Home »
Green Peaks licence renewed; boundary expansion chewed
What Happened at Invermere Council This Week?
By Carol Gordon
The regular meeting of the District of Invermere council was held on Tuesday, January 9, at 7 p.m. in the Municipal Office.
In attendance were: Mayor Gerry Taft and Councillors Greg Anderson, Paul Denchuk, Al Miller and Justin Atterbury.
Staff present were: Chris Prosser, Chief Administrative Officer; Kindry Luyendyk, Corporate Officer and Rory Hromadnik, Director of Development Services.
Gallery: Four people.
BYLAWS & PUBLIC HEARING REPORTS
Revenue Anticipation Borrowing Bylaw No. 1533, 2017 was passed by council.
“A bylaw to provide for the borrowing of money in anticipation of revenue.”
“This bylaw is a security measure for 2018 in the event that regular cash flows fall short of meeting expenditures before tax revenues come in. As well, this bylaw is a requirement from Kootenay Savings Credit Union in order to secure our current line of credit.”
Zoning Bylaw Amendment No. 1534, 2018 – Jeffries, 1522 Lower Lake View Lane
“The Canterbury Beach / Lakeview Lane area is a unique, very old subdivision within Invermere where virtually all the residences / buildings are situated in legal non-conformance to Bylaw No.1145, 2002 setback lot sizing and parcel area coverage regulations for the R-1 Single Family Residential zone.
“In this situation, a rezoning application is necessary with the redevelopment proposal received as it increases the parcel area coverage from the existing 33% to 46% which constitutes a change in density greater than the permitted 40% in the R-1. Changes in permitted use or density trigger a rezoning process.”
Rory Hromadnik, Director of Development Services, provided a report to council. It was followed by questions and discussion with Invermere councillors and Chris Prosser, Chief Administrative Officer. This included what steps are involved in the process and what would it look like if First Nations requested an archaeological assessment?
Councillor Denchuk said: “The one thing I like about seeing these properties redeveloped down there is I think it increases the safety, especially when it comes to fire code.”
After a lengthy discussion about the various aspects of the process, Mayor Taft commented, that it is because the owners are not following the same footprint of the existing old cabin and are trying “to configure the house to best suit the lot, it’s a new building, and they have to meet the new rules and regulations.”
It was passed by council to receive first and second reading for the District of Invermere Zoning Amendment Bylaw No. 1534, 2018 and that a Public Hearing be held in February. For further information: Bylaw 1534
REPORTS REQUIRING ACTION
Business Licence Renewal – Green Peaks Medical Inc.
In 2017, the District of Invermere issued a Temporary Business Licence application to Meagan and Sara Karchuk to operate a medicinal marijuana retail dispensary business, Green Peaks Medical Inc. at 305 Third Avenue in Athalmer.
“The district has no clear policy related to a medicinal cannabis dispensary; however, generally supportive message is contained within section 2.4 of Invermere’s OCP.”
The initial business licence was awarded as a one year probationary licence “to allow for the District Bylaw Officer, RCMP and Interior health, as required, to observe, inspect and evaluate the business operation and performance. No issues were reported by any of the referral agencies/departments, and no complaints received, beyond one parking comment, from the adjacent businesses.”
Councillor Anderson: Gathering the comments that have been made, including those from Sgt. Bob Vatamaniuck, RCMP, “it hasn’t been a problem. The trial has been successful, so I am going to be in favour of an 18-month term.”
Councillor Denchuk: “I kind of feel the same way as Councillor Anderson. There haven’t been any issues. We were comfortable with it before. It’s still in the grey area of legality, but it’s moving towards being legal, and the RCMP are okay with it, so I’m okay with it too.”
Council approved that a Business Licence renewal is granted to Green Peaks Medical Inc. for a term not to exceed 18 months “to allow the federal, provincial legislative frameworks to be revealed and understood and for the district’s municipal process to be developed based on this guidance.”
CORRESPONDENCE FOR INFORMATION
Columbia Valley Food Bank Thank you letter.
Ministry of Agriculture
Union of British Columba
Letters from Municipalities in BC regarding the prevention of quagga and zebra mussels:
City of West Kelowna
Letter received regarding the future cannabis sales.
NEW BUSINESS
Council chews over boundary expansion
Councillor Denchuk: “Just to follow-up (re Grizzly Ridge Properties Presentation to Committee of the Whole Meeting December 14, 2017) to the potential of receiving an application from the Grizzly Ridge owners for a boundary extension to the town. I’ve just been doing my homework, looking through all our policies and I’d just like you all to consider this: if we should or should not accept an application from Grizzly Ridge. It certainly doesn’t fit our policy at the moment for reasons to expand our town boundaries.”
He added: “So I invite you to revisit our policy on Growth Management (Invermere’s OCP Official Community Plan Goal 2: Managing Growth; pg. 24 and 25). It sets examples of when we should extend our boundaries and certainly what they’re proposing, swapping density from one area to another, isn’t in our policy framework. I thought it would be fair enough to bring these points up before we see an application come forward to us and whether or not we actually accept it.”
To Councillor Atterbury’s comment that it would have to go to a referendum, Councillor Denchuk replied: “Absolutely, you’re correct, if we were to accept an application it has to go to a referendum. We just need to be cognizant of the fact that if the request that is made to us is not following our policy; something that we all voted on in 2015 and accepted as our policy for boundary expansion. Just keep that in mind, we don’t have to entertain every idea a developer throws at us and put our community through what would be a very challenging and disruptive process.”
Mayor Taft added: “Over the nine or 10 years that there have been conversations with Grizzly Ridge and Mr. Himmelspach, there have been a lot of different proposals, a lot of different concepts. I think it’s important that we look at the application on its own merits and decide whether it’s worthy of consideration.”
He further explained: “We haven’t seen that application. That committee meeting we had in December, the purpose of that was to bring council up to speed on some of the discussions and what might be the form of the application coming forward.”
Coun. Anderson said that he reread the policies and “If an application comes in those are the kind of things you are going to consider.”
Councillor Miller: “I think you have to keep an open mind on anything that comes to the table and look at the merits. What I’ve seen from the presentation, in my mind, seemed to make reasonable sense to at least to have a look at and go further. I’m certainly not here to sell the project but there are certain parts of it that I like, and if the community-at-large has the ability to look at the whole scheme of things, and make a decision if they want it or not in a referendum, I think that that’s the way to go and then we’re following what our citizens want.”
Councillor Denchuk: “I just want to comment about what’s being said around the table. I’m forming my opinions on what our public has told us in the past what we should consider for boundary expansion, which was made very clear in our OCP which was adopted in 2015, which was a huge public process, with lots of input. We were all involved in that extensively. So, that’s what I’m forming my opinions around.”
He added: “Our community has spoken already so why put tons of people through that sort of process that is going to require enormous amount of time and energy, by our staff and by citizens of this community, who are not getting paid to show up and voice their opinion. So that things don’t happen in a negative way to impact community, you have to consider people’s time and energy when they have already spoken on how they want their town to develop and moving forward.”
Mayor Taft: “The OCP processes, which often talks about things in very conceptual terms in long term visions, they don’t really get 800 or 900 people out. On average, you get 30 – 60 people who participate and maybe 20 or 30 who really particpate.”
He says that therefore, it doesn’t mean that the OCP document represents 3,000 people; “Parts of the values (of the document) might, but it becomes very different when you talk about specific proposals, specific issues. All of a sudden boundary expansion, on the whole, is somewhat nebulous. It can mean a lot of different things. If the application is about 250 acres, half of that is park, and the other half becomes essentially CastleRock, that’s a document that people can look at and make an opinion on. That becomes a lot more transparent and brought to life than conceptual value statements in an OCP, which a lot of people just don’t pay attention to.”
Councillor Denchuk added: “All I am saying is that when you see the application, take all the information, not just what’s being presented to you at the meeting by the developer. Because don’t forget, this community doesn’t have, other than us, the paid people to stand up there and present their side of the story to them. That’s our job. Our job isn’t completely to back the developer and say, let’s support his project. We also need to help our community get their voices across. I want you to remember these policy documents you voted on very recently when that question is coming forward.”
Mayor Taft commented: “I think in theory having a democratic process and a referendum and a very transparent question and having discussion about some of the future development in Invermere that can be a very positive experience. I don’t think that needs to be divisive and I don’t think it needs to be negative. So if anything, I would encourage the people who are concerned about this or who are opposed to this to also operate with some respect and not make it purposely more divisive than it needs to be. Let’s talk about the actual issues and let’s treat the elected officials with respect.”
Councillor Denchuk replied: “So if you’re saying that to our community, our residents in our town, I would say to the developer, that he should cease and desist with his activities on those properties until we decide what we want to do with that property.”
The next District of Invermere regular meeting is Tuesday, January 23 at 7 p.m.
District of Invermere council meets regularly throughout the year on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month (second Tuesdays only during July, August, September and December) at 7 p.m. in the council chambers of the Municipal Office (914 – 8th Avenue, Invermere) unless otherwise indicated.
e-KNOW
