Fearing a potentially almost doubling of density of lots in the Grizzly Ridge properties when a restrictive covenant expires in 2014, District of Invermere (DOI) council Sept. 13 agreed to a planning department recommendation and is informing the Regional District of East Kootenay that it does not support the release.

Grizzly Ridge has applied for the release of Restrictive Covenant LB0301732 from lot 12, District lot 4596, Kootenay District plan NEP88930, a property located adjacent to Zehnder property, west of town.

In a report to council Rory Hromadnik, DOI’s director of development services, explained the district should not support the release of the restrictive covenant from Lot 12 because “the proposed recommendation is consistent with council’s direction regarding parkland and green space dedication associated with subdivision and the desire for a comprehensive land use plan addressing the Grizzly Ridge properties prior to development.  Maintaining the restrictive covenant prevents subdivision of the current 12 lots until April 20, 2014. The covenant was designed to provide time for either an annexation or tripartite planning process to occur on these properties.

“Lot 12 is the most westerly lot of a 12 lot subdivision Grizzly Ridge Properties was approved for in 2009.  The subdivision application was submitted for approval in 2006 but was held for deferred approval pending the outcome of annexation and land use planning discussions with the District of Invermere as well as guidance under the Lake Windermere OCP approved in August 2008,” Hromadnik explained.

“The annexation discussions with the DOI were suspended in early 2009 as a result of differences related to public space dedication, urban containment and existing inventory and developable lands within the current boundary.  With annexation and incorporation into the DOI off of the table the subdivision leading to the current 12 lot configuration was completed.  Covenant LB0301732, agreed to with the initial submission and was registered with the subdivision approval in 2009.  The covenant restricts subdivision by a highway for a five year period, expiring in April 2014 and was originally designed to allow time for the planning / annexation process to be completed,” he continued in his report.

Grizzly Ridge is requesting to discharge Lot 12 from the restrictive covenant to allow a 5.18 acre unit of Lot 12, separated by the public highway, to be subdivided off of the parent lot 12.

“The applicant has stated that the request for the 5.18 acre unit, lot 12B, is to accommodate a sand and gravel deposit that the owners are selling to developments as demand requires,” Hromadnik told council.  “Grizzly Ridge’s intent is to advertise the remnant parent parcel (lot 12A) and keep 12B for the fill material.  Lot 12B is the furthest west of the 12 lots and is located directly adjacent to the Zehnder property, which also has a large commercial gravel pit at this location.  In addition, Lot 12 is well outside of the lots within the ‘Urban Containment Area’ that became the focus of the annexation discussions. “

Hromadnik warned that once the restrictive covenant expires in April 2014 all of the lots split by the public highway will be eligible for subdivision under RDEK Zoning Bylaw No. 900.

“This will potentially increase the lot density from 12 to 20 of which proposed lot 12B would be one,” he said, adding, “As a point of consideration, there is no reference to or offer of parkland included with this application as the RDEK does not require or accept parkland as a condition of subdivision.  Recreational public access to the Crown lands beyond the Grizzly Ridge property has been a point of discussion through all of the land use negotiations with the DOI and is relevant with this application. The subdivision is an opportunity to require dedicated access through Lot 12A to Crown lands providing for alternative access such as the Silver Moose Multi Use Trail proposal as prepared by the Columbia Valley Cycling Society.  Consideration should be given to the requirement of a minimum six metre dedicated access route to accommodate the linking access goals.”

After a detailed discussion, council unanimously agreed to support Hromadnik’s recommendation.

“This is a good but challenging topic,” said Mayor Gerry Taft, providing some background on the Grizzly Ridge issue, with the L-shaped property completely abutting Invermere’s south and western boundaries, leading up to Toby Canyon.

The 12 lot series of properties became an issue five years ago and the district fought to ensure that lots would “be purposely bisected by public roads,” Taft said, noting that the Grizzly Ridge properties were subdivided into 12 parcels in order to be the minimum size before rezoning would be required, with public hearings a part of the process.

“When this five year covenant is up, this 12 lots could become 20 parcels, potentially setting the stage for one offs,” Taft said.

Council members were equally enthusiastic to ensure that the RDEK understands the district’s trepidations.

“I strongly support the recommendation,” said Coun. Bob Campsall, noting the current state of Grizzly Ridge is a “ridiculous proposal in terms of land use. One of the key points: this has nothing to do with Invermere growing from its boundary out. It’s about chopping up and selling” without any consideration to the best uses of the property.

“I think it is crucial we really pressure the RDEK to get some kind of permanent land use plan in place for that whole area,” said Coun. Spring Hawes.

Taft told council he is hoping to work with RDEK staff “to amend the policy somewhat, so there is some kind of process” that would allow for public input, and district input, into any potential border-property land use decisions.

Taft noted that establishing an area plan would be “a tough one” because the Lake Windermere Official Community Plan is unclear on “who has veto power,” due to a tripartite land management situation with the RDEK, DOI and Grizzly Ridge.

“We have a lot of initiatives on the table and when these applications come forward, it’s not a high priority,” said the district’s regional government representative.

“I’m not so sure we have buy in from the landowner, anyway,” he said, adding he still wants to see the Grizzly Ridge properties subdivided “by public roads.”

Coun. Al Miller agreed with his elected peers, noting he wants the district to work “diligently – with that area out there – to see what things could be like out there. Down the road there might be real possibilities for that land.”

Coun. Ray Brydon said he is concerned about the release of the covenant because “hypothetically, he’s (developer) going to use every method to see smaller lots.”

Campsall then suggested that no land use matter is an easy slam dunk, pointing out what happened with Lot 48 alongside Columbia Lake, when former Electoral Area F director Martin Cullen led a charge that forced a rezoning of that land, making it almost impossible for plans by the property owner to build a golf resort.

Taft replied that wouldn’t be an available course for the regional board to take this time around.

“It would be something the board of the regional district would not see. It would be between the applicant and regional staff,” he said.

Breaking with protocol, Taft allowed a member of the public to add a few cents to the council discussion.

Meredith Hamstead, former district planner and land use watchdog said, “There is a major threat for this community to define its future. “It’s death by a thousand paper cuts. It’s a very, very harassing process the developer has undertaken,” she said, urging the district and RDEK to use “quick, creative thinking.”

Ian Cobb/e-KNOW

Article Share