject a[~would be to connect the OCP-designatedRur(3I·2p(3rcel'on:the'westwi:th tl't~R.uraI2 parcels to. the east,

which remain undeveloped due in part to'a.lack ofsiteactess, i·

~.

I?age 32 1164.0091.01 I June 2006 SYSTE depicted on maps of each study area; supplemental data is summarized in the following sections~

Okanagan College Site

gentle southeasterly slope (less than 5 %) loamy soils along west side containing some gravels; soils on the east are clayey and stone free soils are well or moderately well drained southerly 20 % of site is severely degraded due to parking lot construction; parts of remainder somewhat degraded due to surface soil excavation and redistribution Climate Capability for Agriculture rating is 5A (laP)

Land Use: - site currently appears unused (ie uncultivated, weedy), except for parking lot. adjacent land use west ofHwy. 97 is more-or-less natural rangeland including irrigated rangeland to the northwest. forest research plantations occur to the north and east while, on the south is the Vernon campus of Okanagan College.

~', " PalfreylKidston Site

moderately to steeply sloping, mainly northwesterly slopes, gradients mostly between 10 and 30 % scattered rock outcrops in southern part loamy or gravelly loamy textured soils becoming moderately stony at the higher elevations well drained soils potential for surface erosion if irrigation is excessive Climate Capability for Agriculture rating is SA (1 bG)

Land Use: - site currently occupied by orchards in the northern part, forage fields and dairy farm in the southern part. residential (urban) developments are adjacent on the east, north and west sides, Kalamalka Lake Park abuts on the south.

Small Area.. East.of Powerline

steep, northward facing slope with gradients mostly between 20 and 30 % gravelly loamy, moderately to severely stony, well or moderately well, drained soils

2 ~

/~,

Land Uses: - pasture, forage and Christmas trees - abuts Kalamalka Lake Park on the south - pasture, forages, Christmas trees and orchards on the east, south c ~est 'Tfi :e:1~e:- IS PrtJ ,Af'(2ou~ (i\L9. ~l L-d\ 1-ON i 1'00, C:.i+A:.NC-./ 6-

AN'U '0-P~11.:\[-tf[e 1/.)£:..5''( (5 A- t..f¥.6£ 5ul!3'J:>J UI5/o/,\) f 'To ' S't ITf+£- e I 5' S j IV\ ll.-fllL tJt;up -n+«r I S N 0'( i I\) TITS A. L Q, P ersh In 1 e 1t5-". __

gently to moderately sloping and rolling, mainly less than 5 % to 15 % southeasterly gradients rapid to well drained gravelly sandy loam or gravelly loamy sand, about 40 em thick, over cobbly and stony gravelly sand grassy and weedy cover suggests parcel not actively farmed Climate Capability for Agriculture rating is 5A (1 bG)

Land Uses: - urban development on the west and northwest, pasture, forage and orchards on the east and south.

Coldstream Meadows Site -----.. very gently to moderately sloping with southerly aspect northern portion is gravelly loam or gravelly sandy loam with moderate cobble content southern portion is gravelly sandy loam to gravelly loamy sand overlying cobbly and gravelly sand soils are well to rapidly drained Coldstream Creek is moderately entrenched along southern margin

Land Uses: - cultivated field crops and forages on site - health care facility for elderly persons - adjacent land uses on the west, north and east are forage and cultivated field crops. Coldstream Creek is adjacent on the south.

Coldstream Lumber Site

very gently sloping westerly aspect with gradients less than 5 % Climate Capability for Agriculture rating is Class 5A (laF) in the westerly portion and 4A (laP) in east soils are gravelly sandy loam or loam (40 em or more thick) over gravelly loamy sand on the west (south of Coldstream Lumber) and southeast from the gravel pit. These soils are well drained and cobbles/stones range from very few to moderate in the upper part. The majority of the site consists of clayey, moderately well

.. ~ drained soils with imperfectly drained inclusions where a discontinuous water

3 ".",

II&~II ___" __----,,--,,------=== District of Coldstream Agricultural land Review '\

Subject P~rr"'lc::

"-~ \

Figure 6.2 - Subject parcels, viewed from the north

Figure 6.3 = Subject parcels (at upper right), viewed from the northwest

I?age 29 1164.0091.01/ June 2006 URB~NSYSTEMS0 Notation from District staff: This letter was considered by Council at their November 23, 2015 Regular Meeting. At that time, Council passed a resolution that OCP Bylaw No. 1673 "be amended by deleting the Coldstream Valley Develop­ ment Permit Area map of Schedule 'A', and replacing it with the revised Coldstream Valley Development Permit Area map as attached to the report from the Planning Technician dated November 13,2015". For quick reference, staff have attached the revised map behind the Senns' letter, which shows that their has been removed from the Coldstream Vall

November 15, 2015

Re: 10008 Coldstream Creek Road, Cold stream, B.C.

Dear Mayor and Council,

My husband Johann Senn and I (Lilly Senn) live at 10008 Coldstream Creek Road.

First let us start with pointing out that neither my husband nor I received any notification ofthe proposed changes to the OCP - no phone call or letter!

We attended the Open House on November 5, and had the opportunity to discuss with Mr. Mike Reiley, Director of Development Services our concerns about the inclusion of the Environmentally Sensitive Area on our land. As far as we understand, this proposal is a result of an aerial mapping - no physical assessment has been performed on our property. The proposed OCP shows a very small comer of our property, approximately 114 of an acre adjacent to Kal Provincial Park, but our land has been completely included in the proposed DP A. In our opinion, it does not make any sense to have our entire property included in the DP A.

We inquired for the reasons why our land might be included in the Environmentally Sensitive Area. However, Mr. Reiley was not 100% sure why or could not provide a clear answer to our questions and concerns. Apparently there might be some Birds nesting in some of the trees up in the area close to Kal Provincial Park.

My husband mentioned to Mr. Reiley that if we would have clear-cut the portion of our land close to the park, the Environmentally Sensitive Area would not have been an issue at this time, Mr. Reiley agreed. So in other words, we are being penalized for protecting some of our land in its natural state. .

After talking with Mr. Reiley about the merits of this proposal, he indicated that the boundaries of the Environmentally Sensitive Area should possibly be pushed back to the park property line and therefore our land would not be included.

In closing, we respectfully request that Council considers removing our property 10008 Coldstream Creek Road from the Enviromnentally Sensitive Area ofthe OCP proposal.

Respectfull y,

Johann R. Senn and Lilly SemI -.-{- District of Coldstream OfITcial Community Plan

C o l J ~ t'r C .1n l

Cold stream Valley Development Permit Area

Legend

D C o; d ~H~ J01 VJ.lIcj' D O'l ~' bPj;t:nL Permit l\r\,;;}

( ,I '\

"'0- ~. '"I ~ 1 . ~'> ._----)

{J .5 'j j{ i! "Hu u l ~ r ..

PlllI lu:J 0;.1 11 : M,I),', 20 1 ~, I : 2S/J lIU (~. /o)~~~~\v[E November 12. 2015 "i ~ Uu, lJ,

lvIayor and Council, I ~'R''"'Tnt· I L' '. U':!r>. t- ~nnl ~ H iDr'~'''''''-''' '~" f/,., /) !i.i DIS~ • ~ij it ~ U\....q_l\.... ~~\.~_fu.,:, District of Coldstream 9901 Kalamalka Road Coldstream, B.C. VIB lL6

Dear Sirs:

RE: Remainder of Lot G, Plan 11207 RE: Proposed Official Community Plan

Upon attended the recent Official Community Plan information session it was noted that the above-mentioned property is primarily designated open space. This area of our property is our residence and is presently zoned RU2.

This letter is a request that the Official COlmnunity Plan reflect the current zoning and be designated as RU2.

Since the major portion of Lot G is now park (including the west part deemed suitable for residential) the open space designation should no longer be required and the remainder should reflect the current zoning.

Without reflecting the current zoning and current use for this property in the Official Community Plan we are concerned that any prospective purchaser may be unwilling to conclude a purchase at fair market value (if at all) due to uncertainty over the intentions of present or future councils.

We look forward to a favourable decision.

ours y~,., ~ ,& ~"y .. ~~~~ ,;;,~;! a ROYlu.?t.0 .__ ~_~~;! . .... /-., 6<1.-?'t-''{Y).--. . I' /" G--0""!~ ~/ /- / rth Dml1..ne. _Famswo.. '.

c.c. Mike Reiley

C.C. l.V.:'..ll..,.r.£..L'l...t5..2.\:,.J Notation from District staff: This letter was considered by Council at their November 23, 2015 Regular Meeting. At that time, Council passed a reso lution that OCP Bylaw No. 1673 "be amended by deleting the Coldstream Valley Development Permit Area map of Schedule 'A', and replacing it with the revised Coldstream Valley Development Permit Area map as attached to the report from the Planning Technician dated November 13, 2015". For quick reference, staff have attached the revised map behind the Powters' letter, which shows that their has been removed from the Coldstream Val

Nov 9,2015

Dear Mr. Mayor and Council, I am writing to request that my property- 10070 Coldstream Creek Road - be removed from the Coldstream valley Development Permit area. My neighbour Johann Senn and I are the only two properties in our area that are affected. When I asked Mr. Michael Reiley, director of development services, why all properties along the south side of Coldstream Cr. Rd. were omitted except ours, he was unable to answer my queries. What factors were used to come to this decision? Clear cutting our property would most definitely have ended any concerns about sensitive areas, thus, it seems that leaving the land in its natural state has penalized us. Mr. Reiley told me that Mr. Senn and I would have to obtain permission from Development Services if we wished to alter the property in any way other than agriculture eg.plowing or fencing. Would this require environmental studies to be done at our expense? The DP A proposal makes no sense considering the thousands of acres of parkland adjacent to my south borderline. It would seem more reasonable to have the DP A boundary pushed back to the park property line. Mr. Reiley also stated that the DP A had been arbitrarily extended to the road( Coldstream Cr Rd) even though the property below the VID ditch is outside the so-called "sensitive" area. When questioned, Mr. Reiley said "Oh,don't worry about that. We are not concerned about that portion of your property." In that case, why was it included in the DPA plan? It would appear that the Inapping was quite vague and I hope that the Coldstream Council would agree with nly concerns.

Respectfully, Aml and David Powter N 1\ Dislrict of Coldstream

V Official Community Plan Cold",.. m

Coldstream Valley Development Permit Area

Legend

D ColdstfDam Vallo,Y Dovelopment Permit Area

0.5 , Kllomoters

Pflnh.HJ on: r.t\ y·, 20 15 1 : 25,000 ---

.______- _· ~____'___I_4?-~_+_. ~-~---.:::::T-l-\-~--+\~+-v~--"-~ -+ur?_l ___S _ _ ~ *' Thank you for your interest in the Di strict of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process. If you believe that your interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the upcoming Pub lic Hearing tentatively schedu le for Monday, November 23,2015. Please use this sheet to provide your comments on t he draft Plan. Note that your comments form part of the public record and will be provided to Council for consideration at the Public i-Iearing.

,, ' \ /1/) Sf'llU~jJ) 'S.L-C.(1./ OC>hCLu( r(;I.Q \ (I1(j12 tl\t-Q

L!j,U IQC: ~ ~~S \ d Ivdfle,. L(\lmtPC)J)j) c !.< f+l,VaJ(~ " A Dr ALB (p CIL.c?{)-.J -<- -5"1LI/~ P;--5'

.r ALY( bCJV1 c{) ij b( '7~Q.cQ <11'\ It1? / Icv1 & or ~ !vJ_O I/1. \ sh-o-u PC~lcJl (tal:] (pc-ou,(,]

~v . Jj W LtJrJo-.. mio, ,;) ·iIIl f?r.jJJ I;A -D<;, Sh{\'\IJdeJ(Jv](O Qt'\l'D7JJCO!{(f;; n Y1 \ V7:t

ty)(,t/u V1 9 c( (Cv\'~' lS CJfl 5 kIN ( Ci' fet;;J: I~ (\o{(fbSSt1rk. i JlcbV/0J1" t lVlaV1S{(;!' a.y1(.'uiirv'Q_ ,~ :=t251z \Yls1a~{krJrcvJ Gelsh / -J.C4''G- lD '-n d4~Q C{ U~vvY O CAe O c hc-d2L lt,vtm---)

ore. y') (:J± (1), (hi VI of» LOVJ cO CtV'fKJ. v] '(JvtQ Sf Cf ()IPC(,V\d'

~ . . l hQ CP'r1 r{\ ('{luittt~ $r~:>1,(Qd) StJ/!lro ) 0_ ('exfPllY :fLcL'V (;;!WlW7j frosurRYl ~ G-':',.i(ri-

s r"Vlq:W OU\>Cl-cgo C:LVd/Or ;) U1llu"ZQ tho 4A LtM.!Y Ct/\CO %¥tYl .h.~ ~O::O /( (iQ ~

~1,'" J J ). i <.:>--tc.0fSvrzeQr" ,\ Ala - ,

"1irxvt hQrrf Q~M.9d1' ei:. tb((~ l

AL-Q 1?qvdeUl £) bc f10 IJl $U.& ifcriL['cc.Jw-A. ~ -£ -HtQ t,z",;vOo47(L ceQ Cf f,zcUlS c~-p 1~::A,c',Q S-,~'V) ,

1'1 -khX)\ At.. )

GaL- os. -rT7B-1f?1 '"BC-

District o f

This information is collected for administrative and/or operational functions of the District of Coldstream, authorized by the Community Charter. This information has been collected, and will be used and maintained, in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privac)f Act. C otdstream Thank you for your interest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process. If you believe that your interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, November 23,2015. Please use this sheet to provide your comments on the draft Plan . Note that your comments form part of the pub li c record and will be provided to Council for consideration at the Public Hearing.

f // ~~/V~ '..Il- 1:5. )~J.-;7r-/-K:-... 4!( L-·<_"<;~.-.. jrJ.D

/ / ' J '" , /.( -;J / .. 4 r:::> r .( / ---:f4l//./.... Jc; r D. ~"3S Ala L/:-/..-<-.....I/'...... ZK /<'~?<) £Cf::~z'- 72-/f5 . / / ~ ZZ; A5cYf";.J '" L G.:f.J:::, / , ~~/(?..4-/77'~\ < ,,4;- A(;CX~:; =(/r/·hc-/e/z{.... J/ 7t) 0&(;'-'fi2~ / . 6...f-L L S ,

4-;-' ?/c.=-~~ ?3f -= L .. ~ J. ;,z.c ! ;-£.£10 _.~ <...J~".!!J '-. ~

--=- e,.~Z;l/;Y1 Qt!:"

7, /7 . " <- <:- C'" L ,JC;;/ev/J.4 /~ /&L. L8!1/f)-L.sS"~ ~ ~4- /)),1 Y &. <..( ~ . /.

,;.--- .;:7 f./ .....,.- -" / ~ V,r -;r" '-'---:-'y J f .p I . ./<: a'c.;~L/// D ~:.-.':U k...jL.'.7 /"",,'-l/r-J L~"::'/-.1\. ~ ') , ZMl: 7 / ' ... /? /1 A l )/ ~' /.' (c../<::' ~f<.1v~c:. Y4·t;JJ.~j) 714 , / £),0' L; i<"~bK ~d/l"-? <9" L. /-v~/J .> 1... ..1/77-( 7;:Z~' _/L..O~L(,'/ (?LO£/j)

",)/ /', //' IJ H-1'Ct0/ e£)1/~C1~ vu -~ /9-/.-/~)~ tf?,~L 77--tc:. k:4t!-L-t;Y J... /!-/.z.!A..I/ . / • '~.4 '7-;7/ e,< ' -?L /-~~/'<=- ( ft..z.-'C~- /5 /d~ /A.! y/e,,(7.~>D_.J . L !r-/-/C·d /5 ~4c ~

1/'~4 ' /JI>~f / L"i '- • /J ;7 . -

This information is collected for administrative and/or operational functions of the Oft,stri ,fjJfCoitJ-stream, authorized by the Community Charter. This information has been collected, and Will ,b7ted dnd l11aintained, I)~S in accordance lvith the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. (. / / LL , secun~ _ ar'/----·--,./ I ---C 01as t1" eam !/" /_. f. ' / C / /./ , \'"::.::/-rD;L.-- J /L... f<-,' r S ._------(

Thank you for your interest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) r~l!:Y" process. interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable Op ~m~~Y to be ~eard . .. written submissions at the upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, November 23, 2m§. Rlk16euse kl1is'sheet to provide your comments on the draft Plan. Note that your comments form partofthe P'01:i\ffR'le'fd and will be provided to Council for consideration at the Public Hearing. . . 1 ./ OF enl 1)\'-"[1,.. ~ '- M V I (i': .. ~ Iii/ .1..... J·ll \'} \,Je., 'f) e. e d.. S'\O',e, 'o'\¥-i& . \()."e.,S '""" \..O-.~\ro\on " ~

\~e.. '0e£.c\ \:'C-e..e:s b-t.\\i-0~QX\ L(A"l\\,\CI)~,o'(\ sC~C)()\

~'lo.. J '< C) o--.. (~ ~\(\('>-. \::\\Q~ SC~DO\ \2\0..'=1(30\.;'-'(\ ~ ..,

District of

This information is collected for administrative and/or operational functions of the District of Coldstream, authorized by the Community Charter. This information has been collected, and will be used and maintained, ill accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Coldstream Thank you for your interest in the District of Colqstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process. If interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, November 2~; ; ~o1i~{ ffi~

(t\Q ~ 0{'R{ -" ~ ~ \ \ -; O{ J , ~ ~ " \'\(,\

r--.. n~~ ( t, ...\0.J...\ Q/.. x'~.,.j) 'C\ A--2.A,-- "l .~' . \:.. 0 ' \ ( I '\ uS-.,tJ...."{'\ 0--. \ " Q 1\{\ I...k;,-\. (I, .)X,i' c J . (~ L~ '-",;" \(\ l,,':.)lS\J{3\...~ '( \ c,J,/,,, \\")\;"" , .) . \,~Q (~f).-~) ~""'e\L. ~R;" v,,:v.,.'vl- --\ c • ~ \ \.J'-.I" . ~ , ~ '-- _---" \ , ' , ;\r,,\:..\\ \. ,... ') 0--'-\ S, X'~ \,,;:-~_(;\.._ \ ~ \\. ~ '---.YQ .....:'\ ,"j- "''v. O~\ \,J(k. "- \ C, "\ • !,J U." " () ('. \ .. " ... • \?..J ( ,,' \\ -\\"'\.1.:' .-\.. \) ''''.( . ';Or',;",' h. \v, ~(]~ \:\ .. L\-"\'\ • \..\}~:JI '" r\\\I\ \;,'::iLv" \.":;:-( \-:)Q C'~ . \'::::u./~Q':'\~'c _\ ,~~ \J ~C\",,'\\\c\ -,),,\ -v._ ')\ c\~ \-\\::::,- Ct .') (,/ J--~,. - J' ~J

·k-'Li\->... .r\. c,"'--; \ j OJ vA -\.JA A. \ '\0 ~ \o_~ j i;' _ \:).1 V_O r, , . -, - . , 0 J ~ r-\ .. ('II ' ... n.\) \, (' , r.'\..\.( r\\:' <:. ~_ ",,\ \ i' '-\\"\ -'" _ ~ 2:,.... -: . ,,\ (- -, I ,Ii . l- " \ _'" -\ \ j .. - .1'--"- \-..J I f l ,) \ -.J\..". '\')\.~'-' '-_ 1 l'-t~ \. 1" ~~ " _. " , "ll ::lA...-f) \ • . J = I ' _. I \. ,.. ) (; C~\L ~,x r ;'\...c ('~_ ('-'S"::L.\) ..... ~; ~,('\\£~''-'" ,I:, ~(\,"\.\ )C).~\,},,",\

c>.../ \~)X\:~ '" \~\C>Ri \0 \\'1(_ \\S\A.-.- (\)~..:"'~ ~i~.J \ ')(' (id\~~:\( (\'",)\ " -, L~\'C\ C~J:,c\',<, ',\ "'kO \\,,\(~ \ \,_C\,~ . ,\ ex..;" <:~ o

Distdct of

This information is collected for administrative and/or operational functions of the District of Coldstream, authorized by the Community Charter. This information has been collected, and will be used and maintained, in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Coldstream Thank you for your interest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process, If you believe that your interest in property is affected by the proposed ocp Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the upcoming Pub lic Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, November 23,2015. Please use this sheet to provide your comments on the draft Plan . Note that your comments form part of the public record and will be provided to Cou ncilfor consideration at t he Public Hearing.

:£"" <; k':DDo,$ 0 t ~ \fL ~~ Z'Q. ~h 2v-.c (1 (J~A4'\ S:C 'V---- <2. lJ tl'W \, r ~ f ,--:I ()~ C\ t,)+O ?L(~\£,/e,J ' SV. '"- ~ ,"6oevL2 X

,t.--'l' d e..,Jog ""--~ S "-cb ""--'" C>- """'Ii &-~ ·1 /L-J tb~~c.\/L s.thS- () . €6t J·bt-a.... 1¥'-.J .-\t; J \,.~~~ j«-~~ J . ) I I , ), ( '0/ I :::' ILS ' ~'S ~ t{~<-t-',- -' (' '~<;' s Q.~6~~,! I \~ ·~~S 'J ~ :4-- ( (c WS ~ .!LC- B-("' e7.J ~<:; ~ / I / ' ) / I l I \ S;, I

7) iY/' \J i \ 1 _') @, ~' t,'=-tv'--?x _ stQ ~~ \, (A~ ~ or ~L ~l~-('" Jl.---.--~ IJ J! {) (\/ . ~ "--' ~C-~D' '

District of

This information is collected fo r administrative and/or operational functions of the District of Colds tream, authorized by the Community Ch arter, This information has been collected, and will be used and maintained, in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Pro tection of Privacy Act. Coldstre am Thank you for you r int erest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process. If you believe that your interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to presen t w ritten submissions at the upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, November 23, 2015. Pleas e us e t his sheet t o provide you r comments on the draft Plan . Note that your comments form part of the public record and will be provided to Council for consideration at the Public Hearing.

IA I . LA_ . . ' Ot (VJL& ~+<:I.\Go tf\. \-0 CD ,V?lC,W"C":'I.,.;.."" -'ff\( ;;;A /"I'\;_'"v ,""f\~ cZ«v.. :?Qr V":! .-c,lrl""\/

.e.rf\l~Dno, '(,.().\- \-rt;.N"-f } r.\-.,~ke-vl ' ~ ~A/: ,-S+vt it Ccn trvio;;.vte .OV Not- 'J \ .+ hiJv\.\~~(\.:yO~ / CtA ~T \ (''-~ ,,",0 C/~ e... v

(. i-tv,M"'-/'V\.O )"\1) JVL Q{p"'(~(fJ\ a,.",,1"l - &\.C(';' 1,(\".-1:.,::",,\:-:'<:-1"" -e;\--<::. ' D ~ l. d \J ' \~nJ t)PA- , :') _l ' "- e:-M~b G\:,\- I'I~ ~ ,,- . (\0 r 00~~ _,(-eo C\.,t- n. ~ C'0t (.Q.~L.J,~~ €t'\.S2-'~ ~

o,~" ~r- M. .. JL .? ./ ( - IvJi i pf~J-r-.:\-- {1N.. '?,J ;,\.. {"g..,~r ( .- (\:>f ~ 7.::' :·V '\..,~) <.... "\&{ 1\ I'.) 7 ~{\p; N.P L. " '7'"'1 D ------'I ' ,.I' L . . 1,....1 .\ 0',(\1,:;> +- \.. OJ\.. \p ,/l.L'

~ . ~ ,_. ", .. ' \ r ' =::tfi1-- ':;> ''-\''''- 'I) .~,;4:,.0 . ,.. " J) w c...( \.~ ("\e:-

u (\0+ j i..~~ -S &\:: l.J t'"t u bo'--vi- GK,A A L iT'1 19 f'..IL<..h il,

U m~V\.(;'?)e- J cL.." d 0 p r~~\- "\ t1 .'\ ("

. ).S) ()U__ t(. i"'- 11\1) *0-\s:,\JL.~ ,::> t,,"~'V" (\6\,;>e., CIQG'\.\.;C\"' r'~ \?r",r ~ +- +n.:.,,;\.o &"-<:l P,;;,.ft-, "\ c./ --><.~... ,;. ( () (.,--rvv;\-i~~ \?",c..\( 4" '(l. b~l&

U /)11', ti. ,~~ f\ Wp') ! \)./ +a (~\o.e.n~ b';/) ~t"f\O ~/ s+c;,,,KI1" ,"12 't'L-I.: 1\ .:0 LJ ; ~~ fY.' ".:r . \J . (), i L' .:.-d"\ ,0 ,,,-{c~,t iJ ~~?U--- 0\,) c..t\<-s .k- .. X.A ",vvn. A. Dy I p.:L c:te.o \-<-- i

0- ~+o p l:uci i,",~ ~e~\--~i LV6Vlr",,,,", -f-v"V ~'-7f-~:c~e-.J Jb~ l ~~j~f' ':J _ .r .~

~k~~c ,"\D G'f'\. vJ...Jr-~ ~ 1'-'),- \15 . ~l{ /=t \.; Jt.t:o U0e.. '

P (\D /U>Dl-cl--,.;tz... t C""' fl"-\-';':" d!v:~<..'cj.JlD , ,~ f\/)\.J-',::>'.t..- I \..Al<,,'-;}'\--.e / t C0L:)d"C. O~ -"-- ::> <2 .' w<.. ' ,.,.... \J '~ '. ' ) 'J' I .. -- Q" i/ .-\-. PIt< w''-'"' ~ " , .r \- ,')\"5\-" . .xoc. <,j( - sh ", ) ~: ,- x 1tJ :/.Cl; (\e.;OJ.) c- V u' &' \\- &'-0 PI} ~ ~ """ . , .~ '-) co"~'f\ V~t 4 / ("., f Didrict of '.- ~1.2- L;- "' ,'<~;<-- ~!~\H:,-,- ~:-(!._r 'l e. -to{"-\-- i':'i.,,,,)t,,,, ,/'r - \) This information is collected for administrative and/or operational functions of the District of Coldstream, authorized by the Community Charter, This information has been collected, and will be used and maintained, in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.

" . I... i., -,. e \ -<."i-:"'1 Cold stream (.' - .... \- l.. 'I'.?;,;. , ~~-"' \-z,? _.'-',- 1_.1.,..~ "\" \~ -, ..ti,...\ .~ ___ ,"",',. -:'r'-I..l' l~<..- . '\c\ , ~ , ~\ : - \( r\.·:~ ~>1' (.;~ i' )"""'.... ,i'\:. , ) .--.-, , ~ ./ I;:t ;, .J c.~ ,c-.(\\.',.,:..-"', , .....,-Ttl'-.. -\l.·v .. -J~LG "f'\~+- . ~) :}- i Vi

, f"A?J, J ~,.. ,;'1'''u .... >-'0:) \j ! +'V-"8--VO:>J',:.')t"r;o

~f

-tf?.,.,; :j~ , ~ ~.n-~\JJ ~ -:>:1'0 .J7'tJ~ f' w '-!.. :-zrv vw)d, J ?to:-'" ~ -tn! ofNrw ~ -,("""I\' C~ .,\vn",~v '.,''Yf

() _ ~ n> / (() "n , \ A rr-V- ~. v? _bJ..' o-J]-lO -0 G\ -1l,"1f~~"&.1

1~ ""1"..~ . Po J0'1\--' .tl-\ -U-" O"\,, ?! ' oQ .. ~ '\ <;; 11'" ('") '0.,"P""'G' """i'" "'" " ~'[>Qf,,, '-Llt 11" ,,,.,, <>\- G"""",,~ d ....,.,..,J,/10,,( S-~ 07 / OV"'\cl l(" ,J.,.''''II'''''O' ~,,\ "V"'w C>f'~~ "'<1

Q~ ,"1-'.. ,,,,,j

, o\ ~_'-1,~va 7 -S1\

--yv1~' Q",,) J 0V'J~ -+

--1' ~)i'"'=?-1-".H)J (N"'i->\-, -0 V-?7! ~ /\j\?d \.!~Xf'~ + II \"\ '/u"A\J\O:w~-n1..,.::::::. ./

~\:o Of!7'l

Q ~ ?\--,".'Jd C)1~\ v':'"'l'V1I]ou; I 'i J't) 7 o::vv~t ( \'7

~ _'t''J 21 c/ .. \ . ~ V101Ci 'W-oJo \i?-~.O

-IJ- . \!.;/J~..) - g....J ""'j2J '0 .o~.V • Thank you for your interest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process. If you believe that your interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule fo r Monday, November 23,2015. Please use this sheet to provide your comments on the draft Plan . Note that your comments form part of the public record and will be provided to Council for consideration at the Public Hearing.

.. ~ pM,,1- 6J[-" i,..~IS .

District of

This inform ation is collected for administrative and/or operational fun ctions of the District of Coldstream, authorized by the Communitv Charter. This inform ation has been collected, and will be used and maintained, in accordance vilith the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Cold stream Thank you for your interest in the Di strict of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process. If you believe that your interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, November 23,2015. Please us e this sheet to provide your comments on the draft Plan . Note that your comments form part of the public record and will be provided to Council for consideration at the Public Hearing.

12 §-1dfl1 /iA VlJuC; eye t l'$ S;Za r ~ v7 I"u 7 ,,; / y - Iff) LV f5: 8 \/ 0} j)~ /2; c. ~ ~ ~f?r:J 7'!I ~ }to LJ / "_./. ~ __ 7 C9-·f- ,;& hi C Irj1-,1t.JC::~ t-- /9-c/f ~/c7/2 w4f /

Di strict of

Th is information is collected for administrative and/or operational functions of the District of Coldstream, authorized by the Comm unity Charter. This information has been collected, and vi/ill be used and maintained, in accordance with the Freedom of Inform a tio 11 and Protection of Privacjf Act. Coldstream Thank you for your interest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process. If you believe that your interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at t he upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, November 23, 2015. Please use this sheet to provide your comments on the draft Plan . Note that your comments form part of the public record and will be provided to Council for consideration at the Public Hea ring.

,." \\10)' SURE \dHA'f loCAl- SHo pgJr{t? DOPOKjVJ\/)-j(6S HASJo lJO \~\1H ~n~S +- mlfl~S - OV\?9 ~~\J -\-0 ~o BA \J (), J . LUI k:e e,u AVO) J:;~Q vJ G' S~ --Uf\J~GK)Na~S-+K[)G~rzS/ NO mSrlrrO)V or-DPnlrJAcge pBKOe ~~ki ON \

Dis trict of

This information is collected for administrative and/or operational functions of the District of Coldstream, authorized by the Community Charter. Th is information has been collected, and will be used and maintained, in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privac)l Act. Coldstre am Thank you for your interest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) revi ew process. If you believe that your interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, November 23, 2015 . Please use this sheet to provide your comments on the draft Plan . Note that your comments form part of the public record and will be provided to Cou ncil for consideration at the Public Hearing.

tt!ndl.K5 s_ 1· / " U0 () fall r -5 j)~ CceS

JrnprorJoXe'uf.s at.ne /i,~/;bf\.- I k~1Uj~{,Lt)o~~- Thafl.~ O~L-_ R~:})Od

j . / I J. 'I _ I .1 t! v If . V ' J " ; j; 'e /L-t ,/'-e./( rv-- rU/7LOd'-f "~()dS/tJ~ fJ~t!Li-s aloYLt::/ rO~f?&ucJ:-.-J.:5·-.J /ols of- arec:as ~+ +I"L~ tYlOW0r \.{{{)es)~)+· \"'ea-d~, ..

fI,) W-.(!,/I/-- U !.J!)ratl e <5 //l Co IC!5{,~earrL J rf tt.70 n Yer [v.~1d r.et(; 5 5/rz(*-- /+ ds rueS

Be 5iGre ref/(-e5 +-5 {C)V~ C tl.t-uv~le G ~ UL1 __rl-anc~y at LoUJ '- - , ( ::L..V 11'/7 /' of) ~

District of

This information is collected fo r administrative and/or operational functions of the District of Coldstream, authorized by the Community Charter. This information has been col/ected, and vvill be used and maintained, in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privac)l Act. C oldstream Thank you for your interest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process. If you believe that your interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, November 23,2015. Please use this sheet t o provide your comments on the draft Plan. Note that your comments form part of the public record and will be provided to Council for consideration at the Public Hea ring. , \

~ I l (t(~-N~ffJ (/( IALi/"- Se '/!Lj ('9r t.J:L [, PWftJ 9k hJolJtLnu\, / hIlL

'\

L/

District of

This information is collected for administrative and/or operational functions of the District of Coldstream, authorized by the Community Charter. This information has been collected, and \li/iI! be used and maintained, in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Coldstream Thank you for your interest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process. If you believe that your interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, ri0vember 23,2015. Please use this sheet to provide your comments on the draft Plan . Note that your comments form part of the public record~and will be provided to Council for consideration at the Public Hearing.

.~ ~ +k~ 'J \L r ~ 0'10..-"...... , I),. -, ,j,,";:) \ _c' C ! ·-L , .~ CY" C (~\-L.,./'\, Cl ?s R:';

I; dt I (iL_Q Ci ,'\l'--~_ i)/\ : ~ ' -z. 8'C ~'---, p ~~ ~ --~~'J """v-v'\. I,"\r-l,-t . __ ~ ~t.; ·Jt .. ( t ~ ~ ...... - t ~ ---h) "----'L~ , b c~b-i2 \ ' d k- /'~ -. -J-=; _,--; '-"J ( ---

-;\ c /b ~ ~ JA' ~-,Lr, A IV', ':~ £ , .v ( j _~ d' ....-v ~ \ ) J).., k'h· /\ c\ I)

.'i' _ ( ;;", .1' <, <:", CLC 'Cy,---,,_J_J_-,",- A'''_P 'Itt '6 -\ -x r t. Y' i ';--C. + _\ . ~ ~-"'L-p_ -=±u i.e: _~ , La . LJ-Q=] . Q J L C q 0 -hrt=,.vQ " (fl~C t ~ ,L.o ,L""r>, C''-y '~

./~ ''\y ::,i- C--t -\ -L.~ ,Q C.b.· <0 ' -LU :1.~~J.-~\ . ~.2. i q f1d~ R ("J~ -< I -~ ~ \) '-"

~ j > • ...,. o.-L

\,J 'l -_,>.1---<-= ,.0 1 /:sk"=f> "'~ r -:> L, CV'-.Q L:,== I I ~~ {\\ c ~ J~b _A-~ " A C d', :-l ·'h..c ~r- ! <, 1-. Jl_

District of

This'information is collected for administrative and/or operational functions of the District of Coldstream, authorized bV the Comm unitv Charter, This information has been collected, and will be used and m aintained, in accordance with th e Freedom of Information and Pro tection of Privacv Act. C oldstream Thank you for your interest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP). review process. If you be lieve that your interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedu le for Monday, November 23,2015. Please use this sheet to provide your comments on the draft Plan . Note that your comments form part of the public record and will be provid ed to Council for consideration at t he Public Hearing.

~/.!,,/c /d!" ~ [;:/V}///!t/,// A £ P,/ ~ #' ?-L ?: ?:~P'

,/ /' . /7 ,-- 'f p£"c:/ft ./y ?,_/{Lf"4!/../ /( C'P'/'"

/' ~' O/J /' >L /4' /;? PrJ I ...... '~~ / - . ( /L/?/t' , >" I / ~",- "Lei' (?­ //7 .z, L.-;.r;fL /'M/(lt> /r;'<.y1 J/ /->1-I{ ~) ( /i>:& 'V?i' A~;f!

,://? ' ,-/L' £? ... /} £"." ,./ , /,11 /2::.- ~ /'--.:- - / /"' . ....YJ /"',- .t? ('-l. 7/J-.:( /V"~.

5 it )" '7/2.-//-;/2 /7 c;. ?;c..?~/?/:2 5 ?>t'«c:- !2:~

- ?/;(p '7 //z../L.. /'# (0 c//5-7 fi~(...:7 A. ,;( /V"6"!/;~r 'i

;:7,.0/ ...,-,;:: /? )'/-f'C· ?/;:; -' )),pA!.-s .- 1" L- ~/'L- li-7 AI//> 7dP , a..c:i

r ' , A 7 /1 I ? 'C " /;:/F / ';/rf" 7:,0, !l L-/,. .;;.--' I' C- ('0 .:;.?---r {/~ · /0<'i1.. _ :?/v 7" / '--4 r ///)L' .f'P.-<' ...-vt7-G£

/l ~ /AtiJ1/J {...- t!~ <"--V'r,?

---/---'-/.l.-- ,,,-?- -',~"" ''-1Q/-r ~ c! (f)""-. /'1 a:;t L't;4'C. //"?<.:J :;:, ///;2. ,.Iv-£'~/? Cf / "l. /""-£-/1 c:./;~c / .';' ...... -z:...._ ~- ... " ".:..-/

/'!--' ?2.L~£ %~-/ .:::'.4..b·7.£L

{; \ /,,-VI-l///r /' /J ..-r/. il " ~"~I c ////' -- (') ,- ," ~~ -1!<; " .? :"----~ -- ~~ • _ . .../ I r ?- t" ./ / /V v\.. /~ c; (f C{_ (/;2--' (' ( t/,;.- .NoN /'\../h"'V-~ .f'-~ .;:r~' / ~ '....- /.Z C/Cv~~- / /~_ :7 /;~ 04[,,/c.-.,.- "/,1'7,..///,0<: /;L./rr/ /;'''' ~ . / . , " /'/ /''''1. /h/'Y1-7'(-v,.·. ;' /! ..-:7/ 1/ f' 1>1. ~ . (/I-./ {'// ,/I/?U//c( /r".It .,t/[ 14/ Lfr... i.//'!2Fp2~llc' J/' /Z;?/1/ ;' . d 56!v,?:£;Z

Di strict of

Th is information is co llected for adm inistrative and/or operational functions of the District of Coldstream, authorized by the Community Charter. This information has been collected, and will be used and maintained, in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privac)l Act. Coldstream Thank you for you r interest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process. If you believe that you r interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you wil l be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be hea rd or to present written submissions at the upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, November 23,2015. Please use this sheet to provide your comments on the draft Pla n. Note that your comments form pa rt of the· public record and will be provided to Council for consid eration at the Public Hearing.

1if;fvJt'( iou Itf{ ?J)j{;Jut) ;d/ 7/1ttf;f TO E0X$?'J 77/1.// tJe J~ tJiJl'/J---/ tU )[;:1 Jri! lam ~(AJ T#6[-A /tJ/;&1u)J:P /

tJ()/lt- ) /-/;(;; tV ;2;2-/9 /f1!"-'/t6 Y !ilL' /)c,?1-u"u'u l~ 177/ /&£ 7/lddli f1) ;(/JL ~4tttr /::;«)tv( /L-lal/dC

;<:; 1){7lAu :ij'/j{t!/~1-17~ c:WL;:ZO/!{;V / j Crti(;;jf

Distric t of

Th is information is collected for administrative and/or operational functio ns of the District of Co Idstre am, authorized by the Community Charter. Th is information has been collected, and wi!! be used and maintained, in accordance with the Freedom of Info rmation and Protection of Privacy Act. Coldstream Thanl~ you for your interest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process. If you believe that your inte'rest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a re asonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the upcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, November 23,2015. Please use this sheet to provide your comments on the draft Plan . Note that your comments form part of the public record an d will be provided t o Council for consideration at the Public Hearing. ,--- u, 1l ~C~~ Ov~ ·fv wcv«~ (kr! ,-, 'vi crJ\.o,l \~

t1.-20rJ"J~ .-£)1'" S0....~tLs (~ c\.. ct eJ,~,·vc,--V\..·+- kx= 0'--" ~./ ~

-- A- U6\.J, Ncf ;. ./) 1- m J t -J-(~ . (IV

~ ,~ rJ - ~A b-f... ZO,A/Q..., ~tdc~"1 - R veof ru]1. oA~- ~r ~ '-OeM ~w tlior

-1Jve4 ~1l . ct{'Q{J~ vvv>J oY (J ('JvY~~ (~ J Low,;] };;) 4 ) Qv{ai . /,JC~ (/ y~ -

/l ..L / G {'e.Q_~t J- 06 orJ ,k;''-.l,}-t-vN Q0~ ~L / , ~ it:'

District of

This information is collected for administrative and/or operational functions of the District of Coldstream, authorized by the Community Charter. This information has been collected, and will be used and maintained, in accordance lIi1fth the Freedom of Inform ation and Protection of Privacy Act. Co!dstr e a m Thank you for your interest in the District of Coldstream Official Community Plan (OCP) review process. If you believe that your interest in property is affected by the proposed OCP Bylaw you will be afforded a rea sonable opportunity to be heard or to present written submissions at the u'pcoming Public Hearing tentatively schedule for Monday, November 23,2015. Please use this sheet to provide your comments on the draft Plan. Note that your comments form part of t he public record and will be provided to Co uncil for considerati on at the Public Hearing.

tht' IdrLfI l:) re.qu-;n?d hrr S~t5onS / Ah-€--rcfeen

c).t.-V4t.. h CL ve....10 cLn (/ V (-0 CL-rk (i,u""'f2a:5 f7 0 "'1..,:

i-\;IJ,\{,\ 2t f ro \/ / s /0 11 /11-( cf S h; b.e rvt Cl cl ~ -;;jpv:i h 'CeL-a. (4 . ' ~r .' -----i) t-J(-<.fJe-?-vv, 'h---cu/ hW{'ylfefl.. CL,1 C e- ~ ·fr-CL('( h:-'aI1'S/-€./~ j.-/f-.e _ ;~ /'1.. t10(nblt'_ {!ond/h'otj . ,,{ ro c{ J.. b_~e c( Q r a d I '/LC1 . a riL , It o....q'-e-/'. c(rt'V/ 'IUl corrl 'd 9 (-,5 J

a.v0 r;;. Vlf:ovC E vv~.-nf- /.

District of

This information is collected fo r administrative and/or operational functions of the District of Coldstream, authorized by the Community Cha rter. This information has been collected, and will be used and maintained, in accordance with the Freedom of Information and Pro tectioi1 of Privac)l Act. C oldstream