Regular Agenda

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

REGIONAL AGRICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday, January 23, 2014 6:00 pm

REGULAR AGENDA

A. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR

B. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

1. Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee Meeting – January 23, 2014

(Opportunity for Introduction of Late Items)

RECOMMENDATION 1 That the agenda of the January 23, 2014 regular meeting of the Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee be approved as presented.

C. ADOPTION OF MINUTES

1. Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee Meeting – November 21, 2013

RECOMMENDATION 2 Page 1 That the minutes of the November 21, 2013 meeting of the Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee be adopted as circulated.

D. DELEGATIONS

1. Upland Consulting Group Ione Smith  Agricultural Area Plan

E. NEW BUSINESS

1. Agricultural Land Commission Application GODDARD, Gwyllyn c/o Simpson Notary [File No. 13-0412-D-ALR] - Application dated November 14, 2013

FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT Page 5 Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee Agenda – Regular - 2 - January 23, 2014

2. Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2589, 2013 [Agri-Tourism Accommodation Provisions] - Staff report dated, 2013

FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT Page 92

3. Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2592, 2013 [Secondary Suites] - Staff report dated, 2013

FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT Page 102

4. Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2606, 2013 [Medical Marihuana Production Facilities - Staff report dated, 2013

FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT Page 108

F. BUSINESS ARISING FROM DELEGATIONS

1. Upland Consulting Group

G. ADJOURNMENT RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM C.1

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

MINUTES of a REGULAR meeting of the REGIONAL AGRICULTURAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE held in the Board Room at the Regional District Office on Thursday, November 21, 2013

Members: Director M. Macnabb Electoral Area “C” Chair Bruce Naka Member at Large Vice Chair Director S. Fowler City of Armstrong Councillor M. Besso District of Coldstream Alt. Director C. Fraser Township of Spallucheen Director B. Fleming Electoral Area “B” Director R. Fairbairn Electoral Area “D” Director E. Foisy Electoral Area “E” Tom Boeve Agricultural Producer Ian Eggen Agricultural Producer Dennis Lapierre Agricultural Producer Mike Randell Agricultural Producer Peter Stockdale Agricultural Producer Ralph van Dalfsen Agricultural Producer Wendy Aasen Member at Large Blaine Recksiedler Ministry of Agriculture Representative

Staff: R. Smailes General Manager, Planning and Building A. Kittel Regional Growth Strategy Coordinator J. deGroot Executive Assistant (Temp.) (taking minutes)

CALL MEETING TO ORDER

The Chair called the meeting to order at 6:06 p.m. The Chair introduced and welcomed the new representative from the Ministry of Agriculture.

APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee Meeting – November 21, 2013

Moved and seconded by Director Fleming and Councillor M. Besso That the agenda of the November 21, 2013 regular meeting of the Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee be approved with the following additions:  Item C.6 – Restricted Farm Losses; and,  Item C.7 – December Meeting Date CARRIED

ADOPTION OF MINUTES

Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee Meeting – October 17, 2013

Moved and seconded by Councillor M. Besso and Director Fleming That the minutes of the October 17, 2013 regular meeting of the Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee be adopted as circulated. CARRIED

1 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM C.1 Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes – Regular - 2 - November 21, 2013

NEW BUSINESS

Agricultural Land Commission Application MERTION, Klayton [File No. 13-0395-C-ALR]

Wendy Aasen entered the meeting. Director Fowler left the meeting.

Discussion ensued regarding the following:  Agricultural potential of the properties prior to the extraction, rather than following extraction;  There is no statutory ability for the Regional District to require security for remediation of the properties following the extraction;  An agrologist report or reclamation plan have not been submitted by the applicant;  Zoning requirements;  Affects on hydrology and wells on adjacent properties;  Affects on riparian areas;  Reasons given for the extraction (build a homesite);  Proposed future of uses of the properties;  Time frame for the application is short term as far as agriculture is concerned; and  Soil classifications.

Comments:  There is no agricultural justification of the improvements to agriculture or the potential for agriculture;  There may be impacts to the agricultural use of neighbouring properties;  Potential for agriculture hinges on reclamation, a report is necessary;  An agrologist report would be beneficial to provide more information and give an indication of the agricultural potential; and  The agricultural potential of the property was questioned due to its size and soil classifications.

Moved and seconded by Alt. Director Fraser and Ralph van Dalfsen That it be recommended to the Board of Directors it be requested the Agricultural Land Commission ask for financial security for reclamation to be completed and the applicant provide an agrologist report and a geotechnical hydrological report. CARRIED

Agricultural Land Commission Application CAMPBELL, Dean & Laura [File No. 13-0063-D-ALR]

Discussion ensued regarding the following:  The property has little area with farming potential;  Upgrading an existing residence;  Intent of the manufactured home versus permanent modular home;  Size of the proposed modular;  ‘Home plate’ issue;  Options of the Board with the application;  Precedence set by this application; and,  Water servicing requirements for the Building Permit application.

2 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM C.1 Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes – Regular - 3 - November 21, 2013

Comments:  Consensus that the application has little or no negative impacts on agriculture; and,  Support for authorizing the Building Inspector to accept a Building Permit application.

Agricultural Land Commission Application NASON, Robert & Samantha c/o W.E. Maddox [File No. 13-0410-D-ALR]

Discussion ensued regarding the following:  The level of activity on Albers Road;  A boundary adjustment with the property to the north would make sense for agricultural purposes;  Use of productive farm land by constructing buildings or dwellings on the proposed lot;  Reasons for the proposed subdivision; and,  Other previous subdivisions in the area.

Comments:  Proposed subdivision may reduce agricultural potential; and,  Proposal shows no benefit to agriculture.

Core Review – Agricultural Land Commission

Discussion ensued regarding the following:  Pressures from political parties;  Influence and interference from Ministries;  Delegation from the Chair of the Agricultural Land Commission; and,  Lending support to the Agricultural Land Commission

Moved and seconded by Director Fleming and Mike Randell That the letter dated October 28, 2013 from the City of Salmon Arm regarding the Agricultural Land Commission review be received for information. CARRIED

Moved and seconded by Director Fleming and Ian Eggen That it be recommended to the Board of Directors a letter be sent to the Minister of Agriculture indicating the Board’s strong support of the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) and the ALC’s independence as the ALC is vital to the preservation of agricultural land and sustainability of agriculture in British Columbia. CARRIED

Agricultural Land Commission: Message from the Chair: An Update

Discussion ensued regarding the following:  Issues surrounding the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC); and,  The role of the ALC.

Moved and seconded by Ian Eggen and Bruce Naka That the update report dated October 4, 2013 from the Chair of the Agricultural Land Commission be received for information. CARRIED

3 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM C.1 Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes – Regular - 4 - November 21, 2013

Restricted Farm Losses

Moved and seconded by Dennis Lapierre and Director Fleming That it be recommended to the Board of Directors the recommendation of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture that the comprehensive income test outlined in Canada v. Craig be maintained to ensure that small, innovative operations continue to provide the next generation of Canadian farmers be supported. CARRIED

December Meeting Date

The December meeting date is confirmed for December 19, 2013 at 6:00 p.m.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:03 p.m.

Certified Correct:

Chair Corporate Officer

4 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA Ok Ecovillage Farm ALC Exclusion January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Application by Land Owner

NOTE: The il!formation required by this form and the documents you provide with it are collected to process your application under the Agricultural Land Commission Act and regulation. This iliformation will be available for review by any member ofthe public. Ifyou have any questions about the collection or use a,( this il!formation, contact the Agricultural Land Commission and ask for the staff member who will be handling your application.

TYPE OF APPLICATION (Check appropriate box) EXCLUSION X SUBDIVISION in the ALR under Sec. 30(1) of the Agl'icultural Land under Sec. 21(2) of the Agl'icultural Laud Commission Act Commission Act INCLUSION X Non-farm USE in the ALR under Sec. 17(3) of the Agl'icultural Land under Sec. 20(3) of the Agricultural Land Commission Act Commission Act

APPLICANT Registered Owner: Agent: Gwyllyn Goddard Julie Ashfield Simpson Notary Address: Address: 4713 Mackinnon Road Unit 201-7408 Vedder Road Peachland, BC Chilliwack, BC VOH 1X2 V2R4E7 Tel. (778) 238-2778 Tel. (604) 824-5500 ext. 108 E-mail: E-mail [email protected] [email protected]

LOCAL GOVERNMENT JURISDICTION (Indicate name ofRegional District or Municipality)

Regional District of the North Okanagan , Vernon Assessment Area.

3 of 16 5 of 117 Ok Ecovillage Farm ALC Exclusion RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

LAND UNDER APPLICATION (5/IOw land on plan or sketclr) Title Number Size ofEacb Date of Parcel Purchase (Ha.) Month Year 026-773-155 approx. 9.5Ha Aug 2010 714 Mabel Lake Road, near Lumby, BC

OWNERSIDP OR Interests in other lands within this COMMUNITY (Sirow information on plan or sketch)

No direct interests in other lands in the community.

The boundary adjustment has been completed. The PID of the property we have added to our own is: 016-575-679.

PROPOSE:D SUBDIVISION OF: LOT I, SEC 8, Tjp 4~0. ogb~b. Pj:4tJNK:'JCJ~47: & PART OF LOT I, SEC 7, 17, 4£ 18.

~ r: .JQOO( AU. DISTA'r!CCS ~ llrl'n.f J

Rem LQT 1 PLAN 43937

LOT 1 ..u .. PI AN ;:;.PHHJ·I7

WI 4, Mtl ~ fl!l'«o _,..,, .W1 ,I, MH tHS l'tA.V IS -f¥«1Wfl0 I'Oit I~ US£ Oil Ifyou have interests in other lands within this community complete the following: Title Number(s): N/A

4 of 16 6 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

ELECTORAL AREA "D" AGRICULTURAL LAND COMMISSION APPLICATION SUBJECT PROPERTY MAP File: 13-0412-D-ALR Applicant: GWYLLYN GODDARD C/0 J. ASHFIELD SIMPSON NOTARY Location: 714 MABEL LAKE ROAD

I "'TV

E 112 OF NW 114

w 773

1 P5355

7 of 117 Ok Ecovillage Farm ALC Exclusion RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

PROPOSAL (Please describe and show on plan or sketch)

The entirety of the site is located within the ALR, and about 90% of the site is suitable for agricultural use including large relatively flat areas with river bottom soil conditions.

The most challenging part of our application is the portion whereby we are asking for either permission to build 30 homes on ALR land or an area to be excluded from the ALR (with or without swapping for other land). This involves an application "Application for a Non-farm Use" or an exclusion of 56,628 square feet from the ALR.

Our rationale for making the application is that: 1. We have looked for over 3 years and have not found a suitable non-ALR site that meets our criteria: a. Fertile valley bottom b. High nutrient clay/silt soil c. Exposure suitable for market crops d. River/water on site e. Road/Power near lot line f. 20- 40 acres of farmland. g. Cleared area with view of farm safe from flooding h. Soft water wells i. Within 10 minutes of Lumby/within 25 minutes to Vernon j. Access to riparian zone k. Certified organic farmland 2. Our activities support ALR goals a. Use of land for food products, with an emphasis on: i. local, ii. organic, iii. intensive market vegetable farming b. agri-tourism 3. Ecovillages differ from post-auto urban in that the uses are combined (farm, working, living). So this necessitates the construction of homes on the farm, which is not fully consistent with ALC principles which, to a degree looks to delaminate the rural landscape such that residences and farms are kept distant from each other.

In the following three sections, we show that that the ecovillage model is one that can operate on small parcels of land such as ours, and that due to our highly clustered and dense land use planning that the land coverage is similar to that of other single family uses on smaller parcels.

5 of 16 8 of 117 Ok Ecovillage Farm ALC Exclusion RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Operating on Small Parcels

Furthermore, the concept of large industrial and economically prosperous farms is a model that is only feasible and competitive in an era of massive agrotechnology infrastructure. Inexpensive petroleum is required to power the extensive array of equipment and also provide substrate for the genetically modified crops, high density feed lots, pesticides and herbicides required in such operations. As competition farms grow in size at the expense of family farms and the price of oil increases, the ability for smaller farmers to remain economically viable diminishes due to an increased ratio of expenses to income under this conventional model. This is to say that to support larger and more economical equipment the minimum efficient farm size increases.

Thus, we are proposing a hybrid model incorporating some traditional sustainable farming practices mixed with intelligent planning and modern technology. The existence of Ecovillage Farms increases the diversity of farming practices in British Columbia and also ensures that some alternative practices are in place for the future when petrochemicals and fossil fuel may be in high demand and lower supply. Additionally, there is a large and expanding population of consumers who wish to know where their food comes from and who are willing to pay a higher price for food that is local, organic, non-GMO and sustainably grown. This is the niche that our Ecovillage Farm will target for marketing of our products and this is why we believe that our farm and simultaneous associated agri-tourism will enhance the economic and agricultural potential of the site.

Similar Site Density to Other Applications due to Clustering of the homes.

In some jurisdictions the ALC permits subdivision to 5 acre parcel size. In the Okanagan it is not uncommon to see 10,000 sf mansions on small 5 acre ALR parcels. Using the above as a basis for illustration, let's contrast agricultural land usage using an ecovillage model versus the mansion model and a modest hobby farm.

Mansion Ranch Ok Ecovillage Hobby Farm

Lot Size 5 acres 31.5 acres 5 acres

# Residences 1 30 2

Floor Area 8,000 s.f. 42,000 s.f. 3,500 s.f. + 1000 sf ancillary

Building Footprint 5,000 s.f. 21,000 sq. ft. 2,250 s.f.

Garage 2,000 s.f. centralised gravel 600 s.f. parking lot 10,125 s.f.

6 of 16

9 of 117 Ok Ecovillage Farm ALC Exclusion RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Floor area ratio 1 4.6% 3.8% (5.1%)2 2.2%

Footprint Ratio3 3.2% 2.3% (3 .0%)4 1.2%

Agricultural Intensity Low High Low I Medium

Future Uses A farmer could never Goal is to remain May be converted to economically justify affordable farmland in mansion or production. perpetuity amalgamated into economical parcels.

Roads Extensive parking Minimal gravel Minimal gravel area and driveway driveway and parking driveway and parking

Legacy for future Land not accessable. Supports economic Convertible to generations of farming. production farms. farmers

The above shows how the regulatory systems in place have created situations with different ratios of constructed lands to lot size. We are hopeful that the ALC will interpret the ALR rules within the spirit with which they were written by permitting us to craft this development which furthers so many of the objectives of the citizens of Lumby and the objectives of the ALC, while maintaining a floor area ratio that is more comparable to many other ALC sites. Also with far greater agricultural focus than the traditional hobby farm or the mansion ranch house.

We are happy to offer restrictive covenants and/or comply with future ALC/ALR regulations if the ALC is able to approve a non-farm use.

Although the above is an example of ALC use in certain neighbourhoods, and this may not apply to this region within Lumby, we believe it to be evidence of how this type of density, measured as a percentage of lot size is consistent with practices in other regions within the ALC.

The document titled "ALC Planning for Agriculture" (http.//www.alc.qov.bc.ca/publlcatlons/planning/Pianning for Agriculture/Chapter09/09022refere nce.htm) lists a number of cases where subdivision of ALR land is viewed as appropriate. The document also identifies a basis for supporting small scale agriculture as proposed here as we show in our proposal that we benefit agriculture, the diversity of agricultural practices, learning and agritourism.

1 This is calculated as the total floor area of the home(s) including the garage(s) divided by the lot si.ze. 2 This number is based on the lot size including the additional lands we are purchasing via Boundary Adjustment. 3 This is calculated as the total footprint of the home(s) including the garage(s) divided by the lot size. 4 This number is based on the lot size including the additional lands we are purchasing via Boundary Adjustment.

7 of 16 10 of 117 Ok Ecovillage Farm ALC Exclusion RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Key Commission Considerations

Size, agricultural capability, past, current and future agricultural use, and distinguishing physical features (both natural and man-made) of the subject property.

Historically the thirty acre site has had no agricultural use in the past thirty years. Previously there was hog barn that since has been converted into a commercial I residential building. Several years ago the previous owner levelled the floodplain by repeatedly driving an excavator back and forth across the hillsides resulting in patches of bare gravel interspersed with areas of rich floodplain topsoil.

Currently the buildings are empty and we have professional organic farmers establishing the foundation of the farm for the future by growing certified organic cover crops to revitalize and to enhance the topsoil, additionally, converting the bare gravel areas in the future to productive farming. This is being done to obtain organic certification and ready the site for future organic intensive food production for sale in the region.

The distinguishing physical features are: 1. -25 acres of levelled valley bottom soils. 2. -5 acre hill made entirely of blue clay, which has been flattened by a previous owner who has pushed all of the topsoil next to Bessette Creek. Leaving the hill devoid of topsoil, flat and barren.

Our plans are to use the flat area at the top of the hill to build some homes to support onsite farm workers, workers at the agri-tourism center, balanced with people employed offsite. We plan to develop the 25 acres of rich, flat, floodplain lands which will be excellent for certified organic orchards permaculture food forests and greenhouses.

Agriculture and agri tourism alone will not provide a viable economic or social basis for the ecovillage. Just as a village must engage all aspects of society so must the ecovillage seek to include and engage others beyond farming.

Impacts on the subject property that may limit its future agricultural use.

We propose the construction of 30 homes which will preclude agricultural uses on 21 ,000 sf of the site, representing 2.3% of the site. The total area set out for residential development, including parking, pathways, community gardens and yards is 56,628 sf or 1.3 acres.

8 of 16

11 of 117 Ok Ecovillage Farm ALC Exclusion RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Impacts on neighbouring farm operations and the broader farm community.

With an emphasis on sustainable organic farming practices which we believe provide greater economic return in the long run, we expect to create visibility for farming practices, educate others and otherwise enhance farming practices in the region.

We are separated from our immediate neighbours by a highway and Bessette Creek. Our one neighbour across the highway and uphill from us is growing hay and has 10 head of cattle. We have spoken with our neighbours and they are excited about our project and don't see any impacts on their use of farmland.

The general level of parcelization in the area.

The subject parcel is zoned as large holding, though it does not conform to the minimum parcel size of 75 acres specified in the zoning bylaw.

To sustain our own economical farming operations we have expanded our existing parcel size from 22 acres to 31.5 acres through a boundary adjustment with adjoining land. At this size, based on other organic market garden and CSA farms we are familiar with we expect to sustain five farming families and several seasonal workers. These farming operations represent cumulative annual gross income in the $350,000 to $600,000 range.

Impacts on transportation patterns and other services including the provision of water and sewer facilities. Thirty homes and an agri-tourism center is not expected to impact highway traffic on the lightly used highway.

Potable water, irrigation and wastewater treatment are planned to be handled on site.

Will an approval of subdivision be considered a precedent, setting off expectations of further subdivision in the area?

The subdivision is unlikely to be considered precedent setting. All four ecovillages currently in BC are unique developments, each taking a different approach to zoning, agriculture and land use.

History of Commission decision-making in the area.

Unknown to us.

Rationale the applicant has presented to support the subdivision proposal.

9 of 16 12 of 117 Ok Ecovillage Farm ALC Exclusion RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

1. We are asking for less built square footage as a percentage of lot size than many existing developments on agricultural land. 2. We have a strong commitment to agriculture and agri tourism, both of which are supported by the ALC. 3. We represent an alternative model of agriculture than is generally represented within a growing segment of the market. The alternative model includes; a. Economically farming at a smaller scale. b. Subsidizing the farm land cost through the sale of land to community members c. Blending farming with an intentional residential community. d. Joining uses which have been traditionally together (living, farming and working), 5 which have been separated in a post-auto and post-tv world .

Is there an agricultural benefit advanced as part of the application?

Yes.

We propose to develop intensive and high value agriculture on the majority of the site (relative to the existing fallow use and the hay use of neighbouring parcels). The agriculture that is advanced is small scale agriculture which is advocated for in the "Pianning_for_Agriculture" document (http://www.alc.gov.bc.ca/publications/planning/Pianning_for_Agriculture/Chapter09/09022refere nce.htm).

How does the proposal square with local planning and zoning regulations?

Local planning and zoning regulations have identified a provision for ecovillage zoning, consistent with what is proposed herein.

Does the local government support the application? (Input from local governments, including Council/ Board resolutions, staff reports and background data, are very important in the consideration of an application).

Local planning and zoning regulations have identified a provision for ecovillage zoning, consistent with what is proposed herein.

Input from local farm organizations, agricultural advisory committees, MAF* and others.

5 Trainings are available to help people learn to blend the uses together in a way that enriches everyone. 10 of 16 13 of 117 Ok Ecovillage Farm ALC Exclusion RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

6 7 The only organizations we have consulted with are BCARA , Bee S.A.F.E Monashee , and the neighbouring farmers.

As necessary, an on-site inspection by members of the Commission and/or staff is undertaken.

We encourage onsite inspections and our community would like to participate in introducing ourselves and demonstrating our commitment to creating an ecovillage based on agriculture, learning and tourism.

6 The British Columbia Association for Regenerative Agriculture (BCARA) concentrates on providing certification for the Fraser Valley, the Lower Mainland and the Sunshine Coast regions, though other regions within BC are serviced. 7 Bee S.A.F.E. (Securing Agriculture and a Food Economy) is a movement that works to improve health, the environment and local economies by increasing access to local food that is safe for the bees, and for us. 11 of 16 14 of 117 Ok Ecovillage Farm ALC Exclusion RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

CURRENT USE OF LAND (Show il!formCifion 011 plan or skelcfl)

List all existing uses on the parcel(s) and describe all buildings

There is one commercial building which used to be a hog fann and one home with Jess than I ,000 sf We propose to remove both of these buildings.

RemLOT1 ~ - . PLAN 43937 \J "~ :3 E 1/2 0 N of NW 1/4 SEC 8

LOT i PLAN KAP81647 L~rr i Pl :.r-f ,;.· :. f:h::. .; ·;

Small farm Hou\t'

12 of 16 15 of 117 Ok Ecovillage Farm ALC Exclusion RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

USES ON ADJACENT LOTS (Show information on plan or sketch)

North Stream butTer, fallow I forest, horse lifestyle ranch East Unused home and commercial building in foreclosure South Hay production and ~ 10 grazing cows West Fallow hay field

PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF: LOT 1, SEC 8, TP 40, ODYDb PU.N KAP81647: & PART OF LOT 1, SEC 7, 17, & 18, TP 40, ODY< , PlAN 43937. SCALe 1: .JOOO (ALL OISrANCts IN UaR£5 )

Rem LOT 1 PLAN 43937 t{) Rem W 1/2 W/12 ro E 1/2 Rem E 1/2 W/12 0 of NW 1/4 SEC B of NW 1/4 SEC 8 c:;; of NW 1/4 SEC 8 Fallow forest I z Fallow forest I :s Fallow forest I Horse Ranch 0.. Horse Ranch

I 114.5 I ~I :; ' : " :, :; ;.., ~ : LOT 2 Pt600NJ~2t~~- Tc:QJo.9()Sha"'214acres PLAN KAP81647 PU38t~a~ 106 80"e$

Not used I Fallow

Hay and 10 grazing cows

Neighbouring Use~

13 of 16 16 of 117 Ok Ecovillage Farm ALC Exclusion RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

DECLARATION

1/we consent to the use of the intonnation provided in the application and all supporting documents to process the application in accordance with the Agricultural Land Commission Act and regulation. Furthermore, Ilwe declare that the information provided in the application and all the supporting documents are, to the best of my/our knowledge, true and correct. 1/we understand that the Agricultural Land Commission will take the steps necessmy to contl.nn the accuracy of the intonnation and documents provided.

Date Si~11ature of Owner or A~ent Print Name

Gw:,::ll:,::n Shannon Goddard

Date Signature a_( Owner or Agent Print Name

Please ensure the following documents are enclosed with your application: • Application fee payable to the Local Government • Map or sketch showing proposal & adjacent uses • Certificate of Title or Title Search Print • Proof of Notice of Application *(See instructions) • Agent authorization (if using agent) • Photographs (optional)

14 of 16 17 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

TITLE SEARCH PRINT . 2013-11-14, 08:20:59 Requestor: PV15617 Folio/File Reference: 13-0412-D-ALR **CURRENT INFORMATION ONLY - NO CANCELLED INFORMATION SHOWN**

Land Title District KAMLOOPS Land Title Office KAMLOOPS

Title Number CA1708589 From Title Number LA110997

Application Received 2010-08-26

~pplicationEntered 2010-08-30

Title Cancelled 2013-08-22

1\egistered Owner in Fee Simple Registered Owner/Mailing Address:

Taxation Authority VERNON ASSESSMENT AREA

Description of Land Parcelldentifier: 026-773-155 l-egal Description: LOT 1 SECTION 8 TOWNSHIP 40 OSOYOOS DIVISION YALE DISTRICT PLAN KAP81647

Legal Notations THIS CERTIFICATE OF T ITLE MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE AGRICULTURAL LAND COMMISSION ACT, SEE AGRICULTURAL LAND RESERVE PLAN NO. M11122

THIS TITLE MAY BE AFFECTED BY A PERMIT UNDER PART 29 OF THE MUNICIPAL ACT SEE KH9292

THIS TITLE MAY BE AFFECTED BY A PERMIT UNDER PART 26 OF THE LOCAL qoVERNMENT ACT, SEE KW127312

Title Number: CA1708589 Title Search Print Page 1 of2

18 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

TITLE SEARCH PRINT 2013-11-14, 08:20:59 Requestor: PV15617 Folio/File Reference: 13-0412-D-ALR

Charges, Liens and Interests Nature: COVENANT Registration Number: LA110996 Registration Date and Time: 2006-08-1 0 14:33 Registered Owner: THE CROWN IN RIGHT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN Remarks: INTER ALIA

Duplicate Indefeasible Title NONE OUTSTANDING

Transfers Registration Date: 2013-08-22 Description: SUBDIVIDED BY PLAN EPP28944 CA3296584

Title Number: CA1708589 Title Search Print Page 2 of 2 19 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

8.3 COMPREHENSIVE RESORT AND ECOVILLAGE DEVELOPMENTS OVERVIEW

Comprehensive Resort and Ecovillage Developments may be considered as Special Uses. These uses are recognized as potentially appropriate for the plan area however to ensure that they are consistent with the OCP's overall planning principles and objectives they must be considered through individual OCP and Rezoning application processes.

Comprehensive Resort developments are considered to be land uses that may have a residential component but the primary rationale for their development in the plan area is to support a recreational use (e.g. golf, fishing, skiing, eco-tours). These uses will contribute to the economy through job creation and may also provide specialized accommodation.

Ecovillages are intentional communities formed with the goal of becoming more socially, economically and ecologically sustainable. Rural ecovillages are usually based on organic farming, and other approaches which promote ecosystem function and biodiversity. Some of the components of an ecovillage are:

• educated commitment to principles • opportunities for local purchasing • alternatives to purchasing of global energy (e.g. oil) • local food • moral purchasing and decision making • respect diversity • sustainable design practices

Overall an ecovillage is driven by a collective commitment to create an alternative, sustainable lifestyle. Applicants seeking approvals for these projects will need to clearly demonstrate a commitment to sustainability principles and to ensure that the project is consistent with the principles of growth management and rural protection. These uses are not an opportunity for satellite, market driven housing development.

8.4 COMPREHENSIVE RESORT AND ECOVILLAGE DEVELOPMENT POLICIES

8.4.1 Comprehensive Resort or Ecovillage Developments must be recognized through site specific amendments to the Official Community Plan and shall only be considered in conjunction with rezoning to a Comprehensive Development Zone which will define the uses and development regulations specific to the lands in question. As part of the development application review process, or in advance of the application, the RDNO will work with stakeholders to define the terms of development approvals for unique comprehensive resort or ecovillage proposals. Potential stakeholders may include:

• the Agricultural Land Commission • neighbourhood I community associations • Ministry of Health • Local Health Authority • School District • Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure

The goal of this review process will be to ensure that new developments contribute positively to sustainable rural character in the plan area.

Electoral Areas 'D' (Rural Lumby) & 'E' (Cherryville) Official Community Plan Page 39 20 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

8.4.2 Comprehensive Resort and Ecovillage Developments must establish efficient, cost effective wastewater management systems. While conventional septic disposal systems may be appropriate for rural, large lot areas, it is no longer viewed as an acceptable means of wastewater management for new or expanded resort and ecovillage developments. Ecovillages may elect to pursue alternative development strategies but will need to clearly demonstrate the long term viability of such initiatives, providing the appropriate supporting professional reports.

8.4.3 Comprehensive Resort and Ecovillage Developments need to protect the quality of surface and ground water sources, while achieving an economically viable level of development without adding to the financial burden of taxpayers.

8.4.4 Without diminishing the role of the City of Vernon or the Village of Lumby as the principal and secondary commercial and service centres in this area, Comprehensive Resort and Ecovillage Development projects may include limited commercial and personal services to provide visitors and residents with a full service resort or sustainable community experience.

8.4.5 Comprehensive developments in or adjacent to agricultural land should be avoided or heavily buffered except for "Bed and Breakfast" operations and "Agro-tourism" in accordance with Agricultural Land Commission regulations and Ministry of Agriculture standards.

8.4.6 Comprehensive developments within this designation shall be largely self-contained and shall not facilitate nor be deemed to encourage further development on adjacent lands.

8.4.7 In accordance with the provisions of the Development Permit Section of this Plan; land designated as 'Comprehensive Resort or Ecovillage Development' is also designated as a Development Permit Area in matters concerning the protection of the natural environment, protection of development from hazardous conditions, and matters concerning the form and character of commercial and industrial development. The establishment of objectives for the form and character of intensive residential development may also be required.

8.4.8 The design of new and expanded comprehensive resort and ecovillage developments shall be responsive to the natural environment such that site grading and visual impacts from lands beyond are minimized.

8.4.9 The Regional Board may require the developer to provide a Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by a professional engineer that addresses the potential for impacts the development may have on traffic patterns, safety and volumes in the surrounding community. The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure must agree to the Terms of Reference for a Traffic Impact Assessment prior to preparation.

8.4.1 0 The Regional Board may require the developer to provide an Environmental Impact Assessment prepared by a qualified environmental consultant to address potential impacts the development may have on the quality of the natural environment.

8.4.11 Where a comprehensive development proposes a non-traditional land tenure system, such as ecovillage co-housing or cooperative ownership, the Regional Board may address the specialized nature of the ownership as part of the approval process to

Electoral Areas 'D' (Rural Lumby) & 'E' (Cherryville) Official Community Plan Page 40 21 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

ensure that specialized ownership conditions are recognized over the long term (e.g. by future owners and neighbours).

8.4.12 The Regional Board will require the developer to demonstrate how services can be met by the developer for such services as schools so that there are no indirect public costs (e.g. school buses).

8.4.13 Developments which implement water conservation and re-use strategies are encouraged.

8.4.14 Proposals for a Comprehensive Resort and Ecovillage Development projects shall demonstrate how storm-water and wastewater shall be managed on the site such that water quality and surrounding properties are not negatively impacted by the development.

8.4.15 The level of servicing appropriate to each proposal shall be defined for consideration by the Regional Board, however, it is noted that all development must be serviced with a water system meeting the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Regulation.

Electoral Areas 'D' (Rural Lumby) & 'E' (Cherryville) Official Community Plan Page 41

22 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Regional District Of North Okanagan Property Information Management System Roll Number: Jurisdiction: Wednesday, Noveml:ler 13, 2013 4:34PM 7~207448 .002 ELECTORAL Area D Page 1 of2 BCAA Pa'rcel Size: 22.362 Site Address~ RONO Parcel Size: 9,050 ha. 714 LUMBY MABEL LAKER RDNO Assigned Address: ALR Parcel Si;ze-: 9.050 ha. 82L-026,3-4- 714, 716, 752 Lumby Mabel Lake Road BCGS Map Sheet#: Owner Name(s): L~qalDescription: GODDARD, G\NYLLYN q:>T BLK SEC TWP RGE MER DL PLAN 1 -8 40" KAP8,1,647 EQUITY; REGISTERED OWNER TENURE: CROWN-PROVINCIA_L (UNALIENATED Property IP#: '026-773-155. . Land District~Osoyo Land Use besignation(s): Q,C.P. O.C.P. Area Zonin!;J Zoniog Area /l.G 9.050 -ha. LH 9.050 ha. MR

Natural Hazards: fLOODPLAIN -BESSETTE CREEK

475.0 Metres minimum buildin~_elevation Planning Appiications: I FILE; NUMBER ·STATUS OPEN DATE NOTES: 13-0.412-D-ALR A 11/13/-2013 026'-7'73-155

09·0~54-0;LD 8/19/2009 026·!73·155

96•Qp88-0-ALR 010,.~16-04:?RB REJ. 96/11/1;3 - F'ALC REJ 06/08/03 . fiied \;lnder PlD 026-F3•15

94-1019-D-RC otcr~316-043~KH91173- 94/09/1.5- filed under PlD 026-773-155 93-1~73-D,bvP 010 ·316-043 KH009292 94/02/13 - filed under PID 026-773p155

9~0~87~0-ALR 010-316-043 CLOS~D93/08/16- filed u~derPID 026-773-155

'9Hp05-D-ALR 010-316-043. ALC REJ. 92/0~/13-flied under PID 026'-77~-~55 01-0771-D-DP 9/2/2004 010-31.6-043' BLANKET DP ISSUED 04/09/02 - filed under PID 026-773-155

03•Dp1 i~b-SUB 9/2i2003 01 Oo31 S-Oil3 C/0 ISSO 05i04/20 (KAP8164;:) - filed tinder PID 026-173-155

0~•0740-D-AL~ 10/7/2002 019-.316-043 LRC APRV. 03/08/06 RES. #352/200.3- filed under PID 026-773-155

11·0044-D-SUB 7119/201i3 02!H73-1!i5. (FILED UNDER 016-575·679 - CIC IS.SD 13/07/1 ~ Building Permits: 1 I .P~rmitNumber issueDate PermitStatus Const. Value Description

7~-'4~16-D-BP ARCHIVE $0.00 MOBILE HOME INSTALLATION History Notes: Op-0473- D -BP 27 Jun 2006 J=!nal $12,000.00 ACCSSRY BLDG (SHOP- WOODWORKING)

~is.fo•·yNqtes: 94-1024-D -BP Closed $0.00 ACCESSORY BUILDING

Qistory Notes: No F'in~lln~pection

NOTICE OF COLLECTION OF PERSONAL INFORMATION

Personal'inforin!ltion co.llectad on this fo~ITJis c:olrected lor the p1,1rposeof processing this application and for administration and enforcement. The personalln fonnation Is collected uhder the authority_of the Municipal Act and the Regional District's bylaws. 23 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Regional District Of North Okanagan Property Information Management System

Roll Number: Jurisdiction: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 4:34PM 722 07448.002 ELECTORAL Area D Page 2 of2 96-0686-D -BP Cancelled $0.00 MOBILE HOME History Notes: 79-5231-D -BP ARCHIVE $0.00 AGRICULTURAL BLDG (BARN) History Notes:

Fire Investigations Incident Date: Loss Type: Total Loss Value: Jun 01 2006 Residential $0.00

Comments: 2. 09-0554-D-LD CLOSED 09/08/25

Release of Covenant KH91173 3. See file 3064.01 - ALC application withdrawn and fees refunded for potential Ecovillage. 4. GENERAL FILE

130607- NOTICE LTR SENT RE: NOXIOUS WEEDS. 1 , 93-1 01 0-D-BP 94/08/23 TRUSS SPEC'S REC'D FOR BP 96/12/06- REC'D INFO FROM MOTH THAT PROPERTY OWNER HAS BLOCKED WATERCOURSE (RESPONSE DATE/ DEC 13/96) AMP FILE: 8720

BCAA DATA: Property Values School District: 22 Land: $341,000.00 Neighbourhood: 301 Land Use: lmprovments: $309,000.00 Actual Use: 2 ACRES OR MORE -SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING, DUPLEX Total: $650,000.00 Special Lot:

NOTICE OF COLLECTION OF PERSONAL INFORMATION Personal information collected on this form is collected for the purpose of processing this application and for administration and enforcement. The personal information is collected under24 the authorityof 117 of the Municipal Act and the Regional District's bylaws. RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

A vision for future generations The Okanagan Ecovillage

25 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

A vision for future generations The Okanagan Ecovillage

Project Manager Agent Gwyllyn Goddard, BSc MD CCFP Julie Ashfield Founder & Project Coordinator Simpson Notanes Mobile: (778)-238-2778 Office: (604) 824-5500 ext. 108 [email protected] [email protected]

Document completed by: Yonas Jongkind Yarrow Ecovillage Project Natalie Jones Devon Miller Manager Facilitator Planner/Designer Office: (778) 898-9951 Mobile: (604} 798-8990 Mobile: (647} 529-3660 Mobile: (604) 791-2937 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] • • PI ANNING ~~~ tHOUGHT • r1g1n COLLABORAliVE ~)" STORM 26 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 The Okanagan Ecovillage Executive Summary

We have been working since early 2011 to understand how we can share our resources, create stronger community connections, live lighter on the planet, connect with food sources and support organic and sustainable farming practices.

The company Ok Ecovillage Inc. has secured an option on a property located at 714 Mabel Lake Road (Legal Description: Lot 1 Section 8 Township 40 Osoyoos Division Yale District Plan KAP81647. PID: 026-773-155).

After a search for sites, we ended up with a site in the ALR. The site is presently zoned Large Holdings and is not conforming with that zone description.

To date we have completed a series of workshops (see page 12), have studied the models used by other sustainable communities - often branded as "Ecovillages"- and have come up with a site plan and design (see Appendix 1) that we feel reflects the vision we have for our future community (see page 2). We have also undertaken riparian enhancement work on the site (see Appendix 4) and carried out several feasibility studies for the systems required on the site (see Appendix 6) .

K y objectives of the proposed project ar to

1 . Provide farmland using a tenure that supports economic market farming and CSA programs. 2. Enhance and maintain riparian zones. 3. Provide ecological servicing so that the impact of the proposed homes on the environment is minimized. 4. Build homes that will consume very little energy and last a long time. 27 of 117 OI

An ecovillage is an intentional community -- a customized neighbourhood for social, economic and ecological sustainability -- to be legally structured as a strata (private and individually owned/rented) with farmland owned and held in common.

The Okanagan Ecovillage farm community is a clean, modern, intentional community. A strata complex where we wish to build timeless, resilient, beautiful homes in a well-planned village setting that utilizes organic farmland for our health & food security. It is a community that utilizes forms of modern renewable energy and waste treatment technology to enhance our energy security, and that utilizes other forms of technology to pool resources and eliminate waste, enhance leisure-time, ensure adequate private and public spaces, and establish a very high standard of living beyond .what any single individual or family in the community could hope to achieve on their own.

We do not seek to develop a community that only rich people can afford to live in. Although the members must be financially independent to participate initially, we want the richness of the community to be derived from the diversity of the individuals in the project as we work towards the common Vision. Thus, we will have individually owned homes as well as some homes for rent

We intend to build this sophisticated yet comfortable Ecovillage community of 30 individual households on 31.5-acres of organic farmland in the beautiful temperate Okanagan Valley in British Columbia, just outside the town of Lumby and approximately 20 minutes drive from Vernon and 40 minutes from the Kelowna International Airport

The property has a creek with trout where Coho and spring salmon run . The climate is mild in winters and sunny and gorgeous in the summers, allowing for fruit orchard potentiaL The water in the creek is safe to swim in. We are also approximately 35km from the beautiful swimming and fishing at pristine Mabel Lake.

Please also be aware of what an ecovillage is not: it is not shared beds, not shared kitchens, not shared finances, not organized under any common religious beliefs and it is not a "hippy commune." People often make this mistake because the word "ecovillage" evokes some ideas of communal living - not so!

28 of 117 2 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

TABLE OF CONTENT

Proposal Details 5 Location 6 Model for Homes: Organic Farming and Village-like Land Use 7 Financial and Legal Structure 9 Agricultural Land Reserve Context 9 Summary of work done to date 11

Key ALC Considerations 13

Planning Context 17 Land Use Policies 18 Agricultural Policies 23

Appendices 29 Appendix 1: Proposed Site Plan 30 Appendix 2: Proposed Common House Plan and Elevation 31 Appendix 3: Distance To Neighbouring Properties 33 Appendix 4: Ok Ecovillage Riparian Enhancement in 2011 34 Appendix 5: Yarrow Ecovillage Riparian Enhancement 38 Appendix 6: Cleartech Consulting Septic Analysis 40 Appendix 7: We ll Siting and Information 4 7 Appendix 8: Wetland Pacific Corp. Constructed Wetlands Brochure 55 Appendix 9: OUR Ecovillage Zoning By-law (CVRD) 59 Appendix 10: Yarrow Ecovillage Zoning By-law (Chilliwack) 60 Appendix 11: Site Survey 64

29 of 117 OKANAGAN 111 l 1 I ALC & Rezoning Application 3 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

30 of 117 OKANAGAN ,vr 11dt I ALC & Rezoning Application 5 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Location Lot 1 Section 8 Township 40 Osoyoos Division Yale District Plan KAP81647. PID: 026-773-155.

The site is located at 714 Mabel Lake Road, 7km northeast of Lumby, BC in the northeast corner of the Okanagan Valley.

Mabel lake: 30 km «·1firt,H.!W!.f§

~ Cherryville: 36 km Monashee Provincial Patk: 76 km

Villageoft ~ Lumby

Vernon: 35km Kelowna: 90 km @ Location images (clockwise from top-left): 1) Route between Lumby and site, 2) Distances between major landmarks in the Okanagan, 3) Site sub-area breakdown

The property features a diversity of land types: organic farmland, forested areas, and a small elevated plateau suitable for development. The property is also situated along_side Bessette Creek, a watercourse rich in fish species.

31 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Site images (clockwise from top-left): 1) Future ecovillagers walking along agriculture land on a site visit, 2) View of Bessette Creek from property, 3) Northeast view on plateau, 4) Northwest view on plateau

Model for Homes: Organic Farming and Village-like Land Use

At Okanagan Ecovillage, we are planning land use similar to what is done at Yarrow Ecovillage in British Columbia (http://www.yarrowecovillage.ca) and Ithaca Ecovillage in New York State (http:// ecovillageithaca.org/).

The model employed by these other ecovillages is to create a housing development and a small commercial development which provides revenue for the ecovillage in the form of home sales.

This revenue from home sales is then, in turn, re-invested in several community initiatives: 1. Providing low cost farmland for small scale organic market farming 1 and Community Supported 2 Agriculture (CSA ). This type of farming provides opportunities for people to participate in, and learn about, farming and connect with where their food comes from. More information about the Yarrow GSA farm can be found at: http://yecfarm.blogspot.ca/ 2. Providing watershed enhancements. 3. Exploring ecological construction techniques 4. Enhancing community living

1 Market farming is defined as produce which may be sold directly to customers at farmers' markets. 2 GSA farming is a scenario where the consumers pre-purchase up to a year's worth of produce directly from the farmer. They pay at the beginning of the year and then 32have of delivered 117 a box of produce every week. OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezon1ng Application 7 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Location Lot 1 Section 8 Township 40 Osoyoos Division Yale District Plan KAPB1647. PID: 026-773-155.

The site is located at 714 Mabel Lake Road, 7km northeast of Lumby, BC in the northeast corner of the Okanagan Valley.

Mabel Lake: 30 km

Cherryville: 36 km ( Monashee Provincial Park: 76 km Village of ].___... wmby

\lemon: 35km Kelowna: 90 km @ Location images (clockwise from top-lett) : 1) Route between Lumby and site, 2) Distances between major landmarks in the Okanagan, 3) Site sub-area breakdown

The property features a diversity of land types: organic farmland, forested areas, and a small elevated plateau suitable for development. The property is also situated alongside Bessette Creek, a watercourse rich in fish species.

33 of 117 6 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Model for Homes: Organic Farming and Village-like Land Use

The model employed by these other ecovillages is to create a housing development and a small commercial development which provides revenue for the ecovillage in the form of home sales.

This revenue from home sales is then, in turn, re-invested in several community initiatives: 1. Providing low cost farmland for small scale organic market farming 1 and Community Supported 2 Agriculture (CSA ) . This type of farming provides opportunities for people to participate in, and learn about, farming and connect with where their food comes from. More information about the Yarrow CSA farm can be found at: http://yecfarm.blogspot.ca/ 2. Providing watershed enhancements. 3. Exploring ecological construction techniques 4. Enhancing community living

1 Market farming is defined as produce which may be sold directly to customers at farmers' markets. 2 CSA farming is a scenario where the consumers pre-purchase up to a year's worth of produce directly from the farmer. They pay at the beginning of the year and then34 have of delivered 117 a box of produce every week. OKANAGAN · til I ALC & Rezoning Application 7 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Okanagan Yarrow Ithaca Conventional Farmland Yes Yes Yes No Riparian Preservation Yes Yes Yes No Construction Greener than Greener than Greener than To code, code code code inefficient Social Integrated Integrated Integrated Disparate community community community community Economic Shared resources Shared resources Shared resources Individual burden Title Type Strata Strata Strata Strata Building Envelope 200 years 50 years 50 years 40 years Lifespan Density Model Clustered Clustered Clustered Sprawl Uses (Commercial, Combined Combined Combined Separated Residential, Farming) Health Benefits High High High Low 3 (Roseoto Study ) Tenure/Form of Cohousing Co housing Cohousing Conventional Housing

3 http://www.uic.edu/classes/osci/osci590/14_2%3520The of %11720Roseto%20Effect.htm 8 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Financial and Legal Structure

The Ecovillage will be structured as aBC company which will be responsible for purchasing the land, subdividing the land, and subsequently selling the strata units to future residents.

Each member will own 1 share and will have equal say in decision making for the company as well as the right to attend planning workshops.

Agricultural Land Reserve Context

The entirety of the site is located within the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR), and about 90% of the site is suitable for agricultural use, including large, relatively flat areas with river bottom soil conditions.

This is naturally an issue that we will address in our application. We recognize the importance of the ALR and the ALC, and we hope to demonstrate in this package that our proposed development is in line with the thinking and mandate of the ALC.

Site suitability for ecovillage purpose

We have looked for over 3 years and have not found a suitable non-ALR site that meets our criteria: Fertile valley bottom High nutrient clay/silt soil Exposure suitable for market crops River/water on site Road/Power near lot line 20 - 40 acres of farmland. Cleared area with view of farm safe from flooding Soft water wells Within 5 minutes/1 0 km from Lumby Within 25 minutes from Vernon Access to riparian zone Possible to certify organic

We feel that an Ecovillage is a reasonable request in this location, given that our activities support ALR goals: Use of land for food products, with an emphasis on Local Organic Intensive market vegetable farming Promotion of agritourism

36 of 117 OKANAGAN il l I ALC & Rezoning Application 9 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Ecovillages differ from post-automobile urban communities in that land uses are combined (farm, working, living). This necessitates the construction of homes on the farm, which is not fully consistent with ALC principles.

The concept of large industrial and economically prosperous farms is a model that is only feasible in an era of inexpensive petroleum which is required to power the extensive array of equipment and also provide substrate for the pesticides and herbicides required in such operations. As the price of oil increases and as our dependence on genetically modified organisms and industrial farming techniques increases, the ability for smaller farmers to remain economically viable diminishes due to an increased ratio of expenses to income under the conventional model and this makes operating a small farm unprofitable. Thus, a hybrid model incorporating some traditional sustainable farming practices mixed with intelligent planning and modern technology will be required. The existence of ecovillage farms increases the diversity of farming practices in British Columbia and also ensures that some alternative practices are in place for the future when petrochemicals and fossil fuel may be in high demand and low supply.

Additionally, there is a large and expanding population of consumers who wish to know where their food comes from and who are willing to pay a higher price for food that is local, organic, non-GMO and sustainably grown. This is the niche that our Ecovillage Farm will target for marketing of our products and this is why we believe that our farm will enhance the economic and agricultural potential of the site. Finally, there is a need for a demographic shift in farming to younger generations. Fewer young people are entering the workforce as farmers, and more and more farmers are close to retirement age. One of the goals for Okanagan Ecovillage will be to educate and engage young farmers seeking land and opportunities for organic farming.

In some jurisdictions, the ALC permits subdivision to 5 acre parcel size. In the Okanagan it is not uncommon to see 10,000 ft2 mansions on small 5 acre ALR parcels. Using the above as a basis for illustration, let's contrast agricultural land usage using an ecovillage model versus the mansion model and a modest hobby farm: Mansion Ranch Hobby Farm Okanagan Ecovillage Lot Size 5 Acres 5 acres 31.5 acres # Residences 1 2 30 Floor Area 8,000 ft2 (0.2 acre) 3,500 ft2 + 1000 ft2 42,000 ft2 (nearly 1 acre) ancillary (0.1 acre) Building Footprint 5,000 ft 2 2,250 ft2 21 ,000 ft2 Garage 2,000 ft 2 600ft2 Centralised, gravel, 10,125 ft2 Floor area ratio4 4.6% 2.2% 3.8% Footprint Ratio5 3.2% 1.2% 2.3% Agricultural Intensity Low Low/Medium High Future Uses Farming highly May be converted to Goal is to remain unlikely mansion or amalgamated affordable farmland in into economical parcels perpetuity Roads Extensive parking Minimal gravel driveway Minimal gravel driveway area and driveway and parking and parking Legacy for future Land not Convertible to production Supports economic generations of farmers accessible farms farming

4 This is calculated as the total size of the home(s) including the garage(s) divided by the lot size. 5 This is calculated as the total footprint of the home(s)37 of 117including the garage(s) divided by the lot size. 10 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezon1ng Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 The table above shows how the regulatory systems in place have created situations with different ratios of constructed lands to lot size. We are hopeful that the ALC will be able to interpret the ALR rules in the spirit with which they were written by permitting us to craft this development which furthers so many of the objectives of the citizens of Lumby and the objectives of the ALC, maintains a floor area ratio that is more favourable than many other approved projects, and has a far greater agricultural focus than the traditional hobby farm or mansion ranch house.

We are happy to offer restrictive covenants and/or comply with future ALC/ALR regulations as they apply to the land and as they apply to agriculture if the ALC is able to approve a non-farm use.

Although the above is an example of ALR use in other neighbourhoods, and this therefore may not necessarily apply to the region surrounding Lumby, we believe it to be evidence of how this type of density is consistent with practices in other regions within the ALR.

The document titled "ALC Planning for Agriculture" (http://www.alc.gov.bc.ca/publications/planning/ Planning_for_Agriculture/Chapter09/09022reference.htm) lists a number of cases where subdivision of ALR land is viewed as appropriate. The document also identifies a basis for supporting small scale agriculture as proposed here.

Summary of work done to date

We have begun some land management practices on the site and have hosted two workshops in order to gather the group in one place, get to know one another, and envision what we want to see in our community.

Land management The land owner, Gwyllyn Goddard, has already done significant work on the land with regard to improving soil condition through the planting of cover crops, and the creation of a berm along Mabel Lake Road.

Workshops The first workshop was facilitated by Charles Durrett and Katie McCamant from McCamant & Durrett Architects. Charles and Katie are North American leaders in co-housing and authors of "Creating Cohousing". They led what they call the "Getting it Built" workshop, which walked the group through the facts with regard to cohousing, including the design and approvals process, and what makes for a strong, well-functioning community.

The second workshop was a 2-day site-planning workshop that was facilitated by Yonas Jongkind and Natalie Jones, with support from Devon Miller and William Dunn from Origin Collaborative. See the next page for a summary of this site-planning workshop. Left: the group after the "Getting it Built" workshop hosted by Charles Durrett and Katie McCamant.

Right: "Creating Cohousing" cover, written by Charles Durrett and Katie McCamant. 38 of 117 OKANAGAN , 111 I ALC & Rezoning Application 11 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Site Planning Workshop April 7-8th, 2 12

On April 7th and 8th, 2012, the prospective ecovillagers and future inhabitants of Okanagan Ecovillage Farm convened to participate in a collaborative site-planning workshop.

In this workshop run by cohousing expert and Yarrow Ecovillage resident Yonas Jongkind, we learned about cohousing and ecovillage principles, what makes for a well-designed community, and ways that we can reduce our impact on the environment. There was tremendous enthusiasm amongst the group as people from all walks of life (farmers, tradesmen, computer scientists, doctors, community planners, and architects) found that they shared a deep passion for living in an ecologically friendly, complete community.

The result of the workshop was a community design that was made for the community members, by the community members. With input from all of these individuals, including professional facilitators (Yonas Jongkind and Natalie Jones) and designers (Origin Collaborative), we were able to come up with what we feel is an excellent design for our future homes. See Appendix 1-3 for the site plan, common house design and site study which were completed following these workshops by Origin Collaborative (www.origincollaborative.com).

39 of 117 12 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

40 of 117 OKANAGAN 1v 11 • I ALC & Rezoning Application 13 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Key Commission Considerations

Size, agrfcultural capability, past, current and future agricultural use, and distinguishing physical features (both natural and man-made) of the subject property.

The 31 .5 acre site has had no agricultural use in the past 30 years. Previously there was a hog barn active on-site, but it has since has been converted into a commercial I residential building. Several years ago the previous owner levelled the flood plain by repeatedly driving an excavator back and forth across the hillsides resulting in patches of bare gravel interspersed with areas of rich floodplain topsoil.

Currently the existing buildings are empty and we are growing certified organic cover crops to revitalize and to enhance the topsoil, and are working to convert the bare gravel areas to productive soil. This is being done to obtain organic certification and ready the site for future organic intensive food production.

The distinguishing physical features of the site are: 1. 26.5 acres of levelled valley bottom soils. 2. 5 acre plateau made entirely of blue clay, which has been flattened by a previous owner who has pushed all of the topsoil next to Bessette Creek, leaving the hill devoid of topsoil, flat and barren.

Our plans are to use the plateau area to build some homes to support on-site farm workers and workers at an agritourism center, as well as individuals who are employed off-site. We plan to improve the quality of the 25 acres of rich, flat, floodplain lands and anticipate that this land will be excellent for certified organic market crops, orchards, permaculture food forests and greenhouses.

Agriculture and agritourism alone will not provide a viable economic or social basis for the ecovillage. Just as a village must engage with all aspects of society so must the ecovillage seek to include and engage others beyond farming. We hope to do so through community educational workshops on everything from green building to facilitation techniques.

Impacts on the subject property that may limit its future agricultural use.

We propose the construction of 30 homes which will preclude agricultural uses on 21 ,000 ff2 of the site, representing 2.3% of the site. The total area set out for residential development, including parking, pathways, community gardens and yards is 52,628 ft2 or 1.3 acres.

Impacts on neighbouring farm operations and the broader farm community.

We expect to create visibility for farming practices, educate others and otherwise enhance farming practices in the region. We plan to do. so with an emphasis on sustainable organic farming practices, which we believe provide greater economic and ecological benefits in the long run.

The general level of parcelization in the area.

The subject parcel is zoned as large holding, though it does not conform to the minimum parcel size of 75 acres specified in the zoning bylaw.

At the current lot size (31 .5 acres) and based on other organic market garden and CSA farms we are familiar with, we expect to provide annual living income for five farming families and several seasonal workers. These farming operations represent potential cumulative annual gross income in the $350,000 to $600,000 range.

Impacts on transportation patterns and other services, including the provision of water and sewer facilities.

30 homes and an agritourism center is not expected to impact highway traffic on the lightly used Mabel Lake Road.

Potable water, irrigation and wastewater treatment are planned to be handled on site.

Will an approval of subdivision be considered a precedent, setting off expectations of further subdivision in the area?

The subdivision is unlikely to be considered precedent setting. All four ecovillages currently in BC are unique developments, each taking a different approach to zoning, agriculture and land use.

Rationale the applicant has presented to support the subdivision proposal.

1. We are asking for less built square footage as a percentage of lot size than many approved applications. 2. We have a strong commitment to agriculture and agritourism, both of which are supported by the ALC. 3. We represent an alternative model of agriculture to what is generally represented, within a growing segment of the market. The alternative model includes: Economic farming at a smaller scale based on subsidizing the farm land cost through the sale of land to home owners Embracing and combining traditional land uses (living, farming and working) that have been separated in a post-auto and post-tv world.

Is there an agricultural benefit advanced as part of the application?

Yes. We propose to develop intensive and high value agriculture on the majority of the site. The agriculture that we will advance is small scale agriculture as advocated for in the "Planning for Agriculture" document (http://www.alc.gov.bc.ca/publications/planning/Pianning_for_Agriculture/Chapter09/09022reference. htm).

A priority in our project is to improve the agricultural capacity of the land, which has been left fallow for 30 years. Several of our future ecovillagers are organic farmers who are keen to improve the quality of the soil and establish a CSA for the local community.

42 of 117 OKANAGAN I AL C & Rezoning Application 15 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 How does the proposal square with local planning and zoning regulations?

Local planning and zoning regulations have identified a provision for ecovillage zoning, consistent with what is proposed herein.

Does the local government support the application? (Input from local governments, including Council I Board resolutions, staff reports and background data, are very important in the consideration of an application).

Local planning and zoning regulations have identified a provision for ecovillage zoning, consistent with what is proposed herein.

Input from local farm organizations, agricultural advisory committees, MAF* and others.

6 7 The organizations we have consulted with are BCARA , Bee S.A.F.E Monashee , and the neighbouring farmers.

As necessary, an on-site inspection by members of the Commission and/or staff is undertaken.

We encourage on-site inspections and our community would like to participate in introducing ourselves and demonstrating our commitment to creating an ecovillage based on agriculture, learning, and tourism.

6 The British Columbia Association for Regenerative Agriculture (BCARA) concentrates on providing certification for the Fraser Valley, the Lower Mainland and the Sunshine Coast regions, though other regions within BC are serviced. 7 Bee S.A.F.E. (Securing Agriculture and a Food Economy) is a movement that works to improve health, the environment and local economies by increasing access to local food that is safe for the bees, and for us. Our ability to grow safe food is compromised by Genetically Modified crops that cross-pollinate with traditional and organic crops (and even with wild plants of some families) and by the dangero43 ofus pesticides117 used to grow these crops. 16 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

44 of 117OKANAGAN •. , DV' ldtJ I ALC & Rezoning Application 17 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

The application will need to reflect the relevant policies, including the zoning bylaw, OCP bylaw and other documents as appropriate.

With respect to the zoning bylaw, Okanagan Ecovillage Farm anticipates creating a custom zone. The following sections review applicable policy in the OCP and consider how the Okanagan Ecovillage meets those regulations.

Land Use Policies

The North Okanagan 2011 OCP defines ecovillages as a special use which are recognized as potentially appropriate for the plan area (8.4.1) , with the requirements of that ecovillage set out below.

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.2

Comprehensive Resort and Ecovillage Developments must establish efficient, cost effective wastewater management systems. While conventional septic disposal systems may be appropriate for rural, large lot areas, it is no longer viewed as an acceptable means of wastewater management for new or expanded resort and ecovillage developments. Ecovillages may elect to pursue alternative development strategies but will need to clearly demonstrate the long term viability of such initiatives, providing the appropriate supporting professional reports.

Okanagan Ecovillage is currently investigating three possibilities for wastewater management in order to identify which will best meet our system objectives: 1. Ecologically sound I has no negative impact on groundwater This includes addressing pharmaceuticals, endocrine disrupting compounds and personal care products 2. Economically feasible and sustainable 3. Durable and long lasting

Please see the attached report by Chad Meier of Clearteck Consulting (Appendix 6). He addresses the design flows, expected flows, and the potential for a constructed wastewater treatment wetland proposed for the site.

Also see the attached flyer from Wetlands Pacific Corporation {Appendix 8), a leader in constructed wetland construction. A number of constructed wetland projects are in existence in BC. Yarrow Ecovillage has successfully collaborated with the Ministry of Environment to permit the use of a constructed wetland for the treatment of wastewater to be constructed in August The community of Knockholt has been running one for several years in BC to treat leachate and wastewater.

We have not finalized our decision on the wastewater treatment system, and are also considering the use of a Solar Aquatics Treatment plant, which takes the processes of the treatment wetland and moves them into a greenhouse. A solar aquatics treatment plant has been installed in Christina Lake. Information about this technology is available at http://www.ecotek.ca/.

45 of 117 18 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 We will make the decision between the systems after we have entitlements to build and at that time we will review the availability of the systems and prices before making a final decision.

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.3

Comprehensive Resort and Ecovillage Developments need to protect the quality of surface · and groundwater sources, while achieving an economically viable level of development without adding to the financial burden of taxpayers.

Okanagan Ecovillage is working to enhance ground water quality with three separate initiatives: 1 . Advanced wastewater treatment, 2. The enhancement of existing watercourses (riparian enhancement), and 3. Integrated Stormwater Management (ISM)

Advanced Wastewater Treatment

As mentioned above, we are seeking to use ecological wastewater treatment, which in addition to meeting the basic standards set by the Ministry of Environment also support long term human development and groundwater quality by addressing pharmaceuticals, endocrine disrupting compounds and personal care products.

Riparian Enhancement

Enhancing adjacent Bessette Creek is one of the greatest ways that we can improve groundwater and surface water quality in the region. Water quality is not just important to the wider community, it is also important to us.

Maintaining a riparian zone that is up to 130 feet from farmed land means that no sediment will flow from the farms to water courses. Producing food using organic methnds means that no additional algae forming fertilizers and pesticides will be used on site.

These concepts are best illustrated by the work we have done to date, and work done by other similar ecovillages with regard to riparian enhancement. See Appendix 4 for a summary of some work already undertaken to enhance existing riparian areas on the Okanagan Ecovillage site, and Appendix 5 for examples of work done at Yarrow Ecovillage, a similar-sized project in the Fraser Valley.

Integrated Stormwater Management (ISM)

Drainage Systems Ecosystems Reacting to Problems Preventing Problems Engineer-Driven • Interdisciplinary, Team-Driven Protect Property Protect Property & Habitat Pipe and Convey • Mimic Natural Processes Unilateral Decisions • Consensus-based Decisions • Local Government Ownership Partnerships with Others Extreme Storm Focus • Rainwater Integrated with land Peak Flow Thinking! Use • Volume-based Thinking! 46 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Okanagan Ecovillage Farm seeks to use a comprehensive, ecosystem-based approach to rainwater management. The goal is to balance the following: Land use planning; Stormwater engineering; Flood and erosion protection; and Environmental protection.

Traditional stormwater management planning has a primary function to identify the infrastructure needed to service increased development, while the impacts on development are given little consideration. Integrated stormwater management planning (ISMP) has evolved significantly to become a comprehensive approach to also include the preservation and utilization of resources within a watershed. An ISMP is intended to balance the land use needs with the natural values and functions of the watershed.

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.4

Without diminishing the role of the City of Vernon or the Village of Lumby as the principal and secondary commercial and service centres in this area, resort and ecovillage developments may include limited commercial and personal services to provide visitors and residents with a full service resort or sustainable community experience.

To support our residents having a local and low-impact livelihood, it is our intention to include aspects of agritourism and some professional spaces on site. The cornerstone of this is the construction of a learning center. We expect to offer courses on various topics:

1 . Ecovillage Experience 2. Sustainable Living 3. Natural Building (Straw, Cob, Green Roof, Light Clay) 4. Green technologies 5. Yoga/Spirituality/Meditation 6. Farming 0 Seed saving 0 Organic methods 0 Community farming 0 Food preservation and storage o History of regional farming o Permaculture 7. Facilitation and Communication Permaculture Training at Ithaca Ecovillage

In connection with the learning center, we are proposing a food services I restaurant area to be provided as well as some limited accommodation (bunk house and/or hostel style).

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.5

Comprehensive developments in or adjacent to agricultural/and should be avoided or heavily buffered except for "Bed and Breakfast" operations and "Agro-tourism" in accordance with Land Reserve Commission regulations and Ministry of Agriculture standards.

We have no desire to be buffered from our own on-site agricultural activities and are naturally buffered 47 of 117 20 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezontng Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 by roads, streams and parcel location from other agricultural uses.

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.6

Comprehensive developments within this designation shall be largely self-contained and shall not facilitate nor be deemed to encourage further development on adjacent lands.

Our site has low visual connections with other neighbouring sites, and ecovillages are very rarely created. We have no expectation that our development would imply permission for others to develop in the region.

We are in the middle of purchasing some adjoining farmland to enhance our control over riparian areas and increase the amount of arable land on our site.

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.7

In accordance with the provisions of the Development Permit Section of this Plan, land designated as 'Comprehensive Resort or Ecovil/age Development' is also designated as a Development Permit Area in matters concerning the protection of the natural environment, protection of development from hazardous conditions, and matters concerning the form and character of commercial and industrial development. The establishment of objectives for the form and character of intensive residential development may also be required.

We propose to establish form and character at the development permit stage based on a series of workshops that would produce a final design of our homes. During these workshops we will work with our architect to find a way to express our unique Ecovillage character while reflecting local agrarian cultural references through our architecture.

We will also respect the visual and acoustic limitations with respect to our neighbours through a berm that we have already enhanced on the site, which also shelters our homes from road noise from Mabel Lake Road.

Moreover, as mentioned earlier we will work to expand the protection of riparian areas and to protect our development from hazardous conditions.

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.8

The design of new and expanded comprehensive resort and ecovillage developments shall be responsive to the natural environment such that site grading and visual impacts from lands beyond are minimized.

The distance between the proposed homes and neighbouring homes is large (see Appendix 3), and we are proposing a berm to screen the homes from traffic noise on Mabel Lake road.

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.9

The Regional Board may require the developer to provide a Traffic Impact Assessment prepared by a professional engineer that addresses the potential for impacts the development may have on traffic patterns, safety and volumes in the surrounding community. The Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure must agree to the Terms of Reference for a 48 of 117 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application 21 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Traffic Impact Assessment prior to preparation.

We propose that any requirement for a traffic study be waived due to the small number of homes being proposed and the very low levels of traffic on Mabel Lake Road today.

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.10

The Regional Board may require the developer to provide an Environmental Impact Assessment prepared by a qualified environmental consultant to address potential impacts the development may have on the quality of the natural environment.

We expect to proceed with an Environmental Impact Assessmet (EIS) as part of our wastewater treatment system. We ask that no additional requirements for an EIS be added to our proposal due to the large distance between proposed construction and a water course, and the diligence and care we have already shown for the local environment.

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.11

Where a comprehensive development proposes a non-traditional land tenure system, such as ecovillage co-housing or cooperative ownership, the Regional Board may address the specialized nature of the ownership as part of the approval process to ensure that specialized ownership conditions are recognized over the long term (e.g. by future owners and neighbours).

Our proposed tenure is cohousing layered over a strata subdivision.

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.12

The Regional Board will require the developer to demonstrate how services can be met by the developer for such services as schools so that there are no indirect public costs (e.g. school buses).

When it comes to getting kids to school from our community, cooperation will be our approach. At Windsong, a comparably sized cohousing development in Langley which is located 8 minutes from the local fine arts school, each parent drives the children to school one time per week. Since Lumby is only 5 minutes from the site, we expect a similar carpooling arrangement to arise at Okanagan Ecovillage.

It is expected that there will be fewer calls to the fire department and police as many issues that arise in ecovillage communities can be resolved with the help of a neighbour rather than a call for help.

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.13

Developments which implement water conservation and re-use strategies are encouraged.

Water conservation measures are first to be applied using low water-use fixtures throughout the development, including limited grey water recycling in the common laundry.

A sister ecovillage looked extensively into recycling wastewater for irrigation of crops. From a health and safety perspective this was possible; however, additional monitoring requirements and testing requirements caused it to be unfeasible economically49 of 117. We will review their findings and consider how 22 OI

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.14

Proposals for a Comprehensive Resort and Ecovillage Development project shall demonstrate how storm-water and wastewater shall be managed on the site such that water quality and surrounding properties are not negatively impacted by the development.

All storm-water and wastewater shall be treated and returned to the ground on-site using a system of swales, marshes, rock pits and rapid exfiltration basins.

2011 NORD OCP 8.4.15

The level of servicing appropriate to each proposal shall be defined for consideration by the Regional Board, however, it is noted that all development must be serviced with a water system meeting the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Regulation.

In late summer 2013, two new wells were drilled onsite for both agricultural irrigation and residential purposes. New pump houses were built and the water flow measurements are 45 gallons per minute for the domestic well, and 250 gallons per minute for the irrigation well (see Appendix 7 for calculations and locations of wells).

Agricultural Policies

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.1

Agricultural lands are designated on Schedules B, B1 & B2 and are within the ALR and the Agricultural Land Commission Act will take precedence.

Yes.

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.2

Lands designated Agricultural and within the ALR are intended to be used for agricultural purposes and associated uses as allowed by the Agricultural Land Commission and the Regional District. All uses and subdivision of Agricultural Land Reserve land, shall be in accordance with the Agricultural Land Commission Act, regulations thereto or Orders and Policies of the Commission.

Yes.

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.3

The minimum parcel size for Agricultural lands shall be 30.5 ha. Large parcel sizes and setbacks are encouraged and supported through the Zoning Bylaw regulations to minimize the potential for land use conflicts and to support long term agricultural use consistent with Agricultural Land Commission Act objectives.

The subject parcel is currently nonconforming with respect to minimum parcel size. In the summer of 2013, a subdivision was completed to grow the site to 31 .5 acres through the purchase of adjoining 50 of 117 OI

lands through boundary adjustment. For the proposed high-intensity market garden farming, based on the observations of other ecovillages, 20 acres is the most economical size of an ecovillage practicing market farming. Ecovillages with larger sites tend to end up using about 20 acres of land, while the rest remains fallow or is used for forestry. It seems that this amount of land is manageable within a family farming context that emerges within the ecovillage.

Constraints limiting the size include: Ability to walk to the lands from the residences Amount of land farmable by a family Ability to see the lands from the home Ability for other community members to see the farm lands

Conversely, the parcel size needs to be large enough to justify the use of a tractor (no-till I rototiller based farming does not work well at this scale). Considering all of these factors, this suggests a parcel size between 10 and 20 acres.

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.4

Support the Agricultural Land Commission in its efforts to protect and enhance farmland. Where land is in the ALR, minimum parcel sizes shall apply only when the land is: excluded from the ALR; or a. approved for subdivision within the ALR pursuant to the Agricultural Land Commission Act, regulations thereto, or orders of the Commission; b. exempted by the Agricultural Land Commission Act, regulations thereto, or orders of the Commission.

The present site is not in conformance with MPS today, for reasons cited above.

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.5

Agricultural Industrial/and uses that support local farm production should be encouraged. This type of agricultural use shall process or manufacture agricultural products, shall not be intrusive nor offensive to the surrounding area, shall be located sensitively to avoid high capability soils and shall not contaminate ground or surface water

Our application supports local farm production. As with other ecovillages, we intend to perform small scale food production within our learning center food services kitchen for resale to the public. Also, the creation of a GSA will be explored.

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.6

Agricultural Industrial uses may be permitted on lands designated as Agricultural providing these uses are in compliance with the Agricultural Land Commission Act and the Regional District Zoning Bylaw, decisions of the Agricultural Land Commission and standards of the Ministry of Agriculture.

We are not planning any industrial uses aside from the use of the learning center kitchen for preserving food.

51 of 117 24 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezor ung Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 2011 NORD OCP 4.2.7

The Land Reserve Boundaries underwent a comprehensive review through the 2001 OCP process and the revised boundaries are reflected on Schedule B, B 1 & B2. Having successfully completed this review, the RDNO is unlikely to advance additional requests for exclusions. If an exclusion application is advanced, the application will need to be supported by a soil analysis conducted by a professional agrologist or a soil scientist, concluding that the land is physically incapable of supporting agriculture as evaluated. Additionally it must be demonstrated that there are no negative impacts on agriculture. This information is to be provided at the expense of the landowner.

We are seeking a non-farm use.

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.8

The rural character of Electoral Areas 'D' and 'E' shall be maintained to encourage the establishment of the widest range of agricultural activities. Support of programs which have a positive effect on agricultural activities such as noxious weed control, dog control, and routing of major roads and utilities to avoid farm severance 's, shall be considered.

One way that this applies to our project is that we joined lands with a neighbouring farm which is severed by a water course, resulting in a merged parcel that is not severed. The organic farmers currently managing the property are managing the noxious weeds that infiltrated the site while it lay follow (> 30 years).

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.9

Where a non-Agricultural property is adjacent to a property which is in the ALR and a Subdivision or Development Permit application has been received for the non- Agricultural property, an appropriate buffer strip will be established on the non- Agricultural property following the "Landscape Buffer Specifications" published by the Agricultural Land Commission.

We propose buffers between us and our neighbours larger than those required. On-site we are seeking to design the site plan so that similar uses are clustered together, increasing the space between adjacent properties.

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.1 0

The Regional District will strongly encourage the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations to work with area ranchers to improve range land management practices with a goal to improve water quality.

We would welcome input from the Ministry of Agriculture and/or the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations with regard to land management practices that help to improve water quality. We have explored several ways of treating water on-site (see Appendix 4, 5, and 8) and a primary goal for our project is to improve the quality of Bessette Creek.

52 of 117 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application 25 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 2011 NORD OCP 4.2.11

Notwithstanding the minimum parcel size required under the present bylaw (30.5 ha), the Zoning Bylaw may indicate a future minimum lot area for these subdivisions based on other land development considerations (e.g. 1.0 ha to support onsite septic disposal systems). The Zoning Bylaw may make provisions for smaller lots with the approval of the ALC for such purposes as roads.

We envision a building strata subdivision with a community sewer system and community road system so smaller lots would not be required.

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.12

Support ALC policies regarding agro-tourism businesses. An amendment to the Zoning Bylaw is recommended to ensure consistency between different RDNO areas.

We are proposing agritourism uses, and believe that there are sufficient buffers between neighbouring homes.

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.13

Support the Province's general policy of integrated multiple use land management such as grazing and timber management recognizing that the subdivision of lands is not supported for these separate uses.

We seek to use our lands for different uses (farming, learning center, orchard) and are not seeking subdivision for these uses.

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.14

Minimize conflicts between agricultural and other land uses (e.g. residential/recreational) through the use of:

a. agricultural setbacks as specified in Schedule G, Division 16, Zoning Bylaw 1888; b. supporting public access restrictions where appropriate; c. minimum distance setbacks for intensive agricultural operations; d. fencing requirements and landscape buffers; e. covenants that are registered with new rural subdivisions that recognize existing neighbouring agricultural use, as applicable: f. continued liaison w;th Provincial Ministries and Crown agencies in the planning, disposition, and management of Crown lands; and g. compliance with the Farm Practices Protection Act (FPPA).

We provide landscape buffers and large setbacks to neighbouring homes and properties.

53 of 117 26 OKAI\JAGAN I ALC & Rezon1ng Apphcat1on RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 2011 NORD OCP 4.2.15

Encourage all farming operations to comply with provincial regulations particularly as set out in the Environmental Management Act. Farming operations should include best management practices, beneficial biosecurity practices, good agricultural practices and compliance with all regulations and guidelines as administered by the province.

In addition to these best practices we also will meet the standards for Organic Farming which is a much more stringent standard than the above and requires annual inspection and recertification. 2011 NORD OCP 4.2.16

Recognize the importance of local food production, processing, distribution and sale of locally grown products. Efforts to improve the local agricultural economy may include: a. strategically locating a farmers market; b. initiatives to increase agricultural awareness; c. development of community gardens; d. density bonusing for projects providing opportunities for local food production (e.g., community gardens or greenhouses); and e. liaison with the Ministry ofAgriculture regarding opportunities for hosting local workshops on ways to enhance opportunities for growing and marketing economically viable, local agricultural products.

We are advocating for a-e as follows. a. We have already financed organic farmers to produce food locally on site for resale at Farmers' Markets and for a GSA program. b. We provide a learning center to teach people about and raise awareness regarding agricultural issues. c. We include community gardens and a community farm within our development. d. We are asking for a density beyond what is normally allowed on agricultural lands. e. We have not been in communication with the Ministry of Agriculture yet, but we have been following a model that meets the objective of economically viable agricultural products.

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.17

Encourage strategies that will see large agricultural land holdings retained and parcels consolidated and operated as single agricultural operations rather than broken up as individual/and tenures with multiple ownership.

Consistent with the model followed by a few other ecovillages, we propose to complete a strata subdivision, which leaves the farm lands in a type of commons which is managed by the strata as a single operator.

2011 NORD OCP 4.2.18

Wherever possible, future major roads, utility or communication corridors should be directed away from and around land within the ALR.

Not applicable to our application.

54 of 117 OKANAGAN I AI C & Rezon1ng Application 27 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 2011 NORD OCP 4.2.19

Support local agriculture through favourable consideration of proposals that enhance local agriculture through the strengthening of beneficial agricultural practices, support of local food systems, and the expansion of local markets and agro-tourism. The community supports the production of organic agricultural farming practices.

This is precisely what we are looking to achieve with our learning center, commitment to local farmers markets and CSA programs, as well as our commitment to organic farming practices.

55 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

56 of 117 OKANAGAN 1V 1, 1 I ALC & Rezoning Application 29 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 E V TI A OR NG I B A NN Ll A PL CO · • gm . 1 r . '. • www.ongincollaborat,ve.com CD 80 40 20 (metres) Scale 0 1200) Plan Plan (1: Site Site Plan Ecovillage Site Proposed Proposed 1: Proposed Okanagan Appendix Appendix

57 of 117

::J ~

)> s·

()' ().

::J :::0

0 N

~ Qo

(]) D

"Q_ CD !

RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA - -

January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 - -- to PLANNING COLL..ABOAATIVE r c ai lt sola n r-iented • 1 o ovo hot rrum g p xi • ( 1 collaborative.com in rn::l r · ion Appendices sur~ace sur~ace • : ~or www.orig r-oof collect Note ). south ()(')f enerqy R Pitched pa1eiS the Elevation Face West - Elevation Elevation and and Plan Plan Elevation House House House JEllailli Common Common Ecovillage Community Proposed Proposed 2: Proposed Okanagan

Appendix Appendix 58 of 117

w ~

0 e;

)> )>

)> ::J

.... I

:rJ :r

Q) 0

0 §·

Qo -g

co u RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 7.0m G N I G) N ABORATIVE L L O P.AN C n tve.com • t 1 bora a g 16.0m • 1 coll Om . 10m n r lO · • h www.ongt m 5 16. I - 7.5m - , , . @ r· ~ , -J fi ~ - . , I .. · ~ - - · ---- - • L ,- - - · · - - · J::- • r. - ~ -~ , ~~- ~ · - -- . . F .., ~ 1 - l ~ ~ ~ ~ 27.0m - -t · (& - -r - ' ~~ - 0 1 ~ ' ~1 t- - · n;-- ~ ~ 1 J .. . t 1 .. ~ ~l -- ".om - ~.- u . ---=- ~ E I r,: . I ~ ~ "" -=- r 0~ =" '· ~ - 0 . ' r (.. u 1 ~ -= ~ ~ q_ i - m ~ ;:; ;:, f ._ t--o- I I • • ~ .Y . . - --: j , m 0 . 4 2 Plan

House

7.0m

..J

' - -: v"-" L I I I Ecovillage

' . .

~ i Community ,.. 16.0m

lO.Om

"4 __J_ - .,J - JTl _ -C ~

~ . v , · ~ ! (J 0 c; ; ' • ~ • • •

, ~ ~ I 24.0m Proposed Okanagan

59 of 117

::J )>

~ ~

fi cY

0 s

0 ((o

::::0 )>

::J z

G) z )> )> I

0 ""'

N "Q.

D CD RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 COLLABORATIVE PLANNING cor . n ive • 1 g • 1 r Appendices ·l • NWW.orig.ncol!aborat I 1 . ft soo 100m Properties Properties I 1 Neighbouring Neighbouring To Ecovillage ~ ~ .... '" ,.. Distance Distance , -~ - 3: · -- " ·- .... Area !'!n·-: Site Okanagan

... ..,~:!" Appendix Appendix

.... _.

60 of 117 w

~- ~

w g-·

z z )> )>

G) 0 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Appendix 4: Ok Ecovillage Riparian Enhancement in 2011 Report to Members, September 2011 .

I have been told that a previous owner had tried to reverse an avulsion that cut off two meanders in the creek (Figure 1) by hiring a cat to push material from the neighboring hill into the newly formed channel. The material from the hill was composed of layers of silt and clay which would have created considerable amount of suspended sediment in the creek. This work was stopped shortly after it began. The high, over-steepened bank that comes to an unnatural looking point, the random mix of soil types in the bank and the contoured hill support this story.

Figure 1: The blue arrows indicate the old creek bed. The black arrows indicate the direction that material scraped off the hill was pushed in an effort to divert the water back into the old channel. A previous landowner also brought in truckloads of rock for riprap along most of the creek. It is unclear whether all the rock was just placed on the edge of the bank and allowed to tumble in as the bank eroded or whether some rock was pushed into the creek and more rock placed on top of the bank. In either case, there was still an excess of rock high on the bank, much of it unstable, when the current owner purchased the property (Figure 2) . Note that arrows show the direction of water flow.

Much of the rock used was over-sized, over 1.5 m long. A lot of this rock that rolled into the creek was partially or almost entirely buried in the gravel stream bed (Figure 3). The partially buried rock along the toe of the bank made a good base for placing some of the unstable rock higher up the bank. The large rock also create scour wh ich resulted in several pool areas.

The recent work consisted of rearranging the existing rock that had been used for riprap, sloping back the over-steepened sections of bank for planting and removing debris from the bank such as flattened culverts, car parts and concrete. Where the existing rock had favorable habitat such as pools, in stream cover or low-velocity rearing areas, an effort was made to maintain or enhance the conditions that caused the formation of the favorable habitat. 61 of 117 34 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Figure 2: Some of the existing rock had tumbled into Figure 3: The 2m fence post adds scale to this the creek either burying itself or helping create pool photo of rocks that had rolled from the bank into the areas. Some was still perched on the side or on top creek and were buried in the gravel stream bed. of the bank.

Figure 4: Downstream view in 2010 showing Figure 5: 2011 photo showing the unstable rock existing large rock piled to the top of bank. Arrow from the top of bank has been used to fill gaps lower depicts direction of creek flow. on the bank. Some large unstable pieces were removed. Arrow depicts direction of creek flow.

Figure 6: Large rock pushed over the bank after Figure 7: The bank was pulled back for planting and material was pushed down from the nearby hill by the unstable rock used to fill gaps in the existing a previous owner. This bank was vegetated by reed rock. Two logs were also placed here to help canary grass on the lower half and mostly invasive maintain the pool created by the large rock. Arrow weeds on the upper half of the bank. Arrow depicts depicts direction of creek flow. direction of creek flow. 62 of 117 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application 35 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Figure 8: A gap in the existing riprap where the rock Figure 9: Two logs were placed in the gap in the has rolled into the stream. There is a windrow along bank and anchored with rock high on the bank to the top of the bank left by the previous owner. Arrow maintain the pool created by the large rock that had depicts direction of creek flow. rolled into the stream. Arrow depicts direction of creek flow.

\._ Figure 10: This July 2011 photo shows some old Figure 11 : Rock from higher on the bank was used rock had rolled into the stream in places and had to fill gaps and enhance the small groins that were created pools. Arrow depicts direction of creek flow. formed by rock in the creek. The reed canary sod was re-packed along the bank after the rock was adjusted. Additional grass seed was added. Arrow depicts direction of creek flow.

Figure 12: This July 2011 photo shows rock piled Figure 13: The September 2011 photo shows some high up the bank. The grass hides the rock piled of the higher rock used to fill gaps at the base and along the top of the bank. Arrow depicts direction of to enhance the points created by the tumbled rock creek flow. that help create pool and low velocity areas. Arrow 63 of 117depicts direction of creek flow. 36 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Plantmg

Only one 50 m section of the bank was pulled back and material was placed at the top of the bank. This was along the area that had been pushed down from the hillside to form a point (Figure 1 and 7). There is a need for approximately 200 m2 to be planted here.

The majority of the banks had the rock taken from high on the bank and placed lower down. After the rock was removed from the upper portion of the bank, the bank was smoothed with the back of the excavator bucket to fill in the holes left by the rock. These banks still have the dormant reed canary grass sod present that will grow again as soon as there is sufficient moisture. Reed canary grass is resilient and regenerates even when the sod clumps are broken up. There is approximately 200 m2 of this low bank.

All the banks have been seeded with a mixture of sod-building grasses and fall rye for quick germination. Re-seeding will occur again after the next rainfall.

The existing trees are largely cottonwoods and some pacific willow. These will be wrapped with wire to prevent being cut by beavers.

All the banks will be planted with a mixture of native shrubs and trees including: Douglas Fir Ponderosa Pine Western Larch Spruce Red Cedar Water Birch Pacific Willow Black Hawthorn Chokecherry Interior Mock Orange Interior Saskatoon • Red Osier Dogwood Prickly Rose Wood's Rose

The mixture will depend on the availability of native stock. Fir, Larch and Ponderosa pine, mock orange, chokecherry, hawthorn, prickly rose and Saskatoons will be planted on the high bank (Figure 7) where conditions are dry. Spruce, cedar, water birch, red osier dogwood, choke cherry and wood's rose will planted on the lower banks. Trees will be planted at 2m spacing with a shrub in between.

The fall planting will be concentrated on the steep bank that had been pulled back (Figure 7) where there is no canary grass sod left to re-grow. Three staggered rows of willow stakes will be planted along the base of the bank at close (30 em) spacing to create a hedgerow of vegetation beginning just below the normal high water mark. The rooted stock will be planted higher on the bank.

Some planting of rooted stock may occur this fall depending on the weather and the availability of native stocks. The property is currently unoccupied so watering would be difficult. Typically, fall rains begin in late September or early October. Once there is adequate moisture, planting can go ahead and all disturbed areas will be grass seeded again. 64 of 117 OKANAGAN I AI C & Rezoning Application 37 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Appendix 5: Yarrow Ecovillage Riparian Enhancement

Following is a flyer that shows information on a program to enhance Stewart Creek which is a Class 1 fish bearing stream that runs through the Yarrow Ecovillage Project.

Over the past 40 years of farming, the riparian areas were not protected and maintained. Following is an example of a workshop with the Yarrow Ecovillage Stream Team managed to organize as part of their efforts to enhance the quality of their fish bearing stream.

~~ ~ Fraser Valley Regional District Bioengineering Workshop March 1Oth & 11th 2012 Event Organizers: Fraser Vallev Watersheds Coalition and Fraser Vallev Regional District

Location Descripti on Instru ctor Day I Class sess1on at YiJrrow Soli b1oeng1neenng iS ;:,n applteo Dav1d F Polste•, MSc, RP81o IS

Topi cs to be covered include: :b.--, lN~ :o1 ng c l.."'ltno We W.:t11'- fMc..: on be U:f!:d to cuu.ng.:. of :htub; :md ' I :u••ng them., the gtound . vvhti~ th ~e t: ~bel of veget.."''tlo n :.tong ••od•ng g. :ue.,rn bol nl: The c~5.Hng: w• t ~ptout .Jnd l!t.."'btch n,.,..v~eu t km Registration Information: Cost: $1 00; Manual included

Cheques payable to : Fraser Valley Watersheds Coalition - Payments can be made the first day of workshop; Cheque or cash only.

For more information· Email: [email protected] or phone: 604-791 -2235

65 of 117 38 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezon1ng Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Bioengineering Workshop March 1Oth & 11th Agenda

DAY ONE: Saturday March 10th DAY TWO: Sunday March 11th (brtnga norebool< and pen. lunch provtded) (Bring a bag lunch. ram gear. gloves. rubber boots. Yarrow Communrty Hall. 4670 Communrry noteb ool~ pen) (Chesrwaders and tools If you Street; Chilliwack. BC hC!ve rhem) 9:00am lmroducuon ObJectives 9.ooam For mar or the sesston HaNes11ng Plant M atena/5 Faaors Involved tn successful resror.mon Detat/5 ! 0 be arranged on Day I Lclndforms. cllmare. so tis. vegetation Successional reclamauon Noon (approx) - Lunch Site preparation I 00 pm Coffee Break Hancts-on btoengmeermg. restoring bC!nla

Soli btoengmeerrng rechmques Spec res selection. colleaion. handltng 4.00 pm and storage Wrap up Soil bioengtneermg uearments + Water management rechmques Use ot natural processes

Noon- Lunch

I 00 pm - 5 00 pm Soli btoenglneenng rremments continued + Habrtat trnprovemem techniques Mamrenance and monrtormg

If you l!ave any Before (Feb 20 I I) of tlte tools in tile pictures, please bring tl!em to use on tile field day. Make sure yott label your tools will! your nome.

66 of 117 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application 39 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Appendix 6: Cleartech Consulting Septic Analysis for 714 Mabel Lake Road, Lumby BC December 6, 2011 CLEARTECH CONSULTING lTD. 1070 Saddleback Court, Kamloops, BC V2B OB9 ph . 250-320-4832 , fax. 250-554-3653 File: 511-0055 email. [email protected]

Gwyllyn Goddard 25-6014 Vedder Road Chilliwack, BC V2R SM4

Dear Mr. Goddard

Re: Proposed Development 714 Mable Lake Road, Lumby, BC Onsite Wastewater Treatment and Disposal Feasibility Report

1.0 INTRODUCTION

As requested, Cleartech Consulting Ltd. has completed an onsite wastewater treatment and disposal feasibility study for the proposed development of 714 Mable Lake Road located near Lumby, BC.

The feasibility study included a site assessment (test pitting and permeameter testing), a regulatory review, and preparation of the written feasibility report. The test pitting and permeameter testing was completed on October 20, 2011.

2.0 SITE REVIEW AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

In general, the site consists of a semi-rectangular shaped property, (approx. 9.5Ha) bordered by Bissette Creek to the north and Mable Lake Road to the south. The site is in a rural area and is surrounded by large farm and agricultural properties.

The southern portion of the site is elevated above the north portion by approximately 9m. A steep cut slope extends east-west across the site.

Two development options are being evaluated for the site. Option 1 consists of two large residences (1 x 6 bedroom; 6000 ff, 1 x 4 bedroom; 4000 ff) and option 2 is the creation of a small cohousing community consisting of up to 34 x 1-2 bedroom units.

2.1. Flood Plain Search

A search of the flood plain for Bissette Creek was conducted on the Ministry of Environment's Water Resources Atlas. The 200 year flood plain elevation was noted to be 475m and the 20 year flood plain was noted to be 474.9m (near the centre of the site). Most of the lower agricultural area is at or below these elevations.

2.2. Water Well Search

The site not currently serviced by a community water system. A search for registered water wells within 300m of the site was completed on the Ministry of Environments Water Resources Atlas (http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wsd/data searches/wrbc/index.html). The results indicated that the two wells were located on the site (well67 of tags 117 70083 and 18721) and three more wells 4 0 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezontng Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

CLEARTECH CONSULTING LTD.

Gwyllyn Goddard Page 2 of 7 December 6, 2011 Re: 714 Mable Lake Road, Lumby, BC File: 511-0055 were within 300m of the site. The details of the wells are located in the following table.

Table 1: Well Details Well Tag Address Owner Screened Depth Interval 70083 788 Mable Lake Marvin Lentz 29.5-32m 32m Road 18721 N/A Anton N/A 39.6m 71583 Albers Road E Carter N/A 9.1m 58603 Albers Road W Barton N/A 36.Sm 20716 N/A Russell Moor N/A 18.6M

It should be noted that well 70083 was listed at 788 Mable Lake Road. It is possible that this well was incorrectly entered into the database.

If an onsite waste water treatment and disposal system is planned under the provisions of the BC Sewerage System Regulation (maximum flow rate of 22500 L/d) the minimum setback to a drinking water well is 30m . If the maximum daily flow exceeds 22500 L/d then the setback to a drinking water well is 300m unless the sewage is being treated to Class A effluent quality.

3.0 SITE ASSESSMENT

The site assessment consisted of test pitting and permeameter testing. Eight test pits were advanced across the site. The test pits were advanced to evaluate the soil and groundwater conditions. The locations of the test pits are shown on the attached Figure 1. A summary of the test pit results is presented below:

Upper Portion of Site

0-13cm - SILT, some clay, some sand 13-SOcm - CLAY, some silt, dark brown/grey, platey structure 50-350cm - CLAY, some silt, light brown/grey, platey structure 350-400cm -SAND, some silt, brown, single grained 400-440cm -CLAY, some silt, light grey, platey structure - no groundwater seepage noted sample at 95cm (SILTY CLAY, 4% Sand, 40% Silt, 56% Clay)

0-30cm - CLAY, some silt, dark grey, blocky, localized platey structure 30-130cm - CLAY, some silt, light brown/grey/ platey structure

130-165cm - SAND, some silt1 brown/ single grained/ compact

165-240cm - CLAY1 some silt, light grey/ platey structure - no groundwater seepage noted

68 of 117 OKANAGAN I AI C & Rezoning Application 41 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

CLEARTECH CONSULTING LTO .

Gwyllyn Goddard Page 3 of 7 December 6, 2011 Re: 714 Mable Lake Road, Lumby, BC File: 511-0055

0-35cm - CLAY, some silt, dark grey, blocky, localized strong platey structure 35-240cm - CLAY, some silt, light brown/grey, platey structure 240-300cm - SAND, some silt, some gravel, brown, single grained, compact -no groundwater seepage noted

0-30cm - TOPSOIL, (SILT, organics, roots) 30-76cm -SILT, some clay, trace sand, compact, strong blocky structure 76-195cm - CLAY, some silt, brown/light grey, blocky - strong platey below 195cm -no groundwater seepage noted - sample @ 40cm (SILT LOAM, , 15.6% SAND, 58% Silt, 26.4% Clay)

Lower Portion of Site

0-152cm - SILT, trace sand, some clay, organics, large woody debris (suspect disturbed soils) 152-160cm - CLAY, some silt, light grey 160-270cm - SAND, some silt, dark brown/black, organics, moist -groundwater seepage noted at approx. 200cm

0-30cm - SILT, some sand, some clay, dark brown 30-80cm - SAND(f), some silt, brown, single grained, compact, mottles 80-180cm - SAND, some gravel, loose, single grained - groundwater seepage noted at 175cm

0-23cm - SILT, some sand, some clay, dark brown 23-70cm - SAND(f), some silt, brown, single grained, compact, mottles 70-160cm - SAND, some gravel, loose, single grained groundwater seepage noted at 160cm

0-33cm - SILT, some sand, some clay, dark brown 33-68cm - SAND(f), some silt, brown, single grained, compact 68-127cm - mottles, more coarse grained SAND 127-180cm - SAND, some gravel, loose, single grained 180-190cm - CLAY, some silt, grey, wet, soft -groundwater seepage at 180cm

69 of 117 42 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

CLEARTECH CONSULTING lTD.

Gwyllyn Goddard Page 4 of 7 December 6, 2011 Re: 714 Mable Lake Road, Lumby, BC File: 511-0055

A total of nine permeameter tests were completed across the site. The locations of the tests are shown on the attached Figure 1. The results of the testing are presented in Table 2 below.

Table 2 - Permeameter Test Results- Southern Lot

Location Depth (em) Average Kf(s) (mm/day) Upper Portion of Lot PH1 40 281.5* PH2 62 2.8* PH3 70 16.3* PH4 30 26.8 PHS 34 36.8 PH6 31 56.3 Lower Portion of Lot PH7 57 163.5 PHS 62 112.9 PH9 70 593.3

* - indicates test completed in the Clay soils

The tests were completed at depths ranging from 30-70cm below grade. The average hydraulic conductivity for the upper portion of the lot in the SILT LOAM soils (PH4, 5, 6) was 40 mm/d. The average hydraulic conductivity for the lower portion of the lot was 290 mm/d. The above values are consistent with the soil types observed.

4.0 PROPOSED SEPTIC CONFIGURATION

The following provides the basis for the on-site wastewater treatment and disposal recommendations.

4.1. Design Daily Flow

The design daily flows for the proposed development were based on flows from the Ministry of Health's Sewage System Regulation (SSR) companion document Standard Practice Manual, Version 2, September 2007 (SPM).

Two Residence Development

The design flows for the two proposed residences was calculated as per the following :

T a bl e 3 - Res1 "d ent· ta I D es1gn . Fl ow Unit Base Flow (L/d) Additional Flow (L/d) Design Daily Flow (based on living area) (L/d) 6 bedroom; 6000 ff 2500 911 3411 4 bedroom 3000 ff 1700 196 1896 Totnl 70 of 117 5307 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezontng Applicatton 43 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

CLEARTECH CONSULTING lTD.

Gwyllyn Goddard Page 5 of 7 December 6, 2011 Re: 714 Mable Lake Road, Lumby, BC File: 511-0055

The design flow for the proposed residential development is 5307 .L/d.

Co-Housing Development

The design flows for the proposed co-housing development was calculated as per the following :

Table 4 - Co-Housing Design Flow (SPM) Unit Base Flow (L/d) Additional Flow (L/d) Design Daily Flow (based on living area) (L/d) 34 x 1-2 bedroom 1136 0 38264 units ( < 160ote) Total 38264

The design flow based on the requirements of the SPM is 38,264 L/d. This flow rate exceeds the maximum flow allowed under the provisions of the SSR and would require registration under the Municipal Sewerage Regulation.

Cleartech has reviewed effluent flow data from a co-housing development in Yarrow with the same architect. The actual effluent flows have been measured and the results indicate that the flows are 30-48% of the design flows (based on SPM unit flows). Using the results of this data it is reasonable to assign a reduced design flow rate for a similar co-housing development. The reduced design flows are presented in the following table.

T abl e 5 - Co- Housmg Re d uce d Des1gn . Fl ow Unit Base Flow (L/d) % SPM Flow Design Daily Flow (L/d) 34 x 1-2 bedroom 667 58 22678 units ( < 1600ff) Total 22678

Using a design flow that is 58% of the SPM flows (still quite conservative compared to the actual flows measured at Yarrow) results in a design daily flow rate of 22678 L/d/. This would result in maximum daily flows less than 22,700 L/d (the maximum allowable under the provisions of the SSR).

4.2. Disposal Field Sizing

The disposal field sizing is based on the requirements of Table 2.8 of the Standard Practice Manual, Version 2 (SPM). Hydraulic loading rates are selected based on soil type, structure and saturated hydraulic conductivity or percolation rates.

The following table provides a summary of the hydraulic loading rates and the resulting infiltrative area required. The hydraulic loading rates are based on Type 3 effluent to minimize the footprints of the required disposal fields and to address the limited vertical separation. Vertical separation is defined as the unsaturated thickness between the bottom of the infiltrative surface and the water table or impermeable surface (i.e. clay, bedrock)

71 of 117 44 OI

CLEARTECH CONSULTING lTD.

Gwyllyn Goddard Page 6 of 7 December 6, 2011 Re: 714 Mable Lake Road, Lumby, BC File: 511-0055

Table 6 - Disposal Field Sizing

Location Development Soil Type Hydraulic Loading Requ ired Infiltrative Option Rate Area (L/m2/d) (m2) Upper Portion of Large Silt Loam 34 156 Lot Residences Lower Portion of Large Fine 49 108 Lot Residences Sand/Loamy Sand Upper Portion of Co-housing Silt Loam 34 667 Lot Community Lower Portion of Co-housing Fine 49 463 Lot Community Sand/Loamy Sand

The results of the site assessment indicated the vertical separation is limited by the underlying clay unit on the upper portion of the site and the shallow groundwater table on the lower portion of the site. As such the suitable disposal field configuration would be shallow trenches or at-grade seepage beds.

At-grade seepage bed widths should be limited to 3.6m to promote adequate oxygen flux. The disposal field configurations should be as long and narrow as possible while maintaining a minimum 30m setback to surface water or drinking water wells.

For conceptual purposes an optional layout of the disposal fields areas has been illustrated on the attached figures. It should be noted that the location of the disposal fields is quite flexible. The setback to the cut slope must be maintained at a minimum 7.5m. The setback to a drinking water well must be maintained at a minimum of 30m. The disposal fields on the upper portion should be located on the portion of site where the surficial silt loam soils have been not removed.

If the disposal fields are to be located on the lower portion of the site they are best located on the higher elevation to maximize the vertical separation.

4.3. CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS

Cleartech was requested to evaluate the site for effluent disposal into a constructed wetland. Cleartech is not an expert in constructed wetlands therefore we contacted Curt Kerns, of WetlandsPacific Corp. Mr. Kerns indicated that Type 3 effluent could be discharged to a constructed wetland under the Sewerage System Regulation. He further indicated that the unit area required for disposal is 0.041m2/L/d (2fe /Igal/d). Based on the co-housing community daily flows of 22,678 L/d the required area of constructed wetlands would be 930 m2. The effluent would be required to be treated to Type 3 quality (10 mg/L Total Suspended Solids, 10 mg/L Biological Oxygen Demand, < 400 colony forming units/100 mL of fecal coliforms) prior to discharge to the constructed wetland.

Upon discussing the site conditions further with Mr. Kerns, he indicated that the clay soils 72 of 117 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezontng Application 45 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

CLEARTECH CONSULTING LTO .

Gwyllyn Goddard Page 7 of 7 December 6, 2011 Re: 714 Mable Lake Road, Lumby, BC File: 511-0055

30m setback to drinking water wells.

5.0 CLOSURE

We trust the above meets with your immediate requirements. This report has been prepared by Cleartech Consulting Ltd. exclusively for Gwyllyn Goddard and his appointed agents. The above described feasibility report has been completed by Cleartech based on the reported subdivision plans and observed site conditions.

Any damages suffered by third parties as a result of use of this report would be the responsibility of said parties. The soil and groundwater information was obtained from discrete testing locations at various locations across the site. Soil, groundwater, and percolation rates may vary across the site.

If you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned at 250-320-4832.

Yours truly,

CLEARTECH CONSULTING l TO. per: Chad Meier, P.Eng.

Reviewed by: Craig Regier, P.Eng., ROWP

Attachment: 1) Dwg. No. 1 Proposed Development- Upper Portion of Site 2) Dwg. No. 2 Proposed Development - Lower Portion of Site

73 of 117 46 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Appendix 7: Okanagan Ecovillage Well Installation Report

Throughout the course of 2013, we have installed 2 wells on the property, most importantly we have drilled our domestic service well, on the south-west corner of the ecovillage plateau site, and also a farm irrigation well on the far west zone of the property.

This drilling of the domestic well was completed during the month of May. We have also decommis sioned the previous Goudi wells, capping them bottom and top with bentonite clay to ensure they are sealed for the long term.

The domestic well was drilled by Jim @ Aqua Source drilling, and was done to a depth of 98 feet, also Jim ensured the well was registered properly for BC well registration. We then had a flow rate test done by Shane @ Trinity Valley Drilling. The data from the flow rate shows the well is able to service 45 gallon per minute.

If any further information is needed please contact :

Nevin Gavigan Farm Manager 604.791 .8110 [email protected]

74 of 117 0 1-

Trinity Valley Drilling L~mby, B.C.

Domr~lic ci Irrigation ~Jis Pu,ps & P~~re Sysrmu B.C. Ut. Wet/ Driller 41 Ptunp lnstallu

8btftf R~ey 2' 0-'47.9447 Cell 230.,».It16 6toU Ramsey lSO.S-47.9602

FLOW TEST DATA SHEET

CUSTOMEtl 0C 0?'A.d bl-j/v S bL10[)/fR () oATB ·.::f v .....-t ::3 ,b L/CVV> f WELL DEPTH 86' Tc?t or sl .... ~..") ~·_, 'lt. u ff'l~- W&;"LL I · T~ t-r ·;:s t' S"".).. 7> STATIC WA"Tl!l LRV!L 0 I y 7 I PAC..... u l Or ~

l' TfMB MJNSIINCB STARr FUMPIHO lATe l.BllN JIIUMIIINO UM!1 ' '1.t'1' h ff liLJ..'1 ! 'IJI i 4~ · ~. $_;).. J. O.l. J S_3. j'.:l tl) i ') ,.:.; ) Cl ~ (\1.1 .. 'i 1 5 ' De; .i:' ~1 . "). _j)f:> ~ ~_3 ('~ {)7 I s-3 . 5 (). 0£' '-~ • ~- 0. () lf '1' &'L'3. 9 ~ j(.) / /) S L-f. ·Ot ; ;)_ I~ ...s!:i_j_~l J i.f / '-{ "jj ~ ~- do ~0 53. ]_:) d ....- .'J < ' .S_ ""..~ c:l f2 I ~"'I ~0 n:f:J 4o .:j 0 Jft"t'D -:o 4 ·1 ~ t m ~...... £, !C I s- -c. t·>-c i .s7 ._!-:/_'7 I . Ct' 6 (..l I -s-f. '-{_t_ ~ . f ) I< I .:..- A s- s-.... I Jo C] {) i s f t: .s' ; /.{ ~ lh~- l s I E'f' IV ; rc· I '(; C' c) I'P tfb.T'fl. . 4_q f::J/'_fYJ .St•. ut, I ; IJ :3c {;) I (; 0 I , J 7 tl . b (J ;,). '-(C 62: 1 '~ " ."~( -:1:1 ( 'l v1..3 ?o

75 of 117 48 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Applicalion RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Domestic well information

Trinity Valley Drilling Lumby, B.C. Oome11ic & J,.rigation Wt!lls l'rmrps cl P~s,n,r~ Sysiems D.C. Lie. Well Driller d Pump Installer

8~1'1! Ramsey l'OJ47.944) C411 ll0.)SUt16 Stott R•lllft)' 'Z50.S47.9602

FLOW TEST DATA SHEET

CUSTOMEit f."'' Wl l-t.1 tJ f1..:, f) D,'}te D

OAT£ .J"UI-1 ·.~ I ft0 b I u Pf'c:Q.. ~ t..1..L WELL DEPTH 8 b ' TOf C'P .)t ,u.l.N '(6 . · ~, t~ :)

I P~ ~~~~:~~--~-~~· ~G~------Y~-~1------~~~~~~·~~~~~----- >?u .':> )t.l hi4 y r

~ : 0 6 i.;; b (.' '"I -· 6 :t 4

\1\- f'rt 1 d : t-:C j Qij.o Q "f t. 3 3 ' ~"> JlL(u co L/ t.!t Jj . 6c

J . DL'

76 of 117 OKANAGAN 1 ALC & Rezoning Application 49 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Domestic well information

77 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

" ::" i !I! :: p, 1,, : i liS Jh !I! :: ;f ... ;,; :: ... ~v~~I ~ ;;; :al:iD ::,, _,:i, ·•I' I •o ,, ~ ~! ; !bl :: X ~iU:: i• 0'

: :~il : :- !.: §~ :\' ~I ~ ! ~~~ ;;: ~~ : .pO}~ ~ n. ' ,,' ' ~' I . 1 1 I 1 ; I !' "' :: .1; I I i '

, , :: 1' I "II I I II 1 1~ II ! :Nii t I I •

: :~;; 1 l j ll 1 I Q.. I I 1 1 II : : !I 1 I II I o I I o 1 ~,,I I ::

: ~ :: :!

I "oo J: II ! i if 1 I I I j 1 II i ! ~: 1 I 11

: c-4., I ~ ·~u , ,

:-:~>~:: :~li :...,.;: ~~ : 0 :: i I ;: 1 1 I I I I I I f I I I t I II t 1 II 1 1 II I I t l

l : ~: 1 o II 1 I I I 'I 'I ,II ,

·;;;s c 0 Illc l 0 j ;; uIU I .2 ;- u ... " • i !! E :: I I II 0 ...... , , , :~~:: m r~ :: :•- :: c ;j~;I I - ,I 1 0 +I ·~ I I II :: !I 1 I II I I t / .s:: I I II 1 I II Ill I' . t"l Q. ''" IU l! :E 78 of 117 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezon1ng Application 51 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Irrigation well information

PUMP T EST - RECOVER Y DATA PAGE _ / OF _L

11 E eva~ ~ (\.., u£ Oatpm P.Jm! ·- 3D.'-----

TIME

1----'~<-..pc=.()--+------1- I · %~L - - ---t ltue?.L-g _ _ _J.o5 .. __1 -----1---- ·---~i ______1_ ~~--- ·- ,---- - ~- fv '"" P 1 i ID · I' I ~ !:>'/ ktrro n.." ,.; I l ~ -4'1..; f---: "" A)'...... ~""""- -'--"""'""'"4 9 ~ : ~{) l ·-~c:.- t==~--c- C ·· , s lj >·---~ -t ----t- -- 1 I i ; i : 1 : ; ~- - -·.!. __~-~ ·~- ~ -- ~===-~-.-- l---1,---l----- i ----- · - ~----- ·-: --- I i .---- l--1--__,! ,i----- 1-·--- ..:.....-.---+----!,-----r----'-----i ------j

1--t--•.----- ,---- -'-I ----~f---- -:'.-----+---~ -- ---, ------l

! I i I I --r--· -~------1-~--+------~ ----~~~---~---~--- -~------1 l I I I i l----<~-'-. -----t------~- ---1----il ----t- ·- l---l---r----- :;______' --r--- -r---'-- --r------··-----l 1----l:--_j__ I f ---- . I I - ·-- - I------j I : ' l I ~ ' I 1----',---,-·--··--+ -- --~ -----~· ---·--;_----- :-----~------·- ---- I : l ' ------~, ----+------~~~~'------~·L---~------_.!. _____ ~__ __; ______~

79 of 117 52 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Irrigation well information

Trinity Valley Drilling Lumby, B.C.

Oomutic & J,.rllf'lion ~lis Ptmtps & P~s.rtAt~ Systm~S D.C. Lie. Well Driller 4 hmp lflsralur

Sb111f Ramsey 2,0.,.7.944? OJn 1Jo.,n.at 16 6cou Ramsey 'l~.S4?.9602

FLOW TEST DATA SHEET CUSTOMEtl CR. GW'jt..Di,J <; 6o Por-nw OATS ~vl-'1 ~{ /t 3 WELL DEPTH __5'_~_'_ STATIC WA11!1U.EVEI. / ."11

~s~~~· ~+---~'b~--~------~-----·~~~· ~3~~~---- & · S7~~-+---ul~----~------~------'-L~·~4~d~----- ~ : oo~Jf~~--~~-~~----~------~------~l~h~s~- -~6______'} 'of d o J{. . ~ 7.

' i..fS' 10-0 l Ll ' 0d

80 of 117 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application 53 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 • or. US£ THE ,.,.,...,...,onto FOR -- 8 p.erinwter 0- - PREPAREIJ - CO()(Wf() 18, 2 IS SEC aa. 2011 2012 & 201 08 KAP81647 1 P1.AN 12, 7. 7J, 2 1/4 17, JAN TltiS J1JH f'£11 38f\e; . t4 NW P PLAN LOT 7, 1/2 of E SEC 1, 0=53.8 ' LOT ...... \ \ ...., \ OF \ ' c::; z 0 :3 0.. :5 ...... !1.52ho 1.3aaw~ ~- SITE T ..... / PART ·~ ~ i~ 8 "' 1 & ...... ~ : : .. feet ·~ . 22Aacw \f~B W/12 . 21 . . , SEC : • hi~ r ~5$ ,,. 05 ) .\,1/ . 8ha L : 1 9 \! • .. 1/2 '\I 1/4 PtM Total E 43937. ') IIC1flfS ~~L.· KAP81647 '" IN NW fettl) boundrlry) o "100rj Rem of ~ 2020 PLAN • PLAN • conmon DISTANCES Lake 1\a ALL 2.8 ~ronce ( \ dlolan~ 8 ODrv, t LOTA (lrrcluoultdory well feel) fW() , SUBDIVISION SUBDIVISION 545-0511 1655 745 .,_,.,., 2010 • 1 • • , . PlloM LS. Cllet . dlft. B.C. 43937 LOT S.C T (udud/lt9 other irrigation PROPOSED PROPOSED (all (/!lgh.O vrt/HOII, Rem SHoRTT, PLAN P-.r., II. 57l!aT. Told J4SCN J2nd fldt!"'"'~N.l~ - @ showing 28CI ap

81 of 117 M

" . ·

ItO

::;

& "' RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Appendix 8: Wetland Pacific Corp. Constructed Wetlands Brochure

WetlandsPaciflc corp. 921 Maughan Road, Nanaimo, BC V9X 1J2 Canada Telephone 250-722-7117; E-mail [email protected]; www.wetlandspacinc.com

Free Water Surface Constructed Wet1ands

Constructed wet1ands are a series of shallow ponds built to treat and remove contaminants from water utilizing the same principals and multiple mechanisms as natural wetlands.

Free Water Constructed Wetland at Lighthouse Pub, Port Renfrew, BC

Constructed wetlands have multiple pathways for contaminant removal. An incomplete list:

• sedimentation • filtration • heterotrophic and chemotropic microbial decomposition • precipitation • chemical binding • re-oxygenation through photosynthesis • gaseous exchange with the atmosphere, submerged surfaces areas, and soils • sunlight • alternating oxic and anoxic zones with differing microbial communities

Wetland feasibility analysis. design, biota supply, construction, monitoring & management Copydght© 2010 WetlandsPacific Corp. All rights reserved l of 4 82 of 117 OKANAGAN 111 1 I ALC & Rezoning Application 55 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Free Water Surface Constructed Wetlands

Free water constructed wetland in Prince George, DC

Constructed wetlands are essentially a horizontal flow, submerged trickling fllters. They have a vast

surface area comprised of plant material, living and dead, which are heavily colonized by microbial, invertebrate, and vertebrate populations. They purify the water that flows through them including persistent organic pollutants such as DDT. Compared to conventional treatment methods, they tend to be simple, inexpensive, and environmentally friendly. They utilize a far smaller ecological footprint than other advanced wastewater treatment mechanisms. Capital costs approximate those of parklands, and operational and maintenance costs that can be ten per cent of that of an advanced physio-chemical treatment plant. Unlike conventional engineered treatment plants, the ancillary beneflts such as parkland, education, wildlife habitat, groundwater recharge, temperature amelioration, storm water attenuation, and a number of other benefits can exceed the wastewater treatment values.

83 of 117 56 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Free Water Surface Constructed Wetlands

Free Water Constructed Werland ar Arcata Marsh and Wildlife Sanctuary , Arcata, California

Constructed wetlands may be used to treat water from many different sources:

• Domestic wastewater from cities, small communities, individual homes, and businesses • Storm water runoff including streets and highways • Mine drainage, even if acidic • Agricultural wastewater (including livestock waste, cropland runoff, and drainage water) • Landfill leachate • Industrial wastewater • Removes pharmaceuticals, endocrine disrupting compounds and personal care products

84 of 117 OKANAGAN II 1 I ALC & Rezoning Application 57 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Free Water Surface Constructed Wetlands

Constructed wet1ands differ from natural wetlands in that they do not have short circuits through

them and being intensively planted at construction they develop the desired diversity of plants and associated organisms rapidly. They are very inhospitable places for human enteric bacteria. Their life span can exceed a century. So long as they are undisturbed they are a sink for heavy metals and carbon. {Temperate latitude constructed wetlands have been demonstrated to sequester more carbon dioxide than tropical rain forests due to the latter's extreme nutrient deficiency.)

Free Water Constructed Wetland at Lighthouse Pub, Port Ren!Tew, BC

85 of 117 58 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1 Appendix 10: Yarrow Ecovillage Zoning Bylaw (Chilliwack)

8 .11 (ECOVILLAGE) ZONE

(1 ) DESCRiPTION The EV (ECOVJLLAGE) ZONE consists of land in Yarrow, having a legal description ofL ot A District Lot 83 Group 2 New Westminster District Plan BCP8754 (commonly described as 42312 Yarrow Central Road), where a residential development employing sustainable technology and a co-operative social and ownership model has been considered and approved by Council.

(2) PERMIITED USES The following USES shall be the only USES permitted in this zone unless specifically permitted elsewhere in this BYLAW by GENERAL or SPECIAL REGULATIONS. (a) RESTRICTED AGRICULTURE (b) INCIDENTAL AGRiCULTURAL SALES (c) ONE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (i) single .family detached dwelling (d) TWO FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (i) duplex (e) MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (i) townhouse (f) RURAL ANCILLARY USES (subject to Special Regulation) (g) COTTAGE INDUSTRY (subject to Special Regulation) (h) CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL (i) BOARDING U) OUTDOOR RECREATION (i) GUEST RANCH (subject to Special Regulation) (k) PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ASSEMBLY (subject to Special Regulation ) (1) OFF STREET PARKING

(3) LOT SIZE (minimum) 7.5 ha

(4) LOT DIMENSIONS Where a parcel being created by subdivision fronts on a road or highway the minimum frontage on the road or highway shall be 10% of the perimeter of the lot or greater, unless exempted by the Approving Officer.

86 of 117 60 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezon i n~J Application RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

Appendix 9: OUR Ecovillage Zoning By-law (CVRD) 11.2 CD-2 RURAL COMJ>REHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT 2- ECOVJLLAGE

Subject to compliance with the general regulations set out in Parts 4. 5. 6 an d 7 of this Bylaw. the fo ll m-vi ng regul ati ons appl-y in the CD-2 Zone: 1. Permitted Uses The following principal uses and no others arc permitted on a parcel in the CD-2 Zone: a. Agriculture, horti culture; b. Single family dwe llings, not to exceed an overall density of one dwelling per hectare; The foii O\·Vi ng accessory uses are permitted in the CD-2 Zone: a. Fam1 gate sales; b. Educational use, in cluding outdoor kitchen facili ty; c. Bed and breakfast accommodation; d. Six camping spaces; e. Home-based business.

2. Impervious Surfaces and Pm·cel Coverage Limit Impervious surface coverage of a parcel in the CD-2 Zone shall not exceed 15%, of \Vhich not more than 10 % may be parcel coverage.

3. Building Height The height of bu il dings and structures in the CD-2 Zone shall not exceed: a. I 0 metres lor a principal building and structure; b. 7.5 metres for an accessory building and struct ure. 4. Setbacks The fo llowing minimum setbacks for buildings and structu res apply in the CD-2 Zone: Type of Parcel Line All Uses Front parcel line I 0 metres Interior side parcel lin e 7.5 metres Ex teri or side parcel line 7.5 metres Rear parcel line 7.5 metres 5. Special Regulations In the CD-2 Zone. the fo ll owing special regulations apply: a. The tloor area ofench dwelling sha ll not exceed 235 111 ::!. except in the case of one dwelling, whi ch may have unlimited fl oor area and bed and breakrast accom modati on within it; b. The aggregate total number of bedrooms permitted on a parcel is 25; c. Educational act ivities shall be limited to th irty non-resident visitors, and be accessory to the residential and agricultural uses on the parcel; d. Residenti al dwelling unit density is limited to one unit per hectare; e. Ed ucational activities sha ll be limited to between the hours of 7: 00 am to 9:00pm. 6. Minimum Parcel Size The minimum parcel size in the CD-2 Zone is X hectares. 73 South Coll'il·lwn Drafi Zoning Brftllt'-Murch 20 I 2 87 of 117 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application 59 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

8.11 EV (ECOVILLAGE) ZONE (cont'd)

(5) DENSITY (maximum 37 dwelling units) Maximum development permitted on the parcels or defined areas within the overall Developntent Parcel shall he: (a) PARCEL ONE: All uses. (b) PARCEL TWO: (maximum 16 dwelling units)- All uses except Agricultural Sales, Convenience Commercial, Guest Ranch and Public or Private Assembly.

YARROW CENTRAL ROAD ---

E 42312 "' ~ • PARCEL N ONE

L----~- 1------il r--__1------t ~ r PARCEL - ~ cl - -_..___TW______.O -----1 (Remainder)

(6) LOT COVERAGE (nwximum) (a) Residential Use IO% (b) Animal enclosures JOOnl

(7) FLOOR AREA RATIO (maximum) 0.2

(8) SETBACKS (minimum distance to) FLL RLL ISLL ESLL (a) RESIDENTIAL 7.5 7.5 3.0 7.5 (b) URBAN ANCILLARY 7.5 7.5 3.0 7.5 (c) animal enclosures 7.5 7.5 3.0 7.5 (not exceeding 10m2 in area) (d) manure storage 30.0 30.0 30.0 30.0 (e) roadside stands 3.0 7.5 3.0 3.0 (f) all other uses 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5

(9) SITING (a) The siting of "roadside stands" shall be subject to approval by the City of Chilliwack Engineering Department.

88 of 117 OI

8.11 EV (ECOVILLAGE) ZONE (cont'd)

(b) Dwelling units and Animal Enclosures shall be separated by a minimum separation distance of 15 .Om. (c) Where more than one structure for residential use is sited on a lot or within a "strata " development, the minimum separation between said structures shall be 3 .Om.

( 10) BUILDING HEIGHT (maxilnum) (a) RESIDENTiAL !O.Om (b) ANCILLARY USES 6.0m (c) agricultural buildings NIA (d) roadside stands 3.0m (e) GUEST RANCH IO .Om (t) COMMERCIAL or ASSEMBLY 7.5m (subject to Special Regulations)

(11) OFF-STREET PARKING/ SERVICING AND ROADS (a) Shall be developed in accordance with the requirements o_f Section 5.13 of this BYLAW. (b) Shall provide at least the following minimum number of spaces: (i) 0.5 spaces per dwelling unit (ii) 1 space per 10 bed spaces guest ranch (iii) 1 space per I OOni assembly (iv) 1 space per 30m2 commercial (c) The development site shall be serviced in accordance with the requirements of the City and/or any other servicing agreement(s) between the City and the applicant or their successors.

( 12) OFF-STREET LOADING NIA

(13) AMENITY AREA/OPEN SPACE DEDICATION (a) Shall be developed in accordance with the requirements ofSection 5.02 of this BYLAW. (b) A private amenity area not less than 15nl in area and having minimum dimensions of not less than 3m shall he provided for and comiguous to each dwelling unit. (c) A common amenity area of not less than 200m2 and a minimum dimension o_f not less than 6m shall be provided for residential developments with more than 10 units.

89 of 117 62 OI

90 of 117 2801

::IJ

::; ::;

~ )>

o· 5

()" )>

A ~ )> )> )>

(t) 0

z G)

z Qo

0 en

0 N

r D

"Q. CD RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.1

8.11 EV(ECOVILLAGE) ZONE (cont~d)

( 14) FENCING, SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING

(a) Shall be developed in accordanc~ with the requirements of Section 5.05 of this bylaw.

(15) SIGNS (a) Shall be developed in accordance with the requirements of the City Signs Bylaw, in force from time to time.

( 16) SPECIAL REGULATIONS (a) RURAL ANCILLARY or COTTAGE INDUSTRY use shall not exceed one (100m2 area) per dwelling unit. (b) GUEST RANCH use shall be restricted to accommodation for the travelling public andfarm workers on a seasonal basis only, 20 bed spaces maximum. (c) PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ASSEMBLY use shall be restricted to a maximum capacity of 30 non-residents. (d) COMMERCIAL and PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ASSEMBLY height may exceed 10m if structures existing at the time ofapplication November 14, 2005 are convertedfor use. (AB #3286)

91 of 117 OKANAGAN I ALC & Rezoning Application 63 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.2

REGIONAL DISTRICT of NORTH OKANAGAN REPORT

File No.: 13-0037-D-TA

TO: Electoral Area Advisory Committee FROM: Planning Department DATE: November 14, 2013 Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment No. 2589, 2013 (Agri-Tourism SUBJECT: Accommodation Provisions)

RECOMMENDATION:

That Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment No. 2589, 2013 to include the Agricultural Land Commission Agri-tourism provisions into Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 be given First Reading; and further,

That Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment No. 2589, 2013 be referred to various agencies such as the Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee, Advisory Planning Committees, Ministry of Agriculture, and Agricultural Land Commission.

BACKGROUND:

Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2589, 2013 to include Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) Agri-Tourism provisions into Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is a Regional District of North Okanagan (RDNO) initiated amendment supported by Board of Directors resolution passed January 16, 2013:

"That staff be directed to prepare a report regarding incorporating the Agricultural Land Commission Agri-tourism provisions into Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003."

OFFICIAL COMMUNITY PLAN:

The resolution noted above originated from recommendations made in the recently adopted Electoral Areas "D" and "E" Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 2485, 2011 (adopted March 21 , 2012) and the Electoral Area "F'' OCP Amendment Bylaw No. 2484, 2011 (Kingfisher Local Area Plan (LAP), adopted September 5, 2012). The specific policies and action items listed in the OCP and Kingfisher LAP are listed below:

Electoral Areas "D" and "E" Official Community Plan Bylaw No. 2485, 2011 - Section 4. Agricultural and Resource Use:

4.2.12 - Support ALC policies regarding agri-toursim businesses. An amendment to the Zoning Bylaw is recommended to ensure consistency between different RDNO areas.

92 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.2

Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment No. 2589, 2013 (Agri-Tourism Accommodation Provisions) Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee- November 14, 2013 Page 2

Electoral Area "F" OCP Amendment Bylaw No. 2484, 2011 (KLAP) - Section 6. Local Area Plan Recommendations and Policies:

6.7.1 - Review Zoning Bylaw No. 1888,2003 Section 301

Review Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 Section 301 which is currently more restrictive than ALR policies which allow secondary housing units, farm accommodation , farm tourism activities and recreational uses on rural lands provided that these activities will not impact the rural and agricultural nature of the area. The Agricultural Land Reserve Act, its regulations and policies include provision for individuals to pursue limited non-farm uses. The rural stakeholders commented that they would like to see additional opportunities for them to earn an income from their land but they do not feel that there are appropriate avenues for them to follow. RDNO should clarify how the variou s policies of the ALC apply to the Kingfisher area and they could produce a short bulletin on what opportunities are available through application to the ALC and are provided within the rural zoning categories within the plan area.

Policy 6. 7.1: Review Zoning Bylaw No.1888, 2003 Section 301 in relation to uses permitted in the ALR.

6.7.2- Support Recreational Opportunities on ALR and Rural Lands

There are likely many recreational activities that could be accommodated on rural parcels that do not require extensive or permanent construction activities. Provided a land owner can demonstrate that there are no long term impacts to their land or neighboring rural parcels, RDNO should be supportive of non-farm use applications to the ALC for recreation based opportunities within the rural areas of the plan. Some examples might be zip-line operation , cycling and hiking tours, horseback riding, limited bed and breakfast operations, eco-tours etc.

Policy 6.7.2: Support recreational opportunities in the plan area that do not negatively impact lands within the ALR and Rural Areas.

ZONING BYLAW:

Section 301.1 of Zoning Bylaw 1888, 2003 prohibits Agri-Tourism accommodation in conjunction with a number of other restricted uses within the Agricultural Land Reserve. This section currently applies to all Electoral Areas within the Regional District.

AGRICULTURAL LAND COMMISSION ACT AND REGULATIONS:

The Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) Act and Regulations permits Agri-Tourism accommodation within the ALR; however, allows local government to prohibit the use. Section 3(1) of the Agricultural Land Reserve Use, Subdivision and Procedure Regulation states the following:

Section 3(1) "the following land uses are permitted in an agricultural land reserve unless otherwise prohibited by a local governmentbylaw:

(a) Accommodation for agri-tourism on a farm if: i. All or part of the parcel on which the accommodation is located is classified as a farm under the Assessment Act. ii. The accommodation is limited to 10 sleeping units in total of seasonal campsites, seasonal cabins or short term use of bedrooms including bed and breakfast bedrooms under paragraph (d) , and

93 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.2

Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment No. 2589, 2013 (Agri-Tourism Accommodation Provisions) Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee- November 14, 2013 Page 3

iii. The total developed area for buildings, landscaping and access for the accommodation is less than 5% of the parcel;

Section 1(1) "agri-tourism" means a tourist activity, service or facility accessory to land that is classified as a farm under the Assessment Act.

"sleeping unit" means (a) A bedroom or other area used as a bedroom in a cabin, dwelling or accessory building, and (b) A tent or recreational vehicle on a campsite.

Agri-Tourism Accommodation in Other Jurisdictions:

A number of jurisdictions within the Okanagan have adopted Agri-Tourism provisions through Zoning Bylaw amendments. Given the authority of local governments to regulate Agri-Tourism Accommodation there are a number of policies which have been employed to limit use and density beyond the minimum requirements outlined in the ALC Act. Some of these policies include minimum parcel size and/or density ratio, parking requirements, use of cabin or campsite units, limitations on cabin units including kitchen facilities and size, and duration of stay.

A summary of select local and regional government approaches to Agri-Tourism accommodation is listed below:

Kitchen Facilities Parking Max Duration Min. Lot Size Cabins Permitted Cabin Size Municipality Permitted Requirements of Stay Within Cabins One Hundred Eighty (180) City of Vernon 2.0 ha (5 acres) Yes Not Specified Not Specified 1.0 per unit days in one (1) calendar year Ninety (90) days 1.1 per in one (1) campsite space District of Lake Country 2.0 ha (5 acres) Yes Max 90.0 m2 Yes calendar year- 2 per tourist Campsite cabin Spaces Only available 4.0 ha (10 between April 1 City of Kelowna Yes Not Specified No 1.0 per unit acres) and October 31 each year 30.0 m" (for 4 units for first No (units must be Thirty (30) days Regional District of Central units located 3.8 ha (9.4 located in N/A 1.0 per unit in one (1) within principle Okanagan acres) principle dwelling) calendar year dwellinQ) Regional District of Thirty (30) days 4.0 ha (10 Yes (all units must 2 Okanagan Similkameen Max 30.0 m No 1.0 per unit in one (1) acres) be attached) (Rural Osoyoos) calendar year

PLANNING ANALYSIS:

To date the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No.1888, 2003 has prohibited Agri Tourism uses. This report is intended to explore the issue of allowing Agri-Tourism Accommodation provisions within the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) in Electoral Areas "D" and "E" and the portion of Electoral Area "F" within the Kingfisher Local Area Plan boundary. This would apply to only lands designated within the ALR. Agri-Tourism is an allowed use by the ALC regu lations which also permit other activities, other than accommodation, on land that is-classified as a farm under the Assessment Act, if the use is temporary and seasonal, and· promotes or markets farm products grown, raised or processed on the farm. This report only explores permitting Agri-Tourism Accommodation.

94 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.2

Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment No. 2589, 2013 (Agri-Tourism Accommodation Provisions) Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee- November 14, 2013 Page4

Farm Classification Agri-Tourism accommodation is permitted only on lands designated "farm" by the BC Assessment Authority. This is a fixed requirement by the ALC's regulations and by their Policy definition, if the assessment change, the use is no longer permitted. While staff has the ability to determine if a property currently has farm status through the Property Information Management System, there is not a mechanism which will notify staff if farm status is not approved in subsequent years.

Number of Units

The ALC's regulations permit a maximum of ten Agri-Tourism accommodation units, with one cabin or campsite equaling one unit. The maximum limit of sleeping units also includes the number of bed and breakfast bedrooms permitted. As an example, if there are already 3 bed and breakfast bedrooms on a parcel, only 7 additional sleeping units may be permitted under the ALC's regulations. Staff suggest the Board could regulate this number and restrict the number of units based on parcel size or some other formula.

Minimum Lot Size

The ALC Act does not dictate a mm1mum lot size requirement for Agri-Tourism accommodation, however requires that the total developed area for the use, including buildings, landscaping and access (driveways and parking) must be less than 5% of the total parcel area. For example, a 2 ha (5 acres) property could utilize 4,356 fe and a 4 ha (1 0 acre) property could utilize approximately 10,890ft 2 for Agri-Tourism accommodation purposes. This does not restrict the actual number of units allowed on the property with exception of the stated 10 unit maximum. In consideration of this, staff feel a minimum lot size standard to regulate the density of units is prudent. This would help avoid compact, high density rental use on small parcels which could be detrimental to farming capabilities and create land use conflicts.

Planning Staff recommend a tiered density scheme shown below:

Parcel Size <4.0 4.0-8.0 >8.0 (hectares) Number of Units 0 5 10

Cabin and Campsite Use

Agri-Tourism accommodation is intended to be an accessory use for tourism rental purposes only. ALC Regulation allows for both campsite and cabin type units to be used for tourism accommodation. The use of cabin structures is considered a reasonable form of providing agri-tourism; although they can be difficult to regulate as they are prone to be used as prohibited year round rental units. It is proposed that the size and amenities be strictly regulated if the Board chooses to support the use of cabins as Agri-Tourism accommodation units. To prevent potential contravention it is recommended that cooking facilities not be permitted within the units and size be limited to 30 m2 for Agri-Tourism accommodation cabins. The total area would not include attached washroom facilities.

Parking Requirements

To address potential parking issues associated with short term rental accommodations staff recommended that all parking be provided on site at a ratio of one parking space per Agri-Tourism accommodation unit. Staff does not consider parking to be a significant issue due to general size and nature of parcels which will use the Agri-Tourism accommodation provisions; however one space per unit should be easily accommodated and is consistent with surrounding jurisdictions.

95 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.2

Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment No. 2589, 2013 (Agri-Tourism Accommodation Provisions) Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee- November 14, 2013 Page 5

Duration of Stay

As identified in ALC Policy, the use of Agri-Tourism accommodation must be seasonal, which interpreted by the Commission means less than 12 months of the year. Seasonal Use under current RDNO Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is defined as a period no longer than 182 days during a calendar year. To further emphasize the short term rental characteristics of Agri-Tourism uses it is recommended that the duration of stay be limited to thirty (30) days of accommodation of any person in one (1) calendar year.

Electoral Area Implications

The proposed bylaw amendment would apply only to Electoral Areas "D" and "E" and properties within the Kingfisher Local Area Plan boundary of Electoral Area "F". The bylaw would not apply to the remaining areas of Electoral Area "F" or areas "B" and "C". To identify the area in which the bylaw amendment would apply to, map Schedule "I" will be added to Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 which outlines the Kingfisher area. Consistency throughout the entire Regional District could be accomplished through a simple text amendment in the future if desired. Alternatively, the Board could direct staff to include Agri-Tourism accommodations in all Electoral Areas.

FINANCIAL/BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS:

There are no financial implications directly associated with the Bylaw amendment itself other than staff time to prepare the bylaw and the cost of advertising that is required by the statutory process. There are financial and capacity implications as a result of the change in regulation that remove the prohibition due to an increase potential for compliance issues and the resources necessary to respond.

PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS:

No new personnel are required to implement the staff recommendation. It is expected that existing staff can respond to complaints and building inspections, if required. The implementation of Agri Tourism Accommodation provisions may lead to a minor increase in required bylaw enforcement to ensure compliance of structures and use.

SUMMARY:

The inclusion of Agri-Tourism provisions into Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is based on current policy direction from the Electoral Areas "D" and "E" Official Community Plan, the Kingfisher Local Area Plan and endorsed by Board Resolution. This report provides explanation of requirements from the Agricultural Land Commission Act and Regulation in addition to providing further recommendations on practical application of Agri-Tourism regulations. The proposed amendment would apply only to Electoral Areas "D" and "E" and the Kingfisher Local Area Plan boundary.

It is recommended that Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment No. 2589, 2013 to include the Agricultural Land Commission Agri-tourism provisions into Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 be given First Reading and be referred to various agencies such as the Regional Agricultural Advisory Committee, Advisory Planning Committees, Ministry of Agriculture, and Agricultural Land Commission.

96 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.2

Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment No. 2589, 2013 (Agri-Tourism Accommodation Provisions) Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee- November 14, 2013 Page6

Submitted by:

Laura Frank, CIP, RPP Sustainability Coordinator Approved For Inclusion:

Endorsed by: ..-!" --eJ _ ... () _

Rob)~ saris, MCIP, RPP General Manager, Planning and Building

. .

97 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.2

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

BYLAW No. 2589

A bylaw to amend the text of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 to include agri-tourism provisions of the Agricultural Land Commission Act

WHEREAS pursuant to Section 903 [Zoning bylaws] of the Local Government Act, R.S .B.C. , 1996, Chapter 323, as amended, and Regulations passed pursuant thereto, the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan may, by Bylaw, divide the whole or part of the Regional District into zones, name each zone, establish boundaries for the zones and regulate uses within those zones;

AND WHEREAS the Board has created zones, named each zone, established boundaries for these zones and regulated uses within those zones by Bylaw No. 1888, being the "Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003" and amendments thereto

AND WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 895 [Development approval procedures] of the Local Government Act, the Board must, by bylaw, define procedures under which an owner of land may apply for an amendment to a Zoning Bylaw and must consider every application for an amendment to the bylaw;

AND WHEREAS the Board has enacted the "Regional District of North Okanagan Development Application Procedures and Administrative Fees Bylaw No. 2315, 2008 and amendments thereto" to establish procedures to amend an Official Community Plan, a Zoning Bylaw, or a Rural Land Use Bylaw, or to issue a Permit:

AND WHEREAS the Board is desirous to amend the Zoning Bylaw to allow for Agri-Tourism provisions of the Agricultural Land Commission Act;

NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Regional District of North Okanagan, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:

A. CITATION

This Bylaw may be cited as the "Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment No. 2589, 2013".

B. AMENDMENTS

1. Amend Division Two - Interpretation by adding the following definitions:

"Agri-Tourism" means any agri-tourism activity defined under the Agricultural Land Commission Act and related regulation or policy, as amended form time to time.

"Agri-Tourism Accommodation" means accommodation for short term rental to the traveling public on an operating farm or ranch, which is accessory to and related to, the principle farm use of the parcel. Typical uses include but are not limited to Bed and Breakfast, Agri-Tourism Campsites and Agri-Tourism Cabins. The maximum length of stay shall not exceed 30 days of accommodation of any one person during a calendar year.

98 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.2

Pa e 2

"Agri-Tourism Accommodation Unit" means one (1) campsite, one (1) sleeping unit within an Agri-Tourism Cabin, or one (1) bedroom within a dwelling used for Bed and Breakfast purposes.

"Agri-Tourism Campsite" means an area that may be occupied by no more than one (1) tent, holiday trailer, motor home, camper, or similar recreational vehicles for the accommodation of agricultural tourists. Campsite space(s) shall be clearly identified by a unique number of similar designations and shall not be used for year round storage.

"Agri-Tourism Cabin" means a detached building used for the accommodation of 2 agricultural tourists. The maximum gross floor area per tourist cabin shall not exceed 30m , not including attached washroom facilities. An Agri-Tourism Cabin is not permitted to contain a kitchen or to be used as a residence or dwelling.

2. Amend Division Three - Basic Provisions, Section 301 of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 by removing Section 301.1.a.

3. Amend Division Three- Basic Provisions, Section 301 of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 by adding Section 301.3 as follows:

Notwithstanding the provisions of this bylaw, Agri-Tourism Accommodation is permitted within Regional District Electoral Areas "D" and "E" and within the Kingfisher Local Area Plan boundary of Electoral Area "F" as shown on Schedule "I" of this bylaw.

3. Agri-Tourism Accommodation is subject to the following regulations:

a. Agri-Tourism Accommodation use must be accessory to the principle use.

b. All or part of the parcel on which the accommodation is located is classified as 'farm' by the BC Assessment Authority.

c. Agri-Tourism Accommodation units are not permitted on less than 4 ha, and no more than five (5) units are permitted on parcels 4 ha up to 8 ha, and no more than ten (10) units are permitted on parcels 8 ha and greater.

d. Agricultural Land Commission approval is required for Agri-Tourism Accommodation with more than 10 units.

e. The total developed area for buildings, landscaping and access for the accommodation is less than 5% of the parcel.

f. No one person shall stay within an Agri-Tourism Accommodation Unit for more than thirty (30) dates in one (1) Calendar year.

4. Amend Division Eleven - Off-Street Parking - Schedule "B" of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 by adding the following to 1101.3 Schedule of Parking Requirements in alphabetical order:

I Agri-Tourism Accommodation I 1 per sleeping unit

5. Add Division Eighteen - Schedule "I" - Kingfisher Local Area Plan Boundary for Agri Tourism Accommodation attached to this Bylaw as Schedule "A".

99 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.2

Pa e 3

6. Amend Division One, Section 102 - Schedules by adding Schedule I - Kingfisher Local Area Plan Boundary for Tourism Accommodation.

Read a First and Second Time this day of • 2013

Advertised on this day of , 2013 This day of , 2013

Public Hearing held pursuant to the provisions of this day of , 2013 Section 890 of the Local Government Act

Read a Third Time this day of • 2013

Approved by Minister of Transportation and this day of . 2013 Infrastructure (Transportation Acts. 52(3))

ADOPTED this day of 12013

Chair Corporate Officer

100 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.2

DIVISION EIGHTEEN - KINGFISHER LOCAL AREA PLAN BOUNDARY FOR AGRI-TOURISM ACCOMMODATION

-:-·-.:....~t·

I - L --

_, __ . l ... . I I • j . I

.:··

• --:--! . Schedule "A" '\ Attached to and forming part of Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment . No.2589, 2013 Dated at Goldstream, BC, this_ day of ______, 2013

Corporate Officer

Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 11

101 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.3

REGIONAL DISTRICT of NORTH OKANAGAN REPORT

File No.: 12-0507-B-TA I 3060.03.03

TO: Electoral Area Advisory Committee FROM: Planning Department DATE: November 18, 2013 SUBJECT: Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2592 [Secondary Suites]

RECOMMENDATION:

That Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2592, 2013 which proposes to amend the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 to permit secondary suites within single family dwellings on parcels in the Small Holding (S.H), Country Residential (C.R), Non-Urban (N.U), and l-arge Holding (L.H) zones be given First Reading; and further,

That Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment No. 2592, 2013 be referred to the Interior Health Authority and the Okanagan Basin Water Board for review and comment. aACKGROUND:

At the Regular Meeting held on October 17, 2012, the Board of Directors directed staff to prepare a report regarding secondary suites in the Electoral Areas. This direction was provided In response to a recommendation made by the Electoral Area Advisory Committee at their meeting held on October 4, 2012. At that meeting, the Committee talked about amending the Regional District Zoning Bylaw to permit secondary suites on properties that are currently zoned to permit two family dwellings. The above direction was not intended to increase the density within these zones but rather to provide an affordable alternative to constructing a two family dwelling and an opportunity to improve the safety of illegal suites.

In response to the Board's direction, staff prepared Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2592 which proposed to amend the Zoning Bylaw to allow secondary suites as a permitted use on lots with an ~rea of 2 ha or greater in the Small Holding (S.H), Country Residential (C.R), Non~Urban (N .U), and ~arge Holding (L.H) zones. At the Regular Meeting of July 17, 2013 the Board of Directors received Bylaw No. 2592. After considering the Bylaw, the Board resolved to direct staff to prepare amendments to the Zoning Bylaw "to permit secondary suites within accessory residential buildings ~nd to permit secondary suites on lots that are less than 2 ha in size."

In follow-up to the Board's direction, staff requested the Interior Health Authority and the Okanagan ~asin Water Board to provide comments on the matter.

Interior Health

As noted above, staff requested feedback from Interior Health on the Board's direction. Specifically, ~taft asl

102 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.3

Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2592 [Secondary Suites] Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee - November 18, 2013 Page 2

1. What Is the minimum property size threshold for permitting suites on rural properties serviced with on-site sewage disposal systems?; and, 2. What are Interior Health's water servicing requirements for a single family dwelling with a suite, specifically can one well serve both a dwelling and its secondary suite without the need for a community water system?

In a written reply dated September 17, 2013, an Environmental Health Officer for IHA responded that as long as the parcel is large enough and suitable to sustain into the future the required sewerage disposal system(s) and water supply system in compliance with applicable legislation, there should be no issues.

The response from IHA also explained that a dwelling with a secondary suite connected to the same water source and distribution system as the primary residence constitutes a "water supply system" ~nd as such the Drinking Water Protection Act (DWPA) and Drinking Water Protection Regulation (DWPR) would apply. Under the DWPA, a water supply system means a domestic water system, other than: 1) a domestic water system that serves only one single-family residence; and 2) equipment, works or facilities prescribed by regulation as being excluded.

The DWPA and DWPR require that a person must have certain qualifications in order to operate, maintain and repair a water supply system, must have a valid operating permit, and must be knowledgeable of applicable standards and requirements. Water monitoring and testing are to be undertaken in accordance with the regulations and a person responsible for a water supply system rnay be required to prepare a written emergency response and contingency plan and/or an assessment response plan which would identify measures to address threats to the water supply. As noted in the September 17· 2013 response from IHA, in June 2012 the Regional Health Authority Directors sent a joint letter to the Ministry of Health requesting that the DWPA and DWPR exclude two private residences served by the same water system on a single parcel of land from the definition of a "water supply system". IHA reports that changes to the legislation have not yet occurred therefore the ''~ater supply system" rules remain applicable to single family dwellings with secondary suites.

Okanagan Basin Water Board

As follow-up to the Board's direction, staff consulted with the Okanagan Basin Water Board (OBWB) with respect to the policy that local governments may not be eligible for senior government Infrastructure funding should they continue to approve the creation of new lots less than 1 ha where such lots would be serviced by on-site sewage disposal. Although subdivision is not at issue regarding the matter of secondary suites, the premise behind the "1 ha rule" is the recognition that the more dwelling units there are using septic systems in a given area, the greater the chance that ~ystems may malfunction and the less opportunity there will be to find sufficient, suitable, available !~nd for replacement effluent dispersal fields.

The OBWB was asked to advise on maximum density provisions related to suites within detached accessory residential buildings (i.e. carriage houses) and secondary suites within principal dwellings on properties serviced by on-site septic sewage disposal systems. The Executive Director of OBWB i13sponded that carriage houses on lots 1 ha or smaller would undermine the principle of the 1 ha rule of their grant program however secondary suites connected to the same septic system as the primary residence would be acceptable. The 1 ha rule originates from the provincial government's direction in 2000 to all local governments in BC that to be eligible for sewer infrastructure funding, they must provide evidence of a bylaw to the effect that no new lots less than 1 ha will be subdivided unless connected to a community sanitary sewer system. OBWB has advised the RDNO that they are extending the concept of the 1 ha policy to include detached secondary dwellings.

103 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.3

Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2592 [Secondary Suites] Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee- November 18, 2013 Page 3

PLANNING ANALYSIS:

To address the direction provided by the Board with regard to secondary suites within the principal single family dwelling, it is recommended that the Regional District Zoning Bylaw be amended by listing secondary suites as a permitted use in the Small Holding (S.H), Country Residential (C.R), t'Jon-Urban (N.U) and Large Holding (L.H) zones and by stipulating that secondary suites in these zones must comply with the following:

1. Secondary suites must be located in a single family dwelling; 2. No more than one (1) secondary suite shall be permitted within a single family dwelling; 3. No more than one (1) secondary suite shall be permitted per lot; 4. Secondary suites shall not be permitted on lots containing an ancillary single family dwelling or a two family dwelling; 5. Secondary suites on lots within the Small Holding (S.H), Country Residential (C.R), Non-Urban (N .U) and Large Holding (L.H) zones shall not be permitted on lots that are smaller than 1 ha; 6. The maximum floor area of a secondary suite shall not exceed the lesser of 90 m2 (968 square feet) or 40% of the habitable floor area of the single family dwelling; 7. One (1) off-street parking space must be provided for each secondary suite. The parking space may not be provided in tandem with any other parking space required by this Bylaw; 8. Secondary suites must comply with all relevant Regional District bylaws and the British Columbia Building Code; and 9. Secondary suites must be located in a building and on property which is a single real estate entity. No strata titling will be permitted.

With regard to the direction provided by the Board to allow secondary suites within accessory residential buildings, it is to be noted that "ancillary single family dwellings" are currently a permitted use within the C.R, N.U, and L.H zones provided the subject parcel is at least 2 ha in size. An 1'ancillary single family dwelling" is, essentially, a form of "secondary suite within an accessory r~sidential building". An ancillary single family dwelling is limited to a maximum gross floor area of 75 ~quare metres (807.3 square feet) and must be ancillary to (i.e. smaller than) an existing principal siJ1gle family dwelling on the same lot.

What the current Zoning Bylaw regulations for ancillary single family dwellings do not provide for is a s~condary suite within a detached building that also serves another purpose (i.e. shop or barn) and which would have a gross floor area in excess of 75 square metres. It is recognized that having a residential suite in combination with a workshop, garage, barn, indoor riding arena, etc. may be ~esirable to some land owners. Staff, however, do not recommend amending the Zoning Bylaw to permit secondary suites within detached buildings with a gross floor area greater than 75 square meters as there is a tendency for the dwelling unit to be surreptitiously expanded in such a way that jhe dwelling unit may then pose health and safety risks if it is in contravention of Building, Fire, ~lumbing, Electrical Codes, and/or Health regulations.

in addition, it is not recommended to allow ancillary single family dwellings on either ALR or non-ALR lots which are less than 2 ha for the following reasons: · ·· 1. ALR lands: Although the ALC has accepted current Zoning Bylaw regulations allowing ancillary single family dwellings on lands in the ALR, the Commission's acceptance of this provision may be jeopardized in the event the Zoning Bylaw regulations are amended in any way which would expand the potential for non-farm use (i.e. residential dwellings) on ALR lands. Secondary dwellings in detached buildings with their associated driveways, sewage disposal areas, domestic water infrastructure, landscaped areas, etc. would typically consume more arable land than a secondary suite wholly contained within a principal single family dwelling.

104 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.3

Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2592 [Secondary Suites] Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee- November 18, 2013 Page4

2. Non-ALR lands: The OBWB has indicated that carriage houses (secondary suites in a detached building) on lots larger than 1 ha would not compromise the "1 ha rule" from a grant eligibility perspective. Staff however do not recommend that such secondary dwellings be permitted on lots less than 2 ha as lands that are not in the ALR are often characterized by steeper slopes, areas of bedrock, high water table, or other features which are not only less amenable to agriculture, but also pose challenges to on-site septic sewage disposal. The physical characteristics of non-ALR parcels less than 2 ha may compromise the long term ability of the land to accommodate both a principal single family dwelling and a separate secondary dwelling together with two domestic water wells, two separate on-site septic sewerage disposal systems or a combined on-site sewerage system, and potentially, one or two back-up septic sewerage dispersal areas.

The BC Sewerage System Standard Practice Manual (Version 2) states that when two homes occupy one property or a system serves two sources of domestic sewage on one property, the Authorized Person 1 must make sure that the sewerage system complies with the Sewerage System Regulation ~nd local land use bylaws.

The requirements for a water supply system under the DWPA and DWPR, though stringent, do not preclude the Regional District's ability to expand provisions for secondary suites in the Zoning Bylaw however, ensuring compliance with the Act and Regulations may place an additional burden of responsibility on Building Inspection staff.

SUMMARY:

Amending the Zoning Bylaw as outlined above would be consistent with the Policies of the Regional District Official Community Plans and Regional Growth Strategy, all of which either directly support provisions for secondary suites or a greater variety of housing forms, including rental and affordable forms of housing.

~taft recommend that First Reading of Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2592 be supported and further that following First Reading, the Bylaw be referred to the Interior Health Authority and the Okanagan Basin Water Board with a request for their review and written response which staff will report to the Board in advance of Second Reading.

Submitted by:

!Yiarnie Skobalsl

1 As defined by the Sewerage System Regulation

105 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.3

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

BYLAW No. 2592

A bylaw to amend the text of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888 to allow secondary suites in single family dwellings.

WHEREAS pursuant to Section 903 [Zoning bylaws] of the Local Government Act, R.S.B.C., 1996, Chapter 323, as amended, and Regulations passed pursuant thereto, the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan may, by Bylaw, divide the whole or part of the Regional District into zones, name each zone, establish boundaries for the zones and regulate uses within those zones;

AND WHEREAS the Board has created zones, named each zone, established boundaries for these zones and regulated uses within those zones by Bylaw No. 1888 being the "Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003" and amendments thereto;

AND WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 895 {Development approval procedures] of the Local Government Act, the Board must, by bylaw, define procedures under which an owner of land may apply for an amendment to a Zoning Bylaw and must consider every application for an amendment to the bylaw;

AND WHEREAS the Board is desirous to amend the Zoning Bylaw to permit secondary suites within single family dwellings in zones that otherwise permit two family dwellings;

NOW THEREFORE, the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:

A. CITATION

This Bylaw may be cited as the "Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2592, 2013".

B. AMENDMENTS

1. Division Two of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by adding the following definition:

"secondary suite" means a self-contained, accessory dwelling unit located within a single family dwelling. A secondary suite has its own separate cooking, sleeping and bathing facilities. It has direct access to outside without passing through any part of the principal single family dwelling unit.

2. Division Four of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888 is hereby amended by adding the following as Section 409:

106 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.3 Pa e2

Secondary Suites

Secondary suites in the Small Holding (S.H) 1 Country Residential (C.R) 1 Non-Urban (N.U) and Large Holding (L.H) zones must comply with the following:

a) Secondary suites must be located in a single family dwelling; b) No more than one (1) secondary suite shall be permitted within a single family dwelling; c) No more than one (1) secondary suite shall be permitted per lot; d) Secondary suites shall not be permitted on lots containing an ancillary single family dwelling or a two family dwelling; e) Secondary suites on lots within the Small Holding (S.H), Country Residential (C . R) ~ Non-Urban (N.U) and Large Holding (L.H) zones shall not be permitted on lots smaller than 1 ha; f) The maximum floor area of a secondary suite shall not exceed the lesser of 90 m2 (968 square feet) or 40% of the habitable floor area of the single family dwelling; g) One (1) off-street parking space must be provided for each secondary suite. The parking space may not be provided in tandem with any other parking space required by this Bylaw; · h) Secondary suites must comply with all relevant Regional District bylaws and the British Columbia Building Code; and i) Secondary suites must be located in a building and on property which is a single real estate entity. No strata titling will be permitted.

3. Division Eight of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888 is hereby amended by listing secondary suites

as a permitted use in the Small Holding (S.H) 1 Country Residential (C.R), Non-Urban (N.U) and Large Holding (L.H) zones subject to the provisions of Section 409 of this bylaw.

Read a First Time this 11 day of December, 2013 Read a Second Time this day of 12013 Advertised on this day of 12013 this day of 12013

Public Hearing held pursuant to the provisions of this day of 12013 Section 890 of the Local Government Act

Read a Third Time this day of 12013

Approved by Minister of Transportation and this day of ' 2013 Infrastructure (Transportation Acts. 52(3))

ADOPTED this day of 12013

Chair Corporate Officer

107 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.4

REGIONAL DISTRICT of NORTH OKANAGAN REPORT

File No.: 13-0257-B-TA / 3060.03.03

TO: Electoral Area Advisory Committee FROM: Planning Department DATE: September 30, 2013 Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2606, 2013 [Medical Marihuana SUBJECT : Production Facilities]

RECOMMENDATIONS:

That Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2606, 2013, which proposes to amend the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 to establish regulations related to medical marihuana production facilities, be given First Reading; and further,

That Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2606, 2013 be referred to legal counsel, internal departments (including Fire Departments), Agricultural Land Commission, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Health Canada and other various agencies for review and comment prior to consideration of Second Reading.

BACKGROUND:

On December 16, 2012, Health Canada announced changes to Federal Legislation regarding the production and distribution of marihuana for medical purposes. In this regard, the Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations are proposed to become fully implemented by April 1, 2014. The stated objective of the Regulations is to reduce the risks to public health, security and safety of Canadians, while improving the way in which individuals access marihuana for medical purposes. Some of the proposed changes include:  All current personal and designated grow licenses will expire on March 31, 2014.  Production of medicinal marihuana will no longer be permitted in private dwellings.  Production, packaging, labeling and storage of medical marihuana must occur indoors and on the licensed producer’s site.  The licensed producer’s site must be designed in a manner that prevents unauthorized access.  The perimeter of the licensed producer’s site must be secured with an intrusion detection system and a visual monitoring system to detect any attempted or actual unauthorized access.  Areas within a site where cannabis is present must be equipped with a system that filters air to prevent the escape of odours and, if present, pollen.  Medical marihuana will be shipped by producers to users through a courier service. No retailing will occur at the production site.  License holders will need to provide the location of the production sites to the local police force, local fire authority and local government.

108 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.4 Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2606, 2013 [Medical Marihuana Production Facilities] Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – September 30, 2013 Page 2

 Local government regulatory bylaws, including zoning and building bylaws, will need to be respected.

Local governments have the authority to regulate this land use and to direct these uses into specific zones. To date, staff have interpreted the current zoning regulations as permitting medical marihuana operations within zones that allow agricultural, manufacturing and possibly home occupation uses. This report has been prepared to propose amendments to the Regional District Zoning Bylaw that would formally establish regulations related to medical marihuana grow operations.

Agricultural Land Commission

Due to the number of inquiries from local governments and medical marihuana production proponents, the Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) provides the following interpretation with regard to medical marihuana production in the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR).

Section 1 of the ALC Act defines “farm use” as:

An occupation or use of land for farm purposes, including farming of land, plants and animals and any other similar activity designated as farm use by regulation, and includes a farm operation as defined in the Farm Practices Protection (Right to Farm) Act.

Based on the above definition, if a land owner is lawfully sanctioned to produce marihuana for medical purposes, the farming of said plant in the ALR is permitted and would be interpreted by the ALC as being consistent with the definition of “farm use” under the ALC Act.

Notwithstanding the farming of land for the production of medical marihuana, not all activities associated with its production would necessarily be given the same “farm use” consideration. A building such as a greenhouse building solely used to produce medical marihuana may be different than a building complete with business offices and research and development facilities, or other associated facilities. Although these uses may be considered accessory to a farm use, this determination is contingent on the uses being necessary and commensurate with the primary function of the property/building to produce an agricultural product.

The ALC would require information with respect to proposed building(s) before it could provide guidance on whether a particular proposal would be considered consistent with the definition of farm use in its entirely. Proponents are therefore advised to communicate with the ALC in the early stages of developing a farm proposal and in advance of approaching a local government for building permits for a specific property that is within the ALR, to determine whether an application is required for permission under the ALC Act.

Any uses designated as “farm use” are considered to be permitted on properties within the ALR regardless of local government Zoning. Local governments are unable to prohibit farm uses but can regulate matters such as setbacks.

Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888

Based on an interpretation of the Regional District Zoning Bylaw, the Regional District would consider medical marihuana grow operations to be permitted under the following circumstances: 1. Where a property is zoned to permit agricultural uses, is located in the ALR and the production of medical marihuana is limited to greenhouses or other buildings allowed by the ALC. Greenhouses and other buildings are required to be setback 30 m from all property lines; and

109 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.4 Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2606, 2013 [Medical Marihuana Production Facilities] Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – September 30, 2013 Page 3

2. Where a property is zoned to permit a home occupation use only where the use is operated in accordance with the home occupation regulations of the Zoning Bylaw; and 3. Where a property is zoned to permit manufacturing uses and the use is operated in accordance with the regulations of these Zones.

PLANNING ANAYLSIS:

The following issues should be considered when developing land use regulations associated with the production of marihuana for medical purposes:  Proximity and impact on adjacent land uses, especially schools and residences;  The size and configuration of the host property, including access to the property;  Proposed scale of the production facility and any accessory use (i.e. storage);  Servicing requirements (i.e. electrical power, water, sewerage disposal);  Potential noise, glare and vibration generation;  Visual impact and landscaping screening;  Traffic impacts;  Building ventilation and potential odors;  Environmental impacts such as the storage and disposal of liquid and solid waste; and,  Safety and security.

To address the above noted issues and the ALC position on medical marihuana production on the ALR, Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2606 proposes to define ‘marihuana’ and ‘medical marihuana production facilities’ and to regulate medical marihuana production as outlined below. It is understood that some local government jurisdictions are proposing to draft amendments that would prohibit medical marihuana operations in the ALR. Some jurisdictions believe the ALC may not force local governments to treat these operations as a farm use and therefore local governments may be able to prohibit the use in the ALR.

Definitions

The proposed Zoning Bylaw amendment would define ‘marihuana’ as meaning “all parts of the genus cannabis whether growing or not and the seed or clone of such plants”. ‘Medical marihuana production facilities’ would be defined as “facilities licensed by the Federal Government under the Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulation, used solely for the production, manufacturing, processing, testing, packaging and shipping of marihuana and marihuana products for medical purposes”.

Agricultural Use:

To be consistent with the direction provided by the ALC, the proposed Zoning Bylaw amendment would state that a “medical marihuana production facility” is a permitted use on properties that are located in the ALR and are zoned Country Residential (C.R), Non-Urban (N.U) and Large Holding (L.H). To limit impacts associated with offensive odours, noise, vibration or glare in these areas, Bylaw No. 2606 proposes that buildings used to house medical marihuana production facilities be setback 30 m from adjacent Rural zoned properties, 60 m from Residential zoned properties and 15 m from streams. Such setbacks would be consistent with setback requirements associated with dog kennels and buildings that house livestock and poultry.

The proposed Zoning Bylaw amendment will also include a provision that a medical marihuana production facility “must not discharge or emit odorous, toxic or noxious matter or vapour; heat, glare or radiation; recurrently generated ground vibration; noise in excess of ambient noise at the property

110 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.4 Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2606, 2013 [Medical Marihuana Production Facilities] Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – September 30, 2013 Page 4 boundary; electrical interference; or any other health or safety hazards”, which is consistent with the proposed provisions for Industrial Zones and Home Occupation.

It is proposed that medical marihuana production facilities be restricted within the Small Holdings (S.H.) Zones, which have a minimum lot size of 1.0 ha, due to the potential nuisance, safety and community character issues identified within this report. This proposed prohibition would affect 72 Small Holding (S.H.) properties within the Regional District. Since staff does not support this use within the Small Holding (S.H.) Zone, the ALC has been included within the referral of this Bylaw to ensure that this recommended restriction is consistent with ALC policy.

The Board of Directors may consider expanding this proposed restriction to the Country Residential (C.R.) Zone, which has a minimum lot size of 2.0 ha. Expanding the prohibition to include the Country Residential (C.R.) Zone would affect an additional 1,167 properties that are within the ALR. The Board may also wish to observe possible prohibitions of these facilities in the ALR by other jurisdictions and finalize a position at a later date.

Industrial Zones:

Industrial Zones are appropriate zones for medical marihuana production facilities. In most cases they are close to major roads and urban areas where emergency response would be improved. Many industrial sites in the Electoral Areas have high visual permeability and as such, lend themselves well to video surveillance to monitor vehicular activity and facility access. As facilities will require elaborate air filtration systems and multiple levels of security, including substantial perimeter fencing, and backup power supply for security reasons which necessitate installation of onsite generators, they may be more appropriate in the industrial settings rather than in the rural landscape, where they could be seen as intrusive to the rural character.

Commercial medical marihuana production, based upon the proposed Health Canada requirements, is consistent with an industrial use, as defined by the Zoning Bylaw, including Light Industrial (I.1), General Industrial (I.2), Industrial Park (I.3) and Agricultural Industrial (I.4) Zones.

Section 601.1.f Zoning Bylaw within the Light Industrial (I.1) Zone, requires that permitted uses include “manufacturing and processing provided that they do not create fire, explosion, or safety hazards; noise in excess of average intensity of street and traffic noise in the area in question; emit smoke, dust, dirt, toxic, or offensive odours or gas; and there is no production of heat or glare perceptible from any lot line of the site on which the use is located.”

Consideration should be given to requirements for the design of the building, type of security infrastructure considered, utility requirements of such facilities and the capacity, odour and noise, and the necessary power, water and possibly sewer infrastructure (based upon the size of operation). The Regional District has a Form and Character Development Permit Area for industrial zoned sites within Electoral Areas’ Official Community Plans, which requires a Development Permit to be submitted to guide the form and character of new buildings in these zones. The Development Permits are only able to establish general rules for aspects of the proposal such as design, finish, landscaping and screening.

Bylaw 2606 proposes to include “medical marihuana production facility” as an explicit use in the Light Industrial (I.1), General Industrial (I.2), Industrial Park (I.3) and Agricultural Industrial (I.4) Zones.

111 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.4 Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2606, 2013 [Medical Marihuana Production Facilities] Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee – September 30, 2013 Page 5

Home Occupation Use:

The new federal regulations prohibit production in private dwellings; however, no apparent restrictions have been placed on production in detached accessory buildings in residential or rural areas. Staff are of the opinion that commercial production of medical marihuana in rural zones as an ancillary use would currently be permitted if it complied with all of the home occupation provisions within the Zoning Bylaw.

Commercial medical marihuana grow operations will be required to meet the Federal regulations for safety and security measures that will “alter the residential character of the premises and the character of the residential or rural district where the premises are situated” in contravention of the Home Occupation Use Zoning requirements. As well, Section 403.6 of the Zoning Bylaw states that the home occupation use “does not discharge or emit odorous, toxic or noxious matter or vapour; heat, glare or radiation; recurrently generated ground vibration; noise in excess of ambient noise at the property boundary; electrical interference; or any other health or safety hazard”. If the Zoning Bylaw provisions for Home Occupation Use cannot not be met, then commercial medical marihuana production could not be considered a permitted home occupation but this may become a bylaw enforcement matter. Alternatively, the Board could explicitly state that these facilities are not permitted as Home Occupations.

Table 1: Summary of the Home Occupation Regulations within Zoning Bylaw

ZONES RESIDENTIAL RURAL > 2.0 ha (4.942 acres) 7.2 ha (17.79 acres and 2.0 ha (4.942 acres) or and < 7.2 ha (17.79 > 2 ha (4.942 acres) Parcel Size ALL greater less (ALL EAs) acres) (EA "D" &"E") (ALL EAs) (EA "B","C" &"F") 100 m2 Maximum Floor Space 50 m2 (484.4 ft2) 75 m2 (807.3 ft2) 185 m2 (1991 ft2) 185 m2 (1991 ft2) (1076.43 ft2) 2 2 2 2 Maximum # Employees 1 (4 in EA "E") (4 in EA "E") (4 in EA "E") (4 in EA "E")

3 (in addition to 3 (in addition to 3 (in addition to 3 (in addition to 3 (in addition to Off‐street Parking residential parking residential parking residential parking residential parking residential parking requirement) requirement) requirement) requirement) requirement)

On large parcels (greater than 7.2 ha or 17.79 acres), the requirements for a home occupation may be able to met for commercial medical marihuana operations, including noise, vibration, odour and residential character, especially in the more rural areas of Electoral Area “D”, “E” and “F”. Section 403.3 of the Zoning Bylaw indicates that a home occupation can be housed in an accessory building that is 185 m2 (1,991 ft2) on lots 2 ha (4.942 acres) or larger in size in Electoral Areas “D” and “E” and 7.2 ha (17.79 acres) or larger in size in a Rural Zone located in all other electoral areas. A 185 m2 structure can house a large commercial operation in a sparsely populated rural area may meet the Home Occupation Use requirements of the Zoning Bylaw, if sited appropriately.

The proposed amendment to the Zoning Bylaw would specifically permit “medical marihuana production facility” as a home occupation, although would be treated in a similar manner as an auto body or paint shop within Section 403.9 regarding potential nuisance, odour and community safety issues. The Board of Directors could consider restricting medical marihuana production facilities as a home occupation to larger (7.2 ha or greater) parcels to mitigate many of the potential nuisance and rural character issues. The Board could also consider an outright prohibition of these facilities in some or all Electoral Areas.

112 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.4 Zoning Text Amendment Bylaw No. 2606, 2013 [Medical Marihuana Production Facilities] Report to Electoral Area Advisory Committee - September 30, 2013 Page 6

Parking and Loading:

The standards that are proposed for medical marihuana production facilities parking and loading requirements are proposed to be the same as Industrial buildings, as specified within Division Eleven, Section 1011 .3 of the Zoning Bylaw. The minimum parking spaces proposed for a medical marihuana production facility within an Industrial Zone is 1.5 per 100 m2 (1 076 fe) of floor area. Medical Marihuana Production Facilities as a home occupation would require 3 parking spaces, as specified in 403.13.b.

Screening:

The standards that are specified within Division Fifteen, Screening and Landscaping are applicable to medical marihuana production facilities.

SUMMARY:

The Federal Government has enacted the new Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulations to replace the current Marihuana Medical Access Regulations program. The new regulations will no longer authorize individuals to grow medical marihuana and will only authorize larger scale licensed producers. Stricter security, inspection and quality control measures will be required along with greater communication with local police, fire departments and local governments in addition to complying with Local Government bylaws.

In light of the changes to Federal regulations, Staff have proposed the following amendments to Zoning Bylaw 1888, 2003: 1. Create a new definition for Marihuana and Medical Marihuana Production Facilities; 2. Include Medical Marihuana Production Facilities as a permitted use on properties: a) Within the Agricultural Land Reserve in rural Zones (C.R., N.U. and L.H) subject to the facility meeting agricultural setback requirements; b) Within Industrial Zones including Light Industrial (1.1), General Industrial (1.2), Industrial Park (1.3) and Agricultural Industrial (1.4) Zones; c) As a Home Occupation, subject to the provisions of Home Occupation Use. 3. Prohibit Medical Marihuana Production Faculties in all other zones, unless otherwise permitted.

If the Board desires to restrict these facilities from any of the above provisions, staff can be directed to bring back amendments after First Reading in order that a Bylaw may be tabled in a timely fashion.

Submitted by:

Approved For Inclusion:

Endorsed by:

R b a1les, MCIP, RPP General Manager, Planning and Building

113 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.4

REGIONAL DISTRICT OF NORTH OKANAGAN

BYLAW No. 2606

A bylaw to amend the text of Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 to regulate medical marihuana production facilities.

WHEREAS pursuant to Section 903 [Zoning bylaws] of the Local Government Act, R.S.B.C., 1996, Chapter 323, as amended, and Regulations passed pursuant thereto, the Board of the Regional District of North Okanagan may, by Bylaw, divide the whole or part of the Regional District into zones, name each zone, establish boundaries for the zones and regulate uses within those zones;

AND WHEREAS the Board has created zones, named each zone, established boundaries for these zones and regulated uses within those zones by Bylaw No. 1888, being the “Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003” and amendments thereto

AND WHEREAS the Board is desirous to amend the Zoning Bylaw to regulate Medical Marihuana Production Facilities;

NOW THEREFORE, the Board of Directors of the Regional District of North Okanagan, in open meeting assembled, enacts as follows:

A. CITATION

This Bylaw may be cited as the “Zoning Bylaw Text Amendment No. 2606, 2013”.

B. AMENDMENTS

1. Division Two – Interpretation of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by adding the following definitions:

“Marihuana” means all parts of the genus cannabis whether growing or not and the seed or clone of such plants.

"Medical Marihuana Production Facility" means a facility, licensed by the Federal Government under the Marihuana for Medical Purposes Regulation used solely for the production, manufacturing, processing, testing, packaging, and shipping of marihuana and marihuana products for medical purposes,

2. Division Three – Basic Provisions of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by adding Section 306.9 as follows:

Medical marihuana production facilities or grow operations except as explicitly permitted under the provisions of this bylaw.

114 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.4

3. Division Four – General Regulations of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by amending Section 403.9 as follows:

The use does not include auto body and paint shops, automotive sales, vehicle wrecking yards, medical marihuana production facilities and heavy equipment sales, service and repair unless the activity meets all the requirements cited herein; and

4. Division Six – Industrial Zones of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by amending Section 601.1.f as follows:

...manufacturing and processing, including medical marihuana production facilities, provided that they do not create fire, explosion, or safety hazards; noise in excess of average intensity of street and traffic noise in the area in question; emit smoke, dust, dirt, toxic, or offensive odours or gas; and there is no production of heat or glare perceptible from any lot line of the site on which the use is located...

5. Division Six – Industrial Zones of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by adding Section 604.1.i. as follows:

Medical marihuana production facilities, provided that they do not create fire, explosion, or safety hazards; noise in excess of average intensity of street and traffic noise in the area in question; emit smoke, dust, dirt, toxic, or offensive odours or gas; and there is no production of heat or glare perceptible from any lot line of the site on which the use is located.

6. Division Eight – Rural Zones of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by adding Section 802.1.t. as follows:

Medical Marihuana Production Facilities, subject to the provisions of 802.10.m. of this Bylaw.

7. Division Eight – Rural Zones of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by adding Section 802.10.m. as follows:

Medical Marihuana Production Facilities

Medical marihuana production facilities shall only be permitted on lands within the Agricultural Land Reserve, subject to the setbacks of Schedule G of this bylaw and provided that these facilities do not discharge or emit odorous, toxic or noxious matter or vapour; heat, glare or radiation; recurrently generated ground vibration; noise in excess of ambient noise at the property boundary; electrical interference; or any other health or safety hazards.

8. Division Eight – Rural Zones of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by adding Section 803.1.u. as follows:

Medical Marihuana Production Facilities, subject to the provisions of 803.10.n. of this Bylaw.

115 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.4

9. Division Eight – Rural Zones of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by adding Section 803.10.n. as follows:

Medical Marihuana Production Facilities

10. Division Eight – Rural Zones of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by adding Section 804.1.u. as follows:

Medical Marihuana Production Facilities, subject to the provisions of 804.10.o. of this Bylaw.

11. Division Eight – Rural Zones of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by adding Section 804.10.o. as follows:

Medical Marihuana Production Facilities

12. Division Eleven – Off Street Parking, Schedule “B” of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amending Section 1101.3. Schedule of Parking Requirements to include:

Uses Minimum Number of Parking Spaces Required Medical Marihuana 1.5 per 100 m² (1076 square feet) gross floor area Production Facilities

13. Division Sixteen – Agriculture Setbacks of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by amending Table 1: Minimum Setbacks From Lot Lines – Principle Farm Buildings, Structures and Areas, Row 1, Column 4: Dog Kennels, Livestock, Poultry, Game & Fur as follows:

Dog Kennels, Livestock, Poultry, Game & Fur, Medical Marihuana (barns, brooder houses, confined livestock areas, medical marihuana production facilities fur farming sheds, hatcheries, kennels, livestock shelters, milking facilities, indoor and outdoor riding arenas & stables)

116 of 117 RAAC - REGULAR AGENDA January 23, 2014 - ITEM E.4

14. Division Sixteen – Agriculture Setbacks of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by amending Table 2: Minimum Setbacks From Lot Lines – Residential Zones – Accessory Farm Buildings, Structures and Areas, Row 1, Column 4: Livestock, Poultry, Game & Fur as follows:

Livestock, Poultry, Game & Fur, Medical Marihuana

15. Division Sixteen – Agriculture Setbacks of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by amending Table 3: Minimum Setbacks From Lot Lines – Other Than Residential Zones – Accessory Farm Buildings, Structures and Areas, Row 1, Column 4: Dog Kennels, Livestock, Poultry, Game & Fur as follows:

Livestock, Poultry, Game & Fur, Medical Marihuana

16. Division Sixteen – Agriculture Setbacks of the Regional District of North Okanagan Zoning Bylaw No. 1888, 2003 is hereby amended by amending Table 4: Building and Facilities Setbacks from Watercourses for Riparian Protection in Farming Areas, Row 2, Column 4: Category 3:

Medical Marihuana Production Facility

Read a First Time this 20th day of November , 2013

Read a Second Time this day of , 2013

Advertised on this day of , 2013 this day of , 2013

Public Hearing held pursuant to the provisions of this day of , 2013 Section 890 of the Local Government Act

Read a Third Time this day of , 2013

Approved by Minister of Transportation and this day of , 2013 Infrastructure (Transportation Act s. 52(3))

ADOPTED this day of , 2013

Chair Corporate Officer

117 of 117