We asked CSRD Electoral Area B director candidates their thoughts on land-use planning

Candidates consider what they’d like to see happen in terms of land-use planning in CSRD Area B.

340
File photo: A view of Mt. Begbie from the Local Food Initiative's Garden & Art Tour on July 23. Photo: Cierra Courtemanche

Columbia-Shuswap Regional District Area B is getting a new director for the first time since the early 1990s.

As part of the Mountaineer’s coverage of the upcoming municipal election we have asked Area B director candidates a series of questions covering a wide-variety of issues likely to be central in the upcoming election. The series features verbatim answers written by the candidates.

 In this second edition of the Mountaineer’s question and answer series we asked Electoral Area B director candidates to consider the following:

What are your thoughts on land-use planning in the CSRD Area B? What do you intend to do on land-use planning file this term?

Here are the candidates responses:

Doug Stuart is running for CSRD Electoral Area B Director. Photo: Doug Stuart.

Doug Stuart

We need to up date our OCP to guide the planning and growth of Area “B”.

The OCP update should be done in tandem with the city to reflect the concerns of all stakeholders.

George Buhler is running for CSRD Electoral Area B Director. Photo: George Buhler.

George Buhler

The plan for the land will speak for itself, and since most of the land is in the ALR and will require the approval of the ALR commission. I believe that the 10 acre small holdings zoning should be reviewed.

David Brooks-Hill is running for CSRD Electoral Area B director. Photo: David Brooks-Hill.

David Brooks-Hill

Area B of the CSRD brought in a new zoning bylaw in 2014 that set out the rules for private land use. I am not particularly critical of this bylaw and these zoning rules do have to be respected – whether building permits are required or not. I am not against the idea of permitting smaller lot sizes than currently allowed by the zoning, particularly in the rural area surrounding Revelstoke. There is an argument to be made that pretty well all of the private land surrounding Revelstoke has now been developed and so the possibilities of new housing in the area are limited by the 5 acre minimum zoning rules. Revelstoke clearly has a great demand for new housing and greater supply could assist in affordability, especially without onerous building inspection and permitting costs. I would consider this if residents are in favour.

We do have to recognize however that without any city infrastructure in the CSRD, lot sizes cannot be made too small. There are legal requirements set by the province regarding the area required for septic fields and tanks as well as water sourcing that require a significant amount of space. We have to be realistic.